tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13073631.post1919953656997355980..comments2024-01-04T07:21:18.243-05:00Comments on John In Carolina: 3rd Request re: N&O misrepresentation in suit storyUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13073631.post-12710414422781388792008-03-01T16:07:00.000-05:002008-03-01T16:07:00.000-05:00Blythe was the co-byline on the late March 2006 in...Blythe was the co-byline on the late March 2006 inflammatory coverage in the N&O (with Khanna). Isn't it beyond outrageous that she is allowed to write stories now about the lawsuit after she did so much to enable Nifong's frame of the lacrosse players?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13073631.post-7735856165466849542008-03-01T06:34:00.000-05:002008-03-01T06:34:00.000-05:00www.bork.com/downloads/Carrington-Duke_MemoSupport...www.bork.com/downloads/Carrington-Duke_MemoSupportMotionDoc11.pdf - Footnote 6: <BR/><BR/>///For example, as one reporter from the News & Observer noted, “[t]he latest Duke<BR/>lacrosse suit got off to a big start Thursday with publicists, lawyers of national renown, a<BR/>media blitz at the National Press Club, and a lawsuit with its own website.” Anne Blythe<BR/>and Barbara Barrett, 38-Player Lacrosse Suit Gets Fanfare, News & Observer, Feb. 22,<BR/>2008 <BR/><BR/>That same reporter observed that the<BR/><BR/> ****“[Plaintiffs’ counsel]<BR/>Cooper . . . issued what amounted to an opening argument.” ****Id. (emphasis added)<BR/><BR/>Indeed, a basic internet<BR/>search revealed countless online news articles and blog postings quoting or referencing<BR/>Mr. Cooper or Mr. Bork in the course of discussing the litigation. (Ex. 10.)///<BR/><BR/><BR/>John, you wondered why the N&O's article on the '38' Press conference was so different from the rest of the media. I submit that the above is the reason. The phrase highlighted *** above is clearly legalese; probably written by Dukes Attorney. <BR/><BR/>The N&O are continuing to assist Duke Admin, by giving them 'fodder' for this latest filing. <BR/><BR/>It is stated in the deposition that Duke Defendants counsel Gorelik phoned Cooper before the presser....., so there was plenty of time to set this up! JMOAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13073631.post-91875326687733658302008-02-29T21:45:00.000-05:002008-02-29T21:45:00.000-05:00Who will hold the N&O accountable?Who will hold the N&O accountable?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13073631.post-67810501875123183862008-02-29T18:52:00.000-05:002008-02-29T18:52:00.000-05:00Thanks JohnThe N&O appears to be making it up as t...Thanks John<BR/><BR/>The N&O appears to be making it up as they go, not worried about their credibility.<BR/><BR/>On that Motion filed today, it's a joke. They mainly note Rule 3.6(b) of the NC rules. Then they identify content (really whining about it) on the website and the media appearance of Henkelman. <BR/><BR/>My summary is that they're hoping the court will re-write the rule to cover the acts they are whining about. The information is either from public records or a plaintiff. As I recall, in the criminal case the court decided that restricting parties besides the attorneys was a bit broad and we had 60 Minutes after that ruling which stated the Rules do not apply to clients or the public. <BR/><BR/>Next they tell us; <BR/><I>"When a complaint contains such incendiary language, an attorney should not be permitted to hide behind the language of the complaint and make a statement to the press that strings together paragraphs that are highly prejudicial."</I> <BR/><BR/>So now it looks like they want to reclassify the public record so it is a violation of the rule.<BR/><BR/>Not only are they redirecting blame ("misdirected... blame Nifong...), the chickens running and searching for cover by asking for new rules to hide behind.<BR/><BR/>kbpAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13073631.post-68599662000946291142008-02-29T16:59:00.000-05:002008-02-29T16:59:00.000-05:00You got him by the short and curlies John. He is s...You got him by the short and curlies John. He is squealing but will not respond. So it is with cowards.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13073631.post-72282587578936560272008-02-29T16:42:00.000-05:002008-02-29T16:42:00.000-05:00And now, people will also know that Duke claims th...And now, people will also know that Duke claims the www.dukelawsuit.com web site is unfair. boo hooAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com