Nifong

Hello BlueNC

I'm brand new, and realize that my "virgin" post has the potential to inspire heated responses, but this is what I'd like to say this evening: Nifong is right. He was acting in the scope of his employment and the state should pay for his defense.

I think it is important that every taxpayer be mindful that when a guy wins an election because he's promising to fulfill the bloodlust of those who want to rush to judgment, there might, just might be consequences for everyone.

Brunette

P. S. I'm new to this posting stuff, so have probably neglected some aesthetic opportunities by way of "tags," and whatever is meant by "teasers."

Comments

Welcome to BlueNC

and you certainly will generate some heated comments - just with the title of your post. :)

Interesting idea - that he was elected to satisfy blood lust. I thought he was elected to prosecute those who were alleged to have broken the law, according to the law of the State. I'm not sure that's got anything to do with blood lust.

A teaser is an interesting little "tidbit" of or about your post that would appear under the title that would make people want to read it. If you don't write one or insert a "breaK" (the little icon next to the big green check mark at the top of the composing box),the program does it for you. I think.


Be the change you wish to see in the world. --Gandhi

Nifong

First, thank you for your welcomes. I do appreciate each comment (thus far).

The idea that Nifong (or any officer of the court) is elected to see that the letter and spirit of the law are honored is one I would like to see supported. However, I do not think the electoral process supports the concept of Justice wearing a blindfold.

That is, I don't think that prosecutors or judges should run for election.

The fact that Nifong used this hot-button case as part of his campaign for election is what made the defense's job so easy. (Not that it was all that tough to start with, what with the lack of essential evidence). Many have questioned whether indigent defendants could have afforded the exoneration that these Duke students did, but as important as it is to note that the indigent are often unable to afford the legal counsel that true justice requires, this seems to have been a case in which even a third year law student might have prevailed.

Sincerely trying to keep the faith,
Brunette

P. S.
By the way, Icloud, I love your signing quote, and wish I'd snagged it first.

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing
-Edmund Burke

Here you and I are....

both with Irishmen for our quotes, yet they are opposite sides of the spectrum...I love the quote, but I am always put off by Burke. Anyone who stood in the way of Revolution is suspect in my eyes, particularly someone that was the father of conservative thought....

CM
---
The Great appear great because we are on our knees – Let Us Rise!
-- “Big Jim” Larkin

The Great appear great because we are on our knees – Let Us Rise!
-- “Big Jim” Larkin

The only problem with this argument......

Is that Nifong was not elected...he was appointed by Easley after Hardin was tapped for a seat on the bench....this is my understanding, but of course I don't live out there.

However, I do agree with your overall point that making DA political positions mean that they then are potentially corruptible by these high profile cases that can make or break a later career move.

Welcome to BlueNC btw....

CM
-----
The Great appear great because we are on our knees – Let Us Rise!
-- “Big Jim” Larkin

The Great appear great because we are on our knees – Let Us Rise!
-- “Big Jim” Larkin

Yes but like Bush being appointed to the WH.....

he was given a huge leg up in being able to run as the incumbent, even if was for only a brief time. That just becomes an advantage no matter how you slice it.

CM
---
The Great appear great because we are on our knees – Let Us Rise!
-- “Big Jim” Larkin

The Great appear great because we are on our knees – Let Us Rise!
-- “Big Jim” Larkin

A big ole slice

Incumbency is certainly an advantage, and perhaps Nifong had nothing to worry about. But he campaigned aggresively on the lacrosse case. He made a point of coming out very early with strong statements -- statements that he was apparently gambling would be justified by evidence that never surfaced. It struck me as blatant pandering at the time, but I hoped, really hoped, that I was wrong and that he had the goods he seemed to be touting. It's shameful on multiple levels, not the least is which the disgrace to his profession.

As for Mr. Burke's conservatism and other objectionable features of his history, granted all that -- he still gets credit for a great quote. It reasonates for me in particular with respect to state government.

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing
-Edmund Burke

I never knew Burke was the one who said that.

It's a great quote.

This has been the most civil discussion we've had about the Duke Lacrosse/Nifong case since that whole mess started. You are to be congratulated, Brunette. Very nicely done.


Be the change you wish to see in the world. --Gandhi

I find it problematic that the People's representatives

in the legal system are elected. Even though these races are technically nonpartisan, we always know who the Democrats are, and who the Republicans are. We get recommendations from our parties, and in fact that is important to me.

But if they weren't elected, they'd be appointees, which would be problematic from another standpoint. Would we be going through confirmation hearings? Would judges, etc. be appointed similarly to other civil servants who serve at the pleasure of the Governor? I don't know how I feel about that either. I just wish they weren't worried about their campaigns when they are supposed to be worried about the law of the land and justice.


Be the change you wish to see in the world. --Gandhi

The AG should prosecute criminals,

not defend them. And this is coming from someone who is no fan of Duke (in sports), and friends with female Duke grads who had no good things to say about Duke LAX.

1 Thessalonians 5:21: But examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good.

I always wanted to be the avenging cowboy hero—that lone voice in the wilderness, fighting corruption and evil wherever I found it, and standing for freedom, truth and justice. - Bill Hicks

Yeah,

That move really surprised me.

It seemed to by-pass the appeals system already in place. Most other things Roy Cooper has done, I've really, really approved of. This one left me scratching my head.

We have laws and a system of laws because they're supposed to be followed, not jumped over. I realize that Nifong probably screwed this case six ways till Sunday but we will never really know because justice never happened the way it's supposed to in the United States. There was never a trial, a judge never heard arguments, etc.

Not a pretty piece of NC history. Good God, I hope no one names a dinner after it.


Be the change you wish to see in the world. --Gandhi

Ya gotta be kidding me

"We have laws and a system of laws because they're supposed to be followed."

Part of that system is called prosecutorial discretion. It means an honest DA does not prosecute three men he knows are innocent against whom he has absolutely no evidence and in a case where there is no evidence a crime has even been committed. That's part ot the job. Prosecutors choose to NOT prosecute all the time. Cooper had to do the job because Nifong wouldn't do it.

Or do you think that if I were to accuse you of something you should have to go all the way to trial just on my say so alone?

If that's the case I claim I saw you putting puppies in a blender last Saturday. Bring on the judge and jury.

No, I don't "gotta be kidding" you.

I meant we have have a system of laws because we need them and they are meant to be followed - by everyone. It means that if you accused me of something, I'd have the right to confront you face to face in court. It means that I have the right to be represented by a competent attorney.

And no, I don't think it should be on your say so alone. But if my blender was full of puppy juice, then yeah, it should be investigated. My comment was that it is extremely unusual for the State's attorney general to intervene in a case already in progress.

I have no stand on the goddamn Duke case. I don't want that can of worms opened on this board again, because dammit - we will never know the truth and it only brings out the uglies in every one.


Be the change you wish to see in the world. --Gandhi

Yes, but it is extremely unusual for a DA

to create or augment evidence against innocent people - or to hide evidence that would prove them innocent. Entirely appropriate for AG to step in here. We don't always know the truth even when a case is tried in court. We could spend quite some time discussing cases where innocent men and women leave jail after spending years behind bars for crimes they didn't commit. A court of law, facing their accusers and a jury of their peers didn't bring out the truth in those cases.



Robin Hayes lied. Nobody died, but thousands of folks lost their jobs.



***************************
Vote Democratic! The ass you save may be your own.

In this case there was no

In this case there was no puppy juice. There was not even a blender. And at least one of the guys accused of pushing the buttons on the blender was demonstrably on the other side of town at the time puppies were supposedly in the blender. All we had was one person lying about puppies in a blender. At some unspecified time. By some unspecified number of people. With some unspecified number of puppies.

We do know the truth - the charges were completely baseless. You need to stop being in denial about that.

And if I'm falsely accused of a crime that didn't happen, I shouldn't have to be put through the wringer of a court trial. That is NOT how the system works. How the system works is that an honest DA realizes that the accusation bogus and the whole thing gets dropped in the first week.

And if you don't want this discussed here why are you posting such nonsense?

As a result of this incident Mike Nifong is, nationwide, the most famous NC Democrat.

well actually...

And if I'm falsely accused of a crime that didn't happen, I shouldn't have to be put through the wringer of a court trial. That is NOT how the system works.

Actually, that is how the system works. Every day men and women who are guilty go free because rules arent followed, and every day innocent people go to jail because of other rules that arent followed. And along the way we have executed hundreds of innocent people.

Having a day before a jury of your peers is the last thing many people fear. Please dont confuse how the system does work with how it should work and vice versa.

As a result of this incident Mike Nifong is, nationwide, the most famous NC Democrat

Really? You think so? I have a bridge in Brooklyn you can buy also...

"Keep the Faith"

"Keep the Faith"

"Having a day before a jury

"Having a day before a jury of your peers is the last thing many people fear." When they're guilty. There's always the chance the jury will let them off.

The very last thing an innocent man wants is to find their face splashed all over the front page for an extended period of time. What the innocent person wants is for the prosecutor to do his job by figuring it out and never bringing charges in the first place so that the innocent person can go on about his business.

Nevermind a prosecutor that goes on national TV and tries to whip into a frenzy the population of the town so that a fair trial cannot be obtained. 'Cause even if they are not sent to jail there are people that will be running around saying "something happened". And as you point out, juries make mistakes. The innocent person cannot be subject to the mistake if the charges are never brought by an honest prosecutor.

Please don't try to convince me that a rogue prosecuter is either "how the system should work" or "how the system actually works".

And to answer the other two posters, John Edwards will sink back into obscurity in 5...4...3...2...1.
Mike Nifong is going to be in the news for months.
Dean Smith is a funny rejoinder, but I was talking about Democrat politicians, of course.

Hey - don't sell a bridge

get a campaign donation for the NC Democrat who really is the most famous.


Be the change you wish to see in the world. --Gandhi

I didn't post nonsense.

I posted that, in my opinion it was highly irregular for the AG to step into a case like that. In my opinion, that should have been the role of the judge before whom the lack of evidence was brought. Because that is how our system works. Read a book.

It's not nonsense, and I didn't bring up Nifong, our new friend Brunette did. I did put it on the front page, because she had some interesting view points that hadn't been expressed here before. I thought we might actually be able to discuss the ideas opened up by this case, rather than the miasma of this case itself.

And I daresay, Nifong is not the most famous NC Democrat. There's this guy, John Edwards. Maybe you've heard of him. He's got great hair, and he's running for president. He's an NC Democrat. I bet you forgot, though.


Be the change you wish to see in the world. --Gandhi

Or this guy

Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

He absolutely wasn't acting in the scope of his employment...

that's why he's in so much trouble now. Prosecutors are ethically prohibited from making public statements that could prejudice the criminal proceeding. Every prosecutor knows or should know this, yet the NC Bar Association cited more than fifty statements that Nifong made that could be construed as being prejudicial to the criminal proceeding. The Bar Association's complaint has like ten pages of examples of things he shouldn't have said. That's not an accident or an isolated slip-up. That's a pattern of disregarding his ethical responsibilites. Even more serious than his pre-trial statements (to my thinking, at least) is that he knew of potentially exculpatory evidence and he lied to the court and the defense attorneys about its existence. The voters elected him to zealously represent their interests, not to lie and break rules left and right. I don't understand why the state should now be forced to pay for his egregious mistakes.

Welcome, by the way.