After Hammond & Hammond Bailbondsmen, Inc. satisfied conditions for the $100,000 bond for Crystal Mangum and she was released from the Durham Detention Center into house arrest, she was no longer totally incommunicado. The biased media, of course, has not made an effort to interview her or do anything to present her side of what took place on the night of February 17, 2010. They just attempted to put a positive light on the police/prosecutor story, while ignoring its inherent problems with timeframe and logic. One important issue that almost all media have stayed away from is the alleged vandalism of the car of Crystal’s ex-boyfriend. This destructive act was referenced to in the Durham Police’s Incident/investigative report and in the indictment obtained from the Grand Jury.
The Grand Jury Indictment obtained April 5, 2010, alleges that Ms. Mangum “did wantonly injure personal property of Milton Walker, including clothing, car tires and the windshield of his car.” Neither the police nor prosecution put forth a statement with a credible timeline of when and how this damage to Mr. Walker’s car took place. Also, they do not give any credible evidence linking Ms. Mangum to the incident. For example, did the damage to his car take place the night of February 17th, and, if so, when... prior to the domestic dispute? Or did she damage the car after he initiated the fight with Crystal by punching her in the face? Did Mr. Walker call the police about the car damage after discovering it? How did Mr. Walker get home after the incident? Can it be documented that Mr. Walker did have his tires and windshield replaced?
The only media document that I could find that even mentioned the allegedly vandalized car was an article written by Keith Upchurch for the Herald-Sun newspaper. His statement about the vandalism is vague, and doesn’t even hint that Ms. Mangum was responsible for it. Mr. Upchurch’s single sentence on the vandalism is: “Thursday afternoon, an empty black Lincoln car with four flat tires and a shattered windshield was in the driveway, and a leaf blower was in the front yard.” The question is, to whom does the car belong? I tried to obtain photographs of the car, but was informed by Mr. Upchurch that no photographs were taken. I believe that this is relevant because the police incident report describes Mr. Walker’s car as being a blue 2000 Oldsmobile Park Avenue, and not a black Lincoln. I have no idea how to explain this discrepancy. However, when taken as a whole, the credibility of the police/prosecutor’s story is severely strained.
One final point about the car vandalism… Ms. Mangum has always maintained that the argument arose after she broke up with him and asked him to remove his belongings and leave the house. Does it make any sense that she would do anything to hamper his move – such as slash all four of his tires? The police are trying to present the car vandalism as being motivated by Ms. Mangum rage, but the truth is is that Ms. Mangum was not angry with Mr. Walker… at least not prior to him punching her in the face.
Issues revolving around the burned clothes in the bathtub, likewise, are vague and nonspecific. One media source referred to a “bathtub full” of clothes being burned… but whether only a handful of clothes or many clothes were damaged has always been unclear in police and media reports. Were only Mr. Walker’s clothing burned, as the media would lead one to believe? Two things troublesome about the clothing burned in the bathtub are: (1) that the authorities are trying to define this as first degree arson, even though there was no flame damage to the structure; and (2) that the authorities are trying to lay blame on the clothes burning to Crystal Mangum without credible evidence. To my knowledge no officer admitted to witnessing the origin of the fire. Ms. Mangum, according to one report, was supposedly seen carrying clothes into the bathroom, although this report is suspect as she denied ever doing so.
The fact that the media went to extremes and avoided writing about the car vandalism speaks volumes about the veracity of such an occurrence. I believe that the car vandalism accusation was conveniently employed to increase the amount of personal property damaged attributed to Ms. Mangum to an amount greater than $200.
In conclusion, the injury to personal property charge against Ms. Mangum is as bogus as the attempted first degree murder charge, and like that charge, it should be dropped as well. Fact is all charges against Ms. Mangum should be immediately dropped. This entire case against her is nothing more than vendetta justice in retaliation for her role in the Duke Lacrosse case. It is judicial discrimination to which all Nifong supporters and “wrong-enders” (individuals considered by the Powers-That-Be to be on the wrong end of the Duke Lacrosse case) are being unfairly subjected.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
65 comments:
"One final point about the car vandalism… Ms. Mangum has always maintained that the argument arose after she broke up with him and asked him to remove his belongings and leave the house. Does it make any sense that she would do anything to hamper his move – such as slash all four of his tires?"
No, but it makes perfect sense (in CGM's mind) if Walker was dumping her. Retaliation AND a way to prevent him leaving her.
"The police are trying to present the car vandalism as being motivated by Ms. Mangum rage, but the truth is is that Ms. Mangum was not angry with Mr. Walker… at least not prior to him punching her in the face."
Which is believable because of the injuries that were shown on some "suppressed" photos but not on other photos or video taken the same day? Get real! She wan't hit by Walker Sid. She looks just fine in all the photos and video (albeit a bit wasted).
"I believe that the car vandalism accusation was conveniently employed to increase the amount of personal property damaged attributed to Ms. Mangum to an amount greater than $200."
But you said in an earlier post that if you eliminate CGM as doing the property damage (which I guess you, Sid, must, because to do anything else is to disclaim your worldview), then it's either Walker or the cops that did it. Unless Walker has a law degree, why would he trash his own car just to raise the level of damage for a criminal charge? Ergo, Sid, you're saying the cops did it.
So, why would the DPD frame CGM? Why, Sid? What possible motive?
Sid -- You apparently know where Mr. Walker lives (you stated in another post that he lives with his parents in Durham).
Here's a challenge for you --rather than ask these rhetorical questions about Mr. Walker, simply reach out to him (as you've done with CGM) and get his side of this story.
It gets real quiet around here
with all those awful trolls gone.
..
Our sincerest sympathy
for the Mangum family
as they mourn the loss
of husband and father,
Travis Mangum Sr.
..
June 16, 2010
Durham, North Carolina
..
Lance the Intern said...
"Sid -- You apparently know where Mr. Walker lives (you stated in another post that he lives with his parents in Durham).
Here's a challenge for you --rather than ask these rhetorical questions about Mr. Walker, simply reach out to him (as you've done with CGM) and get his side of this story."
I don't know where Mr. Walker's parents live, but I've been told that Milton Walker lives with them.
I did try to talk to Mr. Walker by phone. When I finally was successful in getting him on the phone I introduced myself and talked a bit about my involvement with the "Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong." After I was halfway through my introduction of myself and the organization, the line went dead. I immediately called back several times and repeatedly was referred to voice mail.
Michael said...
"She wan't hit by Walker Sid. She looks just fine in all the photos and video (albeit a bit wasted)."
Just because you cannot see visible signs of trauma on Crystal's face, does not mean that it was not traumatized. She said that she was punched in the face initially three times. She was there and experienced it firsthand. You were not there. She has more credibility than you on this.
Sid -- You wrote "Ms. Mangum stated that after being taken to the police station, photographs were taken of her bruised face, but not one of them was published or aired by the media."
The you wrote "Just because you cannot see visible signs of trauma on Crystal's face, does not mean that it was not traumatized".
Which is it -- were there visible bruises or not? Were the published video and pictures taken with "magic" cameras that do not display bruises?
I've been traumatised by CGM's face.
The death of Travis Mangum is certainly no loss to anyone! Pity he didn't take his ho daughter with him
Sid, the lacrosse crowd continues
to hide potentially exculpatory evidence
from you. Evidence you yourselves
should be well aware of. Apparently,
like Mike, nobody at J4N reads their own
'discovery'.
Milton Walker has been well known to
the Durham Police and the lacrosse lawyers
for over four years now, for his role
in the Duke Rape Scandal.
"The death of Travis Mangum is certainly no loss to anyone! Pity he didn't take his ho daughter with him."
The loss of any human being diminishes us all. Stuff like that statement is uncalled for.
My condolences to CGM, her mom and her sister.
The loss of any human being diminishes us all.
Michael,
I agree with you. I join you in extending condolences to Ms. Mangum and her entire family.
The comments on the "vandalized" car are very interesting. It appears the reporter was trying to lead his readers (viewers) to a conclusion that Crystal vandalized the car even though the reporter had no clue how the car got in that condition. Poor journalism.
If the police have made similar statements to the grand jury without any attempt to investigate, Crystal's case should be thrown out.
"If the police have made similar statements to the grand jury without any attempt to investigate, Crystal's case should be thrown out."
Well said.
Those of you who live in Durham are often subjected to all sorts of police and judicial illegalities, hinky investigations and false prosecutions.
Rigged line-ups,fictionalized police notes, the coziness between the judiciary and the D.A.'s office, the wide variations in bail, witness intimidation...
We know.
The real tragedy here is that Dr Harr et al. failed to stand with the Lacrosse families and use that moment to clean out the corruption and create a safer environment for all our families.
It is not future members of the Duke Lacrosse team who will suffer most from your short-sighted racial bias.
That's YOUR legacy from the Lacrosse Hoax.
"It is not future members of the Duke Lacrosse
team who will suffer most from your short-sighted racial bias."
Ah yes, but they will be free to drink, rape and pillage
to their heart's content, off and on Duke Campus ! ! !
=
DOOK Students are above the LAW !!!
WAAAeeeeeeeeeUUUUUHHHH !!!
+
*
Lacrosse legal logic:
Gosh judge, the WALL musta killed
that poor woman ! ! !
*
To Michael, JSwift, and others who expressed condolences for Crystal's loss:
Thank you. It is sad that individuals such as Anonymous can be so cruel and heartless. Thank you for calling him on it.
Let not your heart be troubled said...
"The comments on the 'vandalized' car are very interesting. It appears the reporter was trying to lead his readers (viewers) to a conclusion that Crystal vandalized the car even though the reporter had no clue how the car got in that condition. Poor journalism.
If the police have made similar statements to the grand jury without any attempt to investigate, Crystal's case should be thrown out."
You bring up an interesting point. I agree that it certainly seems that way. What I find most troublesome is that no photographs were taken by the reporter of the car for documentation purposes. That would also confirm that a car, was, in fact, vandalized. To date, I am uncertain about it.
To Syd's Friend:
Thank you for your thought provoking comments. I would disagree about the two cases on many levels. I believe that in the Crystal Mangum case, charges were leveled against her that police knew to be false... such as the bathtub fire and the car vandalism, plus the attempted murder charge.
In the Duke Lacrosse case, it is reasonable to believe that Ms. Mangum was sexually assaulted in a bathroom. Take these facts into consideration: 1) the Lacrosse team had a history of raucous behavior prior to the March 2006 incident. It was so bad that the president of the university asked the coach to rein in his players; 2) there was underaged drinking at this beer-guzzling stripper party;
3) racial epithets were hurled by the party-goers; 4) Degrading and humiliating comments and gestures were made while the dancers tried to perform which led to the event coming to a premature end; 5) the lacrosse player who called the escort service to arrange for the dancers used a false name and stated it was for a small bachelor party of four or five... they were sent under false pretenses. (Note: when performing before large audiences, usually dancers bring along their own bodyguards for protection. Unfortunately Crystal had none.) None of these details were manufactured, and there was no motivation to hang a felony conviction on these players by the prosecution. In Crystal's case, however, the motivation for seeking criminal charges against her was purely payback for her role in the Duke Lacrosse case.
There are other differences between the cases, as well.
Try these links at WTVD 11 , Sid.
Of course the trolls know all about this.
Photo number seven in a series.
http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=news/local&id=7284042
http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/gallery?section=news&id=7284800&photo=7
photo 7 is here:
http://cdn.abclocal.go.com/images/wtvd/cms_exf_2007/_video_wn_images/wtvd600_Duke_Lacross_Mangum_002_021810.jpg
I get it. somebody vandalized it by putting crime scene tape around it.
Try this one:
Tape Vandal Strikes Again
Sid:
Again, your recollection of the "facts" of the hoax is limited to news reports from the last two weeks of March, 2006, and CGM's discredited witness statements. Moreover, the none five items that you suggest are "facts" are probative of a rape charge.
1) The Coleman committee report, which was commissioned by Richard Brodhead after the rape allegation found NO history or pattern of bad conduct, other than underage drinking which did not distinguish them from any other group at Duke (or NCCU, for that matter), and Brodhead never asked Pressler to "reign in" his players as a result of prior incidents;
2) Underage drinking is not probative of rape;
3) As I've pointed out before, and as you've ignored, the only documented racial statement that came from one (non-indicted) party attendee was in response to Kim Roberts/Pittman calling him a "limp-dicked white boy," itself a racial slur;
4) As I've pointed out before, and as you've ignored, the one comment on record from one (non-indicted) party attendee - the infamous "broomstick" comment - was made in response to Kim Roberts'/Pittman's suggestion - hardly tasteful - that the players drop trou so she could play with their penises. The tasteless banter was initiated by one of the dancers.
5) Please supply any evidence you have, beyond CGM's statements to the DPD and the press, that the nature of the party was misrepresented to the escort service. Again, why is this probative of rape.
CGM has been caught in numerous lies regarding the LAX hoax, including the lie about being attacked by three persons (when she identified four peple as her "three" attackers), her lie about a simultaneous attack in a bathroom that could not physically accommodate four people, and her lie about having an attacker's semen in her mouth, when forensic evidence proved that was impossible.
Contrast the stunning lack of credible evidence in the LAX hoax with (1) police witnessing CGM going postal on her ex-boyfriend (which even she admits to you); (2) a fire and smoke damage in the residence while police were there, and (3) a smashed up car in the driveway.
Sid, there's just no comparison.....
Tell us Michael, just how big
is that bathroom?
"Tell us Michael, just how big is that bathroom?"
Small enough that, when confronted by special prosecutors with the physical impossibility of four adults fitting on the floor of the bathroom during a three-way gang bang, CGM was left no alternative than to suggest that she was being held in mid-air during the alleged "attack."
Well, Michael, then you don't know,
do you?
5No, I believe I just said that I did know it was too small to fit four adults standing, as CGM originally stated. I know this for a fact.
It is clear that the special prosecutors understood the size of the bathroom issue, and referenced it in their questioning of CGM. it is also clear that when confronted with this problem, CGM changed her story (as she had done in respect of so very many other issues).
If the question is, what are the precise dimensions of the bathroom at 610 N. Buchanan, those dimensions have not been reported, to my knowledge.
Why is this relevant to you, and why won't you identify yourself or debate the record openly? Oh, probably because you can't. Because doing so would put you in the same boat as CGM was put when confronted with the laws of time and space - you'd have to make up something silly.
"If the question is, what are the precise dimensions
of the bathroom at 610 N. Buchanan, those dimensions
have not been reported, to my knowledge."
Quite correct, Michael.
Now why is that?
And which bathroom is it?
Bathroom A or bathroom B?
The Blue one or the Green one?
Thank you for the links to the ABC 11 site with the report and the image of the vandalized car.
The question remains, who vandalized the car and when.
Anon and Sid:
The questions you ask are designed to imply issues
with the record that only can exist if there is a plausible alternative explanation, one that neither of you offer.
The actual dimensions of the bathroom are immaterial except to the extent that the folks who have been in there mutually recognize that it's not big enough to fit 4 adults. The SPs recognized it, and so did CGM because she changed her story.
Saying that the question of who vandalized the car is still open implies there is a plausible explanation that someone other than CGM did it. So let's have it. A complete and plausible explanation of who did it and why.
"The question remains, who vandalized the car and when."
Sid, these 'hoods around Central are notorious for trashed,
broken, vandalized cars. Ask anybody that lives or works there.
The cops all know this. That thing could have been sitting like
that for weeks and nobody would notice.
..."immaterial"... LOL
Anon
So the guy's blocking his own driveway with a car that can't be driven. That's a rational explanation? Now it's my turn. LOL, indeed.
Say, how 'bout that Linwood Wilson! Rae Evans has been one busy girl!
The Evans' family will not be attending
any future Duke Alumni Reunions.
Rae Evans, you know we know,
about the terrible crimes you and your
son have committed and continue to commit.
All the lives destroyed by you sociopaths.
We know you know we know.
Thanks for the great memories, Rae.
@Michael:
Thanks for the news regarding the arrest of Linwood Wilson. It definitely seems that what went around is beginning to come around.
I wonder who is next? Ben Himan?
Anonymous @ June 26, 2010 1:49 PM:
Sergeant Schultz! Haven't heard from you since your Stalag 13 days.
Your haven't changed. Just like your Stalag 13 days you know NOTH-THING, NOTH-THING.
Anonymous 1:49,
We know you know we know.
You know we know you know we know.
We know you know we know you know we know.
You know we know you know we know you know we know.
We know you know we know you know we know you know we know.
et sic ad infinitum
Waiting for the "Linwood Wilson did not harass his ex-wife" blog....Sid?
Commenters:
On Wednesday, June 30, 2010, Crystal Mangum will hold a press conference to set the record straight regarding what transpired on February 17th.
This is a story that the bias media does not want to go out to the public, so I do not know how well attended it will be. The media had no problem covering Joe Cheshire and Jim Cooney when they talked about the Duke Lacrosse defendants... The media had no problems talking about Crystal Mangum's arrest on February 17th.
But how well will the media cover Crystal as she explains what happened February 17th? We'll see.
Hey Sid -- Where's the press conference going to be held? Will there be a Q&A?
Sidney:
I'm sure you are prepared to lambaste the media again if they don't take up your kind offer of access to CGM.
However, if they don't show up, there will likely be a "reality-based" reason that doesn't involve a "vast conspiracy." Simply put, her prior performance with the media has been so poor, it's not worth covering her.
Incident #1: The famous "dancer describes ordeal" interview that set the N&O back several years in the credibility department. Why would any paper believe her after that performance?
Incident #2: The Know Bookstore interview during the release of "Last Chance for Grace" which was described by one reporter looking for real "news" as follows:
"But any insights into the contentious case were few and far between. Mangum, who has been described as the pawn of a rogue prosecutor, sidestepped fundamental questions --"
Again, who wants to interview that?
Incident #3: UNC sorority-initiated forum. Vince/Ed Clark has ten minutes of back-and-forth with CGM and then whisks her away (blaming the flu) before the audience can ask any questions.
[This list omits Myra Shird's "CGM for credit" classroom appearance which had no news value.]
Overall, her past media performances are so incredible and/or tightly controlled by her handlers that a news organization on a tight budget would have to think very hard about devoting resources to a CGM presser.
So....rational explanation or "vast conspiracy"? You pays your money you takes your pick!
There will be also be a pole dancing/lap dancing demonstration for Crusty's fans. Attendees are asked to bring unmarked $5 and $10 bills to tuck into her underwear at the end of the presser to help defray her court costs. For an additional fee, she will show attendees how to levitate in small bathrooms.
White males, especially of the student athlete variety, should avoid attending less they be accused of raping her.
Mike Nifong will be there to frame them, Linwood Wilson will offer advice on how to have ex parte telephone conversations with Durham Judges to get bail reduced and finally Sidney Harr will offer tips on fictional/delusional blog writing.
It should be a fun event.
Michael,
I agree with you wholeheartedly. So far as I can see, CGM has avoided any substantial discussion of the case, no doubt because she has been told she runs the risk of being sued for libel or even prosecuted for perjury. Just to be safe, the powers-that-be in Durham have put her away, under house arrest, where only credulous and friendly people (SID, THIS MEANS YOU!) can get at her. This is of course an inconvenience for CGM, but it avoids a disaster.
The following is a current list of issues that Sidney and his fellow Nifongistas have implied are debatable but on which have as yet offered no logical contrary explanation:
1. How the bathroom at 610 N. Buchanan was large enough to fit 4 adult bodies engaging in a simultaneous "gang bang" - particularly given the fact that CGM changed her story in 2007 to suggest that she was held in the air by her "attackers" so as to accommodate the space limitations;
2. Who, other than CGM, had the motive and opportunity to deflate (likely slash) the tires and smash the windshield of Milton Walker's vehicle; and
3. How DNA evidence uncovered by Brian Meehan was not exculpatory when it showed that at least two undisclosed men (not LAX players) had contact with CGM's mouth in the days leading up to the LAX party, but no semen or even trace epithelial DNA from any of the alleged "attackers" was discovered in the very same orifice - despite CGM's detailed testimony that one of her "attackers" ejaculated in her mouth and that she spit that ejaculate on the floor of the bathroom?
The conclusions of the "reality-based" community posters on this website are simple and straightforward on each of these issues:
1. The bathroom was too small to fit 4 adult people. The alleged "attack" in those quarters was not possible. Nifong chose to ignore this. The Special Prosecutors picked up on this issue, confronted CGM with it, and she panicked and changed her story to conform to the obvious space/time facts.
2. Only CGM had the motive and opportunity to vandalize Walker's vehicle. She did so because she was angry he was leaving her and in order to prevent his immediate departure from the house. The Police had no reason to want to manufacture evidence. Walker had no reason to vandalize his own car. Had "local gangs" previously vandalized the car it would have been moved/towed out of the home's driveway to allow for ingress/egress.
3. Sidney has refrained from addressing the "oral DNA issue (despite his promises to address same) for the past 5-6 months because (a) he had not properly researched this issue when he began his defense of Mike Nifong and (b) once confronted with the facts he has no means of perpetuating the Nifong myth that the Meehan DNA evidence was "not exculpatory."
Sidney and fellow Nifongistas, the floor is yours.
"reality-based"...LOL
Has Michael ever attended
a DOOK student party?
Now let's not forget the MONEY
stolen by the very drunk Dook Boyz.
Good luck with the press conference Sid.
Crystal has answered infinitely more
questions than her perps, which to date
amount to ZERO.
Thank you Anon @ 8:19 AM for showing the level of debating skills typical of a Nifongista:
1. Bash Duke "party life" - just in general and just for fun. What an easy target!
2. Talk about "stolen money" like you even know that there was a theft, what amount was involved, and why the DPD never looked into that charge. You don't know anything because there's nothing to know.
3. Talk about CGM's "answers." Yes indeed. There were lots and lots of answers, and they were all different. On the other hand, she can't say a word that's not scripted since she came out with her "book." As for "infinitely more" than her alleged "perpetrators," well that part is true - since there were no actual "perpetrators" they've said nothing and will continue to say nothing because non-existent people can't speak in the "reality-based" world.
Now, if you have anything to say on the subjects I asked questions about....but no, I didn't think so.
When a person is being brutalized, by a gang, memories of this brutalization can become a blur of frightening images.
For God's sake, now you're saying it doesn't matter if all her statements are ridiculous and mutually contradictory, because she was scared?
Often a victim is not the best witness to there own victimization. When one is in a state of terror it's easy to be confused about what had just happened. Everybody present should be questioned, separately and before they can conspire to cover for one another.
@guiowen
Fortunately, courts in the United States do not generally recognize PTSD as a substitute for cogent testimony, particularly where the putative "victim" is the sole fact witness.
The concept that fanciful, farcical, and contradictory testimony from a "victim" is somehow "proof of the victimization" was offered by many hoax observers (enablers) in 2006 and was shot down conclusively. There's no reason to retread this discredited theory.
C'mon Nifongistas! Give us some new theory!
Sid -- Weird stuff going on in Durham....Can you find out why Linwood Wilson's bond was set at only $1000.00? Or why they shuffled his court appearance around so that no reporters would be there when the judge gave him a continuance....
Why are the all the judges and DA's sticking their necks out for Linwood Wilson, while at the same time trying to bury Crystal Mangum?
"Carpetbagger jihad" is not an answer for this one....
Under the heading of "ridiculous and mutually contradictory statements" (thanks @guiowen):
Per Sid's Blog -
"The sight of Walker triggered a fit of hysteria during which Mangum screamed at him. She doesn’t deny that she might have said something to the effect that she was going to stab him, but she did not have a knife and was definitely not armed when yelling."
Per WTVD:
"When asked if she threatened to stab Walker, Mangum said:
'I don't think I said I would cut him, but I do remember telling them to get him out of the apartment because I was afraid of him.'"
Which is it?
Also, the story on the bruises is now that they appeared immediately (because the cops took pictures of them):
"I couldn't understand why the police would blame me for attacking Milton when I could barely walk, and I had bruises on my face that they took pictures of."
But then I guess they disappeared by the time she got to the station....
This, I believe, is the first use in a U.S. criminal case of the "Wolverine defense" named after the mutant member of the X-Men with immediate healing capabilities.
Sid, is a mutant a protected class? If so, I've probably just committed another hate crime!
Milton Walker : "Sometimes she'd do things without thinking, and she probably should have thought that out better."
true dat,Mr. Walker,true dat......
Sid:
The returns are in. The press coverage was completely straight. CGM had her say and they reported it without editorialization.
Where's the conspiracy? Was Rae Evans taking an early 4th of July holiday?
By the way, happy Independence Day! We can all be grateful that we live in a country where we're free to express our views, whatever they may be .
Per swamp woman at her presser:
"Enough is enough. I've lost my father; I've lost custody of my children because of a domestic violence issue," she said.
Good. Glad to hear that the kids have been removed from her.
Gee, do you think that the difference in bail ($1,000 versus $100,000) might be due to the fact that good ol' boy Linwood can be trusted to follow the script?
guiowen, the AG's office has now taken over Wilson's case, the stay of the protection order was lifted (DVPO now in effect), and the Durham County Sheriff's Dept search Linwood's house today & took his firearms and concealed carry permit.
Stevens didn't have much choice after his ex parte problem came out.
Good grief Sydney, open some windows.
This place stinks like a courtroom
full of lacrosse whore lawyers again.
Better yet, lock the windows
and fumigate the place.
Michael said: "There's no reason to retread this discredited theory" Discredited, how so?
Rumor has it that the J4N gang has filed a complaint with the Justice Department alleging violations of CGM's civil rights....Is this true, Sid?
kenhyderal:
Discredited by the evidence that no assault ever took place upon crystal. No assault, no confusion or whatever else for the non victim.
Any one see Mike Pressler on Today this morning. What a classy guy. Sidney Harr must really be choking that Mr. Pressler remains a respected coach in spite of the Duke Rape Hoax
Anonymous said...
"Rumor has it that the J4N gang has filed a complaint with the Justice Department alleging violations of CGM's civil rights....Is this true, Sid?"
Yes. I, not Ms. Mangum, filed the complaint with the Coordination and Review Section in the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice on June 17, 2010. The formal complaint was about the unjust and selective treatment she has received at the hands of the police, prosecutors, and judges. A complete copy of the complaint was handed out to those in attendance at Ms. Mangum's press conference on June 30th. I only heard it mentioned briefly at the end of one news broadcast... I believe NBC-17. You might want to ask them to publish the complete complaint.
The blog I am about to post has to do with the lack of support for Crystal Mangum by politicians, civil rights organizations, and the media editorialists.
Post a Comment