Wednesday, September 12, 2012

Plea deal effort made in order to keep exculpatory evidence from Mangum

Word count: 1,461

It is obvious that Woody Vann, the defense attorney appointed to represent Crystal Mangum, is leading a full-court press in his attempt to pressure his client into accepting a plea deal… one that would be to her detriment and a salvation to Orange County Medical Examiner Clay Nichols, Duke University Hospital, the city of Durham, and prosecutors Kelly Gauger and Charlene Coggins-Franks.

Mangum, the Duke Lacrosse victim/accuser, has been incarcerated since April 3, 2011 on an initial charge of assault with a deadly weapon for the stabbing of Reginald Daye. An alcoholic, Mr. Daye was heavily intoxicated when in a jealous rage he began physically abusing Ms. Mangum by repeatedly punching her in the face and head, spitting on her, pulling out her hair, and kicking in the bathroom door in order to get at her. It was Daye who brought a set of steak knives from the kitchen into the bedroom, where most of the horrific abuse took place, and began throwing them at her. According to Mangum, he was choking her with both hands when she desperately grabbed a knife lying around and stabbed him once.

Prosecution photographs recorded the injuries sustained by Mangum at Daye’s hands, displays the clumps of her hair lying on the floor at the scene, and shows the battered locked bathroom door that Daye had kicked off its hinges.

These photographs have been turned over by prosecution to Ms. Mangum’s defense attorneys (Chris Shella and Mr. Vann), but they have withheld them from her despite her requests to have copies. Her requests for this specific prosecution discovery have been denied by her defense counsel for more than a year.

After Reginald Daye was taken to Duke University Hospital with the non-life threatening wound, he underwent successful emergency surgery by the trauma team and was on his way to a full recovery. On the third postoperative day, however, complications from alcoholic withdrawal led to his transfer to the Surgical Intensive Care Unit. It was then that a decision to intubate him was made in order to administer concentrated oxygen and protect his airway… but, unfortunately the esophagus was intubated instead of the trachea, and the lungs were deprived of oxygen for an extended period of time. This medical malpractice by Duke University staff resulted in Daye’s brain death, and after a week in which no improvement was observed, he was removed from life support and died.

The following day, Orange County Medical Examiner Dr. Nichols performed an autopsy and dictated an Autopsy Examination Report dated April14, 2011. This report, which was released to the public four months later, contained findings of injuries that were not supported by the operative report and other medical records… and many of the reports findings were contradicted by the other documents. Nichols’ narrative omitted mention of problems with delirium tremens which were manifested in Daye, omitted mention of problems with the intubation and re-intubation during CPR, omitted mention of Daye’s weeklong coma, omitted mention of the fact that Daye died after he was taken off life support, and the omission of other pertinent and important facts.

Along with the myriad of false findings and glaring omissions, Dr. Nichols then somehow magically reached the conclusion that Daye died due to “complications of a stab wound to the chest.” No where in the document does the medical examiner even attempt to construct a nexus to support his conclusion. A reasonable person with full knowledge of the facts would immediately realize that Nichols’ conclusion in the autopsy report was reached for the sole purpose of allowing Durham prosecutors to charge Crystal Mangum with Daye’s death… to shift the true responsibility for Daye’s demise from Duke University Hospital staff where it belongs onto Crystal Mangum.

After reviewing the autopsy report by Dr. Nichols, I knew immediately that it was impossible for Daye to have sustained all of the injuries listed (perforations to the left lung, diaphragm, left kidney, fundus of the stomach, spleen, and splenic flexure of the colon) with just a single stab wound with a steak knife. At some point, the State Bureau of Investigation began doing some mysterious experiment that I have been led to believe had to do with the entry wound and its trajectory within Daye’s body. I am not sure what its intention was to prove or to disprove. But, if conducted objectively and scientifically, it would undoubtedly conclude that it was impossible for a single stabbing with a steak knife to inflict the injuries reported by Nichols.

From what I have been told, this mysterious report by the SBI (which has been under scrutiny for many of its unorthodox testing, i.e. markings on bullets, blood spatter, etc.) was conducted over an approximate twelve month period. Crystal Mangum has repeatedly requested to have a copy of this report, as well, but her attorney, Woody Vann has refused.

On May 24, 2012, I showed Mr. Vann the faults within the Nichols autopsy report, and the many discrepancies between it and other medical records. This motivated Mr. Vann to consider having an independent forensic pathologist review the April 14, 2011 autopsy report, and around June 16, 2012, a judge ordered payment for such an expert witness… Dr. Christena L. Roberts.

Crystal Mangum told me that Mr. Vann had received the report from Dr. Roberts but that he would not allow her to see it or give her a copy until after she was released from the Durham County Detention Center. He gave no reason to her for his decision. This important document will undoubtedly refute the determination made by Orange County M.E. Clay Nichols that Reginald Daye died due to complications of a stab wound to the chest. The report by Dr. Roberts would effectively take the murder charge off consideration and destroy the prosecution’s case against Mangum. Crystal Mangum has repeatedly asked Mr. Vann for this document, and he as consistently refused.

Crystal Mangum has been denied the opportunity to see these vital pieces of documents which represent exculpatory evidence. The prosecution is prohibited from withholding such evidence from the defendant, but in this peculiar situation, the defense attorney is the impediment.

As I have said for some time, the truth will set Ms. Mangum free, despite the obstructionist and counterproductive activities of Mangum’s counsel to undermine the strength of her defensive position. Woody Vann, along with prosecutor Charlene Coggins-Franks, is working in conjunction with the mainstream media to keep the truth under wraps. Mr. Vann has no intention of ever allowing these pieces of evidence to ever see the public light of day. The photographs, for example, would heavily lean towards Mangum’s claim that she had been abused and acted in self-defense. The report from the SBI would cast doubt on the numerous injuries listed in the Nichols’ autopsy document, and the report by Dr. Roberts would poke huge holes into the April 14, 2011 report’s findings and conclusion about the cause of Daye’s death. The very credibility of the Nichols autopsy report would be irreparably damaged.

With the annihilation of the Nichols’ report, the prosecution’s case against Mangum would go up in flames as well. As a result of this revelation, Crystal Mangum would be viewed by the public as a victim of Reginald Daye, and a victim of a conspiratorial justice system with heavy collusion from the biased mainstream media. Reputations of the medical examiner, Duke University Hospital, Durham prosecutors, and defense attorneys would also take a beating if the truth were known.

Mr. Vann’s objective now is to keep the truth from being known. To achieve that, he has been seeking to get a plea deal with Ms. Mangum… for her to plea to a felony assault charge in exchange for time served. This would allow the true criminals in this intrigue to escape from the hook, and for the damning prosecution discovery to be disposed of, unseen.

What is truly sad and unfortunate is that Mr. Vann is using his position of trust as attorney for defendant Mangum, to her disadvantage and to the benefit of the prosecution… and he is doing it with the blessing of the North Carolina State Bar. (It seems as though the State Bar is more interested in going after laypersons trying to assist – within the bounds of the law – Ms. Mangum.)

The desperation by the prosecution and its surrogate Vann is evident when he tells Mangum that if she does not accept the plea deal, she is unlikely to get into court before April 2013. This is just one of the scare tactics used by Vann in his bid to protect the prosecutorial conspirators, shield the exculpatory evidence, and really put the screws to the Duke Lacrosse accuser. 

115 comments:

Lance the Intern said...

As I pointed out to you, as per The NC Bar Rules of Professional Conduct, a lawyer can delay transmission of information to a client. It should also be noted that when this happens, it usually indicates that disclosure would harm the client.

Not surprisingly, you ignored my earlier message, stating that you were "too busy" to respond...My assumption is that you will ignore this one as well.

Anonymous said...

This latest post by sidney is nothing more than a repost of the same nonsense he has been typing for months. It is all about building his "case" for future installments of what I call "The evil white people grand conspiracy against everybody else". If/as/when Mangum is brought to justice and winds up with any kind of conviction that does not suit Harr's sense of justice, then we will get treated to the stomach-turning tale of how the evil conspiracy framed her....over and over. This is all groundwork for his future tirades. No, he will not listen because he does not care. Truth be damned.
I am glad Vann has grown a pair and is keeping material away from Mangum.....which, we all know, means keeping it away from Harr. Duh!!
If she wants to fire Vann, let her. Sidney give her the money. Put your money where you loud mouth is....

Anonymous said...

Interesting to me that Sidney is now saying that Shella had material, too, and didn't let Mangum have it. Previously, he was saying that Vann was the culprit here.....not both Vann and Shella. so, when Mangum gave Harr all the information he illegally and disrespectfully posted on his site, there was NO mention by harr, at THAT time, that Shella was holding information from Mangum. None. Harr made NO statement about Shella having information/material which Shella wasn't letting Mangum have. Yet, now, we hear about how Shella supposedly had information, months ago, that he, too, would not let Mangum have. Isn't it interesting? You would think that if it were true that Shell had information which he refused to share with Mangum, that Harr would have known this, at that time, and whined about it, at that time.
This is yet another example of the lies and misrepresentations that charactertize ALL of Harr's writings and stories. Total bullxxxx

Anonymous said...

Ironic isn't it that the information that is supposedly being withheld from Mangum (photos, etc.) is the information which Harr says would support Mangum's claim of self defense. I say, and my opinion is every bit as valid has Harr's, that there is NO SUCH EVIDENCE. I say that the photos Harr claims to exist...showing mangum all beat to hell.....simply do not exist. I say the Roberts report, supposedly validating Harr's wild claims, also does not exist. I say that any so-called evidence of a wild beating and self defense fight simply does not exist.
Harr, you can say what you will......and so can all the rest of us.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

You again show the world that you are completely divorced from reality and probably schizophrenic.

You have presented nothing except unsupported, unsubstantiated allegations.

You delude yourself if you believe that your unsubstantiated raving brought about the involvement of Dr. Christena Roberts.

guiowen said...

Sidney,
I just don't understand what you think you are doing. Let me play devil's advocate, once again, and assume that you actually believe everything you say.
Assuming that prosecutors are keeping CGM in jail just to pressure her, why don't you try to get her bail? Some fellow called Kenhyderal, who claims to be CGM's bosom buddy, is in fact trying to get her out. If so, you should think of him, if not as a friend, then at least as an ally. Yet he claims you won't communicate with him. Why? Wouldn't it be better for Crystal if you, Kenny, and like-minded people at least coordinated your strategies?

Assuming that Vann is in the pay of the Carpetbagger Jihad, coordinated by Rae Evans -- the evil woman that controls so much of the NC justice system, shouldn't you try to get CGM a new lawyer? Since Mike Nifong is so beholden to you (after all, you and your friends did get him a new guitar), I find it unconscionable (to use a word much in vogue in this blog) that he would not apply for a new license and use it to help Crystal.

Assuming Rae Evans controls the NC justice system, shouldn't you go to the U.S. Department of Justice for relief?

Instead, all you do -- so far as I can see -- is sit around, assuring us that the truth will set CGM free. The way you are running things, she will indeed be set free -- sometime around 2022, when she has served out her sentence.

Don't just complain, act!

Anonymous said...

well said, guiowen! Amen. At least Kenny Hissy Man actually sent some money. (apparently....) It makes no sense that Harr is saying that the state is using the tactic of delayed incarceration to force Mangum into signing a plea deal....yet he refuses to put up a dollar to help pay her bail. If Mangum is not in jail, then the state, per Harr, loses its big stick to make her take the plea deal.
No reason for Harr to go to the US Dept of Justice because Mrs. Evans control it, too, and the Supreme Court. Amazes me that Harr hasn't called up the man of color in the White House and informed him of the international plot to screw over Mangum. What is truly comical is that Harr actually believes that there are people sitting around trying to figure out how to stick it to Mangum. (as if they give a damn......)
Remember that not ONE of the Lax guys, not one, and no one from the AGs office....in fact, no one sued or otherwise went after Mangum after the LAX fraud. She is not named in a single suit and no charges were filed against her by the AG.
She did, however, get herself a book deal and apparently sold at least 24 copies to the j4n folks. well, maybe not......

Anonymous said...

Last post of Harr's was 1500 and this one is 1400....we are heading in the right direction.....

Anonymous said...

Given that Harr is now claiming that Shella had information that he, too, withheld for more than a year.....it becomes clearer why Shella withdrew from the case after Mangum illegally and improperly handed over information to Harr.....and after the information got posted in the internet. Absolutely clear now why Harr's interference has been so detrimental to Mangum.

Anonymous said...

Ah, the
duke Lacrosse Accuser" is it, Harr? see the last line in this last piece of trash, folks. so, Mangum is an accuser, is she? I prefer other words.....such as liar, hoax-maker, imposter, and amoral characterless person.
by the way, how come you and vincent clark don't get together and donate the huge proceeds from Mangum's book sales to the bail fund?

Break the Conspiracy said...

Sid:

I am disappointed with this post, a repeat of prior complaints that Vann is not acting in Crystal's interest. Repetition will change nothing.

You believe Vann and other attorneys are conspiring against Crystal. A decision to encourage Crystal to fire Vann and represent herself is the only viable option in the face of a widespread conspiracy. Then she can make evidence available to you.

You see the key to Crystal's defense as making information known: if you can circumvent the complicit media, public pressure will force prosecutors to drop the case.

You have concluded that Crystal is credible and her claim of self-defense is convincing.

The hour of terror you describe is remarkable in its brutality. I agree that the quality of the mug shot is poor, and details are not clear. Other photographs will certainly show serious injuries if Crystal's account is accurate.

Neither Shella nor Vann appealed to the public. The defense attorneys in the lacrosse case used court filings and sympathetic media with great success to argue their case publicly.

While I believe guiowen was facetious in suggesting that you hand out fliers on street corners, he is correct: this blog does not reach a wide enough audience. I do not underestimate the importance of this blog, but warn that merely posting evidence here will not guarantee results.

You must be proactive in making more people aware of this sit, with press conferences, interviews, demonstrations, teach-ins, etc. Be creative. Crystal's freedom is at stake.

Anonymous said...

Break the Conspiracy:

"
Neither Shella nor Vann appealed to the public. The defense attorneys in the lacrosse case used court filings and sympathetic media with great success to argue their case publicly."

Whether or not you are serious, I do not know, You seem to forget that the defense attorneys' statements to the media were in response to corrupt DA NIFONG's public statements about the case, statements made before he had any facts about the case, statements to the effect that a crime had happened, that Lacrosse players were the perpetrators, that their exercise of their right to silence was an indication of guilt, that their retention of counsel was an indication of guilt.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

That you repeatedly have tried to misrepresent false accuser/victimizer Crystal Mangum as the victim/accuser in the Duke Lacrosse case shows that you are still enraged over the outcome of the case and that you believe the Lacrosse players are guilty.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"After reviewing the autopsy report by Dr. Nichols, I knew immediately that it was impossible for Daye to have sustained all of the injuries listed".

SIDNEY< you are a completely incompetent retired physician and are therefore incapable of evaluating the autopsy report.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"
As I have said for some time, the truth will set Ms. Mangum free, despite the obstructionist and counterproductive activities of Mangum’s counsel to undermine the strength of her defensive position."

How come she isn't free yet? You must not be telling the truth.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"This is just one of the scare tactics used by Vann in his bid to protect the prosecutorial conspirators, shield the exculpatory evidence, and really put the screws to the Duke Lacrosse accuser."

You would not be saying that unless you are still enraged by the outcome of Crystal's false allegations against the innocent Duke Lacrosse players, unless you believed the innocent, falsely accused Lacrosse players were guilty.

Anonymous said...

Sidney, your repeated claims (not substantiated facts) are getting old. Very old.
I wonder, frankly, about this Break the Conspiracy poster. Perhaps we have another Malek in the Making.........
you can, of course, continue your whine and cheese party...... heaven forbid you would actually open your purse and put up Mangum's bail.

Anonymous said...

Break, you are a riot! Funny stuff.....

Nifong Supporter said...


Lance the Intern said...
As I pointed out to you, as per The NC Bar Rules of Professional Conduct, a lawyer can delay transmission of information to a client. It should also be noted that when this happens, it usually indicates that disclosure would harm the client.

Not surprisingly, you ignored my earlier message, stating that you were "too busy" to respond...My assumption is that you will ignore this one as well.


Intern, know that I would never purposely ignore you.

Regarding the statement in the Bar rules, could you copy and paste the paragraph wherein the statement is made about "delaying transmission"? Does delaying mean that discovery and evidence can be delayed from a defendant forever?

The rule doesn't make sense. The defendant should be entitled to all discovery, period. Even if it may not be positive or not in the defendant's best interests.

Don't you agree with me... or do you believe that the Bar has it correct on this issue?

Nifong Supporter said...


Break the Conspiracy said...
Sid:

I am disappointed with this post, a repeat of prior complaints that Vann is not acting in Crystal's interest. Repetition will change nothing.

You believe Vann and other attorneys are conspiring against Crystal. A decision to encourage Crystal to fire Vann and represent herself is the only viable option in the face of a widespread conspiracy. Then she can make evidence available to you.

You see the key to Crystal's defense as making information known: if you can circumvent the complicit media, public pressure will force prosecutors to drop the case.

You have concluded that Crystal is credible and her claim of self-defense is convincing.

The hour of terror you describe is remarkable in its brutality. I agree that the quality of the mug shot is poor, and details are not clear. Other photographs will certainly show serious injuries if Crystal's account is accurate.

Neither Shella nor Vann appealed to the public. The defense attorneys in the lacrosse case used court filings and sympathetic media with great success to argue their case publicly.

While I believe guiowen was facetious in suggesting that you hand out fliers on street corners, he is correct: this blog does not reach a wide enough audience. I do not underestimate the importance of this blog, but warn that merely posting evidence here will not guarantee results.

You must be proactive in making more people aware of this sit, with press conferences, interviews, demonstrations, teach-ins, etc. Be creative. Crystal's freedom is at stake.


Break, you are absolutely correct, and I have agreed with what you're saying. It is apparent that Woody Vann will not go quietly like Shella, and it seems like the only alternative is for Mangum to get rid of him.

It is apparent that Vann wants to withhold the prosecution discovery from Crystal and the public because it is exculpatory in nature.

Ms. Mangum has been displeased with Mr. Vann for some time, and it is past time for her to get rid of him and represent herself. At least she will then have access to the discovery.

I will encourage her to release Mr. Vann (whose interests lie with the prosecution, Duke University, and the medical examiner) and represent herself.

Thanks again for your comments. Please continue to share your thoughts with me.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
SIDNEY HARR:

"
As I have said for some time, the truth will set Ms. Mangum free, despite the obstructionist and counterproductive activities of Mangum’s counsel to undermine the strength of her defensive position."

How come she isn't free yet? You must not be telling the truth.


Mangum is not yet free because the people do not know the truth yet. That has to do in large measure to the biased reporting, or lack thereof, by the mainstream media. Once Durhamians and Tar Heelians are made fully aware of the gross injustices against Mangum, there will be a clamoring for her release and dismissal of all charges.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Break, you are a riot! Funny stuff.....


Hah! What's funny is your pathetic comeback. That's the best you can do, no doubt, because Break made his case intelligently and thoughtfully.

Lance the Intern said...

Rule 1.4 Communication

Withholding Information (paragraph 4)

"In some circumstances, a lawyer may be justified in delaying transmission of information when the client would be likely to react imprudently to an immediate communication. Thus, a lawyer might withhold a psychiatric diagnosis of a client when the examining psychiatrist indicates that disclosure would harm the client. A lawyer may not withhold information to serve the lawyer's own interest or convenience. Rules or court orders governing litigation may provide that information supplied to a lawyer may not be disclosed to the client. Rule 3.4(c) directs compliance with such rules or orders."

Note -- bolding is mine.

Nifong Supporter said...


guiowen said...
Sidney,
I just don't understand what you think you are doing. Let me play devil's advocate, once again, and assume that you actually believe everything you say.
Assuming that prosecutors are keeping CGM in jail just to pressure her, why don't you try to get her bail? Some fellow called Kenhyderal, who claims to be CGM's bosom buddy, is in fact trying to get her out. If so, you should think of him, if not as a friend, then at least as an ally. Yet he claims you won't communicate with him. Why? Wouldn't it be better for Crystal if you, Kenny, and like-minded people at least coordinated your strategies?

Assuming that Vann is in the pay of the Carpetbagger Jihad, coordinated by Rae Evans -- the evil woman that controls so much of the NC justice system, shouldn't you try to get CGM a new lawyer? Since Mike Nifong is so beholden to you (after all, you and your friends did get him a new guitar), I find it unconscionable (to use a word much in vogue in this blog) that he would not apply for a new license and use it to help Crystal.

Assuming Rae Evans controls the NC justice system, shouldn't you go to the U.S. Department of Justice for relief?

Instead, all you do -- so far as I can see -- is sit around, assuring us that the truth will set CGM free. The way you are running things, she will indeed be set free -- sometime around 2022, when she has served out her sentence.

Don't just complain, act!


gui, mon ami,

Thanks for the encouragement, but I consider what I do enlightening the people. That is what will get results.

Crystal should get rid of Woody Vann as her attorney, and the U.S. Justice Department should definitely be contacted.

However, the case would be made stronger with the discovery that is currently being withheld by Woody Vann.

Anonymous said...

Yep, snappy comeback sid....a new moniker for perry mason.
Mangum should definitely fire Vann. Absolutely. And represent herself. Oh, and make sidney her counselor. I will definitely buy a ticket if that circus comes to town.
Break, I agree with the other poster. Hilarious.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"The rule doesn't make sense. The defendant should be entitled to all discovery, period. Even if it may not be positive or not in the defendant's best interests."

Whoever appointed a deluded, probably schizophrenic megalomaniac as arbiter of what or what does not make sense?

Anonymous said...

Both Shella and Vann have refused to give Mangum information? For over a year? Wow, sidney, why didn't you say this back when.....when you illegally posted the material Mangum gave you? If there was more....that was exculpatory....one would think you would be screaming your head off about it. Not one word mentioned back then though? interesting......

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"It is apparent that Vann wants to withhold the prosecution discovery from Crystal and the public because it is exculpatory in nature."

Only in your deluded, probably schizophrenic imagination.

Anonymous said...

No, sidney, that rule, along with many others, is there precisely to protect the client's best interests. And in this case, Vann (and apparently Shella) were and are doing the right thing.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"Mangum is not yet free because the people do not know the truth yet. That has to do in large measure to the biased reporting, or lack thereof, by the mainstream media. Once Durhamians and Tar Heelians are made fully aware of the gross injustices against Mangum, there will be a clamoring for her release and dismissal of all charges."

You believe you are reaching people with your blog - you are unwilling to pass out printed material on the streets.

If you are reaching people with your blog, then said "Durhamians and Tar Heelians" should be aware of what you allege. Where is the clamor?

Anonymous said...

Gee, I think Break is right. If Sid can PROVE that Vann is in on the fix, i.e., that he is working for Rae Evans and the grand conspiracy, then Sidney will win the Pulitzer, the Nobel and the Medal of Freedom.
God for it, Sidney. Make Mangum fire Vann.

Nifong Supporter said...


Lance the Intern said...
Rule 1.4 Communication

Withholding Information (paragraph 4)

"In some circumstances, a lawyer may be justified in delaying transmission of information when the client would be likely to react imprudently to an immediate communication. Thus, a lawyer might withhold a psychiatric diagnosis of a client when the examining psychiatrist indicates that disclosure would harm the client. A lawyer may not withhold information to serve the lawyer's own interest or convenience. Rules or court orders governing litigation may provide that information supplied to a lawyer may not be disclosed to the client. Rule 3.4(c) directs compliance with such rules or orders."

Note -- bolding is mine.


Intern, thanks. The example given is pretty extreme, and relies upon a medical professional's opinion that release of discovery would be detrimental to the client.

That is not the case here. If Mr. Vann can find a psychiatrist to say that release of the photographs, the SBI report, and Dr. Roberts' report would be detrimental to Ms. Mangum's well being, then I would give such action a little leeway. But the fact is that Vann is withholding evidence from his client for his own self-serving reasons. That's obvious.

My bottom line is that I believe the rule is ridiculous and in place only to provide a loophole. I believe that a client is always and unconditionally entitled to all discovery related to his case.

If a Prosecutor's psychiatric expert believes that release of evidence to the defendant would be harmful to the defendant, do you think that would be reason enough for the prosecution to withhold evidence from the defendant? The current rule makes just about as much sense... which is none.

Thereby, 'tern, go ye enlightened.

.. and thanks, again for pasting the reference.

Anonymous said...

SUDNEY HARR:

"Thanks for the encouragement, but I consider what I do enlightening the people. That is what will get results."

If you are bringing about such enlightenment, why is Crystal still incarcerated, why is there no clamor for her release?

Anonymous said...

What's a Durhamian? Sounds like an alien from the planet Durhay? Well, considering Durham's lovely history, maybe that's not too far from the truth.

Anonymous said...

I would suggest, Sidney, that you contact a law firm that you trust and chat with them about the rule and how you think it isn't fair. As far as I know, you have no qualifications as an attorney. You do not hold a license to practice medicine in North Carolina and you have no forensic experience at all. Whatever your opinions are based upon, it is not expertise or professional experience in law or medicine.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"That is not the case here. If Mr. Vann can find a psychiatrist to say that release of the photographs, the SBI report, and Dr. Roberts' report would be detrimental to Ms. Mangum's well being, then I would give such action a little leeway."

No you wouldn't. Youy would claim the psychiatrist had been approved by this non existent carpetbagger jihad you fantasize about

Anonymous said...

The example given in the rule is precisely that, an "example". It is not to be interpreted as the ONLY reason/justification for withholding material from a client.

Anonymous said...

From Lance the Intern:

"'In some circumstances, a lawyer may be justified in delaying transmission of information when the client would be likely to react imprudently to an immediate communication.'"

Giving someone access to confidential information, when that someone then publicizes said confidential information illegally, that is grounds for believing the client would be likel to react imprudently.

SIDNEY HARR, be enlightened.

Lance the Intern said...

"My bottom line is that I believe the rule is ridiculous and in place only to provide a loophole. I believe that a client is always and unconditionally entitled to all discovery related to his case.

Sid -- the psychiatrist example was just that, an example (hence the terms "thus" and "might" used in said example). Lawyers can apparently use their own discretion when transmitting information to their client, as long as any delay does not violate other rules or court orders. It does not mean that in all cases where there is a delay, a medical professional must be involved. For you to read that into this rule frankly says more about you and your reading comprehension than it does about the NC State Bar.

Finally, MY bottom line, Sid, is that your beliefs simply do not matter.

Thereby go ye enlightened.

Anonymous said...

Same old xxxx from Sidney. Put your money where your mouth is, Sidney. Bail Mangum out! or, go to the jail and convince her to fire Vann. that's the best way I know for Mangum to end up either in the hospital or in prison.....for a very long time.

Walt said...

Sid wrote: "I believe the rule [RPC 3.4]is ridiculous and in place only to provide a loophole. I believe that a client is always and unconditionally entitled to all discovery related to his case."

This is exactly why you lack credibility. You ignore the law and precedent when it conflicts with your position.

Walt-in-Durham

Anonymous said...

Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr

Anonymous said...

Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr

Anonymous said...

Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr
Sidney Harr Harr Harr

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
SUDNEY HARR:

"Thanks for the encouragement, but I consider what I do enlightening the people. That is what will get results."

If you are bringing about such enlightenment, why is Crystal still incarcerated, why is there no clamor for her release?

Because, with the rare exception of the few people who view this blogsite, the majority of Durhamians and Tar Heelians are unaware that Crystal was being strangled when she stabbed Daye... they think they were just arguing, she got mad, and stabbed him. That's not what happened. Also, most people believe that the stab wound resulted in Daye's death... it had nothing to do with his death. People don't even know about the botched intubation.

Let me know if you require further elucidation.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
What's a Durhamian? Sounds like an alien from the planet Durhay? Well, considering Durham's lovely history, maybe that's not too far from the truth.


Actually, someone from the planet Durhay would be a Durhayian. A Durhamian is someone who is a resident of Durham, NC.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Same old xxxx from Sidney. Put your money where your mouth is, Sidney. Bail Mangum out! or, go to the jail and convince her to fire Vann. that's the best way I know for Mangum to end up either in the hospital or in prison.....for a very long time.


Convincing her to fire Vann would be her best option, as she would then have access to the exculpatory evidence that he has been keeping from her.

And, contrary to your opinion, it would be the key to her getting released.

guiowen said...

Sidney said:
"with the rare exception of the few people who view this blogsite, the majority of Durhamians and Tar Heelians are unaware that Crystal was being strangled when she stabbed Daye."

If you really believe this, then you clearly have to do more. There's no point in having the truth on your side, if only a few people are aware of it.

Reach out, Sidney! Break gave you some ideas of what to do.

Nifong Supporter said...


Walt said...
Sid wrote: "I believe the rule [RPC 3.4]is ridiculous and in place only to provide a loophole. I believe that a client is always and unconditionally entitled to all discovery related to his case."

This is exactly why you lack credibility. You ignore the law and precedent when it conflicts with your position.

Walt-in-Durham


Walt, I don't ignore law and precedent that conflicts with my position... but I realize it for what it is... a loophole. The law is full of legal loopholes.

Walt, remember this important fact: Laws are man-made, and not deified codes handed down from the heavens like manna. Therefore, not all laws are fair, just, or humane. For example, it used to be legal in the United States of America to own slaves.

Thereby, go ye enlightened.

Nifong Supporter said...


guiowen said...
Sidney said:
"with the rare exception of the few people who view this blogsite, the majority of Durhamians and Tar Heelians are unaware that Crystal was being strangled when she stabbed Daye."

If you really believe this, then you clearly have to do more. There's no point in having the truth on your side, if only a few people are aware of it.

Reach out, Sidney! Break gave you some ideas of what to do.


gui, mon ami,

Thanks for the encouragement. Like Break has stated, I realize the importance of getting the word out, and I am trying to do so as best as I can.

Have a great weekend.

Lance the Intern said...

The demonym for people who live in Durham is "Durhamite".

Thereby go ye enlightened.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"Walt, remember this important fact: Laws are man-made, and not deified codes handed down from the heavens like manna. Therefore, not all laws are fair, just, or humane. For example, it used to be legal in the United States of America to own slaves."

SIDNEY, let us not forget you think it was justified for DA NIFONG t0 wrongfully charge three innocent men with an non existent crime.

You are not on the moral high ground here. You are still in the deep moral pit you dug when you first defended DA NIFONG"s corrupt actions.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"Thanks for the encouragement. Like Break has stated, I realize the importance of getting the word out, and I am trying to do so as best as I can."

So wrere are all the people clammoring for Crystal's release?

Nifong Supporter said...


Lance the Intern said...
The demonym for people who live in Durham is "Durhamite".

Thereby go ye enlightened.


Intern, thank you for enlightening my vocabulary with the word demonym.

Although, "Durhamite" may be considered by many to be the demonym for Durham residents, I personally do not like it. I prefer "Durhamian," so I will continue to use it in my blogs.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
SIDNEY HARR:

"Walt, remember this important fact: Laws are man-made, and not deified codes handed down from the heavens like manna. Therefore, not all laws are fair, just, or humane. For example, it used to be legal in the United States of America to own slaves."

SIDNEY, let us not forget you think it was justified for DA NIFONG t0 wrongfully charge three innocent men with an non existent crime.

You are not on the moral high ground here. You are still in the deep moral pit you dug when you first defended DA NIFONG"s corrupt actions.


Of course Mike Nifong was justified to charge the three Duke Lacrosse defendants of sexual assault. He had witness identification. Just because A.G. Cooper said that the boys were "innocent" and "nothing happened," doesn't make it so. That's why all the evidence regarding the case has been sealed, and the crime scene destroyed by a bulldozer when no one was watching.

Mike Nifong acted courageously in prosecuting the case when all around him were advising him to drop it due to political correctness and the political climate. The Powers-That-Be decided to go after Mr. Nifong because he was too independent, and they wanted to make an example of him.

Thereby go ye enlightened.

Anonymous said...

Sid,

A suggestion: you can refer to Crystal's supporters as "Mangumians" on this blog.

guiowen said...

Sidney says:
"The Powers-That-Be decided to go after Mr. Nifong because he was too independent, and they wanted to make an example of him."

Sidney, this is precisely why you should try to persuade Mike Nifong to reapply for his license, so he, as one of the few independent attorneys in North Carolina, can take over Crystal's defense. Remember, he owes it to you after all you've done for him.

Anonymous said...

Nifong Supporter said...

"Mike Nifong acted courageously in prosecuting the case when all around him were advising him to drop it due to political correctness and the political climate. The Powers-That-Be decided to go after Mr. Nifong because he was too independent, and they wanted to make an example of him."


Sid: There's no denying it, you certainly do exist in a parallel universe.

Anonymous said...

Sid: Of course Mike Nifong was justified to charge the three Duke Lacrosse defendants of sexual assault. He had witness identification.

Sid, why did Nifong not insist that the DPD conduct a real investigation?

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"Of course Mike Nifong was justified to charge the three Duke Lacrosse defendants of sexual assault. He had witness identification."

Another bare faced lie on your part.

Crystal was not able to reliably identify any Lacrosse player as an assailant.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEYHAEE:

"Mike Nifong acted courageously in prosecuting the case when all around him were advising him to drop it due to political correctness and the political climate. The Powers-That-Be decided to go after Mr. Nifong because he was too independent, and they wanted to make an example of him".

More bare faced lies on your part.

DA NIFONG acted in his own self interest. It did not take a whole lot of courage to stir up racial tensions in Durham.

He was advised to drop the case because it became obvious he did not have a case, because he was trying to prosecute obviously innocent men.

The NC bar went after DA NIFONG because he was conducting a grossly unethical illegal wrongful prosecution of innocent men.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"Just because A.G. Cooper said that the boys were "innocent" and "nothing happened," doesn't make it so."

What made it so was that the evidence showed no crime had been committed, that Crystal had lied.

You would not be saying this if you were not angry over the dismissal of the phony charges against the innocent Lacrosse players, if you did not believe that the Lacrosse players were guilty.

Then, after the lies you promulgate, you claim you are telling the truth which will set Crystal free.

You are a deluded, probably schizophrenic, blatantly racist megalomaniac.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

Just because you proclaim that the Lacrosse players are guilty and that something did happen does not make it so.

This is another manifestation that you believe as a black man you are above the law.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"Although, "Durhamite" may be considered by many to be the demonym for Durham residents, I personally do not like it. I prefer "Durhamian," so I will continue to use it in my blogs."

You obviously believe, wrongly, you are a person of some importance. You are not. You are a racist black man who believes he is above the law.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"That's why all the evidence regarding the case has been sealed, and the crime scene destroyed by a bulldozer when no one was watching."

Sidney, again you tell barefaced lies, another indication you are a racist black man who believes he is above the law.

The only thing sealed in the Duke Lacrosse case was Crystal's mental health record.

Duke University destroyed the house so it could not be used as evidence in the lawsuits against them.

The house had been examined shortly after the allegations of rape and nothing was recovered which supported the false allegations.

Most significantly, no DNA from Crystal was recovered from the bathroom in which she alleged she had been raped.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"Walt, I don't ignore law and precedent that conflicts with my position".

A blatant piece of hypocrisy from a black racist who believes he is above the law.

There is no evidence that the Falsely accused Lacrosse players are guilty. Yet you blog that your opinion that they are guilty trumps the law.

And you would not be publishing the things you do if you do not believe the Lacrosse players are guilty.

Anonymous said...

Sid falsely claims: That's why all the evidence regarding the case has been sealed

Himan's report is public.

DR. SIDNEY B. HARR IS A LIAR.

Gottlieb's report is public.

DR. SIDNEY B. HARR IS A LIAR.

The DNASI report is public.

DR. SIDNEY B. HARR IS A LIAR.

Crystal Mangum's written statement is public.

DR. SIDNEY B. HARR IS A LIAR.

Kim Robert's written statement is public.

DR. SIDNEY B. HARR IS A LIAR.

The videotape and the transcript of the flawed identification session is public.

DR. SIDNEY B. HARR IS A LIAR.

The written statement of next door neighbor, Jason Bissey, is publicly available.

DR. SIDNEY B. HARR IS A LIAR.

Many of the photographs taken by the players are publicly available.

DR. SIDNEY B. HARR IS A LIAR.

Anonymous said...

The entire case file with the exception of mangum's mental health record is public! The house on Buchanan was photographed over and over......every room. It was examined by not only the Durham police but by nifong's Wilson as well. Again, all public record. The entire lab report is public as are all the statements taken from all the men at the party, the neighbors, the taxi driver, the two women and the Durham access center staff, The other poster is correct. Sidney Harr is lying.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous @ 5:57 said: "The entire lab report is public as are all the statements taken from all the men at the party"........... I don't think this is true. Can you direct me to where I can obtain the statements of all those thought to be present, other then those three who charged plus Dan Flannery, that you say are public. I don't even believe all who were present have even been identified. The entires LaX team, other then it's one Black member, gave DNA samples. This included three non-players who just happened to appear in photographs. Players who were not even present were tested yet no attempt was ever made to acertain a complete list of all who were present. Non present Players, in my opinion, were tested simply to bolster the proposition of team innocence.

Anonymous said...

KENHYDERAL:

"Can you direct me to where I can obtain the statements of all those thought to be present, other then those three who charged plus Dan Flannery, that you say are public. I don't even believe all who were present have even been identified. The entires LaX team, other then it's one Black member, gave DNA samples. This included three non-players who just happened to appear in photographs. Players who were not even present were tested yet no attempt was ever made to acertain a complete list of all who were present. Non present Players, in my opinion, were tested simply to bolster the proposition of team innocence."

Those unidentified party attendees, just like Kilgo's lacrosse player friend, are figments of your imagination. They do not exist. Peove, via fact, not speculation and conjecture, that these unidentified attendees exist.

Anonymous said...

KENHYDERAL:

"I don't think this is true."

The problems are, you are incapable of serious thinking, as you have so adequately demonstrated in the past, and you are incapable of determining what is true.

Anonymous said...

KENHYDERAL:

"Players who were not even present were tested yet no attempt was ever made to acertain a complete list of all who were present."

That is another lie, based only on speculation and conjecture, that you try to pass off as truth.

Anonymous said...

KENHYDERAL:

"Non present Players, in my opinion, were tested simply to bolster the proposition of team innocence."

That is an example of how incapable you are of forming an informed opinion. It is also an example of how uninformed you are.

Early in the Lacrosse case, no one was interested in establishing the innocence of the Lacrosse players.

It is another example of a lie you try to push as truth. You claim that Crystal's rape allegations precipitated an organized media campaign to discredit her. All the media activity early on in the phony Lacrosse case was directed at discrediting the Lacrosse team.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous 5:57pm falsely stated: The entire case file with the exception of Mangum's mental health record is public.

This overstates the evidence that is public. Not all player statements are public. The DPD spent far more time investigating the players than investigating the alleged crime. Much of this is not public.

Kenhyderal falsely stated: no attempt was ever made to ascertain a complete list of all who were present.

In their statements, each of the 3 captains was asked to provide a list of attendees. This constitutes an attempt. One or more of the captains indicated 2 or 3 non-players attended. Two were identified, we're interviewed and gave DNA.

Each of you should apologize for your errors.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous September 16, 2012 4:53 AM


You are in error. All player statements that were made are available on line. I have read them.

The only part of Crystal's case file for the rape case that has been sealed is her mental health record. That evidence from the case is being concealed is a myth.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous September 16, 2012 4:53 AM
:

"The DPD spent far more time investigating the players than investigating the alleged crime. Much of this is not public."

If this is true, the DPD investigated the players in order to find evidence of guilt or complicity. They found nothing. Ergo, there is nothing to be made public.

Anonymous said...

Bahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahaha

Anonymous said...

I do not believe the special prosecutors made the additional evidence they uncovered public. Their reports are not public.Their report summarizes their activities.

The player statements received by the DPD include the 3 captains (public), an affidavit from Wellington (public). one of the players provided evidence that proved he was in Raleigh. Although this evidence was discussed publicly, the evidence itself was not released.

Sidney attempts to make non-release of evidence sound sinister. The case files in cases where charges are dismissed are never released in their entirety. There is far more evidence that is publicly available for the lacrosse case than almost all other cases that were dismissed before trial.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous 5:04am:

The cynic would are that the DPD investigation of the players had little to do with finding evidence of guilt or complicity in the alleged sexual assault.

The investigation had far more to do with uncovering embarrassing information that could be used to pressure players. More ominously, the information could be used to select defendants (if, for example, Crystal was trained to pick pre-selected players). Finnerty's Georgetown arrest would have made him a candidate...

Anonymous said...

Should have been...

The cubic would argue....

Anonymous said...

I can't type on an iPad.

The cynic would argue....

Anonymous said...

Ken:

Can you direct me to the statements of Seligmann and Finnerty that you say are public? I thought that the DPD never interviewed either defendant and never took statements.

Thanks.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
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...

Anonymous said...

"Ken:

Can you direct me to the statements of Seligmann and Finnerty that you say are public?"


I wouldn't count on Cut 'N Paste Kenny to deliver.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous September 16, 2012 5:19 AM:

"I do not believe the special prosecutors made the additional evidence they uncovered public. Their reports are not public.Their report summarizes their activities."

What makes you think the special prosecutors, i.e. the AG's office uncovered any additional evidence? That seems to be a contrivance of people like KENHYDERAL who believe, wrongly, that the Lacrosse players or other innocent Caucasians committed crimes which were covered up.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous 9:15am: What makes you think the special prosecutors, i.e. the AG's office uncovered any additional evidence?

Because they said they did.

The DPD failed to conduct a bona fide investigation. Their "investigation" was designed to take one version of Mangum's allegations (which one had not yet been determined) and select defendants. Once the defendants had been selected, they avoided

evidence because it could clear the defendants. The AG conducted a bona fide investigation, interviewing Mangum about the inconsistencies in her allegations, interviewing players, investigating alibis, determining what time Mangum had been dropped off, etc.

None of the additional evidence was inculpatory.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
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...



Anonymous

September 16, 2012 9:45 AM

"Anonymous 9:15am: What makes you think the special prosecutors, i.e. the AG's office uncovered any additional evidence?"

Because they said they did."

I do not think they did. They reviewed the evidence DA NIFONG had generated and concluded that the Lacrosse players were innocent.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Sid,

A suggestion: you can refer to Crystal's supporters as "Mangumians" on this blog.


Clever thought... I'll give it consideration. Thanks.

Nifong Supporter said...


guiowen said...
Sidney says:
"The Powers-That-Be decided to go after Mr. Nifong because he was too independent, and they wanted to make an example of him."

Sidney, this is precisely why you should try to persuade Mike Nifong to reapply for his license, so he, as one of the few independent attorneys in North Carolina, can take over Crystal's defense. Remember, he owes it to you after all you've done for him.


gui, mon ami,

Crystal doesn't need an attorney to prevail over the bogus charges she is facing. All she needs is the truth.

Also, Mr. Nifong has no desire to practice law in North Carolina, and I don't blame him. He's certainly not going to give the State Bar the opportunity to turn down his request.

guiowen said...

Sidney said:
"Mr. Nifong has no desire to practice law in North Carolina"

Sidney, I hate to put it in these terms, but Crystal is in mortal danger, unless a good attorney helps her. Under the circumstances, I find it unconscionable of Nifong to refuse to help her.
It's not as if the truth which you have been shouting from the treetops for over 500 days now were helping her

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
SIDNEYHAEE:

"Mike Nifong acted courageously in prosecuting the case when all around him were advising him to drop it due to political correctness and the political climate. The Powers-That-Be decided to go after Mr. Nifong because he was too independent, and they wanted to make an example of him".

More bare faced lies on your part.

DA NIFONG acted in his own self interest. It did not take a whole lot of courage to stir up racial tensions in Durham.

He was advised to drop the case because it became obvious he did not have a case, because he was trying to prosecute obviously innocent men.

The NC bar went after DA NIFONG because he was conducting a grossly unethical illegal wrongful prosecution of innocent men.


Keep in mind that Mr. Nifong did not stir up racial tension, as he was not the one who shouted the "n-word" epithet at Crystal Mangum and the other African American dancer.

The evidence in the Duke Lacrosse case has been covered up to prevent the masses from learning the truth. That is why I am enlightening the people by putting online prosecution discovery and whatever evidence I can get my hands on.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Sid falsely claims: That's why all the evidence regarding the case has been sealed

Himan's report is public.

DR. SIDNEY B. HARR IS A LIAR.

Gottlieb's report is public.

DR. SIDNEY B. HARR IS A LIAR.

The DNASI report is public.

DR. SIDNEY B. HARR IS A LIAR.

Crystal Mangum's written statement is public.

DR. SIDNEY B. HARR IS A LIAR.

Kim Robert's written statement is public.

DR. SIDNEY B. HARR IS A LIAR.

The videotape and the transcript of the flawed identification session is public.

DR. SIDNEY B. HARR IS A LIAR.

The written statement of next door neighbor, Jason Bissey, is publicly available.

DR. SIDNEY B. HARR IS A LIAR.

Many of the photographs taken by the players are publicly available.

DR. SIDNEY B. HARR IS A LIAR.


It is obvious that the discovery and evidence acquired by the Attorney General's Office is not publicly available. Much about the Duke Lacrosse case has been shielded from the masses. That's the bottom line.

Nifong Supporter said...


guiowen said...
Sidney said:
"Mr. Nifong has no desire to practice law in North Carolina"

Sidney, I hate to put it in these terms, but Crystal is in mortal danger, unless a good attorney helps her. Under the circumstances, I find it unconscionable of Nifong to refuse to help her.
It's not as if the truth which you have been shouting from the treetops for over 500 days now were helping her


Nice try, gui. I know what you're trying to do. You're trying to persuade Mr. Nifong to help Crystal so that the Bar's Practice Committee can come down on him for practicing law without a license.

Actually, as I stated before, the truth will set Mangum free.

Anonymous said...

Have you persuaded Crystal to fire Woody Vann?

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"Keep in mind that Mr. Nifong did not stir up racial tension, as he was not the one who shouted the "n-word" epithet at Crystal Mangum and the other African American dancer."

There was one exchang of racial epithets at the party, precipitated by black woman Kim Pittman/Roberts, who later falsely accused people at the Lacrosse house of using the "'n-word' epithet", something you deliberately refuse to publish, liar and prevaricator that you are

And, liar and prevaricator that you are, you deliberately do not publish that corrupt DA NIFONG, before he had any facts, declared that the crime had happened, that members of the Lacrosse team had perpetrated the crime, and the crime had been racially motivated.

That is history, SIDNEY. You are a liar and a prevaricator.

Anonymous said...

Sidney,

I take it from your non-denial that you admit to being a liar.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"The evidence in the Duke Lacrosse case has been covered up to prevent the masses from learning the truth. That is why I am enlightening the people by putting online prosecution discovery and whatever evidence I can get my hands on."

That is another bare faced lie you try to pass off as truth. One who lies and prevaricates as deliberately and viciously as you do is incapable of enlightening anyone.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"It is obvious that the discovery and evidence acquired by the Attorney General's Office is not publicly available. Much about the Duke Lacrosse case has been shielded from the masses. That's the bottom line."

SIDNEY, the bottom line is you have no facts to back up that claim. You are a liar and a prevaricator, motivated by your rage that three innocent Caucasian men were not wrongfully convicted of raping Crystal.

Anonymous said...

Sidney,

I find the phrase "little dicked white boy" to be racially offensive as it plays on racial stereotypes.

Despite numerous comments, you have never criticized it. Why do you find that type of racially charged speech to be acceptable?

Anonymous said...

Sidney B. Harr is a liar.

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"Crystal doesn't need an attorney to prevail over the bogus charges she is facing. All she needs is the truth."

As the charges still stand, it should be obvious to you that what you have been peddling is not the truth.

Your repeated declaration that the so called truth you tell will set Crystal free is yet more evidence that you are a deluded, probably schizophrenic megalomaniac.

Anonymous said...

Sidney,

Why didn't the DPD conduct a bona fide investigation? Why didn't Nifong insist on one?

Anonymous said...

SIDNEY HARR:

"
Also, Mr. Nifong has no desire to practice law in North Carolina, and I don't blame him. He's certainly not going to give the State Bar the opportunity to turn down his request."

In other words, even DA NIFONG realizes he was one of the most corrupt prosecutors in American legal history and does not have any chance of ever being allowed to practice law again.

If he does not want his law license back, why are you trying to have the NC bar restore his license?

The answer is, you do not care about DA NIFONG. You care only about carrying on a vendetta against the innocent, falsely accused Lacrosse players because they were not wrongfully convicted of raping Crystal Mangum.

Anonymous said...

Sidney,

Discovery is not made public in almost all cases which are dismissed prior to trial. Why should the lacrosse case be held to a different standard?

Anonymous said...

Sidney B. Harr is a liar.

guiowen said...



sidney said:
" I know what you're trying to do. You're trying to persuade Mr. Nifong to help Crystal so that the Bar's Practice Committee can come down on him for practicing law without a license."

On the contrary, I'm specifically asking him to apply for reinstatement. I realize this may be somewhat embarrassing to him, but remember you're trying to save an innocent mother of three from a long jail sentence. Which is more important? A momentary embarrassment, or Crystal's freedom?

In any case, I notice you tried to practice law without a license, and so far as I could tell all they did was send you to bed without supper.

Anonymous said...

Guiowen,
Absolutely wonderful stuff.........

Anonymous said...

Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny, Ken-ny
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...

The point is that Mangum was and is a liar. The LAX guys did not touch her. Period. If Harr wants to continue his nonsense, let him. We all know the reason behind it. He wants attention for himself...that is painfully obvious. AND....he is full of hate. That's his problem. The trouble here is that Mangum is so limited as to basic intelligence and character that she cannot help but be led around by these lamebrained people who want nothing more than to use her for their various purposes. It may be sex, it may be sensationalism, it may be to make money off her, it make be to use her as a surrogate. In any case, Harr nothing but a user, just like Vincent Clark, just like Nifong, just like the johns who paid her, just like 88 who made her their victim du jour, just like Nancy Grace and the other media wingnuts who used her for ratings....and just like so many others who have taken advantage of a woman who apparently has the morals of a housecat and the judgement of a clothes pin.
I am NOT excusing Mangum....no way. Limited as she is, she is still an adult and damn good at manipulating to get what she wants.

Anonymous said...

Mangum....fire Vann and represent yourself. If you are innocent, Harr says the truth will set you free.....and Harr, per Break, never makes misteaks. :)

Walt said...

Sid wrote: "Of course Mike Nifong was justified to charge the three Duke Lacrosse defendants of sexual assault. He had witness identification."

No, he did not. What he had was a witness who could not initially identify anyone as her alleged attackers. In fact, she could not even guess at a number of attackers consistently. What happened next was a police miscarriage of justice. The DPD abandoned its own rather good lineup procedure and instead pursued a suggestive series of photo lineups that resulted in what Nifong should have known was a faulty identification. That was not courageous. It was a rush to injustice.

"Just because A.G. Cooper said that the boys were "innocent" and "nothing happened," doesn't make it so."

No, that's not what happened. The Attorney General investigated the case and applying the law determined that in fact the accused were innocent.

"That's why all the evidence regarding the case has been sealed,..."

The only sealed evidence is Crystal's mental health record. Which is protected by law.

"... and the crime scene destroyed by a bulldozer when no one was watching."

That was done by Duke. But, the house was photographed inside and out. However, it was not a crime scene.

"Thereby go ye enlightened."

Because you fail to recognize even the most elementary of facts, you fail to enlighten.

Walt-in-Durham

Anonymous said...

Sadly, if Mangum does "fire" Vann, she will be making a terrible decision. If the quality of the so-called motion (she wrote, per Harr) is any indication of Mangum's true education (not the pseudo token degree she got from NCCU), then Mangum will be in real trouble. That piece of writing contained so many errors in grammar, spelling, construction, thought and comprehension.....truly embarrassing.

Anonymous said...

The house was not a crime scene if the crime in reference was ANY form of sexual assault/rape/kidnap or otherwise against Crystal Gail Mangum. Yes, there was underaged drinking at the party. Big damn deal. Sidney, I dare you to march yourself over to NCCU, Wake Forest, Duke, Elon, Shaw, UNC, Liberty University or whatever.....and see just how much and how common underage drinking on college campuses really is. No, it isn't smart. No, it is against the law. No, it is dangerous. But, for the love of holy mike, to claim that underaged drinking (debauchery) is equivalent to and automatically leads to the crime of rape is just plain stupid. sir. The guys were dumb. They hired exotic dancer/strippers. Also NOT against the law and morally shameful. (in my opinion). They drank when they should not have. Again, stupid but not worthy of 30 years in prison.
Get off your moral highhorse, sidney, and admit that the REAL crime committed that night, the REAL injustice, was the LIE told by Crystal Mangum that could have sent innocent men to prison for the rest of their lives.

Anonymous said...

Sidney, for the fourth time.....Mangum said, with certainity per the SANE during the morning interview in March 2006, that there were NO condoms used. The SANE documented "no" in the three choice section of the assessment: yes, no, not sure. The same response was given by Mangum three times: no (meaning no condoms used). This assessment was reviewed during the Nifong hearing with the SANE and, under cross, the SANE testified that she had recorded "no condoms" from Mangum and that Mangum had expressed no doubt, no uncertainity about the absence of condoms.
Then, Mangum found out that there was no evidence of the LAX players (DNA) in or on her. At this point she CHANGED her story and said, well, yeah, they did use condoms and that she could not say which one did or didn't. She also changed her story to say Reade Seligmann did not have intercourse with her.....just another form of non-penetrating sexual intimacy.
Convenient change of story......huh, sidney