was active, vibrant racism manifest throughout at least a portion of the court-side crowd that night. (That's giving her the benefit of the doubt that when she spoke in behalf of the whole crowd she was limited in her perspective to just the crowd closest to her.)

And if her accusatory story is FULL of it on that level, what at all of it can we believe without corroborating witness?

Answer: (be honest).

But the biggest weasel in her (which was surely egged on by her racist family) was that her HIGHLY embellished & expanded version of the original story --released without a second's delay to the national media the morning Duke returned to Durham-- only came out after she'd received (by her own admission) a healthy apology & a public acknowledgment by our AD that she in fact had been racially taunted & slurred. IOWs, she took our gesture of a fully contrite apology --giving her testimony the full benefit of the doubt-- & she then used its witness to launch her utterly ridiculous lambast & fanciful tale.

Had she not done that, I think BYU would not have been so thorough in its investigation — & so adamant in its release that zero evidence had been found to substantiate ANY of her claims.