NYT examines nearly 2,000 pages of documents in the Duke Lax case and...

Learns some interesting stuff. Some good reporting here. It's not as one-sided as the defense lawyers -- or trounced, or the rest of the idiot brigade at SportsJournalists.com -- would like you to believe. I would say it's a fair story, with both sides represented, which is all you can really ask for.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/25/us/25duke.html?ex=1156737600&en=97698116495e50fc&ei=5087%0A

 

Aren't you part of the idiot brigade?

 

Fun with other people's words. Gotta love SportsJournalists.com.

 

I read that story earlier today. I came away thinking Nifong might have more of a case than I thought, but I still think the guys walk.

 

It's a well done story.
The case isn't as one-sided as the defense or the prosecution wanted people to believe. No surprise there. both sides are going to try to punch holes in the other's case.
The prosecution pushed the envelope during discovery. No surprise again.
It's an interesting case, and the prosectution seems to have some serious trouble ahead.
But you never know what's going to happen when the case goes to the jury.

 

I agree. I think the guys walk as well, and that there is not enough evidence to convict. (The whole random semen around the house, though, was a bit bizare.) But it was also absurd how many people here seem to have zero understanding of how the justice system works, starting with the somewhat obvious fact that prosecutors don't generally try to make their case through the media like the defense does. At least this story tells me Nifong wasn't as pathological as some people would lead you to believe.

 

Circle jerks as a frat initiation?

 

The prosecution's case still seems very flawed.
People want DNA evidence.

 

Just because the "official reports" say it, doesn't make it an more or less true than the stuff being put forth by the spin doctors

 

In my endless search for Phrases That Should Be Band Names, I think "Random Semen Around The House" just went to the top of the list.
I now think this case is indeed going to trial.

 

Are you people crazy?

Re-read the NY Times story. Yes, the Times tries to pretend the case isn't one-sided based solely on one cop's police report, a report that is contradicted by another cop's report. The Times stated that Nifong's case isn't as flawed as it's been made out to be, but the story sure didn't back up the assertion.

This case is filled with gaping holes and there's no chance of a conviction. Period.