Thursday, June 6, 2013

Potpourri of Sensational Snippets -- June 2013


Click on the panel above to access
the interactive flogazine

421 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   201 – 400 of 421   Newer›   Newest»
Anonymous said...

Hey Kenny,

Who's your daddy?

Anonymous said...

Hey Kenny,

Who's your daddy?

kenhyderal said...

Yeah, you guys would rather take the word of H.P. Thomas then the word of people with credibility like Rev.Alma Burnette or Judge Abraham Jones. Obviously you're blinded by hatred.

Anonymous said...

KENHYDERAL:

"Yeah, you guys would rather take the word of H.P. Thomas then the word of people with credibility like Rev.Alma Burnette or Judge Abraham Jones. Obviously you're blinded by hatred."

You are blinded by racism. Judge Jones, by calling Crystal a good mother in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, establishes himself as non credible. So far as Crystal, her status as a violent criminal and a non credible bad actor was established before she tried to pull off the rape hoax.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Hmmmmmm, sidney claims /daye was a woman beating drunken alcoholic. sidney claims duke killed date to get back at Mangum. Sidney claims policemen committed a crime. Sidney claims Nichols committed a crime. and kenny is spewing nonsense that a poster's statement (that Mangum sold herself) is libel?
Hilarious......


What is really going to be hilarious is when the prosecution is forced to drop all criminal charges against Mangum. You'll be rollin' in the aisles.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Harr's asks a good question. What was Mangum motive in stabbing Daye? I don't know whether the prosecutor has to prove motive. Walt? Lance?
What I am guessing......I said guessing....because, unlike Harr, I am not psychic....what I am guessing is that both Mangum and Daye were drunk. They got into a verbal argument over the usual....sex, booze and money.....then , it got physical with BOTH of them in a push and shove match. i think she took it up a notch when she grabbed a weapon, threatened him (I'm gonna Fxxx you up!"), and stabbed him. I don't think it's first degree......most likely manslaughter. The reason her claim of self defense falls apart is that there is no evidence of a beating! If this guy had been punching, beating and choking her, Mangum's face and neck would show it. The fact of the door being bashed in does NOT prove he was beating her. What it shows, along with the liquor and messed up apartment, is drunken stupidness. But, a beating? Nope. I doubt it was over the cashier's checks,unless........SHE wanted the money herself....it's not at all clear who said what over the checks......and, no, I don't give a damn what Harr says.
But, motive? How about just a stupid drunken argument where she lost her temper, picked up a deadly weapon and went after him....


Mangum admits to having a few drinks, but there is no evidence that she was heavily intoxicated. Daye, on the other hand, had a stuporous blood alcohol level... and later went into delirium tremens in the hospital.

Mangum states, that the conversation she had with a police officer in the parking lot after they returned from a birthday party sparked the argument and altercation by a jealous Reginald Daye.

Just because Mangum's face was not disfigured with bumps and bruises doesn't mean that she wasn't physically assaulted. Fact is that there are many men who are charged with assault on a female when the woman shows no sign of injury. Your premise regarding assault is faulty.

Nifong Supporter said...


HEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP!
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT!

My flogazine program had been a bit finicky recently and I spent the last couple of days trouble shooting. It has since been debugged and my next article about Duke University Hospital's cover up should be posted by week's end... hopefully by Friday.

As you were.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous at 3:24 AM said: "You are blinded by racism"............Accusing someone of racism who isn't is race baiting which is, in it's self, a racist act. Doing it repeatedly, as you are wont to do, makes it racist. You have three fingers pointing back at yourself.

Walt said...

Kenhyderal wrote: "I'm pretty sure that NC's defamation laws do not cover anonymous communications........ It's my understanding it does. Perhaps Walt can weigh in on this."

Federal law, specifically 47 USC § 230 provides broad immunity to the blogger, in this case Sid, for comments posted on his blog that are not posted by him or people operating at his direction.

Walt-in-Durham

Walt said...

kenhyderal wrote: "Yeah, you guys would rather take the word of H.P. Thomas then the word of people with credibility like Rev.Alma Burnette or Judge Abraham Jones. Obviously you're blinded by hatred."

H.P. Thomas was in a position to know of that which he spoke. In addition, there is a substantial body of evidence that Crystal was an escort/paid prostitute, although I prefer the term escort, at least before the fiasco. There is some annectotal evidence that she pursued escorting in Knoxville, Tennessee after the fiasco ended. I view Thomas as more a confirming witness to the issue of escorting.

As to her qualities as a parent, I find Judge Jones remark, inexplicable. I was in court when he rendered it. Even when he did, there was a good deal of evidence already in the record that Crystal in a fit of anger collected some of her boyfriend's clothes and shoes and set them alight in a bathtub. It may just be my midwestern upbringing, but good parents don't set their lover's clothes and shoes on fire in the home with children present.

Walt-in-Durham

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"What is really going to be hilarious is when the prosecution is forced to drop all criminal charges against Mangum. You'll be rollin' in the aisles."

We are already rolling in the aisles over your persistent deluded misreading of the situation.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"Mangum admits to having a few drinks, but there is no evidence that she was heavily intoxicated."

Yes there was. She was sleepy, incoherent and had to be roused to be read her rights.

"Daye, on the other hand, had a stuporous blood alcohol level..."

Since he was not stuporous, the lab result was probably a false lab result. If you really knew anything about lab reports you know that an erroneous report is possible. When the lab report is inconsistent with the clinical situation, the lab report is probably false.

"and later went into delirium tremens in the hospital."

No he didn't.

"Mangum states, that the conversation she had with a police officer in the parking lot after they returned from a birthday party sparked the argument and altercation by a jealous Reginald Daye."

Which version of her story was that.

"Just because Mangum's face was not disfigured with bumps and bruises doesn't mean that she wasn't physically assaulted."

In this case you said that Crystal showed evidence of a severe beating. Now you are saying there was no evidence.

"Fact is that there are many men who are charged with assault on a female when the woman shows no sign of injury. Your premise regarding assault is faulty."

Give us some specific examples. Your allegation that a woman can be beaten severely around the head and neck is more evidence you are an incompetent physician.

Anonymous said...

KENHYDERAL:

"Anonymous at 3:24 AM said: "You are blinded by racism"............Accusing someone of racism who isn't is race baiting which is, in it's self, a racist act. Doing it repeatedly, as you are wont to do, makes it racist. You have three fingers pointing back at yourself."

You insist, in spite of evidence to the contrary that Crystal was raped by Caucasians. That is race baiting. That makes you a racist.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"My flogazine program had been a bit finicky recently and I spent the last couple of days trouble shooting. It has since been debugged and my next article about Duke University Hospital's cover up should be posted by week's end... hopefully by Friday."

In other words, you again will be trying to pass nothing off as something.

Speaking of coverup, why are you covering up the details of your truncated medical career?

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 12:34 said: "You insist, in spite of evidence to the contrary that Crystal was raped by Caucasians. That is race baiting. That makes you a racist.....,....... I never us the term Caucasian except to point out that it is a discredited meaningless and archaic anthropological determination from 18th Century It's present use in the US especially by police is a euphemism for white skinned people of European ancestry especially of Germanic, Celtic and Slavic origin, quite often but not always excluding many of the Latin and Mediterranean peoples depending on their "shade". Personally I find the term and the way it's used there racist.

kenhyderal said...

Walt said: "Federal law, specifically 47 USC § 230 provides broad immunity to the blogger, in this case Sid, for comments posted on his blog that are not posted by him or people operating at his direction"....... I never suggested that Dr.Harr was legally responsible only that his "anonymous" blogger, whose identity can readily be discovered, was.

Anonymous said...

KENHYDERAL:

"Anonymous @ 12:34 said: "You insist, in spite of evidence to the contrary that Crystal was raped by Caucasians. That is race baiting. That makes you a racist.....,....... I never us the term Caucasian except to point out that it is a discredited meaningless and archaic anthropological determination from 18th Century It's present use in the US especially by police is a euphemism for white skinned people of European ancestry especially of Germanic, Celtic and Slavic origin, quite often but not always excluding many of the Latin and Mediterranean peoples depending on their "shade". Personally I find the term and the way it's used there racist."

To anyone except a blatant unrepentant racist, Caucasian is an innocuous term.

kenhyderal said...

Not to everyone. See this essay http://reinhardkargl.com/iBlog/2011/01/26/caucasian/

Anonymous said...

KENHYDERAL:

http://reinhardkargl.com/iBlog/2011/01/26/caucasian/

He,like you, is trying to make something out of nothing. Unlike you, it may not be because he is racist.

Anonymous said...

Mangum was drunk on her ass the night of the lax party..... She went to area hospitals ED , drug seeking. She was pole vaulting in less than two weeks after the non rape. She had a level 3 DUI in 2002. She damaged Walker's car and set his clothes on fire. She threatened to stab him in front of an officer. She slept with men and moved in with them indiscriminately. She killed a man. She worked for the BunnyHole escort service and allowed online photos of herself to be published......straddling a chair, wearing next to nothing. She went to stranger motel rooms to "perform".
Oh yeah Kenny real nice parenting.

Nifong Supporter said...


Walt said...
Kenhyderal wrote: "I'm pretty sure that NC's defamation laws do not cover anonymous communications........ It's my understanding it does. Perhaps Walt can weigh in on this."

Federal law, specifically 47 USC § 230 provides broad immunity to the blogger, in this case Sid, for comments posted on his blog that are not posted by him or people operating at his direction.

Walt-in-Durham


Hey, Walt. Thanks for the enlightenment. I didn't think that it would be possible that I should be held liable for substance made by commenters to my blog site. However, it is comforting to know that I am legally protected just the same.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
SIDNEY HARR:

"Mangum admits to having a few drinks, but there is no evidence that she was heavily intoxicated."

Yes there was. She was sleepy, incoherent and had to be roused to be read her rights.

"Daye, on the other hand, had a stuporous blood alcohol level..."

Since he was not stuporous, the lab result was probably a false lab result. If you really knew anything about lab reports you know that an erroneous report is possible. When the lab report is inconsistent with the clinical situation, the lab report is probably false.

"and later went into delirium tremens in the hospital."

No he didn't.

"Mangum states, that the conversation she had with a police officer in the parking lot after they returned from a birthday party sparked the argument and altercation by a jealous Reginald Daye."

Which version of her story was that.

"Just because Mangum's face was not disfigured with bumps and bruises doesn't mean that she wasn't physically assaulted."

In this case you said that Crystal showed evidence of a severe beating. Now you are saying there was no evidence.

"Fact is that there are many men who are charged with assault on a female when the woman shows no sign of injury. Your premise regarding assault is faulty."

Give us some specific examples. Your allegation that a woman can be beaten severely around the head and neck is more evidence you are an incompetent physician.


At 3 o'clock in the morning, I'm sleepy, too, but that doesn't mean I'm drunk. Point is that there was no blood alcohol level or other objective test administered after her arrest.

The reason Daye was alert although he had a stuporous blood level is because he is an alcoholic and had built up tremendous tolerance.

That he was an alcoholic and went into delirium tremens confirms that he was highly intoxicated with alcohol and that the lab results were correct.

According to police reports, clumps of Mangum's hair were found at two sites in the apartment. Photos show excoriation/puncture wounds to her face. That is objective evidence of an assault.

During the past year, two male staff members at NCCU were arrested for assault on a female wherein the "victims" had no visible lesions. Ask Walt whether or not a woman must have visible lesions in order for a man to be charged with assault on a female.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
SIDNEY HARR:

"My flogazine program had been a bit finicky recently and I spent the last couple of days trouble shooting. It has since been debugged and my next article about Duke University Hospital's cover up should be posted by week's end... hopefully by Friday."

In other words, you again will be trying to pass nothing off as something.

Speaking of coverup, why are you covering up the details of your truncated medical career?


I don't consider seventeen years to be "truncated," but in answer to your question... it's irrelevant.

Walt said...

Anonymous at 5:40 wrote: "Harr's asks a good question. What was Mangum motive in stabbing Daye? I don't know whether the prosecutor has to prove motive. Walt? Lance?"

Motive is not an element of the crimes charged.

Walt-in-Durham

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

Sid wrote: "During the past year, two male staff members at NCCU were arrested for assault on a female wherein the "victims" had no visible lesions. Ask Walt whether or not a woman must have visible lesions in order for a man to be charged with assault on a female."

It is a common to mistake the elements of a crime with evidence of a crime. Elements are what the state must prove. Evidence is how they do that. Evidence is also how the defense casts doubt.

Sid is correct that injury is not an element of assault on a female in North Carolina. St. v. Newton, 251 N.C. 151, 110 S.E.2d 810.

Under the Newton analysis, we in NC treat the attempt as seriously as the crime. Had the defendant in Newton actually inflicted harm, he would still have been charged with assault, it would have just not been styled "attempted." The Newton analysis generally holds for most crimes in NC, except murder. There we do make a distinction between attempted murder and murder. The death penalty is not available for attempted murder while it is for murder.

Walt-in-Durham

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY:

"At 3 o'clock in the morning, I'm sleepy, too, but that doesn't mean I'm drunk. Point is that there was no blood alcohol level or other objective test administered after her arrest."

SIDNEY< she admitted to drinking and was clinically intoxicated. You wouldn't realize that because you are an incompetent physician.

"The reason Daye was alert although he had a stuporous blood level is because he is an alcoholic and had built up tremendous tolerance."

If Reginald Daye was so alcoholic he could tolerate that alcohol level, his liver would have been diseased. At Autopsy, the liver was normal. More evidence the blood alcohol was a lab error.

"That he was an alcoholic and went into delirium tremens confirms that he was highly intoxicated with alcohol and that the lab results were correct."

According to the clinical records, as so many people have pointed out to you, there was no diagnosis of DTs. None so blind as those who will not see.

"According to police reports, clumps of Mangum's hair were found at two sites in the apartment. Photos show excoriation/puncture wounds to her face. That is objective evidence of an assault."

The photos, including the photos you posted, show no evidence that Mangum had been beaten about the head and neck. You are again altering your story to fit your preconceived blindness. Earlier you were claiming that Crystal had suffered a beating but showed no evidence of it.

During the past year, two male staff members at NCCU were arrested for assault on a female wherein the "victims" had no visible lesions."

What happened at NCCu has no relevance to the stabbing of Reginald Daye. Besides, you have no first hand knowledge of what happened at NCCU.

"Ask Walt whether or not a woman must have visible lesions in order for a man to be charged with assault on a female."

Irrelevant comment. Rather, ssk a competent physician, which you will probably not do because you resent competent physicians, whether or not a person beaten around the face or neck whether or not the victim would have physical findings.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"I don't consider seventeen years to be 'truncated,' but in answer to your question... it's irrelevant."

Whatever you consider is irrelevant because it is a self serving rationalization. Why not ask a competent physician whether or not a medical career of 17 years is truncated. I bet Dr. Nichols and Dr. Roberts have been practicing for a lot more than 17 years.

Retirement from Medicine 17 years after graduation from Medical School is a truncated career.

Unless it was due to something like a serious medical condition which prevented you from practicing, said truncated career is probably due to professional incompetence.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous said: Retirement from Medicine 17 years after graduation from Medical School is a truncated career........... What year did you graduate from Medical School? How many years experience do you have practicing medicine? Any poster who has medical training should first declare their name and then debate the issue with Dr. Harr as to whether the brain death of Reginald Daye was due or not due to an accidental esophageal intubation. Those of us, like myself and I suspect you, having zero qualifications, should keep our traps shut and listen to the debate Questioning Dr. Harr's Medical competence, if you yourself have no medical background, is intellectually dishonest. Dr. Harr has convinced me and unless persons with qualification who are willing to identify them self can give me reasonable arguments to the contrary, I'll stick to the explanation that Dr. Harr has put forth. It's interesting to note that Dr. Roberts, even when told by a Judge to produce a written report, seems unwilling to put her name to one and that neither Duke Hospital or Dr. Nichols will publically challenge Dr. Harr's speculation.

Anonymous said...

Harr has never established HIS credentials Kenny. He is not qualified to make judgments,about Daye and the record. Further there have been several physicians who have commented and NONE agree with him. Roberts was NOT instructed by a judge to produce a written report. If you knew anything about the law and legal proceedings in court, you would understand this. Roberts found nothing to support a claim of medical error, or worse, by Duke. Harr 's silly claim that Roberts was part of the nonexistent conspiracy is bullshit.
There medical records which Harr illegally posted or at least, unethically, posted......show NO evidence of improper tube placement.
Walt, Harr' s version of the so-called beating has changed to fit the evidence. You recall the "hour of sheer terror" story? Where Daye supposedly choked beat head punched and beat the crap out of Mangum? Now he wants to claim that all this physical abuse still happened......just with no bruises, cut, abrasions? The photo of ,Mangum shows a tiny, I mean, TINY mark on her left cheek that could have been made by her own fingernail. It was less than an eighth of an inch. That's it.......there is no way the type of beating that Harr described resulted in no physical damage. Facial trauma is usually very visible, especially so because of blood supply and delicate tissue. I believe that Daye and Mangum were drinking, got into a drunken push and shove match, she lost her temper, grabbed a knife and stabbed him. And yes there was assault by both. But.......Mangum will have a helluva time getting to self defense.........no way.

Anonymous said...

KENHYDERAL:

"Anonymous said: Retirement from Medicine 17 years after graduation from Medical School is a truncated career........... What year did you graduate from Medical School? How many years experience do you have practicing medicine?"

I graduated in 1972 and retired in 2001. I retired because of a Medical condition which precluded me from practicing surgery. In the interim I did complete residencies in General Surgery and Thoracic Surgery and was board certified in both specialties."


"Any poster who has medical training should first declare their name and then debate the issue with Dr. Harr as to whether the brain death of Reginald Daye was due or not due to an accidental esophageal intubation."

There is nothing to debate. There was no esophageal intubation. Therefore, Reginald Daye's death could not be due to esophageal intubation. As to declaring oneself, maybe SIDNEY should declare why he never completed a residency, why he never obtained board certification, why he wants to conceal why he retired after such a short career.

"Those of us, like myself and I suspect you, having zero qualifications, should keep our traps shut and listen to the debate Questioning Dr. Harr's Medical competence, if you yourself have no medical background, is intellectually dishonest."

I have given you my medical background. I predict now you will tell me you do not believe me. That is as powerful as Kilgo saying an anonymous Lacrosse player told him he witnessed an assault on Crystal. That, in turn, is as powerful as a blind man saying I saw the whole thing"

"Dr. Harr has convinced me and unless persons with qualification who are willing to identify them self can give me reasonable arguments to the contrary, I'll stick to the explanation that Dr. Harr has put forth."

This from someone who bases his belief that Crystal was raped on the word of an anonymous individual who cites the word of another individual. It indicates only you are a racist.

"It's interesting to note that Dr. Roberts, even when told by a Judge to produce a written report, seems unwilling to put her name to one and that neither Duke Hospital or Dr. Nichols will publically challenge Dr. Harr's speculation."

That is because "Dr. Harr's speculation" is the megalomaniacal delusions of a former physician who will not document his qualifications to form such an opinion.

Give up you racist motivated presumption of Caucasian guilt and you might see things objectively.

Anonymous said...

I get that there is no requirement for physical damage as an element to establish an assault charge, Walt. That makes complete sense. Nobody is disputing that point with Harr. What IS at issue is his prior claim of some kind of horrific beating.........with absolutely NO evidence to support such a claim. Anybody who got beaten punched slapped choked scratched and otherwise pummeled for an hour would NOT escape with no physical damage. It takes very little pressure to create bruising on the face and neck.
Mangum used a deadly weapon with intent, right?.......so isn't that sufficient to invoke the FMR? Do you see any parallels to Zimmerman? Differences?

Anonymous said...

Harr has never established medical competence. Graduating from medical school does not establish competence. Harr' refusal to document his bonafide s leaves him to,fair questioning of his credentials. His claims of medical error are completely without substance. We all,know why Harr wants to shift the guilt to duke. Duh!! Read state v welch Kenny.

kenhyderal said...

Dr. Anonymous said: "I graduated in 1972 and retired in 2001. I retired because of a Medical condition which precluded me from practicing surgery. In the interim I did complete residencies in General Surgery and Thoracic Surgery and was board certified in both specialties"............But, how did I, or anyone else, know who I was debating with. So, was it you, a fellow retired Physician, who was willing, without evidence, or any real basis, other then the wildest sort of speculation to question the competence of Dr. Harr ? That's not very professional. And, unless you are willing to tell us your name it's also seems rather cowardly.

Anonymous said...

KENHYDERAL:

"But, how did I, or anyone else, know who I was debating with. So, was it you, a fellow retired Physician, who was willing, without evidence, or any real basis, other then the wildest sort of speculation to question the competence of Dr. Harr ?"

I say again, SIDNEY, by his own admission, never completed a residency, never obtained board certification in any medical specialty, he did retire from Medicine 17 after graduating from Medical school, he is unwilling to discuss his background, all of that is strong, albeit circumstantial evidence that his competence as a physician is in question.

"That's not very professional."

You really do not have any comprehension of what "professional" means. Otherwise you would not be calling SIDNEY a distinguished physician.

"And, unless you are willing to tell us your name it's also seems rather cowardly."

But it is not unethical or unprofessional for SIDNEY to claim he is capable of rendering an opinion as to the cause of Mr. Daye's death or the validity of the autopsy report without establishing his professional competence to do so. You seem to accept Kilgo as reliable even though he has never established that he knows anything about the Lacrosse case. You believe him because he has an anonymous Lacrosse player friend, the existence of whom neither he nor you can document.

Anonymous said...

KENHYDERAL:

"So, was it you, a fellow retired Physician, who was willing, without evidence, or any real basis, other then the wildest sort of speculation to question the competence of Dr. Harr ?"

What evidence did SIDNEY have to question the competence and integrity of Dr. Nichols and Dr. Roberts?

SIDNEY, without offering any evidence, called the report fraudulent. You do not demand that SIDNEY show he is competent to question the autopsy report. Why? Because you know his truncated career, lack of residency training, lack of Board Certification in any specialty renders incapable of being a Medical Expert, that is why.

Walt said...

Kenhyderal wrote: "It's interesting to note that Dr. Roberts, even when told by a Judge to produce a written report, seems unwilling to put her name to one..."

She was appointed as a defense expert, not a court expert. As such, the decision to put the report in writing is defense counsel's choice. In this case, a wise one. Knowing Sid would leak the report to the state by posting it on his blog, defense counsel decided to forego the written report. The defense has also elected to treat Roberts as an expert called in anticipation of litigation not expected to testify so they don't have to give her up to the state. Which means, the state doesn't get to use a defense expert to bolster their own expert's opinion. Now that the defense has stopped its leaks through Sid, they may have an expert who disputes Dr. Nichols, they may not, we don't know for sure. However, challenging Nichols' conclusion is not worth much as medical malpractice is not an intervening cause no matter how much Sid wishes it was.

"... and that neither Duke Hospital or Dr. Nichols will publically challenge Dr. Harr's speculation."

Duke cannot, HIPPA. Dr. Nichols is a witness who has given a report. He would be insane to challenge Sid or anyone else before trial. If he did, he would be compromising his value as a witness. Further, his report is clear and supported by the law.

Walt-in-Durham

Walt said...

Anonymous at 3:43 wrote: "Walt, Harr' s version of the so-called beating has changed to fit the evidence. You recall the "hour of sheer terror" story? Where Daye supposedly choked beat head punched and beat the crap out of Mangum? Now he wants to claim that all this physical abuse still happened......just with no bruises, cut, abrasions? The photo of ,Mangum shows a tiny, I mean, TINY mark on her left cheek that could have been made by her own fingernail. It was less than an eighth of an inch. That's it.......there is no way the type of beating that Harr described resulted in no physical damage."

Sid and Nifong are nothing if not consistent. You might recall that Nifong did that all through the fiasco. He kept changing his explanation whenever facts came out to contradict his previous explanation. That doesn't do much to enhance credibility and it certainly isn't persuasive.

Walt-in-Durham

Nifong Supporter said...


Walt said...
Sid wrote: "During the past year, two male staff members at NCCU were arrested for assault on a female wherein the "victims" had no visible lesions. Ask Walt whether or not a woman must have visible lesions in order for a man to be charged with assault on a female."

It is a common to mistake the elements of a crime with evidence of a crime. Elements are what the state must prove. Evidence is how they do that. Evidence is also how the defense casts doubt.

Sid is correct that injury is not an element of assault on a female in North Carolina. St. v. Newton, 251 N.C. 151, 110 S.E.2d 810.

Under the Newton analysis, we in NC treat the attempt as seriously as the crime. Had the defendant in Newton actually inflicted harm, he would still have been charged with assault, it would have just not been styled "attempted." The Newton analysis generally holds for most crimes in NC, except murder. There we do make a distinction between attempted murder and murder. The death penalty is not available for attempted murder while it is for murder.

Walt-in-Durham


Hey, Walt.

Thanks for your legalese enlightenment. Since I have no legal training and do not pretend to be an attorney, I find it very informative.

Have a nice weekend.


Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
SIDNEY:

"At 3 o'clock in the morning, I'm sleepy, too, but that doesn't mean I'm drunk. Point is that there was no blood alcohol level or other objective test administered after her arrest."

SIDNEY< she admitted to drinking and was clinically intoxicated. You wouldn't realize that because you are an incompetent physician.

"The reason Daye was alert although he had a stuporous blood level is because he is an alcoholic and had built up tremendous tolerance."

If Reginald Daye was so alcoholic he could tolerate that alcohol level, his liver would have been diseased. At Autopsy, the liver was normal. More evidence the blood alcohol was a lab error.

"That he was an alcoholic and went into delirium tremens confirms that he was highly intoxicated with alcohol and that the lab results were correct."

According to the clinical records, as so many people have pointed out to you, there was no diagnosis of DTs. None so blind as those who will not see.

"According to police reports, clumps of Mangum's hair were found at two sites in the apartment. Photos show excoriation/puncture wounds to her face. That is objective evidence of an assault."

The photos, including the photos you posted, show no evidence that Mangum had been beaten about the head and neck. You are again altering your story to fit your preconceived blindness. Earlier you were claiming that Crystal had suffered a beating but showed no evidence of it.

During the past year, two male staff members at NCCU were arrested for assault on a female wherein the "victims" had no visible lesions."

What happened at NCCu has no relevance to the stabbing of Reginald Daye. Besides, you have no first hand knowledge of what happened at NCCU.

"Ask Walt whether or not a woman must have visible lesions in order for a man to be charged with assault on a female."

Irrelevant comment. Rather, ssk a competent physician, which you will probably not do because you resent competent physicians, whether or not a person beaten around the face or neck whether or not the victim would have physical findings.


Your comment about the autopsy report not showing liver damage directly goes to my point. You can't believe a darn thing in that autopsy report. It has absolutely not one scintilla of credibility...

Nifong Supporter said...


kenhyderal said...
Anonymous said: Retirement from Medicine 17 years after graduation from Medical School is a truncated career........... What year did you graduate from Medical School? How many years experience do you have practicing medicine? Any poster who has medical training should first declare their name and then debate the issue with Dr. Harr as to whether the brain death of Reginald Daye was due or not due to an accidental esophageal intubation. Those of us, like myself and I suspect you, having zero qualifications, should keep our traps shut and listen to the debate Questioning Dr. Harr's Medical competence, if you yourself have no medical background, is intellectually dishonest. Dr. Harr has convinced me and unless persons with qualification who are willing to identify them self can give me reasonable arguments to the contrary, I'll stick to the explanation that Dr. Harr has put forth. It's interesting to note that Dr. Roberts, even when told by a Judge to produce a written report, seems unwilling to put her name to one and that neither Duke Hospital or Dr. Nichols will publically challenge Dr. Harr's speculation.


Hey, kenhyderal.

You're absolutely correct. No physician will be willing to put their name on a written document concerning their opinion about the autopsy report by Dr. Nichols. They're afraid to do so because they would be forced to tell the truth and implicate Nichols' report as being false and fraudulent.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"Hey, Walt.

Thanks for your legalese enlightenment. Since I have no legal training and do not pretend to be an attorney, I find it very informative.

Have a nice weekend."

Why did you declare that you would humiliate the NC state bar, that you would prevail against Duke in your frivolous lawsuit?

You are a deluded megalomaniac, that's why.

Nifong Supporter said...


Walt said...
Anonymous at 3:43 wrote: "Walt, Harr' s version of the so-called beating has changed to fit the evidence. You recall the "hour of sheer terror" story? Where Daye supposedly choked beat head punched and beat the crap out of Mangum? Now he wants to claim that all this physical abuse still happened......just with no bruises, cut, abrasions? The photo of ,Mangum shows a tiny, I mean, TINY mark on her left cheek that could have been made by her own fingernail. It was less than an eighth of an inch. That's it.......there is no way the type of beating that Harr described resulted in no physical damage."

Sid and Nifong are nothing if not consistent. You might recall that Nifong did that all through the fiasco. He kept changing his explanation whenever facts came out to contradict his previous explanation. That doesn't do much to enhance credibility and it certainly isn't persuasive.

Walt-in-Durham


Walt, like Mike Nifong, my report on what Crystal told me has been consistent. According to her, she was held captive by Daye for an hour in which she endured sheer terror. Terror comes from a mental state and not physical. He terrorized her by his actions, preventing her from leaving, bringing in a bunch of steak knives from the kitchen and throwing them at her, boiling a pot of hot water and carrying it into the bedroom, and busting down the bathroom door... not to mention some of the things she said he said to himself. These aforementioned activities are not physically harmful to her, but invoke a tremendous amount of terror.

Please let me know if further elucidation is required.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"Your comment about the autopsy report not showing liver damage directly goes to my point. You can't believe a darn thing in that autopsy report. It has absolutely not one scintilla of credibility..."

Just the kind of answer one would expect from an ignorant incompetent physician who is angry and resentful about all the competent physicians in the world.

What establishes your credibility?

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"Walt, like Mike Nifong, my report on what Crystal told me has been consistent".

Like corrupt DA NIFONG you are indeed consistent - consistently not credible.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
SIDNEY HARR:

"Hey, Walt.

Thanks for your legalese enlightenment. Since I have no legal training and do not pretend to be an attorney, I find it very informative.

Have a nice weekend."

Why did you declare that you would humiliate the NC state bar, that you would prevail against Duke in your frivolous lawsuit?

You are a deluded megalomaniac, that's why.


Harrism --

"An abundance of self confidence, truth, and intelligence is not to be confused with megalomania."

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

" According to her, she was held captive by Daye for an hour in which she endured sheer terror."

Judging from what has been posted on your so called blog, Crystal never made that claim until she was charged with Murder 1 and cooling her heels in jail.

Now go ahead and again say the police should have gone ahead and interrogated her after she invoked her right to remain silent.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"'An abundance of self confidence, truth, and intelligence is not to be confused with megalomania.'"

While you may have self confidence, you have not even a scintilla of a scintilla of either truthfulness or intelligence. Ergo, you are a deluded megalomaniac.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"You're absolutely correct. No physician will be willing to put their name on a written document concerning their opinion about the autopsy report by Dr. Nichols. They're afraid to do so because they would be forced to tell the truth and implicate Nichols' report as being false and fraudulent."

You are absolutely deluded. No competent physician would issue an opinion that the Nichols autopsy report is fraudulent because the report is not fraudulent.

What is fraudulent is your presumption that you are competent to determine what is fraudulent and what is not.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

If you are so intelligent and so truthful, why are you reluctant to explain your medical career or lack thereof? You never completed a residency, you never attained board certification in any specialty, and a mere 17 years after graduating from Medical school you retired from practicing medicine.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous at 11:30 AM said: "SIDNEY, without offering any evidence, called the report fraudulent. You do not demand that SIDNEY show he is competent to question the autopsy report. Why? Because you know his truncated career, lack of residency training, lack of Board Certification in any specialty renders incapable of being a Medical Expert, that is why".......... No that is not why. Dr. Harr presented evidence by posting the medical record of the "incident" and it's antecedent cause and he, as a retired emergency medicine physician, even though not board certified, is entitled to pass an opinion on it. He also compared the hospital records with the autopsy report and pointed out some obvious and glaring inconsistencies between the two, that need to be addressed. Other Physicians, be they Board certified or not, should identify themselves and carry on a debate as to the validity of his charges. Dr. Harr is not passing himself as a "medical expert" he is simply questioning and rightly so, if the death of Reginald Daye, the applicableness of State vs. Welsh notwithstanding, was solely due to the knife wound

Anonymous said...

KENHYDERAL:

"No that is not why. Dr. Harr presented evidence by posting the medical record of the "incident" and it's antecedent cause and he, as a retired emergency medicine physician, even though not board certified, is entitled to pass an opinion on it."

True. Because of his lack of training and lack of board certification in any specialty he is not entitled to consider it either a knowledgeable or an expert opinion.

"He also compared the hospital records with the autopsy report and pointed out some obvious and glaring inconsistencies between the two, that need to be addressed."

I, a surgeon who had to learn to do autopsies when I was a resident, say the inconsistencies are not glaring. So far as SIDNEY, who has never done a surgical procedure or an autopsy in his life, would never convince a court of law that his opinions were meaningful.

"Other Physicians, be they Board certified or not, should identify themselves and carry on a debate as to the validity of his charges."

This from someone who can not or will not demonstrate that his hero Kilgo knows anything about the Lacrosse case or that Kilgo has a friend on the Lacrosse team. KENNY thinks different standards apply to him or to SIDNEY since they are advocating for Black woman Crystal.

"Dr. Harr is not passing himself as a 'medical expert'"

Yes he is.

"he is simply questioning and rightly so, if the death of Reginald Daye, the applicableness of State vs. Welsh notwithstanding, was solely due to the knife wound"

SIDNEY is neither a lawyer nor a competent physician so he is not competent to render a meaningful opinion on such issues. His attitude towards State vs. Welsh is based on his belief that Duke University killed Reginald Daye via malpractice. He has not even come close to establishing that as fact.

kenhyderal said...

Dr. Anonymous, I presume! You said @3:07: "This from someone who can not or will not demonstrate that his hero Kilgo knows anything about the Lacrosse case or that Kilgo has a friend on the Lacrosse team. KENNY thinks different standards apply to him or to SIDNEY since they are advocating for Black woman Crystal"........................ The former poster Kilgo is not a friend of mine. I dealt with him through a now inactive e-mail address. I implored him to give the name of his Duke Lacrosse Player friend but he was either fearful to do so or would not out of a sense of sense of loyalty to that person. The information Kilgo claimed he was told matched, identically, with Crystal's memory of the events up until the time she was probably administered a stupefying substance. He also said the Players involved had, jokingly, in the past, discussed using date rape drugs. I don't have a double standard I call on both Kilgo and the anonymous Lacrosse Player to do the right thing and please come forth. Kilgo told me this Player was wrestling with his conscience. I note that Kilgo made a donation to Crystal's bail fund in her arson case and when The Hammonds posted her bail, pro-bono, he authorized the money be released to Crystal, in order to assist her and the children. Kilgo was extremely vulgar in his posts especially towards Dave Evans. He also said his friend has a photograph of Evans with a moustache. When Crystal's present legal problems are settled I believe that efforts will be made to identify these two individuals and demand they testify as to what they claim to know.

Anonymous said...

KENHYDERAL:

"The former poster Kilgo is not a friend of mine. I dealt with him through a now inactive e-mail address. I implored him to give the name of his Duke Lacrosse Player friend but he was either fearful to do so or would not out of a sense of sense of loyalty to that person."

Most likely, he would not give you the name of the anonymous Lacrosse player because said Lacrosse player does not exist. You nevertheless believed the anonymous Kilgo because he cited this anonymous Lacrosse player as the source of his information.

"The information Kilgo claimed he was told matched, identically, with Crystal's memory of the events up until the time she was probably administered a stupefying substance."

Crystal was never given a stupefying substance. You assumed, without proof, that she had been because that meshed with your racially motivated presumption of guilt on the part of some innocent Caucasian men.

"He also said the Players involved had, jokingly, in the past, discussed using date rape drugs. I don't have a double standard I call on both Kilgo and the anonymous Lacrosse Player to do the right thing and please come forth. Kilgo told me this Player was wrestling with his conscience."

Said anonymous Lacrosse player will not come forth because said anonymous Lacrosse player does not exist. That Kilgo cites a non existent person as a source of his information, that is prima facie evidence he is lying. You are too racist to realize this.

"I note that Kilgo made a donation to Crystal's bail fund in her arson case and when The Hammonds posted her bail, pro-bono, he authorized the money be released to Crystal, in order to assist her and the children."

A meaningless gesture. It does not mitigate the fact that he lied about what he knew about the Lacrosse case.

"Kilgo was extremely vulgar in his posts especially towards Dave Evans. He also said his friend has a photograph of Evans with a moustache."

Another obvious lie, since no such photograph exists.

"When Crystal's present legal problems are settled I believe that efforts will be made to identify these two individuals and demand they testify as to what they claim to know."

I hope so to. Because Kilgo will have to admit he knows nothing about the Lacrosse rape hoax and will have to admit that said anonymous Lacrosse player does not exist.

Bottom line: You castigate those who question SIDNEY's competence, in spite of strong circumstantial evidence he has none. But you say the anonymous Kilgo has credibility because he cites an anonymous source, the existence of whom he can not prove.

Right on, KENHYDERAL.

Anonymous said...

So since there IS no evidence of the hour of sheer terror beating that Sidney falsely claimed.......now we get a stomach turning dose of poor baby Mangum being emotionally abused? What next, liar, a tiff over the napkin holders that led to a knife in the gut?

kenhyderal said...

Dr. Anonymous (I presume) @ 4:59 said: Bottom line: You castigate those who question SIDNEY's competence, in spite of strong circumstantial evidence he has none. But you say the anonymous Kilgo has credibility because he cites an anonymous source, the existence of whom he can not prove............ . As usual your conclusions makes no sense. Yes the questioning of Dr. Harr's competence is unseemly and it's unworthy of a fellow professional. What evidence circumstantial or otherwise can you present as to what competency he lacks? Medical practitioners, even retired ones, can have different opinions on medical practice and procedures. Of course Kilgo can prove the existence of the alleged Lacrosse Player who was witness to any crimes against Crystal by coming forward. What would be a motive for him in making up the existence of this person. Kilgo is obviously a real person. He posted here long before I did. The information he had coincided perfectly with Crystal's version of events. Is he simply a publicity seeker trying to insert himself into a famous case? If so, why did he suddenly drop out? His postings came to the attention of the Trial Lawyers and they too wanted to discover the identity of this Player friend who was contemplating coming forward with what he saw. I believe this Player probably became fearful given the high stakes and convinced Kilgo to drop this matter. Soon the greedy lawsuits will be completely over. The Trial Lawyers will be turning on their clients, sore about the tens of thousands of billing hours they wasted in such a lost cause. Kilgo if you are still reading this blog give us some guidance.

Anonymous said...

KENHYDERAL:

"As usual your conclusions makes no sense."

They make more sense than your racially motivated presumption of guilt on the part of innocent Caucasian men.

"Yes the questioning of Dr. Harr's competence is unseemly and it's unworthy of a fellow professional."

If SIDNEY were to apply for a position in a clinic or another emergency room, those are exactly the questions any prospective employer would ask him. If he were to testify on Crystal's behalf, he would be required to establish his competence.

"What evidence circumstantial or otherwise can you present as to what competency he lacks?"

I will represent the circumstantial evidence. He never completed a residency. He never achieved board certification in any specialty. He retired from medicine 17 years after he graduated from medical school. If he were to testify in court about medical matters, i.e. the validity of an autopsy, those are issues with which he would have to deal. He will not deal with those issues although he pontificates that the Daye autopsy report was fraudulennt.

"Medical practitioners, even retired ones, can have different opinions on medical practice and procedures."

Medical practitioners would not take seriously the opinions of another practitioner who had no experience in the field in which he is opining upon. SIDNEY has no experience in the specialties of Pathology or Surgery. For that matter he has no experience in the specialty of Critical Care.

"Of course Kilgo can prove the existence of the alleged Lacrosse Player who was witness to any crimes against Crystal by coming forward."

So why has he not come forward and identified the unknown Lacrosse player. It is more than 7 years after the event. In a court that would be powerful circumstantial evidence that he knows nothing about what happened at the Lacrosse party or that his unidentified Lacrosse player even exists.

"What would be a motive for him in making up the existence of this person."

Probably resentment of accomplished Caucasian men, the same motivation for your presumption of guilt.

"Kilgo is obviously a real person. He posted here long before I did. The information he had coincided perfectly with Crystal's version of events."

That his information coincides with Crystal's version does not render him credible, since Crystal's version has been established by overwhelming forensic and medical evidence as non credible.

"Is he simply a publicity seeker trying to insert himself into a famous case?"

In a word, yes.

If so, why did he suddenly drop out?"

He was being outed as a phony. Whenever he was challenged to display his knowledge, he always backed down.

"His postings came to the attention of the Trial Lawyers and they too wanted to discover the identity of this Player friend who was contemplating coming forward with what he saw."

That has never been established as fact. That scenario exists only in your imagination only as a consequence of your presumption of guilt.

"I believe this Player probably became fearful given the high stakes and convinced Kilgo to drop this matter."

Wrong. Kilgo backed down because he was being outed as a phony and it became evident this anonymous Lacrosse player did not exist.

"Soon the greedy lawsuits will be completely over. The Trial Lawyers will be turning on their clients, sore about the tens of thousands of billing hours they wasted in such a lost cause."

More Bullshit from your guilt presuming mind. Trial lawyers take such cases on a contingency fee basis. If they don't collect, the clients do not pay.

"Kilgo if you are still reading this blog give us some guidance."

Don't hold your breath waiting for that to happen. You will asphyxiate if you do. Besides, his coming forward after 7 years does not exactly establish the credibility of his information.He would still have to produce his anonymous Lacrosse player friend, and that person does not exist.

Anonymous said...

KENHYDERAL:


"What evidence circumstantial or otherwise can you present as to what competency he lacks?"

Why don't you establish what competence he HAS?

Anonymous said...

Harr is not competent to make medical judgments. He refuses to establish his credentials . Dr Gosnell, the scumbag murderer in Philadelphia, has an MD. Did that make him either competent or ethical? No. This entire debate about tubes and duke is not relevant at all....... The ONLY issue that appears to be in play, for Mangum, is whether she is going to get manslaughter .

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 8:00 AM said: This entire debate about tubes and duke is not relevant at all....... The ONLY issue that appears to be in play, for Mangum, is whether she is going to get manslaughter........................ Crystal has been indicted on a charge of 1st degree murder. Even a lay person like myself can see that the treatment Daye received at Duke contributed more to his death then did the stab wound. Dismissing a, functioning Daye's, blood alcohol reading, on a possible lab error, is even more speculative then is the speculation he was an alcoholic with a high tolerance for alcohol. If this reading was correct, then the likely occurrence of DT's was not an unexpected outcome. The deficient treatment of this situation, whether caused by DT's or post-surgical infection, was what caused Daye's brain death and which with proper treatment should have been preventable.

Anonymous said...

KENHYDERAL:

"The ONLY issue that appears to be in play, for Mangum, is whether she is going to get manslaughter........................ Crystal has been indicted on a charge of 1st degree murder."

And it was only AFTER she was indicted that she claimed self defense.

Even a lay person like myself can see that the treatment Daye received at Duke contributed more to his death then did the stab wound."

Your position as a layman means your opinion means twice as much as SIDNEY's opinion, which counts for nothing because he is an incompetent physician.

"Dismissing a, functioning Daye's, blood alcohol reading, on a possible lab error, is even more speculative then is the speculation he was an alcoholic with a high tolerance for alcohol."

No it is based on facts about the case, he was not comatose and his liver was normal.

"If this reading was correct, then the likely occurrence of DT's was not an unexpected outcome."

That is an awfully big if. There is a factual basis to believe the reading was a lab error. As you have said at the beginning of your post, you do not have the background or training or experience to comment meaningfully on medical issues. Even a lawyer suing for medical malpractice would have to get expert opinion to support his case. You have none.

"The deficient treatment of this situation, whether caused by DT's or post-surgical infection, was what caused Daye's brain death and which with proper treatment should have been preventable."

Again, by your own admission, you are not capable of telling whether or not DTs happened or whether or not treatment was improper. Speaking as a retired physician with more of a professional background than SIDNEY, i say your statement is not true. Even with proper treatment a patient can die. I have seen it happen.

Anonymous said...

We all know the charges for which Mangum was indicted ,Kenny. No need for you to preach. We are all big boys and girls. The question is how the jury will receive instructions from the judge and whether the jury will have an option to find her guilty of something other than first degree murder. I believe Walt has said that her use of a deadly weapon with intent......invokes the FMR. Harr can run his lying mouth till it falls off his face. There was no error. Nichols was and is right. She stabbed him. He died. You can choke on it and it won't go away.

Nifong Supporter said...


kenhyderal said...
Anonymous at 11:30 AM said: "SIDNEY, without offering any evidence, called the report fraudulent. You do not demand that SIDNEY show he is competent to question the autopsy report. Why? Because you know his truncated career, lack of residency training, lack of Board Certification in any specialty renders incapable of being a Medical Expert, that is why".......... No that is not why. Dr. Harr presented evidence by posting the medical record of the "incident" and it's antecedent cause and he, as a retired emergency medicine physician, even though not board certified, is entitled to pass an opinion on it. He also compared the hospital records with the autopsy report and pointed out some obvious and glaring inconsistencies between the two, that need to be addressed. Other Physicians, be they Board certified or not, should identify themselves and carry on a debate as to the validity of his charges. Dr. Harr is not passing himself as a "medical expert" he is simply questioning and rightly so, if the death of Reginald Daye, the applicableness of State vs. Welsh notwithstanding, was solely due to the knife wound


Thanks, kenhyderal.

I couldn't have put it better myself.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Harr is not competent to make medical judgments. He refuses to establish his credentials . Dr Gosnell, the scumbag murderer in Philadelphia, has an MD. Did that make him either competent or ethical? No. This entire debate about tubes and duke is not relevant at all....... The ONLY issue that appears to be in play, for Mangum, is whether she is going to get manslaughter .


My credentials have already been posted by commenters. It's no secret... especially in this internet age of social media. If there was something negative on my record, surely someone would have produced it by now.

And you can forget about manslaughter. Crystal isn't going to accept a plea deal... PERIOD. The criminal charges against her are going to be dropped. The prosecutors have no case!!

Nifong Supporter said...


HEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP!
IMPORTANT UPDATE!!

The flog is practically completed and will be added to the flogazine tomorrow (Monday) morning... probably before ten.

Sorry for the delays, but in my quest to produce nothing but the highest quality in flogs for you viewers, it sometimes requires much more time than anticipated.

The topic will focus on Duke University Hospital's attempt to cover up its responsibility for Daye's death.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"Thanks, kenhyderal.

I couldn't have put it better myself."

That says nothing good about the way you put things.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"My credentials have already been posted by commenters. It's no secret... especially in this internet age of social media. If there was something negative on my record, surely someone would have produced it by now."

Your credentials show that you never completed any residency training, that you never achieved any kind of board certification, and do not have any great experience in practicing medicine. Residency training, board certification, experience are all indicators of a competent physician. You have none of these.

"And you can forget about manslaughter. Crystal isn't going to accept a plea deal... PERIOD. The criminal charges against her are going to be dropped. The prosecutors have no case!!"

What qualifies you to offer that opinion. Nothing.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"The flog is practically completed and will be added to the flogazine tomorrow (Monday) morning... probably before ten."

What a sad day for the internet and the blogosphere.

"Sorry for the delays, but in my quest to produce nothing but the highest quality in flogs for you viewers, it sometimes requires much more time than anticipated."

The content of your publishings has never been of high quality. It has all been the deluded ravings of a megalomaniac.

"The topic will focus on Duke University Hospital's attempt to cover up its responsibility for Daye's death."

In other words, it will focus on something non existent.

kilgo said...

I am the poster who formerly posted under the name kilgo. I chose the pseudonym after a former Duke president and current dormitory.

I never contacted kenhyderal. I do not have a player friend who claims to have witnessed a rape by mystery rapists.

As all of the posters on this sorry blog realize, I was nothing but a troll. I spewed hatred at the players in order to irritate other posters, many of whom overreacted to any criticism.

kenhyderal is a clever troll.

He deserves credit for his ability to stay in character as a Canadian friend of Crystal living in Dubai. His mystery rapist theory was troll genius. His decision to invoke me, a pseudonymous troll, as a source was truly inspired.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 4:10 said: More Bullshit from your guilt presuming mind. Trial lawyers take such cases on a contingency fee basis. If they don't collect, the clients do not pay"................ Lets hope the claimants had independent counsel before they entered into a contingency contract with the trial Lawyers otherwise, they may find hidden within the agreement performance requirements that predatory trial Lawyers might exploit in order to void, the pay legal fees only on a win clauses. Trial Lawyers are like American Insurance Companies, all they want to do is get paid but hate to pay out, in this case tens of thousands of hours of work and the associated expenses.

kenhyderal said...

Dr. Anonymous @ 9:32 AM 6-23-13 said: No it is based on facts about the case, he was not comatose and his liver was normal"... Do some research Dr. and I think you will find that the majority of chronic alcoholics have normal livers; well over half of them. As well, chronic alcoholics develop a high tolerance for alcohol and can function a blood alcohol level that would make a normal person comatose.

Anonymous said...

KENHYDERAL:

"Lets hope the claimants had independent counsel before they entered into a contingency contract with the trial Lawyers otherwise, they may find hidden within the agreement performance requirements that predatory trial Lawyers might exploit in order to void, the pay legal fees only on a win clauses. Trial Lawyers are like American Insurance Companies, all they want to do is get paid but hate to pay out, in this case tens of thousands of hours of work and the associated expenses."

You are hoping the Lacrosse players' counsel will turn on their clients. This is another manifestation of your resentment of them because they are accomplished Caucasian men and you are not.

Anonymous said...

KENHYDERAL:

"Do some research Dr. and I think you will find that the majority of chronic alcoholics have normal livers; well over half of them. As well, chronic alcoholics develop a high tolerance for alcohol and can function a blood alcohol level that would make a normal person comatose. "

I have. You haven't because you fear the truth. Liver damage results from exposure of the liver to toxic products of alcohol metabolism. An alcoholic who could tolerate a blood alcohol of almost 300 mg % would have bathed his liver in toxic substances for years. He would not have a normal liver.

At least you admit the finding of a normal liver on autopsy was valid. Your hero SIDNEY claims that Dr. Nichols fabricated the finding.

Not surprising you admire SIDNEY since you admire Crystal the false accuser and liar as a paragon of womanhood.

Anonymous said...

Let me get this straight, sidney. What was a solid hour of brutal beating....with face punching, choking, scratching, pushing, shoving, rolling around on the bed, hair pulling........is NOW verbal abuse? And, because Daye was carrying boiling water, Mangum shoved a knife in his side? There was not a mark on her.....so, of course, you had to make a little "adjustment" to your story, didn't you? Just like you "adjusted" your story over the fire incident. What a liar you are.......

Kenny, I hate to burst your little bubble. Several physicians have posted here before that there was absolutely no evidence of ANY medical error in the documentation that Harr illegally put here on his web site. Also, a physician has commented that the blood loss, and trauma that Daye suffered could have dramatically impacted his initial lab results. Also there is not one tiny shred of evidence that Daye was an alcolholic, a woman beater or even violent. DTs were to be ruled out, kenny, along with infection.......as the cause of his symptoms. If you had any medical background, you would see that the meds he was on were geared toward suspicion of a major infection........a frequent complication that can be, and sometimes is, life-ending. Daye had no record of violence. Maungum, however, DOES HAVE A RECORD OF VIOLENCE.
You can make all the excuses you wish.....you can blame a dead man.....a low class thing to do. Conveniently, Mangum didn't whine self defense until Daye died.
I sincerely hope she gets a fair trial and that justice is served.

Anonymous said...

I grew up in a home with a serious alcoholic. He never once raised his hand to anybody in the family. Ever. It is brutally stupid to equate alcoholism with violence, just out of hand, Kenny. There is No evidence that Daye was an alcoholic. Harr has manufactured that whole lie, just to make an excuse for Mangum and to try to shift blame to Daye. There is also no evidence that he was violent and a woman beater. In fact, two of his former female relationships said he was NOT violent toward them. Mangum has a history of violent behavior, Kenny....you can try to lie and rationalize it....but it's well documented. If anybody had a tendency toward violence, it's Mangum.....not Daye.
I will also point out that Mangum left the apartment and went to the place where her child was, Kenny. Just how dumb, stupid and NOT reflective of being a good mother is that behavior!! A good mother would never put her child at risk like that. In fact, a good mother would not be shacking up with a man she had known a couple of weeks, partying with him, leaving her kid with somebody else for long periods....and "escorting" for money. It's an insult to single working mothers for you, and Mangum and Harr, to whine that pole vaulting was the only job she could get.

Anonymous said...

Harr's tactic is the same as Nifong's....as Walt has pointed out....repeat the lie enough and maybe somebody will believe it. he can lie till hell freezes over and it won't make any difference. The whole story line about Duke and Daye and the tube placement is NOT relevant. All that matters is whether Mangum can escape a first degree murder conviction......by claiming self defense.....or, whether Holmes KNOWS damn well there IS no self defense case....and he tries to get her to accept a plea deal....to avoid a very long long prison term. She can, of course, refuse to accept any plea.....and take her chances with a jury. From what I have seen, she is NOT going to get off with self defense. But......it's equally hard to see the prosecutor making first degree murder stick......unless, of course, there is evidence out there about which we know nothing. I am impressed that Holmes has the cajones to tell Harr to stick it.....and that he has, so far as we know, made Mangum shut up as well.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
SIDNEY HARR:

"The flog is practically completed and will be added to the flogazine tomorrow (Monday) morning... probably before ten."

What a sad day for the internet and the blogosphere.

"Sorry for the delays, but in my quest to produce nothing but the highest quality in flogs for you viewers, it sometimes requires much more time than anticipated."

The content of your publishings has never been of high quality. It has all been the deluded ravings of a megalomaniac.

"The topic will focus on Duke University Hospital's attempt to cover up its responsibility for Daye's death."

In other words, it will focus on something non existent.


I will upload the post monentarily, and as you will see, there is an attempt at cover up by revisionist medical history.

Anonymous said...

oooooo, new bullshit....."revisionist medical history".......can't wait for the melodrama..........

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"I will upload the post monentarily, and as you will see, there is an attempt at cover up by revisionist medical history."

No there won't be because Duke had nothing to cover up. You are the only one who is trying to cover up anything-you are trying to cover up that there is adequate probable cause to believe Crystal is criminally responsible for the death of Reginald Daye.

Anonymous said...

KENHYERAL:

Your post of June 23, 2013 at 9:29 PM shows only your lack of knowledge. Read about contingency fees. It is hardly likely a trial lawyer can take a case on a contingency fee basis and then try to collect fees from his client if he fails to win the case.

Could you provide a reference as to under what conditions a trial lawyer can take a case on a contingency fee basis and then charge a client for his legal fees.

kenhyderal said...

A contract between Plaintiffs and Trial Lawyers can say anything. I have no knowledge about the various Duke Lacrosse lawsuits and if they were undertaken on a contingency basis. I'm sure the losses in Court, after great costs were incurred, have made neither the greedy claimants or the even greedier Trial Lawyers happy.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous said: "Kenny, I hate to burst your little bubble. Several physicians have posted here before that there was absolutely no evidence of ANY medical error in the documentation that Harr illegally put here on his web site" .... Who are these physicians?

Anonymous said...

KENHYDERAL:

"Anonymous said: "Kenny, I hate to burst your little bubble. Several physicians have posted here before that there was absolutely no evidence of ANY medical error in the documentation that Harr illegally put here on his web site" .... Who are these physicians?"

I am one.

Have any physicians ever posted support for SIDNEY on this blog?

Dr. Anonymous

Anonymous said...

typical kenny response.......try to attack credibility of opposing opinions and refuse to admit that harr has no credibility.

Anonymous said...

KENHYDERAL:

"A contract between Plaintiffs and Trial Lawyers can say anything."

Maybe you should do some research instead of presenting the racially motivated wishes of your guilt presuming mind.

I once did file(and win) a personal injury lawsuit against the driver who head-injured me. It was handled on a contingency fee basis. What the contract said specifically is that if I did not collect, I did not owe the law firm anything.

If you know anything about tort litigation, you would know that trial lawyers handle big bucks cases on a contingency fee basis.

So explain the following. If Crystal actually had been raped, even after the rape charges had been dismissed, she could have sued in civil court and collected a lot of money. She could have had her choice of many competent trial lawyers if she really had a case. Why hasn't she sued. The most likely explanation is she did not have a case. There would have been no chance for a trial lawyer to collect a big contingency fee.

Anonymous said...

KENHYDERAL:

In a previous post I asked you, "Could you provide a reference as to under what conditions a trial lawyer can take a case on a contingency fee basis and then charge a client for his legal fees."

You did not, probably because you could not.

How Kilgo-ish.

Walt said...

Anonymoust at 10:36 AM wrote: "So explain the following. If Crystal actually had been raped, even after the rape charges had been dismissed, she could have sued in civil court and collected a lot of money. She could have had her choice of many competent trial lawyers if she really had a case. Why hasn't she sued. The most likely explanation is she did not have a case. There would have been no chance for a trial lawyer to collect a big contingency fee."

In fact, Crystal had no civil cause either. While the civil tort of battery covers this, Crystal had no case.

She would have had to prove, much the same though to a lower standard that someone neglignetly (the first of a couple of lower standards) struck - hit - forced her to have intercourse, her. That the person whom she alledged did those things did it in breach of a duty and that she was damaged (financiall) as a proximate result of the defendant's acts.

She could also have a case against the party organizers for the tort of battery on a negligent supervision theory. On that tort, she would not have to prove quite as much as directly against the perpetrators. Still she would have to prove the injury.

Either theory would have required proof by a preponderance of the evidence. (A second lower standard from criminal court.) The difference being that in criminal court, the alleged victim does not need to hire her lawyer, the state pays for it.

However, Crystal didn't even have a tort case. First, she abjectly failed to identify anyone as her attacker[s]. She had no scientific evidence to identify anyone as an attacker. Indeed, the scientific evidence pointed away from the lacrosse party if there were any attackers at all.

Second, Crystal had a problem proving the attack even took place when she claimed it did. There was a sexual assault exam done by an unlicensed nurse. The results of the exam, at best, inconclusive. The results that were present did not confirm her version of events.

Third, Crystal's version of events was continually changing. Worse, for her, she kept putting different versons of events on the record in interviews with the police. She never told the same story twice making her an incredible witness.

Hers was not a case that could survive summary judgment. That is to say, she had no case at all.

Walt-in-Durham

Anonymous said...

Walt, how would a judge instruct a jury regarding a self defense claim, in terms of what has to be proved, etc? Burden? Ability to flee versus fight?

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
KENHYDERAL:

"Anonymous said: "Kenny, I hate to burst your little bubble. Several physicians have posted here before that there was absolutely no evidence of ANY medical error in the documentation that Harr illegally put here on his web site" .... Who are these physicians?"

I am one.

Have any physicians ever posted support for SIDNEY on this blog?

Dr. Anonymous


Dr. Anonymous, as I emphasized in my most recent article, the initial intubation occurred after the emesis and prior to the cardiac arrest. Are we in agreement thus far?

The fact that the intubation was esophageal is what brought about the cardiac arrest. Are you following?

The Summary in Daye's chart is an attempt to make it appear as though the first intubation was undertaken after Daye went into cardiac arrest. The hospital is trying to cover up that it was responsible for Daye going into cardiac arrest.

The article spells it out easily.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Harr's tactic is the same as Nifong's....as Walt has pointed out....repeat the lie enough and maybe somebody will believe it. he can lie till hell freezes over and it won't make any difference. The whole story line about Duke and Daye and the tube placement is NOT relevant. All that matters is whether Mangum can escape a first degree murder conviction......by claiming self defense.....or, whether Holmes KNOWS damn well there IS no self defense case....and he tries to get her to accept a plea deal....to avoid a very long long prison term. She can, of course, refuse to accept any plea.....and take her chances with a jury. From what I have seen, she is NOT going to get off with self defense. But......it's equally hard to see the prosecutor making first degree murder stick......unless, of course, there is evidence out there about which we know nothing. I am impressed that Holmes has the cajones to tell Harr to stick it.....and that he has, so far as we know, made Mangum shut up as well.


I don't know about cajones, but it seems to me that Holmes lacks common sense by not seeking to interview me... the one person who knows more about this case than anyone, and is a doctor, to boot.

Face the facts, Mangum won't plea because the prosecution doesn't have a case against her. It's all trumped up and based on a fraudulent autopsy report. What Holmes should have done long ago is filed a motion to dismiss. He's following the same illogical and faulty tactics of the defense attorneys before him... Shella and Vann.

Anonymous said...

No, what the "article" (comical) does is recycle, reinvent, restate, and regurgitate the same old crap you have been slinging for months. Anybody with a brain figured out long ago that you will lie about anything in order get at Duke and to continue your racist rant. There was no medical error. Clearly. Find ONE, just one physician who agrees with your lies .......everybody who has looked at the documentation, including Roberts, who had far greater access to the medical records, and who had the opportunity to review the case in depth, found NOTHING to support any claim of medical error.
Once AGAIN I point out that Duke's NON error has absolutely nothing to do with the case. It is not relevant. You know it. You just gag on it.....and that's kinda fun to watch

Anonymous said...

Oh, wouldn't it be great if Harr went on the witness stand!!!!! Hell, I would buy a ticket to see that circus! Call up Holmes, bro....tell him you will testify!

Anonymous said...

......"me... the one person who knows more about this case than anyone, and is a doctor, to boot."......
Really, sidney? Really?
YOU know more about the case than anyone? Holy Atticus, bro.....call up lawyer Holmes and tell the man to put you in......you're ready to play.
Geez, what a buffoon....

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"Dr. Anonymous, as I emphasized in my most recent article, the initial intubation occurred after the emesis and prior to the cardiac arrest. Are we in agreement thus far?

The fact that the intubation was esophageal is what brought about the cardiac arrest. Are you following?"

The records document the endotracheal tube was not placed in the trachea. Why are you not following? Because you are an incompetent physician.

"The Summary in Daye's chart is an attempt to make it appear as though the first intubation was undertaken after Daye went into cardiac arrest. The hospital is trying to cover up that it was responsible for Daye going into cardiac arrest.

The article spells it out easily."

No it doesn't.

What your post spells out, SIDNEY, is you are totally divorced from reality.

Do you require further elucidation?

Dr. Anonymous

P.S. You are really resentful that I accomplished something you did not, complete residencies and achieve board certification.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

You are trying to dodge the question, have any physicians posted any support for you on your so called blog(or flog, if you prefer-you seem to enjoy flogging people).

Anonymous said...

I think must enjoy flogging....just not sure how and who he likes to flog. :)
I have read and re-read the limited medical record notes sidney so rudely posted on this site. There is nothing at all that supports ANY improper intubation. He is fantasizing because he wants to find something to pin on Duke. Poor man.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"I don't know about cajones, but it seems to me that Holmes lacks common sense by not seeking to interview me... the one person who knows more about this case than anyone, and is a doctor, to boot."


Boy are you divorced from reality. Your posts show you know nothing about the case. And you are just someone who has an MD degree after your name, not any credentials showing you are a competent or experienced physician.

"Face the facts, Mangum won't plea because the prosecution doesn't have a case against her. It's all trumped up and based on a fraudulent autopsy report."

Prove you are capable of determining whether or not an autopsy report is fraudulent.

"What Holmes should have done long ago is filed a motion to dismiss. He's following the same illogical and faulty tactics of the defense attorneys before him... Shella and Vann."

Boy are you p---ed off that Holmes told you to butt out.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous June 24, 2013 at 12:42 PM

Oh, wouldn't it be great if Harr went on the witness stand!!!!! Hell, I would buy a ticket to see that circus! Call up Holmes, bro....tell him you will testify!

I predict what will happen is that SIDNEY will try to force his way into the court room, be taken into custody, charged with contempt and assessed a significant fine. Then we will see SIDNEY file a lawsuit against the Durham Justice System for violating his civil rights.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 12:40 PM said" " Find ONE, just one physician who agrees with your lies .......everybody who has looked at the documentation, including Roberts, who had far greater access to the medical records, and who had the opportunity to review the case in depth, found NOTHING to support any claim of medical error" ......... How do you know what Dr. Roberts has found? Has she issued a report?

Anonymous said...

KENHYDERAL:

"

Anonymous @ 12:40 PM said" " Find ONE, just one physician who agrees with your lies .......everybody who has looked at the documentation, including Roberts, who had far greater access to the medical records, and who had the opportunity to review the case in depth, found NOTHING to support any claim of medical error" ......... How do you know what Dr. Roberts has found? Has she issued a report?"

According to your hero SIDNEY HARR the undistinguished incompetent physician, what Dr. Roberts found was that the autopsy was not fraudulent.

In any event, you are trying to duck the issue. Has any physician posted anything to support SIDNEY's contention that the autopsy report is fraudulent? The answer is a resounding no.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous said: "According to your hero SIDNEY HARR the undistinguished incompetent physician, what Dr. Roberts found was that the autopsy was not fraudulent"......... Huh????

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous said: "In any event, you are trying to duck the issue. Has any physician posted anything to support SIDNEY's contention that the autopsy report is fraudulent? The answer is a resounding no" Nor has any Physician who is willing to identify himself and go on record, other then Dr. Nichols, to say it was completely accurate.

Anonymous said...

yeah, kenny. sidney harr, the incompetent liar, said on this site that Roberts did not find any problems with the care record or the autopsy results, ie., she found nothing to support Mangum's claims that harr had put in her air-headed mind.
Roberts DID not find any medical error or autopsy issues, kenny. Vann did NOT want her to put her findings in writing because it would NOT have helped Mangum's claims. For god sake, kenny, how dumb can you be?

Anonymous said...

Kenny, Let's regroup. Any debate AMONG EXPERTS over the medical records of Daye's care and over the autopsy finding will occur IN THE TRIAL, UNDER OATH. Have you no clue how trials are conducted? Are you not familiar with how expert witnesses are called to testify, under oath, and how they have to establish their credentials, and how they must submit to cross examination? This stupid web site is NOT the place where any credible physician would engage in a public debate with an asshat like sidney hard! This webs site is a joke, kenny..............not because of Mangum and the terrible crimes she is accused of committing. It is a joke because sidney harr is a racist clown who conjures up imaginary villains, sees the entire world as in a giant conspiracy to get Mangum, and tells any fanciful lie he can spew. The only thing funnier than Harr's rambling lies is your panties-in-a-twist sanctimonious blathering. In a couple of weeks, we will see what happens with Mangum.......trial, plea, postponement, whatever. Till then, this site is the internet equivalent of phone numbers on the bathroom wall.

Anonymous said...

KENHYDERAL:

"Anonymous said: "In any event, you are trying to duck the issue. Has any physician posted anything to support SIDNEY's contention that the autopsy report is fraudulent? The answer is a resounding no" Nor has any Physician who is willing to identify himself and go on record, other then Dr. Nichols, to say it was completely accurate."

Which is irrelevant. SIDNEY wants to discredit the report. That does not put on Dr. Nichols any obligation to prove his report is not fraudulent. It is up to SIDNEY to prove it is fraudulent. So far he has failed miserably.

Anonymous said...

KENHYDERAL:

"Anonymous said: "According to your hero SIDNEY HARR the undistinguished incompetent physician, what Dr. Roberts found was that the autopsy was not fraudulent"......... Huh????"

"Huh????" yourself.

Like SIDNEY, you presume something which has not been proven, that Dr. Nichols report is fraudulent and you expect someone to support SIDNEY.

That is not going to happen. Dr. Harr de facto has admitted that Dr. Roberts has found nothing fraudulent about Dr. Nichols' report.

Anonymous said...

Duke sucks

Anonymous said...

Hey Kenny,

Care to comment on this post?


kilgo said...
I am the poster who formerly posted under the name kilgo. I chose the pseudonym after a former Duke president and current dormitory.

I never contacted kenhyderal. I do not have a player friend who claims to have witnessed a rape by mystery rapists.

As all of the posters on this sorry blog realize, I was nothing but a troll. I spewed hatred at the players in order to irritate other posters, many of whom overreacted to any criticism.

kenhyderal is a clever troll.

He deserves credit for his ability to stay in character as a Canadian friend of Crystal living in Dubai. His mystery rapist theory was troll genius. His decision to invoke me, a pseudonymous troll, as a source was truly inspired.

June 23, 2013 at 4:49 PM

kenhyderal said...

Nice try. So Mr. Kilgo tell us why you don't post under your own user-name "The Great Kilgo" Did you forget your password? Dr. Harr tell us if Mr. Kilgo can still log-on? Can people log-in under more then one user-name? Will his (Google Account) allow for this?

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous Kilgo said: "As all of the posters on this sorry blog realize, I was nothing but a troll. I spewed hatred at the players in order to irritate other posters, many of whom overreacted to any criticism" ...... Golly Kilgo, I never knew you to be so self-deprecating. It's seems right out of character.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous Kilgo said: "His mystery rapist theory was troll genius. His decision to invoke me, a pseudonymous troll, as a source was truly inspired".... .. No you've forgotten it isn't a mystery rapist. The mystery man, is your, supposed, innocent LaX Player friend who witnessed others perpetrating the crime. I'm no genius and it appears neither are you. I certainly am not a troll however. I thought you knew that.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 5:28 said: " Dr. Harr de facto has admitted that Dr. Roberts has found nothing fraudulent about Dr. Nichols' report" This statement is not factual. Dr. Harr has made no such admission de facto or otherwise.

Anonymous said...

Hey Walt, would the prosecution be able to introduce Mangum's prior criminal record into evidence in the Daye trial? Do they have to show that her record establishes a pattern of behavior....? violent? threatening? destructive? i"m curious to know ......when Lovette was recently brought back for a new sentencing hearing for the murder of Eve Carson, I think that hearing included information about his long record and the fact he was charged, and about to be tried, for the murder of a Duke student. Just wondering.......
In a case where it's he said, she said........how would Mangum's claim of a beating by Daye be supportable...since there was no physical evidence of a beating? (unless, of course, she changes her story and now claims it was all psychological, as in the ever-morphing Harr routine.......)

Anonymous said...

Harr initially touted Vann's decision to bring in Roberts, claiming she was an expert. He was VERY defensive about her credentials when posters here questioned her background. In short, Harr "liked" her. Then, she met with Mangum and Vann. At that meeting, per Harr, she essentially told Mangum that there was nothing out of line in the medical record and autopsy findings. Vann did NOT want her to put her findings in writing because (a)it would not have helped Mangum, and (b)her report would have been accessible to the prosecution. Harr, of course, immediately stopped being all mushy about Roberts, saying that she had gone over to the dark side, and THAT was the reason no report was done. (idiot). He even wrote her a letter basically instructing her on what to do. (more idiocy....). Now, he claims the absence of a report proves she is in league with the devil......when, in FACT, Vann was trying to protect his client. Truth is, there never was, nor is there now, anything out of order in the medical record/ and autopsy reports. Because Harr continues to lie simply means he continues to lie........repeating the lie does not make it true. Since that meeting where Roberts told Mangum, per Harr, that there was nothing wrong with the report..........we do not know whether Roberts has had anything further to do with the case. We don't know what contact, if any, Holmes has had with her. I am guessing that Holmes is focusing on what he should be focusing on..........and wasting no time on the silly lies about Daye's care and his autopsy report. Good for Holmes!

Anonymous said...

KENHYDERAL:

"No you've forgotten it isn't a mystery rapist. The mystery man, is your, supposed, innocent LaX Player friend who witnessed others perpetrating the crime. I'm no genius and it appears neither are you. I certainly am not a troll however. I thought you knew that."

You have forgotten that Crystal was not raped. There was no rapist, mystery or otherwise.

Anonymous said...

KENHYDERAL:

"Anonymous @ 5:28 said: " Dr. Harr de facto has admitted that Dr. Roberts has found nothing fraudulent about Dr. Nichols' report" This statement is not factual. Dr. Harr has made no such admission de facto or otherwise."

Yes he has.

Anonymous said...

The poster may have gotten the words tangled up in making the comment about big mouth--small brain....BUT, the description is absolutely accurate in Harr's case. For somebody supposedly interested in , gag me, "social justice" (a code word for all things progressive/liberal), Harr seems to be unable to avoid lying. He lies when the truth would sound better, as my grandfather would say. And when he gets caught in a lie, the man does not even have the decency or character to (a)admit it, or (b)apologize. Instead, he runs off at the mouth, blaming his lies on Mangum's ever-changing lizard behavior, and trying to redirect to some sidebar crap. (like blaming the LEO for starting the fire in the Walker bathtub...and then, when caught in THAT lie....running his mouth about how the LEO should not have called the FD. Gimme break, bro.....you got any pants not burned up?

Anonymous said...

I see Mangum's name on the Superior court calendar for July 1st. What's up with this, Walt, if you happen to know? I thought she had a later trial date set? Wondering if this is Holmes trying for a postponement????

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"I don't know about cajones, but it seems to me that Holmes lacks common sense by not seeking to interview me... the one person who knows more about this case than anyone, and is a doctor, to boot."

Maybe you should explain why you believe you know about the case. What you have published about the case shows you know nothing.

Your legal exploits consist of getting your frivolous lawsuit ignominiously dismissed and practicing law without a license.

And with your credentials, or lack thereof, no one, least of all a competent lawyer, would consider the MD after your name as meaningful.

Anonymous said...

Having a medical degree is NOT a basis for establishment of expertise in ANY medical specialty. Harr would be laughed out of a court room if he tried to represent himself as qualified to render an expert opinion on any medical question.

Anonymous said...

What Harr claims to "know" about the case is based on that infamous liar, Mangum's ever changing report, and on what Harr claims to be the "truth". The "truth" is nothing more than a bucket load of fabrications, halftruths, distortions, and general nonsense....dreamed up by this delusional little man. In short, I know more about the case than Harr does, and I don't know jack sxxx!

Walt said...

Anonymous at 3:40AM wrote: "Hey Walt, would the prosecution be able to introduce Mangum's prior criminal record into evidence in the Daye trial?"

Generally, no. If she does not testify, they cannot get her record in. If she does, then, the state can use her record to impeach her credibility.

"Do they have to show that her record establishes a pattern of behavior....? violent? threatening? destructive?"

They could try to introduce her record to show common plan or purpose to prove the element of intent. That's a weak justification given the other evidence at hand. However, to get to Murder I, they might try.

"i"m curious to know ......when Lovette was recently brought back for a new sentencing hearing for the murder of Eve Carson, I think that hearing included information about his long record and the fact he was charged, and about to be tried, for the murder of a Duke student. Just wondering......."

That was a sentencing hearing, not a trial on the merits. The Court of Appeals left intact the conviction. On sentencing, prior record is an aggrevating circumstance and thus relevant.

"In a case where it's he said, she said........how would Mangum's claim of a beating by Daye be supportable...since there was no physical evidence of a beating?"

You have just highlighted the defense' biggest problem with self-defense. No corroborating evidence.

"(unless, of course, she changes her story and now claims it was all psychological, as in the ever-morphing Harr routine.......)"

That's the Nifong/Harr way of doing things. Don't expect Scott Holmes to fall for that trap. He is a much better lawyer. If her story changes again, you can bet there will be good physical or eye witness evidence to back it up.

Walt-in-Durham

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
No, what the "article" (comical) does is recycle, reinvent, restate, and regurgitate the same old crap you have been slinging for months. Anybody with a brain figured out long ago that you will lie about anything in order get at Duke and to continue your racist rant. There was no medical error. Clearly. Find ONE, just one physician who agrees with your lies .......everybody who has looked at the documentation, including Roberts, who had far greater access to the medical records, and who had the opportunity to review the case in depth, found NOTHING to support any claim of medical error.
Once AGAIN I point out that Duke's NON error has absolutely nothing to do with the case. It is not relevant. You know it. You just gag on it.....and that's kinda fun to watch


Answer me this: Which sequence of events do you believe...
(1) that Daye vomited, went into cardiac arrest, and then was intubated for the first time?
(2) that Daye vomited, was intubated, and then went into cardiac arrest?

Anonymous said...

If Duke had not wanted to take over the mental health system and the medicaid system and dix hospital none of that (this) would have happened in the first place. The whole thing is just another of Duke's power money mongering how can we make everyone and anyone pay trips - as usual.

Anonymous said...

You are trying to create a false premise with two options in your question? An either-or that ignores the reality of Daye's overal condition prior to, during, and subsequent to the intubation event itself. It's a false dichotomy. Daye was failing, potentially with a rising temp, agitation, confusion, and shifting vitals. (this, in a post surgical patient with the kind of wound and repair he had) sounds like infection.......and this possible complication, along with alcohol withdrawal, was being EVALUATED AND RULED OUT. You can boil down a highly complex multi-factorial situation into this first, then this, then this. Anybody who has ever worked in surgical ICUs, in trauma, knows this...absolutely. So, pose all the false misleading and nonsense questions (force choice) you wish.........it only serves to further prove how terribly wrong you are.

Anonymous said...

uh oh, is mistrail recluse baaaaaack?
Medicaid is a STATE funding mechanism to provide funding of various healthcare services for eligible citizens. It is not, nor has it ever been, a takeover target for a private university. Dix Hospital closed, in phases, several years ago. The mental health system, whatever you mean by this, is also STATE operated, if you are referring to STATE hospitals. Duke has, nor will it ever, take over a STATE hospital system. What the hell does this have to do with Mangum?

Anonymous said...

sidney, bless his sad little heart, continues to hang on the evil duke murders poor daye theme. whew..... tickticktick.....July is approaching....."for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for thee"...

Anonymous said...

Harr is trying to do what is called "false cause and effect" logic. It goes like this: "A"happened, then "B". Therefore, "B" was caused by "A". This is third grade, no, first grade thinking and logic. "It rained this morning. There was a car wreck. Therefore, the wreck was caused by the rain". Dumb and dumber.

Anonymous said...

Thanks, Walt. I see the clear distinction on the sentencing versus trial setting.
Would you mind spending a few minutes explaing how/if/whether the judge can shape the charge to the jury....in terms of possible verdict choices? What I mean is this: Can the judge, by his or her authority, tell the jury that they can find Mangum guilty or not guilty of murder 1, and/or guilty/not guilty of manslaughter? etc.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"Answer me this: Which sequence of events do you believe..."

First you should document you have the authority to demand an answer.

"(1) that Daye vomited, went into cardiac arrest, and then was intubated for the first time?
(2) that Daye vomited, was intubated, and then went into cardiac arrest?"

The most likely scenario is @1, that Reginald Daye vomited, aspirated, went into Cardiac arrest and was intubated.

Dr. Anonymous

kenhyderal said...

Coincidental vs. causal is something that always needs to be determined in a cause and effect scenario.

Walt said...

Anonymous at 12:21 wrote: "Walt, how would a judge instruct a jury regarding a self defense claim, in terms of what has to be proved, etc? Burden? Ability to flee versus fight?"

North Carolina recognizes two different types of self-defense defenses. Perfect and Imperfect. Perfect self-defense excuses a killing altogether if, at the time of the killing, the four elements of perfect self defense are present. St. v. Norris, 303 N.C. 526 at 530, 279 S.E.2d 570 at 573 (1981). To benefit from perfect self-defense the defendant must prove:
1. she believed it necessary to kill the deceased in order to save herself from death or great bodily harm. St. v. Deck 285 N.C.209, 203 S.E.2d 830 (1974),
2. that the defendant's belief was reasonable (reasonable person test). St. v. Ellerbe, 223 N.C. 770, 28 S.E.2d 619 (1944),
3. that the defendant was not hte aggressor in bringing on the affray. St. v. Wynn, 279 N.C. 513, 180 S.E.2d 135 (1971), and
4. the defendant did not use excessive force. St. v. Woods, 278 N.C. 210, 197 S.E.2d 358 (1971).

If the defendant believed it was necessary to kill the deceased in order to save herself from death or great bodily harm and if the defendant's belief was reasonable, but the defendant was the aggressor or she used excessive force, the defendant has only tan imperfect right of self-defense. St. v. Norris, 303 N.C. 526, 270 S.E.2d 570 (1981). Having lost the benefit of perfect self-defense, the defendant is guilty of at least voluntary manslaughter. St. v. Potter, 295 N.C. 573, 244 S.E.2d 397 (1997) and St. v. Norris, supra.

Walt-in-Durham

Anonymous said...

Got it, walt. so, I am guessing Mangum would have a VERY difficult time getting to a perfect self defense outcome. listening to zimmerman trial and one of the commentators mentioned she did not know why the prosecution had not brought in a lesser charge, to go along with the second degree....she thought it was overcharging....that the prosecution was willing to risk it all......to get second degree in a high profile case. so, it's all or nothing for the prosecution with mangum? ......

Walt said...

Anonymous at 9:49 wrote: "Thanks, Walt. I see the clear distinction on the sentencing versus trial setting.
Would you mind spending a few minutes explaing how/if/whether the judge can shape the charge to the jury....in terms of possible verdict choices? What I mean is this: Can the judge, by his or her authority, tell the jury that they can find Mangum guilty or not guilty of murder 1, and/or guilty/not guilty of manslaughter? etc."


The jury instructions must be read as a whole. St. v. Cook, 263 N.C. 730, 140 S.E.2d 305 (1965). If the instructions contain a full and fair summary of the evidence and contentions of the parties, together with an accurate stement and explaination of the applicable principles of law, they are sufficient. St. v. Yoes, 271 N.C. 616, 157 S.E.2d 386. (1967). The best way to meet the court's requirement, is to use the N.C. Pattern Jury Instructions.

As a practical matter, the court will tell the two sides to proffer jury instructions before trial or at the latest at the close of evidence. There will be an instructions conference where the lawyers and the trial judge will hash out which instructions are correct. Then, the judge and the lawyers will put them in a, hopefully, logical order so they can be read to the jury after closing arguments.

Walt-in-Durham

Walt said...

Anonymous at 10:15 wrote: "Got it, walt. so, I am guessing Mangum would have a VERY difficult time getting to a perfect self defense outcome. listening to zimmerman trial and one of the commentators mentioned she did not know why the prosecution had not brought in a lesser charge, to go along with the second degree....she thought it was overcharging....that the prosecution was willing to risk it all......to get second degree in a high profile case. so, it's all or nothing for the prosecution with mangum? ......"

I don't know what the law is in Florida, but in N.C. lesser included offenses do not have to be charged. They can arise at the instructions conference. In Crystal's case they have her charged with Murder I and the lesser included.

Walt-in-Durham

Walt said...

Sid wrote: "Answer me this: Which sequence of events do you believe...."

It does not matter, neither is an intervening cause. St. v. Welch.

Walt-in-Durham

Anonymous said...

ah, the lesser is included. got it. thank you.

Anonymous said...

To those of us whose lives, loves and families are deeply affected by tomorrow's SCOTUS rulings on DOMA and Prop 8, tonight is a night of prayerful reflection and hope. I am in my seventh decade and wish, with all my heart, to marry the one I love before I die. I know this topic is not the subject of this web site; it is the subject on my heart tonight. If sidney harr believes in social justice, then perhaps he will reconsider his hurtful and shameful alliance with Victoria Peterson. Tonight, it's all about hope....and belief....and faith.....that fairness and equal rights will prevail over bigotry.

Walt said...

Anon at 5:51, NC's vote on Amendment 1 was foolishness of the worst kind. I hope the Supremes find a way out of it for all of us who really believe in equal protection.

Walt-in-Durham

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 5:51 said: "To those of us whose lives, loves and families are deeply affected by tomorrow's SCOTUS rulings on DOMA and Prop 8, tonight is a night of prayerful reflection and hope. I am in my seventh decade and wish, with all my heart, to marry the one I love before I die. I know this topic is not the subject of this web site; it is the subject on my heart tonight. If sidney harr believes in social justice, then perhaps he will reconsider his hurtful and shameful alliance with Victoria Peterson. Tonight, it's all about hope....and belief....and faith.....that fairness and equal rights will prevail over bigotry" ........ Amen

Walt said...

Anonymous at 10:15 AM wrote: "Got it, walt. so, I am guessing Mangum would have a VERY difficult time getting to a perfect self defense outcome."

I think the NC Supreme Court said it best: "deadly force is not privileged against nondeadly force." State v. Pearson, 288 N.C. 34, ___ S.E.2d ___ (1975), and the Court of Appeals in State v. Nixon, 117 N.C. App. 141 at 150, 450 S.E.2d 562 at 567, (1994).

Walt-in-Durham

Nifong Supporter said...


Walt said...
Sid wrote: "Answer me this: Which sequence of events do you believe...."

It does not matter, neither is an intervening cause. St. v. Welch.

Walt-in-Durham


Hah! Avoiding the question!! I don't blame you because you're smart enough to know that either scenario puts Duke in a bad light.

By the way, Mangum's trial has been moved up to July 1, 2013, as a commenter stated earlier.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
SIDNEY HARR:

"Answer me this: Which sequence of events do you believe..."

First you should document you have the authority to demand an answer.

"(1) that Daye vomited, went into cardiac arrest, and then was intubated for the first time?
(2) that Daye vomited, was intubated, and then went into cardiac arrest?"

The most likely scenario is @1, that Reginald Daye vomited, aspirated, went into Cardiac arrest and was intubated.

Dr. Anonymous

Anonymous said...
SIDNEY HARR:

"Answer me this: Which sequence of events do you believe..."

First you should document you have the authority to demand an answer.

"(1) that Daye vomited, went into cardiac arrest, and then was intubated for the first time?
(2) that Daye vomited, was intubated, and then went into cardiac arrest?"

The most likely scenario is @1, that Reginald Daye vomited, aspirated, went into Cardiac arrest and was intubated.

Dr. Anonymous


So, you believe the following:
(1) Daye vomited;
(2) He aspirated;
(3) The Duke medical staff did nothing;
(4) The aspiration eventually led to cardiac arrest;
(5) CPR was begun with Daye being intubated; and
(6) after 20 minutes of CPR (including oxygen via the endotracheal tube), Daye's heart was resuscitated.

The problem, as I see it, is that no action was taken to address the possibility of aspiration after he vomited.

I believe the staff did the right thing by intubating him after he vomited... the only problem is that the intubation was esophageal which made certain that he would go into cardiac arrest.

Nifong Supporter said...


I would like to thank commenters for all of the enlightenment they provide for us all. For instance, I was unaware that the Court Date for Crystal Mangum's trial to begin had been moved from Monday, July 8, 2013 to Monday, July 1, 2013. I would've shown up at the Durham Courthouse one week late... and of course the media would've missed everything, too.

So thank you, again, commenters for providing a great service, whether intended or not. It is much appreciated.

That is what makes this blog site great!

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"Hah! Avoiding the question!! I don't blame you because you're smart enough to know that either scenario puts Duke in a bad light."

HAH!! SIDNEY the less than artful dodger says someone is dodging the question.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"So, you believe the following:"

NO

You believe:


"(1) Daye vomited;
(2) He aspirated;
(3) The Duke medical staff did nothing;
(4) The aspiration eventually led to cardiac arrest;
(5) CPR was begun with Daye being intubated; and
(6) after 20 minutes of CPR (including oxygen via the endotracheal tube), Daye's heart was resuscitated."

I said I believe that Mr. Daye vomited, aspirated, and then went into Cardiac arrest, for which he was intubated. If you were a competent experienced physician you would know that said sequence of events can happen in a matter of seconds.

"The problem, as I see it, is that no action was taken to address the possibility of aspiration after he vomited."

That is because you are blind. as well as incompetent.

"I believe the staff did the right thing by intubating him after he vomited... the only problem is that the intubation was esophageal which made certain that he would go into cardiac arrest."

There was no evidence of esophageal intubation. That you claim there was is prima facie evidence that you are inexperienced and incompetent.

Dr. Anonymous

You believe:

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"I would like to thank commenters for all of the enlightenment they provide for us all. For instance, I was unaware that the Court Date for Crystal Mangum's trial to begin had been moved from Monday, July 8, 2013 to Monday, July 1, 2013. I would've shown up at the Durham Courthouse one week late... and of course the media would've missed everything, too."

So you, who castigated Walt for dodging issues, are dodging having to explain why the case is going to trial.

"So thank you, again, commenters for providing a great service, whether intended or not. It is much appreciated.

That is what makes this blog site great!"

BULLSHIT! The only thing that is great on this blog site is the overinflated megalomaniacal opinion you have of your own importance.

Anonymous said...

I am the person who posted the july 1st date. I did so, wondering if there were going to be some kind of hearing on a motion to further delay the trial? It doesn't seem at all clear, just from looking at the calendar, that the trial itself begins that date. I am not a lawyer. I am not a law clerk. I have no clue......just wondering.

Anonymous said...

DOMA IS DEAD! Stick that in your ear, Victoria

Anonymous said...

I think sidney harr ought to demonstrate some true conviction that translates into behavior....if he is really serious about social justice and equal rights. I think he ought to DISassociate himself from victoria peterson, remove her photo from his web site, and disavow any form of endorsement from her. Shame on him if he does not do this.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
I think sidney harr ought to demonstrate some true conviction that translates into behavior....if he is really serious about social justice and equal rights. I think he ought to DISassociate himself from victoria peterson, remove her photo from his web site, and disavow any form of endorsement from her. Shame on him if he does not do this.


The Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong is an inclusive grass roots organization, which Ms. Peterson co-founded with me. She has a right to be a member as she shares the view that Mike Nifong was selectively and unjustly disbarred.

I do not pretend to make judgments on other individual members' beliefs, opinions, or ideologies. Personally, I think many of the personal attacks against her by commenters are unwarranted.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
I am the person who posted the july 1st date. I did so, wondering if there were going to be some kind of hearing on a motion to further delay the trial? It doesn't seem at all clear, just from looking at the calendar, that the trial itself begins that date. I am not a lawyer. I am not a law clerk. I have no clue......just wondering.


Again, thank you for informing me about the change with your comment. Otherwise, I might have never known.

As you know, I am not a lawyer, nor do I pretend to be, but my non-lawyerly belief is that the actual trial date of July 8, 2013, was scheduled at Mangum's last hearing many months ago when she requested that Scott Holmes represent her.

So, I believe that the trial is now set to begin on Monday, July 1, 2013. (I believe the date was moved up so that many of Mangum's supporters would be caught off guard and miss the court appearance.)

I don't know what to expect on Monday, but I strongly believe that unless the prosecution and Holmes try to clandestinely push through some sort of plea deal, the most likely outcome will be a continuance.

I believe this, in part, because to my knowledge the defense has done nothing in the way of preparation or investigation.

My odds are with a continuance.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
SIDNEY HARR:

"I would like to thank commenters for all of the enlightenment they provide for us all. For instance, I was unaware that the Court Date for Crystal Mangum's trial to begin had been moved from Monday, July 8, 2013 to Monday, July 1, 2013. I would've shown up at the Durham Courthouse one week late... and of course the media would've missed everything, too."

So you, who castigated Walt for dodging issues, are dodging having to explain why the case is going to trial.

"So thank you, again, commenters for providing a great service, whether intended or not. It is much appreciated.

That is what makes this blog site great!"

BULLSHIT! The only thing that is great on this blog site is the overinflated megalomaniacal opinion you have of your own importance.


Actually, as I have stated many times before, I have a marked tendency towards being an underinflated micromaniac. What gives my comments strength is that I am at one with the truth and committed to spreading enlightenment.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
SIDNEY HARR:

"So, you believe the following:"

NO

You believe:


"(1) Daye vomited;
(2) He aspirated;
(3) The Duke medical staff did nothing;
(4) The aspiration eventually led to cardiac arrest;
(5) CPR was begun with Daye being intubated; and
(6) after 20 minutes of CPR (including oxygen via the endotracheal tube), Daye's heart was resuscitated."

I said I believe that Mr. Daye vomited, aspirated, and then went into Cardiac arrest, for which he was intubated. If you were a competent experienced physician you would know that said sequence of events can happen in a matter of seconds.

"The problem, as I see it, is that no action was taken to address the possibility of aspiration after he vomited."

That is because you are blind. as well as incompetent.

"I believe the staff did the right thing by intubating him after he vomited... the only problem is that the intubation was esophageal which made certain that he would go into cardiac arrest."

There was no evidence of esophageal intubation. That you claim there was is prima facie evidence that you are inexperienced and incompetent.

Dr. Anonymous


So, Dr. Anonymous, you believe the following:
1) Duke staff decided to do a diagnostic study that required oral contrast in an agitated person of questionable level of consciousness;
2) Duke staff, aware that oral contrast agent is inherently nauseating and prone to cause vomiting, administered it through a naso-gastric tube without first protecting the airway;
3) That Daye vomited and immediately cause him to go into cardiac arrest within a matter of seconds;
4) Duke staff then began CPR which included intubation... which you believe was properly placed in the trachea; and
5) After checking blood gas levels and finding them to be distressing, determined that the results would be improved by removing the properly placed endotracheal tube and replacing it with another one.

Is that your story? If so, it doesn't make sense, Doctor A.

Lance the Supreme Poster of Enlightenment said...

"I do not pretend to make judgments on other individual members' beliefs, opinions, or ideologies."

Really? Have you read your own "Nifong Manifesto", and the judgments made on Rae Evans, Roy Cooper, and the NC State Bar?

As Break The Conspiracy noted (and you agreed):

"Sidney reaches his conclusions independent of his analysis of the facts. His conclusions are based on what he wants to believe....

Once he has reached his conclusion, he begins to evaluate the facts. He ignores any facts that contradict his conclusion (e.g., Mangum's written statement, the law relating to intervening causes) and exaggerates beyond all belief the importance of facts that he believes support his conclusion..."

Anonymous said...

So, in other words, sidney, you would lay down with a homophobic bigoted asshat like peterson because she agreed with your racist views? Is that it? just lay down with pretty much anybody so long as they are a racist wing nut, right. It doesn't matter that she made obscene remarks about gay people and their diseases, right, sidney? Noooooo, you don't give a horse's ass whether she is a bigot. Lay down with a pig and you will smell like sxxx.

Anonymous said...

sidney doesn't make judgments on other "members", Lance. You have to be in his little club, with your little decoder ring, and your little t-shirt. Otherwise, the man from glad, or wherever, consider you unworthy of avoiding judgement.........because after all, all the rest of us are evil white oppressors, in league with rae evans, and out to string up Sister

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"The Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong is an inclusive grass roots organization, which Ms. Peterson co-founded with me. She has a right to be a member as she shares the view that Mike Nifong was selectively and unjustly disbarred."

No, the J$N gang is a lynch mob devoted to convincing the public that innocent Lacrosse players raped Crystal.

I do not pretend to make judgments on other individual members' beliefs, opinions, or ideologies."

No, you make judgements about the innocent Duke Lacrosse players based on your guilt presuming racism.

"Personally, I think many of the personal attacks against her by commenters are unwarranted."

You are totally divorced from reality.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"
Again, thank you for informing me about the change with your comment. Otherwise, I might have never known.

"As you know, I am not a lawyer, nor do I pretend to be, but my non-lawyerly belief is that the actual trial date of July 8, 2013, was scheduled at Mangum's last hearing many months ago when she requested that Scott Holmes represent her."

Yes you do pretend you are a lawyer, fortunately for the world, not very effectively.

So, I believe that the trial is now set to begin on Monday, July 1, 2013. (I believe the date was moved up so that many of Mangum's supporters would be caught off guard and miss the court appearance.)"

Maybe so. However, Mangum's supporters attending the court hearing would be to her as cataclysmic as a tsunami, and the court was protecting her.

"I don't know what to expect on Monday, but I strongly believe that unless the prosecution and Holmes try to clandestinely push through some sort of plea deal, the most likely outcome will be a continuance."

Delusions.

"I believe this, in part, because to my knowledge the defense has done nothing in the way of preparation or investigation."

And you have shown your knowledge is as solid as melted jello.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"Actually, as I have stated many times before, I have a marked tendency towards being an underinflated micromaniac. What gives my comments strength is that I am at one with the truth and committed to spreading enlightenment."

Boy are you totally divorced from reality.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"So, Dr. Anonymous, you believe the following:
1) Duke staff decided to do a diagnostic study that required oral contrast in an agitated person of questionable level of consciousness;
2) Duke staff, aware that oral contrast agent is inherently nauseating and prone to cause vomiting, administered it through a naso-gastric tube without first protecting the airway;
3) That Daye vomited and immediately cause him to go into cardiac arrest within a matter of seconds;
4) Duke staff then began CPR which included intubation... which you believe was properly placed in the trachea; and
5) After checking blood gas levels and finding them to be distressing, determined that the results would be improved by removing the properly placed endotracheal tube and replacing it with another one.

No, SIDNEY, what you believe is the following:

"1) Duke staff decided to do a diagnostic study that required oral contrast in an agitated person of questionable level of consciousness;
2) Duke staff, aware that oral contrast agent is inherently nauseating and prone to cause vomiting, administered it through a naso-gastric tube without first protecting the airway;
3) That Daye vomited and immediately cause him to go into cardiac arrest within a matter of seconds;
4) Duke staff then began CPR which included intubation... which you believe was properly placed in the trachea; and
5) After checking blood gas levels and finding them to be distressing, determined that the results would be improved by removing the properly placed endotracheal tube and replacing it with another one "

"Is that your story? If so, it doesn't make sense, Doctor A."

No that is your story. You seem now to be trying to deny it. Too late. You have already exposed yourself as an inexperienced, totally incompetent physician. No amount of denial on your part will reverse that.

Dr. Anonymous

Anonymous said...

Walt is right. Sidney's ridiculous blather about the damn tube is totally irrelevant, though I happen to agree totally with Dr. Anon......who is correct. Sidney simply hides behind false issues because he is too much of a coward to face the real truth......and that truth is that Mangum killed a man. She is a killer. She may, depending on what a jury decides, also be a murderer. But Sidney wants to put on his little white coat, and his little stethoscope....and play doctor. That's fine, sidney........run and play....and let the adults have a conversation about the real issues

Lance the Supreme Poster of Enlightenment said...

"Many of them are infected with diseases, and their lifestyles are very, very dangerous...Many don't live to be senior citizens. Who's going to pay this expense if they get sick in their [ ________ ] lifestyle?"


Sidney - Just curious...What word can I fill in the blank with here that would preclude me from being a member of your J4N gang?

Would "attorney" prevent from being a member? What about "stripper", or better yet. "prostitute"?

What about "nigger"?

If I were to make this statement in public, on the record, with any of the words I've identified, could I still be a member of J4N?

I seriously want to know.

Walt said...

Lance, I am sure the word irrational features prominently in the J4N membership criteria. That is, to be a member one has to be irrational in their beliefs. They have to believe that a 200 lb. man can be simultaneoulsy at an ATM and savagely assaulting a woman across town. They have to irrationally believe that DNA does not exist. They have to irrationally believe that a 5'4" woman can levitate in a tiny bathroom, the same tiny bathroom that accomodates 3-30 men, at least one of which is able to be in more than one place at the same time. To be a member, they have to irrationally believe that a prosecutor can lie to the court and adverse counsel without sanction. They have to believe the same prosecutor can conceal exculpatory evidence yet complain loudly if any other prosecutor does the same thing. To be a member they have to believe that the plain language of a law requiring state action does not apply at all to them. They have to believe that it is acceptable to kill some people who get in the way of their narrative. To be a member of J4N, they have to believe fantasy over fact. So, it's no real surprise that there would be an unreconstructed gay basher in that crowd.

Walt-in-Durham

kenhyderal said...

Walt, as usual, you are being completely disingenuous. I am not a member of The J4Nifong Committee but everyone knows that Seligmann was obviously, un-intentionally, misidentified by Crystal in the flawed photo line-up that she was subjected to. The size of the bathroom is totally irrelevant and the number of assailants who could fit in the room is a complete red herring; something that the Defence has made a big deal out of. This was not a case of how many College Students can you fit in a phone booth or a Volkswagen. A vainly struggling Crystal has her legs lifted off the floor. And, what's all this hyperbole about killing someone who doesn't buy into the victims version of events.

Anonymous said...

KENHYDERAL:

"Walt, as usual, you are being completely disingenuous. I am not a member of The J4Nifong Committee"

Nevertheless you are highly irrational in your beliefs about what happened to Crystal on the night of 13/14 March 2006.

"but everyone knows that Seligmann was obviously, un-intentionally, misidentified by Crystal in the flawed photo line-up that she was subjected to."

Correction. Mr. Seligman was fingered as a suspect by Crystal when she could have honestly said, I don't recognize him.

"The size of the bathroom is totally irrelevant and the number of assailants who could fit in the room is a complete red herring; something that the Defence has made a big deal out of."

The size of the bathroom is relevant for the simple reason that Crystal alleged she had been raped by multiple men in a bath room that could not accomodate multiple adults.

This was not a case of how many College Students can you fit in a phone booth or a Volkswagen. A vainly struggling Crystal has her legs lifted off the floor."

There you show your irrationality. You insist in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary that Crystal was raped. There was no evidence that Crystal was raped.

"And, what's all this hyperbole about killing someone who doesn't buy into the victims version of events."

In case you haven't noticed, during the phoney rape case, the new black panthers were threatening one of the innocent defendants with death. Others, specifically the pot bangers were threatening members of the Lacrosse team with violence. This was all on behalf of a false accuser/victimizer.

And your attitude. as I have said before, is an irrational, racist based presumption of guilt on the part of the innocent Lacrosse team members and on the part of some other innocent Caucasian men.

Anonymous said...

Ken Edwards will persis in his racist lies. Who gives a damn. come on back from the desert and let sister move in with you, bro.

Nifong Supporter said...


Lance the Supreme Poster of Enlightenment said...
"Many of them are infected with diseases, and their lifestyles are very, very dangerous...Many don't live to be senior citizens. Who's going to pay this expense if they get sick in their [ ________ ] lifestyle?"


Sidney - Just curious...What word can I fill in the blank with here that would preclude me from being a member of your J4N gang?

Would "attorney" prevent from being a member? What about "stripper", or better yet. "prostitute"?

What about "nigger"?

If I were to make this statement in public, on the record, with any of the words I've identified, could I still be a member of J4N?

I seriously want to know.


Those eligible to join the Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong need to be eighteen or older and reside on the planet Earth.

Information about joining is present on the official website page.

Nifong Supporter said...


HEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP.
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT!

It is my intention of posting the July 2013 flogazine this coming Sunday, June 30, 2013.

As you were.

Walt said...

Kenheyderal wrote: "I am not a member of The J4Nifong Committee but everyone knows that Seligmann was obviously, un-intentionally, misidentified by Crystal in the flawed photo line-up that she was subjected to."

At least you are capable of admitting the obvious that the lineup procedures were flawed. Indeed they were unduly suggestive. And, approved by Mike Nifong. Thanks for admitting the flaw in the lineup. There's hope for you yet. Of course, you did point out that you are not a member of the committee.

Walt-in-Durham

kenhyderal said...

I was not aware that District Attorneys like former D.A. Mike Nifong approved or disapproved of the protocols, in place, for conducting police line-ups

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"Those eligible to join the Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong need to be eighteen or older and reside on the planet Earth.

Information about joining is present on the official website page."

Which only means you are desperate for people to join your SIDNEY HARR admiration society.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"It is my intention of posting the July 2013 flogazine this coming Sunday, June 30, 2013."

Which means SIDNEY wants to further pollute June as well as pollute July.

Anonymous said...

KENHYDERAL:

"I was not aware that District Attorneys like former D.A. Mike Nifong approved or disapproved of the protocols, in place, for conducting police line-ups".

That is because you are willfully ignorant.

There are guidelines for a proper lineup. The lineup is to contain a number of fillers, i.e. people known to be innocent of the alleged crime. The complaining witness is not to know in advance who is a suspect and who is a filler. The lineup is to be conducted by a police officer who does not know who is a suspect and who is a filler. The whole idea is to get a reliable identification. E.G. if there had been fillers and Crystal identified a filler with 100% certainty, it would have further established her non credibility.

The lineup about which we are discussing contained only suspects, it was conducted by an officer involved in the investigation, and Crystal was told the lineup contained only suspects. It was a lineup which was designed to pick members of the Lacrosse team as people to be indicted. IT WAS ORDERED BY CORRUPT DA NIFONG.

And even though the lineup was flawed from the start, Crystal could not reliably identify who was at the alleged crime scene and who was not. If that was not circumstantial evidence that no rape happened, then what was.

Now you are going to go into your unteneable Chloral Hydrate hypothesis for it to be a theory it has to have evidence. You have none.

kenhyderal said...

I am not a member of the J4N Committee because I disagree with some of the views of some of it's members. I believe former DA Nifong is an extremely capable and well respected individual who can defend himself without support from some guy outside of North Carolina. On the other hand the victim, Miss Crystal Mangum, is a dear friend of mine and she does not have the resources to combat the horrendous injustices she has been subjected to by evil doers and by a corrupt judicial system. I assume many of you stay as members of the blog despite the sick racist statements that often appear here

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 1:25 said: IT WAS ORDERED BY CORRUPT DA NIFONG": So, are you saying that the format of that photo line-up was designed by D.A. Nifong? Is this format used in all cases or are you saying D.A. Nifong personally intervened to prejudicially designed it for nefarious purposes and if so do you have evidence of this? What about utter incompetence by the Durham Police

Anonymous said...

KENHYDERAL:

"I am not a member of the J4N Committee because I disagree with some of the views of some of it's members."

You are still as crazy and rcist as most of them.

"I believe former DA Nifong is an extremely capable and well respected individual"

That is because you choose to be willfully ignorant.

"who can defend himself without support from some guy outside of North Carolina."

No he can't. Look how much public time he sought when he was wrongfully prosecuting the innocent Lacrosse players. Now he hides rather than defend himself.

"On the other hand the victim, Miss Crystal Mangum, is a dear friend of mine"

You may have a dear friend, but "the victim, Miss Crystal Mangum" is a person who has never existed.

"and she does not have the resources to combat the horrendous injustices she has been subjected to by evil doers and by a corrupt judicial system."

Like SIDNEY, you choose to be divorced from reality.

"I assume many of you stay as members of the blog despite the sick racist statements that often appear here".

I stay here to refute the not so slick racist statements you make. I do not have to make a fool out of you. You are already quite accomplished at that.

Anonymous said...

KENHYDERAL:

"Anonymous @ 1:25 said: IT WAS ORDERED BY CORRUPT DA NIFONG": So, are you saying that the format of that photo line-up was designed by D.A. Nifong?"

In a resounding word, YES!!!

"Is this format used in all cases[?]"

Obviously no.

"or are you saying D.A. Nifong personally intervened to prejudicially designed it for nefarious purposes and if so do you have evidence of this?"

That is exactly what I and others are saying. It is a matter of public record that CORRUPT DA NIFONG ordered the improper lineup.

"What about utter incompetence by the Durham Police[?]"

I say again, it is a matter of public record that DA Nifong controlled the police investigation and ordered the improper lineup. That you choose to be aware of the public record is your problem.

If the lineup was solely due to utter incompetence on the part of the Durham Police, why did corrupt DA NIFONG proceed to seek indictments on the basis of the IDs Crystal made? If DA NIFONG were such a competent DA, he would have realized the lineup was not proper and he would not have proceeded to seek indictments.

Either way, DA Nifong was corrupt.

Anonymous said...

KENHYDERAL:

"[Crystal] does not have the resources to combat the horrendous injustices she has been subjected to by evil doers and by a corrupt judicial system."

What you consider "horrendous injustices" by a "corrupt judicial system" is that innocent Caucasian men were not wrongfully convicted of raping Crystal Mangum, the false accuser who, even before she became infamous as a false accuser, had rung up a record of criminal violence.

It is irrefutable direct evidence of your blatant unrepentant racism.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @1:57 said: "I stay here to refute the not so slick racist statements you make" ......... "Can you give an example of a racist statement I have made?".....

Anonymous said...

Kenny: everyone knows that Seligmann was obviously, un-intentionally, misidentified by Crystal in the flawed photo line-up

Do you have credible evidence that Crystal's misidentification was un-intentional?

Anonymous said...

KENHYDERAL:

"Anonymous @1:57 said: "I stay here to refute the not so slick racist statements you make" ......... "Can you give an example of a racist statement I have made?"..... "

How about this:

"[Crystal] does not have the resources to combat the horrendous injustices she has been subjected to by evil doers and by a corrupt judicial system."

You say this because Crystal is black and you believe, without any justification, that innocent Caucasian men raped her. That is racist, whether you want to own up to it or not.

Lance the Supreme Poster of Enlightenment said...

I can see why Kenhyderal refuses to become a member.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 3:05 said: "You say this because Crystal is black and you believe, without any justification, that innocent Caucasian men raped her. That is racist, whether you want to own up to it or not"...... I was not asking what spin you would like to put on things I say or believe. What I've asked from you is to post a direct quote of a racist statement I have made. Good luck in finding one. Here's a tip; I do not use the 18th Century scientifically inaccurate discredited designation of Caucasian nor do I use the terms Mongoloid, Negroid or Australoid either. Your attacks on me appear to be a clear case of projection. It's seems like a feeble attempt by someone ashamed of their own bigotry to try turn the tables on me. Calling me a racist is laughable and just plain ignorant

Anonymous said...

I note that yet again Kenny ignores a request that he provide evidence to support his assertions.

Anonymous said...

KENHYDERAL:

"I was not asking what spin you would like to put on things I say or believe. What I've asked from you is to post a direct quote of a racist statement I have made."

What you have said on many occasions is that Crystal was raped by Caucasian men and that the crime was either covered up or mishandled. There was no crime. That you continue to insist there was is your blatant unrepentant racism.

"Good luck in finding one. Here's a tip; I do not use the 18th Century scientifically inaccurate discredited designation of Caucasian nor do I use the terms Mongoloid, Negroid or Australoid either."

In other words you try to make something out of nothing in order to hide your racism.

"Your attacks on me appear to be a clear case of projection. It's seems like a feeble attempt by someone ashamed of their own bigotry to try turn the tables on me. Calling me a racist is laughable and just plain ignorant".

No it isn't. It is exposing you to truths you do not want to face.

Anonymous said...

ANONYMOUS:

I will come to Kenny's defense.

I do not believe Kenny is a racist. He is simply a troll, albeit a highly effective one.

There is no evidence to support his assertions that he actually believes the nonsense he posts. His failure to make any attempt to support his outrageous claims (or even to engage in an honest debate) supports the view that his motivation is primarily to annoy other posters and to provoke them to overreact.

Your responses to him demonstrate that he has been successful.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous June 29, 2013 at 6:50 AM

Nice try.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous June 29, 2013 at 7:07AM:

On what basis do you claim that Kenny is not a troll and that he actually believes the nonsense he posts. His assertions are not sufficient.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous June 29, 2013 at 7:21 AM

Another nice try.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous June 29, 2013 at 7:38 AM

Nice avoidance.

Anonymous said...

Kenny: I believe former DA Nifong is an extremely capable and well respected individual

Interesting.

Mike Nifong's explanation of his activities essentially boiled down to a claim that he was lazy and incompetent.

He didn't know what was in the discovery file because he did not review it. He did not know the DNASI report was incomplete because he never read it. He did not know what was discussed in the 3 meetings at DNASI because he didn't listen. He never spoke to Mangum about the case even though the case relied almost exclusively on her testimony.

In response to criticism that he approached this case with "studied ignorance," Nifong claimed that he generally prosecuted cases this way. He frequently did not look at the case file until the night before trial.

Kenny, you seem to be implying that Nifong is a liar.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous June 29, 2013 at 7:43 AM

Yet another nice try.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 6:50 AM said: "I do not believe Kenny is a racist. He is simply a troll, albeit a highly effective one" ....... For me to be a troll would require that I was not a friend of Crystal Mangum whose purpose here was to help and defend her. People here seem to like to throw out terms like troll and racist, pretty freely, at persons with a different point of view from their meta-narrative that Crystal, instead of being a victim, was an evil femme fatale who set out to exploit some poor, innocent, defenceless choir boys

Walt said...

kenhyderal wrote: "So, are you saying that the format of that photo line-up was designed by D.A. Nifong?".

No, but it was approved by him after she failed to identify anyone using the a variation of DPD's normal lineup procedure. A procedure that even initially departed in some minor ways from the one approved by the DPD in its General Order Book.

"Is this format used in all cases or are you saying D.A. Nifong personally intervened to prejudicially designed it for nefarious purposes...."

The DPD has a General Order Book which, among many other things sets out the process for conducting a lineup. Jim Hardin when he was DA the former Police Chief and the Superior Court Judges sat down with the Capital Defenders and the Durham County Public Defender and revised the DPD's General Order on lineups to come up with a method that would result in much less suggestive lineups and fewer reversals on appeal. After Crystal failed ot identify anyone as her attacker[s] the DPD went to Nifong with the idea of the no wrong answers lineup to "just pick people who were at the party." That Nifong did approve. Thankfully, it was a one time only deal and the DPD has reverted to following the procedure let out in the General Order Book.

"... and if so do you have evidence of this?"

Yes, former Detective Gottlieb testified to that in his deposition and live testimony before the bar.

"What about utter incompetence by the Durham Police?"

That is possible, but not the fact in this case. The police testified that they deliberately departed from procedure in the GO book. Further, Nifong as the attorney on the case had a responsibility not to use a flawed identification in court. He was the one formerly admitted to the bar and he should have known the law. He ignored his duty and at proceeded forward with the case knowing that he had no admissible evidence of identity. That violates Rule 3.8(a) of the North Carolina Rules of Professional Conduct.

Walt-in-Durham

Anonymous said...

KENHYDERAL:

"For me to be a troll would require that I was not a friend of Crystal Mangum whose purpose here was to help and defend her."

It is hardly something to brag about that you are trying to convict innocent Caucasian men of a crime that did not happen.

"People here seem to like to throw out terms like troll and racist, pretty freely, at persons with a different point of view from their meta-narrative that Crystal, instead of being a victim, was an evil femme fatale who set out to exploit some poor, innocent, defenceless choir boys".

The Lacrosse players, like all of us are human. However since no crime was committed at the Lacrosse party, they were innocent, as were all the male attendees at the party.

That "Crystal, instead of being a victim, was an evil femme fatale who set out to exploit some [obviously]...innocent [men]" is about the most truthful thing you have ever said, even if you said it unintentionally.

Except the part of femme fatale. Contrary to your propaganda, Crystal was not and is not a particularly desirable woman. To be a femme fatale, a woman has to be attractive.

Anonymous said...

Kenny: People here seem to like to throw out terms like troll and racist, pretty freely, at persons with a different point of view from their meta-narrative

Now you, as usual, are being disingenuous.

I concluded that you were a troll, not because you expressed a different point of view, but because you fail to make any attempt to support your outrageous claims or to engage in honest debate. You ignore requests for evidence to support your claims. I noted this in the comment from which you selectively quoted.

For me to be a troll would require that I was not a friend of Crystal Mangum whose purpose here was to help and defend her.

You have done nothing to demonstrate your friendship. Mangum faces serious charges. A friend would not have entrusted Mangum's defense to Harr, even to the point of fallowing her to fire her counsel and represent herself against murder charges. Harr is a complete moron. You exposed yourself when you raised no objections to his interference.

kenhyderal said...

Crystal will be the one to judge who her friends are and who they are that have her best interests at heart. It was Crystal, herself, who determined that Shella and Vann were not acting in her best interests. As Court appointees they seemed awfully eager to dispose of the matter quickly, probably because of time and money, without considering Crystal's innocence and the effect accepting a felony guilty plea would have on her ability to regain custody of her children. The evidence I've heard makes me believe she is innocent by reason of self defence. The State vs. Welsh notwithstanding, Dr. Harr has raised some compelling arguments that the proximate cause of Daye's death was not the wounds inflicted by Crystal but by medical misadventure. As well, the Larceny of Chose in Action is a completely bogus charge only laid to vindictively enhance the murder charge. I only hope Scott Holmes does have Crystal's best interest at heart. Dr. Harr certainly has

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 11:52 said: "I concluded that you were a troll, not because you expressed a different point of view, but because you fail to make any attempt to support your outrageous claims or to engage in honest debate. You ignore requests for evidence to support your claims. I noted this in the comment from which you selectively quoted".............
The onus is always on the accuser to support their accusation. That's our system. It's always stacked in favor of the accused. On this blog as a defender of the alleged victim I am held to a higher standard then those who support the accused. I accept that. My speculations were certainly not supported by the shoddy and inadequate Police investigation of the alleged crime. When Crystal's present legal situation is resolved efforts will be made to re-open the Duke Lacrosse Case. Perhaps evidence in the form of sworn testimony will be available to support Crystal's charge

Anonymous said...

KENHYDERAL:

"Crystal will be the one to judge who her friends are and who they are that have her best interests at heart."

She has thus far not done a very good job of it.

"It was Crystal, herself, who determined that Shella and Vann were not acting in her best interests. As Court appointees they seemed awfully eager to dispose of the matter quickly, probably because of time and money, without considering Crystal's innocence and the effect accepting a felony guilty plea would have on her ability to regain custody of her children."

Crystal believes, probably because of SIDNEY's inimical influence, that she will get a pass. So far as Crystal's innocence, she is at this time innocent because she has not been convicted(unlike the Lacrosse players who are innocent because the crime of which they were accused never happened). There is probable cause to believe she is criminally responsible for Reginald Daye's death.

"The evidence I've heard makes me believe she is innocent by reason of self defence."

Then you are deluding yourself, because there is no evidence she acted in self defense. She did not claim self defense until she was indicted for murder. As Walt-in-Durham has pointed out, Crystal and her advocate will have to make that case at trial.

"The State vs. Welsh notwithstanding, Dr. Harr has raised some compelling arguments that the proximate cause of Daye's death was not the wounds inflicted by Crystal but by medical misadventure."

SIDNEY HARR has not established as fact that Medical negligence on the part of Duke caused Reginald Daye's death. Even if it were, what remains is that Reginald Daye would never have been exposed to Medical negligence had he not been stabbed.

"As well, the Larceny of Chose in Action is a completely bogus charge only laid to vindictively enhance the murder charge. I only hope Scott Holmes does have Crystal's best interest at heart."

So does everyone.

"Dr. Harr certainly has".

No he doesn't.He has only his own interest at heart.

«Oldest ‹Older   201 – 400 of 421   Newer› Newest»