This is a 1, 2, 3 post containing:
1 – a statement Duke BOT chair Robert Steel made on Apr. 7, 2006.
2 – a some facts we all knew on Apr. 7 and some questions they generate in light of what Steel said that day.
3 – a few comments.
Let’s begin ----
From Duke News the full text of BOT chair Robert Steel’s Apr. 7, 2006 statement:
1 - The trustees of Duke University have been in active conversation with President Brodhead and the university’s senior leadership since the outset of the controversy involving the men’s lacrosse team. We appreciate the constancy of President Brodhead’s responsible leadership at a time when the facts are not clear and emotions run high.
President Brodhead has spoken eloquently about the challenges our community faces and the values that must guide us in doing so, in addressing the serious issues that have surfaced as a result of this incident. First and foremost, we await a resolution of the facts surrounding the party of March 13, and join in calling for full cooperation with the police investigation.
As President Brodhead has consistently stated, the crimes alleged are grave and, if verified, will warrant severe punishment from both the criminal justice system and Duke’s student judicial process. Simultaneously, we must protect the rights of students who have maintained their innocence and not been charged with any crime.
As President Brodhead has noted, we need not -- and will not -- wait on the resolution of this case to address broader issues that range from the social culture of our students to difficult questions involving race, class and Duke’s relationships with its Durham neighbors.
We endorse the steps President Brodhead is taking to deal with both the immediate situation and these wider challenges.
The trustees recognize and deeply regret how the current situation has cast a cloud over the many wonderful people who comprise our campus and the larger community of Durham. We are especially grateful to Mayor Bill Bell and Chancellor James Ammons and many others in the Durham community and at Duke for their wise and statesmanlike leadership during this troubled time.
When all of the facts are in, Duke will be judged by how it responded to the challenges before us. The trustees recognize these challenges and pledge our personal and collective support over the coming weeks to ensure that Duke University responds in a manner consistent with the great institution we know it to be.
__________END OF STEEL'S STATEMENT____________________
2 – By Apr. 7 Steel and the rest of us knew about the players’ cooperation with police. Steel and the rest of us also knew their attorneys had approached Nifong offering to provide what they said was exculpatory evidence and to bring the Duke students in for questioning but had been rebuffed by Nifong on both counts.
Steel said nothing about any of that. Why not?
By Apr. 7 Steel and the rest of us knew about the “Wanted” and “Vigilante” posters, both based on the lie that the players hadn’t cooperated with police.
We all knew both posters added to the considerable physical danger the lacrosse players were facing and heightened the danger other Duke students were facing because they could be unintended victims of unstable people stirred to act by the posters.
But in a statement he made clear had the support of his fellow trustees, Steel said nothing critical of the posters’ contents or those circulating them. Or for that matter the 88 Duke faculty mambers who just the day before had thanked them "for not waiting."
Why was that?
What about Steel “calling for full cooperation with the police investigation?”
Did he know of anyone at the time on the lacrosse team or connected with it who wasn’t willing to cooperate so long as their rights were respected and they weren't being set-up as part of a frame-up?
Steel should tell us.
Can you agree with this statement: Steel had to know at the time he made his call “for full cooperation” that it would be helpful to those using the “wall of silence” lie and posters in ways that endangered Duke students?
3 – Final comments:
I’ll be interested to read what you say.
This is my last Duke Hoax post before I join my family for Christmas services and festivities.
I’ll put a few “low intensity” posts up later tonight ( “Low intensity?” They’re easy to do posts. Like posting on a pundit’s claim NYT columnist Paul Krugman is “brilliant.” ) and then JinC will be “closed” for Christmas Eve and Day.
The only important one of the “low intensity” posts will be a full-hearted expression of thanks to our armed forces and their families.
I’ll be back around 10 AM Eastern on Wednesday.
Every good wish for joy and health to you all and those you love
Sunday, December 23, 2007
This is a 1, 2, 3 post containing:
Posted by JWM at 7:53 PM