Ten years ago, on April 11, 2007, North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper put an end to what was then the biggest campus rape hoax in the history of the antiversity, by declaring the three white men victims of the Duke Rape Hoax—Dave Evans, Colin Finnerty, and Reade Seligman—innocent.
Evans, Finnerty, and Seligman had at one point been charged with rape, kidnapping, and sexual offense, even though there was never any probable cause for charging any of them with anything.
On March 13, 2006, two criminals inflicted themselves on the white members of the Duke Lacrosse team. One was a career criminal named Crystal Gail Mangum, aka “Precious,” who was a prostitute, and had also committed strong arm robbery, grand theft auto, DUI, reckless driving, and attempted murder of a policeman. The other, Kim Roberts Pittman, aka “Nikki,” had been convicted of embezzlement. Neither had ever been punished for their crimes. (Pittman got probation, while Mangum had to spend a total of five nights in jail over the course of three weekends. Neither disposition counts as punishment in my book.)
The lacrosse players had ordered two strippers that night, one white and one Hispanic. The service instead sent one black stripper (Mangum), and one black-Asian one (Pittman). The players were too gentlemanly to refuse the females who showed up, even though they were paying them a total of $800.
Not only would the two females rip off the players for the $800, they would cost three of them one year of their lives, an estrimated $2,000,000 in combined attorney’s fees, a lifetime of nightmares, and almost cost them their lives.
I wrote two exposés on the Duke Rape Hoax in 2006-2007. The first one follows below.
I was inspired to re-post this by a hit-piece that New York magazine commissioned on the Duke Rape Hoax, whose author transformed me into “a men’s-rights blogger.” I’ll come to the hit-man, once I re-post both my two reports.
Friday, August 25, 2006
N.Y. Times to Duke Rape Hoax Victims: Drop DeadBy Nicholas Stix
Today's New York Times carries a story by Duff Wilson and Jonathan D. Glater, "Files From Duke Rape Case Give Details but No Answers."
The story seeks desperately to cover for accuser Crystal Gail Mangum and for DA Mike Nifong, and early on draws the following conclusion, which seems more appropriate to an editorial than a news story.
By disclosing pieces of evidence favorable to the defendants, the defense has created an image of a case heading for the rocks. But an examination of the entire 1,850 pages of evidence gathered by the prosecution in the four months after the accusation yields a more ambiguous picture. It shows that while there are big weaknesses in Mr. Nifong’s case, there is also a body of evidence to support his decision to take the matter to a jury.The “reporters” also insist that Mangum was not a prostitute; strongly insinuate that the Duke lacrosse players gave her a date-rape drug; omit the statement of her partner that night, Kim Roberts Pittman, that the two were never apart for more than five minutes, and exert themselves in seeking to paper over contradictions in her story, such as her initial police report that she had been with three other “dancers,” as opposed to one.
Wilson and Glater also omit statements by DA Nifong that undermine his case: His lie that the lacrosse players were stonewalling him, when in fact they had been very cooperative; his claim that the alleged attackers might have given the alleged victim a “date rape drug,” when in fact, there was no evidence of such, and Nifong had avoided the opportunity to do a drug tox screen, to determine what in fact was the case; and Nifong’s early claim that the case would rise and fall on the DNA evidence, a claim that he contradicted, just as soon as it was determined that there was no DNA evidence. And while the reporters mention the complaint by the defendants’ defense attorneys that the accuser was only shown pictures of lacrosse team members, they refrain from mentioning that in typical police practice, for each picture of a suspect, six pictures of people who could not be suspects are typically mixed in. Wilson and Glater write as if they were working as spinmeisters for Nifong’s office: “Outside experts say it is possible for a rapist to leave no DNA evidence. But they say juries often expect to see such evidence.”
“Possible for a rapist,” but not bloody likely. And not possible for three rapists. The reporters also insinuate that another lacrosse player, who has not been charged, also raped Mangum, and seek to spin exculpatory evidence into incriminating evidence, by mentioning it in a sinister manner.
The police recovered semen from beside the toilet — about the same spot where the woman said she had spat out semen from someone who orally raped her. It matched the DNA of Matt Zash, a team captain who lived in the house and has not been charged. His lawyer said the semen had come from other, innocent sexual activity. Investigators also found a towel in the hallway near [defendant David] Evans’s bedroom with semen matching his DNA. The woman had told the sexual assault nurse that someone had wiped her vagina with a rag. Mr. Evans’s lawyer said that this towel had nothing to do with her accusation, and that the semen came from other activity.Wilson and Glater insinuate not only that Matt Zash is an additional rapist, but that the towel they cite is evidence against David Evans.
Not even out-of-control prosecutor Mike Nifong went so far as to indict Zash. And as for the towel, if one searches the sleeping quarters of a healthy, single, 23-year-old man on any given day, one is almost sure to find semen-soaked towels, t-shirts or tissues. In fact, such “evidence” is so commonly found in young men’s sleeping quarters, that in his “Zuckerman” novels, Philip Roth made a running joke of the matter.
Had Wilson and Glater been serious about crime reporting, as opposed to writing propaganda for Mike Nifong, they would have added that had the towel with Evans’ semen been used to wipe Mangum’s vagina, it would also very likely have contained her DNA, as well.
Wilson and Glater seek to weave incriminating evidence out of whole towels, where there is none.
Led by "reporter" Cash Michaels, black media outlets that have long insisted, in the face of mountains of exculpatory evidence, that DA Nifong has been holding back damning evidence against the defendants, will surely trumpet the New York Times reporters' insinuations as part of that "evidence."
Apparently, the Times seeks to re-create the pro-prosecution echo chamber that operated early in tghe case, and was then drowned out by the defendants' attorneys and the blogosphere, before Judge Titus issued his notorious gag order last month.
That Mangum worked for at least one, and possibly three prostitution services (Bunny Hole Entertainment, Allure, and Angel’s Escorts have been named in different reports) has not been disputed by anyone, although the media insist on using the euphemism, “escort service.” But early on, Mangum told a local reporter that she did “one-on-one” sessions with clients, and did not deny (or affirm, for that matter) that they involved prostitution. Perhaps it is theoretically possible, in a parallel universe, for a woman working for a prostitution agency to give paying customers “one-on-one” sessions without engaging in sex, but in this world, the likelihood is nil.
(While it is certainly possible for a prostitute to be raped, it is for some reason very important for Wilson and Glater and others seeking to railroad the Duke Three, to insist that Mangum was not a prostitute. Perhaps they fear that if people believe that Mangum was a prostitute, they will be less likely to believe her story of gang rape.)
The New York Times is trying desperately to help DA Nifong win election this fall, to support Mangum, and to railroad three white men against whom no credible incriminating evidence, but much exculpatory evidence has been adduced. Crystal Gail Magnum has undoubtedly had a hard, sad, life, and very likely was gang-raped – ten years ago, by three black men. But railroading three white men today, will not exact punishment against three black rapists of yesteryear.
Technorati Tags:Duke Rape Case, New York Times, Crystal Gail Mangum, Mike Nifong, Duff Wilson, and Jonathan D. Glater, David Evans, and Matt Zash.
Posted by Nicholas at 4:17 AM
Nice job of reporting! Check out http://liestoppers.blogspot.com/ They are kindred spirits It’s amazing how just by claiming a person to be a “mother” puts a “halo” on her head. Feminist claim that some women have no other option to provide for herself and her children which paints a picture of a selfless martyr, but this is misleading especially regarding this particular “single mom”. This single mom and her children live with their grandfather so the threat of being homeless or hungry is unlikely. This single mom has been arrested in for larceny and evading police, which doesn’t fit the mold of “martyr”. This single mom arrived at the party inebriated and was found drunk and disorderly in a parking lot, but looking at this woman as an individual instead of a sexist stereotype reveals a more realistic picture of this single mom which dims her halo.Feminist go on to rant that criticizing this woman “hinges on blaming the victim”. This single mom is not a victim. This single mom is an “accuser”. There’s enough evidence to question her integrity and whether a crime actually occurred. I find it hypocritical that feminist so easily gives this “single mom” the benefit of the doubt while condemning a group of boys who happen to be on a sports team. People should avoid stereotypes and focus on each individual, including the “accuser”, as a person. The actions of District Attorney Mike Nifong have been reckless and irresponsible in playing out this case before the national media. This has inflamed racial stereotypes throughout Durham which makes it more important that everyone take a step back and let the police do their job. If this woman lied; thus exposing Nifong as a fool, then she should be prosecuted for this crime, which have destroyed these young boys’ lives and reputations. Being a “single mom” shouldn’t be an excuse to condone this type of behavior.
Thanks for the tip -- it's a great blog!
Friday, August 25, 2006 at 4:55:00 PM EDT
Saturday, August 26, 2006 at 1:25:00 PM EDT
Krystal said... [N.S.: Fake comment.]
When a stripper passed out in Durham.I guess it happened years ago. I started having sex at a very early age. I’m not sure why, I just wanted to. When I was still in high school, I was in competition with myself to see how many boys I could have sex with in a week. I became quite self educated in the subtle differences there are in each boys genitalia. Guys who looked like they were packing huge equipment sometimes where packing “happy meal” toys, while guys you would least expect would be packing man-size equipment that would make any girl’s mouth water and pusy sweat.One day I had sex with three boys in the bathroom of my boyfriend’s house, and I immediately got a reputation f being easy. That reputation was a double edged sword. On the positive side, I got more guys than ever, but on the negative side everyone knew. Even in this age of “equal rights” girls still suppose to not like having sex. Strangely, feminist are the ones perpetuating this myth. A feminist friend of mine told me if I claimed I was raped, I could redeem myself and reputation. I could blame my avid hunger for sex on “being abused at an early age”. She even suggested that I claim I was raped by my father. My reputation would be instantly vindicated as I enjoyed all the powers and benefits of being a “victim”.Years later when I was being dishonorable discharged from the Navy for having sex with over half the men and few of the women in my squad, I claimed I was raped, but since many of my sexcapades were video taped, I didn’t want to risk being caught in a lie because I couldn’t remember which guys and gals video taped me and which ones didn’t, so I made a claim in 1996 that I was raped by three boys when I was in high school. It was tough living the lie, and I wasn’t interested in being in the Navy anymore. A friend told me I could make tons of money by marrying a man, having his child, then leaving him forcing him to pay child support which can take up to 60% of his net pay. If I had children from three different guys, I could collect over one thousand dollars of tax free child support each month for 18 years, but that plan fell through because I married a loser who found out I gave birth to another man’s child while married to him. My ex-husband tried to gain custody of my child, but I didn’t want to pay child support to him, so in 1998 I claimed that he kidnapped me and tried to kill me.I’ve been a stripper/prostitute/escort for awhile now, and I’ve been taking a few classes at UCNC in hopes to recruit a few girls of my own to pimp out. One night in 2002 I was having a particular good night, so I partied a little too hard, gave a public lap dance to a cab driver, when he wouldn’t have sex with me in exchange for cab fare, I stole his cab, and when the cops tried to stop me, I tried to kill them. I’m still on probation for that little incident.Earlier this year in 2006, I was working my ass off – literally! I had sex with a “client”, then with my boyfriend, then with a battery vaginal sex toy, then with two guys in exchange for a ride to the lacrosse party. The boys were pissed because I arrived so wasted. I had my routine party drugs that evening and I was feeling grrrrrreate! I stumbled all over the place, and after five minutes I wanted to leave. After why not? I already was paid. My stripper friend, “K”, was arguing with the boys over us taking the money without providing a show. She called them racial slurs and they responded in kind, but to get them back, she called 911 and lied claiming that we were only driving by and racial slurs were being yelled at us. We laughed and laughed that the 911 –people could be so stupid.I was so wasted that I forgot my money and phone at the boys’ house, but the $400.00 “K” didn’t want to slpit her take with me, so she called the cops to have me arrested. I drank the last of my booze and took the last of my party drugs so the cops wouldn’t atke it. By the time the cops arrived I was feeling “fffffffine!” And that’s when it hit me! I was being arrested for … oh I forgot, but to get out of it I claimed rape. That always works. I was surprised they believed me. My story was wild and a fantastic fantasy, but I had no evidence to back it up. I only had a little scratch on my knee from when I fell when I was totally wasted, and a little scrape on my ankle. The doctor and the nurse checked my pusy. I really enjoyed that. I’m thinking of having pap smears every week. I love laying there naked with my legs up and cold metal probes are inserted into my vagina. I must have had four orgasms just waiting there.The local DA, he’s such a loser, wanted so badly to get elected that he cherry picked every piece of evidence to make a case. All he cared about was making national news. He said it was better than sex, and I would agree. In college, the DA should have spent less time with his head in books, and more time learning how to please a woman. You’d figure a white man with such a small penis would make up the difference with some kind of technique.It’s amazing how feminist groups and racist groups are fast to jump on cases like this. I figure I can make bucks on the movie right alone. I thin it’s a laugh how news anchors like Nancy and Wendy twist and stretch any evidence or story to make sure people believe a rape actually occurred, but when someone points out that the evidence proves the rape didn’t really exist, both Nancy and Wendy claim that others are twisting and stretching the evidence. Talk about the kettle calling the pot black. Nancy and Wendy are my heroes. They have no integrity and that’s probably how they got where they are. Girls like Nancy, Wendy, and me should stick together. Using victimhood as a weapon and tool for personal gains will get us rich! I kinda feel sorry for those boys though, but you can’t make an omelet without breaking a few eggs.
Tuesday, August 29, 2006 at 1:24:00 AM EDT
It’s amazing how just by claiming a person to be a “mother” puts a “halo” on her head. Feminist claim that some women have no other option to provide for herself and her children which paints a picture of a selfless martyr, but this is misleading especially regarding this particular “single mom”. This single mom and her children live with their grandfather so the threat of being homeless or hungry is unlikely. This single mom has been arrested in for larceny and evading police, which doesn’t fit the mold of “martyr”. This single mom arrived at the party inebriated and was found drunk and disorderly in a parking lot, but looking at this woman as an individual instead of a sexist stereotype reveals a more realistic picture of this single mom which dims her halo.Feminist go on to rant that criticizing this woman “hinges on blaming the victim”. This single mom is not a victim. This single mom is an “accuser”. There’s enough evidence to question her integrity and whether a crime actually occurred. I find it hypocritical that feminist so easily gives this “single mom” the benefit of the doubt while condemning a group of boys who happen to be on a sports team. People should avoid stereotypes and focus on each individual, including the “accuser”, as a person. The actions of District Attorney Mike Nifong have been reckless and irresponsible in playing out this case before the national media. This has inflamed racial stereotypes throughout Durham which makes it more important that everyone take a step back and let the police do their job. If this woman lied; thus exposing Nifong as a fool, then she should be prosecuted for this crime, which have destroyed these young boys’ lives and reputations. Being a “single mom” shouldn’t be an excuse to condone this type of behavior.