January 17, 2007
The Stripper Has No Clothes
Printer FriendlyBy: Ann Coulter
Stuart Taylor Jr., the liberal but brilliant legal reporter for the National Journal, described The New York Times' coverage of the Duke lacrosse rape case as "(w)orse, perhaps, than the other recent Times embarrassments." For a newspaper that carries Maureen Dowd's column, that's saying something.
As the Times' most loyal reader, this came as welcome news. I had briefly suspected the Times was engaging in fair reporting of the alleged rape case at Duke University. Taylor's article documenting the Times' massive misrepresentations restored order and coherence to my world.
The first part of the story — the lie part — was angrily reported in the Times. But as the accuser's story began to unravel, the Times gave only a selective account of the facts, using its famed lie-by-omission technique.
Among the many gigantic omissions from the Times' pretend-balanced article ("Files From Duke Rape Case Give Details but No Answers") is the fact that the only remaining particulars about the case that are not completely exculpatory come from a memo by Sgt. Mark Gottlieb — written four months after the alleged incident.
Gottlieb, the lead investigator on the alleged rape case, took no contemporaneous notes when he interviewed the accuser, but rather waited for the facts to come in — and his case to be falling apart — to write a memo recalling her statements during that initial investigation. The statements he recalled were surprisingly favorable to the prosecution!
The only problem with his memo, besides being preposterous on its face, is that it is contradicted by the contemporaneous notes taken by other people involved in the investigation. Indeed, the only thing Gottlieb's memo was consistent with were the facts as the prosecution was then alleging them.
Of course, it was hard to keep straight what facts the prosecution was alleging. The accuser made up so many stories about the incident that the Times was forced to offer her Jayson Blair's old position.
The Times "No Answers" article gave no indication that Gottlieb's memo was written four months after the alleged rape, but rather refers to it as the policeman's "case notes," falsely suggesting the notes were taken during the investigation and not after the frame-up.
Beginning with the strongest invented evidence from Gottlieb's "case notes," the Times reported that the nurse who examined the alleged rape victim told Gottlieb that the "blunt force trauma" seen in the examination "was consistent with the sexual assault that was alleged by the victim."
Or at least that's what Gottlieb wrote four months after talking to the nurse. It's not what the nurse wrote the night she examined the accuser. To the contrary, the only sign of physical trauma the nurse noted in her written report immediately after examining the accuser were some superficial scratches on the woman's knee and heel.
Indeed, in all 24 pages of the report prepared by doctors and nurses who examined the accuser the night of the alleged rape, there is no mention of any "blunt force trauma" or any injuries other than the scratches.
Also contradicting Gottlieb's hindsight memo were the notes taken by another policeman during their interview with the accuser — not four months later — saying she described her assailants as "chubby," with a "chubby face" and weighing "260-270" pounds.
That description fit none of the eventual defendants — whom she repeatedly failed to pick out of photo lineups until Gottlieb finally gave up and presented her with a photo lineup of only Duke lacrosse players, to ensure that she couldn't guess wrong.
But according to Gottlieb's hindsight memo, the accuser described one of her rapists as "baby-faced, tall, lean" — just like one of the actual defendants!
In repeatedly citing Gottlieb's after-the-fact memo as if it were the Rosetta stone of the case, the Times also neglected to mention Gottlieb's dark history with Duke students.
Gottlieb repeatedly jailed Duke students charged with minor infractions such as carrying an open beer or playing loud music, often throwing them in cells with violent criminals. He was not so tough on nonstudents, releasing one caught with marijuana and a concealed .45-caliber handgun.
A review of Gottlieb's record published in the Raleigh News & Observer showed that, in the previous year, when he patrolled an area that included both a "crime-ridden" public housing project and Duke off-campus housing, he arrested 20 Duke students and only eight nonstudents. During that same period, the three other officers in that district arrested two Duke students and 61 nonstudents.
At this point, Gottlieb's memo is the linchpin of the prosecution's case, and every single other fact in the case exonerates the defendants.
I mention all this to point out the Alice-in-Wonderland quality of the Times Jan. 15 editorial titled "Politicizing Prosecutors." The editorial had nothing to do with lunatic Southern prosecutors like Mike Nifong, Barry Krischer and Ronnie Earle threatening to put innocent people in prison for being Republican or "privileged white males."
No, the Times was upset because the law allows President Bush to fill vacant U.S. attorney slots with temporary replacements. The Times is enraged that Bush may be choosing prosecutors he likes, rather than prosecutors Sen. Dianne Feinstein likes, for these interim appointments.
If Bush were choosing the most hack, unprincipled, out-of-control Republican party operatives for these temporary U.S. attorney positions, they could not match the partisan witch-hunts of the prosecutors and policemen the Times lies to defend.
Posted by redguy at January 17, 2007 08:34 PM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.redstatesusa.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/670
Comments
This is just plain ridiculous. Gottlieb needs to be relieved of his badge and gun. I've already commented that Nifong needs to be run out of office. And to make this happen the Duke players most affected by this debacle, meaning all of them, need to band together and hit the city of Durham, Duke University, the police department and the D.A.'s office with the biggest lawsuit this world's ever seen. When the smoke clears this whole area should have sunk into the Earth, never to be heard from again.
Posted by: Dave ![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.redstatesusa.com/nav-commenters.gif)
at January 18, 2007 08:08 AM
Wow! What a knock out punch, Ann!
This reminds me of one of my favorite bits from the comedy movie “Johnny Dangerously”:
Lil (Johnny’s wife): “Get this to Johnny on the grapevine. Vermin is going to kill Johnny’s brother at the Savoy Theater tomorrow night. Got it?”
Polly the parrot: “Got it.”
Polly to the first prisoner: “Vermin is going to kill Johnny’s brother at the Savoy Theater, pass it on.”
By the time the message gets to Johnny at the other end of the table, the message is:
“Johnny and the mothers are playin’ “Stompin at the Savoy” in Vermont tonight.”
Why is it that Mr. Nifong and the others are reminding me of Hollywood comedy routines, like in “Johnny Dangerously” or “The Keystone Cops”? Maybe it’s because they were all graduated from “Police Academy”.
Except for the fact that 3 innocent boys’ lives are on the line, this would actually be funny.
And what is this racism Mr. Nifong holds towards white people or Duke students specifically?
As for the Times and liberal Democrats, why is it important for President Bush to admit mistakes and publicly apologize for them yet, the Times and liberal Democrats “go to the mattresses” defending their outright lies, deliberate distortions and mistakes?
I’m sorry – my mistake. I forgot to repeat my hypnotic liberal “kumbaya” incantation this morning: “The double standard of liberals and the liberal media is simply a figment of my imagination.”
Posted by: LynnJG at January 18, 2007 08:36 AM
Ann, my dear, a very good column. But why are you or anyone surprised at this revelation? Why is there the least bit of doubt as to what happened by this point in time? Why does Barney Fife continue to roam the streets of Mayberry, er, I mean, Durham?
My beloved pet, “Rocket, the Wonderdog”, is a more qualified public servant than is the mendacious fabulist hiding behind a badge doing the DA’s biding.
Your tacit opprobrium of the TIMES (“All the News Fit to Wrap Fish in”) is spot on and, with hope, one day everyone else who reads that “paper” will come to the same conclusion as we.
God Bless and God Speed
John
Posted by: Jaksavin at January 18, 2007 08:47 AM
Lynn
Very funny and accurate!
I do remember another line from that movie, something to do with "ice holes."
Sums up the TIMES, Durham DA office, Gottlieb and the rest perfectly!
God Bless and God Speed
John
Posted by: Jaksavin at January 18, 2007 08:51 AM
John,
Yes, I do. And do you remember "fargin bastages"?
Lynn
Posted by: LynnJG at January 18, 2007 08:53 AM
Lynn
We are getting of the track but as far as being called a "farking bastage" someone called me that. Once!
Posted by: Jaksavin at January 18, 2007 01:22 PM
Ann...please keep on keeping on! This is one of the biggest miscarriages of justice our country has seen in a long time. Mr. Nifong should be disbarred, he is a disgrace to the city/county/state and America! Officer Gottlieb should be removed from police duty other than answering the telephone!
How can any reasonable person be expected to sit on a jury for this case and maintain a straight face??? The state attorney general MUST drop all charges...there is NO basis for a trial.
Posted by: CapeConservative at January 18, 2007 01:27 PM
John,
"We are getting of[f] the track ..."
No we aren't. Liberal Democrats and the liberal media ARE "fargin bastages" and "ice holes".
Was I being too vague for you?
So, you were called that "Once! Just Once!", ay?
Lynn
Posted by: LynnJG at January 19, 2007 02:28 PM
Dear Miss Coulter, Thanks for your good work.
Somebody tell me an alternative to bringing out the guillotine. If there is not a legal way to bring to justice the officials that use a public office to abuse citizens, then one must be created. Who is in responsible for holding these renegade officials to account. This business of voting people out of office is not working as a deterrent when the retirement benefits are so incredibly lucrative. The whole business may be as complicated as brain surgery, but this political cancer must be destroyed.
Posted by: taxigringo at January 20, 2007 03:06 AM
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)
