Duke lacrosse: Times' story "Winners" & "Losers"(Part 1)

You know about the Times’ Aug. 26 story people are calling “The Gottlieb Files,” don’t you?

You're asking:

Who wins - who loses - as a result of the story?

And can we identify short- and long-term “Winners” and “Losers?”

I’ll try to answer those questions in this post and another tomorrow.

Today let's look at “Winners”

Durham DA Mike Nifong – The Times’ refusal to “pull the plug” in circumstances where that was called for, helps keep Nifong’s “case” on “life support.”

He can go on “hoping for a miracle.”

Who knows, maybe the accuser will refuse to testify.

Then “the second dancer,” Kim Roberts, might say she needs to devote all her time to “bringing out the truth” in her lawsuit for damages against Duke University:

“Like I told Katie Couric, [Duke President] Brodhead’s apology for what was said to me and Precious that night was the right thing for him to do.

But it didn’t relieve my pain or make me whole. Like Reverend Jackson says, “Some pain only money can help.”

At that point, Nifong will say he’s really, really sorry he didn’t have a chance to present his “case” in court.

Durham Police Sergeant Mark Gottlieb – He’s a big winner at least in the short-term.. Sure his notes came in months after the incidents. He was in the position of the guy at the track who knows the fix in his and the 5 horse will win. He knows just what to say when he gets to the betting window. But the Times took him seriously so he gets away for a while with helping frame three innocent people.

Gottlieb’s going to be protected as the Blincos investigation goes forward. Right now he’s too valuable to Nifong.

But Gottllieb’s “win” now will make him a long-term loser. Police officers are not supposed to frame people. Gottlieb’s a big part of the frame-up. When the truth comes out Gottlieb will very likely find himself in court as a defendant.


Duke University President Richard H. Brodhead – The “Gottlieb Files” story gives him some “cover” as he refuses to speak out about the travesties and injustices inflicted upon Duke students. Brodhead can go on saying something like: “Since the students’ innocence has not been proven in court, I can make no further comment about questions of their guilt or innocence until after trial.

Brodhead’s a short-term winner. As people learn more about how he’s managed the Duke response to the hoax, their criticism grows. I’ll be saying a lot more about Brodhead very soon.


Almost the entire Duke faculty, including it’s much ridiculed “Group of 88.” – They can say, “Well, the Times say there’s more ambiguity than we thought. I want to wait for the trial and get all the facts before I make up my mind.”


Rev. Al Sharpton - He won’t have to answer so many “Tawana Brawley” questions, at least in the short-term.

CBS’ 60 Minutes – A big competitor has “gone first” with its “fall fashion” line. 60 Minutes won’t go with the same style, especially now that they see how bloggers are shreading the Times’ story. If 60 Minutes research and production people have been reading the blogs these last 48 hours (I suspect they have), they’re learning a lot about the case they might have missed.

Also, they’re reading some sharp, very well-informed commentary of the type many of them read after the Texas Air National Guard story. I think that will help them avoid the mistakes they made in the TANG story. This has to be “get it right” time for 60 Minutes It can’t afford to blow two major stories in two years.

Kim Roberts – See under “Nifong” above.

Bloggers – I don’t have to explain why, do I?