I note Baldilocks, today, noting the Mike Nifong case... a case that DavidL has done so well in tracking. I have always said, that the idea was about getting himself reelected. I’ve also suggested repeatedly that the implications of this misdeed are quite deep. Baldilocks brings an interesting perspective to the field, however… one I’d not thought of:
Know this. There are many black people who will jump at the chance to “get back at” white people for the wrongs done to them and their ancestors because of race, even if the individual white person(s) have done nothing. Even some of those same black people who call themselves Christians hold to “the sins of the father” notion–I’m even related to some who hold this belief. That’s part of what this post was about.
Indeed, some blacks–and, notably, some who aren’t mostly black–wanted to punish the Duke lacrosse players without a trial. Back in the day, this was called ‘lynching.’
I think that Nifong counted on this phenomenon, but is not intelligent enough to have thought things out far enough to a logical conclusion. Getting reelected was his immediate goal and other things regarding the rape allegation–the line-up irregularities, the DNA problems and the fact that one of the accused, Reade Seligmann, had an air-tight alibi–could be worked out later. Or so thought someone as cynical and short-sighted as Nifong appears to be.
So now, Nifong will pay for his shortcomings as an individual, but what of the rest of us? By playing into the stereotypes that too many have for white, black, men, women, rich and poor, Nifong has done all of us–and those of other races–a great injury. Nifong’s dubious legacy–along with that of the O.J. Simpson jurors–is that it has made it that much harder for any of us to get real justice when we have been wronged in reality.
A valid point, well written.
June 18th, 2007 at 5:21
My most charitable interpertation of Mike Nifong’s blind procescution, is that Nifong believed that something happened at the party and it involved the Duke lacross team. Sadly for Nifong, he never knew what happened or which players were involved. I hold Nifong belief that something happened as reasonable. But that is it. Nifong dogged persecution of innocent players on dubious evidence was disgracefull.
June 18th, 2007 at 7:24
I can’t bring myself to be quite so charitable. The amount of information that has leaked out about that case is just that; leaks. I suggest to you that the prosecutor knew more than we do now, even at this late date. The preponderance of the evidence that was leaked, exonerated the people he was prosecuting. Yet, I am convinced that not all of it came out. What other exculpatory evidence was there, that didn’t leak?
And to what purpose, would such a prosecution occur? Certainly, justice wasn’t the issue, or the exculpatory evidence would have come out…Nifong would have provided it to the defense. It can only be assumed that is primary consideration was getting reelected.
The point of the post, was the imagery involved; a bunch of rich white kids taking advantage of a poor black girl. Of course, none of it was true, but that doesn’t matter to the imagery. That kind of imagery, would certainly go over with a majority black population in his county.
It seems to me there were an awful lot of people that were willing to jump on this situation as presented by the prosecution, without the benefit of the facts. Those people have some serious questions asked of themselves, now.
June 18th, 2007 at 7:50
Howabout this. Mike Nifong’s theory seemed to be that as some Duke Lacross players were guilty of something, just what he did not know, then it waz appropriate to punishy any three Duke players for a specific crime?
The Duke Gang of what Sixty, were ready to punish the three specific players for alleged, weather, alleged, real or purely imaginary, committed by the white race. So why not suggest the the president of Duke, fire any three professors who signed the letter? He could just draw the names out of hat or bettere yet have Mangum pick three professors out of photo line-up of only Duke professors.
It might not be fair, but it would be turn-about.
June 18th, 2007 at 10:17
What you’ve brought up here, suggests an interesting angle for conversations about educators, going forward; I know that educators like to argue that they are always fact based. Their arguments are invariably to be considered sacrosanct; we mere mortals are not supposed to question them.
Yet, what we see here, is what I think to be a primary example of how such people fall victim to the imagery more quickly than most. They jumped onto the “poor little black girl” bandwagon, before the echoed died, without the facts… and expected us to take their pronouncement as fact.
What does this say, about their observations and dictates about social concerns, and about science? Race relations, seem a prime example, here, as does the myth of global warming. I’m going to be thinking.. and writing about this, a bit, today. I may have something to post tonight over it.