Sunday, August 26, 2012

Could it be that the end of the debacle involving Crystal Mangum is near?

Word count: 1,180

For the past few weeks I have been out of contact with Crystal Mangum, as her visitation privileges had been temporarily revoked over what I feel to be a small matter of inconsequence. Revocation of visitation privileges for an inmate, who has been incarcerated for more than five hundred days, however is no trifling thing… as deprivation of weekly visits from a trusted and concerned friend can be demoralizing and devastating. So, although I cannot personally confirm what I heard from a reliable source, I do believe that it is accurate, and if so, is promising.

What I understand is that recently, during the lengthy period when Crystal was without her visitation privileges, she received a rare visit from her attorney Woody Vann. From what I was told, Mr. Vann suggested during his visit with Ms. Mangum that she accept a plea deal from the prosecution. The exact terms of the plea deal were not known by my source, but my source stated that if accepted by Mangum, they would be in exchange for a sentence of “time served,” and she could be released from custody. My source also related that Mr. Vann told Ms. Mangum that she had a “weak case.”

The aforementioned revelations from my source do not surprise me, and in fact I have been anticipating and predicting for some time that the prosecution would go for a plea deal for time served. Durham prosecutors really have no other option as they have absolutely no case against Mangum for either the murder charge or the larceny of chose in action charge. Taking this flimsy case to trial is totally out of the question, and the prosecutors could not expect to get a special prosecutor to even think about taking it. Even if Mangum was to be represented by the most incompetent turncoat defense attorney in the state, the prosecution could not hope to win a conviction. Actually, the prosecution would be laughed out of the courtroom with any so-called evidence that they would even dare to make public.

With the murder case, the prosecutors have no explanation for the appearance of the crime scene with steak knives strewn about, and a bathroom door kicked off its hinges. The prosecution has no explanation for the clumps of Crystal’s hair deposited at two places in the apartment. The prosecution has no motive for the stabbing by Mangum, and to suggest that the two were arguing over two cashier’s checks that had been filled out is ludicrous. Furthermore, the prosecution has the arduously impossible task of trying to somehow link a stab wound that was successfully repaired during emergency surgery with Daye’s brain death… and they would have to do so without mentioning the fact that Daye underwent a botched intubation by Duke University Hospital staff that resulted in his comatose state that lasted for a week before life-support was removed, resulting in his death. Then, there’s all of the discrepancies between the autopsy report of April 14, 2011 and the operative report and other medical records. This would bring serious scrutiny and questions about the credibility of the entire Orange County Medical Examiner’s Office.

Problems with the larceny of chose in action charge that prosecutors face are that they are unable to produce any credible evidence that the cashier’s checks were taken by Ms. Mangum and not given to her by Reginald Daye. Furthermore they lack credible evidence that Ms. Mangum altered or had the intent to illegally convert the cashier’s checks to her own benefit or an unintended purpose. What is also problematic about the larceny of chose in action charge is that it was filed more than two weeks after the alleged criminal event. The fact that the larceny charge was filed along with the murder charge makes it evident that its function was to promote the first degree part of the murder charge through use of the felony-murder rule.

Prosecutors may initially have planned to eventually take Mangum to trial under a cloak of media secrecy in an attempt to have her convicted of first degree murder and sentenced to life in prison without parole, however, now they are trying to save face with any plea deal for time served. The prosecution will not risk damaging Duke University Hospital reputation by bringing attention to its medical malpractice in a courtroom trial. With the Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong directing attention to the case online, prosecutors are hoping to mitigate any civil liability from Crystal Mangum for malicious prosecution and wrongful incarceration. Therefore, prosecutions’ best case scenario is for Ms. Mangum to accept a plea deal for some lesser crime that she did not commit in exchange for a sentence of time served. And that is the exact deal that Mangum’s defense attorney, Woody Vann, is trying to get her to accept. (This was the strategy successfully used by prosecutors to resolve the James Arthur Johnson case wherein he was wrongfully incarcerated for thirty-nine months and ended up accepting a plea deal for a crime he did not commit in exchange for time-served.)

Mr. Vann was initially selected to represent Ms. Mangum for a reason… to carry out the prosecutions’ agenda. The fact that he has kept important prosecution discovery from Crystal Mangum, including photographs and the report by Dr. Roberts, strongly supports the fact that his interests do not lie with his client. His inaction and unavailability to his client show that Mr. Vann does not have her best interests at heart… on the case for more than four months, he did not file a single motion on her behalf. At least Mangum’s previous attorney made several attempts to have her bail reduced. Finally, to try and convince her that she has a weak case when the exact opposite is true, and to suggest that she consider a plea deal clearly spells out the fact that Mr. Vann’s allegiance lies with the prosecution in protecting Duke University Hospital’s reputation and removing legal liability from those who have grievously wronged her.

The Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong, and Mangum’s friends and supporters are responsible for thwarting the prosecutors’ plans to seriously convict Mangum on trumped up charges that are totally baseless. (Politicians, civil rights leaders and organizations and the mainstream media have joined in the conspiracy against Mangum by concealing the injustices or by turning their heads and ignoring them.)

It is time for Durham prosecutors to cut their losses and unconditionally dismiss all criminal charges against Crystal Mangum… forget about saving face. After all, the mainstream media will go easy on the prosecutors of Crystal Mangum, without doubt. It is also time for Woody Vann to step down as Crystal Mangum’s attorney as it is conclusively apparent that he is trying to broker a deal that is best for the prosecution at the expense of his court appointed client… a client for which he has invested very little time, energy, resource, and commitment.

Plea deal for time served is what the prosecution is now aiming for, but you had better believe that it is pie-in-the-sky. Mentality that should be adopted by the prosecutors now is to do the right thing by dismissing all criminal charges against Ms. Mangum, and damn the consequences. With the plea deal for time served not realistically being in play, it is the vendetta-driven prosecutions’ only option.      

70 comments:

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"The aforementioned revelations(that Crystal would be offered a plea deal) from my source do not surprise me".

Is that the same source that told you the fight took place because Reginald Daye wanted to spend the rent money on drink, or who told you a DPD corporal set Milton Walker's clothes on fire in order to frame Crystal?

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"Even if Mangum was to be represented by the most incompetent turncoat defense attorney in the state, the prosecution could not hope to win a conviction."

This from someone with SIDNEY's record as a legal non eagle.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"From what I was told, Mr. Vann suggested during his visit with Ms. Mangum that she accept a plea deal from the prosecution."

Is that because Woody Vann's hired gun could not find anything wrong with the autopsy findings? That is a possibility.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"With the murder case, the prosecutors have no explanation for the appearance of the crime scene with steak knives strewn about, and a bathroom door kicked off its hinges. The prosecution has no explanation for the clumps of Crystal’s hair deposited at two places in the apartment. The prosecution has no motive for the stabbing by Mangum, and to suggest that the two were arguing over two cashier’s checks that had been filled out is ludicrous."

So say you, who relies on Crystal Mangum as your source, the same Crystal Mangum who lied to you about the burning of Milton Walker's clothes

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"What is also problematic about the larceny of chose in action charge is that it was filed more than two weeks after the alleged criminal event".

Why are you incapable of recognizing that the innocent Lacrosse players were indicted more than two weeks after the alleged crime, after there was no evidence that the crime had happened, after there was no evidence of any intimate contact between Crystal and any innocent Duke Lacrosse player.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"This would bring serious scrutiny and questions about the credibility of the entire Orange County Medical Examiner’s Office."

Your scrutiny of the autopsy report was anything but serious and raised no questions about the credibility of the report, except in your own, deluded, probably schizophrenic, megalomaniacal mind.

Anonymous said...


The latest from Sid:


"The Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong, and Mangum’s friends and supporters are responsible for thwarting the prosecutors’ plans to seriously convict Mangum on trumped up charges that are totally baseless."


Bahahahahahahaha
Bahahahahahahaha
Bahahahahahahaha
Bahahahahahahaha
Bahahahahahahaha


Keept those jokes coming, Sid.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"The fact that he has kept important prosecution discovery from Crystal Mangum, including photographs and the report by Dr. Roberts, strongly supports the fact that his interests do not lie with his client."

In view of you own illegal activities in publishing confidential information given to Crystal, Woody Vann wants to prevent you, an individual with no standing in the case, from having unauthorized access to the discovery file.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"The prosecution will not risk damaging Duke University Hospital reputation by bringing attention to its medical malpractice in a courtroom trial."

The records you illegally accessed and published showed no medical malpractice on the part of Duke.

This statement is another bit of evidence that you are totally out of touch with reality and probably schizophrenic.

Probably it is because of your obvious lack of contact with reality that Woody Vann is determined not to let you have access to the Prosecution discovery file.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"The Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong, and Mangum’s friends and supporters are responsible for thwarting the prosecutors’ plans to seriously convict Mangum on trumped up charges that are totally baseless."

BULLSHIT!!!!

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"It is also time for Woody Vann to step down as Crystal Mangum’s attorney as it is conclusively apparent that he is trying to broker a deal that is best for the prosecution at the expense of his court appointed client… a client for which he has invested very little time, energy, resource, and commitment."

SIDNEy, going to the library and posting blogs which show your total disconnect from reality is not exerting a whole lout of time, energy or resource on behalf of Crystal Mangum.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"Revocation of visitation privileges for an inmate, who has been incarcerated for more than five hundred days, however is no trifling thing… as deprivation of weekly visits from a trusted and concerned friend can be demoralizing and devastating."

Said revocation of visitation privileges happened because shared confidential information with said "trusted and concerned friend" who then illegally published it on the internet.

What said "trusted and concerned friend" wants to do is use Crystal to gain access to confidential information. So much for him being a "trusted and concerned friend".

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"My source also related that Mr. Vann told Ms. Mangum that she had a 'weak case.'”

Your source was Crystal Mangum who changed her story after she was incarcerated, who lied to you about how Milton Walker's clothes were set on fire.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"With the plea deal for time served not realistically being in play, it is the vendetta-driven prosecutions’ only option".

With all the bumbling and incompetence you showed as a would be legal eagle, that opinion of yours has no weight legal, moral or otherwise.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"Even if Mangum was to be represented by the most incompetent turncoat defense attorney in the state, the prosecution could not hope to win a conviction."

Is former DA NIFONG planning a comeback as a defense attorney? That is the only way Mangum could be represented by "the most incompetent turncoat defense attorney in the state".

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"Politicians, civil rights leaders and organizations and the mainstream media have joined in the conspiracy against Mangum by concealing the injustices or by turning their heads and ignoring them."

Said politicians, civil rights leaders and organizations gave up on Crystal once they realized her accusations of rape against the innocent Lacrosse players were baseless.

Anonymous said...

More from Sid:

"The exact terms of the plea deal were not known by my source, but my source stated that if accepted by Mangum, they would be in exchange for a sentence of 'time served,' and she could be released from custody. My source also related that Mr. Vann told Ms. Mangum that she had a 'weak case.'”



Hey Sid, who's your source? It sounds as though you have been talking with kennyhyderal.

gak said...

Two points in your blog hit me as glaring contradictions. First, you state, and I quote, "From what I was told, Mr. Vann suggested during his visit with Ms. Mangum that she accept a plea deal from the prosecution."
The next point you make is, and again I quote, "Durham prosecutors really have no other option as they have absolutely no case against Mangum for either the murder charge or the larceny of chose in action charge".

Now it would seem to me that unless the plea is to some form of misdemeanor(sp?), her lawyer is a jackass. Even with the degree that she suposedly earned from her school, getting a job with a felony record is almost impossible. So for a lawyer to council a client to accept a plea deal when the states case is as weak as you say, the lawyer is an idiot in that she will get out of jail and spend the rest of her life cutting lawns and doing laundry and living on state assistance as nobody in their right mind will hire a felon.
If I were the client and the states case is as weak as you describe, I would want my day in court. No case v weak case, and I have the weak case, I'll take my chances. How do you explain this??

Anonymous said...

Pure dribble harr.

Anonymous said...

gak said...
"So for a lawyer to council a client to accept a plea deal when the states case is as weak as you say, the lawyer is an idiot in that she will get out of jail and spend the rest of her life cutting lawns and doing laundry and living on state assistance as nobody in their right mind will hire a felon."


In her line of work, employers don't worry much about the felony records of their employees.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

If you are so sure the's prosecution has no case against Mangum, why are you so anxious about what is in the prosecution's discovery file?

Anonymous said...

Harr makes no sense. Vann is an ass? Really? And whose fault is it that shella left? And the state offers a plea but vann tells sister her case is weak but but but......? What the heck .........lance said months ago she would get a lesser and would be damn lucky to get a plea deal with a short sentence. Harr is getting this info from mangum .........or is just making it up. Either way harr will try to sell it all as some kind of crap against mangum and try to make himself the bearer of light. Pardon me while i laugh and hurl

Anonymous said...

Hey durham males, sister might be on the loose again. If i were you, i would run if you see her trolling for a new sugar daddy.

Anonymous said...

Harr is such a hypocrite......and a coward. Answer the question, bro...........how dies a black man who whines about race , justice and fairness have a homophobic bigot in his little club? I have black friends who are gay and they think you are a disgrace.

Walt said...

A week ago Woody Vann was the worst lawyer in town. Now he's got her a great deal. Which is it Sid? Let it be said that no one has ever been as inconsistent as you.

Walt-in-Durham

Anonymous said...

How many lawyers does it take to "free" Cyrstal?
Answer: Apparently, none. All it takes is the mighty morphing power racist and is merry band of bigots. Stay tuned, folks.....and let the games begin.
Crystal will walk the streets again........wheeeeee!!!

Anonymous said...

Let's see....clayton jones, Shella, Vann.....who's left, bozo the clown? Oh, hooray, let's call up Cline and she can be sister's new lawyer! Now, wouldn't that be a deal! I'd pay good money for a seat at the trial.....

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
SIDNEY HARR:

"The aforementioned revelations(that Crystal would be offered a plea deal) from my source do not surprise me".

Is that the same source that told you the fight took place because Reginald Daye wanted to spend the rent money on drink, or who told you a DPD corporal set Milton Walker's clothes on fire in order to frame Crystal?


No, it's a different source.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
SIDNEY HARR:

"From what I was told, Mr. Vann suggested during his visit with Ms. Mangum that she accept a plea deal from the prosecution."

Is that because Woody Vann's hired gun could not find anything wrong with the autopsy findings? That is a possibility.


I believe that it is because Mr. Vann's "hired gun" confirmed that the autopsy findings were fraudulent and lacked credibility. Why else would he withhold them from a client who he is trying to undermine?

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
SIDNEY HARR:

"What is also problematic about the larceny of chose in action charge is that it was filed more than two weeks after the alleged criminal event".

Why are you incapable of recognizing that the innocent Lacrosse players were indicted more than two weeks after the alleged crime, after there was no evidence that the crime had happened, after there was no evidence of any intimate contact between Crystal and any innocent Duke Lacrosse player.


That Mr. Nifong waited until after an investigation before indicting the Duke Lacrosse defendants shows that there was no rush to judgment.

The problem with the larceny of chose in action charge against Mangum is that it was made only after Daye's death and along with the murder indictment... and it is clear to a reasonable individual with full knowledge of the facts to conclude that the larceny charge was used solely to make the murder charge first degree under the felony-murder rule.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
SIDNEY HARR:

"The fact that he has kept important prosecution discovery from Crystal Mangum, including photographs and the report by Dr. Roberts, strongly supports the fact that his interests do not lie with his client."

In view of you own illegal activities in publishing confidential information given to Crystal, Woody Vann wants to prevent you, an individual with no standing in the case, from having unauthorized access to the discovery file.


Your explanation makes no sense. Why prevent his client from seeing important discovery and evidence to which she's entitled just to keep me from viewing it? As a defendant, Ms. Mangum has the right to have a trusted friend who also happens to be a retired doctor, take a look at the report by Dr. Roberts.

For Mr. Vann to prevent Mangum from seeing the Roberts report in order to keep me from seeing it is akin to tossing out the baby with the bath water.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
SIDNEY HARR:

"The prosecution will not risk damaging Duke University Hospital reputation by bringing attention to its medical malpractice in a courtroom trial."

The records you illegally accessed and published showed no medical malpractice on the part of Duke.

This statement is another bit of evidence that you are totally out of touch with reality and probably schizophrenic.

Probably it is because of your obvious lack of contact with reality that Woody Vann is determined not to let you have access to the Prosecution discovery file.


Mr. Vann has no obligation to show me discovery, but he has a duty to show it to his client. To do otherwise in ineffective counsel.

Anonymous said...

Harr, you are without a doubt, waaaay up there in the wingnut hit parade. Nifong did NOT wait until after the investigation to indict the LAX guys. In fact, he KNEW Evans was excluded and named him anyway! The LAX guys were trotted out publicly, for the 88 and the black community to see Nifong at work, LONG before the investigation was completed. There was perhaps the fast rush to judgement in the history of durham's ugly politics. the potbangers wanted the boys castrated within two days of the party, bro. Nifong refused to even review defense exculpatory evidence and he did not even interview Mangum until months after the party and months after the LAX guys were indicted. Nifong is a corrupt amoral disgrace of a former lawyer.....yep, your kind of guy, fer sure, bro

Anonymous said...

No, pal, it won't fly. YOU, by the way, are directly responsible for the so-called ineffective counsel who now represents Mangum. YOU, bro. She had a fine lawyer in Shella and your lawyer wannabe antics results in his, rightly, leaving the case. Now Mangum has Woody and you have no grounds to whine. You created this mess. You took confidential material and published it. You violated HIPPA. If Vann is indeed keeping information AWAY FROM YOU, then hooray for him. Maybe the man has cojones after all.

Nifong Supporter said...


gak said...
Two points in your blog hit me as glaring contradictions. First, you state, and I quote, "From what I was told, Mr. Vann suggested during his visit with Ms. Mangum that she accept a plea deal from the prosecution."
The next point you make is, and again I quote, "Durham prosecutors really have no other option as they have absolutely no case against Mangum for either the murder charge or the larceny of chose in action charge".

Now it would seem to me that unless the plea is to some form of misdemeanor(sp?), her lawyer is a jackass. Even with the degree that she suposedly earned from her school, getting a job with a felony record is almost impossible. So for a lawyer to council a client to accept a plea deal when the states case is as weak as you say, the lawyer is an idiot in that she will get out of jail and spend the rest of her life cutting lawns and doing laundry and living on state assistance as nobody in their right mind will hire a felon.
If I were the client and the states case is as weak as you describe, I would want my day in court. No case v weak case, and I have the weak case, I'll take my chances. How do you explain this??


Hey, Gak. Your observations are from the premise that Mangum's attorney is acting in her best interests. I believe the opposite... that he is working in collusion with the prosecution to deliver Mangum according to the wishes of the prosecution.

Saving face and getting rid of civil liability from a malicious prosecution are the goals of the prosecution presently. Even an incompetent defense attorney who was working in Mangum's best interests would demand that the charges against her be dismissed unconditionally as the prosecutors have no case.

Nifong Supporter said...


Walt said...
A week ago Woody Vann was the worst lawyer in town. Now he's got her a great deal. Which is it Sid? Let it be said that no one has ever been as inconsistent as you.

Walt-in-Durham


Hey, Walt. I wouldn't necessarily say Woody Vann is the worst lawyer in town. I would say that he's not working in Crystal's best interests.

A plea bargain for time served would be the best deal for the prosecution as it would relieve them of the civil liability it faces for malicious prosecution and wrongful imprisonment. The prosecution can't even dream of prevailing in court, even with help from the defense attorney who is pulling punches.

A plea deal for time served is what the prosecution would love to have.

Anonymous said...

So, if the prosecutors have no case, why don't you and your bigot band raise some money, get Sister a new lawyer, and insist on a trial!!! Oh, I fogot, you don't actually give any money....you just whine.
Mangum is a fool not to accept a plea with time served. If she accepts this kind of deal, she will, once again, get off without facing responsibility for her actions......

Anonymous said...

Let's be real, folks.....all this talk about deals is based entirely on Harr's historically inaccurate fairy tales that change more frequently than Obama's promises. Harr apparently has had one of his famous chats with Sister....or, he is manufacturing this entire little tale. We will see......

Anonymous said...

Speaking of Mangum and her famous "degree with honors".....James Ammons was the president of NCCU when Mangum got this totally undeserved and transparent degree. Recently Ammons had to resign from Florida A&M, after a band hazing incident cost a young man is life and the Board of Trustees handed Ammons a vote of no confidence. Mangum violated the NCCU code of conduct repeatedly, skipped classes, failed to enroll in required core courses and got her "degree" on the basis of so-called independent study.......which we now see is a huge scandal at UNC where student atheletes in the Afro American studies department got free rides with "independent study". Mangum's writing skills were on display, according to Harr, in the handwritten motions she , uh, wrote. If that writing is typical of an honors degree from NCCU, then it is no wonder that Cline can't spell!!!

Anonymous said...

Oops, failed to note that Cline is another alum of NCCU.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"No, it's a different source."

So, who or what is the source. How do we know it is reliable. Your word that it is reliable carries no weight. You said you had it from a reliable source that a DPD corporal set the fire in Crystal's apartment. That source seems to have been a lie on Crystal's part.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"I believe that it is because Mr. Vann's "hired gun" confirmed that the autopsy findings were fraudulent and lacked credibility. Why else would he withhold them from a client who he is trying to undermine?"

If Woody Vann wanted to undermine Crystal, why would he hire an independent expert to render an opinion. It would make more sense not to challenge the autopsy findings.

As I recall, you applauded the hiring of Doctor Roberts. You also tried to influence her decision, your denials of that notwithstanding.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"That Mr. Nifong waited until after an investigation before indicting the Duke Lacrosse defendants shows that there was no rush to judgment."

You again try to misrepresent the fact. DA NIFONG's investigation showed there was no crime, no evidence of any intimate contact, forcible or otherwise, between Crystal and any Duke Lacrosse player. He indicted three of them anyway, which was wrongful prosecution.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"...it is clear to a reasonable individual with full knowledge of the facts to conclude that the larceny charge was used solely to make the murder charge first degree under the felony-murder rule."

The problem here is that you are the only one who has made that conclusion. Your ranting and raving in this blog shows you are not a reasonable person. You are a deluded, probably schizophrenic megalomaniac.

Further, you do not have knowledge of the facts of the case. Otherwise why would you, via Crystal Mangum, be trying to see the prosecution's discovery file?

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"Mr. Vann has no obligation to show me discovery, but he has a duty to show it to his client. To do otherwise in ineffective counsel."

However, Mr. Vann's client has shown a propensity to show confidential material to someone who has no legal right to view that material.

I believe Mr. Vann also has a duty to keep confidential material away from unauthorized individuals such as yourself.

You are primarily to blame for Mr. Vann's action.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"I believe the opposite... that he is working in collusion with the prosecution to deliver Mangum according to the wishes of the prosecution."

That is the best indication yet that Woody Vann is working in Crystal's best interest.

Lance the Intern said...

Can anyone cite a instance where Sid's "sources" have actually given him a truthful "revelation"?

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"Hey, Walt. I wouldn't necessarily say Woody Vann is the worst lawyer in town. I would say that he's not working in Crystal's best interests."

Another indication that Woody Vann is working in Crystal's best interest.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"The prosecution can't even dream of prevailing in court, even with help from the defense attorney who is pulling punches."

So why are you so concerned about what the prosecution has on Crystal?

Anonymous said...

Lance the Intern August 27, 2012 8:22 AM

"Can anyone cite a instance where Sid's 'sources' have actually given him a truthful 'revelation'?"

No.

Not even Sid can do that.

Anonymous said...

Hey, Lance....beats me.....
Perhaps brother harr does not, in fact, have "sources" Perhaps this is all just a bunch of bunk. Would be kinda embarrassing for him to admit that his sources include people like peterson and wagstaff, and mangum and linwood wilson......:)

Anonymous said...

I think it's comical that Harr is throwing a snit because Vann has finally grown a pair and is keeping information away from Mangum.....translated.....away from Harr. Problem is that Harr keeps running into his own arguments. Is Vann a good guy or a bad guy? Is Dr. Roberts an incompetent hired gun or Dr. Save-the-Day? What a riot......
I recall when Mangum got Vann initially and didn't want him.....she got Shella. And it seems to me another attorney (Jones?) walked off another prior case because of meddling from Harr. Too funny. Poor Sister can't keep a lawyer for more than a month because lawyer wannabe keeps butting in......
I hope Mangum DOES get her day in court, that she is represented by a good lawyer, that all the evidence is heard, that a jury weighs and delivers verdict. She deserves a fair chance to defend herself.

Lance the Intern said...

Sid, you stated: "[Crystal Mangum's] visitation privileges had been temporarily revoked over what I feel to be a small matter of inconsequence."

Care to elaborate?

Anonymous said...

Perhaps Harr got himself barred from seeing Mangum????Perhaps it was because she gave him confidential information and acted against the instructions of her attorney? Could also be because Mangum has issues with behaving herself while behind bars. As I recall she got herself into a scrap with another inmate last time she was in jail.
my bet is that harr has been banned or was barred from contact with her.....permanent, or for some period.

Anonymous said...

Even tho harr reminds us that he "is a doctor"...it is important to remember that he is not licensed to practice medicine in NC and any action, on his part, that is covered under the State Practice Act........could be viewed as practicing medicine without a license. Of course, he is just her lay advocate....or is he? Interesting how harr moves from being the lay advocate to being the expert on forensics, autopsy, pathology, surgery and pharmacology.

Anonymous said...

"Could it be that the end of the debacle involving Crystal Mangum is near?"

No.

Anonymous said...

Wanna bet she gets introuble again before too long? Wanna bet harr will blame it on all the evil white people? Wanna bet?

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

If the prosecution's case against Crystal is so weak, why are you so concerned about what is in the prosecution's discovery file?

Why are you persecuting a dead man over a criminal charge which was shown to be baseless?

Why did you believe Crystal when she lied to you about setting Milton Walker's clothes on fire?

Anonymous said...

think about it, folks......if harr had been barred from contact with Mangum and/or Mangum not allowed any contact with him, etc.......you would think harr would have been screaming about it, all along, and whining his usual whine about persecution, torture, enslavement, evil conspiracy. we didn't hear a word.....until now.....when he mentions her visitation rights.....obliquely. I find that interesting.
Second, what harr refuses to admit is that both sides in criminal cases often attempt to avoid going to trial....for a variety of reasons. he is trying to make this situation all about a weak prosecution case and an "innocent" Mangum. The evidence we have all seen, at this point, does NOT support her claim of self defense. If there were additional powerful evidence to support her claim, Vann would be using it. We all know that all Vann has is Mangum, on the stand, giving her version. (which looks pretty weak to me and opens her up to cross....) On the other hand, the state's claim about the larceny seems overblown and hard to make stick. I figure ANY smart lawyers would negotiate a deal. If the state were 100% confident they could lock her up for first degree murder, they would offer no plea deals at all. If Vann were 100% confident he could get her off with self defense, you can bet there would be no plea discussions going on. (IF THERE ARE ANY SUCH NEGOTIATIONS????) I think any "reasonable person" could figure out that Mangum is going to get minimal prison time, or most optimistically, time served. I also think her claim of self defense is baseless.....BUT, that is just the opinion of a lay person who would really love for her to get her day in court. I think she deserves a fair trial but I also think that many cases wind up with plea deals for the very reasons that exist in the killing of Mr. Daye.
One last comment, having working in hospitals and healthcare for more than three decades, I can say that what harr did, in publishing the confidential records of care from Duke Hospital is absolutely a violation of HIPPA....and, frankly, I am curious why he hasn't yet had a visit from the feds.

Nifong Supporter said...


Lance the Intern said...
Sid, you stated: "[Crystal Mangum's] visitation privileges had been temporarily revoked over what I feel to be a small matter of inconsequence."

Care to elaborate?


Intern, I do not know the particulars to elaborate, but enough to know that it was over a small matter of triviality.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
I think it's comical that Harr is throwing a snit because Vann has finally grown a pair and is keeping information away from Mangum.....translated.....away from Harr. Problem is that Harr keeps running into his own arguments. Is Vann a good guy or a bad guy? Is Dr. Roberts an incompetent hired gun or Dr. Save-the-Day? What a riot......
I recall when Mangum got Vann initially and didn't want him.....she got Shella. And it seems to me another attorney (Jones?) walked off another prior case because of meddling from Harr. Too funny. Poor Sister can't keep a lawyer for more than a month because lawyer wannabe keeps butting in......
I hope Mangum DOES get her day in court, that she is represented by a good lawyer, that all the evidence is heard, that a jury weighs and delivers verdict. She deserves a fair chance to defend herself.


Face it, this case will never go to trial because the state has no case... the prosecutors would be laughed out of the courthouse.

With regards to Vann, I believe he is a bad guy for his client and a good guy for the prosecution.

Dr. Roberts is a consultant whose report I have not seen.

More enlightenment on the plea deal is forthcoming in a matter of minutes with an impending blog.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
think about it, folks......if harr had been barred from contact with Mangum and/or Mangum not allowed any contact with him, etc.......you would think harr would have been screaming about it, all along, and whining his usual whine about persecution, torture, enslavement, evil conspiracy. we didn't hear a word.....until now.....when he mentions her visitation rights.....obliquely. I find that interesting.
Second, what harr refuses to admit is that both sides in criminal cases often attempt to avoid going to trial....for a variety of reasons. he is trying to make this situation all about a weak prosecution case and an "innocent" Mangum. The evidence we have all seen, at this point, does NOT support her claim of self defense. If there were additional powerful evidence to support her claim, Vann would be using it. We all know that all Vann has is Mangum, on the stand, giving her version. (which looks pretty weak to me and opens her up to cross....) On the other hand, the state's claim about the larceny seems overblown and hard to make stick. I figure ANY smart lawyers would negotiate a deal. If the state were 100% confident they could lock her up for first degree murder, they would offer no plea deals at all. If Vann were 100% confident he could get her off with self defense, you can bet there would be no plea discussions going on. (IF THERE ARE ANY SUCH NEGOTIATIONS????) I think any "reasonable person" could figure out that Mangum is going to get minimal prison time, or most optimistically, time served. I also think her claim of self defense is baseless.....BUT, that is just the opinion of a lay person who would really love for her to get her day in court. I think she deserves a fair trial but I also think that many cases wind up with plea deals for the very reasons that exist in the killing of Mr. Daye.
One last comment, having working in hospitals and healthcare for more than three decades, I can say that what harr did, in publishing the confidential records of care from Duke Hospital is absolutely a violation of HIPPA....and, frankly, I am curious why he hasn't yet had a visit from the feds.


I disagree that all Vann has is Mangum on the stand. Photographs, which Vann has kept from his client will show physical effects of Daye's assault. The report from Dr. Christena Roberts, which Vann has kept from his client, will show that the autopsy report of April 14, 2011 is fraudulent and lacking in credibility. The mysterious yearlong SBI report, that Vann has kept from his client, will show who knows what... but it is impossible for it to demonstrate that a single stab wound with a steak knife did all the damage alleged in the autopsy report. (And if it did, then that means that the Duke trauma surgeons missed a laceration to the left lung, a laceration to the diaphragm, a laceration to the left kidney, and a laceration to the fundus of Daye's stomach.)

Lance the Intern said...

"I do not know the particulars to elaborate..."

I bet you DO know, but because the 'particulars' are unflattering, you won't state them here.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

'Intern, I do not know the particulars to elaborate(why Crystal's visitation privileges were suspended), but enough to know that it was over a small matter of triviality."

In other words, you don't have a clue.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"Your explanation makes no sense. Why prevent his client from seeing important discovery and evidence to which she's entitled just to keep me from viewing it?"

Because you are trying to use Crystal to get access to the material, much of which is confidential, which material you have no legal right to view.

Go ye and make some change.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"Face it, this case will never go to trial because the state has no case... the prosecutors would be laughed out of the courthouse."

If you know that already, why are you so anxious to access the prosecution discovery file?

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"With regards to Vann, I believe he is a bad guy for his client and a good guy for the prosecution."

Another indication that Woody Vann is doing a good job for his client, compared to the job SIDNEY is trying to do on her.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"Dr. Roberts is a consultant whose report I have not seen."

So why do you claim it contradicts Dr. Nichols' findings?

Do you think the court will not notice that you tried to influence her report?

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"More enlightenment on the plea deal is forthcoming in a matter of minutes with an impending blog."

A deluded, probably schizophrenic, megalomaniac who doesn't have a clue to the truth is incapable of enlightening anyone, particularly himself.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"
I disagree that all Vann has is Mangum on the stand. Photographs, which Vann has kept from his client will show physical effects of Daye's assault. The report from Dr. Christena Roberts, which Vann has kept from his client, will show that the autopsy report of April 14, 2011 is fraudulent and lacking in credibility. The mysterious yearlong SBI report, that Vann has kept from his client, will show who knows what... but it is impossible for it to demonstrate that a single stab wound with a steak knife did all the damage alleged in the autopsy report. (And if it did, then that means that the Duke trauma surgeons missed a laceration to the left lung, a laceration to the diaphragm, a laceration to the left kidney, and a laceration to the fundus of Daye's stomach.)"

If you are unaware of what Woody Vann has from the prosecution(which is evident from your obviouis, desperate attempts to access it by exploiting Crystal), then you are in no position to make any of those statements.