trinityvixen: (Default)
[personal profile] trinityvixen
Two things that solve nothing:

1) The cover of today's New York Post posts an extremely large, unflattering picture of the woman who accused the Duke lacrosse players of rape. In an extremely vindictive little bit of titling, the cover says "Now America can see her face: THE DUKE LIAR." The utter glee with which this rag publishes the face of a black woman who can now be identified by all the people who've been calling her a slut and a liar for the past year makes me fucking sick.

Is it irony that that cover is next to all the ones talking about the brou-ha-ha over Don Imus? I think that's irony, yes. Speaking of..

2) Don Imus has now been fired. I predict his lawyers will get him the best fucking deal ever. If he sues over this--for whatever reason (we need one in this country?)--I predict he'll probably win. This also doesn't change diddly shit. Imus loses his job, and racism goes away? What about all those people who called in during the brief period Imus was still on the air, going "You're the man! This is bullshit! What are they getting so upset about?" And now the furor over his being fired is sure to usurp what should have been the newsmaker all along: the fact that the Rutgers Women's basketball team accomplished something amazing recently. Their captain, who read a statement to the press, was dead-on about that. No one cared when they won; they only cared when they were victims.

Sigh.

On an interesting note, I went to read the comments of a DJ I listen to at work, and by accident forgot the "4" when I typed in the URL. If any of you have questions about the scientific nomenclature of fish, I have now located the perfect website for you.. Enjoy.

Date: 2007-04-12 10:02 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] umeyard.livejournal.com
If you are going to talk about the news for the day, lets also tip our hats to Kurt Vonnegut. Truely a great man. I hate that his passing is being overshadowed by drama *sigh*

Date: 2007-04-12 11:27 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] trinityvixen.livejournal.com
I don't think it is, actually. Everyone on my friendslist is talking about it. Me? Indifferent. Sorry he's dead, sure, but I'm not a huge fan or anything, so I have to talk about something else lest I be a hypocrite or band-wagoneer.

Date: 2007-04-12 11:32 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] umeyard.livejournal.com
LOL
sadly nobody has posted anything on my friends list today
and i had to explain to my roommate Alan who he was.
how sad is that?

Date: 2007-04-13 12:40 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] moonlightalice.livejournal.com
I saw that, too, and was absolutely furious. Not only is it disgusting, but the case was dropped due to lack of evidence. That does NOT necessarily mean it didn't happen, or that she was lying, it just means that there was not enough material evidence to prosecute. VERY DIFFERENT.

But yeah. I saw that and I wanted to throw up.

Date: 2007-04-13 02:41 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] edgehopper.livejournal.com
That's actually incorrect--it is extraordinarily rare for a prosecutor to say that the accused were actually innocent when dropping a case. See The Volokh Conspiracy for commentary on this point. The question at this point is not whether the allegations were true--they weren't. The question is whether she consciously lied, or whether she was just mentally disturbed. And I don't think the answer to that question is conclusive enough to justify the Post's extreme headline, though that is standard NYPost method.

Date: 2007-04-13 04:12 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] moonlightalice.livejournal.com
I'm not saying the prosecutor said that or would say that. I'm saying that lack of evidence does not constitute innocence (or guilt, for that matter).

Date: 2007-04-13 04:14 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] edgehopper.livejournal.com
No, the prosecutor did say that. This isn't a case of lack of evidence--this is a case where all the evidence points to innocence.

Date: 2007-04-13 04:16 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] moonlightalice.livejournal.com
He did? I thought the judge dismissed the case for lack of evidence.

Date: 2007-04-13 04:29 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] edgehopper.livejournal.com
No, the AG dropped the charges without any judge getting involved. The NYTimes article is here:

North Carolina’s attorney general declared three former Duke University lacrosse players accused of sexually assaulting a stripper innocent of all charges on Wednesday, ending a prosecution that provoked bitter debate over race, class and the tactics of the Durham County district attorney.

Thee highlights from Cooper's speech as reported by K.C. Johnson:

(1) The players are innocent--not victims of a case with insufficient evidence, but innocent. This statement should leave no doubt as to whether a crime occurred.

(2) Nifong might be guilty of criminal misconduct.

(3) Nifong is a "rogue prosecutor."

(4) Lots of people owe the three players an apology, and a rush to judgment took place.

(5) The accuser has serious mental problems (hinted, very strongly, by the AG).

(6) North Carolina needs to change its laws to deal with rogue prosecutors in the future.

Date: 2007-04-13 04:34 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] moonlightalice.livejournal.com
Apologies, then--I thought the case was dismissed for lack of evidence and there was no statement of innocence. Regardless, I agree that the tabloid headline ignores the fact that this woman obviously, from the start, exhibited some serious psychological problems.

Date: 2007-04-13 03:06 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] trinityvixen.livejournal.com
While I agree that she definitely fingered the wrong guys, I dunno that this means that nothing happened at all to her, which is what I think [livejournal.com profile] moonlightalice meant. It's not that "innocent" for these kids means nothing happened at all. I'm pretty sure this woman was messed up (her behavior on the night suggests drugs/alcohol, which, you never know at a party, might not have been consumed with her knowledge), and the inappropriate way the investigation was run means her problems (whatever they were) were compounded and exploited (you ask me, that Nifong guy should be disbarred).

The point here is that gross incompetance on the part of the people investigating the crime and the unreliability of a witness destroyed any chance of determining where, if at all, a crime occurred. I've read most of the relevant details, and I believe that something very possibly did happen to this woman. Whether it was a crime or not, she's clearly incapacitated on one level or another and to hurl a cover like the Post had at her like she consciously made this all up in an effort to get attention (as if--why do pigs assume any woman would want the attention of saying she was raped? They really have no idea what women who come forward about sex crimes face, do they? No sane person would do it on purpose unless something had happened...)...ugh, just sickens me.

Profile

trinityvixen: (Default)
trinityvixen

February 2015

S M T W T F S
1234567
89 1011121314
15161718192021
22232425 262728

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Mar. 30th, 2026 02:25 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios