"... these three individuals [David Evans, Collin Finnerty and Reade Seligmann,] are innocent of these charges."
North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper, Apr. 11, 2007
On April 17, 2006, Collin Finnerty and Reade Seligmann, at the time students in good standing at Duke University, were indicted for rape, sexual assault, and kidnapping by a Durham grand jury.
The indictments were part of an elaborate frame-up directed by then Durham DA Mike Nifong with considerable assistance from certain Durham police officers and their supervisors.
The following day Duke University’s news service issued a press release headed:
Statement from Larry Moneta on Status of Indicted StudentsMoneta’s statement read:
Two Duke University students have been indicted by a grand jury investigating allegations of sexual assault against a Durham woman. The university is prohibited under federal privacy regulations from releasing information regarding student disciplinary matters.The press release included a “Note to editors” identifying Moneta as “vice president for student affairs.”
(For more information about the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act -- FERPA --
Historically, it has been the university’s practice to issue an interim suspension when a student is charged with a felony or when the student’s presence on the campus may create an unsafe situation.
Folks, you know when we play games we often do fakes, making it appear we’re doing one thing when we’re really doing something else. Baseball has its “hidden ball” trick. Football quarterbacks routinely fake a handoff to a back running into the line before throwing a pass down the field.
I’ll bet many of you already know where I’m heading. You're right.
Last April 18 Moneta and Duke did a FERPA fake: “The university is prohibited under federal privacy regulations from releasing ….” They even included the internet address where the editors could reference FERPA. Talk about slick faking.
Then Duke “threw the pass” to the editors: “Historically, it has been the university’s practice to issue an interim suspension ….”
Duke even gave the editors "quarterback" Moneta's name and title so they could report them along with Duke’s FERPA fake and de facto public disclosure the University was suspending Finnerty and Seligmann.
That Duke fake was pretty skunky, even for a university headed by President Brodhead and BOT Chairman Steel.
But now let’s look at a much more deceptive and very likely illegal Duke FERPA fake.
Liestoppers recently reported [excerpt]:
It appears that the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) (20 U.S.C. § 1232g; 34 CFR Part 99) protected key card records of Duke University students which District Attorney Mike Nifong sought by subpoena 0n May 31, 2006 were actually provided to the Durham Police Department, and in turn to the ex-DA, on March 31, 2006. . . .Liestoppers’ post is based on impressive documentation for which links are provided. I hope you read the post if you haven't already done so.
A review of the case notes and State Bar deposition of Sgt. Mark Gottlieb reveals that the private key card records were obtained from Duke University without a court order and in violation of FERPA. (emphasis JinC’s)
Gottlieb's deposition also reveals that the information provided illegally by Duke University contributed to the indictment of Collin Finnerty while leading directly to the indictment of Reade Seligmann.
The key card date, illegally obtained and purposefully misconstrued by Sgt. Gottlieb, offered the only "corroboration" presented to the Grand Jury of Seligmann's presence at the scene of the imagined crimes.
Message to Duke alums and others who contribute financially to the University: Please consider holding off on your financial giving until you’re satisfied Duke has explained its FERPA fakes.
In the meantime, why not give Duke as much encouragement as you can to change so much that is obviously wrong at the University?
When you're contacted by the Annual Fund or a trustee who’s looking for a major gift, why not first give links to the Liestoppers FERPA post and some of KC Johnson’s posts exposing some of Duke’s ideologically-driven and academically inept faculty members (See examples here, here and here )?
If you give Duke such links, please be generous.
Duke needs to answer the questions such links pose, and correct the numerous and critically important problems they expose.
How can Duke be Duke if it doesn’t?