Bar v. Harr: Round two

 Click the LINK below to access the flog –

LINK: http://www.justice4nifong.com/direc/flog/flog24/flog24rid.html

 

Click the LINK below to access the accompanying Directory of Documents –

LINK: http://www.justice4nifong.com/legal/cgm/direc/direc02.htm

Note: The Directory of Documents can be accessed following the flog and the flog can be accessed from the Directory.

Narrative of the flog follows below:
Word count: 1, 673

In the wee hours of Sunday, April 3, 2011, Crystal Mangum, the Duke Lacrosse victim/accuser, stabbed Reginald Daye in the left side with a steak knife. She claims, and evidence supports, that she did so in self-defense in fear for her life.

Emergency surgery on Mr. Daye at Duke University Hospital hours later revealed injury to the colon and a minor lesion to the spleen… both of which were repaired. The operation was deemed to be successful with a postoperative prognosis for a full recovery.

On his third post-op day, Wednesday, April 6, 2011, effects of severe alcoholic withdrawal, or delirium tremens, set in and resulted Mr. Daye’s transfer to the Surgical Intensive Care Unit… he was a heavy alcoholic.

A medical mishap, the accidental intubation of the esophagus instead of the trachea, resulted in deprivation of vital oxygen flow to the lungs… which prevented oxygen from reaching the blood stream, the red blood cells, and other cells of the body.

The heart, starved of oxygen, lapsed into cardiac arrest which resulted in cardiopulmonary resuscitation during which time the mis-positioned endotracheal tube was removed and replaced with one correctly situated in the trachea.

With reestablishment of oxygenated blood flow to the cells of the body, the heart was resuscitated with spontaneous restoration of circulation. However, the brain cells had been without oxygen for too long and died leaving Daye brain dead and in a coma.

Daye remained comatose for a week during a self-imposed media blackout on his condition, after which Duke medical staff electively removed him from life support and he died shortly thereafter on Wednesday, April 13, 2011.

Duke hospital records, such as Daye’s discharge summary elected to omit crucial bits of information in order to obscure the hospital’s role in his demise… specifically that it was the initial intubation into the esophagus that began the cascade of events that ended with Daye being brain dead.

On the following day, April 14, 2011, North Carolina Deputy Chief Medical Examiner Clay Nichols, in his autopsy examination report on Reginald Daye, contained findings of injuries not indicated and/or contradicted in other medical records. For example the Nichols autopsy report observed stab wound inflicted perforations to the left lung, diaphragm, fundus of the stomach, and left kidney in addition to those injuries mentioned in other medical records to the colon and spleen.

Also, for the first and only time Dr. Nichols discloses that there were multiple scabbed over lacerations to the left upper extremity suggestive of “defensive injuries.” These alleged lesions to the left upper extremity are neither mentioned in any other medical record nor documented photographically.

Fact is that EMS assessed Daye’s left upper extremity at the scene and found it to be normal, whereas the orthopedic surgery consult preoperatively examined Daye’s extremities and found no lacerations or breaks in the skin.

In addition to the findings in the Nichols autopsy report being suspect, its conclusion that Daye’s death was due to “complications of a stab wound to the left chest” is also without merit as no nexus between the stabbing and Daye’s brain death or actual death is demonstrated.

What is even more revealing is the fact that Dr. Nichols does not mention in his report about Daye’s descent into the bowels of delirium tremens, which necessitated his move to the SICU… he does not mention that Daye’s initial intubation was esophageal… he does not mention that as a result of the improperly placed endotracheal tube Daye went into cardiac arrest… he does not mention that as a subsequence of extended oxygen deprivation Daye was left in an irreversible comatose state… he does not mention that Daye, while sustained on life support, remained in a coma for a week without sign of recovery… and he does not mention that shortly after his elective removal from life support that Reginald Daye expired.

These important facts are purposely excluded by the medical examiner from the autopsy report on Daye in order to better transfer responsibility for his death from the Duke University Hospital staff to Crystal Mangum.

In other words, Dr. Nichols’ report was fashioned specifically to implicate Ms. Mangum as being solely responsible for Daye’s death.

The mainstream media made extreme efforts to omit reporting the true factors contributing to Daye’s death… ignoring them just like the autopsy report of Dr. Nichols.

Dr. Christena L. Roberts, a forensic pathologist from Black Mountain, North Carolina, likewise does not want to put in writing the true nature of what happened during Daye’s hospitalization at Duke University Hospital… and she does not want there to be a written record by her that debunks the autopsy report of the State’s Deputy Chief Medical Examiner.

Dr. Roberts has made conflicting and contradictory verbalizations to Crystal Mangum and one of her defense attorneys, Woody Vann, about Reginald Daye’s in-house course and his autopsy report.

Mr. Vann told Ms. Mangum that Dr. Roberts related to him that the endotracheal tube was mis-positioned and that it resulted in him being deprived of oxygen, and that she could give no explanation for findings by Dr. Nichols that were contrary to other medical records. Then later, during a meeting between the three, Dr. Roberts told Mangum that the findings in the Nichols autopsy report were accurate.

When Mangum asked why the autopsy report stated that there was a lesion to the left lung, whereas no such lesion was mentioned in the other medical records, Dr. Roberts responded that the Duke University Hospital emergency room staff, radiologists, and trauma surgeons missed the laceration to the left lung which was discovered at autopsy.

None of the communications of Dr. Roberts concerning Daye were recorded and none are in writing… ergo, nothing she may have said or didn’t say about anything related to Daye and his death and autopsy is verifiable.

Despite repeated pleas for a written report by Mangum, who faces life in prison on a murder charge, and despite a court order by Honorable Judge Robert Hobgood to directly deliver a written report to Ms. Mangum, Dr. Roberts has steadfastly refused to provide her with this exculpatory evidence.

E-mail records reveal that the day following Reginald Daye’s death, Woody Vann, the court-appointed defense attorney for Mangum, was made aware of problems with a “tube” insertion by Duke hospital staff that was responsible for Daye’s untimely demise and that Duke University was heavily engaged in covering it up in order to appear that his death was the direct result of a stab wound.

Sidney B. Harr, Lay Advocate for the Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong, and a retired physician, was immediately aware in mid-August 2011 when Daye’s autopsy report was first made available to the public that its findings and conclusion were bogus.

First, he considered it to be anatomically impossible for a single stab wound from a steak knife to cause injury to the left lung, the diaphragm, the left kidney, the spleen, the fundus of the stomach, and the colon.

Secondly, the autopsy report was the first mention of multiple “defensive injuries” to the left upper extremity… it never being previously reported in the media.

Finally, the autopsy report provided no cause of death, and its conclusion failed to provide any support to bolster Dr. Nichols’ claim that complications secondary to the stab wound lead to Daye’s death.

Harr publicly expressed, through his blog site and available media outlets, his concerns about the veracity of the autopsy report… in particular his opinion piece titled “Autopsy report doesn’t add up” that appeared in a January 2012 edition of The Durham News, a bi-weekly supplemental community news insert in the Durham edition of The News & Observer.

In March 2012, after nearly a year of incarceration without substantive action on behalf of her legal counsel, Mangum reached out to Harr seeking his help in filing motions.

Harr drafted three motions, which were signed by Mangum, and he then filed them with the Durham County Clerk of Court’s office. These documents and filings provided the grist for the North Carolina State Bar’s first encounter with Harr.

In July 2012, the Authorized Practices Committee of the State Bar issued Harr a Letter of Caution, telling him to cease and desist from drafting motions for others and from conducting other lawyerly activities… to which Harr consented.

By August 2012, with Mangum not receiving a written report from Dr. Roberts and her attorney withholding other prosecution discovery and evidence from her, Harr filed, as a third party, two Pro Se petitions in Mangum’s criminal case.

This, along with a letter Harr wrote to a Superior Court criminal judge, resulted in the State Bar’s second encounter with the determined justice advocate… and at its quarterly meeting in October 2012, the Authorized Practices Committee decided to take civil action against Harr, seeking a permanent injunction to prevent him from filing documents in Mangum’s case.

With the Durham prosecutors, medical examiner, Mangum’s defense attorneys, the mainstream media, Mangum’s defense expert witness, and certain judges attacking Mangum, Harr was the only one staunchly defending her.

Because of Harr’s medical background and the prominence that the autopsy and hospitalization play in this case, he is an extremely valuable advocate for Mangum to have in her corner.

In trying to affect the outcome of the criminal charges against Mangum towards her detriment, the State Bar is trying to remove her most valuable asset and ally… Harr.

This is the same strategy that worked so successful in the Duke Lacrosse case when the State Bar instituted its own complaint against the Durham D.A. Mike Nifong during its early pretrial phase in order to force his removal as prosecutors of the three Duke Lacrosse defendants.

On Tuesday, December 4, 2012, the State Bar filed with the Wake County civil court a Petition for Permanent Injunction against Harr.

On Monday, December 17, 2012, Harr filed with the court his response, thereby setting the stage for a courtroom showdown.

 
A scheduled date for the hearing – Bar v. Harr – is now pending. 