The only thing wrong with the following ‘demands’ from Mr. Shabazz of the NBPP would be the mistaken use of ‘trial and conviction’ instead of ‘lynching.’

Shabazz said the community has eight demands, among them a trial and conviction for the defendants in the case and that the indicted students and other involved should be expelled.

Why bother with a trial at all if you demand conviction; why ask any questions at all if ‘indictment’ implies ‘guilt’ and ‘involvement’ (whatever that means) is punishable by immediate expulsion?

Is this how members of the NBPP want to be treated themselves, or recommend that anyone, including, say, a black male who is accused of a rape or racial slurs, be treated? Immediate conviction of the accused ? Immediate expulsion of others involved ? I bet not. What Mr. Shabazz doesn’t grasp is that trial presumes you do not have determination of the outcome?be it yea or nay on the conviction?before you begin. Apparently determining the punishment before the conviction is not a problem for him.

Discipline for the members of the lacrosse team, for those on the team actually engaged in unacceptable behavior, including racial slurs, underage drinking, and violations of community ordinances is no doubt overdue. Whether meted out by Duke or the local DA is a matter of prosecution, defense, and evidence.

Finally, though I count myself a libertarian, and believe that we should be able to exercise the right to bear arms, I’m glad that there was attention paid to the ‘no guns’ aspect of the day. I am unequivocably opposed to allowing armed thugs to conduct exercises anywhere, including in proximity to the unarmed populace on the Duke campus.