Says he recalls talking about aiders and abettors, which was a response to a reporter. Says he tried to explain the law to the reporter for five or six minutes but that wasn’t how it was reported. It came out that they likely would charge other people.
Later was asked about lack of comments from the players. He said if they made arrests that might change that.
Says when he talked about use of condoms that he was responding to a hypothetical question. Said he wasn’t specifically talking about this case. “That was taken as my saying that condoms might have been used, and that was not the case.” In fact, he said, the SANE nurse had already told him that condoms were not used. But he still made the condom analogy. “Unprotected sex under these circumstances was not a high likelihood,” he said, given the people involved. What does that mean? That college boys are too sensible to rape women without condoms?
Ever seen this much media interest in a case? The Michael Peterson case some years ago had lots of attention, but he was running the office back then. Michael Petereson is the novelist who was convicted of killing his wife on a stairway with a fireplace blow poke.
Said he tried to limit his comments to what was in the public record but “got confused” by what was in the public record and maybe “got carried away” in some instances. Says “it’s certainly possible” that his comments stirred the media frenzy. Did you intend for your statements to have that effect? Nifong: No.
Do you acknowledge that these statements will result in a finding of misconduct at this trial? Nifong: Yes.
