DUKE RAPE CASE: WHAT 60 MINUTES FAILED TO DO

By Cash MichaelsSpecial for the NNPA from The Carolinian/Wilmington Journal newspapers [DURHAM, NC] There is no question that the Oct. 15 two-part expose’ on the infamous Duke lacrosse alleged rape case by the CBS newsmagazine 60 Minutes, helped to solidify the defense’s most salient points so far – that there has been little, to no evidence publicly revealed proving that three indicted members of the Duke University men’s lacrosse team raped and kidnapped a Black exotic dancer at a wild off-campus party March 14; and that Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong, who is personally prosecuting the case, knew early on that his evidence was weak, but exploited the racially explosive case anyway to win Black votes in last May’s Democratic primary. The widely viewed report, anchored by veteran CBS News correspondent Ed Bradley, has been generally applauded by supporters of the “Duke Three.” “The impact of ’60 Minutes’ expose’ of District Attorney Mike Nifong’s hijacked hoax is readily apparent,” writes blogger Liestoppers (http://liestoppers.blogspot.com/). “A brief review of some of the comments the big tractor has elicited leaves little doubt that the injustice that we, and other bloggers, have been hollering about for months, is now common knowledge across the country. From coast to coast, millions of people now know that Nifong is the embodiment of prosecutorial misconduct.” Kansas City Star columnist Jason Whitlock, an African-American, agreed. “The charges against the Duke lacrosse players should be dropped immediately, and the people demanding the dismissal the loudest and most forcefully should be the very people who have made a living allegedly fighting against racial injustice,” Whitlock wrote Oct. 16. “I’ve said this before, but it’s worth saying again,” he continued. “Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton should be in Durham, N.C., today, promising civil disobedience until the charges are dropped and prosecutor Mike Nifong resigns.” And not surprisingly, Duke University’s student newspaper, The Chronicle, heralded Bradley and 60 Minutes for focusing on what many believe to be a supreme injustice. “For an analytical and well known program such as 60 Minutes to come down so decisively on one side of a highly controversial case seems significant,” The Chronicle’s editorial stated. “The show, anchored by Ed Bradley, highlighted several discrepancies in the prosecution’s case and exposed instances of questionable conduct on the part of Durham officials over the past six months.” Indeed, correspondent Bradley left no doubt, from the very opening of the report, that the Duke Three were being railroaded by false charges of rape, by a prosecutor who may be up to no good, and is determined to convict them at trial next spring. “The evidence 60 Minutes has seen reveals disturbing facts about the conduct of the police and the district attorney, and raises serious concerns about whether or not a rape even occurred,” Bradley told his audience at the top of the show. The three players – Colin Finnerty, 20, of Garden City, NY; Reade Seligmann, 20, of Essex Fells, NJ; and David Forker Evans, 23, of Bethesda, Md. – indicted for first-degree rape, first-degree kidnapping, and first-degree sexual offense, maintained their innocence in first and exclusive interviews with Bradley. “This woman has destroyed everything I worked for in my life,” Evans, a co-captain of the lacrosse who graduated last spring, only to lose a Wall Street job because of the indictments, told Bradley. “She’s put it on hold. She’s destroyed two other families and she’s brought shame on a great university. And, worst of all she’s split apart a community and a nation on facts that just didn’t happen and a lie that should have never been told.” Sophomore Colin Finnerty, who is keeping details of his alibi from the night of the alleged assault close to the vest until trial, told 60 Minutes he has no idea why he was accused of a rape he says he didn’t commit. “I never expected anyone to get indicted, let alone myself,” Finnerty said. And teammate Reade Seligmann, who shared evidence of his alibi, maintained to Ed Bradley that he “did nothing wrong.” Defense attorney Brad Bannon, who along with lead attorney Joseph Cheshire, represent Dave Evans, told The Carolinian/Wilmington Journal newspapers exclusively that Evans, who had turned all prior interview requests down, agreed to speak with Bradley only after Seligmann and Finnerty did. “Dave agreed to be interviewed by Mr. Bradley about any topic Mr. Bradley chose, and he answered all of Mr. Bradley’s questions truthfully,” Bannon responded by email. The CBS broadcast was certainly powerful, and yet, it didn’t convince everybody. “Correspondent Ed Bradley, forever immortalized by some… broke no new ground and, except for showing what was allegedly the alleged victim gyrating onstage after the alleged incident, shed no new light on any aspect of the Duke case, ” Raleigh News & Observer columnist Barry Saunders, an African-American, wrote. Others expressed concern about how demonstratively slanted the 60 Minutes expose’ seemed. “I thought it was pretty one-sided, but that’s to be expected,” said Chapel Hill civil rights attorney Al McSurely, who also serves as chairman of the NC NAACP Legal Redress Committee. “The prosecution hasn’t shown any of its whole cards yet, and I don’t think it will until trial.” In fact, defense attorney Brad Bannon confirms that there is still discovery evidence outstanding. “We have indeed received in excess of 2000 documents, but many of those documents are duplicates, and our review of them reflects, as we have noted in multiple discovery requests and as recently as last week in the attached letter to the District Attorney, that Dave and his co-defendants are entitled to additional discovery that has not been provided,” Bannon said in a statement. All evidence, by state law, is supposed to be turned over to the defense from the prosecution. But observers note that doesn’t mean DA Nifong hasn’t tried, or will not try, to hide what he can, as defense attorneys fear he is. “Jakki,” the cousin of the alleged victim, told ABC News that the 60 Minutes piece was “a lot of intimidation,” adding, “I think they want to her to break, to say, ‘Enough is enough.'” Others also expressed concern. “Through all the publicity of this case, all I wish for is justice to prevail, and hope that the media and people as a whole do not turn a blind eye to this assaulted woman,” Patrick Illes, a Florida businessman, emailed www.ourheartsworld.com Oct. 16, a day after the broadcast. For instance, Bradley interviewed Duke University Law Professor James Coleman – who is on record blasting DA Nifong’s handling of the case, particularly the controversial police photo lineup of all 46 white lacrosse players. “I think that he pandered to the [Black] community by saying ‘I’m gonna go out there and defend your interests in seeing that these hooligans who committed the crime are prosecuted,” Coleman told Ed Bradley, further suggesting that Nifong said, “‘I’m not gonna let their fathers, with all of their money, buy, you know, big-time lawyers and get them off. I’m doing this for you.'” But the 60 Minutes reporter did not interview North Carolina Central University Law Professor Irving Joyner, whose views about the efficacy of the case have been widely reported in both local, and national media like Court TV. “[The 60 Minutes piece] failed to present anything about the state’s case, and that’s the way it should have been,” Prof. Joyner told The Carolinian/Wilmington Journal newspapers. “I thought it was a pro-defense theme that sought to take a shot at Nifong, and possibly impact the election, more than anything else.” Prof. Joyner added that the jury pool in Durham “is already tainted and can’t get any worse” in favor of the defense; the 60 Minutes program will make more lengthy the jury selection process; and that by not revealing any negative background information about the Duke Three or Kim Roberts Pittman, “It was pretty clear that they wanted to present these kids as being pretty pure and without sin” despite evidence of excessive underage drinking and poor judgment the night of the party. The NCCU law professor also agrees with attorney Al McSurely that all of the admittedly weak evidence so far seen by the media, “does not mean it is the only information prosecutors have available to them.” In fact, Joyner adds, there is a lot of evidence and witness testimony that simply isn’t reduced to writing. “I’ve been practicing law long enough to know that what ends up in a report isn’t necessarily everything that’s there, ” he said, adding that, for instance, clarification of evidence or information in a criminal case is not required to be part of the discovery package mandated from the prosecution to the defense. “Just because [evidence] has been released, doesn’t mean that’s it,” Prof. Joyner said. A look at Ed Bradley’s opening remarks on 60 Minutes, in addition to defense attorney Bannon’s indication that much of what they’ve received has been duplicate documents, seems to confirm what Prof. Joyner indicates: Over the past six months, 60 Minutes has examined nearly the entire case file… Ed Bradley said. “Nearly,” but admittedly, not all, Joyner notes. “Just because the defense is slam-dunking during warmups, doesn’t mean a thing when the game starts,” he warns. Joyner has no doubt the 60 Minutes’ producers knew he existed. They called him while they were putting the story together, trying to enlist him in their efforts to locate the alleged victim for an exclusive interview, he says. If Joyner had been interviewed, the veteran law professor could have provided some balance to Prof. Coleman’s 60 Minutes presentation. “We believe there was enough balance in this story,” Kevin Tedesco, spokesman for CBS News and 60 Minutes told The Carolinian/Wilmington Journal newspapers. When asked what was the balance, and more importantly, where was the balance, given that beyond video of Nifong’s prior statements, there was no one opposing Prof. Coleman to give differing perspective, Tedesco replied, “We looked at the evidence, we presented…sometimes the evidence is only…we, we did look at the evidence.” When pressed for further clarification of the “balance” he was referring to, Tedesco could only offer, “The DA had every opportunity to come on our program or to [offer] a proxy, but chose not to.” The 60 Minutes spokesman never went further to explain exactly what “balance” their reporting had, as opposed to the balance they tried, but did not get. While supporters are hoping to parlay the 60 Minutes treatment, and especially video shown on the broadcast purportedly of the accuser pole dancing at a night club just two weeks after the alleged brutal assault, into an effective weapon to either get the charges dismissed immediately, or assure DA Nifong’s election defeat on Nov. 7, African-Americans have pointed questions about how truthful the defendants, and especially Kim Roberts Pittman, the second dancer who has called the rape allegations “a crock,” actually were. Bradley’s report failed to reveal any information about Pittman’s criminal record (she was convicted of embezzling $25,000, and recently was sentenced for violating her probation); the alleged victim (convicted in 2003 of several felony charges related to a car theft, all reduced to misdemeanors) who turned down a chance to be queried on the program according to CBS; or even the minor offenses of two of the three defendants (the most serious being Colin Finnerty’s simple assault conviction in connection with a Washington, DC incident last year). Given how forceful their combined interviews were in making the point that the allegations were fraudulent, giving the audience pertinent information about the backgrounds of all involved, including the accuser, would have given viewers a more accurate barometer of Pittman and the Duke Three’s character and credibility, or lack thereof, beyond their on-air claims, critics say. The portions of the four interviews aired also failed to show Bradley, one of the best television interviewers in the business, pressing any of his subjects with hardball questions about the events surrounding the alleged assault. The News & Observer’s Barry Saunders chided Bradley for his “kid-gloves treatment” and “failure to followup.” Nor did Bradley dig deeper into what sources say was a larger, and still unreported issue surrounding the money paid to both Pittman and the accuser by the lacrosse team captains on the night in question. And there are questions about just how supportive 60 Minutes and CBS News were of the three indicted Duke defendants. For example, on the 60 Minutes website, there are two links – one for Duke University, which has certainly been at the center of the legal controversy, and whose president, Richard Brodhead, has been immeasurably criticized for what many Duke supporters believe to be his weak handling of the controversy early on. But the second link on the 60 Minutes site pertaining to the Duke case is to Friends of Duke University, a very supportive, and most times constructive blogsite for parents and alumni of the institution who believe the Duke Three are victims of prosecutorial misconduct. In fact, several letters demanding that both North Carolina Gov. Mike Easley and State Attorney General Roy Cooper immediately find cause to remove Durham DA Nifong from his post have been formulated and published there. At that site the day after the broadcast, “Friends” spokesman Jason Trumpbour posted, in part, the following message: We welcome those of you who followed the link on the CBS News site to our own. We are very happy that a news program of the stature of 60 Minutes chose to look at the Duke lacrosse case and bring the facts of the case to a wider audience that may not have heard much about the case since it first broke. 60 Minutes also gave us some interesting insights as well. The “Friends” site then refers visitors to other blogsites that are even more virulently critical of both DA Nifong, the Duke rape accuser, and those who support her. Given the one-sidedness of the report, the “Friends” link raises questions about the bias of CBS News and 60 Minutes regarding this story. Critics say it is especially troubling given that the president of CBS News, Sean McManus, is a Duke University alum. Kevin Tedesco, spokesman for CBS News and 60 Minutes, said he “wasn’t unaware” that the “Friends” link existed on the 60 Minutes website, adding, “but that’s not unusual to have anybody connected to both sides of the story to put a link on our site.” But when reminded that there are only two links listed – Duke University and the Friends of Duke University – Tedesco quickly added, “and if somebody had approached us from some other organization that would presumably be on the other side of this story, they would be allowed as well.” When pressed if another organization “on the other side of this story” would have to actually approach CBS News to be linked, Tedesco gave a halfhearted, “Yeah.” Tedesco said in terms of response, 60 Minutes received “a little more than normal” from viewers regarding the Duke rape case story. Tedesco confirmed that CBS approached the Duke Three for the exclusive interviews, but refused to say exactly when. He also confirmed that there were no restrictions on what Bradley could ask the defendants. The 60 Minutes spokesman would not confirm whether attorneys were present off-camera during the Bradley interviews, though conceding that when interviews involve legal controversies, “That’s standard operating procedure.” However just before presstime, Evans attorney Brad Bannon told The Carolinian/Wilmington Journal newspapers, “Joe and I were in the room with Dave as observers when he was interviewed by Ed Bradley, but we took no part in the interview.” The video purporting to show the alleged victim pole dancing at a nightclub two weeks after the alleged assault was secured by CBS News, not the attorneys, atty. Bannon and Tedesco confirmed. The spokesman would not say where or how the video was surreptitiously taken, or by whom. Tedesco also confirmed that 60 Minutes, in fact, did get in direct contact with the accuser in the case and offered to interview her for the program. “She refused,” he said, but did not explain why no mention of the offer was made on the Sunday broadcast. The Durham Herald-Sun reported that DA Nifong advise the alleged victim not to do the interview. Since the story broke on March 24, she has only done one. He added that 60 Minutes will be following the Duke rape case and “report additional material as warranted.” Tedesco said he was not aware of any immediate followup to the Oct. 15 report. Meanwhile the Durham Committee on the Affairs of Black People, which is currently interviewing candidates for the Nov. 7 election, has to decide whether it will endorse DA Nifong, his opponent, Lewis Cheek, or just issue no endorsement at all. Last spring the Committee did not endorse Nifong for the May primary, giving the nod to another Democrat. Nifong already has the endorsement of the People’s Alliance of Durham, a liberal group. He’s unlikely to get the conservative nod, which means the Durham Committee’s decision will be all important. Without it, observers say he could lose Election Day, which is exactly what supporters of the Duke Three – both here and across the nation, especially after the 60 Minutes piece, want. -30-