Coverage of the Duke Lacrosse Scandal The 2006 Duke Lacrosse Case brought to light many of the issues and divisions currently plaguing our media sphere. This terrible act of injustice, which blamed three innocent Duke lacrosse players, Reade Seligmann, Collin Finnerty, and David Evans, for the rape of an African-American stripper, garnered extensive media attention that gripped America for almost an entire year (Wasserman, 3). Today, many scrutinze the media’s methods of covering the case, and deem that
is believed that both sides enter the trial on equal grounds and present evidence to represent and help support their case. However, throughout the proceedings both the prosecution and defense have two very different ethical roles, responsibilities and duties, which tends to cast doubt on both sides remaining equal. The defense’s role is to make the prosecution prove its case with sensible arguments, real evidence, and steadfast testimony; point out facts in which the State has failed to establish
CASE OUTLINE Parties: Evans v. Chalmers Citation of Case: 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 25660 (4th Cir. 2012) Statement of Facts: On March 13, 2006, members of the Duke Lacrosse team attended a party at the home of the team’s co-captains: Evans, Flannery, and Zash. One of the hosts invited two exotic dancers, Mangum and Pittman. The dancers arrived and briefly performed from about midnight until 12:04 AM. Approximately 40 minutes later, both women left together in Pitman’s car. After leaving the
for the university, and instead of the University of Tennessee trying to protect her, the university pretty much forced her to agree on a settlement, and resign from her position with the University of Tennessee.4 The outcome of the settlement did not only effect Jamie Whited’s work life with the University of Tennessee, but it also affected her career moving forward as a professional in college athletics for the Florida Southern, which when they found out about the settlement, the university also forced
society. A big case that was broken out in 2014 was an occurrence at Duke University when three Lacrosse players from were charged with sexual assault. This has caused debate about the adjudication of sexual assault cases regarding the process rights of the alleged accused and due process rights. This was an event that made an impact on many people, and why this case is still known today. This was an incident committed by three players on the Duke University lacrosse team. On March 13, 2006, there was
2010. . • "Tim Lincecum." News around the Globe 24x7. N.p., 6 Nov. 2009. Web. 21 Jan. 2010. . • "define:change - Google Search." Google. N.p., n.d. Web. 21 Jan. 2010. . • press, associated . "Jamal Lewis Enters Plea In Federal Drug Case - Sports News Story - WBAL Baltimore." Baltimore News, Baltimore, Maryland News, Weather & Sports - WBAL Baltimore's Channel 11. N.p., 7 Oct. 2004. Web. 21 Jan. 2010. .
impeding the presentation of sloppy scientific evidence is found Federal Rule of Evidence 403 that gives judges the discretion to admit or to exclude from trial evidence, including scientific, deemed to prejudicial, confusing, or misleading to jurors” (2006). The article then explains that the technical terms used in the trial court while presenting the DNA analyses, is many times too complex for the individuals sitting on the jury. Ultimately, these same jurors are still inclined to reject or accept