Friday, May 29, 2020

Mangum v. Bond, et al.: Malicious Prosecution in Federal Court

150 comments:

Anonymous said...

I am going to venture a guess and say that I don’t think the latest lawsuit is going to turn out well for Sid and Crystal.

Anonymous said...

It’s sad that your very first sentence repeats the legally and factually incorrect idea that the larceny of chose in action was for felony murder. As has been explained to you repeatedly, it cannot form the basis for felony murder.

Clearly you aren’t serious about learning or helping Crystal as this has been explained to you repeatedly, but you refuse to learn.

No one will bother with anything else cause it’s clear you refuse to understand basic legal concepts or listen when people try to help.

Nifong Supporter said...

Earlier comments

Anonymous said...
So the answer is NO. Neither you nor Crystal contracted the prison director (I think that’s the correct title, not “warden”). Nor did you contact the company managing the prison phone system....Nor did you attempt to identify the resources responsible for “monitoring and recording” the phone calls. Consider us elucidated.

What prison is Mangum in now? The one she was in at the time of the phone call is now an all male prison, correct?

Oh, you know NC prisons don’t allow conjugal visits, right? I’m sure Mangum does....

May 24, 2020 at 11:55 AM



Anonymous Anonymous said...
So you admit you expected someone else to do your work for your. Your obligation was to make the request properly and you refused to do that. That’s 100% on you. Don’t try to blame others.


May 25, 2020 at 4:45 AM



kenhyderal said...
@ Anonymous 11:55 5-24-20 :---- You know and we all know that had Dr. Harr contacted those two entities, instead of Director of Prisons Eric Hooks, a Roy Cooper appointee, the outcome would have been no different. As Anonymous at 5-25-20 4:45 noted process and protocol are supreme and these are used at will to deny Justice and achieve desired outcome. In this case, keeping innocent Crystal Mangum incarcerated.

May 25, 2020 at 1:49 PM



Anonymous Anonymous said...
Crystal Mangum has steadfastly maintained that she told the truth about being sexually assaulted at the Duke Lacrosse Spring Break bash in 2006.

....Which version? The one where she was sexually assaulted by 3 men? 5 men? 20 men?

Or this one?

https://www.cosmopolitan.com/health-fitness/advice/a6254/price-of-silence-crystal-mangum/

FWIW, I don't think this last version was even in her book, and as the article states, none of the records of the medical exams verify this version.

May 25, 2020 at 2:20 PM



Anonymous said...
kenhyderal said...
"I agree that Colin Finnerty , being wrongly identified in the flawed photo line-up, was innocent. I also agree that Evans and Seligmann were innocent of rape..."

November 9, 2015 at 2:15 PM

May 28, 2020 at 11:29 AM



kenhyderal said...
@ Anonymous 5-28-20 2:15 PM ...........................But, in my opinion, not necessarily of sexual assault, kidnapping and theft. As well, in all probability, they know who the rapists were

May 28, 2020 at 1:54 PM



guiowen said...
Anony 11:29
Please forgive Kenhyderal. He never lies but, because of context, he misinterprets half of what he hears or sees.

May 28, 2020 at 5:28 PM


Anonymous said...
....But it was perfectly fine to charge them with rape.

Not sexual assault, or kidnapping, or theft, or misprision of felony.

That’s a rather....unusual opinion you got there, Kenny.

May 28, 2020 at 5:43 PM



kenhyderal said...
The rape charges were dropped when DA Nifong decided he had insufficient evidence to meet the burden of proof for rape by these three individuals but he did proceed with charges of sexual assault and kidnapping. The theft of Crystal's money was an open and shut case but unfortunately he decided not to proceed with that

May 29, 2020 at 2:14 PM

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous Anonymous said...
I am going to venture a guess and say that I don’t think the latest lawsuit is going to turn out well for Sid and Crystal.

May 29, 2020 at 3:31 PM


Hey, Anony.

Your guess is what I would consider to be a relatively safe one. Animus towards Crystal Mangum is not only state-wide, but nationally. Also, the media has worked to suppress the truths of Mangum's innocence from the people which works for her continued mistreatment by the courts. Hopefully, Duke University, Roy Cooper, and Tar Heelian politics won't play as big a role in Mangum's federal court case. Obviously Mangum should have won the malicious prosecution case at the state level... as the merits of the case favored her and were not challenged by the defendant. We'll see what happens. Praying that justice will prevail.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
It’s sad that your very first sentence repeats the legally and factually incorrect idea that the larceny of chose in action was for felony murder. As has been explained to you repeatedly, it cannot form the basis for felony murder.

Clearly you aren’t serious about learning or helping Crystal as this has been explained to you repeatedly, but you refuse to learn.

No one will bother with anything else cause it’s clear you refuse to understand basic legal concepts or listen when people try to help.

May 29, 2020 at 5:00 PM


Hey, Anony.

Actually I do listen to advice given to me regarding legal strategy, even though I may not employ the suggestions offered.

What I find extremely puzzling (or as Columbo would say, "a loose end") is why the defense would even bother charging the larceny of chose in action? Makes no sense. The prosecutor didn't build a case for larceny. There was no probable cause provided by the State.

Can you provide me with a logical reason for prosecutors adding that charge to the murder charge/indictment? The only logical reason I can see is as a collateral purpose to upgrade the murder to first-degree. Give me a logical reason and I might change my mind about that... but I doubt it.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
So the answer is NO. Neither you nor Crystal contracted the prison director (I think that’s the correct title, not “warden”). Nor did you contact the company managing the prison phone system....Nor did you attempt to identify the resources responsible for “monitoring and recording” the phone calls. Consider us elucidated.

What prison is Mangum in now? The one she was in at the time of the phone call is now an all male prison, correct?

Oh, you know NC prisons don’t allow conjugal visits, right? I’m sure Mangum does....

May 24, 2020 at 11:55


Hey, Anony.

The phone call took place in April 2018, at which time Crystal was being held in Troy Correctional Institution. She has since been moved to Neuse C.I. in Goldsboro, and is now at Anson C.I. in Polkton.

I do not feel pouring my energy into the monitored and recorded phone call will pay much in the way of dividends because Mr. Walker is not a strong witness, and is an apparent unwilling one. Besides, the report by Dr. Wecht is a much stronger lead on which to focus... so that's were I'm concentrating my efforts. That doesn't mean I will forget about the phone call Mangum had with Milton Walker because I won't. What it means is that I won't pursue it on the front burner. The strongest information going for Crystal is Dr. Wecht's report and the 18-page document that Judge Ridgeway has sealed and is keeping from Crystal Mangum. That would likely really damage Dr. Nichols' credibility.

What do you think about that?

Anonymous said...

What do I think?

Dr. Wecht’s report is not going to get Mangum a retrial. It’s not.

The only way I see a retrial happening is IF you prove there was an error in her original trial. Proving that Milton Walker was coerced to perjure himself during that trial is what you should be focusing on.

That you won’t even attempt to locate Walker and speak to him about this tells us all we need to know about you and your “efforts” to free Mangum.

The only thing I see in your future is a contempt of court charge, a hefty fine, and possibly jail time.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous said: "Dr. Wecht’s report is not going to get Mangum a retrial. It’s not."............. Huh? As usual in the U.S. System it's justice be damned. Gaol Crystal for murder, a crime, according to Dr. Wecht, this world renown forensic pathologist,that had never occurred. Don't ever let a Jury hear this evidence; evidence that would seal a not guilty verdict. Fighters for justice like Dr. Harr will not be deterred,distracted, derailed or scared off. The Crystal haters would like to see the Dr. Wecht report abandoned and send Dr. Harr off on the side show of trying to get, reluctant witness, Walker to admit perjury. Find the possibly already destroyed recording. Investigate whether he lied to appease Crystal. Investigate the Police coercion. Get Stein and Cooper to order a new trial. All the while anyone who can read can see that, in an expert's opinion, Daye died of an accident and not of a murder

Anonymous said...

Right on kennyhyderal.

guiowen said...

Kenhyderal,
Is there any way to get you to stop whining?

Anonymous said...

Udaman Ken.

Anonymous said...

What is the difference between this claim and the previous 2018 claim?

Anonymous said...

A Lawyer (who now pasts as Dr. Caligari) stated it best back in 2018...

"...If the suit alleges that the larceny charge was malicious prosecution, it will be dismissed because it is barred by the statute of limitations. And even if it weren't, the relief for malicious prosecution of one charge (larceny) isn't a new trial on other charges (murder)....
Another swing, another miss. And Dr. Harr's unintentional sabotaging of the MAR shows why the State Bar was right to enjoin him from unauthorized practice of law..."


January 4, 2018 at 11:56 AM

Anonymous said...

Dr. Harr -- How does this work WRT the gatekeeper order from 2018? My understanding was that the gatekeeper order "enjoined Plaintiff [Crystal Mangum] from filing any future legal action against Defendants."

It's my understanding that a gatekeeper order includes a way for a person to file legitimate actions. What did Crystal's gatekeeper order state were the options allowed? Were those options followed?

I tried doing a quick search on your blog for the gatekeeper order details, but couldn't find it -- if you've publsihed this previously, just provide a link.

Anonymous said...

Wasn’t the earlier case in state court? After Sid is tossed from the federal district court, I expect he will file a suit in the U.S. Tax Court.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
What do I think?

Dr. Wecht’s report is not going to get Mangum a retrial. It’s not.

The only way I see a retrial happening is IF you prove there was an error in her original trial. Proving that Milton Walker was coerced to perjure himself during that trial is what you should be focusing on.

That you won’t even attempt to locate Walker and speak to him about this tells us all we need to know about you and your “efforts” to free Mangum.

The only thing I see in your future is a contempt of court charge, a hefty fine, and possibly jail time.

May 30, 2020 at 6:33 AM


Hey, Anony.

I appreciate your advice, but it seems geared for failure. Clearly Dr. Wecht's report is the strongest ammunition in my ordnance... by far. Milton Walker's recantation is especially weak. Besides, I would not want Mr. Walker forced into a perjury charge. The justice system would readily turn a blind eye to the perjury of Dr. Nichols and Officer Marianne Bond, but not as likely regarding Milton Walker or Aykia Hanes.

Nifong Supporter said...


kenhyderal said...
Anonymous said: "Dr. Wecht’s report is not going to get Mangum a retrial. It’s not."............. Huh? As usual in the U.S. System it's justice be damned. Gaol Crystal for murder, a crime, according to Dr. Wecht, this world renown forensic pathologist,that had never occurred. Don't ever let a Jury hear this evidence; evidence that would seal a not guilty verdict. Fighters for justice like Dr. Harr will not be deterred,distracted, derailed or scared off. The Crystal haters would like to see the Dr. Wecht report abandoned and send Dr. Harr off on the side show of trying to get, reluctant witness, Walker to admit perjury. Find the possibly already destroyed recording. Investigate whether he lied to appease Crystal. Investigate the Police coercion. Get Stein and Cooper to order a new trial. All the while anyone who can read can see that, in an expert's opinion, Daye died of an accident and not of a murder

May 30, 2020 at 10:52 AM


Hey, kenhyderal.

I was under the exact same impression... that Anony is trying to divert my attention down the wrong road and scare me off the path towards Crystal's vindication.

Nice try, but won't work.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous Anonymous said...
What is the difference between this claim and the previous 2018 claim?

May 31, 2020 at 5:46 PM


Hey, Anony.

The core issue between this civil malicious prosecution case filed in federal court and the 2018 case filed in state court is basically the same... that the four elements required for the claim had been met with regards to the Larceny of Chose in Action charge/indictment. That Mangum's claim is meritorious is not challenged by the defendants because their defenses are based on technicalities such as untimeliness of filing, improper service, etc.

The present claim adds issues related to Ms. Mangum's deprivation of protection of her due process rights. Specifically the August 15, 2018 trial court's prevention of her presenting her case using her work product... in other words, being forced to present her case from memory alone. This is unheard of. Also the problem with the NC Court of Appeals' failure to address any of the ten issues on appeal in its Opinion. This is, I believe, unheard of, as well.

Ergo, the claim in federal court is not only about malicious prosecution but about her basic civil rights being denied by the State court due to the fact that she's African American.

Hope this answers your question. Let me know if further edification is required.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
A Lawyer (who now pasts as Dr. Caligari) stated it best back in 2018...

"...If the suit alleges that the larceny charge was malicious prosecution, it will be dismissed because it is barred by the statute of limitations. And even if it weren't, the relief for malicious prosecution of one charge (larceny) isn't a new trial on other charges (murder)....
Another swing, another miss. And Dr. Harr's unintentional sabotaging of the MAR shows why the State Bar was right to enjoin him from unauthorized practice of law..."

January 4, 2018 at 11:56 AM

June 1, 2020 at 9:36 AM


Hey, Anony.

Regarding the statute of limitations, it has always been Ms. Mangum's contention that her post-conviction legal counsel has been working to her disadvantage. Regarding the malicious prosecution specifically, her counsel willfully allowed the filing deadline to expire. Neither Ann Petersen nor the NC Prisoner Legal Services mentioned to Mangum or took action on the malicious prosecution case, and then abandoned her as a client several months after the filing deadline had expired. It is for this reason that Ms. Mangum believes that the statute of limitations should toll at the date of the NC PLS letter which severed legal ties dated January 17, 2017.

I'm not an attorney, but I do realize that it is a long shot for an action in a civil court to result in relief in a criminal court. However, the criminal court's misconduct is so egregious that I believe it was worth a try. Nothing ventured, nothing gained.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Dr. Harr -- How does this work WRT the gatekeeper order from 2018? My understanding was that the gatekeeper order "enjoined Plaintiff [Crystal Mangum] from filing any future legal action against Defendants."

It's my understanding that a gatekeeper order includes a way for a person to file legitimate actions. What did Crystal's gatekeeper order state were the options allowed? Were those options followed?

I tried doing a quick search on your blog for the gatekeeper order details, but couldn't find it -- if you've publsihed this previously, just provide a link.


June 3, 2020 at 7:16 AM


Hey, Anony.

Again, I am no attorney, but my understanding is that you are correct about Mangum being enjoined from filing any lawsuits against the defendants in the case on this particular matter. I believe she is entitled to file other lawsuits against other defendants or to file lawsuits against these defendants as long as they are about different issues.

The gatekeeper order against me was extremely broad and it prevented me from filing any papers in the Middle District Federal Court in Greensboro regardless of the parties involved. In other words, a felon, a homeless person, any person off the street would be able to file a complaint on Mangum's behalf... but not me. For me to file anything would require getting permission from the court and paying an amount of approximately $600.00.

Now the gatekeeper ruling by Superior Court Judge Carolyn Thompson prevented Mangum from filing in that court specifically. The gatekeeper (or pre-filing injunction) is not applicable to Mangum filing a claim in U.S. District court, which is what she did on May 11, 2020.

The gatekeeper order by Judge Thompson was really baseless, and not even in response to the defendant's argument in seeking it.

Anonymous said...

Ken and Sid -- It's simple. Even if Mangum wins her civil malicious prosecution case (she's not), it's not going to get her a new trial for murder. That wouldn't even work in Canada.

You KNOW Milton perjured himself during the murder trial. Proving this WILL get Mangum a new murder trial At that time the Wecht documents can be introduced.

kenhyderal said...

Here we go again, as is usual, process is being used to deny justice. Proving Walker lied will be problematic (was he lying in Court = perjury) or was he lying to Crystal (hoping to restore their friendship). Walker is unlikely to admit to perjury when all he need say is he lied to Crystal. Erik Hooks was informed of Walker's statement to Crystal, on the recorded Prison phone, that he was coerced by Police to lie and Hooks did nothing. What does this tell you? This alone should have reopened Crystal's case. But this is only a peripheral issue relating to whether Crystal is prone to threaten with knives. Relating to knives, no investigation or evidence was ever presented by Meier showing Daye was a known knife throwing enthusiast. The real issue is, as Dr.Harr has been pronouncing from day one, there was no murder. I doubt if Dr. Nicholls or Dr. Roberts could or would be able to refute Dr. Wecht's report. At all costs, though, using whatever obfuscation you can find, prevent Dr. Wecht's report from being allowed to get justice for Crystal.

guiowen said...

Keenhyderal,
Is there any way we can get you to stop whining?
we'll forgive your racism if only you stop whining.

Anonymous said...

Dammit Kenny -- How do you expect to get Dr. Wecht's report in front of a Judge or jury where it can be used?

Including it in a CIVIL malicious prosecution brief is not going to do anything. It has nothing to do with the charge of malicious prosecution.

And as has been pointed out since at least 2018, even IF Crystal Mangum wins this case, it will NOT result in a new murder trial.

By all means -- Post how YOU would do this, rather than complain about how others would get this report in front of people that can actually do something about Crystal Mangum's incarceration.

kenhyderal said...

@ Anonymous 6-5-20 11:37 AM----------------------------------I am not a Lawyer. I am not an American. I live abroad. I am a person of modest means. The people who can do something about Crystal's wrongful conviction and her wrongful incarceration have been provided with all the information that proves she is not guilty of what she was convicted of. So, the question is not what I will do but what those responsible for Justice will do. A second question is why they have chosen not to act. I speculate; the powers that be, such as Cooper and Stein want Crystal, despite her innocence, to remain right where she is. I also speculate that this is not going to turn out well for them. They live in fear of what exposure of the truth will reveal.

Anonymous said...

In other words, you going to bitch and whine....

Got it.

Given Sid’s approach, you’ll have a forum for it for about 7 more years.

Anonymous said...

In other words, Kenny would rather continue to post meaningless comments on this blog rather than attempt to correct the injustice that he perceives.

kenhyderal said...

Does anyone else want to speculate, meaningfully, as to why those charged with administering justice refuse to act?

Anonymous said...

Kenny, let me offer a theory. Could it be that, despite the constant misguided efforts by Sid to intervene in the process, Crystal had a fair trial and was found guilty by an impartial jury?

guiowen said...

Kenny,
The question is why YOU refuse to act.

Anonymous said...

I supplied a well-reasoned response to Kenhyderal’s question. Why have you refused to post it?

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal- Dr. Harr refuses to post my comment that answers your questions from June 6. Obviously, any attempt to recreate that comment will also be met with the same response.

I suggest you ask him the details of that comment.

The comment was not insulting to you in any way. It detailed who, according to N.C. law, has the ability to potentially change the outcome of a criminal trial. It also touches briefly on why Dr. Harr’s attempts have failed.

Perhaps the last part is why he has singled it out and refused to allow it

kenhyderal said...

@ Anonymous 4:38 6-6-20 The Jury did not hear evidence regarding the real cause of death.

kenhyderal said...

@ Guiowen 6-6-20 5:10 See my response 6-5-20 First 5 sentences.

Anonymous said...

Kenny,

Please explain how the “real cause of death” is relevant under the well-established North Carolina case law, which has been explained to you at least a dozen times. We’re still waiting.

guiowen said...

Kenny,
So what you are saying is that it would be too much of an effort for you to do anything to help Crystal. Is she aware of this?

Anonymous said...

You never responded, Dr. Harr -- Why have you refused to post my comment?

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal - The North Carolina Governor can grant pardons -- a pardon of innocence, a pardon of forgiveness, or an unconditional pardon. According to the Governor’s Clemency Office website, “[o]rdinarily, an applicant must wait to apply until at least five years have elapsed since the applicant was released from State supervision (including probation or parole).”

So -- The Governor CAN act - after Crystal Mangum is released from state supervision. You're looking at what? 2032?

Sid is going about this the wrong way. The Wecht report is NOT "new evidence" -- it's a different interpretation of existing evidence. by itself, it's not going to get Crystal a new trial. Winning a civil malicious prosecution case is not going to result in a new criminal trial.

Both you and Sid have been told this since at least 2018. Time to start paying attention.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Ken and Sid -- It's simple. Even if Mangum wins her civil malicious prosecution case (she's not), it's not going to get her a new trial for murder. That wouldn't even work in Canada.

You KNOW Milton perjured himself during the murder trial. Proving this WILL get Mangum a new murder trial At that time the Wecht documents can be introduced.


June 5, 2020 at 6:45 AM


Hey, Anony.

I tend to differ with your assertion the civil case will have no advantage on her criminal case. A win in the malicious prosecution case would give credence to Mangum's complaint that Officer Marianne Bond lied before the Grand Jury. In any case other than Crystal's that would be more than enough for the court to grant a new trial on a MAR.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Dammit Kenny -- How do you expect to get Dr. Wecht's report in front of a Judge or jury where it can be used?

Including it in a CIVIL malicious prosecution brief is not going to do anything. It has nothing to do with the charge of malicious prosecution.

And as has been pointed out since at least 2018, even IF Crystal Mangum wins this case, it will NOT result in a new murder trial.

By all means -- Post how YOU would do this, rather than complain about how others would get this report in front of people that can actually do something about Crystal Mangum's incarceration.


June 5, 2020 at 11:37 AM


Anony, as stated above, I believe that if Mangum were to prevail in the civil malicious prosecution complaint, that would give credence to her claims that Officer Marianne Bond committed perjury before the grand jury. Were it anyone other than Crystal Mangum (with the possible exceptions of O.J. Simpson and Mike Nifong), a MAR would be readily granted on that basis alone, I believe. I disagree that pursuing this civil case is worthless.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
In other words, Kenny would rather continue to post meaningless comments on this blog rather than attempt to correct the injustice that he perceives.

June 6, 2020 at 5:16 AM


Hey, Anony.

Actually, kenhyderal has been extremely active in working to rectify the injustices to Ms. Mangum. His comments have even been used as exhibits in Mangum's briefs to demonstrate how a reasonable and intelligent person would see the process in light of having access from this blog site of the truths of her case... something that the media wants to keep hidden from the public. As far as blog site commentary goes, I consider kenhyderal to be a partner as he often responds to comments when my attention is diverted elsewhere.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Kenny, let me offer a theory. Could it be that, despite the constant misguided efforts by Sid to intervene in the process, Crystal had a fair trial and was found guilty by an impartial jury?

June 6, 2020 at 4:38 PM


Hey, Anony.

Your theory doesn't hold water as Crystal did not have a fair trial and the jury was certainly not impartial. How could the jury be impartial when a fourth of them have ties to Duke University Hospital? Also, the prosecution was based on a purposefully flawed autopsy report. And, Mangum's attorneys sold her out, and that is evident to the objective viewer.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
I supplied a well-reasoned response to Kenhyderal’s question. Why have you refused to post it?

June 7, 2020 at 6:57 AM


Hey, Anony.

It's not my policy or practice to refuse posting a comment that passes the kenhyderal Doctrine of civility. I am not sure of which comment you refer.

What I suggest is that you use a handle, sobriquet, or nickname of some sort when submitting a comment... anything other than Anonymous. You don't have to reveal your identity if you don't want, but having a name makes it easier to coordinate what comments come from what sources, and to find which comments to which you refer. Also, if a comment with a name is received, regardless of how silly the content or intent to discredit the seriousness of the site, there is every likelihood that it will be posted.

I receive and publish comments mostly on my cellphone and respond to them on my laptop. Usually I publish comments as soon as they are received, but it is possible for me to inadvertently overlook a comment or believe that a comment viewed initially has already been sent.

I would recommend that you re-submit the comment if you have it, otherwise let me know the exact date and time it was sent and I will try to retrieve and publish it.

Nifong Supporter said...


kenhyderal said...
@ Anonymous 4:38 6-6-20 The Jury did not hear evidence regarding the real cause of death.

June 7, 2020 at 8:51 AM


Hey, kenhyderal.

How very true. I reviewed the trial transcript, with much scrutiny especially when Dr. Nichols was on the witness stand. Throughout, there was never even the mention of the words "esophageal intubation" by either side or the judge. Also, the jury never learned about the e-mail that was sent to Mangum's first attorney Woody Vann which admitted that a tube was responsible for Daye's death and that he did not died secondary to the stab wound.

kenhyderal said...

@ NS 6-8-20 8:51........ Which led the Jury to conclude that Daye died of,in Dr. Nichol's erroneous words,"some sort of infection,or some other catastrophic illness"

kenhyderal said...

@ Guiowen 6-7-20 4:54: Not lack of effort but lack of ability. As a non-Lawyer only Dr. Harr has acquired abilities, far beyond that od almost any non-Lawyer, to navigate the intricacies of the broken,corrupt and fixed American Justice System. The Lawyers who supported the rotten status-quo have seemed to quit posting here hoping, I guess, to save face because they now know how wrong they have been and how right was lay-person Dr. Harr.

Anonymous said...

There you go Kenhyderal. According to Dr. Harr, it's my fault my response from June 6 was never posted. Dr. Harr does have a tendecy to blame others for his failures.

Anonymous said...

Dr. Harr has "acquired abilities...to navigate the intricacies of the...American Justice System"? Where, exactly, is your proof of that?

Dr. Harr has submitted numerous legal filings both for himself and for Crystal Mangum, and he has with every.single.attempt.

I daresay that the lawyers who used to post here got tired of Dr. Harr ignoring their urging for him to find a lawyer to review his various lawsuits before he submitted them.

Marina Lemmons said...

kenhyderal asks: Does anyone else want to speculate, meaningfully, as to why those charged with administering justice refuse to act?

Perhaps you have not convinced them that Crystal is innocent.

Neither you nor Dr. Harr has ever effectively addressed the relevance of Welch—the primary legal issue in this case. You and Dr. Harr have merely stated that you do not believe it is applicable. Dr. Harr has completely ignored the issue in his legal filings, even when opposing counsel raises Welch and similar precedent in their filings. You both consistently have refused to conduct any legal research to confirm your legal conclusion.

While Dr. Wecht is a world renowned expert whose opinion has value, I remind you that his report is just that—an opinion. It does not prove that Crystal is innocent of murder. I do not know whether there are limitations on an attempt to overturn a conviction because of a new medical opinion. A commenter suggested that Dr. Harr find precedent to support his attempt, but he (and you) refused to conduct that research.

I agree that IF Welch is NOT applicable, Dr. Harr has demonstrated that Crystal is not guilty of murder or manslaughter—but only IF it is NOT applicable. However, you both have refused to make any attempt to support your legal conclusion. Instead you simply assert that everyone else (i.e., those who accept the relevance of Welch) is conspiring against Crystal. Crystal is not well served by advocates who substitute conspiracy theories for meaningful research.

Perhaps that is why you have failed to convince those charged with administering justice that Crystal is innocent.

Marina Lemmons

kenhyderal said...

@ Marina Lemmons" Dr. Wecht concluded " It was aspiration "that began" the chain of events that led to death. That was a sufficient intervening cause that broke the chain of events associated with the stab wound; What was the cause of death? Accident." . In Judge Ridgeway's statement to the Jury he told them that the the State must prove that the stab wound was the sole proximate cause of death. It appears that the Jury did not get this. As Dr. Harr has pointed out none of the intervening causes were presented to them For Welch to be applicable the stab wound would of had to be the proximate cause. For Welch to be in effect, disgraced, Dr.Nichol's flippant words would of had to have been correct. "She stabbed him he died"

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal -- You didn't answer Marina's (nice name choice BTW) question.

Dr. Wecht's opinion does not prove innocence.

Dr. Roberts and Dr Nichols both had expert opinions that the stab wound was the proximate cause of death. Thanks to Sidney, the prosecution knew that Dr. Roberts held this opinion.

You would disregard their opinions in favor of Dr. Wecht's simply because his opinion matches your own.

How is Welch inapplicable?

kenhyderal said...

@ Anonymous 6-8-20 Can you repeat Marina's actual QUESTION ?? My response to her post and to your follow up is to compare the Medical and LEGAL C.V. of Dr. Wecht to that of Nichols and Roberts. Yes, his expert opinion does not prove Crystal's innocence but it does introduce abundant doubt that, were a Jury to see this report, would lead them to a verdict of not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. With the poor defense Crystal received the other issue, self-defense, given the battered down bathroom door and the ripped out hair, should also have raised reasonable doubt she was not an aggressor but was acting in self-defense. Reasonable doubt accrues to the accused, in America, except, it seems, when the accused is a poor, marginalized minority woman. Especially a "me too" heroine who dared to take on delinquent sons of privilege

Anonymous said...

kenhyderal claimed: In Judge Ridgeway's statement to the Jury he told them that the the State must prove that the stab wound was the sole proximate cause of death.

This statement is false.

Judge Ridgeway's instructions related to proximate cause begin at approximately 48:10 in the video linked below.

Judge Ridgeway specifically stated that the State need NOT prove that the stab wound was the sole proximate cause of death. Judge Ridgeway stated that the only way that wrongdoer would be excused from death resulting from negligent treatment or neglect is if the negligent treatment or neglect was the sole cause of death.

You have the instructions backward. Crystal is not well served by advocates who misstate important facts.

Marina Lemmons



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ta1cruO5hDU

kenhyderal said...

Marina You're playing a semantics game. My question to you is what did his instructions mean. The sole cause of death, as gleaned from all the Medical Records was his removal from life support, due to irreversible brain death, due to cerebral anoxia, due to errant esophageal intubation. This was the "if". There was nothing in his medical records that referred to any complication of the treated stab wound. There was no record of a post-operative infection. There was no treatment for a post-operative infection. There was a detailed prognosis for a complete recovery. Any Welch precedent ended there. That's where accident became the real cause of death. It seems you are being rather foolhardy to challenge Dr. Wecht, given his credentials. You seem to be an intelligent poster and I believe you do agree that Daye's death was not a murder as the uninformed and misled Jury found. Thanks to poor disgraceful legal representation.

guiowen said...

Marina,
You should understand that, because of context, Kenhyderal misinterprets half of what he reads.

Marina Lemmons said...

kenhyderal makes numerous misstatements..

You're playing a semantics game.

I listened to Judge Ridgeway's jury instructions several times to ensure I heard the instructions correctly. Your statement was directly contradicted by his instructions. That is not semantics. You lose credibility when you make ridiculous statements like this. Falsus in uno. Falsus in omnibus.

There was a detailed prognosis for a complete recovery. Any Welch precedent ended there.

Complications can set in after a prognosis for a complete recovery is provided. You lose credibility when you make ridiculous statements like this. Falsus in uno. Falsus in omnibus.

I believe you do agree Dye's death was not a murder...

I thought manslaughter was the correct charge, but Crystal's testimony must have convinced jurors to convict on a more serious charge. You have failed to convince me that Welch is not applicable. I do not find your opinion persuasive. Those who have cited Welch have been far more persuasive because they have cited additional cases to support their interpretation. You have provided no support for your opinion.

You were correct when you noted to the anonymous poster that I had not asked you a question in my initial post. I will ask one now: Why do you refuse to use your prodigious internet search skills to identify legal precedent that could serve to bolster Crystal's case? I have identified two legal issues that must be addressed to have any chance for success. Instead of doing something productive, you prefer to waste your time arguing with random commenters on an obscure blog site. Why?

Marina Lemmons

kenhyderal said...

That was not how I heard/interpreted Judge Ridgeway's instruction. One person though who does agree with me and with Dr. Harr is the eminent Lawyer and Forensic Pathologist Dr. Cyril Wecht. I take it that you disagree with this expert, choosing instead to go with a Welch precedent, a case with no factual similarities and bend it beyond reason to cover this case. This kind of legal slight of hand tends to confuse Juries. In this unique case why try and find unrelated cases and misapply them? Make a judgement based on fact and on common sense. If there was a manslaughter it was involuntary manslaughter committed by Duke. https://www.thefreelibrary.com/How+judges+don%27t+think%3a+the+inadvertent+misuse+of+precedent+in+the...-a0280005004

kenhyderal said...

@ Marina; Can you reiterate concisely the two Legal Issues you believe that must be addressed?

Anonymous said...

So much for Kenny’s “prodigious internet search skills”...Kenny, did you bother to actually read the document you linked?

“Antagonistic defenses” are when there are two or more defendants in a trial and each defendant asserts his own innocence and accuses the other of committing the crime, or the judge or jury can’t believe one defendant without disbelieving the other(s).

Anonymous said...

And I’ll also note you failed to identify any legal precedent To bolster Mangum’s case.....Sid, feel free to help Kenny out here.

kenhyderal said...

Crystal's case does not need any bolstering by misapplied, tenuously related, rulings that supposedly set precedents. Medical records and a medico-legal expert have found the cause of death was ACCIDENT. An accident that the facts, surrounding which, a deciding Jury was unaware of. Like in this review of the case of White vs People and of subsequent Antagonistic Defenses cases, the pros and cons of using precedent are raised. I believe and as Dr. Wecht has indicated the Welch Precedent is inapplicable, to Crystal's case, for all the many reasons raised there, questioning over use and misuse of precedent.

Anonymous said...

To the poster @ 7:21:

It’s not Kenny’s fault. No one provided him with a concise reiteration of the legal issues that he was to address.

Anonymous said...

Why haven't you asked your good friend, James Coleman, for assistance? He is, after all, co-director of Duke Law School’s Wrongful Convictions Clinic.

He's represented Ted freakin' Bundy (winning Ted 3 stays of execution) -- I don't think he'd be worried about any public or political ramifications for representing CGM.

kenhyderal said...

1. @ Anonymous 6-10-20@ 10:06 "A sarcastic man is a wounded man" . Marina stated, "I have identified two legal issues that must be addressed to have any chance for success." I have perused her posts and I am still uncertain as to what are, in her opinion, the specific two issues for success that she believes must be addressed. 2. @ (Sarcastic) Anonymous: SI If you can identify them on her behalf, by all means go ahead.

kenhyderal said...

Providing legal assistance, by a Professor, to a convicted serial murderer would not be a threat to Duke, other then some negative publicity for them in certain quarters; probably judged as unimportant to their well-being and it may, among some, even be a reputational asset. On the other hand, defending Crystal's would mean many of their alumni and benefactors would look unfavorably upon it and those who would be delighted are probably judged as immaterial to them

Anonymous said...

So your more concerned about Duke, its alumni, and Professor Coleman than to even ask for assistance?

Odd, but okay, I guess....

Anonymous said...

To the poster @ 7:27:

A sarcastic man is a wounded man.

kenhyderal said...

@ Anonymous 6-11-20 7:27. I am among those who would be delighted, if Professor Coleman agreed to assist in freeing the wrongly convicted Crystal Mangum; however I doubt that he would have the courage to so, given the fate of so many, judged to be in support of Justice for Crystal, like former DA Nifong, former Duke alumni and author William Cohan, Nurse Tara Levicy, Dr. Julie Manly, Sgt. Mark Gotleib Detective Ben Hinman, Lab Director Brian Meehan, etc, etc. Him taking a role in this effort could result in similar consequences,suffered by so many others including loss of employment and unrelenting slander.

Anonymous said...

Kenny -- You'll never know his thoughts on assistance until you ask him.

Professor Coleman is the co-director of the Wrongful Convictions Clinic and the faculty advisor for the Innocence Project.

As such, he works to exonerate wrongfully convicted inmates in North Carolina.

I don't think he is worried about loss of employment.

But whatever.....You and Sid feel free to continue to make excuses for not presenting Crystal's case to someone who can actually do something. I'm sure those excuses help you sleep better at night.

kenhyderal said...

@ Anonymous: 6-11-20 2:47............ I'm not sure what Professor Coleman could do better than what Dr. Wecht has already done. I suppose he could bring added prestige to the effort to free Crystal or to influence the Wrongful Conviction Clinic and the Innocent Project to get involved. This might embarrass Gov. Cooper, who already is fully aware of Crystal's innocence, to do the right thing but I am not holding my breath. He has not shown the courage to do the right thing probably because of his action as AG in The Duke Lacrosse Case.

guiowen said...

In other words: Kenny figures Wecht has done all that can be done to help Crystal. Thus Kenny can just sit on the sand in Dubai,and complain. No point in coming to NC.

Anonymous said...

Really, Kenny?? You're "not sure what Professor Coleman could do better than what Dr. Wecht has already done"?

From the Wrongful Convictions Clinic website:

"The Wrongful Convictions Clinic investigates plausible claims of innocence made by North Carolina inmates convicted of felonies.

Students in the clinic study the causes of wrongful convictions, including mistaken eyewitness identification, false confessions, faulty forensic evidence, and “jailhouse snitches.” Together with the Duke Law Innocence Project, a student-run organization with the same mission, student-attorneys work under the supervision of faculty to manage cases and perform a wide range of duties, including interviewing the inmates, locating and interviewing witnesses, gathering documentation, writing legal documents and memos, and working with experts."

As brilliant as Dr. Wecht is, he is a medical-legal and forensic pathology consultant.

He would simply be "one of the experts" that the Wrongful Convictions Clinic and Innocence Project would work with.

You know what? You and Sid seemed entirely convinced that Sid is the ONLY resource available to Crystal Mangum. So much so that you won't even take the opportunity to look at obvious resources available to assist her.

Do what you want - you're going to anyway. And it's been sooo successful thus far.

kenhyderal said...

@ Guiowen: Dr. Wecht has done everything that should be needed to free Crystal. He did this by confirming what Dr. Harr has pointed out from the very beginning ie. Crystal was convicted of a crime that did not happen. Something scoffed at by you and by various legal eagles that used to post here but now, rather than lose face, have withdrawn The Duke Lacrosse advocates no longer have anything grounded in facts to justify the conviction and imprisonment of Crystal. Their strategy now is to hope various tricks and tactics of delay will accomplish her continuing incarceration. You suggest I go to Durham. Have you any suggestion of what I should or could do there. You suggest I organize to raise tens of thousand of dollars to hire high powered Lawyers. Yeah, guilty or innocent that works for the wealthy in America. At present America is, in it's streets, reaping the consequences of it's broken, rotten and corrupt legal system. Corrupt all the way from the cop on the beat to A.G.'s like Barr, federally and and Cooper's hand-picked A.G.Stein in N.C.

guiowen said...

Kenny,
You have an opinion --admittedly from a very reputable expert. Having this opinion is not enough. You have to go to NC and present this to the people who can actually do something. Until you do that, please stop whining.

guiowen said...

By the way, Kenny, Crystal is still guilty of "assault with a deadly weapon." Fortunately, you should be able to get the sentence cut down from 170 months to 98 months. This should get the poor woman out. But you have to DO something.

Anonymous said...

Kenny,

Are you as ineffective in your other endeavors as you are in your attempt to advocate for Crystal?

Anonymous said...

Udaman Kenny.

Nifong Supporter said...


kenhyderal said...
@ NS 6-8-20 8:51........ Which led the Jury to conclude that Daye died of,in Dr. Nichol's erroneous words,"some sort of infection,or some other catastrophic illness"

June 8, 2020 at 8:26 AM


Hey, kenhyderal.

You make a very good point. How can Reginald Daye die of "some sort of infection, or some other catastrophic illness" when he passes away following his elective removal from life-support? Doesn't make sense.

Nifong Supporter said...


kenhyderal said...
@ Guiowen 6-7-20 4:54: Not lack of effort but lack of ability. As a non-Lawyer only Dr. Harr has acquired abilities, far beyond that od almost any non-Lawyer, to navigate the intricacies of the broken,corrupt and fixed American Justice System. The Lawyers who supported the rotten status-quo have seemed to quit posting here hoping, I guess, to save face because they now know how wrong they have been and how right was lay-person Dr. Harr.

June 8, 2020 at 8:44 AM


Hey, kenhyderal.

Yes, I believe that most lawyers who used to post to this site became enlightened to the truths of Mangum's innocence and the injustice committed by the system and decided not to try to defend a trial outcome that is morally and legally indefensible.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous Anonymous said...
There you go Kenhyderal. According to Dr. Harr, it's my fault my response from June 6 was never posted. Dr. Harr does have a tendecy to blame others for his failures.

June 8, 2020 at 9:29 AM


Hey, Anony.

If your June 6 response was never posted please re-submit if you have a copy. I took a quick look and could not find anything for June 6th.

Also, an unfortunate truth is that there are others who do not abide by the rules with conduct that prevents my inability to succeed. That is just an unfortunate fact. Keep in mind that the playing field is not level.

Nifong Supporter said...


Marina Lemmons said...
kenhyderal asks: Does anyone else want to speculate, meaningfully, as to why those charged with administering justice refuse to act?

Perhaps you have not convinced them that Crystal is innocent.

Neither you nor Dr. Harr has ever effectively addressed the relevance of Welch—the primary legal issue in this case. You and Dr. Harr have merely stated that you do not believe it is applicable. Dr. Harr has completely ignored the issue in his legal filings, even when opposing counsel raises Welch and similar precedent in their filings. You both consistently have refused to conduct any legal research to confirm your legal conclusion.

While Dr. Wecht is a world renowned expert whose opinion has value, I remind you that his report is just that—an opinion. It does not prove that Crystal is innocent of murder. I do not know whether there are limitations on an attempt to overturn a conviction because of a new medical opinion. A commenter suggested that Dr. Harr find precedent to support his attempt, but he (and you) refused to conduct that research.

I agree that IF Welch is NOT applicable, Dr. Harr has demonstrated that Crystal is not guilty of murder or manslaughter—but only IF it is NOT applicable. However, you both have refused to make any attempt to support your legal conclusion. Instead you simply assert that everyone else (i.e., those who accept the relevance of Welch) is conspiring against Crystal. Crystal is not well served by advocates who substitute conspiracy theories for meaningful research.

Perhaps that is why you have failed to convince those charged with administering justice that Crystal is innocent.

Marina Lemmons

June 8, 2020 at 12:46 PM


Hey, Marina.

I believe Dr. Wecht and kenhyderal answered your questions regarding Welch, but I would add that in my non-lawyerly opinion that Welch is far more restricted than people want to use in Mangum's case. The Welch case death resulted from a serious stab wound that required a transfusion. Welch had nothing to be with the stabbing victim being brought to the hospital for treatment. Also, in Welch there was no malpractice by the hospital staff whereas that is precisely what happened in Mangum's case.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous Anonymous said...
And I’ll also note you failed to identify any legal precedent To bolster Mangum’s case.....Sid, feel free to help Kenny out here.

June 9, 2020 at 7:25 PM


Hey, Anony.

kenhyderal answered your question. Other legal cases would not proceed because the court and attorney on both sides would realize the manner of death in their case was an accident and not homicide and therefore the case would not be brought.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Kenhyderal -- You didn't answer Marina's (nice name choice BTW) question.

Dr. Wecht's opinion does not prove innocence.

Dr. Roberts and Dr Nichols both had expert opinions that the stab wound was the proximate cause of death. Thanks to Sidney, the prosecution knew that Dr. Roberts held this opinion.

You would disregard their opinions in favor of Dr. Wecht's simply because his opinion matches your own.

How is Welch inapplicable?

June 8, 2020 at 3:17 PM


Hey, Anony.

Again, kenhyderal answered your question. However, re-read the last paragraph of Dr. Wecht's report in which he challenges the accuracy of Dr.s Nichols and Roberts reports because their findings are are not consistent with the medical records. A basic blunder for which one cannot compensate.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous Anonymous said...
To the poster @ 7:21:

It’s not Kenny’s fault. No one provided him with a concise reiteration of the legal issues that he was to address.

June 10, 2020 at 10:06 AM Delete
Anonymous Anonymous said...
Why haven't you asked your good friend, James Coleman, for assistance? He is, after all, co-director of Duke Law School’s Wrongful Convictions Clinic.

He's represented Ted freakin' Bundy (winning Ted 3 stays of execution) -- I don't think he'd be worried about any public or political ramifications for representing CGM.

June 10, 2020 at 11:03 AM


Hey, Anony.

You're comparing apples and asparagus. Getting someone like Bundy or even Charles Manson, a stay of execution is not the same as having a conviction overturned... that would have major political, professional, and personal ramifications in Mangum's case. Because I consider him a friend, there is no reason for subjecting him to certain animus.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Really, Kenny?? You're "not sure what Professor Coleman could do better than what Dr. Wecht has already done"?

From the Wrongful Convictions Clinic website:

"The Wrongful Convictions Clinic investigates plausible claims of innocence made by North Carolina inmates convicted of felonies.

Students in the clinic study the causes of wrongful convictions, including mistaken eyewitness identification, false confessions, faulty forensic evidence, and “jailhouse snitches.” Together with the Duke Law Innocence Project, a student-run organization with the same mission, student-attorneys work under the supervision of faculty to manage cases and perform a wide range of duties, including interviewing the inmates, locating and interviewing witnesses, gathering documentation, writing legal documents and memos, and working with experts."

As brilliant as Dr. Wecht is, he is a medical-legal and forensic pathology consultant.

He would simply be "one of the experts" that the Wrongful Convictions Clinic and Innocence Project would work with.

You know what? You and Sid seemed entirely convinced that Sid is the ONLY resource available to Crystal Mangum. So much so that you won't even take the opportunity to look at obvious resources available to assist her.

Do what you want - you're going to anyway. And it's been sooo successful thus far.

June 12, 2020 at 2:13 PM


Hey, Anony.

You must not have been paying attention. I have repeatedly tried to get the NC Innocence Inquiry Commission involved in Crystal Mangum's case... under two different executive directors both before and after Dr. Wecht's report of October 25, 2019. It refused. Likewise with the NC Center on Actual Innocence and the innocence project at NC Central University School of Law. Even with Mangum being a NCCU graduate, that law school was extremely hostile towards my efforts to obtain help for Crystal. I tried to get legal assistance from the NAACP and ACLU... no luck. Even tried Barry Scheck's Innocence Project. I've tried to un-turn every stone. Surely Duke University is not going to assist Mangum against its own interests. Like the Chewbacca defense... that doesn't make sense!

Nifong Supporter said...


guiowen said...
By the way, Kenny, Crystal is still guilty of "assault with a deadly weapon." Fortunately, you should be able to get the sentence cut down from 170 months to 98 months. This should get the poor woman out. But you have to DO something.

June 12, 2020 at 4:07 PM


Hey, gui, mon ami.

If I am not mistaken, on November 22, 2013, Crystal Mangum was only convicted of second-degree murder. She was not prosecuted at trial for assault with a deadly weapon.
Am I right?

guiowen said...

Sidney,
You're right. She was found guilty of murder. What you have to do is get that cut down to assault with a deadly weapon. Use a lawyer!

kenhyderal said...

Over and above the wrongful charge of Murder, a crime that did not happen, is the fact that Crystal was clearly acting in self-defence. Common sense would tell any reasonable person except maybe a Jury misled by aggressive, pit-bull Prosecutor Coggins-Franks that jealous, drunken, enraged and violent Daye; kicking in a door and dragging Crystal out by the hair was the aggressor. Daye was a well known knife throwing enthusiast and a possessor of brass-knuckles. His penchant for knives was known by his family, his friends, by Crystal and by Crystal's son. Everyone but the Jury. Coggins-Franks badgered a vulnerable Crystal with a desire to win, rather than seek justice. That, and an inadequate Defence by a disinterested and uncaring Meier misled the Jury. You really have to be a Duke Lacrosse Apologist and a Crystal hater to be presented with the facts and not have reasonable doubt that her action was done in self-defence and not as an assault.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous said: "Are you as ineffective in your other endeavors as you are in your attempt to advocate for Crystal?" ...... In some other endeavors where I have chosen to be an advocate I have not encountered the degree of revilement, orchestrated by Duke Lacrosse Apologists and by the blind knee-jerk defenders of,the rotten, to the core, US Justice System, "There are none so blind as those who will not see" Jeremiah 5:21. Worse yet are those who continue to deny what they now know is true choosing to perpetuate injustice rather than lose face. In many areas America is 50-100 years behind civilized nations in "doing the right thing" ie. ending slavery, ending segregation, reforming the broken justice system, adopting universal single-payer health care, eliminating racism, adopting sensible gun control etc. And like those claiming Crystal has been dealt with justly they continue to proclaim the lie of American exceptionalism.

Anonymous said...

So, Kenny, are we to conclude that the answer to the question posted on June 12 at 4:20 p.m. is “yes?”

guiowen said...

Looks like we're here again:

Sidney: "I have some powerful arguments that will get CGM free within two weeks if not sooner."
Sidney: "Please, everybody, tell me the color of your favorite crying towel."
Kenny: "The evil Duke lacrosse apologists have been successful up to now, but will now suffer as the arc of justice bends in Crystal's direction."
Some time later:
Others: "So tell us Sidney how things went?"
Sidney: "I clearly failed to take into consideration the evil behavior of the justice system, and/or the way CGM's attorneys betrayed her!"
Kenny: "What can you expect from the U.S. system? This would never happen in Canada, or any other reasonable country! Reform reform! Drain this swamp!"

guiowen said...

So tell us, Kenny, your other endeavors. Have you ever been successful?

Anonymous said...

Did you talk to your good friend, professor James Coleman?

kenhyderal said...

Guiown said: "So tell us, Kenny, your other endeavors. Have you ever been successful?"...……………………………………...The answer is a resounding yes and with another big win, thanks to Dr. Harr, soon to come. I wont be expecting congratulations from you, though. I predict you will slink away like the many former posters who now know that the positions they took have been discredited.

guiowen said...

Kenny,
Looking forward to your big win.

Anonymous said...

We're apparently at this point:

Kenny: "The evil Duke lacrosse apologists have been successful up to now, but will now suffer as the arc of justice bends in Crystal's direction."

guiowen said...

Sidney,
Is it true that you'll soon be giving Kenhyderal a big win? How can that be, since no one is willing to listen to you, et alone help you?

Anonymous said...

I’m proud to call kenhyderal my friend.

guiowen said...

Here's Kenny's BIG win:..

Anonymous said...
I’m proud to call kenhyderal my friend.

kenhyderal supporter said...

Dr. Harr,

You should remove the post at 4:49 by the imposter.

I am the one who is proud to call kenhyderal my friend.

Anonymous said...

I noticed that on May 21st, Mangum was notified that all parties were to be served a Notice of Right to Consent.

Is that something you're responsible for completing, Dr. Harr?

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
I noticed that on May 21st, Mangum was notified that all parties were to be served a Notice of Right to Consent.

Is that something you're responsible for completing, Dr. Harr?

June 24, 2020 at 6:41 AM


Hey, Anony.

I've been quite busy recently, so I don't know if I previously mentioned that Crystal asked me to file, on her behalf, a malicious prosecution complaint with the Federal Court for the Middle District of North Carolina in Greensboro.

I believe the Notice of Right to Consent had to do with allowing a magistrate judge to arbitrate rather than taking the case to court for a jury trial. Mangum asked me to deny that offer because she would prefer a jury trial.

Currently we are awaiting a reply from the defendants. I don't have PacerMonitor so I don't know the real-time status of her case.

Anonymous said...

Is that different from the current Malicious Prosecution complaint?

Oh -- PACER (Public Access to Court Electronic Records) is capped at $0.10 a page, and the highest they can charge you per document is $3.00 --but each attachment is considered a separate document.

The $0.10 per-page charge is based on the number of pages that result from each search and each requested report or document. The charge is not based on printing.
Enter party name "johnson, t" and receive 2 pages of matches. The charge is $0.20.

Any person can register.

Lance(no longer)TheIntern said...

As a follow-up to Anonymous @ 9:52 am:

The PACER Service Center bills quarterly. If you accrue $30 or less of charges in a quarter, fees are waived for that period.


Back tu lurker mode....

Anonymous said...

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/17179360/mangum-v-bond/

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Is that different from the current Malicious Prosecution complaint?

Oh -- PACER (Public Access to Court Electronic Records) is capped at $0.10 a page, and the highest they can charge you per document is $3.00 --but each attachment is considered a separate document.

The $0.10 per-page charge is based on the number of pages that result from each search and each requested report or document. The charge is not based on printing.
Enter party name "johnson, t" and receive 2 pages of matches. The charge is $0.20.

Any person can register.

June 24, 2020 at 9:52 AM


Hey, Anony.

Boy, was I out of it!! The malicious prosecution complaint filed with the federal court was the same one on which the comments were posted. My mind was working on other projects when I responded. But in answer to your question, the Notice was related to the present case filed in the federal court.

Thank you for the info on PacerMonitor. Have used it in the past... with some difficulty on my part when tracking Mangum's Habeas Petition. May try to use it again.

Nifong Supporter said...


Lance(no longer)TheIntern said...
As a follow-up to Anonymous @ 9:52 am:

The PACER Service Center bills quarterly. If you accrue $30 or less of charges in a quarter, fees are waived for that period.


Back tu lurker mode....

June 24, 2020 at 12:15 PM


Hey, Lance.

Thanks for the info. Glad you are still lurking around. We appreciate your contributions.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous Anonymous said...
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/17179360/mangum-v-bond/

June 24, 2020 at 1:43 PM


Hey, Anony.

Thanks for the link. I used it and found that one of the defendants filed a motion for an extension and also a motion for a waiver. Haven't been able to view the documents and to my knowledge, neither of the documents filed with the court on June 17th have not been received by Crystal. Unfortunately, there is a substantial lag in the process.

Anonymous said...

PACER and PacerMonitor are not the same thing. PacerMonitor is a separate offering with its own pricing structure. Do not confuse the two.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous Anonymous said...
PACER and PacerMonitor are not the same thing. PacerMonitor is a separate offering with its own pricing structure. Do not confuse the two.

June 25, 2020 at 6:08 AM


Hey, Anony.

Thanks for the edification. Consider me enlightened.

kenhyderal said...

Lance(?The Lawyer) said: Back tu lurker mode...…..Lance, I'd be interested to get your take on Dr. Wecht's opinion that the cause of Daye's death was accident not homicide and if that is, in you mind, a game changer which Gov. Cooper and AG Stein, who have been provided with this information need, for the sake of Justice, to act upon.

Lance(no longer)TheIntern said...

Kenhyderal -- Is it a game changer? I don't consider criminal convictions "games", so no.

Does it impact Crystal Mangum's conviction? It could, if it were pursued in the correct manner.

Can Governor Cooper or AG Stein legally act upon this information? No.

In North Carolina, only an appellate court can overturn a conviction. If evidence exists that proves someone was wrongfully convicted, that proof should be presented through a qualified lawyer to the appropriate appellate court for review and consideration.

Since she doesn't have a lawyer, Crystal Mangum can contact the North Carolina Bar Lawyer Referral Service or the Center for Actual Innocence.

Dr. Harr will claim he has tried these venues and been denied -- but that is because he continually attempts to roll his (numerous) cases and the Duke LAX case into this one. It's a poor (I'm bing polite here) strategy and doomed to failure.

He has also continued to pursue a CIVIL case after having been told numerous times that in the extremely unlikely event that Ms Mangum wins, it will have no impact on her CRIMINAL conviction.

The bottom line is that no one bothers to take Dr. Harr seriously (why should they? He's done nothing but file one frivoulous lawsuit after another, to the point of gatekeeper orders being placed upon him ). If he were truly concerned about Ms. Mangum's conviction, he would turn over the relevent documentation to a competent lawyer and remove himself from the legal process.

kenhyderal said...

Lance, you didn't answer my question. Do you believe Crystal is guilty of murder? I get it. Unless one has the resources to hire a Lawyer or can convince Lawyers who are involved in innocent projects; regardless of your innocence, something everybody who knows the facts of this case realizes, you can just stay incarcerated. Justice be damned. Too many have bought into the narrative that Crystal is an evil person of no consequences and Dr. Harr, someone who really cares for Crystal, is a pariah to the American Legal System. A system generally held in contempt by civilized people.

Lance(no longer)TheIntern said...

Crystal Mangum was found guilty by a jury of her peers. She stabbed Reginald Daye, then he died.

The opportunities to contest this result exist. Ignore those opportunities at your own risk.

You lose the privilege of bitching about the results when you ignore those opportunities, however.

guiowen said...


Looks like we've reached this point:


Kenny: "What can you expect from the U.S. system? This would never happen in Canada, or any other reasonable country! Reform reform! Drain this swamp!"

kenhyderal said...

@ Lance As Pit Bull Prosecutor Coggins-Franks would say ANSWER the QUESTION. The opportunities for poor and marginalized defendants do not exist. It is even difficult for those who love Crystal, like Dr. Harr and have the education, experience and determination to challenge it's tortuous process, try and navigate through it, as unequal and stacked as it is, while Officials, warranted to uphold Justice and knowing the real truth, stand by and scoff at these efforts.

kenhyderal supporter said...

Dr. Harr,

It is obvious that kenhyderal is a far better debater than Lance. And that is one more reason why I am proud to call kenhyderal my friend.


kenhyderal said...

@KHS. This isn't a debate. It's a case of right vs. wrong. It's a case where beneficiaries of this corrupt construct are forced to defend the indefensible. The once proud profession of Lawyer is now, thanks to the US system, in almost universal disrepute. No Atticus Finch anywhere to be found.

guiowen said...

But,wasn't Atticus Finch the defender of some rapist?

kenhyderal said...

Like Tom Robinson, Crystal Mangum was not guilty of anything. Unlike Daniel Meir Atticus Finch put up a strong defense that proved innocence but, a racist Justice System, still present in America, convicted an innocent person of color. Unlike Tom Robinson,the rapists who sexually assaulted Crystal were never tried but were declared to be innocent

guiowen said...

So you do like people who defend rapists!

kenhyderal said...

@ Guiowen: Everyone deserves a Legal Defense. What I don't like is Defense Lawyers, knowing their client is guilty of rape, use the strategy of trashing the poor innocent accuser. This has led to one more flaw in the Justice System, needing reform, where victims are mostly afraid to come forward. Thank heavens for Me-too heroines like Crystal Mangum. Hopefully such bravery will lead to guilty individuals facing Justice. But don't hold your breath. In America there are possibly two on the Supreme Court

guiowen said...

Kenhyderal,
Obviously, if she accuses someone of raping her,the defense attorneys will accuse her of lying. Nobody tried to trash her. She was not "the poor innocent accuser".

I do wish you would stop whining. Any chance of that?

Lance(no longer)TheIntern said...

Kenhyderal, what part of:

"Crystal Mangum was found guilty by a jury of her peers. She stabbed Reginald Daye, then he died."

did you not understand?

guiowen said...

Lance,
Please don't be so hard on Kenny. It's just that, because of context, he misunderstands half of what you tell him.

kenhyderal said...

Lance said: Kenhyderal, what part of:Crystal Mangum was found guilty by a jury of her peers. She stabbed Reginald Daye, then he died."did you not understand?"...… But the "then he died was legally and medically unrelated to anything Crystal did My question was, do you really believe they had the information needed to render a correct decision and do you believe, knowing what you now know, their guilty of murder decision was correct? Do you believe had they heard all the evidence they would render the same verdict? You are trained in Law , don't tell me you still believe that the Jury got it right. When poor indigent defendants are incorrectly convicted and those with the power to correct this injustice, who know the truth, say right or wrong the Jury's decision stands and Justice be damned, then there is something fundamentally wrong. Everyone from newly minted Lawyers like you all the way up to the Governor now know Crystal is innocent and have unethically chosen to do nothing, hoping that the inability of Crystal and her supporters to finance and navigate the roadblocks and purposely torturous minutiae in order to get her conviction overturned will hep them save face. Equal Justice for All??

kenhyderal said...

Guiowen said: Obviously, if she accuses someone of raping her,the defense attorneys will accuse her of lying...……………………………. They were the Liars. They slanderously accused her of prostitution and drug addiction and using surrogates Like Duke Lacrosse Liestoppers and Durham in Wonderland Blog to spread these lies. This turned the Public against Crystal, interrupted her College career made it difficult for her to find work and accommodation. This is why abused women for so long failed to come forward. Meanwhile their clients go on to fame and fortune not to mention, thanks to greedy civil suits, massive monetary awards

guiowen said...

Kenhyderal,
Let's go over the facts of the case.
1.When Crystal stabbed Reginald Daye, she was arrested and charged with Assault with a Deadly Weapon.
2.Some time later,Reginald died while in the Hospital.
The jury then had to decide two questions:
1. Was Crystal acting in self-defense?
2. Was there any intervening cause?

The jury felt the answer to both of these questions was NO, and so Crystal was convicted of murder.
Some five years later, Sidney got Cyril Wecht, admittedly a brilliant man, to look at the case. Wecht said the answer to the second question is YES.

This is, of course, only an opinion. Since two other experts have given a different opinion, you and Sidney must arrange to have the question (2) brought up once again in a court of law. Until then,the previous jury verdict is in force.

Assuming you actually do the work,and Wecht's opinion is accepted,Crystal would no longer be considered guilty of murder. Note however that Wecht's opinion in no way deals with question (1) above.Thus Crystal would still be guilty of assault with a deadly weapon.
Still, I believe the penalty or this assault should be 98 months or less, so Crystal could then be set free.

So, do the work,and you might have a nice outcome.

Anonymous said...

Has anyone shared Dr. Wecht's report with the Governor's Clemency Office?

Governor's Clemency Office
4294 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, N.C. 27699-4294
Phone: 919-324-1456
Fax: 919-715-8623
E-mail: clemency@nc.gov

kenhyderal said...

Clemency??? She is innocent and wrongly convicted. An office of the Governor and former AG ; the same person who scuttled Crystal's attempt to get justice in the Duke Lacrosse Case??? Repercussions from what he did, made life very difficult for Crystal, going forward.

Anonymous said...

I'll take that as a "no".

guiowen said...

Kenny,
I see once again that, because of context, you don't understand what people tell you

kenhyderal said...

@ Guiowen: What was I told that I didn't understand?

Anonymous said...

@ Kenhyderal - As Pit Bull Prosecutor Coggins-Franks would say ANSWER the QUESTION.

guiowen said...

Kenny,
What Lance told you. You have to do something,if you really want to get CGM out. Of curse by now I doubt that you really want her out: you'd rather whine.

Anonymous said...

I agree with kenhyderal. I would prefer that Crystal rot in prison than accept clemency for a crime she didn't commit.

kenhyderal said...

@ Anonymous 7-1-20 9:01 PM --------------- No, I would prefer the US Justice System to finally live up to it's ideals. Unfortunately in America they have never have lived up to the lofty principles declared in their founding documents. That's why the self-satisfied braggadocio of American exceptionalism is looked on with such distain by others. They are always 50 to 100 years behind civilized nations in "doing the right thing" In this case reforming the unjust Justice System is long overdue. Releasing the innocent martyr Crystal Mangum would be a step in the right direction. Come on Gov. Cooper and AC Stein. Don't tell me Lawyer Lance is correct and you can't do anything. That is obviously a cop out.

kenhyderal supporter said...

Right on kenhyderal. I’m proud to call kenhyderal my friend.

Anonymous said...

I agree with kenhyderal. I would prefer that Crystal rot in prison than do something that is inconsistent with my narrative.

kenhyderal supporter supporter said...

Right on kenhyderal supporter. I’m proud to call kenhyderal supporter my friend.

Anonymous said...

Dr. Harr -- Any updates? Did Crystal Mangum receive any of the documents filed in court on June 17th?

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous Anonymous said...
Dr. Harr -- Any updates? Did Crystal Mangum receive any of the documents filed in court on June 17th?

July 8, 2020 at 8:32 AM


Hey, Anony.

Haven't been doing too much on comments recently because I am extremely busy getting ready to file.

As far as Crystal's civil case in Federal Court on malicious prosecution, she's received an extension from the Attorney General's Office representing the Durham D.A.'s Office, and has received nothing from Bond's attorney so far. But I expect their arguments to be as last time... on technicalities instead of merit... basically that the Statute of Limitations expired. Will post whatever response Crystal receives.

Marina Lemmons said...

But I expect their arguments to be as last time... on technicalities instead of merit... basically that the Statute of Limitations expired.

This stage of the proceedings is focused exclusively on "technical" arguments. Defendants are required to treat the facts alleged by the plaintiff as true at this stage. Alleged facts are only to be contested after the court determines there is a technical basis for the case and allows it to proceed.

Anyone who states otherwise is ignorant and/or dishonest.

kenhyderal said...

@ Marina 5:46 AM 7-9-20: As someone "ignorant" of the myriad, seemingly incoherent and irrational, technicalities, can you elucidate me as to why these can be used as a gatekeeper and why are they so often employed in a "dishonest" way to thwart justice and engineer preferred outcomes?? I admit ignorance but deny dishonesty.

guiowen said...

Kenny,
Could you please stop whining?

guiowen said...

Marina,
As I've told you before,Kenny doesn't lie. It's just that, because of context, he misinterprets half of what you tell him, and forgets half of what he tells you.

Anonymous said...

In Kenhyderal's defense, there is no "statute of limitations" in Canadian law.

They do, however, have a "limitation period" - A period of time within which a person must bring a claim (for civil claims only -- Malicious Prosecution being a civil claim in Canada).
They are essentially the same thing -- IIRC, the limitation period in Canada for Malicious Prosecution is 2 years.

Kenhyderal could, if he so desired, speak to a Canadian lawyer to determine whether the limitation period is considered a "seemingly incoherent and irrational" technicality.

kenhyderal -- I'd be interested in hearing your Canadian legal expert's opinion.

Anonymous said...

Dr. Harr - What are you getting ready to file? Will it be posted here?

kenhyderal said...

@ Anonymous 7-9-20 1:49 Thanks for the information. My only comment is, that in my opinion, Malicious Prosecution in Canada should be a criminal matter and not a civil matter.

Anonymous said...

You’re opinion aside, I take it by your comment you’re not going to speak to a legal professional?

It might help you with the ignorance you’re admitting. Or are you afraid speaking to a legal expert will only confirm your dishonesty?