justice4nifong: Harr v. Freeman: Brief and evidence

Sunday, June 5, 2016

Harr v. Freeman: Brief and evidence

962 comments:

«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 400 of 962 Newer› Newest»

Anonymous said...: even more claptrap from harr:

"Hey, Fake K.

"Good guess, but EEEEEEEEEEEEh*... wrong.
It would be costly and a waste of time. The reasons for filing against Freeman are based in large measure on her repeated dismissive treatment of my complaints of criminality, and her willingness to take action on a so-called "perjured" statement by Deputy Robert Davis."

Wrong.Your reasons for filing those frivolous non meritorious suits are that you are a megalomaniac and you have delusions of grandeur. Your complaints of criminality are dubious. I repeat, your actions in the Duke Rape Hoax and in the Shan Carter Felony murder case show you can not recognize what is and what is not criminality.

"Instead, my time has been spent, and is being spent, on serious actions and activities (all, by the way, of which are legal and moral) to effect the imminent release and exoneration of Crystal Mangum."

You absolutely can not recognize what is legal and moral. If you did you would not be repeatedly calling the innocent Duke Lacrosse players guilty of raping crystal. Each and every time you refer to crystal as the "victim/accuser" in the "Duke Rape Case" you call the Lacrosse players guilty. crystal was the victimizer/false accuser in the Duke Rape Hoax. And you have been saying her release has been imminent for years. You also said the State would drop the charges and never take her to trial.

"Consider yourself corrected and elucidated."

Rather, you should consider yourself totally and delusionally stupid. You can not even correct or elucidate yourself.; June 15, 2016 at 8:07 AM
Anonymous said...: yet more claptrap from harr:

"
Hey, Walt.

Let me attempt to rephrase my query. Your position, as I understand it, is that a jurisdictional issue does not compel Wake County D.A. Lorrin Freeman to legally act with regards to learning of criminality associated with a case arising out of Durham County. However, despite Freeman not having a legal duty to take action in Mangum's case upon learning of perjury by the medical examiner, do you believe that she has a moral obligation to take action... such as alerting the Durham County district attorney?

I eagerly and enthusiastically await your response."

I am not Walt. I will respond anyway.

You are not capable of identifying criminality. Ergo, you are not capable of informing DA Freeman or any other officer of the court of criminality.; June 15, 2016 at 8:10 AM
Anonymous said...: unbelievable clap trap from harr:

"Hah! What's up, Abe? Don't you trust me? I would never lie or mislead you or any of the commenters to this site."

You have been trying to tell people that the Lacrosse players are guilty of raping crystal.You have been telling people that nifong was a decent, honorable prosecutor.You have been trying to tell people that felony murderer Shan Carter actedin self defense. You tried to tell people nifong did not conceal exculpatory evidence. You have been telling people of a carpetbagger jihad which does nt exist. You tried to tell people that the Durham police set fire to Milton Walker's clothes in order to frame crystal for arson.

Your whole blog has been one continuous effort to lie to and mislad people.; June 15, 2016 at 8:16 AM
kenhyderal said...: Dr. Anonymous said (about Dr.Harr) "you are a megalomaniac and you have delusions of grandeur"............................................... Just one more example of Dr. Anonymous' unethical behaviour making unqualified, psychiatric, diagnostic pronouncements. No wonder he wont tell us his name.; June 15, 2016 at 9:03 AM
kenhyderal said...: @ Walt: Jurisdictional legality aside lets see what morality has to say about this "The Talmud states that if one has information that may lead to the exoneration of an accused person, it is incumbent upon such an individual to come forth and not to remain silent" (Sifra); June 15, 2016 at 10:20 AM
Anonymous said...: clap trap from kenny hissy fit:

"Dr. Anonymous said (about Dr.Harr) "you are a megalomaniac and you have delusions of grandeur"............................................... Just one more example of Dr. Anonymous' unethical behaviour making unqualified, psychiatric, diagnostic pronouncements. No wonder he wont tell us his name."

Just one more example of hissy fit hurling popcorn at me from a range of 500 yards.

I am better qualified than harr and hissy fit to tell whether r not there was malpractice in the death of Reginald Daye.; June 15, 2016 at 10:53 AM
Anonymous said...: hypocritical clap trap from hissy fit:

" Blogger kenhyderal said...

@ Walt: Jurisdictional legality aside lets see what morality has to say about this "The Talmud states that if one has information that may lead to the exoneration of an accused person, it is incumbent upon such an individual to come forth and not to remain silent" (Sifra)"

Well, AG Cooper and his investigators found information, through a thorough investigation of the evidence, something neither harr nor hissy fit ever did, that no rape had been perpetrated against crystal. harr objects to AG Cooper's bringing that to the attention of the public and hissy fit does not chasyise harr for that. And hissy fit still insists crystal was raped, by mystery rapists, te existence of whom he can not verify.

In any event, harr and hissy fit have provided no evidence to exonerate crystal, so what the Talmud says about exoneration is irrelevant here.; June 15, 2016 at 10:59 AM
Anonymous said...: While we are at it, hissy fit, and in view of what you cited from the Talmud, explain how nifong was fighting for justice when he was concealing evidence which exonerated the entire Lacrosse team, the people he wanted to prosecute for the alleged rape of crystal, instead of revealing it?

For that matter, explain why you claimed he did not conceal it, when it has been public knowledge for years that he did conceal it.

And explain why you ranted and raved about the botched police investigation, the failure to identify the men who had deposited their DNA on crystal, why nifong made no attempt to identify those men. Did you consult the Talmud then about what itt said about information which would exonerate the accused?; June 15, 2016 at 11:07 AM
Anonymous said...: Correction of typos:

" Blogger kenhyderal said...

@ Walt: Jurisdictional legality aside lets see what morality has to say about this "The Talmud states that if one has information that may lead to the exoneration of an accused person, it is incumbent upon such an individual to come forth and not to remain silent" (Sifra)"

Well, AG Cooper and his investigators found information, through a thorough investigation of the evidence, something neither harr nor hissy fit ever did, that no rape had been perpetrated against crystal. harr objects to AG Cooper's bringing that to the attention of the public and hissy fit does not chastise harr for that. And hissy fit still insists crystal was raped, by mystery rapists, the existence of whom he can not verify.

In any event, harr and hissy fit have provided no evidence to exonerate crystal, so what the Talmud says about exoneration is irrelevant here.; June 15, 2016 at 11:11 AM
Walt said...: Sid wrote: "Me, and others advocating and trying to free Ms. Mangum are not trying to free a murderess, but are trying to liberate a wrongly convicted innocent. Our efforts are no different than Christine Mumma's (the executive director of NC Center on Actual Innocence) attempts to free Joseph Sledge and Gregory Taylor."

There is a huge difference. For one, Christine Mumma is not ignoring the law. Instead she is arguing to apply it. You are ignoring the law. Worse, you breached the attorney client privilege and revealed confidential defense information to the public. Then, you compounded your error by filing numerous frivolous pleadings and proceedings that accomplished nothing. But, you didn't stop there, you decided to make the situation worse by talking Crystal into firing her lawyer and withdrawing her brief on the issue that might have resulted in a reversal. You sir, are completely different from Christine Mumma.

Walt-in-Durham; June 15, 2016 at 11:44 AM
Walt said...: Sid wrote: "... her willingness to take action on a so-called "perjured" statement by Deputy Robert Davis."

Which took place in her prosecutorial district. You continue to learn. Until you do, you won't understand what is going on.

"Your position, as I understand it, is that a jurisdictional issue does not compel Wake County D.A. Lorrin Freeman to legally act with regards to learning of criminality associated with a case arising out of Durham County."

Again, you misrepresent my position. The state constitution, which defines the limits of a District Attorney's jurisdiction to act, prevents her from filing outside of her prosecutorial district.

"However, despite Freeman not having a legal duty to take action in Mangum's case upon learning of perjury by the medical examiner, do you believe that she has a moral obligation to take action... such as alerting the Durham County district attorney?"

She is prohibited from filing outside of her district. She has plenty to do in her district. There is no obligation, moral or otherwise to waste her time on out of district issues. If you think there is an issue, call the Durham Police Department. (919) 560-4427 is the direct dial number.

You should remember that no court can compel the District Attorney to file criminal charges. That has been explained to you previously. Filing of charges is in the discretion of the District Attorney. So, your lawsuit remains frivolous.

Walt-in-Durham; June 15, 2016 at 11:52 AM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: "The Talmud states that if one has information that may lead to the exoneration of an accused person, it is incumbent upon such an individual to come forth and not to remain silent" (Sifra)"

A false choice if ever I saw one. But, if you and/or Sid feels you have a moral obligation to report, please do so. Call the DPD or the Durham County District Attorney's office. Two agencies that can actually do something rather than blaming someone who is prohibited from acting for not acting. You are acting like the characters Otter and Bluto in Animal House: Otter... I think that this situation absolutely requires a really futile and stupid gesture be done on somebody's part!
Bluto: We're just the guys to do it.

As Bluto would say, you two are just the guys to do it. Unfortunately, you two aren't near as entertaining as Otter and Bluto.

Walt-in-Durham; June 15, 2016 at 12:03 PM
Anonymous said...: It's about time for another harr/hissy fit/kilgo impotent temper tantrum.; June 15, 2016 at 12:38 PM
The Great Kilgo said...: Spin, Kenhyderal, Spin!; June 15, 2016 at 12:58 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "For that matter, explain why you claimed he did not conceal it, when it has been public knowledge for years that he did conceal it"...................The DNA evidence was in fact turned over to the Duke Lacrosse Defence by Former D.A. Nifong. It was essentially a timing issue and an issue of handing over the evidence without annotation.; June 15, 2016 at 1:53 PM
Anonymous said...: She cannot act Sid, legally or morally. No matter what Lorrin Freeman thinks, she cannot prosecute a case or charge a crime which occurs outside of Wake County. So, there is nothing she can do about the alleged perjury in Durham, even if she agreed with you.

You refuse to learn.

And, we've been hearing the lies about Crystal's impending release and exoneration for years - you still have filed nothing that can make it happen, so it's not close.; June 15, 2016 at 2:34 PM
JSwift said...: Kenny,

As you know, Nifong turned over the raw DNA only after he was ordered to do so by the court. He fought the court order, arguing that the production of the raw data would be expensive. What you dismiss as "essentially a timing issue" took place only after he was ordered to turn over the data or provide a complete report. Had the court not ordered that he turn over the data, it is hard to believe that he would have done so voluntarily.

The law requires that all test results be turned over on a timely basis and that the results be summarized. Nifong failed to do so.

As a result, your comment is misleading.

John D. Smith
New York, NY; June 15, 2016 at 2:51 PM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: The DNA evidence was in fact turned over to the Duke Lacrosse Defence by Former D.A. Nifong. It was essentially a timing issue and an issue of handing over the evidence without annotation."

A couple of things. It's not "former D.A." It's ex. He was disbarred and removed from office. "Former" is reserved for those who served honorably and left office. Second, Nifong turned over the DNA evidence he new was exculpatory after he lied to the court.

Remember, in the May 2006 hearing the court asked Nifong if he had any evidence to turn over to the defense. He said he had none. That was a lie. Later, months later, he did turn over the DNA evidence that he had in his possession in May. Nifong would have been fine if, in May, he had said to the court: "No, you honor, I haven't turned everything over to the defense. But, I will. I apologize to the court, I know your discovery order controls this, but it's a lot of evidence and I haven't gotten through it all myself, but some of it may be exculpatory." But, that's not what he said. And, that's not what he did. He did not follow the court's order on discovery, he did not meet the deadline and he lied to the court about it.

Walt-in-Durham; June 15, 2016 at 2:59 PM
kenhyderal said...: Dr. Anonymous said: "I am better qualified than harr and hissy fit to tell whether r not there was malpractice in the death of Reginald Daye"...................... Your proclaimed superior qualification was the same justification you proffered for insisting there was no esophageal intubation.; June 15, 2016 at 3:33 PM
The Great Kilgo said...: Spin, Kenhyderal, spin!; June 15, 2016 at 4:30 PM
kenhyderal said...: Don't tell me you have now come to support
Ubekannte and hate Kenhyderal; June 15, 2016 at 4:44 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

Mockery is not the same as hatred.

But you know that.

.; June 15, 2016 at 4:48 PM
kenhyderal said...: Walt said: "A false choice if ever I saw one.".................................................................................... It seems unambiguously black or white to me; June 15, 2016 at 5:04 PM
Anonymous said...: desperate claptrap from hissy fit;

"Dr. Anonymous said: "I am better qualified than harr and hissy fit to tell whether r not there was malpractice in the death of Reginald Daye"...................... Your proclaimed superior qualification was the same justification you proffered for insisting there was no esophageal intubation."

No.

My superior qualification comes from the fact that, in spite of that admitted error, I, who was trained, experienced, and board certified in two specialties, am familiar with clinical medical situations and no clinical training, no clinical experience kenny hissy fit is not. And harr, the minimally trained, minimally experienced medical school graduate who was never accepted into residency training, who never achieved medical board certification and who spent a truncated post medical school career filing and losing frivolous, non meritorious lawsuits is not.; June 15, 2016 at 5:48 PM
Anonymous said...: even more clap trap fromhissy fit:

"Walt said: "A false choice if ever I saw one.".................................................................................... It seems unambiguously black or white to me"

That is because you are incapable of telling a false choice from a true one. Your agenda is getting your favorite murderess/false accuser a pass for her crimes.; June 15, 2016 at 5:52 PM
Anonymous said...: one more for hissy fit:

With regard to the misinformationyou try to pass off as fact, that nifong willingly provided the defense with the information DNA Security found about crystal's rape kit, you have yet to explain why nifong, who had custody of the evidence, did not try to identify the men who did leave their DNA on crystal. After all, you have said the police investigation was botched, one reason being that no attempt was made to identify those men.; June 15, 2016 at 6:05 PM
kenhyderal said...: He thought, not without good reason, that he could prosecute on the equally serious charges of kidnapping and sexual assault. That may well of led to some deal making immunity to identify the non-Player rapists.; June 15, 2016 at 9:01 PM
inconnu said...: Alors, Kenhyderal,
Est-ce que tu veux l'information que j'ai pour toi?; June 15, 2016 at 9:04 PM
Anonymous said...: persistent clap trap from hissy fit:

"He thought, not without good reason, that he could prosecute on the equally serious charges of kidnapping and sexual assault."

Wrong. You have presented this false hypothesis on previous occasions. It is still a false hypothesis. nifong charged the lacrosse players with first degree rape in April of 2006, in spite of knowing that the only male dna found on crystal did not match their dna. He went to sexual assault in December of 2006 after crystal admitted to nifong's stooge linwod wilson she could not recall being penetrated.

"That may well of led to some deal making immunity to identify the non-Player rapists."

Unlikely. If there were unidentified rapists, nifong had the means to identify them, the male dna found on crystal. Instead of identifying the sources of the dna, he concealed it. I remind you, you are on record as saying the police investigation was botched, on reason being that the sources of the male dna found oon crystal were never identified.

So, I say again, instead of ducking and obfuscating, explain why nifong concealed the dna evidence rather than identifying the sources.

You sure like to grab at totally non existent straws to avoid the inconsistencies in your beliefs.; June 16, 2016 at 2:55 AM
JSwift said...: Kennyhyderal states: He thought, not without good reason, that he could prosecute on the equally serious charges of kidnapping and sexual assault. That may well of [sic] led to some deal making immunity to identify the non-Player rapists.

Kenny,

I am interested in pursuing your theory that Nifong was a complete and utter moron.

You suggest that Nifong chose not to take the straightforward step of attempting to identify the sources of the male DNA found in and on Mangum by running it against available data bases. Instead, he decided to continue to pressure the defendants by prosecuting them on serious felony charges, excluding rape, in the expectation that they would cut a deal and identify the mystery rapists. In making this decision, Nifong realized that he had already prosecuted them for eight months on serious felony charges, including rape, and none of the defendants had shown any inclination to cut any sort of deal. In addition, Nifong realized that he had no credible evidence to support the remaining charges; the only evidence that linked the defendants were the "identifications" made by Mangum in the flawed selection process. Nifong realized that the specific allegations made by Mangum in her written statement had been proven with virtual certainty to be false, further damaging her credibility. Finally, Nifong realized that the decisions were not mutually exclusive. He could run the DNA against the data bases, and if he failed to find matches, he could still continue to prosecute the defendants and try to pressure them to identify mystery rapists. The only way that he would not be able to prosecute them is if the data base identified the mystery rapists as having no connection with the lacrosse team. But that would have solved the crime.

I agree with you, Kenny. Nifong was a complete and utter moron if he believed that running the DNA against the data base was not a critical step in the investigation. Durham is well rid of such an incompetent fool. Think of the poor innocent defendants he must have prosecuted in other cases because of his stupidity.

John D. Smith
New York, NY; June 16, 2016 at 3:48 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You will be standing tall before the man in 11 days.

There are 14 days left until the end of June.

You have 199 days to exonerate and free Mangum.

It has been 54 days since April 23rd, 93 days since the Ides of March and 3,288 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; June 16, 2016 at 3:50 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

Today is the ninth anniversary of Mike Nifong's disbarment. How are coming along on getting his law license restored?

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; June 16, 2016 at 3:52 AM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: "He thought, not without good reason, that he could prosecute on the equally serious charges of kidnapping and sexual assault. That may well of led to some deal making immunity to identify the non-Player rapists."

Now that is unethical!

Walt-in-Durham; June 16, 2016 at 4:06 AM
JSwift said...: Abe:

In the more than eight years since Sidney established this blog, Sidney has done an admirable job of identifying facts and evidence that support his conclusion that Nifong was treated unfairly.

A comprehensive list of these facts and evidence follows:

1. Nifong is the only District Attorney disbarred in North Carolina due to his conduct in a prosecution despite serious misconduct by other prosecutors.

When criticized as essentially supporting the view that "two wrongs make a right," Sidney provided only his opinion that Nifong is "honorable," refusing to provide any other facts and evidence to support that opinion.

Although this evidence is compelling, the pressure brought by the Carpetbagger Jihad has suppressed it.

John D. Smith
New York, NY; June 16, 2016 at 4:07 AM
Anonymous said...: excerpt hrom hissy fit's latest clap trap:

"That may well of led to some deal making immunity to identify the non-Player rapists."

There was no rape. That was proven beyond all doubt. Ergo, there were no rapists, unidentified or otherwise.; June 16, 2016 at 5:02 AM
Anonymous said...: hey, hissy fit:

Show us again that you can provide no evidence that any crystal rapists, unidentified or otherwise, even exist.

I remind you, you are asserting and, therefore, the obligation to prove is yours.; June 16, 2016 at 5:50 AM
A Lawyer said...: However, despite Freeman not having a legal duty to take action in Mangum's case upon learning of perjury by the medical examiner, do you believe that she has a moral obligation to take action... such as alerting the Durham County district attorney?

Assuming she did: you are suing her in federal court for breaching a "moral obligation"? Do you seriously believe that federal courts can enforce "moral obligations"?; June 16, 2016 at 11:51 AM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "Mockery is not the same as hatred".......................... Yeah, but mockery can be a hate crime; June 16, 2016 at 1:17 PM
Anonymous said...: Mockery should never be a hate crime, particularly when the mockery is the result of adopting ridiculous positions in order to irritate others.

You act like a fool (even though you are not actually one) in order to irritate other readers. You successfully irritate Dr. Anonymous to the point where he erupts in hyperbole and childish attacks. Perhaps your provocations should also be viewed as hate crimes.; June 16, 2016 at 1:23 PM
Anonymous said...: A hate crime is a traditional offense like murder, arson, or vandalism with an added element of bias.

Mockery by itself cannot be a hate crime.

Dumbass.; June 16, 2016 at 1:38 PM
The Great Kilgo said...: Spin, Kenhyderal, spin!; June 16, 2016 at 1:59 PM
Anonymous said...: more claptrap from kenny hissy fit:

"

Anonymous said: "Mockery is not the same as hatred".......................... Yeah, but mockery can be a hate crime".

So what should we call all the mockeries of justice you and harr have perpetrated on this blog?; June 16, 2016 at 2:20 PM
Anonymous said...: Sid, the Feds have agreed with the NC ME that Lacy's death was a suicide. You gonna accept it, or pull it into your conspiracy?; June 16, 2016 at 6:10 PM
Anonymous said...: http://www.wral.com/mike-nifong-accused-of-misconduct-in-another-durham-case/15784834/; June 16, 2016 at 6:28 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous Anonymous said...
Sid, the Feds have agreed with the NC ME that Lacy's death was a suicide. You gonna accept it, or pull it into your conspiracy?

This is another case of a miscarriage of justice. From the very beginning, the police and SBI manipulated the crime scene and evidence... and were quick to label the incident as a suicide without any justification. Those close to Lennon stated that he was not depressed, but in good spirits and looking forward to football season. There was missing evidence (tennis shoes initially found on him disappeared while Lacy was in police custody), unexplained evidence (where was the source of the leashes used to hang him), and a myriad of questions, including what happened to Lennon's own tennis shoes.

Clearly, in the heartland of KKK territory of Bladen County, the black male teen Lennon's romantic involvement with a white divorcee surely presents grounds for the initiation of a hate crime based on race.

The decision from the U.S. Department of Justice does not come as a surprise to me as the length of the investigation made it clear as to the outcome. A fair and objective investigation would have reached, within a matter of days, a conclusion of homicide with respect to the manner of death of Lennon Lacy.; June 17, 2016 at 4:39 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous Anonymous said...
http://www.wral.com/mike-nifong-accused-of-misconduct-in-another-durham-case/15784834/

This is old news. It, like the prosecution of Crystal Mangum in Reginald Daye's death, is vendetta-driven as payback for Nifong not ceding to demands of the Powers-That-Be to drop the prosecution of the Duke Lacrosse defendants.

WRAL's headline, is misleading, as this case has been bandied around for years. No doubt all of Mike Nifong's cases have been scrutinized to find something upon which to cause him grief. The Howard case is pretty flimsy for attacking Mike Nifong.; June 17, 2016 at 4:45 AM
Anonymous said...: "Not only did we have DNA testing, which we believe proves Mr. Howard's innocence, but also we think we have, we've alleged egregious prosecutorial misconduct," said Barry Scheck, co-director of the Innocence Project at the Benjamin Cardozo School of Law at Yeshiva University in New York.

Scheck said it's "astonishing" that Nifong didn't turn a police memo about Doris Washington's sexual assault over to Howard's original defense attorneys and even argued at trial that the case didn't involve rape.

"This is the worst kind of prosecutorial misconduct that you can have. It's like knowingly misleading the jury," Scheck said.; June 17, 2016 at 4:52 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous A Lawyer said...
However, despite Freeman not having a legal duty to take action in Mangum's case upon learning of perjury by the medical examiner, do you believe that she has a moral obligation to take action... such as alerting the Durham County district attorney?

Assuming she did: you are suing her in federal court for breaching a "moral obligation"? Do you seriously believe that federal courts can enforce "moral obligations"?

As a prosecutor, Freeman is obliged to act as a "Minister of Justice." In other words, her duty is not merely to convict, but to assure justice is done. Part of that duty would require her to report misconduct and/or crimes that impede justice. Keep in mind that perjury is a Class F felony. Yes, she definitely has a moral obligation, but also a legal one, as well. This would represent the dereliction of duty.

Further, I would maintain, that her attempts to avoid me (and the truth), is because I am African American and if she was forced to take action it would accrue to the benefit of an African American. I believe that in the eyes of Lady Justice, the life of Crystal Mangum is no less valued than that of an Eve Carson.

That said, there may be a reason other than racial bias for Freeman's efforts to avoid me and the truth, but I cannot think of one. Can you? If she could present me with a reasonable excuse for her avoidance of me outside of racism, then I would seriously consider it and retract my racial bias claim. Keep in mind that racism is still alive and well in North Carolina.; June 17, 2016 at 4:57 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous Anonymous said...
"Not only did we have DNA testing, which we believe proves Mr. Howard's innocence, but also we think we have, we've alleged egregious prosecutorial misconduct," said Barry Scheck, co-director of the Innocence Project at the Benjamin Cardozo School of Law at Yeshiva University in New York.

Scheck said it's "astonishing" that Nifong didn't turn a police memo about Doris Washington's sexual assault over to Howard's original defense attorneys and even argued at trial that the case didn't involve rape.

"This is the worst kind of prosecutorial misconduct that you can have. It's like knowingly misleading the jury," Scheck said.

I like and respect Barry Scheck, but clearly in the Howard case he is more focused on disparaging Nifong as a person and prosecutor than proving the innocence of his client, Howard. Unfortunately, it's all about Nifong.; June 17, 2016 at 5:00 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sid:

Today is the ninth anniversary of Mike Nifong's disbarment. How are coming along on getting his law license restored?

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL

Hey, Abe.

To be honest, the reinstatement of Mike Nifong's law license has been placed on the back burner as he is free and under no current legal assault. Instead, I have focused my attention on Crystal Mangum who is falsely incarcerated for a crime that was not even committed. My energies are geared toward securing her freedom and subsequently her exoneration.

After that goal is accomplished, and Shan Carter is free, then I will turn my attention towards the reinstatement of Mr. Nifong's law license.; June 17, 2016 at 5:07 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous Anonymous said...
She cannot act Sid, legally or morally. No matter what Lorrin Freeman thinks, she cannot prosecute a case or charge a crime which occurs outside of Wake County. So, there is nothing she can do about the alleged perjury in Durham, even if she agreed with you.

You refuse to learn.

And, we've been hearing the lies about Crystal's impending release and exoneration for years - you still have filed nothing that can make it happen, so it's not close.

Clearly, if D.A. Freeman has knowledge of a crime that has been committed outside of her jurisdiction, she has the legal right and moral obligation to pass such information onto the appropriate jurisdictional prosecutor. Would you agree with that statement?; June 17, 2016 at 5:11 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid,

You have proven that Nichols made statements that were false. You have not proven perjury.; June 17, 2016 at 5:15 AM
Anonymous said...: more claptrap from harr:

"I like and respect Barry Scheck, but clearly in the Howard case he is more focused on disparaging Nifong as a person and prosecutor than proving the innocence of his client, Howard. Unfortunately, it's all about Nifong."

It should be about nifong. Contrary to the lie harr tries to promulgate, nifong was a thoroughly corrupt prosecutor. That is a matter of public record.; June 17, 2016 at 5:17 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid,

As a retired physician, you believe that when DNA does not match a defendant being prosecuted by Mike Nifong, those DNA results are irrelevant and should be suppressed. Is that correct?; June 17, 2016 at 5:21 AM
Anonymous said...: more claptrap and waffling from harr:

"To be honest, the reinstatement of Mike Nifong's law license has been placed on the back burner as he is free and under no current legal assault. Instead, I have focused my attention on Crystal Mangum who is falsely incarcerated for a crime that was not even committed. My energies are geared toward securing her freedom and subsequently her exoneration."

crystal did murder Reginald Daye. harr is focused on getting crystal a pass for her crimes. Again, harr's performance regarding the Duke Rape Hoax, and his performance regarding the felony murders of Tyrone Baker and Demetrius Greene show harr is incapable of recognizing real criminality.

"After that goal is accomplished, and Shan Carter is free, then I will turn my attention towards the reinstatement of Mr. Nifong's law license."

And, as those goals will never happen, harr will never resume his attempts to get one of the most corrupt prosecutors in US history a pass for his corruption.; June 17, 2016 at 5:23 AM
Anonymous said...: one more piece of claptrap from harr:

"Clearly, if D.A. Freeman has knowledge of a crime that has been committed outside of her jurisdiction, she has the legal right and moral obligation to pass such information onto the appropriate jurisdictional prosecutor. Would you agree with that statement?"

harr has not made DA Freeman aware of any crime, in Durham or elsewhere. harr has made her aware only of his allegation of a crime. And, as I have stated in an earlier comment, harr is singularly incapable of recognizing what is and what is not criminality.; June 17, 2016 at 5:26 AM
Anonymous said...: more clap trap from harr:

"As a prosecutor, Freeman is obliged to act as a 'Minister of Justice.' In other words, her duty is not merely to convict, but to assure justice is done."

I said harr is incapable of knowing what is or is not criminality. harr is incapable of knowing how a prosecutor acts as a minister of justice. harr has called nifong a decent, honorable minister of justice after nifong willfully prosecuted innocent men faor a crime which never happened. harr objected to AG Cooper telling the public that there was no evidence that the crime nifong had tried to pin on innocent men had never happened, and that the innocent men nifong tried to prosecute were innocent.

"Part of that duty would require her to report misconduct and/or crimes that impede justice. Keep in mind that perjury is a Class F felony. Yes, she definitely has a moral obligation, but also a legal one, as well. This would represent the dereliction of duty."

I say again, harr did not make DA Freeman ware of any felony. harr made her aware of his allegation of a felony. Again, harr has repeatedly dhon he is incapable of knowing what is or is not a felony.

"Further, I would maintain, that her attempts to avoid me (and the truth), is because I am African American and if she was forced to take action it would accrue to the benefit of an African American. I believe that in the eyes of Lady Justice, the life of Crystal Mangum is no less valued than that of an Eve Carson."

harr again makes uncorroborated allegations. The difference between Eve Carson and crystal is that Eve Carson's life was of greater value than crystal's, but that Eve Caron was the victim of a murder and crystal was the perpetrator of a murder. harr has manifested a belief, in the Shan Carter and in the case of crystal mangum, that black criminals should get passes for their crimes.

"That said, there may be a reason other than racial bias for Freeman's efforts to avoid me and the truth, but I cannot think of one. Can you? If she could present me with a reasonable excuse for her avoidance of me outside of racism, then I would seriously consider it and retract my racial bias claim."

You again willfully ignore that you make the assertion of racial bias and you must prove it. DA Freeman is not required to disprove it. That you can not conceive of any reason other than racial bias, is in an of itself a manifestation of your own racial bias.

"Keep in mind that racism is still alive and well in North Carolina."

And jkeep in mind harr is one of its most ignorant proponents.; June 17, 2016 at 6:16 AM
Anonymous said...: Correction, and I apologize for the typo"

more clap trap from harr:

"As a prosecutor, Freeman is obliged to act as a 'Minister of Justice.' In other words, her duty is not merely to convict, but to assure justice is done."

I said harr is incapable of knowing what is or is not criminality. harr is incapable of knowing how a prosecutor acts as a minister of justice. harr has called nifong a decent, honorable minister of justice after nifong willfully prosecuted innocent men faor a crime which never happened. harr objected to AG Cooper telling the public that there was no evidence that the crime nifong had tried to pin on innocent men had never happened, and that the innocent men nifong tried to prosecute were innocent.

"Part of that duty would require her to report misconduct and/or crimes that impede justice. Keep in mind that perjury is a Class F felony. Yes, she definitely has a moral obligation, but also a legal one, as well. This would represent the dereliction of duty."

I say again, harr did not make DA Freeman ware of any felony. harr made her aware of his allegation of a felony. Again, harr has repeatedly dhon he is incapable of knowing what is or is not a felony.

"Further, I would maintain, that her attempts to avoid me (and the truth), is because I am African American and if she was forced to take action it would accrue to the benefit of an African American. I believe that in the eyes of Lady Justice, the life of Crystal Mangum is no less valued than that of an Eve Carson."

harr again makes uncorroborated allegations. The difference between Eve Carson and crystal IS NOT that Eve Carson's life was of greater value than crystal's, but that Eve Caron was the victim of a murder and crystal was the perpetrator of a murder. harr has manifested a belief, in the Shan Carter and in the case of crystal mangum, that black criminals should get passes for their crimes.

"That said, there may be a reason other than racial bias for Freeman's efforts to avoid me and the truth, but I cannot think of one. Can you? If she could present me with a reasonable excuse for her avoidance of me outside of racism, then I would seriously consider it and retract my racial bias claim."

You again willfully ignore that you make the assertion of racial bias and you must prove it. DA Freeman is not required to disprove it. That you can not conceive of any reason other than racial bias, is in an of itself a manifestation of your own racial bias.

"Keep in mind that racism is still alive and well in North Carolina."; June 17, 2016 at 6:18 AM
Anonymous said...: Excerpt from harr's claptrap:

"Keep in mind that racism is still alive and well in North Carolina."

Keep in mind that harr is one of its most ignorant proponents.; June 17, 2016 at 6:20 AM
Walt said...: Sid wrote: "As a prosecutor, Freeman is obliged to act as a "Minister of Justice." In other words, her duty is not merely to convict, but to assure justice is done. Part of that duty would require her to report misconduct and/or crimes that impede justice. Keep in mind that perjury is a Class F felony. Yes, she definitely has a moral obligation, but also a legal one, as well. This would represent the dereliction of duty."

Where to begin. I suppose you have just proven you are totally unwilling to learn. I will leave it at that. You are unwilling to learn. For the curious, the NC constitution prohibits a D.A. from one district filing charges in another district. You filed a federal court case to force her to violate her constitutional duty. Common law in NC holds that courts cannot compel a District Attorney to act, let alone compel the outcome of her actions. You filed a court case to attempt exactly that. You will lose. As well you should.

" If she could present me with a reasonable excuse for her avoidance of me outside of racism, then I would seriously consider it and retract my racial bias claim. Keep in mind that racism is still alive and well in North Carolina."

Previously, I have defended you against charges of racial bigotry on this blog. In part, because you had never written a single word, until your screed against Freeman, that gave me any reason to think you are a bigot. Unfortunately, you have convinced me that I was wrong.

Walt-in-Durham; June 17, 2016 at 7:30 AM
Anonymous said...: That said, there may be a reason other than racial bias for Freeman's efforts to avoid me and the truth, but I cannot think of one. Can you?

Yes, Sid, I can think of several - not the least being that you were complaining of something that occurred outside her jurisdiction. If you complained to her about something that happened in California, and she ignored you, would you say that is from race? And, you've already contacted the Durham DA, so why would she need to? And, how do you know she hasn't said something to that DA?

You really are delusional.; June 17, 2016 at 9:26 AM
A Lawyer said...: Walt (@ 7:30) and Anon. (@ 9:26) have it precisely right. Dr. Harr has filed yet another frivolous lawsuit and will be sanctioned for it.; June 17, 2016 at 10:13 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You will be standing tall before the man in 10 days.

There are 13 days left until the end of June.

You have 198 days to exonerate and free Mangum.

It has been 55 days since April 23rd, 94 days since the Ides of March and 3,289 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; June 17, 2016 at 11:19 AM
Anonymous said...: Another reason why the comparison between Eve Carson and Crystal Mangum is so inappropriate and obnoxious.

Eve Carson was murdered by black men.

Crystal murdered a black man.; June 17, 2016 at 11:46 AM
Anonymous said...: The comparison of Eve Carson to Crystal Mangum is more than obnoxious, it is obscene.; June 17, 2016 at 1:36 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "You have proven that Nichols made statements that were false. You have not proven perjury"........................................ Are you then saying that Nichols is a complete idiot?; June 17, 2016 at 2:57 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "Mockery by itself cannot be a hate crime'................." probably legally speaking but Donald Trump's mocking of the handicapped reporter was in the mind of most a hate crime; June 17, 2016 at 3:01 PM
Anonymous said...: kenny hissy fi5 has weighed in with more claptrap:

"

Anonymous said: "You have proven that Nichols made statements that were false. You have not proven perjury"........................................ Are you then saying that Nichols is a complete idiot?"

I think the commentr is sying you and harr are complete idiots.; June 17, 2016 at 3:03 PM
Anonymous said...: hissy fit's latest hypocritical clap trap:

"Anonymous said: "Mockery by itself cannot be a hate crime'................." probably legally speaking but Donald Trump's mocking of the handicapped reporter was in the mind of most a hate crime"

hissy fit it is not hateful to believe that Caucasian men raped crystal simply because they were Caucasian. I remind you, you have proviced absolutely no evidence that crystal told the truth.; June 17, 2016 at 3:07 PM
kenhyderal said...: fix your typo then I will respond; June 17, 2016 at 3:15 PM
Anonymous said...: from hissy fit:

"fix your typo then I will respond".

You don't know how to respond. You know how to obfuscate and dodge and duck, but you don't know haw to respond.; June 17, 2016 at 3:26 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal thinks it is not hateful to accuse Caucasian men of raping Crystal just because they are Caucasian. He thinks that is justice.; June 17, 2016 at 3:30 PM
Anonymous said...: hissy fit:

I remind you again you have provided absolutely no evidence that crystal was raped. harr likes to chant, no one has proven crystal lied. crystal has not proven she told the truth.; June 17, 2016 at 3:44 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny asks: Are you then saying that Nichols is a complete idiot?

His autopsy was incredibly shoddy. Some of his testimony was false. Before characterizing him as a complete idiot, I would want to see more of his work.

In the end, because Roberts agreed that the intubation was not an intervening cause, impeaching Nichols would not have changed the conclusion.

Kenny, do you believe Nichols is a complete idiot?; June 17, 2016 at 4:06 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny commits a hate crime: fix your typo then I will respond; June 17, 2016 at 4:08 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

Would you consider Hillary Clinton's alleged reference to disabled children at an Easter egg hunt as "fucking retards" would be a hate crime?; June 17, 2016 at 5:23 PM
kenhyderal said...: Alleged.; June 17, 2016 at 8:50 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: " Kenny, do you believe Nichols is a complete idiot?"...............................................No just a person willing to commit perjury to cover-up his careless incompetence: justice be damned.; June 17, 2016 at 8:53 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "Kenhyderal thinks it is not hateful to accuse Caucasian men of raping Crystal just because they are Caucasian. He thinks that is justice"...................Hmmm is that you Dr. Anonymous? No pejorative attached? You know, you really say some stupid things. The race of those who sexually assaulted Crystal is completely immaterial, in my mind and in the mind of any right thinking person. When Crystal was being assaulted, it was not by Black persons. Who in God's name do you want me to accuse? In your race-obsessed mind you've wrongly concluded that I hate people of a different race and you are completely off-base with that assessment. I do hate people, however with a sense of superiority and entitlement who use and abuse the vulnerable.; June 17, 2016 at 9:13 PM
Anonymous said...: the claptrap from hissy fit continues:

" Blogger kenhyderal said...

"Anonymous said: " Kenny, do you believe Nichols is a complete idiot?"...............................................No just a person willing to commit perjury to cover-up his careless incompetence: justice be damned."

Just like there is no evidence crystal was ever raped, there is no evidence that Dr. Nichols committed perjury. hisy fit's belief that he did, just like harr's belief, carries no legal weight. So far as justice, i remind the readers that hissy fit continuously spouts off that crystal was raped, even though he can provide no evidence to prove that. He believes innocent men should be prosecuted and convicted for a crime which never happened. His attempts to damn justice are a matter of public record.; June 18, 2016 at 3:11 AM
Anonymous said...: another round od cap trap from kenny hissy fit:

"Anonymous said: "Kenhyderal thinks it is not hateful to accuse Caucasian men of raping Crystal just because they are Caucasian. He thinks that is justice"...................Hmmm is that you Dr. Anonymous? No pejorative attached? You know, you really say some stupid things."

An example of an ad hominem attack against a commenter who points out truths hissy fit does not like.

"The race of those who sexually assaulted Crystal is completely immaterial, in my mind and in the mind of any right thinking person."

hissy fit, this whole wrongful prosecution was perpetrated by nifong because he wanted to get the support of Duke's black electorate by prosecuting well off Caucasian men for gang raping a black woman. You describe that as nifong fighting for justice fo rcrystal and you keep insisting, in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, that crystal was raped by white men. Don't promulgate the obvious fiction that you believe race was immaterial.

"When Crystal was being assaulted, it was not by Black persons."

Wrong. crystal was never assaulted at the party. And I again remind you, you have never presented any evidence she was.

"Who in God's name do you want me to accuse?"

I have made it clear that no one should have been accused because no rape ever took place. Why in God's Name do you insist a rape had taken place when you have not provided any evidence that it had?

"In your race-obsessed mind you've wrongly concluded that I hate people of a different race and you are completely off-base with that assessment."

Interpret that as you will. You obsess on the idea that crystal was raped by white men. Your actions are inconsistent with your words.

"I do hate people, however with a sense of superiority and entitlement who use and abuse the vulnerable."

So why do you praise yourself? You seem to think you are morally superior when you obsess about Crystal being raped by Caucasian men, and you are entitled to presume them guilty.; June 18, 2016 at 3:27 AM
Anonymous said...: Kennyhyderal, in defending his theory that Mangum was raped by mystery rapists at the lacrosse party, state with respect to Dr. Anonymous: You know, you really say some stupid things.

Pot? Kettle?; June 18, 2016 at 3:55 AM
Anonymous said...: Where is the little man kenhyderal?; June 18, 2016 at 4:52 AM
Anonymous said...: Sure as fire will burn
There's one thing you will learn
Those things you have cherished
Are things that you have earned
Luck is when opportunity
Meets with preparation
And the same is true for every generation

Little man
As you climb upon my knee
The whole future lies in thee
Little man

Little man
Never hurry, take it slow
Things worth while need time to grow
Little man

Don't look back
There are things that might distract
Move ahead towards your goal
And the answers will unfold
Little man
Love is always in the air
It is there for those who care
Little man

Don't look back
There are things that might distract
Move ahead towards your goal
And the answers will unfold
Little man
Love is always in the air
It is there for those who care
Little man
Little man
Little man
Little man; June 18, 2016 at 5:19 AM
Anonymous said...: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MALeA6VE2IE; June 18, 2016 at 6:09 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous Anonymous said...
That said, there may be a reason other than racial bias for Freeman's efforts to avoid me and the truth, but I cannot think of one. Can you?

Yes, Sid, I can think of several - not the least being that you were complaining of something that occurred outside her jurisdiction. If you complained to her about something that happened in California, and she ignored you, would you say that is from race? And, you've already contacted the Durham DA, so why would she need to? And, how do you know she hasn't said something to that DA?

You really are delusional.

I attempted to report to D.A. Freeman the commission of a Class F felony crime... something she did not want to hear. Do you not believe that if a district attorney is aware that a crime has been committed that she has a duty to take some action. In the event the crime occurred in another jurisdiction, she has an obligation to notify the district attorney of the appropriate jurisdiction. Can we agree on that? Or, is it your position that she must remain mum and do nothing, despite knowledge of a crime that has resulted in an innocent individual being wrongly convicted and wrongly incarcerated?; June 18, 2016 at 6:16 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous Anonymous said...
Sid,

You have proven that Nichols made statements that were false. You have not proven perjury.

Thank you for at least admitting that Dr. Nichols made false statements (especially involving the spleen). However, he did so under oath and while on the witness stand. How does this not classify as "perjury"? I enthusiastically await your reply.; June 18, 2016 at 6:20 AM
Anonymous said...: more clap trap from harr:

"I attempted to report to D.A. Freeman the commission of a Class F felony crime...something she did not want to hear."

Wrong. You did not report any class F felony. You made an allegation of a class F felony. I repeat, your track record in the Duke Rape Hoax, and in the Shan Carter Felony Murder case show you are impaired with regard to your ability to know what is and what is not criminal.

"Do you not believe that if a district attorney is aware that a crime has been committed that she has a duty to take some action. In the event the crime occurred in another jurisdiction, she has an obligation to notify the district attorney of the appropriate jurisdiction. Can we agree on that?"

The statement is irrelevant because you HAVE NOT informed DA Freeman of any crime. You have not provided any proof that said crime ever happened. I concede Dr. Nichols may have made an error. But perjury I believe means someone made a deliberate intentional effort to mislead the court, and you have not shown that. You are setting yourself as a one man lynch mob. Dr. Nichols, you are saying, should be presumed guilty of perjury because you have proclaimed him so. Your proclamations have no legal weight. I presume you know what legal weight is, as you have used the term previously.

"Or, is it your position that she must remain mum and do nothing, despite knowledge of a crime that has resulted in an innocent individual being wrongly convicted and wrongly incarcerated?"

You have given DA Freeman no knowledge of any crime. You have simply proclaimed Dr. Nichols guilty. And the individual to whom you refer is not innocent. She is a convicted murderess. Your statements about AG Cooper and his opinion that the Lacrosse players are innocent shows you can not recognize distinguish guilt from innocence, even when innocence is glaringly obvious.; June 18, 2016 at 8:10 AM
Anonymous said...: No. Perjury requires intent. You have not proven intent.; June 18, 2016 at 8:12 AM
Anonymous said...: more clap trap from harr:

"Thank you for at least admitting that Dr. Nichols made false statements (especially involving the spleen). However, he did so under oath and while on the witness stand. How does this not classify as "perjury"? I enthusiastically await your reply."

How about you, as the one asserting perjury on the part of Dr. Nichols, explain why this qualifies as perjury.

If I understand perjury,, and I request the assistance of the lawyers who post here, is tha perjury means a deliberate, intentional attempt of the witness to mislead the court on the issue. The issue was whether or not Reginald aye died of complications of the stab wound. Whether or not the spleen was present is irrelevant to whether or not he died as complications of the stab wound.; June 18, 2016 at 8:17 AM
Anonymous said...: Where is the little man kenhyderal?; June 18, 2016 at 8:28 AM
Anonymous said...: more for harr:

What happened to Reginald Daye was he aspirated when he was being evaluated for an intra abdominal infection. Your statements to the effect that he was not at risk of an intra abdominal infection(the prognosis was for a full recovery, no infectious disease specialist was ever consulted) is only proof that you do not understand this clinical medical situation, that you are not qualified to render any meaningful opinion.

I repeat, although you will just go into denial again, that Reginald Daye was placed at risk of an intra abdominal infection when crystal stabbed him. When she stabbed him she lacerated his colon. The result was hours of contamination of the intra abdominal cavity by pathogenic colonic bacteria. It is taught in Microbiology in Medical school that the colon contains literally billions of pathogenic bacteria. Microbiology was not the only course in Medical School in which this was taught.

Whether or not the spleen was present or absent is totally irrelevant to the fact that Reginald Daye died because crystal had placed him at risk for an intra abdominal infection.; June 18, 2016 at 8:36 AM
Anonymous said...: more for harr:

I say this again. You got your nose way out of joint because AG Cooper reviewed the evidence generated in the Duke Rape Hoax, determined that no crime had happened(crystal's story was not credible, there was no evidence, there were no witnesses). You did not do any review of the evidence-you have said the prosecution discovery file was not available to you, as if you had some right to view the evidence. Yet you say that it was inappropriate of AG Cooper to express his opinion that the Lacrosse players were innocent.

Then, today, you set yourself up as a one man lynch mob who believes his proclamation of Dr. Nichols' guilt establishes Dr. Nichols' guilt and means he must be summarily found guilty and sentenced.; June 18, 2016 at 8:58 AM
THE GREAT KILGO said...: IGNORE THE IMPOSTOR WHO HAS BEEN VISITING THIS BLOG

I AM THE GREAT KILGO AND I WANT TO CONGRATULATE UBES FOR HIS NONSTOP LIESTOPPER CRANK MELTDOWNS

SPIN UBES SPIN

QUACK

QUACK

QUACK; June 18, 2016 at 9:34 AM
THE GREATEST KILGO said...: I AM THE GREATEST KILGO AND I WANT TO CONGRATULATE THE GREAT KILGO FOR HIS LIESTARTER CRANK MELTDOWN

SPIN THE GREAT KILGO SPIN

QUACK

QUACK

QUACK; June 18, 2016 at 9:38 AM
kenhyderal said...: In the face of irrefutable proof that the spleen was present, intact and with only a superficial injury which had been cauterized, Nichols insisted that it had been removed, thereby reinforcing the lethality of the injury and suggesting it was life threatening. He surely knew that not to be the case but chose to stand by his assertion in order to conceal his sloppy incompetent work, truth and justice for Crystal be damned. That seems like perjury to me.; June 18, 2016 at 9:38 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

I continue to be interested in discussing your new theory that Nifong was a complete and utter moron. I agree with you that the decision not to make an attempt to identify the male DNA found in and on Magnum was inexcusable. The rationalization you provided earlier is so ridiculous that one can only explain the failure by either an attempt to frame innocent defendants or complete incompetence.

I must concede that I believe the frame is the better explanation, but I am willing to explore your incompetence theory.

John D. Smith
New York, NY; June 18, 2016 at 9:47 AM
THE GREAT KILGO said...: IS THAT YOU UBES?

TRYING TO SHOW A SENSE OF HUMOR?

GET BACK TO YOUR LIESTOPPER CRANK MELTDOWN

SPIN UBES SPIN

QUACK

QUACK

QUACK; June 18, 2016 at 10:43 AM
Anonymous said...: IS THAT YOU THE GREAT KILGO?

TRYING TO SHOW A SENSE OF HUMOR?

GET BACK TO YOUR LIESTARTER CRANK MELTDOWN

SPIN THE GREAT KILGO SPIN

QUACK

QUACK

QUACK; June 18, 2016 at 10:53 AM
JSwift said...: Kenny,

I am sorry. I forgot to sign in for my 9:47 AM comment and accidentally posted it anonymously (even if I did sign it). The anonymous posting is undoubtedly the only reason you did not respond.

Again, I apologize for the inconvenience.

John D. Smith
New York, NY; June 18, 2016 at 10:58 AM
Anonymous said...: IS THAT YOU THE GREAT KILGO?

TRYING TO SHOW A SENSE OF HUMOR?

GET BACK TO YOUR LIESTARTER CRANK MELTDOWN

SPIN THE GREAT KILGO SPIN

QUACK

QUACK

QUACK

.; June 18, 2016 at 11:09 AM
THE GREAT KILGO said...: HAVING TROUBLE WRITING YOU OWN POSTS UBES?

----------------------((((((

Cranks

Every last one of you.

----------------------((((((; June 18, 2016 at 12:49 PM
THE GREAT KILGO said...: ..

Ubes,

Enlighten us.

What is it about the 2006

Duke University Men's Lacrosse Team

that attracts all the Right-Wing Cranks ?

Ubes,

Are you a Lacrosse 'Framer' ?

Is that like an Obama 'Birther' ?; June 18, 2016 at 12:59 PM
the great Kilgo said...: Spin, Kenhyderal, spin!; June 18, 2016 at 1:00 PM
THE GREAT KILGO said...: ..

Ubes, give this a try:

The birthers, insistence that Mr. Obama is not a natural born citizen
is like the Lacrosse Cult's insistence that Nifong and the Durham Police [ and of course dozens of others] FRAMED the Lacrosse players.

Ubes, are you a FRAMER ? ?

..; June 18, 2016 at 1:01 PM
THE GREAT KILGO said...: ..

The Award for Best Lacrosse

Crank of the Week is

" unbekannte " ! ! !

Ubes is making a comeback performance

and once again reminding us all

there is nothing as crazy as

a Lacrosse Supporter ! !

Way to Go, Ubes !

..; June 18, 2016 at 1:02 PM
kenhyderal said...: John D Smith said: "I continue to be interested in discussing your new theory that Nifong was a complete and utter moron. I agree with you that the decision not to make an attempt to identify the male DNA found in and on Magnum was inexcusable. The rationalization you provided earlier is so ridiculous that one can only explain the failure by either an attempt to frame innocent defendants or complete incompetence".............................................. I have no such theory. Former D.A. Nifong acknowledges he made mistakes. He made the mistake of believing he had sufficient evidence, despite the lack of Player DNA, to charge for kidnapping and sexual assault. He firmly believed that a crime had been perpetrated on Crystal. Crystal, herself, believes former D.A. Nifong was seeking justice on her behalf.; June 18, 2016 at 1:04 PM
Anonymous said...: Hey Kenny, you're quite the comic.

Bawawawawawawawawawa

Bawawawawawawawawawa

Bawawawawawawawawawa

Bawawawawawawawawawa

Bawawawawawawawawawa; June 18, 2016 at 1:09 PM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You will be standing tall before the man in 9 days.

There are 12 days left until the end of June.

You have 197 days to exonerate and free Mangum.

It has been 56 days since April 23rd, 95 days since the Ides of March and 3,290 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; June 18, 2016 at 2:05 PM
Anonymous said...: more claptrapfrom hissy fit:

" Blogger kenhyderal said...

In the face of irrefutable proof that the spleen was present, intact and with only a superficial injury which had been cauterized, Nichols insisted that it had been removed, thereby reinforcing the lethality of the injury and suggesting it was life threatening. He surely knew that not to be the case but chose to stand by his assertion in order to conceal his sloppy incompetent work, truth and justice for Crystal be damned. That seems like perjury to me."

hissy fit, it takes much more than the racist opinions of a pair of unqualified incompetents like harr and you to establish that a crime took place, that medical negligence took place.; June 18, 2016 at 2:53 PM
Anonymous said...: I see there have been more harr/hissy fit/kilgo anonymous temper tantrums posted.; June 18, 2016 at 2:55 PM
Anonymous said...: Actually there have been quite a few harr/hissy fit/kilgo anonymous impotent tempe tantrums.; June 18, 2016 at 2:57 PM
Anonymous said...: more clap trapfrom kenny hissy fit:

"Former D.A. Nifong acknowledges he made mistakes. He made the mistake of believing he had sufficient evidence, despite the lack of Player DNA, to charge for kidnapping and sexual assault."

hissy fit is again manifesting he is either ignorant or a liar. It is a matter of public record that nifong charged the Lacrosse players with first degree rape, sexual assault and kidnapping knowing he had no evidence, that he was aware that the only DNA recovered from crystal did not match the DNA of the men he wanted to prosecute. T/hat was not a mistake. That was prosecutorial misconduct and legal malpractice. I again remind hissy fit that the "sexual assault" alleged by crystal was a gang rape perpetrated by members of the Lacrosse team who, not using condoms, penetrated her and ejaculated on her. If nifong seriously believed he could convict anyone without DNA, then nifong demonstrated he was an incompetent. hissy fit, address this issue: if nifong believed he had enough evidence to convict, why did he have done the lineup procedure in which crystal identified three members of the Lacrosse team as her assailants. You yourself have said on this blog that crystal was coerced into identifying them, that the identifications were not reliable. nifong was manufacturing evidence. If he did believe he had enough evidence to convict, wy would he manufacture evidence?

"He firmly believed that a crime had been perpetrated on Crystal."

Since nifong was manufacturing evidence by forcing crystal to identify Lacrosse players as her assailants, it is obvious he did ot believe anyone had raped her. Since he did conceal the DNA evidence, he did not believe crystal had been raped

"Crystal, herself, believes former D.A. Nifong was seeking justice on her behalf."

So again, without ducking, without dodging, without obfuscating explain why nifong made no attempt to identify the men who had left their DNA on crystal. You have said repeatedly that the police investigation was botched, one reason being the sources of the DNA were never identified. Actually that no effort was made to identify the sources. Again I remind you, until December of 2006, when the defense attorneys exposed nifong's perfidy, no one knew about the DNA evidence. nifong and only nifong had the capability of identifying who had left their DNA on crystal. In spite of your dodging and denials and your obfuscation, it has been a matter of public record for years that nifong concealed the evidence rather than identify the sources. How does that add up to seeking justice?

I close with, if you did not know what has been in the public record for years, you were ignorant. If you did know but posted your claptrap anyway, you are a liar.; June 18, 2016 at 3:27 PM
JSwift said...: The Great Kilgo claims: The birthers, insistence that Mr. Obama is not a natural born citizen is like the Lacrosse Cult's insistence that Nifong and the Durham Police [ and of course dozens of others] FRAMED the Lacrosse players.

I disagree. The birthers' claim that Obama is not a natural born citizen has no evidence to back up the claim and requires that one ignore evidence that disproves the claim. The claim that Nifong and the DPD framed the lacrosse defendants provides the most straightforward explanation for the failure of the DPD to conduct a bona fide investigation and Nifong's decision to indict without a credible evidence.

While it is certainly possible that Nifong, Gottlieb and Himan were utterly incompetent and that senior DPD officers failed to supervise the most highly publicized case in Durham history despite its many publicized failures, a deliberate frame is the most plausible explanation. I agree that many have cast the conspiracy net far too widely.

John D. Smith
New York, NY; June 18, 2016 at 4:44 PM
Anonymous said...: Actually there have been quite a few ubes anonymous impotent tempe tantrums.; June 18, 2016 at 5:15 PM
Walt said...: Sid wrote: "I attempted to report to D.A. Freeman the commission of a Class F felony crime... something she did not want to hear. Do you not believe that if a district attorney is aware that a crime has been committed that she has a duty to take some action. In the event the crime occurred in another jurisdiction, she has an obligation to notify the district attorney of the appropriate jurisdiction. Can we agree on that? Or, is it your position that she must remain mum and do nothing, despite knowledge of a crime that has resulted in an innocent individual being wrongly convicted and wrongly incarcerated?"

Another example of a false choice presented by the ever ineffective advocate Sid. The choices are not report, or not report. You have filed a lawsuit that seeks to force her to file charges. As has been pointed out to you many times before, she cannot file charges outside of her prosecutorial district. So, if you admit your lawsuit is without merit and dismiss it, then we can discuss moral obligations. But, as long as you persist in pursing a matter that has no legal merit, the answer must always be the same. She has no duty and you will lose again. As you should

Walt-in-Durham; June 18, 2016 at 5:18 PM
Anonymous said...: harr/hssy fit/kilgo is getting desperate.; June 18, 2016 at 5:28 PM
Anonymous said...: ubes is getting desperate.; June 18, 2016 at 5:51 PM
THE GREAT KILGO said...: HEY JD WHY DON'T YOU LET UBES TRY AND ANSWER FOR HIMSELF; June 18, 2016 at 6:14 PM
JSwift said...: The Great Kilgo,

I'm sorry. Although I recognize that you directed the post to Ubes, I didn't realize that you were unwilling to consider other answers I thought you wanted to raise a subject for discussion. Sorry again.

John D. Smith
New York, NY; June 18, 2016 at 6:24 PM
the great Kilgo said...: Spin, Kenhyderal, spin!; June 18, 2016 at 8:58 PM
Anonymous said...: Where is the little man kenhyderal?; June 19, 2016 at 4:31 AM
Anonymous said...: Pojsting more anonymous hissy fit/harr/kilgo impotent temper tantrums.; June 19, 2016 at 4:38 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Walt said...
Sid wrote: "I attempted to report to D.A. Freeman the commission of a Class F felony crime... something she did not want to hear. Do you not believe that if a district attorney is aware that a crime has been committed that she has a duty to take some action. In the event the crime occurred in another jurisdiction, she has an obligation to notify the district attorney of the appropriate jurisdiction. Can we agree on that? Or, is it your position that she must remain mum and do nothing, despite knowledge of a crime that has resulted in an innocent individual being wrongly convicted and wrongly incarcerated?"

Another example of a false choice presented by the ever ineffective advocate Sid. The choices are not report, or not report. You have filed a lawsuit that seeks to force her to file charges. As has been pointed out to you many times before, she cannot file charges outside of her prosecutorial district. So, if you admit your lawsuit is without merit and dismiss it, then we can discuss moral obligations. But, as long as you persist in pursing a matter that has no legal merit, the answer must always be the same. She has no duty and you will lose again. As you should

Walt-in-Durham

Walt, let me try my hand at elucidation one more time. My complaint is not solely and specifically that Wake County D.A. Freeman did not take action, but rather, she refused to look into my allegations of criminality. She ignored me totally. Had she given serious and thoughtful consideration of my claims of perjury and then reached a conclusion that no crime had been committed, decided to take no action, and then relayed her position to me, then such action might be considered to be somewhat acceptable. That is a far cry from what happened.

Consider yourself elucidated once again.; June 19, 2016 at 5:04 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous Anonymous said...
more for harr:

What happened to Reginald Daye was he aspirated when he was being evaluated for an intra abdominal infection. Your statements to the effect that he was not at risk of an intra abdominal infection(the prognosis was for a full recovery, no infectious disease specialist was ever consulted) is only proof that you do not understand this clinical medical situation, that you are not qualified to render any meaningful opinion.

I repeat, although you will just go into denial again, that Reginald Daye was placed at risk of an intra abdominal infection when crystal stabbed him. When she stabbed him she lacerated his colon. The result was hours of contamination of the intra abdominal cavity by pathogenic colonic bacteria. It is taught in Microbiology in Medical school that the colon contains literally billions of pathogenic bacteria. Microbiology was not the only course in Medical School in which this was taught.

Whether or not the spleen was present or absent is totally irrelevant to the fact that Reginald Daye died because crystal had placed him at risk for an intra abdominal infection.

Nice job of misdirection. Houdini, David Copperfield, and other great illusionists would be proud of your comment.

First of all, Daye did not die from sepsis or an infection of any kind. He died because he was removed from life-support, and he was removed from life-support because he was brain dead. His brain death stemmed from an errant intubation of his esophagus by Duke Hospital medical staff. The misplaced intubation was the proximate and intervening cause of Daye's death... the direct cause of his brain death.

It was never proven or even suggested from the medical records that Daye suffered an infectious process... neither sepsis nor intra-abdominal.

The afore enlightenment should suffice, however if further elucidation is required give me notification.; June 19, 2016 at 5:13 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous Anonymous said...
more for harr:

I say this again. You got your nose way out of joint because AG Cooper reviewed the evidence generated in the Duke Rape Hoax, determined that no crime had happened(crystal's story was not credible, there was no evidence, there were no witnesses). You did not do any review of the evidence-you have said the prosecution discovery file was not available to you, as if you had some right to view the evidence. Yet you say that it was inappropriate of AG Cooper to express his opinion that the Lacrosse players were innocent.

Then, today, you set yourself up as a one man lynch mob who believes his proclamation of Dr. Nichols' guilt establishes Dr. Nichols' guilt and means he must be summarily found guilty and sentenced.

There is clearly a difference between the two cases to which you, yourself, alluded. I never had access to prosecution discovery or defense discovery related to the Duke Lacrosse case. However, in the Mangum murder case, I had access to the prosecution discovery.

The prosecution discovery provides irrefutable evidence that Dr. Clay Nichols committed perjury when he stated that Daye's spleen had been removed during surgery a week and a half prior to Daye's death and autopsy. Daye's testimony about the spleen not only is contradicted by the operative report but by the medical examiner's own autopsy report.

Also, you exaggerate about me wanting Dr. Nichols to be prosecuted for his perjury. I have never desired that, and I believe that in my relief sought I specifically requested that no legal action be taken against him as I do not a believer in scapegoatism. What I specifically pursue is justice for Crystal Mangum.

Keep in mind that the Crystal Mangum murder case is as open and transparent as can possibly be, as I share all of the evidence online. Shirley, the same cannot be said about the Duke Lacrosse case which is shrouded in darkness and secrecy. Neither you, I, the media, nor anyone outside the A.G.'s inner circle of the Duke Lacrosse investigation have any idea about the investigation's objectivity, accuracy, and reliability. The mainstream media may be willing to take A.G. Roy Cooper at his word regarding his promulgations regarding the Duke Lacrosse case, but I do not.

Consider yourself elucidated.; June 19, 2016 at 5:27 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous Anonymous said...
more clap trap from harr:

"Thank you for at least admitting that Dr. Nichols made false statements (especially involving the spleen). However, he did so under oath and while on the witness stand. How does this not classify as "perjury"? I enthusiastically await your reply."

How about you, as the one asserting perjury on the part of Dr. Nichols, explain why this qualifies as perjury.

If I understand perjury,, and I request the assistance of the lawyers who post here, is tha perjury means a deliberate, intentional attempt of the witness to mislead the court on the issue. The issue was whether or not Reginald aye died of complications of the stab wound. Whether or not the spleen was present is irrelevant to whether or not he died as complications of the stab wound.

I am not an attorney either, however, my understanding of perjury is that it is a false statement (intentional) given under oath. To my knowledge, there is no requisite that the false statement be directly or indirectly related to a specific incident or issue... only that it be false.

Whether or not the perjury is harmful or harmless is another issue. But first let's see if we can agree that his testimony about the spleen being removed eleven days prior to his death (during his emergency surgery) is, in fact, perjury. I believe it is.

I am sure that A Lawyer and Walt would agree with me that technically under a legal definition that Nichols' comments about the spleen being removed a week and a half prior to his death is perjury. I invite them to comment and thereby provide you with elucidation on the issue.; June 19, 2016 at 5:35 AM
JSwift said...: Sidney writes: He died because he was removed from life-support, and he was removed from life-support because he was brain dead.

No one disagrees with this statement.

His brain death stemmed from an errant intubation of his esophagus by Duke Hospital medical staff.

No one disagrees with this statement.

The misplaced intubation was the direct cause of his brain death.

Most readers agree with this statement.

... the proximate and intervening cause of Daye's death

Most readers agree that the intubation was A proximate cause of Daye's death. However, you have never demonstrated that it is an intervening cause. You have merely asserted that conclusion, but provided no proof. Two experts concluded otherwise. Moreover, case law provided by Walt provides that medical malpractice is generally NOT an intervening cause. You have provided no case law to counter that conclusion.

Sidney, your readers have been making this argument for more than two years. For more than two years, you have ignored this argument. The unsupported and non-expert opinion of a personal friend of the defendant is not sufficient to overcome a conviction. Finish your argument with facts and law. Otherwise, you should begin making plans to celebrate Mangum's release on February 27, 2026.

John D. Smith
New York; June 19, 2016 at 5:38 AM
A Lawyer said...: Walt, let me try my hand at elucidation one more time. My complaint is not solely and specifically that Wake County D.A. Freeman did not take action, but rather, she refused to look into my allegations of criminality. She ignored me totally. Had she given serious and thoughtful consideration of my claims of perjury and then reached a conclusion that no crime had been committed, decided to take no action, and then relayed her position to me, then such action might be considered to be somewhat acceptable. That is a far cry from what happened.

Consider yourself elucidated once again.

So why are you suing? "Ignoring Sidney Harr" is not a cause of action.

As Walt said, if you voluntarily dismiss your frivolous lawsuit, we can discuss your other points.; June 19, 2016 at 8:38 AM
A Lawyer said...: I am sure that A Lawyer and Walt would agree with me that technically under a legal definition that Nichols' comments about the spleen being removed a week and a half prior to his death is perjury. I invite them to comment and thereby provide you with elucidation on the issue.

I will let Walt address North Carolina law. In federal court, perjury means a statement which is: (1) under oath, (2) false, (3) material to the proceeding, and (4) deliberately and intentionally false.; June 19, 2016 at 8:42 AM
Anonymous said...: more harrian clap trap:

"Walt, let me try my hand at elucidation one more time."

How can you try "one more" attempt at elucidation when you have made no attempts at elucidation in the past? Promulgating delusions is not providing elucidation.

"My complaint is not solely and specifically that Wake County D.A. Freeman did not take action, but rather, she refused to look into my allegations of criminality. She ignored me totally. Had she given serious and thoughtful consideration of my claims of perjury and then reached a conclusion that no crime had been committed, decided to take no action, and then relayed her position to me, then such action might be considered to be somewhat acceptable. That is a far cry from what happened."

You have graphically demonstrated in the past that he can not distinguish between what is or is not criminality. So why should any DA take your allegations seriously? You are just throwing a tantrum because DA Freeman realizes you are just a deluded megalomaniac.

"Consider yourself elucidated once again."

As you have never elucidated anyone in the past, it is impossible for you to elucidate anyone again.; June 19, 2016 at 9:13 AM
Anonymous said...: even more harrian clap trap:

"Nice job of misdirection. Houdini, David Copperfield, and other great illusionists would be proud of your comment."

It was not misdirection. It was the truth. It takes a chronic liar who can't recognize truth to call it misdirection,

"First of all, Daye did not die from sepsis or an infection of any kind. He died because he was removed from life-support, and he was removed from life-support because he was brain dead. His brain death stemmed from an errant intubation of his esophagus by Duke Hospital medical staff. The misplaced intubation was the proximate and intervening cause of Daye's death... the direct cause of his brain death."

First of all, I did not say Reginald Daye died of sepsis. And I did not deny that he aspirated. I pointed out the aspiration was a complication of an evaluation for an intra abdominal infection. Since you deny that Reginald Daye was at risk of an intra abdominal infection,you document you are incompetent to evaluate the situation. That iswhat one would expect from a minimally trained, minimally experienced medical school graduate who was never accepted into residency training, and who never achieved medical specialty board certification and who sprnt his post medical school career filing and losing frivolous lawsuits. You have fired off another salvo of duds, harr.

"It was never proven or even suggested from the medical records that Daye suffered an infectious process... neither sepsis nor intra-abdominal."

So you are saying that someone who has suffered a colon laceration which left his abdominal cavity exposed to hours of contamination from colonic [pathogens is not at risk of an inyra abdominal infection, right? You have once again documented you are incredibly stupid and totally clinically incompetent.

"The afore enlightenment should suffice, however if further elucidation is required give me notification."

That you consider your clap trap enlightening and elucidatiing is yet more documentation that you are incrediblt stupid and clinically incompetent.; June 19, 2016 at 9:27 AM
kenhyderal said...: A Lawyer said: I will let Walt address North Carolina law. In federal court, perjury means a statement which is: (1) under oath, (2) false, (3) material to the proceeding, and (4) deliberately and intentionally false.".............................There seemed to be an effort, from the time of the lethal medical error, to imply the stab wound was what killed Daye. Maximizing the lethality of Daye's injuries, all around, appeared to be the strategy undertaken by all. A spleen so badly injured that it was beyond repair played into this attempted deception. Another factor is, sloppy and incompetent M.E. Nichols, trying to save face, intentionally doubled down on the demonstrably false assertion, made in his autopsy, that the spleen had been removed. If this error was properly acknowledged it could have called into question many of his other pronouncements; eg That Daye had a normal liver. Crystal's right to Justice should trump the ego of an already disgraced M.E. This speaks materially to the question did Crystal murder Day or was his death due to intervening actions.; June 19, 2016 at 9:31 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You will be standing tall before the man in 8 days.

There are 11 days left until the end of June.

You have 196 days to exonerate and free Mangum.

It has been 57 days since April 23rd, 96 days since the Ides of March and 3,291 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; June 19, 2016 at 9:44 AM
Anonymous said...: another dose of harrian claop trap:

"I am not an attorney either,"

That is glaringly obvious.

"however, my understanding of perjury is that it is a false statement (intentional) given under oath. To my knowledge, there is no requisite that the false statement be directly or indirectly related to a specific incident or issue... only that it be false."

Presumes a fact not in evidence, that you are capable of understanding. And you have not established that Dr. Nichols intentionally misrepresented anything to the court.

"Whether or not the perjury is harmful or harmless is another issue. But first let's see if we can agree that his testimony about the spleen being removed eleven days prior to his death (during his emergency surgery) is, in fact, perjury. I believe it is."

What a legal incompetent believes about perjury or any other crime is irrelevant, especially if the legal incompetent is harr who has graphically demonstrated he can not distinguish between what is or is not criminal.

"I am sure that A Lawyer and Walt would agree with me that technically under a legal definition that Nichols' comments about the spleen being removed a week and a half prior to his death is perjury. I invite them to comment and thereby provide you with elucidation on the issue."

I have already suggest that the posters who do know anything about the law weigh in. That does not include you.; June 19, 2016 at 9:57 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid said:

"Hey, Abe.

To be honest, the reinstatement of Mike Nifong's law license has been placed on the back burner as he is free and under no current legal assault."

Yeah. I might buy that, except for the fact that Nifong was "free and under no current legal assault" when you started this website and your futile quest to get his law license restored.

It looks to me (and probably most everyone else) like you have thrown in the towel on Nifong and abandoned your pointless, quixotic mission.

I think we can officially put this in the loss column for you. On the bright side, your streak is still intact.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; June 19, 2016 at 10:03 AM
Anonymous said...: kenny hissy fit clap trap of the daty:

"A Lawyer said: I will let Walt address North Carolina law. In federal court, perjury means a statement which is: (1) under oath, (2) false, (3) material to the proceeding, and (4) deliberately and intentionally false.".............................There seemed to be an effort, from the time of the lethal medical error, to imply the stab wound was what killed Daye."

The medical error would never have happened had crystal not stabbed Reginald Daye, lacerated his colon, and put him at risk of an intra abdominal infection.

"Maximizing the lethality of Daye's injuries, all around, appeared to be the strategy undertaken by all."

kenny hissy fit, I mean no legal training, no legal experience, no clinical training, no clinical experience kenny hissy fit gets this wrong.

A spleen so badly injured that it was beyond repair played into this attempted deception. Another factor is, sloppy and incompetent M.E. Nichols, trying to save face, intentionally doubled down on the demonstrably false assertion, made in his autopsy, that the spleen had been removed."

Presuming facts not n evidence.

If this error was properly acknowledged it could have called into question many of his other pronouncements; eg That Daye had a normal liver."

No it wouldn't. The diagnosis of a normal liver would have been supported by histologic sections of the liver. Speaking as one who has done autopsies, histologic sections of all organs are done in autopsies. hissy fit, have you ever done or attended an autopsy?

"Crystal's right to Justice should trump the ego of an already disgraced M.E. This speaks materially to the question did Crystal murder Day or was his death due to intervening actions."

Except Dr. Nichols was not a disgraced ME, except in the minds of two incompetents, hissy fit and harr. crystal got justice when she was convicted of murdering eginald Daye.; June 19, 2016 at 10:09 AM
Anonymous said...: expect another round of hissy fit/harr/kilgo impotent temper tantrums.; June 19, 2016 at 10:14 AM
Anonymous said...: Maybe hissy fit is out buying more popcorn sohe can toss it at people from a range of 500 yards.; June 19, 2016 at 10:15 AM
Anonymous said...: hey hissy fit, do you know what histologic section means?; June 19, 2016 at 10:50 AM
kenhyderal said...: Daaa; June 19, 2016 at 3:10 PM
Anonymous said...: non answer from hissy fit; June 19, 2016 at 3:22 PM
Walt said...: A Lawyer wrote: "I will let Walt address North Carolina law. In federal court, perjury means a statement which is: (1) under oath, (2) false, (3) material to the proceeding [emphasis added], and (4) deliberately and intentionally false."

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

We know, because Sid breached Crystal's confidence and revealed the defense expert's opinion, that any errors or mis-statements made by Dr. Nichols in the course of his testimony are not material. The defense expert agrees with his diagnosis. Daye's untimely death was a result of Crystal's stabbing of him. There was no intervening cause to break the chain of criminal liability. Only those who refuse to learn, or those trying to cover up the damage they did to Crystal's cause say otherwise.

Walt-in-Durham; June 19, 2016 at 3:28 PM
kenhyderal said...: Of course I do. Don't be so condescending.; June 19, 2016 at 3:29 PM
Anonymous said...: another non answer from hissy fit. hissy fit probably had no clue unytil the term was mentioned to him.; June 19, 2016 at 3:41 PM
Walt said...: Sid wrote: "My complaint is not solely and specifically that Wake County D.A. Freeman did not take action, but rather, she refused to look into my allegations of criminality. She ignored me totally. Had she given serious and thoughtful consideration of my claims of perjury and then reached a conclusion that no crime had been committed, decided to take no action, and then relayed her position to me, then such action might be considered to be somewhat acceptable. That is a far cry from what happened."

That's not what your lawsuit seeks. You seek an order releasing Mangum from prison, vacating her conviction and to force Freeman to meet with you and "seriously consider" your complaint. As has been pointed out to you several times, you have no standing to seek an order releasing Mangum from prison or vacating her conviction. As to Freeman, you have been educated previously that courts in North Carolina cannot order a Prosecutor to take an action, let alone compel the outcome of that action. You have also been told that the District Attorney in Wake County is prohibited from filing charges arising in Durham County. Your complaint, if any there might be is with Roger Echols. He has the sole and exclusive jurisdiction to file perjury charges. He has the sole and exclusive jurisdiction to file a motion to vacate the sentence for good cause. He has the sole and exclusive jurisdiction to have Crystal transferred from the Department of Corrections to the Durham County Jail for re-trial. None of those things, Freeman can do. The state constitution forbids her from doing so.

The real question then is, why didn't you sue Roger Echols? Dismiss your frivolous and meritless lawsuit against Freeman and then we'll have a useful discussion.

Walt-in-Durham; June 19, 2016 at 3:42 PM
kenhyderal said...: Sorry Walt that comment was directed against Dr. Anonymous @3:22. I sincerely doubt that Dr. Roberts, under cross-examination, would have been able to maintain that opinion. What do you think a jury would have concluded if they had been given all the information. Information that was withheld from them. Welch and Holsclaw aside, Judge Ridgeways instruction along with all relevant information about the events that led to Daye's demise, a jury of Crystal's peers, I believe, would most likely of concluded that Duke malpractice was an intervening cause.; June 19, 2016 at 3:43 PM
kenhyderal said...: @ Dr. Anonymous @3:41 .................. Just one further example of condescension from a man with a misguided sense of superiority.; June 19, 2016 at 3:55 PM
JSwift said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; June 19, 2016 at 4:01 PM
JSwift said...: Kenny concludes: a jury of Crystal's peers, I believe, would most likely of [sic] concluded that Duke malpractice was an intervening cause.

I disagree.

I note that your argument ("Welch and Holsclaw aside") essentially boils down to a complaint that Meier did not attempt to encourage the jury to nullify the law because you don't think it is fair and that any reasonable jury would agree with you. That is not an argument that will get Magnum a new trial.

John D. Smith
New York, NY; June 19, 2016 at 4:02 PM
Anonymous said...: really stupid clap trap from hissy fit:

" Blogger kenhyderal said...

I sincerely doubt that Dr. Roberts, under cross-examination, would have been able to maintain that opinion."

Who would have cross examined her. Not the defense. She was their witness. I repeat this, since you have refused to comprehend it. The Prosecution would not have tried to impeach her testimony. It agreed with the testimony of the prosecution expert. Had the defense tried to impeach her testimony they would have said to the jury, loud and clear, our expert agrees with the prosecution expert. So far as the treating physicians, you haven't got a clue what they would have said, let alone the capability of understanding it

Your opinion is irrelevant and valueless. It is the equivalent to a 2 year old believing he can tell a pilot how to fly an airplane(my apologies for insulting all the two year olds in the world).

"What do you think a jury would have concluded if they had been given all the information. Information that was withheld from them."

What information? You may claim there was malpractice. There wasn't. Even if there was, i would not have relieved crystal of criminal responsibility for Reginald Daye's death. Reginald Daye would not have been exposed to the risk of malpractice had crystal not stabbed him.

"Welch and Holsclaw aside, Judge Ridgeways instruction along with all relevant information about the events that led to Daye's demise, a jury of Crystal's peers, I believe, would most likely of concluded that Duke malpractice was an intervening cause."

Such is the opinion of no legal training, no legal experience, no clinical training, no clinical experience hissy fit who has no knowledge of any other information. All he has offered is his and harr's opinions. I say again, the combined opinions of two non knowledgeable utter incompetents establishes nothing of any legal weight.; June 19, 2016 at 4:04 PM
Anonymous said...: clap trap from hissy fit:

"@ Dr. Anonymous @3:41 .................. Just one further example of condescension from a man with a misguided sense of superiority."

Just one further example of hissy fit throwing an impotent temper tantrum and hurling popcorn at someonr from a range of 500 yards.

If hissy fit has a clue about what I was talking about, he got it after I mentioned the term and he looked it up.; June 19, 2016 at 4:08 PM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: " I sincerely doubt that Dr. Roberts, under cross-examination, would have been able to maintain that opinion."

Why do you believe that? You have, heretofore undisclosed experience cross examining expert witnesses? You do know that the defense could not call her as an expert for the purpose of cross examining her. She was Crystal's own expert. An expert who agreed with the state. Had Crystal found an expert who would contradict her, the state might have called her as an expert. However, there is no such expert. When two experts agree, it is highly unlikely that a third will ever be found who disagrees.

"What do you think a jury would have concluded if they had been given all the information. Information that was withheld from them."

You must not have watched Meier's cross examination of Dr. Nichols. Meier hit Nichols with all the contradictions that existed in the records and Roberts report. Nichols stuck to his diagnosis and the jury believed him. Putting Dr. Roberts on the stand to confirm Nichols would have harmed Crystal more than Sid had already harmed her defense.

"Welch and Holsclaw aside, Judge Ridgeways instruction along with all relevant information about the events that led to Daye's demise, a jury of Crystal's peers, I believe, would most likely of concluded that Duke malpractice was an intervening cause."

You consistently ignore the definition of an intervening cause in the pattern jury instruction given by Judge Ridgeway. An instruction written with the full knowledge of the case law. You consistently ignore the totality of the instruction which reads in relevant part: The defendant’s act need not have been the only cause, nor the last or nearest
cause. It is sufficient if it occurred with some other cause acting at the same time, which, in combination with, caused the death of the victim..... No jury would or could conclude any differently the the last one. Had Crystal not stabbed Daye, he would never have suffered and died.

To be successful at trial, Crystal some evidence that there was a sole cause of Daye's death that was not medical malpractice, or even really related to his hospital stay. Sid, comes close to getting the whole notion of intervening cause right when he claims that "Duke murdered Daye." He really needs to say who at Duke formed the specific intent to murder day and then acted on that specific intent. Which, of course, he can't.

Here is the best example of an intervening cause: Al Qaeda trains, arms and sends a bunch of terrorists to attack the Duke University Health System. In the course of that attack, one of the terrorists sees Daye lying in bed and decides to shoot him. That is an intervening cause. Why? Because, for it to be an intervening cause, the law requires the intervenor to have the intent to kill and act on that intent. Only that mens rea will work for an intervening cause.

Crystal would have been much better off never letting Sid know what her expert told her. She would have been a lot better off appealing on the 403(b) issue. But, just because she made lousy choices in her case does not make her innocent. She stabbed Daye. She did not do so in self defense. Daye dying in the hospital is certainly something that reasonable people could expect from a stabbing. She's guilty. The jury got it right.

Walt-in-Durham; June 19, 2016 at 5:11 PM
Anonymous said...: Sid,

Is Crystal refusing to give Meier permission to talk to you? You said she was gonna sign the release and let it happen. What is she hiding? Why won't she give permission?; June 19, 2016 at 7:13 PM
Anonymous said...: Walt said:

"We know, because Sid breached Crystal's confidence and revealed the defense expert's opinion, that any errors or mis-statements made by Dr. Nichols in the course of his testimony are not material."

Can Magnum sue Sid because of his breach?; June 19, 2016 at 7:28 PM
kenhyderal said...: @ Walt: Do you believe the Jury should have been informed of Daye's chronic alcoholism,his decent into acute alcohol withdrawal, his pending potentially fatal delirium tremens, his transfer to an extensive care unit with the diagnosis, not of a probable or even possible intra-abdominal infection but as a presumptive diagnosis of DT's. They did not investigate to rule out DT's as the differential diagnosis. Should they been told of the medical error, should they have been told of the cardiac arrest and the cardiac and cerebral anoxia that led to subsequent brain death. Why not give the Jury all of the facts. Getting justice demanded a full disclosure of all relevant facts.; June 19, 2016 at 9:55 PM
JSwift said...: Kenny,

I understand your belief that Meier should have pursued a strategy of jury nullification. I agree it is possible that such a strategy might have been successful. However, you should not believe that making the jury aware of all relevant "facts" would necessarily have resulted in an acquittal. After all, the readers on this site are aware of all the facts as well as the relevant case law, and, with the exception of the two self-professed personal friends of Mangum, no one has concluded that Mangum is innocent. Many readers (although certainly not all) are not preset in their judgments.

As I noted earlier, the failure of an attorney to pursue a jury nullification strategy does not constitute grounds for a conviction to be overturned.

John D. Smith
New York, NY; June 20, 2016 at 4:19 AM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: "@ Walt: Do you believe the Jury should have been informed of Daye's chronic alcoholism,his decent into acute alcohol withdrawal, his pending potentially fatal delirium tremens, his transfer to an extensive care unit with the diagnosis, not of a probable or even possible intra-abdominal infection but as a presumptive diagnosis of DT's. They did not investigate to rule out DT's as the differential diagnosis."

Criminals don't get to kill alcoholics or drunks, just because they are alcoholics or drunks.

"Should they been told of the medical error, ...."

Repeat after me, medical malpractice is not an intervening cause. There is no place in the criminal law for contributory negligence.

John D. Smith wrote: As I noted earlier, the failure of an attorney to pursue a jury nullification strategy does not constitute grounds for a conviction to be overturned."

That is the argument Kenny has been advancing since day one. We should ignore the law and let Crystal kill whomever she wants. He is, as he has been since he showed up here, a proponent of injustice.

Walt-in-Durham; June 20, 2016 at 4:48 AM
Anonymous said...: more ignorant claptrap from kenny hissy fit:

"@ Walt: Do you believe the Jury should have been informed of Daye's chronic alcoholism,his decent into acute alcohol withdrawal, his pending potentially fatal delirium tremens, his transfer to an extensive care unit with the diagnosis, not of a probable or even possible intra-abdominal infection but as a presumptive diagnosis of DT's."

Ignorant hissy fit has not established that Reginald Daye was a chronic alcoholic. hssy fit himself has admitted on this blog that an event which puts a chronic alcoholic into a hospital can precipitate DTs. If Reginald Daye had gone into DTs because he had to be hospitalized for the stab wound inflicted by crystal, DTs would not have absolved crystal of criminal responsibility, according to hissy fit's earlier post. And even if Reginald Daye had developed DTs, it did not change the fact that he was at risk of an intra abdominal infection because crystal stabbed him and lacerated his colon. That hissy fit dismisses the risk of infection just shows hissy fit is incapable of understanding the situation.

"They did not investigate to rule out DT's as the differential diagnosis. Should they been told of the medical error, should they have been told of the cardiac arrest and the cardiac and cerebral anoxia that led to subsequent brain death. Why not give the Jury all of the facts. Getting justice demanded a full disclosure of all relevant facts."

The Jury did have all the facts. None of what ignorant hissy fit lists, cardiac arrest, brain death, anoxia, would have happened had crystal not stabbed him.

A gross example of hissy fit blaming the victim because he wants his favorite murderess/false accuser to get a pass for her crimes.; June 20, 2016 at 4:49 AM
Walt said...: Anonymous at 7:28 wrote: "Can Magnum sue Sid because of his breach?"

She could. She does have a contributory negligence problem. She did give him the information, knowing he was unreliable and prone to doing self-defeating things with any information he might obtain.

She also has another problem, Sid is judgment proof. Seventeen years of medical practice left him living in subsidized housing, surviving on his minimal social security benefit and food stamps. It's not like Sid has ever earned much money from a profession that usually showers money on even it's most mediocre practitioners. She would also be standing in line behind the California Franchise Tax Board which has an assessment against Sid from when he tried to steal a medical practice.

All that said, I think Sid and Crystal deserve to litigate against one another. Like Sid and Duke. A three way litigation fest with Duke, Sid and Crystal would be a lot of fun to watch. It really is a shame that Judge Eagles has prohibited anyone from pleading in Harr III. I'd like to see Crystal added as a party defendant or a cross defendant on some claim. We could watch Kenny sit on the sidelines and hurl inanities at the various litigants while Sid spewed gratuitous insults in lieu of actual legal reasoning, and Crystal tried to hit on the court room marshal's while Duke did its best imitation of Tallman Trask asserting its entitled privilege to a parking spot.

Walt-in-Durham; June 20, 2016 at 5:08 AM
Anonymous said...: Excerpts from J4N Blog, "Harassment from the “Franchise Tax Board” continues", posted on SEPTEMBER 23, 2009:

"The Franchise Tax Board came into my life in April 2009 as a consequence of my efforts on behalf of obtaining justice for Mike Nifong, with the sudden claim that I owed $455,000.00 plus in back taxes to the state of California from the years 1990, 1993, and 1996."

and

"There is no doubt that the powers that be in the state of North Carolina and the carpetbagger families of the Duke Lacrosse defendants are behind this bogus witch hunt."

res ipsa loquitur.

Maybe this is relevant to Harr I, II, and III, in which harr claims Duke targeted him because of his support for nifong.; June 20, 2016 at 5:40 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You will be standing tall before the man in 7 days.

There are 10 days left until the end of June.

You have 195 days to exonerate and free Mangum.

It has been 58 days since April 23rd, 97 days since the Ides of March and 3,292 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; June 20, 2016 at 5:47 AM
kenhyderal said...: JSwift said: "As I noted earlier, the failure of an attorney to pursue a jury nullification strategy does not constitute grounds for a conviction to be overturned".............................................. Could that failure not be considered incompetent and inadequate representation which can be grounds for getting a new trial. Appeal Attorney Peterson chose only the admission of Walker as grounds for the appeal; a matter that had already been adjudicated at trial. I suspect Lawyers like other professionals are very reluctant to accuse fellow colleagues of incompetentcy especially for indigent marginalized clients. As far as intervening cause the case law seems not readily applicable to the circumstances of this' case. Crystal should have received the benefit of doubt as to whether Daye's medical history of chronic alcoholism was a totally unrelated factor. Then let the State appeal her acquittal and allow a decision more applicable to the circumstances of this case be handed down; June 20, 2016 at 9:45 AM
Anonymous said...: latest captrap from hissy fit:

"JSwift said: "As I noted earlier, the failure of an attorney to pursue a jury nullification strategy does not constitute grounds for a conviction to be overturned".............................................. Could that failure not be considered incompetent and inadequate representation which can be grounds for getting a new trial. Appeal Attorney Peterson chose only the admission of Walker as grounds for the appeal; a matter that had already been adjudicated at trial. I suspect Lawyers like other professionals are very reluctant to accuse fellow colleagues of incompetentcy especially for indigent marginalized clients. As far as intervening cause the case law seems not readily applicable to the circumstances of this' case. Crystal should have received the benefit of doubt as to whether Daye's medical history of chronic alcoholism was a totally unrelated factor. Then let the State appeal her acquittal and allow a decision more applicable to the circumstances of this case be handed down"

Which is another manifestation of hissy fit's legal incompetence and another manifestaiton of his desire to get his favorite murderess/false accuser, who was a convicted criminal before she became a false accuser in the Duke Rape Hoax and before she murdered Reginald Daye, a pass for her crimes.

O?n the subject of doubt, hissy fit does not think that the men crystal falsely accused of raping her deserve no benefit of any doubt. Although there is no evidence that crystal was raped, hissy fit advocates that some men, Caucasian men, should be summarily convicted.; June 20, 2016 at 9:55 AM
kenhyderal said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; June 20, 2016 at 10:03 AM
kenhyderal said...: @ Walt at 5:08: This is a sarcastic and mean post. Why be so contemptuous and sneering. History is full of examples where dissenters have been proven right despite widespread hatred an ridicule. I think this will be the case with both Crystal and Dr. Harr; June 20, 2016 at 10:05 AM
Anonymous said...: kenny hissy fit's latest impotent temper tantrum:

"@ Walt at 5:08: This is a sarcastic and mean post. Why be so contemptuous and sneering. History is full of examples where dissenters have been proven right despite widespread hatred an ridicule. I think this will be the case with both Crystal and Dr. Harr".

Presumes a fact not in evidence, that hissy fit can think.

And hissy fit does not think it is "mean", to put it mildly, to accuse innocent men of a heinous crime in the face of overwhelming evidence that the alleged crime never happened, that the accusing witness LIED about being raped.; June 20, 2016 at 11:02 AM
JSwift said...: Kenny asks: Could that failure [to pursue a strategy of jury nullification] not be considered incompetent and inadequate representation which can be grounds for getting a new trial.

No. Many courts do not support the concept of jury nullification. As a result, an appeal based on a failure to pursue that strategy cannot succeed. If you provide case law that supports a different conclusion, I will admit that I was wrong. Otherwise, stop asking the same question over and over and over and over again and expecting a different answer.

Appeal Attorney Peterson chose only the admission of Walker as grounds for the appeal; a matter that had already been adjudicated at trial.

This has been discussed repeatedly. Only legal matters that have been adjudicated at trial are eligible for appeal. An appeal is a means by which a convicted defendant appeals the improper application of law in a trial. Only someone completely ignorant of the law would suggest that an appeal should avoid questions of law applied in the trial. If you provide case law that supports a different conclusion, I will admit that I was wrong. Otherwise, stop asking the same question over and over and over and over again and expecting a different answer.

As far as intervening cause the case law seems not readily applicable to the circumstances of this' case. Crystal should have received the benefit of doubt as to whether Daye's medical history of chronic alcoholism was a totally unrelated factor.

Medical malpractice is not an intervening cause. If you provide case law that supports a different conclusion, I will admit that I was wrong. Otherwise, stop asking the same question over and over and over and over again and expecting a different answer.

Then let the State appeal her acquittal and allow a decision more applicable to the circumstances of this case be handed down.

This is an incredibly stupid comment. The concept of double jeopardy has been discussed on this board many times. This concept, as applied in the United States (as well as in Canada) precludes the state from retrying a defendant on the same charges after an acquittal. For that reason, in any retrial for Magnum, the larceny of chose charges and first degree murder charges cannot be brought again. Sidney's request that she be retried on those charges demonstrates his complete ignorance of basic legal concepts.

Kenny, I suggest that you do the legal research required to support your arguments. If you find case law that supports your conclusions, I will admit my error. If you continue to repeat the same arguments, ignoring the cases provided by others that contradict your arguments, the readers on the site will conclude that you do not actually care to help Magnum, but are interested only in irritating other readers.

Stop whining and actually do something useful.

John D. Smith
New York, NY; June 20, 2016 at 11:10 AM
A Lawyer said...: The Franchise Tax Board came into my life in April 2009 as a consequence of my efforts on behalf of obtaining justice for Mike Nifong, with the sudden claim that I owed $455,000.00 plus in back taxes to the state of California from the years 1990, 1993, and 1996. ...
There is no doubt that the powers that be in the state of North Carolina and the carpetbagger families of the Duke Lacrosse defendants are behind this bogus witch hunt.

Paranoia strikes deep
Into your life it will creep
It starts when you're always afraid
You step out of line, the man come and take you away

We better stop, hey, what's that sound
Everybody look what's going down
-- Buffalo Springfield, "For What It's Worth" (lyrics by Stephen Stills); June 20, 2016 at 11:15 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

As has been explained to you many, many times - Peterson could only choose matters that were litigated at trial - you cannot introduce new evidence at trial. The purpose of an appeal is to say the Trial Court got it wrong ... hence the argument on the 404(b). You are getting as bad as Sid in your inability to learn/pay attention.

It's why we all consider you a liar, a joke, and an abuser.; June 20, 2016 at 11:26 AM
Anonymous said...: Expect more anonymous harr/hissy fit/kilgo anonymous impotent trmper tantrums, more salvos of duds from harr, more barrages of popcorn from hidssy fit, at the range of 500 yards.; June 20, 2016 at 12:34 PM
kenhyderal said...: JSwift said: "Then let the State appeal her acquittal and allow a decision more applicable to the circumstances of this case be handed down. This is an incredibly stupid comment"....................................As a lay-person I made the wrong choice of words. I was suggesting that Peterson should have raised the issue of intervening cause and the Appeal Court should have given Crystal the benefit of the doubt and ordered a new trial; thereby allowing the State to appeal this order and creating the chance to make new case law more applicable to the circumstances of this case.; June 20, 2016 at 1:19 PM
JSwift said...: Kenny states: I was suggesting that Peterson should have raised the issue of intervening cause and the Appeal Court should have given Crystal the benefit of the doubt and ordered a new trial; thereby allowing the State to appeal this order and creating the chance to make new case law more applicable to the circumstances of this case.

I accept that you misspoke rather than were making a deliberately ridiculous statement.

I am interested in the support for your conclusion that the appeals court should consider an issue not raised at trial (i.e., whether the intubation was an intervening cause) with no credible evidence to support that issue (based only on your speculation that (1) Roberts, the defense expert, would have testified differently than she had indicated earlier and would contradict the conclusion in her report and (2) attending medical personnel whom you have not interviewed would support the conclusion). I do not believe case law exists that supports this conclusion.

If you provide case law that supports a different conclusion, I will admit that I was wrong. Otherwise, stop asking the same question over and over and over and over and over and over and over again and expecting a different answer.

John D. Smith
New York, NY; June 20, 2016 at 1:40 PM
Anonymous said...: more claptrap from hissy fit:

"JSwift said: "Then let the State appeal her acquittal and allow a decision more applicable to the circumstances of this case be handed down. This is an incredibly stupid comment"....................................As a lay-person I made the wrong choice of words. I was suggesting that Peterson should have raised the issue of intervening cause and the Appeal Court should have given Crystal the benefit of the doubt and ordered a new trial; thereby allowing the State to appeal this order and creating the chance to make new case law more applicable to the circumstances of this case."

hissy fit is waffling and dodging again.

hissy fit claimed nifong did not charge the Lacrosse defendants with rape.

It was pointed out to him that nifong did have the defendants indicted for first degree rape.

hissy fit came back with, well nifong dropped the charges-that meant there were no rape charges.

To top it all off, hissy fit claimed nifong did not file rape charges because he had no DNA evidence. nifong sought the indictments knowing he had no DNA evidence against the Defendants, and knowing the only male DNA recovered from crystal's rape kit did not match the DNA of the defendants.

hissy fit made an issue out of the failure of the investigators to identify the men who had left their DNA on crystal. It was pointed out to hissy fit that nifong had the evidence and concealed it, rather than tracing it back to the source. hissy fit denied that nifong concealed the evidence. hissy fit then followed up with a harrian delusion, that because nifong did not conceal the evidence because he turned over the raw data, ignoring that nifong turned over the raw data because the court ordered him to do so, and ignoring the fact that nifong was obligated by law to turn over a report of the results.

hissy fit does not really comprehend what he says.; June 20, 2016 at 1:49 PM
kenhyderal said...: Trying to apply the case law the law as established by Welch and Holsclaw to this case is like trying to apply a square peg into a round hole. The circumstances of those cases bear virtually no similarity.; June 20, 2016 at 3:07 PM
Anonymous said...: latest claptrapfrom kenny hissy fit:

"Trying to apply the case law the law as established by Welch and Holsclaw to this case is like trying to apply a square peg into a round hole. The circumstances of those cases bear virtually no similarity."

In other words, if the law does not support his crusade to get his favorite murderess/false accuser a pass for her crimes, just discard the law.

I remind the readership that no legal trining, no legl eperience hissy fit is ic=ncpble of speaking authoritatively on matters legal.; June 20, 2016 at 3:14 PM
JSwift said...: Kenny whines: Trying to apply the case law the law as established by Welch and Holsclaw to this case is like trying to apply a square peg into a round hole. The circumstances of those cases bear virtually no similarity.

I find Welch and Holsclaw far more compelling than any cases you have referenced.

If you provide case law that supports a different conclusion, I will admit that I was wrong. Otherwise, stop asking the same question over and over and over and over and over and over and over again and expecting a different answer.

John D. Smith
New York, NY; June 20, 2016 at 5:22 PM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: "Could that failure not be considered incompetent and inadequate representation which can be grounds for getting a new trial. Appeal Attorney Peterson chose only the admission of Walker as grounds for the appeal; a matter that had already been adjudicated at trial."

Proving once again how shallow your pool of legal knowledge is. Courts of appeal only consider matters raised at trial.

Walt-in-Durham; June 20, 2016 at 8:23 PM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: ".As a lay-person I made the wrong choice of words. I was suggesting that Peterson should have raised the issue of intervening cause and the Appeal Court should have given Crystal the benefit of the doubt and ordered a new trial;...."

First, it has been explained to you many times before courts of appeal do not hear new evidence. Second, there was no evidence of an intervening cause because the expert witness, the only one called did not testify to any intervening cause. The defense had their own expert, independent medical examiner review the medical record and she found no evidence of an intervening cause either. Mere speculation on your part is not evidence. Grow up and try to do something useful.

Walt-in-Durham; June 20, 2016 at 8:29 PM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: "Trying to apply the case law the law as established by Welch and Holsclaw to this case is like trying to apply a square peg into a round hole. The circumstances of those cases bear virtually no similarity."

You are beginning to sound like Sid with your unwillingness to learn. Welch and Holesclaw announce principals of law. Those principals, incorporated in the pattern jury instructions, guide us in trying cases. Not the factual similarities or differences of a case. Instead of crying about how the law applies, why don't you read the law and come up with case law that says Welch and Holesclaw are not applicable, have been reversed or modified.

Walt-in-Durham; June 20, 2016 at 8:35 PM
Walt said...: Hissyfit, I think Anon at 3:14 has you figured out: "In other words, if the law does not support his crusade to get his favorite murderess/false accuser a pass for her crimes, just discard the law."

Walt-in-Durham; June 20, 2016 at 8:37 PM
kenhyderal said...: Walt said: "We could watch Kenny sit on the sidelines and hurl inanities at the various litigants while Sid spewed gratuitous insults in lieu of actual legal reasoning".............................................................. A clear case of projection. Dr. Harr does not "spew" gratuitous insults at anyone. I really admire his forebearance in face of the daily gratuitous insults "hurled" at him here; June 20, 2016 at 9:19 PM
Anonymous said...: latest claptrap from hissy fit:

"Walt said: "We could watch Kenny sit on the sidelines and hurl inanities at the various litigants while Sid spewed gratuitous insults in lieu of actual legal reasoning".............................................................. A clear case of projection. Dr. Harr does not "spew" gratuitous insults at anyone. I really admire his forebearance in face of the daily gratuitous insults "hurled" at him here"

harr repeatedly, withouut proof, accuses people of racism and repeatedly spews out that the Lacrosse defendants are guilty of raping crystal, even though all the evidence says she lied. harr does "spew gratuitous insults at a nomber of proplr. harr spews out gratuitous insults at DA Freeman. harr has no idea of what forbearance means. Telling the truth about him does not constitute gratuitous insults.; June 21, 2016 at 2:52 AM
Anonymous said...: Really Kenny?

All the people Harr calls racists, and traitors, and turncoats, and incompetent, and all the other names he throws out there ... you say he doesn't engage in name calling?; June 21, 2016 at 4:57 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You will be standing tall before the man in 6 days.

There are 9 days left until the end of June.

You have 194 days to exonerate and free Mangum.

It has been 59 days since April 23rd, 98 days since the Ides of March and 3,293 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; June 21, 2016 at 4:59 AM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: "Dr. Harr does not "spew" gratuitous insults at anyone. I really admire his forebearance in face of the daily gratuitous insults "hurled" at him here[.]"

Apparently you haven't read Sid's briefs. I will give you a piece of advice though: it is better to remain silent and be thought a dunce than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

Walt-in-Durham; June 21, 2016 at 5:17 AM
Anonymous said...: kenny,

Sid "does not spew gratuitous insults at anyone"? Just look at the way he has referred to and attacked the falsely accused lacrosse players, their families and their lawyers thru the years on this blog. It's disgusting, low brow stuff. These were innocent young men who had the temerity to defend themselves against patently false charges.

Sid is no gentleman. He has demonstrated time and again that he is not above insulting and falsely impugning people who don't share his views. This sort of behavior appears to be a recurring theme in his life. It is really no surprise that Sid wasn't able to make it as a doctor; successful professionals do not behave this way.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; June 21, 2016 at 5:47 AM
kenhyderal said...: What's disgusting was the orchestrated campaign of slander designed to cast doubt on the character of a victim, who had the temerity to accuse those who sexually assaulted her. This immoral strategy is, unfortunately, often standard practice. Little wonder that Lawyers are held in such disrepute.; June 21, 2016 at 8:39 AM
Anonymous said...: repeat claptrap from hissy fit, who is decompensating over the feedback he has received today:

"What's disgusting was the orchestrated campaign of slander designed to cast doubt on the character of a victim, who had the temerity to accuse those who sexually assaulted her."

Correction: crystal is no victim. She had no character prior to the Duke Rape Hoax. No one slandered her. No one assaulted her, and that has been shown beyond a doubt. crystal victimized innocent men by falsely accusing them of raping her.

"This immoral strategy is, unfortunately, often standard practice."

What was immoral in the Duke Rape Hoax was nifong's deliberate attempt, motivated by his own greedy self interest, to convict men he knew were innocent of a crime which he knew never happened.

"Little wonder that Lawyers are held in such disrepute.'

The only lawyer ending up in ill repute as a result of the Duke Rape Hoax was corrupt nifong. And you, hissy fit, have the temerity to claim he was acting in the interest of justice.

And again I remind you. hissy fit, you have come up with zero evidence that crystal had been raped.; June 21, 2016 at 9:31 AM
JSwift said...: Kenny whines: What's disgusting was the orchestrated campaign of slander designed to cast doubt on the character of a victim, who had the temerity to accuse those who sexually assaulted her.

Kenny, you must get your story straight. You believe that mystery rapists raped Magnum. As a result, you must believe that she identified that wrong people as her rapists. As a result, she didn't accuse those who sexually assaulted her; she accused people other than those who sexually assaulted her.

I have asked you several times before, and you have always ignored the question: why is it unethical to "cast doubt on the character" of a person who has falsely accused you (or your clients) of felonies?

Please stop whining and do something productive.

John D. Smith
New York, NY; June 21, 2016 at 9:48 AM
Anonymous said...: kenny:

Can you list some of the slanderous things that the defendants in the lacrosse case, their families or their attorneys said about Mangum?

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; June 21, 2016 at 10:16 AM
Anonymous said...: excerpt from hussy fit's clap trap:

"What's disgusting was the orchestrated campaign of slander designed to cast doubt on the character of a victim, who had the temerity to accuse those who sexually assaulted her."

crystal alleged members of the Lacrosse team had raped her. She was shown a number of photo arrays from which she could not identify any Lacrosse player as an assailant. Then came the lineup at which, according to hissy fit, crystal was forced to identify Lacrosse players as her assailants. The two men she identified with 100% certainty as her assailants were able to prove with 100% certainty that they had not been present at the alleged crime scene at the time the alleged crime had allegedly happened. She identified with 90% certainty her third assailant a man who she claimed had a mustache at the alleged time the alleged crime allegedly happened. The picture of that man, David Evans, included in the wanted poster circulated by addison showed him to be clean shaven, and no one ever turned up any evidence he ever had a mustache(but then hissy fit claimed kilgo had seen a picture of David Evans with a mustache). Crystal did not, as hissy fit alleges, "accuse those who sexually assaulted her". She made unreliable identifications of members of the Lacrosse team, which should have not been offered as evidence. Then, nifong, who hissy fit says was fighting for justice for crystal, took those identifications and presented them to the grand jury as evidence.

As is his wont, hissy fit gets it glaringly wrong, in his quest to get crystal a pass for lying about being raped.

What say you, hissy fit?; June 21, 2016 at 11:50 AM
Anonymous said...: I add to my last comment, the lineup, at which according to hissy fit crystal was forced to identify Lacrosse players as her assailants, was done at the behest of nifong, who hissy fit says was fighting for justice for crystal. nifong knew he had no DNA evidence to tie any member of the Lacrosse team to the alleged crime. hissy fit has claimed on this blog that nifong charged Lacrosse players with sexual assault, not rape, because he had no DNA evidence. Ergo, hissy fit acknowledged nifong had no DNA evidence to tie nifong's suspects to the alleged crime. I say again, the "sexual assault" alleged by crystal was a gang rape in which multiple members of the Lacrosse team, not wearing condoms, penetrated her and ejaculated on her.

So it seems hissy fit is twisting himself into contortions in his attempt to get crystal a pass for being a false accuser. hissy fit has no idea of what kind of claptrap he is trying to promulgate.; June 21, 2016 at 12:04 PM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: :What's disgusting was the orchestrated campaign of slander designed to cast doubt on the character of a victim, who had the temerity to accuse those who sexually assaulted her."

You mean the three innocent young men who did not attack her. The three innocent young men who did nothing wrong. Those innocent young men who were wrongfully accused? Those men? What is disgusting is your continual repeat of that Crystal's lie. It speaks volumes about your lack of candor.

Walt-in-Durham; June 21, 2016 at 12:50 PM
guiowen said...: To the 11:50,
Don't worry, Kenny is just a troll.; June 21, 2016 at 1:05 PM
kenhyderal said...: Abe said: "Can you list some of the slanderous things that the defendants in the lacrosse case, their families or their attorneys said about Mangum"..................... They were far too sophisticated to do that directly. They relied on surrogates who systematically disseminated gossip and slander far and wide. They were so successful that people who do not actually know Crystal have come to believe their false characterizations; June 21, 2016 at 1:06 PM
Anonymous said...: Please provide examples.; June 21, 2016 at 1:14 PM
kenhyderal said...: JSwift said: "I have asked you several times before, and you have always ignored the question: why is it unethical to "cast doubt on the character" of a person who has falsely accused you (or your clients) of felonies"..................... You must be a Lawyer. Maybe it's not considered unethical in that profession but it does seem to be immoral to most to re-victimize the victim. It would be up to the Courts to decide if the accusation was false.; June 21, 2016 at 1:16 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "Please provide examples"....................... Examples can be frequently found on this an other blogs; such as the unfounded and untrue slander that Crystal was a drug addicted and mentally ill prostitute. Anyone who actually knows her knows that that is not the case; June 21, 2016 at 1:20 PM
kenhyderal said...: Walt said: "You mean the three innocent young men who did not attack her. The three innocent young men who did nothing wrong. Those innocent young men who were wrongfully accused.".......................................................... One, perhaps two, of them, thanks to a flawed and improperly conducted photo line-up, were wrongfully accused.; June 21, 2016 at 1:26 PM

«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 400 of 962 Newer› Newest»

Sunday, June 5, 2016

Harr v. Freeman: Brief and evidence

962 comments:

Facebook Badge

Subscribe!

Labels

Blog Archive

About Me