June 2019

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29

« A widget too far | Main | Not energized »

Jan 26, 2007


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


Sounds like Guilford College has learned much more from the Duke lacrosse scandal than the media has.


Also more than some students and at least one on campus organization.

Fec Stench

It is difficult to defend a 6'3" white boy from WV, and yet I believe Mrs. Six. My fractured investigation of the anecdotal evidence available indicates this was not a Hate Crime. I also doubt the existence of Brass Knuckles. These were simply a group of very different kids too long in close proximity to one another.

There are no victims here.

Caution: I am an idiot.


The CA

Tim Bates, parent of one of the accused was on Brad & Britt this morning and also tells a different tale. The story about one of the Palestinians whipping a football player with a belt as a prelude to the fight was mentioned. If that's true, it also begs the question as to what made that happen- is it still a hate crime if the Palestinians started it, and if not, why?

Great coverage by Killian, Fec, Fox8, and Brad & Britt.

sean coon

guilford college is an institution whose dna is constructed to deal with such delicate situations.

i still believe the incident was newsworthy, no matter who started it (especially down here in big city mayberry -- it might have been buried in a much larger city), but fec's proximity observation probably has merit to some degree... not that it excuses any type of in-the-moment or built-up xenophobia and excessive retaliation.

Joe Killian

The Guilfordian reported that the brass knuckles were confiscated by the RA on duty. While I haven't been able to get that RA on record I don't believe there's any reason yet to doubt their existence and they figure prominently in eyewitness accounts.

Fec Stench

Joe, that is terrible news.

The CA

Joe, is there any reason none of these people want to go on the record? I can understand the accused remaining silent, but witnesses? I think the silence is only adding to the speculation and distortions.


"is there any reason none of these people want to go on the record?"

Fear of retaliation?

Ed Cone

Not wanting rep of ratting out friends/dormmates/schoolmates?

sean coon

yeah, that's a tough situation, but hopefully someone has the courage to step up; no matter what they witnessed.

The CA

Retaliation from who and why?


From football players or from the Palestinian students, or the supporters of either, depending on the exact nature of what went down and what the would-be witnesses would be reporting.

Joe Killian

The primary reason given to me by witnesses who won't go on the record is fear of retaliation.

Those who have gone on record, both to us, Yes Weekly! and The Guilfordian, have described a group beating of Palestinian students and not the other way around. As far as I know no one who witnessed the attack and saw the Palestinian students either start it or do much of anything but be overpowered and beaten has gone on record with anyone. Could be wrong about that - but if it's out there, I haven't seen it.

Tomorrow will carry a football player's parent's account of his son's version. Look out for it.

The CA

If they fear retaliation, then it is not the Guilford I remember, and believe me, I stuck out quite a bit.

Ed Cone

This is happening in the immediate aftermath of a nasty beating at their doorstep. Whatever the motivation for the beating, it happened, and it's no great stretch to see that people might be a little fearful right about now...

Wendell Sawyer

I think that it is important to note that the charges lodged against all five of the defendants were not filed by the Greensboro Police Department as the result of a criminal investigation by that agency. Instead, the charges against the defendants were the result of affidavits filed with the magistrate by the alleged victims. Therefore, the charges were not "made by the police." The police simply served the arrest warrants.

There is an interesting discussion about this topic on JR’s blog.

Joe Killian

We reported that yesterday in the News & Record. I believe we were the first to explain the distinction. We go further in tomorrow's paper, looking into why the police weren't called that night and what that means for the case.

Wendell Sawyer

Joe, regarding the charges against the last two defendants, today's News & Record stated: "The charges were taken out by the alleged victims and do not represent Greensboro police findings in the case."

In the previous editions of the N&R, I found no specific mention of the source of the arrest warrants. My impression was that the police filed the charges against the first three football players.

Apparently, John Robinson was under that same impression. On his blog on Wednesday evening, Robinson wrote: “The police have arrested the three players and charged them with crimes. While some may wish that the charges – again, made by police, including ethnic intimidation, not the newspaper –are worth only a paragraph or two, this kind of alleged beating on a college campus is bigger than that.”

Why would JR believe that the charges were “made by the police?” I can only imagine that he received that impression from the same source that I received my impression from: the previous news stories in the N&R about the first three football players accused in the incident.

Ed Levy

So, it's safe to assume that the Guilford football team is pro-Israel.... right?

The CA

A "Fighting Quaker" used to be an oxymoron. Now it has a ring of truth to it.

Joe Killian


This is a distinction understood by very few people - including some working police officers and practicing lawyers. A magistrate had to start over twice explaining it to me.

When it became apparent that the clarification was necessary to avoid confusion, it was made. As JR didn't report the story and as far as I know has never served as a magistrate or police officer, I don't blame him for not understanding it. It's not a distinction we often make in the paper and, quite frankly, it rarely needs to be made either way. It was needed in this case and we did it.

Our second day story (the first for which we were actually able to speak to police or the magistrate's office on the story beyond reviewing documents due to deadlines) explains that the students filed the charges on Sunday.

Readers who are unfamiliar with the judicial process in Guilford County clearly needed even further clarification, and we made it the next day. We've subsequently explained it further.

A daily newspaper is comes out once a day. As we've reported the story further and more details have become available, we've made the story and its intricacies more clear each day. This is much more than I could say for some of the journalists in other media who have reported the story so far, to say nothing of uninformed bloggers who have reported rumor as incontrovertible fact.

If you pick up the paper tomorrow it will become even more clear. As the case progresses I'll agree to do everything I can to make as much of it as I can as clear as I can if you agree to keep reading.

This is how it works. Welcome aboard.

Wendell Sawyer

Joe, I will read tomorrow's story with interest. Thanks for your response.

Joe Killian

Any time. Thanks for reading.

sean coon

great stuff...

The comments to this entry are closed.