Timeline: Most recent at top
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
258 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 258 of 258Are we certain that Cousin Kenny is from Canada?
@ Anonymous 7-20-23 5:24 AM The Fraser Institute is Canada's version of Fox News. Everytime a Canadian dies while waiting for treatment they scream about the evils of Single Payer Universal Health Care; which b.t.w. delivers a superior heallth care to Canadians, on the whole, than the predatory Insurance Industry in America provides. On a pro-rated basis more Americans die because of lack of Health Care than Canadians do on a waiting list. And,no Canadian ever goes broke because of health issues. All health care costs 100% covered. No caps, no denials. No fine print.
Right on Cousin Kenny.
KENHYDERAL,
I’M BACK.
Sidney,
What is the status of your most recent secret project?
"no Canadian ever goes broke because of health issues. All health care costs 100% covered. No caps, no denials. No fine print"
O Canada! Our home and native land!
True patriot love thou dost in us command.
We see thee rising fair, dear land,
The True North, strong and free;
And stand on guard, O Canada,
We stand on guard for thee.....
If you're a military veteran, they'll offer you MAID for healthcare issues like PTSD. SO much for "A lasting, rich reward"....
Anonymous Anonymous said...
Sid,
When will you share with us your latest secret project?
July 16, 2023 at 9:24 AM
Hey, Anony.
One of my latest secret projects will likely be posted on this blog site before the end of the week.
Anonymous Nana D. said...
Sidney,
What is the status of your most recent secret project?
July 22, 2023 at 9:01 AM
Hey, Nana D.
One of my secret projects will hopefully be completed today, filed tomorrow, and uploaded by the end of the week.
Anonymous Anonymous said...
Sid,
Why won’t you release comments?
July 19, 2023 at 3:25 PM
Hey, Anony.
I release all comments that are in compliance with the kenhyderal Doctrine. However, Anony-comments, which are silly or written for the purpose of discrediting the seriousness of the blog site, may be subjected to delayed posting or non-posting. The best way to assure the immediate posting of a comment is to have a moniker of some sort attached to the comment and not submit as "Anonymous."
One would think that the best way to assure immediate posting would be to post comments that are relevant to the subject at hand, rather than statements attacking or defending Canada.
KENHYDERAL:
I SENT AN EMAIL TO YOU AT KENHYDERAL@YAHOO.COM. I HAVE THE INFORMATION ABOUT THE PARTY.
HEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP!!
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT!
Within the day I hope to add additional documents to this entry. Also will rearrange the documents in a timeline with the most recent at the top.
Meanwhile, much work is being done on secret projects, some of which you will be aware of by the end of August.
As you were.
KENHYDERAL,
WHY WON’T YOU RESPOND TO MY EMAIL?
The person posting as THE GREAT KILGO is a fraud. As a result of my posts, Kilgo fled from this blog many years ago because I proved there was no basis for any of his claims. We have seen the last of Kilgo and I am confident he will never return.
Did you file 2 motions for Summary Judgment Based on Rule 36(a)(3) in the Mangum v. Aurelius case (one on July 10, then another on July 17)?
If so, why? I'm pretty sure the the first motion still stands until it's ruled on.
I've heard of situations where this was done when the motion for summary judgment was denied, but then there was a judge change. From what I can see, your original motion wasn't denied (or was it, and you haven't told us yet)?
Anonymous Tyrone Rugen said...
Did you file 2 motions for Summary Judgment Based on Rule 36(a)(3) in the Mangum v. Aurelius case (one on July 10, then another on July 17)?
If so, why? I'm pretty sure the the first motion still stands until it's ruled on.
I've heard of situations where this was done when the motion for summary judgment was denied, but then there was a judge change. From what I can see, your original motion wasn't denied (or was it, and you haven't told us yet)?
July 25, 2023 at 10:52 AM
Hey, Tyrone Rugen.
Yes. I filed the Summary Judgment on Rule 36 on July 10, 2023 when I believed that the State did not timely file a response to the Requests for Admission. Then, on July 13th I learned that a response had been timely filed to the Requests on June 28, 2023. So, on July 14, 2023, I filed, on behalf of Mangum, a Motion to Dismiss the Summary Judgment on Rule 36. Later, I realized that the State's Response to Requests was filed only with the NC Office of Administrative Hearings and not with the U.S. District Court. Because of that, I re-filed the Motion for Summary Judgment on Rule 36 in the U.S. District Court on July 17th.
Let me know if further elucidation is required.
Note: On July 24th, yesterday, I filed with the NC Office of Administrative Hearings, on behalf of Ms. Mangum, a Motion for Summary Judgment based on Respondent's Responses. It will hopefully be posted later this evening.
You lost me Sid….
The motion to dismiss filed on July 14th appears to have been filed by Dr. Aurelius, not by you or CGM.
Not surprisingly, Dr. Harr was dismissed as a petitioner in Crystal Mangum’s appeal to the OAC following Dr. Aurelius’ decision not to change Daye’s autopsy report/death certificate.
Surprisingly, the dismissal was ordered on the same day I stated he would be dismissed.
Perhaps Judge Nelson reads your blog, Dr. Harr….
I quickly read through your July 24 document. The part I found interesting wasn’t the analysis/arguments. Rather, it was your “need for urgency” statement that Crystal Mangum was refused access to her medical record (specifically her colonoscopy report).
Crystal Mangum has every right to review her medical/dental records as an inmate. It’s well documented in 28 CFR § 513.42.
Requests to review these medical records must go to a prison staff member designated by the warden, however, not Todd Ishee.
I’d also point out that “review” does not mean “possess”, and this federal regulation only gives her the ability to review these documents, not you.
dhall said...
I quickly read through your July 24 document. The part I found interesting wasn’t the analysis/arguments. Rather, it was your “need for urgency” statement that Crystal Mangum was refused access to her medical record (specifically her colonoscopy report).
Crystal Mangum has every right to review her medical/dental records as an inmate. It’s well documented in 28 CFR § 513.42.
Requests to review these medical records must go to a prison staff member designated by the warden, however, not Todd Ishee.
I’d also point out that “review” does not mean “possess”, and this federal regulation only gives her the ability to review these documents, not you.
July 25, 2023 at 7:14 PM
Hey, dhall.
Thanks for the info on the Statute. Will follow-up on it immediately. Crystal and I both appreciate legal assistance from blog site commenters since we are not legally trained.
Anonymous Tyrone Rugen said...
You lost me Sid….
The motion to dismiss filed on July 14th appears to have been filed by Dr. Aurelius, not by you or CGM.
July 25, 2023 at 5:21 PM
Hey Tyrone Rugen.
I am unaware of Dr. Aurelius filing any document with the NC Office of Administrative Hearings on July 14, 2023. However, I filed, on behalf of Mangum, to dismiss her Motion for Summary Judgment on July 14th in the courts of the NC Office of Administrative Hearings and the U.S. District Court... in the mistaken belief that Aurelius had timely answered the Requests for Admission in both courts.
So, you have 2 motions for summary judgment filed in the Mangum v. Aurelius case (the one in North Carolina Eastern District Court) because you can’t keep the legal cases straight.
For your own future reference, Mangum v. Aurelius is the civil rights case.
Mangum c. NC DHHS is the contested case petition before the OAH.
The timeline in Mangum v. Aurelius (the civil case before the Eastern District Court) looks like this:
July 10th- MOTION for Summary Judgment Based on Rule 36(a)(3) filed on behalf of CGM
July 14th- MOTION to dismiss your motion for summary judgment filed by Dr. Aurelius.
July 17th- MOTION for Summary Judgment Based on Rule 36(a)(3) filed (again) on behalf of CGM.
…And you and Kenny wonder why people keep stating that CGM needs a real lawyer.
WRONGO UBES. IT’S ME, YOUR WORST NIGHTMARE.
SPIN UBES SPIN.
Just a quick follow-up.
I believe that if Crystal Mangum wants a physical copy of her medical record, she has to go through the process as she was told (that is, the medical record can only be released to her legal counsel once a valid authorization for release of information is submitted).
https://files.nc.gov/ncdps/div/Prisons/Policy_Procedure_Manual/D.0600-Access-to-Information-Inmate-Records.pdf
This is MY interpretation of the NCPDS policy and 28 CFR § 513.42, and should NOT be considered in any way legal advice or assistance.
You SHOULD check with an actual lawyer before any attempt by Crystal Mangum to access those medical records.
dhall said...
Just a quick follow-up.
I believe that if Crystal Mangum wants a physical copy of her medical record, she has to go through the process as she was told (that is, the medical record can only be released to her legal counsel once a valid authorization for release of information is submitted).
https://files.nc.gov/ncdps/div/Prisons/Policy_Procedure_Manual/D.0600-Access-to-Information-Inmate-Records.pdf
This is MY interpretation of the NCPDS policy and 28 CFR § 513.42, and should NOT be considered in any way legal advice or assistance.
You SHOULD check with an actual lawyer before any attempt by Crystal Mangum to access those medical records.
July 26, 2023 at 12:00 PM
Hey, dhall.
Not to worry. Neither Crystal nor I will hold you accountable for any comments whether they be advice or suggestions. We appreciate your taking the time to address Mangum's plight.
From what I understand from your interpretation and from the policy which you referenced, only inmates who have legal counsel are able to get access to their medical records through their State Bar-accredited lawyers, and therefore Crystal will never be able to see her medical records... even when she is acting as her own attorney.
I will help Crystal comply with the State's policy. It should have been State agents or prison staff's responsibility to alert Crystal and/or me to procedures required for obtaining a copy of her medical records. I am grateful for all blog commenters' efforts that provide helpful information in this case.
CGM should check with legal aid of North Carolina….Assuming you haven’t burned that bridge already.
Sid, why do you keep citing to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in State Administrative and Court proceedings? They are totally irrelevant and do not apply.
dhall said...
Just a quick follow-up.
I believe that if Crystal Mangum wants a physical copy of her medical record, she has to go through the process as she was told (that is, the medical record can only be released to her legal counsel once a valid authorization for release of information is submitted).
https://files.nc.gov/ncdps/div/Prisons/Policy_Procedure_Manual/D.0600-Access-to-Information-Inmate-Records.pdf
This is MY interpretation of the NCPDS policy and 28 CFR § 513.42, and should NOT be considered in any way legal advice or assistance.
You SHOULD check with an actual lawyer before any attempt by Crystal Mangum to access those medical records.
July 26, 2023 at 12:00 PM
Hey, dhall.
I sent a letter to NCCIW Warden Anthony Perry along with an authorization for release of medical information by Mangum... with copies to NC DPS Secretary Eddie Buffaloe and NC Commissioner of Prisons Todd Ishee. Will see if this gets results or ignored.
HEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP!
IMPORTANT INFORMATION!!
Regarding one secret project, look up Crystal Mangum on Wikipedia.
As you were.
"I sent a letter to NCCIW Warden Anthony Perry..."
As I read the policy, the medical records "may be released to an attending physician or legal counsel of an inmate (or former inmate) with a valid authorization for release of information"
I interpret this to mean that the medical records cannot be released to you, so if that's what you're letter is requesting, don't be surprised if your request is denied.
I agree with the Prince -- Crystal Mangum should check with legal aid of North Carolina.
Your "secret project" was modifying CGM's entry on Wikipedia?
That's about the worst thing I've ever heard.
Your latest edits were removed within 2 hours of your changes.
[pause]
How marvelous.
Sid,
Give us a hint.
What are we looking for in Wiki?
You editing your nonsense onto Crystal's page is supposed to do what?
Sidney added this:
"On July 1, 2019, Dr. Sidney B. Harr, an advocate for Mangum, retained world-renowned forensic pathologist Dr. Cyril H. Wecht to review Mangum's murder case with emphasis on the April 14, 2011 autopsy report by NC Deputy Chief Medical Examiner Dr. Clay Nichols -- which served as the basis for Mangum's prosecution and conviction. On October 25, 2019, three months after receiving materials from Harr about Mangum's case, Dr. Wecht issued his [http://www.justice4nifong.com/exhibit/uLhtm20_n/htm20_n.htm eight-page report] which contained two seminal determinants: (1) the manner of Daye's death was an '''''accident''''' secondary to his alcoholism and an errant esophageal intubation by Duke University Hospital staff and '''''not''''' a homicide secondary to "complications of a stab wound to his chest;" and (2) the opinions of Dr. Nichols regarding Daye's cause and manner of death were unreliable due to "significant inconsistencies" between Nichols' autopsy report and Daye's medical/hospital records. Ramification of Dr. Wecht's report is that Mangum was prosecuted, convicted, and is serving a prison sentence for a crime which was not committed."
I saw the edits you attempted to make on Crystal Mangum's WIKI page.
My thought on why these edits were removed.
One of the 5 pillars of Wikipedia is that it is written from a neutral point of view. As Wikipedia states:
"We strive for articles in an impartial tone that document and explain major points of view, giving due weight for their prominence. We avoid advocacy , and we characterize information and issues rather than debate them...All articles must strive for verifiable accuracy, citing reliable, authoritative sources, especially when the topic...is about a living person...".
In your editing, you identified yourself as "an advocate for Mangum", violating Wikipedia's policies of avoiding advocacy. Strike 1.
The only source you cited (via link) was this blog - a blog created by an admitted "advocate for Mangum". I shouldn't have to be the one to tell you, this blog is NOT considered a "reliable, authoritative source". Strike 2.
Given the lack of neutral tone and impartiality and the failure to cite adequate sources, we are left with an edit that is nothing more than your opinion.
And as Wikipedia notes, "Editors' personal experiences, interpretations, or opinions do not belong on Wikipedia." Strike 3 -- You (or more appropriately, your edits) are out.
A Durham Man -- Dr. Harr's (attempted) edit was removed from Mangum's wiki entry approximately 1.5 hrs after he made it, so you can only see what's changed if you compare the current revision against the previous.
To save everyone else some time, here's the text of Dr. Harr's attempted edit:
"On July 1, 2019, Dr. Sidney B. Harr, an advocate for Mangum, retained world-renowned forensic pathologist Dr. Cyril H. Wecht to review Mangum's murder case with emphasis on the April 14, 2011 autopsy report by NC Deputy Chief Medical Examiner Dr. Clay Nichols -- which served as the basis for Mangum's prosecution and conviction. On October 25, 2019, three months after receiving materials from Harr about Mangum's case, Dr. Wecht issued his [http://www.justice4nifong.com/exhibit/uLhtm20_n/htm20_n.htm eight-page report] which contained two seminal determinants: (1) the manner of Daye's death was an '''''accident''''' secondary to his alcoholism and an errant esophageal intubation by Duke University Hospital staff and '''''not''''' a homicide secondary to "complications of a stab wound to his chest;" and (2) the opinions of Dr. Nichols regarding Daye's cause and manner of death were unreliable due to "significant inconsistencies" between Nichols' autopsy report and Daye's medical/hospital records. Ramification of Dr. Wecht's report is that Mangum was prosecuted, convicted, and is serving a prison sentence for a crime which was not committed."
For reasons I previously outlined, this text was removed.
Sid,
I have two questions for you:
1. Is the one-paragraph insert to Wiki the secret project you have been working on for the past two months?
2. Is Wiki controlled by Rae Evans?
Anonymous A Durham Man said...
Sid,
I have two questions for you:
1. Is the one-paragraph insert to Wiki the secret project you have been working on for the past two months?
2. Is Wiki controlled by Rae Evans?
July 28, 2023 at 4:07 PM
Hey, A Durham Man.
Regarding 1. : No. That project was seriously under consideration within the past week.
Regarding 2. : I do not know.
What did you think changing CGM’s wiki page would do?
dhall said...
I saw the edits you attempted to make on Crystal Mangum's WIKI page.
My thought on why these edits were removed.
One of the 5 pillars of Wikipedia is that it is written from a neutral point of view. As Wikipedia states:
"We strive for articles in an impartial tone that document and explain major points of view, giving due weight for their prominence. We avoid advocacy , and we characterize information and issues rather than debate them...All articles must strive for verifiable accuracy, citing reliable, authoritative sources, especially when the topic...is about a living person...".
In your editing, you identified yourself as "an advocate for Mangum", violating Wikipedia's policies of avoiding advocacy. Strike 1.
The only source you cited (via link) was this blog - a blog created by an admitted "advocate for Mangum". I shouldn't have to be the one to tell you, this blog is NOT considered a "reliable, authoritative source". Strike 2.
Given the lack of neutral tone and impartiality and the failure to cite adequate sources, we are left with an edit that is nothing more than your opinion.
And as Wikipedia notes, "Editors' personal experiences, interpretations, or opinions do not belong on Wikipedia." Strike 3 -- You (or more appropriately, your edits) are out.
July 28, 2023 at 1:10 PM
Hey, dhall.
Thanks for your comments and reposting the edit I made to Wikipedia.
My belief is that the paragraph I submitted and was initially published is extremely objective, and the link substantiates the core issue of the edit.
According to your Strike One, because I am an advocate for Mangum I cannot submit an edit on her page?
Regarding your Strike Two, the link provided used my domain site and was directed specifically to a document by Dr. Wecht. The link did not go to my blog site. Misleading.
Regarding your Strike Three, I believe the paragraph objectively sited true facts... that I retained Dr. Wecht, Dr. Wecht produced an eight-page report, and that two germane determinants were mentioned. That the ramifications in Dr. Wecht's report may require interpretation, that single sentence could be deleted without removing the entire paragraph. Without the paragraph, the general public will not know that the world's foremost forensic pathologist weighed in on Mangum's case... something which the media, and evidently Wikipedia, want to be kept secreted from the general public.
Tyrone Rugen said...
Your "secret project" was modifying CGM's entry on Wikipedia?
That's about the worst thing I've ever heard.
Your latest edits were removed within 2 hours of your changes.
[pause]
How marvelous.
July 28, 2023 at 9:54 AM
Hey, Tyrone Rugen.
Why do you consider the removal of truthful and informative content from Mangum's page marvelous? Do you not want the general public to be aware of Dr. Wecht's input in Mangum's case? Do you believe that the Wikipedia Mangum page is better without the edit I published? I do not think my paragraph was problematic or controversial.
Wikipedia strives to avoid advocacy, and the standard for any submission is that it “must strive for verifiable accuracy, citing reliable, authoritative sources…”
Wikipedia removed your edit.
Therefore, your edit did not meet Wikipedia standards.
My opinion on why it was removed could very well be wrong, but the end result remains the same.
Wikipedia removed your edit.
That’s not Wikipedia’s fault. It’s yours.
But by all means, add Wikipedia to your growing list of co-conspirators.
Anonymous Anonymous said...
You editing your nonsense onto Crystal's page is supposed to do what?
July 28, 2023 at 11:49 AM
Hey, Anony.
My edit to Wikipedia's page on Mangum is supposed to enlighten the general public about some of the truths of Mangum's innocence that the media wants to keep secreted from the public. Now, it appears that Wikipedia wants to collude with the media and suppress the truths, as well. Shame on Wikipedia.
Prince Humperdinck said...
CGM should check with legal aid of North Carolina….Assuming you haven’t burned that bridge already.
July 26, 2023 at 3:36 PM
Hey, Prince Humperdinck.
Don't recall whether or not I contacted Legal Aid of North Carolina in the past. I will take your suggestion and reach out to the organization during the coming week.
Crystal and I appreciate your (and other commenters') recommendations/suggestions.
Sidney
Have you considered asking kenhyderal to add the new paragraph to Wikipedia? It may be that the Wikipedia editors targeted you but would accept the truth if it was delivered by kenhyderal.
Stating that “the link provided… was directed specifically to a document by Dr. Wecht…” is highly misleading.
Remove your comments and let the document speak for itself, otherwise it isn’t “a document by Dr. Wecht”.
Shame on you, Sid.
Consider yourself elucidated.
You should discuss the removal of your edits with the person that removed them before you start blaming Wikipedia for "collud[ing] with the media and suppress[ing] the truth".
You do know you can ask the person who removed your wiki edits why they removed them, right?
Sid,
I know you never care to learn anything that could actually help, but you do realize that the Requests for Admission in the Federal case only apply to that case, right? The fact you are trying to use them in the Admin hearing, and MARs, and the rest is totally legally incorrect.
This has been explained to you. You continue to ignore it.
Despite this, you demand special treatment, and Kenny whines about the fact you aren't getting it.
This is why most of us understand that you aren't really trying to help Crystal, you are just trying to make her think you are.
”Hey, Tyrone Rugen.
Why do you consider the removal of truthful and informative content from Mangum's page marvelous? Do you not want the general public to be aware of Dr. Wecht's input in Mangum's case? Do you believe that the Wikipedia Mangum page is better without the edit I published? I do not think my paragraph was problematic or controversial.”
Three words for you, Sid.
No.
Original.
Research.
“Wikipedia editors must not base their contributions on their own original research. Wikipedia editors must base their contributions on reliable, published sources.”
You didn’t even bother reading the Wiki guidelines before making your edits.
That's about the worst thing I've ever heard.
[pause]
How marvelous.
Anonymous @ July 29, 2023 at 2:13 PM:
“… you do realize that the Requests for Admission in the Federal case only apply to that case, right?”
Sid admits he doesn't bother using any legal tools available to him to assist with research, so….
Apparently, Sid doesn't bother to do any research regardless of what he does.
Read the rules for editing biographies on Wikipedia? No.
Read the rules for filing legal documents? No.
Read the policy for releasing inmate medical records? Apparently not (he won't tell us the contents of the letter HE sent -- which is already against policy rules).
I'm starting to agree with Anonymous @July 29, 2023 at 2:13 PM
Sid isn't really trying to help Crystal, he's just trying to make her think he is.
Hey Sid -- You ask the last editor of the CGM Wiki page why your edits were removed?
Anonymous Anonymous said...
Hey Sid -- You ask the last editor of the CGM Wiki page why your edits were removed?
July 31, 2023 at 6:50 AM
Hey, Anony.
Don't know how to engage editor or person responsible for removing my paragraph. Am waiting for my tech savvy daughter to enlighten me, then will tackle the problem with Wikipedia. Presently am busy working on another project... which might be uploaded on this blog site as soon as this coming weekend.
Sidney,
Why is kenhyderal no longer posting at your blog?
There's no shame in Wikipedia's edits.
Shame on you, Sid, for making your edits without bothering to read the guidelines for editing biographies.
In failing to read and understand those guidelines, your edits violated them.
It really is that simple.
Sidney:
What’s happening? It’s time for you to release another secret project.
Sidney,
Are you all right? Haven't heard from you in a week.
guiowen said...
Sidney,
Are you all right? Haven't heard from you in a week.
August 6, 2023 at 3:40 PM
Hey, gui, mon ami.
Thanks for the concern. Am doing okay, just very busy. Many filings recently and need to get Crystal ready for the September hearing. And will be trying to post some of the recent filings in all of Mangum's cases.
Post a Comment