Tuesday, March 31, 2015

How the NC legal system and the courts failed Crystal Mangum

1,171 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   1001 – 1171 of 1171
Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal Said...

"I believe you've made that up to try and discredit me; as you Duke Lacrosse apologists are want to do"

kenny you have done such a thorough job discrediting yourself you do not have to be concerened about anyone else doing it

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal Said...

"Walt, you are a man of principles and should continue to forcefully voice opposition posts like that. Remember that such gratuitous comments are hurtful to many and serve no purpose other then to insult.'

This same kenny has posted multiple uncorroborated allegations that someone raped crystal at the lacrosse party.

Does anyone really believe that such posts by kenny are not hate speech, are not motivated for his hate of the typre of people he believes are rapists

Anonymous said...

Tinfoil,

Mind your manners.

Anonymous said...

Never feed the trolls - it's what they want - just ignore them. If you waste your time condemning everything they say, you are just giving them what they want.

Ignore the trolls!

kenhyderal said...

Abe said: "That cuts both ways. You should follow your advice. If you paid more attention to the tone and content of your comments and behaved in a more civil manner, I think you would find that people would treat you better"....... Talk about projection. Can you cite one instance where the tone and content of my posts were offensive and uncivil. I don't have to look further then the last few days posts 801-1000 to find where I have been called all sorts of names and told to go f*** myself.

Anonymous said...

Your comments about mystery rapists are offensive. They allege with no credible evidence that players covered up a heinous crime committed by others.

Your characterization of your critics as "Duke Lacrosse apologists" is offensive. It suggests that your critics have no reasonable basis for disagreeing with you.

Your characterization of your critics as biased is offensive. It also suggests that your critics have preconceived notions about Mangum and that they have failed to consider evidence properly and that you, despite your self-identification as a close personal friend of Crystal, have no such bias.

Do you require references to specific comments? Do you want additional subjects that many readers find offensive?

guiowen said...

Kenhyderal,
If you're such a man of principle, why don't you say something about comments such as the one at 12:29 above?

Anonymous said...

" Anonymous said...

yeah right abe, troll on like any good ol' evil duke troll does

blah

June 1, 2015 at 12:29 PM"

boy are you stressed

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal said...

"Talk about projection. Can you cite one instance where the tone and content of my posts were offensive and uncivil."

You do not think accusing innocent men of rape(something you do) is offensive or uncivil?

Boy are you incredibly stupid.

Anonymous said...

Kenny,

Your smug self-righteousness is grating to the point of being uncivil.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous said: "You do not think accusing innocent men of rape(something you do) is offensive or uncivil?".............. Oh I get it; expressing a different point of view then the Duke Lacrosse apologist's meta-narrative, ie that Crystal was sexually assaulted, is offensive and uncivil. On the other hand calling me an incredibly stupid. Canadian bastard who needs to go f*** himself is something I should in Abe's words deal with it

kenhyderal said...

Guiowen said: "Kenhyderal,If you're such a man of principle, why don't you say something about comments such as the one at 12:29 above......... Even the label you have put on that poster fits in with the Duke Lacrosse apologist's strategy of trying, at all times, to destroy the credibility of those with a different point of view. In this case, that this person is mentally ill, a victim of paranoia and auditory hallucinations. Thankfully, the joke is on you because instead they turn the tables on you all by embracing the hurtful appellation and giving back to you just as good as you throw out to them but with less malevolence.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous said: "Your smug self-righteousness is grating to the point of being uncivil"............ From you point of view, you may find me smug and self-righteous but that subjective belief does not meet the definition of incivility

Anonymous said...

kenny:

What's the difference between calling tinfoil tinfoil and calling people who have different views "evil", "Duke apologists", "cyberbullies", "hate criminals", "trolls" "it" and the many other names that have been used on here? Or do you want to pretend that doesn't happen?

It's time for you to take your victim skirt off and pull on a pair of pants.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL

guiowen said...

Kenhhyderal,
If this is how you feel about Tinfoil, then don't expect us to criticize people who talk about your sexual habits.

Anonymous said...

"evil", "Duke apologists", "cyberbullies", "hate criminals", "trolls" "it" are not names - they are descriptives used to label what the evil duke troll gang and its members do who support the actions of those included in the evil duke troll gang that perpetuate the crimes of cyberbullying and hate crimes on this blog (supposedly because they hate all who aren't in their gang or don't hold similar views or appear to with their actions or support of other's actions on this blog similar to the edt gang and display it in ways similar to duke apologists, trolls, and its (think Steven King or even barney or even - hey - evil duke trolls). Evil is what Duke embraces willingly with its symbol of the devil which they display proudly at all times, so appropriate and realistic.

Someone termed the phrase tinfoil hat from the association with conspiracy theorists, which is stupid really and noone gives a darn about that anyway - cuz in theory - if you have a conspiracy theory - there are always two sides to every story - so everyone is a conspiracy theorist regardless of the subject matter - unless there is a legal term implied there - which most of the time there isn't. Just a way for someone to discredit the other persons point of view or the person holding the view - nothing more. It could also be used because the person weilding the term doesn't actually want to think about the situation from both sides. Just a sign that the person who uses the term against another doesn't want to think about things in any great depth. Whatever.

Ken Edwards, why do you say: Even the label you have put on that poster fits in with the Duke Lacrosse apologist's strategy of trying, at all times, to destroy the credibility of those with a different point of view. In this case, that this person is mentally ill, a victim of paranoia and auditory hallucinations. ??? That is not what the term means as used on this blog. Where do you get that from?

Anyway - the evil duke troll gang members started using the term tinfoil hat to try to discredit a poster not in their gang so they wouldn't have to think about any point of view other than their own - and dismiss it - because it did not fit in with their hateful outlook of all who think differently then themselves on this blog - which is to used to deflect all blame from themselves and Duke and place it squarely on Ms. Mangum's back for no reason other than that is what they do. Anyone who does not agree with that, even though Duke and the Duke / Durham / NC judicial system was the one the lacrosse players sued is denegrated. And they troll, commit hate crimes, cyberbully and act like evil duke troll its to discredit anyone and anything that doesn't hate Ms. Mangum like they do.

Why does that need to be explained to ya'll??? g... if you would stop your trolling on these blogs you wouldn't be labled evil duke troll it g... tinfoil hat hatemonger blogmonger because that is what you do. simple really

Anonymous said...

Kenny,

Are you "embarrassed" by the 2:46 comment?

Anonymous said...

Kenny,

Your 8:54 post is uncivil. After having been told that your use of the the term "Duke Lacrosse apologists" is offensive, you label your critics with that offensive term once again. Being deliberately offensive meets the definition of incivility.

Anonymous said...

Why is duke lacrosse apologists an offensive term?

Anonymous said...

I explained it in my comment above.

Anonymous said...

no you didn't.

WHY is it offensive to term what someone is doing as duke lacrosse apologists?

It is an action of placing blame on one person to cover the blame of another correct? How do you see it?

Anonymous said...

No opinion from the Court of Appeals today ... the next Opinion day is June 16.

Walt said...

Kenyhderal wrote: "Walt, you are a man of principles and should continue to forcefully voice opposition posts like that. Remember that such gratuitous comments are hurtful to many and serve no purpose other then to insult."

My principles tell me not to take advice from internet posters who support false accusers of innocent men. If you feel insulted by someone else's post, take it up with the person who wrote it.

Walt-in-Durham

Anonymous said...

Walt, what is the time limit for the Appeals Court to make a decision after final briefs are submitted to them?

Anonymous said...

Tinfoil said:

"Why is duke lacrosse apologists an offensive term?"

Speaking for myself, I have no affiliation with or affinity towards Duke. In fact, as a fan and graduate from a rival school, I don't particularly care for the institution.

I have no interest whatsoever in lacrosse. I have never played it or even watched it played.

The term apologist implies that there was some wrongdoing by the Duke lacrosse team and that I am wrongfully providing cover and justification for it. I have expressed no opinion on the conduct of the Duke lacrosse players other than to say they were falsely accused of a rape that did not happen and that, in my opinion, they conducted themselves remarkably well during and after their ordeal at Mangum and Nifong's hands.

By referring to me as a Duke lacrosse apologist you are falsely suggesting an affiliation and bias that does not exist and falsely connecting me to things I have nothing to do with (and don't even like). You are using this false association to discredit my opinions. You also falsely suggest wrongdoing on the part of the Duke lacrosse players and that I am somehow associated with and apologizing for people who have done wrong.

Calling me a Duke lacrosse apologists is false and offensive. It is an attempt to
discredit me. It is juvenile and it's disgraceful. But you know that. That's why you use the term - to denigrate and insult people who disagree with you.

And you wonder no one takes you and kenny seriously.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL

Anonymous said...

Tinfoil said:

"evil", "Duke apologists", "cyberbullies", "hate criminals", "trolls" "it" are not names - they are descriptives . . ."

As are "Tinfoil" and "idiot" and the other terms kenny whines about.

Pot, meet kettle.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL

Anonymous said...

Abe Froman:

I have NEVER called someone a Duke apologist. You want to apologize now or later?

Anonymous said...

I mean seriously, you go on and on about Ken Edwards lumping you in with his question about are you embarassed by what a certain evil duke troll does to cyberbully those whom do not hold the same view as the evil duke troll gang appears to on these blogs, yet you then turn around and do the same thing to the people who the evil duke troll gang generally attack on a daily basis on these blogs because they have issues with what duke is doing like you seem to in part. So apologize then for doing the same thing to others. Thanks.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous said: "Ken Edwards, why do you say: Even the label you have put on that poster fits in with the Duke Lacrosse apologist's strategy of trying, at all times, to destroy the credibility of those with a different point of view. In this case, that this person is mentally ill, a victim of paranoia and auditory hallucinations. ??? That is not what the term means as used on this blog. Where do you get that from?"............ The term itself is derogatory and suggests the person is suffering from paranoia and is hearing voices. Voices that are disturbing and are rationalized to be radio transmitted into ones brain by evil forces trying to control their mind. The solution they conceive, that will eliminate this threat, is to wear a tin-foil hat that will not allow the radio waves to penetrate the brain. That's where they were coming from and it's indicative of the strategy they always resort to in order to attack the credibility of those who do not buy into their meta-narrative I assumed you turned the tables on them by refusing to allow their insults to deter you.

guiowen said...

Tinfoil,
I'm sorry we made you cry. We should have realized how fragile you are.

To the 3:26 poster,
You've made Kenhyderal cry. That's very naughty of you. The next time you do that, we'll make you sit in the corner for 15 minutes.

To Kenhyderal,
As usual, I've come to your defense. Now go kiss the 3:26, and make up.

kenhyderal said...

Abe said: " I have expressed no opinion on the conduct of the Duke lacrosse players other than to say they were falsely accused of a rape that did not happen and that, in my opinion, they conducted themselves remarkably well during and after their ordeal at Mangum and Nifong's hands"..... That's your opinion. Others have a different opinion.

Anonymous said...

I personally have no idea what happened because i was not involved in any of it - but I think that since duke is so quick to judge and attack people to the point where you have an evil duke troll gang in the first place attacking anyone who question what duke does even though the lacrosse team sued them theirselves over what they did, and thought people were innocent until proven quilty in the first place - so why do you need an AG to say they are innocent when all he needed to do was say there was not sufficient evidence to prove they were quilty - which was the reality of the situation as it seems from all accounts - that there is something more seriously wrong with duke and the politicians and the judicial system conflicted by duke then just that case as evidenced by the current case that is under discussion. tinfoil and idiot are terms used by the evil duke troll gang. evil duke troll gang and the like are terms used by those whom are consistently attacked by the evil duke troll gang or actually have a clue to the abuse that goes on on these blogs.

Anonymous said...

Ken Edwards,

That is one meaning of the term tinfoil hat but it is not what was implied on this blog to my knowledge. The other meaning deals with conspiracy theorys which I at one time questioned, so they (the evil duke troll gang) kept saying that to denegrate. That was my understanding of the term.

Anonymous said...

you didn't make me cry evil duke troll it g... tinfoil hat hatemonger blogmonger

does that make you cry?

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous said: " personally have no idea what happened because i was not involved in any of it - but I think that since duke is so quick to judge and attack people to the point where you have an evil duke troll gang in the first place attacking anyone who question what duke does even though the lacrosse team sued them theirselves over what they did, and thought people were innocent until proven quilty in the first place"................... I think what you call the "Evil Duke Troll Gang" is in reality "The Duke Lacrosse Apologists". This group actually has many Duke University haters and President Broadhead haters. There are two issues. One is the campaign by the Duke Lacrosse Apologists to discredit Crystal, former DA Nifong and any who believe that Crystal was sexually assaulted. Then their is the issue, you stress, with Duke University Hospital and the care or lack of it they provide and those who defend her. Not all of the one cabal are also part of the other. Some support both the Lacrosse Team and the University Hospital and some only one. Most here are primarily in the first camp.

Lance the Intern said...

An "apologist" is simply someone defending something (a belief, a cause, a person) being attacked by someone else.

There is nothing wrong with being called a Duke Lacrosse apologist.

Just as Kenhyderal and Sid should embrace the titles "admitted arsonist apologist" or "convicted killer apologist", or "false rape accuser apologist".

FWIW, a tin foil hat can significantly reduce the intensity of incident radio frequency radiation on the wearer's brain.

Anonymous said...

Tinfoil said:

"does that make you cry?"

Not at all. We aren't the ones whining and complaining. kenny and you are. We are simply pointing out your hypocrisy and dishonesty.

We are used to you and expect you to carry on as usual. Just don't come crying to us, blame us and ask us to stick up for you when other posters turn around and give you a dose of your own medicine.

Here endeth the lesson.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL

Anonymous said...

Then why don't they understand how serious this case is to the welfare of all citizens and visitors to the state of NC if duke is going to kill people (esp. Mr. Daye) with malpractice and then allow the judicial system to cover up that fact in order to frame someone (in this case Ms. Mangum) for murder?

Anonymous said...

Abe are you g... ?

Anonymous said...

Lance:

The term apologist is derisive, especially as used by Tinfoil and kenny. I don't care that they use it; I simply cite it as an example of them complaining when they become the subject of the very tactics they have perfected and repeatedly employed against people they diagree with.

If kenny has a problem with people insulting him, he should talk to someone who cares and not to those who he himself has repeatedly attempted to denigrate and insult.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL

Anonymous said...

I have NEVER used the term apologist Abe. I do not attack people on a daily basis like the evil duke troll gang or some of its members do on this blog, I simply defend myself and others at times. So, don't troll or attack me again. Thanks.

Anonymous said...

To anonymous at 10:49

I am not g. For the last several months I have posted on here mostly as Abe Froman (sometimes I forget to add my name to a post and end up posting anonymously). Previous to that I posted anonymously. If you went thru the anonymous posts over the last year or so you could probably pick mine out.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL

Anonymous said...

i thought you were already on the blog before you started using abe as your name ... so you do know what is going on and how wrong you are to attack and troll me

thanks for confirming

Anonymous said...

In answer to the question: There is technically no time limit on how long they can take to decide. They try to get all cases decided within 90 days, but that's a guideline, not a rule - and some cases take a year or so before the Opinion is issued. They issue opinions the 1st and 3rd Tuesday of each month.

Crystal's appeal was "heard" on January 20, so this is longer than normal, but depending on the Judges on the panel, and the other cases, it's not unusually longer at this point.

A Lawyer said...

I do not attack people on a daily basis like the evil duke troll gang or some of its members do on this blog,

Calling people "evil," "trolls" and members of a "gang" isn't "attacking people on a daily basis"? What a hypocrite.

guiowen said...


Tinfoil:
Just two questions:
1. If I didn't make you cry, why are you whimpering?
2. If Duke is such a big joke, why are people so afraid of it?

Nifong Supporter said...


g...you are 'jarred' by what you perceive as the misuse of of and have - but not by what you and most (if not all) of the evil duke troll gang say to try to discredit Ms. Mangum and the way you and they support Duke killing Mr. Daye with malpractice and then continue to cover it up through the judicial system in order to continue to frame Ms. Mangum for a murder by malpractice that they themselves committed as documented in their own medical records.

Dr. Harr, why do you continue to call g... your friend? You have never answered this question, but it is a serious one. Please do enlighten us on this matter. Thank you.


I use the term "mon ami" because it rhymes with "gui." No other reason. Even though we disagree diametrically on the Mangum case, I have no ill feelings towards gui, the person. Also, gui was the only person who submitted a photo of himself to appear in "The MisAdventures of Super-Duper Cooper" comic strip. (He can be seen in Episode V).

Although I also disagree even more so with Walt, I would some day like to meet him for a cup of coffee... (I might even be able to hand him his crying towel at that time). Anyway, Lance, A Lawyer, and the rest of the commenters who are civil but opposed to Mangum and Nifong I have developed some friendly feelings towards them. I'm a very tolerant person, I guess. Don't know if I answered your question or not.

Nifong Supporter said...


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

I have sent in my Petition for Cert to the Supreme Court, and can now re-focus my attention on Mangum's case. The Geek Squad was unable to fix the problem with my Flash program, so I'm taking my laptop to another computer specialist this weekend. In the meantime I'm going to begin putting together the Aykia Hanes perjury sharlog... that is, writing it, narrating it, and getting the audio together. Once my laptop is up and running with Flash, I will begin putting it all together. I will also upload immediately the j4n investigation once my Flash program permits... hopefully to have it up and running by next Tuesday.

Sorry for the delay, but the next two sharlogs will be worth it!!

Anonymous said...

If i wasn't attacked or trolled or copy pasted trolled on a daily basis lawyer i wouldn't have to clarify the action as that of an evil duke troll or part of an evil duke troll gang at times (not on a daily basis certainly - most of the stuff you see on this blog is copy pasted plagerized posts from long ago that some evil duke trolls use to then turn around and blame and troll and attack again which happens very frequently on this blog and which was not me making those remarks in essence - simply MORE trolling, attacking, falsely blaming and accusing going on by some evil duke trolls ... happens often - don't you recognize the tactic by now that is used on this blog yet)? THAT is not me doing it, I assure you.

Aren't devils thought of as evil? yes they are. Isn't the actions on this blog considered trolling by most. Yes they are. Aren't these trolls appearing to be on the side of duke killing a patient to frame someone for murder? Seems like they are. So - then you have: evil duke troll. Quite appropriate and realistic if you ask me.

guiowen said...


To the 12:39,
Why do you insist on posting as Anonymous? If you used some sort of name (it wouldn't have to be your real name) those evil Duke trolls would be unable to post things and blame them on you.

kenhyderal said...

Abe said: "Here endeth the lesson"....... No Abe, you are mistaken, I have never used the kind of perjoatives, curses and insults against you, Walt, Lance A Lawyer or Guiowen of the kind that I have been subjected to. But hey I can take it. My question, simply, was, are you all not embarrassed, that posters, who resort to this type of crude insults, supports your point of view. You answered that you are not which sounds a bit disingenuous to me because I doubt if you believe that I am an incredibly stupid, insane, lying, Canadian bastard that need to go f*** himself. Or have I misjudged your sense of civility? Because most civilized people will find this kind of post on a blog they take part in as an embarrassment. Not to themselves but to have an avowed supporter, not necessarily acknowledged or condoned by you, who engages in such embarrassing behaviour.

Anonymous said...

g... you were doing it half the time to win free drinks in the bet you made (you said you made a bet with Dr. Harr that no one would take this blog seriously as well ... so that bet was just part of that larger bet of yours). why don't you stop doing it. thanks

guiowen said...

But Kenny, I've already chastised the 3:26 poster. (See my 9:19 comment.) You have not however thanked me in any way. Is that proper behavior on your part?

Anonymous said...

kenny:

Come down from the cross. Or stay up there and continue complaining. I don't care. Either way, we aren't buying it.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL

guiowen said...

But Abe,
Don't you realize how fragile Kenny is? (Not to mention his protege Tinfoil?)

Lance the Intern said...

Sid -- Just a quick question...You say that "The Geek Squad was unable to fix the problem with my Flash program".

Are you using Adobe Flash, or some other tool like Giotto or Swish? (FYI -- If you haven't looked into Giotto, you should)

I would think that if you're using Adobe's software you'd be able to get some assistance from them.

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

g... i am no one's protege i assure you

you are a mean person who has trolled me since day one

WHAT is your problem?

Anonymous said...

No, Kenny, you just use them against people who don't post on the board (though some you think still read it) - calling them traitors, turncoats, incompetent, liars, and the rest. You are still apparently afraid to say it to them directly, however, as you admit you refuse to do anything but post on this board and posit that they still monitor it, even if they ignore you.

kenhyderal said...

Guiown said: "Don't you realize how fragile Kenny is".......................... I've been called a lot of things but fragile was never one of them

kenhyderal said...

Abe said: "Come down from the cross. Or stay up there and continue complaining"..................................Eli Eli lama sabacthani

Anonymous said...

eh?

guiowen said...

Wow,
Kenny,
I didn't realize you are the 21st century's answer to Christ on the Cross! Forgive me for not noticing it sooner!

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous said" "No, Kenny, you just use them against people who don't post on the board (though some you think still read it) - calling them traitors, turncoats, incompetent, liars, and the rest. You are still apparently afraid to say it to them directly, however, as you admit you refuse to do anything but post on this board and posit that they still monitor it, even if they ignore you'..........................Are you talking about Daniel Meier? You are, as usual, wrong. I have called no one a traitor, a turncoat or a liar. I do maintain that the defence given to Crystal by Attorney Meier was inadequate

guiowen said...

To the 2:27,
"Behold, he is calling Elias!"

guiowen said...

Tinfoil,
If you won't answer some simple questions of mine, why should I bother to answer you?

kenhyderal said...

@ Guiowen. Not me. That was Abe who made the inappropriate and sacrilegious comparison. But I, like many a poor soul in this vale of tears, can, sometimes, feel abandoned, just as the Lord, in his human incarnation and the Prophet Job did. Not as you snidely suggest as a Messianic complex on my part but the cry of weakness

Anonymous said...

you just did g...

Anonymous said...

Believe me, kenny, I was not comparing you to Jesus.

You should take a few days off from commenting and collect yourself.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL

Anonymous said...

Dr. Harr,

What J4N investigation are you referring to?

Anonymous said...

" kenhyderal said...

Abe said: " I have expressed no opinion on the conduct of the Duke lacrosse players other than to say they were falsely accused of a rape that did not happen and that, in my opinion, they conducted themselves remarkably well during and after their ordeal at Mangum and Nifong's hands"..... That's your opinion. Others have a different opinion.

Those others, likeyou, choose to be incredibly stupid.

Anonymous said...

Blogger kenhyderal said...

"There are two issues. One is the campaign by the Duke Lacrosse Apologists to discredit Crystal, former DA Nifong and any who believe that Crystal was sexually assaulted."

Any who believe crystal was assaulted are wilfully incredibly stupid. The overwhelming preponderance of the evidence is, crystal lied about being sexually assaulted.

Anonymous said...

Nifong Supporter said...


"Although I also disagree even more so with Walt, I would some day like to meet him for a cup of coffee... (I might even be able to hand him his crying towel at that time)."

Many would like to see you meet with Walt. Probably because when he embarrasses you and discredits you,you will try to sue him, looking for all the money you thought and still think you can shake down from Duke.

Anonymous said...

Noone knows the overwhelming preponderance of evidence except for the AG's investigators and they aren't sharing that information with the public, so therefore anyone who believes Ms. Mangum was assaulted in the public are neither willfully incredibly stupid nor are they informed enough to make a valid judgement on the matter based on what actually happened in the lacrosse case that the public was made aware of if there was not sufficient evidence available to make that judgement.

Anonymous said...

sidney:

"
Sorry for the delay, but the next two sharlogs will be worth it!!"

Yeah, worth about as much as your frivolous lawsuit against Duke and all the frivoloussuits you filed before you fled California.

Anonymous said...

kenny:

"Eli Eli lama sabacthani"

You abandoned him when you began aiding and abetting crystal's lies and indulged in falsely accusing people of a crime which never happened.

Anonymous said...

kenny:

"I do maintain that the defence given to Crystal by Attorney Meier was inadequate"

Correction:

you incredibly stupidly "maintain the defence given to Crystal by Attorney Meier was inadequate"

Anonymous said...

kenny:

"But I, like many a poor soul in this vale of tears, can, sometimes, feel abandoned, just as the Lord, in his human incarnation"

With your ardent embracing of crystal's lies you are in no way like "the Lord, in his human incarnation".

"and the Prophet Job"

If you knew the bible you would know the Book of Job was not a book of prophecy.

Again you manifest incredible stupidity. This time along with blasphemy.

Anonymous said...

We get it - you were incredibly hurt by the lacrosse case and now have only the ability to call everyone incredibly stupid, idiots, and the like because of it and to show great hatred toward Ms. Mangum and others. Another reason to dislike duke and the duke / durham / NC justice system no doubt. However, your inability to communicate beyond that level at this time does NOT give duke and the duke / durham / NC justice system the right to continue harming Ms. Mangum and ALL citizens and visitors to NC with this current case. You do understand this don't you?

kenhyderal said...

Job is certainly considered to be a Phrophet

guiowen said...

Actually, Kenny, many people were crucified by the Romans. Most of them were criminals. You however decided to appropriate Christ's dying words. By your own criterion, you are the blasphemer.

Anonymous said...

seriously g... ... who are you to judge?

guiowen said...

Tinfoil,
No answers until you answer my questions.

John D. Smith said...

Anonymous 4:24:

You are mistaken. The vast majority of the evidence from the initial case has been made public. Mangum's mental health records are the most important information not currently public. As Nifong later admitted, there is "no credible evidence" to support the charges. The City of Durham agreed with the special prosecutors' conclusion that the defendants were innocent of the charges.

No one who claims to believe that Mangum was sexually assaulted has provided any credible evidence to support their stated opinion. No one. Sidney has provided no credible evidence and now claims he has not reviewed the evidence available, preferring to remain ignorant. Kenny has provided no credible evidence, offering instead a preposterous meta-narrative of mystery rapists. In clinging to unsupported opinions, both Sidney and Kenny sacrificed their credibility. As a result, they are unable to assist Mangum in her current predicament because no one trusts them.

I agree that those who profess to believe that Mangum was assaulted are not incredibly stupid. Most are dishonest. Others because of preconceptions or bias simply believe what they want to believe, despite the lack of any evidence to support that belief. Indeed, one finds that not all opinions are equally valid.

John D. Smith
New York, NY

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

John D. Smith said: " Kenny has provided no credible evidence, offering instead a preposterous meta-narrative of mystery rapists. In clinging to unsupported opinions"............... Crystal's rape kit swabs detected unidentified DNA, derived from sperm; the present of which was unexplained by Crystal's sexual history. This sexual history was easily verifiable. Her movements for hours and days prior to her alleged sexual assault have been documented. Failure to identify the source of this DNA suggests to me that AG Cooper didn't want to get at the truth. It was in his interest to make the case go away by tacitly deferring to the notion that Crystal was engaging in acts of prostitution at times and places and with anonymous persons who could not be identified. At one point the Durham Police said they did not want to embarrass anybody. As well, I would certainly like to see a complete list compiled of all who were in attendance. When the defending Lawyers discovered that most likely no actual Player had deposited semen on or in Crystal they realized submitting the DNA of all would prove exculpatory. To that end all white team members were tested, even those no where near the party; an obvious smokescreen. It so happened two non-Player guests were caught in photographs and they too were tested. It's my understanding that there were almost as many non-Players at the Party as Players all but two of them unidentified. I would dearly like to see how the Durham Police and subsequently Cooper's investigators went about determining who had the opportunity.

guiowen said...

Sorry, Kenny. No one whose opinion matters believes you.

John D. Smith said...

Kenny 8:36 continues his meta-narrative. His "proof" that something happened relies entirely on evidence that was never collected. Once again, he proves my point.

QED.

John D. Smith
New York, NY

Lance the Intern said...

" Crystal's rape kit swabs detected unidentified DNA, derived from sperm; the present of which was unexplained by Crystal's sexual history. This sexual history was easily verifiable. Her movements for hours and days prior to her alleged sexual assault have been documented. Failure to identify the source of this DNA suggests to me that AG Cooper didn't want to get at the truth."

Interesting that you consider the "failure to identify the source" of some DNA the failure of AG Cooper, and not Mike Nifong. Especially since Nifong knew the results of the DNA from April 2006 on and deliberately kept this information from the defense.

Why is that?

For the record, conservative estimates have the lab discovering at least two unidentified males' DNA in Mangum's pubic region; at least two unidentified males' DNA in her rectum; at least four to five unidentified males' DNA on her panties.

Nifong, acting as the de facto head of the investigation, had been aware of this at least from the moment he received the lab results from DNA Security, if not from the state crime lab.

kenhyderal said...

John D. said: "Kenny 8:36 continues his meta-narrative. His "proof" that something happened relies entirely on evidence that was never collected. Once again, he proves my point".......... The key word in my hypothesis is unexplained. In order for the DNA evidence to prove that Crystal was untruthful the source of the unidentified DNA must be found. Failure to collect that evidence means it can not be said in certainty that Crystal was not sexually assaulted at the party. However it is insufficient to convict on, without such a proper investigation. Something AG Cooper had no stomach for since too any powerful people wanted it to go away. Lack of such an investigation, though, could allow a guilty perpetrator to go free. I can't prove something happened, AG Cooper can't prove nothing happened. For the present, if there was guilty parties they can't be convicted. I trust Crystal, the victim not entitled jocks or politicians

kenhyderal said...

Whoops "many" not any

Lance the Intern said...

" In order for the DNA evidence to prove that Crystal was untruthful..."

The DNA evidence DID prove that Crystal was untruthful. She identified Dave Evans with 90% certainty, Reade Seligmann and Collin Finnerty with 100% certainty.

Of Collin Finnerty she stated "Collin Finnerty -- He is the guy who assaulted me . . . .
He put his penis in my anus and my vagina"

Of Reade Seligmann: "He was the one that was standing
in front of me . . . um . . . that made me perform oral sex on him"

Of Dave Evans: "He looks like one of the guys who
assaulted me. . . . He looks just like him without the
mustache . . . . About 90%" (Evans never had a mustache)

She also identified Brad Ross and Chris Loftus as being at the party when they were not.


Another question for you, Kenny -- if Crystal is going to lie about such important information, what makes you so sure she isn't lying about her sexual history?

guiowen said...

Kenhyderal said
"This sexual history was easily verifiable. Her movements for hours and days prior to her alleged sexual assault have been documented."

Really, Kenny? Her movements were d9ocumented? Were you following her? Quite frankly, such a statement in your part suggests someone was monitoring her. Why would anyone do that?
Perhaps you are suggesting that someone asked her, "What were you doing over the past week?" and she answered truthfully, telling us all about all her trysts during those days? Then someone went to all these men she had been seeing, and they all gave DNA willingly?

Is that what you're trying to make us believe? I realize you think we're all stupid and easily brainwashed, but honestly!!

kenhyderal said...

Picking the wrong perpetrator in a improperly constituted police line-up even with an expressed degree of certainty is not being untruthful. You should consult the research on the fallibility of photo line-up identification.

kenhyderal said...

Guiowen said: ""What were you doing over the past week?" and she answered truthfully, telling us all about all her trysts during those days? Then someone went to all these men she had been seeing, and they all gave DNA willingly"........................................................................... This is exactly what should have been done and was not done except for one escort agency client who denied any sexual contact and without a warrant rightly refused to provide a DNA sample. Had it been done the metanarrative of the Duke Lacrosse Defence that the unexplained DNA came from prostitution instead of from a sexual assault at the party would have been blown out of the water. Protecting the reputation of people who chose to engage exotic performances is not sufficient reason to not investigate a crime. Crystal had no concern in this regard
hence she answered truthfully and completely.

guiowen said...

Kenny,
Could you please explain who was monitoring her, and why, during that week back in 2006?

Lance the Intern said...

Kenny -- Crystal Mangum stating "He [Collin Finnerty] put his penis in my anus and my vagina" is not an issue with an improperly conducted police lineup. It is a lie. The DNA results proved that it was a lie.

Lance the Intern said...

Kenny -- You haven't answered my question about why the "failure to identify" the DNA is AG Cooper's failure and not that of Mike Nifong.

Nifong knew the DNA results did not match any of the Duke LAX players since April 2006 -- what did he do to identify the source(s)? Why didn't Nifong attempt to get a warrant for the escort agency client's DNA?

Anonymous said...

"kenhyderal said...

Guiowen said: ""What were you doing over the past week?" and she answered truthfully, telling us all about all her trysts during those days? Then someone went to all these men she had been seeing, and they all gave DNA willingly"........................................................................... This is exactly what should have been done and was not done except for one escort agency client who denied any sexual contact and without a warrant rightly refused to provide a DNA sample. Had it been done the metanarrative of the Duke Lacrosse Defence that the unexplained DNA came from prostitution instead of from a sexual assault at the party would have been blown out of the water. Protecting the reputation of people who chose to engage exotic performances is not sufficient reason to not investigate a crime. Crystal had no concern in this regard
hence she answered truthfully and completely."

Again kenny shows he is incredibly stupid. In spite of kenny's delusions to the contrary, all party attendees were identified and none of them matched the DNA found on crystal. kenny asserts there were unidentified attendees because kilgo claimed he had a lacrosse player friend who witnessed an assault on crystal by non lacrosse player attendees. In the 9+ years since that party, there has been no evidence this lacrosse player exists. But incredibly stupid kenny believes he does and comes up with not evidence but a metanarrative to support it.

guiowen said...

Kenhyderal said,
"Protecting the reputation of people who chose to engage exotic performances is not sufficient reason to not investigate a crime."

So you're telling us that Nifong was deterred from investigating by fear of what might be discovered?
How can that be, since we all know that Nifong had "Nifongian courage"? (I'm sure Sidney will be glad to explain to you what "Nifongian courage" means.)

Anonymous said...

" Blogger kenhyderal said...

Picking the wrong perpetrator in a improperly constituted police line-up even with an expressed degree of certainty is not being untruthful. You should consult the research on the fallibility of photo line-up identification."

kenny's incredible stupidity: the improper lineup was conducted by Durham police at the behest of nifong who knew of the DNA on Crystal but who did not want the world to know that the only DNA found on crystal did not belong to anyone nifong had named as a suspect. Yet kenny has expressed the belief nifong was one of the good guys.

Anonymous said...

"kenhyderal said...

John D. said: "Kenny 8:36 continues his meta-narrative. His "proof" that something happened relies entirely on evidence that was never collected. Once again, he proves my point".......... The key word in my hypothesis is unexplained. In order for the DNA evidence to prove that Crystal was untruthful the source of the unidentified DNA must be found."

Another manifestation of kenny's stupidity. I reiterate, nfong,whom kenny rearded as one of the good guys working for justice, knew about the non lacrosse dna and tried to conceal that information from the public because the dna did not match the dna of any member of the lacrosse team, the people nifong named as suspects.

Anonymous said...

kenhyderal said...

"I trust Crystal, the victim not entitled jocks or politicians"

Another example of kenny's incredible stupidity. It has been established beyond doubt that crystal lied about being the victim of a sexual assault.

Anonymous said...

kenhyderal said...

"Crystal's rape kit swabs detected unidentified DNA, derived from sperm; the present of which was unexplained by Crystal's sexual history."

more of kenny'sincredible stupidity regarding what is proof. To establish that the dna was the result of a rape at the lacrosse party kenny would have yo establish beyond reasonable doubt that the date of the alleged crime was the date of dna deposition. kenny has admitted that the exact date whe the dna was deposited can not be determined.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous Anonymous said...
Dr. Harr,

What J4N investigation are you referring to?


What I've attempted to do is organize all the information gleaned from past sharlogs about the Mangum case into an investigation that can be easily followed. Presently, I'm having a problem with the virtual memory on my computer that is preventing me from producing the sharlog. I've been trying to use online tutorials to correct the problem myself... barring that I'll have my daughter work on it this weekend.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous Lance the Intern said...
Sid -- Just a quick question...You say that "The Geek Squad was unable to fix the problem with my Flash program".

Are you using Adobe Flash, or some other tool like Giotto or Swish? (FYI -- If you haven't looked into Giotto, you should)

I would think that if you're using Adobe's software you'd be able to get some assistance from them.


Hey, Lance. I'm using Adobe Flash. But after doing some research on my own, I believe the problem is that the virtual memory allocated by the computer is one fourth of that recommended. Once I'm able to manually change it to an adequate amount, then I'm assuming my Flash will work fine. If I'm not able to allocate more memory on my own by following online tutorials, I will turn it over to my daughter who knows more about computers than I do... on Saturday. Once that's done, I'll be able to upload my j4n investigative sharlog.

Lance the Intern said...

Sid -- Changing your virtual memory is pretty simple -- what version of Windows are you on? I'll send you the instructions.

Lance the Intern said...

One more thing -- the default settings for your virtual memory is that the initial minimum size of the paging file is equal to the amount of RAM installed on your computer, and the maximum size is equal to 3x the amount of installed RAM.

The issue may be that you need more RAM....Unless someone has added RAM to your computer at some point, but hasn't changed the paging file settings.

Good luck!

John D. Smith said...

Kenny,

Lance's post raises an interesting question: How does a brutal gang rape by 3 mystery rapists explain unidentified DNA from at least 8 or 9 males found in and on Mangum?

You should be alleging a brutal gang rape by at least 8 mystery rapists. Your 3 mystery rapist narrative requires that Mangum's consensual history still is incomplete. As you noted earlier, that incompleteness insinuates that Mangum worked as a prostitute.

Moreover, as Dr. Harr explained, DNA would only be found if a rapist ejaculated and did not use a condom, echoing Nifong's explanation that no DNA indicates a rape with no "ejaculatory event." Perhaps there were many non-ejaculating mystery rapists. One can easily imagine a brutal gang rape by more than a dozen mystery rapists.

Kenny, I suggest you modify your narrative to include a larger number of mystery rapists. You are the mystery rapist expert, so I await your revised narrative.

John D. Smith
New York, NY

kenhyderal said...

Lance said: "Kenny -- Crystal Mangum stating "He [Collin Finnerty] put his penis in my anus and my vagina" is not an issue with an improperly conducted police lineup. It is a lie. The DNA results proved that it was a lie".......... No, the DNA results indicate that the predator who sexually assaulted Crystal was inadvertently identified as Finnerty, in an improperly conducted photo line-up. Her certainty about who it was is a very common outcome by victims subjected to this type of an identification process.

kenhyderal said...

John D Smith said: "You are the mystery rapist expert, so I await your revised narrative"................... There were five distinct DNA samples. Two were explained by her given sexual history. Any others were incomplete duplicates of distinct samples found.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous said: "To establish that the dna was the result of a rape at the lacrosse party kenny would have yo establish beyond reasonable doubt that the date of the alleged crime was the date of dna deposition. kenny has admitted that the exact date whe the dna was deposited can not be determined"............. Absolutely correct. It's one of the problems with DNA evidence. "if the glove doesn't fit you must acquit" The timing of the disposition can raise "reasonable doubt" for an accused unless the findings are pared with more traditional, in depth, foot slogging, police work. Which in Crystal's case was never done.

Lance the Intern said...

Sorry, Kenny -- Crystal knew that Collin Finnerty did not assault her. Stating he "put his penis in [her] anus and [her] vagina" is an obvious lie on her part.

Now -- Why haven't you addressed my question about the "failure to identify" the DNA being Cooper's failure and not Nifong's?

guiowen said...

Kenhyderal,
You still haven't explained who was monitoring CGM back in early March 2006. If you can't give us an explanation, I suspect that perhaps you yourself hired a private investigator to keep track of her. Why did you do that?

Anonymous said...

Kenny stated: There were five distinct DNA samples. Two were explained by her given sexual history. Any others were incomplete duplicates of distinct samples found

Wikipedia suggests there were more samples: At Nifong's subsequent ethics trial on June 14, 2007, the complete DNA findings were revealed during defense attorney Brad Bannon's testimony. According to conservative estimates, the lab had discovered at least two unidentified males' DNA in Mangum's pubic region; at least two unidentified males' DNA in her rectum; at least four to five unidentified males' DNA on her underpants; and at least one identified male's DNA in her vagina.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duke_lacrosse_case

There is also a link to a spreadsheet with summaries of the DNA samples. It appears there are more than 5 distinct samples. Apparently, not everything was tested, so it is possible that there are more samples.

http://bp1.blogger.com/_k_8jgSqqBEw/RnG7LUtFURI/AAAAAAAAAAU/
nPzwO3xy2QI/s1600-h/Rape+Kit+Spreadsheet-001.jpg

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous said: " all party attendees were identified and none of them matched the DNA found on crystal"....................................... This never happened. No list was ever compiled. Only two non-Players, out of the many non-Players who were there, were identified and that was not due to good Police work but only to the happenstance of them appearing, in the background, in examined cell-phone photographs, taken of the girls during their abbreviated performance. No one has ever seen such a list and it is my belief that there was no attendance list ever developed. If it's a fact that all attendees were identified then let us see a list. Or is this one more instance where the Durham police don't want to embarrass anyone like these poor, innocent lads for attending what Dr. Harr often describes as a bacchanalia

guiowen said...

Kenhyderal,
Could you please explain who was monitoring CGM during the first week of March 2006? What documents do you have concerning this?

kenhyderal said...

Guiowen said: " You still haven't explained who was monitoring CGM back in early March 2006"..................................... Her employer. The Agency dispatched Crystal to the clients and they kept records. Crystal did no freelance work. During all the hours, in the foregoing days when she was not on assignment, she has witnesses to vouch for her whereabouts. Incidentally the $400.00 stolen from Crystal by Duke Lacrosse Players, half of it belonging to her booking Agency, has never been released by the Durham Police; that along with her cell phone, even though AG Cooper declared the case was over

Anonymous said...

I thought Crystal worked for several agencies.

Anonymous said...

Kenny,

No comment on the DNA analysis linked at 3:41? It looks like more than five distinct samples?

guiowen said...

So how may customers did Crystal have during the first week of March 2006?

guiowen said...

It looks like at least five samples, APART FROM her boyfriend and her driver.

Anonymous said...

kenny:

What type of work was Mangum doing where her "clients" left multiple semen deposits in her underpants, rectum and vagina?

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL

Anonymous said...

Blogger kenhyderal said...

Anonymous said: " all party attendees were identified and none of them matched the DNA found on crystal"....................................... This never happened."

Yes it did. kenny maintains otherwise because he is incredibly stupid. He has never provided any evidence that there were any unidentified party attendees.

Anonymous said...

kenny said

"The timing of the disposition [of DNA] can raise "reasonable doubt" for an accused unless the findings are pared with more traditional, in depth, foot slogging, police work. Which in Crystal's case was never done."

It was never done because nifong did not want the public to know that the only dna found on crystal did not match the dna of any of the people he had named as suspects, the members of the lacrosse team.

Anonymous said...

Guiowen,

I thought it looked like 12 samples. That requires 10 mystery rapists.

Anonymous said...

Kenny,

Do you believe Nifong was "honorable" when he failed to demand that the DPD attempt to identify the unidentified DNA found in and on Crystal? Did he show "Nifongian courage" when he failed to do so?

Anonymous said...

Kenny,

You have avoided Lance's question why you believed the failure to identify the DNA was Cooper's fault and not Nifong's. I thought that was a reasonable question. Why do you believe that you are persuasive when you ignore reasonable questions?

kenhyderal said...

Five distinct samples 2 identified 3 unidentified. You are counting the same distinct samples more then once.

guiowen said...

No, Kenny, it clearly says four or five unidentified samples in her underpants alone.

Apart from that, you haven't told us how many clients she had the week before her rape claims.

Finally, you refuse to tell us why you blame Cooper rather than Nifong for not trying to identify the depositors from their DNA.

John D. Smith said...

Kenny,

I looked at the worksheet. Admittedly, many of the samples are degraded. They are probably older than the complete samples. However, the data that remains for each sample demonstrates enough differences to conclude it comes from different donors. I see more than 5.

Your reaction to this issue demonstrates your problem in the art of persuasion. Rather than providing your own evidence and explaining the data, step by step if necessary, you merely proclaim your conclusion and then treat your critics like a bunch of stupid assholes. That is not persuasive.

This is not even an important point. The beauty of your mystery rapist narrative is its flexibility. If there are more unidentified samples, then there are more mystery rapists. No problem. No one would blame Mangum for miscounting the number of her attackers during such a violent ordeal. You should, however, comment on the logistics. Many of your critics complained that the bathroom was not large enough for Mangum and 3 mystery rapists. Unless you hypothesize that mystery rapists went in and out of the bathroom when they took turns, your narrative becomes physically impossible. A dozen mystery rapists couldn't fit into the bathroom with Mangum at the same time.

John D. Smith
New York, NY

Nifong Supporter said...


Lance the Intern said...
Sid -- Changing your virtual memory is pretty simple -- what version of Windows are you on? I'll send you the instructions.


Hey, Lance.

I have a Toshiba, a year old, with Windows 8.1. I've tried to follow instructions online without success. Hopefully, your instructions will help. Thanks a lot.

Nifong Supporter said...


Lance the Intern said...
One more thing -- the default settings for your virtual memory is that the initial minimum size of the paging file is equal to the amount of RAM installed on your computer, and the maximum size is equal to 3x the amount of installed RAM.

The issue may be that you need more RAM....Unless someone has added RAM to your computer at some point, but hasn't changed the paging file settings.

Good luck!


Thanks. The Virtual Memory gives a recommended size as 4073 MB. However, the allotted amount is 960 MB. I've been trying to increase the allotted amount to 4073, but it remains at 960. I haven't been able to figure out how to get it increased!!!

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous Anonymous said...
Kenny,

Do you believe Nifong was "honorable" when he failed to demand that the DPD attempt to identify the unidentified DNA found in and on Crystal? Did he show "Nifongian courage" when he failed to do so?


For what purpose? As long as the DNA ruled out the Duke Lacrosse players, why proceed further? To do so would be nothing more than a waste of money and resources.

Nifong Supporter said...


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

I have just uncovered mind-boggling/smoking-gun information that will blow the lid off Mangum's conviction and force Mangum deterrents to throw in the towel... and trade them in for crying towels. The end of this travesty is near, and as soon as I get my Flash working you will have a full understanding.

As you were.

Anonymous said...

Sid said:

"As long as the DNA ruled out the Duke Lacrosse players, why proceed further? To do so would be nothing more than a waste of money and resources."

So why did Nifong proceed further? Why did he continue to prosecute the lacrosse players even after he knew the DNA ruled them out?

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL

Anonymous said...

Sid said:

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

I have just uncovered mind-boggling/smoking-gun information that will blow the lid off Mangum's conviction and force Mangum deterrents to throw in the towel... and trade them in for crying towels. The end of this travesty is near, and as soon as I get my Flash working you will have a full understanding."

I assume you have already taken this information to the DA's office, the Attorney General, Mangum's attorneys and the press. How did they respond?

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL

Walt said...

Lance wrote: "The DNA evidence DID prove that Crystal was untruthful. She identified Dave Evans with 90% certainty, Reade Seligmann and Collin Finnerty with 100% certainty....."

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

Walt-in-Durham

Lance the Intern said...

Sid -- You stated " As long as the DNA ruled out the Duke Lacrosse players, why proceed further? To do so would be nothing more than a waste of money and resources."

Kenhyderal stated earlier that the "Failure to identify the source of this DNA suggests to me that AG Cooper didn't want to get at the truth"

Which position is correct -- Would it be a waste of money and resources to attempt to find the DNA source, or is someone (Kenny thinks AG Cooper) at fault for failing to find the source?

If someone is at fault, why would that someone be AG Cooper and not Mike Nifong?

Walt said...

Abe wrote: "Sid said:

"As long as the DNA ruled out the Duke Lacrosse players, why proceed further? To do so would be nothing more than a waste of money and resources."

So why did Nifong proceed further? Why did he continue to prosecute the lacrosse players even after he knew the DNA ruled them out?"


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

Indeed, Syd, why did Nifong proceed? He'd still be practicing law today if he' had simply dismissed the case in May 2006 when the DNASI results were in. In fact, that's what an ethical prosecutor would have done. Dismiss against the three innocent men and tell the DPD to start over and re-investigate the case. But, he didn't. He lied to the court. He withheld evidence. He lied to the public. And, he prosecuted a case for which he had no probable cause.

Walt-in-Durham

kenhyderal said...

Crystal feels that DA Nifong did what he could to get justice for her. He was thwarted from the get go by the sloppy Police investigation and a lack of cooperation from innocent witnesses. I believe he does bear some responsibility for the improper photo line-up that led Crystal to, at no fault of her own, make false identifications. Crystal was, implicitly told and led to believe that all her attackers were present in the line-up, when in fact the actual rapists were not there. The photographs shown her likely contained Players guilty of other crimes against her like drugging, sexual assault, kidnapping and robbery that, most likely involved no DNA deposition

kenhyderal said...

@ Walt: DA Nifong did drop the rape charge but proceeded with sexual assault instead. A criminal act that doesn't necessarily result in DNA deposition

Anonymous said...

kenny said:

Mangum made very graphic and specific accusations that she was the victim of a semen depositing rape, that her attackers did not wear condoms and that they ejaculated on and inside her. Nifong himself stated that the DNA tests would prove who was innocent and guilty.

Whatever Nifong tried to prosecute the defendants for after the defendants' attorneys figured out the results of the DNA tests that Nifong worked so hard to ocnceal, it was inconsistent with the complaint Mangum made.

So, (a) was Mangum lying when she made her initial rape claim, (b) did Nifong behave unethically in continuing the prosecution after it became apparent that none of the defendants raped Mangum in the manner in which she claimed, or (c) both?

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL

Anonymous said...

Kenny -

Even if she was told her attacker was in there - if it wasn't true, she should have said so. Instead, she identified, with 100% certainty, people who were not her attacker. The fact you refuse to fault her for that (I guess she was ok with lying then - cause she figured it was close enough, even though 100% is pretty sure), is proof you are so biased you can't see straight, which is why no one will ever believe you.

Crystal isn't perfect. She may have been assaulted, she may not, but the fact you can find no wrong for her shows you have some sort of hero-complex.

Anonymous said...

" kenhyderal said...

Crystal feels that DA Nifong did what he could to get justice for her. He was thwarted from the get go by the sloppy Police investigation"

Incredibly stupid kenny remains willfully ignorant of facts, that the "sloppy police work" was the result of nifong's desire to keep from the public and from the attorneys of those whom he had identified as suspects that the dna found on crystal did not match the dna of those he had named as suspects.

" and a lack of cooperation from innocent witnesses."

There was no lack of cooperation from witnesses. The only information they could give was that no rape had taken place. Nifong wanted members of the Lacrosse team to provide information which would falsely incriminate other team members. He even went so far as to threaten members of the team with criminal charges of aiding and abetting if they did not come forward.

kenny believs, on the basis of hearsay that a witness to a crime does exist. He has yet to explain why, under the possible penalty of incurring criminal charges, that witness has not come forth.

As I write this, I realize that kenny is more incredibly dense, more incredibly stupid than I believed.

Lance the Intern said...

"He [Nifong] was thwarted from the get go by the sloppy Police investigation"

The DPD got into trouble because they allowed Nifong to run the investigation. In essence you're saying he was thwarted by a sloppy police investigation he was in charge of.

How does Nifong manage to thwart himself?

Anonymous said...

"kenhyderal said...

@ Walt: DA Nifong did drop the rape charge but proceeded with sexual assault instead. A criminal act that doesn't necessarily result in DNA deposition"

Incredibly stupid kenny forgets that the "sexual assault" alleged was a rape in which multiple males assaulted, penetrated and ejaculated on crystal, leaving evidence. nifong's maneuver to exclude dna would not have flown.

De facto, kenny admits that there was no evidence of a rape and nifong was trying to convict without any evidence.

What can one expect from someone so incredibly stupid?

Anonymous said...

I've lost count ... how many bombshells and immediate releases for Mangum has Sid had now? And how many turned out to be anything other than a mistaken assumption by Sid?

This different than the perjury Sid?

guiowen said...

Crystal had originally talked about being raped, by men who were not wearing condoms and had ejaculated in her rectum and vagina. When Nifong realized that Brian Meehan's testimony was going to sink him, he asked Linwood Wilson to "interview" her again, and this time she was no longer certain as to whether they had used condoms.
We all know how Nifong and Crystal have since fared. As to Meehan, he was fired from his job for his unethical behavior. Linwood Wilson was also fired, and was eventually imprisoned for threatening his wife.
Quite a quartet but, as Kenyderal would doubtless tell us, the arc of justice may twist, but eventually reaches us all.

kenhyderal supporter said...

Keep up the good work kenhyderal. Your post this week have been particularly brilliant.

Anonymous said...

Lance,

In all fairness to Nifong, the DPD investigation was already well off-track before Nifong became involved.

Mangum made her rape accusation on March 14, 2006. Gottlieb and Himan started their faux investigation on March 16. They interviewed Mangum, she failed to make identifications in two flawed procedures, they interviewed the other dancer and the sane nurse and collected DNA in the non-testimonial procedure. DPD investigators were instructed to work with Nifong on March 24. Nifong received his first briefing on March 27.

Kenny is disingenuous at best when he claims that Nifong was "thwarted" by the sloppy police investigation. After 13 days, with no specific suspects and no credible evidence, it was not too late to begin a bona fide investigation. Nifong did nothing to demand one. Kenny realizes that Nifong's actions cannot be justified, but in his kenhyderal character, he is required to support Nifong, so he goes through the motions of doing so.



guiowen said...

In my comment above discussing the four villains, I should perhaps have added a fifth one: Mark Gottlieb.
De mortuis nil nisi bonum, so I won't say more.

Anonymous said...

Sindey asks: For what purpose?

Mangum alleged a semen-depositing rape. If Nifong believed her, he would have realized that (1) the defendants could not be guilty or a semen-depositing rape because of the failure to find DNA matches and (2) the DNA could have been deposited by the rapists. Instead, he decided to ignore her allegation and prosecute three defendants selected in a procedure he realized was flawed by a witness whose allegations he had decided to ignore because they were not credible.

For the record, I agree with you and Nifong that the degraded nature of the samples suggests they were deposited earlier than the party, but given the lack of credible evidence that existed, trying to identify the depositors was an obvious step. If Kenny is correct about 3, 6, 8 or 12 mystery rapists brutally raping Mangum at the party Nifong made the decision to let the offenders go free.

Walt said...

Anonymous at 6:47PM wrote: ".... If Kenny is correct about 3, 6, 8 or 12 mystery rapists brutally raping Mangum at the party Nifong made the decision to let the offenders go free."

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

Walt-in-Durham

Lance the Intern said...

"In all fairness to Nifong, the DPD investigation was already well off-track before Nifong became involved.

Mangum made her rape accusation on March 14, 2006. Gottlieb and Himan started their faux investigation on March 16. They interviewed Mangum, she failed to make identifications in two flawed procedures, they interviewed the other dancer and the sane nurse and collected DNA in the non-testimonial procedure. DPD investigators were instructed to work with Nifong on March 24. Nifong received his first briefing on March 27."


While the first two flawed photo line-ups occurred before Nifong received his first briefing on the case, the flawed lineup where Mangum identified Seligmann, Evans, and Collin Finnerty as her attackers occurred afterward.

The manner in which the lineup was viewed (a powerpoint presentation showing each LAX player individually) was done at the direction of Mike Nifong.

The Rectumfinder said...

Did anyone check Sidney Harr and Ken Hyderal's DNA? What if they put on whiteface and raped Crystal to frame the Lacrosse team?

Anonymous said...

q... your posts as usual hold no meaning at all except that you are an evil duke troll from kc's blog.

Why don't ya'll (you especially) stop trolling Kenny and copying and pasting his or anyone else's past posts to start new trolls and arguments against your own trolled cut and paste posts, and then screaming quit whining or quit trolling when a reply is given in defense or asking you to stop or whatever? Seriously.

blah

Kenny, this is an open case - you do realize that right?

Anonymous said...

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

blah

blah

blah

Anonymous said...

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

seriously

get over yourself

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

DO NOT TROLL ME IN ANY WAY AT ALL AGAIN

thanks

blah blah blah

Anonymous said...

It is telling that duke has the type supporters it has on this blog instead of a reasoned, legal, professional, concerned reply from duke and resolution to all the issues that are left to be settled only individually in the minds of all its patients and patrons, students, employees, fans, etc., etc., etc., about this case and the lacrosse case, etc., but not in the court of law nor for the people involved in the cases or for the people in general.

When you actually have people INSISTING duke is beyond reproach even though everyone is left to reproach or not reproach at will based upon what they know or don't know after seeing what is going on through the absence of anything reasoned or legal about what duke is doing in this case(s) to indicate any other reason other than to reproach what they are doing while continuing to watch them not take responsibility nor concern for what they are doing while they are continue to do what they do (or don't do) - and thus leaving all to be reproached by those who do not reproach - or vice versus - because it is duke - afterall ... the only thing left is to question duke and the duke / durham justice system - what the frack are you doing?

Why is that?
Is that the way duke always is?

That IS what you read and see in the 'news' about them afterall - over and over and over again - so it is not just a fluke for duke - it IS who they are and what they do to many.

Perhaps they calculate that doing as they do will bring their desired results. So - really - you have to wonder - what does duke REALLY want and why do they do what they do?

Anonymous said...

seriously, the person who is copy and posting regurgitated plagerized posts and then blaming others for what they just
'said - but didn't' so they can make it look like the other is going on a 'bender' or whatever - ya know - doing it on purpose in order to turn around and blame the other for what they just did is so..... dukishly bent

g... that you? you do that a lot.

guiowen said...

Sorry, Tinfoil,
no answers until you answer my questions of June 2.

Anonymous said...

" Anonymous Anonymous said...

q... your posts as usual hold no meaning at all except that you are an evil duke troll from kc's blog.

Why don't ya'll (you especially) stop trolling Kenny and copying and pasting his or anyone else's past posts to start new trolls and arguments against your own trolled cut and paste posts, and then screaming quit whining or quit trolling when a reply is given in defense or asking you to stop or whatever? Seriously.

blah

Kenny, this is an open case - you do realize that right?

June 5, 2015 at 7:18 PM"

It's not g.

And boy are you stressed.

Anonymous said...

" Anonymous Anonymous said...

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

seriously

get over yourself

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

DO NOT TROLL ME IN ANY WAY AT ALL AGAIN

thanks

blah blah blah

June 5, 2015 at 7:25 PM"

What I said before.

Boy are you stressed.

Anonymous said...

"Anonymous said...

q... your posts as usual hold no meaning at all except that you are an evil duke troll from kc's blog.

Why don't ya'll (you especially) stop trolling Kenny and copying and pasting his or anyone else's past posts to start new trolls and arguments against your own trolled cut and paste posts, and then screaming quit whining or quit trolling when a reply is given in defense or asking you to stop or whatever? Seriously.

blah

Kenny, this is an open case - you do realize that right?

June 5, 2015 at 7:18 PM"

What I said before.

You are thrice stressed.

kenhyderal said...

Guiowern said: "I should perhaps have added a fifth one: Mark Gottlieb.
De mortuis nil nisi bonum, so I won't say more".......................
Deinde etiam ad mortem compulit

Anonymous said...

kenhyderal said...


Deinde etiam ad mortem compulit

So you thing this corrupt cop, who used his authority to bully and intimidate people he did not like, who participated in the attempt to wrongfully convict people you do not like of a crime which never happened, is some kind of victim or hero.

You are more than incredibly stupid. You are morally bankrupt.

guiowen said...

Don't you realize poor Gottlieb was blindsided by those horrible lacrosse players?
The normal behavior when MG accused some Duke students of anything was very simple. The Dean of students would steer them to some in-house lawyer who helped them to plead guilty and bargain for a reduced penalty. In this case he would get them 14-18 years rather than 30.
Instead, these horrible guys actually hired high-priced lawyers! How could MG do his work properly with such meddling? With such poor support from the criminal justice system, he decided he could no longer work at Durham. So he left and eventually, as our good friend Kenny said, deinde etiam ad mortem compulit.
What an injustice for a Social Justice Warrior!
Kenny, I commiserate with you over this horrible injustice.

Anonymous said...

Where is the new shlog that Sid keeps promising us?

The Rectumfinder said...

Where is the new shlog that Sid keeps promising us?

It's up his a$$. But have no fear, I will find it, for I am...

The RECTUMFINDER!

Anonymous said...

Kenny,

Does Mark Gottlieb bear any of the responsibility for the failure to identify the DNA and pursue the mystery rapists?

«Oldest ‹Older   1001 – 1171 of 1171   Newer› Newest»