“60 Minutes” Tonight?
They did a fantastic job. Kudos to Ed Bradley and the crew. As much for their report as for the people they interviewed. The ‘second stripper’ was a revelation. Well spoken, completely together ~ wow. I hadn’t visualized that. (I had the strippers I’ve met through the years who’ve been married to Marines I worked with in my head. As in “stripper” ~ BINGO! “Candy” comes to mind.)
Nifong needs to go down like a BIG DOG and those three kids need to file a wrongful prosecution lawsuit of biblical proportions.
Like I said in my earlier post ~ Nifong is toast if Ed Bradley and co. are working for the defense. The tragedy of it all is the three young lives ruined needlessly.
UPDATE: A link is available now.
“This woman has destroyed everything I worked for in my life. She’s put it on hold. She’s destroyed two other families and she’s brought shame on a great university. And, worst of all she’s split apart a community and a nation on facts that just didn’t happen and a lie that should have never been told,” says David Evans.
You know, whatever her motivations, I wouldn’t put it all on the accuser. She can shriek herself blue in the face from the Duke Bell Tower and that’s her right, lies or not. No. It’s up to the District Attorney whether the case goes forward on the evidence. When there IS no evidence, there is no case. “60 Minutes” shouldn’t have to come to Durham to make a case that’s been made in the press (and blogs) almost since the very beginning. Every revelation has been one more confirmation of exoneration. And yet it continues. The astonishing thing in the interviews was the fact that at least one of the young men had NEVER been questioned by either the Durham police or a representative of the DA’s office. NO. ONE. Hey! I watch “The Closer” ~ the cops crawl all over you like a fly on roadkill.
Or they’re supposed to.
La Shawn Barber’s on the story, as ever. And WOW is all I can say about this dissection of the case.
Media | tree hugging sister | 
October 15, 2006 8:05 pm
Subscribe
All correct and you’re right to point out the bastard Nifong, but you’re a bit off on one point.
No one has a “right” to make false charges. There are laws against that and if she has any money or property those three young men should act quick to remove it all from her lawful possession.
I agree, Mike, but their target should be both the accuser and the prosecutor. Either one could have stopped this at any time.
Take it from me, I wouldn’t hold my breath on the wrongful prosecution lawsuit flying here in Norf Cackalackie. And evidence is a secondary consideration next to, err….local concerns.
No one has a “right” to make false charges.
True, Mike, true. What I meant is that there is no impediment to free speech. No penalty is attached until after said speech, be it inflammatory rhetoric on TV, rambling on the street corner OR bringing patently false charges.
I’m not a lawyer, yet, but I wonder if they can claim that their civil rights were violated and thus make it a federal case.
I hope they go after the DA’s office and the ‘victim’ with every legal gun available, criminal or civil.
And I add the ‘victim’ because there HAS to be a penalty attached to such egregious LIES. Hell, even the goggle eyed “Runaway Bride” was charged and fined. They don’t have to (and probably won’t be able to collect a dime) from her BUT, the message needs to be sent. And the DA’s office can’t prosecute her…can they?