Duke lacrosse: Takedowns of Nifong and Brodhead

Whatever any of us think of Durham’s DA Mike Nifong and Duke’s President Richard H. Brodhead, we can agree on this: neither man has said a single public word critical of the other.

If you doubt that, just ask any member of either man’s staffs, any member of Brodhead’s Duke board of trustees or any member of Nifong’s campaign committee.

So who’s to object to my putting bloggers’ takedowns of each man in the same post?

First, the Nifong takedown from KC Johnson at Durham-in-Wonderland

It's almost as if Mike Nifong didn't read any of his case file before proceeding with indictments.

DNA:

• March 23: Nifong’s office submits a motion to the court affirming, “The DNA evidence requested will immediately rule out any innocent persons, and show conclusive evidence as to who the suspect(s) are in the alleged violent attack upon this victim.”


• April 11: “DNA results can often be helpful, but, you know, I’ve been doing this for a long time, and most of the years I’ve been doing this, we didn’t have DNA. We had to deal with sexual assault cases the good old-fashioned way. Witnesses got on the stand and told what happened to them.”

Nifong apparently discovered it was useful to revise his opinion after the DNA tests he was certain would reveal matches to lacrosse players instead all came back empty.

Respect for Civil Liberties:

• Herald-Sun votebook: “Justice requires a level playing field, and it is the District Attorney’s responsibility to see that every defendant has one.”

• ESPN: “One would wonder why one needs an attorney if one was not charged and had not done anything wrong.”
Nifong apparently discovered it was useful to revise his opinion about the importance of civil liberties after defense attorneys started objecting to his unethical behavior, such as his inflammatory public statements. …

KC provides much more about Nifong’s duplicity before he wraps up with:

If any justice remains in North Carolina, this case will end with the state bar citing his massive procedural misconduct to revoke Nifong’s license to practice law.

You can read the entire post here.

Well said, KC.

The Brodhead takedown can be found at Liestoppers. Most of the post is a carefully reasoned, lucid, and civil letter from a Duke alum to Duke English Dept. Professor Karla Holloway. The letter is a response to an article, “Coda: Bodies of Evidence,” Holloway recently wrote.

The letter writer exposes Professor Holloway’s manipulations of facts so they "fit" with what she “sees” when looking at the world through her all-purpose, Four-in-One race, sex, gender and privilege "prism."

Let’s look at parts of the alum’s letter and then discuss why it’s a very effective Brodhead takedown. The letter begins:

Dear Professor Holloway:

My wife and I both graduated from Duke. I have been following the lacrosse investigation very closely and have corresponded with numerous individuals about the events and Duke's response. I was very sad to read your article "Coda: Bodies of Evidence."

The lacrosse scandal has been painful for all of us in the Duke community.

What is particularly painful is the degree to which members of the Duke faculty have labored to condemn the lacrosse team with what at times appears to be a cruel disregard for the likelihood that no rape occurred.

You address this in your "Coda: Bodies of Evidence" article by saying:

"The appropriate presumption of innocence that follows the players, however the legal case is determined, is neither the critical social indicator of the event, nor the final measure of its cultural facts."

This statement appears strange for a number of reasons.

First, the presumption of innocence obviously doesn't follow a defendant "however the legal case is determined." A defendant found guilty is treated as guilty. Michael Peterson is not presumed innocent while he serves a life sentence for the murder of his wife.

Your statement suggests that you are equating someone charged with someone convicted.

Second, whatever else happened at the party, I struggle to see how anything other than whether or not a rape occurred can be the "critical social indicator of the event."

If there was a rape, the players committed a heinous act.

If there wasn't a rape, they have been the victims of a vicious lie.

Third, the support for the lacrosse players from people like me is not based on a presumption of innocence. It is based on the facts of the case.

We are arguing that the players are actually and demonstrably innocent. The timeline of events is wholly inconsistent with the accuser's story, the medical evidence doesn't support the claim, and no witnesses corroborate the accuser's version of events.

One of the defendants, Reade Seligmann, has produced conclusive evidence that he wasn't even there during the only time any assault could have possibly occurred.

Yet, [Professor Holloway,] you dismiss the evidence no rape occurred out of hand and …

Folks, you can read the rest of the alum’s letter here and more about Prof. Holloway here at KC Johnson’s Durham-in-Wonderland.

Prof. Holloway is very comfortable with Four-in-One prismatic views but they leave reasonable people asking serious questions not just about Holloway but about Brodhead

Why, for instance, Brodhead select Holloway from among hundreds of faculty to head the committee he charged to assess Duke’s Campus Culture?

Wasn’t it clear to everyone at Duke, including Brodhead and the trustees, just what Holloway “sees” when she looks at Duke through her prism?

I have no problem with Holloway sharing her "visions" of Duke, criminal justice et al with the Campus Culture Committee. But by what standard is she the right person to chair the committee. What was Brodhead thinking of?

How does Brodhead, who himself overturned a foundation stone of American justice with his “proved innocent” remark, justify selection of Holloway who says, “ however the legal case is determined, is neither the critical social indicator of the event, nor the final measure of its cultural facts?"

Selecting Holloway to lead a committee charged with assessing Duke’s Campus Culture is a lot like selecting Ward Churchill to determine whether there’s too much patriotism on your campus.

Nice work, Liestoppers.

Hang in there, folks. It’s going to be a long struggle.