Thursday, March 25, 2010

Don’t believe the media hype… Crystal Mangum is Still in jail

The last sentence in the “Newsweek” article titled Crystal Mangum’s Return to Court: A sad final chapter to the Duke lacrosse scandal,” reads as follows: “She's under house arrest on a $250,000 bond.” This article by “Newsweek” writer and Duke University alum Susannah Meadows was posted online on February 23, 2010. However, a reliable source e-mailed me on March 22, 2010 (nearly one month after the “Newsweek” posting) to say that Crystal Mangum was still languishing behind bars in jail. In other words, she was not under house arrest as stated in the “Newsweek” article.

Unlike the unregulated and self-serving North Carolina State Bar’s disciplinary lead jurist F. Lane Williamson, who possesses the divine power of reading former Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong’s and other attorneys’ minds and miraculously determining their intent, I am not blessed with such powers. Therefore, I am unable to determine whether the author of the article, Ms. Meadows, purposefully intended to mislead readers or whether this error was nothing more than another example of her blatantly sloppy journalism.

Normally I would attribute the mistake to the former, however, it is possible that she may have relied on confusing articles by other media sources, specifically NBC 17 News or the News & Observer, as a basis for her claim that Ms. Mangum was under house arrest. Both of these media sources, I believe, intentionally wrote questionable but convoluted and confusing accounts of Ms. Mangum’s incarceration status in order to falsely imply that she was under house arrest rather than being held within the confines of a small jail cell.

Possible misleading sources which Ms. Meadows may have referred to could possibly have included reports by NBC 17 News and/or the News & Observer. NBC 17 News posted online on February 22, 2010 the following article titled “Mangum To Remain On House Arrest, Bond Reduced To $250,000,” and opened with the following paragraph: “Crystal Mangum, the accuser in the Duke Lacrosse case, will remain under electronic house arrest until her next court appearance on April 5 based on last week's charges of arson, assault and child endangerment.” The News & Observer article of February 22, 2010 titled “Duke lacrosse accuser Mangum’s bond reduced” contained this confusing and misleading passage: “As a condition of the bond, Mangum must not have any contact with her boyfriend and remain under electronic house arrest until the case is resolved or the court changes the condition of the bond.”

Why, you ask, would the media prefer to mislead the masses into believing that Ms. Mangum’s custody arrangement was to be restricted to the premises of her home with her only discomfort coming from an electronic monitor strapped to her ankle rather than the stark reality of the cold, small jail cell in which she was actually confined? The answer is simple… to give the appearance that the courts and judicial system in North Craolina possess a modicum of compassion and fair play. However, under the selective circumstances of her arrest and its aftermath, such an illusion is impossible for the objective and logical mind to accept, much less comprehend.

Any reasonable person knows the excessively selective, punitive, and draconian treatment of Crystal Mangum by the Durham police, prosecutors, and courts stems from the fact that she was the accuser in the Duke Lacrosse case. The backlash against Ms. Mangum is the proximate result of the malicious Carpetbagger Jihad against Mike Nifong etal. invoked by Rae Evans, mother of Duke Lacrosse defendant Dave Evans. And even though Durham’s Duke University has given $21 million to the carpetbagger families in an out-of-court settlement, and the City of Durham has spent millions of dollars in attorneys’ fees in defending against the $30 million lawsuit filed by the avaricious carpetbaggers, the cash-strapped city mindlessly continues to target Mike Nifong, Crystal Mangum, and their supporters, as well as any other detractors of the Duke Lacrosse defendants.

The abhorrent treatment given to Ms. Mangum by the state of North Carolina only solidifies the assertion that the North Carolina criminal justice system is truly one of “selective justice based on Class and Color.” Some of the charges filed by Durham Police and prosecutors against Ms. Mangum (especially attempted first degree murder and communicating threats) are rarely, if ever, made in domestic violence cases. Likewise, the charge of identity theft against Ms. Mangum is inappropriate and rarely made against individuals who refuse to give their birth/legal names or use an alias when questioned by police investigating a crime which does not involve the use of another’s name for criminal or fraudulent means.

For a $1 million bond to be imposed in a domestic violence case is unheard of, especially when a weapon is not involved and there are no physical injuries sustained by either party. For a judge to set a bail for Ms. Mangum that is unreachable and unreasonable is a travesty of justice, especially when bonds of such magnitude are not routinely issued in other instances of domestic violence cases where physical abuse is far more grievous than in this case.

Because the biased main-street media is vested in carrying on the vindictive mandate set forth by the Carpetbagger Jihad, I am not surprised by the absence of editorial media outrage at the selective and unfair treatment of Ms. Mangum. Nor am I surprised by the silence emanating from the leadership representing African American communities in Durham and throughout North Carolina. Dr. Rev. William Barber, president of the state NAACP, is quick to attack as racist the statement of a Wake School Board chairman who referred to proponents of the school system’s standing diversity policy as “animals released from cages”… But when an African American woman falls victim to the blatantly excessive and draconian actions of the state’s criminal justice system, he doesn’t say a word. The same can be said for civil rights attorney Al McSurely. Surely, they do not believe her treatment in this “domestic violence” case is justified.

Leaders of the black communities of Durham and North Carolina should have supported Mike Nifong when he was being prosecuted and persecuted by the state because of his handling of the Duke Lacrosse case… but they abandoned him. So, it comes, therefore, as no surprise that Barber, McSurely, and other so-called leaders of the black people in North Carolina would turn their backs to the suffering and unjust plight of Ms. Mangum.

When it comes to a confrontation with the Carpetbagger Jihad Juggernaut, few people or organizations, with the exception of the Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong, have the stomach to man up against its injustice. So, as leaders of the black communities of Durham and North Carolina intentionally stay away from the fray with regards to this issue of injustice, Crystal Mangum remains incarcerated within a tiny cell and continues to suffer injustice. She does not, as the biased mainstream media would like the public to believe, enjoy the small comfort of confinement under house arrest.



44 comments:

Anonymous said...

Karma is a BITCH!!!!

What goes around comes around. Sidney, this drug addled black Ho was given a free pass by you and your cronies, Bell, Baker, Hudson, Petersen Titus, Sill, Ashley, Chalmers, Lopez, Hodge etc... for her framing of the 3 Duke lacrosse players. The only reason they did so is because she was a skanky AA.

Had the race equation been reversed, Mangum would be doing time in abundance for her conduct.

Spare us the feigned outrage Sidney.

I hope she never gets out of jail - she deserves to die there!!!

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

You are not a reasonable person, as is obvious from your malicious vendetta against the three falsely accused innocent Duke Lacrosse players. Therefore, you do not know why the DPD treated cgm the way they did.

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

Whatever cgm did, nifong's conduct was far more egregious. Forensic evidence definitively ruled out a crime on the night of March 13-14 2006. nifong tried to convict Duke Lacrosse players in the media. nifong manufactured a connection between three innocent Lacrosse players and the alleged victim of the alleged crime. nifong did all this because he wanted to win an election.

You condemn what happened to cgm. But you defend nifong and condemn the innocent Lacrosse players.

That is hardly reasonable.

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

You have not read the record of nifong's ethics trial, have you?

There was more evidence of nifong's guilt than of any guilt on the part of the innocent, falsely accused Lacrosse Players.

Mr. Williamson insured nifong would receive a fair trial. nifong intended to deny the innocent, falsely accused Lacrosse players any and all semblance of a fair trial.

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

Why do you want to deny cgm her opportunity to exonerate herself?

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

Have you any comment on cgm's multiple, mutually contradictory accounts of her alleged rape?

Walt said...

"When it comes to a confrontation with the Carpetbagger Jihad Juggernaut, few people or organizations, with the exception of the Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong, have the stomach to man up against its injustice."

The problem is, Syd, you and the committee are manning up for injustice.

Let's review the facts, you and the committee support:

1. Lying to the court,
2. Lying to opposing counsel,
3. Withholding evidence,
4. Making multiple false statements to the media that misrepresent the facts,
5. Continuing prosecutions when there is no credible evidence against the defendants, and
6. Ignoring evidence that others might be guilty or at least involved with illegal activity with the complaining witness.

Good job Syd, good job.

Walt-in-Durham

Anonymous said...

As has been stated several times (yet you seem to conveniently ignore), CGM's bond was reduced to $250,000. A link was provided for you that showed all the current inmates (as well as their bond information). Their is at least 1 other inmate charged with "Attempted 1st degree murder" that is being held on a $1,000,000 bond. Is your argument that this inmates bond is too high as well? What about inmates whose bond exceed $1,000,000?

How do you know the size of the jail cell, Sid? Have you visited CGM lately? Spoken to her? Checked on her children?

Anonymous said...

You've spent a great deal of time b*tching about CGM's treatment, but precious (pun intended) little time actually doing anything about it.
So here's a thought -- if the situation bothers you so much, why not pull your little group together and post CGM's bail?

Anonymous said...

Macbeth Act 5, scene 5, 28–30

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

Have you or any of your group done anything to get cgm released?

What about vi(ciou)ncent clark? What about vic(ious)toria peterson? Both of them once expressed support and concern for cgm. Have they done anything to support her now?

Have you contacted Irving Joyner, who was the NAACP's observer for the Duke case? Do you think he would do something to free cgm?

What about your hero nifong. He seems to be friendly with tracy cline. Have you gone to your hero and asked him to intervene with the DA's office on cgm's behalf.

What about cgm's lawyer. Have you gone to whoever that is and asked that lawyer to get cgm out of jail?

There is a lot you could have done besides write about this. So far, there is no evidence you have done anything.

It is a laughable lie that you are standing up against some "carpetbagger jihad".

Incidentally, by your own admission, you have no evidence of any "carpet bagger jihad".

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

"...the cash-strapped city mindlessly continues to target Mike Nifong, Crystal Mangum, and their supporters, as well as any other detractors of the Duke Lacrosse defendants."

durham would not have had to pay all these legal fees had its police department not enabled nifong's wrongful prosecution of three innocent, falsely accused men.

Maybe durham could have cut its losses had it tried to defend the suits rather than waste money in delaying the suit.

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

"Unlike the unregulated and self-serving North Carolina State Bar’s disciplinary lead jurist F. Lane Williamson, who possesses the divine power of reading former Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong’s and other attorneys’ minds and miraculously determining their intent, I am not blessed with such powers."

Yet, without reviewing any evidence, something you, yourself, have admitted, you are able to determine they were guilty.

With no proof, something else you have admitted, you say there is a "carpetbagger jihad" which is responsible for nifong's dismissal and the exoneration of the innocent, falsely accused Lacrosse players.

You are claiming some special, clairvotant power.

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

Who is your reliable source? It would lend credibility to your claim if your readers could determine for themselves your source is reliable.

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

Why did your hero nifong use the media to mislead the public about the phony Duke rape case?

Why did your hero nifong use the media to lie to the public about the phony Duke rape case? You know, he lied when he demonstrated the choke hold which never happened. He lied when he told the public he had read the medical record.

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

I wouldn't expect nifong to do anything about cgm. After all, even though she was the complaining witness, upon whose word he intended to rely to make the case, he ignored her for 9 months.

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

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

How common was it to set bail in a rape case at $400,000. That high a bail was not set in the Michael Jermaine Burch rape case, even though there was probable cause to suspect him of rape. There was no probable cause in the phony Duke rape case. While out on bail, michael jermaine burch attacked another woman.

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

cgm should be able to support durham in the lawsuits filed against it by the Duke Lacrosse players. Why would durham seek to antagonize a potentially friendly witness?

Maybe the durham pd is blaming cgm for the predicament it got into over her false accusations of rape against the innocent Lacrosse players and is retaliating against her.

That is more plausible than your allegation of a "carpetbagger jihad", something of which you have no evidence.

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

Have you tried to get jesse jackson or al sharpton involved in this case? Surely they would want to support her freedom and would do so if you asked. Or would they?

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

"Some of the charges filed by Durham Police and prosecutors against Ms. Mangum...are rarely, if ever, made in domestic violence cases."

How often are rape charges filed when the forensic evidence definitively rules out the alleged crime?

How often are indictments sought against people whom the complaining witness made id's in an improperly conducted lineup and those id's nevertheless are of questionable reliability?

Here's a good one you have DUCKED answering(QUQCK QUACK QUACK). In Durham, in a rape case, how often, before the innocent Duke Lacrosse players were falsely accused, were the steps or arrest warrant and probable cause hearing circumvented?

March 25, 2010 7:46 AM

edited March 25, 2010, 8:02 AM to correct typos

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

Sydney, you are way behind the curve on this, bringing up an article from over a month ago. The errors were noted the day Meadows' article was published.

Sydney - "I am not blessed with such powers [to read minds and determine intent].

Yet, you pretend to do exactly that with your assertion that reporters "...intentionally wrote questionable but convoluted and confusing accounts of Ms. Mangum’s incarceration status in order to falsely imply that she was under house arrest...".

Meadows and others were in error - the Court ordered Mangum to be under house arrest when & if she posts bail.

You don't need a 'reliable source' to email you as to Mangum's whereabouts, Sydney; just take a peek at the Current Inmate Population page for Durham County.

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

Sydney - "Any reasonable person knows the excessively selective, punitive, and draconian treatment of Crystal Mangum by the Durham police, prosecutors, and courts stems from the fact that she was the accuser in the Duke Lacrosse case."

Why the hell would the black DA and a few black cops want to go after Mangum now, almost 4 years after her false accusation?

All we're seeing here is the not-very-surprising self-destruction of one lying prostitute, nothing more.

Mangum has a court date on April 5; isn't it about time that you, Victor, and Victoria 'burn that house down' Peterson man up and make bail for Precious?

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

Those black organizations you accuse of submitting to this "carpet bagger jihad"(of which you, by your admission, have no proof) were some of nifong's most vocal enablers when the phony Duke rape case was active. Why would they turn against him.

The new black panther party turned on nifong because he did not deliver a guilty verdict. But they had no love for the innocent, falsely accused Lacrosse players.

Anonymous said...

Sidney,

Why not just admit you're a racist bigot and be done with it!

Michael said...

“To Michael and Giseunghill:

I have answered these questions numerous times, however my answers do not evidently satisfy the questioners. I will briefly respond to the two questions once more.

1. How were the DNA findings not fully and completely exculpatory when other mens' [sic] DNA were found in each orifice and the alleged victim testified that at least one LAX player ejaculated in her mouth (which she then spat on the floor)?

Answer: Although unidentified male DNA was obtained from the rape kit exam, it was determined to have been deposited at a time prior to the Duke Lacrosse party. Secondly, just because no DNA was obtained from the victim which matched the Duke lacrosse players does not mean that a sexual assault by the partygoers did not take place. The DNA is definitely not exculpatory in this case.

2. What other evidence did Mr. Nifong have (that would have been admitted at the trial-that-never-happened) in addition to that already available to the media from "open discovery" case files provided the Defense?

Answer: I am not privvy [sic] to all of the evidence the prosecution had, but I will say that the prosecution had witness statements by the accuser and eyewitness identification by the accuser. Blah, blah balh….[about other cases – trying to deflect attention]

Because you may not agree with my answers does not mean that I did not answer the questions you presented.”

This is it? This is all you can say on these two subjects? All right, then.

To"agree" with your "answer" to question #1, I have to believe that:

a. a penis can ejaculate into a woman's mouth without leaving any DNA; OR

b. that the woman has the ability to spit that ejaculate out in such a way that leaves no trace of it (but retains traces of DNA from other men that predated it); AND

c. that the ejaculate falls on the floor but leaves no trace of itself or the saliva of the woman who spit it out.

How can anyone believe that?

To "agree" with your "answer" to question #2 I have to accept testimony from the same person that just offered the story I have to accept in order to "agree" with your "answer" to question #1, which is impossible to believe.

These responses are "answers" only in the sense that you wrote a string of senseless letters following the rubric "Answer:". As with CGM's testimony, your responses to these questions are addled, nonsensical, and mutually contradictory.

To state the obvious:

Question #1 - A penis cannot ejaculate in someone's mouth without leaving DNA; a "sexual assault" may occur without leaving DNA, but not one involving an ejaculation in a orifice followed by an oral evidence swab within a few hours thereof. This "testimony" is a lie, and the lack of DNA evidence demonstrates that it is a lie.

Question #2 - You, Sidney, are aware of NO evidence in this case other than the evidence already publically available in open discovery and reviewed by the media and special prosecutors, since your response cites only CGM's testimony and witness identification, both of which were included in said discovery.

Therefore the difference between you and everyone else who has reviewed this "evidence" is that you still believe a crime could have occurred while everyone else does not. Of course, when pressed to explain WHY you came to a completely different conclusion, you cannot, have not, and apparently WILL NOT.

Nifong Supporter said...

To Anonymous:

You, like other commenters, have avoided the basic point of the blog, which is that the media (Newsweek, NBC, and News & Observer, in particular) are inaccurate when reporting about Crystal Mangum. To report that Ms. Mangum is under house arrest, when she is, in fact, sitting in jail, is totally false. That is sloppy and irresponsible journalism. As a media consumer you should be outraged at the biased media for not reporting objectively, fairly, and accurately.

And if you are the same Anonymous that accused me of being a racist bigot, then you are terribly mistaken. Upon what do you base such an outrageous claim? I did not inject the issue of race into the Duke Lacrosse case. That was done by the partygoers who yelled a racial epithet at Ms. Mangum as she was leaving the house on Buchanan.

Anonymous said...

Actually, Dr. Harr, race was introduced by Kim Roberts when she call one of the attendees a "little-d!cked white boy."

Anonymous said...

Actually, Dr. Harr, Kim Roberts introduced race when she called one of a players a "little-d!cked white boy."

JSwift said...

Michael,

I think you are being unfair to our host.

I do not believe that Sidney believes that the failure to find any player’s DNA is consistent with an attack in which “Adam ejaculated in [her] mouth and [she] spit it out.” I believe he agrees that Adam’s DNA would have been found if Adam had ejaculated in Ms. Mangum’s mouth.

As I understand it, Sidney simply feels free to disregard Ms. Mangum’s specific allegation and to invent a new one that is consistent with the failure to find any player DNA. For example, if attackers had been dressed in sweatshirts, wool hats and gloves and had used lacrosse sticks to sodomize Ms. Magnum, one can imagine an attack that would not have left DNA. Voila! The DNA is not exculpatory.

Sidney is not troubled—albeit only in this case—with the need to invent an entirely new set of accusations because other evidence can disprove the accusing witness’ specific allegations. He is not troubled in this case by the loss of credibility that Ms. Mangum inevitably suffers as a result of the decision to disregard her statement. Others might wonder why “identifications” from a flawed procedure are valid by a witness who has been shown either to fail to remember what had happened or to be lying.

The AG’s report alleged that Ms. Mangum, in response to photographs and other witnesses’ statement, claimed to be dazed before the attack and after the attack, but that she woke up during the attack, thus explaining her confidence in her identifications (even if she didn’t remember exactly what happened). Our host simply ignores these inconveniences.

His critics frequently ask what evidence he has to invent new accusations out of thin air. If one were to propose, for example, that Ms. Mangum was assaulted with lacrosse sticks, others might suggest that evidence, such as serious injuries, would be required to support that theory, particularly for a prosecution not now based on a specific allegation by Ms. Mangum.

Sidney simply engages in innuendo. He refuses to speculate on what he believes happened and as to what evidence might support a new accusation; he simply says that he has not seen all of the evidence. Only a trial will suffice.

He discounts all those who have seen the evidence and concluded that the defendants were innocent and the charges baseless. He simply asserts that all are doing the bidding of the Carpetbagger Jihad®. Roy Cooper and the special prosecutors rigged their investigation at the demand of the defendants. Joe Neff, Dan Abrams, Ed Braddley and even Duff Wilson and John Stevenson are biased and cannot be trusted. Patrick Baker acted improperly when he endorsed the AG’s conclusion of innocence. Ben Himan was incompetent when he concluded that Ms. Magnum was not telling the truth about anything.

Sidney has taken the easy way out. He, like Mr. Nifong, has no obligation to provide a bill of particulars. As he avoids detailing a theory—any theory—he avoids the need to provide substantiation for that theory. In that way, he can continue to blather on and on.

Evidence is irrelevant.

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

You are carrying on a vendetta against three innocent, falsely accused men and their families because they are caucasians. That makes you a racist bigot.

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

You also believe your interpretation of exculpatory trumps the law's definition. That makes you a bit of a megalomaniac.

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

I am asking why you continue to promulgate lies about the phony Duke rape case?

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

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

Echoing what was said earler in response to this post, why aren't you and your justice4nifong gangsters not posting cgm's bail? If you did so, you would get her out of jail.

It seems you justice4nifong gangsters have as much concern for cgm as nifong did. You know, he ignored her for 9 months, all the while presenting himself as her champion.

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

Consider this. If you have the means of posting cgm's bail and are not doing so, aren't you an accomplice to this abhorrent treatment she is receiving?

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

I am asking why you say charging three innocent, falsely accused men with a crime was not abhorrent, considering that forensic evidence definitively ruled out the crime?

March 26, 2010 6:48 AM

Edited March 26, 2010 6:54 AM to correct a typo

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

Take note of the Anonymous comments regarding who injected race into the false accusations of rape made against the three innocent Duke Lacrosse players. It was your hero nifong who publicly declared the alleged crime(which was definitively ruled out by the forensic evidence) had been racially motivated.

Don't forget, nifong prosecuted the three innocent, falsely accused Duke Lacrosse players because they were caucasians. He was losing badly in the race for durham DA and hoped to curry favor with durham's black electorate via prosecution of caucasians.

If that isn't racism then what is?

Brod Dickhead said...

Sidney:

"Crystal Mangum remains incarcerated within a tiny cell and continues to suffer injustice."

To stump up the bail for GMC should be easy for the COJFMN!!

All Mikey has to do is cash in 25% of his Million dollars of free pulicity

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

Super secret info for Sydney from a 'reliable source':

Crystal the lying prostitute is still in jail as of Mar 26 AM

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

You and your justice4nifong gangsters are manning up to nothing.You, yourself, have admitted you have no evidence of a powerful carpetbagger jihad. You are conducting a vendetta against three falsely accused, innocent men. You do it because they are caucasians, because their false accuser, a woman with a history of promiscuity, mental instability, drug use and criminal activity, is black.

unbekannte said...

more uncivility for crazy etc. sidney:

"Unlike the unregulated and self-serving North Carolina State Bar’s disciplinary lead jurist F. Lane Williamson, who possesses the divine power of reading former Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong’s and other attorneys’ minds and miraculously determining their intent, I am not blessed with such powers."

You are sure not blessed with the ability to recognize a false accusation when it happens or to recognize a politically, racially motivated malicious prosecution of innocent men when it happens

Anonymous said...

Sid --

Day 41 and CGM is STILL in jail? What are you actively doing to help this woman and her family?

Anonymous said...

Anyone happen to be in the courthouse today? I understand CGM's court date was this morning...Court Room 002 (Domestic Violence Court, in case you're keeping track, Sid).