Saturday, February 27, 2010

Million dollar bail… a case comparison – Part 2

Raleigh police found a five month old girl who had been beaten by her parents so badly that she sustained the following injuries: (1) a skull fracture, (2) internal bleeding in the brain, (3) three fractured ribs, (4) a cut between the nose and the lip, and (5) bleeding from the right eye. In addition, police found inside the motel room in which they were staying marijuana, drug paraphernalia, and two other children belonging to the mother.

The parents were charged with three counts of misdemeanor child abuse, three counts of contributing to the delinquency of a juvenile, and one count of possession of marijuana and possession of drug paraphernalia.

The baby’s mother, who kicked the father in the back and slammed a door on him was additionally charged with simple assault.

No attempted murder charges levied at anyone!

Crystal Mangum allegedly throws punches and objects at her boyfriend and scratches him, according to police.

Ms. Mangum is charged with attempted first degree murder and placed under a million dollar bond.

Bail set for the parents of beating the child was set at $780,000 and $515,000.

Yet another example of the all too prevalent comparative cases of selective justice based on Class and Color that so predominates the North Carolina criminal justice system. Charges are not leveled with any consistency, bail is arbitrarily set, and the media controls the spin in accordance with the powers that be. The carpetbagger jihad against Mike Nifong (a vindictive call to arms as initiated by Rae Evans in her “60 Minutes” interview) has definitely had a heavy hand in the heavy-handed treatment of Ms. Mangum in this unfortunate and private altercation she had with her boyfriend.

The media, of course, is quick to give prominent negative coverage to Ms. Mangum with a link on the front page of the News & Observer referring to the front page of the local (Triangle & Co.) section. On the front page of that section, the headlines address her as the “Lacrosse accuser.” Then there is a large photo showing Ms. Mangum in prison garb, extending low enough to depict the handcuffs on her wrists. Media coverage of the five month old baby girl who was beaten does not even merit coverage on the front page of the local section.

The cogs of the police, prosecutors, courts, and media are all in sync and spinning to the drumbeat of the carpetbagger families of the Duke Lacrosse defendants and their attorneys in carrying out their vindictive jihad against anything Nifong. Any staunch and vociferous supporter of Mike Nifong who happens to be ensnared in some criminal event, trumped up or not, can expect the same uneven treatment by the police, prosecutors, courts, and media that Ms. Mangum received.

44 comments:

JSwift said...

Sidney,

This post is utterly irresponsible. I call for you to retract your last three posts.

Earlier, you challenged me to provide another explanation for Ms. Mangum’s excessive treatment than your “carpetbagger jihad.”

I provided a theory. You rejected it without comment in two straight posts. I urge that you not challenge your readers to respond if you have no intention of reacting to a response.

I focused on the possible motivations of the Durham defendants and why they may have their own reasons for overcharging Ms. Mangum (i.e., avoiding her testimony on their roles in the frame). The Durham defendants, unlike the lacrosse players, obviously can control the DPD's actions.

I noted that the DPD failed to undertake a bona fide investigation in one of the most highly publicized cases in its history and that the City has fought discovery in the players' lawsuits. I asked why, almost four years after the criminal case began, no one has explained how the DPD could have failed so completely in its responsibilities.

The DPD’s faux investigation was so riddled with flaws that it can only be explained through gross incompetence or corruption.

I presented the theory to stimulate a discussion. You obviously wish to avoid a discussion of the DPD’s role in the frame. Coincidence?

You make the valid claim that Ms. Mangum appears to have been excessively overcharged in the recent episode. Then you inexplicably blame it on...the players and their families. As many of your readers have tried to explain, these sort of baseless charges make you look like an idiot; they do your cause no good.

In the past, I raised a number of questions about the DPD's investigation--with Mayor Bell, the members of the City Council, Judge Whichard, the members of the Whichard committee and Chief Lopez. No one answered any of these questions. As you have alleged of the Attorney General, the City appears to have "sealed" the records of their investigation. 


I can post them as comments. I am sure that all of your readers would all like to hear your answers. I am confident that you can establish that the DPD acted with the utmost professionalism and is beyond criticism.

Walt said...

Syd, your post is irresponsible. Sadly, your boy Nifong let her rapist, if you believe she was raped, go free, thus abusing her once again. Still that is no excuse for her behavior, it just explains it in part.

Whatchoo takin' 'bout, Sydney? said...

Sydney - Yet another example of the all too prevalent comparative cases of selective justice based on Class and Color that so predominates the North Carolina criminal justice system.

Sydney, the DA's office in Durham is run by Tracey Cline, a black female and close associate of your favorite disgraced and disbarred DA, Nifong.

If you have a problem with the charges or bail set for Crystal, talk to DA Cline.

Brod Dickhead said...

Sydney,Sydney,Sydney....

You really are an odious little man! What you cretinously term:

"spinning to the drumbeat of the carpetbagger families of the Duke Lacrosse defendants and their attorneys in carrying out their vindictive jihad against anything Nifong.....

is little more than the slow inexorable grinding of the wheels of justice [if there reallly is such a thing in Durham]. One of these days the truth and all the entailing facts of the vicious frame of innocent men, will come out and you and Mikey will no longer have anything to write about.

Why not get a real job? I believe that Tracy Kline is looking for an official ass kisser. You could leverage your vast experience of trying to rehabilitate Mikey (although you have done a pretty sh!tty job at it) and maybe earn Mikey some funds to pay the victims of this criminal fraud.

The only thing Mikey has to complain about is that he got caught.

Nifong Supporter said...

To Walt:

Rae Evans is the person who said Mr. Nifong abused Ms. Mangum. I do not understand how. It was never explained in the Newsweek article. Mr. Nifong never had the opportunity to prosecute the Duke Lacrosse defendants, and if you remember Walt, it was Mr. Nifong who dropped the rape charges after Ms. Mangum couldn't definitively recall being raped. So your statement, which is difficult to understand, has no basis.


As far as her behavior goes, there are many people who get into altercations (domestic violence), but this is the first time when I ever heard of someone being charged with attempted first degree murder... especially for using a deadly weapon such as her fingernails.

Nifong Supporter said...

To Whatchoo talkin' 'bout, Sydney:

My article is aimed at the Durham District Attorney, the Durham Police Department, and the Judge(s) responsible for imposing such a ridiculous sentence.

The Durham D.A. gender, race, political and past affiliations are irrelevant. Wrong is wrong!

JSwift said...

Sidney,

You "challenged" me to provide another theory than your "carpetbagger jihad" for Ms. Mangum's treatment.

I did. I speculated that the Durham defendants or the DPD may have their own reasons for overcharging Ms. Mangum. After all, this case either betrayed the DPD's gross incompetence or exposed their corruption. They may blame Ms. Mangum for the downside of their own actions.

You have now avoided commenting on three comments I posted. You must really be desparate to avoid discussing the DPD's role in the frame.

Whatchoo talkin' 'bout, Sydney? said...

Sydney - My article is aimed at the Durham District Attorney, the Durham Police Department, and the Judge(s) responsible for imposing such a ridiculous sentence.

You mean bail, of course. It beggars credulity that any of the above might be 'gunning for' Crystal because of her lying involvement in the DukeLAX case.

It's far more likely that they are just tired of her shit, said shit going back way before March, 2006. That, and the magistrate, quite understandably, didn't want to have her back out on the streets again until Monday when the bail amount would be reconsidered.

Bail was reduced to a "reasonable" amount in a short period of time, so quitcherbitchin'.


Wrong is wrong!

Careful now! Start applying that to Nifong and people might start to take you seriously.

unbekannte said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

You claim there is a jihad out to get any and all supporters of nifong. So far only cgm has been arrested and charged. That does not say there are not a whole lot of people supporting nifong.

Say, crazy sidney, none of your gang(sters)of4 have been arrested or charged with anything. Does this mean you really do not support nifong? Or does it mean no one takes you seriously?

In all likelihood it means there is no jihad directed against nifong or any of his supporters.

Aren't you the guy who "proved" that nifong's surge in the polls after the Lacrosse case broke did not really happen?

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

Has cgm had her photo published on the cover of any news magazine mug shot style?

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

Have either nancy disgrace or wicked wendy murphy ever declared cgm guilty on a network news show?

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

Where is the gang of 88, now that cgm needs support

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

Has Durham Crimestoppers ever published a wanted poster style photo of cgm asking for people to come forth with incriminating evidence against her?

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

Would the media have paid any attention to cgm had she not falsely accused three innocent Duke Lacrosse players of raping her.

Would there be any media attention to cgm now had nifong really been an honest prosecutor? An honest prosecutor would have recognized the phony rape accusation for what it was and would not have tried to prosecute anyone for this non existent crime.

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

You would not be giving cgm any publicity, except you are angry that the three innocent white men were not wrongfully convicted.

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

Why should nifong have gotten any opportunity to prosecute any Lacrosse player?

cgm's story after the party was first yes I was raped, then no I was not raped, then yes I was raped, hardly a credible accusation.

Evidence established that no crime had happened. Evidence established there had been no intimate connection between cgm and any Duke Lacrosse player.

Of the three innocent men cgm supposedly identified, two were not at the party at the time of the alleged crime. cgm claimed the third had a mustache at the time of the assault. Photos established he had never had a mustache.

Only a prosecutor who was either totally corrupt or totally stupid and incompetent, would have initiated a prosecution against any Lacrosse players.

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

nifong tried to keep any exculpatory evidence, including the evidence of non Lacrosse player DNA on cgm out of the trial.

Only a corrupt prosecutor interested only in convicting rather than justice, would have done that.

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

Did Tracy Cline ever threaten to prosecute any witness who would not come forward to incriminate cgm?

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

I will say this again using different words.

Filing of rape charges seemed to be consistent in Durham when nifong was DA. nifong's DA office consistently filed charges of rape against men when they had insufficient evidence to convict.

Frequently, the nifong DA office would dismiss charges even before the suspect could be arrested.

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

Maybe you and your gang should be treated the same way the Lacrosse players were treated: no evidence of a crime, declared guilty in the media, all exculpatory evidence either excluded or suppressed, subjected to an unfairly suggestive lineup and then indicted and charged based on a biased, thoroughly unfair id procedure.

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

Has anyone or any organization(NC NAACP, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, the justicernifong gang(sters)of4 for example) publicly stated that some organization would hire an expensive lawyer to help cgm beat the charges?

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

You say the findings of the dnasi exam of the rape kit were not material to the case. Why then did nifong petition the court to allow the testing saying the results would be relevant and material to the case? Why would you say the findings were not material to the case?

I ask again, why is it not important for the defendant in a rape case to know that DNA found on the victim did not match his DNA?

How could the defendants in the Duke case know that unless the individual who had obtained the results(aka nifong) released the results to them?

nifong claimed in his request, that the evidence "might" lead to the identification of the perpetrators. Why was it not exculpatory for the defendants to know the exam had not identified them as the perpetrators?

Are you saying that unless such evidence incriminates the defendants it is not relevant to the case? How is that compatible with the concept of exculpatory evidence?

DeHall said...

Bail was reduced to $250,000, a fact you are well aware of, yet seem reluctant to mention. You also fail to mention the charges of arson and child endangerment. Do these facts upset your narrative?
I struggle to believe you've let your loyalty (?) to Mike Nifong blind you to the point you would excuse or attempt to obfuscate the type of behavior we've seen from CGM. Wrong IS wrong, as you've stated. What about CGM's behavior would you consider "right"?

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

cgm did say that three specific Duke Lacrosse playaer assaulted her. That, like her claim of having been raped, was a crock(acknowledgment to Kim Pittman).

Was that or was that not an accusation? If it was an accusation then why was it inappropriate to refer to her as the “Lacrosse accuser”?

Considering your own attitude, you could also be called a Lacrosse accuser.

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

cgm's allegation that she was raped was not credible. There was no forensic evidence to corroborate her allegation. DNA evidence did not show any intimate contact between any Lacrosse player and cgm. Yet, before there was any evidence(I apologize for repetitiousness) nifong publicly declared there had been a rape, that it had been racially motivated, that caucasian Lacrosse players had been the perpetrators. Three innocent caucasian Lacrosse players were indicted and charged. At least two black organizations, thNorth Carolina NAACP and the new black panther party were vocal in proclaiming their guilt.

Yet you say this miscarriage of justice was not motivated by issues of race or color.

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

One thing was consistent about the DA's office under nifong's leadership, or lack thereof. The DA's office made it a consistent practice to charge men with rape without having sufficient evidence to make the charge stick.

If I remember correctly, Tracy Cline was part of that consistent performance. I have read a story - I can not find it now - that she prosecuted a man for rape, took it to trial, promised proof beyond a reasonable doubt. The jury found the man not guilty and the jury foreman chastised Tracy Cline for wasting the jury's time. Cline simply had no case against the defendant, according to the foreman.

February 28, 2010 2:44 PM

Edited March 1, 2010 4:54 AM

Walt said...

Syd:

You said: "Rae Evans is the person who said Mr. Nifong abused Ms. Mangum. I do not understand how."

By letting her attackers go free, if you believe she was attacked. He set out to charge innocent people, direct a police investigation in such a way as to avoid seeking those who did attack her, if anyone did.


"Mr. Nifong never had the opportunity to prosecute the Duke Lacrosse defendants, and if you remember Walt, it was Mr. Nifong who dropped the rape charges after Ms. Mangum couldn't definitively recall being raped."

That is bunk. Nifong prosecuted innocent men for months. He engaged in media availability after media availability where he made statements that presumed their guilt. He participated in a meeting where he was told that there was no DNA evidence to link the innocent defendants to the putative victim. He concealed that evidence from the defense. He lied about the existence of that evidence to bench and bar. When caught, he ignored the evidence and prosecuted on without probable cause. A prosecution he admits was done with no credible evidence. Yet you continue to whine on about how Nifong didn't get a chance to prosecute someone. I find it incomprehensible how you can criticize that behavior in Hoke, Ford, Graves and a host of others yet excuse it, even venerate it in Nifong. But, I am glad you do because it gives those of us who care about the cause of justice in North Carolina the opportunity to point that out to Nifong and his supporters who do not.

Walt-in-Durham

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

You rail against the unfair treatment you say will happen to nifong lovers.

Again I say, nifong had a fairer hearing before the state bar, a fairer hearing in his criminal contempt trial than he intende to give the Lacrosse players.

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

The media, by nifong's estimate, gave him a million dollars in free publicity because of the Duke case. Was that an example of media bias against nifong?

Do you think all that free publicity hindered his re election attempt?

If his prosecution of the Duke case was costing him the election, why did he seek to publicize it?

Is there any evidence Freda Black ever made an issue of the Duke case? If the Duke case was costing him the election, why was nifong's opponent not publicizing it?

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney?

If the media control how a case is presented, why did they give so much coverage to nifong's spin on the case?

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

What would have happened if this case you describe had happened in Durham? So far you have presented cases outside of Durham.

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

You yourself have admitted you have no hard evidence that cgm's arrest was influenced by the Duke case. You say you have come to the conclusion via logic and common sense.

Logic and common sense would tell you that without hard proof, such allegations are meaningless.

Think about it, crazy sidney. By basing your allegations on what you call logic and common sense, you show you have capacity for neither.

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

Are you alleging that domestic violence incidents never result in either serious injury or death to the victim?

Do you deny that abusers threaten their victims with violence?

Is that the result of your logic and common sense?

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

You imply that the carpet bagger jihad got lenient treatment for the individuals in the Raleigh incident. Wouldn't that be obstruction of justice? Why aren't you going to the authorities?

Are you afraid to show your powers of logic and common sense to the authorities?

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

Is it your logic and common sense which tells you that nifong's pre indictment inflammatory, guilt presuming statements were only mild attempts to encourage witnesses to come forward?

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

I say again, right from the outset, cgm could not make up her mind whether or not she had been raped. nifong either knew or should have known from the start he could not prve rape, based on cgm's word. Why did he wait 9 months to drop the rape charges?

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

I ask again, if the "carpetbagger jihad" is so deternined to get all nifong supporters, why have they not come after you?

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

Quote:

"The baby’s mother, who kicked the father in the back and slammed a door on him was additionally charged with simple assault."

The three Lacrosse players, two of whom were not at the scene of the alleged crime, one of whom was mis-identified by cgm, were indicted, arrested, charged with rape, even though there was no evidence to link them to the actual crime.

Readers, which scenario does crazy sidney think was appropriate?

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

Another quote:

"On the front page of that section, the headlines address her as the 'Lacrosse accuser.' "

Readers, whay is wrong with the headline?

Well, if the newspaper wanted to be accurate, it should have called her the Lacrosse false accuser.

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

Did the "carpetbagger jihad" instruct cgm's kid to place the 911 call that summoned the police?

Nifong Supporter said...

To unbekannte:

You asked why did Mr. Nifong wait nine months before dropping the rape charges. He dropped the rape charges only after she told him that she couldn't be certain whether or not she was raped. This action on the part of Mr. Nifong is admirable, and is something that is terribly missing in many other prosecutors. Case in point, is Wake Prosecutor Tom Ford. Mr. Ford had no credible evidence when he convicted an innocent man, Gregory Taylor, of murder. Mr. Taylor spent 17 years wrongly incarcerated, and with all the mountain of evidence available to question Taylor's guilt, Ford, along with Wake D.A. Colon Willoughby, tried to keep the innocent man behind bars for the rest of his life. Also, take the case of Prosecutor David Hoke, who convicted an innocent man, Alan Gell, of capital murder despite having in his possession exculpatory evidence that proved Gell could not have possibly committed the murder for which he was convicte. Gell served nearly a decade wrongfully convicted in large measure due to withholding the evidence from Gell's defense. Then when the evidence was brought forward, and the appellate court granted Gell a new trial, Prosecutor Hoke, instead of dismissing the charge, allowed the Attorney General's Office to re-try Gell. The jury immediately acquitted Gell at retrial.

It is unfortunate that all prosecutors are not like Mike Nifong. Durham lost one of the best prosecutors and ministers of justice it will ever see.

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney

I say again, at the start of the case there was no evidence of a crime, no evidence of intimate contact between cgm and any Lacrosse player, cgm identified as her attackers two men who were not present at the scene of the alleged crime, identified as her third attacker a man with a mustache(the third man indicted, David Evans, never had a mustache). cgm was unable to say at the start of the case whether or not she was raped.

Any DA who would prosecute any Lacrosse player for raping cgm under those conditions is irretrievably corrupt or hopelessly stupid. nifong deserves no credit for dropping the rape charges 9 months into the case, especially when, during that 9 month interval, he never interviewed cgm.

A decent honorable prosecutor would have never filed charges. It should be hoped that more prosecutors are not like nifong.

Incidentally, answer this. How did the $1 million in free publicity not help nifong's re election campaign. If the Duke case was adversely affecting his election bid, why did he seek publicity for it.

You sure have a perverted idea of integrity.

Whatchoo talkin' 'bout, Sydney? said...

Sydney - He (Nifong) dropped the rape charges only after she told him that she couldn't be certain whether or not she was raped. This action on the part of Mr. Nifong is admirable,

You give Nifong way too much credit, Sydney.

Nifong says that he never talked to Crystal about the details of the case. He sent Lurch to 'interview' Crystal, and only after the revelations of Nifong's and Meehan's malfeasance at the Dec 15 hearing.

Lurch 'interviewed' her without a witness, did not record the 'interview', and provided only typed notes, no contemporaneous written notes.

Her story told in the 'interview' contradicted, yet again, her several previous stories, including the alleged use of multiple penii.

The 'interview' was clearly an attempt by Nifong to ameliorate the damage caused by the Dec 15 hearing. His efforts to do so were as transparent as you are obtuse.