2 Duke Lacrosse Players Arrested for Rape

[kpete]

2 Duke Lacrosse Players Arrested for Rape By TIM WHITMIRE, Associated Press Writer
4 minutes ago

DURHAM, N.C. - Authorities arrested two 20-year-old Duke University lacrosse players early Tuesday on charges of rape, sexual offense and kidnapping.

Durham police arrested Reade Seligmann and Collin Finnerty, said Col. George Naylor of the Durham County jail. The arrests come a little more than a month after a stripper told police she was raped at a party thrown by the lacrosse team.

Seligmann had already posted a $400,000 bond by 7:30 a.m. and Finnerty was in the process of doing so for the same amount. By posting bond, the players avoid making a court appearance today.

Seligmann, from Essex Fells, N.J., and Finnerty, from Garden City, N.Y., are both sophmores. Earlier, they were led out of separate police cruisers in handcuffs, one was wearing a suit jacket, the other was in dress shirt and jeans.

more at:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/duke_lacrosse;_ylt=Avjak1hsgMMmcCUs8hlK3.is0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA2Z2szazkxBHNlYwN0bQ--
http://customwire.ap.org/dynamic/stories/D/DUKE_LACROSSE?SITE=HIHAD&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2006-04-18-07-43-28

[0007]

1. Pretty high bail. Sounds like this judge is a serious dude.

$400,000 a piece. Wow!

[underpants]

4. Idiot reporter on CNN yesterday said they were "getting their passports...

in order and other personal effects" for some reason this guy thought that when someone is about to get arrested they make sure their passport is up to date and that they have it.

:eyes:

Uh you only get a passport ready when you are thinking about leaving the country/doing some traveling.

Well no one flew the coop but it appears that someone apparently was prepared to.

[northzax]

9. no, you also need to turn it over

as a condition of most bail.

[underpants]

13. WRONG!

I was WRONG!

REally I didn't know that. Okay I'm a dumbass

[northzax]

14. you really need to watch more law and order, UP

really. :)

[underpants]

18. DaDUNN!

Never got into that show. Don't know why just never did. Maybe it isn't on enough for me to have an adequate chance to watch it.

[NaturalHigh]

2. A grand jury will indict whomever the DA instructs it to.

There's no doubt in my mind that these guys will be acquitted. She identified them more than two weeks after the alleged attack? That's BS. Nifong should recognize that he's in a hole and stop digging.

[AllieB]

3. Another poster with ESP. Were you at the scene of the rape?

They must've had corroborating evidence of some sort for two players to turn themselves in.

[NaturalHigh]

5. Umm...they were ordered to turn themselves in.

No, I was not at the scene of the alleged rape, nor do I have ESP. Common sense, though, tells me that her story doesn't add up. No DNA after a gang rape, no trace of condoms, injuries before she ever arrived at the party, 46 people saying that there was no assault or sex of any kind with the alleged victim all add up to her story is a lie. This is about politics, not justice.

[AllieB]

6. 80% of rape cases have no DNA

Or have you not read the myriad of links posted on other threads?

All the so-called facts that you just stated were leaked by the DEFENSE, and are not part of the record. Obviously, this is where you're getting your information.

[NaturalHigh]

7. Where are you getting your info?

I would imagine you've seen the same information that I've seen in the media and reached a conclusion different from mine. You have a right to post your opinion, as I have a right to post mine. My opinion is that this woman is lying.

As for "leaks" from the defense, I would imagine that the "hardball" phase has not yet begun. There will more than likely be lots of information given out soon that the DA is desperate to hide, at least until his primary election is over.

[AllieB]

11. Yes, and most of the information was obtained from the DEFENSE

hence, I'm taking it with a grain of salt.

[underpants]

10. That is what I had thought-this didn't sound right

The first time I heard about the DNA tests I could have sworn that I heard that it was the defense team (s) that made that announcement. I have not heard any official statement on this. The sports press lapped up the defense's story and ran with it. I knew that I had heard that right.

[Neil Lisst]

26. this is not one of those cases, however

This is a case WITH DNA evidence, and it is exculpatory. Therefore, alluding to cases in which DNA evidence is not used is an improper comparison. This case is similar to other cases in which the lack of DNA seems to suggest the story alleged told by the complainant may not be true. It's difficult to reconcile the lack of DNA evidence with HER story in this case.

[rocktivity]

8. The victim says the attack took place in the bathroom

Whether it was consenusal or not, I doubt that 46 other people witnessed it unless the door was left open.

:headbang:
rocknation

[AllieB]

12. The 46 other people figure comes from Limbaugh

and Faux News.

[onenote]

17. she also said that their names were Matt, Brett, and Adam

(according to the police report posted at smokinggun.com). But the two guys whose photos she picked out are Reade and Collin.

Something doesn't add up...

onenote

[rocktivity]

22. Maybe they lied to her about their real names. Strippers do.

:evilgrin:
rocknation

[Jeffersons Ghost]

19. it's about Holloway, It's about rumy failure, it's about anything but iraq

or iran

[MadHound]

15. Hey, just because you don't recognize people two weeks after you meet

Doesn't mean that the rest of us can't recognize people two weeks, two months, or two years after meeting them. And don't you think, given that this was a very traumatic meeting, to say the least, that the faces of her attackers wouldn't be seared into the memory of this woman?

And your assesment of what a grand jury does, and how it works is lacking, to say the least. This isn't Law and Order friend, this is real life.

But hey, if you want to continue to be an apologist for rapists, by all means, it's your right. Sadly I get the feeling that you'll be defending these bastards even as the jail doors slam shut behind them:eyes:

[NaturalHigh]

16. I must have missed the part...

where they were convicted of rape. Oh, that's right, they haven't been convicted, though you'd never know it by some of the posts here.

I'm not an apologist for rapists. If I believed they were guilty, I would want them to spend the next twenty years or so in jail. I just don't believe this woman's story, so I don't believe they're guilty.

[MadHound]

20. So, will you believe it when they're convicted and in jail

Or will you come to the conclusion that they were somehow railroaded? Why don't you believe this woman's story? Because she's a stripper?

And frankly, innocent until proven guilty really only applies to the courts. We the public are free to speculate. My speculation is that Nifong, especially in an election year, wouldn't be pursuing such a high profile case unless he was damn sure he could nail it. Otherwise the risk/reward factor is just way to high. That's the reason why he ran this before a grand jury, a test drive so to speak, rather than just throwing people in jail and starting the prosecution.

[NaturalHigh]

27. "We the public are free to speculate."

Absolutely, which means that I am free to speculate that this woman is lying.

As for these guys being convicted, I will lay good odds that will never happen. When the jury hears her BS story and the defense rebuttal, instead of just the cherry-picked info that the DA threw at the grand jury, they'll be going home. I hope that file a major civil suit against the stripper and the DA for slander and malicious prosecution.

[Solo_in_MD]

21. I believe the expression is that the DA could get a

ham sandwich indicted by most Grand Juries.

I am still undecided on this, but from what has been in the media and almost all from the defense, there is no case. That may change when the prosecution side comes out.

[FredScuttle]

23. Gee, the defense says there's no case

In other news, water is wet.

[Katherine Brengle]

25. Exactly -- I can't trust the "information" from the defense --

they have one job--to get their clients aquitted or have the case dismissed.

The prosecution has an ethical duty to investigate and to only try the case if there is sufficient evidence. Legally, they cannot pursue the case if there are no grounds--and a jury will see through it if this case makes it very far and the DA doesn't have a leg to stand on.

I agree with those who said the DA would not go forward with the case in an election year if there was not sufficient evidence.

Remember, we are only getting the media blitz--we have no real idea what information and evidence is available to those involved in the case.

[NaturalHigh]

29. Are you saying that everything we've heard in the media is false?

Because most of what has come out so far points to the stripper's story being a load of crap. If she is lying (and I believe that she is), I hope the players file a civil suit for slander and make her answer for all the grief she has caused them. Of course, there's no chance that the DA will file charges against her for lying since he has his entire political career wrapped up in believing her story.

[FredScuttle]

30. Yup, nothing classier than demanding a rape victim apologize to her rapist

What exactly have you heard in the media? Probably a lot of the BS that the defense has been flinging out for weeks now. Did you her, perchance, of the rape evaluation performed in the hospital the victim was taken to? The nurses and professionals there concur that she was sexually assaulted.

DNA tests exonerate the players? Er, not quite.
Time-stamped pictures exonerating the players? Er, not quite
Witness statements that the victim was drunk and bruised when she arrived? Er, not quite.

[NaturalHigh]

32. Where did I ever demand that a rape victim apologize

to her rapist? Show me one post where I said that.

As for DNA tests, time-stamped pictures, and witness statements, they may not exonerate the players, but they do tend to throw some reasonable doubt in there.

Your opinion is that the lacrosse players raped the stripper. Mine is that she's lying. I'm just as entitled to state my opinion as you and the rest of the string 'em up crowd are yours.

[FredScuttle]

34. Here you go

"...hope the players file a civil suit for slander and make her answer for all the grief she has caused them"

How would you have her answer?

[NaturalHigh]

36. Since it's my opinion that she wasn't raped by these players...

my suggestion that they file a civil suit against her after they are acquitted doesn't even factor in. This is not even remotely asking a rape victim to apologize to her rapist.

Rape is a horrible crime, and I think rapists should do some seriously hard time. I just don't think these guys raped this woman.

[FredScuttle]

41. Hold on

You would support them filing a civil suit against the victim if they're acquitted? Let me clue you in - an acquittal would not equal "she's lying". What the fuck would they be asking in damages from a rape victim? And it's a wonder why rape is such an underreported crime....Hey ladies! If the jury doesn't believe the prosecutor's case, get your pocketbook out!

But, let me guess...you don't think she was raped, right?

[NaturalHigh]

43. Right.

Yes, I would support them filing a civil suit when they are acquitted, not only against the stripper but against the DA.

[FredScuttle]

44. I ask you again...

what damages would you have them ask of the victim?

[NaturalHigh]

45. Well, I don't think she's the victim...

but rather someone who is lying about the whole incident and looking to file her own civil suit. On that assumption, if I were in their shoes and had been publicly accused of such a heinous crime, I would try to get the largest monetary settlement that I could. She probably doesn't have a lot of money, but her future wages could be garnished.

[FredScuttle]

48. I'm not aware that the victim has the power to indict

Of course, in our modern age, single mothers are capable of many things, but in this case, I don't think she has the time to impanel a grand jury and obtain indictments.

You do realize don't you that this is a criminal investigation, not a personal vendetta being waged by the victim, right? The DA is representing the county, not her.

[NaturalHigh]

116. Is the DA really representing the county...

or is he trying to railroad the lacrosse players to further his political career?

[IselaB]

78. You know....

I have no opinion on this case, but I do have an opinion on this exchange. NaturalHigh is being logical, honest and consistent, and you are not.

[FredScuttle]

104. I should care, why?

What are you, the Dick Buttons of this thread?

[timber84]

107. Once again Fred does not allow someone to have an opinion

different to his without adding his own brand of insults.

[FredScuttle]

111. Yup that's me....the Great Deny-er of Opinions

See how many opinions I've denied just on this very thread? :sarcasm:

mess with the bull, you get the snark

[Occulus]

77. IF she's really lying: legally, via a civil case.

If she's really lying, she very well may go to jail as well.

If.

edit: I'm using the word 'lying' very precisely here; az in, she knows some facts are not as she claims them to be. Believe it or not, that's happened before as well.

[Katherine Brengle]

24. Are you freaking kidding me?

Since when is two weeks past the statute of limitations for identifying a rapist?

Oh wait, it isn't. So, you must be talking out of your proverbial ass, eh?

News flash--in most places, a victim has YEARS to report a rape and identify an attacker. Granted, the faster these things happen, the more likely it is that the attacker will be tried and convicted (if guilty), but 2 weeks is pretty quick as far as I know.

[NaturalHigh]

28. Where did I mention the statute of limitations?

I was giving my opinion that it is pretty strange she didn't pick them out immediately but suddenly "remembered" who "raped" her two weeks after seeing their pictures plastered everywhere around Durham. I wonder if she had some help picking them out.

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[NaturalHigh]

33. That was certainly a well-thought out post.

I guess personal attacks are what you have left when your arguments don't hold water.

[Thtwudbeme]

35. Yours don't hold water either, you just add so many words

that I don't bother slogging through most of your posts.

btw---I like your john denverish tree hugging spotted owl luvin granola chomping name.

[NaturalHigh]

37. I hate granola and John Denver.

If you don't like my posts, why don't you put me on ignore?

[Thtwudbeme]

40. I love John Denver and granola

I wasn't kidding, I like your name. I drive a Subaru with a Sierra Club sticker too.

I don't put you on ignore because I am enjoying watching the arguments with you; I have most of the people who agree with you on the ignore list.

[FredScuttle]

49. You're right, my apologies for calling you crazy

That's uncalled for and I've been doing too much of it lately. Sorry.

[NaturalHigh]

117. Apology accepted.

I realize this is an emotional case.

[timber84]

50. Yep you are 100% correct!

Fred had the case all wrapped up about a month ago. Step away from this one. It will get ugly really fast.

[FredScuttle]

56. What's ugly

is the continued attempts by some on this board to (consciously or not) insult rape victims under the guise of "discussing the case". If someone wants to help the defense team smear a rape victim, then yes, I get ugly real fast.

[timber84]

58. Just exactly how has the defense team smeared her?

[FredScuttle]

61. You mean, like lying about her showing up drunk?

and lying about claiming her partner stated she believed no rape occurred? In their zeal to influence the jury pool, the defense team is taking a lot of liberties with the truth.

[timber84]

66. Where are the quotes?

Please cite

[sproutster]

42. :( Also it appears one of the 100% has a solid alibi

And an ATM video.

[FredScuttle]

46. and an unfortunate sense of timing n/t

[dogday]

39. Not true about the Grand Jury

there have been several incidences where the GJ never sought indictments...

Your assumption is wrong... If the evidence is there they will indict, however, it does not take a boat load, just enough for them to think a crime has occurred...

[KitchenWitch]

47. Yes!

The difference between the GJ and a Jury trial is the burden of proof. In a Grand Jury, the burden of proof is probable cause. In a Jury Trial the burden of proof must surmount reasonable doubt.

[Neil Lisst]

95. grand juries do what the DA tells them, hear only what he tells them

The Grand Jury votes on whether to give the DA the indictments he asks for. Usually, they give him all the ones he asks for. The defense has no role, and the DA can tell the grand jurors anything he wants, and often does. Prosecutors are no more honest than most lawyers, and probably considerably less honest than most.

Grand Jurors are typically very tied to the local community, the type of juror who would usually make a prosecution juror in a trial.

[kpete]

38. Duke Rape Indictment

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0418061duke1.html

[genie_weenie]

51. Seems Reade Seligmann has a good alibi

Seligmann's argument is simple: He is innocent and he has an alibi. He attended the party that night, but documents, photos and witness testimony show that he wasn't there long enough or at the right time to attack the alleged victim.

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/LegalCenter/story?id=1858806&page=1

Keep those ATM slips...

[FredScuttle]

53. and an unfortunate sense of timing

I really am not getting this...how can this guy (if he truly does have evidence of his whereabouts) allow himself to be investigated and ultimately indicted? This must be groupthink gone beserk because, in that case, he picked loyalty to the team over self-preservation.

[genie_weenie]

54. Maybe he's covering for another player OR...

Maybe the woman, bombarded with everything, and traumatized is having trouble remembering what her attacker looked like and Reade is covering for another player.

Or maybe she was being pressured to pick out her attackers and is just a human with a bad memory for facial recognition.

Or maybe she was raped by her bodyguard who was angry at not recieving a higher percentage of her monies, prior to the performance and is afraid the guy will kill her if she fingers him. After all he may be a real bad dude.

[FredScuttle]

55. They didn't have a bodyguard

and there's no abusive boyfriend, or pimp, or any other strawmen involved.

[genie_weenie]

57. How are you certain the victim has no boyfriend or bodyguard?

Don't give me that strawmen bullshit. This isn't a strawman, it is a reasonable doubt sceniro the Defense could use to discredit her accusation of the players.

I would say I'm offended that you throw out "that's a strawman", unless you are on intimate or friendly terms with this woman and can then claim she doesn't have a boyfriend, but I know that wouldn't matter to you.

Oh, that's right every piece of information the defense uses is to be tossed aside in the call for justice!

Everything the defense offers up is to be discredited, scoffed at, or ignored...

Nice.

[FredScuttle]

62. Hey, you're the one speculating about a bodyguard

when all parties agree there was no bodyguard.

Feel free to run your imaginary scenarios to discredit the victim's tale, but don't be surprised when you're called on your bullshit.

[genie_weenie]

65. Man this is something

All parties agree there was no bodyguard. At the performance, sure. So, she has never, had a bodyguard before, hmmm. And you know this how?

I like how the "boyfriend" disappeared from your horsecrap response. Is that because you realize oops she may have a boyfriend? Oh, dear you couldn't admit that it might put a damper on the rush to conviction. Bring out th drumhead!

Just keep yourself sealed up. I hope you're never accused of a crime. Because karma would probably get a DA with your level of vindictiveness.

Just keep slamming the shoe on the podium. They are guilty. They are guilty. I will not hear your alibi or anything else!

[FredScuttle]

67. I wouldn't be in this situation

because I don't rape exotic dancers, got it?

You are being willfully ignorant of the details of this story, like a lot of people here. There was no bodyguard, period. She just started working for this escort agency and they sent her and the other dancer to the party alone. Who the fuck knows if she had a bodyguard before...it wouldn't be relevant in the slightest!

And yeah, I believe that there's no boyfriend angle to play...I don't know if she has a boyfriend or not, but the DA and the medical examination verified she had recent injuries consistent with a sexual assault...couple that with the other dancer's statement that the victim was acting completely normal when they arrived and it is highly, highly unlikely that this victim suffered a brutal assault before she showed up the players' house.

You'll keep digging to discredit her story and find excuses for the players, so I guess we're even. And, yes, I'm a vindictive son of a bitch when it comes to three drunk assholes subjecting a woman half their size to a brutal rape and strangulation. Wrath of God vindictive.

[genie_weenie]

72. This is getting to personal, I'm sorry

I'm sorry I should have edited my previous post. I'm apologize for the comments in the post which seemed to be directed at you. Please be sure I was NOT alleging you are capable of rape. It was a comment on the system.

Nifong, I think, made several major mistakes early on (possibly because of the atmosphere surrounding the campus) and the defense capitalized upon them. Now, he's trying to recover from the damage caused to his case.

I don't know if they did it. They may have. But, the State has been guilty of ignoring rule of law (Waco Anniversary today) to often.

I hope this doesn't destroy this woman's life. But, I think it's too late.

So, peace and good luck with your other posts.

[FredScuttle]

74. No offense taken

I know you weren't saying I was capable of rape. I just get ansty when people start with the whole "I hope you/a member of your family are never suspects" because I could easily turn it around to say "I hope you're never in this victim's shoes"...but that's inflammatory and, since we're strangers conversing on a forum, way too presumptuous.

Peace.

[timber84]

76. you had no problem saying that very same thing to me about 3 weeks ago,

why the sudden change of heart? I should I call you out on your bullshit?

[FredScuttle]

84. Please refresh my memory

I'm not in the habit of remembering every conversation I have with you.

[timber84]

85. not sure how to do that

[FredScuttle]

86. How about the link to the thread you're referring to?

Or a summary about what we talked about? I'm sure you think you're memorable, but my memory's dim in my old age.

[timber84]

87. here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=791800&mesg_id=799036

and the insults to me again are not warranted ever so slight as you try to make them

[FredScuttle]

90. Oh yeah

you're the kind soul who claimed the victim went straight to the newspaper after her rape instead of the police, which was a Grade A slice of bullshit. How nice to talk with you again.

I don't take back a single word of that post...why don't you post again questioning what the typical response of a rape victim should be and see how you do with that?

[timber84]

91. Why don't you stop changing the subject?

and admit that you did just what you said you don't do because its inflammatory?

[FredScuttle]

96. Different rules for different people

I make every effort not to be inflammatory with every other poster on this forum. For you, however, I have a different set of rules. That only apply to you. You only.

Sorry...sometimes life is unfair.

[timber84]

97. How cute

[timber84]

92. and I never said she went to the papers before she went to the

police by the way.

[FredScuttle]

94. Oh yes you did

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x791800#797696

and I quote: "I question it because of she went immediately to the newspaper."

[timber84]

98. nowhere does it say that I said she went to the paper before the police

sorry to call you on your own bullshit

[FredScuttle]

103. Not those exact words

but in claiming she went "immediately" to the newspaper was telling indeed.

I already had one argument with you about your bullshit...I don't need another.

[timber84]

105. no this is an arguement about yours this time

[FredScuttle]

108. have fun talking with yourself then

n/t

[BrownOak]

114. Recent?

I don't know if she has a boyfriend or not, but the DA and the medical examination verified she had recent injuries consistent with a sexual assault...couple that with the other dancer's statement that the victim was acting completely normal when they arrived and it is highly, highly unlikely that this victim suffered a brutal assault before she showed up the players' house.

Please show me where it has been reported that the injuries were called "recent" and please provide the timeframe for which "recent" was defined.

Also, please give me the qualifications of the second dancer to determine if the change in the alleged victim's behavior is attributable to a sexual assault as opposed to being under the influence of any type of narcotic.

And if it does turn out that all the evidence shows that a rape happened and that these guys were the ones who did it and the rest of them knew about it, then I'm fine with letting killer out of the closet on them.

[timber84]

60. Just how do you know this to be fact?

[FredScuttle]

64. I don't know it to be fact

but the DA had ample opportunity to investigate the victim's story and he is satisfied she's telling the truth.

[timber84]

68. Maybe he should have investigated a little better seems to me

one of them has a pretty strong alibi,recipts, and witness'.

[FredScuttle]

69. A strong alibi

that he forgot to raise until he was fingerprinted and photographed by the state. Yeah, right.

[onenote]

70. how do you know he didn't raise the alibi?

I don't know if he did or didn't. I also don't know the details as to how solid an alibi it is or isn't. But one thing that folks should not lose sight of: even if alibi evidence was presented to the prosecutor, the prosecutor wouldn't necessarily be obligated to present it to the grand jury: Here's what the Supreme Court said in US v. Williams in 1992:

"...neither in this country nor in England has the suspect under investigation by the grand jury ever been thought to have a right to testify, or to have exculpatory evidence presented. See 2 Hale, supra, at 157; United States ex rel. McCann v. Thompson, 144 F. 2d 604, 605-606 (CA2), cert. denied, 323 U.S. 790 (1944).

Imposing upon the prosecutor a legal obligation to present exculpatory evidence in his possession would be incompatible with this system. If a "balanced" assessment of the entire matter is the objective, surely the first thing to be done--rather than requiring the prosecutor to say what he knows in defense of the target of the investigation--is to entitle the target to tender his own defense. To require the former while denying (as we do) the latter would be quite absurd. It would also be quite pointless, since it would merely invite the target to circumnavigate the system by delivering his exculpatory evidence to the prosecutor, whereupon it would have to be passed on to the grand jury--unless the prosecutor is willing to take the chance that a court will not deem the evidence important enough to qualify for mandatory disclosure. See, e. g., United States v. Law Firm of Zimmerman & Schwartz, P.C., 738 F. Supp. 407, 411 (Colo. 1990) (duty to disclose exculpatory evidence held satisfied when prosecution tendered to the grand jury defense provided exhibits, testimony, and explanations of the governing law), aff'd sub nom. United States v. Brown, 943 F. 2d 1246, 1257 (CA10 1991)."

onenote

[timber84]

71. you make way to many assumptions on a case that you are not

directly involved in. you assume she has no boyfirend, you assume everything the players have to say to defend themselves is a lie, you assume she is telling the whole truth. I hate to tell you this but if that guys alibi is truthful her credibility will be gone. she said that she id' the two indicted being 100% positive.

[FredScuttle]

73. Pot, meet kettle

I'm making assumptions, but you know it's a strong alibi? Please...don't pretend that you're not doing the exact same thing.

[timber84]

75. Just trying to prove a point you and I were not there and do not know the

whole truth. you think that becuase I question certain issues that I am "blaming the victim" and i believe that you are making a rush to judgement in this case, maybe we are both wrong or just being "devil's advocates".

[IselaB]

83. ALLOW HIMSELF to be investigated and indicted?

Is that optional? The suspect makes that determination? Man, those 8 years I spent in San Quentin were for nothing!

There is a fundamental flaw at the very core of your position. I'm not sure why you don't see it or if you are simply pretending not to see it. But your error is in equating an accusation of rape with rape. There's a reason people are innocent until proven guilty. It's not ceremony, and it's not a platitude, it's a principle. It's a good principle. If nothing else, it keeps one's thinking clear.

[FredScuttle]

89. Spare me the lecture on due process

I've gotten it plenty of times during this case. And I say...bully for that. The court can give them due process...I don't.

However, my specific point here is...let's grant that this guy has irrefutable evidence that he was not at the house in the time period in which the rape took place. Why would he shelve it, knowing the DA is looking at the whole team? Why would he submit to the investigation and not once say "Hey! I wasn't there and I have proof!"

There's a post above that makes a good point that even if this guy handed the evidence of his innocence over to the DA, the DA is not compelled to present it to the grand jury. But, jeez Louise, if this guy's alibi is so "iron-clad", what's he doing posing for a mugshot?

[IselaB]

93. I think you are very confused about how these things work

If the guy has a good alibi, then you have to ask the DA why the guy's posing for a mugshot. Because the guy wasn't asked to pose for the mugshot, he was told to.

I think you've backed yourself into a corner by insisting that allegations equal conviction, and by attacking anybody who is withholding judgement as a rapist-sympathizer. It seems to me there are plenty of reasons, at this point, to hold off convicting the suspects even in the court of public opinion.

The DA is up for reelection, and he simply may have made a political miscalculation here. The political element doesn't make it less likely that mistakes are being made, it makes it more likely.

[timber84]

99. nailed it!

nice post and by the way Welcome to DU!

[FredScuttle]

100. I think you have me confused with someone else

I think they're guilty, but I've never said they're not due their opportunity to answer the charges. I've never called anyone on this board a "rapist-sympathizer" and I certainly wouldn't attack someone who doesn't have an opinion one way or the other on this case. I've only been hostile to people who've joined in the defense attempt to smear the victim, as well as respond to some (frankly) Neanderthal attitudes around here regarding rape.

And what corner have I backed myself into? I believe this woman was raped and I think the lacrosse players are the obvious suspects who did it. I'm going to follow the trial like everyone else.

[onenote]

101. of course, he didn't pose for a mugshot until after the indictment

which may have been handed down with or without the DA having knowledge of the alleged alibi evidence

A reasonable supposition is that if the DA knew about the alibi evidence, he didn't think it was ironclad or he didn't know about it. Why that would be the case is impossible to know without knowing far more about the DA's strategy, the defense strategy, and how the investigation has been conducted.

onenote

[TorchTheWitch]

80. Doesn't mean squat

They are using time-stamps from photographs taken at the party which are ridiculously easy to alter to pinpoint the time the alleged incident took place.

A series of time-stamped photographs viewed by ABC News show the girls dancing at midnight and at 12:02 a.m.
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/LegalCenter/story?id=1858806&page=1

I have no doubt that Seligmann did indeed take this cab ride and use the ATM and so forth. However, since they are going by time-stamped photos taken at the party that are easily altered as the time that the alleged incident occurred, this is not sufficient as an alibi. If he had a relevant DOCUMENTED alibi, he would not have been arrested as he would then have just about the strongest case for false arrest as can be.

The time-stamps on the photos aren't relevant due to the fact that they are alterable. I don't see how they can be admissable in court as a reference to time.

To me, this man's actions just look suspicious. Look at it this way...

1. Take photos of stripper with camera where time-stamps are easily altered
2. Rape stripper
3. Get cab driver to take you to ATM machine, stick your face in the ATM machine camera while you take out money from your account that gives you a RELEVANT time-stamped receipt
4. Call your out-of-state girlfriend so there will be RELEVANT time-stamped phone records of your call to your out-of-state girlfriend
5. Make damn sure you hang out with cab driver for suffient length of time where it would cover the same length of time the strippers were at the party
6. Make damn sure the time-stamps on the photos taken of the stripper are altered to make it appear that you weren't even there
7. Submit all this stuff to your attorney

Presto... you now have an eye-witness (cab driver), photographic evidence (ATM video camera with RELEVANT time-stamp), document evidence (ATM receipt with RELEVANT time-stamp), more document evidence of phone call to girlfriend (RELEVANT time-stamped phone records). What you DON'T have is RELEVANT time-stamped evidence of when the incident occurred. And that's why you got arrested... you didn't realize that those photos taken of the stripper with alterable time-stamps are NOT relevant.

How many alibis have just about every single type of time-stamped documented, videoed, phone recorded, eye-witnessed evidence? This just looks to me like an elaborate plan to try to cover up.

[timber84]

82. I guess they are fudging the time stamp @ the ATM ?

Was the camera used his? Or is this now one big conspiracy?

[Neil Lisst]

102. Oh, the crafty machinations of drunken college athletes ...

... planning in detail their "photo-cab-ATM" alibi.

For the record, there are watches shown in the photos which confirm independently the time on the photos.

This is an argument between those who thoughtfully and fairly look at apparent evidence, and those who have the same problem Nancy Grace does - a bias that viciously compels them to consider all who are accused of rape to be guilty.

[genie_weenie]

106. You mean the Illuminati had nothing to do with this?

Khannnnnnnnnnnnn! :evilfrown:

Edit: I had to get the Illuminati spelling correct, they hate that, or do they?

[Neil Lisst]

109. this is why we have jury trials with biased jurors already bounced

This argument largely pits those who still have an open mind versus those who don't.

I'm perfectly amenable to finding one or more men guilty and shipping his ass, but the quality of the evidence isn't there yet.

[genie_weenie]

110. Hey, Neil you did something on these threads that hasn't been done

You posted an excellent reasoned response. Keep up the good work!

Cheers. :toast:


or did you? dun dun dunnnnnnnn

[Neil Lisst]

112. hey, I watch Mind of Mencia, too!

He's pretty funny. I recognize his mom. She's been a character actor for decades. Not sure how I feel about his "dun dun dunnnnn, you're retarded!" though.

[Neil Lisst]

113. KHANNNNNNN! Indeed.

with Reech Coreenthian Lather

[genie_weenie]

88. So, this does not raise a reasonable doubt to you?

Do you think the court is going to be able to get an unbiased jury?

As for you time stamp argument. I take it the only time related evidence you would accept is if a subject ingested a radioactive isotope with a known half-life which could be measured with exactitude?

Are the Men guilty? Does the State need a trial? You really are detailing out a huge pre-meditated cover-up.

The hired the stripper because they knew she would be villified as "one of those broads who is asking for it", drugged and raped her, then got time-stamped evidence to further their innocence, banded together so the victim with her hazy memory couldn't id the men she saw that dark, smoky night (after all the white men all look alike).

Wow, Occam's Razor, where are you?

[timber84]

52. More on the case:

http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=local&id=4091290

[aikoaiko]

59. wow, those details will only magnify opinions of those who rush to judge

There's something there for everyone.

[Imagevision]

63. The Seligmann Putz attacked some gay guy, Rich punk!

[timber84]

79. No it was the other guy.

Finnerty(sp)

[TorchTheWitch]

81. I thought that was the other guy?

What's him name... Finnerty or something like that.

[BrownOak]

115. Doesn't matter, he's rich so he must be guilty**