Samiha Khanna: Duke lacrosse controversy

Reporter Samiha Khanna takes your questions about the Duke lacrosse controversy.

This discussion took place at 11 a.m. Tuesday, April 4, 2006, and is now closed.

-----

Moderator: Samiha will be joining us shortly. Thanks for your patience.

Moderator: A reader writes: "Why was the alleged victim granted anonymity in your interview? I understand the policy of not identifying alleged victims of sexual assault, but that is different than letting them make their accusations publicly behind a veil of secrecy. Particularly absent any criminal charges. I doubt you would have let a lacrosse team member make accusations against the victim anonymously, as a protected source. Or would you have allowed that?"

SK: This is an issue that we discussed at length among the top editors of the newspaper. Being that we had given members of the lacrosse team, their parents, and leaders in the athletic department an opportunity to address these allegations, we had a responsibility to give the alleged victim the opportunity to tell her story as well.

In interviewing her anonymously, we were careful to weigh each statement she made on the position that it might allow her to speak more freely than if she used her name. Therefore, we were careful not to allow her to make wide-spread allegations of any kind. The only part of her story that was different than what police had already released was the racial aspect. We were able to use the statements she made about racist terms being shouted at her because that was corroborated by other sources -- people who gave their names -- who heard the same thing.

Moderator: Where does the case stand at the moment?

SK: The DNA samples taken from 46 members of the Duke men's lacrosse team are supposed to be processed and returned this week. The public, however, won't be aware of these test results -- the Durham district attorney is not planning to make them public. The results of the tests may only be addressed if and when the DA files charges. Meanwhile, the men's lacrosse players are still assembling their team of lawyers. I think this week will be a waiting game.

Moderator: Do you think the national attention this case has received has affected the pace or quality of the investigation in any way?

SK: The national attention to this case certainly has caused Durham's District Attorney Mike Nifong to speak more widely about this case. That has actually helped the flow of information, as certain details have been made public that might not have surfaced so soon had the case not been receiving the same attention. Whether this will affect the integrity of the case -- that we'll have to wait and see. The fact that more people are watching certainly increases the pressure. I think the national attention has also brought more people out of the woodwork and can possibly offer more information. If this ever goes to court, it's going to be hard, though, to find jurors who don't know at least something about this case.

Moderator: Douglass D. writes: "I am a member of the Duke Class of 1980. I've been following the lacrosse incident in the N&O as well as the Duke Chronicle. The opinion piece by Tim Tyson is Sunday's Q section appealed to me because of its candid look back at ugly history. There is also an ugly history of sexism and sexual abuse at Duke; I remember being disgusted by it as an undergraduate from 1975 to 1980. My questions are these: In your judgement as a news reporter, are both sides of this incident's ugly flashbacks to racism and sexism being explored by the community including the Duke campus and the Triangle community at large? With respect to Tim Tyson's piece in Q, have you seen an equivalent column in any local media -- in the N&O or elsewhere -- discussing the history of sexism and sexual abuse at Duke?"