Tuesday, January 15, 2013

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. 



372 comments:

1 – 200 of 372   Newer›   Newest»
Nifong Supporter said...


guiowen said...
We're anxiously awaiting this superflog!


gui, Intern, and others,

Sorry about the delay, but I'm sure you'll agree that it was well worth the wait. I just could not bring myself to post a Super-Flog unworthy of this blog's fans.

I look forward to your comments.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
SIDNEY HARR:
"I feel like I owe it to visitors to this blog site to give them the best product possible, so I refuse to sacrifice quality for the sake of speed. It would be like asking Leonardo Di Vinci to paint Mona Lisa faster. As you will see, hopefully by tomorrow, this Super-Flog will indeed be a masterpiece."

Only in your deluded dreams are you comparable to Leonardo DaVinci.


I would say that we are in a comparable league regarding talent... all things considered.

Walt said...

Drafting of motions for another person constitutes the practice of law. If you are not currently admitted in North Carolina or admitted pro hac vice for the Mangum case, you are practicing law without a license.

You just admitted that you drafted motions for another person. You never cease to prove the value of a law school education. Enjoy the injunction.

Walt-in-Durham

Anonymous said...

Indeed, Harr admits there were several civil actions against him and, apparently, he admits he was arrested and charged in a criminal case. Of course, unlike his lies about Daye where he conveniently forgets to mention that domestic violence charges against Daye were DROPPED....Harr "says" charges against him were dropped. Perhaps he would be a bit more acdurate in his account of the criminal action if he mentioned a "settlement".
95% of this longwinded nonsense is just rehash......with a bit of stew juice added where he asks to "become the legal representative" (wannabe lawyer) for Mangum. As Walt so directly says, "enjoy the injunction", sidney.

Anonymous said...

Amazing, isn't it........using words like "baloney" in his response, and making totally unrelated (hilarious) comments about the construction of a Bar building......Harr rambles all the way to "infinity and beyond"....
ah, and the emails to Vann....clipped. Can you say, deep shit, harr???? you are in it...

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"Anonymous said...
SIDNEY HARR:
'I feel like I owe it to visitors to this blog site to give them the best product possible, so I refuse to sacrifice quality for the sake of speed. It would be like asking Leonardo Di Vinci to paint Mona Lisa faster. As you will see, hopefully by tomorrow, this Super-Flog will indeed be a masterpiece.'

Only in your deluded dreams are you comparable to Leonardo DaVinci."


I would say that we are in a comparable league regarding talent... all things considered.

All hings considered, most people would say you are delusional.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

Your reply to the state bar was, as I expected, another screed about how everyone is against you because of your advocacy of corrupt DA NIFONG.

My socks have not even wiggled after I reviewed your latest posting.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HAR::

"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 document attached to this post regarding the intubation was not an esophageal intubation.

You document again you are not qualified a a physician.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"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."

You have not established as fact any of these events you characterize as errors.

Much of which you publish are matters which one who is performing an autopsy would be able to evaluate during an autopsy. Have you ever done an autopsy? No. I have done several as part of my surgical residency.

You show again you are incapable of commenting meaningfully.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

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

SIDNEY, again you reveal you are delusional.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"
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."

No they don't. You show again you are delusional.

Lance the Intern said...

I'm in full agreement with Walt. Further, I'll add that I've never seen anyone other than a lawyer admitted pro hac vice,so good luck with that.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"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."

Since you are not a party to the case, since you have no standing in the case, you are not capable of filing petitions in the case on behalf of yourself. Your delusions about the non existent carpetbagger jihad, about the non existent vendetta against Crystal, do not establish you as a party to the case.

I would advise you to onsult your so called friend Professor Coleman, but it is obvious you are not his friend, that this claim is another one of your delusions.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"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."

A delusional description of what was happening. What SIDNEY was really doing was shouting, HEY EVERYONE, PAY ATTENTION TO ME!

You omit to say that you were defaming Reginald Daye, misrepresenting him as a violent abuser of women by concealing evidene he was not.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"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."

From what you have not said about your medical career, I would say you are not competent to evaluate the autopsy report or the hospitalization. You once said your competence as a physician was not relevant. You will not reveal the details of your medical career, as Dr. Nichols and Dr. Roberts have. You mention you have had lawsuits and a criminal charge filed against you. That suggests you are trying to hide something. Were you sued because yu botched intubations?


"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."

I think the state bar is trying to protect her fram a delusional, incompetent narcissist.

Anonymous said...

Not only is "pro hac vice" a term linked exclusively to LAWYERS, in most states/jurisdictions, a LAWYER wanting to "practice" outside his/her jurisdiction, for a specific case, must be invited to do so by another LAWYER who currently practices in the desired jurisdiction. And, I believe, though not certain, that a judge has to find a compelling reason to approve "pro hac vice". In other words, there is no such thing as allowing a person who is not licensed to practice law in NC, to become a "lawyer for a day", representing a criminal defendant. Aint gonna happen, harr. On the other hand, it would be tragic/funny to watch your charades.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"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."

I hope it is televised so you will not be able to misrepresent the ignominy you will incur.

Anonymous said...

99% Harr trash, 1% pure Oscar Meyer BALONEY

Lance the Supreme Poster of Enlightenment said...

"I would say that we are in a comparable league regarding talent... all things considered.

Tell you what, Sid -- When crowds queue to see your most famous artworks, T-shirts bear your most famous drawings, and writers continue to marvel at your genius 500 years after you're dead, then you can put yourself in the same league as Da Vinci.

Until then, you're just failed MD who "...took computer classes (including a Flash class) at Wake Tech Community College."

Consider yourself enlightened....

Lance the Supreme Poster of Enlightenment said...

Sid -- A minimal amount of research would have helped you here -- you state in your response to the bar that they "do not have an inherent right to file complaints against laypeople regardless of whether or not their actions may be considered to be the illegal unauthorized practice of law.", and that the state bar's authority is "limited to practicing professional attorney and other legal professionals..."

You are correct in stating that the bar has no "inherent right" -- "inherent rights" are rights that are an intrinsic part of being human -- "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" rights.
What you fail to identify, however, are the bar's legal rights, bestowed by the legal system.

The scope of the state bar to investigate and enjoin unauthorized activities are outlined in NCGS § 84-37.

Anonymous said...

Dear Supreme Poster.....LMFAO!!!!!

Anonymous said...

Round Two??? When did we have Round One? The Bar committee took action and Harr said he would comply. That was supposed to be Round One? As in, Harr lied when he said he would cease and desist? That round?
By the way, perhaps Lance or Walt can tell us if Harr would automatically get his "day in court". One wonders if the court will simply say....nope, Atticus, not gonna happen. I would buy a ticket to see the circus though. Sidney, in spite of having a head the size of Cleveland, is NOT above or exempt from the law.

Anonymous said...

sidney, read NCGS 84-4. I am assuming you can read....... There is nothing in there that says, "this applies to everybody in the state except sidney harr". Oooops

Lance the Supreme Poster of Enlightenment said...

In regards to my 8:37 AM post, I should have stated "legal rights and duties".

Wouldn't want anyone not enlightened by one of my posts....I might get moved back to intern status.

Anonymous said...

This is a flaming waste of time....for the courts, for the everybody involved. Who the bloody hell does this guy think he is? That he should presume to be the only person, in the entire world, qualified to represent Mangum? This guy is wearing a new asshat, from what I can tell........and is becoming ever more comically pathetic. Evidently his entire adult life has included run-ins with the law and the legal system.....several suits, an arrest, charges, etc. We may never know just exactly who this guy really is......right now, he's a loon who has managed to screw up Mangum's life, even worse than she has. I don't know who is the bigger loser......

Anonymous said...

Several points.
1. Harr is already whining that he is being hounded by the NC Bar because he is black. Note that he asked the committee staff to provide him the racial makeup of persons who had previously been pursued for practicing law without a license.
2. The lawyer who sent Harr the second letter reminded harr that playing lawyer without a license can be prosecuted as a criminal misdemeanor.
3. Harr claimed that Daye had DTs. Please note that DTs were suspected but only as part of a rule-out for diagnosis and that Ativan had been prescribed, from the get go, as a prophylactic drug. Also note that there was a suspicion that Daye had an infection and that this was the source of his change in condition. In short, there was NO definitive diagnosis of DTs! No diagnosis of alcoholism! And, by the way, there is not ONE word in the notes that supports is misplacement of the tube. Harr is apparently in waaaay over his head and has no clue what he is reading.
4. One of the emails to Vann notes that the sender was not writing to Vann "about his case"......so, are we to believe anything from these emails, since apparently the sender MIGHT have some kind of legal problems, as well?
5. Several civil actions against you, sidney? You led your readers to believe there was one. Arrested, in handcuffs? That kind of arrest is no traffic ticket? Charged? Charges dropped, says you. Since you refuse to admit that Mr. Daye's charges were DROPPED, we refuse to accept your word that charges were ever dropped against you.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY the incompetent HARR:

You are saying the NC State Bar has no jurisdiction over laymen who are practicing law without a license.

That is like saying the NC State Medical Board can not take action against a layman practicing medicine without a license.

You are truly delusional.

Anonymous said...

Not only can the Bar pursue an action, the penalties for playing lawyer without a license are significant. I can hear the ranting now....."they are picking on me, a senior citizen, a black man, because I have nifongian courage"...or some other crap. Apparently the NC Bar has launched a vendetta against poor Mangum.....and, of course, planted the knife in Daye's torso...and held her down and made her get her fingerprints on it. And, behind it all, we have the Emperor herself, the royal Dragon Lady, Rae Evans....who spend every waking hour, scheming to have Mangum drawn and quartered at SouthPoint.

Anonymous said...

Interesting use of boxing terminology.

I presume that in your mind, "round 1" was back in July when the Authorized Practice Committee sent you a letter asking you to refrain from “preparing or assisting in the preparation of court pleadings or other legal documents for others...”

You remember? You said that you didn't realize it was inappropriate for you to assist in drafting legal documents but that you would stop...

In boxing terms, that would be considered a "TKO".

Perhaps a better title would have been "Bar v. Harr: The Rematch"

guiowen said...

I must commend you, Sidney, for putting all these papers together and presenting them in such an orderly fashion. There's nothing new in them, and certainly nothing to wrinkle my socks, but at least we can see what your arguments are.

Anonymous said...

W
H
E
R
E

I
S

K
E
N
N
Y

T
H
E

T
R
O
L
L
?

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

A super flog NOT!!!!

guiowen said...

Cheer up, Sidney,
I'm sure you knocked Kenhyderal's socks off.

Anonymous said...

I hope the Unauthorized Practice Committee actually does follow through and press charges if Harr continues to influence Mangum. Clearly she has no ability to make good decisions.
There is a pattern to Harr's behavior and I would bet it has been lifelong. He thinks he is an exception, above the law, outside the law......that the rules do not apply to him, no matter the issue. And, if he is cornered in this behavior, he (a)blames others, (b)plays the race card, (c)and makes excuses. His past brushes with the law show this pattern. I would bet you that the prior civil actions and the criminal charges involved similar behavior.
In Mangum's case, it's more a matter of an amoral character, no judgement, lack of concern for others and plain old laziness. She has used men for years and they have used her. Trip her up, get in her way, refuse her demands.....and she escalates right into violent behavior. That's where she is different from Sidney.
If Sidney is in his mid 60s, and if the dates of his medical school training are correct, then there are years unaccounted for....with no obvious medical practice going on.....and no record of employment. Sidney is not being truthful about his past and certainly not disclosing his history.........he exercises his right to privacy. It's too bad he does not show the same respect for Reginald Daye's right to privacy.

Anonymous said...

Among the MANY aspects of Harr's writing I find obnoxious is his silly use of the third person in his narratives.....and, of course, the lapses into street language, sarcasm, attempts at being humorous, pontificating, poor grammar, and wandering run-on sentences. (making a bit of joke here, folks....sidney, it's a big word, ironic.....look it up)
KC has a recent post where he mentions the latest filings by none other than the sleaze-master, Linwood Wilson......who is also representing himself. Read it and note the numerous similarities between Wilson and Harr in their writings and odd content. Hilarious.........I suppose it proves, yet again, that stupidity is not a racial thing......be it trailer trash cracker or that other ugly race word......these two buffoons prove to us yet again that you don't do your own brain surgery, and you don't play lawyer. In Harr's case, the damage is so much worse because he has pushed/led/bamboozled Mangum into thinking that SHE, too, can play lawyer. The blind leading the blind doesn't even begin to define such stupidity......with YEARS in prison at stake for Mangum

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Interesting use of boxing terminology.

I presume that in your mind, "round 1" was back in July when the Authorized Practice Committee sent you a letter asking you to refrain from “preparing or assisting in the preparation of court pleadings or other legal documents for others...”

You remember? You said that you didn't realize it was inappropriate for you to assist in drafting legal documents but that you would stop...

In boxing terms, that would be considered a "TKO".

Perhaps a better title would have been "Bar v. Harr: The Rematch"


Very interesting... I never thought of it that way. But that could've be used as well. In fact, I even like it better than "Round Two" which I used. But it's too late now.

Thank you for your observation, though.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
SIDNEY the incompetent HARR:

You are saying the NC State Bar has no jurisdiction over laymen who are practicing law without a license.

That is like saying the NC State Medical Board can not take action against a layman practicing medicine without a license.

You are truly delusional.


Congrats!! That is precisely what I'm saying! The police and prosecutors can take action against someone who is not a licensed physician for removing a person's appendix in a tool shed, but not the State Medical Board. It can't revoke a medical license if the person doesn't have one. The same applies to the State Bar. The same applies to the NCAA. It can't do anything against me for giving Mangum "impermissible benefits."

Thank you for making my point!

Nifong Supporter said...


guiowen said...
I must commend you, Sidney, for putting all these papers together and presenting them in such an orderly fashion. There's nothing new in them, and certainly nothing to wrinkle my socks, but at least we can see what your arguments are.

gui, mon ami,

Thank you for your commendation, but I beg to disagree. Did you not see the physician note in the History of Present Illness where it states that the "initial intubation was esophageal"? That has never before been published! That's new! And that's important as it supports what I've been saying from Day One.

Nifong Supporter said...


Lance the Supreme Poster of Enlightenment said...
Sid -- A minimal amount of research would have helped you here -- you state in your response to the bar that they "do not have an inherent right to file complaints against laypeople regardless of whether or not their actions may be considered to be the illegal unauthorized practice of law.", and that the state bar's authority is "limited to practicing professional attorney and other legal professionals..."

You are correct in stating that the bar has no "inherent right" -- "inherent rights" are rights that are an intrinsic part of being human -- "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" rights.
What you fail to identify, however, are the bar's legal rights, bestowed by the legal system.

The scope of the state bar to investigate and enjoin unauthorized activities are outlined in NCGS § 84-37.


Supreme Poster,

Laws are man-made and not deified codes handed down from the heavens like manna. It used to be legal to own slaves in North Carolina. Some of the laws against lawyering are so vague as to have no chance of standing up to U.S. Constitutional scrutiny.

Inform me if further elucidation is required.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
I hope the Unauthorized Practice Committee actually does follow through and press charges if Harr continues to influence Mangum. Clearly she has no ability to make good decisions.
There is a pattern to Harr's behavior and I would bet it has been lifelong. He thinks he is an exception, above the law, outside the law......that the rules do not apply to him, no matter the issue. And, if he is cornered in this behavior, he (a)blames others, (b)plays the race card, (c)and makes excuses. His past brushes with the law show this pattern. I would bet you that the prior civil actions and the criminal charges involved similar behavior.
In Mangum's case, it's more a matter of an amoral character, no judgement, lack of concern for others and plain old laziness. She has used men for years and they have used her. Trip her up, get in her way, refuse her demands.....and she escalates right into violent behavior. That's where she is different from Sidney.
If Sidney is in his mid 60s, and if the dates of his medical school training are correct, then there are years unaccounted for....with no obvious medical practice going on.....and no record of employment. Sidney is not being truthful about his past and certainly not disclosing his history.........he exercises his right to privacy. It's too bad he does not show the same respect for Reginald Daye's right to privacy.


The State Bar can't press charges agaisnt a ham sandwich. The District Attorney can, however, but to do so against me in this instance would be a waste of time and resources.

Thereby go ye enlightened.

Lance the Supreme Poster of Enlightenment said...

"Laws are man-made and not deified codes handed down from the heavens like manna.

Well, of course not, Sid. I thought I explained that rather well in my post when I differentiated "inherit" and "legal" rights.

"Some of the laws against lawyering are so vague as to have no chance of standing up to U.S. Constitutional scrutiny."

This is one of the most absurd things you've ever posted. Just because you either don't like them or won't take the time to learn them doesn't mean they are "vague".

Anonymous said...

You just proved my point, made in an earlier post..............you think you are above the law and exempt from the law. you are not, pal. There is nothing remotely vague in the description of what constitutes the practice of law in the statutes. And, by the way, the Bar will and does, in fact, have the absolute right to pursue charges against you, through its agency. I hope you are familiar with the word "agency" in this context. If not, look it up.

Lance the Supreme Poster of Enlightenment said...

"The State Bar can't press charges agaisnt a ham sandwich. The District Attorney can, however, but to do so against me in this instance would be a waste of time and resources."

The State Bar canseek injunctive relief (which is exactly what they are doing with you now). If they are successful, and you violate the injunction by continuing to provide legal assistance without a license,any of a number of things can happen.

This includes finding you in contempt of court or the DA
s office charging you with a Class 1 criminal misdemeanor.

A Class 1 misdemeanor can get you a fine or up to 45 days in jail, or both.

It's not something I'd take lightly, and your so-called "response" is not going to help your cause in any meaningful way.

144 paragraphs to respond to an 11 paragraph motion?

I believe you're just copying your previous legal documents and simply adding in random thoughts.

If we were to take all of the legal documents you've filed since the beginning of this blog and compare them, how much do you think we would find common in each document? Would more than 50% be a good guess? How about 75%?
Would they stand such a test?


Inform me if further elucidation is required

Anonymous said...

There is not ONE word in ANY of the documents Harr has illegally posted here that would lead to Mangum being released without a trial. She is either going to get an offer of a plea deal or not. If one is offered, she is either going to accept it or not. If she refuses a plea offer, she is going to go to trial. At that point, I would be willing to bet she will get second degree or, if she is really lucky, manslaughter. I am not aware of any documentation that a plea deal has been offered. In fact, the prosecutor AND Vann said no such offer had been made. Again, there is not one single word/documentation that Harr has thrown at the wall here....that is going to get Mangum out of jail. She is a fool, a damn fool, for listening to this halfwit and for firing not one, but two, excellent attorneys. If Harr persists and plays lawyer wannabe again, he is going to find himself in major trouble. And, no, Harr is not above the law....and, yes, the DA can and will come after him.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"Congrats!! That is precisely what I'm saying! The police and prosecutors can take action against someone who is not a licensed physician for removing a person's appendix in a tool shed, but not the State Medical Board. It can't revoke a medical license if the person doesn't have one. The same applies to the State Bar. The same applies to the NCAA. It can't do anything against me for giving Mangum "impermissible benefits."

Thank you for making my point!"

Not only are you delusional but you are stupid.

The only point with you is the one your mother felt when she patted you on the head.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"Supreme Poster,

Laws are man-made and not deified codes handed down from the heavens like manna. It used to be legal to own slaves in North Carolina. Some of the laws against lawyering are so vague as to have no chance of standing up to U.S. Constitutional scrutiny.

Inform me if further elucidation is required."

Totally irrelevant and meaningless answer to Lance's post.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"The State Bar can't press charges agaisnt a ham sandwich. The District Attorney can, however, but to do so against me in this instance would be a waste of time and resources."

No it wouldn't

"Thereby go ye enlightened."

How? certainly not by this post.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

There is something missing. Where is the "brilliant" response to the NC State Bar? All I read is another screed about how the non existent carpetbagger jihad is after you.

Anonymous said...

Excellent point, poster. Harr not only fails to respond to the Bar....he goes further and ADMITS that he was practicing law without a license. He did it initially, got warned to quit, said he would quit, and did it again. Do it a third time, and the DA will press charges. Hide and watch, as my best friend used to say.

Anonymous said...

Tell you what, sidney, you gamble and continue on attempting to play lawyer without a license. You do that. You go right ahead and double dog dare the District Attorney to come after you. That's not what rational people do...i.e., rational people abide the law. And don't try to compare the laws concerning praciticing without a license to your typical nonsense about laws allowing slavery. That comparison is way beyond dumb. Perhaps you could say that doctors should not have to be licensed, nor lawyers, nor judges, nor any other professional people. Perhaps not teachers nor CPAs nor dentists nor vetrinarians nor drivers of vehicles nor people who survey property for mortgage loans nor police officers nor those who carry a concealed weapon. NONE of those folks should have to bother with a license......if they don't want to. right, sidney? you should just be able to open up your little doctor shop and start treating patients...without a license and you should be able to write scripts for narcotics without a DEA number. Oh, and that little matter of practicing law without a license.........nah, don't worry about it.

Anonymous said...

"blog's fans"?? As far as I can see, you have one fan......the troll. The rest of us occasionally look at the site to see what kind of nonsense you are spewing and how much damage you are imposing on Mangum. But "fans"? Nope, I don't think so.

Anonymous said...

Isn't this typical of Harr? Now he accuses the entire NC State Bar of a deliberate attempt at silencing her long wolf defender of truth, justice and the socialist way. In fact, he thinks he is the only person IN THE ENTIRE WORLD (save his little bigoted friend, peterson) who is able to save poor Mangum. Sometimes I think Harr must be the world's greatest psycho nut who just loves jerking people around. BUT.....he has directly interferred in Mangum's life so many times, to her everlasting detriment, that I KNOW this guy is truly wearing his own special asshat. How sad for her, to be hooked up with sidney harr.

Anonymous said...

oops, lone wolf, not long wolf......my apology

Anonymous said...

Sidney, why did you ask the Bar committee for a racial breakdown of the people they have gone after for practicing without a license? What is your motive for the question? Why didn't you ask them to provide you with a breakdown of these data by age, or sex, or sexual preference, or religion? or political affiliation?

Anonymous said...

NCGS 84-2.1 is VERY" specific as to what constitutes the practice of law. There is not one phrase that is vague. Sidney Harr has, on multiple occasions, practiced law without a license. He is in violation of the law, has been warned, and now faces an injunction. If he continues, he will find himself charged and, if found guilty, will face a fine and/or jail time.

Anonymous said...

W
H
E
R
E

I
S

K
E
N
N
Y

T
H
E

T
R
O
L
L
?

Anonymous said...

W
H
E
R
E

I
S

T
H
E

T
R
O
L
L
?

Anonymous said...

What does the size of a building (the NC Bar building) have to do with anything, sidney? The issue is, clearly, whether you were/are or are not practicing law without a license. It is a straightforward issue.

Anonymous said...

The whole notion of Daye being an alcoholic is unsupported. Sidney failed to disclose, as is his pattern, that the differential diagnosis could have been DTs or, more likely, an infectious process....as was documented. He also failed to note that Ativan had been given prophylactically since the first day.....as opposed to being started at the time when Sidney claimed the DTs diagnosis was made.....which NEVER happened.
He also fails to note that an NG tube was placed, in order to give contrast, and after the contrast, Daye vomited. When he vomited, he aspirated stomach contents. This is a very typical though dangerous complication with patients. It has absolutely nothing to do with any form of mistake on the part of the physicians.
Sidney fails , once again, to accept the truth and reality of proximate cause. The patient died as a result of complications from a stab wound inflicted by Mangum. Period.
Sidney can argue till hell freezes over.

Anonymous said...

such bullxxxx...."blatant gambit to impact the outcome of the case to (Mangum's) detriment". Reallllllly, sidney? you think the entire NC Bar, no doubt under the control of the Grand Dragon of Evil White People, Rae "the wicked one" Evans.....is trying to have Mangum thrown in the slammer by keeping a retired wingnut from trying to practice (very bad) law? Your dumbness knows no bounds, fella.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous January 17, 2013 at 4:11 AM

You have described the nifongian method of establishing guilt(which method SIDNEY follows) perfectly.

Pronounce your victim guilty and conceal and distort any evidence to the contrary.

Very nifongian, SIDNEY(which you will delusionally take as a compliment. Go ahead. It shows you are desperate for compliments)

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Excellent point, poster. Harr not only fails to respond to the Bar....he goes further and ADMITS that he was practicing law without a license. He did it initially, got warned to quit, said he would quit, and did it again. Do it a third time, and the DA will press charges. Hide and watch, as my best friend used to say.


I did concede that drafting a motion for someone else might be considered "lawyering," however, what I filed in August 2012 was a petition as a Pro Se Petitioner third party. Naturally, my argument is that that is not practicing law, no more than writing a letter to a judge.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
The whole notion of Daye being an alcoholic is unsupported. Sidney failed to disclose, as is his pattern, that the differential diagnosis could have been DTs or, more likely, an infectious process....as was documented. He also failed to note that Ativan had been given prophylactically since the first day.....as opposed to being started at the time when Sidney claimed the DTs diagnosis was made.....which NEVER happened.
He also fails to note that an NG tube was placed, in order to give contrast, and after the contrast, Daye vomited. When he vomited, he aspirated stomach contents. This is a very typical though dangerous complication with patients. It has absolutely nothing to do with any form of mistake on the part of the physicians.
Sidney fails , once again, to accept the truth and reality of proximate cause. The patient died as a result of complications from a stab wound inflicted by Mangum. Period.
Sidney can argue till hell freezes over.


Daye was administered plenty of sedatives during his hospitalization, but I am unaware of him being given any antibiotics postoperatively. So I think that the reasonable person would conclude, as did the Duke doctors, that Daye's deterioration was due to the onset of delirium tremens, which itself can be fatal.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
What does the size of a building (the NC Bar building) have to do with anything, sidney? The issue is, clearly, whether you were/are or are not practicing law without a license. It is a straightforward issue.


Straightforward, I was not practicing law when I filed two Pro Se petitions in Mangum's case as a third party. Also, writing a letter to a judge is not practicing law. Can we agree on that?

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
There is not ONE word in ANY of the documents Harr has illegally posted here that would lead to Mangum being released without a trial. She is either going to get an offer of a plea deal or not. If one is offered, she is either going to accept it or not. If she refuses a plea offer, she is going to go to trial. At that point, I would be willing to bet she will get second degree or, if she is really lucky, manslaughter. I am not aware of any documentation that a plea deal has been offered. In fact, the prosecutor AND Vann said no such offer had been made. Again, there is not one single word/documentation that Harr has thrown at the wall here....that is going to get Mangum out of jail. She is a fool, a damn fool, for listening to this halfwit and for firing not one, but two, excellent attorneys. If Harr persists and plays lawyer wannabe again, he is going to find himself in major trouble. And, no, Harr is not above the law....and, yes, the DA can and will come after him.


You are correct in guessing that the prosecutors will offer a plea deal down the road as the absence of a skeletal shell to support the charges against her is exposed.

If Mangum had been represented by competent attorneys dedicated to fighting for her, the prosecution would have folded long ago.

Anonymous said...

There is nothing in the documentation you illegally posted that supports "as did the Duke doctors, that Daye's deterioration was due to the onset of delirium tremens". Not one word. There is a process of ruling out, or differential diagnosis....are you familiar with it. as a physician? You should be. The doctor suspected DTs, AND Ativan had been given from day zero....they also suspected an infectious process "as part of the differential"...which IS documented in the record. Read the notes, sidney. There is nothing in the record to show the complete list of medications that were administered to Daye, i.e., there is no medications list. Therefore, you do NOT have any basis upon which to conclude that Mr. Daye was or was not given antibiotics. Don't try to bullxxxx, sidney, it does not work.
You filed petitions ON BEHALF OF MANGUM......whether it was with or with fee, is completely immaterial, as per the statutes. Are you having problems with your reading comprehension?
Such filings constitute the practice of law and require a license. Read NCGS 84-2.1. It's there, plain as can be.....it is NOT vague. Your actions in filing petitions are in direct conflict with the statutes. You have also given advice and counsel to Mangum, on multiple occasions, in reference to legal matters, in reference to her defense. That behavior also constitutes a violation. As Walt says, enjoy the injunction....and, if you persist, enjoy paying fines and, perhaps, spending some quality time in a jumpsuit.

Anonymous said...

The poster did not "guess that a plea deal would be offered". The poster said, IF a plea deal is offered....that is not the same as guessing that it would be offered. You have previously lied, claiming that an offer was made. None has been made.

Nifong Supporter said...


Lance the Supreme Poster of Enlightenment said...
"The State Bar can't press charges agaisnt a ham sandwich. The District Attorney can, however, but to do so against me in this instance would be a waste of time and resources."

The State Bar canseek injunctive relief (which is exactly what they are doing with you now). If they are successful, and you violate the injunction by continuing to provide legal assistance without a license,any of a number of things can happen.

This includes finding you in contempt of court or the DA
s office charging you with a Class 1 criminal misdemeanor.

A Class 1 misdemeanor can get you a fine or up to 45 days in jail, or both.

It's not something I'd take lightly, and your so-called "response" is not going to help your cause in any meaningful way.

144 paragraphs to respond to an 11 paragraph motion?

I believe you're just copying your previous legal documents and simply adding in random thoughts.

If we were to take all of the legal documents you've filed since the beginning of this blog and compare them, how much do you think we would find common in each document? Would more than 50% be a good guess? How about 75%?
Would they stand such a test?


Inform me if further elucidation is required


Here's some further elucidation for you: The response that I filed was spontaneously produced... approximately 28 hours worth of work. I did not refer to other pleadings or writings, but drafted it 100% originally. There may be some similarities in the briefs due to similarities in the cases and issues related to them.

As far as taking me to Court, I think the District Attorney has more compelling crimes to deal with prosecuting... such as murders, rapes, robberies, assaults, and other violent acts of crime. If the D.A. is looking for someone to arrest, I would recommend that he consider Dr. Clay Nichols who drafted a false report, as well as the prosecutors who conspired with him. Mangum is innocent. The criminals are on the prosecution side of this case.

Nifong Supporter said...


Walt said...
Drafting of motions for another person constitutes the practice of law. If you are not currently admitted in North Carolina or admitted pro hac vice for the Mangum case, you are practicing law without a license.

You just admitted that you drafted motions for another person. You never cease to prove the value of a law school education. Enjoy the injunction.

Walt-in-Durham


Hey, Walt.

Yes, I drafted motions for Crystal Mangum, but that incident was resolved with the State Bar hearing in July 2012. In August I drafted two Pro Se petitions as a third party in Mangum's case, and I believe that that is well within my rights and in obeyance with the law.

I did not practice law in issues not related to the first State Bar hearing, and I therefore doubt that the judge will rule in favor of the plaintiffs in this case.

Anonymous said...

You drafted two Pro Se petitions, as a third party, on behalf of Mangum. This is EXACTLY defined in NCGS 84-2.1 as the practice of law. Pro Se is immaterial, being a third party in and of itself is not the issue. You did this on behalf of Mangum. You violated the statute.
You were warned the first time you engaged in this behavior and you said you would not repeat the behavior. Your attempt to use Pro Se or third party modifiers is immaterial. You filed petitions on behalf of Mangum. You gave her advice and counsel on legal matters. You are not a licensed attorney in North Carolina.
Don't be too sure the DA will overlook this, sidney.

Anonymous said...

If you think you have not been practicing law, then you can fight the injunction and wind up in court. That's your right. And, of course, you can repeat the same behavior and see where that leads. The response you filed is worthless and will not persuade a judge to refuse to grant the injunction
Walt is right.....as is Lance

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"I did concede that drafting a motion for someone else might be considered 'lawyering,' however, what I filed in August 2012 was a petition as a Pro Se Petitioner third party. Naturally, my argument is that that is not practicing law, no more than writing a letter to a judge."

Since you are not a party to the case(your delusions about what might happen to you hould Crystal be found guilty do not establish you as a party). That means you are not capable of filing a pro se motion in the case. You were "lawyering" without a law license.

Lance the Supreme Poster of Enlightenment said...

"In August I drafted two Pro Se petitions as a third party in Mangum's case, and I believe that that is well within my rights and in obeyance with the law."

What you believe doesn't matter. You can only advocate pro se in a criminal case when you are the defendant.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"Daye was administered plenty of sedatives during his hospitalization, but I am unaware of him being given any antibiotics postoperatively."

If you believe antibiotcs would not have been administered intraoperatively and post operatively in an emergency operation on the colon, you are truly an ignorant physician. I guess you think you deserve a pass on that because you have never performed surgery in your life.

"So I think that the reasonable person would conclude, as did the Duke doctors, that Daye's deterioration was due to the onset of delirium tremens, which itself can be fatal."


You are obviously not a reasonable person and you are the only one who concluded Mr. Daye's deterioration was due to DTs. Your opinion is meaningless.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"Here's some further elucidation for you: The response that I filed was spontaneously produced... approximately 28 hours worth of work. I did not refer to other pleadings or writings, but drafted it 100% originally. There may be some similarities in the briefs due to similarities in the cases and issues related to them."

Well, one similarity shared by all the cases and documents is they show you are far from brilliant.

"As far as taking me to Court, I think the District Attorney has more compelling crimes to deal with prosecuting... such as murders, rapes, robberies, assaults, and other violent acts of crime."

One of which is the violent death of Reginald Daye at the hands of Crystal Mangum. The verdict is waiting for determination. You have provided no evidence it was self defense on Crystal's part.

"If the D.A. is looking for someone to arrest, I would recommend that he consider Dr. Clay Nichols who drafted a false report, as well as the prosecutors who conspired with him."

You have provided no evidence that Dr. Nichols was either part of a conspiracy or that he drafted a false report.

"Mangum is innocent."

That is because she has not been tried and convicted. That is pending.

"The criminals are on the prosecution side of this case."

only in your deluded, extremely less than brilliant mind.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"Hey, Walt.

Yes, I drafted motions for Crystal Mangum, but that incident was resolved with the State Bar hearing in July 2012."

So?

"In August I drafted two Pro Se petitions as a third party in Mangum's case, and I believe that that is well within my rights and in obeyance with the law."

As I and others have pointed out to you, you can not draft a pro se motion in a criminal case unless you are a party to the case. Your belief that you will suffer adverse consequences if Crystal is convicted does not establish you as a party to the case.

I did not practice law in issues not related to the first State Bar hearing,"

Yes you did.

"and I therefore doubt that the judge will rule in favor of the plaintiffs in this case."

Boy are you delusional and extremely less than brilliant.

Walt said...

Sid wrote: "In August I drafted two Pro Se petitions as a third party in Mangum's case," Another admission against interest. As Lance correctly points out, you cannot be pro se in a criminal case unless you are the defendant in said same criminal case.

" and I believe that that is well within my rights and in obeyance with the law." Not that your belief matters, but you are wrong. You are not within your rights nor are you in obeyance with the law. If you consulted a competent attorney not a disbarred, disgraced fraud who never reads his case files, you would figure that out.

Walt-in-Durham

Lance the Supreme Poster of Enlightenment said...

I do believe we've sent Sid into hiding....Or perhaps to consult with his good friend Professor Coleman...Or his fellow pro se attorney, Linwood Wilson.

I look forward to his attempts to rationalize his actions.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

You once claimed Walt in Durham was coming around to your viewpoint on Crystal and the phony Duke Rape case. Do you still think so?

Anonymous said...

Maybe SIDNEY is seeking asylum in the Ecuadorian embassy.

Anonymous said...

Ecuadorian? Since Sid's such a huge Hugo Chavez fan, it's probably the Venezuelan embassy...

Nifong Supporter said...


Lance the Supreme Poster of Enlightenment said...
I do believe we've sent Sid into hiding....Or perhaps to consult with his good friend Professor Coleman...Or his fellow pro se attorney, Linwood Wilson.

I look forward to his attempts to rationalize his actions.


Me go into hiding? Shirley, you joust. I'm still here, however, keep in mind that I do not have internet at home... I must go to the library and the library is not always open. Also, I only have access online for about an hour a day, if I choose to walk to the library. Sometimes a deluge in rain will keep me from venturing out.

Anyway, you can put your minds at ease and rest assured that I will not go into hiding!

Break the Conspiracy said...

Sidney,

Your response to the Bar articulates your view that Crystal faces a widespread conspiracy in her quest for justice: ”With essentially the entire world against MANGUM… ”.

I hope you are able to present your arguments at a hearing. You must ensure that the hearing has extensive media coverage. Media coverage can be instrumental in increasing readership of this blog.

A few suggestions for Crystal’s case. You may wish to act quickly in case the Court grants an injunction that prohibits you from drafting legal motions or advising Crystal what legal motions to file.

1. Crystal should ask the Court to order Dr. Roberts to provide her with a written report. Unless the Court seals the report, you can post it. If the report confirms her oral statements, you can allege she is part of the conspiracy; if it confirms your view, the naysayers will have to admit you have been vindicated. I made this suggestion earlier. Crystal must be persistent.

2. Crystal should ask the Court to order prosecutors to provide her with all discovery ASAP. You realize the practice of the Durham DA's office is not to provide exculpatory evidence to defendants until after a trial date has been set. She needs evidence prosecutors are withholding to prepare her defense.

3. You must post the entire discovery file for this case, posting each page consecutively (the pages are numbered). In this way, you can overcome the cynicism of the naysayers who insist you are hiding discovery that hurts Crystal’s case.

4. Crystal should ask the Court to provide her with all discovery from the sexual assault case. You argue this vendetta prosecution is due to her role in that case. She can expose that vendetta with the incriminating evidence you insist Cooper suppressed. You must post the entire discovery file, posting each page consecutively.

5. Crystal should ask the Court to unseal her mental health records (and provide them to her if the Court rejects the motion in 3 above). You must post these records to overcome the inaccurate media portrayal of Crystal as mentally unstable.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
SIDNEY HARR:

You once claimed Walt in Durham was coming around to your viewpoint on Crystal and the phony Duke Rape case. Do you still think so?


This is what I think... Walt has enough common sense and intelligence to believe that the initial intubation of Reginald Daye on April 6, 2011 was esophageal. ... as is documented in the respiratory therapy document and the physician's History of Present Illness which I presented on my Super-Flog.

Nifong Supporter said...


Hey, Break.

Thanks for your comments. I agree with them. (I have less than four minutes left on the computer.) I have given Mangum my opinion that she should pursue Dr. Roberts in obtaining a written report.

As far as the prosecution discovery goes, there are so many pages... I guess I could put the disk online.

Will consider it.


Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"Anyway, you can put your minds at ease and rest assured that I will not go into hiding!"

Going into hiding would have been the best thing you could have done for Crystal.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"This is what I think... Walt has enough common sense and intelligence to believe that the initial intubation of Reginald Daye on April 6, 2011 was esophageal. ... as is documented in the respiratory therapy document and the physician's History of Present Illness which I presented on my Super-Flog."

You haven't documented any such thing in your super ridiculous so called flog.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"Thanks for your comments. I agree with them. (I have less than four minutes left on the computer.)"

That means you have wasted 46+ minutes of the library's time

"I have given Mangum my opinion that she should pursue Dr. Roberts in obtaining a written report."

I bet you do not agree with the court sealing it to keep it away from you.

"As far as the prosecution discovery goes, there are so many pages... I guess I could put the disk online."

And again illegally post confidential material?

You have not established what right you have to access the prosecution discovery file.

Will consider it.

Anonymous said...

The RT notes confirmed that the tube was properly positioned. You are totally incorrect.

Anonymous said...

Simple because the patient vomited is NOT a reason to assume the tube was improperly placed. In fact the notes indicate the tube WAS properly placed. What is the matter with you? Are you not familiar with intubation notation? Good lord, this is a flaming waste of time.

Anonymous said...

You have the gall to publish the highly confidential John Doe on Mr. Daye. What kind of an Axx are you? John Doe aliases are done routinely in hospitals, for a variety of SECURITY reasons. You have no ethics, no morals and certainly no professsional background. Anybody who would violate a dead man's privacy in this manner is beyond contempt. I know Mangum got these records and I know she gave them to you. What an absolutely sorry-assed thing to do. Your attempts at self inflation and attention-getting leave even fundamental security measures disregarded. Shame on you.

Anonymous said...

Break made a great suggestion. Crystal should obtain her own mental health records, get the court to unseal them and make them available to Sid. Sid can prove that he and kenhyderal are correct and the biased media has falsely described Crystal as mentally unstable.

Anonymous said...

I look forward to the next court appearance of Mangum this week.

Anonymous said...

I recently read an article about Fred Phelps, the so-called pastor of the infamous Westboro Baptist Church. You know the crowd...."God hates fags"...protestors...who attempt to protest at funerals of deceased soldiers. Interesting to compare Phelps to Harr. Both claim to have professional credentials from the past, yet both are unwilling to provide details of their "professional" experience. Both claim there is a conspiracy at work which focuses on them and which grows ever larger. Both claim the perps of the conspiracy are fundamentally revenge-seeking and corrupt. Both claim that they, individually, are superior to others in their intellect. Both use hateful language in their rhetoric against others. Both are racist. Phelps is visciously homophobic' Harr, though claiming not to be homophobic, refuses to disassociate from the known bigot, victoria peterson. Both focus on themselves, repeatedly, in their attempts to gain attention for their "causes". Both are beyond contempt in their willingness to use unethical tactics for their own purposes.
Phelps and Harr, two of a kind.

Anonymous said...

What Sidney purposely avoids and ignores is the established principle of proximate cause. He has been reminded about proximate cause repeatedly by true legal professionals. Mr. Daye died of complications from a stab wound inflicted by Crystal Mangum. Period. Mangum cannot escape responsibility for killing Daye. What she can argue is not whether she should be held responsible for his death....but whether the act of stabbing him was one of self defense. So far, there is virtually no verifiable evidence that she acted in self defense. To me, the most damning piece of evidence against her claim of self defense is the ABSENCE of physical evidence of the beating she claims Daye administered. I also question why she did not immediately claim self defense and why she only brought forward the story about a self defensive act AFTER Daye died. That both were drinking is apparent. That both were arguing is apparent. That both were angry is apparent. BUT, Mangum is going to have to come up with something besides her personal story of self defense in order to convince a jury that she is completely innocent and should go free. I think she is looking at something less than first degree murder.......but scot free on self defense? No way.

Anonymous said...

Perhaps the Raleigh Library is closed today in honor of the Martin Luther King Observance. If so, all well and good. SIDNEY HARR will not get a chance today to blaspheme the memory of Dr. King by claiming Dr. King would have supported his racially motivated vendettas.

Anonymous said...

Harr likes to frame the NC Bar's actions as an attempt to lynch Mangum by removing her personal savior, himself. un-bleepin-believable. this is what I love about harr and his antics.....a never failing sideshow of clowns, balloons, and silliness.
meantime, mangum's date with a jury draws closer.....

Anonymous said...

W
H
E
R
E

I
S

T
H
E

T
R
O
L
L
?

Anonymous said...

W
H
E
R
E

I
S

K
E
N
N
Y

T
H
E

T
R
O
L
L
?

Anonymous said...

Dr. Harr: It's time to exercize your responsibility as the host of this blog and censor garbage like the preceeding posts, random and unrelated to the discussion, the repetitive chanting and sing-song idiocy that keeps getting interjected and especially the dispicable racist posts that slander African Americans.

guiowen said...

Oh God!
Not the anonymous troll again!

Walt said...

Sid wrote: "This is what I think... Walt has enough common sense and intelligence to believe that the initial intubation of Reginald Daye on April 6, 2011 was esophageal. ... as is documented in the respiratory therapy document and the physician's History of Present Illness which I presented on my Super-Flog."

Not so fast Sid. While it is true that Crystal is being held too long without trial, it does not follow that is an injustice. Much of the delay has been caused by her frequent changes in attorney and frivolous motions filed by you.

You raise an interesting fact issue about medical error, however, you do not address the law surrounding subsequent medical error. If you were a lawyer, you would understand that problem for Crystal. Medical error, does not get her off. So no, I am not convinced of Crystal's innocence.

As to the hoax, that's all on Crystal and Mike. They cooked up a false claim and prosecuted it to the limit.

Walt-in-Durham

Anonymous said...

Sid is trying to make the claim that Daye died because of what he defines as a medical error with intubation. Please remember that the documentation shows that Daye was ALREADY in respiratory distress and failing before the intubation. He was also delirious, with fever, and other signs of a possible infection. Sid wants to assume his delirium was due to DTs. DTs were suspected, as was infection, during the rule-out assessment. There is NOTHING, not one word, in the documentation that draws any conclusion that Daye was, in fact, suffering with DTs, just as there is nothing in the documentation that shows a definitive finding of an infection. Ativan had been given since post-op daye one, NOT given temporally as a result of suspicion of DTs, as Harr claimed. With the wounds, surgery, etc, it is FAR more likely that Daye had developed an infection and was heading south.
The KEY point here is that Daye died of complications from the stab wound delivered by Mangum. She is not going to escape responsibility for the stabbing. Her self defense case is very weak. There is no evidence of a beating. There is no history of violence in Daye's life except a years-earlier charge that was dropped. He has witnesses who say he was NOT violent with them. So far, there is no plea deal on the table that has been documented. She is in deep doo-doo and Harr has hung her so far out to dry that it is pathetic

Lance the Supreme Poster of Enlightenment said...

Isn't Crystal due in court today?

Anonymous said...

Yes, I think so. Quasi, at LS, posted recently about the date. I guess these calendars are pretty flexible. Didn't Mangum try to say she needed to be released from jail so she could be her own lawyer? Now, there's a strategy, right!

Anonymous said...

Hey walt, what's the process for granting the prelimin. and permanent injunction against Harr? Court timing? etc....

Anonymous said...

I recently managed to get my hands on a copy of the book that was supposedly written by Mangum. (with Vincent Clark, the opportunistic clown). Read every word though it was a painful experience. The "book" is, first and foremost, a collection of distortions, victim whines, outright lies and excuses. To say it is poorly written is similar to saying the Pope lacks sex appeal. Mangum is not just emotionally immature. She is clearly without the ability to feel remorse or concern for others. I worry about the impact of her behavior on her children more than anything other aspect of this whole sorry decade long case.
Whatever you do, refrain from actually buying this book. Find it at Goodwill or wherever, if you wish. I read it because I wanted to know how she would frame herself. True to form, is all I can......

Walt said...

"Hey walt, what's the process for granting the prelimin. and permanent injunction against Harr? Court timing? etc...."

More or less the same as other states that have adopted the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure approach. In NC, we have merged law and equity. Thus, seeking an injunction is begun like every lawsuit with a complaint setting forth the reason why there will be irreparable harm if one is not granted. If a Preliminary restraining order is sought without notice, there has to be a hearing within 10 days. If the suit just seeks a permanent injunction, then there is no deadline and the normal timelines for answering apply. If memory serves, Rule 65 covers injunctions.

I will not comment about Sid's case specifically. He's making a fool of himself all on his own. I wouldn't want to get in his way.

Walt-in-Durham

Anonymous said...

So, I think the committee asking for a preliminary order and that would mean a hearing within ten days. thanks, walk. always helpful to hear from somebody who actually knows what he or she is talking about

Anonymous said...

LS reports that Mangum is due in court Thursday. The court calendar seems to change frequently so who knows.... Perhaps Sidney Harr will attempt to practice law without a license yet again. As the stomach turns.....only in Durham.

Anonymous said...

I noticed the Bar request for a preliminary and permanent injunction was filed December 4th. Does the ten day period for a hearing start, day one, on the date filed? If so, one would assume there has already been a hearing, at least on the matter of the preliminary injunction. Walt or Lance, is this the typical process? IHarr has filed what he claims is a response and mentions that a hearing will occur.....as though one has not yet occurred......or had not, as of the date of his last super-flop. Are these hearings public?

Walt said...

"I noticed the Bar request for a preliminary and permanent injunction was filed December 4th. Does the ten day period for a hearing start, day one, on the date filing."

Sid can feel free to correct this, but I don't think the bar asked for a temporary restraining order without notice. Thus, there is no need for a 10 day hearing. Normal civil deadlines apply. In NC the count actually starts the day after filing.

"Are these hearings public?"

Yes they are. In civil court almost all hearings that do not involve juvenile custody are public. (Even some child custody hearings are public depending on how counsel are inclined.) The other exception is when civil evidence is presented "under seal." There are times when trade secrets are being litigated that the parties want some secrecy. Most lawyers will tell you that is very rare. The point is, if you cannot settle your differences and have to go to court, somebody's probably going to be able to find out what's going on. Live with it.

Walt-in-Durham

Anonymous said...

ok, and thanks, Walt. I assume there is a difference, then, between a preliminary as well as permanent injunction....and.....a temporary restraining order without notice. I made an assumption the word "preliminary" translated to "temporary", as in.....make him stop it now, and we will argue about stopping it permanently , in court, later. anyway, thanks for the clarification.

Walt said...

There are actually three.

1. Temporary Restraining Order - given without notice and good for only 10 days. Thereafter, a hearing must take place to determine if the TRO will continue as a preliminary injunction. Otherwise the TRO is dissolved.

2. Preliminary Injunction - after notice and hearing continues until the trial. The test for granting a Preliminary Injunction: is the petitioner more likely than not to succeed at trial.

3. Permanent Injunction - granted only after a full trial in the matter. Heard by a judge only. No jury trial right as this is an equitable remedy. (At common law, equitable remedies were heard by the Chancery Court and no right to a jury. Think stuffy old English judges in funny hats with nasal accents.)

I think Tennessee still has a Chancery Court. They grant divorces and handle probate and of course the rare injunction. NC merged law and equity many moons ago. We have handed probate jurisdiction over to the Clerk (Clark in merry old England) but divorces and injunctions are handled in civil court.

Anonymous said...

yep got it. thanks, walt

Anonymous said...

So, Walt, Harr will plead his case for being allowed an exception to the law, and representing Mangum, in court, as I read this response to the Bar committee's request for an injunction. Bizarre!

Nifong Supporter said...


Walt said...
"Hey walt, what's the process for granting the prelimin. and permanent injunction against Harr? Court timing? etc...."

More or less the same as other states that have adopted the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure approach. In NC, we have merged law and equity. Thus, seeking an injunction is begun like every lawsuit with a complaint setting forth the reason why there will be irreparable harm if one is not granted. If a Preliminary restraining order is sought without notice, there has to be a hearing within 10 days. If the suit just seeks a permanent injunction, then there is no deadline and the normal timelines for answering apply. If memory serves, Rule 65 covers injunctions.

I will not comment about Sid's case specifically. He's making a fool of himself all on his own. I wouldn't want to get in his way.

Walt-in-Durham


Hey, Walt!! I used to consider you the voice of reason amongst the Naysayers, Non-believers, ill-willers, and Nifong-Detractors, but after reading your comments above, I may have to reconsider!!!

Anyway, the State Bar has filed a Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings... in other words, it doesn't want to face me in open court. (I can't blame them.) Anyway, I've been working on my response, so that is why I have not been commenting recently.

The Wake County Court has set the date of February 18, 2013 at 10:00 am for the hearing on the Bar's Motion. As time for the hearing nears, I'll give additional info regarding the location within the Courthouse.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
LS reports that Mangum is due in court Thursday. The court calendar seems to change frequently so who knows.... Perhaps Sidney Harr will attempt to practice law without a license yet again. As the stomach turns.....only in Durham.


You are correct about her appearance in Court. It's scheduled for today, Thursday, January 24, 2013 at 11:15am... two minutes from now.

I am in Raleigh, and have no intention of unlawfully representing Ms. Mangum as it is against the law... and I am a law-abiding citizen.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
You have the gall to publish the highly confidential John Doe on Mr. Daye. What kind of an Axx are you? John Doe aliases are done routinely in hospitals, for a variety of SECURITY reasons. You have no ethics, no morals and certainly no professsional background. Anybody who would violate a dead man's privacy in this manner is beyond contempt. I know Mangum got these records and I know she gave them to you. What an absolutely sorry-assed thing to do. Your attempts at self inflation and attention-getting leave even fundamental security measures disregarded. Shame on you.


In other words, you have no problem with the Durham police and prosecutors using a degrading slang term as a reference for Daye? That is the main issue. You diverge.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Dr. Harr: It's time to exercize your responsibility as the host of this blog and censor garbage like the preceeding posts, random and unrelated to the discussion, the repetitive chanting and sing-song idiocy that keeps getting interjected and especially the dispicable racist posts that slander African Americans.


If I censored all of the garbage comments on this site, the only comments would be from kenhyderal, Break, and myself. That would be too boring. Enlightening, but boring.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
The RT notes confirmed that the tube was properly positioned. You are totally incorrect.


If Daye's initial intubation was properly placed, then why was it removed and he then re-intubated when CPR was instituted? Yes, the initial intubation was esophageal, as was reported in the physician's History of Present Illness!!

Sorry, but you can't change history.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Simple because the patient vomited is NOT a reason to assume the tube was improperly placed. In fact the notes indicate the tube WAS properly placed. What is the matter with you? Are you not familiar with intubation notation? Good lord, this is a flaming waste of time.


Daye vomited prior to intubation, probably due in part to nausea associated with the contrast agent that was administered into his stomach via a nasogastric tube.

His emesis was the main consideration for intubation in the first place... to protect his airway from any further possible aspiration and to administer high concentrations of oxygen.

Unfortunately, however, the initial intubation was esophageal and led to his cardiac arrest!
-- Harr Med School 101

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
I recently read an article about Fred Phelps, the so-called pastor of the infamous Westboro Baptist Church. You know the crowd...."God hates fags"...protestors...who attempt to protest at funerals of deceased soldiers. Interesting to compare Phelps to Harr. Both claim to have professional credentials from the past, yet both are unwilling to provide details of their "professional" experience. Both claim there is a conspiracy at work which focuses on them and which grows ever larger. Both claim the perps of the conspiracy are fundamentally revenge-seeking and corrupt. Both claim that they, individually, are superior to others in their intellect. Both use hateful language in their rhetoric against others. Both are racist. Phelps is visciously homophobic' Harr, though claiming not to be homophobic, refuses to disassociate from the known bigot, victoria peterson. Both focus on themselves, repeatedly, in their attempts to gain attention for their "causes". Both are beyond contempt in their willingness to use unethical tactics for their own purposes.
Phelps and Harr, two of a kind.


Frankly, I can't appreciate the comparisons. To me, Phelps and Harr are as different as night and day. I do not have time to elucidate as my computer minutes have waned down to a precious few seconds.


Anonymous said...

SDNEY HARR:

"Hey, Walt!! I used to consider you the voice of reason amongst the Naysayers, Non-believers, ill-willers, and Nifong-Detractors, but after reading your comments above, I may have to reconsider!!!"

I do not think Walt will lose any sleep over that.

"Anyway, the State Bar has filed a Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings... in other words, it doesn't want to face me in open court. (I can't blame them.) Anyway, I've been working on my response, so that is why I have not been commenting recently."

Boy are you delusional.

"The Wake County Court has set the date of February 18, 2013 at 10:00 am for the hearing on the Bar's Motion. As time for the hearing nears, I'll give additional info regarding the location within the Courthouse."

I do not think many people are interested enough to go to the court house and see you make a fool of yourself.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"I am in Raleigh, and have no intention of unlawfully representing Ms. Mangum as it is against the law... and I am a law-abiding citizen."

Yet you practice law without a license, you illegally publish confidential infotmation on your blog. That you are a law abiding citizen is another lie for which you get credit.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"In other words, you have no problem with the Durham police and prosecutors using a degrading slang term as a reference for Daye? That is the main issue. You diverge."

Please specify what the term was and the context in which t was used.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"Unfortunately, however, the initial intubation [of Reginald Daye] was esophageal and led to his cardiac arrest!"

The original intubation was not esophageal.

"-- Harr Med School 101"

The graduates of which have the equivalent of a 5th grade education, a very low quality 5th grade education.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"Frankly, I can't appreciate the comparisons."

That is because you are delusional.

"To me, Phelps and Harr are as different as night and day."

No you aren't. You are both narcissistic sociopaths who blasphme by condemning people you do not like in the name of God Almighty.

"I do not have time to elucidate as my computer minutes have waned down to a precious few seconds."

The end of another hour of wasted computer time at the Raleigh public library.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"If Daye's initial intubation was properly placed, then why was it removed and he then re-intubated when CPR was instituted? Yes, the initial intubation was esophageal, as was reported in the physician's History of Present Illness!!"

The notes contemporary with the intubation document that the et tube was placed in the trachea.

"Sorry, but you can't change history."

So why are you trying to by proclaiming that the et tube was improperly placed?

Lance the Supreme Poster of Enlightenment said...

"To me, Phelps and Harr are as different as night and day."

Well, Fred Phelps actually DOES have a law degree.

Walt said...

Sid wrote: "Anyway, the State Bar has filed a Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings... in other words, it doesn't want to face me in open court."

Errrr....no. What that does mean is you admitted a violation of the rules in your reply. Under our law, where there are no matierial issues of fact after the close of pleadings, the parties are entitled to move immediately to judgment. Your reply continues to illustrate the value of a legal education.

Walt-in-Durham

kenhyderal said...

Crystal Mangum's 6th Amendment Rights are being violated. Everyone in North Carolina should be concerned.

Lance the Supreme Poster of Enlightenment said...

"Crystal Mangum's 6th Amendment Rights are being violated. Everyone in North Carolina should be concerned."

If Crystal had decided to keep her lawyer(s), rather than (finally) deciding to defend herself pro se, she may have gone to trial already.

With that said, I agree with you. I think must other posters here do as well.

KHF Supporter said...

Agreed. North Carolina routinely fails to provide speedy trials to defendants.

Sidney's critics are far more consistent than is Sidney in assessing the failings of the justice system.

Anonymous said...

I agree Mangum has waited too long to go to trial. However it is impossible to determine just exactly how much of the delay has been caused by her idiotic decisions to fire two lawyers and to be led around by Harr. There is no question the trial should have already happened. BUT the stupidity of firing good lawyers and now whining because she wants to go to the NCCU library....is just, well, beyond description. This is a murder trial, folks. ....not a damn parking ticket! Thank god she won't be able to appeal on the basis of incompetent counsel........
I wish the judge could force Mangum to have a lawyer and I wish he could bar her from any contact with Harr and the bigot Peterson. This is not possible, I know.....but I wish it could happen. Mangum needs Shella or Vann

Anonymous said...

Right on kennyhyderal.

Anonymous said...

Mark it down, July 8 is the big day. Maybe Kenny will make an appearance.

kenhyderal said...

Firing her Lawyers has caused no delay. The delay is solely because the prosecution does not want to go to trial; hoping to coerse Crystal to go for a plea bargain. From what I understand this is typical of the North Carolina Justice System. And besides, Court appointed attornys always like to bargain for a plea (Same pay less work and no risk losing a case to affect their reputation.

Anonymous said...

KENHYDERAL:

"Firing her Lawyers has caused no delay. The delay is solely because the prosecution does not want to go to trial; hoping to coerse Crystal to go for a plea bargain. From what I understand this is typical of the North Carolina Justice System. And besides, Court appointed attornys always like to bargain for a plea (Same pay less work and no risk losing a case to affect their reputation."

Hypocrisy, thy name is KENHYDERAL.

You moan about what has happened to Crystal, just about all of which she has brought upon herself.

But you approve of DA NIFONG's prosecution of innocent men, which prosecution consisted of repeated efforts not only to deny them a speedy trial but also to deny them a fair and objective trial.

Walt said...

Kenhydral wrote: "Firing her Lawyers has caused no delay."

Wrong. Each fight with her lawyers caused a delay while they first tried to work out the dispute with the client and then filed a motion to withdraw, calender that motion and have it heard. Then new counsel had to review the file and start the defense from scratch. More delay. Repeat a second time and more delay.

"The delay is solely because the prosecution does not want to go to trial; hoping to coerse Crystal to go for a plea bargain. From what I understand this is typical of the North Carolina Justice System."

A tactic you fully approved of when Nifong was doing so.

"And besides, Court appointed attornys always like to bargain for a plea (Same pay less work and no risk losing a case to affect their reputation.)"

Not for contract public defenders like Vann and Shella. They are paid by the hour. More hours = more pay.

Anon at 3:51 AM seems to have you figured out.

Walt-in-Durham

Nifong Supporter said...


Walt said...
Sid wrote: "Anyway, the State Bar has filed a Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings... in other words, it doesn't want to face me in open court."

Errrr....no. What that does mean is you admitted a violation of the rules in your reply. Under our law, where there are no matierial issues of fact after the close of pleadings, the parties are entitled to move immediately to judgment. Your reply continues to illustrate the value of a legal education.

Walt-in-Durham


I did not admit any violations of law. I do not consider filing a Pro Se Petition as a third party to be a violation of law.

Face it, Walt, the State Bar doesn't want no parts of me!

Nifong Supporter said...


kenhyderal said...
Firing her Lawyers has caused no delay. The delay is solely because the prosecution does not want to go to trial; hoping to coerse Crystal to go for a plea bargain. From what I understand this is typical of the North Carolina Justice System. And besides, Court appointed attornys always like to bargain for a plea (Same pay less work and no risk losing a case to affect their reputation.


kenhyderal, you are absolutely correct, and your enlightenment deserves repeating. Not only does the prosecution not want to take their bogus and baseless case to court, but it also wants to have Crystal Mangum serve as much time in jail as possible. And the longer she is in jail, they figure it will help her accept a plea deal.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
SDNEY HARR:

"Hey, Walt!! I used to consider you the voice of reason amongst the Naysayers, Non-believers, ill-willers, and Nifong-Detractors, but after reading your comments above, I may have to reconsider!!!"

I do not think Walt will lose any sleep over that.

"Anyway, the State Bar has filed a Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings... in other words, it doesn't want to face me in open court. (I can't blame them.) Anyway, I've been working on my response, so that is why I have not been commenting recently."

Boy are you delusional.

"The Wake County Court has set the date of February 18, 2013 at 10:00 am for the hearing on the Bar's Motion. As time for the hearing nears, I'll give additional info regarding the location within the Courthouse."

I do not think many people are interested enough to go to the court house and see you make a fool of yourself.


Hah! Are you kidding? Naysayers, Non-believers, Ill-willers, Nifong-detractors and others of your ilk would pay to see me make a fool of myself in court. But you're smart enough to know that won't happen. You won't want to go to court because you couldn't bear to see me dismantle the State Bar and embarrass it! Such a scene would probably make you break down and cry right in the courtroom.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
I agree Mangum has waited too long to go to trial. However it is impossible to determine just exactly how much of the delay has been caused by her idiotic decisions to fire two lawyers and to be led around by Harr. There is no question the trial should have already happened. BUT the stupidity of firing good lawyers and now whining because she wants to go to the NCCU library....is just, well, beyond description. This is a murder trial, folks. ....not a damn parking ticket! Thank god she won't be able to appeal on the basis of incompetent counsel........
I wish the judge could force Mangum to have a lawyer and I wish he could bar her from any contact with Harr and the bigot Peterson. This is not possible, I know.....but I wish it could happen. Mangum needs Shella or Vann


Mangum should've hired Shella and Vann long before she did because they are more interested in protecting the medical examiner who lied in his autopsy report, and Duke University Hospital which was directly responsible for Daye's death... with an esophageal intubation. Vann has done all he could to prevent Mangum from receiving a written report from Dr. Christena Roberts, who, likewise lacks Nifongian courage and refuses to put anything in writing.

Nifong Supporter said...


OOps. Major mistake. I meant to say "fired" instead of "hired" in the previous comment. My bad.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"I did not admit any violations of law. I do not consider filing a Pro Se Petition as a third party to be a violation of law."

In other words you believe you are above the laws you have violated

"Face it, Walt, the State Bar doesn't want no parts of me!"

It would be better for Crystal if Crystal wanted no part of you.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"kenhyderal, you are absolutely correct,"

No he isn't.

"and your enlightenment deserves repeating."

What enlightenment?

"Not only does the prosecution not want to take their bogus and baseless case to court, but it also wants to have Crystal Mangum serve as much time in jail as possible. And the longer she is in jail, they figure it will help her accept a plea deal."

Boy are you deluded.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"Hah! Are you kidding? Naysayers, Non-believers, Ill-willers, Nifong-detractors and others of your ilk would pay to see me make a fool of myself in court."

No we wouldn't. We read your posts and experience for free you making a fool of yourself every time you pot.

"But you're smart enough to know that won't happen."

You haven't shown yourself capable of any legal feats of awe. Your legal feats are more awful than awe inspiring.

"You won't want to go to court because you couldn't bear to see me dismantle the State Bar and embarrass it!"

You are incapable of dismantling a jigsaw puzzle, let alone the NC state board. So far you have failed laughably in your efforts yo dismantle the state's case against Crystal.

"Such a scene would probably make you break down and cry right in the courtroom."

Perhaps - cry out of for you for the laughable fool you will be making of yourself

kenhyderal said...

@ Walt @ 6: 35 AM http://www.ncmoratorium.org/News.aspx?li=6585

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"Mangum should've hired Shella and Vann long before she did because they are more interested in protecting the medical examiner who lied in his autopsy report, and Duke University Hospital which was directly responsible for Daye's death... with an esophageal intubation."

Boy are you delusional.

"Vann has done all he could to prevent Mangum from receiving a written report from Dr. Christena Roberts, who, likewise lacks Nifongian courage and refuses to put anything in writing."

You are even more delusional. Dr. Roberts' report would affirm Dr. Nichols' report. You are really p---e off because Dr. Roberts has the integrity to blow you off.

Nifongian courage was manifested when corrupt DA NIFONG refused to dismiss the obviously bogus case against the innocent, falsely accused Lacrosse players because he FEARED losing the support of the black electorate and losing his job.

It is poetic justice that he lost it all anyway.

Anonymous said...

KENHYDERAL:

http://www.ncmoratorium.org/News.aspx?li=6585.

So what. If they are working by the hour, they still make more money the more hours they work.

Irrelevant, thy name is KENHYDERAL.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"OOps. Major mistake. I meant to say 'fired' instead of 'hired' in the previous comment. My bad."

Crystal's biggest oops was in not telling you to take a hike to Dubai when you urged her to represent herself.

Anonymous said...

It seems that SIDNEY HARR has again subjected another library to an hour's worth of abuse.

Anonymous said...

Correction:

SIDNEY HARR:

"Hah! Are you kidding? Naysayers, Non-believers, Ill-willers, Nifong-detractors and others of your ilk would pay to see me make a fool of myself in court."

No we wouldn't. We read your posts and experience for free you making a fool of yourself every time you pot.

"But you're smart enough to know that won't happen."

You haven't shown yourself capable of any legal feats of awe. Your legal feats are more awful than awe inspiring.

"You won't want to go to court because you couldn't bear to see me dismantle the State Bar and embarrass it!"

You are incapable of dismantling a jigsaw puzzle, let alone the NC state board. So far you have failed laughably in your efforts yo dismantle the state's case against Crystal.

"Such a scene would probably make you break down and cry right in the courtroom."

Perhaps - cry out of PITY for you for the laughable fool you will be making of yourself

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

Anonymous @ 10: 09 said: "So what. If they are working by the hour, they still make more money the more hours they work"........ At the expense of time they could of spent working for their private clients @ 200.00 /hr

Anonymous said...

KENHYDERAL:

"Anonymous @ 10: 09 said: "So what. If they are working by the hour, they still make more money the more hours they work"........ At the expense of time they could of spent working for their private clients @ 200.00 /hr "

That presumes they have private clients.

Anonymous said...

According to the appropriately named Liestoppers, Crystal goes on trial on July 8.

Plenty of time for the NC State Bar to get an injunction to force the delusional SIDNEY HARR to butt out.

kenhyderal said...

And continued violation of Crystal's 6th Amendment Rights

Anonymous said...

KENHYDERAL:

"And continued violation of Crystal's 6th Amendment Rights".

This from someone who believes the men whom Crystal falsely accused of rape deserved no civil rights.

I say again, hypocrisy thy name is KENHYDERAL.

Lance the Supreme Poster of Enlightenment said...

"I did not admit any violations of law"

You clearly admitted to filing 2 writs of mandamus in August.

"I do not consider filing a Pro Se Petition as a third party to be a violation of law."

There's what you believe and there's the law.

The law states that you can only file pro se in a criminal case when you are the defendant.

Ignorance of the law is, as they say, no excuse.

Consider yourself enlightened

Anonymous said...

On January 24, Superior Court Judge Orlando Hudson denied Mangum’s requests to have her $200,000 bond reduced, her charges dismissed and her release to electronic monitoring.

“I’ve been through all this before with you,” Hudson said Thursday at Mangum’s fifth bond hearing.

Crystal Mangum’s trial date on first-degree murder charges has been set for July 8, and she will remain in jail until then.

Read more here

Anonymous said...

I see that Kenny is back and still trying to impress everyone by tossing around concepts that he knows nothing about, such as the Sixth Amendment.

Anonymous said...


kenhyderal said...
"Crystal Mangum's 6th Amendment Rights are being violated. Everyone in North Carolina should be concerned."

January 24, 2013 at 2:03 PM




Now Kenny is an expert on the Sixth Amendment. Here's what he was saying a few months ago:

kenhyderal said...
"I'm no student of the U.S. Constitution but how is the 6th Ammendment interpreted?"

August 28, 2012 at 8:42 PM

kenhyderal said...

Since that time I've made an effort to enlighten myself. Are there posters here who disagree Crystal's Constiutional right to a speedy trial has been violated.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 1:43 said: "This from someone who believes the men whom Crystal falsely accused of rape deserved no civil rights".......
I believe no such thing. Firstly, in the case of Finnerty and Seligmann, making mistakes on a flawed photo line-up does not constitute a false accusation and secondly I believe all persons, including those guilty of a crime, deserve civil rights

guiowen said...

Kenhyderal,
Why don't you stop whining?
If you're really worried about Crystal, go to Durham and DO something!
But you'd rather loll around on the beach some place in Arabia, telling us all how Sidney is taking care of everything. If you're really Crystal's friend, then you're crazy to let this happen. I don't know what these family responsibilities are that you claim you have, but frankly, on the basis of what you do (as opposed to what you say), I would guess your mother took your passport away and won't return it.

Anonymous said...

KENHYDERAL:

"Since that time I've made an effort to enlighten myself. Are there posters here who disagree Crystal's Constiutional right to a speedy trial has been violated."

You raise questions as to what you read on this blog. Posters like Walt in Durham and Lance, for example, have posted that they decry NC's failure to provide Crystal a speedy trial.

Anonymous said...

KENHYDERAL:

"

Anonymous @ 1:43 said: "This from someone who believes the men whom Crystal falsely accused of rape deserved no civil rights".......
I believe no such thing."

Yes you do.

"Firstly, in the case of Finnerty and Seligmann, making mistakes on a flawed photo line-up does not constitute a false accusation"

Considering that Crystal could have said, I don't recognize anyone, yes it does.

"and secondly I believe all persons, including those guilty of a crime, deserve civil rights".

Considering you approve of DA NIFONG's wrongful prosecution, no you don't. There was no evidence, I say again, no evidence a crime had happened. Yet DA NIFONG prosecuted anyway.

Anonymous said...

kenhyderal said...
"Since that time I've made an effort to enlighten myself."

January 25, 2013 at 9:09 PM


Bahahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahahaha



Anonymous said...


kenhyderal said...
Crystal Mangum's 6th Amendment Rights are being violated. Everyone in North Carolina should be concerned.

January 24, 2013 at 2:03 PM




Right on kenhyderal. I stand 100% behind my friend Crystal, who is truly a victim of the totally corrupt North Carolina justice system. Even though she is completely innocent, the cruel and unusual punishment of being separated from her children provides a powerful inducement for her to accept a plea bargain. Doing this to a Mother is the heighth of wickedness. Any Mother will understand this. In Canada the failure, by now, of the prosecution to bring these capital charges to court would have resulted in a Judge throwing them out. And if the delay was caused by her Attorney, that Lawyer would have been censured and given a deadline to prepare her defense. Unless, that is, he could somehow convince the Judge he needed more time. This practice of extreme over-charging, setting exorbinant bail, delaying the proceedings for months and months, then offering a plea bargain for time served is completely immoral unjust and a blight on the State and on the entire Nation.

Malek Williams
Hillside H.S.
Class of 1996

Anonymous said...

KEN-malek-HYDER-Williams-AL is back.

Anonymous said...

Horse hockey. No plea deal has been offered. Sister wold have gone to trial by now if Harr hadn't played junior lawyer

Anonymous said...

Wake up North Carolina and recognize the travesty. Crystal has been separated from her children and lost custody of two of them because of this bogus capital murder charge. She has been held in custody with no movement of her case for months and it has been suggested that if she doesn't cop a plea, they will not bring her case to trial until July of 2013. The price for her to get justice will be many more months of agonizing separation from her children. Exploiting a Mother's love for her kids in this way is beyond evil.

Malek Williams
Hillside H.S.
Class of 1996

Anonymous said...

KEN-Malek_hyder-Williams-AL strikes again with the impact of a hurtling piece of popcorn.

guiowen said...

anonymous (the pseudo-Malek) said:
"And if the delay was caused by her Attorney, that Lawyer would have been censured and given a deadline to prepare her defense."
Great! Let's see how CGM is censured for causing delays.

Anonymous said...

guiowen said...
anonymous (the pseudo-Malek) said:
"And if the delay was caused by her Attorney, that Lawyer would have been censured and given a deadline to prepare her defense."
Great! Let's see how CGM is censured for causing delays.

January 26, 2013 at 10:12 PM



Right on guiuowen

Anonymous said...

Hilarious comments about Mangum, the super mother, separated from her children. This is the woman who started a fire in front of the kids, who got roaring drunk, had the morals of an alley cat, vandalized property of others, told lies that could have sent innocent men to prison, and used men as sugar daddies rather than get a job? This one? Spare me . What a total crock. Thank sweet god these kids are out of her clutches, at least for a while.

kenhyderal said...

There is not a single grain of truth in the preceeding post. It's nothing but gossip of the worst kind. But as St.Mark said;" Surely, a harsh and horrible punishment awaits those unrepentant gossips who harm followers of Jesus.

kenhyderal said...

Guiowen said: "Great! Let's see how CGM is censured for causing delays"....... Cruelly sarcastic, as usual, I see.

kenhyderal said...

the pseudo-Malek) said: The only original thing Malek Williams has ever said was "right on kenhyderal" and you all know it so stop pretending.

guiowen said...

Oh Kenny, did I make you cry?

Anonymous said...

kenhyderal said...
There is not a single grain of truth in the preceeding post. It's nothing but gossip of the worst kind. But as St.Mark said;" Surely, a harsh and horrible punishment awaits those unrepentant gossips who harm followers of Jesus.


Bahahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahahaha

Anonymous said...

KENHYDERAL:

"There is not a single grain of truth in the preceeding post. It's nothing but gossip of the worst kind. But as St.Mark said; 'Surely, a harsh and horrible punishment awaits those unrepentant gossips who harm followers of Jesus.'"

I hope you are looking in a mirror whrn you recite that. It s applicable to the person you would be seeing.

Anonymous said...

KENHYDERAL:

"Guiowen said: "Great! Let's see how CGM is censured for causing delays"....... Cruelly sarcastic, as usual, I see."

KENHYDERAL can't stand the truth.

Anonymous said...

KENHYDERAL:

"the pseudo-Malek) said: The only original thing Malek Williams has ever said was "right on kenhyderal" and you all know it so stop pretending."

Right on, KEN-Malek-HYDER-Williams_AL.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 6:34 PM said:" I hope you are looking in a mirror whrn you recite that. It s applicable to the person you would be seeing".......... "For if any be a hearer of the word, and not a doer, he is like unto a man beholding his natural face in a glass"... St.James

guiowen said...

Well, Kenny, I don't know what you hear, but you are certainly not a doer, are you?

Anonymous said...

KENHYDERAL:

"Anonymous @ 6:34 PM said:" I hope you are looking in a mirror whrn you recite that. It s applicable to the person you would be seeing".......... "For if any be a hearer of the word, and not a doer, he is like unto a man beholding his natural face in a glass"... St.James"

That lets you out.

Anonymous said...

Right on, KEN-Malek-HYDER-Williams-AL

Anonymous said...

The troll is spouting ......bull

Anonymous said...

ah, malek, of the changed name who discarded his "slave name" (the name his parents gave him), now defends Mangum the Mother of the Year. Oh brother.....

Anonymous said...

KENHYDERAL:

Why do you not comb scripture to find something which sanctifies you for believing innocent men committed a rape which never happened.

Anonymous said...

Wow, Mangum insists on being her own lawyer and now bitches because she can't get out of jail to go to NCCU law library. I guess old sidney forgot to tell her that she wouldn't get a hall pass just by saying she wanted to be her own lawyer. golly, crystal, ya think ya might just be dumb as well as criminal?

Anonymous said...

sidney, pro se means "for yourself". You have been told repeatedly that there is no such thing as you, acting in a " pro se" capacity, on behalf of Mangum or anybody else. You screwed up. Don't admit it, continue on, make an even bigger fool of yourself and, eventually, you will wind up with in court....then, you can be the star on your own stage....which, of course, we ALL know is the real motivation behind all your antics.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
sidney, pro se means "for yourself". You have been told repeatedly that there is no such thing as you, acting in a " pro se" capacity, on behalf of Mangum or anybody else. You screwed up. Don't admit it, continue on, make an even bigger fool of yourself and, eventually, you will wind up with in court....then, you can be the star on your own stage....which, of course, we ALL know is the real motivation behind all your antics.


I filed the petition and was acting as a petitioner on my own behalf, even though the relief I sought may have directly benefitted another. The Bar is just desperately trying to get me to keep from helping Mangum. That's the bottom line.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Wow, Mangum insists on being her own lawyer and now bitches because she can't get out of jail to go to NCCU law library. I guess old sidney forgot to tell her that she wouldn't get a hall pass just by saying she wanted to be her own lawyer. golly, crystal, ya think ya might just be dumb as well as criminal?


Crystal insisted on representing herself because the only thing her two prior turncoat attorneys did was undermine her case. They conducted no investigation, withheld exculpatory evidence and prosecution discovery from her, and did everything in their power to protect the medical examiner, Duke University Hospital, and the city of Durham. She's better off representing herself... at least she has her own interests ahead of others.

Anonymous said...

bull, you violated the law. I love the way you attempt to weasel out of responsibility for your own actions. cowardly. It's always somebody else's fault, isn't it, sidney. Poor little man, blaming others, conjuring up windmills, hearing little conspiratorial voices, tilting away with your little sword. You can run, sidney, but ultimately you will not be able to hide.
The Bar does not give two hoots who you say you are "helping". You practiced law without a license. Period. You want to help Sister? Stay away from her. You won't, or course.....so the circus will continue.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Hilarious comments about Mangum, the super mother, separated from her children. This is the woman who started a fire in front of the kids, who got roaring drunk, had the morals of an alley cat, vandalized property of others, told lies that could have sent innocent men to prison, and used men as sugar daddies rather than get a job? This one? Spare me . What a total crock. Thank sweet god these kids are out of her clutches, at least for a while.


Actually, I fail to see the humor. The courts have consistently used Mangum's children to punish her, without regard for the harm it might be doing to her. It is shameless how malicious the courts have treated Mangum.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
bull, you violated the law. I love the way you attempt to weasel out of responsibility for your own actions. cowardly. It's always somebody else's fault, isn't it, sidney. Poor little man, blaming others, conjuring up windmills, hearing little conspiratorial voices, tilting away with your little sword. You can run, sidney, but ultimately you will not be able to hide.
The Bar does not give two hoots who you say you are "helping". You practiced law without a license. Period. You want to help Sister? Stay away from her. You won't, or course.....so the circus will continue.


Well, I invite you to get a ringside seat at a hearing on February 18, 2013 in the Wake County Courthouse in Raleigh. It's set for 10:00 am, or as soon thereafter as possible. I filed my response to the case this morning, and will try to have all of the pleadings online soon... perhaps in another Super-Flog.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 372   Newer› Newest»