Lacrosse defense sways media

Public opinion shifts as defense attorneys raise questions about the accuser and evidence

DURHAM -- Journalists rushed to Durham in April to tell the world about a sordid evening at 610 N. Buchanan Blvd., where a black exotic dancer reported that she was raped by white lacrosse players from Duke.

An avalanche of media coverage followed, as the confident prosecutor gave dozens of interviews and reporters ferreted out a pattern of drunken misbehavior by jocks at an elite university.

But the story changed, and now the pundits ask: Are the three Duke lacrosse players innocent boys falsely accused?

The opinions still fly on cable TV and popular blogs. Major stories have appeared in Newsweek, Sports Illustrated and Vanity Fair. The nation's opinion leaders at influential newspapers took a break from Iraq and Darfur to come to the defense of the three accused players.

At The New York Times, two columnists have written about the case, including David Brooks, who penned two columns that track the shift in perception. The first posed a question about how young men slip into depravity. The second talked about the stages of witch hunts.

"First frenzy, when everybody damns the souls of people they don't know," wrote Brooks, who will teach at Duke this fall. "Then confusion, as the first wave of contradictory facts comes in. Then deafening silence, as everybody studiously ignores the vicious slanders they uttered during the moment of maximum hysteria."

On Monday, the legal maneuvers will continue in the Durham County courthouse. But in the court of public opinion, the defense has gained the upper hand.

The accused players' attorneys have let loose a steady stream of leaks and court filings that cast doubt on almost everything about the case. Reporters have pounced on every new detail. In some cases, powerful Duke supporters have used their connections to steer journalists toward stories sympathetic to the players.

At the same time, the once-quiet players' families are boldly speaking out.

Defense on the offense

In a five-hour interview with a CBS news reporter, Kathy Seligmann talked about the emotional phone call from her son Reade, when he told her he would be indicted for rape. "You just can't imagine what it's like to see someone do this to your child," she said in a story published on the CBS web site June 22.

David Evans' lawyers took the rare tactic of putting their client on live television outside the jail, defiantly telling the world he didn't do it. On Independence Day weekend, Collin Finnerty's parents proclaimed their son's innocence in an interview with MSNBC's Dan Abrams, a Duke alumnus who for weeks had raised doubts about the case.

Early on, Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong gave scores of interviews, calling Duke lacrosse players "hooligans" who were hiding behind a wall of silence. His emphatic statements fueled a national media story.

Nifong is no longer talking, but the public has gotten more than a glimpse of the evidence -- or lack thereof.

Defense attorneys have attacked the accuser's statements, her medical exam, the police department's lineup procedure and the district attorney's conduct. They disclosed a favorable polygraph test, a dearth of DNA evidence and doubts expressed by a second dancer at the March 13 party that a rape had occurred.

The media's role

Some observers aren't surprised at the shift in media coverage and public perception. They say the defense attorneys are doing what defense attorneys do -- going on the offensive. The lawyers have steadily worked to undermine the accuser's credibility, raise questions about Nifong and plant doubt among Durham residents -- the prospective jury pool.