Thread: Isn't This Racism ??

Just a few of the problems. There are many more. Nifong created his own media circus by talking about this in the press, repeatedly. Before these men had their lawyers.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/...n2352512.shtml

Meehan acknowledged that he has never omitted potentially exculpatory evidence before. "We haven't done that before," he tells Stahl. "In retrospect, I should have done a better job of conveying that information."

Meehan has stated that he told the prosecutor, Durham County District Attorney Mike Nifong, about the other DNA for the first time in mid-April. Later that same month, Nifong indicted three Duke lacrosse players. Meehan has also said in court proceedings that he and Nifong agreed before the evidence tests were completed that his report should be limited to positive matches between the accuser and the players at the team party where she says she was sexually assaulted last March.

Meehan says writing an incomplete report violates his own firm's standards. "It was an error in judgment on my part. … It certainly was a big error," says Meehan. He says his firm wasn't trying to hide the information and that it released it when it was asked. But his client's behavior irks him, he says.

Nifong took six months to tell the players' defense attorneys about the other DNA, as required by law — and during that time, Nifong filed a court motion that stated he was not aware of any potentially exculpatory evidence.

http://205.188.238.109/time/nation/a...573260,00.html

The current ethics charges allege "conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice... engaged in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation" and cites four violations of the state's Revised Rules of Professional Conduct. Among the 41 public statements cited by the bar is one alleging that Nifong knew was not credible: "I would not be surprised if condoms were used. Probably an exotic dancer would not be your first choice for unprotected sex," Nifong said publicly, even after the accuser's own hospital exam statement was taken, in which she said her attackers did not use condoms.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/...n2082140.shtml

The district attorney, Mike Nifong, took to the airwaves giving dozens of interviews, expressing with absolute certainty that Duke lacrosse players had committed a horrific crime. His comments fueled explosive news coverage and fed public suspicion of the team, before much of the evidence was gathered.

"There’s no doubt in my mind that she was raped and assaulted at this location," he said on Fox News' "The O'Reilly Factor."

D.A. Nifong referred to the lacrosse players “a bunch of hooligans” whose “daddies could buy them expensive lawyers.” He played up the racial aspects of the case, but insisted that his public comments had nothing to do with the hotly contested election campaign he was waging in a city with a large black population.

Police released affidavits stating the accuser’s claim that she was pulled into a bathroom by three men and raped “anally, vaginally, and orally” while they “hit, kicked, and strangled” her over a “30 minute” period.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/...n2035702.shtml

(AP) Three Duke lacrosse players took five to 10 minutes to sexually assault a woman hired to perform as a stripper at a team party, and not the 30 minutes she originally described to investigators, a prosecutor said Friday.

From CNN :

Up next, the media's failing grade in the Duke University sex scandal.

KURTZ: It was, when you get right down to it, a local police blotter story, a woman who had accused three young men of rape. But because she was black and they were white, because they were on the lacrosse team and because they played at Duke University, the media just went haywire.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Now to that explosive Duke sex scandal.

MATT LAUER, NBC NEWS: First we want to talk more about the Duke rape case.

BOB SCHIEFFER, CBS NEWS: ... the case that has rocked one of America's elite college campuses and divided the community around it.

BROOKE ANDERSON, CNN: It's the story that everybody is talking about, television can't seem to get enough of it, the Duke University rape case.

KURTZ (voice over): And so began a nightmare for Collin Finnerty, David Evans and Reade Seligmann. "Newsweek" put to of their mug shots on the cover.

The lacrosse season was canceled. They were suspended by the school. And the press coverage was relentless.

Fast forward to late last month. The accuser who was hired to strip at a late-night party changes her story, saying she doesn't think she was raped after all. Rape charges are dropped, but sexual assault charges remain.

On Thursday, we learned that the accuser was changing her story yet again, saying she was assaulted by two men, not three. "The New York Times" put that story on the front page. You needed a microscope to find the tiny wire story inside "The Washington Post."

And on Friday, Mike Nifong, the Durham district attorney who brought this badly flawed case, agreed to step aside and let state prosecutors decide whether to proceed. That was front page news in "The Post" and "The Times" and other papers and made the network newscast.

Now news organizations are all over Nifong for bringing indictments even after there was no DNA match with the players.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

KURTZ: But here's what you're not seeing. You're not seeing editors and reporters and producer standing up and saying, we blew it, we jumped the gun, we went overboard, we helped ruin these kids' lives on the basis of very little evidence, and we're sorry.

How did they do it? The media made this into a racial controversy. The media made this into a story of athletes out of control. The media made into a tale of elite, privileged white kids at a prestigious university, versus an underprivileged single mother at the black college across town. And they did all that because it was the only way to pump up the story into a national soap opera.

They treated the players' denials as a minor detail that wasn't going to stop their train of sensationalism from rolling down the tracks.

Well, the Duke express has now derailed. Journalism has another black eye. And someone should tell these three lacrosse players where they go to get their reputation back.

I'll have more reporting on this Tuesday night at 8:00 p.m. Eastern during a special edition of "PAULA ZAHN NOW" live from Raleigh-Durham, North Carolina.

That's it for this edition of RELIABLE SOURCES.

I'm Howard Kurtz.

Join us again next Sunday morning, 10:00 a.m. Eastern, for another critical look at the media.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIP.../14/rs.01.html

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,246281,00.html

RALEIGH, N.C. — Former Duke lacrosse rape prosecutor Mike Nifong has been slapped with additional ethics charges by the state bar association, which has accused him of withholding DNA evidence and making misleading statements to the court.

The new charges by the North Carolina State Bar against Durham County District Attorney Mike Nifong were announced Wednesday and could lead to his removal from the state bar, according to a copy of the updated complaint. Nifong last year indicted three men from the Duke lacrosse team on charges that they raped a stripper at an off-campus party in March of 2006.

Meanwhile, the Raleigh News and Observer reported Wednesday that with the North Carolina attorney general reviewing the Duke lacrosse case, the new prosecutors must weigh evidence gathered by Nifong's chief investigator, whose private detective career was marked by ethics complaints.

http://www.newsobserver.com/1185/story/535608.html

Nifong hired Linwood E. Wilson, a gospel singer with limited experience working criminal cases, less than four months before the March 13 lacrosse team party at which the accuser claims the assault took place.

4 hate-crime beating teens get probation
By NOAKI SCHWARTZ, Associated Press Writer
48 minutes ago

LONG BEACH, Calif. - Four of nine black teenagers convicted in the racially charged beating of three white women on Halloween were sentenced to probation Friday.

Punishment could have ranged up to confinement in a California Youth Authority lockup until age 25. The teens were ordered to serve 250 hours of community service, 60 days house arrest, and take anger management and racial tolerance programs.

"It was an awful crime. Terrible, emotional and physical injuries," Juvenile Court Judge Gibson Lee said.

Last week, Lee convicted nine teens — eight female and one male — of felony assault, with a hate-crime enhancement against all but one.

Among those sentenced Friday were an 18-year-old youth, his twin sister, their 16-year-old sister — who didn't receive the hate-crime enhancement — and another 16-year-old girl.

The other five defendants face sentencing next week. Names of the defendants were withheld because they are juveniles or were juveniles at the time and were tried as juveniles.

The 18-year-old male teenager had pleaded with the judge, saying he was innocent and tried to help the victims, including taking a skateboard away from an assailant who was using it as a weapon.

"What will my life be like? I'm 18 and convicted of a hate crime," he said.

The victims were in an affluent area of Long Beach that draws crowds with fancy Halloween displays when a crowd of black youths yelled racial insults and one shouted "I hate whites," according to prosecutors.

One victim testified the trio was pelted with small pumpkins and lemons. A witness testified two of the women were beaten with skateboards.

Prosecutors said the beating only ended when a black motorist stopped, pulled the assailants away and shielded the women with his body.

"I'm not sure if all the emotional scars will ever completely vanish," 21-year-old Loren Hyman, one of the victims, said earlier in a victim impact statement. "I feel like the beating I endured on Halloween night is still not over."

Two 15-year-old boys face trial later on charges of felony assault with the hate-crime enhancement.

Long Beach, 22 miles south of downtown Los Angeles, is a major U.S. cargo port with a racially diverse population of 475,000 and neighborhoods ranging from high-end shoreline condos to low-income urban areas.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070203/...tkBHNlYwM3MTg-

Last week, Lee convicted nine teens — eight female and one male — of felony assault, with a hate-crime enhancement against all but one.

If this is what the Judge truly believed - why the "slap on the wrist" sentence ?? Why do I get the feeling if the racial makeup were reversed - black women beated by white teenagers that the uproar would have been deafening ?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,260426,00.html

Report: All Charges Against Duke Lacrosse Players to Be Dropped Soon
Thursday , March 22, 2007

By Liza Porteus
The remaining charges against three Duke University lacrosse players originally indicted for rape may be dropped sometime within the next few days, according to a report.

Inside Lacrosse Magazine writer Paul Caulfield told FOX News on Thursday that several sources have revealed to him that the assault and attempted kidnapping charges still pending against Collin Finnerty, 19, of Garden City, N.Y.; Dave Evans, 23, of Bethesda, Md.; and Reade Seligmann, 20, of Essex Falls, N.J., will soon be dropped.

Caulfield said his sources include more than just attorneys for the defense.

"There is no case here and they will be hearing a dismissal in the coming days," Caulfield told FOX News.

Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong last year indicted the three former players with raping an exotic dancer hired to perform at an off-campus lacrosse party on March 13, 2006. The dancer, who is black, claimed that she was sexually assaulted in a bathroom in the house by three white lacrosse players. DNA was taken from all members of the university lacrosse team, except for the single black player on the team. DNA tests never conclusively proved that anyone on the team assaulted her. But DNA from other individuals was found in the accuser's underwear, among other places.

The case caused a firestorm of racial tension in a community. Lacrosse coach Mike Pressler was essentially fired and last year's spring season was canceled, Seligmann and Finnerty were suspended (Evans had already graduated by the time the story came out), and Duke began a rigorous review of how alcohol on and around campus is treated.

As the months went on, the story of the accuser — a 28-year-old student at North Carolina Central University — continued to change. When she acknowledged late last year that she could not be sure if she was actually raped, Nifong dropped the rape charges against the three players. The players had claimed their innocence all along, calling the charges "fantastic lies."

Nifong is now facing ethics charges from the state bar association from, among other thing, concealing potentially exculpatory evidence that defense lawyers claim could have proved their clients' innocence.

There have been rumors that the families of Finnerty, Seligmann and Evans may be considering civil lawsuits against Nifong, Duke or the state if it turns out the accuser's story doesn't pan out and Nifong is found to be guilty of mishandling the case.

"This is something that will wait in the wings. Once the criminal case is dropped, we are going to see this and I believe we'll see it quite quickly," said Caulfield, a former prosecutor.

June 12 is the date of the next scheduled hearing for Nifong.

The former prosecutor in the Duke lacrosse sexual assault investigation faces a June 12 trial date on ethics charges stemming from his handling of the highly publicized case.

The North Carolina State Bar has charged Nifong with several violations of rules governing professional conduct, including withholding evidence from defense lawyers. He's also accused of lying to the court and to bar investigators, and making misleading and inflammatory comments about the players.

Legal experts have said Nifong could be disbarred if he's convicted. While he said he's not sure if that will happen, Caulfield said he wouldn't be surprised if the district attorney is suspended from practicing.

"We're going to see the tables turned on Mike Nifong in the media and in the courtroom because he still continues to defend his name," Caulfield said.

Selena Roberts Angling To Become "The Amanda Marcotte of the New York Times"

http://ace.mu.nu/archives/220572.php

Who? Well, she's a nobody, a sports columnist you've never heard of.

But in the pages of the New Yor Times, she's still arguing the lacrosse players should be prosecuted because of their "white skin privilege" and yadda yadda yadda.

"What happens if all the charges are dismissed? There is a tendency to conflate the alleged crime at the Duke lacrosse team kegger on March 13, 2006, with the irrefutable culture of misogyny, racial animus and athlete entitlement that went unrestrained that night.

"Porn-style photos of two exotic dancers -- one of whom was the accuser -- emerged from cellphone camera downloads. Heated exchanges between players and dancers occurred. Racial slurs were heard. And in an 'American Psycho' reference, a repulsive e-mail message depicting the skinning of strippers was sent by a player, Ryan McFadyen, who, to his credit, has since apologized."

Um, what sort of photos is one supposed to take of "exotic dancers"?


And that idiotic thing about skinning the strippers -- these morons are at least now acknowledging it was in fact a reference, a joke pulled from a movie. But they still insist that Ryan McFadyen really is interested in skinning strippers.

KC Johnson sees this all as merely the childish repositioning and walk-back of someone who's been proven wrong and simply hasn't the integrity to admit error. Because Selena Roberts is now casting her previous claims that the players were guilty of rape as a mere critique of their "culture." Which is of course pro-rape, and which must still be punished. Proven disasterously wrong about the facts of the case, Roberts insults her critics -- proven completely right -- as a bunch of white racists who just want her to

lay off the lacrosse pipeline to Wall Street, excuse the khaki-pants crowd of SAT wonder kids.

Did this woman happen to notice that one of those SAT wonder kids wasn't even in the same part of town as the hooker when she claims she was raped?

Celebrity racists who get a pass ?


Are the demented ravings of talk fossil Don Imus finally getting the attention they deserve? http://radioequalizer.blogspot.com/2...s-rutgers.html

Though his recent push for the bombing of Mecca was strangely ignored by the mainstream media, overtly racist comments about the Rutgers women's basketball team are generating public anger.

Your Radio Equalizer has long wondered why Imus, who turns 67 this year, gets away with the kind of extreme language that would easily sink Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly and others. How does he remain a mainstream media darling?

In fact, his latest episode caught the attention of WNBC- TV, The New York Times, Drudge and many others:

Imus Creates Firestorm With Rutgers Comments

NEW YORK -- Don Imus is creating controversy again.

On his "Imus In The Morning" show Thursday, he referred to the Rutgers women's basketball team as "nappy-headed hos."

He was talking to Sid Rosenberg with Sports Talk on the phone about the Women's NCAA Championship game.

Imus started out talking about the Rutgers team as, "some rough girls from Rutgers. They got tattoos," and then went on to call them "some nappy-headed hos."

He compared them to the Tennessee team, saying "The girls from Tennessee -- they all looked cute."

The conversation then went on to compare the game to "the jigaboos versus the wannabes." Media Matters reported that the show's executive producer, Bernard McGuirk, made that comment.

Imus has more to say about those remarks, according to the New York Times. Imus said people should relax and not worry about "some idiot comment meant to be amusing."


Memo to WNBC: there's a difference between a talk host "creating cntroversy" and one who mumbles, babbles and comes across like a deranged druggie.



Imus Apologizes For Controversial Comments About Rutgers Players
April 6, 2007

NEW YORK -- Don Imus said he's sorry for a controversy he's created.

On his "Imus In The Morning" show Thursday, he referred to the Rutgers women's basketball team as "nappy-headed hos."

He was talking to Sid Rosenberg with Sports Talk on the phone about the Women's NCAA Championship game.

Imus started out talking about the Rutgers team as, "some rough girls from Rutgers. They got tattoos," and then went on to call them "some nappy-headed hos."

He compared them to the Tennessee team, saying "The girls from Tennessee -- they all looked cute."

The conversation then went on to compare the game to "the jigaboos versus the wannabes." Media Matters reported that the show's executive producer, Bernard McGuirk, made that comment.

To hear the controversial conversation, click here. http://www.wnbc.com/video/11537836/index.html

On Friday morning's show, Imus said, "I want to take a moment to apologize for an insensitive and ill-conceived remark we made the other morning regarding the Rutgers women's basketball team, which lost to Tennessee in the NCAA championship game on Tuesday.

It was completely inappropriate, and we can understand why people were offended. Our characterization was thoughtless and stupid, and we are sorry."

Thursday, The New York Times reported that Imus said people should relax and not worry about "some idiot comment meant to be amusing."

A Rutgers spokesperson issued a statement saying, "We agree with Mr. Imus that this was, in his own words, an 'idiot comment.' We are very proud of the success of the Rutgers women's basketball team. Coach Stringer and the Rutgers players are outstanding ambassadors for this great institution."

MSNBC released a statement saying, "While simulcast by MSNBC, 'Imus in the Morning' is not a production of the cable network and is produced by WFAN Radio. As Imus makes clear every day, his views are not those of MSNBC. We regret that his remarks were aired on MSNBC and apologize for these offensive comments."

http://www.wnbc.com/news/11537229/de...l?dl=mainclick


----

SURVEY : Should Imus be punished for his comments?

Yes, it was very insensitive
No, he's free to say what he wants
No, it's his job to say outrageous things
Not sure

-------

Fitty Labels "Je-Je-Je-Jews" the "Real Goon Squad"

Rapper 50 Cent might be in da you-know-what for calling Jews "goons" on a radio show yesterday. On New York's Hot 97's "Miss Jones in the Morning" show, as the New York Daily News reports, Fitty called to weigh-in on fellow rapper Tony Yayo's assault case. After telling the host that he didn't think Yayo's legal troubles would hurt "his crew," he added, "Worry about the Je-Je-Je-Jew unit. They're the real goon squad. When the lawyers come out, you'll see what it is. I don't pay nobody. I only pay the lawyers."

The rapper didn't clarify what he meant, or if he was referring to anything in particular.

http://www.tmz.com/2007/04/06/is-bri...ger-she-hates/

April 09, 2007
Imus' Tone Deafness Nothing New

http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/...ves/009637.php

Don Imus, the national radio talk-show host for NBC, got himself into some hot water last week when he used racially derogative terms to describe a women's college basketball team. Calling them "nappy-headed ho's", Imus compared them unfavorably to a supposedly "cute" and predominantly white competing team. Today, Imus attempted to apologize to Al Sharpton on the latter's own radio show, but Sharpton didn't let him off the hook:

Don Imus said on his nationally syndicated radio show today that he was a “good person who said a bad thing” by way of explaining his comments about the Rutgers University women’s basketball team that many critics have called racist. ...

Later in the day, the Rev. Al Sharpton, who has been calling for Mr. Imus’s resignation, upbraided him on his own radio show, “Keepin It Real,” as the two discussed his comments. “This is not about whether you’re a good man,” Mr. Sharpton told Mr. Imus, who was a guest on the show. “This is about setting a precedent that allows racist language to be used on mainstream, federally regulated television and radio.

“What you said is racist,” he said.

I'm amazed that Imus still has a show after these comments. After all, Howard Cosell got kicked off of ABC for referring to a black running back as a "little monkey," even though (a) he often called his grandchildren the same thing and didn't intend it as a racial insult, and (b) Cosell had worked tirelessly to support Mohammed Ali during his career. Jimmy the Greek got bounced from CBS for suggesting that the dominance of African-American athletes came from breeding decisions by slave owners. Al Campanis, a man who had worked hard to boost black baseball players, got forced out of the Dodgers organization for voicing some strange ideas about why there weren't more black swimmers.

At least two of these three men did more for racial equality than Imus has ever done, and gave much less reason for offense than Imus. Yet Imus gets to hold onto his job -- at least, so far.

I'm not saying Imus should get canned for one rather offensive and somewhat malicious offense. But it's not the only time Imus has demonstrated a tone deafness on race, either. Next week, I will be interviewing Bernard Goldberg for the release of his new book, Crazies to the Left of Me, Wimps to the Right: How One Side Lost Its Mind and the Other Lost Its Nerve, his latest look at the political scene. It has not hit the stands yet, but I have started reviewing the proofs -- and Goldberg has a chapter just for Don Imus and his cluelessness on race. Titled "Don Imus and St. Charles", Goldberg recounts another conversation where Imus managed to insult most of the civil-rights movement:

On this particular day he was talking to Charles Barkley, the retired basketball star, whose book about race in America -- Who's Afraid of a Large Black Man? -- had just come out in paperback. They started out by talking about the death, the night before, of Coretta Scott King. Sir Charles, who grew up in Alabama, told Imus how much she and her husband, Martin Luther King, Jr., had meant to him.

This gave Don an opening to tell Barkley that, "In my view, just as a white man, it doesn't seem to me that a lot has changed since those marches in Selma."

Not much had changed?

At the time of Selma (1965), most black people in the South couldn't vote, let alone hold public office as many do now. Jm Crow laws still segregated public facilities, and civil rights workers were still getting attacked by law enforcement with the tacit approval of state governments. Plenty changed in 42 years -- and it was people like the Kings who made them change. That isn't to say that more work isn't needed, but only an oaf would insist that nothing had changed since the march from Selma to Montgomery.

Charles Barkley would have none of it. He told Imus that he was wrong, and then talked about what the African-American communities needed to do now, rather than feed into some ignorance how no progress had been made by the civil-rights movement. Goldberg calls Imus a "sissy", but in reality, Imus thought he would pander to his preconceived notion of Barkley's state of mind -- and Barkley called him on it.

Imus spent today pandering as well, it seems. Sharpton wouldn't have any of it, either. Maybe he shouldn't lose his job for making a couple of really bad mistakes, but perhaps these kinds of incidents demonstrate that Imus is very overrated.


UPDATE: Regarding Campanis, here's the Wikipedia entry on the controversy:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Campanis

Campanis' infamous remarks took place on the late-night ABC News program Nightline, coinciding with the 40th anniversary of Jackie Robinson's Major League Baseball debut (April 15, 1947). Campanis, who had played alongside Robinson and was known for being close to him, was being interviewed about the subject.

Nightline anchorman Ted Koppel asked him why, at the time, there had been few black managers and no black general managers in Major League Baseball. Campanis' reply was that blacks "may not have some of the necessities to be, let's say, a field manager, or, perhaps, a general manager" for these positions. Elsewhere in the interview he said that blacks are often poor swimmers "because they don't have the buoyancy." Koppel says he gave Campanis several opportunities to clarify ("Do you really believe that?") or back down on his remarks but Campanis dug himself in deeper with his replies. A protest erupted the next morning and he resigned two days later.

No Cries of Censorship Now
April 9, 2007

What follows is not meant to be a defense of Imus at all. He’s a fool in a cowboy hat

That being said…

Notice the one thing you don’t hear in this brouhaha is cries of censorship. Why bring that up you ask?

The Dixie Chicks.

The poor, oppressed Dixie Chicks who, after saying (in England) that they were ashamed President Bush was from Texas, had their music yanked from country music stations across the nation. Immediately cries of censorship went up from liberals across the land. Censored for saying something politically unpopular.

And yet, the same liberals who defended the Dixie Chicks and demanded that they be played on the radio now call for Imus to be suspended, resign or be fired. (He’s been suspended for two weeks as of this writing.)

The reality of this all is that neither Country Music’s reaction to the Dixie Chicks nor MSNBC’s and CBS Radio’s reaction to Imus have anything to do with censorship. Both have everything to do with freedom of association, and a private enterprise being able to decide who it wants to represent them on the airways. But that didn’t stop the left with the Chicks. Oh no, they were censored because they couldn’t say whatever they wished with impunity. The idiocy of those statements are now laid bare for all to see. If they truly were consistent they would be protesting Imus’s suspension this very instant.

Personally, I don’t think Don Imus had any intent to be racist at all. But it’s one of those third rail type things where even the remote hint of anything racial will get the race warlords in a frenzy issuing calls to arms. After all, they have to do something to justify their “leadership” positions within the African American community.

Much the same thing occurs when anything that offends Muslim sensibilities comes up. Only the Black community can do it without inciting violence.

http://www.thecrimsonblog.com/2007/0...ensorship-now/