Murder at Duke University Hospital: The case for Reginald Daye's demise being intentional

The YouTube video below is Part One

April 3rd… a truly sad anniversary

April 3, 2012 will mark the one year anniversary of yet another Durham tragedy… one that surely calls for no celebration. It will be a year since Crystal Mangum, the Duke Lacrosse victim/accuser has been in jail on bogus charges related to the stabbing of Reginald Daye. What this day will invoke, in people of enlightenment and good will, is a feeling of shame for yet another injustice based on the vendetta prosecution of Ms. Mangum. Like a pit-bull that won’t turn loose a leg of lamb, the Durham police and prosecutors continue to pursue to seek vengeance against the person, an African American female, who was responsible for what has been known as the Duke Lacrosse case.

The Carpetbagger families of the Duke Lacrosse defendants are not just satisfied with the $20 million payout that they each received in a shakedown of Duke University… they thirst for blood of all involved in the case. Rae Evans, mother of Duke Lacrosse defendant Dave Evans, made clear her vindictive streak by publicly stating that she wanted Mike Nifong to “pay every day for the rest of his life.” With her strong connections to the media, which includes more than a decade of working as an executive with CBS News, she has managed to direct the mainstream media into an all-out crusade to crush former Durham district attorney and Duke Lacrosse prosecutor Nifong, Crystal Mangum, Nifong supporters, and anyone considered by the Powers-That-Be to be on the wrong end of the Duke Lacrosse case.

This Carpetbagger Jihad agenda has been highly successful in manipulating the mainstream media to destroy the honorable careers of Mike Nifong, lab director Brian Meehan, and the then Durham Assistant District Attorney Tracey Cline… although, removed from her elected position as Durham district attorney using a little known-rarely used elastic law, the Jihadists’ work on Cline will not be completed until she is at least disbarred. Police detectives and officers who worked on the Duke Lacrosse case have also been put through the wringer by the media and courts, however, with the possible exception of Mike Nifong himself, no one has been exposed to as much media-spurred venom and wrath as Crystal Mangum.

It wasn’t enough that she was abused and exploited at the March 13, 2006 Duke Lacrosse beer-guzzling, stripper-ogling, under-aged drinking debauchery, the city of Durham pounced on its first opportunity to destroy her when she was in need of the services of Durham’s finest. On that February 17, 2010 night, being a victim of a domestic assault in which police were called to her apartment by her children who feared for her life, she ended up in jail on a multitude of trumped up charges. Among them was a felony arson charge for clothes set on fire in the bathtub, with Durham police being the only ones with the means, motive, and opportunity to commit the crime. Her three months of incarceration were interrupted only by the benevolence and generosity of a bail bondsman who had the courage to assist her by satisfying her $100,000 bail. With a mistrial on the most serious arson felony charge, Mangum was convicted on three frivolous and merit-less misdemeanors and sentenced to time served.

Having lost everything after her lengthy time in detention, Crystal Mangum had to virtually start from scratch. With her media-driven notorious past and arson charge, she was unable to find a landlord willing to rent to her, so she entered into a symbiotic relationship with Reginald Daye, a recently laid-off painter who was in arrears with his rent and facing eviction. Their arrangement was for her to help with paying the rent in exchange for her and her children to be allowed to secretly cohabitate in his apartment.

Unfortunately, Mr. Daye had a problem with alcohol and on the evening of April 2, 2011 he had been heavily drinking. An argument between Daye and Mangum ensued and proceeded into the early morning hours of April 3, 2011. It eventually became physical with him dragging her around by her hair and punching her in the face. In self-defense she stabbed him with a paring knife… once in the left torso, and then left the premises.

Daye was awake and walking around his apartment by the time first responders arrived. EMT noted no injuries other than the stab wound to the left torso that had minimal bleeding. They accessed his left upper extremity and found not lesions, contrary to the autopsy report of April 14, 2011… no “defensive wounds.” He was transported to Duke University Medical Center where, in addition to the stab wound, a blood alcohol lab test revealed a level of 296 mg/dL… enough to cause stupor in a normal individual.

When EMT later picked up Crystal Mangum, they noted a cut under her left eye and a swollen lower lip. In addition, at the scene, police recorded finding tufts of brown hair.

Mangum was arrested immediately for assault with a deadly weapon with intent to kill, despite her claims of self-defense, and forensic evidence to backup her claim.

Meanwhile, Reginald Daye, having successful emergency surgery to repair a lesion to the splenic flexure of his colon and a mild lesion to his spleen, required treatment for severe alcohol withdrawal… and was treated with benzodiazepine sedatives to control his symptoms of delirium tremens.

On the evening of the third postoperative day, April 6, 2011, Daye was having respiratory problems and a diagnostic procedure was ordered. However, while being prepped for the procedure, Daye sustained a severe and lengthy anoxic episode that induced a cardiac arrest and brain damage. These events were responsible for Daye lapsing into a deep coma which eventually brought about his elective removal from life support one week later. His brain death had absolutely nothing to do with the stab wound inflicted by Mangum, but rather the lack of oxygenated blood circulating to his brain which was directly responsible for the death of brain cells.

One year later, Mangum remains in jail for acting against Daye in self-defense. Compare this with the case in Sanford, Florida, where George Zimmerman shot and killed an unarmed seventeen year old boy because he “looked suspicious”… evidently defined as being a young black boy wearing a hoodie. In this case Zimmerman was obviously the aggressor and was in pursuit of the young black teen who was walking with iced tea and a bag of Skittles while talking on the cell phone with his girlfriend. There was no photographs released of Zimmerman, who alleges to have sustained a broken nose and a bloody wound to the back of his head. There was no indication of facial trauma on the recently released video of his visit to the police station immediately following the incident. There was no indication of any blood from Trayvon Martin on Zimmerman’s clothing; Martin who Zimmerman claims was on top of him when he shot Martin in the chest. Zimmerman’s story of self-defense doesn’t stand up, and yet he has remained free for more than a month since the incident happened.

Why is it then that Crystal Mangum has already served a one year sentence in jail for acting in self-defense in a state which has its own version of Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” law? The answer is simple… it is because of race. Had the roles in Sanford, Florida been reversed and Zimmerman was an African American and Martin was white, then an arrest would have been made at the scene and the shooter would be in jail today and not awaiting for a grand jury to convene on April 10, 2012 to make a determination.

The problem is in large respect due to mainstream media and its inherent bias. The incident involving Trayvon Martin was of no interest to the mainstream media. It was the social media that brought national and worldwide attention to this outrage, and forced the mainstream media to get involved.

With the circumstances involving Crystal Mangum, she has been so vilified and demonized by the mainstream media that it is nearly impossible for her to get any sympathy from anyone. This is compounded by the NAACP, both locally and nationally, ignoring her plight. Also the African American politicians, especially in Durham, are turning a blind eye and deaf ear to this grave injustice. Senator Floyd McKissick, and Representatives Mickey Michaux and Larry Hall, as well as the entire North Carolina Legislative Black Caucus should be up in arms about the injustices that have plagued Crystal Mangum since February 2010. But they aren’t, and she continues to languish in jail… for a year now.

This is a truly tragic anniversary of incarceration of an innocent person, Crystal Mangum… and it is one that will not be repeated if the Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong has anything to say about it. 

Trend towards mean-spirited media reporting

Since the inglorious days of the Duke Lacrosse party of March 2006 and its aftermath, it seems to me that the media has adopted and honed to perfection the art of cruel, inhumane, and malicious reporting. Without doubt, the Duke case provided plenty of fodder for the media-types upon which to cut its teeth, especially by going after former Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong. In kowtowing to the Carpetbagger Jihadist agenda to seek-destroy-annihilate anyone on the wrong end of the Duke Lacrosse case, the media, with bloodlust relish, crucified Mike Nifong at every turn. No stone was left unturned when it came to Mr. Nifong, and truth, relevance, and objectivity presented no limitations. The worst example of a libelous attack against Mr. Nifong was by MSNBC senior legal analyst Susan F. Filan, who lied in an article by stating that Mr. Nifong asked his son to attend his hearing in an attempt to garner pity and sympathy. Then, based upon the falsehood that she had manufactured, she went to task attacking Mr. Nifong’s character. The truth of the matter is the opposite of the media-reality created by the Nifong detractor. Mr. Nifong specifically asked his son not to attend his hearing, but his son insisted upon showing support for his unjustly targeted father and was present at the North Carolina State Bar hearing; which was more a resemblance of a kangaroo court.

As stated earlier, everyone on the wrong end of the Duke Lacrosse case was fair game for the media headhunters. Brian Meehan, the lab director whose company provided DNA results for the prosecution, was ridiculed by the media after he was unjustly axed from the company he helped establish. Duke Lacrosse case investigator Linwood Wilson’s personal bickering with his wife was dredged across the headlines… a perfect example of mountain making out of molehills. Vying for the cruelest coverage of all, was the way the news portrayed incidents involving the Duke Lacrosse victim and accuser Crystal Mangum. A litany of examples are on hand, with the most recent being the Reginald Daye autopsy report. Although the media has been alerted to the criminally fraudulent and bogus April 14, 2011 Examination of Autopsy Report, it has shown no curiosity as to how or why it differed from the Investigative Report of Death from April 13th. The media was quick to announce that the autopsy report showed injury to “six major organs”… the only problem is that the media relied upon the muscle called the diaphragm to be re-classified as an organ, which it is not. Furthermore, the report of the 13th , which is the far more reliable and accurate of the two, acknowledged only the splenic flexure of the colon as sustaining any stab related injury and receiving any attention during emergency surgery on Daye. ABC-11 television news was also quick to announce that Ms. Mangum stabbed Daye multiple times (seven) which was disproved by both reports. The media is at the ready to help the state keep concealed the truth behind Reginald Daye’s death from a stab wound… trauma from he most assuredly should have fully recovered.

Another gold mine source for the media has been provided by the NCAA’s investigation of the University of North Carolina’s football program. The self anointed organization headquartered in Indiana has as its objective to create athletic-academic crises in order to justify its relevance and the seven figure annual incomes of its top tiered executives. It pretends to place a premium on academic excellence while policing collegiate sports. Using a heavy hand it smashes the opportunities of many athletes to showcase their talents by arbitrarily handing out suspensions, fines, and banishments… usually for the alleged offense of accepting “gifts.” One UNC football player was deemed to have received a fifty dollar gift and the NCAA slapped him with a one game suspension. It is so ironic that the avaricious NCAA organization with it overstaffed and overpaid workforce is so bent on depriving a few athletes from underprivileged and disenfranchised origins from making a few bucks… this, while the NCAA is raking in the dinero hand over fist. Marvin Austin and Michael McAdoo were but a few of the students athletes caught up in the media storm, with McAdoo being cited for receiving “improper academic help” from a tutor. Although he received an F grade in the class, the NCAA tacked on an additional penalty… permanent ineligibility to play college football. The NCAA actions in this case, as in many others too numerous to recount, are examples of excesses in authority with draconian rulings that are arbitrary and capricious.

The media has been especially hard on the fired coach Butch Davis and one of his assistants John Blake. It seems that Blake had a relationship with a football agent of which the NCAA did not approve. Talk about piling on… Blake was unmercifully hammered in media. The News & Observer led the media charge against McAdoo’s professor, Julius Nyang’oro, who was forced to step down from his post as the chair of the Department of African and Afro-American Studies. His alleged culpability was not informing the Dean about a hiring decision he made of a qualified instructor who happened to work as a sports agent.

The main problem at UNC is that its chancellor, Holden Thorp, is shell-shocked. The NCAA really did a number on him, as every miniscule perceived infraction that is connected with UNC college sports is immediately reported to the NCAA. It is pitiful the amount of power the NCAA has over Mr. Thorp and college sports in general. The universities and colleges should unite and force the abolishment of the NCAA which is nothing more than a parasite that is drunk with power and is running rough-shod over student athletes and college administrators.

The News & Observer sports columnist Luke DeCock wrote a truly bizarre article in the September 6, 2011 paper titled, “Withers made bad call with game ball.” Evidently, it’s not enough to just win the football game… now what you do with the game ball is what really counts? DeCock accused UNC football coach Everett Withers of “calling attention to the Tar Heels’ sullied past instead of their new future.” What does he think his article did? First, I, although not an avid sports follower, was unaware that the game ball was given to former coach Butch Davis… until I read DeCock’s column. Second, so what? Big Deal. It is evident that former coach Davis was largely responsible for recruiting many of the team’s members and helping them to develop into a force capable of defeating James Madison by the score of 42-10. The players naturally had affection towards the former coach and Davis was a friend of current coach Withers. So why not give him a game ball that the coach and players felt he deserved? Certainly such an action was not meant to embarrass an overly sensitive chancellor or serve as a detraction. More ink was given to the story about a game ball given by Withers to Davis than to the ponzi scheme which snared North Carolina State University Debbie Yow’s new basketball coach. Somehow, I do not think The News & Observer has its priorities straight.

Finally, there’s The News & Observer’s three part investigative series by J. Andrew Curliss which does a hatchet job on Durham District Attorney Tracey Cline. To summarize my assessment of the series, it was a bunch of sound and fury signifying nothing. I am not the only one to be of that opinion. It is obvious that she is coming under fire because she is a friend of her predecessor Mike Nifong, and because she has treated him with civility… and the Carpetbagger Jihadist position strictly forbids that, as they follow the dictum that “the friend of my enemy is my enemy.” Claiming that Ms. Cline is under fire is a ruse to get the public to believe that there is widespread disapproval in her work. From what I see, the only disapproval of her job performance is from The News & Observer. Alas, a review of the media treatment of Ms. Cline is worthy of a blog itself.

Instead of hyping sensational stories with the intent of ruining careers, tarnishing reputations and destroying lives, all media-types should make a conscientious effort to report the news fairly and objectively. That would be the best service they could provide for its consumers. 

Coming soon: A flog about Governor Bev Perdue and her race-based pardon policy

Reginald Daye’s autopsy report is nothing more than a disgraceful shame…

LINK to flog: http://www.justice4nifong.com/direc/flog/flog7.html

The above flog is interactive to allow you to view documents at will.

Script for the flog is below.

Recently I examined two autopsy reports related to Reginald Daye, the early morning April 3, 2011 stabbing victim of Crystal Mangum… the Duke Lacrosse case victim and accuser. Documents included the Report of Investigation by Medical Examiner conducted on April 13, 2011 by someone whose signature I cannot decipher, and the Report of Autopsy Examination of April 14, 2011 performed by the Orange County medical examiner, Clay Nichols, M.D.

Beginning with the investigative report, it clearly shows that at the time of the stabbing he was intoxicated, as he had a blood alcohol level of 296 mg/dl. However, what I find highly curious is that of all media accounts I am aware of regarding the Daye stabbing and subsequent course of events, there was no mention of Daye’s drunken state. A prime example of media bias.

Supporting the intoxicated state of Daye is a passage from an article in the Newsweek’s “The Daily Beast.” It reads as follows: “A neighbor told The Daily Beast that Mangum and Daye had returned to Daye’s apartment after drinking at a cookout and began quarreling about money, eventually leading to the stabbing…”

Under Probable cause of death, the box “Pending” is checked. Lines are left blank where it states that death was “Due to...” No where is “stab wound” or “stabbing” indicated.

In the section “Manner of Death” the pending box is checked. Notice that the homicide box is not marked.

In the Medical History portion of the form, the box for smoking is checked, but notice that the one for alcoholism is left unmarked. It is my understanding from my sources that Reginald Daye was an alcoholic. He had a high blood alcohol level when medical personnel first obtained blood samples following the incident. Furthermore, I believe that the argument proceeding the stabbing had to do with Reginald Daye wanting to use money contributed by Crystal and intended to go towards rent, to purchase beer.

Under “Means of Death,” a sharp instrument is indicated as being utilized, however under description it reads only “knife per report.” There is no mention of what type of knife was used or the dimensions of the blade. My sources told me that a paring knife was used. However, the media again has elected to be as vague as possible by stating only that a kitchen knife had inflicted the damage. Had it been a butcher knife you can bet that the news reports would have said so… and not just said “kitchen knife.”

I looked below in the report’s “Narrative Summary of Circumstances Surrounding Death,” and not only was there no description of a knife, but there was no mention of a knife… the report reading “Mr. Daye… was reportedly stabbed in the flank at 3:15 am…”

The sections titled “Description of Body” and “Body Diagrams” were both left empty with a notice to “Defer to Orange County Medical Examiner.” Now, I do not know if this is standard procedure or not, but it strikes me as being baffling and quite curious.

The “Narrative Summary of Circumstances Surrounding Death” is where things really get mystifying. First it states that the incision wound is in the left 7th intercostals space of the chest… and that the CAT scan examination shows a laceration of the spleen and a small laceration at the superior pole of the left kidney. The exploratory laparotomy does not confirm any lesions to the left kidney or spleen… the only injury noted is to the splenic flexure of the colon.

The narrative of the operation Mr. Daye underwent states the following: “He underwent exploratory laparotomy, mobilization of splenic flexure, repair of splenic flexure lesion, and lysis of adhesions, and was admitted.” Notice that no where in this report is there any mention of a laceration to the left lower lobe of the lung. No mention of a perforation of the diaphragm. And no mention of an injury or repair to the fundus of the stomach.

Based on this report, what I believe the stab wound injuries to Reginald Daye consisted of is a laceration to the splenic flexure of the colon… period. The CT scan confirmed injury there, and the description of the operative procedures listed attention to the colon only. There was no mention of repair of a stomach laceration. There is no mention of repairs to the diaphragm, left kidney, left lung, or spleen.

You will also notice there is no mention of any lacerations, bruises or other lesions to the left upper extremity. This is in sync with media reports in which I did not find any mention of any defensive-type wounds to the left arm.

WRAL reported that Daye underwent surgery and was expected to make a full recovery. With Daye being at Duke Hospital, with its stellar reputation, I would expect nothing less. Newsweek commented that “a friend told ‘The Daily Beast’ on April 5 that he, Daye, was recovering.” This was one day before Reginald Daye unexpectedly went into cardiac arrest.

However, it appears that Daye’s problems began on the evening of Wednesday, the third post-op day, when the report implies that Daye vomited, and aspirated – vomitus entering his airway – which led to respiratory distress and his cardiac arrest.

Then, according to the report, after 20 minutes of CPR, his heart and lungs were functioning, but he was brain dead. So, on the evening August 6, 2011, Reginald Daye was in a deep coma, and remained in a coma for a week until he died the following Wednesday evening of April 13, 2011… and the media never mentioned it once. Remember, Daye was expected to make a full recovery.

There is no mention of how Daye died, but I have been told that he passed away after he was taken off life support.

This report is deficient in explaining what procedures Mr. Daye underwent, other than the emergency exploratory laparotomy. It is my understanding that he underwent some major procedures which may have contributed to his cardiac arrest.

Finally, on July 28, 2011, a reviewer lists “Stab wound to chest” as the cause of death. A vague and totally inadequate finding. There is no nexus between the stab wound and the cardiac arrest. The cardiac arrest which allegedly occurred on April 6th obviously contributed to his grave neurological condition. And, was he removed from life support?

As problematic as this report is, I believe it to be, by far, more accurate and reliable than the Report of Autopsy Examination which was conducted the following morning, on Thursday, April 14, 2011.

It lists the cause of death as “Complications of stab wound to chest.” However, it fails to list what any of those complications were, or how they were related to the stab wound.

Then, under diagnoses, the fantasy begins with the following entry:
“Stab wound to chest with: Perforation of left lower lung lobes; Perforation of diaphragm; Perforation of stomach; Perforation of colon; Perforation of left kidney; and Perforation of spleen (clinical).”

I’m assuming that a clinical perforation of the spleen is a phantom lesion that somehow produces a laceration within the organ without interrupting its capsule. Actually, I’ve never heard of such.

The paragraphs under “Injuries” I find most curious… especially involving the stab wound itself which the medical examiner described as “gaping.” I would hardly call an incision less than three quarters of an inch in length gaping, but if it were open, more than a quarter of an inch wide, then why was it not sutured closed at the time of surgery to prevent infection? Surgical intervention was well within time for primary closure… and if the wound was not closed at the time of the operation, it would have been well on its way to healing itself by granulation. There is no explanation I can see for the stab wound to be “gaping.”

It then claims that there are sutures on all of the following sites: left lower lung lobe, diaphragm, stomach, colon, and kidney. No mention of surgical intervention on the spleen.

Now if there were sutures to the left lower lung, would they have been performed by a thoracic surgeon, or would a trauma surgeon have been charged with its repair?

Regarding the stab wounds to the left arm, which first appear in this report, there is no mention as to the number of wounds. They are stated to run from the biceps to the wrist with 5 inches the greatest in length.

Under Internal Examination, the left lung does not mention any suture material, as stated was present earlier in the report. The tracheobronchial tree is described as having no abnormalities, which would contradict an aspiration. There is no sign of pulmonary embolism, either. These findings beg the question of what caused the cardiac arrest.

The Gastrointestinal System claims to show sutures in the fundus of the stomach and in the splenic flexure of the colon… sigmoid flexure being an obvious mistake.

The spleen does not show any signs of sutures or disruption of the organ’s capsule.

The left kidney supposedly shows signs of hemorrhage under the upper pole of the left kidney, which the medical examiner attributes to a stab wound… but there is no gross lesion observed on the organ’s capsule or any suturing. Also the adrenal gland which sits like a cap over the upper pole of the kidney is intact and normal in appearance.

The diaphragm is not specifically mentioned in this report… so there is no confirmation by report of the gross exam that sutures are present.

The examination of the brain exhibited no signs of pathology to help explain why Reginald Daye went into a comatose state. Most likely, the brain was deprived of oxygen for an extended time prior to the cardiac arrest, but the reason is unknown. Many people who are successfully resuscitated with CPR lasting twenty minute or longer, usually do not end up brain dead. The cause of his brain death is at the crux of his death, and I can find no nexus with the stab wound.

This leads to the “Summary and Interpretation.” The summary is inconclusive and there is no interpretation. The medical examiner explains that Reginald Daye sustained a single puncture laceration that penetrated a slew of organs in the thoracic and abdominal cavities, with hemorrhaging into them. It is evident that Daye did not die due to shock or blood loss. If there was a hemothorax, or bleeding into the chest cavity, or pneumothorax, air in the thoracic cavity, a chest tube would have been inserted. Repairs to lacerated organs should have put an end to the bleeding into the abdominal cavity. There is no mention as to why Daye was brain dead, why he went into cardiac arrest, which preceded which, and whether or not the patient was taken off life support. These questions are all the more baffling when it was reported post-operatively that he was expected to make a full recovery.

From the type of trauma he sustained, he should have made a full recovery. I believe that only the colon at the splenic flexure was penetrated by the stab wound, and that the Autopsy report embellished the injuries to make a better case for a death secondary to complications of the stab wound. The investigative report of April 13, 2011 is by far the more factual report.

The autopsy report of April 14, 2011 does nothing to shed light on why Reginald Daye died. The only thing that is obvious is that he did not die due to the stab wound he received… which penetrated his colon only.

The media, of course, is in cahoots with the police and prosecutors, and the medical examiner, Dr. Clay Nichols. This was evident from the very beginning when ABC-11 News stated that the warrants read that Mangum repeatedly stabbed her boyfriend. The online video of that news report titled: “Warrants: Mangum repeatedly stabbed boyfriend.” Posted the day following the incident, ABC-11 News went on to state that Daye was stabbed seven times. By misleading the public about the number of times Daye was stabbed, the ABC-11 was trying to make a self-defense scenario seem less likely.

The media also attempted to make the damage from the single stab wound seem more severe than it actually was. Whereas only the colon was penetrated by the knife, in my opinion based on the initial investigative report of April 13, 2011, the media wants the public to believe that six organs were penetrated… and to help do that, they refer to the diaphragm, which is nothing more than a very large muscle, as an organ. And the left kidney and spleen show no indication on gross examination that they were lacerated or repaired.

In short, the Autopsy report of April 14, 2011 is a sham, and does not even list any complications of the stab wound or surgery other than a cardiac arrest which mysteriously appeared and which, upon resuscitation left the patient brain dead… it is not even clear if Mr. Daye was brain dead prior to the cardiac arrest.

The media has done such a terrific job of sowing a culture of hatred against former District Attorney Mike Nifong, Crystal Mangum, and those who are considered by the Powers-That-Be to be on the wrong end of the Duke Lacrosse case, that I would not be surprised if a sinister hand at the hospital was responsible for the death of Reginald Daye. And although this is a very real possibility, the Durham Police never treated Mr. Daye’s death as a possible homicide. Instead the prosecutor was quick to upgrade the charge against Crystal Mangum to include first degree murder… months before the medical examiner even determined a cause of death.

Anatomically there are reasons to doubt the April 14, 2011 Report of Autopsy Examination. According to both reports, the stab wound would have been in the left seventh intercostal space… here. It is very likely that a puncture could have easily penetrated the colon and/or stomach. The April 13, 2011 investigative report well documents that the colon at the splenic flexure was injured.

However, the April 14th report states that the fundus of the stomach had a sutured lesion. This is fundamentally impossible as the fundus of the stomach, which is the part most superiorly positioned, is no where near the colon. Both organs could not be penetrated with a single stab wound.

The April 14th autopsy report is also flawed when it suggests that the knife traveled in a downward direction after penetrating the skin. Notice the position of the diaphragm… and the lungs are sitting atop them. In order to pierce the diaphragm and the lung from the 7th intercostal space, a knife would have to proceed in an upward direction.

The left kidney is located along the back wall of the abdominal cavity, and would require a strenuous thrust up to the hilt of a paring knife to possibly reach the left kidney, and I do not believe it could be reached without first going through the spleen.
And it could not be reached if the blade followed a downward course as determined by the medical examiner.

It is not only the discrepancies between the two reports that makes me doubt the April 14th report’s accuracy, but issues involving human anatomy. The April 14, 2011 autopsy report is nothing more than fiction designed to garner Crystal Mangum a first degree murder charge. The medical examiner is not at fault in the fabrication of this false report. Fault lies with the state and the media, working in conjunction with the Carpetbagger families of the Duke Lacrosse defendants in carrying out their vendetta against Mike Nifong, Crystal Mangum, and those whom they consider to be on the wrong end of the Duke Lacrosse case.

In the pursuit of justice, serious problems with reports by the medical examiners in the autopsy of Reginald Daye demands that the first degree murder charge against Crystal Mangum be dropped.



Media kowtows to Carpetbagger families

Note: This Flog is approximately eight minutes in length, and requires audio.

LINK: http://www.justice4nifong.com/direc/flog/flog5.html

It is shameful the power that the Carpetbagger families of the Duke Lacrosse defendants continue to hold over the mainstream media. The most recent disgraceful example can be found in the July 12, 2011 online article posted on wral.com titled “Father gains custody of Duke Lacrosse accuser’s children.”

One wonders how such a topic could once again focus on expressing the innocence of the three Duke Lacrosse defendants… but it does. WRAL follows the lead of many recent Duke lacrosse related stories in misleading the public with regards to the source of the defendants’ innocence. Initially, wral.com, and other media outlets stated that North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper, in his April 11, 2007 promulgation, found the three partygoing defendants “innocent” of sexual abuse charges related to the March 2006 beer-guzzling, stripper ogling bacchanal.

It wasn’t until this blog site repeatedly pummeled the media with the fact that the attorney general belongs to the executive branch of government, has no judiciary powers, and is incapable of the legal pronouncement of “innocent” or “guilt,” for that matter, that media types stopped naming the attorney general as the source of the boys’ exoneration.

Time and time again this blog enlightened readers, and e-mails informed media-types that, as former Campbell University law school professor Tony Baker stated, “Only a jury, or judge in lieu of a jury” can decide innocence or guilt.

So the media continues to morph its statement regarding the innocence of the Duke Lacrosse triad by stating, quote: “state officials (plural) later declared the players innocent,” unquote. This is a flagrant, bald-faced, in-your-face, two-faced lie. Fabrication. Prevarication. A blatant misrepresentation meant to deceive the public… or at least the vast majority who do not bother to engage their gray matter and are easily susceptible to Jedi mind-tricks.

By using the plural when citing “state official” wral is trying to give credibility to its claim that the boys were found innocent. I have spoken to media-types about this very issue in the past, and the only source given for the proclamation of innocence has been A.G. Roy Cooper.

Now, although the article was attributed to reporter Erin Hartness and Matthew Burns, the web editor, I doubt very seriously that either one of them is responsible for the misinformation about who was responsible for proclaiming the Duke Lacrosse defendants “innocent.” There is probably policy in place at WRAL, as well as in other media outlets, as how to phrase the innocence statement. Just as there most assuredly is a policy in place to bring up the alleged “innocence” of the Duke Lacrosse defendants whenever an article even remotely touches on someone who is somehow related to the Duke Lacrosse case.
Not only that, but you can bet that certain topics related to the Duke Lacrosse case are strictly off limits. For example, the fact that the three defendants and their avaricious attorneys shook down Duke University for $20 million each and are seeking an additional $10 mil from the city of Durham, is never broached.

Likewise, Reade Seligmann’s alleged failure to pay close to $7 million in taxes is kept hush-hush by the media.

The expunged record of Collin Finnerty’s assault charge against two men he mistook for being homosexual in Washington, D.C. is glossed over.

And the fact that Dave Evans’ mother, Rhea Evans, worked for more than a decade as an executive at CBS News, was and is never disclosed… not even during the CBS broadcasts of “60 Minutes” during which the Duke Lacrosse case was featured, and in which Ms. Evans and the Carpetbagger parents of the two other Duke Lacrosse defendants were interviewed.

It is no doubt that Ms. Evans’ connections with the media, and her professional role as a highly successful founder of a Washington D.C. public relations firm have served the Carpetbagger Jihadist’s agenda well. How else can you explain wral.com’s perpetual and false assertion that “state officials later declared the players innocent.”

Instead of continuing to consent to the whims of the Carpetbagger Jihadist agenda, it is high time for wral and all media sources to begin reporting truthfully and objectively when it comes to stories with even the slightest connection to the Duke Lacrosse case.


2010 year end reflections and season’s greetings

2010 was a mixed bag, with anti-Nifong fervor as strong as ever, thanks in large measure to the biased media which cherry picks stories in determining which ones to report on based in large measure on how they adhere to the Carpetbagger Jihad agenda. For example, it jumped on the story about Crystal Mangum (the Duke Lacrosse victim) when she was battered in mid-February by an ex-boyfriend. After police conspired to turn the domestic call into the criminalizing of Ms. Mangum with ludicrous, trumped up and excessive charges, the media saturated the airwaves and newsprint with stories about her arrest. When it became apparent to the media (people in the media are very intelligent) that the charges against Ms. Mangum were bogus and nothing more than a vendetta against her for her role in the Duke Lacrosse case, the coverage output was lowered to a whisper, as media-types were too embarrassed to continue with the charade. When the jury deadlocked on the most serious charge against Mangum in early December, media-types barely touched on the story.

Media stories about Ms. Mangum’s so-called criminal charges were heavily weighted with rehash of the Duke Lacrosse case. Typically, Ms. Mangum was referred to as the “false Duke Lacrosse accuser” and almost all stories misled their audience by proclaiming that the boys were declared innocent. It was a pitiful example of journalism that not only tainted Ms. Mangum’s ability to receive a fair trial, but which was highly propagandistic.

Another abominable anti-Nifong story from the year has to do with the blatant, malicious, and premeditated discrimination against Sidney Harr, the Lay Advocate for the Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong. Harr was nearly arrested on the Duke campus after attending an event open to the public… an interview with Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer. What was obviously discrimination based on Harr’s stance with respect to the Duke Lacrosse case and his support for former Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong, the university came up with a cockamamie excuse that security escorted him off campus because he handed out some business cards and asked people to visit his website. This incident was brought to the attention of the media, but they elected not to cover it as it contradicted their jihadist’s goals.

Media-types and politicians eagerly jumped into the fray when a lesbian was booted from the ROTC program for violating the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy in the military, and when two lesbians were asked to leave Cameron Village mall because they had publicly expressed some affection. The latter case got national media attention and even the ACLU got involved. It seems, and is unfortunately a reality, that discrimination directed at Mike Nifong supporters is legally acceptable and condoned by the media.

In other social justice issues, the wrongful and lengthy incarcerations of Gregory Flint Taylor and Derrick Allen came to light. Their convictions were in part won through SBI lab misconduct, of which their prosecutors were well aware and in which they possibly had a hand. Although the SBI lab and SBI agents have taken the brunt of the media focused attention, the prosecutors have been given a free pass, in accordance with the PAPEN (Protect All Prosecutors Except Nifong) policy. And, the one prosecutor, Gregory Butler, who acted with the integrity of a Mike Nifong, was taken before the North Carolina State Bar. This was a deliberate waste of time, as the unregulated State Bar filed bogus charges against Butler due to media stories critical of him. Butler provided defense with discovery as soon as he became aware that attorneys for the defendant did not possess it, and it was nonsensical of the Bar to pounce on him for that, especially when it had no outcome on the fairness of the proceedings or the judgment meted out. Like Nifong, the Bar’s charges against Butler were laughably without merit, but unlike Nifong, Butler received no disciplinary action from the Bar whereas Nifong received the severest punishment at their disposal…disbarment. Another year in the books, and Mike Nifong remains the only prosecutor to be disbarred since the NC State Bar’s inception.

Finally, an attempt by the state to execute an innocent man was recently revealed. Wilmington’s Shan Edward Carter was wrongfully convicted in 2000 for in the 1996 kidnapping and murder of drug-dealer Donald Brunson. Although prosecutors sought the death penalty, Carter received a life sentence in that case. Prosecutors used this false conviction (which relied on hearsay testimony from unreliable witnesses and which was totally lacking in physical evidence, DNA, eyewitnesses, etc.) to win two death penalty convictions in the self-defense death of drug-dealer Tyrone Baker and the accidental death of Demetrius Green, an 8 year-old boy tragically caught in the line of fire. The cases against Carter are fraught with inappropriate actions and misconduct on the part of the prosecution, SBI lab, judges, investigators, and even Carter’s own defense and appeals lawyers.

Because the media, like the state’s justice system, follows its own tenet of reporting based on Class and Color, it is questionable whether this case will garner the attention in the mainstream media which it deserves. But these cases, along with documents supporting the contention that Shan Carter had nothing to do with the Brunson murder, and that the sentences reached in the Baker/Green case are unfair, will be put before the public in this venue during 2011 and the upcoming years until Carter receives justice.

Finally, I would like to thank all commenters throughout 2010 for taking the time to get involved and voicing their opinions. Because of your involvement I have learned a lot, and I hope that you have benefited by the process also. In appreciation to the commenters I will be paying homage to them in Episode V of “The MisAdventures of Super-Duper Cooper.” More is to come on that later.

For all readers, my fondest wishes for the holidays, a following link will take you to my e-Christmas card. (Unfortunately, I did not know how to control the audio, so before linking up to it, set the volume low and adjust upward.) Enjoy.

LINK: http://justice4nifong.com/direc/xCardBtn.htm

Comments in conclusion about the shameful “so-called” arson case against Crystal Mangum

On Friday, December 17, 2010, a twelve member jury in a Durham criminal courtroom mercifully put an end to yet another legal fiasco hosted by the State of North Carolina. The trial against Crystal Mangum for felony arson and a spate of misdemeanors, culminated a ten month legal process which began amid much fanfare in the media. As is often the case, the media gave little in the way of attention with regards to the conclusion. And this is not to say that the prosecution lost, for they were actually big winners in the verdict delivered on Friday. Because Ms. Mangum was not convicted of the most serious charge, she escaped the probability of more time behind bars, but she was the big loser in this shameful episode of Tar Heel juris prudence.

Make no mistake about it… the case against Crystal Mangum is unlike any other case involving domestic violence in the state’s history. Actions by the first responders to the 911 call made by Crystal’s children, rulings by the magistrate and judges involved in the case, the prosecution’s charges, and the featherweight defense put forth on Ms. Mangum’s behalf were all part of a grand scheme of retribution against individuals who had any part in prosecuting the case against the Duke Lacrosse defendants. Anyone with a scintilla of common sense knows that Crystal Mangum’s case was not handled like similar such cases, and they also know why… Crystal Mangum was the accuser in the Duke Lacrosse case (or as labeled by the media, “false accuser”).

The power that the Carpetbagger families of the Duke Lacrosse defendants hold within the state is embarrassingly immense. Nationally, these families of wealth, status, and privilege have always exerted tremendous sway on the media (the main conduit being through former CBS News executive Rae Forker Evans – mother of Duke Lacrosse defendant Dave Evans), and they used it effectively against Ms. Mangum.

There is no doubt about the vindictive nature of the Carpetbagger families against anyone they perceived to have had a hand in the prosecution which stemmed from an incident in which their sons attended a beer-guzzling, stripper ogling party held in a Buchanan Street house on Duke property in March 2006. The Carpetbagger Jihad against former prosecutor Mike Nifong et al. was officially unleashed during a “60 Minutes” interview in which Ms. Evans promised that “he (Mike Nifong) would pay every day for the rest of his life” (for essentially having the audacity to do his job which happened to include charging their party-going boys with a sexual assault). The city of Durham, the state of North Carolina, and the media enthusiastically embraced this call for vengeance, and pursued, with relish, the destruction of Crystal Mangum, Mike Nifong, and others. And with regards to Ms. Mangum, they were successful, but not quite to the degree in which they had hoped or envisioned.

The arrest and slew of serious charges against Ms. Mangum were made for the purpose of justifying a high bail. Believing that the likelihood of Mangum bonding out was nil, it was the intent of the prosecution to drag out its case over several years while Ms. Mangum languished in jail awaiting trial. (This was the same successful strategy employed by prosecutor Bill Wolfe against defendant James Arthur Johnson who was incarcerated for 39 months before the case against him came to trial.) As in the Johnson case, after Mangum had served a couple of years in jail the prosecutors planned to offer her a plea deal to confess to a felony in exchange for “time served,” the threat being that she could face many more years in jail if convicted. After serving 88 days in the Durham Detention Center a benevolent and generous bail bondsman placed bond which resulted in Ms. Mangum being transferred to house arrest. With Mangum no longer incarcerated, and with prosecutors losing their major bargaining chip to reach a plea deal, they decided to move ahead with the flimsy case against her. Although the prosecutor would have liked to have kept Mangum locked up for two or three years, they realized that they would have to settle for three months. Their goal was now to seek a resolution that would place them and their agents in he best possible light and free of any subsequent civil legal entanglements.

With the three month incarceration following her February 17, 2010 arrest, severe personal damage was sustained by Ms. Mangum. Prior to her arrest Ms. Mangum worked full time, she had custody of her three children, she was enrolled as a graduate student at North Carolina Central University in the Masters program, she rented an apartment for her family, she had amassed personal property for herself and her children, she was able to help take care of her parents, and she was a financially independent individual in society, attempting to put her past Duke Lacrosse history behind her. The aforementioned she lost due to her arrest and three month incarceration, although Judge Abraham Jones did reinstate for Ms. Mangum the custody of her children.

I am of the opinion that the police, most likely Officer Tyler, started the fire in the bathtub, not Crystal or her ex-boyfriend. Police, prosecutors, lab technicians, investigators have often gone afoul of the law in order to win a conviction. In the James Arthur Johnson case, for example, the prosecutor planned to introduce two eyewitnesses to the crime after his main witness retracted his initial statement implicating Johnson. The two “so-called eyewitnesses” both had connections with the police department, and prosecutors discarded this strategy once the NAACP brought media attention to the case. In the Floyd Brown case, prosecutors came up with an alleged verbatim confession from a man who mental health experts testified was too retarded to have made. In the Gregory Taylor case prosecutor Tom Ford used perjured testimony procured through plea deals to convict an innocent man of murder. For the police to set blaze to clothes in a bathtub in a controlled setting in order to concoct a serious felony charge is not much of a stretch.

Why do I believe that police set the fire? The following reasons are but a few:
(1) Police made no attempt to put out the fire. All that was required was to turn on water in the bathtub. That is what you, me, or anyone possessing a modicum of commons sense and sanity would naturally do.
(2) Police had the opportunity to stage the fire after Officer Tyler ordered everyone out of the house because he “smelled smoke.” That is most likely when the fire was set.
(3) With the large number of police on scene, no one saw the bathtub fire actually being set, and police cannot provide a sensible narrative about what transpired from the time they arrived to when the fire was allegedly discovered.
(4) Police and prosecutors sought the most serious charge, first degree arson, when conditions did not merit it... the structure suffered on flame damage.
(5) Police, firemen, and prosecutors did not provide a list of clothing articles which allegedly filled the bathtub or the number of articles damaged by the fire. Are we to presume that a boyfriend who occasionally spends the night at the apartment has a bathtub full amount of clothing there?
(6) The fire report contains no documentation that there was any structural flame damage, only smoke damage to the building (i.e. the box for flame damage to the structure was not checked). I was told that some fire reports which I requested were confidential and I was denied access to them. Those fire reports which were delivered to me were vague. One fire report also exaggerated by stating that the fire department responded to what police described as a “structure fire with a subject trapped.” I believe that the firemen were misled by Officer Tyler.
(7) Although I was not present at the trial, it is my understanding that Judge Jones declared at the beginning of the trial that he would not allow the Durham Police Department to be put on trial. Why even make such a statement unless he had reason to believe the likelihood that the police had a hand in the fire and/or other misconduct?
(8) Police, especially Officer Tyler, realized when they arrived on a call to the residence of Crystal Mangum that they had an opportunity to somehow ensnare her into the criminal justice system. They seized upon the opportunity to the extent that they completely ignored the domestic complaint which triggered the 911 call. In other words, they ignored the fact that Crystal Mangum was repeatedly struck in the face by her ex-boyfriend and that her ex-boyfriend initiated the physical contact (he was never charged.) The media, as well as agencies and groups against domestic violence, kept silent regarding this.

The above are but a few of the glaring reasons why I believe police set the fire and why I have serious doubts as to Ms. Mangum’s involvement in it. And I am not alone in my beliefs. Media-types are aware that the charges against Ms. Mangum were bogus and directly related to a stealth vendetta strategy spawned by the Carpetbagger Jihad. That is why after the initial charges were made and subsequent stories about the case (especially the trial) were muted. For example, if you go to wral.com, the online site of CBS affiliate WRAL – TV 5, you will find a plethora of articles about Mangum’s arrest and events leading up to the trial, but no coverage about the trial itself, or the outcome. I understand that the shameful case made by prosecutors against Mangum was such an embarrassment that the media did all it could to shield it from the public. Coverage by the media was purposely sparse to keep from affording the public a chance to glimpse the cockamamie case against Mangum. And what coverage there was about the trial focused in large part on defining Ms. Mangum as the “False Duke Lacrosse Accuser” (what a way to assure that Ms. Mangum receives a fair trial). Many of the stories, including those by Associated Press, continue to mislead the readers by stating that the Duke Lacrosse defendants were declared innocent. (As I have written for some time, this is misleading because the defendants were not found legally innocent. Roy Cooper, the Attorney General had no authority and was overreaching when he declared the boys innocent. Cooper did so at the urging of defense attorney Joe Cheshire’s underling Brad Bannon… and of course the media has latched onto it for the purpose of repeatedly stating that the boys were “declared to be innocent.”) What the media (including the Associated Press) consistently uses when it drags Mike Nifong into any conversation about the Duke Lacrosse case, is that the North Carolina State Bar convicted him of twenty ethical charges. What charges?… the media doesn’t even name one. Furthermore the average person on the street can not only name one so-called ethical charge against Mike Nifong, they can not even give a reason for Mr. Nifong’s disbarment. And remember that although the media persistently talks about Mike Nifong’s disbarment, they never inform the public that Mike Nifong is the only prosecutor to be disbarred by the State Bar since its inception in 1933. Keep in mind that the people in the media are extremely intelligent. When it comes to Mike Nifong and the Duke Lacrosse case the media aim is to keep the people ignorant… and they have been able to mislead those in the public who are not savvy to their ways of bending, molding, fabricating, spinning and distorting the truth.

Regarding the defense of Ms. Mangum, there is no doubt in my mind that the public defender initially assigned to the case was working more to achieve an outcome that was most favorable to the prosecution. After all, they are both state employees. I believe that the goal of Mangum’s public defender was to have her plead guilty to a felony arson charge in exchange for a sentence of “time served.” At least, by going to trial represented by a private defense attorney, Mani Dexter, Ms. Mangum now has only misdemeanor charges on her record. The major problem that I have with the defense was that (to my knowledge) there was no attempt to obtain a change of venue. As I blogged earlier, this is one case that screamed for it… just like the case against James Arthur Johnson should have had a change of venue from the media inspired racially divided city of Wilson. The judge in the Johnson case denied the motion for venue change, and I am apt to believe that the same would have happened had Mani Dexter, Mangum’s attorney, sought one. I believe that Ms. Dexter’s defense was hampered significantly by rulings from the bench… rulings which may have thwarted an aggressive defense. But I feel that she could have more effectively challenged the misdemeanor charges. Instead of calling one witness, I believe that she should have called several, including Mangum’s ex-boyfriend, and Mangum’s older children. She should have thoroughly investigated and brought before the court the alleged “injured property” (clothing and alleged damage to the car). The defense of Ms. Mangum was featherweight, but the prosecution’s case against her had the weight of straw. A dedicated, determined, competent defense held in a court out of Duke University’s sphere of influence would have trounced the prosecution’s case and resulted in an acquittal on all charges, I strongly believe.

The Durham based jury did its duty by convicting Ms. Mangum on all of the misdemeanor charges against her, even though the charges of contributing to the delinquency of a minor convolutedly relied on a guilty finding in the arson charge… a charge with which Mangum was not convicted. In other words, what is the jury’s basis for finding Crystal Mangum guilty of contributing to the delinquency of her children? Even Judge Jones did not find the charge credible as he reinstated custody to Ms. Mangum of her children. Although the jury deadlocked on the most serious arson charge, it delivered for the prosecution by convicting her on the misdemeanor charges. With those convictions, the police, firemen, prosecutors, and the state are absolved from any future civil prosecution for wrongful incarceration or civil rights violations.

Now Durham County prosecutor Mark McCullough, whose passionate courtroom oratory about his concerns for Ms. Mangum’s children’s safety when the fire was allegedly started, coyly stated to the press that he will take a month to consider re-trying Crystal Mangum in the future. I fail to see McCullough’s concern for Ms. Mangum’s children by a continued attempt to put the mother of the children they love in jail for years based on trumped up charges. Alas, the Carpetbagger Jihad has no consideration for children other than their own and those of the higher social class. Take this to the bank. McCullough’s bravado about considering to re-try Crystal Mangum is empty. There are a number of reasons why. First and foremost, doing so would risk exposing wrongdoing and misconduct by the Durham Police Department. Secondly, even in a Duke University dominated city, a conviction against the “false Duke Lacrosse accuser” could not be reach… in fact, the jurors polled nine to three in favor of acquittal on the charge. And third, the media is not supportive of the prospect of lingering coverage of a bogus charge which they know is based solely on Mangum’s role in the Duke Lacrosse case. A factor which I would not expect to entertain McCullough’s consideration is the tremendous expense and waste of taxpayer money in re-trying Ms. Mangum. If he thought he had a reasonable chance of prevailing at a second trial, expense would not be an obstacle, and the public, which would be unaware of the waste of their taxpayer dollars in doing so, would not object. But, this is all moot, as there will be no re-trial.

Finally, with regards to Jackie Wagstaff, I believe that her utterance of “this is ridiculous” was not intended to travel any further than to the individual seated next to her and to whom she was addressing. However, her emotional investment in the case inadvertently and unintentionally resulted in her blurting out the comment at a decibel level higher than intended. I believe the judge’s ten day sentence was extreme, especially with it lasting over the holidays, and I am hopeful that he will take the initiative to drastically reduce it. 24 hours housed in the jail is more than enough to make a point. (And was what I perceive to be the severity of her sentence due to Wagstaff’s position with regards to the Duke Lacrosse case?)

My final major conclusions:
(1) Ms. Mangum is fortunate to be freed at the conclusion of this trial;
(2) the charges and prosecution against Ms. Mangum were due to her role in the Duke Lacrosse case;
(3) the arson case against Ms. Mangum was bogus, and the fire most likely was started by Officer Tyler;
(4) the defense should have filed a motion for a change of venue, which would have most likely resulted in a trial held on a more level playing field;
(5) the media’s coverage was typically biased for anything related to Mike Nifong and Duke Lacrosse case; and
(6) the prosecution is satisfied with the trial’s outcome and will not risk a re-trial.

The one important thing to take away from this trial is that discrimination from all quarters exist against individuals who are supporters of Mike Nifong and/or whose opinions are not favorable and sympathetic towards the Duke Lacrosse defendants. It behooves people who fall into this category to be aware of this when they encounter a situation which might attract attention or authorities. Examples are Crystal Mangum’s treatment at the February 17, 2010 incident, and Ms. Wagstaff’s severe contempt of court punishment. From my own experience, I can attest to the discrimination and my near-arrest on the Duke University campus which was appalling. The Carpetbagger Jihad influence weighs heavily in North Carolina and throughout the United States, and that is truly shameful.

Joseph Cheshire’s criticism of the media is the height of hypocrisy

Joseph B. Cheshire V, the state’s premiere defense attorney for the powerful, privileged, and well-heeled, should know about the media, and its ability to mold the minds of individuals who are ill-informed and have an abiding faith in whatever the media spoon-feeds them. Cheshire used the media in the Duke Lacrosse case, playing it like a well-tuned Stradivarius, in laying waste to the good reputation that had been built over nearly three decades by a dedicated prosecutor and man of the highest integrity, Mike Nifong. When called upon to destroy the man who dared to charge and prosecute the sons of the three Carpetbagger families of the Duke Lacrosse defendants, Cheshire exceeded all expectations in helping to orchestrate the downfall of the man who Rae Forker Evans, mother of Duke Lacrosse defendant Dave Evans, vowed on CBS’s “60 Minutes” would “pay every day for the rest of his life.” Cheshire did not pull any punches in lambasting Nifong in the media… the media working in unison with Cheshire, state agencies of North Carolina, the North Carolina State Bar and others in fulfilling the Carpetbagger Jihad agenda against Nifong. It was the perfect storm that the media used to control public thought about the Duke Lacrosse case, and mindless individuals exposed to the biased media spin came away believing that the three Duke Lacrosse defendants were exonerated, that Prosecutor Mike Nifong prosecuted the case in an attempt to win an election, and that nothing untoward happened at the Duke house on Buchanan Street, which Duke University wasted no time in secretly razing. The media characterized Mr. Nifong as the second coming of Satan, and he was vilified to the extent that almost all individuals in North Carolina, and those individuals somewhat familiar with the media’s presentation of it throughout the country, have negative and even hostile feelings towards Mr. Nifong. And one person responsible for fanning the media flames has been Joseph Cheshire.

In the November 24, 2010 edition of The News & Observer is an article titled “Lawyer says media fanned the flames.” In it Mr. Cheshire decries the media treatment of his client, former North Carolina Governor Mike Easley. The former governor was involved in several shady deals during which he received substantial financial gain… deals involving real estate and travel. Cheshire managed to wrangle out a plea agreement in which his client pled guilty to a single felony charge in exchange for the State and Federal investigations and prosecutions coming to a close. And, of course, he was to face no jail time… that is punishment reserved for those North Carolinian felony offenders who are poor, disenfranchised, and people of color. Privileged felons are usually required to pay a nominal fee to the court… and I believe that the fine for Mr. Easley was approximately one thousand dollars. Also he is not subject to probation or required to spend time with community service.

All told, Mr. Easley got off easy. He was treated with kid gloves not only by the media, but by the prosecutors and judge as well. State and federal prosecutors were quick to bring their investigations to a close as soon as the former governor agreed to plead guilty to a minor, but felonious, charge. Easley was probably well advised to take the deal in order to prevent more damaging revelations from being brought to the fore. Although Cheshire was able to arrange for the attorney general to state that his Duke Lacrosse clients were “innocent” (and which the media falsely gave credence to), he could not engineer one in this case, so he took it upon himself to state that although his client pled guilty to a felony charge, there was no corruption. I don’t know what Mr. Cheshire’s definition of “corruption” is, but it must come from the same dictionary used by Duke’s Michael Schoenfeld who defined “solicitation” as handing out a business card and asking someone to visit your website.

It’s hard for me to conjure up sympathy for the friendly media treatment of Mike Easley when one considers the hostile and blatantly biased media treatment of Mike Nifong. The media’s greatest flaw is in using Roy Cooper’s April 11, 2007 “Innocent Promulgation” as a basis for stating that the Duke Lacrosse defendants were innocent or exonerated. Despite being informed about this misleading statement, it continues to this day, nearly four years later. In addition, the media persistently labeled Mike Nifong as the “disgraced” former Durham district attorney. Any negative adjectives used to describe Easley were sparingly if ever used. For me, it is more disgraceful to abuse one’s position of power in exchange for one’s personal gain… such as what apparently transpired with Cheshire’s client. Mike Nifong, on the other hand, was merely carrying out his job as the Durham district attorney when he prosecuted the Duke Lacrosse case. And he carried it out at the risk of losing his election bid as the incumbent district attorney. By proceeding with the prosecution of the Duke Lacrosse case, the May 2006 primary election was tightened, and he nearly lost to a November candidate who ran only to oppose Nifong, with the publicized intention of resigning if victorious in order to permit the governor to appoint a new district attorney.

Joe Cheshire is selective when it comes to criticizing the media, or others. For example, he is highly critical of Mike Nifong, but when it comes to Tom Ford, the prosecutor of one of Cheshire’s other clients, Gregory Taylor, Cheshire doesn’t utter one disparaging word. Ford put an innocent man in jail for life as a vendetta because he would not turn and give perjured testimony to implicate an innocent black man in the death of Jacquetta Thomas. Taylor was convicted by hocus-pocus forensics and Ford’s witnesses who gave perjured testimony against Taylor… and although Taylor was wrongfully incarcerated for seventeen years because of Ford’s vengeful actions, Cheshire publicly refers to Tom Ford as a good prosecutor and admirable court-room adversary.

Tom Fetzer, the state Republican chairman stated in response to Easley’s plea deal, “I think North Carolina has developed a reputation for being a very corrupt state.” Well, I agree with Fetzer’s observation, and believe that it is a reputation that is well deserved. How else can the state explain why Mike Nifong is the only prosecutor to be disbarred by the North Carolina State Bar since its inception in1933, when it trails only the states of Louisiana and Illinois in the number of death row inmates who have been exonerated by DNA evidence? How else can the state explain the draconian, singular, and unwarranted persecution of Mike Nifong when it is not even apparent to public why Nifong was disbarred? There is no logical or reasonable explanation for the persecution meted out to Nifong… he was punished to set an example for other prosecutors who elect to pursue the principle of “equal justice for all” instead of abiding by the state’s tenet of “selective justice based on Class and Color.” Nifong was also punished as part of the Jihad against him that was launched by Rae Evans in her “60 Minutes” interview.

For his Duke Lacrosse defendant, for Gregory Taylor, and for Mike Easley, Joseph Cheshire served his clients well. And even though only one of his aforementioned clients was legally found to be innocent (Gregory Taylor), the media has been favorable to them all. The same cannot be said for Duke Lacrosse prosecutor Mike Nifong who the media attacked with relish. Spearheading the media onslaught against Nifong was Joseph Cheshire who now takes umbrage at the slightest media insult of his client, the former governor of the state. The complaints by Cheshire leveled at the media for its coverage of Mike Easley’s alleged corrupt actions are hypocritical and mind-boggling when one considers Cheshire’s role in the media war aimed at Mike Nifong… a war that has not let up since its first volleys in 2006.

Duke… too big to be forced to do the right thing?

After posting the blog which directed viewers to the Investigative Report that detailed the incidents involved in April 14, 2010 discrimination against me by Duke University (which included an audio of part of my conversation with the guard), one of the commenters who goes by the nom de plum of “Anonymous” sarcastically stated “good luck.” It is obvious to commenters possessing intelligence and logic, even those who disagree with me about Mr. Nifong (e.g. Walt-in-Durham and guiowen), that the treatment I received at Duke was outrageous and inappropriate. It is equally apparent to politicians such as those who represent me, that I was discriminated against solely for my thoughts and opinions regarding Mike Nifong. However, because of the emotionally negative media hype against Nifong in the well orchestrated Carpetbagger Jihad agenda, politicians are not willing to get involved in the fray. Unlike former Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong, who confronted the Duke Lacrosse case head-on despite risks to his election to another term as D.A., politicians, it seems, lack the courage to wade into the morass that was created on the Duke campus on April 14th… a pre-meditated, malicious, and unwarranted attack against a person launched solely because of his beliefs about Nifong which were not consistent with those of the university.

Having recently emerged from a serious mid-term election, the politicians can be given some slack for not immediately responding to the request for their input and involvement in this issue of civil rights importance. But it is an issue that will not disappear, in spite of the media’s best efforts to ignore it. Unlike other instances of discrimination which the media has jumped on whole hog, such as that at Cameron Village, the act of discrimination at Duke University involves Duke… the institution in Durham that is too big to be forced to follow rules, regulations, ethics, and principles that others are constrained to abide by. The Cameron Village incident is a case in point. The security officer at the mall requested two lesbians to leave the property because they showed affection in public… an action which the guard deemed to be objectionable, although it was an action which did not violate any rules or regulations. The York Properties company acted swiftly and appropriately to this act of discrimination by one of its employees, utilizing the principles of “restorative justice.” The head of the company met with the two women who were discriminated against, and he accepted responsibility for the discriminatory actions, apologized to the two women, made it clear that such discrimination would not take place again, and told of steps that would be taken to see that such discrimination would never recur.

York Properties acted in a timely and responsible way, and it no doubt was motivated to do so by the intensive and extensive media coverage. Local and national newspapers and television stations covered every single step, beginning with the incident itself, the apology, the meeting with the head of York Properties, the acceptance of the demands made by the women who were offended, and the rally which emphasized the anti-discrimination concessions they had won. CNN was one of the national news stations which heavily covered the event.

When it comes to Duke University, on the other hand, the media cowers in the shadow of the institution’s might. The media dare not publish or air an article that might stoke the anger of Durham’s giant, and to do a story on discrimination by Duke, especially against a pro-Nifong supporter carries only risks and no benefits for them. The media would much rather keep the public ignorant of Duke’s unethical act of discrimination and its ludicrous response. Unlike York Properties, which took the high road to resolving the situation, Duke took the low one, because it felt that it was powerful enough to do so and get away with it. So when I asked Duke University for an official response as to why I was kicked off campus and by whom, I was told that it was because I handed out business cards to its students and employees and asked them to visit my website. As ridiculous as it sounds, it is the best excuse that the university could concoct. To make matters worse, its spokesman, Michael Schoenfeld lied by trying to shift blame from someone in administration and place it on Duke Police. There is no doubt that Duke police have more important things to do that escort people off campus for handing out business cards and monitoring visitors’ conversations to see whether or not they are "soliciting."

So, not only does Duke not accept responsibility for its premeditated and malicious action, but it lays the blame for the incident on me, a guest invited to their campus for an event. Duke does not apologize to me, which I would not expect and would not seek because it has no remorse for its despicable actions towards me. And it makes plain that it will continue to act against me in the future if I hand out business cards on its campus. But as anyone with reason knows, the act of discrimination against me was purely due to the fact that I am an openly known supporter of Mike Nifong.

Duke could learn a lot from York Properties about how to handle issues that arise wherein the conduct of one of its employees is egregious and unacceptable. Duke, like York Properties, and each and every one of us should be held accountable for its actions. Duke is not and should not be treated as privileged and exempt from following the basic rules of civility and decency to which we all are expected to adhere.

Going along with public opinion can lead to disastrous results… just ask the Carolina Panthers

The National Football League team Carolina Panthers have gotten off to a dismal 0-3 start this year, in large measure due to significant deficiencies in a key player position, quarterback. Earlier in the year, it jettisoned the seasoned veteran QB starter of previous seasons Jake Delhomme, where an injury currently prevents him from competing. Matt Moore was anointed as starter at quarterback at the beginning of the season. Stepping in as a backup during last season, Moore showed flashes of competence, and at times even played extremely well. The franchise decision makers settled on Jimmy Clausen, a rookie fresh from Notre Dame University as Moore’s backup. After the first two games ended in the L column, Moore was pulled and his backup Clausen was given the starting nod for game number three. Unfortunately, the outcome was no different than before.

Meanwhile, in Philadelphia, the Eagles are riding a 2-1 record, in large measure due to the arm and legs of its QB Michael Vick. After a forced 18 month hiatus, imposed by the justice system because of his role in a dog-fighting enterprise, Michael Vick was slated as a backup quarterback to the less experienced starter Kevin Kolb (only two previous pro starts). When Kolb was knocked out of the game in the second quarter, Vick nearly brought the Eagles a come from behind victory. Vick’s play in the second game of the season (while Kolb sat out due to a concussion), not only garnered a victory for the Eagles, but earned him the starting position. In game three, the Eagles handily prevailed with Vick posting a three touchdown passing game.

What makes Michael Vick so valuable is his ability to escape from the pocket and eat up big chunks of yardage. This particular talent opens up passing opportunities which would not be available to pure pocket passers and QBs slow of foot. Vick is also gifted with a powerful and accurate throwing arm. However one of his greatest assets might just be his many years of league experience in which he as faced many defenses, game situations, and pressures.

Now, I do not profess to be a sports fanatic, or even an aficionado. So, how, you may wonder, does this discussion relate to the usual topics of discussion on this blog? Simple. It explains how going along with public opinion does not always result in a positive outcome. In this case specifically, Michael Vick could easily have been on the Carolina Panther roster. He could have been designated as the starter which he deserved to be, or brought in off the bench to dig the Panthers out of a hole in trying to secure a come from behind victory. And after his release from prison, Vick was available to any NFL team for a song. But they all passed on him… even the Oakland Raiders. Teams that desperately were in need of a quarterback, did not even give Vick an opportunity. None, that is, except the Philadelphia Eagles. Let’s face it, Vick is no slouch at the position, and is, in fact, a shoo-in for the Hall of Fame in Canton.

Why did Carolina, Oakland, and other teams in dire need of talent in the most important position in the game, willing to overlook Michael Vick? It was certainly not because he lacked talent. There was a generalized view that because of his dog-fighting past Vick was a pariah intended to be ostracized. Owners of football teams were wary of P.E.T.A. and the public outcry against Vick’s past involvement with the promotion and involvement in dog-fighting, and they silently decided amongst themselves to basically blacklist Vick from the game and to penalize him by preventing him from making a living by playing the game he loved. Everyone, including the Carolina Panthers, was on board… except for the Philadelphia Eagles. Now the bigwigs and owners of the Carolina Panthers are probably kicking themselves in the rear end for letting the golden opportunity of having a talented, quality, exciting quarterback like Michael Vick end up with the Eagles when it was well within their grasp. And if they are not kicking themselves, they should be as they languish in their division’s cellar.

Believe it or not, I do like dogs… although I am more of a cat person. Also, I detest dog-fighting for sport… and other sports which pit animals against one another in brutal battles to the death. I also believe that Michael Vick’s punishment was excessive because of his celebrity, however, to his credit, he handled it with much dignity. He served the time for the crime with which he was convicted, and he should have been free to pursue his career without the animosity and hostility to which he was subjected. And, yes, the Carolina Panthers, with its quarterback uncertainties, should have leapt at the chance to acquire him when he first hit the market. But bowing to media and public opinion and sentiment, Carolina decided to go along with the other teams and freeze Vick out of the league… which was where his career was headed when Vick finally received a chance with the Eagles.

Had Carolina Panther owners had the courage to do the right thing and bring Vick on board early on, it would have been to their benefit. Instead, they folded to pressures of public opinion and passed on him, despite knowledge that he could have undoubtedly been a great addition to the team. Now the Panthers are hurting at the quarterback position and they have no one to blame but themselves. Other teams, like the Oakland Raiders, are in the same boat. But going along with public opinion is safe, and does not require courage.

That is why the vast majority of individuals, who have been spoon-fed gobs of Carpetbagger Jihad anti-Nifong propaganda succumb to the Jedi mind-tricks of the media and espouse vitriolic sentiment against former Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong. They feel the security in being among the vast majority of people in their beliefs. Plus, it requires no courage to side with the majority and those perceived to be in power.

Members of the Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong are vastly outnumbered in their support of justice for Mike Nifong… and to acknowledge their position which is markedly in the minority, takes a tremendous amount of courage. And courage has been tested, as I was nearly arrested on the Duke University campus earlier this year solely because of my support for Mike Nifong. And no one represents courage like Mike Nifong, who weathered the public sentiment whipped up against him by the biased media storm, as he carried forth with his prosecution in the Duke Lacrosse case. (The North Carolina State Bar had to intervene with its trumped up ethics charges in order to get Nifong off the case, the first step in getting charges dropped against the three Duke lacrosse lads from families of wealth, status, and privilege.)

Mike Nifong mustered up the courage to go against prevailing wishes of the state and media-generated sentiment of the public when he pursued the charges against the Duke Lacrosse defendants. Members of the Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong mustered up courage to support justice for Mike Nifong against overwhelming anti-Nifong public opinion. Taking an unpopular stand did not, and probably will not, accrue to the benefit of Mr. Nifong or his supporters in the near term. However, the same cannot be said for the Carolina Panthers. Had the Panther owners shown some guts to go against the flow of the opinions held by the public and NFL, they would undoubtedly have a better record and be in contention for making the playoffs.

In life, people are often presented with opportunities to go with the flow or swim upstream against the tide. Which direction you go is not the issue of importance. Choosing to take the right path, even when it is in the face of a hurricane, is the right thing to do. Just keep in mind that the greater the headwinds, the more courage will be required.

NC Justice System: Cruelty without Christianity

To his credit as a columnist, The News & Observer’s Barry Saunders in a recent commentary brought up an issue that is rarely touched upon by the media… the cruelty that seems embedded in our state’s criminal justice system. In his article, Mr. Saunders alluded to Anson County Prosecutor Michael Parker’s treatment of a mentally retarded defendant when he wrote, “Parker spitefully refused Dix workers’ request to take him to the State Fair.” However, Parker carried spite much further by directly interfering with Brown's placement by sabotaging the arrangements at an assisted living facility that had been painstakingly arranged by social workers after his 14 years of wrongful incarceration. Thereafter state employees involved in helping Brown find appropriate housing had to work in secret to prevent District Attorney Parker from intervening.

Is the cruelty exhibited by Michael Parker typical? Yes, and it can be found among police officers serving on the front lines of the urban battlefield to judges sitting behind the benches, and even among ancillary workers in the social/criminal justice field. Is the cruelty exhibit by Parker to be construed as Christ-like behavior? No. People who call themselves Christians and act like heathens are as phony as the currently trumped up charges against Crystal Mangum and those leveled against Mike Nifong by the State Bar. It takes more than attending church to embody the true spirit of Christianity.

The vendetta justice treatment of Crystal Mangum is an example of the cruel and malign attitudes of many in the justice system. The vindictive/retribution motive empowering the backlash by all state officials and staff against Ms. Mangum has its roots in her role in the Duke Lacrosse case. Even though she was the victim in that incident, the state, Carpetbagger families, and the media defined her as the villain. Cruelty in the present problems engulfing Ms. Mangum began on the night of February 17, 2010. Police were summoned to her apartment in response to a 9-1-1 call placed by Ms. Mangum’s daughter who feared her mother might be killed after Mangum’s ex-boyfriend began punching her in the face. When Crystal’s true identity became apparent to police, she was designated as the instigator, aggressor, and offender, and her ex-boyfriend, with a past history of physical violence against women, became the vulnerable victim of the altercation. Then the Durham Police Department got creative and manufactured a crime (which they called “arson”) and laid the blame on Ms. Mangum. A specific incident of police cruelty manifested itself by their commands given to Ms. Mangum to “stand up” while she was lying facedown on the floor with her hands cuffed behind her back. Police reports referred to this as Ms. Mangum refusing to follow commands. (Ask yourself, would a true Christian, in emulating Jesus Christ, taunt a helpless woman lying facedown with her hands cuffed in back, by ordering her to stand up? Is that what Christianity is about?)

What is so tragic about this entire incident is that Durham Police harbored unjustified animosity towards Ms. Mangum based solely on her role in the Duke Lacrosse case, and they abused their power by exacting revenge based on fraudulent and trumped up charges. Most serious was the attempted first degree murder charge. No where in the Durham Police reports is there anything to substantiate such a charge. Likewise, the charge of identity theft was a stretch, to say the least. Ms. Mangum was concerned with how the authorities would respond if they knew her true identity and realized her link to the Duke Lacrosse case. The events that transpired that night validated her concerns, as she was hauled off to jail and placed under a $1 million bail, despite being the victim of domestic violence.

Magistrate B. Wakil acted cruelly towards Ms. Mangum by imposing a $1 million dollar bail on someone who was definitely not a flight risk or a threat to society. By issuing that unreachable bail Ms. Mangum languished in jail, unable to report to work at her full-time job. Because of the bail set by Wakil, Ms. Mangum lost her source of income (with its health benefits), which meant she was unable to pay rent for her apartment (which she lost). Behind bars, she was unable to attend classes at NCCU where she was enrolled in the graduate program working towards a Master’s degree; she was dropped from the courses after she obtained a loan to pay for tuition, books, and supplies. In jail, she was unable to take care of her three children, and she lost custody of them.

Wakil was merely a cog in the wheel of the injustice visited upon Ms. Mangum, but her role in unnecessarily and brutally disrupting Mangum’s life was instrumental and cruel beyond measure. Nothing in the police report could support such draconian treatment. While Ms. Mangum struggles, trying to keep her head above water, Magistrate Wakil goes on with her life, without accounting for the wanton damage to that of another.

Of course, Durham Assistant District Attorney Angela Garcia-Lamarca holds the lion’s share of cruelty and inhumanity towards Ms. Mangum because she is the prosecuting attorney. Ms. Garcia-Lamarca, as a prosecutor, is charged not only with representing the state, but also with seeking the truth… acting as a “Minister of Justice,” if you will. But she has become the hub in this conspiracy of evil by proceeding with a prosecution which is suspect, lacks merit, and trumped up. Her initial plea offer to Ms. Mangum shortly after her arrest was for Mangum to plead guilty to the false charges (eight in total, including attempted first degree murder, arson, assault and battery, and child abuse) against her and serve a two year prison sentence. What a deal. Her public defender thought she should give it serious consideration stating that if she went to trial and was convicted she could possibly be sentenced to six years behind bars. It was only after the miraculous satisfaction of her $100,000 bail by generous and benevolent bail bondsmen several months later that the prosecution’s plea offer was modified as follows: plead guilty to arson, three counts of contributing to the delinquency of a juvenile, injury to personal property, and resisting a public officer in exchange for time served (three months). This is quite a drastic departure from the prosecutor’s previous offer, which goes to emphasize the non-existence of the prosecution’s case.

Ms. Garcia-Lamarca’s cruelty is also responsible for totally destroying Crystal Mangum’s life. Not being a flight risk or threat to society, Ms. Mangum should have been released without bail, so that she could continue to work, pay the bills, attend classes, support her three children, and help take care of her parents. Instead, Ms. Garcia-Lamarca took the toughest position possible to assure that Ms. Mangum would be locked up for a lengthy period of time. Now ask yourself, if Jesus of Nazareth was prosecuting the case against Ms. Mangum, would he proceed as Ms. Garcia-Lamarca? Undoubtedly not… and if he was given the identical case by police, after looking at it, he would dismiss all charges and rebuke police officers for trumping up such garbage.

District Court Judge Claude Allen’s cruelty and animus against Ms. Mangum is evident by his ruling to subject Ms. Mangum to electronic house arrest in the event that she bonded out. Ms. Mangum (who is neither a flight risk nor threat to society) should not have even been placed under bail, much less considered for monitoring and house arrest after making bond. Judge Allen gave no explanation for this cruel, bizarre and unjust ruling. But, he is not held accountable by any person or body. The Honorable Judge Jennifer Knox when confronting a suspected rape defendant who had been placed under similar conditions (requiring house arrest and monitoring if bonded out), reduced the amount of his bail to $300,000, but dropped the condition of house arrest if he bonded out. Surely, one would consider a suspected male rape defendant more of a threat to society than a female victim of domestic violence. But Judge Knox acted honorably and righteously by dismissing the house arrest condition. There is no doubt that in considering the two aforementioned judges that Judge Knox acted in the true spirit of Christianity. The same cannot be said for Judge Allen.

Crystal Mangum, a victim in the Duke Lacrosse case, has been caught up in the vindictive vortex spun in response to the call of the Carpetbagger Jihad. And this malicious fervor against Mangum and surrogates of Mike Nifong has permeated through all walks of life and levels of government… including the Jail Diversion Program. This county agency provides defendants with an alternative to incarceration while awaiting trial. Since her May 18, 2010 transfer from the Durham County Detention Center to house arrest, Ms. Mangum has been under its auspices. Although she achieved limited relief from the courts (unrestricted mobility weekdays from 8:00 am until 5:00 pm), she is still required to be at home in the evenings and on weekends.

Recently, Ms. Mangum requested to have a weekend free in order to go to the beach. Her immediate supervisor authorized her to have the freedom to enjoy this activity. Days later, she learned that the supervisor had been overruled by someone higher up in the pre-trial program’s chain. The excuse given for denying Ms. Mangum’s request is that “it wouldn’t look good.” This mean-spirited denial by the Jail Diversion Program is yet another troubling example of the cruelty that is so prevalent in the state’s criminal justice system that it has been accepted as the norm. But inhumanity was not the only driving force here… the state does not want to do anything that would make Ms. Mangum look vulnerable, innocent, or non-threatening. Keeping her tied to house monitoring on a short leash, solidifies the media created perception that Ms. Mangum is an imminent threat and danger to society… just like the affable and severely retarded Floyd Brown (as determined by Prosecutor Michael Parker). Therefore, because Ms. Mangum and Mr. Brown do not come from families of wealth, power, and prestige, the North Carolina system of “selective justice based on Class and Color” has no qualms with their being subjected to cruel treatment and punishment.

The state does have a mandate to protect its citizens from criminals and the crimes they commit. That said, in a civilized society, defendants, whether charged or convicted, deserve to be treated with basic dignity and compassion. To act in a malevolent manner against those disadvantaged by being in the throes of the correctional system is contrary to the very principles upon which Christianity is based. Ask yourself this question: “If Jesus of Nazareth was managing the Durham County Jail Diversion program, and Crystal Mangum (wrongfully charged, wrongfully placed on electronic house arrest, not a flight risk, and not a threat to society) requested to have a weekend free to go to the beach, what would he say?”