Prosecutorial Indiscretion

The Washington Post

"THE PROSECUTOR has more control over life, liberty and reputation than any other person in America. His discretion is tremendous. He can have citizens investigated, and, if he is that kind of person, he can have this done to the tune of public statements and veiled or unveiled intimations."

Robert H. Jackson, then the U.S. attorney general, spoke those words to a group of federal prosecutors in 1940. But they ring disturbingly true today about the conduct of Durham County, N.C., District Attorney Michael B. Nifong in prosecuting three Duke University lacrosse players. Just before Christmas, Mr. Nifong dropped rape charges after the accuser said she "could no longer testify with certainty that it occurred." But the three men remain charged with kidnapping and first-degree sexual offense, which carry equally severe penalties. Mr. Nifong should drop those charges as well.

It's been clear for months that Mr. Nifong's case -- to the extent he has a case -- is riddled with flaws that raise serious questions about his motives and ethics. The accuser's story has been inconsistent and unreliable -- and that was even before the latest interview with the prosecutor's office, in which, according to his filing, she said she could no longer be certain she had been penetrated with a penis. The physical evidence was scant at best; the identification procedure -- the woman was shown photographs of only Duke lacrosse players -- was shockingly shoddy; one defendant seems to have an alibi.

Even the liberal Washington Post editorial page is sick of this pathetic story.The Marxist narrative of the evil white capitalist male isn't holding up in this case.When will the tenured socialists on campus be held accountable for their lies and slander?