Kirk Osborn, RIP
by
William L. Anderson
by William L. Anderson
DIGG THIS
According to
the pundits, the North Carolina attorney general’s office is likely
to drop all charges soon against Reade Seligmann, Collin Finnerty,
and David Evans in the Duke Non-Rape, Non-Kidnapping, and Non-Sexual
Assault case. Yet, perhaps the man who is more responsible than
anyone else for laying the groundwork that ultimately destroyed
the prosecution’s case will not be there.
Kirk Osborn,
the attorney who first represented Seligmann, died this past weekend
of a massive heart attack. He was the attorney with whom I had the
most personal contact. He was not a source of information for me
– indeed, I have approached no one close to the case – but at the
same time, we encouraged each other. I praised his work, and he
praised my articles.
Recently, Osborn
had moved to the background of this case, but in the very dark days
of April and May of 2006, he was able to do some things that quietly
undermined the case of Michael B. Nifong, and the savvy Osborn bears
much of the credit for how Nifong’s career is imploding along with
the case. When he died, Osborn could see the end both of the criminal
case and Nifong’s sorry tenure as Durham County District
Attorney.
To understand
where this article is leading, one first needs to know what happened
last April 17 when Nifong obtained indictments for Seligmann and
Finnerty. According to the official "timeline" of the
rape of Crystal Gail Mangum, the assault supposedly took place after
12:15 a.m. on the morning of March 14.
However, at
that very time, Seligmann had taken a cab to a nearby bank and was
standing in front of an automatic teller withdrawing cash, the teller
taking a photo of the young man as he exited the cab. Indeed, Seligmann
had an electronic record and the word of the cab driver,
Moez Elmostafa, an African immigrant.
Since he represented
Seligmann, Osborn went to the DA’s office to let Nifong know that
he had important exculpatory information about his client. Nifong
sent someone out to Osborn with this message: "If you think
your client is innocent, then we have nothing to talk about."
At that moment, Osborn knew that Nifong was trying to frame the
young men.
Seligmann’s
bond was set at $400,000, which was paid, and Seligmann was released.
At a subsequent hearing for Seligmann in May, Osborn ultimately
set a trap and the arrogant Nifong walked into it. People who saw
the hearing, however, might not have recognized that it represented
an important "tipping point."
In fact, the
whole thing started out badly. The New Black Panthers, a black hate
group from Atlanta, came to Durham spewing death threats to the
lacrosse players and demanding that Duke University let them on
campus to "interview" the players. Surprisingly, Duke
refused to allow them inside.
However, Nifong
was happy to see the NBP and "briefed" them on the case
in a personal meeting. Other Nifong supporters rallied around the
NBP and made all of the usual murderous declarations that one might
expect from such a gathering.
Seligmann then
walked to his bond hearing, and Osborn put his body between the
young man and the howling mob. Durhamites and the NBP screamed death
threats to Seligmann, and then the mob moved into the courtroom,
where they continued to make open threats, Nifong saying nothing
to discourage this outrage and supporting it with his silence and
his body language. The judge at the hearing was Ronald Stephens,
a former Durham prosecutor and Nifong’s old boss; Stephens clearly
was on Nifong’s side and hostile to the defense. While he told those
making death threats to be quiet, he refused to remove the miscreants
from the courtroom, thus making sure everyone understood that Seligmann
was as good as guilty, in his opinion.
When Osborn
asked the judge to reduce the bond from $400,000 to $100,000, Nifong
laughed out loud – and received no admonishment from the judge for
his obnoxious outburst. Nifong also openly made fun of Seligmann’s
counsel, including Osborn. Later, however, Osborn made perhaps the
most significant request in the entire case: the request that all
hearings be recorded and transcribed, something that Stephens resisted
at first, but ultimately agreed to do as Osborn was stubborn and
persistent.
Osborn insisted
that everything be on the record, which is important. In
that hearing, as well as subsequent hearings, Nifong made statements
about evidence and other things that ultimately proved to be lies.
Those false statements were the basis of much of the action the
North Carolina State Bar has taken against him, and it is very likely
that Nifong will be disbarred.
Because his
statements were part of the record, Nifong had nowhere to hide when
the December 15, 2006, hearing exposed his lies to the world. Yet,
long before most people had jumped on the anti-Nifong bandwagon,
Osborn understood that Nifong was lying – and trying to frame his
client.
One has to
understand that defense attorneys do not make a career out
of attacking prosecutors. Indeed, improper statements about prosecutors
can lead to one being drummed out of the law profession, and attorneys
are loathe even to broach the possibility of a frame-up. Thus, when
Osborn began filing motions to have Nifong removed and released
Seligmann’s own timeline (and photograph at the bank teller) to
the press, he was doing so in peril of his own career.
Indeed, at
that time, it seemed that Nifong was going to win. The press was
on his side, Durham voters were on his side, much of Duke University’s
faculty and administration was on his side, other prosecutors in
the state were on his side, and the first two judges who were in
charge of the case, Stephens and Kenneth Titus, were on his side.
The judges seemed all-too-happy to grease the skids and no one in
a position of authority was willing to intervene to stop the railroading.
The case was
extremely stressful to Osborn, something he said in his emails to
me. He was especially angry about the May hearing when Nifong "treated
us like dogs." In another email, he said that we had to make
sure that Nifong never would be able to practice law again; strong
words, very strong words.
In the end,
Osborn’s heart did not stand up to all of the stress that Nifong
and his minions caused with their endless lies. Yet, while Nifong
is in disgrace, Osborn is praised. The Seligmann family issued the
following statement:
We are heartbroken
over the death of Kirk Osborn.
Kirk stood
up for Reade at great personal cost. He stood by Reade and together
they faced the mob that was outside the Durham County Courthouse
a year ago; Kirk never flinched and faced both that mob outside
the Courthouse and the bias within the Courthouse with the courage
that he showed throughout this case. He passionately believed
that the truth would emerge and that the world would know of the
injustice that was done that day and every day of this baseless
prosecution.
While it
is now plain to anyone with any reason and objectivity that there
was no sexual assault and that Reade has been the victim of an
unprincipled prosecution, we are nonetheless saddened that Kirk
did not live to see the day when Reade will be completely exonerated.
While that day will come, it will now come too late for Kirk to
share in it. When that day does arrive, it will be as a direct
result of Kirk’s courage, skill and passionate belief in the truth.
Our hearts
go out to Kirk’s family. We ask that everyone remember them in
their prayers. We will never forget Kirk and his sacrifices for
Reade and for justice. Kirk’s fight for the truth and for justice
in this case met the highest standards of ethics and professionalism
and stand in stark contrast to those who condemned Reade. He is
an example of what a lawyer should be.
We will be
forever grateful to Kirk and will never forget what he has done
for us.
In their
article on Osborn’s death, Joe Neff – one of the few journalists
who really understood this case – and Benjamin Niolet, both of the
Raleigh News & Observer, wrote:
Osborn was
aggressive early with his defense. He filed a motion seeking to
have Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong removed from the case,
accusing the prosecutor of going after the lacrosse players to
win votes.
Osborn's
court filings announced to the world that despite Nifong's assurances
that a rape occurred, Seligmann had phone records, receipts, security
camera images and a cab driver that would show he was almost a
mile away when the woman said he was participating in her rape.
Seligmann's
alibi, which Nifong protested proved nothing, helped convince
many that the allegations against Seligmann, Dave Evans, 23, and
Collin Finnerty, 20, were untrue.
After the
State Bar charged Nifong with ethics violations, he asked the
state Attorney General to take over the case. Two veteran prosecutors
are reviewing the case and will decide whether to press forward.
The
case will never go to trial, and that is in large part because Osborn
was willing to step forward in the early days when the press and
the legal profession were downright craven. All of us who care about
justice owe much to this man. Indeed, Kirk Osborn, rest in peace.
We will miss you, and miss you greatly.
March
27, 2007
William
L. Anderson, Ph.D. [send him
mail], teaches economics at Frostburg State University in Maryland,
and is an adjunct scholar of the Ludwig
von Mises Institute.
Copyright
© 2007 LewRockwell.com
William
Anderson Archives
|