No, this post is not about clothing.
It’s about the Aug. 25 Durham Herald Sun story which begins:
Two of the country's best-known lawyers are representing three former Duke University lacrosse players falsely accused of rape and may file a federal civil-rights lawsuit against the city next month, multiple sources say.You can read the H-S story here.
The players have hired Washington, D.C., lawyer Brendan Sullivan and New York City litigator Barry Scheck to represent them in the pending civil case.
Sullivan -- who gained fame in the 1980s while representing former Marine Lt. Col. Oliver North -- is working for lacrosse players David Evans and Collin Finnerty.
Confirmation of that came Friday from Chris Manning, a law partner of Sullivan's in the Washington firm Williams & Connolly.
Manning said that Scheck -- a member of O.J. Simpson's legal "dream team" in the 1990s -- is representing the third falsely accused player, Reade Seligmann.
Sources say Sullivan and Scheck contacted the city's lawyers recently and told them Durham faces litigation over how police handled the Duke lacrosse case.
Their move prompted City Council members, senior administrators, City Attorney Henry Blinder and a private-practice attorney retained by the city, Joel Craig, to huddle behind closed doors twice this week for consultations.
Blinder and Craig are supposed to attend a face-to-face meeting with the players' attorneys sometime in the next few days to hear them describe the basis for a lawsuit and perhaps terms for an out-of-court settlement.
The council has scheduled a closed-door meeting on Sept. 6 to hear a report from Blinder and Craig on the results of that meeting.
Comments for those who appreciate irony:
1) The H-S story ran 17 months to the day the Raleigh News & Observer published a front-page story with headlines that gave no indication the facts of the story were in dispute:
Dancer gives details of ordealFor any readers who didn't “get it” from the headlines, the N&O’s uncritical reporting of “the victim’s” story and its reporting of what the N&O knew then was a lie about the players not cooperating with police, the N&O told readers:
A woman hired to dance for the Duke lacrosse team describes a night of racial slurs, growing fear and, finally, sexual violence
It is The News & Observer's policy not to identify the victims of sex crimes.
2) The H-S story ran one year to the day the NY Times published "Files From Duke Rape Case Give Details but No Answers.”
A better headline would have been: “Times Hypes Gottlieb Notes Meant to Bolster Frame-up.”
Within a few hours of its appearance, Liestoppers.com had shredded the Times’ story (I'm not kidding about the “few hours". The NYT story appeared on the net a little after midnight; Liestoppers posted a little after 3 A. M. ).
Other bloggers and journalists added to Liestoppers' shredding so that within a few days the Times’ story had little or no credibility with informed, fair-minded people.
What a difference from the public's and media’s largely credulous reactions to the N&O’s fraudulent March 25 story about "the victim's" "ordeal" during a night that ended "finally" in “sexual violence.”
We'd learned a lot in the five months between the N&O’s story and the Times’ story.
By August 25, 2006 I’ll bet even many of Duke faculty’s Group of 88 and the NAACP’s state leadership knew Nifong’s “case” was really a frame-up.
That brings us to the next irony.
3) A year ago most city council members who’ll meet behind closed-doors on Sept. 6 to hear what will surely be a “bad news” report were supporting Mike Nifong for Durham DA. Also, most, if not all, of them had up until then said nothing I can recall critical of the DPD.
Councilwoman Diane Catotti’s supporters will surely agree she did all she could last Fall to help elect her friend, Mike Nifong.
Of course, they’ll add she didn’t do it because she and Nifong are friends.
I won't question that.
I’m sure Catotti, who’s up for re-election this year, backed Nifong because after following the Duke Hoax case closely for five months, she felt Nifong was the right person to be DA.
I also don’t doubt Catotti had her reasons a few months back for opposing an outside review of police conduct in the frame-up and ongoing cover-up of same.
Catotti is regarded as the most liberal and/or progressive member of the city council ( No, I don’t know the difference between “liberal” and “progressive,” either. But it seems to be important, at least to "progressives" who just hate, hate being called "liberals." ).
In any case, don't both "liberals" and "progressives" tell us they're all about justice and opposed to rogue prosecutors and police who violate the rights of citizens?
I’ve got to end this now, but I’ll soon post again concerning the H-S’s story.
I hope you read the entire H-S story.
The Raleigh News & Observer has so far reported nothing that I could find on the possible lawsuits.
KC Johnson and Liestoppers posted on the H-S story.
The Johnsville News has a comprehensive post updating on the Duke Hoax case, including a part it titles: Durham in Legal Crosshairs. That really says it, doesn't it?