Friday, February 20, 2015

Corresponding for Justice: Update February 20, 2015


864 comments:

1 – 200 of 864   Newer›   Newest»
John D. Smith said...

The "issue" Kenny raises--Cooper's decision not to ask a court to release discovery in the lacrosse case--is a fool's errand. Sufficient evidence is available publicly to conclude the defendants were innocent. Indeed, enough was available prior to the indictments to support that conclusion.

Kenny will never be satisfied. Exclusions or redactions are unacceptable. If everything was released, Kenny would complain about what the special prosecutors did not do.

Irrespective of what evidence was released, Kenny would create a new theory around it.

Kenny does not act in good faith.

John D. Smith
New York, NY

guiowen said...

John D. said
"Kenny does not act in good faith."

Did you just notice that?

John D. Smith said...

No.

John D. Smith
New York, NY

Anonymous said...

The only evidence available to the general public was major fraud and corruption in the investigation, which is not the same as sufficient evidence to conclude innocence.

Anonymous said...

Actually, no. That is not correct.

Lack of DNA.

Anonymous said...

None of the lacrosse players would have touched someone like Crystal Mangum and the bathroom was too small for a gang rape.The only crime that was committed that was a false rape accusation.She made it up because she about to be locked up for public intoxication.She already had a criminal record for auto theft and had made a previous false rape accusation

Anonymous said...

A Duke co-ed explained it best at the time - those guys could get any girl they wanted.They would never have to stoop that low.

Anonymous said...

From what I've heard about the case, it wasn't about "getting a girl", but perhaps it was about drunken rage and assualt because they didn't 'get' a girl?

Anonymous said...

@8:30:

From what I've heard about the case, it was an obvious frame. There was no sex. There was no assault.

I suggest you apologize for your ridiculous comment.

Anonymous said...

@8:41 and @8:42:

Your comments add nothing to the discussion.

Nifong Supporter said...


Lance the Intern said...
"They can't even determine whether or not Daye's spleen was removed at surgery... and whether or not the stomach was perforated..."
And neither can you, as you never examined Mr. Daye's body. We are left to conclude that you also fall far short of the "fair and responsible" mark.


Hey, Lance... I'm not the expert witness. In fact, I'm not even involved in the case technically. Don't you think that the medical examiner should be able to know for sure whether or not the spleen was present at autopsy and whether or not there were sutured repair wounds to the stomach, and whether or not there were linear scabbed over lesions to the left upper extremity that suggested "defensive injuries"? Dr. Nichols' autopsy report was not merely sloppy, it was fraudulent... and his testimony was nothing less than perjury.

Anonymous said...

Sid:

Have you had any success yet locating an expert who will testify that Mr. Daye's deathw as wholly independent of the stabbing? Have you even tried to find such an expert?

John D. Smith said...

Dr. Harr claimed: On the extremely rare occasions when I am wrong on legal issues, I will admit to it.

This statement is incorrect. I will provide one example. There are many more.

Consider your claim regarding the lacrosse case that the failure to find DNA that matched any of the defendants was not “exculpatory.”

As you know, Mangum alleged that her alleged attackers ejaculated in and on her and did not use condoms. As you also know, in her written statement provided on April 6, she alleged that one of her attackers ejaculated in her mouth and she spit out the semen. As you also know, DNA that matched her attackers would have been found in and on her if her specific allegation had been correct. As a result, the failure to find DNA that matched the defendants proved with virtual certainty that the defendants did not commit the specific attack alleged by Mangum—that her attackers ejaculated in and on her and did not use condoms.

You justified your claim that this failure to find matching DNA was not “exculpatory” by arguing that it did not prove that the defendants could not possibly have committed a sexual assault on Mangum that was different than the one she alleged.

That is not the definition of “exculpatory.”

As you know, “exculpatory” evidence is evidence that tends to excuse, justify, or absolve the alleged fault or guilt of a defendant. Exculpatory evidence need not prove innocence of all possible crimes with absolute certainty.

In other cases, you have correctly applied the definition of “exculpatory.”

This error has been pointed out to you repeatedly. You have never admitted your error.

I ask that you admit your error regarding the definition of “exculpatory” as it related to the lacrosse case and apologize for your longstanding failure to correct it. You should also explain why you believe readers should trust you when you are guilty of such an obvious and longstanding error.

John D. Smith
New York, NY

John D. Smith said...

Dr. Harr,

The current sharlog contains several errors.

The problem with the prosecution’s theory is that it wants to go directly from Point A [the stab wound] to Point B [Daye’s death] and bypass Point X [the esophageal intubation].

You mischaracterize their theory.

No one believes the esophageal intubation is “non-existent or irrelevant.” The autopsy report should have included it in the chain of events leading to death. Intubation was part of that chain—the question is whether the chain of causality was broken. Nichols and Roberts concluded it was not.

Hospital records within prosecution discovery, along with Dr. Roberts interpretation of them, correctly established that the initial intubation of Day… was esophageal… and that precludes Mangum’s stabbing as being a proximate cause of death.

You misinterpret the law.

You correctly identify esophageal intubation as causing brain death. However, that does not “preclude Mangum’s stabbing as being a proximate cause of death.” If intubation was required by a complication from the stabbing, the stabbing is also a proximate cause. There can be more than one proximate cause.

I sympathize with your argument that neither Nichols nor Roberts identified the complication that required intubation. However, both concluded that death was an indirect result of the stabbing. I suspect Meier did not pursue this because other evidence supports this conclusion.

At the point of the esophageal intubation, Duke University Hospital assumed complete liability for Daye’s outcome… Mangum no longer being legally responsible.

You misinterpret the law.

Medical malpractice is NOT necessarily an intervening cause. In order to terminate Mangum’s legal liability, you must demonstrate that (1) Daye would with certainty have survived without an intubation and (2) the need for the intubation was completely independent of the stabbing. Certainty is an almost insurmountable threshold. Infection or DTs exacerbated by trauma do not meet the independence requirement.

Given the expert opinions, you have the burden of proof.

There were no complications surgically, and postoperatively, Daye was given a prognosis for a complete recovery. This is where Mangum’s legal liability for murder or manslaughter ends.

You misinterpret the law.

This is not a serious argument. As a former physician, you know an initial prognosis is not a guarantee. Mangum remains legally responsible if complications set in. I do not fault you for noting the prognosis. Your conclusion, however, is incorrect.

I suggest you remove the sharlog and replace it with a corrected version. Alternatively, you may post a notice in which you note errors.

John D. Smith
New York

Nifong Supporter said...


John D. Smith said...
Dr. Harr,

Thank you for your response.

As I stated in my earlier comment, I am not a doctor. I cannot answer the question regarding the spleen except as speculation. I believe that the spleen had not been removed because it was described in the autopsy report. I believe Nichols answered incorrectly twice because of incompetence, not perjury.

I note that you ignored a significant part of my comment. I do not trust you and do not respect your opinion. I gave three reasons:

1. You are not an expert.
2. You are a friend of Mangum and may be biased.
3. Your earlier opinions on other subjects frequently have been proven incorrect.

The third reason is the most important. You have shown that you will either provide opinions without adequate knowledge or that you are a liar.

I do not accept the opinions or fools and liars.

John D. Smith
New York, NY


Mr. Smith, you are right when you assume that the spleen was not removed. The operative report counters any possibility that the spleen was removed. However, in both of the brief filed with the Appeals Court, the assistant Attorney General and Mangum's appeals attorney Petersen state that Daye's spleen was removed at surgery... thereby misleading the Court. That's an outrage, as it suggests that the wound inflicted by Mangum was worse than it actually was and therefore more likely to result in Daye's death.

As far as trust goes, you'd rather trust me than a medical examiner who's been fired for withholding evidence, and whose testimony at trial regarding the spleen contradicts his own autopsy report. Dr. Nichols had a camera at autopsy and he could have easily documented his claims, but the only photos he took were of the left lung, and the chest cavity wasn't even entered during surgery.

As far as friendship with Mangum goes, that is totally irrelevant. The point is that I did not know Mangum personally when I fought on her behalf in the 2010 "arson" case. I didn't know Mike Nifong when I formed the Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong and began to advocate for him.

The point is that I will come to the support of anyone I don't know (even you) if mistreated by the justice system. Just the same, I will not defend the actions of a friend whom I know to be in the wrong.

Regarding errors I might have made previously, I do not claim to be perfect... but then neither is Dr. Nichols, the Durham prosecutors, Mangum's attorneys, or you. And whatever errors I may have made in the past, I do not believe they are as numerous as you imply... naturally, I would need to have specific examples.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Sid:

Have you had any success yet locating an expert who will testify that Mr. Daye's deathw as wholly independent of the stabbing? Have you even tried to find such an expert?


I did contact noted forensic pathologist Cyril Wecht, and he graciously gave me about twenty minutes of his time over the phone. I have no doubt that he would've given accurate testimony, but he did not offer to work pro bono, so I did not pursue the matter.

Because of the political nature of the case involving Mangum, anyone who would testify about the truth of Daye's death (in which Duke University Hospital would be implicated) would risk retribution as the P-T-Bs are very vindictive. Although I would appreciate someone who possessed the Nifongian courage to do the right thing and speak on Mangum's behalf and wrongful conviction, I would be very concerned about any retribution they would receive as a result.

Nifong Supporter said...


Mr. Smith, I will respond to your comment of 9:37 AM later. Very interesting your responses, but never the less incorrect.

Anonymous said...

Dr. Harr,

This duke vindictive thing - is there anything in the justice system that can be done about it? I know you are not a lawyer, but surely there must be some way to legally hold duke responsible for their malpractice without fearing retribution nor murder by malpractice or any other harmful action, public nor private, to anyone if one must complain about duke issues or services received or a hostile environment in which one must receive them.

Do you think they have established their environment and the environments in which they hold sway as threatening to all because of this case?

If so, what do you think can be done to correct the issue, because as you probably well know, most would not want to receive health services in an environment where they must fear for their lives or the lives of others instead of being able to possess trust in the health providers vs. fear of threat of retaliation if one must or does complain of services received (or not received)?

kenhyderal said...

John D. Smith said: "No one believes the esophageal intubation is “non-existent or irrelevant"..... Thanks entirely to Dr. Harr. Until Dr. Roberts report became public almost everyone on this blog insisted there was no esophageal intubation including the race obsessed cardio-thoracic surgeon Dr.Anonymous

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal claims with no support: thanks entirely to Dr. Harr.

You are a liar.

Break noted that one of the Duke medical reports noted that the initial intubation was esophageal.

You know that.

You are a liar.

I demand that you apologize for your lie.

kenhyderal supporter said...

Stop disrespecting kenhyderal you troll.

John D. Smith said...

Dr. Harr,

Thank you for your 9:39 reply. In it, you ask for specific examples of the errors to which I alluded. I had provided one specific example in my 9:35 comment. Although you acknowledged my 9:37 comment, promising a future response, you failed to acknowledge the 9:35 comment.

I will not repeat the comment. Once again, I ask that you acknowledge your error and apologize for your longstanding refusal to admit it.

John D. Smith
New York, NY

Anonymous Supporter said...

Stop disrespecting Anonymous you troll.

Anonymous said...

Cases of white men raping black women are practically non existent.It never happens.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous said: "Break noted that one of the Duke medical reports noted that the initial intubation was esophageal".......The initial report said the initial endo-tracheal tube inserted by RTT Becker was withdrawn and replaced because of a size error. Dr. Vaslef later conceded and I quote "The initial intubation turned out to be esopogeal"

Anonymous said...

But I bet those involved in the case knew all along. This blog and the people on it have nothing to do with the case so they fact they are wrong doesn't matter.

Anonymous said...

Sid - you claim you need a list of all the times you are wrong - it's been provided repeatedly, and yet you refuse to acknowledge them.

Just a few you continue to ignore:

Felony Murder (which was not in play)

No pre-trial motions to dismiss

Inadmissible record of Daye

No law on Writ of Habeas Corpus

Incorrect understanding of appellate courts/procedure

The list goes on and on. You will just continue to ignore tham, and will very likely bring up the Felony Murder and Inadmissible Record again, as you have done repeatedly, even after being shown you are wrong.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous 4:56,

I believe you are correct. The defense lawyers would have known the initial intubation was esophageal they read the medical reports. Except for the conspiracy theorists and those who believe all court appointed attorneys are lazy and incompetent, no one believes that Mangum's four lawyers would have failed to have done that.

The issue is a legal one. If Dr. Harr is correct, an esophageal intubation cuts off Mangum's liability. If Shella, Vann, Holmes, Meier, Walt, A Lawyer, Lance, and numerous anonymous posters are correct, it does not.





Anonymous said...

The issue is a legal one. If Dr. Harr is correct, an esophageal intubation cuts off Mangum's liability. If Shella, Vann, Holmes, Meier, Walt, A Lawyer, Lance, and numerous anonymous posters are correct, it does not.



And we all know through his myriad of lawsuits (all losses) that Sid's legal analysis is always spot on (felony murder, prior record, appeal deadlines, the list goes on and on).

The real problem Sid and Kenny have is that no one has told them about the nexus - so they assume it doesn't exist. They refuse to believe that these people did their jobs - and knew what Dr. Roberts and the other doctors would say, and knew it would hurt Crystal, so they kept it out.

Duke wasn't on trial, Crystal was - and their job was to defend Crystal, not expose Duke. Sid has a different agenda, and Kenny is just an idiot.

Sid has provided zero proof of any conspiracy or conflict - and both he and Kenny admit they haven't sought answers from anyone actually involved in the case - because they don't want answers, they want to whine.

Anonymous said...

If you bothered to actually watch the sharlogs and take notice of what Dr. Harr says in the blog comments, you would see that Dr. Harr has communicated with the people who's professional and elected jobs put them in the position to take responsibility for the corruption apparent in this case.

Anonymous said...

I have read them - and he has provided no proof of corruption. You obviously can't read.

Again - you can either think that the Defense attorneys did their job, and knew that these "questions" Sid has actually do have answers, and those answers aren't helpful to Crystal so they left it alone, or you can believe they are all in on a big conspiracy.

Sid's problem is he refuses to actually ask the lawyers or doctors involved anything - he learned his lesson when he asked IDS about the payments - they showed he was totally wrong and delusional - so he won't ask anymore, just make assumptions and move forward.

Personally, I believe that the lawyers all did their jobs and they knew that Dr. Roberts would hurt Crystal, as would the Duke Doctors, so they didn't use them. They didn't care about Duke at all - they wanted to defense Crystal, who was unfortunately misled by Sid and Kenny.

There is no obvious corruption in the case - there are mentally ill people on this blog who are upset that their weekend fling is locked up, and they haven't found a replacement yet.

Nothing Sid is doing will help Crystal - and he still refuses to provide any proof that she supports what he is doing.

It's just sad. And he poisons her relationship with attorneys by saying the attorneys should have been doing X and Y when they legally can't - but Crystal then doesn't trust them because they don't do it, and when they tell her they can't, Sid convinces her they are lying to protect Duke.

He is a disgrace and a pathetic human being. He has been a failure throughout his life, and leaves scandals behind him everywhere he goes. It's sad that he has to look for meaning in these ways.

Anonymous said...

I can't read any more of your posts at this point because of weariness of your obstinate refusal to actually see the facts of this case for what they are ... corruption (which is probably just the tip of the iceberg of criminal charges against the ME and civil charges against duke). This case is just another of about a million examples anyone in this state can give to demonstrate the corruption that the citizens of NC have been suffering from for the past decade or more.

Anonymous said...

You have shown no evidence of corruption. You discard the logical explanations in order to promote your irrational and bizarre conspiracy theories.

You are a pathetic joke, just like Sid and Kenny.

Anonymous said...

Mike Nifong is a principal example of "the corruption that the citizens of NC have been suffering from for the past decade or more." Yet, Sid and his one or two followers on this blog continue to praise the Fong. Please explain the reason for this phenomenon.

Anonymous said...

I still don't understand how the lacrosse case was permitted to happen if Duke is all powerful and controls the justice system. Not only does one have to believe that Duke wanted to frame three do its students on fake felony charges, but it wanted to do so in such a way that it's reputation would be dragged through the mud in the national media for several months.

They may be powerful and immoral, but they are also incredibly stupid.

Anonymous said...

politics is a hell where devils play havoc with the lifes of many

guiowen said...

TinFoil said
"I can't read any more of your posts at this point because of weariness..."
Here I was hoping you'd add that you were too weary to write any more comments. Too much to hope for, I guess.

Anonymous said...

g... you are mean

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous said: "or you can believe they are all in on a big conspiracy".................. Or that they were too lazy, or too indifferent or even incompetent. I know some of them lurk here. Let them post and tell us openly that they did interview those at Duke who treated Daye. If they did this they did not share that information with their client; which in itself seems unethical.

Anonymous said...

Sidney,

Can you post the entire discovery files you received from Crystal? The interviews the prosecution conducted would be interesting.

Anonymous said...

What interviews?

Anonymous said...

All of the interviews they conducted.

dr abel justus said...

This is my testimony about the good work of a man who helped me..My name is Nina George and I base in London.My life is back!!! After 8 years of marriage, my husband left me and left me with our three kids. I felt like my life was about to end,and was falling apart. Thanks to a spell caster called papa Justus who i met online. On one faithful day, as I was browsing through the internet, I was searching for a good spell caster that can solve my problems. I came across series of testimonies about this particular spell caster. Some people testified that he brought their Ex lover back, some testified that he restores womb, some testified that he can cast a spell to stop divorce and so on. There was one particular testimony I saw, it was about a woman called grace,she testified about how papa Justus brought back her Ex lover in less than 72 hours and at the end of her testimony she drop papa Justus e-mail address. After reading all these,I decided to give papa a try. I contacted him via email and explained my problem to him. In just 3 days, my husband came back to me. We solved our issues, and we are even happier than before. papa Justus is really a talented and gifted man and i will not to stop publishing him because he is a wonderful man...If you have a problem and you are looking for a real and genuine spell caster to solve that problem for you. Try the great papa Justus today, he might be the answer to your problem. Here's his contact:
drabeljustus@gmail.com Thank you great Justus. Contact him for the following:

(1)If you want your ex back.
(2) if you always have bad dreams.
(3)You want to be promoted in your office.
(4)You want women/men to run after you.
(5)If you want a child.
(6)[You want to be rich.
(7)You want to tie your husband/wife to be yours forever.
(8)If you need financial assistance.
(9)Herbal care
10)Help bringing people out of prison
(11)Marriage Spells
(12)Miracle Spells
(13)Beauty Spells
(14)PROPHECY CHARM
(15)Attraction Spells
(16)Evil Eye Spells
(17)Kissing Spell
(18)Remove Sickness Spells
(19)ELECTION WINNING SPELLS
(20)SUCCESS IN EXAMS SPELLS
(21) Charm to get who to love you.
(22)Business spell.
Contact him today on:
drabeljustus@gmail.com,
+2347033354868.
You can also CONTACT HIM ON whats-app on the same phone number.

Anonymous said...

kenhyderal said...

"I know some of them lurk here."

Please tell us how you know this, wise and all knowing kenhyderal.

guiowen said...

Hello Daniel Meier,
Kenny has just about had it with you! You'd better answer, or else!

kenhyderal said...

Daniel Meier said to Guiowen:: I expect that you are most interested in the state of the appeal and my view of its chance of success. We can discuss why the self defense attempt didn't work. Chrystal, didn't do a particularly effective job. Finally, we can discuss why the medical treatment did not offer much promise. Kenny's good friend Sidney Harr is a piece of work. I have never seen such consistently bad judgment on legal issues"............ Can we conclude that Crystal has given you permission to discuss the case with Guiowen, a sarcastic person who has disparaged her so often.

kenhyderal said...

Dear Attorney Meier; If you would draw up the form you require and e-mail it to justice4nifong@gmail.com Dr. Harr will forward it to me and I will attempt to have Crystal sign it and return it to you.

guiowen said...

There, Kenny,
I told you my intercession would help. Aren't you glad I'm ere for you?

Anonymous said...

Why do you assume they still lurk here? Again you are a coward who doesn't really want answers - you refuse to contact anyone you expect others to do your work for you. Does Crystal know how little you are actually doing for her, or do you lie and pretend you care?

Anonymous said...

Wow / so you are so lazy you want Meier to do your work for you? If you want to talk to him contact him directly, don't rely on some random poster on a blog claiming to be him. You do know how sad you come across with your incessant whining and refusal to actually do anything for yourself right?

Anonymous said...

Can we conclude she's never given you permission to do anything since both you and Sid refuse to provide any proof she supports what you are doin (well what Sid is doing, you do nothing but whine). I doubt that's Meier but who knows. If you want to hear from him email him. You won't, we know. You just assume he watches the blog and cares enough to respond to you. If he did, he'd have done it long before now ... Why should he respond now if he's ignored you this long?

Anonymous said...

He has already contacted their office and has gotten no response. What will contacting them do to assist Ms. Mangum at this point? Is there a reason for it?

Walt said...

Sid wrote: "As far as trust goes, you'd rather trust me than a medical examiner who's been fired for withholding evidence, and whose testimony at trial regarding the spleen contradicts his own autopsy report. Dr. Nichols had a camera at autopsy and he could have easily documented his claims, but the only photos he took were of the left lung, and the chest cavity wasn't even entered during surgery."

No one trusts you Sid. You betrayed Crystal's trust. You've been wrong on the law every time you've stated it. You have engaged in ever larger and larger conspiracy theories. Never once have you given anyone a reason to trust you.

Walt-in-Durham

Nifong Supporter said...


John D. Smith said...
Dr. Harr,

The current sharlog contains several errors.

The problem with the prosecution’s theory is that it wants to go directly from Point A [the stab wound] to Point B [Daye’s death] and bypass Point X [the esophageal intubation].

You mischaracterize their theory.

No one believes the esophageal intubation is “non-existent or irrelevant.” The autopsy report should have included it in the chain of events leading to death. Intubation was part of that chain—the question is whether the chain of causality was broken. Nichols and Roberts concluded it was not.

Hospital records within prosecution discovery, along with Dr. Roberts interpretation of them, correctly established that the initial intubation of Day… was esophageal… and that precludes Mangum’s stabbing as being a proximate cause of death.

You misinterpret the law.

You correctly identify esophageal intubation as causing brain death. However, that does not “preclude Mangum’s stabbing as being a proximate cause of death.” If intubation was required by a complication from the stabbing, the stabbing is also a proximate cause. There can be more than one proximate cause.

I sympathize with your argument that neither Nichols nor Roberts identified the complication that required intubation. However, both concluded that death was an indirect result of the stabbing. I suspect Meier did not pursue this because other evidence supports this conclusion.

At the point of the esophageal intubation, Duke University Hospital assumed complete liability for Daye’s outcome… Mangum no longer being legally responsible.

You misinterpret the law.

Medical malpractice is NOT necessarily an intervening cause. In order to terminate Mangum’s legal liability, you must demonstrate that (1) Daye would with certainty have survived without an intubation and (2) the need for the intubation was completely independent of the stabbing. Certainty is an almost insurmountable threshold. Infection or DTs exacerbated by trauma do not meet the independence requirement.

Given the expert opinions, you have the burden of proof.

There were no complications surgically, and postoperatively, Daye was given a prognosis for a complete recovery. This is where Mangum’s legal liability for murder or manslaughter ends.

You misinterpret the law.

This is not a serious argument. As a former physician, you know an initial prognosis is not a guarantee. Mangum remains legally responsible if complications set in. I do not fault you for noting the prognosis. Your conclusion, however, is incorrect.

I suggest you remove the sharlog and replace it with a corrected version. Alternatively, you may post a notice in which you note errors.

John D. Smith
New York

Nifong Supporter said...



RESPONSE TO ABOVE COMMENT



Hey, Mr. Smith.
Congratulations. You are half-way on the road to enlightenment regarding Crystal Mangum's case in that you (unlike Walt, mon ami gui, Lance, and other Mangum-naysayers) have acknowledged the cornerstone truth that the initial intubation of Daye was esophageal. That esophageal intubation is invariably fatal if not immediately recognized and corrected is a universally accepted fact - as it prevents oxygen flow to the lungs, blood stream, and cells of the body. You are approaching full enlightenment because you have accepted that the esophageal intubation resulted in Daye's brain death... and Daye's brain death and its accompanying irreversible comatose state were the reasons that Daye was electively removed from life-support whereupon he died.
The reason for your enlightenment is because you are a visitor to this blog site... the only source in the entire world where the truths about Mangum's case, the autopsy report on Daye, and circumstances surrounding Daye's death can be found. You are far more enlightened about Mangum's case than the jurors in the November 2013 trial and the Appeals Court judges currently in the process of determining Mangum's fate regarding her appeal... that is because the truths readily available in my blog site have been purposely kept from them by attorneys from both the prosecutors' teams and Mangum's own turncoat defense attorneys. Likewise, the mainstream media has withheld these very truths from the public... and it, like the jurors and the appeals court judges believe: that Daye's spleen was damaged so severely by the knife wound that it was removed at surgery; that Daye received multiple "defensive injuries" to his left upper extremity resulting from repeated jabs by Mangum; that knife wound injuries included perforations to the left lung, diaphragm, left kidney, and stomach; and that some "vague and ambiguous" complication from the knife wound led to Daye's death. Mangum's own defense attorney Daniel Meier opined before the jury that possibly an "infection" from the knife wound possibly precipitated Daye's death.
Mr. Smith, your final challenge to receive full enlightenment regarding the Mangum case is your recognition that the esophageal intubation was an intervening cause (as well as proximate cause) of Daye's death and that there is absolutely no nexus between the stab wound and the esophageal intubation... especially since the stab wound, which was not considered life-threatening and was successfully treated at surgery, had a postoperative prognosis for a complete recovery. With full enlightenment comes the acceptance that Daye's was accidental, not murder, and that the crime of murder for which Mangum was charged and convicted (like the larceny of chose in action charge) never even took place.
I do plan on using your comment in my future correspondences for justice.

Nifong Supporter said...


kenhyderal said...
John D. Smith said: "No one believes the esophageal intubation is “non-existent or irrelevant"..... Thanks entirely to Dr. Harr. Until Dr. Roberts report became public almost everyone on this blog insisted there was no esophageal intubation including the race obsessed cardio-thoracic surgeon Dr.Anonymous


Hey, kenhyderal.

You are absolutely correct. It wasn't until I had gotten a copy of the Roberts report (reluctantly given to Mangum on the third day of her trial) that I was able to get some traction... although a couple of medical records did also state that the initial intubation was esophageal (and I did post them long ago).

But Mangum's lawyers did not want her to have a written report from Roberts because they were aware that I would see the admission from the forensic pathologist that the initial intubation was esophageal... something which I had been saying since Crystal first gave me a copy of prosecution discovery in late March 2012.

Anonymous said...

What proof do you have, Dr. Harr, that the intubation malpractice was accidental? This malpractice error seems highly questionable as to motive given all the facts related to the Mangum/Duke saga and to the fact that Duke has no known medical lack of intelligence and ability to preclude them performing a test without killing the patient's brain first.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Dr. Harr,

This duke vindictive thing - is there anything in the justice system that can be done about it? I know you are not a lawyer, but surely there must be some way to legally hold duke responsible for their malpractice without fearing retribution nor murder by malpractice or any other harmful action, public nor private, to anyone if one must complain about duke issues or services received or a hostile environment in which one must receive them.

Do you think they have established their environment and the environments in which they hold sway as threatening to all because of this case?

If so, what do you think can be done to correct the issue, because as you probably well know, most would not want to receive health services in an environment where they must fear for their lives or the lives of others instead of being able to possess trust in the health providers vs. fear of threat of retaliation if one must or does complain of services received (or not received)?


You bring up some interesting points. I certainly would not go to a Duke University Hospital facility under any circumstances for fear of retribution. Actually, Duke is so powerful, I even tried to reduce the threat of its interference when I was in what I considered to be a vulnerable position while receiving radiation therapy at an entirely different hospital. That is why I asked for a delay in my lawsuit against Duke... until the treatments had been completed.
I do not believe most people would be targeted by Duke University Hospital staff unless they are highly visible or outspoken on controversial views. Daye was a prime candidate for diabolical treatment because his death would greatly increase the possible jail sentence for Mangum if convicted... and being an African American whose life didn't matter, he was expendable.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
What proof do you have, Dr. Harr, that the intubation malpractice was accidental? This malpractice error seems highly questionable as to motive given all the facts related to the Mangum/Duke saga and to the fact that Duke has no known medical lack of intelligence and ability to preclude them performing a test without killing the patient's brain first.


I have no proof that the esophageal intubation was accidental, and actually I believe that it probably was intentional for the purpose of giving Mangum the more serious charge of murder rather than assault.

However, I phrase it as an accident for the purpose of not bringing another issue to bear and not muddle up the premise that a crime, at least by Mangum, was not committed.

Nifong Supporter said...


Walt said...
Sid wrote: "As far as trust goes, you'd rather trust me than a medical examiner who's been fired for withholding evidence, and whose testimony at trial regarding the spleen contradicts his own autopsy report. Dr. Nichols had a camera at autopsy and he could have easily documented his claims, but the only photos he took were of the left lung, and the chest cavity wasn't even entered during surgery."

No one trusts you Sid. You betrayed Crystal's trust. You've been wrong on the law every time you've stated it. You have engaged in ever larger and larger conspiracy theories. Never once have you given anyone a reason to trust you.

Walt-in-Durham


Walt, you cannot even tell me definitively whether or not you believe that Daye's spleen was removed at surgery or was present at autopsy. At least Mr. Smith concedes that the initial intubation of Daye was esophageal. Will you say as much?

The esophageal intubation is the crux of Mangum's defense and was withheld from the jurors by her traitorous attorneys... now being withheld from the appeals court judges.

Face it, Walt, my blog site is the only venue where the truth about Daye's autopsy and circumstances surrounding his death are posted. You don't need to trust me... just trust the evidence that I presented from prosecution discovery.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Sid - you claim you need a list of all the times you are wrong - it's been provided repeatedly, and yet you refuse to acknowledge them.

Just a few you continue to ignore:

Felony Murder (which was not in play)

No pre-trial motions to dismiss

Inadmissible record of Daye

No law on Writ of Habeas Corpus

Incorrect understanding of appellate courts/procedure

The list goes on and on. You will just continue to ignore tham, and will very likely bring up the Felony Murder and Inadmissible Record again, as you have done repeatedly, even after being shown you are wrong.


I acknowledge that I am not an attorney and have no legal training and that my understanding of the law may be at times a bit off, however, I stand by my statements regarding facts of the case and interpretations of the evidence... especially the medically related. Most of my claims are backed up by evidence from prosecution discovery anyway.

Hopefully this addresses your concern.

Anonymous said...

Dr. Harr,

If I may ask, what exactly did you do to reduce the threat of interference by Duke in your treatment at another hospital? In this area, Duke doctors and duke affiliates and duke 'crazies' for lack of a better term to describe their sports fans and the politically duke bent are abundent in all venues of life.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
If you bothered to actually watch the sharlogs and take notice of what Dr. Harr says in the blog comments, you would see that Dr. Harr has communicated with the people who's professional and elected jobs put them in the position to take responsibility for the corruption apparent in this case.


You are exactly correct. Almost without exception, most of the officials and professionals have just ignored my cries about the injustice and wrongful incarceration of Mangum. Very sad.. and abhorrent representation by those in office.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Dr. Harr,

If I may ask, what exactly did you do to reduce the threat of interference by Duke in your treatment at another hospital? In this area, Duke doctors and duke affiliates and duke 'crazies' for lack of a better term to describe their sports fans and the politically duke bent are abundent in all venues of life.


I waited until my treatment was concluded before I filed a response in my lawsuit against Duke. By waiting for the treatment's conclusion, I missed the arbitrary deadline set by the judge (despite my request for an adequate extension). Although there was no guarantee, by waiting to file my brief seeking the extension, I did not make my reason for seeking the delay (treatment) public, ergo I was reasonably assured that people at Duke would have no influence on the outcome of my treatment.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
I can't read any more of your posts at this point because of weariness of your obstinate refusal to actually see the facts of this case for what they are ... corruption (which is probably just the tip of the iceberg of criminal charges against the ME and civil charges against duke). This case is just another of about a million examples anyone in this state can give to demonstrate the corruption that the citizens of NC have been suffering from for the past decade or more.


I agree with you that there is much corruption in the medical examiner system and in the state's so-called justice system. That's why I'm so involved.

Anonymous said...

Dr. Harr,

So you knew that there would be no Duke affiliated doctors or medical technicians involved in your treatment before you received it? What did you do to assure yourself of that?

Anonymous said...

Dr. Harr,

Do you think that fear of what Duke doctors and duke medical technicians might do to harm others in retaliation for their honest and professional involvement in this case is also a factor in the 'corruption' apparent in this case? Corruption may not be the right term in that case. What would be the legal term to describe this negative influence of fear of harmful retailiation to self or others?

Anonymous said...

Harr is an idiot if he thinks the employees at Duke would risk imprisonment just to get back at him.

And, if he is using that as an excuse for missing deadlines, he's showing it even more

Anonymous said...

Why would duke employees risk imprisonment? Duke seems to like to keep their image donation worthy, and they have at least the ME system, (as a ready example), to attempt to achieve those ends.

Don't hear any muslim prayers being broadcast from their esteemed christian church steeple do ya after their donations were threatened if'n they didn't change the grand decision to do just that. Seems duke likes to hear what money has to say more than they do an Islam call to prayer.

Anonymous said...

It's funny - now Dr. Harr blames Duke for the ME system (even though it has nothing to do with it), earlier he claimed Meier had a conflict because he went to UNC and UNC housed the ME.

He has no actual proof of anything - he changes his story to fit his latest made up conspiracy.

Anonymous said...

When did Dr. Harr blame duke for the ME system per se? Anyone could blame them for not standing up to the ME and insisting they fix the errors of the state's autopsy report though. They certainly could read and understand their own doctor's report in comparison to the obviously faulty ME autopsy report. They did nothing however ... just let the fraud continue on ... even still. That is offensive and says nothing good about Duke.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous said: Wow / so you are so lazy you want Meier to do your work for you"...... No; I suspect this is not Daniel Meier but instead a cruel hoaxer who sadistically gets his kicks from messing with those who are sincere in a desire to help Crystal. I had to devise a way to test it's authenticity before I acted on it. Besides, since I have no experience in legal matters, there is the question of what format would be sufficient to allow Meier to discuss his defence of Crystal with me

Anonymous said...

So ... Kenny just gonna pretend that was Meier and wonder why he isn't responding, or actually send an e-mail to check it out?

I think we all know the answer to that ... cowardly/lazy Kenny ... loves to talk, hates to do.

Anonymous said...

Blogger kenhyderal said...

Anonymous said: Wow / so you are so lazy you want Meier to do your work for you"...... No; I suspect this is not Daniel Meier but instead a cruel hoaxer who sadistically gets his kicks from messing with those who are sincere in a desire to help Crystal. I had to devise a way to test it's authenticity before I acted on it. Besides, since I have no experience in legal matters, there is the question of what format would be sufficient to allow Meier to discuss his defence of Crystal with me





The easy way to test it ... actual e-mail Meier - his address is public - then you know any response you get (if you get one) is from him. Instead, you can play games and continue to run and hide.

I doubt that was him as well ... but rather than devise games - if you care that much, just contact him directly. What are you so afraid of? Yeah, he will probably ignore you, but you never know unless you try. I have never seen someone (you) so scared of being proven wrong that you do all you can to avoid even doing basic research.

Walt said...

Sid wrote: "Walt, you cannot even tell me definitively whether or not you believe that Daye's spleen was removed at surgery or was present at autopsy."

That is immaterial.

"At least Mr. Smith concedes that the initial intubation of Daye was esophageal. Will you say as much?"

I have always given you the benefit of the doubt on that issue. I have always written that medical malpractice is NOT an intervening cause. Thus, even if there is proof of medical malpractice, such malpractice does not serve to cut off Crystal's liability for Daye's death. You have consistently refused to recognize the issue of proximate cause.

"The esophageal intubation is the crux of Mangum's defense and was withheld from the jurors by her traitorous attorneys... now being withheld from the appeals court judges."

No it is not the crux of her defense. Why? Because there is no evidence to support it as a defense. Both experts agree that death was the proximate result of Crystal's stabbing of Daye.

"Face it, Walt, my blog site is the only venue where the truth about Daye's autopsy and circumstances surrounding his death are posted."

No, your blog is not the venue for truth. It is, at best, your venue for speculation. Speculation that is not supported by any evidence.

"You don't need to trust me... just trust the evidence that I presented from prosecution discovery."

I don't trust you have the full discovery. I don't trust anyone who would be a traitor to Crystal. I don't trust you to even post the full discovery if you have it. Your paranoia long ago caused you to veer off into massive conspiracy theories that get in the way of a reasoned discussion.

Walt-in-Durham

kenhyderal said...

Who is the one playing games? The poster, be it Meier or not, is correct, though. Daniel Meier is not going to respond directly to me. I found that out by contacting the second chair Attorney Farber. All I've asked of Meier, who I am sure is present on this blog, is to come out and affirm that he interviewed the Physicians who treated Daye but withheld this from Crystal. I can only surmise he wont because he didn't and that would reveal to you all the inadequacy of the defence he provided

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

Walt said: "No it is not the crux of her defense. Why? Because there is no evidence to support it as a defense. Both experts agree that death was the proximate result of Crystal's stabbing of Daye"............Did they agree on that without either of them questioning the physicians treating Daye or did they rely solely on the sketchy notes concerning his demise without a mention of a mistake that clearly constitutes malpractice.


Anonymous said...

Kenny - you still make excuses - you are worse than the cowardly lion. You ask a 2nd chair unaffiliated with Meier's firm in the heat of representation and apply that to everyone.

You really are a pathetic coward. That's why no one takes you seriously. You just look for reasons not to act. It's sad that Crystal might think you actually care about her and want to help.

Ramsey Kath said...

I have never seen myself shed tears for anything before, but this very day that my lover left the house with annoyances after we had some fight about him always coming home late and flirting with women, i cried the whole day, But after so many days of loneliness i decided to look for solution to my relationship and answer came to me when i saw Dr.Adodo details on the internet and i read a lot of reviews about him and i decided to give him a call and through the help of Dr.Adodo my lover came back to me within 48 hours and since then he has never come home late, So you can see how powerful and useful Dr.Adodo is to the whole world that is why i am going to be putting Dr.Adodo contact details right now for the sake of those people that will need his help contact Dr.Adodo via mobile +2348156784928 or you write him via email at Adodospelltemple@gmail.com you can contact him on his web http://adodospelltemple.wix.com/adodospelltemple

Anonymous said...

Do you EVER stop your mean attacks and baseless complaints on this blog? EVER?

Anonymous said...

Dr. Harr,

Is it possible for you to include the latest jokester posts from the person changing id's and advertising for some poor soul in the kendyrl rules? Many might agree that the subject matter of this blog does not lend itself well to these 'jokes'. Thank you.

John D. Smith said...

Dr. Harr,

the esophageal intubation was an intervening cause...of Daye's death.

Two experts concluded otherwise. No expert supports your conclusion. Although not an expert, you have made no attempt to prove it. You incorrectly believe that an esophageal intubation automatically cuts off Mangum's liability.

My comment was directed at your misunderstanding of the law. You ignored that argument.

You also ignored my 2/21 9:35am and 7:05pm comments. You asked for specific examples of your legal errors. I provided one.

The example is directly on point. You changed the legal definition of "exculpatory" to suit your argument. In this case, you similarly change the legal definitions of "intervening cause" and "proximate cause" to suit your argument.

Finally, regarding you use of my comment: I will require that you retract and correct any correspondence that misrepresents my opinion.

John D. Smith
New York, NY

Anonymous said...

There are no kendryl rules.

While I agree that the advertising should be removed, you should avoid sounding like a complete moron.

Anonymous said...

Why don't you go read elsewhere if all you are going to do is attack on this blog for absolutely no reason. Thanks.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous said: You ask a 2nd chair unaffiliated with Meier's firm in the heat of representation and apply that to everyone`......... That was post conviction. I always get a laugh at anonymous posters who choose to call me a coward. They will dare not do so giving their real name. Crystal knows who her friends are and she sees though people like you who feign concern for her.

Anonymous said...

The anonymous posters aren't claiming they want to help then whine like a cowardly little baby and make excuses about why they really don't. You may have deluded Crystal and are taking advantage of her but everyone on this board knows you are full of shit and just a coward and a whiner.

Anonymous said...

WHAT pray tell is he supposed to do to help Ms. Mangum short of raising the money to hire her a competent, non-conflicted, experienced defense and civil rights attorney who is willing and able to deal with Duke and the Duke / Durham / NC in-justice system (if one can be found)?

Lance the Intern said...

"WHAT pray tell is he supposed to do to help Ms. Mangum short of raising the money to hire her a competent, non-conflicted, experienced defense and civil rights attorney..."
Anonymous, why does it have to be SHORT of this?

One would think that all of those wishing for a different outcome for Ms. Mangum would be assisting her in raising funds to hire a competent lawyer if they feel her current one is "conflicted".

FYI -- Ann Petersen is a 1978 graduate from the University of Wisconsin Law School. From what I gather she has no ties to Duke.

Anonymous said...

None of the attorneys Mangum went through had ties to Duke. Sid has still produced zero evidence of any conflict.

Walt said...

Kenhyderal wrote: "Did they agree on that without either of them questioning the physicians treating Daye or did they rely solely on the sketchy notes concerning his demise without a mention of a mistake that clearly constitutes malpractice."

Kenny, you know better. The evidence is two experts. Both of whom agree on the cause of death. Without an expert to contradict the defense expert and Dr. Nichols, the malpractice angle is a non-starter. Even if someone were to come in and testify to an intervening cause, there would still be the proximate cause problem for the defense to overcome.

Walt-in-Durham

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous said: "everyone on this board knows you are full of shit and just a coward and a whiner"............ And your name is?

kenhyderal said...

Walt said: . Even if someone were to come in and testify to an intervening cause, there would still be the proximate cause problem for the defense to overcome". ........ A problem that a competent defence should easily be able to do. With virtually no reinforcement from the Defence the Jury in my opinion failed to comprehend Judge Ridgeway's instruction on this matter. As I have so often said any non-fatal injury such as a broken ankle would have put alcoholic Daye at risk of delirium tremens and if there was a fatal medical error in treating this condition, unrelated to the stab wound, other then it was that which sent this at risk alcoholic to hospital.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous said:None of the attorneys Mangum went through had ties to Duke. Sid has still produced zero evidence of any conflict"..... Holmes, disingenuously, declared a conflict

Anonymous said...

I was referring to the alleged comments with Duke. And, I don't need to give my name, unlike you I'm not a fame whore trying to get some sick sense of self-esteem by pretending to be Crystal's friend.

I'm trying to help her by keeping Sid from doing things too crazy ... sadly it doesn't work.

And, I'm not the one claiming to want to help Crystal while actually doing nothing but whining.

Whine Kenny, Whine.

Oh, and I'm John A. Smith - you've been told that before.

Fake Kenhyderal said...

There was nothing disingenuous about Scott Holmes' motion to withdraw, and the conflict was not because of Duke.

The conflict was that Holmes took the position of assistant clinical professor of law and supervising attorney for the civil litigation clinic at the NCCU School of Law, and there was a faculty member in the same department representing a client in an adverse position to Mangum.

Fake Kenhyderal said...

I would also point out that Superior Court Judge Paul Ridgeway only allowed Holmes to withdraw after he (Holmes) contacted the other professor and the N.C. Bar to determine if they would agree to let him stay on as Mangum's attorney despite the conflict.

Anonymous said...

He had the case for 7 months and did absolutely nothing to assist Ms. Mangum in her defense during that time. Instead, he knowingly wasted all that time, quit her case against her will, and then left her with less than 3 months to find another lawyer and prepare for the sham of a trial that ensued after the judge refused to allow the new attorney more time to prepare adequately for any murder trial - much less this one. Convenient no? All with a new position of power and 'esteem' to boot. Sounds like duke's influence all the way.

Fake Kenhyderal said...

Scott Holmes had Crystal Mangum as a client from March 28 to August 29, a period of roughly 5 months.

I can find no record of motions made during any period leading up to her trial, with the exception of the ones Sidney Harr made that were documented here on this site.

kenhyderal said...

Fake K. said: "The conflict was that Holmes took the position of assistant clinical professor of law and supervising attorney for the civil litigation clinic at the NCCU School of Law, and there was a faculty member in the same department representing a client in an adverse position to Mangum"............So, who is this client of Holmes' colleague, with the adverse position with Crystal, that she knows nothing of. Even the fanatical Duke Lacrosse apologist KC Johnson said "The precise nature of that conflict was left very murky by Holmes"

Walt said...

Kenhyderal wrote: In response to me pointing out a lack of evidence, " A problem that a competent defence should easily be able to do."

Not without evidence, and here, Crystal had none. In fact, her evidence, disclosed by Sid, agreed with the State's evidence.

"With virtually no reinforcement from the Defence the Jury in my opinion failed to comprehend Judge Ridgeway's instruction on this matter. As I have so often said any non-fatal injury such as a broken ankle would have put alcoholic Daye at risk of delirium tremens..."

Again you either do not understand the law that has been explained to you many times before, or you chose to ignore the law, it was the stab wound that put Daye in the hospital with his alcoholism. Proximate cause, Kenny, proximate cause.

"... and if there was a fatal medical error in treating this condition, unrelated to the stab wound, other then it was that which sent this at risk alcoholic to hospital."

At the risk of being repetitive, see me comment above. Medical error, even medical malpractice is not an intervening cause. Crystal put Daye in the hospital, and under our law she is held accountable for the results.

Walt-in-Durham

Walt said...

kenhyderal wrote: "So, who is this client of Holmes' colleague, with the adverse position with Crystal,..[?]"

Not a colleague. But, an attorney who is supervised by Holmes. The attorney's conflict is the supervisor's conflict.

KC Johnson said: "The precise nature of that conflict was left very murky by Holmes"

That is immaterial. If the client would not waive the conflict and the NCSB would not give Holmes a ruling that it was not a conflict, then he had a conflict. I have always found it interesting that you accuse every lawyer in this case of having a conflict of interest without any evidence. Indeed, you manufacture false conflicts out of pure supposition. Yet, when a real conflict arises and a real client refuses to waive the conflict, you are critical of Holmes. Seems like a strange double standard at work.

Walt-in-Durham

kenhyderal said...

John A. Smith said: I was referring to the alleged comments with Duke. And, I don't need to give my name, unlike you I'm not a fame whore trying to get some sick sense of self-esteem by pretending to be Crystal's friend. I'm trying to help her by keeping Sid from doing things too crazy ... sadly it doesn't work. And, I'm not the one claiming to want to help Crystal while actually doing nothing but whining. Whine Kenny, Whine. Oh, and I'm John A. Smith - you've been told that before"........ You don't like to give your name but you have told me before you are John A. Smith? Fame whore, a sick sense of self esteem, a pretender, a whiner: all you can do Jon A. Smith is call names. Claiming that you are trying to help Crystal by thwarting Dr. Harr is laughable. Oh, if you are John A.Smith why did you not attach your name to that anonymous post. Or better yet why don't you register your account under a user name?

kenhyderal said...

Walt said: "Again you either do not understand the law that has been explained to you many times before, or you chose to ignore the law, it was the stab wound that put Daye in the hospital with his alcoholism. Proximate cause, Kenny, proximate cause".....That's not what Judge Ridgeway's instructions said. Walt, as usual you interpret the Welch ruling too broadly.

kenhyderal said...

Walt said: Yet, when a real conflict arises and a real client refuses to waive the conflict, you are critical of Holmes. Seems like a strange double standard at work" Murky,murky. Who is this client and what is his adverse position with Crystal?

Anonymous said...

Whine Kenny, whine. Don't try to find the truth by asking people who know, make assumptions and just whine.

Wah wah wah.

Such a cry baby.

Anonymous said...

.So, who is this client of Holmes' colleague, with the adverse position with Crystal, that she knows nothing of. Even the fanatical Duke Lacrosse apologist KC Johnson said "The precise nature of that conflict was left very murky by Holmes"


That was reported and discussed in Court - the other faculty member represented Crystal's ex-husband in the custody matters, and that was communicated to Crystal - as it was discussed in open court. If she claims to have heard nothing, she's lying - she was right there.

Anonymous said...

Walt our law does NOT give medical persons the right to kill nor maim with their malpractice without holding responsibility for the same, regardless of how you interpret the law, which is not the same as how the judge interpreted it (probably because no medical person has the right to kill nor maim by malpractice without taking the responsibility for it). Why do YOU keep saying it does?

guiowen said...

Walt doesn't say that. Try reading his comments.
But perhaps you're the one who thinks "It's all the same to me" is equivalent to "I hope"?

Anonymous said...

I'm sure you do not hope that Ms. Mangum receives equal protection under the law in this case g... from all your and Walts's comments on this blog, which in the context of what you are talking about - your statement about Ms. Mangum rotting in jail - is about the same thing as you hoping that she does.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous said: "That was reported and discussed in Court - the other faculty member represented Crystal's ex-husband in the custody matters".........Richard Ramseir the father of Anna and RJ was represented by Nakia Davis, a Family Law Attorney, and he received temporary custody of the two kids in July 2011. Davis is also an Assistant Professor of Family Law at NCCU. I don't believe that when Holmes withdrew, in August 2013, Richard was seeking permanent custody. I believe he still lives in West Virginia at least he did at the time Holmes resigned. Crystal has visiting rights and was able to visit with the kids while she was on bail. Her and Richard are on good terms. I will endeavor to find out if he was using Davis at the time, to seek permanent custody but, to my knowledge that was not the case. It's my view that Holmes didn't want to continue on with Crystal's case and needed to give Ridgeway a plausible reason to withdraw,

Anonymous said...

Do you really think that is a wise post?

guiowen said...

to the 5:04,
I guess your comprehension is really not "well enough" as you so quaintly put it.

Anonymous said...

no g... it is quite easy to comprehend your consistently mean posts that make no sense except to understand that you are a very mean poster out to harrass whomever posts in support of Ms. Mangum or against the in-justice of this case or in support of the rights of the citizens and visitors to this state to not be threatened or put in fear for their lives or the lives of others by duke

Anonymous said...

You are still an idiot and provide no proof to support your anti-Duke paranoia.

Anonymous said...

She's had custody hearings in 2014 - you as her good friend weren't there to support her and see who was representing the other side? You must not be as close as you pretend. You were aware those hearings were going on, weren't you?

Anonymous said...

I'm quite sure duke puts others in fear for their lives on purpose - with no regard for what they are doing when they do it. Heck, you have to sign your life over to them just to receive their medical services in the first place. You have no idea what you are talking about if you have no idea what most people are subjected to by duke in this state. It is quite irrational for ya'll to think that only the lacrosse team was put at risk by what duke did and does when they were able to sue for millions in compesation for what duke did to them personally.

Anonymous said...

You are an idiot. And you still never explain how Duke frequently gets sued (like all large organizations) and frequently loses if they are so powerful.

Idiot.

Anonymous said...

perhaps you are the idiot if you need further explaining

Anonymous said...

You've never provided any explanation and never refuted the evidence that shows you are wrong. You are clearly the paranoid, delusional, idiot.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous 4:46, 4:22, 3:48:

Please do not feed the troll.

Anonymous said...

actually you post on this blog to annoy others and as a 'joke', refusing to listen to the many times explanations for anything have been given - you do it to harrass and bully others, and you demand answers and apologies and then demean the answers in order to demand more answers and apologies - all for your own entertainment and to 'joke' and harrass more ... that is all

it is all you have done on this blog for going on 2 years now that i have seen

why do you do that?
you don't actually seem all that amused nor entertained by your own 'jokes' and harrassment ... you just continue on and on ...
and on
is there a purpose to it?

Fake Kenhyderal said...

"You must not be as close as you pretend. You were aware those hearings were going on, weren't you?"

It's rather obvious Kenny wasn't aware of these hearings.

Lance the Intern said...

"I'm quite sure duke puts others in fear for their lives on purpose - with no regard for what they are doing when they do it. Heck, you have to sign your life over to them just to receive their medical services in the first place. "

Duke has never put me in fear of my life.

With that said, could you clarify your comment "you have to sign your life over to them just to receive their medical services.." a bit more?

Are you referring to "authorization for treatment" or similar documents (surgery consent forms, etc)?

Anonymous said...

why do you do that?
you don't actually seem all that amused nor entertained by your own 'jokes' and harrassment ... you just continue on and on ...
and on
is there a purpose to it?


Is there a purpose to you posting the same delusional paranoia about Duke day after day, year after year? I guess you think if you repeat it enough someone might believe it?

Anonymous said...

So, Kenny, did the Meier who posted here pass your little "test" or do you believe it wasn't really him?

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
You know Dr. Nichols was fired right? Hardly seems immunize.


You need to put things into perspective. Dr. Nichols was fired before Mangum's trial and before the media (which was pushing the story about him mishandling evidence in the Cumberland County case) became aware of his involvement in Mangum's case. It was then that media coverage about Dr. Nichols came to an abrupt stop. He has been given immunity because Orange County D.A. Jim Woodall refuses to investigate Dr. Nichols for his fraudulent autopsy report and for perjury. No one will investigate him because he has immunity.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Dr. Harr,

So you knew that there would be no Duke affiliated doctors or medical technicians involved in your treatment before you received it? What did you do to assure yourself of that?


I felt that I could best protect my anonymity while undergoing radiation therapy by not making it public knowledge with the filing of a brief in requesting an extension. I felt particularly vulnerable during radiation treatment as one cannot determine the dose of radiation one is receiving as it is painless.

Nifong Supporter said...


Fake Kenhyderal said...
Scott Holmes had Crystal Mangum as a client from March 28 to August 29, a period of roughly 5 months.

I can find no record of motions made during any period leading up to her trial, with the exception of the ones Sidney Harr made that were documented here on this site.


Hey, Fake K.

You are correct. Not only did Scott Holmes not file any pre-trial motions, I don't believe that Daniel Meier did either. The only thing Holmes did was try and get me to remove everything about Crystal's case from this blog site and stop commenting about it.

And I agree that his reason for abandoning Mangum was nothing but baloney.

Anonymous said...

Sid - how can you claim to be an effective advocate when you can't even read, or if you can read, you have no comprehension?

There are close to a dozen pre-trial motions filed by Meier contained in the Record on Appeal - so he did file them.

Once again you are wrong, but once again you will just make excuses and move on.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous said @ 12:40 AM :Do you really think that is a wise post".............. Probably not. Unfortunately, I sometimes allow myself to get provoked by people here who only seek to do harm to Crystal. Many of them are obviously bullies who think because of her vulnerable position they can pick-on her. They cant however bully me. I always I challenge them to identify themselves and they never do

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous said: "She's had custody hearings in 2014 - you as her good friend weren't there to support her and see who was representing the other side? You must not be as close as you pretend. You were aware those hearings were going on, weren't you"................... Holmes resigned in 2013. The temporary custody order was then in effect.

Anonymous said...

If it was just a temporary order it was a pending case - so there would be a conflict until the final custody order.

You are good at asking people for names, you are shitty at doing anything else or taking steps to try and find answers. You clearly just get off name-dropping a Crystal, but the fact she didn't talk about her custody issues with you is proof you are making it up.

Walt said...

Anonymous at 2:11 PM wrote: Sid - how can you claim to be an effective advocate when you can't even read, or if you can read, you have no comprehension?

There are close to a dozen pre-trial motions filed by Meier contained in the Record on Appeal - so he did file them.

Once again you are wrong, but once again you will just make excuses and move on."


Ding-Ding-Ding, ladies and gentlemen, we have a winner!

Anonymous said...

Anonymous 3:41:

You are being unfair. Kenny is also good at Google, particularly for subjects unrelated to the discussion.

John D. Smith said...

Dr. Harr,

You have failed to acknowledge your repeated error in the legal definition of "exculpatory" during the lacrosse case. I have noted this error three times on this thread. You have ignored those comments.

Please apologize for your claim that you admit your errors. That assertion is demonstrably false.

Please explain why your failure to acknowledge and admit obvious errors makes you a more credible,advocate.

John D. Smith
New York, NY

guiowen said...

Actually, if Holmes hadn't quit, Kenny and Tinfoil would now be bitching endlessly about his conflict of interest.

Anonymous said...

Guiowen,

Remember Tinfoil's explanation of a conflict.

Any attorney who lives in Durham has a conflict because they may go to Duke for medical treatment. Even if they don't go to Duke, they still have a conflict because they may be in an accident and taken to Duke for treatment.

Even attorneys who don't live in Durham, but represented Mangum in a trial in Durham have a conflict. They may be in an accident on their way to or from the courthouse.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous said: the fact she didn't talk about her custody issues with you is proof you are making it up"........ Not so. I obviously wont post her letter to me regarding this but I do have such correspondence. Things you claim as facts are manufactured out of whole cloth. You are obviously blinded by hatred.

mullar sharron said...

Hi everyone act there.. my name is MULLAR SHARRON i am from germany. i will never forget the help DR.TRUST render to me in my marital life. i have been married for 5 years now and my husband and i love each other very dearly and deeply. after 3 years of our marriage my husband suddenly change he was having an affair with a lady outside,i praying for divine intervention the thing became more serious.my husband just came home one day he pick up his things and left me and the kids to his mistress outside. i was confuse and i did not no what to do at first. i was searching for help in the internet, i saw so many people sharing testimony on how dr.trust help them with their relationship problem. i email him and tell him how my husband left me. And he assure me that my husband will be back home within the next 48 hours .To my greatest surprise my husband came home on his knees that i should find a place in my heart to forgive him,i was truly astonished and shocked when my husband knelt down begging for forgiveness and for me to accept him back.. I am really short of expressions, and i don't know how much to convey my appreciation to you dr. trust you are a God sent to restore broken relationship. And now i am a joyful woman.Email: (ULTIMATESPELLCAST@GMAIL.COM OR ULTIMATESPELLCAST@YAHOO.COM) tel +2348156885231

mullar sharron said...

Hi everyone act there.. my name is MULLAR SHARRON i am from germany. i will never forget the help DR.TRUST render to me in my marital life. i have been married for 5 years now and my husband and i love each other very dearly and deeply. after 3 years of our marriage my husband suddenly change he was having an affair with a lady outside,i praying for divine intervention the thing became more serious.my husband just came home one day he pick up his things and left me and the kids to his mistress outside. i was confuse and i did not no what to do at first. i was searching for help in the internet, i saw so many people sharing testimony on how dr.trust help them with their relationship problem. i email him and tell him how my husband left me. And he assure me that my husband will be back home within the next 48 hours .To my greatest surprise my husband came home on his knees that i should find a place in my heart to forgive him,i was truly astonished and shocked when my husband knelt down begging for forgiveness and for me to accept him back.. I am really short of expressions, and i don't know how much to convey my appreciation to you dr. trust you are a God sent to restore broken relationship. And now i am a joyful woman.Email: (ULTIMATESPELLCAST@GMAIL.COM OR ULTIMATESPELLCAST@YAHOO.COM) tel +2348156885231

Curtis Ruben said...


For the past 3 months now I have been looking for good and geniue spell to bring back my ex lover back and also help me to win lottery. and it has been a hard time for me finding the right place until I get in contact with Dr Trust who gave me powerful prayer and assured me that it will take two days before the spell will be effective, truly 2 days later, my Ex Lover rang me, i answered the call, he started apologizing, we are together Now. Thank you for making her to know that we are meet to be together and also making my dreams come true. And he did a spell that make me to win lottery. Please if any body needs LOVE SPELL,LOTTERY,PRENANCY SPELL, DIVORCE SPELL, GET YOUR PARTNER. BACK AND MANY MORE YOU MAKE NEED. Email him now for your own help. Ultimatespellcast@yahoo.com or Ultimatespellcast@gmail.com call him +2348156885231 All thanks goes to DR.Trust for the excessive work that he has done for me.

Fake Kenhyderal said...

Kenny, Tinfoil, Sid --

I think someone is trying to offer you some help here.

Have you explored the option of contacting Dr. Trust and having him cast some type of spell for Crystal?

In addition to getting her out of prison, you may also get a spell for her to win the lottery - thus ensuring she will be comfortable for life and won't have to work as an "escort" to provide for herself and her family.

My take? It's at least as effective as everything you've been doing so far.

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

Guiowen wrote: "Actually, if Holmes hadn't quit, Kenny and Tinfoil would now be bitching endlessly about his conflict of interest."

Ding-Ding-Ding, ladies and gentlemen, we have a winner.

In that case though, they would be right. He did have a conflict of interest.

Walt-in-Durham

Anonymous said...

Sydney, if Daye would have died because of an infection that set in, would this have change anything in your mind on the case? If not, why?

Anonymous said...

The issue was it was an intubation error that caused brain death which led to Mr. Daye being taken off life-support by Duke with the authorization of his family members after one week - and then the state ME completely leaving those facts out of the autopsy report that was used to charge and convict Ms. Mangum while lying about other major issues that did NOT happen to Mr. Daye as recorded in the Duke medical records. You do understand that about this case right?

If Duke did not treat an infection or the wound properly to prevent infection - they would have been responsible for that too. Nothing gives Duke the right to perform malpractice, not even their issues with Ms. Mangum.

guiowen said...

TinFoil,
Is there any way we can get you to stop whining?

Fake Kenhyderal said...

Watch it, Tinfoil...Guiowen might contact Dr. Trust and get a PRENANCY SPELL put on you.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

The issue was it was an intubation error that caused brain death which led to Mr. Daye being taken off life-support by Duke with the authorization of his family members after one week - and then the state ME completely leaving those facts out of the autopsy report that was used to charge and convict Ms. Mangum while lying about other major issues that did NOT happen to Mr. Daye as recorded in the Duke medical records. You do understand that about this case right?

If Duke did not treat an infection or the wound properly to prevent infection - they would have been responsible for that too. Nothing gives Duke the right to perform malpractice, not even their issues with Ms. Mangum.

Yes I know how Daye died. The question is if he died lets say of the super bug.

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/super-bug-linked-antibiotic-kills-30000-yearly/story?id=29226704

How would Sydney or Anonymous look at the case. Does anything change in your minds? A hospital is not perfect.

Anonymous said...

What pray tell is g... whining about anyway? Someone pointing out the issues in this case?

g... stop trolling me - i've already told you that many times before ... yet you continue. Why? Do you have another drinking bet going? What is it this time?

Anonymous said...

You still don't get it do you? The ME lied on the autopsy report to get Ms. Mangum charged and covicted, which is proven by fact and evidence. That, and the abundant evidence of a coverup and neglect to deal with that issue by Duke and the NC justice system is a severe injustice for all.

Is that really so hard to understand?

kenhyderal said...

Ă€nonymous at 10:50 said : Sydney, if Daye would have died because of an infection that set in, would this have change anything in your mind on the case? If not, why?`................. You raise an important question. That would have provided a direct nexus to the stab wound and despite the malpractice, in esophageally intubating him, Welch would seem to apply. From what I have been able determine, I am confident in Dr. Harr`s opinion that it was delirium tremens, due to his previously existing alcoholism, that he was being treated for not complications of the stab wound. I am confident that medical personnel who treated Daye, if brought into court, would testify to that. If an infection were only one of the possibilities but no definitive diagnosis was ever made then Crystal should receive the benefit of any doubt in that regard. This is important because if there was no direct nexus then no murder occurred. With the hard physical evidence and Daye`s own admissions Crystal could well of acted in self-defence. Again, in a he said, she said, benefit of the doubt should accrue to Crystal; especially since Daye`s statement and his interrogator were never subjected to aggressive cross examination. Theories derived from crime scene investigation, contrived by the prosecution to match Dayes`s self serving statement and used to confuse Crystal on the stand by hostile questioning, should not trump the right she has to the benefit of the doubt that she acted in self-defence,

Anonymous said...

The ME didn't lie - he was overworked and incompetent and sloppy. He missed a lot. Unfortunately, when a competent examiner looked at everything, she acknowledged that the ME was sloppy and lazy and made mistakes, but since he was right on the ultimate conclusion (if not for Crystal stabbing Daye, he wouldn't have died then), she wasn't helpful.

No one is defending the ME, but even a stopped clock is right twice a day - and the ME was right here - no evidence has been produced to contradict that - just random speculation by people who don't have access to all the information.

Anonymous said...

No, if Duke had not performed intubation malpractice that resulted in brain death - the patient would not have died. Their own records document that. Is Duke lying on their own medical records?

Anonymous said...

Why didn't Duke point out the issues of the discrepacies in the autopsy report used to charge and convict Ms. Mangum yet?

If I were a doctor at Duke watching this case, especially the ones that realize the lies, coverups, and other issues with this case from firsthand involvement - I would have found employment elsewhere by now. I wonder if any of them have because of this case.

Anonymous said...

You should get Dr. Trust to put a spell on Duke.

Anonymous said...

Except as has been repeatedly pointed out - you are totally wrong and ignore any responses. So idiot.

That's all you are ... And idiot. No more responses needed for you.

Anonymous said...

In the good old days Crystal Magnum would have been hanged in public.Same thing should happen to Jodi Arias but women who kill men get a free pass just like when they falsely accuse men of rape.Tawana Brawley and Jackie Coakley also got off with no punishment.It makes me sick.

Anonymous said...

You'd probably be better off NOT going to Duke to get 'help' as a 'consumer' about your feelings of illness about the issue.

And others probably will not take your illness as a reason to allow Duke to harm you, others, or themselves.

The issues of this case, if not resolved in a manner that does not hide the truth of the patient's death and the ME's and justice system's involvement in the coverup, will only further Duke's ability to harm others and make people more ill.

Anonymous said...

Idiot.

Anonymous said...

kenhyderal said...
"You raise an important question. That would have provided a direct nexus to the stab wound and despite the malpractice, in esophageally intubating him, Welch would seem to apply."

Not the clearest sentence, but it seems you do understand Welch to a degree. But in this case you feel that the esophageal failure is different from an infection that the hospital might have prevented by being more diligent. And it has been shown that hospitals are failing at preventing infections.

So, why is the esophageal case different from an infection transmission due to poor practices? I am assuming you do not think that Duke purposely did the esophageal failure here, it was just a mistake.

Anonymous said...

Actually, if you've been seeing what Sid and Kenny (and to an extend Tinfoil, though his paranoia makes his message almost incomprehensible) are saying - they actually do believe that Duke intentionally killed Daye in order to frame Crystal.

So, yes, they are saying the esophageal intubation wasn't actually malpractice, it was a deliberate act, made to look like malpractice, in order to get back at Crystal for Duke lacrosse.

kenhyderal said...

No, I believe that it was medical malpractice not murder. The unethical behaviour by Duke is in allowing Crystal to be charged with murder for a death they are responsible for. Since the death has not and in my opinion can not be shown to be tied to the stab wound then the Welch ruling should
not apply. Judge Ridgeway said as much in his instructions. There is no such thing as "esophageal failure". The question is was the esophageal intubation that lead to cerebral anoxia done in the treatment of complications of the stab wound or for an unrelated medical condition delirium tremens due to the pre-existing condition of chronic alcoholism.

kenhyderal said...

@ Anonymous @ 7:54 for clarification:...... Sorry I missed a comma between "That" & "would"

Anonymous said...

How many other deaths by intubation has Duke been responsible in the years leading up to and after this malpractice death? How many have they admitted to and taken responsibility for? How many have they blamed on others?

Is this a procedure that Duke is not capable of performing well without risking the lives of their patients?

Have these malpractice issues been addressed and corrected by Duke, or do these malpractice deaths continue unabated?

Do these malpractice deaths figure into the ratings that media 'best of' listings use to influence the public?

Anonymous said...

Since the death has not and in my opinion can not be shown to be tied to the stab wound then the Welch ruling should
not apply.


Yes, in your opinion. Unfortunately, in the opinion of the jury and the experts and lawyers who looked into this case (who all have a lot more information and training than you), they believed Welch would apply.

Just because you disagree with the jury's verdict doesn't mean it was wrong, or the people involved had conflicts or were in on a conspiracy. Meier argued and fought for self-defense. If he'd wanted her convicted, he wouldn't have (and you claim it was weak, but he pointed out everything you said you would have).

Anonymous said...

How many deaths by malpractice has the state or Duke medical examiner and autopsy system lied about and covered up?

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous said: "Just because you disagree with the jury's verdict doesn't mean it was wrong, or the people involved had conflicts or were in on a conspiracy"....There are people who agree with the OJ Simpson verdict too. Juries get it wrong. In glaring cases like this one, usually, weak defence or weak prosecution is responsible. The conspiracy that, to this day, has disadvantaged Crystal emanated from the Duke Lacrosse plaintiffs, their powerful parents, their Attorneys and greedy trial Lawyers who set out, by any means possible, to, unjustly trash and discredit Crystal. Say Crystal Mangum to the average man on the street in North Carolina and they immediately have an absolutely false impression of who this person is. Holmes, Coggins-Franks, Meier and the Jury all have bought the meta-narrative

Anonymous said...

Kenny -- You should get Dr. Trust to put a spell on them.

Walt said...

Anonymous at 8:02 AM wrote: "Actually, if you've been seeing what Sid and Kenny (and to an extend Tinfoil, though his paranoia makes his message almost incomprehensible) are saying - they actually do believe that Duke intentionally killed Daye in order to frame Crystal.

So, yes, they are saying the esophageal intubation wasn't actually malpractice, it was a deliberate act, made to look like malpractice, in order to get back at Crystal for Duke lacrosse."


Ding-Ding-Ding, ladies and gentlemen we have a winner.

Walt-in-Durham

Anonymous said...

a winner of what walt?

a ding ding contest?

Walt said...

Kenhyderal wrote: "Juries get it wrong."

Not very often, And, not in this case. Just for the record, I think the O.J. jury's criminal acquittal was the correct verdict. The state did not prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Very different from Crystal's case where the state prove her guilt beyond any reasonable doubt.

"In glaring cases like this one, usually, weak defence or weak prosecution is responsible."

Not in the way you mean it, but the defense was weak. To begin with, Sid violated Crystal's confidence and told the state that the defense knew Dr. Nichols was right, and could prove it. Second, Crystal decided to take the stand and lie about matters which the state could easily refute. She was a terrible witness in that regard. That is all on her too as she did well when she testified about the checks. Obviously, that testimony was what her various lawyers had worked on her giving. Finally, the defense was weak in the sense that Crystal paid too much attention to Sid and perhaps even you rather than the excellent lawyers who had her best interests at heart.

"The conspiracy that, to this day, has disadvantaged Crystal emanated from the Duke Lacrosse plaintiffs, their powerful parents, their Attorneys and greedy trial Lawyers who set out, by any means possible, to, unjustly trash and discredit Crystal."

No conspiracy. Crystal trashed herself. She told the lie that kicked off the fiasco. She set Milton Walkers clothes alight. She stabbed Daye. All of those things she did all by herself.

"Say Crystal Mangum to the average man on the street in North Carolina and they immediately have an absolutely false impression of who this person is."

If they do, then that impression is built on her actions.

"Holmes, Coggins-Franks, Meier and the Jury all have bought the meta-narrative."

No, the jury just listened to her and found her untruths to be unbelievable.

Walt-in-Durham

Anonymous said...

No doubt Duke is glad to know that you don't mind if they kill you with malpractice so that they can fulfill whatever agenda they personally have at the moment Walt.

Just the type of patient they are looking for.

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

Walt said: "Ding-Ding-Ding, ladies and gentlemen we have a winner' in response to Anonymous at 8:02 AM who wrongly characterized my position:........... I am disappointed that Walt seems to agree with this poster, even after I refuted his mischaracterization of my view.

Anonymous said...

Why are you disappointed?

Haven't you read any of Walt's other many posts?

Anonymous said...

Why do you delete so many of your posts?

kenhyderal said...

Walt said: Just for the record, I think the O.J. jury's criminal acquittal was the correct verdict. The state did not prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Very different from Crystal's case where the state prove her guilt beyond any reasonable doubt".......................... The very fact you have absolutely no doubt that Crystal might have acted in self-defence tells us where you are coming from. I don't blame the Jury because they were naively convinced by Coggins- Franks, who aggressively badgered and deliberately confused Crystal about inconsequential minutiae surrounding the incident that she was lying, with only a weak rebuttal by Meier. He failed to stress the obvious where a bigger, stronger, drunken, jealous, enraged Daye, who by his own admission had busted down a bathroom door where she had barricaded herself and who dragged her out by the hair might have had to defend herself and the ludicrous idea that he was fleeing his own apartment from fear of an attacking Crystal; especially after he admitted he was trying to keep her from leaving with someone else is equally unbelievable

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous said"Why do you delete so many of your posts?"....... Sober second thought.

Anonymous said...

???

So, in just a few minutes you became sober enough to have a second thought that was better than the non-sober first thought?

???

Anonymous said...

Is Mike Nifong still alive?

Anonymous said...

Yes

Walt said...

Kenny, Kenny, Kenny, Crystal might have had a self defense argument if she had stabbed Daye when he came through the bathroom door. Unfortunately for her, she did not. Instead, she escaped. At that point, our self defense law says she cannot go and arm herself and then attack.

However, she did. She went to the kitchen and armed herself with a steak knife. Apparently many steak knives as she threw several at him before stabbing him. Self defense ended when she armed herself and started throwing knives. That is aggression and that moves this into murder.

Walt-in-Durham

Anonymous said...

Kenny,

Please refrain from making straw man arguments.

Anonymous said...

What the frack is going on here? I leave for a little while and come back hoping to be elucidated by a nice shlog, but all I find are these evil, mean, hate-filled, nonsensical, crazy making comments from a bunch of insane hate-crime blog mongers.

blah

blah

blah

Anonymous said...

g ... i've already told you to stop copy and pasting posts that aren't even yours and then sitting there and trolling what you just posted.

seriously

get over yourself

troll doesn't even describe what you do any more g ... since you are seriously evil

DO NOT TROLL ME IN ANY WAY AT ALL AGAIN

thanks

Anonymous said...

Firstly you interpret the Welch Ruling far too broadly. Secondly Crystal's admission that she stabbed Daye, was that she did so in self defence and, if so, by law, that would make her not guilty. Thirdly, if the cause of Daye's death was not homicide but medical error, which was covered up and which was totally unrelated to any treatment for that stab wound, it would mean a wrongful charge of murder was laid. The jury got it all wrong. An ineffective defence allowed the prosecution to convince them of the fantastical theory that a murderous Crystal pursued a frightened and fleeing Daye and mortally wounded him while totally ignoring, drunken and enraged, Daye's preceding actions. It's as if Daye, suddenly, calmed himself down and soberly assessing the situation that he has angered Crystal by kicking in the bathroom door and dragging her out by the hair decided she was now a danger to him and he, poor boy, had to flee, for his life, her wrath. Let's get real. When an obvious miscarriage of justice has occurred, especially if you can show how inadequate the defence was. Then the, in place, rules about grounds for appeal, have to be interpreted as broadly as possible, for the sake of justice. Not to do so gives even more reason that the public holds the Law Profession is held in such low regard.

kenhyderal said...

This entry by Anonymous @7:31 is a cut and paste of a post I made on April, 17 2014 @9:52

Fake Kenhyderal said...

"a murderous Crystal pursued a frightened and fleeing Daye and mortally wounded him while totally ignoring, drunken and enraged, Daye's preceding actions. It's as if Daye, suddenly, calmed himself down and soberly assessing the situation that he has angered Crystal by kicking in the bathroom door and dragging her out by the hair decided she was now a danger to him and he, poor boy, had to flee, for his life, her wrath."


That pretty much sums it up. CGM is one cray cray bitch.

kenhyderal said...

Walt said: "She went to the kitchen and armed herself with a steak knife. Apparently many steak knives as she threw several at him before stabbing him. Self defense ended when she armed herself and started throwing knives. That is aggression and that moves this into murder"................... No it was Daye, the known knife thrower, who was throwing knives at Crystal. While he was on top of her and choking her to death, she picked up one the knives scattered around the apartment that he had thrown at her and nearing unconsciousness plunged it into his side

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous said: That pretty much sums it up. CGM is one cray cray bitch".......... Taken so obviously out of context that it makes you look disingenuous if not deceitful.

Anonymous said...

Kenny states: While he was on top of her and choking her to death, she picked up one the knives scattered around the apartment that he had thrown at her and nearing unconsciousness plunged it into his side

Kenny, except there is no credible evidence to support that version and credible evidence that contradicts it. The jury didn't view the errors in Crystal's statement as the "inconsequential minutiae" you claim, but as evidence she was not telling the truth.

The jury's decision not to believe Crystal is not subject to appeal.

Anonymous said...

How to throw a knife: The throw


Here you will actually learn how to throw a throwing knife. Let's begin with the stance: your right foot is the back one (toes at distance mark), your left foot is in front, the gap between the two is about two feet (your actual foot, not the measure). The heels are on a line. The two feet form a 45° angel (left 12 o`clock, right 13:30 o`clock position) or wider. Both knees are bent, especially the front one. The weight rests primarily on the ball of your back foot (behind your toes).
Both arms are straight and point to the target, which is in the height of the chest. The right arm now makes a round and smooth swing to the back, the knife is even behind the head. Then it swings forward towards the target, like you wanted to chop off some branch between you and the target. While swinging forward, the weight is shifted to rest on the front foot, the chest follows this movement. The right shoulder does not move, it remains in a (tilted) line with the left.
two snapshots of the knife throw
For the throw, the weight is shifted to the left foot while the right arm with the knife is brought to the front.
As the knife arm is about in line with the left one and points exactly to the target, quickly let the knife go and snap your fingers back together. Do not stop the swing of the knife throw, go on with the movement. This is called follow through and considered very important for a good stick.

Compare the description of John`s knife throwing style, where the knife throw motion sequence is explained again, or the (external link / new window)pictures at Throwdini.

If you do not need your left arm for aiming any more, you can draw it back when beginning the forward movement. Later, you can even employ your hip to add to the power of the knife throw (long distance only). As already explained, it is important that you get the whole movement into your muscle-memory, that you do it the same way every time. Then find the distance where the knives stick. That is the only way, force or sharp blades won't help.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Sid - how can you claim to be an effective advocate when you can't even read, or if you can read, you have no comprehension?

There are close to a dozen pre-trial motions filed by Meier contained in the Record on Appeal - so he did file them.

Once again you are wrong, but once again you will just make excuses and move on.


I am totally unaware of any motions filed by Meier... that doesn't necessarily mean that there weren't, however, answer me this: Did Meier file any motion to dismiss the bogus larceny of chose in action counts?

Nifong Supporter said...


John D. Smith said...
Dr. Harr,

You have failed to acknowledge your repeated error in the legal definition of "exculpatory" during the lacrosse case. I have noted this error three times on this thread. You have ignored those comments.

Please apologize for your claim that you admit your errors. That assertion is demonstrably false.

Please explain why your failure to acknowledge and admit obvious errors makes you a more credible,advocate.

John D. Smith
New York, NY


I am not still mired in the Duke Lacrosse case, as my efforts are focused on working to overturn Mangum's conviction. Furthermore, I disagree with you that my definition of exculpatory is incorrect.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
In the good old days Crystal Magnum would have been hanged in public.Same thing should happen to Jodi Arias but women who kill men get a free pass just like when they falsely accuse men of rape.Tawana Brawley and Jackie Coakley also got off with no punishment.It makes me sick.


You fail to accept enlightenment from this blog site, otherwise you would understand that Mangum's stab wound to Daye had nothing to do with his death. The proximate cause of Daye's death was the esophageal intubation... this is what attorneys from both sides hid from the jurors and what the mainstream media has kept hidden from the public.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
The ME didn't lie - he was overworked and incompetent and sloppy. He missed a lot. Unfortunately, when a competent examiner looked at everything, she acknowledged that the ME was sloppy and lazy and made mistakes, but since he was right on the ultimate conclusion (if not for Crystal stabbing Daye, he wouldn't have died then), she wasn't helpful.

No one is defending the ME, but even a stopped clock is right twice a day - and the ME was right here - no evidence has been produced to contradict that - just random speculation by people who don't have access to all the information.


I hate to say it, but your defense of Dr. Nichols is pitiful. Of course Dr. Nichols committed perjury when he described injuries to internal organs and Daye's left upper extremity that were in conflict with the operative report and other medical records. Being overworked, incompetent, and sloppy does not exempt Dr. Nichols from committing perjury additionally.

Anonymous said...

I am totally unaware of any motions filed by Meier... that doesn't necessarily mean that there weren't, however, answer me this: Did Meier file any motion to dismiss the bogus larceny of chose in action counts?



He did at the close of State's evidence, he didn't pre-trial because there is no legal mechanism for that - and your constant insistence there was just poison's Crystal's relationship with her attorneys. They cannot file it - but you claim they can, and tell Crystal that because they didn't they were biased against her.

Meier handled that as he should. He pointed it out, he moved to dismiss at the close of State's and close of All, and the Jury acquitted on it.

You are a fucking idiot and ass to keep telling Crystal more could have been done. Meier handled that exactly as the law allowed, and it should - and Crystal was not convicted.

You convinced Crystal that this had something to do with Felony Murder (it' didn't), and that the fact no one but you (an idiot with no legal experience) would move to dismiss showed they were corrupt - when in fact they were doing what the law allowed.

Meier didn't make that motion because he would have been laughed at. He got those dismissed, and that's what matters.

You are a disgrace as a human, and if you liked women, we'd suspect you were upset that Crystal wasn't available for you, but you don't, so you are just an ass.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Firstly you interpret the Welch Ruling far too broadly. Secondly Crystal's admission that she stabbed Daye, was that she did so in self defence and, if so, by law, that would make her not guilty. Thirdly, if the cause of Daye's death was not homicide but medical error, which was covered up and which was totally unrelated to any treatment for that stab wound, it would mean a wrongful charge of murder was laid. The jury got it all wrong. An ineffective defence allowed the prosecution to convince them of the fantastical theory that a murderous Crystal pursued a frightened and fleeing Daye and mortally wounded him while totally ignoring, drunken and enraged, Daye's preceding actions. It's as if Daye, suddenly, calmed himself down and soberly assessing the situation that he has angered Crystal by kicking in the bathroom door and dragging her out by the hair decided she was now a danger to him and he, poor boy, had to flee, for his life, her wrath. Let's get real. When an obvious miscarriage of justice has occurred, especially if you can show how inadequate the defence was. Then the, in place, rules about grounds for appeal, have to be interpreted as broadly as possible, for the sake of justice. Not to do so gives even more reason that the public holds the Law Profession is held in such low regard.


It does my heart good to know that all of my sharlogs and blogs have gotten the truth out to the people... and that some of them, such as this commenter, are now enlightened. Unfortunately, to my knowledge, my blog site is the only online site that displays the truth about Daye's death. Again, that means that only readers and viewers of this blog site have the opportunity to become enlightened on the subject. On-spot comments such as the one above is evidence that my efforts on this blog site have borne fruit.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 864   Newer› Newest»