Timeline: Most recent at top
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
258 comments:
1 – 200 of 258 Newer› Newest»Sid,
You should send a copy to the North Carolina State Bar.
Once again Dr. Harr clearly lays out the absolute innocence of, wrongly convicted, Crystal. He does so in a way anyone can understand and those that continue to insist Dr. Nicholls was correct are simply denying the undeniable and are doing so because of ill-will towards her. It brings forward the question of why The Justice System of North Carolina, despite her absolute innocence, wants to run out the clock and keep Crystal where she is as long as possible. They may be in hope that, once she is released the problem of their liability will go away but when the truth of her unjust persecution becomes known there will be a demand for accountability. Those in government who, thanks to Dr. Harr have known of her innocence all along will be in disgrace and the Public will be angry that because of them fairness will demand she be compensated from the public purse for all the years she has lost. Years that they knew, full well, she was innocent.
Right on kennyhyderal.
What happened to the countdown?
Fake Abe Froman
Chicago, IL
@ Fake Abe : Abe doesn't do his count-downs to inform us but simply to cruelly mock the hopes of those who seek justice for Crystal. He believes the odds are in his favor because he knows full well that those with power do not want to see the injustice done to Crystal revealed and they will wield that formidable power to make sure it doesn't happen. Both Abe and those with power should keep the words of Dr. King in mind abourt the arc of Justice, as history might eventually leave them in disgrace.
Where is Abe?
Sid ... why do you still mention felony murder? That is absolute proof that your efforts lack seriousness, as it has been repeatedly explained to you that it was never in play. This really is all just a cruel joke on Crystal to you, isn't it?
Are these for an appeal to Dr. Aurelius’ letter regarding her review of the data regarding Reginald Daye’s death?
If so, why didn’t you post the actual petition for contested case document as well?
I’m reposting this, as you didn’t respond in the comments from your previous blog entry (this is in regards to the claim that Mangum v. Aurelius was improperly served):
Anonymous @ May 13, 2023 at 6:08 AM has stated why the defendant was improperly served.
Can you respond to the claims within that comment?
Kenhyderal,
No one (except maybe Sidney Harr) believes any of what you say. For a while I thought you had a strong ally in Cyril Wecht. By now, I think we are all aware that Wecht just said a few things to get rid of your presence; by now he is unwilling even to repeat what he said.
Dr. Harr,
kenhyderal is trolling Abe Froman. It is time for you to adopt the Abe Froman Doctrine and ban all posters from your blog who are trolls.
And let's include in that Doctrine anyone who does not register at Google blogspot with a "user name" will be considered a troll
NO.
I put my name in my comments (as does Abe, guiowen, Rugen, Abe Froman Supporter, etc.)
You can see who's making the comment, so they shouldn't have to register w/ Google.
https://www.simpleanalytics.com/blog/does-google-sell-your-data
"Google monetizes personal data in other ways, some of which involve disclosing personal data to third parties. One of those ways is real-time bidding system (RTB) that powers Google Adsense."
Kenny and others may be OK with this, but I'm not.
"Once again Dr. Harr clearly lays out the absolute innocence of, wrongly convicted, Crystal. He does so in a way anyone can understand "
Except that:
1) He brings up Mike Nifong, who has NOTHING to do with Mangum's criminal trial
2) He brings up the Duke defendants (and the falsely reported settlement amount), which has NOTHING to do with Mangum's criminal trial
3) He brings up "felony murder" in regards to the Felony of Chose in Action count, when it has been shown time and time again that Felony of Chose in Action CANNOT be used to elevate a charge to Felony Murder.
I could go on -- but listing these issues simply doesn't matter to you or Sid.
Sid does more to harm Crystal Mangum's current situation than to help it.
And YOU support him.
That is about the worst thing I've ever heard.
[pause]
How marvelous.
OK Prince, as long as you monitor the blog and inform others if someone posts using your moniker. I would like to see, though, the end of using an other's moniker and tagging
it with supporter or even supporter-supporter. That just mockery and mischief making and it's confusing to those who are trying to respond. What do other think of this suggestion. Given the seriousness of this Unjust Situation, lets have serious discussion here.
Sid,
Kenny says you are a mischief maker because you call yourself “Nifong Supporter.”
I’m proud to post as kenhyderal supporter.
Anonymous Anonymous said...
Sid,
You should send a copy to the North Carolina State Bar.
May 21, 2023 at 10:24 AM
Hey, Anony.
The NC State Bar will not intervene in attorney misconduct in a case involving Crystal Mangum. Unfortunately, the group is not objective and independent... I do not believe the NC Judicial Standards Commission is objective and independent either.
Anonymous Anonymous said...
Sid ... why do you still mention felony murder? That is absolute proof that your efforts lack seriousness, as it has been repeatedly explained to you that it was never in play. This really is all just a cruel joke on Crystal to you, isn't it?
May 23, 2023 at 3:41 PM
Hey, Anony.
As I have been trying to impress, the "felony-murder rule" provides justification for elevating the murder from second to first-degree. First degree conviction is a mandatory life sentence, whereas second-degree is in a range from twelve years to life. Consider the fact that the "Larceny of Chose in Action" indictment was totally lacking in probable cause. The prosecution did not even try to argue the larceny charge at trial, and she was found not guilty on the two larceny counts.
To summarize, what the Larceny of Chose in Action charge represents is the malevolent extreme of State's hostility against the black Duke Lacrosse Accuser.
Hope this provides elucidation.
Sid,
What happened in the Oxygen Media case?
And as has been repeatedly explained - you are wrong on the felony murder rule. Larceny of a Chose in Action does not qualify as a predicate felony and cannot form the basis for felony murder. Yet you refuse to listen.
You are wrong.
dhall said...
Are these for an appeal to Dr. Aurelius’ letter regarding her review of the data regarding Reginald Daye’s death?
If so, why didn’t you post the actual petition for contested case document as well?
May 23, 2023 at 5:12 PM
Hey, dhall.
The Respondent's Prehearing Statement can be found here.
I did not include it because I addressed all nine items and did not feel that it added much. Also, I did not upload my Prehearing Statement because it consists of 47 pages and 288 pages of 75 exhibits of evidence. To upload it would take much time. I may do it later, but currently I have decided to begin work on a new sharlog.
dhall said...
I’m reposting this, as you didn’t respond in the comments from your previous blog entry (this is in regards to the claim that Mangum v. Aurelius was improperly served):
"Anonymous @ May 13, 2023 at 6:08 AM has stated why the defendant was improperly served.
Can you respond to the claims within that comment?
May 23, 2023 at 5:20 PM
"Anonymous said...
No, you served a lawyer, who had not agreed to accept service. Unless a lawyer states he represents someone, and says you can serve him, you cannot.
You served the attorney you had dealt with previously - there is no indication he is still representing them, nor that he said you can serve him.
So, your service is improper - and the Defendants are well within their rights to simply ignore you.
Are you elucidated?
May 13, 2023 at 6:08 AM"
Hey, dhall.
I'm not sure which service is referenced... the MAR or the federal lawsuit against Aurelius, et al.?
Regarding the federal lawsuit, Assistant Attorney General John Schaeffer is representing the defendants, as well as the Respondent in the Petition filed with the NC Office of Administrative Hearings.
Confirmation of its service is the January 30, 2023 signed USPS return receipt request card to the NC Assistant Attorney General.
Anonymous Tyrone Rugen said...
"Once again Dr. Harr clearly lays out the absolute innocence of, wrongly convicted, Crystal. He does so in a way anyone can understand "
Except that:
1) He brings up Mike Nifong, who has NOTHING to do with Mangum's criminal trial
2) He brings up the Duke defendants (and the falsely reported settlement amount), which has NOTHING to do with Mangum's criminal trial
3) He brings up "felony murder" in regards to the Felony of Chose in Action count, when it has been shown time and time again that Felony of Chose in Action CANNOT be used to elevate a charge to Felony Murder.
I could go on -- but listing these issues simply doesn't matter to you or Sid.
Sid does more to harm Crystal Mangum's current situation than to help it.
And YOU support him.
That is about the worst thing I've ever heard.
[pause]
How marvelous.
May 25, 2023 at 10:10 AM
Hey, Tyrone Rugen.
Regarding the mentioning of Nifong, I do not know the context in which it was used, but usually when referencing the former Durham district attorney I do so to exemplify the extreme animosity and vindictiveness of the State and media against him and Ms. Mangum.
Regarding the Duke Lacrosse defendants, again, I do not know the context in which I mentioned them. As a rule, I usually reference them to show the uncompromising support of the three defendants by the State and media.
Regarding the "felony-murder rule," Larceny of Chose in Action is a Class H felony... and a felony, whether Class A or Class H, is a felony. Therefore, I do not understand why you feel the felony-murder rule cannot be in play. Without any probable cause, why else would the State seek to indict and convict Ms. Mangum for the alleged theft of two cashier's checks which were of no use to her?
Sid,
What is the topic of your next sharlog? Will it contain any new information, or just rehash what you have published repeatedly in the past?
Dr. Harr - according to North Carolina G.S. 14-17(a), first-degree murder includes a homicide committed in the perpetration or attempted perpetration of any of the following felonies:
arson;
rape or a felony sex offense;
robbery;
kidnapping;
burglary; or
a felony committed or attempted with the use of a deadly weapon.
All of these felonies have 1 thing in common- violence.
Larceny of Chose in Action is not a violent crime, therefore it can’t be used to elevate a charge to felony murder. This has been discussed at length here on this blog. Lawyers have commented on this subject.
You repeatedly ignore them, to your own and Crystal Mangum’s detriment.
You apparently trust Dr. Cyril Wecht, Mike Nifong, and James Coleman —Why not simply ask one of them if larceny of chose in action can be used in this manner?
I eagerly await you posting their response.
Wait….You wrote these documents and “…do not know the context” in which they were used?
Show me where Nifong or the LAX three were mentioned during CGM’s murder trial - either by the prosecution,CGM’s defense attorney(s), a witness, the jury, or the judge.
Show me 1 case where “larceny of chose in action” was used to convict someone of felony murder.
It will probably be a rehash of felony murder, even though a class H felony like Larceny of Chose in Action cannot legally form the basis for felony murder.
This one issue is proof that Sid isn't serious about helping Crystal. He keeps arguing a fight that isn't real.
Anonymous Anonymous said...
Sid,
What is the topic of your next sharlog? Will it contain any new information, or just rehash what you have published repeatedly in the past?
May 27, 2023 at 6:46 AM
Hey, Anony.
I assume that some visitors to my blog site may not be as well versed in as you and other regulars, so I tend to rehash in order to enable those unfamiliar with the truths of Mangum's case to be able to understand. That said, the sharlog I have just begun working on today will contain a topic not given consideration in the past, and it will contain new exhibits of evidence never shown before. I think it will be one of the more important sharlogs I have produced. Hopefully it will be completed within a couple of weeks.
dhall said...
Dr. Harr - according to North Carolina G.S. 14-17(a), first-degree murder includes a homicide committed in the perpetration or attempted perpetration of any of the following felonies:
arson;
rape or a felony sex offense;
robbery;
kidnapping;
burglary; or
a felony committed or attempted with the use of a deadly weapon.
All of these felonies have 1 thing in common- violence.
Larceny of Chose in Action is not a violent crime, therefore it can’t be used to elevate a charge to felony murder. This has been discussed at length here on this blog. Lawyers have commented on this subject.
You repeatedly ignore them, to your own and Crystal Mangum’s detriment.
You apparently trust Dr. Cyril Wecht, Mike Nifong, and James Coleman —Why not simply ask one of them if larceny of chose in action can be used in this manner?
I eagerly await you posting their response.
May 27, 2023 at 9:26 AM
Hey, dhall.
As you stated with regards to first-degree murder: "according to North Carolina G.S. 14-17(a), first-degree murder includes a homicide committed in the perpetration or attempted perpetration of any of the following felonies:
arson;
rape or a felony sex offense;
robbery;
kidnapping;
burglary; or
a felony committed or attempted with the use of a deadly weapon."
The State's position is that Ms. Mangum committed a homicide while perpetrating the robbery of Daye's two cashier's checks. According to your quote of the statute, a first-degree murder is authorized when "a felony" is committed or attempted (Larceny of Chose in Action, although a Class H felony, is, nonetheless, a felony) with the use of a deadly weapon (a steak knife is considered a deadly weapon). The statute does not exclude lower level felonies, such as a Class H felony, so I do not see why the "felony-murder rule" is not applicable in Mangum's case.
Comprende, Amigo?
Tyrone Rugen said...
Wait….You wrote these documents and “…do not know the context” in which they were used?
Show me where Nifong or the LAX three were mentioned during CGM’s murder trial - either by the prosecution,CGM’s defense attorney(s), a witness, the jury, or the judge.
Show me 1 case where “larceny of chose in action” was used to convict someone of felony murder.
May 27, 2023 at 9:36 AM
Hey, Tyrone Rugen.
When I respond to comments (I'll try to reply every Saturday, and more frequently time permitted) I don't have documents before me and don't have time to look up documents referenced in comments, so I attempt to respond the best I can using memory. The more specific the question and identifiable the document referenced, will allow me to better respond more accurately. Keep in mind I have/had juggled many legal actions in the past, and at times can get confused or mix up one case with another, so specifics of the case will be helpful.
As far as Larceny of Chose in Action goes, it is an extremely rarely prosecuted charge... period. Nonetheless, though a Class H felony, it is still a felony and is applicable for use as a "felony-murder rule."
Sid,
You have three days to free Mangum.
Fake Abe Froman
Chicago, IL
Lawyers have stated otherwise on this blog, and you have chosen to ignore them.
Ask a lawyer you trust if your belief about larceny of chose in action is correct, then let us know their response.
Comprende, Amigo?
“ The State's position is that Ms. Mangum committed a homicide while perpetrating the robbery of Daye's two cashier's checks.”
Daye stated the he gave Mangum the checks before the stabbing.
There was no robbery committed when Daye was stabbed.
Everyone knows this. The State knows this. You lie about the state’s position when you make these ridiculous claims.
Kenny,
Do you believe that the next sharlog will be one of the most important yet?
Anonymous Anonymous said...
“ The State's position is that Ms. Mangum committed a homicide while perpetrating the robbery of Daye's two cashier's checks.”
Daye stated the he gave Mangum the checks before the stabbing.
There was no robbery committed when Daye was stabbed.
Everyone knows this. The State knows this. You lie about the state’s position when you make these ridiculous claims.
May 28, 2023 at 5:44 AM
Hey, Anony.
Thank you for making my point. "Daye gave Mangum the checks before the stabbing." Ergo, Mangum should never have been charged or indicted for Larceny of Chose in Action.
Truly, you are enlightened.
Fake Abe Froman,
Thank you for continuing the countdown.
Tyrone Rugen said...
Lawyers have stated otherwise on this blog, and you have chosen to ignore them.
Ask a lawyer you trust if your belief about larceny of chose in action is correct, then let us know their response.
Comprende, Amigo?
May 28, 2023 at 5:31 AM
The only lawyer I trust and a man whose integrity is beyond compromise is Dr. Cyril H. Wecht, and I choose not to waste his valuable time with such a question... especially in light of the fact she was found not guilty of the Class H felonies which were totally lacking in probable cause.
I would very much like to hear from any attorney why the charge was pursued in the first place by the State. Clearly the "felony-murder rule" makes the most logical reason for such a senseless indictment.
If you agree with my statement, then you agree that the felony of chose in action was never applicable for use as a "felony-murder rule.”
If the “State's position is that Ms. Mangum committed a homicide while perpetrating the robbery of Daye's two cashier's checks”, the charge would have been felony murder.
It wasn’t. No felony murder charge was ever brought against Mangum.
So thank you for making my point.
Sid - why the felony murder rule doesn't apply to you has been explained many times. You only keep flogging it because you want to lie to Crystal. It wasn't even included in the jury instructions.
And, yes, you served the attorney - as has been repeatedly explained - that is not proper service. You know that.
Just cause you keep repeating your totally debunked theories doesn't make them right.
You’ve heard from attorneys Walt and Dr. Caligari about larceny charge dating back to at least 2012, and chose to ignore them.
That’s on you, not any lawyer that comments here.
If you “… would very much like to hear from any attorney why the charge was pursued in the first place by the State... ” to see if felony murder was the logical reason for pursuing this charge, ask those lawyers you say you trust.
I await your posting of their response(s).
Walt on April 14, 2013 (in regards to Mangum's larceny of chose in action charge) :
"I regard it as an over-charge situation. The state is doing what Nifong, Cline and even back to the days of Hardin had a bad habit of doing, over-charging in hopes of getting an easy plea to what they should have charged in the first place."
Anonymous on Nov 2013:
"Listen to the instructions ... The jury was NOT instructed on felony murder. Period. It is not in play. The State didn't even argue the Larceny counts."
Anonymous On Nov 22, 2013:
"The larceny charge has been thought, by most of us, to be loose and weak. However, two officers heard Daye tell her to give back his property."
Anonymous On Jan 6, 2014:
"The Jury never said she intended to kill Daye (in fact, since they did not find 1st degree, they specifically found no premeditation or deliberation - oh, and stop with the Felony Murder rule crap - simple felony larceny cannot lead to felony murder)."
People have literally been telling you for going on 10 years that Felony murder was NEVER in play, and that simple felony larceny cannot lead to felony murder.
10 YEARS you've been ignoring these comments, you're not going to change, and you're not going to ask a real lawyer if you are correct in your assumptions.
You've rejected objective reality and substituted your own.
"Clearly the "felony-murder rule" makes the most logical reason for such a senseless indictment."
As Walt pointed out, under Hardin, Nifong, and Cline, the Durham County District Attorney's office had a habit of over-charging defendants in the hopes of getting them to accept a plea deal.
Attempting to force Mangum into a plea deal is a more logical reason for the indictment than "felony murder" -- especially as the jury was not instructed on felony murder.
As far as larceny of chose in action being an "extremely rarely prosecuted charge", those who assert must prove.
Where is your proof?
Sid,
You have one day to free Mangum.
Fake Abe Froman
Chicago, IL
There’s been motions filed in the Mangum v. Aurelius case by the defendant for a week now.
Are you going to post them any time soon?
Are these motions the reason why Crystal isn’t getting out of prison tomorrow?
Anonymous Prince Humperdinck said...
There’s been motions filed in the Mangum v. Aurelius case by the defendant for a week now.
Are you going to post them any time soon?
Are these motions the reason why Crystal isn’t getting out of prison tomorrow?
May 30, 2023 at 8:16 PM
Hey, Prince Humperdinck.
I do not stop by the Federal Courthouse every day to see if anything's been filed. My records show my last visit as being on May 22nd.
Thank you for the notification. I will drop by and get copies of the filing this morning.
Sid,
Today is May 31. And so ends another countdown.
Fake Abe Froman
Chicago, IL
Because Sid won't post them ...
The Defendants are pointing out that they were not properly served; that there is a pending matter in the Office of Administrative Hearings; that he is seeking relief from people not parties; and his deadline to serve is gone.
So, Sid's lawsuit will get tossed for reasons that people have said all along - including withing the time to fix the issues, like the service of process. And Kenny will whine about the injustice of the system.
You have all been elucidated.
I did a quick review of the OAH -- It looks to me like they exist as as an organization to adjudicate administrative law contested cases. As such, I don't think they have the ability to "force" a person to do anything if that person hasn't violated an administrative law.
What I don't see is any reference to administrative rule(s) or law(s) that Dr. Aurelius may have broken -- in either your supplement to petition or motion for expedited hearing documents.
Dr. Harr -- Can you identify specifically which administrative law or rule you're claiming Dr. Aurelius broke?
I guess Sid's to busy writing/filing responses to the defendant's newest motions to update us.
Who knows why -- It's not like Dr. Aurelius violated any of CGM's Constitutional rights by not completing Sid's little questionnaire, or that the court can compel Dr. Aurelius to complete Sid's little questionnaire.
Anonymous said...
I guess Sid's to busy writing/filing responses to the defendant's newest motions to update us.
Who knows why -- It's not like Dr. Aurelius violated any of CGM's Constitutional rights by not completing Sid's little questionnaire, or that the court can compel Dr. Aurelius to complete Sid's little questionnaire.
June 1, 2023 at 3:40 PM
Hey, Anony.
Want to issue a premature gloat advisory. It may be true that the court cannot compel Dr. Aurelius to complete my little questionnaire, however, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 36(a)(3) an admission is considered admitted if the person upon whom it is served fails to respond or object within thirty days. So, cooperation from Dr. Aurelius is not mandatory for the admissions to be admitted.
Hope this has provided you with much needed elucidation.
The admissions admitted to what? This lolsuit?
This lolsuit (like all your others) is going to fail.
When are you going to post the new filings?
" however, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 36(a)(3) an admission is considered admitted if the person upon whom it is served fails to respond or object within thirty days. So, cooperation from Dr. Aurelius is not mandatory for the admissions to be admitted."
You have to serve the defendant correctly before the time limit starts for their response.
Hope this has provided you with much needed elucidation.
Sid,
Why won’t you post the new filings? What are you hiding?
Sid,
Are you hiding something again?
How many times do people need to remind/elucidate Sid that he never sent the questions through formal discovery. And, even if he did - those deemed admissions are only usable in that case. They cannot form the basis for a MAR, or used in any other way, to argue that they are true and Mangum should be freed.
He hasn't sued the right parties, he's in the wrong court, and he's pushing a frivolous argument.
But, I get it - he will pretend he's helping Crystal and Kenny will scream about how unfair it all is. And, at the end of the day Crystal will continue to sit in jail falsely believing that Sid and Kenny actually care about her when their actions and refusal to actually do anything that could help show they don't. She is right where they want her.
Dr. Harr,
You should forward the new filings to kenhyderal so that he can review them.
@ Anonymous 6-3-23 6:49---- What is false is Crystal's conviction for murder. That unfairness alone, in a proper Justice System, should be sufficient to free her. It's Dr. Harr and I who want Crystal released and it's the politicized NC Justice System that want her right where she is.
Right on kennyhyderal.
kenhyderal,
Please provide us with your analysis of the new filings.
Sid,
Post the filings so that we can see whether you served your documents properly.
Sid,
Why won’t you post the new filings?
Kenny - if you really wanted her free, you'd call out Sid when he continues to do frivolous lawsuits and claim frivolous things like felony murder that actually destroy his credibility to the Courts, and keep her there.
We are all onto your little scheme with Sid to emotionally abuse Crystal. Sadly, it appears as though Crystal is not.
Sid,
What are you.hiding? Post the new filings.
Sid,
It’s time to come clean.
Sid,
Where are the new filings?
Sid,
Care to provide an explanation of why you are unwilling to post the new filings?
Sid,
Show me the money!
Sid,
Why are you hiding the filings?
I am rather disappointed. Sid filed a response to one of the motions from the defendant on May 31, and managed to fire off a complaint about the judge (I'm assigning Judge James C Dever, III). but STILL hasn't managed to update us on the various motions filed in this lawsuit.
It's as if he knows he's going to lose, and wants to make sure no one finds out about it.
Where's the transparency, Sid?
You've got a google account, so you have access to a free google drive. Just post the docs there and provide a link. That's what Walt was doing...8-10 years ago.
Kenny --
What is false is you. You don't exist as "Kenhyderal" or "Kenny Edwards from Canada now in the UAE" anywhere else but on this blog.
My best guess is that your are actually Sid (Sid went to Medical school in Washington state, so I'm sure he knows a little more about Canada than those of us in NC). Or you are one of the few remaining "J4N" committee members.
I also note that the only way you can even be contacted is through Sid.
Dhall, Callm3Chuck, Walt and others had the courage to actually identify themselves with their real names.
Sid,
It’s time to face the music and post the filings.
That should have read "I'm ASSUMING Judge James C Dever, III".
Sorry for any confusion -- I'm not assigning judges in North Carolina, Sid.
I promise.
@ Tyrone 6-5-23 7:13 Huh? Kenhyderal is my "user name" It's a user name I use on-line on Google and on Yahoo and have done so for many years. It was my user-name when I introduced Crystal to Dr. Harr back in 2010 and both can attest to the existence of Kenneth D. Edwards. Not sure what makes you doubt this existence but nevertheless I would hope you yourself develop enough courage to post as a registered user and not as an anonymous one. I understand you believe your posting tagged Tyrone Rugen adequately identifies you but that is hardly the case especially when you have the temerity to question me.
Anyone can create a false name, use that false name to create a google account, then a blogger account.
Answer this - Are you the “kenhyderal@yahoo.com” on Twitter?
Tyrone,
How can you have the temerity to question kenhyderal’s identity. I suggest that you follow kenhyderal@yahoo.com on Twitter.
I've looked at kenhyderal@yahoo,com on twitter.
I'll defer to our kenhyderal here, but I don't think they're the same person, which is why I asked.
Still no update from Sid on the defendant's filings in the Mangum v. Aurelius case. 12 days since Aurelius' first response, 10 days since the second.
Sid's not going to post them, because he knows how silly they make this lolsuit look.
You can create a google/blogger account under a fake name in less than 5 minutes.
So I could, for example, create an account named "Fake Kenhyderal" and would meet all Kenny's requirements to "post as a registered user and not as an anonymous one".
It would still be no less anonymous than his own.
He (she? Steve Matherly? Jackie Wagstaff?) refuses to actually identify their real identity.
@ Tyrone 6-6-23 5:17 I'm not on Twitter but, I suspect, Jakki Yancey from Raleigh is the one using my user name there. I asked about this but was told, since I have no Twitter account, "she" is perfectly entitled to use it. Whoever it is, they do seem to post in Chinese.
Right on kenhyderal@yahoo.com.
Stop playing with your spoiled cat Adonis, Sid, and post the new filings.
Kenny,
Is Jakki Yancey the media celebrity also known as “Cousin Jackie?”
@ Tyrone: Well, we know that your name is not Tyrone Rugen, a fictional character, Just as you know my name is not Ken Hyderal. I've told, on this blog, my birth registered name. Crystal has known me for 25 yrs. and Dr. Harr has for 12 yrs. Perhaps you're accusing me of using a fake alias for them back then and also for Google and Yahoo going back to 2003. But, if that's so, I've engaged in that deception for many years. Why don't you tell us your name?
I’m sure CGM and Sid know you and your real name.
I’m also sure your real name isn’t Kenneth D. Edwards.
You can google search for Kenneth Edwards, and you’ll find the musician, the CEO, the history teacher, the software engineer, etc…
None of whom have a background that is the same as you claim yours to be.
Why don’t you tell us your name?
Dear J4N readers: I guess I should really stop feeding this troll. Sincerely: Ken Edwards
Dear J4N readers: My apologies to you for feeding the Kenhyderal troll. Sincerely, Tyrone Rugen
Come on Sid!
Post the filings so we can see what's going on with this case!!
Kenny,
Is Jakki Yancey the same person as Cousin Jackie? Are you Cousin Jackie?
Nifong Supporter said...
Anonymous Anonymous said...
Stop playing with your spoiled cat Adonis, Sid, and post the new filings.
June 6, 2023 at 1:48 PM
Hey, Anony... and others,
If I don't give significant attention to Adonis, he will start biting me. So, stop playing with my spoiled cat is not an option.
Regarding the posting of the documents filed, that is too time-consuming and I cannot afford to do that when there are other legal and non-legal documents, in addition to the sharlog video that take priority. When I have time, I will file the documents, but I do not think they will be much of a revelation.
My actions on Mangum are an open-book. There is nothing for me to hide as my activities in support of my fiancé are, for all intents and purposes, as transparent as an open window.
No, they are not. You’ve apparently sent a letter regarding the judge, and filed at least 1 response to something.
What that something is, you refuse to say, just as you refuse to state what your response is.
That is hardly transparency.
You can simply drop the files in a google drive, and post links to those files. It takes minutes- especially for anyone who’s taken classes at Wake Technical.
Your sharlog videos are a waste of time and effort.
I tell you what - I’ll give you my email address, you send the documents to me, and I’ll post links to them for everyone to read. That’s a better offer than Kenhyderal’s ever given you.
@ Tyrone 6- 7-23 4:50 AM:---- You need to get virtuality into perspective. Believing that just because you cant find a person's biography on-line, that they don't exist is probably an indication you desperately require a dose of reality.
Kenny,
We’re waiting for your answer.
Kennny,
Is Jakki Yancey the same person as Cousin Jackie? Are you Cousin Jackie?
Kenny - I didn’t state you don’t exist. Obviously you do.
I’m stating your name is really not Ken Edwards. The Ken Edwards you claim to be doesn’t exist anywhere but on this blog.
Sincerely, Tyrone Rugen
@ Anonymous 6-10-23 10:44. Answer to what? Are you the Anonymous poster 6-9-23 12:245 ? If so who is Cousin Jackie? See what I mean folks. When posters choose Anonymity you never know who the hell you're responding to.
Kenny,
Is Jakki Yancey the same person as Cousin Jackie? Are you Cousin Jackie?
Tyrone Rugen,
I can confirm that Ken Edwards is a highly decorated veteran of the Canadian Air Force who was stationed at Naval Base Kitsap. My friends in Bremerton and I all know Ken well. He was widely recognized in Bremerton as a fighter for justice.
Right on kenhyderal supporter.
kenhyderal -- I know a number of people have volunteered to post Dr. Harr's legal files, and I understand his reluctance to accept those offers. Undoubtedly, he feels uncomfortable accepting "assistance" from people he doesn't know (I would definitely feel the same -- sorry, anonymous users).
At any rate, I do think he would feel more comfortable accepting the help of those people he does know.
Has Dr. Harr reached out to you to see if you could provide assistance with keeping the blog up to date with the latest legal filings on his/Crystal Mangum's court cases?
"He was widely recognized in Bremerton as a fighter for justice"
Barracks Lawyer?
I know that the Royal Canadian Navy worked with civilian US Navy employees from Kitsap at the CFMETR in Nanoose Bay, but I'm not familiar with the Royal Canadian Air Force working with the US Navy at Kitsap.
Hello Sid,
It is apparent that you are refusing to post the most recent filings. Are you also holding back comments?
Anonymous Anonymous said...
Hello Sid,
It is apparent that you are refusing to post the most recent filings. Are you also holding back comments?
June 14, 2023 at 10:31 AM
Hey, Anony.
First of all, the only comments I do not post are those in violation of the kenhyderal Doctrine, some of those that are repetitive, and some that are totally silly.
As far as my legal filings go, I am currently working on another project (for which I had to interrupt work on my sharlog), ergo, posting documents which have already been filed is not a priority.
Kenny,
Why won’t you answer the question? What are you hiding?
@ Anonymous 6-15-23 4:28 I don''t know what question you are referring to. Please indicate the time and date or else repeat the question?
In your heyday (2009-2010) you created a whopping 172 blog entries -- None with video.
Once your use of "flogs", "sharlogs" (whatever you call them) began, the number of blog entries rapidly decreased, until now you generate approximately 1 new blog entry per month.
In other words, you generated as many blog entries in 2010 alone (103) as you have since 2015!
From the beginning, This blog was created to encourage thought and discussion about the justice system in the state of North Carolina.
I will state this simply. You CANNOT encourage thought and discussion about the justice system when you REFUSE to post documents that detail the information used by that justice system to come to a conclusion.
You're failing to meet the (very simple) goals YOU set for this blog.
"If you had any shame it would be different."
Kenny,
One of the posts was on June 11 at 5:37 AM. However, I am sure you will continue to ignore it.
@ Anononymous: 6-16-23:--- No,I am Ken Edwards. By Cousin Jackie do you mean Jakki Yancey?
Kenny,
Google “Jakki Yancey Raleigh NC DUI” and you will find a mugshot of someone who certainly looks like “Cousin Jackie,” the self appointed spokesperson for Crystal back in the day. I guess she should have been referred to as “Cousin Jakki” in her media interviews.
So, Cousin Jakki uses the Twitter account “kenhyderal@yahoo.com” and your Google blogger name is “kenhyderal.” Is this all one big coincidence?
@ Anonymous 6-17-23 11:56 No, not likely a coincidence. Done purposely but for reasons unknown to me.
Right on Cousin Jakki.
Kenny,
When was the last time you communicated with Cousin Jakki?
@ Anonymous 6-18-23 5:28 AM :The last time was July 11 2018. My attempts to communicate with her recently re: my user name have been in vain. Really, don't want to join Twitter to commicate there with whoever it is. Twitter says, "the information about this poster is confidential and they are not violating any regulations". I've looked at the posts and it appears they are a transgender person from Raleigh. They occasionally post in Chinese. Jakki being the only transgender person I know.
I agree with kenhyderal supporter. The Google blogger known as kenhyderal is the fighter for justice, Ken Edwards.
"My actions on Mangum are an open-book. There is nothing for me to hide as my activities in support of my fiancé are, for all intents and purposes, as transparent as an open window."
6 weeks since the original petition to OAH (which you never posted).
1 month since the last filing from Dr. Aurelius.
2 weeks since the last filing from Crystal Mangum.
No information posted on any of these -- This stands as proof against your transparency statement.
Looking back, this appears to be common behavior from you. You hide most everything that proves how poorly you act -- to the point that Walt would post them, because you wouldn't.
There are lies of commission and lies of omission. You're a liar.
Calling Dr. Harr a liar for not posting things you feel entitled to view and on a timetable that suits you is mean spirited and outrageous and just plain wrong. Dr. Harr acts in the best interests of his fiancee Crystal and he owes no duty to provide readers of this blog, especially those who remain Anonymous, with information they feel is their due. Omittting to publish anything here can hardly be considered deceitful.
@ Nifong Supporter : Hello Dr. Harr: Did you receive my post of June 20 responding to Prince H. ?
Sid says his actions are transparent. They are not.
That make him a liar.
Right on Cousin Kenny.
kenhyderal said...
@ Nifong Supporter : Hello Dr. Harr: Did you receive my post of June 20 responding to Prince H. ?
June 21, 2023 at 9:50 AM
Hey, kenhyderal.
Thanks for the supportive comment.
Apologies for not posting your comment sooner. The past couple of days I have been without my cellphone for extended periods of time and have therefore been unable to moderate the comments.
Currently I am engaged in a project which I should complete by this weekend... one of the most extensive which will include numerous links. The text is nearly completed, so the next couple of days will be spent setting up links to the exhibit. I am hoping this project will lead to Crystal's release.
Anonymous Prince Humperdinck said...
"My actions on Mangum are an open-book. There is nothing for me to hide as my activities in support of my fiancé are, for all intents and purposes, as transparent as an open window."
6 weeks since the original petition to OAH (which you never posted).
1 month since the last filing from Dr. Aurelius.
2 weeks since the last filing from Crystal Mangum.
No information posted on any of these -- This stands as proof against your transparency statement.
Looking back, this appears to be common behavior from you. You hide most everything that proves how poorly you act -- to the point that Walt would post them, because you wouldn't.
There are lies of commission and lies of omission. You're a liar.
June 20, 2023 at 6:30 AM
Hey, Prince Humperdinck.
As kenhyderal noted in his response to you, I am no liar. I am merely extremely busy trying to get Crystal Mangum out of prison. Such efforts take priority over posting documents that have already been filed. (Maybe a lawyer with access to PacerMonitor can get some of the documents in the Federal case posted or provide a link.)
Three things:
1) "Currently I am engaged in a project which I should complete by this weekend... one of the most extensive which will include numerous links. The text is nearly completed, so the next couple of days will be spent setting up links to the exhibit. I am hoping this project will lead to Crystal's release."
Blog entries (even those with numerous links) aren't going to get Crystal Mangum out of prison. If they did, given the volume of blog entries you've created, she'd be out by now.
2) "My actions on Mangum are an open-book. There is nothing for me to hide as my activities in support of my fiancé are, for all intents and purposes, as transparent as an open window."
The words "open-book" and "transparent" do not mean what you think they mean.
3)"There are lies of commission and lies of omission."
This is most definitely true.
You need to check by the Court house. A motion was filed yesterday to Strike your "Requests for Admission Seeking Response", as well as a memorandum to support this new motion to strike.
Mangum V. Aurelius is going down like a sweet muffin.
Sid,
In keeping with your “open book” philosophy, will you post the latest motion?
And, despite multiple people pointing out that a major issue is Sid failed to serve them properly - which he does know how to do having done it in the past - he is still taking no steps to simply properly serve them. It's a very simple process, yet he refuses to take it - makes you wonder why?
Rather than do anything that might help, he likes to do things he knows won't work, and then he and Kenny scream about the injustice of it all, rather than take simple fixes.
It's almost like he doesn't really want to help Crystal, he just wants her to think he is trying.
Anonymous White Goodman said...
You need to check by the Court house. A motion was filed yesterday to Strike your "Requests for Admission Seeking Response", as well as a memorandum to support this new motion to strike.
Mangum V. Aurelius is going down like a sweet muffin.
June 22, 2023 at 12:44 PM
Hey, W.G.
Thanks for the heads up on the motion to strike. I wouldn't have normally checked until next Tuesday or Wednesday, but thanks to your alert I picked up copies of the legal documents from the court this morning.
(To be honestly truthful, I wasn't too impressed by them.)
Thanks, again.
Sid,
It’s not surprising that you were not impressed by the filing—given that you, no doubt, do not understand much of it.
“To be honestly truthful…”
Is there any other way to be truthful?
Sid,
Post the new motion. What are you hiding?
Sid,
It’s time to release the Kraken.
Dr. Harr,
I recommend that you forward a copy of the motion to strike to kenhyderal so that he can begin his research and assist you in preparing your response.
Sid - why don't you just fix the service issue?
The fact you aren't shows you aren't serious about this lawsuit. Even their motions note that you could fix service if you wanted to.
Why don't you want to do that?
You seem to be demanding special treatment for yourself and Crystal. Neither of you deserve special treatment. So, fix service, and move forward. If you refuse to fix service, that is your fault, not an injustice.
Kenny,
What is your opinion of the motion to strike? Will the motion be granted?
Anon at 11:13 - we know what Kenny will say: that it will be granted because the system is unjust, and even though the fix is easy, and has been clearly explained to Sid - because they won't give Sid/Crystal special treatment, he will just whine.
Again - their goal is not at all to actually help Crystal.
Sid,
When will you complete your next project and when will Crystal be released?
Where is Cousin Kenny?
This lawsuit will fail.
Dr. Harr/Crystal Mangum is seeking relief for violations of her constitutional rights (specifically the 5th and 14th amendments) by the NC OCME by not answering the 25 affirmatives. There was no agreement with the OCME to complete these affirmatives, and there is no legal basis for a federal court to compel any state official to answer them.
Dr. Harr/Crystal Mangum want copies of Dr. Clay Nichols personnel file, even though for Mangum’s murder trial these files were available to her lawyer, but declared protected documents under state law. Neither Dr. Aurelius nor the DHHS can circumvent state law.
Dr. Harr/Crystal Mangum want Dr. Aurelius and the DHHS to compel Todd Ishee to arrange for an appropriate medical assessment for Mangum, even though they do not have the power to do so.
In short, they are asking for relief that can’t be granted because it is either outside the scope of the federal court, or outside the abilities of the defendants.
All of this has been identified earlier, and Dr. Harr did not (and cannot) deny that the sought after relief can be granted. He cannot site one case or law (NC or federal) that states otherwise.
In my previous comment, I meant to state that the sought after relief cannot be granted by the defendants.
My apologies for any confusion.
Cousin Kenny,
Where are you? Have you bailed on Sid?
"Currently I am engaged in a project which I should complete by this weekend..."
"Should" but wasn't.
Par for the course, to be honestly truthful.
Right on Cousin Kenny.
Well -- A motion was filed by Sid in the Mangum v. Aurelius case to get the case in front of a magistrate judge (the judge currently assigned is Sid's good buddy, Judge James C Dever, III)
Because getting the case assigned to a magistrate judge worked so well for previous lawsuits.
It's pointless to discuss the case without seeing both sides' filings.
Sid,
Does your new project include another lawsuit?
Anonymous Anonymous said...
Sid,
Does your new project include another lawsuit?
June 27, 2023 at 9:52 AM
Hey, Anony.
No.
Anonymous Prince Humperdinck said...
Well -- A motion was filed by Sid in the Mangum v. Aurelius case to get the case in front of a magistrate judge (the judge currently assigned is Sid's good buddy, Judge James C Dever, III)
Because getting the case assigned to a magistrate judge worked so well for previous lawsuits.
June 27, 2023 at 8:37 AM
Hey, Prince Humperdinck.
Mangum's case against Dr. Aurelius was referred to Magistrate Judge Robert Jones, with the presiding judge being James Dever. When the case manager submitted the motions and documents, they were sent to the district judge rather than the magistrate judge. All the recent motion I filed was for the magistrate judge to be involved in the process.
Anonymous Tyrone Rugen said...
“To be honestly truthful…”
Is there any other way to be truthful?
June 24, 2023 at 5:52 AM
Hey, Tyrone.
"To be honestly truthful," as longtime visitors/commenters to this site know, is a "Harrism."
dhall said...
This lawsuit will fail.
Dr. Harr/Crystal Mangum is seeking relief for violations of her constitutional rights (specifically the 5th and 14th amendments) by the NC OCME by not answering the 25 affirmatives. There was no agreement with the OCME to complete these affirmatives, and there is no legal basis for a federal court to compel any state official to answer them.
Dr. Harr/Crystal Mangum want copies of Dr. Clay Nichols personnel file, even though for Mangum’s murder trial these files were available to her lawyer, but declared protected documents under state law. Neither Dr. Aurelius nor the DHHS can circumvent state law.
Dr. Harr/Crystal Mangum want Dr. Aurelius and the DHHS to compel Todd Ishee to arrange for an appropriate medical assessment for Mangum, even though they do not have the power to do so.
In short, they are asking for relief that can’t be granted because it is either outside the scope of the federal court, or outside the abilities of the defendants.
All of this has been identified earlier, and Dr. Harr did not (and cannot) deny that the sought after relief can be granted. He cannot site one case or law (NC or federal) that states otherwise.
June 25, 2023 at 8:44 AM
Hey, dhall.
Paragraph One: Dr. Aurelius doesn't need to respond to the twenty admissions, but if she doesn't respond or object to them within thirty days, then pursuant to Fed. Rules Civil Procedure Rule 36(a)(3), they are considered as admitted.
Paragraph Two: Mangum is representing herself in the MAR and by refusing her access to the 18-page document, the court is in violation of the Brady Rule.
Paragraph Three: Failure to provide medical treatment or withholding it is in violation of the Geneva Convention.
Paragraph Four: Relief Mangum seeks will support her absolute innocence and exoneration.
WRT Dr, Aurelius response, the time limit doesn’t begin counting down until the defendant is properly served. That aside, There is no legal basis for the federal court to compel a response.
The Brady rule requires prosecutors to disclose material, exculpatory information in the government's possession to the defense. The defense was given access to the Nichols personnel file during the trial. Dr, Aurelius not granting Mangum access now is not a Brady violation.
Geneva Conventions (plural - there were 4 conventions) rules define the basic rights of both military personnel and civilians, including treatment of wounded and sick, during wartime.
Mangum is not a prisoner of war. She’s a convicted criminal. The Geneva Conventions rules aren’t in play. Even if they were, NC inmate medical care are under the auspices of the DPS - who are not defendants.
Has anyone heard from Cousin Kenny?
Sid -- Ask Dr. Wecht if you're paragraphs 1-4 responses apply to the Mangum v. Aurelius case.
Let us know his response.
Paragraph One: Dr. Aurelius doesn't need to respond to the twenty admissions, but if she doesn't respond or object to them within thirty days, then pursuant to Fed. Rules Civil Procedure Rule 36(a)(3), they are considered as admitted.
Dr. Harr - as someone previously pointed out, you never sent your admissions through formal discovery. Crystal Mangum had filed the motion to dismiss the DHHS case, and the only agreement was that a written report would be forthcoming.
Your admissions weren't made available to Dr. Aurelius until 4 days after the motion to dismiss was filed.
Cousin Kenny,
It appears that Sid could use a little help in responding to dhall. Why won’t you lend him a hand?
Right on dhall.
Udaman dhall.
Is Cousin Kenny spending all of his free time on Twitter these days?
Sid,
Why won’t you release the comments? Were you partying all weekend?
Sidney,
Haven't heard from you in a week. Are you all right?
Sid on June 22, 2023 at 5:21 AM:
"Currently I am engaged in a project which I should complete by this weekend... one of the most extensive which will include numerous links. The text is nearly completed, so the next couple of days will be spent setting up links to the exhibit. I am hoping this project will lead to Crystal's release."
It is now July 5th.
No new filings in the Mangum v. Aurelius lawsuit since June 26. No input from Sid since June 27. Shockingly, no comments from Cousin Kenny since June 21.
Cousin Kenny,
Are you tweeting again and ignoring Sid’s blog?
Anonymous guiowen said...
Sidney,
Haven't heard from you in a week. Are you all right?
July 4, 2023 at 10:06 AM
Hey, gui, mon ami.
Thanks for the concern. I'm okay physically... just have a lot of plates on my table. That's why I haven't been commenting more frequently. When responding to comments I like to give full fledges responses, and that I do not have time to do at present.
Things should be clearer by the end of next week.
So, that means by the end of the week yet another secret project will fail, you will still refuse to accept the advice on how to fix your current lawsuit and Kenny will cry about injustice instead of actually trying to help.
Sid,
Wake up and release the comments.
I see you're back to not posting comments. So much for "transparency".
Just a quick note -- On June 22, Dr. Harr stated:
"Maybe a lawyer with access to PacerMonitor can get some of the documents in the Federal case posted or provide a link."
PACER (Public Access to Court Electronic Records) is a service that provides electronic public access to federal court records, as well as the ability to maintain electronic case files, including electronic filing.
PacerMonitor is 3rd party software that pulls its data from PACER, and allows for case tracking and searching only.
Dr. Harr undoubtedly meant PACER here instead of PacerMonitor. No lawyer that I'm aware of would use software for tracking only, when PACER allows you to track AND file court documents at a cheaper rate.
Sid,
Have you heard from Cousin Kenny lately?
Cousin Kenny,
Take a break from tweeting and join us at J4N.
Sid,
Are you late again with the release of your secret project?
Dr. Harr,
After an absence of a number of years, I visited your blog today and was surprised to find that there are no recent posts by kenhyderal. Do you have any idea as to the whereabouts of kenhyderal?
Malek Williams
Hillside H.S.
Class of 1996
Here we are...
6 weeks since this blog entry.
7 weeks since the petition was filed with the NC Office of Administrative Hearings.
10 weeks since the last MAR was filed.
5 months since Mangum v. Aurelius was filed.
..And nothing's going on but the rent.
Malek,
As Sid would say, welcome (back) to the party pal.
HEY, EVERYBODY!! LISTEN UP!
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT!!
Have just completed a few secret projects and will begin to post all documents related to the Office of Administrative Hearings filings starting this evening.
As you were.
Malek,
Check out kenhyderal@yahoo.com at Twitter.
Sid is still filing nonsense in the Federal suit. Rather than simply fix the service issue, which he has been advised to do repeatedly, he is just whining that the rules shouldn't apply to him.
If he was serious about helping Crystal, he'd listen to advice and fix the obvious issues, which are an easy fix. Instead he pretends he's helping, and just whines that the system is stacked again him.
This is all a game to him. It's unfortunate Crystal doesn't seem to realize that.
Post the docs from the Mangum v. Aurelius case while you’re at it.
That’s it?
Regarding the motion to dismiss you as a petitioner:
NCGS 150B-2(2) states you must be a "person aggrieved" to request a formal appeal with the Office of Administrative Hearings.
NCGS 150B-2(6) states that in order to be a petitioner, the administrative decision (Dr. Aurelius' decision not to change or alter Daye's autopsy report or death certificate) must have affected your person, property, employment, or any other legal rights.
It did none of those things.
I fully expect you to be dropped as a petitioner.
I don't know what affect this will ultimately have -- I'm sure you'll continue to prepare Crystal Mangum's OAH documents, just with your name removed.
Not aggrieved; OMG . Crystal is a fiancee who is being wrongly incarcerated for a murder that never occurred and using the precedent of a dead pet bird to indicate no aggrievement is a sure indication just how far the NC Justice system is willing to descend, in order to thwart Crystal's search for justice
Anonymous Anonymous said...
That’s it?
July 13, 2023 at 4:42 AM
Hey, Anony.
No, there's much more. However, there is work requiring my immediate attention, so I will only be able to add in drips and dabs, unfortunately.
Anonymous Anonymous said...
Here we are...
6 weeks since this blog entry.
7 weeks since the petition was filed with the NC Office of Administrative Hearings.
10 weeks since the last MAR was filed.
5 months since Mangum v. Aurelius was filed.
..And nothing's going on but the rent.
July 10, 2023 at 11:22 AM
Hey, Anony.
With regards to most of the issues you mention, the ball is in the court's court. In other words, Crystal and I are waiting for action by the judges in the respective cases. Delay is definitely not in our best interest.
We can always count on Cousin Kenny to provide thoughtful comments and analysis.
Kenhyderal -- Dr. Harr being affianced to Crystal Mangum doesn't matter.
Dr. Aurelius' decision not to change or alter Daye's autopsy report or death certificate does not affect his person (that is, his physical being), his property (he hasn't lost any), employment (the decision didn't get him fired), or any other legal rights (none of his legal rights were impaired by this decision).
He simply does not meet the requirements of NC's general statutes to be an "aggrieved person".
Again, having his name removed as a petitioner doesn't really do anything -- he's going to keep preparing Crystal Mangum's legal documents. He just won't have his name listed as a petitioner.
Quite frankly, it just means less typing for him.
Dr. Aurelius was not present during Daye’s autopsy. Any request for admission that asks about that event should be objected to.
Welcome back Cousin Kenny.
kenhyderal,
Welcome back and thank you for your cogent comment.
Right on Cousin Kenny.
Yo Cousin Kenny, how are you doing?
Leave Kenny alone….
He’s aggrieved.
Right on Cousin Kenny.
Sid,
Is Cousin Kenny an aggrieved person?
Sid,
When will you share with us your latest secret project?
Right on Cousin Kenny.
Dr, Harr,
If you are dismissed from the case, could kenhyderal replace you as an aggrieved person?
It's still amusing how Sid and Kenny are upset that Crystal and Sid are treated just like everyone else and aren't getting the special treatment they feel they deserve.
And, the reason Sid isn't posting documents from his Aurelius case is simple: as he has been told repeatedly, his lawsuit will fail if for no other reason than he hasn't served them properly. He knows how to do it, he's been told he can do it and fix the issues, but he refuses to do it. Instead he keeps whining about why that rule should not apply to him.
Again, he has no real interest in helping Crystal, he just wants her to think he does. If he wanted to help her, he'd have fixed the service on that lawsuit long ago, rather than screaming that he shouldn't be subject to the same rules as everyone else.
Cousin Kenny would be a fine choice to add to the litigation as a party. Cousin Kenny is a fighter for justice and has a long list of grievances.
Sid,
Why won’t you release comments?
Cousin Kenny has a long list of grievances.
https://issuesinsights.com/2023/07/17/welcome-to-canada-the-doctor-wont-see-you-now-but-the-undertaker-will/
Post a Comment