Tuesday, September 29, 2009

Selective Justice Awards Banquet

“The Selective Justice Awards Banquet” is the title of Episode IV of the upcoming “The MisAdventures of Super-Duper Cooper” comic strip. The “Super-Duper” comic strip is often far out in its story line, but it is based on the truth about the state’s unjust and selective justice system. Episode IV light-heartedly pokes fun at the North Carolina State Bar, the biased media, North Carolina attorneys and judges, and a couple of politicians.
Part 1 of the 4 part episode will appear on Sunday, October 4, 2009, on the official Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong website,
www.justice4nifong.com. Parts 2 through 4 will be posted on subsequent Sundays.

This episode pays special tribute to the North Carolina State Bar, the state’s system of “selective justice based on Class and Color.” Collusion in the “selective justice process” by the media, both local and nationally, is also acknowledged for disseminating and perpetuating blatant lies, misinterpreting motives and intentions, wrongfully defining terms (“exculpatory” comes to mind offhand), and giving credence to dubious actions and statements. The biased media falls terribly short when it comes to challenging the inappropriateness of certain actions (the overstepping proclamation of “innocent” by Attorney General Roy Cooper, for example), and not questioning the weak and bogus documents by the State Bar used in the disbarment of Mike Nifong. Even the most cursory perusal of the State’s documents would prove to an objective individual, of at least average intelligence, that the case against Mr. Nifong is totally without merit.

What is most despicable outcome of the media’s coverage of the Duke Lacrosse case and Mike Nifong, is the vilification of Mr. Nifong, a dedicated public servant who was prosecuting the Duke Lacrosse case well within acceptable standards of the law. Because he refused to dismiss the case as desired by the “powers that be,” Mike Nifong was persecuted excessively by the state. An appropriate analogy can be made with what transpired during the twelfth century when the Archbishop of Canterbury Thomas Becket refused to be a rubber-stamp to England’s King Henry II… only Becket was persecuted to the “ultimate” extent.

The role of the media in defining Mike Nifong as one deserving the public’s contempt and as a person to be ostracized, is deplorable. The media should be ashamed of itself for its actions, especially the CBS TV news magazine “60 Minutes,” which helped lead the way in misguiding a populous that did not have access to the facts and did not make the effort to challenge the singular and illogical actions of the state against Mr. Nifong.

Finally, just as the biased media has kept under wraps the fact that Mr. Nifong is the only prosecutor to be disbarred by the State Bar since its inception in 1933 (76 years ago), it has made every attempt to shield from its subscribers and viewers the fact that a grass roots organization (Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong) is strongly supportive of Mr. Nifong and is dedicated to seeing that the State Bar unilaterally and unconditionally reinstates his license to practice law in North Carolina without restrictions.


The News & Observer in the September 29, 2009 issue, for example has room to give coverage to the following two articles… 1) a chocolate lab dog shot in 2006 dies of pacreatitis at the age of 13 years, and 2) in Ankara, Turkey, a van carrying hives crashes and angry bees sting accident victims and rescuers. Articles of some interest to some people, true. But I believe the readers of the newspaper would be better served with an article about a growing movement, and the organization behind it, that is seeking justice for a prosecutor who has been unjustly and selectively persecuted, abused, and maligned by the state of North Carolina, the State Bar, and the media, itself. Episode IV of “The MisAdventures of Super-Duper Cooper : The Selective Justice Awards Banquet” will shed light on it.

14 comments:

Walt said...

"What is most despicable outcome of the media’s coverage of the Duke Lacrosse case and Mike Nifong, is the vilification of Mr. Nifong,..."

Nifong was first lionized by the media. It gave him uncritical access. The media printed and broadcast his statements without even the pretense of checking to see if any of them were accurate. I think the phrase is live by the sword, die by the sword.

"...a dedicated public servant who was prosecuting the Duke Lacrosse case well within acceptable standards of the law."

Once the DNA tests came back Nifong lacked probable cause to proceed with a prosecution. From that moment on, his prosecution was far from the acceptable standards of the law. In fact, his obligation then and there was to dismiss against the innocent defendants and decide if the state would pursue other potential defendants (those who left a DNA sample) or drop the case entirely.

"The role of the media in defining Mike Nifong as one deserving the public’s contempt and as a person to be ostracized, is deplorable."

The public rightly expects even elected prosecutors to refrain from using the office for political gain. Nifong handed his detractors all the ammunition they needed.

Walt-in-Durham

Nifong Supporter said...

Walt, again, I must respectfully disagree with you. The statements Mr. Nifong made, which the State Bar condemned him for, were made prior to any indictments being handed down. The media may have quoted Mr. Nifong, but I do not recall him being placed on a pedestal by the media. Mr. Nifong, in making statements early on was not seeking adoration, he was trying to encourage partygoers to come forward to the police with details about what transpired.

Regarding the DNA evidence, this case was not based on DNA evidence. It was an eyewitness case from the beginning. When the accuser identified Seligmann and Finnerty with 100% certainty, in early April 2006, weeks later an indictment was sought for them. Although she identified David Evans with 90% certainty, Mr. Nifong did not indict him at the time. It wasn't until after DNA material on one of the false fingernails was found that matched with David Evans, that Mr. Nifong indicted Mr. Evans. To suggest that the DNA evidence that did not match the Duke Lacrosse defendants was "exculpatory" is grossly misleading and wrong. At best it was "non-inculpatory."

Finally, you suggest that Mr. Nifong used his office for political gain. What knowledge do you have to support such an allegation? To me, it seems like nothing more than b.s. (..baseless speculation). If you have some information, I would be glad to consider it. If I am not mistaken, the only reference I saw to the Duke Lacrosse case was made by Attorney General Roy Cooper with his "The Duke Lacrosse Decision" ad. Show me some substance to your accusations. The State Bar made the same baseless speculation and the b.s. was carried throughout the country by the biased media.

Walt said...

"The statements Mr. Nifong made, which the State Bar condemned him for, were made prior to any indictments being handed down." Never the less, they were made.

" The media may have quoted Mr. Nifong, but I do not recall him being placed on a pedestal by the media."

Nifong sought out the media, granting over 50 interviews. During the media blitz and even later, he made statements that sounded as if he knew the case inside and out, as if he was certain that a rape took place and that he had ample evidence to secure a conviction. None of that was true. Yet, the media accepted it for the longest time. Indeed, some of the less reputable cable shows (Nancy Grace to mention names) exhalted him long after it was clear there were problems with the case.

"he was trying to encourage partygoers to come forward to the police with details about what transpired."

He may have been. But, we know from the police reports that the team captains gave voluntary statements to the police with the names of most if not all the attendees. We know from the statements of defense counsel that they offered information to the DA's office prior to the indictments. We also know that defense counsel advised the DA whom they were representing. If Nifong wanted to talk, he need have only picked up the phone and contacted one of the defense counsel. As you may not be aware, under North Carolina's Rules of Professional Conduct, if a party has counsel, an attorney (Nifong was an attorney at the time) cannot contact them without going through counsel. Nifong told defense counsel he was only interested in talking to their clients if they wanted to plead guilty. That is not the stance to take if you want witnesses to come forward. Of course, one of the problems was all the witnesses contradicted Crystal's stories. Could it be the DA didn't want them to come forward?

"Regarding the DNA evidence, this case was not based on DNA evidence. It was an eyewitness case from the beginning. When the accuser identified Seligmann and Finnerty with 100% certainty, in early April 2006, weeks later an indictment was sought for them."

The problem with that formulation is, it is not correct. Crystal viewed two previous lineups where she saw Seligmann, Finnerty and Evans pictures with no fillers. By definition, the first lineups unduly placed Sleigmann, Finnerty and Evans images in her mind. In the April lineup she saw their pictures again. The earlier suggestion of the three defendants could have produced her selection in the April lineup, rather than a familiarity with the defendants. Of course she could not have been familiar with the defendants from a rape, or assault as one did not occur. But, Nifong and the DPD could not know that before April 12, 2006. Thus, Nifong had a suggestive identification that he knew, if he was as great a lawyer as you have posted, or should have known would not be admissable in court. He received the SBI DNA tests in late March showing no match to any of the Lacrosse team. Once he got the differential DNA analysis from DNASI with no matches to the defendants no District Attorney would have proceeded with that case.

Let's recap, by the end of April 2006 Nifong knew there was no DNA match. He knew that his identification was faulty, he knew that the victim had given numerous stories, with the number of assailants ranging from 20 to 3, with divergent descriptions of the various assailants and no other witnesses corroborating even one of Crystal's stories.

That's not a case. That's time for a dismissal.

Walt-in-Durham

Walt said...

"Finally, you suggest that Mr. Nifong used his office for political gain. What knowledge do you have to support such an allegation?"

Nifong was locked in a three-way election battle in the Democratic primary. Nifong attended an election event at NCCU where he heard a lot of voters upset with the slow pace of the investigation into the hoax. That event spurred Nifong to seek indictments that he knew, or should have known were not likely to be sustainable for long. I don't know what his thinking was at the time, but it appears as if the indictments along with his statements were designed to address the sentiments of voters at the NCCU forum, rather than to seek justice in a case.

The sad fact is Nifong would have won had he simply said that he respected the concerns of the voters, but that he would not interfere with an ongoing police investigation. People would have respected that, even if they didn't like it.

Walt-in-Durham

Nifong Supporter said...

Walt, it sounds as though you have no evidence to back up the claim that Mr. Nifong's motivation was political. In pursuing his duties as district attorney by prosecuting a case, it is unreasonable to expect him abandon his duties merely because it might appear to conflict with his campaign for re-election to the office of district attorney. I am sure that statements made at an election event at NCCU had no effect on his duties as a prosecutor. You have no proof that the comments at the election event did have a relationship on how he conducted his prosecution. F. Lane Williamson and the State Bar also made the wild accusations about political motives for Mr. Nifong proceeding with the Duke Lacrosse case. But like you, they offered no proof.

Tom said...

The headline in the New York Post should have read:CRYSTAL BLEW PERSUASION.

Justice4Jack said...

"The “Super-Duper” comic strip is often far out in its story line, but it is based on the truth about the state’s unjust and selective justice system."

You did get that point right, Cooper is NOT without his own guilt, and the state of NC has NO "Justice System!"

"Even the most cursory perusal of the State’s documents would prove to an objective individual, of at least average intelligence, that the case against Mr. Nifong is totally without merit."

Are you BLIND, why do you KEEP ignoring the FACTS?! You people pick and choose what you want to see, and "BELIEVE!"

"What is most despicable outcome of the media’s coverage of the Duke Lacrosse case and Mike Nifong, is the vilification of Mr. Nifong, a dedicated public servant who was prosecuting the Duke Lacrosse case well within acceptable standards of the law."

What is so DISPICABLE is that he wasn't sentenced LONGER, and that the 3 Stooges settled for MONEY, instead of telling the TRUTH to the world, their silence was bought, and Fong is/was only "DEDICATED," to his OWN selfish agenda! Acceptable standards, are you SERIOUS?! Fong has NO standards, NO remorse, and NO conscience!

"The role of the media in defining Mike Nifong as one deserving the public’s contempt and as a person to be ostracized, is deplorable. The media should be ashamed of itself for its actions, especially the CBS TV news magazine “60 Minutes,” which helped lead the way in misguiding a populous that did not have access to the facts and did not make the effort to challenge the singular and illogical actions of the state against Mr. Nifong."

Did widdle Mikey write this FOR you?! Fong is the one who "MISGUIDED" the public! Oh, the troll is a wicked little POS!

Comapre him to Thomas Becket, are you on drugs?! Try Lord Angelo from "Measure for Measure," now that is a TRUE Shakespeare villian he has A LOT in common with!

"The News & Observer in the September 29, 2009 issue, for example has room to give coverage to the following two articles… 1) a chocolate lab dog shot in 2006 dies of pacreatitis at the age of 13 years, and 2) in Ankara, Turkey, a van carrying hives crashes and angry bees sting accident victims and rescuers. Articles of some interest to some people, true. But I believe the readers of the newspaper would be better served with an article about a growing movement, and the organization behind it, that is seeking justice for a prosecutor who has been unjustly and selectively persecuted, abused, and maligned by the state of North Carolina, the State Bar, and the media, itself."

Well, the day after my brother was MURDERED there was NO mention on ANY of the "News Outlets in Durham!" Not ONE single article of a TOP IBM executive found dead on the American Tobacco trail, of a "SUICIDE?!"

Here are a couple of "NEWS" articles that DID get printed May 12, 2005. The day AFTER Jack's body was found!

1) Apartment complex's troubles continue
Durham's Murdoch Place, for low-income renters, is mired in a bankruptcy proceeding.

2) Bill Gates: Mobile phones to take over iPod.

NOW THIS IS DESPICABLE!

Nifong get his license back, NOT AS LONG AS THERE IS BREATH IN MY BODY!

Rhonda Fleming
Cleveland, Ohio
Justice4Jack
Sister Of Allen Jackson Croft Jr.
Murdered May 11, 2005 in Durham
Justice4All2005@yahoo.com
www.MySpace.com/Sinnderrella

Justice58 said...

Tom

Epic Fail!

Nifong Supporter said...

To Rhonda,

It is our intention to see that Mike Nifong's law license is reinstated. We are confident that we will prevail because justice is on our side.

Justice58 said...

It is our intention to see that Mike Nifong's law license is reinstated. We are confident that we will prevail because justice is on our side.




I'm standing in solidarity with this blog in helping to get Mr. Nifong's license restored.


Keep up the fight! Big Up!

Justice4Jack said...

Nifong Supporter said...

"To Rhonda,

It is our intention to see that Mike Nifong's law license is reinstated. We are confident that we will prevail because justice is on our side."

I always love how you IGNORE my questions, then go to SUCH lengths to reply to Walt's, with "SUCH RESPECT?!"

He has NO personal ties to Nifong, WE do!

And it is OUR intention to see him charged with CONSPIRACY to conceal MY brother's MURDER!

I KNOW he is shaking in his little boots, and guessing a few people are thinking of "VACATIONING" in Canada for a "spell!"

AND, I shall add that WHEN the poo hits the fan, (WHICH will be SOONER than even we expected) that A LOT of you are in for QUITE the wake up call, it will be interesting to see just how much you "SUPPORT" the Fong then!

Rhonda Fleming
Cleveland, Ohio
Justice4Jack
Sister of Allen Jackson Croft Jr.
Murdered May 11, 2005 in Durham NC
Juctice4All2005@yahoo.com
www.MySpace.com/Sinnderrella

Nifong Supporter said...

To Rhonda,

The reason I respond to Walt's questions and comments is because although we totally disagree with each other when it comes to Mr. Nifong and the Duke Lacrosse case, we are able to discuss it with mutual respect and civility.

I have made many attempts to engage you in positive dialogue but the pain of your loss and misplaced hostility prevent this.

I sincerely hope that you can get some grief counselling. I'm sure that your brother would not want you to live constantly with his unfortunate loss consuming you and preventing you from finding peace.

unbekannte said...

You say you will prevail because justice is on your side. Do you mean that biased prejudiced racist bigot know-nothing megalomaniac who goes by "justice58"?. If that is your idea of justice, don't hold your breath waiting to prevail. You will choke before you do.

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

Justice58 said...

You say you will prevail because justice is on your side. Do you mean that biased prejudiced racist bigot know-nothing megalomaniac who goes by "justice58"?. If that is your idea of justice, don't hold your breath waiting to prevail. You will choke before you do.



If you can't distinguish between the sentence Sidney was making and my alias, then you really can't expect anyone to take you serious. I mean really!

I thought you weren't coming back? Seems to me that you're obsessed with Justice58? Pathetic clown!