Monday, September 12, 2011

Governor's racist pardon policy denies compensation to wrongly incarcerated African Americans


Click the link below to view interactive flog:

http://justice4nifong.com/direc/flog/flog8.html

Wake County prosecutor Tom Ford prosecuted Gregory Taylor for the 1991 murder of Jacquetta Thomas. Although he lacked evidence against Taylor in the death of the black woman, Ford maliciously pursued the case against Taylor because he would not implicate African American Johnny Beck, who Taylor knew to be innocent.

Ford used perjured testimony from compromised individuals, who faced their own criminal charges and jail time, along with hocus-pocus SBI lab work, to win a conviction against Taylor which carried a life sentence.

It was only after Taylor served seventeen years in prison that his case was brought before the Innocence Inquiry Commission by Attorney Christine Mumma and the NC Center on Actual Innocence, and he was unanimously declared innocent by a three judge panel. This ruling was enough to free Greg Taylor from confinement behind bars, but he required a pardon from the governor in order to receive the maximum compensation of $750,000 from the state for which he was entitled.

Governor Bev Perdue took her time, causing undo stress and anxiety for Taylor and his family, before finally issuing the pardon in May 2010.

Erick Daniels, an African American who spent more than seven years wrongfully incarcerated for an armed robbery he has adamantly and repeatedly said he did not commit, is equally deserving of a pardon so that he can receive compensation from the state as mandated by the General Assembly. In February 2011, the Office of Executive Clemency denied Erick Daniels’ request for a pardon. When I confronted the Governor’s Office about the denial, Mark A. Davis, the general counsel for the governor told me in a letter dated July 26, 2011, that they had conducted their own investigation. According to their findings, they did not definitively establish Mr. Daniels’ actual innocence, and due to “confidentiality concerns,” they could not share details of their investigation.

Mr. Davis lied in that letter, as the Governor’s Office conducted no investigation, and that is why he cannot share any details of it… and not because of “confidentiality concerns.” Furthermore, there was no forensic or scientific evidence to connect Daniels to the crime, he did not even fit the description of the armed masked perpetrator. The robbery victim fingered Erick Daniels based solely on the shape of his eyebrows in a middle school yearbook.

In addition, another man, Samuel Allen Strong, admitted to committing the crime for which Daniels served seven years. Strong not only fit the initial description of the robbery suspect, but had a past criminal record that included armed robbery, and at the time of his confession was in jail on a separate armed robbery incident.

Despite all of the above, and a declaration of innocence from Judge Orlando Hudson, Governor Bev Perdue expects the public to believe that Erick Daniels very likely was involved in the September 2000 crime.

A May 21, 2000 article in The News & Observer titled “Innocent Charlotte man spent 12 years in prison” tells of the wrongful conviction of Shawn Giovanni Massey on charges of a 1999 kidnapping and armed robbery. He served twelve years of a fourteen year sentence, convicted solely on eyewitness testimony. The only problem is that the victim went to the prosecutor with concerns that she had mistakenly identified Massey, because the perpetrator had cornrow braids and Massey did not.

A striking similarity between the cases of Massey and Daniels is that neither man fit the description of the armed robbery perpetrator, who in both instances was described as having cornrow braids. Erick Daniels and Shawn Massey each had closely cropped hair.

Mecklenburg County District Attorney Peter Gilchrist, in rare prosecutorial candor, admitted that his office botched the case by failing to disclose to the defense that the victim expressed doubt about her identification of the defendant… and eyewitness identification was all that the prosecution had with which to charge and convict Shawn Massey on the serious crimes of kidnapping and armed robbery. In other words, there was no forensic evidence tying Shawn Massey to the crime.

Gilchrist did not identify the prosecutor, and The Charlotte Observer writer Gary L. Wright, who was undoubtedly operating under the well-established media PAPEN (Protect All Prosecutors Except Nifong) policy, didn’t apparently make the effort to identify the prosecutor responsible for bringing an eyewitness case to trial and obtaining a conviction without disclosing exculpatory evidence to the defense about the victim’s own doubts about the accuracy of her identification. District Attorney Gilchrist also stated that he thought the prosecutor did not intend to withhold the information from the defense attorney, and that it was nothing more than a case of bad judgment.

It is interesting to note that The News & Observer glosses over such egregious missteps and malfeasances by prosecutors such as this that occur routinely throughout the state; yet use the least provocation to go after Tracey Cline, the African American Durham District Attorney, who worked under the former D.A., Mike Nifong, and has treated him with civility and respect. This has made her a target of Carpetbagger Jihadists… but that is another story.

On his release in May 2010, law professor James Coleman, a co-director of Duke’s Wrongful Convictions Clinic and Innocence Project, drove Massey from the state prison in Greenville to Charlotte where he was reunited with his family.

Although Professor Coleman and I are diametrically opposed in our positions regarding the Duke Lacrosse case and Mike Nifong, I consider him a good friend, and I credit him with preventing Duke University from arresting me on a trumped up charge for being a supporter of Mike Nifong… again, that is another story.

Since being freed, Massey has been unable to land a job, and earlier this year, the governor denied him a pardon. Upon learning that his pardon had been denied, Shawn spiraled downward into a deep depression.

Paul Stam, an Apex Republican, is unsympathetic to the plight of those whose lives have been destroyed by the state through wrongful incarceration, stating, “This is not a welfare issue. The last thing we need to do is to set up a new program just for people who’ve been exonerated.” I strongly disagree as money alone will not help the wrongfully imprisoned adjust once released and not help them emotionally heal from scars inflicted by the state.

The state has a duty to make things right for these innocents. Many experience painful flashbacks and some struggle with relationships. Most all have had difficulty finding employment. As a wrongly incarcerated man for 18 years, Darryl Hunt summed it up when he said about the state, “They put you out with no help as to how to adjust.”

A September 4, 2011, article in The News & Observer by Mandy Locke titled, “Freedom is sweet, but new problems set in,” described the extraordinary challenges which face those exonerated and released after many years of incarceration… a sampling of which follows.

Darryl Hunt at 46 is battling health issues including a stroke after he spent 18 years on death row. He referred to a misconception when he stated, “Everyone assumes we are okay because we are free. There is so much more to it.”

Dwayne Dail, now 43, spent nearly two decades in jail and finds life after prison overwhelming. He suffers from panic attacks and flashbacks to abuses he sustained while incarcerated.

Leo Waters is 62 but feels decades older. He served 21 years in prison for robbery and rape. A disabling back injury sustained in prison forced him out of a job after being released because he frequently called in sick. Since his experience he now keeps to himself and feels uncomfortable around people.

Shawn Massey, now 38, said about his life and situation, “I’m just trying to keep my head above water.”

Even the compensation of $50,000 per year of a wrongful incarceration with a $750,000 maximum is inadequate. Duke University, in a shakedown, shelled out $20 million to each of the Duke Lacrosse defendants even though they never spent a day in jail. Surely the state can do better than it has.

To an objective, rational, and reasonable individual it is evident that Gregory Taylor, Erick Daniels, and Shawn Massey were all unjustly convicted and wrongly served lengthy prison sentences. Of the three, only Taylor has received a pardon and the compensation that he is entitled to as mandated by the General Assembly… which is a pittance when one considers that they were deprived of a human’s most valuable possession… freedom.

The reason for the denial of a pardon for Erick Daniels and Shawn Massey is obvious. It is because of the color of their skin… the fact that they are African Americans. Race is the determining factor in the governor’s decision regarding pardons of innocence. The onus is on the governor to prove otherwise, but to date Governor Perdue who publicly advocates for transparency in government is shielding a racist policy behind a claim of “confidentiality concerns.”

The reason Governor Bev Perdue feels at ease denying pardons to deserving African Americans who have been wrongly incarcerated is because the NAACP, black politicians, black community leaders, black religious leaders, black businesses, black organizations, and black media have remained silent about the blatant and egregious mistreatment of these people of color who are being victimized again by a Democratic governor blocking their access to the compensation to which they are entitled. The African Americans throughout the Tar Heel state are enabling the governor to proceed with carrying out her policies based on race by remaining silent.

State NAACP President William Barber, to my knowledge, has not commented on the denial of a pardon for Durham resident Erick Daniels. Neither has Durham politicians Senator Floyd McKissick, Representatives Larry Hall and Mickey Michaux, or Democratic Congressman David Price.

Prospects do not look good for another request for a Pardon of Innocence that is pending before Governor Perdue, as the petitioner is an African American named Glen Edward Chapman.

An article in the April 3, 2008 News & Observer titled “Another innocent inmate leaves state’s death row” is about Glen Chapman who spent fourteen years on death row for two slayings he did not commit. Again, information that a key witness identified someone other than Chapman was withheld from his attorneys. Furthermore, a forensic report showed that one victim most likely died from a drug overdose rather than due to foul play.

According to the article, defense attorneys stated that the only physical evidence tying Chapman to the one homicide victim was the result of consensual sex with the victim. In addition, it was never reported to defense lawyers that eyewitnesses had last seen the murder victim alive with someone with a history of violence against her in the days after prosecutors claimed she had died.

On August 15, 2011, I hand-delivered a letter to the Capitol Building for Governor Perdue requesting that she give Glen Chapman the pardon he deserves, so that he can receive compensation for the state’s injustices against him.

Later, I received a letter dated August 23, 2011, from Pat Hansen, the Governor’s Clemency Administrator who stated that my comments regarding a possible Chapman pardon would be taken into consideration. The Office of Executive Clemency’s response was appreciated; however, what I found to be extremely disturbing is that the office is apparently under the auspices of the North Carolina Department of Corrections. This seems to represent a grave conflict of interest and one that does not bode well for the interests of justice.

Odds for Glen Edward Chapman receiving a pardon of innocence from Governor Perdue are a long shot when one considers past history and the fact that Mr. Chapman is a man of color.

Equal justice for all demands that Erick Daniels, Shawn Massey, and Glen Chapman receive a pardon from Governor Perdue. That will enable them to receive compensation from the state for their wrongful incarcerations in accordance with law set forth by the state’s legislature. Tar Heelians of good conscience rooted in the principle of “equal justice for all” will accept nothing less. 

154 comments:

Anonymous said...

Sid -- Again, you make the accusation that the Governor's office did not conduct an investigation into the Erik Daniel's case.

What proof do you have to support this?

Anonymous said...

Sid - Do you understand the concept of "burden of proof"?

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
"Sid -- Again, you make the accusation that the Governor's office did not conduct an investigation into the Erik Daniel's case.

What proof do you have to support this?"


I have no proof, but I think that it is highly unlikely that the governor's office would conduct an investigation. If they did, why not discuss the findings? Do you think their "investigation" included an interview with Daniels or Samuel Allen Strong? I doubt it.

Anonymous said...

James Coleman,like Roy Cooper,was a hero in the Duke rape hoax where a disgusting black woman falsely accused innocent white men of raping her in a bathroom that was too small.He knew the case was a fraud from the very beginning and wrote the report showing the exemplarly behavior of the entire team at the time a dishonest DA had referred to them as hooligans and the mainstream anti-white media went along with it.He might be called an Uncle Tom by black racists but he's a great man in my book.

Anonymous said...

Always remember - no white man would ever want to have sex with Crystal Mangum.

Anonymous said...

I find it utterly consistent and sadly amusing that Sid support Cline, who happens to be black, in her contemptible performance as the Durham, uh, DA............while he trashes Purdue, who happens to be white....and who HE says engages in similar behavior to Cline. (no investigations, sloppy work, etc.)
Odd, isn't it.
Sid supports Cline and looks the other way when she gets completely exposed for the poorly educated, unethical performer she is....because she was Nifong's leutinant. Funny how Cline runs FROM or runs AWAY FROM Nifong, depending on which way the wind is blowing.

Anonymous said...

Sid:
"Mr. Davis lied in that letter, as the Governor’s Office conducted no investigation..."

Sid again:
"I have no proof, but I think that it is highly unlikely that the governor's office would conduct an investigation..."[italics mine]

Your last "flog" complained about the N&O's treatment of Tracey Cline -- at least the N&O had proof.

Your a hypocrite, Sid.

Walt said...

"It is interesting to note that The News & Observer glosses over such egregious missteps and malfeasances by prosecutors such as this that occur routinely throughout the state; yet use the least provocation to go after Tracey Cline...."

No real surprise Sid. The N&O regularly goes after the easy story. Tracy has been lying, cheating and stealing to get her convictions for years. Now, she's been caught. Better late than never.

Walt-in-Durham

Walt said...

"Sid supports Cline and looks the other way when she gets completely exposed for the poorly educated, unethical performer she is...."

She really isn't as bright as she comes off in the story.

Walt-in-Durham

Anonymous said...

"She really isn't as bright as she comes off in the story."

I didn't think that was possible.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
"James Coleman,like Roy Cooper,was a hero in the Duke rape hoax where a disgusting black woman falsely accused innocent white men of raping her in a bathroom that was too small.He knew the case was a fraud from the very beginning and wrote the report showing the exemplarly behavior of the entire team at the time a dishonest DA had referred to them as hooligans and the mainstream anti-white media went along with it.He might be called an Uncle Tom by black racists but he's a great man in my book."


I am unaware of anyone calling James Coleman an "Uncle Tom." Even though we disagree on Duke Lacrosse and Mike Nifong I still consider him a good friend. And, he kept me from being arrested and jailed on a bogus charge!

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
"I find it utterly consistent and sadly amusing that Sid support Cline, who happens to be black, in her contemptible performance as the Durham, uh, DA............while he trashes Purdue, who happens to be white....and who HE says engages in similar behavior to Cline. (no investigations, sloppy work, etc.)
Odd, isn't it.
Sid supports Cline and looks the other way when she gets completely exposed for the poorly educated, unethical performer she is....because she was Nifong's leutinant. Funny how Cline runs FROM or runs AWAY FROM Nifong, depending on which way the wind is blowing."


As I have said, I'm very unhappy with D.A. Cline allowing the prosecution of Crystal Mangum to continue in the current case, as well as the one in 2010. That said, I believe that the recent three part hack job by The News & Observer was selectively done and amounted to nothing more than a very small hill of beans.

Nifong Supporter said...


Walt said...
"'It is interesting to note that The News & Observer glosses over such egregious missteps and malfeasances by prosecutors such as this that occur routinely throughout the state; yet use the least provocation to go after Tracey Cline....'

No real surprise Sid. The N&O regularly goes after the easy story. Tracy has been lying, cheating and stealing to get her convictions for years. Now, she's been caught. Better late than never.

Walt-in-Durham"


Walt,

It is my understanding that Tracey Cline challenged the N&O writer, Andrew Curliss, to a public debate about her record... but that he chickened out.

The story was nit-picky, and not worth a paragraph, much less a three part series.

Nifong Supporter said...


NOTE: I will offer two hundred American dollars ($200.00) to anyone who can explain, to my satisfaction, why Erick Daniels or Shawn Massey or Glen Chapman should be denied a pardon of innocence. (You must be 18 years of age or older and a resident of planet Earth to qualify.)

Anonymous said...

"It is my understanding that Tracey Cline challenged the N&O writer, Andrew Curliss, to a public debate about her record... but that he chickened out. "

The N&O counter-offered with an alternate forum (such as a radio program with a moderator) to debate the points made in the articles. To date, Tracey Cline has declined. Would you consider that "chickening out" as well?

She simply wants to score points with her constituency to keep her job, rather than actually perform her job in an ethical manner.

But you wouldn't know that, Sid, because you live in Raleigh

Anonymous said...

"I will offer two hundred American dollars ($200.00) to anyone who can explain, to my satisfaction...."

That's just it, Sid -- your mind is already made up about this -- no explanation will suffice.

Anonymous said...

Sid -- Here's a little civics lesson for you...
(from http://perspectiveindustry.com/ar
chives/81 ):

...If individuals are freed by North Carolina’s Center on Actual Innocence and it’s three-judge panel, as Taylor was, they are immediately eligible for a pardon and may receive financial compensation without an investigation. If, however, an individual is exonerated via a law school program and a single judge, even with the cooperation of a district attorney, they are subjected to the process of the counsel’s investigation. There is also no time limit in regards to when these pardons must be granted; whether to grant them and when is fully at the discretion of the governor.

Exonerees are eligible to receive $50,000 for every year they were wrongfully incarcerated, with a cap of $750,000. Since North Carolina’s constitution requires the legislature to pass a balanced budget, if the governor were to grant pardons in a timely fashion, it could conceivably put an even larger dent in the state’s monetary obligations.

Anonymous said...

Do us all a favor and send the $200 to the famiy of Reginald Daye, Sidney. Since you lied about Mr. Daye and defamed a dead man, it is the least you can do. Show some character......

Anonymous said...

If Crystal Mangum had been punished for making a false rape accusation against innocent white men who would never want to have sex with her Reginald Daye might still be alive.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
"'I will offer two hundred American dollars ($200.00) to anyone who can explain, to my satisfaction....'

That's just it, Sid -- your mind is already made up about this -- no explanation will suffice."


That's just not true. The reason that the award is not too high is in the event someone is able to actually give an explanation that would make me agree that Daniels should not receive a pardon.

You cannot think of a reason, so you take the easy way out and attack by saying that my mind is made up. To accurately put it, I do have an opinion, but it can be changed... That said, knowing what I do about the Daniels case, I doubt that it is possible to change my opinion... but it is possible.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
"Sid -- Here's a little civics lesson for you...
(from http://perspectiveindustry.com/ar
chives/81 ):

...If individuals are freed by North Carolina’s Center on Actual Innocence and it’s three-judge panel, as Taylor was, they are immediately eligible for a pardon and may receive financial compensation without an investigation. If, however, an individual is exonerated via a law school program and a single judge, even with the cooperation of a district attorney, they are subjected to the process of the counsel’s investigation. There is also no time limit in regards to when these pardons must be granted; whether to grant them and when is fully at the discretion of the governor.

Exonerees are eligible to receive $50,000 for every year they were wrongfully incarcerated, with a cap of $750,000. Since North Carolina’s constitution requires the legislature to pass a balanced budget, if the governor were to grant pardons in a timely fashion, it could conceivably put an even larger dent in the state’s monetary obligations."


Thank you for the civics lesson. I appreciate it when commenters take the time to educate me as well as other viewers.

However, your comment supports my contention that the governor has the discretion as to when and whether or not to grant pardons and does so using race as a factor.

Now am I to believe that the counsel conducted an investigation just because the governor's general counsel said so? Why should I, especially if they can't reveal anything about it because of "confidentiality concerns"? And, am I to believe, if an investigation was conducted by the counsel, that it included an interview with Erick Daniels and/or Samuel Allen Strong?

All I am asking from the governor is an explanation as to why a pardon was denied to Erick Daniels and Shawn Massey.

If Duke University, a private institution, can shell out a total of $60 million to three Duke Lacrosse defendants who never spent one day in jail, surely the state of North Carolina should be able to come up with $1.5 million to give to two individuals who spent a total of nearly two decades wrongly imprisoned. It's not their fault that they were unjustly charged, convicted, and sentenced. The fault lies with the state.

The economic problems the state is having should not prevent those who are unjustly incarcerated from receiving the measly amount the General Assembly has mandated that they should receive.

Thereby go ye enlightened.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
"Do us all a favor and send the $200 to the famiy of Reginald Daye, Sidney. Since you lied about Mr. Daye and defamed a dead man, it is the least you can do. Show some character......"


What lie did I say about Mr. Daye, and how did I defame him? Surely not by insinuating that he was an alcoholic. Face it, alcoholism is a disease, and I do not believe it should be stigmatized. Anyway, the fact that he was functioning at a blood alcohol level in which an average person would be in a stupor and hardly arouseable, along with a history of alcoholism from my sources, I believe it is safe to say that Daye was an alcoholic.

By the way, I have a lot of empathy and sympathy for his family. But Crystal Mangum is not responsible for Daye's death.

Anonymous said...

According to the Office of Executive Clemency, Glenn Edward Chapman's pardon is being reviewed (http://www.doc.state.nc.us/clemenc
y/pardons.htm )

Thus it has not been denied.

Go ye therefore enlightened.

Give my $200.00 to the Daye family.

Anonymous said...

"What lie did I say about Mr. Daye..."

Well -- Let's start with this one:

"...by Friday, April 8, 2011, he was awake, strolling around, talking, and making plans for his release."

We KNOW that Mr Daye was in a coma on April 6th, and was in a coma for a week (as Sid admitted). Thus the original quote from Sid is a lie.

Anonymous said...

yes, you lied when you said Mr. Daye was an alcoholic. Not one shred of EVIDENCE supports this.....except, of course, your infamous "sources". Being drunk on an occasion is NOT evidence of alcoholism and Mr. Daye's liver was healthy. Go on, Sid, tell us another lie. You are a sad irrelevant little man with a sad little view of the world.

Anonymous said...

so, when you described the lacrosse players as drunken, you were also saying they were alcoholics.....because, obviously, being drunk means being an alcoholic, at least in the world according to Sid and his sources. And, of course, you did NOT mean to defame the lacrosse players by saying, therefore, that they were all alcoholics, too, since you said they were drunken. Funnier and funnier, Sid

Anonymous said...

"But Crystal Mangum is not responsible for Daye's death."

Why are you afraid to have a court decide that? If there is no evidence she will be exonerated. A declaration by you that she did not do it has no legal weight.

Anonymous said...

Let's lsee....not only do we have dr. sid, the great forensic pathologist....we also have Sidney, the palm reader, Sid, the Judge (and jury), Sid, the reincarnation of Jesus, Sid, the, uh, journalist (per KenHissyfit), Sid, the StarTrekker who can apparently teleport himself into places and minds, and KNOW what happened and what was said....even though he was not there, except through his magic super powers!!! Wow, Sid, when I grow up, I wanna be just like yooooooooo!
BulllllSxxxxxxxxxx, Sid...

Lance the Intern said...

Of the people identified in your "flog", 4 have been pardoned and received compensation (Taylor, Dail, Waters, Hunt). From what I can gather, all of these cases were coordinated through North Carolina's Center on Actual Innocence.

The 2 that were denied a pardon (Massey and Daniels) were not handled in this manner. Further, I'm told that most requests are submitted at least five years after a former inmate has achieved good standing in his or her community. That is not the case for either of these gentlemen.

1 person (Chapman) is on the waiting list for a pardon, and has not been denied compensation.

2 things stand out to me --

1) I think that any case successfully overturned through the work of the Center on Actual Innocence is pretty much guaranteed a pardon from the Governor, although this will be done "in the fullness of time"

2) I think both Massey and Daniels may have been to quick in submitting their requests for the pardon.

I don't see race as an issue here.

I get the impression that you think that compensation here is relatively small (1.5 million) in the greater scheme of things.

I'll remind you that there are around 60 people currently on the "applications for pardon" waiting list, and North Carolina currently has a budget deficit of around $2.4 billion dollars.

Anonymous said...

Anybody ever wonder what exactly Sid is saying with his repeated use of the term "carpetbagger jihad"?
Let's look at the definitions of the words. "In sum, carpetbaggers were seen as insidious Northern outsiders with questionable objectives meddling in local politics, buying up plantations at fire-sale prices and taking advantage of Southerners" (Wikipedia). Jihad, same source,
"an Islamic term a religious duty of Muslims, meaning struggle, the war against unbelievers, a moral and spiritual struggle against unbelievers, in western society, a holy war".
So, does Sid mean the Yankees are a'comin to Durham to launch a holy war against the ignert southrons"? Is his term a slur against people from the north and against Muslims? Does he think some Yankee transplanted from northern Iraq is trying to buy up all the convenience stores in Durham?
Ah, yes, Dave Evans' Mother is really a secret Yankee Methodist convert to Islam.
sooooooo, every time Sid uses his term "carpetbagger jihad" we know he really means "Heah come dem damn yankee Muslims, a'tryin' to sneak in heah and build one a' dem mooosekeys whera dey is a'plannin'to holla a hog call six time eva' daye"!!!! Look out, folks, it's the geeeeee-we-been-HAAAD!!!

Anonymous said...

Sidney claims Mrs. Evans launched the Jihad when she made her statement on 60 Minutes regarding Mr. Nifong's wrongful prosecution of her son(by the criteria Sidney lists in this edition of his blog, Mr. Nifong's prosecution of David Evans was a wrongful prosecution).

Mrs. Evans made that statement in the latter half of January of 2007. By that time, for one example, the State Bar had already largely completed its case against Mr. Nifong. All the other objections to Mr. Nifong's conduct had already taken place.

Sidney has never explained this inconsistency on his part.

Anonymous said...

I saw that show and heard the statement. I also saw where one of the distinguished 88 from Duke wrote her an email and told her she had "given birth to a farm animal". Wonder why good old Siddo doesn't condemn that kind of shameful language? guess what, the jerk who wrote that comment just happens to be a black man! Yep, good old Sid focuses on Mrs. Evans......and ignores the scum who wrote that remark.

Anonymous said...

By the way, the man who told Dave Evans' mother she had "given birth to a farm animal" is none other than Houston Baker.....who still refuses to apologize, still states publicly that Sister was a victim of assault, still comments about her "bravery". He's a faculty member at Vanderbilt now, happily spewing his particular brand of racist jibberish.

Anonymous said...

Houston Baker has done more and said more to act like a farm animal than has any Duke Lacrosse Player.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
"According to the Office of Executive Clemency, Glenn Edward Chapman's pardon is being reviewed (http://www.doc.state.nc.us/clemenc
y/pardons.htm )

Thus it has not been denied.

Go ye therefore enlightened.

Give my $200.00 to the Daye family."


I am aware that Glen Chapman's petition for a pardon is pending. If it is denied, and I am betting that the selective justice system based on Class and Color that dictates many decisions, then if you can explain why it is denied to my satisfaction, then I will send a money order to Daye's family on your behalf.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
"What lie did I say about Mr. Daye..."

Well -- Let's start with this one:

"...by Friday, April 8, 2011, he was awake, strolling around, talking, and making plans for his release."

We KNOW that Mr Daye was in a coma on April 6th, and was in a coma for a week (as Sid admitted). Thus the original quote from Sid is a lie.




The date that I gave may have been inaccurate, but that does not make the statement qualify as a lie, as I stated what I was told and what I believed to be the truth. Because of all of the secrecy, intrigue, and stealth associated with this case, I would not take for granite anything stated by the media or in the autopsy report.

At least I try to give an accurate statement and inform the people about what is going on instead of hiding the truth like the media does.

Anonymous said...

I see now -- When YOU do it, it's an "inaccurate" statement. It's only a lie when others do it.

How convenient for you, Sid.

Anonymous said...

Whatever happened to your Reginald Daye died of "massive air embolism" theory, Sid?

Anonymous said...

"...then if you can explain why it is denied to my satisfaction, then I will send a money order to Daye's family on your behalf"

If Chapman's pardon is not denied, will you send the money to Daye's family as well?

kenhyderal said...

@ Anonymous 7:54 AM 9/14 Keep in mind Normal liver function tests do not rule out an alcohol use disorder

Anonymous said...

kenhyderal:

What ruled in that Mr. Daye was an alcoholic? Sidney's anonymous sources?

No responsible physician would diagnose a patient had a disorder unless he could rule it in.

In these times no insurance provider would pay for treating a patient for a disease just because that disease could not be ruled out.

Your question is as meaningful as Sidney's contention that a DA is justified in prosecuting someone for a crime because the crime might have happened even though there was no evidence.

Harr Supporter said...

The Pardon Office conducts investigations using the analytical techniques pioneered by noted blogger, Sidney Harr, in his analysis of the Duke Lacrosse case and other cases. Harr’s method involves adopting a conclusion (e.g., either that the defendant is guilty or the defendant is innocent). The investigator ignores evidence that is inconsistent with the conclusion and evaluates other evidence in the way most supportive of the conclusion. As long as the investigator cannot prove with absolute certainty that the conclusion is incorrect, the conclusion is valid.

The Pardon Office starts with the conclusion that the defendant is guilty and requires that evidence prove with absolute certainty that the defendant could not possibly have committed a crime. This standard of actual innocence is far higher than a failure to find the defendant guilty “beyond a reasonable doubt” required in the judicial system. Because the Governor does not want to be criticized as having approved payments to possible criminals, she requires that wrongfully convicted defendants meet this high standard to qualify for compensation.

The Governor denied Pardons of Innocence because none of the defendants met the standard for actual innocence set by Harr in the Lacrosse case. Although evidence they were innocent was substantial, and the judicial system properly set aside the earlier guilty verdicts to restore the defendants’ legal innocence, none of the defendants was able to prove with absolute certainty that they could not possibly have committed a crime.

Please donate $200 for the support of Crystal’s children.

kenhyderal said...

@ Anonymous 3:01 AM 17/9 It was not a question. I only suggested that it is possible to be an alcoholic and to present a normal liver on autopsy. Incidentally, I am not, unlike Dr. Harr, making a diagnosis based on hearsay. It appears, though, at the time of his injury he was intoxicated.

Anonymous said...

kenhyderal:

I again ask, what evidence was there that Mr. Daye was an alcoholic?

That Sidney learned from his anonymous sources that Mr. Daye was drunk at the time of his injury is not evidence.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Whatever happened to your Reginald Daye died of "massive air embolism" theory, Sid?




It was that... a theory, and I have not ruled it out as a cause of his brain death. What I know is that Daye did not die of a stab wound to the torso.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
"...then if you can explain why it is denied to my satisfaction, then I will send a money order to Daye's family on your behalf"

If Chapman's pardon is not denied, will you send the money to Daye's family as well?


Why should I? It is my hope that Chapman is granted a pardon, but past history shows he has little chance of getting one. There is no doubt that he, along with Daniels and Massey deserve to be pardoned.

Nifong Supporter said...


Harr Supporter said...
The Pardon Office conducts investigations using the analytical techniques pioneered by noted blogger, Sidney Harr, in his analysis of the Duke Lacrosse case and other cases. Harr’s method involves adopting a conclusion (e.g., either that the defendant is guilty or the defendant is innocent). The investigator ignores evidence that is inconsistent with the conclusion and evaluates other evidence in the way most supportive of the conclusion. As long as the investigator cannot prove with absolute certainty that the conclusion is incorrect, the conclusion is valid.

The Pardon Office starts with the conclusion that the defendant is guilty and requires that evidence prove with absolute certainty that the defendant could not possibly have committed a crime. This standard of actual innocence is far higher than a failure to find the defendant guilty “beyond a reasonable doubt” required in the judicial system. Because the Governor does not want to be criticized as having approved payments to possible criminals, she requires that wrongfully convicted defendants meet this high standard to qualify for compensation.

The Governor denied Pardons of Innocence because none of the defendants met the standard for actual innocence set by Harr in the Lacrosse case. Although evidence they were innocent was substantial, and the judicial system properly set aside the earlier guilty verdicts to restore the defendants’ legal innocence, none of the defendants was able to prove with absolute certainty that they could not possibly have committed a crime.

Please donate $200 for the support of Crystal’s children.


The governor is worried about being criticized for compensation being given to possible criminals? Daniels, Massey, and Chapman are not possible criminals... they are very much victims of the criminal actions of the state in charging and prosecuting innocent individuals without any credible evidence!!!

Thereby go ye enlightened.

kenhyderal said...

@ Anonymous 10:30 AM 17/9 There is no evidence that he was an alcoholic but there is evidence, in the Investigative Report, that he was intoxicated. (Blood Alcohol Level- 296mg/dl) Was there ever any indication in the arrest notes that Crystal her self appeared to be intoxicated?

Harr Supporter said...

they are very much victims of the criminal actions of the state in charging and prosecuting innocent individuals without any credible evidence

I agree. However, you cannot make that claim.

You have supported a prosecution without credible evidence. As you have noted, the lack of credible evidence does not prove that an individual could not possibly have committed a crime. You can't have it both ways.

The Governor uses the Harr standard. She requires that Massey, Daniels and Chapman prove that they could not possibly have committed a crime. As you have noted, the absence of evidence is not sufficient to prove actual innocence.

Stop whining.

The Governor is using the same requirements you impose in the Duke Lacrosse case. I believe the standard that you and the Governor use is unfair because it is virtually impossible to satisfy. However, you cannot complain about unfairness, because the standard is one you have supported.

Perhaps you should explain why different rules should apply to different cases.

Anonymous said...

kenhyderal

What does that translate to in terms of a blood alcohol level, i.e. a BAC of .01 means 0.1% of a person's blood is alcoho?

The question again is what evidence is there that Mr. Daye was an alcoholic.

Whether or not Crystal was intoxicated is irrelevant.

There was evidence in the arrest report that she did stab Mr. Daye.

Anonymous said...

kenhyderal

296 mg of alcohol in 100 ml of blood(which is roughly 100,000 mg) calculates out to a BAC of .002 to .003. The legal limit for intoxication in most jurisdictions is a BAC of .08.

Anonymous said...

Check that. I was wrong. It does not calculate out to .002. 100 ml is about 100 mg.

296mg per deciliter would indicate a blood alcohol of .3, at which level Mr. Daye would have been unconscious. According to police reports he was talking, telling them he had been stabbed by his girlfriend.

Yes, a chronic alcoholic can have a higher tolerance for alcohol. A chronic alcoholic would also have liver damage.

Also, even with a higher tolerance for alcohol, such high levels of alcohol will have effects on a user.

I apologize for my atrocious math and rush to judgment. However, it seems like the Blood alcohol of 296 mg per deciliter might have been an invalid measurement.

kenhyderal said...

A blood alcohol level of about 300-400 mg per 100 ml will usually cause loss of consciousness. However, highly tolerant individuals may show only moderate drunkeness at 400 mg per 100 ml, the normal LD50 (Lethal dose for 50%)

Anonymous said...

I think we are missing the point. Sid, as usual, made a highly judgmental statement about Daye....that he was an alcoholic, without one shred of EVIDENCE. Daye may have been intoxicated that day. He may have been drunker than a skunk. Sid claims, as usual, that his sources, gag me, told him Daye was an alcoholic. His sources also told Sid that Daye was up, cavorting in the halls at DUH, ready to go home....when, in FACT, he was in a life-ending coma. Now, of course, Sid claims that he KNOWS the cause of Mr. Daye's death is not the stab wouND that was apparently inflicted by Mangum. SOS, Sid...SOS. Sid dresses up his opinions as fact, backed by his sources (who are, apparently, everywhere, all the time, with total shape-changing ability)......then, when the FACTS appear, he tap dances (click, click, shuffle, ball change) and blames all sorts of other factors....the weather, acts of God, global warming, whatever.
I enjoy read his nonsense because I enjoy a joke.....
Tell you what, MY sources tell me that:
Mangum was and is a common street whore.
Mangum lied trying to make a buck off some guys she thought would buy her off
Mangum is an unfit mother
Mangum stabbed Daye
Mangum abuses drugs, lies, sells it for money, and has the morals of a house cat.
Nifong knew the Duke guys didn't do a damn thing to Mangum
Nifong want to make a name for himself and keep his job.
THAT'S WHAT MY SOURCES TELL ME, SID.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said: "Houston Baker has done more and said more to act like a farm animal than has any Duke Lacrosse Player."

I absolutely agree. The Duke Lacrosse players did not act like farm animals. Farm animals don't look on the internet and hire local strippers. Farm animals don't drink alcohol for 10 hours straight. Farm animals don't steal their money back from a stripper. Farm animals don't lock the girl out of the house and refuse to give her her purse, money, phone and shoe back. Farm animals don't call both girls niggers. Sluts, whores. Farm animals don't make fun of a mother's stretch marks. Farm animals don't do any of these things. Hooligans do.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said... "Always remember - no white man would ever want to have sex with Crystal Mangum."

An overt racist statement, of course. The Duke lacrosse players could have sent Magnum home after seeing her, but they approved to pay her to dance for the sole purpose of turning them on sexually.

Ironic, this idea, that specifically white men would not be attracted to Mangum. The underlying insinuation is as if white men in general are not attracted to black women. Ironic, I say, when It is a well-documented fact that in the great state of North Carolina, white men have made it a tradition to be sexually attracted to and have sex with black women for over two hundred years. Sometimes in preference to their wives.

Anonymous said...

With the exception of hiring strippers off the internet, Not ONE single statement by the poster at 8:27 has EVER been substantiated by a single FACT. Not one. More jibberish in defense of a woman who had at least five different male samples in/on her when the rape kit was done and.....not ONE single lacrosse player's sample matched ANY of the five.
Unless you were THERE at the party that night, you have ZERO way to know what was and was not said, by the lacrosse guys and the two women who went, voluntarily, for money to "perform". By the way, hiring strippers is not illegal, as far as I know. It may be stupid and sexist, for sure. But it isn't illegal. Houston Baker is a disgrace......as a person of color, I find his remarks, then and now, shameful.
The point is that using the "my sources" refrain, which Sidney does more frequently than Sister whines "I'm a victim", is just Sidney's soup du jour for making any kind of outrageous, totally unfounded slur he wants to make. sooooooooo, if Sidney can have "sources", why can't the rest of us simply manufacture our OWn sources and make up our own nonsense?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
"James Coleman,like Roy Cooper,was a hero in the Duke rape hoax where a disgusting black woman falsely accused innocent white men... He knew the case was a fraud from the very beginning and wrote the report showing the exemplarly behavior of the entire team..."

It's not true that James Coleman's report showed "the exemplary behavior of the entire team." The report showed that the team had an unusual amount of trouble both involving police and campus police for underage drinking and disruptive behavior. His report supported the accusation that the lacrosse team were hard-partying. This finding by Coleman directly relates to the disastrous behavior of the lacrosse players that night. And the huge amount of drinking they were not only known for but had been on a marathon drinking binge the night in question which did not lead to clear thinking or good decisions. Saying that Coleman's report presented the lacrosse players as exemplary can only come from someone who read the spin by the media and defense and did not actually read the report.

Anonymous said...

Mr Anonymous 8:58. We're talking about the behavior of the lacrosse team. YOU brought up their behavior. Stick with it. Don't change the subject.

The behavior of the lacrosse team is absolutely corroborated by multiple sources. Most of them by the players themselves. By police reports. By testimony. By the Attorney General.

Did I say their was illegal? Being a hooligan is not illegal. Being a drunk, disrespectful, racist, sexist is not illegal. But what it is not is exemplary behavior.

Anonymous said...

Let me make myself as clear as I can. I'm not defending Crystal Mangum. This has nothing to do with Nifong. Or the state bar. Or the media. Or all the other things people like to talk about.

I'm only talking about the behavior of the Duke lacrosse team that particular night.

The Duke lacrosse team acted like a bunch of assholes.

Are you clear? It's not illegal. I'm not saying they raped her. Don't go flying off in your jittery brain like you're on crack. I'm not defending anyone. I'm just saying, by all accounts, by every angle -

The Duke lacrosse team that night acted like assholes.

Maybe not every single guy. But the team as a whole, acted like assholes.

Anonymous said...

Nope,wrong again. No police report, no witness testimony ESCEPT Mangum, no Cooper report EVER said the lacrosse players had been drinking for ten hours, ever called either woman the N-word, ever stole the stripper's money, etc. NOT ONE word of testimony or evidence...except, of course, Mangum who changed her story more than her drawers.
I figure the guys were drinking and being rowdy and stupid....and, god knows, they PAID for that behavior big time. (which they certainly should have.....).
Hooligans? Count me in....I'd rather be a hooligan than a drug abusing, lying, street tramp who brought three babies into this world without a shred of decency, exposed them to violence SHE created for herself, and is currently sitting in the slammer charged with murder. Yep, I'll take hooligan any time, pal.

Anonymous said...

In fact, I HAVE read the Coleman report, along with the published reports from the three other committees appointed by Brodhead after the lacrosse fraud. The report, with remarks from Coleman and others, is clear in that it DOES note the specific number and nature of offenses (all misdemeanor or dropped) that were committed by members of the team. (five, over a two year period). Noise, urinating in public, drunk and disorderly, and defacing property). The report also notes similar behavior on the part of fraternities, sororities, other athletic teams and the general student population at Duke. At no point does the report indicate that the lacrosse team members had a higher infraction rate than other groups and/or, that the infractions were any more serious in nature. Dumb, drinking, rowdy, rude, obnoxious college boys....yep, no argument there. No angels, no halos. BUT, there is a world of difference between being a loud drunk punk and a rapist. You can call the team whatever derogatory term you wish. The report labeled the Coleman report neither indicted nor cannonized the team members.

Anonymous said...

So you agree with me. We are in full agreement. The Duke lacrosse team acted like hooligans. They did not behave in an exemplary manner as the post I quoted stated. And Coleman's report does not say they acted in an exemplary manner as was posted and constantly advocated

And yes, there are multiple supports of everything I stated. Because you say there are none is not accurate and does not make it accurate You say there is no police report.

David Evans in his police statement said who he thought stole the money from Crystal Mangum. He also said there was racial epithets. All three indicted players have stated that the drinking party started at 2 pm. Playing beer pong in the back yard. The dancers went on around midnight. That's ten hours of drinking. No one on the team or any of their lawyers have denied this scenario. Let me point out that David Evans is not Crystal Mangum as you claim is the only one who has testified about this. The boy who stole the money also gave a report to the police. All three captains originally in their police interview also support this scenario. The Attorney General, specifically Coman, interviewed all team members who all corroborated the scenario.

It's amazing to me still, years later, how many experts there are out here who only listen to the spin.

Anonymous said...

No, I do not agree with you. And what you THINK or what I THINK makes not one whit of difference. As I said, you can call the team hooligans or whatever terms you wish. Your right. And mine to differ. I think the team members were drinking....and I think they were acting stupid. That does not make them axxholes. There were never any statements concerning theft of money except by Mangum. The argument that took place, as I recall, was over the amount of money to be paid.....the two women wanted XXXX, the players refused to pay all of XXX because they said the dancers were staggering drunk and not in any shape to "perform". The whole thing sounded to me like a stupid silly drunk bunch of people.....including the two "dancers". I did not say there was no police report. What I said is that there was no evidence or testimony that your interpretations of what happened were accurate....with the exception of hiring the performers and with the exception of what Mangum, herself, claimed.
The boys at the party said there were words BACK and FORTH....in fact, the second female said there was a single racial slur made against her in retaliation for a nasty remark she made. Hardly the racist rantings you infer.
The Coleman report notes the paradox between how the lacrosse team members behaved academically and on road trips and, in general, how they acted when no alcohol was involved.........and how a number of the underclassmen acted when drinking games go started.( which was, by all accounts, dumb and dumber) The report DOES state that their behavior, when alcohol was not involved was "outstanding". The report also notes that there was NO evidence of violence, assault racist or sexist behavior among the team members.
The AG report noted, specifically, an allegation made by Mangum that her money had been stolen. There was never any evidence that this, in fact, had occured, per the report. There were allegations made, by Nifong and his team, that the supposed theft may have involved the second dancer herself. Again, nothing was EVER substantiated.
I agree with you about one thing.....there ARE lots of folks who only listen to spin.....

Anonymous said...

kenhyderal

Someone who could have tolerated a BAC of 0.296 would have had evidence of chronic liver damage.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous September 19, 2011 11:28 AM

"And yes, there are multiple supports of everything I stated."

No there aren't.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous @ September 19, 2011 9:04 AM

"The behavior of the lacrosse team is absolutely corroborated by multiple sources. Most of them by the players themselves. By police reports. By testimony. By the Attorney General."

No it isn't.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous @ September 19, 2011 8:43 AM

"I say...It is a well-documented fact that in the great state of North Carolina, white men have made it a tradition to be sexually attracted to and have sex with black women for over two hundred years.

No it isn't

Anonymous said...

Anonymous @ September 19, 2011 9:14 AM

"Maybe not every single guy. But the team as a whole, acted like assholes."

Why did that justify falsely charging three innocent men with rape?

Anonymous said...

Sidney said, "What I know is that Daye did not die of a stab wound to the torso."

Sidney, no you don't.

Anonymous said...

"All three indicted players have stated that the drinking party started at 2 pm."

No they didn't. Even if they did why would that indicate a rape had taken place?

There was no forensic evidence of the kind of rape with which they were charged.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
"Let me make myself as clear as I can. I'm not defending Crystal Mangum. This has nothing to do with Nifong. Or the state bar. Or the media. Or all the other things people like to talk about.

I'm only talking about the behavior of the Duke lacrosse team that particular night.

The Duke lacrosse team acted like a bunch of assholes.

Are you clear? It's not illegal. I'm not saying they raped her. Don't go flying off in your jittery brain like you're on crack. I'm not defending anyone. I'm just saying, by all accounts, by every angle -

The Duke lacrosse team that night acted like assholes.

Maybe not every single guy. But the team as a whole, acted like assholes."


A comment that bears repeating.

Anonymous said...

Again. David Evans stated in his POLICE REPORT that a player stole money from Crystal Mangum's purse. He argued with that player that that was a stupid thing to do. And he told the player to put the money back. The player did not put the money back. The police - in their POLICE REPORT - said they FOUND THE MONEY in the apartment. David Evans admitted it was taken from Crystal Mangum. When asked by police what Evans was going to do with the money, he said he was going to use the stolen money from Crystal Mangum for beer money.

That's not what I THINK. It's what HAPPENED according to what the team players said happened.

This is all in black and white in the police reports. This has been admitted by players and their lawyers. NO ONE HAS DENIED these facts on the team or their representatives. Only people who blindly defend the lacrosse team for other agendas claim that it's a matter of allegation.

You just said the team were hooligans and now you deny it. You are inconsistent.

Again. I'm not talking about the fricking accusation of rape. I'm talking about the BEHAVIOR of the team. The post said that the team acted EXEMPLARY. And that the Coleman report said the team acted EXEMPLARY. Those are FALSE statements. Period. It's not a matter of opinion. It's not a matter of what you personally think or theorize. It's a matter of recorded fact.

kenhyderal said...

@ AnonymousSeptember 19, 2011 12:12 PM You're wrong. Mr. Daye had a BAC reading of .296mg/dl and on autopsy his liver was found to be normal. Once again, having a normal liver does not preclude a diagnosis of alcoholism. Cirrhosis of the liver can be a symptom of alcoholism as can a high tolerance for alcohol. Neither, however, are definitive.

Anonymous said...

I would rather be a hooligan than a lying prostitute or a corrupt DA. Anytime. We all know the party was a silly college boy dumb stunt. God help us all! Some college jocks got drunk. Heavens to betsy. Call the media. What a shocker!

Anonymous said...

Sid states "...they are very much victims of the criminal actions of the state in charging and prosecuting innocent individuals without any credible evidence!!!"

It's amazing to me how you can see these "criminal actions of the state" when it's convenient for you, but when Nifong and now Cline do exactly what you're claiming the state is doing, they are the victims.

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal -- a high BAC can also be indicative of binge drinking, which is NOT alcoholism.

The medical history portion of the Medical Examiner's investigative report clearly does not have "alcoholism" checked. Are you or Sid more qualified than the Medical Examiner to make this call?

Anonymous said...

kenhyderal

A normal liver makes it highly unlikely that someone can tolerate a BAC of 0.296. To tolerate a BAC that hight, the person would have been drinking long enough that his liver would have been abnormal.

Anonymous said...

"Maybe not every single guy. But the team as a whole, acted like assholes."

So, Sidney, how did that justify charging three men with rape when there was no evidence said alleged rape ever happened.

To say that alleged rape could have happened without leaving evidence is a meaningless statement.

Anonymous said...

kenhyderal:

"Once again, having a normal liver does not preclude a diagnosis of alcoholism."

What ruled in a diagnosis of alcoholism? That is the question you have failed to answer.

If Mr. Daye was able to tolerate a BAC of 0.296, he would have had to have been drinking heavily for several years. Drinking heavily over several years would have resulted in liver damage.

Anonymous said...

"Sid states '...they are very much victims of the criminal actions of the state in charging and prosecuting innocent individuals without any credible evidence!!!'"

A perfect example of the state "charging and prosecuting innocent individuals without any credible evidence" is the prosecution of David Evans, Reade Seligman and Colin Finnerty.

Anonymous said...

Where is tiny whiny wacko quacko squirmy wormy kilgo?

Anonymous said...

Could it be? Is Motormouth back?

Lance the Intern said...

Sid -- Judge Orlando Hudson is now on record stating that "Tracey [Cline] is still responsible" for Durham prosecutors and the State Bureau of Investigation violating the law by withholding key evidence in the Derrick Allen case.

Would you agree that Derrick Allen is a victim of the criminal actions of the state? If not, why not?

kenhyderal said...

@ Anonymous 2:35 PM 19/9 said ........ "a high BAC can also be indicative of binge drinking, which is NOT alcoholism"
I agree. Might I refer you to my September 17 8:56 AM post.
Unlike Dr. Harr, I am not saying that Mr. Daye was an alcoholic. I am saying, at the time of his stabbing he was intoxicated and there was no presented evidence that Crystal was. There is, although, good evidence that two money orders that were being disputed over were bought and paid for by her.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous at 2;42 Pm said "If Mr. Daye was able to tolerate a BAC of 0.296, he would have had to have been drinking heavily for several years. Drinking heavily over several years would have resulted in liver damage" Not necessarily so. Here's a synopsis of a research paper from Dec. 2010 that suggests that less then 50% of high risk alcoholics have liver damage. A new study by German researchers found that a variation in the PNPLA3 (adiponutrin) gene was associated with cirrhosis of the liver and elevated transaminase (liver enzyme) levels in alcoholic Caucasians. The risk of cirrhosis in alcoholics in the genetic high risk group might be as high as 25% to 50%. Full findings are published in the January 2011 issue of Hepatology, a journal of the American Association for the Study of Liver

Anonymous said...

Thank you, Kenhyderal, for pointing out that there is no conclusive evidence to indicate alcoholism in Mr. Daye.

Perhaps you can convince Sid that his claims of alcoholism have no basis in truth as well.

kenhyderal said...

The whole alcoholism issue is a red-herring. The question is did an intoxicated Daye attack Crystal to get his hands on her two money orders, meant for apartment rent, that she had purchased and made out in his name because of the lease being in his name but which he was intent on using to purchase more alcohol and, in defending herself, did she resort to using a kitchen knife.

Anonymous said...

Or....is the real issue......did mangum attack Mr. Daye over some issue having nothing at all to do with money (since we don't know all the circumstances what went down)....and did Mangum ATTACK Mr. Daye with a knife....and did he try to defend himself.....?? We do not know with certainity what, if anything, they were arguing about and we do not know whether/which party was defending herself/himself.....and we do not know who grabbed the knife first....and so on, and so on. To speculate at this point in a manner that, once again, characterizes poor Mangum and the helpless victim who simply wanted to pay the rent and who was trying to defend herself.....is groundless gossip. For once, how about we wait until the evidence is presented at trial and then, if warranted, we can all wrap our arms around poor innocent Mangum. Or maybe we can show some respect for Mr. Daye and his family and feel some relief that Mangum will be off the streets for awhile.

Anonymous said...

There is, although, good evidence that two money orders that were being disputed over were bought and paid for by her.

We have not seen the evidence. Sid refused to provide it, relying solely on his sources.

Please provide a link.

Anonymous said...

" The question is did an intoxicated Daye attack Crystal"....Mr Daye had defensive wounds documented on his autopsy report. Were there any documented defensive wounds on CGM at the time of her arrest?

On a side note, I know that CGM's lawyer, Chris Shella, has complained to the Superior Court Judge about the Durham PD and Prosecutor's office (primarily about access to the crime scene)...How Sid can continue to support both Crystal AND Tracey Cline is baffling to me.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Sid states "...they are very much victims of the criminal actions of the state in charging and prosecuting innocent individuals without any credible evidence!!!"

It's amazing to me how you can see these "criminal actions of the state" when it's convenient for you, but when Nifong and now Cline do exactly what you're claiming the state is doing, they are the victims.


There is a big difference between Erick Daniels and Shawn Massey, neither of whom fit the descriptions of the perpetrators as neither of them had cornrow braids. In addition there was no forensics to link them.

In the Duke Lacrosse case, the defendants were present at the party, they were identified by the victim, and the Duke party goers had a reputation for raucous partying. There was underaged drinking (probably drug use which the media has chosen to conceal), the use of a racial epithet, and the lacrosse player who arranged for the entertainment did so using false pretenses.

The two cases are no where near comparable.

Thereby, go ye enlightened.

Anonymous said...

Sid, sometimes you amaze me with your hypocrisy.

Did any of the Duke LAX 3 match descriptions given by the accuser? Was there any forensics to link them to the alleged "attack".

The Duke LAX3 were picked out of a lineup -- Was Erick Daniels and Shawn Massey picked out of a lineup?

Evidence exists that show that 2 of the 3 Duke LAX accused weren't even at the residence when the alleged "attack" occurred. Is there evidence that proves Daniels and Massey were elsewhere?

Anonymous said...

Yep, I agree. Sid's double and triple standards, his proven-guilty-till-innocent-if-its-one-of-his-pet-victims approach, his sham sources to bolster clearly racist interpretations, his obfuscation when confronted with his own lies, and his hysterically funny self-inflated ego..........are all fodder for what is arguably one of the most embarrassing "blobs" on the internet.
Not much else funnier in Durham.....well, maybe the sight of Nifong in his bathrobe or Mangum in her cleaned-up conservative business suit costume at her big book unveiling.

Anonymous said...

To the September 19 1:14P poster. I did not agree with you or say the team were hooligans. Read my post again. I said it was "your right" to call them whatever names you prefer. and "my right" to disagree. I did NOT say "you're right", meaning I did not agree with you in calling them hooligans. There is a difference between "your right" and "you're right". Try to understand.
I will repeat.......I don't give two hoots what you or anybody else call the team....hooligans, axxholes or otherwise. What DOES matter to me is that the three men falsely accused by Mangum and unethically pursued by the scumbag of all DAs (Nifong) were NOT GUILTY of any crime that night. Stupid, yes! Drunk, no doubt! Pissed off, likely! Ashamed, I sure as hell hope so......for condoning underage drinking, and for hiring strippers. If that makes them hooligans, engaging in debauchery and a wildly outrageous night of drunken sex-fueled wickedness equivalent to the last night at Woodstock, then gee whiz, call up Brodhead and let him know a good portion of his students, frats, sorority chicks, jocks, FACULTY, and administration nerds....are ALL heading straight to hell.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous Sept 19 9:24 said: "Hooligans? Count me in.... Yep, I'll take hooligan any time, pal."

Now, Anonymous Sept. 20 12;32, maybe you're not the same anonymous. But the poster of Sept. 9:24 seems to agree to count him in on calling the team hooligans. I was responding to that poster.

I did not misunderstand the use of "your right". However it is not anyone's right to give a statement such as the original statement I responded to, and only issue I'm addressing, that the team's behavior was "exemplary" that night.

The team's behavior was not exemplary and it's not anyone's "right" to say that it was exemplary when the evidence shows that their behavior was not exemplary. And it's not anyone's "right" to say that the Coleman report stated that the team's behavior that night was exemplary when the Coleman report did not state that.

That is the only issue I'm addressing.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @5:26 AM said...
Thank you, Kenhyderal, for pointing out that there is no conclusive evidence to indicate alcoholism in Mr. Daye...................Right there is evidence but it is not conclusive.

Deacon said...

Anonymous September 19, 2011 2:21 PM said...
"We all know the party was a silly college boy dumb stunt. God help us all! Some college jocks got drunk. Heavens to betsy. Call the media. What a shocker!"

You're right. Heavens to betsy white college boys telling black strippers they didn't order niggers, why good gracious, they're just silly innocent little boys. I mean every white college boy in America steals black girl's money from her purse, that's part of growing up. And refusing to give her back her shoe and phone and locking her out of the house, why that's just boys being boys. And don't all white boys from ivy league schools call local black girls sluts and whores? That's just good clean fun. What's all the fuss about? And when they said why don't you go home and feed your kids, we see your stretch marks, what are people so upset about? That happens at every college party every night in every college in America. You all are giving me the vapors.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 4:08 said in response to my statement (There is, although, good evidence that two money orders that were being disputed over were bought and paid for by her)

"We have not seen the evidence. Sid refused to provide it, relying solely on his sources"........... It is my understanding that the evidence of this will be presented in court.

Anonymous said...

"...it's not anyone's "right" to say that it was exemplary when the evidence shows that their behavior was not exemplary. And it's not anyone's "right" to say that the Coleman report stated that the team's behavior that night was exemplary when the Coleman report did not state that...."

I would suggest your usage of the word "right" is wrong.

Anonymous said...

And you, of course, poster, being the judge and jury and, of course, ACTUALLY PRESENT at the party....overhead and saw all this behavior you describe. Of course you did. And, of course, you also heard and saw what the women did and what they said....and, of course, you KNOW that these two totally innocent virginal women never ever said a single ugly word or comment to any of the men.
I repeat......the men, all of them, were stupid and dumb to condone underage drinking and to hire strippers. Period. I was NOT at the party so I do NOT know what was said. Oh, I suspect you weren't there, either....but, of course, you DO know! Sure, you do.
Tell you what, let's just say that I think telling an outrageous set of lies that could have sent innocent men (black, white, green, purple, or plaid) to prison for 30 years is one helluva lot worse than ANY of the behavior of the men that night! Do I think these guys were stupid and dumb. You bet I do. Do I think they ALL regret ever having their party and hiring strippers? Yes!
You are foolish and narrow minded to think that anybody condones nasty language that was , no doubt, hurled by BOTH the men and the women that night. But, it's always the same old tired story, isn't it. Poor innocent Crystal....the "victim"....of the evil white bad boys. Give me a break!!! Just like now....she is the "victim" of the evil white machine that is trying to railroad her into prison for stabbing Daye.
Here we go again....

Anonymous said...

Of course I wasn't there. This was all told in the police reports by the lacrosse players. This is what the players themselves said happened. On the record.

It's been four years. Why is it so hard to say they did not act in an exemplary fashion? Which is what the original poster said. They are not threatened with prison now.

Why is it so hard to accept what the players themselves said happened and say, you know, that wasn't good behavior?

We're still defending their bad behavior.

Anonymous said...

By the way, you say "You are foolish and narrow minded to think that anybody condones nasty language". Maybe you don't. But certainly many posters on this site do.

In fact, a poster just yesterday said that "Some college jocks got drunk. Heavens to betsy. Call the media. What a shocker!"

That's defending and condoning their behavior.

Anonymous said...

WHERE


IS


THE


GREAT


KILGO?

Anonymous said...

I want some justice4nifong.

Anonymous said...

Give us a little justice4nifong.

Anonymous said...

So, Sid, if the stab wound apparently inflicted by Mangum didn't kill Mr. Daye, you think Mangum ought to be released again to go free in Durham?
If Mangum goes free, should she get all her kids back?
Should Cline be removed from office for the way you think she has been mistreating Mangum?

Anonymous said...

Deacon said:

"You're right. Heavens to betsy white college boys telling black strippers they didn't order niggers, why good gracious, they're just silly innocent little boys. I mean every white college boy in America steals black girl's money from her purse, that's part of growing up. And refusing to give her back her shoe and phone and locking her out of the house, why that's just boys being boys. And don't all white boys from ivy league schools call local black girls sluts and whores? That's just good clean fun. What's all the fuss about? And when they said why don't you go home and feed your kids, we see your stretch marks..."

All of which, apparently, justifies a false rape accusation in some eyes. Call it the "whatever they did was bad enough", or "something happened that night" allegation.

Anonymous said...

Know what, none of us (as far as I know) were actually there that night, and none of us know what each person said.....including the boys there and the two women there. We all have our opinions and our interpretations, and we all think whatever we wish.......I doubt a single one of us is going to change his or her mind after reading these posts. I have said it before, and I will say it again.....the lacrosse guys made a HUGE mistake in allowing underage drinking and in hiring strippers. I know it's common in colleges...even Brodhead finally admitted it. However, there were all kinds of allegations about racial slurs being hurled by the men AND the women. Of course, it isn't OK. Of course, nobody is excusing dumb college jocks who do stupid things. And, equally, nobody ought to give a pass to the woman whose lies could have caused three men to wind up in prison. Some time after the lacrosse fraud, there was a white Duke female who went to a party sponsored by a black men's fraternity. At the party she charged that she was assaulted and raped by at least one black man. There was the same environment of excessive drinking and, according to many at the party, extensive drug usage. Where was the moral outrage then?
Doesn't it seem ironic that the Group of 88 didn't get their drawers all twisted up in a knot and run out to beat on pots and pans in front of the guy's frat house? Isn't it odd that Duke didn't throw the frat guys off campus? Where was the righteous indignation over this allegation of rape from the faculty within a day or two of when it was supposed to have happened? Sure makes one wonder....
I think drinking and drugs and sexual promiscuity are as commonplace on college campuses as backpacks and hoodies. Does this mean I think it's ok? No.
As crude and stumbling drunk as the Duke players were that night, as sexist as they were in hiring strippers.......I still say their behavior pales in comparison to the devious lies told by Mangum, the corrption spewed by Nifong and the lynchmob mentality of the Duke 88 who have never had the decency to apologize.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Sid, sometimes you amaze me with your hypocrisy.

Did any of the Duke LAX 3 match descriptions given by the accuser? Was there any forensics to link them to the alleged "attack".

The Duke LAX3 were picked out of a lineup -- Was Erick Daniels and Shawn Massey picked out of a lineup?

Evidence exists that show that 2 of the 3 Duke LAX accused weren't even at the residence when the alleged "attack" occurred. Is there evidence that proves Daniels and Massey were elsewhere?


Erick Daniels was picked out of a middle school year book by the victim based on the shape of his eyebrows... even though Daniels had close cropped hair and a dark complexion whereas the perpetrator had cornrow braids and a light complexion.

Lance the Intern said...

Since you are apparently ignoring my comment, I'll ask again

Judge Orlando Hudson is now on record stating that "Tracey [Cline] is still responsible" for Durham prosecutors and the State Bureau of Investigation violating the law by withholding key evidence in the Derrick Allen case.

Would you agree that Derrick Allen is a victim of the criminal actions of the state? If not, why not?

Deacon said...

Anonymous 11:38, you're still making excuses. You don't have to be there. The players have reported what was said. The racial slur is NOT an allegation. Numerous team members heard it and repeated it to police. A neighbor next door also reported what he heard which corroborated what players told police. As well as the second dancer, who never accused them of rape. Why can't you say they were sexist because of what they said, not because they hired strippers which others do? College kids who hire strippers don't usually call them sluts and whores. They don't scream in their faces. They don't steal their money. They don't say "we didn't order niggers." They don't say "you have stretch marks, go home and feed your kids." Rich kids who order strippers usually don't tell them "don't listen to them, they're just strippers". They don't say "Thank your grandpa for my cotton shirt." Is Hitler worse than them? Yes. Is Stalin? Yes. Is Bundy? Yes. Why do you go there? If they are not the worse people, then they're okay? The reason people get upset is that you make excuses and refuse to say that these young men acted in a sexist and racist manner. It is not alleged. It is not just because they ordered strippers. It's not because they did what everyone else does. Not all college kids do this. That's an insult to college students everywhere. Everyone doesn't act this way. EVEN WITH STRIPPERS. It was their very particular behavior. Why is it so hard to just admit it?

This all started because a poster said the team's behavior that night was exemplary. That's false. And you're still making excuses for it.

Deacon said...

I'm not talking about the behavior of Crystal Mangum and Mike Nifong. I'm talking only about the behavior of the Duke Lacrosse team.

What Mangum and Nifong did does not excuse the behavior of the lacrosse team which happened before the rape allegations.

Anonymous said...

Deacon said:
"What Mangum and Nifong did does not excuse the behavior of the lacrosse team which happened before the rape allegations."

What happened before the rape allegations does not excuse the behavior of Nifong and Mangum.

Anonymous said...

"...Again. I'm not talking about the fricking accusation of rape. I'm talking about the BEHAVIOR of the team. The post said that the team acted EXEMPLARY. And that the Coleman report said the team acted EXEMPLARY. Those are FALSE statements. Period. "

Actually, the Coleman report did identify the team as "...a cohesive, hard working, disciplined, and respectful athletic team. Their behavior on trips is described as exemplary."

The report goes on to state that "...Nevertheless, their conduct has not been different in character than the conduct of the typical Duke student who abuses alcohol. Their reported conduct has not involved fighting, sexual assault or harassment, or racist behavior. Moreover, even the people who have complained about their alcohol-related misconduct often add that the students are respectful and appear genuinely remorseful when they are not drinking."

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 6:14 AM said.........So, Sid, if the stab wound apparently inflicted by Mangum didn't kill Mr. Daye, you think Mangum ought to be released again to go free in Durham?
If Mangum goes free, should she get all her kids back?........... Of course, if it is determined that the knife woulds, subsequent to his death, were acquired while attacking Crystal and she was defending herself against an assult by him. Crystal's previous conviction of misdemeanor child abuse that she was found guilty of, three counts I might add for three children, was dependent upon her setting fire to the building or committing first degree arson. Since a jury was unable to convict her of that charge and it was later dropped this conviction is bogus. Judge Abe Jones said as much during the trial and, rightly, stated, after declaring a mis-trial, that Crystal was a good mother. Much evidence to this effect was presented, in court under oath, before him, with no evidence to the contrary

Deacon said...

The Coleman report did not refer to the Duke team's behavior the night of the party. The Coleman report was investigating the team's past behavior. And the report does not state that the team's behavior, even in the past, was always exemplary.

The original post at the beginning of this thread is using the Coleman report to defend the team's behavior ON THE NIGHT of the party. The team's behavior was not exemplary on THE NIGHT OF THE PARTY.

To use the Coleman report to defend the team's behavior ON THE NIGHT OF THE PARTY is disingenuous and false.

Anonymous said...

None of the three innocent young men ever used any racial slurs and none of them ever had any physical contact with Crystal Mangum.Who would want to.Reade Seligmann said he left the party because it was boring.As one of the young men said they could have had sex with her if they wanted to by just giving her more money but nobody wanted to.

Deacon said...

It's true that none of the three indicted players were said to have used racial slurs. But that's not what the poster said. That's not the issue at hand. Why are you still defending the post?

You cannot take one single word from the Coleman report "exemplary" which was used as a past reference in the report when they went on trips and does not even apply to their general past behavior and then apply that single word to describe and defend the team's behavior the night in question.

Coleman did not find that the team's behavior was exemplary that night. Their behavior as a whole THAT NIGHT was not exemplary.

Anonymous said...

Deacon -- Did you even read the post you're attacking? It states (highlights mine):

"He knew the case was a fraud from the very beginning and wrote the report showing the exemplarly behavior of the entire team at the time a dishonest DA had referred to them as hooligans and the mainstream anti-white media went along with it"

It is NOT defending the behavior of the team on ANY particular night. It is defending them at the time that Mike Nifong (and a great deal of mainstream media -- Nancy Grace et al) were declaring them hooligans.

I simply don't understand the point you're trying to make here.

Deacon said...

Oh my god. Like blasting through a concrete wall.

Nifong was declaring the team hooligans for their behavior on the night of the party. The report has nothing to do with the night of the party.

The poster admires Coleman for "showing the exemplary behavior of the entire team."

The report does not show that the entire team was always exemplary. And it certainly does not show they were exemplary on the night which Nifong said they acted like hooligans.

Yet this report is consistently used to defend the team as a whole. As it is being used in the quote you're quoting.

Anonymous said...

I don't think anybody is saying the entire team were angels (or exemplary) the night of the party. I don't think anybody is trying to say that, for pete sake. And, I don't think the original poster was saying that Coleman was excusing or defending the team AT ALL. I read the report in detail and I don't recall any reference to the team's behavior on that specific night, one way or the other. so, could we please, pretty please get off the exemplary debate?
Nifong, on the other hand, made a PUBLIC statement calling the team "hooligans". DAs are specifically forbidden from making such judgments in public. It was one of the statements that got his butt disbarred, among many other behaviors.
Call the team hooligans, idiots, drunks, creeps, jocks-gone-wild, wahatever you wish. Who gives a flying flip what any of us want to call them for their behavior that night!!! Some of us would call Mangum a sex worker, a whore, a prostitute, an exotic dancer, a working mother trying to make an honest living.........whatever. Same point here. Use any label you wish.
Personally I think Coleman's name being brought up in this mess of a blog lies at Sidney's doorstep....because he name drops Coleman as his "friend" and as the man who, according to Sidney, kept him from being hauled off the jail.
Prof. Coleman is a brillant man and a fair one, too. I respect his opinions and I think the committee's report was both objective and fair. By the way, the report is still readily available online for those who would like to return to the source document.

Deacon said...

If you want this subject dropped then stop defending the poster.

The poster IS defending the team by saying a report found them to be exemplary in the very same sentence he criticizes Nifong for describing the team as hooligans.

The poster also says the media is "anti-white". The poster uses racial language. The media is of course majority white itself.

Your statement that no one believes the team acted exemplary that night is inaccurate. For four years we've heard people on this board (and on this very thread) say that the team THAT NIGHT did nothing wrong.

The issue we're addressing right now is not Nifong or the dancers. The issue is the team's behavior. If the team did not act in an overtly racist, sexist and classist manner, the media, police, Nifong et al would not have been armed with the ammunition to promote the rape accusation as credible.

Because the team behaved in the way they actually did, not in a common way, this gave raw meat to the media to run with the story. Their actual behavior presented a nightmare for their lawyers and humiliation for their families. The racist, sexist and classist behavior the police, DA and media knew in detail from the beginning and gave rise to the imagination that a rape could have occurred. If the whole team acted in an exemplary manner, the idea of a rape may not have been fueled so strongly. In fact, Mangum may not have even accused them of rape.

To defend, deny or call the team's behavior irrelevant misunderstands the largeness of the entire event that exploded nationally.

Anonymous said...

Wow deacon you know so much more about the motives of the folks involved than all the rest of us You even know what Mangum might have done. Good for you.
Gievn that it is your contention that the lacrosse guys brought the raoe charge on themselves by acting , your word, non exemplary, then can we assume you are one of those guys who says a woman brings a rape on by dressing too sexy or being out alone at night or just being drunk? It was her fault judge. She was just looking too good. And judge if those drunk guys hadnt hollered at her about her stretch marks, she wouldnt have said nine or was it four orsix would have raped her
Good lord deacon You honestly think the behavior of the team had anything to do with nifong's scummy behavior?
Wow thats all i can say. Wow.

Anonymous said...

There were members of "the team" that weren't at the party, but for media (and apparently Deacon's) purposes are lumped in collectively as "the team" of "hooligans".

I challenge you, Deacon, to name 3 Duke Lacrosse players and provide proof that they "acted in an overtly racist, sexist and classist manner" on the night in question.

Deacon said...

Here we go again. On and on. On and on. On and on...

I'm using "team" because the original POSTER used the word TEAM. Jesus Christ.

Read from the top of the post.

Proof is in the police reports. In interviews. It's in interviews the entire team had with Coman at the AG's office. It's corroborated by eyewitness statements. Etc., etc.

All you who have just written that no one is saying that this "team" did not behave in that manner, read this last post.

Do you really want me to out the names of the individual players? Why would you want that for their families? The DA's office, lawyers, police, everyone has agreed to keep their names non-public. KC Johnson knows the names. Everyone who is close to the investigation knows.

What part of "niggers" isn't racist?

Members of the lacrosse team did not behave in an "exemplary" manner.

Deacon Fan said...

I for one would like Deacon to out those individual players that behaved in a racist, classist, sexist manner. At the very least, it may provoke them to step forward and apologize for their behavior.

Deacon Supporter said...

Deacon justifiably blames the players.

Gottlieb took control of the case on 3/15. He and Himan interviewed Mangum, spoke with Levicy and executed a search warrant on 3/16. Although DPD notes and captains’ statements do not contain details Deacon provided, they were outraged at the deplorable behavior. Despite a lack of evidence (Mangum provided descriptions that matched no players, failed a flawed identification and changed her allegation), they were determined to proceed. Their outrage caused them to do nothing the next couple of days. On 3/21, Mangum failed another flawed identification and changed details again. On 3/22, they interviewed Kim, who confirmed the players’ deplorable behavior (and withdrew a statement that the allegation was a “crock” when arrested on a parole violation). They grew more outraged, but interviewed no neighbors (except Bissey, who telephoned Himan). They scheduled a meeting with the players through a lawyer retained by Duke, a meeting intended as the focus of the investigation. When players hired attorneys, the meeting was cancelled.

Gottlieb reacted with the NTO.

Nifong learned of the case on 3/23. Addison gave his first interview on 3/24. The N&O published an interview with Mangum on 3/25 and protests began. Nifong began his media campaign on 3/27, targeting players who were ashamed of the team’s behavior. Although the campaign was unsuccessful in convincing players to cooperate, it incited the community. Nifong learned in late March that SBI found no DNA match, and there was no credible evidence to support the allegation as the DPD did no real investigation.

The community was outraged.

Dropping the case because there was no evidence was not an option; the community would not accept it. Conducting a bona fide investigation was not an option; Nifong and the DPD suspected the allegations were false, and a credible investigation might produce evidence that proved Mangum was a liar and force them to drop charges.

Nifong did the only thing possible.

He designed a rigged identification procedure to select defendants. The grand jury dutifully indicted the selections. Nifong and the DPD spent the next 9 months avoiding evidence that might prove the allegations false and require that charges be dropped.

If the team’s behavior had not been so deplorable, Nifong and the DPD would not have made public statements, the community would not have been outraged, and they could have dropped charges when there was no evidence. They would not have been required to attempt to frame defendants. Nifong would not have been disbarred.

See. The team’s behavior is solely to blame.

Deacon said...

Hey, this guy said the team's behavior was exemplary and this other guy Deacon said the team's behavior was not exemplary. I mean, they're behavior was not exemplary but... what do we do? We can't let him say that. Let's say no one thinks the team was exemplary - oh but the original post said that they were. All right...

Let's say that he's misusing the word team, not all the team was there, right? Oh but the original post used the word team.. Hmmm... This one is hard...

Let's think. The guy said the team was exemplary and then Deacon said they weren't exactly exemplary, and of course they weren't, but... let's talk about how bad Nifong is and that Deacon by saying the team wasn't exemplary, he means everything Nifong did is right.

Yeah - and that Mangum is worse. Yeah, let's say Deacon's saying by saying the teams was not exemplary, that he thinks the team raped Mangum. That's what he's saying. That's outrageous. How dare him!

All right, let's calm down, we can't say that. Think. A guy said the team was exemplary and then Deacon said they weren't, which of course they weren't - hmm.... I know! Let's say that he's saying the team's behavior is solely to blame for everything. Yeah, yeah, that's it... I'll write down a whole narrative, it'll take me awhile, of the whole case, how everyone else behaved and say that Deacon's saying that the team is to blame for all of that.

When that first guy said the team was exemplary and Deacon said the team's behavior was not exemplary, we'll say Deacon really means the team's behavior is solely to blame. For everything. Everything in the entire case! Got him!

Sigh... yawn... oh, brother...

Anonymous said...

All of the young men at the party including Devon Sherwood said they found Mangum repulsive and none of them wanted to have sex with her much less go to all the trouble of raping her.Besides the bathroom was too small to commit a gang rape in as was poited out by AG Roy Cooper on 60 minutes.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
" The question is did an intoxicated Daye attack Crystal"....Mr Daye had defensive wounds documented on his autopsy report. Were there any documented defensive wounds on CGM at the time of her arrest?

On a side note, I know that CGM's lawyer, Chris Shella, has complained to the Superior Court Judge about the Durham PD and Prosecutor's office (primarily about access to the crime scene)...How Sid can continue to support both Crystal AND Tracey Cline is baffling to me.


It is important to keep in mind that the first mention of "defensive" wounds was noted in the fraudulent April 14th autopsy report that was made available to the media after 120 days. There was no mention of any "defensive" wounds to Daye in the more reliable report of April 13th. My belief is that there were no defensive lesions to the arms of Daye.

Lance the Intern said...

"My belief is that there were no defensive lesions to the arms of Daye."

The pathologist that conducted the autopsy was Dr. Clay Nichols.

Sid -- I suggest you contact this physician (919-966-2253) and ask him about the 2 documents and the defensive wounds. Until you do, your claims of "fraudulence" carry no weight.
Further, by labeling the autopsy report "fraudulent" you may be committing libel against Dr. Nichols.

Anonymous said...

There is no question that the mainstream media in this country is anti-white.That's why they jumped on this story at first but the fact is there are hardly any cases of white men raping black women.It's almost always the other way around.Any attack on the character of these innocent young men is just blaming the victim.The real criminals all along were drunk prostitute Crystal Mangum and disbarred loser Mike Nifong.They should have been locked up in the same cell together.Then maybe Reginald Daye would still be alive.

Anonymous said...

Don't mess with those lax boys.

kenhyderal said...

@ Anonymous 8:17 AM 9/23 The size of the bathroom is a complete "red-herring". Sexual assults can be singular rather then several and consecutive rather then aggregate. It didn't have to be a variation on how many college boys can you cram into a phone booth.

Anonymous said...

kenhyderal said...
@ Anonymous 8:17 AM 9/23 The size of the bathroom is a complete "red-herring". Sexual assults can be singular rather then several and consecutive rather then aggregate. It didn't have to be a variation on how many college boys can you cram into a phone booth.

Kenny,

Have you read the statment made by your heroine to the police describing the rape she claimed occurred in the bathroom?

kenhyderal said...

Memories of such a traumatic event are bound to be a blur of frigtening and panic filled images. Crystal was, after that, diagnosed with P.T.S.D

Anonymous said...

Come on Kenny, you can come up with something better than that. But then again, you have been diagnosed with H.U.Y.A.D.

Anonymous said...

Hey Kenny, isn't it a little late in Dubai for you to be posting?

kenhyderal said...

@ Anonymous 2:19 PM 9/24......... My head is screwed on straight and I seek to be enlightened. @ Anonymous 2:28 PM 9/24........ The search for truth and justice continues around the clock.

Anonymous said...

Kenhydral-Crystal clearly stated that she was raped orally,vaginally,and anally by at least three men in the bathroom at the same time and she said at one point she was suspended in mid air.As Roy Cooper pointed out it wasn't possible for four adults to stand still in the bathroom at the same time.In another one of her stories she said she was assaulted by ten more lacrosse players in the back yard.This is what a delusional drug addicted prostitute Crystal Mangun really is.

Nifong Supporter said...


Lance the Intern said...
"My belief is that there were no defensive lesions to the arms of Daye."

The pathologist that conducted the autopsy was Dr. Clay Nichols.

Sid -- I suggest you contact this physician (919-966-2253) and ask him about the 2 documents and the defensive wounds. Until you do, your claims of "fraudulence" carry no weight.
Further, by labeling the autopsy report "fraudulent" you may be committing libel against Dr. Nichols.


The Autopsy report of April 14, 2011 is factually fraudulenty as it lists numerous lesions not even mentioned in the April 13th investigative report. The only lesion the 13th report listed was to the splenic flexure of the colon. That report is without doubt the most reasonable and logical one, especially with wounds inflicted with a paring knife.

As I further stated, I do not fault Dr. Nichols for going along with the "program" as he undoubtedly knows what happens when one doesn't... the prime example being the persecution of Mike Nifong.

The Nichols report is not only criminally fraudulent, but is totally inadequate. It is useless. It doesn't even pretend to explain how the knife wound caused Daye's death. No mention about how the knife wound cause Daye to go into a coma. Was Daye on life support, or removed from life support? Dr. Nichols report doesn't even broach these pertinent questions.

My statements libelous? .. that's ridiculous.

Lance the Intern said...

Sid -- I'll take that as an admission that you never sought clarity or input from Dr. Nichols. As for libel -- you only have to meet 3 criteria in the United States,

1) The person first must prove that the statement was false.
2) That person must prove that the statement caused harm.
3) They must prove that the statement was made without adequate research into the truthfulness of the statement.


You've admitted to #3 above. I'd suggest you respectfully publish an apology to Dr. Nichols.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 10:06 PM said " a delusional drug addicted prostitute" This is absolutely 100% untrue. It's slander and libel to continue making such statements, that have absolutely no basis in fact. In my opinion, it's hearsay derived solely from rumors that were purposely disseminated in an attempt to discredit Crystal

Anonymous said...

"kenhyderal said...
Crystal was, after that, diagnosed with P.T.S.D"

Since you claim to be so concerned about whether other posts are based on facts, provide a link supporting your statement. Or, should we conclude that the statment is based on your diagnosis, Dr. Ken?

kenhyderal said...

This information was revealed by Crystal in a speech she made at U.N.C. april 22 2009

Anonymous said...

There is no question Crystal was a drug addled prostitute although I don't know why any man,especially a white man would want to have sex with her.Do blacks think we lust after your women because believe me we don't.

kenhyderal said...

@ Anonymous 12:17 AM.... Your anonymous statements are cowardly, racist, ignorant, illegal and immoral.... @ Nifong Supporter. This type of garbage constitutes hate speech and should be suppressed.

Anonymous said...

Hey Kenny,

Your statements are cowardly, racist, ignorant, illegal and immoral....This type of garbage constitutes hate speech and should be suppressed.

Lance the Intern said...

Ken -- My recollection (poor that it is) of the UNC event was that Crystal described some symptoms of post traumatic stress disorder that she suffered, not that she had been diagnosed with PTSD.

She did, however, state that she had been diagnosed with PTSD (in 1993) in her book.

Perhaps you are confusing the two.

kenhyderal said...

No, I'm not confusing the two episodes. Besides the public statements she made, regarding this matter, at U.N.C., I have personal knowledge about this.

Lance the Intern said...

I don't recall her specifically stating a diagnosis of PTSD at the UNC event. Of course, we weren't allowed an opportunity to question her (although it was advertised as a Question and Answer session).

As I recall much of what was discussed was about issues with the media (it was, after all, the topic of the program).

Anonymous said...

Don't you understand? Kenny has personal knowledge of Crystal's medical condition. No doubt, he has reviewed her medical records and consulted with her doctors. Don't argue with ol' Kenny Boy.
End of discussion.

Ryan said...

I have read this blog for a long time without ever having responded to some of the more outlandish articles, but I felt compelled here:

While I have no respect for the governor and agree in principle that these men deserve pardons, you lose credibility in accusing her and the counsel of being "racist" and simply denying pardon requests based on the color of someone's skin. You rail against the N&O, Joe Neff...etc. for similar headlines, but apparently the rules don't apply to you. Here's a little civics and fact-flavored commentary.

Taylor's pardon came about for several reasons: The law states pardons/compensation in NC rely heavily on the decision of the state's Innocence Inquiry Commission and the three judge panel. Up until September, Taylor was the ONLY person EVER exonerated by way of the NCIIC. Also, the SBI fraud and misconduct in his case were covered extensively by the media during the commission's investigation and hearing, reflecting poorly not only on the SBI but the state of NC. The governor's office really had no choice but to pardon him (rightfully so). One could assume that this was largely a PR move to deflect criticism, but that is simply a theory.

It is also apparent that you are unaware of the case of Jonathan Pierpoint (another Duke Law exoneree) who is as white as the day is long. I am very familiar with his and Massey's daily ordeals and I assure you Pierpoint's is every bit as bad, if not worse. His request for a pardon was denied the same week as Massey's. The governor's office claimed their internal investigation in to the request for a pardon did not convince them that Pierpoint was actually innocent. This "investigation" was somehow conducted without ever contacting or interviewing the alleged victim in Pierpoint's case, who had recanted his childhood testimony for 14 years before anyone would listen. He was the key to the exoneration. Your claim that an investigation didn't happen in other cases is probably true, race not being a factor.

The problem here is, you obviously suffer from tunnel vision through a narrow, race-obsessed scope. You even admit "I have no proof" when confronted about your claims of no investigation, thus you have no credibility. It's too bad, because while you have some decent points here and you may be right about certain elements of the problems with the pardon process, your arguments are divisive and baseless, putting you on the same level of honesty and integrity as those you consistently rail against.

It's easy enough to stand up to what you see as an injustice, but being able to back it up, objectively, with the facts and well-articulated theories will bring more people to your side. This is the problem with so many "activists" for "social justice"...while their hearts might be in the right place, their brains often don't follow.