Sports Law Blog
All things legal relating
to the sports world...
Saturday, June 16, 2007
My Apology to Mike Nifong

I am not long on sympathy. I have little to no sympathy for OJ Simpson, Kobe Bryant or Pacman Jones, each of whom has suffered public and professional ($monetary$) reprobation despite not being convicted of the crimes for which they were accused. I do not quibble with those who, because of the media reports, believe wholeheartedly in their guilt.

I have a similar absence of sympathy for the Duke Lacrosse team and can’t quite come to grips with ESPN having a half hour special two days ago about them. The same media outlets wiping their tears now were the ones reporting that they had a reputation for excessive on-campus rowdiness and belligerence and that they were having a party (parties?) generously laced with alcohol, minors, and strippers. (Was Pacman invited?) The same woman to be believed when she says she did not see the other girl attacked in any way, though she could not account for her whereabouts at all times because she was, um, working, also said they had a confrontation after the boys began yelling something about a broomstick.

Somehow others invite the bad that happens upon them. They are not excused for being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Personal responsibility is the slogan of our day. But the Duke Lacrosse team gets a pass. No one had to get raped at that party for Duke to legitimately suspend that team for the year. Precisely that type of animal-housing is supposed to be the bane of college athletics, and sports generally. Beyond their guilt or innocence, why the sympathy?

Which brings me to why I have sympathy for and am apologizing to Mike Nifong. The reason he is being publicly pummeled, and in my mind the reason why he was before the North Carolina ethics board, is because he did as civil rights organizations and feminist organizations have asked white men to do since I became interested in such politics: Disregard the low-mindedness of the media which promotes the idea that status and class and race have something to do with innocence and guilt, protect women from being raped and promote their coming forward by taking them seriously even when the only witnesses are them and the alleged broomstickers.

Maybe he did so for political reasons, to retain office in a majority black district. But such an accusation is not taken seriously when alleged by any other defendant. These defendants used their wherewithal to sell it. And if it be the case, the crime he is guilty of is overzealously protecting the district he lives in from alleged rapists. What other prosecutors are publicly or professionally skewered for this? Or does it not happen elsewhere?

So I want to apologize to Mike Nifong for the absence of support he has received from the same groups who used plenty of airtime to lambaste Don Imus and HipHop for disrespecting black women. Nifong is my white man of the week because he did what groups to which I belong asked him to do, and when the chips came down we did not have your back. We dropped the ball. So when will the next prosecutor take a case where it’s his word against hers? Not soon, especially if the alleged rapists have money and connections and look good in a suit and haircut to deflect their poor reputation and all the alleged victim has is … what, 15 minutes of Oprah Winfrey’s attention?


Firstly, I will agree with you on the hypocrisy of the media outlets (mainly, ESPN) in their reporting of this story. They, like Nifong, decided to go ahead and judge these student-athletes guilty before the facts were ever really divulged. Then, when it became apparent that no rape occurred (or, at least, that there was absolutely no convincing evidence that a rape occurred), they jumped at the opportunity to spend hours of programming denouncing the "quick to judge" mentality that surrounded Nifong's actions.

However, I can't see any reason to apologize to Nifong. There is a difference in taking up the cause of those without the necessary resources to ensure justice for themselves, and in haphazardly declaring guilt on "rich white boys" (as he, so eloquently, put it) and foregoing the traditional course of investigation and prosecution before such judgments are reached. It is clear to EVERYONE in the legal environment in North Carolina that Nifong acted extremely inappropriately and, quite possibly, unethically.

I fail to see how you have no sympathy for the likes of Pacman Jones (not convicted of anything, at this point) and Kobe Bryant (absolved of all criminal wrongdoing), but you feel sorry and feel compelled to issue an apology to Mike Nifong, a man who is under investigation himself for unethical behavior and, after admitting that he acted in a very inappropriate manner and said some very inappropriate things, decided that N.C. would be better off if we wasn't working as the District Attorney.

Blogger Stephen -- 6/16/2007 12:18 PM  

My problem is that the Duke LaCross team members are now being portrayed as choir boys. Did it ever enter their minds that it is totally unacceptable to hire minority females to strip at their party? Innocent of rape perhaps - but they are still animals and do not make their parents proud.


Anonymous Anonymous -- 6/16/2007 3:00 PM  

For too long our society has always not taken accusation of rape seriously that some men have got away with the crime. Alternatively some men have been convicted of rape they never committed.
However Nifong made a lot of mistakes for reasons we can all conjecture on.
There is no doubt in my mind "something happened" in that house, which we will never know.
Most importantly, Nifong went after some privileged young men and got burned.

Anonymous Anonymous -- 6/16/2007 3:31 PM  

I would like to echo Stephen's comments. Also, Victoria, why is it inherently unacceptable to hire a stripper - female minority or not? One willingly offers a service and another party accepts.

In the Duke lacrosse team's case it was an exercise in poor judgment and cause for the university to take action because there is specific conduct for school athletes, but that's really it.

Anonymous Anonymous -- 6/16/2007 4:14 PM  

do you are so wrong on this its not funny. NIfong violated the basic rights of the defendants which is basically what the country has built itself on since the passage of the bill of rights. This was not a case of "zealousness" but rather an abuse of power as bad as what is being done to Genarlow Wilson in the name of law enforcement.

That they are male, white or rich or even male, white and rich does not matter. I really dont understand this lacross boys "backlash." This isnt about them at all.

Anonymous Anonymous -- 6/16/2007 4:35 PM  

Please read the following story and tell me that you still believe Nifong is owed an apology.

I think it's clear that not even Nifong would want anyone to apologize to him. He clearly understands that how he acted was horrible, and that nothing short of his disbarment is just punishment.

Your commentary comes across as nothing other than a minority taking the side of his race (or a person defending people of his race), all the while ignoring the actual facts of the situation. It's unfortunate that this commentary would appear on a blog as respected as this one.

Blogger Stephen -- 6/16/2007 5:11 PM  

I cannot believe this blog posting.

Choir boys? No not even close, but the media doesn't see gray besides they recall only too well that they were at the castle doors with torches and pitchforks ready to drag the players out and deal their own justice. They've got sucking up to do.

Duke should remain shamed that a varsity program was so wild and out of control.

But Nifong?

He concealed exculpatory evidence and by hiding that evidence obtained indictments he likely never could have obtained. He lied to the wolf pack of the media and community to poison the jury pool as much as possible.

Mike Nifong did not as you suggest do what civil rights and feminists groups have asked (I pray that's not what they seek) and protect women from being raped. Trying to frame the accused and whipping everyone into a lynch mob mentality did not advance civil rights nor the interests of women.

What it did do is make more people susceptible to buying a "She's lying" defense. He reinforced belief that the system is crooked.

If you think he's owed an apology that's your call.

I think women, the public in general and the legal profession are the ones owed the apology... from Mike Nifong.

Blogger Mark -- 6/16/2007 6:06 PM  

Thank you for a clear and reasoned response to this whole mess; it's one of the best I've read.

Blogger Susan M. -- 6/16/2007 8:25 PM  

To the "something happened" group , get it through your thick skull "nothing happened". She had semen of more than 11 different males in her none of it from any of the players.

Anonymous Anonymous -- 6/16/2007 10:28 PM  

This is the dumbest post I have seen on this subject along with some of the most idiotic responses to it.

Get a life folks. Those of you contending "that something happened" look like fools.

The Attorney General of NC has declared them to be innocent. There is absolutley no other evidence that this entire team is out of control. Read the report commissioned by the Duke administration.

And the Durham DA (Nifong) just got disbarred for his illegal activities involved with this false prosecution.

Get the facts before you write!

Anonymous Anonymous -- 6/16/2007 10:38 PM  

Good lord, even Nifong admits he broke the ethics rules over and over. He's been disbarred for grostesque abuse of power in violation of the rules. And you're apologizing to him because you ddn't support that conduct as strong as you should have? Huh?

Anonymous Anonymous -- 6/17/2007 12:55 AM  

Its been a long time (probably 12 months or more) since I have read such a steaming pile of flop regarding this case. Your ignorance of the facts of this case is astounding.

I know it must hurt for a black man who supported this trout to see just what kind of person Crystal Mangum is. It must hurt for a black man to see his people be played like a sock puppet by a man who couldnt light a watch with his mind power.

The facts are that CGM is a retarded whore. She was believed by most because of her race or her gender. Not because she was credible, believable or convincing. The same can be said for those who banged the pots against the players. They saw white, male and priviliged then they just filled in the rest of the story themselves.

It is the author of this offal that is the small minded bigot. It is the author that judges people by the color of their skin and not the content of their soul. It is the author of this tripe whos opinion would be 180 degrees if the races were reversed. The authors piece reads like disjointed ramblings from a NBPP flunkie. The author himself reads like a bad comic book.

We know the truth. We knew it from the beginning. We knew these young men, we live with them in our communities. We watch them excel in school and we watch them succeed in life.

We also know Crystal Mangum. We know her type and we can spot her from a distance and you can bet we avoid her and her type. The author knows CGM also.....he is fooling nobody

Anonymous pops213 -- 6/17/2007 1:02 AM  

Please avoid personal attacks in your comments or your comments will be deleted. Thank you.

Anonymous Sports Law Blog Staff -- 6/17/2007 1:29 PM  

pops213, by your own words you are acknowledging that like those who you condemn, you saw white, male and priviliged -- and black stripper -- then you just filled in the rest of the story yourself.

Blogger Marcella Chester -- 6/17/2007 2:24 PM  

I too agree that he was just the tool used by a couple organizations that sought to use this case to get publicity for their causes. However, witholding evidence from the otherside, especially evidence that would help support their claims of innocence, is unconscionable and he desevers everything he's got coming to him. His disbarment is just going to be the first of several cases he's going to have to defend as a result of his conduct. I also hope that ALL prosecutors pay attention and realize their job is not to get convictions but to seek justice for the wronged and punishment for the guilty.

Blogger ZGKnight -- 6/17/2007 3:54 PM  

The comment above was by Zach Phipps.

Blogger ZGKnight -- 6/17/2007 3:58 PM  

Over-zealous prosecution is not new. The Innocence Project and others have used DNA evidence to exonerate 203 convicted felons so far, who together served a total of 2500 years in prison... wrongly.

So maybe we should be disbarring those prosecutors too eh? Where is the outcry over those cases, which went a whole lot farther than the Duke prosecution? Do you think it is relevant that 71% of those wrongful convictions were of minorities?

This case is a tragedy on so many levels, and will set back law enforcement several decades, back to the time when minority women who reported rape were presumed to be whores and people thought it was impossible to rape someone who was sexually active. If you don't agree, look again at the subtext of some of these comments here.

Anonymous Corey -- 6/18/2007 3:18 AM  

"We know her type and we can spot her from a distance and you can bet we avoid her and her type."

Well see, that has always been the problem. The only things you can see from a distance are skin color and gender and you really shouldn't rely just on that.

Anonymous Corey -- 6/18/2007 3:25 AM  

Corey, in most of those cases there was never an allegation that the prosecutor hid evidence (there may have been some, I won't claim none without reading them all).

The typical Innocence Project case the evidence available at the time pointed to the convicted person to such a degree that the state had a legitimate case. Advances in technology provided exculpatory evidence not available at the first trial.

Nifong tried to hide available evidence. Vast difference.

Blogger Mark -- 6/18/2007 7:39 AM  

Does the deletion of comments include the original blogger? Another inappropriate blog from someone writing, for what I thought, was supposed to be a blog on sports law and not about unsupported personal bias'.

And wrong to hire "minority female strippers?" But it is then ok to hire male strippers. And its ok to hire non-minority strippers? What?

Anonymous Tag H. -- 6/18/2007 9:31 AM  

I agree with Tag H. Is this a sports law blog or have the contributors gone astray-a bit? It is summer time, so maybe this is just filler stuff...

Anonymous Anonymous -- 6/18/2007 10:40 AM  


One of the most oft-raised constitutional challenges to convictions is a violation of the prosecution's constitutional obligation under *Brady v. Maryland* (1961) to disclose exculpatory evidence. So I think failures occur quite frequently, although perhaps not as blatantly as here.

Tag H and Anonymous 10:40:

The tag line for this blog reads "All things legal relating to the sports world." The Duke lacrosse story and its fallout, including the latest developments as to Nifong's law license (and whether Nifong's punishment was warranted), "relat[e] to the sports world." For proof, this has been reported on in the sports web sites ( and discussed on sports blogs (

Blogger Howard Wasserman -- 6/18/2007 11:15 AM  

Yeah, gotta agree with H.W. here. This is most definitely a law issue relating to the sports world, and should be covered at length on this blog. ESPN and the other major sports media outlets are covering this story in a major way, and I think this blog is the perfect forum for discussing this case.

I think others, along with myself, are just a little disappointed that a viewpoint that, in our opinion, so blatantly ignores the facts of this case would be allowed to be posted here by a "guest blogger." I'm not sure you should be allowing just anyone who teaches law and has watched sports before to be a blogger on your site. Then again, it isn't my site, so that's your choice.

Blogger Stephen -- 6/18/2007 12:10 PM  

To Mr. Wasserman:

Dre's comments weren't really concerned with a concentration on sports, but rather with a concentration on his personal bias' regarding race relations. The spirit of his bogging attempt weren't concerned with sports.

I heard that Paris Hilton caught some of the college world series while watching TV in jail, do we start bogging about her?

Anonymous Tag H. -- 6/18/2007 3:47 PM  

Tag H:

What you deride as Andre's "personal bias[es] regarding race relations" could also be described as his "*opinions* regarding race relations." And this blog exists for the expression of such opinions, when those opinions about anything, including race relations, arise out of the context of sports. The fact that you disagree with those opinions does not make them illegitimate or remove from the scope of this forum.

We have had posts discussing race relations, including statements of opinion, in the past. Off the top of my head: Mike has blogged about the racial overtones to discussions about Georgetown basketball or of the media's tendency to label white football coaches such as Bill Belichek as geniuses, but not black coaches such as Tony Dungy. Race is part of law and it is part of sports--making all fair game for this blog.

And as for Paris Hilton: If she gets time in "the hole" for live-blogging the College World Series, I promise I will throw a post together.

Blogger Howard Wasserman -- 6/18/2007 8:31 PM  

Mike Nifong should really apologize to every young woman who is sexually assaulted and has trouble getting a law enforcement official to believe her because of this case. He should also be held liable for every dime the three students' parents had to pay to clear them.

Should the lacrosse team have been having beer/stripper parties? Of course not. Are they choir boys? I doubt it. Incidents like this happen when you do things you shouldn't. But it should have been obvious to Nifong at at early point in the proceedings that Ms. Magnum was not telling the truth.

Nifong rode the train to election as D.A. The North Carolina bar finally punched his ticket after he disgraced his profession and cost three young men an irreplaceable piece of their youth (and reputations).

How about apologizing to the young men and their families instead?

Anonymous DonK -- 6/18/2007 9:34 PM  

H.W., I still don't see how you view Smith's post as one of legitimate opinion on an issue on which you could swing either way. There seems to be absolutely no debate that Nifong acted in horribly unethical manners. He doesn't even seem to disagree himself.

I think issues on race are important and can even be fun to discuss, so I have no problem with the inherent use of it in the topic. However, surely you have to recognize that Smith is coming across as having blinders in his view of this case because of his race. Again, I don't think there's anything wrong with the topic that Smith is discussing. It just seems to me that he is taking an embarassingly uninformed view on it.

Blogger Stephen -- 6/18/2007 9:35 PM  

I think somewhere along the way you lost sight of a few simple things: (1) It's one thing to protect women who allege they have been raped and it's another thing to pursue indictments on individuals without enough evidence to support the requisite standard to indict. You seem to be trying to argue that this is the beast that society has created (civil rights groups, etc) but in boiling down your argument, it seems to me that you're actually calling for a change in the standard by which we indict---quite a hefty stance. (2) Your argument also seems to overlook the enviornment in Durham. We are talking about a racially charged city and an elected position (D.A.) that required the black vote. To argue we should be thanking Nifong is ridiculous. His stance was not to protect women, blacks, or black women, but was a ploy designed to garner votes from a race that may not have supported him otherise. In other words, he played the black community for fools, something which deserves far worse than a thank you note. (3) Mike Nifong is your white man of the week? Do you not see the irony in that comment? That is the perfect example of a setback comment. You worked hard to make your point (regardless of whether others agree or disagree with you) but that comment sent your blog back. Simply stated, you're far too accomplished and educated to utter such words.

Anonymous Anonymous -- 6/18/2007 9:53 PM  

Nifong is my white man of the week because he did what groups to which I belong asked him to do, and when the chips came down we did not have your back.

I understand that "PC Cred" is considered important to anyone who wants to succeed in academia, but this is just absurd. This is part of what is wrong with legal education. Far too little ethics are taught, and those who rush to prove their PC Cred have no qualms about stomping on any ethical or Constitutional rule – so long as your personal critical theory gets promoted. I had hoped that this would be fading, but it appears to be alive and well.

But, enough about why law school generally sucks – because it rewards this kind of intellectual laziness and calls it "critical theory."

Lets get down to specifics.

This one is my favorite -- you proudly name Nifong, your “White Man of the Week.”

I certainly am happy that I am not "White Man of the Week." Setting the bigotry of that title aside, it doesn't seem to be a position of honor. This “White Man of the Week” is the worst kind of human being – one with the power to make major changes in the lives of others, who wielded that power with avarice and without ethics.

I understand that you hate the accused because they are waspy over privileged brats. I understand. I don’t like them either -- for pretty much the same reason. I envy them! They can afford to go to a $30K a year school, and they can afford to hire strippers! Christ, when I was in college I drove a cab to pay my tuition and dug bottles and cans out of the trash for beer money. I hate (cough, cough, envy) these little over privileged bastards!

Nevertheless, I’m not willing to throw any sense of logic or reason out the window just so that I can establish my PC Cred (I’m left of Trotsky anyhow). I am similarly unwilling to be a member of a tiny, but shrill, chorus that tries to make the fantasy a reality who thinks that you can take concrete facts, shake them in a bag with some poorly learned critical race theory, and somehow manufacture support for Mike Nifong’s actions.

Those who would do not possess the requisite skills to be a lawyer, let alone a law professor.

I am curious, for which "groups" do you claim to speak? What " civil rights organizations and feminist organizations " asked Nifong, or anyone else, to hide exculpatory evidence and abuse a position of power for personal and political gain? I'd just like to know so that I can avoid any meetings of such groups because they sound, in this context, like euphemisms for the nazis.

Here’s the fact: Nifong had lied to the court, as a prosecutor he made public inflammatory statements about three indicted players and their teammates, and withheld critical DNA evidence from defense attorneys.

And he’s “White Man of the Week”?

You want to give him a pass exactly why? Civil Rights groups wanted him to do that? You need to shore up your PC Cred? I’d accept “I was hanging out with Ricky Williams, watching Cheech and Chong movies before writing this column” as an excuse. At least then your lack of judgment and common sense would be both temporary and explicable.

Please, until you can get your mind straight, think about another profession for a little bit.

The last thing the legal education community needs is more intellectual dishonesty. In fact, none of us needs that.

We need equal justice.

To that end, I agree that it would be a wonderful day in America when 3 rich white boys go to jail for raping a girl, black or white. This just aint that day. Why not? Not because they are rich, not because they are white, not because they are privileged athletes… its because they didn’t goddamn do it!

That doesn’t mean that the initial story didn’t have all the trappings of “yet another campus rape.” And that is what made us all run like moths to a fire when the story broke.

Countless Sunday mornings on American campuses begin with some poor girl saying “you will never believe what happened to me at the (pick one) frat/lacrosse/football party.” The vast majority of those crimes go unpunished. When the victim is a black girl and the perpetrators are over privileged white kids, the prosecution rate drops to near-zero, and the conviction rate is... somewhere around George Bush's IQ.

Yes, when I first saw this story, I myself said "it's about time." I too lionized Nifong for a moment.

I'm tired of unequal justice, and unequal valuation of life. Whether we like it or not (and neither of us do), a black person's life is worth less than a white person's. The application of the death penalty, rape prosecutions, hell, the sheer disproportionate number of black men in prison. Put up a poster that shows a missing black girl, and it will be in the gutter by nightfall. A rich white girl goes missing, and it is a national tragedy.

Equal justice has been long overdue, and when this story first broke, I myself was cheering for the prosecution. I thought “maybe we are turning a corner.”

That was BEFORE ALL THE FACTS CAME OUT. Once the facts came out, I was able to change my mind.

Now that the facts are out, I can remove my “wishful thinking blinders” and look at the situation objectively.

The sum of Nifong's contribution to society is this:

1) He dragged a few dozen boys through the mud and the legal system for personal gain, when he knew (at the least) that there was exculpatory evidence – let alone evidence of their innocence. None of those boys broke the law. Yes, they should have their allowances taken away, and maybe Duke should suspend them just for acting like baboons. Fair enough. But they broke no law, and Nifong knew that.

2) He made damn certain that the next time a black girl accuses a group of white boys of raping her, everyone is going to wonder if she is lying too. Nifong made it much easier to get away with exactly the kind of crime that you (and I) think is so abhorrent.

In other words, Nifong managed to make black life cheaper than it already is. I'm not even black and I'm pissed about that -- why aren't you?

My only hope is that this story will fade from memory -- and fast. That will serve two goals. 1) These boys can get back to their decadent, but seemingly law-abiding lives. 2) The sooner we forget, the sooner the next girl who finds herself raped will not have this lying skank's baggage in her hand.

Mr. Nifong, White Man of the Week. Take a bow! Who was White Man of the Week last week? David Duke?

Please, no matter what good or bad thing I may ever do in my life, don't ever tag me with that idiotic, bigoted, and narrow minded “honor.”

Anonymous Marc J. Randazza -- 6/19/2007 6:47 AM  

Sounds like a lot of bullcrap to me. I don't know who wrote this stupid article, but I pray that the prosecutor in my town use evidence to try peoples lives, not politics and a misguided sense of "pay back" for past injustice.

Anonymous Anonymous -- 6/25/2007 2:27 PM  

"Something happened" alright. This stripper/prostitute was mounted by more men then Seabiscuit.

There should be a new law "the Nifong felony" to convict prosecutors of a crime and let them serve a jail sentence for this kind of abuse.

Anonymous Anonymous -- 6/25/2007 2:33 PM  

Andre, I respect your opinion. It is concise and informative. However, before waylaying the kids at Duke as your first few sentences may have suggested in my view, there are a few things that has to be addressed. I'm not an attorney or a Nancy Grace t.v. crime show junkie, but I'll play one in this comment section.

Did the lacrosse players showed immaturiry and stupidity on their parts in the incident? Without a doubt, yes. That is on the record, due to their past antics.

The majority of people who have followed this, such as yourself, are not "lionizing" them as choir boys. You sir, think we and the media are. That's immature on your part.

No one is lionizing them, except for the hypocrites who had already called them guilty: ESPN and the holier-than-thou sports talking heads who decided not to perform due diligence and research the story and the case. Making up your mind in 15 seconds so that you can be the first on-air is akin to being Nancy Grace and Jesse Jackson, who has yet and never will apologize for making mistakes in his own right.

Have you considered the following facts since spring of 2006: has any player since June 2006 has gotten into trouble with the law or has done anything that could easily have himself or the team expelled from Duke University? No. What have they done since June 2006? They had to endured the ridicule of their actions, accepted the punishment of losing a season and a coach, and assumed the responsibilties of their past actions, notwithstanding the crime they were accused of. Some of those players may have felt that they should not have to deal with all of that (I stress "some players"), but the overall feeling with the team is to cease and desist from any further childish acts and activities that could put others in harm's way.

In other words, Andre, they are not perfect. Never was and never will. Just like you and me. The irresponsibility of today's media has made it evident to me that all of us have failed the litmus test of the justice system: innocent until proven guilty and to find someone guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, the evidence must be consistent and uncompromised.

It's no surprise that you have sympathy for Mr. Nifong. Now you see how those who supported the lacrosse players feel. We called them stupid and foolish to be supporting them. The shoe is on the other foot. No one doesn't have to side with you on Mr. Nifong, and they deserve that right, as much as you.

Consider Mr. Nifong's punishment as a "rush to convict." The same treatment he received when he compromised his office and duties as District Attorney, inciting basically a clash between classes, race, and sex, and going to abnormal extremes to "rush judgment" towards the team and the accused, as a means to be elected.

And we think that our elected leaders are professionals at this.

Nifong isn't the only one. Duke University has apologized, somewhat, but the faculty has not taken the wherewiththal to apologize; the black community of Durham for following Nifong like lemmings and in turn being embarrassed themselves, and controversial "ambulance" chasers in the likes of Jesse Jackson.

Who are to kid here, either. I was as guilty to think that the lacrosse players did something violently wrong, come to realize that I "rushed to judgment" as well.

The lacrosse team didn't want any sympathy, but leave it to ESPN to pimp and pander anything they take to task, as an indirect way of apologizing. In effect, they haven't apologized for their actions either.

These are young adults (not kids) and for a few, of course they are going to tear up. They have never been in trouble before in their lives. For most college students, rich, middle class or poor, black or white, or Hispanic, they will freak out as well if they run afoul of the law.

I take no sides in this matter, because there are no sides to take. All of us are losers in the case. You, me, and everyone else. We have failed the justice system in adhering to reckless judgment and disregard to fairly investigate the case without any bias. That is what Mike Nifong is guilty of: being woefully and publicly biased. Perry Mason and Hamilton Burger thinks that's irresponsible.

If you are assuming that I sympathize with the players, think again. They are going to learn that their actions can be either good or result in bad. I can only hope that Duke, Durham, the lacrosse team, and the parties involved have learned something very powerful and sobering about the events that has taken place for little over a year.

If not, then we will never learn from recent past history. Most of the time, we don't learn from history.

Anonymous Anonymous -- 6/28/2007 12:55 AM  

Is Andre still apologetic that a criminal tried to railroad three innocent people?


Anonymous Anonymous -- 8/31/2007 8:19 PM  

Your well reasoned opinion is appreciated. I agree that college students who do not qualify as choir boys should spend thirty years in jail.

Anonymous Anonymous -- 9/03/2007 12:55 PM  

Thank you for this post. It is like a breath of fresh air to hear someone say that Nifong has become a scapegoat and is being completely railroaded for doing what DAs do in this country EVERYDAY (and are SUPPOSED to do). YES the evidence was shakey, YES he manipulated evidence to his favor, NO he did not have all his facts together before he opened his mouth and YES the victim changed her story (by all accounts, she was too drugged at the party to know what really happened), but these things happen all the time. It seems to me the high-riced lawyers on the Lacross players side successfully used the media to place their snotty, ill-mannered clients into the role of the victim, turning the tables on Crystal Gayle Mangum.

I, for one, appreciate Mike Nifong for trying to dw what he believed was right and am a bit ill at the whining I hear coming from the LaCross team.

Again, thank you for this post. I was beginning to wonder if our society had completely forgotten the value of diverse thinking. It seems EVERYONE is saying the same thing, and NO ONE sees the other side of this story.

Anonymous Anonymous -- 10/08/2007 1:18 AM  

I sincerely hope that all of you Nifong lovers get to see your children ruined over crimes of which they were wholly innocent.

This post sickens me, as do all of you who offer an ounce of sympathy to Nifong.

Anonymous Klaymore -- 2/07/2008 2:17 AM  

This is obviously a troll, a post by someone who does not mean what they write, they are only provoking controversy to enjoy the consternation caused here.

Unless the post is about meta-morality, that it's OK to prosecute innocent men because they are white and this satisfies some larger narrative about social justice. If it is, then psychiatric help might be in order.

The black community of Durham should apologize for their attempt at a lynching. The cynical attempt of Nifong to win an election by prosecuting the innocent is beyond comprehension.

Anonymous Anonymous -- 7/22/2008 12:37 PM  

Post a Comment