Entire Duke lacrosse team cleared by DNA

Cylinder

Philosopher
Cylinder
Joined
Jun 10, 2005
Messages
6,062
Location
Arkansas
From the Sports Illustrated article:

DNA testing failed to connect any members of the Duke University lacrosse team to the alleged rape of a stripper, attorneys for the athletes said Monday.

Citing DNA test results delivered by the state crime lab to police and prosecutors a few hours earlier, the attorneys said the test results prove their clients did not sexually assault and beat a stripper hired to perform at a March 13 team party.

No charges have been filed in the case.

"No DNA material from any young man was present on the body of this complaining woman," said defense attorney Wade Smith.
Click to expand...

"Failed to connect" is a poor choice of words here, since the DNA evidence excludes any team member tested from being the donor of the exemplar. There is a small error probability with a positive test - one in a certain billion may share the same alleles for that particular marker - but exclusion is certain - that is the donor does not share those alleles.

This woman needs some prison time if she fabricated this story. These young men (with the exception of the stupid emailer) had there lives upended and real damage done to their college careers and personal life over this nonsense.

Disgusting.
 
While I don't doubt the facts presented in the story, I would point out that the person relaying the facts is the attorney for the accused.

48hour rule applies.
 
Rob Lister said:
While I don't doubt the facts presented in the story, I would point out that the person relaying the facts is the attorney for the accused.

48hour rule applies.
Click to expand...

I agree with the caveat that this is a specific empirical claim - not a he said/she said matter. This attorney could have suffered vapor lock during the presser but barring that...
 
I find that when the attorney for either side says anything, the truth turns out to be almost nothing like what they said.

This could be different, and if the Prosecutor actually drops the charges I'll actually believe it...

Not that I necessarily think they are guilty anyway. There's a certain persumption of innocence I try to maintain.

You're right though, if it is demonstratable that she made it up, she should go to prison -- not that she likely would though.
 
Rob Lister said:
I find that when the attorney for either side says anything, the truth turns out to be almost nothing like what they said.
Click to expand...

I agree with that and your general sense of caution - don't get me wrong. OTOH, this isn;t a claim that they were all having tea and cake with their favorite gramdmother at the time of the incident. Citing DNA results that excludes team members as donors is more than compelling - it is absolute. It could be that the defense counsel is lying about this finding. There could be some bizaree mix up in chain of custody of the samples. Or...
 
Cylinder said:
From the Sports Illustrated article:



"Failed to connect" is a poor choice of words here, since the DNA evidence excludes any team member tested from being the donor of the exemplar. There is a small error probability with a positive test - one in a certain billion may share the same alleles for that particular marker - but exclusion is certain - that is the donor does not share those alleles.

This woman needs some prison time if she fabricated this story. These young men (with the exception of the stupid emailer) had there lives upended and real damage done to their college careers and personal life over this nonsense.

Disgusting.
Click to expand...

If you read the artcle you'll see that they didn't have DNA sample known to be from the aledged attacker(s), so this does not prove anything with 100% certainty.
 
Kerberos said:
If you read the artcle you'll see that they didn't have DNA sample known to be from the aledged attacker(s), so this does not prove anything with 100% certainty.
Click to expand...

I read the article, and didn't see that. Can you point it out specifically, please, in case I somehow missed it?
 
slingblade said:
I read the article, and didn't see that. Can you point it out specifically, please, in case I somehow missed it?
Click to expand...
It's not said explicitly, but a of of the statements in the article don't make sense if there was a DNA sample from the attacker.

"Cheshire said the report indicated authorities took DNA samples from all over the alleged victim's body, including under her fingernails, and from her possessions, such as her cell phone and her clothes.

"They swabbed about every place they could possibly swab from her, in which there could be any DNA," he said."

Notice it says "could be" not "was".

""The truth is if you speak to crime lab directors, they will tell you that in only a relatively small number of cases is there any DNA evidence," said Peter Neufeld, co-founder of the Innocence Project."

also "Stan Goldman, who teaches criminal law, evidence and criminal procedure at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles, said the DNA results don't mean that Nifong can't go forward with the case -- but the test results make a successful prosecution much harder."

If they had a DNA trace which the players didn't match then quite clearly this would mean that the case couldn't go forward.

Of course the defence attouney says that there would have been traces if her story was trye, but while that might be so, I'm less inclined to trust him on this than on a purely factual claim like a DNA match/mismatch.
 
I smell a case of semantics leading to a false conclusion with this story. Or as I like to call it, 'Journalism nowadays.'
 
Cylinder said:
"Failed to connect" is a poor choice of words here...
Click to expand...
They're precisely the correct words. The DNA test results do not prove team members couldn't have done it, but instead failed to prove they did do it. Or in other words, they may have raped her but they didn't leave any DNA behind. Given that, according to Peter Neufeld of the Innocence Project, "only a relatively small number of cases is there any DNA evidence", I'd say the test results don't mean a whole lot.
 
Cylinder said:
This woman needs some prison time if she fabricated this story. These young men (with the exception of the stupid emailer) had there lives upended and real damage done to their college careers and personal life over this nonsense.

Disgusting.
Click to expand...

Meh. They're only athletes.
 
On a point of order, if no DNA was found on the alleged victim, why did they take DNA samples from the team when they had nothing to match it to anyway? Am I missing something here?
 
Ian Osborne said:
On a point of order, if no DNA was found on the alleged victim, why did they take DNA samples from the team when they had nothing to match it to anyway? Am I missing something here?
Click to expand...

They had samples to match. They just didn't get the kind of matches they were hoping for.

From above : "Cheshire said the report indicated authorities took DNA samples from all over the alleged victim's body, including under her fingernails." So this means that they dug some of the gunge from underneath her fingernails, and tried to match it against the team DNA. (More accurately, of course, against the DNA of the individual team members).

The woman had gunge under her fingernails, of course. We all do. And the gunge had DNA in it -- the woman's, plus DNA from assorted other people and things that she's handled/touched since the last time she scrubbed for surgery.

What it didn't have was DNA that matched any member of the team.

Which means either that she wasn't assaulted in the first place, or that the person who assaulted her managed to do so without leaving DNA under her fingernails. (E.g. she didn't scratch him all that seriously during the assault.)
 
[yechhh...]
Semen sample? From the victim, I mean.
[/yechhh...]
 
Team

It is not at all unusual for false allegations of rape to occur. This is a well known trick by those "in the know" to use against those that they have it in for, or in some way want to get some gain. They just use the states limitless resources against the so called "perpetrator(s)". Just like using false allegations of child abuse is used more and more in child custody cases. The people being accused are suddenly put on the defensive, and the accusers get to sit back and watch, and snicker.

Unfortunately, punishment for the false accusers never even closely approaches that of those falsely accused, if found guilty. And that is why false accusations are becoming more and more popular.
 
From the Rush link above:

"CALLER 2: Oh, no, I'm saying -- the apology was good.

LIMBAUGH: I regret that you heard me say it. "

Just as a sample of taking things out of context.


Every "exotic dancer" I ever talked to beyond "Nice Weather" brought up: a) how lonely she is, b) how she could use a few dollars. Prostitutes? I don't know, I wasn't that lonely, and didn't have the cash to find out.

But if the women at Duke are prostitutes, arent' the boys just shoplifters? Hmmm, consenual, for money, but the boy's didn't pay? You do know how to make a hormone? Don't pay her!
 
1. So did the coach resign too quickly?

2. How does one get raped by 4 men and not have any DNA from them? All four were careful to wear a condom? Not one left a pubic hair on her anywhere?
 
Beerina said:
1. So did the coach resign too quickly?

2. How does one get raped by 4 men and not have any DNA from them? All four were careful to wear a condom? Not one left a pubic hair on her anywhere?
Click to expand...
See post 15.

Do rapists ever wear condoms? I must confess to total ignorance on this issue (thank FSM).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom