To access flog, click on the link below:
http://www.justice4nifong.com/direc/flog/flog4.html
In the Saturday, June 04, 2011 edition of The News & Observer newspaper, an article titled “Accused stepdaughter wants her life back” by staff writer Thomasi McDonald chronicled yet another chapter in the malfeasance and misdeeds of Wake County prosecutor Tom Ford.
The name “Tom Ford” probably does not sound familiar to most but it should, as Ford was the prosecutor in the botched murder investigation of Jacquetta Thomas that unfolded nearly two decades ago. As is it’s PAPEN Policy (Protect All Prosecutors Except Nifong), The News & Observer article never once mentioned the Gregory Taylor case or linked Tom Ford to it. It was Gregory Flynt Taylor who Prosecutor Ford saddled with that homicide… but he did so only because Taylor, who is white, would not give perjured testimony in order to convict Johnny Beck, the African American designated suspect who was Ford’s primary target.
In 1993, Taylor was convicted by the use of perjured testimony, a specialty of Prosecutor Ford, and with some hocus-pocus forensics which manipulated evidence to favor the prosecution’s scenario. In Taylor’s case, a stain on the bumper of his car was misleadingly determined to be human blood… which, in fact, it was not.
Prosecutor Ford won a life sentence against Greg Taylor because Taylor refused to implicate another innocent man with perjured testimony.
Returning to the story about the accused stepdaughter… Carletta Alston was charged in June 17, 2009 with the death of her stepfather Michael Donnell Smith. Smith, standing in his Knightdale driveway, was shot in the face during the early morning hours as he prepared to drive to work. His wife Phyllis and stepdaughter Carletta were inside the house when they heard the gunfire.
Afraid to venture outside to investigate, they placed a hysterical 9-1-1 call. Police arrived later and conducted an investigation that produced a stack of letters between the murdered victim Smith, who was also a co-pastor at a church and another woman. The correspondence pointed towards a romantic relationship between the two. Michael Smith’s wife Phyllis, denied knowledge of any affair until it was brought to her attention by the police.
Two days following the murder of Michael Donnell Smith, June 6, 2009, Wake deputies first interviewed Carletta Alston. They could not determine a motive for her to commit the murder. According to the newspaper article, police focused on the stepdaughter Carletta because her account of the shooting differed with other witnesses… specifically, police stated that the time Carletta Alston gave for hearing the shot was significantly later than the time given by neighbors.
Police did not state how much different, but surely a record of the 9-1-1 call would narrow down the timeline. Allegedly gunpowder residue was found somewhere on Alston’s nightgown, but not on her hands, or the hands of her mother. And, as Alston’s attorney, Karl Knudsen of Raleigh stated regarding gunpowder residue, “There’s always the possibility of contamination.”
Based upon Alston’s version of the time at which she heard the gunshot differing with the time given by the neighbors and the forensic report that gunpowder residue was found on Alston’s nightgown… exactly where it was never stated… Carletta Alston was charged with the murder of her stepfather Michael Donnell Smith. Police and prosecutors did not even have a motive in arresting Alston.
What is truly absurd is the statement made by Wake County District Attorney Colon Willoughby which fundamentally stated that there was reason enough to arrest Carletta Alston, there was reason enough for a grand jury to indict Carletta Alston for the murder of Michael Donnell Smith, but that they didn’t have a strong enough case to take it to court. Tea Party conservatives and birthers may believe this line spewed by the Wake County D.A., but Jedi mind-tricks have no affect on me and others with strong logical minds and a modicum of common sense.
Put another way, if the prosecutors did not have a strong enough case to take to court, then Alston should not have been indicted. And, if prosecutors did not have a strong enough case to indict Alston, she should have never been arrested. It’s as simple as that. To aver otherwise is what makes North Carolina justice the laughing stock of the country.
So Carletta Alston upon being arrested lost the two jobs that she held at nursing homes, and she languished in jail at costly taxpayer expense for a year. When she was unexpectedly released from custody without explanation, she had in essence served a one year sentence for not committing a crime… courtesy of prosecutor Tom Ford and the state’s selective justice system based on Class and Color.
The North Carolina justice system is one in which the well-heeled, powerful, privileged, and connected are given “rare deals.” Most of these deals substitute a small fine in place of serving jail time. Those who are disenfranchised, indigent, and people of color are dumped onto the scrap heap of despair and injustice, left to fend for themselves after losing years of their lives and their self dignity to an uncaring, inhumane, and unsympathetic system.
What happened to Carletta Alston is not an isolated incident. The following are but a smattering of examples:
James Arthur Johnson was charged with the murder, rape, kidnapping and armed robbery of Brittany Willis by Wilson County prosecutor Bill Wolfe. Despite lacking credible evidence Johnson, who solved the crimes against Willis, served a 39 month sentence before being forced to agree to an Alford plea deal for a misprision of felony. A misprision of felony charge is applied to person who has knowledge of a crime but does not go to authorities with it. Even this charge did not fit the plea deal which Johnson accepted.
Not only that, but friends and family of Brittany Willis offered a $20,000 reward upon which they reneged after Johnson identified the perpetrator of the crimes against Willis. The media has kept quiet about this.
Judge Osmond Smith III sentenced 15 year-old Erick Daniels to confinement for ten to fourteen years after he was convicted of an armed robbery in which prosecutor Freda Black offered not a shred of credible evidence. The victim of the robbery picked out the young boy’s photograph from a middle school year book based solely on the shape of his eyebrows.
Although he has been proclaimed “innocent” by a judge, the governor and her Office of Executive Clemency has refused to issue a pardon to Erick Daniels who is struggling to get a job with a false felony conviction on his record.
Crystal Gail Mangum, who was the victim and accuser in the Duke Lacrosse case, had charges trumped up against her in February 2010 after police were called to her apartment by her children out of fear for their mother’s safety. Crystal had been repeatedly punched in the face by her ex-boyfriend after she made an insulting comment.
When the responding police realized the identity of Crystal, they dropped attention from Crystal’s abuser and focused on her instead. In order to have Mangum convicted of a crime that would carry serious jail time, the Durham Police, the only ones with the motive, means, and opportunity, set fire to clothing in the bathtub, claimed it was arson, and attributed it to Crystal.
With a slew of other bogus charges, initial bail was set at $1 million. Like Carletta Alston, Crystal Mangum lost her job… but in addition lost her apartment, many of her belongings, custody of her children, was dropped from graduate school classes in which she was enrolled, and she lost her independence.
Crystal spent three months in jail before a $100,000 bail was unexpectedly satisfied by a benevolent bail bondsman. Even though her attorney, Mani Dexter, put up an almost non-existent feather-weight defense, Mangum was not convicted of the most serious arson charge, and was sentenced to time served on other frivolous charges for which she was convicted.
The system of selective justice based on Class and Color thrives in North Carolina because civil rights groups, politicians, and community leaders allow it. They remain silent while the vulnerable individuals, who look to and depend upon them for protection, are mashed under the uncaring heel of those in positions of power in the justice system.
The NAACP, under leadership of Dr. Rev. William Barber II, remained silent as a dormouse. Where was his voice, or that of the NAACP, when Carletta Alston was thrown into the slammer because her recollection of events differed from others about the time at which a gun was fired? State senators and representatives in Wake County have also remained silent when their constituent Carletta Alston languished in jail at taxpayer expense despite the fact that prosecutor Tom Ford had not built a case against her.
Clergymen throughout the state may deliver fiery sermons to their flock from within the confines of their houses of worship, but when it comes to speaking out publicly against the injustice against the very people they serve , then it is as though they have suddenly lost their voices.
Because of the deafening silence amongst community and civil rights leaders, prosecutors like Tom Ford are emboldened and have no compunction against tossing the disenfranchised, poor, and people of color in jail in order to close a case. So what if innocent people are serving time behind bars while the real culprits run free? Who cares?
And, Tom Ford can count on the media coddling up to him, in conjunction with the media’s PAPEN Policy. Duke Lacrosse Prosecutor Mike Nifong in doing his job within acceptable standards, was vilified and butchered by the media… but not so with the Greg Taylor Prosecutor Tom Ford.
Even though the Greg Taylor case received plenty of media press, the prosecutor of the case Tom Ford was rarely mentioned. SBI lab agent Duane Deaver was the designated scapegoat for the case. Well known defense attorney Joseph Cheshire, in defending Greg Taylor, was lenient when discussing the prosecutor who snatched seventeen years of his client’s best years from him. No disparaging words about Ford were uttered from Cheshire’s lips… even referring to Ford as a capable opponent. Cheshire saved his criticism for Mike Nifong only.
In fact, that was Cheshire’s strategy in the Duke Lacrosse case. Not to defend the defendants, but to attack Nifong, the prosecutor who was too independent and would not yield to the tenet of “selective justice based on Class and Color.” So with the media in tow, the Duke Lacrosse defense set out to destroy Mike Nifong, which was culminated with his disbarment, making him the only prosecutor to be disbarred by the North Carolina State Bar since its inception in 1933.
I have to hand it to The News & Observer for even having the gumption to mention Tom Ford’s name in the article. However, even in doing so, it attempted to mislead. Take the passage “Knudsen also noted that the prosecutor handling the case, Tom Ford, has a reputation for being very thorough and willing to do everything he can with the available evidence.” Ford exhibited his talents with evidence in the Greg Taylor case when he turned a bumper stain into human blood, and when he took a negative scent from a tracking hound and with a little abracadabra turned it into a positive one.
Then the article tried to define Tom Ford as a dedicated prosecutor by stating, “But he backed away from taking Alston to trial.”
“He came to the conclusion that it was not a case they wanted to move forward with,” Knudsen said.
I have not a problem with that decision, but why did it take twelve months for Tom Ford to come to the conclusion that he did not, and never did have a case against Carletta Alston? Twelve months while Ms. Alston served time without being convicted of a crime. The fact of the matter is, as was previously stated, that Carletta Alston should never have been arrested and charged with the crime.
Thanks to Tom Ford’s handiwork, the state of North Carolina owes Carletta Alston. As Ms. Alston struggles to find work and deal with other problems related to her unjust incarceration, the state needs to step in and help make her whole… as much as is humanly possible. That is what true justice demands and that is what we, as Tar Heelians, should demand.
Sunday, June 12, 2011
More of Wake County Prosecutor Tom Ford’s handiwork…
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
64 comments:
the state’s selective justice system based on Class
That's Crystal's major malfunction. Bitch ain't got no class.
Sid wrote: "Crystal Gail Mangum, who was the victim and accuser in the Duke Lacrosse case,... "
Not so fast Sid. Crystal was a false accuser and not a victim. In fact, she started out a chain of events that saw three innocent men victimized.
Walt-in-Durham
Here we go again. SOS. Same old Sid. Same old Nifong. Same old Sister. Same old S***.
Sid cheapens stories like this of prosecutorial misconduct by his inability to include the Duke hoax in with the mix. Prosecutors are run amok in this country, and are only rarely held to account. Nifong got what he deserved and so should many others. It seems with Sid that you have to be "of color" in order to suffer from prosecutorial abuse?
Walt said...
"Sid wrote: 'Crystal Gail Mangum, who was the victim and accuser in the Duke Lacrosse case,... '
Not so fast Sid. Crystal was a false accuser and not a victim. In fact, she started out a chain of events that saw three innocent men victimized.
Walt-in-Durham"
Hey, Walt.
I must respectfully disagree with you. The chain of events began with the Duke Lacrosse party host using a false name acquired the services of two exotic dancers using false pretense of performing before a small bachelor party of four or five, instead of a beer guzzling party of hormone surging college partygoers, who had been warned by the Duke president through their coach to rein in their debachery.
Secondly, it has never been truly ascertained that her revelation of events was totally false. During a traumatic experience it is possible to make a misstatement or two in recounting an event.
Anonymous said...
"Sid cheapens stories like this of prosecutorial misconduct by his inability to include the Duke hoax in with the mix. Prosecutors are run amok in this country, and are only rarely held to account. Nifong got what he deserved and so should many others. It seems with Sid that you have to be 'of color' in order to suffer from prosecutorial abuse?"
Au contrare, mi Ami. Gregory Taylor was a victim of prosecutorial misconduct. Alan Gell was a victim of prosecutorial misconduct. Dwayne Dail was a victim of prosecutorial misconduct. I have advocated on behalf of all of them who were unjustly incarcerated for crimes they did not commit.
However, I do not consider the three Duke Lacrosse defendants, who never spent a day in jail and who shook down Duke University for $20 mil each and are trying to pry another $10 mil from the cash-strapped city of Duham, to be "victims" of prosecutorial misconduct. They were in attendance at an event which was frowned upon by the university's president (considering the lacrosse team's abysmal reputation), and it is not unreasonable to believe that a sexual assault took place, especially when the racial epithets used is taken into consideration.
Now Sid, "The chain of events began with the Duke Lacrosse party host using a false name acquired the services of two exotic dancers using false pretense of performing before a small bachelor party of four or five, instead of a beer guzzling party of hormone surging college partygoers,..." There is no evidence to support that. In fact, the party pictures look rather tame.
"who had been warned by the Duke president through their coach to rein in their debachery." There is no evidence to support that. In fact, the Coleman report paints a very different picture. It shows that lacrosse team members had a 100% graduation rate during Pressler's time. The lacrosse team had fewer drunkeness arrests per capita than Duke students as a whole. That is very different from the false picture you and Nifong paint.
"Secondly, it has never been truly ascertained that her revelation of events was totally false." Actually it has. Her own renditions contradict themselves. That is fully disclosed even in the early going of the DPD investigation. The Special Prosecutors investigation further proves her false allegation.
"During a traumatic experience it is possible to make a misstatement or two in recounting an event." This is correct, as far as it goes. However, Crystal's inconsistencies go far beyond a misstatement or two. In fact, her various versions of the event are mutually contradictory. Further, she most certainly falsely identified two people as they were not even at the party when the falsely alleged assault took place. In addition, it is a physical impossiblility that the falsely alleged assault to have taken place with the number of people involved in the space where she claims it happened.
Finally, the DNA directly contradicts her identification of the assailants. Of course, the facts have never stood in the way of Nifong when it came to carrying out an injustice.
Walt-in-Durham
"Au contrare, mi Ami..."
Sid -- If it's French your attempting here, the correct phrase for "my friend" is "mon ami". The word "mi" is Spanish as you are attempting to use it here.
If you don't know the language, don't use it. It makes you appear well, less than intelligent.
As for the rest of your post...Well, it proves you are less than intelligent.
This blog site is like a NASCAR race. Boring as hell, but you have to watch because of the potential for a wreck! And Sid, you are wrecking almost weekly. Even when you get it right you get it wrong. All the 'proper' (according to you) cases of prosecutorial misconduct are perpetrated on those of the right color and socio-economic class. It seems you are unwilling to beleive that the same injustice can be meted out to those with power and money. Well it seems that the FACTS prove you wrong. It's just that those with power and money in the Duke case held the State to account with the proper results. Would that all inept and evil prosecutors were held to the same standard and forced to pay with their law licenses and heavy financial penalties for themselves and their employers-it would clean up things much faster!
My suggestion is and will continue to be abolishing the office of prosecutor/DA and making this a position that all licensed attorneys in a given area have to rotate through for 6-12 months at a time. Everyone would behave differently if they knew their careers would span "both sides of the aisle."
Anonymous said...
"'Au contrare, mi Ami...'
Sid -- If it's French your attempting here, the correct phrase for 'my friend' is 'mon ami'. The word 'mi' is Spanish as you are attempting to use it here.
If you don't know the language, don't use it. It makes you appear well, less than intelligent.
As for the rest of your post...Well, it proves you are less than intelligent.
Mon ami,
Thank you for the correction... and yes, it was French in which I was attempting to communicate.
I enjoy using phrases in French, Latin, and other languages to break the monotony of Americanized English. I am definitely not trying to convey that I am extremely intelligent because that is self evident.
Au revoir.
Anonymous said...
"This blog site is like a NASCAR race. Boring as hell, but you have to watch because of the potential for a wreck! And Sid, you are wrecking almost weekly. Even when you get it right you get it wrong. All the 'proper' (according to you) cases of prosecutorial misconduct are perpetrated on those of the right color and socio-economic class. It seems you are unwilling to beleive that the same injustice can be meted out to those with power and money. Well it seems that the FACTS prove you wrong. It's just that those with power and money in the Duke case held the State to account with the proper results. Would that all inept and evil prosecutors were held to the same standard and forced to pay with their law licenses and heavy financial penalties for themselves and their employers-it would clean up things much faster!
My suggestion is and will continue to be abolishing the office of prosecutor/DA and making this a position that all licensed attorneys in a given area have to rotate through for 6-12 months at a time. Everyone would behave differently if they knew their careers would span 'both sides of the aisle.'"
Interesting concept regarding the abolishment of the office of prosecutor/DA, but I do have doubts about its potential effectiveness. Who knows? Maybe a small scale experiment may not be such a bad idea.
Regarding the bulk of your comment, I believe that the record reinforces that the poor, the disenfranchised, and people of color are treated differently by the courts and the media than the well healed privileged individuals in positions of status and power. Why else do you believe that Sheriff Donnie Harrison's daughter received the rare deal that she did? Why do you think that Governor Perdue will not pardon Erick Daniels? Why do you think that the family and friends of Brittany Willis can renege on a $20,000 reward offer that was earned by James Arthur Johnson. And, related to the current flog, why do you believe that Prosecutor Tom Ford arrested Carletta Alston without credible evidence and allowed her to languish in jail for a year before releasing her without comment? These are but a few examples I can readily spew forth... Give me one example of where a well healed criminal defendant was treated the same in court as would a disenfranchised one.
Also, if you're looking for a boring site, I would recommend Durham-Wonderland, or Liestoppers.
Hey sid. How many literary awards. , blog awards, journalism awardshave you and your athetic site won?
Hey sid. How many literary awards. , blog awards, journalism awardshave you and your athetic site won?
"Also, if you're looking for a boring site, I would recommend Durham-Wonderland..."
Jealous much? That the DIW blog ignores you while you have links to it from your own website must be a huge source of dismay for you.
Anonymous said...
"Hey sid. How many literary awards. , blog awards, journalism awardshave you and your athetic site won?"
My web and blog sites may have received some journalism awards, but I am not aware of any. In fact, I do not know if those who hand out awards even take my sites into consideration.
I would appreciate it if you could enlighten me about blog awards, as I will admit, about that subject I am ignorant.
Lance the Intern said...
"'Also, if you're looking for a boring site, I would recommend Durham-Wonderland...'
Jealous much? That the DIW blog ignores you while you have links to it from your own website must be a huge source of dismay for you."
Dismay for me? Not in the least. The reason DIW ignores me is because it knows that it can't compete with me. My blog and flog site is innovative, cutting edge, and futuristic. I have yet to see a blog site that can compare with it.
With regards to putting a link to DIW, that just is an example that shows I have no fear of that blog site. I know I can hold my own against it. If DIW felt it could even be in the same class as my site, it would reciprocate and put a link to my blog site.
Furthermore, I have on many occasions written comments to DIW, but they have to scrutinize comments before they post them. I no longer write comments on their site. My blog site, on the other hand is censor-free.
But, I don't fault DIW for ignoring me. Like Dirty Harry said in "Magnum Force," "A man's got to know his limitations."
" My blog and flog site is innovative, cutting edge, and futuristic."
No -- as was pointed out to you, there are websites that have been using the FLASH technology for YEARS prior to your use. In this day, your adoption now can hardly be considered "cutting edge". If you would like to see some truly innovative blogs, I suggest the following:
http://spacecollective.org/
http://www.alexbuga.com/v9/
" I know I can hold my own against [DIW]..."
Really? How many times has your blog been mentioned in Wall Street Journal? How about Slate? No? OK -- Something closer to home maybe, like the News and Observer? Still nothing?
Why does a google search for DIW show 2,790,000 results, while a search for "Justice4Nifong" come up with 1,590?
I think you're attempting to over-compensate for some...inadequacy
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz……………………
Lance the Intern said...
" 'My blog and flog site is innovative, cutting edge, and futuristic.'
No -- as was pointed out to you, there are websites that have been using the FLASH technology for YEARS prior to your use. In this day, your adoption now can hardly be considered 'cutting edge'. If you would like to see some truly innovative blogs, I suggest the following:
http://spacecollective.org/
http://www.alexbuga.com/v9/"
Thanks for the references to the above listed websites. I thought that they were both creative and fun. Flash websites have tremendous advantages over HTML when it comes to animation and interactivity. In the future I plan to redo my current website as a Flash website.
I do not deny that Flash websites, such as the two you brought to my attention, exist. However, my point is that the flog (a portmanteau of Flash and blog) is not current in common use because because it is highly labor intensive to produce. Even Alex Buga has a blog site within his website, but the blog site is the routine and typical one consisting of the written word only.
If you find a blog site, that presents material in a flog format like mine, please let me know. I do not believe such an animal, other than mine, exists.
Thanks again for the references to the Flash websites. They're very entertaining and creative, and I really enjoyed them.
Anonymous said...
" 'I know I can hold my own against [DIW]...'
Really? How many times has your blog been mentioned in Wall Street Journal? How about Slate? No? OK -- Something closer to home maybe, like the News and Observer? Still nothing?
Why does a google search for DIW show 2,790,000 results, while a search for 'Justice4Nifong' come up with 1,590?
I think you're attempting to over-compensate for some...inadequacy"
The readership has nothing to do with the quality of the contents and other attributes of a blog/flog site. The media's bias extends beyond Mike Nifong, to include sites that are supportive of him. That is why blog sites that bash Nifong are given recognition and are referenced in the media. Not because they merit it. Also, I believe that DIW has been in existence much longer than my blog site. Despite the prejudice against my blog site, I am sure that it will steadily gain on the competition. It's just a matter of time, because my blog site is one of truth, conscientious thought, and relevance.
Thereby, go ye enlightened.
"The media's bias extends beyond Mike Nifong, to include sites that are supportive of him."
Be real Sid, the media doesn't have any bias against sites that support Nifong. The media got burned by Nifong's lies, thus they really don't want to look bad again. That's the problem Vince has too. Just as soon as anyone in the media looks too closely at Nifong's or Crystal's story, they figure out its a pack of lies.
Walt-in-Durham
Here we go again. Now the media is prejudiced against poor victim Sid. It couldnt possibly be that this site is ignored because of its deceitful racist opinion by its authot or because it is nothIng more than some guy's attempt to puff himself up. Noooooo. He is a victim of the evil white media oppressor! Waaaahhhhh. Boooo. Hooooooo
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz……………………
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz……………………
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz……………………
W H E R E
I S
T H E
G R E A T
K I L G O ?
W H E R E
I S
M O T O R
M O U T H?
You consider a flash video with you reading (in the most boring monotone) over it "innovative, cutting edge and futuristic"?
Yeah -- your intelligence (like your French) is evident, all right, mi Ami
Walt said...
"'The media's bias extends beyond Mike Nifong, to include sites that are supportive of him.'
Be real Sid, the media doesn't have any bias against sites that support Nifong. The media got burned by Nifong's lies, thus they really don't want to look bad again. That's the problem Vince has too. Just as soon as anyone in the media looks too closely at Nifong's or Crystal's story, they figure out its a pack of lies.
Walt-in-Durham"
Walt, it's time for a reality check. The media was heavily involved in destroying Mike Nifong in the view of the public. He was vilified and demonized like no other. Ever hear of Tom Ford? Few people have, and the reason is that this prosecutor, like so many others are protected by the media. Ford was responsible for Gregory Taylor losing 17 years of his life behind bars. Ford had no case against him. Just like Ford had no case against Carletta Alston, yet she spent a year in jail, lost the two jobs she had because of it, and has been unable to find a job since. The only prosecutor the media has railed on is Mike Nifong... and the reason has to do with the influence of Rae Evans and her connections with CBS News where she worked as an executive for more than a decade.
The media is the one that stirred up the Duke Lacrosse case in order to profit from it in the long run... and to gain retribution against Nifong for having the gall to charge three "hooligans" from families of privileged, prestige, and power.
You better believe that the media is against Nifong, Nifong supporters, and anyone considered to be on the wrong end of the Duke Lacrosse case.
Anonymous said...
"You consider a flash video with you reading (in the most boring monotone) over it 'innovative, cutting edge and futuristic'?
Yeah -- your intelligence (like your French) is evident, all right, mi Ami"
Mon Ami,
The flog presentations with their animations, highlighting, and other visual forms of emphasis, and audio and musical additions are unique and cutting edge. Sure, I will admit that my delivery could use some work, but it doesn't take away from the fabulous communication experience that I have created. That alone is more innovative than reading the printed word on paper. My flogs are an experience of enlightenment, in all truth.
Thereby, go ye enlightened.
Hey -- What do you call it when Sid puts a new link to his videos on his website?
"logging his flog"...
badump bump.
Sid wrote: "Walt, it's time for a reality check. The media was heavily involved in destroying Mike Nifong in the view of the public."
Sid you and Nifong are the ones who need a reality check. Nifong went public early with his lies and the media published them without restriction. In fact, Nifong himself said it was a million dollars worth of free publicity. It was not until a few responsible journalists started looking closer at the case that Nifong's free ride with the press ended. Once it became obvious to the media that Nifong had lied to them from the beginning, they definitely were of a mood to burn him.
"He was vilified and demonized like no other." A villification that was much deserved.
"Ever hear of Tom Ford?"
I have, read all about him in the News and Observer and at WRAL's website. Your point?
"Ford was responsible for Gregory Taylor losing 17 years of his life behind bars. Ford had no case against him. Just like Ford had no case against Carletta Alston, yet she spent a year in jail, lost the two jobs she had because of it, and has been unable to find a job since."
Exactly what Nifong was trying to do to three innocent men. He just failed, fortunately.
"...and the reason has to do with the influence of Rae Evans and her connections with CBS News...."
Her connections with CBS probably helped get 60 Minutes to give a look at her son's case. But, what they reported was true. Unlike the lies Nifong told.
Nifong lied to the media, Nifong lied to the court, Nifong pursued a case against innocent men for which he had no probable cause. There is nothing worse than a DA who would do that.
Walt-in-Durham
Sid, you amaze us all. How many times do you have to be told the TRUTH....that the statement by the Evans family happened long AFTER Nifong had made countless public condemnations and judgements about the three falsely accused men. AND, that Nifong already knew there was no inculpatory DNA evidence for the three falsely accused young men!!! Get a grip, fella. You need to adjust your meds.
Sidney,
The last couple of posts have been brilliant satire. Well done!
I have tried for a long time to determine your motivation. I concluded there are only three possible explanations: (1) you are incredibly stupid and genuinely fail to understand that Nifong is guilty of the misconduct you rightly criticize in other prosecutors; (2) you are completely dishonest, knowing full well that a man you describe as "honorable" is also guilty of misconduct; and (3) this site is a masterful parody of the intellectual and ethical bankruptcy of those who support Nifong.
These posts make it clear that you are a masterful satirist.
The irony of your criticism of prosecutors who prosecute without a credible investigation is not lost on your readers. Particularly on a blog purportedly dedicated to obtaining justice for Mike Nifong, a man criticized for his "rush to accuse" in the Duke case, who brought charges with no bona fide police investigation, who indicted defendants with "no credible evidence" to support charges, the harshness of your criticism is clear.
Because the nominal objective of this site is restoring Nifong's license to practice law, you do not criticize Nifong directly. Instead you criticize other prosecutors for eggregious conduct similar to Nifong's and rely on your readers to make the connection. In that way, you initiate a discussion of Nifong's malfeasance while appearing to "support" him. Clever.
I owe you an apology.
When I earlier questioned your honesty and labeled you a shameless hypocrite, I failed to recognize your disguised sarcasm. You completely fooled me. I take comfort in the knowledge that you have fooled many.
Again, well done!
Thank you all for the comments. I wish I had the time to respond to each and every one, but that would require a lot of time which I do not have at the present time.
Currently I am busy working on a case about a man wrongly on death row, and I am working on a flog which is not limited to the justice system, but that addresses North Carolina politics in general. That flog will hopefully appear by this weekend.
Like the flogs and blogs that appear on this site, I am sure that after reading them you will leave enlightened.
Regarding the current blog, I did note that no one mentioned anything about the year Carletta Alston spent in jail. Do you think she deserves some sort of compensation? I hear little if any criticism about Tom Ford. Finally, although I believe Mike Nifong acted within acceptable practice with his prosecution of the Duke Lacrosse case, don't you feel that Tom Ford's actions are far more egregious than anything Nifong is accused of doing?
actually, there were several comments about alston's time in jail. whether she should be compensated is a question between her and the courts. since NONE of us know the full extent of evidence againist her, if any....then perhaps that information is relevant. Enough to jail her? not enough to eventually prosecute? ineptness of Ford and his team? As I thought you would know by now, certain acts of prosecutors (like Ford)are immune from accountability. Nifong's punishment was merciful and totally appropriate because it concerned his actions beyond the insulated cubbyhole of his immunity.
Sid wrote: "Finally, although I believe Mike Nifong acted within acceptable practice with his prosecution of the Duke Lacrosse case, don't you feel that Tom Ford's actions are far more egregious than anything Nifong is accused of doing?"
There is your problem, Sid. If you think Nifong acted within the acceptable practice with his prosecution in the lacrosse case, then Ford's actions are equally acceptable.
Walt-in-Durham
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz……………………
Wheeeerrrrreeeeee's Mikey? You'd think that if bathrobe boy were making a serious run at getting his license back in 2012, we would all be hearing literal panting from Sid. Rapid heartbeat, pupils dilated, wild cheering...."go, mikey, go"! So, Sid, how's the campaign going? Picking up steam? Fund raising? Lots more supporters for the We Love Mikey club? Jackie and Victoria making speeches yet? We just assume that the 88 will be turning out in force for your boy....
Anonymous said...
"actually, there were several comments about alston's time in jail. whether she should be compensated is a question between her and the courts. since NONE of us know the full extent of evidence againist her, if any....then perhaps that information is relevant. Enough to jail her? not enough to eventually prosecute? ineptness of Ford and his team? As I thought you would know by now, certain acts of prosecutors (like Ford)are immune from accountability. Nifong's punishment was merciful and totally appropriate because it concerned his actions beyond the insulated cubbyhole of his immunity."
Tom Ford charged Carletta Alston with the murder of her stepfather without a shred of credible evidence. He didn't even have a motive. She was held in jail for a year and then released because Ford was unable to conjure up a case against her. As a result of her arrest, she essentially served a one year sentence. As a result of her arrest, she lost the two jobs she held at the time. As a result of her arrest, it is undoubtedly more difficult for her to find work now. Yes, she should receive compensation for her wrongful incarceration, measly though it is. The State should also assure that she is employed and that she receives back wages.
If you were wrongfully held in jail for a year, wouldn't you want compensation too?
Regarding Mike Nifong, he did not concoct the assault scenario out of mid-air. There was a victim who made the claim, which was credible considering the Duke Lacrosse team reputation and its beer-guzzling, stripper ogling parties in which there was underaged drinking and racial epithets tossed about and an audience hostile at the fact that they felt cheated out of a two hour performance in which they felt they had the right to make sexist and degrading remarks at the performers. Mike Nifong acted well within standards when he prosecuted the Duke Lacrosse defendants.
Walt said...
"Sid wrote: 'Finally, although I believe Mike Nifong acted within acceptable practice with his prosecution of the Duke Lacrosse case, don't you feel that Tom Ford's actions are far more egregious than anything Nifong is accused of doing?'
There is your problem, Sid. If you think Nifong acted within the acceptable practice with his prosecution in the lacrosse case, then Ford's actions are equally acceptable.
Walt-in-Durham"
Walt there is a big difference between what happened at the beer-guzzling, stripper ogling Duke Lacrosse party and the slaying in Knightdale. First of all, in the Duke Lacrosse case, a victim identified three assailants with a high degree of certainty. There was no witness identification or motive regarding Carletta Alston's arrest. In the Duke Lacrosse case, Nifong, acting as a true "Minister of Justice," dismissed the rape charges when he felt they were not applicable. He did not dismiss the sexual assault charges, however. That was done by the Attorney General who was more than anxious to overreach and declare the boys "innocent." (This was the result of coersion from Cheshire's underling Brad Bannon.) In the Carletta Alston case, after a year, Ford, who was probably unable to scrounge up some perjured testimony to implicate Ms. Alston in her stepfather's death, dismissed the charges without explanation. This is shameful.
Tom Ford already took many valuable years from Gregory Taylor in another case without credible evidence, yet the media shields him, and no disparaging words are spoken about Ford. That's my point. Everyone picks on Mike Nifong... the result of the very successful application of the Jedi Mind-trick on the public. (Other than myself, not many people are immune to media Jedi mind-tricks.)
So in conclusion, Walt... Yes, there is a difference.
Anonymous said...
"Wheeeerrrrreeeeee's Mikey? You'd think that if bathrobe boy were making a serious run at getting his license back in 2012, we would all be hearing literal panting from Sid. Rapid heartbeat, pupils dilated, wild cheering....'go, mikey, go'! So, Sid, how's the campaign going? Picking up steam? Fund raising? Lots more supporters for the We Love Mikey club? Jackie and Victoria making speeches yet? We just assume that the 88 will be turning out in force for your boy...."
The campaign for justice moves forward, although the steps may seem small. The Committee welcomes members from the Group of 88, but they have not volunteered to date. But I am proud of the courageous individuals who are members and are willing to take a stand that has been vilified by the media. I have no doubt that we will achieve our goal.
Thereby, go ye enlightened.
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz……………………
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz……………………
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz……………………
ooooo, enlightened. what a big word for such a small mind.
find some new tunes, sid. boring, boring, boring.....
Sid, you wrote: "Walt there is a big difference between what happened at [Sid's distortion of the facts omitted] the Duke Lacrosse party and the slaying in Knightdale. First of all, in the Duke Lacrosse case, a victim identified three assailants with a high degree of certainty."
In truth, she did not. Her descriptions do not match the people she ultimately picked from a flawed array. That also brings up the suggestive nature of the identification procedures Durham Police used. In violation of their own General Order the DPD used an array of photos for the false accuser to pick from that had no known innocent fillers. Specifically, they used only pictures of white lacrosse team members. This type of array has been proven time and again to produce false identifications. Thus the DPD General Orders prohibit such an identification procedure. I think that you would complain long and loud if Tom Ford used such a tainted identification.
"In the Duke Lacrosse case, Nifong, acting as a true "Minister of Justice," dismissed the rape charges when he felt they were not applicable."
The problem is he pursued them after April 6, 2006 when it became obvious that he had no identifiable suspect. Yet, he did pursue the charges after April 6 without probably cause. Exaclty the same sort of thing you accuse Ford of doing. The difference being, Nifong refused to listen to any exculpatory evidence from the defense and he knew that he had no reliable or even admissable identification.
"He did not dismiss the sexual assault charges, however."
Which continued his baseless prosecution.
"That was done by the Attorney General...."
Who conducted a fair investigation. The Special Prosecutors, as you so conveniently like to forget interviewed Crystal at lenght and could not get a consistent story from her. The Special Prosecutors looked at the suggestive lineup and decided that was unuseable. The Special Prosecutors looked at the DNA evidence, which did provide certain identification, and decided that the defendants were not the ones who had assaulted or raped Crystal. No amount of Nifong's lies can change the facts of the case. What is truly disgusting about Nifong is he continues to lie about his misconduct.
What we are left with is an unrepentant liar who will stop at nothing to equate his gross misbehavior with that of any other prosecutor in North Carolina. While Tom Ford may be bad, his conduct is not as bad as the liar Nifong's.
Walt-in-Durham
Police notes reflect that it was Nifong's idea toshow Crystal photos. He was adamant that it was not a line-up. Nifong was angry that every defense lawyer and therefore the players refused to cooperate with police after the players got lawyers. Many did not return Himan's (lead investigator) phone calls. Because defense was not cooperating, police wanted a reason to go to the defense lawyers and say, look, the victim remembers your player at the party, so your player should speak to us. The idea was to show Crystal photos of the players to see if this would jog her memory of remembering anyone like he spoke to me, etc. so that they could go to lawyers and then try to get that individual player to talk to police about what happened at the party. According to testimony, Gottlieb & Himan were shocked when she just identified the 3 guys that raped her. Now, you don't have to believe them. But that was the testimony.
Look -- Cy's back!!
How's Mike enjoying retirement?
You're the man, Sid, you're the man.
Walt,
It is beyond me how you can say, presumably with a straight face, that Mike Nifong is worse as a prosecutor than Tom Ford. No way! Mike Nifong gave nearly 30 years of prosecutorial service to North Carolina without a blemish on his record. He had an outstanding reputation as being fair and an attorney with integrity. His record was such that he was recommended to be the District Attorney of Durham. Now, based on one case, in which you happen to question the way he prosecuted it, and in which the defendants never spent a day in jail, received $20 million each as reward for their participation in a beer-guzzling, stripper-ogling party with a racial epithet being tossed around and underaged drinking, you have come to the conclusion that Mike Nifong is worse than Tom Ford.
Let me tell you about two cases involving Ford. The Gregory Taylor case is one in which Ford did not care about the prostitute victim and was more interested in closing the case rather than solving it. He tried to pressure Greg Taylor to give perjured testimony to implicate an African American who Taylor knew could not have possibly committed the crime, and when he refused, a vindictive Ford convicted Taylor of the crime and got him sentenced to life. Fortunately, Taylor only spent 17 years behind bars.
Then there's the case of Carletta Alston, who Ford arbitrarily arrested without cause for the murder of her stepfather. He had no motive and no case, yet Ford allowed her to be incarcerated for twelve months. And you do not think his actions are worse than what Nifong's been accused of?
You and the mainstream media are far too lenient on Ford, while crucifying Nifong at the behest of the Carpetbagger Jihadists.
Step back, take a deep breath, and look carefully at the facts, Walt.
Anonymous said...
"Police notes reflect that it was Nifong's idea toshow Crystal photos. He was adamant that it was not a line-up. Nifong was angry that every defense lawyer and therefore the players refused to cooperate with police after the players got lawyers. Many did not return Himan's (lead investigator) phone calls. Because defense was not cooperating, police wanted a reason to go to the defense lawyers and say, look, the victim remembers your player at the party, so your player should speak to us. The idea was to show Crystal photos of the players to see if this would jog her memory of remembering anyone like he spoke to me, etc. so that they could go to lawyers and then try to get that individual player to talk to police about what happened at the party. According to testimony, Gottlieb & Himan were shocked when she just identified the 3 guys that raped her. Now, you don't have to believe them. But that was the testimony."
Thank you for the information and your insights on the case. I have no reason to doubt that the defense did not cooperate with the police and prosecution, as it even refused to present reciprocal discovery while being hypocritical in accusing Nifong of doing just that (which, contrary to media spewings, did not).
Anonymous said...
"You're the man, Sid, you're the man."
Thank you. I'll take that as a compliment.
I'm working hard on the first of my political flogs. It'll surpass all expectations. Hope to have it posted by Monday.
Thereby go ye enlightened.
Sid, you wrote: " It is beyond me how you can say, presumably with a straight face, that Mike Nifong is worse as a prosecutor than Tom Ford."
I most certainly did write that with a straight face, because it is true. Nifong lied to the court and Nifong lied to the public. For those offenses he was disbarred and convicted of contempt. Making him the sleaziest of all DAs to ever disgrace North Carolina. Further, Nifong did committed his offenses in an effort to maliciously send three innocent men to prison.
"No way! Mike Nifong gave nearly 30 years of prosecutorial service to North Carolina without a blemish on his record. "
Most of his so called career was spent in traffic court fixing tickets where his reputation for being lazy was well known and justly deserved. If you believe him, Nifong spent the rest of his career not preparing his cases and generally being the least prepared lawyer in the room. Sadly, in North Carolina we don't disbar the lazy.
"He had an outstanding reputation as being fair and an attorney with integrity."
No, his reputation before traffic court was for his lack of preparedness. His reputation in traffic court was for favoring certain lawyers in the defense bar over others.
"His record was such that he was recommended to be the District Attorney of Durham."
Oddly, no one recommended Nifong for the appointment. Easley picked him because he agreed not to run for the office. A promise neither Sachs nor Cline would make.
" Now, based on one case, in which you happen to question the way he prosecuted it, and in which the defendants never spent a day in jail, received $20 million each as reward for their participation in a beer-guzzling, stripper-ogling party with a racial epithet being tossed around and underaged drinking, you have come to the conclusion that Mike Nifong is worse than Tom Ford."
Because the facts support that conclusion. Not that Ford is by any measure good, in fact, I am on record as saying he is almost as bad as Nifong. In fact, other than the blatant nature of Nifong's conduct, they are more or less equals. Nifong just did it on a bigger and worse scale.
Of course in your selective whitewash of Nifong's malicious prosecution of three innocent men, you ignore his willing use of a suggestive and inadmissable lineup. That omission makes you a hypocrite of the worst kind.
Walt-in-Durham
Sid wrote: "I have no reason to doubt that the defense did not cooperate with the police and prosecution, as it even refused to present reciprocal discovery while being hypocritical in accusing Nifong of doing just that...."
Another lie from Nifong and Syd. It's been discussed here before, the defense, offered Nifong all the information they had before filing. He refused to listen. The facts are difficult for you. But this is further evidence of how dishonest you and Nifong are.
Walt-in-Durham
Walt,
I agree that the defense attempts to show evidence to Nifong, but not the DPD, has been discussed many times before.
Sid is lying. I demand that he apologize.
Anon, I want you to apologize.
This is Sidney's blog. He has a well-established right to tell lies and make false and misleading statements.
Anonymous said...
"Walt,
I agree that the defense attempts to show evidence to Nifong, but not the DPD, has been discussed many times before.
Sid is lying. I demand that he apologize."
Our interpretations of the situation may be at odds, as are our positions, but I would not agree that it is worthy of an apology.
When it comes to apologies, I feel that unless they are given with sincerity, they are meaningless. So it would do no good for me to apologize to you. Likewise, although I believe that Duke University owes me an apology for the way it mistreated me, I refuse to ask it for an apology because I doubt that it would be sincere. The university maliciously tried to put me in jail and the only regrets it harbors is that it was unsuccessful.
If you need to ask for an apology, then if you get one, it is most likely meaningless.
Anonymous said...
"Anon, I want you to apologize.
This is Sidney's blog. He has a well-established right to tell lies and make false and misleading statements."
Although I may have the right, as blog site owner, to lie and make false and misleading statements, I have chosen to stick with expressing the truth. One can not enlighten the public by telling falsehoods... such as other blog sites which I will not mention.
Thereby, go ye enlightened.
Sidney ignores what is inconsistent with his mantra. He fails to keep his promises if he finds them inconvenient.
Anon 6/23 3:49pm: Gottlieb & Himan were shocked when she just identified the 3 guys that raped her. Now, you don't have to believe them. But that was the testimony.
Yes. That was the testimony. Chalmers also made this claim in his report to the City Council.
I am skeptical of self-serving statements—even under oath—made by those who may have something to hide. This version may allow some defendants to minimize their exposure. A procedure designed to produce defendants, particularly one where defendants were pre-selected, could result in civil liability.
Some observers have speculated that Crystal was coached to select specific players. The defendants came from affluent areas. Others question whether Evans was selected because of known/potential DNA contamination and a scratch and Finnerty due to his DC arrest. Gottlieb’s lack of follow up on Crystal’s first selection is inconsistent with later queries. Crystal’s father announced the night before the procedure that she had identified her three assailants. Although Travis Magnum was not credible, his premature announcement nevertheless is an interesting coincidence.
The April 4 selection process was videotaped, unlike the March 16 and March 21 procedures. It is inconceivable that Nifong and/or the DPD believed it was more important that the jury see Crystal’s reactions while identifying witnesses than while identifying her alleged assailants.
The DPD did not use the selection process to advance their investigation. Despite a case that depended on the testimony of an unreliable witness (and the risk that the identifications would be inadmissible), they made no attempt to build a case, say by interviewing the players Crystal selected as her assailants. The lack of investigation provides additional confirmation that their objective was to select defendants—not to solve a criminal case.
I am sure you agree that the selection process requires investigation.
Harr Supporter said...
"Anon 6/23 3:49pm: Gottlieb & Himan were shocked when she just identified the 3 guys that raped her. Now, you don't have to believe them. But that was the testimony.
Yes. That was the testimony. Chalmers also made this claim in his report to the City Council.
I am skeptical of self-serving statements—even under oath—made by those who may have something to hide. This version may allow some defendants to minimize their exposure. A procedure designed to produce defendants, particularly one where defendants were pre-selected, could result in civil liability.
Some observers have speculated that Crystal was coached to select specific players. The defendants came from affluent areas. Others question whether Evans was selected because of known/potential DNA contamination and a scratch and Finnerty due to his DC arrest. Gottlieb’s lack of follow up on Crystal’s first selection is inconsistent with later queries. Crystal’s father announced the night before the procedure that she had identified her three assailants. Although Travis Magnum was not credible, his premature announcement nevertheless is an interesting coincidence.
The April 4 selection process was videotaped, unlike the March 16 and March 21 procedures. It is inconceivable that Nifong and/or the DPD believed it was more important that the jury see Crystal’s reactions while identifying witnesses than while identifying her alleged assailants.
The DPD did not use the selection process to advance their investigation. Despite a case that depended on the testimony of an unreliable witness (and the risk that the identifications would be inadmissible), they made no attempt to build a case, say by interviewing the players Crystal selected as her assailants. The lack of investigation provides additional confirmation that their objective was to select defendants—not to solve a criminal case.
I am sure you agree that the selection process requires investigation."
Interesting thoughts. Possibly a review of what you call the selection process is called for. I know that I was involved in a drive-by lineup while taking a walk by Raleigh police officers who said I fit the description of a burglar. They held me for about 15-20 minutes or so, until a patrol car came up with a woman in the back seat. I was instructed, as I stood on the sidewalk to turn and face the car and then turn and give a profile. Talk about humiliation. And what would've happened had this woman identified me as the burglar... I'm sure that I would've been taken to the jail and locked up no questions asked. However, my belief is that no crime took place and that the police wanted to intimidate or get information from me solely because I'm a Nifong supporter. A sad commentary on our state's justice system.
Post a Comment