justice4nifong: Potpourri of Sensational Snippets

Tuesday, July 2, 2013

Potpourri of Sensational Snippets - July 2013

Click on the graphic panel above

to access the interactive flogazine

310 comments:

1 – 200 of 310 Newer› Newest»

Nifong Supporter said...: Walt said...
Kenheydral wrote: "The forces lined up on the side of Duke and against Crystal Mangum belong to all races. She has been sacrificed to protect the "powers that be"(read Duke). This case is not and never was about race. Unfortunately, though, from an outsider's point of view, there seems to exist in North Carolina a selective justice system that's based on race and especially on class. Poor people of all races are victims."

Crystal's case is not an example of a selective justice system based on race or class. Her prosecution is amply supported by probable cause. If she was rich or even middle class, she would be getting the same treatment. Indeed , she has managed to pick and fire able attorneys a privilege not available to most clients of the Public Defender's office. If anything, Crystal's case is a counter argument to your thesis that there is a class based justice system in North Carolina.

Sadly, Crystals's case will be used as an example of how there is not a class based system and it will be used to illustrate that poor people and people of color get the same and even better breaks than whites.

Walt-in-Durham

Walt, I'm going to assume that you're serious when you say that people of color get the same if not better breaks than whites. I don't understand your logic. It makes about as much sense as saying that Mike Nifong catered to the black vote in order to win the Durham District Attorney race. It just doesn't make sense.

You say that Crystal got a break because she managed to get an attorney that she wanted? If there was any justice in our state's justice system, criminal charges against her would never have been brought. She would never have spent 689 days in jail on bogus charges.

Her trial date has been continued until mid November 2013, but I would still wash your crying towel and have it on standby. The prosecution's case is so non-existent that it will never make it to trial. (Prosecutors will be too embarrassed to present it.); July 2, 2013 at 2:32 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
There is not one shred of evidence to back up wild claims that mangum has been sacrificed to protect Duke. In fact, most of us who have cared for Duke in the past, and who were horrified by the Brodhead-Group of 88-it's not about the truth crap at Duke, would say that the LAX guys were thrown under the bridge by Duke until it became abundantly clear that nifong was a lying scumbag, that Mangum was a lying manipulator and that integrity in the DA's office was as hard to find as a clean men's toilet.
To this day, many of us continue to send Duke 88 dirty pennies every year in response to their endless fund drives. Until Brodhead leaves, this practice will continue.
Mangum has waaaaay too many second and third and fourth chances, waaaay too many passes. I agree with Walt; defendants do NOT routinely get to run through four different lawyers , wasting the court's time, and attorney resources. She has gotten away with lawyer roulette for far too long. Had she been held accountable for lying in 2006, maybe, just maybe Mr. Daye would not be dead today. Had she been held accountable for the violent threats and violence against property in the Walker case, maybe Daye would not be dead today.
I have no idea whether she will be convicted of first degree murder. I doubt it. I think she will get off with manslaughter and time served, plus a little bit. Fine, if the jury so determines, I will respect whatever the verdict.
But to somehow claims that poor Mangum is the victim of a plot to get her, is sheer unadulterated racist rubbish. From trash minds.

I beg to differ with you on all counts, but will expound on the following. Mangum is not wasting Court time and attorney resources... the Durham prosecutors are by bringing the bogus charges against her in the first place. There's no probable cause nor credible evidence. This is clearly a case of self-defense... as domestic violence is an epidemic worldwide, in case you haven't heard. Durham is not an immune zone for domestic violence.

But the fact also remains that the murder charge is based on a fraudulent autopsy report. Totally bogus. A motion should have been filed long ago to have the murder charge dismissed because of it.

Actually Mangum, instead of playing lawyer roulette, would be better off if she represented herself. At least she would be represented by someone who had her best interests as the number one priority... and not to protect Duke University Hospital and the medical examiner.; July 2, 2013 at 2:42 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Walt said...
Sid wrote: "Second, The Durham News, an insert community newspaper of The News & Observer allowed for me to be a guest columnist in today's edition."

Sadly, the N&O published Sid's rehash of what he routinely writes here. Again, he provided no facts to support his allegations and no law to support his legal theory. Indeed, he ignored the proximate cause doctrine completely, as well as St. v. Welch and St. v. Holsclaw. Again, a failure to persuade.

Hey, Walt. I've got an idea. Why don't you do a guest column article for the Durham News to rebute my claims. Of course, you would have to use your true identity, so I can understand why you might not be so inclined to do so.

Anyway, consider this a formal challenge.; July 2, 2013 at 2:48 PM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"Walt, I'm going to assume that you're serious when you say that people of color get the same if not better breaks than whites. I don't understand your logic. It makes about as much sense as saying that Mike Nifong catered to the black vote in order to win the Durham District Attorney race. It just doesn't make sense."

Boy are you deluded. What does not make sense is your claim that corrupt DA NIFONG was a paragon of ethical prosecution.

"You say that Crystal got a break because she managed to get an attorney that she wanted? If there was any justice in our state's justice system, criminal charges against her would never have been brought. She would never have spent 689 days in jail on bogus charges."

She hasn't spent 689 days in jail on bogus charges. An example of bogus charges are the charges corrupt DA NIFONG filed against the innocent, falsely accused Duke Lacrosse players.

"Her trial date has been continued until mid November 2013, but I would still wash your crying towel and have it on standby. The prosecution's case is so non-existent that it will never make it to trial. (Prosecutors will be too embarrassed to present it.)"

I understand that the trial was delayed at the request of Crystal's attorney so he could familiarize himself with the case. That does not sound like the prosecution will dismiss the charges. It sounds like Crystal is getting a break.; July 2, 2013 at 3:07 PM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"I beg to differ with you on all counts, but will expound on the following. Mangum is not wasting Court time and attorney resources... the Durham prosecutors are by bringing the bogus charges against her in the first place. There's no probable cause nor credible evidence. This is clearly a case of self-defense... as domestic violence is an epidemic worldwide, in case you haven't heard. Durham is not an immune zone for domestic violence."

Boy are you divorced from reality.

"But the fact also remains that the murder charge is based on a fraudulent autopsy report."

No they aren't"

"Totally bogus."

No they aren't.

"A motion should have been filed long ago to have the murder charge dismissed because of it."

It would have failed.

"Actually Mangum, instead of playing lawyer roulette, would be better off if she represented herself. At least she would be represented by someone who had her best interests as the number one priority... and not to protect Duke University Hospital and the medical examiner."

So says SIDNEY who had his frivolous lawsuit against Duke ignominiously bounced out of court and who claimed he would humiliate the NC state bar.; July 2, 2013 at 3:11 PM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"Hey, Walt. I've got an idea. Why don't you do a guest column article for the Durham News to rebute(sic) my claims."

Not necessary since it is so obvious that the claims you have made have no basis in fact.

"Of course, you would have to use your true identity, so I can understand why you might not be so inclined to do so."

"Anyway, consider this a formal challenge."

How about you ask your readers to render a decision as to who has credibility-you or Walt.; July 2, 2013 at 3:14 PM
Walt said...: Sid wrote: "Walt, I'm going to assume that you're serious when you say that people of color get the same if not better breaks than whites."

That's not what I wrote, and you know it. I wrote: "Sadly, Crystals's case will be used as an example of how there is not a class based system and it will be used to illustrate that poor people and people of color get the same and even better breaks than whites." You have crossed the line to deliberate misrepresentation. Here-to-fore, I have given you hte benefit of the doubt on these matters. No more.

"I don't understand your logic."

Yes, you do, you chose to misrepresent what I wrote.

"You say that Crystal got a break because she managed to get an attorney that she wanted?"

She did, not onece but twice. Normally, you don't get to pick your public defender. You get who is assigned.

"If there was any justice in our state's justice system, criminal charges against her would never have been brought."

Since you are no longer an honest reporter, there is no reason to believe that criminal charges should not have been brought. However, the record is clear, Crystal stabbed a man. She used deadly force when she was not privileged to do so. That makes the charges supported by probable cause.

Walt-in-Durham; July 2, 2013 at 7:50 PM
Anonymous said...: why wasn't mangum priviliged to defend herself?

are there no poor white people???
thats what walt seems to imply, so yes walt, your statement was confusing and could be interpreted as dr. harr interpreted it.

why do you hate mangum so much, walt?
why do you actually appear to think that she has no right to defend herself from the abuse shoveled her way?; July 2, 2013 at 8:12 PM
Anonymous said...: Why is Markeith Council portrayed as a white man in your video?; July 2, 2013 at 8:19 PM
Anonymous said...: George Zimmerman,God bless his soul,has a far better case of self-defense than worthless lying prostitute Crystal Mangum but she'll probably get away with it just because she's black and a woman.Blacks don't care if one of their own is murdered as along as another black did it.; July 2, 2013 at 11:52 PM
Anonymous said...: Sidney, you are either terribly impaired or deliberately lying. Please note the word SADLY that prefaces Walt's comment. It explains it all! What he meant was that Mangum's case would be used by those who wish to deny that there are any problems in NC with our justice system........he was saying that her case would be
MISused. Your tired racist crap has morphed into nasty cheap shots.
Walt, you are exactly right. And, to your credit, you predicted that Holmes would ask for more time.....Mangum has been stalling all along.; July 3, 2013 at 3:15 AM
Anonymous said...: I agree with Walt 100%.....and I understand his statement. There ARE problems with the system in NC......one of which centered in the DA office in Durham......with scum like Nifong and the ignorant unconscious Cline. Walt was pointing out how Mangum's case would be used improperly. sidney hard is a sad little man. that's all. racist and pathetic. now, it seems we must add yet another distortion to his long list of lies.; July 3, 2013 at 3:43 AM
Anonymous said...: In Sid's video, he portrays Markeith Council as an old, fat, balding white man.

The truth is that Sid knows neither Mr. Council's age or his race.

So why would Sid purposely choose this portrayal?; July 3, 2013 at 7:06 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
SIDNEY HARR:

"Walt, I'm going to assume that you're serious when you say that people of color get the same if not better breaks than whites. I don't understand your logic. It makes about as much sense as saying that Mike Nifong catered to the black vote in order to win the Durham District Attorney race. It just doesn't make sense."

Boy are you deluded. What does not make sense is your claim that corrupt DA NIFONG was a paragon of ethical prosecution.

"You say that Crystal got a break because she managed to get an attorney that she wanted? If there was any justice in our state's justice system, criminal charges against her would never have been brought. She would never have spent 689 days in jail on bogus charges."

She hasn't spent 689 days in jail on bogus charges. An example of bogus charges are the charges corrupt DA NIFONG filed against the innocent, falsely accused Duke Lacrosse players.

"Her trial date has been continued until mid November 2013, but I would still wash your crying towel and have it on standby. The prosecution's case is so non-existent that it will never make it to trial. (Prosecutors will be too embarrassed to present it.)"

I understand that the trial was delayed at the request of Crystal's attorney so he could familiarize himself with the case. That does not sound like the prosecution will dismiss the charges. It sounds like Crystal is getting a break.

Let me shaft you with a bolt of enlightenment: the prosecutors and Mangum's attorney are working together. Bottom line.; July 3, 2013 at 7:53 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
SIDNEY HARR:

"Hey, Walt. I've got an idea. Why don't you do a guest column article for the Durham News to rebute(sic) my claims."

Not necessary since it is so obvious that the claims you have made have no basis in fact.

"Of course, you would have to use your true identity, so I can understand why you might not be so inclined to do so."

"Anyway, consider this a formal challenge."

How about you ask your readers to render a decision as to who has credibility-you or Walt.

I automatically have more credibility than Walt because I use my true identity!!

When I became an advocate for justice and a rectifier of injustice, the first thing I realized was that I would not be effective doing so anonymously.; July 3, 2013 at 7:57 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Walt said...
Sid wrote: "Walt, I'm going to assume that you're serious when you say that people of color get the same if not better breaks than whites."

That's not what I wrote, and you know it. I wrote: "Sadly, Crystals's case will be used as an example of how there is not a class based system and it will be used to illustrate that poor people and people of color get the same and even better breaks than whites." You have crossed the line to deliberate misrepresentation. Here-to-fore, I have given you hte benefit of the doubt on these matters. No more.

"I don't understand your logic."

Yes, you do, you chose to misrepresent what I wrote.

"You say that Crystal got a break because she managed to get an attorney that she wanted?"

She did, not onece but twice. Normally, you don't get to pick your public defender. You get who is assigned.

"If there was any justice in our state's justice system, criminal charges against her would never have been brought."

Since you are no longer an honest reporter, there is no reason to believe that criminal charges should not have been brought. However, the record is clear, Crystal stabbed a man. She used deadly force when she was not privileged to do so. That makes the charges supported by probable cause.

Walt-in-Durham

Hey, Walt... Chill. I apologize to you for sloppily misinterpreting what you said. I consider you an honorable person and I will humbly accept responsibility for my mistake.

That said, Mangum, like anybody else, is entitled to use deadly force when someone is choking her.

Fact is that the wound was not lethal, as he was postoperatively determined to have a prognosis for a full recovery.

Also, for the record, Attorney Scott Holmes is not a public defender.; July 3, 2013 at 8:04 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Why is Markeith Council portrayed as a white man in your video?

I do not know what Mr. Council looks like. I do not know his race. My google research did not turn up any images for me to use in his depiction.

As race was not an issue, I merely wanted to have a non-descript representation of him to display discrepancies in height and weight of the two.

Hope this answers your question. If more edification is required, please give me notification.; July 3, 2013 at 8:09 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
George Zimmerman,God bless his soul,has a far better case of self-defense than worthless lying prostitute Crystal Mangum but she'll probably get away with it just because she's black and a woman.Blacks don't care if one of their own is murdered as along as another black did it.

Are you pretending to be an authority on black people? You're probably not even an African American.; July 3, 2013 at 8:12 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Sidney, you are either terribly impaired or deliberately lying. Please note the word SADLY that prefaces Walt's comment. It explains it all! What he meant was that Mangum's case would be used by those who wish to deny that there are any problems in NC with our justice system........he was saying that her case would be
MISused. Your tired racist crap has morphed into nasty cheap shots.
Walt, you are exactly right. And, to your credit, you predicted that Holmes would ask for more time.....Mangum has been stalling all along.

Because my time online at the library is limited, I have a tendency to rapidly read the comments, and on extremely rare occasions I do inadvertently misinterpret a comment. As has just been noted, I did make such an acknowledgement and apologize to Walt.

So just because I made a little mistake in interpretation you want to crucify me?; July 3, 2013 at 8:16 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
In Sid's video, he portrays Markeith Council as an old, fat, balding white man.

The truth is that Sid knows neither Mr. Council's age or his race.

So why would Sid purposely choose this portrayal?

Would you have preferred that I represent Mr. Council with green skin and purple hair? Had I known his race or other characteristics, I would have depicted them with fidelity.; July 3, 2013 at 8:19 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: HEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP!
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT.

Have a safe and sane Fourth of July.

I should have my next flarticle posted this coming Friday... an opinion piece about Paula Deen.

As you were.; July 3, 2013 at 8:21 AM
Anonymous said...: You purposely chose to portray Mr. Council as an old, balding, fat white man because portraying him as a young, fit black man would not fit your narrative.

You're a racist. It truly is that simple.; July 3, 2013 at 8:31 AM
Anonymous said...: Are you familiar with the name Rahiem Bailey?; July 3, 2013 at 8:40 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"Let me shaft you with a bolt of enlightenment: the prosecutors and Mangum's attorney are working together. Bottom line."

You shaft anyone with a "with a bolt of enlightenment"? HAH!!!!; July 3, 2013 at 9:33 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"I automatically have more credibility than Walt because I use my true identity!!"

The fact that nothing you have published is credible shows that is a fallacy.

"When I became an advocate for justice and a rectifier of injustice, the first thing I realized was that I would not be effective doing so anonymously."

Another fallacy, in that it is obvious you have never advocated for justice or have tried to rectify injustice. You have tried only to promulgate for injustice.; July 3, 2013 at 9:36 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"Hey, Walt... Chill. I apologize to you for sloppily misinterpreting what you said. I consider you an honorable person and I will humbly accept responsibility for my mistake."

You have never considered anyone but your own deluded racist megalomaniacal self as honorable and have never apologized for any mistakes or lies you have promulgated.

"That said, Mangum, like anybody else, is entitled to use deadly force when someone is choking her."

There is no evidence anyone was choking her.

"Fact is that the wound was not lethal, as he was postoperatively determined to have a prognosis for a full recovery."

You are not competent to determine that the wound was not lethal. Dr. Nichols is. So is Dr. Roberts.

"Also, for the record, Attorney Scott Holmes is not a public defender."

But he does have Crystal's interest at heart, as is evidenced by his telling you to butt out.; July 3, 2013 at 9:40 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"Are you pretending to be an authority on black people? You're probably not even an African American."

However, since you are Black, you seem to think you are an authority on anyone. You think people should believe your delusion of a carpetbagger jihad simply because you, Black person, have promulgated it.

Now come back and tell me I do not believe in the Carpetbagger jihad because of a Jedi mind trick and again show the world what a crackpot you are.; July 3, 2013 at 9:44 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"So just because I made a little mistake in interpretation you want to crucify me?"

Why don't you admit your gross mistakes, e.g. accusing a DPD officer of setting the fire in Milton Walker's apartment?; July 3, 2013 at 9:46 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"Would you have preferred that I represent Mr. Council with green skin and purple hair? Had I known his race or other characteristics, I would have depicted them with fidelity."

How come you have never depicted anything connected with the Lacrosse case, the innocent Lacrosse players, corrupt DA NIFONG, or Crystal with fidelity or accuracy?; July 3, 2013 at 9:48 AM
Anonymous said...: Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you the true face of Mr. Markeith Council.

The story this image came from can be found here.

It took me approximately 3 minutes to find.

So Sid, if "race is not an issue", will you change the image in your video to accurately portray Mr. Council?; July 3, 2013 at 10:23 AM
Anonymous said...: yep, once again, sidney is caught, black handed, as they say....right in the middle of a baldfaced LIE; July 3, 2013 at 11:17 AM
Anonymous said...: Correction:

SIDNEY HARR:

"Would you have preferred that I represent Mr. Council with green skin and purple hair? Had I known his race or other characteristics, I would have depicted them with fidelity."

How come you have never accurately depicted anything connected with the Lacrosse case, the innocent Lacrosse players, corrupt DA NIFONG, or Crystal with fidelity or accuracy?; July 3, 2013 at 11:40 AM
Anonymous said...: Since Harr is warning us (gag) that he is going to hold court on Paula Deen, it seems fair to comment, too. Here's my humble, and frequently wrong, opinion on Deen. A long time ago (more than 20 years) she called somebody a nigger. She admitted it. At some point, long ago, she said having a wedding or reception with black men in white dinner jackets, implying a plantation wedding, might be fun or nice. The quote about the "slave wedding theme" has been changed at least ten times this past week. Nonetheless Deen said she did use the word nigger a long time ago, knew it was wrong, and she apologized.
Deen has been vilified in the media. She has lost virtually all her sponsorships, network shows, endorsements, cooking deals, etc. She has been made the butt of countless jokes and ridicule. She has a big yellow R painted on her.
Contrast this treatment with what has happened recently when other people have used EQUALLY FILTHY language. Here are just two examples. Alex Baldwin, a while male, last week called a man a dirty nigger and faggot. Has he lost he movie deals? Lil Wayne (while stomping on the flag) used the cunt word eleven times in one (excuse me while I gag) "song". In other so-called "songs", he repeatedly uses fag, fucking fag, bitch, whore, beaner, and cracker. Anybody know of any recording deals he has lost? And, just for a bonus, anybody remember when Farrakhan called jews "likes"? And how about OJ Simpson's repeated use of the nigger word? Oh, I forgot........black people can say nigger; but everybody else is subject to be-heading for using the same word.
I KNOW nigger is an ugly word. So are wop, spic, slope, cunt, fag, and kike. Cracker does not hold the same loaded hate as do the other race-denegrating words, at least to most of us.......but, anybody who thinks nigger is worse than woo, or spic, or beaner, or fag, or kike .......is just ignorant.
Deen apologized for something she said two decades ago. The others I mention have NEVER apologized for any of their foul language. Personally I find all these words disgusting.....AND, I will add that the lousy curse words that use the female component....are EQUALLY offensive.....such as mother fucker, cocksucker, and son of a bitch. I am delibertely writing out the full words here.....because I refuse to condone these equally offensive words, all of them, while we blister Deen for saying one of them.; July 3, 2013 at 11:42 AM
Anonymous said...: so the fuck what
if your mama or someone else hasn't taught you to not get your shorts in a wad over a stupid fucking word by now than something is seriously wrong with your perception of life; July 3, 2013 at 10:42 PM
Anonymous said...: 10:42, my point here is that I see no reason for the OVER reaction to Deen's behavior, while we ignore the behavior of so many others. I don't like any form of cursing (my choice), but I think it is stupid and unfair to dump all over this woman. It is hypocritical. Yes, my mama taught me to ignore stupid fucking words.....; July 4, 2013 at 5:14 AM
Anonymous said...: Walt, you had it right.......Holmes got a postponement.......more stalling. At least Harr cannot keep whining that poor Mangum is being held in jail as a tool to make her knuckle under to a plea. Of course, NO plea deal has been offered, as far as we know. And, of course, the charges have not been dropped.; July 4, 2013 at 5:25 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"Would you have preferred that I represent Mr. Council with green skin and purple hair? Had I known his race or other characteristics, I would have depicted them with fidelity."

The issue is, you made no attempt to learn his ethnicity.You presumed he was White.

And you claim you are not racist.; July 4, 2013 at 5:48 AM
Anonymous said...: To 5:48....you are exactly right. sidney made no attempt, at all, to identify the race of the officer involved and ASSUMED that the man was white......and ASSUMED that the black man involved was victimized and did nothing wrong. So much for any claim that harr is not a racist. bull.; July 4, 2013 at 3:06 PM
Anonymous said...: .Crystal Mangum......The race-gender-class crowd had a field day putting Mangum up as their prototype victim. Only problem: she lied!

This is the woman whom Tim Tyson extolled as "somebody's daughter, somebody's sister, somebody's mother and somebody's sweetheart." (Tyson is the professor at UNC who published S&M explicit dominance photos involving himself on the internet)

The woman whom Cathy Davidson heartrendingly described as "a single mother who takes off her clothes for hire partly to pay for tuition at a distinguished historically black college."

The woman of whom Wahneema Lubiano and the 88 wrote, with such self-righteousness, "No one is really talking about how to keep the young woman herself central to this conversation, how to keep her humanity before us . . . She doesn’t seem to be visible in this. Not for the university, not for us." (Waaaaaaaaneeeeema has yet to publish her ten year old "forthcoming manuscript)

The woman of whom (then) Duke professor Houston Baker plaintively asked, "The lacrosse team ... may well feel they can claim innocence and sport their disgraced jerseys on campus, safe under the cover of silent whiteness. But where is the black woman who their violence and raucous witness injured for life? Will she ever sleep well again?" (This quote came before the jerk sent an email to one of the LAX parents telling her she had given birth to a farm animal.....)

So now, on top of her previous litany of bizarre crimes, this honors graduate of N.C. State has stabbed someone."
......lest we forget........apparently Mangum slept quite well, at least until 2010 when she tangled with Walker, and, ultimately killed Reginald Daye.; July 4, 2013 at 4:22 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous @ 5:25 7-4-13 said: " At least Harr cannot keep whining that poor Mangum is being held in jail as a tool to make her knuckle under to a plea"...... Much to the consternation of the Prosecutors. They did all they could to keep Crystal locked up and separated from her Children, in order to coerce her. The bail, even after two reductions by different Judges, was far beyond the reach of her or her Family, her friends and her supporters to raise. Doing so took almost two years. Like Reade Seligmann, Crystal was wrong fully charged. He was out on bail within hours. Her charge of First Degree Murder is also a wrongful and completely bogus charge. Any fair observer can recognize that.; July 5, 2013 at 10:25 AM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:

"Much to the consternation of the Prosecutors. They did all they could to keep Crystal locked up and separated from her Children, in order to coerce her."

No they didn't.

"The bail, even after two reductions by different Judges, was far beyond the reach of her or her Family, her friends and her supporters to raise. Doing so took almost two years."

Would not have been necessary had she not stabbed Reginald Daye.

"Like Reade Seligmann, Crystal was wrong fully charged. He was out on bail within hours."

Correction: UNlike Reade Seligman, Crystal WAS NOT wrongfully charged.

"Her charge of First Degree Murder is also a wrongful and completely bogus charge. Any fair observer can recognize that."

I am a lot more objective and fairer than you are. So is Walt in Durham. Both of us say that there was probable cause to charge her.

Besides you, SIDNEY is the only one saying the charge is bogus and trumped up. Everyone knows what a liar SIDNEY is. If you want to buy into his lies, expect no sympathy from me.; July 5, 2013 at 11:20 AM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "I am a lot more objective and fairer than you are. So is Walt in Durham. Both of us say that there was probable cause to charge her.
Besides you, SIDNEY is the only one saying the charge is bogus and trumped up. Everyone knows what a liar SIDNEY is. If you want to buy into his lies, expect no sympathy from me"........Probable cause for first degree murder??? What everyone knows, is this was, simply, the immoral strategy of extreme over-charging, in order to extract a plea deal from Crystal by keeping her separated from her children, so she would, out of desperation, plead guilty to a charge of manslaughter in exchange for time served. The impossible bail bond amount, set, and the lack of a speedy trial also played into this outrage. Changing Lawyers, who were unwilling to advocate for her and who did absolutely nothing did not, in any way, contribute to the nearly two years she spent in gaol. Come on people; wake up.; July 5, 2013 at 2:47 PM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:

"Probable cause for first degree murder??? What everyone knows, is this was, simply, the immoral strategy of extreme over-charging, in order to extract a plea deal from Crystal by keeping her separated from her children, so she would, out of desperation, plead guilty to a charge of manslaughter in exchange for time served."

It is a deluded exaggeration on your part that this is the case.

"The impossible bail bond amount, set, and the lack of a speedy trial also played into this outrage."

I agree that Crystal deserved a speedy trial. However delaying the trial is not something unique to Crystal. In the case of the falsely accused Lacrosse players, corrupt DA NIFONG made no attempt at a speedy trial. As there was no probable cause to believe anyone raped Crystal, there is probable cause to believe Crystal is criminally liable for Reginald Daye's death.

"Changing Lawyers, who were unwilling to advocate for her and who did absolutely nothing did not, in any way, contribute to the nearly two years she spent in gaol. Come on people; wake up."

Yes it did. What you and SIDNEY define as advocating for Crystal is presenting SIDNEY's junk analysis as justification for dismissing all charges. For giving Crystal another pass, in other words.; July 5, 2013 at 2:55 PM
Anonymous said...: no, ken edwards, YOU are the one who will never wake up because you are too content to wallow in and hide behind racism as an excuse for the stupid nonsense that rae evans and the entire white world are out to get your little criminal friend.; July 5, 2013 at 5:18 PM
kenhyderal said...: Calling me a racist is a blatant example of "projection" on your part. Mrs. Rae Evans was instrumental in advocating for the dismissal of former D.A. Michael Nifong, the one District Attorney who maintained an element fairness for all without reference to race or class. When the Duke LaCrosse case fell apart, predatory Trial Lawyers using vulturistic tactics, cowardly and anonymously set out to destroy the reputation of Crystal Mangum in order to bolster their greedy attempts to extort the people of North Carolina. Thankfully this extortion has failed. Now that sections of the American Voting Rights Act has been declared unconstitutional scores of counties in North Carolina will again be free to try and perpetrate tactics which serve to dis-enfranchise minority voters. The ban on same-sex Marriage there means the state is way out of step with most of the civilized world. As usual where human rights are concerned it's decades behind and fighting a rear-guard action. No, I'm wide awake. It's you who are living in darkness. I'm a Canadian we don't have such inequalities but my friend Crystal,living in North Carolina, has been a victim of real racism; July 5, 2013 at 8:57 PM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:

"Calling me a racist is a blatant example of 'projection' on your part."

No it isn't. It is calling it like it is.

"Mrs. Rae Evans was instrumental in advocating for the dismissal of former D.A. Michael Nifong"

If she was, the world is a lot better for it.

"[DA NIFONG] the one District Attorney who maintained an element fairness for all without reference to race or class."

Which is why he tried to stir up racial passions over the case? Which is why, unlike any DA in history, gave more than 30 press conferences before there was any evidence of the case(acknowledgement to attorney Roy Black), which was why he continued to prosecute the case when he found he had no probable cause, which was why he directed the Durham police to conduct a rigged lineup so Crystal could finger members of the Lacrosse team?

"When the Duke LaCrosse case fell apart, predatory Trial Lawyers using vulturistic tactics, cowardly and anonymously set out to destroy the reputation of Crystal Mangum in order to bolster their greedy attempts to extort the people of North Carolina."

Wake up. Your girl Crystal started to destroy her own reputation before she ever falsely accused the Lacrosse players of raping her. The Lacrosse case imploded because it became obvious she had LIED about being raped and that corrupt DA NIFONG ran with that lie to further his political career.

"Thankfully this extortion has failed. Now that sections of the American Voting Rights Act has been declared unconstitutional scores of counties in North Carolina will again be free to try and perpetrate tactics which serve to dis-enfranchise minority voters. The ban on same-sex Marriage there means the state is way out of step with most of the civilized world. As usual where human rights are concerned it's decades behind and fighting a rear-guard action. No, I'm wide awake. It's you who are living in darkness."

"No we're not. Those of us whom you accuse of living in darkness prevented liar Crystal and corrupt DA NIFONG from pursuing an unethical, wrongful prosecution."

"I'm a Canadian we don't have such inequalities"

Read your own history. Yes you have.

"but my friend Crystal,living in North Carolina, has been a victim of real racism."

Your friend Crystal is the victim only of her own self destructive behavior. You claim this and say I am living in darkness.; July 6, 2013 at 2:53 AM
Anonymous said...: Right on kennyhyderal.; July 6, 2013 at 9:15 AM
Anonymous said...: Right on kenhyderal. Anyone who actually knows Crystal rejects completely the vicious slander, that emananated from The Duke Lacrosse Defence, in an effort to destroy her credibility. These lies are ongoing and widely beleived. None of those who post their poison here have ever met Crystal. I ask them, don't you find it strange that her friends, her professors, her classmates her teachers, her pastor, etc. all have a favorable opinion of her and have provided her with character references. Hearing these references caused Judge Abraham Jones to declared that, from the evidence he heard, he beleived her to be "a good mother" Crystal is not and never was a prostitute. Crystal is not and never was a drug addict or an alcoholic. Crystal was a responsible parent. Crystal was a responsible member of her community. Crystal, having come from humble circumstances, was working hard to build a better like for herself and her children. Her Pastor advised her not to choose exotic dancing and escorting as a way to support herself because, regardless of her character,such a choice can be fraught with peril.; July 6, 2013 at 9:17 AM
Anonymous said...: Regarding Qnonymous July 6, 2013 at 9:17 AM:

KEN-Malek-HYDER-Williams-AL posts again,only this time it is anonymously.; July 6, 2013 at 9:36 AM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:

"[DA NIFONG] the one District Attorney who maintained an element fairness for all without reference to race or class."

You are schizoid. On a previous post in this blog, you admit that Reade Seligman was wrongfully prosecuted. Yet you say the man who orchestrated the wrongful prosecution was a model of fairness.

HUH???!!!; July 6, 2013 at 9:38 AM
kenhyderal said...: Seligmann had an air-tight alibi that he was absent, at the time the crime occurred. The flawed photo line-up that Crystal was subjected to, by the Durham Police, led to his mistaken identification and subsequent charge. Crystal was led to believe that all of her perpetrators were present somewhere in the photo line-up and it was incumbent upon her to pick out the three who assaulted her. We now know that this line-up contained only Duke LaCrosse Players many of whom were no where near the scene. Suspiciously, the only non-Players who appeared were those who happened to show up in photos taken at the Party. No comprehensive listing of all those present was ever developed.; July 6, 2013 at 9:57 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny Hyderal lied: Suspiciously, the only non-Players who appeared were those who happened to show up in photos taken at the Party

The April 4line up included NO non-players even though two non-player attendees had already been identified.

Kenny Hyderal is a liar.; July 6, 2013 at 10:03 AM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "KEN-Malek-HYDER-Williams-AL posts again,only this time it is anonymously"..... Stop being disingenuous. Let's have honest discussion. You know full well that this person is making mischief here by copying old posts of mine and passing them off as his own views, proceeded with the tag "right on kenhyderal" Once again I call on Dr. Harr to exercise his duty and put a stop to such abuses.; July 6, 2013 at 10:07 AM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "The April 4line up included NO non-players even though two non-player attendees had already been identified".... Thanks for the information. Let me correct my statement to replace "who appeared" with "who were identified"; July 6, 2013 at 10:11 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny: Stop being disingenuous. Let's have honest discussion.

Why don't you stop being disingenuous? Why don't you engage in honest discussion?

You were asked a couple of reasonable questions on the last thread in response to your comments. You didn't answer them.; July 6, 2013 at 10:34 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous asked about Kenny: "Why don't you stop being disingenuous? Why don't you engage in honest discussion?"

Kenny is a troll. Trolls are disingenuous. Trolls do not engage in honest discussion.

Trolls annoys.; July 6, 2013 at 11:24 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
You purposely chose to portray Mr. Council as an old, balding, fat white man because portraying him as a young, fit black man would not fit your narrative.

You're a racist. It truly is that simple.

That is not true. As I stated, my exhaustive google search was unable to turn up any images of Mr. Council and I saw no mention of his race. Had I known that he is an African American then my graphic exemplar would have been that of a generic African American male.; July 6, 2013 at 11:40 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Are you familiar with the name Rahiem Bailey?

No. Should I be?; July 6, 2013 at 11:41 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
SIDNEY HARR:

"So just because I made a little mistake in interpretation you want to crucify me?"

Why don't you admit your gross mistakes, e.g. accusing a DPD officer of setting the fire in Milton Walker's apartment?

I do not know for a fact that the police did not start the fire. Whether or not Crystal started the fire is something of which I am equally mystified. I just do not know.

When I made accusations earlier I did so completely relying on what Ms. Mangum said as being the truth. Currently, I am not as convinced as I was earlier.; July 6, 2013 at 11:48 AM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:

"Seligmann had an air-tight alibi that he was absent, at the time the crime occurred. The flawed photo line-up that Crystal was subjected to, by the Durham Police, led to his mistaken identification and subsequent charge."

The improper lineup was orchestrated by corrupt DA NIFONG. Even if it weren't, there was no evidence against Reade Seligman. No matter how you try to spin it, the individual responsible for the wrongful prosecution of Reade Seligman was corrupt DA NIFONG.

"Crystal was led to believe that all of her perpetrators were present somewhere in the photo line-up and it was incumbent upon her to pick out the three who assaulted her."

I say again, it was at the instruction of DA NIFONG that Crystal was told that her assailants were in the lineup. She should not have been told that. Even if DA NIFONG had not orchestrated the lineup, the fact is he had no evidence, no probable cause to believe any member of the Lacrosse team had perpetrated the alleged crime. Ultimate responsibility for the wrongful prosecution rests with corrupt DA NIFONG. Even with the lineup results, a fair DA would not have prosecuted.

"We now know that this line-up contained only Duke LaCrosse Players many of whom were no where near the scene."

It was known shortly after the lineup that the lineup contained only Duke Lacrosse players.

"Suspiciously, the only non-Players who appeared were those who happened to show up in photos taken at the Party. No comprehensive listing of all those present was ever developed."

Yes there was. You say otherwise because Kilgo allegedly told you that a rape had happened. Kilgo is a witness whose credibility you can not verify. Kilgo's information comes from a source whose existence you can not establish.

Face it, KENNY. It comes down to, you believe Crystal because she is Black. That is blatant unrepentant racism.; July 6, 2013 at 11:50 AM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:

"Stop being disingenuous. Let's have honest discussion. You know full well that this person is making mischief here by copying old posts of mine and passing them off as his own views, proceeded with the tag "right on kenhyderal" Once again I call on Dr. Harr to exercise his duty and put a stop to such abuses."

Let's put it this way. Your posts are so ridiculous it is not credible that anyone would want to copy them and repost them for whatever reason. Except for you.; July 6, 2013 at 11:52 AM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:

"Thanks for the information. Let me correct my statement to replace "who appeared" with 'who were identified'"

How about you provide factual evidence that there were unidentified people at the Lacrosse party. Kilgo's unverifiable information is not factual evidence. In compliance with the principle of He who asserts must prove, it is incumbent upon you to prove your allegation.

You seem to believe, quite erroneously, if no one can disprove your allegation it must be accepted as true.

Boy are you stupid.; July 6, 2013 at 11:56 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you the true face of Mr. Markeith Council.

The story this image came from can be found here.

It took me approximately 3 minutes to find.

So Sid, if "race is not an issue", will you change the image in your video to accurately portray Mr. Council?

If you go to google now and click on image you can find a photograph of Mr. Council. When I prepared my flarticle in late June 2013, no photo was available.

Also, if race, as we both agree, is not an issue in this case, why should I expend valuable time that I could be devoting to another flarticle by re-working the image. Not good management of time.; July 6, 2013 at 11:58 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"That is not true. As I stated, my exhaustive google search was unable to turn up any images of Mr. Council and I saw no mention of his race. Had I known that he is an African American then my graphic exemplar would have been that of a generic African American male."

Someone was able via a Google Search to prove that Mr. Council was black. If you had done an "exhaustive Google search", you would have been able to learn his ethnicity.

You did not Google search. You just presumed he was a Caucasian male(scream, KENNY, scream). And you claim you are not racist.

HAH!!!; July 6, 2013 at 11:59 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
SIDNEY HARR:

"Would you have preferred that I represent Mr. Council with green skin and purple hair? Had I known his race or other characteristics, I would have depicted them with fidelity."

The issue is, you made no attempt to learn his ethnicity.You presumed he was White.

And you claim you are not racist.

WRONG-O! I did extensive research online to obtain a photo of Mr. Council with which I would've used... however, when I conducted my research, there was nothing posted.; July 6, 2013 at 12:04 PM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"I do not know for a fact that the police did not start the fire."

That is the same as saying you did not know that Mr. Council was not white. You are supposed to verify before printing. You admit you did not know whether or not the police started the fire. But you printed they did.

"Whether or not Crystal started the fire is something of which I am equally mystified. I just do not know."

Your earlier statements, that a DPD officer started the fire say you believed Crystal did not start the fire. If you did not know whether or not Crystal started the fire, what justified you falsely accusint a DPD officer of starting it in order to frame Crystal for arson?

"When I made accusations earlier I did so completely relying on what Ms. Mangum said as being the truth. Currently, I am not as convinced as I was earlier."

In other words, Crystal lied and you believed her. Now you know she lied and you are trying to cover up your exposed butt, not very successfully. Your repeated attempts at spin only make you look more wantonly guilty.; July 6, 2013 at 12:05 PM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"If you go to google now and click on image you can find a photograph of Mr. Council. When I prepared my flarticle in late June 2013, no photo was available."

Which says that without evidence you presumed him to be Caucasian. I call that racism.

"Also, if race, as we both agree, is not an issue in this case, why should I expend valuable time that I could be devoting to another flarticle by re-working the image. Not good management of time."

If race had been an issue, you would have expressed your view without pre judging who Prison Guard Council was. You pre judged that the perpetrator of this beating was a White man.; July 6, 2013 at 12:08 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
SIDNEY HARR:

"That is not true. As I stated, my exhaustive google search was unable to turn up any images of Mr. Council and I saw no mention of his race. Had I known that he is an African American then my graphic exemplar would have been that of a generic African American male."

Someone was able via a Google Search to prove that Mr. Council was black. If you had done an "exhaustive Google search", you would have been able to learn his ethnicity.

You did not Google search. You just presumed he was a Caucasian male(scream, KENNY, scream). And you claim you are not racist.

HAH!!!

As I said, in late June 2013, at the time I did my research, I could not find any image of Mr. Council online. After I completed and posted the flarticle, images of Mr. Council began to appear online.

Please let me know if further elucidation is required.; July 6, 2013 at 12:10 PM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"WRONG-O! I did extensive research online to obtain a photo of Mr. Council with which I would've used... however, when I conducted my research, there was nothing posted."

So now the question is, if you did extensive research and were unable to determine his ethnicity, why did you portray him as white? In doing so, you did make an issue of race. You Hypocrite.; July 6, 2013 at 12:10 PM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"As I said, in late June 2013, at the time I did my research, I could not find any image of Mr. Council online. After I completed and posted the flarticle, images of Mr. Council began to appear online."

The question, again, is if you could not determine his ethnicity why did you depict him as White. The image you posted was not a photo. It would have been easy to post the image with a blank, instead of a Caucasian, face.

"Please let me know if further elucidation is required."

Trying to CY racist A is not providing elucidation.; July 6, 2013 at 12:16 PM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"Also, if race, as we both agree, is not an issue in this case, why should I expend valuable time that I could be devoting to another flarticle by re-working the image. Not good management of time."

If you had reworked the flog to show that Mr. Council was Black, not white, it would have corrected a misleading error. Why did you not want to do that? Was it because you wanted people to believe that a huge white man was the perpetrator?; July 6, 2013 at 12:18 PM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

Your attempts to CY racist A are only showing how R your A is.; July 6, 2013 at 12:20 PM
Anonymous said...: harr is a liar. harr is a racist. what else is new? this latest example is just one of many. Racist Liar and asshat. period.; July 6, 2013 at 12:25 PM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:

"...in the photo line-up and it was incumbent upon [Crystal] to pick out the three who assaulted her."

Rather, it was incumbent upon the police to insure Crystal could reliably identify someone as an assailant. It was incumbent upon the police NOT to tell Crystal whether or not suspects were in the lineup.

The other point you ignore is that the lineup was to be conducted by an officer who was not part of the investigation, someone who did not know who was suspected. The lineup was conducted by Mark Gottlieb, who was involved in the investigation.

That fact, in and of itself, would have compelled a fair DA not to base a prosecution on that lineup. Did corrupt DA NIFONG proceed with prosecution without verifying the validity of the lineup procedure. Yes.

And you say corrupt DA NIFONG was the paragon of fairness.

HUH???!!!; July 6, 2013 at 12:29 PM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"No. Should I be [familiar with Rahiem Bailey]?"

He is someone with whom you would not become familiar, a young Black man who was murdered in 2012. The suspects were two black men.; July 6, 2013 at 12:48 PM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:

"Seligmann had an air-tight alibi that he was absent, at the time the crime occurred."

What you leave out is that after the lineup, Mr. Seligman's attorney tried to show DA NIFONG the evidence of Mr. Seligman's "ai-tight alibi" and DA NIFONG refused to look at it.

Is that fairness on the part of a prosecutor whom you describe as "the one District Attorney who maintained an element fairness for all without reference to race or class"?

No.; July 6, 2013 at 12:53 PM
Anonymous said...: Right on kennyhyderal; July 6, 2013 at 2:00 PM
Anonymous said...: "at the time the crime occurred"....what crime, ken edwards?
the crime of stealing a car, trying to run over an officer, getting a DUI, reckless driving, violence, child abuse, assault, killing a man? those crimes?; July 6, 2013 at 4:27 PM
Anonymous said...: Right on kennyhyderal; July 6, 2013 at 6:40 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

Why don't you stop being disingenuous? Why don't you engage in honest discussion?

You were asked a couple of reasonable questions on the last thread in response to your comments. You didn't answer them.

Who's your daddy?; July 7, 2013 at 7:14 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

Why don't you stop being disingenuous? Why don't you engage in honest discussion?

You were asked a couple of reasonable questions on the last thread in response to your comments. You didn't answer them.

Who's your daddy?; July 7, 2013 at 7:14 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
SIDNEY HARR:

"No. Should I be [familiar with Rahiem Bailey]?"

He is someone with whom you would not become familiar, a young Black man who was murdered in 2012. The suspects were two black men.

Your point being?; July 7, 2013 at 12:28 PM
Lance the Supreme Poster of Enlightenment said...: "As I said, in late June 2013, at the time I did my research, I could not find any image of Mr. Council online. After I completed and posted the flarticle, images of Mr. Council began to appear online.

Please let me know if further elucidation is required."

Except, of course, the article (and associated picture) has been available from the N&O since 12 June.

Sid is, of course, lying. Images were available, but simply did not fit his meta-narrative, so he purposely chose not to use them.; July 7, 2013 at 6:08 PM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"Your point being?"

Like you did not want to know about the innocent black men wrongfully incarcerated by incompetent black DA Tracey Cline, you wouldn't want to know about a black man murdered by two black criminals. You would prefer to believe that the murderers of a black man would be white.; July 7, 2013 at 6:13 PM
Anonymous said...: Poor little lying sidney. Being a racist liar is just no fun.; July 7, 2013 at 6:14 PM
Anonymous said...: Sidney thinks that white people are evil. Sidney thinks that black people are victims. There is no in-between. White = evil. Black = victim.

Of course, sidney tries to make us all believe he is not racist.....by saying he supports scumbag nifong. We all know why sidney bleats endlessly about bathrobe boy.; July 7, 2013 at 6:18 PM
Anonymous said...: The basic problem with a man like Harr is that he wants attention, wants to be noticed, wants to get a rise out of people. That's his essential MO. To be ignored is the ultimate putdown for an insecure individual who seeks attention. That's why he writes this ridiculous nonsense of a flop. that's why he files nuisance suits. that's why he pretends to be a lawyer. that's why he wears a t-shirt and pretends to hold press conferences. it's all about wanting attention.
Paying ANY attention to him, even negative attention, just reinforces his behavior.; July 8, 2013 at 6:53 AM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous @ 6:14 said:"Poor little lying sidney. Being a racist liar is just no fun".............................. "Blessed are you, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake" (Matthew 5:11); July 8, 2013 at 10:11 AM
Anonymous said...: yes, thank you for pointing out the verse, ken edwards. I think it is nice of you to remember how the liar and the scumbag falsely accused, reviled and persecuted the three INNOCENT lax players.; July 8, 2013 at 10:34 AM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:

"Anonymous @ 6:14 said:"Poor little lying sidney. Being a racist liar is just no fun".............................. "Blessed are you, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake" (Matthew 5:11)".

There is no way anyone could even remotely believe SIDNEY is being prosecuted for the sake of the Man from Nazareth, who once said, among other things, I am the Truth. SIDNEY tries to purvey obvious lies and distortions as the truth.; July 8, 2013 at 10:37 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
SIDNEY HARR:

"Your point being?"

Like you did not want to know about the innocent black men wrongfully incarcerated by incompetent black DA Tracey Cline, you wouldn't want to know about a black man murdered by two black criminals. You would prefer to believe that the murderers of a black man would be white.

Does not compute!
Your twisted and convoluted thinking is beyond my comprehension.; July 8, 2013 at 12:11 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: kenhyderal said...
Anonymous @ 6:14 said:"Poor little lying sidney. Being a racist liar is just no fun".............................. "Blessed are you, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake" (Matthew 5:11)

Hey, kenhyderal. I like the verse. Thanks for presenting it.; July 8, 2013 at 12:14 PM
Anonymous said...: My goodness sidney, you being the man, one would think you would have already been familiar with the verse from Matthew.
Most people who profess to be christian have heard of the beatitudes.; July 8, 2013 at 12:30 PM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"Does not compute!
Your twisted and convoluted thinking is beyond my comprehension."

That is because you are totally incapable of comprehending. If you were able to comprehend anything you would not be arguing for the existence of the carpetbagger jihad.; July 8, 2013 at 12:56 PM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"Hey, kenhyderal. I like the verse. Thanks for presenting it."

So how do you claim that anyone is persecuting you for justice' sake by pointing out your obvious lies and distortions.; July 8, 2013 at 12:58 PM
Anonymous said...: Poor little sidney, pants on fire.....yet again.; July 8, 2013 at 2:34 PM
Anonymous said...: If all else fails, kenny hissy, you can always sling the big jesus hammer and quote scripture. It's reeeeel effective, especially coming from you. Pass the collection plate, kenny.; July 8, 2013 at 4:58 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous @ 10:34 said: "yes, thank you for pointing out the verse, ken edwards. I think it is nice of you to remember how the liar and the scumbag falsely accused, reviled and persecuted the three INNOCENT lax players".......... Crystal has never reviled or persecuted anyone. She reported to Police that she had been sexually assaulted and she described, as best she could, the assailants. Later, she made a good faith attempt to pick them out of a photo line-up. One, incidentally, that probably contained only one of the perpetrators. She has never called anyone, even those who violated her, liars or scumbags. That's the gambit of those who have a vested interest in discrediting her and of their duped minions like those found here and elsewhere. As usual, a favorite form of attack is to accuse her and those who support her of the very sins they themselves so freely commit; July 8, 2013 at 8:29 PM
Anonymous said...: OK, hissy boy, let's take a poll...since you say that people who post here are guilty "of the very sins themselves so freely commit". Hmmmmm? How many of the people who post here have a criminal record with nine convictions? How many are guilty of child abuse? Level III DUI? car theft? assault? How many have killed another person? How about you, Walt? criminal, Lance? How about you, dr. anon? you guilty of child abuse? Me, nope.....no criminal record. Gosh, kenny, YOU post here? Let's discuss your criminal record. Or, perhaps, one of crystal's many sweet boyfriends....Matt. How about his convictions?; July 9, 2013 at 3:51 AM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:

"Crystal has never reviled or persecuted anyone."

KENHYDERAL's moral compass. Falsely accusing innocent men of raping her is not reviling or persecuting them.

"She reported to Police that she had been sexually assaulted and she described, as best she could, the assailants."

No she didn't. After she was taken to the Durham Access Center and was asked if she was raped, she said yes. She was unable to describe any member of the Lacrosse team as a perpetrator.

"Later, she made a good faith attempt to pick them out of a photo line-up. One, incidentally, that probably contained only one of the perpetrators."

No she didn't. And since the forensic and medical evidence, which was available to the authorities at the time showed no rape had taken place, the lineup could not have contained any perpetrators. More racist guilt presumption on the part of KENHYDERAL.

"She has never called anyone, even those who violated her, liars or scumbags. That's the gambit of those who have a vested interest in discrediting her and of their duped minions like those found here and elsewhere."

Defending innocent men against bogus charges in no way constitutes an attempt to vilify Crystal. Crystal made no comments during the case because the case was shown to be bogus and she did not want to expose herself to questioning. When her so called book was published she continued to lie, this time in public, about being raped.

"As usual, a favorite form of attack is to accuse her and those who support her of the very sins they themselves so freely commit".

Fallacious statement since no one ever tried to commit any sins against Crystal, except Crystal herself and the blatant, unrepentant racists who support her.; July 9, 2013 at 4:24 AM
Anonymous said...: People like Harr and Ken Edwards, who are both racists, are not going to change their rhetoric. May as well let them both run their mouths. Who gives a damn what these two wingnuts and their little merry band of asshats think?; July 9, 2013 at 7:58 AM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "Let's discuss your criminal record".......... I have no criminal record. Go ahead and check me out? Then let us know your name so we can do the same for you.; July 9, 2013 at 9:19 AM
Anonymous said...: We will take your word for an absence of criminal record for you. YOU accuse others who post here of being guilty of the crimes we KNOW Mangum committed and got convictions on. (Nine, in fact). YOU are the person who needs to prove such accusations. People here do not need to identify themselves if they do not wish to do so. You go by your silly kenyhyderal, that's YOUR choice. Since YOU are the one making accusations, I'd suggest YOU are the one who needs to provide proof that others who post here are guilty of crimes that Mangum has not only been charged with....but convicted of..... in other words, prove your accusations are stuff them; July 9, 2013 at 9:41 AM
Anonymous said...: Prove OR stuff!; July 9, 2013 at 9:43 AM
kenhyderal said...: What accusations have I made here?I've accused no one here of any crimes. I have accused unknown people of sexually assaulting Crystal Mangum. What I am suggesting is that the people here who revile Dr. Harr and myself and who are constantly calling us racist are projecting their own sins on to us.; July 9, 2013 at 10:05 AM
Anonymous said...: hey sidney, perhaps you should consider taking somme kind of refresher course in computer searching. All you had to do...to find an image....was go to google, find the article in question, enter the name of the person involved and click images. It's really not all that hard. The officer's image had been readily available well before you claimed you looked. (another of your lies, apparently.) You brought it up because you wanted to falsely portray an incident of white on black violence. And when you got caught lying, you lied AGAIN by claiming the image was not available. poor little sidney.; July 9, 2013 at 10:39 AM
Walt said...: kenheyderal wrote: " Crystal has never reviled or persecuted anyone. She reported to Police that she had been sexually assaulted and she described, as best she could, the assailants. Later, she made a good faith attempt to pick them out of a photo line-up. One, incidentally, that probably contained only one of the perpetrators. She has never called anyone, even those who violated her, liars or scumbags."

She was a little more involved than that. First, as you point out, Crystal did make a report. A false report. Not one single thing about her initial report could be confirmed by evidence other than she appeared at 601 N. Mangum Street late on March 13, 2006.

Second, Crystal gave several different versions of the story to various investigators over time. Often times those versions of the story were mutually exclusive and at least one version (levitating in mid-air) defies the laws of physics.

Third, as a witness, if she did not see any of her alleged attackers in a lineup, she had a duty to say so. To Crystal's credit, she did so early on. The problem came up with the last lineup, she did pick three innocent people.

Fourth, there is the issue of rape. Did it happen at all? The medical evidence of a rape is slim and can be explained by her prior sexual encounters over the weekend of March 11 - 12, 2006. Further, there was no semen present from any lacrosse player or other attendee at the March 13 party. She gave two differing explinations of this - with or without condoms. Of course, the with condoms version explains the lack of semen, though not the absence of mitochondrial DNA under her fingernails or elsewhere if there was a violent encounter. Also, the with condoms version is not supported by the facts of the case. No used condoms were located in the search.

Giving Crystal the benefit of the doubt as I am inclined to do, it is most likely that if she was raped it happened earlier in the weekend and somewhere other than 601 N. Mangum. The failure of the DPD and the Nifong to investigate that possibility cannot be charged to Crystal. That's their failing. Her failing is not being truthful in her statements and in not refusing to falsely accuse.

Walt-in-Durham; July 9, 2013 at 11:34 AM
Anonymous said...: good points, walt. why think that Mangum was raped AT ALL, given that there was no physical evidence consistent with forced sexual assault. I know the SANE initially try to note vaginal redness and swelling "consistent with rape".........this statement was later soundly denounced and rejected, even by her own physician counterparts, and as she admitted in the Nifong disbar/process. As you know, Mangum changed her story to suit the evidence re the condoms. Given that it was HIGHLY likely she had been sexually busy before she ever got to the LAX party, it would be pretty hard to sort out whether she sold sex, just participated because she was a friendly kind of gal, or was raped. I would also point out that Mangum has yet, to this day, never owned up to the lies she told. It seems to me that, in the end, Nifong and the DPD used Mangum for Nifong's purposes....and she went along for the ride willingly.; July 9, 2013 at 11:51 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
hey sidney, perhaps you should consider taking somme kind of refresher course in computer searching. All you had to do...to find an image....was go to google, find the article in question, enter the name of the person involved and click images. It's really not all that hard. The officer's image had been readily available well before you claimed you looked. (another of your lies, apparently.) You brought it up because you wanted to falsely portray an incident of white on black violence. And when you got caught lying, you lied AGAIN by claiming the image was not available. poor little sidney.

The only way you could tell for certain that Officer Council's photo was posted online at the time I did my research was for you to have googled it prior to me. I doubt that you did. Simply put, the photo was posted after I conducted my research.

End of verse, chapter, story.; July 9, 2013 at 11:55 AM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:

You are on record foe calling Crystal a rape victim. In your last long winded post you said the flawed lineup included one perpetrator.You can't post things like that and not accuse people of crimes.; July 9, 2013 at 12:48 PM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"The only way you could tell for certain that Officer Council's photo was posted online at the time I did my research was for you to have googled it prior to me. I doubt that you did. Simply put, the photo was posted after I conducted my research.

End of verse, chapter, story."

You are really desperate for personal posterior camouflage. The end of verse, chapter, story is, you presumed Mr. Council was white, and your basis for that was his victim is black.; July 9, 2013 at 12:52 PM
Anonymous said...: wrong, sidney.....the photo appeared in conjunction with the article and, if you had bothered, you could have easily found his image in other simple searches. you lied. End of your lie.....found out, yet again, liar.; July 9, 2013 at 1:00 PM
Anonymous said...: YOU claimed you could not find an image and you ASSUMED the gentleman was white. Your assumption makes you a RACIST and a LIAR; July 9, 2013 at 1:02 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous July 9, 2013 at 11:51 AM;

What the examiner found was diffuse vaginal edema. If one knew anything about female sexual response, one would know that arousal can cause that.

The examiner, for anyone who does not know by this timee, was resident Julie Manly, not SANE in training Tara Levicy.; July 9, 2013 at 1:09 PM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:

"I have no criminal record. Go ahead and check me out? Then let us know your name so we can do the same for you."

You also have no evidence that Crystal was ever raped and yet you claim she was and that the perpetrators were unidentified attendants at the Lacrosse party.

They you insist you are accusing no one of crimes.

At the same time, you are trying to misrepresent Crystal's documented crimes as misadventures which others have exaggerated.

I say again, like SIDNEY, you are totally divorced from reality.; July 9, 2013 at 1:12 PM
kenhyderal said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; July 9, 2013 at 2:14 PM
kenhyderal said...: Walt said : " Crystal gave several different versions of the story to various investigators over time. Often times those versions of the story were mutually exclusive and at least one version (levitating in mid-air) defies the laws of physics"........................ Once again Walt you are being disingenuous. Crystal's memory of the assault was clouded by the sudden onset of impairment, of unknown cause and by the emotional trauma of being abused by several, large intoxicated and rowdy individuals. The holding of her legs, up by the ankles, through the open door, by someone not necessarily inside the small room, while others, took turns entering and exiting, to molest her, is not something to ridicule. Saying she was levitating is just trying to make a joke out of this God awful event.

July 9, 2013 at 2:14 PM
Delete; July 9, 2013 at 2:16 PM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL

"Once again Walt you are being disingenuous. Crystal's memory of the assault was clouded by the sudden onset of impairment, of unknown cause and by the emotional trauma of being abused by several, large intoxicated and rowdy individuals."

There is no medical or forensic evidence to corroborate that this scenario of yours ever happened. Ergo, it is impossible that Crystal's memory could be clouded by the assault. Her stories varied because she lied, she could not keep her stories straight.

"The holding of her legs, up by the ankles, through the open door, by someone not necessarily inside the small room, while others, took turns entering and exiting, to molest her, is not something to ridicule."

What is something to ridicule is your belief that this kind of thing actually happened. It didn't.

"Saying she was levitating is just trying to make a joke out of this God awful event."

What God awful event? The only God awful events were that Crystal lied about being raped and then corrupt DA NIFONG ran with those lies to get himself elected.; July 9, 2013 at 2:40 PM
Anonymous said...: The SANE did the initial examination, NOT the physician. And the SANE documented vaginal edema . She incorrectly and in violation of appropriate procedure, falsely and incorrectly concluded...was consistent with rape. It was, by the way, highly consistent with heavy sexual activity, use of vibrators and other penetrating objects, and, for some women, highly consistent with vaginal irritations and external tissue irritation seen with "yeast" infections.
The SANE wrote, four times, that Mangum said NO condoms were used. She repeated this in the Nifong testimony. Mangum later changed her story to fit the evidence. (a sidney behavior......) The SANE was totally discredited. J. Manly, a RESIDENT< who had very limited experience and certainly was no specialist in gynecology and related sexual trauma, did NOT participate in the initial examination of Mangum.
Mangum was NOT raped. She had intimate sexual contact with AT LEAST five different males (non from the LAX party), as evidenced by at least five different samples in and on her. As others have said, the walking sperm bank....... but raped, bull crap; July 9, 2013 at 3:22 PM
Anonymous said...: From Liestoppers:

"The SANE exam of false rape accuser Crystal Mangum was performed March 14, 2006 in the Duke University Medical Center Emergency Department (ED) by Dr. Julie Manly, assisted by SANE-in-training Tara Levicy. Levicy incompletely recorded the findings in the Sexual Assault Examination Report (SAER), mistakenly co-signed the SAER as the examiner, and was responsible for turning over the SAER and her notes to the police.; July 9, 2013 at 4:37 PM
Anonymous said...: From http://www.examiner.com/article/louisville-s-dr-julie-manly-tries-to-save-hospital-haiti:

"This is not Dr. Manly’s first brush with the national news media. Back in March of 2006, She examined and treated an African-American woman who charged that she had been raped by three white Duke University lacrosse players. Her medical report indicated that the woman presented some “diffuse edema,” but no visible bruises, abrasions, tearing or bleeding."; July 9, 2013 at 4:41 PM
Anonymous said...: Manly tried to explain away her failure to actually perform the initial exam. She did not. The SANE was in the room with Mangum, did the exam, did the interview, recorded the findings and was held accountable during the Nifong committee appearance. Manly was the resident in the ED at the time. She did not do the initial examination, nor did she document the initial findings. As a SANE in training, or, as Levicy tried to say, SANE finished with training, there STILL was a requirement for a physician to serve as supervisor in a collaborative practice setting. The SANE improperly concluded , in her notes, that the edema she said she observed was consistent with rape. In fact, vaginal edema, as has been noted, can and is frequently associated with sexual activity, irritation, and infection. The SANE has long since been completely exposed for the bias she demonstrated and for her lack of professionalism and objectivity in documenting her findings.; July 9, 2013 at 4:50 PM
Anonymous said...: Edwards can whine all he wants, rant that mangum was raped. frankly, she may have been raped......many times.......but, as walt says....she was NOT raped by anybody at the LAX party. if Ken Edwards were a true friend to this woman, he would stop his silliness and help her come to grips with her OWN responsibility and accountability for her OWN sorry decisions.; July 9, 2013 at 4:53 PM
Anonymous said...: Julie Manly, not Tara Levicy, actually performed the exam on Crystal which revealed no evidence of rape.; July 10, 2013 at 4:45 AM
Anonymous said...: Nope, not correct. Levicy did the exam and so stated in the Nifong hearing. The exam we are talking about here included what is commonly called a "rape kit" exam. Manly was one of several residents in the ED. I will also add that arguing over who did the actual physical examination and who improperly, and with bias, due a false conclusion.......is hardly a core issue. Levicy has long been exposed for her bias and she was called on it during the Nifong hearing.
What IS important is that there was NO RAPE. Period.; July 10, 2013 at 5:42 AM
Anonymous said...: Poster, all of Levicy's testimony during the Nifong hearing is readily available on youtube. watch it and hear her admit to her role in the examination, her documentation, her notes, her interview of Mangum, etc. It's all there.; July 10, 2013 at 5:43 AM
Anonymous said...: Hey, Walt, question for you........If Mangum were to, even at this late date, find a conscience and admit that she lied.....i.e., come clean about her lies over the false rape allegations, do you think it would help, hurt, or have no impact on her pending trial for killing Daye? From a perspection point of view? From a legal consequence, since nobody is going to go back and take legal action against her, apparently. just wondering.......??????; July 10, 2013 at 5:47 AM
Anonymous said...: Julie Manly did the exam.; July 10, 2013 at 6:14 AM
Anonymous said...: whatever, poster. you stick to your story. It's hardly relevant to the core issue...which is that NO RAPE occurred.; July 10, 2013 at 7:20 AM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: "Once again Walt you are being disingenuous. Crystal's memory of the assault was clouded by the sudden onset of impairment, of unknown cause and by the emotional trauma of being abused by several, large intoxicated and rowdy individuals. The holding of her legs, up by the ankles, through the open door, by someone not necessarily inside the small room, while others, took turns entering and exiting, to molest her, is not something to ridicule. Saying she was levitating is just trying to make a joke out of this God awful event."

You are the one changing the story, not I.

Anonymous at 5:47 wrote: "Hey, Walt, question for you........If Mangum were to, even at this late date, find a conscience and admit that she lied.....i.e., come clean about her lies over the false rape allegations, do you think it would help, hurt, or have no impact on her pending trial for killing Daye?"

Unless she puts her reputation in issue, her previous false allegation will not come into evidence. That said, the self-defense angle calls for her to put her reputation in issue. She might try, as George Zimmerman has, to put her version of self-defense forward using the state's witnesses. That can work. And, if I was defending her, you can bet your bottom dollar that I wouldn't let her near the witness stand. She has never told the same story twice under relatively friendly questioning. I can't imagine how poorly she would do on cross-examination.

Walt-in-Durham; July 10, 2013 at 11:51 AM
Anonymous said...: Surely Holmes won't let her get near the witness stand either. On the other hand, it sure would be some interesting courtroom drama. :); July 10, 2013 at 12:44 PM
Anonymous said...: ...Hey Walt, what do you think of this?
"Zimmerman’s lead attorney, Mark O’Mara, told reporters Wednesday after resting his case that the jury’s only option should be the second-degree murder charge brought by prosecutors. If jurors are unable to convict Zimmerman or murder, then he should be acquitted, O’Mara said, because the shooting on Feb. 26, 2012 was intentional.
“What George did was an intentional act that he knew he was pulling the trigger, the reason why he did it was self defense and that doesn’t suggest the manslaughter charge would be appropriate,” O’Mara said."
interesting, in relation to Mangum, too.....; July 11, 2013 at 5:55 AM
Walt said...: Anonymous at 5:55 AM wrote, "Zimmerman’s lead attorney, Mark O’Mara, told reporters Wednesday after resting his case that the jury’s only option should be the second-degree murder charge brought by prosecutors. If jurors are unable to convict Zimmerman or murder, then he should be acquitted, O’Mara said, because the shooting on Feb. 26, 2012 was intentional.
“What George did was an intentional act that he knew he was pulling the trigger, the reason why he did it was self defense and that doesn’t suggest the manslaughter charge would be appropriate,” O’Mara said."

This is why self-defense is such a trickey defense. You have to admit intentionally taking a life. If the jury doesn't buy S-D, then the defendant is sunk. Thus, Crystal's reliance on delay as a defense. Her S-D claim is weaker than Zimmermans. The police got a bunch of statements from him and believed him. She came up with self-defense long after the fact and never talked to the police.

"interesting, in relation to Mangum, too....."

I have always thought the Mangum case was more of an domestic dispute/escalating violence case. They fought over money. The fight escalated. She grabed a steak knife. I don't think she acted intentionally. (A further complication for her S-D claim.) I think the evidence supports Misdemeanor Assault with a Deadly Weapon. Under NC's misdemeanor manslaughter rule, I think a felony conviction form Manslaughter II is where the jury will come down. She will get a felony conviction and a little more time in jail. Unfortunately, another short stay in jail denies her the rehabilitation she needs. Crystal has been on the wrong trajectory since at least 2002.

Anonymous at 12:44 PM wrote: "Surely Holmes won't let her get near the witness stand either. On the other hand, it sure would be some interesting courtroom drama. :)"

Holmes is a smart guy. He wisely shut Sid out. That stopped the leaks of the defense case to the state. And, our own window as well. In the interests of justice, I applaud Holmes for that.

Walt-in-Durham; July 11, 2013 at 7:21 AM
Anonymous said...: I agree completely about Holmes' actions relative to Harr and others who were doing nothing but harm to Mangum and her case.
It seems pretty clear that Daye and Mangum got into a brawl over money or sex...fueled by booze...and Mangum's documented history of a tendency toward physical violence........and, as Walt says, it went from push-and-shove to full-out fighting...and Mangum grabbed a weapon. I believe the person who overhead a female voice saying, "I"M going to fxxx you up"! heard the truth....an out of control Mangum, going after Daye. The LACK of physical evidence to support the notion that Daye was beating the crap out of her is, to me, a major problem for Mangum. I realize that a victim does not have to have actual injury to claim assault........but Mangum didn't raise the self defense claim until Daye was dead, and, initially (per Harr) she claimed that Daye beat, punch, choked, wrestled and generally whacked the crap out of her. Kinda hard to make such a claim when all you ended up with is a tiny pinprick size indent on your cheek; July 11, 2013 at 7:53 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
SIDNEY HARR:

"The only way you could tell for certain that Officer Council's photo was posted online at the time I did my research was for you to have googled it prior to me. I doubt that you did. Simply put, the photo was posted after I conducted my research.

End of verse, chapter, story."

You are really desperate for personal posterior camouflage. The end of verse, chapter, story is, you presumed Mr. Council was white, and your basis for that was his victim is black.

Desperate... are you kidding? I'm just telling the truth for your edification. Whether or not you choose to believe me is no sweat off me.

Regarding Mr. Council's race, I had no idea, and after I was unable to come up with an image, I just used a generic exemplar. It's really that simple.; July 11, 2013 at 9:33 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Hey, Walt, question for you........If Mangum were to, even at this late date, find a conscience and admit that she lied.....i.e., come clean about her lies over the false rape allegations, do you think it would help, hurt, or have no impact on her pending trial for killing Daye? From a perspection point of view? From a legal consequence, since nobody is going to go back and take legal action against her, apparently. just wondering.......??????

Talk about lies!!! That is what the entire autopsy report on Reginald Daye is... a pack of lies. The entire murder prosecution, including the Larceny charge is nothing but a lie.

Perry Mason would've filed a Motion to Dismiss in a New York minute had he been defending Mangum and the charges against her would've been dropped. Not only does the prosecution not have probable cause or credible evidence, but their autopsy report is fraudulent and false.; July 11, 2013 at 9:41 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Surely Holmes won't let her get near the witness stand either. On the other hand, it sure would be some interesting courtroom drama. :)

Forget about it! There's not going to be a trial. Prosecution doesn't have a case, and what they'll try to do is work with Scott Holmes to have Mangum accept a plea deal.; July 11, 2013 at 9:44 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Walt said...
Anonymous at 5:55 AM wrote, "Zimmerman’s lead attorney, Mark O’Mara, told reporters Wednesday after resting his case that the jury’s only option should be the second-degree murder charge brought by prosecutors. If jurors are unable to convict Zimmerman or murder, then he should be acquitted, O’Mara said, because the shooting on Feb. 26, 2012 was intentional.
“What George did was an intentional act that he knew he was pulling the trigger, the reason why he did it was self defense and that doesn’t suggest the manslaughter charge would be appropriate,” O’Mara said."

This is why self-defense is such a trickey defense. You have to admit intentionally taking a life. If the jury doesn't buy S-D, then the defendant is sunk. Thus, Crystal's reliance on delay as a defense. Her S-D claim is weaker than Zimmermans. The police got a bunch of statements from him and believed him. She came up with self-defense long after the fact and never talked to the police.

"interesting, in relation to Mangum, too....."

I have always thought the Mangum case was more of an domestic dispute/escalating violence case. They fought over money. The fight escalated. She grabed a steak knife. I don't think she acted intentionally. (A further complication for her S-D claim.) I think the evidence supports Misdemeanor Assault with a Deadly Weapon. Under NC's misdemeanor manslaughter rule, I think a felony conviction form Manslaughter II is where the jury will come down. She will get a felony conviction and a little more time in jail. Unfortunately, another short stay in jail denies her the rehabilitation she needs. Crystal has been on the wrong trajectory since at least 2002.

Anonymous at 12:44 PM wrote: "Surely Holmes won't let her get near the witness stand either. On the other hand, it sure would be some interesting courtroom drama. :)"

Holmes is a smart guy. He wisely shut Sid out. That stopped the leaks of the defense case to the state. And, our own window as well. In the interests of justice, I applaud Holmes for that.

Walt-in-Durham

Hey, Walt.

Let me clue you in... there haven't been any leaks of the defense case because the defense hasn't done anything. In other words, there's nothing to leak.

Also, anyone who thinks that Mangum and Daye fought over money is ill-informed. They didn't fight over money or cashier's checks. That's evident in the police report by Officer Bond which took place April 4th in his hospital room. Daye was angry at her for "being disrespectful" and he even said she was running off at the mouth.

Face it, larceny had nothing to do with the incident that night. Although Daye and his nephew stated Mangum took money, they never said how much she took... the police never asked how much she took, and she was not charged with stealing money!; July 11, 2013 at 9:53 AM
Walt said...: Sid wrote: "Hey, Walt.

Let me clue you in... there haven't been any leaks of the defense case because the defense hasn't done anything. In other words, there's nothing to leak."

Sid, you are coming un-hinged. You were the one who leaked the Roberts oral report. You were the one who leaked the defense theory on self-defense. You leaked the autopsy and Daye's medical records. So don't say there was nothing to leak when you were doing the leaking. Most of it to the detriment of the defense.

As to the defense doing nothing, you are simply deluded. First, the defense asked for numerous, five I think, bond reductions. Second, the defense sought a psych evaluation for the defendant to determine if she was fit to stand trial. Third, the defense sought an expert to explore the autopsy and see if they could make anything of an intervening cause. We all know far too well, as does the state, that the defense expert found no intervening cause. That's not doing nothing, that's searching for a defense, what a good defense lawyer does. Crystal has had three of them. However, the last one has wisely shut you out to at least stop the damage to the defense.

"Also, anyone who thinks that Mangum and Daye fought over money is ill-informed. They didn't fight over money or cashier's checks. That's evident in the police report by Officer Bond which took place April 4th in his hospital room. Daye was angry at her for "being disrespectful" and he even said she was running off at the mouth."

I read the poice report and I have to say that I definitely got it that Daye and Crystal were fighting over money. That is a difference of opinion which is what juries are for.

"Face it, larceny had nothing to do with the incident that night. Although Daye and his nephew stated Mangum took money, they never said how much she took... the police never asked how much she took, and she was not charged with stealing money!"

Hmmmmm....larceny of a chose in action is North Carolina's quaint way of alleging someone stole a check.

Walt-in-Durham; July 11, 2013 at 11:18 AM
Anonymous said...: "The only way you could tell for certain that Officer Council's photo was posted online at the time I did my research was for you to have googled it prior to me. I doubt that you did. Simply put, the photo was posted after I conducted my research.

End of verse, chapter, story."

Except, of course, you did no research (it was pointed out to you that the N&O story was published on the 12th).

The truth is that in order to meet your meta-narrative (poor black victim, bad white oppressor), Mr. Council HAD to be depicted as a white man.
You're a liar, Sid. Admit it, correct your errors and move on.; July 11, 2013 at 11:25 AM
Walt said...: Sid wrote: "Perry Mason would've filed a Motion to Dismiss in a New York minute had he been defending Mangum and the charges against her would've been dropped."

Well there you go, criminal procedure based on fiction.

"Not only does the prosecution not have probable cause or credible evidence,..."

Actually they do have probable cause and a great deal of evidence.

"... but their autopsy report is fraudulent and false."

That's not the evidence that you provided. In fact, the evidence you provided directly contradicts your statement. The defense expert and the Medical Examiner say otherwise. Thanks to you, we know that.

Walt-in-Durham; July 11, 2013 at 11:25 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"Desperate... are you kidding? I'm just telling the truth for your edification."

When have you ever told the truth?

"Whether or not you choose to believe me is no sweat off me."

So why are you trying so hard to cya?

"Regarding Mr. Council's race, I had no idea, and after I was unable to come up with an image, I just used a generic exemplar. It's really that simple."

The question is, why did you not use a generic black image?; July 11, 2013 at 11:49 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"Talk about lies!!! That is what the entire autopsy report on Reginald Daye is... a pack of lies. The entire murder prosecution, including the Larceny charge is nothing but a lie."

What credentials do you have to state authoritatively that the autopsy was a lie? What legal expertise do you have to authoritatively the charges re lies.You couldn't see that the obviously false charges DA NIFONG filed against the Lacrosse players were lies.

"Perry Mason would've filed a Motion to Dismiss in a New York minute had he been defending Mangum and the charges against her would've been dropped."

That is indeed delusional since Perry Mason IS a fictional character.

"Not only does the prosecution not have probable cause or credible evidence, but their autopsy report is fraudulent and false."

When have you ever established those allegations as factual? Never.; July 11, 2013 at 11:54 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"Forget about it! There's not going to be a trial. Prosecution doesn't have a case, and what they'll try to do is work with Scott Holmes to have Mangum accept a plea deal."

If so, I would like you to try to butt into the case to advise Crystal not to take a plea deal. Then your A will land up in jail while you are still trying to cover it up over the fiasco with Officer Council.; July 11, 2013 at 11:57 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"Hey, Walt.

Let me clue you in..."

You cluing in a lawyer about legal matters. That shows beyond any doubt you are delusional.

"there haven't been any leaks of the defense case because the defense hasn't done anything. In other words, there's nothing to leak."

In other words you haven't been able to leak anything about the case because Mr. Holmes has told you to butt out. Boy are you p---ed about that.

"Also, anyone who thinks that Mangum and Daye fought over money is ill-informed. They didn't fight over money or cashier's checks. That's evident in the police report by Officer Bond which took place April 4th in his hospital room. Daye was angry at her for "being disrespectful" and he even said she was running off at the mouth."

Anyone who thinks Crystal was beaten by Reginald Daye and acted in self defense is delusional. Especially when that individual is presenting photographs that show Crystal was not beaten and then claiming such photos show she was beaten.

"Face it, larceny had nothing to do with the incident that night. Although Daye and his nephew stated Mangum took money, they never said how much she took... the police never asked how much she took, and she was not charged with stealing money!"

Neither had self defense.; July 11, 2013 at 12:03 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Walt said...
Sid wrote: "Hey, Walt.

Let me clue you in... there haven't been any leaks of the defense case because the defense hasn't done anything. In other words, there's nothing to leak."

Sid, you are coming un-hinged. You were the one who leaked the Roberts oral report. You were the one who leaked the defense theory on self-defense. You leaked the autopsy and Daye's medical records. So don't say there was nothing to leak when you were doing the leaking. Most of it to the detriment of the defense.

As to the defense doing nothing, you are simply deluded. First, the defense asked for numerous, five I think, bond reductions. Second, the defense sought a psych evaluation for the defendant to determine if she was fit to stand trial. Third, the defense sought an expert to explore the autopsy and see if they could make anything of an intervening cause. We all know far too well, as does the state, that the defense expert found no intervening cause. That's not doing nothing, that's searching for a defense, what a good defense lawyer does. Crystal has had three of them. However, the last one has wisely shut you out to at least stop the damage to the defense.

"Also, anyone who thinks that Mangum and Daye fought over money is ill-informed. They didn't fight over money or cashier's checks. That's evident in the police report by Officer Bond which took place April 4th in his hospital room. Daye was angry at her for "being disrespectful" and he even said she was running off at the mouth."

I read the poice report and I have to say that I definitely got it that Daye and Crystal were fighting over money. That is a difference of opinion which is what juries are for.

"Face it, larceny had nothing to do with the incident that night. Although Daye and his nephew stated Mangum took money, they never said how much she took... the police never asked how much she took, and she was not charged with stealing money!"

Hmmmmm....larceny of a chose in action is North Carolina's quaint way of alleging someone stole a check.

Walt-in-Durham

Hey, Walt.

Specifically, I was saying that the defense under Holmes has done nothing. However, all defense representation has essentially did nothing. Filing bail reductions is petty. What these attorneys should have been filing are motions to dismiss. But did they? No!

Having her sent for a psyche evaluation only plays into the hands of the prosecution and media... a bone-headed move.

The only reason Vann obtained a forensic expert witness was to appease me... then he had to shut her up to keep from giving a written report. What she told Mangum orally was nothing but lies... and since nothing's in writing, you can't go by what she allegedly said.

Regarding the theft of money, Mangum was never charged with that. Regarding the "Larceny of chose in action" charge, Daye admitted that he gave her the two checks to hold on to. Besides, she couldn't convert them to her use because she was not listed as the payee or remitter. It's nothing more than a bogus charge in order to initiate the "felony-murder rule" and bring the murder charge to first degree.

You know that, Walt. C'mon... admit it.; July 11, 2013 at 12:29 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
"The only way you could tell for certain that Officer Council's photo was posted online at the time I did my research was for you to have googled it prior to me. I doubt that you did. Simply put, the photo was posted after I conducted my research.

End of verse, chapter, story."

Except, of course, you did no research (it was pointed out to you that the N&O story was published on the 12th).

The truth is that in order to meet your meta-narrative (poor black victim, bad white oppressor), Mr. Council HAD to be depicted as a white man.
You're a liar, Sid. Admit it, correct your errors and move on.

That flarticle was about physical abuse of prisoners... it had nothing to do with race, as you are trying to make it out to be. The race of the inmate or the corrections officer is irrelevant. I was equally as upset with the beatings meted out to white inmated Timothy Helms and Joshua Wrenn.

Grow up and stop playing the race card.; July 11, 2013 at 12:33 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
SIDNEY HARR:

"Forget about it! There's not going to be a trial. Prosecution doesn't have a case, and what they'll try to do is work with Scott Holmes to have Mangum accept a plea deal."

If so, I would like you to try to butt into the case to advise Crystal not to take a plea deal. Then your A will land up in jail while you are still trying to cover it up over the fiasco with Officer Council.

I have already given Mangum my non-lawyerly advice not to accept any plea deal. And if I speak to her in the future I will reiterate it.
(That's not going against a court order.); July 11, 2013 at 12:37 PM
Walt said...: Sid wrote: "What these attorneys should have been filing are motions to dismiss. But did they? No!"

Did it ever occur to you that a competent lawyer might be aware of NCGS § 15A‑954 which sets out the circumstances under which a motion to dismiss may be filed? I know you are big on frivolous motions, but real lawyers are guided by the law and respect their ethical obligations to refrain from filing frivolous motions. So please look at NCGS § 15A‑954 and tell us which sub-part was violated and provide case law to support your argument.

"Having her sent for a psyche evaluation only plays into the hands of the prosecution and media... a bone-headed move."

Not given her history. It is actually a pretty smart move. It gets her out of the criminal justice system, gets her help and might just pave the way for a NGRI defense. Of course you are not a lawyer, so you don't see the value in exploring actual defenses.

"The only reason Vann obtained a forensic expert witness was to appease me..."

No, that's called exploring a defense. The obligation of a defense lawyer.

" What she told Mangum orally was nothing but lies... and since nothing's in writing, you can't go by what she allegedly said."

Unless you were lying about what she said, I can. Oral statements are just as reliable as written ones. Vann was trying, in vain, to keep a bad report from reaching the prosecution. That's all on you.

"Regarding the theft of money, Mangum was never charged with that."

There you go again misrepresenting what was written. You really don't want to have any credibility at all.

Walt-in-Durham; July 11, 2013 at 12:55 PM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"Hey, Walt.

Specifically, I was saying that the defense under Holmes has done nothing. However, all defense representation has essentially did nothing. Filing bail reductions is petty. What these attorneys should have been filing are motions to dismiss. But did they? No!

Having her sent for a psyche evaluation only plays into the hands of the prosecution and media... a bone-headed move.

The only reason Vann obtained a forensic expert witness was to appease me... then he had to shut her up to keep from giving a written report. What she told Mangum orally was nothing but lies... and since nothing's in writing, you can't go by what she allegedly said.

Regarding the theft of money, Mangum was never charged with that. Regarding the "Larceny of chose in action" charge, Daye admitted that he gave her the two checks to hold on to. Besides, she couldn't convert them to her use because she was not listed as the payee or remitter. It's nothing more than a bogus charge in order to initiate the "felony-murder rule" and bring the murder charge to first degree.

You know that, Walt. C'mon... admit it."

The legal expertise of SIDNEY HARR who still claims corrupt DA NIFONG was a paragon of an ethical prosecutor when he wrongfully prosecuted three innocent men for raping Crystal Mangum.; July 11, 2013 at 1:25 PM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"That flarticle was about physical abuse of prisoners... it had nothing to do with race, as you are trying to make it out to be. The race of the inmate or the corrections officer is irrelevant. I was equally as upset with the beatings meted out to white inmated Timothy Helms and Joshua Wrenn.

Grow up and stop playing the race card."

See how desperately SIDNEY is trying to C his racist A.; July 11, 2013 at 1:27 PM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"I have already given Mangum my non-lawyerly advice not to accept any plea deal. And if I speak to her in the future I will reiterate it."

This from SIDNEY who believed he could file pro se motions in a criminal case to which he was not a party.; July 11, 2013 at 1:30 PM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"The only reason Vann obtained a forensic expert witness was to appease me..."

More evidence that SIDNEY is a deluded megalomaniac.; July 11, 2013 at 1:32 PM
Anonymous said...: I'm surprised we have been treated to a stomach-turning sermon on how an innocent child was gunned down by a murderous police wannabe maniac white/hispanic dude from Mr. know-it-all Harr. Before it's all over, no matter what the jury verdict may be, I guarantee we will get a full-bore dose of social justice, evil white people-victimized black people. If Zimmerman is found guilty, then he is sure to get a lighter sentence from a corrupt white judge. If he is found innocent, then, holy hell, the corrupt justice system let a murderer go free.
I have watched a considerable portion of the trial, done my best to read BOTH sides, listened, and tried to keep an open mind. At this point, my emotional gut says" He got out of his car, he's guilty.". My head, based on what I know of the law and what the hard evidence says, tells me a very different story. But, I'm sure Harr will, as always, blame corrupt white people, who, one way or the other, will manage to come out the villans in his paranoid conspiratorial racist mind.; July 13, 2013 at 2:04 PM
Anonymous said...: Zimmerman has been acquitted for shooting a black thug that attacked him.Absolutely wonderful.Congratulations George.; July 14, 2013 at 3:20 AM
kenhyderal said...: It could never happen in Canada. 1. No Neighborhood Watch Volunteer would be ever be armed. That would be illegal. 2. Being a young Black male there is not considered the profile of a criminal.; July 14, 2013 at 8:31 AM
Anonymous said...: Thanks for that insightful comment, kennyhyderal.; July 14, 2013 at 9:31 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Zimmerman has been acquitted for shooting a black thug that attacked him.Absolutely wonderful.Congratulations George.

To George Zimmerman:
You are no Mack Bolan.; July 14, 2013 at 11:15 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
I'm surprised we have been treated to a stomach-turning sermon on how an innocent child was gunned down by a murderous police wannabe maniac white/hispanic dude from Mr. know-it-all Harr. Before it's all over, no matter what the jury verdict may be, I guarantee we will get a full-bore dose of social justice, evil white people-victimized black people. If Zimmerman is found guilty, then he is sure to get a lighter sentence from a corrupt white judge. If he is found innocent, then, holy hell, the corrupt justice system let a murderer go free.
I have watched a considerable portion of the trial, done my best to read BOTH sides, listened, and tried to keep an open mind. At this point, my emotional gut says" He got out of his car, he's guilty.". My head, based on what I know of the law and what the hard evidence says, tells me a very different story. But, I'm sure Harr will, as always, blame corrupt white people, who, one way or the other, will manage to come out the villans in his paranoid conspiratorial racist mind.

It is painfully obvious that had Zimmerman followed advice of the police dispatcher and not followed Trayvon Martin, that the young teen would be alive today. Zimmerman was without a doubt the instigator and aggressor in this sad case.; July 14, 2013 at 11:18 AM
Anonymous said...: Well If Martin had not suckered punch Zimmerman after calling him a creepy assed cracker, and telling him he was going to die that night, and jumping on him, and beating him up, maybe he would not have gotten himself shot.; July 14, 2013 at 12:12 PM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"To George Zimmerman:
You are no Mack Bolan."

To SIDNEY HARR: you are no fighter for justice, nor are you a teller of truth, nor are you a competent physician.; July 14, 2013 at 12:26 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "Well If Martin had not suckered punch Zimmerman after calling him a creepy assed cracker, and telling him he was going to die that night, and jumping on him, and beating him up, maybe he would not have gotten himself shot"................. When you are being stalked by a "creepy" character, while walking home on a dark rainy night, human fear kicks in and your physiology prepares you for two choices; run away, as his girl-friend advised, or to stand and confront that threat verbally and physically. Like Trayvon I and I suspect most others would take the second choice. In civilized places, unless the stalker was mentally unstable you would not expect to be shot dead.; July 14, 2013 at 3:01 PM
Anonymous said...: Thanks for that insightful comment, kennyhyderal.; July 14, 2013 at 5:58 PM
Anonymous said...: Or a cop who shoots you or beats you up because you either run or verbally argue with the aggressive stalker (the cop) as would be naturally expected of a person when met with an aggressive stalker (ie. cop, etc.).

So many guns bought lately and yet the political system is erring on the side of the guy who did not listen to the cops and killed the unarmed innocent kid as a consequence - yet will deem to take away constitutional rights of everyone to achieve more gun controls??? Makes no sense to me.

So, are 'we' supposed to 'listen' to cops or not?

And, are 'we' not supposed to 'act' in human manners when confronted with an 'aggressive stalker' cop? How should a 'real' human act?

Does this case make case law for 'all' or just for this case, or for only those in Florida?; July 14, 2013 at 6:07 PM
kenhyderal said...: The only thing more frightening then a, "Dirty Harry like", rogue Cop is a "wannabe Dirty Harry Like Cop". Both are on power trips and we are their victims.; July 14, 2013 at 9:20 PM
Anonymous said...: George stood his ground and Trayvon is under the ground.There just might be an ounce of justice in this world.; July 15, 2013 at 3:28 AM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:

"The only thing more frightening then a, "Dirty Harry like", rogue Cop is a "wannabe Dirty Harry Like Cop". Both are on power trips and we are their victims."

Go to http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2013/07/five-moments-that-may-have-led-to-george-zimmermans-acquittal/

Read the article.

There is testimony from prosecution witnesses that George Zimmerman did not act like a "wannabe Dirty Harry Like Cop".

That said, and I admit I am no lawyer" I question whether or not George Zimmerman can escape civil liability for Trayvon Martin's death. He was not supposed to be carrying a gun. He was instructed not to leave his vehicle. The sad tragic altercation would not have happened if George Zimmerman had followed instructions.; July 15, 2013 at 4:57 AM
Walt said...: The Zimmerman case reads like a bad reprise of Nifong's botched prosecution. Withhold evidence, lie, over-charge, ignore the constitution, and violate the rules of professional conduct.

Walt-in-Durham; July 15, 2013 at 5:11 AM
Anonymous said...: Walt, agreed. Total circle jerk....bad lawyers, bad lawyering, bad police work, and a media mob mentality.; July 15, 2013 at 11:12 AM
Anonymous said...: My favorite parts were the prosecution's incessant repeating of the Zimmerman curse words, the brain-dead joke by West, the iron-lady judge routine, and....best of all...the eleventh hour insertion of the child abuse factor! High drama, lousy lawyering...; July 15, 2013 at 11:32 AM
Anonymous said...: .....Nifong hearing....."a clear case of intentional prosecutorial misconduct"....Williamson, in his closing remarks......; July 15, 2013 at 1:37 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: HEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP!!
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT.

My next flarticle should be posted by the end of the week. It contains quite a bit of animation, which takes a lot of time.

Also... News Flash: Michael Peterson has been granted a new trial!!

As you were.; July 16, 2013 at 6:40 AM
Anonymous said...: I just personally witnessed a "protest" downtown in an eastern city. Using the word "protest" to describe what took place is a miserable cheapening of that word....that meant so much during the civil rights movement of the 60s and 70s. I saw pushing,shoving, screaming at passersby, pounding on car windshields, spitting on cars, making obscene gestures (as in, putting their hands on their private parts and making hip movements), and doing all of this IN FRONT OF PEOPLE TRYING TO PASS, INCLUDING CHILDREN. They were and are nothing but a bunch of law-breaking punks, trying to claim a legitimate purpose of being animals and thugs. I hope the police do their job!; July 16, 2013 at 8:17 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"EY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP!!
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT."

As important as feathers are to a bull.

"My next flarticle should be posted by the end of the week. It contains quite a bit of animation, which takes a lot of time."

Sidney will be posting more garbage. Clamp your collective noses before attempting to read.

"Also... News Flash: Michael Peterson has been granted a new trial!!"

http://murderpedia.org/male.P/p/peterson-michael-iver.htm
DA NIFONG was one of the prosecutors who challenged Michael Peterson's credibility.; July 16, 2013 at 8:21 AM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL, SIDNEY HARR:

The Today show this AM had an interview with a George Zimmerman juror. She cited testimony from Trayvon Martin's girl friend which indicated that Trayvon Martin initiated the confrontation which led to the tragic shooting.

So let's get this straight. George Zimmerman was not acting like a dirty Harry wannabe.; July 16, 2013 at 9:03 AM
Anonymous said...: i wonder if his father knew that neighborhood watchman zimmerman had a gun and thing for teens in sweatshirts - if not - zimmerman is in the wrong for profiling the man's kid without adequate warning for his neighbor's awareness and ability to keep his child safe in that neighborhood with that watchman; July 16, 2013 at 9:54 AM
Anonymous said...: Now that 'we' know that the NSA has a recording of Mr. Trayvon Martin's conversation with his friend - the friend that states she was talking to him on the phone up to just a minute before he died - can't they listen to what actually was accurring from Mr. Martin's side of the conflict - and add that to the federal civil rights investigation of Mr. Zimmerman (if nothing else to determine if Mr. Zimmerman is not accurately portraying what actually occurred)? Could they use that information in the interest of national security from a full blown hate crime attack and retaliation by any race against another in a jury case against Mr. Zimmerman or any other?; July 16, 2013 at 5:46 PM
Walt said...: Anonymous at 5:46 PM wrote: "Now that 'we' know that the NSA has a recording of Mr. Trayvon Martin's conversation with his friend - the friend that states she was talking to him on the phone up to just a minute before he died - can't they listen to what actually was accurring from Mr. Martin's side of the conflict - and add that to the federal civil rights investigation of Mr. Zimmerman...."

AMENDMENT IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

If the fourth amendment means anything, it means warrantless wiretap information is not admissible into evidence in a criminal prosecution. Weeks v. United States, 232 U.S. 383 (1914), generally, Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961) applying Weeks to the states and Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967) applying the rule to wiretaps. Let's trample on our civil rights in the name of ... civil rights. Not a good idea.

Walt-in-Durham; July 16, 2013 at 7:57 PM
Anonymous said...: Thank you for sharing your understanding of the answer to that odd question Walt.

So, how can the NSA use the information they have stored at all to go after anyone without turning themselves into unlawful stalkers? So then Snowden would be lawful in his ability to 'defend' himself from the NSA's unconstitutional stalking of every USA citizen by claiming self-defense (in a sense)?

I wonder how they plan to use the information if it is unlawfully gathered - and therefore cannot be presented as evidence nor probable cause. Do you think they will circumvent that, for what reasons, and how will they achieve the circumvention without violating the constitution and civil rights of all?

Is that only for terrorism or can it be used subjectively for patriotism based on party affiliations or whatever is deemed subjectively patriotic at the time?; July 16, 2013 at 9:05 PM
Walt said...: Anonymous at 9:05 PM wrote: "So, how can the NSA use the information they have stored...?"

I take the government at its word on this program that the data is really be stored/analyzed to detect terrorist threats. I suspect the data will then be used to begin an intervention against the terrorists.

I sincerely hope the government will not go so far as to use this NSA data in ordinary criminal cases as evidence. To do so would make what is already a quesionable program, from a constitutional perspective, really troubling. I really don't want our government to be that big and powerful.

Walt-in-Durham; July 17, 2013 at 7:16 AM
Anonymous said...: Our government has built FEMA detention centers (prisons) to house entire families based on some yet unknown threat.

On the threat list is people who protest the government and people who vote and campaign for people like Ron Paul.

Did you know that?; July 17, 2013 at 7:33 AM
Walt said...: Federal Criminal Charges for Zimmerman?

I doubt that federal criminal charges for George Zimmerman will be filed. Not that there is not a great deal of pressure to do so. However, I see only two real possibilities for federal charges and the facts simply do not support either crime.

The first possibility is Deprivation of civil rights. Under 18 U.S.C. § 242. To make a case, the statute requires the defendant (in this case Zimmerman) be acting under color of state law. As such, 18 U.S.C. § 242 has normally been used against state and local officials who have been using their office to discriminate. The argument against Zimmerman is under United States v. Price, 383 U.S. 787 (1966) people who acted in concert with a county sheriff could were subject to 18 U.S.C. § 242. However, there is no real evidence to support that Zimmerman was cooperating with police. Indeed, he seems to have disregarded 911's suggestion that he stay in his car.

The other possibility is a hate crime. Under 18 U.S.C. § 249, it is a crime willfully to “cause[] bodily injury to any person . . . because of the actual or perceived race, color, religion, or national origin of any person.” This charge might be a slightly better fit, because there is some evidence that Zimmerman’s initial perception of Martin was influenced by Martin’s race. However, the Florida jury appears to have rejected that theory. Instead they seem to believe Zimmerman shot Martin because Martin was punching Zimmerman in the face and pounding his head against the pavement. In other words, the reason that Zimmerman “cause[d] bodily injury to” Martin was self-defense, not Martin’s race.

Walt-in-Durham; July 17, 2013 at 7:54 AM
Walt said...: Anonymous at 7:33 AM wrote: "Our government has built FEMA detention centers (prisons) to house entire families based on some yet unknown threat."

Yet another reason to restrict the size and power of government.

Walt-in-Durham; July 17, 2013 at 7:58 AM
Anonymous said...: How do you restrict a government that bows to a shadow government and deems to imprison innocent citizens based upon some subjective unconsitutionally with no legal right nor regard for civil rights determination unknown to any but themselves probable cause?; July 17, 2013 at 8:21 AM
Anonymous said...: No white man would ever want to have sexual relations with Tawana Brawley,Crystal Mangum,or Rachel Jeantel.There isn't that much alcohol or Viagra in this world.; July 18, 2013 at 12:18 AM
Anonymous said...: I'm so glad George Zimmerman shot a worthless punk like Trayvon Martin and was acquitted.Good job ladies.; July 18, 2013 at 3:42 AM
Walt said...: Just to be clear, Anonymous at 12:18 AM, those comments are bigotry at its worst and have no place in the discussion here.

Walt-in-Durham; July 18, 2013 at 4:19 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Walt said...
Just to be clear, Anonymous at 12:18 AM, those comments are bigotry at its worst and have no place in the discussion here.

Walt-in-Durham

Thanks, Walt. Kenhyderal, myself, and most of the commenters share your view. Unfortunately, all that commenter does is prove that racism is still alive and well.; July 18, 2013 at 7:37 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
I'm so glad George Zimmerman shot a worthless punk like Trayvon Martin and was acquitted.Good job ladies.

It is sad commentary on your part that you are glad that a young teenager, who was unarmed and minding his own business, was stalked and goaded into a confrontation wherein he was killed. Zimmerman knew about the Stand your ground law... he most likely acted with premeditation.; July 18, 2013 at 7:40 AM
kenhyderal said...: Nifong Supporter said: "Unfortunately, all that commenter does is prove that racism is still alive and well"...... Alive and sick,sick,sick.; July 18, 2013 at 9:28 AM
Walt said...: Sid wrote: "Thanks, Walt. Kenhyderal, myself, and most of the commenters share your view. Unfortunately, all that commenter does is prove that racism is still alive and well."

That comment has been made too many times before. Others have objected to it though. There are people of good will as well. The number of those of good will vastly exceeds those who are active racists.

Walt-in-Durham; July 18, 2013 at 11:08 AM
Anonymous said...: It is sad commentary on your part that you are glad that a man who was unarmed and minding his own business, was goaded into a confrontation wherein he was killed. Mangum most likely acted with premeditation.; July 18, 2013 at 12:06 PM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"Walt said...
Just to be clear, Anonymous at 12:18 AM, those comments are bigotry at its worst and have no place in the discussion here.

Walt-in-Durham

Thanks, Walt. Kenhyderal, myself, and most of the commenters share your view. Unfortunately, all that commenter does is prove that racism is still alive and well."

And you think you are not nurturing the growth and maintenance of racism? f so you are deluding yourself.; July 18, 2013 at 1:10 PM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"It is sad commentary on your part that you are glad that a young teenager, who was unarmed and minding his own business, was stalked and goaded into a confrontation wherein he was killed. Zimmerman knew about the Stand your ground law... he most likely acted with premeditation."

I believe George Zimmerman has civil liability for Trayvon Martin's death. However, evidence given by prosecution witnesses indicates that Trayvon Martin, not George Zimmerman, turned the situation into a violent confrontation.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2013/07/five-moments-that-may-have-led-to-george-zimmermans-acquittal/; July 18, 2013 at 1:14 PM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:

"Nifong Supporter said: 'Unfortunately, all that commenter does is prove that racism is still alive and well'...... Alive and sick,sick,sick."

You, like SIDNEY believe you are not someone nurturing the survival and growth of racism. You are not only a blatant unrepentant racist, you are a hypocrite.; July 18, 2013 at 1:18 PM
Anonymous said...: Something for KENHYDERAL and SIDNEY HARR:

Tawana Brawley, years before anyone heard of Crystal, falsely accused white men of raping her. One of them, Stephen Pagones, sued her for defamation and won a judgment of $190,000. Tawana never paid-surprise, surprise.

With interest, the amount of money she owes to Mr. Pagones has grown to almost $500,000. Papers have been filed in the state of Virginia, where she has hidden, to garnish her wages(she works in a nursing home) until the judgment has been paid.

Undoubtedly KENNY, SIDNEY, and Al Sharptoungue will call this an unjust prosecution of a hard working single mother. If Sharptongue had not tried to exploit Tawana's lies to establish himself as a celebrity, the whole situation would not have happened.

How about Reverend Al, if he is truly concerned about Tawana, pay her judgment out of his own resources. He probably can, now.; July 18, 2013 at 1:24 PM
Anonymous said...: Trayvon Martin unfortunately took the advice Kenny provided in this thread. Having been disrespected, Trayvon in all likelihood went back and confronted Zimmerman both verbally and physically. He punched him and slammed his head on the concrete sidewalk.

Delivering a real beat down is the best way to earn respect. A younger, more athletic person can be an effective teacher.

Zimmerman unfortunately had a gun and ended the lesson on respect.; July 18, 2013 at 4:24 PM
Anonymous said...: zimmerman said what he did himself to the 911 operator - he got out of his car to stop a "... punk" "a..hole" "who always gets away" - i think it was premediated as well since the 911 operator then told him to stay in the car until the cops got there - obviously sensing zimmerman was profiling the kid as that was all the kid was doing wrong was being a punk ahole who always gets away in the eyes of zimmerman; July 18, 2013 at 4:32 PM
Anonymous said...: When did he say he got out to "stop" a punk or asshole? The operator also asked him which way the person had gone.

Please provide a link. Thanks.; July 18, 2013 at 4:41 PM
Anonymous said...: i read that on cnn - it was a quote from the 911 call - don't have a link - read it on cnn in last couple of days; July 18, 2013 at 4:50 PM

«Oldest ‹Older 1 – 200 of 310 Newer› Newest»

Tuesday, July 2, 2013

Potpourri of Sensational Snippets - July 2013

310 comments:

Facebook Badge

Subscribe!

Labels

Blog Archive

About Me