That’s the question William L. Anderson is asking Further, he speculates that the Duke president may have violated federal law if he knew of and approved of the effort by Duke administrators to trick the lacrosse players into cooperating with the police without legal representation:
If the accusation against the administrators is true – and those to whom I have spoken tell me it is – and Brodhead either approved of the actions or did not try to stop them when he did know (or cover up these actions), then Brodhead could have been involved in a conspiracy to deprive these students of their rights to an attorney of their own choosing. Second, conspiracy to deprive someone of his or her civil rights is a federal crime, and while I have been very critical over the years of federal criminal law, nonetheless I point out this alleged transgression because the feds have prosecuted people for actions much more benign than what I have just described.
I wonder if this will come up at today’s panel discussion at Duke Law School. I also wonder if there will be a discussion of this:
When the accused students obtained counsel, Brodhead announced that he was “disappointed” with their decision. This is important to remember: the players already were being convicted both in the media and by large segments of the Duke faculty and student body, and the athletes did what individuals being accused of serious crimes should do, and that is to seek legal representation.
I’ll never forget my flabbergasted reaction when I saw Durham DA Mike Nifong say on ESPN that if the lacrosse players were so innocent, why were they hiring attorneys. Simply incredible.
