Monday, March 16, 2009

Granny & The Duke/Durham Frame

On this McClatchy Watch thread an Anon 8:28 commented:

As my grandmother used to say:

"If you don't want it in the newspaper, don't join a rowdy college lacrosse team, throw a drunken party where you hire a mentally unstable stripper, encourage them to penetrate themselves for your amusement, holler vaguely racist things as the party disintegrates and live in a county with an imbalanced and unscrupulous DA."

My granny was right. Bad things can happen in that situation. Those kids should have been in the library.

Further down the thread I responded - - -

To Anon 8:28,

With all respect to your Granny, bad things can happen anywhere; being “in the library” is no protection.

Do you recall the cab driver arrested at work and put on trial after he provided an alibi for one of the innocent students "the Durham justice system" was framing and planning to send to prison for decades?

Do you know that trusting citizens, unaware they were being lied to by authorities, voted as a grand jury to indict three innocent young men who’ll now carry that stigma for the rest of their lives?

Do you at least know the Durham Police and DA repeatedly lied to the entire public about "stonewalling" and "horrific crimes?"

Those are all things much, much worse then some bad college student behavior. They are all essential parts of a police state’s operating system, as the Nazis and Soviets showed us.

One last thing: Did your Granny ever tell you about the sort of people who witness or learn about what happened in Durham in Spring 2006, and then focus most of their criticisms and blame not on the authorities but on the victims?

If you're Granny did talk about such people, she might have used Lenin's term for them: "useful idiots."

Do you remember?

Thanks for reading.

John in Carolina


Folks, so far Anon 8:28 hasn’t responded but I’ll check back tomorrow.


ryanpaige said...

It's also not as if not being at the party was enough to keep from "getting into trouble".

There were people who weren't at the party who were subject to the NTO. Given the free-for-all that was the "identification" process, not being at the party very likely wouldn't have been enough to save a person from indictment had that person been unlucky enough to get picked (as we've seen, though Seligmann was at the party, he was provably gone by the time the made-up "crime" could have taken place. And yet, he was still indicted. So being able to prove you weren't there wasn't enough to stop the hammer from coming down).