Law prof: "Nifong tried to cheat"

University of Maryland Law School professor Jason Trumpbour writes (“Now we are seeing some action!” Dec. 14):

Today, the defense teams filed a motion to compel discovery which reveals even more evidence of the prosecutorial misconduct that moved Representative [Walter] Jones to write his letter [to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.]

Contained in that motion is evidence that [DA Mike]Nifong tried to cheat on discovery. The private lab hired by Nifong never reported that it had found dna from numerous males in the rape kit samples taken from the vaginal area, anus and undergarments of the alleged victim.

Nifong never turned this information over to the defense, opposed an earlier motion to compel discovery of the records containing this information and has yet to fully comply with that earlier motion.

The information is particularly relevant as evidence because it contradicts statements made by the alleged victim and also provides an explanation for the “edema” inside her vagina. Of course it would also fundamentally undermine any argument that Nifong was planning to make that the accused could have committed a gang rape, ejaculated and not left any dna on the alleged victim.

The motion also suggests that the private lab was complicit with Nifong in attempting to cheat on discovery. The lab’s owner is listed among the prosecution witnesses.

If it is true that the lab owner aided Nifong in attempting to obstruct justice, Nifong would now have to decide if he still wants to call a key expert witness who might have to invoke his Fifth Amendment rights on the stand in response to cross examination. How much more screwed up can a prosecution case get?!

Trumpbour, who also teaches in the University of Baltimore’s Legal and Ethical Studies graduate program, holds three degrees from Duke University (A.B., 1988, A.M., 1991, J.D., 1991.) as well as a doctorate from Cambridge University (Ph.D., 1996). He's been in private practice and also served in the Criminal Appeals Division of the Maryland Attorney General’s Office (1988-2001).

Like Duke University Law School professor James Coleman, Trumpbour has for many months been alerting the public to Nifong’s travesties. Here’s part of a letter Trumpbour wrote on Aug. 4 in response to one of the Durham Herald Sun’s “gosh, we love Mike Nifong” editorials:

In an August 1 editorial, you found District Attorney Mike Nifong "courageous" and "contrite" in his discussion of the Duke lacrosse case at a recent press conference.

Unfortunately, there is little courage to be found in a desperate appeal to sympathy by an embattled politician. And Nifong was hardly contrite as he continued to obfuscate the relevant legal standards for his conduct.

You also stated that Nifong "still believes he has a good case" and find that significant for some reason. Yet, Nifong apparently lacks the courage of those convictions. After ramrodding evidence through a hopelessly backlogged SBI crime lab and racing to get indictments before the election, Nifong is now trying to postpone the day of reckoning until next spring.

Nifong refused to even look at any of the exculpatory evidence proffered to him by the defense. This action violated North Carolina Rule of Professional Conduct 3.8 which prohibits a prosecutor from avoiding "pursuit of evidence merely because he or she believes it will damage the prosecutor's case."

In hiding his eyes from that evidence, Nifong abdicated the responsibilities of the office to which he was appointed and should have no further claim to it. (bold added)[…]

Trumpbour identified himself as a member of Friends of Duke University. He serves as FODU's spokesperson. FODU has no formal affiliation with Duke but seeks to work with the University on a variety of issues including securing as much justice as is now possible for the three framed young men – David Evans, Collin Finnerty and Reade Seligmann.

FODU welcomes the involvement of Duke and non-Duke people alike.

I included Trumpbour’s H-S letter in an Aug. 4 post: “This Duke Friend is a Durham friend, too”

The Aug. 4 post includes a link to KC Johnson's "Roy Cooper's Silence" post [Cooper's NC's Attorney General] in which KC provides a scholarly review of N. C. law and procedures relating to Nifong's misconduct as well as a link to Coleman's Jun. 12 letter in which he said of the rigged ID procedure that was the most essential part of the frame-up of Evans, Finnerty and Seligmann: "And three students would do; there could be no wrong choice."

Trumpbour continues to be a friend of Duke and Durham. He’s a friend of Justice, too.

You can read Trumpbour’s Dec. 14 column here.