justice4nifong: Fix the Court: "Harr accosted Justice Breyer"

Friday, July 22, 2016

Fix the Court: "Harr accosted Justice Breyer"

721 comments:

«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 400 of 721 Newer› Newest»

kenhyderal said...: All aboard evacuated. One fireman killed fighting the post evacuation explosion. Present temperature this evening 46 degrees C ( 115) F; August 3, 2016 at 10:04 AM
JSwift said...: Sidney:

Because Abe is apparently unavailable, I provide his update below.

You have 151 days to exonerate and free Magnum.

It has been 34 days since the end of June, 102 days since April 23rd, 141 days since the Ides of March and 3,336 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred.

John D. Smith
New York, NY; August 3, 2016 at 10:40 AM
Anonymous said...: John:

I was busy with other things today and forgot to post the daily countdown. Thanks for filling in.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; August 3, 2016 at 12:43 PM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You have 150 days to exonerate and free Mangum.

It has been 35 days since the end of June, 103 days since April 23rd, 142 days since the Ides of March and 3,337 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; August 4, 2016 at 5:15 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: HEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP!
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT!!

I have been exceedingly busy working on Crystal's case recently. For a couple of days I did not have a chance to review comments. I did, however, just now eradicate the odious comment that went afoul of the kenhyderal doctrine.

For the next couple of days I will be out of town and unable to actively participate in the comments. Then, I will work on the three legal projects in which I am involved.

There should be a breakthrough in Crystal's case soon. A lot has been happening, but I have not had the opportunity to enlighten everyone about it yet. Keep patience.

Ciao for now.; August 4, 2016 at 3:27 PM
Anonymous said...: clap trap from harr:

"There should be a breakthrough in Crystal's case soon."

harr has been making that bombastic proclamation for years.

"A lot has been happening, but I have not had the opportunity to enlighten everyone about it yet."

harr has never enlightened anyone, particularly himself.; August 4, 2016 at 5:00 PM
Anonymous said...: All charges dropped in the bogus case against the innocent Baltimore police officers in the death of drug dealer Freddie Gray.Let's hope corrupt prosecutor Marilyn Mosby suffers the same fate as Mike Nifong - disbarment and bankruptcy.; August 4, 2016 at 5:30 PM
guiowen said...: So, Sidney, what's your new plan? Whom are you suing now?; August 4, 2016 at 8:48 PM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You have 149 days to exonerate and free Mangum.

It has been 36 days since the end of June, 104 days since April 23rd, 143 days since the Ides of March and 3,338 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; August 5, 2016 at 2:56 AM
A Lawyer said...: Then, I will work on the three legal projects in which I am involved.

Harr III has been dismissed. I assume you will appeal, but that will be a waste of time. Your lawsuit against DA Freeman will be dismissed as well. So what's the third: did you finally locate the right courthouse to file Mangum's MAR in?

There should be a breakthrough in Crystal's case soon.

Remotely possible, if the MAR is filed in the right courthouse. But if it was ghost-written for Mangum by Dr. Harr, it will likely meet the fate of his previous 20+ lawsuits.

Dr. Harr, what color crying towel would you like when the Freeman case gets dismissed? How about Duke blue?; August 5, 2016 at 8:04 AM
Walt said...: A Lawyer wrote: "Harr III has been dismissed. I assume you will appeal,..."

Indeed, Sid has filed his notice of appeal and the case is now docketed with the Fourth Circuit under cause number 16-1846. The court gave Sid until August 18 to file his informal brief stating the matters he wishes to raise on appeal. Sid has until August 17 to request a transcript if he wishes to designate portions of the transcript to be considered on appeal. Only matters designated in the informal brief will be considered by the 4th Cir. The defendants/appellees may file a response within seventeen days of Sid's informal brief.

"... but that will be a waste of time."

Indeed, it will. The District Court got the decision right in Harr III. As it did in Harr II and Harr I. Sid is a three time loser because he failed and refused to make a coherent argument.

"Your lawsuit against DA Freeman will be dismissed as well."

Right again. I can't wait to hear Sid's cry that all his lawsuit is about is forcing Freeman to sit down and listen to him. Unfortunately for Sid, that's not what he sought in his meritless lawsuit, so it too will be correctly dismissed.

A Duke blue crying towel for you Sid.

Walt-in-Durham; August 5, 2016 at 10:54 AM
A Lawyer said...: The court gave Sid until August 18 to file his informal brief stating the matters he wishes to raise on appeal.

Walt, could you please post that here or on your blog when it's available?

I can't wait to hear Sid's cry that all his lawsuit is about is forcing Freeman to sit down and listen to him. Unfortunately for Sid, that's not what he sought in his meritless lawsuit, so it too will be correctly dismissed.

And even if it were just about forcing Freeman to sit down with him, a court (and especially a federal court!) has no power to order that. As I've said before, "Ignoring Sidney Harr" is not a recognized cause of action.; August 5, 2016 at 12:36 PM
Anonymous said...: hey harr:

Why do you say your lawsuit was to force DA Freeman to sit down and listen to you? If that is what you believe, then why should it go to a lawsuit?

Why did you not just use the mail yo inform her of your concerns?

After all, you used the mail to inform the office of the president of Duke, and inform the office of the dean of Duke's law school that you would be attending the Breyer event. You obviously accept as fact that the president and the dean had read your letters.

You could have accepted as fact tat DA Freeman would have read your letter, just as you accepted as fact that the president of Duke and the Law School dean had read your letters.

Or are you admitting that you have no evidence that either the president of Duke or the dean of the law school ever read your letters. And there sinks your allegation that Duke conspired to discriminate against you; August 6, 2016 at 3:18 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You have 148 days to exonerate and free Mangum.

It has been 37 days since the end of June, 105 days since April 23rd, 144 days since the Ides of March and 3,339 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; August 6, 2016 at 4:54 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You have 147 days to exonerate and free Mangum.

It has been 38 days since the end of June, 106 days since April 23rd, 145 days since the Ides of March and 3,340 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; August 7, 2016 at 5:06 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You have 146 days to exonerate and free Mangum.

It has been 39 days since the end of June, 107 days since April 23rd, 146 days since the Ides of March and 3,341 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; August 8, 2016 at 4:43 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous Anonymous said...
hey harr:

Why do you say your lawsuit was to force DA Freeman to sit down and listen to you? If that is what you believe, then why should it go to a lawsuit?

Why did you not just use the mail yo inform her of your concerns?

After all, you used the mail to inform the office of the president of Duke, and inform the office of the dean of Duke's law school that you would be attending the Breyer event. You obviously accept as fact that the president and the dean had read your letters.

You could have accepted as fact tat DA Freeman would have read your letter, just as you accepted as fact that the president of Duke and the Law School dean had read your letters.

Or are you admitting that you have no evidence that either the president of Duke or the dean of the law school ever read your letters. And there sinks your allegation that Duke conspired to discriminate against you

If you had been viewing the sharlogs, you would be aware of the letters that I wrote to Freeman in January and February 2015, and April 2016. The letters are there which express my concerns. The problem is that my letters were ignored. I received no response. That is why I was forced to file a lawsuit... a last resort.

As far as Brodhead and Levi reading my letters, I am not certain that they did. Much mail is opened by their subordinates, I would assume. Whether it ever reaches them and they actually read it are unknowns to me.; August 8, 2016 at 5:32 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous A Lawyer said...
The court gave Sid until August 18 to file his informal brief stating the matters he wishes to raise on appeal.

Walt, could you please post that here or on your blog when it's available?

I can't wait to hear Sid's cry that all his lawsuit is about is forcing Freeman to sit down and listen to him. Unfortunately for Sid, that's not what he sought in his meritless lawsuit, so it too will be correctly dismissed.

And even if it were just about forcing Freeman to sit down with him, a court (and especially a federal court!) has no power to order that. As I've said before, "Ignoring Sidney Harr" is not a recognized cause of action.

Hey, A Lawyer.

I believe you are getting the cases mixed up. The informal opening brief appeal of the Duke discrimination case to the Fourth Circuit is due around August 18th. It will be filed within the week.

The Freeman case, at last check, I believe that the defendant refiled a response to my response to her response to my initial brief. It is my understanding that the next phase is for the Magistrate Judge to make a recommendation to the District Judge.; August 8, 2016 at 5:39 AM
A Lawyer said...: The problem is that my letters were ignored. I received no response. That is why I was forced to file a lawsuit... a last resort.

So your letters were ignored-- that's not a basis for a lawsuit. As I've pointed out above, "Ignoring Sidney Harr" is not a recognized cause of action.

I believe you are getting the cases mixed up.

No, I know that there are separate cases; it's just that they are all destined for the same fate-- dismissal.

The informal opening brief appeal of the Duke discrimination case to the Fourth Circuit is due around August 18th. It will be filed within the week.

I'd love to see it when it's filed. I'm especially looking forward to reading how you try to get around the statute of limitations.

The Freeman case, at last check, I believe that the defendant refiled a response to my response to her response to my initial brief.

I'd also like to read Freeman's Reply. Maybe you or Walt could post it.

It is my understanding that the next phase is for the Magistrate Judge to make a recommendation to the District Judge.

Which will be a recommendation to dismiss the case. What on earth do you hope to accomplish by filing one losing lawsuit after another?; August 8, 2016 at 7:58 AM
Anonymous said...: Folks, Sidney is not going to stop filing lawsuits. He gets great satisfaction from composing them. And he can write lawyereze with the best of them. Does not matter if what he writes has any case law behind it either. We know he lives on a limited income, but he finds a way to pay the filing fees required. Everyone has to have a hobby in life.; August 8, 2016 at 8:20 AM
kenhyderal said...: Seeking Justice, for the disadvantaged,something very much lacking in America, is a wonderful and altruistic pursuit for a retired Physician to engage in.; August 8, 2016 at 10:21 AM
Anonymous said...: more claptrap from harr:

"If you had been viewing the sharlogs, you would be aware of the letters that I wrote to Freeman in January and February 2015, and April 2016. The letters are there which express my concerns.The problem is that my letters were ignored. I received no response. That is why I was forced to file a lawsuit... a last resort."

You have no basis for any lawsuit. As the Lawyers on this blog have pointed out to you, DA Freeman is under no legal obligation to take your allegations at face value. You have made allegations of a crime. You have provided no evidence to support your allegations. I remind you, your performance in Shan Carter's felony murder of Tyrone Baker and Demetrius Greene and your performance in the Duke Lacrosse Rape Hoax cast serious doubt as to whether you are capable of recognizing criminality.

You are again showing harrian hypocrisy. You complain of DA Freeman not responding to you. You have characterized nifong as a decent honorable prosecutor who acted with integrity. Reade Seligman's family tried to present Reade Seligman's alibi evidence to nifong. nifong refused to look at it. If you ever did check standards of prosecutorial ethics, you would have learned that a DA is ethically bound to look at Alibi evidence. Yet you offer no criticism for nifong for refusing to look at Reade Seligman's evidence. You call that an example of nifong's integrity. HAH!!!

So far as you being forced to file a lawsuit, you were not. You believed you powerful enough and intimidating enough to force DA Freeman to intervene in the case of crytal's murder of Reginald Daye and have it overturned-look up what you wrote as relief sought. And you are p---ed at finding out, yet again, that you are but an insignificant delusional megalomaniac.; August 8, 2016 at 10:22 AM
Anonymous said...: more harrian claptrap.

"As far as Brodhead and Levi reading my letters, I am not certain that they did. Much mail is opened by their subordinates, I would assume. Whether it ever reaches them and they actually read it are unknowns to me."

You have just admitted your suit was frivolous and without merit.

You alleged that the authorities at Duke conspired to discriminate against you at the Breyer event. You have cited your letters as evidence the authorities knew you would be there. In harr iii, you alleged that they had a reporter from AP seek out and identify you.

How could that have happened if the authorities at Duke were not aware of yur plans to attend?

What else could it have been is not evidence of anything.

And again I say, you sued Duke based on a delusiona; belief that Duke would cave in and pay you an exorbitant settlement.

I hope people from the court system have read this post of yours, your admission you had no case.; August 8, 2016 at 10:30 AM
Anonymous said...: clap trap from hissy fit:

"Seeking Justice, for the disadvantaged,something very much lacking in America, is a wonderful and altruistic pursuit for a retired Physician to engage in."

harr is trying to pass off a double felony murderer as someone who acted in self defense, is trying to pass off a woman who falsely accused innocent men of rape(neither harr nor hissy fit have ever provided evidence crystal told the truth about being raped) as a rape victim, and trying to pass off said false accuser as having acted in self defense when she murdered her boyfriend by libeling her boyfriend. harr is not seeking justice for the disadvantaged. harr is trying to get a couple of criminals passes for their crimes.

Considering all the frivolous, non meritorious lawsuits harr has filed, that is anything but altruistic.; August 8, 2016 at 10:39 AM
A Lawyer said...: Seeking Justice, for the disadvantaged,something very much lacking in America, is a wonderful and altruistic pursuit for a retired Physician to engage in.

How does it help "the disadvantaged"-- or anyone-- to file countless frivolous lawsuits, all doomed to early dismissal?; August 8, 2016 at 12:33 PM
kenhyderal said...: The disadvantaged can't afford competent legal representation. Although they are guaranteed legal representation what they receive is neither adequate,competent or timely. In America, esoteric process trumps the quest for Justice. It's this that keeps America so over lawyered. Mistakes in process by Dr. Harr are more them made up for by his determination and dedication to obtain justice. Something that's totally lacking in the representation given to the marginalized and the indigent. It's easy for you lawyers to find fault with any superficial un-fundamental process errors he makes. I've never heard any criticism of the poor quality representation "real" Lawyers gave Crystal.; August 8, 2016 at 1:35 PM
guiowen said...: Sidney actually thinks that his lawsuits are going to help someone.
When he realize that he's not getting anywhere with them, he proceeds to blame someone -- the "powers-that-be", Duke University, Attorney Meier, etc. -- and complains that they were all in the pay of Rae Evans, that they turned out to be stronger than he had imagined. Not to worry, he will come out with a newer and stronger lawsuit.; August 8, 2016 at 2:00 PM
Anonymous said...: clap trap ftom hissy fit:

"The disadvantaged can't afford competent legal representation. Although they are guaranteed legal representation what they receive is neither adequate,competent or timely. In America, esoteric process trumps the quest for Justice. It's this that keeps America so over lawyered. Mistakes in process by Dr. Harr are more them made up for by his determination and dedication to obtain justice."

Your statement is totally irrelevant because it is obvious that harr has no interest in obtaining justice for anyone. That is glaringly evident from his efforts to get a couple of convicted murderers, one of whom falsely accused innocent men of rape, passes for their crimes.; August 8, 2016 at 2:23 PM
Anonymous said...: clap trap from hissy fit:

"It's easy for you lawyers to find fault with any superficial un-fundamental process errors [harr] makes."

Some of harr's "superficial un fundamental" mistakes: harr sues the Wake County DA over a case which was prosecuted in Durham County. He seeks to coerce the Wake County DA to have crystal's conviction overturned and to have crystal released from prison, claiming his status as a Wake County resident and that crystal was incarcerated in a State Prison situated in Wake County. He claims that the suit was not about crystal, after the relief requested in his lawsuit was that crystal's conviction be overturned and crystal released. In his suits against Duke, harr claims there was a conspiracy on the part of the Duke University authorities to discriminate against him, which conspiracy was the result of letters harr sent to President of Duke and the Dean of DUke's Law School informing them he would be attending the Stephen Breyer event Duke. Just recently harr admitted he can not establish that those authorities ever read the letters.

"I've never heard any criticism of the poor quality representation "real" Lawyers gave Crystal."

That is because crystal relieved high quality representation. This is from hissy fit who believes innocent men should be presumed guilty of raping crystal simply because hissy fit believes her allegations.; August 8, 2016 at 3:46 PM
Anonymous said...: with regard to hissy fit's comment on harr's legal ability, remember hissy fit has called harr a distinguished former physician. harr is a minimally trained, minimally experirnced medical school graduate who was never accepted into residency training, who never achieved board certification and who spent most of his post medical school career filig and losing frivolous non meritorious lawsuits. What distinguishes harr from most ,medical school graduates is his total lack of achievement as a physician.; August 8, 2016 at 4:16 PM
A Lawyer said...: In America, esoteric process trumps the quest for Justice. It's this that keeps America so over lawyered.

Show me another modern, industrialized country that does not have a complex legal system. Complex societies require detailed rules.

Mistakes in process by Dr. Harr are more them made up for by his determination and dedication to obtain justice.

"More than made up for"in what way? Certainly not in the results achieved.

It's easy for you lawyers to find fault with any superficial un-fundamental process errors he makes.

Suing a state D.A. in federal court for refusing to meet with him is not a "superficial un-fundamental process error"-- it's a sign of delusional thinking.

I've never heard any criticism of the poor quality representation "real" Lawyers gave Crystal.

You start: tell us exactly what the real lawyers did wrong, and what you think they should have done differently. In answering, keep in mind the requirement to comply with America's "esoteric practice[s]."; August 8, 2016 at 8:54 PM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You have 145 days to exonerate and free Mangum.

It has been 40 days since the end of June, 108 days since April 23rd, 147 days since the Ides of March and 3,342 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; August 9, 2016 at 1:42 AM
Anonymous said...: for A Lawyer:

At one point, hissy fit sid he would have had the defense put Dr. Roberts on the stand, treat her as a hostile witness, and then try to imprach her opinion, that Reginald Daye died from complications of the stab wound.

In other words, hissy fit said an effective defense would have been telling the jury that the drfrnse rxpert agreed with the prosecution expert.; August 9, 2016 at 2:54 AM
Anonymous said...: correction of typos:

for A Lawyer:

At one point, hissy fit said he would have had the defense put Dr. Roberts on the stand, treat her as a hostile witness, and then try to impeach her opinion, that Reginald Daye died from complications of the stab wound.

In other words, hissy fit said an effective defense would have been telling the jury that the defense expert agreed with the prosecution expert.

My apologies.; August 9, 2016 at 4:50 AM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: "Seeking Justice, for the disadvantaged,something very much lacking in America, is a wonderful and altruistic pursuit for a retired Physician to engage in."

If Sid were seeking justice, and he was in any way effective, it might be an altruistic and wonderful pursuit. As is, he seeks injustice and he is grossly ineffective.

Walt-in-Durham; August 9, 2016 at 5:56 AM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: "The disadvantaged can't afford competent legal representation."

That is in the nature of being disadvantaged. No matter where you are from. Which does not mean that the disadvantaged don't get competent legal representation in criminal courts, they do.

"Although they are guaranteed legal representation what they receive is neither adequate,competent or timely."

Time and time again, Kenhyderal has made this claim without any evidence to support it. Worse, when confronted with evidence to the contrary, see State v. Sandy and Supris, https://appellate.nccourts.org/opinions/?c=2&pdf=33952

"In America, esoteric process trumps the quest for Justice. It's this that keeps America so over lawyered."

No, it does not. As A Lawyer correctly observed complicated societies have complicated legal processes. Those are in place to protect fairness.

"Mistakes in process by Dr. Harr are more them made up for by his determination and dedication to obtain justice."

Sid has made some rather glaring mistakes in process, such as filing a MAR in federal court when no such action exists there. However, he could do some simple reading and comprehending which would have solved that problem.

"Something that's totally lacking in the representation given to the marginalized and the indigent."

He who asserts, must prove.

"It's easy for you lawyers to find fault with any superficial un-fundamental process errors he makes."

Except Sid's errors, other than foolishly attempting to file a MAR in federal court have not been superficial process errors. Instead he has filed suit after suit that lacks any basis in law. He has made unfounded charges of bias against Magistrates and judges without providing any evidence. Those are not superficial process errors.

"I've never heard any criticism of the poor quality representation "real" Lawyers gave Crystal."

That's because she got high quality representation. Your criticisms of the lawyers who represented Crystal have been based on your often stated position that you are a friend of Crystal's and don't need any proof of what she says. You have stated, many times, that if she says it, you believe it. However, our system and all systems of justice require evidence. You have failed to offer any beyond your blind trust in what she says. For those of us interested in justice, we have looked at the evidence and reached a contrary conclusion.

Walt-in-Durham; August 9, 2016 at 6:10 AM
kenhyderal said...: Walt said: "That's because she got high quality representation. Your criticisms of the lawyers who represented Crystal have been based on your often stated position that you are a friend of Crystal's and don't need any proof of what she says. You have stated, many times, that if she says it, you believe it. However, our system and all systems of justice require evidence. You have failed to offer any beyond your blind trust in what she says. For those of us interested in justice, we have looked at the evidence and reached a contrary conclusion"................................No you are wrong Walt. The Lawyers assigned Crystal all barely gave her the time of day. There is no doubt that the best representation is given by advocates who believe in the innocence of their clients. Crystal did not have that advantage. Their representations showed they prejudicially believed her to be probably guilty so, why extend the effort. After all she is "The Crystal Mangum". Let's get a plea deal, let's get her adjudged unfit to stand trial, let's keep her off the stand and for God's sake let's not take on Duke Hospital, for this woman. Had any sincere effort been expended it could have easily been shown Daye was a hopeless, chronic alcoholic prone to violence. No counter was given to the Prosecution witnesses to the contrary and believe me there are witnesses out there who could. It could of easily been shown that Daye's statement given to the Police was filled with irreconcilable inconsistencies. It could have easily been shown that the repaired stab wound played no part in Daye's death, whatsoever, save that he went to Hospital for that reason. A jury could have easily been convinced that Daye was not murdered but died of a accidental medical error. Supporting Meier's pitiful performance is tantamount to defending the indefensible.; August 9, 2016 at 9:44 AM
Anonymous said...: clap trap from hissy fit:

".No you are wrong Walt."

No he isn't.

"The Lawyers assigned Crystal all barely gave her the time of day. There is no doubt that the best representation is given by advocates who believe in the innocence of their clients. Crystal did not have that advantage."

Crystal's disadvantage is that she was nt a credible witness to her own innocence.

"Their representations showed they prejudicially believed her to be probably guilty so, why extend the effort."

Another uncorroborated allegation from hissy fit, the same hissy fit who believes certain Caucasian men are guilty of raping crystal, even though he can provide no evidence the alleged rape ever happened.

"After all she is "The Crystal Mangum". Let's get a plea deal, let's get her adjudged unfit to stand trial, let's keep her off the stand and for God's sake let's not take on Duke Hospital, for this woman."

Another hissy fit of presuming facts not in evidence.

"Had any sincere effort been expended it could have easily been shown Daye was a hopeless, chronic alcoholic prone to violence."

The information Officer Bond obtained indicated tat Reginald Daye was not "a hopeless, chronic alcoholic prone to violence."

"No counter was given to the Prosecution witnesses to the contrary and believe me there are witnesses out there who could. It could of easily been shown that Daye's statement given to the Police was filled with irreconcilable inconsistencies."

Identify who those witnesses were.

"It could have easily been shown that the repaired stab wound played no part in Daye's death, whatsoever, save that he went to Hospital for that reason."

Here hissy fit shows he is incredibly stupid. When crystal stabbed Reginald Daye, she lacerated hiscolon, which set him up for major complications, one of which being a inyta abdominal infection, for which Reginald Daye was being worked up when he aspirated. What can one expect from someone who has described harr as a aistinguished former physician.

"A jury could have easily been convinced that Daye was not murdered but died of a accidental medical error. Supporting Meier's pitiful performance is tantamount to defending the indefensible."

Another manifestation of hissy fit's incredible stupidity. The defense's own expert agreed with Dr. Nichols' opinion. No other expert disagreed with it. harr, for reasons I have enumerated, does not qualify as an expert. Again, hissy fit's defense strategy would have been for the defense to put their expert on the stand and then announce to the jury that their expert agreed with the prosecution's expert.; August 9, 2016 at 10:06 AM
Anonymous said...: excerpt ftom hissy fit's clap trap:

"A jury could have easily been convinced that Daye was not murdered but died of a accidental medical error. Supporting Meier's pitiful performance is tantamount to defending the indefensible."

hissy fit once claimed that the operating surgeon would have testified that Reginald Daye's death was not due to the stab wound.

hissy fit once claimed he hd actually talked to the operating surgeon.

Medical ethics and Privacy regulations would precluded the operatinfg surgeon from giving hissy fit any information which would have allowed hissy fit to draw that conclusion.

hissy fit is just a BS artist, and not a very effective one.; August 9, 2016 at 10:22 AM
Anonymous said...: From hissy fit:

"No counter was given to the Prosecution witnesses to the contrary and believe me there are witnesses out there who could. It could of easily been shown that Daye's statement given to the Police was filled with irreconcilable inconsistencies."

From me:

Identify who those witnesses were.

Better yet, you and harr hire an attorney to identify those witnesses and then have them testify under oath.

My guess is, there are no such witnesses and no lawyer would take your case.; August 9, 2016 at 10:25 AM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: "No you are wrong Walt. The Lawyers assigned Crystal all barely gave her the time of day."

Lawyers are not paid to hold their clients hands. Rather, they are paid to give them advice, counsel and to advocate for them. Her lawyers did that, and did it zealously within the bounds of the law.

"There is no doubt that the best representation is given by advocates who believe in the innocence of their clients."

That is sheer folly unsupported by evidence or even citation. In fact, it is a poor advocate who ignores the facts and simply tells the client what she wants to hear.

"Crystal did not have that advantage."

Crystal squandered the advantages she had when she confided in Sid that her own expert agreed with the medical examiner."

"Their representations showed they prejudicially believed her to be probably guilty so, why extend the effort. After all she is "The Crystal Mangum"."

Again you are assuming facts not in evidence. Indeed there is no evidence that any lawyer who worked on her case did that at all.

"Let's get a plea deal,..."

All good criminal defense lawyers look at plea offers, especially when their independent expert agrees with the state's.

"... let's get her adjudged unfit to stand trial,..."

Given Crystal's history with alcohol and drugs as well as her conduct while being questioned, that seems quite reasonable.

"... let's keep her off the stand..."

Given her past history of changing stories when questioned by even the friendliest of questioners, that seemed reasonable. In fact, Crystal testified and did more damage to her case than even the most pessimistic person could have anticipated.

... and for God's sake let's not take on Duke Hospital, for this woman."

Again, where's the evidence? Crystal's own expert identified the problems in the medical examiners findings as well as the course of treatment at Duke. But, her conclusions were that despite those problems, she agreed with the M.E.'s finding that Daye died as a result of the stab wound inflicted by Crystal. To "take on Duke Hospital" her lawyers needed some proof they had done something. She had none. Worse for her, her expert didn't provide any reasons.

"Had any sincere effort been expended it could have easily been shown Daye was a hopeless, chronic alcoholic prone to violence."

Which is of course not relevant to the question of Crystal's guilt.

More to follow in another post.

Walt-in-Durham; August 9, 2016 at 10:34 AM
Walt said...: Kenyhderal wrote: "No counter was given to the Prosecution witnesses to the contrary and believe me there are witnesses out there who could."

He who asserts, must prove. You have never offered any proof, you are just full of hot air.

"It could of easily been shown that Daye's statement given to the Police was filled with irreconcilable inconsistencies."

His statement was not. Nor, can you provide any reliable witness that says so.

"It could have easily been shown that the repaired stab wound played no part in Daye's death, whatsoever, save that he went to Hospital for that reason."

That is not the law, and you know it.

"A jury could have easily been convinced that Daye was not murdered but died of a accidental medical error."

Not without evidence. There is no evidence to support your wild suppositions. What the defense did have was an independent medical examiner who supported the state's theory of the case.

"Supporting Meier's pitiful performance is tantamount to defending the indefensible."

Wrong again. Meier did as good a job as can be done. He very effectively highlighted a possible alternative theory of death using Dr. Nichols and the, not so confidential, report given him by Dr. Roberts. He got the sole cause jury instruction issued. He argued an intervening cause as best he could under the circumstances that his own expert wouldn't back that up with a medical opinion.

Your position always comes down to you believe Crystal because, you allege, she is your friend. That is a distinct bias on your part. You allow your alleged friendship to bias your judgment. That renders your already weak advocacy impotent. You would do much better if you checked your bias at the door and look at the facts. If you did, you would, as I, reach the conclusion that the real wrong done to Crystal was the prior bad acts evidence that Judge Ridgeway allowed in. Instead, you reject that actual problem in favor of your fantasies.

Walt-in-Durham; August 9, 2016 at 10:35 AM
guiowen said...: Actually, it's not clear to me that Kenhyderal is Crystal's friend. He has done nothing to help her. Why doesn't he come to North Carolina and, together with Sidney, try to get a lawyer for Crystal?; August 9, 2016 at 11:08 AM
kenhyderal said...: Walt said: You would do much better if you checked your bias at the door and look at the facts. If you did, you would, as I, reach the conclusion that the real wrong done to Crystal was the prior bad acts evidence that Judge Ridgeway allowed in. Instead, you reject that actual problem in favor of your fantasies...................So, Walt, why was that grounds for appeal unsuccessful? You can't even consider that Crystal acted in self defense. You can even consider that the wound she inflicted on this madman was non-fatal. You cant even consider that she took the stand and told the basic truth under oath. You have to fall back on legal artifice. Retain your bias of her guilt but claim, maybe, the jury was prejudiced by hearing of previous so called bad acts. Thanks to Meier that Jury was deprived of crucial facts. Defend his incompetence. Label Crystal a mentally disturbed alcoholic drug addicted prostitute. Label Reginald Daye as a kind, lovable and sober victim of a homicidal Crystal. Walt you are living in an alternate universe and desperately trying to defend the broken American Justice System which all, across the political spectrum, agree, except for you who are beneficiaries of it, that it must be reformed. You should form your opinion about Crystal from people who actually know her. You would be surprised at how different a person from what you have read and heard of her from those who know her not.; August 9, 2016 at 4:48 PM
Anonymous said...: clap trap from hissy fit:

"So, Walt, why was that grounds for appeal unsuccessful? You can't even consider that Crystal acted in self defense."

crystal, herself, by her performance on the stand, proved shr did not act in self defense

"You can even consider that the wound she inflicted on this madman was non-fatal."

Reginald Daye was not a madman. And the wound obviously caused his death. That you are too stupid and too ignorant to recognize that does not raise doubt. Again, harr's opinion is not the opinion of a medical expert.

"You cant even consider that she took the stand and told the basic truth under oath."

She did not tell the truth. That was the verdict of the jury.

"You have to fall back on legal artifice. Retain your bias of her guilt but claim, maybe, the jury was prejudiced by hearing of previous so called bad acts."

crystal's bad acts were not "so called". crystal falsely accused innocent men of raping her. She was a convicted criminal before she did that. She was convicted of other crimes after that. She was not acquted of arson. A mistrial was declared after the jury failed to reach a verdict.

"Thanks to Meier that Jury was deprived of crucial facts."

What crucial facts. That you believe something does not render it factual. You expressed the belief that nifong did not charge the lacrosse defendants with rape. It is a matter of factual public record that he did.

"Defend his incompetence."

"Meier displayed no incompetence for anyone to defend.

"Label Crystal a mentally disturbed alcoholic drug addicted prostitute."

There is evidence she was.

"Label Reginald Daye as a kind, lovable and sober victim of a homicidal Crystal."

There is also evidence this actually was the case.

"Walt you are living in an alternate universe and desperately trying to defend the broken American Justice System which all, across the political spectrum, agree, except for you who are beneficiaries of it, that it must be reformed. You should form your opinion about Crystal from people who actually know her. You would be surprised at how different a person from what you have read and heard of her from those who know her not."

hissy fit, these last sentences show only you are completely out of touch with reality. You are in denial of what crystal is and has been.

Upon what actual evidence did you form your opinion that certain Caucasian men raped crystal?; August 9, 2016 at 6:24 PM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You have 144 days to exonerate and free Mangum.

It has been 41 days since the end of June, 109 days since April 23rd, 148 days since the Ides of March and 3,343 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; August 10, 2016 at 3:11 AM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: "So, Walt, why was that grounds for appeal unsuccessful?"

The state of the law is prior bad acts are admissable under certain circumstances. Crystal needed to argue to change the law. She did not. That said, the prior bad acts were the best chance to gain a reversal. However, Crystal very unwisely withdrew that appeal and proceeded under the absolutely preposterous appeal that Sid wrote.

"You can't even consider that Crystal acted in self defense."

Actually, I did. Unfortunately for her, the evidence does not support that theory.

"You can even consider that the wound she inflicted on this madman was non-fatal."

But, she did inflict the wound. Under the law, she is responsible for the consequences, unless there is an intervening cause. We don't want criminals to walk free simply because they got lucky with the health care system.

"You cant even consider that she took the stand and told the basic truth under oath."

Actually, I watched her testify. I have written that one portion of her testimony struck me as truthful. I have written that many times. I have always believed Crystal when it came to the checks issue. You are always unfair in your characterization of my observations. What I did not believe was the majority of Crystal's testimony. It contradicted the physical evidence and the circumstantial evidence. Further, she was contradicted on too many facts during cross examination for me to believe much of what she said.

"You have to fall back on legal artifice."

No, I don't. The substantive law is not an artifice. It is how we organize ourselves. Further, those laws are applied equally to all. You are the one who wants to ignore the law and not apply it to Crystal but to all others. That is the most rancid of discrimination.

"Retain your bias of her guilt but claim, maybe, the jury was prejudiced by hearing of previous so called bad acts."

The prior bad acts evidence is the only thing I think should have been done differently in this case, by the state. Did that evidence unfairly prejudice the jury? Probably not. Crystal got on the stand and did herself in. So the prior bad acts are probably harmless error.

"Thanks to Meier that Jury was deprived of crucial facts."

What facts? Meier highlighted the inconsistencies in the medical reports from the autopsy. He had no expert witness to contradict the Medical Examiner, so he couldn't just speculate. You, of course, reject the whole notion of fairness in a trial. You reject the idea that the jury should hear the facts from witnesses and by observing exhibits. Again, it is you who seeks injustice.

"Defend his incompetence."

There was no incompetence to defend.

"Label Crystal a mentally disturbed alcoholic drug addicted prostitute."

That's your characterization, not mine.

"Label Reginald Daye as a kind, lovable and sober victim of a homicidal Crystal."

Again, those are your characterizations, not mine.

"Walt you are living in an alternate universe and desperately trying to defend the broken American Justice System which all, across the political spectrum, agree, except for you who are beneficiaries of it, that it must be reformed."

That has never been my position, and you know it. But, you are content to misrepresent all those who disagree with you.

"You should form your opinion about Crystal from people who actually know her. You would be surprised at how different a person from what you have read and heard of her from those who know her not."

I have no opinion about Crystal. I do have an opinion about her guilt. She is guilty of manslaughter. The evidence is overwhelming on that point.

Walt-in-Durham; August 10, 2016 at 9:54 AM
kenhyderal said...: Walt said : " She is guilty of manslaughter. The evidence is overwhelming on that point". But, she was found guilty of murder and sentenced accordingly.; August 10, 2016 at 1:31 PM
kenhyderal said...: @ Walt 9:54 AM. Walt, don't be so disingenuous. Stop your sanctimonious pretense. A one page google search with the terms Justice4nifong/Walt-in-Durham/Crystal/drugs brought up the following post by you: May 7 2014................ I said, " that they have been fed a completely distorted picture of Crystal Mangum, a person that I know and that they don't" You replied.
Unfortunately, it is Kenhyderal who wants to feed the completely distorted picture. Let's review the facts. Crystal was a prostitute. She lied multiple times in an effort to frame three innocent men. She was more than willing to change her story every time the state or the defense found out her previous story was contradicted by the facts.
I said, "It's a characterization with no basis in reality, whatsoever." your replied
"Unsure which characterization you are writing about. But, Crystal's conduct, well documented and some of it admitted to by Crystal is bad enough. She stole a cab. She left her childredn for days at a time to engage in prostitution, drinking and drugs. She resorts to violence to solve her percieved problems. Those are the facts that characterize her"........ Crystal is my friend. I don't forget or forgive this kind of vicious libel. My characterization of Crystal, oft repeated, is that she is a good, kind and intelligent person of faith, from humble circumstances who has struggled against mighty odds to better herself and give a better life to her children. This has been thwarted by high and mighty people like you, who having bought into the meta-narrative disseminated by the Duke Lacrosse Defense in order to discredit the accusations she made. You perpetuate the abuse her and her children have had to endure. As a Professional man with an influential voice in Society you should be more empathetic to the marginalized; August 10, 2016 at 9:33 PM
guiowen said...: Kenny,
Nobody (except maybe Sidney) believes your story.; August 10, 2016 at 9:41 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny:

You can be Mangum's friend and still acknowledge the terrible mistakes and wrongs she has committed in her life. You can characterize Mangum as "a good, kind and intelligent person of faith" without lying about her past, or accusing innocent people of committing a rape that did not happen. Good people do bad things all the time.

However, lying about Mangum's past, lying about her victims and the people who support her victims is not an effective or persuasive strategy. It renders you and Sid ineffective as advocates and makes you look silly.

Carry on.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; August 11, 2016 at 4:18 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You have 143 days to exonerate and free Mangum.

It has been 42 days since the end of June, 110 days since April 23rd, 149 days since the Ides of March and 3,344 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; August 11, 2016 at 4:18 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny still just whines and whines and whines.

You are just a big baby. You've done nothing to help Crystal, just whine and type away on your keyboard and encourage Harr in his pathetic attempts at feeding his own ego.

Wah wah wah.; August 11, 2016 at 5:29 AM
Anonymous said...: more clap trap from hissy fit:

"[crystal] is a good, kind and intelligent person of faith, from humble circumstances who has struggled against mighty odds to better herself and give a better life to her children. This has been thwarted by high and mighty people like you, who having bought into the meta-narrative disseminated by the Duke Lacrosse Defense in order to discredit the accusations she made.'

There was no meta narrative. There was no evidence that crystal ever told the truth-you, yourself, have admitted you can provide no evidence that crysral told the truth. What discredited crystal was the otal lack of evidence that the rape ever happened.

Bottom line is crstall discredited herself; August 11, 2016 at 7:16 AM
Anonymous said...: clap trap from hissy fit:

"Crystal is my friend. I don't forget or forgive this kind of vicious libel."

What libel?

The story of crystal stealing a cab comes from police recorde compiled before crystal became infamously notorious for falsely accusing Lacrosse team members of raping her.

An example of libel: describing Reginald Daye as a violent alcoholic.

A further example of libel: writing that some Caucasian men were guilty of raping crystal when there is zero evidence that crystal told the truth when she accused those Caucasian men of raping her. You, yourself, have admitted you can providr no evidence crystal ever told the truth.; August 11, 2016 at 7:59 AM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal, wrote: "As a Professional man with an influential voice in Society you should be more empathetic to the marginalized"

As far as using my voice, I do so when I think the cause of justice requires it. Thus, I oppose the use of prior bad acts evidence. Further, I support the lawyers providing indigent legal services. You don't. That tells me which side of the justice scale you are on.

What I don't do is blindly support those who lie, cheat, and kill people.

Walt-in-Durham; August 11, 2016 at 8:19 AM
Anonymous said...: Careful, Walt,
kenny will start tossing popcorn at you from a range of 500 yards. And he won't turn his other cheek while doing it.; August 11, 2016 at 8:51 AM
kenhyderal said...: Walt said: " I support the lawyers providing indigent legal services"........ How so? In North Carolina, is providing legal services to Court designated indigent clients voluntary or compulsory? As a person of modest means how can I support those Court appointed attorneys in providing quality representation to an indigent accused like Crystal as you claim you do? Do you yourself provide legal service to the indigent?; August 11, 2016 at 10:04 AM
Anonymous said...: kenny:

There has never been an issue with Mangum getting quality legal representation; she's had several competent attorneys assigned to represent her at various points during her prosecution. Mangum and Sid have repeatedly eschewed quality legal representation, preferring instead to engage in flights of fancy bereft of evidence and not grounded in the law. No competent attorney will pursue a case or defense that has no good faith basis in the law and is unsupported by the facts, or permit a non-client, non-attorney to manage or direct the case.

Your efforts would have been much better spent persuading Mangum to accept the competent legal assistance that was repeatedly made available to her at every stage of the case thru appeal, and prevailing on Sid to stand down and not interfere with her defense.

As Walt has repeatedly said, with friends like you and Sid, Mangum needs no enemies.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; August 11, 2016 at 12:30 PM
kenhyderal said...: Abe: Let's look at the record. With Crystal in Gaol for over 500 days her appointed Attorneys Vann and Shella, each, only visiting her, for a few minutes a few times, to discuss her case. Both Lawyers showed little or no interest or commitment to her. Crystal asked for a new Attorney because of Vann's obvious inaction and his cavalier lack of concern for her plight, as someone wrongly accused and facing an impossible bail. Only after pressure from Dr.Harr did he agree to have the autopsy reviewed but he had little stomach, as did the appointee Dr. Roberts, for taking on Duke Hospital. Shella and Holmes both quit despite Crystal's strong objections. Calling what she received quality representation is specious. There was no "dream team" there for her. I'm pretty certain, in America, as unethical as this situation is, for poor indigent accused, this is the norm. As well, I'm almost certain Walt's defence of Meier's performance is disingenuous. Perhaps his preformed opinion of Crystal clouds his judgement and wont allow him to be objective. His defence of Meier's performance is a desperate attempt to defend the indefensible. Meier didn't want Crystal on the stand because firstly he didn't believe his client and he knew an experienced prosecutor can easily confuse a nervous witness and mix her up. Once Coggins-Franks did this to Crystal she then went on to label her a liar in front of the jury. Meier allowed Coggins-Franks to viciously badger Crystal without any objections and without any countering.; August 11, 2016 at 3:14 PM
Anonymous said...: claptrap from hissy fit:

"Abe: Let's look at the record. With Crystal in Gaol for over 500 days her appointed Attorneys Vann and Shella, each, only visiting her, for a few minutes a few times, to discuss her case. Both Lawyers showed little or no interest or commitment to her. Crystal asked for a new Attorney because of Vann's obvious inaction and his cavalier lack of concern for her plight, as someone wrongly accused and facing an impossible bail. Only after pressure from Dr.Harr did he agree to have the autopsy reviewed but he had little stomach, as did the appointee Dr. Roberts, for taking on Duke Hospital. Shella and Holmes both quit despite Crystal's strong objections. Calling what she received quality representation is specious."

o it isn't. Crystal sabotaged her attorneys by involving harr. Chris Shellaquit because crystal passed on confidential material to harr.

"There was no "dream team" there for her. I'm pretty certain, in America, as unethical as this situation is, for poor indigent accused, this is the norm. As well, I'm almost certain Walt's defence of Meier's performance is disingenuous. Perhaps his preformed opinion of Crystal clouds his judgement and wont allow him to be objective."

You again refer to the so called metanarrative about crystal. There was no such metanarrative. What discredited crystal is thart no rape happened, that crystal lied about being raped.

"xHis defence of Meier's performance is a desperate attempt to defend the indefensible."
NBo it wasn't. It was right on the mark.

"Meier didn't want Crystal on the stand because firstly he didn't believe his client and he knew an experienced prosecutor can easily confuse a nervous witness and mix her up. "

Not at all consistent with harr's claim that crystal would have madea solid witness.

"Once Coggins-Franks did this to Crystal she then went on to label her a liar in front of the jury."

No, crystal's performance convinced the jury she was not credible.

"Meier allowed Coggins-Franks to viciously badger Crystal without any objections and without any countering."

Because he had nothing with which to counter crystal's performance,

Meanwhile, you would have put DDr. Roberts on the stand to impeach her opinion,which agreed, thereby announcing to the jury that the defense's expert witness agreed with the prosecution's expert witness. That wold have done wonders to establish crystal's non credibility.; August 11, 2016 at 3:31 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: HEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP!
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT!

Am having trouble copying and pasting, so I will try responding to comments later.

Today I did file a response in the Harr v. Freeman case.

And, last Tuesday I filed the appeal brief with the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Been busy, and will be engaged in traveling for the next week. Will try to work on draft of next sharlog while I am gone.; August 11, 2016 at 5:58 PM
A Lawyer said...: Today I did file a response in the Harr v. Freeman case.

And, last Tuesday I filed the appeal brief with the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Dr. Harr,
Would you be good enough to post those documents here?
Thanks.; August 11, 2016 at 8:06 PM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You have 142 days to exonerate and free Mangum.

It has been 43 days since the end of June, 111 days since April 23rd, 150 days since the Ides of March and 3,345 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; August 12, 2016 at 3:43 AM
Anonymous said...: No, Dr. Harr won't post them. We have to rely on Walt for that. Sid knows his filings are a joke, so he hides them.; August 12, 2016 at 8:27 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You have 141 days to exonerate and free Mangum.

It has been 44 days since the end of June, 112 days since April 23rd, 151 days since the Ides of March and 3,346 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; August 13, 2016 at 9:10 AM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: "Walt said: " I support the lawyers providing indigent legal services"........ How so?"

The company I work for has a policy of "give five." That is we give five percent of our income to worthy causes, matched by our employer. In my case, because of North Carolina's prohibition on the corporate practice of law, my company provides legal research support services to public defenders offices across the state. Personally, I do research and writing for public defenders.

"In North Carolina, is providing legal services to Court designated indigent clients voluntary or compulsory?"

North Carolina provides public defenders on the public payroll. Pay is equal to that of Assistant District Attorneys. Which you would know if you bothered to RTFF. For conflicts of interest cases, members of the bar volunteer to provide legal services to the indigent on a contract basis. North Carolina courts have always maintained they have the authority to compel members of the bar to represent the indigent in the event of a public funding shortfall. To the best of my knowledge, we have never had to resort to that on a state wide basis.

"As a person of modest means how can I support those Court appointed attorneys in providing quality representation to an indigent accused like Crystal as you claim you do?"

Hmmm, an ex-pat living in the middle east, I doubt the modesty of your means. Or, perhaps, I doubt your claims to being an ex-pat. However, if you are what you claim, the first thing you could do to support lawyers providing services to the indigent is stop making unfounded accusations about them.

"Do you yourself provide legal service to the indigent?"

See above. Although, I began my legal career in a public defender's office.

Walt-in-Durham; August 13, 2016 at 11:25 AM
Walt said...: ALLCON: Here is a link to my blog where you can find a link to Sid's latest frivolous and meritless brief. https://walt-in-durham.blogspot.com/2016/06/harr-iii-motions-and-order.html?showComment=1471113412476#c3880157376141264852. You can read about it in the comments section of the posting.

Walt-in-Durham; August 13, 2016 at 11:38 AM
Walt said...: Here's a link to Sid's meritless brief that he just filed in the Freeman case: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B7z91VniTzKQQ3piN0x1MTI4S0U

Sid has always been unleashed from reality, but this one is really unreal. Hard to comment on it but let's say it's more of a rehash of complaints from Harr I, II and III than it is anything serious or worthy of consideration.

Walt-in-Durham; August 13, 2016 at 11:57 AM
kenhyderal said...: Walt: Thanks for posting Dr. Harr's brief. Tell us what specifically do you find about it that is meritless. I'm sure it is "hard" for you comment negatively on it's substance but, no doubt, you can find some technicality that will allow you to dismiss this effort. As for my financial situation I'll disclose that just as soon as Donald Trump does; even though I'm not one of the "poorly educated" he loves.; August 13, 2016 at 1:35 PM
Anonymous said...: This one goes to an old filing.; August 13, 2016 at 1:48 PM
Anonymous said...: hey hissy fit:

How about you show why harr's case has merit.; August 13, 2016 at 2:04 PM
Anonymous said...: hissy fit, your last post is like a response you once made to a poster's challenge, that you show proof there were mystery rapists: you said the poster should prove there weren't. That was one of your typical dodges, and an admission you had no proof of mystery rapists.; August 13, 2016 at 2:08 PM
Anonymous said...: clap trap from hissy fit:

"As for my financial situation I'll disclose that just as soon as Donald Trump does; even though I'm not one of the "poorly educated" he loves."

You have proven on many occasions you are anything but well educated; August 13, 2016 at 2:10 PM
Anonymous said...: hey hissy fit:

In view of your status of not at all well educated, I'll pass on some information. No one has to prove harr's lawsuit is without merit. harr has to prove his suit has merit.; August 13, 2016 at 2:17 PM
A Lawyer said...: Walt: Thanks for posting Dr. Harr's brief.

Yes, Walt, thank you.

Tell us what specifically do you find about it that is meritless. I'm sure it is "hard" for you comment negatively on it's substance but, no doubt, you can find some technicality that will allow you to dismiss this effort.

The problems with Dr. Harr's brief, and with his lawsuit, have nothing to do with technicalities. He simply has no case. He is suing DA Freeman for "refusing to engage him" (Brief at p. 3). There is no law requiring a district attorney to engage with him; as I have stated above, "ignoring Sidney Harr" is not a cause of action.; August 13, 2016 at 3:11 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny asks: "Tell us what specifically do you find about it [Dr. Harr's brief] that is meritless."

MLK answers: "Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity"; August 13, 2016 at 3:31 PM
Anonymous said...: Sid (or Walt now that it's been filed);

Any chance at posting Crystal's MAR?; August 13, 2016 at 4:18 PM
Walt said...: A Lawyer wrote: "The problems with Dr. Harr's brief, and with his lawsuit, have nothing to do with technicalities. He simply has no case. He is suing DA Freeman for "refusing to engage him" (Brief at p. 3). There is no law requiring a district attorney to engage with him; as I have stated above, "ignoring Sidney Harr" is not a cause of action."

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

Walt-in-Durham; August 13, 2016 at 7:58 PM
kenhyderal said...: For a DA to refuse to accept the report of a crime for investigation seems to me a dereliction of duty. For an Agent of the Justice System to ignore a reported crime simply because the informant is a critic of how Justice is administered seems to me unethical. Nicholls, at very least gave demonstrably false information to the Court. That needs to be investigated to determine if it rose to the level of perjury. All the justice in the world flies out the window if even one witness gives perjured testimony. Ideally, any incident of perjury in a trial should vacate the decision. Nicholl's wrong testimony suggested a much more aggressive,aggravated and deliberate attack by Crystal and lessened the impression that it was self-defensive. Let's be honest we all know that in North Carolina taking the side of Crystal Mangum and former DA Mike Nifong is going to insure you will not receive fair and sympathetic treatment by the Justice System especially where the sacred icon Duke University is involved. I believe DA Freeman, Dr. Nicholls and Dr. Roberts all know that It subconsciously affects the way they do their jobs.; August 13, 2016 at 9:14 PM
Desconocido said...: Kenhyderal,
Sera posible que dejes de quejarte tanto? No entiendes que estamos casados de todas tus locuras?; August 13, 2016 at 9:40 PM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You have 140 days to exonerate and free Mangum.

It has been 45 days since the end of June, 113 days since April 23rd, 152 days since the Ides of March and 3,347 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; August 14, 2016 at 8:08 AM
Anonymous said...: clap trap from hissy fit:

"For a DA to refuse to accept the report of a crime for investigation seems to me a dereliction of duty."

Presumes that it actually is a report of a crime from a reliable witness. harr has documented many times he is not a reliable witness.

"For an Agent of the Justice System to ignore a reported crime simply because the informant is a critic of how Justice is administered seems to me unethical."

You, who claims nifong was acting for justice for crystal when he knew he had no evidence crystal was raped, says something seems unethical to you. You are totally ignorant of what ethical means.

The problem is not that harr is a critic of the justice system. The problem is that harr is an unreliable presenter of uncorroborated allegations which harr, who has no legal expertise. expects to be accepted at face value just because harr has made them.

"Nicholls, at very least gave demonstrably false information to the Court. That needs to be investigated to determine if it rose to the level of perjury. All the justice in the world flies out the window if even one witness gives perjured testimony."

harr has not presented evidence that Dr. Nichols committed perjury. If I am corret, intent to deveive the court is an element of perjury. harr claims Dr. Nichols was covering up malpractice on he part of Duke. harr is incapable of determining what is or is not malpractice.

"Ideally, any incident of perjury in a trial should vacate the decision."

There is no evidence of perjury. The opinion of harr does not establish there was.

"Nicholl's wrong testimony suggested a much more aggressive,aggravated and deliberate attack by Crystal and lessened the impression that it was self-defensive."

No it didn't. crystal herself undermined her claim of self defense via her own testimony.

"Let's be honest we all know that in North Carolina taking the side of Crystal Mangum and former DA Mike Nifong is going to insure you will not receive fair and sympathetic treatment by the Justice System especially where the sacred icon Duke University is involved."

A metanarrative concocted by hissy fit, who tries to pass off his ignorance as honesty. What was determined in the Duke Rape Hoax, by the evidence generated, was that there was no rape and that nifong knowingly prosecuted three innocent men for a crime he knew never happened. hissy fit, himself, has admitted he can produce no evidence crystal told the truth about being raped.

"I believe DA Freeman, Dr. Nicholls and Dr. Roberts all know that It subconsciously affects the way they do their jobs."

Here, again, hissy fit makes allegations based on non verifiable claims, showing again he is not oe of te world's highly educated individuals.; August 14, 2016 at 11:07 AM
A Lawyer said...: For a DA to refuse to accept the report of a crime for investigation seems to me a dereliction of duty. For an Agent of the Justice System to ignore a reported crime simply because the informant is a critic of how Justice is administered seems to me unethical.

If she is unethical or guilty of dereliction of duty, there are remedies available under the law. Sidney Harr suing her in federal court is not one of them.; August 14, 2016 at 2:51 PM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You have 139 days to exonerate and free Mangum.

It has been 46 days since the end of June, 114 days since April 23rd, 153 days since the Ides of March and 3,348 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; August 15, 2016 at 3:10 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

If you reported the "crime" of perjury of Dr. Nichols in Durham to the prosecutor in Dubai would they have to respond? You seem o think they would, so why don't you?

It's been explained repeatedly why Freeman has no obligation, and despite Sid's claims about Mangum residing in Wake now - that's also been explained repeatedly on this blog. The fact he refuses to listen and learn is his problem. Every one of these efforts (Harr III, Freeman Lawsuit, and MAR) will fail.

You have yet to explain why the statute of limitations should not apply to Sid.; August 15, 2016 at 4:40 AM
A Lawyer said...: Walt,
The link on your blog to Harr's 4th Circuit Brief in Harr III actually goes to an old district court filing. Can you please fix that link or post a better one?
Thanks.; August 15, 2016 at 10:22 AM
Anonymous said...: I just did another reading to harr's reply to DA Freeman's motion to dismiss. Harr refers to the duty of a DA to investigate claims of innocence.

Again, harr describes nifong as a decent honorable minister of justice who acted with integrity. nifong's way of investigating claims of innocence was to refuse to hear alibi evidence, to conceal evidence establishing the innocence of the people he wanted toprosecute, and to manufacture, via the improper lineup procedures, evidence against those he wanted to prosecute.

Can we say harr the gross, obscene hypocrite, boys and girls?; August 15, 2016 at 3:19 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "nifong's way of investigating claims of innocence was to refuse to hear alibi evidence, to conceal evidence establishing the innocence of the people he wanted toprosecute, and to manufacture, via the improper lineup procedures, evidence against those he wanted to prosecute"....................... Your characterization of Former DA Nifong's involvement does not accurately describe how he proceeded prior to his withdrawal. For a more objective account see the March Vanity Fair story on this subject by William Cohan; August 15, 2016 at 8:57 PM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You have 138 days to exonerate and free Mangum.

It has been 47 days since the end of June, 115 days since April 23rd, 154 days since the Ides of March and 3,349 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; August 16, 2016 at 2:24 AM
Anonymous said...: kenny:

Cohan's article in Vanity Fair did not address Nifong's refusal to consider alibi evidence, his decision to conceal exculpatory evidence, the improper lineup procedures, lying to the court, or the other unethical conduct that led to his disbarment, removal from office and imprisonment.

It has been established beyond doubt that Nifong was one of the most unethical and infamous prosecutors in the history of American jurisprudence. That you and Sid lionize him speaks volumes about you and your motives and motivations. No sausage for you.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; August 16, 2016 at 2:32 AM
Anonymous said...: Delusional claptrap from hissy fit who again documents he is not one of the world's highly educated people:

"Your characterization of Former DA Nifong's involvement does not accurately describe how he proceeded prior to his withdrawal."

Yes it is.

"For a more objective account see the March Vanity Fair story on this subject by William Cohan"

What cohan wrote was anything but an objective account, considering his ony source wa nifong. cohan got his material only fro nifong, whom the public historical record documents was a corrupt prosecutor who knowingly accused three innocent men of a crime he knew never happened.

For an objective account, hissy fit, check out the ESPN documentary, Fantastic Lies.; August 16, 2016 at 3:41 AM
Anonymous said...: Regarding cohan:

This is from Stuart Taylor:

https://newrepublic.com/article/117383/william-d-cohans-duke-lacrosse-case-book-gets-many-things-wrong

"“I am convinced, frankly, that this woman suffered a trauma that night” and that "something did happen in that bathroom," Cohan told Joe Neff of the Raleigh News & Observer. In an April 8 Bloomberg TV interview, he ascribed the same view to his three main sources: “Between Nifong, Crystal, and Bob Steel, the consensus seems to be something happened in that bathroom that no one would be proud of.” He said much the same on MSNBC's fawning "Morning Joe" the next day."

Later in this article:

"In an April 9 email responding to an inquiry from me[Stuart Taylor], Robert Steel contradicted Cohan's claim that Steel thinks "that something happened in that bathroom that no one would be proud of." Steel told me: "I have no view now, nor have ever had a view of what if anything happened in the bathroom. Period." He added that he had never used, or heard, the words used by Cohan."

"James Coman, the veteran prosecutor who led Attorney General Cooper’s reinvestigation of the case, has denounced as "figments of [Nifong's] imagination" Nifong's assertion that Cooper had "sandbagged" Coman. To the contrary, Coman told reporter Joe Neff that, after an in-depth reexamination of the evidence, he and his colleague Mary Winstead insisted that Cooper declare the players innocent, and Cooper agreed. Cohan appears never to have called Coman or Winstead to check the accuracy of Nifong's self-serving speculation."

"Cohan's claim that Duke University paid $60 million in 2007 to the three wrongly indicted lacrosse players to settle their threatened lawsuit against the university is flat-out false. The actual figure is widely known to have been one-third as much, as stated in more reliable reports. These reports also give the lie to Cohan's wild, book-promoting claims that the lacrosse case has cost Duke "near $100 million" in settlements and legal and PR fees."; August 16, 2016 at 4:18 AM
Anonymous said...: Rearding harr's claim that the Lacrosse Players shoo down Duke for a total of $60 Million:

http://www.metronc.com/article/?id=1374

"The settlement paid by Duke University to the three families of the falsely accused lacrosse team members — estimated to be around $18 million — follows on the heels of similar deals, one with the student whose teacher gave him a failing grade because he simply played the game, and the other with the former lacrosse coach who was summarily fired without so much as a how-do-you-do. The Washington, DC-based Williams & Connelly law firm took on the civil matter for the families pro bono, demonstrating the outrage felt worldwide about the case. Duke paid up because the school could be vulnerable to civil suits by the players for harming their reputations by dismissing them summarily before the facts were known."; August 16, 2016 at 4:20 AM
Walt said...: From the article above: "Duke paid up because the school could be vulnerable to civil suits by the players for harming their reputations by dismissing them summarily before the facts were known."

Only Sid and Kenny refuse to acknowledge the facts. Kenny latches on to the thoroughly discredited Cohan who failed to check up on anything Nifong told him. Had he done so, he would have found out Nifong was lying to try and patch up his tattered reputation. Of course, that's what Kenny and Sid do too.

Walt-in-Durham; August 16, 2016 at 6:06 AM
Walt said...: Anonymous at 3:41 AM wrote: "For an objective account, hissy fit, check out the ESPN documentary, Fantastic Lies."

I second that recommendation! Fantastic Lies is a much more objective account than anything Cohan wrote. Of course, the producers at ESPN sought out the true story. Something that neither Sid, Kenny, nor Cohan will ever be successfully accused of.

Walt-in-Durham; August 16, 2016 at 6:09 AM
Fake Kenhyderal said...: " Your characterization of Former DA Nifong's involvement does not accurately describe how he proceeded...."

Kenny -- would you say the same with regard to Darryl Howard?; August 16, 2016 at 8:19 AM
kenhyderal said...: Walt said: " Had he done so, he would have found out Nifong was lying to try and patch up his tattered reputation. Of course, that's what Kenny and Sid do too"....................Huh? What was it that tattered my reputation, causing me to tell lies in order to restore it? What were those lies and to whom did I tell them?; August 16, 2016 at 8:50 AM
Fake Kenhyderal said...: Reading is fundamental, Kenny.

Walt is saying that you do the same thing that Nifong does -- lie to patch up Nifong's tattered reputation.; August 16, 2016 at 8:59 AM
kenhyderal said...: Ambiguous at best but OK, what lie did I tell then to "patch up" former DA. Nifong's reputation.; August 16, 2016 at 9:12 AM
Anonymous said...: clap trap from hissy fit:

"Huh? What was it that tattered my reputation, causing me to tell lies in order to restore it? What were those lies and to whom did I tell them?"

Let's look at some inconsistencies.

You said no one compiled a complete list of those who attended the lacrosse party on 13 March 2006. It turned out that David Evans did furnish a list of people who attended the party. All you have come up with is that kilgo told you a lacrosse player told him that there were numerous non lacrosse player attendees who had raped crystal. You have never been able to corroborate that allegation, just like you have never been able to show any evidence crystal ever told the truth when she said she had been raped.

You ranted and raved about the shoddy police investigation, in which the identities of the men who had deposited their DNA on crystal were never determined. I pointed out to you that nifong had custody of that evidence, that nifong concealed the evidence rather than trace it back to the sources. You claimed, in the face of the historical record, that nifong did not conceal the evidence. Maybe you were just ignorant. Or maybe you lied.

It was pointed out to you that crystal had described a gang rape in which multiple males penetrated her and left their DNA on her. The DNA did not match the DNA of any man who had been at the party. You claimed nifong did not charge the Lacrosse players with rape but with sexual assault, again in the face of the public, historical record, that nifong charged the lacrosse payers with first degree rape. Again, maybe you were just ignorant. Or maybe you just lied.

Then you came up with the excuse, that crystal was so disoriente she could not give an accurate account of what happened, ignoring that, if shr could not give an accurate account, that was not probable cause to believe a rae had happened, especially in view of the physical exam that showed no evidence of rape.

Then you resort to, tara levicy said there were injuries consistent with rape, conveniently forgetting that Dr. Julie Manly, not tara levicy, did the exam.

Maybe it was not conscious lying, but you made no effort at all to tall an accurate story. You have just presumed guilt, then discarded any truth, and resorted to concocting fantasies.; August 16, 2016 at 9:28 AM
Anonymous said...: clap trap from hissy fit:

"Ambiguous at best but OK, what lie did I tell then to "patch up" former DA. Nifong's reputation."

I repeat, you claimed nifong did not conceal the DNA evidence recovered from crystal's person, and, you sai nifong did not charge the Lacrosse players with rape.; August 16, 2016 at 9:30 AM
Fake Kenhyderal said...: In a discussion with a person named "DaveEvansNewYacht", you stated the following:

"Both Author William Cohan and former DA Mike Nifong claim that it identified this person with 98 % certainty. AG Cooper agrees it is probably Evans DNA but ascribes it's presence to transference."

When D.E.N.Y. (wow -- I never noticed that before...I wonder if he picked that name on purpose because the initials spelled "Deny"?)

Anyway -- when DENY challenged you to provide a source for the "...AG Cooper agrees it is probably Evans DNA..." you never responded. Because there isn't one. You made it up.

So there's one for you....I'm sure I can find more.; August 16, 2016 at 9:49 AM
kenhyderal said...: From the Wikipedia entry Duke Lacrosse Case-"DNA was also taken from all surfaces of three of Mangum's false fingernails retrieved from the trash in the party house bathroom (widely but falsely reported as DNA taken only from the "underside" of a single fingernail). According to DNA Security, the fingernail DNA showed some characteristics similar to lacrosse player David Evans's DNA. However, the match was not conclusive, as 2% of the male population (including Evans) could not be excluded based on the sample.[49][72] In addition, because Evans lived in the house, defense attorneys contended that any DNA present might have come from the tissue paper, cotton swabs, or other hygiene-related trash that had been in the garbage can along with the fingernail. This was confirmed later by Attorney General Cooper's investigation: "... to the extent that Evans's DNA could not be excluded, the SBI experts confirmed that the DNA could easily have been transferred to the fingernails from other materials in the trash can".[37" Tsk-tsk another dastardly lie by Kenhyderal about poor little choir-boy Davy Evans; August 16, 2016 at 1:19 PM
JSwift said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; August 16, 2016 at 1:40 PM
Anonymous said...: clap trap from hissy fit:

"From the Wikipedia entry Duke Lacrosse Case-"DNA was also taken from all surfaces of three of Mangum's false fingernails retrieved from the trash in the party house bathroom (widely but falsely reported as DNA taken only from the "underside" of a single fingernail). According to DNA Security, the fingernail DNA showed some characteristics similar to lacrosse player David Evans's DNA. However, the match was not conclusive, as 2% of the male population (including Evans) could not be excluded based on the sample.[49][72] In addition, because Evans lived in the house, defense attorneys contended that any DNA present might have come from the tissue paper, cotton swabs, or other hygiene-related trash that had been in the garbage can along with the fingernail. This was confirmed later by Attorney General Cooper's investigation: "... to the extent that Evans's DNA could not be excluded, the SBI experts confirmed that the DNA could easily have been transferred to the fingernails from other materials in the trash can".[37" Tsk-tsk another dastardly lie by Kenhyderal about poor little choir-boy Davy Evans".

Another hissy fit inconsistency:

hissy fit claims the finding of DNA consistent with but not matching David Evans' DNA found on a false fingernail is evidence that David Evans raped crystal.

crystal alleged she had been assaulted and penetrated by multiple males, who did nt use condoms, who ejaculated on her. The DNA found onher did nt match the DNA of anyone who attended the party, and hissy fit has provided zero evidence there were any unidentified party attendees. But, according to hissy fit, the failure to find DNA matching the DNA of any party attendee including David Evans, does not rule out a rape.

hissy fit again documents he is not one of the world's highly educated people.; August 16, 2016 at 1:50 PM
Anonymous said...: hissy fit, before you resort tp kilgo again, verify that kilgo ever told you that a lacrosse player told him that unidentified party attendees raped crystal.; August 16, 2016 at 1:52 PM
Anonymous said...: hissy fit, so far as the male DNA found on crystal after the party, the obvious explanation is that crystal engaged in sex with a number of men before she attended the party.; August 16, 2016 at 1:54 PM
guiowen said...: Kenny,
And if Kilgo did tell you this, verify that some lacrosse player indeed told him that unidentified party attendees raped Crystal.; August 16, 2016 at 1:57 PM
guiowen said...: Kenny,
And if some lacrosse player indeed told Kilgo about the unidentified non-lacrosse players, please verify that the lacrosse player who told Kilgo this was telling the truth.; August 16, 2016 at 1:59 PM
guiowen said...: Kenny,
Since there is a complete record of Crystal's male company for the two weeks before the lacrosse party, please verify that the male DNA found on her did not belong to any of these friends of hers.; August 16, 2016 at 2:02 PM
JSwift said...: Kenny claims: Your characterization of Former DA Nifong's involvement does not accurately describe how he proceeded prior to his withdrawal. For a more objective account see the March Vanity Fair story on this subject by William Cohan.

Kenny,

The March vanity fair article does not describe "how [Nifong] proceeded prior to his withdrawal."

The only discussion of "how [Nifong proceeded prior to his withdrawal" are the following passages. They say nothing about why proceeded as he did.

"The young men were subsequently indicted by a Durham County grand jury after a police investigation and a nurse’s examination convinced Mike Nifong, the district attorney, that a crime had occurred." [2nd paragraph]

"Nifong overzealously championed his case in the media." [3rd paragraph]

"Nine months into the case, Nifong dropped the rape charge and offered Mangum the chance to abandon the entire case. But she refused his offer. She said she wanted justice. Eventually, to defend himself in front of the state bar, Nifong had to recuse himself from the case, and he handed it over to Roy Cooper..." [4th paragraph]

You must have confused this article with one that actually discusses "how [Nifong] proceeded prior to his withdrawal." Can you post the link to the correct article? Thanks.

John D. Smith
New York, NY; August 16, 2016 at 2:05 PM
guiowen said...: Kenny,
Let us agree that only 2% of the male population have the tyoe of DNA fou nd on Crystal's nail. If during the 14 days prior to the party, Crystal had had contact with as little as 40 men, then there is a 55% probability that at least one of these men had that same type of DNA. This is not the same as your claim that there is a 98% probability that the DNA came from Evans.
Please learn some mathematics before making such statements again in future.; August 16, 2016 at 2:32 PM
kenhyderal said...: JSwift said:, "They say nothing about why proceeded as he did."........What they say to me and what Crystal believes is that he was seeking justice for her.; August 16, 2016 at 2:37 PM
Anonymous said...: clap trap from hissy fit:

"What they say to me and what Crystal believes is that he was seeking justice for her."

Explain why nifong concealed the DNA evidence found on crystal rather than trace it back to its sources. nifong did conceal the evidence.

Explain why nifong had the improper lineup conducted in which crystal was coerced into identifying innocent men as her assailants.

Explain why nifong did not have crystal interviewed by his office until almost 9 months after the alleged crime allegedly happened.

Explain why you can provide zero evidence that crystal told the truth about being raped.; August 16, 2016 at 2:44 PM
kenhyderal said...: @ Guiowen: " Figures often beguile me, particularly when I have the arranging of them myself; in which case the remark attributed to Disraeli would often apply with justice and force: "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics." - Mark Twain- Of people Crystal came in casual contact in the 14 days proceeding the sexual assault 0% of them attended the drunken bash. But let's say there were 40 present are you saying that statistically speaking there was a 55% chance the DNA of one of them would also be compatible with what was found on Crystal's broken nail? I be interested in the opinion of a statistician on this point.; August 16, 2016 at 2:54 PM
guiowen said...: That is precisely what I'm saying. If each has 2% probability of something (and these probabilities are independent) then among 40 individuals, there is a 55% probability that at least one of them will this something.
Quite simply, 0.98 raised to the 40th power is 0.446.; August 16, 2016 at 3:04 PM
Anonymous said...: clap trap from hissy fit:

" Of people Crystal came in casual contact in the 14 days proceeding the sexual assault 0% of them attended the drunken bash."

There was no evidence it was a drunken bash. All the time stamped photos show a rather tame affair. The only drunk there was crystal.

"But let's say there were 40 present are you saying that statistically speaking there was a 55% chance the DNA of one of them would also be compatible with what was found on Crystal's broken nail? I be interested in the opinion of a statistician on this point."

And I am still interested in by why you say DNA on a false fingernail compatible with but not matching the DNA of a suspect is evidence of rape, but the failure to find any DNA on crystal's person which matched the DNA of any attendee at the party, after crystal accused them of perpetrating a semen depositing gang rape, is not evidence that crystal lied.

You have provided zero evidence there were any unidentified party attendees.

And, in spite of crystal's knon history. the only possible explanation for the DNA found on crystal is, she had sex with multiple males prior to the Lacrosse party.; August 16, 2016 at 3:13 PM
Anonymous said...: To my last comment I add, after attended the party, she lied about being raped.You have provided zero evidence crystal ever told the truth.; August 16, 2016 at 3:16 PM
Anonymous said...: One thing more, hissy fit:

Just because you wish that crystal had been raped does not establish she was.

I remind you, you are the only one right now insisting crystal was raped. The rest of us are saying she was not.; August 16, 2016 at 3:30 PM
Fake Kenhyderal said...: Kenny - Nice try, but the wiki quote states what the SBI confirmed, not that AG Cooper "agrees it is probably Dave Evans DNA"

But you know that. Tsk-tsk, Kenny....; August 16, 2016 at 3:48 PM
JSwift said...: Kenny asks: ... would also be compatible with what was found on Crystal's broken nail?

The statistical discussion is correct. Thank you Guiowen.

However, I add a clarification. The DNA in question was not found on "Crystal's broken nail" as Kenny suggests. The DNA was found by swabbing several fake, press-on nails found in the wastebasket in Evans' bathroom.

Kenny's imprecise language makes it sound as though the nails had been broken when they were torn off. There is no evidence to support that description. The fake nails were whole.

John D. Smith
New York, NY; August 16, 2016 at 4:55 PM
kenhyderal said...: It depends on what the meaning of "was confirmed by Attorney General Cooper's investigation" is. At any rate characterizing what I wrote as lying is ludacris.; August 16, 2016 at 4:58 PM
kenhyderal said...: Would it help JSwift if I added "of" to broken?; August 16, 2016 at 5:01 PM
JSwift said...: Kenny,

No. One or more of the nails appeared not to have been put on at all. Others may have fallen off.

John D. Smith
New York, NY; August 16, 2016 at 5:04 PM
guiowen said...: Kenny,
I didn't accuse you of lying. I merely said you did not understand the mathematics involved.; August 16, 2016 at 6:23 PM
Anonymous said...: Ludacris is the stage name of rapper/actor Chris Bridges.; August 16, 2016 at 7:38 PM
guiowen said...: "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics."

The reason that it is so easy to lie with statistics is that people have difficulty with the mathematics involved. That makes it easy for someone to give an incorrect interpretation and lead you to believe something that is not really supported by the statistics.; August 16, 2016 at 7:39 PM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You have 137 days to exonerate and free Mangum.

It has been 48 days since the end of June, 116 days since April 23rd, 155 days since the Ides of March and 3,350 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; August 17, 2016 at 4:39 AM
Anonymous said...: hey hissy fit:

There was a list of party attendees.

Te DNA found on crystal post party did not match the DNA of any of the party attendees.

What explains the"unexplained" DNA found on crystal is that she had sex with multiple men prior to the party. Sex with multiple men is an activity indulged in by prostitutes.

You have given zero evidence that crystal was raped.; August 17, 2016 at 5:02 AM
Anonymous said...: Except Crystal's word ... and Kenny says she'd never lie about anything. That's all the proof Kenny needs!; August 17, 2016 at 8:24 AM
kenhyderal said...: Dr. Anonymous said: "There was a list of party attendees. The DNA found on crystal post party did not match the DNA of any of the party attendees."..................The so called list of attendees, Evans provided, has never been released. It was never vetted so no one can vouch for it's completeness or it's lack thereof. Maybe he forgot to include on the list the three party guests who raped Crystal.; August 17, 2016 at 9:59 AM
Anonymous said...: delusional clap trap from hissy fit:

".The so called list of attendees, Evans provided, has never been released. It was never vetted so no one can vouch for it's completeness or it's lack thereof."

Both the prosecution and defense vouched for its completeness. It has been part of the public record for years that both prosecution anddefense agreed thateveryobnewhohad attended the party had been identified.

"Maybe he forgot to include on the list the three party guests who raped Crystal."

As there was no evidence crystal was raped and no evidence of unidentified party ttendees, that statement is but another expression on your part f your wish that crystal had been raped.; August 17, 2016 at 10:14 AM
Anonymous said...: Correction of typos:

delusional clap trap from hissy fit:

".The so called list of attendees, Evans provided, has never been released. It was never vetted so no one can vouch for it's completeness or it's lack thereof."

Both the prosecution and defense vouched for its completeness. It has been part of the public record for years that both prosecution and defense agreed that everyone who had attended the party had been identified.

"Maybe he forgot to include on the list the three party guests who raped Crystal."

As there was no evidence crystal was raped and no evidence of unidentified party ttendees, that statement is but another expression on your part of your wish that crystal had been raped.; August 17, 2016 at 10:16 AM
Anonymous said...: hissy fit, why are you expending so much effort wishing crystal had been raped.; August 17, 2016 at 10:20 AM
JSwift said...: Kenny falsely claims: The so called list of attendees, Evans provided, has never been released.

This statement is demonstrably false.

The list was included in Evans' written statement to the Durham police.

Evans' statement, along with the other captains' written statements, was included as an exhibit in Nifong's disbarment hearing and is available publicly.

The availability of the statement has been discussed previously on this blog. Kenny owes readers an explanation of why he repeats a demonstrably false statement.

Kenny claims: It was never vetted...

I ask that you refrain from stating your opinions and assumptions as established facts. Your tendency to do so is why readers frequently accuse you of lying.

John D. Smith
New York, NY; August 17, 2016 at 10:46 AM
kenhyderal said...: JSwift said: "The list was included in Evans' written statement to the Durham police "........................................No it wasn't at least not in the statement I saw. Can you show us the list?; August 17, 2016 at 1:36 PM
kenhyderal said...: JSwift said: I ask that you refrain from stating your opinions and assumptions as established facts"......... Does this request extend to all posters or only to those who don't accept the metanarrative. Anyway, let me rephrase it. In my opinion, there was never a vetting of the list of attendees provided to The Police by David Evans to determine if it was complete.; August 17, 2016 at 1:42 PM
JSwift said...: Kenny,

I do not have a link. I do not currently have the time to retype it.

However, I will provide the list after you have provided the information long requested of you: (1) evidence that Kilgo told you that he has a player friend who told him that non-players raped Crystal at the party and (2) evidence that said player made this allegation to Kilgo.

John D. Smith
New York, NY; August 17, 2016 at 1:45 PM
Anonymous said...: clap trap from hissy fit:

"JSwift said: "The list was included in Evans' written statement to the Durham police "........................................No it wasn't at least not in the statement I saw. Can you show us the list?"

How about you show us the statement you saw. Was that the statement you claim kilgo made, that some lacrosse player told him that unidentified party attendees raped crystal? If so, that was not evidence of unidentified party attendees.; August 17, 2016 at 2:00 PM
JSwift said...: Kenny,

My request that assumptions and opinions not be presented as established facts applies to all posters. However, in my opinion you are one of the more egregious offenders, in large part because you refuse to provide evidence to support your frequently ridiculous opinions and you refuse to engage in an honest discussion of those opinions. You are certainly not the only offender.

I agree with you that the Durham police likely made no bona fide attempt to verify the names on Evans' list. In my opinion, they made no bona fide attempt to investigate Crystal's allegation. I believe they did not actually believe she had been raped and attempted to use the allegation to deliberately frame Duke students for a crime they did not believe had occurred. I can provide examples of the investigation's many failures that lead to my conclusion if you agree to discuss the information I provide.

I believe the special prosecutors made some attempt to verify the list through their analysis of the pictures of the party they had access to in their investigation and in their interviews of attendees.

John D. Smith
New York, NY; August 17, 2016 at 2:02 PM
Anonymous said...: more clap trap from hissy fit:

"JSwift said: I ask that you refrain from stating your opinions and assumptions as established facts"......... Does this request extend to all posters or only to those who don't accept the metanarrative."

What metanarrative? The so called metanarrative concocted by the lawyers defending the innocent lacrosse players, the so called metanarrative defaming crystal? Said metanarrative is a figment of your imagination.

"Anyway, let me rephrase it. In my opinion, there was never a vetting of the list of attendees provided to The Police by David Evans to determine if it was complete."

Your opinion is as meaningful as your statement that nifong did not charge the lacrosse players with rape.; August 17, 2016 at 2:05 PM
kenhyderal said...: JSwift said: "(1) evidence that Kilgo told you that he has a player friend who told him that non-players raped Crystal at the party and (2) evidence that said player made this allegation to Kilgo"............... At present, evidence of these occurrences is unavailable. Perhaps the list of attendees that you say was included with David Evans statement is available but, to my knowledge, has never been seen. When you get time find what you say exists post it.; August 17, 2016 at 2:58 PM
kenhyderal said...: To Dr. Anonymous at 2:00PM. Here is Evans' statement you requested. http://hackedbannedandlockeddown.yuku.com/topic/838/David-Evans-Police-Statement#.V7Tmx-T6u1s; August 17, 2016 at 3:38 PM
JSwift said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; August 17, 2016 at 4:08 PM
JSwift said...: Kenny:

The Captains' written statements are exhibits 12a (Zash), 12b (Evans) and 12c (Flannery). Each of the statements contains a list of attendees. The lists are similar, but not exactly the same. Evans' list contains a couple of "fraternity guys," including one named Blake.

You should ask inmyhumbleopinion why she did not post the entire text of the Evans statement.

I can't copy the text into a comment (I have a pdf file). I looked for a link and could not find one.

I suggest you ask Sidney to post the statements. Before he concluded that the disbarment hearing was a kangaroo court, he must have reviewed the depositions and the evidence introduced into the hearing.

John D. Smith
New York, NY; August 17, 2016 at 4:55 PM
Anonymous said...: clap trap from hissyfit:

"At present, evidence of these occurrences is unavailable(that kilgo ever told hisssy fit that some lacrosse player told him that unidentified party attendees raped crystal)."

hissy fit again admits he has no evidence that there were unidentified party attendees.

"Perhaps the list of attendees that you say was included with David Evans statement is available but, to my knowledge, has never been seen. When you get time find what you say exists post it."

Presumes a fact not in evidence, that hissy fit has knowledge of the situation. hissy fit's claims, that nifong did not charge the lacrosse players with rape, that nifong did not conceal the exculpatory evidence, show hissy fit is not knowledgeable.; August 17, 2016 at 5:55 PM
Anonymous said...: for hissy fit:

At 2 pm I thought you were referring to a reference which said there were unidentified attendees. Y/ou did give a reference to kilgo.

For my failure to understand, I apologize.

IHowever, you still have provided zero evidence thar crystal was raped.; August 17, 2016 at 6:14 PM
kenhyderal said...: JSwift said: "You should ask inmyhumbleopinion why she did not post the entire text of the Evans statement"......................................................... She, in this case, is Joan Foster the most rabid Crystal hater and the most dedicated and knee-jerk defender of Evans, Finnerty and Seligman . Why don't you post the web address and we can download the whole pdf file ourselves; August 17, 2016 at 9:27 PM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You have 136 days to exonerate and free Mangum.

It has been 49 days since the end of June, 117 days since April 23rd, 156 days since the Ides of March and 3,351 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; August 18, 2016 at 4:31 AM
JSwift said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; August 18, 2016 at 4:40 AM
Anonymous said...: hissy fit:

"JSwift said: "You should ask inmyhumbleopinion why she did not post the entire text of the Evans statement"......................................................... She, in this case, is Joan Foster the most rabid Crystal hater and the most dedicated and knee-jerk defender of Evans, Finnerty and Seligman . Why don't you post the web address and we can download the whole pdf file ourselves"

hissy fit refers to the metanarrative, supposedly concocted by the innocent Lacrosse players' lawyers to discredit crystal.

Said metanarrative, like the carpetbagger jihad, does not exist.; August 18, 2016 at 5:05 AM
JSwift said...: Kenny,

You are confused again.

The pseudonymous poster, inmyhumbleopinion, is the person who set up the site hackedbannedandlockeddown. She is not Joan Foster as you falsely suggest. inmyhumbleopinion, along with another pseudonymous poster PB, were the two leading trolls at the Talk Left Duke discussion board. They insisted that each piece of evidence be considered separately. Like you, they pretended not to understand the concept of probability. Thus, like you, they insisted that outcomes that were even remotely possible deserved the same consideration as outcomes that were highly likely.

I do not understand what web address you expect me to post. As I told you twice previously, I don't have a web address. I would have posted it already if I had one. Instead, I have a pdf file saved in my computer. I don't remember where I got it.

Perhaps you would not be so confused if you actually read the posts you respond to, rather than offering the knee-jerk criticism you so frequently provide.

John D. Smith
New York, NY; August 18, 2016 at 5:07 AM
Anonymous said...: hissy fit:

All the Lacrosse party attendees have been identified. The DNA found on crystal post party did not match the DNA of any party attendee.

The explanation for the so caled male DNA found on crystal is that crystal engaged in sex with multiple males prior to the party.

Prostitutes engage in sex with multiple males.; August 18, 2016 at 5:09 AM
Anonymous said...: hissy fit.

You have provided zero evidence that crystal told the truth about being raped.; August 18, 2016 at 5:10 AM
Anonymous said...: hissy fit:

You have provided zero evidence that any unidentified individuals attended he Lacrosse party.; August 18, 2016 at 5:12 AM
Anonymous said...: hissy fit:

You have provided zero proof that kilgo, whoever or whatever kilgo is, ever told you that a lacrosse player ever told him he had witnessed unidentified party attendees rape crystal.; August 18, 2016 at 5:15 AM
Anonymous said...: hissy fit:

You did say at one time that nifong charged the Lacrosse defendants with sexual assault, not rape.

You also said, nifong believed he could convict the defendants of sexual assault without DNA evidence.

Finally, at one point that nifong believed the Lacrosse defendants, after being charged with sexual assault, would reveal who the actual rapists were.

nifong charged the Lacrosse defendants with first degree rape. He dropped the rape charges in December of 2006, months after he charged them after crystal changed her story too one which would not support a charge of rape.

Again, you show the world you are not one of the world's highly educated people.; August 18, 2016 at 5:23 AM
kenhyderal said...: @ JSwift apologies for my confusion. I simply did a google search of David Evans statement for the benefit of Dr. Anonymous. I first encountered Joan Foster and her vicious and contemptuous characterizations of Crystal on the Duke Lacrosse Liestoppers Blog. The ugliness of her remarks about Crystal were a stark contrast to the kind and gentle person I know. Anyway, bottom line, if I'm ever to see justice done, following the disappearance of Kilgo, who was either scared off or bought off, I need identify those at the party guilty of the rape who obviously were not Players. Comparing the given lists of Evans, Flannery and Zash , lists I've never seen, would be a good start.; August 18, 2016 at 9:30 AM
JSwift said...: Kenny,

I was considering the time consuming task of typing the lists into comments and posting those comments, but have decided against doing so because you failed to grant my request that you refrain from stating your assumptions and opinions as established fact.

John D. Smith
New York, NY; August 18, 2016 at 10:30 AM
JSwift said...: Kenny states: I simply did a google search of David Evans statement...

Odd. I did a number of Google searches to try to find a link, and IMHO's website did not appear in any search.

John D. Smith
New York, NY; August 18, 2016 at 10:42 AM
Anonymous said...: claptrap from hissy fit:

"I first encountered Joan Foster and her vicious and contemptuous characterizations of Crystal on the Duke Lacrosse Liestoppers Blog. The ugliness of her remarks about Crystal were a stark contrast to the kind and gentle person I know."

What you consider ugly remarks is actually the truth, that crystal lied about being raped, that she was a convicted criminal before she became notorious as the false accuser in the Duke Rape Hoax, and the DNA, which you claim is evidence of a rape, is actually evidence that she was a prostitute. Gentle people do not threaten others, do not murder others.

"Anyway, bottom line, if I'm ever to see justice done, following the disappearance of Kilgo, who was either scared off or bought off, I need identify those at the party guilty of the rape who obviously were not Players. Comparing the given lists of Evans, Flannery and Zash , lists I've never seen, would be a good start."

Except there is and never was any evidence crystal was raped.; August 18, 2016 at 12:32 PM
Anonymous said...: hey hissy fit, if the male DNA found on crystal was evidence of a rape occurring at the party, and nifong was out for justice for crystal, explain why nifong concealed the existence of that evidence.; August 18, 2016 at 12:35 PM
Anonymous said...: excerpt from hissy fit's clap trap:

"if I'm ever to see justice done, following the disappearance of Kilgo, who was either scared off or bought off, I need identify those at the party guilty of the rape who obviously were not Players."

Justice was done when AG Cooper investigated the alleged crime, found there was no evidence of a crime, dismissed all charges against the Lacrosse players with prejudice and stated that the conclusion of his investigators was that the Lacrosse players were innocent.

And again we have the question, why do you so fervently wish that crystal had been raped. Why would anyone who says he is interested in justice wish that on any woman.

You are the one saying crystal was raped. No one else is. In the past few days, harr has not posted.; August 18, 2016 at 12:41 PM
Anonymous said...: hey, hissy fit:

I posted this earlier. It beas repeating.

You are so taken with cohan. cohan quoted nifong as saying AG Cooper's investigators fet sandbagged when the ag expressed his opinion that the Lacrosse payers were innocent. cohan never actualy ased the ivestigators anything.

"James Coman, the veteran prosecutor who led Attorney General Cooper’s reinvestigation of the case, has denounced as "figments of [Nifong's] imagination" Nifong's assertion that Cooper had "sandbagged" Coman. To the contrary, Coman told reporter Joe Neff that, after an in-depth reexamination of the evidence, he and his colleague Mary Winstead insisted that Cooper declare the players innocent, and Cooper agreed. Cohan appears never to have called Coman or Winstead to check the accuracy of Nifong's self-serving speculation."

here is the url:

https://newrepublic.com/article/117383/william-d-cohans-duke-lacrosse-case-book-gets-many-things-wrong; August 18, 2016 at 12:50 PM
Anonymous said...: correction of typos

hey, hissy fit:

I posted this earlier. It bears repeating.

You are so taken with cohan. cohan quoted nifong as saying AG Cooper's investigators fet sandbagged when the ag expressed his opinion that the Lacrosse payers were innocent. cohan never actualy asked the investigators anything.

"James Coman, the veteran prosecutor who led Attorney General Cooper’s reinvestigation of the case, has denounced as "figments of [Nifong's] imagination" Nifong's assertion that Cooper had "sandbagged" Coman. To the contrary, Coman told reporter Joe Neff that, after an in-depth reexamination of the evidence, he and his colleague Mary Winstead insisted that Cooper declare the players innocent, and Cooper agreed. Cohan appears never to have called Coman or Winstead to check the accuracy of Nifong's self-serving speculation."

here is the url:

https://newrepublic.com/article/117383/william-d-cohans-duke-lacrosse-case-book-gets-many-things-wrong; August 18, 2016 at 1:09 PM
A Lawyer said...: following the disappearance of Kilgo, who was either scared off or bought off,

Or who was just trolling you.; August 18, 2016 at 1:51 PM
The Great Kilgo said...: Kenhyderal,
Please help me! Ubes and Desco are holding 09u79ouglgpol; August 18, 2016 at 2:03 PM
Desconocido said...: No te preocupes, Kenhyderal! Solo vamos a obligar a Kilgo a que te de la informacion que necesitas. No le vamos a hacer ningun mal.; August 18, 2016 at 2:05 PM
ubes said...: Also,
Kenhyderal,
Willst du, dass wir dir helfen? Ja, oder nein?; August 18, 2016 at 2:06 PM
Anonymous said...: excerpt from hissy fit's clap trap:

"I need identify those at the party guilty of the rape who obviously were not Players."

What evidence do you have that a rape happened?

What you have cited so far:

The Male DNA found on crystal. You have admitted that you can not establish that the DNA had been deposited at the party. nifong's concealment of the evidence suggests nifong did not believe it had been deposited at the party. Why did he not identify the sources. Well, if nifong actually believed the DNAwas not deposited at the party, if he had identified the sources of the DNA as men who had not been at the party, that would have precluded prosecution of anyone at the party. nifong went public, early in the case, proclaiming that the alleged crime had happened at the party.

Whitish fluid in crystal's genital tract on the rape exam. You argue that should have been presumed to be semen. In most ERs, the proper procedure to be done is a wet mount which would have demonstrated or not demonstrated the presence of motile sperm. Demonstration of motile sperm is what makes the diagnosis of semen in the ER. If that fluid had been semen then the rape kit would have tested positive for alkaline phosphatase. It did not. Your explanations why are speculation, nothing more. You are saying, one can establish a crime had been committed by speculating on why there was no evidence. Is that consistent with the prosecution's obligation to prove bryond a reasonable doubt. Obviously not.

kilgo's claim that a lacrosse payer had told him he had witnessed unidentified party attendees rape crystal. Again, you have admitted you can not document kilgo ever told you this. kilgo's claim is evidence of nothing. Why kilgo has vanished, why his lacrosse player has never materialized, again that is just speculation on your part. Again you are claiming you can establish a crime happened by speculating why there is no evidence of said crime.

Again, what kind of gratification do you get by wishing crystal had been raped?; August 18, 2016 at 2:26 PM
kenhyderal said...: A Lawyer said: " Or who (Kilgo) was just trolling you"........................ Not likely. A troll would not have made a large donation to Crystal's bail in her arson case.; August 18, 2016 at 8:57 PM
Anonymous said...: Sid ... you ever gonna post the MAR/Writ of Habeas that was filed on Crystal's behalf? I bet you wrote it, and I bet it is as brilliant as everything else you have written and filed, and I bet it will fail just as spectacularly (but Kenny will still like it). But, would be nice to see it. Why are you hiding it?; August 19, 2016 at 3:38 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You have 135 days to exonerate and free Mangum.

It has been 50 days since the end of June, 118 days since April 23rd, 157 days since the Ides of March and 3,352 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; August 19, 2016 at 4:55 AM
Anonymous said...: from hissy fit:

"A Lawyer said: " Or who (Kilgo) was just trolling you"........................ Not likely. A troll would not have made a large donation to Crystal's bail in her arson case."

Forget about whether or not kilgo was truthful. You still can not verify that kilgo ever told you a lacrosse player witnessed a rape at the lacrosse party.

And you still can not verify that crystal ever told the truth wnhen she claimed she had been raped.; August 19, 2016 at 5:56 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

Why did you never comment on Newport's anonymous source, who not only confirmed Kilgo's anonymous source, but identified the mystery rapists?; August 19, 2016 at 6:14 AM
kenhyderal said...: @ ubes 2:06 ....... Du bist ein Betrüger So v/d; August 19, 2016 at 10:16 AM
ubes said...: Kenhyderal,
Der Betrueger bist du!; August 19, 2016 at 11:36 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny stated: I need identify those at the party guilty of the rape who obviously were not Players

Why? Newport identified them already. You need to go to Durham and make the accusation.; August 19, 2016 at 12:56 PM
Inconnu said...: Kenhyderal,
Je ne comprends pas pour quoi tu as fait cela a mon pauvre ami Ubes. Tout ce qu'il veut, c'est de t'aider.
En tout cas, le gros Kilgo est avec nous. Je te prie de nous dire ce que tu voudrais que nous en fassions.; August 19, 2016 at 9:11 PM
The Great Kilgo said...: Kenhyderal, please help me! Inco and Desco are kfjjskmv; August 19, 2016 at 10:19 PM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You have 134 days to exonerate and free Mangum.

It has been 51 days since the end of June, 119 days since April 23rd, 158 days since the Ides of March and 3,353 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; August 20, 2016 at 5:08 AM
guiowen said...: So, Kenhyderal,
Any luck locating Kilgo?; August 20, 2016 at 2:06 PM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You have 133 days to exonerate and free Mangum.

It has been 52 days since the end of June, 120 days since April 23rd, 159 days since the Ides of March and 3,354 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; August 21, 2016 at 8:05 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

I heard that your lolsuit against DA Freeman and Wake County was disposed of last week. More specifically, it is my understanding that the court granted the defendants' motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction and failure to state a claim. Is this true? Do you have any comment?

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; August 21, 2016 at 4:26 PM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You have 132 days to exonerate and free Mangum.

It has been 53 days since the end of June, 121 days since April 23rd, 160 days since the Ides of March and 3,355 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; August 22, 2016 at 1:34 AM
Anonymous said...: harr is in a fetal posiyin hiding under hie bed after his latest failure,; August 22, 2016 at 2:01 PM
Anonymous said...: A 37 year old black man named Kasey Nesbitt was just sentenced to life in prison for the rape and murder of a 100 year old white woman.Of course you never hear about these stories in the MSM unlike Crystal Mangum's ridiculous story of being gang raped by Duke lacrosse players.; August 22, 2016 at 4:23 PM
A Lawyer said...: Anon. @ 4:23:
Didn't you get the hint last time?
Get lost.; August 22, 2016 at 8:10 PM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You have 131 days to exonerate and free Mangum.

It has been 54 days since the end of June, 122 days since April 23rd, 161 days since the Ides of March and 3,356 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; August 23, 2016 at 2:38 AM
Anonymous said...: August 22, 2016 at 4:23 PM you are just as racist as Sidney, as Kenhyderal, as Al Sharpton.; August 23, 2016 at 3:31 AM
Walt said...: Abe wrote: "Sid:

I heard that your lolsuit against DA Freeman and Wake County was disposed of last week. More specifically, it is my understanding that the court granted the defendants' motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction and failure to state a claim. Is this true? Do you have any comment?"

I'm not Sid, but I did read Judge Flanagan's order. Indeed, Sid did lose and lose miserably. She found, as we all expected that he had neither standing, nor did he assert a claim upon which relief may be granted. The court was not impressed with Sid's conclusory claims. We've been trying to point that out to Sid for a long time. But, he refuses to learn and keeps repeating his same mistake. His conclusions are not evidence, nor are they facts. The court also found Freeman had absolute immunity, which Sid failed to even offer evidence, or law to show why Freeman's conduct was outside the protection of her immunity. Well, no one has ever successfully accused Sid of being an effective advocate.

Walt-in-Durham; August 23, 2016 at 6:56 AM
Anonymous said...: Walt:

Thanks for confirming that Sid's suit against DA Freeman and Wake County was dismissed.

Do you know what's going on with the MAR Sid/Mangum filed in federal court? I think I read somewhere that it has been docketed and assigned a case number, but I could be wrong.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; August 23, 2016 at 7:46 AM
JSwift said...: Abe,

The judgment and order are available at the following links. The earlier filings are not available except through PACER.

https://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/north-carolina/ncedce/5:2016cv00199/149747/15

https://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/north-carolina/ncedce/5:2016cv00199/149747/16

John D. Smith
New York, NY; August 23, 2016 at 2:40 PM
Anonymous said...: Well, unsurprisingly the Freeman lawsuit went down in flames. Sid, are you ever gonna do anything to actually help Crystal, or just keep lying to her?; August 23, 2016 at 4:10 PM
JSwift said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; August 23, 2016 at 5:25 PM
JSwift said...: The docket for the MAR filing is on Justia, but no filings are available except through PACER.

https://dockets.justia.com/docket/north-carolina/ncmdce/1:2016cv00978/72733

John D. Smith
New York, NY; August 23, 2016 at 5:27 PM
A Lawyer said...: John,
Thanks for posting those links.; August 23, 2016 at 8:50 PM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You have 130 days to exonerate and free Mangum.

It has been 55 days since the end of June, 123 days since April 23rd, 162 days since the Ides of March and 3,357 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; August 24, 2016 at 3:32 AM
Walt said...: The U.S. District Court has chosen to treat Sid's Motion for Appropriate relief as a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and referred the matter for screening. As is Sid's style there are many conclusory statements and little in the way of evidence or citation to authority. He is depending on the broad leeway the court grants pro-se prisoners in Habeas petitions. That said, the court is still not going to be overly impressed by his conclusory statements. Crystal, who is smart enough to know Sid's not much of an advocate, probably isn't planning her get out of jail party on this effort.

With any luck, here is a link to Crystal's petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B7z91VniTzKQcjg0aFNoVFVEaFU

Walt-in-Durham; August 24, 2016 at 7:33 AM

«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 400 of 721 Newer› Newest»

Friday, July 22, 2016

Fix the Court: "Harr accosted Justice Breyer"

721 comments:

Facebook Badge

Subscribe!

Labels

Blog Archive

About Me