¿Puedes dejar de hacer preguntas tan estúpidas?
Answers
Answer:
The Duke lacrosse case was a widely reported 2006 criminal case in which three members of the men's lacrosse team of Duke University were falsely accused of rape.[1][2][3] The three students were David Evans, Collin Finnerty, and Reade Seligmann. The case evoked varied responses from the media, faculty groups, students, the community, and others. The case's resolution sparked public discussion of racism, sexual violence, media bias, and due process on campuses, and ultimately led to the resignation and disbarment of the lead prosecutor, Durham County District Attorney Mike Nifong.
In March 2006, Crystal Gail Mangum, a black student at North Carolina Central University[4][1] who worked as a stripper[5] and dancer, accused three white Duke University students – all members of the Duke Blue Devils men's lacrosse team – of raping her. The rape was alleged to have occurred at a party hosted by the lacrosse team, held at the house of two of the team's captains in Durham on March 13, 2006. Durham District Attorney Nifong suggested that the alleged rape was a hate crime.[6][7][8][9]
In response to the investigation uncovering an email from a player referring to "killing strippers and skinning them"[10], Duke University suspended the lacrosse team for two games on March 28, 2006. The following week, on April 5, Duke lacrosse coach Mike Pressler was forced to resign by athletic director Joe Alleva, and Duke president Richard Brodhead canceled the remainder of the 2006 season.[11]
On April 11, 2007, North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper dropped all charges, declaring the three lacrosse players "innocent" and victims of a "tragic rush to accuse".[12][11]
The initial prosecutor, Mike Nifong, was labeled a "rogue prosecutor" by Cooper, and withdrew from the case in January 2007 after the North Carolina State Bar filed ethics charges against him. In June 2007, Nifong was disbarred for "dishonesty, fraud, deceit and misrepresentation", making him the first prosecutor in North Carolina disbarred for trial conduct. Nifong served one day in jail for lying about sharing DNA tests (criminal contempt); the lab director said it was a misunderstanding and Nifong claimed it was due to weak memory.[13] Mangum maintained her insistence that she was sexually assaulted that night. She faced no charges.[14][15]
Cooper noted several inconsistencies between Mangum's accounts of the evening and Seligmann and Finnerty's alibi evidence. The Durham Police Department also came under fire for violating their own policies by allowing Nifong to act as the de facto head of the investigation; using an unreliable suspect-only photo identification procedure with Mangum; pursuing the case despite vast discrepancies in notes taken by Investigator Benjamin Himan and Sgt. Mark Gottlieb; and distributing a poster presuming the suspects' guilt shortly after the allegations.[16]
In 2007, Seligmann, Finnerty, and Evans sought unspecified damages and called for new criminal justice reform laws in a federal civil rights lawsuit against the City of Durham.[16]