This N&O story nicely explains Nifong’s three potential sources of woe: (1) state ethics hearing; (2) judge still in charge of the lacrosse case; and (3) judge handling the request from a Durham resident for the DA to leave office. I was also pleased to see it explicitly mention the December 15 hearing, in which a DNA expert testified that Nifong requested he withhold some of the results from the defense team.
But of course it wouldn’t be the Duke lacrosse case–or, excuse me, “controversy” as it’s now called–without some spin and half-truths. Retired Durham PD captain, Tony Rigsbee Sr., wrote in to the Herald-Sun today. His argument is that a thorough investigation of the case will damage officer morale. The Durham PD is innocent because…
“I do not see how the mayor or the council can hold
any officer, investigator or any other member of the Police Department
responsible if they followed standard operating procedures during the
case.”
…Uh. They didn’t. From their investigation/interrogation in the Duke dorms (confronting students without counsel) to giving the accuser a photo array with only lacrosse players, the Durham PD will be hard pressed to explain why it made the choices it did.
This is not a public crucifying the police department for its necessary involvement with a rogue DA. This is the public asking tough questions of the police department for its frightening complicity with a rogue DA.
