justice4nifong: How the NC legal system and the courts failed Crystal Mangum

Tuesday, March 31, 2015

How the NC legal system and the courts failed Crystal Mangum

1,171 comments:

«Oldest ‹Older 401 – 600 of 1171 Newer› Newest»

Anonymous said...: What evidence? You state your opinions. Nothing more.; May 2, 2015 at 5:48 PM
Anonymous said...: Tinfoil:

What argument? Barely coherent histrionics, shrill ad hominem attacks and crude name calling are the tactics of someone without an argument to make.

Grow up and learn to behave.; May 2, 2015 at 6:21 PM
Anonymous said...: If you are arguing with me for no reason other than to troll on this blog (which you do all the time) then the evidence is there evil duke troll. Why do you do it again? You've stated to get reactions, to win drinking bets, to win bets that noone would take this blog seriously, ... what else?; May 2, 2015 at 6:22 PM
Anonymous said...: Only a person with no evidence to present and no argument to make behaves like Tinfoil.; May 2, 2015 at 6:25 PM
Anonymous said...: What's there to argue about?

Ya'll prove with every post that you are evil duke trolls - it doesn't matter to whom or what about - you simply continue to be evil duke trolls with your crazy making abusive repetitive cyberbullying racist lying trolling and baiting so that you can accuse, cyberbully, lie and troll some more. Ya'll are beyond evil - you do this here on this blog - over and over and over again and actually think that no one can see what you are doing. Why do you continue?; May 2, 2015 at 6:34 PM
guiowen said...: Could you all please stop feeding the troll (i.e. Tinfoil)? Ignore him!; May 2, 2015 at 9:41 PM
Anonymous said...: Give it a rest, Tinfoil. Come back when you are ready to behave like an adult.; May 2, 2015 at 9:46 PM
Anonymous said...: NEWS
Duke says noose incident was 'result of ignorance and bad judgment'

Student says he was unaware of cultural significance of a noose in the South.

Duke University says it has completed its investigation of a noose found hanging in a tree near the Bryan Center Plaza on April 1 and "has determined that it was a result of ignorance and bad judgment."

It says the unnamed undergraduate student responsible has written an open letter of apology, has been sanctioned through the university conduct system, and will be eligible to return to classes next semester.

The student will not face any criminal charges.

In the letter, the student claims he was playing with the string while sitting with friends and left it hanging because he "truly did not appreciate the historical sensitivity of a noose hanging in a tree."

"My purpose in hanging the noose was merely to take some pictures with my friends together with the noose, and then texting it to some others inviting them to come and "hang out" with us -- because it was such a nice day outside. If there was ever a pun with unintended consequences -- this was certainly one," the student wrote."...

abc11.com on May 1, 2015; May 3, 2015 at 6:31 AM
Anonymous said...: Until these examples of News and Headlines do not saturate the local news in ANY way - why don't you evil duke trolls stop being ignorant duke student wanna be evil duke troll cyberbullies, eh?

RE:

NEWS abc11.com March 2015

"Alleged racist comments under investigation at Duke University

Alleged racist comments directed at an African American female student are the focus of an internal investigation at Duke University."

..."The campus' newspaper, Duke Chronicle, is reporting students are writing their fears and frustrations on sticky notes and then posting them on the glass window of the Black Student Allliance office on campus."; May 3, 2015 at 6:38 AM
Anonymous said...: ...(from above): "The Duke People of Color Caucus released an anonymous statement.

What happened to the young Black woman on Sunday, March 22, 2015, is intimately connected to the conditions that necessitated the takeover of the Allen Building on February 13,1969, by Black students," the group wrote on the social website Tumblr, adding that there have been other questionable campus incidents."; May 3, 2015 at 6:40 AM
Anonymous said...: "President Richard Brodhead and Provost Sally Kornbluth have also joined the call for a united campus community. They sent a message to all Duke students condemning the alleged incident and reaffirming the seriousness of their investigation." ...

abc11.com March 2015; May 3, 2015 at 6:41 AM
Anonymous said...: You have provided one example of a Duke student acting stupidly (for which he was suspended) and another example of Duke students allegedly acting like complete assholes (with no update for an investigation).

What is your point?; May 3, 2015 at 7:03 AM
Anonymous said...: Until these examples of News and Headlines do not saturate the local news in ANY way - why don't you evil duke trolls stop being ignorant duke student wanna be evil duke troll cyberbullies, eh?; May 3, 2015 at 7:10 AM
Anonymous said...: I don't understand that comment. It seems like a gratuitous ad hominem attack.; May 3, 2015 at 7:12 AM
Anonymous said...: Continuing on with your ignorance and cyberbully evil duke troll tactics anyway, eh?; May 3, 2015 at 7:18 AM
Anonymous said...: No, I am not responsible for the actions of people I have never met.; May 3, 2015 at 7:21 AM
guiowen said...: To the 7:21,
Please stop feeding the troll!; May 3, 2015 at 9:08 AM
Anonymous said...: Hide your valuables. Tinfoil is on a bender.; May 3, 2015 at 9:55 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
NEWS
Duke says noose incident was 'result of ignorance and bad judgment'

Student says he was unaware of cultural significance of a noose in the South.

Duke University says it has completed its investigation of a noose found hanging in a tree near the Bryan Center Plaza on April 1 and "has determined that it was a result of ignorance and bad judgment."

It says the unnamed undergraduate student responsible has written an open letter of apology, has been sanctioned through the university conduct system, and will be eligible to return to classes next semester.

The student will not face any criminal charges.

In the letter, the student claims he was playing with the string while sitting with friends and left it hanging because he "truly did not appreciate the historical sensitivity of a noose hanging in a tree."

"My purpose in hanging the noose was merely to take some pictures with my friends together with the noose, and then texting it to some others inviting them to come and "hang out" with us -- because it was such a nice day outside. If there was ever a pun with unintended consequences -- this was certainly one," the student wrote."...

abc11.com on May 1, 2015

I have a problem with the entire credibility of this news article because the alleged student responsible for the noose was never identified. For all I know, the letter about the incident could've been drafted by a public relations firm. If a name and photo of the responsible party was produced, then I would accept the article at face value. Without it, however, I don't buy the story.; May 3, 2015 at 11:44 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Sid still completely ignores self-defense as well - because he knows that was fought, and that was the only way Mangum could have been not guilty - but that doesn't fit his conspiracy theory.

He also still refuses to admit he's wrong on felony murder, the prior record, and many other things.

Oh, and Mangum was supposed to be out long before now - and a new flog up, and all kinds of other things.

Sid, have you ever been right about anything?

Self-defense should not have completely been ignored, but it was a much weaker argument than the proximate cause of death issue.

I thought Mangum would be out long before now because I underestimated the lengths the State would go to for a vendetta against Mangum. Also, I thought many people would exhibit more common sense... clearly that was not the case.

I am right on many things... one being that Mangum might lose if she was represented by turncoat lawyers. Also, I believe that I will be right about Mangum getting out of jail and having her conviction overturned. It'll be sooner rather than later.; May 3, 2015 at 11:52 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: HEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP!!
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT AND UPDATE.

I expected to have the all-important sharlog posted no later than Monday, but it looks as though I might have to delay a bit. I'm shooting for Tuesday or Wednesday at the latest. It'll be an extremely important and comprehensive posting.

As you were.; May 3, 2015 at 11:54 AM
Anonymous said...: I think we should all thank Sidney for the upcoming sharlog. He has repeatedly stated that he cannot a make judgment about a criminal case unless he has reviewed the ENTIRE discovery file from both the prosecution and the defense. Although much of the evidence was used in the trial, there was some interesting evidence not used.

Sidney has acquired all discovery and he will post it. After readers have had an opportunity to review everything, they will be in a position to reach judgments.

Sidney apologizes for his impatience. He forgot that readers have not seen everything.; May 3, 2015 at 12:00 PM
Anonymous said...: Proximate cause would still leave Mangum a convicted felon. Self-defense was the only way to get a not guilty. It was the critical issue. You still ignore it.; May 3, 2015 at 12:07 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous 12:07:

You misunderstand Sidney's entire argument. If he is correct about the proximate cause issue, and Walt, A Lawyer, Lance, Giuowen, Break, Shella, Vann, Holmes, Meier, Nichols, Roberts, the prosecutors, the media, politicians, civil rights leaders and countless others are wrong, the prosecutors would be so embarrassed after they wer caught, that they would surely drop all charges.; May 3, 2015 at 2:53 PM
kenhyderal said...: Judge Ridgeway's instructions to the jury were correct.
Unfortunately, Meier did not raise the issue of Daye's alcoholism or the life threatening alcohol withdrawal symptoms that were being treated for and the malpractice by Duke in that treatment protocol which killed him; May 3, 2015 at 3:39 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

Please provide the notes from the interviews that prosecutors and defense attorneys had with attending medical professionals.

Like Sidney, I can't reach a conclusion unless I have seen the entire files of evidence complied by both the prosecution and the defense.; May 3, 2015 at 3:45 PM
Anonymous said...: "kenhyderal said...

Judge Ridgeway's instructions to the jury were correct.
Unfortunately, Meier did not raise the issue of Daye's alcoholism or the life threatening alcohol withdrawal symptoms that were being treated for and the malpractice by Duke in that treatment protocol which killed him

May 3, 2015 at 3:39 PM"

Again kenny shows he is incredibly stupid.; May 3, 2015 at 4:10 PM
Anonymous said...: "Blogger Nifong Supporter said...

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

I expected to have the all-important sharlog posted no later than Monday, but it looks as though I might have to delay a bit. I'm shooting for Tuesday or Wednesday at the latest. It'll be an extremely important and comprehensive posting.

As you were.

May 3, 2015 at 11:54 AM"

When have you ever published anything which meets the criteria of all important.; May 3, 2015 at 4:12 PM
Anonymous said...: "Nifong Supporter said...

Anonymous said...
Sid still completely ignores self-defense as well - because he knows that was fought, and that was the only way Mangum could have been not guilty - but that doesn't fit his conspiracy theory.

He also still refuses to admit he's wrong on felony murder, the prior record, and many other things.

Oh, and Mangum was supposed to be out long before now - and a new flog up, and all kinds of other things.

Sid, have you ever been right about anything?

Self-defense should not have completely been ignored, but it was a much weaker argument than the proximate cause of death issue.

I thought Mangum would be out long before now because I underestimated the lengths the State would go to for a vendetta against Mangum. Also, I thought many people would exhibit more common sense... clearly that was not the case.

I am right on many things... one being that Mangum might lose if she was represented by turncoat lawyers. Also, I believe that I will be right about Mangum getting out of jail and having her conviction overturned. It'll be sooner rather than later.

May 3, 2015 at 11:52 AM"

Again you show you are incredibly stupid.; May 3, 2015 at 4:14 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: " Please provide the notes from the interviews that prosecutors and defense attorneys had with attending medical professionals".......... I don't know about the prosecution but to my knowledge no medical personnel that treated Daye were ever interviewed by any of Crystal's Lawyers. If they did they never confided any of that information to Crystal. If that did not happen that seems to me to be legal malpractice. Medical malpractice and Legal malpractice meant the cards were stacked against Crystal; May 3, 2015 at 9:55 PM
Anonymous said...: " kenhyderal said...

Anonymous said: " Please provide the notes from the interviews that prosecutors and defense attorneys had with attending medical professionals".......... I don't know about the prosecution but to my knowledge no medical personnel that treated Daye were ever interviewed by any of Crystal's Lawyers. If they did they never confided any of that information to Crystal. If that did not happen that seems to me to be legal malpractice. Medical malpractice and Legal malpractice meant the cards were stacked against Crystal

May 3, 2015 at 9:55 PM"

kenny yet again shows he is incredibly stupid.; May 4, 2015 at 3:07 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny whines and lies - and refuses to ask the people who know anything. He claims to rely on comments from Mangum yet provides no proof he even communicates with her - and she's not exactly known for honesty.

Whine and lie Kenny, whine and lie.; May 4, 2015 at 3:42 AM
Anonymous said...: To your knowledge the Roberts' report was exculpatory as well - so your knowledge is lacking. And did you e pest those doctors to say anything other than they thought the wound was treated successfully - expected a full recovery - but complications arose which led to the esophageal intubation and death?

The issue isn't that what happened is in disputed - it's the legal significance, and you just don't like the law.; May 4, 2015 at 4:12 AM
Anonymous said...: If Crystal had not stabbed Daye he wouldn't have died when he did - and you and Sid keep telling crystal to ignore self-defense even though it was the on,y path to innocence.

You each also continue to refuse to e en attempt to talk to anyone who would actually have the answers you seek.

Whine whine whine.; May 4, 2015 at 4:15 AM
Walt said...: John D. Smith wrote: "

I must agree to some extent with Kenny. The delays in the NC justice system are unacceptable.

I too was frustrated in the lacrosse case as Nifong dragged out the discovery process for almost a year. The court does not hear non-discovery related motions until discovery is complete. I welcome Kenny's criticism of Nifong for those delays."

True, Nifong was an expert at dragging out cases in hopes of coercing a plea. And I won't argue that point. In fact, I have criticized the current law in North Carolina on that point.

"The initial delay in Mangum's murder case likewise was unacceptable."

I must point out that initially, Mangum sought an insanity defense. The delay while that was sorted out is attributable to her. However, I think the better course, though not the law in NC is to set every criminal case for a trial date at the initial hearing. That way the defendant knows the trial date and she/he can make decisions about delays accordingly. Unfortunately that is not the law in NC. (It is in most other jurisdictions, as a matter of state law.)

"However, Walt is correct in noting that Mangum's decision to fire her lawyers, file frivolous motions and represent herself contributed to the delays."

Worth repeating.

Walt-in-Durham; May 4, 2015 at 7:51 AM
kenhyderal said...: Pursuing a phoney not-guilty by reason of insanity option was not something Crystal wanted. Crystal only fired Vann after he showed little interest in her case, failed to visit her and did nothing for months; May 4, 2015 at 8:48 AM
Anonymous said...: Who sought a non-quilty by insanity plea? When was that done?

Is that why the psychiatric evaluation was done?

Was it a state psychiatrist who conducted the evaluation?

What was the outcome of that evaluation?

Did the psychiatrist have a conflict of interest with Duke?

It seems odd that if all that were done that the defense was unable to get an expert to testify on Ms. Mangum's behalf in the trial.; May 4, 2015 at 9:10 AM
Anonymous said...: She had a competency evaluation (according to Kenny, Sid, and news reports) - that's hardly the same as an insanity defense. As to why the doctor wouldn't testify - obviously they found her competent to stand trial (which is a very low standard anyway) - so they wouldn't use the doctor. No conflict, just if it's not helpful, it doesn't matter.

Competency to stand trial is a very low standard.

Don't read conspiracies into everything.; May 4, 2015 at 9:44 AM
kenhyderal said...: Shella was looking for an easy defence; May 4, 2015 at 9:51 AM
Anonymous said...: That doesn't make sense - very few not-guilty by insanity cases 'win' from what is reported in the news. Anyway, that would have meant she had to be locked up until she was 'determined' sane because she defended herself when she was assualted. No wonder she fired him.; May 4, 2015 at 9:58 AM
kenhyderal said...: Crystal did not agree to Shella's strategy but she did not fire him he quit citing Crystal`s release of information to Dr.Harr. He had done nothing for months; May 4, 2015 at 10:05 AM
Anonymous said...: She is lucky that he quit. Was he the lawyer later caught in a sting? Was he assigned to her through the Durham Public Defender's office?; May 4, 2015 at 10:11 AM
kenhyderal said...: Yes and yes.; May 4, 2015 at 10:21 AM
Anonymous said...: Walt - why do you continue to attribute what the defense lawyers whom have been fired, quit for personal conflict issues, or had State Bar complaints made against them to Ms. Mangum herself? This entire blog practically for the past few years has focused on the injustice within the system in this case. Why do you continue to lie about this case on this blog and elsewhere like you do?; May 4, 2015 at 10:31 AM
Anonymous said...: "Anonymous said...

Walt - why do you continue to attribute what the defense lawyers whom have been fired, quit for personal conflict issues, or had State Bar complaints made against them to Ms. Mangum herself? This entire blog practically for the past few years has focused on the injustice within the system in this case. Why do you continue to lie about this case on this blog and elsewhere like you do?

May 4, 2015 at 10:31 AM"

Another poster showing he is incredibly stupid.; May 4, 2015 at 10:52 AM
Walt said...: Anonymous at 10:31 wrote:

"Walt - why do you continue to attribute what the defense lawyers whom have been fired, quit for personal conflict issues, or had State Bar complaints made against them to Ms. Mangum herself?"

Because she is the client. She is in charge of the case. Not her lawyer, not Sid. She authorized every one of those delays.

"This entire blog practically for the past few years has focused on the injustice within the system in this case."

There are injustices that are found in this case. And I have pointed them out. Yet only one anonymous poster has ever cared to comment on those issues. However, those injustices have nothing to do with the autopsy, or even the cause of death. No evidence is available to suggest that Daye died by any other means than complications from a stab wound inflicted by Crystal.

"Why do you continue to lie about this case on this blog and elsewhere like you do?"

I am not the one lying. You are the one who is fooling yourself. And, that is your problem.

Walt-in-Durham; May 4, 2015 at 12:57 PM
A Lawyer said...: Self-defense should not have completely been ignored, but it was a much weaker argument than the proximate cause of death issue.

Even if you were right about the proximate cause of death (and you're not), without self-defense Mangum would have been convicted of attempted murder, or, at a minimum, assault with a deadly weapon, and she would still be in prison.

I am right on many things... one being that Mangum might lose if she was represented by turncoat lawyers.

Actually, you predicted on this blog that the State would never go to trial because they had no case" and that Mangum would be acquitted "even with a turncoat lawyer." Two things you were not right about.

Also, I believe that I will be right about Mangum getting out of jail and having her conviction overturned. It'll be sooner rather than later.

I'm not holding my breath.; May 4, 2015 at 1:57 PM
kenhyderal said...: Walt said: "There are injustices that are found in this case. And I have pointed them out. Yet only one anonymous poster has ever cared to comment on those issues. However, those injustices have nothing to do with the autopsy, or even the cause of death"......... Walt could you refresh our memory on the issue you have pointed out that only this poster commented on. Was I on the thread at the time?; May 4, 2015 at 1:59 PM
kenhyderal said...: A Lawyer said: "Even if you were right about the proximate cause of death (and you're not), without self-defense Mangum would have been convicted of attempted murder, or, at a minimum, assault with a deadly weapon, and she would still be in prison".......... Those charges would not be included in the murder charge that was laid."; May 4, 2015 at 2:03 PM
Anonymous said...: "Blogger kenhyderal said...

Walt said: "There are injustices that are found in this case. And I have pointed them out. Yet only one anonymous poster has ever cared to comment on those issues. However, those injustices have nothing to do with the autopsy, or even the cause of death"......... Walt could you refresh our memory on the issue you have pointed out that only this poster commented on. Was I on the thread at the time?

May 4, 2015 at 1:59 PM

Blogger kenhyderal said...

A Lawyer said: "Even if you were right about the proximate cause of death (and you're not), without self-defense Mangum would have been convicted of attempted murder, or, at a minimum, assault with a deadly weapon, and she would still be in prison".......... Those charges would not be included in the murder charge that was laid."

May 4, 2015 at 2:03 PM"

WOW!!! A Double.

Twice in a row kenny shows he is unbelievably stupid; May 4, 2015 at 2:09 PM
kenhyderal said...: Walt said: "Because she is the client. She is in charge of the case. Not her lawyer, not Sid. She authorized every one of those delays".... Crystal apposed the resignations of Shella and Holmes. She fired Vann after more then a year because he rarely attended her in gaol and he refused to provide her with a copy of the Robert`s report. Holmes last minute resignation and the Court`s refusal to give Meier time to study the case was, unlike her months in gaol waiting for a trial, a time when a delay would have been beneficial for Crystal since she had finally made bail.; May 4, 2015 at 2:32 PM
kenhyderal said...: Someone should ask the genius at 2:03 PM if all he can do is call names.; May 4, 2015 at 2:36 PM
Anonymous said...: Obviously Walt she did not authorize the lawyer from NCCU quitting since she stated in court that she did not want him to quit - which btw the law is on her side that she can agree to carry on with a lawyer whom has a conflict if she puts in writting the agreement or some such thing right? So that half year delay that left only a few months for a new lawyer to be found and to prepare for the trial under appeal was in no way her fault. Why do you say it was?

If she is in charge of the case and decides to fire a lawyer whom is not defending her or her rights in a timely manner, how can she be at fault for the lawyer's errors of delay for which she found grounds to fire them?; May 4, 2015 at 2:54 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny writes: "Some should ask the genius at 2:03 PM if all he can do is call names."

Uh, Kenny, aren't you the genius at 2:03 PM? I believe you mean 2:09 PM.

Perhaps a little introspection is in order. I suspect that most posters would not resort to childishly calling you names if you demonstrated a real willingness to engage in honest debate.

You tend to state your opinions and then treat your critics as not worthy of any consideration or respect.

For example, consider your recent charge that the defense lawyers were "evil" for discrediting Mangum. I asked if it was "evil" to discredit a false accuser. You refused to consider the question because you didn't accept the premise. There is no premise.

I ask it again: Is it "evil" for a defense attorney to discredit an accuser whom the defense attorney believes has made a false accusation?

Please stop being so disingenuous.; May 4, 2015 at 4:31 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous 2:54 PM:

You have incorrectly described the process for waiving a conflict. BOTH parties must agree to waive the conflict. Mangum did so; the other party did not.

As I recall, Holmes was forced to withdraw because he had joined the faculty at NCCU.; May 4, 2015 at 5:01 PM
Anonymous said...: " Blogger kenhyderal said...

Someone should ask the genius at 2:03 PM if all he can do is call names.

May 4, 2015 at 2:36 PM"

If you noticed, the "genius" who posted at 2:03 PM is you.

Boy are you incredibly stupid.; May 4, 2015 at 6:39 PM
kenhyderal supporter said...: Stop bullying kenhyderal you evil duke trolls.; May 4, 2015 at 6:40 PM
Anonymous said...: Duke obviously did not learn its lesson about innocent until proven guilty in a court of law with the lacrosse case.

Not only did they reveal the student's apology letter that insults the intelligence of many since it directly contradicts the racist faternity song about lynching bruhaha Duke just had, while at the same time not including the ignorant duke student's identity due to privacy issues, begging the questions of why the apology letter wasn't private too then and how is one to distinquish ignorant duke students from non-ignorant duke students now - but they held a campus wide racism solidarity event at their campus during the basketball championship season before completing the investigation into the noose hanging and then published a 'private' "ignorant" apology letter and labeled the duke student ignorant and with bad judgement while allowing that the student was welcome back to duke the next semester and that it wasn't about racism afterall after the basketball championship and investigation ended.

It would be difficult for anyone to trust any organization that consistently immersed themselves in this type of political behavior, much less a medically orientated organization.; May 4, 2015 at 8:20 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "Uh, Kenny, aren't you the genius at 2:03 PM? I believe you mean 2:09 PM"........ Yes thank you for correcting my error. No, it is not evil to discredit a false accuser. As I pointed out the 8th commandment does that. The Duke Lacrosse Defence, though, in my opinion, did that falsely, not only to cast reasonable doubt on Crystal's accusation against their clients but with the intent of discrediting her with a campaign of relentless slander, gossip and lies, using every means at their disposal, in order to bolster their greedy lawsuits. Thankfully this scheme failed. What is evil is that, in this nefarious process, they convinced people that Crystal is a liar, a drug addict, a prostitute, an unfit Mother and on and on.; May 4, 2015 at 8:46 PM
Anonymous said...: Duke just confirmed to the public that their students are ignorant and with bad judgement - putting all of them at risk for being labeled ignorant racist and any negative reprecussions that arise from that. This while Baltimore is in flames over police brutality and killings of blacks in that city sporting tanks, the military and many media representatives. Are they inciting more racial tensions on their campus in hopes of tank patrols and media encampments?

???; May 4, 2015 at 8:58 PM
guiowen said...: Kenhyderal said:
Anonymous said: Is it "evil" to discredit a false accuser?....................... The 8th Commandment says so and legally speaking it's not only a sin but knowingly doing that is also a crime. Crystal did neither the sin or the crime

April 30, 2015 at 2:24 PM

What you are saying above is that it is a sin to discredit a false accuser. Now you say the opposite. Well, I guess it's really asking too much to expect you to exhibit some logic.; May 5, 2015 at 2:14 AM
guiowen said...: Kenhyderal said:
Anonymous said: Is it "evil" to discredit a false accuser?....................... The 8th Commandment says so and legally speaking it's not only a sin but knowingly doing that is also a crime. Crystal did neither the sin or the crime

April 30, 2015 at 2:24 PM

What you are saying above is that it is a sin to discredit a false accuser. Now you say the opposite. Well, I guess it's really asking too much to expect you to exhibit some logic.; May 5, 2015 at 2:14 AM
Anonymous said...: The sin lies in the cyberbullying which has been proven to be cause of suicide and violent aggression against some victims; the massive media racist rape-mongering campaign that was perpetuated by those whom discredited in such harmful manners and otherwise, and the continued harrassment of all in the same manner with no heed or understanding or accountability for further harm done. Most people would take your continued harrassment on this blog g... as something rather evil, ignorant, and demonstrative of bad judgement, but hey, at least you occassionally display manners ... so; May 5, 2015 at 3:15 AM
Anonymous said...: " kenhyderal supporter said...

Stop bullying kenhyderal you evil duke trolls.

May 4, 2015 at 6:40 PM"

It is not bullying to point out a fact kenny himself makes self evident.

From http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/a/abrahamlin109276.html:

"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt.

Abraham Lincoln"; May 5, 2015 at 4:23 AM
Anonymous said...: " kenhyderal said...

Anonymous said: "Uh, Kenny, aren't you the genius at 2:03 PM? I believe you mean 2:09 PM"........ Yes thank you for correcting my error. No, it is not evil to discredit a false accuser. As I pointed out the 8th commandment does that. The Duke Lacrosse Defence, though, in my opinion, did that falsely, not only to cast reasonable doubt on Crystal's accusation against their clients but with the intent of discrediting her with a campaign of relentless slander, gossip and lies, using every means at their disposal, in order to bolster their greedy lawsuits. Thankfully this scheme failed. What is evil is that, in this nefarious process, they convinced people that Crystal is a liar, a drug addict, a prostitute, an unfit Mother and on and on.

May 4, 2015 at 8:46 PM"

et again kenny shows he is incredibly stupid.

http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/m/matthewhen189365.html:

"None so deaf as those that will not hear. None so blind as those that will not see.

Matthew Henry; May 5, 2015 at 4:27 AM
Anonymous said...: " kenhyderal said...

Anonymous said: "Uh, Kenny, aren't you the genius at 2:03 PM? I believe you mean 2:09 PM"."

That was not the post. Check the post at May 4, 2015 at 6:39 PM.

Again kenny shows he is incredibly stupid.; May 5, 2015 at 4:32 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

I thank you for your response. However, it is not clear what is permissible in discrediting a false accuser.

First, I should note that I use the term "false accuser" to include any accuser who makes an accusation that is not true. This includes false accusations that are intentional and unintentional.

With your reference to the 8th Commandment, you appear to draw a distinction. As I understand you (and forgive me if I am wrong because I found your response unclear), you believe it is permissible to discredit a false accuser who is lying, but that it remains "evil" to discredit a false accuser whose errors are not intentional (you have faulted a fatally flawed intentification procedure; Cooper suggested Mangum was delusional).

How does a defense attorney determine whether a false accusation is deliberate or unintentional? What level of certainty is required to justify a decision to discredit a false accuser who is thought to be lying?

You claim that the defense lawyers discredited Mangum not primarily with the aim of casting reasonable doubt on her accusations, but to "bolster their greedy lawsuits." In all fairness, this claim is ridiculous. First, the defendants faced up to 30 years in prison if convicted; I doubt they were setting the stage for future lawsuits. Second, the defense lawyers did not represent the defendants in their lawsuit against the city, Nifong, DNASI, the DPD and others. I do not know who represented them in their settlement with Duke. If the criminal defense lawyers did not, then it appears you are a false accuser.

Finally, in your attempt to clear Mangum, both you and Sidney have discredited Daye. You clearly believe he is a false accuser, not admitting that he beat Mangum within a inch of her life without causing injuries, threw knives at her and then strangled her, and only in a last ditch attempt to save her life did she reluctantly stab him. You and Sidney have discussed his alcoholism, his extensive criminal record with no serious convictions, his history of beating up prior girlfriends, and many other misdeeds.

I do not understand why you and Sidney are not "evil" in this attempt to discredit Daye. I am obviously missing something. It appears that you apply different rules depending on which side of the discrediting Mangum finds herself.

Please help me understand. Thanks.; May 5, 2015 at 4:58 AM
Walt said...: Anonymous at 2:54PM wrote: "Obviously Walt she did not authorize the lawyer from NCCU quitting since she stated in court that she did not want him to quit - which btw the law is on her side that she can agree to carry on with a lawyer whom has a conflict if she puts in writting the agreement or some such thing right?"

Wrong. The conflict was not hers alone to waive. The person seeking child support from her would have had to waive the conflict. He did not.

Walt-in-Durham; May 5, 2015 at 6:48 AM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: "Walt could you refresh our memory on the issue you have pointed out that only this poster commented on. Was I on the thread at the time?"

RTFF.

But, you have been gloriously and willfully absent from the real issue that is 403(b). Not that I would expect you to know anything about real justice, or care about it. Your only care is to impugn innocent men for crimes that never took place.

Walt-in-Durham; May 5, 2015 at 6:52 AM
Anonymous said...: So why do you blame Ms. Mangum for that half year of wasted trial preparation time Walt? In every instance it seems there is in evidence that Ms. Mangum continually requested her lawyers to assist her in her defense in a timely manner - and ALL the lawyers refused to do so. So, again, why do you blame Ms. Mangum?; May 5, 2015 at 7:52 AM
kenhyderal said...: Walt said: " But, you have been gloriously and willfully absent from the real issue that is 403(b). Not that I would expect you to know anything about real justice, or care about it. Your only care is to impugn innocent men for crimes that never took place"................... Unfortunately that is all I can, presently, pin my hopes on and which I fear will not be successful. Meier argued this issue at trial. Walker was an unwilling witness and he has often acknowledged that he bore much of the blame for the incident. I don't think that this was the issue that tipped the Jury. To a degree it was prejudicial but the failure of Meier to show that medical malpractice, with no nexus to the stab wound, was the sole cause of Daye's death was in my mind what allowed the Jury to be taken in by Coggins-Franks. This was never presented to the Jury. His failure to impeach Nicholls and his failure to put Roberts on the stand and have her admit under oath that neither the wound or any sequelae from it caused Daye to die was a case of an inadequate representation being given to Crystal.; May 5, 2015 at 9:26 AM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: " Please help me understand. Thanks." ...... Evil is not a legal term. However crime like sin requires intent.; May 5, 2015 at 9:34 AM
Lance the Intern said...: "... To a degree it was prejudicial but the failure of Meier to show that medical malpractice, with no nexus to the stab wound, was the sole cause of Daye's death was in my mind what allowed the Jury to be taken in by Coggins-Franks. This was never presented to the Jury."

From The Herald-Sun Nov. 19, 2013:

"Dr. Clay Nichols, under questioning by defense attorney Daniel Meier, said the victim, 46-year-old Reginald Daye, might have survived if complications hadn't arisen at Duke University Hospital, where he was treated after the April 2011 stabbing....

Nichols...said the autopsy showed Daye was stabbed in the left chest, that his left lung was pierced and other organs were damaged. He said the knife wound was two to three inches deep....
Jurors saw a slide of Daye's damaged lung, but Nichols said he had no photos of the other damaged organs.

Meier asked if Daye's internal injuries might have been caused in the hospital by a tube inserted into his chest. Nichols said his records showed that no chest tube was inserted on the left side."

Kenny -- You are incorrect that medical malpractice as a cause of death was never presented to the jury.

It was presented, they didn't believe it.; May 5, 2015 at 9:56 AM
Anonymous said...: May 5, 2015 at 7:52 AM

Blogger kenhyderal said...

"To a degree it was prejudicial but the failure of Meier to show that medical malpractice, with no nexus to the stab wound, was the sole cause of Daye's death was in my mind what allowed the Jury to be taken in by Coggins-Franks."

Kenny yet again shows he is incredibly stupid. And he thinks his ignorant stupidity is something meaningful.; May 5, 2015 at 10:48 AM
Anonymous said...: " Walt said: " But, you have been gloriously and willfully absent from the real issue that is 403(b). Not that I would expect you to know anything about real justice, or care about it. Your only care is to impugn innocent men for crimes that never took place"................... Unfortunately that is all I can, presently, pin my hopes on and which I fear will not be successful. Meier argued this issue at trial. Walker was an unwilling witness and he has often acknowledged that he bore much of the blame for the incident. I don't think that this was the issue that tipped the Jury. To a degree it was prejudicial but the failure of Meier to show that medical malpractice, with no nexus to the stab wound, was the sole cause of Daye's death was in my mind what allowed the Jury to be taken in by Coggins-Franks. This was never presented to the Jury. His failure to impeach Nicholls and his failure to put Roberts on the stand and have her admit under oath that neither the wound or any sequelae from it caused Daye to die was a case of an inadequate representation being given to Crystal.

May 5, 2015 at 9:26 AM
Blogger kenhyderal said...

Anonymous said: " Please help me understand. Thanks." ...... Evil is not a legal term. However crime like sin requires intent.

May 5, 2015 at 9:34 AM"

You seem to be saying that Crystal never intended to kill Reginald Daye and therefore she shouldn't be held criminally liable, even though she killed him.

Another incredibly stupid statement from kenny.; May 5, 2015 at 10:53 AM
Anonymous said...: So why do you blame Ms. Mangum for that half year of wasted trial preparation time Walt? In every instance it seems there is in evidence that Ms. Mangum continually requested her lawyers to assist her in her defense in a timely manner - and ALL the lawyers refused to do so. So, again, why do you blame Ms. Mangum?

The did assist in her defense - only delusional Sid and Kenny think there is anything to the proximate cause stuff - the attorneys tried to get her to focus on a defense that could actually work (self-defense), but she ignored them, because of Sid and Kenny. The attorneys did what they could, but they couldn't overcome Sid and Kenny.

There was no conspiracy, just whiners and liars misleading Crystal and encouraging her to mistrust her attorneys becaus Sid and Kenny don't understand the law and betrayed Crystal.; May 5, 2015 at 10:55 AM
Anonymous said...: his failure to put Roberts on the stand and have her admit under oath that neither the wound or any sequelae from it caused Daye to die

In her report Roberts said the death was a complication from a stab wound - why do you and Sid think she would suddenly change her mind on the stand and claim she had been lying all the time? More likely she would have explained the nexus, and Crystal would have gotten LWOP.

Are you really this stupid, or you just like to pretend?

Cause of course Meier wouldn't talk to you - you are a blithering idiot.; May 5, 2015 at 10:58 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

Thank you for your response. I did not expect such candor.

If I understand you correctly, what you call "evil" is entirely subjective. If someone does something you do not like (such as discredit Mangum as their clients are charged with multiple felonies based almost solely on Mangum's accusation), you are free to impugn their motives and thus label them as "evil."

On the other hand, when someone suggests you are "evil" because you discredit those you wish to discredit (such as the lacrosse players, the defense attorneys, Reginald Daye, KC Johnson, Liestoppers, most of the posters on this blog), you simply "reject the premise" and end the discussion.

I suppose that any interaction with you is a complete waste of time. You win.; May 5, 2015 at 1:09 PM
kenhyderal said...: My intent is to discredit those who are guilty, either of crimes themselves or those who, on behalf of the guilty, falsely slander Crystal in order to discredit her charges. What is evil is that these know the lies and slander they level are false but such deliberate lies are calculated to ruin her reputation in order to cast doubt on her veracity .; May 5, 2015 at 1:45 PM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: "To a degree it was prejudicial but the failure of Meier to show that medical malpractice, with no nexus to the stab wound, was the sole cause of Daye's death was in my mind what allowed the Jury to be taken in by Coggins-Franks. This was never presented to the Jury."

Crystal didn't submit medical malpractice to the jury because she had no evidence the medical malpractice was the sole cause of the death. Her own expert agreed with the Medical Examiner that the cause of death was complications from the stab wound. You have, for years, refused to accept the law as it is. Worse, you have disregarded the very problematic 403(b) evidence. Leading to the inescapable conclusion that you are in no way interested in the cause of justice.

Walt-in-Durham; May 5, 2015 at 1:51 PM
kenhyderal said...: Lance said: "Meier asked if Daye's internal injuries might have been caused in the hospital by a tube inserted into his chest. Nichols said his records showed that no chest tube was inserted on the left side" Kenny -- You are incorrect that medical malpractice as a cause of death was never presented to the jury.
It was presented, they didn't believe it".........
What he raised was a complete red herring. He made no mention of Daye's alcoholism, his life threatening alcohol withdrawal symptoms, his impending delirium tremens and his esophageal intubation which caused his brain death; a serious and inevitably fatal medical error that not recognizing in a timely fashion constitutes medical malpractice. These being the sole cause of his death with no nexus to his successfully treated stab wound.; May 5, 2015 at 1:55 PM
Walt said...: Anonymous at 10:55 AM wrote: "The[y] did assist in her defense - only delusional Sid and Kenny think there is anything to the proximate cause stuff - the attorneys tried to get her to focus on a defense that could actually work (self-defense), but she ignored them, because of Sid and Kenny. The attorneys did what they could, but they couldn't overcome Sid and Kenny.

There was no conspiracy, just whiners and liars misleading Crystal and encouraging her to mistrust her attorneys becaus[e] Sid and Kenny don't understand the law and betrayed Crystal."

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

Walt-in-Durham; May 5, 2015 at 1:55 PM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: "What he raised was a complete red herring. He made no mention of Daye's alcoholism, his life threatening alcohol withdrawal symptoms, his impending delirium tremens and his esophageal intubation which caused his brain death; a serious and inevitably fatal medical error that not recognizing in a timely fashion constitutes medical malpractice. These being the sole cause of his death with no nexus to his successfully treated stab wound."

Those are not intervening causes, let alone the sole cause. See Welch. A defendant will be held criminally responsible for second-degree murder if [her] act caused or directly contributed to the victim's death. State v. Jordan, 333 N.C. 431, 439, 426 S.E.2d 692, 697 (1993), State v. Welch, 135 N.C. App. 499 at 503, 521 S.E.2d 266 at ___ (1999). To escape responsibility based on an intervening cause, the defendant must show the intervening cause was "the sole cause of death." Sate v. Holsclaw, 42 N.C. App. 696 at 699, 257 S.E.2d 650 at 652 (1979).

And no, I am not reading Welch, Jordan and Holsclaw too broadly.

Walt-in-Durham; May 5, 2015 at 2:01 PM
kenhyderal said...: Walt said: "You have, for years, refused to accept the law as it is. Worse, you have disregarded the very problematic 403(b) evidence. Leading to the inescapable conclusion that you are in no way interested in the cause of justice:......................... I accept the law and the interpretation of that law to the Jury by Judge Ridgeway. The appeal on the 403(b) evidence I fear will go nowhere as it was already raised at trial. An inadequate defence by Meier, his failure to conduct an investigation into the real cause of Daye's death, his lack of time to prepare for the trial after Holmes precipitous withdrawal. Then, there is reluctance by Court appointed Appeal Attorneys to criticize their fellow colleagues especially on behalf of a marginalized and unpopular defendant. The same can be said in this case of the M.E.'s; May 5, 2015 at 2:08 PM
kenhyderal said...: whoops sentence #3 no verb .Please insert after withdrawal "are stronger grounds".; May 5, 2015 at 2:13 PM
kenhyderal said...: The SOLE cause of Daye's death, esophageal intubation, was totally and completely unrelated to his stab wound. This argument was never made.; May 5, 2015 at 2:17 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Lance the Intern said...
"... To a degree it was prejudicial but the failure of Meier to show that medical malpractice, with no nexus to the stab wound, was the sole cause of Daye's death was in my mind what allowed the Jury to be taken in by Coggins-Franks. This was never presented to the Jury."

From The Herald-Sun Nov. 19, 2013:

"Dr. Clay Nichols, under questioning by defense attorney Daniel Meier, said the victim, 46-year-old Reginald Daye, might have survived if complications hadn't arisen at Duke University Hospital, where he was treated after the April 2011 stabbing....

Nichols...said the autopsy showed Daye was stabbed in the left chest, that his left lung was pierced and other organs were damaged. He said the knife wound was two to three inches deep....
Jurors saw a slide of Daye's damaged lung, but Nichols said he had no photos of the other damaged organs.

Meier asked if Daye's internal injuries might have been caused in the hospital by a tube inserted into his chest. Nichols said his records showed that no chest tube was inserted on the left side."

Kenny -- You are incorrect that medical malpractice as a cause of death was never presented to the jury.

It was presented, they didn't believe it.

Like Nichols, I saw no indication that a chest tube was inserted into Daye's left chest wall. By insisting that it was, Meier only succeeded in destroying his own credibility with regards to the medical issues. All he had to do was mention "esophageal intubation," but that would not help his intended goal... protecting Duke and convicting Mangum.

The Herald Sun is extremely biased against Crystal anyway.; May 5, 2015 at 2:35 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: HEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP!!
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT!!

Unfortunately, the file I was working on got inadvertently messed up... after it was nearly completed and after much work was invested in it. Therefore, I've been set back... Depending on when I'm able to get the file back on track, I would say that the posting of it will be at the earliest on next Monday. Sorry about the delay. But it seems with these large complicated files problems seem to abound. Anyway, I will be working on it around the clock, so I may not be commenting for several days... (so don't get alarmed).

As you were.

As you were.; May 5, 2015 at 2:40 PM
Anonymous said...: Most of the posters here fail to see the genius of the strategy Sidney and Kenny would have adopted had they been able to lead Crystal's defense.

Posters focus on the minutiae of case law and the autopsy and defense medical expert reports and miss the big picture.

Esophageal intubation. Jury nullification. Crystal should be free.

Whether the law holds that esophageal intubation is an intervening cause is irrelevant.whether the experts support the theory is irrelevant. That is why neither Sidney nor Kenny provide cases. That is why neither Sidney nor Kenny found an expert. It doesn't matter.

The jury would wilt in their skillful hands. Sidney using his cartoons to show the effect of an esophageal intubation and how Duke suffocated Daye. Kenny closing with "The law is an ass."

Crystal would be free.; May 5, 2015 at 2:51 PM
Anonymous said...: Dr. Roberts talks about a chest tube (perhaps she saw records Sid didn't?), and she explicitly says the death was related to the stab wound.

Kenny, you keep saying that's wrong, and that she would have admitted all that on the stand. Other than Sid, who has admitted he hasn't seen all the records, and clearly missed a chest tube, what is your proof? And IF you believe Dr. Roberts was/is lying about her conclusions, why do you think she wouldn't stick to them had she been put on the stand?

Really, are you this stupid (we know Sid is), or do you just pretend?; May 5, 2015 at 3:04 PM
Anonymous said...: Obviously no one really knows how and why Mr. Daye died exactly except for those who killed him - the Duke medical persons. The Duke medical reports in no way matches the state's autopsy report used to charge and convict Ms. Mangum for the malpractice death of Mr. Daye, so these are the persons who need to be put on the stand and questioned about the "complications" that killed Mr. Daye to determine the true cause of death. Accurate cause of death is normally required to convict someone in murder cases one would assume.; May 5, 2015 at 3:33 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: " and she (Dr.Roberts) explicitly says the death was related to the stab wound. Sid hasn't seen all the records, and clearly missed a chest tube, what is your proof? And IF you believe Dr. Roberts was/is lying about her conclusions, why do you think she wouldn't stick to them had she been put on the stand"............Under oath and under cross examination Dr. Roberts would have to concede that the sole cause of Daye's death was or at least may have been due to an esophageal intubation and that medical error occurred while he was being treated for delirium tremens and that condition was not directly related to his successfully treated stab wound; May 5, 2015 at 4:31 PM
Anonymous said...: Jury nullification. The law doesn't matter.; May 5, 2015 at 5:35 PM
Anonymous said...: Walt,

What are the chances of an appeal that alleges that Meieir provided incompetent counsel because he didn't try to convince the jury to nullify the law?; May 5, 2015 at 5:38 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny you are a fucking idiot who gets dumber with every post. Every medical professional but Sid who left California in disgrace and scandal say you are wrong.

You are a crybaby, and idiot. You left a while ago, everyone, especially Crystal, would be better off if you'd go away again. The next time you say anything intelligent or relevant will be the first time.

I have to conclude you are joking and playing games here, because no one can really be so stupid and delusional. You are a joke. We are on to you.; May 5, 2015 at 6:42 PM
Anonymous said...: She said the excluded DTs - read the fucking report. You are an idiot and pathetic,; May 5, 2015 at 6:43 PM
Anonymous said...: But try to understand
Try to understand
Try try try to understand
Ken's a magic man.; May 5, 2015 at 7:43 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "She said the excluded DTs - read the fucking report. You are an idiot and pathetic"..... She said no such thing.; May 5, 2015 at 9:10 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny you are an idiot - it's been pointed out to you repeatedly - but agai , you won't ask anyone to clarify just keep whining and lying.

Oh and she did mention the chest tube whichSid is claiming he didn't see ... A lie by Sid, or a lie by Roberts?

Idiot, whiner, liar ... You are quite the trifecta Kenny.; May 6, 2015 at 3:25 AM
Anonymous said...: "Blogger kenhyderal said...

Under oath and under cross examination Dr. Roberts would have to concede that the sole cause of Daye's death was or at least may have been due to an esophageal intubation and that medical error occurred while he was being treated for delirium tremens and that condition was not directly related to his successfully treated stab wound"

Yet again kenny sows he is incredibly stupid.; May 6, 2015 at 6:31 AM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: "Under oath and under cross examination Dr. Roberts would have to concede that the sole cause of Daye's death was or at least may have been due to an esophageal intubation and that medical error occurred while he was being treated for delirium tremens and that condition was not directly related to his successfully treated stab wound."

Wrong three ways. First, she is an expert and professional witness. She would not contradict her own findings. Instead, she would embarrass the cross-examiner who tried to get her to do that.

Second, "sole cause" is an issue for the jury, not a witness. The state would object to her testifying to "sole cause" if she was inclined to contradict herself. And, that objection would be correctly sustained from the bench.

Finally, you ignore the doctrine of proximate cause.

Walt-in-Durham; May 6, 2015 at 7:35 AM
Walt said...: Anonymous at 5:38 PM wrote: "Walt,

What are the chances of an appeal that alleges that Meieir provided incompetent counsel because he didn't try to convince the jury to nullify the law?"

Not good. In general North Carolina prohibits jury nullification and argument for jury nullification. State v. Lewis, 2002 N.C. App. LEXIS 2200. It is not ineffective assistance to argue for that which is prohibited. Further, Crystal did not raise that in her brief.

Walt-in-Durham; May 6, 2015 at 7:59 AM
Anonymous said...: With evil duke trolls like Walt who just happen to be NC licensed lawyers, (or so they claim), allowed to give legal opinion and advice by the NC State Bar that is obviously conflicted against the person being publically assisted by a retired doctor on a blog who has no professional legal training but is about the only legal assistance the defendant can obtain through the NC justice system - because ... yes ... because Duke killed the patient and deceased in question with malpractice ...... that all says a LOT about the state of affairs in NC for most if not all of its citizens and those whom visit NC.; May 6, 2015 at 9:06 AM
kenhyderal said...: Walt said: " "sole cause" is an issue for the jury, not a witness"..... Then the Jury needed to hear, in minute detail, about the intubation error and it's deadly consequences which led to Daye's brain death before they could make a reasoned judgement on sole cause. They also needed to hear if Daye required a tracheal intubation because of complications of his wound. Nicholls and Roberts are Medical Examiners. Both stated they did not know what the complications were. There are, however, personnel at Duke who do know. If this was not pursued by Crystal's Lawyers it constitutes a case of a woefully inadequate defence. I contend that this was never done and if it was done and Duke confirmed that a post-surgical infectious process caused him to be taken to the ICU then Crystal was never told this.; May 6, 2015 at 9:39 AM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: "Then the Jury needed to hear, in minute detail, about the intubation error and it's deadly consequences which led to Daye's brain death before they could make a reasoned judgement on sole cause."

Given the experts, both state and defense opined otherwise, that evidence would be difficult, perhaps impossible to get into evidence.

"They also needed to hear if Daye required a tracheal intubation because of complications of his wound. Nicholls and Roberts are Medical Examiners. Both stated they did not know what the complications were."

Again, both gave an opinion. Crystal is stuck with that.

"There are, however, personnel at Duke who do know. If this was not pursued by Crystal's Lawyers it constitutes a case of a woefully inadequate defence. I contend that this was never done and if it was done and Duke confirmed that a post-surgical infectious process caused him to be taken to the ICU then Crystal was never told this."

You are engaging in speculation that is not supported by either the defense's expert or the Medical Examiner.; May 6, 2015 at 9:59 AM
Anonymous said...: " Anonymous said...

With evil duke trolls like Walt who just happen to be NC licensed lawyers, (or so they claim), allowed to give legal opinion and advice by the NC State Bar that is obviously conflicted against the person being publically assisted by a retired doctor on a blog who has no professional legal training but is about the only legal assistance the defendant can obtain through the NC justice system"

What shows you are incredibly stupid is that this "retired doctor" has minimal medical training and minimal medical experience and would not be recognized as a medicakl expert by any court in the land, let alone as a legal expert.

"- because ... yes ... because Duke killed the patient and deceased in question with malpractice ...... that all says a LOT about the state of affairs in NC for most if not all of its citizens and those whom visit NC.

May 6, 2015 at 9:06 AM"

That statement only reinforces tat the commenter is incredibly stupid.; May 6, 2015 at 10:02 AM
Anonymous said...: " kenhyderal said...

Walt said: " "sole cause" is an issue for the jury, not a witness"..... Then the Jury needed to hear, in minute detail, about the intubation error and it's deadly consequences which led to Daye's brain death before they could make a reasoned judgement on sole cause. They also needed to hear if Daye required a tracheal intubation because of complications of his wound. Nicholls and Roberts are Medical Examiners. Both stated they did not know what the complications were. There are, however, personnel at Duke who do know. If this was not pursued by Crystal's Lawyers it constitutes a case of a woefully inadequate defence. I contend that this was never done and if it was done and Duke confirmed that a post-surgical infectious process caused him to be taken to the ICU then Crystal was never told this.

May 6, 2015 at 9:39 AM"

kenny again manifests his incredible stupidity.; May 6, 2015 at 10:05 AM
Walt said...: Anonymous at 9:39 AM you are rambling incoherently. Under NC law, I am allowed to give information. As no attorney client relationship exists, no advice is given. I have no conflict of interest in this case because I don't represent the State of North Carolina (I am not a Deputy Attorney General), nor do I represent Crystal. And, I never have represented either. Thus, no conflict of interest.

Walt-in-Durham; May 6, 2015 at 10:07 AM
Anonymous said...: They took him to ICU to do an unnessary, life threatening, medically unsound and neglectful test for something that didn't need to be tested in that risky of a way at that time. He could have been agitated because they would not release him like he thought was going to happen. At this point, it would be hard to believe Duke about what they did or didn't do since they have not spoken up against the obvious discrepancies in the state's ME autopsy report, leaving not only Ms. Mangum but all citizens and visitors to NC to continue to be harmed by that system which undoubtedly they contribute to, profit from, and have obvious and real conflicts of interest with.; May 6, 2015 at 10:07 AM
Anonymous said...: Whatever Walt the evil duke troll legal advisor and instigator.

Like I said, it shows the state of affairs in NC really well.

Good example!; May 6, 2015 at 10:11 AM
Walt said...: Anonymous at 10:07 AM wrote: "They took him to ICU to do an unnessary, life threatening, medically unsound and neglectful test...."

Assuming facts not in evidence and then drawing conclusions. Keep your eye on the evidence. Both experts said Daye died as a result of complications of the stab wound. No matter what facts you assume, you have to deal with the facts that both experts agree as to the cause of death.

Walt-in-Durham; May 6, 2015 at 10:18 AM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "They took him to ICU to do an unnessary, life threatening, medically unsound and neglectful test for something that didn't need to be tested in that risky of a way at that time. " ...... No that's wrong. His alcohol withdrawal and impending delirium tremens were life threatening if not treated correctly and he needed to be taken to the ICU. This was related to his severe chronic alcoholism and was probably unrelated to his wound; May 6, 2015 at 10:20 AM
Anonymous said...: "Anonymous said...

They took him to ICU to do an unnessary, life threatening, medically unsound and neglectful test for something that didn't need to be tested in that risky of a way at that time. He could have been agitated because they would not release him like he thought was going to happen. At this point, it would be hard to believe Duke about what they did or didn't do since they have not spoken up against the obvious discrepancies in the state's ME autopsy report, leaving not only Ms. Mangum but all citizens and visitors to NC to continue to be harmed by that system which undoubtedly they contribute to, profit from, and have obvious and real conflicts of interest with.

May 6, 2015 at 10:07 AM"

Yet another commenter who shows incredible stupidity.; May 6, 2015 at 10:33 AM
Anonymous said...: " kenhyderal said...

Anonymous said: "They took him to ICU to do an unnessary, life threatening, medically unsound and neglectful test for something that didn't need to be tested in that risky of a way at that time. " ...... No that's wrong. His alcohol withdrawal and impending delirium tremens were life threatening if not treated correctly and he needed to be taken to the ICU. This was related to his severe chronic alcoholism and was probably unrelated to his wound

May 6, 2015 at 10:20 AM"

kenny yet again manifests his incredible stupidity.; May 6, 2015 at 10:35 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny, you are still whining and lying and showing you are an idiot.

Why don't you ask Meier or Dr. Roberts about the report, or if she was asked about DTs and what her answer was?

Of course you won't, because you are an idiot, a whiner, and a liar, who doesn't are about the truth - you just want to babble on proving you are an idiot, whiner, and liar.

If you weren't so pathetic we'd almost feel sorry for you. As it is ...

Idiot ... whiner ... liar ... prove you aren't, and man up and try to find answers instead of just stating things as true when you refuse to check them out.

Idiot ... whiner ... liar ...; May 6, 2015 at 11:35 AM
Anonymous said...: This was related to his severe chronic alcoholism and was probably unrelated to his wound.

For the first time Kenny concedes it could have been related to the wound ... both experts concluded it was related. Kenny, why are you smarter than them?; May 6, 2015 at 11:36 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Dr. Roberts talks about a chest tube (perhaps she saw records Sid didn't?), and she explicitly says the death was related to the stab wound.

Kenny, you keep saying that's wrong, and that she would have admitted all that on the stand. Other than Sid, who has admitted he hasn't seen all the records, and clearly missed a chest tube, what is your proof? And IF you believe Dr. Roberts was/is lying about her conclusions, why do you think she wouldn't stick to them had she been put on the stand?

Really, are you this stupid (we know Sid is), or do you just pretend?

I do not believe that a chest tube was inserted in Daye... clearly there seems not to have been one prior to his fateful intubation on April 6th. For the week following the intubation, the media was in a self-imposed blackout on news about Daye's condition. The usual indication for a chest tube insertion is to remove air (pneumothorax), fluid (hemothorax), or both(pneumohemothorax)from the lining of the lung... There was no documentation in the hospital records of prosecution discovery that suggests that a chest tube was inserted.

One reason for Roberts bringing up such a possibility was to cover the e-mail to Vann which mentioned a "problem with a tube" as being responsible for Daye's death. By bringing up a chest tube, it could confuse and obscure the endotracheal tube which no one wanted to mention. That's my theory with regards to the chest tube.

Let me know if further elucidation is required.; May 6, 2015 at 1:34 PM
Anonymous said...: No, Sid, you yourself mention you don't have the complete Medical Records (though Dr. Roberts does). You are just a complete and total liar and a joke.

She wasn't confused on some e-mails, she reviewed the records, and there was a chest-tube - she even describes the kind.

You are wrong on this, and so many other things. You'd have more credibility if you'd just admit it.; May 6, 2015 at 1:39 PM
Anonymous said...: Again, you could clear up your "I think" if you'd get a release from Crystal and ask people. But, you won't. Just like the payments to experts - you will just assume - but you aren't making an ass out of you and me, just you with your assumptions.; May 6, 2015 at 1:40 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: kenhyderal said...
Anonymous said: "They took him to ICU to do an unnessary, life threatening, medically unsound and neglectful test for something that didn't need to be tested in that risky of a way at that time. " ...... No that's wrong. His alcohol withdrawal and impending delirium tremens were life threatening if not treated correctly and he needed to be taken to the ICU. This was related to his severe chronic alcoholism and was probably unrelated to his wound

Delirium tremens can be life-threatening and should be aggressively treated... I believe that he should have been transferred to the SICU. I also believe that kenhyderal is correct and that risks outweighed the benefits in the attempt to obtain contrast imaging in looking for a possible infection. I believe it was clear that his sign of agitation was due to D.T.s and not an infection. Instead of introducing contrast into the stomach for diagnostic scanning purposes (which carries a risk of emesis), I believe the prudent course would have been to focus on therapeutically treating his agitation under a presumptive diagnosis of delirium tremens.

Post-intubation there was never any sign that Daye suffered any infection... no mention of cultures taken, an infectious disease consultation obtained, or the administration of antibiotics.; May 6, 2015 at 1:43 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
No, Sid, you yourself mention you don't have the complete Medical Records (though Dr. Roberts does). You are just a complete and total liar and a joke.

She wasn't confused on some e-mails, she reviewed the records, and there was a chest-tube - she even describes the kind.

You are wrong on this, and so many other things. You'd have more credibility if you'd just admit it.

According to his testimony, the one thing that Dr. Nichols and I do agree on is that there was no chest tube inserted in Daye. I don't believe that one was inserted, and the reason Meier brought up the chest tube was to cause confusion and take away any possible attention from an endotracheal tube.; May 6, 2015 at 1:46 PM
Anonymous said...: But, you won't ask Meier or anyone else to confirm your suspicions.

You are joining Kenny in the idiot, whiner, liar category.; May 6, 2015 at 1:55 PM
Anonymous said...: So, Dr. Roberts and Meier conspired to make up the chest tube?

It's amazing - when people agree with you - Nichols on the chest tube; Roberts on the sloppy autopsy - you think they are right - when they disagree (both on cause of death; Roberts on Chest Tube) - it's a conspiracy - only you are perfect.

I suspect even Kenny and Tinfoil are going to realize you are turning yourself into a joke at this point.; May 6, 2015 at 2:00 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "For the first time Kenny concedes it could have been related to the wound"...... Only to the extent that that the manifestations of delirium tremens can be modified and or worsened by co-morbid conditions. The experts were Medical Examiners and had no involvement in Daye's treatment. I don't know if they had access to treatment records not available to the Defense or if there are additional records of Daye's treatment for example by the Respirologist who esophageally intubated Daye with an endo-tracheal tube or if Nicholls or Roberts ever interviewed attending Physicians and Medical personnel; May 6, 2015 at 2:32 PM
Anonymous said...: He needed a six pack - if they had given him that instead of suffucating him with a tube he would still be alive from his ill fated Saturday binge.; May 6, 2015 at 2:47 PM
Anonymous said...: kenny:

I understand your need to concoct facts that you think exonerate Mangum. However, even if it is conceded (w/o evidence) that Daye was a raging drunk, that he suffered from DT's while at DUMC and that DUMC improperly intubated him, that does not relieve Mangum from culpability for his death. As has been pointed out over and over again, it does not break the chain of causation.

You and Sid need to come up with a different set of facts if you want a sausage.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; May 6, 2015 at 2:56 PM
Anonymous said...: By the way, have you found a single medical professional willing to testify that Mangum's knife wound was not the proximate cause of Mr. Daye's death? Without that, what are you even arguing about?

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; May 6, 2015 at 2:58 PM
Anonymous said...: Actually ALL the doctors agree he died from complications. In other words, the complications were the proximate cause.; May 6, 2015 at 3:05 PM
Anonymous said...: Dr. Harr,

Are you game to writing an appeal as it should be written in Ms. Mangum's defense on this blog? Then you can give Ms. Mangum a copy and she can submit it if she agrees with what is written. It shouldn't be that difficult since the different issues of this case are argued on this blog continually. We can call it the J4N blog appeal until such time as Ms. Mangum might submit it herself and call it her own. Even if not needed in the case the current appeal 'wins', at least a complete and concise document of all the appeal arguments would be available for further use as needed.; May 6, 2015 at 3:29 PM
A Lawyer said...: The appeal on the 403(b) evidence I fear will go nowhere as it was already raised at trial.

If the issue wasn't raised at trial, it can't be raised on appeal.; May 6, 2015 at 3:59 PM
kenhyderal said...: Does that also apply to inadequate Counsel?; May 6, 2015 at 4:13 PM
kenhyderal said...: Sausage King said: "As has been pointed out over and over again, it does not break the chain of causation"...................... The chain of causation has to be stepwise. As Dr. Harr pointed out you can't leap from "she stabbed him" to "he died". Unless Daye was being treated for a direct complication to that stab wound there is no chain. Let me give you a chain of causation without gaps. Reginald Daye became habituated to alcohol and when he was restricted from consuming alcohol while receiving treatment at DUMC he went into alcohol withdrawal with impending delirium tremens. He was taken to a ICU where diagnostic procedures led to an esophageal intubation. This caused him anoxia leading to cardiac arrest and brain death.; May 6, 2015 at 4:31 PM
Anonymous said...: "Nifong Supporter said...

"Post-intubation there was never any sign that Daye suffered any infection... no mention of cultures taken, an infectious disease consultation obtained, or the administration of antibiotics."

Sidney Harr shows here he is incredibly stupid.; May 6, 2015 at 4:42 PM
Anonymous said...: " Blogger kenhyderal said...

Sausage King said: "As has been pointed out over and over again, it does not break the chain of causation"...................... The chain of causation has to be stepwise. As Dr. Harr pointed out you can't leap from "she stabbed him" to "he died". Unless Daye was being treated for a direct complication to that stab wound there is no chain. Let me give you a chain of causation without gaps. Reginald Daye became habituated to alcohol and when he was restricted from consuming alcohol while receiving treatment at DUMC he went into alcohol withdrawal with impending delirium tremens. He was taken to a ICU where diagnostic procedures led to an esophageal intubation. This caused him anoxia leading to cardiac arrest and brain death.

May 6, 2015 at 4:31 PM"

kenny shows yet again he is incredibly stupid.; May 6, 2015 at 4:44 PM
Anonymous said...: " kenhyderal said...

Does that also apply to inadequate Counsel?

May 6, 2015 at 4:13 PM"

Irrelevant.

All the problems with which Crysta;l's counsel had to deal were caused by Crystal herself.

Yet again kenny shows he is incredibly stupid.; May 6, 2015 at 4:47 PM
Anonymous said...: Mr. Meier asked the judge for more time to prepare for the trial, stating that he did not have enough time to adequately prepare for the trial did he not? If so, it was an issue raised at the trial and thus should be made part of the appeal.

In addition, Ms. Mangum raised the issue about still not receiving the written defense autopsy report she had requested over a year earlier, and the reason why she fired any of the lawyers - for delaying providing her with the written report and defense counsel concerning the same, even bringing up the issue of inadequate defense council since it was made clear she was requesting the written defense autopsy report at the beginning of the trial against Mr. Meier's wishes.

The defense council's complaint about not having sufficient time to prepare for the trial would obviously apply to the written defense autopsy report as well.; May 6, 2015 at 5:14 PM
Anonymous said...: The expert witness domestic abuse and battered persons issues would include some of the same appeals. There was not sufficient time for an expert witness to be found that also held a professional degree as required by the state as stated at the trial, and there was not sufficient time for the chosen expert witness to become an expert on Ms. Mangum's particular case and the issues involved in time for a trial. In addition, the fact that this expert witness would most certainly need to include the trauma Ms. Mangum received from the Duke Lacrosse Case in her expert testimony - not including mention of the Duke Lacrosse Case in the trial as was agreed to by the Prosecution and the Defense council would need to be nullified or something similar to allow for expert witness testimony.

In addition, the issue about why the Prosecution denied the expert witness from testifying in the trial should be put on appeal, as well as the fact that the Prosecution questioned the expert witness about her knowledge of the J4N blog - which went against her own agreement not to mention the Duke Lacrosse Case which is obviously associated with Mr. Nifong's involvement in the lacrosse case.; May 6, 2015 at 5:34 PM
Anonymous said...: Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny

Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny

Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny

Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny

Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny

Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny; May 6, 2015 at 7:26 PM
Anonymous said...: Dr. Harr,

Mr. Meier asked for the case to go to appeal at the end of trial, right? Did he submit a form or motion on Ms. Mangum's behalf to document this request for appeal?

What reason did he give for requesting the appeal?

Is it contained within the written appeal motion request if there is one? Where on the internet do you view that motion? Do you have a copy of it?; May 7, 2015 at 1:56 AM
Anonymous said...: All Meier did was give notice of appeal - that's all you do at the end of the trial - you do t raise specific grounds at that time. As the record on appeal is prepared, issues are fleshed out - and the final issues brought forth on appeal are presented in the brief. In this case that was the 403b evidence.

All of Kenny and Sid's assumptions and questions would be easily answered - they just need a release from Crystal and then ask the attorneys. They won't do that. They know they are wrong and don't even want the chance of Meier, or anyone else, talking to them and proving them wrong.

Idiots, whiners, liars.; May 7, 2015 at 3:31 AM
Anonymous said...: seriously stop

anyway, they are not going to ask the previous lawyers anything at this point - the case is still going on - and the lawyers probably wouldn't and couldn't say anything anyway

there - you got attention for the day on this blog - you can run along now to the other blogs you troll on and see what kinda attention you can troll up there

blah; May 7, 2015 at 5:21 AM
Walt said...: A Lawyer wrote: "The appeal on the 403(b) evidence I fear will go nowhere as it was already raised at trial.

If the issue wasn't raised at trial, it can't be raised on appeal."

Again, Kenny demonstrates his complete lack of knowledge on the law or procedure. A Lawyer is right, if an issue is not raised at trial, it cannot be raised on appeal. For those who cared enough to watch the trial, Milton Walker was called as a witness. Meier objected to his testimony. The state cited Evid.R.403(b) as grounds to allow Walker's testimony. The judge gave the matter consideration and then ruled the testimony was admissible. Thus, the issue was raised at trial as it must be to be preserved on appeal.

Dishonest posters like Kenny choose to ignore the law and procedure. That way, they can make up the most ridiculous claims that satisfy their own biases and nothing else.

Walt-in-Durham; May 7, 2015 at 5:33 AM
Anonymous said...: They also poison the relationship (intentionally) between Crystal and her lawyers. When the lawyers try to help Crystal, Kenny and Sid say "well, they aren't filing Motions to Dismiss the bogus charges so they are in a conspiracy." The lawyers can try to explain all they want that there is no legal mechanism to file that Motion to Dismiss, but Kenny and Sid just convince her they are lying, and destroy the trust - even though Kenny and Sid are wrong.

To the anonymous poster who keeps whining about alleged bullying - they won't ask the lawyers because they know they are wrong and don't want to know the truth - they want to continue to delude Crystal and gullible idiots like you into feeding their ego.

Idiots, whiners, liars.; May 7, 2015 at 7:24 AM
Anonymous said...: All they had to do was give her a copy of the written defense autopsy report and provide solid legal assistance and advice on that - which none of them did.

It is what she wanted - it is her case and she claims self-defense and that Duke killed Mr. Daye with malpractice. It is what she needs legal defense assistance with.

Why do you think she asked Dr. Harr to examine the medical records? Because she saw the discrepancies and errors between the reports and needed a professional to confirm how Mr. Daye died and explain the discrepancies and errors.

She has not received legal defense assistance to an adequate or reasonable level on these issues of her defense yet.

Maybe, just maybe, if you stop calling everyone idiots, liars, whiners, and whatever, etc., there would be a lot less whining going on on this blog. Try it, we'll see.; May 7, 2015 at 7:49 AM
Anonymous said...: If you'd stop whining, lying, and making idiotic posts we'd stop calling you whiners, liars, and idiots.

But, you haven't stopped - so ...

Idiots, whiners, liars ... that's what you are.; May 7, 2015 at 7:55 AM
Anonymous said...: ok ... so stop whining about it

thanks; May 7, 2015 at 8:08 AM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "All of Kenny and Sid's assumptions and questions would be easily answered - they just need a release from Crystal and then ask the attorneys. They won't do that. They know they are wrong and don't even want the chance of Meier, or anyone else, talking to them and proving them wrong"........................ Strange then that they kept information from Crystal herself. The questions I've raised, Crystal does not know the answers to. They have cited an Attorney's right to withhold information, at their discretion, from their client. They were fearful that Crystal would share the information with Dr. Harr; the motive for which was not likely, in my opinion, to protect Crystal.; May 7, 2015 at 8:37 AM
Anonymous said...: They didn't keep any information from Crystal - they told her that it pointed out issues with the autopsy, but since the conclusion is the same, it would hurt her, and they didn't want a written report because that would go to the State and be used against her.

Sid kept convincing her Dr. Roberts was lying and would somehow change her opinion on the stand - so she insisted on having a report prepared, which was handed to the State, and which hurts Crystal.

Again, Kenny, you are a waste of oxygen - idiot, whiner, liar.; May 7, 2015 at 8:49 AM
kenhyderal said...: Walt said: "Dishonest posters like Kenny choose to ignore the law and procedure. That way, they can make up the most ridiculous claims that satisfy their own biases and nothing else" .............. Walt I am not a Lawyer and have no legal knowledge or expertise. I am not making any claims. I simply believe that Crystal was wrongfully convicted and that her Jury did not receive all the relevant information that would allow them to reach a just decision. I know the legal system is built on rules, rulings and regulations but many seem designed to suppress the truth and create unfair obstacles for wrongly convicted persons. People wrongly convicted, due to an inadequate defense. a uninformed jury and a prosecution seeking conviction rather then the truth, need recourse not a system hiding behind regulations creating obstacles to getting at the truth.; May 7, 2015 at 8:53 AM
Anonymous said...: "kenhyderal said...

Anonymous said: "All of Kenny and Sid's assumptions and questions would be easily answered - they just need a release from Crystal and then ask the attorneys. They won't do that. They know they are wrong and don't even want the chance of Meier, or anyone else, talking to them and proving them wrong"........................ Strange then that they kept information from Crystal herself. The questions I've raised, Crystal does not know the answers to. They have cited an Attorney's right to withhold information, at their discretion, from their client. They were fearful that Crystal would share the information with Dr. Harr; the motive for which was not likely, in my opinion, to protect Crystal.

May 7, 2015 at 8:37 AM"

Another incredible piece of stupidity fromkenny.; May 7, 2015 at 8:56 AM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "They didn't keep any information from Crystal - they told her that it pointed out issues with the autopsy, but since the conclusion is the same, it would hurt her, and they didn't want a written report because that would go to the State and be used against her"..... That's what they told her it said but they still wouldn't show her until ordered to do so by the Judge; May 7, 2015 at 8:58 AM
Anonymous said...: And, when she got it - that's exactly what it said - so they weren't lying - only you and Sid have been proven to be liars.

Idiot, whiner, liar.; May 7, 2015 at 9:01 AM
Anonymous said...: Blogger kenhyderal said...

" Walt I am not a Lawyer and have no legal knowledge or expertise. I am not making any claims."

another manifestation of kenny's incredible stupidity. He, by his own admission, knows nothing of the law. But he posts his claims as if they are sound legal principles. And he claims he makes no claim.; May 7, 2015 at 9:03 AM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: "That's what they told her it said but they still wouldn't show her until ordered to do so by the Judge/"

That's not the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth now is it? Because anyone who watched the trial or the videos of the trial knows what happened next. The state asked for and received a copy of the report. That made permanent Sid's double cross. The state already knew the defense expert agreed with the M.E. from Sid's breach of confidentiality. But, when Crystal demanded the report, she handed over the last shred of doubt that might have existed to the state.

Often, Crystal is her own worst enemy. But, with friends like Sid and Kenny, she really doesn't need any enemies.

Walt-in-Durham; May 7, 2015 at 10:18 AM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: "Walt I am not a Lawyer and have no legal knowledge or expertise."

That's very clear.

"I am not making any claims."

Actually, you do. For example, you claimed that the 403(b) would go nowhere because it was raised at trial. That is contrary to the law and procedure.

"I simply believe that Crystal was wrongfully convicted and that her Jury did not receive all the relevant information that would allow them to reach a just decision."

Based on your own misunderstanding of the law. In fact, Crystal was not wrongfully convicted. She received a fair trial. She is not entitled to place supposition before the jury in an effort to confuse them. That is what you have argued for from the very beginning.

"I know the legal system is built on rules, rulings and regulations..."

Yet, you disregard those who can explain those rules and rulings for you and instead substitute your wild guesses for facts and law.

"but many seem designed to suppress the truth and create unfair obstacles for wrongly convicted persons."

Except those rules and rulings are well designed to do the opposite. Your ignorance is not a substitute for rigorous inquiry. If you cared about wrongful conviction, you would be all about the 403(b) issue. Obviously, you do not care.

"People wrongly convicted, due to an inadequate defense. a uninformed jury and a prosecution seeking conviction rather then the truth, need recourse not a system hiding behind regulations creating obstacles to getting at the truth."

First, Crystal was not wrongfully convicted. Second, you have demonstrated you do not care about wrongful conviction because you do not try to figure out the 403(b) issue. Third, this is the very best system ever devised to assure that the innocent go free.

I really believe that you are seeking to perpetuate an injustice by seeing a guilty killer let free.

Walt-in-Durham; May 7, 2015 at 10:27 AM
kenhyderal said...: Walt said: "Actually, you do. For example, you claimed that the 403(b) would go nowhere because it was raised at trial. That is contrary to the law and procedure".......... That was not a claim but a speculation on my part.; May 7, 2015 at 2:16 PM
kenhyderal said...: Walt said: "She is not entitled to place supposition before the jury in an effort to confuse them. That is what you have argued for from the very beginning"...... Walt I don't understand your meaning here. What supposition do you refer to. Crystal claimed self defence in stabbing Daye. For that, if argued competently there was reasonable doubt. It is not supposition that Daye died because of a medical error; one that constitutes a case of medical malpractice. The only supposition I make is that this was related to treatment for alcohol withdrawal not to treatment for a complication of the stab wound inflicted by her. Tell me why the Jury should not have heard evidence in support of such a supposition. For example asking those who treated Daye what they believed they were treating him for and if that alcohol withdrawal was independent of the surgical repair of the non-lethal stab wound or if the wound and subsequent repair brought on the life threatening withdrawal symptoms.; May 7, 2015 at 2:34 PM
kenhyderal said...: Walt said: "Third, this is the very best system ever devised to assure that the innocent go free"............. Oh yeah. I forgot American Exceptionalism. Some eg. Conrad Black would disagree
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tu_E4q_AMG0; May 7, 2015 at 2:51 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous Anonymous said...
Dr. Harr,

Mr. Meier asked for the case to go to appeal at the end of trial, right? Did he submit a form or motion on Ms. Mangum's behalf to document this request for appeal?

What reason did he give for requesting the appeal?

Is it contained within the written appeal motion request if there is one? Where on the internet do you view that motion? Do you have a copy of it?

The sharlog which I am currently working on, and which I have been having technical problems which have delayed its posting, will contain a list of nine issues for appeal. I don't know who made the list, but only that Petersen chose only to appeal one of the nine issues listed. Foremost should've been ineffective counsel, which, ofcourse, was not on the list.; May 7, 2015 at 2:59 PM
Anonymous said...: A few urls for incredibly stupid kenny to check put

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UcKHxF_daRc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ADj8VMZHbuc; May 7, 2015 at 4:35 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

Crystal claimed self defense in stabbing Daye. For that, if argued competently there was reasonable doubt.

You have made this argument since the trial and have convinced no one.

I take it that you concede you have not argued this competently.; May 7, 2015 at 4:51 PM
kenhyderal said...: This was the job assigned to Meier to an impartial jury. I'm arguing here with biased people who would never be selected for a jury to try Crystal; May 7, 2015 at 9:41 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said" "A few urls for incredibly stupid kenny to check put".........................
Racism in any nation is evil. Let the informed decide which nations have the worst record.; May 7, 2015 at 9:45 PM
Anonymous said...: Is Mike Nifong still alive?I heard he committed suicide.Is there any truth to that?; May 8, 2015 at 2:04 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny, as always you just assume those questions weren't asked, and the attorneys didn't know that the answers would hurt Crystal. Oh, and yes they would have told her that - just like they told her the Roberts report would be bad - but she had you and Sid convincing her they were betraying her. And you've not said what you would have argued differently on self-defense - it was competently and aggressively argued the problem is Crystal had done it before (the 403b evidence) and she denied prior abuse and testified contrary to the physical evidence.

You continue to be an idiot, whiner, and liar.; May 8, 2015 at 3:45 AM
Anonymous said...: " kenhyderal said...

This was the job assigned to Meier to an impartial jury. I'm arguing here with biased people who would never be selected for a jury to try Crystal

May 7, 2015 at 9:41 PM"

Again kenny shows he is incredibly stupid.; May 8, 2015 at 4:01 AM
Anonymous said...: " kenhyderal said...

Anonymous said" "A few urls for incredibly stupid kenny to check put".........................
Racism in any nation is evil. Let the informed decide which nations have the worst record.

May 7, 2015 at 9:45 PM"

kenny the hypocrite does not believe in judge not if you don't want to be judged. Either that or he believes he is qualified to be a rock thrower.; May 8, 2015 at 4:03 AM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: "Walt I don't understand your meaning here. What supposition do you refer to."

Is that a statement or a question? However, you have been supposing about medical evidence that is not in the record.

"Crystal claimed self defence in stabbing Daye."

Now you go changing the topic without a new paragraph. This is why Break christened you the "master debater." That's not a positive reference, BTW.

"For that, if argued competently there was reasonable doubt."

It was competently argued. The jury took one look at the physical evidence and rejected that argument out of hand.

"It is not supposition that Daye died because of a medical error; one that constitutes a case of medical malpractice."

It is supposition, but I have always assumed it for the purposes of discussion. However, it has been pointed out to you time and time again that medical malpractice is not an intervening cause unless it is the sole cause.

"The only supposition I make is that this was related to treatment for alcohol withdrawal not to treatment for a complication of the stab wound inflicted by her."

That is supposition. But, Sid inadvertently above dispensed with that argument when he wrote that he disagreed with the decision to to a study to determine the source of Daye's agitation.

"Tell me why the Jury should not have heard evidence in support of such a supposition."

Because juries find facts and if it is helpful to their deliberations hear opinion evidence from experts. The only experts available in this case agreed that Daye died of complications from a stab wound inflicted by Crystal. To hear anything else, an expert would have been required to testify to the contrary, and back it up.

For example asking those who treated Daye what they believed they were treating him for and if that alcohol withdrawal was independent of the surgical repair of the non-lethal stab wound or if the wound and subsequent repair brought on the life threatening withdrawal symptoms."

Now you are engaging in speculation bordering on fantasy. Maybe the jury could have heard about alien abduction too or while they were at it, some evidence in the Lindbergh kidnapping. Much less speculative, a treating physician would agree with the other two physicians in the case that the death was the result of complications from a stab wound. When two experts reach the same conclusion you have a very steep logical and persuasive hill to climb when trying to counter them. A hill made steeper by your continuous disregard for law and procedure.

Walt-in-Durham; May 8, 2015 at 5:32 AM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: "Walt said: "Third, this is the very best system ever devised to assure that the innocent go free"............. Oh yeah. I forgot American Exceptionalism. Some eg. Conrad Black would disagree"

Yes, the word of a mail fraud convict. The emphasis on fraud. You are a master debater, I'll give you that.

Walt-in-Durham; May 8, 2015 at 5:37 AM
Anonymous said...: From Walt in Durham:

"Because [a jury finds] facts and if it is helpful to their deliberations hear opinion evidence from experts. The only experts available in this case agreed that Daye died of complications from a stab wound inflicted by Crystal. To hear anything else, an expert would have been required to testify to the contrary, and back it up."

OK, kenny, sidney, how would you accredit yourselves as Medical Experts?; May 8, 2015 at 6:34 AM
Anonymous said...: Another for kenny and sidney, in reference to the previous comment on expert witnesses:

Say the Daye family sued for malpractice. If a trial lawyer took the case, do either of you honestly think he would call either f you to testify as an expert witness?

My guess is that both of you will dodge the question by claiming that no trial lawyer would dare take on Duke.

The lawyers for the innocent Lacrosse players did and Duke caved.; May 8, 2015 at 6:42 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Is Mike Nifong still alive?I heard he committed suicide.Is there any truth to that?

What's your source?; May 8, 2015 at 8:19 AM
kenhyderal said...: Walt said: "Yes, the word of a mail fraud convict. The emphasis on fraud. You are a master debater, I'll give you that"........ Your skill at defending the indefensible, such as the American Justice System, makes any debating skills I might have pale; May 8, 2015 at 2:06 PM
Anonymous said...: "kenhyderal said...

Walt said: "Yes, the word of a mail fraud convict. The emphasis on fraud. You are a master debater, I'll give you that"........ Your skill at defending the indefensible, such as the American Justice System, makes any debating skills I might have pale

May 8, 2015 at 2:06 PM"

kenny again shows his incredible impotent stupidity.; May 8, 2015 at 2:20 PM
kenhyderal said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; May 8, 2015 at 2:36 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

The Ontario Securities Commission has banned Black for life from serving as a director or officer of a public company in Ontario. This ban is for life.

I thought Ontario was in Canada. It seems the Canadian justice system is just as corrupt.; May 8, 2015 at 4:41 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny whines: "I'm arguing here with biased people..."

Kenny, you are correct that none of the readers here would be selected to serve on a jury to try Crystal. Of course, neither you nor Sid could be selected either.

You and Sid are far, far more biased when it comes to judging Crystal than most of the posters here.

Bias is not what prevent you from convincing others. You did an incredibly ineffective job.

It is not particularly compelling to be told that one should ignore the many inconsistencies between Crystal's testimony and the physical evidence because she was under stress. It is not particularly compelling to be told to ignore Daye's statement despite its consistency with the evidence because the DPD didn't aggressively interrogate him.

Bias is not a reliance on evidence. You did are really bad job of arguing this point. You are totally incompetent.; May 8, 2015 at 4:50 PM
kenhyderal said...: Walt said: "Now you are engaging in speculation bordering on fantasy. Maybe the jury could have heard about alien abduction too or while they were at it, some evidence in the Lindbergh kidnapping. Much less speculative, a treating physician would agree with the other two physicians in the case that the death was the result of complications from a stab wound. When two experts reach the same conclusion you have a very steep logical and persuasive hill to climb when trying to counter them. A hill made steeper by your continuous disregard for law and procedure"............. If you notice Walt I always say that if the treating Physicians at Duke agree with the opinion of the ME's I will concede that Daye's death was a complication of the stab wound. However I am confident that the Surgeons who repaired the wound and the Physicians attempting to save Daye's life after the disastrous medical error would testify that the treatment he was undergoing was unrelated to the wound. That he was admitted to hospital because of the wound is insufficient, in my opinion, to say his death was a complication of the stab wound. The sole cause of death was the medical error. Both the Holsclaw ruling and Judge Ridgeway's instructions to the Jury are correct because the errant esophageal intubation was the sole cause of death and it bore no relationship to the stab wound.; May 8, 2015 at 9:03 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "The Ontario Securities Commission has banned Black for life from serving as a director or officer of a public company in Ontario. This ban is for life".... Because he was convicted of a felony.; May 8, 2015 at 9:08 PM
Anonymous said...: I think it says a lot about the state of affairs for police training and mental illness in the USA if a professional contracted to instruct entire police squadrons on how to safely diffuse, handle, and understand domestic violence situations and the mentally ill suffering from illness that arise from domestic abuse and other such illnesses is not allowed to testify in the Durham / Duke Court system because they do not hold a professional degree.; May 9, 2015 at 3:13 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

I note you have no comment on my claim that you are far more biased than those you claim are biased.; May 9, 2015 at 4:36 AM
Anonymous said...: "kenhyderal said...

If you notice Walt I always say that if the treating Physicians at Duke agree with the opinion of the ME's I will concede that Daye's death was a complication of the stab wound. However I am confident that the Surgeons who repaired the wound and the Physicians attempting to save Daye's life after the disastrous medical error would testify that the treatment he was undergoing was unrelated to the wound. That he was admitted to hospital because of the wound is insufficient, in my opinion, to say his death was a complication of the stab wound. The sole cause of death was the medical error. Both the Holsclaw ruling and Judge Ridgeway's instructions to the Jury are correct because the errant esophageal intubation was the sole cause of death and it bore no relationship to the stab wound.

May 8, 2015 at 9:03 PM"

Once again kenny, the medical expert NOT!!! manifests his incredible stupidity.; May 9, 2015 at 5:27 AM
Anonymous said...: " Anonymous said: "The Ontario Securities Commission has banned Black for life from serving as a director or officer of a public company in Ontario. This ban is for life".... Because he was convicted of a felony.

May 8, 2015 at 9:08 PM
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think it says a lot about the state of affairs for police training and mental illness in the USA if a professional contracted to instruct entire police squadrons on how to safely diffuse, handle, and understand domestic violence situations and the mentally ill suffering from illness that arise from domestic abuse and other such illnesses is not allowed to testify in the Durham / Duke Court system because they do not hold a professional degree.

May 9, 2015 at 3:13 AM"

Provide the specifics. Unless you can, this is nothing but an uncorroborated allegation.; May 9, 2015 at 5:29 AM
Anonymous said...: So what evil duke troll?

Did you get your start at trolling on the Durham-In-Wonderland blog?; May 9, 2015 at 5:45 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous 5:45:

Please stop acting like an asshole.; May 9, 2015 at 5:52 AM
Anonymous said...: And, Kenny just continues to assume that no one actually talked to the doctors or Dr. Roberts to see what their answers would be - oh, and he bases that on Crystal telling him no one told her about it - though he admits she is a less than credible source of information (she gets confused).

Idiot, whiner, liar.; May 9, 2015 at 6:10 AM
Anonymous said...: Well were you born a troll, or is it generally an acquired trait?

Did you get your trolling skills from work related activities - or was it purely from the internet?

Why won't you answer the question about whether your trolling career started on the Durham In Wonderland blog, or not?

???; May 9, 2015 at 7:22 AM
Anonymous said...: well since you are ALSO the alias tinfoil hat hatemonger evil duke troll it g..., and you have also mused before how you thought you were others which was really weird but ok, you are STILL trolling yourself in essense, so ... like has been said in essense before:

we get it evil duke troll it g... tinfoil hat hate monger ... you are a crazy making, anti-anythingNotDuke, Ms. Mangum, Dr. Harr, Mr. Nifong and anyone who supports them in any way hating, hate-crime committing ... troll (to be nice)

blah; May 9, 2015 at 7:29 AM
Anonymous said...: egad egad and egad

so ... this is your latest alias and trolling trick evil duke troll it g... tin hat hatemonger

...

blah blah and blah

...

blah

p.s. what happened to your little ms. manners alias, eh?; May 9, 2015 at 7:30 AM
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; May 9, 2015 at 7:31 AM
Anonymous said...: That was one of my posts posted against your trolling before wasn't it? Is that you then evil duke troll it g... copy and pasting evil duke trolling like you do all the time again? What, ya got another drinking bet going?; May 9, 2015 at 7:32 AM
Anonymous said...: seriously

get fracking real

you are probably the troll who posted that post to look like someone else just so you could then troll it too

and if you are not - (which you are since you do just that continuously on this blog) ... now ya know

blah

p.s. duke sucks nomatter - it's their image - duke - the land of 'duke's evil a... suck - and always will' ville

blah; May 9, 2015 at 7:33 AM
Anonymous said...: great ... paste all the comments against your trolling for a bit. You will stay very busy as there are probably thousands. Maybe you'll actually start to consider that you are just a troll after about the 1001st one. We'll wait and see. Go on ... let's see if it works.; May 9, 2015 at 7:36 AM
Anonymous said...: Sidney,

I hope you realize that posts like 5:45, 5:52, 7:22, 7:29, 7:30, 7:31, 7:32, 7:33, 7:36 confirm the extent to which your blog is nothing but a joke. Your failure to crack down on nonsensical and inane posts has fostered this ridiculous environment.; May 9, 2015 at 7:57 AM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: " though he admits she is a less than credible source of information (she gets confused)"........... Absolutely wrong. I, like all people who actually know Crystal personally find her to be completely credible. She was deliberately and unfairly badgered by Coggins-Franks in an effort to confuse and any inconsequential discrepancy was labeled as a lie.; May 9, 2015 at 9:23 AM
Anonymous said...: "enhyderal said...

Anonymous said: " though he admits she is a less than credible source of information (she gets confused)"........... Absolutely wrong. I, like all people who actually know Crystal personally find her to be completely credible. She was deliberately and unfairly badgered by Coggins-Franks in an effort to confuse and any inconsequential discrepancy was labeled as a lie.

May 9, 2015 at 9:23 AM"

Yet another manifestation of kenny's incredible stupidity.; May 9, 2015 at 9:54 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

You have repeatedly claimed that a competent attorney could have convinced a jury that Crystal acted in self-defense.

I ask that you demonstrate how you would have done so had you been the attorney. In order to do this, you must provide significant detail. Your generalization is insufficient. Provide evidence, refer to specific testimony and statement.; May 9, 2015 at 10:00 AM
Anonymous said...: Hide the women and children; Tinfoil is on another bender.; May 9, 2015 at 10:57 AM
Anonymous said...: kenny:

How do you know Mangum?; May 9, 2015 at 11:08 AM
kenhyderal supporter said...: kenhyderal met Crystal in Bremerton, Washington. What happens in Bremerton stays in Bremerton.; May 9, 2015 at 1:25 PM

«Oldest ‹Older 401 – 600 of 1171 Newer› Newest»

Tuesday, March 31, 2015

How the NC legal system and the courts failed Crystal Mangum

1,171 comments:

Facebook Badge

Subscribe!

Labels

Blog Archive

About Me