You ain't seen no ugliness yet (Signifying Nothing: how does saying nothing at all become so loud?)

Monday, 24 April 2006

You ain't seen no ugliness yet

The big news today is that the attorney for accused player Reade Seligmann has filed a motion for discovery into the background of the alleged victim in the Duke lacrosse rape investigation.

That’s really it as far as the links go. I read on the CourtTV message board that Rita Cosby had another interview with Our Man Moez in which he cleared up the time of when he was called to the lacrosse house to pick the second group of players up—it sounds like he just got confused looking at the call log. Apparently more footage from the interview with Kim Roberts was released today as well, but I haven’t seen that either. What can I say?—I had lots of work to do today.

But, if you’re really bored, I’m sure you can find some amusement at the website of Moez Mostafa’s On Time Taxi, featuring all sorts of weird clipart of generic white people in a city that looks nothing like Durham (maybe Durham, Ontario instead) and flat rate service to 9th Street and Shooters, which I suppose is a way to build brand loyalty. Alas, no prominent endorsement from Reade Seligmann yet…

5 comments:

Any views expressed in these comments are solely those of their authors; they do not reflect the views of the authors of Signifying Nothing, unless attributed to one of us.

1. me wrote @ Mon, 24 Apr 2006, 11:30 pm CDT:

I agree; this case has only just begun to get ugly. The anti-rape activists wanted publicity and now they have it.

The Smoking Gun already has heavy competition from bloggers for getting the details of the accuser’s life. The rush is on to be the first blog to post any bit of information or photo. The accuser’s name was cited as early as April 9, and other details that have not yet been published by actual news sites have been confirmed, such as her escort agency and her address in 2002.

The defense lawyers will not have to do much more than let their investigators leak where information can be found. The bloggers will do the rest.

That is, of course, if this case survives the election. I will not be surprised if the winner, whether Nifong, Black or Bishop, quickly sweeps this under the rug. If not, the county had best rebudget the prosecutor’s office because this case is going to become very expensive for taxpayers. 46 rushed analyses of DNA samples is just the tip of the expense iceberg.

2. Here Iam wrote @ Wed, 26 Apr 2006, 2:51 pm CDT:

If Wille Gary gets involved it will become much uglier.

3. Here Iam wrote @ Wed, 26 Apr 2006, 2:52 pm CDT:

Sorry, the URL Link did not take.

http://www.essence.com/essence/lifestyle/takeastand/0,16109,1186586,00.html

4. Dave wrote @ Wed, 26 Apr 2006, 4:51 pm CDT:

Of course, I don’t believe that Willie Gary is licensed to practice law in North Carolina.

5. Sharon wrote @ Thu, 27 Apr 2006, 7:12 pm CDT:

This is beginning to look like a traumatized woman suffering PTD from an earlier rape. She charged rape before in 1996 when she was 14 against three men:

“The accuser, a 27-year-old student at North Carolina Central University in Durham, told police she was hired to perform as a stripper at a March 13 party, where she was raped by three men.

According to the Creedmoor police report in August 1996, when the woman was 18, she told officers she was raped and beaten by three men “for a continual time” in 1993, when she was 14. She told police she was attacked at an “unspecified location” on a street in Creedmoor, a town 15 miles northeast of Durham.

The report lists the names of the three men, but no other details. Creedmoor police Chief Ted Pollard said Thursday he had no recollection of the report, and his staff has been unable to find any additional information about it.

Durham police Officer Brian Bishop, who interviewed the accuser in 1996 while working on the Creedmoor force, said Thursday he had a vague recollection of the report but couldn’t remember any details.

When asked about the accuser’s previous report of rape, Durham County District Attorney Mike Nifong declined to comment.

Before Seligmann and Finnerty were indicted, attorneys for the players pointed to the accuser’s criminal history when answering questions about their clients’ legal troubles. The woman pleaded guilty to several misdemeanors in 2002.”

What is the likelihood of the same circumstances happening again? Either she is lying and this is her standard MO (but to what gain) or she had a psychotic break (maybe brought on by the threat of rape with a broom). She was drugged up, disoriented….

But how did she get those traumatic injuries? Rough sex? Or could it be she was attacked again? Being raped once doesn’t preclude being raped again. But each time by three men? She could have been remembering her past rape, and getting the details mixed up with either a present attack or a psychotic flashback?

Just supposing here.

I don’t know what to think anymore.

http://www.nbc17.com/news/9054222/detail.html

Comments are now closed on this post.