Word count: 1,588
On Tuesday, September 18, 2012, H. Wood Vann and his client Crystal Mangum, the Duke Lacrosse victim/accuser, appeared in Durham’s Superior Court where Mr. Vann argued for a bail reduction from $200,000 to $50,000. I was not present at this event, but from the accounts I have read and comments made to me by eyewitnesses, Mr. Vann put up a spirited attack.
Mr. Vann appropriately stated that Ms. Mangum was no flight risk, was a Durham native, presented no danger to the community, and that she appeared in Court (when under house arrest in the 2010 arson case). Also, he mentioned that Crystal Mangum was defending herself against an intoxicated Daye who kicked in a bathroom door Mangum had locked behind her, and then pulled out some of her hair and hairweave. To his credit, Mr. Vann also brought up the fact that there are questions suggesting that Daye’s death might have been due to treatment he received at Duke University Hospital. He explained to Superior Court Judge Michael Morgan that on the night (Monday, April 4, 2011) after his assault and emergency surgery (Sunday, April 3, 2011) that Mr. Daye was up and walking around and talking to police. Mr. Vann then described that two days later (Wednesday, April 6, 2011) Mr. Daye, who was an alcoholic, went into delirium tremens which preceded a cascade of events, beginning with a bout of emesis (most assuredly induced by the administration of contrast agent into his stomach via a naso-gastric tube), and culminated with his removal from life support and death a week later (Wednesday, April 13, 2011).
According to newspaper accounts, the Durham prosecutor did not refute: 1) that Daye kicked in the bathroom door; 2) that Daye pulled out Mangum’s hair; 3) that Daye was an alcoholic and intoxicated; 4) that Daye’s surgery was successful with an excellent prognosis for a full recovery; and 5) that Daye’s downward spiral to death was directly related to complications from delirium tremens. Instead, Assistant District Attorney Charlene Coggins-Franks gave an irrational, illogical, and unbelievable narrative of events wherein she claimed the two were arguing over cashier’s checks that Ms. Mangum allegedly wouldn’t return to her. The Herald-Sun article even states that the cashier’s checks were given to her - not that she took them. (QUESTION: So, where does larceny fit in in this fantasy scenario conjured up by Coggins-Franks if Reginald Daye gave the checks to Ms. Mangum and she allegedly refused to return them? ANSWER: There is no case for larceny!) Coggins-Franks also admitted during the hearing that Ms. Mangum locked herself in the bathroom, but evidently she did not give an explanation for this action (which was obviously to protect herself from Daye), and then the prosecutor conveniently neglects to mention that Daye was responsible for kicking in the bathroom door!
Prosecutor Coggins-Franks then expects the judge to believe that after an intoxicated Reginald Daye asked Ms. Mangum to leave his apartment (for which he was the sole lessee and who paid the rent) and she refused, that he then decides to leave of his own volition and as he is doing so, Ms. Mangum grabs a knife and stabs him. According to witnesses and Ms. Mangum, the prosecutor stated that he was stabbed in the back. This is a blatantly and factually incorrect statement, as the wound was inflicted to the front-lateral aspect of the chest. There are two possible explanations for this misstatement by Coggins-Franks, which are: (1) She doesn’t know the pertinent facts of this case (possibly due to being overworked or a heavy caseload which have deprived her of time to be knowledgeable about the case), and (2) She purposely attempted to mislead the judge into believing that Mangum stabbed the defenseless and unaware “victim” in the back (a bold attempt to rule out self-defense). Once more, Woody Vann apparently rose to the occasion by rebutting that Mr. Daye was stabbed in the back. To my knowledge Prosecutor Coggins-Franks did not counter the correction made by Mr. Vann.
In another pathetic attempt, Prosecutor Coggins-Franks does her best to shift Daye’s transfer to the Intensive Care Unit from complications related to alcoholic withdrawal to an infection secondary to the stab wound. However, the record clearly shows that concerns by the medical staff were due to impending D.T.s as Daye was given repeated boluses of the sedative Valium intravenously. From the hospital records I have viewed, there was no indication that any cultures were taken or antibiotics given to Daye during his hospitalization. The intention of Coggins-Franks here is again to mislead the Court.
Despite relatively strong arguments by the defense, and weak, illogical and erroneous prosecution statements totally lacking in credibility, the judge refused to reduce bail for Ms. Mangum. If I am not mistaken, every time a hearing has been brought before the Court, a different judge has been sitting on the bench. This leads me to believe that the prosecution spends much of its energies in judge shopping for criminal charges it knows lacks wheels.
Although I was somewhat impressed by Mr. Vann’s performance at this hearing (my expectations were exceedingly low), I still retain questions about his true allegiances. My concerns are due mainly to the following: (1) his refusal to share all prosecution discovery with Mangum… especially the photographs which show her injuries and the crime scene, as they would convey the nature of the abuse and horror to which Mangum was subjected at Daye’s hands and lend to her claim to be a victim of domestic violence; (2) his refusal to turn over to Mangum the report by forensic pathologist Dr. Christena L. Roberts for which Judge Henry Hight ordered the defense expert witness to receive compensation on June 18, 2012 – more than three months ago; (3) his refusal to give his client the mysterious SBI report; (4) his refusal to file a motion to dismiss the ridiculous and baseless “larceny of chose in action” charge which permit the prosecution to up the murder charge to first degree; (5) his pulling punches in his argument for Mangum by protecting Duke University Hospital – laying blame for Daye’s brain death on aspiration rather than the esophageal placement of an endotracheal tube by Duke staff; and (6) his overall lack of urgency and aggressiveness in the face of such bogus and baseless criminal charges. In addition, Mr. Vann has not had adequate communication with Mangum, visiting her on extremely rare occasions. For example, she did not even know that she would be going to court until the morning of the hearing… and she did not know about what the hearing would be.
Personally, I have the impression that the hearing of September 18, 2012, was a staged event, and that it was preordained that bail would be denied to Crystal Mangum. Keep in mind that it is imperative that Mangum remain incarcerated in order for the prosecution to be able to force a plea deal upon her… and that is its ultimate goal. Prosecutor Coggins-Franks cannot take the case to trial because she has no case, and her performance at the hearing was pitiful at best. Defense attorney Vann, on the other hand, did well enough to encourage trust by his client and her supporters – but that is exactly what he wants. A trusting client would be easier for Mr. Vann to persuade to accept a plea deal down the road that would best benefit the prosecution, the medical examiner, and Duke University Hospital… all at the expense of Crystal Mangum who would be saddled with a felony conviction, inability to obtain compensation, and loss of vindication.
If Woody Vann had his client’s best interests at heart, he would refrain from withholding important and probable exculpatory evidence from her, and produce it immediately. The truth behind the evidence that Mr. Vann is withholding from Mangum is enough to have the fraudulent charges against her dismissed.
As The News & Observer editorial’s Our Views column stated in its December 14, 2010 editorial titled “Hide and seek”: “When evidence is hidden that could help a defendant, the justice system is corrupted.”
MEDICAL BOARD COMPLAINT
The fraudulent Autopsy Examination Report of April 14, 2011, by Dr. Clay Nichols, with its fabricated false findings and unsupported conclusion is at the heart of the bogus murder charge against Crystal Mangum, and it is evident it was prepared to prop up the prosecution's case. Dr. Clay Nichols is the Deputy Chief Medical Examiner of the state of North Carolina, and he has a duty to provide accurate, objective, and fair autopsy reports – and not to mold the findings and conclusions to fit the whims of the prosecution… no more so than the SBI lab, which has recently come under scrutiny for its lack of impartiality. This incident which involves the medical examiner is just as damning.
Three weeks ago, I notified the state’s Chief Medical Examiner, Dr. Deborah Radisch, about the problems with the April 14, 2011 autopsy report in hopes that another report would be issued to rectify problems with the initial one. Receiving no indication that such movement was forthcoming, on September 19, 2012, I reluctantly mailed, by certified, a formal complaint with the North Carolina Medical Board against Dr. Nichols.
Click on the link below to access the Formal Complaint against Dr. Clay Nichols and the accompanying exhibits.
LINK: http://www.justice4nifong.com/legal/cgm/bk01/bk01direc.htm
230 comments:
1 – 200 of 230 Newer› Newest»Anonymous said...
SIDNEY HARR:
"Although Crystal may have set Daye's clothes on fire in the bathtub, the Durham Police made no effort to extinguish the blaze... (That tells you something right there.)"
Yes it does. It tells us the Durham Police acted properly to call the Durham Fire Department.
That you fault the Durham police for calling the Durham Fire Department shows, once more, that your are completely divorced from reality and probably schizophrenic.
Answer me this: If you go into your bathroom and find a few clothes on fire in the bathtub, what would you do? (a) Turn on the water in the bathtub/shower; (b) Call the Fire department; (c) close the bathroom door and go back to what you were doing; (d) none of the above.
By any reference of logic, a reasonable person would do (a).
Anonymous said...
According to the appropriately named Liestoppers, there was a hearing to consider reduction of Crystal's bail. The motion was denied.
The poster mentioned that Woody Vann did not mention Christena Roberts' report on the Reginald Daye autopsy.
SIDNEY HARR will claim that this shows Woody Vann is in cahoots with the prosecution and is withholding the exculpatory evidence. The more logical explanation is that Dr. Roberts' report found no flaws in Dr. Nichols' report.
I wonder why SIDNEY has not ranted and raved about this. Could it be he was uninformed about the hearing because no one wanted him present to disrupt the hearing.
Now let's hear SIDNEY rant and rave that he was kept away from the hearing because he told the truth.
HAH!!!!
Have you heard the expression: "He who laughs last laughs best"? Keep that in mind.
My answer to most of your comments are in this current blog. The fact that Dr. Nichols' report is flawed and fraudulent is evident to anyone who can read, has an understanding of the English language, and who has intact mental faculties allowing for reasoning and logic.
Need I expound more?
"but from the accounts I have read and comments made to me by eyewitnesses..."
Would these be the same "sources" you've used for information in other blog entries?
The only deciding factor that needs to be taken away from the bail reduction hearing is that Crystal Mangum's current bail is already lower than Durham County’s guidelines for the charges against her.
Poor Sidney...he does not understand the difference between and the purpose of a bond hearing and a trial. Gosh I bet dr Nichols is just terrified.......a complaint by the distinguished doctor wing nut..........oooooooo......
Sidney go to the library and look up twit.....then look in the mirror
Wow, Sidney grades Vann......golly , perry, we are so impressed
Correction, Sidney......the prosecutor did not say Daye was stabbed in the back. He said Daye was stabbed as he was leaving......once again, you are lying
I am sure that the North Carolina Medical Board will treat your formal complaint with all the credibility it deserves.
If I were a LEO and there were children present, I would close the door, remove the children and call the fire dept...........because that is exactly what I am required to do by my duty book, wing nut. It's called RACE.....and any idiot who has ever worked in healthcare or law /fire knows exactly what I am talking about, numbnut
Oh and I would restain the innocent mother of three who deliberately put her own children at risk with the contemptible behavior.
RACE-E First E equal extinguish i.e. "turn on the tap".
RACE
Remove anyone to a safe location
Alert by calling 911
Contain by closing doors/windows
Extinguish if safe to do so
In that order -- so if the fire department responds before "E" can be performed, then the professionals get to perform "E"
It's common sense, heh?
What would be unsafe about dousing smoldering clothing confined to a bathtub?
Your responsibility is to perform all the other things before attempting to extinguish the fire.
What part of that are you failing to understand?
No Kenny. You idiot. The e is for evacuate. Rescue assess contain as in close doors and evacuate.
The LEO did exactly what he was supposed to do. Exactly. You mentally challenged guru Sidney is losing brain cells daily
Once again wrong focus Sidney. If your innocent mother of three had not been violent and likely drunk on her ear, had she not been attacking walker, had she not threatened to stab him in the presence of an officer, had she not set the fire.........the question of putting it out would not be relevant. What kind of dip wad are you that you think it was ok for this crazy liar to behave this way in front of her children
I guess it depends on where you are...My RACE acronym states "REMOVE, ALERT, CONTAIN, EXINGUISH" (just as Kenhyderal was aluding too). We also have a "PASS" acronym for using the fire extinguisher :)
Once again wrong focus Sidney. If your innocent mother of three had not been violent and likely drunk on her ear, had she not been attacking walker, had she not threatened to stab him in the presence of an officer, had she not set the fire.........the question of putting it out would not be relevant. What kind of dip wad are you that you think it was ok for this crazy liar to behave this way in front of her children
The RACE is just that lance, an order set,for officers, etc. no officer would attempt to extinguish at a crime scene......he or she would remove assess or alert ( as in yours) and contain. If the fire were life threatening he would protect life and would remove / evacuate. I think we are missing the point. We don't know just how big the fire was and whether it may have already started up the interior walls or created a smoke inhalation problem. The last thing an officer would do is attempt to put o ur a fire when there are children that need evacuation and protection at a violent crime scene with a suspect who was resisting arrest, and out of control
Yep I know the PASS too. I think the officer made a judgment call at the scene. With Mangum and walker fighting, car damage going on, threats of stabbing, and children......my guess is that putting out a fire would be the last thing the officer would do. He would call the fire dept and let them do their jobs properly while he kept. Ontology at the scene. 16 oiesntl
Kept control at the scene.......darn auto correct .......15 easiabo
The security system for this site is screwed up. It is requiring multiple tries even tho the numbers and letters are correct ????? A pain......
So, Sidney, on the basis of this appeal, will you still recommend that Crystal get rid of Woody?
Have you in fact talked to her about this?
Have you decided to communicate with Kenhyderal?
Who gives a corn dog who put the fire OUT. The point is that Mangum set it. Not " may have" Sidney. She admitted it. Another lie from you. She set a fire in an apartment complex with other people living behind the next wall, in the presence of her children. Are you a total whack or what? Nobody gives a damn who put it out........she set it.
Thank goodness the fire was contained so innocent people were not hurt by this crazy woman
Sidney her bail is already way belong recommended amounts. Why should any judge reduce it?
The purpose of a bond hearing is not to argue the meritsmre the charge.
SIDNEY HARR:
"Answer me this: If you go into your bathroom and find a few clothes on fire in the bathtub, what would you do? (a) Turn on the water in the bathtub/shower; (b) Call the Fire department; (c) close the bathroom door and go back to what you were doing; (d) none of the above."
Who told you it was just "a few clothes on fire in the bathtub"? Crystal, who lied to you that she did not set the clothes on fire?
You have no first hand knowledge as to how intense the fire was. You have not established that the fire could have been extinguished simply by turning on the shower. Your,therefore are meaningless to the issue.
SIDNEY HARR:
"The fact that Dr. Nichols' report is flawed and fraudulent is evident to anyone who can read, has an understanding of the English language, and who has intact mental faculties allowing for reasoning and logic."
You have not established as fact that Dr. Nichols' report was flawed. To do that you will have to argue your point before the NC Medical Board. If you do so, you will make an even bigger fool of yourself than when you filed your frivolous, money seeking lawsuit against Duke.
SIDNEY HARR(acknowledgement to Lance):
"but from the accounts I have read and comments made to me by eyewitnesses..."
What eyewitnesses?
Are they the same eyewitnesses who said Reginald Daye wanted to spend his rent money on drink?
KENHYDERAL:
"RACE-E First E equal extinguish i.e. "
'turn on the tap'."
How do you know the fire was not out of control, that it would have been possible to turn on the tap?
From the same Crystal who lied to SIDNEY HARR that she did not set the fire in the first place.
Go hide and try again to pass yourself off as Malek Williams.
KENHYDERAL:
"What would be unsafe about dousing smoldering clothing confined to a bathtub?"
I ask again, was it Crystal the liar who told you it was smoldering clothes confined to a bath tub.
Maybe you heard it from Kilgo, who learned about it from his Lacrosse player friend who happened to be there when Crystal set the clothes on fire.
Go pretend to be Malek Williams.
SIDNEY HARR:
Correction:
"Answer me this: If you go into your bathroom and find a few clothes on fire in the bathtub, what would you do? (a) Turn on the water in the bathtub/shower; (b) Call the Fire department; (c) close the bathroom door and go back to what you were doing; (d) none of the above."
Who told you it was just "a few clothes on fire in the bathtub"? Crystal, who lied to you that she did not set the clothes on fire?
You have no first hand knowledge as to how intense the fire was. You have not established that the fire could have been extinguished simply by turning on the shower. Your questions, therefore are meaningless to the issue.
SIDNEY HARR:
"According to newspaper accounts, the Durham prosecutor did not refute: 1) that Daye kicked in the bathroom door; 2) that Daye pulled out Mangum’s hair; 3) that Daye was an alcoholic and intoxicated; 4) that Daye’s surgery was successful with an excellent prognosis for a full recovery; and 5) that Daye’s downward spiral to death was directly related to complications from delirium tremens."
You got it wrong.
You omitted to mention that Woody Vann never established(for that matter neither have you) "1) that Daye kicked in the bathroom door; 2) that Daye pulled out Mangum’s hair; 3) that Daye was an alcoholic and intoxicated; 4) that Daye’s surgery was successful with an excellent prognosis for a full recovery; and 5) that Daye’s downward spiral to death was directly related to complications from delirium tremens."
For refutation to be necessary, you have to first establish points 1 through 5 as fact.
SIDNEY HARR:
"Prosecutor Coggins-Franks then expects the judge to believe that after an intoxicated Reginald Daye asked Ms. Mangum to leave his apartment (for which he was the sole lessee and who paid the rent) and she refused, that he then decides to leave of his own volition".
You have not established as fact that at the time Reginald Daye was stabbed he was intoxicated.
SIDNEY HARR:
"[Prosecutor Coggins-Franks] purposely attempted to mislead the judge into believing that Mangum stabbed the defenseless and unaware “victim” in the back (a bold attempt to rule out self-defense)."
It is Woody Vann's job as defense counsel to rule in self defense. What evidence did Mr. Vann present to show it was self defense. None.
SIDNEY HARR:
"In another pathetic attempt, Prosecutor Coggins-Franks does her best to shift Daye’s transfer to the Intensive Care Unit from complications related to alcoholic withdrawal to an infection secondary to the stab wound."
SIDNEY, if you had any competence as a physician, you would know that medical or surgical treatment can precipitate acute alcohol withdrawl. Reginald Daye's treatment was necessitated by Crystal stabbing him. She can not deny responsibility because he went into alcohol withdrawl.
SIDNEY HARR:
"Despite relatively strong arguments by the defense, and weak, illogical and erroneous prosecution statements totally lacking in credibility, the judge refused to reduce bail for Ms. Mangum."
So say you, whose major legal accomplishment is having your frivolous lawsuit tossed ignominiously out of court.
If the judge denied reduction of bail, the most likely reason is that Woody Vann did not make his case. That would suggest his arguments were not as powerful as you believe.
SIDNEY HARR:
"
Although I was somewhat impressed by Mr. Vann’s performance at this hearing (my expectations were exceedingly low), I still retain questions about his true allegiances. My concerns are due mainly to the following: (1) his refusal to share all prosecution discovery with Mangum… especially the photographs which show her injuries and the crime scene, as they would convey the nature of the abuse and horror to which Mangum was subjected at Daye’s hands and lend to her claim to be a victim of domestic violence; (2) his refusal to turn over to Mangum the report by forensic pathologist Dr. Christena L. Roberts for which Judge Henry Hight ordered the defense expert witness to receive compensation on June 18, 2012 – more than three months ago; (3) his refusal to give his client the mysterious SBI report; (4) his refusal to file a motion to dismiss the ridiculous and baseless “larceny of chose in action” charge which permit the prosecution to up the murder charge to first degree; (5) his pulling punches in his argument for Mangum by protecting Duke University Hospital – laying blame for Daye’s brain death on aspiration rather than the esophageal placement of an endotracheal tube by Duke staff; and (6) his overall lack of urgency and aggressiveness in the face of such bogus and baseless criminal charges. In addition, Mr. Vann has not had adequate communication with Mangum, visiting her on extremely rare occasions. For example, she did not even know that she would be going to court until the morning of the hearing… and she did not know about what the hearing would be.
Personally, I have the impression that the hearing of September 18, 2012, was a staged event, and that it was preordained that bail would be denied to Crystal Mangum. Keep in mind that it is imperative that Mangum remain incarcerated in order for the prosecution to be able to force a plea deal upon her… and that is its ultimate goal. Prosecutor Coggins-Franks cannot take the case to trial because she has no case, and her performance at the hearing was pitiful at best. Defense attorney Vann, on the other hand, did well enough to encourage trust by his client and her supporters – but that is exactly what he wants. A trusting client would be easier for Mr. Vann to persuade to accept a plea deal down the road that would best benefit the prosecution, the medical examiner, and Duke University Hospital… all at the expense of Crystal Mangum who would be saddled with a felony conviction, inability to obtain compensation, and loss of vindication."
All that can be said is that you again show you are totally divorced from reality and are probably schizophrenic.
SIDNEY HARR:
"The fraudulent Autopsy Examination Report of April 14, 2011, by Dr. Clay Nichols, with its fabricated false findings and unsupported conclusion is at the heart of the bogus murder charge against Crystal Mangum, and it is evident it was prepared to prop up the prosecution's case. Dr. Clay Nichols is the Deputy Chief Medical Examiner of the state of North Carolina, and he has a duty to provide accurate, objective, and fair autopsy reports – and not to mold the findings and conclusions to fit the whims of the prosecution… no more so than the SBI lab, which has recently come under scrutiny for its lack of impartiality. This incident which involves the medical examiner is just as damning."
You are setting yourself up for another ignominious bounce out of court type of event.
How are you going to prove those allegations. You can assert that someone with a 5th Grade education can see the flaws, but that is just another unsupported allegation, not proof.
You truly are divorced from reality and probably schizophrenic.
KENHYDERAL:
With regard as to how intense was the fire set by Crystal:
You claim, based on what Crystal told you that her cab theft incident was blown up out of proportion by those who wanted to discredit her after she made her(proven false) rape allegations.
The story of the cab theft incident comes from police records made at the time of the incident, before Crystal ever became infamous as the Duke Lacrosse false accuser.
You expect us to regard you as credible because you believe Crystal the liar? HUH!!!
SIDNEY HARR:
From Wikipediia:
"Pro se legal representation means advocating on one's own behalf before a court, rather than being represented by a lawyer. This may occur in any court proceeding, whether one is the defendant or plaintiff in civil cases, and when one is a defendant in criminal cases."
Are you a defendant in the Reginald Daye stabbing case. The answer is obviously no. Ergo, there was nothing pro se about the second set of motions you filed.
What is clear is that Harr is emotionally disturbed, that he does not have the ability to distinguish fact from opinion and that he has strongly held deeply embedded racial hatred. It's sad and ,for Mangum, unfortunate. Were he not meddling in her affairs to the detriment of her defense (as in the HIPPA violation) , it would all just be laughable and embarrassing for him.
The man does not have even a basic understanding of the justice/ legal process.......he is what is often called a "google lawyer". ........which obviously cost Mangum the services of Shella.
I am glad Mangum is in jail and very glad she is separated from the children. Those kids are the innocent ones and they deserve stability and a violence free home.
SIDNEY HARR:
Why don't you admit it. You did not know squat about Crystal's bail hearing until it was mentioned here on your blog.
Anonymous said...
SIDNEY HARR:
"In another pathetic attempt, Prosecutor Coggins-Franks does her best to shift Daye’s transfer to the Intensive Care Unit from complications related to alcoholic withdrawal to an infection secondary to the stab wound."
SIDNEY, if you had any competence as a physician, you would know that medical or surgical treatment can precipitate acute alcohol withdrawl. Reginald Daye's treatment was necessitated by Crystal stabbing him. She can not deny responsibility because he went into alcohol withdrawl.
So let me get this straight.. You're saying that the stab wound, or the operation and treatment of the stab wound caused Reginald Daye to have delirium tremens?
Maybe I require further elucidation, otherwise, my comment is "hogwash!"
Sid -- Gastrointestinal hemorrhage can precipitate alcohol withdrawal. As an emergency room physician, you should know this.
But don't just take my word for it -- feel free to check with the American College of Medical Toxicology.
Anonymous said...
Correction, Sidney......the prosecutor did not say Daye was stabbed in the back. He said Daye was stabbed as he was leaving......once again, you are lying
I was not in attendance at the hearing, but I have been told by two sources who were present, including Crystal Mangum, that the prosecutor Coggins-Franks stated that Daye was stabbed in the back.
Lance the Intern said...
Sid -- Gastrointestinal hemorrhage can precipitate alcohol withdrawal. As an emergency room physician, you should know this.
But don't just take my word for it -- feel free to check with the American College of Medical Toxicology.
So, Intern, correct me if I'm wrong... If tea-tottler me (who has never imbibed a drop of alcohol) has a gastrointestinal hemorrhage, I will go into delirium tremens. Right?
Anonymous said...
SIDNEY HARR:
"Answer me this: If you go into your bathroom and find a few clothes on fire in the bathtub, what would you do? (a) Turn on the water in the bathtub/shower; (b) Call the Fire department; (c) close the bathroom door and go back to what you were doing; (d) none of the above."
Who told you it was just "a few clothes on fire in the bathtub"? Crystal, who lied to you that she did not set the clothes on fire?
You have no first hand knowledge as to how intense the fire was. You have not established that the fire could have been extinguished simply by turning on the shower. Your,therefore are meaningless to the issue.
You should consider a career in politics... if you are not already one. You adroitly and with great finess sidestepped the question.
"So, Intern, correct me if I'm wrong... If tea-tottler me (who has never imbibed a drop of alcohol) has a gastrointestinal hemorrhage, I will go into delirium tremens. Right?
Is this truly the interpretation you derived from my post? Is this truly the best argument you have? You truly didn't know that GI hemorrhage can precipitate alcohol withdrawal and that delirium tremens are considered the most severe form of withdrawal symptoms?
It's these kinds of ridiculous statements, Sid, that do more harm to your reputation as a physician.
Seriously, please put a little more thought into your replies.
It's "teetotaler", by the way. That is, unless you mean that drinking tea makes you walk unsteadily.
SIDNEY HARR:
"
So let me get this straight.. You're saying that the stab wound, or the operation and treatment of the stab wound caused Reginald Daye to have delirium tremens?
Maybe I require further elucidation, otherwise, my comment is "hogwash!'"
To the first part of that statement, I will say that if Reginald Daye went into DTs as a complication of the medical treatment necessitated by Crystal's stabbing him. I say that because I have seen patients go into DTs after major surgery or intense medical therapy. Evidently you have not.
With regard to the second part of your statement, "hogwash" does not surprise me. It is the kind of thing I expected from a totally incompetent physician.
SIDNEY HARR:
"I was not in attendance at the hearing, but I have been told by two sources who were present, including Crystal Mangum, that the prosecutor Coggins-Franks stated that Daye was stabbed in the back."
Oh Joy! You were told by one of your reliable sources and by Crystal the Liar that the prosecutor said Reginald Daye was stabbed in the back.
SIDNEY HARR:
"So, Intern, correct me if I'm wrong... If tea-tottler me (who has never imbibed a drop of alcohol) has a gastrointestinal hemorrhage, I will go into delirium tremens. Right?"
First, it is tea-toataler, not tee-tottler.
You would not go into DTs following a gastrointestinal hemorrhage but, considering your age and the amount of blood loss, you could become totally disoriented and act like you are in DTs. Take it from someone who has seen it.
In any event, you erect another straw fisherman holding a red herring.
Sidney,
Don't you think it's time you did something? Instead all you do is argue with the bloggers here, most of whom wish you well.
I gave you a list of things that I feel you should do. Have you taken any of my advice?
1. Have you talked to Crystal about firing Vann?
2. Have you finally decided to communicate with Kenhyderal?
3. Have you done anything to persuade Nifong to come out of retirement?
4. Have you asked your friends at J4N to contribute to the bail fund?
5. Have you asked your friends to help you promulgate your version of events?
6. Have you gone to Eric Holder with your complaints?
Until you do something I just don't see how you can consider yourself a true friend of Crystal.
SIDNEY HARR:
"You should consider a career in politics... if you are not already one. You adroitly and with great finess sidestepped the question."
Again, just the kind of response I would expect from a totally incompetent racist person.
Again, you have erected a straw fisherman holding up a red herring.
You are assuming facts not in evidence. You are assuming the fire was "a few clothes on fire in the bathtub", probably because that is what Crystal the liar told you. Until you establish as fact that the fire was "a few clothes on fire in the bathtub", your questions are not relevant to the situation in Milton Walker's apartment.
You have a penchant for putting up as straw men irrelevant questions and thinking you are brilliant. It only shows you are completely incompetent.
SIDNEY HARR:
While we are on the subject of side stepping, explain how you, who have no standing in the Reginald Daye stabbing case, could have filed a pro se motion.
Dr. Harr:
Let me preface this comment by saying that I am a lawyer, but I am not *your* lawyer. Only your own lawyer who has had a privileged atorney-client communication with you can give you legal advice. Moreover, while I am admitted to practice in two U.S. states, I am not admitted in North Carolina, so there may be nuances of North Carolina law I am not familiar with.
Having said all that, I feel a need to caution you. A non-lawyer can file a pro se petition in their *own* case-- a case where they are a party. If a non-lawyer files a document in someone else's case, in which they ask the Court to grant some relief to a party to that case, that would generally constitute the unauthorized practice of law, even if the papers are called "pro se petition."
I *strongly* urge you to consult with a North Carolina lawyer before you file any other legal papers relating to Ms. Magnum. If the North Carolina Bar contacts you about any of your prior filings, I would again *strongly* urge you to consult with a North Carolina lawyer before you respond to any inquiry from them.
So, Sidney, what do you think about this guy who claims to be a lawyer, but can't even spell "Mangum" properly?
Is his advice any good? Will you heed it?
SIDNEY HARR:
Your complaint to the North Carolina Medical Board is what one would expect from a totally incompetent physician.
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
You da man, Sid, you da man.
All I can say, having read the Harr complaint, is that we should all be very glad this man is not licensed in NC. His complaint is laughable and disgraceful. I would not be at all surprised if Nichols files suit and I hope he does. Malicious defamation is a serious issue and making reference to criminal intent iis enough to be grounds for a lawsuit.
Absolutely incorrect, flawed and hilariously off......per my surgeon friends who looked at this .........
Suggest the "lawyer" work on his writing skills.......kinda odd to see a lawyer finish a sentence with the word "with" .
SIDNEY HARR:
I again challenge you to explain how you, who are neither a defendant in the Reginald Daye stabbing case or a lawyer representing a defendant can file a pro se motion in the case.
I spoke to a source who told me that there is no way in hades that Mangum is going to get a 50k bail on a murder charge and that there just was no new evidence at all to support any self defense claim to the extent that a judge would decide, at the bond hearing, to reduce the bail. Remember Sidney this was a bond hearing, not a trial. You seem to have difficulty understanding the difference. My source also said that the prosecutor did NOT say Daye was shot in the back. I asked specifically about this. And the prosecutor continues to say that the argument was over the checks, which Daye wanted back from Mangum and which she refused to hand over. The prosecutor said that it was clear that Mangum was the aggressor and that Daye was leaving when she stabbed him. I know Harr will rant about his story
guiowen said...
Sidney,
Don't you think it's time you did something? Instead all you do is argue with the bloggers here, most of whom wish you well.
I gave you a list of things that I feel you should do. Have you taken any of my advice?
1. Have you talked to Crystal about firing Vann?
2. Have you finally decided to communicate with Kenhyderal?
3. Have you done anything to persuade Nifong to come out of retirement?
4. Have you asked your friends at J4N to contribute to the bail fund?
5. Have you asked your friends to help you promulgate your version of events?
6. Have you gone to Eric Holder with your complaints?
Until you do something I just don't see how you can consider yourself a true friend of Crystal.
gui, mon ami,
I am doing the best thing possible for Crystal. I am enlightening the masses... shedding light on the truth behind the vendetta prosecution against Crystal Mangum. Remember, the truth will set Ms. Mangum free.
Anonymous said...
Dr. Harr:
Let me preface this comment by saying that I am a lawyer, but I am not *your* lawyer. Only your own lawyer who has had a privileged atorney-client communication with you can give you legal advice. Moreover, while I am admitted to practice in two U.S. states, I am not admitted in North Carolina, so there may be nuances of North Carolina law I am not familiar with.
Having said all that, I feel a need to caution you. A non-lawyer can file a pro se petition in their *own* case-- a case where they are a party. If a non-lawyer files a document in someone else's case, in which they ask the Court to grant some relief to a party to that case, that would generally constitute the unauthorized practice of law, even if the papers are called "pro se petition."
I *strongly* urge you to consult with a North Carolina lawyer before you file any other legal papers relating to Ms. Magnum. If the North Carolina Bar contacts you about any of your prior filings, I would again *strongly* urge you to consult with a North Carolina lawyer before you respond to any inquiry from them.
Hey, Anonymous Attorney.
Thank you for the advice... and I will consult an attorney before I file anything further with the courts regarding Mangum's case.
I actually had no idea, not being an attorney, that it was against the law to file a Pro Se petition in the case of a third party. My research found nothing to prohibit doing so. But before I file anything else, I will check with an attorney. Thank you for your insight and advice.
I welcome your legal contributions to this blog.
Also, please excuse the petty comments by some of my petty commenters about your misspelling of Mangum's name.
Sid,
guiowen is right. It's time for you, Kenny and Malek to get off the sidelines. You should put on your J4N t-shirts, find VP, and head for the steps of the Durham Courthouse for another press conference. You're acting like you're scared of Rae Evans and the powers that be.
SIDNEY HARR:
"I am doing the best thing possible for Crystal. I am enlightening the masses... shedding light on the truth behind the vendetta prosecution against Crystal Mangum. Remember, the truth will set Ms. Mangum free."
No you are not. You are telling lies and distorting the facts.
SIDNEY HARR:
"I actually had no idea, not being an attorney, that it was against the law to file a Pro Se petition in the case of a third party. My research found nothing to prohibit doing so."
Actually you did not attempt to find out. I learned what pro se meant simply by doing google search on the term. It took less than a minute.
guiowen said...
So, Sidney, what do you think about this guy who claims to be a lawyer, but can't even spell "Mangum" properly?
Is his advice any good? Will you heed it?
I believe his claims to be an attorney are true, and I will do my best to follow his advice.
SIDNEY HARR:
"Also, please excuse the petty comments by some of my petty commenters about your misspelling of Mangum's name."
You should have added, don't pay any attention to those commenters who point out my lies, my distortions of fact, my unsupported allegations, my complete divorcement from reality.
Anonymous said...
SIDNEY HARR:
I again challenge you to explain how you, who are neither a defendant in the Reginald Daye stabbing case or a lawyer representing a defendant can file a pro se motion in the case.
The explanation is presented in the opening paragraphs of the Petition for Writ of Mandamus. Check it out and you should receive adequate elucidation.
SIDNEY HARR:
"I believe his claims to be an attorney are true, and I will do my best to follow his advice."
Really?
You who describe attorneys as people who take your money to represent you and then sell you out to the rich plaintiff.
SIDNEY HARR:
"The explanation is presented in the opening paragraphs of the Petition for Writ of Mandamus. Check it out and you should receive adequate elucidation."
Elucidation for what? Why you tried again, in the face of a warning by the NC board, to practice law without a license.
In a previous comment you yourself admitted you broke the law by attempting to file motions pro se in the Reginald Daye stabbing case.
Anonymous said...
I spoke to a source who told me that there is no way in hades that Mangum is going to get a 50k bail on a murder charge and that there just was no new evidence at all to support any self defense claim to the extent that a judge would decide, at the bond hearing, to reduce the bail. Remember Sidney this was a bond hearing, not a trial. You seem to have difficulty understanding the difference. My source also said that the prosecutor did NOT say Daye was shot in the back. I asked specifically about this. And the prosecutor continues to say that the argument was over the checks, which Daye wanted back from Mangum and which she refused to hand over. The prosecutor said that it was clear that Mangum was the aggressor and that Daye was leaving when she stabbed him. I know Harr will rant about his story
I will agree that the prosecutor did not say Daye was "shot" in the back. She said he was "stabbed" in the back.
Face it, Prosecutor Charlene Coggins-Franks' scenario of events has more holes in it than a collander.
SIDNEY HARR:
"If a party to a case is dissatisfied with some decision of the trial court, the party may appeal the decision to a higher court with a petition for a writ of mandamus before the trial proceeds. The order will be issued only in exceptional circumstances."
This is a definition of writ of mandamus from http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/writ+of+mandamus.
How do you qualify as a party to the Reginald Daye stabbing case?
Anonymous said...
SIDNEY HARR:
"Also, please excuse the petty comments by some of my petty commenters about your misspelling of Mangum's name."
You should have added, don't pay any attention to those commenters who point out my lies, my distortions of fact, my unsupported allegations, my complete divorcement from reality.
No... I don't mind abusive and disrespectful comments directed towards me, but I don't appreciate them being directed towards other commenters.
My computer time is up for this session, so, thereby go ye enlightened.
SIDNEY HARR:
"
I will agree that the prosecutor did not say Daye was "shot" in the back. She said he was "stabbed" in the back.
Face it, Prosecutor Charlene Coggins-Franks' scenario of events has more holes in it than a collander."
You who believe in the carpetbagger jihad and jedi mind tricks?
Oh come now.
SIDNEY HARR:
"No... I don't mind abusive and disrespectful comments directed towards me, but I don't appreciate them being directed towards other commenters.
My computer time is up for this session, so, thereby go ye enlightened."
So you are bugging out before you can confront more questions you do not want to answer.
What kind of comments? Do you mean comments to the effect that KENHYDERAL's scenario of what happened to Crystal(she was raped by unknown non lax party attendees, that the Lacrosse team covered for the real rapists) is totally implausible.
Do you mean remarks that Kilgo knows nothing about the Duke Lacrosse case?
Right on Dr. Harr.
Malek Williams
Hillside H.S.
Class of 1996
Sidney says:
"I am doing the best thing possible for Crystal. I am enlightening the masses... shedding light on the truth behind the vendetta prosecution against Crystal Mangum. Remember, the truth will set Ms. Mangum free."
I've told you several times already, the few people who read your blog are well aware of your arguments. You have to do something to reach out to others.
Break gave you some ideas; I'm sure you can come up with others. But the blog is just not enough.
If you reached enough people with the truth, something would already have happened. Instead all we see is a few notes from Kenhyderal and Malek Williams about how wonderful Crystal is. No one else is helping.
Right on Dr. Harr.
Malek Williams
Hillside H.S.
Class of 1996
September 22, 2012 8:32 AM
Is KENHYDERAL trying out a new masquerade?
SIDNEY HARR:
"No... I don't mind abusive and disrespectful comments directed towards me, but I don't appreciate them being directed towards other commenters."
Do you mean such things like the belief that KENHYDERAL is reposting his past comments and attributing them to Malek Williams?
My mistake. The prosecutor did not say daye was stabbed in the back. The statement was that he was stabbed as he was leaving. I checked twice.
SIDNEY HARR:
"Face it, Prosecutor Charlene Coggins-Franks' scenario of events has more holes in it than a collander."
SIDNEY, your so called logic has holes in it bigger than the ones that sank the Titanic.
SIDNEY HARR:
"nswer me this: If you go into your bathroom and find a few clothes on fire in the bathtub, what would you do? (a) Turn on the water in the bathtub/shower; (b) Call the Fire department; (c) close the bathroom door and go back to what you were doing; (d) none of the above.
By any reference of logic, a reasonable person would do (a)."
If a capability for logic is necessary to react appropriately to this scenario, then it is obvious that you would have chosen option d.
SIDNEY HARR:
"The fact that Dr. Nichols' report is flawed and fraudulent is evident to anyone who can read, has an understanding of the English language, and who has intact mental faculties allowing for reasoning and logic."
That would leave you out.
Don't worry Sidney, in the end Mangum will get what she deserves. The truth will come out and Mangum will get exactly what she deserves.
You will get what you deserve too.......no doubt
Silly man, ridiculous false allegations and a waste of bandwidth = Sid. My physician friends who read this junk said they question whether this guy was ever a doctor! Absolutely false and completely CSI grade melodrama. Where did you go to school? NCCU?
Anonymous said...
SIDNEY HARR:
"I will agree that the prosecutor did not say Daye was "shot" in the back. She said he was "stabbed" in the back.
Face it, Prosecutor Charlene Coggins-Franks' scenario of events has more holes in it than a collander."
You who believe in the carpetbagger jihad and jedi mind tricks?
Oh come now.
Is that the best comeback you can make? I'm not surprised because you know, as well as I, that the prosecution's version of events doesn't make any sense whatsoevah.
Out of the clear blue in court she states that Daye politely asked Ms. Mangum to leave because she evidently would not return two cashier's checks (which she could not convert for her use), and when she refused to leave, although he alone was on the lease, decided to leave and on his way out the door, Mangum springs into action, grabs a steak knife and stabs him in the back.
Yeah... That explains your piddly comeback.
Anonymous said...
Right on Dr. Harr.
Malek Williams
Hillside H.S.
Class of 1996
Hey, Malek. Thanks for the support.
guiowen said...
Sidney says:
"I am doing the best thing possible for Crystal. I am enlightening the masses... shedding light on the truth behind the vendetta prosecution against Crystal Mangum. Remember, the truth will set Ms. Mangum free."
I've told you several times already, the few people who read your blog are well aware of your arguments. You have to do something to reach out to others.
Break gave you some ideas; I'm sure you can come up with others. But the blog is just not enough.
If you reached enough people with the truth, something would already have happened. Instead all we see is a few notes from Kenhyderal and Malek Williams about how wonderful Crystal is. No one else is helping.
gui, mon ami, you're absolutely right... and so is Break. I need to reach more of the populous. Ergo, after my next fantastic flog (which I am now working on and should be ready by week's end hopefully), I will start doing my mini-documentaries on a video format and upload them on You Tube.
What do you think about that?
Anonymous said...
SIDNEY HARR:
"No... I don't mind abusive and disrespectful comments directed towards me, but I don't appreciate them being directed towards other commenters.
My computer time is up for this session, so, thereby go ye enlightened."
So you are bugging out before you can confront more questions you do not want to answer.
What kind of comments? Do you mean comments to the effect that KENHYDERAL's scenario of what happened to Crystal(she was raped by unknown non lax party attendees, that the Lacrosse team covered for the real rapists) is totally implausible.
Do you mean remarks that Kilgo knows nothing about the Duke Lacrosse case?
Oops. Only two minutes left in my session. Will try to get around to addressing your concerns next time. In the meantime, may you go, thereby, enlightened. (Less than a minute left!)
SIDNEY HARR:
"Is that the best comeback you can make? I'm not surprised because you know, as well as I, that the prosecution's version of events doesn't make any sense whatsoevah."
SIDNEY, you have never made sense in anything you have said. Your version is not credible, considering it is based on what Crystal the liar told you.
SIDNEY HARR:
" Ergo, after my next fantastic flog (which I am now working on and should be ready by week's end hopefully), I will start doing my mini-documentaries on a video format and upload them on You Tube."
What next fantastic flog? You have never produced any fantastic blog or flog entries yet.
I am hoping you do post on youtube. You will be making a fool of yourself in front of millions of people.
SIDNEY HARR:
"Oops. Only two minutes left in my session. Will try to get around to addressing your concerns next time. In the meantime, may you go, thereby, enlightened. (Less than a minute left!)"
So you are again bugging out in order to avoid confronting questions you do not care to answer.
SIDNEY HARR:
"Hey, Malek. Thanks for the support."
Don't you mean, KENHYDERAL, Thanks for the support?
Sidney said,
" Ergo, after my next fantastic flog (which I am now working on and should be ready by week's end hopefully), I will start doing my mini-documentaries on a video format and upload them on You Tube."
I must say I'm looking forward to seeing the videos. They will no doubt be very interesting.
SIDN(inn)EY H(ypocrite)ARR(acist):
"Hey, Malek. Thanks for the support."
Don't you mean, KENHYDERAL, Thanks for the support?
Anonymous September 23, 2012 4:05 was not me.
Ano-ninny-mous
Guiowen. Wonderful stuff.........;)
SIDN(inn)EY H(ypocrite)ARR(acist):
"Is that the best comeback you can make? I'm not surprised because you know, as well as I, that the prosecution's version of events doesn't make any sense whatsoevah."
SIDNEY, you have never made sense in anything you have said. Your version is not credible, considering it is based on what Crystal the liar told you.
SIDN(inn)EY H(ypocrite)ARR(acist):
"Ergo, after my next fantastic flog (which I am now working on and should be ready by week's end hopefully), I will start doing my mini-documentaries on a video format and upload them on You Tube."
What next fantastic flog? You have never produced any fantastic blog or flog entries yet.
I am hoping you do post on youtube. You will be making a fool of yourself in front of millions of people.
SIDN(inn)EY H(ypocrite)ARR(acist):
"Oops. Only two minutes left in my session. Will try to get around to addressing your concerns next time. In the meantime, may you go, thereby, enlightened. (Less than a minute left!)"
So you are again bugging out in order to avoid confronting questions you do not care to answer.
Is copy and paste KENHYDERAL at it again under a different guise?
Is KENHYDERAL reluctant to take responsibility for what he posts?
Is KENHYDERAL decompensating?
Maybe it is SIDNEY HARR who is decompensating?
Harr is not going to change his story or his tactics. Period. He does not give a damn about Mangum or Nifong, and we ALL know it. This is about racism and hatred. He is just so angry that those rich white boys did NOT do what they were supposed to have done. Nifong is Harr's surrogate hero because Nifong was dumb enough to court the black vote by thinking he could railroad the LAX guys. And it almost worked. When the goshdarn lab results were properly and fully understood, oooopsie, the black/academia/left coalition just had a four alarm come-apart....and poor sidney hasn't been able to be rational since. Darn it, truth DOES have a way of setting INNOCENT people free, doesn't it, sidney.
anyway, bro, stop fretting....justice will come for Mangum, too, and she will get what she deserves.
"The explanation is presented in the opening paragraphs of the Petition for Writ of Mandamus. Check it out and you should receive adequate elucidation."
Do you mean the paragraph that references NCGS 58-19-70?
This statute covers insurance, and this particular section details judicial review for those "aggrieved by the any order" or "by any failure" of the Commissioner of Insurance of North Carolina or an authorized designee of the Commissioner.
You also mention NCGS 15A-901 through 15A-910 (which do cover discovery). These statutes cover disclosure by the state and disclosure by the defendant. They do not state anything regarding communication between the defendant and their lawyer.
It's like you simply cut and pasted someone's work, without bothering to review the statutes provided...Especially if you look at the difference in text between chapters 1-2 and the rest of the document.
You might want to keep this link, for future reference.
Anonymous said...
SIDNEY HARR:
" Ergo, after my next fantastic flog (which I am now working on and should be ready by week's end hopefully), I will start doing my mini-documentaries on a video format and upload them on You Tube."
What next fantastic flog? You have never produced any fantastic blog or flog entries yet.
I am hoping you do post on youtube. You will be making a fool of yourself in front of millions of people.
I'm sure that what you really meant to say is that I will be "enlightening millions of people."
guiowen said...
Sidney said,
" Ergo, after my next fantastic flog (which I am now working on and should be ready by week's end hopefully), I will start doing my mini-documentaries on a video format and upload them on You Tube."
I must say I'm looking forward to seeing the videos. They will no doubt be very interesting.
gui, mon ami, the videos will be as interesting and as enlightening as the flogs. The main difference being that the videos on You Tube will not be interactive.
I hope to finish my present flog by week's end and then I'll begin on the video. I know the anticipation is much akin to that of waiting for the iPhone 5.
SIDNEY HARR:
"I'm sure that what you really meant to say is that I will be 'enlightening millions of people.'"
I am sure what I meant to say is that you will be making a fool of yourself in front of millions of people.
A deluded, probably schizophrenic megalomaniac is incapable of enlightening anyone, especially himself.
Lance the Intern said...
"The explanation is presented in the opening paragraphs of the Petition for Writ of Mandamus. Check it out and you should receive adequate elucidation."
Do you mean the paragraph that references NCGS 58-19-70?
This statute covers insurance, and this particular section details judicial review for those "aggrieved by the any order" or "by any failure" of the Commissioner of Insurance of North Carolina or an authorized designee of the Commissioner.
You also mention NCGS 15A-901 through 15A-910 (which do cover discovery). These statutes cover disclosure by the state and disclosure by the defendant. They do not state anything regarding communication between the defendant and their lawyer.
It's like you simply cut and pasted someone's work, without bothering to review the statutes provided...Especially if you look at the difference in text between chapters 1-2 and the rest of the document.
You might want to keep this link, for future reference.
Thanks, Intern. I try my best to understand this legal stuff, which to be truthful, I find very complicated. So, it is possible that since I am not an attorney and have no legal training, that I might misinterpret part of the law and legal regulations. I will readily admit that I am not well versed in legalese mumbo-jumbo.
SIDNEY HARR:
"I'm sure that what you really meant to say is that I will be 'enlightening millions of people.'"
You were also sure, based on what Crystal told you, that she did not set fire to Milton Walker's clothes.
You were also sure that your frivolous lawsuit against Duke had merit.
SIDNEY HARR:
"gui, mon ami, the videos will be as interesting and as enlightening as the flogs"
In other words you will be dumping more garbage on the internet.
Anonymous said...
SIDNEY HARR:
"I'm sure that what you really meant to say is that I will be 'enlightening millions of people.'"
I am sure what I meant to say is that you will be making a fool of yourself in front of millions of people.
A deluded, probably schizophrenic megalomaniac is incapable of enlightening anyone, especially himself.
It is evident from your comment that you are beyond enlightment... My condolences.
SIDNEY HARR:
"I hope to finish my present flog by week's end and then I'll begin on the video. I know the anticipation is much akin to that of waiting for the iPhone 5."
You show again you are completely divorced from reality and probably schizophrenic.
There will be less anticipation than there was for your non news conference about Crystal.
SIDNEY HARR:
"
Thanks, Intern. I try my best to understand this legal stuff, which to be truthful, I find very complicated. So, it is possible that since I am not an attorney and have no legal training, that I might misinterpret part of the law and legal regulations. I will readily admit that I am not well versed in legalese mumbo-jumbo."
Yet you think you can state with authority that your frivolous lawsuit against Duke had merit, that the actual innocence of the Falsely accused Lacrosse players is legally meaningless, that the forensic autopsy performed by Dr Nichols was flawed, that Woody Vann is in cahoots with the prosecution, that you know what pro se means, that you can violate the law at will and plead ignorance of the law.
This all shows that you believe you are above the law.
SIDNEY HARR:
"It is evident from your comment that you are beyond enlightment... My condolences."
Another of your delusions.
I am not capable of being enlightened by a deluded, probably schizophrenic megalomaniac. No one is, especially the deluded, probably schizophrenic megalomaniac himself.
well, at long last, a small word of truth from Harr....admitting that he does not know jackXXXX about the law or, as he so cleverly puts it, the legal mumbo-jumbo. I'd be careful using phrases like "mumbo-jumbo", if I were you, bro. the PC police over at the Duke 88 club don't take kindly to having one of the brothers using language that has its roots in racism.
Ordered a new bumper sticker for my new vehicle...same as the old one....it has the Duke LAX logo and the phrase "Proud Duke Hooligan since 2006". Where are you, bathrobe boy???????
It matters not whether Harr spouts his venom on youtube, the street corner, or the front lawn of the white house.....it's harr's version of the truth.....and, as we say in the south, he has a right to his opinions, bless his heart.
"Thanks, Intern. I try my best to understand this legal stuff, which to be truthful, I find very complicated. So, it is possible that since I am not an attorney and have no legal training, that I might misinterpret part of the law and legal regulations."
I'm willing to bet you don't even bother attempting to understand "this legal stuff"....So, how did you identify NCGS 58-19-70 as applying to this particular scenario? Why is the text different in your document?
Wonder how the Bar committee will deal with the latest Harr behavior? Wonder if they will give him another fanny spank or, perhaps, will take a bit more stern view of his repeated "playing lawyer" misadventures?
Just to be clear, yet again, sidney......the prosecutor did NOT say that Daye was stabbed in the back. And, you are inventing details and inferences of tone that also were not presented by either side during the hearing. I hope that you can somehow manage to understand the difference between a bond hearing and a trial.
SIDNEY HARR has bugged out again rather than confront issues he does not like
Am not a doctor and I don't pretend to be something I am not....which harr seems to do regularly. but, it seems to me that the original report about the daye killing was that he was stabbed in the left flank....so I assume that means his left side. Not at all certain, but I believe the lab testing was related to the angle and trajectory of the knife.....
if mangum's story, as retold by harr, is to be believe....she grabbed a knife and stabbed daye while he was on top of her, choking her. check me if I am wrong here; I think is just about word for word from harr. so the stab wound angle of the knife should be from the right side, under daye's upraised arm.
I don't see anything in the documents AT ALL that support's harr notion of botched care of fradulent reports......and I have had several physician friends take a look, too. They all say harr's story is just, well, baloney. It's disappointing to think that a man who claims to have once been a physician would be so disrespectful of the dead and so disdainful of the law.
Second degree murder bail guidelines in Durham are $600,000. Mangum's bail has already been reduced twice. There is justification for further reduction. None. This is where Harr has such limited understanding and capacity, apparently. He thinks, because he says so, that the judge should just automatically accept whatever harr says. sounds stupid, doesn't it. nonetheless, harr believes that whatever mangum says is the god's honest truth and that mangum should simply be let go, altogether, because she says she knifed mr. daye in self defense. What sidney refuses to accept, or just to intellectually limited to comprehend, is that we have trials by jury in our country.....that people are innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.....that juries do not find people innocent......that evidence is a part of a trial process....and that simply throwing a hissy on a street corner has nothing to be with "truth".
there is NO justification for further reduction....correction...
So if Mangum killed Daye in self defense, why didn't SHE say so in her first interview with the police? She did not do so.
Anonymous @ 11:34 said: "What sidney refuses to accept, or just to intellectually limited to comprehend, is that we have trials by jury in our country"........... What Anonymous fails to comprehend is, that in North Carolina, defendents, especially minorities and the poor are routinely subjected to blatent over-charging, the setting of a bail amount designed to be well beyond their ability to raise and then to hold them for many long months without bringing them to trial and threatening them with months more of the same, in order to pressure them in pleading guilty to a reduced charge in exchange for time served. This is especially odious and beyond evil when the victim is a mother, being separated from her children. Such has been the victimization of Crystal Mangum.
Anonymous said...
So if Mangum killed Daye in self defense, why didn't SHE say so in her first interview with the police? She did not do so.
Glad you asked, but first, she didn't kill Daye... Duke University Hospital is responsible for that. She did stab Daye in self defense, however.
According to the police notes themselves, when Mangum was approached by police and asked if she wanted to give a statement she said yes. Then she was placed under arrest and read her Miranda Rights in which she was told that anything she said would be used against her... so she, being an intelligent individual, kept quiet.
To sum it up, she was arrested before the Durham Police even conducted an investigation or asked her for a statement.
Comprende?
try again, sid. she was read her rights and, of course, any woman who just killed a man in self defense would say so. your version of events and rationalization makes absolutely no sense at all. once again, you are speculating and adjusting your version of the truth to make it fit evidence. Any idiot knows that a woman who has just been beaten for an hour and choked, nearly to death, by a drunken wild man....is going to say, IF IT IS THE TRUTH.....that she fought him and stabbed him to keep from getting killed.
absolutely ridiculous to say otherwise.
Kenny, hate to tell you this, but the person directly responsible for the charges against Mangum was none other than "no conscious"Cline, the Nifong clone, the BLACK woman, who is now facing loss of her license to practice law. So, explain to us all, then , how this BLACK prosecutor, this Nifong clone, had it in for Mangum. One would think that Cline would fall all over herself to protect dear Crystal, just to make her look better to the Nifong crowd.
If you lived here or even had a clue about culture and the afro american community in durham, you would understand just how far off-base you are in making the argument that poor crystal is languishing in jail as a result of sidney's jihad.
you can say mangum didn't kill daye till the cows come home......it makes no difference. Walt has explained the law to you, many times, and you dumbly elect to ignore it. Proximate cause applies here, sidney. Lance will tell you the same thing......but, of course, you being the CSI lawyer-doctor-forensice expert, know better than all the professional people.
Same old tired nonsense from sidney and kenny. the evil white oppressor grand conspiracy is out to get poor Mangum. yawn. you fellas need some new material.
hate to tell you both this.......not one squeaking word of it is true.......
Sid -- Answer my question:
How did you identify NCGS 58-19-70 as applying to your writ of Mandamus? Why is the text different in your document between paragraphs 2 and 3?
Anonymous @2:21 said: "Kenny, hate to tell you this, but the person directly responsible for the charges against Mangum was none other than "no conscious"Cline, the Nifong clone, the BLACK woman, who is now facing loss of her license to practice law. So, explain to us all, then , how this BLACK prosecutor, this Nifong clone, had it in for Mangum. One would think that Cline would fall all over herself to protect dear Crystal, just to make her look better to the Nifong crowd"....... What does the race of the former District Attorneys Cline and Nifong have to do with this kind of injustice, that appears to be all too prevalent in North Carolina? Injustice is injustice regardless of the race of those who participate in perpetuating it. If DA Cline chose to continue it without, like Dr. Harr, raging against it, then she bears some guilt for it as well.
Kenhyderal,
So, how is the bail money coming along? Have you managed to tqalk to Sidney about it?
Sidney,
Have you decided to cooperate with Kenny about the bail money, or do you still refuse to communicate with him?
I'd be very upset to find out that some imprudent words of mine had spoiled things for an innocent mothe4er of three.
Guiowen @3:11 said: "Sidney,
Have you decided to cooperate with Kenny about the bail money, or do you still refuse to communicate with him"........... I have not discussed bail for Crystal with Dr.Harr. My dealings have been with a Lawyer in Raleigh, Mark Simeon, who is holding money in trust towards the non-refundable $20,000.00 needed for a Bail Bond Company to put up the $200,000.00 bail. Who, other then myself have made contributions towards this, I do not know. In a communication from that Lawyer, I was told that the amount needed was close to being realized.
Anonymous said...
"Anonymous September 23, 2012 4:05 was not me."
September 23, 2012 5:00 PM
We don't believe you.
Malek Williams
Hillside H.S.
Class of 1996
KENHYDERAL:
"This is especially odious and beyond evil when the victim is a mother, being separated from her children. Such has been the victimization of Crystal Mangum."
It seems that Crystal separated herself from her children on multiple occasions. It does not seem that separation would traumatize her.
"Anonymous said...
"Anonymous September 23, 2012 4:05 was not me."
September 23, 2012 5:00 PM
We don't believe you.
Malek Williams
Hillside H.S.
Class of 1996
I don't believe you, KENHYDERAL
KENHYDERAL:
"What does the race of the former District Attorneys Cline and Nifong have to do with this kind of injustice, that appears to be all too prevalent in North Carolina? Injustice is injustice regardless of the race of those who participate in perpetuating it. If DA Cline chose to continue it without, like Dr. Harr, raging against it, then she bears some guilt for it as well."
What race has to do with it is that black man SIDNEY HARR will not call out black former prosecutor Tracey Cline for overcharging people and then keeping them incarcerated for prolonged periods without trial.
KENHYDERAL:
" I have not discussed bail for Crystal with Dr.Harr. My dealings have been with a Lawyer in Raleigh, Mark Simeon, who is holding money in trust towards the non-refundable $20,000.00 needed for a Bail Bond Company to put up the $200,000.00 bail. Who, other then myself have made contributions towards this, I do not know. In a communication from that Lawyer, I was told that the amount needed was close to being realized."
Based on your previous behavior patterns, there is doubt that you really have been in contact with said lawyer. Why has he not posted on J4N?
SIDNEY HARR:
'Glad you asked, but first, she didn't kill Daye... Duke University Hospital is responsible for that. She did stab Daye in self defense, however."
Whether or not Crystal is guilty of killing Reginald Daye is up to a jury. However SIDNEY has not even come close to establishing as fact that Duke University Hospital is responsible for his death.
He is totally divorced from reality and probably schizophrenic.
I wonder if the lack of communication between kenhyderal and Sidney is not based on their disagreement on the role of Tracey Cline in overcharging Crystal.
Kenhyderal properly attributes some guilt to Cline if she was aware of the charges and let the overcharging continue. Cline was the DA for most of the first year after Crystal's arrest, and she had a reputation for overcharging defendants to force plea bargains.
Sidney has absolved Cline from all responsibility, apparently taking the position that the ADAs involved were rogue prosecutors who hid their actions from Cline. Cline was unaware of the charges despite some media coverage.
Malek Williams
Hillside H.S.
Class of 1996
KENHYDERAL:
"...in North Carolina, defendents, especially minorities and the poor are routinely subjected to blatent over-charging, the setting of a bail amount designed to be well beyond their ability to raise and then to hold them for many long months without bringing them to trial and threatening them with months more of the same, in order to pressure them in pleading guilty to a reduced charge".
Which is almost exactly what happened to the innocent falsely accused Duke Lacrosse players. You believe that the prosecution of the innocent, falsely accused Lacrosse players was appropriate.
Yes they did make bail. So did rapist Michael Jermaine Burch, whose existence you seem to deny. While out on bail, Michael Jermaine Burch raped another victim, something you seem to shy away from recognizing.
"Anonymous said...
"Anonymous September 23, 2012 4:05 was not me."
September 23, 2012 5:00 PM
We don't believe you.
Who's we? KENHYDERAL and his alternate persona Malek Williams?
SIDNEY HARR:
"According to the police notes themselves, when Mangum was approached by police and asked if she wanted to give a statement she said yes. Then she was placed under arrest and read her Miranda Rights in which she was told that anything she said would be used against her... so she, being an intelligent individual, kept quiet."
Who really told you this - Crystal the liar?
The lack of a speedy trial statute in North Carolina is a problem (there WAS one, but it was repealed by the General in 1989). I can't seem to find out why it was repealed. If anyone knows, I'd be interested in the details.
KENHYDERAL:
"...in North Carolina, defendents, especially minorities and the poor are routinely subjected to blatent over-charging".
Was black man Michael Jermaine Burch overcharged or given an exorbitant bail?
Incidentally, the word is "bltant", as in "blatant unrepentant racist", not "blatent".
Incidentally, the word is not "bltant."
Anonymous said...
Incidentally, the word is not "bltant."
September 24, 2012 5:02 PM
Correct! it is blatant as in blatant unrepentant racist.
Typing from nexus tablet... My post was supposed to say "repealed by the general assembly"....Just in case Sid decides to name "the general" in a future lawsuit.
Sidney said:
"she was placed under arrest and read her Miranda Rights in which she was told that anything she said would be used against her... so she, being an intelligent individual, kept quiet."
I guess the problem is that if you tell a lie it's difficult to keep track of all you say. Better and smarter to say nothing at all rather than have your lies come back to haunt you at the trial.
guiowen September 24, 2012 5:57 PM
I like the way Judge Judy says it. If you tell the truth, you do not need a good memory. If you lie, you need a good memory in order to keep the lie consistent.
yep, I agree, guiowen. now, I suppose sidney is going to tell us that the Miranda rights were developed as a tool to target poor vicitim Crystal by the jihad crowd. It is not credible for sidney to claim poor crystal kept silent when asked what happened when, supposedly, she was yelling her head off, rolling on the floor in the aunt's apartment, telling her kid to call 911. (I think that sidney's wild tale, anyway......) If I am not mistaken, sidney said poor crystal was telling the child exactly what to say to the 911 operator. isn't that nice.....teaching a child how to lie. runs in the family, huh.
guiowen, I did a little digging and found that the statute was, as you said, repealed in in 1989. The only information I found as to the rationale was that there were so many cases, and so few resources to help defendants, that people were being herded through the system, breakneck speed, and not given a fair opportunity for a defense. The implication was that the push to abandon the speedy trial requirement actually came from those with interests on the defense side......which, if true, is quite peculiar. I would have thought it would be the other way round. I got this information from an old friend who has been a political observer and courthouse junkie for many many years.....so it could be wrong.
anyway, it also seems odd to me that the limitation requirement stands for misdemeanors but not felony cases. If a criminal case involves both felony and misdemeanor charges, does the limitation requirement apply?
In spite of sidney's wrongheaded racist views to the contrary, most of us would like Mangum to get a fair and prompt trial. Frankly, the last thing I would like to see is her getting her hands back on those children.......for their benefit. BUT, she should have a fair trial and a prompt one. I will also add that Harr's meddling has done nothing for Mangum except CREATE delay. Shame on him for his hypocrisy......claiming he cares about justice for her.
First, If Mangum had nothing to hide and if her story of self defense was true, then she had nothing to fear by explaining her actions to the police.
Second, the claims of this viscious beating, "ten punches to her face", choking, etc.....would, without a doubt, have left visible evidence. Sidney knows, if he really is a physician, that face and head injuries are notorious bleeders. She would have been bruised and bleeding, no question about it. Sidney claims the existence of mysterious prosecutor photos, showing this beating evidence, that somehow Vann won't let his client have. Uh huh, sure, right. Yet, the CLEAR mug shot (no, it isn't blurry, sidney) shows not one, not one visible mark.
Third, Ask yourself if it makes sense that a woman who has just been beaten and choked, and who has just stabbed a wild drunken maniac, would RUUN STRAIGHT TO THE LOCATION WHERE HER CHILD IS. That, my friends, makes no sense at all. Kenny, your innocent mother of three crap is nothing but a LIE. A truly caring innocent mother of three, who had just escaped a near-death beating, and who would not know, for certain, that she had stopped her attacker, would NOT, I repeat NOT, run to the place where her child was. That, numbnut, would be the last place she would go. What she would do, however, is run to the nearest door, beat it down, scream bloody murder and wake up the entire apartment complex, yelling for HELP!!! You can rant all you want about poor crystal, the innocent mother of three.....bullXXXX. If her story is true, she deliberately and with no care for safety, exposed her own child to a possible attack by the wild drunk Daye.
either way, sidney, total bullXXXX
You have totally ignored this whole obvious flaw in her lies....but it is there....and you know it.
"The only information I found as to the rationale was that there were so many cases, and so few resources to help defendants, that people were being herded through the system, breakneck speed, and not given a fair opportunity for a defense. The implication was that the push to abandon the speedy trial requirement actually came from those with interests on the defense side"
Thanks, anonymous. It's my understanding that most delays come from the defense side...So a speedy trial statute would stillbe beneficial.
Lance the Intern said...
Sid -- Answer my question:
How did you identify NCGS 58-19-70 as applying to your writ of Mandamus? Why is the text different in your document between paragraphs 2 and 3?
Hey, Intern.
I don't mean to ignore your question, but I'm to busy advocatin' to go and research how I identified the statute or why the text (font?) is different between two paragraphs. A lot of work to do yet on my big flog.
You wrote the document, but you have to research how you identified this particular statute?
How...unusual.
And yes, you DO mean to ignore my question -- as you have others.
Anonymous said...
SIDNEY HARR:
"According to the police notes themselves, when Mangum was approached by police and asked if she wanted to give a statement she said yes. Then she was placed under arrest and read her Miranda Rights in which she was told that anything she said would be used against her... so she, being an intelligent individual, kept quiet."
Who really told you this - Crystal the liar?
No. This information is found in the last three paragraphs of a police report which I will link you to now...
Officer Bond's report
Thereby, go ye enlightened.
SIDNEY HARR:
"No. This information is found in the last three paragraphs of a police report which I will link you to now...
Officer Bond's report".
You neglect, probably intentionally, to mention that the police report indicates Crystal was under the influence, that her speech was slurred and incoherent. You neglect, probably intentionally, to mention that Reginald Daye said Crystal had stabbed him and had taken his money.
What Crystal said weeks later about the events that night, considering she had indications of being drunk and incoherent, is not credible. Crystal has not made a case for self defense.
SIDNEY HARR:
"I don't mean to ignore your(Lance's) question, but I'm to busy advocatin' to go and research how I identified the statute or why the text (font?) is different between two paragraphs. A lot of work to do yet on my big flog."
In other words, you are ducking his question.
SIDNEY HARR:
What you said about the police report was not really 100% correct.
You said, "According to the police notes themselves, when Mangum was approached by police and asked if she wanted to give a statement she said yes. Then she was placed under arrest and read her Miranda Rights in which she was told that anything she said would be used against her... so she, being an intelligent individual, kept quiet."
Officer Bond said, he entered the room where Crystal was, informed her she was under arrest for assault, and then tried to read her her Miranda rights.
He had to wake Crystal up when he entered the room. While he was reading her the Miranda warning she kept falling asleep. When asked if she understood her rights, Crystal just mumbled. Officer Bond pressed her for a yes or no answer to the question, did she understand the Miranda warning. Crystal then replied yes and then refused to answer questions.
Officer Bond did not ask her to give a statement before she was arrested and read her rights. He did not see her or question her until after she was in custody. Self defense did not become an issue until a bit of time passed after the arrest.
I suspect you planted the suggestion in her that she claim self defense.
Also, Officer Bond's report does not provide any evidence that Reginald Daye caused the damage which was found in the apartment. It could have resulted from Crystal being outraged when he left the apartment.
SIDNEY HARR:
Liar Liar pants on fire.
Now you will probably blame the Durham Police Department for lighting up your pants.
so now, of course, sidney has to blame the police officers and claim they are in on the grand conspiracy as well.
Mangum was drunk. Period. She was drunk in 2002 when she stole a car, got herself another DUI, reckless driving, and trying to run over an officer charge. She was drunk in 2006 when she lied and tried to put innocent men in prison. She was drunk in 2010 when she attacked a man with a ladder and vandalized his car and she was drunk in 2011 when she stabbed Reginald Daye.
There were no signs of a beating or choking and we ALL know it, Sidney.
I have no doubt this was a domestic fight and likely over money. I have no doubt that both Daye and Mangum were drinking...and probably way too much. Based on her documented history and convictions for behavior involving violence toward others and property, it seems far more likely that she did NOT stab the man in "self defense". However, the question of self defense versus outright assault that turned to murder has to be settled in court, by a jury verdict....and not by the opinions and lies of wingnut Harr
SIDNEY HARR:
What you said about Crystal Mangum's arrest is not at all what Officer Bond put in his report. The only logical conclusion is that what you said, "According to the police notes themselves, when Mangum was approached by police and asked if she wanted to give a statement she said yes. Then she was placed under arrest and read her Miranda Rights in which she was told that anything she said would be used against her... so she, being an intelligent individual, kept quiet.", came from Crystal.
That you think you can promulgate such a glaring lie as the truth is yet more evidence that you are totally divorced from reality and probably schizophrenic.
SIDNEY HARR:
To Anonymous September 25, 2012 9:45 AM I add, Officer Bond's report states that Crystal had no evidence of any severe beating.
Did you actually read that report before citing it?
tell you what, I would like to know why Mangum, the innocent mother of three, left her child with somebody else and was with her then-current lover, getting drunk and partying. One would think this innocent mother of three would (a)have her child with her and stay sober, or, (b)stay with her child at the aunt's apartment. If sidney now tells us that mangum already knew daye was this wild drunken maniac, then WHY did she continue to shack up with him, take his money, let him cook for her, and "rub her feet"?
It is also important to note that the officer(s) specifically checked for injuries to her and found only "a very small cut" on her hand. Please, sidney......do you realllllly think that a woman could sustain "ten punches to the face",get the crap beat out of her for an hour on her face and head, get choked.....and not have a single injury to her head and face, not one tiny bruise mark on her neck, or a nail scratch, or a split lip with bleeding from her mouth? You are supposedly a retired physician. You know damn well how head trauma bruises and bleeds. Don't be a dunce and try to pretend that mangum somehow had these mystery invisible injuries.
More Jeopardy
Answer: Enlightenment
Question: What is SIDNEY HARR incapable of delivering?
Also sidney, don't try to re-tread that business about the prosecution having the mystery photos that show all the injuries that Mangum supposedly sustained. Nice try, no cigar, sidney....
What I love about sidney is that he is one of the best at creative alibi/explanations for his alternative universe. For example, no injuries visible in Mangum's mug shot, then the explanation is that the photo is blurry (not) or, even more comical, there are mystery photos the prosecution is hiding. Mangum sets a fire in an apartment (where are children are....) and sidney says, why worry, be happy...and, golly gee, lets focus on the big bad policeman who did his duty and called the FD. Mangum is drunk on her beside in a strip joint, gives a man a lap whirl, steals his keys, steals his car, drives recklessly, gets yet another DUI and tries to whack an officer with the stolen car. But, no problem yet again.....those big bad raleigh police somehow KNEW that someday the lovely Ms. mangum would be the target of the evil jihad, and so they mistreated her, in advance! Mangum lies about getting raped....ooops, no matches from the lab.....well, maybe they DID use condoms, after all. Seligmann is taking money out of an ATM when he is supposed to be raping her.....well, ooopsie again, lets change the time of the rape. Mangum has Daye's checks in her purse (which she conveniently remembers to grab as she flees this drunk crazy man).....ooopsie, it was not an arguement over money; it was an argument over how she was getting hit on by a policeman.
and so on, and so on, and so on.....
this latest creative explanation about how she didn't tell the officers right away that it was self defense has to be right up there in the top ten of "lies created to cover up"......
geez, bro, you need to work on some new material.....your creative bullxxxx is getting kinda stale.
oh, by the way, just how big do you think the jihad will finally be? Is the black man in the white house a part of the evil coverup...or is he going to eventually swoop down on durham and be "the truth" that sets sister free?
Anonymous said...
SIDNEY HARR:
"No. This information is found in the last three paragraphs of a police report which I will link you to now...
Officer Bond's report".
You neglect, probably intentionally, to mention that the police report indicates Crystal was under the influence, that her speech was slurred and incoherent. You neglect, probably intentionally, to mention that Reginald Daye said Crystal had stabbed him and had taken his money.
What Crystal said weeks later about the events that night, considering she had indications of being drunk and incoherent, is not credible. Crystal has not made a case for self defense.
Crystal did admit to having a few drinks at the party just prior to midnight, but to my knowledge, Durham Police made no attempt to take a blood alcohol level. Am I right? Whatever, Daye's blood alcohol was undoubtedly much higher.
Furthermore, after stabbing Daye in self-defense, she grabbed her purse which contained two cashier's checks which Daye had given to her. She never took any money, and she was not charged with larceny of money... Right? How much money did she allegedly take?
The case for self-defense is that she had physical signs of abuse, clumps of her hair were on the floor at the scene, and that the locked bathroom door was kicked in.
Need I say more?
Anonymous said...
SIDNEY HARR:
What you said about the police report was not really 100% correct.
You said, "According to the police notes themselves, when Mangum was approached by police and asked if she wanted to give a statement she said yes. Then she was placed under arrest and read her Miranda Rights in which she was told that anything she said would be used against her... so she, being an intelligent individual, kept quiet."
Officer Bond said, he entered the room where Crystal was, informed her she was under arrest for assault, and then tried to read her her Miranda rights.
He had to wake Crystal up when he entered the room. While he was reading her the Miranda warning she kept falling asleep. When asked if she understood her rights, Crystal just mumbled. Officer Bond pressed her for a yes or no answer to the question, did she understand the Miranda warning. Crystal then replied yes and then refused to answer questions.
Officer Bond did not ask her to give a statement before she was arrested and read her rights. He did not see her or question her until after she was in custody. Self defense did not become an issue until a bit of time passed after the arrest.
I suspect you planted the suggestion in her that she claim self defense.
Also, Officer Bond's report does not provide any evidence that Reginald Daye caused the damage which was found in the apartment. It could have resulted from Crystal being outraged when he left the apartment.
I did not plant the suggestion of self-defense as I was not in communication with Crystal until nearly after one year of her incarceration... around March 2012.
I would be interested in having the police officer's explanation for the kicked in bathroom door, the clumps of Crystal's hair on the floor, and the physical injuries she sustained.
Anonymous said...
SIDNEY HARR:
Liar Liar pants on fire.
Now you will probably blame the Durham Police Department for lighting up your pants.
Here's a suggestion for you. Why don't you go to the "Here Comes Honey Boo Boo" site and look up your Honey Boo Boo nickname?
Lance the Intern said...
The lack of a speedy trial statute in North Carolina is a problem (there WAS one, but it was repealed by the General in 1989). I can't seem to find out why it was repealed. If anyone knows, I'd be interested in the details.
'tern, for a change, I am in total agreement with your sentiments in your comment. If you find out the answer as to why it was repealed, please enlighten us all. Thanks.
there was NO evidence of any physical injury to Mangum and, of course, Harr knows this. A kicked in door is not evidence of abuse in and of itself. fact is, SHE could have been the one doing the kicking. who knows. as to the hair evidence, those of us with even marginal brains are going to wait to hear what the prosecution says about this so-called hair pulling. There could have, in fact, been a fight going on...no question about it. so what, bro? You think men are always the aggressors in fights? You think women don't start brawls? WHO,bro, had the documented convictions involving violence? Daye, no. Crystal, yes.
You have your silly non-evidenced base tale.....feel free. We will wait till the trial and find out the true story.
as to the honey boo boo snappy comeback,....it's easy to tell when somebody gets under the racist skin, isn't it.....because harr does his snappy comeback regarding a stupid reality TV show that features honky rednecks. Wow, bro, us ignert crackers is just bummed out with the put-down.
SIDNEY HARR:
"Crystal did admit to having a few drinks at the party just prior to midnight, but to my knowledge, Durham Police made no attempt to take a blood alcohol level. Am I right? Whatever, Daye's blood alcohol was undoubtedly much higher."
Officer Bond recorded that Crystal smelled of alcohol, was asleep when he went in to talk to her, and that she had to be repeatedly aroused when he was reading her her rights. Those are definite clinical signs of impairment - except to a totally incompetent physician.
SIDNEY HARR:
"I would be interested in having the police officer's explanation for the kicked in bathroom door, the clumps of Crystal's hair on the floor, and the physical injuries she sustained."
Officer Bond's report said Crystal had no signs of physical injuries. He mentioned the broken bathroom door. He did not mention any clumps of hair.
You really did not read his report, did you.
SIDNEY HARR:
"Here's a suggestion for you. Why don't you go to the "Here Comes Honey Boo Boo" site and look up your Honey Boo Boo nickname?"
Here's a suggestion for you. Why don't you read your material before you misrepresent what it says.
SIDNEY HARR:
"The case for self-defense is that she had physical signs of abuse, clumps of her hair were on the floor at the scene, and that the locked bathroom door was kicked in."
She had no physical signs of abuse. As to who kicked in the door, that might have been Crystal. Ergo, there is no case for self defense.
Maybe you can post the source for your claim that clumps of hair were found. Why don't you read it first.
SIDNEY HARR:
The report DPD FSI Report by Investigator Brown noted one clump of brown hair in the bathroom floor next to the lock on the floor.
If Crystal herself destroyed the door after Reginald Daye left, maybe she pulled out her own hair.
You have not established as fact that Ronald Daye kicked in the door.
SIDNEY HARR:
You have claimed that the police found clumps of Crystal's hair in the apartment.
In your Mangum/Daye case-Police Records/Media Directory, there is one mention of one clump of hair found in the bathroom.
It seems you have been misrepresenting more facts about the case than was believed.
Liar Liar Pants on Fire.
SIDNEY HARR:
This is what you said earlier today:
"The case for self-defense is that she had physical signs of abuse, CLUMPS(emphasis added) of her hair were on the floor at the scene, and that the locked bathroom door was kicked in."
Again, The DPD FSI Report by Investigator Brown, which you posted, said "ONE" clump of hair was found on the bathroom floor.
Liar Liar Pants on fire.
SIDNEY HARR:
"I would be interested in having the police officer's explanation for the kicked in bathroom door, the clumps of Crystal's hair on the floor, and the physical injuries she sustained."
I'd be interested in why you misrepresented what was in Officer Bond's report.
SIDNEY HARR:
"'tern, for a change, I am in total agreement with your sentiments in your comment. If you find out the answer as to why it was repealed, please enlighten us all. Thanks."
Check out the comment by Anonymous September 25, 2012 4:17 AM.
You really are trying to avoid the truth, aren't you.
SIDNEY HARR:
From the Honey Boo Boo site, here is YOUR nickname:
Your new name is...
Starlite Hon-Bun
Share with your friends!
Now all your readers will be able to share your Honey Boo Boo nickname.
SIDNEY HARR:
For your acolyte KENHYDERAL, here is his nickname:
Your new name is...
Karmen Elmer
Let's everybody share.
SIDNEY HARR aka starlite hon bun:
Why are you so fascinated with Honey Boo Boo?
Glass Houses, SIDNEY.
SIDNEY HARR, aka starlite hon bun:
Here is what your girl Honey Boo Boo has chosen for Victoria Peterson:
Victory Poo Poo
Now isn't that precious.
SIDNEY HARR aka starlite hon bun:
Here's one for Malek Williams, provided he is not just a figment of KENHYDERAL aka Karmen Elmer:
Mudslug Wisteria
SIDNEY HARR aka Starlite Hon Bon:
Here's one from Honey for Justice4nifong:
Jabber NoNo
Mud slug wisteria!!! Oh perfect.....? Hilarious. Hun bun Harr.
Hey Sidney. Ever give a thought to Eve Carson? Two scumbags murdered her. Remember? Wanna talk about justice Sidney? Lets discuss them and what they did, shall we? Wanna talk about justice? Lets discuss what happened to this truly innocent young woman.
Mike nifong. Maize nanny. Tracey no brain cline.....trixie chickadee. Hun bun Harr....oh lord, how perfect.
This garbage is typical of the puerile kind of posts that many of these cowardly anonymous posters waste our time with. They need to grow up. They should also get a user-name so we know who they are.
Hey, Kenny, don't take it so hard! It's Sidney who started this with Honey Boo Boo. Complain to him!
Post a Comment