February 18th Hearing

 

Click on the link below to view the flog and the directory. 

They both have links to each other.

LINK to Flog:  http://www.justice4nifong.com/direc/flog/flog25/flog25.html

LINK to Directory:  http://www.justice4nifong.com/direc/flog/flog25/flog25direc.html

Transcript of the flog is below

Word count: 1,125

 At the October 24, 2012 meeting of the North Carolina State Bar’s Authorized Practices Committee meeting held in Raleigh, a decision was made to file a civil complaint against Harr enjoining him from assisting Crystal Mangum, the Duke Lacrosse victim/accuser who is currently facing murder charges.
 

The impetus behind the legal action stemmed from two documents Harr filed in Mangum’s case on August 7, 2012… one a petition for writ of mandamus to have the Larceny of chose in action charge against her dismissed, and the other to order her attorney, at the time, Woody Vann, to turn over all discovery which he had been withholding to her.
 

Harr drafted and signed these documents as a third party Pro Se petitioner and stated in the filings his arguments for having standing in the case.
 

 The motion for a preliminary and permanent injunction against Harr was filed in the Wake County Courthouse in downtown Raleigh on December 4, 2012.  In addition to mentioning the two petitions filed in August, the State Bar plaintiff also mentioned the previous incident addressed and resolved in the Bar’s July 17, 2012 meeting.

 

 Also the Bar included in its complaint the August 13, 2012 letter Harr had written to Judge Orlando Hudson… which it evidently considered to be the province of licensed attorneys.  This transgression was never mentioned in the Letter of Notice the Bar sent to Harr in late August.

 

 Harr responded to the civil suit on December 17, 2012, in a filing that denied that his petitions breached any law against lawyerly conduct as he was solely representing himself.

 

 He furthermore asserted that the motions he drafted and filed for Crystal Mangum had been settled earlier and that he was within his legal rights to send a letter to a judge advocating for position or cause.

 

 In addition to defending against the State Bar’s allegation, Harr filed two motions of his own… one to waive the general statutes that prohibit him from legally representing Mangum in Court, and the other to have oral arguments.

 

 The reasons given for allowing him to represent Mangum were that she could not find a defense attorney that would be willing to attack the state’s deputy chief medical examiner, Dr. Clay Nichols, and willing to place Daye’s death on Duke University Hospital.

 

 Finally, Harr requested oral arguments to better express his position to the presiding judge… something which was denied him in his discrimination lawsuit against Duke University in 2011.  Like Duke University, the Plaintiff State Bar has an exceedingly weak case against Harr and has no likelihood of prevailing in open court.

 

 To improve its odds and lessen its exposure to ridicule and embarrassment, the State Bar, relying on Rule 12(c) in the state’s Civil Procedures, filed on January 14, 2013, a Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings.  This is a motion Harr believes to be rarely used, and definitely one of desperation. 

 

 Such a motion, if granted, would dispense with oral arguments in open court, which Harr had specifically requested in his initial response… with the ruling being made behind closed doors of the judge’s chamber based upon the pleadings filed alone.  In essence, it would once again deprive Harr of his day in court… this time as a defendant.

 

 Harr filed his response in the Wake County Courthouse two weeks later… strenuously objecting and renewing his call for oral arguments in open court.

 

 Plaintiff State Bar had sought to schedule the hearing on Monday, February 18, 2013… Presidents’ Day, a federal holiday.  A clever move on the part of the Bar to lessen the attention the event would receive otherwise.

 

 On January 30, 2013, Harr received notice that the hearing would take place in Courtroom 10-C, before the honorable Judge Carl R. Fox.

 

 The following day, Harr researched the web for information about the black-rober and learned the following about Carl R. Fox:

1. he graduated from UNC-CH with a B.A. degree;
2. he graduated from UNC- CH School of Law with a law degree;
3. he worked as a district attorney in Orange County from 1984 until 2005; and
4. he has since been an Orange County Superior Court judge in Chapel Hill.

The significance of the above is that for more than forty years, the North Carolina Medical Examiner’s office has been at UNC-CH… moving in mid-January 2013 to its new facility in Raleigh.

 

 Therefore, throughout his more than two decades-long career as a prosecutor, Judge Fox had a close relationship with the Orange County medical examiner and its forensic team.

 

 As a result, it can be assumed that he: (a) developed a strong working relationship with those medical examiners; (b) might have fostered friendships with those medical examiners; (c) could possibly personally know Dr. Nichols and communicated with him; and (d) developed a fierce loyalty with the Orange County medical examiners secondary to his professional and collegiate ties with them and UNC-CH.

 

 The conflict of interest clearly arises when one considers that the basis of Harr’s advocacy on Mangum’s behalf is due to the fact that her first degree murder charge is based on an autopsy report on Reginald Daye by the state’s deputy chief medical examiner… Dr. Clay Nichols, the Orange County Medical Examiner at UNC-CH.

 

 The extensive fraudulence of the Nichols’ Autopsy Examination Report is widely known by the mainstream media, the Durham prosecutors, Mangum’s defense attorneys, Mangum’s defense expert witness forensic pathologist Dr. Christena Roberts, the North Carolina State Bar, the North Carolina Medical Board, politicians, civil rights leaders, and others.

 

 Unfortunately there has been a concerted effort by all to conceal the spurious nature of the autopsy report… so egregious and damaging that it, alone, should be grounds for the dismissal of the murder charge Mangum now faces.

 

 On February 1, 2013, Harr filed a Motion for Disqualification of Judge Carl R. Fox on the Claim of Partiality… for a reasonable person with full knowledge of the facts would believe that Harr could not receive an impartial ruling from Judge Fox.

 

 North Carolina General Statutes and Canon 3(C)(1)(a) state that the “due process clause imposes on the trial judge the duty of absolute impartiality,” and provides that “upon the motion of any party, a judge should disqualify him or herself in any proceeding in which his or her impartiality may be reasonably questioned…”

 

 Harr requested that the hearing to be heard by Honorable Judge Paul C. Ridgeway, a Superior Court Wake County judge with no substantial ties to Orange and Durham Counties.   

 

 The ball is now in Judge Carl R. Fox’s courtroom… the question being, will the black-rober recuse himself or fight to preside over the scheduled February 18^th hearing.

 

 Stay tuned.   nn