Monday, March 12, 2012

It’s a crime to steal from yourself!

“Drats!” I can almost hear one of the executives of the Prison Industrial Complex now muttering as on February 22, 2012 a felon slipped through its greedy grasp to gain his freedom. Anxious to build its prison population to expand its bottom line the correctional facility failed to reel in the potential boarder in large measure because he was not a person of color. The fact that he was a retired Cary police officer most assuredly helped him wiggle off the hook. The News & Observer article of February 23, 2012 by Amanda James titled “Artist off the hook for theft charges” detailed the story of one, Keith Adams… artist turned felon. His crime – collecting his artwork from a restaurant that had closed.

According to the article, the Angier artist loaned 26 of his paintings to Bistro 155, an Apex restaurant that was shuttered in January 2012. Keith Adams, who valued his paintings at more than $5,000, was advised by the building owner’s lawyer to wait until inventory was taken before collecting his pieces. However, concerned that some or all of his paintings might be stolen, he entered the restaurant, gathered his paintings, took them home, and then alerted police authorities. He didn’t want the police to think that they had been stolen. With that information, or confession, in hand, the Apex police promptly placed Mr. Adams under arrest and charged him with larceny… for stealing his own property.

At a hearing in the Wake County Courthouse on February 22, 2012, Assistant District Attorney Jeff Cruden informed the court that charges against Adams, larceny and breaking and entering, were being dismissed. It was a rare act of sanity in the Tar Heelian justice system that deprived the Prison Industrial Complex of some income for its insatiable fiduciary appetite.

Unfortunately the Assistant District Attorney of Durham County, Kelly Gauger, lacks the wisdom, sense of justice and courage to do the same in the case against Crystal Mangum, the Duke Lacrosse victim/accuser. In essence she is charged with two counts of larceny, one for each of the two money orders that she purchased and took with her after she stabbed Reginald Daye in self defense. (Note that it was not mentioned that Keith Adams was charged with 26 counts of larceny… one for each of his works of art.) Instead, Ms. Gauger is moving forward with the prosecution, along with a first degree murder charge which totally lacks merit. Gauger is doing her part to appease the Prison Industrial Complex which is after taxpayer money and to sate the Carpetbagger Jihadists’ call for vengeance against anything and anyone considered to be on the wrong end of the Duke Lacrosse case.

The larceny charge against Mangum is unwarranted because she paid for the two money orders, which were made out to Daye’s landlord, with her money even though Daye was listed as the remitter. Reginald Daye was placed on the money orders because he held the lease to the apartment which they shared. Because of the notoriety surrounding the bogus and trumped up arson charge against Ms. Mangum, she was unable to find anyone to allow her to rent an apartment.

Daye wanted the money orders for use to purchase alcohol, which was the basis of the hours long argument that preceded the stabbing. If Reginald Daye had the money, he simply would not have paid for the money orders and instead would’ve wasted the money on booze sans input from Crystal Mangum. Daye did not pay for the money orders and he was not entitled to them.

Now the biased mainstream media wants the public to believe that Crystal Mangum stabbed Reginald Daye with a knife in order to steal two money orders that Daye purchase which were made out to the landlord and ones which she could not convert to cash as her name was not even listed as the remitter.

But, then, the prosecution is desperate for a motive in the stabbing and a reason for keeping Crystal Mangum behind bars. Prosecutor Gauger is focused on punishing Crystal Mangum by doing the dirty work for the Carpetbaggers. Justice… that’s not in the prosecutor’s purview.

And, like in the James Arthur Johnson case, and many others like it, prosecutor Kelly Gauger will drag out the proceedings as long as possible to assure that Crystal Mangum serves a term in jail without even being convicted. That’s the way North Carolina’s selective justice based on Class and Color works.

An action such as prosecuting a person for “stealing his/her own property” is what makes North Carolina’s justice system the laughing stock of the country and brings it into disrepute. The larceny charge against Ms. Mangum makes no more sense than the larceny charge against artist Keith Adams. At least the Wake County assistant D.A. had the common sense to drop the larceny charge against Mr. Adams.

Unfortunately, even though the charges against Mr. Adams have been dropped, he is still recorded as a felon. However with a little effort and money, he should be able to have those charges expunged. One lesson he could take away from this is to undervalue his works that he loans out so that if it becomes necessary for him to retrieve them in the future he will only be charged with a misdemeanor. 


Coming soon: Currently work is being done on an interactive flog that should be uploaded in about two weeks and is focused on the marked disparity in the application of laws in the Tar Heel state. Don’t miss it!

231 comments:

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

You have ZERO proof that the money orders were made in the terms you describe, that the argumen (if any) was over the money orders, that any dispute had anything to do with money, that Daye wanted the money for any reason, much less to buy alcohol, and that Mangum was defending herself.
Zero. So just keep up the bullXXXX. We all know what it is, why you waste time writing it and....above all else.....please DO continue to prove what a racist bigoted whacko you really are!!!

Anonymous said...

SIDN(inn)EY H(ypocrite)ARR(acist)

At least you have given up that the media have been saying that Mr. Daye was stabbed by a paring knife.

What happened to your reliable sources, SIDN(inn)EY H(ypocrite)ARR(acist)?

Too little, too late, SIDN(inn)EY H(ypocrite)ARR(acist). Yopu have revealed yourself as a liar.

Anonymous said...

SIDN(inn)EY H(ypocrite)ARR(acist)

"Instead, Ms. Gauger is moving forward with the prosecution, along with a first degree murder charge which totally lacks merit."

SIDN(inn)EY H(ypocrite)ARR(acist), why don't you take your proof of this to the Feds and ask them to intervene? Isn't prosecuting someone on a non meritorious charge a civil rights violation?

Anonymous said...

SIDN(inn)EY H(ypocrite)ARR(acist):

"Crystal Mangum [is] the Duke Lacrosse victim/accuser".

SIDN(inn)EY H(ypocrite)ARR(acist), you would never be repeatedly saying that unless you believed the Lacrosse players were guilty.

Anonymous said...

SIDN(inn)EY H(ypocrite)ARR(acist):

"Gauger is doing her part...to sate the Carpetbagger Jihadists’ call for vengeance against anything and anyone considered to be on the wrong end of the Duke Lacrosse case."

SIDN(inn)EY H(ypocrite)ARR(acist), prove with hard evidence that the carpetbagger jihad exists.

Anonymous said...

SIDN(inn)EY H(ypocrite)ARR(acist):

"And, like in the James Arthur Johnson case, and many others like it, prosecutor Kelly Gauger will drag out the proceedings as long as possible to assure that Crystal Mangum serves a term in jail without even being convicted."

Just like Tracey Cline did, when she falsely prosecuted Frankie Washington and Leon Brown.

Whenever youhear those names, SIDN(inn)EY H(ypocrite)ARR(acist), you duck your head in the sand then say you have never heard of them.

You again make it self evident what a racist hypocrite you are. The case against Crystal looks stronger than the cases against Frankie Washington and Leon Brown.

It is definitely stronger than the case MIKE NI(nny)FONG had against the innocent, wrongfully accused Duke Lacrosse players.

Anonymous said...

SIDN(inn)EY H(ypocrite)ARR(acist):

"An action such as prosecuting a person for “stealing his/her own property” is what makes North Carolina’s justice system the laughing stock of the country and brings it into disrepute."

No, SIDN(inn)EY H(ypocrite)ARR(acist), what brought the Durham part of the NC Justice system into disrepute were the wrongful actions of MIKE NI(nny) FONG and TRACEY CLIN(incompoop)E.

Anonymous said...

SIDN(inn)EY H(ypocrite)ARR(acist):

"Coming soon: Currently work is being done on an interactive flog that should be uploaded in about two weeks and is focused on the marked disparity in the application of laws in the Tar Heel state. Don’t miss it!"

What you call "disparity in the application of laws in the Tar Heel state" - I can think of a prime example, the way the DA's office under MIKE NI(nny)FONG handled Michael Jermaine Burch as compared to the way the same officde handled the charges against the innocent, falsely accused Duke Lacrosse players.

Anonymous said...

SIDN(inn)EY H(ypocrite)ARR(acist)

How have you established Crystal Mangum's innocence - by claiming the media said Mr. Daye was stabbed by a paring knife? The media said it was a kitchen knife.

I remind you, you claimed a paring knife was a kitchen knife and that you did not distort anything the media said. Then you said the mediawas distorting the story.

And you claim you do not speak dishonestly, that we can take what you say to the bank.

Who is your banker - John Dillinger, maybe?

Anonymous said...

SIDN(inn)EY H(ypocrite)ARR(acist)

You say we can take it to the bank that you know what you talk about.

You could write me a check for a few hundred dollars and I could take it to the bank and unless you could cover the check it wouldn't do me much good.

These accusations you make, based on your reliable sources are checks you really can not cover.

Sidney Owes Another Apology said...

Sid claimed: "he is still recorded as a felon."

This is false. Adams was not convicted of any felonies. He is not a felon.

The phrasing in the N&O article was misleading. Adams continues to have an arrest record that shows he was arrested and charged with felonies. However, he is not a felon.

Sid, your problem is that you erroneously continue to believe that defendants are required to go to trial to prove their innocence. That is not required in our system.

I suggest that you correct your error.

Adams is not a felon.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous @ March 12, 2012 4:46 PM:

"Sid, your problem is that you erroneously continue to believe that defendants are required to go to trial to prove their innocence."

That is true, SIDN(inn)EY. So why are you saying the charges against Crystal should be dismissed? Why do you want to deprive Crystal her chance to prove her innocence?

Anonymous said...

There is no such thing as the prison complex, whacko sid......just another flase madeup cute little phrase like your carpet heehaw. Having worked in the federal prison system, I can tell you that privately operated prison management corporations do NOT want more prisoners locked up in NC. If you knew the first thing about how these companies operate, you would understand that getting and keeping occupancy down, avoiding in-prison violence, keeping infection and other health issues under control, maintaining a stable workforce (guards, etc.) and meeting local, county, state and federal regulations.....ARE the metrics upon which financial performance is based. NOT on filling up prisons. What a total ditz you are....

Anonymous said...

Anonymous @ March 13, 2012 4:32 AM

But SIDN(inn)EY said you could take to the bank as true whatever he says.(sarcasm smiley)

I wonder what bank SIDN(inn)EY uses for his money?

Anonymous said...

No, Adams is not a felon. Do you not have a clue? In order to be described as a "felon", one must be charged with felony offenses and CONVICTED of felony offenses.

I'd say that Nifong-Cline-Linwood W.-Peterson-Wagstaff-et al are the TRUE reasons why most folks either burst out laughing or shudder with disgust when Durham and Justice are brought up in the same sentence. And, oh, by the way, most of us read this silly web site for comic relief at your obvious ill-informed racist rantings.

Lance the Intern said...

If CGM purchased the money orders, she should have proof, just as Keith Adams had proof that he was the owner of the paintings he took.

Just as in the Adams case, she should be afforded the opportunity to prove that ownership in a court of law.

But let's be honest here, Sid. When it comes to CGM (like Nifong), you aren't looking for "justice", you're looking for her to get off free without having to take responsibility for her actions.

The biased J4N Media would have you believe that CGM bears no responsibility for the death of Reginald Daye.

Justice is not in the J4N's purview, just in their name.

Anonymous said...

Reginald Daye is dead because Mangum was not and has not been held accountable for her past behavior(s). Period. Mangum, Durham's poster child for the "I am a poor black woman who everybody picks on because I am black" crowd, is soon to be joined by Cline.
Sid's red herring, the money orders, is so blatantly silly......First, we had Daye, the wildly aggressive woman-beating drunken alcoholic, then we had Daye, the aggressor who got a pin-prick stab with a paring knife by poor defenseless Sister. Now, we have Mangum, innocently defending her money orders and her desire to pay rent....comically funny.....fighting off the evil Daye. Harr, this web site's racist-in-residence, thinks the evil Duke doctors, who are in cahoots with Rae Evans, off'ed Daye to help the heehaw conspiracy frame up the Mangum-the-innocent-victim.
I think Obama is actually George Bush's closeted evil twin and the Prez is in cahoots with Madonna, Derek Jeeter and Hank Williams, Jr. to punish all those who hurt poor bathrobe boy, Nifong.

Walt said...

The state dismissed the Adams case because the state could not meet its burden of proof.

To prove burglary the state needs evidence (a concept that Nifong seems not to understand) that the defendant broke and entered into the dwelling or place of another for the purpose of committing a felony. In the Adams case, the state did not have evidence that Adams broke and entered for the purpose of committing a felony. That is, he was there to take his property.

In the alternative, North Carolina could have charged him under NCGS 14-54(b) with a misdemeanor. 54(b) does not require evidence of intent to commit a felony, just breaking and entering into a building. Apparently, the DA thought it a waste of time to pursue a misdemeanor charge against someone with a compelling story to tell.

That is very different from Crystal's situation. From the evidence in the public domain there is ample evidence to support the charge of manslaughter under NCGS 14-18. The state must prove (again something Nifong doesn't seem to get) the deceased died as teh result (not necessarily the direct result or only cause) of a criminal act committed by the defendant. St. v. Jones, 15 N.C. App. 537 (1972)

I remain skeptical about the D.A. being able to prove Murder, but I understand charging it to get a plea to Manslaughter.

Walt-in-Durham

Lance the Intern said...

Since Sid is notorious for not responding to comments on older posts, I thought this should be brought forward (thanks to Kenhyderal):

Voters did not vote along racial lines in DA contest, says VU professor 6-12-2006

NASHVILLE, Tenn. – The district attorney prosecuting the rape case against three of Duke University’s lacrosse players received significant support from both black and white voters in the recent Durham primary, according to a voting analysis by Vanderbilt University political scientist Christian Grose.

“Given that about the same percentage of blacks and whites supported Michael Nifong, the results do not suggest a racially divided city,” Grose said. Nifong obtained felony indictments against white student-athletes accused of kidnapping and raping a black dancer hired to perform at a team party. Grose’s precinct-by-precinct analysis showed that Nifong received 44 percent of the black vote and 46.2 percent of the white/nonblack vote.

Just over half (50.6 percent) of the total number of white voters cast their ballots for Freda Black, the other white candidate in the race. She also received support from 25.2 percent of the black voters. Meanwhile, the only African-American candidate in the race for district attorney, Keith Bishop, received 30.8 percent of the black vote and 3.2 percent of the white/nonblack vote. “Bishop was endorsed by the Durham Committee on the Affairs of Black People, a powerful African-American group for endorsements,” said Grose, a Duke University graduate. “Many times, although not in this DA election, the committee can guarantee much black voter support.”

Nifong received a larger percentage of the black vote than the other two contenders, but he did not get a majority of the black vote. His percentage of the white vote was slightly less than 50 percent. “Nifong basically did well among both blacks and whites, demonstrating that Durham voters do not seem to be polarized along racial lines, at least on this issue,” Grose said. “In addition, the voting results suggest that Nifong’s high-profile attention to this case could have helped him with black voters.”

It has long been Sid's contention that the Duke LAX case did not help Nifong win the election. Here's an actual voting analysis that states wise.

Sid -- I challenge you to find a study that supports your contention that, for Nifong, "courting the black vote...[was] a perfect prescription for losing the election".

Once you've found this study, post it here. We'll be waiting.

Walt said...

Lance, good point. The wrongful prosecution certainly helped blunt Bishop's endorsement by the Committee. Bishop, would have been a much better D.A. than either Tracey Cline or Nifong. Which is an admittedly very low bar to cross.

Completely unrelated, I wonder why Sid/Nifong isn't banging on the Tommy Arthur drum?

Walt-in-Durham

kenhyderal said...

@ Anonymous @ 4:32 AM : Leading private prison companies essentially admit that their business model depends on high rates of incarceration,” he (David Shapiro ACLU Attorney) added. “For example, in a 2010 annual report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Corrections Corporation of America (CCA), the largest private prison company, stated: ‘The demand for our facilities and services could be adversely affected by…leniency in conviction or parole standards and sentencing practices…’ Quote from Canadaian Lawyer Weekly Or, perhaps you are suggesting they filed a fraudulent annual report with the SEC.

Anonymous said...

I am very familiar with the company. You took the quote completely out of context. The company filing notes Addressed factors that could help or hurt the company' s performance within certain business lines and subsidiaries. The reference quoted was made with regard to long term contracts in max security prisons where the company had been forced to make enormous up front investments in plant and equipment with the assumption of a long term use. The same filing also spoke to the factors that contributed to good results in contracts where incentives such as early release, reduced violent episodes, good behavior time, etc were met and exceeded.
Know something about the business before you run your mouth or misuse a quote.
By the way i suggest you review the parole conversion rates, early release, health metrics for outsourced managed prisons versus those operated by state governments.

Anonymous said...

You da man, Kenny, you da man.

Anonymous said...

KEN(inny)HY(pocrite)DER)acist)AL gets it wrong again.

Why am I not surprised.

kenhyderal said...

From the Economist Magazine Aug 2010:
From an economic point of view, we should expect firms that compete for and rely on government contracts, such as prison operators, to maximise the spread between the amount billed and the actual cost of delivering the service. If contractors can get away with providing less value for money than would the government-run alternative, they will. Moreover, contractors have every incentive to make themselves seem necessary. It is well-known that public prison employee unions constitute a powerful constituency for tough sentencing policies that lead to larger prison populations requiring additional prisons and personnel. The great hazard of contracting out incarceration "services" is that private firms may well turn out to be even more efficient and effective than unions in lobbying for policies that would increase prison populations.

When we add to the mix the observations that America already puts a larger proportion of its population behind bars than does any other country (often for acts that ought to be legal), and that the US already spends an insane portion of national income on the largely non-productive garrison state, it is hard to see the expansion of a for-profit industry with a permanent interest in putting ever more people in cages as consistent with either efficiency or justice.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @4:02 said: "You took the quote completely out of context" Not me. That was a direct quote by Shapiro in an interview with The Canadian Lawyer Weekly

Anonymous said...

Interesting how kenny selects quotes isnt it........
You,kenny, dont do a very good job of validating your sources or reading for context. Same old kenny......popping off as usual. Suggest kenny the expert explore the difference in performance on early release, parole rates, prison offenses, and recitivism rates for systems run by outsourced versus gov. Management.

Anonymous said...

If Kenny HissyFit wants to slam for-profit prison management. Fine, go for it, fella. However, those of us who live in, work in, pay taxes in, vote in, grow up in, and believe in North Carolina.....KNOW that the issue of a broken justice system in this state has very very little to do with accusations of corruption and greed in prison management companies. This silly flop of a web site is supposedly all about Harr's quest for redemption of the worst, most corrupt, liar of a DA in the history of our state. Oh, and of course, Harr expanded his focus to include his personal Kennyesque-come-apart at Duke. In keeping with Harr's insistence that the focus of this pseudo-intellectual claptrap is "justice for nifong", I submit, Kenny, that you, who live god-knows-where, supposedly are BFFs with Durham's professional victim, claim to have secret insider evidence of some kind of mystery guest at the LAX party.........you, pal, need to quit running your own "red herrings" up your "ad hominy" (beans and corn) flagpole.
thanks to the poster for the ad hominy comment....if ever there were a person full of bean-produced gas and trivial corn, it is Ken, pen pal to the star of the Durham jail.

Anonymous said...

Much as it chagrins me to say this, Kenhyderal's pointing put the potential for corruption in privately run prisons. isjustified.

In Pennsylvania, in therecent past, two Juvenile court ustices wound up in prison. These so-called justices were sentencing juvenile offenders to a privately rub juvenile detention facility and receiving kickbacks from that facility. Many of the juveniles sentenced were deprived of their rights.

That said, I would ask Kenny to document specific instances when something like that happened in North Carolina. Remember, just because Sid-ninny alleges something as true, one can not take it to the bank.

Anonymous said...

Agree with you, poster. There are, of course, abuses of power and corruption of systems in ALL our institutions. Prime Examples: Nifong and Cline. It is not justified to condemn for-profit prison management companies, as an entire enterprise because of specific examples of illegal or unethical behavior in some situations. Nor is it justified to proclaim the entire justice system in NC to be an ethical cess pool because of the behavior of certain DAs and judges. I do agree that when incentives are wrong, wrongful behavior will occur. No where has this been seen more clearly than in the disgraceful behavior of Cline and Nifong.
Numerous examples of absolutely purile behavior on the part of certain politicians and government officials in BOTH parties makes me want to toss my cookies....sometimes I think the only solution is the nuke the Beltway.
For profit prison management companies have had both amazing successes and miserable failures....agreed.

Anonymous said...

One thing about Sid ya gotta admire....he is consistent in his paranoia and delusions. The Grand Conspiracy Club grows ever larger. I expect the Dubai-Canada branch of the crop-circle-LBJ-shot-Kennedy-black-helicopter-911 was caused by aliens-club will be formed by Kenny HissyFit. Mangum is a victim. Nifong is a victim. Sid is a victim. Cline is a victim. Peterson is a Bxxxx, uh, victim. Daye is a woman abusing drunk. Perdue is a witch. Obama is GOD. Wow, the world according to Harr is just too much fun these days!

Harr Supporter said...

Sidney:

You did not inform your readers that your case against Duke was dismissed.

It appears that your attorney “purposely bungled” your lawsuit against Duke. Rather than making bona fide arguments supporting your case, your attorney chased sensational headlines, made baseless accusations and repeated the irrelevant drivel regularly appearing on this blog. Your attorney sold out your interests as plaintiff to provide additional rubbish for the blogger who manages this site.

At least you avoided possible sanctions because of your frivolous filing. Congratulations.

Link:

http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/
north-carolina/ncmdce/1:2011cv00263/56317/20/

Highlights in the next post.

Harr Supporter said...


In his 34 pages of objections, much of which is a diatribe... Plaintiff takes the extraordinary tact of repeatedly maligning the motivations and personal integrity of the United States Magistrate Judge and thus this court...

The substance of Plaintiff’s objections is that he claims that the Magistrate Judge misstated the facts; namely, he contends that the Magistrate Judge incorrectly stated that Plaintiff was handing out his business cards after the interview with Justice Breyer rather than before, as Plaintiff claims... Plaintiff appears to believe this is important...

Notwithstanding, whether Plaintiff engaged in his solicitation before, during, and/or even after the event does not affect the legal analysis of Plaintiff’s claims. What Plaintiff overlooks is that Duke University is a private institution, and thus Plaintiff was at all times on private property when the alleged events took place. See McFadyen v. Duke Univ., 786 F. Supp. 2d 887, 942-43 (M.D.N.C. 2011). A claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 requires that the Defendant act “under color of state law.” Whatever Duke may have done or not done, it is clear that Plaintiff has not alleged facts sufficient to suggest that the actions of Duke, a private institution, should be treated as actions of the state...

The court therefore adopts the Magistrate Judge’s Recommendation.

This leaves the issue of Plaintiff’s gratuitous and vile invective directed at this court. Such comments were totally unnecessary for, as explained above, the factual distinction Plaintiff pressed was wholly irrelevant to the legal issues raised by the motion to dismiss his complaint... Plaintiff’s pro se status is not an excuse to engage in abusive conduct, and Plaintiff is warned against further personal attacks on the Magistrate Judge or any judicial officer of the federal courts... The court will not hesitate in appropriate cases to exercise its full contempt and other powers [providing power to punish misbehavior by fine or imprisonment, or both] in order to protect the dignity of the nation’s judicial system as a forum for the thoughtful resolution of legitimate grievances. Plaintiff is admonished to conduct himself accordingly...

IT IS ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 5) is GRANTED and that this action be DISMISSED.

Anonymous said...

Hooray! Harr finally gets what he deserves......a swift kick in his arrogant obnoxious rear.

guiowen said...

Cheer up, Sidney. At least you didn't have to pay any money for this.

Anonymous said...

Harr supporter: "in his 34 pages of objections, much of which is a diatribe... Plaintiff takes the extraordinary tact of repeatedly maligning the motivations and personal integrity of the United States Magistrate Judge and thus this court..."

It sounds awfully similar to Tracey Cline vs. Judge Hudson, doesn't it?

Anonymous said...

Hey, SIDN(inn)EY

are you going to sue your attorney for legal malpractice?

Anonymous said...

From the decision in Harr versus Duke: "Plaintiff’s pro se
complaint alleges that his 'First Amendment Rights to Freedom of
Speech and Expression were violated by Defendants'"

Kind of funny, since SIDN(inn)EY believes AG Cooper's right to express his belief in the innocence of the wrongfully accused innocent Duke defendants should have been suppressed.

Anonymous said...

SIDN(inn)EY H(ypocrite)ARR(acist)

What does your friend Professor Coleman think of this decision?

Are you going to appeal on the ground that you had inadequate representation?

Anonymous said...

SIDN(inn)EY H(ypocrite)ARR(acist),

What happened?

Did Duke buy off your attorney?

Well, SIDN(inn)EY, no $20 million settlement for you(at one time you claimed if anyone deserved a $20 million from Duke, it was you).

Dukegate slams shut on your hand.

Anonymous said...

Sidney is damn lucky that he did not get slapped with something more than a warning.....such as an order to pay costs, a contempt charge, etc. This whole silly nonsense is nothing but a pathetic man's anger and racism manifested in a completely worthless suit. I cannot wait for the excuses, blaming, conspiracy, and bigotry tirade to begin.

Anonymous said...

Hey, SIDN(inn)EY. just to rub it in:

Wikipedia has a section on npro se representation. It lists a number of famous pro se litigants. Guess who's not on the list.

Hint: he is a racist hypocrite who is conducting a vendetta against three innocent, falsely accused Duke Lacrosse players.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous @ March 15, 2012 4:50 AM:

Don't forget the carpetbagger jihadists.

Lance the Intern said...

I doubt we'll hear much about this from Sid --

"...Plaintiff is warned against further personal attacks on the Magistrate Judge or any judicial officer of the federal courts."

Too bad...I really was looking for Sid's attempts to explain these results.

Lance the Intern said...

On a side note, the court handed down it's decision on March 5th .

Sid's known about this for 10 whole days and didn't share?

For shame, Sid.....

Anonymous said...

Hey there, Kenny-the-all-knowing-source-for-truth-and-justice....care to explain to us hicks in the US how your country endorsed Quaddafi's record for improving human rights? Of course, I am sure we are ALL just really keen to hear how Quaddafi is the champion for human rights from your perspective. Want to tell us how wonderful it was to live under his rule? How women were treated? How children were slaughtered? Care to explain the basis for Canada's flowing endorsement of his record in the UN report? Huh, Kenny, huh???

Anonymous said...

I am certain Harr will spew out his usual invectives again everybody on the planet who does not look like him, think like him, or act like him. Can't wait.....let the shouting begin.

Anonymous said...

I am sorry Harr didn't get a contempt citation, a fine and some time in the big house, actually. He wasted the court's time, made absolutely false statements, grossly attacked the Magistrate on a viscious personal level and , in general, behaved like the horse's ass that he is.

Anonymous said...

". I am deserving of receiving a much larger amount of compensation than the Duke Lacrosse defendants. Without a doubt."

-- Sid Harr, Nov 24, 2011 4:21 PM

Anonymous said...

"true justice is on my side, and I am confident that in the final analysis, I will prevail.

Thereby, go ye enlightened."


--Sid Harr, Dec 2, 2011 12:54 PM

Anonymous said...

I just read the whole order referenced in the link on Harr's case. It is astounding to me that a man who claims to be a physician and, hopefully, some degree of common sense, ethics and intelligence, would think it appropriate to make such viscious personal attacks on a Magistrate. Who the hell does Harr think he is? Above the law? Above respect for the court? Above standards of common decency? Does Harr really think he can just lie his backside off, say anything he wants about anybody at any time?
Apparently so........

Anonymous said...

Harr went to the "Tracey Cline School of Writing Legal Documents"....

Anonymous said...

"Not to seek representation by an attorney was my choice, as I previously stated. Why pay to have an attorney sabotage my case? At least I have a good chance of prevailing by representing myself.
-- Sid Harr, Apr 8, 2011 12:54 PM

Anonymous said...

"My lawsuit against Duke has merit, believe it. You can't go by what others may say or do. You need to look at the facts."

--Sid Harr, Jan 15, 2012 11:01 AM

Anonymous said...

" I would have to be an idiot to trust my case with an attorney."

--Sid Harr, Jan 17 2012 8:42 AM

Anonymous said...

"Duke University does not fear me. At least not yet. Duke has the media on its side, as well as the Magistrate Judge. However, what it does not have on its side is justice. Justice rides with me."

--Sid Harr Dec 15, 2011 7:22 AM

Anonymous said...

"The fact that I am not represented by counsel shows that I am smart enough not to waste my money. Truth be told, I never even gave a nanosecond of a thought to retaining an attorney.

That my case is strong is without doubt. Likewise, that I suffered greater injustice than the Duke Lacrosse defendants, I believe is not questionable."


-- Sid Harr, Dec 17, 2011 1:37 PM

Anonymous said...

"Actually, my case against Duke is the most important and relevant lawsuit to hit the Tar Heel courts in decades. Keep in mind, I am fighting for your rights."

-- Sid Harr, Dec 19, 2011 2:22 PM

Anonymous said...

It seems SIDN(inn0EY is following Nancy Grace's example of April 7, 2006.

Anonymous said...

Why isn't the media covering Duke's win in this case?

I smell a conspiracy.....

Anonymous said...

SIDN(inn)EY:

"Coming soon: Currently work is being done on an interactive flog that should be uploaded in about two weeks and is focused on the marked disparity in the application of laws in the Tar Heel state. Don’t miss it!"

Maybe this upcoming flog will be SIDN9inn)EY's revelation that his lawsuit was dismissed with prejudice.

Anonymous said...

"Representing myself is a sign of intelligence..."

--Sid Harr, Feb 9, 2012 7:47 AM

Anonymous said...

Since Sid was never declared innocent of solicitation by a court or jury, he is therefore guilty of solicitation.

I propose a magenta "S" (to match the "J4N" logo) be permanently affixed to any and all of his J4N t-shirts.

Anonymous said...

"I am my best advocate, and I believe that I can represent myself well without a law degree."

--Sid Harr, Apr 12, 2011 12:13 PM

Anonymous said...

We are going to be treated to a full frontal view of the Harr racism and paranoia soon when he tells us all about how he got screwed because he is black and because he is in love with nifong.

Anonymous said...

Something for SIDN(inn)EY, advocate of First Amendment rights - NOT!

"Based on the significant inconsistencies between the evidence and the various accounts given by the accusing witness, we believe these three individuals are innocent of these charges."

This is a quote from AG Cooper regarding his office's investigation of the bogus Duke Rape case. Note, SIDN(inn)EY, he said "we believe these three individuals are innocent of these charges.", not we proclaim these three individuals innocent.

SIDN(inn)EY, advocate of First Amendment rights - NOT! thinks Mr. Cooper's expression of his belief should have been suppressed.

Anonymous said...

SIDN(inn)EY, defender of First Amendment rights NOT!:

Here is another quote from AG Cooper's news conference on his investigation of the Due Rape Case:

"COOPER: I'll tell you about this. Any state in the country, including the federal government, can have a rogue prosecutor who goes on out on his own and does thing continues. Here in North Carolina we have solved the problem, we've corrected the problem. But I propose today a way that I think it can be done more quickly, and I think that that's important."

Notice, contrary to claims, Mr. Cooper did not specifically refer to MIKE NI(nny)FONG as a rogue prosecutor.

Anonymous said...

You da man, Sid, you da man.

Anonymous said...

Lance the Intern said...
"On a side note, the court handed down it's decision on March 5th .

Sid's known about this for 10 whole days and didn't share?

For shame, Sid....."


Hey Sid, we're still waiting to hear from you.

Harr Supporter said...

Lance, what is truly distressing about his silence is that Sidney probably has been working feverishly on his appeal.

I expect that he will attack the statement “whether Plaintiff engaged in his solicitation before, during, and/or even after the event does not affect the legal analysis of Plaintiff’s claims” as proof of bias by the Court. He will ignore the significance of the statement (namely, that the description of his activities had no bearing on the decision) and deny once again that he engaged in solicitation when he handed out business cards (a point that the opinion makes clear is “wholly irrelevant to the legal issues raised”).

I expect that his appeal will repeat much of his “diatribe” that Nifong has been mistreated and this time malign the personal integrity of U.S. District Judge Thomas D. Schroeder.

I thought the Court demonstrated remarkable patience in warning Sidney for his earlier “vile invective directed at the Court” rather than finding him in contempt. I expect that an appeals court would not be so lenient for a repeat performance.

What I find sad is that that Sidney may not understand that his behavior is unacceptable. As you have noted previously, Sidney shows signs that he needs professional help.

Anonymous said...

SIDN(inn)EY:

You might have considered it foolish yo have entrusted your case to an attorney. Your choice did not disprove the axiom that one who represents himself in court has a fool for a client.

In any event, whether or not you think it justified that Duke settled with the innocent, falsely accused Lacrosse players, those innocent, falsely accused Lacrosse players made out better against Duke than you did.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 7:20 3-12-12 said: "Hey there, Kenny-the-all-knowing-source-for-truth-and-justice....care to explain to us hicks in the US how your country endorsed Quaddafi's record for improving human rights? Of course, I am sure we are ALL just really keen to hear how Quaddafi is the champion for human rights from your perspective. Want to tell us how wonderful it was to live under his rule? How women were treated? How children were slaughtered? Care to explain the basis for Canada's flowing endorsement of his record in the UN report? Huh, Kenny, huh???...........Huh????. You're asking me to defend Quaddafi? To claim Canada gave a glowing endorsement to him, though, is a distortion. You are referring to the the re-tabling of the UN Human Rights Council's, previously tabled report, prepared just before the time of the Lybian Revolt. Ironically the UNHRC, in it's report praised Libya’s human rights record in 2011 just months before Libya was suspended, to coincide with the West’s agenda to oust the Libyan leader Qaddafi. At that time, the UNHRC did a periodic review of Lybia & in it's reveiw it faintly praised Qaddafi for the promotion of human rights. Australia welcomed Libya’s willingness to facilitate visits by Human Rights Watch & Amnesty International, Canada welcomed recent legislation that allowed Libyan women, married to foreigners, the right to pass on their Libyan nationality to their children. Even the US supported Libya’s increased engagement with the international community but also highlighted concerns about freedom of expression. I'm a severe critic of Canada's Consevative Government and should not, as a Canadian, be expected to defend their policies. They seem to be taking Canada down the US road.

Anonymous said...

You da man, Kenny, you da man.

Anonymous said...

You da man, Kenny, you da man.

Anonymous said...

Dont you just love it when kenny copies other's writing and forgets to quote or give credit. Canada endorsed the report and praised Q. Period. Wonder why? Hmmmmm?

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 5:09 PM said: " Dont you just love it when kenny copies other's writing and forgets to quote or give credit......... Credit whre credit is due. This part of my post was a quote. "Australia welcomed Libya’s willingness to facilitate visits by Human Rights Watch & Amnesty International, Canada welcomed recent legislation that allowed Libyan women, married to foreigners, the right to pass on their Libyan nationality to their children. Even the US supported Libya’s increased engagement with the international community but also highlighted concerns about freedom of expression" Shenali Waduge The Asian Tribune.

Anonymous said...

Hey Kenny, isn't it a little embarassing to be caught passing off another writer's work as your own? You forgot to mention that you copied most of your post from Ms. Waduge's writing.

Ms. Waduge, as appearing in the Sri Lanka Guardian:

"Ironically the UNHRC praised Libya’s human rights record in 2011 just months before Libya was suspended to coincide with the West’s agenda to oust Libyan leader Gaddafi. So the UNHRC did a periodic review & praised Gaddafi for the promotion of human rights – Australia welcomed Libya’s willingness to facilitate visits by Human Rights Watch & Amnesty International, Canada welcomed recent legislation allowing women married to foreigners the right to pass on their Libyan nationality to their children. [E]ven the US supported Libya’s increased engagement with the international community but also highlighted concerns about freedom of express – similar to the statements issued on Sri Lanka!"

From Kenny's post on March 17, 2012 at 1:58 PM:

"Ironically the UNHRC, in it's report praised Libya’s human rights record in 2011 just months before Libya was suspended, to coincide with the West’s agenda to oust the Libyan leader Qaddafi. At that time, the UNHRC did a periodic review of Lybia & in it's reveiw it faintly praised Qaddafi for the promotion of human rights. Australia welcomed Libya’s willingness to facilitate visits by Human Rights Watch & Amnesty International, Canada welcomed recent legislation that allowed Libyan women, married to foreigners, the right to pass on their Libyan nationality to their children. Even the US supported Libya’s increased engagement with the international community but also highlighted concerns about freedom of expression."

Anonymous said...

Anyone have time to go back and check past threads to see how many of Kenny's other posts are plagiarized? I always thought that Kenny was a jackass, but now he has proven that he also is a fraud.

Anonymous said...

Ken,

Do you wish to comment on the dismissal of Sidney's lawsuit? As you know, the Court was harshly critical of Sidney's filing, noting that he ignored the legal issue raised in the Motion to Dismiss and responded with a "vile invective directed at the Court."

You have been critical of commenters who make ad hominem attacks in their comments. Do you believe that ad hominem attacks are appropriate in court filings? If not, do you believe that Sidney deserves the criticism he has received?

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 6:01 AM said: "I always thought that Kenny was a jackass, but now he has proven that he also is a fraud" ...... Anonymous posters like you are all but impossible to interact with, in a setting such as this blog. First, you try to provoke a reaction from me on a matter completely out of context from the topic at hand and then you ask me to defend my Country's position on a statement made to an out of date UN Report. When I come to the conclusion, by researching what you wrote, that you have mischaracterized what Canada did conribute to the report and tried to point that out to you, you accuse me of plagerism? Just where are you going with all this and what does it have to do with Crystal's ownership of the Money Orders she is charged with stealing.

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

Anonymous @ 10:23 said: "Do you wish to comment on the dismissal of Sidney's lawsuit"...... While I agree that Duke University, as a private institution, can enforce, on their own property, whatever anti-solicitation regulations they choose no one can convince me that the treatment of Dr. Harr is universally applied in similar circumstances. I can only conclude that he was singled out and Duke used it's anti-solicitation policy as a convenient excuse to silence him. I can only speculate on their motives but, it seems to me, it probably has to do with the obscene, embarassing and financially unnecessary multi-million dollar settlement they made with the accused LaX Players.

Anonymous said...

Ken:

Thank you for your response. However, you missed a couple of questions.

Do you believe that ad hominem attacks are appropriate in court filings? If not, do you believe that Sidney deserves the criticism he has received?

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous said: "Do you believe that ad hominem attacks are appropriate in court filings"..... A. No. Anonymous also asked, "If not, do you believe that Sidney deserves the criticism he has received" A. Yes but it should not affect how the decision he rendered was made.

Anonymous said...

KEN(inny)HY(pocrite)ER(acist)AL:

"I can only speculate on their motives but, it seems to me, it probably has to do with the obscene, embarassing and financially unnecessary multi-million dollar settlement they made with the accused LaX Players.

Maybe you could explain why Duke settled with the Lacrosse players if it was financially unnecessary. As I have repeatedly said to stick-my-head-in-the-sand SIDN(inn)EY, an institution like Duke settles rather than defend because it can not defend and it does not want the case go to discovery.

Maybe "the [so called] obscene, embarassing and financially unnecessary multi-million dollar settlement they made with the accused LaX Players" is the reason SIDN(inn)EY sued. He hoped to collect an obscene amount of money from Duke.

He deluded himself into thinking he was such a powerful individual he could shake down Duke. It seems he is still stunned to fine out he is not.

Anonymous said...

KEN(inny)H(ypocrite)DER(acisr)AL:

"it seems to me, it probably has to do with the obscene, embarassing and financially unnecessary multi-million dollar settlement they made with the accused LaX Players."

You got it wrong. You should have said, it seems to me, it probably has to do with the obscene, embarassing and financially unnecessary multi-million dollar settlement they made with the WRONGFULLY accused LaX Players.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 4:34 said: "Maybe you could explain why Duke settled with the Lacrosse players if it was financially unnecessary. As I have repeatedly said to stick-my-head-in-the-sand SIDN(inn)EY, an institution like Duke settles rather than defend because it can not defend and it does not want the case go to discovery.......... Duke recklessly and foolishly expected their Insurance Company to repay them. Their insurer, National Union Fire Insurance Company said it was left in the dark and shouldn't have to pay for any of the settlement costs. It said university officials violated the contract by not telling the company about the settlement until after the fact. The university argued that it was barred from disclosing information because of the settlement's confidentiality clause. This situation is now in litigation between Duke and them. Duke miscalculated very badly and the Administration is now rightly embarrased. If, as is expected, Duke loses this case, then, eventually, students will end up paying for the irresponsible action of the Administration. People like Dr. Harr add to their embarrasment by speaking out against this ridiculous settlement they made, which they thought,was being done with other people's money.

Anonymous said...

KIN(inny)H(ypocrite)der(acist)AL::

"Duke recklessly and foolishly expected their Insurance Company to repay them. Their insurer, National Union Fire Insurance Company said it was left in the dark and shouldn't have to pay for any of the settlement costs. It said university officials violated the contract by not telling the company about the settlement until after the fact. The university argued that it was barred from disclosing information because of the settlement's confidentiality clause."

What this adds up to is one more piece of incredibly unbelievable bullshit, something which makes sense only if you ignore the facts of the case.

Duke settled with the Lacrosse players because they could not defend whatever charges would have been made in a civil suit. If they could have defended the suit, there would have been no confidentiality agreement to worry about. .An institution does not settle a lawsuit which it can defend.

Except in the mind of a racist, hypocrite ninny.

Anonymous said...

KEN(inny)HY(pocrite)DER(acist)AL:

"[Duke] university argued that it was barred from disclosing information because of the settlement's confidentiality clause.

That Duke University reached a settlement with the wrongfully accused Lacrosse players was announced in the press. Duke could have informed its insurer that it was negotiating a settlement with the wrongfully accused Lacrosse players without violating any proposed confidentiality agreement.

Would it be a violation of any confidentiality agreement if the University disclosed the terms to its insurer, which was expected to pay the settlement?

Stop believing SIDN(inn)Y's delusions and consult the facts.

Anonymous said...

Kenny is so busy impressing us with his erudite responses that he, once again, misses the point. Kenny poses as the standard bearer, along with Harr, for justice and truth. Always ranting about HIS opinions and HIS perspectives.....etc.etc. funny, though, he claims to be from a country that has RECENTLY praised a dictator that is as vile and ruthless as any common Nazi. Amazing isn't it......Kenny, the world traveler, now hailing from Dubai, no less, says he is good friends with Mangum......but has never set foot in Durham. One does wonder just exactly how this, uh, friendship bloomed. Kenny poses, flexes his muscles for us, gets his shorts in a knot for the
ad hominy (beans and corn) attacks, and flails about like my grandmother's upper arms.
Keep it up, Kenny......you and Sidney continue to provide weekly entertainment for us mere mortals.

Anonymous said...

KEN(inny)HY(pocrite)DER(acist)AL

How do you reconcile SIDN(inn)EY's conflicting views on how Duke University deals with litigation.

On the one hand he claims Duke settled with the wrongfully accused Lacrosse Defendants even though they could have prevailed in court.

On the other hand, he claims Duke deals with litigation by buying off the plaintiffs' attorneys to get them to sell out their clients.

Why did Duke not buy off the attorneys for the wrongfully accused Lacrosse players?

Anonymous said...

KEN(inny)HY(pocrite)DER(acist)AL

I have been involved in litigation both as plaintiff and defendant.

In the case in which I was the defendant, if I had settled with the plaintiffs without consulting with my liability carrier, my carrier would not have reimbursed me.

It is highly illogical, highly implausible that Duke would have settled with the wrongfully accused LAX defendants without consulting with their liability carrier and then expected their carrier to reimburse them.

It is especially illogical and highly unbelievable that they would do it if they believed they could prevail in court.

Anonymous said...

KEN(inny)HY(pocrite)DER(acist)AL:

"People like Dr. Harr add to their embarrasment by speaking out against this ridiculous settlement they made, which they thought,was being done with other people's money."

People like SIDN(inn)EY H(ypocrite)ARR(acist), via their speaking out show only that they have no clue as to what went on. They embarrass themselves, not Duke.

Anonymous said...

Harr is an embarrassment to himself and, honestly, the laughingstock of the entire lax hoax fiasco. I read this site at times because it is funny. At times, it is so damn funny that I think Harr must be the world's greatest writer of satire. He makes an ass of himself every time he opens his mouth. does make one wonder if this whole site is nothing more than somebody's idea of a joke......???????
Anybody who would put his photograph on the same page with the likes of Peterson and Wagstaff has several screws loose.

Anonymous said...

Don't know about you guys, but I would be mortified and shaking in my boots if a court admonished me in the manner, tone and language that was handed down to Harr. He is damn lucky not to be sitting in jail and/or paying a contempt fine. I cannot imagine a more humiliating incident than to be shown to be so utterly ridiculous. Lord, Sid, get a hobby, travel, do some charity work.....something, fella, you need help...

Anonymous said...

KEN(inny)HY(pocrite)DER(acist)AL

Do you really believe that Duke believed it could, without involvement of their liability carrier, negotiate a settlement with the wrongly accused Lacrosse players and then pass the cost on to their liability carrier?

Do you think Duke would even offer the wrongfully accused Lacrosse players a settlement worth millions if they could prevail in court?

Do you think Duke's attorneys would advise them to settle to the tune of millions of dollars if they thought they could prevail in court?

If so, then ridiculous your name is Kenhyderal.

Anonymous said...

Where's Sid?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous @ March 19, 2012 1:26 PM

"Where's Sid?"

I said earlier that SID(ninny) was doing a Nancy Grace, imitating Ms. DisGrace's behavior on the day AG Cooper expressed his belief that the wrongfully accused Lacrosse players were innocent.

In his video, Jon Stewart that Ms. DisGrace was out raping puppies.

What do you suppose SID(ninny) is doing?

Anonymous said...

He's waiting for Tracey Cline to go into private practice.

Nifong Supporter said...


Sidney Owes Another Apology said...
Sid claimed: "he is still recorded as a felon."

This is false. Adams was not convicted of any felonies. He is not a felon.

The phrasing in the N&O article was misleading. Adams continues to have an arrest record that shows he was arrested and charged with felonies. However, he is not a felon.

Sid, your problem is that you erroneously continue to believe that defendants are required to go to trial to prove their innocence. That is not required in our system.

I suggest that you correct your error.

Adams is not a felon.

So Adams' criminal record shows that he has been charged with a felony, but you state that he is not a felon. Why? .. because he hasn't been convicted yet. Maybe technically you are correct, but try telling that to a prospective employer.

Nifong Supporter said...


Lance the Intern said...
If CGM purchased the money orders, she should have proof, just as Keith Adams had proof that he was the owner of the paintings he took.

Just as in the Adams case, she should be afforded the opportunity to prove that ownership in a court of law.

But let's be honest here, Sid. When it comes to CGM (like Nifong), you aren't looking for "justice", you're looking for her to get off free without having to take responsibility for her actions.

The biased J4N Media would have you believe that CGM bears no responsibility for the death of Reginald Daye.

Justice is not in the J4N's purview, just in their name.

Lance, the prosecutors should have proof that Crystal Mangum was not the purchaser of the money orders before charging her with larceny. The name listed as remitter is usually the purchaser, but it is not necessarily so in all cases, such as this one.

Nifong Supporter said...


Walt said...
The state dismissed the Adams case because the state could not meet its burden of proof.

To prove burglary the state needs evidence (a concept that Nifong seems not to understand) that the defendant broke and entered into the dwelling or place of another for the purpose of committing a felony. In the Adams case, the state did not have evidence that Adams broke and entered for the purpose of committing a felony. That is, he was there to take his property.

In the alternative, North Carolina could have charged him under NCGS 14-54(b) with a misdemeanor. 54(b) does not require evidence of intent to commit a felony, just breaking and entering into a building. Apparently, the DA thought it a waste of time to pursue a misdemeanor charge against someone with a compelling story to tell.

That is very different from Crystal's situation. From the evidence in the public domain there is ample evidence to support the charge of manslaughter under NCGS 14-18. The state must prove (again something Nifong doesn't seem to get) the deceased died as teh result (not necessarily the direct result or only cause) of a criminal act committed by the defendant. St. v. Jones, 15 N.C. App. 537 (1972)

I remain skeptical about the D.A. being able to prove Murder, but I understand charging it to get a plea to Manslaughter.

Walt-in-Durham

Walt, your comments have repeatedly proven that you are one of the more intelligent commenters to this site, however, I must respectfully disagree with even a manslaughter charge. Daye did not die from the stab wound. He died as the result of medical malpractice or a hospital homicide. It's that simple. The autopsy reports failed to even link the stab wound to the removal of life support which resulted in Daye's death. Fact is that Daye might still be alive today if left on life support, and like several people who have recovered after weeks on life support who had been declared to be irreversibly brain dead and regained consciousness, Daye might have even miraculously came out of his coma. It's impossible to know as he was quickly removed from life support.

Again, Crystal Mangum was not responsible for Daye's death, Period. Medical malpractice or a hospital homicide.!!

Nifong Supporter said...


Walt said...
Lance, good point. The wrongful prosecution certainly helped blunt Bishop's endorsement by the Committee. Bishop, would have been a much better D.A. than either Tracey Cline or Nifong. Which is an admittedly very low bar to cross.

Completely unrelated, I wonder why Sid/Nifong isn't banging on the Tommy Arthur drum?

Walt-in-Durham

Tommy Arthur? Fill me in or give me a link.

Anonymous said...

SIDN(inn)EY H(ypocrite)ARR(acist):

"He(Reginald Daye) died as the result of medical malpractice or a hospital homicide. It's that simple."

A simpleton comes up with a simple solution.

SIDN(inn)EY, unless you have had access to the medical record, you have no information as to why he died. Ergo, you are not qualified to say anything about the cause of death.

Anonymous said...

SIDN(inn)EY H(ypocrite)ARR(acist):

"Again, Crystal Mangum was not responsible for Daye's death, Period."

SIDN(inn)EY, why don't you go to the judge and ask for a hearing so you can present what evidence you have.

Anonymous said...

SIDN(inn)EY H(ypocrite)ARR(acist):

"several people...have recovered after weeks on life support who had been declared to be irreversibly brain dead and regained consciousness,"

SIDN(inn)EY, if you really were experienced in the practice of medicine, you would know most people on life support for more than a few weeks do not recover, especially after they have found to be brain dead.

Anonymous said...

SIDN(inn)EY H(ypocrite)ARR(acist):

"Walt, your comments have repeatedly proven that you are one of the more intelligent commenters to this site".

SIDN(inn)EY, you the least intelligent commenter on this site.

Anonymous said...

SIDN(inn)EY H(ypocrite)ARR(acist):

"
Tommy Arthur? Fill me in or give me a link."

Go to Liestoppers.

Anonymous said...

SIDN(inn)EY H(ypocrite)ARR(acist):

Just like you could have done a Google and enlightened yourself about Leon Brown and Frankie Washington, you could have done a Google search and enlightened yourself about Tommy Arthur.

Anonymous said...

Sidney has NO inside sources, no magic information crystal ball, no ability to see through walls or leap over buildings. He simply lies to make his so-called evidence fit his racist theories. There is not one shred of evidence to show any form of mal practice or medical homicide. It will be up to the court/jury to determine whether Mangum is guilty as charged, NOT the infamous Dr. Harr, who thinks he knows more about the law and medicine than all the rest of us. Harr loves to drum up conspiracy, loves to conjure up demons (of a particular race, apparently) and loves to make himself the center of attention with his silly comments. Most of us pay no attention to what this wingnut has to say because it is (a)deceit, (b)boring,(c)racist, and (d)bigoted.
I agree with another poster: this site is comic relief.
Actually, sister didn't stab Daye with Sidney's infamous paring knife; it was a nail clipper!

Anonymous said...

Hey, SIDN(inn)EY, any comment about Dukegate?

Anonymous said...

yeah, sid, when do we get to hear, now, how the federal courts, the entire NC justice system........no, make that the entire United States justice system is out to get YOU because of your loyalty to the disgusting Nifong? when does the show begin?

Anonymous said...

I was saddened and angered to see that some scumbag(s) vandalized the Duke Gardens. It's personal with me as a memorial to my family member is there. What kind of ass would do something so totally senseless? Let's hope LEOs can find the perps....

Lance the Intern said...

" I must respectfully disagree with even a manslaughter charge. Daye did not die from the stab wound. He died as the result of medical malpractice or a hospital homicide. It's that simple. The autopsy reports failed to even link the stab wound to the removal of life support which resulted in Daye's death. Fact is that Daye might still be alive today if left on life support...

Opinions are like @ssholes, Sid - and this is nothing more than ill informed opinion (at best).

Lance the Intern said...

"Lance, the prosecutors should have proof that Crystal Mangum was not the purchaser of the money orders before charging her with larceny. The name listed as remitter is usually the purchaser, but it is not necessarily so in all cases, such as this one."

As you state, the name listed as remitter is USUALLY the purchaser. I'm sure that this will be the state's evidence. It's up to Crystal and her legal team to prove that she was in fact the purchaser -- either by producing a receipt, or by testimony from the person she purchased them from.

Anonymous said...

Indeed, Lance. It's all a house of cards that Harr tries to build as some sort of reason for Daye to have attacked Mangum. I remind Sidney that there is a very clear, large full-face and side face head/mug shot of Mangum taken when she was arrested. There is not ONE mark on her face or neck. Zip Nada. Your claim, Sid, that she was bruised is baseless and false.

Lance the Intern said...

"Again, Crystal Mangum was not responsible for Daye's death, Period. Medical malpractice or a hospital homicide.!!"

Sid's next argument will be that Mr. Daye attempted to stab Crystal, missed, and stabbed himself.

You should be ashamed, Sid.

Anonymous said...

It is deeply and shamefully disrespectful for sid to call Daye an alcoholic. And just as hurtful to the Daye family for him to LIE about duke killing their relative. I dont know whether i believe Harr was ever a licensed physician or whether he "retired". Reputable physicians do NOT make outrageous claims like this. In fact I think Harr is making statements that Duke attorneys would be interested in seeing. Vvery very shameful racist behavior

Anonymous said...

Not being a lawyer, I will say, up front, I have no clue whether Duke has grounds to come after Harr for his defammatory comments that the hospital engaged in "medical homicide", etc. I think there is some distinction between statements represented as fact and statements represented as opinion.....but not at all sure whether that distinction still applies. To publish a statement, made by a so-called retired physician, as a clear statement of FACT that Daye was killed by Duke Hospital and its physicians, seems like libel to this lay person. Whether Duke would give this silly blog one second's thought, with regard to telling Harr to desist, it doesn't seem likely.
but, once again, it seems that a person of integrity, especially a fomer physician, would have some sense of ethics.....and a desire to avoid telling lies. That is certainly not the case with Harr. He's entitled to his opinion....as Lance, and my grandmother would say.....we all have assholes, elbows and opinions. Harr clearly wants to present himself, deluded as he is, as having insider information that makes his so-called "facts". true. To Harr, I say, BULLSXXX.

Anonymous said...

Speaking as a retired surgeon, I ay o responsible physician, retired or otherwise, would have made the comments SIDN(inn)EY has made about the Reginald Daye case.

Lance the Intern said...

Well...We knew it was only a matter of time

Anonymous said...

yep, cooool! J4DA! As in, "we are the J4DumbAsses"!. Can't wait....let the games begin, with Durham's leading racist homophobe leading the charge. wheeeeee.......
now we will all ge treated to Harr's bullXXXX on the subject. Personally, I'd rather have a root canal repair.

Anonymous said...

Let's see.....hmmmm, slogans for the new group might be....??
"Do not let Cline DEcline" or,
"Fong and Cline, together again,the sequel", or...
"Who the hell needs brains, reinstate Cline...we done voted for ignerts, let's keep em"...or...
"Durham...let's keep our DA-DA", or
"Have a conscious,keep Cline!, or,
"Down with reprobate rapin'Hudson". or, my personal favorite....
"Mangum for DA, at least she knows where the jail is....."

Anonymous said...

It's about time that our old friend "cut and paste Kenny" responds to this post:



"Hey Kenny, isn't it a little embarassing to be caught passing off another writer's work as your own? You forgot to mention that you copied most of your post from Ms. Waduge's writing.

Ms. Waduge, as appearing in the Sri Lanka Guardian:

'Ironically the UNHRC praised Libya’s human rights record in 2011 just months before Libya was suspended to coincide with the West’s agenda to oust Libyan leader Gaddafi. So the UNHRC did a periodic review & praised Gaddafi for the promotion of human rights – Australia welcomed Libya’s willingness to facilitate visits by Human Rights Watch & Amnesty International, Canada welcomed recent legislation allowing women married to foreigners the right to pass on their Libyan nationality to their children. [E]ven the US supported Libya’s increased engagement with the international community but also highlighted concerns about freedom of express – similar to the statements issued on Sri Lanka!'

From Kenny's post on March 17, 2012 at 1:58 PM:

'Ironically the UNHRC, in it's report praised Libya’s human rights record in 2011 just months before Libya was suspended, to coincide with the West’s agenda to oust the Libyan leader Qaddafi. At that time, the UNHRC did a periodic review of Lybia & in it's reveiw it faintly praised Qaddafi for the promotion of human rights. Australia welcomed Libya’s willingness to facilitate visits by Human Rights Watch & Amnesty International, Canada welcomed recent legislation that allowed Libyan women, married to foreigners, the right to pass on their Libyan nationality to their children. Even the US supported Libya’s increased engagement with the international community but also highlighted concerns about freedom of expression.'

March 18, 2012 5:25 AM

Anonymous said...

Yep. I figured the card carrying socialist brigade will be marching lockstep to the tune of the ""ohCanada" any day now. Kenny will tell us all about his brillance out there in the dubai land of freedom, where women walk behind their husbands, keep themselves covered and still undergo mutilation of their private parts because of some barbaric religious custom. I have an idea.....lets take up a ollectipn and buy one way plane tickets for sid and victoria to join kenny hissy in his paradise. I am just certain that victoria and her christian moralizing would fit right in down at the mosque

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

@5:25 am SAID: " Hey Kenny, isn't it a little embarassing to be caught passing off another writer's work as your own? You forgot to mention that you copied most of your post from Ms. Waduge's writing"........... It was hardly plagerism since I was the person who provided you with the source and the name of the author.

Anonymous said...

A Story about Little Kenny Hissy Fit
Once upon a time little Kenny wrote a school paper and turned it in to his teacher. The teacher said to Kenny that she thought he wrote down other people's work, copied it in his school paper and didn't give credit to the correct author. Kenny was ashamed of himself because he got caught stealing another's words and ideas. Kenny told the teacher where he got the quotes and told the teacher who was the correct author. The teacher said to Kenny, "I am glad you have admitted your theft, but you still get an "F" on this paper because you did not give credit up front. Little Kenny grew up but didn't learn his lesson.

Anonymous said...

Nice irony can be found the title of Harr's most recent flub, "It's a crime to steal from yourself!".....it's also a bit of a moral or ethical crime to steal intellectual property from others, as in, failing to credit sources when quotes are made.
You are definitely the man, Kenny.......an academic"felon" perhaps??????

Nifong Supporter said...


Harr Supporter said...
Sidney:

You did not inform your readers that your case against Duke was dismissed.

It appears that your attorney “purposely bungled” your lawsuit against Duke. Rather than making bona fide arguments supporting your case, your attorney chased sensational headlines, made baseless accusations and repeated the irrelevant drivel regularly appearing on this blog. Your attorney sold out your interests as plaintiff to provide additional rubbish for the blogger who manages this site.

At least you avoided possible sanctions because of your frivolous filing. Congratulations.

Link:

http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/
north-carolina/ncmdce/1:2011cv00263/56317/20/

Highlights in the next post.

Harr Supporter, the reason I did not inform my readers that the case I filed against Duke had been dismissed is because I was unaware of it. I became enlightened because of your posted comment. Thank you. Evidently the decision was made on March 5, 2012, but according to the postmark, it was not mailed out until March 13, 2012. On March 13th I left town for a week, and on Tuesday, March 20th, while online at the out-of-town library for the first time since leaving Raleigh, I found out about the dismissal from your comment. So, 17 days after the determination I have finally gotten my hands on the ruling.

That should explain why I didn't inform anyone. Thank you for doing so.

Naturally, my reply will be forthcoming... it may take a while as I have a lot on my busy schedule.

Anonymous said...

Harr, this is hilarious. I believe we will all recall a very similar comment and explanation from Harr in one of his earlier postings.....not able to get some kind of mailing, etc? funnier and funnier. Poor Sidney....the world's leading authority on truth, justice and the socialist way.....can't manage his mail.

Anonymous said...

We are all just breathless with anticipation, awaiting your reply.
golly geez whiz, why keep your adoring fans in suspense?
meantime, how's courageous vicky these days? Busy defending the Hooked on Phonics graduate Cline?

Anonymous said...

liar liar, pants on fire......

somebody send the firemen to sid's house....

Anonymous said...

Amazing isn't it how sidney thinks he is above the law and everybody else is beneath it? The LAX guys, according to sidney, were supposed to prove their innocence....even though sid has been told frequently, in little words that even he can understand, that the burden of proof rests with the accuser.....as in, innocent until proven guilty. Sid thinks the LAX guys are somehow not worthy of equal treatment under the law. On the other hand, Sid thinks HIS so-called case against Duke should require no proof....except, of course, his version/words. So, Sid is above the law....in his own mind.
Amazing how hypocrisy lives and thrives in the mind of such racist bigotry.

Lance the Intern said...

Sid's got a lot on his busy schedule, like:

1. Meetings for Justice 4 Nifong
2. Meetings for Justice 4 Crystal
3. Meetings for Justice for Durham DA's.

Anonymous said...

SIDN(inn)EY:

"Harr Supporter, the reason I did not inform my readers that the case I filed against Duke had been dismissed is because I was unaware of it."

SIDN(inn)EY manages to be unaware of a lot of things, Leon Brown, Frankie Washington, what the media said was the weapon used on Reginald Gaye, when Mrs. Evans made her statement to 60 minutes.

SIDN(inn)EY, willful ignorance does not justify your lack of knowledge.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @7:20AM March 15 said: "Care to explain the basis for Canada's flowing endorsement of his record in the UN report? Huh, Kenny, huh???"........ Care to explain your own mis-characterization of what Canada contibuted to The Report? It was deliberately deceitful. In trying to find evidence of your charge, I found an article by Ms. Waduge that seemed to refute your assertions. Her reporting seemed more reasonable since charges that Canada ever endorsed Libya's human rights record did not ring as credible. What Canada did, along with all the other countries party to the report was to acknoledge that things were improving which also included the USA but with a caveat. This whole subject was decidedly off topic and you, obviously, introduced it here simply to to try and provoke me as a Canadian. And Lance accuses me of being a troll. Now, you have seized on my failure to indicate the source, for the information I uncovered. I note that you never gave your source for the information you reported which, apparently, caused you to come to the conclusion you did about Canada.

Lance the Intern said...

From Wikipedia:

"[A] troll is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community...with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion."

I see no posts here from Kenhyderal or from a number of anonymous posters that are about the topic of discussion. Hence, the troll declaration.

DNFTT.

Anonymous said...

KEN(inny)HY(pocrite)DER(acist)AL:

"Now, you have seized on my failure to indicate the source, for the information I uncovered. I note that you never gave your source for the information you reported which, apparently, caused you to come to the conclusion you did about Canada."

KEN(inny) you repeatedly cite Kilgo as a source of information about the Duke bogus rape case. Kilgo, while making multiple declarations about how much he knew, whenever he was challenged to put up what he knew, he always backed down.

I think you said somewhere in the recesses of J4N that you consider Kilgo a reliable source merely because his information conforms with your implausible explanation of what took place on the night of 13/14 March 2006.

What are your other criteria of reliability, provided you really know what reliability means?

kenhyderal said...

@ Lance 10:22 AM .....I reject the charge that I am a troll but, I do plead guilty to "feeding" the various anonymous trolls who try to provoke me with their off-topic slander. Unlike Dr. Harr, I'm inclined to defend myself against such attacks and to correct what I perceive to be distortions.

kenhyderal said...

@ Anonymous 10:30 AM........ I have cited Kilgo as a likely credible source of information because he has apparently spoken with someone, he claims is a LaX Player, who was in attendence. Unless either he is not being honest about what he was told or the Player in question was not telling him the truth, then I find his information to be not self-serving and more credible than what most of you have garnered from the press and from the blogs. It is well known that disseminating rumour that puts a positive spin, for the defence is a standard Defence strategy. Kilgo's version coincides with what I have been told by Crystal. Yeah, Lance there I go again feeding a troll.

Anonymous said...

I am curious. A few posters here refer to Sidney Harr as a doctor of some sort. What is he a doctor of, where did he get his degree and what is his CV?

Anonymous said...

KEN(inny)HY(pocrite)DER(acist)AL:

"I have cited Kilgo as a likely credible source of information because he has apparently spoken with someone, he claims is a LaX Player, who was in attendence. Unless either he is not being honest about what he was told or the Player in question was not telling him the truth, then I find his information to be not self-serving and more credible than what most of you have garnered from the press and from the blogs."

In other words you can not differentiate between solid evidence and hearsay fantasy.

Anonymous said...

KEN(inny)HY(pocrite)DER(acist)AL:

"Kilgo's version coincides with what I have been told by Crystal."

I say again you can not discriminate between facts and self serving fantasy.

Anonymous said...

KEN(inny)HY(pocrite)DER(acist)AL:

"Unlike Dr. Harr, I'm inclined to defend myself against such attacks and to correct what I perceive to be distortions."

Considering the totally implausible version of what happened on the night of 13/14 March 2006, you are incapable of recognizing distortions. So far, you have been unsuccessful in defending your position.

Anonymous said...

KEN(inny)HY(pocrite)DER(acist)AL:

"It is well known that disseminating rumour that puts a positive spin, for the defence is a standard Defence strategy."

Unfortunately, the lack of semen on the rape kit, the lack of any DNA implicating the accused, Crystal's non credible complaint, Crystal's previous criminal history are not spin but facts. Except to a racist hypocritical ninny.

Anonymous said...

kenhyderal said...
"Kilgo's version coincides with what I have been told by Crystal."

Bahahahahah

So the man from Dubai who has never been to Durham talks with Crystal?

Bahahahahah

Anonymous said...

KEN(inny)HY(pocrite)DER(acist)AL:

"Kilgo's version coincides with what I have been told by Crystal."

All that means is you dismiss the facts in favor of the word of two false accusers.

Anonymous said...

Right. Hissyfit talks to sister victim.........and i talk to eleanor roosevelt!!! Bull.

Anonymous said...

With regard to Kenhyderal, this from Henry IV part I:

"I can call spirits from the vasty deep." Owen Glendower (3.1)

"Why, so can I, or so can any man; / But will they come when you do call for them?" Hotspur (3.1)"

Kenhyderal and Sidney seem very much like the character of Owen Glendower.

kenhyderal said...

"O, while you live, tell truth, and shame the devil"

Anonymous said...

KEN(inny)HY(pocrite)DER(acist)AL:

"'O, while you live, tell truth, and shame the devil'"

You and Crystal and SIDN(inn)EY should follow that advice.

Anonymous said...

Comical kenny. You and sidney have much in common.

Anonymous said...

Know what kenyy old pal, there is a simple way for you and sid to shut all us ad hominy attackers up .....just prove your statements. Simple as that. Prove you and sister are prison pals or whatever. Prove it! As we say here in the lowly USA, put up or shut up. otherwise you just full of beans and corn.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Harr, this is hilarious. I believe we will all recall a very similar comment and explanation from Harr in one of his earlier postings.....not able to get some kind of mailing, etc? funnier and funnier. Poor Sidney....the world's leading authority on truth, justice and the socialist way.....can't manage his mail.

The postmark on the envelope is a matter of record. I can also produce my travel documents which support the fact that I left Raleigh on March 13, 2012, the same day the ruling was mailed to me.

I can manage my mail, but I cannot control when mail is sent to me.

Thereby, go ye enlightened.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 7:37 said: "Prove you and sister are prison pals or whatever. Prove it!".......... Whaaa? You want me to prove here that I am a friend of Crystal Mangum? Now how would you suggest I do that? Well let's see; perhaps Dr. Harr can confirm that I put Crystal in touch with his Organization The Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong a group which Crystal subsequently joined.

Anonymous said...

SIDN9inn)EY H(ypocrite)ARR(acist):

"Thereby, go ye enlightened."

A deluded megalomaniac who ducks his head in the sand to avoid being enlightened is incapable of enlightening anyone.

Anonymous said...

KEN(inny)HY(pocrite)DER(acist)AL:

"You want me to prove here that I am a friend of Crystal Mangum?"

How about you prove that Crystal was raped on the night of 13/14 March 2006.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 9:31 said: "How about you prove that Crystal was raped on the night of 13/14 March 2006."...... To continue on with your penchant for using Shakespeare quotes. "but at length the truth will out"--(The M.of V.) I await that time with patience.

Anonymous said...

KEN(ninny)HY(pocrite)DER(acist)AL:

(quoting Shakespeare)"but at length the truth will out".

The truth came out in April 2007 in Attorney General Cooper's press conference.

First Justice58 said a flood would drown the anti NI(nny)FONG forces.

SIDN(inn)EY predicted a day of reckoning was coming for all the anti NI(nny)FONG detractors.

Now you.

And you still have yet to prove that Crystal was raped on the night of 13/14 March 2006.

Anonymous said...

KEN(inny)HY(pocrite)DER(acist)AL:

"To continue on with your penchant for using Shakespeare quotes. 'but at length the truth will out'--(The M.of V.) I await that time with patience."

This is an admission on your part that you can not prove Crystal was raped, that you cannot negate the facts in the case.

Yes you may try to twist things, but that is not proof.

Anonymous said...

KEN(inny)HY(pocrite)DER(acist)AL:

"To continue on with your penchant for using Shakespeare quotes. 'but at length the truth will out'--(The M.of V.) I await that time with patience."

Who are you waiting upon? Kilgo? SIDN(inn)EY? VIC(ious)TOR(acist)IA PETER(acist)SON(inny)Y?

You will have a long long wait, probably longer than the wait for Godot.

kenhyderal said...

With apologies to Lance the battle, with trolls, of quotations continues. "“The two most powerful warriors are patience and time" - Tolstoy

Anonymous said...

KEN(inny)HY(pocrite)DER(acist)AL:


"'The two most powerful warriors are patience and time' - Tolstoy

KEN(inny)HY(pocrite)DER(acist)AL All your patience and time are worthless. The facts of the case are, Crystal Mangum was not raped on the night of 13/14 March 2006. Contrary to Dicky Brodhead, facts do not change.

Anonymous said...

KEN(inny)HY(pocrite)DER(acist)AL:

Upon whom do you base your patience and time? Kilgo, whose imaginary LAX player friend has not emerged in 6+ years - except in your and Kilgo's delusions.

kenhyderal said...

Watch and wait; wait and see. And, to the City of Durham I say, "don't waste the tax-payers money on an unnecessary settlement. Even at this late date, conduct a proper investigation, including identifying all who were there present, both players and non-players. Then, interrogate them under oath". Because of the faulty investigation, the innocent, which may well include Seligmann and Finnerty and could include some Players who were present but totally un-involved, providing, that is, they suffered some, identifiable, damage to their reputations. These may have a case for any damages they suffered caused by the botched police investigation or because of any "proven" prosecutortial misconduct. As far as any wrongful interuption to their athletic or academic career that remains the liability of Duke, which seems to be an easy mark.

Anonymous said...

KEN(inny)HY(pocrite)DER(acist)AL says:

"don't waste the tax-payers money on an unnecessary settlement. Even at this late date, conduct a proper investigation, including identifying all who were there present, both players and non-players. Then, interrogate them under oath"

KEN(inny)HY(pocrite)DER(acist)AL, a thorough investigation was conducted, by the AG's office which established that no crime occurred on the night of 13/14 March 2006.

That you continue to believe in your implausible, illogicsl explanation of what happened does not negate that investigation.

So go on wasting your time in waiting.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous said: "a thorough investigation was conducted" Thorough?? This is simmply not the case.

Anonymous said...

KEN(inny)HY(pocrite)DER(acist)AL says:

"Anonymous said: 'a thorough investigation was conducted' Thorough?? This is simmply not the case.

Wrong!!!

AG Cooper's investigation was based on a thorough of the facts of the case.

KEN(inny)HY(pocrite)DER(acist)AL's assertions are based on hearsay evidence from a blowhard who knows nothing. He accepts that evidence because it agrees with Crystal's attempt at posterior personal camouflage.

KEN(inny)HY(pocrite)DER(acist)AL offers no facts, just speculation based on his pre conceived notion that a crime did occur.

kenhyderal said...

A.G Cooper threw in the towel, when he realized the investigation was so botched that there was no chance of any convictions. He apparently failed to anticipate that this would open the door for a massive civil suit against Durham. Since eveybody "lawyered-up" so quickly there was never any opportunity to interrogate known witnesses let alone identifying all who were present.

Anonymous said...

KEN(inny)HY(pocrite)DER(acist)AL says:

"A.G Cooper threw in the towel, when he realized the investigation was so botched that there was no chance of any convictions."

There was no chance of any conviction because no crime had happened.

What evidence do you have that a crime did happen, other than the word of false accuser Crystal Mangum and clueless blowhard Kilgo?

Anonymous said...

KEN(inny)HY(pocrite)DER(acist)AL

You still have not explained why there was no evidence of rape on the rape kit. Offering unsubstantiated allegations is not explaining.

Anonymous said...

Until kenny hissy fit proves his silly claims,about mangum, i say he is lying .......and just trying to draw attention to himself. Same old tired crap from another person Who has an inflated opinion of himself. Frank, scarlett-kenny, we dont give a damn.

Lance the Intern said...

Sid -- You REALLY need to start moderating this blog -- at least to keep the discussion on topic.

Do you plan on addressing any of the questions brought up here in the comments section?

Anonymous said...

No offense intended, Lance.....but what exactly IS the topic? Sid's silly lawsuit? Nifong? The Korean War? Whaaaat?
Seems to me this whole site is nothing more than the personal ranting of a man who has his own set of problems. I have no issue at all with anybody, including Harr, airing out their opinions. But keeping on topic? What topic? That's the question, seems to me?

Anonymous said...

I think Harr and his band of wingnuts leave themselves wide open for a wide range of comments, posts and topics. For example, I think the comments about Peterson are absolutely fair.......as are the comments about Kenny's questionable statements and assertions that he is best friends with Mangum.
KC Johnson moderates his site closely, I agree.........BUT he also writes pieces that are directly relevant to the stated purpose of his original/initial site mission, focus and intent.
Anyway, perhaps we ought to be asking ourselves what the REAL intent of this particular site is? Just to annoy others? Just to amuse? Just to complain and whine about Duke?

Anonymous said...

The whole premise of this web site is flawed. Nifong will NEVER get a license to practice law in this state and, from what I have heard, he has no plans to seek one. Harr can whine all he wants; it has no purpose and serves no one except Harr. All this blathering by people like Kenny is pointless. We could just as easily be arguing over whether Oswald shot Kennedy.
At some point, interest in this silly web site will die and Harr will find himself looking at blank pages. Let's hope that happens soon.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 9:10 said: "The whole premise of this web site is flawed. Nifong will NEVER get a license to practice law in this state and, from what I have heard, he has no plans to seek one" Allow me to quote myself...... "These(the Players) may have a case for any damages they suffered caused by the botched police investigation or because of any "proven" prosecutortial misconduct"..... I'm not sure, though, genuine prosecutorial misconduct was satisfactorily proven, judicially, against former DA Nifong

Anonymous said...

KEN(inny)HY(pocrite)DER(acist)AL

Have you given up on quoting Shkespeare?

Of course the premise of this blog is preposterous. SIDN9inn)EY does not care if Mr. NI(nny)FONG gets his license back. This is a vehicle for him to carry out his vendetta against the innocent, falsely accused Lacrosse players.

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

Anonymous @ 10:38 said : " Have you given up on quoting Shkespeare". This was started by one of you sophmoric Anonymous posters in a vain attempt to appear erudite.

Anonymous said...

kenhyderal said...
"This was started by one of you sophmoric Anonymous posters in a vain attempt to appear erudite."

There you go copying and pasting again, Kenny. See the comment on March 19, 2012 at 7:31 AM.

kenhyderal said...

Judge for yourself dear readers. This confused person thinks I needed to copy and paste a word, that's not my own, into my last comment. Perhaps he is the same person who previously accused me of being a plagerist or is lamely trying to jump on that band-wagon. At any rate, he or she is looking rather silly by accusing me of being a one word plagerist.

Anonymous said...

KEN(inny)HY(pocrite)DER(acist)AL:

"Anonymous @ 10:38 said : ' Have you given up on quoting Shkespeare'. This was started by one of you sophmoric Anonymous posters in a vain attempt to appear erudite."

Do you think you appear as brilliant by coming up with implausible, illogical delusions which you think prove that false accuser Crystal was raped.

Anonymous said...

Care to comment, Kenny?


From Kenny's post of 11/15/11 at 5:11 p.m.:

"...This law made Upper Canada the first British colony to abolish slavery. The Act remained in force until 1833 when the British Parliament's Slavery Abolition Act abolished slavery in all parts of the British Empire."


From Wikipedia entry titled "Act Against Slavery":

"...This law made Upper Canada the first British colony to abolish slavery. The Act remained in force until 1833 when the British Parliament's Slavery Abolition Act abolished slavery in most parts of the British Empire."

Anonymous said...

More from copy and paste Kenny:


From Kenny's post of 9/18/11 at 2:08 p.m.:

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


From Yahoo Answers, Why do people vomit when they dring a lot?:

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

kenhyderal said...

Great research but dont think you really need to get a life.

Anonymous said...

The point here,kenny, is that you would appear a bit more credible if you were, in fact, ethical and remembered to give credit for using the work of another. Getting caught in repeated acts of grade school cheating does not exactly bolster your claims of intellectual superiority.

Anonymous said...

KEN(inny)H(ypocrite)DER(acisr)AL

Here is something from Wikipedia which you did not cite. The context was Reginald Daye's BAC in the face of normal liver.

"Long-term persistent consumption of excessive amounts of alcohol can cause liver damage and have other deleterious health effects."

Anonymous said...

The TRUTH is that all this speculation about the circumstances surrounding Mr. Daye's death is just that.....speculation. Nobody, including Harr, Kenny, me....or anybody else who opines here.....has inside scoop beyond what we all read in the news. Harr likes to pretend he has sources who give him information. Bull. and double Bull.
It's one thing to express an opinion...to have reasonable debate and differences of opinion. Much of what poses as fact from Harr and others is nothing more than biased opinion....and should be presented as such.

Anonymous said...

At the risk of creating a explosion of comment about the Trayvon Martin case....here's my two cents.
First, it is a tragedy for anybody....white, black, brown,whatever....to be killed and for life to be cut short.
Second, the evidence is NOT clear, NOT conclusive, NOT at all indicative of either Zimmerman being a wild racist aggressor OR Martin being a suspicious aggressor himself. As more and more information emerges, we are getting an evolving story....with conflicting reports.
Third, it makes me sick when police turn a blind eye and make assumptions, one way or the other.
Fourth, it makes me just as sick when race baiting outsiders, politicians and general racist whackos (on all sides) descend on a community and start stirring the pot.
Fifth, this situation reminds me of the pot-banging 88 and the black panthers who yelled "castrate" and "black vengance" in durham.
Sixth, this situation reminds me of a south Texas police chief who refused to see beyond his prejudice and sometimes let people "go" for the wrong reasons.
Seventh, I think it is outrageous for the President of the United States to make such inflammatory statements as he made....i.e., "my son would be like Trayvon, etc.". What he SHOULD have done was urge calm and remonstrate those who were trying to incite retaliatory violence.
Eighth, I will end where I began....this is a tragic situation. BUT, why isn't it equally tragic, for the race/gender/class left when the races are reversed? If the REAL issue is justice and fairness for ALL, there should be NO selective outrage

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 2:54 AM said: "Getting caught in repeated acts of grade school cheating does not exactly bolster your claims of intellectual superiority".......Since you are so concerned that posters here provide references, can you indicate to us where I have made a claim of intellectual superiority to anyone. I note that sourcing information that's quoted here is not a general practice but if you wish to have such a standard apply then I am perfectly willing to do so. At the same time should anonymous posters not be asked to use a distinct user-name. Using wikepedia as a source for information and failing to indicate where the information was acquired can hardly be termed as cheating. Does this requirement only apply to people who beleive Crystal Mangum was assulted?

Anonymous said...

ooo, I think old Kenny has his shorts in a knot.....

Funny stuff.....:)

Anonymous said...

I think Kenny has a point. The good doctor Harr can simply require that all posts be completely identified and verified as actual, real people with a verifiable address...... now THAT would be lots of fun, wouldn't it, Kenny!!!

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 8:59 said: "I think Kenny has a point. The good doctor Harr can simply require that all posts be completely identified and verified as actual, real people with a verifiable address"...... I'm all for it. "Stand and be counted"(Cambridge Dictionary of American Idioms). In the print media this is a standard requirement. If chosen the information could be withheld but I think an identifiable user-name is a minimum. Dr. Harr certainly has my information. It would certainly eliminate some of the cowardly racist remarks that are sometimes found here. I must say that this has diminished, lately, though. I was at one time driven, by disgust, away from this blog by such content and critical of Dr. Harr for not censoring it.

Anonymous said...

Kenny says harr has his information....whatever that means. Not being a regular poster here, I suspect that others would not find it completely "you show me yours, and I will show you mine"...if only the moderator had access to the verifiable identify of posters. One would think what the other poster was referencing, perhaps in humor, was the idea that everybody who posts would have to put up, with each post, a full open identity. I wonder how many people would post to this web site under these terms. Being a regular reader of DIW, I note that Professor KC Johnson has no such requirement for his posters, BUT he also monitors offensive posts and rarely, if ever, lets them appear.

Anonymous said...

As a fairly regular read of this site, I can tell others that I will continue to post anon so long as Harr continues to manufacture his unverifiable "sources" as a basis for his pseudo evidence. Fair is fair........
I suspect that Harr would not mandate identifiable posting because he realizes that many of us would find him, yet again, the king of hypocrites for refusing to disclose his so-called"sources"

kenhyderal said...

On this question, the ethical considerations of The Canadian Association of Journalists might be informative. http://www.caj.ca/?p=358 In the case of information, Dr. Harr reported, about Reginald Daye; if there was medical malfeasence, at Duke, his informant may have asked to remain confidential.

Anonymous said...

To Ken re the allegation of medical shenanigans at Duke....that is always the Harr excuse.....i.e., he has to protect his sources. spare me....we all know he is bullXXXXXXX.
If you think this guy is telling the truth, I have some lovely beach property in Nevada, I'd be happy to sell you

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