Why There Will Be No Criminal Investigation in the Duke Case
by
William L. Anderson
by William L. Anderson
DIGG THIS
The daily page
of the Liestoppers
blog says it all: Time it has taken Roy Cooper to start a criminal
investigation: 124 Days, 19 Hours, 28 Minutes, 49 Seconds.
The clock ticks continuously, and by the time readers
see this, more time will elapse.
In fact, the
clock might as well tick forever, for there will not be any
criminal investigation at all, not from the State of North Carolina,
and certainly not from the federal government. None.
The irony,
of course, is that a year ago, the State of North Carolina was sparing
no expense to prosecute rape, kidnapping, and sexual assault charges
against Reade Seligmann, Collin Finnerty, and David Evans, despite
the fact that everyone involved in the case, from police
to prosecutors to attorneys knew beyond a doubt that the charges
were bogus. The CBS show "60 Minutes" already had eviscerated
the charges in a broadcast, bloggers like K.C.
Johnson were shredding the credibility of Nifong and his Duke
University and Durham supporters, and Nifong already had lied to
judges about evidence that would be exposed at the December 15,
2006, hearing. Charges from the state bar would soon follow, and
Nifong finally would be disbarred in June, 2007.
Attorneys for
the players, and bloggers and journalists covering the case already
have exposed a number of crimes and outright lies committed by police
and prosecutors. For those few who still might have doubts about
the open and unabashed lawbreaking that occurred, the
civil suit that the three families have filed against Durham
and Nifong is an eye-opener. In short, if ever there were a dishonest
and malicious prosecution, this is it.
Yet, despite
the fact that much criminal behavior already has been exposed, and
the lawsuit is likely to expose even more of the same, the criminal
authorities are not interested. The reason is not that authorities
would have a difficult case; indeed, all that has been uncovered
in official venues, from the investigation by North
Carolina Attorney General Cooper and the North Carolina Bar,
not to mention Judge W. Osmond Smith III’s recent criminal contempt
hearing in which Nifong was sentenced to a day in jail, is enough
to establish a massive criminal conspiracy.
The reason
is simple: the politics of race. Seligmann, Finnerty, and Evans
are white, and their accuser, Crystal Gail Mangum, is black. The
NAACP and other black organizations had staked all of their
credibility to the charges being true, and desperately tried to
keep the case alive, even when it was exposed as a lie. Furthermore,
the rape crisis organizations and feminist groups also refused to
let go of the lies that propelled this case in the first place.
The radical
faculty members, employees, administrators and students at Duke
also rebelled at seeing this "opportunity" slip through
their fingers, so they insisted that Cooper either had covered up
the evidence or had been kowtowing to white supremacists. In other
words, even the truth could not stop business as usual, so people
from these groups simply comforted themselves with the Big Lie that
the players were guilty of rape, but were going to skirt justice
because of their race and family incomes.
It is not hard
to see how this would affect Cooper’s decision to avoid any criminal
investigation. Cooper is a Democrat with aspirations of being governor,
and in North Carolina, the only way for Democrats to win a state-wide
election is through heavy turnout from blacks and radical/leftist
whites. That members of these groups were bitterly disappointed
when the case fell apart means that Cooper cannot do anything to
further earn their enmity.
It is not as
though Cooper is ignorant of any criminal activity. At the April
12 press conference in which he exonerated the three young men,
declaring them innocent and declaring Nifong to be a "rogue
prosecutor," the following exchange took place between Cooper
and a journalist:
Q: What about
Mike Nifong? Do you think that his actions warrant a criminal
investigation?
COOPER: Well,
I think it's important that we let the process work with the North
Carolina State Bar. Our investigation dealt mostly with the facts
of this case and making a decision. Their investigation is dealing
more with the pretrial comments and with the discovery issues
on the DNA that our investigators really did not get into the
details of that.
I think once
the bar finishes that hearing process, then we will know more
about that process when it comes.
Q: Is it
a possibility?
COOPER: It's
certainly a possibility, but I don't want to to speculate at
this point. I think all options are certainly on the table.
Thus, it clearly
is not in Cooper’s interests nor in the interests of the North Carolina
Democratic Party for there to be a further investigation, especially
since all of the principals on the prosecution side were
Democrats. Along those lines, we also hear silence from the attorneys
for the three young men who clearly saw everything Nifong and the
police were doing. The most visible attorneys, Wade Smith and Joe
Cheshire, both are among the most influential Democrats in the state,
and they are not about to damage their party to encourage more action
against Nifong.
There is another
body that has jurisdiction, however, and that is the federal government.
As one who has been extremely critical of federal prosecutions and
federal criminal law, I am extremely reluctant to call for federal
action, even if Cooper and the State of North Carolina take a powder.
Nonetheless, I have seen the feds throw huge amounts of resources
into cases in which they had less jurisdiction and the effects of
the "crimes" committed were far less harmful than what
we have seen take place in Durham and North Carolina.
After all,
there are a number of avenues the feds could take. Most certainly,
Durham and Nifong used federal grants from the Violence Against
Women Act in pursuit of this case, and the fraudulent use of federal
money has landed many people in prison before. There are massive
conspiracies to deprive Seligmann, Finnerty, and Evans of their
Constitutional Rights, and there are the usual sets of "fraud"
and "conspiracy" charges that the feds do not seem hesitant
in using elsewhere.
The main reason
for the reluctance of the feds to be involved, as I see it, is the
Jena case. While I will not discuss this case in this article, I
have read a number of dispatches and posts on the case and realize
that like the Duke case, what everyone has thought was true simply
was not.
(There was
no "white tree" in the schoolyard, the students who hung
the infamous nooses received punishment, and in the immediate aftermath
of the hanging of the nooses, there were no racial incidents. The
case is much more complicated than what most people who have taken
sides want to believe. Furthermore, there is questionable
conduct by the parents of the so-called Jena 6, who have received
almost a half-million dollars in donations after their sons were
charged with attempted murder in the beating of a white student
at the local high school. I definitely have sympathy for both the
whites and the blacks in this case, and decry the irresponsible
talk coming from the extremists on both sides. Jason
Whitlock of the Kansas City Star, a black columnist and
a hard-hitting writer, pens perhaps the best commentary I have read
in this case.)
Nonetheless,
while the story is more complicated than what the activists tell
us, black
Democrats in Congress have taken up the cause. In a recent hearing,
they demanded that the local U.S. attorney in Louisiana charge the
three white students who originally hung the nooses from a tree
with "hate crimes," which would place them in prison for
most of their lives. (To his credit, the federal prosecutor, who
is black, told the members of Congress there was no criminal statute
under which he could charge the students; the members of Congress
basically demanded that he make up a law.)
While there
was a federal investigation of the Jena case, the absence of charges
there means that if the feds were to attempt to investigate the
Duke case and subsequently bring charges, the outcry among the black
groups and black congressional Democrats would be very loud. Given
its precarious situation from the Republican loss of Congress to
its declining fortunes in Iraq, the Bush Administration simply is
not going to pursue anything in the Duke case that will make it
subject to even more accusations of racism. I also believe that
a Hillary Clinton administration will re-visit Jena and file hate
crime charges against the white students and try to bulldoze them
through the courts, which most likely will be quite happy to overlook
the fact that the actions of the students, though reprehensible,
are not covered by legal statutes.
(The Bush Administration
also still is smarting from its total failure in the wake of Hurricane
Katrina and the subsequent charges that its failure has been due
to racist attitudes. Actually, its failure is due to the fact that
it is attempting to implement socialist "solutions" which
always are doomed to fail. This is the reason for the continual
post-Katrina stumbling in New Orleans, but those who are most loudly
crying "racism" also support socialism.)
Therefore,
I doubt seriously that there will be criminal cases of any kind
in the Duke case. If there is to be legal relief, it will be in
the civil arena, and those who committed crimes will be permitted
to go on as though nothing ever happened. In the end, the police
state triumphs – again.
October
20, 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. He also is a consultant
with American Economic Services.
Copyright
© 2007 LewRockwell.com
William
Anderson Archives
|