Item description for A Rush to Injustice: How Power, Prejudice, Racism, and Political Correctness Overshadowed Truth and Justice in the Duke Lacrosse Rape Case by Nader Baydoun & R. Stephanie Good...
Overview A rowdy party, booze, boys, and a stripper-and after a wild night of living it up, charges of assault and rape were leveled at certain members of the Duke lacrosse team. When the district attorney brought charges, it seemed like an easy verdict. Few suspected then that this national blockbuster of a news story was all based on lies. Seasoned trial attorney Nader Baydoun deconstructs the case and reveals the egregious misconduct that led to a rush to judgment and a gross injustice. By presenting the evidence with a trained eye for detail, Baydoun exposes the political pandering of the district attorney, his neglect of crucial evidence, the way in which he stacked the case against the innocent suspects, and how he tenaciously believed unreliable victim testimony-all to ensure his reelection. Baydoun also takes the university leadership to task for its failure to support the students in the case. In this gripping tale of injustice, Baydoun sets the record straight and points the way to justice for the real victims.
Promise Angels is dedicated to bringing you great books at great prices. Whether you read for entertainment, to learn, or for literacy - you will find what you want at promiseangels.com!
Studio: Thomas Nelson
Est. Packaging Dimensions: Length: 9.27" Width: 6.46" Height: 1" Weight: 1.06 lbs.
Release Date Jun 5, 2007
Publisher Thomas Nelson
ISBN 1595551182 ISBN13 9781595551184 UPC 020049140802
Reviews - What do customers think about A Rush to Injustice: How Power, Prejudice, Racism, and Political Correctness Overshadowed Truth and Justice in the Duke Lacrosse Rape Case?
Doesn't hold a candle to "Until Proven Innocent" May 29, 2008
"A Rush To Injustice" isn't a bad book or an awful book: it simply isn't anywhere as good or comprehensive or well-written as Until Proven Innocent: Political Correctness and the Shameful Injustices of the Duke Lacrosse Rape Case.
Where Stuart Taylor and KC Johnson engaged in extensive first-hand research, interviewing many of the participants directly and drilling down to an almost microscopic level, the authors of "Rush" were content to rely primarily on newspaper and magazine articles. Ironically, "Until Proven Innocent" points out the bias and inaccuracy of many of these articles.
The primary author appears to be Nader Baydoun, a Nashville lawyer who graduated from Duke University. The viewpoint is very much first-person. Badoun took it upon himself to "investigate" the situation. He claims he heard "tales of crooked prosecutors, selfserving faculty members, turncoat administrators, irate revenge-seeking neighbors, and even, possibly dirty cops who were out to pursue their own personal agendas." Well, anyone who followed in KC Johnson's blog Durham-In-Wonderland or the Liestoppers blog knew about these things as soon as they came to light.
The book is not well-written. The word "I" appears far too frequently because Baydoun is telling the story of his reactions to the case with the case itself being secondary. Events that were of critical importance have to wait for Baydoun to wade his way through preliminaries with chapter titles like "The Plot Thickens" and "Duked". He doesn't reach one of the most truly outrageous episodes, the infamous and reprehensible Group of 88, until page 93.
Comments such as "Much to my chagrin, it has become all too apparent to me that hypocrisy has been allowed to reign in the halls of Duke, overshadowed and underscored by the arrogance of some seemingly highly educated faculty members and students." This and many other comments sound like apologia from rightfully concerned and embarassed Duke alumni, but do nothing to tell the story of the three falsely accused Duke lacrosse players.
Overall, as I said, this is not an awful book, but "Until Proven Innocent" is far superior for anyone who is interested in the actual story of the case and not Baydoun's subjective shame over the goings on at his alma mater.
best account of the Duke Lacrosse case Feb 18, 2008
This is best and most succinct of the three books currently available on the Duke Lacrosse case. As someone who knows some of the characters in this story, I think this book provides a very good account of the thought processes and actions of everyone involved.
Good Account of a Legal Lynching Jan 28, 2008
This book was the first of three to bring us an account of the Duke LaCrosse Rape Scandal Hoax of 2006. The authors do a good job of describing how a terrible lie by a mentally disturbed black stripper nearly sent three innocent white Duke students into prison for life. Even more than the lie, we're shown how a gallery of villians conspired to railroad the three innocents because of their various agendas. As the authors point out, on nearly every university campus, students are forced to take diversity classes where they're taught that white males are the source of all problems. This is part of the fanatical politically correct obsessions of white male treachery, black victomhood and feminist radical theory. You're presented with an amazing gallery of lynch mob members, determined to over-ride the truth in their goal of incacerating for life the young trio. You've got a very disturbed female black stripper who had made the same charges three years before against a group of men but didn't pursue her complaint. There's the psychopathic district attorney, Mike Nifong who knew early on that the rape charges were a lie but nevertheless pursued the suspects because he wanted to be re-elected as DA. Duke University's gutless president, Richard Brodhead and his treacherous cronies never wavered in their support of the demented Nifong and consistently refused to look at the pile of documentation by the defense attorneys that proved the innocence of the accused. You had a group of 88 Duke professors (or a gallery of 88 bigots) who signed a newspaper ad that encouraged protestors to "turn up the volume" against the LaCrosse players, even though many of these professors had LaCrosse players in their classes. There were the violently anti-white New Panther Party who came to Duke to demonstrate and urged violence against the players. The North Carolina chapter of the NAACP comes across as a morally derelict group that demanded Nifong imprison the boys.
The Durham Police and judges were also derelict in trying to uncover the truth The authors show us how the media outrageously distorted the truth and crucified the accused, led by the New York Times and CNN's disgrace, Nancy Grace who constantly referred to the accused as "rapists". The Times articles were so pro-Mike Nifong you would think he was personally writing the articles. Even Duke Hospital helped ignite the inferno when one of its emegency nurses, Tara Livecy distorted her examination of the stripper to show that she had been raped. The nurse was proud of being a feminist and said she never ever doubted any woman who cried rape. Many student protestors were equally guilty, especially one student/faculty led group, The Potbangers, that held countless protests in front of the residences of the LaCrosse players and threatened them with bodily harm. Throughout this book, you may be reminded of an identical case in New York State in 1987 when black teenager Tawana Brawley accused a group of white men, including a young district attorney, of gang rape. For a year, her false charges were fanned by racial arsonists like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson. In a horrifying example of deja vu, both Sharpton and Jackson flew into Durham to scream for justice while demanding imprisonment against the accused trio. Like Tawana Brawley, the stripper was never charged with anything. While Nifong was eventually disbarred, none of the lynch mob has ever apologized for its actions. In fact, President Brodhead was just recently praised by his board of trustees for his outstanding efforts in handling the false rape case--which would suggest the board supported the president's unwavering support of Mike Nifong.
My one complaint is that there are no photographs in this book. A true life drama this big demands pictorial enhancement to give us images of both the villians and the heroes. One of the heroes, in addition to the defense attorneys, was the feisty, heroic Duke campus newspaper, The Chronicle, which never wavered in urging for people to hold their judgements until all the facts were in The paper stood up to the administration and to the arrogant faculty members who demanded that they were the only ones who knew the truth. In the end, they were proven to be just as guilty as Mike Nifong in trying to perpetuate a horrendous miscarriage of judgement upon three of its own students.
Nifong's and Brodhead's Rush to Judgment Oct 9, 2007
This book lacks the immediacy of parts of Don Yaeger and Mike Pressler's IT'S NOT ABOUT THE TRUTH and lacks the comprehensiveness of Stuart Taylor's and KC Johnson's UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT, which stands as the definitive book on the Duke case, supported as it is by Johnson's absolutely heroic record of events in his Durham-in-Wonderland blog and by Taylor's early advocacy. You need Yaeger-Pressler for what it contains about the Pressler family which is not in UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT. Do you need the Baydoun-Good A RUSH TO INJUSTICE? The word opportunistic is probably unduly harsh for A RUSH TO INJUSTICE, but the book is too anecdotal, too personal, and the Index is unreliable. As much as the magnificent Robert Ekstrand is quoted here, he does not come to life as he does in Taylor and Johnson's book. Ekstrand should probably write his own book, for the record, as Mike Pressler should have done (rather than turning his diary over to Yeager). Yet you will find some information in A RUSH TO INJUSTICE not in Taylor and Johnson, who left out some of what they knew (imagine the magnitude of evidence in their hands) when they felt it would be distracting. Baydoun and Good have the time to point the reader to Brodhead's rush to judgment (surely the wrong judgment) in the James Van de Velde case at Yale, which resulted in a lawsuit naming Brodhead and others. One wonders if the higher administration at Yale held its breath during the wooing of Brodhead by Duke, afraid he might refuse. Would Yale hire him back, now? This is not a case in which one book says it all, even the splendid UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT. But the Baydoun and Good book is not absolutely essential, unless you are trying to amass a small library of early books on the case. Still, the case is so horrific that there is satisfaction at watching it dissolve, once again--after experiencing the terror, once again, on reviewing the way the ravening rogue prosecutor Nifong seized on the lacrosse players as they were thrown to him by the faculty Gang of 88 and the President of Duke University, Richard Brodhead.
Excellect Accompaniment for It's Not About the Truth Sep 25, 2007
I read this book in less than two days, it was so compelling - as, indeed, was It's Not about the Truth, a particularly accurate and damning title and book itself.
Mr. Baydour's account draws strength from his stance as a very loyal alumnus and a lawyer. He and Ms. Good have provided us many details in this well-written book that I had not digested heretofore. They have also zeroed in upon the overriding problems at Duke University and many other institutions as well: political correctness, the power of such groups, the silence of most others in the presence of political correctness (a national phenomenon), and the ideological and impenetrable fervor of its perpetrators, fundamentalist in style (The far right and the far left meet here in their intransigence).
To this picture I would add a long-time, widespread view that the University's hiring record for presidents has somehow not been as successful as one would want. For many of us there have been two really superb presidents: Dr. William Preston Few at the beginning and recently Governor Terry Sanford. The latter's operation in a tricky personnel/work situation I personally witnessed. He was a man of great breadth and savoir faire.
This view of the University's administration is not unique to this case. Again, it is widely bruited within and without that the managers, high and low, never make mistakes, never apologize, personnel need to be yes/persons or else no matter how expert they are, and, judging from the experience of the Lacrosse Team, expert groups are also expendable. Again, it is a national problem. Mr. Baydoun and Ms. Good have exposed some of these phenomena at Duke as have none other except the authors of It's Not about the Truth, and even more forcefully.
These problems have gradually worsened in the second half of my fifty years of observation from within and without. Mr. James B. Duke was quoted to a former boss by one of Mr. Duke's associates as saying that, "If I do not hire people who know more about it than I do, I have not done my job." Many institutions and businesses do not want to hear from such personnel and are likely to crush them. The Lacrosse Case contained some of that style.