Sunday, January 22, 2012

Restatement of purpose

Every now and again it seems as though the readers and commenters of this blog site get derailed about the purpose of the Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong and its members. Once again, let me put the train back on track to avoid the discourse of distractions and the obstacles of obfuscation… so we can locomotion along the rails to enlightenment.

As we near our four anniversary this coming June, our mission statement and resolve has been steady, uncompromising, and one which follows the light of truth. The fundamental beliefs upon which this organization was founded have been and remain based upon the following principles: (1) former Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong was selectively and unjustly persecuted and disbarred by the North Carolina State Bar because of his handing of the Duke Lacrosse case; (2) Mr. Nifong handled the Duke Lacrosse case well within the acceptable standards of a state prosecutor; (3) that Mr. Nifong is the only prosecutor to be disbarred due to professional misconduct is an outrage, especially when considering prosecutors Tom Ford (Gregory Taylor and Carletta Alston cases), Bill Wolfe (James Arthur Johnson case), Michael D. Parker (Floyd Brown case), and David Hoke (Alan Gell case), just to name a few. Our group’s focus remains committed to encouraging the NC State Bar to unilaterally and unconditionally reinstate Mr. Nifong’s license to practice law in the state without restrictions. Although Mr. Nifong has expressed that he never intends to practice law again, it is the contention that his license to practice law was unjustly taken by the Bar, and that it needs to man up and do the right thing by reinstating it.

Members of the Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong, I believe, are some of the most courageous people in the state, because they lend their names and their faces to a righteous cause that is widely unpopular with the public because of contamination of the news that is broadcast and published by biased media-types… the big wigs in the upper echelons who determine what stories to follow, which stories to ignore, and what spin to give. Instead of remaining silent in the face of blatant anti-Nifong injustice, like most politicians, media outlets, and many civil rights organizations, members of the Committee speak loudly by their demonstration of courage. There are many ways to put it, but I like the saying attributed to President Abraham Lincoln who stated: “To sin by silence makes cowards of men.” One thing is certain… the members of our group, currently one shy of two dozen, are not cowards.

The Committee is, and always has been an inclusive organization, welcoming brave individuals who coalesce around the principles recited above with respect to former Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong. No one has been turned down for membership, and dues and/or investment of time or money is not required. All that is required is the heart to seek justice for Mike Nifong, which at its most primal form would be the reinstatement of his law license. Potential members are not vetted or required to provide personal information about themselves, their political leanings, or their ideologies on other topics. Likewise, our group is extremely tolerant of others and we do not discriminate with respect to granting membership.

It is not expected, or even desired that everyone who joins the group hold the same beliefs or opinions on issues other than Mike Nifong’s mistreatment by the state and the media. Gay and lesbians, people of all races and colors, worshippers of all religions as well as atheists, Democrats and even Republicans are all invited to join.

Some commenters are quick to cast some Committee members as homophobes or racists, but I find that these labels are often made without substance. There are people who might not agree with same-sex relationships or who might have a problem with gay and lesbians getting married, but that, at least to my way of thinking, does not categorize them as being homophobes. Personally, I have no problem whatever with gay and lesbian relationships. I have no problem with civil union between couples of the same sex and I do not object to the term “marriage” being used to define such relationships. To my mind marriage is an institution in which two individuals are fully and lovingly committed to one another regardless of their sexes. Not only that, but I believe that the liberal tolerance towards gays and lesbians is growing and gaining greater acceptance.

Hopefully this blog will put issues about homophobia and racism to rest, and the future blogs can be devoted to issues of criminal justice… such as the vendetta prosecutions of Crystal Mangum, the racist pardon policy that the governor’s office has used to deny pardons to Erick Daniels and Shawn Massey, the anti-Nifong discrimination by Duke University against me, and other important issues facing Tar Heelians who believe in the principle of “equal justice for all” instead of those who follow the tenet of “selective justice based on Class and Color.”

272 comments:

1 – 200 of 272   Newer›   Newest»
Anonymous said...

Sideny, you are a deluded megalomaniac who is conducting a vendetta against innocent men because those innocent men were not falsely convicted of a bogus rape charge.

Anonymous said...

Two words for buddy. Bull shit. You and your racist homophobic friends are a disgrace to the very principles you tout. If you had a spine, you would tell peterson and her bigoted friends to take their venom elsewhere, like maybe the westboro baptist church crowd. Your failure to do so is a clear indication of your true colors. The smell of hate is all over you.

Anonymous said...

And I say that gays and lesbians should not have "marriage" as you say in quotes. They should have MARRIAGE as anyone else is allowed to have without the changing of the term to be a term falsely considered as just as good as in civil unions --unless everyone will now be given a civil union and that term is applied equally. Finally if you do not believe in equality and that inequity is directed at gays and lesbians you ARE a homophobe. And if you support those who are homophobes you support their views and so you are a homophobe as well. It is always unfortunate that those who say they fight for justice are blind to ways that they ignore their own oppressive behaviors. You wasted a blog with this drivel that only serves to discredit your weak attempt at a point. So, yes why not just get back to your business as usual -- ignorance-- not enlightenment. What a joke you are.

Anonymous said...

To the 2:32 poster. Thank you.

Anonymous said...

In 2003, she [Victoria Peterson] testified before the County Commissioners to urge them not to extend partnership benefits because: "Many of them are infected with diseases, and their lifestyles are very, very dangerous," Peterson told the board. "Many don't live to be senior citizens. Who's going to pay this expense if they get sick in their gay lifestyle?"

Anonymous said...

Sid says: "Members of the Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong, I believe, are some of the most courageous people in the state...."


Bahahahahaha
Bahahahahaha
Bahahahahaha
Bahahahahaha
Bahahahahaha
Bahahahahaha
Bahahahahaha

Anonymous said...

kenhyderal said...
"I do KNOW Crystal Mangum"

This is the same Kenny who claims to be in Dubai and to never have been closer to Durham than Washington, D.C.

Bahahahahaha
Bahahahahaha
Bahahahahaha
Bahahahahaha
Bahahahahaha
Bahahahahaha
Bahahahahaha
Bahahahahaha
Bahahahahaha
Bahahahahaha
Bahahahahaha
Bahahahahaha
Bahahahahaha
Bahahahahaha
Bahahahahaha
Bahahahahaha
Bahahahahaha
Bahahahahaha
Bahahahahaha
Bahahahahaha
Bahahahahaha

Anonymous said...

Yep good old victoria thinks gay people are immoral sick perverts and sid has her picture plastered on his silly web site. I just love hearing sid preach about jesus and then reading about how he thinks his cronies are courageous. Total hypocritical crap.
Right kennnnnnnny......and i am personal friends with margaret thatcher even though i have never been to england. You and sid and your imaginary friends are a riot. Personally i wouldnt be too proud of telling anybody in durham ( who has a brain and a modicum of decency) that i was all chummy with sister. She is not my idea of somebody i would want anywhere near my kids.......just me,of course, but i just dont dig the pole vaulting drug using motel visiting boyfriend brawling fire setting stabbing thing......oh yeah, and the lying thing isnt too cool either. But i am just sure fine people like victoria and sidand wahneeeeema and you think sister is "precious".

Anonymous said...

..."and other important issues facing Tar Heelians who believe in the principle of “equal justice for all” instead of those who follow the tenet of “selective justice based on Class and Color.”  "
This is an amazing statement...let's NOT discuss those silly unimportant issues that face Tar Heelians...like that old homophobic thing that Sid can't hide from.....it's ALL OVER YOU, Sid. As if there were "equal justice for all (LGBT people)"....as if you weren't so bigoted that you have to put quotation marks around the word MARRIAGE", because you can't stomach the idea that the word would be used JUST THE SAME for all of us. You will NOT convince anybody on this flop (except Kenny, Crystal's pal, that you are anything but the racist homophobic bigot that you are.....unless and until you completely disassociate yourself from the drivel that Victoria Peterson and her ilk spew. Perhaps you should ask yourself just why you think it is OK for Peterson say say, in public, that all gay people are disease ridden and carrier of disease. I guess it's OK for me to say all men of color are disease ridden and prone to acts of sexual violence against women. Either ONE of these comments is stupid, bigoted, and utterly false! But, YOU, Sid, not only allow Peterson's photo to be on your site, you actually describe her as courageous. Some courage.....WWJD to YOU, Sid.

Walt said...

Sid wrote: "(1) former Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong was selectively and unjustly persecuted and disbarred by the North Carolina State Bar because of his handing of the Duke Lacrosse case;..." No, he was not. Nifong violated the rules of professional conduct. At the end of his bar trial, he admitted as much. However, the DHC went on to make clear findings beyond any doubt that indeed Nifong did violate the rules of professional conduct so completely as to deserve disbarrment.

"(2) Mr. Nifong handled the Duke Lacrosse case well within the acceptable standards of a state prosecutor;..." As bad as NC prosecutors can be, it is not within our ethical standards to prosecute cases without probable cause.

"(3) that Mr. Nifong is the only prosecutor to be disbarred due to professional misconduct is an outrage,...." I agree, it is an outrage. Hoke, Graves, Easley and Ford should be disbarred as well. However, disbarring Nifong is a good start.

Walt-in-Durham

Anonymous said...

I've good reason to believe that Tracey Cline will soon join Nifong on that "disbarred" short lst.

Anonymous said...

I agree....the list needs to grow, with Cline et al joining the Dishonor Roll, along with Nifong.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 4:06 AM said " Right kennnnnnnny......and i am personal friends with margaret thatcher even though i have never been to england" You are birds of a feather,though.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 6:33 PM 1-22-12 said "This is the same Kenny who claims to be in Dubai and to never have been closer to Durham than Washington, D.C." I have been to Bremerton Washington, though.

kenhyderal said...

@ Anonymous 4:06 AM. I'm proud to call Crystal a friend. I think you will find that a majority of decent people in Durham disagree with you about Crystal. Including many on the Faculty at Duke University; peole you suggest "don't have a brain"

Anonymous said...

yep, if you are referring to the 88, I doubt there is more than a teaspoon of gray matter collectively among the whole whacko bunch. for example, the infamous Wahneeeema Lubiano who has been telling us about her "forthcoming manuscripts and publications" for, how many now, ten years or so??? A real mental giant, that one. Or perhaps it's Jack Wagstaff, the durham goofball who spent some time in the pokey for contempt behavior during Mangum's last run-in with the law. Or, maybe you mean the wonderful Linwood Wilson, all-round nice guy, deacon, and habitual liar who physically abused his former wife. Maybe Ms. Cline will have no problem with ethics and decide to invite Sister over for some conscious reprobate mind discussion about Judge Hudson.
Lord, Ken, I bet Sister is up for Prom Queen at NCCU!

Anonymous said...

"To sin by silence makes cowards of men"......reallllly, sid? You? using this quote? Hilarious. Being silent about bigotry and blatant homophobia by one of your secret society , decoder ring wearing, secret handshake knowing, charter members.........you mean THAT kind of silent? Honest Abe, you aint, cupcake....

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal: "I'm proud to call Crystal a friend. I think you will find that a majority of decent people in Durham disagree with you about Crystal".

No they don't.

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal: "Anonymous @ 6:33 PM 1-22-12 said "This is the same Kenny who claims to be in Dubai and to never have been closer to Durham than Washington, D.C.' I have been to Bremerton Washington, though."

Which is farther away from Durham than is Washington DC.

Anonymous said...

From Walt in Durham: "'that Mr. Nifong is the only prosecutor to be disbarred due to professional misconduct is an outrage,....' I agree, it is an outrage. Hoke, Graves, Easley and Ford should be disbarred as well. However, disbarring Nifong is a good start."

Think of how mightily Mr. Nifong strove to earn this distinction.

Anonymous said...

Sideny: From the list ofcorrupt prosecutors you have failed to list Tracey Cline(Frankie Washington, Leon Brown, the vendetta against Judge Orlando Hudson.

Anonymous said...

Sideny: "Potential members are not vetted or required to provide personal information about themselves, their political leanings, or their ideologies on other topics."

So that's why homophobe Victoria Peterson became a member of your committee.

Anonymous said...

Sideny, the final comment I have today is:

It is obvious that Mr. Nifong attempted the most egregious wromgful prosecution in American Legal History.

Your putting on your Darth Vader suit and declaring something else does not negate the truth.

Have you thought how you are going to prove to a court that there was a conspiracy at Duke to arrest you because of your pro Nifong advocacy?

Come on, lrt's hear it. This should be good.

Anonymous said...

Sideny: "...et me put the train back on track to avoid the discourse of distractions and the obstacles of obfuscation… so we can locomotion along the rails to enlightenment."

Sideny, a deluded megalomaniac is incapable of enlightening anyone, least of all himself.

Anonymous said...

Sideny(quoting Abraham Lincoln): ""To sin by silence makes cowards of men".

Sideny, you do know that Abraham Lincoln was a Republican, which party you so vigorously condemn.

Anonymous said...

Sideny: "
Hopefully this blog will put issues about homophobia and racism to rest".

Issues of racism will never be put to rest so long as you continue your racially motivated vendetta against the innocent, falsely accused, wrongfully prosecuted Lacrosse Players.

Anonymous said...

Here's a question for ya, Sid, you deep thinker and standard bearer for truth, justice and the liberal American way.....If Victoria Peterson is such a courageous person, how come she is so frightened of us disease ridden blights on society? Huh??

Anonymous said...

The NC State Bar does not simply "reinstate" lawyers that have had their license revoked. The LAWYER must petition to have his restored (after waiting 5 years).
So...if Nifong's not going to petition, it ain't going to happen.
You'd think that an organization committed to "persuading the State Bar to....reinstate Mr. Nifong's license..." would be aware of this.

Anonymous said...

The ultimate truth here is that there is NO PURPOSE to this J4N nonsense and this flop except a format for Sid to write his "Dear Diary" entries.

Anonymous said...

Sideny: "Hopefully this blog will put issues about homophobia and racism to rest, and the future blogs can be devoted to issues of criminal justice… such as ...the anti-Nifong discrimination by Duke University against me".

You have offered no proof that Duke University discriminated against you. You are deluded if you believe your vendetta agaist three innocent, falsely accused men makes you a figure of national interest.

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal:

You said in a post that you express doubt as to defense theories, based on facts stipulated to on line. Specify what theories. Specify what facts.

You have stipulated to the facts, the evidence in the case did not implicate any member of the Lacrosse team.

Anonymous said...

I was just looking at headlines and noticed that Warren Jeffs has spent millions on ad placements around the country, warning America that Jesus is coming soon and will specifically free Jeffs and punish all the rest of us for our sins against his chosen one. Had to laugh out loud at that one.....it reminds me of sid who thinks that he is so important that his frivolous nuisance suit is of national interest....and that there is an evil (white) yahoo bunch out to get him. Interesting similarities between Jeffs and Harr, too.....including a hardcore following of sheep, uh, faithfuls. Comical to me that both these deluded whackos seem to think that the LORD is on their side......

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Sideny, you are a deluded megalomaniac who is conducting a vendetta against innocent men because those innocent men were not falsely convicted of a bogus rape charge.

I do not have a vendetta against the Duke Lacrosse defendants... I never have. Why should I? Seligmann, Finnerty, and Evans never did anything to me. I have no animus towards them, and have never shown any. I do not even have a vendetta against Duke University for the gross discrimination against me. I am only seeking justice.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Two words for buddy. Bull shit. You and your racist homophobic friends are a disgrace to the very principles you tout. If you had a spine, you would tell peterson and her bigoted friends to take their venom elsewhere, like maybe the westboro baptist church crowd. Your failure to do so is a clear indication of your true colors. The smell of hate is all over you.

Your premise of racism and homophobia is without basis or merit. Hate is a word that is not in my lexicon.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
And I say that gays and lesbians should not have "marriage" as you say in quotes. They should have MARRIAGE as anyone else is allowed to have without the changing of the term to be a term falsely considered as just as good as in civil unions --unless everyone will now be given a civil union and that term is applied equally. Finally if you do not believe in equality and that inequity is directed at gays and lesbians you ARE a homophobe. And if you support those who are homophobes you support their views and so you are a homophobe as well. It is always unfortunate that those who say they fight for justice are blind to ways that they ignore their own oppressive behaviors. You wasted a blog with this drivel that only serves to discredit your weak attempt at a point. So, yes why not just get back to your business as usual -- ignorance-- not enlightenment. What a joke you are.

Let me put it this way... I believe that gays and lesbians deserve the same rights as heterosexuals in a committed relationship regardless of what term is used and whether or not there are quotation marks. I cannot control what other people think, and just because people believe as I do about the mistreatment of Mike Nifong does not signify that I agree with all of their beliefs... or that I even know what they believe on other topics. So, no, I would not say that I am a homophobe. Your definition is far too expansive.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
In 2003, she [Victoria Peterson] testified before the County Commissioners to urge them not to extend partnership benefits because: "Many of them are infected with diseases, and their lifestyles are very, very dangerous," Peterson told the board. "Many don't live to be senior citizens. Who's going to pay this expense if they get sick in their gay lifestyle?"

The statement attributed to Ms. Peterson is not one with which I agree, but our Constitution allows us each to have our own beliefs and opinions. I am sure that she does not believe that she does not share my opinions about gays and lesbians, but the "Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong" is not about issues of sexual preference.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Yep good old victoria thinks gay people are immoral sick perverts and sid has her picture plastered on his silly web site. I just love hearing sid preach about jesus and then reading about how he thinks his cronies are courageous. Total hypocritical crap.
Right kennnnnnnny......and i am personal friends with margaret thatcher even though i have never been to england. You and sid and your imaginary friends are a riot. Personally i wouldnt be too proud of telling anybody in durham ( who has a brain and a modicum of decency) that i was all chummy with sister. She is not my idea of somebody i would want anywhere near my kids.......just me,of course, but i just dont dig the pole vaulting drug using motel visiting boyfriend brawling fire setting stabbing thing......oh yeah, and the lying thing isnt too cool either. But i am just sure fine people like victoria and sidand wahneeeeema and you think sister is "precious".

When it comes to Crystal Mangum, it is not that we are "chummy" with her, it is that we believe that she is a victim of "vendetta justice"... retaliation for her role in the Duke Lacrosse case. We are advocating for "equal justice for all" and not for "selective justice based upon one's role in the Duke Lacrosse case."

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
..."and other important issues facing Tar Heelians who believe in the principle of “equal justice for all” instead of those who follow the tenet of “selective justice based on Class and Color.”  "
This is an amazing statement...let's NOT discuss those silly unimportant issues that face Tar Heelians...like that old homophobic thing that Sid can't hide from.....it's ALL OVER YOU, Sid. As if there were "equal justice for all (LGBT people)"....as if you weren't so bigoted that you have to put quotation marks around the word MARRIAGE", because you can't stomach the idea that the word would be used JUST THE SAME for all of us. You will NOT convince anybody on this flop (except Kenny, Crystal's pal, that you are anything but the racist homophobic bigot that you are.....unless and until you completely disassociate yourself from the drivel that Victoria Peterson and her ilk spew. Perhaps you should ask yourself just why you think it is OK for Peterson say say, in public, that all gay people are disease ridden and carrier of disease. I guess it's OK for me to say all men of color are disease ridden and prone to acts of sexual violence against women. Either ONE of these comments is stupid, bigoted, and utterly false! But, YOU, Sid, not only allow Peterson's photo to be on your site, you actually describe her as courageous. Some courage.....WWJD to YOU, Sid.

It is okay for you to think or say that all men of color are disease ridden and prone to acts of sexual violence against women. The First Amendment protects your right to think and say that. You just need to be aware that what you say reflects upon the kind of person you are.

Nifong Supporter said...


Walt said...
Sid wrote: "(1) former Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong was selectively and unjustly persecuted and disbarred by the North Carolina State Bar because of his handing of the Duke Lacrosse case;..." No, he was not. Nifong violated the rules of professional conduct. At the end of his bar trial, he admitted as much. However, the DHC went on to make clear findings beyond any doubt that indeed Nifong did violate the rules of professional conduct so completely as to deserve disbarrment.

"(2) Mr. Nifong handled the Duke Lacrosse case well within the acceptable standards of a state prosecutor;..." As bad as NC prosecutors can be, it is not within our ethical standards to prosecute cases without probable cause.

"(3) that Mr. Nifong is the only prosecutor to be disbarred due to professional misconduct is an outrage,...." I agree, it is an outrage. Hoke, Graves, Easley and Ford should be disbarred as well. However, disbarring Nifong is a good start.

Walt-in-Durham

Hey, Walt. As far as I'm concerned, the disciplinary hearing against Mike Nifong at which he was disbarred was nothing more than a kangaroo court. The prosecution against Nifong by the State Bar was as flawed and leaky as is the murder charge against Crystal Mangum for Reginald Daye's death... both bogus vendettas.

Mike Nifong didn't deserve to be disbarred, but Prosecutor Tom Ford definitely does.

Anonymous said...

Sideny: "Hey, Walt. As far as I'm concerned, the disciplinary hearing against Mike Nifong at which he was disbarred was nothing more than a kangaroo court. The prosecution against Nifong by the State Bar was as flawed and leaky as is the murder charge against Crystal Mangum for Reginald Daye's death... both bogus vendettas."

This from a man who has said he is unfamiliar with the detail of the Duke false rape, who has admitted he has no legal expertise.

Anonymous said...

Sideny: "It is okay for you to think or say that all men of color are disease ridden and prone to acts of sexual violence against women."

Sidey has been preaching that Caucasian Lacrosse players are prone to acts of sexual violence against black women, imply because they are Caucasian and play Lacrosse.

Anonymous said...

Sideny: We are advocating for 'equal justice for all' and not for "selective justice based upon one's role in the Duke Lacrosse case."

Wrong! You are conducting a vendetta against three innocent men simply because they are Caucasians who were not wrongfully convicted of a bogus rape charge.

Anonymous said...

Sideny: "...the 'Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong' is not about issues of sexual preference."

True. Said committee is about a vendetta against three innocent men because they are Caucasians who were not wrongfully convicted of a bogus rape charge.

Anonymous said...

Sideny: "I cannot control what other people think, and just because people believe as I do about the mistreatment of Mike Nifong does not signify that I agree with all of their beliefs... or that I even know what they believe on other topics."

You do think you can control what is or is not true. You seem to think you can make something true just by saying it is.

Boy you are one deluded megalomaniac.

Anonymous said...

Sideny: "Hate is a word that is not in my lexicon."

Oh yes it is. You would not be publishing what you have published about the innocent, falsely accused Lacrosse players(falsely accused of rape by Crystal Mangum) if you did not hate them.

Anonymous said...

Sideny: "I do not have a vendetta against the Duke Lacrosse defendants... I never have. Why should I? Seligmann, Finnerty, and Evans never did anything to me."

So why do you deny they are innocent, why do you refer to Crystal Mangum(who falsely accused them of rape) a victim, why do you accuse Mrs. Rae Evans of initiating a jihad against Mr. Nifomg, why do you carp about Mr. Cooper expresing his belief that the three Lacrosse defendants are innocent?

Anonymous said...

Well, isn't it reassuring to know that "liberal tolerance for gays and lesbians is growing".....
I just love how Sid uses the word "tolerance", as though THE GAY is some kind of annoying sound from the next door neighbor, or perhaps "tolerating" that ugly mosque that got built in the community. What a bigoted man you are, Sid. Guess what, pal....take your "tolerance" and, well, put it some place. Geez, I guess it ought to be OK for white people to "tolerate" black people, right, Sid? Would you be all happy and warm fuzzy inside knowing that liberal whites are growing in their "tolerance" for you?
THIS is why the comments will continue about your racism and your support of homophobic people like Peterson. You, yourself, best take a long hard look in the mirror and ask yourself whether YOU would be content to be in a civil union or a "marriage" and be "tolerated". give me a break!

Anonymous said...

Sideny: "I have no animus towards them[the innocent, falsely accused Duke Lacrosse players], and have never shown any."

Yes you have.

Anonymous said...

Sideny: "I do not even have a vendetta against Duke University for the gross discrimination against me."

If that were true, you would not be accusing them of "gross discrimination" against you, you would never have complained about them settling with the innocent, falsely accused Lacrosse players, you would never have said in your blog that if anyone deserved $20 million from Duke it is you.

Anonymous said...

It is okay for you to think or say that all men of color are disease ridden and prone to acts of sexual violence against women. The First Amendment protects your right to think and say that. You just need to be aware that what you say reflects upon the kind of person you are."
Sid, you are really in need of a medication adjustment. I clearly stated that BOTH of the statements, the one about gays and lesbians by Peterson, and the silly hypothetical statement were WRONG, incorrect, ignorant......TO MAKE A POINT. How do you NOT get it, Sid? good lord...

Anonymous said...

Sid, you are a racist and a bigot. Period.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 7: 22 AM said : "Kenhyderal:
You said in a post that you express doubt as to defense theories, based on facts stipulated to on line. Specify what theories" The theorey that Crystal made up the accusation of rape in order to "shake down" these athletes. The fact stipulated to was that Crystal was incapacitated shortly after consuming a drink given to her and remained incapacitated until she was at the Durham Intake Center

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal: "The fact stipulated to was that Crystal was incapacitated shortly after consuming a drink given to her and remained incapacitated until she was at the Durham Intake Center"

That so called fact was never stipulated by anyone except those who were trashing the innocent men Crystal falsely accused of raping her.

Anonymous said...

Krnhyderal: "The theorey(sic-Krnny you should learn to spell or at least use a spell checker) that Crystal made up the accusation of rape in order to 'shake down' these athletes."

That was never a defense theory. That was from someone other than a defense attorney quoting Crystal saying the rich white boys would take care of her.

But you highlight something interesting about Ms. Mangum. She claims she was raped. She has never filed a civil suit. If she could make a case there would have been many contingency fee hungry attorneys heading for her door looking to represent her.

At least one, Willy Gary, did contact her then beat a hasty retreat.

Many of her former supporters, like Nancy Grace, Wendy Murphy, the New Black Panthers have distanced themselves from her.

Why?

Anonymous said...

Kenny, one final word for now. I suspect you are getting your information from Crystal's memoir.

If so, that so called source lacks credibility. Like Mark Gottlieb's straight from memory account of the case, that memoir was produced after it became obvious Crystal had lied about being raped.

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal: "The fact stipulated to was that Crystal was incapacitated shortly after consuming a drink given to her...".

You are referring to the allegation that she was given a date rape drug.

I point out, the defense attorneys always maintained that their clients were innocent. The defense attorneys would never have stipulated to as fact that Crystal was given a date rape drug.

Anonymous said...

Ken, you also fail to remember that Mangum admitted she had been drinking before she arrived at the party. And her dancin partner also stated that both of them consumed several drinks at the party.
Are you now saying that Mangum was drugged and raped? is that it? if so, provide us with specific EVIDENCE of such drugging and rape to support your allegations.

Anonymous said...

speaking of the infamous Sister "book", a friend of mine bought a copy and shared it among a group at our office. I read it. All I can is this: (1) whoever actually wrote the "book" needs to revisit their Hooked on Phonics class....a more poorly written piece of trash you would not find (2)the "book" is full of lies, contradictions, self pity, blaming others, whining, race baiting and sheer fantasy. You folks who live in Durham, who happen to be white, it's ALL YOUR FAULT! wow, who knew?????!!!
Oh, one final comment.....Sister may consider writing Book Two, the sequel, title "I stabbed him and you evil carpetbagger jihadists made me do it!!!"

Anonymous said...

"...Although Mr. Nifong has expressed that he never intends to practice law again, it is the contention that his license to practice law was unjustly taken by the Bar, and that it needs to man up and do the right thing by reinstating it."....
Notice the phrase....it is THE contention... wow, the contention, no less? Geez, Sid, I think you best do a little more homework. As has been noted by another poster, if Nifong does not apply for reinstatement of his license, there will be no review. So, who exactly is going to be his surrogate and apply, on his behalf? You? Do you think this strategy will fly? I know you consider yourself Captain SuperJustice....
Even Nifong has enough sense to know and ADMIT that he lied.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous January 25, 2012 7:24 AM:

Some time ago, a young girl named Brittainy Willis was raped and murdered. Her family offered a reward for information which would solve the crime. A man named James Arthur Johnson, claimed the reward. Mr. Johnson had been arrested and charged in the crime. The Willis family refused to pay him because they believed he had been involved in the crime.

Sideny began a crusade to have the Willis family pay Mr. Johnson the reward. During that campaign, some issue arose concerning Mrs. Rae Evans, Mother of falsely accused Lacrosse player David Evans. Sideny offered to pay money to anyone who could prove something to his satisfaction about Mrs. Evans.

However he attached a condition - the Willis family first had to pay Mr. Johnson. Sideny was aware that the Willis family had already refused to pay Mr. Johnson. So that condition would never be met and Sideny would never pay off.

So, Sideny knows the state bar will not just unilaterally restore Mr. Nifong's license. I say he uses that issue as an excuse to carry on his vendetta against the innocent, falsely accused Lacrosse players.

Anonymous said...

Right. Exactly, poster. The real truth of this J4N gibberish is that it has essentially nothing to do with Nifong and everything to do with Sid Harr and his own little world. Sad.

Walt said...

"Hey, Walt. As far as I'm concerned, the disciplinary hearing against Mike Nifong at which he was disbarred was nothing more than a kangaroo court."

There's where you go off the tracks Sid. Nifong's bar hearing was not a kangaroo court. Indeed, the DHC hearing protected Nifong's rights in ways that he tried to deny to the suspects in the Lacrosse case. The DHC heard the evidence in open. All the witnesses, and there were many, testified in open court and were available for cross examination by Nifong. Nifong was present and able to assist his defense counsel. (Actually, Nifong mostly hindered his defense with his utter ignorance of the law, but that's his problem, not the DHC's.)

The evidence produced by the State Bar at the DHC hearing was uncontroverted. Further, the evidence proved Nifong's violations beyond any reasonable doubt. That is what is called a full and fair hearing.

Unfortunately, the DHC has not acted against some others. But, two wrongs don't make it right.

Walt-in-Durham

Walt said...

Kenhydral wrote: "The fact stipulated to was that Crystal was incapacitated shortly after consuming a drink given to her and remained incapacitated until she was at the Durham Intake Center[.]"

She made up the rape allegation much later, at the Duke Emergency Room.

Walt-in-Durham

Walt said...

"Think of how mightily Mr. Nifong strove to earn this distinction.

January 23, 2012 11:52 AM"


Indeed, he did. In my recollection, no prosecutor has gone quite as bad as Nifong. The lies to the media, the lies in court, the refusal to look at evidence, his own claim to never look at or prepare his cases. Nifong is amazing in the worst possible way.

Walt-in-Durham

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Sideny: "I do not have a vendetta against the Duke Lacrosse defendants... I never have. Why should I? Seligmann, Finnerty, and Evans never did anything to me."

So why do you deny they are innocent, why do you refer to Crystal Mangum(who falsely accused them of rape) a victim, why do you accuse Mrs. Rae Evans of initiating a jihad against Mr. Nifomg, why do you carp about Mr. Cooper expresing his belief that the three Lacrosse defendants are innocent?

I do not know whether the Duke Lacrosse defendants are innocent or guilty of sexually assaulting Crystal Mangum. But they are not legally "innocent" because Attorney General Roy Cooper said they are (which he did under the duress of Joe Cheshire's Brad Bannon). Cooper is entitled to his beliefs and opinions, but he was irresponsible in making the "innocent" promulgation, as he is of the executive and not judicial branch of government.

Regarding Rae Evans, she publicly stated on "60 Minutes" that she hoped Mr. Nifong would pay, every day, for the rest of his life... Very vindictive statement from Ms. Evans which launched the Carpetbagger Jihad against Mr. Nifong.

Anonymous said...

By that logic, as a result of the hung jury and the prosecutor's decision not to retry the case, Crystal Mangum is not innocent of first degree felony arson.

Would you agree, Sid? If not, why not?

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 5:45 AM said: The defense attorneys would never have stipulated to as fact that Crystal was given a date rape drug" ...... Of course not. What is not in dispute,since it's found in statements of accused Evans, alleged victim Crystal Mangum and witness Kim Roberts was that upon her arrival Crystal was given a drink by player Flannery. Her rapid incapacitation soon after was witnessed by all present. My theory was expressed in a post here on January 5th in response to an Anonymous poster who suggested she arrived impaired. I'll repost that here. Anonymous @5:58 AM said ". According to accounts, when she arrived, she was so impaired she could not perform"...... Not according to her fill-in driver Brian Taylor in his signed statement to Detective Himan or to 610N neighbor Jason Bissey who saw her arriving. Soon after the girls, were given a drink by the players, one that Roberts/Pittman set aside without consuming Crystal showed signs of impairment. The flawed police investigation failed to discover a source for her impairment. The matron at the substance abuse centre said she had no signs of alcohol. By the time she reached DUMC she showed no signs of impairment, whatsoever. Her 5 drug screen was clear (no cocaine,heroin,cannibis,methamphetamine or ghb) The much later, out of state, hair ananysis for the most common date rape drug rohypnol was also negative. The natural history of this rapid onset and short recovery seems indicitive of a substance like chloral hydrate that was not tested for. If the players were dissatisfied with the performance or it's length their only recourse was civil not to rob Crystal. It has not been determine what the cause of her sudden impairment was and one possibility might be that she was administered a substance that impaired her.

Anonymous said...

Sideny: "But they are not legally "innocent" because Attorney General Roy Cooper said they are (which he did under the duress of Joe Cheshire's Brad Bannon)."

If they are not legally innocent then what are they? AG Cooper said they were innocent because he and his office reviewed all the evidence and found that no crime had happened. You have admitted you are unfamiliar with the evidence in the case. This duress of Joe Cheshire's Brad Bannon is a figment of your deluded megalomaniacal imagination. You would never be publishing things about them not being found legally innocent if you did not believe them guilty. And you would not have been calling Crystal Mangum a victim if you did not have an opinion on the guilt or innocence of the Lacrosse players.

As has been pointed out to you on previous occasions, Mrs. Rae Evans did not make her statement to 60 Minutes until AFTER the outrage against Mr. Nifong's misconduct had become apparent.

Why do you continue to deny the truth.

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal: "What is not in dispute,since it's found in statements of accused Evans, alleged victim Crystal Mangum and witness Kim Roberts was that upon her arrival Crystal was given a drink by player Flannery."

OK, quote those sources directly. Give the readers the capability to see if you are reporting accurately.

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal: "in statements of accused Evans...Crystal was given a drink by player Flannery."

From David Evans Statement: "She [Crystal] was obviously on some kind of drug from the start, the black stripper. She couldn't walk or talk clearly."

And: "The black girl[Crystal] couldn't talk or stand up straight she was so high."

And: "The girls were sloppily dancing due to the black stripper's [Crystal's] state of mind and began to kiss. The black stripper "went down" on the hispanic stripper.

You alleged Crystal was not impaired when she arrived at the Lacrosse House.

And: "The girlKim Roberts][David Evans] was nice and talked with Danny while I made her a whiskey and Diet Pepsi."

You alleged that it is in David Evans statement that Dan Flannery gave Crystal a drink. That was no where in that statement. Rather, David Evans made Kim Roberts a drink and Ms. Roberts was not impaired.

Anonymous said...

Ken's full of bullshit. CGM admitted to taking flexeril nd drinking prior to the events at the lacrosse party. She also had access to a number of antidepressants. Face it- CGM lied about being raped because of the events after she'd already left the party to keep from going to the drunk tank.

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal, this was written about Kim Roberts/Pittman on June 9, 2006:

"Meanwhile, the second exotic dancer, Kim Roberts, has credibility problems. She subsequently changed her story when it was revealed she’s facing criminal charges in an unrelated case. There have been accusations leveled againt Nifong that he made a deal with Roberts in exchange for her testimony should the case go to trial."

URL: http://capitolhillcoffeehouse.com/more.php?id=A405_0_1_0_M

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 6:15 said " David Evans made Kim Roberts a drink and Ms. Roberts was not impaired"... Ms. Roberts said she did not consume her drink.

kenhyderal said...

Crystal was under treatment for a chronic back problem for which she was prescribed Flexeril, a muscle relaxant. She was in the habit of taking one prior to doing the acrobatics involved in her routine. She had corrctive surgery that solved this problem in 2010. This medicine had never given her any problems before even combined with moderate alcohol consumption. In my opinion it could not have caused the impairment that was witnessed

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal: "in my opinion it[flexeril] could not have caused the impairment that was witnessed".

Irrelevant!

You cited sources which stipulated as fact that Crystal became impaired after being given a drink at the party. One cited source did not say that. The other sources(Crystal herself and Kim Roberts/Pittman) were not reliable sources.

In my opinion, you fabricated the story that it was stipulated at fact that Crystal became impaired after being given a drink at the party.

Thank you for admitting that Crystal was impaired before ever getting to the party.

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal: The only conclusion one could draw from your opinion is that prior to the party, Crystal indulged in something other than Flexeril which rendered her impaired.

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal: "Her rapid incapacitation soon after was witnessed by all present."

The only Lacrosse player you cited was David Evans, via his statement. His statement clearly said that Crystal was impaired before she arrived at the party.

Why do you say something different.

Anonymous said...

Kenhhyderal: "Soon after [arriving] the girls, were given a drink by the players, one that Roberts/Pittman set aside without consuming Crystal showed signs of impairment."

According to David Evans statement which you say stipulated as fact that Crytstal became impaired after being given a drink, no one gave Crystal a drink, Crystal was impaired when she arrived.

Neither Brian Taylor nor Jason Bissey were present in 610 N Buchanan when Crystal walked in.

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal: "It has not been determine what the cause of her sudden impairment was and one possibility might be that she was administered a substance that impaired her."

It has been determined, via a source you have cited, that Crystal was already impaired when she arrived at the party. A more likely possibility that she self administered the substance which impaired her.

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal: "If the players were dissatisfied with the performance or it's length their only recourse was civil not to rob Crystal."

Crystal did not complete her part of the contract, according to David Evans' statement which you have cited. Therefore, it is questionable whether or not the money in question was hers, that she earned it.

The proper civil solution would have been for Crystal to sue for the money(which would have revealed she had breached the contract). Instead she falsely accused the Lacrosse team of raping her.

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal: It is obvious you never actually read David Evans' statement. Why should we believe that you have read the statements of Brian Taylor or Jason Bissey.

I repeat, I suspect you are getting your data from Crystal's self serving memoir.

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal: "In my opinion it could not have caused the impairment that was witnessed".

I am going to continue making an issue of your errors.

So what! Contrary to what you asserted, Crystal was impaired before she arrived at the party.

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal: "The fact stipulated to was that Crystal was incapacitated shortly after consuming a drink given to her and remained incapacitated until she was at the Durham Intake Center".

If you had really read David Evans statement, you would have read that no one at the Lacrosse party ever gave her a drink and that she was already impaired when she arrived at the party.

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal: "It has not been determine what the cause of [Crstal's] sudden impairment was and one possibility might be that she was administered a substance that impaired her."

Let's correct that statement:

"It has not been determine what the cause of [Crystal's] impairment was and [the most logical] possibility might be that she [self] administered a substance that impaired her."

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal: "Her rapid incapacitation soon after was witnessed by all present."

Wrong!

What was witnessed by all present(which does not include Brian Taylor or Jason Bissey) was that Crystal was already impaired when she arrived at the party.

That was in David Evans' statement which, I believe, you never read.

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal: "The natural history of this rapid onset and short recovery seems indicitive of a substance like chloral hydrate that was not tested for."

Why was it not tested for, if the clinical course of Crystal's impairment and the drug screen revealed no other drug?

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal, I should have said:

Why was it(Chloral Hydrate) not tested for, if the clinical course of Crystal's impairment was indicative of it and the drug screen revealed no other drug?

From what I have found out, Chloral Hydrate has been used as a Date Rape drug.

Anonymous said...

ONE MORE TIME!!!!

Kenhyderal, it was never stipulated as fact in David Evans' statement to the police that Crystal became impaired after drinking something given to her at the party. You would have known that had you read the statement.

Either you did not read the statement or you fabricated. Which is it.

Maybe it's both.

kenhyderal said...

Are you disputing that Crystal was given a drink upon her arrival?

kenhyderal said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal: "Are you disputing that Crystal was given a drink upon her arrival?"

In a couple of words, yes and more.

It was your statement that David Evans' statement to the Durham police was that Crystal was given a drink, which after she took in, she became impaired.

What David Evans said was that Crystal was impaired at the time she arrived. He does not say that anyone gave Crystal a drink. He says he prepared a drink for Kim Roberts/Pittman before Crystal arrived.

So I ask again, Did you fail to read David Evans' statement? If so, why did you make those claims about it.

You are uncomfortable, aren't you Kenny?

kenhyderal said...

Are you impeaching the statements of Taylor and Bissey and Roberts regarding Crystal not appearing to be impaired upon her arrival?

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal: "Are you impeaching the statements of Taylor and Bissey and Roberts regarding Crystal not appearing to be impaired upon her arrival?"

I am saying Bissey and Taylor were not present in the house when Crystal, who according to David Evans who was there, demonstrated behavior that showed impairment.

And I am saying that Kim Roberts/Pittman had documented credibility issues.

It adds up to, it was never stipulated as fact that Crystal became impaire after taking a drink at the party.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous said " What David Evans said was that Crystal was impaired at the time she arrived"... This is a self-serving statement.

Anonymous said...

Kenny, your defense of your position is awfully feeble.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous said "it was never stipulated as fact that Crystal became impaire after taking a drink at the party".... But that she was given a drink is not in dispute.

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal: "'Anonymous said ' What David Evans said was that Crystal was impaired at the time she arrived"... This is a self-serving statement."

You said that avid Evans, in his statement to the police that Crystal took a drink at the party and became impaired. David Evans said that Crystal was impaired when she arrived at the party.

Why don't you read the statement.

I say, you have been caught in a fabrication and are deperately trying to extricate yourself.

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal: "Anonymous said "it was never stipulated as fact that Crystal became impaire after taking a drink at the party".... But that she was given a drink is not in dispute."

Kenny, readDavid Evans' statement, in which you have claimed Crystal was given a drink and then she became impaired. David Evans said Crystal was impaired when she arrived. It does not say any lacrosse player gave her a drink.

Why don't you read the statement and see for yourself.

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal; ""it was never stipulated as fact that Crystal became impaire after taking a drink at the party".... But that she was given a drink is not in dispute."

So you are backing off on your statement, that it was stipulated as fact that Crystal became impaired after she arrived at the party?

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous said: So you are backing off on your statement, that it was stipulated as fact that Crystal became impaired after she arrived at the party".... No, I am saying independent evidence showed she arrived sober and became impaired after she was given a drink. That she was given a drink is not in dispute.

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal: "No, I am saying independent evidence showed she arrived sober and became impaired after she was given a drink. That she was given a drink is not in dispute."

You are failing to recognize, that these issues are in dispute, mainly from your obviously contrived posting.

I say again: You claimed that it was stipulated as fact on the internet that Crystal took a drink at the Lacrosse party and then became impaired. You claimed David Evans' statement to the police said that. David Evans statement to the police did not state that.

If by independent evidence, you mean Jason Bissey and Brian Taylor, neither of them were at the party. Brian Taylor, it seems, took off after delivering Crystal to the party.

Crystal is not and independent or credible source of evidence.

People other than me have noted Kim Roberts/Pittman's credibility. You have not established at all as fact either that Crystal was given a drink at the party or that she did not become impaired until after taking a drink at the party.

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal, if you are saying that independent evidence showed Crystal was sober when she arrived at the party, then the matter by definition is in dispute.

David Evans' statement, which you have cited, says that Crystal was not sober when she arrived at the party.

You have two conflicting accounts. I say that places the matter in dispute.

Anonymous said...

You know, Kenny, Crystal's statement is on line: (http://hackedbannedandlockeddown.yuku.com/forums/17/Case-Documents#.TyGfEEq5Z95

Crystal states that Dan Flannery asked her if she wanted a drink, she replied yes, and he got her one. However, she admits to having two beers at Brian Taylor's house before leaving for the Lacrosse party.

She also alleges three Lacrosse player were with her in the bathroom at the same time(which bathroom has been described as too small to accommodate 4 adults at once.

She states that three members of the Lacrosse team assaulted her, penetrated her, and ejaculated. It was later documented in three places in the medical record that they did not use condoms.

The forensic exam pf the rape kit showed no evidence of blood, saliva or semen. The only DNA recovered from her person did not come from any Lacrosse player.

If the rape had happened as described, such evidence, including DNA from the Lacrosse Players, would have been found.

Ergo, there was no evidence of rape.

Lance the Intern said...

Ken says " No, I am saying independent evidence showed she arrived sober.."

Crystal has admitted to drinking and taking prescription drugs prior arriving at the Duke LAX party.

Anonymous said...

Kenny wrote (regarding Precious and her drugs):

"She was in the habit of taking one prior to doing the acrobatics involved in her routine."
_________________________________

That should have read:

She was in the habit of taking "one" prior to doing the "acrobatics" involved in her "routine".

Anonymous said...

The score so far is Anonymous 30 kenhyderal 8, not counting one comment deleted by the author and one by Lance the intern.

Kenny, your defense of your position continues to be very feeble.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous said "The score so far is Anonymous 30 kenhyderal 8".... That should read "Anonymouses" This isn't exactly The Oxford Union and I beleive I have raised "reasonable doubt" as to the unproven but generally accepted theories of what happened

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @6:11 said "Why was it(Chloral Hydrate) not tested for, if the clinical course of Crystal's impairment was indicative of it and the drug screen revealed no other drug?
From what I have found out, Chloral Hydrate has been used as a Date Rape drug.......... Although Chloral Hydrate has long been used to incapacitate victims it has been difficult to detect. Here is a summary of a recent (1-5-12) application for a patent. Described herein is the first known immunoassay that indirectly confirms the presence or use of chloral hydrate. Because of the rapid metabolism of chloral hydrate, the inventors developed using novel immunogens and a novel antibody, a surrogate immunoassay for its detection and quantification which targets the metabolite TCG. The antibody of the invention is surprisingly specific for TCG. The use of a TCG-specific antibody in an immunoassay format overcomes resource and practical limitations associated with previously described analytical methods used to detect chloral hydrate and its metabolites, enabling its application in diverse areas such as DFR,(Drug Facilitated Rape) water-testing and environmental toxicology. US PAtent Application 20120003674 -Benchikh,McConnell,Fitxgerald & Lowry

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal:

OK I should have anonymouses.

So far as your posting about Chloral Hydrate, it does not change the situation, that no one found a date rape drug in Crystal's system. That in turn does not establish as fact that Crystal was impaired as a result of something given to her at the party.

How does Crystal's statement(have you read it?) that she was assaulted, penetrated ejaculated upon by three Lacrosse players who did not use condoms establish the possibility that non Lacrosse Players perpetrated the assault?

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal: "Anonymous said "The score so far is Anonymous 30 kenhyderal 8".... That should read "Anonymouses" This isn't exactly The Oxford Union and I beleive(sic) I have raised 'reasonable doubt' as to the unproven but generally accepted theories of what happened"

No you haven't. To have raised reasonable doubt the way you think you have you have to establish your contentions as facts. You have not done so.

Incidentally, f you were to consult the Oxford Dictionary, you would see the word is believe, not "beleive".

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal: To have raised what reasonable doubt, it would have helped for you not to compromise your credibility.

You did claim that David Evans, in his statement to the Police, said that Crystal became impaired after taking a drink prepared by Dan Flannery. David Evans did not.

Anonymous said...

Hey Kenny:

Instead of trying to create reasonable doubt about the innocence of the Lacrosse players, why don't you try to prove beyond a reasonable doubt they were guilty.

The prosecutor's obligation, as you have stated, is to prove guilt beyond any reasonable doubt.

Had Ms. Mangum filed a civil suit, she would not have that obligation. The minimum standard she wold have to meet is preponderance of the evidence. Whomever she sued would have had to testify. In a civil case she would have her day in court. Crystal has not sued.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous said: " Instead of trying to create reasonable doubt about the innocence of the Lacrosse players, why don't you try to prove beyond a reasonable doubt they were guilty"... I'm trying to create reasonable doubt as to the theory that nothing happened.

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

Anonymous @ 10:36 AM said: "You have two conflicting accounts. I say that places the matter in dispute" David Evans and other party-goers are not independent witnesses. On the other hand Roberts, Taylor and Bissey are. Also, remeber the 5 drug screen at DUMC came up negative and intake personel at Durham Intake and DUMC did not find she was under the influence of alcohol. Two beers and a Flexeril would not account for the incapacitation observed in Crystal shortly after she consumed a drink provided for her at the party.

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal: "On the other hand Roberts, Taylor and Bissey are(independent witnesses)."

So what. They were not present at the party. They are not witnesses to what happened at the party.

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal: "David Evans [is]] not [an]independent [witness]".

However, David Evans was present at the party, David Evans gave his statement to the police before the case became so notorious, David Evans voluntarily gave a DNA sample to the police before the NTO. People have said that failure to voluntarily give a DNA sample is an indication of guilt.

David Evans, regardless of his presence at the party, is credible.

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal: "I'm trying to create reasonable doubt as to the theory that nothing happened."

How?

Crystal says she was raped. She described a crime in which the perpetrators would have left evidence, including their DNA, on the rape kit, on her. There was no such evidence. The only DNA found on her was older DNA which did not match any Lacrosse player.

How have you created doubt about that?

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal: "I'm trying to create reasonable doubt as to the theory that nothing happened."

How about you provide evidence, in the face of the forensic evidence, that something did happen.

The forensic evidence says something did not happen.

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal: "Two beers and a Flexeril would not account for the incapacitation observed in Crystal shortly after she consumed a drink provided for her at the party."

Crystal's self ingestion of some substance not picked up on the drug screen on top of flexeril and alcohol would.

When was a blood alcohol drawn? If you remember anything about the discussion about Ronald Daye, alcohol is metabolized very rapidly.

If the matron at the access center did not think Crystal was intoxicated, would she have drawn a blood alcohol.

If a blood alcohol was drawn on the morning of 15 March 2006(when Crystal was seen at DUMC, it would not have reflected the level of alcohol in Crystal's blood at the time of the party.

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal: "David Evans and other party-goers are not independent witnesses. On the other hand Roberts, Taylor and Bissey are."

Regardless of your opinions of the witnesses, the fact remains that there is differing accounts, which means the matter is not settled.

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal:

"JOSEPH NEFF, BENJAMIN NIOLET AND ANNE BLYTHE - STAFF WRITERS
Tags: durham | duke_lacrosse
DURHAM -- Four days after she said she was raped, the accuser in the Duke lacrosse case told co-workers at a Hillsborough strip club that she was going to get money from some boys at a Duke party who hadn't paid her, the club's former security manager said.

"She basically said, 'I'm going to get paid by the white boys,' " H.P. Thomas, the former security manager at the Platinum Club, said in an interview Friday. "I said, 'Whatever,' because no one takes her seriously."

Read more here: http://www.newsobserver.com/2006/11/04/97066/accuser-in-duke-lacrosse-case.html#storylink=misearch#storylink=cpy

This was published in the News Observer in early November of 2006, 7 months after the rape case became notorious.

The allegation that Crystal was trying to shake down the Lacrosse players did not come from the defendants or their attorneys.

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal:

This is from Kim Pittman/Roberts' statement to the police:

"We conversed about our plan for the dance. There was a knock on the door and we were handed two drinks of equal amounts. WE did SIP the drinks, but Precious' cup fell into the sink (emphasis added)."

Does that say that Kim did not drink her drink? No. It does say that Crystal(Precious) took as much from her drink as Kim did from hers.

Kim Roberts/Pittman does not state that Crystal took a drink at the party and then became impaired.

Harr Supporter said...

Ken: I'm trying to create reasonable doubt as to the theory that nothing happened.

No you're not.

You're engaging in speculation and trying to pass off innuendo as evidence.

Yes, I believe someone gave Mangum a drink. Yes, I believe she spilled her drink and drank some of Kim's. Yes, I believe she grew more intoxicated over time.

Be honest. Two 22 ounce Ice House beers is close to four normal beers. She may have understated even that. With another drink and flexeril, she could very easily have been intoxicated.

Your comment that she had never had a negative reaction is not compelling. Please explain the episode where she passed out at the Platinum Club and it took four people to carry her out to the parking lot. Please explain the episode with Jarriel Johnson where she got out of the car and walked down Creedmoor until he finally got her to get back in. Please explain why there were no injured parties when there were damages to both the taxi she stole and the police cruiser. Please explain why her mother claimed she had a nervous breakdown a couple of years earlier.

Please provide facts and independent sources. Innuendo is not helpful.

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal:

At the url:

http://johnsville.blogspot.com/2006/04/duke-lacrosse-rape-timeline.html

there are excerpts from Jason Bissey's statements to various parties. He does not comment on the state of Crystal Mangum when she arrived at the party. There is nothing to indicate Mr. Bissey ever saw Crystal when she arrived.

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal:

To borrow from the Bible, my name is not legion for I am not many.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 3:23 said : "The only DNA found on her was older DNA"..... DNA deposition can not be chronicled. Anonymous @ 3:23 also said: "DNA which did not match any Lacrosse player"... There were other people there besides Lacrosse Players who did not submit DNA samples

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 5: 40 said: "To borrow from the Bible, my name is not legion for I am not many" That's not borrowing it's distorting.

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal: "DNA deposition can not be chronicled. Anonymous @ 3:23 also said: "DNA which did not match any Lacrosse player"... There were other people there besides Lacrosse Players who did not submit DNA samples".

Sideny has said that the unidentified Male dna found on Ms. Mangum's person was deposited there before the night of 13/14 March 2006. That was his rationalization that it was not exculpatory - it was not related to the alleged crime. Wendy Murphy, a Crystal supporter at the time, said the dna was old dna. The fact that it was old, degraded dna was why it took a sophisticated test to detect it. So, you are wrong.

You are also wrong about other males, not Lacrosse players, being there who did not submit DNA samples.

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal: "Anonymous @ 5: 40 said: "To borrow from the Bible, my name is not legion for I am not many" That's not borrowing it's distorting."

Distorting is your comment that there were men, not Lacrosse players, at the party who were not required to give DNA samples.

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal:

I will borrow from Shakespeare.

Distorting, thy name is Kenhyderal.

Anonymous said...

Ken: There were other people there besides Lacrosse Players who did not submit DNA samples

THIS STATEMENT IS FALSE.

There were two non-plsayers at the party. They both submitted DNA samples.

Please retract your comment and apologize to the readers on this board for making false statements.

Anonymous said...

For Anonymous January 27, 2012 4:09 AM:

Kenhyderal again goes down in flames while taxiing the wrong way on the runway.

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal: "There were other people there[at the lacrosse team party] besides Lacrosse Players who did not submit DNA samples"

Here is the full extent of Kenny's hypothesis.

These "other people" perpetrated the rape. Members of the Lacrosse team could identify them. But the Lacrosse team covered up for them, even after they were ordered to submit to DNA testing, even after three of their teammates, who they knew were innocent, were indicted for the crime.

Can we say totally implausible, boys and girls?

And Ken says he has created reasonable doubt to the hypothesis that nothing happened at the Lacrosse party.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 4:09 AM said: "There were two non-players at the party"..... Two, that were identified, that is. As well, crimes other then DNA depositing rape were possibly committed by people there present; eg. administering a noxious substance, kidnapping, sexual assult and theft.

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderalfinally emerging): "Anonymous @ 4:09 AM said: "There were two non-players at the party"..... Two, that were identified, that is. As well, crimes other then DNA depositing rape were possibly committed by people there present; eg. administering a noxious substance, kidnapping, sexual assult and theft."

Another completely implausible scenario from Kenny. If there was no evidence of the crime with which the Lacrosse players were charges, then other crimes must have happened for which there was no evidence.

The charges of sexual assaul and kidnapping were dismissed, because there was no evidence they ever happened.

The charge of theft was never filed. That all revolved around "Crystal's" money. It could have been disputed whether or not the money in question was Crystal's money.

As to administration of a noxious substance, even Kenny admits there was no evidence of that.

Anonymous said...

To my last post let's add, Kenny thinks that a campaign was initiated to discredit and vilify Ms. Mangum because no one was ever charged with or convicted of these crimes for which there was no evidence.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal:

You are channeling Sid-ninny.

Sid has been asked multiple times why there was no evidence of the crime which Crystal described, why there was no evidence incriminating any of the accused, and Sid-ninny replies that the crime could have happened without leaving evidence.

Document your source which confirms your allegation that non-lacrosse players, who were not required to give samples for DNA testing were there.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 2:59 AM said : "distorting is thy name kenhyderal" ....Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please: Mark Twain

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 10:27 said: "Document your source which confirms your allegation that non-lacrosse players, who were not required to give samples for DNA testing were there".... To date they have been un-identified. I have been assured, though, by a former poster on this blog (Kilgo) that the conspiracy of silence will soon be breeched.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: ""distorting is thy name kenhyderal" ....Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please: Mark Twain"

I have provided you with facts which disprove your allegation, that it was stipulated as fact on the internet that Crystal became impaired after taking a drink at the party.

Dan Flannery's statement is accessible at http://hackedbannedandlockeddown.yuku.com/topic/839#.TyLteyO5Z94:

"When the black girl arrived, she was dropped off by a male and was suspected to be high and drunk. She could hardly speak and her words were slurred and at times incomprehensible."

Mind you, this statement was made freely and before the case became a conyroversy.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "To date they have been un-identified. I have been assured, though, by a former poster on this blog (Kilgo) that the conspiracy of silence will soon be breeched(sic)."

Kilgo is someone who claimed to have extensive knowledge of the case. Every time he was challenged to discuss that information, he backed down.

Kilgo has been saying for years this so called conspiracy of silence would soon be breached. So far it hasn't happened.

If you have been getting your information from Kilgo, you have been accessing a very unreliable source.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal:

You say Jason Bissey witnessed Crystal Mangum arrive at 610 Buchanan and that she was sober. Jason Bissey's statement says he first saw Crystal at 11:50 PM. David Evans, in his statement, says Cystal arrived at 11:45 PM. It seems Jason Bissey did not see Crystal arrive.

I bet you were unaware that case related documents were available on line, did you.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: When you say the wall of silence will soon be "breeched(sic)", what did you mean?

Are you saying the other people who were at the party will come forward and admit that they, not the Lacrosse team members, perpetrated the alleged rape.

Wouldn't that derail Sid-ninny's train!

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "Anonymous @ 2:59 AM said : "distorting is thy name kenhyderal" ....Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please: Mark Twain".

Are you saying you can not distort facts because you can not get your facts straight.

It is obvious in many of your recent posts you did not get your facts straight.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal:

Actually I said, Distortion thy name is Kenhyderal.

Anonymous said...

OOPS! Excuse me.

What I said was Distorting, thy name is Kenhyderal.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 11:05 said: "Are you saying the other people who were at the party will come forward and admit that they, not the Lacrosse team members, perpetrated the alleged rape"..... No, I'm saying Lacrosse Players who were not party to the alleged assult and whose only crime would be failing to come forward will, in conscience, reveal what they know

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "Anonymous @ 11:05 said: "Are you saying the other people who were at the party will come forward and admit that they, not the Lacrosse team members, perpetrated the alleged rape"..... No, I'm saying Lacrosse Players who were not party to the alleged assult and whose only crime would be failing to come forward will, in conscience, reveal what they know"

So now you are waffling and saying that members of the Lacrosse team did rape Crystal Mangum. Why are you so interested in non Lacrosse players who were not DNA tested?

So explain why there was no evidence which incriminated any Lacrosse player in said alleged rape? Why was it that the only male DNA recovered from the rape kit and from Crystal's person matched males other than the Lacrosse players?

Actually, the Lacrosse players have all come forward with what they know, that no crime ever happened.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 10:43 said : "I have provided you with facts which disprove your allegation, that it was stipulated as fact on the internet that Crystal became impaired after taking a drink at the party"..... You're hanging your hat on this rather weak, straw-man, arguement, that there exists a dispute over whether Crystal arrived in an impaired condition. Self serving statements by Lacrosse Team members seem to say she did and independent witness Taylor said she did not. I'm asking you, though, was Crystal not given a drink when she arrived. The drink in question is referred to by, former, defendant Evans, alleged victim Crystal and also by independent witness Roberts. Do you deny the existence of this drink. Are you suggesting, that it was not offered to Crystal, and to say that it was is a fabrication, by her, to further a possible allegation that she was administered a noxious substance.

Lance the Intern said...

I'm still attempting to understand your point here, Kenhyderal. I think you're saying that there were non-LAX people that raped Crystal Mangum and the Duke LAX players know who these people are....

It's an interesting theory. If this were the case, why would Nifong order the DPD to run a LAX-team only photo lineup?

Why would Crystal pick the 3 people she did?

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-Hyderal: "You're hanging your hat on this rather weak, straw-man, arguement, that there exists a dispute over whether Crystal arrived in an impaired condition."

Kenny, it was your contention that the statements of David Evans, Crystal Mangum and Kim Roberts/Pittman established as fact that Crystal became impaired after taking a drink at the Lacrosse party. That was simply not so.David Evans statement, in particular, said Crystal was already impaired when she arrived. Dan Flannery's statement was that Crystal was impaired at the time.

"...was Crystal not given a drink when she arrived. The drink in question is referred to by, former, defendant Evans, alleged victim Crystal and also by independent witness Roberts."

The drink in question was not referred to by David Evans. He referred only to a drink he fixed for Kim Roberts/Pittman. Crystal's statement was that while they were in the bathroom preparing, someone asked if they wanted drinks and they replied yes. Crystal does not say she drank it.

From Kim Roberts Police statement to the police given between 2:15 PM AND 4 PM ON MARCH 22, 2006: "We conversed about our plan for the dance. There was a knock on the door and we were handed two drinks of equal amounts. We did sip the drinks, but Precious cup fell into the sink." In other words, Crystal did not drink very much at the party.

It is by no means established as fact that Crystal became impaired after she took a drink at the party.

Your approach is very Nifongian. Dismiss any evidence which calls your belief into question. It does not work that way

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "Do you deny the existence of this drink. Are you suggesting, that it was not offered to Crystal, and to say that it was is a fabrication, by her, to further a possible allegation that she was administered a noxious substance."

I obviously do not deny that Crystal was given a drink. I am saying that it is not established as a fact that she drank that drink. Kim Roberts/Pittman's account was that she spilled her drink.

I do assert, contrary to what you have said, it has not been established as fact that Crystal became impaired as a result of a drink given to her by a member of the Lacrosse team.

You can not dismiss evidence which you do not like.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal:

I again point out the implausibility of your belief about other people at the Lacrosse party.

Your claim is that other people who were not members of the Lacrosse team and who were not DNA tested raped Crystal Mangum. You claim that members of the team could identify the perpetrators but did not. You are saying that members of the Lacrosse team still refused to identify the perpetrators even though three of their own were indicted for the crime.

That scenario, I say again is not at all plausible.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal, something for you to digest, from the News and Observer April 13, 2007:

"In early 2006, she began dancing under the name "Precious" at The Platinum Club, a rundown strip joint in the countryside between Durham and Hillsborough. Yolanda Haynes, The Platinum Club's manager at the time, told investigators that Mangum seemed mentally unstable and appeared to be under the influence of drugs or drink whenever she was there.

Read more here: http://www.newsobserver.com/2007/04/13/44070/mangums-life-conflict-contradictions.html#storylink=cpy

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "The drink in question is referred to by, former, defendant Evans, alleged victim Crystal and also by independent witness Roberts. Do you deny the existence of this drink."

David Evans did not refer to that drink in his statement to the police. Roberts' reference to the drink is that Crystal sipped it rather than drank it and then spilled it in the sink.

That does not establish as fact that Crystal became impaired as a result of a drink she took at the Lacrosse party.

So, instead of throwing more tantrums, why not man up and admit you got it wrong.

If it helps you, I admit I got it wrong about Jason Bissey not being able to see Crystal when she arrived at the Lacrosse house. Based on David Evans' statement I believed she arrived at 11:50 PM. Jason Bissey said he saw her at 11:45 PM. After reviewing other sources, including(don't flinch) KC Johnson's Until Proven Innocent, I learned Crystal arrived at 11:40 PM.

See, it isn't hard to admit a mistake.

kenhyderal said...

Lance @ 2:32 PM 1-27-12 said: "I think you're saying that there were non-LAX people that raped Crystal Mangum and the Duke LAX players know who these people are".... I'm also suggesting that crimes, other then rape, were commited possibly by LAX Players. Non-player atendees, other then the two, photographically identified, were also at the party and remain unidetified and un-tested. Serious crimes, other then DNA depositing rape, could also have occured.(eg. sexual assult, administering a noxious substance and theft.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "Serious crimes, other then DNA depositing rape, could also have occured.(eg. sexual assult, administering a noxious substance and theft."

The sexual assault alleged by Ms. Mangum was a "DNA depositing rape". What you are saying is what Mr. Nifong was saying when he dropped the rape charge, namely, if we can't prove the alleged crime, let's prosecute anyway.

Name a legal expert who says that is the way to proceed in a criminal prosecution.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "Serious crimes, other then DNA depositing rape, could also have occured.(eg. sexual assult, administering a noxious substance and theft."

Referring back to your previous posts, you admit no noxious substance was found in Ms. Mangum's system. That does not support a suspicion that Lacrosse players administered a noxious substance.

It has not been established, by sources you have referenced, that Ms. Mangum became impaired via a drink she was given at the party.

On the other hand, according to this N&O article I cited, there were reports of Ms. Mangum showing up for work, acting as if she were impaired.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "Non-player atendees, other then the two, photographically identified, were also at the party and remain unidetified(sic) and un-tested."

According to you that information comes from Kilgo. Kilgo, as I have told you before, has a history of claiming to know things about the Lacrosse case which no one else knows, then backing down whren challenged to reveal what he knows. That says, Kilgo is not the source of any valid information about the rape case.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "'I think you're saying that there were non-LAX people that raped Crystal Mangum and the Duke LAX players know who these people are'.... I'm also suggesting that crimes, other then rape, were commited(sic)...".

If you are saying that people other than Lacrosse team members who raped Crystal and that the LAX players knew who they were, then you still have something to explain

Why would the LAX players reveal to the authorities who they were once it was clear they were suspects in the alleged crime(an NTO in NC is issued to have suspects give evidence such as DNA)? Why would the LAX players not reveal who they were when three of their own were indicted?

To say people do not act in their own best interests is not an answer. It is a dodge.

Kilgo liked to dodge when challenged to reveal what he knew about the Lacrosse case.

Anonymous said...

Clarification needed:

I should have said "Why would the LAX players not reveal to the authorities who they were once it was clear they were suspects in the alleged crime(an NTO in NC is issued to have suspects give evidence such as DNA)? Why would the LAX players not reveal who they were when three of their own were indicted?

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "Serious crimes, other then DNA depositing rape, could also have occured.(eg. sexual assult, administering a noxious substance and theft."

It is a matter of record tha Mr. Nifong, in spite of his zeal to convict the Lacrosse players, did not charge them with theft. At one point Crystal was saying that Kim Roberts/Pittman took her money. You seem unconcerned about that.

Under what legal theory is it proper to presume other crimes were committed if the alleged crime could not be proven?

I remind you, Ms. Mangum alleged a "DNA depositing rape". Forensic examination did not show any evidence of said "DNA depositing rape".

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal, let's get back to the non LAX player DNA found on Ms. Mangum's person. You have contended that the time of DNA deposition could not be determined. You suggest that the non LAX DNA could have been deposited at the time of the alleged rape.

If so, explain why Mr. Nifong did not attempt to identify who those non-LAX males were. It has been determined in open court Mr. Nifong concealed the evidence.

Mr. Nifong ordered the test which revealed the non LAX DNA because he believed he could identify suspects from the results.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 11:01 AM said: "It is a matter of record tha Mr. Nifong, in spite of his zeal to convict the Lacrosse players, did not charge them with theft. At one point Crystal was saying that Kim Roberts/Pittman took her money. You seem unconcerned about that".... At the time, Crystal did not know who had taken her money. She only knew it was gone. Investigation later discovered where it went.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "At the time, Crystal did not know who had taken her money. She only knew it was gone. Investigation later discovered where it went."

So where did it go? Cite a source that describes that investigation.

It still doesn't change the fact that Mr. Nifong, in spite of his zeal to convict the LAX players, never charged them with theft.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 10:40 AM said : "Referring back to your previous posts, you admit no noxious substance was found in Ms. Mangum's system. That does not support a suspicion that Lacrosse players administered a noxious substance" ..... There were only 5 substances tested for
Four of them were common illegal street drugs. The date rape drug Rohypnol was only tested for in hair samples weeks later. The most obvious drug comensurate with the symptoms Crystal exhibited was not tested for. This drug, Chloral Hydrate, is extremely fast acting and very quickly completely metabolized. Until very recently testing for it has been notoriously difficult. New methods not in use at the time depend on a metabolite that can later be detected in urine.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal, with respect to your last post:

Nevertheless, a drug screen was done and did not reveal any noxious substance in her system. That does not support the charge that a noxious substance was administered, regardless of whether or not Chloral Hydrate could have been used. The fact that Chloral Hydrate could not be tested for is not evidence that it was used. Consult some attorney if you doubt me.

Add to this, it has not been established as fact that Crystal consumed a drink at the Party.

It is not established that Crystal became impaired at the party. There is testimony that she was impaired when she got to the party. That you call such testimony self serving is irrelevant.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal, again referring back to your last post:

If Crystal was in fact impaired by Chloral Hydrate, what establishes it that it was administered at the party.

It is entirely possible that Crystal self administered the drug before the party.

According to the N&O, I say again, it was said that Crystal would show up at her place of work impaired. Those events happened before the Lacrosse party.

Of course, in spite of the fact that this news appeared in the News and Observer after AG Cooper expressed his belief that the LAX 3 were innocent, you would regard it as self serving, a story brewed up by the LAX defendants' lawyers to discredit Ms. Mangum.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal, here is something more for you to ponder:

A Sergeant Shelton was the DPD officer who responded to Kim Roberts/Pittman's 911 call. That was the call in which she said that a rape had happened but that she and her girlfriend had been subjected to racial epithets spoken by people in the LAX house.

Sergeant Shelton eventually responded to Pittman'Roberts second call from the Kroger parking lot, made to report that Crystal Mangum would not get out of her car. According to Sergeant Shelton, Crystal was walking outside the LAX house when the epithets were made and that she picked her up.

Pittman/Roberts did not mention the party let alone the alleged rape.

Is it plausible that Pittman/Roberts was at the scene of this crime but would not report the crime to the police? Is it plausible that Pittman Roberts would pick up the alleged victim, then try to have her evicted from her car.

While we are at it, Sergeant Shelton tried to find out from Crystal what had happened. According to his notes, Crystal did waiver between yes I was raped and no I wasn't before settling on Yes I was.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 1: 37 PM said: So where did it (the money) go? Cite a source that describes that investigation"..... Let us start with David Evans statement.
"It was then that Peter Lamade said he had her money. I don't know if Ryan or him took the money, but I yelled and reiterated the bodyguard message and how the cops were going to come and that we needed them out. I took the money to Dan and told him to give it back and get them out.
After the whole thing we went next door thinking the cops might come because of the "racial slur", I don't know what was said.
When we got back Danny gave me $260 [it looks like 360 was scratched out and was replaced by 260] that he still had from what was taken. I gave him a $100 bill because he had paid extra. He won a $100 game of beer pong. I put the $160 on my desk, and the next day put it on our living room table" This money was seized in a search warrant. I might also point out that this money has never been returned to Crystal

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @2:08 said: " There is testimony that she was impaired when she got to the party" And, independent, testimony that she was not.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "' There is testimony that she was impaired when she got to the party' And, independent, testimony that she was not."

Ergo, because there is conflicting testimony, it has not been established that she became impaired because of an event at the party.

You can not discard testimony because it does not support your idea of what happened. It doesn't work that way.

Except for corrupt prosecutors, such as Mike Nifong, who are determined to convict regardless of evidence of innocence.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal:

So you have finally gotten around to reading David Evans' statement.

It says that members of the Lacrosse team wanted to take back the money because Crystal failed to perform. The contract was she was to dance two hours and she did not.

It seems David Evans was against the idea of taking Crystal's money and tried to prevent it. You cannot say David Evans had any intent to steal.

If the money was seized in a search warrant from the Lacrosse house, does that not say that the police took the money. If Crystal never got it back, would that not be the fault of the police department?

Was any of the money in Crystal's purse, which she abandoned. What happened to that purse. Was that purse seized in a search?

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @5:31 PM said: " Was any of the money in Crystal's purse, which she abandoned. What happened to that purse. Was that purse seized in a search? The money was taken from her purse. The purse/ make-up bag and her identifation documents, one of her shoes and her cell phone were all seized. The money seized was found outside the purse. The amount found was $160.00 dollars. That would be $140.00 short; given the amount in question is $400.00 and that $100 of the $260.00 handed to Evans by Flannery was returned to him; as per David Evans' statement. None of this property has ever been returned to Crystal. She did make attempts to recover it after Cooper dropped the case but was given a run-around

kenhyderal said...

I suspect Kilgo, like myself is one of the few posters who personally know anyone who was at 410N Buchannan on the night in question. Like many of the Anonymous posters Kilgo can indulge in posting assinine and non-productive garbage that in no way furthers the discussions and most often consist of ad-hominen attacks on anyone proposing alternate arguments. I wish these Anonymous posters, though, would get a back-bone and post under a user name so at least one knows who they are debating with. In that respect Kilgo shows more courage.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal

If you know who was at the party why do you not go to the police with the information. Why don't you name the people who were at the party?

In any event, you boast of having a user name. When one goes to your profile one finds no information. You are doing a lot of hiding yourself, in a big glass house.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "I suspect Kilgo, like myself is one of the few posters who personally know anyone who was at 410N Buchannan on the night in question."

I thought I'd mention the party that night was at 610 North Buchanan.

Anonymous said...

Kne-ninny-hyderal:

How do you know any non Lacrosse player at the party at 610 N Buchanan perpetrated any crime?

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal:

Let's go at this again. In her statement, Crystal alleged a DNA depositing crime.

Explain how that could indicate the occurrence of a non DNA depositing sexual assault.

The absence of LAX DNA on the rape kit would indicate only that no DNA depositing crime occurred. It would also indicate that Crystal's allegations were false.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal:

Here is something for you to digest. You seem to regard David Evans' statement as an admission that the crime of theft had occurred. Why did the police then no arrest and charge any of the people named with theft?

Was it because the police were focused only on getting members of the Lacrosse team for rape?

They would have had no rape charge to investigate had Crystal not made her false allegations of rape. So, to an extent, Crystal herself is responsible for whatever non prosecution happened over her money.

In any event, it is clear that Crystal breached the contract. She took money to perform for two hours. Then, she did not do so. So it is questionable whether or not she earned the money.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "I wish these Anonymous posters, though, would get a back-bone and post under a user name so at least one knows who they are debating with. In that respect Kilgo shows more courage."

Kilgo makes allegations then fails to back them up. That is cowardice, not courage.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "[Crystal] did make attempts to recover [the money] after Cooper dropped the case but was given a run-around".

If she was given a run around by the police, how is that the responsibility of the Lacrosse team. David Evans tried to recover the money for her. The police, according to you, impounded the money. Aren't they the reason Crystal never got the money back?

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal:

I suspect Kilgo is yourself.

In any event Kilgo's modus operandi was to claim to have extensive knowledge of the Lacrosse case, more knowledge than anyone else on the face of the planet. It seems he never went to the police with his knowledge. Whenever challenged to reveal his knowledge, he backed away. In any event that is not a display of courage. Neither is using a user name rather than posting as anonymous when there is no information about you on your profile site.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "...many of the Anonymous posters...can indulge in posting assinine and non-productive garbage...".

It seems what you define as "assinine and non-productive garbage" are posts which do not agree with your totally implausible allegations about the Lacrosse party, posts which point out the flaws in your reasoning.

Like Mike Nifong, you want anything that exonerates the Lacrosse team suppressed, because you can't deal with it.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "I suspect Kilgo, like myself is one of the few posters who personally know anyone who was at 410N Buchannan on the night in question."

Did either you or kilgo contact the police with that information after the story of the night of 13/14 March 2006 broke.

If not, would that not be obstruction of justice?

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal:

If you do know kilgo, if you do know Crystal Mangum, it makes it kind of unlikely you are posting from Dubai. In turn, that makes it likely you are hiding who you are.

As I said in a previous post, you are hiding in a big glass house.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal, let's get back to Sergeant Shelton's notes.

You have contended that Pittman/Roberts' statement confirmed Crystal had become impaired after taking a drink at the Lacrosse party.

When Sergeant Shelton encountered Ms. Pittman/Roberts at the Kroger store, she told Sergeant Pittman that Crystal was impaired but she did not know why. I believe she said she did not know what was going on but she knew Crystal needed help.

She did not mention the party. She claimed she had picked up Crystal while Crystal was walking by the Lacrosse house.

Why would Ms. Pittman/Roberts not report to Sergeant Shelton that Crystal had become impaired after taking a drink at the party.

If she had done so, don't you think that Sergeant Shelton would have gotten her to a medical facility which could have run a tox screen?

kenhyderal said...

Anononymous @ 4: 16 said :" I thought I'd mention the party that night was at 610 North Buchanan".... I stand corrected. Anonymous @ 4:45 AM said :
Did either you or kilgo contact the police with that information after the story of the night of 13/14 March 2006 broke"... The only person I know who was at @ 610N Buchanan is Crystal. Kilgo, I understand, knows members of the Lacrosse Team. Apparently he has been told by one of them that if he is ever subpoenaed to testify in the civil suit he will answer truthfully. Anonymous @ 4:48 said: " If you do know kilgo, if you do know Crystal Mangum, it makes it kind of unlikely you are posting from Dubai. In turn, that makes it likely you are hiding who you are"....... I do not know Kilgo personaly but I did work with him on an effort to secure a bail for Crystal, in the Milton Walker case. Dr. Harr can testify as to my identity. In fact it was I who introduced Dr.Harr to Crystal by getting Crystal to make contact with him. Subsequent to that she made the decision to join his Justice for Nifong Committee

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 4: 42 said: "It seems what you define as "assinine and non-productive garbage" are posts which do not agree with your agree with your totally implausible allegations " Not at all; it's all this kenny-kenny-kenny and hinny-hinny-hinny stuff. Time to grow up.

kenhyderal said...

@ Anonymous @12:21. Good questions. It's difficult to understand why Kim Roberts both in her phone call about the racial epithet and at Kroger's failed to mention that her and Crystal had been performing at the party. It may have had something to do with her parole situation.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal:

What you define as asinine and immature is disagreement with your highly implausible hypotheses.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "Good questions. It's difficult to understand why Kim Roberts both in her phone call about the racial epithet and at Kroger's failed to mention that her and Crystal had been performing at the party. It may have had something to do with her parole situation."

How would it have violated her parole to inform an officer that her "companion" had been administered a noxious substance?

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "Time to grow up."

Yes, Kenny, it is time for you to grow up and realize you are aiding and abetting Sid-ninny's vendetta against three innocent men.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "Kilgo, I understand, knows members of the Lacrosse Team. Apparently he has been told by one of them that if he is ever subpoenaed to testify in the civil suit he will answer truthfully."

If I recall correctly, that was part of the boasts he was making, that he had more knowledge of the Lacrosse case than anyone. I say again, whenever challenged to reveal what he knew, he always ran away.

If he was not present at the Lacrosse party, it is impossible for him to have the knowledge he claims. If he did have knowledge which would have incriminated people, then it is a mystery why he did not give that knowledge to the police.

Kilgo is a fraud, in my opinion, and you are not very wise if you believe he is a reliable source of information.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal; "The only person I know who was at @ 610N Buchanan is Crystal."

So how can you be so sure there were non Lacrosse players there?

One thing that has been established as fact is that Crystal identified Brad Ross with 100% certainty as being at the party. Brad Ross was not even in Durham that night.

So if you are relying for Crystal for your information, Crystal, like Kilgo, is not a reliable source.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "It's difficult to understand why Kim Roberts both in her phone call about the racial epithet and at Kroger's failed to mention that her and Crystal had been performing at the party. It may have had something to do with her parole situation."

Explain, if you can, why reporting a rape to the Durham police would have adversely affected her parole situation. I would think making a 911 call to falsely accuse men at 610 N Buchanan of yelling racial slurs at her would be more of a risk to her parole status. At the time she made the call, the house was empty.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "Apparently he[kilgo] has been told by one of them that if he is ever subpoenaed to testify in the civil suit he will answer truthfully."

If that is indeed true, if that player had information of relevance to the Lacrosse case, then why did Kilgo not report that to the police.

It is a matter of public record that Mr. Nifong tried to intimidate Lacrosse players into giving incriminating evidence against whoever Mr. Nifong considered a suspect. His statement was that anyone who had knowledge of the crime and did not come forward with incriminating testimony would be charged with aiding and abetting.

Of course, the truth is, no crime happened and therefore, any Lacrosse player giving testimony of such a crime would be committing perjury.

I say again, Mr. Nifong should have been charged with attempting to suborn perjury.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal:

Referring to kilgo as your source of information about the Lacrosse party does not do anything for your credibility.

Anonymous said...

From Me: "
How would it have violated her[Kim's] parole to inform an officer that her "companion' had been administered a noxious substance?"

The only way I can think of is that Kim herself administered the noxious substance.

According to her statement, Crystal did not drink her drink, she spilled it into the sink.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 272   Newer› Newest»