Shouldn't this get Mike Nifong disbarred?

First he tells the judge in today's hearing that he didn't know of the exculpatory information in the DNA report from the private lab.

“The first I had heard of this particular situation was when I was served with this particular motion” on Wednesday, Nifong told the judge.

Then the head of the lab, Brian Meehan, gets up to testify and admits that he and Nifong had discussed these results.

The head of a private DNA laboratory said under oath today that he and District Attorney Mike Nifong agreed not to report DNA results favorable to Duke lacrosse players charged with rape.

The lab guy has no explanation of why he would so grossly violate his own lab's policies.

Meehan struggled to say why he didn’t include the favorable evidence in a report dated May 12, almost a month after Seligmann and Finnerty had been indicted. He cited concerns about the privacy of the lacrosse players, his discussions at several meetings with Nifong, and the fact that he didn’t know whose DNA it was.

Under questioning by Jim Cooney, a defense attorney for Seligmann, Meehan admitted that his report violated his laboratory’s standards by not reporting results of all tests.

Did Nifong and his investigators know the results of all the DNA tests? Cooney asked.

“I believe so,” Meehan said.

“Did they know the test results excluded Reade Seligmann?” Cooney asked.

“I believe so,” Meehan said.

Was the failure to report these results the intentional decision of you and the district attorney? Cooney asked.

“Yes,” Meehan replied.

At that answer, several people in the packed courtroom clapped. Superior Court Judge W. Osmond Smith III warned the standing-room only crowd to be quiet or leave.

After the hearing, once Nifong realizes what a bombshell Meehan's testimony was, the district attorney tries to walk back the statement he made in court.

After court, Nifong clarified his remarks to say that he knew about the DNA results.

"And we were trying to, just as Dr. Meehan said, trying to avoid dragging any names through the mud but at the same time his report made it clear that all the information was available if they wanted it and they have every word of it,” Nifong said.

Either way, Nifong is cooked. He either violated his legal responsibilities to give exculpatory evidence to the defense or he lied to the judge about his knowledge of the results. And there is no way to align his after-court weasely excuse with his very clear statement that he only found out about the DNA results when he was served with the subpoena.

KC Johnson aptly calls this the "Perry Mason" moment. Check out his blog for live commentary from the hearing.

Don't they disbar attorneys who lie to judges? I think it's disbarrment time for Mike Nifong.

If this were a movie or a novel, no one would believe that a district attorney could be both so dishonest and so incompetent.