There is a scandal now brewing in the Duke lacrosse case. I'm
not even sure whether to call it a rape case anymore. You're about to see
why.
Consistent with the procedure in North Carolina and elsewhere,
the prosecution has to turn over its evidence to the defense to prepare for
trial. There's still more to come, but the bulk of what has been turned over
is troubling enough. It suggests a failure to follow standard procedure that
is rather mind-boggling.
Consider: The District Attorney went to the grand jury for an
indictment before he even performed DNA tests (it turns out there was no
match). One of the investigators was still collecting prices for DNA tests
while the DA was giving interviews. He announced to the press that he was
certain that a rape had taken place before excluding the possibility that
the woman's physical symptoms were the result of sex with another man (turns
out she'd had sex with her boyfriend within the preceding 24 hours). They
were still investigating the woman's whereabouts during the 24 hours leading
up to the party, and they had already been to the grand jury. The prosecutor
relied on a photographic identification procedure that reportedly violated
the standards of his own department. If the discovery is any indication, his
case is sitting on quicksand.
None of this means the woman is lying. But at the very least,
standard procedure should have been to await the results of tests, and then,
given the results, the inconsistencies in the woman's statements, the fact
that at least one of the boys seems to have an airtight alibi, investigate
further before indicting anyone.
Instead, the train had already left the station.
It doesn't matter anymore why the DA was so determined to
indict. His critics will say it was just because he was thinking about his
political career. His supporters will say he really believed her, and that a
District Attorney has every right to be responsive to the community that
elects him. My guess is he really did believe her, but it certainly didn't
hurt that he needed to. And one thing is clear: He's not going to change his
mind now.
That means this case is going to trial, unless a judge steps in
to stop it, which is something that rarely happens.
Story Continues Below
And of this you can be sure: No good will come of it. Trials do
not tend to be healing experiences. Sides dig in. Things get more
contentious, not less. Tempers are bound to flare. Reliving the evening in
living color is not likely to be pretty. Hearing the racial epithets again,
rereading the e-mails, all of that will not improve race relations, even if
it has nothing to do with whether a rape happened or not.
Even before that, there will be the questions of who serves on
the jury and what counts as a jury of their peers. Shall we start counting
how many minorities there are, how many "Duke" people, how many of "us" and
how many of "them"?
If she takes the stand, she'll be slaughtered on cross.
If she doesn't, the prosecution doesn't have a chance.
No one will be convinced that the case was handled fairly.
If even one of the boys is convicted, there will be outrage in
the Duke community.
If they're all acquitted, there will be outrage in the black
community that three white boys got away with rape.
Conservatives will be outraged that three boys' lives were
ruined because an ambitious prosecutor believed a lying "slut" (as in the
nuts and sluts defense), which will be played to a fare-thee-well.
Victims rights advocates like me will be depressed because we
will worry, rightly, about all the messages being sent to legitimate
victims.
And what would have happened if the District Attorney had waited
to go to the grand jury, followed the identification procedure, let the test
results come in, found out about the boyfriend and investigated enough to
learn that one of the suspects had an airtight alibi? He might have decided
not to file charges at all, or not to file them against these three young
men.
There are reasons you follow procedures. In general, they are
there to spare outrage.