There was a lingering hope that the return of DNA tests would grant a sense of finality to the allegations against the Duke men's lacrosse team. What the Duke-Durham community has witnessed, however, is anything but. And in the absence of more definitive, new information, the public continues to resort to and rely on skepticism and speculation.
Given all the unanswered questions that remain, I, for one, am not prepared to let the investigation come to a close just yet. While I am ashamed to align myself in any way with District Attorney Mike Nifong, I too am not yet satisfied with ending the investigation now.
If there is indeed remaining credible evidence that the unidentified North Carolina Central student and mother of two was victimized on the night in question, I implore the mighty powers-that-be to let the investigation go on.
If she was sexually assaulted, find the perpetrator[s]. If she was beaten, find her abuser[s]. If she was maltreated because of her gender, profession, or color of her skin, find and prosecute every single individual responsible.
But just look at all those "ifs." The hope of finding answers to those indefinite "ifs" is becoming more improbable because of the stupid, stubborn obstinacy of those in charge of the investigation.
Investigators and the general public, both locally and nationally, formulated their opinions from the very onset and are now trying to make the facts fit their formed opinions instead of letting their opinions be formed by the facts.
The accuser claims that three men, not 47, assaulted her. Despite absolutely no DNA connection, the investigation continues to focus on the Duke lacrosse team as a whole-but rumor has it that there are more white men in the Duke-Durham community than the 46.
According to Nifong's faulty logic there have been rape cases for hundreds of years without there being any DNA. Don't be stupid, Mike. There was always DNA, investigators just couldn't test for it at the time. In this instance, defense lawyers have said the North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation tested for latex residue and DNA, and returned no match between any samples given by the players on the team.
Admittedly, the absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence. But the overwhelming lack of evidence is indeed the evidence of absence.
Growing increasingly incensed and frustrated with the handling of this investigation, I cannot help but return to the implications of one Duke professor and his inappropriate call for the premature resignation of athletic and academic administrators in the wake of these criminal allegations.
Despite any concrete evidence, Professor Houston Baker, Jr. placed himself at the forefront of public condemnations against the University and the Duke lacrosse team from the onset of the investigation. Again and again he called for the resignation of those who "maraud, deploy hate speech and feel proud of themselves in the bargain."
But of precisely those actions, Baker himself is guilty. Based solely on hearsay and despite any independently verifiable evidence, Baker deliberately incited community division from the get-go and in the ensuing weeks has done nothing to amend the conflict he wrought and encouraged.
Baker argues that the Duke community will be able to regain confidence in the those who head this institution when they finally "demonstrate that they don't just write books, pay lip service, or boast of safe citizenship... but actually do step up morally, intellectually and bravely to assume responsibilities of leadership for such citizenship."
His recommendation? "Surely the answer to the question must come in the form of immediate dismissals of those principally responsible for the horrors of this spring moment at Duke. [and] any other agents who silenced or lied about the real nature of events at 610 Buchanan on the evening of March 13, 2006."
But Baker himself did nothing more than foolishly speculate upon the "real nature of events." And as a result of Baker's own hate-speech, the subsequent weeks following the "horrors of this spring moment" have resulted in deplorably unproductive shouting matches and near-race-riot relations. So if Baker does indeed believe the words he wrote in his open letter to University administrators, then he himself should be equally subject to the conditions he imposed upon other members of the Duke community.
If restoring confidence in Duke indeed calls for some dismissals-then Professor Baker, with his overly sensational fanaticism, hateful intolerance and foolish impatience has proven that he ought to be one of them.
Houston, we have a problem. Where's your resignation?
Boston Cote is a Trinity senior. Her column runs every other Friday.
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.