justice4nifong: A prosecution case built on lies

Tuesday, June 23, 2015

A prosecution case built on lies

973 comments:

«Oldest ‹Older 401 – 600 of 973 Newer› Newest»

Anonymous said...: Kenny,

Have you bothered reading the Opinion, or are you just going to bask in your ignorance and spout off whatever comes into your head?; July 7, 2015 at 2:08 PM
Anonymous said...: "kenhyderal said...

Petersen was reluctant to use inadequate defence by Meier as grounds for the appeal. Nor did she seek out the expert witnesses at Duke who treated Daye that could confirm there was no murder. If a Jury gets it wrong because they were not given adequate information it would only seem reasonable to seek out and provide that evidence to the COA so they could order a new trial in light of this.

July 7, 2015 at 1:46 PM"

Yet another iteration of kenny the deaf blind man saying I see and hear everything.; July 7, 2015 at 2:15 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "You simply won't ask anyone if they did that much (and you've already said if Meier told you he did, you'd call him a liar - yet you still seem surprised he won't talk to you - assuming he sees this)"......................... I don't need to ask Meier because I already know the answer. I have yet to call anyone a liar. I would just like him to either admit he did not or else claim he did and at that point you will hear from me. I know he is lurking here.; July 7, 2015 at 2:48 PM
guiowen said...: Hello, Daniel Meier,
Kenhyderal is well aware that you are still lurking here. He has just had it with your refusal to talk to him. In a moment he will have you and Anne Petersen contradicting each other.
Note this is a classic prisoner's dilemma example. The two culprits always wind up double-crossing each other.
You'll see what happens then: you'll be lucky to get away with disbarment.
Talk quick before Petersen gets you disbarred.; July 7, 2015 at 3:00 PM
guiowen said...: Kenhyderal,
I think we have them now! Crystal will soon be out!; July 7, 2015 at 3:00 PM
Anonymous said...: kenhyderal said...

"I have yet to call anyone a liar."

With regard to such obvious liars such as mr. harr, crystal, kilgo, william cohan, you obviously can't see or hear their lies. Not surprising for a deaf blind man who claims he sees and hears everything.; July 7, 2015 at 3:46 PM
Anonymous said...: I doubt Meier still lurks and if he does I doubt he cares whether or not Kenny thinks he is a liar. Kenny is a shiner, joke, liar and abuser. He's pathetic and should be ashamed of himself.; July 7, 2015 at 6:12 PM
kenhyderal said...: Attorney Meier has not lied about this matter nor have I accused him of doing so. I have, though, accused him of failing to investigate the accident at Duke that caused Daye to die, rendering his unnecessary death an accident not a murder. Posters here have insisted that this was fully looked into and most likely Meier found that those treating Daye would only concur with the findings of the ME Dr. Nicholls and would therefore not be of help to Crystal. I believe this was never done and I believe there are expert witness available that would refute Nicholls conclusion. I also believe that this failure indicated Crystal received an inadequate defence.; July 7, 2015 at 8:50 PM
Anonymous said...: " kenhyderal said...

Attorney Meier has not lied about this matter nor have I accused him of doing so. I have, though, accused him of failing to investigate the accident at Duke that caused Daye to die, rendering his unnecessary death an accident not a murder. Posters here have insisted that this was fully looked into and most likely Meier found that those treating Daye would only concur with the findings of the ME Dr. Nicholls and would therefore not be of help to Crystal. I believe this was never done and I believe there are expert witness available that would refute Nicholls conclusion. I also believe that this failure indicated Crystal received an inadequate defence.

July 7, 2015 at 8:50 PM"

Just another iteration of kenny the deaf blind man saying I saw and heard everything.; July 8, 2015 at 3:11 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny - you've already admitted you've reached your conclusion. You feel Meier was incompetent and didn't do it - and admit nothing he would say would affect your belief. So if he did waste his time still lurking here, and further wasted his time responding to an abuser of women who is too spineless to contact him directly - you'd either say he's just incompetent or a liar and incompetent. So, again, why would he waste his time?; July 8, 2015 at 4:42 AM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: " If a Jury gets it wrong because they were not given adequate information it would only seem reasonable to seek out and provide that evidence to the COA so they could order a new trial in light of this."

After all this time, and you still don't understand the appellate process. This has been explained to you before.

Walt-in-Durham; July 8, 2015 at 5:59 AM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: " I have, though, accused him of failing to investigate the accident at Duke that caused Daye to die, rendering his unnecessary death an accident not a murder."

Even you admit that the alleged treatment was an accident. Do you not understand that contributory negligence is an accident? Do you not understand that contributory negligence has no place in the criminal law? Or, do you just refuse to learn the law?

"Posters here have insisted that this was fully looked into and most likely Meier found that those treating Daye would only concur with the findings of the ME Dr. Nicholls and would therefore not be of help to Crystal. I believe this was never done and I believe there are expert witness available that would refute Nicholls conclusion. I also believe that this failure indicated Crystal received an inadequate defence."

It was looked into. The defense hired an expert to give an independent medical examination. Do you recall what that expert's conclusion was? I do. She agreed with the state. Daye's death was the result of complications from a stab wound inflicted by Crystal. If you think there are other witnesses, then you need to produce them because there are two very competent witnesses that disagree with your amateur opinion.

Walt-in-Durham; July 8, 2015 at 6:06 AM
Anonymous said...: duke sukes

there has never been a time when they haven't

the prospects for them ever becoming nonsucky have become non existent ... cuz they suck no matter in all ways; July 8, 2015 at 6:22 AM
Fake Kenhyderal said...: Based on spelling on grammar, I think that Anonymous@6:22 has revealed himself.....As A Kentucky fan.; July 8, 2015 at 7:31 AM
kenhyderal said...: Walt says: "After all this time, and you still don't understand the appellate process. This has been explained to you before"..... OK Walt tell us what an innocent, wrongly convicted, defendant who was provided with an inadequate defence does to get a new trial if an Appeal Court can't hear new evidence.; July 8, 2015 at 8:23 AM
Anonymous said...: " kenhyderal said...

Walt says: "After all this time, and you still don't understand the appellate process. This has been explained to you before"..... OK Walt tell us what an innocent, wrongly convicted, defendant who was provided with an inadequate defence does to get a new trial if an Appeal Court can't hear new evidence.

July 8, 2015 at 8:23 AM"

Irrelevat statement since crystal was neither innocent nor wrongly convicted.; July 8, 2015 at 8:28 AM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "Kenny - you've already admitted you've reached your conclusion. You feel Meier was incompetent and didn't do it - and admit nothing he would say would affect your belief. So if he did waste his time still lurking here, and further wasted his time responding to an abuser of women who is too spineless to contact him directly - you'd either say he's just incompetent or a liar and incompetent. So, again, why would he waste his time""...... If he says he did not, perhaps, that will confirm to you all the incompetence of the defence he provided. If he says he did, I'm prepared to expose that as an untruth.; July 8, 2015 at 8:28 AM
guiowen said...: Kenhyderal,
I realize you're just fantasizing about all the wonderful things you're prepared to do for Crystal. That's fine, so long as you're aware that it's all just a fantasy of yours.
Crystal is not innocent, and she was not wrongly convicted. That's all.; July 8, 2015 at 8:48 AM
fake guiowen said...: Kenhyderal, I'm going to help you. A friend of mine will play the part.; July 8, 2015 at 9:57 AM
fake daniel meier said...: Kenhyderal,
After reading your friend Guiowen's comment, I have decided it will be best for all if I approach you. What exactly would you like me to do?

P.S. congratulations on having such a competent and generous friend as guiowen.; July 8, 2015 at 9:59 AM
Anonymous said...: kenny said:

"OK Walt tell us what an innocent, wrongly convicted, defendant who was provided with an inadequate defence does to get a new trial if an Appeal Court can't hear new evidence."

provide evidence, in admissable form and in a timely manner that the defendant is one or more of the following:

A. innocent;
B. wrongly convicted;
C. received an inadequate defense;
D. that new evidence exists to be heard.

What is remarkable about your and Sid's relentless attacks on everyone and everything associated with the murder case against Mangum is that you have presented no evidence to support any of your claims. You simply make wild assertions and try to convince us that if we, or the courts, or Mangum's attorneys chase you down into your rabbit hole we will find the secret evidence that supports you and the "truth" will become clear. I am sorry but that isn't how it works and you, Sid and Mangum don't get to manipulate the legal system that way.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; July 8, 2015 at 10:09 AM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: "OK Walt tell us what an innocent, wrongly convicted, defendant who was provided with an inadequate defence does to get a new trial if an Appeal Court can't hear new evidence."

BZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZT [manual buzzer] Run him.

There you go again making statements that are completely unsupported by any law or for that matter any reasonable look at the facts. There is no "if" involved. The fact that you continue to insist to the contrary is simply proof that you are unwilling to learn. So, the burden is on you to prove that courts of appeal can take new evidence.

I posted on this years ago when Crystal was convicted. Because you refuse to learn, I will not waste my time repeating the procedure. It's laid out for anyone who cares. You obviously do not.

Walt-in-Durham; July 8, 2015 at 10:10 AM
Anonymous said...: So, Kenny - you are prepared to do all these things, but only if someone wastes their time and breath and reaches out to you. You are not prepared to attempt to contact any of them directly.

You are the typical keyboard warrior - big man at the computer, but totally unwilling to actually do anything but bluster and hide behind a screen.

And, I'm sure your "proof" is that Crystal said she wasn't told that they had - and she's clearly an incredibly credible person who would never lie to suit her purposes (I mean, she did eventually admit she lit Milton's clothes on fire - her earlier denials don't count as lies I guess).; July 8, 2015 at 10:18 AM
fake daniel meier said...: Kenhyderal,
Why haven't you answered me? I need to know just what it is that you want me to do.; July 8, 2015 at 12:00 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous Fake Kenhyderal said...
"Hah! Hold your horses. Rome wasn't built in a day."

It should only take you a few minutes to take down the current sharlog and replace it with a message publicly apologizing to Aykia Hanes.

Write your apology and give me access to your blog, and I'll even do it for you.

Thanks for the offer, but I prefer to do it in my own classy way by using a sharlog. Once I have completed it, I will replace the current sharlog. I am probably a couple of days short of completing it. Shouldn't be as long as my usual sharlog.; July 8, 2015 at 12:27 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: kenhyderal said...
Petersen was reluctant to use inadequate defence by Meier as grounds for the appeal. Nor did she seek out the expert witnesses at Duke who treated Daye that could confirm there was no murder. If a Jury gets it wrong because they were not given adequate information it would only seem reasonable to seek out and provide that evidence to the COA so they could order a new trial in light of this.

kenhyderal, you are absolutely correct. The appeal by Petersen was extremely weak and I had no doubt that it would be denied by the Court of Appeals. It was an appeal that would place no burden of blame on Duke University Hospital or on turncoat defense attorney Daniel Meier.

I don't believe that corrections to the appeals brief were even made by Petersen, as the COA judges appear to believe that Daye died a couple of days following the stabbing.; July 8, 2015 at 12:33 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: guiowen said...
Kenhyderal,
I realize you're just fantasizing about all the wonderful things you're prepared to do for Crystal. That's fine, so long as you're aware that it's all just a fantasy of yours.
Crystal is not innocent, and she was not wrongly convicted. That's all.

gui, mon ami, I think I better shop for a crying towel for you to go along with the ones for Walt and Abe because Mangum is going to be released soon and her conviction overturned. The P-T-Bs, Durham prosecutors, mainstream media, turncoat defense attorneys, and the misled masses are no match for Lady Justice, the Man from Nazareth,the Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong, and the truth. And the truth will set Crystal Mangum free!

(Duke Devil blue okay, or would you prefer a different colored towel?); July 8, 2015 at 12:39 PM
guiowen said...: Sidney,
What do you mean by "soon"? Would that be March of 2026?; July 8, 2015 at 1:18 PM
Anonymous said...: Dr. Harr,

How are appeal decisions containing obvious errors like the date and manner of death protested? What is the next step for Ms. Mangum to correct the wrongs of the appeal attorney in the defense brief? How long does she have to do so?

Can the appeal decision stand if the appeal judges are basing their decision on false information to begin with?

Can Ms. Mangum file another corrected appeal brief based on the nine items you mentioned? What are those nine items on that list?; July 8, 2015 at 1:29 PM
Anonymous said...: Maybe that is why there are no articles on WRAL and the News and Observer about the Appeal Decision because the date of death is wrong? Just one article so far on ABC11 saying the Appeal decision found nothing wrong with the trial. Guess they didn't find anything wrong with date of death either?; July 8, 2015 at 3:01 PM
kenhyderal said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; July 8, 2015 at 4:45 PM
kenhyderal said...: @ Walt at 10:10 OK Walt, let me reword the question. If, as you have pointed out today and in the past, a Court of Appeal can't hear new, exculpatory, evidence what recourse does the wrongly convicted have to get a new trial. In other words, how are miscarriages of justice dealt with in North Carolina?; July 8, 2015 at 4:47 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

I thought there was a discussion of Motions for Appropriate Relief earlier. Here is a summary.

https://appellate.nccourts.org/opinions/?c=2&pdf=32433

I would expect that a successful MAR will not be based on speculation and inexpert opinion.; July 8, 2015 at 5:19 PM
Anonymous said...: Sorry. Wrong link. My iPad is not copying correctly. Try googling Motion for Appropriate Relief North Carolina; July 8, 2015 at 5:26 PM
Anonymous said...: http://sogpubs.unc.edu/electronicversions/pdfs/aojb1003.pdf; July 8, 2015 at 5:28 PM
Anonymous said...: http://www.appealslawgroup.com/blog/2014/june/what-is-a-motion-for-appropriate-relief-in-north.aspx; July 8, 2015 at 5:33 PM
Anonymous said...: http://www.arnoldsmithlaw.com/motion-for-appropriate-relief-mar.html; July 8, 2015 at 5:35 PM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: "OK Walt, let me reword the question. If, as you have pointed out today and in the past, a Court of Appeal can't hear new, exculpatory, evidence..."

BZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZT [manual buzzer] Run him.

Two hits on the manual buzzer in one day. Not good Kenny, not good. There is no "if" allowable. Until you show some evidence of learning, you get no answers. I would observe though that the rule is the same in Canada. Housen v. Nikolaisen, [2002] 2 S.C.R. 235, 2002 SCC 33. Even though you probably can't figure out what S.C.R. and SCC mean, those are the Supreme Court of Canada's case reports. See also: BAGMOOR WIND LIMITED, v THE SCOTTISH MINISTERS, [2012] CSIH 93. That's the highest court in Scotland.

"...what recourse does the wrongly convicted have to get a new trial. In other words, how are miscarriages of justice dealt with in North Carolina?"

Again, you have failed to show any evidence of an ability to learn. Therefore, you must RTFF as I posted this answer back when Crystal was convicted.

Walt-in-Durham; July 8, 2015 at 5:40 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

Based on reading of these posts, an MAR requires expert legal assistance. You, Sidney and Crystal should not do this without legal assistance. Hire a good lawyer.

Second, your speculation and opinions are not sufficient. Your unequaled skill as a master debater is not enough.

Scrutinize the discovery. Hire one or more legal experts who will provide reports that contradict the Nichols and Roberts conclusions. Interview the attending medical personnel and have them sign affidavits. Interview all of the witnesses.; July 8, 2015 at 5:43 PM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

Are you telling Mangum that she's going to be released soon? If you are that's just cruel.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; July 8, 2015 at 9:06 PM
guiowen said...: Abe,
No, I doubt he's actually telling her that. That's probably just for our consumption.; July 8, 2015 at 9:40 PM
kenhyderal said...: Did you ever wonder why the perception of Lawyers by the public is so low? "If lawyers want to improve their image, we can start by improving reality. Make the justice system swifter, more transparent and more even-handed. Find ways to make the price of lawyers’ talents and efforts affordable to more than 20% of the population. Push harder for principled conduct rules and fewer obstructive tactics in litigation" Jordon Furlong. Walt cites SCC rulings about a car accident where a passenger was rendered paraplegic and if fault fell on the municipality for the road condition or on the driver. Applying rulings such as this to set a precedent principle for a case like Crystal's is nothing more then legal mumbo-jumbo designed to baffle the incognizant. Likewise, the oft cited Welch and Holsclaw rulings have little common sense circumstantial equivalencies to Crystal's case. Anyways, thanks to Poster @ 5:43 for a more helpful answer than Lawyer Walt's citations and the kind of lawyerly response that does nothing to improve the tarnished image the public holds of his profession.; July 8, 2015 at 9:45 PM
Anonymous said...: kenhyderal said...

"Walt cites SCC rulings about a car accident where a passenger was rendered paraplegic and if fault fell on the municipality for the road condition or on the driver. Applying rulings such as this to set a precedent principle for a case like Crystal's is nothing more then legal mumbo-jumbo designed to baffle the incognizant. Likewise, the oft cited Welch and Holsclaw rulings have little common sense circumstantial equivalencies to Crystal's case. Anyways, thanks to Poster @ 5:43 for a more helpful answer than Lawyer Walt's citations and the kind of lawyerly response that does nothing to improve the tarnished image the public holds of his profession."

Another iteration of kenny the deaf blind man saying, I saw and heard everything.; July 9, 2015 at 3:56 AM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: " Walt cites SCC rulings about a car accident where a passenger was rendered paraplegic and if fault fell on the municipality for the road condition or on the driver."

Again, you show how you refuse to learn. The ruling was cited to show you that the rule is universal. If you wanted to help Crystal, you would learn the law so you could help her. Instead, you are just an internet blowhard who knows nothing, but is quite willing to demonstrate your ignorance.

Walt-in-Durham; July 9, 2015 at 4:25 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

Were any of the links I provided helpful? If so, you could thank me for doing your research for you. Yet you fail even to acknowledge them. Instead you attack Walt for having the audacity to show that Canada has many of the same legal rules as the US (not particularly surprising given our shared heritage from English common law).

Don't do anything to actually help Crystal. Just keep on master debating. That is what you do best.; July 9, 2015 at 5:06 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny is all type, no action - he's made that clear for a long time now.; July 9, 2015 at 6:07 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Sid:

Are you telling Mangum that she's going to be released soon? If you are that's just cruel.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL

Yes I am telling her that, and I believe that it is true. There is no way in Hades that she'll serve anywhere near the time of her sentence, and there is the greater likelihood that she will be released relatively soon with her conviction overturned.; July 9, 2015 at 7:18 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: guiowen said...
Sidney,
What do you mean by "soon"? Would that be March of 2026?

gui, mon ami,

The wheels of justice move slow. If I had control over the rate at which these wheels rotated, then she would be released by week's end. I try to push them as fast as possible, and I am hopeful that her release would be no later than August 2015... but a release by the end of July 2015 is not unrealistic.; July 9, 2015 at 7:22 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Dr. Harr,

How are appeal decisions containing obvious errors like the date and manner of death protested? What is the next step for Ms. Mangum to correct the wrongs of the appeal attorney in the defense brief? How long does she have to do so?

Can the appeal decision stand if the appeal judges are basing their decision on false information to begin with?

Can Ms. Mangum file another corrected appeal brief based on the nine items you mentioned? What are those nine items on that list?

I am not a lawyer or legally trained, as you know, so I cannot give you an accurate answer to your inquiries. However, I am doing all I can to get the truths of the case to those in position to do something about the injustice as soon as possible.

There were about nine topics which were listed upon which an appeal could be based, and Ann Petersen only chose to bring up one... the weakest that would not lay blame on Meier, the judge, or Duke University Hospital. Ineffective counsel would be the topic that I would have at the head of my appeal. Defense counsel was in essence a reverse-Perry Mason... having a strong defense case that was impossible to lose, and yet allowing the prosecution to win a conviction.; July 9, 2015 at 7:29 AM
Anonymous said...: Dr. Harr,

Is Ms. Mangum filing a MAR within the 10 days allowed after the Appeal Judgement? Is that correct? What is she doing to protest the ruling immediately?; July 9, 2015 at 7:30 AM
Anonymous said...: Dr. Harr,

Is Ms. Mangum waiting for you within that 10 day period to assist her in writing an appropriate motion for relief, is she writing it herself, or is her appeal defense attorney providing immediate assistance?; July 9, 2015 at 7:35 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid - you've been saying she will be released soon for a while - yet you have yet to do anything to actually help her. Nothing you do on a Sharlog will matter, and you've sent so many incorrect and false ones (IDS Expert Payments, Kia Haynes perjury, and others) - I doubt anyone even looks at them anymore.

The fact you keep giving Crystal false hope, while admitting you know nothing about how to actually make it happen, just proves that you don't care about her - you are a sadist and abusing her.

It's pathetic and sad.; July 9, 2015 at 10:06 AM
Anonymous said...: "Nifong Supporter said...

Anonymous said...
Sid:

Are you telling Mangum that she's going to be released soon? If you are that's just cruel.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL

Yes I am telling her that, and I believe that it is true. There is no way in Hades that she'll serve anywhere near the time of her sentence, and there is the greater likelihood that she will be released relatively soon with her conviction overturned."

Another iteration of mr. harr, another deaf blind man, saying he sees and hears everything.; July 9, 2015 at 10:06 AM
Anonymous said...: Let's not get too carried away with blaming Sid for giving Mangum bad advice and false hope.

First of all, we have no idea who is manipulating who in that relationship. Mangum has spent a lifetime manipulating people and the system. She may well be taking advantage fo Sid and using him to do her bidding.

Second, Mangum made the bed she is sleeping in. If Mangum decided to follow Sid's "advice" and cast aside the advice of actual lawyers, that was her decision and it is her problem. The consequences of that decision rest on her and her alone.

Finally, if ever there were two people who deserve each other, it's Sid and Mangum.

If, after all these years of bad results, Mangum is still heeding Sid's advice, following his instructions and placing stock in his empty promises, then she clearly has quite a way to go before she is fit to rejoin society. 14 to 18 years may be about right.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; July 9, 2015 at 10:20 AM
Walt said...: Anonymous at 7:30 wrote: "Is Ms. Mangum filing a MAR within the 10 days allowed after the Appeal Judgement? Is that correct? What is she doing to protest the ruling immediately?"

Ummmm, there is no 10 day rule for filing a MAR after an appellate ruling. It's ten days after entry of judgment, which happened years ago. N.C.G.S. 15A-1414. There is another type of MAR governed by N.C.G.S. 15A-1415 and generally may be filed at any time after judgment. A person may base this type of MAR only on the grounds identified in N.C.G.S. 15A-1415, such as the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the case or the conviction was obtained in violation of the state or federal constitution. An assertion that an indictment or other charging document was fatally defective is an example of a jurisdictional claim. Newly discovered evidence that was not presented at trial falls under the scope of 15A-1415. Assertions that the defendant did not knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently enter a guilty plea or waive the right to be represented by counsel are examples of claims of unconstitutional convictions.

She could also appeal to the North Carolina Supreme Court. Discretionary appeals to the Supreme Court are governed by N.C.G.S. 57A-31 and Rule 15 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure. She has fifteen (15) days to file her petition for review with the Clerk of the Supreme Court (App. Rule 15(b)). Then the state has ten (10) days to file it's response. (App. Rule 15(d)). No supporting brief is required, but supporting authorities may be set forth briefly in the petition. (App. Rule 15(c)).

If the case is accepted by the Supreme Court for review, then, and only then, will briefs be called for and potential oral arguments scheduled. (App. Rule 15(g)). Under N.C.G.S. 7A-31(b)there are only a few cases where the Supreme Court can accept a discretionary review from a decision of the Court of Appeals:
(1) The subject matter of the appeal has significant public interest, or
(2) The cause involves legal principles of major significance to the
jurisprudence of the State, or
(3) Delay in final adjudication is likely to result from failure to certify and
thereby cause substantial harm, or
(4) The work load of the courts of the appellate division is such that the
expeditious administration of justice requires certification.

Thus Crystal's petition will have to show that the COA is wrong and either there is substantial public interest or the case involves significance to the jurisprudence of the state. The 404(b) issue is one of those significance to the jurisprudence matters that the Supremes are interested in. That's why it was so important for Crystal to proceed on the 404(b) issue rather than some of Sid's loopy theories that have no evidence to support them.

Of course, Sid is mostly just interested in abusing Crystal for his own amusement, not in helping her.

Walt-in-Durham; July 9, 2015 at 10:22 AM
kenhyderal said...: Walt said: "Again, you show how you refuse to learn. The ruling was cited to show you that the rule is universal. If you wanted to help Crystal, you would learn the law so you could help her. Instead, you are just an internet blowhard who knows nothing, but is quite willing to demonstrate your ignorance"..................... Of course I want to help Crystal but, according to you, there is no way to reverse what I believe to be an injustice because of what case law proscribes; unjust or not, reasonable or not. I'm not a Lawyer, you and Daniel Meier are. Attacking my lack of knowledge about matters legal is not really something that demonstrates your superior brilliance. You have your bias about Crystal and I have mine. I simply asked you "if" she acted in self defence, which despite the Courts finding is a distinct possibility and something I believe, what would be her next course of action. Self-defence is something that Meier argued ineffectively for. In a clothed individual blood from an inflicted wound does not necessarily reach the floor in the place where the stabbing occurred. This was a highly fluid situation in a small apartment so, where blood was found on the floor is not, necessarily, probative. Besides, her own testimony Crystal needed qualified expert witnesses, yes even Dr. Roberts to, perhaps, qualify her conclusion after hearing input from other expert witnesses from Duke Hospital who were actually involved in the treatment of Daye and in the accident that killed him. The unqualified battered woman expert was worse then useless.; July 9, 2015 at 12:55 PM
guiowen said...: Kenhyderal,
Hire your own lawyer. Pay him or her well. Take this to the NC Supreme Court if need be.
Why do you have to ask so many questions rather than doing what you clearly have to do? Do we need to spell this out for you?; July 9, 2015 at 1:10 PM
Anonymous said...: kenhyderal said...

"Attacking my lack of knowledge about matters legal is not really something that demonstrates your superior brilliance"

Your belief is that in spite of your lack of knowledge in several specialized fields of knowledge, you know the situation better than anyone. Did you learn that from kilgo. kilgo claimed he knew more about the lacrosse false rape case than anyone. He ran away after people challenged him to show what he knew.

In any event it is another iteration of blind deaf kenny claimeing he heard and saw everything.; July 9, 2015 at 1:30 PM
The great Kilgo said...: Kenhyderal,
I have very important information for you, that will blow the lid off this case. Please call me.; July 9, 2015 at 1:52 PM
kenhyderal said...: Guiowen said: "Hire your own lawyer. Pay him or her well. Take this to the NC Supreme Court if need be"....................................................... Marie Antoinette said, "they have no bread? Let them eat cake".; July 9, 2015 at 1:58 PM
Anonymous said...: guiowen:

Sid and kenny both know that their claims are, in Walt's words, loopy. Neither one has or will ever shell out a nickel of their own money to advance them in a meaningful way. There are, after all, consequences for making unsubstantiated and outright false claims in the real world.

There is a limit as to how far Sid and kenny will go for Mangum. It ends exactly where their own self interests begin.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; July 9, 2015 at 2:16 PM
Anonymous said...: kenny:

If you mean what you say, it's time for you and Sid to get off your asses and pony up in a meaningful way.

You need to lead by example by kicking in some of your own money. Sell your assets, if necessary. Hold fundraisers. Stage protests. Put up or shut up. Otherwise, all you are is a troll.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; July 9, 2015 at 2:22 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

I am sick of waiting for you to get in touch with me. I put it all on the line for you. I am giving you one last chance. Please meet me down by the pier tonight at midnight. I will be wearing a red dress w/ high heels. I will have on fishnet stockings and my back will be shaved. When I see you I will say "Looking for a good time, sailor?" to which you will reply, "How much for a blumpkin?"

I'll have all the documents regarding Mangum's assault and the identity of the mystery rapists. If you believe Mangum was raped you will meet with me.

Please be there.

THE GREAT KILGO; July 9, 2015 at 2:31 PM
guiowen said...: Come on, Kenny,
We all know you Canadians working in the UAE are well paid. If you really want your little friend out of jail, spend some money. Don't tell us about some 18th century woman.; July 9, 2015 at 3:09 PM
kenhyderal said...: Abe said: "If you mean what you say, it's time for you and Sid to get off your asses and pony up in a meaningful way. You need to lead by example by kicking in some of your own money. Sell your assets, if necessary. Hold fundraisers. Stage protests. Put up or shut up. Otherwise, all you are is a troll"................That's what poor people have to do, I guess, to get justice. Since so many Court appointed Attorneys unethically gave only a minimal effort to defending indigent clients they are appointed to the constitutional guarantees of representation have little meaning it seems. In the paper I quoted yesterday, one of the points made as to how Lawyers could improve the terrible image they have with the Public is to "Find ways to make the price of lawyers’ talents and efforts affordable to more than 20% of the population". Over and above this not to give your best effort to an indigent client you have been appointed to defend is a moral deficiency; period.; July 9, 2015 at 3:18 PM
Anonymous said...: kenny whined:

"That's what poor people have to do, I guess, to get justice. Since so many Court appointed Attorneys unethically gave only a minimal effort to defending indigent clients they are appointed to the constitutional guarantees of representation have little meaning it seems."

No attorney in the history fo the world has ever given less effort to defending an indigent client than you have given to freeing Mangum. Come on, kenny, give something. $5.00. $10.00. Anything. Stop being a troll and do something for Mangum.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; July 9, 2015 at 3:26 PM
kenhyderal said...: You are out by at least 1000 fold; July 9, 2015 at 4:35 PM
Anonymous said...: Abe,

You are being unfair. Don't forget all of the master debating Kenny has done on Mangum.; July 9, 2015 at 4:51 PM
Anonymous said...: Dr. Harr,

I agree that it is time for kenhyderal to put up or shut up. He talks a good game but what has he done to help Crystal?

Malek Williams
Hillside H.S.
Class of 1996; July 9, 2015 at 6:46 PM
THE GREAT KILGO said...: kenhyderal,

The poster at 2:31 is an impostor. I would never wear a red dress and high heels. However, I am willing to provide you the information about the lax party.; July 9, 2015 at 6:51 PM
Fake Kenhyderal said...: " Marie Antoinette said, "they have no bread? Let them eat cake"."

No she didn't.; July 9, 2015 at 8:08 PM
guiowen said...: OK Kenny, so give $10,000!; July 9, 2015 at 8:33 PM
Anonymous said...: Walt,

What are your legal thoughts on the apparent fraud of the state's autopsy report in comparison to the Duke Medical Reports?

What about the way the malpractice was completely covered up, (what is the legal term for that - maliciously misstating facts in order to conceal information of significant importance to a case?), by the misstating of the date and manner of death, and leaving out details of the discrepancies between the evidence on trial about the same in the Appeal briefs and decision? How is that issue corrected and filed appropriately?; July 9, 2015 at 10:09 PM
Anonymous said...: Crystal probably likes being incarcerated.It was better than her life on the outside anyway.Going to prison is part of black identity.; July 9, 2015 at 11:10 PM
Anonymous said...: THE GREAT KILGO said . . .

Kenny,

I waited at the pier for you for three hours. You never showed up, but I made $400.00. I'll be there again tomorrow night, if you are still interested in meeting.

THE GREAT KILGO; July 9, 2015 at 11:37 PM
Walt said...: Anonymous at 10:09 PM wrote: "What are your legal thoughts on the apparent fraud of the state's autopsy report in comparison to the Duke Medical Reports?"

I have always assumed, for purposes of the discussion, that medical malpractice occurred. So, repeat after me - CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE HAS NO PLACE IN THE CRIMINAL LAW.

Every time you think Daye's medical treatment is an issue repeat the bold phrase above. Then, make an argument why the case law should be reversed. As I do not sit on the Supreme Court, my thoughts about the wisdom of the case law are no more, and no less relevant than yours. So, make a cogent argument why you think the case law should be reversed.

Walt-in-Durham; July 10, 2015 at 3:32 AM
Anonymous said...: 1. Duke and Ms. Mangum have 'history' that could and should have been brought up when considering the possibility written into the law that mentions sole cause of death from medical malpractice existing as a point that can be questioned and examined when determining guilt in a murder case, especially given the obvious cover-up of Duke's malpractice in this case that caused the actual death of Mr. Daye as documented in Dukes' medical records, the state's autopsy report, the defense autopsy record, the appeal defense attorney's briefs, and the appeal judges decision, all of which give so many variant's of the deceased's death that the defendant has no practical means of accomplishing any of them - and none without the direct assistance of Duke.

2. The possibility does exist that malpractice can be the sole cause of death, as it does for any medical proceeding, therefore it can and should be examined to the fullest extent necessary to eliminate reasonable doubt as to guilt for a murder conviction by law. The law is written to cover the contributory negligence aspect inherent in a case where the possibility exists that indeed the professional malpractice is the sole cause of death.

Therefore, there are just two reasons why Duke could indeed be the proximate cause of contributory negligence greater than Ms. Mangum for the death of Mr. Daye and therefore sole cause of death by malpractice in adherence to how the law was stated by the judge at the trial, therefore rendering Ms. Mangum not guilty of murder as determined by the law.; July 10, 2015 at 8:02 AM
Anonymous said...: " Anonymous Anonymous said...

1. Duke and Ms. Mangum have 'history' that could and should have been brought up when considering the possibility written into the law that mentions sole cause of death from medical malpractice existing as a point that can be questioned and examined when determining guilt in a murder case, especially given the obvious cover-up of Duke's malpractice in this case that caused the actual death of Mr. Daye as documented in Dukes' medical records, the state's autopsy report, the defense autopsy record, the appeal defense attorney's briefs, and the appeal judges decision, all of which give so many variant's of the deceased's death that the defendant has no practical means of accomplishing any of them - and none without the direct assistance of Duke.

2. The possibility does exist that malpractice can be the sole cause of death, as it does for any medical proceeding, therefore it can and should be examined to the fullest extent necessary to eliminate reasonable doubt as to guilt for a murder conviction by law. The law is written to cover the contributory negligence aspect inherent in a case where the possibility exists that indeed the professional malpractice is the sole cause of death.

Therefore, there are just two reasons why Duke could indeed be the proximate cause of contributory negligence greater than Ms. Mangum for the death of Mr. Daye and therefore sole cause of death by malpractice in adherence to how the law was stated by the judge at the trial, therefore rendering Ms. Mangum not guilty of murder as determined by the law.

July 10, 2015 at 8:02 AM"

You are incredibly stupid.; July 10, 2015 at 8:09 AM
Fake Kenhyderal said...: "The possibility does exist that malpractice can be the sole cause of death"

Repeat after me:

"If Crystal had not stabbed Reggie, he wouldn't have been in the hospital"; July 10, 2015 at 9:48 AM
guiowen said...: To Anonymous 8:02,
Hire a lawyer. I've already discussed with Kenhyderal the possibility that he will contribute $10,000 for this. Perhaps you can come up with $5,000. No doubt there are friends of yours who would like to bring down Duke and will contribute similar amounts.; July 10, 2015 at 10:29 AM
Anonymous said...: Tinfoil:

I am but a simple sausage maker, but even I understand what Walt, Fake Kenny and so many others have been saying on here for so long.

In layman's terms, people are responsible for the reasonably foreseeable consequences of their actions. Most of us are taught this when we are children.

When you use a deadly weapon on someone there is always a chance that medical help may not be immediately available, or that a mistake may be made in the treatment of the injuries you inficted and the victim may die. Foreseeable circumstances such as the inavailability of adequate and timely medical care, a medical mistake, or unanticipated complications during convalescence do not relieve the person using the deadly weapon from responsibility for their victim's death. To the contrary, it's all the more reason NOT to go around stabbing, shooting, clubbing or beating people unless it is absolutely necessary to protect yourself or others or, in some cases, property.

This is something people of ordinary intelligence understand and universally agree upon. That is why it is the rule of law in civilized society. That is why neither you, Sid nor kenny have been able (or will ever be able) to find a medical expert, judge, jury, competent lawyer, reporter or normally functioning adult to buy the ridiculous claim that Mr. Daye's death was not due to complications from the stab wound inflicted by Mangum.

Consider yourself elucidated.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; July 10, 2015 at 10:51 AM
kenhyderal said...: Abe said: "That is why neither you, Sid nor kenny have been able (or will ever be able) to find a medical expert, judge, jury, competent lawyer, reporter or normally functioning adult to buy the ridiculous claim that Mr. Daye's death was not due to complications from the stab wound inflicted by Mangum".................... Just watch us.; July 10, 2015 at 12:41 PM
Anonymous said...: We have been watching since Mangum's conviction more than 19 months ago.; July 10, 2015 at 12:53 PM
Anonymous said...: kenny said...

"Just watch us."

We have been.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; July 10, 2015 at 12:57 PM
kenhyderal said...: Fake KH said: "Repeat after me. If Crystal had not stabbed Reggie, he wouldn't have been in the hospital".............................................. Repeat after me. If Reginald Daye had no become habituated to heavy alcohol consumption; something that led him, while in a state of gross intoxication, to commit violence on a defenceless woman, he would not have of been in hospital, where deprivation of his usual dose of alcohol led him to go into a serious life-threatening alcohol withdrawal and it's associated and potentially fatal delirium tremens. Saying what sent him to hospital is a proximate cause is equivalent to Dr. Nicholls' "She stabbed him he died" A ME is supposed to find cause of death in a stepwise manner. ie. Removal from life support, due to brain death, due to cerebral anoxia, due to prolonged oxygen deprivation, due to esophageal intubation, due to a medical error during treatment for acute alcohol withdrawal, due to chronic alcoholism.; July 10, 2015 at 1:08 PM
Fake Kenhyderal said...: Sorry Kenny -- Mangum's stabbing of Reggie put him in the hospital, not his alcohol consumption.

The "steps" begin with the stabbing, and end with Reggie's death. Despite your wishes otherwise, Reggie's death will always be Mangum's responsibility.; July 10, 2015 at 1:15 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

Neither you nor Sid will do something as simple as get a release from Mangum and contact Meier or her other attorneys. Why should we believe that you would actually do anything? You are a blog-warrior, but overall coward. You can type a good game, but that's as far as you go.

But, I have no doubt you and Sid will continue to play games and torture and abuse Crystal - it's what sadists and abusers do, and you and Sid fit the mold.; July 10, 2015 at 1:15 PM
kenhyderal said...: Abe said: " That is why it is the rule of law in civilized society"................................................................................ And in a lot of uncivilized societies as well. But societies can change for the better. Look at America they lag behind much of the world but eventually they are dragged screaming and kicking towards a society of more perfect justice. In a country where there are more Lawyers per capita then in any other nation and more people in prison then any other society it's no wonder that Law, once held to be a noble calling, is such a despised profession there.; July 10, 2015 at 1:22 PM
kenhyderal said...: Don't you just love those amateur psychiatrists like Anonymous @ 1:15 But of course they always remain anonymous while they attack Dr. Sidney Harr, Kenneth Edwards and Crystal Mangum. Talk about cowardly blog warriors.; July 10, 2015 at 1:29 PM
Fake Kenhyderal said...: Amen, Kenny -- We should establish Sharia law, just like the UAE.; July 10, 2015 at 1:33 PM
kenhyderal said...: Fake KH said: "Mangum's stabbing of Reggie put him in the hospital, not his alcohol consumption" ......................................... You've neglected his alcohol fueled, jealous rage that led him to brutally attack a defenceless woman who used whatever means available to save herself from potential death.; July 10, 2015 at 1:34 PM
guiowen said...: So, Kenny,
Are you getting the $10,000 (your part of the lawyer's fee)?; July 10, 2015 at 1:37 PM
Fake Kenhyderal said...: "You've neglected his alcohol fueled, jealous rage that led him to brutally attack a defenceless woman who used whatever means available to save herself from potential death."

And neither you nor Sid nor anyone else has proven that this is the true version of the events that occurred.

But thanks for trying.; July 10, 2015 at 1:38 PM
Anonymous said...: Fake Kenny,

You are being unfair to Kenny. Kenny is a master debater, and a master debater is never required to prove anything. When you are a master debater, you simply make claims and everyone else is required to accept those claims as established fact unless they can prove with absolute certainty that the claim cannot possibly be true.

Kenny is angry that Crystal's trial was not run as a master debate, with Kenny in the star role as master debater. He could claim that Crystal acted in self-defense, and no one could prove with absolute certainty that she attacked Daye. Similarly, Kenny could claim that the intubation was the "sole" cause of death, and everyone would be required to accept it because he is the master debater.

Unfortunately, the trial was not a master debate, and evidence was important. Kenny thinks that is so unfair.; July 10, 2015 at 4:10 PM
kenhyderal supporter said...: I'm proud to call kenhyderal my friend.; July 10, 2015 at 7:20 PM
kenhyderal said...: Fake KH said: "And neither you nor Sid nor anyone else has proven that this is the true version of the events that occurred".................What about jealous Daye's admission of violently abusing Crystal because she disrespected him by talking to a male friend; July 10, 2015 at 9:46 PM
Anonymous said...: Self-defense was argued and rejected by the jury - and nothing that happened at the hospital was relevant to self-defense. You can keep crying all you want, but self-defense was aggressively argued - and every point you want made - alcohol fueled rage, continuous beating, pulling hair, and the rest was argued - it all boiled down to if he let her go - and the evidence pointed to that - as did her prior history with Milton Morgan.

Just because you didn't agree with the jury didn't mean they were wrong.; July 11, 2015 at 4:27 AM
Anonymous said...: " kenhyderal said...

Fake KH said: "And neither you nor Sid nor anyone else has proven that this is the true version of the events that occurred".................What about jealous Daye's admission of violently abusing Crystal because she disrespected him by talking to a male friend

July 10, 2015 at 9:46 PM"

None so blid as he who refuses to see, none so deaf as he who refuses to hear.; July 11, 2015 at 4:38 AM
Anonymous said...: Sidney,

It has now been 10 days since you realized that this sharlog was completely false and that your accusation that Aykia Hanes was guilty of perjury was baseless.

Why did you not take down the sharlog at that time? A new reader who listened to the sharlog without reading the comments could be deceived by a product you now concede is eggregiously false.

In addition to your public apology to Aykia Hanes, you also owe apologies to anyone who played this sharlog after you realized it was false.

Take it down now or include the warning I suggested over a week ago that you took "under advisement."; July 11, 2015 at 5:51 AM
Fake Kenhyderal said...: Oh, Kenny - Reggie's admission was never part of the problem. It's the part that you described as "a defenceless woman who used whatever means available to save herself from potential death" hat has never been proven. I'll note you didn't attempt to address it, either.; July 11, 2015 at 7:09 AM
Anonymous said...: Does anybody really know what time it is; July 11, 2015 at 8:32 AM
Anonymous said...: Does anybody really care; July 11, 2015 at 8:34 AM
Anonymous said...: If so I can't imagine why; July 11, 2015 at 8:34 AM
Anonymous said...: We've all got time enough to cry; July 11, 2015 at 8:35 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny - everything aboutbDaye being drunk and angry with Crystal - and even starting the fight - was in the trial. You've been told many times - the issue was Crystal says he was choking her - Daye said he let her go. The jury didn't believe Crystal - but you can't point to anything that wasn't introduced regarding the self-defense, you just disagree with the jury.; July 11, 2015 at 9:39 AM
kenhyderal said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; July 11, 2015 at 4:09 PM
Anonymous said...: What new trial?; July 11, 2015 at 4:12 PM
kenhyderal said...: Meier failed to stress to the Jury how improbable Daye's version was. He failed to give the Jury alternate explanations for the evidence found; for example, you can't pinpoint the exact place where Daye was, when Crystal stabbed him, in self-defence, by where blood was found on the floor. In a clothed individual who remains mobile, the clothing would soak up the blood and not allow it hit the floor while he moved about. Daye, a known knife thrower, is the more likely one to have thrown multiple knives at a person he is attacking then the victim who would grab hold of a single available knife within her reach. The image of Crystal peppering Daye with knives is just ludicrous. Walker's testimony came in, but no one ever heard about the previous repaired stab wound that alcoholic Daye has suffered. The circumstances surrounding that could be informative. Common sense though would belie that the bigger, stronger, drunken alcoholic, Daye in a self admitted jealous rage who, out of control, had physically assaulted Crystal would, suddenly, come to his senses and decide to flee his own apartment. At one point, he says he was trying to keep her from leaving and at another point he was telling her to leave. Well, I could go on and on but I've been cautioned about letting the prosecution know what strategy could be used in Crystal's new trial; July 11, 2015 at 4:14 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

You must have missed the news. The Court of Appeals rejected Crystal's appeal. On what basis are you predicting new trial? Are are you just master debating again?; July 11, 2015 at 4:18 PM
Anonymous said...: Sid,

Have you considered re-titling you most recent shlog as "A Sharlog Built on Lies?"; July 11, 2015 at 6:44 PM
guiowen said...: To the 4:18,
Please let Kenny fantasize.; July 11, 2015 at 7:15 PM
Anonymous said...: So, Kenny, you admittedly do nothing to help Crystal but fantasize and furiously comment on Sid's blog.

Sid does nothing but put false information on a blog (which no one reads), and sends bizarre letters to people who immediately throw them away. Nothing in the Courts.

Exactly how will you get Crystal a new trial?; July 12, 2015 at 5:44 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

How will your master debating get Crystal a new trial?; July 12, 2015 at 6:43 AM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "Exactly how will you get Crystal a new trial?".................... Just watch me.; July 12, 2015 at 7:54 AM
kenhyderal supporter said...: I'm proud to call kenhyderal my friend. He will answer all of the doubters in due course.; July 12, 2015 at 7:55 AM
kenhyderal supporter said...: Just watch him.; July 12, 2015 at 7:56 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

We have been watching you master debate for 19 months since Crystal's conviction.; July 12, 2015 at 7:57 AM
guiowen said...: we've been watching him master debate since Crystal was arrested in 2011.; July 12, 2015 at 8:55 AM
Anonymous said...: "kenhyderal said...

Meier failed to stress to the Jury how improbable Daye's version was. He failed to give the Jury alternate explanations for the evidence found; for example, you can't pinpoint the exact place where Daye was, when Crystal stabbed him, in self-defence, by where blood was found on the floor. In a clothed individual who remains mobile, the clothing would soak up the blood and not allow it hit the floor while he moved about. Daye, a known knife thrower, is the more likely one to have thrown multiple knives at a person he is attacking then the victim who would grab hold of a single available knife within her reach. The image of Crystal peppering Daye with knives is just ludicrous. Walker's testimony came in, but no one ever heard about the previous repaired stab wound that alcoholic Daye has suffered. The circumstances surrounding that could be informative. Common sense though would belie that the bigger, stronger, drunken alcoholic, Daye in a self admitted jealous rage who, out of control, had physically assaulted Crystal would, suddenly, come to his senses and decide to flee his own apartment. At one point, he says he was trying to keep her from leaving and at another point he was telling her to leave. Well, I could go on and on but I've been cautioned about letting the prosecution know what strategy could be used in Crystal's new trial

July 11, 2015 at 4:14 PM"

You are incredibly and viviously stupid.; July 12, 2015 at 9:46 AM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said:" and viviously stupid" ................................ Huh??; July 12, 2015 at 10:06 AM
guiowen said...: It's "viciously", Kenny. Don't act as if you never made a typo.; July 12, 2015 at 10:33 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

You do know you might actually have to talk to someone to help Crystal, right? Your furious typing isn't going to accomplish anything. But, it is nice (sad) to see you aren't done abusing Crystal with false hope yet.; July 12, 2015 at 10:43 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

Have you asked your Mommy to give you your passport?; July 12, 2015 at 2:49 PM
Anonymous said...: Crystal should have been executed and if Nifong had any self respect he would have committed suicide.He made a national clown of himself.; July 12, 2015 at 3:00 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous at 3:00 - don't be an asshole and a racist. No one thinks you are cute - we all know you are pathetic and hopefully everyone just ignores you.; July 12, 2015 at 6:19 PM
kenhyderal said...: Guiowen said : "It's "viciously", Kenny"............................ Vicious? Moi? I usually get called the antithesis of vicious, "a bleeding heart liberal"; July 12, 2015 at 9:29 PM
guiowen said...: You are so funny, Kenny!; July 12, 2015 at 9:55 PM
Anonymous said...: Here is a link for incredibly viciously stupid kenny to follow:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvVPdyYeaQU; July 13, 2015 at 3:46 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

I think vicious is accurate. Look at your treatment of Daye and the lacrosse players.; July 13, 2015 at 4:37 AM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: "... you can't pinpoint the exact place where Daye was, when Crystal stabbed him, in self-defence,..."

That's because Crystal didn't stab him in self defense.

" I could go on and on but I've been cautioned about letting the prosecution know what strategy could be used in Crystal's new trial[.]"

That is the first time on this blog you have ever even given consideration to doing something helpful to Crystal's cause. Unfortunately it is more than a few days late and many dollars short.

Walt-in-Durham; July 13, 2015 at 6:00 AM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: "Abe said: " That is why it is the rule of law in civilized society"................................................................................ And in a lot of uncivilized societies as well."

Kenny, you apparently don't understand the rule of law. The rule of law means many different things, in court though it means that the laws are applied equally. In this case, the law was applied equally to Crystal as it is all other defendants. What you continually argue for is an unequal application of the law. You don't want the law that contributory negligence has no place in the criminal law, prohibited from application to Crystal. You argue that precedent, should not be applied to Crystal. You argue that despite its near universal application, courts of appeal don't hear new evidence, for the court of appeals to hear new evidence.

Walt-in-Durham; July 13, 2015 at 6:11 AM
Anonymous said...: Walt, at 6:11 AM, makes the case rather conclusively that keeny believes his favorite murderess should get a pass for he crime.; July 13, 2015 at 6:22 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous Anonymous said...
Sid - you've been saying she will be released soon for a while - yet you have yet to do anything to actually help her. Nothing you do on a Sharlog will matter, and you've sent so many incorrect and false ones (IDS Expert Payments, Kia Haynes perjury, and others) - I doubt anyone even looks at them anymore.

The fact you keep giving Crystal false hope, while admitting you know nothing about how to actually make it happen, just proves that you don't care about her - you are a sadist and abusing her.

It's pathetic and sad.

Actually, Crystal has every reason to be optimistic. The case against her was baseless, flawed, and the only reason the prosecution prevailed is because her attorneys sold her out. She will be free soon... once the truth is known.; July 13, 2015 at 8:14 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Let's not get too carried away with blaming Sid for giving Mangum bad advice and false hope.

First of all, we have no idea who is manipulating who in that relationship. Mangum has spent a lifetime manipulating people and the system. She may well be taking advantage fo Sid and using him to do her bidding.

Second, Mangum made the bed she is sleeping in. If Mangum decided to follow Sid's "advice" and cast aside the advice of actual lawyers, that was her decision and it is her problem. The consequences of that decision rest on her and her alone.

Finally, if ever there were two people who deserve each other, it's Sid and Mangum.

If, after all these years of bad results, Mangum is still heeding Sid's advice, following his instructions and placing stock in his empty promises, then she clearly has quite a way to go before she is fit to rejoin society. 14 to 18 years may be about right.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL

Hey, Abe.

You got a couple of things wrong. First, Mangum did not follow my advice, which was to study her case and prepare to represent herself at trial. Instead, she chose to place her faith in her attorneys... definitely a mistake in my estimation as it was obvious to me that they had a priority of protecting Duke and the medical examiner. Also, her own attorneys withheld from her information from the defense experts and investigators. Despite repeated attempts, she has never seen any of the reports by those individuals paid by the IDS.

Second, because I am advocating for Mangum does not mean that she has manipulated me. Simply, I observed a gross injustice against her, and as a concerned citizen I decided to do something about it. Comprende?; July 13, 2015 at 8:22 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
kenny:

If you mean what you say, it's time for you and Sid to get off your asses and pony up in a meaningful way.

You need to lead by example by kicking in some of your own money. Sell your assets, if necessary. Hold fundraisers. Stage protests. Put up or shut up. Otherwise, all you are is a troll.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL

Abe, truth, not money, will free Crystal. The politicians, media-types, and the State have damaged Mangum in public opinion to the OJ/Nifong level. Fundraisers, protests would be a waste of time and money. The important avenue to take is to enlighten the masses.; July 13, 2015 at 8:30 AM
Anonymous said...: Sidney Harr said

"
Hey, Abe.

You got a couple of things wrong. First, Mangum did not follow my advice, which was to study her case and prepare to represent herself at trial. Instead, she chose to place her faith in her attorneys... definitely a mistake in my estimation as it was obvious to me that they had a priority of protecting Duke and the medical examiner. Also, her own attorneys withheld from her information from the defense experts and investigators. Despite repeated attempts, she has never seen any of the reports by those individuals paid by the IDS.

again mr. harr shows how viciously and incredibly stupid hw is.; July 13, 2015 at 8:32 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Walt said...
Anonymous at 10:09 PM wrote: "What are your legal thoughts on the apparent fraud of the state's autopsy report in comparison to the Duke Medical Reports?"

I have always assumed, for purposes of the discussion, that medical malpractice occurred. So, repeat after me - CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE HAS NO PLACE IN THE CRIMINAL LAW.

Every time you think Daye's medical treatment is an issue repeat the bold phrase above. Then, make an argument why the case law should be reversed. As I do not sit on the Supreme Court, my thoughts about the wisdom of the case law are no more, and no less relevant than yours. So, make a cogent argument why you think the case law should be reversed.

Walt-in-Durham

Walt, what contributory negligence? Duke Hospital staff was singularly and totally responsible for Daye's brain death... and brain death is the reason he was taken off life-support. The stab wound had absolutely nothing to do with his brain death or anything that led to his brain death. Dr. Nichols said a "complication" from the stab wound led to Daye's death. What "complication"? A complication from a stab wound could be a secondary infection or problems secondary to shock or blood loss (there is no evidence that Daye received a transfusion).

Face it, the only "complication" Daye sustained was an esophageal intubation by Duke Hospital staff for the treatment of delirium tremens.; July 13, 2015 at 8:43 AM
guiowen said...: Sidney,
How precisely, do you propose to make the truth known?; July 13, 2015 at 8:52 AM
Anonymous said...: The new sharlog shows a picture of both doors with apartment N having the door open and a wreath nearby. Apartment P is also shown. You just need to enlarge that picture to see P, which would show they are side by side. I assume this is a discovery photo that Sidney has had all along. What a tall tale Sydney weaved when he had the answer all along. In the first sharlog he cropped this open door picture to make up the breezeway.

Second he bemoans the fact that Walt made a mistake in chiding him on doing an apology to Ms. Hanes. So, in affect he is trying to rationalize what he did based on Walt here. My goodness what a stretch. And he also shows a picture of Walt with ever changing faces. No idea what this means other than Sydney is just being a jerk.; July 13, 2015 at 9:14 AM
Anonymous said...: Nifong Supporter:

"Walt, what contributory negligence? Duke Hospital staff was singularly and totally responsible for Daye's brain death... and brain death is the reason he was taken off life-support. The stab wound had absolutely nothing to do with his brain death or anything that led to his brain death. Dr. Nichols said a "complication" from the stab wound led to Daye's death. What "complication"? A complication from a stab wound could be a secondary infection or problems secondary to shock or blood loss (there is no evidence that Daye received a transfusion).

Face it, the only "complication" Daye sustained was an esophageal intubation by Duke Hospital staff for the treatment of delirium tremens."

mr. harr again mabnifests his vicious incredible stupidity.; July 13, 2015 at 9:46 AM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "Walt, at 6:11 AM, makes the case rather conclusively that keeny believes his favorite murderess should get a pass for he crime"........................What Walt wont address is recourse in situations, like Crystal's, where, available, exculpatory evidence was not presented at trial; July 13, 2015 at 10:17 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny - it wasn't exculpatory - again, Self-Defense was the only way to get a Not Guilty in this case - and the jury rejected that. After they rejected self-defense, the only issue was Manslaughter v some degree of murder. That's been pointed out, you will say it's wrong, but it's not wrong. Self-defense, which was argued and rejected, was the only way to get a not guilty. And the Dr. Roberts report was not, and is not, exculpatory, no matter how many times you and Sid claim it - in fact, admission of that report would have helped the State get a lot closer to 1st Degree - which has been Sid's goal all along. Sid has admitted he has no interest in doing anything to actually help Mangum, and all you do is comment.; July 13, 2015 at 10:23 AM
Walt said...: Sid wrote: "Walt, what contributory negligence? Duke Hospital staff was singularly and totally responsible for Daye's brain death... and brain death is the reason he was taken off life-support."

That you don't understand the law is not a basis to disregard it. Contributory negligence is the doctrine that any amount of negligence on the part of anyone other than the defendant renders null and void the plaintiff's case in civil court. This is the doctrine that you have pursued all along, that some other negligence, cut off Crystal's liability. In fact, that is not our law. The NC Supreme Court specifically rejected that idea with the holding that Contributory Negligence has no place in the criminal law. Like the anonymous poster who argued it above, you are guilty of refusing to address the law as it is. Rather you pursue a fantasy based defense based on your fundamental refusal to acknowledge the law that exists. Until you realize that, your whole position is flawed. And deeply flawed, at that.

"The stab wound had absolutely nothing to do with his brain death or anything that led to his brain death. Dr. Nichols said a "complication" from the stab wound led to Daye's death. What "complication"? A complication from a stab wound could be a secondary infection or problems secondary to shock or blood loss (there is no evidence that Daye received a transfusion)."

Strictly Sid's supposition. The facts are Nichols testimony was unchallenged. Further, Crystal's own expert agreed with Dr. Nichols. Thus, it was a complication.

"Face it, the only "complication" Daye sustained was an esophageal intubation by Duke Hospital staff for the treatment of delirium tremens."

Another case of arguing fantasy not facts. However, let's assume them to be true. The DT's were presumably caused by Daye's withdrawal from alcohol. A withdrawal necessitated by his hospitalization for a stabbing. That is a consequential result. Thus, Dr. Nichols and Dr. Roberts are correct. Under our law, the death must be from a sole intervening cause. Not a consequential one.

Walt-in-Durham; July 13, 2015 at 11:18 AM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: What Walt wont address is recourse in situations, like Crystal's, where, available, exculpatory evidence was not presented at trial[.]"

I explained that 19 months ago when the verdict was entered. I further explained it to you in this very thread. You are just being dishonest.

Walt-in-Durham; July 13, 2015 at 11:20 AM
kenhyderal said...: No you didn't. At least by my reading of the posts you made on this thread. But, perhaps you can point out the date and time you posted this explanation. Are you reluctant to hurt your reputation with the Duke Lacrosse apologists by appearing to help, with Crystal`s exoneration, in any way?; July 13, 2015 at 1:35 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,
Try July 9 at 10:22.; July 13, 2015 at 1:40 PM
kenhyderal said...: Kenhyderal said: I could go on and on but I've been cautioned about letting the prosecution know what strategy could be used in Crystal's new trial...... Walt answered: That is the first time on this blog you have ever even given consideration to doing something helpful to Crystal's cause...............................................................................`I must say, though,(as above) you did concur with advice I`ve been given from an Anonymous Poster about revealing what new exculpatory evidence there is.; July 13, 2015 at 1:45 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: Try July 9 at 10:22.
As Walt so scornfully points out Crystal`s case does not meet Supreme Court requirements 1 to 4. All she has is exculpatory evidence, available, but not presented by Meier, that the Jury never heard.; July 13, 2015 at 1:55 PM
Anonymous said...: Again, Kenny, you refuse to talk to Meier or anyone else to see what the answers would be. Others have noted here that Dr. Roberts states that DTs were ruled out in her report (as they stopped treatment since the symptoms continued) - you claim that's false. What if it wasn't? How would it have played in your fantasy world if the treating doctors had said it wasn't DTs, those were ruled out, and if Dr. Roberts had said it? You see what happens when Sid does a little bit of investigation to test out his theories - turns out his assumptions are almost always wrong.

I guess we know why you refuse to do anything but type away.

At least this is the first time Sid mentioned the Larceny Charges without falsely claiming they could lead to felony murder. He does slowly learn.; July 13, 2015 at 2:26 PM
Anonymous said...: Walt,

If Duke wasn't guilty of killing Mr. Daye with their 'sole cause' malpractice, then why did they contribute to the coverup of their malpractice by the medical examiner and justice systems?

They could have AT LEAST made sure the DA investigated the discrepancies in the state's autopsy report as soon as they were aware of the major issue for the sake of ALL NC citizens and visitors to NC.

Instead, they are apparently still hoping that the problem remains hidden, evidenced by WRAL and NandO Not running an article about the loss of the appeal by Ms. Mangum and the coverup by the date and manner of death in the appeal briefs and decision.; July 13, 2015 at 2:33 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "Again, Kenny, you refuse to talk to Meier or anyone else to see what the answers would be. Others have noted here that Dr. Roberts states that DTs were ruled out in her report (as they stopped treatment since the symptoms continued) - you claim that's false"...................................... It is false. Dr. Roberts's said no such thing. It's Meier that refuses to talk to me or to Dr. Harr; July 13, 2015 at 2:35 PM
Anonymous said...: Dr. Harr,

WHAT EXACTLY are you basing your optimism on when you proclaim the truth will set Ms. Mangum free? HOW is that going to happen without her actually submitting motions, briefs, complaints, etc. herself if she is to 'win' without the assistance of a lawyer?

You blame her for not preparing, but did she even have access to the resources and the where-with-all needed at the time for her to prepare to legally defend herself against murder charges on her own? Does she have the resources NOW to fight on her own?; July 13, 2015 at 2:42 PM
Anonymous said...: " kenhyderal said...

No you didn't. At least by my reading of the posts you made on this thread. But, perhaps you can point out the date and time you posted this explanation. Are you reluctant to hurt your reputation with the Duke Lacrosse apologists by appearing to help, with Crystal`s exoneration, in any way?

July 13, 2015 at 1:35 PM"

As there was no Duke Lacrosse rape case, there canbe no duke rape apologists. There isonly viciously incredibly stupid kenny trying to falsely convict innocent men and trying to get his favorite murderess a pass for her crimes.; July 13, 2015 at 3:01 PM
Anonymous said...: " Blogger kenhyderal said...

Anonymous said: Try July 9 at 10:22.
As Walt so scornfully points out Crystal`s case does not meet Supreme Court requirements 1 to 4. All she has is exculpatory evidence, available, but not presented by Meier, that the Jury never heard. "

There was no exculpatory evidence to be presentes.; July 13, 2015 at 3:02 PM
Anonymous said...: It is false. Dr. Roberts's said no such thing. It's Meier that refuses to talk to me or to Dr. Harr

Have you contacted Meier, or do you expect him to just reach out to you to talk? Have you even provided him a release to speak with you, or a reason to do so? He has no reason to contact you. I don't imagine he thinks he needs anything from you - it's you and Sid who have questions and want answers. Why would he contact you?

Your excuses for why you are just a cowardly commentator and not really interested in doing anything get flimsier and flimsier.; July 13, 2015 at 3:08 PM
kenhyderal said...: I have nothing to say to Meier other then accuse him of providing Crystal with an inadequate defence. You all keep telling me I need to talk to him so he can confirm that he thoroughly investigated and sought out all the evidence. I have already determined he did no such thing. I've asked him to simply contradict me.; July 13, 2015 at 4:00 PM
guiowen said...: Kenny,
I've no doubt you can use his refusal to answer you as reason for a new trial. You need only explain to the Supreme Court that you and Sidney are Crystal's protectors.; July 13, 2015 at 4:06 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

When you say that you "already determined he did no such thing [sought out the evidence]" are you just master debating or did you actually do something?; July 13, 2015 at 5:00 PM
Anonymous said...: Sidney,

Could Aykia Hanes' alarms have been set off when Daye broke down the bathroom door? I suggest you do some experiments at your own apartment. Set up alarms in the apartments next to yours that share a wall. Break down your bathroom door and see if any alarms are set off. You probably will want to repeat the experiment several,times.; July 13, 2015 at 5:20 PM
Anonymous said...: If you look at the bigger picture, what you see in this case is a state that effects the health of the USA and the world through it's Big Money Politics, which in NC means Medicine (think Pharma & Bush & Co. politics), Research, and ... pigs, (the human guinea pig variety is of particular interest to Big Money Politics), demonstrating the severely corrupted mindset, accountability, and political power and ethics that rules, and endeavors to rule, the health of the state, nation, and the world.; July 13, 2015 at 5:22 PM
Anonymous said...: I have already determined he did no such thing. I've asked him to simply contradict me.

Just like Sid determined that the apartments weren't side-by-side? Just like Sid determined prior abuse by Daye? Just like Sid determined all these experts hired? Just like Sid determined felony murder?

Why should he waste his time on you? And how big is your ego that you think he pays attention. The only example you have is a post by Sid where he indicated Meier told him someone told him someone was posting in his name, and he wasn't - doesn't mean Meier saw it.

Your ego is huge, but you are still just a pathetic little keyboard warrior who refuses to do anything.

You are a joke, and an abuser.; July 13, 2015 at 6:04 PM
kenhyderal said...: Yeah, yeah, call names. First, you all say, " why are you afraid to directly ask Attorney Meier". Then you say, " why should he waste his time on you". Because I want all you Crystal detractors to know that Meier, by his own admission ethically failed to do, for his client, what was needed.; July 13, 2015 at 8:24 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "Just like Sid determined that the apartments weren't side-by-side"............ And, if I cant show, conclusively, that Meier did not investigate the circumstances of Daye's death at Duke with those who treated him then I will do like Dr. Harr did with Ms. Hanes and apologize to him.; July 13, 2015 at 9:19 PM
guiowen said...: So, Kenhyderal, have you collected the money for your new lawyer?
Have you finally got hold of your passport?; July 13, 2015 at 10:19 PM
Anonymous said...: All that has to be proven is that he didn't inform the jury of whether or not he investigated Duke's malpractice as a possibility for sole cause of the death to prove that Mr. Meier did Not provide adequate defense legal assistance for his client - since that is what his client wanted him to do in the first place.

His client had to go against his 'command' just to get a written copy of the defense autopsy report by pleading with the judge for it herself at the beginning of the trial, and then didn't receive the report until the last few hours of the last day of the trial, allowing barely a lunch break to make medically uninformed decisions concerning the medical information.

That in itself is all that is needed for evidence, but obviously there is much more proof that Mr. Meier neither provided adequate legal assistance nor informed the jury of Duke's involvement, (not by questioning nor expert evidence and testimony), in the death by malpractice - which is a critical mitigating factor when judging for murder per the law and 'sole cause' clause in This case.

Mr. Meier surely doesn't give a hoot what is said about him on this blog, (just don't pretend and say it for him), or he would have given adequate murder defense legal assistance to begin with.; July 13, 2015 at 10:23 PM
Anonymous said...: A lot of people who study crime wonder why there so many cases of black men raping white women but almost no cases of white men raping black men.They try their best to avoid the simple and obvious answer - white men don't find black women sexually attractive.; July 13, 2015 at 10:40 PM
Anonymous said...: Yes, like all the attorneys who were trying to do what was best for Crystal and not her abusers (Sid and Kenny) or people with an anti-Duke agenda - Meier tried to keep an incredibly damning expert report from the prosecution.

There is nothing exculpatory in the Roberts report - she acknowledges flaws with the original autopsy by trashes the same conclusion. Sid and Kenny claim that she couldn't have defended that on the stand or explains her reasoning - Meier and others talked to her and knew how damaging her testimony would be on the stand to Crystal and pushed to keep it off.

I'm sure Meier doesn't care what abusers of women like Sid and Kenny say on this blog. Why would he?; July 14, 2015 at 3:42 AM
Anonymous said...: Regarding these "missing reports":

Gruelle (the DV expert) - she testified, so Crystal saw her report.
Accident Reconstruction - they attempted to testify, Crystal saw their report.
Dr. Roberts - Crystal saw her report.
The Investigator - he sat behind Crystal the entire time, so I'm sure Crystal knew about him - and they don't produce written reports - so he wasn't a surprise.
So the only "missing" report is the mental health experts - and so there are 2 options there: 1. The reports would not have been helpful to Crystal, so they weren't produced (because once produced they have to be turned over to the prosecution); or 2. Crystal declined to cooperate after the initial interviews, so they never got far enough along to generate a report.

The two abusers still refuse to believe anything that doesn't fit their pre-conceived view of how they want this to go - Sid even admitted he ignored Crystal when she contradicted what he wanted to be true.

Walt is right - with friends like Sid and Kenny, Crystal really does surround herself with abusers. It's sad she has a tendency to go from abusive relationship to abusive relationship - and she is right back in that same cycle now.; July 14, 2015 at 4:57 AM
Anonymous said...: Sidney,

Has Aykia Hanes replied to your apology? Will you post your apology to her and her reply, if any?; July 14, 2015 at 5:06 AM
Anonymous said...: What did the Investigator investigate?; July 14, 2015 at 6:14 AM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: " But, perhaps you can point out the date and time you posted this explanation."

See my post on July 9, 2015 at 10:22 AM for my most recent explanation of how you introduce new evidence. I also posted similar information in a thread where we discussed the appeal process. Your willful ignorance does not become you.

"Are you reluctant to hurt your reputation with the Duke Lacrosse apologists by appearing to help, with Crystal`s exoneration, in any way?"

My only interest in this case is to see Crystal get a fair trial and that justice be done. That is why I have been so critical of the 404(b) evidence. If the COA had reversed on 404(b) grounds, I would have been quite pleased. They didn't. I expected that, but I think that was the most worthy argument Crystal had to make. I am disgusted to see Sid breach Crystal's confidence in him and leak the defense evidence that there was no intervening cause. Likewise I am disgusted to see Kenny and Sid abuse Crystal by telling her false tales about the law and how she's going to get out of prison soon.

I have written it before, but it bears repeating, with friends like Sid and Kenny, Crystal doesn't need any enemies.

Walt-in-Durham; July 14, 2015 at 7:34 AM
Walt said...: Anonymous at 2:33 PM wrote: "If Duke wasn't guilty of killing Mr. Daye with their 'sole cause' malpractice, then why..?"

He who asserts must prove. Prove it.

Walt-in-Durham; July 14, 2015 at 7:45 AM
Anonymous said...: Seriously Walt, I wonder why people do things like you do below. You could just ignore the intent of the question completely, but instead you ignore AND maliciously misrepresent what was said by changing the original intent of the sentence to fit your agenda. Is this a common legal tactic, or are you just being maliciously disingenuous?

Re: Read the entire original sentence again (below) to clear up your obvious lack of understanding of the intent of what was written:

Blogger Walt said...

Anonymous at 2:33 PM wrote: "If Duke wasn't guilty of killing Mr. Daye with their 'sole cause' malpractice, then why..?"

He who asserts must prove. Prove it.

Walt-in-Durham

July 14, 2015 at 7:45 AM

Anonymous said...

Walt,

If Duke wasn't guilty of killing Mr. Daye with their 'sole cause' malpractice, then why did they contribute to the coverup of their malpractice by the medical examiner and justice systems?

They could have AT LEAST made sure the DA investigated the discrepancies in the state's autopsy report as soon as they were aware of the major issue for the sake of ALL NC citizens and visitors to NC.

Instead, they are apparently still hoping that the problem remains hidden, evidenced by WRAL and NandO Not running an article about the loss of the appeal by Ms. Mangum and the coverup by the date and manner of death in the appeal briefs and decision.

July 13, 2015 at 2:33 PM; July 14, 2015 at 8:58 AM
guiowen said...: Anonymous 2:33,
It is vitally important that you collaborate with Sidney and Kenhyderal in obtaining a new trial for Crystal.
Please communicate with them so that you can contribute a reasonable sum for this defense. I have already discussed with Kenhyderal the possibility that he contribute $10,000. An anti-Duke warrior such as you should be able to contribute at least $5,000. Some of your friends, who share your interest, should do as much.; July 14, 2015 at 10:02 AM
Anonymous said...: Tinfoil keeps asserting that things needed to be investigated - yet they provide no proof things weren't investigated, except that no one will share the results of the investigation with him (and the two abusers, Kenny and Sid).

Sid has already proven he can't be trusted, and Kenny is an idiot.; July 14, 2015 at 10:29 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous Anonymous said...
The new sharlog shows a picture of both doors with apartment N having the door open and a wreath nearby. Apartment P is also shown. You just need to enlarge that picture to see P, which would show they are side by side. I assume this is a discovery photo that Sidney has had all along. What a tall tale Sydney weaved when he had the answer all along. In the first sharlog he cropped this open door picture to make up the breezeway.

Second he bemoans the fact that Walt made a mistake in chiding him on doing an apology to Ms. Hanes. So, in affect he is trying to rationalize what he did based on Walt here. My goodness what a stretch. And he also shows a picture of Walt with ever changing faces. No idea what this means other than Sydney is just being a jerk.

Actually, I wish I would've recognized the letter P on the door next to the door with the N. The N is much easier to read. Had I realized that the P was on the door, I never would have uploaded the previous sharlog and made claims of perjury against Hanes.

As far as Walt goes, I was just pointing out that he jumped the gun by assuming that I had not apologized to Hanes. Like me, he lacked the facts to support his allegation. He simply made a mistake.

Since I don't have an image of Walt, rather than using a bland silhouette, I decided to use a morphing composite image. More creative and interesting than the typical silhouette. Nothing sinister.; July 14, 2015 at 12:08 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Walt,

If Duke wasn't guilty of killing Mr. Daye with their 'sole cause' malpractice, then why did they contribute to the coverup of their malpractice by the medical examiner and justice systems?

They could have AT LEAST made sure the DA investigated the discrepancies in the state's autopsy report as soon as they were aware of the major issue for the sake of ALL NC citizens and visitors to NC.

Instead, they are apparently still hoping that the problem remains hidden, evidenced by WRAL and NandO Not running an article about the loss of the appeal by Ms. Mangum and the coverup by the date and manner of death in the appeal briefs and decision.

You make good points about the media. The News & Observer is especially wary about writing anything about Mangum and the Duke Lacrosse case. For example, the newspaper did not mention in its Raleigh edition that D.A. Echols dropped the recent Duke fraternity rape case. Both WRAL and N&O are extremely biased against Mangum.; July 14, 2015 at 12:15 PM
Fake Kenhyderal said...: Sid -- In your revision, you stated that Walt "jumped the gun" by assuming that you did not apologize to Aykia Haynes.

A public offense (such as calling someone a liar and perjurer on a blog) deserves a public apology -- so Walt did not "jump the gun".

it took you longer than 2 weeks from the time someone pointed out that you were wrong to offer that public apology.

You should be ashamed.; July 14, 2015 at 12:20 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...

Dr. Harr,

WHAT EXACTLY are you basing your optimism on when you proclaim the truth will set Ms. Mangum free? HOW is that going to happen without her actually submitting motions, briefs, complaints, etc. herself if she is to 'win' without the assistance of a lawyer?

You blame her for not preparing, but did she even have access to the resources and the where-with-all needed at the time for her to prepare to legally defend herself against murder charges on her own? Does she have the resources NOW to fight on her own?

The period of time of approximately nine month prior to her trial when Crystal Mangum was out on bail, I tried to get her to study and prepare to represent herself in court. I offered my help in helping her to have a better understanding of her case, especially the medical aspects, and to help her with strategies in defending herself at trial. She, unfortunately, elected to place her faith in her attorneys who sold her out.

The truth will set Mangum free... the problem being that there are many who do not want to know the truth. They want to continue believing the fantasy in which the stab wound somehow caused a complication that resulted in Daye's death. I just need to force-feed the truth to a few individuals.; July 14, 2015 at 12:21 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Fake Kenhyderal said...
Sid -- In your revision, you stated that Walt "jumped the gun" by assuming that you did not apologize to Aykia Haynes.

A public offense (such as calling someone a liar and perjurer on a blog) deserves a public apology -- so Walt did not "jump the gun".

it took you longer than 2 weeks from the time someone pointed out that you were wrong to offer that public apology.

You should be ashamed.

Hey, Fake K.

Check out this timeline: On July 1, 2015, I mailed a certified letter of apology to Aykia Hanes. On July 2, 2015, Walt-in-Durham castigates me for not apologizing to Aykia Hanes.

The fact is that I apologized to Aykia Hanes prior to Walt criticizing me for not apologizing to her.

Do you understand, or is further elucidation required?; July 14, 2015 at 12:26 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Sidney,

Could Aykia Hanes' alarms have been set off when Daye broke down the bathroom door? I suggest you do some experiments at your own apartment. Set up alarms in the apartments next to yours that share a wall. Break down your bathroom door and see if any alarms are set off. You probably will want to repeat the experiment several,times.

Great suggestion, however, I like where I live and do not want to be evicted. Besides, I think the relevance would only be applicable to the apartments sharing the same floor plans and construction as 3507 Century Oaks Apartments N and P in Durham.; July 14, 2015 at 12:31 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Sidney,

Has Aykia Hanes replied to your apology? Will you post your apology to her and her reply, if any?

No, I already did, and maybe, respectively.; July 14, 2015 at 12:33 PM
Fake Kenhyderal said...: Sid -- Read this slowly so that maybe you'll understand.

You accused Aykia Hanes publicly, but you apologized to her privately on 1 July.

If you were serious about your apology, you would have:

1) Immediately replaced the post with one stating that you were wrong and apologizing to Aykia Hanes.

2) Removed the offending post where you wrongly accused Aykia Hanes (along with any comments) as soon as you found out you were wrong.

That you did neither indicates that you don't take your apology seriously.

Shame on you.; July 14, 2015 at 12:43 PM
Walt said...: Sid wrote: "Check out this timeline: On July 1, 2015, I mailed a certified letter of apology to Aykia Hanes. On July 2, 2015, Walt-in-Durham castigates me for not apologizing to Aykia Hanes.

The fact is that I apologized to Aykia Hanes prior to Walt criticizing me for not apologizing to her.

Do you understand, or is further elucidation required?"

And Sid did not correct his false assertions until July 14. Again you failed, Sid. Not as bad as your decision to sabotage Crystal's defense by breaching her confidence and revealing privileged information, but failed none the less.

Walt-in-Durham; July 14, 2015 at 1:01 PM
kenhyderal said...: Honest people like Dr. Harr and Crystal are not afraid of the truth. Concealing information, except maybe in the mind of a Lawyer, should not be a way to secure justice. Dr. Harr posted the information so everyone would know the truth including the prosecution. That should not have given them a licence to manipulate the truth by carefully and craftily constructing a prosecution that minimizes Duke's culpability and relied heavily on crime scene findings, in their hands for months and selectively chosen to bolster Daye's improbable and contradictory statement. Nor should Crystal's ill-prepared defence have wanted to keep available information from the Jury. As well Crystal naively believed all she would have to do was to take the stand and testify truthfully under oath and her self defence assertion would prevail. To Lawyers this is all a big game of besting your legal opponent where getting the truth is not paramount.; July 14, 2015 at 1:51 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

Please stop master debating.; July 14, 2015 at 2:00 PM
Anonymous said...: kenny said:

"Concealing information . . . should not be a way to secure justice."

That's an odd statement coming from a Nifong apologist.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; July 14, 2015 at 2:22 PM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

The internet is not written in pencil. It is forever.

The false accusations you made against Ms. Hanes were posted on this website for all to see. Your apology deserves equal dignity. It should be posted prominently on this website.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; July 14, 2015 at 2:30 PM
Anonymous said...: kenny:

You and Sid have had years to some forward with evidence of Mangum's innocence. You have not done so. The inescapable conclusion is that no such evidence exists and you are simply masturdebating for the sake of masturdebating.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; July 14, 2015 at 2:34 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous said...

"Sidney,

Could Aykia Hanes' alarms have been set off when Daye broke down the bathroom door? I suggest you do some experiments at your own apartment. Set up alarms in the apartments next to yours that share a wall. Break down your bathroom door and see if any alarms are set off. You probably will want to repeat the experiment several,times."

Sid replied:

"Great suggestion, however, I like where I live and do not want to be evicted. Besides, I think the relevance would only be applicable to the apartments sharing the same floor plans and construction as 3507 Century Oaks Apartments N and P in Durham."

Sid,

Then you should go into Ms. Hanes' apartment building, start kicking in the doors on the floor where she lives and see if it sets off any alarms. The landlord and tenants might be upset at first, but once you tell them you are just trying to get Mangum out of prison they will understand. I am sure they would all agree that a horrible miscarriage of justice has occurred and they want her out of prison and back in their building as soon as is humanly possible.

On a serious note, have you ever approached Mangum and Daye's neighbors and asked them about Mr. Daye's alleged propensity for violence and their personal experiences and observations of Mangum and Daye? If Daye was a violent drunk with a propensity for throwing knives and beating women, I am sure his co-tenants would have first hand, eyewitness knowledge of it. Such statements and eyewitness accounts would only be helpful for Mangum. But we both know that isn't the case, don't we?

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; July 14, 2015 at 2:51 PM
John D. Smith said...: Kenny,

Walt has been more helpful than you admit.

Mangum's options are limited to an appeal to the NC Supreme Court (with an appeal to SCOTUS) and an MAR. Walt addressed both.

An appeal to the NCSC must appeal the COA ruling on the 404(b) issue. As Walt points out, the NCSC may have policy reasons for considering that claim.

A COA considers whether the trial court committed legal errors and does not consider new evidence. You and others were incorrect about an appeal based on ineffective counsel. That is not grounds for appeal.

Ineffective counsel is a constitutional question to be included in an MAR. An MAR can introduce new evidence.

However, an MAR cannot rely on your master debating skills.

I use the term "master debating" to describe your tactics on this blog: As master debater, you are responsible only for making assertions, and readers are required to accept each assertion as fact unless they can prove with certainty that any assertion is not true. If an assertion is disproven, it is ignored. Readers are still required to accept all remaining unproven assertions as fact. You are not required to provide evidence to support your claims; that is the sole responsibility of those who disagree with you.

An MAR based on master debating is not credible. You cannot say you are a master debater, assert that Meier provided ineffective counsel and demand that the state prove the assertion false.

You must provide evidence to support your claim. A statement from Mangum is not enough. You need experts to support your medical and other claims, affidavits from those whose testimony you claim would have supported Mangum and a detailed analysis of the transcript and discovery, pointing out errors and omissions. You must demonstrate that Meier made no attempt to find these favorable witnesses or declined to have them testify.

You must provide case law to support your conclusion that Welch is not applicable. Only then can you demonstrate that Meier's failure to introduce the esophageal intubation into evidence was an error.

You must be precise and specific. Uninformed opinions, narratives and speculation are futile. Master debating will not be successful.

John D. Smith
New York, NY; July 14, 2015 at 5:12 PM
Anonymous said...: "...You must provide case law to support your conclusion that Welch is not applicable. Only then can you demonstrate that Meier's failure to introduce the esophageal intubation into evidence was an error.
July 14, 2015 at 5:12 PM"

Is there another case to retrieve case law from where Duke killed someone with intubation malpractice (or similar) during a testing procedure that did not have to be done in order to save the life of the patient and/or could have been done in different manners in order to achieve adequate and non-lethal diagnostic results - thereby achieving the result of killing the patient with negligent malpractice and consequently allowing the facts of the malpractice to be lied about on a state autopsy report so that another person (whom they have well-known negative past history with) ends up having false murder charges placed against them so they are therefore not required - nor do they - take legal accountability and responsibility for the deadly malpractice themselves as required by law.

In other words, is there another case where it is suspected that the medical facility kills a patient with malpractice in order to frame another for murder, and then allows the justice system to blatantly 'cover-up' that fact throughout the trial process so that indeed, the defendant is convicted of murder by malpractice and the medical facility is Not held accountable and responsible for their own deadly malpractice?; July 14, 2015 at 7:16 PM
Anonymous said...: Dr. Harr,

Is Ms. Mangum currently writing her own MAR?

Have you been able to obtain a copy of the MAR submitted by the appeal defense attorney and rejected by Judge Hudson that you previously mentioned?

Who are these few individuals whom you plan to "force feed" the truth to who will be able to achieve Ms. Mangum's freedom?; July 14, 2015 at 7:25 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous 7:16pm:

Please stop master debating.; July 14, 2015 at 7:50 PM
Anonymous said...: What is your problem 7:50 PM?; July 15, 2015 at 4:59 AM
Anonymous said...: This is the first case I remember ever hearing about where the hospital kills the patient with 'sole cause' malpractice and then actively participates in the cover-up of the malpractice in order to frame a known 'victim of the hospital' for murder by malpractice. Have you heard of others?; July 15, 2015 at 5:11 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Fake Kenhyderal said...
Sid -- Read this slowly so that maybe you'll understand.

You accused Aykia Hanes publicly, but you apologized to her privately on 1 July.

If you were serious about your apology, you would have:

1) Immediately replaced the post with one stating that you were wrong and apologizing to Aykia Hanes.

2) Removed the offending post where you wrongly accused Aykia Hanes (along with any comments) as soon as you found out you were wrong.

That you did neither indicates that you don't take your apology seriously.

Shame on you.

The fact remains that I sent an apology to Hanes well before W-I-D chastised me for "not apologizing" to her. The fact remains that he was mistaken in his premise that I had not apologized to Ms. Hanes.

The so-called "public" apology was posted as soon as it was completed, however, it appears that it was not soon enough for you.; July 15, 2015 at 8:23 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Walt said...
Sid wrote: "Check out this timeline: On July 1, 2015, I mailed a certified letter of apology to Aykia Hanes. On July 2, 2015, Walt-in-Durham castigates me for not apologizing to Aykia Hanes.

The fact is that I apologized to Aykia Hanes prior to Walt criticizing me for not apologizing to her.

Do you understand, or is further elucidation required?"

And Sid did not correct his false assertions until July 14. Again you failed, Sid. Not as bad as your decision to sabotage Crystal's defense by breaching her confidence and revealing privileged information, but failed none the less.

Walt-in-Durham

Hey, Walt.

Yeah, it took some time to produce a revised sharlog, and upon its completion I uploaded it on this blog site immediately.

You didn't address the issue of your accusation that I hadn't apologized to Aykia Hanes like you claimed. But, that's okay. I'm not big on apologies, unless they are given voluntarily and in good faith. And, as stated in the sharlog, an apology from you is not something I seek as I do not believe your error was malicious.; July 15, 2015 at 8:30 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: kenhyderal said...
Honest people like Dr. Harr and Crystal are not afraid of the truth. Concealing information, except maybe in the mind of a Lawyer, should not be a way to secure justice. Dr. Harr posted the information so everyone would know the truth including the prosecution. That should not have given them a licence to manipulate the truth by carefully and craftily constructing a prosecution that minimizes Duke's culpability and relied heavily on crime scene findings, in their hands for months and selectively chosen to bolster Daye's improbable and contradictory statement. Nor should Crystal's ill-prepared defence have wanted to keep available information from the Jury. As well Crystal naively believed all she would have to do was to take the stand and testify truthfully under oath and her self defence assertion would prevail. To Lawyers this is all a big game of besting your legal opponent where getting the truth is not paramount.

Hey, kenhyderal.

Absolutely correct. I believe in openness and transparency in my investigations and publications. That is what gives them credibility. In fact, I try not to hold back any information unless it is personal and irrelevant.

Clearly it is my position that Daniel Meier's priority in Mangum's case was to protect Duke University Hospital and the medical examiner. All of Mangum's attorneys have been, to great extent, turncoats.; July 15, 2015 at 8:36 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Sid:

The internet is not written in pencil. It is forever.

The false accusations you made against Ms. Hanes were posted on this website for all to see. Your apology deserves equal dignity. It should be posted prominently on this website.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL

Hah, Abe. Shirley you jest. I have gone above and beyond when it comes to an apology to Hanes.

Do you think W-I-D owes me an apology for jumping the gun and accusing me of not apologizing to Aykia when I already had?; July 15, 2015 at 8:39 AM

«Oldest ‹Older 401 – 600 of 973 Newer› Newest»

Tuesday, June 23, 2015

A prosecution case built on lies

973 comments:

Facebook Badge

Subscribe!

Labels

Blog Archive

About Me