Duke University Suspends Entire Lacrosse Team Due To Rape Allegation

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Collin Finnerty tells his side of Duke story
BY BART JONES
bart.jones@newsday.com
April 12, 2007, 11:25 PM EDT

RALEIGH, N.C. -- Collin Finnerty never got the chance to tell his side of the story to Durham County District Attorney Mike Nifong, the DA's prosecutors or the Durham police, Finnerty said Thursday in his first interview since being absolved of all charges in the Duke lacrosse rape case.

They never asked for it, he said.

While the nation debated for nearly a year whether he and two other Duke lacrosse players raped a stripper hired for a team party, none of those law enforcement officials interviewed the Garden City man. In fact, Nifong said early on in the probe that the players weren't cooperating.

Finnerty said that what he would have told them is that he left the party at the house on North Buchanan Boulevard minutes after the two exotic dancers arrived on March 14, 2006, and that he was not even present when the accuser reported the attack took place.

"We kind of got out of there quickly," Finnerty said. "It wasn't possible that we were there when she is saying there was a crime."

He added, "No one knows the true timeline. It's something that we've been waiting to get out there."

"That's one of the frustrating things. To not be able to tell your side of the story is kind of tough, especially for a full year," the lanky 20-year-old Chaminade graduate said in the lobby of a $450-a-night hotel near Raleigh, where he and his family stayed this week. "We still haven't really told our story."

Finnerty said that after he left the party he bought some food, went back to his campus dorm, and then called one of his sisters on his cell phone. He said records back up his account.

Nifong issued an apology for his office's actions yesterday, but Nifong's office and the Durham police department did not return calls seeking comment yesterday.

Finnerty, David Evans and Reade Seligmann were charged with rape, sexual offense and kidnapping, although Nifong dropped the rape charge in December.

Finnerty's parents, Kevin and Mary Ellen, said yesterday was the first day in a year they woke up with any sense of relief.

Mary Ellen Finnerty called the ordeal "a mother's worst nightmare," with the possibility hanging over them of her son going to prison for decades.

"Think of all the talking heads I had to listen to that bashed my son nightly," she added.

They said Wednesday's exoneration has opened the door a bit more to the possibility of Collin's resuming his studies at Duke. But they remain terrified as long as Nifong is the district attorney and some members of the police department who were involved in the case are still on the force, they said.

For the past year, the family has felt that "you have this crazy man chasing your son, and there's nothing you can do about it," Kevin Finnerty said.

Collin Finnerty, who had been attending Hofstra University until recently, said he has made no final decision on Duke.

"It would be great to be back with my teammates," he said. But "it would be tough for my parents, I think, to send me back down there."

The family also said it had made no decision on filing a civil lawsuit against Nifong, the police department or Duke, which suspended sophomores Finnerty and Seligmann after their indictments.

Finnerty's defense attorney, Wade Smith, noted that filing a civil suit would mean remaining immersed in the case for years and the family may want instead to move on.

The family said Wednesday was one of the most emotional moments of their lives as they gathered with the two other families and their attorneys in a hotel suite to watch Attorney General Roy Cooper's television announcement.

Mary Ellen Finnerty said she felt her heart pounding and had trouble breathing. When Cooper said her son was exonerated, Collin "nearly passed out" and had to sit down.

The room was filled with tears and hugs.
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:
I like to use facts to back up my statements, not paranoia and prejudice. Try it sometime.

I refer the right honourable gentleman to my previous question.

Do you EVER think that you might be wrong?
 
financeguy said:


I refer the right honourable gentleman to my previous question.

Do you EVER think that you might be wrong?

I'm 100% positive that I'm not always right. But what does this have to do with the issue at hand?
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:
I'm 100% positive that I'm not always right. But what does this have to do with the issue at hand?

It's a mistake to think that progressives hold a monopoly on truth. And it's another mistake to think that progressives hold a monopoly on morality. Maybe you don't think that, but there's an awful lot of dismissiveness on here towards points of view outside of the mainstream.

It does not necessarily relate to this thread in particular. It's more of a general point.
 
financeguy said:


It's a mistake to think that progressives hold a monopoly on truth. And it's another mistake to think that progressives hold a monopoly on morality. Maybe you don't think that, but there's an awful lot of dismissiveness on here towards points of view outside of the mainstream.

It does not necessarily relate to this thread in particular. It's more of a general point.

Wow, you assume way way too much about me.

I think the reason you get dismissed is you often don't bring anything to the table to back up your views, and if you do they aren't credible. You often come off as a paranoid bigot, if you don't want to come off that way you may want to think about how you approach debating.

^That is neither a monopoly on morality or truth.
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:


Wow, you assume way way too much about me.

I think the reason you get dismissed is you often don't bring anything to the table to back up your views, and if you do they aren't credible. You often come off as a paranoid bigot, if you don't want to come off that way you may want to think about how you approach debating.

Never mind all that tripe.

Don't you really, in your hearts of hearts, believe that progressives are in the right - and, if they are in the right - doesn't that imply that conservatives must automatically be in the wrong?

Don't you really think that conservatives are probably bad people?

I propose that some forms of progressive thought hold, at their core, a prejudice every bit as ugly as that which you see in the other side.
 
financeguy said:


Never mind all that tripe.

Ignore the ugly truth, it will be easier to live with yourself.

financeguy said:

Don't you really, in your hearts of hearts, believe that progressives are in the right - and, if they are in the right - doesn't that imply that conservatives must automatically be in the wrong?

Don't you really think that conservatives are probably bad people?


No. Like I said you assume way too much.
 
financeguy said:
Don't you really think that conservatives are probably bad people?

Wow. That's a really absurd assumption. It is perfectly reasonable to think those on the opposing side of an issue or issues are wrong, but still think they're honest, decent people.

Take my parents, for example. :wink:
 
U2Bama said:
I lean conservative, and I think that most would agree that, yes, I probably am a bad person.

~U2Alabama



i reserve that judgement only for Bush voters. i'm fine with conservatives, even Republicans.

i can understand in 2000, but by 2004, if you voted for Bush, you are a bad person.

or, at least owe us all a formal letter of apology that will outline the steps you are going to take in order to rectify such a stunning lapse in judgement.

and then you have to enlist.



yes, mostly kidding
 
RALEIGH, N.C. -- The NCAA on Wednesday granted Duke's request for an extra year of eligibility for its men's lacrosse players following a rape scandal that led to the cancellation of much of last season.

Duke played just eight games in 2006 before the university canceled what was left of the season as police investigated allegations a woman was sexually assaulted at a team party.

Three players were later indicted, but the accusations were eventually debunked by North Carolina's top prosecutor, who called the trio "innocent" victims of a "tragic rush to accuse."

The waiver affects all players who were not seniors during the '06 season, and it grants them a fifth year of eligibility regardless of whether they play at Duke or another school.

The announcement comes just two days after the Blue Devils (17-3) lost to Johns Hopkins 12-11 in the NCAA championship game.
 
RALEIGH, N.C. -- District Attorney Mike Nifong was disbarred Saturday for his "selfish" rape prosecution of three Duke University lacrosse players -- a politically motivated act, his judges said, that he inexplicably allowed to fester for months after it was clear the defendants were innocent.

"This matter has been a fiasco. There's no doubt about it," said F. Lane Williamson, the chairman of the three-member disciplinary committee that stripped the veteran prosecutor of his state law license.

Even Nifong and his attorneys supported the decision, though the veteran prosecutor refused to admit to the end that no crime occurred at a March 2006 lacrosse team party.

The committee said Nifong manipulated the investigation to boost his chances of winning his first election for Durham County district attorney. In doing so, he committed "a clear case of intentional prosecutorial misconduct" that involved "dishonesty, fraud, deceit and misrepresentation."

Williamson specifically cited Nifong's comments in the early days of the case, which included a confident proclamation at a candidate forum that he wouldn't allow Durham to become known for "a bunch of lacrosse players from Duke raping a black girl." He also called the lacrosse team "a bunch of hooligans" at one point.

Appointed district attorney in 2005, Nifong was in a tight race for the office when an exotic dancer told police she was raped at the party.

"At the time he was facing a primary, and yes, he was politically naive," Williamson said. "But we can draw no other conclusion that those initial statements he made were to further his political ambitions."

During the ethics trial, Nifong acknowledged he knew there was no DNA evidence connecting Reade Seligmann and Collin Finnerty to the 28-year-old accuser when he indicted them on charges of rape, sexual offense and kidnapping. Nifong later charged Dave Evans with the same crimes. But months later, state prosecutors concluded the three players were "innocent" -- a fact Williamson hammered home on Saturday.

"We acknowledge the actual innocence of the defendants, and there's nothing here that has done anything but support that assertion," Williamson said.
 
What a shock. Can book deals & the talk show circuit be far behind?

Also I heard something about a financial settlement between the 3 men & Duke. It was on the ESPN ticker so no details other than that. I assume because Duke adopted the same "guilty until proven innocent" mentality that Nifong did. How Duke handled this was pretty shameful, not only re: the players but also their coach.
 
Back
Top Bottom