Saturday, August 9, 2014

Insanity, denial, and delusion rule the NC Medical Examiner's Office


492 comments:

1 – 200 of 492   Newer›   Newest»
Anonymous said...

Bahahahahaha


Bahahahahaha


Bahahahahaha

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
SIDNEY HARR:

"Sorry. There was a lull in the rain. I reached the library dry and intact. I will post the blog in a few minutes. Enjoy."

But the water running off your carcass has seriously polluted Ealeigh.


Your comment lacks logic. First and foremost, I am DRY. I made it to the library, and therefore the computer dry. Therefore, how can water be running off my body (or as you put it, carcass)? Doesn't make sense.

Anyway, look at the sharlog and try to address the important issues posed by the sharlog: namely, do you agree with the probation sentence? do you believe that Sharad Amtey died due to natural causes, strangulation, or "complications of an assault"?

Tin-Foil Hat said...


Dr. Harr,

Finally, the media’s best kept secret from the public. Find out the real link between the Carpetbagger families of the Duke Lacrosse defendants and the media. Visit the following link. I welcome your response.

http://justice4nifong.com/btnnews/btnnews.htm

Tin-Foil Hat said...

As I have so frequently stated, the Grievance Commission of the North Carolina State Bar used all of the creative juices it could muster to come up with an excuse for disbarring former Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong. They are so elaborate and nonsensical that not even Nifong bashers can make sense of them. The problem stems from the fact that no one can explain why Mike Nifong was disbarred… the only prosecutor to be disbarred by the North Carolina State Bar since its inception in 1933. He certainly did not withhold discovery from defense attorneys of the Duke Lacrosse defendants. He had his staff deliver more than a thousand pages of discovery in three sets to attorneys for the defendants within 24 hours of the defense’s motion. What the media doesn’t want the public to know is that defense attorneys did not reciprocate when prosecutors sought discovery held by defense.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"
Your comment lacks logic. First and foremost, I am DRY."

Probably because you went into a restroom, towelled of, then wrung the towel out some where in the stacks.

"I made it to the library, and therefore the computer dry. Therefore, how can water be running off my body (or as you put it, carcass)? Doesn't make sense."

What does not make sense is why the library authorities would allow you to drip corruption in the library.

"Anyway, look at the sharlog and try to address the important issues posed by the sharlog: namely, do you agree with the probation sentence? do you believe that Sharad Amtey died due to natural causes, strangulation, or "complications of an assault"?"

I have read the opening of the sharlog. You start of with a lie. You claim Crystal was convicted after a whirlwind trial. Not true. You mae a habit of lying.Why should any one believe you?

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

From what I have read so far, Mrs. Amtey went after her rather frail husband. He would not have died had she not assaulted him. Just like eginald Daye would not have died if Crystal not stabbed him

Anonymous said...

Anonymous August 9, 2014 at 10:14 AM:

"As I have so frequently stated, the Grievance Commission of the North Carolina State Bar used all of the creative juices it could muster to come up with an excuse for disbarring former Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong."

What was the reason why corrupt DA NIFONG was disbarred? HE WAS THOROUGHLY CORRUPT>

You really think you are brilliant, ven though you can not see anything so simple. HAH!!!

Tin-Foil Hat said...

Can we have a little more res ipsa loquitur?

Anonymous said...

It's the same crap Sid has been spewing. He ignores that the autopsy was reviewed by Dr. Roberts - and errors were found, but the conclusion was confirmed, so she wasn't exculpatory. DT's were ruled out.

He's doing his same whining that he disagrees with the conclusion, and therefore the conclusion must be wrong. He doesn't want an investigation, he wants someone to agree with him - because he's never wrong (even when he is - though he's refused to admit it).

I really hope Sid understands everyone but Tin-Foil considers him a joke, and is just having fun with this, and doesn't think anyone really takes him seriously.

He refuses to engage in an honest discussion about anything, so how could he be taken seriously? Either you agree with him, despite evidence, or you are wrong.

Anonymous said...

wtf

crazy making evil duke troll it has named itself Tin Foil Hat now, so those posts on this sharlog comments and in the future that say Tin Foil Hat says: are written by the evil duke troll tin foil hat it - NOT from anyone else

just in case anybody wonders

Anonymous said...

Dr. Harr,

I think it was complications of an assualt, which the strangulation itself may not have caused the death, but the health condition that the victim suffered was exacerbated by the strangulation event - causing death. Of course, I have only the news coverage to go on to make that judgement. Sad case.

How can Dr. Radissh (sp?) say that Dr. Nichols' autopsy report was appropriate and 'correct', when even Dr. Nichols himself testified that the report was erroneous on some issues - and the second exceedingly tardy M.E. report stated on record that Dr. Nichols report was seriously deficient of the truth and professionalism and 'correctness'?

This state seriously has major issues. Who is in charge of the M.E. system? Ms. Woos and then the governor right? Looks like you have some more letters to write and document here to see what they have to say about these issues and her written reply. Remembering, of course, that if they do not respond or deal with the issues, (since they are responsible for doing just that), it then becomes professional neglect and contributing to potential harm and even death, and continued errors in all future M.E. reports, for ALL NC citizens and visitors to this state.

This places all under undue threat of harm,(like for example the case of the six year old dying of the carbon monoxide poisoning mentioned in the news).

If you send a copy of any letters you may write to Ms. Woos and the governor to the news outlets as well, you can also document their responses here - or lack thereof on these serious M.E. issues that have potential to negatively affect all.

Anonymous said...

Are you really stupid enough to think that the rest of us don't know that people post under all kinds of different names and realize this blog is a joke? Wow, you really are wearing the tinfoil too tight!

Anonymous said...

you think it is a place for you to troll abusively and with hate filled prejudice for your own amusement at the expense and harm or annoyance of others

others may not think the same way obviously

Anonymous said...

Dr. Harr,

This seems like a serious legal issue involving the case, since now the head of the M.E. system is in essence saying that Dr. Nichols lied on the stand that his own report is wrong, and that the second M.E. from Va. doesn't know what the heck she is talking about in her report that contradicts Dr. Nichol's report but is more in-line with Duke's medical reports.

What to do about this now?

Tin-Foil Hat said...

Stop bullying me you hate criminal.

Anonymous said...

Dr. Harr,

I know that you are a doctor and do not want to harm another doctor noted by you're excusing Dr. Nichols of his fraud and wrongfully accusing and contributing to the wrongful imprisonment of Ms. Mangum, but this is not the first and only case that is documented that he has made errors that have caused major legal issues with other murder cases. A lot of harm has been done, and obviously will continue unabated as evidenced by the head of the M.E. system's lack of professional reponsibility for these issues with the potential to cause harm to many.

Tin-Foil Hat said...


I am not alone in my view that the prosecution and persecution of Crystal Gail Mangum is nothing more than a vendetta by the state and the mainstream media because of her role as a victim and accuser in the Duke Lacrosse case of March 2006. Although many people share my view that Mangum is a victim of vindictiveness spawned ultimately by the actions of the Carpetbagger Duke Lacrosse defendants’ families, few of them are willing to publicly express it.

Anonymous said...

Who's your daddy?

Anonymous said...

Dr. Harr,

By stating that Dr. Nichols' autopsy report is 'correct', the head of the N.C. Medical Examiner system has in essense now stated that Duke is lying about what they did to Mr. Daye to cause his brain death, (if they did), and his ultimate death by their placement and removal of their life support machines. I wonder if she realizes that and what she plans to do about the serious issues with Duke's malpractice and/or lying about it that she is in essence claiming in her response to you.

Anonymous said...

... well actually she is agreeing with Dr. Nichols that whatever Duke documented in their medical reports that they did for and/or to Mr. Daye - Duke was lying about it all. There is no other way to interpret it.

Anonymous said...

How could Dr. Nichols even justify that the death was a casualty of the knife wound, when in essense he is claiming that Duke did not treat the lung infection or any of the other wounds as noted by the discrepancies between the Duke medical reports and his autopsy report at all. So therefore Duke is quilty of serious medical negligence and malpractice by not even providing Mr. Daye with basic life saving medical services that Dr. Nichols claims would be necessary in order for Mr. Daye to survive the defensive knife wounds as noted on his autopsy report and in direct contridiction to Duke's medical reports. Nothing.

Anonymous said...

Who's your daddy?

Anonymous said...

It still amuses me that Sid's ego is so big that he assumes that since no one involved in the case would talk to him (because he proved he could not be trusted to keep confidence), that they must not have asked any of these questions or done any of these investigations. Rather than realize they were likely done, and the answers weren't helpful to Crystal, he assumes they just weren't done.

It must be hard having the world so revolve around you that if you aren't told something you just assume it didn't happen.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous August 9, 2014 at 1:51 PM

Ray Charles

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said August 9, 2014 at 5:15 PM

Dr. Harr,

"I know that you are a doctor"

No, he is a minimally trained, minimally experienced ddderson with MD appended, inappropriately, to his name

"and do not want to harm another doctor:

ARE YOU SERIOUS???!!!


"noted by you're excusing Dr. Nichols of his fraud"

Impossible since Dr. Nichols committed no fraud.


"and wrongfully accusing and contributing to the wrongful imprisonment of Ms. Mangum,"

Also impossible. Crystal committrd murder

"but this is not the first and only case that is documented that he has made errors that have caused major legal issues with other murder cases."

It is not even the first. It is not even the first. It is not the first instance in which Sidney tries to claim he s brilliant after showing what an idiot he is.

A lot of harm has been done, and obviously will continue unabated as evidenced by the head of the M.E. system's lack of professional reponsibility for these issues with the potential to cause harm to many.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

"Dr. Harr,"

You mean SIDNEY the minimally trained,minimally experienced person with MD inappropriately to his name.

"By stating that Dr. Nichols' autopsy report is 'correct', the head of the N.C. Medical Examiner system has in essense now stated that Duke is lying about what they did to Mr. Daye to cause his brain death,"

No, SIDNEY the minimally trained,minimally experienced person with MD inappropriately to his name is fantasizing about what caused Mr. Daye's death. His death was a direct result of the stab wound inflicted by Crystal.

"(if they did), and his ultimate death by their placement and removal of their life support machines."

The need to institute life support would never have arisen had Crystal not stabbed Mr. Daye.

"I wonder if she realizes that and what she plans to do about the serious issues with Duke's malpractice and/or lying about it that she is in essence claiming in her response to you."

Judging from how she behaved at the end of the duke rape hoax, she is not capable of that kind of planning.

Or is she planning to deal with the way dealt with the rape hoax, continue to lie about it

August 9, 2014 at 6:45 PM

Tin-Foil Hat said...

Many people keep their feelings about this case bundled up inside because they lack the will to do anything to rectify the failings of the state’s justice system. Others remain quiet because they lack the courage to take a righteous stand against an unpopular position. This is understandable after witnessing the brutalization of former Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong by the state and the media for his actions in doing the right thing in prosecuting the Duke Lacrosse case. Courageously prosecuting the Duke case in the true sense as a “minister of justice,” he butted heads with the Powers-That-Be who demanded that the charges against the student/athlete/partygoers be dropped. As a result, the state went through extraordinary means to make an example of Mr. Nifong… something which they did very well, as is evidenced by the fact that there is little if any movement to go against the Powers’ will by offering support to Ms. Mangum.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous August 10, 2014 at 7:35 AM

No one believes the propaganda you spout because you are incredibly and irredeemably stupid.

Now go ahead and again threaten to call me a hate criminal.

Don't you hate it when someone points out how stupid and impotent you are?

Tin-Foil Hat said...

Hey hate criminal why don't you go look for some res ipsa loquitur?

Anonymous said...

TFH August 10, 2014 at 7:53 AM

No one believes the propaganda you spout because you are incredibly and irredeemably stupid. that's res ipsa loquitur

Now go ahead and again threaten to call me a hate criminal.

Don't you hate it when someone points out how stupid and impotent you are?

Anonymous said...

Sid - you keep insisting Crystal is innocent - but you ignore that she stabbed Daye.

So, do you believe that she acted in self-defense, in which case the cause of death and medical treatment was/is totally irrelevant (though on this blog you and others once said she should not argue self-defense because then she would be admitting to first-degree murder, something that is completely and totally legally incorrect - she'd just be admitting to stabbing).

If she was not acting in self-defense, then the medical treatment would only be relevant for manslaughter v. murder.

So, did the jury get self-defense wrong, you believe she is totally innocent, and all your blathering about the treatment is irrelevant, or do you think she was not acting in self defense?

Tin-Foil Hat said...

keep up the good work Dr. A (hole)

Anonymous said...

This is a test.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous August 10, 2014 at 9:12 AM

your glaring impotence is speaking for itself again. I have been called worse than that by better men than you.

now lgo back to your rathole and cry some more.

Anonymous said...

Where's Kenny?



Malek Williams
Hillside H.S.
Class of 1996

Anonymous said...

Going to prison is just part of being black.That's where a repulsive black murdering prostitute like Crystal Mangum belongs.Mike Nifong should been incarcerated too.He knew all along the Duke lacrosse players were innocent.The only people who believed in the case were those on the wrong end of the Bell Curve.

Anonymous said...

Ten-gallon hat said,

Dr. Nichols conveniently omitted the events that contributed to Daye’s death that included delirium tremens, an esophageal intubation that precipitated cardiac arrest and brain death, a weeklong comatose state, and the elective removal from life support by the medical staff at Duke University Hospital that resulted in Daye’s demise.

The autopsy report can be compared with other medical records and documents in order to support the premise that the true cause of Daye’s death had nothing to do with the stab wound, but rather the errantly placed endotracheal tube.

That the North Carolina justice system has been hijacked is realized by the fact that the mainstream media, politicians, civil rights organization, and community leaders, despite having full knowledge of the significant problems with the autopsy report and prosecution’s case against Mangum, have elected to remain mute and idle… acting as enablers or conspirators after the fact. No one has Nifongian courage to challenge the blatant and disparate legal mistreatment of Crystal Mangum by the state.

Anonymous said...

That the North Carolina justice system has been hijacked is realized by the fact that the mainstream media, politicians, civil rights organization, and community leaders, despite having full knowledge of the significant problems with the autopsy report and prosecution’s case against Mangum, have elected to remain mute and idle… acting as enablers or conspirators after the fact. No one has Nifongian courage to challenge the blatant and disparate legal mistreatment of Crystal Mangum by the state.



Except, as has been noted - the autopsy was reviewed by an expert, who discussed each of those issues, and addressed the discrepancies between the autopsy and the medical records, and discussed the injury and course of treatment, and concluded that while the report was sloppy, the cause of death was correct - Complications from the stab wound.


You can scream all you want in disagreement with the investigation, but please stop pretending one wasn't done. It was done, it just didn't agree with Sid's paranoid worldview, so he disregards it.

Anonymous said...

actually - most just want to not be killed by duke's medical services - and not have the injustice and corruption that is duke in NC continue that harms so many - what a jerk you are to STILL not realize that

don't complain about the damn lacrosse case on this blog and condemn others who actually give a sheat about what goes on in with duke and their services and what the injustice system does to harm those whom duke harms or who question what duke does - over and over and over again - what a troll you are

Malek Williams
Hillside H.S.
Class of 1996

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
SIDNEY HARR:

From what I have read so far, Mrs. Amtey went after her rather frail husband. He would not have died had she not assaulted him. Just like eginald Daye would not have died if Crystal not stabbed him


WRONG-O!! Daye would not have died had Duke University Hospital staff not intubated him in the esophagus! Can you recognize the difference?

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous Anonymous said...
Dr. Harr,

I think it was complications of an assualt, which the strangulation itself may not have caused the death, but the health condition that the victim suffered was exacerbated by the strangulation event - causing death. Of course, I have only the news coverage to go on to make that judgement. Sad case.

How can Dr. Radissh (sp?) say that Dr. Nichols' autopsy report was appropriate and 'correct', when even Dr. Nichols himself testified that the report was erroneous on some issues - and the second exceedingly tardy M.E. report stated on record that Dr. Nichols report was seriously deficient of the truth and professionalism and 'correctness'?

This state seriously has major issues. Who is in charge of the M.E. system? Ms. Woos and then the governor right? Looks like you have some more letters to write and document here to see what they have to say about these issues and her written reply. Remembering, of course, that if they do not respond or deal with the issues, (since they are responsible for doing just that), it then becomes professional neglect and contributing to potential harm and even death, and continued errors in all future M.E. reports, for ALL NC citizens and visitors to this state.

This places all under undue threat of harm,(like for example the case of the six year old dying of the carbon monoxide poisoning mentioned in the news).

If you send a copy of any letters you may write to Ms. Woos and the governor to the news outlets as well, you can also document their responses here - or lack thereof on these serious M.E. issues that have potential to negatively affect all.


I have written letters to Governor McCrory and I have written to Dr. Wos. Wos ignored me, and the governor's office said that my request to meet with the governor or his representative was denied. The governor is not accessible to anyone except his big donors, cronies, and GOP mucky-mucks. McCrory turns a blind eye and a deaf ear towards ordinary Tar Heelians with serious concerns. It's very sad.

I will produce those correspondences to Wos and the governor in the future.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Sid - you keep insisting Crystal is innocent - but you ignore that she stabbed Daye.

So, do you believe that she acted in self-defense, in which case the cause of death and medical treatment was/is totally irrelevant (though on this blog you and others once said she should not argue self-defense because then she would be admitting to first-degree murder, something that is completely and totally legally incorrect - she'd just be admitting to stabbing).

If she was not acting in self-defense, then the medical treatment would only be relevant for manslaughter v. murder.

So, did the jury get self-defense wrong, you believe she is totally innocent, and all your blathering about the treatment is irrelevant, or do you think she was not acting in self defense?


I do not ignore that Mangum stabbed Daye... she did. However, the stab wound was not life-threatening. It was successfully treated by Duke trauma surgeons and Daye had a post-operative prognosis for a full recovery. It was the esophageal intubation that precipitated a cascade of events that resulted in Daye's death.

As far as stabbing Daye, I believe she did so in self-defense... after all prior to the stabbing Daye had busted down the locked bathroom door and dragged her out by her hair. Keep in mind that Daye was never charged with assault and battery for that. Instead, the prosecution painted him as a saint... something which Mangum's turncoat attorney Meier didn't challenge.

Anonymous said...

WRONG-O!! Daye would not have died had Duke University Hospital staff not intubated him in the esophagus! Can you recognize the difference?


Can you recognize that if Crystal hadn't stabbed him, he wouldn't have been in the hospital for the Duke University Hospital Staff to intubate him in the first place?

Had Crystal not stabbed him, Duke wouldn't have been treating him, and he wouldn't have died.

Comprende?

Anonymous said...

Instead, the prosecution painted him as a saint... something which Mangum's turncoat attorney Meier didn't challenge.



Let me guess - even though you are totally wrong (but won't admit it), you still think they should have introduced the inadmissible Assault charges from years ago, right? You just can't ever admit when you were wrong.

Anonymous said...

no - he said that Mr. Daye busted down the door and dragged her out by the hair which is obvious by the evidence and by his own admission

why don't YOU understand that?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

no - he said that Mr. Daye busted down the door and dragged her out by the hair which is obvious by the evidence and by his own admission

why don't YOU understand that?



Meier brought all of that up - he repeated it frequently throughout the trial and in his closing. So, that's obviously not what Sid is referring to. Why can't you understand that?

Anonymous said...

Remember - the only real dispute in this case (despite Sid's claims - but certainly as far as self-defense)is what happened after Daye pulled Crystal out of the bathroom.

Did he let her go, and she ran into the kitchen to get a knife and come back at him as he says (which means no self-defense, and is what happened with Milton Walker, which is why that testimony hurt so bad); or

Was he holding her down and choking her when she grabbed a knife to stab him and get him off of her, as she says (which means self-defense).

The jury believed him, hence no self-defense. There was no dispute there was a fight, no dispute he kicked in the door and drug her out. It all comes down to what happened next, and the jury believed Daye's version, not Crystal's.

Basically, no matter what happened earlier, she ceased being the aggressor when she she went into the bathroom. But, if he did let her go and went to leave, then he ceased being the aggressor after the bathroom.

It's all who the jury believed about where the stabbing took place - and they believed Daye, not Crystal. It wouldn't matter if Daye had hit her before, or not (she said not, though she is changing that story), or anything else. If he let her go, and she ran to get a knife and came back at him - no self-defense.

guiowen said...

The problem, as I see it, is that, after the run-in with Milton Walker, her "friends", such as Sidney and Kenhyderal, could have explained to her that she had just dodged a bullet, and encouraged her to seek some sort of psychological help. Instead, they told her, essentially, that she could get away with just about anything because she had their help, since Sidney, the physician, and Kenny, the master debater, would prove she was always innocent. Thus the next time one of her boyfriends disrespected her, she lost her temper and decided to show him who was boss.
Well, we all know how that turned out.

Anonymous said...

Yes and THAT issue did not get resolved with sufficient evidence - so therefore there was not sufficient evidence but there was sufficent reasonable doubt to preclude determining the case on that issue alone.

In addition - apparently the jury was highly questionable in its selection orchestrated by Mr. Meire and the Duke/Durham justice system to be considered fair, reasonable, or free from bias, undue influence and conflict of interests, as well as possible prejudice and discrimination which no one would agree to unless they held the same bias, conflict-of-interest, prejudice and discrimination, and/or were seriously uninformed about the Duke lacrosse case and the hatred that Duke and many of its supporters visibly demonstrate and hold toward Ms. Mangum.

So what's your point?

Anonymous said...

Other than the recent comments Sid is continuing to shit out all over this board, what evidence do you have that there were problems with the Jury selection? There was the issue with a juror, and it was addressed.

Let me guess ... asking you for proof is trolling, just like continuing to ask you about proof of conflicts.

Anonymous said...

Dr. Harr has the transcripts, altho I've never personally seen jury names published in public and don't recommend him doing it here.

You can google to determine Mr. Meire's conflicts with duke just like anyone else can. Prove that he doesn't have a conflict.

You are a troll - that's why I tell that you are - because your trolling is ALL you do here and it is very hateful and obssessive.

Repeat post this explanation like you do all the others after the next time you ask it why don't you. Eventually ... you may just 'get it'.

Anonymous said...

Dr. Harr,

Perhaps if you write a letter of reply to Dr. Radish with the facts of the discrepancies between ALL the medical records and How, Why, When, etc. they were or were not presented into the case - and the consequences of those actions or non-actions, AND copy Dr. Wos and Govenor McCory, AND ask for IMMEDIATE EXPLANATION and relief for the false imprisonment of Ms. Mangum - basing it all on Dr. Radish's highly questionable, unprofessional and negligent reply to you so far, AND document it here for public record so they can not just continue to ignore the issues ... perhaps that might 'work'?

p.s. do not use adjetives to describe what happened - use legally recognized adverbs like professional negligence, fraud, conflict of interest, bias, etc. Also write like the clique - 'just the facts maam'. Try that instead.

p.s.s. like actually show what duke lied about if Dr. Nichols record IS correct as Dr. Radish states, what they lied about if Dr. Nichols admission that his own report contained errors, and then what they lied about if Dr. Roberts version is to be believed. Like that.

Anonymous said...

Yeah, I've googled it, and can't find anything that remotely rises to the level of a conflict - as anyone with a brain who isn't a paranoid delusional individual can see. And, you know that, hence you just scream troll rather than answer.

Why would working for some healthcare companies in Texas in the 1990s be a conflict with Duke (who wasn't even in this case)?

I know, you won't answer you will just call me a hate criminal and say troll ...

It's too bad, cause I actually am curious, because I want to know what me and everyone else but you and Sid are missing about that.

Anonymous said...

ok - prove that Mr. Meier didn't represent Mr. Young in the civil case, (after getting his criminal case dismissed), because he disagreed with his client's son for what he (and his team) allegedy did to Ms. Mangum that he then became an excellent choice of lawyers with no conflict of interest to duke or the duke lacrosse team and their families to subsequently represent her in a murder trial.

Anonymous said...

What evidence do you have that Meier represented (or represents) Spencer Young in a civil suit? There is nothing on Young's website about a civil suit that Meier is handling, and in fact, Mr. Young seems awfully upset with Meier for limiting his representation only to the criminal charges.

You are the one asserting a conflict, you'd have to prove a conflict exists - legally the presumption is no conflict - but the law has never been something you paid attention to.

I can't prove a negative - there is zero evidence that Meier represents Young in a civil suit, so that's proof. If you can find proof that there is such a civil suit - it still wouldn't rise to a conflict, but there is no evidence of a civil suit.

Anonymous said...

And, given how much venom Mr. Young is still spewing at Meier, and about 40 other people (claiming to have filed criminal charges against them with the FBI), I doubt he and Meier are on such good terms that Meier would be representing him on anything.

So BZZZZ you are wrong again! But, I know you won't try again, you will just scream troll.

But I am still curious if you have any proof of a conflict.

Anonymous said...

I think it is Mr. Meier who may ultimately have to prove he has no conflict - not I that has to prove anything - sorry.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

I think it is Mr. Meier who may ultimately have to prove he has no conflict - not I that has to prove anything - sorry.



Who is going to make him? You? Of course you don't have to prove anything, you have no evidence - you just spout off like Sid. The only person who could complain about the representation is Mangum, and so far as I have seen (though I doubt it would be public) she hasn't formally filed any complaints or issues.

And, ask Walt and A Lawyer - the presumption is no conflict - Meier doesn't have to prove anything. Someone who wants to accuse him of a conflict would have to present evidence of a conflict, and he would have to explain that. But, absent proof/evidence - again, it's impossible to prove a negative, so he has nothing to prove.

Anonymous said...

Does anyone else not miss Kenny? I don't miss him at all (though I suspect he's the paranoid guy calling everyone a troll).

Anonymous said...

you guys are always welcome to leave this blog if you hate it and everyone here enough to be so hateful and mean like you are on this blog to everyone ... no one's stopping you

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

you guys are always welcome to leave this blog if you hate it and everyone here enough to be so hateful and mean like you are on this blog to everyone ... no one's stopping you


Asking you to back-up what you are saying isn't mean or hateful. You only think it is because you know you have nothing to back it up.

People who can't defend their positions claim their opponents are mean. People who can actually defend their position do.

Anonymous said...

i guess that is the problem then

i'm not your opponent or anything else

Anonymous said...

Nope, you are just a paranoid delusional person who can't argue his way out of a wet paper bag.

Anonymous said...

not sure that arguing would help in the first place actually

you are a troll who likes to argue obsessively

egad - go find someone to argue with at liestoppers or whatever

i thought you were leaving anyway

what happened to your camel?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

not sure that arguing would help in the first place actually

you are a troll who likes to argue obsessively

egad - go find someone to argue with at liestoppers or whatever

i thought you were leaving anyway

what happened to your camel?



Don't like to argue, like to learn - which is why I ask - the problem is, you can't backup your claims with evidence, which bothers me - I'd love to see if you have merit to your issues - but you refuse to provide back-up, which leads me to conclude you don't have any support.

I'd love for you to have support so we could have an open and honest discussion, but you seem incapable of that.

Anonymous said...

with you - yes

i just think you are a troll

i answered your questions and you diss me because you don't like the answers and then ask the same arguments again and again and again and diss on and on and on

i gave you my answer to your arguments - and also told you to stop trolling me

get over yourself and stop dissing me everytime you don't get an answer you don't like

i am not talking to you anyway - i am talking to Dr. Harr

Anonymous said...

"Where's Kenny?"



Malek Williams
Hillside H.S.
Class of 1996



KEN-Malek_HYDER-Williams_AL strikes again

Anonymous said...

Yeah but Sid is as pathetic as you in his inability to actually defend his position. Neither one of you can argue out of a wet paper bag - if either of you had any legitimate issues, you could defend your positions. You can;'t, so you say anyone who disagrees is a troll or a liar. i really hope this is a joke for you, cause if your life is really this pathetic and devoid of ability to reason you deserve what you get.

Anonymous said...

actually i've 'won' most if not all the arguments i've actually engaged in with you on this blog

can't take it eh - you can't lose an argument without going abusively insane about it and trolling like a madman is the real issue

why would anyone have to argue their way out of a wet paper bag to begin with?

Anonymous said...

tell you what

you try it first

you put yourself in a wet paper bag (without your computer or phone eh) and argue away (only) to get yourself out

see ya after awhile

Anonymous said...

It's not winning to yell troll, call someone a hate criminal, and then go run hide under your bed with your tinfoil hat.

You have yet to provide a shred of back-up for your claims of a conflict. That's not a win.

Name one argument you've "won" on this board?

Anonymous said...

yes i did

i just won the conflict argument

either way you look at it Mr. Meier has a conflict

go see how Mr. Young feels about Mr. Meier representing Ms. Mangum then if you think you are right

report back with evidence and proof will ya

and tell us how the wet bag escaping by argument attempt works out for ya while your at it

we all await your evidence laden proof and conclusions ...

Anonymous said...

You haven't proven any conflict - Meier representing Young on unrelated criminal charges doesn't remotely create a conflict.

Anonymous said...

forgetting half the argument to suit your own selfserving conclusions isn't exactly justice is it?

Anonymous said...

Didn't forget the other half - it was already established that working for hospitals in Texas in the 1990s doesn't create a conflict. It's just sad that you keep bringing up the same wrong stuff expecting a different result - you know that's often cited as the definition of insanity.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous Anonymous said...
WRONG-O!! Daye would not have died had Duke University Hospital staff not intubated him in the esophagus! Can you recognize the difference?


Can you recognize that if Crystal hadn't stabbed him, he wouldn't have been in the hospital for the Duke University Hospital Staff to intubate him in the first place?

Had Crystal not stabbed him, Duke wouldn't have been treating him, and he wouldn't have died.

Comprende?


Your statement makes as much sense as the following: If Daye wouldn't have been born, he wouldn't have died.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Anonymous said...

no - he said that Mr. Daye busted down the door and dragged her out by the hair which is obvious by the evidence and by his own admission

why don't YOU understand that?



Meier brought all of that up - he repeated it frequently throughout the trial and in his closing. So, that's obviously not what Sid is referring to. Why can't you understand that?


Prosecutors repeatedly stated how kind and gentle Daye was... what a good and decent person... non-violent, etc.

Turncoat Meier didn't challenge this portrayal by bringing up his past criminal record, his drug abuse record and alcoholism, the fact that he was intoxicated. Turncoat Meier never conducted an investigation to interview other girlfriends of Daye's who were alleged to have been abused. Plus Turncoat never mentioned the prior incident of physical abuse by Daye which sent Mangum to the urgent care center... about a week before the stabbing. Meier was content to let prosecution paint Daye as a saint instead of a drunk, jealous, alcoholic abuser the night of the stabbing.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Dr. Harr has the transcripts, altho I've never personally seen jury names published in public and don't recommend him doing it here.

You can google to determine Mr. Meire's conflicts with duke just like anyone else can. Prove that he doesn't have a conflict.

You are a troll - that's why I tell that you are - because your trolling is ALL you do here and it is very hateful and obssessive.

Repeat post this explanation like you do all the others after the next time you ask it why don't you. Eventually ... you may just 'get it'.


My next sharlog will be about the jury selection process and how Turncoat Meier used it to sabotage his client Mangum.

Nifong Supporter said...


Haven't heard many comments about the legal treatment of Dottie Amtey... Do you think she received a fair sentence (probation for a plea of voluntary manslaughter)?
Do you think Judge Fox was correct in refusing to give her jail time because of the screwed up autopsy reports by the medical examiners?
Do you think Dr. Nichols' explanation that Sharad Amtey died of a heart attack and not strangulation is valid and warranted a charge of assault and not murder/manslaughter?
C'mon, commenters... Address the issues!!!

guiowen said...

Heavens, Sidney! To hear you talk, one would think you have an excellent case for having Meier disbarred and sent to jail along with Clay Nichols and others.
Unfortunately, except for Kenhyderal and one or two other posters here, no one really believes any of this. You'll have to figure out some way to get more people to listen to you.
Perhaps you and the J4N club should hold demonstrations on the streets of Durham/Raleigh to see whether you can convince anyone.

Anonymous said...

Turncoat Meier didn't challenge this portrayal by bringing up his past criminal record, his drug abuse record and alcoholism, the fact that he was intoxicated.


That "past criminal record" was totally inadmissible, as has repeatedly been explained to you, but you refuse to pay attention to the law. You understand why no one takes you seriously when you keep repeating the same debunked and incorrect arguments all the time, right?

Anonymous said...

Plus Turncoat never mentioned the prior incident of physical abuse by Daye which sent Mangum to the urgent care center... about a week before the stabbing.



You mean the one he asked Crystal about on the stand, and she denied there was ever any prior abuse? You really think it would have been helpful for him to call his client a liar? She was specifically asked about prior abuse and said it never happened.

guiowen said...

Sidney,
As far as the Amtey case, I guess the question is whether he would have died without her actions.
I imagine there is a possibility that she assaulted him and he had a heart attack at that time. If so, he would have died anyway. Her actions did not contribute to his death.

Anonymous said...

Regarding the Amtey case - I have no real information on the case, but what the media has reported, and you yourself repeatedly point out how incorrect, unreliable, and twisted media accounts can be - and while you love jumping to unsupported conclusions, and making dramatic leaps of faith and accusations with no real facts, most of the people on this board don't share your penchant for doing that. You need to lure Kenny back if you want a syncophant other than tin-foil hat.

Anonymous said...

Remember, Crystal could have been convicted of manslaughter as well, but the Jury found that she stabbed him with malice, which is what is required for 2nd Degree Murder.

And, Judge Fox deviated from the statutory sentencing guidelines to give her probation (it is in a mandatory active block).

Not that Sid cares about accuracy, but he keeps referring to the Judge as a Wake County Judge - he's not. Judge Fox is an Orange County Judge (used to be the DA). Superior Court Judges go to various counties - so he was in Wake for that case (just like Ridgeway, a Wake County Judge was in Durham for Mangum).

Lance the Intern said...

"Do you think she received a fair sentence (probation for a plea of voluntary manslaughter)?"

Do you think Crystal could have received a fairer sentence for a plea bargain?

I do....Unfortunately for Crystal she was "advised" against any plea bargain by *someone*.

Anonymous said...

This is for Kenny, wherever he may be....

Anonymous said...

Dr. Harr,

I think the lady was quite aware that her husband was too ill for her to be assualting him in any way, that the man had a right to his bedroom with no argument given his medical condition, and that the lady was probably overstressed from her husband's illness and whatever and lost it even though she was not reportedly attacked by him. I also believe that man's health was going to drag both of them into a formidable hell where he was going to die anyway and she was going to get even more overstressed from his illness. Instead she lost it and sent herself into a formidable hell and saved her husband the trouble. She admitted to attacking him, and indeed thought she killed him when she did, so she plead quilty to voluntary manslaughter which seems reasonable given the circumstances described in the news.

As far as what the judge did - perhaps you could ask him to explain his reasoning and rationale better. Trying to compare it to Ms. Mangum's case in relation to the M.E. system is confusing at this point.

Anonymous said...

Dr. Harr,

Maybe you can write to the judge in that case about his rulings and ask him for a written opinion about the differences between that case and Ms. Mangum's case. Also ask for advice in obtaining a lawyer for Ms. Mangum with no conflicts of interest or biases to taint and sabotage her defense in the new trial the Appeal Court will probably order.

Is there a specific method of writing to a judge for his opinions and insights into a case he presided over in relation to another pending case with similar issues? What is it?

If nothing else, perhaps he can give you advice in how to get the M.E. issues resolved for Ms. Mangum's case especially, and perhaps for both and for all.

Perhaps he will be kind enough to extend his wisdom and support to the rights of all NC citizens on these issues.

Ms. Mangum needs a lawyer with no conflicts to duke, the M.E. system, political aspirations, etc.

Perhaps you can ask him how to resolve the conflict of interest issues with duke for all in NC as well or give advice on how to do so.

It would be interesting to see what he had to say on the issues. He might practice his judgeship in Durham as well as Wake and other counties, so his input would be enlightening.

Anonymous said...

Given that only the paranoid few see this massive conflict with Duke (and zero evidence has been provided that any of Mangum's attorneys has a conflict - as has been repeatedly noted working for hospitals in Texas in the 1990s isn't a conflict, and being appointed to represent the now indigent father of a Duke Lacrosse student on some minor criminal charges isn't a conflict), I doubt Judge Fox will have advice on how to deal with irrational paranoia.

But, hey, he's one more person for Sid to be ignored by that he can add to the conspiracy.

Anonymous said...

you don't live in NC to how the frack do you know if it is paranoia or conspiracy or not?

???

Anonymous said...

How do you know where I live? Hell, you still think all the people posting as Anonymous are the same person. And, you've repeatedly been asked for proof of the Duke issues as well (like the attorney conflicts), and just like then, you scream troll and run and hide because you have nothing.

The fact there is malpractice isn't anything new or unique to Duke - and they pay out millions of dollars a year when they are sued for their mistakes, so clearly the justice system doesn't completely protect them.

I know, troll troll ... go away ... blah blah blah.

I keep hoping that just once you may have something intelligent or new to say, or provide a scintilla of evidence to back up one of your claims, but that's like waiting for Sid to do something right too ...

Anonymous said...

yeah well you're so stupid and such a jerk that you don't even realize you told everyone here that you weren't from NC and that your annoying posts are for your evil little entertainment only

you provide proof since you assert you are so right and righteous in your thug like trolling

egad - and to think you actually think you are entitled to your evil jerky obnoxious obssessive endless trolling for no other reason than to cause harm to others

egad and egad

Anonymous said...

How does asking you questions harm you or anyone else?

And, I'm not the one who said I wasn't from NC - there are lots of people who post as anonymous.

I guess egad is the new blah?

Nifong Supporter said...


guiowen said...
Heavens, Sidney! To hear you talk, one would think you have an excellent case for having Meier disbarred and sent to jail along with Clay Nichols and others.
Unfortunately, except for Kenhyderal and one or two other posters here, no one really believes any of this. You'll have to figure out some way to get more people to listen to you.
Perhaps you and the J4N club should hold demonstrations on the streets of Durham/Raleigh to see whether you can convince anyone.


A mob of naked people could demonstrate about the injustice against Mangum in Raleigh and Durham simultaneously and the media would ignore it. Remember, the media is part of the conspiracy against Mangum. The media doesn't want the people to know the truth just like Turncoat Meier did not want the jurors to know the truth.

Anonymous said...

then why are you trolling on and on?

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Plus Turncoat never mentioned the prior incident of physical abuse by Daye which sent Mangum to the urgent care center... about a week before the stabbing.



You mean the one he asked Crystal about on the stand, and she denied there was ever any prior abuse? You really think it would have been helpful for him to call his client a liar? She was specifically asked about prior abuse and said it never happened.


Face it... Mangum was not prepared to take the stand by someone with her best interests at heart. Turncoat Meier's strategy of not impugning Daye's reputation was ill-advised. The police reports of Mangum's friend Larry O'Briant document the incident... and his credibility is not in question.

Nifong Supporter said...


guiowen said...
Sidney,
As far as the Amtey case, I guess the question is whether he would have died without her actions.
I imagine there is a possibility that she assaulted him and he had a heart attack at that time. If so, he would have died anyway. Her actions did not contribute to his death.


So, gui, your position is that the fact that she was strangling him had nothing to do with his apparent heart attack? Yet, you want to say that a non-fatal stab wound was responsible for Daye's death ten days later when he was electively removed from life support? Doesn't make sense.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Remember, Crystal could have been convicted of manslaughter as well, but the Jury found that she stabbed him with malice, which is what is required for 2nd Degree Murder.

And, Judge Fox deviated from the statutory sentencing guidelines to give her probation (it is in a mandatory active block).

Not that Sid cares about accuracy, but he keeps referring to the Judge as a Wake County Judge - he's not. Judge Fox is an Orange County Judge (used to be the DA). Superior Court Judges go to various counties - so he was in Wake for that case (just like Ridgeway, a Wake County Judge was in Durham for Mangum).


Thank you for the correction. You're correct. Judge Fox is from Orange County. As a matter of fact, I tried to get him disqualified because of that fact when the State Bar sought injunctions against me.

It was an honest mistake... no harm, no foul. See, I'm macho enough to admit my mistakes and publicly state that I'm a mere mortal and not perfect.

Nifong Supporter said...


Lance the Intern said...
"Do you think she received a fair sentence (probation for a plea of voluntary manslaughter)?"

Do you think Crystal could have received a fairer sentence for a plea bargain?

I do....Unfortunately for Crystal she was "advised" against any plea bargain by *someone*.


Prosecution claims it never offered Mangum a plea deal... I never saw a plea deal. I would still not advise Mangum to accept a plea deal. What I advised her to do was to represent herself. Had she prepared and done so, she would never have been convicted. Mangum's turncoat attorney Meier did her in... with the help of the judge.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Dr. Harr,

Maybe you can write to the judge in that case about his rulings and ask him for a written opinion about the differences between that case and Ms. Mangum's case. Also ask for advice in obtaining a lawyer for Ms. Mangum with no conflicts of interest or biases to taint and sabotage her defense in the new trial the Appeal Court will probably order.

Is there a specific method of writing to a judge for his opinions and insights into a case he presided over in relation to another pending case with similar issues? What is it?

If nothing else, perhaps he can give you advice in how to get the M.E. issues resolved for Ms. Mangum's case especially, and perhaps for both and for all.

Perhaps he will be kind enough to extend his wisdom and support to the rights of all NC citizens on these issues.

Ms. Mangum needs a lawyer with no conflicts to duke, the M.E. system, political aspirations, etc.

Perhaps you can ask him how to resolve the conflict of interest issues with duke for all in NC as well or give advice on how to do so.

It would be interesting to see what he had to say on the issues. He might practice his judgeship in Durham as well as Wake and other counties, so his input would be enlightening.


Your suggestions are valid, but I have no faith in the judges that have been assigned to Mangum's case or Judge Fox. I was disappointed in Fox's probation sentence for Amtey when it was obvious that she was responsible for her husband's death due to strangulation. Just because the medical examiner's office is totally inept and screwed up is not reason to mete out rare deals to certain individuals.

Anonymous said...

That's ridiculous Dr. Harr.

What would the professional responsiblity of a judge be when confronted with the M.E. issues he has encountered in your case with the State Bar, and with the Amety case, and with full knowledge of Ms. Mangum's case and her false imprisonment based upon the same issues?

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Dr. Harr,

I think the lady was quite aware that her husband was too ill for her to be assualting him in any way, that the man had a right to his bedroom with no argument given his medical condition, and that the lady was probably overstressed from her husband's illness and whatever and lost it even though she was not reportedly attacked by him. I also believe that man's health was going to drag both of them into a formidable hell where he was going to die anyway and she was going to get even more overstressed from his illness. Instead she lost it and sent herself into a formidable hell and saved her husband the trouble. She admitted to attacking him, and indeed thought she killed him when she did, so she plead quilty to voluntary manslaughter which seems reasonable given the circumstances described in the news.

As far as what the judge did - perhaps you could ask him to explain his reasoning and rationale better. Trying to compare it to Ms. Mangum's case in relation to the M.E. system is confusing at this point.


I believe that neither the prosecutor nor the judge wanted to impose a jail sentence on Dottie Amtey. The prosecutor even went so far as to accuse her husband of emotional domestic abuse, saying that her husband tried to exert control, just because he turned the television set off. The prosecutor later refers to this murderess who strangled her husband with her bare hands as a "nice lady."

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
That's ridiculous Dr. Harr.

What would the professional responsiblity of a judge be when confronted with the M.E. issues he has encountered in your case with the State Bar, and with the Amety case, and with full knowledge of Ms. Mangum's case and her false imprisonment based upon the same issues?


Don't completely understand the question, but the State Bar case against me really had nothing directly to do with my case. The Amtey medical examiner issue had to do with two very different conclusions as cause of death... the first being natural causes, and the second which was presented five weeks later was "complications of an assault."
Medical examiner issues in Mangum's case had to do with false and fraudulent findings and a conclusion that is not substantiated.

Lance the Intern said...

Sid stated on November 29, 2012:

"Durham prosecutors’ desperate objectives now are centered around getting Crystal Mangum to accept a plea deal ..."

Are you lying now, or were you lying then?

guiowen said...

Anonymous 12:02 said
"I guess egad is the new blah?"

I've been asking him to mind his manners whenever he uses "blah blah blah".
I guess he feels this will keep me out of the discussion

guiowen said...

Sidney said
"So, gui, your position is that the fact that she was strangling him had nothing to do with his apparent heart attack? Yet, you want to say that a non-fatal stab wound was responsible for Daye's death ten days later when he was electively removed from life support? Doesn't make sense."

Sorry, Sidney, but I just don't know enough about the details. I'm trying to explain how the judge/prosecutor came to this conclusion, because you specifically asked for comments.

Anonymous said...

Dr. Harr,

He (the judge) holds professional responsibility in his knowledge of the issues, and would be considered complicite in continued M.E. system dysfunctions that are similar that are not immediately corrected by his own professional actions to insure that the issues are corrected for all. Do you agree? Would that be a correct assumption to make?

Anonymous said...

Have you ever asked Crystal if she was offered a plea deal? Or are you once again afraid of finding out if you were wrong?

Anonymous said...

Guiowen - I'm not sure egad is anymore polite than blah ... I guess Mr. Tin-Foil Hat is just one of those people who can't engage in polite conversation. :-(

Anonymous said...

don't troll me again whoever you are

seriously

ever

there: don't ask me stupid questions i will not answer to your liking over and over and over again and then whine and make childish frowny faces about your concept of polite discussion

just don't do it - ever - then you won't have to get all frowny about it

thanks

guiowen said...

To the 3:05,
I'm sorry; did we hurt your feelings?

Anonymous said...

Oh, and if me or anyone else does dare ask you a question? Egad, whatever will you do? Spout some nonsensical nonsense and scream blah, blame Duke, and hide under your bed?

So long as you continue to post unsubstantiated bullshit, many people will continue to call you out on it.

Anonymous said...

you post unsubstantiated bs with every troll you post evil duke troll it (which is 99.9 percent of every post you post)

Anonymous said...

It still amuses me that asking for proof is considered abusive trolling by you. It must be sad to hold views that are so weak you cannot defend them.

When I've pointed out where Sid is wrong (even when he won't admit it - Daye's prior record; felony murder; Welch, etc.), I provide actual evidence. When you claim something, you provide nothing, or provide something that is debunked, then scream troll.

In honor of Guiowen who doesn't like blah ... egad!

Anonymous said...

i do not own this blog so therefore provide do proof or evidence at all - i merely comment on that which is provided

i visited this blog to see what the news was talking about with the M.E. autopsy errors and Duke's malpractice and have been harrassed by the evil duke troll gang from moment one

it just happens to be part of the Ms. Mangum vendetta which you are a part of on this blog and in your trolling of myself, which you project all your anger and hatred unto me, evidenced by being accussed of being Dr. Harr, Kenny, Ms. Peterson, and Ms. Mangum by the evil duke troll it on this blog who hails from the liestoppers and durham in wonderland evil duke troll gang, of which you are a part of.

blah is my response to your trolling of which you are fully aware of what you are doing so stop

egad is my expression of amazement at your continued example of what duke is and does and in your continued evil duke trolling as part of the evil duke troll gang on this blog

comprende?

Anonymous said...

You don't like me accusing you of being others, yet you accuse me of being others. I'm not the one behind the vast majority of the posts you are complaining of.

Comprende?

Anonymous said...

really?

why do you keep trolling me then with these stupid questions?

did you ask Mr. Young yet what he thinks bout Mr. Meier representing both himself and Ms. Mangum in a murder trial yet?

Anonymous said...

Have you? It doesn't matter what Young thinks anyway - whether he is happy or sad (and since he apparently hates Meier, I'm sure he wouldn't be happy) is irrelevant to whether or not there is a conflict.

And, Meier's representation of Young ended with the dismissal of his charges, so clearly no conflict.

Comprende?

Anonymous said...

maybe in your imaginary evil duke gang blog world where duke always 'wins' things 'work' that way

in real life durham in nonwonderland, that's not how things 'work'

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

maybe in your imaginary evil duke gang blog world where duke always 'wins' things 'work' that way

in real life durham in nonwonderland, that's not how things 'work'



I would ask you for proof, but that's trolling. And, if Young is so tied to Duke, and Duke always wins, why has he gone from a mulch-millionaire to apparently broke, and why can't he get anything remotely close to what he perceives as justice (yes, he's irrational, but still ... if he is so powerful, as you claim, shouldn't he get more help from Duke)?

Nifong Supporter said...


Lance the Intern said...
Sid stated on November 29, 2012:

"Durham prosecutors’ desperate objectives now are centered around getting Crystal Mangum to accept a plea deal ..."

Are you lying now, or were you lying then?


Neither. That is what I believed then... thinking that Durham prosecutors had some common sense. I had no proof of my own account that they offered Mangum a plea deal and never expressed such.

Furthermore, even if I may have gotten facts incorrect, for it to be a lie there must be an intent to deceive... something which I have never intended.

Nifong Supporter said...


guiowen said...
Sidney said
"So, gui, your position is that the fact that she was strangling him had nothing to do with his apparent heart attack? Yet, you want to say that a non-fatal stab wound was responsible for Daye's death ten days later when he was electively removed from life support? Doesn't make sense."

Sorry, Sidney, but I just don't know enough about the details. I'm trying to explain how the judge/prosecutor came to this conclusion, because you specifically asked for comments.


gui, mon ami,

I certainly didn't mean to ridicule and I appreciate your explanation. However, I am of the belief that the prosecutor and judge both felt sympathy for Dottie Amtey... why, I'm not sure. But it seems like they went out of their way to get her off with the lightest sentence possible. This is in contrast with the Mangum case in which they went after her with a vengeance.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Dr. Harr,

He (the judge) holds professional responsibility in his knowledge of the issues, and would be considered complicite in continued M.E. system dysfunctions that are similar that are not immediately corrected by his own professional actions to insure that the issues are corrected for all. Do you agree? Would that be a correct assumption to make?


Not being a lawyer, I can't really give you a reliable answer. Maybe Walt or A Lawyer might be able to weigh in on your question.

I agree with you that the judge is in a way complicit with the misdeeds and malfeasances of the medical examiner by allowing false and fraudulent statements to be introduced into testimony and considered by the jurors. My feeling is that Judge Ridgeway was extremely partial in his handling of the case.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Have you ever asked Crystal if she was offered a plea deal? Or are you once again afraid of finding out if you were wrong?


At one time or another I may have asked Crystal about being offered a plea deal. Can't really remember what she said about it. I do believe at one time or another I heard that she had been offered a plea deal. My current belief is that she was not.

Anonymous said...


Furthermore, even if I may have gotten facts incorrect, for it to be a lie there must be an intent to deceive... something which I have never intended.


Ah, but you are quick to say that Dr. Nichols had an intent to deceive regarding the spleen instead of a slip of the tongue. It must be nice to live with such double standards.

Anonymous said...

At one time or another I may have asked Crystal about being offered a plea deal. Can't really remember what she said about it. I do believe at one time or another I heard that she had been offered a plea deal. My current belief is that she was not.


But, you won't ask her, you will just continue to claim that as a fact without any proof, and expect people to believe it?

A Lawyer said...

He (the judge) holds professional responsibility in his knowledge of the issues, and would be considered complicite in continued M.E. system dysfunctions that are similar that are not immediately corrected by his own professional actions to insure that the issues are corrected for all. Do you agree? Would that be a correct assumption to make?

A judge has the responsibility, and the power, to rule on the case before him, and his ruling must be based solely on the evidence presented by the parties to the case. A judge has no jurisdiction -- no power, no authority-- to rule on other issues, involving people not parties to the case before him, and based on evidence not offered by the parties to his case.

Lance the Intern said...

Sid- You did,in fact, lie with your statement. Specifically you created what is known as a "fabrication". That is, you submitted a statement as truth without knowing for certain that it actually is truth.

You, sir, are a liar.

Anonymous said...

Seriously, if someone says something they believe to be true, and then at some point find out something else that makes them question that truth as they once knew it, and they admit it and that they don't know for sure anymore based on what they know now - that makes them a liar?

???

Why even argue with someone like that then? Like you for example. You will never admit you are wrong and that you have considered new evidence and a change of your mind based on it unless you are playing a lying game in your own mind, and anyone who you can change their mind based on any evidence you might provide to change their mind are deemed liars by you.

???

So you never change your mind if you actually don't won't to consider yourself a liar ... interesting ... why argue then with you?

Anonymous said...

Here is a statement that is neither lie nor fabrication:

You are a moron.

Now go refold your tinfoil hat.

Anonymous said...

Except Sid lies cause he doesn't say "I think she wasn't offered a plea" he says she wasn't and bases all kinds of attacks on an assumption he could easily discover (except Crystal won't talk to him). That's lying. Like his continuing to bring up Daye's inadmissible record, felony murder, and others. Face it tin-foil, you've put your faith in a serial liar, and just refuse to recognize it.

I do hope the space under your bed isn't too cramped.

Anonymous said...

Is that what you do evil duke troll tin hat it when you find you have to change your mind about something - hide under your bed and refold your tin hat until you no longer think of yourself as a liar?

???

Anonymous said...

If you'd ever actually provide any evidence/proof of your claims I'd be perfectly willing to change my mind, but you won't - you keep bringing up the same stuff, which has been shown to be wrong.

Unlike you and Sid, I'm open to being convinced - I'm not taking a position, and then twisting all the facts to fit it and ignoring everything else.

Anonymous said...

since i don't do any of those things you just falsly accussed me of you must be projecting again

Anonymous said...

tinfoil hat is an evil IT troll.

See? I can play this game, too.

Food Lion has a coupon for their 75ft tin foil at www.foodlion.com/coupons.

You should look into it. I think you need a bigger hat.

They deliver, so you don't even have to leave the house, lest you be exposed to more evil Dookies.

Anonymous said...

thanks - good advice for those like you in need of extra tin foil for really homongous it hats

Anonymous said...

Don't falsly accusse me of having a big evil IT troll head like you do.

Stop bullying me you hate criminal.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...

Furthermore, even if I may have gotten facts incorrect, for it to be a lie there must be an intent to deceive... something which I have never intended.


Ah, but you are quick to say that Dr. Nichols had an intent to deceive regarding the spleen instead of a slip of the tongue. It must be nice to live with such double standards.


Nichols' tongue didn't slip twice. He stated twice during direct exam that the spleen was removed during surgery previously. That is not a slip. Especially when he described the organ in his autopsy report. He's a medical examiner who had time to prepare to testify. If he cannot get something as simple as what happened to the spleen correct, how can any of his testimony be considered credible?

Nifong Supporter said...


Lance the Intern said...
Sid- You did,in fact, lie with your statement. Specifically you created what is known as a "fabrication". That is, you submitted a statement as truth without knowing for certain that it actually is truth.

You, sir, are a liar.


Lance, to what statement are you referring to as a fabrication? More elucidation is required.

Lance the Intern said...

Sid, you stated on November 29, 2012:

"Durham prosecutors’ desperate objectives now are centered around getting Crystal Mangum to accept a plea deal ..."

Now you say "I never saw a plea deal".

If you now make the statement "I never saw a plea deal",that makes your previous statement a complete fabrication.

You made the statement in no uncertain terms as if it were truth, without knowing if it were true or false.

Anonymous said...

Sid:

You did make absolute, unqualified statements of fact that the prosecutors had offered Mangum a plea deal.

On an unrelated note, what is the latest news us on your lawsuit against Duke and your habeas petition?

Anonymous said...

FBI stats state that over one-third of a million white women have been sexually assaulted by black males since 1987 — with no visible protest from the civil rights leadership.

Interracial rape is almost exclusively black on white. Not one case of a white sexual assault on a black female was found in the FBI study.

Anonymous said...

If interracial crime is the ugliest manifestation of racism, what does this tell us about where racism really resides?

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous Lance the Intern said...
Sid, you stated on November 29, 2012:

"Durham prosecutors’ desperate objectives now are centered around getting Crystal Mangum to accept a plea deal ..."

Now you say "I never saw a plea deal".

If you now make the statement "I never saw a plea deal",that makes your previous statement a complete fabrication.

You made the statement in no uncertain terms as if it were truth, without knowing if it were true or false.


That is what I believed at that time... it made sense to me. Keep in mind that this is a blog... blogs are composed of opinions. It would seem that on this particular point I was mistaken.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Sid:

You did make absolute, unqualified statements of fact that the prosecutors had offered Mangum a plea deal.

On an unrelated note, what is the latest news us on your lawsuit against Duke and your habeas petition?


In my lawsuit with Duke, I am filing an appeal with the Fourth Circuit.

My habeas corpus filed with the Court of Appeals was denied. I received no reply from the habeas corpus filed with the Superior Court of Durham County. My next step will be to file a habeas corpus with the North Carolina Supreme Court.

I will work on the habeas corpus after I file my appeal in the Duke case.

The Great Kilgo said...

Wake up liestopper cranks.

I heard from kenhyderal and he is contacting the friend of the lax player who was at the party. This will stir up liestoppers.com and their buddy KC.

In the meantime keep on spinning Ubes.

guiowen said...

But I thought the Great Kilgo WAS the friend of the lax player?
I guess someone can't keep his stories straight.

The Great Kilgo said...

Stop bullying me you hate criminal.

Anonymous said...

My habeas corpus filed with the Court of Appeals was denied. I received no reply from the habeas corpus filed with the Superior Court of Durham County. My next step will be to file a habeas corpus with the North Carolina Supreme Court.


The fact that all are denying you, perhaps you'd be better off spending your time actually studying the law, and listening to the advice Walt and others have given you - first, you are gonna get tagged for not being a lawyer - as you have been told, your interpretation is wrong; second, if the person you are filing it on behalf of hasn't consented, you don't have standing; third - you can't file a Writ while the appeal of right is underway - so until the initial appeal is ruled on, your Writ is improper as a matter of law.

Not that it will stop you, but you are going to get denied out of hand.

Anonymous said...

Sid said:

"That is what I believed at that time... it made sense to me. Keep in mind that this is a blog... blogs are composed of opinions. It would seem that on this particular point I was mistaken."

If you believed it to be true, you should have blogged that it was your belief or opinion. You did not. Instead, you blogged it as fact.

We can parse what it means when you state as fact things that are not true. We can debate whether a lie requires intent, or what level of intent is required (i.e., knowledge of actual falsity or just reckless disregard of the truth). The fact remains that you have a long history of stating things that, upon further scrutiny, turn out to be incorrect. That makes it very hard to take you, or anything you say, seriously.

Anonymous said...

Sid likes to state all of his opinions as facts - because he is infallible ...

It's a fact that Dr. Roberts does not believe her conclusions, and is, in fact, lying.

It's a fact that Crystal's attorneys have conflicts with Duke and betrayed her to protect Duke.

It's a fact that Dr. Nichols intentionally lied/did a sloppy autopsy to protect Duke.

It's a fact that Daye's prior criminal record should have been introduced (even if it isn't admissible).

It's a fact that Crystal's attorneys asked her to lie about prior assault by Daye, so when she was asked on the stand she would deny it happened on multiple occasisons.

It's a fact that Crystal was facing felony murder due to the Larceny of Chose in Action.

The list of facts according to Sid goes on and on, sadly he has no evidence or proof of any of them, nor will he ever admit he could be mistaken.

Anonymous said...

he just admitted he was mistaken in his understanding of a plea deal being offered or not to Ms. Mangum - so that is not a fact when you state that he doesn't admit to his mistakes ... so in your judgemental spectrum of standards to go by when you attack someone for sport and what you accuse them of ... you are a liar

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
My habeas corpus filed with the Court of Appeals was denied. I received no reply from the habeas corpus filed with the Superior Court of Durham County. My next step will be to file a habeas corpus with the North Carolina Supreme Court.


The fact that all are denying you, perhaps you'd be better off spending your time actually studying the law, and listening to the advice Walt and others have given you - first, you are gonna get tagged for not being a lawyer - as you have been told, your interpretation is wrong; second, if the person you are filing it on behalf of hasn't consented, you don't have standing; third - you can't file a Writ while the appeal of right is underway - so until the initial appeal is ruled on, your Writ is improper as a matter of law.

Not that it will stop you, but you are going to get denied out of hand.


My right to file a habeas corpus as a third party is protected by NC General Statutes. I can't be penalized or accused of practicing law by filing the habeas corpus document.

On the bright side, I'm at least doing something on behalf of Crystal.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Sid likes to state all of his opinions as facts - because he is infallible ...

It's a fact that Dr. Roberts does not believe her conclusions, and is, in fact, lying.

It's a fact that Crystal's attorneys have conflicts with Duke and betrayed her to protect Duke.

It's a fact that Dr. Nichols intentionally lied/did a sloppy autopsy to protect Duke.

It's a fact that Daye's prior criminal record should have been introduced (even if it isn't admissible).

It's a fact that Crystal's attorneys asked her to lie about prior assault by Daye, so when she was asked on the stand she would deny it happened on multiple occasisons.

It's a fact that Crystal was facing felony murder due to the Larceny of Chose in Action.

The list of facts according to Sid goes on and on, sadly he has no evidence or proof of any of them, nor will he ever admit he could be mistaken.


I would not classify all the above as irrefutable facts, but I would state that they are reasonable assumptions that are based on facts.

Anonymous said...

Dr. Harr,

Can you post the law under which you base your understanding of Habeous corpus here (in complete format). Then we can all analyze the understanding of Habeous corpus based on the actual law. From what I read the Habeous corpus comes into play after the appeals process. So - post what you are basing your understanding on here for further input on that matter if you can. Thanks.

Anonymous said...

My right to file a habeas corpus as a third party is protected by NC General Statutes. I can't be penalized or accused of practicing law by filing the habeas corpus document.


That's not true, as you have been advised, and as even rudimentary research would have shown you. Hide behind "ignorance of the law" all you want - you are wrong, and 30 seconds of research would have shown you that - you refused to do that, because you knew you were wrong. Good luck.

Anonymous said...

Whether he legally can file a Writ or not, am I not the only one bothered by the fact that while her appeal is pending, and after she has intentionally chosen to not respond to his requests/comments about filing a Writ, Sid is going ahead and continuing to attempt to influence the judiciary and others in Crystal's case?

Seems to me she should have some say in whether or not this is being done, and her refusal to contact him, and respond to him when he asks her about it should be a loud and clear message to Sid.

But, as we've always said, this has never been about Crystal, it's always been about Sid, and this is just further proof of it.

Walt said...

"Lance the Intern said...
"Do you think she received a fair sentence (probation for a plea of voluntary manslaughter)?"

Do you think Crystal could have received a fairer sentence for a plea bargain?

I do....Unfortunately for Crystal she was "advised" against any plea bargain by *someone*."


Ding-Ding-Ding, Ladies and Gentlemen, we have a winner.

Walt-in-Durham

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Whether he legally can file a Writ or not, am I not the only one bothered by the fact that while her appeal is pending, and after she has intentionally chosen to not respond to his requests/comments about filing a Writ, Sid is going ahead and continuing to attempt to influence the judiciary and others in Crystal's case?

Seems to me she should have some say in whether or not this is being done, and her refusal to contact him, and respond to him when he asks her about it should be a loud and clear message to Sid.

But, as we've always said, this has never been about Crystal, it's always been about Sid, and this is just further proof of it.


Wrong-O! This is about justice!

As far as influencing the judiciary goes I feel that it is my obligation to inform the Court that the autopsy report used to charge and convict Mangum was false and fraudulent. I feel its my obligation to inform the Court that the star witness for the prosecution, the medical examiner Dr. Nichols, committed perjury that was inflammatory and prejudicial. I feel that as a Tar Heelian it is my obligation to help an innocent individual obtain her freedom and have her conviction overturned.

As far as communication goes, we are in communication as I spoke with her by phone recently, received mail from her recently, and am mailing a letter to her this afternoon.

I have no doubt that Crystal appreciates my efforts on her behalf.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Dr. Harr,

Can you post the law under which you base your understanding of Habeous corpus here (in complete format). Then we can all analyze the understanding of Habeous corpus based on the actual law. From what I read the Habeous corpus comes into play after the appeals process. So - post what you are basing your understanding on here for further input on that matter if you can. Thanks.

Below is a link to the NC General Statute that refers to Habeas Corpus. In particular statute 17-5 is the one I used to support my belief that it was proper and legal for me to file the petition on behalf of Crystal.
General Statute on Habeas Corpus

Hope this answers your questions.

Nifong Supporter said...


Walt said...
"Lance the Intern said...
"Do you think she received a fair sentence (probation for a plea of voluntary manslaughter)?"

Do you think Crystal could have received a fairer sentence for a plea bargain?

I do....Unfortunately for Crystal she was "advised" against any plea bargain by *someone*."

Ding-Ding-Ding, Ladies and Gentlemen, we have a winner.

Walt-in-Durham

Walt and Lance,

Yes, I would and did advise Mangum of accepting a plea deal even though one was apparently not offered to her. Why should she plead guilty to a crime she didn't commit? Would you plead guilty to a crime you didn't commit? Do you think Perry Mason would encourage his client to plead guilty to a crime he/she didn't commit?

Had I represented Mangum, I would've gotten an acquittal... hung jury at worst. The prosecution had no case... period.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
My right to file a habeas corpus as a third party is protected by NC General Statutes. I can't be penalized or accused of practicing law by filing the habeas corpus document.


That's not true, as you have been advised, and as even rudimentary research would have shown you. Hide behind "ignorance of the law" all you want - you are wrong, and 30 seconds of research would have shown you that - you refused to do that, because you knew you were wrong. Good luck.


Upon what do you base your claim that a third party cannot file a petition for Habeas Corpus for a third party?

The NC General Statute 17-5 reads as follows: "§ 17-5. By whom application is made.

Application for the writ may be made either by the party for whose relief it is intended or by any person in his behalf.
"

I hope this edification will suffice.

Anonymous said...

Dr. Harr,

If the Appeals Court orders a new trial, Ms. Mangum will still be in need of non-conflicted, non duke biased lawyer to assist in her defense. What would you suggest be done to insure that the Duke / Durham Public Defenders office has no conflict of interest with duke and is thus capable of providing a lawyer to assist Ms. Mangum in a new trial? The first thing would be to get her out of jail, and back on bond release, so that is another thing to consider in insuring the same bias and fraud with the conflicted Public Defenders office does not occur again in her case. What are your thoughts on these issues?

Anonymous said...

Dr. Harr,

Speaking of Perry Mason, seems the NC Medical Examiner Systems saga has just got more a bit more complex. There is an article today in the News and Observer outlining a new case filed by the whistle blower in the M.E. office who discovered the bullet fragment that got Dr. Nichols and apparently himself fired. Well, he resigned and retired, but nevertheless, he is suing for being forced to resign and retire as a victim of a whistle blower vendetta (he alleges) against him after he testified to the SBI in that case about the bullet fragment. Per the M.E. office, he actually documented the bullet incorrectly which is why Dr. Nichols did not turn it over to the SBI (even though Dr. Nichols was fired for it before Ms. Mangum's trial). ???

Perhaps Nichols is right and Duke is horribly wrong in what happened to Mr. Daye in their hospital to cause his death? ???

Anyway, isn't that what the M.E. office is stating by saying there was nothing wrong with Dr. Nichols autopsy report in the Mangum case.

???

Anonymous said...

Just a few days ago you said you hadn't heard from her in several weeks, and she wasn't responding to you despite you providing her self-addressed stamped envelopes. Was that a lie, or has she since started communicating again? And you explicitly said you had mentioned the Writ and she had not responded - so if you are sure she appreciates it, why isn't she saying so?

Anonymous said...

Sid said:

"Had I represented Mangum, I would've gotten an acquittal... hung jury at worst. The prosecution had no case... period."

That's big talk coming from a man with no legal training who has never won a case.

Anonymous said...

SideNote:

Option 1:

cop drives by and figures person will get out of the middle of street as soon as he finishes crossing it in the next minute

Option 2:

cop stops and ends up killing the middle of the street lolligagger, so the street is now blocked off and everyone and their brother and sister and the national guard and news reporters from around the world with tear gas and stun grenades flying about are waiting for Obama and Holder to stand in the middle of the street to make an announcement about the virtues of taking the high road (or at least the middle of the road)


hmmmmm ... so many choices

Walt said...

Sid wrote: "Application for the writ may be made either by the party for whose relief it is intended or by any person in his behalf."

That is not a right of yours, but of Crystal's.

But, you've never been one to follow the law.

Walt-in-Durham

Walt said...

Anonymous at 6:51 PM wrote: "That's big talk coming from a man with no legal training who has never won a case."

Ding - Ding - Ding, Ladies and Gentlemen, we have a winner!

Sid's all talk and no walk.

Walt-in-Durham

Walt said...

Sid wrote: "Why should she plead guilty to a crime she didn't commit? Would you plead guilty to a crime you didn't commit?"

Except she did commit a crime.

Walt-in-Durham

Anonymous said...

Sid wrote: "Why should she plead guilty to a crime she didn't commit? Would you plead guilty to a crime you didn't commit?"

Answer: To avoid a conviction, and much longer sentence, for the crime you did commit. This is a lesson Mangum learned the hard way.

Anonymous said...

Dr. Harr,

There is a series starting now on "The Real News" network that is interesting in its delving into further understanding of the position that the NAACP takes on certain issues and why they do so. You might be interested in following it. I have always wondered in this case why the NAACP doesn't insure that lawyers are available to assist those they purportedly support with cases such as the current Mangum case. That would seem like a very reasonable thing for them to do to me, but since it is not seen in reality, I am hoping this series will provide a deeper understanding into the issue.

Anonymous said...

There are lawyers available to assist with cases like the Mangum case. In fact, Mangum had several competent attorneys assigned to assist her free of charge in the trial of her case. She currently has a lawyer handling her appeal, also without charge to her.

Falsely and baselessly accusing Mangum's lawyers of being incompetent, part of a massive conspiracy and/or of conflicts of interest does not change those facts or create a controversy. It does nothing to help Mangum and just makes you look unserious.

Anonymous said...

well exxxcccccuuuuuussssseeee me
(for looking unserious)

blah

guiowen said...

To the 11:14,
Please mind your manners.

A Lawyer said...

Nifong Supporter said:
In my lawsuit with Duke, I am filing an appeal with the Fourth Circuit.


Last we heard from you, the Magistrate Judge recommended that your suit against Duke be dismissed and that your right to file future suits be limited. You said you were going to file objections with the District Judge.

Are we now to assume that the District Judge turned you down as well? If so, could you please post (1) your objections to the Magistrate's Recommendations, (2) the defendants' response, and (3) the District Judge's rulings?

We await this further elucidation.

A Lawyer said...

Nifong Supporter said:
Below is a link to the NC General Statute that refers to Habeas Corpus. In particular statute 17-5 is the one I used to support my belief that it was proper and legal for me to file the petition on behalf of Crystal.
General Statute on Habeas Corpus

Hope this answers your questions.


Dr. Harr, presumably you failed to read section 17-4 (even though it comes before 17-5). Section 17-4 says:

"§ 17-4. When application denied.
Application to prosecute the writ shall be denied in the following cases:
****
(2) Where persons are committed or detained by virtue of the final order, judgment or decree of a competent tribunal of civil or criminal jurisdiction, or by virtue of an execution issued upon such final order, judgment or decree."

As Walt previously pointed out, this statute means that no court can even consider a habeas petition for Mangum until and unless her conviction is reversed on appeal.

Did you somehow miss this when you were preparing your habeas petition?

Anonymous said...

Dr. Harr,

On the series I mentioned previously currently running on the "The Real News" network, the quest speaker is actually a history professor who occassionally works at Chapel Hill (persumably UNC). He is, or was, if I heard what was said correctly, the president of a Black Association of Lawyers. It is an interesting conversation.

Anonymous said...

Did you somehow miss this when you were preparing your habeas petition?


He didn't miss it, he just ignores it because it doesn't fit his worldview.

Anonymous said...

"§ 17-4. When application denied.
Application to prosecute the writ shall be denied in the following cases:
****
(2) Where persons are committed or detained by virtue of the final order, judgment or decree of a competent tribunal of civil or criminal jurisdiction, or by virtue of an execution issued upon such final order, judgment or decree."

So does this mean:

1. That the Habeous corpus could have been filed in the two month period that Mr. Meier was acting as a lawyer appointed by the Public Defenders office, but before the final judgement of the actual trial?

1a. Where does it actually state that it has to be submitted after the Appeals Court process, but only AFTER they issue their judgement on the appeal, and only if that judgement orders a news trial?

2. Does execution in the final sentence mean an actual execution, or does it simply mean that some action was executed based upon a final judgement?

It is certainly easy to misinterpret what is written in the statute on this issue.

Anonymous said...

It's not remotely confusing to anyone with a modicum of intelligence and certainly anyone with legal training, or willing to do 30 seconds of research can figure it out.

See, this all goes back to further proof that Sid's efforts are all about him, not Crystal. He takes steps that he claims are to help him (his letters, this Writ, many others), and his gullible followers on this board think it's great that he's trying to help Crystal, and ignore that it's all really self-promotion.

Sid knows these efforts will fail - in fact, he counts on it. Because he wants a martyr - that's why he is upset she didn't get LWOP - she will actually get out, and likely in Sid's lifetime - and he loses a cause, so he needs to keep hurting her.

But, in the interim, he will continue to file things he knows will fail, because he wants to pretend he's helping, while really getting his name out, and when they do fail, he blames Duke and the conspiracy, not the law, even though everyone has told him from the beginning he would fail becuse of the law, not Duke.

This whole exercise is Sid's big ego lovefest and it's sad how many of you are sucked in and actually think he is doing anything other than playing you for fools and feeding his narcissistic ego.

Anonymous said...

evil duke troll: your last post does not even fit into the current discussion about Habeous corpus nor provide more accurate and complete understanding which you so willingly blame Dr. Harr for not having in such hateful manners

Anonymous said...

Yeah actually it does - it shows how Sid knew the Habeas was wrong ... Oh, and you couldn't file it before the trial after she was released - she wasn't in custody. The purpose of a Habeas Petition is to have the person brought before a court to challenge their illegal detention - say the folks in Gitmo being held without charges - she was not in custody, so Habeas relief was inapplicable to her.

I know, I'm pointing out why you and Sid are wrong, therefore I'm a troll because you are as scared of the truth and seeing Sid for what he is as you are of little men hiding under bridges.

If pointing out why Habeas was denied is off topic you've managed to lower my already infinitesimal opinion of your intelligence.

Anonymous said...

no actually it was your little big rant for the day about your hatred for Dr. Harr

your further explanation does nothing to understand the law, but it is helpful in understanding your hatred better

Anonymous said...

Okay - make this clear on the law:

1. A Writ of Habeas Corpus cannot be granted after someone is being held/incarcerated based on a Conviction/Judgment - that's what appeals and MARs are for. So, Sid can file all the Writs he wants, they will never be granted, because they are the wrong pleading, not because of a conspiracy.

2. A Writ could not have been filed before the trial while Mangum was out on bond, because she was not being held - and a Writ is used to have someone brought before a court to justify their further detention - no detention, no Writ.

Therefore - Sid can file all the Writs he wants, and say whatever he wants in them, they are useless to helping Crystal. The only things that can help Crystal are her appeal (which is underway), and if that is unsuccessful, a further appeal, or a MAR (Motion for Appropriate Relief).

Comprende?

Anonymous said...

That is what Dr. Harr is saying in his writ, that she is being detained incorrectly while she awaits the Appeal Court's decision - so what is wrong with what he did?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

That is what Dr. Harr is saying in his writ, that she is being detained incorrectly while she awaits the Appeal Court's decision - so what is wrong with what he did?


Because - as has been pointed out - once there has been a trial, and a conviction (Judgment), as there was in this case - a Writ is improper - the case gets resolved via appeal. That was noted a few comments ago.

So, what's wrong with it is that a Writ is used pre-conviction, an appeal is used post-conviction.

That's the law, so what's wrong with it is that he is ignoring the proper legal procedure, and then wondering why it's not working. It's not working because legally the courts cannot grant a Writ under the circumstances Mangum is in - they will address her case/issues in the appeal which is ongoing.

Anonymous said...

So you can write a writ during the initial trial process if the person is detained incorrectly because the lawyer has a conflict of interest, but before the appeals process or the actual trial?

Anonymous said...

Mr. Meier's legal strategy was to tell his client, Ms. Mangum, that he intended to ask the judge for sufficient time to present his case for her defense professionally, which he did but his request was denied by the judge, and which is what Mr. Meier based his application for appeal for Ms. Mangum. So there was no time for a Habeous Corpus to be written either based upon his client's understanding of his intentions in his request for more time to assist in her defense and the quickness of the trial itself, coupled with receiving the second autopsy report just hours before the end of the trial.

Can a writ be considered by the Appeals Court with this additional complaint highlighted for reasoning of timing of submitting the writ?

Westley said...

Anonymous @4:50 and @5:29:

I am impressed.

Walt said...

Anonymous at 5:29 PM wrote: "Can a writ be considered by the Appeals Court with this additional complaint highlighted for reasoning of timing of submitting the writ?"

No, a writ of habeas corpus is not a substitute for an appeal. In re Burton, 257 N.C. 534, 126 S.E.2d 581 (1962). In habeas corpus proceedings, the court is not permitted to act as one of errors and appeals, but the right to afford relief, on such hearings, arises only when the petitioner is held unlawfully or on a sentence manifestly entered by the court without power to impose it. See Burton, Supra. In this case, Mangum was tried by Superior Court, a court that has the power to impose a sentence. Thus, until she has exhausted her appeal and motion for appropriate relief, she has no claim under habeas corpus.

In theory, she might have had the claim prior to conviction, but as has been pointed out correctly when she was on bail, she was not being held and thus no habeas issue. Further, before she made bail, there was no habeas issue as a court had set bail. So in this case, there is no present or past habeas issue. One might arise in the future, but only after appeals are exhausted.

Walt-in-Durham

Walt said...

Anonymous at 5:10 AM wrote: "So you can write a writ during the initial trial process if the person is detained incorrectly because the lawyer has a conflict of interest, but before the appeals process or the actual trial?"

You can write it, but it would be properly denied. Habeas corpus goes to lawful detention, not conflict of interest. Detention is the only issue the court can consider on habeas.

Walt-in-Durham

Walt said...

Anonymous at 4:50AM wrote: "That is what Dr. Harr is saying in his writ, that she is being detained incorrectly while she awaits the Appeal Court's decision - so what is wrong with what he did?"

See the discussion above.

Walt-in-Durham

Walt said...

A Lawyer wrote: "As Walt previously pointed out, this statute means that no court can even consider a habeas petition for Mangum until and unless her conviction is reversed on appeal."

I would add, that habeas would be available if her conviction is affirmed and she has exhausted all her appeals and motion for appropriate relief. Although, habeas petitions in those situations are almost never granted unless there is an intervening change in sentencing law.

Walt-in-Durham

Anonymous said...

So what do you do when you are unlawfully detained while awaiting the Appeals process to end?

That was just done in the Howard case wasn't it? Was he able to get out? What did the lawyer do in his case to try and get him out of jail?

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Dr. Harr,

If the Appeals Court orders a new trial, Ms. Mangum will still be in need of non-conflicted, non duke biased lawyer to assist in her defense. What would you suggest be done to insure that the Duke / Durham Public Defenders office has no conflict of interest with duke and is thus capable of providing a lawyer to assist Ms. Mangum in a new trial? The first thing would be to get her out of jail, and back on bond release, so that is another thing to consider in insuring the same bias and fraud with the conflicted Public Defenders office does not occur again in her case. What are your thoughts on these issues?


I believe that Crystal should do what I'm doing in my lawsuit against Duke. Represent herself! She's intelligent enough and the State's case is weak to the point of being non-existent. She could've fared much better in the November 2013 trial if she would've represented herself... but she placed her faith in Turncoat Dan Meier. That's why she ended up losing big-time.

I tried to get Mangum to study and prepare to represent herself before, but she lacked confidence and I think she lacked the energy required to seriously prepare her case. Also, I think she thought that even with lousy representation that she would never be convicted of second degree murder or manslaughter. She shouldn't've, but the conspiratorial deck was really stacked against her.

Had I hired an attorney to represent me against Duke, not only would he/she have charged me up the kazoo, but would've sold me out as well. My chances against Duke are much better with me controlling my destiny.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous Anonymous said...
Dr. Harr,

Speaking of Perry Mason, seems the NC Medical Examiner Systems saga has just got more a bit more complex. There is an article today in the News and Observer outlining a new case filed by the whistle blower in the M.E. office who discovered the bullet fragment that got Dr. Nichols and apparently himself fired. Well, he resigned and retired, but nevertheless, he is suing for being forced to resign and retire as a victim of a whistle blower vendetta (he alleges) against him after he testified to the SBI in that case about the bullet fragment. Per the M.E. office, he actually documented the bullet incorrectly which is why Dr. Nichols did not turn it over to the SBI (even though Dr. Nichols was fired for it before Ms. Mangum's trial). ???

Perhaps Nichols is right and Duke is horribly wrong in what happened to Mr. Daye in their hospital to cause his death? ???

Anyway, isn't that what the M.E. office is stating by saying there was nothing wrong with Dr. Nichols autopsy report in the Mangum case.

???


Yes, the Medical Examiner's Office is carefully wording its statement by saying the "findings" were accurate and appropriate. This statement by Chief Medical Examiner Radisch is wrong, however as there are too many significant discrepancies with the Nichols autopsy report and other medical records... especially the operative report. I believe the operative report is correct when it states that the only lesions on Daye were a minor one to the spleen and a laceration to the splenic flexure of the colon. It stated that the stomach was normal... not that there was a sutured wound in that organ's fundus. Also, no mention was made in the operative report of a laceration to the left kidney, left lung, or diaphragm... all of which are reported in the autopsy report. Then Nichols contradicts himself with perjured testimony at trial that the spleen was removed at surgery (not according to the operative report)... and then Nichols goes on to describe the spleen in his autopsy report which he stated at trial was missing because it had been removed by surgeons. Not to mention Nichols' observation of multiple "defensive" injuries to the left upper extremity which were contradicted by other reports.

Daye's autopsy report is totally bogus and unreliable not only in its findings but in its conclusion... and everyone is trying to cover this up.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Just a few days ago you said you hadn't heard from her in several weeks, and she wasn't responding to you despite you providing her self-addressed stamped envelopes. Was that a lie, or has she since started communicating again? And you explicitly said you had mentioned the Writ and she had not responded - so if you are sure she appreciates it, why isn't she saying so?


What I said was accurate. It had been some time since I heard from her despite enclosing a self-addressed/stamped-envelope the last time I wrote to her. Since I posted that comment, Crystal did telephone me and she later sent some information that I had requested. I told her on the phone that I had filed two habeas corpi on her behalf and she seemed to be pleased that I did.

Hope that untangles any confusion.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Sid said:

"Had I represented Mangum, I would've gotten an acquittal... hung jury at worst. The prosecution had no case... period."

That's big talk coming from a man with no legal training who has never won a case.


What you fail to realize is that I would win not because I would be a fantastic court advocate, but because the case against Mangum is so weak. I believe Mangum could've won her case had she represented herself. The only reason she lost is because her turncoat attorney Meier prevented the introduction of any of Dr. Roberts' report or any other medical opinions to contradict Nichols.

So, I'm not bragging or talking big when I say I could've gotten Mangum off had I represented her. Anybody could... even you. It took skill and talent on the part of Meier to lose the case for Mangum while at the same time appearing to put up a hardy defense.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 492   Newer› Newest»