<p>Yeah, I agree. The one with the very common, generic name, who came across so well on 60 min. . . It is particularly hard to come up with his name. The other two names are a little more distinctive, though sitting here right now I can only come up with Reed Seligman. America has a short memory. And we love stories of people triumphing over difficulties; I think that those boys will be given many chances. Just watch it w/ the stripper parties.</p>
<p>Well, as rich73cas notes, just because they published a demand for $30M doesn’t mean that any settlement in the case will bear any resemblance to that amount. I am aware that the industry (and Republican) propaganda about the fictitious “flood of abusive lawsuits” is a crock, and in fact these plaintiffs have no realistic chance of winning that kind of money in a contested lawsuit. And I do think the former defendants should be reimbursed for their defense costs, as I’ve noted before (and as I’ve predicted would happen.) </p>
<p>But I have to admit, I have a lot of sympathy for Saunders’ point of view. Demanding a pot of additional cash for the indignity of being forced to hire good lawyers to defend yourself (a process which resulted in your public and express exoneration, no less) without even spending as much as a day in jail, seems a bit excessive to me. And the eagerness of people here who are A Lot Like the lax defendants - parents of similar young men and women, I’d imagine - to cheer for a big bucks payoff for “our side” while not showing any interest in seeing people Not Like Us compensated for far greater injuries is distasteful to me. $30 million? Too much. Cost of defense plus $100K? - probably OK; even generous. Every lesson that needs learning has been learned here. More money won’t increase the value of the moral of the story.</p>
<p>I think Barry Saunders’ column is downright nasty. He has written ugly things about the Lax team before, and to taunt them with “daddykins” comments (among other sarcastic remarks about the tv show they might have missed while briefly in jail) is just the kind of ugliness that still persists in parts of Durham. He, Nancy Grace and Wendy Murphy will probably swear to their dying day (along with Nifong) that “something happened”.</p>
<p>Remember that the police department allowed a poster to be sent out that had every player on the lax team, and said a rape did occur, before changing it to say that it was an alleged rape?? Those posters were plastered everywhere, on the Duke campus, in the newspapers, etc. Remember the demonstrations through the streets and the pot-banging and “Castrate” signs?? And the hundreds of posts on CC saying horrible things about the team, all the players, etc.?</p>
<p>The trauma that these young men suffered cannot be calculated, whether they spent time in jail or not, whether they had a trial or not, whether they had family support or not. They will remember this every day of their lives. Publicly they seem to be stalwart and poised, and maybe they truly are, and have moved on with their lives now that the case is over. But how can you erase memories of the perp walk to get DNA tests, Collin and Reade’s arrest at the Duke dorm? (and did you know that Nifong wanted them arrested while they were in a class, instead of early in the morning at their dorm?? Their lawyers had to work it out that it would not happen during class!) How can you forget the New Black Panthers coming to the campus looking to “talk” with the lax team. Not to mention the NYT articles, the many hours of people talking about these “terrible” lax guys for months on tv.</p>
<p>I don’t know what the settlement should be, but I do know that it seems as though “Google” lasts forever, and the memories of all of this will never be erased from Reade’s, Collin’s and Dave’s eyes. The City of Durham has many within it who were Nifong enablers–they watched this happen, they closed their eyes and ears to the facts and no one came forward from the DA’s office or the police department to say anything to prevent these players from gonig to jail for 30 years. They certainly should be held accountable.</p>
<p>
Who would object to fair compensation for people “Not Like Us?” I’m not seeing that here. Or anywhere, for that matter. In fact, the lax boys have used their notoriety to get the message of justice for all across in a very powerful way.</p>
<p>Not “objection”, Stickershock - just lack of interest. But I imagine if they started throwing tens of millions of bucks at every convicted felon who somehow manages to prove he wasn’t really guilty - and actually did spend some time behind bars - we’d start hearing grumbling real quick. And how about the poor innocents who just get beat up by the cops, or Tazered? How much should they get? People always seem to think that the compensation “other people” get for an injury is too much, which the compensation they - or people like them - received for an insult directed their way is way too little. I don’t see a message here for “justice for all” - the lax players aren’t “all”. What I see is a reiteration of the fact that justice is a whole heck of a lot more likely for people like me and mine than it is for the poor and non-photogenic. Just an observation.</p>
<p>The “compensation” you guys are talking about for the lax players is way, way too much. And I have friends who are plaintiff’s lawyers. I agree that Saunders’ column was over the top and rude, but I do understand where he’s coming from.</p>
<p>“Finally, whatever settlement the city of Durham agrees on, I hope they subtract from the bottom line the amount they had to spend through the past years, answering complaints about the lacrosse team’s parties, etc. I’m sure the police dept had better things to do during that time, than continue to expend time, energy, and money on responding to complaints about the noise, etc.”</p>
<p>Yes, given that Durham is the “murder capital of North Carolina,” don’t you find it strange that people living around the Duke campus divert police attention from more serious crimes in Durham? The police have better things to do? You’re missing the point! Shouldn’t Sgt. Gottlieb be risking his life, breaking up some gang shooting or responding to a domestic violence call? This is EASY duty for cops like him. The Trinity Park residents have a Dukie peeing on their rosebushes! These people are such primadonnas. Their rosebushes and their quiet time is much more valuable than the lives of those in Central Durham. (The police chief already indicated that they need 60 more officers in Durham.)</p>
<p>Kluge, how can you make the statement that there is a “lack of interest” in justice for all? You have no basis to make that claim. </p>
<p>Maybe you should ask your plaintiff attorney firends if they EVER asked at the start of a lawsuit for only the true & reasonable amount of compensation their clients deserved. I’d guess the answer is never. It’s no different than pricing one’s home for sale…you don’t list it at the price you are hoping to achieve. As for compensation for those who have been tazered, that’s a bit silly. Try following a cop on nightly rounds in violent areas & then tell me how YOU would restrain crazy, violent, potentially armed suspects. It is only after a suspect is restrained & calm that his innocence can be determined. Cops do not randomly tazer those walking down the street minding their own business.</p>
<p>If you don’t see a call for justice for all from these lax boys & their families, then you haven’t been paying attention.</p>
<p>
And DA’s don’t randomly indict innocent college students for crimes they didn’t commit.</p>
<p>Except, sometimes they do. It’s just that most people don’t care too much about the first one, only the second one, like I said.</p>
<p>How much money did Rodney King get? And how long was he incarcerated for?</p>
<p>How much money did Abner Louima get? And how long was he incarcerated for?</p>
<p>Iskinner, what’s your point? King and Louima were beaten nearly-to-death. I can’t say whether or not a multimillion dollar award is sufficient compensation (and in both instances, by the way, the police initially lied about the incidents, which for many people provided added justification for compensation).</p>
<p>Actually, there was another interesting article in the N&O today about the varying settlements for some of those mentioned above. The point was that the $10 million each that the 3 in the Duke lacrosse case are demanding is way too much, and-- as has been stated here by others-- they will never receive that.</p>
<p>The article (link below) references Amadou Diallo, an African immigrant, who was shot 19 times by NYC police officers in 1999. He was unarmed. His family was seeking $61 million from the city; they actually received $3 million. Louima received only $8.7 million from NYC, after being falsely arrested and then sodomized by a broomstick handle, resulting in extensive internal injuries. Albert Mosely of Baltimore received $44 million after being slammed into a concrete wall in 2003, by a Baltimore police officer, rendering him a quadraplegic. Eddie Joe Lloyd of Detroit spent 17 years in prison for a rape and murder he didn’t commit. He received $2.6 million in his settlement with Detroit. Darryl Hunt spent 19 years in jail for a murder he didn’t commit. He received $1.65 million from the city of Winston Salem, and another $368,000 from the State. The list goes on and on.
<a href=“http://www.newsobserver.com/news/story/700835.html[/url]”>http://www.newsobserver.com/news/story/700835.html</a></p>
<p>More comments from lawyers and legal defense folks in this article published today, all of whom question the discrepancy w/regard to how much the former lacrosse players are demanding:
<a href=“http://www.newsobserver.com/news/crime_safety/duke_lacrosse/story/701012.html[/url]”>http://www.newsobserver.com/news/crime_safety/duke_lacrosse/story/701012.html</a></p>
<p>In part:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Has it been reported who leaked this $30 million figure in the first place?</p>
<p>From a public-relations standpoint, it certainly doesn’t help these guys. </p>
<p>(Whether or not it hurts them - making them seem “greedy,” etc. - no doubt depends, like most things about this case, on whom you ask.)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>My point is that multi-million dollar compensation is sometimes justified for government misconduct even if one is not incarcerated.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Cite that King’s beating nearly killed him? Cite that Louima’s beating nearly killed him?</p>
<p>Thanks in advance!!!</p>
<p><a href=“and%20in%20both%20instances,%20by%20the%20way,%20the%20police%20initially%20lied%20about%20the%20incidents,%20which%20for%20many%20people%20provided%20added%20justification%20for%20compensation”>quote</a>.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>That’s part of the reason why big damages are appropriate in the Duke Lacrosse case – it was an extreme and outrageous abuse of the legal process, compounded by lie after lie after lie.</p>
<p>My main question is this - what <em>does</em> it take to have some positive change. People keep, rightfully in my opinion, bringing up all the other cases that were disasters of justice and state that these three only got justice because they could hire highly capable attorneys. So - how are things going to change? The only tactic that seems <em>not</em> to have been tried is to sue the ever-lovin’ out of the life support systems of said injustice and create some real penalty for perpetrating crimes.</p>
<p>Look at the Durham Police Department report - THAT’S THEIR IDEA OF INTROSPECTION. Dear God. And the Whichard committee? First shot out of the box, from the chair, was that the lineups weren’t lineups. The writing was pretty clear on the wall in that moment.</p>
<p>Apparently it takes a $30M lawsuit to get people to even start thinking there might need to be some kind of systemic change around here, in which case, thank goodness that stars have aligned such that it is finally happening.</p>
<p>As for Barry Saunders - he is simply a mean-spirited incarnation of T. S. Eliot’s Hollow Men. He never met an easy provocation he wouldn’t exploit, yet he’s never penned a column that provoked positive change.</p>
<p>DukeEgr: You may not like Barry Saunders’ style, but how do you know that he has “never penned a column that provoked positive change?” </p>
<p>Actually, I do not believe "it takes a $30M lawsuit to get people to even start thinking there might need to be some kind of systemic change . . . " </p>
<p>I do think that “creating some real penalty” for these types of injustices should include the firing and permanent disbarring of the prosecutors who deliberately withhold evidence to get a conviction or indictment, which would be very worthwhile. This occurred in Nifong’s case, of course, though it was not done in the Alan Gell case, nor in any of the cases mentioned earlier, to my knowledge, where men spent years in prison, paying for crimes they never committed. </p>
<p>I honestly think the demand for money (and even the eventual payout) doesn’t have much impact on the institution, the city, or the state involved. Obviously, the lawsuits don’t effect positive change. And in the case of the former Duke lacrosse players, that demand for money will hurt them far more, I believe, in both the short and long run.</p>
<p>I will also add that everywhere I turn, I see Cheshire’s face, and I hear his voice-- whether on TV or in newsprint. While he’s certainly a successful and outstanding lawyer, I have to believe that he views this particular case as his big chance to make a national name for himself (and make some additional money). He seems to be exploiting this for all it’s worth, and I honestly don’t think his efforts are solely for those 3 guys, nor for the sake of justice.</p>
<p>Saw this on another board and thought it really highlights the issue in the Duke case:</p>
<p>"The Federal Civil Rights Act which, ironically, the Duke victims appear to be preparing to use in Durham, was specifically drafted to deal with communities like Durham. That is, communities which consciously and intentionally violate individual civil rights with no apparent expectation that anyone will do anything about it.</p>
<p>The Civil Rights laws have teeth. Some of the teeth include paying for the plaintiff’s legal fees, and possible injunctions to force change in Durham, whether residents like it or not.</p>
<p>This is something that residents have brought on themselves."</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It’s not obvious to me. I can think of dozens of risky behaviors that businesses, organizations, and institutions don’t engage in because they are afraid of being sued.</p>
<p>jack - I’ve lived in Durham for 20 years. Mr. Saunders’ column has been truly nothing but shoddy research and invective that panders to whatever segment of “angry citizen” he believes he can latch on to that week; though when questioned on mistakes in his column, he manages to put up a pretty good wall of silence. I’ve managed to lower my expectations for columnists, though, so it no longer alters my view of <em>journalists</em>.</p>
<p>I’m not sure, given the continuing payout to Chief Chalmers, the continued employment of Gottlieb and Himan, and a sitting judge acting as a character witness for a man who lied, as DA, in BOTH his court and the court of the judge holding the contempt trial that it’s at all clear anything but the largest of hammers will make an impact on this situation.</p>
<p>Speaking for myself, I actually haven’t seen Cheshire’s face or heard his voice since the contempt hearing, and it would seem that’s a reasonable place for him to have been.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, then, you’re not a regular subscriber to the N&O, and you don’t watch the same news channels I do. From my perspective, he doesn’t miss an opportunity to be seen and heard. You sure don’t hear or see the other (most especially the equally and/or more prominent) lawyers from this case. By all accounts, Cheshire is a real publicity hound.</p>
<p>Again, I don’t think the “largest of hammers” will be millions paid in a lawsuit. That obviously hasn’t worked elsewhere. Has it? My guess is, you have to hit people closer to home (losing their jobs) and, effectively, their own pocketbooks.</p>
<p>lskinner: With regard to lawsuits over those wrongfully imprisoned, beaten, etc – well, that’s still happening-- so those lawsuits don’t seem to have effected any overall positive change. If they have, I don’t think this would still be occurring, and there would be no need for an organization like the Innocence Project.</p>
<p>I think the only lesson that a lawsuit of this magnitude with convey to The Durham DA’s Office, as well as to those in countless other cities across America, is NEVER to f%&* with affluent white defendants and their families. One of the mothers of one of the defendants in the Duke case vowed that Nifong had messed with the wrong family. And clearly, she was right! Sow the wind. Reap the whirlwind!</p>
<p>The Durham DA’s office should have known that the families of affluent defendants, families that have been raised with every expectation that they will be treated fairly in our justice system, would never roll over and play dead in the wake of such egregious judicial misconduct. They forgot who they were dealing with is all. </p>
<p>No problem, they only need go back to abusing the ones they’ve always been able to railroad with virtual impunity, the poor who can only afford a court appointed attorney, who by virtue of long observed history, know not to expect fair treatment in the criminal justice system, the ones who would NEVER garner the kind of sustained outrage exhibited in forums such as this interminable thread.</p>