Two Duke Lacrosse Players Get Indicted, Rest of Us Still Clueless

Well, it was simply a matter of time before one or more Duke lacrosse players would be indicted in the investigation of the alleged rape of a Durham, North Carolina woman. On Monday afternoon two sealed indictments were borne from a grand jury, about a month after the incident took place:

Judge Ronald Stephens of Superior Court sealed the indictments after the grand jury adjourned, citing a state law that allows indictments to remain secret until a defendant is arrested or appears in court.

The two team members could appear in court as soon as Tuesday morning.

Mr. Ekstrand issued a brief written statement at 9 p.m., saying in part, "Today, two young men have been charged with crimes they did not commit."

He did not identify the men or the charges.

Indeed, the plot thickens, because the whole dang case was just a little cut and dry before, don't you think? Sheesh.

So here's the latest monkey wrench: Only two men were indicted, yet the common water cooler factoid is that three guys were in on the gang rape. Plus, Ryan McFadyen, the player who sent out that disgusting e-mail to his teammates, is claimed to not be one of the two indicted.

Seriously, guys, I'm waiting for it. I'm waiting for another plot twist. But the question is: what the hell is gonna happen next? Does a team member break the silence and tell all on SportsCenter? Does the woman discover she's pregnant? Does she confess that she made it all up?

At this juncture I wouldn't be surprised by any of those outcomes, based on the complexity of the story.

No. Freakin'. Clue. But you know what's satisfying? None of us know, including the reporters.

Perhaps we should all walk away from it while the investigation unfolds. To most of our knowledge, nothing in terms of legal process, evidence, nor bias has been botched. All the policemen and judicial officials appear to have done a commendable job up to this point.

Continued on the next page Page 1 — Page 2

Article tags

Spread the word
Bookmark and Share
Profile image for matthew-t-sussman

Article Author: Matthew T. Sussman

Sussman is the founder and former editor of Blogcritics Sports. Twitter: @suss2hyphens

Visit Matthew T. Sussman's author pageMatthew T. Sussman's Blog

Read comments on this article, and add some feedback of your own
  • No image found

Article comments

  • 1 - sal m

    Apr 18, 2006 at 8:02 am

    this case is turning into more of a disaster everyday, and the person to blame is the prosecutor.

    he painted himself into a corner from day one and found himself in a position where he had to indict someone. that isn't good for anyone.

    and as far as indictments go, the old saying is "you can indict a ham sandwich," so this development means pretty much nothing.

    this prosecutor will turn out to be just one of the losers as a result of this case.

  • 2 - Andy Marsh

    Apr 18, 2006 at 8:14 am

    I was flipping channels last night and on alot of the news channels the discussion was centered on the fact that she's a stripper. That seems to be the big defense here...she was a stripper so she asked for it...that's if it ever happened at all.

    I would have thought that if she was gonna go after money she should have picked a college sport that atually gets money, like football. Or are LaCrosse palyers mostly from wealthy families?

  • 3 - Matthew T. Sussman

    Apr 18, 2006 at 4:45 pm

    Let's just put it this way Andy: It's Johns Hopkins only power house sport.

Add your comment, speak your mind

Personal attacks are NOT allowed.
Please read our comment policy.
Please preview your comment.

blogcritics lists for May 18, 2013

fresh articles Most recent articles site-wide

fresh comments Most recent comments site-wide

most comments Most comments in 24hrs

top writers Most prolific Blogcritics for April

top commenters Most prolific Commenters in 24 hrs