Breaking: Nifong slapped with second, harsher ethics complaint

posted at 9:45 am on January 24, 2007 by Allahpundit

Just across on Fox. ABC News has a teaser up but no link yet. Who called it? Me, that’s who.

They’ve had a file open on him since March, which makes me think maybe these were older charges that they’d already finished investigating and about which they felt confident enough to proceed. The accusation of suppressing evidence is more recent. It could be they haven’t gotten around to it yet and are planning to amend the complaint when they do.

Admittedly, that was about as tough a call as predicting that Bush’s speech would be boring and unpersuasive.

Among the new charges: withholding DNA evidence.

There’s a press conference coming up; we may very well have video. While we wait, go watch the clip in the sidebar of the Duke kids’ parents unloading on the bastard.

Update: Tasty.

The North Carolina Bar today filed an amended complaint accusing Nifong of withholding DNA evidence from the defense and making misrepresentations to the presiding judge in the case. The Bar has accused Nifong of conduct that involves “dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation.” Nifong also allegedly violated a rule that “prohibits an attorney from knowingly making false statements of material fact.”…

Nifong could receive anything from private reprimand to disbarment in connection with the ethics charges. If disbarred, Nifong would have to give up his seat as Durham County District Attorney.

The hearing’s on May 11. I’d bet my first child that he won’t disbarred.

Update: In my best John McEnroe voice: you cannot be serious.

The test results from DNA Security of Burlington found DNA from at least four unidentified men in and on the accuser and excluded the entire lacrosse team as the source. The bar’s complaint said Nifong hid these results from defense lawyers, who repeatedly asked for all DNA test results. Nifong then lied to the court, either on paper or in direct comments to a judge, on five occasions, the complaint said.

When the State Bar notified Nifong on Dec. 20 that the organization was investigating the withheld evidence and false statements, Nifong acknowledged that he knew of the DNA results in April and May, the complaint said. Nifong told the bar that he withheld the results out of concerns for the players’ privacy concerns.

Update: Nifong’s lead investigator in the case? Also the subject of ethics complaints in the past, although the charges were never proved.

Update: Here’s the complaint. You already know most of the facts from having watched the 60 Minutes piece. Scroll down to the bottom of page 29 and go from there.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

YES!!!!!!!!!

Wade on January 24, 2007 at 9:57 AM

Anyone notice that spot on his forehead? Now, imagine a full beard and a turban…

RedWinged Blackbird on January 24, 2007 at 9:58 AM

He needs to be disbarred, indicted, and sentenced to several years in jail, plus sued for every penny he earned on those kids’ reputations.

Enoxo on January 24, 2007 at 9:59 AM

I’d bet my first child on the fact that he won’t disbarred.

Sad, but true. What do you lawyers have to do to get disbarred?

Jaibones on January 24, 2007 at 10:06 AM

Hope this all pans out right – if so, it’ll also be a brake on others who play fast and loose with the law and justice.
Meanwhile, still more to wait for re the Duke University kangaroo court.
Just a general comment – can we all agree to stop using the diminuative “kids” or “boys”? At 18, these are young men. There are quite a few 18 year olds around here who are already married with a kid and are working hard to support their families. Two hundred years ago ,there was no “teenager” talk. Schooling was over at 12 and boys were apprenticed with 7-9 year contracts to learn a trade – and left home to room at their place of apprenticeship. They were subject to arrest and jail if they tried to skip out of the contract their parents signed. Working full time and married was common by 20. Just cause these men are in college doesn’t mean they aren’t men. They are facing charges that could put them in prison, adult punishment due their ages. Just something to chew on – the MSM and the female smothering of the culture seems to be the source of this nonmenclature, putting young men down all the time. Let’s not be suckered into it.

naliaka on January 24, 2007 at 10:06 AM

Yeah, good bet that they will circle the lawyer wagons and let him keep his ill-gotten seat.

bbz123 on January 24, 2007 at 10:06 AM

In other unexpected news, I predict it will rain in your town at some point in the future.

Kevin M on January 24, 2007 at 10:12 AM

The thing is this will make it easier for Jesse, Al, and the group of 88 to claim Nifong mislead them. To which I would respond how? The same information that lead them to brazenly and baselessly demonize those LAX players is the very same information that you have today. The ONLY new evidence is that Nifong suppressed evidence of 4 other mens DNA being found in her rectum. So had you knwon that there would not have been any protests? I think not.

Theworldisnotenough on January 24, 2007 at 10:17 AM

he withheld the results out of concerns for the players’ privacy concerns.

Seriously! Who lets this crap grammar get published?

JoeEgo on January 24, 2007 at 10:19 AM

As an academic, I have a particular interest in how Duke has responded as an institution and how the faculty have responded as individuals. Nifong deserves to be rotting in jail for the rest of his life for the framing of three innocent persons and ruining their lives and the lives of their families in myriad ways. However, the university needs to be held accountable as well for, with the exception of Provost Lange who showed real b__ls in confronting the lynch mob called the “potbangers,” not defending the presumtion of innocence before the facts were known, and in not reining in and punishing the gang of 88 (now 87) for their outrageous statements and disrespect for their students.

Sadly, a similar event would have played out similarly on most college campuses. Being a left-wing ideologue in academia gives one the ability to terrorize others and not even having to apologize when irresponsible behavior leads to terrible consequences. Nifong will be punished, but there will not even be a serious inquiry into institutional dysfunctions and individual unethical and irresponsible behavior by the administration and a large segment of the faculty. Among the faculty and administration, life at Duke will go on as though nothing happened.

ptolemy on January 24, 2007 at 10:20 AM

You’re going down, you smug lying bastard.

shooter on January 24, 2007 at 10:28 AM

The rush to judgement of these apparently innocent young men is indicative of the lunatic-leftist, PC idealogy prevalent in most universities today. Let’s hope that this glaring example shines some light on the purveyors.
Nifong should be swiftly, and severely punished.

mountainmanbob on January 24, 2007 at 10:33 AM

What took so long?

Candy Slice on January 24, 2007 at 10:38 AM

Guilty.

Oh wait, did I rush to judgment there?

JammieWearingFool on January 24, 2007 at 10:46 AM

Wow! I hope the bar has cojones and gives him what he deserves. As for me, I work in academia and I will discourage any student from going there. An institution that throws its students to the wolves like Duke did, doesn’t deserve any support.

Ellen on January 24, 2007 at 10:47 AM

Nifong has achieved an infamous milestone. To be Nifonged is now part of the lexicon.

He has joined the ranks with other infamous jack offs like OJ, whose names are now synonymous with bad behavior.

His family must be proud of him.

there it is on January 24, 2007 at 11:00 AM

The hearing’s on May 11. I’d bet my first child that he won’t disbarred.

Unless it’s just a ploy to get out of changing diapers, I wouldn’t be that sure. From what Liestoppers is reporting, there is some serious political pressure for the general assembly in NC to do something about this – something the bar would obviously rather not see happen. Pertinent quote (among many):

From the comments of Dollar and Blust, new legislation may depend in part on two factors: the response of the State Bar and the volume of outrage from the media and the public. Considering the unprecedented move by the State Bar to bring ethics charges against District Attorney Nifong as he continued with the prosecution that was the source of the charges, the Bar seems well aware of the impetus placed upon it to demonstrate it can effectively clean its own house.

If Nifong gets off with anything less than disbarment, it will be seen as nothing more than a slap on the wrist, and the pressure for the NC general assembly to do something will mount (not to mention pressure on the feds to get involved).

There is little risk to the bar at large if they (rightly) decides to throw Nifong under the bus and disbar him. They will be seen as being able to properly discipline their own. On the other hand, if they don’t disbar him, the pressure for the NC general assembly to take legislative action will probably be pretty strong, and that the consequences of that is something the bar will have to weigh against sacrificing Nifong to the punishment he so richly deserves.

They’re stupid if they let him off the hook (which would be, IMO, anything less than permanent disbarment).

thirteen28 on January 24, 2007 at 11:11 AM

“Nifong then lied to the court, either on paper or in direct comments to a judge, on five occasions, the complaint said.”

and

Nifong told the bar that he withheld the results out of concerns for the players’ privacy concerns.

the investigator- “Wilson was never charged with a crime…”

..neither was the drug runner who was shot in the arse while running away with 700+ POUNDS of pot.
If Nifong doesnt go to jail, if he is NOT disbarred, this will hurt every court in the land. Every ethical DA in North Carolina must call for complete justice against these arrogant power hungry vermin. Nifong and his ‘gang’ are a total disgrace to that city and state.

So who plays the horrific evil villain in the movie?
Gregory Itzin? ( president Logan on 24)

shooter on January 24, 2007 at 11:13 AM

..neither was the drug runner who was shot in the arse while running away with 700+ POUNDS of pot.

Now that is one strong drug runner.

Anyway, I think Duke’s president is done. The public face of support he’s getting from the trustees and the administration is pretty standard for academia. I’m sure the college is hearing cries of displeasure from the alumni association and the Foundation is probably looking at just how much of its endowment is going to be used to pay settlements.

If Duke does get a new administration, expect members of the Group of 88 to start putting out applications. Tenure is great, but it doesn’t offer absolute protection and the faculty who signed that letter are unlikely to see administrative positions come their way. The Trustees have to approve all academic officers, and some of them will likely hold grudges.

Slublog on January 24, 2007 at 11:22 AM

I’m not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV, but I have worked for them for almost 25 years now. Most of them have the morals of alley cats, but there are some who are decent human beings, and the decent ones want to see Nifong drawn and quartered. I can’t help but think that if an “average citizen” (i.e., nonlawyer) pulled crap like this, the law would put him UNDER the jail.

/I said what you told me to say, now will you let my family go?

MarineDad on January 24, 2007 at 11:22 AM

The hearing’s on May 11. I’d bet my first child that he won’t disbarred.

AP, what do you have to do to get disbarred then?

I mean really. This is like someone that works the cash register at Walmart getting taped slipping $20′s in their pocket and still having a job – just not at the cash register.

If he doesn’t get disbarred for this then there is no effective discipline being enforced at all. Prosecutors (and other lawyers) can get away with anything.

Dwilkers on January 24, 2007 at 11:27 AM

It is unfortunte that Nifong cannot be given the same punishment he was attempting to inflict on others.

For that matter, in Nifong’s case, it is unfortunate Keel Hauling, Flogging to an inch of his life, and Crucifiction are no longer used in the United States. Maybe we could send him to Iran for execution of sentence.

omegaram on January 24, 2007 at 11:27 AM

The first rumblings, very slight, begin against Brodhead.

Slublog on January 24, 2007 at 11:33 AM

The thing is this will make it easier for Jesse, Al, and the group of 88 to claim Nifong mislead them.

I’m still wondering why there’s no outrage from the African-American community. Nifong, a privileged white man, sold them a story and played them for fools so he could win re-election, guaranteeing his pension. He didn’t just play the race card, he’s playing the race game -sowing racial distrust and hatred for personal gain. We’re all losers in this game. Except for Nifong, unless he’s disbarred.

taznar on January 24, 2007 at 11:35 AM

I agree with thirteen28. The state bar has some serious weighing to do here. However, I would not be too suprised, disapointed for sure, but not suprised to see him keep his bar license. As a law student taking an ethics course this semester, I’m excited to bring this case up during class.

Troy Rasmussen on January 24, 2007 at 11:37 AM

Sad, but true. What do you lawyers have to do to get disbarred?

I think the only thing explicitly stated is to “[B]e caught shooting a judge in a courtroom with video evidence.”

Hoodlumman on January 24, 2007 at 11:45 AM

ptolemy on January 24, 2007 at 10:20 AM
WELL SAID!

Not noted yet is the travesty of the decision to cancel the Duke Lacrosse season. A team ranked 2nd in the country didn’t even play. How that has hurt the players, seniors especially, we will never know. The damage is multi faceted to be sure, and Nifong is just the tip of that rotten iceberg.

The entire team got nifonged, as well as many many others.

Also, as a side benefit, maybe other ‘questionable’ DA’s around the country might straighten up, if need be.

shooter on January 24, 2007 at 11:46 AM

Sad, but true. What do you lawyers have to do to get disbarred?

Jaibones on January 24, 2007 at 10:06 AM

Well, the first thing they would have to do is become a conservative and resign from the Democratic Party. That would be the initial step to take.

sdd on January 24, 2007 at 11:47 AM

Sad, but true. What do you lawyers have to do to get disbarred?

Jaibones on January 24, 2007 at 10:06 AM

Refusal to sell your soul.

Tim Burton on January 24, 2007 at 12:10 PM

It has been a core element of the liberal worldview that to use the law to knowingly prosecute innocent individuals is one of the most egregious injustices in our society. When I hear people – and not to target the Democrats unfairly, but it is always a liberal Democrat – claim that “social injustice” is their great passion, I always wondered what, exactly, they are talking about.

I guess they are talking about Mike Nifong.

The ironic part for me is that this group obviously despises social injustice, too. We just see it in different places, I suspect.

Jaibones on January 24, 2007 at 12:14 PM

Jaibones on January 24, 2007 at 12:14 PM

Let’s not rush to judgement against Nifong like the group of 88 did against the players. At least not until we find out how many people’s DNA Nifong has in his rectum.

pedestrian on January 24, 2007 at 12:21 PM

Let’s not rush to judgement against Nifong like the group of 88 did against the players. At least not until we find out how many people’s DNA he has in his rectum.

pedestrian on January 24, 2007 at 12:23 PM

Nifong is like a lamb covered in honey and mint jelly in the middle of the saregetti… I love it!

x95b10 on January 24, 2007 at 12:28 PM

However, I would not be too suprised, disapointed for sure, but not suprised to see him keep his bar license. As a law student taking an ethics course this semester, I’m excited to bring this case up during class.

Troy Rasmussen on January 24, 2007 at 11:37 AM

If they do, I hope the NC general assembly comes down hard on the NC state bar.

It would be hard to come up with a stronger case for disbarment, and if the bar can’t police it’s own then they should surrender the right to have that authority.

thirteen28 on January 24, 2007 at 12:30 PM

Dunno, wouldn’t it be more accurate to say the Duke lacrosse team was “Duked” or “88″ed. That would be smeared, the entire team membership photos put up on Wanted posters, their professors stirring up their fellow classmates against them … there’s quite a list here. Just cause Nifong was up to his own antics doesn’t mean a single person at Duke had to go along with it, and especially not the faculty. The adults are supposed to provide leadership, not provocations. What the group of 88 was doing was setting up pre-conditions for a lynching, in the classic sense, the sense that everyone deplores, based on crude stereotypes and scapegoating; the very meaning of lynching that those very same professors have been railing against for years at how unfair and awful it is. Yeh, well lynching is awful and was awful and shouldn’t be wished on your worst enemy or you are no better than the one you criticise. Lynchings usually don’t occur when enough outside pressure comes to bear to dissuade the local group from carrying out emotional justice, not fair and balanced justice – cool and impartial to determine the truth – not just what every thinks what happened.
That Duke also harbors a Law School is especially pathetic. Send your son to Duke? Hahahahaha. How about your daughter? DO you want her to be taught to hate her own brother?

naliaka on January 24, 2007 at 12:32 PM

Nifong told the bar that he withheld the results out of concerns for the players’ privacy concerns his career. He said ruefully, “I needed to stay in office long enough to get state retirement benefits, so I figured it was a perfectly understandable thing to do. And those rich punks were drinking under age, anyway, so they deserved it. Honestly, I’m the victim here.”

There, fixed it.

Laura on January 24, 2007 at 12:50 PM

“When the State Bar notified Nifong on Dec. 20 that the organization was investigating the withheld evidence and false statements, Nifong acknowledged…”

Didn’t he finally do something about some charges in this case on the 21st of December??? One day after the State Bar came calling?

shooter on January 24, 2007 at 2:45 PM

The thing is this will make it easier for Jesse, Al, and the group of 88 to claim Nifong mislead them.

This is nothing new for Al Sharpton, and he knows exactly how to handle it–just pretend it didn’t happen, and eventually it will go away. The civil suit which the cop in the Tawana Brawley case won, which made shreds out of the whole Brawley incident was completely ignored by his constituency, and eventually by the mainstream media. How else could he dare run as a candidate for president?

That piece of trash Nifong ought to be in jail for this crap. I’ll tell you this–there are going to be some HUGE lawsuits coming out of this, and one of the plaintiffs will be Duke, which will be on the hook for huge punitive damages. Talk about pain and suffering, and mental anguish! Under these terms in the dictionary is a picture of these poor kids. I wouldn’t be surprised if Duke ended up having to cough up several million. They left those boys to twist in the wind at best, if not actually helping at the lynching itself. This is PC run amok.

smellthecoffee on January 24, 2007 at 2:56 PM

AP, with all due respect…Nifong is going down. He is the perfect fall guy, no one likes him, he set up the black community, made some profs. look like fools, NC is pissed off, no elected official in their right mind will defend him, he is “spoiled goods”; there is no downside for taking him out.

right2bright on January 24, 2007 at 4:17 PM

“I’d bet my first child that he won’t disbarred”

Better get ready to say bye-bye to Junior, then. I hope you weren’t too attached. ;^)

He will almost certainly lose his license over this case. His actions were a WILLFUL abuse of his position as prosecutor and flies directly against his prosecutor’s oath of office. He will also face civil liability for malicious and false prosecution.

His disbarment may not be permanent, however. Bill Clinton was disbarred from practice before the Supreme Court (and he accepted Arkansas state disbarment, as well) for committing perjury under oath for a 5 year period.

Lawyers in Illinois (I read my wife’s state bar Journal) get disbarred, either permanently but usually for a period of time, for misappropriation of client moneys, malpractice, conflict of interest, and conviction of a felony. This is similar to what happens in other states such as Wisconsin.

The NC bar will act and that action will be more than a slap on the wrist. It will include removal from office as well disbarment, because this is an egregious violation of the defendant’s civil rights as well as a criminal act.

And regardless of what NC does, it is my hope that federal charges will be brought for violating the civil rights of the defendants under color of law.

georgej on January 24, 2007 at 4:36 PM

Refusal to sell your soul.
Tim Burton on January 24, 2007 at 12:10 PM

Lawyers have souls?? Who would have known..

docdave on January 24, 2007 at 4:53 PM

Dr. Sowell nailed it in one on May 16, 2006, right after Nifong got himself elected with his posturing on this case.

If there is a smoking gun in the Duke University rape case, it is not about the stripper who made the charges or the lacrosse players who have been accused. The smoking gun is the decision of District Attorney Michael Nifong to postpone a trial until the spring of 2007.

That makes no sense from either a legal or a social standpoint, whether the players are guilty or innocent. But it tells us something about District Attorney Nifong.

Suppose, for the sake of argument, that the players are guilty. What is the point of letting a bunch of rapists remain at large for another year? What about the dangers that they would pose to women on or off the Duke University campus?

What purpose does the delay serve? The most obvious purpose is the same as the purpose that delay serves in confidence games.

After a fraud has been perpetrated and it is only a matter of time before the victim finds out, it can still make a big difference whether the victim finds out suddenly or slowly over an extended period of time. This is called “cooling out the mark.”

One of Clinton’s press secretaries called these delaying tactics “telling the truth slowly.”

It was out of the question for Nifong to drop the case before the recent election, no matter how flimsy the evidence might be or how much of that evidence exonerates the accused instead of showing them to be guilty.

Even after being re-elected, the district attorney cannot let his indictment collapse in public while there is nationwide attention focussed [sic] on this case 24-7.

What will be different next year? The public will have either forgotten the case or be tired of hearing about it. The D.A. can even turn the case over to some lawyer on his staff to take into court and see it either get thrown out by the judge or fail to convince a jury.

We will all be tired of hearing about it by then. We are the marks who will be cooled out.

Bullseye.

Freelancer on January 24, 2007 at 4:54 PM

barry krisher is the Palm Beach County State Attorney that went after Rush. IMO, I’m in good company.

tormod on January 24, 2007 at 9:19 PM

Justice demands impeachment, disbarrment, trial, and if convicted, prison. Nothing else will do. Justice for all, or justice for none. There is no middle way.

the-gunslinger on January 25, 2007 at 2:20 AM

What do you lawyers have to do to get disbarred

?

In the Old Days, get caught with a Dead Girl or a Live Boy

In these Post-Enlightenment times, neither applies ( see Gary Condit or Gerry Studds, etc ) Now you need to piss off a Major Donator, commit Aggravated Racial Insensitivity, or probably do both while wanking in plain sight

Oldie but a Goodie: “What do you call 500 lawyers chained together and tossed overboard in deep seas? ….a good start”

Janos Hunyadi on January 25, 2007 at 3:30 AM