'Innocent': The Case that Changed Duke

Photo Illustration by Carolyn Chang and Jack White | The Chronicle

2 | THURSDAY, MARCH 10, 2016

The Chronicle

www.dukechroniclesports.com

Editor’s note Dear Readers, On March 13, 2006, members of the Duke men’s lacrosse team held a party at a house on Buchanan Blvd. Rape allegations, prosecutorial misconduct and a media frenzy followed. The events that played out in the next year would have an indelible impact on Duke, Durham and all those involved in the Duke lacrosse case. As we approach the 10th anniversary of the case, The Chronicle wanted to reflect on where our University has gone in the years since. We hope you will find our coverage of the impact the case has had on Duke to be engaging and informative. Amrith Ramkumar Editor-in-chief

3.... President Richard Brodhead on the anniversary 4.... Faculty members look back on the Group of 88 5.... Duke moves closer to Durham, but tensions remain 6-7....Timeline of the case that transformed the University 8-9....Where are they now? 10.... The birth of the Duke scandal 11.... Danowski leads Blue Devils post-incident 12.... Lacrosse’s impact on Duke’s reputation 13.... ‘Fantastic Lies’ 30 for 30 director discusses new ESPN film 13....Q&A with former Chronicle editor Seyward Darby 14....Where the lacrosse house once stood 19.... Visualization of media coverage post-incident Han Kang | The Chronicle

The Chronicle

www.dukechroniclesports.com

THURSDAY, MARCH 10, 2016 | 3

‘I am certainly at ease in my conscience’ Brodhead on 10-year anniversary of the lacrosse case Gautam Hathi The Chronicle Ten years later, President Richard Brodhead says he has come to terms with the lacrosse case that rocked Duke’s campus. “I am certainly at ease in my conscience with the role that I played,” he said. Brodhead said he does not spend much time thinking about the incident that cast a shadow over Duke, but the episode— and the role he played during it—have had a significant impact on his legacy as president of the University. As the case was winding down, Brodhead apologized for his unwillingness to defend the lacrosse players earlier in the process. “The fact is that we did not get it right, causing the families to feel abandoned when they most needed support,” he wrote in a 2007 statement. “This was a mistake. I take responsibility for it, and I apologize.” Confusion and realization Looking back and examining his role in the case, however, Brodhead said there is little he could have done differently. When discussing the yearlong saga, Brodhead described himself as someone who was swept up in an unpredictable and fundamentally unwinnable situation. From the start of the case, he said, the confusion surrounding what actually happened meant that it was hard to foresee how serious the allegations were and how uncontrollable their fallout would become. Brodhead said the first memory he has of the incident is hearing from the office of Larry Moneta, vice president for student affairs, after asking Moneta about reports that something had happened at a party in a house off East Campus. He was given the impression that any fallout from the party at 610 N. Buchanan Blvd. would blow over quickly, he said. “What I was told was their office had heard about this and made some inquiries, and what they had heard was that there was a lot of doubt about the story that the woman was telling,” he explained. “It was their impression that this would blow over.” Brodhead, who arrived at Duke in Summer 2004, said that he remembered that report because the doubts that surfaced early on would turn out to be prescient.

Chronicle File Photo President Richard Brodhead spoke at a community gathering following last April’s noose incident. One of the first high-profile national episodes Brodhead had to handle as president was the Duke lacrosse case.

“A year and a half later, people understood what grounds there were to doubt this, but there was a year and a half of hot and heavy activity between the first sighting and the last sighting [of the case],” he said. The incident quickly gained attention, but Brodhead said that doubts about what exactly had happened at the party remained for weeks. It was not until the Duke lacrosse players were questioned by the police that Brodhead said he realized how serious the situation was. Brodhead added that the full intensity of the case still surprised him weeks later in April, when he was sitting at a restaurant in New York City. “I saw a story about Mike Nifong, the DA of Durham, North Carolina, on a [news] crawl out the window of a New York restaurant,” he said. “That’s what the story turned out to be.”

Chronicle File Photo Former Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong was disbarred for his handling of the Duke lacrosse case. Brodhead noted that Nifong’s actions kept the case in the national spotlight.

Lacrosse and Durham: ‘A story from hell’ Brodhead described the lacrosse scandal as an explosive mixture of classic college-town community tensions and an unscrupulous district attorney that would have rankled any university unfortunate enough to be involved. “When you look at the event magnified by the false accusation and then raised to the nth power by the DA’s assertions, you had a story from hell,” he said. “You had a story designed to inflame every passion in this city, and believe me, it would not only have been in this city that it would have happened.” But despite the unique and perhaps indelible impact that the episode had on Duke, Brodhead discussed the scandal and the circumstances leading to it as simply a special case of problems that affect colleges and the communities around them nationwide. “I’ve spent my whole life at universities. Every university is in a college town,” he said. “It’s going to be pretty hard to find a town that doesn’t have racial or class dimensions to it.” But Brodhead acknowledged that Duke’s relationship with Durham was different than the relationship that most colleges have with their college towns. He noted that Duke is physically separated from Durham rather than right in the middle of it and that the University has a long history of dissociating itself from its surroundings. “Duke used to be regarded as very aloof and remote,” he noted. “The perception is that these are people from somewhere else with lots of money who aren’t part of the community. And then of course if you add elements of race, when you had members of a sports team who could be caricatured as if they were nothing but white privilege…you

were going to have a big explosion.” After 10 years, however, the relationship between Duke and Durham has changed, Brodhead noted. In particular, he pointed to the fact that Duke is now one of the largest employers and healthcare providers in the city, which means that a lot more Durham residents directly interact with Duke on a daily basis. Even today, however, Durham residents have their issues with the University. Annie Thornhill, former president of the Burch Avenue Neighborhood Association, noted that loud parties and disorderly conduct still mar interactions between Duke and Durham. “When people don’t act like neighbors, it’s hard to want to welcome them into your neighborhood,” she said. “We’ve lived here 10 years, and we’ll have people come in across the street who act like this is just a temporary place to hang out.” In 2014, community members formed the Durham Neighborhoods United group due to frustration over fraternity parties in residential neighborhoods. Despite the lingering tensions, Brodhead argued that if something similar to the lacrosse case were to happen today, Durham residents might not jump to the same conclusions about Duke that they did 10 years ago. He suggested that the role Duke has played in revitalizing Durham and its efforts to better connect with local leaders might make Durham residents more likely to give the University the benefit of the doubt. “The social fabric knitting Duke and Durham is much, much closer and more intricately connected than it ever was before,” See BRODHEAD on Page 15

4 | THURSDAY, MARCH 10, 2016

www.dukechroniclesports.com

The Chronicle

Misreading ‘a social disaster’: Group of 88 members look back Neelesh Moorthy The Chronicle “What does a social disaster sound like?” That was the provocative question raised by an advertisement published in The Chronicle April 6, 2006. The ad came three weeks after a lacrosse party where three players—David Evans, Collin Finnerty and Reade Seligmann—were falsely accused of raping stripper Crystal Mangum. It was published and signed by 88 faculty members and featured quotes, all anonymous, from Duke students expressing concern with issues involving sexual assault and race on campus. The Chronicle spoke to four of the original signatories of the ad—which many have argued prematurely rushed to judgment and unfairly vilified the three players. Ten years after it was published, the four signatories interviewed said that the ad was solely meant to promote a discussion on Duke culture and to reflect on issues of sexual assault and race for students who did not feel comfortable on Duke’s campus. “It wasn’t about the kids at all,” said Christine Beaule, former Mellon lecturing fellow in the Thompson Writing Program, current assistant professor at the University of Hawaii and one of the original signatories. Criticism came from multiple sources, both within and outside of Duke. Stephen Baldwin, professor of chemistry, published a column in The Chronicle on Oct. 23, 2006 asserting that the faculty who had “savaged the character” of the lacrosse players should be “tarred and feathered, ridden out of town on a rail and removed from the academy.” In an article in The New York Post, John Podhoretz accused the faculty of “declaring that those students did not deserve the presumption of innocence.” After the names and email addresses of the faculty who signed the petition were posted online, a number of signatories reported receiving hate mail, including death threats, from people across the country. Ten years later, the faculty interviewed by The Chronicle claimed the ad was misinterpreted and that no one

Special to The Chronicle Former Duke lecturer Christine Beaule said that the ad was not meant as a response to the allegations against the lacrosse players.

Special to The Chronicle The advertisement above was placed in The Chronicle April 6, 2006, three weeks after a party where three lacrosse players were falsely accused of raping a stripper.

anticipated the backlash. “I’d have to have been a psychic to see it coming,” said one former Duke faculty member who signed the ad and asked to remain anonymous for fear of retaliation. Of the original Group of 88, approximately 50 signatories are still affiliated with the University, according to the Duke directory. A ‘launching pad’ The anonymous signatory said the ad’s original intent was to provide support for students who felt alienated at Duke and reassurance that their voices were being heard. “As their faculty, we wanted them to know that we care about these students,” the anonymous signatory said. Beaule said that, soon after the news of the lacrosse party broke, she overheard racial slurs and phrases like the “n-word” and “go back to Africa” on the bus and directed at black faculty. She said on one occasion she overheard students saying, “They would have made sure to beat her [Mangum] up a little so that she wouldn’t talk.” When asked to sign the ad, it was presented to her as a vehicle to address the “horrible racism on campus in that moment,” Beaule said. A Jan. 16, 2007 open letter penned by 87 faculty members, many of whom were part of the original “Group of 88,” defended the advertisement. “The ad has been read as a comment on the alleged rape, the team party or the specific students accused,” the

letter stated. “Worse, it has been read as rendering a judgment in the case. We understand the ad instead as a call to action on important, longstanding issues on and around our campus, an attempt to channel the attention generated by the incident to addressing these. We reject all attempts to try the case outside the courts, and stand firmly behind the principle of the presumption of innocence.” Alexander Rosenberg, R. Taylor Cole professor of philosophy and one of the original signatories of both the ad and the open letter, accused the media of consciously perverting the ad to attack faculty who were concerned about campus culture. He added that an apology was out of the question, because the ad was not meant to presume the lacrosse players guilty. Although not intending to pass judgment on the lacrosse players, the timing of the ad so close to the incident was not a coincidence, said William Chafe, Alice Mary Baldwin professor emeritus of history and a signatory. Chafe said that he thought the ad was an opportunity to use the incident as a “departure point” to commence a series of discussions on sexual assault on campuses nationwide, adding that directing focus to the lacrosse players was not his goal. “Do we hem and haw over details of what did or did not happen?” Chafe wrote in an article in The Chronicle of Higher Education published on May 3, 2006. “Or do we see this as a rare opportunity to address the strains within

our campus and city? ” He also wrote that it was understood that the criminal justice system would have to decide whether a sexual assault took place in this particular instance. The ad similarly noted that issues of campus culture exist “regardless of the results of the police investigation” and “won’t end with what the police say or the court decides.” Despite the signatories’ stated intentions, some faculty critical of the advertisement claimed that attempts to address broader issues of racism and campus culture were invariably bound to reflect negatively on the lacrosse players. Economics professor E. Roy Weintraub, along with other economics faculty, wrote a letter to The Chronicle on Jan. 10, 2007 welcoming the accused students back into the community. The letter was in response to the perception that “Duke faculty is now seen as prejudiced against certain of its own students.” Weintraub told The Chronicle that the 88 faculty were “injecting themselves into something they didn’t know anything about.” “No matter what the ad producers were trying to say, it could not be intended as anything other than support for the putative victim [of the alleged rape],” he said. Weintraub also added that statements made outside of the ad, by some of the same faculty signatories, similarly rushed to vilify the players. Houston Baker, then-George D. and Susan Fox Beischer professor of English, wrote in a March 29, 2006 open letter to the administration that Duke male athletes had been “given license to rape, maraud, deploy hate speech and feel proud of themselves in the bargain.” Former Provost Peter Lange responded to Baker April 3, 2006, writing that he was “disappointed, saddened and appalled” to receive the letter. He wrote that it the “rushed to judgment.” Baldwin, who criticized the Group of 88, agreed with Weintraub, noting that the ad would not have been placed had it not been for the lacrosse case. He added See GROUP OF 88 on Page 16

Special to The Chronicle Former Provost Peter Lange noted that he was saddened in 2006 when a faculty member “rushed to judgment.”

The Chronicle

www.dukechroniclesports.com

THURSDAY, MARCH 10, 2016 | 5

Duke moves closer to Durham, but tensions remain

Chronicle File Photo One of the most concrete changes that followed the lacrosse case was a shift in how the University engaged with the city of Durham.

Sarah Kerman The Chronicle In the decade since the lacrosse case, the University has redesigned its efforts to improve relations between Duke and the city of Durham. These efforts, which began in 2006, have ranged from more routine conversations with local leaders to funding economic revitalization programs to the creation of a new administrative position specifically interacting with Durham and the surrounding region. Phail Wynn, who came to Duke in 2008 to fill the newly created position of vice president for Durham and regional affairs, acknowledged that there was substantial work to be to be done to improve Duke-Durham relations in the wake of the case. “It’s not just a matter of reading in the newspapers the fact that there is a live case—you’re listening to and watching the district attorney [Mike Nifong] make all these accusations that we found later to be groundless, essentially condemning the whole culture of Duke as being responsible for that happening,” Wynn said. “That really created some seriously negative perceptions that it took some time to diffuse even after the matter was resolved.” Need for restructuring In the months after the lacrosse case broke, Duke worked to manage both its local connections and national reputation. Its local efforts were challenged by a history of mistrust between the community and the University, which was exacerbated by

the national media’s coverage. One headline in The New York Times read, “New Strain on Duke’s Ties with Durham.” Another in Inside Higher Ed declared, “TownGown Relations on Trial” and ESPN wrote, “Turbulent Times for Duke and Durham.” John Burness, former senior vice president for public affairs and government relations, was in charge of dealing with the media controversy surrounding the case. After 17 years at the University, he stepped down from his position in 2008 to focus on writing and teaching. A Board of Trustees’ 2006 strategic plan titled “Making a Difference” split Burness’ duties between two new administrative positions, Wynn said. Michael Schoenfeld became the vice president for public affairs and government relations, and Wynn took on the role of vice president for Durham and regional affairs. Wynn said the creation of a separate office was important in fostering greater engagement between Duke and Durham. He noted that during the lacrosse case Burness had many competing duties, which he said detracted from his ability to devote as many resources toward forming connections with Durham. “I doubt that John [Burness] would have had the time to devote an entire year to conversations in the community about perceptions of Duke in Durham with all the other responsibilities he had,” Wynn said. ‘Aloof, arrogant and uncaring’ Wynn came to Duke after serving as president of Durham Technical Community College for 28 years. He said he often heard the University characterized as “aloof, arrogant

and uncaring” during early conversations following the case in the Durham community. He noted that he did not perceive Duke as a particularly welcoming place during his time at DTCC. He said that the reputation of Duke as a relatively distant institution complicated local relations in the years following the lacrosse case. “They said, ‘Oh Duke must’ve bought [the players] off because the DA said they’re guilty,’” Wynn noted. “One of the challenges I had coming here, even after [the players] were exonerated and the case was called out, there were still lingering doubts that there really was exoneration.” Annie Thornhill, former president of the Burch Avenue Neighborhood Association, noted that community members in the neighborhood, which borders Central Campus, were “skeptical and wary” after the case. “I think that we have a lot of strong ties. but there’s also a lot of experiences—lacrosse being one of them—where the relationship with the University has been spotty,” she said. In his first year, Wynn said he made it his goal to engage in community conversations with Durham residents to gather information about actions Duke could take to be seen as a more accessible community asset. Engaging the community Following his arrival at Duke, Wynn conducted meetings with local governing officials, community stakeholders, business leaders and neighborhood association presidents of the 12 central Durham neighborhoods closest to Duke’s campus. He explained that these conversations went on to shape the Office for Durham

and Regional Affairs’ strategic plan—which expanded on involvement that had begun with the Durham Neighborhood partnership under Nannerl Keohane’s presidency. He noted that his goal was to help improve community perceptions by promotion so that Duke’s “invisible hand” was not just seen a financial partner but also as a collaborative partner. In addition to the 2008 initial year of community conversations, Wynn now holds quarterly meetings with the presidents of neighborhood associations in close proximity to campus as a way of seeking feedback about the University’s position in the community. Jody White, former president of the Trinity Park neighborhood association, noted topics in meetings often include safety involving automobile traffic, collaboration on neighborhood events and complaints about fraternity housing parties. Durham City Manager Tom Bonfield has served in his current role since 2008, the same year Wynn entered his position. Bonfield said he has seen a number of productive connections between Durham and Duke, noting that since so many of the institutional partnerships are relationship-based, it will be important for Duke staff and Durham city government officials to maintain these relationships in the future. “I think over the next five years I would expect that a number of senior people at the University probably will retire,“ Bonfield said. “It will be important as those transitions occur for us all to keep the level of commitment that we have had.” See DURHAM on Page 17

6 | THURSDAY, MARCH 10, 2016

www.dukechroniclesports.com

The Chronicle

The Chronicle

www.dukechroniclesports.com

THURSDAY, MARCH 10, 2016 | 7

Graphic by Dottie Kontopoulos and Carolyn Sun | The Chronicle

8 | THURSDAY, MARCH 10, 2016

Where are www.dukechroniclesports.com

Mike Nifong Mike Nifong served as the Durham District Attorney at the time of the allegations against the Duke men’s lacrosse players and filed charges of rape against three of the players. In December 2006, he filed to drop the rape charges a week after the director of a private DNA testing lab admitted in court that he had withheld test results showing that the players’ DNA was not found in the alleged victim’s body or underwear. On January 12, 2007, Nifong asked to be removed from the Duke lacrosse case and requested that the North Carolina state attorney general appoint a special prosecutor in his place. The North Carolina State Bar later alleged that Nifong had lied to court and bar investigators, withheld DNA information and made misleading remarks in reference to the three formerlyindicted Duke lacrosse players.In June 2007, the North Carolina State Bar filed an order to disbar Nifong. He was then found guilty of contempt in September 2007 and was sentenced to serve one day in jail by Superior Court Judge W. Osmond Smith. Smith found that Nifong had knowingly provided defense attorneys with an incomplete report of DNA testing of the men’s lacrosse players. The omitted data contained test results showing the DNA of four men—none of whom were Duke lacrosse players—on Crystal Mangum, the stripper who claimed she was sexually assaulted at a March 2006 party held by the lacrosse team. Collin Finnerty, Reade Seligmann and David Evans, Trinity ‘06, launched a civil lawsuit against Nifong and other defendants in October 2007. Shortly thereafter, Nifong filed for bankruptcy, attempting to shield himself from the lawsuits. However, two judges ruled that the players’ claims should be heard in federal court, effectively nullifying his bankruptcy protection. In May 2014, the city of Durham settled the long-running lawsuit, according to the Charlotte Observer. Under the terms of the settlement, Finnerty, Seligmann and Evans received no money but the city agreed to make a $50,000 grant to the N.C. Innocence Inquiry Commission. In addition, Nifong agreed to give the commission $1,000, settling the case against him. In “The Price of Silence: The Duke Lacrosse Scandal, The Power of the Elite, and the Corruption of Our Great Universities,” a book by William Cohan released in April 2014, Nifong said he still believes that Mangum was attacked in the bathroom at the party..

The Chronicle

David Evans David Evans, Trinity ’06, was a co-captain of the 2005-06 men’s lacrosse team and was the third player charged with first degree forcible rape, first degree sexual offense and first degree kidnapping May 15, 2006—one day after his graduation. Evans was also one of the three members of the team who leased the house on 610 N. Buchanan Blvd., the location of the party that hosted members of the team and strippers Crystal Mangum and Kim Roberts. In a press conference after he was indicted, Evans asserted that the charges brought against him and his teammates were “fantastic lies.” The charges against him and his teammates were dropped April 12, 2007. Evans received his master’s in business administration from the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School in 2013. According to his LinkedIn page, Evans is currently a principal for the consumer team at Apax Partners, a private equity and venture capital firm, in New York. Evans has remained out of the media spotlight after settling with the University for an undisclosed amount in June 2007. Evans could not be reached for comment.

Collin Finnerty Collin Finnerty, a sophomore on the men’s lacrosse team at the time, was charged with first degree forcible rape, first degree sexual offense and first degree kidnapping April 18, 2006. Finnerty turned himself in and was released on a $400,000 bail. Charges against Finnerty and his teammates were dropped April 12, 2007. Although he was allowed to return to Duke for classes in Spring 2007, Finnerty transferred to Loyola College in Baltimore, Md., where he continued to play lacrosse and started every game of the 2008 and 2009 seasons. He was named co-captain his senior year, and graduated in 2010 with a degree in communications. He currently works in equity sales trading for Deutsche Bank, according to his LinkedIn page. In recent years, Finnerty has remained out of the media spotlight after settling with the University for an undisclosed amount. The Chronicle was unable to contact Finnerty for comment.

Ryan McFadyen After returning from the March 13, 2006 lacrosse party, Ryan McFadyen, Trinity ’08—at the time a sophomore—sent an email to the members of the lacrosse team that joked about cutting the skin off strippers. McFadyen has said the email was a reference to the popular movie “American Psycho.” The day after the email’s release, Mike Pressler resigned as coach of the lacrosse team, and President Richard Brodhead decided to cancel the men’s lacrosse season. Although McFadyen was not one of the three players accused of rape, his email gained national media attention and resulted in his suspension from the University in March 2006. However, McFadyen resumed classes as a student in Fall 2006, continued to play on the lacrosse team and played as tight end on the football team during the 2008 season with Coach David Cutcliffe. He graduated in 2008 with a bachelor of arts degree in history and received a master’s degree in liberal studies from Duke in 2010. A 2014 article in Vanity Fair profiled McFadyen and revealed that he had changed his name to John in an effort to distance himself from the email. “I’ve been through a lot,” he said in the article. “I put most of it behind me, but I don’t think anybody can really comprehend, because to really understand what happened to me, how it affected me—I’m still not fully realizing what I’ve been through six years down the road.” McFadyen was also interviewed for the ESPN 30 for 30 special “Fantastic Lies” about the lacrosse case. According to his LinkedIn account, McFadyen is currently an associate developer for Post Road Residential. McFadyen did not respond to The Chronicle’s requests for an interview.

Joe Alleva Joe Alleva served as Duke’s athletics director from 1998-2008. He was responsible for many expansions in the athletic department during his tenure, but was highly scrutinized for his actions during the lacrosse case. During a press conference with Brodhead March 28, 2006, Alleva said the incident was just an example of “boys being boys”—a dismissal of the accuser’s story that attracted negative press attention. Alleva is also noted for forcing the resignation of Coach Mike Pressler. “It will be part of his legacy,” said Jon Jackson, associate director of athletics for communication, in a 2008 article in The Chronicle. “Any of us who touched that portion of our history, it’s going to be part of all of our legacies.” Alleva was succeeded by Kevin White, who still heads the department today. Alleva is currently the athletics director at Louisiana State University. At the end of last year, Alleva received unflattering media attention during speculation that Les Miles, famed LSU head football coach, would be fired due to a three-game losing streak after an undefeated start to the season.

they now? The Chronicle

www.dukechroniclesports.com

President Brodhead President Richard Brodhead was less than two years into his presidency when the University was thrust into the national spotlight by the lacrosse case. During the early days of the case, Brodhead came under fire for being slow to respond to accusations against the players, and he later apologized for not better supporting the accused players and their families after the charges were dropped. Brodhead noted that while the case was unfolding, the confidence with which former District Attorney Mike Nifong spoke about the accusations dispelled the initial belief that the case would die out. “Anyone here would understand that the whole lacrosse episode is deeply associated with regret,” Brodhead said in a Towerview article published in June. “Whether in real time, things could have been handled dramatically differently, I’ll never know.” Despite the case being one of the most turbulent moments of his presidency, Brodhead noted that many positive changes to the University resulted from it—including the creation of a new housing system, the construction of more public shared spaces and the improvement in Duke’s relationship with Durham. “When you take a job like mine, you know that every high-level thing, for good or for bad, is a part of your legacy,” Brodhead said. “It was my job to try to steer this place through that. I hope that it becomes seen in a perspective with many other things.”

THURSDAY, MARCH 10, 2016 | 9

Crystal Mangum Crystal Mangum—a black stripper enrolled in classes at North Carolina Central University at the time—alleged that she had been raped by members of the Duke men’s lacrosse team at a party held in a house near East Campus March 13, 2006.She reported being sexually assaulted for 30 minutes by three men in a bathroom and that party-goers yelled racial slurs at her. The three accused players were eventually found innocent, and Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong was disbarred for perjury and violating professional conduct. After a lengthy media silence, Mangum released a memoir called “The Last Dance for Grace: The Crystal Mangum Story” in October 2008 and maintained that she was assaulted at the party in March 2006. In November 2013, she was convicted of second-degree murder for stabbing her boyfriend Reginald Daye. Mangum stabbed Daye in April 2011 in a fight at Daye’s home, 10 days after which he died at Duke University Medical Center. She was sentenced by Superior Court Judge Paul Ridgeway to a minimum of 14 years in prison after about six hours of deliberation by a 13-person jury. Mangum claimed she was acting in self-defense at the time. She said Daye knocked her to the floor, threatening and choking her. She testified that she did not intend to kill him. She is currently serving her sentence at the North Carolina Correctional Institute for Women in Raleigh.

Reade Seligmann Reade Seligmann, at the time a sophomore on the men’s lacrosse team, was charged with first degree forcible rape, first degree sexual offense and first degree kidnapping April 18, 2006. Like Finnerty, Seligmann turned himself in and was released on a $400,000 bail. Charges against Seligmann and his teammates were dropped April 12, 2007. Although he was allowed to resume classes at Duke in Spring 2007, Seligmann did not return to campus. Seligmann transferred to Brown University in 2007, where he continued to play lacrosse and graduated in 2010 with a degree in history and public policy. He attended Emory Law School and is currently an associate for Connell Foley, according to his LinkedIn page. Since his wrongful accusation during the lacrosse case, Seligmann has been involved with the Innocence Project—a national litigation and public policy organization dedicated to exonerating wrongfully convicted individuals. Seligmann raised $50,000 in 2010 for the Innocence Project and organized the Eyewitness Identification Symposium at Brown, which focused on discussing ways to improve the accuracy of the eyewitness identification process. “I’d like to say I’m a noble guy and I would have done all that stuff,” Seligmann said to the Newark Star-Ledger in 2010. “But I probably wouldn’t have gotten involved in that if my life hadn’t been so impacted by a similar cause.” Seligmann settled with the University for an undisclosed amount in June 2007. In recent years, he has remained out of the media spotlight. Seligmann did not respond to The Chronicle’s request for interview.

Photo Illustration by Matthew Rock and Carolyn Chang | The Chronicle

John Burness John Burness served as senior vice president for public affairs and government relations for 17 years and was responsible for addressing the media controversy surrounding the allegations of rape faced by three Duke men’s lacrosse players in 2006. In an article published March 27, 2006, Burness told The Chronicle that there were “two very different versions of what went on at the party.” “My understanding is that some people who have talked to the players have suggested it would be very much in their advantage to get their side of the story out in one way or another,” he told The Chronicle. Burness stepped down from his position in June 2008, opting to focus on writing and teaching on the topic of higher education. In the summer of 2010, he left Duke to serve a one-year term as interim president of Franklin and Marshall—his alma mater in Lancaster, Pa. In Fall 2011, he returned to Duke as a professor of the practice in the Dewitt Wallace Center for Media and Democracy at the Sanford School of Public Policy—a position that he holds today. He teaches a class called “Higher Education and News Media.”

Mike Pressler Mike Pressler began coaching Duke men’s lacrosse in 1991 and was head coach when three lacrosse players were accused of rape in 2006. He led Duke to three ACC championships and two Final Fours. In 2006, he ranked within the NCAA’s top 10 among active coaches in both winning percentage and overall victories. Because of the scandal, however, he resigned April 5, 2006. Pressler later filed a defamation suit in 2008 against the University, which alleged that John Burness, senior vice president for public affairs and government relations, intentionally made slanderous comments about Pressler after his coaching contract with the University was cancelled in 2006. Burness told reporters from Newsday that the difference between Pressler and his successor John Danowski was “night and day.” The University settled with Pressler over the claims in March 2010.In 2014, Pressler discussed the scandal during an interview in CBS’ “60 Minutes” episode entitled “Rush to Judgment.” Pressler took over as head lacrosse coach for Bryant College, a small Division I school in Smithfield, R.I. in August 2006, where he still coaches today.

10 | THURSDAY, MARCH 10, 2016

The Chronicle

www.dukechroniclesports.com

The birth of the ‘Duke scandal’ Emma Baccellieri The Chronicle Eleven days after the off-campus party that became the catalyst for the Duke lacrosse case, The Raleigh News and Observer ran its first front page story on the situation. It would not be the last, and The Raleigh News and Observer would not be alone. In the days and weeks that followed, Duke’s campus became the focus of an intense media frenzy that tangled the facts of the case in clumsy narratives about privilege and power at the University. The media coverage had an immediate impact, putting the University under a harsh spotlight that provided an imperfect framework for public perception of the case. The coverage had more lasting effects, as well—helping to keep the memory of the case alive a decade later, creating the concept of the “Duke scandal” as a common occurrence and contributing to a persistent idea of Duke lacrosse as an abstraction divorced from any specific reality. “‘Duke lacrosse’ is really no longer about Duke. ‘Duke lacrosse’ is a shorthand for some set of circumstances,” said Michael Schoenfeld, vice president for public affairs and government relations. “To some people, ‘Duke lacrosse’ is a story about race, class and gender issues in America. To others, ‘Duke lacrosse’ is a shorthand for political correctness. For others, ‘Duke lacrosse’ is a shorthand for rushing to judgment. People see it through their various prisms. ” Media narratives “When Bad Things Happen at Good Places,” from The Boston Globe. “Sex, Lies, and Duke,” on the cover of Newsweek, over a backdrop of the players’ mug shots. “Rape Case Highlights South’s Abiding Divide” from the London-based The Guardian. And perhaps best-known, “Sex and Scandal at Duke,” the 5,000-word Rolling Stone analysis of the connection between lacrosse and campus social culture. Within three months of the initial accusation, the lacrosse case was dissected in these pieces and hundreds of others. According to a 2007 American Journalism Review analysis of the coverage, three of the four major news networks devoted more time to Duke lacrosse than to the Iraq War in April 2006. Sexual assault, race, big-time college athletics, class, gender, privilege—the case

Chronicle File Photo Recent incidents on campus such as the hanging of a noose last April have garnered national headlines very quickly since the 2006 lacrosse case, administrators said.

could be reduced to fit the keywords of any number of hot-button issues. “The media quickly latched onto a narrative too seductive to check: rich, wild, white jocks had brutalized a working class, black mother of two,” reads the American Journalism Review’s analysis. Although the coverage was often high on drama, much of it was short on nuance and objectivity. Many outlets fixated on perceptions of Duke’s athletic culture, painting a portrait of privileged athletes who dominated the social scene and felt entitled to whatever they wanted—such as an April 2006 Los Angeles Times piece headlined, “Lax Environment: Duke lacrosse scandal reinforces a growing sense that college sports are out of control, fueled by pampered athletes with a sense of entitlement.” Significant space was also devoted to the perceived relationship between Duke and Durham, which was often reduced to a

Chronicle File Photo The dismissal of former Duke guard Rasheed Sulaimon fed the perception of the Duke scandal last Spring.

portrayal of a wealthy institution of Northern outsiders in a Southern, working-class city, according to the American Journalism Review analysis. “I think—and many people who follow the media would agree—that the coverage of Duke lacrosse was one of the low points of U.S. media in the last 10 years,” Schoenfeld said. As television crews and reporters gathered on campus, Durham became a focal point for scores of reporters, pundits and activists. It was not just Duke lacrosse and its players being scrutinized, but Duke writ large— creating an environment for students and faculty that was distracting at best and dangerous at worst. “It emphasized for me in a way that I had never experienced before…how the media can take control of your life in a way you never imagined or anticipated,” said Sue Wasiolek, associate vice president for student affairs and

dean of students. “I can’t remember at what point I began to feel that, but it was relatively early on, and once I did feel that loss of control, I felt it for a very long time.” As the case progressed, the credibility of Durham County District Attorney Mike Nifong came into question, shaking the foundations of the narratives that had driven early coverage. Although the dimensions of race and privilege that had initially defined the case remained present, a new element now took center stage—the flaws behind Nifong’s rush to judgment. But in many ways the damage done by the storm of original reporting could not be reversed. “It’s all controlled by the initial setting,” said Larry Moneta, vice president for student affairs. “That’s all that people remember. People don’t remember the rest of it, and they’re not interested in any information that corrects the erroneous information. They’re See DUKE SCANDAL on Page 19

Chronicle File Photo Dean of Students Sue Wasiolek said that she had not heard the term ‘Duke scandal’ before the lacrosse case.

The Chronicle

www.dukechroniclesports.com

THURSDAY, MARCH 10, 2016 | 11

Danowski-led Blue Devils put scandal in rearview mirror Ryan Hoerger The Chronicle When Duke President Richard Brodhead canceled the rest of the lacrosse season on April 5, 2006, amid allegations that members of the team had raped a woman at an off-campus party, the jolt threatened to throw the program’s on-field product into disarray when the Blue Devils returned to Koskinen Stadium in 2007. The team’s schedule on Duke’s athletics website for that 2006 season lists the eight games the Blue Devils played prior to the announcement, but no mention of any other scheduled games. Duke went 6-2 in those contests and seemed every bit the national title contender that many expected the Blue Devils to be just a year removed from a heartbreaking loss to Johns Hopkins in the national title game. But then a seemingly damning email written by Duke defenseman Ryan McFadyen was made public in the wake of the allegations surrounding the off-campus party, and everything changed—again. Brodhead moved to cancel the season, head coach Mike Pressler resigned and suddenly the program’s future was on shaky ground, both on and off the field. When Southern Methodist was handed the so-called “death penalty” for repeated NCAA violations in the 1980s, it brought a college football powerhouse to its knees. But in Durham, Duke navigated that pitfall by luring away one of the top coaches in the country from Hofstra. The situation that John Danowski inherited when he arrived on campus was hardly enviable, but he quickly set about trying to return to the field and get back to competing for championships. “You get stronger, you learn and improve, or you can go the other way,” Danowski said during his introductory press conference July 21, 2006. “But certainly here, it appears to me that everybody’s working really hard to

Jack White | The Chronicle Duke men’s lacrosse made eight consecutive Final Fours between 2007 and 2014 and has won three of the last six national championships.

learn from past experiences and push against public perception—Duke forward.” exactly replicated its last full season Push forward they have. under Pressler. The Blue Devils pieced Ten years ago, the program was together a 17-3 record and advanced mired in uncertainty as the lacrosse to the national championship game case played itself out. before falling one win Now, the only nearshy of a title. certainty is that— The next year ou get stronger, you with the exception brought the same learn and improve, of last season’s loss promise, and the or you can go the other to Ohio State—the same crushing Blue Devils will be way. disappointment. Duke busy on Memorial Day — John Danowski won 18 games—a weekend, competing program-record— for a national but fell 10-9 to Johns championship. Hopkins in the Final Four. Under Danowski’s guidance, Duke The breakthrough finally came in has advanced to eight Final Fours in 2010, just five seconds into overtime. nine seasons, capturing three of the Blue Devil faceoff specialist C.J. last six national titles and cementing Costabile bested his Notre Dame itself as one of the premier programs opponent at the draw, then scampered in college lacrosse. unmarked straight down the middle of In Danowski’s first season on the the field, slipping a shot past Fighting sidelines—which marked the return of Irish goalkeeper Scott Rodgers. the Blue Devils to the field, where they That goal—the one that sealed the once more had control over wins and first NCAA championship in program losses, rather than fighting a battle history—brought with it ripple effects

Y

Chronicle File Photo Head coach John Danowski noted that he focuses on the many facets of Duke when recruiting players.

that began to elevate the Blue Devils to the ranks of the elite programs in the country. “Maybe, maybe, if things go well, your team could compete for a national championship,” Danowski said. “But we don’t focus on that, because that’s not a given and we don’t know that as coaches. But maybe we do know that you can play on ESPN six or seven times, and maybe you can play in front of 50,000 people on Memorial Day weekend. And so we think that’s worth it.” Danowski said he does not have a recruiting pitch, instead laying out the expectations of balancing the many facets of life at Duke. He also did not seem to need to make a pitch to get the Blue Devils who were members of the 2006 squad to return for the 2007 campaign. Of the 36 freshmen, sophomores and juniors on the 2006 roster, just three did not return in 2007— sophomore Ben Koesterer and accused players Collin Finnerty and Reade Seligmann. After two more seasons ended in Final Four heartbreak, Duke broke through again in Philadelphia in 2013, with Brendan Fowler dominating the faceoff X with 13 straight victories to help the Blue Devils hold off Syracuse 16-10. Duke enjoyed the taste of victory so much that it came back for a second helping the next year in Baltimore, downing fellow ACC foe Notre Dame to capture back-to-back titles. The baggage from the lacrosse case will always be part of the conversation whenever the Blue Devils are involved. But the dynasty that Danowski has developed in Durham must not be forgotten. “Our guys go on and go to graduate school, they go to med school, they go to the military, they go to Wall Street. They coach, they teach,” Danowski said. “I think we’re pretty consistent and fair by saying that whatever your dreams are, you can achieve them with a Duke degree. The place can change your life—if you let it.”

Chronicle File Photo The Blue Devils celebrated their second straight national championship in 2014 after topping Notre Dame in Baltimore.

12 | THURSDAY, MARCH 10, 2016

www.dukechroniclesports.com

The Chronicle

Administrators emphasize Duke’s recovery from lacrosse case Carleigh Stiehm The Chronicle Many people worried that the University’s national standing would suffer as a result of the lacrosse case, but a decade later those fears have proved largely unfounded, according to University officials. Although many administrators urged caution in assuming that the University would suffer in any way as a result of the perceived scandal, others predicted drastic declines to come in the support provided to the University. These concerns were focused on three potential fronts: the number of applicants to the University, donations back to Duke from alumni and Duke’s national ranking—a calculation which includes both of the previous two factors. Looking back on the first of these three metrics a decade after the story first broke, in the months preceding the lacrosse scandal, Duke received 19,379 total applicants, up significantly from 18,083 in 2005, according to numbers provided by the current Dean of Undergraduate Admissions Christoph Guttentag. The following year, the number of applicants dropped to 19,206, in a deviation from the pattern of application growth. “I expect the visibility of the lacrosse case may have had a small effect on the number of applications in 2007,” Guttentag said. “If it did, the effect was clearly minimal and temporary, and it’s hard to separate out how much of that was part of the normal fluctuation in applications we see from year to year.” It is unclear whether the decrease in applicants was a direct result of the lacrosse coverage, but the admission numbers returned to a steady state of growth beginning in 2008, when 20,352 students applied. “We can never be certain why people

don’t apply, since without their applications we don’t know exactly who they are,” Guttentag said. Although applicant numbers quickly rebounded, University officials fielded some questions with concerns about student safety brought on by the extensive media coverage. In April 2006, Peter Vaughn, who then served as the executive director of alumni and development communications, reported that his office alone had received more than a thousand e-mails from alumni and parents about the case. Guttentag noted that more recently his office has received “thousands of phone calls and emails every year” asking about Duke. “Whenever anything about Duke gets national exposure, regardless of whether it’s perceived as positive or negative, we’ll field a few questions about it. But never very many, and never for very long,” Guttentag said. “Overwhelmingly people want to know more about the opportunities Duke provides its students, and they want to know what we’re looking for in our applicants.” In the five years after lacrosse story broke, Duke experienced the greatest increase in applications in its history, said Michael Schoenfeld, vice president for public affairs and government relations. He highlighted that this accomplishment came directly on the heels of claims from critics who said that no student would want to attend Duke after the lacrosse case. “If you look back 10 years ago, what impact did Duke lacrosse have on Duke’s reputation? Well, the University today receives more applications than any time in its history. At the time, critics of the University or those who were worried said, ‘Nobody will ever apply to Duke again,’” Schoenfeld said. Another area of University reputation that was scrutinized at the time was the alumni donation percentages. Donations are a large source of

institutional funding—going to support financial aid, merit scholarships and even campus maintenance and development, said Melissa Antaya, director of marketing for the Office of University Development. In the year prior to the lacrosse case, $276 million was raised in alumni giving and 69 percent of seniors contributed to the senior gift, according to numbers provided by the OUD. “I’ve told trustees it’s going to take two to five years to recover from this,” John Burness, who served as senior vice president for public affairs and government relations, said in a 2006 interview. In 2006, alumni donations spiked to $342 million and continued to rise to $380 million in 2007, according to the OUD. This marked a period of unprecedented growth despite the negative media coverage that surrounded Duke. “The fact that alumni giving set records last year speaks volumes,” Burness told The Chronicle following the record setting donations reported in 2007. “Alums love this place. They know what a difference it made in their lives, and they want to make that much of a difference for the current students.” Senior gift contributions were less steady following the lacrosse case, with 61 percent of the class giving in 2006 and 66 percent giving in 2007. These figures have fluctuated over time, however. In more recent years, the senior participation has fallen to far lower numbers. “Unfortunately, senior gift participation has lagged in recent years, especially compared to our peers,” Antaya said. For Duke’s Class of 2015, 32 percent of seniors gave, compared to an average 64 percent giving rate at its peer institutions and 90 percent at the University of Pennsylvania, according to data provided by the OUD. Antaya attributed the drop to staffing changes within the Senior Gift Team and

Graphic by Ada Zhang | The Chronicle Although many thought Duke’s reputation would be hurt following the scandal, the University did not take major hits in many key measures of reputation.

Special to The Chronicle Dean of Admissions Christoph Guttentag said that applicant numbers returned to normal a few years following the case.

to issues with communication rather than to dissatisfaction of graduates. As for the concern about Duke falling in the national rankings, the University has historically tried not to put too much weight behind minute changes, Schoenfeld previously told The Chronicle. At no point in the past decade has Duke fallen out of the top 10 in the annual college rankings by U.S. News & World Report. The ranking includes alumni giving and application numbers as part of the scoring process. Although Duke’s ranking fell from five to eight in the years that followed, it has since bounced higher and lower without too much change, though it has yet to crack the top five again. Many concerns that arose about Duke’s reputation following the lacrosse case have proven to be overblown, but Duke community members and others still react strongly to new scandals. “If you go back and look at other kinds of incidents in the University’s history, the same predictions were made,” Schoenfeld said. “The most apocalyptic predictions about the future, about whether Duke would be able to succeed as a university, were actually made in the controversy after the Nixon library in 1981. If you go back and look at the press clippings, at what people were saying, after the University had first accepted and then turned away Richard Nixon’s library, you’ll find many similar kinds of statements about the future of Duke.” Looking back 10 years later, Duke has continued to thrive by many measures despite its time in the negative spotlight. Since the lacrosse scandal, there have been other high-profile incidents, and there may be more to come in the future, but administrators are confident in the University’s ability to weather them as they come. “Duke is a very resilient institution,” Schoenfeld said. “I think one of the things that, one of the lessons from lacrosse is that where the University’s reputation is concerned, you can bend it but you can’t break it.” Emma Baccellieri contributed reporting.

The Chronicle

www.dukechroniclesports.com

THURSDAY, MARCH 10, 2016 | 13

ESPN director discusses upcoming lacrosse film about people who aren’t in them, so that is never a huge problem for me. Or so I thought at the time! I would have liked to talk to President [Richard Brodhead], for example, because I think in the end it would have been beneficial to the University to address how they handled the matter and what they learned from it. They didn’t think it was necessary.

Ryan Hoerger The Chronicle Marina Zenovich is the director of an upcoming ESPN 30 for 30 documentary that examines the Duke lacrosse case and the national firestorm that it generated. Named after a sound byte from David Evans—one of the three lacrosse players falsely accused of rape—“Fantastic Lies” will air Sunday, the 10year anniversary of the off-campus party that triggered the chain of events. Zenovich answered questions via email from The Chronicle’s Ryan Hoerger—who prescreened the film—about her experience revisiting the case and her impressions of what she found. The Chronicle: What first got you interested in the Duke lacrosse case and revisiting it in the form of a documentary? Marina Zenovich: I was approached by the producer of “Man on Wire” to do the film. Of course I knew about the story but hadn’t followed it to the end, so was interested in researching what had happened. I had no idea what I was getting into. TC: At the beginning of the film, there’s a description of the divide that existed between Duke and Durham, and how the community was ready for this type of firestorm. As you interviewed people around the community now 10 years removed from the party, did you get a sense of how that contrast has evolved? Is it any better? Is it worse? MZ: You should ask a local. From an outsider’s perspective, I think the divide was milked by the media in the firestorm of the case. I think most people in Durham want to forget what happened. The University officials certainly did. TC: In the interviews with the lawyers for the players and the players’ families, you really get a sense of the holes in the case laid out by [former Durham County district attorney Mike] Nifong. What most

Chronicle File Photo After a year-long case, the three lacrosse players accused of rape were declared innocent in April 2007.

surprised you about the case itself? MZ: Where do I begin? What surprised me the most was the extent of the prosecutorial misconduct as well as the misconduct by the police. These guys were really just having a field day and doing whatever they wanted to suit their own needs. It was almost as if they had decided what had happened in the case and then went searching for facts that would prove it, instead of the other way around. TC: What were the primary emotions expressed by the players’ families and other former players when you talked to them, and was there any hesitancy on their part about revisiting something that caused so much pain? MZ: Hesitation? How about flat out Nos. It took months to get them to talk, and even when they agreed, it was incredibly hard for them to reopen old wounds. This case was incredibly difficult for everyone involved, especially the families of the indicted boys. TC: In one part of the documentary,

TC: How do you think the lacrosse case affected public perception of Duke as a university and the public perception of lacrosse as a national sport? Ten years removed from the party, how does the case still affect public perception of Duke lacrosse specifically? MZ: Like anything, it depends on who you talk to. I am an outsider, so I don’t want to proclaim to know anything more than what I learned making the film which I put into the film.

there’s an insinuation that maybe the way everything was handled by the University administration doesn’t happen if it’s a different sport implicated in the controversy, like men’s basketball. Could you elaborate on that a bit? MZ: Draw your own conclusions. TC: The end of the film reveals that [accuser] Crystal Mangum consented to an interview, but that prison officials denied the request [Mangum is now serving time for second-degree murder of her exboyfriend]. What happened there? MZ: I guess she had done press in the past and it caused problems in the prison. For this reason, they felt it wasn’t a good idea. TC: In general, there were so many key people and entities who declined to be interviewed for the film. What were the challenges in trying to revisit the case without their cooperation, and how did you get around them? MZ: I kind of specialize in making films

Photo Courtesy of Jeff Vespa, ESPN ESPN 30 for 30 director Marina Zenovich urges viewers to draw their own conclusions.

Former Chronicle editor reflects on coverage 10 years later Rachel Chason The Chronicle Seyward Darby, Trinity ’07, served as editor of the 101st volume of The Chronicle in 2005-06, when three Duke lacrosse players were falsely accused of raping a stripper at a party held by the team. Darby now works as an editor for Foreign Policy. Now 10 years since the March 13 party, Darby answered questions via email and reflected on coverage of the case as well as the atmosphere on campus.

Special to The Chronicle Seyward Darby led The Chronicle’s coverage of the lacrosse case when it began in March 2006.

The Chronicle: When did you first hear about the allegations, and when did you realize how big the story would become? Seyward Darby: I first heard about them when I was in New York City for spring break. I was in the Empire State Building. At the time, we didn’t know that the lacrosse team was involved, only that a rape had allegedly occurred in a house off East Campus. We found out that lacrosse players were being accused

a few days later-—the day after Duke fell out of the men’s basketball bracket during March Madness. We knew it was going to be huge when media vans and trucks began rolling into campus, and when The New York Times called The Chronicle office to ask for assistance in obtaining a copy of the search warrant for the Buchanan house. TC: What was the atmosphere like on campus as the story developed? SD: If you were to walk across campus on a given day in those initial weeks, not much would have seemed out of the ordinary—save the journalists and videographers posing in front of the Duke Chapel to provide dispatches for local and national TV shows. Certainly, there were protests that The Chronicle documented at the time, students and professors and Durham residents who believed the lacrosse players had committed a crime, or at the very least were hiding something they had done, criminal or not. And there were students,

especially friends of the lacrosse team, who were vocal about the principle of “innocent until proven guilty.” Yet most people, as I recall, didn’t know what to believe; the facts weren’t at all clear at that point—this is before even the DNA test results were released—so most students, when they were thinking or talking about the case, were pondering whether a rape could have happened, whether the accuser might be lying, whether the district attorney had a piece of damning evidence or was just overzealous. In other words, the campus atmosphere was one of curiosity and anticipation. People absolutely wanted to know what had happened, and they wanted a just outcome. But they also weren’t jumping to sweeping, collective judgments about the allegations in the case. Additionally, I would say that students were frustrated by how the media were portraying Duke and Durham: using See DARBY on Page 17

14 | THURSDAY, MARCH 10, 2016

The Chronicle

www.dukechroniclesports.com

From the archives

Where the lacrosse house once stood Daniel Carp The Chronicle At first glance, it looks like any other construction site. Construction sign out front. Trucks rolling on and off the lot. Two stories of yellow-painted walls waiting for someone to finally call it home. But the lot at 610 N. Buchanan Blvd., sitting directly across from Duke’s East Campus between Dacian Ave. and Urban Ave., is not your typical construction site. It is the first house to be built on the land since three Duke men’s lacrosse players were falsely accused of raping stripper Crystal Mangum there nearly nine years ago. Two houses down from the construction site, Durham resident Gwen Palmer opens her door on a rainy Monday afternoon. It takes her no time to make the connection herself after I inquire about the construction site. “Do you want to come talk about the Duke lacrosse house?” she calls up the stairs to her husband, Ed. Even as construction wears on and the house grows closer to completion each day, the lot continues to attract attention from passersby. Cars driving along Buchanan Blvd. tend to slow down ever so slightly around the 600 block to catch a passing glimpse, Ed Palmer said. Joggers circumnavigating Duke’s East Campus wall conveniently stop to take a rest. “Everybody’s interested in it. They always tell their friends,” said Ed Palmer, who has only lived in his house since 2008 but had family living there for decades prior. “They’re always pointing at the vacant lot, and you know what they’re talking about.” Before the infamous Duke lacrosse case, there was no reason for people to stop and stare at the modest white house that stood at 610 N. Buchanan Blvd. It was just another rental property in Trinity Park home to Duke undergraduates, which was abundantly common nearly a decade ago. Noisy neighbors Taking advantage of their ability to live off campus during their final year at Duke, undergraduates often rent houses in the Trinity Park and Trinity Heights neighborhoods, which—along with Downtown Durham and Ninth Street— encircle East Campus. Designed to curb student behavior in these neighborhoods, a decades-old Durham zoning ordinance mandates that only three unrelated persons can inhabit a single-family home. Landlords renting to Duke students would often turn a blind eye when it came to this statute. “There were multiple landlords, two or three—always worked very carefully with the students to have only three names on the leases even though it was apparent if anyone ever drove by the house and you saw the cars parked that a whole lot more kids were living in those houses,” said John Burness, who served as senior vice president for public affairs and government relations until 2008 and is now a visiting professor of the practice at the Sanford School of Public Policy. Students and their Trinity Park neighbors were constantly at odds. Loud parties would rage on until as late as 4 a.m. Drunk students would urinate on people’s lawns and damage their properties. Phones in Duke’s administrative offices would ring

Chronicle File Photo The house at 610 N. Buchanan Blvd. where the lacrosse party took place was recently demolished.

off the hook with complaints. “Neighbors were just outraged with the University for not doing something to clamp down on the behavior of the students,” Burness said. “They came to us—and we spent a lot of time on this—literally it got to the point where they sent a letter home to the parents of anyone they could identify who was living in any of those houses at the beginning of the year letting them know that the students were expected to be decent neighbors.” In January 2004, city-mandated housing inspections took place in the neighborhoods of Trinity Park and Trinity Heights. Among the violations inspectors were looking for was the illegal conversion of single-family homes into multiple-family homes—occupancy greater than three. It was also around this time that residents of Trinity Park approached the University about potentially buying out rental properties with the hopes of moving students out of the area. “The neighbors came to us and said they were thinking of putting together a nonprofit and [asked] would it be possible to raise enough money to purchase from one landlord there between 12 and 14 of these properties,” Burness said. “They wanted to know if we could help them purchase these houses out from under [Guy Solie, who rented the properties] and deal with that. We thought about that, and it was really complicated for the University to do.” Solie, Trinity ‘67 and Graduate School ‘76, had built up a portfolio of desirable real estate near Duke’s East Campus for his company, Trinity Properties. The house at 610 N. Buchanan Blvd. was one such property. Despite the quickly growing tensions between the neighbors and University regarding student housing in residential neighborhoods, Burness said the lacrosse house at 610 N. Buchanan didn’t receive close to the majority of neighbors’ complaints. “No. Absolutely not,” Burness said when asked if he recalled the house being more of an issue than others in the neighborhood. “To me, it was just one of the other houses.” Joanna Darby, who has lived directly behind the property at 705 Watts Street since 1999, added that though she recalled more than

three students living in the house at 610 N. Buchanan, that house was nowhere near the neighborhood’s biggest concern. “There were occasional parties at that house,” she said. “Not a lot, but occasional.” With the neighbors clamoring for the University to step in and buy Solie’s properties in 2004, Burness threw his support behind the complicated move. Ultimately, Burness’ efforts were unsuccessful. “We were spending so much time and getting so much beef with the neighbors. The police were unhappy and the city was unhappy. My argument didn’t carry,” Burness said. “Perhaps, if we had been successful in purchasing it... when I originally recommended it, what later became the big issue never would have occurred.” By early 2006, pressure from Trinity Park residents had finally mounted on the University. It was time for Duke to make a move. On Jan. 18, 2006, Solie filed to create a new corporation called Soleil, LLC. A month later, between Feb. 22 and Feb. 27, Solie transferred 15 of his properties from Trinity Properties to Soleil, LLC. On Feb. 28, Durham Realty, a company owned by Duke University, bought all 15 properties— including the house at 610 N. Buchanan Blvd.—for a total of $3.7 million. Now their new landlord, Duke allowed students living in the houses at the time to remain there for the duration of their existing leases, even those that extended beyond the end of the academic year. Although Burness noted that the final price tag may have been inflated due to future potential earnings of the rental properties, the property acquisition was heralded by the Durham community as the right move for Duke. “Neighbors were ecstatic with us when it got out that we were doing this,” Burness said. “There were editorials in the local paper talking about how Duke was doing the right thing and what a good neighbor we were and blah blah blah. It was one of those things that was pretty universally seen as Duke acting responsibly.” Little did the University know that one of the houses it had purchased as part of a good public relations move was about to become the epicenter of a media firestorm.

The Duke lacrosse case Exactly two weeks after 610 N. Buchanan Blvd. was purchased by Duke, on March 13, 2006, members of the Duke men’s lacrosse team held a party at their house. It was at that party where Mangum—one of the two strippers the team had hired for the evening—accused senior David Evans and sophomores Colin Finnerty and Reade Seligmann of raping her. Ed and Gwen Palmer were not in Durham when the allegations finally surfaced later that month—their house was undergoing renovations at the time. But from a distance, it didn’t take long for them to realize that the 600 block of N. Buchanan Blvd. had become ground zero for what would become some of the darkest days in Duke’s history. “My brother called me and said, ‘You won’t believe this, but your house is on CNN right now.’ They were doing all their TV stuff down the block, showing the whole block,” Ed Palmer said. “I turned on the TV and whoever it was from Fox News was standing on the front porch.” Television crews would make frequent pilgrimage to the house, making it the backdrop for many of their reports during the ensuing weeks and months. Supporters tacked posters to the walls of the house while dissenters defaced it with angry messages and accusations. Protestors walked up and down the block banging pots and pans and shouting for change. The lacrosse case drew dividing lines across Duke’s campus, the city of Durham and the entire United States. Even before there was a trial, even before any arrests were made, most condemned the three players as guilty. Academics pitted themselves against athletes when a cohort of professors, later known as the Group of 88, published an advertisement in which they vilified the accused lacrosse players. The idea that three privileged, white athletes at an elite private institution had raped an African American woman sparked racial tensions in a city that juxtaposes the University community with the city’s large black population. The University was tied for fifth in the nation See LAX HOUSE on Page 18

The Chronicle

www.dukechroniclesports.com

BRODHEAD from page 3 he said. “More people in Durham know Duke as a good partner and a good neighbor now than was the case 10 years ago.”

THURSDAY, MARCH 10, 2016 | 15

spend much time thinking about it. “I live in the present tense headed toward the future tense,” he explained. “I don’t spend my time looking back on this.” He emphasized that after the scandal died down, he focused on moving forward rather than second guessing. “It was important for the community to move forward at some point, to let go of that and to go on with the business of the University,” he said. “It’s not that it ever vanishes, but I would hope that it becomes seen in a perspective with many other things.” When asked whether the episode has impeded him in any way, Brodhead replied that it had not. He pointed to the success of the University’s financial aid fundraising campaign, which was underway during the case, as evidence that lacrosse did not interrupt the University’s major initiatives. “This was distracting. It took a lot of emotional energy for a lot of people, certainly including the accused students,” he said. “But we always had ideas about what we wanted to be spending our time on, and we always did our best to spend time on that. And the time came when we were past the distraction.” Burness said, however, that lacrosse has changed the trajectory of Brodhead’s time at Duke. “[Brodhead]’s had the unfortunate circumstance that this for him is kind of the defining moment of his presidency,” Burness said. “[Lacrosse] undercut his ability to carve out his own identity, in a way, and to establish in an academic sense where he was trying to take the University.” Brodhead acknowledged that others might see him differently as a result of his decisions during the case, but dismissed the idea that it has significantly altered or dampened his achievements as president. “When you take a job like mine, you know that every high level thing, for good and for bad, is your responsibility,” he said. “[Lacrosse] was a big episode. It was certainly part of my presidency. It was my job to try to steer this place through that. And I’m pleased to say that later it has been my job to do a lot of other things that were defined in terms of positive aspiration rather than crisis management.”

Administrative response Brodhead said that the University has learned its lessons from the incident and the criticisms of Duke’s administration that followed it, noting that changes have been made to address the issues that surfaced during the scandal. In particular, Brodhead discussed the University’s response to a series of reports that were commissioned during and after the scandal to examine the University from top to bottom. He cautioned that because the reports were initiated at a time when many believed the accusations against the Duke lacrosse players had merit, the conclusions of the reports had to be considered cautiously. “The difficulty with the reports is that they were attached to the case at the time,” he Chronicle File Photo explained. “It was as if to uphold the report The University commissioned reports to examine campus culture and administrative response was to uphold the truth of the accusations. after three lacrosse players were falsely accused of rape. Of course, that’s what you had to be careful not to do.” Brodhead noted that although he have also dissolved the rights of Brownstone, One report on the administrative has heard such claims, he does not feel Round Table and all kinds of other things response to the lacrosse case—from a personally less open or less willing to that people didn’t have complaints about,” committee chaired by Julius Chambers, speak on University issues as a result of he explained. “I still think that the answer that was recommended by the report in former chancellor of North Carolina the episode. Central University, and William Bowen, “I have heard it reported that [Burness] late April of that year was a draconian former president of Princeton University— has said that. He’s never said that to my recommendation that would have been faulted among other things, the lack of face. It’s his view, not mine,” Brodhead said. quite destructive of the social fabric of the diversity in the upper administration, the “I speak out on every issue that I consider University.” Brodhead acknowledged that there administration’s slowness to understand the appropriate for a University president to are still problems with campus culture. He racial aspects of the case and administrative speak out on. There’s many issues where I noted that people who have not been at communications failures. don’t think it’s that appropriate, and there’s Duke for the past 10 years may think that the Brodhead argued that the diversity many that are.” lacrosse scandal did not change much about of the upper administration has since undergraduate life, but said that if students improved, pointing to the additions of black Changing the undergraduate experience had been on campus 10 years ago, they administrators Dr. A. Eugene Washington, The University also commissioned a would see the improvement today. chancellor for health affairs and president report—from a committee chaired by “A person who stepped from that moment and CEO of Duke University Health System, Moneta and Robert Thompson, former vice to this moment would see a lot of change and Phail Wynn, vice provost for undergraduate here,” he said. “I’m not saying that there isn’t president for Durham education and dean of the hen you look at the more change to be made.” and regional affairs. Trinity College of Arts and event magnified Of the top seven Sciences—that examined administrative positions by the false accusation and the undergraduate A lasting legacy? Brodhead noted that if nothing else, the described in the report then raised to the nth power campus culture and lacrosse case was an “immense distraction” as the “senior leadership by the DA’s assertions, you suggested ways to improve from his presidency, but that he does not Sarah Kerman contributed reporting. of Duke,” five are held it. Brodhead said that, in had a story from hell. by white men today—the response to these reports, same number as when changes have been made — Richard Brodhead the lacrosse scandal to the undergraduate occurred. experience to reduce Several administrators noted that leaders divides between groups of students. at Duke have become less willing to discuss “If someone were to say, ‘What’s different controversial issues affecting the University. now as a result of lacrosse,’ I would say “I don’t think I’m in a great position that we have all worked very hard to create to say whether [Brodhead] was gun-shy a seamless integration of the different or not [after lacrosse], but I believe the aspects of the student experience and their institution is,” said Sue Wasiolek, associate administration,” he said. vice president for student affairs and dean Brodhead noted that the “athleticof students, in a 2015 interview with The academic divide” at Duke, something which Chronicle. “I know that I am. I know that he said used to be prominent in discussions I have a higher level of fear associated with of the University’s culture, has been greatly just making decisions, and I have a much reduced. He also noted that the housing greater tendency to collaborate, to check in, model has been revamped to guarantee a to consult.… That’s how I would describe right of return for independent students and just the institution as a whole as a result of to include more communal spaces in which the lacrosse case.” students can interact. John Burness, who was the University’s He added that administrators also did not senior vice president for public affairs and implement an initial recommendation made government relations during the case, by the campus culture committee to disband echoed the sentiment. all selective housing groups. “We’re not as open as we were before,” “The report comes to the edge of Chronicle File Photo Burness explained. “I think we’ve become recommending the dissolution of residential John Burness, former senior vice president for public affairs and government relations, said that less willing to deal with controversy.” rights for Greek life. Of course, it would the University has become less open when dealing with controversies since the lacrosse case.

W

16 | THURSDAY, MARCH 10, 2016

www.dukechroniclesports.com

to resign, cancelling the season and suspending the accused players. He suggested that the administration should have done little else beside ensuring the police investigation could continue, while “rigorously maintaining an assumption of innocence.” Baldwin argued, however, that the University’s actions actually stemmed from pressure placed on Duke from the Group of 88.

GROUP OF 88 from page 4 that, although conversations about sexual assault and race on campus are important, they should have occurred afterward when tensions were not as high. “The timing made it seem like an indictment,” he said. “The last thing they wanted was a discussion. They were incensed. They just didn’t behave well. They could have backed off, let the facts come out, and then we can have this conversation.” He added that concerned faculty members could have gone to Student Affairs and asked to create a forum or to invite speakers, rather than taking out a public ad. But the anonymous signatory said their personal intentions for signing were to address an “emergency situation” for students, not to use the lacrosse case as a “launching pad.” The signatory noted that, after the initial accusations by Mangum, many students “felt in danger,” “wished they hadn’t come to Duke” and needed reassurance from faculty. “I don’t think this was opportunistic, as in, ‘Let’s just jump on the bandwagon of this big spectacle,’” the anonymous signatory said. “That never crossed my mind.” According to the ad, students’ statements were intended to depict their emotions concerning broader experiences—which they saw reflected in the “extraordinary spotlight” of the lacrosse case. The anonymous signatory noted that, though the ad itself was not meant to judge the lacrosse players, certain student statements referencing the case might have led to the ad’s misinterpretation. “No one is really talking about how to keep the young woman [Mangum] herself central to this conversation, how to keep her humanity before us,” one anonymous student wrote in the ad. ‘Everybody shuts up about it’ The faculty members who spoke to The Chronicle agreed that the discussions the ad intended to create are ongoing. Many are not convinced Duke has fixed the issues the ad sought to address. The anonymous signatory described a “big man on campus” ethos embedded within the privilege and “hegemonic” power of being on a sports team, and said the University needed to do a better job of reeling in students’ “baser instincts.” The faculty member noted that many incoming students assume that sexual assault is unlikely on campus because “smart students don’t rape,” but that gender relations on campus remain unbalanced. Rosenberg described Duke’s student body as “bimodal”—split between extremely committed undergraduates and those who did not come to Duke primarily for its educational mission. He also called into question the role and impact of Greek life and Division I athletics on campus. Even though Duke has seen an increase in class diversity in recent years, Chafe noted that issues of hate speech and derogatory remarks have not left Duke’s campus, citing the recent defacement of a Black Lives Matter poster as an example. “Campus culture has improved, but not in a decisive or determinative manner,” Chafe said.

The Chronicle

Carolyn Chang | Chronicle File Photo One signatory of the advertisement cited the defacement of a Black Lives Matter flyer last Fall as an example of hate speech still present on campus.

Beaule compared Duke culture to culture at the University of Hawaii, where she now works. Compared to Duke, she said UH has more respect for minorities, less sense of entitlement and that racist statements are not used as loosely as she sometimes found at Duke. Rosenberg added that Duke has taken steps to correct its perceived image, citing programs like DukeEngage. However, he said that a negative perception of the type of students who go to Duke still persists. The University has also failed to promote a thorough discussion on how campuses should conduct themselves when such controversies erupt, Baldwin said. He noted that, due to University settlements following the lacrosse case, Duke lost out on potential new faculty, new buildings and greater financial aid. “No one has learned any lessons from the ordeal because the University has never had this conversation,” he said. “The education we could get on how to handle this type of crisis is amazing, but everybody shuts up about it.” Blown out of proportion James Coleman, John S. Bradway professor of the practice of law and codirector of the Wrongful Convictions Clinic at Duke, chaired the Lacrosse Ad Hoc Review Committee convened by President Richard Brodhead to investigate the behavior of the lacrosse team in the five years prior to the case. Coleman explained that the importance of the ad itself was blown out of proportion, adding that it had no impact whatsoever on the case or on Nifong’s improper conduct and that he didn’t find the ad itself “inappropriate.” Coleman pointed to a column written by David Brooks in The New York Times April 9, 2006 as a much more problematic example of rushing to judgment, one that Brooks wrote likely did influence Nifong’s actions. “A community so degraded, you might surmise, is not a long way from actual sexual assault,” Brooks wrote. Although Coleman acknowledged that the advertisement did not “necessarily represent a rush to judgment,” he noted that it is human nature to rush to judgment every time sensational allegations are

made, a trend only exacerbated by the 24/7 news coverage such events often receive. Beaule agreed with Coleman that the ad should not have generated as much attention as it did. “With all due respect to The Chronicle, it’s not an important place to promote a message,” she said. “It was just another space.” Divided loyalties The anonymous signatory explained that, looking back, one reason for the criticism of the Group of 88 was the perception that they were turning their attention to some students but not to others. Coleman noted that, at the beginning of the case, very few people came to the players’ defense. Placing the ad depicting the voices of minority students and not the lacrosse students as well did not detract from faculty commitment to the lacrosse students, the anonymous signatory explained. After the news of the alleged rape broke, the signatory reached out to one of the accused students offering to talk, provide support or even post bail should he be arrested, the signatory said. “I experienced that protective gesture for that student, who I knew to be a great person,” the signatory said. “That was my first impulse, co-existing with a desire to protect other students.” Rosenberg noted that Seligmann had taken one of his classes, and from what he could see “[Seligmann] didn’t seem the kind of person who would be guilty of a violent crime.” The anonymous signatory noted that the only reason the ad was put out in favor of “othered” students rather than the lacrosse players was that they wanted to speak for students who did not have as much “elite support”—“the less popular crowd.” “I was committed to those that came in with more privilege just as much as those with less, because self-critical and critical education means we are all better,” the anonymous signatory said. Rosenberg expressed disappointment with the University’s response to the situation, just as many critics of the Group of 88 have. He said that the administration was “overly precipitate” in forcing lacrosse coach Mike Pressler

Would they do it again? The faculty members who spoke to The Chronicle had different opinions on whether they would be willing to place such an ad should another such controversy erupt, and many expressed concern that the hateful messages faculty received might prevent discussion in the future. Both Rosenberg and the anonymous signatory noted that minority faculty— such as women of color—received a disproportionate amount of the vitriol directed at the Group of 88. “All these people could be and were seriously threatened and could rightly have been considered in danger of their livelihood,” Rosenberg said. Numerous faculty whom The Chronicle reached out to declined to comment for fear of retaliation. Beaule said that the rise of anonymity on the Internet makes people less willing to speak out and affix their name to various causes and that in her situation, her decision to sign onto such an advertisement in the future would largely depend on the specific campus culture. Weintraub said that personal activism should not be the role of faculty members, adding that the purpose of a university is not to make social change. He also said that collegial trust among faculty was damaged and that he has lost friends as a result of the incident. Baldwin, on the other hand, said that though he has lost a degree of respect for some members of the Group of 88, relationships continue to be cordial. Other faculty noted that it was important for them to speak out on such issues. Coleman argued that “there is no way to nor would we want to shut faculty up from participating in a discussion” of structural issues, for example. Chafe noted, however, that next time more caution might be taken to ensure there was no misunderstanding over the intentions of the message. He also emphasized the role of faculty to speak out as conscientious members of the community, adding that some of his fellow faculty members have been more hesitant to comment given the events of 2006. Despite noting that certain quotes directly referencing the case might have led to the ad’s misinterpretation, the anonymous signatory said they would not take out the quotes if asked to do it over again, in order to be “honest to the students, because the case was relevant to how they felt.” Rosenberg explained that in the years since the lacrosse case, he has hesitated at times to sign on to various causes due to fear of receiving “annoying or even worse emails and attention,” notably in the recent instance of being asked to support efforts by contingent faculty to unionize. “I signed on, but I was angry that I allowed those considerations to enter my mind,” he said.

The Chronicle

www.dukechroniclesports.com

THURSDAY, MARCH 10, 2016 | 17

DARBY from page 13 these big brushstrokes of “black versus white,” “poor versus rich” and the like. Students weren’t operating under the delusion that the university was a perfect place, or that its relationship with the city was impeccable, but they also saw the good along with the bad—and they didn’t like seeing the place they called home reduced to generalizations and assumptions.

Special to The Chronicle Phail Wynn’s position was created after the lacrosse case so that a Duke administrator could focus exclusively on maintaining relationships with Durham residents and leaders.

DURHAM from page 5 Tensions remain Although more collaborative conversations between Duke officials and Durham residents have happened in the wake of the lacrosse case, Duke’s social culture continues to be a source of concern for neighbors. Community members formed Durham Neighborhoods United in 2014 in an effort to communicate concerns about disruptive off campus behavior. Last year, the city of Durham launched an investigation into several fraternity houses located near campus, including homes on Vickers Avenue and Chapel Hill Street, for violations of city ordinances. “It’s really troubling,” Thornhill said. “We’ve lived here 10 years and we’ll have people come in.. who act like this is just a temporary place to hang out and I’m raising my children here.” Thornhill said that although the majority of her interactions with Duke students have been positive, she hopes the University will work with the neighborhoods surrounding campus to make sure the students who are not following neighborhood expectations experience real consequences for misconduct

off-campus. She also added that it would be helpful if neighbors had more information about Duke’s student conduct process. In 2009, the Trinity Heights Action Committee convened a task force of city officials, community members, Duke administrators and students. The committee noted that one challenge of maintaining positive relations with students in off-campus houses is the temporary nature of student housing—which means neighbors have to reiterate their expectations at the start of each new academic year. Wynn noted that although student conduct in off-campus houses has been and remains an issue that the University must address, it now has additional priorities—including creating affordable housing, addressing crime issues and continuing to expand the city’s economic revitalization. Despite the challenges that have persisted in the relationship between Duke and the surrounding neighborhoods, Wynn expressed that he aims for the city to view Duke as a long-term partner in confronting new issues that arise. “Part of being an engaged partner for the long term means as the priorities change, we have to continue making adjustments and maintaining our strong partnership efforts,”

Photo Courtesy of Colin Huth, DPAC Duke has assisted Durham’s revitalization, including partnering with the city to promote the Durham Performing Arts Center.

being accused of gang rape on national television. As student journalists, we were stunned—and just tried to manage the onslaught as best we could, remembering that our responsibility was to report the news fairly and clearly. It didn’t matter what we thought or what our hunches were if we couldn’t report them out; it mattered what we knew. Lives hung in the balance, on both sides of the case; they weren’t there for the media’s enjoyment. Every person at the party that night had an experience, a story to tell, and it was important not to fixate on one version of events as the absolute truth when not every version was known. I’m referring to the fact that, at first, the players were not speaking publicly. There were upsetting developments, like the email from one player making a sick joke about skinning strippers and reports that players may have used racial slurs at the party. But the question on the table wasn’t whether the players had done any kind of wrong; it was whether they gang-raped a woman. We tried very hard to keep that at the forefront of our minds.

TC: Had there been criticism of and discussion surrounding Duke’s social culture before the accusations? SD: Yes, there had been: In the years leading up to the case, for instance, The Chronicle had written articles about how drinking and partying culture had been pushed off campus and, by most accounts, could quickly spin out of control. I myself wrote three such features, documenting changes in university alcohol policy in the preceding decades. Neighbors in Trinity Park complained about rowdy parties, students complained about an TC: Do you think Duke’s image administration that stifled social life— changed as a result of the media’s including the nownarrative? infamous tailgate— SD: I think it and the University did. For several ne day, most of Duke’s press implored students years after, I was for basketball, or profesto behave found that if I responsibly. I know, sors doing ground-breaking research. said in a social too, that many The next, fellow students were being situation that I students of color, accused of gang rape on national went to Duke, and many white television. people would students too, were sort of count —Seyward Darby back in their concerned about the status of race brains and relations both on campus and off. There realize, “Oh! You were there during were also ongoing conversations about the the lacrosse case. How awful was that? dangers of privilege, misogyny, and many, Do you think they really did it?” This many other important issues. So, put simply, question still comes up now and then, there was criticism, much of it founded—and by the way; I think that Nifong and not all discussion turned into constructive the national media so intensely cast action, which was upsetting. suspicion—or outright blame—on the But I will add this: These kinds of players early on that some people who critiques and conversations are not watched from afar during that phase unique to Duke. I attended Yale for don’t know, remember, or believe the graduate school, for example, and similar ultimate outcome. I think too that media themes came up all the time. I say this were quick to snatch up subsequent not at all to excuse what problems Duke stories of controversy at Duke: The sex had—because it definitely had them, and powerpoint is a good example. I was frustrated by them—but rather to underscore something the media did not TC: Is there anything you would like always keep in mind as the lacrosse case to add? progressed: that universities are living SD: Just that I was really proud of institutions at which new generations the work The Chronicle did. I’m sure of students and teachers are perennially it wasn’t perfect—we were kids, really, grappling with and addressing social, covering a massive story about our peers, economic and political injustices people we knew from classes and social and inequalities, whether specific to life. But we worked incredibly hard to a campus or absorbed from broader be as professional as possible. I give American culture and history. Duke enormous credit to managing editor was put under a microscope during the Sarah Kwak, news editor Steve Veres, lacrosse case, held up as uniquely awful and sports editor Mike Van Pelt. I was at times, and I fear a broader, potentially only at the helm for the first two months powerful conversation about enduring of the story, because we had an editorial problems (and potential solutions) at changeover and Ryan McCartney took universities nationwide never occurred; the reins. the case went off the rails, the story He did a tremendous job steering shifted, and—predictably—the media coverage as the case moved into a very and public lost interest. different phase. Also, our sports reporters were fantastic, staying on top of things as TC: What was it like having so much the months passed in a way even national media attention directed at campus? reporters could not. The Chronicle’s SD: In a word, surreal. One day, coverage was a solid team effort and one most of Duke’s press was for basketball, that I hope, amid all the ugly carnage or professors doing ground-breaking of the lacrosse case, is at least one small research. The next, fellow students were example of good.

O

18 | THURSDAY, MARCH 10, 2016

The Chronicle

www.dukechroniclesports.com

LAX HOUSE from page 14 pundits debated whether that prestigious ranking would drop alongside the number of applications and donations received. “It was like a meteor had hit the campus,” said Michael Schoenfeld, who currently serves as Duke’s vice president for public affairs and government relations. The Blue Devils played their last game of the season on March 21, falling to No. 3 Cornell 11-7. By April 5, President Richard Brodhead cancelled the remainder of Duke’s lacrosse season and head coach Mike Pressler was forced to resign. Finnerty and Seligmann were arrested and indicted on charges of first degree rape, first degree sexual offense and kidnapping on April 18, 2006. By May 15, Evans had joined them as the third defendant in the Duke lacrosse case. On June 8, court documents indicated that Kim Roberts, the other stripper at the party that night, was with Mangum for all but five minutes of the evening. Roberts expressed skepticism that the sexual assault ever took place. As inconsistencies continued to surface regarding the case, the focus began to shift from the defendants to Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong, who had taken it upon himself to help lead the Durham Police Department’s investigation. Nifong later came under fire for falsely reporting the results of DNA tests and intimidating witnesses in the case, ultimately resulting in his removal from the case and disbarment. A key piece of the inconsistencies in Mangum’s testimony and DUPD’s investigation had to do with the physical layout of the house at 610 N. Buchanan Blvd. Throughout the investigation and ensuing civil cases, the house stood vacant as a piece of evidence. After Nifong removed himself from the case and turned it over to North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper in January 2007, the attorney general and special prosecutors visited the house to examine the space themselves. It turned out to be one of the turning points of case. “That was one of the compelling dimensions of the evidence to them in their investigations—that the story the complaining witness had given did not square with the physical realities of that space,” said Bob Ekstrand, who represented various members of the 2006 Duke men’s lacrosse team in civil suits against the University and city of Durham. On April 11, 2007, Cooper dropped all remaining charges against Evans, Finnerty and Seligmann. Although their names were finally cleared after a year-long legal battle, Nifong’s fraudulent misrepresentation of the case had done significant damage to the Duke community. Bringing down the house As several members of the men’s lacrosse program took civil action against Duke and the city of Durham, the house continued to stand vacant as a part of legal investigations for the next four years. During that period of time, the structure’s condition continued to deteriorate. “I think the house was always in a state of disrepair,” Darby said. “I’m sure it got worse by being empty and not kept up.” The house’s mailbox began to overflow with junk mail. Year after year of local phone books, delivered but untouched, sat on the front porch. An ominous black question mark was spray-painted on its back wall. Even though the doorbell still rang, nobody was there to answer—the house’s front door padlocked shut. On July 12, 2010, when the University was

Chronicle File Photo The University purchased a number of properties near campus shortly before the March 13 party occurred.

finally able to once again access the property it had bought more than four years prior, the white house at 610 N. Buchanan Blvd. was demolished. Local news crews and a small crowd gathered outside the house for its swift and unceremonious funeral—demolition took just 15 minutes. “It happened like that,” Gwen Palmer said. “All of a sudden here they are, and the house is gone.” Schoenfeld did not attend the demolition, but had someone save him a brick from the old lacrosse house. He pulls it out from the back of his bookshelf and lays it on the table in his office. When asked why he saved the brick, Schoenfeld responds that he collects Duke souvenirs. Not all believed the house at 610 N. Buchanan Blvd. should have been demolished. Opponents of the demolition likened the property to a memorial of the injustices of the lacrosse case. “There was never any consideration to doing anything with the house other than returning it to being a healthy, important part of the neighborhood. The structure itself was far less important than some of the ideas and other things that came out of the events of 2006,” Schoenfeld said. “It had become both an eyesore and a safety hazard.” Ekstrand believed that despite the condition the house had fallen into after four years of vacancy that it could have been repaired. Furthermore, he alluded to a higher purpose the property could have served. “It had a pretty visible role in all the public turmoil surrounding the false allegations. In light of that, it always made sense to me that there was significance to be drawn from that. I always, whenever I wondered what would happen to that house, thought its best use would be to turn it into an innocence project office,” Ekstrand said. “It would stand as a pretty powerful reminder for all of us that the truth is not always what you think and when accusations of the most serious kind are made, they should be responded to with the care and caution that would have served the defendants so well back then.” After the lot was cleared, it sat vacant under the University’s control for more than four years. Despite the high level of publicity surrounding the lot, Schoenfeld said selling the

land was no easy task for Duke. “It’s a very odd-shaped lot, so the size of it and the shape of it make it kind of challenging to build something on,” Schoenfeld said. “There had not been many offers to buy the property, as far as I know.” Conversations with residents of Trinity Park told a slightly different story. Many surrounding neighbors had expressed interest in buying the land in hopes of adding it to their current property. Duke had prioritized selling the land for the construction of another single-family home. “There were several people around here who wanted to buy that lot and just keep it as their backyard. People wanted to buy the lot and just keep it as a garden,” Ed Palmer said. “Duke owned the property and didn’t want to do that. They wanted a house there.” While Duke continued to wait for the right offer, the vacant lot continued to attract the same attention from passersby as it did when the white house once stood. Even in the house’s absence, the lot remained a landmark in the Trinity Park community. “Several people besides us would say, ‘I live two houses down from the Duke lacrosse lot,’ because everybody knows where that is,” Gwen Palmer said. “The people on the other side two houses down do it too, because I’ve gotten their guests.” At one point, the weeds in the vacant lot grew to be three feet tall. Shortly after the Palmers called Duke, landscapers began cutting the grass every other week. Darby would often use the vacant lot for what she called “guerrilla gardening.” Multiple years she attempted to grow pumpkins and tomatoes on the site where the lacrosse house once stood, with admittedly limited success. “I liked having that open space,” Darby said. “It was empty and no one was using it, and it was the only area that got sun.” She also began to notice before long that the garage behind the house had become somewhat of a haven for Durham’s homeless population who couldn’t make it to a shelter on time. Days drifted into months and years as the vacant lot at 610 N. Buchanan Blvd. remained uninhabited. It watched as students who lived across the wall on East Campus as freshmen moved into other nearby rental properties as seniors and graduated. Shortly after the house’s demolition, the last students who were at Duke

during the lacrosse case were gone—an entire generation turned over. It wasn’t until June 20, 2014 that Duke finally sold the lot for $100,000 to University City, LLC, a company established by Aaron Lubeck just two months prior. A founding member of Trinity Design/ Build, Lubeck—who is no longer affiliated with the firm—contracted the group, which specializes in green building and eco-friendly interiors to build a single-family home at 610 N. Buchanan Blvd. One of the first pieces of the project was the installation of a geothermal well, which provides for more environmentallyfriendly heating and cooling of the home. Lubeck, a former adjunct lecturer at Duke’s Nicholas School of the Environment, and Trinity Design/Build both declined to comment for this story. Although Lubeck still currently owns the land, the house will be sold on completion to Alan Townsend, who took over as Dean of the Nicholas School in May 2014. Townsend could not be reached for comment in time for publication. Schoenfeld was unaware of the details concerning the house’s future, but expressed excitement for what the construction of a new house at 610 N. Buchanan Blvd. could mean for the neighborhood of Trinity Park. “The Trinity Park neighborhood has become, over the last 15 or 20 years, one of the most desirable and interesting neighborhoods in Durham and even in the state of North Carolina,” Schoenfeld said. “Having another residence there and another family there is a positive thing for the neighborhood.” Whether the construction and completion of a new house at 610 N. Buchanan Blvd. will affect the overall memories and consciousness of the Duke lacrosse scandal is unclear. Though the run-down white house and vacant lot both served as physical reminders of the case, the events of 2006 are forever stitched into the fabric of this University, for better or for worse. With a new family moving in, the physical void in the neighborhood will be filled. But all likelihood is that cars will still slow down ever so slightly and joggers will still take a quick break when they reach the 600 block of Buchanan— pointing at the new yellow house where the lacrosse house once stood. Editor’s Note: This story originally ran in the February 2015 issue of Towerview Magazine.

The Chronicle

DUKE SCANDAL from page 10 just going to live with that first reaction.” The ‘Duke scandal’ Although the media scrutiny was intense and difficult to navigate in the moment, it did not have lasting significance for the University, administrators said. They said the case proved Duke’s resilience both as an institution and as a brand, noting that no meaningful indicator of the school’s reputation—as measured by admissions statistics, donations and national ranking—showed any signs of decline. The coverage did, however, provide what seems to be the first widespread use of the term “Duke scandal.” “I don’t recall ‘Duke scandal,’ that term, being used prior to lacrosse,” Wasiolek said. An analysis of Google’s Trends tool, which analyzes news coverage for specific phrases, shows that the term was not used in the media before April 2006. To look at the term’s use over time is to see a snapshot of the negative moments of Duke’s media presence in the last decade—with spikes coinciding with the Karen Owen powerpoint in October 2010, the Anil Potti fraud incident, the Pi Kappa Phi “Pilgrims and Indians” party in November

www.dukechroniclesports.com

2011 the Kappa Sigma “Asia Prime” party scrutiny, Schoenfeld said. February 2013, the disclosure of adult film “There have been no shortage of incidents star Belle Knox as a Duke student in February at other campuses that are dealing with their 2014, the reported sexual assault allegations own things,” Moneta added, noting that against basketball player Rasheed Sulaimon in student life at Duke is very similar to what he March 2015 and the noose found on campus saw in his decade as an administrator at the in April 2015. University of Pennsylvania. Duke’s peer institutions do not appear But several administrators noted that the to have such an intimate relationship with media coverage of controversies at Duke has the term “scandal” in the media. There are been more thorough in the years since the occasional instances lacrosse case. of “Harvard scandal,” “I think the media ating Duke is an art has a propensity to use “Stanford scandal” and form. others, but a graph of that term more loosely those terms’ use provides —Larry Moneta [at Duke] than it would nothing like the repeated with other institutions,” peaks of “Duke scandal.” Wasiolek said. For “Yale scandal,” “Northwestern scandal,” There are a number of factors that might “Vanderbilt scandal” and several other contribute media’s attraction to the notion of schools, there are so few examples of the term the Duke scandal. There is the institution’s that the Google Trends tool does not produce visibility—its prominence in a broad variety of any results at all. fields, from academics to athletics to medicine. But there are far more similarities than To some, the spotlight on Duke’s controversies differences between Duke and its peers, is a classic example of trying to knock a administrators said, and Duke is certainly successful institution off its pedestal. not alone on the list of academically elite “Hating Duke is an art form,” Moneta schools that grapple with issues such as said. “Not as much as it used to be, actually, campus sexual assault and a high-pressure but I think there’s a piece of it there—I think social culture. Most, if not all, schools at there are people who are thrilled that Duke is Duke’s level are under constant media caught doing something.”

H

THURSDAY, MARCH 10, 2016 | 19

Duke does not purport to be a perfect place, Wasiolek noted, pointing in particular to the ways the school has tried to grow and change since the lacrosse case. But there is still, to some, a dangerous perception of the University as collectively arrogant. “One of the first things that I say to people when they’re looking at Duke— to come here as a student, when they’re considering it for employment—is Duke is not perfect,” Wasiolek said. “And yet, somehow many people get the impression that we think we are, and that’s a terrible place to be.” Many of the incidents that have garnered negative media attention for the University— not only the lacrosse case, but also the events associated with Greek life and gender dynamics—tie into old ideas of Duke’s privilege and exclusivity. The result is what Schoenfeld described as a “closed feedback loop” of stories on old stereotypes. “Duke’s reputation, whether it’s deserved or not, is one of a student body that is very privileged, that is entitled, that is wealthy, that is smart, ambitious,” Wasiolek said. “And when you lay that on top of a sports culture of success, then what comes out at the other end of that is a tendency and propensity to try to find fault.”

Lucy Zhang | The Chronicle A selection of some of the most common words in media coverage of the lacrosse case is pictured above. The size of each word represents how often it was used. An interactive version will be viewable online.

20 | THURSDAY, MARCH 10, 2016

www.dukechroniclesports.com

In 2006, there was judgment before justice.

Premieres Sunday, March 13 9 PM/ET

The Chronicle