Duke Case: Paula Zahn and Alberto Gonzales, Replace
NN’s Paula and AG the AG make a pathetic pair.
To the persecuted Duke Three, they have been unfair.
“Out in the Open: The Duke Assault Case: A Question of Race”
Seemed not so much designed to heal as to save CNN face.
Even the title of the special edition is at fault.
Just as there was no rape, there was no assault.
Pretending that there was won’t make it so.
Paula Zahn and CNN, NOT the way to go!
That show was slanted, sloppy, a disgrace.
It's apparent there should not have been a case.
Paula went to Durham, sat out in the cold,
And read a script, as she had been told.
To defend Crystal Gail Mangum, the false accuser,
There was a feminut Ph. D., what a loser.
At “accuser” instead of victim, “loser” took offense.
After all, the difference between them is immense.
Calling Crystal a victim indicates there was a crime.
But there was no such crime or even enough time.
Crystal, no one raped, kidnapped or sexually assaulted.
Only for watching strippers and drinking can players be faulted.
In an hour, Crystal’s conviction never was referenced.
Such is one way that prosecution side was preferenced.
CNN found a Crystal cousin to give Crystal praise.
CNN’s Nancy Grace is not the only one to amaze.
Was there a reference to Crystal’s prior gang rape claim?
No. Of course not. Then she accused blacks. What a shame!
Cash Michaels said white racism had reared its ugly head.
He should have said the prosecution was baseless instead.
The bias and errors of the show are unassailable.
After all, the show transcript is available.
CBS’s Leslie Stahl called a stripper a stripper, as she should.
Paula called her “an exotic dancer,” as we knew she would.
“It seems everyone, the prosecution, the defense, and the media, rushed to judgment,” Paula pronounced.
But, just the prosecution and the media, not the defense, deserve to be denounced.
Equating everyone was a pathetic ploy.
One more media trick designed to annoy.
She was there “to confront disturbing questions about privilege, fairness, justice, and conclusions based on stereotypes, instead of facts,” Paula claimed.
With “privilege” put before “fairness and justice,” CNN and Paula should be ashamed.
It is NOT agreed that “someone made a sexual reference to using a broomstick on the young women,” as CNN surely should have learned.
It was suggested (stupidly) that a stripper who used sex toys during her “act” might use the broomstick herself, a suggestion rightly spurned.
As for “[r]acial slurs were hurled at the dancers”-- strippers, to be precise,
That’s a gross distortion taken out of context, though a few were not nice.
CNN: “[N]othing was left behind. DNA tests showed no match between any of the players and the young woman.”
That something happened, CNN shamefully implied. But “the young” woman was NOT Iin that bathroom with even one young man.
The CNN transcript refers to defendant David Evans as “unidentified male.”
When it came to mastering the basic facts of the case, CNN obviously did fail.
Paula said that, with respect to the Duke case, “a lot of folks have fallen into stereotypes.”
Cash Michaels, ungallantly but correctly, replied: “Part of that is your fault in the media.” Yipes!
Note: Mr. Michaels is a journalist and a television commentator too.
And, about his own culpability, he does not seem to have a clue.
Reverend Jesse Lee Peterson: “…not all, not all, not all, but most black people are racist toward white Americans today. And this was a good example.”
The Reverend is black. In Durham, in the Duke case, it was on the rights of whites that the local criminal justice system did trample.
Reverend Peterson: “When Dr. King was assassinated, they took a message of forgiveness and character and they perverted that message to hatred and judgment. And you now have young black people believing that white Americans are racist toward them and they have no justified reason for that.”
It was wonderful that, for Reade Seligmann, Collin Finnerty and David Evans, each falsely accused, Reverend Peterson went to bat!
Reverend Peterson: “[T]hey were accused before even finding or discovering the evidence, the proof that this had happened. Had that been reversed, had it been black men accused by a white woman, the story would totally be different. They would have to wait and find out. But because it's white on black, before the evidence was even proven -- here this woman is a stripper, she had children out of wedlock. Apparently, she just had another baby. But that doesn't matter. Character doesn't matter. These guys were victimized, not the woman.”
Reverend Peterson is a very good man.
Paula Zahn: “As the case unfolded, Durham District Attorney Michael Nifong soon found his career on the ropes.”
For getting the truth from CNN, I don’t have high hopes.
But for the opportunity presented by the gang rape tale and accepted by Mr. Nifong, Ms. Zahn,
Mr. Nifong would have lost the May 2, 2006 Democrat primary to Freda Black and by now his career as a prosecutor would be gone!
Jeffrey Toobin, CNN Legal Analyst: “[T]he rape charges last month when the accuser admitted she wasn't sure if she had been forced to have sexual intercourse.”
Do these CNN folks take any care or have any shame or a bit of remorse?
That she was not certain whether a male sex organ or something else was inserted, not that she was not forced, Crystal finally said last December.
Did Ms. Toobin ever read the report of the interview? Did he never know or not remember?
With Crystal’s ever changing story, Mr. Toobin needs to keep track.
David Evans’ imaginary mustache is now a five o’clock shadow. To find out the next version, with Crystal, check back.
Mr. Toobin: “It's important to remember, though, that that's not all the evidence in the case. The district attorney has not put forward his evidence. Are there admissions by some of the defendants? Are there admissions or statements by other lacrosse players at the party incriminating the defendants? We don't know that yet.”
That Mr. Toobin is not privy to what Mr. Nifong produced in discovery seems to be a safe bet.
BUT Mr. Toobin’s so-called analysis is all wet.
And he should not get the parents more upset!
Asking whether there are admissions or statements does not make them materialize.
The Duke always has been based not on evidence, but on wishful thinking and outright lies!
CNN: Crystal “and her cousin believe that the district attorney has made so many mistakes, justice for them may not be possible.“
Hopefully, a false report prosecution against Crystal will not be IMpossible.
“I believe in my heart that she is not the type of person to just fabricate this story,” Crystal’s cousin (not further identified) insisted.
Sometimes acceptance of the truth and reality is fiercely resisted.
America, beware! Cousin said Crystal “has representation now. So I think, you know, some things are going to change. I think in 2007 she's going to have to, you know, pull up her bootstraps and get out here and stop letting people kick the dirt on her and slay her name.”
If Crystal ever dares to take the stand, SHE will be “slayed” on cross-exam. Not that that would be a shame. Crystal should have apologized long ago and apparently deserves lots of blame.
Of course, Durham County, North Carolina District Attorney Nifong has been worse.
To the Seligmann, the Finnerty and the Evans families, Mr. Nifong has been a curse.
So it is too much to much to expect them to endure
AG the AG saying federal intervention is “premature.”
The “official lawlessness” exception surely applies.
The DA and his enablers deceived and told the court lies.
If the DA’s victims were not white, but black,
Would Alberto Gonzales leave them on the rack?
If he acted, he might be Supreme Court Justice-fit.
But, he declined to investigate the Durham snake pit.
Michael J. Gaynor has been practicing law in New York since 1973. A former partner at Fulton, Duncombe & Rowe and Gaynor & Bass, he is a solo practitioner admitted to practice in New York state and federal courts and an Association of the Bar of the City of New York member.
Gaynor graduated magna cum laude, with Honors in Social Science, from Hofstra University's New College, and received his J.D. degree from St. John's Law School, where he won the American Jurisprudence Award in Evidence and served as an editor of the Law Review and the St. Thomas More Institute for Legal Research. He wrote on the Pentagon Papers case for the Review and obscenity law for The Catholic Lawyer and edited the Law Review's commentary on significant developments in New York law.
The day after graduating, Gaynor joined the Fulton firm, where he focused on litigation and corporate law. In 1997 Gaynor and Emily Bass formed Gaynor & Bass and then conducted a general legal practice, emphasizing litigation, and represented corporations, individuals and a New York City labor union. Notably, Gaynor & Bass prevailed in the Second Circuit in a seminal copyright infringement case, Tasini v. New York Times, against newspaper and magazine publishers and Lexis-Nexis. The U.S. Supreme Court affirmed, 7 to 2, holding that the copyrights of freelance writers had been infringed when their work was put online without permission or compensation.
Gaynor currently contributes regularly to www.MichNews.com, www.RenewAmerica.com, www.WebCommentary.com, www.PostChronicle.com and www.therealitycheck.org and has contributed to many other websites. He has written extensively on political and religious issues, notably the Terry Schiavo case, the Duke "no rape" case, ACORN and canon law, and appeared as a guest on television and radio. He was acknowledged in Until Proven Innocent, by Stuart Taylor and KC Johnson, and Culture of Corruption, by Michelle Malkin. He appeared on "Your World With Cavuto" to promote an eBay boycott that he initiated and "The World Over With Raymond Arroyo" (EWTN) to discuss the legal implications of the Schiavo case. On October 22, 2008, Gaynor was the first to report that The New York Times had killed an Obama/ACORN expose on which a Times reporter had been working with ACORN whistleblower Anita MonCrief.