Commentaries, Global Warming, Opinions   Cover   •   Commentary   •   Books & Reviews   •   Climate Change   •   Site Links   •   Feedback
"And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." - John 8:32
WEBCommentary Contributor
Author:  Michael J. Gaynor
Bio: Michael J. Gaynor
Date:  October 29, 2007
Print article - Printer friendly version

Email article link to friend(s) - Email a link to this article to friends

Facebook - Facebook

Topic category:  Other/General

Duke Case: Dukeblues44 and Impersonator

"Dukeblues44" is the person who anonymously forwarded Ryan McFadyen's infamous e-mail to the Durham police, thereby permitting the prosecution to release it and pretend that members of the 2005-2006 Duke University Men's Lacrosse Team were monsters, even though the e-mail was, in the words of Stuart Taylor, Jr. and KC Johnson in Until Proven Innocent, "a play on revolting course material assigned by Duke professors" and that was readily ascertainable by the police, the prosecution and, of course, the Duke administration.

"Impersonator" is the person who sent an email to team members in the name of one of them that was designed to induce recipients to go to the Durham police and give evidence against teammates.

Are "Dukeblues 44" and "Impersonator" the same person?

Will anyone in the know say so?

As Durham, North Carolina's News & Observer's Ruth Sheehan might put it, the silence of those who know is "sickening." The person or persons should be identified.

To those who know (with due credit to Ms. Sheehan):

We know you know.

We don't know why you are, but we know you know who sent those emails and one of you needs to come forward and tell.

Do not be afraid of retribution. Do not be persuaded that somehow this was done by one or more "good guys" to "bad guys."

Protecting a vigilante or vigilantes who violated e-mail privacy and perpetrated a hoax that exacerbated THE Hoax is wrong and if the perpetrator(s) won't come forward and confess, covering up for him, her or them is wrong too.

Durham-in-Wonderland comment: "The Ryan M. e-mail...was sent anonymously to the Durham police on 3/27/06 from the following e-mail address: Dukeblues44. We know, from Himan's deposition, that Nifong was receiving information on the case from a woman who worked in his office and whose husband was with the Duke police. This e-mail address sure sounds like a moniker for a Duke cop."

I doubt it was "a Duke cop."

I think that screen name was supposed to represent all the players that had not allegedly committed the fabricated gang rape.

Members of Duke University's varsity sports teams are called blue devils.

There were 47 members of the 2005-2006 Duke University Men's Lacrosse Team.

By the time that e-mail was anonymously sent to the Durham police, false accuser Crystal Gail Mangum had cut down the number of phantom rapists from twenty to a much more manageable three.

Subtract three from 47 and the result is 44, allegedly the number of teammates covering up for the three.

A person (or persons) with (1) advanced computer skills, (2) access to the email accounts of members of that team, (3) a great interest in the Hoax being real, (4) a willingness to violate the players' privacy and (5) a desire for anonymity obviously forwarded that e-mail and fabricated the e-mail purportedly from a team member to teammates warning that he would be telling the truth and they should too.

I might have been a Durham policeman or a person in the Durham County District Attorney's Office, but I doubt that too.

So who sent those e-mails?

After I posted a thread on the LieStoppers message board titled "Who's Dukeblues44?," a Duke parent e-mailed me:

"[Your] Liestoppers post certainly generated some interest and some theories but no conclusions, yet.

"I found it a little surprising that most of the posters seemed to think that the e-mail was sent by someone from the Durham Police. The Police had the captains' computers from which they could have easily, and legally, accessed Ryan's e-mail. Why would the Police have to go through a charade involving an anonymous e-mail? Also Himan testified in his deposition, that he did not know who sent the e-mail. Why would he lie under oath? I recall that the Special Prosecutors indicated that the Durham police did not send the e-mail. I also recall hearing that the Police did not access the captains' computers, maybe because the Police knew the whole thing was a hoax from the beginning.

"I still think it was someone from Duke, either a Duke cop or [name deleted].The Duke police may get access to information on students' computers when the students are subject to a serious criminal investigation. And we know that there is a Duke police--Crimestoppers connection (Duke police director Robert Dean was/is on the Crimestoppers Board.) And why was the e-mail sent specifically to Durham police Capt. LaVarge ? Maybe he was a friend of Dean or some other Duke cop.

"...I think [name deleted] is a real possibility. He was an anti lacrosse player, left wing activist who led the protests and likely produced the vigilante/wanted posters. He was a Duke employee and an IT expert who may have been able to tap into the players' computers. His statement thanking the sender of the e-mail may have been a ruse to try to get the players to come forward. The bogus e-mail from one of the players (Archer) may also have been the work of [name deleted]l, again with the objective of scaring the players into coming forward.

"It's important that we determine the identity of the anonymous sender. It would really help in the civil actions against Duke/Durham."

It sure would!

I had posted this comment on the LieStoppers message board:

"A Durhamite Dukie political correctness extremist named Sam Hummel was not mentioned in Until Proven Innocent: Political Correctness and the Shameful Injustices of the Duke Lacrosse Rape Case by Stuart Taylor, Jr. and KC Johnson.

"What a pity!

"From AASHE: 'Sam Hummel is AASHE's IT Manager. After graduating with a degree in Computer Science, Sam served as Duke University's first Environmental Sustainability Coordinator from 2004 to 2006....'

"In the fall of 2002, Sam was a senior at Duke with formidable computer skills.

"The Chronicle, Duke's newspaper, offered some insight into the kind of fellow Sam was: 'Sam Hummel, a senior, said he felt that the campus needed more 'things to do with two or three of your friends,' such as an air-hockey, foosball or pool table. He also suggested 'computer labs just for playing computer games which you could come to as an individual during the day.'

"Individuals can play computer games at Duke.

"Durham People's Alliance acknowledged Sam as a member and provided this contact information: 'e-mail: cell: 919-475-8136.'

"A comment by 'Darren E.' at the Editors' Blog of Durham's News & Observer quoted Sam as follows: 'I was also incensed to read comments by Cpl David Addison of the Durham Police Department saying that the police approached the lacrosse team but that all the members refused to cooperate with the investigation. While I don't think anyone should have to cooperate and potentially incriminate themselves, I was appalled that the team was working as a unit in refusing to cooperate. Surely, some of them were in a position to tell what they knew. The only explanation I could conceive for the entire team not-cooperating was that lawyers had told no one to speak with the investigators. That belief resulted in my taking a sign to the 'Pots and pans wake-up call against sexual assault' that read "Get a Conscience, Not a Lawyer."'

"How about 'Get a Lawyer with a Conscience,' Sam?

"And how about the whole truth, Sam?

"Jenny Warburg photographed you and your mother, Anne Hummel, another Duke alumni, outside the house where the party and alleged rape did not occur.

"You were holding TWO signs, Sam. The big one read: 'Sunday Morning: Time to Confess.'

"Do YOU have something to confess, Sam?

"Your mother was holding a sign that read: 'Outraged Duke Alum'.

"Were you outraged as well as incensed?

"In your outrage, did you do a bit more than carry a couple of signs?

"Do tell whether you did anything else in an attempt to crack that imaginary 'blue wall of silence.'

"'Darren E.' to the Editors: '....your March 25 story which was incredibly sympathetic to the accuser and left out the fact that the players had cooperated (and police had previously acknowledged this cooperation) started a chain of actions which led to the potbanging and associated vilifying of the players. It should also be noted that Hummel is the likely source of the wanted poster that was passed around. So please don't say your initial reporting has had no effect on the case, because that simply isn't true.'

"You did have the computer skills to prepare that wanted poster, didn't you, Sam?"

"'John in Carolina':

"...Duke's Brodhead 88 precinct has yet to report either its 'Get Well vote' or who paid for its Chronicle ad.

"When there's news concerning either one of those, you'll be switched immediately to Sam Hummel who's standing by under the big red and white CASTRATE banner at Potbangers' headquarters in Trinity Park.

"Sam Hummel, April 7, 2006 (Durham Responds Message 124):

"'To the individual who provided the police with Ryan McFadyen's e-mail:

"Thank you for coming forward. Many individuals clearly have information about the lacrosse team members' activities on March 13-14, but you are one of the few who has volunteered what you know to the police investigators. By sharing Ryan's own words, you broke the silence that Ryan and other lacrosse team members have kept. Thank you for breaking that silence.

"I'm sure it was difficult to decide whether or not to forward that e-mail to the police. Ryan must be a teammate or a friend of yours. It would have been easier to do nothing. Thank you for having the fortitude to do what is right. I hope there are more individuals like you with information about that night. More who have the courage and principle of character to share what they know.

"It is not too late to share what you know. Please, if you or anyone reading this has any information that may help investigators ascertain the truth, please call Durham Crime Stoppers at (919) 683-1200. Callers can remain anonymous...."'

"None of the designated recipients of the email (ALL of the sender's teammates) forwarded it to the police, Sam. They knew it was an attempt at comic relief parodying Duke course material ('American Psycho'). They also knew there was no kidnapping, rape or sexual assault and expected DNA tests to exonerate them.

"Now who had the computer skills, interest and 'fortitude' to create another gmail account with a suggestive screen name and forward that email, out of context?

"Using a Duke computer to do it would have been easy, right?

"Sam, I emailed you a simple question: 'Who's Dukeblues44?'

"Care to answer?

"DARE to answer?"

No response from Sam.

Is Sam the sort of fellow who would ask the teammates to "share"? (It doesn't strike me as the word of choice for a Durham or Duke policeman or policewoman.)

IF Sam, then Duke's Environmental Sustainability Coordinator, sent those e-mails, especially the incendiary one used by the prosecution to manipulate public opinion, Duke will need to get out the checkbook again.

Even if Sam didn't, Duke eventually will be writing more checks for betraying and abusing its lacrosse players.

Michael J. Gaynor

Send email feedback to Michael J. Gaynor

Biography - Michael J. Gaynor

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,,, and 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.

Gaynor's email address is

Read other commentaries by Michael J. Gaynor.

Copyright 2007 by Michael J. Gaynor
All Rights Reserved.

[ Back ]

© 2004-2024 by WEBCommentary(tm), All Rights Reserved