With the Blue Devils team awash in scarlet-letter scandal for much of the last year, victory (Duke defeated Dartmouth 17-11) seemed to matter less than the triumph of willpower and self-preservation.

"Today was all about us," the Associated Press quoted midfielder Dan Oppedisano. "It's about your teammates, your coaches and your families."

A psychological group hug and feeling of vindication are understandable. Unfortunately, the infamous case of the "Duke Three" — where race, class and politics converged when a trio of white student-athletes were accused of raping a black woman — is far from completed.

SPORTS SCOPE: Could lacrosse itself gain from bad publicity?

The collateral damage is far-reaching. Some lost faith in the university, reputations on personal and institutional levels were ruined and questions of possible prosecutorial malfeasance are unresolved. Mistakes of a deeper character issue were committed by all parties, including athletes, administrators and the accusers.

The three lacrosse players were handcuffed, stigmatized and ostracized — and ultimately exonerated of the most serious charge. That doesn't yet clear the men of pending indictments or absolve them from violating codes of conduct, including being part of a group that included vile, racist teammates. Those involved are undeniably guilty of bad judgment.

Richard Brodhead, the president of Duke, was so circumspect and fearful about potential repercussions that he failed to offer any public support to the accused, presumed innocent under the law. Some professors also rushed to judgment with their public views. Give Duke a D minus in crisis management.

The two women who were paid $800 (only to dance?) offered conflicting stories. For months, the elusive search for justice dangled by a stripper's sequin, until the state prosecutor's office dropped first-degree rape charges against the three former players after they could not be linked to DNA evidence.

But the worst perpetrator of all might be the man whose office has the obligation to be fair and impartial. If anyone looks guilty of something serious in all of this, it is Mike Nifong, the taunting state prosecutor.

The North Carolina Bar Association has charged him with ethical violations. Nifong is no innocent when it comes to pandering to the black community of Durham, N.C., for political gain. He raised legal brows everywhere after a series of news conferences before he filed charges. The lack of physical evidence, including the smoking gun of DNA, and the woman's credibility issues argued against a strong case.

As incredulous as it is scandalous, Nifong never interviewed the accuser before filing charges. The woman alleging rape was shown only photos of the 46 white men on the team, a breach of police identification procedure that could be deemed prejudicial. Then there was Nifong's condemning language at events to whip up black voters at North Carolina Central.

In the most damning evidence of potential prosecutorial misconduct, a lab technician revealed he and Nifong agreed to withhold evidence that might help the defense. (The lab found that DNA of five men on the woman or her clothing did not belong to players.)

Nifong refused to drop charges of kidnapping and sexual offense. To drop the case, which is what a reasonable prosecutor might do, would mean that it never should have been pursued.

So, can the accused receive a fair trial? Any potential jury pool would be composed, in part, of black jurors. The community suffers from racial divide. Will black jurors feel pressure from the NAACP, black clergy and activists to condemn three whites in a reach for cosmic justice? "It's not going in our favor at this point," Michael Page, on the Durham County board of commissioners, told The San Jose (Calif.) Mercury News.

Shouldn't Page, who is black, and every county resident pursue righteousness, regardless of race and politics? A prosecution should not be a barometer of retribution for past race-hate crimes in the state.

This case looks a lot like the exotic performer who sought it — threadbare. If the accuser is lying, she has injured the innocent and damaged a school's reputation and a city's already tenuous race relations. Perhaps worse, she has done an unconscionable injustice to real victims of rape, sentencing them to future suspicion about the veracity of their serious claims.

***

E-mail Jon Saraceno at jons@usatoday.com