justice4nifong: A stacked deck in the courthouse

Thursday, July 20, 2017

A stacked deck in the courthouse

543 comments:

«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 400 of 543 Newer› Newest»

Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal

"Anonymous said: "It's not just Ms Gallas you owe an apology to, Kenny -- you misquoted here in an effort to advance your agenda, and when called out on it, you hid it like a little bitch"..................... No, ANONYMOUS, I Ken Edwards, unlike you, don't hide. Tell us, though, what was the "misquote" of Ms. Gallas I supposedly made. I have deleted no posts in this thread. The only time I ever delete a post is if I discover I have made a typing error and this deletion will show immediately preceding my corrected post as "deleted by the author"

You do try to bullshit your eay through and around facts which do not support your fixationn on belrving Crystal had been raped.; August 17, 2017 at 4:40 PM
Anonymous said...: Oh, Kenny...you lying little bitch. Fake KH kept your quote. Look at his post. You didn't delete the post, you just edited it and removed your statement that Ms. Gallas believes Crystal was "surreptitiously drugged by attendees at the Duke Lacrosse Party".
So there's 2 lies in the span of 1 day.; August 17, 2017 at 7:58 PM
kenhyderal said...: Edited my post? Once posted, how does one edit their post without deleting it?; August 18, 2017 at 10:19 AM
FakeKenhyderal said...: Nowhere on Ms Gallas' website or in her book does she contend that "...Crystal was surreptitiously drugged by attendees at the Duke Lacrosse Party"

Whether you like it or not, stating that this is her contention is simply not true. I pointed out her actual statement (from her blog, not her book).

Admit your mistake and move on.; August 18, 2017 at 1:14 PM
kenhyderal said...: Fake KH said : "Nowhere on Ms Gallas' website or in her book does she contend that "...Crystal was surreptitiously drugged by attendees at the Duke Lacrosse Party"................. That's the implication I ascertained from reading what she wrote. But hey, let's wait and see what she says if she returns. If she says my interpretation was correct I trust you will give me an apology.; August 18, 2017 at 1:23 PM
FakeKenhyderal said...: Kenhyderal -- She states in no uncertain terms ""While I do not pretend to know who specifically assaulted Crystal Mangum or even whether it happened at that party or at earlier calls she was dispatched to..."

It's obvious to everyone that your interpretation of Vicky Gallas is incorrect.

If she says "I DO NOT PRETEND TO KNOW....WHETHER IT HAPPENED AT THE PARTY OR EARLIER..."

The she DOES NOT PRETEND TO KNOW THAT CRYSTAL WAS SURREPTITIOUSLY DRUGGED BY ATTENDEES AT THE DUKE LACROSSE PARTY.

I feel like I'm taking crazy pills.; August 18, 2017 at 1:52 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"Fake KH said : "Nowhere on Ms Gallas' website or in her book does she contend that "...Crystal was surreptitiously drugged by attendees at the Duke Lacrosse Party"................. That's the implication I ascertained from reading what she wrote. But hey, let's wait and see what she says if she returns. If she says my interpretation was correct I trust you will give me an apology."

You ascertained Crystal was surreptitiously drugged because you are a guilt presuming racist.; August 18, 2017 at 2:18 PM
kenhyderal said...: From Ms Gallas Blog " In the days that followed, it became clear that Crystal Mangum accepted an open drink at that party and if she did so there, it's more than likely that she did so earlier as well. While I do not pretend to know who specifically assaulted Crystal Mangum or even whether it happened at that party or at earlier calls she was dispatched to, it's clear to me that she was drugged" b.t.w. Crystal had no earlier calls.; August 18, 2017 at 3:16 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"From Ms Gallas Blog "In the days that followed, it became clear that Crystal Mangum accepted an open drink at that party and if she did so there, it's more than likely that she did so earlier as well.'"

Called presuming a fact not in evidence, that if Crystal accepted one drink she accepted another.

"While I do not pretend to know who specifically assaulted Crystal Mangum or even whether it happened at that party or at earlier calls she was dispatched to, it's clear to me that she was drugged'"

Irrelevant statement as Crystal was never assaulted.

"b.t.w. Crystal had no earlier calls."

Yes she did.; August 18, 2017 at 4:42 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

Crystal's driver took her to a number of "earlier calls' before he took her to the Lacrosse party.

Crystal's behavior after the party was not consistent with the effects of a date rape drug. The victims of a date rape drug do not recall the details of the assault. They recover from the effects and find out they had been assaulted. Go back to http://johnsville.blogspot.com/2007/06/crystal-gail-mangum-april-6-2006.html, Crystal's written description of what happened to her. She gives a lot of details about the alleged assault(which never happened).; August 19, 2017 at 3:05 AM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "Crystal's driver took her to a number of "earlier calls' before he took her to the Lacrosse party"............... No, he did not. Taylor took her to one half hour show at 3:00 PM. From there she went to her parents home. Later that afternoon she went out with her Father. In the evening at 9:00 PM she went to Taylor's place. There she had two beers then showered to get ready for the booking leaving there at 10:45.; August 19, 2017 at 9:00 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhydeal:'Anonymous said:

"Crystal's driver took her to a number of "earlier calls' before he took her to the Lacrosse party"............... No, he did not. Taylor took her to one half hour show at 3:00 PM. From there she went to her parents home. Later that afternoon she went out with her Father. In the evening at 9:00 PM she went to Taylor's place. There she had two beers then showered to get ready for the booking leaving there at 10:45.

According to the information in the well researched accounts of what happened(and that DOES NOT include Last aDnce for Grace) Crystal had a number of appointments before she went to the party.

And the fact still is, you have zero evidence that Crystal ever told the truth when she claimed she had been raped.; August 19, 2017 at 10:07 AM
kenhyderal said...: No, these appointments were a day and a half before. There was only one, between 3:00 and 3:30 PM on the afternoon, prior to the one that sent her into such harms way.; August 19, 2017 at 1:27 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"No, these appointments were a day and a half before. There was only one, between 3:00 and 3:30 PM on the afternoon,"

How do you know she did not have sex with multiple men on those days? We know that the male DNA found on Crystal, on the rape kit, was not put there after the party. We do know it was not put there at the party. It could not have been put there before the party. The only way to determine whether or not it was put there from her contacts would have been to test those contacts' DNA, and Nifong did not do that. Why? Because he knew there would be matches with the male DNA found on Crystal and that would have blown his plan to use rape charges against the Lacrosse players to further his political ambitions out of the water.

"prior to the one that sent her into such harms way."

Since it has been established by hard evidence that Crystal never told the truth when she alleged she had been raped by Lacrosse players at the Lacrosse party, said appointment did not send her into harm's way. If anything, it put the innocent, falsely accused Lacrosse players(whom you resent because they are Caucasians who are more accomplished than you are and are better off than you are) in harm's way.; August 19, 2017 at 3:27 PM
kenhyderal said...: You've obviously lost the current argument about the possibility that Crystal could have been given a date rape drug and so you now change the subject. On the new subject you raised all we have to go on is Crystal's consensual sexual history in the week prior. She gave her boyfriend and her driver as contacts and both their DNA was identified. She did not engage in sex with any of the clients her booking agency sent her to. All their names and addresses were readily available. The one client they did interview refused to give a DNA sample as he had every right to do so, without seeing a warrant but he denied having any sexual contact. The mistake DA Nifong made was that he was convinced and for good reason he could successfully prosecute those he had indicted for the equally serious crimes of kidnapping and sexual assault not to even mention theft, probably the easiest crime committed against Crystal to prove. I consider this a failure on his part but Crystal is sympathetic to his sincere efforts to obtain justice for her. She sees him, like her, as a victim of the Duke Lacrosse apologists; August 19, 2017 at 4:05 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"You've obviously lost the current argument about the possibility that Crystal could have been given a date rape drug and so you now change the subject."

Just like you have zero evidence Crystalwas raped, you have zero evidence Crystalwas administered a date rape drug. Ergo, there is no argument to lose. Citing Chloral Hydrate, a drug which is not readily available, as a drug which is rapid acting and not detectable, does not establish that any possibility she was given a date rape drug.

"On the new subject you raised all we have to go on is Crystal's consensual sexual history in the week prior."

You mean crystal's KNOWN sexual history.

"She gave her boyfriend and her driver as contacts and both their DNA was identified. She did not engage in sex with any of the clients her booking agency sent her to. All their names and addresses were readily available.

Does not change facts. The only way to establish that Crystal was raped at the party was to establish that the male DNA found on Crystal matched the DNA of person(s) at the party. You have zero evidence that there were any unidentified party attendees. Nifong made no attempt to find the sources of that DNA because it did not match the DNA of the men he wanted to prosecute. The only way to establish who deposited the DNA and when it was established would be to analyze the DNA of all the men with whom Crystal had contact.

"The one client they did interview refused to give a DNA sample as he had every right to do so, without seeing a warrant but he denied having any sexual contact."

More Kenhyderalian hypocrisy. You seem to deny the accused had any rights to be presumed innocent. You presume the m guilty when you have zero evidence Crystal ever told the truth when she claimed she was raped.

"The mistake DA Nifong made was that he was convinced and for good reason he could successfully prosecute those he had indicted for the equally serious crimes of kidnapping and sexual assault"

Nifong had no probable cause to believe any Lacrosse player ever raped Crystal. Probable cause evaporated when the DNA results came back. He had no good reason to believe he could successfully prosecute the men he wanted to prosecute. Again, you ignore the fact that Nifong had the accused for First Degree Rape, and that Nifong did manufacture evidence, the improper police lineup in which Crystal was coached to identify members of the Lacrosse team as her assailants. He did not resort to prosecuting them for Sexual assault and Kidnapping until almost 9 months after the Rape Hoax became news, when Crystal told the Nifong DA office she could not recall actually being penetrated. I remind you, in her written statement to the Police that she had been penetrated.

"not to even mention theft, probably the easiest crime committed against Crystal to prove. I consider this a failure on his part"

Nifong's biggest failure was wrongfully prosecuting the innocent men Crystal falsely accused of raping her.

"but Crystal is sympathetic to his sincere efforts to obtain justice for her."

Except that Nifong made no sincere efforts on her behalf. All his efforts were focused on his own self interest, getting himself elected so he could pad his retirement benefits. If he cared so much for Crystal, explain why Nifong never had her directly interviewed by his office until almost 9 months AFTER she made her allegations.

"She sees him, like her, as a victim of the Duke Lacrosse apologists"

As there was no rape, there were no apologists for the innocent, falsely accused Lacrosse players. Crystal and Nifong were victimizers.; August 19, 2017 at 5:16 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

A Correction:

Originl: You ignore the fact that Nifong had the accused for First Degree Rape, and that Nifong did manufacture evidence, the improper police lineup in which Crystal was coached to identify members of the Lacrosse team as her assailants.He did not resort to prosecuting them for Sexual assault and Kidnapping until almost 9 months after the Rape Hoax became news, when Crystal told the Nifong DA office she could not recall actually being penetrated. I remind you, in her written statement to the Police that she had been penetrated.

Corrected: You ignore the fact that Nifong had the accused INDICTED for First Degree Rape, and that Nifong did manufacture evidence, the improper police lineup in which Crystal was coached to identify members of the Lacrosse team as her assailants. He did not resort to dropping the Rape charge and only prosecuting them for Sexual assault and Kidnapping until almost 9 months after the Rape Hoax became news, when Crystal told the Nifong DA office she could not recall actually being penetrated. I remind you, in her written statement to the Police that she had been penetrated.; August 19, 2017 at 5:32 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"The one client they did interview refused to give a DNA sample as he had every right to do so, without seeing a warrant but he denied having any sexual contact."

One possible reason might be that he was a john, prostitution is illegal, and he feared prosecution. Speculation, I admit. However, it is a more likely situation than your claim that Crystal was administered a date rape drug, in the face of the fact that she did not act like someone who had been given a date rape drug.; August 19, 2017 at 6:05 PM
kenhyderal said...: An experienced person like Ms. Gallas thinks she did. Although Chloral Hydrate is a prescription medication it is very easy to synthesize with readily available simple ingredients like ethanol chlorinated water and acetic acid (water vinegar Clorox and vodka) It's actually the simplest of all date rape drugs to illicitly manufacture.; August 19, 2017 at 9:08 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"An experienced person like Ms. Gallas thinks she did."

Experienced at running an escort service, not at Chemistry or Pharmacology.

"Although Chloral Hydrate is a prescription medication, it is very easy to synthesize with readily available simple ingredients like ethanol chlorinated water and acetic acid (water vinegar Clorox and vodka) It's actually the simplest of all date rape drugs to illicitly manufacture."

Did anyone find evidence that members of the Lacrosse team synthesized Chloral Hydrate. I have looked up how to synthesize Chloral Hydrate, and it requires a certain amount of expertise to do it. You can not do it just by tossing the ingredients in a bowl and stirring them up. Who, on the Lacrosse team had that expertise? For that matter do you yourself know what is involved in the synthesis of Chloral Hydrate? More likely you read about it somewhere on the web and now you consider yourself an expert, just like you read about medical malpractice somewhere on the web and now consider yourself a medico-legal expert.

In any event, the facts you cite, ease of synthesis, rapid acting, difficult to detect do not establish any suspicion Crystal was given Chloral Hydrate. Date Rape drugs leave the victim confused and often unable to recall specific details of what happened, not surprising since said drugs suppress CNS activity. I say again, check out the written statement Crystal gave to police: http://johnsville.blogspot.com/2007/06/crystal-gail-mangum-april-6-2006.html. In that statement Crystal gives a lot of specific details as to what purportedly happened to her, details which were later proven to be fabricated. She did not act like someone recovering from a date rape drug. In fact, the officer who responded to Kim Roberts/Pittman's call for assistance to get Crystal out of her car thought Crystal was faking unconsciousness.

And check out https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chloral_hydrate: " In humans it is metabolized within 7 hours into trichloroethanol and trichloroethanol glucuronide by erythrocytes and plasma esterases and into trichloroacetic acid in 4 to 5 days". Detection of Chloral Hydrate is not impossible. According to http://www.vanceholmes.com/court/trial_duke_timeline.html, at the time Crystal arrived in the DUMC ER, there was time to test for Chloral Hydrate. It is false that metabolites of Chloral Hydrate are undetectable.

And again, I put this to you. According to the statement Crystal gave to the police, Kim was aware that Crystal had been dragged into the bathroom, and in that statement she had told Kim that men had hurt her. So why did Kim not tell the police officer that men at the Lacrosse party had hurt her. The obvious answer is, Crystal never told Kim about any assault at the party, and she lied when she gave her statement to the police.

Kenny the big zero strikes again.; August 20, 2017 at 4:39 AM
Anonymous said...: Udaman Ubes.; August 20, 2017 at 6:43 AM
Anonymous said...: Sidney or Kenny or both continue to post anonymously to create the illusion that they have support.; August 20, 2017 at 8:20 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"The one client they did interview refused to give a DNA sample as he had every right to do so, without seeing a warrant but he denied having any sexual contact."

Another comment.

What did he have to hide?

Soon after Crystal made her allegations all three captains of the Lacrosse team gave samples for DNA analysis.

Then came the NTO which required each Caucasian member of the Lacrosse team to give samples for DNA analysis. NC law requires that whoever seeks the NTO to have probable cause to believe that the individuals subjected to the order could be suspects. In her false allegations, Crystal never claimed each and every member of the Lacrosse team had been an assailant. Ergo, the probable cause requirement was not met. Lawyers for the players could have had the order quashed. The Lacrosse players did not fight the NTO. They complied with the order.

No one on the Lacrosse team had anything to hide.

So I ask again, what did Crystal's client have to hide?; August 20, 2017 at 9:11 AM
kenhyderal said...: Dr. Anonymous said: "No one on the Lacrosse team had anything to hide"...................................................................... Yes, some of them did have something to hide; i.e. the names of their non-Player guests who actually committed the DNA depositing sexual assault. Those who held her down, equally guilty of the crime, were ever so anxious to give DNA samples. Likewise for those who took part in drugging and kidnapping her. There was no warrant compelling this client to provide DNA. As an innocent person, he had no incentive to cooperate or become involved.; August 20, 2017 at 3:06 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"Dr. Anonymous said: "No one on the Lacrosse team had anything to hide"...................................................................... Yes, some of them did have something to hide; i.e. the names of their non-Player guests who actually committed the DNA depositing sexual assault. Those who held her down, equally guilty of the crime, were ever so anxious to give DNA samples. Likewise for those who took part in drugging and kidnapping her. There was no warrant compelling this client to provide DNA."

You have provided zero evidence that Crystal was ever raped, and you have provided zero evidence that there were any unidentified party attendees. Why? So I ask again, what kind of charge do you get from believing you friend was subjected to a gang rape?

"As an innocent person, he had no incentive to cooperate or become involved."

Still, his refusal to give a DNA sample would imply, if he had engaged in sex with Crystal, he did not want the world to know about it. It is a fact that most men who associate with escorts do it for sex. Maybe he was married. Maybe he forced himself on Crystal.

And you are saying the willingness of the Lacrosse players to cooperate with the authorities happened because they were guilty of something. HUH???!!!; August 20, 2017 at 3:50 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny, you are grabbing at some really illusory straws.; August 20, 2017 at 4:22 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny, you are not making sense. You are making scents, some rather foul scents.; August 20, 2017 at 4:24 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny always was an oderous fellow.; August 20, 2017 at 6:07 PM
kenhyderal said...: Dr. Anonymous said: "And you are saying the willingness of the Lacrosse players to cooperate with the authorities happened because they were guilty of something. HUH???!!!" ...............................They didn't cooperate. Let me quote DA Nifong at the time: "One would wonder why one needs an attorney if one was not charged and had not done anything wrong.” “I’m disappointed that no one has been enough of a man to come forward. And if they would have spoken up at the time, this may never have happened.”; August 20, 2017 at 9:33 PM
guiowen said...: What exactly did Nifong (or you for that matter) expect? Did you expect them to confess to something they hadn't done>; August 20, 2017 at 9:56 PM
guiowen said...: I might add, that's part of the reason good old Mike was disbarred.; August 20, 2017 at 9:57 PM
Anonymous said...: Udaman g.; August 21, 2017 at 3:14 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"'Dr. Anonymous said: "And you are saying the willingness of the Lacrosse players to cooperate with the authorities happened because they were guilty of something. HUH???!!!' ...............................They didn't cooperate. Let me quote DA Nifong at the time: 'One would wonder why one needs an attorney if one was not charged and had not done anything wrong.' 'I’m disappointed that no one has been enough of a man to come forward. And if they would have spoken up at the time, this may never have happened.'”

Before he made those statements, and before any evidence was generated, corrupt Nifong went on record that a crime had happened and that members of the Lacrosse team were perpetrators. People accused of a crime have a right to be presumed innocent. They have a right to be represented by an attorney. They have a right not to talk to the authorities. This was, not only the Lacrosse players availing themselves of their rights under the, but also corrupt Nifong trying to undermine their rights under the law. And no one came forth with evidence that something happened because nothing had happened. It was not the Lacrosse players refusing to cooperate.

Don't try to make, not sense but more foul scents, by spewing forth the crap that no one had been formally accused. Nifong DID accuse the entire Lacrosse team of either raping Crystal or of being complicit in the rape.

Saying that Nifong complained about the Lacrosse players not cooperating is like someone saying that Jewish people were bad because Adolf Hitler said so.; August 21, 2017 at 3:58 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

Part of Nifng's wrongful prosecution was threatening members of the Lacrosse team with charges of aiding and abetting if they did not talk about what he alleged had happened.

Considering his treatment of Moez Elmostafa, and his refusal to look at alibi evidence, and his documented attempt to conceal exculpatory evidence from those he had accused, Nifong did not want to hear from any Lacrosse player that nothing had happened. He wanted incriminating information.

Basically, Nifong was attempting to suborn perjured incriminating testimony.

You have the temerity to say, "Justice be damned" after Sidney's frivolous, not meritorious lawsuit was dismissed.; August 21, 2017 at 4:06 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

From Vicky Gallas:

"I do not believe that she would be able to recall so many specific details from a rape if one occured(sic)."

I refer you again to crystal's hand written statement given to the police(http://johnsville.blogspot.com/2007/06/crystal-gail-mangum-april-6-2006.html.

Crystal did give specific details.

The implication of Ms Gallas' opinion is, Crystal made up the details as she went along.

If she had been telling the truth then male DNA found on her person would have matched the DNA of men who had attended the party. It did not. You have presented zero evidence there ever were unidentified party attendees. Alkaline Phosphatase would have been found on the tape kit. It was not. Your bullshit does not change the facts.

Crystal lied about being raped.

The innocent, falsely accused Lacrosse players had nothing to cover up.; August 21, 2017 at 6:32 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny said,

"Let me quote DA Nifong at the time: 'One would wonder why one needs an attorney if one was not charged and had not done anything wrong.'"

Kenny,

Who needs an attorney more than someone who is being investigated for a crime they didn't commit (and that didn't even happen)? That is exactly what was happening to the lacrosse players when they retained lawyers.

You would think an experienced prosecutor like Mike Nifong would understand and respect the right of a person being investigated for committing a heinous crime to be represented by an attorney. With inflammatory, unprofessional and unethical statements like this, it is no wonder he was disbarred.; August 21, 2017 at 9:19 AM
guiowen said...: The thing is that, in general, when the police arrested some Duke student, the dean of students would send him to some "lawyer" who advised him on how to plead guilty and get off with a reasonable bargain. Nifong was simply not used to having the students come up with their own lawyers. As it was, the lacrosse players got lawyers who were quite a bit more competent than Mike, and good old Mike felt ambushed by this turn of events. Obviously he was disappointed.; August 21, 2017 at 3:09 PM
guiowen said...: I will say good old Mike was right on one thing: if any of the lacrosse players had confessed, Mike might still be the D. A.
Too bad, Mike!; August 21, 2017 at 3:11 PM
Anonymous said...: Udaman g.; August 22, 2017 at 3:35 AM
Anonymous said...: Sidney or Kenny or both continue to post anonymously to create the illusion that they have support.; August 23, 2017 at 7:11 PM
Anonymous said...: Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.; August 24, 2017 at 3:18 AM
Anonymous said...: More for Sidney:

Donald Trump is ranting and raving about how unfair the media is.

You have ranted and raved about how unfair the media is for years,lo0ng before Trump ever became news.

You were Trumpian long before Trump ever did.; August 24, 2017 at 10:51 AM
Anonymous said...: Sidney or Kenny or both continue to post anonymously to create the illusion that they have support.; August 25, 2017 at 7:41 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous Anonymous said...
More for Sidney:

Donald Trump is ranting and raving about how unfair the media is.

You have ranted and raved about how unfair the media is for years,lo0ng before Trump ever became news.

You were Trumpian long before Trump ever did.

August 24, 2017 at 10:51 AM

Hmmm. Definitely not a compliment, but there is a difference. The truth is that the media has been biased and unfair in its reporting and non-reporting of stories about Mike Nifong, Crystal Mangum, and myself. That's just a fact.

The WRAL-5 News article of July 4, 2016 was factually incorrect for the purpose of misleading the public. I made numerous attempts to have both WRAL and Fix-the-Court correct their stories. Both ignored me, with Fix-the-Court finally relenting after two months, and WRAL refusing to this day to correct its errors. WRAL still refers to me as a "Durham" man and claims that my lawsuits against Duke University had to do with the 2006 Duke Lacrosse case.

Donald Trump is the president of the United States, supposedly, and therefore is a public figure, something about which I believe he relishes. It appears to me that his attacks on the media are conducted for the purpose of discrediting it... something that would work to his benefit on negative stories about Trump and his administration.

I would like to see the media be more accurate, objective and unbiased in its reporting and valued by the people. A true Trumpian wants to destroy the credibility of the media with confusion and obfuscation in a way that would have the public disbelieve and even renounce the media.

So, you see... what appears somewhat similar is, in fact, diametrically opposite.

Consider yourself "elucidated."; August 26, 2017 at 11:32 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: HEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP!!
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT.

Just want everyone to know that my recent absence from the Comments section is due to challenges on many fronts... working on my appeal, working on freeing Crystal Mangum, working on serving a complaint and summons on Fix-the-Court, and work on a new sharlog.

Regarding Crystal, I believe that her release will be imminent.

As you were.; August 26, 2017 at 11:36 AM
guiowen said...: Sidney,
How many times have you said Crystal's release is imminent?; August 26, 2017 at 12:21 PM
Anonymous said...: Udaman g.; August 26, 2017 at 1:12 PM
Anonymous said...: Sidney Harr:

"Hmmm. Definitely not a compliment, but there is a difference. The truth is that the media has been biased and unfair in its reporting and non-reporting of stories about Mike Nifong, Crystal Mangum, and myself. That's just a fact.'

What is a fact is you do not know what you are talk9ng about

"The WRAL-5 News article of July 4, 2016 was factually incorrect for the purpose of misleading the public. I made numerous attempts to have both WRAL and Fix-the-Court correct their stories."

However, those stories were not defamatory. Because you did not like them,, that does not make them defamatory.

"Both ignored me,"

That is not surprising.

"with Fix-the-Court finally relenting after two months, and WRAL refusing to this day to correct its errors. WRAL still refers to me as a "Durham" man and claims that my lawsuits against Duke University had to do with the 2006 Duke Lacrosse case."

Referring to you as a Durham man was not defamatory to you. It was defamatory to Durham. And you , yourself, connected your frivolous, non meritorious lawsuits against Duke to the Duke Rape HOAX.

"Donald Trump is the president of the United States, supposedly, and therefore is a public figure, something about which I believe he relishes. It appears to me that his attacks on the media are conducted for the purpose of discrediting it..."

And your false attacks on the media are not???!!! HAH!!!

"something that would work to his benefit on negative stories about Trump and his administration."

Sidney, you are just as big a zero as Kenny, your wackolyte.

"I would like to see the media be more accurate, objective and unbiased in its reporting and valued by the people."

No you wouldn't. Look at the way you rant and rave about the unbiased, objective, accurate reporting on the Duke Rape HOAX.

"A true Trumpian wants to destroy the credibility of the media with confusion and obfuscation in a way that would have the public disbelieve and even renounce the media."

Which is EXACTLY what you are trying to do. Only you are too deluded and megalomaniacal to realize it. So I am giving you some real enlightenment and elucidation.

"So, you see... what appears somewhat similar is, in fact, diametrically opposite."

No it isn't. You are one of the world's grossest Trumpians.

And you have shown a signal lack of capability for discerning facts.; August 26, 2017 at 1:18 PM
Anonymous said...: Sidney Harr:

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

Just want everyone to know that my recent absence from the Comments section is due to challenges on many fronts... working on my appeal, working on freeing Crystal Mangum, working on serving a complaint and summons on Fix-the-Court, and work on a new sharlog."

That is the same excuse you always give to explain why you have shied away with dealing with the comments on this blog.

"Regarding Crystal, I believe that her release will be imminent."

How many years have you been saying her release is imminent? Has she been released. Not the last time you checked, after the last time you said her release was imminent.

"As you were."

You were as you have always been,delusional and megalomaniacal.; August 26, 2017 at 1:22 PM
Anonymous said...: Udaman Ubes.; August 26, 2017 at 4:20 PM
Anonymous said...: If anyone is planning on buying Crystal a gift based on Sid's prediction that her release from prison is imminent, I would urge (a) you refrain from buying anything perishable and (b) that you save the receipt.; August 26, 2017 at 5:37 PM
Anonymous said...: Sidney or Kenny or both continue to post anonymously to create the illusion that they have support.; August 26, 2017 at 6:37 PM
Anonymous said...: Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.; August 26, 2017 at 6:59 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: guiowen said...
Sidney,
How many times have you said Crystal's release is imminent?

August 26, 2017 at 12:21 PM

gui, mon ami, I do not know how many times I have predicted Crystal's imminent release, but when I made those predictions I felt confident in them. I now have reason to believe that she will be released shortly, and my efforts have been directed to trying to see the objective achieved.; August 27, 2017 at 8:38 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous Anonymous said...
Sidney Harr:

"Hmmm. Definitely not a compliment, but there is a difference. The truth is that the media has been biased and unfair in its reporting and non-reporting of stories about Mike Nifong, Crystal Mangum, and myself. That's just a fact.'

What is a fact is you do not know what you are talk9ng about

"The WRAL-5 News article of July 4, 2016 was factually incorrect for the purpose of misleading the public. I made numerous attempts to have both WRAL and Fix-the-Court correct their stories."

However, those stories were not defamatory. Because you did not like them,, that does not make them defamatory.

"Both ignored me,"

That is not surprising.

"with Fix-the-Court finally relenting after two months, and WRAL refusing to this day to correct its errors. WRAL still refers to me as a "Durham" man and claims that my lawsuits against Duke University had to do with the 2006 Duke Lacrosse case."

Referring to you as a Durham man was not defamatory to you. It was defamatory to Durham. And you , yourself, connected your frivolous, non meritorious lawsuits against Duke to the Duke Rape HOAX.

"Donald Trump is the president of the United States, supposedly, and therefore is a public figure, something about which I believe he relishes. It appears to me that his attacks on the media are conducted for the purpose of discrediting it..."

And your false attacks on the media are not???!!! HAH!!!

"something that would work to his benefit on negative stories about Trump and his administration."

Sidney, you are just as big a zero as Kenny, your wackolyte.

"I would like to see the media be more accurate, objective and unbiased in its reporting and valued by the people."

No you wouldn't. Look at the way you rant and rave about the unbiased, objective, accurate reporting on the Duke Rape HOAX.

"A true Trumpian wants to destroy the credibility of the media with confusion and obfuscation in a way that would have the public disbelieve and even renounce the media."

Which is EXACTLY what you are trying to do. Only you are too deluded and megalomaniacal to realize it. So I am giving you some real enlightenment and elucidation.

"So, you see... what appears somewhat similar is, in fact, diametrically opposite."

No it isn't. You are one of the world's grossest Trumpians.

And you have shown a signal lack of capability for discerning facts.

August 26, 2017 at 1:18 PM

Do you consider WRAL's statement that I'm a "Durham" man to be accurate and/or truthful? It may not be defamatory in and of itself, but it is misleading... which is its intent, and that is why WRAL has refused to rectify it.

WRAL's statement that my lawsuits against Duke University were about the 2006 Duke Lacrosse case is not defamatory either... but like the Durham man statement it is false; untrue. Like the Durham man statement, it is misleading to the extent that it incites unwarranted hostility towards me. It is a damaging statement... without doubt.; August 27, 2017 at 8:46 AM
Anonymous said...: Sidney Harr:

"Do you consider WRAL's statement that I'm a "Durham" man to be accurate and/or truthful? It may not be defamatory in and of itself, but it is misleading... which is its intent, and that is why WRAL has refused to rectify it."

Prove that the intent of WRAL was to mislead anyone about you. Your usual way of replying is to say, what else could it be. That is not evidence that WRAL tried to harm you by publishhing misleading informatoin.

"WRAL's statement that my lawsuits against Duke University were about the 2006 Duke Lacrosse case is not defamatory either... but like the Durham man statement it is false; untrue. Like the Durham man statement, it is misleading to the extent that it incites unwarranted hostility towards me. It is a damaging statement... without doubt."

What is without a doubt is that the statement was damaging. That you took personal offense against it is not WRAL damaging you It is you damaging yourself, and you deserve no compensation from WRAL for that.

Sidney, the legal experts who post here have explained to you, that to prevail you have to show that the statements were intentionally defamatory, or that they who made the statement intended to cause damage to you. That they were wrong does not add up to defamation. You have not shown you suffered any damages. You have not documented that the statements incited any intentional hostility towards you. Just because you chose to be offended is not evidence that anyone intentionally sought to incite hostility towards you.

There was a lot of hostility towards you before you ever filed your lawsuits, and that hostility was generated by the patently wrong statements you have posted on your blog over the Duke Rape HOAX, e.g. all the times you have posted that Crystal, the victimizer/false accuser in the Duke Rape HOAX was the victim/accuser in the Duke Rape case.

Your latest screed is just another irrelevancy.

So consider yourself enlightened and elucidated.; August 27, 2017 at 9:38 AM
Anonymous said...: SIdney Harr:

"gui, mon ami, I do not know how many times I have predicted Crystal's imminent release, but when I made those predictions I felt confident in them. I now have reason to believe that she will be released shortly, and my efforts have been directed to trying to see the objective achieved."

So?

Is Crystal still incarcerated?

Why should any one, including Crystal, have any confidence in your ability to put your money where your mouth is?; August 27, 2017 at 9:40 AM
Anonymous said...: Sidney, your whole attitude is one of total ignorance of a basic fundamental of the legal system:

YOU HAVE TO MAKE YOUR CASE!!!!

You think you state your case and it is up to the defendant to disprove it.

Answer this: why do you think you make your case by asking irrelevant questions?; August 27, 2017 at 10:11 AM
Anonymous said...: More for Sidney:

You seem to think you present your case to the court and ask, show me why my case does not have merit.

Your obligation as a plaintiff is to prove your case has merit.

Again, your case does not have merit just because you got your nose a little bit out of joint.; August 27, 2017 at 11:11 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid openly admits the statement is not defamatory, yet still claims it's shocking when his defamation lawsuit is dismissed.

That's all the delusion I can handle right now.

See ya!; August 27, 2017 at 1:28 PM
Anonymous said...: kenhyderal,

Please share with the group your views on Dr. Harr's prediction that Crystal's release is imminent.; August 28, 2017 at 3:19 AM
Anonymous said...: February 2026 is imminent, at least in some sense of the word.; August 28, 2017 at 10:10 AM
kenhyderal said...: “The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice.” Dr. MLK; August 28, 2017 at 10:21 AM
guiowen said...: What is justice?; August 28, 2017 at 10:45 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

“'The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice.' Dr. MLK"

Meaning only that the arc of the moral universe has never and never will bend towards you and Sidney.; August 28, 2017 at 1:45 PM
kenhyderal said...: Guiowen said: "What is justice?"......................Ask your conscience.; August 28, 2017 at 4:51 PM
guiowen said...: Kenny,
I hope it's not setting a murderer free.; August 28, 2017 at 4:55 PM
kenhyderal said...: I hope it's not incarcerating an innocent single black mother of three for murder when no murder occurred. The homicide of Reginald Daye was due to medical misadventure, rising to the level of medical malpractice, while he was being treated in an ICU at Duke for acute alcohol withdrawal. The question remains what was he being treated for. If it was a post-surgical infection them Welch would apply. It was not. There was no post-surgical infection causing Daye's acute distress. It was solely impending delirium tremens. Dr. Nicolls had the hospital records yet he never mentioned acute alcohol withdrawal; choosing instead, probably deliberately, to ignore this crucial condition and instead ingenuously speculating that it was "obviously some sort of infection, or some sort of other catastrophic illness" when he knew better. Then, Crystal's incompetent Lawyer, Daniel Meier asked Dr. Nichols, "could Daye have survived the stabbing if he had not contracted the "infection". To which Dr. Nichols simply answered, "Yes." Huh? What infection? Again I say, there was no record of any infection, nada,zero. Already Meier was siding against his client. Duke killed Daye. Duke goes scot free Crystal is convicted of murder. Ask yourself is this justice?; August 28, 2017 at 9:51 PM
guiowen said...: A jury of her peers found she murdered him. If you feel this was an injustice, come to Durham, hire a lawyer, hire a medical expert, and try to get her free.; August 28, 2017 at 11:33 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"Guiowen said: 'What is justice?'......................Ask your conscience."

Hey Kenny the hypocrite. What is just about lyig about being raped and accusing innocent men of perpetrating the non existent crime. What is just about a corrupt prosecutor prosecuting the innocent men just to further his political ambitions and pad his retirement benefits.

You have documented you do not know what a conscience is.; August 29, 2017 at 2:56 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"I hope it's not incarcerating an innocent single black mother of three for murder when no murder occurred."

It was not. It was incarcerating a murderess.

"The homicide of Reginald Daye was due to medical misadventure, rising to the level of medical malpractice, while he was being treated in an ICU at Duke for acute alcohol withdrawal."

No it wasn't. First off, just like you do not know what a conscience is(because you do not have one), you have no idea of what medical malpractice is. He was not only being treated for possible DTs, he was also being evaluated for an intra abdominal infection, the risk of which he was exposed to because Crystal stabbed him.

"The question remains what was he being treated for. If it was a post-surgical infection them Welch would apply. It was not. There was no post-surgical infection causing Daye's acute distress."

Here Kenny the hypocrite again shows he knows enough about a medical issue as he knows about justice. Kenny believes innocent men should have been convicted and incarcerated for sex crimes against Crystal when he has zero evidence said crimes ever happened, zero evidence that Crystal ever told the truth about being a victim of sex crimes.

"It was solely impending delirium tremens. Dr. Nicolls had the hospital records yet he never mentioned acute alcohol withdrawal; choosing instead, probably deliberately, to ignore this crucial condition and instead ingenuously speculating that it was "obviously some sort of infection, or some sort of other catastrophic illness" when he knew better."

Kind of a weird statement since Kenny has never documented he knows anything about clinical medicine or forensic pathology, just like he knows nothing about the true concept of justice.

"Then, Crystal's incompetent Lawyer, Daniel Meier asked Dr. Nichols, "could Daye have survived the stabbing if he had not contracted the "infection". To which Dr. Nichols simply answered, 'Yes.'"

Valid question. Dr. Nicholls, as it is obvious except to an ignorant person like Kenny, knows more about the situation than Kenny ever did, more about the situation than ignorant Kenny is capable of knowing.

"Huh? What infection? Again I say, there was no record of any infection, nada,zero."

Wrong yet again. In a patient subjected to a laceration of the colon, exposed to hours of colonic contamination of the abdomen as a result of said laceration(inflicted by Crystal), there was a risk of infection. The only person who disputes that, besides Kenny, is Sidney, the minimally trained, minimally experienced medical school graduate who was never accepted into residency training, who never achieved medical specialty board certification, who never never in his life performed surgery on a patient with a colonic laceration, and who never in his life ever performed an autopsy.

"Already Meier was siding against his client."

No he wasn't.

"Duke killed Daye."

No they didn't

"Duke goes scot free Crystal is convicted of murder. Ask yourself is this justice?"

The answer given by a jury of Crystal's peers, as noted by Guiowen, was a resounding YES. Your ignorance of the law, of clinical medicine, and of forensic medicine does not nullify that.

Again, you are quite the hypocrite since you obviously think it would have been justice to convict innocent men of sex crimes, when there is zero evidence the crimes ever happened, zero evidence the complaining witness ever told the truth when she alleged the crimes had happened.; August 29, 2017 at 3:13 AM
Anonymous said...: kenhyderal,

And do you agree with Dr. Harr's prediction that Crystall's release is imminent?; August 29, 2017 at 3:17 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid,

What has been filed and pending that could lead to Crystal's release? You know full well (even if you refuse to admit it), there would have to be a hearing, and since no hearings are set, nothing is imminent. Why do you keep lying? Other than Crystal who you are emotionally abusing and manipulating, do you think anyone believes your obvious lies?

When there is a hearing set in a lawsuit/court action that could actually affect Crystal, let us know. Until then, keep your idiotic pronouncements and obvious lies to yourself.; August 29, 2017 at 4:22 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhydral:

i forgot.

You are still riding on top of some turnip truck, and, according to some beliefs, that makes you an expert at anything.; August 29, 2017 at 4:40 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Sid,

What has been filed and pending that could lead to Crystal's release? You know full well (even if you refuse to admit it), there would have to be a hearing, and since no hearings are set, nothing is imminent. Why do you keep lying? Other than Crystal who you are emotionally abusing and manipulating, do you think anyone believes your obvious lies?

When there is a hearing set in a lawsuit/court action that could actually affect Crystal, let us know. Until then, keep your idiotic pronouncements and obvious lies to yourself.

August 29, 2017 at 4:22 AM

Hey, Anony.

Clearly you have not been paying attention. Had you, you would have known that on March 14, 2017, Mangum filed a Pro Se Motion for Release on Recognizance pending an outcome on the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus which she filed Pro Se on July 5, 2016. The Court requested that the State respond to the motion, which it did. On April 11, 2017, the briefs were delivered to the Magistrate Judge.

Currently we are awaiting the ruling on that motion.

Consider yourself elucidated.; August 29, 2017 at 7:44 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: guiowen said...
A jury of her peers found she murdered him. If you feel this was an injustice, come to Durham, hire a lawyer, hire a medical expert, and try to get her free.

August 28, 2017 at 11:33 PM

Hey, gui, mon ami.

Hah, shirley you jest. Remember that the so-called jury of her peers included three jurors with close ties to Duke University and its hospital.

CLICK to access transcripts of Duke-related jurors

Not only that, but a fourth juror was allowed to remain seated when he committed misconduct by making the statement that they (the jurors) should consider the reputation of Durham... the statement made well before trial testimony.

Why should Mangum or anyone hire an attorney to represent Mangum. The case is too political and it will just result in yet another turncoat attorney protecting Duke University and the medical examiner.

Also, Mangum already had a medical expert... Dr. Christena L. Roberts. She, along with Mangum's attorneys, did not want to provide Mangum with a written report... she didn't even bother to show up at trial... and she did her best to protect Duke University Hospital and the medical examiner.

Mangum did the right thing with her Pro Se filing of the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and her Motion for Release on Recognizance.; August 29, 2017 at 8:10 AM
Anonymous said...: Sidney Ha:

"Hey, Anony.

Clearly you have not been paying attention. Had you, you would have known that on March 14, 2017, Mangum filed a Pro Se Motion for Release on Recognizance pending an outcome on the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus which she filed Pro Se on July 5, 2016. The Court requested that the State respond to the motion, which it did. On April 11, 2017, the briefs were delivered to the Magistrate Judge.

Currently we are awaiting the ruling on that motion.

Consider yourself elucidated."

Again,explain how someone incapable of receiving elucidation deliver elucidation to anyone else.

He can't.; August 29, 2017 at 8:15 AM
Anonymous said...: Sidney Harr:

"
guiowen said...
A jury of her peers found she murdered him. If you feel this was an injustice, come to Durham, hire a lawyer, hire a medical expert, and try to get her free.

August 28, 2017 at 11:33 PM

Hey, gui, mon ami.

"Hah, shirley you jest. Remember that the so-called jury of her peers included three jurors with close ties to Duke University and its hospital."

So. You claim, with zero proof, that Duke killed Reginald Daye via malpractice. You are incapable of determining whether or not malpractice took place. There was nothing for Duke to cover up. Even if there were, the guilty verdict against Crystal would not have precluded the Daye family from filin a malpractice against Duke

"CLICK to access transcripts of Duke-related jurors"

Irrelevant, as I have explained above.

"Not only that, but a fourth juror was allowed to remain seated when he committed misconduct by making the statement that they (the jurors) should consider the reputation of Durham... the statement made well before trial testimony."

Cite a legal precedent which defines that as misconduct. And you are again thoroughly HYPOCRITICAL, as you try to defend Nifong's obviously guilt presuming statements, made after he, without any evidence, publicly accused members of the Lacrosse team of perpetrating a brutal sex crime against Crystal, and, not only that, made statements saying that the Lacrosse players availing themselves of their Constitutionally guaranteed rights to retain counsel, to not talk to the authorities, were indications of guilt. Have you ever heard of the presumption of innocence. Obviously not.

Why should Mangum or anyone hire an attorney to represent Mangum. The case is too political and it will just result in yet another turncoat attorney protecting Duke University and the medical examiner."

That is based on your delusional claim that the prosecution was a vendetta based prosecution to retaliate against Crystal for accusing the Lacrosse players of raping her. You are forgetting that there was no evidence the crime ever happened, no evidence that Crystal ever told the truth. What caused the prosecution was that Crystal stabbed Reginald Daye and he died. Further, you are incompetent to way whether or not Reginald Daye's death was due to medical malpractice on the part of Duke.

"Also, Mangum already had a medical expert... Dr. Christena L. Roberts. She, along with Mangum's attorneys, did not want to provide Mangum with a written report..."

Because her opinion agreed with Dr. Nicholls' opinion, that Reginald Daye resulted from the stab wound inflicted upon him by Crystal.

"she didn't even bother to show up at trial..."

So why did the defense not subpoena her? Again, because her testimony would have supported Dr. Nichols' testimony. Why did you not testify at the trial on behalf of trial. Because, considering your lack of experience, lack of training, lack of credentials, the court would have rejected you as an expert witness.

"and she did her best to protect Duke University Hospital and the medical examiner."

No she did not. There was nothing to cover up. Just like you and Kenny have provided zero evidence Crystal had been raped, you have provided zero evidence that there was something to cover up.

"Mangum did the right thing with her Pro Se filing of the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and her Motion for Release on Recognizance."

If I am correct, any defendant has the right to file such a motion pro se. That does not mean the motion will be granted. That Crystal Mangum filed the motion, that you and your wacko-lite Kenny believe she is innocent is not grounds for granting such a motion.

Consider yourself elucidated and enlightened.; August 29, 2017 at 8:33 AM
Anonymous said...: Sidney Harr:

The three jurors with connections to Duke were a mail man, a housekeeper and a the wife of a Cardio Thoracic Surgeon, who would not have been involved in a laparotomy on a patient who had received a penetrating colon wound. None of them would have had any knowledge of what happened in the Reginald Daye case.

This is but one of your grossest, most delusional attempts to bullshit your way around and through facts which you do not like.

And you think you can enlighten people and provide elucidation to people. That is an even bigger piece of bulshit you use to get around and through facts you do not like.; August 29, 2017 at 8:40 AM
kenhyderal said...: Dr. Anonymous said: " In a patient subjected to a laceration of the colon, exposed to hours of colonic contamination of the abdomen as a result of said laceration(inflicted by Crystal), there was a risk of infection. The only person who disputes that, besides Kenny, is Sidney,"............................... I wish you would stop saying that this is something I dispute. You know better as I have said countless times. I agree this was a possibility. But, as I stated, the question is not what he was being evaluated for, which could trigger a Welch ruling but what was he was being treated for and what was the cause of that condition and did that cause have anything to do with the stab wound. The fatal mishap occurred when he was taken to the ICU to be treated for impending delirium tremens. Attempting to eliminate other possible causes during this treatment, where a medical mishap occurred is an intervening cause. Medical malpractice as defined by a failure to recognize and correct a esophageal intubation in a timely manner before it causes brain death is, in this case, the intervening cause that killed Daye. Had there been an infection it would have been documented and even treated during his comatose state. No nexus between the stab wound and Daye's demise.; August 29, 2017 at 9:40 AM
Anonymous said...: The hospital's malpractice, even if it occurred, does not absolve Crystal for stabbing Mr. Daye and his subsequent death. Hospitalization, medical treatment and even medical error are foreseeable consequences of stabbing someone. A person who stabs someone takes the risk that medical care may not be readily available or that mistakes may be made during the treatment of the victim, or that complications may arise, in spite of the hospital's best efforts. The failure of other people to undo the results of your bad actions doesn't shift responsibility for your bad acts to them, or wipe you clean from blame. Put another way, when you injure someone as severely as Crystal injured Mr. Daye, you are responsible for the outcome.

Welcome to the real world. Your actions have consequences.; August 29, 2017 at 10:07 AM
Anonymous said...: Krnhyderal:

"Dr. Anonymous said: " In a patient subjected to a laceration of the colon, exposed to hours of colonic contamination of the abdomen as a result of said laceration(inflicted by Crystal), there was a risk of infection. The only person who disputes that, besides Kenny, is Sidney,"............................... I wish you would stop saying that this is something I dispute. You know better as I have said countless times. I agree this was a possibility."

Nevertheless you dispute that it was an evaluation for a [ossible infection that led to the incident from which he died. The real world fact which you willfully ignore is that he would never have been at risk for infection, he never would HAVE to have been evaluated for one.

"But, as I stated, the question is not what he was being evaluated for, which could trigger a Welch ruling but what was he was being treated for and what was the cause of that condition and did that cause have anything to do with the stab wound."

Let me enlighten you again, which will do you no good since you remain willfully ignorant of facts you do not like. You presume, because he was being treated for DTs, that ruled out an intra abdominal infection. It did not. Whether or not he was being evaluated for DTs, an intra abdominal infection had to be ruled in or out. What would have been real malpractice would have been what you, ignorantly, de facto propose, ignore the possibility of an infection and assume his symptoms were due to DTs.

The fatal mishap occurred when he was taken to the ICU to be treated for impending delirium tremens. Attempting to eliminate other possible causes during this treatment, where a medical mishap occurred is an intervening cause."

Not in this case. I say again, regardless of any presumptive diagnosis of DTs, in this case, an individual who was exposed to hours of colonic contamination of the abdominal cavity, which in this case was caused by the stab wound inflicted by Crystal. It was from the need for evaluation for intra abdominal infection in which the mishap happened.

"Medical malpractice as defined by a failure to recognize and correct a esophageal intubation in a timely manner before it causes brain death is, in this case, the intervening cause that killed Daye."

Kenny again shows his utter ignorance of medico legal issues. This did not rise to the level of negligence. Something wrong did happen and it was noted and there was an attempt to treat it. It was unsuccessful because, as Crystal's expert documented, the vomitus obscured the view of he airway. The vomitus obscured the view of the airway as a result of the evaluation for intra abdominal infection necessitated by the stab wound inflicted on ReginaldDaye by none other than Crystal Mangum.

"Had there been an infection it would have been documented and even treated during his comatose state."

Irrelevant. No infection would have been documented had the treating doctors just presumed, which ignorant Kenny de facto maintains they should have done, ignored the possibility of infection and presumed DTs was the cause of his symptos.

"No nexus between the stab wound and Daye's demise."

Yes there was.

Have you come up with any real experts with clinical ane/or legal experience who agree with you. Just try to say Sidney Harr. As I have pointed out on many occasions, this man is but a medical school graduate who was never accepted into residency training, who never achieved medical specialty board certification, who spent a truncated post medical school career filing and losing frivolous, non meritorious lawsuits. That hardly qualifies him as a medical expert. His history of the lawsuits he filed in NC, against Duke, against DA Lorin Freeman, against WRAL, against Fix the Court, against Duke, all document he is no legal expert.; August 29, 2017 at 10:42 AM
kenhyderal said...: Delirium Tremens, unrelated to the stab wound is an intervening cause i.e. , no Welch ruling triggered. Post surgical infection, related to the stab wound, not an intervening cause. In a legal context how one goes about making the correct diagnosis is immaterial. What is relevant is did treatment for the stab wound lead to him falling victim to medical error? Records indicate it did not. You can't rely on the need to eliminate this possibility to negate the intervening cause; that being his chronic alcoholism, his acute alcohol withdrawal and his pending life threatening delirium tremens.; August 29, 2017 at 1:46 PM
Anonymous said...: Except if you look at Dr. Roberts' report - she noted that they considered DTs, and ruled them out. I know you say she would have said that was a lie had she taken the stand, but the report is clear. Deny it all you want Kenny, but unless you talked to Dr. Roberts yourself, everything you say is just made up BS to prove a false point.

Her report specifically addresses DTs, so for you and Sid to say no one considered that - they did - and she still concluded the stab wound was a proximate cause of death (she also noted the esophageal intubation). The problem is that the Defense's own expert considered every issue you and Sid claim no one considered, and she still said the stab would did it. Had she testified, Crystal would likely have been guilty of 1st Degree Murder, which really seems to be what upsets you and Sid the most - you clearly are more upset that she will eventually be released than you are about anything else.; August 29, 2017 at 3:19 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"Delirium Tremens, unrelated to the stab wound is an intervening cause i.e. , no Welch ruling triggered."

Irrelevant, because the episode of care which led to his death was unrelated to DTs, as has been explained to you. That you willfully choose to be ignorant of the situation does not establish that DTs was the only problem affecting Mr. Daye.

"Post surgical infection, related to the stab wound, not an intervening cause. In a legal context how one goes about making the correct diagnosis is immaterial. What is relevant is did treatment for the stab wound lead to him falling victim to medical error?"

Hey Kenny, medical error, when it happens, does not necessarily mean malpractice.

"Records indicate it did not."

Medical records indicate that the administration of contrast, which induced the vomiting, was done to rule in or rule out an intra abdominal infection, which would not have been necessary had Crystal not stabbed Reginald Daye and lacerated his colon.

"You can't rely on the need to eliminate this possibility to negate the intervening cause; that being his chronic alcoholism, his acute alcohol withdrawal and his pending life threatening delirium tremens."

Bullshit.

Regardless of the presence or absence of DTs did not eliminate the need to evaluate Reginald Daye for an intra abdominal infection. Again, your willful ignorance of why an evaluation for intra abdominal infection does not get Crystal a pass for making it necessary that the treating physicians had to evaluate him.

And you have no hard evidence he was a chronic alcoholic.

Before anyone makes statements in a Court of Law trying a case like the Reginald Daye murder as to the cause of death would have to establish his/her credentials, his/her competence to render expert opinions. How about you establish your credentials to render such opinions. Maybe you can cite a Medical Reference which says administration of intra gastric contrast is standard treatment for suspected DTs.

Not falling off a turnip truck does not establish your credentials. You do not know what you are talking about. That is a fact.; August 29, 2017 at 3:36 PM
Anonymous said...: Hey Kenny:

Check this article out,since you are so fond of fancying yourself an expert medical witness because you read medical articles on line:

http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/166032-treatment.

One quote from this article:

"Special concerns in the treatment of alcohol withdrawal include the following:

Failure to consider the diagnosis of alcohol withdrawal syndrome in patients with altered mental status, abnormal vital signs, or single simple seizure

Failure to treat patients with severe alcohol withdrawal syndrome with adequate doses of benzodiazepines, because these patients may require extremely large doses of parenteral benzodiazepines

(This is a goodie, emphasis added)Making the assumption that all seizures in people with alcoholism are due to alcohol withdrawal WIRHOUT CONSIDERIN OTHER CAUSES OF SEIZURES, SUCH AS INFECTION(get that, INFECTION), HEMORRHAGE(Reginald Daye did suffer from hemorrhage after Crystal stabbed him), OR TRAUMA( Reginald Daye did suffer from Trauma, the stab wound inflicted by Crystal which lacerated his colon)

Failure to exclude other etiologies of altered mental status in patients with suspected alcohol withdrawal

Failure to admit patients to the hospital with signs and symptoms of major withdrawal or delirium tremens (DTs)

Failure to diagnose such conditions as hypoglycemia and pancreatitis(more conditions which can cause the same type of symptoms seen in DTs)

Failure to administer thiamine in patients presenting with alcohol withdrawal

Failure to use adequate chemical sedation with use of physical restraints"

No where in that article does it say that the administration of intra gastric contrast is a tretment for suspected DTs. It is done when a CT scan is done, for many indications, including evaluating a patient for an intra abdominal infection.

The reason Reginald Daye aspirated was because he was being evaluated for an intra abdominal infection. He was put at risk of an intra abdominal infection because Crystal stabbed him.; August 29, 2017 at 3:50 PM
Anonymous said...: OOPS. Typo alert. When I typed WIRHOUT, I should have typed WITHOUT. And I left off he G when I typed CONSIDERIN.

Sorry about that.; August 29, 2017 at 3:52 PM
kenhyderal said...: @ Dr. Anonymous: Was it ever established that Reginald Day had a post-surgical infection? It's completely obvious that he did not. Sure he needed to be evaluated for one but when one was not present any nexus to the stab wound is absent. Dr. Nichols told the jury that it was "obviously some sort of infection"; wrong. And what was the "other catastrophic illness" he referred to. He was never asked to speculate. The jury contrary to what they were instructed never did consider intervening cause. As lay people never given all the facts they relied on Nichols' "she stabbed his he died" suggestions as the basis to find her guilty of murder.; August 29, 2017 at 4:49 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"@ Dr. Anonymous: Was it ever established that Reginald Day had a post-surgical infection? It's completely obvious that he did not. Sure he needed to be evaluated for one but when one was not present any nexus to the stab wound is absent. Dr. Nichols told the jury that it was "obviously some sort of infection"; wrong. And what was the "other catastrophic illness" he referred to. He was never asked to speculate. The jury contrary to what they were instructed never did consider intervening cause. As lay people never given all the facts they relied on Nichols' "she stabbed his he died" suggestions as the basis to find her guilty of murder."

Another instance of Kenny trying to bullshit his way around and through facts he does not like.

It was not at all established that Reginald Daye was in DTs. A presumptive diagnosis is not a definitive diagnosis which rules out any and all other etiologies for his sympt0ms and signs.

At the time the iatrogenic incident happened, no, there was no established infection. At that stage, because he was put at risk for anintra abdominal infection because Crystal had stabbed him and lacerated his colon, it had to be ruled in or ruled out that he had an infection, and that was why he was administered intra gastric contrast. Kenny dodges the issue of whether or not administration of intra gastric contrast is a treatment for DTs. That he does not know is evidence of his lack of clinical expertise. And the bottom line is, yet again, that had Crystal not stabbed him, Reginald Daye would never have v=been at risk of an intra abd0m9nal infection and the evaluation for an intra abdominal infection would not have been done.

That Kenny chooses to be willfully ignorant does not get his favorite murderess/false accuser a pass for murdering Reginald Daye.; August 29, 2017 at 5:52 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhydral:

I say this again so you again can choose to be willfully ignorant.

The issue was not that it was never established that Reginald Daye had an infection.

He was placed at risk of infection when Crystal stabbed him and lacerated his colon. He had signs and symptoms consistent with an infection. It was incumbent upon the treating physicians to rule in or rule out an intra abdominal infection. The evaluation for the possible intra abdominal infection caused the iatrogenic injury. The evaluation would never have happened had Crystal never stabbed him. That is the glaringly obvious nexus between the stab wound and Reginald Daye's death.; August 29, 2017 at 5:57 PM
Anonymous said...: Kwnny:

So far, no clinically experienced physician has spoken up supporting your willful ignorance.

Sidney Harr is no clinically experienced physician.; August 29, 2017 at 5:59 PM
kenhyderal said...: Dr. A. said: " it had to be ruled in or ruled out that he had an infection, and that was why he was administered intra gastric contrast. Kenny dodges the issue of whether or not administration of intra gastric contrast is a treatment for DTs. That he does not know is evidence of his lack of clinical expertise. And the bottom line is, yet again, that had Crystal not stabbed him, Reginald Daye would never have v=been at risk of an intra abd0m9nal infection and the evaluation for an intra abdominal infection would not have been done"............................. If it was ruled out, then the evaluation for it, that put him at risk for the deadly medical mistake inflicted on him, was an intervening cause of his demise. Yes I am fully aware that the botched procedure was meant to rule out this suspected post-surgical intra-abdominal infection but the fact that it was the wound, which sent him to hospital, is insufficient to dismiss the real cause of death the errant esophageal intubation, making that an intervening event according to my reading of Judge Ridgeway's instructions especially had the jury, like me, heard all the facts.; August 29, 2017 at 9:09 PM
guiowen said...: Maybe the jury, unlike you, did hear all the facts.; August 29, 2017 at 11:17 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"Dr. A. said: " it had to be ruled in or ruled out that he had an infection, and that was why he was administered intra gastric contrast. Kenny dodges the issue of whether or not administration of intra gastric contrast is a treatment for DTs. That he does not know is evidence of his lack of clinical expertise. And the bottom line is, yet again, that had Crystal not stabbed him, Reginald Daye would never have v=been at risk of an intra abd0m9nal infection and the evaluation for an intra abdominal infection would not have been done"............................. If it was ruled out, then the evaluation for it, that put him at risk for the deadly medical mistake inflicted on him, was an intervening cause of his demise. Yes I am fully aware that the botched procedure was meant to rule out this suspected post-surgical intra-abdominal infection but the fact that it was the wound, which sent him to hospital, is insufficient to dismiss the real cause of death the errant esophageal intubation, making that an intervening event according to my reading of Judge Ridgeway's instructions especially had the jury, like me, heard all the facts."

You remain willfully ignorant.

The iatrogenic event happened when he was being evaluated for an infection. Read this again: THE IATROGENIC EVENT HAPPENED WHEN HE WAS BEING EVALUATED FOR AN INFECTION. In other words, the treating physicians were in the process of ruling in or ruling out an infection when the iatrogenic event happened. An intra abdominal infection HAD NOT been ruled out, when he aspirated.

And again, the evaluation for an intra abdominal infection, which evaluation resulted in the iatrogenic event, would not have happened had Crystal not stabbed him.

So far as"but the fact that it was the wound, which sent him to hospital, is insufficient to dismiss the real cause of death the errant esophageal intubation, making that an intervening event according to my reading of Judge Ridgeway's instructions especially had the jury, like me, heard all the facts", So what. Like Sidney you have shown a distinct inability to understand the facts or the legal implications of the facts; August 30, 2017 at 3:11 AM
Anonymous said...: Hey, Kenny:

Has any clinically competent physician, has any competent legal authority supported your take on the murder of Reginald Daye.

I remind you again, Sidney Harr is not a clinically competent physician and he is no competent legal authority.; August 30, 2017 at 3:13 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

That you think you are aware of the facts of the case is irrelevant. You have shown repeatedly that you ignore facts you do not like, that your response to facts you do not like is to bullshit your way around and through those facts you do not like.; August 30, 2017 at 3:15 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous Anonymous said...
Sidney Harr:

The three jurors with connections to Duke were a mail man, a housekeeper and a the wife of a Cardio Thoracic Surgeon, who would not have been involved in a laparotomy on a patient who had received a penetrating colon wound. None of them would have had any knowledge of what happened in the Reginald Daye case.

This is but one of your grossest, most delusional attempts to bullshit your way around and through facts which you do not like.

And you think you can enlighten people and provide elucidation to people. That is an even bigger piece of bulshit you use to get around and through facts you do not like.

August 29, 2017 at 8:40 AM

Hey, Anony.

You completely missed the point. If Mangum would have been found not guilty of murder, then that would have meant that all three connected to Duke University would have had to have voted to acquit. By so doing, the two employees would have been in jeopardy of being fired. And, if you read the transcript of the surgeon's wife, it's obvious that she did everything possible to get on the jury.

Mangum's turncoat attorney Daniel Meier assured that Mangum would not be acquitted when he allowed the three Duke-related jurors to be seated on the jury. That alone is grounds for appeal on ineffective counsel. Just ask A Lawyer or Walt.; August 30, 2017 at 4:44 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous Anonymous said...
The hospital's malpractice, even if it occurred, does not absolve Crystal for stabbing Mr. Daye and his subsequent death. Hospitalization, medical treatment and even medical error are foreseeable consequences of stabbing someone. A person who stabs someone takes the risk that medical care may not be readily available or that mistakes may be made during the treatment of the victim, or that complications may arise, in spite of the hospital's best efforts. The failure of other people to undo the results of your bad actions doesn't shift responsibility for your bad acts to them, or wipe you clean from blame. Put another way, when you injure someone as severely as Crystal injured Mr. Daye, you are responsible for the outcome.

Welcome to the real world. Your actions have consequences.

August 29, 2017 at 10:07 AM

Keep in mind that the medical malpractice stemmed from actions to treat Daye's delirium tremens (extreme agitation), and had nothing to do with the stab wound or its treatment. Also, the judge's instruction was contravened when Mangum was found guilty because Judge Ridgeway stated:
"Second, the state must prove that the defendant's act
was a proximate cause of the victim's death. A proximate cause
is a real cause, a cause, without which, the victim's death
would not have occurred. The act of the accused need not be the
immediate cause of the death. A defendant is legally
accountable if the direct cause of death is a natural result of
the criminal act. Neither medically negligent treatment nor
neglect of an injury will excuse a wrongdoer, unless the
treatment or neglect was the sole cause of death."

The prosecution never proved that the stab wound was the proximate cause of death. The medical examiner's conclusion was vague and unspecific... for example he provided no nexus between the stab wound and Daye's brain-death. In fact, both attorneys, working in a collaborative instead of adversarial relationship, failed to mention the esophageal intubation and week-long comatose state, and elective removal from life-support.

Because the jury was not informed of the medical malpractice, they were not able to rule with enlightenment that the esophageal intubation was the sole cause of Daye's brain-death and subsequent death following removal from life-support.; August 30, 2017 at 5:39 AM
Anonymous said...: Sidney Harr:

"Hey, Anony.

You completely missed the point. If Mangum would have been found not guilty of murder, then that would have meant that all three connected to Duke University would have had to have voted to acquit. By so doing, the two employees would have been in jeopardy of being fired. And, if you read the transcript of the surgeon's wife, it's obvious that she did everything possible to get on the jury."

You presume a fact not in evidence, that if those people voted to acquit, they would have been fired. That they would have been fired is another one of your delusions. You have no evidence of that, just like you have no evidence Crystal was ever raped, no evidence that Crystal ever told the truth when she claimed she had been raped, no evidence that Duke ever conspired to discriminate against you at the Breyer event.

"Mangum's turncoat attorney Daniel Meier assured that Mangum would not be acquitted when he allowed the three Duke-related jurors to be seated on the jury. That alone is grounds for appeal on ineffective counsel. Just ask A Lawyer or Walt."

Why don't you ask Walt of A Lawyer. Probably they would also tell you that you are delusional, but in different words.

Again, considering your record of filing and having dismissed a series of frivolous, non meritorious lawsuits, your opinion that having those jurors on the panel was grounds for an appeal is as meaningful as a claim that Joe Stalin was a benevolent despot.; August 30, 2017 at 5:57 AM
Anonymous said...: Sidney Harr:

"Keep in mind that the medical malpractice stemmed from actions to treat Daye's delirium tremens (extreme agitation), and had nothing to do with the stab wound or its treatment."

You again show how incompetent and incapable you are as a clinician. As I have explained to your wacko-lyte Kenny, the iatrogenic episode which caused Reginald Daye's death resulted from an evaluation for an intra abdominal infection. That the presence of an intra abdominal infection was not established before his death is irrelevant. His symptoms, fever, tachycardia, disorientation were consistent with infection. The evaluation was necessary. For the treating physicians to have just assumed the symptoms were due to DTs and not to have evaluated him for infection, now that would have been malpractice. Reginald Daye had been put at risk for an intra abdominal infection when Crystal stabbed him and lacerated his colon. The evaluation for infection would not have been necessary had Crystal not stabbed him and lacerated his colon.

'Also, the judge's instruction was contravened when Mangum was found guilty because Judge Ridgeway stated:
"Second, the state must prove that the defendant's act
was a proximate cause of the victim's death. A proximate cause
is a real cause, a cause, without which, the victim's death
would not have occurred. The act of the accused need not be the
immediate cause of the death. A defendant is legally
accountable if the direct cause of death is a natural result of
the criminal act. Neither medically negligent treatment nor
neglect of an injury will excuse a wrongdoer, unless the
treatment or neglect was the sole cause of death."

The judge's instruction was not contravened. Again, considering your history of grossly stupid legal misadventures documents you are not capable of authoritatively making that kind of statement, To put it in terms you might be able to understand, you do not know anything about what you are talking.

The prosecution never proved that the stab wound was the proximate cause of death."

Yes they did.

"The medical examiner's conclusion was vague and unspecific..."

No it wasn't.

"for example he provided no nexus between the stab wound and Daye's brain-death."

Only a complete legal and medical incompetent, who knows nothing about what he is talking, would render that opinion.

"In fact, both attorneys, working in a collaborative instead of adversarial relationship, failed to mention the esophageal intubation and week-long comatose state, and elective removal from life-support"

Presumes a fact not in evidence, that the attorneys collaborated to have Crystal convicted. And the esophageal intubation was the consequence of an evaluation for an intra abdominal infection, to which Reginald Daye was placed when Crystal stabbed him and lacerated his colon. Your total clinical incompetence does not refute that.; August 30, 2017 at 6:12 AM
Anonymous said...: Sidney, you are so easy to shoot down.; August 30, 2017 at 6:13 AM
Anonymous said...: Sidney Harr:

"And, if you read the transcript of the surgeon's wife, it's obvious that she did everything possible to get on the jury."

I did.

And your opinion is worth less than 1 millionth of a pre Euro Italian Lira.; August 30, 2017 at 6:15 AM
A Lawyer said...: If Mangum would have been found not guilty of murder, then that would have meant that all three connected to Duke University would have had to have voted to acquit. By so doing, the two employees would have been in jeopardy of being fired.

Says who? Duke wasn't being charged or sued; they had no interest in the outcome of this trial; there is zero reason to believe they cared one way or another about the verdict.

Mangum's turncoat attorney Daniel Meier assured that Mangum would not be acquitted when he allowed the three Duke-related jurors to be seated on the jury. That alone is grounds for appeal on ineffective counsel. Just ask A Lawyer or Walt.

Nonsense. Which is why Mangum's appeals have failed and her pending habeas will fail as well.; August 30, 2017 at 8:13 AM
kenhyderal said...: Dr. A. said; "That you think you are aware of the facts of the case is irrelevant. You have shown repeatedly that you ignore facts you do not like, that your response to facts you do not like is to bullshit your way around and through those facts you do not like"....................................... This statement is typical of the tortured logic of Dr. Anonymous. Examples please. What facts do you claim I ignore? What facts don't I like? How do I get around these facts you say I don't like. Do I ignore the facts or do I respond to the facts. Facts are facts. Liking or disliking facts is meaningless. Yes, there can be differing explanations or opinions for the presence or the meaning of these facts but to a Duke Lacrosse apologist conceding anything seems frightening to them. It's as if any crack will bring down the dam.; August 30, 2017 at 9:31 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"Dr. A. said; "That you think you are aware of the facts of the case is irrelevant. You have shown repeatedly that you ignore facts you do not like, that your response to facts you do not like is to bullshit your way around and through those facts you do not like"....................................... This statement is typical of the tortured logic of Dr. Anonymous."

No it isn't. It is another fact Kenny does not like and through which he tries to bullshit his way.

"Examples please. What facts do you claim I ignore? What facts don't I like? How do I get around these facts you say I don't like. Do I ignore the facts or do I respond to the facts. Facts are facts. Liking or disliking facts is meaningless. Yes, there can be differing explanations or opinions for the presence or the meaning of these facts but to a Duke Lacrosse apologist conceding anything seems frightening to them. It's as if any crack will bring down the dam."

A glaring example is your guilt presuming attitude towards the innocent men who were falsely accused of taping Crystal. Another glaring example is your repeated assertion that unidentified men raped Crystal at the party, and that members of the Lacrosse team participated in the rape.

The FACTS are: there is zero evidence that Crystal was raped; there is zero evidence she ever told the truth when she claimed she was raped; there is zero evidence there were any unidentified party attendees; there IS evidence that Crystal was sexually active before the party, the male DNA found on Crystal in he wake of her allegations of rape.

I pointed out to you, after the party Crystal drove away with Kim Roberts/Pittman. Kim called 911, NOT to report a rape but to complain that while she and her black girlfriend were either walking or driving past the house on Buchanan Street someone had yelled n---er at them. Then Kim drove Crystal, not to a hospital or to a police station but to a grocery store to have a security guard forcibly to remove Crystal from her car. I asked you, would she have done that if Crystal actually had been raped. Your reply was, Kim was probably unaware of the rape. However, in the hand written statement Crystal gave to the police, Crystal said Kim was aware she had been dragged into the bathroom, and that she had told Kim she had been hurt.

So, you have yet to explain why Kim, after being informed by Crystal that she had been raped and hurt, drove Crystal to a grocery store parking lot, not to a police station or to a hospital. The answer,for your edification is, Crystal lied about being raped.; August 31, 2017 at 3:13 AM
Anonymous said...: Krnhyderal:

"Do I ignore the facts"

Yes.

"or do I respond to the facts."

Well yes. You try to bullshit your way around them if you do not like them. Example: I asked you why Nifong indicted the accused Lacrosse players for RAPE, when the DNA evidence indicated no one on the Lacrose ream had had sex with Crystal, let alone criminal sex, which is an Historical FACT!!! Your response was he did not indict them for rape but for sexual assault and kidnapping.; August 31, 2017 at 3:20 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"Yes, there can be differing explanations or opinions for the presence or the meaning of these facts"

True, but the only valid explanation is, Crystal lied about being raped. That you believe differently is meaningless, since you have ZERO evidence Crystal was raped. False, contrived explanations, like the ones in which you believe are meaningless.

"but to a Duke Lacrosse apologist"

Since there was no rape, there are no Duke rape apologists.

"conceding anything seems frightening to them."

You are the one frightened by the facts.

"It's as if any crack will bring down the dam."

The dam crumbled over tan years ago, when Crystal was exposed as a false accuser, and you are one who, like Crystal and Sidney, is still floundering in the resultant flood.; August 31, 2017 at 3:28 AM
kenhyderal said...: Dr. Anonymous said: "No it isn't. It is another fact Kenny does not like and through which he tries to bullshit his way".......................... See what I mean. Dr. A., it seems, does not understand the meaning of "fact" What particular fact. Dr. A., are you talking about, in your statement "IT" is another fact Kenny does not like" Facts are facts but there can be several possible valid reasons these facts exist. eg Unidentified DNA extracted from sperm was found on Crystal. You speculate, without any facts that it came from clients of her escort service and that she lied about her consensual sexual history. I speculate also without facts that it came from non-Player guests at the Party who raped her. You have no circumstantial evidence. of your speculation. I have Crystal's statements.; August 31, 2017 at 9:27 AM
guiowen said...: In other words, we're wondering whether Crystal told the truth. Kenhyderal has, as evidence, Crystal's statements. WOW!; August 31, 2017 at 11:10 AM
Anonymous said...: KenhyderaPart 1:

"Dr. Anonymous said: "No it isn't. It is another fact Kenny does not like and through which he tries to bullshit his way".......................... See what I mean. Dr. A., it seems, does not understand the meaning of "fact"

Yes I do. Apparently so do you. The difference is you try to deny facts which do not fit with your guilt presumption and you try to bullshit your way around and through them.

"What particular fact. Dr. A., are you talking about, in your statement "IT" is another fact Kenny does not like"

The facts are, Crystal was not raped and Crystal did not tell the truth when she claimed she had been raped.

"Facts are facts but there can be several possible valid reasons these facts exist."

No reason why those facts exist which has no, I say again, NO evidentiary support is, by definition NOT a valid explanations.; August 31, 2017 at 11:40 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

Part 2:

"eg Unidentified DNA extracted from sperm was found on Crystal. You speculate, without any facts that it came from clients of her escort service and that she lied about her consensual sexual history."

Wrong. I said the DNA was deposited on Crystal before the party at 610 Buchanan Avenue. The evidence to support this is: 1) the DNA recovered from Crystal's person did not match the DNA of any male who had attended the party; 2) Crystal alleged a gang rape in which multiple assailants, not using condoms, penetrated her and ejaculated on her and deposited their bodily fluids on her, meaning that, if she had been raped at the party, the DNA found on her would have matched the DNA of people at the party; 3)you have no evidence to support your hypothesis that there were unidentified party attendees. Kilgo's "evidence" is hearsay, not evidence, and you can not document he ever told you that. Ergo, your contention that there were unidentified party attendees is not a "possible valid reason" why male DNA was found on Crystal after the party; 5) it is a fact that the DNA was not deposited upon Crystal after the party. Result: the classic bit of Sherlockian logic(paraphrased), when all other possibilities have been eliminated, what remains must be the truth. Crystal was not raped at the party, she never told the truth about being raped at the party. No DNA was ever deposited on Crystal at said party.

"I speculate also without facts that it came from non-Player guests at the Party who raped her. You have no circumstantial evidence. of your speculation."

Wrong yet again. Read the last paragraph. I have presented hard evidence for what I have said. I repeat, you try to bullshit your way around and through facts, I say again, FACTS, which you do not like because they do not mesh with your guilt presumption. On the other hand you admit you have no hard evidence that the DNA came from non player party guests.

"I have Crystal's statements."

But you have no corroborating hard evidence, no corroborating witnesses. You have talked about how Nifong could have impeached Reade Seligmann's alibi. He cou9ldn't. However, had the case gone to trial, even an inexperienced lawyer could have impeached Crystal's statements. The police had the players' statements that nothing happened at the party. So you are saying that those statements should have been disregarded. That is called a presumption of guilt, not speculation on some valid explanation as to the findings in the case.

What I have, again, is: 1) Crystal alleged a gang rape in which multiple assailants, who did not use condoms, penetrated her and left their bodily fluids on her; the male DNA found on her did not match the DNA of any male party attendee; 3) the DNA was not deposited after the party.

To that I add, what I have already said: 1) When Kim drove Crystal away from the party, she called 911, not to report a rape but to report that someone at the Buchanan House called them "n---er"; 2) Kim drove Crystal, not to a police station or to a hospital but to a grocery store to have Crystal removed from her car; 3) Crystal claimed, again,in her statement to the police that Kim was aware that she had been assaulted at the party. Again I ask something which you try to duck and bullshit your away around and through, if Kim was aware that Crystal had been assaulted, as Crystal, herself, alleged, why did Kim not report a rape to the police when she called them, and why did Kim not drive Crystal to the police or to a hospital.

Crystal never mentioned rape to anyone after the party until someone at the Durham Access Center if she had been raped.

It all adds up to, Crystal was not raped, Crystal lied about being raped.; August 31, 2017 at 11:41 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

Here is is again, the link to Crystal's statement given to the police:

http://johnsville.blogspot.com/2007/06/crystal-gail-mangum-april-6-2006.html.

Read it if you are not afraid.; August 31, 2017 at 11:50 AM
kenhyderal said...: DNA deposition can not be accurately timed. You have no evidence to support your hypothesis that there were only two non-Players present at the Party during the time of the incident. No comprehensive list of attendees exists; if it does exist let's see it. I believe no comprehensive list was ever made.; August 31, 2017 at 1:10 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"DNA deposition can not be accurately timed."

Which means you have no evidence to support your hypothesis that the DNA was deposited at the Lacrosse party. That the DNA did not match the DNA of any male who attended the party IS evidence which does say the DNA was not deposited at the party.

"You have no evidence to support your hypothesis that there were only two non-Players present at the Party during the time of the incident."

You have no evidence to support your hypothesis that there were more than 2 non player attendees at the party. You are asserting there were. You have to prove.

DNA deposition can not be accurately timed. You have no evidence to support your hypothesis that there were only two non-Players present at the Party during the time of the incident."

That is but an admission on your part that it can not be determined definitively that the DNA was deposited at the party, nothing more.

"No list of attendees exists; if it does exist let's see it."

Both prosecution and defense agreed that everyone who had attended the party had been identified. That is evidence that there were no unidentified party attendees. Since you are the one asserting that there were unidentified party attendees, it is up to you and to no one else to provide the comprehensive list of party attendees. So why don't you find it and show it to us.

"I believe no comprehensive list was ever made."

So what. You also believe in the face of zero evidence that a rape had happened that Crystal had been raped. Enough said.

P.S. That kilgo might have told you there were unidentified part attendees is irrelevant. You can not even document that kilgo ever told you anything like that, strongly suggesting you fabricated that claim. More than enough said.; August 31, 2017 at 3:11 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

Here is some more;

You have claimed that Nifong was out for justice for Crystal, why did he make no effort to identify men who had deposited their DNA on Crystal?

It was not because he believed the rapists were party attendees. He, as I have stated above, agreed with the defense that everyone who had been to the party had been identified. The DNA did not match any male whom both prosecution and defense had agreed, had been at the party.

It would have been totally unethical to indict men whose DNA did not match the DNA found on Crystal for rape. And it would have been even more unethical to indict men whose DNA did not match the DNA found on Crystal in the hope that they would finger someone else as the perpetrators.

Nifong made no effort to identify the men who left their DNA on Crystal because it would blow his case out of the water.

And I remind you, you claimed, falsely, that Nifong did not indict the accused for rape. I repeat, if you did not know he had indicted the accused for rape, you were incredibly stupid because that had been publicly known for years. If you did know, wel then you were and are a liar.; August 31, 2017 at 3:20 PM
kenhyderal said...: Dr. Anonymous said: "Both prosecution and defense agreed that everyone who had attended the party had been identified"................... Not in the Duke Lacrosse Case. That was in the Case against former DA Nifong where it was a moot matter; August 31, 2017 at 4:12 PM
guiowen said...: It wouldn't surprise me any to find out that some friends of Nifong had been Crystal's clients. I can imagine them saying, "Please, Mike, don't even try to test Crystal's customers for DNA! Can you imagine what my wife would say?"; August 31, 2017 at 4:14 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"Dr. Anonymous said: "Both prosecution and defense agreed that everyone who had attended the party had been identified"................... Not in the Duke Lacrosse Case. That was in the Case against former DA Nifong where it was a moot matter"

No it was no a moot matter. That both prosecution and defense agreed that everyone who had been at the party had been identified means only that everyone at the party had been identified.

You say, if there was a comprehensive list of attendees, then let's see it. I sagree. However, YOU are the one who is asserting that there were unidentified party attendees. So, it is incumbent upon YOU to provide a complete list of party attendees which shows some attendees were never identified.

Then, let's test their DNA to document they had had sex with Crystal.

Until and unless you do that, you have no evidence that there were any unidentified attendees.; August 31, 2017 at 4:36 PM
guiowen said...: Come to think of it, Crystal's employers probably asked good old Mike not to test their customers. "For God's sake, Mike, we'll lose all our customers if you do this!"; August 31, 2017 at 9:17 PM
kenhyderal said...: In the case against former DA Nifong, who was at the Party was of no relevance to the so-called ethics violations he was being charged with . Here is what his Lawyer stipulated to as an agreed to FACT (Trial Transcript item 7 page 2)
"The investigation revealed that the residents of 610 North Buchanan were captains of the Duke University lacrosse team, and that a majority of the other attendees at the March 13, 2006, party were members of the team" Quite immaterial to DA Nifong's defence but, personally, I have reason to question the term a majority . According to Kilgo's team member friend there were as many or more non-Players there than Players. Duke Lacrosse apologists behave as if DA Nifong's Lawyers and the Prosecutors approved person by person a definitive list of attendees. If AG Cooper ever did prepare such a list in his self-described thorough investigation it's been sealed to the Public.; August 31, 2017 at 9:28 PM
kenhyderal said...: @ Guiowen @ 9:17; Libelous to both Crystal and former DA Nifong.; August 31, 2017 at 9:34 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"In the case against former DA Nifong, who was at the Party was of no relevance to the so-called ethics violations he was being charged with . Here is what his Lawyer stipulated to as an agreed to FACT (Trial Transcript item 7 page 2)
"The investigation revealed that the residents of 610 North Buchanan were captains of the Duke University lacrosse team, and that a majority of the other attendees at the March 13, 2006, party were members of the team" Quite immaterial to DA Nifong's defence"

As is characteristic of Kenny, TOTALLY IRRELEVANT to the issue of whether or not there were unidentified party attendees. The statement DOES NOT even inply there were unidentified party attendees. I say again, Kenny trying to bullshit his way around an through facts he does not like, facts which do not mesh with his guilt presuming attitude.

"but, personally, I have reason to question the term a majority ."

No you don't.

"According to Kilgo's team member friend there were as many or more non-Players there than Players."

And you can not document that kilgo ever told you this or that kilgo's lacrosse player ever existed. More guilt presuming irrelevancy from Kenny. I remind Kenny that guilt presumption is not a feature of our legal system, probably not a feature of the Canadian legal system,. It is a feature of what are called legal systems in totalitarian legal systems in placeslike Nazi Germany and North Korea. Heil Kenny.

"Duke Lacrosse apologists behave as if DA Nifong's Lawyers and the Prosecutors approved person by person a definitive list of attendees. If AG Cooper ever did prepare such a list in his self-described thorough investigation it's been sealed to the Public."

Again, more ducking and dodging and bullshitting by Kenny. Kenny is the one, the ONLY one, maintaining that there were unidentified party attendees who raped Crystal. So it is incumbent upon Kenny and no one else to identify the unidentified party attendees and prove they raped Crystal.; September 1, 2017 at 3:27 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"@ Guiowen @ 9:17; Libelous to both Crystal and former DA Nifong."

You maintain, in the face of zero evidence, that the accused Lacrosse players were guilty of sex crimes against Crystal.

Why is that not libelous?

Hypothetical situation: Suppose members of the Lacrosse team sued you for libel. You could defend yourself by proving your statements were true. How would you prove your statements were true. Bring kilgo's Lacrosse player in to testify for you? Said kilgo's lacrosse player has not surfaced in over 10 years, not even with an anonymous post following the documentary Fantastic Lies. kilgo has been gone for years.; September 1, 2017 at 3:59 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"If AG Cooper ever did prepare such a list [of Lacrosse party attendees] in his self-described thorough investigation it's been sealed to the Public"

Why does your mentor Sidney not start legal action to forcE then AG, now Governor Cooper to unseal the files?

The answer, which has been posted here a number of times, AG Cooper had no authority to seal the files.

More of Kenny bullshitting, unsuccessfully, through and around facts which do not mesh with his guilt presumption.; September 1, 2017 at 4:03 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

If you really comprehended what Guiowen said, he was describing a hypothetical situation. It was not libel.; September 1, 2017 at 4:05 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

Maybe now, in view of your hypothesis about unidentified party attendees, you would explain why Nifong, who you say was working for justice for Crystal, made no attempt to identify the men who had deposited their DNA on Crystal. I did read something to the effect that he and Meehan wanted to protect peoples' privacy. I can see two possibilities here: either the men were rapists, in which case Nifong was delinquent in his duty in failing to identify them, or they were Crystal's customers.

So how can you say that Nifong was working for justice when he had indicted for rape men who could not have raped Crystal?

And the whole situation is summed up, again, in, Crystal was never raped and Nifong looked for high profile people to indict in order to further his political agenda and pad his retirement benefits.; September 1, 2017 at 9:00 AM
guiowen said...: Kenny,
So who were these people whom Nifong and Meehan did not want to embarrass, and why?; September 1, 2017 at 11:44 AM
kenhyderal said...: Dr. A Said "Heil Kenny..........................
You know Dr. A. is on shaky ground when he starts throwing out Nazi comparisons. He has eased up, though, on calling me an anti-Caucasian racist whatever Caucasian means. The way he seems to use the word is as a euphemism for white skinned people of northern European ancestry. I wonder if he excludes Hispanics. Skin color is more a function of ancestral latitude then of ancestral genetics. White skinned people can belong to many races; September 1, 2017 at 3:30 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"Dr. A Said "Heil Kenny..........................
You know Dr. A. is on shaky ground when he starts throwing out Nazi comparisons. He has eased up, though, on calling me an anti-Caucasian racist whatever Caucasian means. The way he seems to use the word is as a euphemism for white skinned people of northern European ancestry. I wonder if he excludes Hispanics. Skin color is more a function of ancestral latitude then of ancestral genetics. White skinned people can belong to many races"

Total irrelevant bullshitting from Kenny, his standard response to facts he does not like.

The issue was whether or not presumption of guilt was appropriate for any legal system in a democracy. Kenny believes it is when the accused are people he dislikes. Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin tried, imprisoned and executed people they disliked.

So again I say, Heil Kenny. You earned that kind of greeting.; September 1, 2017 at 4:11 PM
Anonymous said...: Hola, Kenny,
Tu si eres como Nicolas Maduro.; September 1, 2017 at 4:27 PM
Anonymous said...: I see Kenny has returned to his active troll mode.; September 2, 2017 at 4:46 AM
kenhyderal supporter said...: kenhyderal, turn yourself in to the authorities. It is the only chance you have.; September 2, 2017 at 1:02 PM
guiowen said...: Hey, Kenny,
Sorry to hear you're in such trouble. Let me know if I can help you out of this mess.; September 2, 2017 at 1:40 PM
Anonymous said...: fy g there you go again acting like an evil duke troll and cyberbully and hate crime monger who won't stop stalking kenhyderal and cyberbulling him because that is what you always do as a member of the evil duke troll gang. can't you leave kenhyderal alone and stop trolling him and cyberbullying him all the time? blah blah blah; September 2, 2017 at 4:35 PM
Anonymous said...: Sidney or Kenny or both continue to post anonymously to create the illusion that they have support.; September 2, 2017 at 4:37 PM
Anonymous said...: This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.; September 2, 2017 at 6:14 PM
Anonymous said...: This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.; September 2, 2017 at 6:14 PM
guiowen said...: Hey,
It's Crybully Tinfoil!; September 2, 2017 at 8:56 PM
guiowen said...: CryBully Cry:
You make Ken Edwards sigh.
He's old enough to know better.
So CryBully cry!; September 2, 2017 at 9:51 PM
guiowen said...: Hola, Kenhyderal!
Pensandolo bien, tu si te pareces mucho a Nicolas Maduro!; September 2, 2017 at 10:29 PM
Anonymous said...: For Sidney and Kenny:

If you have not heard about what happened to Nurse Alex Wubbels, then check it out.

What Nifong and the Durham Police tried to do to the innocent, falsely accused Lacrosse players was the same kind of thing Detective Jeff Payne tried to do to Alex Wubbels, ignore the law and bully someone, nothing more.

Kenny says Nifong was out for justice fr Crystal.

Sidney calls Nifong a decent, honorable minister of justice who acted well within the ethical guidelines for a prosecutor.

I say both of them have zero concept what justice is, just like they have zero evidence Crystal was ever raped, zero evidence czrystal ever tod the truth when she claimed she had been raped.; September 3, 2017 at 4:33 AM
kenhyderal said...: Guiowen said: " Pensandolo bien, tu si te pareces mucho a Nicolas Maduro!............................................ No tengo bigote; September 3, 2017 at 8:12 AM
kenhyderal said...: Re: Anonymous 2 posts at 6:14. Dr. Harr please clear this repetitive garbage from the blog. I do note those who frequently call me a troll, mainly because they don't agree with my non-conventional views, don't seem to mind the real trolls who seek to disrupt the discussions.; September 3, 2017 at 8:24 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"Re: Anonymous 2 posts at 6:14. Dr. Harr please clear this repetitive garbage from the blog. I do note those who frequently call me a troll, mainly because they don't agree with my non-conventional views, don't seem to mind the real trolls who seek to disrupt the discussions."

What you call your "unconventional views" are guilt presuming views, the views are, in the face of zero evidence of a crime that innocent men raped Crystal. Those views are just as garbage like as the views you want banned.; September 3, 2017 at 8:51 AM
Anonymous said...: Udaman Kenny.; September 3, 2017 at 9:06 AM
Anonymous said...: kenhyderal,

Rather than whine to Dr. Harr about repetitive posts on this blog, you should do something constructive to help Crystal. How long has it been since you said you were working on a plan to win a new trial for Crystal? One year? Two years?

Malek Williams
Hillside H.S.
Class of 1996; September 4, 2017 at 9:50 AM
guiowen said...: Malek,
Do you actually expect good old Kenny to do anything worthwhile?; September 4, 2017 at 8:58 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal and his alternative explanations:

He offers alternative explanations, unsupported by evidence, of what happened in the Duke Rape Hoax and claims these establish guilt of a crime.

He offers alternative explanations of what happened to Reginald Daye, also unsupported by evidence, and says these establish reasonable doubt as to whether Crystal murdered Reginald Daye.; September 5, 2017 at 4:44 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny is giving us Sidney Harr Alternate Reality Theories, or SHARTS.; September 5, 2017 at 11:41 AM
FakeKenhyderal said...: "Sidney Harr Alternate Reality Theories, or SHARTS."

Anonymous FTW!; September 6, 2017 at 7:26 AM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "Kenny is giving us Sidney Harr Alternate Reality Theories, or SHARTS"............................... In the case of Reginald Daye the evidence Dr. Harr provides is real and specific. Dr. Nicholl's "she stabbed him he died" doesn't seem to follow any proscribed protocol in a cause of death determination where the entire sequence of events leading to the death as well as all conditions significantly contributing to the death should be outlined. Leaving the Jury to believe, without a factual determination, that Daye died of an infection due to the stab wound. That theory is not borne out by the medical records at Duke whereas the errant esophageal intubation, that set up a chain of events all of which should have been presented to the jury i.e. anoxia leading to cardiac arrest, leading to deprivation of oxygen to the brain, leading to irreversible brain death, leading to death after elective removal of life support, is. The most significant contributing factor would have been the medical mishap of an esophageal intubation unrecognized in a timely manner. After a successful surgical repair what sent Daye to the CCU? Were the symptoms due to an infection or to acute alcohol withdrawal and impending delirium tremens. As it turned out there was no infection leaving alcohol withdrawal and alcoholism as the significant contributing factor.; September 6, 2017 at 3:45 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

Part 1:

"Anonymous said: "Kenny is giving us Sidney Harr Alternate Reality Theories, or SHARTS"............................... In the case of Reginald Daye the evidence Dr. Harr provides is real and specific."

Considering Sidney's lack of expertise in maters clinia=cal and matters legal, that is highly unlikely.

"Dr. Nicholl's "she stabbed him he died" doesn't seem to follow any proscribed protocol in a cause of death determination where the entire sequence of events leading to the death as well as all conditions significantly contributing to the death should be outlined."

It was. Kennys lack of clinical and legal expertise means he, like Sidney, is incapable of renderng any meaningful evaluation. Neither one knows what he is talking about.

"Leaving the Jury to believe, without a factual determination, that Daye died of an infection due to the stab wound."

Confirmation that Kenny knows nothing of what he is talking about. Reginald Daye's death was the result of an evaluation for an intra abdominal infection, which was necessary because 1) he had signs and symptoms consistent with infection, hewasat risk of an intra abdominal infection, and Crystal out him at risk when she stabbed him.

"That theory is not borne out by the medical records at Duke"

Considering HIPPA laws, Kenny would have had any firs hand access to, or any knowledge of what was in the medical records.; September 6, 2017 at 4:48 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

Part 2:

""whereas the errant esophageal intubation, that set up a chain of events all of which should have been presented to the jury i.e. anoxia leading to cardiac arrest, leading to deprivation of oxygen to the brain, leading to irreversible brain death, leading to death after elective removal of life support, is. The most significant contributing factor would have been the medical mishap of an esophageal intubation unrecognized in a timely manner."

Reginald Daye was administered intra gastric contrast, what is done when a Ct scan with contrast is ordered, and a CT scan would have been ordered to rule out an intra abdominal infection, the risk of which was a direct result of Crystal stabbing him. He vomited and aspirated. An endo tracheal tube was placed expeditiously, it was not properly placed. A direct laryngoscopy was performed after the intubation and it was noted that the tube was in the proper position. Dr. Roberts, the DEFENSE's expert said the view of the airway was obstructed by the vomitus, which explains the difficulty with the intubation, something no clinical experience, no clinical training Kenny is capable of understanding. His opinion is meaningless.

"After a successful surgical repair what sent Daye to the CCU?"

Are you sure of that? CCU means Cardiac Care Unit. Post op surgical patients are sent to the SICU, Surgical Care Unit, to the recovery room. That makes me believe that Kenny has noidea of wha he is talking about.

"Were the symptoms due to an infection or to acute alcohol withdrawal and impending delirium tremens. As it turned out there was no infection leaving alcohol withdrawal and alcoholism as the significant contributing factor."

More documentation that no clinical training, no clinical experience Kenny knows nothing of what he tries to talk about. According to Kenny, Reginald Daye's symptoms were fever, tachycardia and disorientation, which were consistent with DTs but which were also consistent with an intra abdominal infection. Reginald Daye was put at risk of intra abdominal infection when Crystal stabbed him and lacerated his colon. The only way an intra abdominal infection would have been an evaluation, which evaluation was necessitted by the stab wound Crystal inflicted on Reginald Daye. Because of the aspiration and cardiac arrest, which was a consequence of the evaluation, the evaluation did not reach the point to which the infection had been definitively ruled out.

Now, Kenny likes to spout off on Medical malpractice, something else of which he knows nothing. As the legal experts have explained, even if there had been malpractice, it would not have relieved Crystal of criminal liability for Reginald Daye's death.; September 6, 2017 at 4:49 PM
Anonymous said...: I forgot.

Kenny has not yet fallen off a turnip truck.

What would happen to him if he presented that to a court to establish his credentials as a medical expert.; September 6, 2017 at 5:05 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: HEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP!!
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT!!

Why didn't anyone tell me about the August 29th Habeas Corpus ruling? You guys usually are on top of things. It's something that I usually learn from you commenters. Let me get you up to date: On August 29th Magistrate Judge Joi Elizabeth Peake made a Recommendation to the U.S. District Court Judge to deny Mangum's Habeas Corpus. Peake also ruled to deny all three motions of Mangum... for release on her own recognizance, to compel the State Bar to make a ruling on the grievance against Ann Petersen, and to compel Ridgeway to give Mangum the 18-page document from Dr. Clay Nichols' personnel file. Regarding the State Bar ruling, it was moot as the State Bar decided after more than two years (and right after a Motion to compel them to answer was filed) not to take any action against Petersen. (The only person the State Bar has gone after has been me... someone over whom the organization has no authority.)

On September 5th Crystal Mangum filed a Motion to Extend time to file an Objection. That is where things now stand in her habeas corpus case.

This issue has kept me busy, with my WRAL lawsuit... reasons why I have not been as active on the comment section as I would like. Apologies.

Haven't seen the Magistrate's Recommendation yet.

As you were.; September 6, 2017 at 7:49 PM
kenhyderal said...: Dr. A Said: "Reginald Daye was administered intra gastric contrast, what is done when a Ct scan with contrast is ordered, and a CT scan would have been ordered to rule out an intra abdominal infection, the risk of which was a direct result of Crystal stabbing him. He vomited and aspirated. An endo tracheal tube was placed expeditiously, it was not properly placed. A direct laryngoscopy was performed after the intubation and it was noted that the tube was in the proper position. Dr. Roberts, the DEFENSE's expert said the view of the airway was obstructed by the vomitus, which explains the difficulty with the intubation"................................... The Jury did not hear any of this. Nor were they told Daye's death was a consequence of an esophageal intubation. And they certainly were not informed that esophageal intubation unrecognized in a timely fashion is considered medical malpractice by The American Society of Anesthesiologists .; September 6, 2017 at 9:13 PM
Anonymous said...: Krnhyderal:

"'Dr. A Said: "Reginald Daye was administered intra gastric contrast, what is done when a Ct scan with contrast is ordered, and a CT scan would have been ordered to rule out an intra abdominal infection, the risk of which was a direct result of Crystal stabbing him. He vomited and aspirated. An endo tracheal tube was placed expeditiously, it was not properly placed. A direct laryngoscopy was performed after the intubation and it was noted that the tube was in the proper position. Dr. Roberts, the DEFENSE's expert said the view of the airway was obstructed by the vomitus, which explains the difficulty with the intubation'..................................."

"The Jury did not hear any of this."

If they had, and if he jury instructions had included instructions on this, the Jury would have been told that a Medical complication would not have relieved Crystal of criminal liability for Reginald Daye's death.

"Nor were they told Daye's death was a consequence of an esophageal intubation."

They would have been told that the esophageal intubation was a consequence of an evaluation for an intra abdominal infection. Reginald Daye was placed at risk of an intra abdominal infection when Crystal stabbed him and lacerated his colon.

"And they certainly were not informed that esophageal intubation unrecognized in a timely fashion is considered medical malpractice by The American Society of Anesthesiologists."

It would have been considered malpractice if the treating physicians did not recognize what happened, and the medical records indicate the treating physicians did recognize something was wrong and attempted to correct the situation. That there was bad outcome does not mean it was negligence, and did not rise to the level of malpractice, which no clinical training, no clinical experience, turnip truck rider Kenny can not recognize. And since when did the American Society of Anesthesiologists recognize no clinical training, no clinical experience, turnip truck rider Kenny as a medical expert?; September 7, 2017 at 3:12 AM
Anonymous said...: Sidney Harr:

"Why didn't anyone tell me about the August 29th Habeas Corpus ruling? You guys usually are on top of things. It's something that I usually learn from you commenters."

If you are so concerned about Crystal's welfare, why did you make zero effort to learn the ruling? You are what would be called a charlie fox trot, and you blame others for your incompetence. Not at all surprising.

"Let me get you up to date: On August 29th Magistrate Judge Joi Elizabeth Peake made a Recommendation to the U.S. District Court Judge to deny Mangum's Habeas Corpus. Peake also ruled to deny all three motions of Mangum... for release on her own recognizance, to compel the State Bar to make a ruling on the grievance against Ann Petersen, and to compel Ridgeway to give Mangum the 18-page document from Dr. Clay Nichols' personnel file. Regarding the State Bar ruling, it was moot as the State Bar decided after more than two years (and right after a Motion to compel them to answer was filed) not to take any action against Petersen."

Which means only that all the actions and motions you lament over had no merit. Again, not at all surprising.

"(The only person the State Bar has gone after has been me... someone over whom the organization has no authority.)"

When you attempted to practice law with no law license, you gave the state bar authority to sanction you.

"On September 5th Crystal Mangum filed a Motion to Extend time to file an Objection. That is where things now stand in her habeas corpus case.

This issue has kept me busy, with my WRAL lawsuit... reasons why I have not been as active on the comment section as I would like. Apologies."

Actually, you were ducking the comments because you could not come up with any answer. You were intimidated.

"Haven't seen the Magistrate's Recommendation yet."

And you won't if, as seems to be your wont, you expect your commenters to keep you informed.; September 7, 2017 at 3:19 AM
Anonymous said...: Sidney Harr:

With all your lawsuits, your attempts at bringing down the State Bar on attorneys you dislike, your frivolous, non meritorious lawsuits, you remind me of Detective Payne, the police officer who roughed up the nurse in Utah, because she would not bow to his will.

You think you have some kind of right to enforce your will on just about everyone with whom you come into contact.

And you call yourself a crusader for justice. HAH!!!.

That kind of behavior is very Trumpian, if you hadn't noticed.; September 7, 2017 at 4:53 AM
A Lawyer said...: On August 29th Magistrate Judge Joi Elizabeth Peake made a Recommendation to the U.S. District Court Judge to deny Mangum's Habeas Corpus. Peake also ruled to deny all three motions of Mangum... for release on her own recognizance, to compel the State Bar to make a ruling on the grievance against Ann Petersen, and to compel Ridgeway to give Mangum the 18-page document from Dr. Clay Nichols' personnel file.

Exactly the result Walt and I predicted. Anyone notice a pattern as to who on this board makes accurate predictions and who makes ones which don't happen?

The only person the State Bar has gone after has been me... someone over whom the organization has no authority.

The court decided they do indeed have authority over you. (This, you may remember, was at a hearing where you predicted that you would "humiliate" the State Bar.); September 7, 2017 at 8:10 AM
kenhyderal said...: A usual Dr. Anonymous refuses to recognize facts, invariably taking his theories to be facts. He said: "They would have been told that the esophageal intubation was a consequence of an evaluation for an intra abdominal infection. Reginald Daye was placed at risk of an intra abdominal infection when Crystal stabbed him and lacerated his colon".... Would have been? Wrong , fact is they were not told that. Dr. A also said. "It would have been considered malpractice if the treating physicians did not recognize what happened, and the medical records indicate the treating physicians did recognize something was wrong and attempted to correct the situation." The criteria for malpractice here is "in a timely fashion". If cardiac arrest due to anoxia occurred, fact is the errant insertion was not recognized in a timely fashion. Law suits for billions have been successful due to such errors. Just google it.; September 7, 2017 at 1:40 PM
guiowen said...: Kenhyderal,
Please stop whining.
The time to do something was 2010, after Crystal was set free. A good friend would have explained to her that she had just dodged a bullet, and tried to keep her from acting in such a dangerous fashion. Unfortunately you did none of this. We have seen the consequences of your failure to act.; September 7, 2017 at 1:49 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"A usual Dr. Anonymous refuses to recognize facts, invariably taking his theories to be facts."

I state facts, based on extensive clinical experience, unlike Kenny who believes medial and legal expeience comes from not falling when riding on a turnip truck.

"He said: 'They would have been told that the esophageal intubation was a consequence of an evaluation for an intra abdominal infection. Reginald Daye was placed at risk of an intra abdominal infection when Crystal stabbed him and lacerated his colon".... Would have been? Wrong"

Another fact, through and around which no clinical training, no clinical training Kenny tries to bulshit his way.

"fact is they were not told that."

So?

"Dr. A also said. 'It would have been considered malpractice if the treating physicians did not recognize what happened, and the medical records indicate the treating physicians did recognize something was wrong and attempted to correct the situation.' "

The criteria for malpractice here is 'in a timely fashion'". Kenny, for it to have been not in a timely fashion would have been, if the treating physician was aware of a problem but then ignored it. I have known physicians who did precisely that. However, that did not happen in the Reginald Daye case.

"If cardiac arrest due to anoxia occurred, fact is the errant insertion was not recognized in a timely fashion."

Yes it was. That there was a bad result does not make that malpractice. Again, that statement is based on rather extensive clinical experience. You have zero clinical experience.

"Law suits for billions have been successful due to such errors. Just google it."

I am sure there have been. That does not document you know what you are talking about. How many medico-legal lectures and educational experiences on medical malpractice have you attended? I have attended a number of them, conducted by attorneys and physicians. That, not Google, is how one learns about medico-legal issues. It is obvious you have learned nothing.

The final thing, as has been explained on this forum by real legal experts(which designation leaves out you and Sidney) Medical malpractice does not automatically relieve Crystal from legal responsibility for Reginald Daye's death. Again, the legal principle, that the victim would never have been exposed to the risk of medical malpractice had he not been injured by the accused.; September 7, 2017 at 2:45 PM
kenhyderal said...: The victim would not of been exposed to the risk of medical malpractice had he not been a chronic alcoholic. Although at risk of a post-surgical infection he did not experience one. Had he not suffered from acute alcohol withdrawal he would have been discharged to go back to his habituated daily alcohol intake. Judge Ridgeway's
instructions were clear to me, a lay person who was presented with the facts. The jury, relying on what they had been told assumed he died of complications from the stab wound and without any intervening cause; September 7, 2017 at 4:06 PM
guiowen said...: It's not clear to me that Reggie was a chronic alcoholic. If he was, however, that's all the more reason why Crystal should have been more careful.; September 7, 2017 at 4:14 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"The victim would not of been exposed to the risk of medical malpractice had he not been a chronic alcoholic."

Not true. There was no malpractice in the first place. He was exposed to all the risks of surgety, including malpractice, because Crystal stabbed him.

"Although at risk of a post-surgical infection he did not experience one."

You do not know that, one reason being that you have no clinical training an no clinical experience. The experienced clinicians who were treating him did not know. However, they were obligated to either rule it in or rule it out, which is what resulted in the evaluation which,in turn resulted in the adverse event which killed him. The bottom line is, again, he would have never been eposed to the adverse event had Crystal not t=stabbed him and lacerated his colon.

"Had he not suffered from acute alcohol withdrawal he would have been discharged to go back to his habituated daily alcohol intake."

You have not established that he was in DTs. Even if he were in DTs, it would have been incumbent upon the experienced clinicians treating him to rule in or rule out an intra abdominal infection. Whether or not he was in DTs is really irrelevant.

Judge Ridgeway's
instructions were clear to me, a lay person who was presented with the facts."

Bullshit of the most foul order. Your statements about the Duke Rape HOAX document yoou have never been clear about the facts.

"The jury, relying on what they had been told assumed he died of complications from the stab wound and without any intervening cause"

In other words, they, unlike you, were clear on the facts, were clear on the fact that there was no intervening cause.

Neither you nor Sidney are competent to establish there was an intervening cause, as the two of you have so abundantly documented in this blog.; September 7, 2017 at 5:03 PM
A Lawyer said...: Law suits for billions have been successful due to such errors.

Why didn't Reginald Daye's family file a malpractice action?; September 7, 2017 at 8:33 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

Presumption of guilt is not equivalent to being aware of facts.; September 8, 2017 at 3:22 AM
Anonymous said...: Regarding A Lawyer's post at 8:33 PM:

Hey Menny, Sidney, why don't the two of you advise the Daye family to file a malpractice suit on behalf of Reginald Daye and then the two of you advise them.; September 8, 2017 at 4:41 AM
Walt said...: An excerpt from the Magistrate's proposed order: "Petitioner now states that she might have altered her defense strategy to attack Daye’s cause of death if she had received the report earlier, but this ignores the fact that, as stated above, the report ultimately agreed with Nichols’s conclusion that Daye died from complications connected to the stab wound inflicted by Petitioner. Putting Roberts on the stand or introducing the report in any way would have simply highlighted to the jury that two experts had looked at the question and both concluded that Daye died as a result of the stab wound. Thus, Petitioner has failed to establish any basis for habeas relief, and this claim should be denied."

Where have I heard that before? Could it have been A Lawyer? Could it have been Lance? Or could I have written it? In any case, this should lay to rest the Roberts angle.

Walt-in-Durham; September 8, 2017 at 1:02 PM
Anonymous said...: The Magistrate is apparently unable to appreciate a good shart.; September 8, 2017 at 2:23 PM
Anonymous said...: Of course, shart is an acronym for Sidney Harr Alternate Reality Theory.; September 8, 2017 at 2:25 PM
kenhyderal said...: Walt in quoting the Magistrate's proposed order said: " Putting Roberts on the stand or introducing the report in any way would have simply highlighted to the jury that two experts had looked at the question and both concluded that Daye died as a result of the stab wound"................................I'm not sure that it would have highlighted to the Jury that Crystal murdered Daye. Especially if Meier had gotten Nichols to agree to the chain of events that lead to his death. Arguments certainly could have been made about intervening events, only indirectly and tenuously related to the repaired stab wound; tenuous associations such as her action causing him to be hospitalized and therefore depriving him of his habituated dose of alcohol, or the need to eliminate a diagnosis other then the presumptive one of acute alcohol withdrawal, with impending life-threatening delirium tremens, or the well recognized medical malpractice of failing to detect and correct a misplaced endotracheal tube, or the unavoidable time required to re-establish circulation after the error induced cardiac arrest, or even the elective removal from life support, after days of irreversible coma, all might of said to a jury this was not a murder. Judging by Ridgeway's instructions these happenings unknown to the Jurors seem to be intervening causes with only the weakest nexus to the successfully repaired stab wound. Given all the facts a Jury of twelve good men and true will most likely make the common sense decision.; September 8, 2017 at 4:02 PM
Anonymous said...: The jury made the only decision they could make based on the evidence and testimony. No one wants to hear a shart in court or in the jury room.; September 8, 2017 at 4:10 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"Walt in quoting the Magistrate's proposed order said: " Putting Roberts on the stand or introducing the report in any way would have simply highlighted to the jury that two experts had looked at the question and both concluded that Daye died as a result of the stab wound"................................I'm not sure that it would have highlighted to the Jury that Crystal murdered Daye. Especially if Meier had gotten Nichols to agree to the chain of events that lead to his death."

Fat chance of that. Another manifestation of Kenny's yotal lack of legal knowledge and legal competence.

"Arguments certainly could have been made about intervening events, only indirectly and tenuously related to the repaired stab wound;"

Another manifesttion of Kenny's clinical incomprtence and lack of medical knowledge/

tenuous associations such as her action causing him to be hospitalized and therefore depriving him of his habituated dose of alcohol,"

No evidence of Reginald Daye requiring a daily dose of alcohol. That stoty came from Crystal after she was facing a chatge of Murder 1. If Kenny is admitting that the stab wound is what exposed Reginald Daye to the risk of DTs, he is admitting rhat the stab wound Crystal inflicted on Reginald Daye caused his death.

"or the need to eliminate a diagnosis other then the presumptive one of acute alcohol withdrawal, with impending life-threatening delirium tremens,"

And here no clinical training, no clinical experience IS claiming that the presumptive diagnosis of DTs eliminated rhe risk of an intra abdominal infection. It did not. Can anyone expect better from an individual with no clinical training or clinical experience who, nevertheless, thinks he is a medical expert because he rides on a turnip truck.

"or the well recognized medical malpractice of failing to detect and correct a misplaced endotracheal tube, or the unavoidable time required to re-establish circulation after the error induced cardiac arrest,"

This is the opinion of no legal training, no legal experience, no clinical experience, no clinical training Kenny who thinks he becomes a medical expert because he read something on line which he is incapable of understanding. What happened to Reginald Daye did not add up to medical malpractice. Even if it had, it would not have relieved Crystal iof criminal responsibility for Reginald Daye's death.

"or even the elective removal from life support, after days of irreversible coma, all might of said to a jury this was not a murder."

Kenny is incompetent to make such statement.

"Judging by Ridgeway's instructions these happenings unknown to the Jurors seem to be intervening causes with only the weakest nexus to the successfully repaired stab wound."

Reginald Daye died. That means the ;rocedure was not successful. That it was not successful does not add up to malractice.

"Given all the facts a Jury of twelve good men and true will most likely make the common sense decision.

This is from someone who glaringly fails to qualify as one of the "good men and true".; September 8, 2017 at 5:41 PM
Anonymous said...: ?Kenkyderal:

A jury of twelve good men and true would not have convicted innocent men of rape when there is zero evidence the crime ever happened, zero evidence that the complaining witness ever told the truth.; September 8, 2017 at 6:01 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous Anonymous said...
Sidney Harr:

"Why didn't anyone tell me about the August 29th Habeas Corpus ruling? You guys usually are on top of things. It's something that I usually learn from you commenters."

If you are so concerned about Crystal's welfare, why did you make zero effort to learn the ruling? You are what would be called a charlie fox trot, and you blame others for your incompetence. Not at all surprising.

"Let me get you up to date: On August 29th Magistrate Judge Joi Elizabeth Peake made a Recommendation to the U.S. District Court Judge to deny Mangum's Habeas Corpus. Peake also ruled to deny all three motions of Mangum... for release on her own recognizance, to compel the State Bar to make a ruling on the grievance against Ann Petersen, and to compel Ridgeway to give Mangum the 18-page document from Dr. Clay Nichols' personnel file. Regarding the State Bar ruling, it was moot as the State Bar decided after more than two years (and right after a Motion to compel them to answer was filed) not to take any action against Petersen."

Which means only that all the actions and motions you lament over had no merit. Again, not at all surprising.

"(The only person the State Bar has gone after has been me... someone over whom the organization has no authority.)"

When you attempted to practice law with no law license, you gave the state bar authority to sanction you.

"On September 5th Crystal Mangum filed a Motion to Extend time to file an Objection. That is where things now stand in her habeas corpus case.

This issue has kept me busy, with my WRAL lawsuit... reasons why I have not been as active on the comment section as I would like. Apologies."

Actually, you were ducking the comments because you could not come up with any answer. You were intimidated.

"Haven't seen the Magistrate's Recommendation yet."

And you won't if, as seems to be your wont, you expect your commenters to keep you informed.

September 7, 2017 at 3:19 AM

Anony, let me get this straight. You do not believe that it is incompetent for the Clerk's Office to send all correspondence intended for the plaintiff Pro Se to another attorney in another city with no apparent connection to the case? I place blame where blame is due.

Just because a judge rules against a motion or a complaint does not automatically mean that they are without merit. Judges are human and they therefore make mistakes... and being human, some are also racists.

Whether I have a law license or not is irrelevant. The State Bar has no authority or jurisdiction against me... a lay person. Sure, the Bar and its members, like any other citizen, can lodge a complaint against me with the appropriate district attorney if they feel that I am breaking the law. But to waste their time on investigating me for helping Crystal Mangum is outlandish.

I do plan on accessing the Recommendation... and, for your edification, I am not relying on commenters to provide me with a link to the document.

Consider yourself elucidated, Anony.; September 9, 2017 at 5:56 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous Anonymous said...
Sidney Harr:

With all your lawsuits, your attempts at bringing down the State Bar on attorneys you dislike, your frivolous, non meritorious lawsuits, you remind me of Detective Payne, the police officer who roughed up the nurse in Utah, because she would not bow to his will.

You think you have some kind of right to enforce your will on just about everyone with whom you come into contact.

And you call yourself a crusader for justice. HAH!!!.

That kind of behavior is very Trumpian, if you hadn't noticed.

September 7, 2017 at 4:53 AM

First of all, I do not dislike any attorney. I even like Daniel Meier and feel sorry for him because he has a misguided moral compass. I don't even fault Holmes, Vann, or Shella for getting off Mangum's case... as they probably couldn't bear to misrepresent Mangum to the extent Meier did to convict their client. And they likely feared ending up like Mike Nifong if they were to adequately defend Mangum and have her acquitted.

As far as my lawsuits are concerned, they are all meritorious, and would likely prevail in a jury trial, which is why it is so important that the defendants are able to get the case dismissed on summary judgment or Motion to Dismiss.

I don't try to enforce my will on anyone. All I do is present the facts and the truths in hopes that justice will follow. If a just outcome is not achieved initially, I merely continue to present the facts until I am successful.

Hah, there's no way I am comparable to Detective Payne or our president. I am Harrian... which is far different than being Trumpian.; September 9, 2017 at 6:09 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous A Lawyer said...
On August 29th Magistrate Judge Joi Elizabeth Peake made a Recommendation to the U.S. District Court Judge to deny Mangum's Habeas Corpus. Peake also ruled to deny all three motions of Mangum... for release on her own recognizance, to compel the State Bar to make a ruling on the grievance against Ann Petersen, and to compel Ridgeway to give Mangum the 18-page document from Dr. Clay Nichols' personnel file.

Exactly the result Walt and I predicted. Anyone notice a pattern as to who on this board makes accurate predictions and who makes ones which don't happen?

The only person the State Bar has gone after has been me... someone over whom the organization has no authority.

The court decided they do indeed have authority over you. (This, you may remember, was at a hearing where you predicted that you would "humiliate" the State Bar.)

September 7, 2017 at 8:10 AM

Hey, A Lawyer.

Yes, you and Walt have had a better prognostication performance than have I, but my predictions were based on a false premise that justice would play a role in the rulings.

As far as humiliating the Bar, that was little more than "trash talk"... athletes do it all the time.; September 9, 2017 at 6:19 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Walt said...
An excerpt from the Magistrate's proposed order: "Petitioner now states that she might have altered her defense strategy to attack Daye’s cause of death if she had received the report earlier, but this ignores the fact that, as stated above, the report ultimately agreed with Nichols’s conclusion that Daye died from complications connected to the stab wound inflicted by Petitioner. Putting Roberts on the stand or introducing the report in any way would have simply highlighted to the jury that two experts had looked at the question and both concluded that Daye died as a result of the stab wound. Thus, Petitioner has failed to establish any basis for habeas relief, and this claim should be denied."

Where have I heard that before? Could it have been A Lawyer? Could it have been Lance? Or could I have written it? In any case, this should lay to rest the Roberts angle.

Walt-in-Durham

September 8, 2017 at 1:02 PM

Hey, Walt.

Thanks for the excerpt. Hope to see the Recommendation soon. Clearly that excerpt provides openings to be shot to pieces. Can't wait to get my hands on the rest of the Recommendation... in order to assist Crystal in a non-lawyerly way, of course.

What do you and A Lawyer think about the magistrate's September 6th Order on Mangum's Motion to Extend the filing of her Objection?; September 9, 2017 at 6:27 AM
Anonymous said...: Sidney Harr:

"Anony, let me get this straight. You do not believe that it is incompetent for the Clerk's Office to send all correspondence intended for the plaintiff Pro Se to another attorney in another city with no apparent connection to the case? I place blame where blame is due."

Let's see. Crystal falsely accuses innocent men of raping her(you have zero evidence she ever told the truth), Nifong wrongfully prosecutes them to advance his political agenda and pad his retirement, and you blame them. Shan Carter chases down and kills a fellow drug dealer who was fleeing , killing an innocent 8 year old boy in the process and you call it self defense. Crystal Mangum kills Reginald Daye and you blame Reginald Daye, and you exert no effort to learn the outcome of Crystal's motions and then blame the posters on this blog. You put blame where blame is due. BULLSHIT!!!!

"Just because a judge rules against a motion or a complaint does not automatically mean that they are without merit. Judges are human and they therefore make mistakes... and being human, some are also racists."

You believe you decide whether or not your motions and lawsuits have merit. In spite of your delusions, that does not make them meritorious. And because your frivolous, non meritorious lawsuits and motions are dismissed does not mean the judges make mistakes or are racist.

"Whether I have a law license or not is irrelevant. The State Bar has no authority or jurisdiction against me... a lay person."

Yes the Bar does have jurisdiction when an ignorant, non license lay person tries to practice law.

"Sure, the Bar and its members, like any other citizen, can lodge a complaint against me with the appropriate district attorney if they feel that I am breaking the law. But to waste their time on investigating me for helping Crystal Mangum is outlandish."

Not at all outlandish, considering you have done NOTHING to help Crystal.

"I do plan on accessing the Recommendation... and, for your edification, I am not relying on commenters to provide me with a link to the document."

In case you haven't noticed, You HAVE complained that commenters did not inform you of the outcome of Crystal's motions.Yes you do rely on commenters to provide information to you.

"Consider yourself elucidated, Anony."

You have yet to explain how someone like you, who is willfully resistant to elucidation can provide elucidation to anyone.; September 9, 2017 at 9:01 AM
Anonymous said...: Sidney Harr:

"First of all, I do not dislike any attorney."

Yes you do. You dislike all attorneys because they know more about the law than you do. Just like you dislike a lot of Doctors who, unlike you, are well trained, experienced and board certified. In other words, you dislike all doctors who know what they are doing.

"I even like Daniel Meier and feel sorry for him because he has a misguided moral compass. I don't even fault Holmes, Vann, or Shella for getting off Mangum's case... as they probably couldn't bear to misrepresent Mangum to the extent Meier did to convict their client. And they likely feared ending up like Mike Nifong if they were to adequately defend Mangum and have her acquitted."

Here Sidney documents he is a delusional megalomaniac who is incapable of providing either enlightenment or elucidation.

"As far as my lawsuits are concerned, they are all meritorious, and would likely prevail in a jury trial, which is why it is so important that the defendants are able to get the case dismissed on summary judgment or Motion to Dismiss."

More documentation that Sidney is a delusional megalomaniac, who believes he, not the courts, decide whether or not his lawsuits are meritorious.

"I don't try to enforce my will on anyone."

Yes you do. A glaring example is your frivolous,non meritorious lawsuit against DA Lorin Freeman, because she would not respond to your attempted coercion to force her to intervene in a case in which she had no authority to intervene.

"All I do is present the facts and the truths"

More BULLSHIT!!!!

"in hopes that justice will follow."

Advocating the innocent falsely accused Lacrosse players are guilty is not advocating for justice(and each and every time you refer to Crysta as the"victim/accuser" in the Duke rape case you are proclaiming the accused are guilty, in spite of all your denials.

"If a just outcome is not achieved initially, I merely continue to present the facts until I am successful."

Wrong. You have repeatedly reacted to just outcomes by trying to get the just outcome reversed, e.g., when you refiled your frivolous, non meritorious lawsuits against Duke after they were dismissed.

"Hah, there's no way I am comparable to Detective Payne or our president. I am Harrian... which is far different than being Trumpian."

Oh yes you are comparable. You try to bully people into accepting your will when it is contrary to law, and you blame the media when you show the world what a deluded megalomaniac you are.; September 9, 2017 at 9:13 AM
Anonymous said...: Sidney Harr:

"Hey, A Lawyer.

Yes, you and Walt have had a better prognostication performance than have I, but my predictions were based on a false premise that justice would play a role in the rulings."

That is yet another delusional fantasy on your part. You have never advocated for justice.

"As far as humiliating the Bar, that was little more than "trash talk"... athletes do it all the time."

First you are no athlete. And you are trying to institute personal posterior camouflage after you boast turned out, like so many of your boasts, turned out empty.; September 9, 2017 at 9:16 AM
kenhyderal said...: Dr. A. said: "And here no clinical training, no clinical experience IS claiming that the presumptive diagnosis of DTs eliminated rhe risk of an intra abdominal infection. It did not" ...............................How many times do I have to tell you, I have not made such a claim? Repeating over and over again that I did is not going to make it so. Saying I believe that, is dishonest on your part because you know better. Once again; risk yes, occurrence no. Yes it needed to be eliminated. No it was not found. Had it been found then a nexus to the stab wound, triggering a Welch ruling, would have occurred. When no infection was present, then the original presumptive diagnosis of acute alcohol withdrawal with impending Delirium Tremens, totally unrelated to the stab wound which sent him to the critical care unit, was in place. Don't purposely misrepresent my views.; September 9, 2017 at 9:18 AM
Anonymous said...: Sidney Harr:

"Hey, Walt.

Thanks for the excerpt. Hope to see the Recommendation soon. Clearly that excerpt provides openings to be shot to pieces. Can't wait to get my hands on the rest of the Recommendation... in order to assist Crystal in a non-lawyerly way, of course."

Presumes a fact not in evidence. You have never done anything which ever assisted Crystal, except to assist getting her found guilty.; September 9, 2017 at 10:04 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"Dr. A. said: "And here no clinical training, no clinical experience IS claiming that the presumptive diagnosis of DTs eliminated rhe risk of an intra abdominal infection. It did not" ...............................How many times do I have to tell you, I have not made such a claim?"

De facto, even if you do not realize it, not at all surprising since you lack any and all clinical training and experience, you do say the presumptive diagnosis excluded the possibility of an infection.

"Repeating over and over again that I did is not going to make it so. Saying I believe that, is dishonest on your part because you know better. Once again; risk yes, occurrence no."

"[O]ccurence no" is irrelevant. You admit the risk was there. Ergo you admit it was incumbent upon the treating physicians to evaluate him for an intra abdominal infection. The adverse event which caused Reginald Daye's death was a consequence of that evaluation. The evaluation would never have been necessary had Crystal never stabbed him.

"Yes it needed to be eliminated. No it was not found. Had it been found then a nexus to the stab wound, triggering a Welch ruling, would have occurred. When no infection was present, then the original presumptive diagnosis of acute alcohol withdrawal with impending Delirium Tremens, totally unrelated to the stab wound which sent him to the critical care unit, was in place."

Wrong yet again, again not at all surprising considering Kenny's total lack of clinical experience and total lack of clinical knowledge. Again, "no it was not found" is irrelevant. The fatal event was a consequence of the evaluation. The evaluation was necessary because Crystal stabbed him. While "the original presumptive diagnosis of acute alcohol withdrawal with impending Delirium Tremens, totally unrelated to the stab wound which sent him to the critical care unit, was in place" is also is irrelevant. That is not what caused the adverse event which caused Reginald Daye's death. There is your nexus for you. because you can not recognize it does not mean the nexus was not there. And even if the adverse event was due to malpractice, and neither you nor Sidney are competent enough or capable enough to know what malpractice is, the adverse event would not have relieved Crystal of criminal responsibility for Reginald Daye's death.

"Don't purposely misrepresent my views".

I don't misrepresent your views. I point out that your views show, I say again, you have no knowledge of what you presume to talk about. So whether or not someone is misrepresenting your views is another irrelevancy.; September 9, 2017 at 10:39 AM
Anonymous said...: kenhyderal,

Rather than whine to Dr. Harr about repetitive posts on this blog, you should do something constructive to help Crystal. How long has it been since you said you were working on a plan to win a new trial for Crystal? One year? Two years?

Malek Williams
Hillside H.S.
Class of 1996

September 4, 2017 at 9:50 AM

Kenny, Are we to conclude that you concede Malek's point and all of your talk in the past about winning a new trial for Crystal was just your usual master debating?; September 9, 2017 at 11:18 AM
kenhyderal said...: Malek Williams is a fraud and someone with obvious bad intentions. If you have spent time on this blog you will know his motive is to create harm for Crystal, If you haven't, go back and look at his old posts and decide for yourself. He claims to be her classmate but Crystal has no knowledge whatsoever of him. He claims, as her classmate, she knew him by another name but he will not give that name. He claims he changed his name to Malek Williams because he did not want to use what he calls his "slave name". What I do for Crystal is of course no business of this trouble maker and beside I would not share such information with any Anonymous poster, including you. B.t.w. Malek could well of been the name of an Arab slave trader and Williams could well have been the name of an English plantation owner. The Mangum Family have been in North Carolina and the Edwards Family in Canada since Ante-bellum days. Maybe Malek should learn some history; September 9, 2017 at 8:43 PM
guiowen said...: Kenny,
You still haven't done anything for Crystal -- nothing worth while, in any case. Malek is quite right on that score.; September 9, 2017 at 10:25 PM
Anonymous said...: Krnhyderal:

"Malek Williams is a fraud and someone with obvious bad intentions. If you have spent time on this blog you will know his motive is to create harm for Crystal, If you haven't, go back and look at his old posts and decide for yourself. He claims to be her classmate but Crystal has no knowledge whatsoever of him. He claims, as her classmate, she knew him by another name but he will not give that name. He claims he changed his name to Malek Williams because he did not want to use what he calls his "slave name". What I do for Crystal is of course no business of this trouble maker and beside I would not share such information with any Anonymous poster, including you. B.t.w. Malek could well of been the name of an Arab slave trader and Williams could well have been the name of an English plantation owner. The Mangum Family have been in North Carolina and the Edwards Family in Canada since Ante-bellum days. Maybe Malek should learn some history"

Crystal has a history of criminal activity starting years before she became the victimizer/false accuser in the Duke Rape HOAX. Kenny is in willful denial of that historical fact. Yet he says someone else needs to learn about history.; September 10, 2017 at 3:11 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

Other than your occasional sharts, outrageous lies and compulsive master debating, what have you done for Crystal?; September 10, 2017 at 7:32 AM
kenhyderal said...: @ Anonymous @ 7:32.......... See my response @ 9-9-17 8:43 PM to Anonymous 9-9-17 @ 11:18 AM; September 10, 2017 at 8:37 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"@ Anonymous @ 7:32.......... See my response @ 9-9-17 8:43 PM to Anonymous 9-9-17 @ 11:18 AM"

Your post at 9/9/17 is meaningless, as are all your posts.; September 10, 2017 at 10:21 AM
guiowen said...: So how long have we been hearing this from Kenny? "I'm doing incredibly important things for Crystal, but I have to keep the evil p.t.b.'s from finding out, so I can't tell anyone about it."; September 10, 2017 at 1:35 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny - no one needs to see any of your responses - you are an idiot, a coward, and an abuser. Go away.; September 10, 2017 at 3:42 PM
kenhyderal said...: Tell us your name; if you dare.; September 10, 2017 at 9:09 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

to Anonymous 9/10/17 9:09 PM:

"Tell us your name; if you dare."

How about you admit, if you dare, that you have zero evidence that Crystal was ever raped, that Crystal ever told the truth when she claimed she had been raped.; September 11, 2017 at 2:53 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

Your comment at September 10, 2017 at 9:09 PM is a non answer. It is a de facto admission that you can not document you have ever helped Crystal. Just like you can not document kilgo ever told you anything about the Duke Rape hoax.; September 11, 2017 at 3:46 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny loves to ignore the truth. When someone points out he's a coward, liar, and abuser - he screams that they aren't giving their name. He doesn't address the merits of the post - because he knows it's true.

I bet he still thinks Meier lurks here, and that it means something that Meier refuses to post and refute Kenny's idiotic claims (even though, from a letter Sid posted, Meier said he'd be willing to talk if a waiver was obtained from Crystal). Kenny refuses to do anything to help, and refuses to actually have a discussion with anyone, because he knows he's full of it.

Kenny, how sad and pathetic is your life that you have to continue encouraging abuse of Crystal?; September 11, 2017 at 3:54 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny's all hat and no cattle.; September 11, 2017 at 4:48 AM

«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 400 of 543 Newer› Newest»

Thursday, July 20, 2017

A stacked deck in the courthouse

543 comments:

Facebook Badge

Subscribe!

Labels

Blog Archive

About Me