Nifong: Grassroots Groups Trying to Run Him out of Office
Durham, N.C. — In a letter to the North Carolina State Bar, the embattled former prosecutor in the Duke lacrosse case complains about how grassroots groups are trying to run him out of office.
The Dec. 28 letter is an attachment to Mike Nifong's written response filed Wednesday to an ethics complaint filed by the North Carolina State Bar.
In it, Nifong cites one group, Friends of Duke University -- a group of alumni, parents and supporters of the school -- that takes aim at how he handled the case and has also provided instructions on a blog about how to petition for the DA's removal.
"A well-connected and well-financed (but not, I would suggest, a well-intentioned) group of individuals … have taken it upon themselves to ensure that this case never reaches trial," Nifong writes in the eight-page letter to the State Bar's Grievance Committee.
The letter was dated the same day the Bar initially filed an ethics complaint against Nifong for allegedly breaking rules of professional conduct in the case against the three Duke lacrosse athletes accused of sexually assaulting an exotic dancer last March.
Nifong continues in the letter: "If this seems like paranoid delusion to you, perhaps you should check out Web sites... such as (Friends of Duke University)."
But the founding member of the group, University of Maryland law professor and Duke graduate Jason Trumpbour, offers no apologies.
"I think Mike Nifong has to realize he is the author of his own misfortune," Trumpbour said.
"Given his conduct, he doesn't deserve to be in office," he added. "I got involved in this case, because early on, it became clear to me that these defendants were not getting a fair trial."
WRAL was unable to reach Nifong for comment on Friday.
In its initial complaint, the State Bar cited more than 100 examples of public statements Nifong made to the media, including WRAL, since the case broke in March. In part, the Bar said those comments "have a substantial likelihood of heightening public condemnation of the accused."
In January, the Bar amended the complaint, adding that Nifong allegedly withheld DNA evidence from defense attorneys -- exculpatory evidence that could negate a defendant's guilt.
In his written response this week, Nifong said he did not intentionally violate ethics rules and denied that he intentionally withheld evidence.
A series of public hearings will be held before the State Bar's Disciplinary Commission and will eventually lead to a public trial, possibly in June. If the Bar finds Nifong guilty, he could be disbarred.
Amid mounting scrutiny of his handling of the sexual assault case, Nifong recused himself from it in January and asked the North Carolina Attorney General's Office to appoint a special prosecutor.
The criminal trial for the defendants -- Reade Seligmann, Collin Finnerty and David Evans -- was expected to go to trial this spring but has been delayed as new prosecutors review evidence in the case.
Seligmann, Finnerty and Evans were indicted last year on charges of first-degree rape, sexual assault and kidnapping, but Nifong dropped the rape charges in December because the accuser said she could not testify with certainty that she was raped.
All three suspects still face the two other charges. Throughout the investigation, they have maintained their innocence in the case
The Dec. 28 letter is an attachment to Mike Nifong's written response filed Wednesday to an ethics complaint filed by the North Carolina State Bar.
In it, Nifong cites one group, Friends of Duke University -- a group of alumni, parents and supporters of the school -- that takes aim at how he handled the case and has also provided instructions on a blog about how to petition for the DA's removal.
"A well-connected and well-financed (but not, I would suggest, a well-intentioned) group of individuals … have taken it upon themselves to ensure that this case never reaches trial," Nifong writes in the eight-page letter to the State Bar's Grievance Committee.
The letter was dated the same day the Bar initially filed an ethics complaint against Nifong for allegedly breaking rules of professional conduct in the case against the three Duke lacrosse athletes accused of sexually assaulting an exotic dancer last March.
Nifong continues in the letter: "If this seems like paranoid delusion to you, perhaps you should check out Web sites... such as (Friends of Duke University)."
But the founding member of the group, University of Maryland law professor and Duke graduate Jason Trumpbour, offers no apologies.
"I think Mike Nifong has to realize he is the author of his own misfortune," Trumpbour said.
"Given his conduct, he doesn't deserve to be in office," he added. "I got involved in this case, because early on, it became clear to me that these defendants were not getting a fair trial."
WRAL was unable to reach Nifong for comment on Friday.
In its initial complaint, the State Bar cited more than 100 examples of public statements Nifong made to the media, including WRAL, since the case broke in March. In part, the Bar said those comments "have a substantial likelihood of heightening public condemnation of the accused."
In January, the Bar amended the complaint, adding that Nifong allegedly withheld DNA evidence from defense attorneys -- exculpatory evidence that could negate a defendant's guilt.
In his written response this week, Nifong said he did not intentionally violate ethics rules and denied that he intentionally withheld evidence.
A series of public hearings will be held before the State Bar's Disciplinary Commission and will eventually lead to a public trial, possibly in June. If the Bar finds Nifong guilty, he could be disbarred.
Amid mounting scrutiny of his handling of the sexual assault case, Nifong recused himself from it in January and asked the North Carolina Attorney General's Office to appoint a special prosecutor.
The criminal trial for the defendants -- Reade Seligmann, Collin Finnerty and David Evans -- was expected to go to trial this spring but has been delayed as new prosecutors review evidence in the case.
Seligmann, Finnerty and Evans were indicted last year on charges of first-degree rape, sexual assault and kidnapping, but Nifong dropped the rape charges in December because the accuser said she could not testify with certainty that she was raped.
All three suspects still face the two other charges. Throughout the investigation, they have maintained their innocence in the case
- Reporter: Julia Lewis
- Photographer: Keith Baker
- Web Editor: Kelly Gardner
RELATED TOPICS: Duke University
Copyright 2011 by Capitol Broadcasting Company. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
71 Comments
| MOST | Viewed | E-mailed | Discussed | |||
Most Viewed Stories
Most Viewed VideosMost Viewed Slideshows
| ||||||
| MOST | Viewed | E-mailed | Discussed |
Most E-mailed Stories
Most E-mailed Videos | |||
| MOST | Viewed | E-mailed | Discussed |
Most Discussed Stories
Most Discussed Blog Posts | |||
Multimedia
Key dates in the investigation of Lance Armstrong on charges he used performance-enhancing drugs.
Key events in Iran's relations with the West.
An interactive look at the controversial decision and reversal of the Susan G. Komen Foundation to stop funding breast exams at Planned Parenthood.
Have a donation? Schedule a pickup online!
Renaissance Park- Raleigh's Newest Urban Community
Save Money On Your Energy Bill - togetherwesave.com



![[SLIDESHOW]](http://wwwcache.wral.com/asset/share/2012/02/09/10711513/4f348e7981bb5-51x75.jpg)
![[SLIDESHOW]](http://wwwcache.wral.com/asset/entertainment/out_and_about/2012/02/04/10712136/pics_agunn53833-100x75.jpg)
![[SLIDESHOW]](http://wwwcache.wral.com/asset/entertainment/2012/02/11/10719067/10719072-1329050037-100x75.jpg)
![[SLIDESHOW]](http://wwwcache.highschoolot.com/asset/content/2012/02/11/10717011/10717011-1328936455-100x75.jpg)
![[SLIDESHOW]](http://wwwcache.highschoolot.com/asset/content/2012/02/11/10717059/10717059-1328939591-100x75.jpg)







WRAL.com welcomes your comments on this story. All comments are moderated prior to publication based on our posting guidelines. Please review them prior to posting and if your message is not approved.
This story is closed for comments. Comments on WRAL.com news stories are accepted and moderated between the hours of 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. Monday through Friday.
March 6, 2007 4:43 p.m.
Three college kids did not parade around in front of the media and use it to promote self. They could have ranted a little at the DA's public trial and lapse of good judgment at not being honest with the evidence. They were more mature in representing NC in the media than Nifong. Unfortunate that they behaved like immature kids and got into this mess, but hopefully they will grow through it and be responsible adults that do not misrepresent truth to promote self...It all is too sad, really, for everyone. But as for Nifong accusing a group of trying to remove him as if there is no reason to remove him, it's sadder.
March 4, 2007 9:08 p.m.
I believe there are fundamental differences between what Nifong did and what you're accusing us of doing.
Nifong leapt to judgment for what appears to be political self-interest. While some here may be critical of Nifong for partisan reasons, many (perhaps most) are simply disgusted with his behavior which even you must agree was over the top.
Many of his actions since the case broke, particularly the harsh language he used to characterize the suspects, were public. We all saw his press conferences, self-indulgent posturing and speechifying. In context with what we now know to be the paucity of evidence he had, we can justifiably conclude that his actions were premature at best and highly unethical. We can reach these conclusions based on the evidence WE HAVE.
Lastly, his office is governed by a specific code of ethics that he explicitly agrees to uphold. We as the public enjoy a broader freedom to comment. So we are NOT doing what Nifong did.
March 4, 2007 8:24 p.m.
We could debate this sorry affair for the next 20 years without a satisfactory resolution. We all know that one cannot do anything about spilled milk ~ except clean it.
March 4, 2007 6:56 p.m.
b. With your train of thought, let's take it back a notch and rebuke the stripper for attending a "party" with 18 to 21 year old college kids and subject them to ludeness...let's condemn all of them for stupidity, but the allegations against the college kids had little substancial evidence, facts were withheld, and the DA of all people should have known better. He isn't 20 years old, and he shouldn't act like it. It seems to me that the three college kids conducted themselves in a most mature manner, which is more than can be said for any of the other adults involved.
March 4, 2007 4:52 p.m.