Wednesday, November 14, 2007

Look! It’s Sergeant Addison

When citizen journalists Tony Soprano and Baldo saw the news buried in a Durham Herald Sun story today, they immediately got the word out with posts at Liestoppers forum: David Addison, the Durham Police Corporal who as DPD spokesperson repeatedly and falsely stated a “horrific crime” was committed at the Duke lacrosse party, has been promoted to Sergeant.

The H-S story began:

Some of the area's heaviest-hitting civil attorneys this week joined two high-profile national litigators to fight a federal lawsuit arising out of false sex-assault allegations against three young men in the Duke lacrosse case.[...]

All three Duke athletes were declared innocent by the state Attorney General's Office in April.

[James] Maxwell, a past president of the North Carolina Bar Association and the N.C. Academy of Trial Lawyers, is representing newly promoted Durham police Sgt. David Addison in the federal litigation.

Addison is accused of conspiring to wrongfully prosecute Seligmann, Finnerty and Evans.
You can read the entire H-S story here.

My reaction?

I’m sorry it happened, and I don’t doubt that some of you are understandably angry about it. But Addison’s promotion will serve the interests of those seeking truth and justice.


A burden on the attorneys suing Durham City and DPD is to show that what police officers and their supervisors did to David Evans, Collin Finnerty and Reade Seligmann was part of accepted practice (attorneys often use the phrase “usual and customary”); and that is was not just the actions of individual rogue cops acting in ways unacceptable to DPD and Durham City.

That being the case, isn’t DPD’s decision to promote Addison something you’d note if you were an attorney for one of the three young men?

By awarding him a promotion, Durham and DPD are saying, “What Addison did was fine by us. As a matter of fact, we promoted him.”

An informed Durham citizen might ask: “Who made the decision to promote Addison? Was it Izzy, Curly or Moe?”

Something else:

A number of Addison’s supervisors had to write commendatory notes, evaluations, etc. as part of his promotion process. All of those have to be reviewed by a committee on promotions.

There was more to the process, but you get the idea: a lot of DPD supervisors endorsed the promotion.

Usual and customary?

Message to Duke President Richard Brodhead and the Chronicle editorial board: The Duke Hoax case hasn’t gone away. And it will get “uglier” and “Dukier” regardless of how many times you tell people it’s all over.

In Closing:

The following five posts were published last February and March. If you are interested in the suits, I think you'll be very interested in the Addison Series posts below. They provide background to the events described in the suit filings and more.

The Addison Series #1 – “This horrific crime” 2/16/07

Addison Series #2 – “CrimeStoppers will pay cash” 2/20/07

Addison Series #3 – “Not my poster” 2/25/07

Addison Series #4 - "They call it 'squeezing'" 3/2/07

Addison Series # 5 – “Major Duke Involvement" 3/11/07

In the "squeezing" post I suggested what things might be like for Addison in the event a Federal inquiry into the Hoax frame occurred. Currently he's a defendant in a civil suit.

However, much of what I said in the "squeezing" post applies to his current situation.

In fact, I think he may be facing a far more difficult situation with the attorneys who'll depose him in the civil suit than he might with federal investigators. Have any of you ever seen Brendan Sullivan in action?

The Addison Series leaves no doubt that as the civil suit progresses we're going to learn a lot more about not only what Nifong and DPD did but about what Duke University did as well.


Anonymous said...

"Was it Izzy, Curly or Moe?”

John you stepped over the line there. The Three Stooges were more ethical than that!

Great Post! Your series on Addison is one of the best examples of citizen journalism. Truly worthy of an award that professional journalists get given. Thanks!


Your fans at Bull City in Wonderland said...

Great job.

Why didn't the dailies get this before the election? Not that it would of made a difference . . .

Anonymous said...

JinC quote "we're going to learn a lot more about ...."


Thanks for your diligence.

Anonymous said...

Apparently no one with any decision making ability in Durham understand basic common sense. Promoting one of the bad actors in the Duke Hoax will not look good to a jury.

Just as their decision to not release the name of suspended officers in the current investigation. How do they explain that when compared to the Wanted Poster? I don't think "we protect our own" will play well in court.

Juries are made up of normal people and we know right from wrong.

kbp said...

Thanks John!

Some great points pointed out in this post.

So many ignore what is actually SOP at DPD and city hall in Durham.

Anonymous said...

quote 8:20pm
"Juries are made up of normal people and we know right from wrong."

Me thinks that juries in Durham may be different. Sadly.