Duke (finally) apologizes to Lacrosse players for throwing them to the wolves

[pnwmom]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20070929/duke-lacrosse/

"Duke University President Richard Brodhead apologized Saturday for not better supporting the men's lacrosse players falsely accused in last year's highly publicized rape scandal.

"Brodhead, speaking at the university's law school, said he regretted Duke's "failure to reach out" in a "time of extraordinary peril" after a woman accused three players of raping her at a March 2006 party thrown by the team.

"Given the complexities of this case, getting the communication right would never have been easy," Brodhead said. "But the fact is that we did not get it right, causing the families to feel abandoned when they were most in need of support. This was a mistake. I take responsibility for it and I apologize for it."

SNIP

As authorities began to investigate the allegations, Brodhead and the university initially suspended the highly ranked team from play. He later canceled the remainder of its season and ousted longtime coach Mike Pressler. Meanwhile, Durham County prosecutor Mike Nifong labeled the team "hooligans" as he searched for suspects.

But even as Nifong won indictments against players Reade Seligmann, Collin Finnerty and Dave Evans, it became clear the allegations had no merit.

SNIP

[Botany]

1. I hope they sue Duke's ass off

a half ass apology 1.5 years later .... please

[pnwmom]

7. I understand there's already been a settlement. Details undisclosed. n/t

[Igel]

14. Probably one requirement was a public apology, to

be issued no later than the last day of September '07.

College prez probably feels magnanimous because he did it couple of days early.

[LisaL]

61. Right. But only with the three who were indicted.

There is no settlement with the rest, and I imagine they could sue if they wanted to.

[pnwmom]

81. There is one other student who had a settlement.

The one who was failed in a course by a professor engaging in grade retaliation.

[Robson]

13. Unfortunately it won't come out of the hide of those who convicted them

Yes Duke should be sued as an institution, but so should those individual university leaders and the DA that had them convicted and jailed. Suing the the university isn't good enough. They need to change behaviors and that's done by depleting the personal assets of those who made the premature decisions. Then when this happens again they won't be so quick to convict.

[pnwmom]

20. I think the DA might still be sued.

And there are some members of the faculty who deserve to be sued. But I imagine the students probably just want to get on with their lives.

[tammywammy]

2. Well, I guess better late than never

It's sad it took this long for an apology.

[pnwmom]

8. And the condemning section of the faculty -- the group of 88 --

have never apologized.

[tammywammy]

11. Oh, I know

I hope they feel some guilt for what they did, but I doubt it.

[struggle4progress]

16. The "88" explicitly said: "We reject all attempts to try the case outside the courts and stand

firmly by the principle of the presumption of innocence."
http://www.concerneddukefaculty.org/

[pnwmom]

19. They paid lip service to the presumption of innocence in the midst

of an ad that did anything but.

http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:-z2LAZX3TYsJ:academic.brooklyn.cuny.edu/history/johnson/petition.pdf+%22What+does+a+social+disaster+sound+like%22&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=us

“Students are shouting and whispering about what happened to this young woman…”
“‘If something like this happened to me…what would be used against me—my clothing? Where I was?”’
“No one is really talking about how to keep this young woman herself central to this conversation, how to keep her
humanity before us…”
“To the students speaking individually and to the protestors making collective noise, thank you for not waiting and for
making yourselves heard.”


And then there were individual professors who made particularly damning statements -- and have never apologized. (Same link.)

Prof. Houston Baker: “Young, white, violent, drunken men among us - implicitly boasted by our athletic
directors and administrators - have injured lives,” and his remark that the lacrosse team “may well feel they can claim
innocence and sport their disgraced jerseys on campus, safe under the cover of silent whiteness. But where is the black
woman who their violence and raucous witness injured for life? Will she ever sleep well again?”

Prof. Mark Anthony Neal: “”Regardless of what happened inside of 610 N. Buchanan Blvd, the young men
were hoping to consume something that they felt that a black woman uniquely possessed.”

[struggle4progress]

24. You're not linking to the actual ad: you're linking to a misrepresentation of it

[pnwmom]

28. That was an exact quotation from the original ad, and you know that.

And you also didn't provide a link to the original ad. It seems hypocritical that you would criticize me for doing the same thing you had done.

Pres. Brodhead has apologized for not disavowing the ad, and for the statements of the faculty who condemned the students. He recognizes that these statements were wrong, even if you don't. He also talks about the dangers of "instant moral certainty" and makes a "call to caution." Let's hope we've learned something from this case.

http://www.durhamwonderland.blogspot.com/

SNIP

Second, some of those who were quick to speak as if the charges were true were on this campus, and some faculty made statements that were ill-judged and divisive. They had the right to express their views. But the public as well as the accused students and their families could have thought that those were expressions of the university as a whole. They were not, and we could have done more to underscore that.

SNIP

I'll end with the deepest lesson this case taught me. When I think back through the whole complex history of this episode, the scariest thing, to me, is that actual human lives were at the mercy of so much instant moral certainty, before the facts had been established. If there’s one lesson the world should take from the Duke lacrosse case, it’s the danger of prejudgment and our need to defend against it at every turn. Given the power of this impulse and the forces that play to it in our culture, achieving this goal will not be easy. But it’s a fight where we all need do our part.

Much of me hopes the Duke lacrosse case will be forgotten someday. But if it is remembered, let’s hope it is remembered the right way: as a call to caution in a world where certainty and judgment come far too quickly.

[fishwax]

26. the ad from the group of 88 didn't claim the lacrosse players were guilty

It offered minority voices speaking about racism and sexism on campus. That the lacrosse players are not guilty of rape does not mean that the issues of racism and sexism on campus are not real. The ad doesn't mention the lacrosse players at all, and the professors stressed the importance of the presumption of innocence.

[pnwmom]

29. Hogwash. The ad applauded the potbangers,

who were crowding outside the house where the rape did NOT occur, and protesting the students inside.

“To the students speaking individually and to the protestors making collective noise, thank you for not waiting and for
making yourselves heard.”

"Thank you for not waiting" -- in other words -- thank you for not waiting for a trial to occur before you harrass the non-rapists.



Maybe you should read Pres. Brodhead's apology. He -- finally -- seems to understand.

http://www.durhamwonderland.blogspot.com/

SNIP

I'll end with the deepest lesson this case taught me. When I think back through the whole complex history of this episode, the scariest thing, to me, is that actual human lives were at the mercy of so much instant moral certainty, before the facts had been established. If there’s one lesson the world should take from the Duke lacrosse case, it’s the danger of prejudgment and our need to defend against it at every turn. Given the power of this impulse and the forces that play to it in our culture, achieving this goal will not be easy. But it’s a fight where we all need do our part.

Much of me hopes the Duke lacrosse case will be forgotten someday. But if it is remembered, let’s hope it is remembered the right way: as a call to caution in a world where certainty and judgment come far too quickly.

[fishwax]

38. students have a right to make their voices heard

and the ad doesn't suggest that they "harass the non-rapists."

I agree with much of what you say about prejudgment being a dangerous thing, but I can't bring myself to condemn the group of 88 for something they didn't say.

[LisaL]

62. The students who were quoted in the ad were quoted anonymously.

No names were given to go with the supposed quotes.

[qdemn7]

33. Fuck the Gang of 88 and their politics

This is why I don't like Tenure for educators. I'd like to see everyone of these miserable cocksuckers fired. :puke:

[fishwax]

37. that's a well-reasoned argument

:eyes:

[pnwmom]

30. Where's the link the the actual ad? This isn't it. n/t

[struggle4progress]

42. OK: here's the full text of the "88" ad, which clearly aimed at dialog about race and sex on campus

The people, who took out the ad, wanted the university to hear unheard student voices about the sometimes nasty racist and sexist climate.

I didn't realize, when I posted the previous "88" link, that the link given there, to the full-text of the 88 ad, was now broken: in the past it has worked fine for me.

We are listening to our students. We’re also listening to the Durham community, to Duke staff, and to each other. Regardless of the results of the police investigation, what is apparent everyday now is the anger and fear of many students who know themselves to be objects of racism and sexism, who see illuminated in this moment’s extraordinary spotlight what they live with everyday. They know that it isn’t just Duke, it isn’t everybody, and it isn’t just individuals making this disaster.

But it is a disaster nonetheless.

These students are shouting and whispering about what happened to this young woman and to themselves.

. . .We want the absence of terror. But we don’t really know what that means . . . We can’t think. That’s why we’re so silent; we can’t think about what’s on the other side of this. Terror robs you of language and you need language for the healing to begin. 1

This is not a different experience for us here at Duke University. We go to class with racist classmates, we go to gym with people who are racists....It’s part of the experience. 2

If it turns out that these students are guilty, I want them expelled. But their expulsion will only bring resolution to this case and not the bigger problem. This is much bigger than them and throwing them out will not solve the problem. I want the administration to acknowledge what is going on and how bad it is. 3

Being a big, black man, it’s hard to walk anywhere at night, and not have a campus police car slowly drive by me. 4

Everything seems up for grabs--I am only comfortable talking about this event
in my room with close friends. I am actually afraid to even bring it up in public. But worse, I wonder now about everything. . . . If something like this happens to me . . . What would be used against me -- my clothing? Where I was? 5

I was talking to a white woman student who was asking me “Why do people --
and she meant black people -- make race such a big issue?” They don’t see race. They just don’t see it. 6

What Does A Social Disaster Sound Like

You go to a party, you get grabbed, you get propositioned, and then you start to question yourself. 7

. . . all you heard was "Black students just complain all the time, all you do is complain and self-segregate." And whenever we try to explain why we’re offended, it’s pushed back on us. Just the phrase "self-segregation": the blame is always put on us. 8

. . . no one is really talking about how to keep the young woman herself central to this conversation, how to keep her humanity before us . . . she doesn’t seem to be visible in this. Not for the university, not for us 9

I can’t help but think about the different attention given to what has happened from what it would have been if the guys had been not just black but participating in a different sport, like football, something that’s not so upscale. 10

And this is what I’m thinking right now – Duke isn’t really responding to this. Not really. And this, what has happened, is a disaster. This is a social disaster. 11

The students know that the disaster didn’t begin on March 13th and won’t end with what the police say or the court decides. Like all disasters, this one has a history. And what lies beneath what we’re hearing from our students are questions about the future. This ad, printed in the most easily seen venue on campus, is just one way for us to say that we’re hearing what our students are saying. Some of these things were said by a mixed (in every way possible) group of students on Wednesday, March 29th at an African & African American Studies Program forum, some were printed in an issue of the Independent that came out that same day, and some were said to us inside and outside of the classroom. We’re turning up the volume in a moment when some of the most vulnerable among us are being asked to quiet down while we wait. To the students speaking individually and to the protestors making collective noise, thank you for not waiting and for making yourselves heard.

We thank the following departments and programs for signing onto this ad with African & African American Studies: Romance Studies; Psychology: Social and Health Sciences; Franklin Humanities Institute; Critical U.S. Studies; Art, Art History, and Visual Studies; Classical Studies; Asian & African Languages and Literature; Women’s Studies; Latino/a Studies; Latin American and Caribbean Studies; Medieval and Renaissance Studies; European Studies; Program in Education; and the Center for Documentary Studies. Because of space limitations, the names of individual faculty and staff who signed on in support may be read at the AAAS website: http://www.duke.edu/web/africanameric/

[Robson]

41. Regarding the gang of 88 I have but one question................

From the gang of 88.......just how can one expect a liberal arts/education that would develop broadly educated individuals who are committed to or characterized by open inquiry, critical thinking, effective communication, and responsiveness to the needs of individuals and society?

This gang represented just the opposite.....gross closed minded prejudice. They should all be fired.

[struggle4progress]

43. Horseshit: they ran an ad asking people to think about racism and sexism on campus

[Robson]

48. I've read the ad

Sorry, that's not how I read it.

Have you read the ad? Based upon the points in their ad the 88 gang had an agenda to use this incident and these boys to advance it, just as Al Sharpton may have (innocently?) used Tawana Brawley. Unfortunately the girl in the Duke case will impact the credibility of future legitimate civil rights cases. Actually let's hope it does impact future cases so that they are prosecuted fairly, not politically.

If it wasn't for the one boy's family who could afford a competent defense team they likely would have been railroaded into prison.

Yes such railroading has certainly happened much more than it ever should have with African Americans but that's certainly no reason to make it acceptable in this case. I have strong feelings on this per my signature by-line, and see equal justice (not political correctness justice) for all as noble goal.

[struggle4progress]

54. I've posted the text of the ad upthread for anyone interested in what it really says

[pnwmom]

49. No, they thanked students for not waiting to "make their voices heard"

in a context where students were banging pans in front of the "rapists" house, holding signs urging that they be castrated, etc.

The group of 88 were trying to add fuel to the fire and they succeeded.

[struggle4progress]

63. If the students had actually been physically threatened by anyone, they could have filed

a criminal complaint with respect to NCGS § 14‑277.1 (Communicating threats).

[pnwmom]

68. The students were threatened by strangers carrying signs calling

for them to be castrated, and by voices saying "Dead Man walking" as they walked the gauntlet into court.

You can't file a criminal complaint against an unknown person.

And in addition to being physically threatened, they were harrassed by all the "Wanted" posters placed all around campus.

[struggle4progress]

74. I would be interested if you can provide a reputable news source for the claim

that anyone threatened to castrate the players or otherwise made credible physical threats against them: after beating back the Klan many years ago, North Carolina actually has laws that can be used against people who try to intimidate other people.

I've looked for evidence that your assertion is true: the only links I find are rightwing noise sites

[pnwmom]

76. Here is one of the best sources, and a far better source than the NYTimes

or some of the other mass media sites. Prof. Johnson is not right-wing, he's a history professor and a Democrat who is currently supporting Obama for President. And he, with Stuart Taylor, has written a book on the whole fiasco.

As a university professor, he began to study the case when he became disturbed at how the officials at Duke University were handling the situation. First he blogged at another site, and as his research grew, he set up his own site.


http://durhamwonderland.blogspot.com/search?q=castrate

George Washington University law professor Jeffrey Rosen reviews Until Proven Innocent in this week’s Sunday New York Times book review:

From the Scottsboro Boys to Clarence Gideon, some of the most memorable legal narratives have been tales of the wrongly accused. Now “Until Proven Innocent,” a new book about the false allegations of rape against three Duke lacrosse players, can join these galvanizing cautionary tales . . . In their riveting narrative, Stuart Taylor Jr., one of America’s most insightful legal commentators (and a former reporter at The New York Times), and KC Johnson, a history professor at Brooklyn College and the City University of New York, portray Nifong as “evil or deluded or both” . . .

Nifong’s sins are now well known, but Taylor and Johnson argue that he was aided and abetted by the news media and the Duke faculty. They are withering about the “lynch mob mentality” (in the words of a defense lawyer) created by bloviating cable news pundits on the left and the right. But they are also sharply critical of what they call the one-sided reporting of the nation’s leading newspapers, including The New York Times. With a few exceptions, the authors suggest, The Times’s coverage consistently showed a “pro-Nifong bias,” most notably in a front-page article apparently trying to resurrect the case after it seemed on the verge of collapse.

At least “many of the journalists misled by Nifong eventually adjusted their views as evidence of innocence” came to light, the authors conclude. That’s more than can be said for Duke’s “activist professors,” 88 of whom signed an inflammatory letter encouraging a rush to judgment by the student protesters who were plastering the campus with wanted posters of the lacrosse team and waving a banner declaring “Castrate.” Even when confronted with DNA evidence of the players’ innocence, these professors refused to apologize and instead incoherently attacked their critics. In the same spirit, the authors charge, the president of Duke, Richard Brodhead, fired the lacrosse coach, canceled the season and condemned the team members for more than eight months. The pandering Brodhead, in this account, is more concerned about placating faculty ideologues than about understanding the realities of student life on his raunchy campus . . .

Taylor and Johnson have made a gripping contribution to the literature of the wrongly accused. They remind us of the importance of constitutional checks on prosecutorial abuse. And they emphasize the lesson that Duke callously advised its own students to ignore: if you’re unjustly suspected of any crime, immediately call the best lawyer you can afford.

SNIP



__________________

And this has reminded me of one of the worst things Duke administrators did: they associated a lawyer with the case, who wasn't really working for anyone except for Duke, and they told the students NOT to hire their own lawyers and even NOT to tell their parents. Fortunately, word got out to the parents anyway, and the rest is history.

[struggle4progress]

83. I asked for a reputable news-source: you provided a rightwing blog

[pnwmom]

84. The professor is a left-wing Democrat supporting Obama.

And the article quoted is from a book review in the Washington Post.

[struggle4progress]

87. I can't find any evidence of his contributions to Democratic campaigns

so it's not clear what his alleged "support" for Democrats means. Meanwhile, his rhetoric is heavily laced with wingnut buzzwords

[pnwmom]

91. Here are photos.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12115147/site/newsweek/page/2/

A shot of the “wanted” posters that were plastered over the Duke campus.



A photo of the “castrate” banner

[struggle4progress]

96. 1. This doesn't establish anything about Johnson's political affiliation

[struggle4progress]

97. 2. Where did the photo come from?

http://img225.imageshack.us/img225/1338/castrate2pi2.jpg isn't
a standard media source. What's the provenance of the photo?

It doesn't seem to be on the MSNBC site you link to.

The photo actually on the MSNBC site is merely captioned
"a poster urged lacrosse team members to help with the
investigation," which doesn't sound very threatening

[LisaL]

149. I think you got her there. This photo obviously is photo shopped.

In reality, they are carrying a sign that says "We love lacrosse."
:eyes:

[struggle4progress]

151. I asked for specifics about where and when the photo was taken, about who took it, and who was in it

The question under discussion is whether the accused Duke students were actually threatened. Since this picture is waved at me in order to show that the students were actually threatened, I want some specific corroborating information -- especially because it is not clear why no criminal complaint were filed, if the students were actually threatened.

I do not know the origin of this picture. I do not know who took it. I do not know whether it shows what you seem to think it shows or not -- namely a threat against the accused students. Since I can only find the picture on rightwing sites that I really do not trust (such as Limbaugh's or Johnson's), it is true that I distrust this picture.

My view, hard as it is for you to understand, is simply this: I am interested in what is demonstrably true at this point in time; the case generated much media noise and blogger rumor, dense smoke, and plenty of dishonest behavior from quite a few people. Of course, you may be right that my view is risible and ridiculous. But if you can defend your view, you should be able to provide provenance for the photo. I've looked for such info and haven't found it.

Until I know what this picture really is, I have only questions and conjectures. It may well be that somebody on occasion carried a banner saying "Castrate" through the streets of Durham. It may even be that the people shown in your photo did. If anyone did so, it is not impossible that they intended to threaten the Duke students, though it is also not impossible that they intended to send some completely different message. But for all I know (for example), the photo may have little to do with the accused Duke students: it may show a group of people parading down a street at an anti-rape "Take Back the Night" march, proclaiming the not-uncommon view that the judicial system should provide for the castration of rapists. Or it may be a group of people costumed up expressly for the sole purpose of having this picture taken and then disbanded; one website on which the alleged photo appears contains this rather clearly posed shot, for example:

http://img213.imageshack.us.nyud.net:8090/img213/3131/chantsrw6.jpg

[pnwmom]

101. He has declared himself to be a Democrat. Since when do you have to give money

before you can count yourself as one?

http://www.chicagosportsreview.com/content/img/f190716/kcjohnson_feb20_07.pdf

"You’ve stated that you’re a Democrat. When you began the blogging, were you surprised by critics calling you a right-wing nut? Did that make you re-examine some “right-wing nuts?”

"Oh, absolutely. You have to. It’s odd. You see groups that you saw before as unabashedly positive, like the NAACP, act the way they have, and your thinking has to change. You say to yourself, if I’m a supposed right wing nut, then 90 percent of the people in this country are too. This didn’t surprise me in some ways though. One of the issues I’ve really pushed is more attention to the history of the American state. Looking at that, you know there’s a tendency among activist-left in the academy to just brand anyone who disagrees with them as a right wing-nut. It works, and it’s hard for them to give up that stance. ... Put it this way: before this case started I had never seen defending civil liberties as a right wing position."

________________

I never saw defending civil liberties as a right-wing position either. I'm amazed that so many DUers see it that way.

[struggle4progress]

123. Johnson's stuff is published in National Review, Weekly Standard, FrontPageMag, NY Sun and other

such outlets:

(National Review)
March 17, 2004, 8:43 a.m.
Campus Hourglass
Ensuring transparency and accountability.
By Candace de Russy & Robert David Johnson

(Weekly Standard)
The Standard Reader
From the December 19, 2003 / January 5, 2004 issue:
Robert David Johnson on "The Arts of Democracy."
12/29/2003, Volume 009, Issue 16

(FrontPage Magazine)
Academic Freedom on the Front Lines
By Robert David Johnson
FrontPageMagazine.com | Tuesday, January 11, 2005

(FrontPage Magazine)
Terrorist Lawyer on Trial
By Robert David Johnson
FrontPageMagazine.com | Friday, July 02, 2004

(New York Sun)
Re-Visioning America
By Robert David Johnson
September 17, 2004

[pnwmom]

125. He publishes widely in publications both on the left and the right.

That doesn't make him a conservative.

[struggle4progress]

129. The rightwing media outlets I just mentioned don't publish material from folk who disagree with them

[pnwmom]

133. He is a person who believes that academic freedom should apply

to academics on the left AND on the right -- a position which has at times put him at odds with the majority, which in the humanities tends to lean left. Not surprisingly, those on the right are happy to receive his support.

I'm sure you aren't saying that his positions on academic freedom for all make him a right-wing nut. Are you?

[struggle4progress]

147. He has been a regular columnist for Horowitz's FrontPageMag & pushes their dishonest propaganda line

[pnwmom]

152. Why don't you give specifics of what he says that you disagree with?

You're relying on your own prejudice to judge him. Rather than examining his words, or his website, you're making assumptions based on some of his associations.

It's not surprising that a conservative site would appreciate his support, since he advocates academic freedom for conservatives as well as progressives.

[struggle4progress]

157. At this point, I've thoroughly debunked your claim Johnson is a "leftwing Democrat"

[pnwmom]

158. And you'll keep telling yourself that, but you're wrong.

He says he's a progressive Democrat and an Obama supporter, and I think he's in a much better position to know than you.

[struggle4progress]

168. See my #165 below, for example (link to post in text)

#165

[struggle4progress]

130. I find no evidence whatsoever supporting your claim that Johnson is a "leftwing Democrat"

[pnwmom]

132. So you think Johnson is lying about being a progressive and a Democrat?

[struggle4progress]

148. I consider quite a lot of Johnson's rhetoric dishonest

[pnwmom]

153. It seems to me that you are making a lot of assumptions about him

that are as groundless as the assumptions many people here made about the Duke students and their guilt.

[struggle4progress]

159. Can't support your claim that Johnson is a "leftwing Democrat," eh?

[pnwmom]

160. What difference does it make whether he's a leftwing Democrat,

a progressive Democrat, a liberal Democrat, a moderate Democrat, or a centrist Democrat?

He's a Democrat who's strongly pro-choice, pro-gay rights, and an Obama supporter for 2008.

He's not a rightwing nut, as you make him out to be, and he's one of the best sources of documentation on the Duke case that's around -- far better than any outlet in the mass media.

I confess: I did not have documentation when I described him as left wing -- except that I knew he's a strong supporter of Obama, who is among the most liberal members among the Senate, as determined by his voting record. www.progressivepunch.com

But it seems to me that rather than addressing the real issue -- all the accurate documentation of the case on his website -- you would rather go off on a tangent.

So -- in Prof. Johnson's words -- here you go:

http://durhamwonderland.blogspot.com/2007/01/apologia-for-disaster.html

"Finally, Davidson gets to the real victim—herself, and her 87 colleagues. She has been victimized by “right-wing ‘blog hooligans’,” who have criticized the ad.

"Davidson is a professor of English. I can only assume that she deliberately chose the word “hooligans,” to imitate Nifong’s insult of the lacrosse players.

"And who are these “blog hooligans”? Again, Davidson doesn’t say. The three major blogs who have criticized the Group of 88: Johnsville News, a non-ideological crime site; Liestoppers, which as far as I can tell has no ideological bent at all beyond a hostility to Mike Nifong; and this site, which is run by a centrist Democrat who’s vehemently pro-choice and pro-gay rights, and who’s backing Barack Obama for president in 2008. If this is the “right wing,” then I wonder if Davidson, safe in the “groupthink” environment at Duke, has ever met a real right-winger."

[struggle4progress]

163. Here he supports a CUNY trustee because opponents of the trustee supported the Oaxaca teachers

The Governor Has a Choice
By ROBERT DAVID JOHNSON
July 11, 2006

... Wiesenfeld has ... enemies, too, most notably CUNY's faculty union ... On June 28, union members rallied in front of the Mexican consulate on behalf of striking teachers in Oaxaca ... http://www.nysun.com/article/35798

[struggle4progress]

164. Here he is calling Lynne Stewart a "terrorist" during her trial

Terrorist Lawyer on Trial
By Robert David Johnson
FrontPageMagazine.com | Friday, July 02, 2004

... The Left’s response to Islamic fascism represents a scandal of American intellectual life ... leftist academics have interpreted Islamic fundamentalism as an anti-imperialist cause worthy of sympathy ... http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID={92B5B54A-BB8F-4AE7-987A-B099D2D84F90}

[struggle4progress]

165. Here he and his coauthors explicitly identify him as a rightwinger:

The AHA's Double Standard on Academic Freedom
by David Beito, Ralph E. Luker, and Robert K. C. Johnson

... We weighed into this controversy as part of a three person "left/right" coalition ... two of us (David Beito and Ralph Luker) are members of Historians Against the War (HAW) ... http://www.historians.org/Perspectives/issues/2006/0603/0603vie2.cfm

But lest there remain the slightest doubt, let us see how rightwinger Horowitz (who certainly knows Johnson's politics, because Johnson used to be a columnists for Horowitz's FrontPageMag) interprets it:

ABOR: Historians' Hypocrisy
by David Horowitz
Professor David Beito is a libertarian, Professor K.C. Johnson a conservative .. and Professor Ralph Luker a liberal .. <Article can easily be located by searchengine>

[struggle4progress]

166. Conclusion: When Johnson calls himself a "centrist Democrat" he's full of shit

[LisaL]

77. Would you consider photos of the demonstrators carrying the sign

saying "castrate" as evidence?

[struggle4progress]

85. A supposed photo by itself is meaningless, especially in the age of photoshopping.

If one is interested in whether anyone made credible threats against the accused Duke students, then a photo alone is not necessarily compelling: even if it is an accurate photo, it may require only a few seconds to compose the scene and capture it, so it may merely reflect a staged event.

For those reasons, I am completely uninterested in photos lifted from rightwing sites, such as Limbaugh's. A credible photo has a provenance: typically, a news-photographer keeps some record of when and where the photo was taken, and under what circumstances, as well as who is in the photo. Knowing who took the photo, when and where it was taken, and who is in it, is important for establishing historicity.

The Duke Lacrosse case generated more varieties of bullshit from more people than almost any local event I can remember. Quite a few people, with widely varying perspectives, appear to have misrepresented facts for many different reasons. At this point, I am primarily interested in understanding the mechanisms of misrepresentation, and this is only possible if one can distinguish the factual from the propaganda.

[LisaL]

86. Oh boo-hoo.

Here is an article from a local NC newspaper. But I bet you find something wrong with it too.
"On the same day, Nifong started a media offensive. The News & Observer had broken the story of the team giving DNA samples and then published an interview with Mangum. Activists and neighborhood residents had responded with two protests outside the house where three lacrosse captains lived: a candlelight vigil and a raucous affair where protesters banged pots and held signs that read "Castrate" and "Get a Conscience, Not a Lawyer.""
http://www.newsobserver.com/1537/v-print/story/564100.html
I don't think it's a rightwing newspaper, by the way. The N&O started off with "Dancer gives details of ordeal" article, which I bet you would have found to your liking.

:eyes:

[struggle4progress]

89. So here's my question: this is reported as fact more than a year after the events BUT

is there a contemporary account?

I read news constantly and constantly find untrue assertions reported as "commonly known" facts in such retrospective summaries: one recalls, for example, the subsequent reportage of events surrounding the lead-up to the Iraq war, where mythology frequently replaced fact.

The question under consideration is whether the accused Duke students were credibly threatened. As evidence, you provide a news account, from much later, claiming that somebody threatened to castrate them, an event for which you also claim to have photographic evidence. The details, that are important to determining whether there was actually any credible threat, would include as precisely as possible a description of the date, time, location, and circumstances under which such a threat occurred, and an identification of the parties responsible. This is basic historical methodology.

[LisaL]

93. Not contemporary enough for you?

I've already told you N&O was busy publishing "dancer gives details of ordeal" as a "contemporary account." But it's pretty clear to me that you will find a problem with whatever link is provided for you anyway. I am done with playing this game.

[struggle4progress]

94. Yes: an Apr 2007 report is not a contemporary account of events in Mar or Apr 2006

[pnwmom]

98. How convenient for you, since the local newspapers

no longer have articles from those months available on their websites.

But if you had been reading them at the time, which I was, you would have seen the pictures then.

Instead, you were apparently devoting your time to prejudging the students as guilty.

[struggle4progress]

99. Such as: Police arrived at quiet house (N&O Mar 2006)?

Samiha Khanna, Staff Writer

DURHAM -- When police visited a house near Duke University on March 14 to investigate a 911 call about racial slurs, they found the house -- where neighbors had witnessed a rowdy party earlier in the evening -- completely quiet ... http://www.newsobserver.com/1185/story/423877.html

[pnwmom]

100. All the links I've been following are dead. You found a live one.

And if you kept looking, I'm sure you could find what you're looking for.

[struggle4progress]

124. I find live links by the hundreds. What I don't find is an answer to my question.

[LisaL]

167. Maybe you should try harder.

[pnwmom]

95. Prof. K.C. Johnson is a professor of history who

examined the evidence as it was occurring, since he became interested in the case very early on.

The problem with providing links is that what little coverage members of the media gave to this issue is no longer on their websites, as I'm sure you know. But I think if you contacted Prof. Johnson with a courteous and professional query, he would be happy to answer your questions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KC_Johnson

[qdemn7]

78. The "Horsheshit" was that ad

It was nothing more than an slimy bottom-feeder tactic typical of those who are always looking to play the race card and sexism card.

[KittyWampus]

57. LOL! Think of all the DU'ers who were outraged and condemned those students. As liberals

you'd think they'd be "committed to or characterized by open inquiry, critical thinking, effective communication, and responsiveness to the needs of individuals and society".

IIRC, the majority of DU'ers posting on the subject were definately SURE those guys were guilty. And road that case for all it was worth toward the issues of racism/sexism.

[abq e streeter]

66. I wondered about this in a post further down the page...

Just noticed your post... I suspected as much, and two other DUers responded confirming my suspicions also ( I"m pretty new, and didn't know for sure how DUers reacted to this case)). Sad , but human nature I guess to act on preconceived notions rather than patiently wait for the true story to emerge. This is a perfect example of why I said when I joined DU that it was with trepidation, as I am not a lockstep "politically correct" leftist all the time and I can only assume that my questioning the prevailing sentiment of many DUers would have gotten me the same angry responses I got from some progressive friends and acquaintances when I voiced my suspicions that these young men were being railroaded.

[pnwmom]

69. I'm glad you've stuck around.

We don't need everyone walking around in lockstep, especially when we're being led off a cliff.

[abq e streeter]

71. thank you

The kind words are appreciated, and I've gotten quite a few of them since I started shooting my mouth off, er, I mean , posting...I do have two people on an ignore list , which I didn't know existed, and which makes me sad to have had to use; I'm open to being disagreed with, or even corrected, but not insulted etc. Fortunately, the kind words and respectful disagreements have far outnumbered the other type of communication.

[varkam]

3. A day late and a dollar short, my friends.

It's good that they apologized, but just how sorry are they? Are they, say, $1 million worth of sorry? $2 million?

[pnwmom]

9. If I were a parent at the school, or an alumna, I would have been furious.

Duke had a responsibility to stand up for the principle of "innocent until proven guilty" and they failed miserably -- not only that, they allowed a large group of faculty to publicly condemn the students.

[varkam]

22. I agree 100%.

The whole system of American jurisprudence rests upon that principle, among others. The accused have a right to be shrouded in innocence until provided a fair trial and regarded as guilty if and only if the evidence presented against them in those proceedings are deemed to incriminate them beyond a reasonable doubt as defined by a jury of their peers.

[pnwmom]

31. Can you believe how many Dems were ready to toss that principle aside?

It was truly eye-opening for me. And as the mother of young sons, it was scary.

[bluestateguy]

4. Schools should wait until players are convicted (if at all) before canceling the season

A lost season is gone forever, and can't be recovered.

Now if those screaming yo-yos that were banging pots and pans outside of the lacrosse players' house would step forward and apologize.

Ah, crickets...

[pnwmom]

10. I don't think they should have suspended the students either. n/t

[struggle4progress]

17. Many universities suspend students following a criminal indictment: otherwise, they are vulnerable

to lawsuits should the allegedly behavior later occur against another member of the university community

[pnwmom]

21. At the time of THESE indictments, it was already known that no DNA from

any of the 46 students had been found on the woman, and that the students had passed lie detector tests, and that the woman was a drug user with a history of making and withdrawing rape charges.

From the very beginning, it was clear that this was an unusually shaky case -- at least to anyone who didn't begin with a prejudice against the students. Heck, I myself began with a prejudice against Duke students -- but as soon as I began to pay any attention (only after my elderly mother asked me what I thought), it was obvious that the case smelled to high heaven.

[struggle4progress]

23. Universities typically won't try to out-guess the legal system in such cases -- and if you think

for a moment you'll understand why:

Suppose Mr/Ms Doe indicted for criminal assault. And suppose that Dr University Administrator decides to let Doe continue to attend school. And suppose then another student alleges a new assault by Doe. Dr Administrator then faces an ugly lawsuit.

If your child attended a daycare center or high school, where a student or staff member was indicted for a sexual assault, you wouldn't want the daycare center or high school to have that person around until the matter was resolved.

[pnwmom]

27. What I don't understand is why the Duke administration

did not disavow the letter of 88 containing the quotes of the students who were assuming that members of the LAX team were rapists, and the statements of Prof. Baker and others who did the same thing.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

128. Oh poor them. They missed a lacrosse season.

Sorry, I think whether or not one plays lacrosse in college is rather trivial when you boil things down.

These guys were accused, then exonerated. They've got their freedom. That's all they need. Stop making these guys out to be suffering martyrs when they were in part responsible for their own predicament.

[pnwmom]

134. It must be great to feel so confident that you or your loved ones

could never make a mistake that would put any of you in the sights of a railroading prosecutor.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

138. I've seen much, much worse in terms of miscarriages of justice

Such as men who were executed only to later be revealed to be innocent. Or even men who were nearly executed but thankfully due to the advent of DNA were exonerated.

Example is Kirk Bloodsworth, who did absolutely nothing to contribute to the fact he was falsely accused of rape and murder of a 9 year old girl. He sat nearly a decade on prison on death row before DNA cleared him of the crime. Even after being released from prison, he still had to face claims he was still the killer, until the real killer was found and confessed to the crime.

These Duke guys helped dig the hole they got themselves into, only stood accused for about a year, and never even had to face a jury. What's the worst that happened to them? They missed a year of lacrosse. Big fat hairy deal.

Don't get me wrong. I'm glad for the sake of justice the truth came out. But I'm not going to cry my eyes out for these guys as if they are some sort of marytrs. Because they're not.

[pnwmom]

144. They were facing 30 years in prison and the only reason they were vindicated

was because their parents were able to spend millions on attorneys -- and even then, a lot of luck was involved.

No one should have to go through a false prosecution -- not Kirk Bloodsworth, and not the Duke students. But we are ALL at risk when people minimize the evil of the actions of a prosecutor like Nifong. If Nifong had been allowed to continue, the next person he attacked could have ended up being wrongly executed. Durham is fortunate that the students and their attorneys were able to put an end to this monster's career.

[Bubba HoHoHo Tep]

155. My first post

Your comment is sadly lacking in any level of sympathy. Once labeled a rapist, these young innocent men will never completely be cleared. It will follow them in life and appear even in their obituaries decades later. I have seen that much discussed in my time lurking here.

This lunatic woman helped destroy their lives and the university and outrageous professors did more so. I would have sued and demanded $1 million per professor they retained out of the 88. I'd let them off with $100,000 for each one they fired.

[2rth2pwr]

5. Insincere, this should have happened the day they were cleared. nt

[Captain Hilts]

6. Yes, I assumed they had. I could understand a lawsuit here. nt

[rockymountaindem]

12. Hopefully this whole situation will prompt a lot of reflection

among those who were so quick to 1) defend themselves and leave a part of their organization twisting in the wind (I'm talking about the administration, here) and 2) people who just assumed these guys were guilty because, well, they're part of some "white elitist power structure" of people who just do that all the time and the only difference is that these guys got caught.

It probably won't, though.

[struggle4progress]

15. As a result of neighborhood complaints, Duke had just purchased 610 N. Buchanan

for resale for single family occupancy not long before the now-famous stripper party there:

What is happening with the house at 610 N. Buchanan Blvd.?

In February 2006, the university purchased 12 houses and three lots in neighborhoods close to campus -- including 610 N. Buchanan -- with the intent of turning them into owner-occupied residences. The $3.7 million investment came in response to complaints about the noise and other disturbances caused by parties in off-campus houses rented by multiple students. http://www.dukenews.duke.edu/2006/03/lacrossefaq.html#house

So there was some prior concern about student behavior at the property. And despite university plans to change the use of the property, there was continuing reason for concern about student student behaviors there on the night in question:

On March 13, the team held a spring break party at 610 N. Buchanan Blvd. Two escort service dancers were hired to perform, investigators said. There was underage drinking and racial slurs were shouted, defense lawyers have acknowledged. http://www.newsobserver.com/145/story/465495.html

Shortly after the party ended, a member of the Lacrosse team sent an email about murdering strippers:

Hours after an exotic dancer was allegedly raped by members of the Duke University lacrosse team, a player apparently sent an e-mail saying he wanted to invite more strippers to his dorm room, kill them and skin them. http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8GQ1F0GC&show_article=1

The subsequent university investigation, comparing behaviors of lacrosse team members to other students and other team members, noted:

By all measures that we considered, the disciplinary record of the lacrosse team was noticeably worse that the records of all other athletic teams. http://www.dukenews.duke.edu/mmedia/features/lacrosse_incident/lacrossereport.html

And there was some history of team members having run-ins with local law enforcement:

About a third of the members of the Duke men's lacrosse team .. have been previously charged with misdemeanors stemming from drunken and disruptive behavior in the past three years ... http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=2387151

An out-of-town assault charge against a team member also became known not long after the party:

A member of the Duke University lacrosse team was charged last fall with assaulting a man in the Georgetown section of Washington. http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/05/sports/othersports/05duke.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

What would a responsible university administrator or law enforcement official do, when a rape charge appears in this context? The natural reaction, of course, would be Whoa! We might have a major problem here!

[pnwmom]

18. Of course the Administration should have been worried. That's not the issue.

It was not appropriate for members of the Arts and Science faculty to put out the letter of the 88, which condemned the students whether or not the specific charges were ever proved. It was the responsibility of the Administration to disavow that statement after it was made. And it was not appropriate to fire the coach, who had done nothing wrong, or to cancel the entire season after promising the students that they wouldn't do so. (The punishment was supposed to have been limited to forfeiting two games.) Instead of standing up for the presumption of the students' innocence, which is at the very foundation of our legal system, every action the Administration took had the effect of making it appear as if Duke had already judged the students to be guilty.

Besides cherrypicking that damning statement from Brodhead's report and leaving out others that cast a far more positive light on the students' records, you also left out facts about the accuser that were known to the Duke administration very quickly after the charges were made -- far before the public or the media became aware. From the very beginning, the Duke police knew Mangum's history, and knew that her credibility was low. They knew about her drug use, her lying, and her previous rape charges. All the information they already had about her should have made them realize that there was a good chance that the students were being railroaded. But they were only concerned with Duke's image, not with the lives of their students.

[struggle4progress]

25. Athletics Director Joe Alleva March 28, 2006: "In a meeting this morning, our student-athletes

made it clear to us that their behavior was inappropriate and recommended the suspension of their own season until the legal process is complete." http://dukenews.duke.edu/2006/03/alleva.html

[pnwmom]

32. He's lying. n/t

[struggle4progress]

44. THAT response, coming without the slightest evidence, tells me enough about who you are.

[pnwmom]

56. I'm someone more informed than you are, since you were obviously

too busy prejudging the guilt of the students.

http://durhamwonderland.blogspot.com/2007/09/top-32-countdown-i.html

27) “We had to stop those pictures . It doesn’t mean that it’s fair, but we had to stop it. It doesn’t necessarily mean I think it was right—it just had to be done.”

--Board of Trustees chairman Bob Steel, explaining to the New Yorker why Duke canceled the 2006 men’s lacrosse season.

[struggle4progress]

72. Search the archives: I never expressed any opinion about the guilt or innocence

of the accused lacrosse team members, nor did I ever express any opinion about the truth or falsity of the rape accusation.

Why don't you stop making nasty groundless accusations? I quote the athletic director; you accuse him of lying; I point out there's no evidence of that; you accuse me of prejudging the case. It's just ugly noise.

[pnwmom]

80. All of your posts in this thread have been about defending the

professors who wrote an ad that even the Duke administration has now admitted contributed to a poisonous atmosphere against the students.

And even now that the A.G. of N.C. took the highly unusual step of declaring all the students to be INNOCENT, you're still defending the people who prejudged them as guilty.

[fishwax]

92. defending professors against baseless accusations is hardly the same as

assessing the guilt or innocence of the accused.

It's interesting that so many who have attacked people for presuming the lacrosse players guilty are also eager to attack the group of 88 for saying something they didn't actually say.

As for the Duke administration--I didn't think they handled the case well as it happened, and see no reason to accept their assessment of things now.

[pnwmom]

102. I'm criticizing the professors for what was said in that poster.

For the "quotes" from unnamed students that assumed the guilt of the LAX players.

And for applauding the pot bangers who were surrounding the student's house, hanging wanted posters around campus, and holding up banners that said "Time to Confess" and "Castrate."

Because that's what they did when they thanked students for "not waiting" and "speaking out."

[fishwax]

106. you're criticizing professors for condemning the players in the ad, when in fact they didn't n/t

[pnwmom]

108. They applauded the pot bangers for condemning the students,

which amounts to the same thing.

And some of the Professors, Houston Baker, for example, went much further.

[fishwax]

110. applauding students for making their voices heard is not the same as condemning others n/t

[pnwmom]

113. Holding up signs that say "Time to Confess" and "Castrate" is condemning.

Those were among the voices that the 88 were supporting.

[fishwax]

114. there are no such signs in the ad from the group of 88

[pnwmom]

115. Nobody ever said they were stupid. n/t

[fishwax]

116. but people (such as you) have said they said things they didn't say, which is ironic, given

your admirable insistence on facts over sensationalist speculation with respect to other aspects of this case.

[pnwmom]

117. I think Prof. Gustafson explains well the problem with the 88's statement.

It cleverly managed to create a link in people's minds between the alleged rape and other issues that the signers wanted to highlight. In other words, it used the accused students to score political (in the broad sense) points. Of course, the strategy backfired on them when it turned out the accuser was lying and the students were innocent, and that they had linked their cause to a hoax.

http://durhamwonderland.blogspot.com/2006/11/michael-gustafson-speaks-out.html

One thing the ‘Social Disaster’ poster did early on in the case,” Gustafson astutely noted, “is couple, to some, the ideas of the students’ guilt and the still-pressing problems we have on campus regarding class and gender and color and everything else. Unfortunately, by co-opting the energy of the moment in March, those faculty members and others may have pinned their hopes for a real discussion of important issues, knowingly or unknowingly, on a case that to me is not holding up well at all under the scrutiny that such a case rightly deserves.” And as the case collapses, the Group of 88 and their allies have refused to concede the error, because to do so will require asking some hard questions about their own behavior and beliefs.

Gustafson agrees that Duke has experienced “a social disaster,” but not the one that the Group of 88 has imagined. This disaster

"involves three men who have been used by the media and others as a personification of Houston Baker’s “white, male, athlete, privilege” rather than being three men. It involves three men whose civil rights have somehow become far less important because of their color, and gender, and perceived place in society. It involves three men whose due process is apparently not the stuff of “critical thought” but rather secondary to a study of “broad social implications” . . . I must say one of the broadest social implications of this case has been the academy’s abandonment of the defense of civil liberties for these three men based on their social markers . . . We simply cannot allow our students’ civil liberties to be trampled so that we can extract the energy of the events of March 13th to effect change on this campus. To do so would be a violation of the very trust that we have been given to educate the men and women who come to this place seeking to become critical thinkers."

For the past six months, Duke’s faculty has claimed to be conducting a comprehensive examination of “campus culture” while avoiding the most breathtaking cultural flaw the lacrosse case has revealed: the willingness of a vocal minority of the faculty to effectively endorse a prosecutor’s corrupt campaign against their own university’s students because of those students’ race, class, gender, and athletic status.

SNIP

[fishwax]

118. While Gustafson makes some interesting points,

I think the ad was misread (intentionally, by some) from the beginning, and that the analysis you linked to continues in some of the same errors.

[pnwmom]

119. Houston Baker was one of the 88, and he wrote his own letter.

Do you defend it, as well? After using the word "alleged" a couple of times, he eventually dispenses with it and simply spews venom.

http://www.dukenews.duke.edu/mmedia/features/lacrosse_incident/lange_baker.html

"The lacrosse team - 15 of whom have faced misdemeanor charges for drunken misbehavior in the past three years - may well feel they can claim innocence and sport their disgraced jerseys on campus, safe under the cover of silent whiteness. But where is the black woman who their violence and raucous witness injured for life? Will she ever sleep well again? . . .

"Duke University's higher administration has engaged in precisely such a tepid and pious legalism with respect to the disaster of recent days: the actual harm to the body, soul, mind, and spirit of black women who were in the company of Duke University lacrosse team members as far as any of us know. All of Duke athletics has now been drawn into the seamy domains of Colorado football and other college and university blind-eying of male athletes, veritably given license to rape, maraud, deploy hate speech, and feel proud of themselves in the bargain."

[fishwax]

122. Houston Baker's own words are different from the group of 88

though people do like to conflate the two, using the more extreme example of Houston Baker's words to poison the original group of 88 ad (as does the analysis you posted in your last post).

Houston Baker's words did seem to come from and convey a presumption of guilt which (while neither illegal nor actionable in civil court) did not show sound judgment. He did not in this letter (though I seem to recall less measured words in an interview) proclaim specific guilt in the allegations of March 13, but his call for immediate suspension of the entire lacrosse team is unjustified.

It's worth contextualizing the passages that you quote, though. Baker's letter is specifically critiquing the administration's response--two weeks of hushed silence--to the allegations of what happened that night. The administration knew about the allegations 24 hours after the incident but didn't address the public for two full weeks, until they could no longer keep the story quiet, magnifying the sense of invisibility felt by man female and minority members of the Duke community. That's what Baker is talking about. Here's the beginning of the first paragraph that you quote:

"There is no rush to judgment here about the crime - neither the violent racial epithets reported in a 911 call to Durham police, nor the harms to body and soul allegedly perpetrated by white males at 610 Buchanan Boulevard. But there is a clear urgency about the erosion of any felt sense of confidence or safety for the rest of us who live and work at Duke University."

[NashVegas]

46. Duke Is Now Singing the Hit Country Song: "Stand By Your Thugs"

Coming soon to CMT.

[pnwmom]

60. And what song are you singing?

"I've been working on the railroad"?

[NashVegas]

75. Wow, That's a Really Racist Comment, pnwmom

I'm really surprised and disappointed that any DUer would make such negative assumptions about race.

[pnwmom]

79. Oh yeah, right.

:sarcasm:

http://www.amazon.com/Working-Railroad-Shaped-Board-Wheels/dp/0590543172

[NashVegas]

121. Well Then, What Was Your Intention

For referencing an old song whose history is directly tied to the slavery of Africans in America?

[petronius]

131. I think she was referring to the slang use of the term "railroading"

I.e., to coerce or push someone down an ill-advised path. In this case, it would refer to the case against the Duke kids being railroaded or pushed along by cheerleaders who ignored doubts and exculpatory facts...

[pnwmom]

137. Thank you petronius. That's exactly what I was referring to. n/t

[NashVegas]

140. Out of Dozens of "Railroad" Songs You Chose a Song Associated With Black Slaves

And then waited for someone else to come up with an explanation for you. Sorry, Ma'am, I'm just not buying it.

[pnwmom]

141. Your response made no sense to me, since I associated the song with the Irish.

And the title very well describes what you and others had been doing -- working on the railroading of those students.

I learned the modern version in public school in Illinois, and they're still teaching it to elementary school students today, as "Americana."

http://www.contemplator.com/america/railroad.html

The origins of the tune are unknown. Some trace it back to a "Louisiana Levee" song of African-Americans. Others believe it is an old hymn adapted by the Irish work gangs in the West. The verses of "Dinah" and "Someone's In the Kitchen" are later additions. The tune was also adapted by Texans as The Eyes of Texas are Upon You. Dinah may refer to a woman OR a locomotive. The horn signifies the call to lunch.

http://www.bussongs.com/songs/ive_been_workin_on_the_railroad.php

Appears to have been first printed in 1894 in CARMINA PRINCETONIA
May be a derivative of an old Irish song: "I've been working on the Levee"

http://www.voicesacrosstime.org/come-all-ye/ti/2004/lessons/05McGuireSettlingWesternFrontier.html

"I’ve Been Working on the Railroad” also has an unknown author. Some believe the song came from an old Irish work song in the west and others believe it is an old African American song used when working on the Louisiana levees. The tune has been adapted for “The Eyes of Texas Are Upon You.” Regardless of the song’s origin, it became another popular American folksong.

[NashVegas]

143. What Do Those Illinois Schools Teach?

New York public schools spelled it out plainly, even in junior high.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I%27ve_Been_Working_on_the_Railroad

The "Someone's in the kitchen with Dinah" section is actually an older song that has been absorbed by "I've Been Working on the Railroad". It was published as "Old Joe, or Somebody in the House with Dinah" in London in the 1830s or '40s, with music credited to J.H. Cave.<4> "Dinah" was a generic name for an enslaved African-American woman.<5> The melody for this section of the song may have been adapted from "Good Night Ladies", written (as "Farewell Ladies") in 1847 by E. P. Christy.<6>

Whose' labor do you suppose it was that built the railroads, south of the Mason-Dixon line? Should I truly believe you don't know? I'm having a real hard time believing anyone who's been through a public school music history course or two wouldn't know that.

[pnwmom]

145. Face it -- your gotcha moment fell flat.

You can't prove the origins of the song, no one can. Authorities DIFFER. And you certainly can't prove what was in my mind when I alluded to it. Whose labor do you think built the railroads in the midwest and west? Mostly Irish and Chinese.

Surely you learned that in school in New York.

[NashVegas]

146. ;)

Keep peddlin'

[Forkboy]

161. No, she's right, it did fall flat.

Sorry...

[flashl]

34. they were not innocent choir boys

Duke Panel Scolds Lacrosse Team but Says It Shouldn't Disband

• They often behave irresponsibly when they drink alcohol
  
• "Their extensive record of repetitive misconduct should have alarmed administrators responsible for student discipline," the review of the team found
  
• Communication problems and a lack of alarm by some university administrators at the behavior of the lacrosse team were a common theme in the judicial process review

Universities campus Crime Statistics and the Jeanne Clery Act

Duke's reported and under-reported rape stats are rather high.

New Strain on Duke's Ties With Durham

The incident, straddling at once the quintessential social flashpoints of race, class and gender, has led community and university leaders to fear that the progress they have made in recent years in improving their relationship will be swept away in the storm.

Almost every college community bears scorch marks from the inevitable friction between town and gown, but Durham has a particularly bad case. In its most recent survey of students from 361 colleges and universities, the Princeton Review ranked Duke fifth worst in the category of strained town-gown relations and sixth in having little interaction between students of different socioeconomic classes and racial groups.

Community leaders and residents say this may be because Duke is an especially elite and privileged institution in a culturally diverse and economically struggling city that already carries the harsh history of race relations in the South. Duke is believed to be the model for the hard-partying college in Tom Wolfe's 2004 novel, "I Am Charlotte Simmons."

Duke officials ignored complaints from the community about its drunken and disrepectful students. They suppressed Duke's campus crime stats. The flashpoint that the incident generated from the community started long before the lacrosse team made national news.

[Robson]

35. Could describe any university in the USA

Duke officials ignored complaints from the community about its drunken and disrepectful students. They suppressed Duke's campus crime stats.

It is a rare example where a university in the USA doesn't have a problem with drinking, rowdy students, friction with the local community and under-reporting campus crime.

That has nothing to do with a DA wrongfully charging and convicting innocent students of rape for political purposes and a university staff that went along with him.

[flashl]

36. It correctly adds context to the environment at Duke n/t

[pnwmom]

No, those statements were typical of those that poisoned the atmosphere

against the Duke students and would have made a fair trial in Durham very hard to achieve.

The facts of the case were what was important, not the overall context at Duke. And there never was any case -- just a prosecutor with a plan to railroad them, who thought he could succeed because there are enough people like you willing to believe him based on their pre-existing prejudices about Duke students.

[pnwmom]

51. self-delete (dupe)

[Beelzebud]

39. Neither was I in my early 20's. So what?

[pnwmom]

53. Obviously, if you're not an innocent choirboy

then you deserve to be railroaded to prison for 20 or 30 years for a rape that never occurred.

:sarcasm:

[pnwmom]

50. Since when do you have to be innocent choirboys to deserve

the presumption of legal innocence and the protection of all your constitutional rights?

The Duke President has apologized for the actions of its faculty and administration that contributed to an atmosphere that prejudged and condemned the students. Your statements are just another example of the kind of drivel that was used in an effort to railroad them. The fact is that there was NO RAPE. The accuser made the whole story up. All your points are entirely IRRELEVANT.

[flashl]

120. Do you mean the accuser that had memory lapses after DEATH THREATS? n/t

[pnwmom]

135. You must be taking about another case. I'm talking about the accuser

who had no signs of trauma in her physical examination, but claimed a brutal rape and beating had occurred. I'm talking about the accuser who said she had had no sex with anyone for a week, but who had DNA in her vagina from her boyfriend, her "driver" and 4 or 5 other men (none of whom were among the 46 lacrosse players) -- and who worked for an escort service, entertaining gentlemen in hotel rooms. I'm talking about the accuser with a long history of drug and alcohol abuse, who had also been diagnosed with conditions that led to treatment with anti-psychotic medicine. I'm talking about the accuser who was never separated from the other stripper for more than 6 minutes. I'm talking about the accuser who had previously claimed to have been raped by another group of three men, but had withdrawn those charges.

All of this is documented in the final report of issued by the Attorney General of the State of North Carolina. So where did you hear about death threats? And how would they be relevant to the DNA evidence and all the other physical evidence?

[Dr. Strange]

82. It's okay, though.

Apparently Crystal Magnum wasn't a choir girl, so (even though it didn't happen) she deserved to be raped, right?

:eyes:

[JeanGrey]

40. Well, wasn't that big of them. I'd love to know how much

the kids got out of them and out of those idiots that wrote that letter, if anything.

[fishwax]

45. I hope they get nothing out of the people who wrote the letter

since writing a letter is hardly an actionable offense.

BTW, though, welcome to DU JeanGrey :hi:

[JeanGrey]

73. Thank you! I've enjoyed it so far.

I think whether it is actionable or not depends on what is in it.

[abq e streeter]

47. I wonder how many DUers

also immediately assumed these guys were guilty based on them being privileged white jocks being accused by a black woman. I had a gut feeling they were being railroaded and was amazed at the angry responses I got from progressive friends who were outraged that I even would consider that possibility. Not gloating that I was right and and my friends were wrong; there's nothing to gloat about--its just a sad incident all the way around, plus I've been wrong about plenty of things in my life. This one just smelled fishy from the start.

[LisaL]

52. I've noticed in those kind of cases, a lot of people immediately

assume guilt, and don't bother to think that the accusations could be false, or police could have the wrong person. Take even the recent Hanna Mack case. Police first suspect mother's boyfriend, yet now they've arrested another man. But do people wait for any evidence that the accused actually did it? Thankfully, there is DNA. I shudder to think what was happening before DNA testing became available.

[pnwmom]

58. My impression was that the majority of DUers felt that way, at least

in the first few months after the accusation.

[Nutmegger]

112. Guilty until proven innocent.

Even more so with this case due to the social class factors.

[lumberjack_jeff]

55. It is reasonable to ask what form that support should have taken. n/t

[pnwmom]

59. The Duke President gave an example in his apology.

He said they should have disavowed the statements from the faculty that were condemning the students. He didn't give specifics, but there were some egregious ones -- Prof. Houston Baker's rantings, for example.

They also should have made certain that professors weren't retaliating against students in their classes -- and that happened, too.

[defendandprotect]

88. We are far, far from knowing the truth of this case --

We can see the emotionalism just on this thread --

And, certainly there was racism and sexism on this campus --
and certainly the administration knew it --

How do you begin to defend a team hiring an exotic dancer in their "house" --
and doing that because if they went out some of their younger teammates wouldn't have been able to drink.

Others who have been hired to entertain on the campus say they've had to hire bodyguards when they go there.

The "houses" were being shut down because of problems with drinking, etal --
This "house" happened to still be open, but on its way to being shut down.

Of many oddities in the case, one was the obvious clearing out of the house very quickly after the "incident."

Another is the taking of pictures ..... of a female who was obviously in need of assistance.
What was the reason for it -- pleasant memories?

Let's begin by NOT ignoring the reality of this campus and the problems that did exist there --
Someday, we might have more info --

PS: As far as behavior on campus, I think it was Rolling Stone that did a story on it --

[pnwmom]

111. Only if you purposely insulate yourself from exposure to the facts of the

case. Read the State's report, which can be downloaded from Prof. K.C. Johnson's website. Read the rest of the documents on Johnson's website. (Not that it should matter, but besides being an historian, he's a Democrat.)

There is a MOUNTAIN of evidence that proves the students' innocence.

www.durhamwonderland.blogspot.com

[Katherine Brengle]

64. ugh

People need to learn what "unfounded" means versus "didn't happen."

[LisaL]

65. Starting with you, I would say.

[pnwmom]

67. Not in this case, because both are true. No rape occurred

and the charges were completely unfounded.

You should read the report by the N.C. attorney general's office. No rape occurred, and Nifong knew it. That's why he is out of a job and was found criminally liable. And this is why the A.G. declared with no "if's, and's or but's" that the students were INNOCENT of all charges.

[defendandprotect]

90. The hospital records -- doctor and nurse -- indicate sexual assault ---

Rape does not have to be penetration with a penis ---

[live love laugh]

104. I am glad that you said that because it is true and relevant. n/t

[pnwmom]

109. Haven't you read the state's final report? There was NO medical evidence

of assault -- only of sexual activity, some of which she acknowledged. The DNA tests showed DNA from her boyfriend, her "driver," and 4 or 5 unidentified males, NONE of them being LAX players. And this is not surprising since she was a sex-worker employed by an escort service.

[pnwmom]

105. That's a lie. I'll assume you're just misinformed. All that the hospital

records indicated was that she had had recent sexual activity. There were no injuries, as there certainly would have been if she were raped with an object. And since the second set of DNA tests showed the DNA of her boyfriend and her "driver," plus 4 or 5 other unidentified men, that explains the signs of sexual activity. And none of this is a big surprise since she was working as a prostitute for an escort service.

If you are truly misinformed about the facts of the case, you should read the report of the Attorney General of North Carolina. His report shows definitively that there was never any rape at all and that is why he took the unusual step of declaring the students not merely not guilty, but INNOCENT of all charges.

[live love laugh]

103. Right. And OJ didn't kill his wife if you read the attorney's report. n/t

[pnwmom]

107. This is the report from the top prosecutor, not the defense.

The Attorney General of the State of North Carolina, whose job it is to oversee the prosecution of cases in the state, has issued a report going through all the evidence that proves the innocence of the students.

This is nothing like the O.J. case. If you remember, the DNA evidence strongly indicated his guilt. In this case, the DNA evidence helped to prove the students' innocence.

[Forkboy]

70. Why don't you explain it to us.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

126. Forgive me if I'm not too sympathetic towards these lacrosse players

Don't get me wrong. They were wrongly accused, and they were eventually vindicated. And I'm glad the truth came out and they aren't in jail for a crime they didn't commit.

But on the other hand, these guys knew the risks of what they were doing. They knowingly hired an adult performer with the intention of enjoying her services. It doesn't take a brain surgeon to realize that a large amount of women in that industry might perhaps harbor a certain level of disdain for the people who hire them to perform. Many times these women have grown up victims of sexual abuse, and it shows a rather low level of self-esteem and self-worth for one to make it her profession to stimulate others sexually through dancing and what have you.

So why is it such a surprise that this one dancer may have had emotional and mental issues and perhaps harbored a grudge towards these men? And that grudge perhaps translated into her making up a story as to what happened that night?

These guys really weren't that stupid not to realize this.

They should count their lucky stars the truth came out and they were exonerated. And that is all they deserve. They don't deserve one penny for a situation which they are in part responsible for. They can get on with their lives and that's it.

In other words, you're free men. Quit yer bitchin'.

[LisaL]

127. Oops. For some curious reason, they haven't listened to you.

I suspect the three accused got more than a penny from their settlement with Duke. And I also suspect more lawsuits are under way.

[pnwmom]

136. So they should have expected that a prosecutor would try to railroad them?

That's the little part that gets to me.

I hope they make Durham pay. A lot of people in that city government colluded to help Mike Nifong, and I hope it all comes out.

[LoZoccolo]

139. You know what your argument reminds me of?

It reminds me of people who accuse victimized women of being partially responsible for their own rapes due to what they were wearing or the "situation" they put themselves in.

[pnwmom]

142. That's exactly it, LoZoccolo.

And there's such a smugness to it -- such a certainty that nothing bad could ever happen to anyone if they just behaved properly, dotted all their i's and crossed their t's.

It might be nice to live in that kind of world, but we don't.

[kwassa]

169. what I can't figure out ....

is why you are so into this case.

I've been reading your notes since it happened, along with everyone else. Mostly, you turned out to be right.

But it wasn't obvious what right or wrong was in this case, though you thought it obvious. Nothing is really settled until the courts deal with the issues. The prosecution collapsed. Nifong is downright bizarre, as it turns out.What did he think he was doing?

Are you related, in any way, to members of the lacrosse team?

[LoZoccolo]

170. I would think that all U. S. Amercians should have an interest...

...in presuming people innocent until they are found guilty. Some day it might be you.

[Forkboy]

162. There's something we can agree on.

:thumbsup:

[Xithras]

150. Umm, it's a legal business activity.

We're not talking about a doper here who illegally buys pot and ends up ODing on laced weed, or a john who catches VD from a prostitute. Those are illegal and illicit activities, and you knowingly take your chances when you participate in them.

Stripping is a legal and legitimate business activity dominated by professional and hard working women who are simply trying to make a living. I don't see how any person taking part in a legal activity can ben held responsible when the service provider turns out to be a nutcase with a vendetta.

If a Taco Bell worker spits in your food, do you blame yourself for partaking in a service which exploits the labor of the unskilled and uneducated by working them long hours for little pay? Or do you have him arrested?

[pnwmom]

154. The Puritans around here seem to forget that. n/t

[SayWhatYo]

156. I suppose if she truly was rape then you wouldn't have sympathy for her either??

I mean, she did put herself in that situation, right? She should have been smart enough to know what could have happened... Same logic, right? Or is it different?