As I noted in my last post, Duke started their back-peddling and CYA campaign when inviting the disgraced former Lacrosse players back. But the first suit isn't coming from one of the accused (those will come once all the charges are dropped). Gateway Pundit has the whole story.
UPDATE: The Assistant Provost and English Professor Cathy Davidson, one of the Gang of 88 at Duke provides a compelling defense for why Academics should not be elevated in society's collective conscious. Ugh. How can she defend her actions? Well, she might as well brush up on her rationalization and justification, she'll be using them in court.
As an aside, she references web "hooligans". KC Johnson says:
Finally, Davidson gets to the real victim—herself, and her 87 colleagues. She has been victimized by “right-wing ‘blog hooligans’,” who have criticized the ad.I would be considered a right winger by some, and I can assure the Big Three bloggers (who I am sincerely grateful to for shining the light of truth on this whole debacle) that I'm as interested in the just resolution to this case as anyone.
Davidson is a professor of English. I can only assume that she deliberately chose the word “hooligans,” to imitate Nifong’s insult of the lacrosse players.
And who are these “blog hooligans”? Again, Davidson doesn’t say. The three major blogs who have criticized the Group of 88: Johnsville News, a non-ideological crime site; Liestoppers, which as far as I can tell has no ideological bent at all beyond a hostility to Mike Nifong; and this site, which is run by a centrist Democrat who’s vehemently pro-choice and pro-gay rights, and who’s backing Barack Obama for president in 2008. If this is the “right wing,” then I wonder if Davidson, safe in the “groupthink” environment at Duke, has ever met a real right-winger. Or perhaps Davidson is referring to mystery blogs, like the mystery legions of people who were elevating the lacrosse players to the status of martyrs between March 29 and April 6.
As a woman who has been on the receiving end of prejudice and discrimination and even harassment (I had to report my first boss out of college for sexual harassment--a charge he richly deserved, but that's another story) and worse, I am sensitive to the plight of a woman being gang-raped. Good grief! Who isn't? (It isn't right wing hooligans who would slap a wrist and turn away. The right wingers are the death penalty folks, remember?) If the facts supported the assertion, no tears would be shed for these guys fates except by their mothers. But the facts of this case have not supported this woman's assertion at all and for Davidson to defend herself in the face of all the facts is not only unseemly it belies an inability to view this situation fairly.
This case, ultimately, is about our judicial system. Political correctness has so brainwashed the elites, that the presumption in any case involving sex and race (where the victim is black and the perp is white) is automatic guilt. This should worry every person who may ever want a fair trial.
And when the charges are dropped, and even before in cases like the grading retaliation, her inability to "get it" is why Cathy Davidson should be sued. For a lot of money. If she can't see the wrongness of her actions after all that is now known, she may need the help of the legal system to spell it out for her.