From your document: "the Chief Medical Examiner...would review the Dr. Nichols autopsy report and issue a written report in exchange for Ms. Mangum voluntarily dismissing her lawsuit.....Mangum filed to dismiss her lawsuit on October 20, 2022."
You them later state that Mr. Schaeffer wrote a letter stating "...after Dr. Aurelius finished reviewing the documentation related to the case, she would give here opinion as to whether the cause and/or manner of death should by changed in the original report."
You go on to state "...he omitted mention of any commitment for Dr. Aurelius to complete the 20 affirmatives"
From what I've been able to find, there was no commitment to complete your questionnaire.
I can only conclude that Dr. Aurelius giving her opinion whether the original report should be changed meets the agreed upon requirements.
By all means, post the legal documents that contain what the agreed upon documents should be. I can only guess they'd be either in the motion to dismiss or the stipulation of dismissal documents.
HEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP!! IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT!
To all commenters, visitors, and especially kenhyderal, Abe, Prince Humperdinck, dhall, Dr. Caligari, and others whom I failed to mention, Crystal and I (and my spoiled Siamese cat Adonis) hope that you have a wonderful Christmas and that the Year of 2023 finds you all happy and healthy.
Alas, I failed to get Crystal released by Christmas, but I had no chance when the NC Chief Medical Examiner refused to respond to a set of Affirmatives provided to her two months ago on October 24, 2022. Just demonstrates the cruelty and racism of the State.
dhall said... From your document: "the Chief Medical Examiner...would review the Dr. Nichols autopsy report and issue a written report in exchange for Ms. Mangum voluntarily dismissing her lawsuit.....Mangum filed to dismiss her lawsuit on October 20, 2022."
You them later state that Mr. Schaeffer wrote a letter stating "...after Dr. Aurelius finished reviewing the documentation related to the case, she would give here opinion as to whether the cause and/or manner of death should by changed in the original report."
You go on to state "...he omitted mention of any commitment for Dr. Aurelius to complete the 20 affirmatives"
From what I've been able to find, there was no commitment to complete your questionnaire.
I can only conclude that Dr. Aurelius giving her opinion whether the original report should be changed meets the agreed upon requirements.
By all means, post the legal documents that contain what the agreed upon documents should be. I can only guess they'd be either in the motion to dismiss or the stipulation of dismissal documents.
December 21, 2022 at 12:15 PM
Hey, dhall.
The assurances given by the Assistant Attorney General John Schaeffer was that the Chief Medical Examiner Dr. Michelle Aurelius would review the Nichols autopsy report and issue a written report. The discovery process in a lawsuit includes depositions, interrogatories, and affirmatives. I felt it necessary to include the affirmatives to support facts of the case that are exculpatory for Mangum... the necessity due to the likely omissions of key factors of the case such as the errant esophageal intubation in treating Reginald Daye's delirium tremens, his cardiac arrest, his re-intubation, and his elective removal from life-support. I did not anticipate that the Chief Medical Examiner, who has refused to communicate with me, would refuse to respond to the affirmatives which do nothing more than direct attention to indisputable facts of the case.
I made the mistake by having Crystal enter into the agreement with the NC DOJ in good-faith, which I do not believe was reciprocated... especially as evidenced by the State's lack of attention given to the affirmatives.
Uncalled for, FKE. The treatment of Veterans is no joking matter, regardless of their country.
Dr. Harr -- as you state, the "assurances given by the Assistant Attorney General John Schaeffer was that the Chief Medical Examiner Dr. Michelle Aurelius would review the Nichols autopsy report and issue a written report."
That's it. Unless you show otherwise, there is no need for your affirmatives -- regardless of number.
You go on to state that "The discovery process in a lawsuit includes depositions, interrogatories, and affirmatives.". That very well may be correct for the discovery phase. My understanding is that the "discovery process" is when litigating parties share information about witnesses and evidence to be presented at trial. This case never went to trial -- therefore there was no "discovery process".
Looking at the timeline, these "affirmatives" weren't presented to the NC DOJ until "on or about" Nov 1st -- after the motion to dismiss was filed. We have no idea when these went from the DOJ to the NC OCME, but we do know the stipulation of Dismissal was filed on Nov 7th, and the case was dismissed the following day.
Again, I see no reason why the NC OCME has to respond to your affirmatives. Unless you are willing to post the Motion to Dismiss and the Stipulation of Dismissal that prove otherwise.
As I posted and as Dr. Caligari agreed, there's nothing you can do to compel the NC OCME to complete these documents.
The ME was never going to respond to your questionnaire and there is no way for you or Mangum to compel her to do so. Certainly not in the context of the lawsuit you recently agreed to dismiss or any other lawsuit you or Mangum may file seeking to compel the ME to review its findings re: Mr. Daye's death.
Still waiting for some documentation from the court on this statement:
"....In the Kinsley case, Mangum agreed to a Stipulation to Dismiss her case in exchange for the State agreeing to provide a written report in review of the Dr. Nichols autopsy report on Reginald Daye. Mangum was given assurances that by accepting this proposal offered by the State, the final report would be issued much more expeditiously. As part of this process, the State agreed to respond to the affirmatives...
Can you post the document where the State agreed to respond to your affirmatives?
"You should start getting used to the likelihood that in short order time-wise Crystal Mangum will be freed, that she will be exonerated on the second degree murder conviction, and that she will be compensated for her damages inflicted by the state and others. Please try to prepare yourselves mentally before the day of justice-reckoning arrives... and don't forget to place an order for a crying towel"
Sidney Harr, June 28, 2016 at 6:34 AM
The road goes on forever and the party never ends.
"HEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP! STATEMENTS OF ENLIGHTENMENT!
I am hopeful we will soon be able to devote more time discussing the Shan Carter case with my strong belief that Crystal Mangum's conviction will soon be overturned and she set free." Sidney Harr, November 5, 2015 at 12:58 PM
"Walt, I may have lost a few legal skirmishes, but the war will be won when the Durham prosecutors are forced to drop charges against Mangum. It's only a matter of time." Sidney Harr, March 1, 2013 at 1:35 PM
The road goes on forever and the party never ends.
Don't forget -- Kenny had mystery witnesses that needed to be called for Mangum's "new trial", too.
Kenny knows a lot of mystery witnesses. He just can't name them, and he's afraid that if he gives the names to Sid, they'll end up posted here just like other privileged information.
Quite the conundrum, unless CGM gets a lawyer, right Kenny?
How many responses have you received to the Five Affirmatives? Does anyone agree with you? Why won’t you publish the responses?
January 9, 2023 at 10:03 AM
Hey, Anony.
I received a total of ten replies for the Twenty Affirmatives... none from the government officials, and I received no reply for the Five Affirmatives.
All of the responses were straight-line yes/agree, no/disagree, and one was straight-line unsure. When I sent thank-you e-mails to those responding, none were able to be delivered, so I can't vouch for the authenticity. Therefore, because of the low number of responses, I do not believe the results are worth publishing.
dhall said... I have seen nothing from either Kenhyderal or Dr. Harr regarding toxicology reports.
January 9, 2023 at 12:00 PM
Hey, dhall.
I am assuming that you're referring to the blood alcohol level of Daye on his admission to the hospital on April 3, 2011? I've posted it on this site before... I believe. It does exist.
If you are referring to toxicology studies on Mangum regarding the 2006 Duke Lacrosse case, then I have no information about that. I have never really focused on that case.
HEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP!!! IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT!
Yesterday, on behalf of Crystal Mangum, I manually filed with the Durham Superior Court's Criminal Division a Motion for Appropriate Relief (MAR). I will try and have the brief and its exhibits posted by week's end.
Dr. Harr -- WRT the new Motion for Appropriate Relief, my understanding is that (according to G.S. 15A-1415(c) ), the defendant can file a MAR on the grounds that new evidence unknown to the defendant at the time of trial entitles them to some relief, as long as the motion is filed within a reasonable time.
G.S. 15A-1415 doesn't define what the "reasonable time" is, however. Do you have any information on that?
Is it your (well, Crystal Mangum's) claim that the Wecht document meets this requirement?
Anonymous guiowen said... Sidney, How many MARs have you filed so far?
January 10, 2023 at 12:00 PM
Hey, gui, mon ami.
This is the third MAR filed by Crystal. The first two MARs were assigned by Senior Resident Judge Orlando Hudson to the presiding trial Judge Paul Ridgeway at Mangum's trial who denied them.
dhall said... Dr. Harr -- I am referring to toxicology studies from the night Crystal Mangum visited DUMC. So, it is regarding the 2006 Duke Lacrosse case.
Kenhyderal and I discussed this at some length recently.
January 10, 2023 at 6:25 AM
Hey, dhall.
I realized that after I began my answer, so I just added that I didn't really study the Duke Lacrosse case with intensity.
dhall said... Dr. Harr -- WRT the new Motion for Appropriate Relief, my understanding is that (according to G.S. 15A-1415(c) ), the defendant can file a MAR on the grounds that new evidence unknown to the defendant at the time of trial entitles them to some relief, as long as the motion is filed within a reasonable time.
G.S. 15A-1415 doesn't define what the "reasonable time" is, however. Do you have any information on that?
Is it your (well, Crystal Mangum's) claim that the Wecht document meets this requirement?
January 10, 2023 at 6:52 AM
Hey, dhall.
Dr. Wecht's response to the Twenty Affirmatives on November 18, 2022, in light of the fact that the NC Chief Medical Examiner Dr. Michelle Aurelius refuses to answer them, is the basis for new evidence that is the timely basis for this third MAR filed by Crystal Mangum.
"G.S. 15A -1415(c) allows defendants to file a motion for appropriate relief to introduce new evidence that was not nor with reasonable efforts could not have been, discovered prior to trial."
Neither Dr. Wecht's opinion piece or his affirmatives response are "new evidence" -- They're using the same evidence from the original trial, but drawing a different conclusion. There's also the fact that Dr. Wecht's opinions could have been obtained prior to the trial by the exercise of reasonable diligence.
There's no legal order to force the NC OCME to respond (nor a commitment to respond) to your affirmatives, so Dr. Aurelius' non-response isn't "new evidence" either.
I just don't see how these can be considered a "basis for this third MAR filed by Crystal Mangum".
It's beyond obvious she needs true legal representation. Getting this representation should be your goal, not filing meaningless lawsuits for her.
Anonymous said... Sid - You gonna Namath-guarantee this MAR?
Does it contain an endgame packet? Crying towels?
The road goes on forever and the party never ends.
January 11, 2023 at 7:55 PM
Hey, Anony.
No can Namath-guarantee regarding Mangum's release because the State is not acting in good-faith. I gave benefit of the doubt to the State when I averred that Mangum would be released before Christmas, but the Chief Medical Examiner has refused to complete the Affirmatives that would lay groundwork for Mangum to be released and receive justice.
"G.S. 15A -1415(c) allows defendants to file a motion for appropriate relief to introduce new evidence that was not nor with reasonable efforts could not have been, discovered prior to trial."
Neither Dr. Wecht's opinion piece or his affirmatives response are "new evidence" -- They're using the same evidence from the original trial, but drawing a different conclusion. There's also the fact that Dr. Wecht's opinions could have been obtained prior to the trial by the exercise of reasonable diligence.
There's no legal order to force the NC OCME to respond (nor a commitment to respond) to your affirmatives, so Dr. Aurelius' non-response isn't "new evidence" either.
I just don't see how these can be considered a "basis for this third MAR filed by Crystal Mangum".
It's beyond obvious she needs true legal representation. Getting this representation should be your goal, not filing meaningless lawsuits for her.
January 11, 2023 at 12:05 PM
Hey, dhall.
Your well-intentioned suggestion that Mangum needs an attorney would only shrink my bank account and fatten the wallet of an attorney who would undoubtedly sabotage Mangum's case. That suggestion is not even on the table. All her past attorneys have allowed her to be convicted for a crime that was never committed. Besides, I tried to get her an attorney but the innocence projects and civil rights/social justice organization would not accept her as a client.
Can you give me the name of an attorney who would be willing to talk to me about Mangum's case?
Dr. Harr -- Did you purposely choose not to address the issues I brought up regarding G.S. 15A -1415(c)?
With regards to attorneys, no attorney I know would be willing to talk to you about Mangum's case. Because they don't practice law in North Carolina, any legal advice they gave you would be considered unauthorized practice of law.
You already know someone with a JD (from one of the top 50 law schools in America) who could point you in the right direction....Cyril Wecht.
Granted, he may not be able to practice law in North Carolina either, but surely the "world's most eminent medico-legal expert" can identify a legal resource for you.
As for "sabotag[ing] Mangum's case", any lawyer you find could do no worse that what you've done thus far.
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!"
The road goes on forever and the party never ends.
Nifong Supporter said... HEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP!! IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT!
You can consider yesterday, September 9, 2020, the beginning of the end of the manifest injustice by the state, courts, and media against Crystal Mangum. An event took place which I believe will be instrumental in resulting in Crystal's freedom and exoneration.
I will expose this major development in a post by this Sunday, September 13th at noon.
This is the first of several special secret projects that is underway. They will be revealed shortly.
P.S. For Mangum/Nifong detractors -- if you don't know where your crying towel is, I would suggest you either start looking for it or shop for a new one. Of course, you can always order one from me.
As you were.
September 10, 2020 at 12:48 PM
The road goes on forever and the party never ends.
I'm a senior citizen who believes that the state of North Carolina has harshly, excessively, and unjustly treated former Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong.
61 comments:
Sid,
Thanksgiving was 27 days ago.
There are 4 days until Christmas.
Abe Froman
Chicago, IL
From your document:
"the Chief Medical Examiner...would review the Dr. Nichols autopsy report and issue a written report in exchange for Ms. Mangum voluntarily dismissing her lawsuit.....Mangum filed to dismiss her lawsuit on October 20, 2022."
You them later state that Mr. Schaeffer wrote a letter stating "...after Dr. Aurelius finished reviewing the documentation related to the case, she would give here opinion as to whether the cause and/or manner of death should by changed in the original report."
You go on to state "...he omitted mention of any commitment for Dr. Aurelius to complete the 20 affirmatives"
From what I've been able to find, there was no commitment to complete your questionnaire.
I can only conclude that Dr. Aurelius giving her opinion whether the original report should be changed meets the agreed upon requirements.
By all means, post the legal documents that contain what the agreed upon documents should be. I can only guess they'd be either in the motion to dismiss or the stipulation of dismissal documents.
Sid,
Thanksgiving was 28 days ago.
There are 3 days until Christmas.
Abe Froman
Chicago, IL
Merry Christmas, everyone.
Sid,
Thanksgiving was 29 days ago.
Christmas is in two days.
Abe Froman
Chicago, IL
Sid,
I will be travelling this weekend and may not be able to post comments. Therefore, I am publishing my comments for the next three days:
For December 24, 2022:
Sid,
Thanksgiving was 30 days ago.
Christmas is tomorrow.
Abe Froman
Chicago, IL
For December 25, 2022:
Sid,
Thanksgiving was 31 days ago.
Today is Christmas.
Abe Froman
Chicago IL
For December 26, 2022:
Sid,
Thanksgiving was 32 days ago.
It has been 1 day since Christmas.
Abe Froman
Chicago, IL
- Thus endeth the countdown -
Merry Christmas to everyone!
HEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP!!
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT!
To all commenters, visitors, and especially kenhyderal, Abe, Prince Humperdinck, dhall, Dr. Caligari, and others whom I failed to mention, Crystal and I (and my spoiled Siamese cat Adonis) hope that you have a wonderful Christmas and that the Year of 2023 finds you all happy and healthy.
Alas, I failed to get Crystal released by Christmas, but I had no chance when the NC Chief Medical Examiner refused to respond to a set of Affirmatives provided to her two months ago on October 24, 2022. Just demonstrates the cruelty and racism of the State.
dhall said...
From your document:
"the Chief Medical Examiner...would review the Dr. Nichols autopsy report and issue a written report in exchange for Ms. Mangum voluntarily dismissing her lawsuit.....Mangum filed to dismiss her lawsuit on October 20, 2022."
You them later state that Mr. Schaeffer wrote a letter stating "...after Dr. Aurelius finished reviewing the documentation related to the case, she would give here opinion as to whether the cause and/or manner of death should by changed in the original report."
You go on to state "...he omitted mention of any commitment for Dr. Aurelius to complete the 20 affirmatives"
From what I've been able to find, there was no commitment to complete your questionnaire.
I can only conclude that Dr. Aurelius giving her opinion whether the original report should be changed meets the agreed upon requirements.
By all means, post the legal documents that contain what the agreed upon documents should be. I can only guess they'd be either in the motion to dismiss or the stipulation of dismissal documents.
December 21, 2022 at 12:15 PM
Hey, dhall.
The assurances given by the Assistant Attorney General John Schaeffer was that the Chief Medical Examiner Dr. Michelle Aurelius would review the Nichols autopsy report and issue a written report. The discovery process in a lawsuit includes depositions, interrogatories, and affirmatives. I felt it necessary to include the affirmatives to support facts of the case that are exculpatory for Mangum... the necessity due to the likely omissions of key factors of the case such as the errant esophageal intubation in treating Reginald Daye's delirium tremens, his cardiac arrest, his re-intubation, and his elective removal from life-support. I did not anticipate that the Chief Medical Examiner, who has refused to communicate with me, would refuse to respond to the affirmatives which do nothing more than direct attention to indisputable facts of the case.
I made the mistake by having Crystal enter into the agreement with the NC DOJ in good-faith, which I do not believe was reciprocated... especially as evidenced by the State's lack of attention given to the affirmatives.
In the great country of Canada, a veteran like Crystal Mangum would have been offered MAID service years ago.
Merry Christmas to Sid and Ken-ny.
Where is Ken-ny?
Uncalled for, FKE. The treatment of Veterans is no joking matter, regardless of their country.
Dr. Harr -- as you state, the "assurances given by the Assistant Attorney General John Schaeffer was that the Chief Medical Examiner Dr. Michelle Aurelius would review the Nichols autopsy report and issue a written report."
That's it. Unless you show otherwise, there is no need for your affirmatives -- regardless of number.
You go on to state that "The discovery process in a lawsuit includes depositions, interrogatories, and affirmatives.". That very well may be correct for the discovery phase. My understanding is that the "discovery process" is when litigating parties share information about witnesses and evidence to be presented at trial. This case never went to trial -- therefore there was no "discovery process".
Looking at the timeline, these "affirmatives" weren't presented to the NC DOJ until "on or about" Nov 1st -- after the motion to dismiss was filed. We have no idea when these went from the DOJ to the NC OCME, but we do know the stipulation of Dismissal was filed on Nov 7th, and the case was dismissed the following day.
Again, I see no reason why the NC OCME has to respond to your affirmatives. Unless you are willing to post the Motion to Dismiss and the Stipulation of Dismissal that prove otherwise.
As I posted and as Dr. Caligari agreed, there's nothing you can do to compel the NC OCME to complete these documents.
The ME was never going to respond to your questionnaire and there is no way for you or Mangum to compel her to do so. Certainly not in the context of the lawsuit you recently agreed to dismiss or any other lawsuit you or Mangum may file seeking to compel the ME to review its findings re: Mr. Daye's death.
And Froman
Chicago, IL
Happy New Year Sid and Ken-ny.
Still waiting for some documentation from the court on this statement:
"....In the Kinsley case, Mangum agreed to a Stipulation to Dismiss her case in exchange for the State agreeing to provide a written report in review of the Dr. Nichols autopsy report on Reginald Daye. Mangum was given assurances that by accepting this proposal offered by the State, the final report would be issued much more expeditiously. As part of this process, the State agreed to respond to the affirmatives...
Can you post the document where the State agreed to respond to your affirmatives?
Happy Birthday Ken-ny.
Happy New Year Ken-ny.
Ken-ny,
Have you found the toxicology report?
Ken-ny,
Will 2023 be the year in which you reveal your secret plan to win Crystal a new trial?
Ken-ny,
Please also provide an update regarding your secret place to win compensation for Crystal from N.C
Ken-ny,
I am correcting the typo. Please also provide an update regarding your secret plan to win compensation for Crystal from N.C.
Ken-ny,
Have you completed your research on the statute of limitations issue that you claimed was raised by one of Sid’s LOL lawsuits?
"You should start getting used to the likelihood that in short order time-wise Crystal Mangum will be freed, that she will be exonerated on the second degree murder conviction, and that she will be compensated for her damages inflicted by the state and others. Please try to prepare yourselves mentally before the day of justice-reckoning arrives... and don't forget to place an order for a crying towel"
Sidney Harr, June 28, 2016 at 6:34 AM
The road goes on forever and the party never ends.
"HEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP!
STATEMENTS OF ENLIGHTENMENT!
I am hopeful we will soon be able to devote more time discussing the Shan Carter case with my strong belief that Crystal Mangum's conviction will soon be overturned and she set free."
Sidney Harr, November 5, 2015 at 12:58 PM
The road goes on forever and the party never ends
"Walt, I may have lost a few legal skirmishes, but the war will be won when the Durham prosecutors are forced to drop charges against Mangum. It's only a matter of time."
Sidney Harr, March 1, 2013 at 1:35 PM
The road goes on forever and the party never ends.
Ken-ny,
When will you identify the mystery rapists?
Don't forget -- Kenny had mystery witnesses that needed to be called for Mangum's "new trial", too.
Kenny knows a lot of mystery witnesses. He just can't name them, and he's afraid that if he gives the names to Sid, they'll end up posted here just like other privileged information.
Quite the conundrum, unless CGM gets a lawyer, right Kenny?
Dr. Harr,
Did you hear back from Professor Coleman?
Anonymous Nifong Supporter Supporter said...
Dr. Harr,
Did you hear back from Professor Coleman?
January 5, 2023 at 6:33 AM
Hey, Nifong Double Supporter.
No, I never heard back, and did not expect to hear from him. If I do, I will let you know.
Dr. Harr,
Do you know why kenhyderal is not posting? I am concerned by his absence.
Where is the toxicology report?
Sid - Are you waiting for Kenny to post your proof that the State agreed to respond to your affirmatives?
dhall,
Has Kenny delivered the toxicology report to you?
Sid,
How many responses have you received to the Five Affirmatives? Does anyone agree with you? Why won’t you publish the responses?
I have seen nothing from either Kenhyderal or Dr. Harr regarding toxicology reports.
Anonymous Anonymous said...
Sid,
How many responses have you received to the Five Affirmatives? Does anyone agree with you? Why won’t you publish the responses?
January 9, 2023 at 10:03 AM
Hey, Anony.
I received a total of ten replies for the Twenty Affirmatives... none from the government officials, and I received no reply for the Five Affirmatives.
All of the responses were straight-line yes/agree, no/disagree, and one was straight-line unsure. When I sent thank-you e-mails to those responding, none were able to be delivered, so I can't vouch for the authenticity. Therefore, because of the low number of responses, I do not believe the results are worth publishing.
dhall said...
I have seen nothing from either Kenhyderal or Dr. Harr regarding toxicology reports.
January 9, 2023 at 12:00 PM
Hey, dhall.
I am assuming that you're referring to the blood alcohol level of Daye on his admission to the hospital on April 3, 2011? I've posted it on this site before... I believe. It does exist.
If you are referring to toxicology studies on Mangum regarding the 2006 Duke Lacrosse case, then I have no information about that. I have never really focused on that case.
HEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP!!!
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT!
Yesterday, on behalf of Crystal Mangum, I manually filed with the Durham Superior Court's Criminal Division a Motion for Appropriate Relief (MAR). I will try and have the brief and its exhibits posted by week's end.
As you were.
Dr. Harr -- I am referring to toxicology studies from the night Crystal Mangum visited DUMC. So, it is regarding the 2006 Duke Lacrosse case.
Kenhyderal and I discussed this at some length recently.
Dr. Harr -- WRT the new Motion for Appropriate Relief, my understanding is that (according to G.S. 15A-1415(c) ), the defendant can file a MAR on the grounds that new evidence unknown to the defendant at the time of trial entitles them to some relief, as long as the motion is filed within a reasonable time.
G.S. 15A-1415 doesn't define what the "reasonable time" is, however. Do you have any information on that?
Is it your (well, Crystal Mangum's) claim that the Wecht document meets this requirement?
Is Abe ready for another countdown?
Sidney,
How many MARs have you filed so far?
Anonymous guiowen said...
Sidney,
How many MARs have you filed so far?
January 10, 2023 at 12:00 PM
Hey, gui, mon ami.
This is the third MAR filed by Crystal. The first two MARs were assigned by Senior Resident Judge Orlando Hudson to the presiding trial Judge Paul Ridgeway at Mangum's trial who denied them.
dhall said...
Dr. Harr -- I am referring to toxicology studies from the night Crystal Mangum visited DUMC. So, it is regarding the 2006 Duke Lacrosse case.
Kenhyderal and I discussed this at some length recently.
January 10, 2023 at 6:25 AM
Hey, dhall.
I realized that after I began my answer, so I just added that I didn't really study the Duke Lacrosse case with intensity.
dhall said...
Dr. Harr -- WRT the new Motion for Appropriate Relief, my understanding is that (according to G.S. 15A-1415(c) ), the defendant can file a MAR on the grounds that new evidence unknown to the defendant at the time of trial entitles them to some relief, as long as the motion is filed within a reasonable time.
G.S. 15A-1415 doesn't define what the "reasonable time" is, however. Do you have any information on that?
Is it your (well, Crystal Mangum's) claim that the Wecht document meets this requirement?
January 10, 2023 at 6:52 AM
Hey, dhall.
Dr. Wecht's response to the Twenty Affirmatives on November 18, 2022, in light of the fact that the NC Chief Medical Examiner Dr. Michelle Aurelius refuses to answer them, is the basis for new evidence that is the timely basis for this third MAR filed by Crystal Mangum.
Dr. Harr --
"G.S. 15A -1415(c) allows defendants to file a motion for appropriate relief to introduce new evidence that was not nor with reasonable efforts could not have been, discovered prior to trial."
Neither Dr. Wecht's opinion piece or his affirmatives response are "new evidence" -- They're using the same evidence from the original trial, but drawing a different conclusion. There's also the fact that Dr. Wecht's opinions could have been obtained prior to the trial by the exercise of reasonable diligence.
There's no legal order to force the NC OCME to respond (nor a commitment to respond) to your affirmatives, so Dr. Aurelius' non-response isn't "new evidence" either.
I just don't see how these can be considered a "basis for this third MAR filed by Crystal Mangum".
It's beyond obvious she needs true legal representation. Getting this representation should be your goal, not filing meaningless lawsuits for her.
Dr, Harr,
Now that the new MAR has been filed, are you predicting a date by which Crystal will be released?
Sid - You gonna Namath-guarantee this MAR?
Does it contain an endgame packet? Crying towels?
The road goes on forever and the party never ends.
Anonymous said...
Sid - You gonna Namath-guarantee this MAR?
Does it contain an endgame packet? Crying towels?
The road goes on forever and the party never ends.
January 11, 2023 at 7:55 PM
Hey, Anony.
No can Namath-guarantee regarding Mangum's release because the State is not acting in good-faith. I gave benefit of the doubt to the State when I averred that Mangum would be released before Christmas, but the Chief Medical Examiner has refused to complete the Affirmatives that would lay groundwork for Mangum to be released and receive justice.
Anonymous Harr Supporter said...
Dr, Harr,
Now that the new MAR has been filed, are you predicting a date by which Crystal will be released?
January 11, 2023 at 3:45 PM
Hey, Harr-Supporter.
Can't make guarantees when the State refuses to act responsibly or in good-faith.
dhall said...
Dr. Harr --
"G.S. 15A -1415(c) allows defendants to file a motion for appropriate relief to introduce new evidence that was not nor with reasonable efforts could not have been, discovered prior to trial."
Neither Dr. Wecht's opinion piece or his affirmatives response are "new evidence" -- They're using the same evidence from the original trial, but drawing a different conclusion. There's also the fact that Dr. Wecht's opinions could have been obtained prior to the trial by the exercise of reasonable diligence.
There's no legal order to force the NC OCME to respond (nor a commitment to respond) to your affirmatives, so Dr. Aurelius' non-response isn't "new evidence" either.
I just don't see how these can be considered a "basis for this third MAR filed by Crystal Mangum".
It's beyond obvious she needs true legal representation. Getting this representation should be your goal, not filing meaningless lawsuits for her.
January 11, 2023 at 12:05 PM
Hey, dhall.
Your well-intentioned suggestion that Mangum needs an attorney would only shrink my bank account and fatten the wallet of an attorney who would undoubtedly sabotage Mangum's case. That suggestion is not even on the table. All her past attorneys have allowed her to be convicted for a crime that was never committed. Besides, I tried to get her an attorney but the innocence projects and civil rights/social justice organization would not accept her as a client.
Can you give me the name of an attorney who would be willing to talk to me about Mangum's case?
Dr. Harr -- Did you purposely choose not to address the issues I brought up regarding G.S. 15A -1415(c)?
With regards to attorneys, no attorney I know would be willing to talk to you about Mangum's case. Because they don't practice law in North Carolina, any legal advice they gave you would be considered unauthorized practice of law.
You already know someone with a JD (from one of the top 50 law schools in America) who could point you in the right direction....Cyril Wecht.
Granted, he may not be able to practice law in North Carolina either, but surely the "world's most eminent medico-legal expert" can identify a legal resource for you.
As for "sabotag[ing] Mangum's case", any lawyer you find could do no worse that what you've done thus far.
To quote guiowen::
Here we go 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!"
The road goes on forever and the party never ends.
"Besides, I tried to get her an attorney but the innocence projects and civil rights/social justice organization would not accept her as a client."
Wanna know why?
https://abc11.com/archive/8643409/
Nifong Supporter said...
HEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP!!
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT!
You can consider yesterday, September 9, 2020, the beginning of the end of the manifest injustice by the state, courts, and media against Crystal Mangum. An event took place which I believe will be instrumental in resulting in Crystal's freedom and exoneration.
I will expose this major development in a post by this Sunday, September 13th at noon.
This is the first of several special secret projects that is underway. They will be revealed shortly.
P.S. For Mangum/Nifong detractors -- if you don't know where your crying towel is, I would suggest you either start looking for it or shop for a new one. Of course, you can always order one from me.
As you were.
September 10, 2020 at 12:48 PM
The road goes on forever and the party never ends.
Sid,
You should contact Attorney Sidney Powell, who posted several times last year on your blog.
Sid,
Will your close friend Professor Coleman recommend an attorney?
Looks like Sid never graduated from Harr Law School....
Sid,
Did Kenny work with you on the latest MAR?
Right on kennyhyderal.
Sid,
Where’s the MAR?
Post a Comment