insomnomaniac

Come quick! The Duke "scandal" dissected

WARNING: Content may offend you. Explicit analysis of Duke rape allegations ahead...

OK, so I was reading the original police reports and some of the other factual information about the allegations in the so-called "Duke rape scandal," and I wanted to analyze her story a little more "thoroughly" than the MSM has been doing.

Leaving aside the fact that it's hard for it to be a scandal if no rape actually happened, and since we don't know yet if one did, it's a bit premature to call it a scandal...I found the timeline implausible.

The stripper (please, let's stop calling her an "exotic dancer." There's nothing "exotic" about taking off your clothes for money in front of 40+ ogling young men) alleges that she was held against her will by three (count 'em, she said THREE, not four, not ten, but three) of the Duke lacrosse players in a bathroom of a rental house off campus. She further alleges that in a period lasting 30 minutes (count 'em, not 40, not 60, not 2 hours, but half an hour), these three men "gang raped" and strangled her, violating her anally, vaginally and orally.

Hmmmm....

OK says I...Let me wonder for a moment how exactly that might have worked? The bathroom of this house is--no doubt--not huge. I've seen these off-campus-type houses before, and I've been inside homes like the one shown on TV. I live in NC and this type of bungalow is pretty common here. The typical bathroom is barely large enough for two people to fit in comfortably, never mind FOUR, especially when one is a person who doesn't want to be there and who--we have a right to presume--fought the people who were keeping her there.

But let's set even that aside. Let's give her the benefit of the doubt that it was some recently remodeled huge spa-like room in which three big athletic guys could easily subdue a 27 year-old "dancer" (so one assumes she's not some little weak wilting violet physically) without leaving substancial evidence of a struggle (i.e., broken glass, blood from scratches on surfaces, ripped shower curtain, spilled toiletries, broken toilet seat, etc...

Let's also give her the benefit of the doubt that the reason there was ZERO DNA or any evidence of sexual activity with any of the 46 players (including those arrested) on her person was that they all wore condoms while viciously attacking, raping and sodomizing her.

Can someone please explain to me the following:

• Why did she not bite any of them? Even if you're held down by two big guys, you can clamp down your jaw--especially if you're in a choke-hold at the same time. It's basic human instinct to gasp for air, and that action alone causes the jaw to open and close. Such action could have torn a condom leaving DNA in her mouth, why didn't this happen?


• How exactly did the men do the transfer? If each of the three had their way with her in one fashion or another, how did they change hands (so-to-speak) in terms of who subdued her without her escaping and/or one of the guys getting hurt in some way? How could this happen smoothly? There would have to have been at least three times during which she was only being held down by one guy--I mean, if you presume that the guy violating her was probably busy removing the condom he would have to have worn (which takes two hands to do neatly and without spilling), and this would have to have taken at least a minute or two (1 to remove neatly, maybe 30 seconds to dispose of correctly, i.e., FLUSH), that leaves the guy who's getting ready to violate her (putting on condom, also takes two hands, also takes a minute or two, depending on how drunk, flustered, ham-handed the guy is) busy too. So we're supposed to believe that for up to two minutes of a thirty minute time frame, TWICE (that's at least four, maybe even five minutues total) this woman was up against one guy and she couldn't break free or at least do enough damage or make enough noise to attract the attention of anyone else at the party who could have helped her, her partner included?


• Did each guy climax? I hate to be graphic, but if they did have condoms on (which they would have to have to avoid transferring DNA, and even if they weren't concerned about this, I imagine they'd be worried about disease and pregnancy at least), and they were drinking, we can probably safely assume it wouldn't be something that happened all that quickly. So if we take two minutes per guy to transfer/condom-up, that leaves 24 minutes for each guy to choose his desired position (front, back or center), get her into that position (and remember, she's an unwilling partner, presumably gagging, choking and fighting), and get the guy or guys holding her to move into their positions so they can continue to subdue her adequately for the guy who's raping her to succeed. Are you following me here? Seems like an awfully short period of time in which to do all that, am I crazy? Also, if they didn't each climax, how did they decide when they were "done" with her enough to turn her over to the next guy?


• After the 30 minutes in the bathroom, what happened? Did the guys just leave her lying there, clean up around her and walk back out into the party like nothing had happened? Wouldn't they have been a bit sweaty and dissheveled? Wouldn't they perhaps have been bleeding from scratches inflicted by her during her stuggle? Wasn't anyone trying to go pee while they were in there and wondering what the f--k was going on in there? Are we to believe every attendee at the party is a heartless criminal evil pig? Really?


• How did she leave the house without screaming "THOSE GUYS JUST RAPED ME!!! HELP! CALL THE COPS!" Did they threaten her in some way beyond what they did to her? Was she in shock to the point where she lost all sense of self-preservation? Why didn't she at least run out of the building and scream for help on the sidewalk? If--as she claims, and as we've heard from neighbors, this was such a rowdy belligerent bunch, it's hard to believe the surrounding community would have been hostile to HER, or even that she could have thought that (if what she says happened really did anyway).


• Even if we give her the benefit of the doubt that her story is true--that these guys, despite being drunk, are all Quick-Draw-McGraws who are capable of choreographing a spontaneous gang raping session with the coordination and precision of Cirque de Soleil performers--I still have to ask her what the hell she was doing at least half an hour later passed out drunk in a parked car outside a convenience store instead of at the ER? Even if she was terrified of what they might do if she called for help from the house or the area outside the house, once safely at the store, why not call the cops to her aid? Why was she passed out in that car??? What if that cop hadn't happened upon her, essentialy BREAKING THE LAW?

  Where was her dance partner in all this? Why didn't she call the cops for her, if--as she claims--she was so out of it from shock and horror that she couldn't herself? How do we know that she just didn't want to spend a night in jail for public drunkenness and loitering (which she would have to have done had she not given the cops the rape story)?



• If she was able to identify the guys who took her in the bathroom BY NAME for the search warrant police report, why do the names of the two guys she identified visually NOT MATCH THOSE NAMES?


• Why was she not shown pictures of men OTHER than the members of the lacrosse team? If the DA were remotely interested in the truth, wouldn't he insist that she do this?


• Why did the DA wait so long to get her to ID the men who raped her? Why wait a month? And why not take her IDs and check out their alibis BEFORE arresting them? Couldn't they have merely questioned them, discovered their alibis and released them? Is the DA so stupid that he doesn't know that eye-witness IDs are notoriously inaccurate even immediately following a crime, never mind a month later?

Yes, of course, some of my questions are rhetorical. It's clear this DA is politically motivated, but that doesn't mean something didn't happen to this woman. What does point in that direction, however, is that her story just doesn't hold together under anything resembling the scrutiny of a person with common sense, or a person who's ever had sex--coerced or otherwise.

I just find it impossible to believe her timeframe of the events. It would be more plausible if there were DNA evidence all over the damn place. I can imagine it's easy to do what she alleges they did if you're messy about it. I further believe it's possible if you have a huge conspiracy in place (i.e., if all the party attendees knew about and helped plan such an attack, and didn't mind if it only involved 3 of their number, even if they might all get in trouble for it). Whatever people might think or say about these Duke students, no matter how good they are at lacrosse, I doubt such a prestigious university would accept 46 amoral morons in a four-year time period (and if you think admissions procedures aren't critical enough to uncover such tendencies in so many applicants, you are an amoral moron yourself).

I can also imagine that it would be easier to perpetrate such an attack if the woman were drugged or otherwise significantly impaired, but then how is it that she claims to be so clear on the details of what happened, who did it, for how long and where? If she were drugged by them or so drunk she passed out a mere 30 minutes later in a car, how is it that a month later she can clearly remember the faces of the people she claims did this to her? Everyone knows one of the most "appealing" properties of "rufies" for those pigs who use it is that the victim can't remember THAT anything happened, much less what or who did it! Even your garden-variety alcoholic intoxication produces memory-impairment of a magnitide significant enough to call into question any IDs she might make, never mind her account of the events that allegedly took place!

All I know is, if I were the defense attorneys for any of those who get arrested, I would do the following:

• Question her timeline as I have done above


• Question the DA's lack of "control" suspects in her visual identification process


• Call every single police officer who dealt with her that night to the stand


• Hire an expert in eye-witness identification--one with credentials in the study of cross-racial IDs and how much less reliable they are than even intra-racial IDs


• Impugn the testimony of her partner using a transcript of her conversation with a NY PR firm


• Take the jury on a tour of the house, bathroom especially.


• Call the examining nurses to the stand and ask them what "consistent with" means. I would ask (because I already know the answer) whether there are OTHER things with which her injuries would be consistent (falling down stairs, falling down period, while drunk in particular, getting manhandled by someone else OTHER than these players, either before or after the party, getting in a fight with a woman, etc...)


• I would ask the police why they did not right away round up all 46 players and examine them for scratches, bruises, etc...And if they did, I would want to know if the accuser was shown these pictures as part of her ID process (what do you BET she was).
  

I wouldn't bother dredging up the character of the accuser, no need. To me there is enough evidence to impugn her entire story without stooping that low.

I want to stay objective, to avoid letting the media try this case, but the "facts" available so far (mostly from her--her police report, the search warrant, her IDs) make it seem highly unlikely that an attack like the one she described took place. My "gut" tells me what we have here is a woman who didn't want to spend a night in jail, who knew the team had a "rep" in town as being a rowdy bunch, who saw an opportunity and took it. If it turns out my gut is correct, and she lied, then I feel strongly the DA should prosecute her, should apologize to the university, the team and the community as a whole, should resign and finally, should be personally sued in civil court for monetary damages by those wrongly accused and tried.

I could be wrong. This could have been the fastest, cleanest gang rape overlooked or covered up by the largest number of people in history, but I doubt it, I really do.

Posted by insomnomaniac at April 21, 2006 9:36 PM | TrackBack