The Nifong resignation was overdue and the man was subsequently disbarred from the practice of law. There are cases where an innocent person is placed on trial and convicted. Such cases typically have involved faulty eye-witness testimony and do not involve prosecutorial misconduct. There are cases where a person who is factually guilty but legally innocent on the basis of a brilliant defense and a fumbling prosecutor.
The Nifong performance appears to have been politically-motivated, not by any ideology but a desire to be re-elected in a jurisdiction where there was a substantial black population and where there was a strong social dividing line between town and gown. Ideology did play a part when the portion of the faculty involved in fluff courses and heavily-steeped in political correctness paid for newspaper ads that ignored the concept of innocent until proven guilty.
Rape is a detestable crime, but we have seen the gravity of the true crime depreciated by the hyphenated variants that often involve a high degree of consent. Rape trials often involve attacks on the victim, even when they are dead as a result of the crime. Yet false testimony is often given. Forensic testing has provided a tool for both prosecution and defense.
In this case, an abundance of exculpatory DNA evidence was suppressed and the credibility of the complainant appeared to be in the Tawana Brawley category. On an appeal, this could have assured a reversal of any conviction. Yet the case dragged on, at great cost to the families of the defendants.
Nifong finally did the right thing, but were matters dragged out until he could collect his pension?
What apology will be provided by those faculty members who bought into the prosecutorial house of cards concocted by the now-disgraced prosecutorial? How will they make amends? Does anyone offer PC de-programming? Would not a civil suit be appropriate?