Click link below to access the flog:
http://www.justice4nifong.com/direc/flog/fl13.html
Read the transcript of the flog below:
Today, in the early morning hours of November 20, 2011, I retrieved from my post office box the following correspondence… a first class letter from the Office of the Clerk of the United States District Court in Greensboro. The one page letter from the Clerk of Court appears to have been drafted on Wednesday, November 16, 2011, and the envelope has a postmarked date of Friday, November 18, 2011.
Most likely the letter was delivered on Saturday, November 19, 2011, however I had spent all that day inside my apartment trying to complete a flog and did not visit my mailbox that day.
The envelope contained two sheets of paper, with one page consisting of the aforementioned letter of November 16th from John S. Brubaker, the Clerk. Evidently, the letter was submitted by Deputy Clerk Trina Law.
This document made mention of an accompanying recommendation made by the Magistrate Judge, and it included a time limit of Monday, December 5, 2011 by which to respond to the recommendation.
The second enclosed page consisted only of the heading with my name and address, which I have redacted for this flog, and which was visible in the window of the envelope. Otherwise, the page was blank without any body or text.
Therefore I have no idea as to the identity of the Magistrate Judge or his/her recommendation. I know not whether he/she sided on my behalf or that of the defendants regarding their motion to dismiss.
On Monday, October 3, 2011, I purchased round-trip airline tickets for a Thanksgiving trip to the west coast. My departure from Raleigh is scheduled for early tomorrow morning, Monday, November 21, 2011, with a return date of Sunday, November 27, 2011.
When I fly out of Raleigh first thing in the morning, I will not even be able to visit a post office until I reach my final destination late in the afternoon on Monday. After landing at the airport, I must take a bus and a train to complete my trip. Most likely, the earliest I will be able to mail a letter to the Clerk of Court will be on Tuesday morning, November 22, 2011… and it will be mailed from California.
In the letter I plan on drafting shortly, I will request that another letter be sent out with the inclusion of the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation. Furthermore, I will seek to have the time allotted for my response to be reasonably and fairly extended beyond the date of December 5, 2011.
Until I am aware of the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation and the basis for his/her recommendation, then I am unable to begin work on a response.
I will keep you posted.
60 comments:
Bawawawawawa
So why exactly do you think this is important enough to take up bandwidth? I washed three loads of laundry today, cleaned the bathroom, had coffee (black two cups) with friends, inhaled, exhaled, and otherwise went about my business. Good lord fella do you honestly think anybody gives a hoot about what i did today or, for that matter, what you did with your silly pants-in-a-twist nonsense with Duke?
Correction:
Sidney Harr was violating Duke's policy on solicitation and was requested to desist.
Sidney Harr has expressed resentment over Duke's de facto admission of wrongdoing when it settled with the innocent, wrongfully accused Lacrosse players. Sidney has said in his blog that if anyone deserves a multi million dollar settlement from Duke, it is he. Draw your own conclusions whether or not "On April 14, 2010, Duke University kicked Sidney Harr off campus".
Sid - Call the clerk's office:
John S. Brubaker, Clerk of Court
324 West Market Street, Suite 401
Greensboro, NC 27401
336 332-6000
And let them know that when you received the letter, the Magistrate Judge's recommendation was missing.
Sid, Have you considered whether Rae Evans could be the cause of your problem?
Hey Sid, who's minding the store while you travel? Can we count on Kenny to act as blog moderator this week?
Anonymous said...
So why exactly do you think this is important enough to take up bandwidth? I washed three loads of laundry today, cleaned the bathroom, had coffee (black two cups) with friends, inhaled, exhaled, and otherwise went about my business. Good lord fella do you honestly think anybody gives a hoot about what i did today or, for that matter, what you did with your silly pants-in-a-twist nonsense with Duke?
My lawsuit against Duke University is a fight not only for my rights, but for your rights. My lawsuit objects to a private institute holding a public event arbitrarily discriminating against an individual based on one's beliefs, thoughts, or opinions. It also addresses the question of whether an institution can monitor and regulate private conversation. Do you believe that Duke University should be able to eaves drop on conversation between two individuals who are on their property attending a public event?
When I recommended my web and blog sites to people to whom I gave my business card, I did so in a private conversation. I was not publicly announcing to a group of people to visit my web site. The reason given for kicking me off campus was bogus, as I was not soliciting. If handing out a business card is considered an action worthy of expulsion from campus, then the security guards and police would be spending all their time trespassing individuals. It's ridiculous.
Anonymous, my lawsuit is fighting to prevent institutions like Duke from unjustly discriminating against you, kicking you off its property, and threatening you with arrest. It's not just about me. You should be supportive of my efforts.
Anonymous said...
Correction:
Sidney Harr was violating Duke's policy on solicitation and was requested to desist.
Duke had no solicitation policy against individuals at the time of my harassment. It had a policy which stated conditions under which corporations were to follow when soliciting students. Even this policy did not prohibit soliciting. However, to consider handing out a business card and recommending that someone visit a web site during a private conversation is hardly solicitation.
Anonymous said...
Sidney Harr has expressed resentment over Duke's de facto admission of wrongdoing when it settled with the innocent, wrongfully accused Lacrosse players. Sidney has said in his blog that if anyone deserves a multi million dollar settlement from Duke, it is he. Draw your own conclusions whether or not "On April 14, 2010, Duke University kicked Sidney Harr off campus".
I do not have resentment over Duke wasting its money settling with the Duke Lacrosse defendants. What I have is astonishment. Why should Duke settle with the Duke Lacrosse defendants by giving them $20 million each? What did Duke do to deserve to feel obligated to hand out such a large settlement?
Certainly Duke University's actions against me were far more egregious. They were malicious and pre-meditated. I am deserving of receiving a much larger amount of compensation than the Duke Lacrosse defendants. Without a doubt.
Lance the Intern said...
Sid - Call the clerk's office:
John S. Brubaker, Clerk of Court
324 West Market Street, Suite 401
Greensboro, NC 27401
336 332-6000
And let them know that when you received the letter, the Magistrate Judge's recommendation was missing.
Thanks for the advice and the address. On Monday, November 21, 2011, I mailed a certified letter to the Clerk of Court from Sacramento, CA. Its expected date of delivery is on Friday, November 25, 2011.
Anonymous said...
Sid, Have you considered whether Rae Evans could be the cause of your problem?
I do not believe that Ms. Evans was the proximate cause of my situation in which I was the victim of institutional discrimination by Duke University.
Perhaps the tooth fairy and you, Sid, think you are entitled to money. Personally, I think your whole action against Duke is nothing but attention-seeking hogwash. I doubt seriously that (a)you were just handing out a business card, and (b)that you were kicked off the campus in the manner you describe. You do not have a history of proving your wild statements. When challenged, you simply ignore direct questions, or, you manufacture your "sources"......which is similar to what Tracey Cline did in the third grade complaint she wrote. Instead of providing hard evidence, she used a phrase "based on observation and belief"....over and over.....to justify your accusations. I don't think 20M is near enough for what the lacrosse guys went through. You, on the other hand, deserve nothing.
Duke University does have a policy regarding solicitation and Sidney was in violation of that policy.
Sidney is suing Duke because he believes Duke should pay him an undeserved, exorbitant amount of money.
Enough said.
Sid -- I'm wondering if the blank sheet of paper with your name/address was just to display that information in the letter you received, and that ANOTHER letter (probably sitting in your mailbox, since you're on the west coast) was mailed with the judge's recommendation.
Sid, provide PROOF that your allegations are real and accurate. Saying it's so does not make it so.....
Sid, Why no response? You certainly weren't bashful about voicing your opinions regarding D.A. Cline in your post on September 7.
"Hey Sidney:
What about this latest glob of goo Ms. Cline has dumped upon herself?"
November 19, 2011 5:41 AM
No comments from Kenny in over a week. How could that be?
Second murder trial for the killer (yeah, I know, the accused killer) of Eve Carson begins today. A world of difference between Orange and Durham counties with respect to the conduct of the DAs. whew.....sad sad Durham county.
Sidney, Professor Coleman has taken Cline to task over her intemperate and bizarre meltdown against Judge Hudson. Coleman has made public comments about her behavior and has implied the NC Bar may have to become involved with regard to her unethical behavior. So, now, what do you have to say about Cline and her "conscious"?
The Nifong clone is as unethical as her former boss.
Hey, Sidney:
If your suit is dismissed, will you appeal on the ground of inadequate representation
The U.S. District Court re-sent a letter to me on Friday, November 25, 2011, and it was in my mailbox when I arrived home on Saturday, November 26, 2011. It included the recommendation of Magistrate Judge P. Trevor Sharp, who recommended that my case against Duke University be dismissed. I am still in the process of writing a response, for which the deadline has been moved back to December 12, 2011.
Naturally, I am disappointed in the magistrate's recommendation, but I am far from being deterred. I will post my response, along with the magistrate's recommendation, when I have completed preparing and filing it.
No surprise here, Sid. You have no case. However, if you think you do have cause to go after Duke for some perceived wrong, then press on! Somehow, an old phrase pops into my mine just now.....something about, "a fool for a client"........
Hey Sid:
Get that great legal mind Tracey Cline to write up your response.
It included the recommendation of Magistrate Judge P. Trevor Sharp, who recommended that my case against Duke University be dismissed.
Shocking news.
There's not a great deal of information about Judge Sharp -- FWIW, he was the judge that recommended that prayers referencing Jesus and other sectarian deities made before meetings of the Forsyth County Commissioners were unconstitutional.
"Hey Sid:
Get that great legal mind Tracey Cline to write up your response."
Sid, don't settle for anything less than the Fong.
How soon are we going to hear Trevor Sharp being inducted into the geehaw club? Is he, too, part of a vast conspiracy? Is he secretly in cahoots with Mrs. Evans, Mr. Cooper and the evil Dukies?
Anonymous said...
How soon are we going to hear Trevor Sharp being inducted into the geehaw club? Is he, too, part of a vast conspiracy? Is he secretly in cahoots with Mrs. Evans, Mr. Cooper and the evil Dukies?
I am busy preparing my response, but at the earliest time possible, I will upload a flog that will include the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge and my response.
Isn't it amazing how Sid goes all proper on us when he wants to appear all righteous and "lawyer-ly". I can't wait for Sid to tell us how duke paid off the Judge. Or, better yet, how the lousy justice system in Carolina is racist and class-ist....and, of course, Sid will tell us he is the victim of the evil white oppressor. wheeeeee
I am busy preparing my response, but at the earliest time possible, I will upload a flog that will include the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge and my response.
Can you also upload all of the filings for this case? You posted your initial filing, but failed to post Duke's response, your reply and all subsequent filings. We have not seen the legal arguments provided by both parties.
We assume that Duke asserted that, as a private actor, they are not required to guarantee your freedom of speech. If so, your claim that Duke violated your first amendment rights has no merit.
We do not know what argument you used to counter this legal issue in your filings.
When readers raised this issue on the blog, you simply ignored them. A strategy of ignoring the legal arguments raised by the other party likely does not convince a court.
Although I agree Duke probably has the right to evict Dr.Harr from it's campus, for a violation of their broad anti-solicitation policy, the question needs to be asked why this policy is used arbitrarily against certain individuals. I can guarantee you that an anonymous person, such as myself would not be evicted for handing out a business card or asking someone to visit my web-site. It should be obvious to any fair-minded person that Dr.Harr has been singled out for this treatment. The motive, for which, must be related to his positions regarding the Duke LAX case.
Nonsense Sidney harr , in spite of his hat size, is not a major concern to duke. Frankly, i doubt they could care less about his silly blob and web site. Whats it got now? He, peterson, wahneema, crystal, tracey, jackie w and kenyyhissy as loyal fans? My guess is that he violated their policy by doing far more than quietly handing out a card. We only have his version of what transpired. I bet you a beer, sidney isn't telling it like duke is telling it. This is much noise about nothing. Just like the ranting about the most unethical lawyer to hit durham ( and considering its durham, thats sayin something......)
Isnt it amazing that good ole sid gets his shorts in a knot over the lacrosse guys receiving $$$ from duke but is all wounded martyr when it comes to wanting a payout for himself. Hypocrisy is fun, isnt it ,sid.
"I can guarantee you that an anonymous person, such as myself would not be evicted for handing out a business card or asking someone to visit my web-site."
Given Sid's distorted view of reality, which he regularly exhibits on this website, why would any rational person believe Sid's description of the events that occurred on the Duke campus? Further, as indicated by the poster at 3:49, Sid could set himself on fire in the center of the Duke campus and not a single person would know who he is.
Kenhyderal said "...It should be obvious to any fair-minded person that Dr.Harr has been singled out for this treatment."
The Duke solicitation policy clearly states that for an entity to solicit on university property it must
1) be sponsored by a recognized student organization
2) have a purpose that aligns directly with the listed mission of the recognized student organization,
3) register their activity with the OSAF prior to engaging Duke community members,
4) have a member of the recognized student organization remain with the off-campus entity's representatives for the duration of their time on university property,
5) abide by all local, state, and federal laws as well as university policies.
Sid violated at least 4 of these by soliciting (as defined by Duke) for the j4n committee on the Duke campus.
Would these same rules apply to a single person representing themselves (as opposed to an entity like the j4n committee)? I don't know -- but I would definitely check with Duke University before I attempted it.
Anonymous said...
I am busy preparing my response, but at the earliest time possible, I will upload a flog that will include the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge and my response.
Can you also upload all of the filings for this case? You posted your initial filing, but failed to post Duke's response, your reply and all subsequent filings. We have not seen the legal arguments provided by both parties.
We assume that Duke asserted that, as a private actor, they are not required to guarantee your freedom of speech. If so, your claim that Duke violated your first amendment rights has no merit.
We do not know what argument you used to counter this legal issue in your filings.
When readers raised this issue on the blog, you simply ignored them. A strategy of ignoring the legal arguments raised by the other party likely does not convince a court.
It was my intention to do a flog to contain all documents. Because flogs take a long time and a lot of energy to produce, I have not been able to spend much time on it. However, sometime after I file my response, I will try to post all of the documents related to the case submitted to date. Other issues pop up which take priority over updating my legal quest for justice.
Anonymous said...
Nonsense Sidney harr , in spite of his hat size, is not a major concern to duke. Frankly, i doubt they could care less about his silly blob and web site. Whats it got now? He, peterson, wahneema, crystal, tracey, jackie w and kenyyhissy as loyal fans? My guess is that he violated their policy by doing far more than quietly handing out a card. We only have his version of what transpired. I bet you a beer, sidney isn't telling it like duke is telling it. This is much noise about nothing. Just like the ranting about the most unethical lawyer to hit durham ( and considering its durham, thats sayin something......)
Isnt it amazing that good ole sid gets his shorts in a knot over the lacrosse guys receiving $$$ from duke but is all wounded martyr when it comes to wanting a payout for himself. Hypocrisy is fun, isnt it ,sid.
There is no doubt that Duke University has the media on its side. The question is does it have the courts on its side, as well. My guess would be that it does, considering the baseless recommendation by the Magistrate Judge. Never the less, true justice is on my side, and I am confident that in the final analysis, I will prevail.
Thereby, go ye enlightened.
A simple google search would have shown you that suppressions of speech are not violations of the First Amendment unless the State or Federal government does the suppressing.
“He who is his own lawyer has a fool for a client”
@ Lance the Intern. These rules indicate who can solicit. It seems to me that solicitation requires unwanted, persistent, entreaty and importunity
Nope. Solitation in the duke setting MUST meet duke's policy requirements. I have seen it enforced consistently on the campus. This whole business is just another example of sid's inflated self importance and his silly paranoia. This so-called nifong committee is laughable and sad. As is the notion that duke would somehow concern itself with special treatment of Harr because he rants about nifong. In short, he failed to follow duke's requirements and he was told to desist. Period. To somehow claim that he was singled out because of his silly j4n argle bargle is is to understand further just how grandiose and pumped up an ego can become. Sad and spectacularly misguided
Sid: My lawsuit against Duke University is a fight not only for my rights, but for your rights. My lawsuit objects to a private institute holding a public event arbitrarily discriminating against an individual based on one's beliefs, thoughts, or opinions.
I do not believe you.
As you know, the McFadyen suit claims Duke intervened against a student-led voter registration drive at the homecoming game. The Monk campaign was permitted to conduct a registration drive at the same game.
The students were not permitted to wear their T-shirts even when they gave up their registration materials. Did Duke consider your J4N shirt part of your "solicitation" for Nifong? If so, this is consistent with Duke's earlier behavior.
You stated that this suit has no merit. As a result, your readers may conclude that you support Duke's actions against the students.
You now claim that you seek to support the rights of others. You missed the opportunity to do this earlier.
Your readers must conclude that that you believe either that (1) Duke owes a greater responsibility to you as a visitor than they owe to their students or (2) pro-Nifong speech is protected and anti-Nifong speech is not.
You owe your readers an explanation. You may wish to consider an apology.
Sid,
Did it ever occur to you that Kenny is the only poster who agrees with you? That fact alone should tell you why your suit is being dismissed.
Uh huh here we go with the conspiracy again. "duke having the courts on their side". I wondered how long it would take sid to claim he has been done in by the evil duke media evans court white people mob. So here we go, folks. Enjoy the show. It's geeeeehaw time on the J4N show!!!
@ Anonymous 12/3/11 5:21. I still maintain that what Dr. Harr did does not meet the definition of soliciting.
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny.
You da man Kenny, you da man.
Anonymous said...
Uh huh here we go with the conspiracy again. "duke having the courts on their side". I wondered how long it would take sid to claim he has been done in by the evil duke media evans court white people mob. So here we go, folks. Enjoy the show. It's geeeeehaw time on the J4N show!!!
My response, which should be available online by next Sunday, will explain everything. Be patient.
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny.
Anonymous said...
Sid: My lawsuit against Duke University is a fight not only for my rights, but for your rights. My lawsuit objects to a private institute holding a public event arbitrarily discriminating against an individual based on one's beliefs, thoughts, or opinions.
I do not believe you.
As you know, the McFadyen suit claims Duke intervened against a student-led voter registration drive at the homecoming game. The Monk campaign was permitted to conduct a registration drive at the same game.
The students were not permitted to wear their T-shirts even when they gave up their registration materials. Did Duke consider your J4N shirt part of your "solicitation" for Nifong? If so, this is consistent with Duke's earlier behavior.
You stated that this suit has no merit. As a result, your readers may conclude that you support Duke's actions against the students.
You now claim that you seek to support the rights of others. You missed the opportunity to do this earlier.
Your readers must conclude that that you believe either that (1) Duke owes a greater responsibility to you as a visitor than they owe to their students or (2) pro-Nifong speech is protected and anti-Nifong speech is not.
You owe your readers an explanation. You may wish to consider an apology.
I do not believe the j4n t-shirt was an issue because it was never mentioned in the letter by Mr. Schoenfeld, and because I had worn that same t-shirt many times when going to Duke campus, including all three days of the three day John Hope Franklin Conference, and nobody objected or said anything to me. Consequently, I had no expectations that it would cause a problem when I went to the April 14, 2010 event.
Presently I will post a flog about the NCAA... My subsequent flog, which should be posted next Sunday, will cover my lawsuit against Duke University.
kenhyderal said "@ Lance the Intern. These rules indicate who can solicit. It seems to me that solicitation requires unwanted, persistent, entreaty and importunity
Try getting your definition from Duke's Office of Student Activities and Fscilities, rather than http://www.thefreedictionary.com
Duke doesn't give two hoots and a snow cone about Sid and his silly blob. What they do care about is inappropriate behavior, as defined by their standards on their private campus. For Sid to imply that he was singled out because of his Nifong nonsense is pure fantasy and arrogance. Who gives a tinker's damn if Sidney Harr wants to be bathrobe boy's biggest fan! Trust me, it aint big D. The mistreatment of the young men involved, their teammates, their coach, their families and others (by Duke, Nifong, the 88, the Durham police, etc.) is what matters still from that night. NOT Sidney-and-his-shape-changer-sources. Give us a break, Sid. This is nothing but nuisance pandering.....
@Lance the Intern "Solicitation is defined by the act of interceding into a Duke community member's space in order to request information or communicate information about products, services, or events that are not related to Duke University or its educationa lmission". And, Dr.Harr's action costitutes, a breech of this, how?. I've been on a lot of University Campuses around the world, including in China and no where, in my experience, would handing out a business card with a web address on it get you evicted.
Kenhdyeral says "Dr.Harr's action costitutes[sic], a breech of this, how?."
Kenhyderal -- The "Justice 4 Nifong" website (of which this blog is just a small part) -- which Sid freely admits is listed on both the shirt he was wearing and on the business cards he was handing out -- was created for 1 purpose. That purpose (a service, if you will) is to re-instate Mike Nifong. This purpose does not align with an recognized student organization.
It seems odd to me that you are so willing to believe Sid's side of this story, given his unwillingness to post the court documents. He's been asked several times, but "...Other issues pop up (like the NCAA!) which take priority over updating my legal quest for justice.
It is comical that anybody, including Ken Who Has No Clue, would think that Sidney is accurately, fairly, and fully recounting what transpired without slanting it ALL in his favor. His so-called accounts of what happened in the lacrosse case, over and over and over, demonstrate his racist bias and his clear tendency to manufacture information that suits his purpose. If in doubt, say you got it from a "source"...etc.etc. Now, we have HIS proclaimed innocent handing out of a business card as the basis for being dragged out of a meeting, practically in handcuffs....and being saved by the coincidental appearance of Prof. Coleman. Please. My guess is that (a)it did NOT go down the way Sid is portraying the incident (b)it is overblown self-promoting nonsense, designed to give him something to complain about, and (c)it is designed to get him notoriety and money. Until Sid PROVES that what he says happened, the WAY he says it happened, all the rest is pure speculation.
Put up or shut up, Sid. Simple
kenhyderal says " I've been on a lot of University Campuses around the world, including in China and no where, in my experience, would handing out a business card with a web address on it get you evicted."
Just so, Ken. Based on your own experience, what Sid claims to have happened has never gotten you thrown off a university campus, yet you claim to believe Sid's side of this story, without hearing or reading Duke's version. Ask yourself, "Why is that?"
The reason Kenny Hissy automatically takes Sid;s version as The Truth is that to do otherwise, to even raise one tiny little question about Sid's honesty, would be incompatible with the one-track-mindset that floods this silly blob whenever the Fonster and Sister get regurgitated. Heaven forbid Sid would tell a whopper about his duke experience because that might mean he tells whoppers elsewhere.....as in the "sources" who float through the hallways at Duke Hospital and conjure up tales about Mr. Daye's apparent murder at the hands of the Duke physicians.
Gracious, Sid couldn't possibly have made up something....do ya think????
Anonymous said...
The reason Kenny Hissy automatically takes Sid;s version as The Truth is that to do otherwise, to even raise one tiny little question about Sid's honesty, would be incompatible with the one-track-mindset that floods this silly blob whenever the Fonster and Sister get regurgitated. Heaven forbid Sid would tell a whopper about his duke experience because that might mean he tells whoppers elsewhere.....as in the "sources" who float through the hallways at Duke Hospital and conjure up tales about Mr. Daye's apparent murder at the hands of the Duke physicians.
Gracious, Sid couldn't possibly have made up something....do ya think????
My statement of events regarding what occurred on the Duke University campus on April 14, 2010, have been consistent and represent the truth. The "solicitation excuse" is the best Duke University could come up with, as its case for kicking me off campus is non-existent.
Be patient. Enlightenment is on the way... hopefully by this coming weekend.
Put up or shut up sid. And dont expect anybody except maybe kenny hissy and Victoria to believe your fabrication
Your explanation, though consistent, is nonetheless without one shred of PROOF.
enlighten yourself, fella.
I think that Sid, now having to post the court documents, has finally actually read them. Thus he's reluctant to post them, as he knows that his case is frivolous. What are you waiting for, Sid?
Post a Comment