justice4nifong: Disturbing new development and mounting taxpayer burden

Sunday, January 4, 2015

Disturbing new development and mounting taxpayer burden

Click to access 'Grievance filed with State Bar against Ann B. Petersen'

257 comments:

«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 257 of 257

A Lawyer said...: Personally, I hope Sid files for an en banc hearing and when he loses, I hope he files a cert petition. No two litigants deserve each other like Duke and Sid.

Walt is, as usual, right on the money.

What makes this even funnier is that the Court of Appeals never even considered the merits of Dr. Harr's appeal, because Dr. Harr missed the deadline to appeal from the Magistrate Judge to the District Judge. So even if he files for cert., he has waived all of his claims and his appeal will continue to go nowhere.; January 13, 2015 at 10:39 AM
Walt said...: Sid wrote: "...; especially in light of the fact that she has truth and justice on her side..."

The truth is, Crystal stabbed a man who died as a result thereof. Justice says we put killers like that in jail.

"..., and efforts by all conspirators in the state and nation are unable to keep her incarcerated with their bogus charges."

No bogus charges. No bogus conviction. No conspiracy. Anyone who has to resort to a conspiracy theory to explain an event is probably a nut.

Walt-in-Durham; January 13, 2015 at 10:40 AM
Walt said...: Sid wrote: "The problem isn't that the delirium tremens Daye suffered were ruled out by the ineffective treatment for it, but rather the treatment was inadequate... his case of DT's was much more severe than anticipated."

Let's not blame the victim.

Walt-in-Durham; January 13, 2015 at 10:42 AM
guiowen said...: Actually, I think it would be great if Sid could win something against Duke.; January 13, 2015 at 11:11 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid, it's sad that you are still clinging to the notion of these fictitious experts out there. Why you think it is more convoluted and confusing that Dr. Roberts spent more than 10 hours on the case, and requested additional funds, and is the MD identified, as opposed to a vast anti-Mangum conspiracy, is beyond me.

If you are wrong, will you admit it, and shut down the blog and leave Crystal alone, or just concoct some other conspiracy (this time it will be that they should have consulted doctors - you are nothing if not predictable - again ignoring Dr. Roberts).

You are a joke.

And, Kenny, I guess Meier isn't going to respond to you? Shame on him.; January 13, 2015 at 1:50 PM
Break the Conspiracy said...: Walt and A Lawyer:

I share your enthusiasm for protracted litigation between Sidney and Duke.

Walt, you provide an excellent plan for allowing Sidney to maximize the number of his filings. I agree: first, file requesting an en banc hearing, and then, when that is denied, file a cert. After that is denied, he should again ask the Supreme Court to hear Harr II.

When the Supreme Court denies a hearing, Sidney retains many options. Due to his skillful lay legal work, the Court left a "loophole" in their ruling. As we know, Sidney is an expert at using the "loopholes" in the law.

Sidney should follow with Harr III, Harr IV, Harr V, etc. until he either gets a hearing or a Court threatens to hold him in contempt if he persists in filing duplicitous lawsuits.

Although Duke is not required to respond to any such suit, these suits have little cost except a small filing fee. He doesn't actually have anything better to do, and filing lawsuits may keep him from further compromising Mangum's case.

In any event, there are two possible positives. First, although highly remote, it is possible that a rogue judge may decide to order Duke to respond and hold a hearing. Second, the media at some point may cover Sidney's repetitive and frivolous lawsuits and publicize the shameful treatment he received at the hands of Duke. That may trigger some response by Duke to try to protect its brand.; January 13, 2015 at 5:04 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "And, Kenny, I guess Meier isn't going to respond to you? Shame on him" ...... Of course not. He would not want to publically admit to the shamefully inadequate defense he provided, by not speaking to those Duke practitioners who treated Daye. Even if all he had to do was come out on-line one more time and say yes I did.; January 13, 2015 at 9:48 PM
Anonymous said...: Walt,

What is the charge levied against someone for contributing directly to the death of an individual, and then keeping quiet and covering up the involvement in the death, therefore allowing another person to take the blame for the death, (even though there would be no death if the person who directly killed the person and then remained quiet and tryed to cover up their direct cause of death to the deceased who by all accounts was kicking, breathing, and voicing his displeasure actively at the people who DIRECTLY caused the death as a person who was very much alive before they directly caused the person's actual death because the person was actively complaining (and then wrongly blamed it on another))?; January 13, 2015 at 9:58 PM
Anonymous said...: No, Kenny, he probably doesn't want to engage in people who refuse to contact him directly, nor to get into discussions with people who aren't his client, and have no indication they are speaking on behalf of his client.

I'm sure he isntceorrird about what a handful of people on a blog led by a discredited crazy person have to say.; January 14, 2015 at 3:43 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

You've already said you do not believe Meier did any real work on the case, and if he says he did, you'd say he was lying. Your mind is made up - why should he respond to you? You've made it clear that you have already reached your conclusion no matter what he says.; January 14, 2015 at 4:52 AM
Lance the Intern said...: " Of course not. He would not want to publically admit to the shamefully inadequate defense he provided"

Did you contact Mr. Meier at the links provided, or did you expect him to contact you from the comments here on this blog?; January 14, 2015 at 6:11 AM
Lance the Intern said...: "What is the charge levied against someone for contributing directly to the death of an individual, and then keeping quiet and covering up the involvement in the death, therefore allowing another person to take the blame for the death, (even though there would be no death if the person who directly killed the person and then remained quiet and tryed to cover up their direct cause of death to the deceased who by all accounts was kicking, breathing, and voicing his displeasure actively at the people who DIRECTLY caused the death as a person who was very much alive before they directly caused the person's actual death because the person was actively complaining (and then wrongly blamed it on another))?"

Is that you, Mojo Jojo?; January 14, 2015 at 6:23 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid is just going to whine about how the rules shouldn't apply to him because he doesn't get access to the Federal Law Library.; January 14, 2015 at 6:41 AM
Anonymous said...: To the guy who keeps asking the question in all bold - you've asked it hundreds of times, and never listen to the answer, so either STFU, or just keep proving you are an idiot.

Remember, the law requires that Mangum be A proximate cause, not THE proximate cause. If she hadn't stabbed him, he wouldn't be dead.

And, malpractice happens all the time.; January 14, 2015 at 6:42 AM
Anonymous said...: If Mr. Daye had been taken to any hospital in the area INSTEAD of duke's, he would still be alive because the other hospitals wouldn't have had reason to kill him like duke did. Therefore, it wasn't Ms. Mangum's fault Mr. Daye attacked her and she had to defend herself from him AND then he was taken to a DUKE hospital. Did anyone ask her permission to take Mr. Daye to a DUKE hospital - NO! So, it is not her fault that DUKE (not another hospital in the area) killed Mr. Daye. UNC would have had no problem keeping Mr. Daye alive, intubation or not.; January 14, 2015 at 7:05 AM
Anonymous said...: Not only that, but UNC (as an example) isn't trying to be 3 BILLION dollar donation worthy as is Duke, and no other hospital, (that isn't Duke's), has a known reason to have a vendetta against Ms. Mangum that would make Mr. Daye's death by malpractice SO suspicious that they then involve themselves in whatever the legal charges are for assisting in the coverups and lying about the true cause of death by malpractice like what has happened in this case.; January 14, 2015 at 7:13 AM
Anonymous said...: So, you still believe Duke ordered it's employees to commit 1st degree murder, risking the death penalty or life in prison, and got a lot of people to agree to that?

You are more delusional than Sid if you think Duke is ordering people be killed, but that certainly seems to be what you are saying.; January 14, 2015 at 7:17 AM
Anonymous said...: Ms. Mangum WAS NOT standing there telling whoever took him to a Duke hospital to "take him to Duke - they'll take care of him (wink, wink)", was she? NO? So how could she be responsible for what Duke did that killed him? She's not, Duke is - by law.; January 14, 2015 at 7:17 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous @ 7:05:

Mo' Linquish.; January 14, 2015 at 7:18 AM
Anonymous said...: What possible evidence, other than Sid's delusional rantings, do you have that any of Mangum's attorneys had conflicts with Duke, or any relationship with Duke?

Sid was originally upset with Meier because of his affiliation with UNC.

Sid is grasping at strays, and idiots like you are following along, showing what low self-esteem and pathetic lives you actually live.; January 14, 2015 at 7:18 AM
Anonymous said...: ... and your 'perfect' excuse: no one will believe that ya'll would actually do what ya'll just did - so, hey, go right ahead. We'll just call whomever calls BS on the whole thing and ya'll delusional - that will work - cuz we're duke - and we could always threaten to kill or maim, (or troll to hell and back), anyone who doesn't believe us ... if nothing else.; January 14, 2015 at 7:23 AM
Lance the Intern said...: "So how could she be responsible"

She stabbed him. No stabbing = no trip to the hospital = no death.

State v. Welch.; January 14, 2015 at 7:23 AM
Anonymous said...: You honestly think that all of the nurses, doctors, aides, technicians, and the rest, would commit murder just because their employer asked them to?; January 14, 2015 at 7:31 AM
Anonymous said...: If you had any proof of anything you say, maybe people would listen - but you don't - you create vast conspiracies, which shows you are basically full of this. It's just unfortunate that the rest of us have to deal with it when that shit comes out of your ass and onto your keyboard when you post on this board.; January 14, 2015 at 7:32 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Walt said...
Sid wrote: "Hey, Lance, the current lawsuit is still in play."

Just barely. As Sid should know, the 4th Cir. affirmed the District Court on December 22, 2014. That means Sid has to file a Petition for Writ of Certiorari before March 22, 2015, or, he must petition in a timely manner for an en banc hearing. Otherwise the ruling is final. Life support, Sid's case is on extraordinary life support.

Personally, I hope Sid files for an en banc hearing and when he loses, I hope he files a cert petition. No two litigants deserve each other like Duke and Sid.

Walt-in-Durham

Hey, Walt.

You're right. It ain't over 'til it's over.

Thanks for keeping the viewers abreast of the legal technicalities.; January 14, 2015 at 7:43 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: guiowen said...
Actually, I think it would be great if Sid could win something against Duke.

Hey, gui, mon ami.

It's nice to have someone in my corner rootin' against Duke.; January 14, 2015 at 7:46 AM
Anonymous said...: If it is 100% death by malpractice, then that case does not apply probably. Anyway, this is an entirely different situation, since Duke vs. Mangum is common news - shoved upon the public consistently. Heck, the proof is Duke's own medical records and the defense medical examiner's report, which would never have been looked at or questioned if Ms. Mangum did not take the intiative to examine them, question them, obtain a doctor to explain them, and then insist upon justice being served on the true killers for Mr. Daye's death. Whether it was simple malpracte or murder, that is up to the public to decide per their own judgements at this point in time since NOONE with the responsibility to investigate has done so yet.; January 14, 2015 at 7:49 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Break the Conspiracy said...
Walt and A Lawyer:

I share your enthusiasm for protracted litigation between Sidney and Duke.

Walt, you provide an excellent plan for allowing Sidney to maximize the number of his filings. I agree: first, file requesting an en banc hearing, and then, when that is denied, file a cert. After that is denied, he should again ask the Supreme Court to hear Harr II.

When the Supreme Court denies a hearing, Sidney retains many options. Due to his skillful lay legal work, the Court left a "loophole" in their ruling. As we know, Sidney is an expert at using the "loopholes" in the law.

Sidney should follow with Harr III, Harr IV, Harr V, etc. until he either gets a hearing or a Court threatens to hold him in contempt if he persists in filing duplicitous lawsuits.

Although Duke is not required to respond to any such suit, these suits have little cost except a small filing fee. He doesn't actually have anything better to do, and filing lawsuits may keep him from further compromising Mangum's case.

In any event, there are two possible positives. First, although highly remote, it is possible that a rogue judge may decide to order Duke to respond and hold a hearing. Second, the media at some point may cover Sidney's repetitive and frivolous lawsuits and publicize the shameful treatment he received at the hands of Duke. That may trigger some response by Duke to try to protect its brand.

Hey, Break, where's the love? Surely you know my lawsuit against Duke is not frivolous. No more frivolous than Mike S. Adams' discrimination lawsuit against UNC-Wilmington.

Also, rogue judges are the ones who dismiss legitimate lawsuits and deny deserving plaintiffs their day in court in order to protect big-wig corporations and businesses.; January 14, 2015 at 7:52 AM
Anonymous said...: From what I've personally seen of what Duke does for quite some time now, I think he was murdered by them in order to frame Ms. Mangum for murder. That is from knowing Duke (ie: "I saw what you did, so you can wipe off your grin, it's all been a pack of lies) as I do, and it is my right to hold that judgement, just as it is anyone else's, as I please at this point in time.; January 14, 2015 at 7:54 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Sid is just going to whine about how the rules shouldn't apply to him because he doesn't get access to the Federal Law Library.

I don't mind playing by rules that are fair. Do you believe that it is fair to deny a layperson Pro Se litigant the right to use the Federal Courthouse law library... thus depriving him/her of access to case law?; January 14, 2015 at 7:56 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
So, you still believe Duke ordered it's employees to commit 1st degree murder, risking the death penalty or life in prison, and got a lot of people to agree to that?

You are more delusional than Sid if you think Duke is ordering people be killed, but that certainly seems to be what you are saying.

How can anyone be put at risk for murder or any other crime when the Durham Police Department, District Attorneys, and State Attorney General's Office all refuse to investigate Daye's death and autopsy despite major discrepancies and undeniable perjury by Dr. Nichols? The mainstream media is quiet on the subject, too. So, what risk is there if doing something at the behest of the P-T-Bs?; January 14, 2015 at 8:01 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous Lance the Intern said...
"So how could she be responsible"

She stabbed him. No stabbing = no trip to the hospital = no death.

State v. Welch.

Hey, Lance.

Allow me to correctly revise your equation.

No alcoholism = no delirium tremens = no transfer to SICU = no need for intubation = no esophageal intubation = no brain death = no irreversible coma = no elective removal from life support = no death.

Let me know if further elucidation is mandated.; January 14, 2015 at 8:06 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: HEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP!!
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT...

By tomorrow, Thursday, January 15th, I plan to post recent letters sent out earlier this month. In the future I will add e-mails, too.

As you were.; January 14, 2015 at 8:09 AM
Lance the Intern said...: "Allow me to correctly revise your equation."

Sadly, your math skills are lacking.; January 14, 2015 at 8:40 AM
Lance the Intern said...: "No more frivolous than Mike S. Adams' discrimination lawsuit against UNC-Wilmington."

Sid -- Your dispute with Duke is nothing at all like the Adams discrimination case, but thanks for bringing it to our attention.

For those not familiar with this case, you can read more here.; January 14, 2015 at 8:52 AM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "No, Kenny, he probably doesn't want to engage in people who refuse to contact him directly, nor to get into discussions with people who aren't his client, and have no indication they are speaking on behalf of his client"......................Crystal is no longer a client of Daniel Meier; January 14, 2015 at 9:05 AM
Anonymous said...: Then all the more reason to ignore you. But he still can't go talking about privileged communications with random people. And you still haven't answered why he should answer you or care what a few obvious crackpots think. Ignoring crazy people is usually the best alternative.; January 14, 2015 at 9:09 AM
Lance the Intern said...: Kenhyderal -- Did you attempt to contact Mr. Meier from the links provided?; January 14, 2015 at 9:12 AM
Anonymous said...: Of course he hasn't - he thinks Meier should monitor Sid's blog and just choose to respond. Kenny and Sid don't want answers they want to maintain their delusions.; January 14, 2015 at 9:22 AM
kenhyderal said...: I would just like people to realize that Meier did not do the
adequate job in defending Crystal that was required, in order to prove her innocence. People here speculate that he did investigate these matters and if he did as you suggest and found them unhelpful then I would better understand his failure to raise proximate cause issues in Court something a jury would, I believe, have found helpful in determining that Crystal did not murder Daye; January 14, 2015 at 10:38 AM
Lance the Intern said...: So -- For the record, you did not contact Mr. Meier, correct?; January 14, 2015 at 10:42 AM
Anonymous said...: As much as you may wish it was otherwise, the cause of death is not an issue in Mangum's murder case.

Two medical doctors (including the defense expert) agreed that Mangum's stab wound was the proximate cause of Mr. Daye's death. Even if there was malpractice, that does not relieve Mangum from culpability, unless it was the sole cause of death. See, State v. Welch.

In all the years since Mangum killed Mr. Daye, no one has produced any evidence in admissable form that (a) Duke committed malpractice or (b) that the malpractice was the sole cause of Mr. Daye's death.

You attempt to explain the absence of such evidence by concocting an elaborate and massive conspiracy that not only doesn't make sense, but is supported by no evidence. And you slime the people involved in the case in a most vile and derogatory manner.

As a direct result of those tactics:

(a) several competent attorneys withdrew from Mangum's case;
(b) Mangum's trial was delayed several times;
(c) important defense evidence was leaked to the media and prosecution compromising Mangum's defense;
(d) there was no chance for a plea deal that may have resulted in reduced charges and less prison time for Mangum;
(e) Mangum was quickly tried and convicted of the most serious charge against her and subsequently sentenced to a lengthy prison term;
(f) Sid has been hauled into court, admonished and sanctioned for the unauthorized practice of law;
(g) the people involved in the criminal justice system, and others who might assist Mangum will not listen, read or respond to anything Sid says.

To paraphrase Walt, with friends like you and Sid, who needs enemies?; January 14, 2015 at 11:31 AM
Anonymous said...: No, the defense medical examiner said 'she agreed that the death started with a chain of events from a stab wound that ended with death caused by complications. The direct cause of death was intubation error that caused brain death.' I would copy it and paste it here, but you can't copy from sharlogs - however that is the essense of what she said. She did NOT say the stab wound was the proximate cause of death - the complications, ie. intubation malpractice was the direct cause of death. She then goes on to explain many of the discrepancies between the first autopsy report and the duke medical records.

If this had been presented in court it would not have even reached the level of what the judge clarified the law to be, since the complications, (ie. intubation malpractice), was the proximate and 100% cause of death.

That is why the report was kept from Ms. Mangum until the last 3 hours of the trial after years of her asking her lawyers, the medical examiner, and the court for it. If that is not a conspiracy to suppress evidence favorable to the defense, what is?

Even now, with her appeals attorney not even stating the correct date of death so as to leave out the facts of the intubation malpractice completely in her appeal that is not Ms. Mangum's but simply her own version of whatever it is she is doing, (which isn't representing Ms. Mangum in the least), the conspiracy is made even more obvious.; January 14, 2015 at 12:38 PM
Anonymous said...: I would just like people to realize that Meier did not do the
adequate job in defending Crystal that was required, in order to prove her innocence. People here speculate that he did investigate these matters and if he did as you suggest and found them unhelpful then I would better understand his failure to raise proximate cause issues in Court something a jury would, I believe, have found helpful in determining that Crystal did not murder Daye

Kenny, why should he care what you think? You have no idea what he did, or did not, do, and the fact you have issues with him - I'm sure he considers totally irrelevant. It is amazing that you think he should care about you, that he's still monitoring this blog, and that he will respond to something you post on this blog, as opposed to you contacting him directly.

You are a sad, pathetic joke. You are verging on Sid territory.; January 14, 2015 at 12:38 PM
Anonymous said...: I would just like people to realize that Meier did not do the
adequate job in defending Crystal that was required, in order to prove her innocence. People here speculate that he did investigate these matters and if he did as you suggest and found them unhelpful then I would better understand his failure to raise proximate cause issues in Court something a jury would, I believe, have found helpful in determining that Crystal did not murder Daye

Dr. Roberts did investigate, and was unhelpful on the proximate cause, and likely was able to explain the links in her report that Sid claims are there. He very likely talked to others as well - you are just mad because he won't share them with you, but you have no right to them.; January 14, 2015 at 2:00 PM
Lance the Intern said...: "the defense medical examiner said 'she agreed that the death started with a chain of events from a stab wound that ended with death caused by complications. The direct cause of death was intubation error that caused brain death.' "

Where did Dr. Roberts say this?; January 14, 2015 at 2:41 PM
Walt said...: Lance, you and I both know that Dr. Roberts did not write "The direct cause of death was intubation error...."

In fact, in her report, Dr. Roberts offers the expert medical conclusion: Daye's death was the result of complications from a stab wound to the chest. Those who don't want to accept the facts of the matter try to write "direct cause" where Dr. Roberts wrote "mechanism of his death...." Inherent in that substitution is a willful decision to ignore the doctrine of proximate cause. Those posters, including Sid are simply deluding themselves.

Instead, Lance has the correct formulation for proximate cause: "No stabbing = no trip to the hospital = no death."

Walt-in-Durham; January 14, 2015 at 6:29 PM
Anonymous said...: NOT if the death is caused by avoidable, preventable malpractice that is 100% the responsibility of the hospital Walt ... and you know it.

Why do ya'll keep arguing on this blog about your 'yeah duke and the corruption in this state' agendas?

To be evil duke trolls?; January 14, 2015 at 6:49 PM
Lance the Intern said...: The challenge, Tinfoil, is simple. Provide the input of one (1) non-biased physician who agrees with you and Sidney that the cause of Mr. Daye's death was not complications resulting from a stab wound to the chest.

Until then, yours is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.; January 14, 2015 at 7:22 PM
Anonymous said...: Your logic Walt gives EVERY hospital the right to kill whomever they want to and NOT take responsibility for their actions.

hmmmmm ... let's look at duke (as an example). Guy in bed 2 needs a new kidney and is willing to pay top dollar for it. Guy in emergency room bed 2 has a matching healthy kidney and can't pay for services rendered cuz he's poor and on medicare or medicaid or has no insurance at all. You do the math.

Is DUKE that corrupt, evil and money hungry? Well ... we read about it in the news ALL the time ... so yeah ... they are.

Faulty logic Walt. That's why the law is not the way you say, cuz at least most (or some) of the laws in this grand country of ours are logical. I would hate to be you in emergency room bed 2 with your type logic.; January 14, 2015 at 7:30 PM
Lance the Intern said...: Walt - How many logical fallacies did you spot in the post from Anonymous@ 7:30?; January 14, 2015 at 8:11 PM
Anonymous said...: Lance - your logic in your statement of find a non-biased doctor to give a detailed report is exactly the logic duke is using. They never thought Ms. Mangum would be able to find a doctor to give her that: a non-biased detailed report - and since she did find one (Dr. Harr) - who's main concern at first was about the Medical Examiner issues in this state and Ms. Mangum's false arrest and convinction (rightly so as proven by evidence and fact), all they do is ignore him and still refuse to take responsibility for their malpractice and continue to falsly blame Ms. Mangum for it, (and have evil duke trolls call him delusional and stupid and anything else to discredit him or anyone who believes what he proves to be correct with facts and evidence in abundance).; January 14, 2015 at 8:40 PM
Anonymous said...: Dr. Harr,

Is it possible to include statements like those just made in the Kendyrl rules for this blog? These type statements that have no value except to be cruel and abusive to Ms. Mangum have no place on this blog except to prove how distorted and evil the thinking of some is when it pertains to issues regarding duke and Ms. Mangum. Unless that in itself is of value or course, if proof is needed about that aspect of what duke has done (and continues to do).; January 14, 2015 at 11:27 PM
Anonymous said...: Dr. Roberts isn't biased - Sid just disagrees with her, so he claims she is.

Sid could never testify - the scandals and lawsuits in his past would preclude that, and he knows it. Plus, he wouldn't qualify as an "expert" under the Rules of Evidence.

Plus, his claims have been investigated (why everyone just assumes that since no one will share the results with random whiners on a blog means it didn't happen is beyond me), and discounted.

Again, you can either believe that Sid and a handful of others, who have repeatedly been demonstrably wrong on many areas, are right, and there is a vast conspiracy of hundreds of people, who are willing to commit murder for Duke, risking their own freedom; or you can believe that Sid is a loon.; January 15, 2015 at 6:53 AM
Lance the Intern said...: "Ms. Mangum's false arrest and convinction [sic](rightly so as proven by evidence and fact)"

Having been convicted by a jury of her peers, both evidence and fact point to Ms. Mangum being responsible for the death of Mr. Daye.; January 15, 2015 at 7:30 AM
Anonymous said...: According to Dr. Harr's examination of the jury selection, it was more a jury of duke's peers (including the wife of duke surgeon) than a jury of Ms. Mangum's peers.; January 15, 2015 at 7:39 AM
Anonymous said...: What I believe truly has nothing to do with Dr. Harr. I read the medical reports provided, watched the trial as it happened (thanks to WRAL news), see what is still happening in the case thanks to this blog, have read about what duke does for years now in the news, and have seen their evil play out consistently and wreck havoc in this state in order to make my own conclusions based on evidence and fact.; January 15, 2015 at 7:46 AM

«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 257 of 257 Newer› Newest»

Sunday, January 4, 2015

Disturbing new development and mounting taxpayer burden

257 comments:

Facebook Badge

Subscribe!

Labels

Blog Archive

About Me