More Fan Mail

One man's opinion In his letter of July 16, W. Russell Robinson states the following: "These boys have a history of throwing wild parties and underage drinking. These boys ordered up an exotic dancer for delivery." Is he referring to "these boys" as the lacrosse team or the three men charged with felony sexual assault? If it is "these boys" as a team, then how is it justifiable to charge three members of the team with crimes "committed" by the entire team? If it is "these boys" -- the three men charged with felony sexual assault -- then where is the proof that they specifically threw numerous wild parties and ordered an exotic dancer? Robinson is entitled to his opinion but he should at least recognize that opinion needs to be based in some concrete reality and not a figment of one's imagination fueled by hatred of a class of individuals and their families. T. HannanDurhamJuly 18, 2007

NEXT!!!

Bias freely admitted

I wholeheartedly admit, especially to Nancy McCaffrey [Letters, July 9] that, yes, I do have a bias. This could be the reason I submitted my bias/opinion to the opinions page. I welcome all opinions, and I am grateful to The Herald-Sun for publishing not just my opinion but all other opinions, including yours. This, I'm sure you may know, is what Jâ??ºrgen Habermas coined the as public sphere. In fact, if you have read any other of my biased letters, you may have observed the predilection for things that are fair and just. By design or coincidence, I noticed that you failed to mention that I considered former district attorney Mike Nifong's methods "reprehensible." I also observed that you chose not to challenge the facts I presented via ESPN nor take a position on the sexist and bordering on racist slur hurled by Rush Limbaugh. If we can, lets sidestep opinion for a bit and come back to some simple facts. These boys have a history of throwing wild parties and underage drinking. These boys ordered up an exotic dancer for delivery. Do these behaviors personify mature college students? W. RUSSELL ROBINSON Durham July 16, 2007

NEXT!!! Unedited

I W. Russell Robinson whole heartily admit, especially to Ms. McCaffrey that yes I do have a bias. This could be the reason why I submitted my bias/opinion to the opinions page. I welcome all opinions and I am grateful to the Herald Sun for publishing not just my opinion but all other opinions including yours. This, I’m sure you may know, is what Jürgen Habermas coined the as public sphere. In fact if you have read any other of my biased letters, you may have observed that have predilection all things that are fair and just. By design or by coincidence, I noticed that you failed to mention that I considered Nifong’s methods “reprehensible.” I also observed that you chose not to challenge the facts I presented via ESPN nor take a position on the sexist bording racist slur hurled by Rush Limbaugh. If we can, lets sidestep opinion for a bit and come back to some simple facts. These boys have a history of throwing wild parties and underage drinking. These boys ordered up an exotic dancer for delivery. Do these behaviors personify mature college students? Unless college has changed, theses actions are pretty thuggish. Nifong called them hooligans. Again, that’s not me, that Nifong speaking. One additional criticism I do have with Nifong however was that some deal was made to allow these boys to surrender to the authories. Somehow that was prearranged. In fact, in 2006 attorneys Mitchelson and Calloway suggested that lawyers have a media strategy in place. If you would like to know more about it we could meet for lunch and discuss it.

Sincerely,

W. Russell Robinson

More Fan Mail

An obvious bias

Regarding W. Russell Robinson's letter of July 2 titled "Familiar Formula": He writes that money was lavishly spent to defend the accused in the Duke case. That it was old money, strategically spent. Does he know the families personally? Does he know where that money came from? Of course not, but it fits his vision, his bias. He refers to the justice served on former district attorney Mike Nifong as a lynching. I believe the word lynching would be more appropriately used to describe the actions served by Nifong, not upon him. Odd choice of words, but it fits his vision, his bias. The accused didn't surrender under the cover of darkness to avoid media scrutiny. Someone made sure the media was alerted and waiting when they turned themselves in and the scene was replayed too many times to count. The innocent lacrosse players were taken to jail with handcuffs. Again, it fits Robinson's vision, his bias. The accuser painted herself as the "stereotypical black Jezebel," something Robinson blames on the defense counsel. She painted herself with her own choices, no one needed to say anything. But it's his vision, his bias. Robinson also wonders if the defense counsel for the declared innocent in the Duke case plan on doing pro bono work for others in jail wrongly accused. Have you asked any of them? Or was that your final shot of your bias and agenda filled letter? So many times Robinson is wrong that his bias is as clear as the facts of this case. It is a shame he chooses to be blinded by the former. Nancy McCaffrey Fuquay Varina July 9, 2007

Ode To Tony Montana Unedited

Money + Power = Respect (to some degree at least). The money that was lavishly exhausted on this defense team represents old money that was spent rather strategically: one portion going to legal expenses while the other went into a public relations campaign. According to ESPN, Bob Bennett, an ex-Clinton lawyer headed the external public relations campaign for the accused. Duke University followed suit retaining their external public relations firm, Burson-Marsteller, whose clientele include McDonalds, BP, and Cisco. Further, with the lynching of Mike Nifong there are still questions which remain outstanding. His methods, clearly reprehensible; could it be that he knew something we refuse to recognize; the negative equity of African-American women in the presence of white men of privilege. Was he was attempting to employ the same tactics used to demonize alleged black rapists in reverse? According to legal scholar Valarie Smith, the press tends to dehumanize black rapists as savages, wolves, and beasts which in turn fuel the fears about black men. Why is it that the accused in this matter were allowed to surrender themselves under the cover of darkness, completely prepared for the “perp walk” as opposed to being apprehended and drug into jail like the folk from lower castes of this country that we see on “cops?” Could it be that Nifong attempted to beat the Cheshire defense squad to the punch of media deflection and misdirection as they vehemently inundated the press by painting the accuser as the stereotypical black jezebel? Rush Limbaugh clearly called the woman a “Ho” but still has a job. http://mediamatters.org/items/200604030004 One last question, being that Cheshire and others are riding this horse of justice, I wonder do they plan to do any pro-bono work for others in jail who have been wrongfully accused?

Ode To Tony Montana

Familiar formula

Money + Power = Respect (to some degree). The money that was lavishly exhausted on the lacrosse defense represents old money spent strategically: One portion went to legal expenses while the other went into a public relations campaign. According to ESPN, Bob Bennett, an ex-Clinton lawyer, headed the external public relations campaign for the accused. Duke University followed suit retaining their external public relations firm, Burson-Marsteller, whose clientele include McDonald's, BP, and Cisco. Further, with the lynching of Mike Nifong there are still questions outstanding. His methods were clearly reprehensible. Yet could it be that he knew something we refuse to recognize -- the negative equity of African-American women in the presence of white men of privilege? Was he attempting to employ the same tactics in reverse frequently used to demonize black rapists? Why is it that the accused in this matter were allowed to surrender under the cover of darkness, completely prepared for the "perp walk," as opposed to being apprehended and drug into jail like the folk from lower castes of this country we see on "Cops?" Was Nifong attempting to beat the Joe Cheshire defense squad to the punch of media deflection and misdirection as they vehemently inundated the press by painting the accuser as the stereotypical black jezebel? Rush Limbaugh called the woman a "ho" but still has a job. Cheshire and others are riding the horse of justice. I wonder whether they plan on doing any pro-bono work for others in jail who have been wrongfully accused? W. RUSSELL ROBINSON Durham July 2, 2007 Originally published in Durham Herald Sun July 2007