Wednesday, April 20, 2016

Duke University against discrimination?

81 comments:

Anonymous said...

Did you file Harr III? The panel doesn't link to anything.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous Anonymous said...
Did you file Harr III? The panel doesn't link to anything.


I'm impressed... you are fast. I just posted this. Are you a speed reader?

Anyway, the answer to your question is in the affirmative.

Can't take anymore questions right now. Need to get ready for a visit.

Nifong Supporter said...


Oops. Now I realize what happened. You didn't read about my filing in the article. You were just going by the illustration. I accidentally spilled the beans!!

Sometimes, when I first upload, there are some quirks in the system and it'll take a few minutes to get them adjusted and corrected.

Anonymous said...

Sid,

Is the filing of Harr III the major event you predicted on or before April 23? How does this filing result in Mangum's release and exoneration?

Anonymous said...

Walt or A Lawyer:

I understand that Duke is not required to respond to this filing other than to refer to the decision in Harr Ii. Is that correct? Does Harr risk additional sanctions?

Anonymous said...

harr persists in filing frivolous, non meritorious lawsuits.

Anonymous said...

harr said that the main stream media did not cover the story of Duke's discrimination against him. There was no discrimination against harr on the part of Duke. harr's own recording of the confrontation documents that harr violated Duke's non solicitation policy, was told to stop, and then precipitated a conflict with the security guard who told him to stop.

harr claimed his "friend", Provessor Coleman intervened for him. The taped conversation indicated that harr tried to drag an unwilling Professor Coleman into the confrontation.

Anonymous said...

harr rants and raves how the innocent Duke Lacrosse players shook down Duke for millions of dollars

The motivation for harr's repeated filings against Duke is his deluded belief he can shake down Duke for millions of dollars.

Anonymous said...

If harr is trying to push harr versus Duke round three, doesn't the statute of limitations come into play? The incident harr calls discrimination happened 6 years ago. He has twice had is case dismissed before going to trial, indicating it was determined before trial that his case had no merit. So after 6 years and two failed attempts to litigate the frivolous case, shouldn't his latest attempt just be dismissed?

A Lawyer said...

Any new suit by Dr. Harr against Duke is barred by the statute of limitations, by res judicata and by the sanctions order in Harr II. It will not end well for Dr. Harr.

The Rectumfinder said...

I am now more confident than ever that rectumfication will finally prevail soon in Sidney's can... and long before year's end. I can't exactly predict when, but sometime soon you will begin to see cracks in Sidney's butt. Prepare yourself because his behind will soon crumble before your very eyes and be overrun by Crusaders of Justice.

Walt said...

A Lawyer wrote: "Any new suit by Dr. Harr against Duke is barred by the statute of limitations, by res judicata and by the sanctions order in Harr II. It will not end well for Dr. Harr."

I concur.

Sid has added the Associated Press as a defendant in this version. Thus, the District Court will dismiss against all the defendants but A.P. sooner rather than later. However, Sid will at least last to a 12(b)(6) ruling against A.P. This is just an exercise by Sid to call attention to himself. Unless he is a blithering idiot, he knows that he cannot prevail. He has been educated many times why his legal theory is completely wrong. Again, unless he is a blithering idiot, he knows because the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled twice against him, that he will lose again. What we are seeing is the act of a serial pest litigator. Nothing more.

Truly sorry to see Sid wasting the court's time on a piece of litigation that has no merit what so ever.

Anonymous said...

Walt - can you post a link to the pleadings?

I'm curious how this helps Sid at all ... and what the basis for the lawsuit against the AP is - though actually that's probably to catch their attention.

Anonymous said...

harr, you again have shown beyond any and all doubt you are a delusional megalomaniac.

There is nothing in the media about your third lawsuit because there is nothing to your lawsuit.

A Lawyer said...

Walt,
Where id you see the Complaint?

And suing AP? For what?

Does NC have an anti-SLAPP law?

Fake Kenhyderal said...

Sid -- Why stop with AP. The following companies are represented on AP's Board of Directors:
Lee Enterprises, Inc.
Community Newspaper Holdings, Inc.
The E.W. Scripps Company
The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
Journal Communications, Inc.
Swift Communications
The Spokesman-Review
Cowles Publishing Co.
GatehouseMedia, LLC
New Media Investment Group
The New York Times Co.
Cox Media Group
ESPN
BH Media Group
The Omaha World-Herald
Univision Communications, Inc.
Fusion
The Santa Fe New Mexican and The Taos News
Gannett Co., Inc.
A. H. Belo Corporation
The Ogden Newspapers Inc.
Paxton Media Group
Hearst Corporation
The McClatchy Company
Times Publishing Company


You should go after them as well.

Anonymous said...


Sid:

You have 255 days to exonerate and free Mangum.

There are 2 days until April 23rd.

It has been 37 days since the Ides of March and 3,232 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL

Anonymous said...

And, filing another frivolous lawsuit against Duke, which will be summarily dismissed, is doing nothing to advance your goal of freeing Mangum.

Kenny, you still support Sid's actions?

Anonymous said...

Does anyone realize how disgustingly inappropriate it is that harr considers himself a great civil rights hero, the same harr who calls nifong, who tried to undermine the civil rights of innocent men, a decent honorable minister of justice.

harr's motivation for suing Duke is is belief that he can shake down Duke for millions of dollars, nothing more.

Walt said...

Anonymous at 1:04 PM wrote: "Walt - can you post a link to the pleadings?"

They are available on PACER. For those without access, I'll download a copy and post it on my blog this evening.

"I'm curious how this helps Sid at all ..."

It doesn't in a sane world. Unfortunately Sid suffers from a fixed false belief fantasy. So, this meritless lawsuit feeds his fantasy.

"and what the basis for the lawsuit against the AP is - though actually that's probably to catch their attention."

None, other than he is a mean spirited little man who enjoys forcing companies to pay legal bills for his frivolous lawsuits.

Walt-in-Durham

Walt said...

A Lawyer wrote: "Walt,
Where id you see the Complaint?

And suing AP? For what?"


AP is in the caption. He doesn't say why he's suing A.P.

Walt-in-Durham

Walt said...

A Lawyer wrote: "Does NC have an anti-SLAPP law?"

I don't think so.

Walt-in-Durham

Anonymous said...


Sid:

You have 254 days to exonerate and free Mangum.

April 23rd is tomorrow.

It has been 38 days since the Ides of March and 3,233 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL

Walt said...

As promised, my blog now has a link to the complaint in Harr III: http://walt-in-durham.blogspot.com/2016/04/harr-iii_22.html

Anonymous said...

Walt,

That assumes he can even get service on "Associated Press" - that's not their legal name, and he's not serving their registered agent. I suspect he has a similar issue with "Duke University" - but they have the automatic dismissal under the sanction.

Anonymous said...

Unsurprisingly - as others have noted - Sid cites the Felony Murder Rule - still.

Kenny, you ready to admit he's lost his mind yet, or you still enjoy being complicit in his abuse of Crystal?

A Lawyer said...

Walt, thanks for posting that "Complaint."

Insofar as it seeks to re-litigate Dr. Harr's dispute with Duke and its officers/employees, it is barred by the sanctions order in Harr II (not to mention res judicata and the statute of limitations), and will summarily be dismissed (probably with new, tougher sanctions entered against Dr. Harr). Any allegations about Crystal Mangum are irrelevant because Dr. Harr has no standing to complain about anything done to her.

The claim against the AP is utter nonsense. He doesn't allege that AP libeled him. AP's supposed "failure to cover" what Dr. Harr thinks they should have covered is a frivolous claim, because under the First Amendment AP can report what they want. And, as someone pointed out above, AP has not been validly served. (In fact, none of the defendants have been served under any method authorized by Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.)

So this will result in a quick dismissal, with more sanctions against Dr. Harr (perhaps, this time, a ban on him filing anything in any court without prior judicial approval.)

Dr. Harr should have known all of this, based on prior comments on this blog. And if Dr. Harr thinks this will somehow help Mangum, he is seriously delusional.

Anonymous said...

A Lawyer ...

Remember, Dr. Harr knows he isn't going to help Crystal, he just likes to emotionally abuse her, and this helps further that. He wants her to think he's trying, and wants her alleged friends like Kenny to tell her he's trying, so she keeps further isolating themselves from those trying to help her, and clinging to Harr. It's absolutely textbook cultish/emotionally abusive behavior.

In addition, he knows he cannot file anything in State Court, or even Federal Court on Crystal's behalf, so he files lawsuits for himself - and tries to bring in irrelevant claims (and still felony murder).

Anonymous said...

harr again documents he is a deluded megalomabiac.

Anonymous said...

harr manifests the same old harrian hypocrisy, and I repeat.

harr admits he never reviewed the facts of the Lacrosse hoax. But he thinks it perfectly proper when he proclaims the Lacrosse players guilty.

AG Roy Cooper did investigate the case, found there was no evidence of a crime, and then expressed hs belief that the Lacrosse players were innocent.

harr rants and raves that was not proper for the AG to do that.

guiowen said...

Sidney,
What exactly do you expect will happen to day?

Anonymous said...


Sid:

Today is April 23rd. We are expecting big news today regarding Mangum's imminent release. Don't disappoint us again, Sid.

You have 253 days to exonerate and free Mangum.

It has been 39 days since the Ides of March and 3,234 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL

Anonymous said...

Sid,

38 minutes left.

guiowen said...

As April 24 dawns, what happened yesterday that had us all so aroused?

Anonymous said...

WHERE

Anonymous said...

IS

Anonymous said...

KENHYDERAL

Anonymous said...

?

Anonymous said...


Sid:

You have 252 days to exonerate and free Mangum.

April 23rd was yesterday. It has been 40 days since the Ides of March and 3,235 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL

Anonymous said...


Sid:

What was supposed to happen on or before yesterday relating to Mangum's case?

Do you have any more deadlines or predictions you wish to announce?

Feel free to requisition yourself one of the Duke blue crying towel you have promised to me and Walt. You should give a few to kenny, too. I am sure he's crestfallen and I hate to see perfectly good towels go to waste.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL


Abe Froman
Chicago, IL

Anonymous said...

Kenny will be back, he's sleeping under his bridge.

Anonymous said...


Sid:

You have 251 days to exonerate and free Mangum.

It has been 2 days since April 23rd, 41 days since the Ides of March and 3,236 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL

Anonymous said...

Biggest salvo of duds harr has ever fired off.

Anonymous said...

In other words,, harr's dudliest salvo yet.

Anonymous said...

This latest attempt was pathetic even by Harrian standards. It does nothing to help Mangum, or Harr - it actually hurts them because it solidifies the fact that Harr is a delusional loon who shouldn't be taken seriously and believes he should be exempt from the same laws and procedures that everyone else must abide by.

Anonymous said...

Has harr fled the country ot avoid the sanctions headed his way?

Anonymous said...

Waa waa, I just want a jury trial!

Anonymous said...


Sid:

You have 250 days to exonerate and free Mangum.

It has been 3 days since April 23rd, 42 days since the Ides of March and 3,237 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL

Anonymous said...


Wherever Sid is it must be cold, because he seems to have taken all his socks with him.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL

The Rectumfinder said...

Don't matter where he went, I will find his ass and drill a new hole in it. I am the Rectumfinder!

Nifong Supporter said...


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

I apologize for my recent lack of involvement in the blog comment section, however, I have been extremely busy working on Crystal's release and exoneration. Specifically, I have filed a lawsuit which I believe will be to the benefit of Ms. Mangum... it was filed yesterday morning. The parties named as defendants in the suit will receive the complaint tomorrow, so I will plan on posting the brief on this blog site sometime tomorrow afternoon or evening.

As far as Crystal goes, prospects for her imminent freedom and exoneration grow in bounds by the day... and cracks in the wall of injustice will be evident to you all in the near future.

As you were.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous Anonymous said...
Sid,

Is the filing of Harr III the major event you predicted on or before April 23? How does this filing result in Mangum's release and exoneration?


No. The case concerning Duke University and myself is a separate case involving me and having little, if anything, to do with Crystal's situation. I never expected Harr III to directly affect Mangum's case.

It is very likely that I might have been referencing the lawsuit I filed yesterday, although I am not sure.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous Anonymous said...
harr said that the main stream media did not cover the story of Duke's discrimination against him. There was no discrimination against harr on the part of Duke. harr's own recording of the confrontation documents that harr violated Duke's non solicitation policy, was told to stop, and then precipitated a conflict with the security guard who told him to stop.

harr claimed his "friend", Provessor Coleman intervened for him. The taped conversation indicated that harr tried to drag an unwilling Professor Coleman into the confrontation.


The security guard who forced me off campus never mentioned a word about any solicitation policy. In fact, he told James Coleman that he was told to remove me from campus and that was what he was doing... that he was doing his job.

I did not precipitate any conflict... when I tried to find out why he was being abusive towards me, all he could say was that I was "trespassing." You see, I was, in fact, doing nothing more than others similarly situated. The actions against me by Duke were nothing more than discriminatory.

Nifong Supporter said...


Walt said...
A Lawyer wrote: "Any new suit by Dr. Harr against Duke is barred by the statute of limitations, by res judicata and by the sanctions order in Harr II. It will not end well for Dr. Harr."

I concur.

Sid has added the Associated Press as a defendant in this version. Thus, the District Court will dismiss against all the defendants but A.P. sooner rather than later. However, Sid will at least last to a 12(b)(6) ruling against A.P. This is just an exercise by Sid to call attention to himself. Unless he is a blithering idiot, he knows that he cannot prevail. He has been educated many times why his legal theory is completely wrong. Again, unless he is a blithering idiot, he knows because the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled twice against him, that he will lose again. What we are seeing is the act of a serial pest litigator. Nothing more.

Truly sorry to see Sid wasting the court's time on a piece of litigation that has no merit what so ever.


Walt, I believe that you are an intelligent person. Surely you must realize that there is a difference between a serial litigator and someone who is trying to get his day in court. That's all I'm doing... trying to get my day in court. If the white Raleigh police officer who spilled a free cup of coffee is allowed to go to court, then why shouldn't I?

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous Anonymous said...
Walt - can you post a link to the pleadings?

I'm curious how this helps Sid at all ... and what the basis for the lawsuit against the AP is - though actually that's probably to catch their attention.


I thought the reason for listing the Associated Press as a defendant was obvious... but maybe it wasn't. The AP is listed because it was part of the conspiracy against me that day. I believe that AP reporter Tom Breen was sent to first confirm me as the target by approaching me and getting my name as a pretense on doing a story about the Breyer interview and audience reaction to it. It was only after Breen walked away that the security guard intercepted me on my way to the building's exit.

Fortunately for me, James Coleman passed by and he was able to intercede on my behalf... had he not, I would have wound up in jail on who knows what charges and the AP would have had the story it was in actuality sent to cover -- "Disturbance at Justice Breyer event by Nifong supporter."

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous Anonymous said...
And, filing another frivolous lawsuit against Duke, which will be summarily dismissed, is doing nothing to advance your goal of freeing Mangum.

Kenny, you still support Sid's actions?


As previously responded, the Duke lawsuit has nothing to do with advancing my goal of achieving justice for Ms. Mangum.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous Anonymous said...
Does anyone realize how disgustingly inappropriate it is that harr considers himself a great civil rights hero, the same harr who calls nifong, who tried to undermine the civil rights of innocent men, a decent honorable minister of justice.

harr's motivation for suing Duke is is belief that he can shake down Duke for millions of dollars, nothing more.


WRONG-O!! I diligently did my best to achieve an out-of-court settlement with Duke University that would result in it guaranteeing that Duke would not harass Nifong supporters in the future. I did so in good faith, with Duke all but ignoring me... with the exception of a single confrontational and accusatory letter on May 10, 2010.

With Duke refusing to engage me in substantive dialog as the statute of limitation approached, I was forced to file a lawsuit.

I don't think the Duke Lacrosse defendants tried to resolve their differences with the university before shaking them down for $20 million each... they certainly didn't waste any time in going after Duke.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sid:

What was supposed to happen on or before yesterday relating to Mangum's case?

Do you have any more deadlines or predictions you wish to announce?

Feel free to requisition yourself one of the Duke blue crying towel you have promised to me and Walt. You should give a few to kenny, too. I am sure he's crestfallen and I hate to see perfectly good towels go to waste.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL


Hey, Abe.

Patience. kenny and I are not going to be needing the towels... you and Walt are. The end of the State's reign of draconian injustice is around the corner. Unfortunately, your vision cannot navigate around a corner, so you will not be able to see the inevitable until it is right in your face.

DUCK!!

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous Anonymous said...
Has harr fled the country ot avoid the sanctions headed his way?


Sanctions! What sanctions? Sanctions by who and for what?

Believe me, I am not one to flee in the face of adversity. I challenge the fates head-on... like a charging bull towards a red cape.

Anonymous said...

So, what Defendants did you name that you think will change Crystal's fate?

Anonymous said...


Sid:

You have 249 days to exonerate and free Mangum.

It has been 4 days since April 23rd, 43 days since the Ides of March and 3,238 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL

Walt said...

Sid wrote: "Walt, I believe that you are an intelligent person. Surely you must realize that there is a difference between a serial litigator and someone who is trying to get his day in court."

I do recognize the difference. You are a serial litigator who has not stated a claim upon which relief can be granted. In fact, you have now strayed beyond the statute of limitations which makes you even worse than a serial litigator.

"That's all I'm doing... trying to get my day in court."

If that was the case, you would have stated a claim the first time upon which relief could be granted. You did not. And now, you are stating the same claim a third time.

"If the white Raleigh police officer who spilled a free cup of coffee is allowed to go to court, then why shouldn't I?"

Race has nothing to do with it. You are a filer of frivolous and vexatious lawsuits.

Walt-in-Durham

Anonymous said...

harr said:

"WRONG-O!! I diligently did my best to achieve an out-of-court settlement with Duke University that would result in it guaranteeing that Duke would not harass Nifong supporters in the future. I did so in good faith, with Duke all but ignoring me... with the exception of a single confrontational and accusatory letter on May 10, 2010.

With Duke refusing to engage me in substantive dialog as the statute of limitation approached, I was forced to file a lawsuit.

I don't think the Duke Lacrosse defendants tried to resolve their differences with the university before shaking them down for $20 million each... they certainly didn't waste any time in going after Duke."

Your latest rant shows again your interest in money, and it says, in spite of your denials, you thought you could shake down Duke for big bucks.

Anonymous said...

harr said:

"As previously responded, the Duke lawsuit has nothing to do with advancing my goal of achieving justice for Ms. Mangum."

Trying to get a murderess/false accuser a pass for her crimes is not exactly working for justice.

Anonymous said...

harr said:

"Believe me, I am not one to flee in the face of adversity."

I don't believe you. Your multiple previous ineffective attempts at personal posterior camouflage show you duck adversity.

"I challenge the fates head-on... like a charging bull towards a red cape."

Ramming your head repeatedly into a brick wall, thinking you are denting the wall and not your head, is not exactly challenging the fates head on.

Anonymous said...

For harr, the delusionaal, megalomaniacal, hypocritical fabricating ignorant liar:

First you rant and rave about how you deserve your day in court. You did not think the innocent, falsely accused Lacrosse players were entitled to their day in court when they sued Durham and corrupt nifong over their wrongful prosecution.

Maybe Walt and A Lawyer would comment on this. Many lawsuits are settled in favor of the defendant without ever going to court. You have no right in the US legal system to have your case heard in court. No plaintiff has that right.

You have to prove your case. You allege there was a conspiracy on the part of Duke to violate your civil rights. You have never offered any proof of said conspiracy. The best you have come up with is, what else could it have been. That is just another way of saying that the defense has not disproven your allegations. You have to prove your allegations. No one has to explain why you got involved in the situation at Duke. You have to prove it was a conspiracy. You haven't.

The Rectumfinder said...

The end of Sidney's's reign of draconian incontinence is around the corner. Unfortunately, his vision cannot navigate behind his back, so he will not be able to see the inevitable until it is right up his ass.

DUCK!!

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous Anonymous said...
So, what Defendants did you name that you think will change Crystal's fate?


I put the obvious defendants in my lawsuit. You will see by tomorrow.

Ciao, Baby.

Anonymous said...


Sid said:

"The end of the State's reign of draconian injustice is around the corner. Unfortunately, your vision cannot navigate around a corner, so you will not be able to see the inevitable until it is right in your face."

My vision is 20/20, straight thru to 2026, and I see at least two major smackdowns headed your way in the next several months, as the courts deal with the two lawsuits you have filed. The best case is scenario for you is that both suits are dismissed, with no further sanctions or penalties against you.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL

Anonymous said...

hey, harr:

Where does it ast, in the Constitution, in the US code, in any state code, that the filing of a lawsuit guarantees a plaintiff any right to have the suit litigated in court?

Anonymous said...

hey, harr:

What is your evidence that Duke officials conspired to ambush you.

A Lawyer said...

I put the obvious defendants in my lawsuit. You will see by tomorrow.


If you're suing on Mangum's behalf, you may be in violation of the Bar injunction.

If you are filing on your own behalf, you have no standing to seek any relief that will aid Mangum.

If you're suing judges and prosecutors, you may be violating rules of judicial immunity.

For your own sake, please ask Prof. Coleman or another qualified lawyer to look at your suit before you file it.

If you don't take this advice, this will end badly for you.

Anonymous said...

He says he's already filed it. I am sure it will be readily dismissed.

If he sues the Judges or the Prosecutors - they have immunity, and he has no standing.

If he sues Crystal's attorneys - he has no standing.

If he sues others - it will also fail.

There is no lawsuit he can file that anyone will have to respond to.

JSwift said...

A Lawyer states: If you don't take this advice, this will end badly for you.

I believe you are over-reacting. The courts have made it clear that they will show extreme patience with Sidney as a pro se litigant, being very careful not to apply meaningful sanctions lest they be criticized for making the courts inaccessible.

As long as Sidney does not face financial penalties or incarceration, he loses nothing. Although the likelihood of winning any litigation is zero for the reasons discussed repeatedly, Sidney is hoping that one of his lawsuits will be noticed and generate media coverage of Magnum. However, the last time that happened, the Indy story was not quite what he had in mind.

I expect Sidney will receive nothing worse than a slap on the wrist.

John D. Smith
New York, NY

Anonymous said...

Correction:

Anonymous said...

hey, harr:

Where does it say, in the Constitution, in the US code, in any state code, that the filing of a lawsuit guarantees a plaintiff any right to have the suit litigated in court?

Anonymous said...

Sid,

You should be interested in the following:



http://digitalcommons.law.seattleu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1404&context=sulr

Anonymous said...





W
H
E
R
E

I
S

K
E
N
H
Y
D
E
R
A
L
?


Anonymous said...


To Anonymous at 6:30 PM:

Sid's case against Duke was litigated in court. Twice. Both times it was dismissed prior to trial.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL

kenhyderal said...

@ Anonymous 6:31:........................... A very interesting and detailed analysis from a the Law School at a University very near my old stamping grounds.

Anonymous said...


Sid:

You have 248 days to exonerate and free Mangum.

It has been 5 days since April 23rd, 44 days since the Ides of March and 3,239 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL

Anonymous said...

Can't wait to see Sid's brief, and see him rail about Felony Murder (which was never a factor in Crystal's case); Perjury (which didn't occur); and all the other theories and mistakes of law and fact he puts out there.

I'm also curious who he thinks the "obvious" defendants are, and want to see why he claims he has standing.

Where did you file the lawsuit Sid?