Duke Rape Case (I cannot believe this)

[sproutster]

http://www.herald-sun.com/durham/4-722409.html
<snip>
The photos show the woman attempting to get back inside the house at
610 N. Buchanan Blvd. where the attack allegedly occurred on the night
of March 13-14, said attorney Bill Thomas, who represents one of the
lacrosse players.

"She had a big smile on her face," Thomas said.

Then the woman fell down at the back door of the house and lay on the
ground "for quite some time" as if she were intoxicated or asleep,
Thomas added.

--I had to post this to be fair. No DNA yet.

[freeplessinseattle]

1. maybe she wanted revenge? or her fee?

why are you assuming she went back for more "fun"?

[Kingshakabobo]

2. With a "big smile" ? n/t

[1932]

9. An exposure of 1/60 of second -- give me 60 shots per second of

every second of a rape victims post-attack facial expressions, give me pictures taken by the attackers, give me the attackers' lawyer spinning what they're showing, and I'll find you a frame that helps the prosecution. It doesn't mean she wasn't raped.

[Kingshakabobo]

11. I guess it will be your hypothetical versus real evidence.

Assuming this IS real evidence and it DOES show her smiling. Who knows, the defendant's attorney could be full of shit. Imagine that.

[1932]

18. Well, until the trial, we're all hypothesizing. But here's my prediction

about this photo: it's evidentiary weight will be offset by all the other photographs , oral evidence and scientific evidence.

[sproutster]

23. Agreed, but it's looking dark.

All the defense has to do is get a "professional" who performs certain acts, and say how common they are.

It will be up to the doctors I'm guessing. *sigh*

[1932]

25. ?

With 46 people witnessing the thing, I think it's going to be up to a few witness statements. All the elements needed to prove rape will probably be directly available from witness evidence.

[LostinVA]

68. Dark? How? It's early days, and this is a common defense tactic

Smear the plaintiff.

[Roland99]

15. I'd love to see a 60fps camera.

There's much more going on with a camera than the shutter opening/closing.

[cantstandbush]

48. Move alon. White men have been raping and abusing black women

for centuries with on consequence...except maybe a few bastard children whose clans come back to haunt them. Ask Thomas Jefferson and the rest of them.

[ClintonTyree]

3. That will never be allowed as evidence...

it's pure conjecture as to her reason for laying on the ground. She may have been unconscious. No one but her knows for sure.

[Kingshakabobo]

4. Sure it will be allowed.

The prosecution will be allowed to rebut this evidence with their own "version" but to disallow would be crazy. Especially since the original report by the security guard was an intoxicated person. Also, the police handled it as an intoxicated person. Intoxication was introduced in to this case by independent sources.

[Pavulon]

5. Photos will be (NT)

[GreenArrow]

29. "roofies"

?

[LostinVA]

67. That's what I was wondering

[salin]

73. comes to mind per the security guard's description

behaving drunk -but no smell/indication of being drunk...

None the less - if the photos indicate the bruises were already present... it does raise some questions.

Then there is the 'fantasy' email sent shortly after the event... the whole thing is creepy/frightening.

[sproutster]

6. My question

If the DNA comes back and three players are contributers. Does this negate her charges?

Since she was sooo drunk, but everything inside the house was as they said it was?

[philosophie_en_rose]

7. So what?

Maybe she was smiling - in a self-hating way. Maybe she needed to get help and didn't know where she was. Maybe she thought they had left. Maybe she was smiling at the thought of revenge. Maybe she was disoriented. Maybe she was just really drunk.

I'm not saying that any of those possibilities occurred, but they are just as likely as "fake rape victim goes back for more." :eyes:

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

8. Um what spin would you expect the LAWYER FOR THE PLAYER to

put on this? LOL.

[1932]

10. "Thomas declined to allow The Herald-Sun to view the pictures."

Best line from the article.

The lawyer is clearly trying to taint potential jurors with his statements. If the pictures were as powerful as his spin claims, he'd release the picture.

[blondeatlast]

47. Yep--sore thumb, elephant in room, rat-odor line.

The defense atorney would not be trying to try this case in the media, would he?

Naaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah, couldn't be... :sarcasm:

[Marie26]

53. Exactly

It's all about the innuendo. They're trying to influence the jury pool now, before this goes to trial. I predict these photos will never see the inside of a courtroom, yet jurors will remember this "shocking evidence" from the newspapers. If they don't hear it at trial, they can assume it was just those wily prosecutors keeping it out; and continue to believe it was true. It gives someone who is pre-disposed to finding the teammates innocent an excuse for doing so. And all they need is one stubborn juror to prevent a guilty verdict.

[BrownOak]

77. Or....

...they could be waiting to release them after the DNA tests as they are now saying.

I disagree with you on the what the potential impact on this case would be if the photos weren't shown to the jury. All it takes is for the prosecution to mention it in opening or closing arguments and the stage is set for the the defense to either have to show the photos or risk losing credibility.

You can doubt the existence of these photos all you wish, but if they do show up it's a huge blow to the prosecution.

[LostinVA]

78. It's only a huge blow if they can be proven to show what this guy claims

And that's a big "if," considering the attorney wouldn't even let the paper see them.

No one si really saying the photos don't exist... only that it's easily to take a photo out of context and place a false context on it.

[BrownOak]

79. It's not the context that's the important part here though

The context of the escort's smile is not really an issue. The real key to this is if those photos do in fact show bruising on the alleged victim. If that's the case, and those photos are consistent with the photos taken at the hospital, then the only thing that gets this case to a trial is the fact that the DA in Durham is facing a primary election in early May and politically he can't afford to lose the black vote in Durham.

Assuming that these photos are what the defense says they are, and at some point they're going to have to come forward with them, then there are just way too many irregularities in the story to believe the allegations.

*If the bruises the alleged victim claims came from the physical assault are shown to have been there prior to her arrival at the house then it also cast doubts on the origins of the injuries the hospital found to be consistent with sexual assault.

*The defense has also stated that they have interviewed the second escort extensively and she said the second dancer never told her about a rape.

*The defense has also claimed to have conclusively established that the second escort was definitely behind the first 911 call and was the person identified as "Kim" at the Kroger store in the second call. That first first call is almost certainly a false report given the inconsistencies in it.

*The alleged victim's father has given varying accounts of his story regarding his daughter and when he knew of the assault. His first account given to a local TV station was that he had "no doubt" that his daughter was raped and he described her injuries. That report was given on March 31. Yet on April 1, another paper in the state released a story about a reporter visiting the father earlier in the week and he was unaware that the individual in the news as the reported victim was his daughter. He called her and told the media that she didn't tell him anything about it. In that interview he said he saw his daughter the day after the reported incident. So what you have is the story breaking in the news, a reporter visiting the father about a week later and catching him totally surprised that it was his daughter, the father calling the daughter and her telling him she was raped, and then the father giving a local TV station a report a few days later that he had "no doubt" she was raped after seeing her when she was released from the hospital. Something doesn't add up there.

Like I said, at some point the defense will have to produce the evidence which will be the deciding factor in all of this. Nobody is trying to slip by this with the Kobe defense - consensual sex did occur, instead they are categorically denying the events as alleged. That would be a pretty risky approach if they did commit a crime and were trying to hide it.

[LostinVA]

87. I honestly don't give a damn what the defense attorney is smearing

Not saying... SMEARING. He's saying things that have not ben reported anyplace else -- basically, lies. They are ways to handle this publicly without stooping to this level.

I wish the damned DNA results would come back.

And, yeah, context is important, because the attorney is stating these photos show certain things (smiling, etc.)

[LostinVA]

69. Oh ho -- I missed that!

Tres interesting....

[benburch]

12. *sigh*

Attempting to get back in?

Or arriving in the first place?

Impossible to assign a reliable time sequence to photographs, you know, even if they are on the same roll of negatives as internegatives could have been made to exonerate the perps. And with digital photos, the forgery possibilities are endless.

I think we probably abused her. I think also she meant to rip them off. But the second issue cannot be allowed to excuse the first. You can criminally rape a dishonest stripper because rape cannot be allowed to be an acceptable punishment for a rip-off!

[sproutster]

17. Mmm, I disagree

How stupid she would hold up drunken frat boys?

Appears by the evidence they stole her money. Or perhaps that was part of her ploy. I read this first thing in the morning, and now I have coffee.

[benburch]

19. Reportedly, she danced for ten minutes and then planned to leave...

and take her fee with her.

True? Who knows? A man charged with rape will do anything to discredit the victim, ESPECIALLY if he is guilty.

[femmedem]

24. Just speculating. But I was a dancer

and I always took the money upfront, and I was always very clear with whoever organized the party that if people got grabby or in any way abusive I was going to leave with the money ASAP. I never had to, but if I had, I wouldn't have considered that ripping anybody off.

As others have said, this doesn't really have any bearing on whether or not she was raped.

[benburch]

32. Agree completely.

In fact, I thought I said that.

[benburch]

36. Ah, I said that elsewhere...

Sometimes I lose track of what I said where.

BTW, I am a sexworker's rights activist, and run a mailing list for sexworkers and activists.

[femmedem]

65. I figured we were on the same page.

I just didn't want the thread to go too far down that path. Even though I contributed!

And thanks for the work you're doing, although it's been a long time since I've been in the biz.

[LostinVA]

70. Esp. since she was told 5 men would be there, and it was 40+

Things could have quickly gotten scary... which sounds like why they left in the first place.

[Marie26]

55. She planned to leave

because she was scared. According to the affidavit, they were being agressive & using racial slurs. After she left, a teammate came out to apologize & ask her to come back in. I think it was a safety thing, rather than an attempt to "rip them off."

[benburch]

64. Entirely probable.

But I'm just taking the spin at face value and saying a ripoff would not have justified this in any way shape or form.

[jeffrey_X]

76. Good point...

"A man charged with rape will do anything to discredit the victim, ESPECIALLY if he is guilty*."

*and rich and white.

[Ohio Joe]

13. This has no bearing on her being raped or not

She is a dancer that was convinced to go back to a party she was working. The idea for her while working is to give the impression of having a good time, so once she decided to go back, of course she would be smiling, IT IS HER JOB !

[femmedem]

14. Unfortunately, this reminds me

of my own experience. When I pressed charges against the man who raped me, the defense attorney spun the guy holding a knife to me with one hand while placing the other arm around me as the two of hugging. (I mentioned this in another thread, so I apologize for being repetitive.)

As for her smiling...well, all I can say about that is that when I was in the emergency room, I sure made a lot of inappropriate jokes. There's no way, no way at all to predict how anyone's going to respond to trauma.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

16. There were some kind of photos in your case?

[femmedem]

20. No, there weren't photos in my case

and time will tell what these photos reveal. I'm just cautioning that I have first hand experience of a district attorney twisting the truth to discredit a rape victim. And I'd like to add that although people think of photos as showing unbiased truth, that's not always the case. Remember the cropped photos of the toppling statue in Baghdad? Photos are framed, cropped and selected by a photographer, and sometimes that photographer has an agenda.

Peace.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

21. I guess I don't understand how a defense attorney can "spin" a hug versus

knife holding etc. unless he's talking about a photo or surveillance video or something objective. I guess he could have been talking about interpreting what someone says they saw?

[femmedem]

26. It was during the bail hearing

Cross examination:

Me: So then he took out the knife...threatened to kill me...put his other hand around me."

Attorney: So the two of you were hugging. What happened next?

My hands are shaking as I remember. And this was half my life ago.

[sproutster]

22. My thought was *click* *click* *delete* *delete* *click*

I believe that the photos are in possesion of the defense attorney.

[bloom]

27. I think believing what the defense attorney puts out

is like believing what the Defense Secretary (Rumsfeld) says.


Esp. what is put out in the media - there is nothing to keep them honest. Unless the media itself refuses to run stories that are not backed up - with actual photos or whatever the case may be - serious checking. Why would anyone even print this? There is nothing but what the lawyers say.

[Kingshakabobo]

30. I feel the same way about prosecutors. n/t

[bloom]

31. There are laws that restrict what the prosecutors put out

IOW - they can't just make up stuff. So it's really not the same at all.

[Kingshakabobo]

33. Laws schmaws. In a perfect world, yes.

But if you don't think prosecutors lie, I have beautiful "one owner-low mileage" bridge I would like to sell you.

edit to add: also, there are laws that are to be followed by the defense attorneys as well. For instance, neither side is supposed to suborn perjury but it is done ALL THE TIME.

[bloom]

34. I suppose you will think what you are determined to think

but if you were to notice - prosecutors are held to a higher standard and you don't see them putting out false information to the press like you do in the case of defense attorneys. For one thing - they don't want the whole trial nullified - thrown out.

No prosecutor nor law enforcement officer should ever speak to the press without first reading and understanding the local state disciplinary rules based upon the American Bar Association's Model Code of Professional Responsibility; in Missouri, for example, these are Supreme Court Rules 3.6, 3.8 and 8.2. Failure to comply with them can subject the trial lawyer to civil suits, disciplinary complaints, contempt of court proceedings, mistrial or reversal of the verdict in the case.

The general rule concerning trial publicity is set out in the first paragraph of Rule 3.6:

A lawyer shall not make an extrajudicial statement that a reasonable person would expect to be disseminated by means of public communication if the lawyer knows or reasonably should know that it will have a substantial likelihood of materially prejudicing an adjudicative proceeding.

http://www.showme.net/CapeCounty/pa/Publicity%20Article%202.htm

[Kingshakabobo]

35. "Think what I'm determined to think"? LOL

So, am I now supposed to google the hundreds of cases where prosecutors got caught red-handed lying, withholding exculpatory evidence and/or suborning perjury?

Come on.

BTW: I edited the prior post to add that there a laws and ethics codes governing how BOTH sides conduct themselves. That doesn't mean they are followed.

[bloom]

37. And if the prosecutors are found to have presented faked evidence

the results can be thrown out.

I don't see the same standard applied to defense attorneys - and of course they don't care if a conviction were overturned - that would be a good thing for them. And if their fake evidence gets their clients off - then that is all to the good for them too.

[Kingshakabobo]

39. I agree, to a point.

I just think you are giving far too much credit to prosecutors and minimizing the "if the police say he's guilty then he must be guilty effect" and the prosecutor's use of the media.

I know too many cops, defense attorneys and state's attorneys to believe a word they say. Especially in high profile case such as this rape case.

I understand there are ethics codes for BOTH SIDES. Sometimes I think MAYBE we should adopt a system that is less adversarial. Like England??? Maybe??

Anywho...:hi:

[High Plains]

44. Defense attorneys who get caught faking evidence can be

disbarred.

If you're trying to argue that defense attorneys are more apt than prosecutors to lie or distort evidence, sorry, I'm not buying it.

[dsc]

41. I don't care what the standards say

in NC they don't get punished for the misconduct. Just last year there was a case where a prosecutor conspired to keep exculpatory evidence out of a death penalty case. The prosecutor had both lied and subored perjury and not a damn thing happened other than a reprimand from the bar. The prosecutor has both his licence and his job.

On edit Here is the case I am referring to

http://www.truthinjustice.org/gell-probe.htm

There is a great deal that stinks about this case, but we'll never find the source of the malodor because Attorney General Roy Cooper has closed the case.

Case closed? Based on evidence presented at the new trial, Gell didn't commit this murder. All Cooper and the state has is the word of two girls who had a great deal to gain by saying someone else committed the murder.

They're going to be out of jail this time next year unless, as Bryant suggests, their deal with prosecutors be torn up based upon the new innocent verdict - a verdict which was correct and proper and, frankly, unavoidable based on the testimony of forensics experts and the dozen or so folks who saw Jenkins alive days after he was supposed to have been murdered.

How can Cooper possibly justify not launching an investigation?

It should be noted that the investigation has since been done and the only punishment given is what I said.

[Neil Lisst]

38. Prosecutors lie all the time, try their cases in the press all the time.

Their real case is never as good as the one they tell the media.

The police and the prosecutors try their cases in press a lot more than defendants.

[blondeatlast]

49. Until the opposing council sees ANY purported evidence,

I don't believe any of it.

I don't believe prosecutors or defense attorneys.

[Neil Lisst]

28. It's probably admissible. The weight it is given will be up to the jury

This case will involve a lot of testimony, and that testimony will develop a timeline of events - the one the prosecution claims, and the one the defense claims.

Whether the camera was set to the accurate time, whether the time was accurate - these are issues both sides will want to address, for obvious reasons.

But the photo comes in, and the person who took it gets to testify as to what he did and saw. He can't say what was in her mind, he can only say what was in his mind, and what he directly observed or heard others say.

This photo doesn't change much, IMHO, even if it purports to show her smiling, which it may not. The defense lawyer won't show the photo. That should suggest he prefers interpreting it for others.

[northzax]

90. any identifying photo should be withheld from the press

at this point. If it was shown to the media, and published, he'd be accused of smearing the victim, right? and if the media says "the photo doesn't show what he says it does' he can't really refute that, without publically identifying the victim. so he has to play a shadow game, at this point.

[FredScuttle]

40. Anything to head off the DNA test results coming up

I put as much credence into this as I do anything that comes out of McClellan's mouth...that is to say, none

And if the defense attorney refused to share the pictures or any information on who took them and when with the paper, why in the hell should this be given any consideration?

[LostinVA]

71. I was thinking that too -- why was this even a story?

There is no evidence that these photos even exist.

[jukes]

81. Lost

see my post # 74 below. this is a point of law, and no fotos; real , contrived, or fotoshopped acn refute this point.

[Fleshdancer]

42. how convenient that a student was taking pictures outside that night

:eyes:

Does anyone really believe this?

The article also claims that she had bruises on her legs before the attack occured according to these pictures. Um, isn't the victim black? Wasn't the party at night? Pardon my ignorance, but how easy is it for pictures to show bruises on dark skin at night?

[Neil Lisst]

43. Thank you! The "you can see the bruises" in the photo ..

Is about as big a load a marlarkey as told in this whole incident. If there's one thing that should be certain, it's that photos taken at night with a flash, of a black woman with bruises, would NOT show that.

This was little more than the defense attorneys stealing the Sunday news cycle by making a claim that they do not support with the photo. If it showed what they said it does, they'd have it out.

[dsc]

45. your second point is sound

but cameras have become ubiquitious as of late. They are on cell phones and digital cameras have become a common accessory for teens. I do believe that pictures were taken just not that the pictures show what the lawyer says.

[Neil Lisst]

50. ditto that. cameras are everywhere among that age group.

[dsc]

52. truth be known I am still waiting for a video

I would not be surprised at all if a video comes out of this.

[Neil Lisst]

63. you know there's got to be one!

come on, guys getting a stripper who will dance a while and leave?

someone had to be taping

[dsc]

66. I figure as much too

I will be very shocked if no video exists.

[KingFlorez]

46. I agree

I'm not sure I buy this

[Marie26]

51. "Thomas declined to allow The Herald-Sun to view the pictures."

So, a defense lawyer swears he has photos that completely exonerate his clients, yet he refuses to show these photos to the press. But he says it's true, and why would he lie? I think this is all just a part of the smear campaign against the victim that these defense lawyers have been orchestrating for the past week. Just my two cents.

[LostinVA]

72. Per a Durham resident: the Herald-Sun is a very insular RW rag

[Ksec]

54. I see lots of people willing to convict because theyre white

Its kinda funny when those who claim to be Liberal , act exactly like freepers , willing to convict on skin color alone.

[bloom]

56. Who said anything about what color they are.

I'm willing to convict them because they are sports stars who think they can get away with gang-rape. :evilgrin:

And what kind of "liberal" are you with your racist sports logo, anyway? Must be a "Freeper" :sarcasm:

[FredScuttle]

57. Too true, bloom

It must take a truckload of cognitive dissonance to play the race card when you've got Chief Wahoo as your avatar. LOL

[Ksec]

58. Riiight.

[Neil Lisst]

61. most native Americans prefer to be called Indians

there's ample support available at the sites of INDIAN TRIBES

I don't really think the race of the guys is much of an issue for those who are prepared to hang them now and try them later. But it certainly doesn't help them.

[FredScuttle]

59. "you see lots of people" eh?

Good...then you'll have a plethora of posts to direct me to support this accusation. Myself, I haven't seen one thread that says "convict because they're white". Nice strawman though, even bolder when one considers your avatar.

[Ksec]

60. Yes, those Cleveland Indians are real evil doers.

LOL

Dude . I struck a nerve with the truth and you felt the need to attack me. Im not gonna play. Its just too easy to see the reality here.

[FredScuttle]

62. The "truth", lol

I have no need to attack you....I'm just pointing out the utter idiocy of calling other people racist when you've selected, as your avatar, a racist image.

Hey, I like the team...just wish they'd bring their name and logo into the 20th century.

It must be very easy for you to see reality...especially after your fourth bong hit.


edit: to your point about racism in this case, you are aware, aren't you, that according to the eyewitnesses, it was the white players who were yelling at the black victim to "thank (her) grandpa for (their) cotton shirts"? Wasn't us that brought race into this incident.

[jukes]

74. IF the woman was under the inluence

of alcohol, rohypnol, or other drug, it DOES NOT constiture consensual sex or serve as a valid defense for rape.

[Triana]

75. rohypnol

First thing I thought. That's a date rape drug. Regardless - like you say, has nothing to do with whether she was raped or not. They're just trying to blame the victim by smearing her name. Instead of "well, she was wearing provocative clothing, she asked for it", it's "well, she was a drunken (or drugged) barfly and of bad character, and so she asked for it".

You won't hear a peep about the character of the white guys who allegedly raped her. Wild, drunken (underage, no less, a few of them), belligerant, out-of-control, testosterone-driven thugs.

Nope. It's all the woman's fault. It's HER character that's at fault, not theirs. I guess we may never know all the facts (most likely not), and I can't say I'd choose to be an exotic dancer if I were in her situation (2 kids, trying to get through college) but it is good money and THAT DOES NOT JUSTIFY rape or RACIAL slurs being yelled at her -- regardless. I view that as rather irrelevant. If it is relevant, then the character of the drunken, violent, belligerant, lily-white sports thugs is ALSO equally relevant and should be treated as such.

[TimeChaser]

82. I know in Ohio law at least,

that one cannot consent to sex while intoxicated

[BrownOak]

83. Missing the Point

It's not a question of if the alleged victim is inebriated or sober - it's the bruises and the time stamps that will make or break this case.

The point of the defense is that the escort showed up for the evening with those bruises and if those bruises correspond to the photos taken at the hospital than it is impossible to say they were the result of a physical assault inside the house. You can write off the comments about her being drunk as an attempt by the defense to assault her character, but it would seem a pretty stupid tact to take in light of all the drinking citations and general party reputation of the suspects. "Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, please ignore the 15 alcohol citations of my clients and instead focus on this picture of a drunken accuser." Not the smartest approach.

As for the character of the accused players, you heard nothing but questions of their character for the first two weeks after the case broke. The papers came out with news that "15 Players had Prior Charges" which is a great headline but a bit misleading when the current charges are something as serious as rape. However, it certainly has more sizzle than saying "15 College Students had Alcohol Citations" which is almost as accurate. The players following their lawyers' advice is painted as an athletic code of silence. These guys have been under the microscope. At any rate, if nobody would hear a peep about their character, how did you come up with the image of the players as wild, drunken, underage, belligerent, out-of-control, testosterone-driven thugs?

Nobody deserves to have racial slurs being yelled at them but before you get out the torches and pitchforks maybe we should be sure of the context. Nobody deserves to be raped, but before you convict these guys maybe you should wait for the whole story to unfold.

[Fleshdancer]

88. fresh bruises look different from older ones

doctors would be able to figure out which wounds were fresh during the examination.

I still call bs on the photos though. Think about seeing bruises on dark skin from a picture taken at night. That would be one hell of flash.

[northzax]

94. nothing about their character?

where have you been, exactly? I just found 18 articles on ESPN.com alone that talk about that. And there is a primary difference: the accused are identified by name, the victim is not. As far as I know, no media outlet has published her name. Which is as it should be. But don't pretend that all the articles written about the players don't affect them either.

Even if the charges were dropped tommorow, and an apology issued for malicious prosecution (which isn't going to happen, but it's the best result for the players, obviously) for the next 50 years, googling their name and "Duke University" will bring up rape accusations. and articles talking about how stupid and or evil they are. Which is probably true. But not for all of them.

Find her name, and google it, with Duke University her alma mater, and see what comes up.

[BlooInBloo]

80. Which happens more?

White southern men lying, saying that no rape occurred?

Or one southern black woman lying, saying that a rape did occur?

No amount of "smile on her face" trumps that fact, in my mind at least.

And no, I'm not suggesting we toss out the notion of innocent-until-proven-guilty. I AM saying that this smile-on-her-face business needs to be taken in perspective.

[WilmywoodNCparalegal]

84. as per WRAL... DNA results were delivered to the DA's office

but they have not been made public. Some attorneys for the lacrosse players have pledged to make the results publicly known. We shall see.

[warrens]

86. If they don't, you'll know why...

The lab said the cops, the DA or the defense can release them if they want to.

[northzax]

95. if they are positive, we'll know

because someone will be in handcuffs by sunset. If not, then they are either inconclusive or don't mesh with other supposed facts.

but if the DA has a decent case against someone, and a strong accusation against them, and a positive DNA sample? arrest them.

[peacebaby3]

85. I haven't made any decisions on guilt or innocence in this case, but I did

see an interview with this defense attorney on the Today show this morning and while they said he would not allow them to show the pictures, that NBC had verified that the pictures do exist.

Supposedly, the DNA test should be back this week and this defense lawyer says that it should exonerate any of his clients (no names were offered). He said 46 of the players had submitted to DNA test so I guess we will see what comes back.

[LostinVA]

89. No one's saying they don't exist -- just if they show the stuff he's sayin

And, context is important, no matter what the newbie poster on here is saying.

[peacebaby3]

92. I agree, context is important, but the story this morning did not dispute

was in the pictures. It said that NBC officials had viewed the photos and then it said what was in each photo. It seems they would have said that the defense attorney was not reporting the photos accurately if they were different from what was described, but they gave their own description that was even more detailed than this article.

As I stated before, I'm not trying to argue guilt or innocence here at all because I don't know and I will wait until I hear all of the information.

[LostinVA]

93. I don't think you get what I mean: what he's saying you see in the photos

isn't necessarily what is in the photos. You could take a photo of me smiling and happy, then two seconds later shoot me dead. Or, I could be smiling and looking happy because you said you'd shoot em dead if I didn't. Or a million other things.

And, I agree with the other poster up thread: dark bruises on a dark-skinned person??? And, doctors do know if a bruise is fresh or not...

THis sooo sounds like cutting the evidence to fit the story....

WE'll see if the defense attorneys release the DNA results or not...

[peacebaby3]

96. I said I agree that context matters, but what I am saying is that the news

NBC, on the Today Show described what was in the pictures. They even went so far as to say there was a "fresh cut on her chin." They then said that another photo showed the woman on the back stoop, smiling, and you could see the top of her cell phone sticking out of her purse. This was the description from the network report and then they interviewed the defense attorney so it was not his description, it was their (the network reporter's/reporters') description.

I'm not arguing about the context of these photos at all. It could be that the woman was smiling and trying to be nice because she didn't want to get killed at the place. I read a post or two earlier that the defense attorney might be exaggerating or faking evidence so what I am saying is that if he is, then either so is NBC or they are falling for the same faked evidence. I guess it will be up to the judge (if they will be admissible) or the jury to decide what these photos actually mean to the case if it goes to court.

The defense will use these pictures if the DNA evidence comes back positive on some of these players because I'm sure they will say she was not raped, that she consented. If they can show some of the wounds that are noted by the rape examination were already there, then that will be a problem for the DA.

I also heard in this report (I believe it was from the defense attorney) that there was also some new info about the phone call that was made by another woman about racial slurs being yelled at her. Apparently, there is some evidence that this was actually a friend of the dancer. There is also an interview with the other dancer from the party that she saw nothing unusual and that this dancer didn't say anything to her about being raped. Does any of that mean she wasn't raped? Nope, but it will be a burden for the DA to overcome if any of it is true.

Is any of this true? I have no idea. I'm just reporting what I heard from the news this morning.

And I am definitely not defending these guys, but I'm not going to decide their guilt or innocence until I know all the facts. I was raped when I was 16. It was how I lost my virginity so I know exactly how horrible it can be.

[Ksec]

97. No DNA match. Hmmm

I guess those of you who had them convicted are pissed. Live and learn .

And Im sure these rapists took the time to wear protection.

[peacebaby3]

98. I didn't say they were guilty. Did you mean to reply to my post? n/t

[FredScuttle]

99. No DNA match, according to the defense attorney

who, in no report I've seen, ACTUALLY GOT THE RESULTS OF THE TEST

[ismnotwasm]

91. "Big Smile?"

What the fuck is that supposed to mean? What if it's a grimace of pain? I hate shit like this. I'm appalled at the whole story but "big smile" sounds like a manipulative bunch of bullshit. Fucking makes me sick.

"In addition, the time-stamped photos indicate the woman was severely bruised on her legs and face, and had cuts on her legs, knees and feet when she arrived at the home -- and before the rape allegedly occurred -- Thomas said."

So what these sick fucks are saying they let a ADMITTEDLY SEVERELY hurt, and most likely beaten women, with some type of altered mental state provide exotic dancing/entertainment for them? And they have photos to prove it? What a bunch of bastards.

Whatever the truth, and so far I'm of the opinion that the woman is telling the truth about the rapes, THIS line of defense doesn't pass the smell test.

Total asswipes.