Duke Professors try to cover their arses

[Aisengard]

http://www.concerneddukefaculty.org/

In April, a group of Duke faculty members published an advertisement in The Chronicle. The ad, titled "What does a Social Disaster Sound Like?" was mostly a compilation of statements made by Duke students in response to the incident and its immediate aftermath. This ad has figured in many discussions of the event and of the University's response. It has been broadly, and often intentionally, misread. We urge everyone to read the original ad, available at http://listening.nfshost.com/listening.htm. We have. Some of us were among the ad's signers.

The ad has been read as a comment on the alleged rape, the team party, or the specific students accused. Worse, it has been read as rendering a judgment in the case. We understand the ad instead as a call to action on important, longstanding issues on and around our campus, an attempt to channel the attention generated by the incident to addressing these. We reject all attempts to try the case outside the courts, and stand firmly by the principle of the presumption of innocence.

Uh huh. I don't understand why these schmucks just admit it: they got duped. Their racism towards the rich, white aristocrat forced them to make assumptions about the actions of said aristocrats based on their own prejudiced views. Why can't they just admit they were wrong and push not for 'equality' between 'minorities' and the mainstream, and instead use this opportunity to stress Equality for all?

Guess they have that poor black people are a direct result of rich white people albatross still stuck around their necks. Thank god I don't go to Duke, what a complete mess.

 

[sandorski]

Sounds to me like there are other issues needing addressed there.

 

[slash196]

Originally posted by: Aisengard
http://www.concerneddukefaculty.org/

In April, a group of Duke faculty members published an advertisement in The Chronicle. The ad, titled "What does a Social Disaster Sound Like?" was mostly a compilation of statements made by Duke students in response to the incident and its immediate aftermath. This ad has figured in many discussions of the event and of the University's response. It has been broadly, and often intentionally, misread. We urge everyone to read the original ad, available at http://listening.nfshost.com/listening.htm. We have. Some of us were among the ad's signers.

The ad has been read as a comment on the alleged rape, the team party, or the specific students accused. Worse, it has been read as rendering a judgment in the case. We understand the ad instead as a call to action on important, longstanding issues on and around our campus, an attempt to channel the attention generated by the incident to addressing these. We reject all attempts to try the case outside the courts, and stand firmly by the principle of the presumption of innocence.

Uh huh. I don't understand why these schmucks just admit it: they got duped. Their racism towards the rich, white aristocrat forced them to make assumptions about the actions of said aristocrats based on their own prejudiced views. Why can't they just admit they were wrong and push not for 'equality' between 'minorities' and the mainstream, and instead use this opportunity to stress Equality for all?

Guess they have that poor black people are a direct result of rich white people albatross still stuck around their necks. Thank god I don't go to Duke, what a complete mess.

This has nothing to do with race and everything to do with the sad fact that in today's society, a woman only needs to claim she was raped to destroy the life of a man. Rape his a horrible thing of course, and victims should be protected, but not to the extent that it keeps law-abiding men under constant threat of ruination just because he picked the wrong girl to hook up with at a party.

 

[techs]

Originally posted by: slash196

Originally posted by: Aisengard
http://www.concerneddukefaculty.org/

In April, a group of Duke faculty members published an advertisement in The Chronicle. The ad, titled "What does a Social Disaster Sound Like?" was mostly a compilation of statements made by Duke students in response to the incident and its immediate aftermath. This ad has figured in many discussions of the event and of the University's response. It has been broadly, and often intentionally, misread. We urge everyone to read the original ad, available at http://listening.nfshost.com/listening.htm. We have. Some of us were among the ad's signers.

The ad has been read as a comment on the alleged rape, the team party, or the specific students accused. Worse, it has been read as rendering a judgment in the case. We understand the ad instead as a call to action on important, longstanding issues on and around our campus, an attempt to channel the attention generated by the incident to addressing these. We reject all attempts to try the case outside the courts, and stand firmly by the principle of the presumption of innocence.

Uh huh. I don't understand why these schmucks just admit it: they got duped. Their racism towards the rich, white aristocrat forced them to make assumptions about the actions of said aristocrats based on their own prejudiced views. Why can't they just admit they were wrong and push not for 'equality' between 'minorities' and the mainstream, and instead use this opportunity to stress Equality for all?

Guess they have that poor black people are a direct result of rich white people albatross still stuck around their necks. Thank god I don't go to Duke, what a complete mess.

This has nothing to do with race and everything to do with the sad fact that in today's society, a woman only needs to claim she was raped to destroy the life of a man. Rape his a horrible thing of course, and victims should be protected, but not to the extent that it keeps law-abiding men under constant threat of ruination just because he picked the wrong girl to hook up with at a party.

I beg to differ. I think your point is a valid one for discussion, but doesn't apply in this case. This particular travesty stems from a prosecutor who was either incredibly stupid, or biased or out to make a name for himself. It also stems from a lack of oversight of the prosecutors office. Which is one of the reasons the Patriot Act scares the h*ll out of me.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

The case also highlights the tremendous amount of discrimination that males are subject to in our society, such as false accusations of rape and the creation of hostile anti-male environments on college campuses such as Duke.

I hope that the stripper gets prosecuted for making a false accusation. IMHO, a false accusation should be punishable by the maximum punishment that the falsely accused could have received. I'm hoping that Nifong ends up jailed, too, as well as divorced and bankrupted. We can only hope that Nifong gets butt-slammed in prison and later dies of AIDS as a result.

As for Duke...I'm hoping that male Duke students will file a class action lawsuit claiming that the University created a hostile environment for male students, perhaps resulting in lower grades for Duke's male students. Also, high school students across the nation need to know about the environment at Duke with it's collection of 88 white male hating professors. High schoolers should boycott Duke.

Duke University also needs to lose its donors. The three victims of the false accusations should personally attempt to contact every donor to tell them their story and to explain how the University is a haven for Racist Marxist Feminists and its ilk and that they should thus cease all donations in protest of the University's and its professors' outrageous conduct and as a sign of support for the victims.

I'm hoping that the victims mercilessly and relentlessly sue and bankrupt everyone in sight, waging an uncompromising scorched earth campaign, from Nifong to the University President to the Gang of 88 to the DNA tester who filed the DNA report that excluded the exculpator evidence and to any media sources that committed slander or libel. (Of course, they should sue the stripper too, but she's probably judgment proof--no money.)

What's real scary is that I read that the stripper recently had a baby! I feel awful for the fate of that poor infant.

One thing is for certain--my view of Duke University has decreased dramatically. I also had no idea that it was located in a ghetto nor that Durham was a ghetto.

 

[ProfJohn]

It has been said for years that if you want to create a zoo in Raleigh all you have to do is put a fence around the Duke campus.

I think WhipperSnapper had it right in that this case highlights the anti-male environment on many of the nation?s largest universities. Then you have the anti-rich environment created by all the liberals who teach on campus. Put the two together and this is what you get.

I think this case has nearly everything to do with race. If this was a white girl claiming rape or black guys accused of raping a black woman it would have never made the news and more than likely without the pressure and the media the DA does his job the right way.

 

[Wreckem]

Originally posted by: slash196

Originally posted by: Aisengard
http://www.concerneddukefaculty.org/

In April, a group of Duke faculty members published an advertisement in The Chronicle. The ad, titled "What does a Social Disaster Sound Like?" was mostly a compilation of statements made by Duke students in response to the incident and its immediate aftermath. This ad has figured in many discussions of the event and of the University's response. It has been broadly, and often intentionally, misread. We urge everyone to read the original ad, available at http://listening.nfshost.com/listening.htm. We have. Some of us were among the ad's signers.

The ad has been read as a comment on the alleged rape, the team party, or the specific students accused. Worse, it has been read as rendering a judgment in the case. We understand the ad instead as a call to action on important, longstanding issues on and around our campus, an attempt to channel the attention generated by the incident to addressing these. We reject all attempts to try the case outside the courts, and stand firmly by the principle of the presumption of innocence.

Uh huh. I don't understand why these schmucks just admit it: they got duped. Their racism towards the rich, white aristocrat forced them to make assumptions about the actions of said aristocrats based on their own prejudiced views. Why can't they just admit they were wrong and push not for 'equality' between 'minorities' and the mainstream, and instead use this opportunity to stress Equality for all?

Guess they have that poor black people are a direct result of rich white people albatross still stuck around their necks. Thank god I don't go to Duke, what a complete mess.

This has nothing to do with race and everything to do with the sad fact that in today's society, a woman only needs to claim she was raped to destroy the life of a man. Rape his a horrible thing of course, and victims should be protected, but not to the extent that it keeps law-abiding men under constant threat of ruination just because he picked the wrong girl to hook up with at a party.

I dont think in this case their lives will be ruined, each over the three will end up with large sums of money after suing various groups.

The New York Times and Time Magazine are fvcked, as is Duke University. These guys have a lot of valid targets for lawsuits. Ones with deep pockets. The media is going to get anal raped because they pretty much fabricated stories and ran with them. The New York Times and Time Magazine being the principle culprits. They were running made up stories as late as two months ago.

 

[Wreckem]

Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper

What's real scary is that I read that the stripper recently had a baby! I feel awful for the fate of that poor infant.

Well she was likely banged five ways to Sunday by four men, UNPROTECTED, the same day as the Duke Party. None of the four guys were on the Duke Lacrosse team or at the party.

Its not suprising shes pregnant.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

I think this case has nearly everything to do with race. If this was a white girl claiming rape or black guys accused of raping a black woman it would have never made the news and more than likely without the pressure and the media the DA does his job the right way.

Actually...there was a case where a white girl was gang raped by black guys right around the time of the Duke case. I think it was at a college in Virginia. Didn't make any news.

 

[dahunan]

Kobes accuser came to the hospital to be inspected by the nurse for Kobe's semen.. they found none.. but they did find the semen from two other men and a pubic hair from another - all from caucasians.. << none of that was allowed into evidence because it was protected info via some privacy law

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally posted by: dahunan
Kobes accuser came to the hospital to be inspected by the nurse for Kobe's semen.. they found none.. but they did find the semen from two other men and a pubic hair from another - all from caucasians.. << none of that was allowed into evidence because it was protected info via some privacy law

Probably protected by a rape shield-type of law, all of which are unconstitutional as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Aisengard]

I don't think you can sue news magazines or papers for reporting stories, however unjustified they may be. They didn't make up facts, they used the false ones provided by Nifong, et al. Can we as Americans sue the NYT for 'making up stories' about WMD in Iraq?

Journalists are completely safe. Nifong, the police department, and Duke especially should be extremely terrified about these three men who have every right to a vendetta.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally posted by: Aisengard
Journalists are completely safe. Nifong, the police department, and Duke especially should be extremely terrified about these three men who have every right to a vendetta.

It's going to be case-by-case for the journalists. I think commentators, especially any who called them rapists or whatnot, could be in for it. I can just imagine them receiving phone calls.

<Ring>

"Hello?"

"Hi, Mr. Commentator...we'll agree not to sue you for libel and intentional infliction of emotional distress in the Duke Lacrosse case if you'll settle with us for $500,000 cash."

Also, if records are available, they should go after all TV and radio talk show hosts who committed slander.

"What the...?"

If the families are rich, as long as there's some semblance of a case, they could file lawsuits anyway and make these wise guys spend money to hire lawyers.

 

[Aisengard]

From Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slander_and_libel#United_States_law

the landmark 1964 case of New York Times v. Sullivan, in which the Supreme Court of the United States announced constitutional restrictions to state defamation law. The court held that where a public official was defamed, the plaintiff had to prove not just that an untruthful statement was made, but also that it was made with "actual malice" - that is, with knowledge of falsity or with reckless disregard for the truth.

Journalists didn't know if it was true or false...no one did except for the defendants, the woman, and probably Nifong. At least, Nifong at least went forth with 'reckless disregard' for the truth. Journalists are protected in America a lot more than in other places, thanks to that thing called the First Amendment.

In the various states, whether by case law or actual legislation, there are generally several "privileges" that can get a defamation case dismissed without proceeding to trial. These include the allegedly defamatory statement being one of opinion rather than fact; or being "fair comment and criticism", as it is important to society that everyone be able to comment on matters of public interest. The Supreme Court, however, has rejected the opinion privilege outright and has declined to hold that the "fair comment" privilege is a Constitutional imperative.

Almost everyone in this case had some kind of 'opinon,' they didn't know the facts and how could they. Wikipedia says that most defamation lawsuits are against newspapers and that makes sense, but when was the last time that you heard the NYT or other big-time newspaper go to trial for libel, or even settle out of court? I very much doubt that the media, savage as they may be, will pay whatever consequences come from speaking their ill-informed minds.

 

[dahunan]

^^^ "with reckless disregard for the truth"

Journalists DO KNOW that this is AMERICA.. Innocent Until Proven Guilty

Women are given the freedom to make claims like this and 9 times out of 10 they do not receive any punishment for their false claims... some even get paid off in the sum of millions if they falsely accuse the right person... the system needs to respect the rights of both parties and leave these cases up to the law to decide.. not the public who is commonly way out of the loop in regards to factual knowledge of any case