So What Happens Now?

Firehouse · #1 04-10-2006, 10:36 PM

Word tonight is that members of the Duke lacrosse team have been all but exonerated by DNA evidence. Other new evidence reported by defense attorneys further suggest that the accusations may be deliberately false.

Activists at Duke claim readiness to completely overturn any "culture" at Duke that displeases them. These ususal suspects always focus their attacks on fraternities and masculine athletics.
Fifty-five varsity athletes at Duke are members of eleven different IFC fraternities. Five Lacrosse players are fraternity men: Kappa Alpha and Delta Sigma Phi.

So what happens now?
Where does the Lacrosse team go to get their season back?
Where does the lacrosse coach go to get his professional reputation restored?
Will the flase accusers be charged, or will they be ignored so as not to offend the activists?
Will fraternities and athletics be attacked now by activist faculty in spite of the indicators that the greatest wrong was done by the false accuser?

This issue hits close to home.

jubilance1922 · #2 04-10-2006, 10:53 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Firehouse
Word tonight is that members of the Duke lacrosse team have been all but exonerated by DNA evidence. Other new evidence reported by defense attorneys further suggest that the accusations may be deliberately false.

Activists at Duke claim readiness to completely overturn any "culture" at Duke that displeases them. These ususal suspects always focus their attacks on fraternities and masculine athletics.
Fifty-five varsity athletes at Duke are members of eleven different IFC fraternities. Five Lacrosse players are fraternity men: Kappa Alpha and Delta Sigma Phi.

So what happens now?
Where does the Lacrosse team go to get their season back?
Where does the lacrosse coach go to get his professional reputation restored?
Will the flase accusers be charged, or will they be ignored so as not to offend the activists?
Will fraternities and athletics be attacked now by activist faculty in spite of the indicators that the greatest wrong was done by the false accuser?

This issue hits close to home.

Lack of DNA evidence does not mean that a sexual assault did not occur.

It also doesnt mean that a friend of a lacrosse player committed a crime, and the players are covering for that person or persons.

Kevin · #3 04-10-2006, 11:01 PM

If the DNA doesn't fit, you must acquit.

But yeah, I suppose it's possible that a player is "covering" for someone else who was present at the scene.

Unless that person's presence can be shown to exist, and in light of some of the other evidence (that the injuries were incurred before the alleged incedent), the claims of this woman are looking shakey. The real tragedy here is that these guys were guilty in many people's eyes before a single shred of evidence came to light.

XOMichelle · #4 04-10-2006, 11:01 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by jubilance1922
Lack of DNA evidence does not mean that a sexual assault did not occur.

It also doesnt mean that a friend of a lacrosse player committed a crime, and the players are covering for that person or persons.

She has a point.... I mean, if they all wore condoms there would be no DNA evidence, right?

kddani · #5 04-10-2006, 11:03 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by jubilance1922
Lack of DNA evidence does not mean that a sexual assault did not occur.

Unfortunately most people are too quick to think that no DNA = no rape. They forget about condoms.

And even more unfortunate, this makes this case even more murky. If she did lie, I hope that she is punished. But if she's telling the truth, it is scary and unfortunate that those who did it to her may not be able to be punished.

None of us know what happened for certain.

My guess/hope is that eventually someone (or several someones) from the team will crack and come forward with more information about what really happened.

Kevin · #6 04-10-2006, 11:04 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by XOMichelle
She has a point.... I mean, if they all wore condoms there would be no DNA evidence, right?

If they wore condoms, where did the DNA evidence that came back negative come from?

kddani · #7 04-10-2006, 11:05 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ktsnake
If they wore condoms, where did the DNA evidence that came back negative come from?

Strippers are allowed to have boyfriends/hook up buddies. Maybe she got some before she went dancing, or from the night before. We don't know.

macallan25 · #8 04-10-2006, 11:10 PM

They covered that today on Fox News. They said something like spermicidal residue can stay for up to three days on the girl, so they would have been able to find that out. Everyone pretty much concluded that the stripper probobly screwed her boyfriend and nothing more. They also had on some dumbass activist that said she was right in crying rape because, "she was probobly scared from the slurs that were yelled at her."
The fact is, the dumb bitch significantly altered the lives of quite a few men on the lacrosse team and caused one of the best coaches in the country to quit his job, not to mention the season that was cancelled....which would make me pretty f*cking mad if I were a senior.

kddani · #9 04-10-2006, 11:15 PM

Not all condoms contain spermicide

Do rape kits test for spermicide? I don't necessarily know why they would.

*Disclaimer, before someone tries to attack me- I DON'T KNOW WHAT HAPPENED. Neither do you. But there are a lot of holes in both sides*

macallan25 · #10 04-10-2006, 11:19 PM

Oh, I wasn't attacking you, I think I was typing that when you posted. I can't really remember what they said...but the condom question was asked on Fox News and one of the analysts said something about some kind of residue that is left from it that can stick around for like three days.....which would have been discovered by the hospital I guess since she had the tests done immediately.

BobbyTheDon · #11 04-10-2006, 11:28 PM

Attorneys match no DNA to lacrosse players

Quote:

Cheshire said even if the alleged attackers used a condom, it's likely there would have been some DNA evidence found suggesting an assault took place. He said in this case, the report states there was no DNA on her to indicate that she had sex of any type recently.

"The experts will tell you that if there was a condom used they would still be able to pick up DNA , latex, lubricant and all other types of things to show that -- and that's not here," he said.

Kddani is right though. There are holes on both sides, and no one will ever truly know what happened. But if these kids get exonerated, and if I were them, I would sue the hell out of all those organizations for defamation.

Rudey · #12 04-10-2006, 11:40 PM

It's not just DNA from sperm. Samples were taken from all over the body.

On top of that they haven't found traces of latex or lubricants and another hooker/escort is saying something that conflicts with the first hooker's story.

Is this a repeat of the Al Sharpton/Tiwana Brawley incident?

-Rudey

Rudey · #13 04-10-2006, 11:41 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by kddani
Not all condoms contain spermicide

Do rape kits test for spermicide? I don't necessarily know why they would.

*Disclaimer, before someone tries to attack me- I DON'T KNOW WHAT HAPPENED. Neither do you. But there are a lot of holes in both sides*

What are the holes on the LAX players side?

-Rudey

Rudey · #14 04-10-2006, 11:42 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by kddani
None of us know what happened for certain.

My guess/hope is that eventually someone (or several someones) from the team will crack and come forward with more information about what really happened.

So you say you don't know what happened but imply that a rape did occur and a player will come forward?

-Rudey

alum · #15 04-10-2006, 11:43 PM

Will this be another Tawana Brawley story?