justice4nifong: Team player or independent?

Sunday, September 1, 2013

Team player or independent?

Click panels above to access sites

329 comments:

1 – 200 of 329 Newer› Newest»

Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

You again repeat the lie, over and over again, that Crystal Mangum was the victim/accuser in the Duke Lacrosse case. She was and is the victimizer/false accuser.; September 1, 2013 at 11:15 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

You repeat the lie that Dr. Nichols' autopsy report was fraudulent.; September 1, 2013 at 11:16 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

Your main complaint with the mainstream media is they will not pay attention to you or give credence to the lies you are telling.; September 1, 2013 at 11:17 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

You say corrupt DA NIFONG acted properly when he prosecuted the Duke Lacrosse players for raping Crystal Mangum. Let's try this again. What evidence did DA NIFONG have that a rape had occurred. What evidence did he have that implicated any member of the Lacrosse team in the alleged rape?; September 1, 2013 at 11:18 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

Another lie you try to promulgate, that Duke University caused the death of Reginald Daye.; September 1, 2013 at 11:19 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Walt said...
Sid wrote: "Vann won't call me to testify because he does not seek a full acquittal for Mangum."

How wrong you are. As an expert (you didn't treat, so all you can do is offer an opinion and nothing more) you are directly contradicted by not one, but two other experts. Further, you have yet to write a single thing that suggests you have any medicine or science to base your claims upon. You have consistently misrepresented the law and the science. If Vann wanted to send Crystal's case to a quick conviction, listing Sid as an expert would be the way to do it.

"He's going to try and get Crystal to accept a plea deal."

If he can't get another continuance, that's probably in her best interests. She has no defense. Thanks to Sid's breach of the attorney client privilege everyone knows that there is no medical defense. She has no battered spouse defense, again thanks to Sid's breach of the attorney client privilege we've seen the state's discovery that discounts that notion. (Not that Crystal ever had much of a defense there.) With Sid sidelined by the bar, Crystal can't file any more motions designed solely to delay the proceeding. It's time for serious plea negotiations or Crystal needs to do some prison planning.

Walt-in-Durham

Walt, as hard as I try, it seems as though I just cannot enlighten you. Every doctor who has read the evidence available on my blog site knows that Daye died secondary to an esophageal intubation which resulted in his brain death... and led to his removal from life support. Any doctor who has knowledge of the facts of the case as put forth in my blog site is also aware that Nichols' report is false in its findings and conclusion.; September 1, 2013 at 11:20 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

What was ethical or proper about DA NIFONG getting into the media before he had any facts and vouching for his case, vouching for his case before he had ever investigated?; September 1, 2013 at 11:21 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

How was DA NIFONG's behavior ethical when he got into the media and made guilt presuming statements on the part of the Lacrosse players?; September 1, 2013 at 11:22 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

How was it proper for DA NIFONG to get into the media and say publicly that retention of counsel by a potential defendant is an indication of guilt.; September 1, 2013 at 11:23 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

How was it proper for DA NIFONG to seek indictments against members of the Lacrosse team when the only thing he had was the alleged victim's unreliable identification of them as her accusers. Reade Seligman and Colin Finnerty were not at the scene of the alleged crime. David Evans, whom Crystal claimed had a mustache at the time of the alleged crime, never had a mustache.; September 1, 2013 at 11:25 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

What qualifications do you have to question the autopsy report on Reginald Daye. You have not denied what was said in the Independent Weekly, that you spent most of your time after Medical School filing lawsuits against various and assorted defendants, most of which you backed down from pursuing.; September 1, 2013 at 11:27 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
SIDNEY HARR:

How was it proper for DA NIFONG to get into the media and say publicly that retention of counsel by a potential defendant is an indication of guilt.

I don't understand what you find so egregious about such a statement... if, in fact, he did make it.

It's obvious that you don't want to discuss the bogus vendetta charges against Mangum. It's obvious, that like the media, you don't want to address the fact that Dr. Nichols was acting as a team player when he produced the fraudulent autopsy report on Daye.; September 1, 2013 at 11:32 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

" don't understand what you find so egregious about such a statement... if, in fact, he did make it."

In other words, you would have denied the presumption of innocence to the people corrupt DA NIFONG wanted to indict. Yes he did make multiple guilt presuming statements. It was documented in his ethics trial.

"It's obvious that you don't want to discuss the bogus vendetta charges against Mangum."

How can one address your uncorroborated allegation that there is a vendetta against Crystal, other than to point out that it is uncorroborated.

"It's obvious, that like the media, you don't want to address the fact that Dr. Nichols was acting as a team player when he produced the fraudulent autopsy report on Daye."

It may seem so to you. The fact is, confirmed by Dr. Roberts' review, that the autopsy report was not fraudulent.; September 1, 2013 at 11:39 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

What you published in your blog of Monday, November 2, 2009:

"Mr. Nifong does make the following statement, as published in the article: “I agree with the Attorney General’s statement that there is no credible evidence that Mr. Seligmann, Mr. Finnerty, and Mr. Evans committed any crimes for which they were indicted – or any any other crimes against Ms. Mangum – during the party.”

So explain how corrupt DA NIFONG was acting ethically when he sought indictments against the innocent, falsely accused Lacrosse players.; September 1, 2013 at 7:26 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous@ 11:39 said: " The fact is, confirmed by Dr. Roberts' review, that the autopsy report was not fraudulent" ......... You've seen a review by Dr. Roberts ?? That's more then Crystal has.; September 1, 2013 at 9:37 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous @7:26 said: "Mr. Nifong does make the following statement, as published in the article: “I agree with the Attorney General’s statement that there is no credible evidence that Mr. Seligmann, Mr. Finnerty, and Mr. Evans committed any crimes for which they were indicted – or any any other crimes against Ms. Mangum – during the party.”
So explain how corrupt DA NIFONG was acting ethically when he sought indictments against the innocent, falsely accused Lacrosse players................... At the advice of his Counsel and hoping to mitigate his sentencing Former DA Nifong threw in the towel and claimed agreement with AG Cooper's statement. A sad case where this former champion for justice, like St.Peter in the courtyard after Jesus' arrest, had to deny he had acted with honor. Under the desperate pressure his courage failed him. The perpetrators of injustice in North Carolina win again. Not forever,though "the Arc of the Moral Universe Is Long, but It Bends Toward Justice”; September 1, 2013 at 9:57 PM
Anonymous said...: Harr has always been a racist and a liar. That's nothing new. the information from the IndyWeek article provides history.....demonstrates his patterns.....and further documents what many have suspected. Harr is a pathetic man. He may feel grief over the passing of his wife. That's a family matter and not, at least to me, appropriate for comment here. However, his pattern of filing nuisance law suits, engaging in questionable (at the least) behavior, handing over Mangum's defense to the prosecution, trying to extort money out of people through false means (forging signatures), etc.......shows a man bereft of morals and integrity. No wonder he accuses the world of being criminal......when he is corrupt himself.

Not ONE single physician has agreed with Harr.....not one. Nichols, Roberts AND the doctor(s) who have commented here have ALL disagreed with Harr. Mangum herself revealed to Harr that Roberts found nothing improper in the Nichols report. We ALL know why Vann didn't want a report from Roberts. If he received such a report, it would be favorable to the prosecution's case, and Vann would be obligated to turn it over to the state. We ALL know this.....and any idiot can understand that Harr screwed over Mangum when he put information on this site.
I think it is hilarious that Harr was praising Vann and Roberts to the stars above.....until, of course, Roberts found no problem with Nichols' report.

Thank goodness the judge is not going to allow Mangum to stall yet again.

Harr can run his lying mouth all he wants. Mangum better consider a plea deal IF one is offered.; September 2, 2013 at 4:34 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"Walt, as hard as I try, it seems as though I just cannot enlighten you. Every doctor who has read the evidence available on my blog site knows that Daye died secondary to an esophageal intubation which resulted in his brain death... and led to his removal from life support. Any doctor who has knowledge of the facts of the case as put forth in my blog site is also aware that Nichols' report is false in its findings and conclusion."

SIDNEY you lie. No doctor who has ever read your blogs believes that Reginad Daye died from an esophageal intubation.; September 2, 2013 at 5:22 AM
Anonymous said...: kenhyderal:

"Anonymous@ 11:39 said: " The fact is, confirmed by Dr. Roberts' review, that the autopsy report was not fraudulent" ......... You've seen a review by Dr. Roberts ?? That's more then Crystal has."

Woody Vann has. According to what has been published on this blog, by reliable sources, which means neither you nor SIDNEY, Woody Vann did not ask for a written report because it did not disagree with Dr. Nichols' report.; September 2, 2013 at 5:26 AM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:

"Anonymous @7:26 said: "Mr. Nifong does make the following statement, as published in the article: “I agree with the Attorney General’s statement that there is no credible evidence that Mr. Seligmann, Mr. Finnerty, and Mr. Evans committed any crimes for which they were indicted – or any any other crimes against Ms. Mangum – during the party.”
So explain how corrupt DA NIFONG was acting ethically when he sought indictments against the innocent, falsely accused Lacrosse players..................."

Which is more credible yhan anything you have heard from Kilgo's non existent Lacrosse player friend.

"At the advice of his Counsel and hoping to mitigate his sentencing Former DA Nifong threw in the towel and claimed agreement with AG Cooper's statement."

That is Bullshit.

"A sad case where this former champion for justice, like St.Peter in the courtyard after Jesus' arrest, had to deny he had acted with honor."

Corrupt DA NIFONG was never a champion o justice. He prosecuted three innocent men for rae when, by his own admission, he had no probable cause.

"Under the desperate pressure his courage failed him."

If corrupt DA NIFONG ever had any courage, he would have informed the gathering at NCCU that there was no evidence of rape and he was not going to prosecute anyone.

"The perpetrators of injustice in North Carolina win again.

Not in this case. The perpetrators of injustice were corrupt DA NIFONG, who prosecuted for no probable cause, and Crystal the false accuser and victimizer.

"Not forever,though 'the Arc of the Moral Universe Is Long, but It Bends Toward Justice'”.

Which is why in over 7 years no evidence has emerged that Crystal was raped.; September 2, 2013 at 5:35 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"Walt, as hard as I try, it seems as though I just cannot enlighten you. Every doctor who has read the evidence available on my blog site knows that Daye died secondary to an esophageal intubation which resulted in his brain death... and led to his removal from life support. Any doctor who has knowledge of the facts of the case as put forth in my blog site is also aware that Nichols' report is false in its findings and conclusion."

Why don't you provide examples of any doctor who believes you. Maybe you could organize a petition drive in which all these Doctors sign a statement saying Duke caused the death of Reginald Daye. Maybe Kilgo and his non existent Lacrosse layer will help you.; September 2, 2013 at 5:38 AM
Anonymous said...: Isn't it up to the prosecution to prove that the defendant is quilty?

How can it be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that Mr. Daye died as a result of the stab wound when the medical records themselves show several facts that do not support that claim and cast doubt?

It is the responsibility of the prosecution to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that Ms. Mangum killed Mr. Daye, and that it meets the criteria of the level of degree of murder that she has been charged with.

Ms. Mangum has to defend against those charges and accusations.

You cannot decide them, nor can I.

They have to be proven.

That is my current understanding of the case.

If this case is not actually tried like the lacrosse case was not actually tried, then it will leave the same unaswered questions and incessant accusations and meaningless defenses that go on continually building even more distrust, hatred, and division, causing even more harm, and violence, and illness ...

how do you think it will end?; September 2, 2013 at 6:20 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous September 2, 2013 at 6:20 AM:

"Isn't it up to the prosecution to prove that the defendant is quilty(sic)?

The criterion is beyond a reasonble doubt.

"How can it be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that Mr. Daye died as a result of the stab wound when the medical records themselves show several facts that do not support that claim and cast doubt?"

The medical records do not raise any reasonable doubt, especially the way that SIDNEY the incompetent physician misrepresents them.

"It is the responsibility of the prosecution to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that Ms. Mangum killed Mr. Daye, and that it meets the criteria of the level of degree of murder that she has been charged with."

You got that right. I doubt you know what reasonable doubt is.

"Ms. Mangum has to defend against those charges and accusations.

You cannot decide them, nor can I.

They have to be proven."

Correct. But SIDNEY the incompetent physician has not raised any reasonable doubt.

That is my current understanding of the case.

If this case is not actually tried like the lacrosse case was not actually tried, then it will leave the same unaswered questions and incessant accusations and meaningless defenses that go on continually building even more distrust, hatred, and division, causing even more harm, and violence, and illness ...

how do you think it will end?; September 2, 2013 at 6:27 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous September 2, 2013 at 6:20 AM

"If this case is not actually tried like the lacrosse case was not actually tried, then it will leave the same unaswered questions and incessant accusations and meaningless defenses that go on continually building even more distrust, hatred, and division, causing even more harm, and violence, and illness ..."

Except in the mind of guilt presuming racists like SIDNEY and KENHYDERAL, there is no doubt that no rape ever took place.; September 2, 2013 at 6:29 AM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:

You must be realky distraught that DA NIFONG is on the record that he had no probable cause to believe any member of the Lacrosse team had raped Crystal. No credible evidence means no probable cause. Ergo, what DA NIFONG had presented to the Grand Jury was perjured testimony.; September 2, 2013 at 6:31 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

More on DA NIFONG's admission that he had no credible evidence.

You made a statement in that blog that prosecutors have proceeded without credible evidence. But, you cite as such a case the prosecution of James Arthur Johnson. You call that a wrongful prosecution.

Yet you insist that DA NIFONG was correct to proceed with prosecuting the Lacrosse players when he had no credible evidence.

James Arthur Johnson is black. The Duke defendants are white. You are saying it is wrongful to prosecute a black defendant with no credible evidence but it is proper to prosecute white defendants with no credible evidence.

I guess this is how you think a Justice System should operate without regard to race or color.; September 2, 2013 at 6:35 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

If there are any comments by physicians posted on your blog supporting your mis interpretation of Reginald Daye's medical records and Dr. Nichols' report, you can, vis the mechanism of copy and paste, repost those comments.

You will probably argue that those physicians do not want to go on the record. Tat would be nothing more than an admission that you lied.; September 2, 2013 at 6:53 AM
Anonymous said...: Here's something I do not understand about what you say and how you say it:

how can you say that a doc does not want to go on record is an admission of a lie?

To me it sounds like doctors who do not want to go on the record, which, when you are dealing with duke, is highly understandble.

Why do you keep deny that?

It will probably become a big part of the case (that type duke animosity and conflicts of interest and denying that it even exits when that is all that it is to the degree that YOU can't even see it perhaps)? Is that why you do not admit it nor address it as something very real that needs to be addressed in this case?; September 2, 2013 at 7:14 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous September 2, 2013 at 7:14 AM

"Here's something I do not understand"

Not surprising since your capacity for understanding is so small.

"about what you say and how you say it:

how can you say that a doc does not want to go on record is an admission of a lie?"

What I said is that if SIDNEY can not post quotes from doctors who read his "evidence" about the death of Reginald Daye, he, SIDNEY, is lying about doctors believing SIDNEY's version of events. What is not documented did not happen.

"To me it sounds like doctors who do not want to go on the record, which, when you are dealing with duke, is highly understandble."

Understandable to you maybe. That means zero.

"Why do you keep deny that?"

Because your claim is not credible.

"It will probably become a big part of the case (that type duke animosity and conflicts of interest and denying that it even exits when that is all that it is to the degree that YOU can't even see it perhaps)? Is that why you do not admit it nor address it as something very real that needs to be addressed in this case?"

No it won't. Contrary to what SIDNEY claims, Duke has nothing to cover up regarding the death or Reginald Day. That is what you are incapable of seeing.; September 2, 2013 at 7:44 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous September 2, 2013 at 7:14 AM

"It will probably become a big part of the case (that type duke animosity and conflicts of interest and denying that it even exits when that is all that it is to the degree that YOU can't even see it perhaps)? Is that why you do not admit it nor address it as something very real that needs to be addressed in this case?"

Provide some documentation that all this "duke animosity and conflicts of interest". Saying that you read it in the papers to which you can not or will not provide a link, suggests there is no documentation, which in turn suggests you are fabricating all this "duke animosity and conflicts of interest"; September 2, 2013 at 7:49 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"Every doctor who has read the evidence available on my blog site knows that Daye died secondary to an esophageal intubation which resulted in his brain death... and led to his removal from life support."

Proof of your lie.

I have read the evidence on your blog and I have gone on record that no esophageal intubation happened and that Reginald Daye died as a result of the stab wound inflicted on him by Crystal.

Dr. Anonymous; September 2, 2013 at 7:52 AM
Anonymous said...: you are one example that is currently being documented of duke animosity and conflict of interest actually

you do not see it do you?; September 2, 2013 at 8:35 AM
kenhyderal said...: Dr. Anonymous said: "I have read the evidence on your blog and I have gone on record that no esophageal intubation happened"............And the reason for re-intubation, was?; September 2, 2013 at 8:53 AM
Lance the Supreme Poster of Enlightenment said...: "Walt, as hard as I try, it seems as though I just cannot enlighten you. Every doctor who has read the evidence available on my blog site knows that Daye died secondary to an esophageal intubation which resulted in his brain death..."

Where's the proof for this statement? I've only seen 1 doctor post on this site, and he's emphatically disagreed with you -- providing the medical information why.; September 2, 2013 at 8:53 AM
Lance the Supreme Poster of Enlightenment said...: Kenhyderal -- Not to speak for Dr. Anonymous, but he has has posted on this several times. I suggest you read some of his older comments. They are extremely enlightening.; September 2, 2013 at 8:58 AM
Anonymous said...: Why do you believe what a Dr. Anonymous says on this blog?

Did the anon dr. give documentation and proof for what is claimed by you'll as another credible medical analysis of the records?

Do you believe the anon dr. because what was determined was what you want to believe, or because compelling explanations and analysis was given?

How was the intubation explained?; September 2, 2013 at 9:28 AM
Lance the Supreme Poster of Enlightenment said...: "Why do you believe what a Dr. Anonymous says on this blog?

Did the anon dr. give documentation and proof for what is claimed by you'll [sic] as another credible medical analysis of the records?

Do you believe the anon dr. because what was determined was what you want to believe, or because compelling explanations and analysis was given?

How was the intubation explained?"

As a retired surgeon, I believe Dr. Anonymous is more trustworthy in this matter than Dr. Harr (a former ER doctor with no practical surgical experience).

Beyond that, read Dr. Anonymous' older posts. I think he does provide compelling analysis.; September 2, 2013 at 9:44 AM
Anonymous said...: How am I to believe the anonymous doctor is an actual retired surgeon, and one without a conflict of interest to duke or the medical examiner, etc.?

Was that ever determined, and how?; September 2, 2013 at 9:52 AM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:

"Dr. Anonymous said: "I have read the evidence on your blog and I have gone on record that no esophageal intubation happened"............And the reason for re-intubation, was?"

It was not an esophageal intubation. The records SIDNEY illegally accessed and posted said a direct laryngoscopy was done and showed the tube was in the trachea. I have done direct laryngoscopy. It is impossible not to detect and esophageal intubation on direct laryngoscopy.

If the patient was not being ventilated adequatly, then the proper thing was to replace the tube.

I can recall one case of a patient who was properly intubated and not ventilated properly. Bronchoscopy showed the tip of the tube was butting up against the wall of the trachea.

Now it is my turn. How many intubations have you done. How many times have you done direct laryngoscopy?; September 2, 2013 at 10:00 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous September 2, 2013 at 8:35 AM:

"you are one example that is currently being documented of duke animosity and conflict of interest actually

you do not see it do you?"

How would that be since I have never lived in North Carolina and havehad no contact with Duke?; September 2, 2013 at 10:03 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous September 2, 2013 at 9:28 AM:

"Why do you believe what a Dr. Anonymous says on this blog?"

I am credible and SIDNEY is not.

"Did the anon dr. give documentation and proof for what is claimed by you'll as another credible medical analysis of the records?"

Who gave a credible analysis of the record. SIDNEY who claims the record showed an esophageal intubation and it was not.

"Do you believe the anon dr. because what was determined was what you want to believe, or because compelling explanations and analysis was given?"

Do you believe SIDNEY because it is what you want to believe? I do not believe SIDNEY because he is a liar and because, before I retired, I was a competent physician. Read the article in the Independent Weekly and you will learn that SIDNEY never was.

"How was the intubation explained?"

Reginald Daye aspirated and went into cardio respiratory arrest.; September 2, 2013 at 10:09 AM
Lance the Supreme Poster of Enlightenment said...: "How am I to believe the anonymous doctor is an actual retired surgeon, and one without a conflict of interest to duke or the medical examiner, etc.?"

Ask him.; September 2, 2013 at 10:11 AM
Walt said...: Sid wrote: "Walt, as hard as I try, ... Nichols' report is false in its findings and conclusion."

You have yet to post the word of a single physician to support that claim. You have, however, posted the words of a known physician that disputes your claim and agrees with Nichols. Thanks to your breach of the attorney client confidentiality, the prosecution knows too. With friends like you, Crystal needs no enemies.

Walt-in-Durham; September 2, 2013 at 10:11 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous September 2, 2013 at 9:52 AM

"How am I to believe the anonymous doctor is an actual retired surgeon, and one without a conflict of interest to duke or the medical examiner, etc.?"

I cab honestly say I have never lived in North Carolina and have never had any contact with Duke. Whether or not you believe it is irrelevant. It is the truth.; September 2, 2013 at 10:12 AM
Anonymous said...: I am not sure of course why you would, why do you seem to have a conflict of interest with duke?

I only know instinctively that the failed intubation effort should have been pulled immediately so Mr. Daye could breath another way, and it wasn't. What ever was done, was not done in time - and it could have been done in time if the effort to have him breath again was done correctly - so, therefore, a faulty intubation that ultimately resulted in his being taken off life support.

Why was the liquid given to Mr. Daye that required the intubation at a time when he was already strugling with other issues that needed immediate attention? That in itself seems wrong and a deadly medical error.; September 2, 2013 at 10:13 AM
Anonymous said...: In other words, you don't just let the patient's brain die from lack of oxygen with an intubation tube jammed in their throat, you reventilate immediately in one of a variety of ways that are available to reventilate immediately.; September 2, 2013 at 10:20 AM
Anonymous said...: The fact that duke is hyped as a medical facility with top ranked doctors and care is another factor that makes this one intubation death suspicious to occur at duke with Mr. Daye in conjuction with Ms. Mangum and the lacrosse case.

How many intubations per year that end in brain death and ultimate death occur at Duke and for what years and what reasons? That would be interesting to note.; September 2, 2013 at 10:30 AM
kenhyderal said...: Dr. Anonymous said: "Now it is my turn. How many intubations have you done. How many times have you done direct laryngoscopy"........I am a lay person so, I have never done an intubation but you, of course, knew that. You didn't answer the question, though. Dr. Harr gave, what he considered evidence, as to why Mr. Daye was re-intubated. What you have done, on the other hand, is offer a alternate possible explanation. Yours seems more speculative then does his. Why do you think Duke Hospital doesn't refute Dr. Harr's accusations, that he has widely published and why do you think Dr. Nichols does not sue Dr. Harr for accusing him of fraud ?
Why also is Dr. Roberts so reluctant to produce her written report, reviewing Dr. Nichols autopsy? Is it really out of concern for Crystal?
She has failed to respond to a letter from Crystal requesting the report. If Crystal`s well-being was her motive for that then at least tell her so, in writing, in response to her request and go on record to saying she concurs with Dr. Nichols autopsy; September 2, 2013 at 10:45 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous September 2, 2013 at 10:13 AM:

"I am not sure of course why you would, why do you seem to have a conflict of interest with duke?"

What would you define as a conflict of interest with Duke? How could I have a conflict of interest with an institution with which I have had no contact?

I only know instinctively that the failed intubation effort should have been pulled immediately so Mr. Daye could breath another way, and it wasn't."

Then you know nothing. The proper procedure is to pull the tube which is not working and replace it with one that was.

"What ever was done, was not done in time - and it could have been done in time if the effort to have him breath again was done correctly - so, therefore, a faulty intubation that ultimately resulted in his being taken off life support."

You again show you have no qualification to comment on this situation.

"Why was the liquid given to Mr. Daye that required the intubation at a time when he was already strugling with other issues that needed immediate attention? That in itself seems wrong and a deadly medical error."

Reginald Daye would not have been exposed to the risk of a medical error had he not been stabbed by Crystal. Check this out with Walt.; September 2, 2013 at 11:03 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous September 2, 2013 at 10:20 AM.

"In other words, you don't just let the patient's brain die from lack of oxygen with an intubation tube jammed in their throat"

Precisely.

"you reventilate immediately in one of a variety of ways that are available to reventilate immediately."

What are the other ways available?

The proper procedure after removing the non functional tube is to replace it with one that is functioning. That is what was done.; September 2, 2013 at 11:07 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny complains: You didn't answer the question, though.

Why are you entitled to answers to questions you raise? You do not answer questions posed to you.

I will ask you a question. As a friend of Crystal, Dr. Harr has a conflict. More importantly, he has consistently shown himself to be a liar, willing to say anything he believes will help his cause.

Why should anyone believe a word he says?

I agree that the reports raise questions that to someone like myself with no medical expertise. However, I view Dr. Nichols, Dr. Roberts and even the anonymous self-described doctors on this blog as having greater credibility than Dr. Harr.

I ask again: Why should anyone believe a word he says?; September 2, 2013 at 11:15 AM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:

"I am a lay person so, I have never done an intubation but you, of course, knew that. You didn't answer the question, though. Dr. Harr gave, what he considered evidence, as to why Mr. Daye was re-intubated."

No he did not. I say again, the records he illegally accessed and posted show that there was no esophageal intubation. SIDNEY insists there was.

"What you have done, on the other hand, is offer a alternate possible explanation. Yours seems more speculative then does his."

It isn't.

Why do you think Duke Hospital doesn't refute Dr. Harr's accusations, that he has widely published"?

It is SIDNEY's responsibility to prove his allegations, not Duke's responsibility to refute them. SIDNEY has shown he has not made any credible allegations.

"and why do you think Dr. Nichols does not sue Dr. Harr for accusing him of fraud ?"

Maybe he will.

"Why also is Dr. Roberts so reluctant to produce her written report, reviewing Dr. Nichols autopsy? Is it really out of concern for Crystal?"

If it upholds the credibility of Dr.Nichols' autopsy report, it is inculpatory evidence.

"She has failed to respond to a letter from Crystal requesting the report. If Crystal`s well-being was her motive for that then at least tell her so, in writing, in response to her request and go on record to saying she concurs with Dr. Nichols autopsy".

Maybe she will.

Meanwhile we have SIDNEY pressuring her(ineffectively) to produce a report that disagrees with Dr. Nichols' conclusions.

On the subject of lawsuits, if Crystal had been raped, why did she not file a civil suit against the men she accused of raping her? The maid who accused DSK of rape did file a civil suit against DSK and got a settlement.; September 2, 2013 at 11:15 AM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:

Your last post is an example of how the Nifong lovers and the Crystal lovers operate. Make an allegation against someone. If the accused does not disprove it, it must be true.

The justice system in the US and in Canada, in case you haven't noticed, puts the burden of proof on the one who asserts. In a criminal case, the prosecutor has to prove the defendant guilty. In a civil case, the plaintiff must prove the defendant responsible for a tort.

So where do you come up with the totally asinine conclusion that Duke's failure to refute SIDNEY's claims proves anything? SIDNEY's claims were not credible in the first place. He has offered no facts to support the allegations he is making.

If someone were to post in this blog that you are a homosexual pedophile, should you be found guilty unless you could prove you were not.

Guilty until proven innocent is the position from which you operate, and it is not a valid position.; September 2, 2013 at 11:25 AM
Anonymous said...: If there is a law that states that someone has to take responsibility for questionable actions taken by an institution's medical employees that obviously DO have a conflict of interest with the person who can be then charged with murder, then there has to be another law that says no they can't or NO ONE will want to see a doctor at duke again unless they are sure that duke is not as vengeful and unethical as they appear, or 'likes' them or something.

I don't know, how do you trust them after watching what they do to people? It is difficult for a lot of people I am sure.

I don't feel the need to be a duke fan in order to feel safe in the hands of the medical profession is a very healthy way to run a health care system, do you?; September 2, 2013 at 12:05 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous September 2, 2013 at 12:05 PM:

"If there is a law that states that someone has to take responsibility for questionable actions taken by an institution's medical employees that obviously DO have a conflict of interest with the person who can be then charged with murder, then there has to be another law that says no they can't or NO ONE will want to see a doctor at duke again unless they are sure that duke is not as vengeful and unethical as they appear, or 'likes' them or something."

HUH???!!!

"I don't know, how do you trust them after watching what they do to people? It is difficult for a lot of people I am sure."

First specify what they did.

"I don't feel the need to be a duke fan in order to feel safe in the hands of the medical profession is a very healthy way to run a health care system, do you?"

Why do you say that is the way the NC health care system is run?

You make absolutely no sense at all.; September 2, 2013 at 12:43 PM
Anonymous said...: Duke is currently a major part of the NC Health Care system.

The things that I see happening to people in NC at the hands of Duke and in conjuction with Duke is what I refer to. I do not feel the need to specify these things unless I am specifically talking about them, like right now with this one case. Please understand that so you will understand enough to not have to question everything said.

You are being a troll to not understand what was said, how it was said, and what it implies for every NC citizen.; September 2, 2013 at 1:06 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous @1:06:

Why do you believe anything that Dr. Harr has to say? He has consistently shown himself to be liar?; September 2, 2013 at 1:10 PM
Anonymous said...: I asked for proof of what he was speaking in regards to duke's medical actions out of deep concern for the safety of their medical practices for personal reasons when i read the news that talked of the error.

he showed them, i read them, they appear to say what he says they say, the subject was discussed, and nothing further has been shown to prove that how he interprets the reports is incorrect to any, but perhaps you'll from dr. anonymous on this blog and the medical examiners report that is in question in court.

That is basically what i believe as that was what i was interested in fully understanding, and still is.; September 2, 2013 at 1:20 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous September 2, 2013 at 1:06 PM:

"Duke is currently a major part of the NC Health Care system."

True. But it is a private institution.

"The things that I see happening to people in NC at the hands of Duke and in conjuction with Duke is what I refer to. I do not feel the need to specify these things unless I am specifically talking about them, like right now with this one case. Please understand that so you will understand enough to not have to question everything said."

What things. The way you put this suggests you can not document these things. I say, if you can not document your allegations, then how can one be sure you are not fabricating?

"You are being a troll to not understand what was said, how it was said, and what it implies for every NC citizen."

What you have been saying has been making no sense whatsoever.; September 2, 2013 at 1:27 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous September 2, 2013 at 1:20 PM:

"I asked for proof of what he was speaking in regards to duke's medical actions out of deep concern for the safety of their medical practices for personal reasons when i read the news that talked of the error.

he showed them, i read them, they appear to say what he says they say, the subject was discussed, and nothing further has been shown to prove that how he interprets the reports is incorrect to any,"

That statement is meaningless. SIDNEY must prove his allegations. He hasn't.

"but perhaps you'll from dr. anonymous on this blog and the medical examiners report that is in question in court."

The Medical Examiner's report is not in question except from SIDNEY, who has not standing in the case to question it and who has no credentials to show he is capable of questioning it. That he questions it does not establish it is fraudulent.

"That is basically what i believe as that was what i was interested in fully understanding, and still is."

Where did you learn grammar?; September 2, 2013 at 1:32 PM
Anonymous said...: I read the local news, therefore I do not feel the need to document anything, as, if you read the local news, you would understand the bs most are very tired of as is presented coming out of duke and durham court system in conjuction with duke in the local news. It is too numerous in examples to enumerate on, so I don't, and to make the matter clear, I won't. You are being a troll to not understand that after this explanation (not that you aren't already).

Just because it doesn't seem to affect you in anyway, doesn't mean it doesn't affect every citizen of NC. I am sure you understand that. Do you?; September 2, 2013 at 1:36 PM
Anonymous said...: Unless the specialties, or skills that duke provides are equal across the state, than it does not matter that they are private institution - since they serve the state in this capacity of specialized care and provide these services to all.

In addition, if you have no choice other than to be taken to duke hospitals in case of emergency as the federally required closest emergency facility, then, again, it does not matter, as they service all in that capacity.

They cannot shirk their responsibilities for one, and not have all others hold concern for the quality and safety of the services they provide to all NC citizens, as that is who they provide service to in large degree.

You do understand that, correct?; September 2, 2013 at 1:53 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous September 2, 2013 at 1:36 PM.:

"I read the local news, therefore I do not feel the need to document anything, as, if you read the local news, you would understand the bs most are very tired of as is presented coming out of duke and durham court system in conjuction with duke in the local news. It is too numerous in examples to enumerate on, so I don't, and to make the matter clear, I won't. You are being a troll to not understand that after this explanation (not that you aren't already)."

Oh I understand. You can not corroborate the allegations you make but want to be regarded s credible. You aren't.

"Just because it doesn't seem to affect you in anyway, doesn't mean it doesn't affect every citizen of NC. I am sure you understand that. Do you?"

Explain how something you can't document concerns the Citizens of NC.; September 2, 2013 at 2:25 PM
Anonymous said...: It is especially grevious that the concerns addressed in this case about duke's medical services are not addressed openly and honestly, and immediately, but are indeed, in the hands of one person who duke obviously has a major conflict of interest with and such negative history that ALL are aware of without a lawyer to assist her in her defense, and this is allowed to fester in the minds of all the patients, potential patients, other referring doctors, and concerned family members, etc. that they serve for so long.

How can you trust anyone's service in conjunction with duke if they rule with such fear and threats as are presented quite clearly in this case in the form of questionable conflict of interests, fraudulent reports to make duke's medical malpractice appear nonexistant and placing blame of murder on someone who duke obviously has something against. There is no way that you can.

You cannot continue to abuse people on this blog with your admitted trolling as public service to duke and not expect that to become a legal issue now that Dr. Harr has another case against Duke and duke provides public service to all citizens of NC in the form of medical services.

You troll to annoy and falsly discredit on purpose as you stated yourself is your motivation for causing intentional abuse in the form of public service for duke on this blog in our last discussion.

I suggest you stop.; September 2, 2013 at 2:35 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous September 2, 2013 at 1:53 PM:

"Unless the specialties, or skills that duke provides are equal across the state, than it does not matter that they are private institution - since they serve the state in this capacity of specialized care and provide these services to all."

Duke is not the only academic medical center in North Carolina. There are 5 Medical Schools in North Carolina, 3 of them older than Duke. If you are saying Duke dominates health care deliery in NC, you are wrong.

"In addition, if you have no choice other than to be taken to duke hospitals in case of emergency as the federally required closest emergency facility, then, again, it does not matter, as they service all in that capacity."

Maybe you can specify the requirements of the federally required closest emergency facility.

"They cannot shirk their responsibilities for one, and not have all others hold concern for the quality and safety of the services they provide to all NC citizens, as that is who they provide service to in large degree."

What responsibilities is Duke shirking?

"You do understand that, correct?"

From the way you write, I think you understand nothing.; September 2, 2013 at 2:35 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous September 2, 2013 at 2:35 PM:

"It is especially grevious that the concerns addressed in this case about duke's medical services are not addressed openly and honestly, and immediately, but are indeed, in the hands of one person who duke obviously has a major conflict of interest with and such negative history that ALL are aware of without a lawyer to assist her in her defense, and this is allowed to fester in the minds of all the patients, potential patients, other referring doctors, and concerned family members, etc. that they serve for so long."

What concerns have been raised in this case. I presume you are referring to the death of Reginald Daye. The death of Reginald Daye has raised no concerns about the quality of care at Duke. It has raised questions about your sanity and about SIDNEY's qualifications as a physician.

"How can you trust anyone's service in conjunction with duke if they rule with such fear and threats as are presented quite clearly in this case in the form of questionable conflict of interests, fraudulent reports to make duke's medical malpractice appear nonexistant and placing blame of murder on someone who duke obviously has something against. There is no way that you can."

You have not established as fact that all these things are indeed happening. Unless you do, you are just making unsupported allegations and you can not reasonably expect anyone to take you seriously.

"You cannot continue to abuse people on this blog with your admitted trolling as public service to duke and not expect that to become a legal issue now that Dr. Harr has another case against Duke and duke provides public service to all citizens of NC in the form of medical services."

I am offering my opinions as a public service to the people who read your insanity and SIDNEY's uncorroborated allegations. Get your facts straight.

"You troll to annoy and falsly discredit on purpose as you stated yourself is your motivation for causing intentional abuse in the form of public service for duke on this blog in our last discussion."

Those are your judgments. They are not supported by any facts.

"I suggest you stop."

If you do not like what I write, you can always cease and desist trying to pass off your uncorroborated allegations as fact.; September 2, 2013 at 2:42 PM
Anonymous said...: bhp; September 2, 2013 at 2:43 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous@11:15 said: "On the subject of lawsuits, if Crystal had been raped, why did she not file a civil suit against the men she accused of raping her? The maid who accused DSK of rape did file a civil suit against DSK and got a settlement".......... Wait for it..; September 2, 2013 at 2:58 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: If someone were to post in this blog that you are a homosexual pedophile, should you be found guilty unless you could prove you were not''..... No but I would certainly sue them.; September 2, 2013 at 3:01 PM
Anonymous said...: Even if your public service is to troll those who are concerned about duke's medical services due to the questions raised about their medical services posed in both the lacrosse case and this current case in the guize of obsessively accusing anyone you do not agree with of providing uncorrobarated facts, even when they aren't even providing facts to begin with - the only reason you do so is because of the lacrosse case. therefore, duke can still be blamed for your actions of harmful, annoying, intentional abusive trolling because they are also blamed for the lacrosse case by their own students, and have settled with them on that. why don't you go blame duke - not people who simply post things in concern for dukes continued inability to provide service that are of question and potentially very harmful to many.

i have asked you to stop
i am providing no facts
you make no sense in that regard i assure you; September 2, 2013 at 3:16 PM
Anonymous said...: I agree that Levicy made comments in the lacrosse case that were completely irresponsible and not supported by the results of the exam. Other than those comments, the criticism focuses on the failure to correct the false statements made by Nifong. I am not aware of any questions related to the quality of care provided to Crystal in the lacrosse case.; September 2, 2013 at 3:40 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous September 2, 2013 at 3:16 PM:

Even if your public service is to troll those who are concerned about duke's medical services due to the questions raised about their medical services posed in both the lacrosse case and this current case in the guize of obsessively accusing anyone you do not agree with of providing uncorrobarated facts, even when they aren't even providing facts to begin with - the only reason you do so is because of the lacrosse case. therefore, duke can still be blamed for your actions of harmful, annoying, intentional abusive trolling because they are also blamed for the lacrosse case by their own students, and have settled with them on that. why don't you go blame duke - not people who simply post things in concern for dukes continued inability to provide service that are of question and potentially very harmful to many."

Boy are you deluded.

"i have asked you to stop"

So?

"i am providing no facts"

Probably because you can't.

"you make no sense in that regard i assure you"

Ask me if I care.; September 2, 2013 at 3:41 PM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:

"Anonymous@11:15 said: "On the subject of lawsuits, if Crystal had been raped, why did she not file a civil suit against the men she accused of raping her? The maid who accused DSK of rape did file a civil suit against DSK and got a settlement".......... Wait for it.."

We have been waiting. Like Kilgo's imaginary Lacrosse player friend, in over 7 years it has not manifested.

By now the statute of limitations has probably expired. It means Crystal had her opportunity to file suit and chose not to. That suggests she did not have a case.

Why do you believe she will eventually have a case as more time goes by.; September 2, 2013 at 3:44 PM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:

"Anonymous said: If someone were to post in this blog that you are a homosexual pedophile, should you be found guilty unless you could prove you were not''..... No but I would certainly sue them."

The question was, why do you think that Duke's so called failure to refute SIDNEY's allegations is meaningful? If you believe it is meaningful, youm do not believe that the person who makes an allegation is obligated to prove the allegation. Anglo Saxon Justice systems consider that fundamental.

Since you are claiming guilty until proven innocent, you are no advocate for justice.; September 2, 2013 at 3:49 PM
Anonymous said...: well ... that's duke for you (sad huh)

since i have asked you to stop trolling me, i think you should, as - you are right, i am providing no facts - just talking about what is in the news and what my concerns are with these cases and duke in regards to medical services, etc.

i find it very abusive for you to continue when i have explained this to you very patiently in hopes that you will be logical and understand

i do not think your trolling Dr. Harr like you do is such a great idea either. i am sure you can understand that he doesn't need your extra abuse when he has so many other concerns - or any time really.

thanks; September 2, 2013 at 4:03 PM
Lance the Supreme Poster of Enlightenment said...: Look - Apparently, our anonymous poster (Victoria Peterson, I suspect) has an obvious bug up her ass about DUMC.

To anonymous, I simply say -- don't use DUMC or it's affiliates if you don't like them (I personally prefer Carolinas Healthcare System, but that's because I worked there for several years). Bringing your bias against DUMC here to a post about the Charlotte Observer and Mark Isley does nothing to move the conversation forward.

To the other anonymous poster that feels the need to respond to you. Don't. You're wrestling with a pig.

Sid should seriously consider moderating this blog. Between this crap and the anonymous poster quoting Shakespeare and Martin Luther, the level of discourse has seriously gone down hill.; September 2, 2013 at 4:46 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous September 2, 2013 at 4:03 PM:

"well ... that's duke for you (sad huh)"

What is?

"since i have asked you to stop trolling me, i think you should, as - you are right, i am providing no facts - just talking about what is in the news and what my concerns are with these cases and duke in regards to medical services, etc.

You are making allegations which you will not corroborate.

"i find it very abusive for you to continue when i have explained this to you very patiently in hopes that you will be logical and understand"

You do not like to be called out as a fabricator(there is no other conclusion when you make allegations you won't corroborate).

"i do not think your trolling Dr. Harr like you do is such a great idea either. i am sure you can understand that he doesn't need your extra abuse when he has so many other concerns - or any time really."

If SIDNEY can't stand the heat, let him get out of the kitchen.

"thanks"

You're welcome; September 2, 2013 at 4:52 PM
Anonymous said...: I'm with you, Lance. Mistrail-Recluse is probably Durham's very own resident bigot, the famous Victoria herself. Apparently she has issues with grammar, spelling, coherent sentences, and......the bug up her rear about Duke. No wonder she and sidney are soul-mates.
This blog has turned into silly rambling, nonsense about fracking, trash about Duke, Kenny Hissy dribbling about poor Mangum and the usual hogwash from Harr.
I occasionally read here to find comments from you and Walt.....and Dr. Anon. Otherwise, it's trash.

Looking forward to November.....; September 2, 2013 at 5:22 PM
Anonymous said...: ok, for the last time:

what allegations exactly is it that you say i have made that i will not corraborate?

we will settle it (i am sure it will be another round of your abuse followed by another phb from me and we can just go to yesterday's coversation instead of repeating) but ... for the last time

what IS your problem?
i have made no allegations and therefore no corraborations and therefore no facts that are uncorroborated

therefore, you can accuse me of nothing; September 2, 2013 at 5:30 PM
Anonymous said...: The abuse and the support of same abuse on this blog from people with obvious conflicts of interest with duke is documentation of serious issues all face when dealing with duke.

The fact that it is done deliberately to try to keep people from discussing serious issues that affects all in conjunction with duke in an attempt to improve the situation and/or hold them accountable for the harm they cause is indicative of the level of abuse and manipulation of all citizens of NC by Duke through all the means of power, influence, and control at their disposal.

It has become a horrendous deadly joke - and duke continues to laugh and bully others into agreeing things are funny when they harm people - because they are duke - and - so - its funny - laugh

yeah - right

they need to be held accountable instead of laughed at or with

enough is enough; September 2, 2013 at 6:01 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous September 2, 2013 at 5:30 PM:

"ok, for the last time:"

I doubt that.

"what allegations exactly is it that you say i have made that i will not corraborate?"

That Duke University dominates health care in NC, that Duke University abuses patients, that Duke University caused the death of Reginald Daye.

"we will settle it (i am sure it will be another round of your abuse followed by another phb from me and we can just go to yesterday's coversation instead of repeating) but ... for the last time

what IS your problem?"

I have none. You do. You fabricate allegations against Duke.

"i have made no allegations and therefore no corraborations and therefore no facts that are uncorroborated"

Yes you have made allegations which you will not corroborate.

"therefore, you can accuse me of nothing"

Who is accusing. I am explaining you my rather low opinion of you.; September 2, 2013 at 6:06 PM
Anonymous said...: What is the conflict of interest that Duke has with Crystal Mangum?; September 2, 2013 at 6:12 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous September 2, 2013 at 6:01 PM:

"The abuse and the support of same abuse on this blog from people with obvious conflicts of interest with duke is documentation of serious issues all face when dealing with duke."

Here you ARE making allegations which you can not corroborate.

"The fact that it is done deliberately to try to keep people from discussing serious issues that affects all in conjunction with duke in an attempt to improve the situation and/or hold them accountable for the harm they cause is indicative of the level of abuse and manipulation of all citizens of NC by Duke through all the means of power, influence, and control at their disposal."

How am I doing anything to "keep people from discussing" something which you are intrinsically incapable of discussing.

"It has become a horrendous deadly joke - and duke continues to laugh and bully others into agreeing things are funny when they harm people - because they are duke - and - so - its funny - laugh"

Here again you ARE making allegations which you will not back up with facts.

"yeah - right

they need to be held accountable instead of laughed at or with"

By whom? People whom I have reason to believe are fabricators?

"enough is enough"

So get out of the kitchen if you can't stand the heat.; September 2, 2013 at 6:13 PM
Anonymous said...: What mistakes in treating Crystal Mangum did DUMC make in the lacrosse case?

Are the mistakes to which you refer the inappropriate comments made by Tara Levicy and the failure of DUMC to correct the false statements made by Nifong about the medical evidence? Are those the mistakes?

If so, I believe most posters here will readily agree.; September 2, 2013 at 6:35 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous @3:44 said: "Why do you believe she will eventually have a case as more time goes by"..... Because, once her present case is disposed of, the eye-witness to her rape will be uncovered. There is no statute of limitations for that crime.; September 2, 2013 at 9:06 PM
Anonymous said...: you know the funniest thing is that all these general statements made about duke (or just talking about the news in conjunction with duke) that you keep repeating over and over claiming the 'allegation' is 'uncorroborated' and demanding proof or you can't and won't believe - and think that gives you the right to bully and troll people on this list - all those things/complaints become even more apparent to all others with your actions - thanks for helping in documenting your abuse and spreading the word about dukes

i was just concerned about you - you seemed to be repeating yourself over and over - talking basically to your self - so - like i said - i was concerned

but - hey - carry on as dr. harr likes to say - you can always talk to the buddhist hp - it is usually in deep meditation - so you don't bother it; September 3, 2013 at 2:34 AM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:

"Because, once her present case is disposed of, the eye-witness to her rape will be uncovered."

Since there was no rape, no eye witness to a rape of Crystao will be uncovered.

"There is no statute of limitations for that crime."

The crime has been disposed of already. So far as a civil case, there is a statute of limitations for filing and it is less than 7 1/2 years.; September 3, 2013 at 4:29 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous September 3, 2013 at 2:34 AM:

"you know the funniest thing is that all these general statements made about duke (or just talking about the news in conjunction with duke) that you keep repeating over and over claiming the 'allegation' is 'uncorroborated'"

You are making allegations and refusing to back them up. That means only one thing, you are making uncorroborated allegations.

"and demanding proof or you can't and won't believe"

I am not demanding proof. I am saying that without proof you are making uncorroborated allegations and I do not take them as true.

" - and think that gives you the right to bully and troll people on this list - all those things/complaints become even more apparent to all others with your actions - thanks for helping in documenting your abuse and spreading the word about dukes"

Your definition of bullying is someone will not accept your uncorroborated allegations as true.

"i was just concerned about you - you seemed to be repeating yourself over and over - talking basically to your self - so - like i said - i was concerned"

No, you were p---ed off because I said I think you are fabricating your uncorroborated allegations.

"but - hey - carry on as dr. harr likes to say - you can always talk to the buddhist hp - it is usually in deep meditation - so you don't bother it"

You mean SIDNEY HARR, the incompetent who somehow got an MD degree and then spent the rest of his life trying to extort money from people under the fiction of fighting for justice.

You must be desperate for people to idolize if you stoop to idolizing SIDNEY.; September 3, 2013 at 4:36 AM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:

Correction:

"Because, once her present case is disposed of, the eye-witness to her rape will be uncovered."

Since there was no rape, no eye witness to a rape of Crystal will be uncovered.

"There is no statute of limitations for that crime."

The CASE has been disposed of already. There was no crime.

So far as a civil case, there is a statute of limitations for filing and it is probably less than 7 1/2 years.; September 3, 2013 at 4:40 AM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:

Maybe you can explain how someone coming forward more than 7 years after it was determined definitively that Crystal was not raped would be considered credible.; September 3, 2013 at 4:56 AM
Anonymous said...: this is ridiculous i am sure to many - my apologies

to the person who is a YOU HAVENT CORROBRATED BULLY on this blog

seriously

stop

p.s. bhp or hpb stands for buddist hand puppet (hp) - don't forget

thanks; September 3, 2013 at 5:17 AM
Walt said...: kenhyderal wrote: "Anonymous@11:15 said: "On the subject of lawsuits, if Crystal had been raped, why did she not file a civil suit against the men she accused of raping her? The maid who accused DSK of rape did file a civil suit against DSK and got a settlement".......... Wait for it.."

That statute of limitations ran out a long time ago. You can wait all you want.; September 3, 2013 at 5:57 AM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: "There is no statute of limitations for that crime."

You were being asked about Crystal filing a civil suit. For that, there is a statute of limitation. For felonies (cases which may only be brought by the State of North Carolina) there is no statute of limitation. However, there is irrefutable proof that none of the lacrosse team was involved in her alleged rape. There are five suspects whose DNA has, hopefully, been entered into the national database. Under N.C. law, those people might still be prosecuted by the state, though not by Crystal.

Walt-in-Durham; September 3, 2013 at 6:04 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous September 3, 2013 at 5:17 AM:

"this is ridiculous i am sure to many - my apologies"

I agree. You are supremely ridiculous.

"to the person who is a YOU HAVENT CORROBRATED BULLY on this blog"

Oh I am a bully because I believe you are a ridiculous fabricator.

"seriously"

Seriously you are a ridiculous fabricator.

"stop"

You should stop fabricating.

"p.s. bhp or hpb stands for buddist hand puppet (hp) - don't forget"

No, it means butt headed poster.

"thanks"

You are welcome; September 3, 2013 at 6:20 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
SIDNEY HARR:

What qualifications do you have to question the autopsy report on Reginald Daye. You have not denied what was said in the Independent Weekly, that you spent most of your time after Medical School filing lawsuits against various and assorted defendants, most of which you backed down from pursuing.

A medical degree and years of experience provides me with the qualifications to question Nichols' autopsy report.

As far as the article in the Indy Week, most of it was one-sided gossip. I only had 300 words, so I sure wasn't going to waste them.

I do plan on addressing some of the subjects mentioned in the article in upcoming flogs and flarts.; September 3, 2013 at 6:51 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Isn't it up to the prosecution to prove that the defendant is quilty?

How can it be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that Mr. Daye died as a result of the stab wound when the medical records themselves show several facts that do not support that claim and cast doubt?

It is the responsibility of the prosecution to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that Ms. Mangum killed Mr. Daye, and that it meets the criteria of the level of degree of murder that she has been charged with.

Ms. Mangum has to defend against those charges and accusations.

You cannot decide them, nor can I.

They have to be proven.

That is my current understanding of the case.

If this case is not actually tried like the lacrosse case was not actually tried, then it will leave the same unaswered questions and incessant accusations and meaningless defenses that go on continually building even more distrust, hatred, and division, causing even more harm, and violence, and illness ...

how do you think it will end?

If Mangum gets an attorney who fights for her in good faith, a Motion to Dismiss will be filed based on a fraudulent autopsy report and granted by the judge.

If she gets an attorney who puts Duke and the medical examiner before her, then she will probably be forced to accept a plea deal.; September 3, 2013 at 6:57 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
The fact that duke is hyped as a medical facility with top ranked doctors and care is another factor that makes this one intubation death suspicious to occur at duke with Mr. Daye in conjuction with Ms. Mangum and the lacrosse case.

How many intubations per year that end in brain death and ultimate death occur at Duke and for what years and what reasons? That would be interesting to note.

A very intelligent comment... and thought-provoking. Intubation statistics are information I would be interested in seeing, too.; September 3, 2013 at 7:32 AM
Walt said...: Sid wrote: "If Mangum gets an attorney who fights for her in good faith, a Motion to Dismiss will be filed based on a fraudulent autopsy report and granted by the judge."

That would not be the subject matter for a motion to dismiss criminal charges. A motion to dismiss in North Carolina is limited to a few circumstances found in NCGS 15A-945. You have never cited a single provision of Section 15A-945 you allege has been violated. In fact, the medical examiner's report is an issue for the jury. Thus, filing a motion to dismiss would not be in good faith, but in fact would be frivolous and vexatios.

Walt-in-Durham; September 3, 2013 at 7:51 AM
Anonymous said...: If Harr were truly an experienced medical doctor he would already know that there are numerous resources, readily available ONLINE, to evaluate Duke University Hospital's medical/surgical care.....in relation to national/regional benchmarks established by such organizations as Medicare, JCAHO, and HCAPS. Any idiot with opposable thumbs can, with a few clicks, find out how Duke compares to its peers.....i.e., to other academic medical centers. And, for those who are apparently too limited to be able to find out for themselves, Duke compares exceptionally well. Intubation rates, unplanned extubations, re-intubation rates, etc.....are recorded meticulously.
I say again, and AGAIN, there is not one shred of evidence that there was ANY incorrect/improper intubation/ventilation/reintubation, etc. Harr has manufactured a fantasy which he repeats often. There is not ONE single physician who agrees with him. Not ONE. We all know it and so does he. He is a racist liar who is a serial law suit filer and predator.
So, Harr, PROVE your allegations......absent proof, you will continue to be what we all already know you are......are racist liar.; September 3, 2013 at 8:05 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"A medical degree and years of experience provides me with the qualifications to question Nichols' autopsy report."

Your medical degree in and of itself does not qualify you to comment. What you call your years of medical experience, according to the Independent Weekly were spent filing frivolous law suits. You have no residency training, you have no board certification. You are singularly unqualified.

"As far as the article in the Indy Week, most of it was one-sided gossip. I only had 300 words, so I sure wasn't going to waste them."

It would not have taken more than less than 100 words to deny the allegations. You did not deny them.

"I do plan on addressing some of the subjects mentioned in the article in upcoming flogs and flarts."

You will address them as ineffectively as you address most issues.; September 3, 2013 at 9:23 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"If Mangum gets an attorney who fights for her in good faith, a Motion to Dismiss will be filed based on a fraudulent autopsy report and granted by the judge."

Said attorney would have to establish as fact in court that the Autopsy report was fraudulent. So far you are the only individual with an MD degree who claims it is fraudulent. And you are singularly unqualified to testify as an expert.

"If she gets an attorney who puts Duke and the medical examiner before her, then she will probably be forced to accept a plea deal."

Which means if she gets an attorney who will not present a proper autopsy report as fraudulent.; September 3, 2013 at 9:26 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"Anonymous said...
The fact that duke is hyped as a medical facility with top ranked doctors and care is another factor that makes this one intubation death suspicious to occur at duke with Mr. Daye in conjuction with Ms. Mangum and the lacrosse case."

No it does not.

"How many intubations per year that end in brain death and ultimate death occur at Duke and for what years and what reasons? That would be interesting to note."

Hospitals keep those kinds of statistics. However that information is not available to just anyone. One must establish a need to know so to speak. Uncorroborated allegations of misconduct on the part of Duke do not establish one's need to know.

"A very intelligent comment... and thought-provoking. Intubation statistics are information I would be interested in seeing, too."

I am sure you would like to know, considering the way you have misrepresented data in the past.; September 3, 2013 at 9:30 AM
Lance the Supreme Poster of Enlightenment said...: ""Walt, as hard as I try, it seems as though I just cannot enlighten you. Every doctor who has read the evidence available on my blog site knows that Daye died secondary to an esophageal intubation which resulted in his brain death..."

Sid - I asked before, but I assume you missed it -- can you provide ANY proof for this statement?; September 3, 2013 at 10:09 AM
Anonymous said...: Sidney, why haven't any of your law suits been successful? Name one and give the details....that can be validated.....where your claim was, in fact, found to have merit and where you won your claim in court. Just one.; September 3, 2013 at 10:19 AM
Anonymous said...: Wouldn't that be the same thing, getting a dismissal or accepting a plea deal if it is timed served and indicates in writing the discrepancies of the medical examiners and duke medical records and actions and thus non guilt.

If she has to call on the medical examiner and duke in order to prove she was not responsible for Mr. Daye's death, (as for one thing he could figuratively speaking still be alive today if he were still on life support until his brain possibly recovers from duke's medical malpractice), then won't they have to prove what they say in the reports in order to prove she is quilty of murder?

How are duke and the medical examiner held responsible for their actions if they are proven to be criminally and/or civily unjust?; September 3, 2013 at 10:21 AM
Walt said...: Anonymous at 10:21 wrote: "Wouldn't that be the same thing, getting a dismissal or accepting a plea deal if it is timed served and indicates in writing the discrepancies of the medical examiners and duke medical records and actions and thus non guilt."

To plea guilty, the defendant, in this case Crystal, has to admit to every element of the state's case. It is in fact the same as a guilty verdict by a jury.

"If she has to call on the medical examiner and duke in order to prove she was not responsible for Mr. Daye's death..."

The state has the burden of proof that Crystal was responsible. They will call the Medical Examiner, Dr. Nichols to testify to the cause of death including what lead up to the death. The defense may try to cross examin or during their case call a rebuttal witness. The problem is, the defense has no rebuttal witness nor any material with which to cross examin Dr. Nichols. Sid's opinons do not constitute cross examination material. Nichols will easily refute them, just as Dr. Anonymous does.

"then won't they have to prove what they say in the reports in order to prove she is quilty of murder?"

The reports are evidence upon which the jury will find guilt. Your question though pre-supposes two issues, first that the reports are in error (they are not frauds) and second that somehow the law is that medical malpractice is an intervening cause.

As I wrote above, we now know the defense has no rebuttal witness to Dr. Nichols and no cross examination material. Thank's Sid for breaching the attorney client confidentiality and letting everyone know how defenseless Crystal really is.

Second, the law in North Carolina and the rest of the country is medical malpractice is not an intervening cause. St. v. Welch, St. v. Holsclaw and St. v. Jordan.

Walt-in-Durham; September 3, 2013 at 10:41 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous September 3, 2013 at 10:21 AM:

"Wouldn't that be the same thing, getting a dismissal or accepting a plea deal if it is timed served and indicates in writing the discrepancies of the medical examiners and duke medical records and actions and thus non guilt."

There are no real discrepancies. SIDNEY, who has absolutely no expertise in this area, only imagines there are discrepancies.

"If she has to call on the medical examiner and duke in order to prove she was not responsible for Mr. Daye's death, (as for one thing he could figuratively speaking still be alive today if he were still on life support until his brain possibly recovers from duke's medical malpractice), then won't they have to prove what they say in the reports in order to prove she is quilty of murder?"

Crystal's attorneys would have to impeach the evidence presented. That would take an expert. SIDNEY is no expert. Also, if Reginald Daye were still alive today by being kept on life support, the odds would be overwhelmingly in favor of his not recovering.

"How are duke and the medical examiner held responsible for their actions if they are proven to be criminally and/or civily unjust?"

Someone would have to prove their actions were "criminally and/or civily(sic) unjust. Again that would take testimony from expert witnesses. SIDNEY is no expert.; September 3, 2013 at 10:45 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

How many autopsies have you performed? How many autopsy reports have you written.

To establish yourself as competent to comment expertly on this case, you would have to establish you are an expert. Unless you have performed autopsies and written autopsy reports, you could not establish expertise.; September 3, 2013 at 10:49 AM
Anonymous said...: you know who has absolutely no crediblity except as a bonifide duke supporting public hating hate-crime adled troll patrol member - a prolific one at that?

yup - amazingly your right ...

you; September 3, 2013 at 11:04 AM
Anonymous said...: Howya doin, Victoria? Gone out and bashed any gay people lately? Taken any new English speaking classes, or, are you still working on your GED?; September 3, 2013 at 11:14 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous September 3, 2013 at 11:04 AM

"you know who has absolutely no crediblity except as a bonifide duke supporting public hating hate-crime adled troll patrol member - a prolific one at that?

yup - amazingly your right ...

you"

Boy do I have you p---ed off for calling you out as a fabricator. Keep it up. I am tremendously enjoying your discomfiture.

Meanwhile address the issue of SIDNEY's competence(or lack thereof).

Meanwhile explain how someone who has never done an autopsy in his life, never prepared an autopsy report in his life can be considered an expert on autopsies.; September 3, 2013 at 11:21 AM
A Lawyer said...: If Mangum gets an attorney who fights for her in good faith, a Motion to Dismiss will be filed based on a fraudulent autopsy report and granted by the judge.

There is no such thing as a "motion to dismiss based on a fraudulent autopsy report." That is an issue which can be raised only at trial. No attorney will make such a motion because the law does not allow it.; September 3, 2013 at 11:24 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous September 3, 2013 at 11:04 AM

Who are you?

Someone suggests Victoria Peterson, aka Victory Poo Poo according to Honey Boo Boo(isn't that precious).

You sound a lot like Justice58, aka biased prejudiced racist bigot fanatic know nothing megalomaniac injustice58.

Either way, your comments mean as much as a pig's ability to fly(my apologies for insulting all the pigs in the world).; September 3, 2013 at 11:25 AM
Anonymous said...: A Lawyer September 3, 2013 at 11:24 AM

It does seem that SIDNEY has as much competence as a lawyer as he does a Physician.; September 3, 2013 at 11:27 AM
Anonymous said...: seriously, i was commenting on your credibility like you were commenting on his

and haven't you asked or told him that at least 1000 times that i've seen

or pointed it out to others

if your asking me what i believe
i believe this sheat needs to be proven
duke sucks
thats what i believe; September 3, 2013 at 11:28 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

Do any lawyers agree with you that the autopsy report is fraudulent?; September 3, 2013 at 11:28 AM
Anonymous said...: Where do you suggest Dr. Harr find a lawyer to ask that question of?

duke, nccu, unc ???
or any of their conflicted lawyers throughout the state?
maybe the bar governed by duke (or unc)
yeah, thats the ticket

not

exactly where do you suggest he find this lawyer?; September 3, 2013 at 11:46 AM
Lance the Supreme Poster of Enlightenment said...: "exactly where do you suggest he find this lawyer?"

While no longer practicing, Mike Nifong should be available.; September 3, 2013 at 11:53 AM
Anonymous said...: He needs a lawyer to assist him.

Ms. Mangum needs a lawyer to assist her.

The state needs lawyers with no conflicts of interest with duke who can practice in Durham and protect the public from them.

That is the number one problem.

The next is that if you consider what Durham just stated was their right to do basically whatever they want and not be held accountable for it in the duke student case - and acknowledge that duke is basically running the show in Durham - you start to get the REAL big picture of what duke / durham is.

there is NO justice
for anyone
obviously; September 3, 2013 at 12:01 PM
Lance the Supreme Poster of Enlightenment said...: "He needs a lawyer to assist him.

Ms. Mangum needs a lawyer to assist her."

Do you mean that Sid needs a lawyer to assist or that Mike Nifong needs a lawyer to assist? It's unclear from your statement.

In regards to Ms. Mangum, the court will appoint her a lawyer (or she is free to pay for her own representation).; September 3, 2013 at 12:12 PM
guiowen said...: Mike Nifong is eligible to apply for reinstatement. Sidney tells us that Mike is the only lawyer around (well, except maybe for Cline) who has the courage -- Nifongian courage -- to do what is right.
So why doesn't Nifong apply for reinstatement, and offer his services (pro bono) to Crystal?
What is going on???; September 3, 2013 at 12:14 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous September 3, 2013 at 11:46 AM:

Where do you suggest Dr. Harr find a lawyer to ask that question of?

duke, nccu, unc ???

or any of their conflicted lawyers throughout the state?

maybe the bar governed by duke (or unc)

yeah, thats the ticket

not

exactly where do you suggest he find this lawyer?"

What you admit is that no lawyer agrees that the Autopsy report is fraudulent.; September 3, 2013 at 12:23 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous September 3, 2013 at 11:28 AM:

"seriously, i was commenting on your credibility like you were commenting on his"

I am qualified to comment on SIDNEY's credibility or lack thereof. On the other hand you aren't qualified to comment on whether or not it gets wet whn it rains.

"and haven't you asked or told him that at least 1000 times that i've seen"

You haven't seen anything. That's why you fabricate.

"or pointed it out to others"

You mean pointed out what you are fabricating.

"if your asking me what i believe i believe this sheat needs to be proven

duke sucks

thats what i believe"

So you admit you believe in nothing, which explains why you fabricate.; September 3, 2013 at 12:31 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous September 3, 2013 at 12:01 PM:

"He needs a lawyer to assist him."

You mean SIDNEY who thinks he knows the law better than any lawyer? SIDNEY doesn't think he needs a lawyer for anything.

"Ms. Mangum needs a lawyer to assist her."

She had a number of lawyers to assist her, most of whom she fired.

"The state needs lawyers with no conflicts of interest with duke who can practice in Durham and protect the public from them."

They have them. How about the Lawyers who got Duke to settle with the falsely accused Lacrosse players?

"That is the number one problem."

No it isn't.

"The next is that if you consider what Durham just stated was their right to do basically whatever they want and not be held accountable for it in the duke student case - and acknowledge that duke is basically running the show in Durham - you start to get the REAL big picture of what duke / durham is."

Give examples of when Duke has done this.

"there is NO justice for anyone obviously"

DA NIFONG got justice when he was disbarred and then convicted of criminal contempt.

Crystal got justice when AG Cooper stated she had not been raped.

SIDNEY got justice when his frivolous lawsuit against Duke was dismissed and when the Bar forced him to cease practicing law without a license.

Justice is getting what you deserve. In all the above examples, an individual got what he/she deserved.; September 3, 2013 at 12:39 PM
Anonymous said...: so did duke then, so quit whining about it

thanks; September 3, 2013 at 1:37 PM
kenhyderal said...: A hypothetical question for Walt/Lance. If new evidence comes forward and this cold case gets re-opened, perpetrators are identified by DNA, arrests are made and the individuals are found guilty at trial, does Crystal not have the right to seek damages, from them and from those who have shielded them, for the suffering and loss of reputation she has endured; September 3, 2013 at 2:36 PM
Lance the Supreme Poster of Enlightenment said...: Kenhyderal, while North Carolina has no statute of limitations for felony cases, civil cases regarding loss of reputation would probably fall under the Libel/Slander/Defamation section that covers Civil and Personal Injury Actions.

I believe that the statute of limitations for these types of claims is only 1 year.; September 3, 2013 at 3:03 PM
Anonymous said...: Dear Victoria, you and Sidney have much in common....bigotry, racism, loser, and bullshit. Congratulations. See you around the courthouse, loser.; September 3, 2013 at 3:07 PM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:

"A hypothetical question for Walt/Lance. If new evidence comes forward and this cold case gets re-opened, perpetrators are identified by DNA, arrests are made and the individuals are found guilty at trial, does Crystal not have the right to seek damages, from them and from those who have shielded them, for the suffering and loss of reputation she has endured".

What evidence is there that Crystal was raped at the Lacrosse party on the night of 13/14 March 2006. The word of Kilgo's anonymous lacrosse player friend is not evidence, even if he did exist.; September 3, 2013 at 3:11 PM
Anonymous said...: well, well, well...sidney.....filed a few law suits, have you, bro? how many have you won, bro? come on, Atticus, tell us all about your illustrious legal career. We can't wait. And, oh, by the way, the school where you got your medical training is NOT even among the top 100 ranked medical schools in the country.
how come no residency, bro? how come you got your butt kicked in court, bro? How come you forged a signature, bro? Filed countless nuisance law suits, bro? Name just one of these suits that was found, in court, to be in your favor.; September 3, 2013 at 3:35 PM
Anonymous said...: victoria probably will not appreciate you jumping all over her sheat for things that i've said to you on this blog - probably no more than she deserves any of your other abuse of her

that would probably be considered a hate-crime if you continue since i've asked you to stop

thanks; September 3, 2013 at 3:48 PM
Walt said...: Kenhyeral wrote: "A hypothetical question for Walt/Lance. If new evidence comes forward and this cold case gets re-opened, perpetrators are identified by DNA, arrests are made and the individuals are found guilty at trial, does Crystal not have the right to seek damages, from them and from those who have shielded them, for the suffering and loss of reputation she has endured?"

She most certainly had that right until the statute of limitations ran. As Lance points out, for libel and slander the statute is but one year. For her injuries arising from the tort of battery, she had three years. The discovery rule might save her, if it turns out her attacker was someone who was completely unknown and from a time before the lacross party.

Walt-in-Durham; September 3, 2013 at 4:53 PM
Anonymous said...: ooooo, a hate crime? wow, mistrail recluse/victoria/troll.....whoever you are........here's a message for you........your posts make absolutely no sense, are poorly written, and BOR-ING.; September 3, 2013 at 5:17 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous September 3, 2013 at 3:48 PM:

"victoria probably will not appreciate you jumping all over her sheat for things that i've said to you on this blog - probably no more than she deserves any of your other abuse of her"

So?

"that would probably be considered a hate-crime if you continue since i've asked you to stop"

No it wouldn't.

"thanks"

You're welcome.; September 3, 2013 at 5:20 PM
Anonymous said...: Dr. Harr, is what you posted the actual civil complaint that you filed in court? It says a legal brief.

In addition, and please forgive my lack of knowledge on these things and understand my asking:

is the conclusion or ending where you state what you are requesting missing from what you posted?

Also, what are you asking for in your civil case?

How much time do you have to file admendments to your original filing?

What is the main cause for action? Is that needed in a civil case?

Thank you if you don't mind my asking. I am trying to understand your civil case, and looked for the conclusion to understand what you were asking for specifically, but did not find it.; September 3, 2013 at 5:49 PM
Anonymous said...: Nifong always knew Crystal Mangum had never been raped.A Duke co-ed explained it best at the time - those guys could get any girl they wanted.They would never have to stoop that low.; September 3, 2013 at 6:29 PM
Anonymous said...: why do you perpetuate hate?; September 3, 2013 at 6:44 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous September 3, 2013 at 6:44 PM:

"why do you perpetuate hate?"

Perpetuating the false story that innocent white men raped Crystal on the night of 13/14 March 2006 is perpetuating hate on a grand scale.; September 4, 2013 at 4:28 AM
Anonymous said...: yes, i agree

i got to see a black single mother get torn apart by durham/nc judicial system, duke, and duke supporters (the media, etc.) - because she said she was raped - and NOONE except her (and her rapists) knows if she was raped or not - and she says she was

in addition, i got to see hatred on massive scale of the entire mental health population in NC when the ENTIRE mental health system was attacked, dismantled, and all mental health patients basically denied necessary care for years on end (that hatred continues btw) in the name of 'mental health reform'

i saw hatred of the judicial system
i saw hatred of duke
i saw hatred of nc
i saw hatred of blacks
i saw hatred of whites
i saw hatred of children and their families

and then i get to see you repeating the same thing incessantly on this blog and say you can because you want to perpetuate the hatred and will not stop when asked

stop

thanks; September 4, 2013 at 4:47 AM
Anonymous said...: black single mother get torn apart? Really? REALLY? Let's see..........yep, she's black. Single? well, sorta.... Mother? She burped out three children...but I wouldn't insult actual mothers by applying that term to Sister. Selling it, shacking up, using, being violent in the presence of children.....not exactly mother-worthy.

Torn apart? Hardly. In case you somehow have limited intelligence and cannot remember.....Sister had a record four years before the LAX party. She was pole vaulting and lap dancin' in Raleigh in 2002. But I suppose you and sidney can somehow claim that Rae Evans (aka, Satan) reached back four years into Sister's past and warped the judicial system to make Sister steal a car, drive recklessly, resist arrest, try to run over an officer, and get herself a level three DWI. yeah, that was Evans' fault, sure.

Poor victim Mangum. Poor victim Sidney. Same song, different singer.; September 4, 2013 at 5:12 AM
Anonymous said...: yes, torn apart emotionally, mentally, maliciously, slanderously, obsessively, relentlessly, criminally and civilly unjustly, in front of ALL (didn't matter who - ALL witnessed it)

and - even after being asked to stop

you continue; September 4, 2013 at 5:19 AM
Anonymous said...: "...in addition, i got to see hatred on massive scale of the entire mental health population in NC when the ENTIRE mental health system was attacked..."

That explains a great deal.; September 4, 2013 at 6:25 AM
Walt said...: Anonymous at 4:47 AM wrote: "...because she said she was raped - and NOONE except her (and her rapists) knows if she was raped or not - and she says she was..."

But, we do know who did not rape her, the three men she falsely accused. We also know that 43 other people who attended the lacrosse party did not rape her. Her race, her motherhood, her general character, none of those things excuse a false accusation. If she knows who raped her, she knows it was not Reade Seligman, Colin Finnerty or David Evans. She lied about them.

Crystal may have been raped. I think the evidence (reliable evidence that is) points to five possible rapists who may or may not have assaulted her sometime before the lacrosse party. What I do not know is why she chose to lie about it. That's all on her though.

Walt-in-Durham; September 4, 2013 at 6:37 AM
Lance the Supreme Poster of Enlightenment said...: You can find samples of the Duke Lacrosse case media coverage here.

A quick review found no examples of articles "tearing apart" Crystal Mangum, nor was their any expressions of hatred I could find.; September 4, 2013 at 6:40 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
If Harr were truly an experienced medical doctor he would already know that there are numerous resources, readily available ONLINE, to evaluate Duke University Hospital's medical/surgical care.....in relation to national/regional benchmarks established by such organizations as Medicare, JCAHO, and HCAPS. Any idiot with opposable thumbs can, with a few clicks, find out how Duke compares to its peers.....i.e., to other academic medical centers. And, for those who are apparently too limited to be able to find out for themselves, Duke compares exceptionally well. Intubation rates, unplanned extubations, re-intubation rates, etc.....are recorded meticulously.
I say again, and AGAIN, there is not one shred of evidence that there was ANY incorrect/improper intubation/ventilation/reintubation, etc. Harr has manufactured a fantasy which he repeats often. There is not ONE single physician who agrees with him. Not ONE. We all know it and so does he. He is a racist liar who is a serial law suit filer and predator.
So, Harr, PROVE your allegations......absent proof, you will continue to be what we all already know you are......are racist liar.

Show me, in writing, where someone supports Duke University Hospital's version of events. They can't... because in the true version, Daye was intubated in the esophagus. It's that simple.; September 4, 2013 at 7:17 AM
Lance the Supreme Poster of Enlightenment said...: Sid -- Speaking of "show me", you stated
""Walt, as hard as I try, it seems as though I just cannot enlighten you. Every doctor who has read the evidence available on my blog site knows that Daye died secondary to an esophageal intubation which resulted in his brain death..."

For the 3rd time, can you provide ANY proof to support this statement?; September 4, 2013 at 7:30 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Dr. Harr, is what you posted the actual civil complaint that you filed in court? It says a legal brief.

In addition, and please forgive my lack of knowledge on these things and understand my asking:

is the conclusion or ending where you state what you are requesting missing from what you posted?

Also, what are you asking for in your civil case?

How much time do you have to file admendments to your original filing?

What is the main cause for action? Is that needed in a civil case?

Thank you if you don't mind my asking. I am trying to understand your civil case, and looked for the conclusion to understand what you were asking for specifically, but did not find it.

I used the term "civil complaint" and "legal brief" interchangeably, although I don't know if that is absolutely correct.

I believe that the complaint is posted in its entirety. It consists of about 60 pages.

In my civil case I am asking for a ruling in my favor with regards to Duke University's discrimination, I am asking that Brian Meehan be allowed his day in court, and I'm seeking compensation for my oversight work as a defacto regulator overseeing autopsy report of a state medical examiner.

Hope the above will help you better understand my complaint. Feel free to ask questions... I will do my best with answers, although I am at a great disadvantage being barred from the Federal Courthouse law library.; September 4, 2013 at 7:40 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous September 4, 2013 at 4:47 AM:

"yes, i agree"

With what? That you are a hate monger? If so that would be a change. You would be stating a truth rather than fabricating.

"i got to see a black single mother get torn apart by durham/nc judicial system, duke, and duke supporters (the media, etc.) - because she said she was raped - and NOONE except her (and her rapists) knows if she was raped or not - and she says she was"

The people accused of raping her said no. Crystal was not raped. There was no evidence, forensic or medical that she was raped. She got torn apart by the Durham/NC justice system because she falsely accused innocent men of raping her.

"in addition, i got to see hatred on massive scale of the entire mental health population in NC when the ENTIRE mental health system was attacked, dismantled, and all mental health patients basically denied necessary care for years on end (that hatred continues btw) in the name of 'mental health reform'"

Document you actually saw that.

"i saw hatred of the judicial system
i saw hatred of duke
i saw hatred of nc
i saw hatred of blacks
i saw hatred of whites
i saw hatred of children and their families"

If that is true, how does further hate mongering do anything for the problem.

"and then i get to see you repeating the same thing incessantly on this blog and say you can because you want to perpetuate the hatred and will not stop when asked"

How about you stop supporting a lie, that Crystal was raped by white men.

"stop"

I would stop if you would stop the hate mongering.

"thanks"

You are welcome. Now stop your hate mongering and fabrications.

PS: Your statements that only Crystal and her rapists know if she was raped is false. Since there was no rape, there were no rapists.; September 4, 2013 at 7:49 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous September 4, 2013 at 5:19 AM:

"yes, torn apart emotionally, mentally, maliciously, slanderously, obsessively, relentlessly, criminally and civilly unjustly, in front of ALL (didn't matter who - ALL witnessed it)

and - even after being asked to stop

you continue"

Crystal could have avoided all this had she told the truth in the first place, that she had not been raped.

I would stop if you would stop pushing a lie, that Crystal was raped.

Kind of typical of a fabricator to call telling the real truth a hate crime.; September 4, 2013 at 7:53 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"Show me, in writing, where someone supports Duke University Hospital's version of events. They can't... because in the true version, Daye was intubated in the esophagus. It's that simple."

You duck the issue.

You say that Duke's version of events is wrong. You are asserting. It is your obligation to prove your assertions. Can you cite any physician other than yourself (and you are hardly a competent physician) who supports your version of the events.

That you claim that Duke has to disprove your allegations is de facto proof that you can not prove your allegations.; September 4, 2013 at 7:59 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"Show me, in writing, where someone supports Duke University Hospital's version of events. They can't... because in the true version, Daye was intubated in the esophagus. It's that simple."

Show me in writing the opinion of any physician who accepts your version of events. You assert. You must prove.; September 4, 2013 at 8:01 AM
Walt said...: Sid wrote: "I used the term "civil complaint" and "legal brief" interchangeably, although I don't know if that is absolutely correct."

A complaint is the pleading that initiates a civil suit. FRCP 3. By the way, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure are not locked away in the Federal Court law library. They are available for free online. A brief is a document that explains the legal reasons for a particular motion.

"In my civil case I am asking for a ruling in my favor with regards to Duke University's discrimination,...

A vexatious and frivolous request as you have already had your day in court on that issue and lost. Look for a rule 11 sanction.

"...I am asking that Brian Meehan be allowed his day in court,..."

Meehan has had his day in court as well. However, Sid has no standing to ask for such. Indeed, this part of the complaint probably violates the State Court injunction against Sid practicing law.

"... and I'm seeking compensation for my oversight work as a defacto regulator overseeing autopsy report of a state medical examiner."

Another cause for which you have no standing in court.

"...I am at a great disadvantage being barred from the Federal Courthouse law library."

You are not barred from using the Supreme Court's law library unless you misbehaved there and have not disclosed such. The Supreme Court's law library is located in downtown Raleigh and is very complete. Given your previous legal research, I doubt that you have even cracked open the first law book, let alone darkened the door of a law library, but they are available if you actually cared to look.

Walt-in-Durham; September 4, 2013 at 8:26 AM
Lance the Supreme Poster of Enlightenment said...: Sid has shown that, despite his 1 class at Wake Technical, he is unable to perform the simplest of google searches. Of course he's never read the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.; September 4, 2013 at 8:40 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"I used the term "civil complaint" and "legal brief" interchangeably, although I don't know if that is absolutely correct.

I believe that the complaint is posted in its entirety. It consists of about 60 pages.

In my civil case I am asking for a ruling in my favor with regards to Duke University's discrimination,"

There was no discrimination on the part of Duke.

"I am asking that Brian Meehan be allowed his day in court,"

He had his day in court.

"and I'm seeking compensation for my oversight work as a defacto regulator overseeing autopsy report of a state medical examiner."

Here is real hubris. SIDNEY who never achieved board certification, who never performed an autopsy in his life, wanting compensation for making an uncorroborated allegation that Dr. Nichols' autopsy report is fraudulent. SIDNEY, you have to prove your allegation. How are you going to prove the autopsy report is fraudulent. Saying a 5th Grader could see it is fraudulent is not proof.

"Hope the above will help you better understand my complaint. Feel free to ask questions... I will do my best with answers, although I am at a great disadvantage being barred from the Federal Courthouse law library."

What is there to misunderstand. For the umpteenth time in your life you file a frivolous lawsuit that will get bounced out of the system before it ever comes to trial. It is res ipsa loquitur that this suit has no merit.; September 4, 2013 at 9:07 AM
Anonymous said...: mistrail-recluse.......troller........keep on with the crybaby whine about Sister. It's truly funny.; September 4, 2013 at 9:26 AM
Anonymous said...: Another junk law suit, filed by a serial lunatic who tries to leech off society by claiming victimhood. Harr, sad little man.
If Mangum were raped that night, or perhaps in the 24 hours or so before the LAX party, I'd sure like to hear her admit to it.......which, of course, she never will. She told her dance partner that she intended to make some money off those (rich) white boys.....claiming injury/rape. And, of course, she worked the system, avoiding jail for her drunkenness, by claiming rape....and being delivered, instead, to Duke ED.
Her lies and Nifong's amoral vulgar corruption could have sent innocent men to prison. Thank god it didn't happen.
Seems to me Mangum will be damn lucky to get a plea deal....IF she actually does.; September 4, 2013 at 10:03 AM
kenhyderal said...: Walt said: "If she knows who raped her, she knows it was not Reade Seligman, Colin Finnerty or David Evans. She lied about them.".......Crystal only knows that she was raped by a group of white males after being drugged. She had no idea who they were; only that they were there present. Her recollection of the assault was one of a series of terrifying images. She was led to believe that three of her assailants were present in the flawed photo line-up she was shown and she did her best to pick them out. She knows now that she mistakenly identified Finnerty and Seligman because they had alibis. All of the Team members provided DNA, including many who were no where near the party. But this party did not consist solely of Players. There were dozens of other unidentified party attendees besides the two non-Players who happened to show up in confiscated photographs. No definitive list of who was there was ever developed and those Players who were there at the advice of Counsel refused to provide lists of attendees.; September 4, 2013 at 10:04 AM
Anonymous said...: Walt,

Ms.Mangum did not lie about being raped by those three.

The Durham judicial system and Duke did.

She was never asked anything again until almost a year later when the case finally landed in the AG office.

This is what I saw from the news.

She was sick, she said she was raped, Duke pushed the rape on its own students for their own political, media, and attention in the form of being pitied in the end by their intended donor targets, as well as election, and even more nefariously medical / mental health manipulation and control of the entire state of NC (and the USA if they have their way).

Durham judicial system enabled and made the farce of justice possible.

Duke people and their supporters and the Durham judicial system keep attacking everyone about it.

Instead of taking the blame for what they did and correcting the issues so no more harm is done to any - they dig deeper and deeper and keep harming more and more people - because they hogwashed to many the first time around - and think they can continue unchecked and unstoppable now.

What about that do you not agree with if you do not mind answering thoughtfully one more time.; September 4, 2013 at 10:13 AM
kenhyderal said...: Lance said: "A quick review found no examples of articles "tearing apart" Crystal Mangum, nor was their any expressions of hatred I could find"...... Articles maybe not but the blogs do so "in spades" Day after day year after year; this one, Duke Lacrosse Liestoppers, Durham in Wonderland etc. The Anonymous poster, describing Crystal's unjust treatment and the continuing hatred she endures has got it exactly right; September 4, 2013 at 10:26 AM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:

"Crystal only knows that she was raped by a group of white males after being drugged."

Correction: Crystal lied about being raped by a group of white males.

"She had no idea who they were; only that they were there present. Her recollection of the assault was one of a series of terrifying images."

Crystal has no idea of who raped her because no one raped her.

"She was led to believe that three of her assailants were present in the flawed photo line-up she was shown and she did her best to pick them out. She knows now that she mistakenly identified Finnerty and Seligman because they had alibis."

Yet she identified them with 100% certainty as assailants. She lied.

"All of the Team members provided DNA, including many who were no where near the party. But this party did not consist solely of Players. There were dozens of other unidentified party attendees besides the two non-Players who happened to show up in confiscated photographs."

The only one who claims that he has a friend on the Lacrosse team who witnessed the rape. In the more than 7 years since the alleged rape, Kilgo has disappeared and there has been no hard evidence that this anonymous Lacrosse player exists.

"No definitive list of who was there was ever developed and those Players who were there at the advice of Counsel refused to provide lists of attendees."

Everyone who attended the party was identified and excluded as a perpetrator. For that matter the forensic evidence, i.e. there was no evidence of rape on the rape kit, no physical findings diagnostic of rape, established that no rape occurred.

KENNY thinks it credible that Lacrosse team members would witness a rape and then cover it up when the consequences would be that innocent team member would be indicted.

KENNY also omits something important about the improper lineup, that corrupt DA NIFONG had the lineup conducted because he wanted to indict and charge members of the Lacrosse team. KENNY has called corrupt DA NIFONG a fighter for justice.; September 4, 2013 at 10:36 AM
Anonymous said...: since the AG said there was insufficient evidence, he could not determine if there was a rape or not because he claimed insufficient evidence in order to do so - not that no rape happened

you continue to discredit and repeat incessantly about this one issue - why?; September 4, 2013 at 10:44 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous September 4, 2013 at 10:13 AM:

"Walt,

Ms.Mangum did not lie about being raped by those three."

Yes she did

"The Durham judicial system and Duke did."

The people who said that a rape had taken place were the liars.

"She was never asked anything again until almost a year later when the case finally landed in the AG office."

She saw photo lineups of members of the Lacrosse team within 3 weeks of making her allegations. Then she saw the final, improperly conducted photo array. As a result of that lineup, in the first weekof April 2006, she lied when she identified the three innocent LaCrosse players as her assailants.

"This is what I saw from the news."

This is what you pass off as what you saw from the papers.

"She was sick, she said she was raped, Duke pushed the rape on its own students for their own political, media, and attention in the form of being pitied in the end by their intended donor targets, as well as election, and even more nefariously medical / mental health manipulation and control of the entire state of NC (and the USA if they have their way)."

You have no idea of what you are talking about.

Durham judicial system enabled and made the farce of justice possible.

"Duke people and their supporters and the Durham judicial system keep attacking everyone about it.

Instead of taking the blame for what they did and correcting the issues so no more harm is done to any - they dig deeper and deeper and keep harming more and more people - because they hogwashed to many the first time around - and think they can continue unchecked and unstoppable now."

What Duke should have taken the blame for was pandering to the race baiters who wanted Lacrosse players wrongfully convicted. They never have.

"What about that do you not agree with if you do not mind answering thoughtfully one more time."

I am not Walt.; September 4, 2013 at 10:45 AM
Lance the Supreme Poster of Enlightenment said...: "Articles maybe not but the blogs do so "in spades" Day after day year after year; this one, Duke Lacrosse Liestoppers, Durham in Wonderland etc. The Anonymous poster, describing Crystal's unjust treatment and the continuing hatred she endures has got it exactly right"

I read this blog and D-I-W, and I've yet to read a blog entry vy the authors "tearing apart" Crystal Mangum. Some may have exposed unpleasant truths, but that's simply not the same thing.

I think you are probably referring to the responses that are written, rather than the blog entries themselves.

I don't read Liestoppers, so I cannot comment on that content.; September 4, 2013 at 10:45 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous September 4, 2013 at 10:13 AM:

Maybe you would like to explain the following. I have put this to SIDNEY and to KENHYDERAL and to Injustice58 when she was posting her venom, and they all duck the issue.

Crystal alleged a violent brutal rape in which multiple males penetrated her and ejaculated inside and on her. They did not use condoms.

In that kind of rape, the perpetrators would have left evidence. Forensic testing of the rape kit revealed no evidence of a rape. Most significantly, the kit tested negative for acid phosphatase, a component of semen. When DNASI did their thing they did a more sensitive test for semen which was also negative. They did STR testing for he Y chromosome and the only DNA recovered from Crystal's person did not match the DNA of any member of the Lacrosse team, any party attendee.

How could such a rape have occurred and not leave any evidence?

KENHYDERAL's claim that there were unidentified attendees at the party is, to say the least, a very tenuous claim. He says he was told by Kilgo, who used to post on this blog, that he had a friend, a member of the Lacrosse team, who witnessed a rape. When Kilgo was posting on J4N he showed he knew nothing about the Lacrosse case. His anonymous Lacrosse player friend has not surfaced in over 7 years.

So what evidence do you have that Crystal was raped. Crystal's multiple mutually conflicting stories are uncorroborated allegations, not evidence.

Again, I am not Walt.; September 4, 2013 at 10:54 AM
Anonymous said...: if others cannot answers your incessant detailed questions about rape, then I assure, I cannot either

your a troll
blah
(yes, now i'm imagining the hp as a goat blahing down at you - it must have got bored with ohmming - or something)

if i was crystal - i'd go after your ass for continuing on like you do - harming all others because of your incessant hate-crimes against her; September 4, 2013 at 11:02 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous September 4, 2013 at 10:44 AM:

"since the AG said there was insufficient evidence, he could not determine if there was a rape or not because he claimed insufficient evidence in order to do so - not that no rape happened"

You lie. What AG Cooper said was there was NO evidence of a rape and that he and his investigators believed the three accused were innocent.

"you continue to discredit and repeat incessantly about this one issue - why?"

Because there never was any evidence that Crystal was raped. What evidence can you offer that Crystal was raped?

Here is a quote from AG Cooper's statement, with emphasis added:

"We believe that these cases were the result of a tragic rush to accuse and a failure to verify serious allegations. Based on the significant inconsistencies between the evidence and the various accounts given by the accusing witness, WE BELIEVE THESE THREE INDIVIDUALS ARE INNOCENT OF THESE CHARGES."

Link to AG Coopeer's statement:
http://www.cnn.com/2007/LAW/04/11/cooper.transcript/

Notice he did not say only that there was not enough evidence to proceed. He said the accused were INNOCENT!!!

So far as SIDNEY is concerned, if he does not like the AG's statement, he can choke on it.; September 4, 2013 at 11:12 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous September 4, 2013 at 11:02 AM:

"if others cannot answers your incessant detailed questions about rape, then I assure, I cannot either"

In other words you can not back up any of your statements with facts.

"your a troll"

You are entitled to your opinion.

"blah"

Meaningless babble.

"(yes, now i'm imagining the hp as a goat blahing down at you - it must have got bored with ohmming - or something)"

You have a very unimaginative imagination. That must be why you fabricate so much

"if i was crystal - i'd go after your ass for continuing on like you do - harming all others because of your incessant hate-crimes against her"

So now your are going to fabricate charges of hate crimes against me, just like Crystal fabricated the charges of rape.; September 4, 2013 at 11:18 AM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:

"Articles maybe not but the blogs do so "in spades" Day after day year after year; this one, Duke Lacrosse Liestoppers, Durham in Wonderland etc."

There are no such articles anywhere except in you deficient imagination.

"The Anonymous poster, describing Crystal's unjust treatment and the continuing hatred she endures has got it exactly right".

This from someone who believes in Kilgo's imaginary, non existent Lacrosse player friend.; September 4, 2013 at 11:23 AM
Anonymous said...: Run your mouth till it falls out of your head, poster. Mangum lied. Period. She and her scumbag DA got caught in their lies. Period.; September 4, 2013 at 11:28 AM
Anonymous said...: you are a rape baitor

you talk about it all the time

you talk about even though you are comitting hate crimes against crystal every time you do it

all your writings are meaningless - although i have tried to read them for meaning - you only refute - and only provide or are interested in facts and details about rape

you continue to bully even when asked directly not to

you continue to commit hate-crimes and feel you can get away with it, so therefore, you continue even when asked not to

trolls and bullies - do not answer my posts again and do not comment on me again - i am not here for you to bully non stop - and have asked you to cease and desist immediately - and that includes you too

thanks; September 4, 2013 at 11:34 AM
Anonymous said...: Hilarious, the 11.34 wants us mean and evil people to stop pickin on its little feelings....awwwwwww.
Here's a suggestion, mistrail-recluse/victoria/whoever you have the misfortunre to be..........get yourself a copy of "Rational Thought for Dummies". Read it.
Bless your heart.......; September 4, 2013 at 11:46 AM
Anonymous said...: i am blessed not to be you

and i am very rationally minded, so am grateful for that (that i'm not you); September 4, 2013 at 11:49 AM
Anonymous said...: how sweet......the troll is blessed.

Hey, walt, who picked up the Mangum case this time around? I have not heard as yet.
Were the charges against Shella dropped? Involving him getting, uh, caught up in a moment of "fun for hire", as they say? Sounded like a big deal over nothing.

Vann ought to get put his case files on a rolling cart and wheel it in/out of the court room. What a circus. Only in Durham. Glad to know the judge is sticking to the Nov. timeframe.; September 4, 2013 at 12:43 PM
A Lawyer said...: To: Anonymous at 11:34

Commenting on an internet forum about an issue of public concern is protected by the First Amendment and is not any kind of crime; certainly not a "hate crime." Your comments merely illustrate your lack of knowledge about the law.; September 4, 2013 at 1:41 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous September 4, 2013 at 11:34 AM:

"you are a rape baitor"

No I'm not.

"you talk about it all the time"

I talk about how Crystal falsely accused innocent men of rape. Since the accusation was false, thre was no rape and no one is baiting anyone over this.

"you talk about even though you are comitting hate crimes against crystal every time you do it"

It is not a crime to point out the truth, that Crystal lied about being raped.

"all your writings are meaningless - although i have tried to read them for meaning - you only refute - and only provide or are interested in facts and details about rape"

I am writing about someone making a false accusation of rape.

"you continue to bully even when asked directly not to"

No I don't. I point out a truth which you deny. If you want me to cease, stop lying about Crystal being raped.

"you continue to commit hate-crimes and feel you can get away with it, so therefore, you continue even when asked not to"

How is it a hate crime to point out a truth. Falsely accusing innocent men of rape, now there is a real hate crime.

"trolls and bullies - do not answer my posts again and do not comment on me again - i am not here for you to bully non stop - and have asked you to cease and desist immediately - and that includes you too"

Stop supporting Crystal's lies and I will have nothing to post about.

"thanks"

You are most welcome.; September 4, 2013 at 1:55 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous September 4, 2013 at 11:49 AM

"i am blessed not to be you

and i am very rationally minded, so am grateful for that (that i'm not you)"

If you believe that, you probably believe Adolf Hitler was a great friend to the Jewish people.; September 4, 2013 at 1:57 PM
Anonymous said...: seriously, that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever, since i'm stating what i feel

you don't acknowledge other's feelings do you - i have seen that a LOT from duke people - like from the crazies - as simple example; September 4, 2013 at 2:18 PM
Anonymous said...: prove, with exact quotes and times of quotes (from posts on this blog) where i have supported crystal's or anyone elses lies

i have asked questions to better understand

i have explained exactly why i did not like duke, and have been trolled and bullied and had hate-crimes commited by you and others ever since

i have asked for specific details to understand the current case, and stated my understanding of the lacrosse case, which has not changed

other than that - i have asked you to stop bullying and trolling and committing hate-crimes (to no avail apparently) - as well as others

so -- stop

thanks

and, just to be fair, don't accuse me of anything else without providing exact quotes and reasons for that - and if you do it once and i don't reply - don't keep doing it - because then you are being a troll and committing a hate-crime, because this case is NOT going away, and because i told you to stop; September 4, 2013 at 2:28 PM
A Lawyer said...: hate-crimes

You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means.; September 4, 2013 at 2:48 PM
Lance the Supreme Poster of Enlightenment said...: Inconceivable.....; September 4, 2013 at 3:03 PM
Anonymous said...: what exactly about the use of the term hate-crime is what you state is something i don't think it means what you think it means A Lawyer, if you don't mind my asking?

thanks; September 4, 2013 at 3:10 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous September 4, 2013 at 2:18 PM:

"seriously, that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever, since i'm stating what i feel"

I guess you can't understand metaphor. Intelligent people can.

"you don't acknowledge other's feelings do you - i have seen that a LOT from duke people - like from the crazies - as simple example"

Give specific examples of what you have taken from Duke people.; September 4, 2013 at 3:12 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous September 4, 2013 at 2:28 PM:

"prove, with exact quotes and times of quotes (from posts on this blog) where i have supported crystal's or anyone elses lies"

Are you denying that you have said Ceystal had been raped? If you have posted that opinion, you are supporting Crystal's lies. Crystal lied about being raped.

"i have asked questions to better understand"

About what?

"i have explained exactly why i did not like duke, and have been trolled and bullied and had hate-crimes commited by you and others ever since"

No. You, who have insisted on having specific documentation of your suppor of Crystal's lies, say you will provide no facts to back up the allegations you make about Duke.

"i have asked for specific details to understand the current case, and stated my understanding of the lacrosse case, which has not changed"

The most specific details I have given you is that AG Cooper, after investigating the alleged crime, found no evidence to corroborate the crime and dismissed charges against the defendants saying that he and his investigators believed the defendants were innocent.

"other than that - i have asked you to stop bullying and trolling and committing hate-crimes (to no avail apparently) - as well as others"

How can I stop doing something I am not doing?

"so -- stop"

Stop supporting Crystal's lies.

"thanks"

You are most welcome.

"and, just to be fair, don't accuse me of anything else without providing exact quotes and reasons for that - and if you do it once and i don't reply - don't keep doing it - because then you are being a troll and committing a hate-crime, because this case is NOT going away, and because i told you to stop"

How about you provide documentation of the allegations you have been making.; September 4, 2013 at 3:21 PM
Anonymous said...: the crazies screaming at the bb player that he was an orphan when his parents had just died

you use a lot of their tactics btw; September 4, 2013 at 3:22 PM
Anonymous said...: for the allegations discussion - go back to the last blog discussion

remember?

thanks; September 4, 2013 at 3:23 PM
Lance the Supreme Poster of Enlightenment said...: Anonymous @ 3:10 pm
From the FBI:

"A hate crime is a traditional offense like murder, arson, or vandalism with an added element of bias. For the purposes of collecting statistics, Congress has defined a hate crime as a “criminal offense against a person or property motivated in whole or in part by an offender’s bias against a race, religion, disability, ethnic origin or sexual orientation.” Hate itself is not a crime—and the FBI is mindful of protecting freedom of speech and other civil liberties."

By definition nothing our other posters here have done can be considered a hate crime . Make sense?; September 4, 2013 at 3:24 PM
Walt said...: Anonymous at 10:13 AM wrote: "Walt,

Ms.Mangum did not lie about being raped by those three."

In fact, she did. At the last lineup, she said with "100% certainty" that Seligman, Finnerty and Evans raped her. That was, in fact a lie. She told multiple versions of how the alleged rape happened. Contradictory versions. At least some of those have to be untrue. The evidence suggests that all of her versions are untrue.

"The Durham judicial system and Duke did."

I think just about everyone is in agreement that Duke through its various spokespeople and through it's president lied.

The Durham judicial system is more complicated. Did the Durham Police lie? Some did. Certainly CPL Addison, SGT Gottlieb and Investigator Hyman did. But, other police officers told the truth.

Did the judges presiding over the case lie? That's more difficult to say. Judge Hudson drug his feet dealing with the motion to dismiss Nifong from the prosecution. Judge Smith did a good job. One Superior Court Judge signed off on the NTO that was clearly beyond the bounds of the statute.

Of course Mike Nifong lied. He lied in his press conference describing how the attack happened. He lied to the court about exculpatory evidence. Take your pick, plenty of bad actors in the judicial system on this case. But, I think Judge Smith did a decent job. I think the defense lawyers did a great job. They too are part of the system.

"She was never asked anything again until almost a year later when the case finally landed in the AG office."

But, she was. In fact Crystal was interviewed numerous times by the DPD and the DA's office from March through December 2006.

"She was sick, she said she was raped,..."

There was no evidence she was raped. No semen, no DNA from anyone at the lacrosse party. No injuries consistent with a rape.

"Duke pushed the rape on its own students for their own political, media, and attention in the form of being pitied in the end by their intended donor targets, as well as election, and even more nefariously medical / mental health manipulation and control of the entire state of NC (and the USA if they have their way)."

Without question Duke did blame their own students. Beyond that, the motives you ascribe to Duke are your own. There is no proof of motive. That's what I had hoped the various lawsuits and the Wichert commission might figure out. So far, they have not.

"Durham judicial system enabled and made the farce of justice possible."

To the extent Mike Nifong was central to that premise, yes it did. One very unethical prosecutor, a couple of unethical cops and a person willing to lie abused the judicial system, taking complete advantage of the flaws therein to make a farce of justice. Only a few brilliant defense lawyers and one courageous member of the Bar's committee on grievances stopped a miscarriage of justice.

"Duke people and their supporters and the Durham judicial system keep attacking everyone about it.

Instead of taking the blame for what they did and correcting the issues so no more harm is done to any - they dig deeper and deeper and keep harming more and more people - because they hogwashed to many the first time around - and think they can continue unchecked and unstoppable now."

You are being very confusing. I don't respond to wild generalities beyond saying you need to be specific.

Walt-in-Durham; September 4, 2013 at 3:48 PM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: "...Crystal only knows that she was raped by a group of white males after being drugged."

There is no evidence to support that newest version of events.

"She had no idea who they were; only that they were there present. Her recollection of the assault was one of a series of terrifying images."

Another new version of events. That makes version 8 or 9, I've lost count.
"She was led to believe that three of her assailants were present in the flawed photo line-up she was shown and she did her best to pick them out."

The problem is she lied about the people she picked. If she didn't know, then the truthful answer, no matter how suggestive the lineup, is "I don't know."

"But this party did not consist solely of Players. There were dozens of other unidentified party attendees besides the two non-Players who happened to show up in confiscated photographs. No definitive list of who was there was ever developed and those Players who were there at the advice of Counsel refused to provide lists of attendees."

You will need to provide evidence to support that claim. The police reports say otherwise.

Walt-in-Durham; September 4, 2013 at 3:54 PM
Walt said...: Anonymous at 12:43 PM wrote: "Hey, walt, who picked up the Mangum case this time around?"

I think Woody Vann got stuck with it.

Walt-in-Durham; September 4, 2013 at 4:00 PM
Anonymous said...: So, We had Vann I, then Son of Vann, and now, we have Vann goes to Camp!!!! The Woody Triology. Poor Woody....gotta be asking himself, why me, lord? The man has done his best. I hope he does as effective a job of kicking Harr's butt to the curb as Holmes as done.; September 4, 2013 at 4:27 PM
Anonymous said...: No white man would ever want to have sex with Crystal Mangum much less go to all the trouble of raping her in a bathroom that was too small.In general white men don't find black women attractive.; September 4, 2013 at 4:37 PM
Anonymous said...: Walt, would the last post be considered a hate-crime in NC?

What do you think?

I know you have asked that person to stop doing that before.

That is a prime example of some of the abuse i keep being asked to document and prove - which seems silly to me - since it happens all the time on this blog - and it was not difficult to document at all.; September 4, 2013 at 4:45 PM
A Lawyer said...: Anonymous at 4:37: Your post is disgusting, racist and blatantly untrue in many ways. Rape is a crime of violence, not lust.

Anonymous at 4:45: No, it's not a hate crime, because it's not a crime at all. It's free speech (albeit disgustingly racist free speech).; September 4, 2013 at 5:05 PM
Walt said...: Anonymous at 4:37, that comment has no place here, or anywhere else.

Anonymous at 4:45 wrote: "Walt, would the last post [4:37 PM] be considered a hate-crime in NC?"

No. That last comment is protected speech under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and Article I, Section 14 of the North Carolina Constitution.

In general, NC provides for a sentence enhancement for a crime that is motivated by hate. NCGS 14-3. Thus, you would need to show an underlying crime. For example murder, battery, burglary, vandalism. That is not present here.

NCGS 14-12.14 outlaws dressing like the Ku Klux Klan. That is not present here.

NCGS 14-401.14 outlaws assault based on race, class or creed. I doubt the constitutionality of that statute, but that's why the sentence enhancement in 14-3. Again, that's not the case here.

There are various statutes in the NC General Statutes that make it a crime to vandalize different places because of hate. Again, that's not the case here.

Walt-in-Durham; September 4, 2013 at 5:15 PM
Anonymous said...: Walt,

Of your answers to my understanding of the lacrosse case, since you agreed and expanded upon most of what I said, i wanted to thank you for that since it helps me to better understand the case. I probably should read one of the books written about it. Which one(s) do you suggest? Have you read it/them? I was so tired of the case after awhile, i skipped parts of it (like the guys talking on cnn, etc.), but listened to the AG end, and picked up basically what the AG said and tried to understand that.

About Ms. Mangum and charges or accusations and lies or whatever. How is anybody to believe anything about what she told the cops in the lineup or whenever, since all of them were proven to be lying and not credible?

In addition, Ms. Mangum was sick, (and pregnant), and being torn to pieces in the media by duke and their supporters, so ... again - where is the understanding of that? Any lawyer would use that in her defense or support I would think.

It is hard to understand why all was or is being pinned on her in such abusive ways that ultimately harm many, and you watch duke people laugh about that without any consideration at all for anything except duke or their connections to duke, and i know you will say prove it and i will wonder why you don't see it because most do and are truly sick of it, and ... it is a big joke to many it seems that these newer issues, (which are very serious to all if you think deeply enough about it), are faced by her in a manner that she can't even get a lawyer do adequately represent her because of duke in durham.

Why is this (that many who seem to be connected to duke appear to find the whole thing amusing)?

What do you think the motive was then? What do you think it is now?; September 4, 2013 at 5:31 PM
Anonymous said...: There is no evidence that Mangum was sick when she lied about being raped by the lax guys. To my knowledge, there is no evidence she was pregnant at that time, either. There were no findings that she was pregnant when she was examined at the Duke ED. She did not state that she was pregnant at that time, nor did she tell Levicy that she was pregnant at that time.

Her story changed so many times........she claimed, variously, that three , six, nine, fifteen, and three (again) raped her. She claimed they did NOT use comdoms. She claimed they DID use condoms. She claimed they held her suspended in mid air in a bathroom the size of a small phone booth. She claimed at least of them ejaculated IN and ON her. (no DNA/semen from them was found IN or ON her). She changed her story about the time of the NON-rape. Numerous other changes.....far too many to note here. A complete LIE, through and through.

All it took was Mangum the Liar plus Nifong the scumbag opportunistic liar....three ignorant hick police officers......a corrupt lab operator......and boom......

By the way, rumor has it that Linwood is at it...yet again.......making an ass of himself.; September 4, 2013 at 5:39 PM
Anonymous said...: Actually, the media did a complete hatchet job on the lax guys....not on Mangum. Poster, have you never heard of Nancy Grace, Wendy the ditz, msnbc, the Herald Swamp, the IndyFreak, the N and Awful? They assumed.....from the get-go that the LAX guys were guilty......that the evil rich white boys had raped the poor black single mother, just working her way thorugh school. The 88 at Duke? The pot bangers? Where were you, poster? Dead? Stoned out of your mind?
Jesse J, and the Black Panthers.....all supporting the santified Sister, the poor thing who could have been somebody's sister? Please.
It was NOT until the truth came out and the lies AND the liars were shown to be the pond scum they all were.......that the media even remotely gave a fair shake to the LAX guys. To this day, Rev Jesse and airhead Wahneeeeeema have never had the decency to apologize to the LAX guys.
Mangum has NEVER EVER been held accountable for what she did. NEVER. But we all know the truth.....and she can sit with it for the rest of her life.; September 4, 2013 at 6:19 PM
Anonymous said...: How long before Mangum goes back to her pole vaulting profession? Wouldn't be cool for her to get caught breaking the law at this point, would it.....so perhaps she is getting support some other way. One wonders?.............perhaps she is living in sidney's basement......or Kenny Hissy send her play money.; September 4, 2013 at 6:22 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous @5:31 asks: Why is this (that many who seem to be connected to duke appear to find the whole thing amusing)?

I have never found anyone who finds the lacrosse case to be amusing.

I do not find Mangum's false accusations to be amusing. I find them despicable.

I do not find Nifong's attempt to frame three young men to be amusing. I find it despicable.

I do not find the co-operation of the DPD in the frame attempt to be amusing. I find it despicable.

I do not find Meehan's and DNASI's willingness to violate firm and industry practice to further the frame to be amusing. I find it despicable.

I do not find Levicy's unsupported statements made to the DPD to be amusing. I find them despicable.

I do not find the Gang of 88's attempt to use Nifong's attempted frame to further their race, gender, class agenda to be amusing. I find it despicable.

I do not find Brodhead's pandering to be amusing. I find it despicable.

I do not find the media's horrendously biased coverage, particularly of the initial phase of the case, to be amusing. I find it despicable.

Finally, I do not find your disingenuous questions and posts to be amusing. I find them...; September 4, 2013 at 6:39 PM
Anonymous said...: Amen, 6:39....and Amen! Ding ding ding.....as walt would say.......you win best post of the week!!!! Well said..........; September 4, 2013 at 7:06 PM

«Oldest ‹Older 1 – 200 of 329 Newer› Newest»

Sunday, September 1, 2013

Team player or independent?

329 comments:

Facebook Badge

Subscribe!

Labels

Blog Archive

About Me