Tuesday, April 27, 2010

Vendetta justice makes a mockery of the NC courts at taxpayer expense

A 59 year old man went into an online chat room and became the acquaintance of a fourteen year old girl. Later, he traveled from Raleigh to Burlington, North Carolina where he met the young teenager in person. An attentive Burlington police officer noted suspicious activity by a car driven by the man (it had no license plate), and upon pulling it over noted that the 59 year old male driver was accompanied by the 14 year old girl as a passenger. Also in the vehicle were drugs and drug paraphernalia. The man, Bryant Harrison Dennis, was arrested and charged with statutory sex offense, indecent liberties, contributing to delinquency of a minor, possession of marijuana, and possession of drug paraphernalia… and his bail was set at $10,000.
During a domestic dispute which her boyfriend described as a “misunderstanding,” Crystal Mangum allegedly scratched her boyfriend, and executed a controlled burn of some of her boyfriend’s clothes. As a result, she was charged with attempted first degree murder, assault and battery, five counts of felony arson, three counts of contributing to the delinquency of juvenile, communicating threats, identity theft, injury to personal property, and resisting arrest… bail for her was set at one million dollars.

The two-case comparative illustrated above represents but a small sampling of disparity in treatment afforded to the majority of criminal suspects versus someone on the wrong end of the Duke Lacrosse case. It is the vastness of the difference in treatment between the two which requires the public to suspend logic and sense of fair play that enables the North Carolina justice system to even dare to implement such draconian and excessive charges and outrageously high bail. Strip away the veneer of anti-Nifong public fervor created by the media, and the charges against Ms. Mangum and the million dollar bail are laughable. It is payback… vendetta justice… courtesy of the Carpetbagger Jihadists. What is really ironic is that the Carpetbagger families of the Duke Lacrosse defendants and their attorneys are able to foment anti-Nifong and anti-accuser sentiment among Durhamians and get unyielding support from them while at the same time costing those same Durhamians millions of tax dollars to defend the city of Durham against the carpetbagger lawsuits. The media has been an effective and willing accomplice of the Jihadists in achieving this outcome which boggles the logical mind.

Probably one of the best known examples of vendetta justice nationally is that which Orenthal James Simpson received in Las Vegas, Nevada, after he succumbed to what I believe to be an elaborately executed sting operation. The judge in that case before handing down an extremely harsh sentence against Simpson, told the courtroom and the media that her ruling was not in the least bit influenced by Simpson’s prior criminal court battle in which he was found not guilty. Although the judge gave those assurances with a straight face, anyone and everyone with any knowledge about the Nicole Brown Simpson/Ron Goldman murders and the subsequent trial of O. J. Simpson, knew otherwise. And the judge knew they knew, but because the public animus and anger towards Simpson, the judge felt comfortable issuing an unprecedented lengthy prison sentence for him… and the judge may have even felt compelled to do so by the people.

There are many instances of vendetta justice in the Tar Heel state, and they include the following cases: Gregory Taylor (charged and convicted by prosecutor Tom Ford because Taylor would not implicate an innocent black man in a murder… after his exoneration by a three judge panel, the state continues its harassment of him, including the withholding of a pardon by the governor); Floyd Brown (a profoundly retarded man who was charged with murder based solely on a confession which experts state he could not have made… held for fourteen years without a trial, and when finally released Prosecutor Michael D. Parker willfully disrupted and interfered with assisted living arrangements that had been set up by his family and state agencies); Theodore Jerry Williams (who complained about the district attorney’s office, and later while in custody, was brutally beaten up – including a broken arm – and then charged with attacking a correctional guard).

One of the most shameful examples of vendetta justice is that of Alan Gell. He was sentenced to death, even though the prosecutors had exculpatory evidence (which they withheld from the defense team) proving that he could not possibly have committed the murder for which he was charged. He served ten years before the evidence came to light and he prevailed at a re-trial. Gell incurred the wrath of the state when he filed civil law suits about his unfair and tragic ordeal (however, unlike Mike Nifong, Prosecutor David Hoke was granted immunity as a state employee). Subsequently, when it came to the attention of the Johnston County prosecutor’s office that Gell impregnated his girlfriend just prior to her being of legal age, he was charged, and given a five year sentence. Under usual circumstances probation would be more likely, but nothing as severe as the sentence he received. This sentence was enforced without consideration given to the fact that Alan Gell had already wrongfully served ten years for a murder he did not commit. The convoluted and tortuous reasoning for the charges against Gell and his sentence defy common sense and mathematics. According to my arithmetic, ten years wrongly served minus five years of a bogus sentence equals freedom with five years credit… and it shouldn’t have taken a Joe Cheshire to get Gell a better deal. Alan Gell remains incarcerated today. He should be immediately released.

Almost everyone associated with the wrong end of the Duke Lacrosse case has been a victim of vendetta justice… no one more so than Mike Nifong. He has been so vilified and demonized by the Carpetbagger Jihadist Machine with its media and public relations connections, that he, his supporters, Crystal Mangum, and others connected with the Duke Lacrosse case are treated by the police, prosecutors, and courts with the same disregard for the rule of law and fair play that O. J. Simpson was subjected to during his Las Vegas interaction with the criminal justice system.

The public turned a blind eye as unprecedented injustice upon unprecedented injustice was heaped upon former Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong… including disbarment, a jail sentence, and a request for the U.S. Department of Justice to proceed with criminal charges against him for depriving the three Duke lacrosse beer-guzzling, stripper partygoers of their civil rights. The public’s blind eye is a powerful enabler that allows those dispensing criminal justice in the state to veer from or even totally disregard the legal statutes in place to assure impartiality and fairness in the system.

Mike Nifong supporters are likewise being targeted with unjust treatment. At a recent event on the campus of Duke University, a known Nifong supporter and member of the Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong who was wearing a Committee tee shirt, was accused of trespassing on Duke’s private property despite the fact that he was on campus at the institution’s public invitation to attend a three-way interview featuring U. S. Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer. He was not told prior to attending the event that Mike Nifong supporters were not invited, and he was not warned prior to attending that his presence on the campus was not wanted. Instead, upon leaving the event, a security guard honed in him, telling him that he was trespassing. Despite the Nifong supporter’s protestations, the guard escorted him off the property in a manner to ensure the infliction of emotional pain, humiliation, public scorn, and embarrassment… and there was the continuous threat of imminent arrest, as the guard called in backup. It is evident that Duke University has no qualms with suspending civil rights and First Amendment Rights when it comes to Mike Nifong supporters.

But it is the malicious and cruel treatment of Ms. Mangum that truly puts North Carolina to shame when it comes to vendetta justice. The media is responsible for getting the public to forget that Ms. Mangum was the victim at the Duke Lacrosse beer-guzzling stripper party. She was the one who was scheduled by the escort service (under false pretenses by a Duke lacrosse party host) to perform at the bacchanalian festivity. She was the one who was dehumanized and humiliated by the mostly Duke lacrosse team members… one of whom made obscene gestures with a broom. She was the one with whom the partygoers vented anger after she stopped dancing minutes into the performance due to the audience’s lewd and crude behavior. Finally, she was the one upon whom some of the partygoer’s heaped racial epithets, including the n-word. Yet Crystal Mangum is the one who is targeted for vendetta justice by the courts and the state… and the court and justice system, under the Jedi mind-trick spell of the carpetbaggers, are quick to impose it.

The vendetta justice plan for Ms. Mangum is to punish her by keeping her incarcerated for as long a period as possible. So far she has remained imprisoned since February 18, 2010, and even if she was able to post bond, the judge in the case determined that she would be released to house arrest. No such contingency was made for the aforementioned child predator with the $10,000 bail… when he posts bond, he’s free. A mean-spirited and punitive backbone supports the North Carolina justice system, one in which the principles of fairness, compassion, morality, and rehabilitation are defiled.

Finally, vendetta justice comes at a cost to taxpayers in the state. Using the police, prosecutors and courts to exact private party (i.e. Carpetbagger) revenge results in taxpayer dollars going towards unjustified prosecution, diverts police and court resources that could otherwise be focused on legitimate crime, and pays for expenses needed to incarcerate many individuals who are neither a threat to society nor a flight risk. Especially in this period of economic hardship with the state and municipalities scrapping by financially, the concept of vendetta justice should be immediately jettisoned. It is time to, among other things, release those wrongfully incarcerated by vendetta justice (Alan Gell, Crystal Mangum, George Goode, Rayford Burke, etal.). Money used to pay for their incarceration could be much better spent defending the cash-strapped city of Durham from the lawsuits of the avaricious Carpetbaggers and their money-hungry attorneys.

12 comments:

Anonymous said...

Sid -- CGM's bond was reduced to $250,000 on 22 Feb, yet you consistently fail to mention this, and keep repeating the lie that her bond is $1,000,000...So, I checked the Durham County current inmate population. CGM is still incarcerated. Also still incarcerated is one Tina Faye Edwards (she's been a guest since 10/26/09). Ms. Edward's bond? $250,000.00. Her charge? 1st degree arson. Also a guest is one Lorian C. Johnson, bond $250,000.00. The charge? 1st degree arson. Do you see a pattern? Are Edwards and Johnson also victims of "vendetta justice"?

JSwift said...

Anonymous,

Ms. Mangum’s bail actually was reduced again to $100,000.

I am sure that you agree that this is another of a series of utterly irresponsible posts by Sidney.

Our host insures that most comments can only address his dishonesty or ridicule his double standard. Sidney makes no serious attempt at accuracy, and commenters keep busy merely trying to correct his numerous misstatements.

Ms. Mangum’s arrest provides an excellent case in point. Whether Ms. Mangum was grossly overcharged in this episode is a legitimate question. I have not researched charges in domestic violence cases and do not know sufficiently the facts in this case. Sidney has provided no relevant data to support his opinions. The broader point of whether the DPD or police in general overcharge defendants—particularly poor minority defendants—and thus force lengthy pretrial incarceration and unjust plea bargains merits real discussion. Our host, however, has trivialized this issue, preferring to make the baseless allegation that the Carpetbagger Jihad® is responsible for Ms. Mangum’s treatment.

He has made this allegation in numerous separate posts and, despite repeated requests from his readers, has refused to provide any support whatsoever for this ridiculous allegation. He admits he has none. He notes a glaring flaw in his speculation, recognizing that it would be “idiotic” for the City of Durham to “do the bidding” of the Carpetbagger Jihad®, noting correctly that the interests of the City and the former defendants conflict significantly. Despite these seemingly insurmountable problems with his theory, he then repeats without support his claim that the City acts in its own worst interest in support of the Carpetbagger Jihad®.

As a result, he avoids any serious discussion of more significant issues.

Walt and I have addressed problems with the justice system in several comments on recent threads. The players have alleged in their lawsuits that the DPD engaged in serious misconduct and have questioned whether the DPD’s activities in this case are symptomatic of more general wrongdoing. As you know, the primary victims of police misconduct are the poor minority defendants Sidney claims he wants to protect. As a result, many observers believe that full disclosure of the DPD’s activities and court oversight of the DPD is the real focus of the former defendants’ lawsuit—and precisely what the City of Durham seeks to avoid. Sidney refuses to address this issue, preferring simply to label the plaintiffs as greedy.

Most readers recognize that this is not the only case of prosecutorial/police misconduct or the most egregious. However, thanks in large part to Mr. Nifong's “million dollars of free publicity” and the ability of the defendants to fight back, the misconduct in this case is probably the most highly publicized prior to trial. Few prosecutors call undue attention to themselves while they are attempting to frame innocent defendants. Similarly, most prosecutors would drop charges and try to move on once their frame had been exposed. Not Mr. Nifong.

Sidney shows no interest in improvements to the system that could offer greater protection to defendants like Ms. Mangum, Mr. Taylor, Mr. Johnson and Mr. Daniels, whose causes he claims to champion. Why fight for changes in an imperfect system that can actually benefit the poor when he can fight imaginary evils like the Carpetbagger Jihad®?

Tilting at windmills is far more rewarding than helping real people.

Anonymous said...

Yes, Ms. Mangum's bond has been reduced. The issue here is that it should never had been set so high in the first place. One comment mentions Tina Faye Edwards but fails to mention the circumstances of the case and the fact that she was alleged to have set the fire May 2008. For well over a year she was not in jail on the arson charge. Also, Lorian C. Johnson has been released and there is little information about his case. The issue here is over why exactly was Ms. Mangum treated the way she was and what happens in cases with similar circumstances?

It does appear that the police and DA's office in Durham has been especially heavy handed. Going to a grand jury at the final moment before Ms. Mangum's scheduled court appears raises questions into to motives of the DA's office. The initial setting of the bond so high and the charges don't appear to fit what happened at the scene. Moreover, the boyfriend is not any help to to state's case because he is on record saying the charges don't make sense to him.

This is the deal...there is a valid question to be raised about what the DA's office is doing by handling the case this way? It is also interesting that if you look at all cases (not just in Durham) the disparity in charges and bonds for different defendants is often startling. What accounts for Ms. Mangum's treatment.

Supposedly, the lacrosse players were treated in such a way that it exposed glaring flaws and misconduct in the system. Durham and Mike Nifong were singled out as being the archetype for bad investigations and misconduct. The truth is that there are serious problems in courts all across North Carolina. The fixation by certain people on the Duke Lacrosse case has made it extremely difficult to talk about criminal cases reasonable.

Where I agree with Sid is that the DA is motivated to treat Crystal in a certain way. If it even appears that Crystal was been treated with a light hand, the crazy bloggers would have descended on Tracy Cline and her office. It makes much more sense to treat Crystal harshly to placate the idiots who still write about the case everyday. There also appears to be people in the DA's office who have an ax to grind with their boss. Don't be surprised about the lengths people will go to so they can cover their ass.

It is unfortunate that Crystal's current situation is even being discussed relative to the Lacrosse case. They should have no relevance to each other.

JSwift, What I would suggest is that people consider that there has developed a very strange myth about the importance of the Duke case. It was supposed to have meant the police and DA's were going to change their behavior. In fact, that case was just about retribution for daring to even charge certain people. The parents of the players used every bit of influence they had to punish Crystal and Nifong. The resulting civil suits were to punish the citizens of Durham for living in such a backwater that would not fully support their sons. There is NO desire by people involved in the civil suits to make things better in the courts in Durham or anywhere.

For those people who say they support justice and Mike Nifong got what he deserved, why are you silent on the cases Sid does mention? The lacrosse players were the last people who needed all of the support they got and still have.

I can tell you that I have done the research and can find no similar domestic case that resulted in such charges. I have seen the police report and talked to the people involved. Ms. Mangum's children called the police after she was allegedly assaulted. The boyfriend was not charged. That is very unusual. Also the DA's office was not willing to reduce/drop charges even after hearing the 911 tape and speaking with the boyfriend. I can't find a single criminal defense attorney who thinks that state can put on a case as it has been charged.

I would suggest that anyone who thinks there can't be influence by the lacrosse parents or other forces is being shortsighted.

Anonymous said...

I'll grant you that the treatment from the DA's office seems heavy-handed. However, there has been no single link to any of the Duke LAX families that would tie them to CGM's current situation. None. That fact, however, has not stopped Sid and others from continuing to spout this nonsense as if repeating it actually makes it so.
Consider this -- The current DA (Tracey Cline) was an assistant to Mike Nifong. Nifong was even in the audience when she took her oath of office. It's not a leap of logic to assume they like and respect one another.
It is also not a drastic leap of logic for one to look at Mike Nifong's situation and assess at least partial blame on CGM.
Have you even considered that CGM's treatment is due to her role in the demise of Nifong's career?
It's puzzling to me why anyone would spend so much time creating fiction about a 'carpetbagger jihad', when there exists a much more plausible scenario that should be explored.

Nifong Supporter said...

To Anonymous April 28, 2010 6:54 AM
:

(excerpt) Anonymous said...
I can tell you that I have done the research and can find no similar domestic case that resulted in such charges. I have seen the police report and talked to the people involved. Ms. Mangum's children called the police after she was allegedly assaulted. The boyfriend was not charged. That is very unusual. Also the DA's office was not willing to reduce/drop charges even after hearing the 911 tape and speaking with the boyfriend. I can't find a single criminal defense attorney who thinks that state can put on a case as it has been charged.

I would suggest that anyone who thinks there can't be influence by the lacrosse parents or other forces is being shortsighted.


Thank you for your comments. Although I repeated just the final paragraphs of your comments, it should be read in its entirity. I plan on copying your statements and using them in future arguments. I hope you continue to contribute your intelligent and insightful comments to this blogsite.

Nifong Supporter said...

To Anonymous April 28, 2010 1:23 PM
:

Anonymous said...
"I'll grant you that the treatment from the DA's office seems heavy-handed. However, there has been no single link to any of the Duke LAX families that would tie them to CGM's current situation. None. That fact, however, has not stopped Sid and others from continuing to spout this nonsense as if repeating it actually makes it so."


Rae Evans, mother of Duke Lacrosse defendant, declared jihad against Mike Nifong and everyone on the "wrong end" of the Duke Lacrosse case on her "60 Minutes" interview when she said about Mr. Nifong "you will pay every day for the rest of your life." Ms. Rae Evans, who owns a Washington DC consulting firm and worked for more than ten years as an executive for CBS News, has many contacts and is quite influential. Considering the malignacy of her statement towards Mr. Nifong, it is not unreasonable to conclude that she has fostered, directly or indirectly, unfair and disparate treatment for Mr. Nifong, Ms. Nifong, and other supporters of Mr. Nifong.

Anonymous said...

Put aside Nifong's treatment -- we were,after all, speaking of CGM. What evidence do you have linking CGM's current incarceration with anyone in any of the Duke LAX families? The answer, of course, is none.

Have you even considered the relationship between Nifong and the current AG, and that CGM's treatment could be based upon their blaming CGM for what happened to Mike Nifong and to Durham?

guiowen said...

I agree CGM's treatment has not been very good. I bear no animosity towards her, though I would be afraid to meet her. (She's too much of a loose cannon.)
Now, with the lowered bail, it should be possible to get her out of jail. The fourteen members of the J4N committee should be able to put together the money.
That fellow Kenhyderal who lives in Dubai should be willing to help, too, though he ca,me up with some lame excuse for not doing so. (He would have us believe that Arab money can't be converted into dollars, or something like that.)

Nifong Supporter said...

To Anonymous:

Anonymous said...
"Put aside Nifong's treatment -- we were,after all, speaking of CGM. What evidence do you have linking CGM's current incarceration with anyone in any of the Duke LAX families? The answer, of course, is none.

Have you even considered the relationship between Nifong and the current AG, and that CGM's treatment could be based upon their blaming CGM for what happened to Mike Nifong and to Durham?"


There may be no direct link from the Carpetbagger families to the excessive and draconian treatment of Crystal Mangum, but it was Rae Evans (mother of defendant Dave Evans) who invoked the jihadist atmosphere with her statement to Mr. Nifong that he would "suffer every day for the rest of his life" during her "60 Minutes" interview. That negative and vindictive atmosphere against Mr. Nifong evelopes Crystal Mangum, and anyone considered to be on the wrong end of the Duke Lacrosse case.

I am sure that the Attorney General's Office and the media are under the influence of the Carpetbagger Jihad's agenda, and are enablers of the excessively unjust treatment of Crystal Mangum.

Nifong Supporter said...

To guiowen:

Although I want very much to have Crystal released from jail, I do not believe that she should be under $100,000 bail when a 59 year old man charged with statutory sexual offense against a 14 year old girl he met in an online chat room is given a $10,000 bail. Ms. Mangum should be released without bail... but for justice to be served, the bogus and inflated charges against her should be dismissed.

kenhyderal said...

guiowen said...That fellow Kenhyderal who lives in Dubai should be willing to help, too, though he ca,me up with some lame excuse for not doing so. (He would have us believe that Arab money can't be converted into dollars, or something like that.)
I've explained the process before on another thread. Anyone anywhere in the world can bail out Crystal if they post $100,000 dollars US. To have her released for !0% of that amount the poster would have to be a US Citizen and be able to provide sufficient collateral to cover the entire $100,000. A Bail Bond Company would then, for a non-refundable fee, post her bond. If someone is willing to securitize the $100,000 then I, along with other haters of injustice, would indeed contribute to the cash requirementof $10,000

Nifong Supporter said...

To kenhyderal:

Thank you for your informative contribution about specifics of bail and requirements for non-U.S. citizens. Statements made by blog commenters that are educational and informative are valued, and very much welcomed.