Investigator Benjamin Himan testified in Nifong's trial on ethics violations that the police and the prosecutor were aware of a host of problems in the case Nifong was pursuing against members of the Duke lacrosse team.

Chief among the problems, the investigator testified, was that they couldn't prove Reade Seligmann was even at the party when an escort service dancer said she was raped by him.

"We didn't have any DNA. We didn't have him at the party," Himan testified. "It was a big concern to me to go for an indictment and not even know where he was, if he was even there. ... I didn't want to indict somebody that shouldn't have been indicted."

The testimony came as the first day of Nifong's trial before a disciplinary committee of the State Bar came to a close.

It was a dramatic moment in a remarkable day for the North Carolina justice system, in which an elected district attorney had to defend his law license while a national television audience looked on.

The case is scheduled begin again at 9 a.m. Tuesday.

In the first day, lawyers painted very different pictures of the Durham prosecutor and his motivations as he pursued the rape charges.

Prosecutors for the bar, which licenses and regulates lawyers, called Himan and one of the lacrosse players' lawyer.

The lawyer described how Nifong had condemned the players to the public while refusing to discuss the case with lawyers.

Himan testified the case against the lacrosse players had serious problems and Nifong knew from the start that it was likely not winnable. Their only witness -- the accuser -- was unreliable and had given conflicting stories.

Today's testimony is crucial to the Bar's efforts to prove its accusations, that Nifong broke ethics rules through his early public statements and purposely withheld evidence from three Duke lacrosse players who were falsely accused of sexual assault.

One of the lawyers representing the State Bar said in her opening statement that Nifong seized on politically explosive allegations to go the lacrosse players regardless of the evidence.

"Mr. Nifong intentionally sought out the world's attention," State Bar prosecutor Katherine Jean said.

"When the world was focused squarely on North Carolina and its justice system, Mr. Nifong repeatedly and intentionally misled the media and therefore the public about a very serious case, caused racial unrest in Durham, intentionally concealed evidence to which he now admits the defendants were entitled to but which was extremely harmful to his theory of the case and made false representations to two judges in an effort to keep the defendant from discovering it."

One of Nifong's attorneys said the prosecutor regrets some of his statements to reporters and does not dispute that the lacrosse players are innocent.

But Nifong committed no intentional ethics violations, he said.

"I contend to you there was nothing political about Mike Nifong," said the lawyer, David Freedman. "I contend to you when you hear all the evidence at no time did Mr. Nifong commit any intentional violations."

The hearing, which is expected to take five days, may serve as a de facto Duke lacrosse trial.

Nifong, who had championed the case against the three former players -- Dave Evans, Collin Finnerty and Seligmann -- recused himself in the wake of ethics charges from the State Bar.

Next page >