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

Friday, July 22, 2016

Fix the Court: "Harr accosted Justice Breyer"

721 comments:

«Oldest ‹Older 401 – 600 of 721 Newer› Newest»

Anonymous said...: Walt:

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B7z91VniTzKQcjg0aFNoVFVEaFU is a link to a Memorandum of Law filed by AG Cooper in 2013 seeking to have one of Sidney Harr's lawsuits, naming the State of North Carolina as a defendant, dismissed.; August 24, 2016 at 8:13 AM
Anonymous said...: Walt,

Both links go to the motion to dismiss. Could you please repost the Writ?; August 24, 2016 at 8:43 AM
A Lawyer said...: Walt,
Neither your link to the MAR/Habeas Petition, nor your link to Dr. Harr's brief on appeal in the 4th Circuit, work.; August 24, 2016 at 11:57 AM
Walt said...: I'll work on those.

Walt; August 24, 2016 at 1:06 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: HEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP!
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT!

As you may be aware, I have suffered a few setbacks... mainly because the state's legal system is corrupt and racist and because the mainstream media is biased. Be that as it may, I will prevail in obtaining justice for Crystal Mangum.

I regret that I have been away from the comment page for so long, but my advocacy work has shifted into high gear, leaving me little time to spend reviewing and answering comments. Traveling, letter-writing, and working on sharlogs have consumed much of my time recently. Believe me, unlike D.A. Lorrin Freeman, I am not ignoring you. I would never do that. I'm just very busy.

As you were.; August 24, 2016 at 1:42 PM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You seem to disappear and be unavailable to give updates, or read and respond to comments, whenever there is a decision or development that is unfavorable to you. A reasonable person could easily conclude that you do, in fact, ignore us when things don't turn out your way, and that you are incapable of dealing with and learning from your past experiences. Have you managed to learn anything from your many losses and setbacks over the past five or so years other than "the state's legal system is corrupt and racist" and "the mainstream media is biased"?

If you need a crying towel, please feel free to use one of the ones you promised to send me. I would hate to see them go to waste.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; August 24, 2016 at 2:17 PM
Anonymous said...: It is amazing the detail the courts have to provide when responding to Sidney's lawsuits. They cross all their Ts. In reality they probably are saying:

You freaking idiot go away!; August 24, 2016 at 3:07 PM
Walt said...: Try this link for the Habeas petition: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B7z91VniTzKQUGdXdXVOcm5WVEk

Try this for the Freeman order: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B7z91VniTzKQTmZLcmR5THlsa0E

Walt-in-Durham; August 24, 2016 at 3:16 PM
Walt said...: Oh, and Sid, if you need a crying towel, after the one you promised Abe, feel free to use one you promised me.

Walt-in-Durham; August 24, 2016 at 3:23 PM
Anonymous said...: harr finally emerges with more clap trap:

"As you may be aware, I have suffered a few setbacks... mainly because the state's legal system is corrupt and racist and because the mainstream media is biased. Be that as it may, I will prevail in obtaining justice for Crystal Mangum."

Getting crystal apassfor murdering Reginald Daye is not aquest for justice. harr has been promising he would have crystal exonerated for years, starting before crystal went to trial.

"I regret that I have been away from the comment page for so long, but my advocacy work has shifted into high gear, leaving me little time to spend reviewing and answering comments."

In other words you are trying to duck that your high gear advocacy has accomplished nothing but showing you are a delusional megalomaniac.

"Traveling, letter-writing, and working on sharlogs have consumed much of my time recently. Believe me, unlike D.A. Lorrin Freeman, I am not ignoring you. I would never do that. I'm just very busy."

Well, we have been, if not ignoring you, marveling at your delusional megalomania.; August 24, 2016 at 5:59 PM
Anonymous said...: Sid, the system isn't racist and corrupt - you are a narcissistic idiot who refuses to learn. Everyone but Kenny told you what was gonna happen. You can't pretend to be surprised.; August 24, 2016 at 6:04 PM
Anonymous said...: Sid, the Larceny charges were dismissed and never had anything to do with fekony murder - how fucking stupid and pathetic are you to keep bringing them up?; August 24, 2016 at 6:05 PM
Anonymous said...: Sid, you complain that Mangum's appellate attorneys did nothing after the court of appeals, but she fired them. Why should they do anything? She made it clear she didn't want their help.; August 24, 2016 at 6:17 PM
Anonymous said...: for harr:

Your opinions on Reginald Daye's treatment and autopsy are not the opinions of a medical expert. They are the opinions of a minimally trained, minimally experienced medical school graduate who was never accepted into residency training, who never achieved medical specialty board certification, and who spent a truncated post medical school career filing and losing frivolous lawsuits.; August 24, 2016 at 6:42 PM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You have 129 days to exonerate and free Mangum.

It has been 56 days since the end of June, 124 days since April 23rd, 163 days since the Ides of March and 3,358 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; August 25, 2016 at 5:35 AM
Anonymous said...: On August 24, 2016 at 3:07 PM, Anonymous said...
"It is amazing the detail the courts have to provide when responding to Sidney's lawsuits."

What's truly amazing is that Sid has seemingly learned nothing from the decisions rendered by the courts dismissing his numerous lawsuits, except to conclude that the system must be corrupt, racist and biased.

Instead of carefully reading the decisions with an open mind, engaging in critical thinking and challenging his methods, assumptions, beliefs and tactics, Sid chooses to use them to justify his conclusion that the world is engaged in a massive, unjust and racially motivated conspiracy against him and Mangum. Hence, he continues to make the same mistakes over and over again, without learning or accomplishing anything.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; August 25, 2016 at 12:29 PM
A Lawyer said...: Instead of carefully reading the decisions with an open mind, engaging in critical thinking and challenging his methods, assumptions, beliefs and tactics, Sid chooses to use them to justify his conclusion that the world is engaged in a massive, unjust and racially motivated conspiracy against him and Mangum. Hence, he continues to make the same mistakes over and over again, without learning or accomplishing anything.

Bingo!

Walt, I and others not only predicted that Dr. Harr's cases would be dismissed, but we correctly predicted the grounds upon which the courts would rely. That would suggest to an impartial observer that we knew what we were talking about.

Many times, I have urged Dr. Harr to have his lawsuits reviewed by his friend, Prof. Coleman, before he files them. That would save Dr. Harr much wasted effort from pursuing legal theories that have no chance of success.; August 25, 2016 at 1:03 PM
A Lawyer said...: Try this link for the Habeas petition: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B7z91VniTzKQUGdXdXVOcm5WVEk

That's a state-court MAR mistakenly filed in federal court. And that's before we even get to the substance.; August 25, 2016 at 3:21 PM
kenhyderal said...: The decisions are not based on a search for justice but on a crafted justification, slick citations and all, to deny justice, especially to the poor, the marginalized and those that advocate for the reform of this corrupt U.S.Justice System. It's a system that's perpetuated by American lawyers, generally despised and vilified, as it's main beneficiary. It serves mainly those with wealth and connection but forsakes the disadvantaged as so much flotsam, despite lofty constitutional guarantees. The entrenched injustice is bigger then you or Dr. Coleman and you know it. Even the undemocratic US political system recognized that it must be reformed.; August 25, 2016 at 3:46 PM
Anonymous said...: about time hissy fit came up with some more meaningless clap trap.; August 25, 2016 at 3:53 PM
Anonymous said...: I have a hard time deciding who is more pathetic and stupid - Kenny or Sid. Both clearly care about nothing but abusing Crystal, but at least Sid does something, so I think that makes Kenny more pathetic. Even if Sid is a failure at all he does, he at least does something. Kenny types on his keyboard.; August 25, 2016 at 6:46 PM
Anonymous said...: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/canada-s-wrongful-convictions-1.783998; August 25, 2016 at 7:39 PM
Anonymous said...: https://www.aidwyc.org/cases/historical/; August 25, 2016 at 7:52 PM
Anonymous said...: http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/wrongful-convictions/; August 25, 2016 at 8:15 PM
kenhyderal said...: Thank you Anonymous at 8:15: This was a great excerpt from The Canadian Encylopedia; August 25, 2016 at 9:32 PM
kenhyderal said...: @Anonymous 6:46 I have full confidence in Dr. Harr. I would not be capable of doing legal work like he can or petitioning American State officials. I'm very grateful that he came to the defence of my old friend. I do not have the financial resources to hire American Lawyers but I am convinced that Dr. Harr, in Crystal's case, is every bit, if not more so, as effective as any disinterested Court appointed Attorney that might be provided to Crystal would be. Dr. Harr will persist until he vindicates Crystal. With right on his side he "will overcome" He is a fighter for justice for American Blacks in the tradition of Dr. King Rev. Jackson and Rev Sharpton; August 25, 2016 at 9:51 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

What legal work has Sid done that you couldn't do? Are you saying that you couldn't refuse to learn and fail at everything you attempt? I mean, Sid has lost every single legal action he's attempted - you are probably right, you couldn't do that, you might actually succeed at something, so I guess Sid is the more pathetic one, you are just the despicable one taking advantage of him to further your abuse of the vulnerable like Sid and Crystal.; August 26, 2016 at 4:36 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You have 128 days to exonerate and free Mangum.

It has been 57 days since the end of June, 125 days since April 23rd, 164 days since the Ides of March and 3,359 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; August 26, 2016 at 5:10 AM
Anonymous said...: hey hissy fit

You call harr an effective advocate. So explain this.

You say crystal is innocent. Yet she is i jail, convicted of murder, in spite of al of harr's advocacy for her.

That har could not keep a supposedly innocent person from being convicted, that is hardly effective advocacy?; August 26, 2016 at 5:39 AM
Anonymous said...: hey hissy fit:

You admire race baiter jesse.

After crystal was exposed as a false accuser jesse put a lot of distance between himself and crystal. jesse never spoke up for ctystal in her trial. :It seems even a race baiter like jesse does not believe in crystal's innocence.; August 26, 2016 at 5:41 AM
Anonymous said...: hey hissy fit:

Like race baiter jesse, race baiter al has put a lot of distance between himself and crystal. Does that mean race baiter al believes in crystal's innocence? No.; August 26, 2016 at 5:43 AM
Anonymous said...: hey hissy fit:

More about race baiter al:

Tawana Brawley, via her default in Stephen Pagones' defamation suit, did admit she had defamed Stephen Pagones.

brawley now has the responsibility to pat off a big judgment to Pagones.Is race baiter al advocating for her now? No.

People have pointed out race baiter al has the resources to help brawley. Is he doing so? No.

As he did with crystal, race baiter al has put a lot of distance between himself and brawley.; August 26, 2016 at 5:48 AM
Anonymous said...: hey hissy fit:

You commit the blasphemy of comparing harr to Dr. Marti LutherKing.

harr advocates that innocent men are guilty of a crime which never happened.

Dr. King would never have advocated for anything like that.

I remind you, you have provided zero evidence that the crime ever happened or that crystal ever told the truth when she claimed she had been raed.; August 26, 2016 at 5:53 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Walt said...
Oh, and Sid, if you need a crying towel, after the one you promised Abe, feel free to use one you promised me.

Walt-in-Durham

Hah, Walt. It's not over, yet. When it is, you'll be the one in need of the crying towel.; August 26, 2016 at 6:15 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: HEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP!
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT.

Just an update to let you know that I am beginning a new sharlog. It's been written and dictated. Will begin laying down soundtrack and hope to be posted within a week. Have been busy engaging in letter-writing. Recent setbacks could have been anticipated considering the political atmosphere in this state. I'll proceed undaunted.; August 26, 2016 at 6:18 AM
Anonymous said...: Harr says he will proceed undaunted.

Which is but an admission on the part of harr that he is incapable of learning. harr will proceed with filing frivolous non meritorious lawsuits and then indulging in temper tantrums.

And hissy fit calls him an effective advocate.; August 26, 2016 at 6:23 AM
Anonymous said...: harr also tells Walt it's not over.

Hey harr, the it you refer to has never begun.; August 26, 2016 at 6:24 AM
A Lawyer said...: Recent setbacks could have been anticipated considering the political atmosphere in this state.

The recent setbacks could have been predicted by reading the comments on this thread.; August 26, 2016 at 6:27 AM
Walt said...: Sid wrote: "Recent setbacks could have been anticipated considering the political atmosphere in this state."

No, your setbacks have nothing to do with politics. They have to do with the fact that you have no evidence, nor any law to back up your conclusory allegations. Allegations that are ridiculous on their face, I might add. Of course, you never disclosed your expectation of a set back.

"I'll proceed undaunted."

Let me give you a suggestion. Before you proceed undaunted, or otherwise, call on your good friend Jim Coleman and ask him to review your pleadings. He might be able to point you in the right direction.

Walt-in-Durham; August 26, 2016 at 10:19 AM
Walt said...: Sid wrote: "Hah, Walt. It's not over, yet. When it is, you'll be the one in need of the crying towel."

Sid, how many times have you assured me I would need a crying towel? Yet, every time it is your proceeding that has been found to be meritless, frivolous, or both.

I have read your mistakenly filed MAR. Crystal got lucky, the court decided not to treat it as one of your frivolous filings, but as a pro-se filing by Crystal. Unfortunately, you drafted it and in all likelihood researched it. It has all the hallmarks of your style. Lots of unsupported allegations and conclusory statements. It lacks citation to authority which most prisoners provide because of the jailhouse law libraries. It does have your usual citation, if you can call it that, to various unrelated legal matters reported in the popular media. Which of course, you never favor the court with any reasons why those unrelated proceedings should have any value for a court trying to figure out your pleadings. Never-the-less, Crystal caught a break with the mis-filed MAR. Unfortunately, it is not a particularly good effort on her/your part. It would help if you are going to ignore the law, if you took a remedial course in rhetoric. At least that would help you construct an argument.

As is, with friends like you, Crystal doesn't need any enemies.

Walt-in-Durham; August 26, 2016 at 10:30 AM
kenhyderal said...: What Walt needs is a remedial course in Empathy. Material he was probably taught back in kindergarten but since, seems to have forgotten.; August 26, 2016 at 1:08 PM
Anonymous said...: hissy fit comes up with another demonstration of how clueless he is.; August 26, 2016 at 1:40 PM
Anonymous said...: what hissy fit needs is a dose of reality.

crystal is in prison not because of ant vendetta against her because of the Duke Rape Hoax or because of any injustice of the system. She was discredited because she falsely accused three innocent men of rape. She is in ptison because she murdered her boyfriend. harr is no crusader fr justice. harr is a delusional megalomaniac who thinks he can intimidate the justice system.; August 26, 2016 at 2:11 PM
Cervantes said...: del poco dormir y del mucho leer, se le secó el celebro, de manera que vino a perder el juicio.; August 26, 2016 at 2:41 PM
Anonymous said...: What Kenny and Sidney need is a remedial course in Common Sense. Material they were probably taught back in kindergarten but since, seem to have forgotten.

Empathy will not free Crystal. Frivolous lawsuits will not free Crystal. An understanding of the law is a good first step.; August 26, 2016 at 9:11 PM
kenhyderal said...: "¡Que un hombre despreciado y cubierto de cicatrices, Todavía se esforzó con su último gramo de coraje, Para alcanzar la estrella inalcanzable!" (One man scorned and covered with scars still strove with his last ounce of courage to reach the unreachable stars; and the world will be better for this) Miguel de Cerventes; August 26, 2016 at 9:12 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "An understanding of the law is a good first step"............To the common man, using esoteric legal processes to deny justice makes no sense; August 26, 2016 at 9:19 PM
Anonymous said...: To the common man, repeating the same failed arguments over and over and over again meets the definition of insanity attributed to Einstein.

An esophageal intubation is not an intervening cause simply because Kenny and Sidney want it to be.; August 26, 2016 at 9:23 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

You are confused again.

What constitutes a "proximate cause" and an "intervening cause" are not, as you incorrectly suggest, "esoteric legal processes."; August 26, 2016 at 9:27 PM
kenhyderal said...: To the common man using common sense it was Duke that killed Daye not Crystal and saying otherwise is nonsensical. Off to work so I'll be back this evening; August 26, 2016 at 9:53 PM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You have 127 days to exonerate and free Mangum.

It has been 58 days since the end of June, 126 days since April 23rd, 165 days since the Ides of March and 3,360 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; August 27, 2016 at 3:52 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Walt said...
Sid wrote: "Hah, Walt. It's not over, yet. When it is, you'll be the one in need of the crying towel."

Sid, how many times have you assured me I would need a crying towel? Yet, every time it is your proceeding that has been found to be meritless, frivolous, or both.

I have read your mistakenly filed MAR. Crystal got lucky, the court decided not to treat it as one of your frivolous filings, but as a pro-se filing by Crystal. Unfortunately, you drafted it and in all likelihood researched it. It has all the hallmarks of your style. Lots of unsupported allegations and conclusory statements. It lacks citation to authority which most prisoners provide because of the jailhouse law libraries. It does have your usual citation, if you can call it that, to various unrelated legal matters reported in the popular media. Which of course, you never favor the court with any reasons why those unrelated proceedings should have any value for a court trying to figure out your pleadings. Never-the-less, Crystal caught a break with the mis-filed MAR. Unfortunately, it is not a particularly good effort on her/your part. It would help if you are going to ignore the law, if you took a remedial course in rhetoric. At least that would help you construct an argument.

As is, with friends like you, Crystal doesn't need any enemies.

Walt-in-Durham

Walt, the fact that the brief is type suggests that Crystal didn't directly draft the document because she has no access to a computer or keyboard in prison. I did my best to try and remedy this by twice offering to purchase a laptop computer, printer, Word software, ink cartridges and a ream of paper for the purpose of donating it to the NC Correctional Institution for Women. I never received a reply from the warden. As far as citations for the document, the government is remiss in precluding me from having access to the law library in Raleigh's Federal Courthouse.

To quote John Paul Jones, "I have not yet begun to fight." Though a few battles may have been lost, the war is far from over.; August 27, 2016 at 3:53 AM
Anonymous said...: from hissy fit

"Anonymous said: "An understanding of the law is a good first step"............To the common man, using esoteric legal processes to deny justice makes no sense"

Except no one denied crystal justice. crystal tried to deny three innocent enjustice by falsely accusing them of rape. hissy fit indulges tet again in hypocrisy in the name of justice.; August 27, 2016 at 3:54 AM
Anonymous said...: more from hissy fit

"To the common man using common sense it was Duke that killed Daye not Crystal and saying otherwise is nonsensical. Off to work so I'll be back this evening"

Experirnce in dealing with situations like the Reginald Daye stabbing says crystal killed Reginald Daye.

Neither harr nor hissy fit have the Clinical experience to unerstand what happened to Rginald Daye.; August 27, 2016 at 3:58 AM
Anonymous said...: for harr:

Not only are you ignorant of clinical medicine and ignorant of the law, you are ignorant of history.

In the Battle of Flamborough Head, John Paul Jones' objective was to destroy a convoy from the Baltic States which was carrying strategically important naval stores to Britain. Serapis and Countess of Scarborough were the convoy escorts.

Jones captured Serapis. One of his ships captured Countess of Scarborough.

In capturing Serapis, Jones' flagship, Bon Homme Richard was severely damaged and sunk. Half his crew were killed or wounded. Jones took his prizes to Holland. Britain exerted diplomatic pressure on Holland which turned the captured British ships over to France.

Meanwhile, that strategically important Baltic convoy got to Britain intact. Richard Pearson, Captain of Serapis, was knighted for his efforts which protected the convoy.

People in the Navy won't like this, but Jones suffered a strategic defeat, losing his flagship, losing half his crew, and failing to achieve his objective.; August 27, 2016 at 4:37 AM
Anonymous said...: hey harr:

The battle off Flamborough head lasted 3 hours.

The fights you have picked have lasted for years, and you have won nothing.

Review the comments posted by Abe Froman if you want a tally of your non triumphs; August 27, 2016 at 5:22 AM
Anonymous said...: hissy fit, quotung Cervantes:

"One man scorned and covered with scars still strove with his last ounce of courage to reach the unreachable stars; and the world will be better for this"

How has the world been made better by crystal lying about being raped, or by nifong prosecuting innocent men for a crime which noifong knew never happened, or by harr claiming nifong, when he embarked knowingly on this malicious prosecution, acted with integrity?

You have ome up with zero evidence that ant crime hapened or that crystal ever told the trruth when she claimed she had been raped.; August 27, 2016 at 6:02 AM
fake guiowen said...: That's not Cervantes; those are some lyrics from Man of La Mancha, based, admittedly, on some things you can read in Cervantes's masterwork. I hope you don't think Cervantes, in the 16th century, wrote things tht translated so beautifully into 20th century English.; August 27, 2016 at 10:51 AM
A Lawyer said...: The decisions are not based on a search for justice but on a crafted justification, slick citations and all, to deny justice

So, Ken, you have read the cited cases and can explain to us how they do not support the result the court reached?

And you can point us to a single time in American history where a court held that a private citizen can sue an elected district attorney for failing to meet with him or her?

Or are you just making stuff up again?; August 27, 2016 at 11:50 AM
kenhyderal said...: @ Fake Guiowen: So was the Spanish quote ( "¡Que un hombre despreciado y cubierto de cicatrices, Todavía se esforzó con su último gramo de coraje, Para alcanzar la estrella inalcanzable!") not authentic Cervantes or was it reverse translated from the musical? If it is from Don Quixote what would be a more accurate translation?; August 27, 2016 at 3:20 PM
Anonymous said...: from hssy fit:

"Fake Guiowen: So was the Spanish quote ( "¡Que un hombre despreciado y cubierto de cicatrices, Todavía se esforzó con su último gramo de coraje, Para alcanzar la estrella inalcanzable!") not authentic Cervantes or was it reverse translated from the musical? If it is from Don Quixote what would be a more accurate translation?"

Whatever the source of the quote, it does not describe harr. Trying to convince people that innocent raped crystal, saying that nifong behaved with integrity when he knowingly accused innocent men of a crime he knew never happened, trying to get the false accuser in the Duke Rape Hoax a pass for murdering her boyfriend, that is not trying to make the world a better place.; August 27, 2016 at 3:34 PM
kenhyderal said...: A Lawyer said: "So, Ken, you have read the cited cases and can explain to us how they do not support the result the court reached? ..............................................I don't play that game. We're talking common sense, to the common man, whose view would undoubtedly be "cut the crap" and agree to meet with the citizen you work for.
A Lawyer also said: "And you can point us to a single time in American history where a court held that a private citizen can sue an elected district attorney for failing to meet with him or her?......................................Too bad Dr. Harr had to resort to a lawsuit to get her attention. Do you have any guess why she would not even bother meet with him. Too busy, too embarrassed, too intimidated? No it's because of his challenge to the corrupt system that she is part and party to. Crystal and Dr. Harr will come out of all this with honor while the Justice System, already held in such disregard and the reputation Lawyers who practice in it will fall even lower in the eyes of the common man.; August 27, 2016 at 3:50 PM
fake guiowen said...: Kenny,

There are passages from Cervantes that refer to the way some people saw Don Quixote. There is nothing in his works that translates as the lyrics from The Impossible Dream. Now anyone can translate from English in to Spanish, using (if necessary) google translate. That hardly makes this Spanish translation into a quote from Cervantes.
Is that clear enough for you?; August 27, 2016 at 4:13 PM
kenhyderal said...: No need for sarcasm. Your getting as bad as the authentic Guiowen. You did not answer my question. Are you saying that this Spanish quote is not authentic Cervantes and it is only lyrics from the musical translated back into Spanish?; August 27, 2016 at 4:27 PM
Anonymous said...: from hissy fit:

"Too bad Dr. Harr had to resort to a lawsuit to get [DA Freeman's] attention. Do you have any guess why she would not even bother meet with him."

One reason would be that DA Freeman had no authority to intervene in a criminal case outside her jurisdiction.

Another reason would be, harr demanded she get crystal's conviction overturned and crystal released from prison, something DA Freeman had no authority to do.

Another reason is that harr was alleging criminal activity in Durham County, and he should have reported the activity to the authorities in Durham County.

The lawyers o this forum have explained all this quite clearly. That hissy fit is too stupid to recognize the situation, that does not establish grounds for harr to file suit against Wake County DA Freeman.

The most important reason would be, harr was alleging crimes. harr's behavior in the Duke Rape Hoax and in the Shan Carter felony murder case shows harr is incapable of determining what is or is not criminal activity..; August 27, 2016 at 4:53 PM
Anonymous said...: further claptrap from hissy fit{

"No it's because of his challenge to the corrupt system that [DA Freeman] is part and party to."

What was corrupt in the system was nifong's attempt to convict innocent men of raping crystal after crystal lied about being raped. hissy fit maintains crystal was raped even though he can provide zero evidence crystal was raped, even though he has admitted he can not provide evidence crystal told the truth about raped. So much for hissy fit's ability to know what is or is not corruption in a justice system.

"Crystal and Dr. Harr will come out of all this with honor"

Hardly since neither harr nor crystal has shown any knowledge what honor is.

"while the Justice System, already held in such disregard and the reputation Lawyers who practice in it will fall even lower in the eyes of the common man."

So now hissy fit presumes he knows what truly honorable men believe, hissy fit who has shown that he himself is devoid ogf honor. How else can one describe an individual who believes innocent men should be convicted of rape on the word of a liar, who was already a convicted criminal and false accuser at the time she lied about being raped on te night of 13/14 March 2006.; August 27, 2016 at 5:06 PM
fake guiowen said...: KENHYDERAL,
yes, that is what I said. There is no quote from Cervantes that translates into the lyrics from TID.; August 27, 2016 at 5:17 PM
Anonymous said...: for hissy fit

empty calories

calories derived from food containing no nutrients.

Yur posts are the intellectual equivalent of empty calories.

A lot of words but zero meaningful content.; August 27, 2016 at 5:51 PM
A Lawyer said...: .I don't play that game.

...meaning you know you'd lose. You were the one who brought up the argument that the decisions against Dr. Harr were based on "slick citations." Your inability to support that claim is duly noted.

We're talking common sense, to the common man, whose view would undoubtedly be "cut the crap" and agree to meet with the citizen you work for.

Wake County, as of July 1, 2015, had a population of 1,024,198. Is the DA required to meet with all of them? That's more than 2,800 meetings each day, including Sundays. How long does each meeting have to last to satisfy your legal standard?

In any event, if the "common man" doesn't like the way DA Freeman is doing her job, they can vote her out at the next election. That's how we handle political disputes in this country. Suing her for the tort of "ignoring Sidney Harr" is not a proper response.

Do you have any guess why she would not even bother meet with him. Too busy, too embarrassed, too intimidated?

As I explained just above, "too busy" is a perfectly adequate explanation.

But if you want another reason, consider this: If I called up my local DA and told him I wanted to meet with him to discuss the aliens from outer space who come very night and steal my prize tomatoes from a field in a neighboring county, I suspect he'd refuse to meet with me. If you think that's a bad analogy, consider that Dr. Harr has a multi-decade record of filing baseless lawsuits from one end of the country to another. He was just recently sanctioned by a federal court in North Carolina for frivolous litigation. Isn't that a valid reason for DA Freeman to budget her time more wisely?

Suppose DA Freeman had met with Dr. Harr. Could another citizen of Wake County sue her for wasting her job time and the taxpayers' money? Can you give one reason why Dr. Harr's lawsuit would be valid and that one would not?; August 27, 2016 at 9:07 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

If I demand a meeting with Barak Obama to discuss the alien takeover at Area 51 and show him all the articles and evidence there are aliens there - does he have an obligation to meet with me? And if he refuses can I sue?

Freeman has over 1 million people in Wake County. She can't meet with every loon who wants to talk to her, especially when they are complaining about something she can do nothing about.

You are pathetic.; August 28, 2016 at 4:46 AM
kenhyderal said...: @ A Lawyer:........... DA FReeman spent a lot more time responding to Dr. Harr's suit then she would have if she had met with him about his report of a crime and if necessary referred it to the proper agent. But, I'm sure that's OK with her. She will spend as much time and effort as it takes to keep the corrupt system she is part of going.; August 28, 2016 at 8:35 AM
Anonymous said...: more ignorance from hissy fit:

"DA FReeman spent a lot more time responding to Dr. Harr's suit then she would have if she had met with him about his report of a crime and if necessary referred it to the proper agent."

Presumes a number of facts not at all in evidence, namely, that harr is capable of recognizing what is or is not criminal, that harr had no obligation to report his allegations to the proper authorities, that harr had some kind of right to report criminal activity to someone who has no jurisdiction over the alleged criminal activity and force that perso to intervene, that the person to whom harr reported the criminal activty had an obligation to accept harr's allegations as credible.

"But, I'm sure that's OK with her. She will spend as much time and effort as it takes to keep the corrupt system she is part of going."

It seems o with you that harr files a frivolous, non meritorious lawsuit because he wants to get his and your favorite murderess/false accuser a pass for her crimes.

hissy fit, DA Freeman wasted a lot of her time because harr filed a lawsuit which he had no right to file.

That you are too blindly stupid to see that does not render harr's lawsuit meritorious.; August 28, 2016 at 9:22 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You have 126 days to exonerate and free Mangum.

It has been 59 days since the end of June, 127 days since April 23rd, 166 days since the Ides of March and 3,361 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; August 28, 2016 at 9:24 AM
Anonymous said...: You have to remember Sidney has to keep his costs down. Filing a suit in Durham County would require travel to Durham. And as we all know this is just to much trouble(like never checking the apartment layout). Some things he is forced to leave Wake, but having a suit or two locally is so much easier.; August 28, 2016 at 10:54 AM
A Lawyer said...: DA FReeman spent a lot more time responding to Dr. Harr's suit then she would have if she had met with him

What evidence do you have that she spent 30 seconds on the lawsuit? If you read the motion to dismiss, you will see that it was filed on her behalf by the State Attorney General's Office.; August 28, 2016 at 11:12 AM
JSwift said...: Kenny states: DA FReeman spent a lot more time responding to Dr. Harr's suit then she would have if she had met with him

Kenny,

If Freeman's office had met with him and disagreed with his accusations, declining to follow up with he authorities in Durham and indicating that they have no power to intervene in Mangum's case (let alone order her release), how confident are you that he would not have sued her anyway?

After all, you and Sidney seldom admit you are wrong; anyone who disagrees with either of you is evil and/or conspiring against you. One of the DA's filings noted that Sidney completely misunderstands the legal concept of "proximate cause." As is common with Sidney's style, he ignored this argument entirely.

John D. Smith
New York, NY; August 28, 2016 at 12:26 PM
Anonymous said...: I doubt Freeman spent more than a few minutes on the lawsuit. The AGs office would have defended, and they needed little to no input from her.; August 28, 2016 at 12:39 PM
kenhyderal said...: JSwift said: "One of the DA's filings noted that Sidney completely misunderstands the legal concept of "proximate cause." ...........................Yeah, yeah we know a Welch president no matter how torturous can be use to save Duke from any liability.; August 28, 2016 at 1:45 PM
Anonymous said...: more ignorance from hissy fit:

"JSwift said: "One of the DA's filings noted that Sidney completely misunderstands the legal concept of "proximate cause." ...........................Yeah, yeah we know a Welch president no matter how torturous can be use to save Duke from any liability."

Irrelevant statement as Duke incurred any liability. It takes a lot more than the opinions of two clinically ignorant incompetents to establish medical negligence.; August 28, 2016 at 2:04 PM
JSwift said...: Kenny falsely states: Yeah, yeah we know a Welch president [sic] no matter how torturous [sic] can be use to save Duke from any liability.

Kenny,

You are confused once again.

The Welch precedent says nothing--absolutely nothing--about saving "Duke from any liability." I will start with the premise that Duke committed malpractice in the esophageal intubation and thus is negligent. As a result of this malpractice, Duke may have civil liability to Daye's relatives.

As has been discussed repeatedly on this blog, the question addressed by Welch is whether, IN ADDITION TO DUKE'S CIVIL LIABILITY, Magnum is ALSO criminally responsible. If there is an intervening cause, Magnum is not criminally responsible, and Duke remains civilly responsible. If there is no intervening cause, Magnum is criminally responsible and DUKE IS ALSO CIVILLY RESPONSIBLE.

Contrary to your false statement, there is nothing in Welch that would end Duke's civil liability. Absolutely nothing.

This subject has been discussed repeatedly. As a result, I believe that you owe an explanation for your false statemen to the readers of this blog. How can you be so confused when this point has been discussed so often. Obvious mistakes such as this detract from your already damaged credibility. When you misstate an obvious point of law, others find it more difficult to accept anything you have to say.

John D. Smith
New York, NY; August 28, 2016 at 2:05 PM
A Lawyer said...: Obvious mistakes such as this detract from your already damaged credibility. When you misstate an obvious point of law, others find it more difficult to accept anything you have to say.

Word.; August 28, 2016 at 2:30 PM
kenhyderal said...: So, whose going after Duke? His estranged relatives? The only person hurt by this is Crystal. With Crystal gaoled for, supposedly, murdering Daye, perhaps, on behalf of one or more or all of Daye's relatives a greedy American Trial Lawyers could on contingency sue Duke for their malpractice causing the death of their Family member. They might have to go out of State to find such a Lawyer. Or, maybe Walt would take this on. Duke might argue that Dr. Nicholls the renown pathologist said it wasn't them. Or maybe Dr. Anonymous could testify that there was no malpractice.; August 28, 2016 at 3:09 PM
JSwift said...: Kenny,

The only party able to "go after" Duke is someone on behalf of Daye's estate or Daye's relatives. However, at this point, I believe the statute of limitations has passed. If so, unless there was some sort of settlement, I expect they cannot sue Duke at this point.

I believe the law regarding contributory negligence you criticize so harshly in Welch is passed down to us from English common law. As a result, I expect that the same general principle is applicable in Canada as well as the United States.

Also, Crystal is not the "only person hurt by this." The person "hurt by this" most directly was Reginald Daye.

John D. Smith
New York, NY; August 28, 2016 at 3:25 PM
Anonymous said...: kenny,

I like your suggestion. Crystal should sue Duke for damages. Although a medical provider arguably has a duty only to the patient, this is a chance to create new law. If they hadn't screwed up, she wouldn't have been convicted of murder. That should be Sid's next project.; August 28, 2016 at 3:37 PM
Anonymous said...: hey hissy fit:

Whose expert medical testimony would establish malpractice?

You, no clinical training, no clinical experience hissy fit?

harr, the minimally trained, minimally experienced medical school graduate who was never accepted into residency training, who never achieved any board certification, and who spent his post medical school career filing and losing lawsuits?

It takes medical expert testimony to prove malpractice. If the Daye family had sued, their advocate would have had to prove their case. Your opinions, harr's opinions do not qualify as expert medical testimony.

Your opinions prove only that you are incredibly stupid.; August 28, 2016 at 5:09 PM
Anonymous said...: hssy fit, if there had been a malpratice suit on behalf of Reginald Dayr, if you and harr testified there was malpractice and if I had testified there was not, the result would have been a directed verdict in favor of the defendant.

Or, more likely, I would have never had to testify. After hearing your credentials, or hearing harr's credentials-or rather the lack thereof-the Judge would have dismissed the plaintiff's suit. The plaintiff would not have made their case.

Or, even more likely, once the plaintiffs' attorney learned you or harr were the experts, the lawyer would have realized he could not make the case and would have never tried to take the case to trial.; August 28, 2016 at 5:21 PM
Anonymous said...: hissy fit, this is something you again get wrong. You seem to believe Duke would have had to disprove the plaintiffs' case. The plaintiffs would have had to makr their case.

Again, if you and harr were the so called "experts" supporting the plaintiffs' case, their lawyer would never have taken the case.; August 28, 2016 at 5:25 PM
Walt said...: J Swift wrote: "The person "hurt by this" most directly was Reginald Daye."

Ding - Ding - Ding, Ladies and Gentlemen, We Have A Winner!

Walt-in-Durham; August 28, 2016 at 8:10 PM
Walt said...: Anonymous at 3:37 PM wrote: "If they hadn't screwed up, she wouldn't have been convicted of murder."

But, she would have been convicted of attempted murder or assault with a deadly weapon resulting in serious bodily injury. Same sentence.

Walt-in-Durham; August 28, 2016 at 8:15 PM
A Lawyer said...: perhaps, on behalf of one or more or all of Daye's relatives a greedy American Trial Lawyers could on contingency sue Duke for their malpractice causing the death of their Family member. They might have to go out of State to find such a Lawyer.

Duke gets sued for malpractice all the time. In-state lawyers have no problem suing Duke.

It is possible that Mr. Daye's family did threaten to sue Duke, which settled privately before suit was filed; there's no way to know either way. We do know that no suit was filed (that would be public record), and that it would be too late for the Daye family to sue now.; August 28, 2016 at 8:29 PM
kenhyderal said...: Dr. Anonymous said: "hssy fit, if there had been a malpratice suit on behalf of Reginald Dayr, if you and harr testified there was malpractice and if I had testified there was not, the result would have been a directed verdict in favor of the defendant"...................................... I should remind the blog readers that Dr. Harr discerned from the medical records the cause of Daye's cardiac and cerebral anoxia was an errant esophageal intubation while until it was absolutely irrefutable the pompous and self-important Dr. Anonymous continually spouted that there was no esophageal intubation. He did finally eat his words, though.; August 28, 2016 at 9:37 PM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You have 125 days to exonerate and free Mangum.

It has been 60 days since the end of June, 128 days since April 23rd, 167 days since the Ides of March and 3,362 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; August 29, 2016 at 4:30 AM
Anonymous said...: for kenny:

For your edification, yes it was an adverse event, harr recognized it and I did not. Check out http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3576054/. An adverse event does not automatically rise to the leve of malpractice. does not automatically rise to the level of malpractice. Many adverse events happen because if the risks inherent to medical care.

When crystal stabbed Reginald Daye, she lacerated his colon, a consequence of which was, his abdominal cavity was exposed to hours of contamination from pathogenic colonic bacteria. The delay was unavoidable. It ws due to the time it took the first responders to respond, to transport him to the hospital, and then the time it took hospital personnel to prepare him for surgery. The person who put him at risk was crystal.

An article you cited about esophageal intubation becomes malpractice when it is not recognized and not treated. The people who intubated Reginald Daye recognized that something was wrong and took stes to correct it. That they were unsuccessful did not automatically rise to the level of malpractice.; August 29, 2016 at 4:38 AM
Anonymous said...: more for kenny:

harr may have recognized the adverse event. What harr FAILED to recognize establishes he is no medical expert. Every surgical procedure entails the risk of complications. harr has repeatedly posted that the prognosis was for a full recovery. harr believed there was no possibility of surgical complications.

Reginld Daye was at risk of developing an intraabdominal infection, and I have already described why. harr has blogged that there was no possibility of a surgical infection.; August 29, 2016 at 4:43 AM
Anonymous said...: yet more for kenny:

For an expert witness to be accepted as an expert, that witness would have had to establish his expertise.

What could harr establish. Well, one question he would have been asked is, what experience have you had in the surgical treatment of colon lacerations. harr would have had to answer none. Or, what experience have you had dealing with intra abdominal infections. Again harr would have had to answer none.

So far as intubation, harr would have been asked what experience have you had, hoow many intubations have you done. harr once said, on a rare occasion he had intubated a patent's esophagus. I asked him how many intubations had he had performed. harr did not answer. If he did only one esophageal intubation in his abbreviated 17 year post medical school career, that could be considered rare. However if he only attempted 3 intubations and 1 of them was esophageal, then esophageal intubation would not have been a rare occurrence with him. I believe, if asked how many intubations he hhad performed, harr would have answered evasively.; August 29, 2016 at 4:54 AM
Anonymous said...: one more for kenny:

Had harr testified in a malpractice trial, Daye family versus Duke University Medical Center, and attempted to establish his expertise, the judge would have instructed the jury, harr is not an expert witness, and his testimony must beregarded as non expert.; August 29, 2016 at 4:57 AM
Anonymous said...: one final word for kenny:

Reginald Daye was placed at risk of the adverse event because crystal stabbed him and lacerated his coon. As legal experts have explained to you, even if there had been malpractice it would not have relieved crystal of criminal responsibility.

that you are too stupid to reognize that does not absolve her.; August 29, 2016 at 5:02 AM
Anonymous said...: fromhissy fit:

"

JSwift said: ". I also asked you to use your influence as a supporter to encourage Sidney to admit his error and correct it".......................... I am in no position to give advice, at your behest, to Dr. Harr; a man who has far more knowledge, experience and expertise than I."

Your knowledge and experience is zero. harr's is not that much above zero, maybe a 1, just to be generous. 1 divided by zero is infinity. So mathematically, harr is infinitely more knowledgeable than you. Compared to thousands of medical school graduates like me, who did complete residency training and did achieve board certification, harr's expertise is pathetic. You are damning him not with faint praise but almost inaudible praise.

"Technically speaking, you are correct but, de facto, it puts Dr. Harr at a prejudicial, subjective determination by those who are antagonistic to him. In other words practically speaking he is not in error. I note, you often, magisterially, demand responses."

harr's errors: crystal was the victim/accuser in the Duke Rape Case; she was the victimizer/false accuser in the Duke Rape HOAX; nifong acted with integrity when he knowingly prosecuted 3 innocent men for a crime which he knew never happened; Reginald Daye was not at risk for complications following surgery. Reginald Daye was not at risk of an intra abdominal infection after hours of colonic contamination of his abdominal cavity; felony murderer shan carter acted in self defense when he shot and killed Demetrius Green and Tyrone Baker. And here's goody: in his suit against DA Freean, harr said the suit was not about crystal, after he said in his suit that the relief sought was that crystal's conviction be overturned and crystal be released from prison.; August 29, 2016 at 5:45 AM
Anonymous said...: from hissy fit:

"I should remind the blog readers that Dr. Harr discerned from the medical records the cause of Daye's cardiac and cerebral anoxia was an errant esophageal intubation while until it was absolutely irrefutable the pompous and self-important Dr. Anonymous continually spouted that there was no esophageal intubation. He did finally eat his words, though."

Lame, hissy fit.

You only acknowledge your frustration over your own incredible stupidity.; August 29, 2016 at 5:48 AM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: " I should remind the blog readers that Dr. Harr discerned from the medical records the cause of Daye's cardiac and cerebral anoxia was an errant esophageal intubation ...."

In our criminal justice system, we do not relieve someone of criminal liability simply because there was a subsequent act of negligence. For that to happen, there must be some intervening cause that is, to quote the North Carolina Pattern Jury Instructions, the sole [emphasis added] cause of death. What Sid did not discern is that the errant esophageal intubation was the sole cause of death. Two qualified physicians did, of course, discern after reviewing the medical records that the errant esophageal intubation was not the sole cause of death. In fact, they concluded that the cause of death was a stab wound inflicted by Crystal Mangum.

Generally, we require the intervening cause to be malicious in nature if it is to cut off criminal liability. That is, the perpetrator of the intervening cause has to have criminal intent. Mere negligence is not sufficient to be an intervening, or as we call it in NC, sole cause. By way of illustration, had events happened as they did between Crystal and the late Reginald Daye, but after his surgery, an angry terrorist had decided to detonate a suicide vest in his hospital room, that would be an intervening cause. Why? Because the terrorist had malicious intent. Had that been the situation, Crystal would not have been criminally liable for the late Daye's death.

Although, she would have still been liable for either attempted murder or assault with a deadly weapon. The State must prove generally the same elements for Murder II, Attempted Murder and Assault with a deadly weapon resulting in serious bodily injury, but save one element. That is death. Had there been an intervening or sole cause that was not Crystal's stabbing, she would still have been convicted of either attempted murder, R. LaFave & Austin W. Scott, Jr., Substantive Criminal Law § 6.2, at 25 (1986 & Supp.2000), or assault with a deadly weapon. N.C.G.S. 8C § 14-32.

As you can see, North Carolina has two separate offenses, one common law - Attempted Murder in the Second degree, and one statutory law - assault with a deadly weapon resulting in serious bodily injury. The elements of the two crimes vary only slightly and reflect differing approaches to the same problem. What to do with the criminal who acts to kill, but does not succeed. The legislature addressed the problem by following the American Law Institute's Model Penal Code and enacted N.C.G.S. 8C § 14-32 in 1987.

The North Carolina Supreme Court, over two centuries followed the common law and developed the doctrine of "attempt." Both approaches are correct, the American Law Institute was really only trying to codify existing common law. NC has, and continues to have both common law crimes and statutory crimes. In either approach, Crystal would have been convicted on the facts in her case had Daye not died, or had there been a sole cause that intervened. North Carolina's sentencing guidelines, which are well designed to take racial disparities out of criminal sentencing, would have imposed a similar sentence to that which Crystal received for Murder 2.

Walt-in-Durham; August 29, 2016 at 6:22 AM
Anonymous said...: The only way that Crystal could have been found Not Guilty is self-defense, something that Sid and Kenny repeatedly told her to ignore.

Her attorneys were trying to get her acquitted. Kenny and Sid were trying to get her to be a convicted felon, and blame Duke.

Sid has a proven hatred of Duke, so does Kenny. They are using Crystal, and abusing her, and pretending to be her friend, to try and punish Duke.

And, as Sid has proven with his frequent lawsuits seeking monetary compensation for himself, he's also trying to sue enough people in the hopes that someone will settle with him and give him money.; August 29, 2016 at 8:13 AM
kenhyderal said...: @ Walt. Thank you Walt for that thorough explanation of the law as it exists. What it all boils down to though is our disagreement with Nicholls conclusion and our conclusion that treating his chronic alcoholism was the intervening and sole cause of his death. This is how the common person would judge this. Even the anonymous informant knew there were employees at Duke that believed this. Dr. Nicholls made no mention at all of all the intervening events. Why I ask? Was everything that happened irrelevant as far as the law is concerned ? If Dr. Nicholls had told the Jury the real cause of death with the complete sequence of events how would they have interpreted the Pattern Jury Instructions on this matter? If Dr. Roberts has taken the stand would she of brought up these matters and despite of them maintain her agreement with Dr. Nicholls. Then let the State appeal if they thought the common or statutory law was violated. If Crystal gets a new trial Medical Staff, who treated Daye's wounds, will testify that the stab wound was "medically" unrelated to his death regardless of what Dr. Nicholls said and regardless of the potential, as Dr. Anonymous so often points out, for an intra abdominal post surgical infection. Yes possible and a nice fall back to keep Crystal culpable but something never documented to have occurred. Even if it was a procedure required to rule this out as a differential from the presumptive diagnosis of life threatening acute alcohol withdrawal. I have no legal expertise but perhaps it's what you call Jury Nullification.; August 29, 2016 at 10:15 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid,

Are you and Kenny watching any of the Daryl Howard stuff? You keep thinking Crystal will be released immediately, even though you haven't filed anything to help her. A Judge set aside Howard's conviction over 2 years ago ... and they are still litigating it, and it will probably be a few more years. Nothing happens quickly.

You need to stop lying to Crystal and everyone else.; August 29, 2016 at 10:19 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

I still find it funny that you've never talked to Dr. Roberts but you still assume she couldn't have answered your questions. She would have been horrible for Crystal. She apparently even told Crystal that herself. The fact you keep pushing her testimony is proof that you are mainly upset that Crystal wasn't convicted.; August 29, 2016 at 10:22 AM
Anonymous said...: from kenny:

"@ Walt. Thank you Walt for that thorough explanation of the law as it exists. What it all boils down to though is our disagreement with Nicholls conclusion and our conclusion that treating his chronic alcoholism was the intervening and sole cause of his death"

You have not established that Reginald Daye wasa chronic alcoholic. The installation f contrast into his stomach was ot part of treatment for chronic alcoholism. it was part of a workup for an intra abdominal infection. Reginald Daye was placed at risk of intra abdominal infection when crystal stabbed him and lacerated his colon.

Are you going to repeat harr's delusion,that Reginald Daye was not at risk of an intra abdominal infection-the same harr who never performed surgery for abdominal trauma in his life?; August 29, 2016 at 10:26 AM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "The only way that Crystal could have been found Not Guilty is self-defense, something that Sid and Kenny repeatedly told her to ignore".................Self defence was so obvious that I can't see how any competent attorney could have let Coggins-Franks cast doubt on it. A bigger, stronger, jealous, drunken, enraged, knife tossing, chronic alcoholic, who admitted to violently attacking and assaulting Crystal. How he let her turn that into a smaller, weaker, frightened Crystal feloniously attacking him as he tried to flee seems to be completely inadequate representation. Your charge that we want Crystal, a person we care for, found guilty is preposterous and you know it.; August 29, 2016 at 10:28 AM
Anonymous said...: more from kenny:

"This is how the common person would judge this."

::Irrelevant. Anyone lacing clinical training or experience, e.g. you and harr, is not capable of understanding the situation.

"Even the anonymous informant knew there were employees at Duke that believed this."

What anonymous informant? What employees at Duke. Tis suspiciously similar to your story that klgo told you that some anonymous lacrosse player told him that he had witnessed unidentified party attendees rape crystal.; August 29, 2016 at 10:31 AM
Anonymous said...: more irrelevance from kenny:

"Dr. Nicholls made no mention at all of all the intervening events."

That was because there were no intervening events, as yhe knowledgeable legal experts have explained to you. Your clinical ignorance, harr's clinical incompetence do not establish there were.; August 29, 2016 at 10:33 AM
Anonymous said...: more irrelevance from kenny:

"If Dr. Nicholls had told the Jury the real cause of death with the complete sequence of events how would they have interpreted the Pattern "

Dr. Nichols did tell the jury the real cause of death.; August 29, 2016 at 10:35 AM
Anonymous said...: from kenny:

"If Dr. Roberts has taken the stand would she of brought up these matters and despite of them maintain her agreement with Dr. Nicholls."

What matters? Just like you have provided zero evidence that crystal was raped, you have provided no evidence there were other matters to be brought up.; August 29, 2016 at 10:38 AM
Anonymous said...: krnny's ignorance emerges again:

"If Crystal gets a new trial Medical Staff, who treated Daye's wounds, will testify that the stab wound was "medically" unrelated to his death regardless of what Dr. Nicholls said and regardless of the potential, as Dr. Anonymous so often points out, for an intra abdominal post surgical infection."

No they wouldn't. It is clear to anyone with hands on experience dealing with colon trauma and intra abdominal infection from colon trauma, and that includes me and excludes kenny and harr that Reginald Daye was at risk of an intra abdomonal infection post op, and that risk is what led to the adverse event which resulted in his death. Reginald Daye was put at risk by crystal.

Tell us, kenny, how many times have you and harr performed surgery on a patient with penetrating colon trauma?; August 29, 2016 at 10:44 AM
Anonymous said...: kenny manifests more ignorance:

"Yes possible and a nice fall back to keep Crystal culpable but something never documented to have occurred. Even if it was a procedure required to rule this out as a differential from the presumptive diagnosis of life threatening acute alcohol withdrawal. I have no legal expertise but perhaps it's what you call Jury Nullification. "

Tell us kenny, how does a diagnosis of life threatening alcohol intoxication exclude the possibility of a life threatening intra abdomonal infection in a patient exposed to hours of colonic contamination of the abdominal cavity from a penetrating stab wound of the colon. It doesn't.

And I remind you you have not established that Reginald Daye was undergoing life threatening alcohol withdrawl.; August 29, 2016 at 10:50 AM
Anonymous said...: more from kenny:

"Self defence was so obvious that I can't see how any competent attorney could have let Coggins-Franks cast doubt on it."

What legal training have you had that makes you competent to render that opinion? None.

Evidence of your lac of competence coes from the Duke Rape Hoax. Both prosecution and defense agreed all the party attendees had been identified. The male DNA recovered from crystal did not match the DNA of any of the party attendees. Months after the Duke Rape Hoax imploded, you claim kilgo told you that an anonymous Lacrosse player told him that there were unidentified party attendees raped crystal. You made that assertion at a time when you could give no evidence to corroborate it. And you say this s evidence crystal was raped at the party.; August 29, 2016 at 10:57 AM
guiowen said...: Kenny,
Try not to lose your temper.; August 29, 2016 at 11:00 AM
Anonymous said...: more ignorance from kenny:

"A bigger, stronger, jealous, drunken, enraged, knife tossing, chronic alcoholic, who admitted to violently attacking and assaulting Crystal."

If you really knew anything about the case, you would know that was untrue. Just lie you have offered zero evidence that crystal was raped, you have offered zero evidence that Reginald Daye was violent, that Reginald Daye was a chronic alcoholic, that Reginald Daye indulged in knife tossing.

It is a kilgo-esque situation all over again. You imagine what happened and expect it to be accepted as true.; August 29, 2016 at 11:04 AM
Anonymous said...: yet more from kenny:

"How he let her turn that into a smaller, weaker, frightened Crystal feloniously attacking him as he tried to flee seems to be completely inadequate representation."

Seems to be only to you. But yo have manifested on many occasions you deny reality whenever it dors not fit your metanarrative.

The evidence showed crystal stabed Reginald Daye. Crystal could not make a casefrr self defense.

It is like the cab stealing episode. The details came frm police records generatedat the time of te incident. crystakl describes a different version years after the incident. And with no facts to support you, you say crystal's revised version should be accepted as true.; August 29, 2016 at 11:10 AM
Anonymous said...: A final bit of ignorance from kenny:

" Your charge that we want Crystal, a person we care for, found guilty is preposterous and you know it."

It is obvious you believe crystal should be given a pass for her crimes, which began years before she became the vicyimizer/false accuser in the Duke Raope Hoax. That does not render her innocent.

And who cares for her? Sadly, no one. Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, William Barber, Irving Joyner, even Victoeia Peterson, once staunch crystal supporters, have all distanced themselves from crystal.; August 29, 2016 at 11:15 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid,

Your buddy Nifong is going to be testifying in Durham today and tomorrow ... why aren't you there with your shirt showing support? You could also attempt to ask Howard's attorneys about Crystal's case, and then sue them if they ignore you ...; August 29, 2016 at 11:59 AM
Anonymous said...: kenny prevaricated:

"If Crystal gets a new trial Medical Staff, who treated Daye's wounds, will testify that the stab wound was "medically" unrelated to his death regardless of what Dr. Nicholls said and regardless of the potential, as Dr. Anonymous so often points out, for an intra abdominal post surgical infection."

Which member(s) of the medical staff who treated Mr. Daye is(are) going to testify that the stab wound inflicted by Mangum was "medically" unrelated to his death, or did we just catch you in yet another lie?

kenny further prevaricated:

"Self defence was so obvious that I can't see how any competent attorney could have let Coggins-Franks cast doubt on it."

Self defense was not obvious. After reviewing all the evidence, the jury unanimously rejected Mangum's self defense claim, for reasons previously explained ad nauseum by Walt, A Lawyer and others. Like it or not, that ship has sailed and it isn't coming back. It is a determination that is not subject to further review.

As Sid is slowly learning, justice will not be subverted. Mangum must pay for her crimes. Hopefully, when she gets out in 2026, or thereabouts, she will have learned something from all this and be ready to rejoin society. Otherwise, she may very well end up back in prison again.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; August 29, 2016 at 11:59 AM
Anonymous said...: No, Kenny,

It's obvious to all that you and Sid don't actually care for Crystal - you abuse and manipulate her for your own purposes - and the problem now is that she will get out - had she gotten LWOP like you and Sid wanted, you'd have a Martyr for life.

You are a pathetic joke and everyone on this blog knows it. No one thinks you are a real friend to Crystal or want her helped.; August 29, 2016 at 12:02 PM
Anonymous said...: from http://abc11.com/news/disbarred-prosecutor-could-be-called-in-murder-case/1489068/:

"Expected to testify at the hearing is former Durham County district attorney Mike Nifong, whom Hudson said in his 2014 ruling failed to share with defense attorneys a police memo and other evidence that pointed to suspects other than Howard."

And:

"[darryl Howard] was sentenced to 80 years in prison in 1995 after being convicted in the strangling of 29-year-old Doris Washington and her daughter, 13-year-old Nishonda. Both were sexually assaulted, and their apartment was burned. Witnesses who lived in the same housing project testified they saw Howard at the crime scene."

And:

"Later DNA testing of samples taken from the two bodies showed sperm left by a convicted felon who has a history of drug dealing and violence against women, Howard's attorneys from the New York-based Innocence Project said in court filings."

And:

"It wasn't until a few years ago that Howard's attorneys found a Durham police memo about an informant's tip that the convicted killer's attorney said wasn't turned over before the murder trial, the Court of Appeals said. The police tipster knew that the women were raped before being killed, which investigators hadn't told the public, a police captain noted. The informant added that the women were probably killed because Doris Washington allowed drug dealers to sell from her apartment, and they blamed her for $8,000 worth of missing drugs."; August 29, 2016 at 12:35 PM
Anonymous said...: from http://www.newsobserver.com/opinion/op-ed/article12523220.html:

"In 1992, Darryl was arrested and charged with the murders of Doris Washington and her 13-year-old daughter, Nishonda. Injuries and physical evidence recovered from their bodies provided clear evidence they had both been sexually assaulted. Because of the limited technology available at the time, no DNA was recovered from Doris. However, DNA testing of the evidence recovered from Nishonda proved before trial that Darryl wasn’t the person who raped Nishonda.

To get around this powerful evidence pointing to Darryl’s innocence, the lead prosecutor, MIKE NIFONG(ephasis added), and Durham Police Detective Darryl Dowdy incredibly took great measures to convince the jury that no sexual assaults took place. They succeeded. Darryl was convicted and has spent more than 20 years in prison for a crime he didn’t commit."

Read more here: http://www.newsobserver.com/opinion/op-ed/article12523220.html#storylink=cpy; August 29, 2016 at 12:40 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny and Sid still like to ignore the key issue in the self-defense:

It doesn't matter if Daye started the fight - he was clearly the aggressor when he kicked in the door, and drug her out. If he had been on top of her when she grabbed a knife and stabbed him, it would have been self-defense. However, the Jury believed that he let her go, and she ran into another room, grabbed a knife, and came back at him. They can (and likely did) believe that Daye was bigger, and attacked Crystal in a drunken rage. But, they also believed he had abandoned the fight by letting her go and turning to leave. At that point, nothing that had happened before mattered. Crystal no longer had self-defense to protect herself because she could have left.

That's why the Milton Morgan evidence was so damaging - because that's exactly what Crystal did there - went into the other room to grab an knife and rejoin the fight.

Ignore it all you want Kenny, the Jury heard the evidence, and just didn't find Crystal credible.; August 29, 2016 at 1:10 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: " grabbed a knife, and came back at him"................A knife? There were a multitude of knives scattered all over the apartment. Anybody ask how they got there? No need to run to the kitchen if Daye had peppered them all over the house. What about the angle of the knife entry suggesting that Daye was on top of Crystal? Most likely one of the multitude of knives scattered throughout would have been at hand for Crystal, as she lay gasping for air beneath Daye while he attempted to choke the life out of her. So do you think Daye was a peaceful man who fled his own apartment just to restore peace. Where was he going to seek refuge from Crystal? At his Nephew's place? By the time he got to Hospital his BAC was still in the grossly intoxicated stage. All questions the Jury never heard.; August 29, 2016 at 1:40 PM
guiowen said...: From what I can see (and this is what the jury believed), Reginald did in fact attack Crystal. After a moment, however, he came to his senses, let go of her, and started to walk out of the room. (Note he was not fleeing.) Crystal decided to teach him a lesson, and stabbed him in the back. Why shouldn't she? She had done this once before, to good old Milton, and got away with a slap on the wrist. Surely Reginald would testify on her behalf, just as Milton had done. Unfortunately, Reginald died on her, and couldn't help her any more. Too bad, Reggie! Too too bad, Crystal!; August 29, 2016 at 2:05 PM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: " What it all boils down to though is our disagreement with Nicholls conclusion and our conclusion that treating his chronic alcoholism was the intervening and sole cause of his death."

There's your problem. An intervening cause has to have malicious intent. It's not a condition of the victim. It's not negligence of some third party. It is not even the intentional, but lawful, act of a third party. It has to be malicious. Until you can identify that malicious act, your medical theory just does not work.

"This is how the common person would judge this."

Your sense is not common. Rather, your sense is uncommon.

"Even the anonymous informant knew there were employees at Duke that believed this."

Unsupported hearsay. Try some evidence.

"If Dr. Roberts has taken the stand would she of brought up these matters and despite of them maintain her agreement with Dr. Nicholls."

You keep bringing up Dr. Roberts taking the stand. She would not have contradicted her findings. Independent Medical Examiners simply don't do that. No expert does. It's called lying. Either they are lying on the stand or they are lying in their report. They aren't going to lie. You have an IME to tell you the truth, whatever it is so you can adjust your defense accordingly. Crystal got an IME and she got her unvarnished opinion. Had she not liked the IME opinion, then Crystal needed to get a different IME. Unfortunately, Sid revealed Dr. Roberts' opinion and it made it impossible for Crystal to get a different IME to say something different. If that would have even been possible. You have to think that when two Docs agree on a cause of death the chance of finding one with a differing opinion is going to be very unlikely.

"Then let the State appeal...."

That's not the way it works, the state cannot appeal an acquittal. The double jeopardy clause.

"... Medical Staff, who treated Daye's wounds, will testify that the stab wound was "medically" unrelated to his death..."

I guess you just don't understand the issue of malicious. Unrelated is not malicious.

"I have no legal expertise but perhaps it's what you call Jury Nullification."

That is the argument for the ultimate injustice. Special treatment for this one defendant not available to all others.

Walt-in-Durham; August 29, 2016 at 2:06 PM
Anonymous said...: Plus, in her report Dr. Roberts noted they suspected DTs, and started treatment, but he was non-responsive so they stopped. Do you think she would be more likely to say that means it wasn't DTs, or that she would continue to back the DT theory, despite medical evidence it wasn't DTs?; August 29, 2016 at 2:09 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny seems to know what a lot of folks would say, even though he's never done anything but sit on his keyboard and type.

Kenny, this is why you aren't fooling anyone - you want to pretend to help Crystal to continue to emotional abuse her. You are a whiny, pathetic, abusive joke.; August 29, 2016 at 2:10 PM
Anonymous said...: hissy fit's latest:

"Anonymous said: " grabbed a knife, and came back at him"................A knife? There were a multitude of knives scattered all over the apartment. Anybody ask how they got there? No need to run to the kitchen if Daye had peppered them all over the house."

crystal waas the source of reginald daye throwing knives. Credibility, thy name is not crystal mangum.

"What about the angle of the knife entry suggesting that Daye was on top of Crystal? Most likely one of the multitude of knives scattered throughout would have been at hand for Crystal, as she lay gasping for air beneath Daye while he attempted to choke the life out of her."

Again, that is from crystal. Credibiity, thy name is not crystal mangum.

"So do you think Daye was a peaceful man"

According to Officer Bond, who interviewed women who had known Reginald Daye before crystal murdered him, Feginald aye was not a violent man. Again the history f Reginald Daye's violence comes from crystal. Credibility, thy name is not crystal mangum.

"who fled his own apartment just to restore peace. Where was he going to seek refuge from Crystal? At his Nephew's place?"

By all accounts that is what he did. That you, who believes crystal was raped even though you can provide zero evidence of that, do not believe that is irrelevant.

"By the time he got to Hospital his BAC was still in the grossly intoxicated stage. All questions the Jury never heard."

Again, even id Reginald Daye had been an alcoholic, that BAC would have rendered him unconscious. He wasn't. If he could have tolerated a BAC that high, he would have been exposing his liver to high levels of toxins secondary to alcohol metabolism and his liver wouldhave been damaged. It wasn't. That you believeit was damaged is meaningless. After all you believe mystery rapists raped crystal, even though you have zero evidence she was raped, zero evidence there ever were unidentified mystery rapists.; August 29, 2016 at 2:11 PM
Anonymous said...: No one has ever said Daye was peaceful - except Crystal - remember, she was asked on the stand if he had ever raised his voice to her, or struck her - after a neighbor said he heard fighting and yelling. Crystal is the one who said Daye was peaceful, was she lying?

And, again, you are ignoring that it doesn't matter. Even if he threw knives all around. The physical evidence didn't support him strangling Crystal when stabbed, and being stabbed in the bedroom.

Only Crystal said he was peaceful.

He could have attacked her in a drunken rage - but then he let her go, and abandoned the fight. She didn't.; August 29, 2016 at 2:26 PM
Anonymous said...: According to the neighbor, Kia Haynes, Daye was not peaceful. She often heard yelling, and screaming, and sounds like people getting hit and/or being thrown against the wall - at least once hard enough to knock her clock off.

Crystal was asked about this on the stand - she said that Daye had never raised his voice to her, had never struck her, and she had never known him to be anything but gentle and kind. Evidence had come in that Daye was violent, Crystal is the one who dismissed it and discounted it. So, why do you keep saying Crystal was lying about Daye?

Was Crystal lying?; August 29, 2016 at 2:28 PM
kenhyderal said...: Even if lying about Daye having previously been violent to her would have been helpful, Crystal would not and did not lie under oath. She naively believed if she took the stand and told the truth she would receive justice. Crystal believed she had nothing to fear from the truth.Daye's maniacal rage in her experience was a one time event triggered by insane jealousy. Crystal dismissed and discounted it because in wasn't the truth.; August 29, 2016 at 3:03 PM
kenhyderal said...: @ Walt: Can I ask you Walt what exactly was adjudged the malicious intent in the Welch case.; August 29, 2016 at 3:05 PM
kenhyderal said...: @ Dr. Anonymous: I've given you citations many times that show a chronic alcoholic can register a BAC of up to 400 and can still function. Do I have to repost them? Also I have also shown that a chronic alcoholic can in a majority of case still have a normal liver. Do I have to repost that? Besides, who can trust Dr. Nicholls pronouncement anyway that Daye's liver was normal or for that matter that his spleen was absent.; August 29, 2016 at 3:14 PM
Anonymous said...: the latest from hissy fit:

"Dr. Anonymous: I've given you citations many times that show a chronic alcoholic can register a BAC of up to 400 and can still function."

A chronic alcoholic who can function with a bac thathigh would have a history of heavy drinkng for years. The products of alcohol metabolism are hepatotoxc. An alcoholic who could function at that high BAC would have been exposing to high levels of liver toxins for years. Such a person, more likely than not, would have had liver damage, which translates to, it is highly unlikely such an individual would have a normal liver.

"Do I have to repost them? Also I have also shown that a chronic alcoholic can in a majority of case still have a normal liver."

:Not an alcoholic who could tolerate a BAC that high.

"Do I have to repost that?"

Please do. All you would accomplish yet again is to show that you are totally ignorant of clinical medicine. Reading articles on line is not hands on clinical experience.

"Besides, who can trust Dr. Nicholls pronouncement anyway that Daye's liver was normal or for that matter that his spleen was absent."

Which is another iteration of how you explain the lack of evidence of rape on crystal's rape kit. Evidence should be there. It is not. You offer speculation, without offering any facts, as to why the evidence is not there. Then you say you have established that evidence was there. You haven't.; August 29, 2016 at 4:14 PM
kenhyderal said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; August 29, 2016 at 4:14 PM
kenhyderal said...: I said: Even the anonymous informant knew there were employees at Duke that believed this." Walt replied: "Unsupported hearsay. Try some evidence".................... It wold not be hearsay if the e-mail author, easily identified, and his Attorney Woody Van were subpoenaed and the Duke Staff member who was his informant was identified.; August 29, 2016 at 4:16 PM
Anonymous said...: more nonsense from hissy fit:

"Even if lying about Daye having previously been violent to her would have been helpful, Crystal would not and did not lie under oath. She naively believed if she took the stand and told the truth she would receive justice. Crystal believed she had nothing to fear from the truth.Daye's maniacal rage in her experience was a one time event triggered by insane jealousy. Crystal dismissed and discounted it because in wasn't the truth."

This yrt another iteration of kenny speculation. In this case, the evidence does not support hissy fit's view of the case. He offers not facts to support his case, just speculation as to why the facts do not support his case. Then he belirves, quite falsely, that he has made his case.; August 29, 2016 at 4:18 PM
Anonymous said...: the latest from hissy fit:

"I said: Even the anonymous informant knew there were employees at Duke that believed this." Walt replied: "Unsupported hearsay. Try some evidence".................... It wold not be hearsay if the e-mail author, easily identified, and his Attorney Woody Van were subpoenaed and the Duke Staff member who was his informant was identified."

So identify the email author. If you can't, this is but another iteration of, kilgo told you an anonymous lacrosse player told him he had witnessed unidentified party attendees rape crystal.

It is still hearsay.

How long have we been waiting for kilgo's anonymous lacrosse player to come forth. He hasn't. That rather strongly establishes he does not exist. You offer speculatin but no facts to explain why the anonymous lacrosse player has not come forth. Your speculation does not establish that kilgo's anonymous lacrosse player exists.; August 29, 2016 at 4:25 PM
kenhyderal said...: Dr. Anonymous said: "So identify the email author".............. Well, in this case we still have his e-mail address. So his identity could be easily ascertained. And certainly Attorney Vann knows his name.; August 29, 2016 at 4:46 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

Seeing you twist is pathetic. You said that it was a farce that Daye was peaceful and he was an angry alcoholic. It was pointed out that Crystal said Daye was peaceful, now you don't know what to do.

Is your life so pathetically sad that you have to abuse poor Crystal? Let her be.; August 29, 2016 at 4:48 PM
kenhyderal said...: Dr. Anonymous said: Reading articles on line is not hands on clinical experience".................................................................. But The Annals of the American Society of Science, though, is a pretty reliable source http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3283941; August 29, 2016 at 4:50 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: Seeing you twist is pathetic...............,. No twist there. Crystal's experience up to that time was such. But tell us in your opinion and from what you know was Daye a violent person? Kicking down a locked door and dragging a women out by the hair is extremely violent. Tolerating a blood alcohol of .296 and still walking and talking is a convincing sign of chronic alcoholism.; August 29, 2016 at 4:58 PM
JSwift said...: Kenny asks Walt: Can I ask you Walt what exactly was adjudged the malicious intent in the Welch case.

Kenny,

I obviously am not Walt, but nevertheless will answer.

You are confused once again.

As you recall, in the Welch case, the victim refused to have a transfusion and died. There was no malicious intent connected with the treatment. As a result, the failure to consent to a transfusion, likely causing death, was NOT an intervening cause and the defendant remained legally responsible for the victim's death due to the wounds he had inflicted.

I found Walt's answer to be completely clear. Your confused question makes it appear that you are making no attempt to understand what other posters are saying, but rather simply pretending to engage in a conversation with them.

I note that you never explained why you made such an obvious error yesterday when you completely misstated the law.

Finally, I suspect that you are reading too much into your "anonymous informant." As I recall, Vann was contacted by an anonymous informant at DUMC (and presumably has an e-mail address), who indicated that Daye had died after an esophageal intubation. The informant may be making the same error in legal judgment as you and Sidney, believing incorrectly that an esophageal intubation automatically cuts off Mangum's legal responsibility.

Are you genuinely having comprehension problems or are you just playing games with other commenters?

John D. Smith
New York, NU; August 29, 2016 at 5:29 PM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: "@Walt: Can I ask you Walt what exactly was adjudged the malicious intent in the Welch case."

You should recall that the facts in Welch were that the victim was a Seventh Day Adventist who did not believe in blood transfusions. The victim, through family, declined to have a life saving blood transfusion and subsequently died from an otherwise survivable wound. Welch argued the voluntary refusal of life saving medical treatment was the sole cause of his victim's demise.

The court upheld the guilty verdict and held that even the intentional withholding of life saving medical treatment was not an intervening cause. The court held that the killer could not compel his victim to take life saving medical treatment that was against his religious beliefs. Welch's murder conviction was upheld. There was no malicious act. Even though the victim would have survived had he taken the blood transfusion.

As I wrote earlier, a malicious act requires some person with criminal intent to intervene. The example I gave was of a terrorist invading the hospital. You could substitute mob hit man or some other person with a nefarious purpose. While, from Crystal's point of view, the case would be easier if the malicious act was done by someone with criminal intent against the late Daye, that is not an exclusive requirement. The malicious actor could have criminal intent to harm someone else and Daye be collateral damage. (Thus my use of the terrorist in a suicide vest without a specific intent to harm the late Daye.)

The law does not take away Daye's right to live simply because he is alleged to be a drunk. Even if he was a terminal cancer patient with only days to live when Crystal stabbed him, any loss of life, even if for moments, is sufficient to support the murder charge. We just don't devalue human life that much in this country. Nor do they in Canada, by the way.

Walt-in-Durham; August 29, 2016 at 5:42 PM
kenhyderal said...: @ Walt: Walt let me quote JSwift from yesterday. "The Welch precedent says nothing--absolutely nothing--about saving "Duke from any liability." I will start with the premise that Duke committed malpractice in the esophageal intubation and thus is negligent. As a result of this malpractice, Duke may have civil liability to Daye's relatives.As has been discussed repeatedly on this blog, the question addressed by Welch is whether, IN ADDITION TO DUKE'S CIVIL LIABILITY, Magnum is ALSO criminally responsible. If there is an intervening cause, Magnum is not criminally responsible, and Duke remains civilly responsible. If there is no intervening cause, Magnum is criminally responsible and DUKE IS ALSO CIVILLY RESPONSIBLE"..He believes I am confused but I agree entirely with this statement and I am of the opinion that there was an intervening cause ; that being Daye's acute alcoholic withdrawal due to his chronic alcoholism. Keep in mind that a hospital that restricts alcohol from a chronic alcoholic without adequately supporting him with compensatory treatments could be considered negligent.; August 29, 2016 at 9:36 PM
Anonymous said...: from kenny:

vThe Annals of the American Society of Science, though, is a pretty reliable source http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3283941

And:

"[Reginald Daye]Tolerating a blood alcohol of .296 and still walking and talking is a convincing sign of chronic alcoholism. "

Tour reference refers too ALL chronic alcoholics. You put Reginald Dayr in a subset of all alcoholics, an alcoholic who can tolerate aBAC of almost 300. Most chronic alcoholics can not tolerate a BAC of almost 300.; August 30, 2016 at 3:14 AM
Anonymous said...: hissy fit:\

A safe level of alcohol consumption is defined for men as 4 standard drinks in 24 hours. A example of a standard drink is a 12 ounce of beer(v).

To reach a BAC of 300, Reginald Daye would have had to consume a lot more than 4 standard drinks in 24 hours(http://awareawakealive.org/educate/blood-alcohol-content).

To reach the point tht he could have tolerated a BAC of 300, Reginald Daye would have had to consume a lot more than 4 standard drinks in 24 hours every day for years. Judging from what Officer Bond learned from women who knew Reginald Daye, he did not do that.; August 30, 2016 at 3:22 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You have 124 days to exonerate and free Mangum.

It has been 61 days since the end of June, 129 days since April 23rd, 168 days since the Ides of March and 3,363 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; August 30, 2016 at 3:33 AM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: " I am of the opinion that there was an intervening cause ; that being Daye's acute alcoholic withdrawal due to his chronic alcoholism."

You are entitled to your opinion. But, that opinion is not supported by the law. Not of this country and not of yours. Further, your opinion contrary to the law as it is, is no aid in your understanding of why Crystal is guilty and in prison. Worse, that leads you to the unfounded belief that somehow Crystal's class, race, or gender somehow is to blame for her circumstance. Those are errors attributable to your refusal to accept the law as it is. If you were to argue for a change in the law and were to set forth good reasons for it, perhaps people would respect your opinion more. But, you don't. You just repeat the same erroneous opinion time and time again. To quote Abe Froman, "no sausage for you."

"Keep in mind that a hospital that restricts alcohol from a chronic alcoholic without adequately supporting him with compensatory treatments could be considered negligent."

Again, negligence is not malice. For a cause to be considered the sole cause or an intervening cause, it must be malicious. Again, "no sausage for you."

Walt-in-Durham; August 30, 2016 at 3:51 AM
Anonymous said...: more for hissy fit:

http://www.gastro.net.au/diets/alcohol.html:

This reterence cites a number of studies which showed that the occurrence of alcohol related liver disease increases with heavy alcohol consumption. A quotr from this study:

"156 papers were reviewed assessing the relation of individual alcohol consumption to risk of physical damage. Evidence was found for a dose-response relationship between alcohol consumption and risk of liver damage. At levels of more than 20-30 grams alcohol/day, all individuals are likely to accumulate risk of harm. [P.Anderson et al. Addiction (1993) 88(11)]."

If Reginald Daye had consumed eniugh alcohol daily to be able to tolerate a BAC of near 300, the odds are he would have developed liver disease by the time he was murdered. Admitted the odds are not 100%. However the odds he would have a normal liver after that much drinking are much much less than 50%.

The facts, Date had no history of heavy drinking, able to function, normal liver, indicate that the BAC was a lab error. That you will not acknowledge that is not relevant.; August 30, 2016 at 4:02 AM
Anonymous said...: hissyfit, here is more for you:

You argue that crystal was not impaired when she arrived at the lacrosse party.

crystal admitted she drank 44 ounces of beer prior to the party. That would add up to 3 2/3 standard drinks in a period of much less than 24 hours. For women, a safe level of alcohol consumption is 2 standard drinks in 24 hours. Consuming 3 2/3 standard drinks inn the space of less than 2 hours would result in a BAC of more than 100 in a woman(http://awareawakealive.org/educate/blood-alcohol-content). A BAC that high would cause the kind of impairment described by David Evans ad Matt Zash in their statements to police(http://www.brad21.org/effects_at_specific_bac.html).

You have said that crystal had consumed that mch alcohol previously without suffering impairment. If that is true, you have documented crystal is a chronuc alcoholic.; August 30, 2016 at 4:14 AM
JSwift said...: Kenny states: .He believes I am confused but I agree entirely with this statement... in response to my comment that the Welch precedent says nothing--absolutely nothing--about saving "Duke from any liability."

This current agreement is in direct conflict with Kenny's false statement to which I responded: Yeah, yeah we know a Welch president [sic] no matter how torturous [sic] can be use to save Duke from any liability.

If we rule out confusion, as I suggested as the explanation for his false statement, we are left with two possible explanations for the false statement. First, Kenny could have simply made a stupid mistake and inadvertently said something he did not mean to say (although a fairly egregious one given the magnitude of the legal error). The second possible explanation is that Kenny deliberately lied, presumably in an attempt to support his opinion.

I note that, despite my requests for an explanation of how he made so significant an "error" in his legal analysis, for two days, Kenny has steadfastly refused to provide an explanation. I would certainly forgive a stupid mistake. I would not forgive a deliberate lie.

Kenny, I ask you for the the third time to explain how you made such a significant mistake in your comment. I also ask that you explain why it took you so long to note your agreement with me, even if you failed to acknowledge your error, criticizing my suggestion that you were confused. Would you have preferred that I concluded that you were a liar?

John D. Smith
New York, NY; August 30, 2016 at 4:21 AM
Anonymous said...: hissy fit to Walt:

"I am of the opinion that there was an intervening cause ; that being Daye's acute alcoholic withdrawal due to his chronic alcoholism."

You have not established that Reginald Daye was a chronic alcoholic.

And you presume Reginald Daye was not at risk of an intra abdominal infection. You presume that if DTs were present, DTs would not have excluded the possibility of an intra abdominal infection. The adverse event happened because Reginald Daye was at risk of an intra abdominal infection. That you are incapable of recognizing that is irrelevant.

Reginald Daye was put at risk of an intraabdominal infection when she stabbed him.; August 30, 2016 at 4:22 AM
Anonymous said...: hey, hissy fit:

My opinion that Reginald Dayewas at risk for intra abdominal infection isbased on actual clinical, hands on experience.I have dealt with intra abdominal infections resulting from colonic contamination. In a couple of cases, the duration of colonic contamination was of only 1-2 minutes duration. Reginald Daye was exposed to hours of colonic contamination.

Describe what actual hands on clinical experience you have hd with patients developing an intra abdominal infection from colonic contamination.; August 30, 2016 at 4:45 AM
JSwift said...: Anonymous 4:22:

You miss the bigger point.

You are correct in noting that Kenny has not established that Daye was a chronic alcoholic and that Kenny has not established that Daye was not at risk of an infection. However, even if Kenny were correct in his medical diagnosis, treatment for DTs would not represent a sole, or intervening, cause under the law because there was no malicious intent. As a result, Kenny is incorrect in his legal conclusion irrespective of whether he is correct in his medical conclusion.

Kenny doesn't like the law (or, more likely, doesn't like the law as it relates to this specific case). As a result, he is implicitly arguing for jury nullification. He doesn't want to use that term directly, so he tries to obfuscate the facts and the law.

I suppose he realizes that an appeal or MAR based on the argument that Meier did not attempt to encourage the jury to nullify the law has zero chance of success and risks being treated as frivolous.

John D. Smith
New York, Ny; August 30, 2016 at 4:45 AM
Anonymous said...: hissy fit, you like to cite on lie references.

Lry's have some references that say a patient exposed to hours of intra abdominal colonic contamination is not at risk of intra abdominal infection.; August 30, 2016 at 4:47 AM
Anonymous said...: hissy fit, how about some references showing that DTs occurring in a patient at risk of intra abdominal infection precludes the possibility of intra abdominal infection.

Reginald Daye's symptoms, fever, tachycardia, disorientation, are consistent with an infextious process. That is based on actual hands on clinical experience.

Thhat harr insists that a infection was not a risk is aevidence only of harrs lacjk f hands on clinical experience.; August 30, 2016 at 4:52 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid,

Why aren't you in Durham offering support to Nifong?

He's being accused of being a completely unethical and corrupt prosecutor - you need to offer your services to explain how he's not unethical or corrupt, but instead the beacon to which all prosecutors aspire.; August 30, 2016 at 7:22 AM
Anonymous said...: from http://www.dukechronicle.com/article/2016/07/prosecutor-in-duke-lacrosse-case-mike-nifong-faces-more-misconduct-allegations:

"Former Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong, prosecutor in the Duke lacrosse case, has been accused of misconduct again in the case of a 1995 double homicide.

WRAL reported that in 1995—while Nifong was district attorney—Darryl Anthony Howard was convicted of two counts of second-degree murder for the 1991 deaths of Doris Washington and her 13-year-old daughter, Nishonda Washington. Howard was sentenced to 80 years in prison.

In May 2014, Superior Court Judge Orlando Hudson ordered a new trial for the case. Hudson ruled that Nifong and a police detective who worked on the case withheld evidence suggesting that Doris Washington was raped and murdered by the New York gang for which she dealt drugs. This evidence—along with the fact that the DNA in this case implicated another man—could have proven Howard’s innocence.

Howard's attorneys, prosecutors and Hudson last month to discuss plans for the new hearing, which is scheduled for late August, according to WRAL.

According to a Washington Post column in 2014, Nifong maintained that neither Nishonda nor Doris Washington had been raped prior to their murders, despite evidence indicating otherwise.

'Years later, Nifong would attempt to prosecute innocent men for a rape that never happened,' Radley Balko of the Washington Post wrote. 'Here, he prosecuted a likely innocent man by pretending two rapes never happened.'”

Is harr going to get his wish, true justice for nifong, a criminal conviction and a prison term.

Who wants to bet harr will blame this on the non existent carpetbagger jihad?; August 30, 2016 at 8:40 AM
Anonymous said...: fromhttp://www.indyweek.com/news/archives/2016/08/29/the-morning-roundup-hb-2-is-doomed:

"Nifong, the prosecutor at trial, repeated the investigator’s claim to the jury during his closing arguments and suggested that the sperm on the teen was the result of consensual sex before the murder.

Those claims by Nifong and Dowdy were contradicted by a police memo that was in law enforcement files but not turned over to trial attorneys representing Howard."

This is the prosecutor who, according to harr, always behaved with integrity.; August 30, 2016 at 8:43 AM
Anonymous said...: and this:

"Darryl Anthony Howard, 54, was convicted in 1995 of two counts of second-degree murder in the 1991 drug-related deaths of Doris Washington and her 13-year-old daughter, Nishonda Washington. He was sentenced to 80 years in prison.

Superior Court Judge Orlando Hudson ordered a new trial in the case in May 2014, ruling that Nifong and a police detective withheld evidence suggesting that Doris Washington was raped and killed by a New York gang for which she dealt drugs – evidence that could have cleared Howard.

DNA evidence also implicated another man, not Howard, in the crime.

The state Court of Appeals reversed Hudson's ruling in April, however, ordering a hearing so that attorneys for the state could present evidence to show why the convictions against Howard should stand.

"The eyewitness testimony is this case was overwhelming that the defendant had committed this crime," Assistant Attorney General Mary Carla Babb argued to the appeals court last year.

Howard's attorneys, prosecutors and Hudson met behind closed doors Thursday to discuss plans for the hearing, which is scheduled for late August.

Prosecutors declined to comment after the meeting, but Howard's attorneys blamed Nifong for what they believe is the conviction of an innocent man.

"Not only did we have DNA testing, which we believe proves Mr. Howard's innocence, but also we think we have, we've alleged egregious prosecutorial misconduct," said Barry Scheck, co-director of the Innocence Project at the Benjamin Cardozo School of Law at Yeshiva University in New York.

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

"This is the worst kind of prosecutorial misconduct that you can have. It's like knowingly misleading the jury," Scheck said. "I think it's extremely troubling that it's Mike Nifong."

Read more at http://www.wral.com/mike-nifong-accused-of-misconduct-in-another-durham-case/15784834/#KBLFwbfaf6vtLTmQ.99

hey harr, what say you about your favoritr "decent, honorable minister of justice"?; August 30, 2016 at 8:55 AM
Anonymous said...: more:

http://www.citizen-times.com/story/news/2016/08/30/judge-weighs-nc-man-wrongly-convicted-murders/89574860/:

"Also expected to testify is Nifong, the former Durham County district attorney. The judge said in his 2014 ruling that Nifong failed to share with defense attorneys a police memo and other evidence that pointed to suspects other than Howard. A Durham police detective testified at Howard’s trial that investigators never considered that the sexual assaults were linked to the killers. Nifong repeated that claim despite a police memo in the prosecution’s files that contradicted him."; August 30, 2016 at 9:02 AM
kenhyderal said...: JSwift said: "Kenny, I ask you for the the third time to explain how you made such a significant mistake in your comment. I also ask that you explain why it took you so long to note your agreement with me, even if you failed to acknowledge your error, criticizing my suggestion that you were confused. Would you have preferred that I concluded that you were a liar?"....................... I am neither confused or a liar. Duke has escaped liability for it's medical malpractice; concealing it and unethically not admitting their culpability. Meanwhile, Crystal went to gaol for murdering Daye. The public and Daye's Family were unaware that a egregious medical error killed him. By unethically not taking responsibility and allowing a marginalized person to take the full blame allowed sufficient delay until they were made financially safe by limitation statutes. Welch precedents keep the accused culpable and although not eliminating civil liability it allows unethical institutions like Duke, by covering up their malfeasance, lessen the possibility that relatives will learn they are liable and sue. As it is they believe all blame goes to Crystal, the convicted, albeit wrongly, accused.; August 30, 2016 at 9:37 AM
Anonymous said...: kenny:

How do you know that Daye's family was unaware that Duke University Hospital committed a medical error in its treatment of Mr. Daye? How do you know that they did not responsibility for any errors they committed and that they did not settle with Mr. Daye's family? Or are lying again?

You also know that alleged medical malpractice does not excuse Mangum from culpability for stabbing Mr. Daye. You fool no one (least of all the courts) by lying that it does.

Lying has not helped Mangum, or helped you make a case for her. It is also immoral. You should abandon it as a strategy. It does not work.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; August 30, 2016 at 9:55 AM
Fake Kenhyderal said...: "Your buddy Nifong is going to be testifying in Durham today and tomorrow ... why aren't you there with your shirt showing support? You could also attempt to ask Howard's attorneys about Crystal's case, and then sue them if they ignore you .."

I'm betting Sid's afraid that his "Justice4Nifong" T-Shirt will be interpreted in a manner other than Sid's meaning for it.; August 30, 2016 at 10:00 AM
JSwift said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; August 30, 2016 at 10:38 AM
JSwift said...: Kenny,

I asked you previously to refrain from stating your opinions as established fact, particularly in comments directed to me.

In addition, your 9:37 AM comment contains factual errors. Once again, you are either confused, careless or dishonest (after your last complaint, I will not attempt to discern your motivation). You claim that Duke "conceal[ed]" its error and "cover[ed] up their malfeasance." These statements are false. The medical reports documented the fact that the initial intubation was esophageal. Documentation of the error is not consistent with your false claim that the error was "concealed" or "covered up" by Duke. Remember, most cases of medical malpractice do not have a related criminal case. Victims of malpractice or their relatives rely primarily on medical reports for information.

I understand that you do not agree with the law related to contributory negligence and you believe that Meier should have approached that issue in a way to encourage jury nullification. I understand your frustration. The failure of an attorney to attempt to encourage a jury to nullify the law is not grounds for an appeal or an MAR.

As a result, you attempt to make the case for nullification on this board because you have no other outlet. However, your arguments have not been successful. You rely primarily on stating your opinions and suggesting that anyone who disagrees with you is acting in bad faith. I suggest that you refine them rather than simply repeating them unchanged over and over and over...

John D. Smith
New York, NY; August 30, 2016 at 10:41 AM
Anonymous said...: For hissy fit at August 30, 2016 at 9:37 AM:

hissy fit is back, again showing he understands neither clinical medicine nor the law and unableto explain why, if DTs did occur in a patient at risk of an intra abdominal infection DTs would nullify the risk of intra abdominal infection.; August 30, 2016 at 10:54 AM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: How do you know that Daye's family was unaware that Duke University Hospital committed a medical error in its treatment of Mr. Daye? How do you know that they did not responsibility for any errors they committed and that they did not settle with Mr. Daye's family? Or are lying again".....................................There does not exist any internal reporting of this fatal error. It's nature had to be discerned from reading the Hospital records and making an interpretation of the couched account of this incident. Something Dr. Harr did. Something that Dr. Anonymous denies and something that Dr. Roberts realizes but chose to mitigate. Ethics requires full disclosure and an admission of the mistake by the actual person or persons.; August 30, 2016 at 1:38 PM
Anonymous said...: hissy fit is back again showing he understands neither the law nor clinical medicine.; August 30, 2016 at 1:49 PM
guiowen said...: Kenhyderal,
Is there any way we can get you to stop whining about the same thing over and over again?; August 30, 2016 at 1:59 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny prevaricated:

"There does not exist any internal reporting of this fatal error. It's nature had to be discerned from reading the Hospital records and making an interpretation of the couched account of this incident."

But the incident was recorded in the hospital records. How can you say there was no internal reporting of the incident when it is in the hospital records? It is either one or the other.

I ask again:

How do you know that Daye's family was unaware that Duke University Hospital committed a medical error in its treatment of Mr. Daye? How do you know that DUMC did not accept responsibility for any errors they committed and that they did not settle with Mr. Daye's family? Did Mr. Daye's family, or someone purporting to represent them, inform you of this? Did you obtain this information from another source with direct knowledge of what the Daye family knows or doesn't know and what Duke did or did not with respect to the Daye family? Or is this yet another one of your badly contrived lies?

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; August 30, 2016 at 2:07 PM
Anonymous said...: fom hissy fit:

"Is there any way we can get you to stop whining about the same thing over and over again?"

How about you stop showing the world how ignorant you are.; August 30, 2016 at 2:17 PM
JSwift said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; August 30, 2016 at 2:19 PM
JSwift said...: Guiowen,

I believe Kenny is frustrated.

He doesn't believe the law is fair, and doesn't want it to apply. In addition, he chooses to believe everything Mangum says, even when she contradicts other witnesses, physical evidence and even herself, and thinks everyone else should believe her as well.

He has come to the belated recognition that neither (1) the failure of Meier to encourage the jury to nullify a law he believes is unfair or (2) the decision by the jury not to believe Mangum and reject her self-defense plea represents grounds for an appeal or an MAR. He now realizes (although his pride won't let him admit it) that he should not have encouraged Sidney to influence Mangum's defense. He should have flown to Durham, interviewed lawyers, hired one and started a fund to pay for her defense. Sidney would have been far more useful as a fundraiser than an uninformed lay advocate.

You should forgive Kenny. He is frustrated, and this is his only outlet. The readers here will discuss the case. No one else cares enough to hear his whining.

John D. Smith
New York, NY; August 30, 2016 at 2:27 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "But the incident was recorded in the hospital records. How can you say there was no internal reporting of the incident when it is in the hospital records? It is either one or the other.......................................Only the standard record of treatment kept for all patients admitted. A fatal error such as the one that killed Daye requires a special enquiry and a full report of the incident with a view to preventing such catastrophic errors from occurring. Anyway perhaps the Daye Family was compensated. Duke has a sordid record of buying off litigants.; August 30, 2016 at 2:49 PM
JSwift said...: Kenny states: A fatal error such as the one that killed Daye requires a special enquiry and a full report of the incident with a view to preventing such catastrophic errors from occurring.

Agreed. How do you know that an internal review of the esophageal intubation was not conducted?

John D. Smith
New York, NY; August 30, 2016 at 3:02 PM
kenhyderal said...: JSwift said: "He has come to the belated recognition that neither (1) the failure of Meier to encourage the jury to nullify a law he believes is unfair or".........................If ever there was a case that cried out for Jury Nullification it was this one. If the Jury had only heard that Duke killed Daye not Crystal and that his death was accidental or due to negligence on the part of Duke and not because of Crystal's action then I believe they, like most ordinary folk. y would say convicting Crystal of murder when it was Duke that killed him is not fair. Walt pointed out wounding with intent has the same penalty but of course Crystal's intent was not to kill Daye but only to stop him from choking her to death.; August 30, 2016 at 3:02 PM
kenhyderal said...: JSwift: "Agreed. How do you know that an internal review of the esophageal intubation was not conducted"................... I don't know that. I have a question, though, if there was such a review and a report made could this information be acquired by Crystal? Perhaps Dr. Anonymous could weigh in on this.; August 30, 2016 at 3:06 PM
JSwift said...: Kenny,

You should have taken the advice readers gave you early on. Your decision to rely on Sidney did not work out well. You are whining now because you did not take action when you had the opportunity. The opportunity is gone forever.

John D. Smith
New York, NY; August 30, 2016 at 3:09 PM
JSwift said...: Kenny,

Now that you are focused on jury nullification, I note that the concept is passed down from English common law. Courts are generally opposed to jury nullification. The view is that the jury does not have legal right to decide to nullify the law, but, notwithstanding the lack of legal right, a jury nevertheless has the power to do so.

Given our shared heritage, this is true in both the United States and Canada. One difference is interesting: in Canada, the Crown has limited rights to appeal a note guilty verdict if, for example, the law is improperly applied. In the US, the protection against double jeopardy prevents the state from appealing an acquittal (a protection you and Sidney have occasionally and mistakenly suggested Mangum should waive). As a result, jury nullification may have less effect in Canada the in the US.

John D. Smith
New York, NY; August 30, 2016 at 3:18 PM
Anonymous said...: All of Kenny's arguments can easily be explained if you just realize that he's an emotional abusive prick who wants to hurt Crystal. We can only surmise that she rejected him when they knew each other and he's made it his mission to get back at her.

He's desperate for proof that she was brutally raped (not something a friend would do);
He constantly encourages Sid to keep up his frivolous lawsuits and lies to her (not something a friend would to);
He constantly encourages her to believe the world is against her, and she is perfect, and not to learn from her mistakes (not something a friend would do);
He wanted her to put on evidence that would all but guarantee 1st Degree Murder (and LWOP), not something a friend would do.

The list goes on and on ... Kenny isn't a friend of Crystal, he hates her, and is doing all he can to hurt her.

It really does explain everything he has done on this blog and elsewhere. We need to all recognize this, and just ignore him.

Don't play his games. He's a sad, pathetic, scorned man who just can't get over his issues.; August 30, 2016 at 3:29 PM
Anonymous said...: JSwift ...

Kenny is a man of typing, not action. Even if there was still an opportunity to do something, he wouldn't. He refuses to do anything but use his fat little fingers to type and master-debate, but he won't even try to communicate with people who would know, or try to help. He types. Sometimes he Googles, but he usually just types and keeps repeating the same lies and flawed logic he always has.

Oh, and sometimes he claims that he knows people read this blog and are just ignoring him.

Kenny seems to know an awful lot without proof.

But, i think 3:29 got it right, the one thing he never got to "know" was Crystal, and he's still bitter.; August 30, 2016 at 3:34 PM
Anonymous said...: kenny again manifests his ignorance:

"Only the standard record of treatment kept for all patients admitted. A fatal error such as the one that killed Daye requires a special enquiry and a full report of the incident with a view to preventing such catastrophic errors from occurring."

Wrong. Any hospital death is reviewed. I speak from experience.

"Anyway perhaps the Daye Family was compensated. Duke has a sordid record of buying off litigants."

How do you define a "sordid record of buying off litigants"? Maybe you buy into harr's fantasy of the Lacrosse players shaking down Duke. If a defendant agrees to a settlement, it is because the defendant is negligent and would rather settle than litigate a losing cause in court. A history of settling with plaintiffs rather than go to trial is not "sordid record of buying off litigants".

Again you document you are ignorant about the legal system.; August 30, 2016 at 4:00 PM
Anonymous said...: more from hissy fit:

"If ever there was a case that cried out for Jury Nullification it was this one."

No it isn't.

"If the Jury had only heard that Duke killed Daye not Crystal and that his death was accidental or due to negligence on the part of Duke and not because of Crystal's action then I believe they, like most ordinary folk. y would say convicting Crystal of murder when it was Duke that killed him is not fair."

Daye died from a medical error. Daye would not have been exposed to the risjk of a medical error had crystal not stabbed him. This has been explained to you. That you willfully remain ignorant does not call for jury nullification.

"Walt pointed out wounding with intent has the same penalty but of course Crystal's intent was not to kill Daye but only to stop him from choking her to death."

crystal presented her case for self defense to the jury.The jury rejected it

You may argue that crystal believed telling the truth would exonerate her. crystal has a history of making up the truth as she goes along. That is what she did in the trial.; August 30, 2016 at 4:08 PM
Anonymous said...: from kenny:

"JSwift: "Agreed. How do you know that an internal review of the esophageal intubation was not conducted"................... I don't know that. I have a question, though, if there was such a review and a report made could this information be acquired by Crystal? Perhaps Dr. Anonymous could weigh in on this."

In each and every hospital where I either trained or worked had Morbidity and Mortality Conferences, Risk Management Committees, peer review Committees, all focused on reviewing adverse occurrences.; August 30, 2016 at 4:28 PM
kenhyderal said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; August 30, 2016 at 4:38 PM
kenhyderal said...: @ Cowardly Anonymous 3:29. I don't suppose you will tell me your name.; August 30, 2016 at 4:41 PM
kenhyderal said...: Did anyone other then me note that Dr. Anonymous has finally and begrudgingly admitted that "Daye died of a medical error" Something he has long denied. He knew this to be the case all along but like with the esophageal intubation he had trouble admitting he was in error. I predict soon he will also acknowledge that Daye was a chronic alcoholic. He often accuses me of making assertions without proof but he asserts that Daye's BAC was a lab error.; August 30, 2016 at 4:44 PM
Anonymous said...: hissy fit fantasizing:

"I predict soon [Dr. Anonymous] will also acknowledge that Daye was a chronic alcoholic."

Care to place a bet on that?

"He often accuses me of making assertions without proof"

Because you do, e.g. crystal was raped(you yourself have admitted you have no proof that crystal told the truth about being raped), there were mystery rapists, kilgo told you an anonymous lacrosse player told him he had witnessed mystery rapists rape crystal(you yourself have admitted you can not verify that).

"but he asserts that Daye's BAC was a lab error."

Not quite. I say that other evidence, no credible history of long term heavy alcohol consumption(crystal's claims are not credible), he was not impaired by his supposed BAC of nearly 300, his normal liver at autopsy(your speculation about Dr. Nichols do not prove his liver was abnormal) are all evidence that the BAC was a lab error.

August 30, 2016 at 4:44 PM; August 30, 2016 at 4:58 PM
Anonymous said...: hissy fit:

"@ Cowardly Anonymous 3:29. I don't suppose you will tell me your name."

hissy fit, how about you explain your belief, that if DTs occur in a patient at risk of an intra abdominal infection, that nullifies the risk of intra abdominal infection.; August 30, 2016 at 5:03 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

The first time you actually get off your fat ass and do anything to help Crystal other than random bullshit you type, I will make sure 3:29 reveals her name.; August 30, 2016 at 5:32 PM
JSwift said...: Anonymous 5:32 PM wrote: Kenny, The first time you actually get off your fat ass and do anything to help Crystal other than random bullshit you type, I will make sure 3:29 reveals her name.

Kenny,

That sounds like a good trade. You are probably too late to do anything useful at this point, having wasted the past four years, but you should at least try to identify what options, if any, remain. I suggest that you take time off, fly to North Carolina and interview lawyers. Good luck.

John D. Smith
New York, NY; August 30, 2016 at 6:00 PM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: "I don't know that. I have a question, though, if there was such a review and a report made could this information be acquired by Crystal? Perhaps Dr. Anonymous could weigh in on this."

The late Daye's medical treatment is the subject of his right of privacy. To a certain extent, that right is not paramount to Crystal's right to a fair trial. Thus, Daye's medical records of his treatment were made available to the NC Medial Examiner and to Crystal's Independent Medical Examiner. Those two experts reviewed the record and reached the same conclusion. Daye died as a result of a stab wound inflicted by Crystal Mangum.

That said, there is no other evidence of an independent or sole cause of his death. To have such evidence, Crystal would have needed to find a second IME who would testify. She could not find such an IME. The case is closed. There was no intervening cause.

Arguing for jury nullification is to argue for injustice. I get it, Kenny wants his murderous friend to be set free. Well, the common sense approach says that's not a good idea.

Now if Kenny was serious about helping Crystal, he would have advanced the argument that the law should change. That malice should not be required of an intervening cause. That is how intellectually honest people approach this problem. He should have read Welch and asked to see Welch's brief and the state's brief. How did Welch and his attorneys argue to set aside the malice requirement? How could Kenny hone his argument better than Welch did? Had he done that, had he used this board in an honest way by admitting the state of the law and arguing to change it, perhaps he would have hit upon a better argument than Welch did. Or at least he would have perhaps hit upon a better way to make the argument than Welch did. But, that's not Kenny.

Walt-in-Durham; August 30, 2016 at 6:48 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "The first time you actually get off your fat ass and do anything to help Crystal other than random bullshit you type, I will make sure 3:29 reveals her name"...........................I would be very surprised if that cowardly anonymous was female. The ideas, epithets and course language are not characteristic of a member of the fairer sex. One of the great things I did for Crystal was to introduce her to Dr. Harr. He has has been her kind friend and dedicated advocate. Crystal would be the best one to confirm that I also have been helpful to her. Dr. Harr has heard this from her and has said so on this blog in the past.; August 30, 2016 at 8:44 PM
guiowen said...: Kenny,
If you've been as helpful as Sidney, and you two are her best friends, then it's no wonder Crystal is languishing in gaol.; August 30, 2016 at 9:49 PM
guiowen said...: Cheer up, Kenny! Sidney specifically said he could get her out in no more time than it took to build the Roman Empire (17 years.); August 30, 2016 at 9:52 PM
Anonymous said...: from hissy fit:

"I would be very surprised if that cowardly anonymous was female. The ideas, epithets and course language are not characteristic of a member of the fairer sex. "

Why?

It has been documented crystal said to Milton Walker, I'm going to kill you, mm---er f---er.; August 31, 2016 at 3:13 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You have 123 days to exonerate and free Mangum.

It has been 62 days since the end of June, 130 days since April 23rd, 169 days since the Ides of March and 3,364 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; August 31, 2016 at 5:06 AM

«Oldest ‹Older 401 – 600 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