Nifong's Legacy

Lots of other folks are covering the downfall of Mike Nifong (D-NC), formerly the Durham DA and infamous for running with the allegation, in the face of objective lack of evidence, that one Crystal Mangum had been raped by members of the Duke University lacrosse team.

Nifong may no longer have his job or his bar certification (and it may be that he'll lose his freedom for a time), but the ramifications of his misdeeds will far outlive the just conclusion of this saga.

Many are wondering why Nifong behaved the way he did. Stupidity? Evil? I'd say that it was a little bit of each, especially since the two often go hand-in-hand. But the stupidity and the evil aren't necessarily apportioned in the way some might believe.

When Mangum made her allegations, Nifong saw a way in which he could ensure his subsequent reelection as DA in the mostly black and, therefore, mostly Democrat Durham district. He could hold himself up as the defender of black womanhood in particular and black people in general. And, in their turn, many of Nifong's constituents saw him that way.

Know this. There are many black people who will jump at the chance to "get back at" white people for the wrongs done to them and their ancestors because of race, even if the individual white person(s) have done nothing. Even some of those same black people who call themselves Christians hold to "the sins of the father" notion--I'm even related to some who hold this belief. That's part of what this post was about.

Indeed, some blacks--and, notably, some who aren't mostly black--wanted to punish the Duke lacrosse players without a trial. Back in the day, this was called 'lynching.'

I think that Nifong counted on this phenomenon, but is not intelligent enough to have thought things out far enough to a logical conclusion. Getting reelected was his immediate goal and other things regarding the rape allegation--the line-up irregularities, the DNA problems and the fact that one of the accused, Reade Seligmann, had an air-tight alibi--could be worked out later. Or so thought someone as cynical and short-sighted as Nifong appears to be.

So now, Nifong will pay for his shortcomings as an individual, but what of the rest of us? By playing into the stereotypes that too many have for white, black, men, women, rich and poor, Nifong has done all of us--and those of other races--a great injury. Nifong's dubious legacy--along with that of the O.J. Simpson jurors--is that it has made it that much harder for any of us to get real justice when we have been wronged in reality.

Thanks a lot, Mr. Nifong. :::spit:::

Comments

[babylonandon]

Juliette, I'd have to say that all that happened was that Nifong grabbed onto the same political tactics format that has almost completely taken over our political discourse.

All of these idiots ESPECIALLY (but not exclusively) THE DEMOCRATS have adapted the "Its the seriousness of the charges, not the facts" credo as their primary tool for conducting business.

The most glaring example is the whole "Bush lied to get us into war" line. They all saw the same info as Bush did and some of them were even pushing him to act more rashly than we did.

They also know that the WMD's ended up either in Syria or being scrapped during the invasion but due to the media bias and the potential for conflict with Russia, France, and Germany over their hands in this Bush's hands are tied. This gives them ruthless cover to bust up on Bush.

Its not helped by Bush's utter lack of (and disinterest in) talking to our listening to us people. Bush will be gone in '08 but the Congress-critters will hang on like the human HIV viruses they are. We can't get rid of the worst of them.

I really wish they'd bought it on 911 and I wish and pray those traitors would get taken out each and every day so we could replace them with people who represent us and not their bank accounts. This country will not get straightened out until the current crop of Congress-scum is in the ground (preferably in one large batch).

[babylonandon]

Yes, I know...I shouldn't give into hate.

It's difficult because every time I see Teddy "killer" Kennedy, Ambulance-chaser Edwards, Hitlery, the Byrd-brained Klansman, Hanoi John, PelHOsi, Benedict Murtha, or Mafia Land-baron Reid open his or her mouth and start to spew treason, I start to have fantasies of taking one my broadswords and disembowling them.

We can't even legally get rid of them. Hell, in my state we can't even have a fair election. The Governor has banned any ID requirements and there are organizations that have helped thousands of illegal immigrants, dead people, and out-of-state visitors vote (for Democrats).

I'm pretty well convinced that only a revolution can help us now.

[negronova]

So, my standard question is: Is the same outrage displayed against Nifong, displayed when The Innocence Project highlights another case where they have helped get an innocent person out of jail?

No?

Why. Not?

[baldilocks]

The Innocence Project became more successful at freeing the innocent mostly because of the advent of DNA technology--something which Nifong already had access to when he decided to prosecute the players.

[Tully]

Not only did he have access to the DNA technology, he had access to the resulting evidence which did NOT support his persecution, er, prosecution. And he concealed that exculpatory evidence from the defense.

No excuse there. Prosecutorial misconduct in the first degree. He knew he didn't have a case, the evidence overwhelmingly pointed to innocence on the part of the defendents, and he did his best to destroy them anyway.

I have more pity for the accuser than I do for Nifong. Admittedly, it's not hard to beat zero.

[negronova]

And he concealed that exculpatory evidence from the defense.

The same can be said for some of The Innocence Project cases.

My question still stands.

[baldilocks]

From the Innocence Project site itself:

• Fifteen people had been sentenced to death before DNA proved their innocence and led to their release.

• The average sentence served by DNA exonerees has been 12 years.

• About 70 percent of those exonerated by DNA testing are members of minority groups.

• In over 35 percent of the cases profiled here, the actual perpetrator has been identified by DNA testing.

Now some of the accused and found to be innocent surely may be victims of malicious prosecution. However, most of them probably had the bad luck to look too much like the actual perpetrator, not have a valid alibi and/or even have a history of committing the crimes for which they were wrongly accused.

When DNA tech became available, the accused and innocent were exonerated. This is not to understate the unjust tribulation that they suffered, but to contrast the *mostly* ghastly mistakes made about them against the purposeful actions of Nifong. Unlike the mistaken and, perhaps, not-mistaken but craven DAs who prosecuted the innocent, Nifong has no lack of necessary tech to hide behind. He knew that the biological and other real evidence pointed to a dearth of guilt. He just refused to acknowledge it simply because he had too much invested in the idea that the men were guilty.

[negronova]

OK, let's go here.

Most law enforcement officers and prosecutors are honest and trustworthy. But criminal justice is a human endeavor and the possibility for corruption exists. Even if one officer of every thousand is dishonest, wrongful convictions will continue to occur.

DNA exonerations have exposed official misconduct at every level and stage of a criminal investigation. This misconduct has included:

* deliberate suggestiveness in identification procedures
* the withholding of evidence from defense
* the deliberate mishandling, mistreatment or destruction of evidence
* the coercion of false confessions
* the use of unreliable government informants or snitches

My question still stands.

[baldilocks]

Ed,

I'm working on an answer to your question which will have its own post. :-)

[negronova]

Thanks.
Really.