justice4nifong: Crystal Mangum denied a fair trial by Judge Paul Ridgeway

Monday, March 21, 2016

Crystal Mangum denied a fair trial by Judge Paul Ridgeway

329 comments:

«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 329 of 329

Anonymous said...: kenny hissy fit, how about you answer the question:

A crime is alleged. Evidence shows overwhelmingly that the crime never happened. Nevertheless someone is charged with the crime.

How can someone charged with committing a non existent crime be anything but innocent?; March 28, 2016 at 10:39 AM
Anonymous said...: kenny hissy fit:

Again, what evidence can you cite that proves crystal was raped.; March 28, 2016 at 10:47 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

Here is another case where the District Attorney declared a person innocent:

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/nyc-crime/exclusive-brooklyn-da-declares-man-wrongfully-served-16-years-killing-rabbi-innocent-article-1.1886662

The money shot:

"“I believe Jabbar Collins is innocent,” District Attorney Kenneth Thompson told the Daily News Editorial Board Tuesday. “A travesty of justice happened in that case.”

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; March 28, 2016 at 11:47 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

Here is a case in North Carolina where the prosecutor declared a man innocent and then apologized to him:

"District Attorney Jon David, who was not the original prosecutor in the case, told the judges Friday that he believed in Sledge's innocence and credited the work of the Innocence Commission for unearthing an "injustice" in the conviction.

David also apologized to Sledge.

"There's nothing worse for a prosecutor than convicting an innocent person," he said. "The 'sorry' is imperfect to convey the magnitude of what happened with respect to this man's life."

Read more at http://www.wral.com/declared-innocent-sledge-freed-after-37-years-for-double-murder/14381367/#mRq3gdXYM9Gv6Ygk.99

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; March 28, 2016 at 12:01 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "How can someone charged with committing a non existent crime be anything but innocent?"........................................Crystal was charged with murder a crime she did not commit. There is more likelihood that Crystal was raped then there is that she murdered Reginald Daye.; March 28, 2016 at 1:29 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny -- Wikipedia says different:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crystal_Mangum; March 28, 2016 at 1:36 PM
kenhyderal said...: Walt said: "The only story that doesn't make any sense is yours and Crystal's. The jury, quite correctly, didn't believe her and neither do I. And, you have proven yourself to be unable or unwilling to learn. Crystal is guilty. She is a killer and she belongs in prison. Hopefully, she is working her rehabilitation plan while she is locked away. Otherwise, she will only re-offend once she is released"...................Your contempt and hatred for Crystal is very evident. You should read the post by Anonymous Mar. 26th 6:19 He rightly surmised both versions of the event were plausible and the jury chose to go with Daye's (un-examined) statement. Why; I maintain that Crystal received an ineffective defence from Meier and the jury only received one side, forcefully, from Coggins-Franks and a pitiful defence from Meier; March 28, 2016 at 1:54 PM
Anonymous said...: kenhyderal said...

"Anonymous said: "How can someone charged with committing a non existent crime be anything but innocent?"........................................Crystal was charged with murder a crime she did not commit. There is more likelihood that Crystal was raped then there is that she murdered Reginald Daye."

Like your mentor, you are dodging the issue and trying to institute personal posteruor camouflage.

Stop dodging and address the issue.; March 28, 2016 at 1:56 PM
Anonymous said...: kenhyderal said...

"Walt said: "The only story that doesn't make any sense is yours and Crystal's. The jury, quite correctly, didn't believe her and neither do I. And, you have proven yourself to be unable or unwilling to learn. Crystal is guilty. She is a killer and she belongs in prison. Hopefully, she is working her rehabilitation plan while she is locked away. Otherwise, she will only re-offend once she is released"..................."

"Your contempt and hatred for Crystal is very evident."

No it isn't. What is obvious is your own contempt and hatred for the innocent men wrongfully charged with the non existent rape of crystal mangum. You show again how much you hate Caucasian men who are more accomplished and better off than you are. Your lack of any meaningful status is your own responsibility, no one else's.

"You should read the post by Anonymous Mar. 26th 6:19 He rightly surmised both versions of the event were plausible and the jury chose to go with Daye's (un-examined) statement."

You misrepresent what he said, just like you misrepresented what I once said. I said, the best evidence YOU could come up with is, a rape could have happened. You said I conceded a rape could have happened. Why don't you learn to comprehend what you read.

"Why; I maintain that Crystal received an ineffective defence from Meier and the jury only received one side, forcefully, from Coggins-Franks and a pitiful defence from Meier"

And you establish yourself as obviously delusional as your master, harr the hypocritical fabricating delusional megalomaniac.; March 28, 2016 at 2:08 PM
Anonymous said...: kenhyderal said...

"Anonymous said: "How can someone charged with committing a non existent crime be anything but innocent?"........................................Crystal was charged with murder a crime she did not commit."

No she wasn't.; March 28, 2016 at 2:11 PM
kenhyderal said...: Huh?; March 28, 2016 at 2:43 PM
kenhyderal said...: Dr. Anonymous (the insecure, race obsessed, poster incapable of forwarding any argument without resorting to personal attacks) said: "You show again how much you hate Caucasian men who are more accomplished and better off than you are. Your lack of any meaningful status is your own responsibility, no one else's" ........................What is it you consider to be "meaningful status" ?; March 28, 2016 at 2:51 PM
Anonymous said...: kenny hissy fit:

You say you believe crystal was raped.

I ask again, what evidence do you have that crystal was raped.

In the ESPN documentary, it was noted, cell phone records establish that crystal made a cell phone call at the time she was allegedly held in the bathroom and was allegedly being rape. It was not a 911 call.

From https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gh8oGF4iXQ

Kim Pittman/Roberts called 911 when she had crystal in her car, not to report a rape but to report that men at the Lacrosse house had shouted n---er at her and at her girlfriend.

I remind you that you have admitted that the time of deposition of the male DNA found on crystal can not be established. That finding is not evidence of a rape occurring on the night of 13/14 March 2006.

Another question for you: in the ESPN documentary there is a video of brian meehan saying under oath that he and nifong agreed the finding of DNA on crystal's person would not be reported. Why did they do that?

So cease and desist the equivocating, the dodging, the futile attempts to say your miserably exposed butt is not exposed. Either address the issues or admit you can't.; March 28, 2016 at 2:53 PM
Anonymous said...: kenhyderal said...

"Dr. Anonymous (the insecure, race obsessed, poster incapable of forwarding any argument without resorting to personal attacks) said: "You show again how much you hate Caucasian men who are more accomplished and better off than you are. Your lack of any meaningful status is your own responsibility, no one else's" ........................What is it you consider to be "meaningful status" ?"

That's an easy one.

Your obsession upon insisting crystal was raped in the face of overwhelming evidence she was not.

Your hatred of Caucasian men, and probably of all men, who are better off and more accomplished than you are.

Your refusal to confront the issue of why you can provide no evidence that crystal was raped.

Your insistence that innocent men are guilty of perpetrating a crime which never happened.

The statement you made that da nifong did not charge the lacrosse defendants with rape.

Why don't you tell the blog what kind of status you have achieved in comparison to all your documented ignorance and falsehoods.; March 28, 2016 at 3:00 PM
Anonymous said...: kenhyderal said...

Huh?(probably in response to my comment of March 28, 2016 at 2:11 PM)

kenny hissy fit shows he is incapable of comprehending a simple 3 word sentence.

Yet he wants people to believe he understands complex legal and medical situations.; March 28, 2016 at 3:13 PM
kenhyderal said...: Dr. Anonymous said: "kenny hissy fit shows he is incapable of comprehending a simple 3 word sentence" (In response to me saying, " Crystal was charged with murder a crime she did not commit") and his reply was "No she wasn't"............... Now, which one of us can't read.; March 28, 2016 at 4:04 PM
Anonymous said...: kenhyderal said...

"Dr. Anonymous said: "kenny hissy fit shows he is incapable of comprehending a simple 3 word sentence" (In response to me saying, " Crystal was charged with murder a crime she did not commit") and his reply was "No she wasn't"............... Now, which one of us can't read"

It is about comprehension, not just reading.

It is obvious you are incapable of comprehension.; March 28, 2016 at 4:11 PM
kenhyderal said...: I rest my case.; March 28, 2016 at 4:29 PM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

Here is a story about a rape case where the DA declared the defendant innocent and issued an apology:

http://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/2015/06/10/grand-rapids-man-wrongly-convicted-rape-prosecutor-says/71040804/

"A Grand Rapids man spent about 17 years in prison for a rape he didn't commit, a prosecutor said Wednesday, announcing that he will ask a judge to erase the conviction after a new "inescapable conclusion" about the case.

Kent County prosecutor William Forsyth said he met with Quentin Carter and apologized.

"I fully recognize, however, that neither my apology nor the setting aside of his conviction can begin to adequately compensate Mr. Carter for what he has lost," Forsyth said in a statement. "Tragically, there is nothing that can be done to restore his youth or return to him the years he spent in prison."

He said Carter's innocence in the sexual assault is an 'inescapable conclusion'"; March 28, 2016 at 4:52 PM
Anonymous said...: kenhyderal said...

"I rest my case."

You haven't made any case you have tried to make.

You have not made your case, your allegation that crystal was raped. Each and every time you are given an opportunity to do so, you dodge, trying to cover your exposed butt.

You haven't made your case that crystal was convicted of a crime which never happened. You blindly echo the sayings of harr the hypocritical fabricating delusional megalomaniac, that crystal acted in self defense and that malpractice on the part of Duke killed Reginald Daye. harr the hypocritical fabricating delusional megalomaniac who is not competent to render those medical legal judgments.

You have called harr a distinguished former physician. A medical school grduate who was never accepted into residency training and who never achieved medical specialty train9ng is distinguished onlyby his lack of ability.; March 28, 2016 at 5:23 PM
Anonymous said...: kenhyderal said...

"Anonymous said: "How can someone charged with committing a non existent crime be anything but innocent?"........................................Crystal was charged with murder a crime she did not commit."

That was an attempt on kenny hissy fit's part to dodge the issue, why he krrps insisting innocent men are guilty of raping crystal when no evidence at all was generated to show the crime ever happened.; March 28, 2016 at 5:38 PM
Anonymous said...: correction of typo:

kenhyderal said...

"Anonymous said: "How can someone charged with committing a non existent crime be anything but innocent?"........................................Crystal was charged with murder a crime she did not commit."

That was an attempt on kenny hissy fit's part to dodge the issue, why he keeps insisting innocent men are guilty of raping crystal when no evidence at all was generated to show the crime ever happened.; March 28, 2016 at 5:48 PM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

Here is a case where a DA declared a defendant innocent and immediately dropped charges and had him released after a DNA test revealed that he did not rape the alleged victim:

http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/da_blames_dna_label_clerical_error_for_arrest_of_innocent_man_jailed_2_mont

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; March 28, 2016 at 7:06 PM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You have 278 days to exonerate and free Mangum.

It has been 14 days since the Ides of March and 3,209 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; March 29, 2016 at 4:01 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Walt said...
Sid wrote: "Hah! Gotcha, ...Ding-a-ling."

Wrong again Sid. You'r the only ding-a-ling. Worse, you are ignorant of the law and ignorant of the facts. You have failed to learn. Just as you failed to learn as a physician, you fail to learn as an advocate.

Without respect,
Walt-in-Durham

One question, Walt... What happened to Daye's spleen?; March 29, 2016 at 4:05 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous Anonymous said...
harr the hypocritical fabricating delusional megalomaniac:

I again challenge you to explain this:

If someone is charged with a crime and said crime has been shown by overwhelming evidence never to have happened, how can the individual charged with the alleged crime be anything but innocent?

The first part f the prosecutor's obligation to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt is to establish that a crime happened.

My sentiments exactly. Just like the alleged Larceny of Chose in Action never took place, Daye's death was accidental due to medical malpractice by Duke University Hospital staff in treating Daye's delirium tremens. A homicide was never committed, ergo Mangum is innocent of murder. Glad that we see eye to eye on this.; March 29, 2016 at 4:08 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sid:

Here is an article from Friday where a prosecutor in Illinois publically declared a defendant was innocent:

http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/25/us/oldest-cold-case-conviction-overturned-maria-ridulph-taken/

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL

Hey, Abe.

Thanks for the link. I visited the page, however, that statement by the prosecutor differs entirely with the situation in the Duke Lacrosse case. First, and most importantly, the Illinois case statement by the prosecutor was made after the defendant had been convicted. In the Duke Lacrosse case, the defendants were in the process of being prosecuted... a trial had never occurred and no verdict had been cast. It was not appropriate for the prosecutor to make a determination as to guilt or innocence at this stage... his sole obligation being either to continue to prosecute the Duke Lacrosse case or to dismiss it.

There are many instances where DNA or other incontrovertible evidence has proven that a convicted defendant was actually innocent of a crime, and in such cases when the prosecutor asks that a conviction be overturned it is appropriate to proffer his opinion that the individual convicted is deemed to now be innocent.

Do you understand the subtleties of my argument? If additional elucidation is required, give me notice.; March 29, 2016 at 4:22 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sid:

Here is a case where a DA declared a defendant innocent and immediately dropped charges and had him released after a DNA test revealed that he did not rape the alleged victim:

http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/da_blames_dna_label_clerical_error_for_arrest_of_innocent_man_jailed_2_mont

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL

Nice research, Abe. This case, I must admit, is similar in temporal aspects with the Duke Lacrosse case, as the defendant's case had not yet been adjudicated and the prosecutor dropped charges against the suspect before it went to trial.

DNA, video, and fingerprints (to an extent), are several means by which a defendant's innocence can be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. In such cases, the prosecutors have no other alternative than to drop the charges. Also, in such cases it is not unreasonable or inappropriate to proclaim the defendant innocent. No such issues of incontrovertible evidence of innocence were present in the Duke Lacrosse case, as sexual assault by individuals at a beer-guzzling event hosted by a notorious group of obnoxious athletes could most definitely not be ruled out.

So, I stand corrected with respect to my position that it is totally outside the realm of propriety that a prosecutor in the pre-trial phase would or should proclaim a defendant innocent. Clearly in the DNA-proven case alluded to, it is not unreasonable. In the Duke Lacrosse case, however, the facts do not warrant such a determination by the prosecution as Crystal Mangum has unwaveringly maintained that she was sexually assaulted and there is no overriding proof to the contrary.; March 29, 2016 at 4:46 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sid:

Here is a story about a rape case where the DA declared the defendant innocent and issued an apology:

http://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/2015/06/10/grand-rapids-man-wrongly-convicted-rape-prosecutor-says/71040804/

"A Grand Rapids man spent about 17 years in prison for a rape he didn't commit, a prosecutor said Wednesday, announcing that he will ask a judge to erase the conviction after a new "inescapable conclusion" about the case.

Kent County prosecutor William Forsyth said he met with Quentin Carter and apologized.

"I fully recognize, however, that neither my apology nor the setting aside of his conviction can begin to adequately compensate Mr. Carter for what he has lost," Forsyth said in a statement. "Tragically, there is nothing that can be done to restore his youth or return to him the years he spent in prison."

He said Carter's innocence in the sexual assault is an 'inescapable conclusion'"

This case differs from the Duke Lacrosse case temporally because his innocence was proclaimed by prosecutors after he had been convicted, and not in the pre-trial phase of the case.; March 29, 2016 at 4:54 AM
Anonymous said...: Nifong Supporter said...

"One question, Walt... What happened to Daye's spleen?"

harr the hypocritical fabricating delusional megalomaniac again resorts to holding up the image of a straw fisherman holding up a red herring.

What happened to Reginald Daye's spleen is irrelevant to what happened to Reginald Daye. Reginald Daye died from complications of the stab wound inflicted by crystal mangum.; March 29, 2016 at 5:01 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sid:

Here is a case in North Carolina where the prosecutor declared a man innocent and then apologized to him:

"District Attorney Jon David, who was not the original prosecutor in the case, told the judges Friday that he believed in Sledge's innocence and credited the work of the Innocence Commission for unearthing an "injustice" in the conviction.

David also apologized to Sledge.

"There's nothing worse for a prosecutor than convicting an innocent person," he said. "The 'sorry' is imperfect to convey the magnitude of what happened with respect to this man's life."

Read more at http://www.wral.com/declared-innocent-sledge-freed-after-37-years-for-double-murder/14381367/#mRq3gdXYM9Gv6Ygk.99

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL

Hey, Abe... this is a much weaker and irrelevant comparison than your other due to the timeline issue. The prosecutorial proclamation of innocence occurred long after the defendant Joseph Sledge had been convicted and not during the pre-trial phase. But what I find particularly galling is that this same D.A. Jon David filed a ridiculous and frivolous complaint with the NC State Bar against defense attorney Christine Mumma, who was singularly the most important person responsible for securing the freedom of this innocent man, Sledge.; March 29, 2016 at 5:01 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous Anonymous said...
Nifong Supporter said...

"One question, Walt... What happened to Daye's spleen?"

harr the hypocritical fabricating delusional megalomaniac again resorts to holding up the image of a straw fisherman holding up a red herring.

What happened to Reginald Daye's spleen is irrelevant to what happened to Reginald Daye. Reginald Daye died from complications of the stab wound inflicted by crystal mangum.

So, in other words you feel it is irrelevant if the State's star witness and medical examiner (whose questionable work is the basis for the criminal complaint) commits perjury that is harmful and prejudicial against the defendant... right?; March 29, 2016 at 5:04 AM
Anonymous said...: Nifong Supporter said...

"Anonymous Anonymous said...
harr the hypocritical fabricating delusional megalomaniac:

I again challenge you to explain this:

If someone is charged with a crime and said crime has been shown by overwhelming evidence never to have happened, how can the individual charged with the alleged crime be anything but innocent?

The first part f the prosecutor's obligation to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt is to establish that a crime happened.

My sentiments exactly. Just like the alleged Larceny of Chose in Action never took place, Daye's death was accidental due to medical malpractice by Duke University Hospital staff in treating Daye's delirium tremens. A homicide was never committed, ergo Mangum is innocent of murder."

Another iteration of harr the hypocritical fabricating delusional megalomaniac holding up the inage of a straw fisherman holding a red herring, another futile attempt by harr to dodge the issue and cover his exposed butt.

"Glad that we see eye to eye on this."

Another iteration of harr's deluded megalomaniacal state. We quite obviously do not see eye on this.; March 29, 2016 at 5:06 AM
Anonymous said...: harr the hypocritical fabricating delusional megalomaniac says:

"No such issues of incontrovertible evidence of innocence were present in the Duke Lacrosse case, as sexual assault by individuals at a beer-guzzling event hosted by a notorious group of obnoxious athletes could most definitely not be ruled out."

harr, explain how this is compatible with thr prosecutor's obligation to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt. The prosecutor has to rule in a crime beyond a reasonable doubt.

harr again resorts to holding up the image of a straw fisherman with a red herring.; March 29, 2016 at 5:22 AM
Anonymous said...: harr he hypocritical fabricating delusional megalomaniac"

" In the Duke Lacrosse case, however, the facts do not warrant such a determination by the prosecution as Crystal Mangum has unwaveringly maintained that she was sexually assaulted and there is no overriding proof to the contrary."

harr fabricates again.

crystal was not interviewed by nifong's da office until December of 2006, almost 9 months AFTER the alleged crime allegedly took place. She said she could not recall being penetrated, an element of the crime of rape. nifong dismissed the rape charges.

The failure to find DNA from any of the suspects, including the three innocent men nifong had indicted, is "overriding proof" that no rape happened at the Lacrosse party on the night of 13/14 March 2006.; March 29, 2016 at 5:30 AM
Anonymous said...: Nifong Supporter said...

"Anonymous Anonymous said...
Nifong Supporter said...

"One question, Walt... What happened to Daye's spleen?"

harr the hypocritical fabricating delusional megalomaniac again resorts to holding up the image of a straw fisherman holding up a red herring.

What happened to Reginald Daye's spleen is irrelevant to what happened to Reginald Daye. Reginald Daye died from complications of the stab wound inflicted by crystal mangum.

So, in other words you feel it is irrelevant if the State's star witness and medical examiner (whose questionable work is the basis for the criminal complaint) commits perjury that is harmful and prejudicial against the defendant... right?"

harr the hypocritical fabricating delusional megalomaniac again resorts to the futile tactic of the straw fisherman holding a red herring to dodge the issue.

Dr. Nichols did not commit perjury. Your legal career(and I use the term extremely loosely), of filing and losing frivolous lawsuits shows your are incapable of knowing what is or is not perjury.

Here we have an extremely obvious manifestation of harrian hypocrisy. He objects to AG Cooper expressing his belief that the Lacrosse defendants were innocent after AG Cooper reviewed the facts of the case, something harr never did. harr's repeated statements that there is no evidence that a rape did not happen is evidence of harr's ignorance of the Duke Rape Hoax(if he knows the facts, then it is evidence he is lying). But harr proclaims he can proclaim the Lacrosse defendants guilty. And he proclaims he can proclaim Dr. Nichols guilty of perjury when harr himself is incapable of knowing the truth.; March 29, 2016 at 5:50 AM
Anonymous said...: Nifong Supporter said...

"Hey, Abe... this is a much weaker and irrelevant comparison than your other due to the timeline issue. The prosecutorial proclamation of innocence occurred long after the defendant Joseph Sledge had been convicted and not during the pre-trial phase."

So you are saying, when incontrovertible evidence is generated which exonerates the defendants and proves the defendants are innocent as a matter of fact in the pre trial phase, it is not appropriate to believe the defendants are - innocent right?

And you are saying that because you do not call the incontrovertible evidence of innocence exculpatory, you can proclaim the defendants guilty.

Another iteration of harrian hypocrisy.; March 29, 2016 at 5:57 AM
Anonymous said...: harr the hypocritical fabricating delusional megalomaniac:

Let's go over this again.

Crystal alleged a brutal gang rape in which multiple males assaulted her, penetrated her and ejaculated on and into her person. That meant they left their DNA on her person.

The Durhm DA's office, headed by nifong, had an NTO issued requiring all Caucasian members of the Lacrosse team to give samples for DNA analysis. Via that order, the DA's office named each and every Caucasian member of the team a suspect.

State Crime lab testing of the rape kit materials revealed no DNA from any Caucasian member of the Lacrosse team. More sophisticated testing of the rape kit materials revealed the only male DNA found on crystal's pereson did not match the DNA of the suspects, including the DNA of the three men nifong had indicted.

In the cases cited for you by Abe Froman, what led to the exonerations was that the DNA found on the victim did not match the DNA of the accused suspect.

So why do you say there was no incontrovertible evidence that no rape happened?; March 29, 2016 at 6:45 AM
Anonymous said...: Nifong Supporter said...

"Anonymous Anonymous said...
harr the hypocritical fabricating delusional megalomaniac:

I again challenge you to explain this:

If someone is charged with a crime and said crime has been shown by overwhelming evidence never to have happened, how can the individual charged with the alleged crime be anything but innocent?

The first part f the prosecutor's obligation to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt is to establish that a crime happened.

My sentiments exactly. Just like the alleged Larceny of Chose in Action never took place, Daye's death was accidental due to medical malpractice by Duke University Hospital staff in treating Daye's delirium tremens. A homicide was never committed, ergo Mangum is innocent of murder."

So why do you claim there was no evidence to show that the rape alleged by crystal mangum never happened. There was, and it has been described to you on multiple occasions.; March 29, 2016 at 7:21 AM
Anonymous said...: harr the hypocritical fabricating delusional megalomaniac:

Two possible answeres to my last comment.

You are willfully ignorant.

You are a liar.; March 29, 2016 at 7:23 AM
Anonymous said...: Nifong Supporter said...

"So, I stand corrected with respect to my position that it is totally outside the realm of propriety that a prosecutor in the pre-trial phase would or should proclaim a defendant innocent. Clearly in the DNA-proven case alluded to, it is not unreasonable. In the Duke Lacrosse case, however, the facts do not warrant such a determination by the prosecution as Crystal Mangum has unwaveringly maintained that she was sexually assaulted and there is no overriding proof to the contrary."

Tet's go at this again, harr the hypocritical fabricating delusional megalomaniac.

crystal did backtrack on her claim. She initially described a brutal penetrating gang rape. THAT was the sexual assault she claimed. About 9 months later she said she could not recall being raped.

The finding, that the DNA found on the rape kit that did not match the DNA of any Caucasian member of the Lacrosse team is, combined with crystal's allegation she was gang raped by multiple males who left their DNA, is overriding evidence she was not raped or assaulted at the Lacrosse party on the night of 13/14 March 2006.

So, are you just ignorant, or are you a liar?; March 29, 2016 at 8:11 AM
Anonymous said...: harr the hypocritical fabricating delusional megalomaniac:

Once in your blog, you said nifong was a decent, honorable prosecutor because he dismissed the rape charges after crystal did recant, and I remind you the sexual assault crystal originally alleged was a penetrating gang rape.

You also did comment once that the DNA evidence found on the rape kit, male DNA that did not match the DNA of any of the Lacrosse players was not exculpatory.

So it does not come down to, either you are ignorant or you are a liar. You are the worst of both worlds. You are an ignorant liar.

Why should anyone believe that a hypocritical, hypocritical fabricating delusional megalomaniacal ignorant liar is capable of providing enlightenment?; March 29, 2016 at 9:17 AM
Anonymous said...: harr the hypocritical fabricating delusional megalomaniacal ignorant liar:

Isn't it about time for you or kenny hissy fit or both to publish another anonymous comment.; March 29, 2016 at 9:19 AM
Anonymous said...: Another Courageous move by Attorney General Cooper.

He will not defend the NC anti gay bill in court.

His earlier courageous acyt was defying the bigots and expressing his belief, that based on a thorough investigation of the facts of the Duke Rape Hoax, that the crime never happened and that those accused were, as a matter of real world fact, were innocent.

And harr the hypocritical fabricating hypocritical delusional megalomaniacal ignorant liar says it isinappropriate for AG Cooper to express his opinion.

But harr the hypocritical fabricating delusional megalomaniacal ignorant liar believes he can proclaim the defendants are guilty.; March 29, 2016 at 9:28 AM
Anonymous said...: Of course, victoria Peterson,who harr counts as one of his pro crystal supporters, has expressed harsh anti gay opinions.; March 29, 2016 at 9:30 AM
A Lawyer said...: In the Duke Lacrosse case, however, the facts do not warrant such a determination by the prosecution as Crystal Mangum has unwaveringly maintained that she was sexually assaulted and there is no overriding proof to the contrary.

Seligmann's and Finerty's alibi evidence wasn't "overriding proof" of their innocence?; March 29, 2016 at 11:28 AM
Anonymous said...: kenny hissy fit:

When are you going to come out of that hole in which you are hiding and address the issue, that there was no evidence crystal was raped at the Lacrosse party on thenight of 13/14 March 2006.; March 29, 2016 at 12:16 PM
kenhyderal said...: I`m beginning to feel like a stuck record but here goes again; the presence of unidentified male DNA, extracted from sperm, deposited within a time frame that included the time of the Duke Lacrosse Party and that was unexplained by the consensual sexual history of Crystal prior to her rape kit. And, there was no ascertainment of non-players who were present at the party, save two who happened to appear in photographs of the audience watching Crystal`s dance. Probable semen on Crystal`s person that was not confirmed and was excused as an exudate from a possible yeast infection; March 29, 2016 at 1:36 PM
guiowen said...: Of course you're a stuck record. None of us believe your claim that Crystal told everything about her consensual sexual history.
If you want to convince us, go get a list of all of Crystal's clients for thee two weeks prior to the lacrosse party, and get each one of them to submit a DNA sample.
Comprendes?
Hast du verstanden?
Est-ce que tu as compris?
Hai capito?; March 29, 2016 at 2:02 PM
Anonymous said...: kenhyderal said...

"I`m beginning to feel like a stuck record but here goes again;"

No. For a long time you have been sounding like a guilt presuming racist.

"the presence of unidentified male DNA, extracted from sperm, deposited within a time frame that included the time of the Duke Lacrosse Party"

You yourself have admitted the time at which the DNA was left can not be established. It can not be established that the DNA was deposited on the night of 13/14 March 2006. It is not evidence that a rape occurred on the night of 13/14 March 2006.

"and that was unexplained by the consensual sexual history of Crystal prior to her rape kit."

Which is only evidence that at some time Crystal engaged in sex with multiple unknown men. That does not establish she had sex with anyone at the party or that said sex was forcible gang rape, which is what crystal alleged.

"And, there was no ascertainment of non-players who were present at the party, save two who happened to appear in photographs of the audience watching Crystal`s dance."

Yes there was. All the party attendees were identified. Your "evidence" that there were unidentified non Lacrosse player attendees comes, according to you, from kilgo who claimed he has a Lacrosse player friend who witnessed a rape perpetrated by a number of non Lacrosse player attendees. Kilgo may have been real. There is no evidence his Lacrosse player friend is real. That said anonymous Lacrosse player has not materialized in over 10 years, and that is evidence that said anonymous Lacrosse player friend is not real. So you have no evidence that any mystery rapists ever attended the party.

"Probable semen on Crystal`s person that was not confirmed and was excused as an exudate from a possible yeast infection"

The failure to detect Alkaline Phosphatase on the Rape kit materials is evidence that Semen was not deposited on crystal.

As I recall, you said that Dr. Julie Manly was an experienced Gynecologist. She was a first year Emergency Medicine Resident. She could have determined whether or not the fluid was Semen by doing a simple test, a wet mount which would have revealed motile sperm if the fluid was present. You said a wet mount would have been only cya medicine. All that is evidence that you do not know anything about clinical medicine, meaning you have no credibility.

So thank you for living down to my expectations. You have established only that you believe a rape happened even though you, just like discredited corrupt nifong, have no evidence.; March 29, 2016 at 2:09 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

You presume Crystal was telling the truth about her sexual history prior to the party - given her track record, you seem to be the only one willing to presume that.; March 29, 2016 at 2:18 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny hissy fit:

Here's another opportunity for you.

You have said that nifong prosecuted the Lacrosse defendants because he had enough evidence to convict them for sexual assault. I remind you, nifong charged them with rape, as well as sexual assault and kidnapping.

The evidence did nt tie any member of the Lacrosse team to the alleged rape. Even you have conceded that.

So where was the evidence that justified nifong's indictment and prosecution of any member of the Lacrosse team.; March 29, 2016 at 2:54 PM
Anonymous said...: more for kenny hisssy fit and his evidence, or lack thereof, of the rape of crystal:

Your claim, about unidentified rapists at the Lacrosse party, again, comes from kilgo supposedly telling you he has an anonymous Lacrosse player friend.

When kilgo posted on this blog he would brag that he knew more about the Duke Rape Hoax than anyone. I would challenge him to demonstrate his "knowledge", to put up or to shut up. He always backed down with some kind of evasive, irrelevant screed. AND HE NEVER ASSERTED ON THIS BLOG HE EVER HAD AN ANONYMOUS LACROSSE PLAYER FRIEND!!!

So there are two non mutually exclusive possibilities: 1) said lacrosse player friend never existed; 2)kilgo's anonymous Lacrosse player friend is someone you have fabricated, just like corrupt, disbarred, disgraced nifong tried to fabricate a rape case against the innocent, falsely accused Lacrosse players.; March 30, 2016 at 3:06 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You have 277 days to exonerate and free Mangum.

It has been 15 days since the Ides of March and 3,210 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; March 30, 2016 at 4:03 AM
The Great Kilgo said...: Kenhyderal, please help me! Ubes is holding me captive! He won't let me go unoenoienbc9e87['Pnca]=; March 30, 2016 at 8:40 AM
Ubes said...: Sorry, Kenhyderal! I just can't take the chance that Kilgo might tell you the name of his lacrosse friend.; March 30, 2016 at 8:55 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous Anonymous said...
Another Courageous move by Attorney General Cooper.

He will not defend the NC anti gay bill in court.

His earlier courageous acyt was defying the bigots and expressing his belief, that based on a thorough investigation of the facts of the Duke Rape Hoax, that the crime never happened and that those accused were, as a matter of real world fact, were innocent.

And harr the hypocritical fabricating hypocritical delusional megalomaniacal ignorant liar says it isinappropriate for AG Cooper to express his opinion.

But harr the hypocritical fabricating delusional megalomaniacal ignorant liar believes he can proclaim the defendants are guilty.

I applaud Roy Cooper for refusing to defend the discriminatory bill passed by the Republican legislature and signed by Governor McCrory. It's no secret that I overwhelmingly support Cooper over the incumbent. It is tragic, however, that both gubernatorial candidates refused to work for justice for Crystal Mangum.

Regarding the Duke Lacrosse case, I still maintain that it was inappropriate for him to declare the Duke Lacrosse defendants innocent. No evidence was presented to conclusively support that the Duke Lacrosse defendants were innocent and that no sexual assault transpired.; March 30, 2016 at 8:58 AM
Anonymous said...: Sidney falsely claims: No evidence was presented to conclusively support that the Duke Lacrosse defendants were innocent and that no sexual assault transpired.

Sidney is a liar.; March 30, 2016 at 9:04 AM
Anonymous said...: Sidney states: In the Duke Lacrosse case, however, the facts do not warrant such a determination by the prosecution as Crystal Mangum has unwaveringly maintained that she was sexually assaulted and there is no overriding proof to the contrary.

In the Daye murder "case, however, the facts do not warrant such a determination" [of innocence] by Dr. Sidney B. Harr as Reginald Daye has unwaveringly maintained that he released Magnum and was walking away when she stabbed him "and there is no overriding proof to the contrary."

By his own standards, Sidney is not able to proclaim Mangum's innocence and owes all of his readers numerous apologies for his inappropriate proclamations.; March 30, 2016 at 9:32 AM
Fake Kenhyderal said...: "No evidence was presented to conclusively support that the Duke Lacrosse defendants were innocent and that no sexual assault transpired."

Unfortunately (for you) it doesn't work that way. All defendants are afforded the presumption of innocence, and it is the job of the prosecutor to prove their guilt.

For the Duke LAX defendants, there was no evidence presented to conclusively support that they were guilty....

This should NOT need to be explained to you.; March 30, 2016 at 10:47 AM
Anonymous said...: Nifong Supporter said...

"Regarding the Duke Lacrosse case, I still maintain that it was inappropriate for him to declare the Duke Lacrosse defendants innocent. No evidence was presented to conclusively support that the Duke Lacrosse defendants were innocent and that no sexual assault transpired."

And again you show you are a willfully ignorant liar.; March 30, 2016 at 10:56 AM
Walt said...: Sid wrote: "One question, Walt... What happened to Daye's spleen?"

That is immaterial. The evidence is uncontroverted. The state and the defendant both obtained experts to offer opinions. Both experts agreed as to the cause of death. Without evidence by way of a contrary opinion, that is admissible, the location of the spleen is unimportant. But, I do look forward to your continuing rants that have no purpose other than to prove you are unwilling to learn.

Walt-in-Durham; March 30, 2016 at 10:58 AM
Walt said...: A Lawyer wrote: "Seligmann's and Finerty's alibi evidence wasn't "overriding proof" of their innocence?"

That of course, is the central failure of Sid and Kenny's position. They ignore all evidence and argue only fantasy.

Walt-in-Durham; March 30, 2016 at 11:00 AM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: "I`m beginning to feel like a stuck record but here goes again; the presence of unidentified male DNA, extracted from sperm, deposited within a time frame that included the time of the Duke Lacrosse Party and that was unexplained by the consensual sexual history of Crystal prior to her rape kit."

If one believes Crystal's version of her sexual history. However, the disinterested witness provides a timeline that is consistent with multiple sperm deposits that did not come from the lacrosse party.

"And, there was no ascertainment of non-players who were present at the party, save two who happened to appear in photographs of the audience watching Crystal`s dance."

Because there were none. Of course your position also ignores the alibi evidence in total.

Walt-in-Durham; March 30, 2016 at 11:06 AM
Walt said...: Sid wrote: " No evidence was presented to conclusively support that the Duke Lacrosse defendants were innocent and that no sexual assault transpired."

Again, you ignore the alibi evidence and the DNA.

Walt-in-Durham; March 30, 2016 at 11:08 AM
Anonymous said...: harr the hypocritical delusional megalomaniac:

I say again,you are a willfully ignorant liar.; March 30, 2016 at 11:15 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid -- Do you believe that witches should be thrown in the river and if they drown they are innocent?; March 30, 2016 at 12:43 PM
kenhyderal said...: Walt said: "However, the disinterested witness provides a timeline that is consistent with multiple sperm deposits that did not come from the lacrosse party:............................... Huh?? Who are these disinterested witnesses?; March 30, 2016 at 1:09 PM
kenhyderal said...: Walt in quoting A Lawyer said:Seligmann's and Finerty's alibi evidence wasn't "overriding proof" of their innocence ? "................................... DA Nifong felt Seligmann's alibi evidence was contrived and Investigative Author Cohan agreed with him; March 30, 2016 at 1:13 PM
Anonymous said...: How did Nifong and Cohan come to the conclusion that the photos, electronic records, cell records and gps were contrived? If Cohan is an "Investigative Reporter" as you suggest, why didn't he conduct an investigation? I thought investigative reporters investigated?; March 30, 2016 at 1:29 PM
Anonymous said...: Nifong conducted frequent media interviews after the story went national—Fox News, CBS, MSNBC, Newsweek—describing players as uncooperative and worse, and assuring their conviction as part of his primary election campaign. What he didn’t do was talk to the accuser, Crystal Gail Mangum, about her story. How closed off was he from alternative theories of the case?

“We tried to convince him that we had a story to tell ourselves. Mr. Nifong put his hands over his ears and said I don’t want to hear it,” said Wade Smith, attorney for accused player Collin Finnerty.

“He literally put his hands over his ears,” said Jim Cooney, lawyer for accused player Reade Seligmann.

Seligmann’s mother Kathy added: “You don’t speak to the accuser and you don’t speak to the accused, but you’re positive something happened?”; March 30, 2016 at 1:34 PM
Desconocido said...: Bueno, Kenhyderal,
Alfin piensas venir a NC a buscar al viejo Kilgo?; March 30, 2016 at 1:43 PM
Anonymous said...: kenhyderal said...

"Walt in quoting A Lawyer said:Seligmann's and Finerty's alibi evidence wasn't "overriding proof" of their innocence ? "................................... DA Nifong felt Seligmann's alibi evidence was contrived and Investigative Author Cohan agreed with him"

So?

That adds up to, all three of you are incredibly stupid ignorant liars.; March 30, 2016 at 2:08 PM
Anonymous said...: incredibly stupid ignorant liar kenhyderal said...

"Walt in quoting A Lawyer said:Seligmann's and Finerty's alibi evidence wasn't "overriding proof" of their innocence ? "................................... DA Nifong felt Seligmann's alibi evidence was contrived and Investigative Author Cohan agreed with him"

So why was corrupt, disgraced, disbarred da nifong afraid to listen to the alibi evidence? If the alibi was contrived, why was nifong afraid to challenge it in open court?; March 30, 2016 at 2:11 PM
John D. Smith said...: Kenny,

I do not accept your claim that Nifong believed that Seligmann's alibi evidence was contrived. The only evidence that exists to support that claim is Nifong's statement to that effect. As you know, Nifong is a convicted liar. I do not accept as credible the statements of convicted liars. Without proof of its validity, your claim is intellectually dishonest.

John D. Smith
New York, NY; March 30, 2016 at 2:15 PM
Anonymous said...: incredibly stupid ignorant liar kenny hissy fit:

From the comment at March 30, 2016 at 1:34 PM:

"We tried to convince him that we had a story to tell ourselves. Mr. Nifong put his hands over his ears and said I don’t want to hear it,” said Wade Smith, attorney for accused player Collin Finnerty.

He literally put his hands over his ears,” said Jim Cooney, lawyer for accused player Reade Seligmann."

That is documented in the ESPN documentary which you, harr, and cohan are afraid to watch.

The question is, again, if nifong was so sure that the alibi was contrived, why was he unwilling to have it discredited in open court?

The answer is, he knew he could not discredit it. If he had tried to discredit it, the result would have been that the charges would be dropped. As was presented in the documentary, to win the election for da, he had promised he would not drop the case, that he would convict the defendants.; March 30, 2016 at 2:19 PM
Anonymous said...: increibly stupid, ignorant liar kenny hissy fit:

More about cohan.

cohan quoted nifong as saying that the AG's investigators felt the AG had sandbagged them when he presented his belief that the Lacrosse payers were innocent.

AG Investigator Jim Coman was interviewed for the documentary, at the end of the documentary. Go andwatch that part, if you dare to confront the truth. Mr. Coman was appalled and flabbergasted that nifong would have tried to prosecute the Lacrosse players.

You may admire cohan because he panders to your ignorance. That does not change te fact that you are an incredibly stupid, ignorant lying guilt presuming racist.; March 30, 2016 at 2:25 PM
Anonymous said...: Incredibly stupid ignorant liar kenhyderal said...

"Walt said: "However, the disinterested witness provides a timeline that is consistent with multiple sperm deposits that did not come from the lacrosse party:............................... Huh?? Who are these disinterested witnesses?"

You are admittedly not exactly disinterested, but you have admitted it could not be established that the male DNA found on crystal, which DNA did not match the DNA of the party attendees, was deposited on the night of 13/14 March 2006. That finding is not evidence of a rape.

Further, I say your story of kilgo telling you he knew a member of the Lacrosse team who witnessed multiple non Lacrosse Team attendees assault crystal, is something you fabricated.

If you assert that multiple, non Lacrosse Team attendees assaulted crystal, you assume the obligation of proving it. You Haven't. The best YOU, yes YOU have come up with is, no one can prove there were no non Lacrosse attendees.; March 30, 2016 at 2:35 PM
Anonymous said...: Incredibly stupid ignorant liar kenhyderal said...

"Walt in quoting A Lawyer said:Seligmann's and Finerty's alibi evidence wasn't "overriding proof" of their innocence ? "................................... DA Nifong felt Seligmann's alibi evidence was contrived and Investigative Author Cohan agreed with him"

Did that mean Reade Seligman should not have beenallowed to present his alibi evidence.

Kind of hypocritical of you as you believe crystal should not only had the right to present her alibi evidence but also had a right to have her evidence go unchallenged.

So I ask again, why did nifong want to prevent Reade Seligman from presenting his alibi evidence.

Answer, again: nifong knew he could not discredit Reade Seligman's evidence.; March 30, 2016 at 2:40 PM
kenhyderal said...: Dr. Anonymous said: "Further, I say your story of kilgo telling you he knew a member of the Lacrosse team who witnessed multiple non Lacrosse Team attendees assault crystal, is something you fabricated"...................He told the same thing on this blog. Unfortunately for reasons known only to him he systematically deleted every post he ever made. I do have my suspicions for why he suddenly ceased and desisted. He also changed his e-mail address.; March 30, 2016 at 2:56 PM
Anonymous said...: incredibly stupid ignorant liar kenny hissy fit:

What else is apalling about your attitude, you not only expect people to accept your drivel as truth, you expect people to accept the drivel of hypocritical fabricating delusional megalomaniacal ignorant liar harr as truth.; March 30, 2016 at 2:56 PM
Anonymous said...: hypo=critical fabricating delusional megalomaniacal ignorant liar harr:
incredibly ignorant stupid liar kenny hissy fit:

Isn't about time that one or both of you post another anonymous comment.; March 30, 2016 at 2:58 PM
kenhyderal said...: Dr. Anonymous said: "That finding is not evidence of a rape".........................Unless the DNA matched someone shown to be at the Party. Has anyone ever seen a list of all who were in attendance? Offering DNA samples by every member of the Team including those known to be absent was calculated to give the impression that only Players, save two present in photographs, were there. Were the DNA samples extracted from sperm run through the state or national data bank?. Have they been destroyed?; March 30, 2016 at 3:06 PM
Anonymous said...: incredibly stupid ignorant liar kenhyderal said...

"Dr. Anonymous said: "That finding is not evidence of a rape".........................Unless the DNA matched someone shown to be at the Party. Has anyone ever seen a list of all who were in attendance?"

Have you. Have you proven there were unidentified attendees? No.

"Offering DNA samples by every member of the Team including those known to be absent was calculated to give the impression that only Players, save two present in photographs, were there."

Irrelevant dodge on the part of kenny hissy fit.

"Were the DNA samples extracted from sperm run through the state or national data bank?. Have they been destroyed?"

Why don't you ask nifong? He, not the suspects, had custody of the evidence, from start to finish. It was nifonfg's decision to concesl the evidence.

Maybe you can ask cohan why nifong prevented the running of "the DNA samples extracted from sperm run through the state or national data bank".; March 30, 2016 at 3:12 PM
Anonymous said...: Unless the DNA matched someone shown to be at the Party.

Correct.

Has anyone ever seen a list of all who were in attendance?

Yes. Nifong and the DPD had the list.

Offering DNA samples by every member of the Team including those known to be absent was calculated to give the impression that only Players, save two present in photographs, were there.

There were no other attendees.

Were the DNA samples extracted from sperm run through the state or national data bank?.

Nifong and the DPD indicated they were not. Nifong claimed that he did not realize that DNA was relevant in a rape investigation in which the alleged perpetrators ejaculated and did not use condoms if it did not match the defendants.

Have they been destroyed?

I do not know.; March 30, 2016 at 3:47 PM
Anonymous said...: kenhyderal said...

Dr. Anonymous said: "That finding is not evidence of a rape".........................Unless the DNA matched someone shown to be at the Party. Has anyone ever seen a list of all who were in attendance? Offering DNA samples by every member of the Team including those known to be absent was calculated to give the impression that only Players, save two present in photographs, were there. Were the DNA samples extracted from sperm run through the state or national data bank?. Have they been destroyed?"

That nifong, who had custody of the evidence, tried to conceal it rather than chase it down indicates he did not think there were unidentified party attendees or that the males who deposited the dna did it on the night of 13/14 March 2006, or that it was deposited as the result of a forcible gang rape.

Why do you think nifong concealed the evidence you think was so signiuficabt?; March 30, 2016 at 4:02 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said:" Why do you think nifong concealed the evidence you think was so signiuficabt".................. That didn't happen.; March 30, 2016 at 4:16 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny lied: That didn't happen.

You are a liar.; March 30, 2016 at 4:20 PM
Anonymous said...: kenhyderal said...

"Anonymous said:" Why do you think nifong concealed the evidence you think was so signiuficabt".................. That didn't happen."

Yes it did.

Check out the ESPN documentary.

brian meehan testified under oath that he and nifong agreed not to report the finding that the only male DNA found on crystal did not match any of the DNA of any of the Lacrosse players.

Who engaged DNA Security to test the rape kit materias? nifong.

When did nifong have the samples? April of 2006, before he sought indictments against the Lacrosse players.

When did anyone other than nifong and meehan know about the dna evidence? December of 2006, when meehan testified.

Who, besides nifong and meehan knew about the dna evidence between April and December of 2006? No one.

That adds up to, nifong concealed the evidence.; March 30, 2016 at 5:38 PM
Anonymous said...: kenny hissy fit:

The questions are, if the male dna found on crystal, dna which did not match the dna of the men nifong had indicted for rape, was evidence of a rape, why did nifong conceal it and why did he indict men who were clearly not the source of the dna?; March 30, 2016 at 5:47 PM
Anonymous said...: kenny hissy fit:

If nifong did not conceal the evidence, that the dna found on crystal's person did not match the dna of the men he had indicted, explain why no one but nifong and brian meehan knew about the dna evidence between April of 2006 and December of 2006.

Who but nifong was in a position to run "the DNA samples extracted from sperm run through the state or national data bank", or any other measure to identify who deposited the dna?; March 30, 2016 at 5:58 PM
The Great Kilgo said...: Ubes is having another one of his liestopper crank meltdowns

spin Ubes spin

Quack Quack Quack; March 30, 2016 at 6:19 PM
Anonymous said...: harr the hypocritical fabricator and/or kenny hissy fit or possibly both posting anonymously again trying to delude people into believing they have support.; March 30, 2016 at 6:29 PM
Anonymous said...: Great Kilgo,

Instead of criticizing Ubes for his spinning, you should criticize Kenny for his spinning and lying.; March 30, 2016 at 6:48 PM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You have 276 days to exonerate and free Mangum.

It has been 16 days since the Ides of March and 3,211 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; March 31, 2016 at 4:01 AM
Anonymous said...: More harrian hypocrisy.

harr said that crystal should never have gone to trial.

There is overwhelming evidence that the crime, of which the Lacrosse players were charged, never happened.

?Here, harr says that they can not be considered innocent because they never went to trial. What he advocates is, they should have been tried, convicted, sentenced to a long prison term and then exonerated years later to be considered innocent.; March 31, 2016 at 4:15 AM
Ubes said...: Kenhyderal,
That was certainly not Kilgo. If Kilgo were free, don't you think he would have given you the necessary information?
That's why we're keeping him in our compound. Don't worry, we won't .hurt him; March 31, 2016 at 4:15 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

You should apologize for your lies.; March 31, 2016 at 4:30 AM
Anonymous said...: kenny hissy fit:

Here is your track record.

You claimed Dr. Julie Manly was an experienced Gynecologist when she examined crystal. She was a first year Emergency Medicine Resident(unlike your master harr, she was accepted into and completed residency training). That information was available on the internet at the time you made your claim.

You claimed nifong did not charge the Lacrosse players with rape. It had been public knowledge for years that he did charge them with first degree rape.

You claimed nifong did not conceal the finding, that the only male DNA found on crystal's rape kit did not match the DNA of the men nifong had indicted for the alleged crime. Again, it is public knowledge, has been for years, that niifong did conceal that finding.

Finally, you claim that mystery party attendees raed crystal at the Lacrosse party on the night of 13/14 March 2006. You base that claim on another claim, that kilgo told you a friend of his, a Lacrosse team member, had witnessed the rape. kilgo has disappeared from the face of the earth, and all his J4N posts with him. In over 10 years, his Lacrosse player friend has never materialized.

Yet you want people to believe you are knowledgeable about the Duke Rape Hoax.

Funny.

When he was posting, kilgo used to claim he knew more about the rape hoax than anyone.

Are kilgo and his friend something you havefabricated?

"MMMMM - Could be". Acknowledgement given to Warner Brothers who created the Caracter of Bugs Bunny.; March 31, 2016 at 4:49 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
More harrian hypocrisy.

harr said that crystal should never have gone to trial.

There is overwhelming evidence that the crime, of which the Lacrosse players were charged, never happened.

?Here, harr says that they can not be considered innocent because they never went to trial. What he advocates is, they should have been tried, convicted, sentenced to a long prison term and then exonerated years later to be considered innocent.

No hypocrisy. There are many instances when people (especially of color) are arrested and charged with a crime, and then, due to lack of evidence, the case is dropped by the D.A. or dismissed by a judge. When this happens, that doesn't mean that the defendants were "innocent" of the crime or that they were exonerated (as by a trial jury). In the Duke Lacrosse case the media has presented the case as one in which the three defendants were innocent or exonerated... that is not what happened! A sexual assault cannot be ruled out based on DNA evidence. And, the fact that an assault occurred cannot be ruled out by DNA evidence either.

In the Mangum murder case, the fact that no crime occurred is based on the fact that medical malpractice (possibly accidental) resulted in Daye's brain death and subsequent death. Clearly there was no nexus presented between the stab wound and Daye's brain death or actual death. In other words, in Mangum's murder case, no homicide was committed. A crime (sexual assault) cannot be ruled out in the Duke Lacrosse case. Comprende?; March 31, 2016 at 5:21 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous Anonymous said...
Sid -- Do you believe that witches should be thrown in the river and if they drown they are innocent?

No.; March 31, 2016 at 5:24 AM
John D. Smith said...: Sidney states:: In the Mangum murder case, the fact that no crime occurred is based on the fact that medical malpractice (possibly accidental) resulted in Daye's brain death and subsequent death. Clearly there was no nexus presented between the stab wound and Daye's brain death or actual death. In other words, in Mangum's murder case, no homicide was committed...Comprende?

No. I don't comprende.

1. You confuse "no crime" with murder. Ignoring Daye's death, Magnum would have faced felony charges for assault with a deadly weapon. Magnum stabbed Daye. A jury rejected her self-dense claim. Although you may disagree with the jury's finding, you cannot claim that "overriding proof" of her claim existed. As a result, by your own standard, you cannot claim "no crime occurred"or that Magnum is "innocent."

2. You have never proven your assertion that the esophageal intubation is an intervening cause. You merely asserted it. Moreover, you are not a medical expert. In the trial, one expert, Nichols, testified that the intubation was not an intervening cause, even if he did not explain the nexus. Based on your disclosures, we know that a second expert, Roberts, also concluded that the esophageal intubation was not an intervening cause. Your assertion that we should ignore these expert opinions because these experts are both conspiring against Magnum requires proof. You have offered none.

3. Based on the expert opinions, one may conclude that evidence exists that the stabbing and the esophageal intubation were BOTH proximate causes of Daye's death. The case law Walt provided concludes that medical malpractice is not an intervening cause and that the person responsible for the act that initiated the chain of events remains legally responsible. You claim Welch is not applicable. However, you have declined to provide case law that supports your assertion.

As a result, there is no "overriding proof" that the intubation is an intervening cause and that therefore Magnum is "innocent."

Comprende?

John D. Smith
New York, NY; March 31, 2016 at 6:38 AM
Anonymous said...: Nifong Supporter said...

"Anonymous said...
More harrian hypocrisy.

harr said that crystal should never have gone to trial.

There is overwhelming evidence that the crime, of which the Lacrosse players were charged, never happened.

?Here, harr says that they can not be considered innocent because they never went to trial. What he advocates is, they should have been tried, convicted, sentenced to a long prison term and then exonerated years later to be considered innocent."

"No hypocrisy."

Yes there was hypocrisy, and you have just posted more harrian hypocrisy.

"There are many instances when people (especially of color) are arrested and charged with a crime, and then, due to lack of evidence, the case is dropped by the D.A. or dismissed by a judge. When this happens, that doesn't mean that the defendants were "innocent" of the crime or that they were exonerated (as by a trial jury)."

Lack of evidence is not synonymous with no evidence. There was absolutely no evidence that crystal was raped. If she had bee raped, there was no evidence that the accused eretrated the rape. She alleged a brutal gang rape in which multiple assailants penetrated her and left their DNA. Two of the accused could prove they werenot at the scene of the ALLEGED crime at the time the crime Allegedly happened. crystal identified a man who was clean shaven, who never had a mustache, as an assailant who had a mustache. That third wrongfully charged man, David Evans, was making a cell phone call at the time of the alleged crime. crystal was making a cell phone call, not to 911, at the time the alleged crime was happening. The only DNA recovered from the rape kit did not match the DNA of the three wrongfully indicted men. That is total absence of evidence, not lack of evidence. If you proclaim it is not, you proclaim only that you are incredibly stupid.

"In the Duke Lacrosse case the media has presented the case as one in which the three defendants were innocent or exonerated... that is not what happened!"

That was because, in spite of your guilt presuming racism, they were exonerated.

End Paet 1; March 31, 2016 at 6:52 AM
Anonymous said...: art 2>

"A sexual assault cannot be ruled out based on DNA evidence."

Totally irrelevant comment. The prosecutor has to rule in a sexual assault beyond a reasonable doubt. The defendants are not obligated to rule it out. The sexual assault alleged by crystal was a gang RAPE. The evidence showed overwhelmingly no rape occurred.

"And, the fact that an assault occurred cannot be ruled out by DNA evidence either."

Another irrelevant post. I repeat, the assault alleged by crystal was a rape in which DNA was left. No DNA matching the suspects was found. Said sexual assault WAS ruled out.

"In the Mangum murder case, the fact that no crime occurred is based on the fact that medical malpractice (possibly accidental) resulted in Daye's brain death and subsequent death. "

No it didn't. There was no Malpractice. Malpratice has to be established by expert medical testimony. By virtue of your credentials, or rather your total lack thereof, your opinion does not establish malpractice. And, if malpractice did occur, it did not relieve crystal of criminal responsibility for Reginald Daye's death. The aspiration occurred as part of a workup for an intra abdominal infection. Reginald Daye was put at risk for an intra abdominal infection by the stab wound crystal inflicted. That no Infectious Disease consultant was involved is another one of your straw fishermenn holding up a red herring. Reginald Daye was at risk of an intra abdominal infection post op. Your contntion that he was not is but another manifestation of your lack of medical expertise

"Clearly there was no nexus presented between the stab wound and Daye's brain death or actual death."

Clearly there was. You are just incapable of recognizing it.

"In other words, in Mangum's murder case, no homicide was committed."

Yes there was, and crystal perpetrated it.

"A crime (sexual assault) cannot be ruled out in the Duke Lacrosse case."

A crime was definitively ruled out. Again, you lack the capacity to see that. And you ignore, it is the prosecution's responsibiliy to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that a crime happened. I notice you do not say crystal had to rule out a homicide. You choose to be willfully ignorant of that principle in the Duke Rape Hoax.

"Comprende?"

I do.You show yet again that you obviously do not.; March 31, 2016 at 6:54 AM
Anonymous said...: corrected typos

Nifong Supporter said...

"Anonymous said...
More harrian hypocrisy.

harr said that crystal should never have gone to trial.

There is overwhelming evidence that the crime, of which the Lacrosse players were charged, never happened.

?Here, harr says that they can not be considered innocent because they never went to trial. What he advocates is, they should have been tried, convicted, sentenced to a long prison term and then exonerated years later to be considered innocent."

"No hypocrisy."

Yes there was hypocrisy, and you have just posted more harrian hypocrisy.

"There are many instances when people (especially of color) are arrested and charged with a crime, and then, due to lack of evidence, the case is dropped by the D.A. or dismissed by a judge. When this happens, that doesn't mean that the defendants were "innocent" of the crime or that they were exonerated (as by a trial jury)."

Lack of evidence is not synonymous with no evidence. There was absolutely no evidence that crystal was raped. If she had bee raped, there was no evidence that the accused perpetrated the rape. She alleged a brutal gang rape in which multiple assailants penetrated her and left their DNA. Two of the accused could prove they were not at the scene of the ALLEGED crime at the time the crime Allegedly happened. crystal identified a man who was clean shaven, who never had a mustache, as an assailant who had a mustache. That third wrongfully charged man, David Evans, was making a cell phone call at the time of the alleged crime. crystal was making a cell phone call, not to 911, at the time the alleged crime was happening. The only DNA recovered from the rape kit did not match the DNA of the three wrongfully indicted men. That is total absence of evidence, not lack of evidence. If you proclaim it is not, you proclaim only that you are incredibly stupid.

"In the Duke Lacrosse case the media has presented the case as one in which the three defendants were innocent or exonerated... that is not what happened!"

That was, because, in spite of your guilt presuming racism, they were exonerated.

End Part 1; March 31, 2016 at 7:07 AM
Anonymous said...: Continuing correction of typos

Part 2>

"A sexual assault cannot be ruled out based on DNA evidence."

Totally irrelevant comment. The prosecutor has to rule in a sexual assault beyond a reasonable doubt. The defendants are not obligated to rule it out. The sexual assault alleged by crystal was a gang RAPE. The evidence showed overwhelmingly no rape occurred.

"And, the fact that an assault occurred cannot be ruled out by DNA evidence either."

Another irrelevant post. I repeat, the assault alleged by crystal was a rape in which DNA was left. No DNA matching the suspects was found. Said sexual assault WAS ruled out.

"In the Mangum murder case, the fact that no crime occurred is based on the fact that medical malpractice (possibly accidental) resulted in Daye's brain death and subsequent death. "

No it didn't. There was no Malpractice. Malpratice has to be established by expert medical testimony. By virtue of your credentials, or rather your total lack thereof, your opinion does not establish malpractice. And, if malpractice did occur, it did not relieve crystal of criminal responsibility for Reginald Daye's death. The aspiration occurred as part of a workup for an intra abdominal infection. Reginald Daye was put at risk for an intra abdominal infection by the stab wound crystal inflicted. That no Infectious Disease consultant was involved is another one of your straw fishermen holding up a red herring. Reginald Daye was at risk of an intra abdominal infection post op. Your contntion that he was not is but another manifestation of your lack of medical expertise.

"Clearly there was no nexus presented between the stab wound and Daye's brain death or actual death."

Clearly there was. You are just incapable of recognizing it.

"In other words, in Mangum's murder case, no homicide was committed."

Yes there was, and crystal perpetrated it.

"A crime (sexual assault) cannot be ruled out in the Duke Lacrosse case."

A crime was definitively ruled out. Again, you lack the capacity to see that. And you ignore, it is the prosecution's responsibiliy to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that a crime happened. I notice you do not say crystal had to rule out a homicide. You choose to be willfully ignorant of that principle in the Duke Rape Hoax.

"Comprende?"

I do. You show yet again that you obviously do not.; March 31, 2016 at 7:10 AM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: "Huh?? Who are these disinterested witnesses?"

Perhaps, it is worth reviewing the timeline of events leading up to the ill fated lacrosse party of 13/14 March, 2006.

Saturday March 11, 2006. In the waning hours of that day, Jarriel Johnson of Raleigh picks up Crystal Gail Mangum. He takes her to the Holiday Inn Express in Wakefield for an appointment at 11:00 PM.

Sunday March 12, 2006. In the very earliest hours of what should have been a day of rest, Jarriel Johnson drives Crystal from the Holiday Inn Express to the Platinum Club north of Hillsborough. He doesn't say when they arrived, but it was probably after 1:00 AM. Usually the Platinum didn't really get busy until the wee hours. At least twice Crystal came out of the club to where Johnson was waiting for her in his car and implored him to stay at least one more hour. Both times he agreed. At 4:30 AM, Crystal finally emerged from the Platinum and returned to Johnson's car. He drove her to an hour long job at the Millennium Hotel in Durham. They must have arrived there around 5:00 AM, just as the sun was starting to lighten the morning sky.

Sunday March 12, 2006, later in the day. Jarriel Johnson drove Crystal to Raleigh "to find this guy she met." They, Johnson and Crystal, checked into a hotel near Lane Street in Raleigh. There, they bought Chinese Food and waited for the man to call. Johnson left around midnight.

Monday March 13, 2006 When Johnson came back to pick up Crystal, he had to wait in the car while she "performed" for an older man man in the hotel room. After the man left, Johnson went back to the room. Later in the afternoon, they checked out and started for home. In the afternoon, along Creedmoor Road, in Raleigh, Crystal asked Johnson to stop the car so she could get out and go to the restroom. Instead of seeking out a public restroom, she started walking down Credmoor Road. Johnson wrote, in his written statement to police, that he pulled over his car and got out to chase her down. Crystal told him to leave her alone. Johnson had to ask her several times before she climbed back into his car. They reached his home about 4:30 PM.

Monday March 13 in the late afternoon. Johnson was not able to drive Crystal that night, so Brian Taylor, another friend, agreed to drive her to a bachelor party in Durham

Monday March 13, around 11:00 PM. Crystal arrives at 601 North Buchanan Street in Durham.

The above and foregoing timeline was provided by Jarriel Johnson in a written statement to Durham Police. Only those who are willfully ignorant can't recognize the activities of a working prostitute in the description provided by Johnson. He is credible simply because his statement is against his own penal interest.

Walt-in-Durham; March 31, 2016 at 7:34 AM
Walt said...: Sid, once again it is you who no comprendes. Sid wrote: "No hypocrisy. There are many instances when people (especially of color) are arrested and charged with a crime, and then, due to lack of evidence, the case is dropped by the D.A. or dismissed by a judge. When this happens, that doesn't mean that the defendants were "innocent" of the crime or that they were exonerated (as by a trial jury)." Yes it does. Coffin v. U.S. 156 U.S. 432 ___ S.Ct. ___, ___L.Ed.___ (1895) That means since at least 1895 in the U.S.A period, there has been a presumption of innocence. The burden is on the state to prove guilt. If the state fails, for whatever reason, then the defendant is and remains as he always was, innocent.

...In the Mangum murder case, the fact that no crime occurred is based on the fact that medical malpractice (possibly accidental) resulted in Daye's brain death and subsequent death. Clearly there was no nexus presented between the stab wound and Daye's brain death or actual death." That is your opinion unsupported by the facts. The facts are two competent physicians have diagnosed otherwise. Further, the law is abundantly clear, medical malpractice is not an intervening cause, nor does contributory negligence have any place in the criminal law. This has been explained to you time and time again. It is clear that tu` no comprende.

Walt-in-Durham; March 31, 2016 at 7:46 AM
kenhyderal said...: Dr. Anonymous said: "Are kilgo and his friend something you havefabricated"......... Kilgo was posting here before I realized that it was my old friend Crystal who was the victim in the Duke Lacrosse Case and reached out to her. Subsequent to that, I discovered the blog and registered to join it. I then put Crystal in touch with Dr. Harr; March 31, 2016 at 8:49 AM
Anonymous said...: Further proof Sid just doesn't get it:

He says "medical malpractice (possibly accidental)" - by definition malpractice is accidental - there is no "possibly" about it. If it's intentional, it's not malpractice, it's a crime.; March 31, 2016 at 8:57 AM
Anonymous said...: kenhyderal said...

" Kilgo was posting here before I realized that it was my old friend Crystal who was the victim in the Duke Lacrosse Case and reached out to her."

Irrelevant statement, as crystal was not the victim but the victimizer in the Duke Rape
Hoax. I remind you, you have provided no evidence that she was raped.

Subsequent to that, I discovered the blog and registered to join it."

So maybe you did not fabricate kilgo. You did probably fabricate his Lacrosse player friend. You do admit you can provide no evidence that kilgo ever told you he had a friend who was on the Lacrosse team. You have presented no evidence that kilgo's friend actually exists.

"I then put Crystal in touch with Dr. Harr".

And boy did you really further mess up her already messed up life.; March 31, 2016 at 9:25 AM
kenhyderal said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; March 31, 2016 at 9:34 AM
kenhyderal said...: Walt said: "Only those who are willfully ignorant can't recognize the activities of a working prostitute in the description provided by Johnson. He is credible simply because his statement is against his own penal interest"............. Walt your prejudice is showing. Crystal does not dispute his timeline. Crystal worked for an Escort Agency and they booked her appointments. All records were available. She did this to support her kids and pay for her college. She did not do this to support a drug addiction as is the case of many who are forced to resort to prostitution. Escorting and exotic dancing were at that time her means of livelihood.; March 31, 2016 at 9:36 AM
Anonymous said...: kenhyderal said...

"Walt said: "Only those who are willfully ignorant can't recognize the activities of a working prostitute in the description provided by Johnson. He is credible simply because his statement is against his own penal interest"............. Walt your prejudice is showing. Crystal does not dispute his timeline. Crystal worked for an Escort Agency and they booked her appointments. All records were available. She did this to support her kids and pay for her college. She did not do this to support a drug addiction as is the case of many who are forced to resort to prostitution. Escorting and exotic dancing were at that time her means of livelihood."

So where did all the male DNA come from?

You have no proof it got there at the Lacrosse party on the night of 13/14 march 2006.

You have no proof there were unidentified party attendees.

Why was she impaired when she arrived at the party. You called the witnesses who said she was impaired self serving. That would be credible only, I say again, only if there was something for them to be self serving about. No one, not nifong, not harr, not you, not cohan has provided any proof of such an event. The only evidence nifong ever came up with was that nothing had happened, and his case was built on concealing that evidence, not on presenting it in court.

This is from the ESPN documentary. Crystal was impaired when aDurham Police officer encountered her at the Krogers parking lot, in response to a call from Kim Pittman/Roberts to the police saying not that crystal was raped but that crystal wouldn't get out of her car. The officer took her to the Durham Access Center for involuntary cmmittment for detoxification. So Crystal was faced with the prospect of NC Social Services learning she had been out close to midnight, dressed in a skimpy costume, impaired, dancing at the team party when she maybe should have been home with her kids.

Whatever you think of that, it is a plausible explanation of why crystal would lie about being raped.

It is far more plausible than the reasons you have come up with to support crystal's allegation of rape.

So go ahead and cry I am trashing crystal's reputation. she trashed her own reputation. And you have tried to trash the reputations of obviously innocent men.; March 31, 2016 at 10:03 AM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "Why was she impaired when she arrived at the party. You called the witnesses who said she was impaired self serving. That would be credible only, I say again, only if there was something for them to be self serving about"................. Let's start with the most innocuous, wanting to shield their fellow teammates. Alternate driver Taylor, Kim Roberts, and Jason Bussey all testified she arrived un-impaired. She suddenly became grossly impaired after consuming a drink handed to her when she was in the bathroom getting ready to dance. She immediately became impaired. Her impairment ended as precipitously as it had began indicative of the date rape drug chloral hydrate that was never tested for and which at that time was almost impossible to detect; properties well known to sexual predators with nefarious intent.; March 31, 2016 at 1:44 PM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: "...She suddenly became grossly impaired after consuming a drink handed to her when she was in the bathroom getting ready to dance. She immediately became impaired. Her impairment ended as precipitously as it had began indicative of the date rape drug chloral hydrate that was never tested for and which at that time was almost impossible to detect; properties well known to sexual predators with nefarious intent."

First, Jarriel Johnson described the odd behavior of Crystal demanding to be let out of his car on Monday afternoon in Raleigh to seek a public restroom. But, she did not. Instead, he had to chase her down and ask her many times to get back in his car.

Second, the more likely explanation for Crystal's impairment on the night of March 13/14 is the interaction between the Flexeril she was taking and the alcoholic drinks she was consuming. Her behavior is exactly what is warned of for people combining Flexeril and alcohol.

Kenny's speculations are simply not credible.

Walt-in-Durham; March 31, 2016 at 2:15 PM
Anonymous said...: Drinking on top of cyclobenzaprine (a muscle relaxant) can also cause both physical and mental impairment.; March 31, 2016 at 2:18 PM
Anonymous said...: Oops. Walt beat me to it.; March 31, 2016 at 2:19 PM
kenhyderal said...: Walt said: "Second, the more likely explanation for Crystal's impairment on the night of March 13/14 is the interaction between the Flexeril she was taking and the alcoholic drinks she was consuming. Her behavior is exactly what is warned of for people combining Flexeril and alcohol"..................................... Possible but that had never been Crystal's experience. She was prescribed flexeril by her Orthopod to take prior to her dance routines because of the spinal condition she was suffering from at that time. It was subsequently corrected by spinal surgery. She never experience that type interaction before or after by having drinks after taking that medication. Although patients are told to avoid alcohol while taking it doing so would not realisticly produce the kind of reaction that Crystal experienced; March 31, 2016 at 3:13 PM
Anonymous said...: kenhyderal said...

Walt said: "Second, the more likely explanation for Crystal's impairment on the night of March 13/14 is the interaction between the Flexeril she was taking and the alcoholic drinks she was consuming. Her behavior is exactly what is warned of for people combining Flexeril and alcohol"....................................."

"Possible but that had never been Crystal's experience. She was prescribed flexeril by her Orthopod to take prior to her dance routines because of the spinal condition she was suffering from at that time. It was subsequently corrected by spinal surgery."

Not at all relevant. Combining Alcohol and fleseril causes the impairment witnessed in crystal. There was no evidence of a date rape drug being administered. Again you have provided absolutely no evidence it was. You resort to the same old invalid argument, YOU say it could have happened.

"She never experience that type interaction before or after by having drinks after taking that medication."

Did you ever observe crystal after she downed 44 oubces of beer(she admitted to drinking two 22 ounce cans of beer before taking flexeril. How much hands on clinical experience have you had with flexeril? None, I'll warrant.

"Although patients are told to avoid alcohol while taking it doing so would not realisticly(sic) produce the kind of reaction that Crystal experienced".

Again the question is, how many patients have you observed and treated who took Flexeril after downing 44 ounces of beer? Unless you have observed and treated at sleast several dozen,you are not in a position to make that kind of statement.; March 31, 2016 at 3:24 PM
Anonymous said...: kenny the liar prevaricated,

"Although patients are told to avoid alcohol while taking it (flexeril) doing so would not realisticly produce the kind of reaction that Crystal experienced." There's even a warning on the label about the risk of mixing it with alcohol.

But it does and it did. How does continuing to lie about the false rape accusations Mangum made help her in any way?; March 31, 2016 at 3:48 PM
Anonymous said...: kenny hissy fit:

You say, nifong and cohan believed Reade Seligman's alibi was contrived.

Time stamped security camera footage documented that Reade Seligman was making ATM withdrawls, away from thr site of the alleged crime at the time the alleged crime was allegedly happening

Moez Elmostafa gave a statement that Reade Seligman was in his cab at the time the alleged crime was allegedly happening.

You say the DNA found on crystal is evidence a rape happened, even though you admit you can not establish that the DNA was deposited at the Lacrosse Party on the night of 13/14 March 2006.

You say that kilgo told you he had a Lacrosse team member friend who told him he had witnessed multiple non Lacrosse members raping crystal at the party. kilgo and all his posts have vanished from the face of the earth. kilgo's friend has not materialized after ten years. So, you can not document that kilgo ever told you about a Lacrosse player friend and you can not document said Lacrosse player friend ever existed.

Your whole case that crystal was raped was contrived.

You do not comprehend what contrived means.; April 1, 2016 at 4:41 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You have 276 days to exonerate and free Mangum.

It has been 16 days since the Ides of March and 3,211 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; April 1, 2016 at 5:13 AM
Anonymous said...: kenny hissy fit:

You have yet to explain why you believe Reade Seligman should not have been allowed to present his alibi evidence. After all, you believe that crystal should have presented her alibi evidence and have it accepted at face value, even though it was contrived.; April 1, 2016 at 5:20 AM
Anonymous said...: Abe,

You didn't update the numbers.; April 1, 2016 at 5:27 AM
Anonymous said...: ATTENTION EVERYONE:

It has been brought to my attention that I did not update the numbers on today's daily countdown. The correct numbers are as follows:

Sid has 275 days to free and exonerate Mangum.

It has been 17 days since the Ides of March.

It has been 3,212 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred.

I apologize for any confusion or distress caused by my oversight.

AS YOU WERE.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; April 1, 2016 at 6:54 AM
Unknown said...: Get over it! This girl is a terrible person, a waste of space and air, a liar and a killer. Can we please execute her and move on to the next despicable human being?; April 29, 2016 at 1:46 PM
Anonymous said...: Is this every responsible for anything in her life?; September 2, 2016 at 7:43 PM
Anonymous said...: Is this woman every responsible for anything in her life?; September 2, 2016 at 7:44 PM

«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 329 of 329 Newer› Newest»

Monday, March 21, 2016

Crystal Mangum denied a fair trial by Judge Paul Ridgeway

329 comments:

Facebook Badge

Subscribe!

Labels

Blog Archive

About Me