justice4nifong: Team player or independent?

Sunday, September 1, 2013

Team player or independent?

Click panels above to access sites

329 comments:

«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 329 of 329

Anonymous said...: and i found you to be someone who will basically blame me for all that you find dispicable because i question the things you despise to understand them better, and find that i despise the same things as you in this matter

so - why do you despise my questions to understand better then? was it because i also mention other things about duke that leads me to not like them?; September 4, 2013 at 7:36 PM
Anonymous said...: no, i do not find duke interesting enough to read all the national news about them about all the lax players and blah blah blah so stop fracking blaming for not kissing your fucking victimized immature asses

hows that

make fun of it; September 4, 2013 at 7:41 PM
Lance the Supreme Poster of Enlightenment said...: Are the anonymous posts from @ 7:36 and @ 7:41 from the same person? I'm sorry, but if so, it appears your arguing with yourself.

For clarity's sake, I suggest you give yourself some kind of name (simply use the Name/URL option instead of selecting "anonymous") when posting.
Thanks.; September 4, 2013 at 7:57 PM
Anonymous said...: fy lance

why don't you go fucking struggle to cope with kids the same age as these guys blaming someone concerned about a patient dying at duke hospital with essentially the whole stupid lacrosse case simply because they ask questions about dukes medical services because they are stupid fucking struggling with people a hell of a lot more mature than those students cope with a hell of a lot more life crippling issues than those students (because of and at duke)

try it

see if you appreciate being blamed for not watching those lax kids crying on cnn at the same time - you probably wouldn't either

see if you are so enlightened then

laugh; September 4, 2013 at 8:13 PM
Anonymous said...: I find it very hard to respect duke because they have not fired Dr. Broadhead and whoever else for their parts in that farce in light of the major medical facility he heads and the patients he forced to watch all that, and then conduct business in such a way that even one person treats me the way i have been treated on this blog because i asked questions in concern of dukes medical services when i became aware of the issues.

why is he still the president?

why are you people still so despising of duke patients and their families - is that just business as usual at duke - to despise patients and their families?

it sure feels that way

you guys should just shut down the hospital and play sports - and laugh

that is duke to me

and many others btw (i am not the only one in the category of patient or patients family btw - and many of them probably have the same questions as i) - so hey - beat them up too when they ask - maybe someday the bb court will be all duke has to worry about any more

laugh; September 4, 2013 at 8:48 PM
Anonymous said...: that part it is dispicable too

that they cry about their own people victimizing them and then blame it on innocent bystanders with no part in the matter except to hope and try to make sure a patient(s) doesn't die

that's tough work in durham/duke land - i assure you (the innocent bystander part - people not dying bit); September 4, 2013 at 9:47 PM
Anonymous said...: also:

you guys keep beating people up about the lax case when those guys made millions - and it was essentially their fault to begin with since they had the party where all that sheat started - if that was dukes fault - then it wasn't anybody elses but dukes

you beat me up to try to keep me from asking questions about their medical services and questions to better understand these other cases

one person even asked me why i was still here after a bit of his trolling dispicably based abuse and then when i still had more questions - since most do - he trolled and abused me even more to try to get me to not ask any more questions about medical services (which he then termed dispicable

this is all based on the billions of dollar donation drive going on by duke?

so, fess up, how much do they pay you?; September 4, 2013 at 10:59 PM
Anonymous said...: I think mistral-recluse/trolly is having a meltdown. Now the poster is resorting to foul language. When all else fails, just throw in an obscenity or two.

Nobody who posts here thinks Duke is perfect. Nobody, poster. Most of us have strong dislike of how Duke (the University) handled itself re the LAX case. Most of us have equally strong feelings of respect for Duke (the hospital) in terms of the millions of dollars in charity care, the thousands of lives saved, the thousands of jobs made available, and the thousands of medical research and care innovations generated by Duke. Again, have mistakes been made? Of course. You are an idiot for trying to paint Duke as some kind of monolith . It is not. Anybody who lives here and who was here during the LAX case and who has taken the time to read and understand ALL that went on.........has a far better grasp of what happened. Your posts ramble on and on and on......senselessly. You criticize and make wild totally unsupportable allegations and claims about Duke, the city, Nifong, Mangum, Durham, the media and god knows what else.

If you want to post your obscenities, feel free to do so. None of us care and none of us read your nonsense.; September 5, 2013 at 4:20 AM
Anonymous said...: Walt, could you maybe shed some light on how plea deals get offered, get negotiated, get structured, and .......as far as you know.......has anybody besides Harr actually discussed a plea deal? I have seen nothing and heard no rumors.
Would be interesting to know also the likely sentencing Mangum might face IF she were to be found guilty......I assume the judge will instruct the jury as to charges and alternatives?; September 5, 2013 at 4:24 AM
Walt said...: Anonymous at 5:31 PM wrote: "...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?"

She has never disputed the identification. If at any time she had said, "No, that's not them" the case would have ended. She has had that opportunity for seven years and she has not taken it. Instead, she has shopped her "story" to various news shows only to have it shot down when those shows start fact checking.

"In addition, Ms. Mangum was sick, (and pregnant),..."

I see no evidence of sickness beyond drug seeking behavior.

"and being torn to pieces in the media by duke and their supporters, so ... again - where is the understanding of that?"

I disagree. Until Joe Neff got involved for the News and Observer the media had been very solicitous of Crystal. Everything she said was taken as true and reported as such. The New York Times, Time, the local media, Nancy Grace and Wendy Murphy did infamous hatchet jobs on the innocent defendants while being generally uncritical of Crystal. Neff came along and started digging into the story and the news coverage began to turn. But, before that, Crystal was getting no grief from the media.

"Any lawyer would use that in her defense or support I would think."

That's not a defense to lying.

Walt-in-Durham; September 5, 2013 at 4:36 AM
Walt said...: Anonymous at 5:31 wrote: "...that she can't even get a lawyer do adequately represent her because of duke in durham.

I am sorry you see it that way. But, the truth is, Crystal has gotten numerous lawyers in Durham to represent her. She has fired two of them, one twice. She has fired them not because they were conflicted, but because they did not tell her what she wanted to hear. At this point she might want to consider that Woody Vann, Chris Shella and Scott Holmes gave her good advice. I don't know what Holmes told her, but Sid breached the attorney client privilege of confidentiality and told us a great deal of what Vann's advice was. Vann was honest with Crystal. He got authorization for an independent medical review. The IMR physician, a skilled pathologist, concluded that there was no significant problems with the autopsy report.

Vann, Holmes and Shella all told Crystal about the law that killers are responsible for even the medical malpractice on their victims and even the voluntary decision to end life support. Again, that's not what you and Crystal want to hear. But, it's the law. No matter how much Sid brays about it not being the law, it is. The court decisions are well settled. She needs to think about that.

I know Shella, Vann and Holmes told her about the felony murder rule and the misdemeanor manslaughter rule. A third time, that is not what you or Crystal wants to hear. But, it is the law and she needs to think about that too.

It is not that she cannot find a lawyer to represent her, it's that she cannot find a lawyer to lie to her. That has nothing to do with Duke and a lot to do with the high quality of the bar in Durham and across the state.

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

I am not connected with Duke University beyond having a few friends who teach there. (Fewer than before March of 2006, I might add.) Although to Duke's defense, I will have to say that I did not see a lot of of people who saw this fiasco as humorous.

"What do you think the motive was then? What do you think it is now?"

I have posed that very question and it only elicits speculation. I don't pretend to know the motives of all the actors. It seems that Nifong's motive was greed and the desire to win a difficult election. Being the weakest candidate in a three candidate Democratic Primary was not a good place to be. Nifong's own poor ethical compass made for a situation where he did the wrong thing at every turn. I think his motive was greed guided by a deficient sense of ethics.

Bordhead has done this type of thing before. He saddled Yale with a similar mess before leaving for Duke. His ethics are at best questionable.

The cops? Who knows. Gottleib had a vendetta against Duke students. So bad that he was transferred away from campus. Beyond Gottleib's vendetta, we don't know much about why Addison would go on the record to lie. We don't know why Hyman participated in the frame. We know the Chief took off and was not around. The city manager, at the time, was lazy. He completely deferred to his staff. That's not a motive, but a character failing.

Sorry, I can't help on many of the motives.; September 5, 2013 at 4:37 AM
Anonymous said...: see - i was right

you only say those things because i was talking about their medical services when i read about the possibility of intubation malpractice and came to make sure what was going on and the reality of the situation

everyone else would like to respect duke too but can't because of you guys supporting their fracking bs all the time with your abuse, etc. - and beating up the innocent instead of dealing with your own issues that might actually cause people to respect them. no one really does any more - you are student loan indepted or work there to think that they do

not very easy to respect duke when you've got people here bashing on people like you did me for being upset at duke for what they do because you don't kiss their ass like you people do

when you beat up perfect strangers for voicing their displeasure in having to deal with all this sheat you read in the news about duke AND trust their medical services on top of that, you really and truly take the cake

and then you push and push and push to get people to shut up so you can continue to hide your errors and kill people, etc. and whine to get more donor support, etc. with no remorse - and threats and bullying to silence peoples complaints about it being dukes only main tactic and that is very obvious too many

hows that working for you'll?; September 5, 2013 at 4:51 AM
Anonymous said...: Walt,

I started to read what you wrote in response to me and had to stop fairly quickly since i really can't take the duke sidedness of it at this point in time - i'll come back to it.

My first question is this and where i stopped for now:

drug seeking behavior (seriously) where do you get that from? I thought her drink was spiked so she got really sick.

Why don't you say it that way?

You make it sound like it is her fault those guys put drugs in her drink they offered her and which she consumed unknowingly of that fact - that was a big error that is never mentioned - and you just tried to blame Ms. Mangum for it.

Why do you do that?; September 5, 2013 at 5:57 AM
Lance the Supreme Poster of Enlightenment said...: Anonymous@ 8:13, @8:48 et al.:

Are you on medication? Speak with your doctor. It appears your dosage may need changed.

Sid:
These anonymous posts are begging for moderation.; September 5, 2013 at 5:58 AM
Anonymous said...: seriously lance?

you are more of a whiny baffoon than you originally appeared to be.

you can't beat me up into submission to your dukeness so you determine that drugging me and making me shut up with the help of the moderator to kick me out is your next option

typical duke reaction btw

i'm sure dr. harr got a good laugh out of that one; September 5, 2013 at 6:15 AM
Lance the Supreme Poster of Enlightenment said...: Anonymous @ 6:15:

I don't wrestle with pigs.; September 5, 2013 at 6:17 AM
Anonymous said...: you should try it some time

one of those down home hog wrangling type of events would do your whiny baffoon ass some good probably

never knew pigs were pink myself till i saw pics of all these piles of washed (and washed up) pigs during one major NC rain event - did you know that - that pigs were pink?; September 5, 2013 at 6:29 AM
Anonymous said...: more documentation anyone???

anyway, yeah, their fairly abusive and that's the emotional mental psychological crap patients and their families have to deal with when getting services at duke walt and a lawyer - do you need more example or should we all document further?; September 5, 2013 at 7:05 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous @ September 5, 2013 at 6:29 AM:

"you should try it some time

one of those down home hog wrangling type of events would do your whiny baffoon ass some good probably

never knew pigs were pink myself till i saw pics of all these piles of washed (and washed up) pigs during one major NC rain event - did you know that - that pigs were pink?"

Racist much?; September 5, 2013 at 10:10 AM
Anonymous said...: How is commenting that pigs are pink in any way racist?

I was seriously amazed at the sight of piles of pink pigs - i never knew pigs were pink - and the piles of pigs of course created an odd site.

We've got lots of hog farms in nc too. i'm sure someone would be willing to accomodate a down home hog wranglin' if'n you asked em nice nuff. ask duke, they'll know someone who could arrange it i'm sure

i'm actually being serious btw (just in case you were wondering ifn the hp hand gone all southern red neck on ya'll or not - yup - guess so); September 5, 2013 at 10:49 AM
A Lawyer said...: anyway, yeah, their fairly abusive and that's the emotional mental psychological crap patients and their families have to deal with when getting services at duke walt and a lawyer - do you need more example or should we all document further?

I think you'e addressing me in that post, although your lack of punctuation and non-standard syntax makes it hard to tell. If you are, then I'm not sure why: I do not live in North Carolina, have never dealt with Duke in any capacity, and have refrained from commenting on your generalized accusations against Duke. I post here to comment on legal issues. Specifically, I have pointed out that (1) Dr. Harr's latest lawsuit is legally frivolous, and (2) North Carolina law does not permit a pre-trial motion to dismiss a criminal case based on an allegedly-false autopsy report (an issue which can only be raised at trial). So far, no one has attempted to rebut either of those conclusions.; September 5, 2013 at 11:00 AM
Anonymous said...: A lawyer: You said they were generalized issues with duke and needed documentation - so - we (the blog crows) just documented a general idea of the abuse that goes on on this blog which IS indicative of how many get treated by and at duke in many ways.

that's all.

anyway:

Are NC's laws much different than other states that you have seen? If so, how so?

Does each county have their own laws that can in any way supercede the state or federal laws?

If so, how does that apply to Durham?

Thank you for your time and thought btw.; September 5, 2013 at 11:14 AM
Anonymous said...: Walt:

I seriously don't think too many are going to be able to deal with duke treating someone like everyone has seen them treat Ms. Mangum,

and know how much they hate her,

AND 'witness' them kill Mr. Daye with medical malpractice,

AND the family takes him off life support in only a week,

AND have that law you mention so often shoved down everyone's moral concious and sense of justice, Walt.

Truly, that is way too much for any to allow to happen and know that Duke can then turn around and do that to anyone, including them (if you think deeply enough about it).

That, is not going to happen.
Even if it passes for justice in the durham/duke courtroom, it will not pass in the public's mind.

That is too much abuse and injustice to deal with - and the public nor Ms. Mangum DO NOT DESERVE that.; September 5, 2013 at 11:47 AM
A Lawyer said...: Are NC's laws much different than other states that you have seen? If so, how so?

I haven't done much of a study on North Carolina laws. In the few areas I have looked at (for example, the grounds for making a pre-trial motion to dismiss a criminal case), North Carolina law is not wildly different from that in the states where I practice.

Does each county have their own laws that can in any way supercede the state or federal laws?

Counties and cities can have their own local laws, but those laws cannot contradict state law, and neither state nor local laws can contradict federal law.; September 5, 2013 at 12:21 PM
Anonymous said...: I agree with Lance....racist liars, homophobic bigots, lunatics and asshats .........feel free to rant all you wish. Nobody gives a rat's behind......; September 5, 2013 at 12:38 PM
Anonymous said...: If a judge does not follow the law, neither state nor federal, but bases decisions solely on the wishes of the plaintiff against the defendant that defys the letter of the law, how is that handled in the court system?

How can a judge defy the statues of state or federal law and be a judge?; September 5, 2013 at 12:44 PM
Anonymous said...: There is no indication at all that Mangum has been mistreated by the judicial system in NC. In fact, it is quite easy to make a case that she has received preferential treatment....over and over. Just as an example, three bond amount reductions.....200K for murder? Ridiculous. Multiple attorneys....which she routinely dumped because they would not let sidney harr run their case..... All the way back to 2002, Mangum has gotten a break, and it has only served to reinforce her miserably unethical and immoral behavior. Had somebody made her pay the price for lying in the LAX case, maybe, just maybe, Mr. Daye would be alive today.
She's gotten many many breaks. Most of us think it's waaaay past time for her to be held accountable.; September 5, 2013 at 1:17 PM
A Lawyer said...: If a judge does not follow the law, neither state nor federal, but bases decisions solely on the wishes of the plaintiff against the defendant that defys the letter of the law, how is that handled in the court system?

By an appeal to a higher court.

How can a judge defy the statues of state or federal law and be a judge?

Can you give me an example?; September 5, 2013 at 1:46 PM
Anonymous said...: What if the judge knows that he/she is not following the letter of the law and seems amused when they tell you that you can always appeal it?

And, the judge uses this tactic as common practice in many cases, to simply decide in favor of whatever the plantiff wishes, and then, if it isn't right, make it go to appeal - instead of following the letter of the law to begin with?

What if they do this in conjuction with campaign timing and elections?

Is there a way to hold that judge accountable for this type intentional delay of justice and purposely and knowingly not following the letter of the law to begin with, but only what is wanted by the plaintiff - therefore making the case longer and more burdensom then it needs to be, but only if the defendent is able to catch the mistake and if a lawyer is willing to assist, or do it pro se, and take the case to a higher court.

Doesn't this type practice incur more judicial unnessary cost for the public to bear?

Is this type practice of law - that is purposeful and deliberate appeal court hopping for better way to put it - legal?; September 5, 2013 at 3:03 PM
Anonymous said...: I don't think the law is based on whether or not duke or duke supporters or those with dislike of Ms. Mangum or whatever thinks that she should be held accountable for her part in the lacrosse case when charging her with a murder in another case that occured due to dukes malpractice.

Precisely because they have this attitude which is apparent to many, the death at the hands of duke is questionable, and therefore casts long shadows of doubt.; September 5, 2013 at 3:17 PM
guiowen said...: Anonymous at 3:03:

Can you give us an example of this? Has this happened to someone you know?
What is the judge's name?; September 5, 2013 at 3:34 PM
Anonymous said...: no, i was just wondering; September 5, 2013 at 3:39 PM
A Lawyer said...: In North Carolina, judges are elected for 8-year terms. If a judge is habitually reversed on appeal, someone can run against him or her when they run for re-election and point that out.

Federal judges are appointed for life. They can be removed only by impeachment. That has happened a few times in U.S. history, although not very often.; September 5, 2013 at 4:08 PM
Anonymous said...: Other than election, is there a statute or governing laws that cover judges in NC that lawyers use in dealing with issues they may encounter with judges?

Do people actually have to endure injustice for 8 years if a judge is elected, and then found to engage in practices that need attention for justice to prevail in the court before the 8 year period is complete?

If you, a lawyer, had to try a case in that type situation, how would you handle the judge so that you could complete the case in a timely cost efficient manner?; September 5, 2013 at 4:17 PM
Anonymous said...: So i've thought about the pink pigs for a bit and discovered that they are really very white pigs with thin skin that helps them to retain the mud that usually covers them to keep their skin cool and protected from insects.

Their skins are similar to humans, which is why lotions are tested on them, but because it is thin, the blood vessels show pink from below the skin.

I was wondering why they were pink.; September 5, 2013 at 4:48 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous @4:17pm asks: Other than election, is there a statute or governing laws that cover judges in NC that lawyers use in dealing with issues they may encounter with judges?

North Carolina judges may be removed in one of three ways:

Judges may be impeached by the house of representatives and convicted by a two-thirds vote of the senate.

Judges may be removed for mental or physical incapacity by joint resolution of two thirds of the members of each house of the general assembly.

On the recommendation of the judicial standards commission, the supreme court may censure or remove a judge.

Source: Removal of Judges in NC

Of course, you could have discovered that on your own by using a search engine.

1. Type "google.com" in your browser.

2. Enter a word, several words or a phrase that describe what information you are seeking.

(For example, in this case, try "judicial impeachment nc".)

3. Clink on the links that appear until you find one that provides the information.

You will find that the internet can provide a wealth of information.; September 5, 2013 at 5:39 PM
Anonymous said...: I have absolutely no clue why some idiot is posting remarks about pink pigs.....with white skin and mud...except to make what he or SHE considers cleverly disguised racist comments. Really cute, poster, really really clever of you. None of us is bright enough to figure out the underlying racist obscene shit you are shoveling.
Of course, one could also comment on black skinned animals like black snakes that slither around on their bellies.......but that would be silly, wouldn't it , poster.
Nobody gives a flying donut about your pink pigs, your Fracking tirade, your wild accusations, and your apparent inability to use punctuation. But feel free to continue.; September 5, 2013 at 6:10 PM
Anonymous said...: ok, i will

i'm not being racist at all about pink pigs

i thought about them when lance commented on wrestling with pigs - so i guess i was talking to lance about pink pigs - since he was interested (or not) in wrestling with them, and just to be even more helpful, suggested he might try hog wranglin instead since that is a NC past time for some (maybe) i think i've heard of hog wranglin' ... anyway

what's your prob?; September 5, 2013 at 6:29 PM
Walt said...: Anonymous at 5:57 AM wrote: "drug seeking behavior (seriously) where do you get that from?"

The record in the case.

"I thought her drink was spiked so she got really sick."

There is no evidence to support that notion.

"Why don't you say it that way?"

Because there is no evidence to support that notion.

"You make it sound like it is her fault those guys put drugs in her drink they offered her and which she consumed unknowingly of that fact - that was a big error that is never mentioned - and you just tried to blame Ms. Mangum for it."

Again, there is no evidence that happened. Further, the evidence is abundantly clear that no rape took place at 610 North Buchanan Street on the night of March 13-14, 2006. When she told a story about rape at that location by the people there, it was simply untrue.

Walt-in-Durham; September 5, 2013 at 6:37 PM
Walt said...: Anonymous at 12:44 wrote: "If a judge does not follow the law, neither state nor federal, but bases decisions solely on the wishes of the plaintiff against the defendant that defys the letter of the law, how is that handled in the court system?

How can a judge defy the statues of state or federal law and be a judge?"

You need to be specific. Generalities beg for a general answer, or none at all.

Walt-in-Durham; September 5, 2013 at 6:46 PM
Anonymous said...: Well why would there be any evidence?

The people who were responsible for the case seriously blew the case from the beginning anyway.

Why then do you choose to believe non evidence against Ms Mangum but not against the lacrosse players?

If there is no evidence - there is no evidence to support or disclaim anything - not just one side - that is how i see it logically as far as believing things about that case is concerned. Why don't I see the case presented that way now? Why is it so lopsided against Ms. Mangum when so many others are to blame and that has been proven?; September 5, 2013 at 6:56 PM
Anonymous said...: I was asking for a general answer and most of my questions and comments are of a general nature.

would you talk of specifics (if there were anything specific other than general curiousity) on this blog?

why do you ask me or anyone else then?; September 5, 2013 at 6:59 PM
Lance the Supreme Poster of Enlightenment said...: A little enlightenment for our anonymous pig enthusiast. George Bernard Shaw (look him up -- I believe another user gave you instructions on how to use google) had a famous quote:
“Never wrestle with pigs. You both get dirty and the pig likes it.”

The meaning he's conveying in this pithy quote is two-fold

1) The way to handle someone who's obviously determined to gouge and attempt to enrage you is to stay calm and polite. The other person will look the fool.

2) Don’t sink to their level and give them exactly what they are working for.

Have a nice day.; September 5, 2013 at 7:10 PM
Walt said...: Anonymous at 6:56 PM wrote: "Well why would there be any evidence?"

There is always evidence of a crime.

"The people who were responsible for the case seriously blew the case from the beginning anyway."

Still, evidence was collected, statements were taken, the Special Prosecutors re-investigated the case, the Defense obtained extensive discovery. Yes, there is a mountain of evidence and it contradicts your version. What is lacking is evidence to support your claim that she was given a drugged drink at the lacrosse party.

"Why then do you choose to believe non evidence against Ms Mangum but not against the lacrosse players?"

Because there is a substantial amount of evidence against her credibility. First, there are statements and photos showing her arrival in what appears to be an impaired state. Second there is her admission that she took Flexeril and had one or two large sized beers before the party. To quote the FDA: "Using cyclobenzaprine [Flexeril] together with ethanol can increase nervous system side effects such as dizziness, drowsiness, and difficulty concentrating. Some people may also experience impairment in thinking and judgment."

"If there is no evidence - there is no evidence to support or disclaim anything - not just one side - that is how i see it..."

There is substantial evidence to support what I have reported, none to support your claims.

"Why is it so lopsided against Ms. Mangum when so many others are to blame and that has been proven?"

Because she lied and was caught in her lies. Things like written statements get collected by the police. Things like digital photos get downloaded and collected by the police. DNA gets collected and analyzed. The DPD even chronicled their flawed lineups, preserving the flaws for all to examine. The medical reports were collected and are also a part of the record.

Why don't I believe Mangum? There is no corroborating evidence for her story. Why do I believe that Reade Seligman, Dave Evans and Colin Finnerty did not rape her? Because there is evidence, DNA, photos, testimony from numerous witnesses that corroborate their version.

Earlier you asked me to speculate on motives. Well, I won't speculate on Mangum's motive, but I will say her conduct before and after the lacrosse party looks like a text book adverse interaction between the Flexeril that she admits taking and alcohol that she admits drinking. To put it simply, her judgment and thinking were impaired. That is the chemical reason we cannot believe what she said. The facts confirm that she was not raped on the night of 13-14 March at 610 North Buchanan Street.

Walt-in-Durham; September 5, 2013 at 7:57 PM
Walt said...: Anonymous at 11:14 AM wrote: "Does each county have their own laws that can in any way supercede the state or federal laws?

If so, how does that apply to Durham?"

North Carolina is not a home rule state.

Walt-in-Durham; September 5, 2013 at 8:00 PM
Anonymous said...: ok - so what's wrong with hog wranglin' lance?; September 5, 2013 at 8:06 PM
kenhyderal said...: Walt said:" First, there are statements and photos showing her arrival in what appears to be an impaired state"..... There are no photographs of Crystal arriving. There are self serving statements by Lacrosse Players saying she arrived intoxicated but these are contradicted by the statements of her Driver, by the neighbor Jason Bissey who witnessed her arrival and by her dance partner Kim Roberts.; September 5, 2013 at 8:31 PM
Anonymous said...: Walt,

Then my first question was correct in stopping at your statement about drug seeking behavior in the original post we are still discussing about Ms. Mangum being sick or not.

She was not seeking drugs then as you previously stated, she had taken what you said she took from what you say, and drank beers, and something else at the party from what i read.

So, she was sick from the negative side effects - which seems to fit what was viewed as not well by many.

I don't know Walt, I think I picked up enough on that case as it is - I really did not visit this site to talk about it though - although I do understand all the confusion - i do not appreciate it in terms of durham or duke - and am still distrustful of duke and durham because of it, and feel for her, because what she has gone through is a lot for anyone.

I seriously don't want to talk about it further right now though. Thanks for clarifying for me and taking your time with that though. I am sure I will read more about it here, but for now I seriously have no idea on the matter and never posted anything about it - so i'm not someone to be bashed for it i assure you.; September 5, 2013 at 8:40 PM
kenhyderal said...: Such a reaction is possible in a cyclobenzaprine naïve individual. Crystal was not. She had a spinal condition for which cyclobenzaprine was prescribed, to be used prior to her giving one of her dance performances, by an orthopedic surgeon. She finally had surgery done by him to correct this anatomical problem in 2010. Such a reaction,in similar circumstances, prior, had never happened to her, including times that she had also drank beer with it. Her impairment only came when she was poured a drink after her arrival. This impairment had a sudden onset and by an hour later had worn off completely; suggestive of chloral hydrate. By the time she reached DUMC she showed no signs of impairment, whatsoever. Her 5 drug screen was clear (no cocaine, heroin, cannabis, methamphetamine or ghb) The much later, out of state, hair analysis for the most common date rape drug rohypnol was also negative. The natural history of this rapid onset and short recovery seems indicative of a substance like chloral hydrate that was not tested for.; September 5, 2013 at 9:13 PM
Lance the Supreme Poster of Enlightenment said...: Crystal Mangum was diagnosed as bipolar at any early age, and was known to be on Ambient, Paxil, and Methadone.
In my experience, I've only seen Methadone prescribed for 1 thing....What was Crystal taking it for?; September 5, 2013 at 9:47 PM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:

"Walt said:' First, there are statements and photos showing her arrival in what appears to be an impaired state'..... There are no photographs of Crystal arriving. There are self serving statements by Lacrosse Players saying she arrived intoxicated but these are contradicted by the statements of her Driver, by the neighbor Jason Bissey who witnessed her arrival and by her dance partner Kim Roberts."

Hw about the statements of the platers that she was intoxicated at the time of her arrival contradict the statement of her driver(which was given AFTER the players gave their statements)> the players' statements would have been self serving IF their had been a crime. Forensic and medical evidence showed their had been no rape.

KENNY, your blatant unrepentant guilt presuming racism is showing again.

What testimony from Jason Bissey and Kim Pittman/Roberts? When you first made your allegation the only statement you could cite was the statement of Crystal's driver, which was contradicted by the statements of the Lacrosse players.

September 5, 2013 at 8:31 PM; September 6, 2013 at 4:25 AM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:

"[Crystal's] impairment only came when she was poured a drink after her arrival."

Wrong. It was apparent when she arrived for her performance.

This impairment had a sudden onset and by an hour later had worn off completely; suggestive of chloral hydrate. By the time she reached DUMC she showed no signs of impairment, whatsoever. Her 5 drug screen was clear (no cocaine, heroin, cannabis, methamphetamine or ghb) The much later, out of state, hair analysis for the most common date rape drug rohypnol was also negative. The natural history of this rapid onset and short recovery seems indicative of a substance like chloral hydrate that was not tested for."

From the description oh her behavior and the description of how a date rape victim acts, it is not at all indicative that she was given Chloral Hydrate.

What you omit(probably on purpose) was that there was no indication prior to Crystal's arrival at the party that anyone intended to drug her.

Again, KENNY, how about you realize your guilt presuming racism is not equivalent to rational thought.; September 6, 2013 at 4:31 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous September 5, 2013 at 6:56 PM:

"Well why would there be any evidence?"

Maybe you should ask yourself why wouldn't there be any evidence considering Crystal's description of the crime. She described a crime which would have left evidence.

"The people who were responsible for the case seriously blew the case from the beginning anyway."

The people in charge of the case were determined to charge and prosecute members of the Lacrosse team.

"Why then do you choose to believe non evidence against Ms Mangum but not against the lacrosse players?"

What do you define as non evidence. You seem to be saying that one can be charged with crime and found guilty on the basis that there was no evidence he/she did not do it. You really have a twisted way of thinking.

"If there is no evidence - there is no evidence to support or disclaim anything - not just one side - that is how i see it logically as far as believing things about that case is concerned. Why don't I see the case presented that way now? Why is it so lopsided against Ms. Mangum when so many others are to blame and that has been proven?"

To blame for what? They committed no rape. I say again you have a vicious twisted way of thinking about things.; September 6, 2013 at 4:39 AM
Anonymous said...: If Mangum is so honorable and honest, Kenny, why hasn't she come forward publicly and (a)admitted she lied when she accused the three LAX guys, and (b)apologized to them? She never has done either.

Why did she insist to Levicy that the men did NOT use condoms?....and, after learning that NONE of their DNA was in or on her, change her story and say that they DID use condoms. She insisted that at least one of the three ejaculated and deposited semen inside her. Levicy admitted in the Nifong hearing that Mangum told her THREE times the men did NOT use condoms. It's all on video on YouTube, Kenny. Watch it for yourself. Mangum changed her story so many times, Kenny.....Conveniently, to fit the evidence as it unfolded.; September 6, 2013 at 5:02 AM
Anonymous said...: "The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those who speak it".....George Orwell.

Poster, I'd suggest that you spend some time educating yourself about the hard evidence in the LAX case and in the Daye killing before you run your mouth. The truth in these cases is based on evidence, not wild speculation, rumors, and racist nonsense.
I'd also suggest to you that believing the completely unqualified opinions of a proven liar like sidney hard reflects very poorly on YOUR judgment.; September 6, 2013 at 5:24 AM
Anonymous said...: Morning, Lance........Shaw was correct. Perhaps one of these days Victoria will read Pygmalion. Loved your comment to the pink pig poster (PPP); September 6, 2013 at 5:29 AM
Anonymous said...: Lance,

It has not escaped my attention that you then insinuated that i needed to be drugged and silenced when i pointed out to Walt the discrepancies of whether or not Ms. Mangum was drugged unknowingly by consuming a drink offered her at the lacrosse party.

That is what you 'guys' do on this blog. It is a behavior that is apparent at duke in general at times, it is a practice that is deadly in the medical field i assure you.

It is really obvious at this point.

Why do you do that since it is so obvious?

Is that legal now that these new cases are in court to be doing that here consistently and with an organized group of trolls that appear to do so on duke's behalf to any that question or point out discrepancies that are not favorable to duke?

How does that make duke look any better?

It only supports doubts against them.; September 6, 2013 at 5:48 AM
Lance the Supreme Poster of Enlightenment said...: Anonymous- I posted a comment asking you to give yourself an alias, so it would be easier to distinguish your comments from other anonymous posters. Your comments from 4 Sept @ 7:36 and 7:31 really do appear (to this reader) as if you're arguing with yourself.

Your response to my request was full of foul language, that to be honest, has no place here. Profanity is, after all, the last resort of the truly ignorant.

It was to this post full of foul language that I responded asking if you were on medication, because none of your posts prior stooped to such level.

Since then, you've posted, among legitimate questions, comments regarding pink pigs and hog wrestling.

I ask you - do any of these comments add to the dialogue?; September 6, 2013 at 6:09 AM
Lance the Supreme Poster of Enlightenment said...: Correction: The comments were from 4 Step @7:36 and 7:41; September 6, 2013 at 6:11 AM
Lance the Supreme Poster of Enlightenment said...: Autocorrect sucks.; September 6, 2013 at 6:13 AM
Anonymous said...: Then you, Lance, stepped into a documentation of the abuse on the list (of me in specific - but many others as well), and have been given notice of that if you happen to read for anything other than something that you can then feel self-rightous and enlightened about when bullying me further - and to try to get me to shut up about the discrepancies that Walt and I were discussing.

Every body knows about foul language and wrestling with pigs lance - but hey - since you want to lecture us all about it on this fine day and feel all warm and special inside about that so that you can still try to ignore the fact or distract from the fact of the discrepancies that were legitamally being discussed because that is what you and your pack of duke trolls do - to help duke perpetuate lies, abuse, and whatever else that you do - then you fool no one but yourself i assure you.; September 6, 2013 at 6:21 AM
Lance the Supreme Poster of Enlightenment said...: "Then you, Lance, stepped into a documentation of the abuse on the list (of me in specific - but many others as well), and have been given notice.....

By "stepped into a documentation" did you mean "stepped int a discussion"? If so, this is why I asked for you to create an alias.

It's difficult to follow a discussion when multiple participants are identified simply as "anonymous", and one posts seemingly contradictory messages.

"you have been given notice..." Notice of what, exactly?; September 6, 2013 at 6:35 AM
Anonymous said...: sometimes i sigh because when i thought of duke initially, i hoped for intelligence

i found none; September 6, 2013 at 6:44 AM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:

Let's get down to basics. What hard evidence establishes that Crystal was raped on the night of 13/14 March 2006?

Crystal's allegation is just that-an allegation. Without corroborating evidence it is just an allegation.

What you heard from Kilgo is hearsay, and unreliable hearsay at that considering you have never established that the source of the hearsay even exists.; September 6, 2013 at 7:32 AM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:

What is wrong with your view of the so called Duke Rape Case:

In a criminal case, the fundamental beginnings are 1) the accused is presumed innocent and 2) it is the burden of the prosecution to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Those principles apply in Canada, in case you haven't noticed.

You proceed from the premise that Crystal's allegation of rape must be accepted at face value and that the defendants must be presumed guilty. If there is evidence which exonerates them, your starting point is that this evidence must be discarded. The only evidence which means anything is evidence which supports your presumption of guilt.

And you have presented no evidence which shows guilt. You have simply come up with hypotheses and non credible scenarios.

I call you a blatant, unrepentant guilt presuming racist because you do show a big part of your presumption of guilt is the race of the false accuser and the race of the falsely accused defendants.; September 6, 2013 at 8:57 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
There is no indication at all that Mangum has been mistreated by the judicial system in NC. In fact, it is quite easy to make a case that she has received preferential treatment....over and over. Just as an example, three bond amount reductions.....200K for murder? Ridiculous. Multiple attorneys....which she routinely dumped because they would not let sidney harr run their case..... All the way back to 2002, Mangum has gotten a break, and it has only served to reinforce her miserably unethical and immoral behavior. Had somebody made her pay the price for lying in the LAX case, maybe, just maybe, Mr. Daye would be alive today.
She's gotten many many breaks. Most of us think it's waaaay past time for her to be held accountable.

Don't blame Daye's death on Mangum... put it where it belongs: 1) On an intoxicated Daye who was physically abusing Mangum and
2) Duke University Hospital staff responsible for the esophageal intubation that led to Daye's brain death and subsequent actual death.; September 6, 2013 at 11:47 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: HEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP!!
Important Announcement.

I hope to have a new post added no later than Sunday... It will deal with the Indy Week August 21, 2013 article.

Other exciting stuff in the pipeline will be coming forth in the near future... keeping this blog site light years ahead of the other blog sites that try to compete.

Education, Enlightenment, and Entertainment... it's all here.

As you were.; September 6, 2013 at 11:55 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"Don't blame Daye's death on Mangum... put it where it belongs: 1) On an intoxicated Daye who was physically abusing Mangum and
2) Duke University Hospital staff responsible for the esophageal intubation that led to Daye's brain death and subsequent actual death."

There is no evidence that Reginald Daye was abusing Crystal and there was no evidence that Reginald Daye's death was due to malpractice on the part of Duke.; September 6, 2013 at 12:37 PM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"HEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP!!
Important Announcement."

SIDNEY again screaming, hey look at me.

"I hope to have a new post added no later than Sunday... It will deal with the Indy Week August 21, 2013 article."

SIDNEY will publish another round of delusions to explain why he was such a failure as a physician.

"Other exciting stuff in the pipeline will be coming forth in the near future... keeping this blog site light years ahead of the other blog sites that try to compete."

What is in SIDNEY's pipeline is just a lot of sludge and waste.

"Education, Enlightenment, and Entertainment... it's all here."

Where? Your BS is as entertaining as Jackie Gleason's You're in the Picture. Enlightenment, Education, that has never been part of your deluded megalomaniacal narcissism.

As you were; September 6, 2013 at 12:45 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous @ 8:57 said:"What is wrong with your view of the so called Duke Rape Case:
In a criminal case, the fundamental beginnings are 1) the accused is presumed innocent and 2) it is the burden of the prosecution to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Those principles apply in Canada, in case you haven't noticed".... In case you haven't noticed with a skillful defence, reasonable doubt can easily become unreasonable. (think OJ Simpson and Casey Anthony) With the right Lawyer and with resources everyone knows you can get away with murder (and sexual assault); an advantage not often enjoyed by the poor. Given the shabby Police investigation raising reasonable doubt in the Duke Lacrosse case was not too difficult.; September 6, 2013 at 3:43 PM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:

"In case you haven't noticed with a skillful defence, reasonable doubt can easily become unreasonable. (think OJ Simpson and Casey Anthony) With the right Lawyer and with resources everyone knows you can get away with murder (and sexual assault); an advantage not often enjoyed by the poor. Given the shabby Police investigation raising reasonable doubt in the Duke Lacrosse case was not too difficult.

What you choose to not notice is you are trying to dodge the issue of why there was no evidence that Crystal was raped on the night of 13/14 March 2006.

You have no hard evidence on which to hang your hypothesis that Crystal was raped by non lacrosse team party attendees. You ignore that the police investigation was shoddy because DA NIFONG(whom you praise as a fighter for justice) was fixated on prosecuting innocent men. And you can not present any hard evidence that Kilgo's anonymous Lacrosse player even exists.

What it boils down to is you are a blatant unrepentant guilt presuming racist. You believe innocent men should be convicted of raping Crystal because of who and what they are.; September 6, 2013 at 4:36 PM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: "In case you haven't noticed with a skillful defence, reasonable doubt can easily become unreasonable. (think OJ Simpson and Casey Anthony) With the right Lawyer and with resources everyone knows you can get away with murder (and sexual assault); an advantage not often enjoyed by the poor. Given the shabby Police investigation raising reasonable doubt in the Duke Lacrosse case was not too difficult."

Not so fast there, Kenny boy. Just up the thread you said that two of the three defendants had iron clad alibis. So you admit they didn't do anything near Crystal. As to poor David Evans who you try every so obliquely to incriminate, there was no evidence. No DNA identifying him. No valid line up. Even you admit the lineup was flawed.

All the defense there had to do was show those facts. That was no easy feat mind you. Not against a lying, unethical prosecutor who would stop at nothing to railroad three innocent men. Not with a witness who was more than willing to change her story every time new evidence came to light. Not against an unethical lab director who was willing to conceal evidence. No, that was not easy. And, they are innocent.

Walt-in-Durham; September 6, 2013 at 4:45 PM
Walt said...: I do want to return to Harr's latest complaint and throw out a few items for thought.

Harr has filed a second case against Brodhead, Levi and Duke University regarding his being tossed off campus those years ago. Any thoughts on that claim?

Harr also wants the federal court to intervene and declare the autopsy fraudulent. Any thoughts on that claim?

Harr has named North Carolina as a defendant in his litigation. Anyone think the 11th Amendment applies, should apply or does not apply? Why? Or, Why not?

Walt-in-Durham; September 6, 2013 at 4:50 PM
Anonymous said...: Walt, I'm no lawyer and not even marginally qualified to have an opinion and the question you raise. Here's my lay person two cents.
His case has been heard and decided. Filing a second suit is just simply frivolous and should be treated as such. Doesn't the system deal with people who file nuisance suits?
The validity of Nichols report and his expertise would be challenged in court by the defense IF there were any grounds to do so. Roberts blew that notion clean out of the water and the prosecution knows this. If the defense can come up with a credible expert who will testify under oath in court that Nichols is a criminal incompetent fraud....then, hey, the jury can hear that testimony. But not one single physician has agreed with hard, who is totally Unqualified.
I can't comment on the 11th Amendment question; way above my knowledge and expertise.
What I would like to know is just exactly WHAT Vann or whoever turns out to be the lawyer du jour, really does have as defense for Mangum? No physical evidence of a beating....no history of violence by Daye.......nothing but her story (he said, she said) that he was beating her. I think a plea deal , with manslaughter if she is lucky, is her best bet.; September 6, 2013 at 5:07 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous September 6, 2013 at 5:07 PM

According to a post on Liestoppers, Crystal's new attorney is Daniel Meier.; September 6, 2013 at 5:12 PM
Anonymous said...: Walt in Durham:

"Harr also wants the federal court to intervene and declare the autopsy fraudulent. Any thoughts on that claim?"

If such a thing were possible, it would take someone much more credible than SIDNEY HARR to prove the autopsy fraudulent.; September 6, 2013 at 5:16 PM
kenhyderal said...: Lance @ 9:47 said:"In my experience, I've only seen Methadone prescribed for 1 thing....What was Crystal taking it for?" Musculoskeletal pain. http://www.aafp.org/afp/2005/0401/p1353.html; September 6, 2013 at 8:42 PM
A Lawyer said...: I do want to return to Harr's latest complaint and throw out a few items for thought.

I commented on most of these issues on the last thread, but happy to repeat them here.

Harr has filed a second case against Brodhead, Levi and Duke University regarding his being tossed off campus those years ago. Any thoughts on that claim?

Totally frivolous and vexatious, because it is a blatant violation of res judicata. If anything in the Complaint is sanctions-bait, that is. You lose a lawsuit, and appeal it all the way to the Supreme Court and still lose, it's over.

Harr also wants the federal court to intervene and declare the autopsy fraudulent. Any thoughts on that claim?

Two thoughts: (1) Dr. Harr has no standing to raise that claim, and (2) federal courts do not intervene in pending state-court criminal cases. Google Younger v. Harris.

Harr has named North Carolina as a defendant in his litigation. Anyone think the 11th Amendment applies, should apply or does not apply? Why? Or, Why not?

Should it apply? No, because the U.S. Supreme Court has extended it way beyond its actual language. (On its face, the 11th Amendment only applies to suits against a state by citizens of another state.) Does it apply (under the state of the law as it now exists)? Certainly to any claim for money damages; probably not to a claim for injunctive relief for a violation of the 14th Amendment by state actors. Not that I see any valid 14th Amendment claim in this Complaint.; September 6, 2013 at 8:47 PM
kenhyderal said...: @Anonymous :8:32 PM 9-5-13 and 4:25 AM......"At about 11:30 Precious arrived and came to the back where we met for the first time. I waited outside and she went inside to collect her money. She showed me her payment ($400.00) and we went straight the bathroom where my outfit was to change clothes. Precious came with her dancing gear on and did not need to change.
We conversed about our plan for the dance. There was a knock on the door and we were handed two drinks of equal amounts. We did sip the drinks, but Precious cup fell into the sink. We finished getting dressed and proceeded to the living room, led by Dan, to do our show. There were about 20-25 young guys there, who were all sitting down. Precious and I began our show which, in my opinion, seemed to be going well. Precious began showing signs of intoxication at this point. We continued with the performance until one of the boys brought out a broomstick and after asking if we had any toys, said he would use the broomstick on us"....Roberts statement to the Police Mar.22 2006; September 6, 2013 at 8:58 PM
kenhyderal said...: Jason Bissey, in his statement to Police March 31 2006, said he didn't see any signs that Crystal was intoxicated when she arrived. While she was still outside and before she entered the house with Roberts she was completely visible to him from his porch"; September 6, 2013 at 9:20 PM
Anonymous said...: http://www.morganstanleygate.com/2013/04/how-daniel-meier-liar-has-failed-why-he.html

"How Daniel Meier "The Liar" Has Failed and Why He Must be Removed"; September 7, 2013 at 2:53 AM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:

"@Anonymous :8:32 PM 9-5-13 and 4:25 AM......"At about 11:30 Precious arrived and came to the back where we met for the first time. I waited outside and she went inside to collect her money. She showed me her payment ($400.00) and we went straight the bathroom where my outfit was to change clothes. Precious came with her dancing gear on and did not need to change.
We conversed about our plan for the dance. There was a knock on the door and we were handed two drinks of equal amounts. We did sip the drinks, but Precious cup fell into the sink. We finished getting dressed and proceeded to the living room, led by Dan, to do our show. There were about 20-25 young guys there, who were all sitting down. Precious and I began our show which, in my opinion, seemed to be going well. Precious began showing signs of intoxication at this point. We continued with the performance until one of the boys brought out a broomstick and after asking if we had any toys, said he would use the broomstick on us"....Roberts statement to the Police Mar.22 2006"

And David Evans and Matt Zash, neither of whom committed any crime, mae statement to the police that Crystal was impaired when she arrived. According to Kim Roberts/Pittman, they only sipped the drinks, which suggests they did not imbibe them. If both dinks were spiked, then why was Kim not impaired?; September 7, 2013 at 4:48 AM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:

"Jason Bissey, in his statement to Police March 31 2006, said he didn't see any signs that Crystal was intoxicated when she arrived. While she was still outside and before she entered the house with Roberts she was completely visible to him from his porch"

Check this out.

http://johnsville.blogspot.com/2006/04/duke-lacrosse-rape-timeline.html

This site quotes Jason Bissey's statements at lengt. The issue of whether or not Crystal was sober or intoxicated is never mentioned. You stretch things quite a bit ifyou claim Jason Bissey stated Crystal was sober.; September 7, 2013 at 4:56 AM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:

Check this out:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/12/us/12duke.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&:

"In the interview, the woman, 28, a stripper and the mother of three children, said she was attacked after she and another woman had danced at the party. She said the assault occurred between 11:40 p.m. and midnight on March 13.

That contradicts time-stamped photographs of her dancing at the party after midnight, as well as a next-door neighbor’s report of seeing the two women entering the house at midnight."; September 7, 2013 at 4:59 AM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:

from http://liestoppers.blogspot.com/2009/08/updated-chronology-of-duke-lacrosse.html

"Durham PD Investigator Ben Himan picks up statement from eyewitness Jason Bissey, but does not question or interview him."; September 7, 2013 at 5:00 AM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:

"Jason Bissey, in his statement to Police March 31 2006"

You forgot to add, which happened a couple weeks after David Evans and Matt Zash gave their statements to police. Their statements were not self serving.; September 7, 2013 at 5:15 AM
Anonymous said...: No, methadone is NOT used for musculskeletal pain unless there is a need for continuous 24 hr narcotic-level pain relief for severe pain. In order for methadone to have been appropriate, Mangum would have been in such pain that she would have been essentially NON ambulatory. She certainly would not have been able to be engaged in any physical activity or exercise.....such as dancing, stripping, pole vaulting or (even)driving. Under no circumstances would she have been able to be taking methadone, along with the other drugs she was taking, and still be able to be up, functional, working, dancing, etc. Pure nonsense.; September 7, 2013 at 6:21 AM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:

The Issue you refuse to address is why there was no forensic evidence, no medical evidence that Crystal was raped.

Since there was no evidence of a crime in the first place, when Crystal became intoxicated is irrelevant. Since no crime happened, no one gave her any substance to facilitate the commission of a crime.

All your posts on the Duke case presume that a crime did happen. That is why you are a big irrelevancy and nothing more.; September 7, 2013 at 7:30 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Walt said...
I do want to return to Harr's latest complaint and throw out a few items for thought.

Harr has filed a second case against Brodhead, Levi and Duke University regarding his being tossed off campus those years ago. Any thoughts on that claim?

Harr also wants the federal court to intervene and declare the autopsy fraudulent. Any thoughts on that claim?

Harr has named North Carolina as a defendant in his litigation. Anyone think the 11th Amendment applies, should apply or does not apply? Why? Or, Why not?

Hey, Walt.

I appreciate you acting as moderator to steer meaningful discourse in the comment section.

Before I give my three cents worth, I better look up the 11th Amendment.

Thanks again. You, kenhyderal, Supreme Poster, A Lawyer, Break the Conspiracy, and others help make this blog site great.; September 7, 2013 at 7:48 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Walt in Durham:

"Harr also wants the federal court to intervene and declare the autopsy fraudulent. Any thoughts on that claim?"

If such a thing were possible, it would take someone much more credible than SIDNEY HARR to prove the autopsy fraudulent.

I have no problem with another physician evaluating the Autopsy Report that Dr. Nichols performed on Daye and putting his/her evaluation in writing.

Keep in mind, that as of today, I have never seen anything in writing by Dr. Roberts about the case.; September 7, 2013 at 7:52 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"I have no problem with another physician evaluating the Autopsy Report that Dr. Nichols performed on Daye and putting his/her evaluation in writing."

What you want some other physician to do is to put something in writing that says Dr. Nichols' report is fraudulent. I say again, your background as a physician, or ack thereof, does not qualify you to pronounce the report as fraudulent.

"Keep in mind, that as of today, I have never seen anything in writing by Dr. Roberts about the case."

Keep in mind that you have no right to see anything Dr. Roberts might put into writing. If you happened to see something, I say again, you are not qualified or capable to pronounce any opinion on it.; September 7, 2013 at 8:32 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

Amendment XI

The judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by citizens of another state, or by citizens or subjects of any foreign state.; September 7, 2013 at 8:43 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"The text of the Eleventh Amendment limits the power of federal courts to hear lawsuits against state governments brought by the citizens of another state or the citizens of a foreign country. The Supreme Court has also interpreted the Eleventh Amendment to bar federal courts from hearing lawsuits instituted by citizens of the state being sued and lawsuits initiated by the governments of foreign countries. For example, the state of New York could invoke the Eleventh Amendment to protect itself from being sued in federal court by its own residents, residents of another state, residents of a foreign country, or the government of a foreign country."

From: http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/11th+Amendment.

It is clear you have no right to file your frivolous lawsuit against the State of North Carolina.; September 7, 2013 at 8:45 AM
Break the Conspiracy said...: Sidney,

I assume that you have already been in contact with Crystal's newest lawyer, Daniel Meier.

I recommend that you volunteer to provide expert testimony related to (1) the accuracy of the autopsy report, (2) the severity of the horrendous injuries Crystal suffered as a result of the horrific beating Daye inflicted and (3) how Daye's alcoholism resulted in his chronic violent behavior.

In your first meeting with Mr. Meier, I suggest that you bring a copy of Crystal's book, Last Dance for Grace, so that Mr. Meir may discover Crystal's credibility in the same way you discovered it.

I suggest that you also bring a copy of the motion to dismiss you drafted on behalf of Crystal. Although Mr. Meier may be able to incorporate some improvements, your motion almost certainly will permit him to make the filing more quickly.

This is exciting! Your skillful management of Crystal's expectations has resulted in another fresh start. Crystal has successfully removed three lawyers whom you and she believe were conspiring against her.; September 7, 2013 at 9:41 AM
Anonymous said...: She didn't remove the 3rd, He quit due to conflict of interest.

The second just got busted in a prostitution sting.

The first could be the fourth, but he's not.; September 7, 2013 at 9:50 AM
Anonymous said...: I wonder how it affects students at duke who have a conflict of interest due to family ties when connected to lawyers who may or may not have a negative effect on legal issues that involve duke?

I wonder how it affects the ethical and professional performance of the lawyers in that position.

How do lawyers deal professionally with those type issues?

How do the students fair is duke is negatively affected in any way by lawyers with family ties?; September 7, 2013 at 10:04 AM
Anonymous said...: My current prediction:

Once he gets a chance to read the discovery file and speak to Ms. Mangum he will withdraw due to conflict of interest.; September 7, 2013 at 10:12 AM
Anonymous said...: Why does the Durham Public Defender's office assign lawyers to cases where you can very quickly and easily find that there are some major issues between the lawyer and the case that might have a negative effect on the integrity and ability to provide equal protection to the client as guaranteed by law?

With Duke, you cannot say that conflict of interest isn't a major factor since duke basically operates of one big 'family' - clan - gang - pack - pact related - donor oriented - power hungry - media controlling - money grubbing fear mongering leader wanna bees of even their own 'subjects'.

As example, why are people so angry when someone else has a complaint or seems to do something that negatively effects duke, (like they did with the lacrosse players, the group off 88, broadhead, etc., etc - not accounting for the actual ethics or morality of what they did of course)?; September 7, 2013 at 10:49 AM
Anonymous said...: How long does jury selection take?

How can an unbiased jury be found in Durham (when the question is - did Ms. Mangum kill Mr. Daye and with what intent of action - and Mr. Daye died under questionable circumstances at Duke, Duke has a well-known thing against Ms. Mangum, and everyone in Durham is subject to the medical care of duke?; September 7, 2013 at 11:27 AM
Anonymous said...: What would that be called in legal terms and what laws, etc., govern that type of environment when the conflict of interest is one's own potential personal well-being or safety to the point of loss of life?

That complexity of equal protection cannot be denied as a factor in any case involving Duke in Durham, but especially in this case - if reality is not denied.; September 7, 2013 at 12:06 PM
Anonymous said...: Duke has a well-known thing against Ms. Mangum

What is this well-known thing? I have never seen duke show any animosity against Ms. Mangum.; September 7, 2013 at 12:17 PM
Anonymous said...: In addition, with the issue of self-defense such an important topic of this case, the thought of self-preservation in connection to Duke's medical services, (which is required as needed in emergencies in Durham), will be an issue that cannot be denied for everyone involved in the case - including the judge, jury, and all lawyers, and their families, etc.

How is this issue handled in Durham?

Are there already judicial procedures in place in Durham and NC to handle this reality legally and efficiently, or is this something that has to be determined during each case involving Duke in Durham?; September 7, 2013 at 12:28 PM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:

Check this out:

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57601847/nyc-man-reportedly-brain-dead-after-random-possibly-racially-motivated-attack/

About a white man attacked and critically injured by a black man spewing out threats against white people.

Of course you will deny it happened because some academic sociologists in academic ivory towers say that this kind of racism doesn't exist.; September 7, 2013 at 2:19 PM
guiowen said...: This is great, Sidney!
With a new lawyer, I've no doubt you can postpone this three or four more months.; September 7, 2013 at 4:01 PM
Anonymous said...: Why is this Dr. Harr's fault?
It will probably be postponed longer than that anyway at the rate things are going.; September 7, 2013 at 4:19 PM
Anonymous said...: Ah, sarcasm is lost on some folks, isn't it Break and Guiowen. Love the post, Break. And, guiowen, always a pleasure to read your comments. Good stuff!!; September 7, 2013 at 5:51 PM
Anonymous said...: the sarcasm was apparent
just so yesterday
keep up

here: this is funnier

http://www.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/video/showbiz/2013/08/22/fod-will-ferrell-zach-galifianakis-debate-kids.funny-or-die.html; September 7, 2013 at 5:58 PM
Walt said...: Anonymous at 10:49 AM wrote: "Why does the Durham Public Defender's office assign lawyers to cases where you can very quickly and easily find that there are some major issues between the lawyer and the case that might have a negative effect on the integrity and ability to provide equal protection to the client as guaranteed by law?"

They don't assign lawyers that have conflicts. The only lawyer to ever have a conflict of interest problem with Crystal was Scott Holmes and he was a lawyer she chose. His conflict does not involve Duke at all, but North Carolina Central University.

"With Duke, you cannot say that conflict of interest isn't a major factor..."

Yeah, I can. If anything, this case illustrates how small the conflict issue is.

Of course, I think you are deliberately misrepresenting the idea of a conflict of interest. A conflict of interest does not mean a conflict or disagreement. A conflict of interest means a lawyer is employed by two different parties with adverse interests. Thus, the focus is on the parties, not the lawyer.

Walt-in-Durham; September 7, 2013 at 6:47 PM
Walt said...: Anonymous at 11:27 AM wrote: "How long does jury selection take?"

As long as it takes. But normally, a half day seats a jury in a non-capital case.

"How can an unbiased jury be found in Durham (when the question is - did Ms. Mangum kill Mr. Daye..."

The same way it can in hundreds of other jury trials that happen every year in Durham County year. You really have too high an opinion of Mangum. She's just an ordinary defendant among hundreds of equally ordinary defendants.

"... Mr. Daye died under questionable circumstances at Duke,...."

No he did not. The defense has, and thanks to Sid we know about it, evidence that confirms the autopsy findings. No questionable circumstances. But, even if there was medical malpractice involved, and there was not, that is not an intervening cause to excuse Crystal's killing. St v. Welch, St. v. Holsclaw and St. v. Jordan.

Walt-in-Durham; September 7, 2013 at 6:56 PM
Anonymous said...: Walt,

Are you saying that Ms. Mangum is just one of hundreds of defendants who in self-defense stabbed someone, and then that person died at Duke hospital from medical malpractice, and they then were or are being charged with murder because Duke killed them with their medical malpractice? And that these defendants also were part of a case so public and nefarious as the duke lacrosse case?

Your lowly opinion of Ms. Mangum is clear Walt which makes your answers on this blog disingenuous at best and leads others to abuse her as if that's ok for anyone to do on this blog. I hope you put a disclaimer on that with any legal advice you gave Dr. Harr on her behalf.; September 8, 2013 at 1:41 AM
Anonymous said...: And Walt, if that is the way that the durham/duke judicial system is going to continue to perform their services for the people who they are entrusted to protect, defend, and serve to such an extent as their very lives are endangered, or they can be crippled for life, or imprisoned for life for dukes medical malpractice - then i can assure you that it will become a future for durham/duke where few if any ever trusts their services again.; September 8, 2013 at 2:06 AM
Anonymous said...: worse walt, you have joined in the attack on innocent bystanders and patients and patients family members of duke for asking about dukes medical malpractice at a time when that information was of great importance to myself, and more importantly, to others

thanks

not

it is hard to believe duke operates this way

but - hey - here it is

total inncocents being blamed for Ms. Mangum and the entire lacrosse case ... because they are a patient at duke or a family member of patients at duke and ask important questions about their medical malpractice

THAT is DUKE for you (and duke supporters)
durham simply enables and follows along and leads their way (since they are duke)

duke/durham

blah; September 8, 2013 at 3:18 AM
Anonymous said...: and lance youze bestn to member that weez aint no pink pig wrestlers down here in this heren neck of the woods, weza hog wranglers - and damn proud like of it

yah; September 8, 2013 at 3:33 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous September 8, 2013 at 3:18 AM

You make absolutely no sense whatever.

Maybe you are the one who assured SIDNEY the autopsy report was fraudulent. Certainly you function at the level of a 5th grader.; September 8, 2013 at 4:16 AM
Anonymous said...: justice in durham:

the public defenders office is run by a duke grad with a conflict of interest with duke

the police chief is currently in hot water (steaming?) for alledgedly stating a public defender "deserved to be shot" when HE WAS SHOT AS AN INNOCENT BYSTANDER in durham (where else?)

this new case is about whether duke will purposely kill someone to frame someone for murder who has stood against them (for thinking they were and/or actually were raped by one of dukes own students) for murder (cuz the patient has to be at duke - if in durham) - and the alledged 'perp' can't get a lawyer to validly assist through the public defenders office

if you look at duke news - there is widespread animosity about the rape that takes place there (by duke students and others of dukes finest)

justice or farse

you decide

as usual; September 8, 2013 at 4:50 AM
Walt said...: Anonymous at 1:41 AM wrote: "Are you saying that Ms. Mangum is just one of hundreds of defendants who in self-defense stabbed someone, and then that person died at Duke hospital from medical malpractice,..."

You just admitted it was medical malpractice that killed Daye. Medical malpractice does not relieve Crystal of guilt. St. v. Holsclaw, St. v. Welch and St. v. Jordan.

As to the rest of your comment, you are deliberately misrepresenting what I wrote.

Walt-in-Durham; September 8, 2013 at 5:03 AM
Anonymous said...: well how do you term what you do then walt?

public service?; September 8, 2013 at 5:06 AM
Anonymous said...: PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT (number ? of HOW many?)

The durham police chief has just made it quite all right for innocent bystanders to be shot - and ifn that darn durham police chief wants to go further and blame the 'perp' for murder (cuz that's his job afterall - but not cuz the gun shot was deadly or not) all he's got to do is send the shot innocent bystander (whos still kicking and breathing) to duke hospital for emergency care and let em know all wink wink like that a murder charge for the perp would be nice - or duke thinks that themselves cuz their horns have been activated for some reason or nother - and bam - your good as dead.

so .... no innocent bystanders allowed in durham till the storm passes ... if ever; September 8, 2013 at 5:27 AM
Anonymous said...: Don't know too much about mangum's latest lawyer. I am sure harr is going to tell us all, sooooon, just how crappy, corrupt, and conspiratorial Maier must be. Cannot wait. let the games begin; September 8, 2013 at 6:56 AM
Anonymous said...: once again, the poster completely misrepresents the incident with the chief's comments. Yes, the statement was made...about a defense attorney.....and, yes, the chief (a)admitted he was out of line with his comment, (b)apologized personally and publicly, and (c)the attorney in question said it was no big deal. The DPD, like many other LEOs, has a love hate relationship with defense attorneys.......and anybody with a brain can understand why. Honest policemen do their jobs, at personal risk, for lousy pay....catch the bad guys.....and defense lawyers do their jobs.....and some of the bad guys avoid responsibility for their crimes. But if you've been around the station long enough, you understand the tension. Durham is NOT unique in this tension, at all. I have seen it far far worse elsewhere.
An excellent point has been made....Mangum is no more, no less "special" than any other defendant. Her case gets press because of the LAX incident, but to claim that the entire community, justice system, state of NC, national media, hospital systems, etc.....are all somehow in cahoots and out to get Sister, is pure dribble. Most of us who live here know the truth and, frankly, we are sick of hearing about Mangum, want her to get a fair trial, and otherwise.....want her to refrain from criminal acts and be a decent citizen. The jury will determine her fate, not Harr, and certainly not Duke. I'm tired of Mangum, her antics, her endless victim whine, and her use/abuse of the public defender resources.; September 8, 2013 at 8:00 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous September 8, 2013 at 1:41 AM:

"Walt,

Are you saying that Ms. Mangum is just one of hundreds of defendants who in self-defense stabbed someone, and then that person died at Duke hospital from medical malpractice"?

There is no evidence that Crystal acted in self defense. There is no evidence that Reginald Daye died as a result of Duke's malpractice.

Even if he did, as Walt has said(and I am not Walt), that would not relieve him of responsibility for Reginald Daye's death.; September 8, 2013 at 8:39 AM
Anonymous said...: Walt has repeatedly cited specific case law (or whatever the correct reference is) that shows mal practice is not an intervening factor. I don't know why people can't simply read and learn. There was NO mal practice, no error, no issue with Daye's care, NOR with Nichols report and findings. idiots want to claim otherwise.; September 8, 2013 at 8:47 AM
Anonymous said...: Correction:

Anonymous September 8, 2013 at 1:41 AM:

"Walt,

Are you saying that Ms. Mangum is just one of hundreds of defendants who in self-defense stabbed someone, and then that person died at Duke hospital from medical malpractice"?

There is no evidence that Crystal acted in self defense. There is no evidence that Reginald Daye died as a result of Duke's malpractice.

Even if he did, as Walt has said(and I am not Walt), that would not relieve HER of responsibility for Reginald Daye's death.

September 8, 2013 at 8:39 AM; September 8, 2013 at 9:43 AM
Anonymous said...: i did not misrepresent the chief from my point of view

sorry

from my point of view it was right on the money - and there's another cop with a grudge and lawyer out to prove it

i'm sick of being victimized because of dukes antics in durham and nc and elsewhere

and if you don't see it - you haven't bothered to look - or you are so used to it - that it doesn't bother you if a few people die here and there - long as you keep bringing home that thar duke paycheck

yeah right
you people who keep enabling duke and durham to run their billions dollar shut up or die game or die and shut up - will eventually have it land right back where it belongs - have fun with that one; September 8, 2013 at 10:28 AM
Anonymous said...: yep, the Pink Pig Poster is having a meltdown.
Gooooo Duke!; September 8, 2013 at 10:40 AM
Anonymous said...: a prevelant duke attitude caught in documentation

it is why duke sucks

that is what duke is to most btw

mean and evil; September 8, 2013 at 10:56 AM
Anonymous said...: I, for one, love Duke. It is not perfect. It is a single entity. It is not a monolith. It is not run by evil people. It is not run by people who sit around thinking about how to get Mangum. I love Duke because the hospital and its staff work miracles. I love Duke because the University offers great education to thousands. Perfect, no. A fine institution, composed of thousands of employees, students, faculty, physicians, caregivers , families, donors, and friends......yes. And, poster, you can take your lunatic poorly informed attitudes and put them where the sun does not shine.; September 8, 2013 at 11:23 AM
Anonymous said...: My bad, it is NOT a single entity. My mistake.; September 8, 2013 at 11:24 AM
Anonymous said...: yeah, well duke and its not perfect can have a bit in the sun with that type attitude about the duke you love so much - and stick your billions dollar donation drive in the mud with it

you kill and abuse and use our families
and then tell us to stick it where the sun don't shine ifn we complain about you people killing, abusing and using people and their families

nice

yeah, we all love duke cuz they suck

blah; September 8, 2013 at 11:52 AM

«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 329 of 329 Newer› Newest»

Sunday, September 1, 2013

Team player or independent?

329 comments:

Facebook Badge

Subscribe!

Labels

Blog Archive

About Me