Thursday, February 16, 2012

Why Tracey Cline should be reinstated as Durham D.A.

Readers of my blog and viewers of my flog know that I am no fan of suspended Durham District Attorney Tracey Cline. As the county’s head prosecutor, I believe that she should have stepped in and dismissed her Assistant D. A. Angela Garcia-Lamarca’s 2010 vendetta prosecution of Crystal Mangum, the Duke Lacrosse victim/accuser. Likewise, I feel she should have moved to force prosecutor Kelly Gauger to drop the murder and larceny charges against Ms. Mangum related to the April 13, 2011 death of Reginald Daye. Despite the fact that D.A. Cline is a friend of former Durham D.A. Mike Nifong and has treated him with civility and respect, I am nonetheless not an ardent backer of her.

You may then query, why do I advocate for her to be reinstated as Durham district attorney? The answer is surprisingly simple and devoid of political prejudices. Tracey Cline should be reinstated as the district attorney because she was overwhelmingly elected to that position by the people of Durham County. In other words, the people had spoken… people who Ms. Cline represented. Her job, and that of any other elected official, be it municipal, county, or state, should not be threatened because of a single individual’s discontent.

Durham defense attorney Kerry Sutton is certainly not an objective bystander when it comes to D.A. Cline. Attorney Sutton had sparred with Cline numerous times within the confines of the courtrooms housed in the Bull City’s justice building. The News & Observer even intimated that Ms. Sutton may have political aspirations and be considering a run for the state senate. Wherever the truth lies, her motives for launching the attack against Ms. Cline can be brought into question.

I am also bothered by the fact that a “little known law” that is on the books and one that is rarely used is the basis for the removal of Ms. Cline from elected office. Not only that, but the law is ambiguous, vague, and subject to a wide range of interpretation. Yes, I am concerned that a “little known law” is being used in an attempt to oust from office the county’s highest ranking prosecutor.

Ms. Sutton seems to be especially offended by the language Tracey Cline used in going after Superior Court Judge Orlando Hudson. She refers to it as “venom.” However, Cline supporters may construe this same language as a yardstick to measure her passion for vigorously prosecuting those charged with crimes. Her supporters may attribute her defiant and unyielding stance against Judge Hudson to be an indication of her dedication and determination in the conviction of her beliefs.

In a way, and to an extent, I can appreciate Ms. Cline’s actions in going against the superior court judge… although I would never advise it. I agree that, as human beings, judges make mistakes and that none are infallible. For example, in my civil rights discrimination lawsuit against Duke University, Magistrate Judge P. Trevor Sharp, in a Recommendation, misstated facts about the case; inaccurate and prejudicial “facts” which he attributed to me. He stated that I represented that “after an interview with U.S. Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer concluded, I began passing out my business cards.” This was totally incorrect, false and misleading. Specifically, in my Complaint, I mentioned that “while waiting for the interview to begin I passed out a few cards to some individuals I had engaged in conversation.” Kerry Sutton and others may consider my use of the accusatory term that he “lied” to be venom. I would say that it is possibly a “politically incorrect” term… but it is nevertheless the truth. Should I have used a less inflammatory term to describe the magistrate judge’s misstatements? Possibly. But like Ms. Cline, I am extremely passionate about the anti-Nifong discrimination to which I was subjected by Duke University and I do not feel that I should be sanctioned because of it.

The fact that Judge Robert Hobgood, who is charged with overseeing Sutton’s complaint against Cline, decided to immediately suspend Ms. Cline as Durham district attorney does not bode well for her. Doing so automatically prejudices the case against her by implying that the action taken was a safeguard to prevent Ms. Cline from pursuing a course that would result in an imminent threat or peril. Without an explanation from Judge Hobgood about his decision for immediate suspension, it is not unreasonable to believe that he caved to The News & Observer-led media vendetta against Ms. Cline.

It has been evident for months that the Triangle area newspaper had Tracy Cline in its crosshairs… just like it did her predecessor, Mike Nifong. The three part series by the N & O, titled “Twisted Truth” was a pathetic bid to stir the public into an anti-Cline frenzy, just like it had successfully accomplished against Mr. Nifong. In its rare exception to the PAPEN (Protect All Prosecutors Except Nifong) policy, the newspaper was at the vanguard of the media offensive against Cline. It highlighted a few instances in which it alleged the prosecutor had withheld evidence and misled the court… dramatizing them as if they were singular events throughout the state’s history of juris prudence. Had the media been conscientiously objective, then it would have produced three-part series about the following legal luminaries: Wilson prosecutor Bill Wolfe for his mishandling of the case against James Arthur Johnson; Wake County prosecutor Tom Ford and his misconduct in Gregory Taylor and Carletta Alston cases; prosecutor David Hoke’s withheld exculpatory evidence in the Alan Gell case, and many others. Note, that although The News & Observer did extensively cover the Alan Gell case and its associated prosecutorial misconduct, it went out of its way to shield the prosecutors and take the focus away from their misdeeds.

Without doubt the media’s attacks against Tracey Cline are rooted in the Duke Lacrosse case and are a part of the seemingly endless and ubiquitous vindictive web cast by the Carpetbagger Jihadists in an attempt to ensnare those considered by the Powers-That-Be to be on the wrong end of that case. For example, the discrimination against me by Duke University had its origins from that case, as well. That the repetitive onslaught to remove Ms. Cline as Durham district attorney is vindictive and politically motivated is clearly evident.

Do I agree with Ms. Cline’s repeated attacks against Judge Hudson? No.
Do I believe her disparaging confrontations against the judge are productive? No.
Do I agree with the way her assistant prosecutor Garcia-Lamarca handled the 2010 case against Crystal Mangum? No.
Do I agree with the ongoing prosecution of Mangum by her assistant Kelly Gauger? No.
The most important question is, however, do I think Tracey Cline should be removed from office because of my disagreements with the way she has conducted herself as Durham district attorney? No. Because the people of Durham elected her to the office of Durham district attorney, the people should be the ones to remove her, if so inclined… not a single individual who may or may not have an ax to grind against Ms. Cline.

I submit that instead of using a “little known law” that is rarely used to remove Tracey Cline as Durham district attorney, Kerry Sutton should have taken the more appropriate and responsible track of initiating and circulating a recall petition amongst the Durham County electorate… allowing the people to determine the destiny of their elected officials instead of a single person.


231 comments:

1 – 200 of 231   Newer›   Newest»
Anonymous said...

Sid-ninny: "I believe that she should have stepped in and dismissed her Assistant D. A. Angela Garcia-Lamarca’s 2010 vendetta prosecution of Crystal Mangum, the Duke Lacrosse victim/accuser."

Sid-ninny, Crystal was the victim of no ne but herself. She accused three innocent men of raping her and was revealed as a false accuser.

Anonymous said...

Sid-ninny: "You may then query, why do I advocate for her to be reinstated as Durham district attorney? The answer is surprisingly simple and devoid of political prejudices. Tracey Cline should be reinstated as the district attorney because she was overwhelmingly elected to that position by the people of Durham County."

And you advocate that Mike Nifong be restored to the practice of law even though he perpetrated one of the grossest wrongful prosecutions in NC and US history.

Anonymous said...

Sid-ninny: "[Tracey Cline's} job, and that of any other elected official, be it municipal, county, or state, should not be threatened because of a single individual’s discontent."

It wasn't. It was threatened because of Ms. Cline's inappropriate behavior and ridiculous attempt to get Judge Orlando Hudson.

Anonymous said...

Why don't you ask Frankie Washington and Leon Brown their opinion on Tracey Cline?

Anonymous said...

Sid-ninny: The News & Observer even intimated that Ms. Sutton may have political aspirations".

Mike Ni-nny-fong had political aspirations, the achievement of which motivated his wrongful prosecution of the innocent, falsely accused Lacrosse players, something you have tried to deny.

Anonymous said...

Sid-ninny: "I am also bothered by the fact that a “little known law” that is on the books and one that is rarely used is the basis for the removal of Ms. Cline from elected office. Not only that, but the law is ambiguous, vague, and subject to a wide range of interpretation."

Sid-ninny, considering your admitted lack of legal expertise, I submit you are incapable of determining any law, little known or otherwise, is "ambiguous, vague, and subject to a wide range of interpretation".

You were not bothered by the attempt of a corrupt prosecutor to wrongfully convict three innocent, falsely accused Duke Lacrosse players.

Anonymous said...

Sid-ninny: "...Cline supporters may construe this same language as a yardstick to measure her passion for vigorously prosecuting those charged with crimes."

Do "charged with crimes" include Frankie Washington and Leon Brown, two men who spent long terms in confinement waiting for trial when Tracey Cline prosecuted them for crimes they did not commit?

Anonymous said...

When she loses her license, you j4n guys can buy her a gee-tar like you did Mikey.

They can sit on de' po'ch an' sang dem blues away.

Anonymous said...

Sid-ninny: "But like Ms. Cline, I am extremely passionate about the anti-Nifong discrimination to which I was subjected by Duke University and I do not feel that I should be sanctioned because of it."

No, what you are rabid about is conducting a vendetta against the three innocent Lacrosse players whom Crystal Mangum falsely accused of raping her

Anonymous said...

Sid-ninny, you would not refer to Ms. Mangum as the Victim/accuser in the Lacrosse case unless you believed the Lacrosse players were guilty.

Anonymous said...

Sid-ninny: "The three part series by the N & O, titled “Twisted Truth” was a pathetic bid to stir the public into an anti-Cline frenzy, just like it had successfully accomplished against Mr. Nifong."

Yet you call Mr. Ni-nny-fong's attempts to stir up piblic condemnation of the Duke Lacrosse team as mild attempts to get witnesses to come forth.

Anonymous said...

Sid-ninny: "The fact that Judge Robert Hobgood, who is charged with overseeing Sutton’s complaint against Cline, decided to immediately suspend Ms. Cline as Durham district attorney does not bode well for her. Doing so automatically prejudices the case against her".

This is awfully similar to claims made that Mr. Cooper's expression of his belief that the Lacrosse defendants were innocent prejudiced Mr. Ni-nny-fong's ethics trial.

Anonymous said...

Sid-ninny, if I recall correctly, in the Murder of Eve Carson, you called the publication of surveillance pictures showing the murderers using her ATM card and driving her SUV prejudicial to the defendants' right to a fair trial.

In case you don't know, one plead guilty to Murder 1 rather than face a trial and possible death penalty. The other was convicted in open court of Murder 1.

Anonymous said...

Sid-ninny: "Without an explanation from Judge Hobgood about his decision for immediate suspension, it is not unreasonable to believe that he caved to The News & Observer-led media vendetta against Ms. Cline".


In a written opinion, Judge Hobgood explained why he suspended Ms. Cline.

Anonymous said...

Sid-ninny: "Because the people of Durham elected her to the office of Durham district attorney, the people should be the ones to remove her".

Judge Hobgood did have the discretion to remove her.

Harr Supporter said...

Sidney advises: I submit that instead of using a “little known law” that is rarely used to remove Tracey Cline as Durham district attorney, Kerry Sutton should have taken the more appropriate and responsible track of initiating and circulating a recall petition amongst the Durham County electorate… allowing the people to determine the destiny of their elected officials instead of a single person.

North Carolina does not provide its citizens with the right to recall elected officials.

The 7A-66 affidavit Sutton filed with the court represents the only method by which a sitting NC District Attorney may be removed. The only alternative is to wait for the next election.

Your recommendation is based on a demonstrably false assumption. I suggest that you amend or remove it and apologize to your readers for your confusion. I further suggest that you research your blogs before you post to avoid errors.

ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Laws_governing_recall

Anonymous said...

Sid-ninny: "Because the people of Durham elected her to the office of Durham district attorney, the people should be the ones to remove her".

That's kind of like saying the Duke Lacrosse case should have been tried in Durham because a Durham jury would be more likely to bring in a guilty verdict.

Anonymous said...

Sidney does have a point.......if the people of durham were dumb enough to elect this ignorant excuse for a lawyer, because she was black, then I say, fine,, let em have her. The comedy that is durham politics and government is well known around the country; a perfect example of stupidity run amuck..
I guess sid would be one of those people who was upset when the voters in some southern states continued to vote for segregation......and found themselves sitting next to black kids in school because the tyranny of the majority was overturned. And of course sid is all upset because the voters in califoria vited to outlaw gay marriage and equal rights for gay people.......and the courts overturned the people's vote. Since sid thinks the will of the people ought to prevail, i guess he would have no problem living in a state that voted to keep those "coloreds" in their place.........sure thing, sid, lets let the people vote and you can shine shoes!
What a total loser you are....

Lance the Intern said...

Sid -- Your "little known law" was evoked against Mike Nifong, but Judge Orlando Hudson delayed it, due to the pending bar decision.

This "little known law" has been used to remove a NC district attorney in the past, however, so obviously it's only "little known" to those with "little minds" and "little legal expertise".

You can file it under "legalese mumbo jumbo", where you put everything else law-related that you don't understand.

Lance the Intern said...

"I submit that instead of using a “little known law” that is rarely used to remove Tracey Cline as Durham district attorney, Kerry Sutton should have taken the more appropriate and responsible track of initiating and circulating a recall petition amongst the Durham County electorate… allowing the people to determine the destiny of their elected officials instead of a single person"

I submit that this is why you are a poor resource to rely upon for any political or legal opinion.

North Carolina is one of 12 states that do not allow for recall at all .

the newly empowered Republican legislature has tried to move the law toward a more relaxed standard in the use of recall elections -- perhaps, Sid, you should be supporting them.

Anonymous said...

"Why Tracey Cline should be reinstated as Durham D.A."

According to Sid-ninny, it is because Sid-ninny says so.

Man In Black said...

Truly, you have a dizzying intellect.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Sid-ninny: "You may then query, why do I advocate for her to be reinstated as Durham district attorney? The answer is surprisingly simple and devoid of political prejudices. Tracey Cline should be reinstated as the district attorney because she was overwhelmingly elected to that position by the people of Durham County."

And you advocate that Mike Nifong be restored to the practice of law even though he perpetrated one of the grossest wrongful prosecutions in NC and US history.

You're joking... right?

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Sid-ninny: The News & Observer even intimated that Ms. Sutton may have political aspirations".

Mike Ni-nny-fong had political aspirations, the achievement of which motivated his wrongful prosecution of the innocent, falsely accused Lacrosse players, something you have tried to deny.

To suggest Mike Nifong used the Duke Lacrosse case for political aspirations is absurd. Courting the black vote is a sure way to lose an election. Had Mr. Nifong wanted to assure himself of victory, he would've dropped all charges against the Duke Lacrosse defendants. That the media and the State Bar would make such an accusation shows that they are out of touch with reality. Their premise would only work in the Twilight Zone.

Nifong Supporter said...


Harr Supporter said...
Sidney advises: I submit that instead of using a “little known law” that is rarely used to remove Tracey Cline as Durham district attorney, Kerry Sutton should have taken the more appropriate and responsible track of initiating and circulating a recall petition amongst the Durham County electorate… allowing the people to determine the destiny of their elected officials instead of a single person.

North Carolina does not provide its citizens with the right to recall elected officials.

The 7A-66 affidavit Sutton filed with the court represents the only method by which a sitting NC District Attorney may be removed. The only alternative is to wait for the next election.

Your recommendation is based on a demonstrably false assumption. I suggest that you amend or remove it and apologize to your readers for your confusion. I further suggest that you research your blogs before you post to avoid errors.

ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Laws_governing_recall

Thank you for enlightening me and the readers about the lack of the ability of the public to recall an elected official. This proves even more how backward our state's legal system is. If the electorate cannot recall an official, why should an individual have the power to do so? It makes no sense.

As far as my blogs go, they remain unaltered, as is my policy. If I make mistakes, unlike Duke University, I accept responsibility for them.

Anonymous said...

"To suggest Mike Nifong used the Duke Lacrosse case for political aspirations is absurd."

Of course he did -- anyone not suffering from massive cranial-rectal inversion can see that it was done specifically to swing the black vote in an otherwise close race.

Nifong Supporter said...


Lance the Intern said...
"I submit that instead of using a “little known law” that is rarely used to remove Tracey Cline as Durham district attorney, Kerry Sutton should have taken the more appropriate and responsible track of initiating and circulating a recall petition amongst the Durham County electorate… allowing the people to determine the destiny of their elected officials instead of a single person"

I submit that this is why you are a poor resource to rely upon for any political or legal opinion.

North Carolina is one of 12 states that do not allow for recall at all .

the newly empowered Republican legislature has tried to move the law toward a more relaxed standard in the use of recall elections -- perhaps, Sid, you should be supporting them.

I can't imagine myself ever supporting a Republican because he/she puts profits ahead of people. Republicans lack compassion, tolerance, and commonsense... they are driven by primal greed at the expense of the masses... and bent on sowing a greater divide between the few haves and the many have-nots.

The fact that the overwhelming number of states have recall provisions for elected officials shows how truly backwards North Carolina is.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Sid-ninny: "Without an explanation from Judge Hobgood about his decision for immediate suspension, it is not unreasonable to believe that he caved to The News & Observer-led media vendetta against Ms. Cline".


In a written opinion, Judge Hobgood explained why he suspended Ms. Cline.


He did? When? Pray tell, would you be so kind as to enlighten me about his reason for suspending Ms. Cline? Also, Judge Hobgood's denial of a motion to delay Ms. Cline's hearing is evidence of his prejudice against her. What is the big rush? Why not allow her attorneys' the opportunity to prepare a defense? I smell a kangaroo in the courtroom.

Nifong Supporter said...


Man In Black said...
Truly, you have a dizzying intellect.

I will take that as a compliment. Thank you.

May your travels take you down the road of enlightenment.

Lance the Intern said...

"I can't imagine myself ever supporting a Republican because he/she puts profits ahead of people. Republicans lack compassion, tolerance, and commonsense... they are driven by primal greed at the expense of the masses... and bent on sowing a greater divide between the few haves and the many have-nots."

Like that evil Republican, Abraham Lincoln.....

Whatever, Sid -- Do you know PERSONALLY, one Republican who is as you have described?

Lance the Intern said...

"He did? When? Pray tell, would you be so kind as to enlighten me about his reason for suspending Ms. Cline?"

All spelled out here . A modicum of research would have shown you that.

"Also, Judge Hobgood's denial of a motion to delay Ms. Cline's hearing is evidence of his prejudice against her. What is the big rush?"

Because he has by law only 30 days from the time the defendant receives the finding of fact to conduct the hearing. The latest it could have been delayed was February 28-29. Cline's lawyers wanted to delay until the 3rd of March.

A question you should be asking is "Why didn't they chose to move the hearing to a date within the appropriate timeframe?"

Anonymous said...

Sid-ninny: "You're joking... right?(referringto my ststrmrnt that Mike Ni-nny-fong perpetrated the grossest act of prosecutorial misconduct)".

Sid-ninny, the joke is your contention that Mr. Ninny-fong conducted a prosecution which was well within ethical standards for a prosecutor.

Anonymous said...

Si-ninny: "To suggest Mike Nifong used the Duke Lacrosse case for political aspirations is absurd."

A not unexpected answer from Sid-nnny.

Sid-ninny, is spite of your ridiculous claims(which are a joke) comparison of election results with the only pre election poll shows that there was a surge in support from Black and White voters for Mr. Ni-nny-fong after Crystal Mangum's false accusations against the innocent Lacrosse players became an issue.

The pre election poll was from Freda Black. Mr. Ni-nny-fong either did not do his own pre election poll because he feared what it would show or he did the poll and found it showed he had no support.

Anonymous said...

Sid-ninny: "If the electorate cannot recall an official, why should an individual have the power to do so? It makes no sense."

From your blog posts it is res ipsa loquitur you do not know what makes sense and what doesn't.

Anonymous said...

Sid-ninny: "Republicans lack compassion".

And you think, via your vendetta against three innocent men who were not convicted after being falsely accused of rape, you show your compassion. What a joke!

Anonymous said...

Sid-ninny: "I smell a kangaroo in the courtroom."

We see that a deluded megalomaniac is publishing this joke of a blog.

Anonymous said...

Sid-ninny: "Man In Black said...
Truly, you have a dizzying intellect.

I will take that as a compliment. Thank you."

More evidence that Sid-ninny is a deluded megalomaniac

Anonymous said...

Sid-ninny: "The fact that the overwhelming number of states have recall provisions for elected officials shows how truly backwards North Carolina is."

What shows the backwardness of Durham's part of NC is that Durham County would elect first Mike Ni-nny-fong then Tracey Cline as District Attorney

Anonymous said...

Sid-ninny(to Man in Black): May your travels take you down the road of enlightenment."

Sid-ninny, a deluded megalomaniac like yourself is incapable of enlightening anyone, especially himself

Anonymous said...

Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney.
Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney, Sid-ney.

Anonymous said...

You da man, Sid, you da man.

Anonymous said...

Tracey Cline - another incompetent and illiterate black politician.

Anonymous said...

Gosh sid i thought you said you dont attack groups of people........?????? Hmmmmm.
Not only a racist bigoted hypocrite, but also a liar.

Anonymous said...

Nifong Supporter said...

"Without doubt the media’s attacks against Tracey Cline are rooted in the Duke Lacrosse case and are a part of the seemingly endless and ubiquitous vindictive web cast by the Carpetbagger Jihadists in an attempt to ensnare those considered by the Powers-That-Be to be on the wrong end of that case."

Bahahahahahahaha.

Nifong Supporter said...


Lance the Intern said...
"He did? When? Pray tell, would you be so kind as to enlighten me about his reason for suspending Ms. Cline?"

All spelled out here . A modicum of research would have shown you that.

"Also, Judge Hobgood's denial of a motion to delay Ms. Cline's hearing is evidence of his prejudice against her. What is the big rush?"

Because he has by law only 30 days from the time the defendant receives the finding of fact to conduct the hearing. The latest it could have been delayed was February 28-29. Cline's lawyers wanted to delay until the 3rd of March.

A question you should be asking is "Why didn't they chose to move the hearing to a date within the appropriate timeframe?"

Hey, Lance.

Thanks for the link. I'll download it and view it later. Time is at a premium when online at the library.

Anonymous said...

Cline is an embarrassment to durham. But. Thats not the real shame in this mess. She is a corrupt inept and unethical prosecutor. She wants convictions; guilt is not relevant. And to hell with due process The reason for her rage against hudson is that he stood in her way and confronted her behavior. Cline has been on a crash path with her own downfall for several years........
I am glad we have a legal process for removal. Lives are at stake.......she has way too much power for a woman who has lost control of herself.

Anonymous said...

Sid-ninny: "Crystal Mangum [is] the Duke Lacrosse victim/accuser."

Sidninny, you got that wrong. Crystal Mangum is the Duke Lacroees victimizer/false accuser.

Anonymous said...

Hilarious! Watching the Cline hearing and, apparently, seated behind her.....coincidentially, I am sure, sits the ever-present bigot-in-residence, Victoria Peterson. (her image is a bit blurry, but friends tell me it's her.....). Odd, isn't it, that Peterson is sitting in line with the WRAL camera field of view.
The hearing reveals that Cline is not just an ignorant person; it also shows that she is emotionally unstable.

Walt said...

Another column ghost written by Nifong. Note the criticism of the NCGS section 7A-66 which was invoked against Nifong. Of course, Nifong/Sid is going to defend Nifong's protege. Contrast this with the venomous opposition Sid has to other prosecutors who practice injustice. It is also interesting that Sid/Nifong would call for Cline's reinstatement when she approved the District Attorney's fight to sustain the conviction of Eric Daniels. It just proves how empty Sid's cries about justice really are.

Walt-in-Durham

Anonymous said...

Agreed, Walt. Sid supposedly thinks the "people" should decide Cline's fate. Nonsense. I guess Sid would be just fine with having a majority of the voters down in Raleigh deciding to reinstate segreated bathrooms and lunch counters.......after all, it's the will of the people, right, Sid? The reason Cline was suspended WITH pay, by the way, was because there was probable cause to support Sutton's allegations. To accuse a judge of "raping" people, having a "reprobate" mind, disregarding "the truth", etc.....with absolutely NOTHING to back up the accusations except "belief and information", as Cline put it, was and is so outrageous as to make the Durham DA's office look even worse than it already did. I think Cline is having some kind of nervous breakdown.....she has a history of melodramatic courtroom antics. I have seen her at work, ranting and yelling......it is not pretty. Bottom line is that nobody in her positions, with the power the office affords, can make wild accusations without evidence.
Sid/Nifong/David is a sad little man.....

Lance the Intern said...

"I can't imagine myself ever supporting a Republican because he/she puts profits ahead of people. Republicans lack compassion, tolerance, and commonsense... they are driven by primal greed at the expense of the masses... and bent on sowing a greater divide between the few haves and the many have-nots."

What does Victoria Peterson think about this? Her pro-life, anti-gay, pro-Jesse Helms stance is very much in line with republican views...Regardless of the political affiliation she claims.

Anonymous said...

Interesting comment about Peterson....she has, for years, claimed that she is "pro the people" and very much a big government, entitlement, more welfare proponent.....definitely NOT a fiscal conservative. However, her social positions are so far to the right, on gays and abortion in particular, that one wonders if she knows where she is, on any given day. The venom she spews about gays, pro choice proponents and Voter ID advocates is toxic. The fact that her photo appears on the so-called J4N web site is a true indicator of Sid's own racist bias

Walt said...

uAnon at 11:18 AM said: "Agreed, Walt. Sid supposedly thinks the "people" should decide Cline's fate....."

Sid's take on people power is selective at best. As you pointed out, he might have an objection to the good people of Raleigh re-segregating restrooms. Further, he seems to want to ignore the people's voice in constructing their government. Our State Constitution is not a grant of power. All power which is not expressly limited by the people in our State Constitution remains with the people and an act of the people through their representatives in teh legislature is valid unless prohibited by that Constitution. State ex rel. Martin v. Preston, 325 N.C. 438, 448-449. "Therefore, the Court gives acts of the General Assembly great deference...." In Re Spivey, 345 N.C. 404 at 412 (1977)The people through our State Constitution created the office of District Attorney. Article IV, Section 18. The people through the General Assembly created one and only one method to remove a prosecutor NCGS 7A-66 long before Tracey Cline sought the office. Now, Sid wishes to ignore the Constitution and the law to achieve some result. Whatever he cares about, it is not the will of the people.

Walt-in-Durham

Anonymous said...

To refer to Mangum as a "victim", as Harr does, is to reveal, with 100% clarity, the true racist, bigoted and utterly disdainful mindset this man exhibits. I think he enjoys being provocative, thinks he is funny and gets his "jollies" from making outlandish and foolish statements. He has NO sincere beliefs, except in his own inflated ego. He has no convictions, no sense of morality and certainly no substantive intellect. The writing quality is poor, lacks humor, reveals surprisingly irrational thought and shows no imagination. Nobody takes Harr seriously except Harr. Nobody thinks his writing is interesting, worthwhile or makes any real contribution to the ongoing body of discussion about the lacrosse hoax. (ooops, I forgot the Kenny character). The point here is that this Harr web site and subsequent Harr comments are just the dribblings of an essentially incontinent mind.

Anonymous said...

Ah, yes, the infamous courageous Victoria Peterson, our famous keeper of Christian morality and protector of the unborn heterosexual. (Funny, what if the baby VP says has to be born turns out to be QUEEEEER?) Oh my god, Victoria, how dreadful!
Peterson should devote herself to raising money for the development of a new in utero test to see if the fetus likes K D Lang music too much or prefers her mother to eat hummus rather than mac n cheese. If the Qtest proves positive for the, uh, gay gene, Peterson can open a new abortion mill and call it, "Terminal Measures for the Disease ridden Perverts".
anyway, back to the antics of Peterson. She appeared briefly on the TV camera feed from WRAL during the Cline hearing. She has also been spotted lately hovering around the Durham halls of justice with the powerfully ineffective jackie Wagstaff.
whoooowhoooo, Sid, better get your gang together soon and plan Cline's farewell party at the Fonster's house.

Lance the Intern said...

I doubt we'll hear anything further of substance from Sid on this particular post. He's obviously embarrassed himself with his lack of knowledge here.

Anonymous said...

As we say in Texas, "big hat, now cows". that's Sidney.....lots of bluster, zero substance.

Nifong Supporter said...


Walt said...
Another column ghost written by Nifong. Note the criticism of the NCGS section 7A-66 which was invoked against Nifong. Of course, Nifong/Sid is going to defend Nifong's protege. Contrast this with the venomous opposition Sid has to other prosecutors who practice injustice. It is also interesting that Sid/Nifong would call for Cline's reinstatement when she approved the District Attorney's fight to sustain the conviction of Eric Daniels. It just proves how empty Sid's cries about justice really are.

Walt-in-Durham

Walt, mi amigo, surely you jest. I write and accept responsibility for all material on this website. If someone else wants to contribute a blog, I would undoubtedly make note of it. In fact, I have offered to post writings of others, such as the medical examiner of Reginald Daye, but to date, I have had no takers. So everything in this post, and the flog that I'm about to upload come from within the confines of my cranium.

Just because I do not believe that Tracey Cline, who was elected by the people, should be removed by a single person acting on a little known, rarely used "elastic" law, that does not suggest that I agree with her prosecutorial record. I do have problems with The News & Observer singling her out for criticism, while ignoring the egregious misconduct of other prosecutors.

Anyway, the flog I am about to post goes more into the process of removing Cline from office.

Enlightenment awaits you, Walt.

Nifong Supporter said...


Lance the Intern said...
I doubt we'll hear anything further of substance from Sid on this particular post. He's obviously embarrassed himself with his lack of knowledge here.

Sorry to disappoint you, Lance. In a few minutes I will upload my take on the feeding frenzy about Cline... in a new flog!

Lance the Intern said...

While refusing to acknowledge the plethora of errors you made in this post. Typical Sid.

Answer me this, Sid -- if North Carolina doesn't allow for recall elections, how else would they remove someone that had violated the rules of conduct for that office?

In your little world, that person could not be removed. Think about that.

Anonymous said...

Sid-ninny(to Walt in Durham): "Walt, mi amigo, surely you jest."

Sid-ninny, the only jest or joke in this blog is you.

Anonymous said...

Sid-Ninny: "Sorry to disappoint you, Lance. In a few minutes I will upload my take on the feeding frenzy about Cline... in a new flog!"

What you uploaded a short time ago contains nothing of substance. It is just another manifestation of your deluded megalomania.

kenhyderal said...

annonymous @ 4: 17 said: "To refer to Mangum as a "victim", as Harr does, is to reveal, with 100% clarity, the true racist, bigoted and utterly disdainful mindset this man exhibits" .......To consider the Duke Lacrosse Players as victims of either former DA Michael Nifong or accuser Crystal Mangum, as this anonymous poster does, rings more like racism to a good many and especially to anyone who has themself have been a victim of it.

Anonymous said...

Dear Kenny oblivious, .....first I am a person of color, second, I am gay. Yes, I have been the recipient of racist and homophobic behavior. I KNOW what it feels like. And, pal, some of the worst examples of racist and bigoted behavior I have EVER seen have come from persons of color. Wake up, cupcake.....racism is an evil that infects us ALL, straight, gay, brown, white, black, or plaid. Even you.

Mangum is a professional "victim". Nifong is an amoral disgrace to our state. A man is dead now because people like you have been giving Mangum a pass for years.

and, yes, I am the author of the post to which you referred....

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "To consider the Duke Lacrosse Players as victims of either former DA Michael Nifong or accuser Crystal Mangum, as this anonymous poster does, rings more like racism to a good many and especially to anyone who has themself have been a victim of it."

This from a man who says Crystal was raped but can not explain the lack of forensic evidence, whose take on the rape case is that Crystal was raped by people at the Lacrosse party who were not identified but who were known to the Lacrosse players, that the Lacrosse players were covering for these unknowns even when a rogue prosecutor showed he was determined to prosecute them regardless of the lack of evidence.

Draw your own conclusions.

P.S. He also thinks Kilgo, who has never demonstrated he has first or second hand knowledge of what happened, is an authority on the bogus Duke rape case.

kenhyderal said...

@ Anonymous 5:58 : Bigotry of any kind is, ignorant and evil and yes it can be found in members of any race. Your statement that some of the worst examples of bigotry come from people of color is in itself a bigoted statement. Crystal Mangum is not a racist or an intolerant person. I wish I could say as much about all members of the Duke Lacrosse team. Nor is she the scheming person, out to scam that the LaX Defense has made her out to be.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "Crystal Mangum is not a racist or an intolerant person. I wish I could say as much about all members of the Duke Lacrosse team. Nor is she the scheming person, out to scam that the LaX Defense has made her out to be."

Why are the members of the Duke Lacrosse team racist and intolerant? You think so because they defended themselves against a black woman who falsely accused them of rape?

I again say, had Crystal not falsely accused three men of rape, she would not have left herself open to discreditation.

What discredited her was the information about her in Mr. Ninny-fong's casew file, not anything any of the innocent Lacrosse players ever did.

kenhyderal said...

Anoinymous @ 5:58 said: "Mangum is a professional "victim" ":.......This label does not apply to Crystal, a hard working individual from humble circumstances who has strived to raise herself up. It's standard tactics for abusers to deflect blame from themselves by throwing doubt upon a claim of victimization by a person that's been abused. It's just a more subtle variation of "blame the victim".

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "It's just a more subtle variation of 'blame the victim'".

Ken-ninny, Crystal is the victimizer, not the victim.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "It's standard tactics for abusers to deflect blame from themselves by throwing doubt upon a claim of victimization by a person that's been abused."

The Lacrosse players abused Crystal by defending themselves against her false allegations? Is that what you are saying?

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 4:28 said: "Crystal is the victimizer, not the victim" .....One needs to ask themselves who had the power in this encounter. Hey,did you notice that former Head of the IMF that poor fellow Dominic Struss Kahn who was victimized by an all powerful Chamber Maid in New York has now been questioned in France about his involvement with hotel prostitution.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "One needs to ask themselves who had the power in this encounter."

What encounter? An encounter at the Lacrosse house? All the forensic evidence indicates there was no encounter at the Lacrosse house.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: In the encounter between Crystal and the DPD at the DUMC ER, Crystal lied about being raped by members of the Lacrosse team. That was her victimizing the Lacrosse team. As the Lacrosse team was not present in the ER, they had no influence over what happened in that encounter.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "Hey,did you notice that former Head of the IMF that poor fellow Dominic Struss(that's Strauss, Ken-ninny) Kahn who was victimized by an all powerful Chamber Maid in New York has now been questioned in France about his involvement with hotel prostitution."

None of that has any relevance to Crystal's false allegations of rape.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: In her statement, Crystal alleged that she and her assailants were all in this bathroom together. That bathroom was too small to accommodate 4 adults simultaneously. So how could the alleged encounter, as described by Crystal, have happened?

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hygeral: Consider this about Kilgo.

I had a go round with Kilgo a number of years ago in which I challenged him on multiple occasions to establish his credibility. His response was, he lived in Durham and would know more about the bogus rape case than anyone who did not live in Durham. It was a dodge, a tactic to avoid admission that he knew nothing.

You do not live n Durham. Do you meet Kilgo's criterion of being knowledgeable about the case?

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal, the Defense attorneys had nothing to do with the story that Crystal planned to shake down the Lacrosse players. That story came from people who worked at the Strip club where Crystal worked, and the story was published after AG Cooper's investigation exonerated the Lacrosse players.

That Crystal planned to shake down the Lacrosse layers does show she tried to victimize them.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal, what you really advocate is, evidence be d---ed, a black woman accused white men of raping her, and that alone should be enough to convict. That sounds like a pretty racist attitude to me.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 4:55 AM said: "Ken-ninny-hyderal: In her statement, Crystal alleged that she and her assailants were all in this bathroom together. That bathroom was too small to accommodate 4 adults simultaneously. So how could the alleged encounter, as described by Crystal, have happened" ........ Of all the multitude of "straw-grasping" speculations raided to cast doubt on Crystal's allegation, the biggest "red-herring" of them all is the size of the bathroom.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 8:05 PM said: " You do not live n Durham. Do you meet Kilgo's criterion of being knowledgeable about the case"....... I have spoken, extensively, to the victim and apparently Kilgo has spoken to a player who was, there, present.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "Of all the multitude of "straw-grasping" speculations raided to cast doubt on Crystal's allegation, the biggest 'red-herring' of them all is the size of the bathroom."

The size, or lack thereof, of the bathroom has been noted in the media, while Mike Ni-nny-fong was prosecuting, or rather, persecuting the innocent, falsely accused Lacrosse players for his own political benefit.

What Ken-ninny calls a "red herring" is an example of Ken-ninny's racist attitude. D--n the evidence. A black woman accused white men of raping her. That should be enough for conviction.

Who told you that was a red herring. Probably Kilgo, who has repeatedly demonstrated he has no knowledge of what happened on the night of 13/14 March 2006.

Who told Kilgo? This unidentified Lacrosse player who was Kilgo's friend, which Lacrosse player has never emerged in almost 6 years?

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "I have spoken, extensively, to the victim and apparently Kilgo has spoken to a player who was, there, present."

That is not very impressive, considering you can not explain why there was no objective evidence that a rape happened, only Crystal's word which varied from account to account(compare with the Duke Coed who was raped by Michael Jermaine Burch, the word of said coed never varied)?

"Kilgo has spoken to a player who was, there, present." There is a red herring. Kilgo has indicated, via his refusal to divulge what he claims he knows, shows he spoke to no one who was there.

If Kilgo had such vital information, why did he not go to the police, while the police were advertising for anyone with information to come forth?

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous@ 8:09 said: " That story came from people who worked at the Strip club where Crystal worked, and the story was published after AG Cooper's investigation exonerated the Lacrosse players.

That Crystal planned to shake down the Lacrosse layers does show she tried to victimize them.......... That story comes from an unnamed bouncer at the Strip Club who claims to have overheard her telling others that she was "going to get some money from some boys at a Duke party". When quoting this hearsay the following words are always left off ("who had not paid her")

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "That story comes from an unnamed bouncer at the Strip Club who claims to have overheard her telling others that she was "going to get some money from some boys at a Duke party". When quoting this hearsay the following words are always left off ('who had not paid her')"

Where does your information come from? Is this from Crystal's memoir?

So far as hearsay is concerned, what do you call your allegation that there were unidentified males at the Lacrosse party? You say you got your information from Kilgo who, in turn, got his information from a Lacrosse player he knew.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal:

What establishes that there were men at the party who were not identified?

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal, on the subject of what Crystal said at the strip club, how do you establish that the innocent players attorneys had anything to do with the story?

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 9:58 sdaid: "If Kilgo had such vital information, why did he not go to the police, while the police were advertising for anyone with information to come forth?' ...... Kilgo has no first hand information only what his, conscience stricken, friend, part of the "wall of silcence", has told him. I understand Kilgo has encouraged him to speak out. His doing so would vindicate Crystal and could result in new charges but this could potentially jeopardize the pending civil suit. Like Kilgo I too encourage him "to do the right thing"

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 11:53 said: "on the subject of what Crystal said at the strip club, how do you establish that the innocent players attorneys had anything to do with the story"....... Their campaign, once initiated, became viral. "A cruel story runs on wheels, and every hand oils the wheels as they run. ~Ouida"

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "Kilgo has no first hand information only what his, conscience stricken, friend, part of the "wall of silcence", has told him."

Kilgo, I repeat, has claimed to have extensive, intimate knowledge of what happened on the night of 13/14 March 2006, more than any one on the planet. He, whenever challenged to validate his credibility, he always backed down. That indicates Kilgo has no knowledge of what happened. That indicates Kilgo's friend does not exist. In the almost six years since Crystal made her false allegations, that so called friend has not been identified.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "Their campaign(the Lacrosse players campaign to defend themselves from false charges), once initiated, became viral."

There is no question that the Lacrosse players' insistence on their innocence did become public. It did not include any attacks on Crystal Mangum.

So, instead of dodging the question, what evidence was there that the story of Crystal wanting to shake down the Lacrosse players, was the work of the innocent Lacrosse players' attorneys?

Dodging a question indicates you do not want to answer it. That, in turns, indicates you do not wish to admit you are wrong.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: " A cruel story runs on wheels, and every hand oils the wheels as they run. ~Ouida'"

And the campaign to wrongfully convict the innocent Lacrosse players of rape, falsely alleged by Crystal Mangum, is a perfect example.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: Where did you get your information about what was overheard at the Strip Club where Crystal worked?

Anonymous said...

Kilgo: "Like Kilgo I too encourage him(the unknown Lacrosse playeer) 'to do the right thing'".

You mean, like Mike Ni-nny-fong, you want some Lacrosse player to come forth and give perjured testimony that a rape occurred.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal:

What evidence establishes that there were unknown, unidentified men at the Lacrosse party?

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal:

What evidence do you have that Kilgo really has a friend who was on the Lacrosse team in 2006.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 2:38 PM 2-23-12 said : "Ken-ninny-hyderal: Where did you get your information about what was overheard at the Strip Club where Crystal worked" From an article by investigative reporter Joseph Neff published in the News and Observer on November 4th 2006 where he reported on his interview with ex-bouncer H.P. Thomas from the Platinum Club

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 5:30 PM 2-23-12 said: "What evidence do you have that Kilgo really has a friend who was on the Lacrosse team in 2006" I have only his word on that. If it is not true, though, what would be his motive for saying so?

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "I have only his(Kilgo's) word on that. If it is not true, though, what would be his motive for saying so?"

Attentyion seeking, racism, dislike of the Lacrosse players, to name a few.

The litmus test is that Kilgo always backed down whenever challenged to establish his credibility.That is a reliable sign he has none.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: Regarding "News and Observer on November 4th 2006"

"'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."

That is a direct quote from the above newspaper article.

Here is another quote from the same article: "While [Crystal} talked about being owed money, the accuser never gave any word or indication of being hurt, [Thomas] said.

I think you are fabricating that quote about Crystal not getting paid. It does not show up in the News or Observer you have cited.

It may be viewed at http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1732077/posts.

kenhyderal said...

From Wikipedia "The strip club's security officer said that Mangum told co-workers four days after the party that she was going to get money from some boys at a Duke party who had not paid her, mentioning that the boys were white. The security guard did not make a big deal of it because he felt that no one took her seriously.[77]"

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 2:29 PM 2-23-12 said: "In the almost six years since Crystal made her "false"( my quotation marks) allegations, that so called friend has not been identified"....... And the litigants are doing everything they can to make sure he is not. Millions are at stake.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "From Wikipedia 'The strip club's security officer said that Mangum told co-workers four days after the party that she was going to get money from some boys at a Duke party who had not paid her, mentioning that the boys were white. The security guard did not make a big deal of it because he felt that no one took her seriously.[77]'"

You said the quote about "some boys at a Duke party who had not paid her" came from Joseph Neff's article published in thr News and Observer. It did not. Go back to Wikipedia, click on reference #77 and read the article for yourself.

You are trying to present false information as the truth.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "And the litigants are doing everything they can to make sure he(the unknown Lacrosse player) is not. Millions are at stake."

No they are not. Said unknown Lacrosse player does not exist. Ergo, it is impossible for him to come forth.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 2:32 2-23-12 said: "What evidence establishes that there were unknown, unidentified men at the Lacrosse party?"..... And what evidence is there that there were not. Unbelievably who all were there has never been determined. The two non-players tested were two that happened to appear in seized photographs.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal:

If you had actually read the N%O article, you would know no one at the strip club believed her to be credible. Why did you not read the article? Why did you try to pass off the"not being paid" quote as something from the N&O article?

How are you going to blame that on the Defense attorneys. At the time the incident happened, the innocent Lacrosse players had not been charged.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "Anonymous @ 2:32 2-23-12 said: 'What evidence establishes that there were unknown, unidentified men at the Lacrosse party?'..... And what evidence is there that there were not".

Ken-ninny, you ARE a ninny when it comes to the working of the legal system. He who asserts must prove - that is how the system works.

Your answer, that no evidence disproves it means only you can not prove it, just lke you can not establish a motive for why anyone at the party would have raped Crystal.

Lame answer, Ken-ninny, really lame answer.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "Unbelievably who all were there has never been determined."

Who told you it has never been determined? Kilgo? Kilgo has repeatedly demonstrated he knows nothing about what happened at the Lacrosse party, that he ever knew anyone who did know.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal:

The N%O article from November 4th 2006 DID NOT quote Crystal as saying the White boys did not pay her, Why did you imply that it did?

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal:

If Crystal did say at thr strip club that the white boys did not pay her, she is contradicting herself on the issue of the money being stolen. If they did not pay her, then she ever had the money in her possession. Ergo, o one could have taken it from her.

Oh what a tangled web we weave etc.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: regarding the issue of unknowns at the Lacrosse party:

It is irrelevant whether or not any unknowns were present at the party. Forensic evidence pretty conclusively that no rape took place at the party.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 10:21 said : "You said the quote about "some boys at a Duke party who had not paid her" came from Joseph Neff's article published in thr News and Observer. It did not. Go back to Wikipedia, click on reference #77 and read the article for yourself"........It's a matter of semantics. Wikipedia, it seems made the same inference that I did. The situation Crystal found herself in was that the Club was looking for their $200.00 dollars. Since the Players were being charged, Crystal assumed that her money would be recovered.

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

Anonymous @ 1:04 said:"It is irrelevant whether or not any unknowns were present at the party. Forensic evidence pretty conclusively that no rape took place at the party"....... We needed to account for the un-identified DNA found from the rape kit and can not be accounted for from Crystal's sexual history. You yourself use the words "pretty conclusively" which basic translates to a reasonable doubt. Hopefull these samples are being retained.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "It's a matter of semantics. Wikipedia, it seems made the same inference that I did. The situation Crystal found herself in was that the Club was looking for their $200.00 dollars. Since the Players were being charged, Crystal assumed that her money would be recovered."

You can't make that inference.

Crystal, according to you and according to Wikipedia and according to the Joseph Neff N&O article, actually, said she hadn't been paid(the N&O article did not quote her, it quoted someone else making that statement - why did you say Crystal made the statement?)

The only inference you can make from that is that Crystal had not been paid. If she had not been paid, she did not have any money in her possession to be robbed of, at least any of the money she was to be paid for dancing for two hours(which she did not do).

Where did you get the notion that the club was looking for her money?

Did you read in the article that none of the people she talked to took her seriously?

Did you read she returned to work at the strip club 4 days after that alleged brutal rape. Is that typical behavior from a rape victim?

The actual quote from the N&O article is "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."

One can not infer from that quote that Ms. Mangum was referring to the money she was supposed to be paid.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "We needed to account for the un-identified DNA found from the rape kit and can not be accounted for from Crystal's sexual history."

Yes we can. First, the fact you are ducking is, there was no evidence of semen, blood or saliva from the rape kit. Crystal alleged a rape in those fluids would have been deposited. Crystal also alleged her attackers did not use condoms.

You yourself have admitted Crystal was a sexually active woman before the Lacrosse party. And DNA from more than 5 males was found on her.

Since no semen was found on the rape kit by sensitive reliable tests, the only inference one can draw is that no semen was deposited on the night of 13/14 March 2006. In turn, the only inference one can draw about the male DNA(from more than 4 males) found on Crystal was all deposited before the night of 13/14 March 2006.

Anonymous said...

I said, "Since no semen was found on the rape kit by sensitive reliable tests, the only inference one can draw is that no semen was deposited on the night of 13/14 March 2006. In turn, the only inference one can draw about the male DNA(from more than 4 males) found on Crystal was all deposited before the night of 13/14 March 2006."

Allow me to clarify. I should have said:

Since no semen was found on the rape kit by sensitive reliable tests, the only inference one can draw is that no semen was deposited on the night of 13/14 March 2006. In turn, the only inference one can draw about the male DNA(from more than 4 males) found on Crystal is, it was all deposited before the night of 13/14 March 2006.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal:

Referring again to the quote I copied from the N&O article, note Crystal said not that she was going to get $400(what she was supposed to be paid) or $200(which you say she was looking for) but that she was going to get "some money". One can not infer from this that Crystal was looking to be paid for dancing at the Lacrosse house. The truth is, she did not dance for the two hours she agreed to because she was impaired when she arrived at the Lacrosse house.

kenhyderal said...

The Club gets 50% of the money. Crystal did not have the money to turn in. It was stolden from her. She assumed it would be recovered and she would then have the money to pay the Club and most importantly to feed her children.

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

Anonymous @ 1:56 said: "why did you say Crystal made the statement?".......... I have spoken extensively to Crystal about the $400.00
Anonymous also said:
The only inference you can make from that is that Crystal had not been paid. If she had not been paid, she did not have any money in her possession to be robbed of, at least any of the money she was to be paid for dancing for two hours(which she did not do"... Crystal was paid upon arrival. In a completely sober condition, I might add. She put the money in her bag. It was removed (stolden) by a Player

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 2: 09 said: "Since no semen was found on the rape kit by sensitive reliable tests, the only inference one can draw is that no semen was deposited on the night of 13/14 March 2006. In turn, the only inference one can draw about the male DNA(from more than 4 males) found on Crystal is, it was all deposited before the night of 13/14 March 2006" No it was not. Only two of five samples were deposited, according to Crystal's checked out history, before that date. I only wish we has a qualified person here to settle this argument about the presence or absence of semen in the original NCBI analysis.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "The Club gets 50% of the money. Crystal did not have the money to turn in. It was stolden from her. She assumed it would be recovered and she would then have the money to pay the Club and most importantly to feed her children."

Why would Crystal have to turn in whatever money she got from the Lacrosse party? The club had no connection to the escort service who sent her to the Lacrosse party.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "Crystal was paid upon arrival. In a completely sober condition, I might add. She put the money in her bag. It was removed (stolden) by a Player"

So why did Crystal say she had not been paid? Incidentally the word is not "stolden" but stolen.

It sounds to me like Crystal was trying to get a lot more than $200 or $400 from the players.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "only wish we has a qualified person here to settle this argument about the presence or absence of semen in the original NCBI analysis."

There is no argument. The SBI Crime Lab, employing multiple sensitive, accurate testing procedures found no Semen. Ergo there was no semen. Any male sperm deposited on Crystal were deposited prior to the night of 13/14 March 2006.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "Only two of five samples were deposited, according to Crystal's checked out history, before that date."

The SBI Crime lab findings, that no semen was found on Crystal's rape kit, says confirms that any sperm deposited on Crystal got there prior to the night of 13/14 March 2006, regardless of whatever history Crystal gave to the authorities.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "I only wish we has a qualified person here to settle this argument about the presence or absence of semen in the original NCBI analysis."

Someone who desperately clings to an untenable, implausible hypothesis of what happened on the night of 13/14 March 2006 will not listen to any one, least of all an expert.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: It has not been established as fact that Crystal was completely sober when she arrived. Her driver left her there and then immediately drove off. He would not have had an opportunity to observe Crystal when she walked into the house.

David Evans and Dan Flannery did, and they reported she was impaired when she walked in. Their statements were not self serving. At the time they were cooperating with an investigation in which they were not suspects.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: It has not been established as fact that Crystal took a drink at the party. It has been established she drank almost three pints of beer and then took flexeril before she went to the party.

Anonymous said...

Ke-ninny-hyderal: From Wikipedia:

"During Nifong's ethics trial on June 14, 2007, the complete DNA findings were revealed during Brad Bannon's testimony. It revealed, according to conservative estimates, that the lab had discovered at least TWO(emphasis added) unidentified males' DNA in Mangum's pubic region; at least TWO(emphasis added) unidentified males' DNA in her rectum; at least FOUR to FIVE unidentified males' DNA on her panties; and at least ONE(emphasis added) identified male's DNA in her vagina."

Two plus two plus 4 to 5 equals 8 to 9 unknown males.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 5:48 said: "Ken-ninny-hyderal: It has not been established as fact that Crystal was completely sober when she arrived. Her driver left her there and then immediately drove off. He would not have had an opportunity to observe Crystal when she walked into the house"........ Crystal spent 2 hours and 40 minutes with Taylor before he dropped her off and he testified she was not intoxicated.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 5:50 @ 5:50 said:Ken-ninny-hyderal: It has not been established as fact that Crystal took a drink at the party. It has been established she drank almost three pints of beer and then took flexeril before she went to the party"..... What she consumed before is from her own testimony. I can't beleive that those who deny Crystal was assulted continue to deny that she was given a drink upon her arrival. Do you really want to cling to this? If so you have completely bought into the defence strategy of denying eveything that can't be proven with 100% certainty. It's good defence strategy but at this point it becomes a case where reasonable doubt becomes unreasonable

kenhyderal said...

@ Anonymous @ 5:53 I should have said Escort Agency not Club

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "I can't beleive that those who deny Crystal was assulted(sic) continue to deny that she was given a drink upon her arrival."

What you are ignoring is that it has not been established that she consumed said drink. Kim Pittman/Roberts account is that she spilled the drink into the sink.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "Crystal spent 2 hours and 40 minutes with Taylor before he dropped her off and he testified she was not intoxicated."

According to accounts most of those 2 hours and 40 minutes, Crystal was with clients rather than with Taylor.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "Do you really want to cling to this? If so you have completely bought into the defence(ic) strategy of denying eveything that can't be proven with 100% certainty."

That "defence strategy" is your problem. It was proven beyond any reasonable doubt that no male bodily fluid was deposited on Crystal on the night of 13/14 March. You want it accepted as absolutely true that there was.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "It's good defence strategy but at this point it becomes a case where reasonable doubt becomes unreasonable".

You are confused. It is not the defense responsibility to establish reasonable doubt. It is the prosecution's responsibility to prove beyond a reasonable doubt.

Your hypothesis that unknowns at the party raped Crystal is not reasonable doubt. Combined with your assertion that Lacrosse team members knew these unknowns but would not identify them in the face of a threatened prosecution makes what you call reasonable doubt an implausible and highly unreasonable hypothesis.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: The sperm fraction DNA from Crystal's vaginal swab matched Matthew Murchison. Ergo, it did not come from any unidentified male.

The other DNA was extracted from other items in the rape kit.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal:

According to Crystal, she had sex with Matthew Murchison one week before the LAX party. According to her regular driver, Jarriel Johnson, she had multiple sexual encounters in the week before the party. There were multiple occasions before the night of 13/14 March when male DNA was deposited on Crystal's person. Combined with the finding of no semen or any male bodily fluid on Crystal's rape kit

Anonymous said...

I said:"Ken-ninny-hyderal:

According to Crystal, she had sex with Matthew Murchison one week before the LAX party. According to her regular driver, Jarriel Johnson, she had multiple sexual encounters in the week before the party. There were multiple occasions before the night of 13/14 March when male DNA was deposited on Crystal's person. Combined with the finding of no semen or any male bodily fluid on Crystal's rape kit"

To complete: Ken-ninny-hyderal:

According to Crystal, she had sex with Matthew Murchison one week before the LAX party. According to her regular driver, Jarriel Johnson, she had multiple sexual encounters in the week before the party. There were multiple occasions before the night of 13/14 March when male DNA was deposited on Crystal's person. Combined with the finding of no semen or any male bodily fluid on Crystal's rape kit it establishes that any sperm evidence found on the rape kit came from sperm deposited prior to the night of 13/14 March 2006

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal, it has been established as fact that Crystal was sexually active before the events of the night of 13/14 March 2006. DNA from multiple unidentified males would have been found on her person even if the party of 13/14 March had not happened. The finding of DNA from a number of unknown males on her person in no way establishes that unknown males were present at the party. The findings of the SBI Crime lab regarding the rape kit, no semen, blood or saliva, establishes that male DNA was not deposited on her person on the night of 13/14 March 2006.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 7:09 said: "According to her regular driver Jarriel Johnson, she had multiple sexual encounters in the week before the party" ......... Not true. She had sex with him on one occasion. Her Escort job did not involve any sexual encounters.

Anonymous said...

Ken: Her Escort job did not involve any sexual encounters.

Are you sure about that? Can you provide a log of Crystal's late night appointments in hotel rooms and provide affidavits from her "dates" in those appointments? (I assume that because you live in Dubai that you did not attend all of these appointments and do not have first hand knowledge.)

I agree that a performance with a vibrator in front of a couple does not constitute a "sexual encounter." Late night vibrator performances are further proof of "good mothering" skills.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "Not true(that Crystal had sexual encounters in the week prior to March 13/14 20'06). She had sex with him on one occasion. Her Escort job did not involve any sexual encounters."

It is true. Ken-ninny, if you believe a job with an escort service does not involve intimate encounters, you are incredibly naive.

In any event, forensic examination of the rape kit showed beyond a reasonable doubt that Crystal did not have sex at the LAX party, forcible or not.

kenhyderal said...

Private investigators amd investigative reporters looked long and hard for evidence that happened and found none. Crystal was not the sterotypical sex trade worker that the LaX Defense wish she was. Rumors were spread that she was a drug addict and a prostitute who was often impaired. Hearsay was often quoted to try and promote this picture. Instead the facts are that she was a struggling single mother trying to get ahead, for herself and for her children. Her,friends, her Pastor and her College Professors, who all describe her much differently, have much more credibility.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "Crystal was not the sterotypical(sic) sex trade worker that the LaX Defense wish she was."

Yes she was. Read the accounts of the Duke Lacrosse phony rape case, if you dare, and see there was plenty of evidence Crystal was a sex worker.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "Rumors were spread that she was a drug addict and a prostitute who was often impaired."

Those were documented events. She showed up impaired to a session with AG Cooper and his investigators.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "Hearsay was often quoted to try and promote this picture."

Here is an example of hearsay:

Ken-ninny says there were unidentified males at the Duke Lacrosse Party. How does he know. Kilgo told him.

How did Kilgo. Some anonymous Duke Lacrosse player told him.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "Instead the facts are that she was a struggling single mother trying to get ahead, for herself and for her children."

The fact is, pre LAX party, Crystal's parents cared for and provided for her children.

Anonymous said...

Ken: Private investigators amd investigative reporters looked long and hard for evidence that happened and found none.

Who is Josephus Van Hook? Did Crystal recite poetry at the Millennium Hotel?

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "Her,friends, her Pastor and her College Professors, who all describe her much differently, have much more credibility."

In the wake of the exoneration of the innocent, falsely accused Duke Lacrosse players, a lot of her friends and supporters, e.g. Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Nancy dis-Grace, Wendy Murphy, the New Black Panther party have all abandoned her.

Where are all those supporters now that Crystal is in jail charged with murder 1?

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal, judging from what you think is credible, you are not capable of determining who has credibility and who does not.

kenhyderal said...

@ Anonymous 1:19 PM ... From Det Himans interview with Van Hook..... "I asked him if he had sex with the girl and he stated “no”. He then stated “I don’t know what the intention was, but I did not have sex with her, “nothing happened”. He asked what had happened and I told him that I was investigating the a sexual assault. And it was told to him it had to deal with “Duke lacrosse” and he stated he was familiar with the case, but asked if that was the same girl that was the victim in that case. We said we were given information that she had been to the hotel that night and performed a dance"

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 1:15 said : "Those were documented events. She showed up impaired to a session with AG Cooper and his investigators" ...... No she did not. No one in attendence at that meeting has said so. For a first hand account of that incident you should read Crystal's book pp 153 onward. It's on-lne

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 1:19 said: The fact is, pre LAX party, Crystal's parents cared for and provided for her children`.......... Crystal`s loving Family helped her with babysitting while she worked and attented College.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hydral: "For a first hand account of that incident you should read Crystal's book pp 153 onward. It's on-lne".

So you admit you are getting your material from Crystal's book. Crystal published her book after the Lacrosse case blew up in Ni-nny-fong's face and she was discredited. It is nothing but a self serving effort to reclaim her totally lost reputation.

That is as bad as your claim, based on Kilgo told me that someone told him evidence, that there were unidentified males at the Lacrosse party.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: Regarding Crystal's theft of a cab:

From Fox News: "She tried to escape again, but a flat tire ended the second leg of her getaway. Finally in custody, she was found to have a blood-alcohol content of 0.19 (the state limit is 0.08). While being questioned, Mangum passed out and was taken to a hospital."

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,265374,00.html#ixzz1nR7e4pQu

That is direct testimony, not, Kilgo told me that someone told him, type of evidence. Crystal went on a drunken joyride. If you got your information from Crystal's book, then Crystal's book is a feeble attemot people she did not get caught as a false accuser.

kenhyderal said...

Anoinymous " 2:43 said : `It is nothing but a self serving effort to reclaim her totally lost reputation`.......It`s an effort to set the record straight. For those who know Crystal, her reputation remains intact

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal:

From the Nov. 4, 2006 N&O article:

"'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."

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

That is not, kilgo told me that someone told him, testimony.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "It`s an effort to set the record straight. For those who know Crystal, her reputation remains intact".

The record is straight.Crystal falsely accused three innocent men of raping her. That is borne out by evidence which is not, Kilgo told me that someone told him, type of evidence.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal:

AG Roy Cooper on the bathroom in which the alleged crime took place:

"One of the things that stunned them was that the accuser came up with a new wild and vivid version of her central allegation in the case, the alleged attack in the bathroom. Here's what she said happened:

'She was suspended in mid-air and was being assaulted by all three of them in the bathroom. And I've been in that bathroom. And it was very difficult for me to see how that could have occurred. And then we got another new story,' Cooper tells Stahl.

"Well, wait. Because it was so small or…" Stahl asks.

'It was a small bathroom. Yes. And you would've had to have four people in there in different positions that she was describing to us being attacked,' Cooper says.

'Including up in the air?' Stahl asks.

'Including being suspended in mid-air. It was just difficult for any of us to see how that could have occurred,' the attorney general says.

http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-18560_162-2673456-2.html?pageNum=2&tag=contentMain;contentBody

Again, that is direct testimony by G Cooper as to what Crystal told him, what he knew about the bathroom, not Kilgoish hearsay.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal, Something else for you to consider, from the same url:

Crystal said that DaveEvans and Colin Finnerty helped her into Kim Roberts/Pittman's car. A time stamped photo showed it was neither Dave Evans nor Colin Finnerty.

"Cooper showed her the photo. Asked what she said, the attorney general tells Stahl, "Well, I don't remember what the answer was for that particular picture, but it was usually – that that picture's been doctored. Or that just can't be true. Or Duke University paid somebody off."

Here Crystal is trying to institute personal posterior camouflage after being revealed as non credible. The evidence is not Kilgoish hearsay.

Crystal's entire book was an ineffective attempt at personal posterior camouflage(or cya, as youmight say).

Anonymous said...

Ken-nnny-hyderal, more from the same url, concerning Crystal's identification of David Evans:

"Dave Evans thought the case against him would fall apart because of how the accuser had identified him in a photo line-up at the police station. She had told police Evans had a moustache.

'We had photos of the night before, the night after. No moustache,' Evans points out."

I think you said David Evans had a 5 O'Cloc shadow which looked like a mustache. If that came from Crystal's book, then it another Crystal Mabgum attempt at cya after being exposed as not credible.

Again, this is direct testimony, not Kilgoish hearsay

kenhyderal said...

At Anonymous at 2:50 PM...... This was written 5 years after this event. The way it`s been described is out of all proportion to what occured. The sentence she received on four misdemenours of 3 weekends in gaol doesn`t square with with the lurid accounts manufactured as part of the campaingn to discredit Crystal. The charge of larceny was laid for taking the car. She was of the opinion that she had consent. The intoxicated car owner at the Club would not back her up on this. She was stopped for speeding. She travelled a few seconds after the red lights came on because she did not realize she was being stopped. In trying to pull off the roadway after she stopped her fender came in contact with the approaching officer. He was not in the slightest injured. She then tried to pull ahead. There was no second chase. It was then that something punctured the tire. She blew 0.19 and was charged with DWI. She was 24 at the time. That was the extent of her record. There were LaX Players who had a more extensive record.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal, consider this:

"Back when she'd(Crystal) just accused wealthy white Duke students of rape, lawyers were volunteering to work for her pro bono should she want to sue for damages."

From http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2010/02/22/crystal-mangum-s-return-to-court.html.

Where are the trial lawyers now.

The fact that no trial lawyer is pushing Crystal to file a civil suit against the Lacrosse players is an indication she has no case.

Have any trial lawyers come forth to represent her since her book was published?

Would that indicate her book has convinced any contingency fee hungry lawyer that she has a case?

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal(on Crystal's cab theft escapade): "There were LaX Players who had a more extensive record."

No there weren't. That was something Ni-nny-fong conjured up to stir up pre trial animosity against the Lacrosse players.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal @ February 25, 2012 3:29 PM>

That seems to be a description from Crystal's cya book.

Police records contemporary with the incident record that Crystal stole the cab, led police on a high speed chase and tried to run down a police officer. She was charged with seven felonies but was allowed to plead to lesser charges.

Settling a criminal case with such a plea bargain is not at all uncommon in Durham. Michael Jermaine Burch perpetrated two rapes in Durham, the second while he was free on bail after being charged in the first rape. He was allowed to plead to attempted sexual assault.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "This was written 5 years after this event. The way it`s been described is out of all proportion to what occured. The sentence she received on four misdemenours of 3 weekends in gaol doesn`t square with with the lurid accounts manufactured as part of the campaingn to discredit Crystal".

The description of what happened came from police records which were contemporary with the incident.

You are telling me someone told you the case was blown up out of proportion. That is hearsay. The direct testimony says Crystal was lucky to escape without felony charges.

Anonymous said...

So Ken, was Van Hook a match for the DNA?

kenhyderal said...

To my knowledge he was not tested.

Anonymous said...

Ken: To my knowledge he was not tested.

He was not. As a result, he (and Crystal's other clients) remain possible sources for the unmatched DNA. Crystal's claim that she did not have sexual encounters as part of her escort job and Van Hook's denial that they had sex on March 11 at the Millennium Hotel do not eliminate her clients as sources.

Most observers would consider that explanation far more plausible than the preposterous theory that you have proposed.

Of course, you know that.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal,

The results of the SBI Crime lab testing of the rape kit excludes the possibility that any of the DNA found on Crystal was deposited there on the night of 13/14 March 2006.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal,

I think you are a little bit confused on forensic testing for semen. You say acid phosphatase is found in other bodily fluids than semen.

Does that mean a positive test for acid phosphatase does not suggest the presence of sperm?

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal, check out this url:

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022175904000584

It is an abstract of a journal article on the RSID test for semen. The test can detect the presence of semen out to a dilution of 1:400,000.

If semen were on Crystal's rape kit, it would have been full strength, not diluted to a strength of 1:400,000. The NC SBI Crime lab uses the RSID test for semen. Since the RSID test was negative, it ruled out the presence of semen beyond any reasonable doubt.

Anonymous said...

Excuse me.

Instead of asking, "Does that mean a positive test for acid phosphatase does not suggest the presence of sperm?", I should have asked Does that mean a positive test for acid phosphatase does not suggest the presence of semen?

Anonymous said...

ken-ninny-hyderal, consider this:

From: http://www.wavesignal.com/Forensics/Semen.html

"Acid phosphatase (AP) is found in high levels in semen and originates from the epithelial cells where it is secreted into the prostate gland. The level of AP activity is 500 to 1000 times higher in human semen than in any other normal body fluids or secretions (1). It has been amply demonstrated that elevated levels of AP activity persist in the vaginal pool after sexual intercourse and in semen stains. Thus the detection of strong AP activity is considered a fairly reliable indicator of the presence of semen."

So if a high acid phosphatase is not detected, it suggests the absence of semen.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal,more about the RSID test for semen:

"the RSID-semen test identifies the presence of the seminal vesicle-specific antigen, or semenogelin. Id. at 28; Jennifer Old et al, Developmental Validation Studies of RSID-Semen A Lateral Flow Immunochromatographic Strip Test for the Forensic Detection of Seminal Fluid, Independent Forensics, Rev. D 3, 3 (2010). This antigen is unique to semen, and therefore, there is no cross reactivity with other bodily fluids in males and females or with semen from other mammals. Id. at 3, 31. This test can also identify semen even if the stain was stored under less favorable conditions which have been shown to affect other tests such as the Acid Phosphatase test. Id. at 10-11."

url: http://ncforensics.wordpress.com/2011/10/19/forensic-tests-for-semen-what-you-should-know/

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 9:23 said: "The NC SBI Crime lab uses the RSID test for semen"......... No they didn't. On April 7, 2006, DSI performed a seratic PSA presumptive tests for the presence of semen on the rape kit. That negative test could not eliminate the presence of semen on Crystal's person

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

At Anonymous 6:27 AM : Mr. Van Hook is a known person. His testimony coincides with Crystal's. When it is determined who all were at the Party that night then they along with Mr. Van Hook can give DNA samples

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "DSI performed a seratic PSA presumptive tests for the presence of semen on the rape kit. That negative test could not eliminate the presence of semen on Crystal's person".

Ken-ninny, the SBI Crime lab protocol calls for Acid Phosphatase assay, Christmas tree stain and RSID for semen.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal:"Mr. Van Hook is a known person. His testimony coincides with Crystal's. When it is determined who all were at the Party that night then they along with Mr. Van Hook can give DNA samples".

It has already been determined, by sensitive reliable tests conducted by the SBI Crime lab on the rape kit that no rape happened at the party. Whether or not all the party attendees have been identified is moot.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "On APRIL 7, 2006(emphasis added), DSI performed a seratic PSA presumptive tests for the presence of semen on the rape kit.

Ken-ninny, consider this from the Affidavit filed by the three innocent Lacrosse players in their lawsuit against Durham:

"On APRIL 6, 2006(emphasis added), the rape kit items and reference DNA samples for Crystal Mangum and the lacrosse players were all transferred from Agent Leyn back to Durham Police CSI Angela Ashby, who transferred them to DSI."

On April 6, 2006, the NC SBI Crime lab no longer had the rape kit in its custody. They had been transferred to DSI. Note it was DSI, not the SBI Crime lab which performed the "seratic PSA presumptive tests".

As I have told you, the SBI Crime lab's protocol consists of Acid Phosphatase, Christmas Tree Stain and the RSID for semen. You can check it out for yourself.

So, all told, testing by both the NC SBI Crime lab and DSI showed beyond reasonable doubt there was no semen on the rape kit.

I say again, the NC SBI Crime lab did not perform the "seratic PSA presumptive tests". It was DSI.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous said: "I say again, the NC SBI Crime lab did not perform the "seratic PSA presumptive tests". It was DSI"..... Conceeded! Where can I find documentation that shows the NC SBI performed the RSID Test?

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 1:01 said " So if a high acid phosphatase is not detected, it suggests the absence of semen" It may suggest that but it certainly does not prove that.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "Conceeded! Where can I find documentation that shows the NC SBI performed the RSID Test?"

Why don't you try a google search on "How NC SBI Crime lab tests for semen". That's what I did.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal: "' So if a high acid phosphatase is not detected, it suggests the absence of semen' It may suggest that but it certainly does not prove that."

True. However, in combination with other results, such as a negative Christmas Tree stain, negative RTSD for semen, negative seratic PSA presumptive tests, it establishes beyond reasonable doubt that semen is not present.

Again, I remind you, the prosecution has to prove that Semen IS present. How does a negative Acid Phosphatase do that?

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal, consider this:

"[Acid Phosphatase] is only a presumptive test because the AP enzyme is also present in vaginal secretions, so the test cannot distinguish between the two.

Read more: Forensic Serology Testing | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/about_7221411_forensic-serology-testing.html#ixzz1na18OCex

The implication of this is that a POSITIVE acid phosphatase assay DOES NOT confirm the presence of semen, which is why more sensitive tests are done.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal, This is what I found when I did a google search on the NC SBI Crime lab:

"From http://www.ncdoj.gov/getdoc/0c6b24c3-af68-4efa-a0e7-17a55f1b1147/Body-Fluid-SOPs-Rev-O6.aspx:

"Semen Analysis.

Acid phosphatase
Sperm identification: Christmas Tree Stain
RSID Semen Test"

This is how the SBI Crime Lab tests for semen."

It was posted as a comment to "The misguided and unenlightened hurt themselves", which Sidney posted on February 2, 2012. Did you ever read that comment?

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 4:06 said: " This is how the SBI Crime Lab tests for semen."........ And was there documentation that this was done?

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-Hyderal: "" This is how the SBI Crime Lab tests for semen."........ And was there documentation that this was done?"

This was the kind of response I was expecting you would give. Thanks for living down to expectations.

If the tests were not done, you would have to presume the SBI Crime lab did not test for semen and then reported to the DA they had done so.

The SBI Crime lab became known for doing everything it could to give the DA's the evidence it wanted, even to the extent of fudging the evidence. Mike Ni-nny-fong sent the rape kit to the SBI crime lab with a request to expedite the testing, that he wanted the evidence as soon as possible. That in and of itself means your hypothesis, that SBI did not follow their protocol is not plausible.

Further, after he learned of SBI's results, Mr. Ni-nny-fong engaged the services of DSI to do the more sensitive Y string testing. That says, Mr. Ni-nny-fomg accepted SBI's results as valid.

Further, as you inadvertently documented, DSI did do a test for semen which supported the SBI finding of no semen(yes the test you cited has a 2.9% false negative rate which means that the odds AGAINST semen being present were on the order of >32 to 1). Do you think SBI would not think that DSI would not run their own test for semen? If you do, you are more naive than I thought.

SBI would not report a finding of no semen to the DA only to risk that the DA would have tests done which would reveal that they(SBI) had lied?

What would be a plausible reason why SBI would not follow their protocol in testing Crystal's rape kit? The case had not developed into a controversy at that point.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal, consider this:

Mike Ni-nny-fong made a pre trial statement that he believed the SBI tests were negative because the Lacrosse players wore condoms(of course Crystal said they did not use condoms)

That would suggest Mr. Ni-nny-fong accepted the testing as valid.

It makes your implied hypothesis, that SBI did not test for semen and then reported it did even less plausible.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal, if you are questioning whether or not the SBI Crime lab followed its own protocol in testing Crystal's rape kit, I say it is your responsibility to prove they did not.

Your response, was there documentation, seems to be like Crystal's response to AG Cooper when he showed her pictures which contradicted what she was saying. Her response was to claim the photos were doctored. One could not assume the photos were doctored unless Crystal could prove they were.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal, more about acid phosphatase:

"Testing for acid phosphatase remains a valuable presumptive test for the screening of swabs collected from sexual assault survivors and for the testing of stains found on clothing and bedding."

And:

"Acid phosphatase activity is 50-1000 times greater in human semen than in any other bodily fluid. The use of acid phosphatase as a marker for semen is compromised because the vagina is also a source of vaginal acid phosphatase. Since seminal and vaginal acid phosphatase can not discriminate, the only approach to differentiating semen in vaginal secretion is by quantitative analysis such as PSA or the microscopic inspection for sperm.

url: http://www.semenonpanties.com/laux.htm

So tell me why a negative test for Acid Phosphatase is not a presumptve test for semen.

Anonymous said...

Keen-ninny-hyderal, from Wikipedia:

"In medical and forensic science, a presumptive test is an analysis of a sample which establishes either:

The sample is definitely not a certain substance

The sample probably is the substance.

From my previous post:

"Testing for acid phosphatase remains a valuable presumptive test for the screening of swabs collected from sexual assault survivors and for the testing of stains found on clothing and bedding."

The question is, what is a low acid phosphatase presumptive of?

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal, more about acid phosphatase:

"However, this substance is found in the greatest concentration in the prostate and up to 1,000 times greater in seminal fluid than any other bodily fluid. The latter fact is useful in the science of forensics since the detection of prostatic acid phosphatase (PAP) in vaginal tissue measuring levels greater than 3 U/ML (units per milliliter) is used as supporting evidence that a rape has occurred."

So what does a level of less than 3 U/ML (units per milliliter) mean?

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal, this is the url for my last quote:

http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-acid-phosphatase.htm

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal, what motive would the NC SBI have for not testing Crystal's rape kit for semen? Crystal had not become a media figure at that time.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal, the point is:

Even if the SBI crime lab had only done an acid phosphatase assay, a negative acid phosphatase, i.e. less than 3 U/ML (units per milliliter), is reliable evidence of the absence of semen. Only a positive assay would be cause for additional tests to confirm the presence of semen.

In this case, there was additional testing done, by DSI, as you have inadvertently pointed out. The result of that test, added to a negative acid phosphatase rules out, beyond reasonable doubt, the presence of semen.

Anonymous said...

Kin-ninny-hyderal, here's more to think about:

You say those accounts of Crystal's cab ride are not true and exaggerated way out of proportion.

Why hasn't Crystal sued the authors of those incorrect accounts for libel. A libel suit would require them to prove the truth of those statements. Did you ever thin of that.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ninny-hyderal, one more to make it an even 200:

Judging from what you said, the story of Crystal saying she wanted to get money from the white boys, you believe the story to be manufactured and therefore untrue. It was printed. Doesn't that make it libel?

Why hasn't Crystal sued the authors of the story for libel?

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 231   Newer› Newest»