« DENIAL-AGATIONS |
| COLCOR REDUX »
June 15, 2007 in JUSTICE | Permalink
Nifong while embarrassing our state's judicial system unfortunately isn't alone. problems of this sort with prosecutors and judges have been going on for years in many of the 100 counties. look at Rex Gore. this prosecutor allows assistant da's to wrongfully dismiss cases, lie about evidence, refuse to prosecute cases where the victim doesn't support the Gore regime(politically) etc. another subsequential joke is that next to the judge hearing the nifong issue is mitchell tyler. who is mitchell tyler you ask. this is the former superintendant of the columbus county school system that committed to $30k an acre for the new south columbus school while land in the area at that time was going for around $800 an acre! he was forced to resign but the crooked officials in columbus county broughn him back into the "cookie jar" as a courthouse administrator. columbus county has a clerk of court and does not need this crook who spends his days at the taxpayers expense conducting phone interviews and harrassing voters into aking campaign contributions to democratic candidates. he incidentally married sherry dew(prince formally) the head of the democratic party in columbus county. this is another story of how this man broke up a home. more on this later.
June 16, 2007 at 11:55 AM
June 16, 2007 at 11:56 AM
June 16, 2007 at 11:59 AM
Nifong and scum like him are nothing new to the North Carolina judicial community. Rex Gore and his like should be worried as the media has set a new precedent against false dismissals, lying prosecutors, improper prosecutions, and lack of prosecutions for cases where the victim doesn’t support the Gore regime. It’s funny that next to the judge hearing the Nifong case sits Mitchell Tyler. Who is Mitchell Tyler you ask? Mitchell Tyler aka home wrecker, crook and such was the superintendent for the Columbus County School system during the 1980s. He resigned from office after a scandal where he committed the taxpayers of Columbus County to $30k an acre for land worth $800 an acre for the site of the new South Columbus School. Columbus County residents (taxpayers) cried for blood from this leech Mitchell Tyler. He and his squeaky voice would later re-surface as “courthouse administrator.” This behind the scenes job donned on this crook was courtesy of the Gore regime. What did Mitchell Tyler promise to the Gores in return? He uses his taxpayer funded work days to harass taxpayers for donations to democratic candidates which his new wife Sherry Dew (formally Prince) acts as chairmen of. Sherry Dew Prince Tyler, Chairwoman of the Columbus democratic party? This is another story of escapades paid for by the taxpayers eg sex lies and campaign contributions.
June 16, 2007 at 12:44 PM
Committee is unanimous on all issues on all the contested issues in the case.
1) Extrajudicial statements: Yes.
2) Did Nifong know that these statements would be disseminated? Yes.
3) Did Nifong know that these statements would materially prejudice proceeding? Yes.
4) Did Nifong statements have substantial likelihood of heightening public condemnation of accused? Yes. Note of explanation: The "accused" in this instance includes the set of suspects (the lacrosse players). Not necessary to make finding as a legal matter that they were actually indicted.
5) By making misleading statements to media, did Nifong engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, misrepresentation? No. The one statement at issue on this point (possible use of condoms) no worse than certain others that were not alleged to involve dishonesty--such as the statement to the effect that the accused were not cooperating. Therefore, not appropriate to pick out this statement as the worst of the group.
6) Failure to provide DNA evidence report failed to provide necessary exculpatory evidence? Yes; Failed to make reasonably diligent effort to deal with discovery effort? Yes.
7) Failure to provide memorializations of Meehan statements: (a) fail to make timely disclosure of exculpatory evidence? Yes. (If anything, Bar's charge was too narrow.) (b) failed to make reasonably diligent effort to comply with discovery request? No. [AG had taken position that prosecutors did not need to provide such memorializations, though this is no longer the law.]
8) Failure to provide complete report of all Meehan tests (a) failed to make timely disclosure to defense all material required by law and court opinions? Yes. (b) failed to disclose evidence or information that he should have known was subject to disclosure under applicable law. Yes.
9) Failure to provide memorializations of Meehan oral reports (a) failed to make timely disclosure to defense of exculpatory evidence? Yes. (b) failed to disclose evidence or information that he knew was subject to disclosure under applicable law? Yes.
10) Instruction of Meehan to have report only positive matches? YES. (b) request a person other than a client to refrain from voluntarily giving information to another party? No.
11) False statements of material fact to court? Yes. (b) conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, misrepresentation, deceit? YES.
12) False statements of material fact to opposing counsel? Yes. (b) conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, misrepresentation, deceit? YES.
13) Failure to disclose everything re DSI report to court--false statements to court? Yes. (b) conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, misrepresentation, deceit? YES.
14) False claim that all Meehan oral statements included in his report? Yes. (b) conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, misrepresentation, deceit? YES.
15) Falsely implying to court that he was not aware of DNA results at start of 12-15 hearing? Yes. (b) conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, misrepresentation, deceit? YES.
16) False statements to State Bar that privacy concerns played a role in Meehan report? No. (b) conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, misrepresentation, deceit? No.
17) False statements to State Bar that Meehan report did not include exculpatory evidence? Yes. (b) conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, misrepresentation, deceit? YES.
18) False statements to State Bar that his 12-15 statements referred to alleged charges against him by Duke defendants' lawyers? Yes. (b) conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, misrepresentation, deceit? YES. [Notes the consensus of the hearing committee on the above issues: worry that such charges are extremely rare and fear tha such charges might have chilling effect in normal cases.]
19) Conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice? Yes.
NC Bar & Grill |
June 16, 2007 at 07:32 PM
Mitchell Tyler in his RC Soles created job, meets Sherry Dew Prince. Sherry was the head of the infamous Columbus County Democratic Party aka the machine. Mitchell a former ousted school superintendant easily breaks up Sherry's home. Sherry who owes nearly $8ok in unpaid back taxes receives an appointment from Gov. Bev Perdue. Now Sherry is a judge. Only in Columbus County.
Jim Re |
June 28, 2010 at 08:30 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.