Ethics Charges Will Not Be Dropped Against Nifong

Mike Nifong must be living in a dream world. Did he actually think that the raft of ethics charges against him stemming from his abhorrent actions in the Duke case would be dropped by the North Carolina State Bar?

A disciplinary committee rejected a request Friday to dismiss ethics charges against the former prosecutor in the Duke lacrosse case, who is accused of withholding critical DNA evidence from the defense.

The decision by the three-member panel came shortly after an hourlong hearing, at which committee Chairman F. Lane Williamson repeatedly challenged the arguments made by lawyers for Durham County District Attorney Mike Nifong.

“I just don’t see where this gets you on your argument to dismiss,” Williamson said.

The North Carolina State Bar has accused Nifong of breaking several rules of professional conduct as he led the investigation into allegations that three lacrosse players raped an exotic dancer at a team party in March 2006.

This week, North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper dismissed all charges in the case. He said the three players indicted were innocent, and his investigators concluded that no attack occurred.

In doing so, he portrayed Nifong as a “rogue” prosecutor who rushed the case by failing to verify the accuser’s allegations.

“I don’t want to make comments outside the courtroom,” Nifong said after Friday’s hearing. “You’ll have an opportunity to hear things I have to say inside the courtroom.”

The panel agreed. There's no reason to drop the charges against Nifong because his actions cannot be explained away as simple mistakes.

Disbarred and sanctioned. That's my bet.

Mrs. Lawhawk (an attorney in her own right) thinks that the best thing for Nifong to do would be to fall on his sword and quit the practice of law. That is the only honorable thing left for Nifong to do, but I doubt that he'd take the honorable route out considering that he was attempting to weasel out of the ethics charges and his so-called apology to the Duke three was anything but.

The News and Observer notes that the quest to convict hid a lack of evidence. Are you reading that New York Times? Your reporters claimed that there was more than sufficient evidence to not only go forward with the case even as it appeared that there was no DNA evidence or any other evidence supporting the rape charges, but continue to keep your readers in the dark about your own shoddy and biased reporting on the case. As the N&O reports:

A News & Observer examination of Nifong's handling of the case, based on documents and dozens of interviews, adds new insights about the investigation's focus on shoring up Mangum's claims. Nifong ignored contrary facts, withheld evidence favorable to the accused and refused to discuss the case with defense lawyers.

His lead investigator, Linwood Wilson, pressured witnesses and produced different timelines and accounts to support Mangum's shifting statements.

There is no evidence that Nifong or any investigator challenged Mangum to explain the contradictions in her versions of what happened at 610 N. Buchanan Blvd. Nor did they speak with the doctor who conducted the pelvic examination hours after Mangum said she had been raped.

Baffling those who knew him along with the millions of people around the world who came to know his name, Nifong stuck with Mangum's stories. As he fought to win the Democratic nomination for district attorney, he made a series of decisions and inflammatory statements that propelled the case into an international scandal. It turned three college students into criminal suspects and brought scorn on Durham, Duke and almost every other institution involved.

That forms the basis of the ethics charges against Nifong. And that will ultimately lead to him losing his career over this.

For the record, Mangum is the last name of the accuser.