Dear Atorney General Cooper
My guess is that you are trying to figure out how to get out of this without further damage to the democratic party. It ain't happening. What you need to do is end it quickly and let the healing begin. I probably wouldn't be writing this except the camel's back broke today reading the blogs. 7 of the best years of my life were spent in Charlotte and Salisbury. What broke the camel's back was a line I saw in the comments of a blog. "The Banana Republic of North Criminila."
You have had in excess of 70 days to review 1850 pages of documents. Thats less then 27 pages a day and dropping as you prolong this nonsense. Given 2 hours for reading, and 6 for data sorting, I'm thinking that you should have had this figured out by now. I realize that this doesn't include Interview time and photo op time, but it all averages out.
There is no way that you are going to get the public to take that spoonful of sugar to make this medicine go down. I've been a lifelong card carrying democrat for over 30 years and I assure you that under the current circumstances neither you nor Governor Easley would get my vote and I've always voted along party lines. I grew up believing that the democrats are the peoples party. History has told me I'm right. This is the exception to the rule.
Enough is enough already. What more do we need to wait for. If you do have any evidence that the public isn't aware of, then share it with defense council and lets get this show on the road. If not, then let the 3 innocent men move on. My father had an expression. To phrase it politely, it states "Poop or get out of the bathroom". I believe it applies here.
Sincerely
Thursday, March 29, 2007
Saturday, March 17, 2007
Higher Education
I don’t really care what happens to Duke University, as I’ve never been a member of the faculty or staff nor an alumnus. I am sure the alumni care a great deal. This rant has less to do with Duke itself then with the bigger broader picture of what I see in their teaching staff. This is not limited to Dukes teaching staff as Peggy Reeves Sanday from Penn State and her, of late, biggest cheerleader, Dr. A.G. Rud from Perdue are guilty of the same thinking patterns as the 88 of Duke University.
There seems to be a great deal of friction between those academics who support Dr. KC Johnson and those who support the 88. Dr. Johnson, in his Durham in Wonderland blog looks at facts as pretty much black and white. Sanday, Rud, and most if not all of the 88 see facts as, to quote Dr. Rud, “open for discussion.” Where this comes into play is that the 88, Rud, Sanday, and others still see the disaster in Durham as a good example of the race, culture, privilege war.
Let’s look at the 88 and a quote from Dr. Baker. When asked if he or the rest of the 88 regretted the original ad now referred to as the listening ad, Dr Baker Responded
“We had a long discussion about what the word ‘regret’ means, and philosophy professors weighed in and we had detailed discussions in terms of the epistemology of specific words,” says Baker. “If you talk to 80 different college professors, you’ll have 80 different opinions.”
The very idea that the dictionary wouldn’t due for this, tells me not only that the above “open for discussion” concept, applies to everything in their lives, but that they are living in a 60’s hippie commune fantasy world where everything must be discussed. They are not willing to speak for themselves and hide behind the commune (group) walls they have created. The problem here is that most of the rest of the world sees facts as Dr. Johnson does. They see the word regret as the rest of us do. Had they had a consensus meeting and agreed that the definition of regret meant this or that, I doubt an apology statement would have been issued because nobody would have known what THEIR definition of regret meant. Perhaps worse, they might have issued one and been laughed at because of their obscure and philosophical definition.
On the subject of Dr. Rud, I read his blog and all I can think is that this man is easily impressed with his own hot air. Here are two quotes on evidence and its status as open for discussion:
“(using quotes I am)….. merely emphasizing that I see facts as conditional and open for discussion”
“I also use quotes to indicate my concern that these so-called "facts" be arrogated by one particular viewpoint, with what appears to me to be its attendant literalism and epistemological imperialism.”
And as best as I can translate with my Greek to English dictionary, he means this:
I also use quotes to indicate my concern that these so-called “facts” are claimed only by one particular viewpoint, with what appears to me to be its associated rigid adherence to that viewpoint and explicit imposition of power based only on those facts and viewpoint.
The first fallacy in his argument is that facts are open to discussion. They are not. They are however open to interpretation. There is a difference. For example, we find a dead body with a disfigured head and a bloody rock 3 feet from the body. Fact, the body is dead. Fact, the rock is bloody. Fact, the rock is in close proximity to the body. Discuss that! On the concept of interpretation, does the rock fit the disfigurement of the head? Is the blood type the same as that found on the dead body? Is the proximity of the rock to the body relevant to the fact that the body is dead? In short, was this a murder?
Lets apply this to the scandal, shall we. First, what facts do we have? We have a party attended by some of the lacrosse team. We have a party where drinking was involved. We have a party with entertainment (strippers). We have an accusation of rape and finally we have the ever-popular racial epithets.
If you listen to the 88 and company, they would have you believe that racially biased elitist men threw a party to get drunk and rape a stripper. Male bonding, as they like to call it. How do they come to this conclusion? They drag up a history of slave owners “having their way” with black slave women per Dr. Chafe. (Dr. Chafe, is this the explanation you would give to give to Heidi Klum’s kids?) They rely almost entirely on questionably anonymous quotes that in some cases are so carefully constructed that they sound more like a 50-year-old professor then a 20-year-old coed. They take individual facts and use them out of any context to support these ideas. The interpretation of the facts by the 88 and company would have you believe that this “girl who cried wolf” story is a fact that fits their cause. There in lies the crux of the feud. They see the story of an increasingly discredited storyteller as the backdrop for their cause. Then they claim the story as fact.
The story as fact is another fallacy. In proper research, you find an incident that actually happened and use its facts. You don’t find a story and use it. Sure, the men hired strippers, sure the men drank, BUT WHERE IS THE RAPE? They may be able to claim a group think mentality or a mob mentality, based on facts, but if they look at their own actions they are just as guilty. They would have you believe that the party and the drinking is an example of white male privilege. Tell that to the students at the strike parties after a show on campus. Tell that to the African American frat where the last alleged rape occurred. They would have you believe that a racial epithet is racism. Not to sound childish, but Kim started it, the SOLE offender to this was just following suit. If I took a story to my psychology professor and said, “Here, this is an example of my claim.” he would have said that it exists only in my mind and maybe in the mind of the author.
On the subject of racial epithets, the group claims racism. I don’t see it. First and foremost, the group keeps using the word epithets, the plural. The only proof of epithets is a single exchange between Kim Roberts and one of the players. Kim Roberts according to witnesses started the exchange. Far too many of the individuals who use them at a time like that are guilty of venting stupidity with their anger. As a youth, I was guilty of using the N word in anger. Not because I am racist, but because my vocabulary was insufficient to defend myself otherwise. I never actually heard the word till I was 10 years old or so. Instead of requiring a diversity course for all students, they might try an English class with a focus on vocabulary.
As this paper is into its 3rd page, it dawns on me that it could become a book. A book I would say, I have no time to write and others are more qualified to write. To sum up the above, the 88 have taken facts out of context and claimed them as support for a cause. They appear to manufacture facts as they need (I wonder any of them taught Nifong), and they refuse to see the other side as they want others to see theirs. This scares me out of my shoes. The idea that more then 10 percent of a college faculty think along these lines is bad enough, but to find it at one of the most prestigious schools in the U.S. should be criminal.
There seems to be a great deal of friction between those academics who support Dr. KC Johnson and those who support the 88. Dr. Johnson, in his Durham in Wonderland blog looks at facts as pretty much black and white. Sanday, Rud, and most if not all of the 88 see facts as, to quote Dr. Rud, “open for discussion.” Where this comes into play is that the 88, Rud, Sanday, and others still see the disaster in Durham as a good example of the race, culture, privilege war.
Let’s look at the 88 and a quote from Dr. Baker. When asked if he or the rest of the 88 regretted the original ad now referred to as the listening ad, Dr Baker Responded
“We had a long discussion about what the word ‘regret’ means, and philosophy professors weighed in and we had detailed discussions in terms of the epistemology of specific words,” says Baker. “If you talk to 80 different college professors, you’ll have 80 different opinions.”
The very idea that the dictionary wouldn’t due for this, tells me not only that the above “open for discussion” concept, applies to everything in their lives, but that they are living in a 60’s hippie commune fantasy world where everything must be discussed. They are not willing to speak for themselves and hide behind the commune (group) walls they have created. The problem here is that most of the rest of the world sees facts as Dr. Johnson does. They see the word regret as the rest of us do. Had they had a consensus meeting and agreed that the definition of regret meant this or that, I doubt an apology statement would have been issued because nobody would have known what THEIR definition of regret meant. Perhaps worse, they might have issued one and been laughed at because of their obscure and philosophical definition.
On the subject of Dr. Rud, I read his blog and all I can think is that this man is easily impressed with his own hot air. Here are two quotes on evidence and its status as open for discussion:
“(using quotes I am)….. merely emphasizing that I see facts as conditional and open for discussion”
“I also use quotes to indicate my concern that these so-called "facts" be arrogated by one particular viewpoint, with what appears to me to be its attendant literalism and epistemological imperialism.”
And as best as I can translate with my Greek to English dictionary, he means this:
I also use quotes to indicate my concern that these so-called “facts” are claimed only by one particular viewpoint, with what appears to me to be its associated rigid adherence to that viewpoint and explicit imposition of power based only on those facts and viewpoint.
The first fallacy in his argument is that facts are open to discussion. They are not. They are however open to interpretation. There is a difference. For example, we find a dead body with a disfigured head and a bloody rock 3 feet from the body. Fact, the body is dead. Fact, the rock is bloody. Fact, the rock is in close proximity to the body. Discuss that! On the concept of interpretation, does the rock fit the disfigurement of the head? Is the blood type the same as that found on the dead body? Is the proximity of the rock to the body relevant to the fact that the body is dead? In short, was this a murder?
Lets apply this to the scandal, shall we. First, what facts do we have? We have a party attended by some of the lacrosse team. We have a party where drinking was involved. We have a party with entertainment (strippers). We have an accusation of rape and finally we have the ever-popular racial epithets.
If you listen to the 88 and company, they would have you believe that racially biased elitist men threw a party to get drunk and rape a stripper. Male bonding, as they like to call it. How do they come to this conclusion? They drag up a history of slave owners “having their way” with black slave women per Dr. Chafe. (Dr. Chafe, is this the explanation you would give to give to Heidi Klum’s kids?) They rely almost entirely on questionably anonymous quotes that in some cases are so carefully constructed that they sound more like a 50-year-old professor then a 20-year-old coed. They take individual facts and use them out of any context to support these ideas. The interpretation of the facts by the 88 and company would have you believe that this “girl who cried wolf” story is a fact that fits their cause. There in lies the crux of the feud. They see the story of an increasingly discredited storyteller as the backdrop for their cause. Then they claim the story as fact.
The story as fact is another fallacy. In proper research, you find an incident that actually happened and use its facts. You don’t find a story and use it. Sure, the men hired strippers, sure the men drank, BUT WHERE IS THE RAPE? They may be able to claim a group think mentality or a mob mentality, based on facts, but if they look at their own actions they are just as guilty. They would have you believe that the party and the drinking is an example of white male privilege. Tell that to the students at the strike parties after a show on campus. Tell that to the African American frat where the last alleged rape occurred. They would have you believe that a racial epithet is racism. Not to sound childish, but Kim started it, the SOLE offender to this was just following suit. If I took a story to my psychology professor and said, “Here, this is an example of my claim.” he would have said that it exists only in my mind and maybe in the mind of the author.
On the subject of racial epithets, the group claims racism. I don’t see it. First and foremost, the group keeps using the word epithets, the plural. The only proof of epithets is a single exchange between Kim Roberts and one of the players. Kim Roberts according to witnesses started the exchange. Far too many of the individuals who use them at a time like that are guilty of venting stupidity with their anger. As a youth, I was guilty of using the N word in anger. Not because I am racist, but because my vocabulary was insufficient to defend myself otherwise. I never actually heard the word till I was 10 years old or so. Instead of requiring a diversity course for all students, they might try an English class with a focus on vocabulary.
As this paper is into its 3rd page, it dawns on me that it could become a book. A book I would say, I have no time to write and others are more qualified to write. To sum up the above, the 88 have taken facts out of context and claimed them as support for a cause. They appear to manufacture facts as they need (I wonder any of them taught Nifong), and they refuse to see the other side as they want others to see theirs. This scares me out of my shoes. The idea that more then 10 percent of a college faculty think along these lines is bad enough, but to find it at one of the most prestigious schools in the U.S. should be criminal.
Thursday, March 15, 2007
An Open Letter To Duke University President Brodhead
Dear President Brodhead:
I am writing you in reference to the public disaster your school and surrounding community faced last year. I’m sure we both understand I am talking about what is now commonly known as the lacrosse rape scandal. Social or otherwise, I’m sure we both agree that this was a terrible disaster.
I read the blogs and I read the newspapers but these are not the reasons I’m writing. I am writing because of what this outsider sees happening to your school. I am a married father of 2 looking at my first tuition bill in about 5 years. While I’m not sure I’ll be able to afford your institution, I’m equally not sure that I would encourage my children to go. The disaster your community experienced last year could have been better survived with great strength and leadership at several levels. Sadly, this was not to be seen.
While you as an individual and president of the school cannot stop freedom of speech, you should have cautioned your faculty at all levels, both publicly and privately, that they are seen as representatives of your school. I do not mean just those individuals known now as the Group of 88, I am referring to the entire faculty. Those who openly support either side are going to upset somebody. This should have happened very early on. We, the national community have not seen strength or organization from Duke at the levels we should have. We did not see strength to stand up and protect those 3 individual students or the rest of the team while evidence was still being collected.
What we the outside, national community have seen is tremendous infighting between students and teachers, and amongst the faculty. This infighting, this disorganization is doing very serious damage to your school’s image. For schools at your level, image is a very great deal as I’m sure I don’t have to remind you. Further, this lack of organization has cost you a coach and who knows what, that we haven’t heard about.
I firmly believe that this situation is correctable. To correct it will take strength in the face of adversity. I believe several actions are long past due and still not too late to take. These actions will anger many I’m sure. The question I would pose is simply this: Does the current Duke administration have that strength?
First, The longer Collin, Reade, and David are in the news, the longer Duke is known for a scandal. I believe you should exercise whatever resources you have to show Attorney General Cooper and Governor Easley your support for those men. This scandal is still going and needs to end.
Second, the faculty, and I mean the entire faculty, must show unity in the face of this disaster. This unity will take a great negotiator. It will also show organization. It has been a year since this started. We, the national community, still haven’t seen organization from Duke.
The publicity that the 88 professors are garnering needs to be handled through one source. Whether that source is one of the faculty directly such as Dr Lubiano or Dr. Chafe, or an outside agency, one source is needed. This will also show organization and take a great negotiator. It will also show the tolerance those 88 professors were looking for.
Finally, and this is very telling to me, is the alumni. I am aware of Friends of Duke University, which was started by an alumnus. It should tell you something when the alumni are talking and it’s not in agreement with the loudest voices currently on the campus. There are no Friends of Duke University, no alumni, coming forward to say the group is correct. What do they know that the 88 don’t? Ask them.
In conclusion, I’d like to thank you for the time you invested in reading this letter. I understand you receive many demands in your daily duties at Duke, most of them being time. I have pointed out only what I see as limits on the future of Duke and a long history of high educational standards. I pray that you, the university and the surrounding community affected by this, find peace.
Sincerely
I am writing you in reference to the public disaster your school and surrounding community faced last year. I’m sure we both understand I am talking about what is now commonly known as the lacrosse rape scandal. Social or otherwise, I’m sure we both agree that this was a terrible disaster.
I read the blogs and I read the newspapers but these are not the reasons I’m writing. I am writing because of what this outsider sees happening to your school. I am a married father of 2 looking at my first tuition bill in about 5 years. While I’m not sure I’ll be able to afford your institution, I’m equally not sure that I would encourage my children to go. The disaster your community experienced last year could have been better survived with great strength and leadership at several levels. Sadly, this was not to be seen.
While you as an individual and president of the school cannot stop freedom of speech, you should have cautioned your faculty at all levels, both publicly and privately, that they are seen as representatives of your school. I do not mean just those individuals known now as the Group of 88, I am referring to the entire faculty. Those who openly support either side are going to upset somebody. This should have happened very early on. We, the national community have not seen strength or organization from Duke at the levels we should have. We did not see strength to stand up and protect those 3 individual students or the rest of the team while evidence was still being collected.
What we the outside, national community have seen is tremendous infighting between students and teachers, and amongst the faculty. This infighting, this disorganization is doing very serious damage to your school’s image. For schools at your level, image is a very great deal as I’m sure I don’t have to remind you. Further, this lack of organization has cost you a coach and who knows what, that we haven’t heard about.
I firmly believe that this situation is correctable. To correct it will take strength in the face of adversity. I believe several actions are long past due and still not too late to take. These actions will anger many I’m sure. The question I would pose is simply this: Does the current Duke administration have that strength?
First, The longer Collin, Reade, and David are in the news, the longer Duke is known for a scandal. I believe you should exercise whatever resources you have to show Attorney General Cooper and Governor Easley your support for those men. This scandal is still going and needs to end.
Second, the faculty, and I mean the entire faculty, must show unity in the face of this disaster. This unity will take a great negotiator. It will also show organization. It has been a year since this started. We, the national community, still haven’t seen organization from Duke.
The publicity that the 88 professors are garnering needs to be handled through one source. Whether that source is one of the faculty directly such as Dr Lubiano or Dr. Chafe, or an outside agency, one source is needed. This will also show organization and take a great negotiator. It will also show the tolerance those 88 professors were looking for.
Finally, and this is very telling to me, is the alumni. I am aware of Friends of Duke University, which was started by an alumnus. It should tell you something when the alumni are talking and it’s not in agreement with the loudest voices currently on the campus. There are no Friends of Duke University, no alumni, coming forward to say the group is correct. What do they know that the 88 don’t? Ask them.
In conclusion, I’d like to thank you for the time you invested in reading this letter. I understand you receive many demands in your daily duties at Duke, most of them being time. I have pointed out only what I see as limits on the future of Duke and a long history of high educational standards. I pray that you, the university and the surrounding community affected by this, find peace.
Sincerely
What I learned from the Duke Rape Scandal (continued)
The 88 loudest voices on campus are wing nuts. This is my own personal opinion. Back in my college days we learned, in various classes, how to make and support arguments. One of the first things I learned is that anonymous informants and anonymous quotations are very dangerous. To use one or two judiciously in your work might be justifiable, but to rely on only anonymous quotes and sources leads the reader to think that you made them up, or plagiarized your research or other negative responses from the reader. To that end, let’s look at the “Group”.
The “Listening ad” is the first and most egregious example of this. I will not debate the intent of the words written by Dr. Lubiano and any others who wrote it. I will however address the line in that ad that states as follows: “These students are shouting and whispering about what happened to the young woman and to themselves”. If you are shouting about unjust treatment, even using the most poetic and creative literary meaning of the word shout, I suspect anonymity is not your primary goal. The professors would have helped their cause(s) more if they could quote somebody and attribute that quote to a name and or a face. There are at least two quotes used by Dr. Chaffe in 2 separate articles that have eerily similar content and structure, but different specific meanings. This leads me to believe that Chaffe, Lubiano, and the group of 88 are, much like the Durham PD, manufacturing evidence. Go figure. There are quotes that are so carefully structured and phrased, that they sound more like a 50 year old college professor and not a 20 year old college coed. I will post some of the quotes in the next few days.
The “Listening ad” is the first and most egregious example of this. I will not debate the intent of the words written by Dr. Lubiano and any others who wrote it. I will however address the line in that ad that states as follows: “These students are shouting and whispering about what happened to the young woman and to themselves”. If you are shouting about unjust treatment, even using the most poetic and creative literary meaning of the word shout, I suspect anonymity is not your primary goal. The professors would have helped their cause(s) more if they could quote somebody and attribute that quote to a name and or a face. There are at least two quotes used by Dr. Chaffe in 2 separate articles that have eerily similar content and structure, but different specific meanings. This leads me to believe that Chaffe, Lubiano, and the group of 88 are, much like the Durham PD, manufacturing evidence. Go figure. There are quotes that are so carefully structured and phrased, that they sound more like a 50 year old college professor and not a 20 year old college coed. I will post some of the quotes in the next few days.
Wednesday, March 14, 2007
My Letter Writing Campaign
Below you will find letters I've sent to the NAACP, Governor Michael Easley, and others. Use these as a sort of template if you wish, to write your own.
NAACP National Headquarters
4805 Mt. Hope Drive
Baltimore, Md. 21215
March 12, 2007
Re: Duke Lacrosse legal matter in Durham
Dear Sirs:
I am writing this letter to voice my concern and dismay at the N.C. chapter of the NAACP. I am sure you are thinking “why not write them directly?” I wanted the national office to understand just what the N.C. chapter is doing to the credibility of your entire organization. Because of the magnitude of the case, every chapter in every state is going to end up paying for the sins of the N.C. chapter and its case monitor, one Irving Joyner. We have seen time and again that the NAACP calls upon ALL citizens to help fight and show light upon a blatant and corrupt prosecution of some obviously innocent African American individual. Now, I submit, it is time to be evenhanded in this pursuit.
Mr. Joyner has gone on record on numerous occasions in support of District Attorney Michael B. Nifong. Even as the case has unraveled and it has become clear that an entire community rallied around a woman who used a lie to stay out of mandatory detox, and a District Attorney who used this same lie to sway minority votes in an election, Mr. Joyner has steadfastly supported Mr. Nifong and this hoax. A man I might add, in his defense to the state bar, has said if a defendant can afford the best lawyers to read reports fine, if not then oh well. Can you truly support this man in good conscience? We obviously know that the majority of African American residents of Durham and elsewhere are not in financial shape to afford the best legal defense. Sadly, the next time you call upon ALL citizens of our local and national communities to support your next case of injustice, there are many who are going to remember the Duke case and how you persisted in your cries of "Wolf" instead of insisting upon scrupulous fairness for all citizens. Further, how is this going to help the next poor innocent soul whom you choose to support? People will remember this case. It will destroy your credibility. Is this really what you want? More importantly, is this what men like Dr. Martin Luther King fought so hard for? I think not. He demanded true justice for all citizens, not justice based on our personal likes or dislikes.
This is a very sad commentary on a man that so many claim to respect and a very sad commentary on a man whose ideas many pledge to build upon. The only conclusion I can come to after examining the whole situation is simply that Mr. Joyner and the N.C. chapter officers caved in, reflexively, to local pressure. I would hate to see more Alan Gells come before the justice system anywhere knowing how your support is, at face value, different based on skin color.
Please, I would respectfully ask, Demand of the State of North Carolina that this injustice end now.
Sincerely
Governor Michael Easley
Office of the Governor
20301 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-0301
March 13, 2007
Re: Duke lacrosse legal matter
Dear Governor Easley
I am writing as a former resident of North Carolina and a concerned citizen for justice. I am sure you are aware of the situation in Durham. Three young men are charged with crimes by the state that not only did they not commit, but that never happened. All evidence made public to date shows this to the conclusion of any reasonable individual.
I understand that you have many factors to consider. Among these factors are the residents of Durham and how they will react when they find out that a district attorney running his first election campaign, mislead them for personal gain. It is my personal opinion that somebody in power should stand up and say enough is enough. As a lifelong registered democrat, I see it as an opportunity to show the citizens of Durham and beyond that Justice in North Carolina is not done in secret or done for the personal gains of the various officers of the court. I believe that if you or Attorney General Cooper were to make a public showing with a full investigation of the corruption, you would show democrat and republican alike that justice is justice and not politics.
I would like to think that I am a reasonable man. One of the first things to cross my mind upon reading about the case and where it stands today is that any future vacations should avoid the state. I bring this up because in my home state of Florida we see tourism board ads for many states. I just happened to see a tourism ad when reading about the case. If I can make that association, I’m sure many, many others either can or already have. The potential for damage to the democratic party nationally, North Carolina as a state, and the political officials within that state is to my mind almost beyond comprehension. The discussions on the internet about the deep roots of corruption in Durham and beyond are truly very sad.
In conclusion, I believe this is a great opportunity to show the rest of the nation that democrats are only human and more importantly, we as a party are willing to admit mistakes and clean them up. Even if my take on that opportunity is wrong, do 3 innocent young men need to be punished over a crime that never happened? Thank you for taking the time to hear my plea.
Sincerely
Email to Dr Brodhead
Dear Dr. Brodhead
I am writing to you because of the events of last spring. I’m sure you realize I’m talking about what is now referred to as the rape scandal. You have my deepest sympathies, not only for what the apparently false claims did to the school, but because you are being looked at under a microscope. Your every action is sadly being analyzed by everybody from highly qualified academics, to armchair quarterback pseudo-intellectuals. I’m sure this has made for some very short nights for yourself and your faculty and staff.
My “agenda” in this letter is simply this. Duke needs to be out of the press. We, the outside world, see a lack of organization at your school. We see faculty vocal against students and faculty infighting. Please don’t take these words as an insult. They are not meant to be. I am stating only what I see here in Florida as evidenced by the civil suit and the news reports. I understand that you have healing to do and intricate problems to resolve, and appearances can be very deceiving. Every time Collin, Reade, and David are mentioned, Duke University and its lacrosse program follow. Then, along come statements about corrupt prosecution, the protests sponsored and or supported by the 88 vocal professors, and a litany of expressions and comments that are just not needed.
The only way that Duke University is going to get the “rest” that it needs is to push for an end to a scandal that is still ongoing. As long as Collin, Reade and David are still charged with crimes, Duke is still associated with that scandal. To those ends, I would implore you to marshal your resources and take a more vocal and postured stance in support of the 3 students. Show Governor Easley and Attorney General Cooper your support for these men. Once the scandal is out of the news the healing can truly begin. Once the scandal is history, the press won’t have an interest and your university.
Sincerely and respectfully submitted
NAACP National Headquarters
4805 Mt. Hope Drive
Baltimore, Md. 21215
March 12, 2007
Re: Duke Lacrosse legal matter in Durham
Dear Sirs:
I am writing this letter to voice my concern and dismay at the N.C. chapter of the NAACP. I am sure you are thinking “why not write them directly?” I wanted the national office to understand just what the N.C. chapter is doing to the credibility of your entire organization. Because of the magnitude of the case, every chapter in every state is going to end up paying for the sins of the N.C. chapter and its case monitor, one Irving Joyner. We have seen time and again that the NAACP calls upon ALL citizens to help fight and show light upon a blatant and corrupt prosecution of some obviously innocent African American individual. Now, I submit, it is time to be evenhanded in this pursuit.
Mr. Joyner has gone on record on numerous occasions in support of District Attorney Michael B. Nifong. Even as the case has unraveled and it has become clear that an entire community rallied around a woman who used a lie to stay out of mandatory detox, and a District Attorney who used this same lie to sway minority votes in an election, Mr. Joyner has steadfastly supported Mr. Nifong and this hoax. A man I might add, in his defense to the state bar, has said if a defendant can afford the best lawyers to read reports fine, if not then oh well. Can you truly support this man in good conscience? We obviously know that the majority of African American residents of Durham and elsewhere are not in financial shape to afford the best legal defense. Sadly, the next time you call upon ALL citizens of our local and national communities to support your next case of injustice, there are many who are going to remember the Duke case and how you persisted in your cries of "Wolf" instead of insisting upon scrupulous fairness for all citizens. Further, how is this going to help the next poor innocent soul whom you choose to support? People will remember this case. It will destroy your credibility. Is this really what you want? More importantly, is this what men like Dr. Martin Luther King fought so hard for? I think not. He demanded true justice for all citizens, not justice based on our personal likes or dislikes.
This is a very sad commentary on a man that so many claim to respect and a very sad commentary on a man whose ideas many pledge to build upon. The only conclusion I can come to after examining the whole situation is simply that Mr. Joyner and the N.C. chapter officers caved in, reflexively, to local pressure. I would hate to see more Alan Gells come before the justice system anywhere knowing how your support is, at face value, different based on skin color.
Please, I would respectfully ask, Demand of the State of North Carolina that this injustice end now.
Sincerely
Governor Michael Easley
Office of the Governor
20301 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-0301
March 13, 2007
Re: Duke lacrosse legal matter
Dear Governor Easley
I am writing as a former resident of North Carolina and a concerned citizen for justice. I am sure you are aware of the situation in Durham. Three young men are charged with crimes by the state that not only did they not commit, but that never happened. All evidence made public to date shows this to the conclusion of any reasonable individual.
I understand that you have many factors to consider. Among these factors are the residents of Durham and how they will react when they find out that a district attorney running his first election campaign, mislead them for personal gain. It is my personal opinion that somebody in power should stand up and say enough is enough. As a lifelong registered democrat, I see it as an opportunity to show the citizens of Durham and beyond that Justice in North Carolina is not done in secret or done for the personal gains of the various officers of the court. I believe that if you or Attorney General Cooper were to make a public showing with a full investigation of the corruption, you would show democrat and republican alike that justice is justice and not politics.
I would like to think that I am a reasonable man. One of the first things to cross my mind upon reading about the case and where it stands today is that any future vacations should avoid the state. I bring this up because in my home state of Florida we see tourism board ads for many states. I just happened to see a tourism ad when reading about the case. If I can make that association, I’m sure many, many others either can or already have. The potential for damage to the democratic party nationally, North Carolina as a state, and the political officials within that state is to my mind almost beyond comprehension. The discussions on the internet about the deep roots of corruption in Durham and beyond are truly very sad.
In conclusion, I believe this is a great opportunity to show the rest of the nation that democrats are only human and more importantly, we as a party are willing to admit mistakes and clean them up. Even if my take on that opportunity is wrong, do 3 innocent young men need to be punished over a crime that never happened? Thank you for taking the time to hear my plea.
Sincerely
Email to Dr Brodhead
Dear Dr. Brodhead
I am writing to you because of the events of last spring. I’m sure you realize I’m talking about what is now referred to as the rape scandal. You have my deepest sympathies, not only for what the apparently false claims did to the school, but because you are being looked at under a microscope. Your every action is sadly being analyzed by everybody from highly qualified academics, to armchair quarterback pseudo-intellectuals. I’m sure this has made for some very short nights for yourself and your faculty and staff.
My “agenda” in this letter is simply this. Duke needs to be out of the press. We, the outside world, see a lack of organization at your school. We see faculty vocal against students and faculty infighting. Please don’t take these words as an insult. They are not meant to be. I am stating only what I see here in Florida as evidenced by the civil suit and the news reports. I understand that you have healing to do and intricate problems to resolve, and appearances can be very deceiving. Every time Collin, Reade, and David are mentioned, Duke University and its lacrosse program follow. Then, along come statements about corrupt prosecution, the protests sponsored and or supported by the 88 vocal professors, and a litany of expressions and comments that are just not needed.
The only way that Duke University is going to get the “rest” that it needs is to push for an end to a scandal that is still ongoing. As long as Collin, Reade and David are still charged with crimes, Duke is still associated with that scandal. To those ends, I would implore you to marshal your resources and take a more vocal and postured stance in support of the 3 students. Show Governor Easley and Attorney General Cooper your support for these men. Once the scandal is out of the news the healing can truly begin. Once the scandal is history, the press won’t have an interest and your university.
Sincerely and respectfully submitted
Tuesday, March 13, 2007
The Duke Lacrosse Scandal and What It Taught Me
I should preface this essay by telling you the reader that I got interested in the Duke case because of 2 similarities between Collin Finnerty and myself. First, Collin and I both come from the same hometown, Garden City N.Y. Second, we both chose to go to school in North Carolina. I did not attend Duke. I went farther south to a little town named Salisbury, which sits about 30 minutes north of Charlotte on I85. I moved out of town 2 days after graduation only to return three times in the 30 years I’ve been gone. I am not scholarly save to say I have some college under my belt and that I read and further my interests in watch repair, music, science fiction, and amateur radio (I hold a technician licence with code).
Where to start….who knows. I remembered hearing about the case and the charges and then let it go. Then one day I tried to lookup the case on the net to see if a resolution was to be found. That’s when I was hit with several (excellent) blogs and the realization that the case wasn’t even close to over. So I did what any cybergeek does at a time like this….I read. What I read was just about as bizarre as the success of William Hung as a singer. I’m still reading the archive sections of some of the blogs and commentary. At this point I should state that the major blogs I read on this are Durham In Wonderland, Liestoppers, John in North Carolina, and the Johnsville News. Add to that the excellent work of Dr William Anderson at Lewrockwell.com. On to what these 5 sources and others have taught me.
In reading these blogs, the single biggest thing I’ve learned is how the main stream media is no longer a source for news. After seeing K.C. Johnson pick apart this news story or that academic’s essay, I’ve learned to read the heartstring tugs or the inflammatory phrases more clearly. On the subject of the mass media, I’ve been looking on the net for any news video about the case. I believe that the major news outlets are about to self destruct. CNN is going after Fox. MSNBC is going after CNN, and Fox is willing to take on anybody who gets in the way. Just my personal opinion. The media, no matter which side they are on, seems to discount this evidence or vilify whomever they see fit. So now I read my news on the net from less known sources like slate.com or similar sites.
What else I’ve learned. I have 2 boys ages 10 and 12. I would hope that down the road I will be able to either see them through college or at least help them part of the way. To that extent I am absolutely amazed, no, make that shocked, at the number of academics who are trying to build a case for their cause on the foundations of the “Duke rape case”. If you are not familiar with that case, its now referred to as the Duke rape scandal or the Duke rape hoax. In short, the accuser lied to stay out of detox as I understand it.
I read Peggy Reeves Sanday’s article wherein she tries to put the case into perspective by sidestepping the 2 points that are the perspective of this case. She won’t address if the rape actually happened and she won’t address District Attorney Michael Nifong’s role in the case. This shows me she is trying to build a case for her gang rape mentality, on which she is supposed to be an expert, on a story that is as much fiction as Harry Potter. If her research were as thorough as this, I wouldn’t want my children learning from her. In college, I was expected to show facts in my psychology classes to support my assertion that something exists or not. If I took a story to my professor and said this supports my assertion that such and such exists, he or she would have responded that it does only in my mind and the mind of the writer. The gang of 88 did this when they rushed to judge the lacrosse students as guilty because of race, class, and privilege. Now we have numerous professors at Duke who are trying to show racism or sexism from the fictitious facts surrounding this “case”. This truly frightens me. I was relieved to know that the group of 88 are only 88 of over 750 teachers.
What else I’ve learned. The writings I’ve read talk about race/gender trumps class/whatever…..what is true most of all is opinion trumps fact for far too many people with the power to affect you and your family. If you are young and in college, these folks are especially worrisome. If you are like me with a family as I stated above, these folks will teach our kids.
Opinion trumps fact. Irving Joyner is the case monitor for the NAACP in North Carolina. In reading his statements and bringing them to a criminal lawyer I know, Joyner is commenting on what he would like to see, not what is. I wrote to the NAACP about him and their official stance on the case. I would hate to have Joyner defending me based on his opinions.
There are other things I’ve picked up on during my time reading about this case. While I knew that corruption existed and people in positions of power used that power for personal gain, I never thought that the corruption could run as deep as it does in Durham. The appearance alone is chilling.
Perhaps I will continue this thought later, for now its time to go
I should preface this essay by telling you the reader that I got interested in the Duke case because of 2 similarities between Collin Finnerty and myself. First, Collin and I both come from the same hometown, Garden City N.Y. Second, we both chose to go to school in North Carolina. I did not attend Duke. I went farther south to a little town named Salisbury, which sits about 30 minutes north of Charlotte on I85. I moved out of town 2 days after graduation only to return three times in the 30 years I’ve been gone. I am not scholarly save to say I have some college under my belt and that I read and further my interests in watch repair, music, science fiction, and amateur radio (I hold a technician licence with code).
Where to start….who knows. I remembered hearing about the case and the charges and then let it go. Then one day I tried to lookup the case on the net to see if a resolution was to be found. That’s when I was hit with several (excellent) blogs and the realization that the case wasn’t even close to over. So I did what any cybergeek does at a time like this….I read. What I read was just about as bizarre as the success of William Hung as a singer. I’m still reading the archive sections of some of the blogs and commentary. At this point I should state that the major blogs I read on this are Durham In Wonderland, Liestoppers, John in North Carolina, and the Johnsville News. Add to that the excellent work of Dr William Anderson at Lewrockwell.com. On to what these 5 sources and others have taught me.
In reading these blogs, the single biggest thing I’ve learned is how the main stream media is no longer a source for news. After seeing K.C. Johnson pick apart this news story or that academic’s essay, I’ve learned to read the heartstring tugs or the inflammatory phrases more clearly. On the subject of the mass media, I’ve been looking on the net for any news video about the case. I believe that the major news outlets are about to self destruct. CNN is going after Fox. MSNBC is going after CNN, and Fox is willing to take on anybody who gets in the way. Just my personal opinion. The media, no matter which side they are on, seems to discount this evidence or vilify whomever they see fit. So now I read my news on the net from less known sources like slate.com or similar sites.
What else I’ve learned. I have 2 boys ages 10 and 12. I would hope that down the road I will be able to either see them through college or at least help them part of the way. To that extent I am absolutely amazed, no, make that shocked, at the number of academics who are trying to build a case for their cause on the foundations of the “Duke rape case”. If you are not familiar with that case, its now referred to as the Duke rape scandal or the Duke rape hoax. In short, the accuser lied to stay out of detox as I understand it.
I read Peggy Reeves Sanday’s article wherein she tries to put the case into perspective by sidestepping the 2 points that are the perspective of this case. She won’t address if the rape actually happened and she won’t address District Attorney Michael Nifong’s role in the case. This shows me she is trying to build a case for her gang rape mentality, on which she is supposed to be an expert, on a story that is as much fiction as Harry Potter. If her research were as thorough as this, I wouldn’t want my children learning from her. In college, I was expected to show facts in my psychology classes to support my assertion that something exists or not. If I took a story to my professor and said this supports my assertion that such and such exists, he or she would have responded that it does only in my mind and the mind of the writer. The gang of 88 did this when they rushed to judge the lacrosse students as guilty because of race, class, and privilege. Now we have numerous professors at Duke who are trying to show racism or sexism from the fictitious facts surrounding this “case”. This truly frightens me. I was relieved to know that the group of 88 are only 88 of over 750 teachers.
What else I’ve learned. The writings I’ve read talk about race/gender trumps class/whatever…..what is true most of all is opinion trumps fact for far too many people with the power to affect you and your family. If you are young and in college, these folks are especially worrisome. If you are like me with a family as I stated above, these folks will teach our kids.
Opinion trumps fact. Irving Joyner is the case monitor for the NAACP in North Carolina. In reading his statements and bringing them to a criminal lawyer I know, Joyner is commenting on what he would like to see, not what is. I wrote to the NAACP about him and their official stance on the case. I would hate to have Joyner defending me based on his opinions.
There are other things I’ve picked up on during my time reading about this case. While I knew that corruption existed and people in positions of power used that power for personal gain, I never thought that the corruption could run as deep as it does in Durham. The appearance alone is chilling.
Perhaps I will continue this thought later, for now its time to go
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)