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