justice4nifong: Deception in a grand conspiracy corrupts and hijacks the North Carolina justice system

Monday, February 10, 2014

Deception in a grand conspiracy corrupts and hijacks the North Carolina justice system

429 comments:

1 – 200 of 429 Newer› Newest»

Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Weren't we supposed to have the most enlightening flog yet at this point? One where Sid still makes critical errors because he doesn't have full information, yet pretends he is so brilliant it doesn't matter?

Sorry, I missed my self-imposed deadline by a couple of days. However, making these flogs are so time consuming... it takes a lot. The other thing is that I want to provide viewers with the best possible product, and I will put quality before expediency every time. You deserve the best. At least with my blog site you can get the truth, something which the mainstream media has not been willing to do regarding Crystal's case.

I think you'll agree the flog is well worth the wait.; February 10, 2014 at 11:44 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
The fact that Sid either doesn't have complete medical records and thus doesn't know about the chest tube and other things, or the fact he has them and is lying about them, either way, people need to realize he is a con artist and trying to get people on board with his plot to destroy Crystal.

Makes no sense. Why would I want to destroy Crystal?

Regarding the chest tube, I saw no mention of one in the medical records that I have. I have no reason to believe that one was inserted. In his summary, Dr. Nichols claims that the chest cavity was full of blood and fluid, and if that was the case, especially after an stab wound to the lung, surely a chest tube would've been inserted. Meier did nothing to help his client... but he did a lot to help Duke University Hospital.; February 10, 2014 at 11:49 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: A Lawyer said...
She should be freed immediately, and I will see that that happens.

Dr. Harr:

No disrespect intended, but, given for 0-for-everything record in court, I am dubious that you will see that any such thing happens.

Hey, A Lawyer. No disrespect taken. However, regardless of my record in the courtroom or legal system, the issues of truth and facts regarding those issues will result in Mangum's conviction being overturned... and she will be freed.; February 10, 2014 at 11:54 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Sid says:

Walt, there has been a vendetta against Mangum since her identity became known as the Duke Lacrosse victim/accuser. Meier successfully completed his mission, which was to conceal Duke University Hospital's role in Daye's death. He never even said the word "endotracheal tube" but he did mention "chest tube"... something that was never performed on Daye. He made his own cross examination of Dr. Nichols appear to be inept... which it most certainly was. Meier never had, as a goal, the acquittal of Mangum. I, however, would've been able to prevail had I been representing her.

Just because you don't know there was a chest tube doesn't mean it happened. Keep reading the medical records, or perhaps you don't have complete records. But it's funny that you assume they'd just make something up with no evidence.

Regarding the issue of the chest tube, that is one thing that I am in agreement with Dr. Nichols. Dr. Nichols and I both say that no chest tube was inserted in Daye. Mangum's attorney Daniel Meier says that the medical records state there was. Meier is wrong about that... like Dr. Nichols said, there was no chest tube.; February 10, 2014 at 11:59 AM
Anonymous said...: So, you admit you are operating on partial medical records. I bet if you'd promise to admit you were wrong and stop your attempts to "help" Crystal, they'd show you proof of the chest tube.; February 10, 2014 at 12:41 PM
Anonymous said...: Sid said:

"Makes no sense. Why would I want to destroy Crystal?"

You want to draw attention to and elevate yourself. You have allowed yourself to become so consumed by your quixotic quest that you are unable to think or act rationally. Your obsession has made you unaware of and/or oblivious to the harm you have inflicted on Mangum. Mangum's lawyers, several commentators and at least two articles have pointed this out, yet you persist in your conduct, at Mangum's peril.

I would urge you to seek the advice of someone whose opinion you respect (Prof. Coleman?) who can explain to you exactly why and how your efforts are so counterproductive.; February 10, 2014 at 12:59 PM
Anonymous said...: Dr. Harr continues to expose the corruption and malpractice in the judicial system, the ME's system, and Duke ... and that is detrimental to Ms. Mangum after she requested his help in understanding the medical and autopsy reports since noone else would explain them to her how?; February 10, 2014 at 1:15 PM
Walt said...: Sid, if you have to resort to a conspiracy theory to explain something, you're probably a nut.

The simple truth here is, none of your theories is error. If Crystal gets a reversal, and I don't think she will, it will be for:

1. 404(b) evidence,
2. juror misconduct, or
3. time to prepare a defense.

Of the three, the 404(b) issue is the only one that I think holds any hope. I don't like the Milton Walker testimony or frankly any 404(b) testimony. That said, the Judge's ruling on the 404(b) evidence was within the mainstream of our precedent.

The second, the COA is likely to hold the judge's curative instruction was sufficient.

On the third, Crystal caused the problems by firing lawyers right and left. I don't think the COA is going to decide to make law on those facts.

Walt-in-Durham; February 10, 2014 at 1:18 PM
Anonymous said...: Sid ... you continue to be an idiot.

You attack Meier for not bringing up Daye's criminal record an his prior Assault On a Female and Simple Assault charges. However, your own records show those were DISMISSED, and therefore inadmissible.

Also, you say Meier did not bring up the prior DV incident between Mangum and Daye a week prior. Did you miss the part where Kia Haynes testified that she often heard fighting and arguing, Meier asked Crystal about it, and Crystal repeatedly said that Daye had NEVER raised his voice to her, nor touched her, prior to this day. Should Meier have called Crystal a liar on the stand?

But, we were all correct, except Kenhyderal and your Anonymous syncohpant - this is just as inaccurate and wrong as the rest of your flogs and restates the same old discredited crap you've been spouting for a while.; February 10, 2014 at 1:23 PM
Anonymous said...: Good flog Dr. Harr.

Do you think that perhaps Mr. Meier meant the intubation tube when he said "chest tube"?

His mention of chest tube leads to even more questions about why the chest cavity seems to have been left untreated by Duke as the ME notes seem to indicate in his autopsy report with the untreated infection in the lung and blood filled chest cavity and the lack of any treatment of an infection in the Duke medical reports. Is that conclusion correct based on what was presented at trial and in the reports?; February 10, 2014 at 1:29 PM
Anonymous said...: Or perhaps Meier has access to the full Medical Records, and Dr. Roberts' report, and they may discuss a chest tube in there.

Remember, Sid has admitted he doesn't have complete records.; February 10, 2014 at 2:34 PM
Anonymous said...: Dr. Harr, this case seems to point to obstruction of justice by the ME's, the DA, and Duke in not addressing the discrepancies themselves, and/or perhaps even more malpractice than previously you thought to which they are legally responsible for, and/or accessory to the obstruction of justice, etc.; and to the lawyers involvement in the obstruction of the justice of this case for Ms. Mangum and the people as well.

The level of trust the people place in these positions that can affect life and death decisions for all make those crimes a burden too heavy to carry by Ms. Mangum and the people alone.

Adding in the continued disregard by the justice system of these life and death issues creates a threatening, hostile, and unsafe environment for all who live or travel in NC.

How are these persons holding these positions of professional responsibility to the people held accountable and investigated for their actions in this case through the USA justice system?

How is Ms. Mangum or the people assured that the Duke / Durham justice and medical systems, as well as the NC ME system are professionally capable of serving the people if there is no investigation into the roles they played and continue to perpetuate in the apparent injustice of this case?; February 10, 2014 at 2:58 PM
Anonymous said...: At least you anonymous sycophant supports you Sid; February 10, 2014 at 7:06 PM
kenhyderal said...: So says an anonymous sycophant of Rae Evans and the 05-06 Duke Lacrosse Team; February 10, 2014 at 9:05 PM
guiowen said...: OHHHH! He took Rae Evans'name in vain! That's a sacrilege!; February 10, 2014 at 10:19 PM
Anonymous said...: Sid is right on many things but so wrong on the why and the bigger picture. He really does want to harm Crystal and many of you are buying into it.

He is saying nothing here he hasn't said all along, and that has been refuted and discredited before, but he pretends it's new.

I will let Walt beat the dead horse of "even if it was malpractice, because he was only in the hospital because of Crystal she will still be A proximate cause."

Listening to Sid prattle on about what he considers important (in contrast to what is actually legally important), just shows how delusional he is.

He claims he will help Crystal, but he has said nothing here he hasn't said a million times before.

He keeps insisting no one did any investigation, though he has no evidence of that. The more likely, and correct, answer is that investigations were done, and conclusions reached, and decisions made accordingly, they just refuse to share them with Sid since he has no right to them, nor does the whiny Anonymous who will just call me a Duke troll.; February 11, 2014 at 2:59 AM
Anonymous said...: Do you even have to rely on duke or the nc justice system to do it's job 'right'?; February 11, 2014 at 6:06 AM
Anonymous said...: no - you're sitting in ny cheering on lacrosse teams and hoping your 200,000 dollar education isn't trashed by duke's antics - so you troll people on the list - making an example of duke that many are all to familiar with.

you are the whiner - duke sukes and is evil or you wouldn't be out here being an evil duke troll in the first place.

blah on you; February 11, 2014 at 6:15 AM
Anonymous said...: evil duke trolls:

1. whine about being asked to stop being evil duke trolls

2. criticize, blame, harrass and accuse others of ridiculous things that is only a reflection of themselves that they can't recognize as their own problems if the other they are vilifying has a justifiable problem with what duke does, or how they do it, or the harm they do - in order to try to discredit the other - all the while putting on this totally ridiculous and abusive show for all to see as an example of what duke is while cheering on the harm that is being done to 'the people' by the actions of duke and those corrupted by them

3. are just an example of what duke really is; February 11, 2014 at 6:39 AM
Anonymous said...: Odd that no one (especially Sid) is responding to the points about how Daye's prior Assault charges, which were dismissed, are inadmiasible, and so he's wrong to say that shows a problem with the defense, nor has he addressed the point that Crystal was asked, more than once, if Daye had ever yelled at or struck her before that day (as some witnesses had testifies), and she specifically denied it. Does Sid really think it would have been helpful to the defense to openly expose Crystal as a liar?; February 11, 2014 at 6:55 AM
Anonymous said...: that is your limited biased view of reality only and they are not Dr. Harr's concerns obviously

you are petty in your concerns and your accusations; February 11, 2014 at 7:11 AM
Anonymous said...: So, after watching the flog I would have to say that the autopsy report is flawed. The part about the spleen being removed or not seems like a major failure in documenting the facts of the autopsy. So you can make a case that Nichols was very sloppy based on case load or whatever.

Then the quote from the Judge to the jury explaining that there can be a case for death outside of the knife wound. Cannot remember exactly what was said as the flog is long and skipping to that part does not seem to be an option.

Maybe Walt or A Lawyer can comment if that if the appeal succeeds can this poor autopsy report be looked at again for what really happened to Daye.; February 11, 2014 at 9:16 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous Anonymous said...

that is your limited biased view of reality only and they are not Dr. Harr's concerns obviously

Except that Dr. Harr specifically points to not bringing up Daye's prior Assault Charges, nor the prior incidents of Domestic Violence against Crystal by Daye as part of his "proof" that her attorney wasn't interested in defending her.

So, it was his concern, but as they are demonstrably wrong, he just ignores them.; February 11, 2014 at 10:32 AM
Anonymous said...: To Anonymous at 7:11

They are solely and uniquely Sid's concerns. He is the one who has raised these claims to bolster Mangum's self defense claim.; February 11, 2014 at 10:34 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
So, you admit you are operating on partial medical records. I bet if you'd promise to admit you were wrong and stop your attempts to "help" Crystal, they'd show you proof of the chest tube.

Hey, for once I'm in agreement with Dr. Nichols... there was no chest tube!!
So now you're claiming that corporate attorney Meier is correct in stating that a chest tube was inserted and Dr. Nichols is wrong?; February 11, 2014 at 12:07 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Walt said...
Sid, if you have to resort to a conspiracy theory to explain something, you're probably a nut.

The simple truth here is, none of your theories is error. If Crystal gets a reversal, and I don't think she will, it will be for:

1. 404(b) evidence,
2. juror misconduct, or
3. time to prepare a defense.

Of the three, the 404(b) issue is the only one that I think holds any hope. I don't like the Milton Walker testimony or frankly any 404(b) testimony. That said, the Judge's ruling on the 404(b) evidence was within the mainstream of our precedent.

The second, the COA is likely to hold the judge's curative instruction was sufficient.

On the third, Crystal caused the problems by firing lawyers right and left. I don't think the COA is going to decide to make law on those facts.

Walt-in-Durham

Hey, Walt, answer me this: Was Daye's spleen removed at surgery on April 3, 2011 as was testified by Dr. Nichols on the witness stand, or was it present at autopsy as recorded in Dr. Nichols' autopsy report of April 14, 2011?

If you can give a logical explanation to support both premises, you should enter my "Enlighten Sid Contest."; February 11, 2014 at 12:11 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Sid ... you continue to be an idiot.

You attack Meier for not bringing up Daye's criminal record an his prior Assault On a Female and Simple Assault charges. However, your own records show those were DISMISSED, and therefore inadmissible.

Also, you say Meier did not bring up the prior DV incident between Mangum and Daye a week prior. Did you miss the part where Kia Haynes testified that she often heard fighting and arguing, Meier asked Crystal about it, and Crystal repeatedly said that Daye had NEVER raised his voice to her, nor touched her, prior to this day. Should Meier have called Crystal a liar on the stand?

But, we were all correct, except Kenhyderal and your Anonymous syncohpant - this is just as inaccurate and wrong as the rest of your flogs and restates the same old discredited crap you've been spouting for a while.

Crystal was not prepared by the defense attorneys to take the stand. If she did take the stand she should have been told to tell the truth. I don't believe that Mangum was telling the truth when she said that she and Daye did not argue. She was probably coached by her attorney to say that.

Crystal has lied to me on numerous occasions about the 2010 incident, however, as I have repeatedly said in the past, Perry Mason's clients lied to him all the time but that didn't mean they were guilty.; February 11, 2014 at 12:16 PM
Anonymous said...: Same old boring bullshit....; February 11, 2014 at 12:21 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Good flog Dr. Harr.

Do you think that perhaps Mr. Meier meant the intubation tube when he said "chest tube"?

His mention of chest tube leads to even more questions about why the chest cavity seems to have been left untreated by Duke as the ME notes seem to indicate in his autopsy report with the untreated infection in the lung and blood filled chest cavity and the lack of any treatment of an infection in the Duke medical reports. Is that conclusion correct based on what was presented at trial and in the reports?

Thanks.

Meier wasn't confused when he said chest tube. He did so in an attempt to mislead Mangum into believing that he was addressing the "tube" problem. However,
if the chest cavity was full of blood from the knife wound, a chest tube should have been inserted. The chest X-ray and scan pretty much ruled out injury to the left lung... The trauma surgeons never even entered the chest cavity, limiting their exploratory surgery to the abdomen. So when Meier states that the left lung and diaphragm were perforated, he is lying.; February 11, 2014 at 12:22 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Same old boring bullshit....

I'd like to refer you to DurhamWonderland.; February 11, 2014 at 12:23 PM
Anonymous said...: You now think that Crystal lied in her testimony? You just broke Kenhyderal's heart.; February 11, 2014 at 12:51 PM
Anonymous said...: Meier wasn't confused when he said chest tube. He did so in an attempt to mislead Mangum into believing that he was addressing the "tube" problem. However,
if the chest cavity was full of blood from the knife wound, a chest tube should have been inserted. The chest X-ray and scan pretty much ruled out injury to the left lung... The trauma surgeons never even entered the chest cavity, limiting their exploratory surgery to the abdomen. So when Meier states that the left lung and diaphragm were perforated, he is lying.

Sid is starting to see his conspiracy unravel - he bases it on inadmissible testimony, now says Crystal was clearly lying in her testimony, he knows he doesn't have all the records - and NO ONE is taking him seriously, so he's resorting to calling people liars, when he has ZERO evidence to back up his claims.

Poor Sid.; February 11, 2014 at 2:56 PM
Anonymous said...: You obviously did not watch the flog - as there is plenty of evidence there to show that it was not Ms. Mangum who killed Mr. Daye, that this evidence and facts are being covered up by the ME's, Duke, the DA, the lawyers, and the judge by not allowing sufficient time in order for Ms. Mangum to work with a defense lawyer who will actually assist her, and that Ms. Mangum is being forced to pay for Duke's malpractice with the assistance of the ME, Duke, and the DA - with the Durham NC public defenders' legal support and the judge's lead.; February 11, 2014 at 4:13 PM
Anonymous said...: Remember, only self-defense would have gotten Mangum a NG. The causation would be the manslaughter v. 2nd v. 1st. Sid ignores the self-defense, or hides behind spurious arguments like inadmissible dismissed criminal charges and alleged abuse that Crystal denies (because apparently Sid thinks she was a liar).

And, Dr. Roberts (the vaunted expert Sid keeps citing), who reviewed the autopsy, and the complete medical records (something Sid admits he's never done), ultimately concluded, according to Crystal herself, that while there were issues with the autopsy, the ultimately conclusion, that Crystal died of a complication from the stab wound, was correct.

And, remember, SID could be totally right about the esophageal intubation, and the rest - and Daye still would have died from complications from the stabe wound, because but-for the stab wound, he wouldn't have been in the hospital for that issue. But, Walt has explained that many, many times, and you, and Sid and the rest of the la la land dwellers simply ignores that fact because it doesn't fit your paranoid world view.

Unless Duke committed an INTENTIONAL act (killing Daye on purpose), it wouldn't cut off the chain of events started by Crystal stabbing Daye (but, again, that's been explained ad nauseum and you refuse to listen.; February 11, 2014 at 4:32 PM
Anonymous said...: If Duke committed an intentional act and killed Daye on purpose, that act clearly would cut off Mangum's liability.

However, I understand that an independent act would also cut off liability. Kenny has attempted to argue this, and Sidney has barely touched on it. If an esophageal intubation were the result of delirium tremens, Mangum would have to prove the the onset of the DTs was wholly unrelated to the stab wound. This is a difficult task. I understand the law is such that a pre- existing condition (e.g., alcoholism) does not cut off liability. Moreover, I understand that trauma can trigger or exacerbate the DTs.

I have suggested that Sidney pursue this argument, but, as is typical, he has largely ignored the suggestion. Kenny, as is typical, makes unsupported assertions he expects others to embrace without evidence.; February 11, 2014 at 4:46 PM
Anonymous said...: If the malpractice was the cause of death as is indicated in the medical records - then the stab wound was not - and by law - duke holds responsibility for their own malpractice.

Heck yeah I've got a problem with duke doing that to Mr. Daye and Ms. Mangum and the people of NC - you betcha. Not paranoia - realism - it sucks to watch - and its even worse to be in any way affected negatively by them when they profess to be leaders in health services - it is worrisome to say the least. They have taken their trust issues too far in this case for justice or the health of the people - which are areas of professional practice that they supposedly 'specialize' in - so there are no exuses for what they have done in this case.

Your world view doesn't include Duke / Durham or the NC corrupt justice system apparently. Unfortunately - many people do have a worldview that does include that - and they are not paranoid either, but they are rightly and justly concerned because they are realistic and see Duke for what it really is and what they really do - not some hyped up sports entertainment adrenaline fueled we are the winners - yeah for me scenerio that so many buy into - or a $200,000 dollar education that fuels the need to win at all costs - but the difference between life and death for many. You do understand that don't you?; February 11, 2014 at 5:13 PM
Anonymous said...: If the malpractice was the cause of death as is indicated in the medical records - then the stab wound was not - and by law - duke holds responsibility for their own malpractice.

Medical malpractice does not - by law - cut off criminal liability on the part of Mangum.

This point has been made so often, with case law provided to support this point. I can draw only one conclusion: You are a liar.; February 11, 2014 at 5:37 PM
Anonymous said...: You do understand that more than 1 person can be responsible for something, right? If Duke committed malpractice, they are responsible for that, and the Daye family can sue them for those damages. But, that doesn't absolve Crystal's criminal liability.

If Walt holds Sid while A Lawyer shoots him, they are BOTH responsible for murder - see, 2 people, 1 incident.

In this case, Crystal is criminally liable, Duke is potentially civilly liable.

Why that is so hard for you to understand ... and, NC Case Law is CLEAR medical malpractice is NOT an intervening cause, so EVEN IF Duke committed Malpractice, since the only reason Daye was in a position for Duke to commit malpractice was the stab would that sent him to the hospital ... Crystal would still be responsible, even if Duke were also responsible.

Though this has ALL been explained to you, and you will continue to ignore it and instead listen to Sid and his ramblings that are not grounded in reality or law.; February 11, 2014 at 5:40 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous 5:40:

The poster is not unbelievably stupid. The poster is a liar.; February 11, 2014 at 5:57 PM
Lance The Supreme Poster of Enlightenment said...: Sid -- It's been my experience that organs removed during surgery end up with a pathologist at some point for analysis.

As a former ER physician wouldn't you agree?

It stands to reason then that Mr. Daye's spleen could have been removed during surgery AND still been "present" at the autopsy.; February 11, 2014 at 7:18 PM
Anonymous said...: The judge states in the trial that if the malpractice is the sole reason for death then it negates the law ya'll insist on everybody not understanding correctly for the benefit of duke.

The spleen was left intact to the body as noted in the operative reports and simply repaired (not removed).

If you watched the flog - you would have seen that.; February 12, 2014 at 12:03 AM
Anonymous said...: Evil Duke Trolls: people who call those who actually watched the flog liars because they didn't so have no idea what they are trolling about, and only act to troll and falsly accuse others - simply because they do not give a hoot about the subject matter - only that Ms. Mangum is harmed, Dr. Harr is discredited, and any who have concerns about what is happening is trolled and falsly accused ... all for the 'benefit' of duke. Nice show evil duke trolls - you do duke proud - yeah!; February 12, 2014 at 12:22 AM
Anonymous said...: I still want someone to explain why you don't ask Sid about his accusations (he calls proof) that the defense was biased because they didn't bring up Daye's past even though it is totally inadmissible. Can't admit Sid is wrong on something?

And now argument to support his claim of "ignoring" past abuse of Crystal by Daye, even though both the defense and prosecution directly asked her about it, and she explicitly denied it by saying "of course Crystal lied."

It's funny apparently now Crystal IS a liar but Sid can do no wrong. He's been saying all along that only he and Crystal are infallible, now it's just him.; February 12, 2014 at 3:44 AM
Anonymous said...: i didn't visit this blog to criticize Dr. Harr - i am interested in the subject matter as i have to make life and death decisions based upon what i learn about this case - and that IS my concern

ya'll troll, abuse, harrass and criticize him enough obviously - what - you think you need more people to join your evil duke troll gang

yeah ... right; February 12, 2014 at 4:02 AM
Anonymous said...: What life and death decisions? No, you come on this blog to criticize everyone else.

Duke saves many more people than are harmed via his mistakes, and it's funny that you still openly support a man who is demonstrably wrong in many areas (he is right in others), and think HE can help you make life or death decisions? He can't even understand the basics of law.

If you are relying on Sid's advice to help with life or death decisions, you have your own issues.

Sid is not saying ANYTHING about Duke that people are necessarily disagreeing with - it was possibly, if not probably, malpractice. But, that doesn't change Crystal's liability (no matter what Sid says), and Crystal's liability has nothing to do with your "life or death" decision.

If Crystal had prevailed on self-defense, the Duke stuff would have been completely irrelevant to her case (as would the autopsy). Sid hates Duke, and this is an anti-Duke vendetta, so he sabotages Crystal's self-defense claim, and her other claims, to keep his vendetta against Duke going.

I hope you have other sources of advice than a random blog visited by maybe 10 people, most of whom understand this is all a joke.; February 12, 2014 at 5:17 AM
Anonymous said...: whatever, if you are the one with a dead patient on your hands i'm sure you might eventually see things differently - unless you enjoy dead patients on your hands or something

eh? is that it?; February 12, 2014 at 7:33 AM
Anonymous said...: I didn't visit this blog to criticize anyone actually - i was attacked by an evil duke troll gang repeatedly, incessantly, and as their sport because i do have life and death decisions to make concerning duke - and this case reveals much about duke that they apparently failed to hide this time because Dr. Harr was able to intercede and reveal the discrepancies to all. Are you just a part of the gang?

Do i think he should be talking about Ms. Mangum as he sometimes does - NO of course not - but he has plenty of evil duke trolls egging him on to do so - so that is his problem ... not mine.; February 12, 2014 at 7:59 AM
Anonymous said...: You do understand that if it weren't for Crystal Sid wouldn't have issues with Duke, right? His issue is they are treating him the way they are because of his support for Crystal and Nifong, and they treated Daye the way they did because of Crystal.

If you are looking at him to bash Duke and their quality outside of Crystal, that's nothing he has ever done. He might at some point, but he's said before Duke is a fine hospital, that just has a vendetta against Crystal; February 12, 2014 at 9:21 AM
Anonymous said...: are you seriously trying to convince me of what you are saying?

seriously?

i do have life and death decisions to make concerning duke - therefore i do know very well what and who and why of duke - even more so than before this particular case ... but you read about them - and get to know them over the years - and ... well - i assure you - you convince noone - probably not even yourself

blah; February 12, 2014 at 9:29 AM
Anonymous said...: It is common and routine practice for organs (especially in situations involving potential criminal activity)....removed during surgery....to be preserved and available during autopsy.
I also want to point out again, for the 10,000th time, that NONE of this ridiculous discussion about Duke, tubes, Nichols.....has anything AT ALL to do with Mangum, the trial, her guilt, and her appeal. I don't give a damn what Harr, the racist asshat, has to say. All of this nonsense is just blabber for this silly web site.
Mangum is not going to win an appeal either.....404 notwithstanding. She will do ten years or more.....as a minimum; February 12, 2014 at 9:38 AM
Anonymous said...: So she hurt you that bad huh?; February 12, 2014 at 9:40 AM
Anonymous said...: Mangum has hurt a lot of people (herself included) as a result of her bad choices and bad decisions. She needs to be in prison.; February 12, 2014 at 11:06 AM
Anonymous said...: Many more were hurt by Duke and the Duke / Durham justice system than by Ms. Mangum since they are the ones running the show - not Ms. Mangum obviously.; February 12, 2014 at 12:00 PM
Anonymous said...: It's funny how no one seemed to care when the victims were white lacrosse players. A little more attention to some of those issues back then might have helped everyone (including Mangum) in the long run.; February 12, 2014 at 12:22 PM
Anonymous said...: NoOne?; February 12, 2014 at 12:27 PM
Anonymous said...: Some might wonder why the Duke lacrosse team doesn't actually protest this case as well as their own - since they now may deem themselves 'persons of interest to be framed by Duke again' - based on the continued framing nature demonstrated by Duke in this case.; February 12, 2014 at 12:36 PM
Anonymous said...: It's certainly a surprise that the lacrosse players aren't helping Sid, and his pro-Nifong website, to free the murderer who falsely accused them of a crime that didn't happen.

Beyond that, I imagine their grip on reality is too firm to get involved in something like this.; February 12, 2014 at 12:53 PM
Anonymous said...: naw - just the money they won so they can hope to stay as far away from them as possible perhaps - or are they now privately considered by duke to be duke hero's to be esteemed, admired, and held in highest regard by all of duke now?; February 12, 2014 at 1:04 PM
Anonymous said...: That's doubtful. Duke had to pay the lacrosse defendants millions of dollars for all the wrongs Duke did to them, so I doubt they are on Duke's Christmas card list. Likewise, I doubt the lacrosse players want anything to do with Duke after everything Duke did to them. You must not have followed the lacrosse case, or you would know this.; February 12, 2014 at 2:57 PM
Anonymous said...: well - wasn't sure if there was some private duke lacrosse team hero worship going on or not at duke - you say no - and i certainly do not know; February 12, 2014 at 3:15 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "But, Walt has explained that many, many times, and you, and Sid and the rest of the la la land dwellers simply ignores that fact because it doesn't fit your paranoid world view... You should read carefully the Judges explanation to the jury of this. Unlike Walt he knows that not any or every post event happening that led to death is a proximate cause.; February 12, 2014 at 4:56 PM
Anonymous said...: So, Kenny,

Why don't you convince us? Don't just give your conclusion. Back it up with evidence--real evidence. It would be best if you found a credible expert (Harr is not credible for reasons you understand).

If you decline to respond, I think we will have to conclude that you have no evidence.; February 12, 2014 at 5:19 PM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: "You should read carefully the Judges explanation to the jury of this. Unlike Walt he knows that not any or every post event happening that led to death is a proximate cause."

BZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZt Run him.

Again, you misrepresent the jury instruction. The instruction said that "medical negligence or neglect does not excuse the defendant unless the neglect was the sole cause of death."

That is what I have been writing for almost three years. You have consistently misrepresented the law and the facts. I don't expect you to ever be honest in your postings. But, the instruction was clear and consistent with the law as I have posted it.; February 12, 2014 at 5:51 PM
Walt said...: Sid wrote: " you should enter my "Enlighten Sid Contest."

You have consistently refused enlightenment. I don't expect you to change now.; February 12, 2014 at 5:55 PM
Anonymous said...: Isn't that for the DA to investigate, (since the malpractice is clearly evident in the medical records and complications are noted on the autopsy report), to determine actual cause of death before charging anyone with murder?; February 12, 2014 at 5:57 PM
Anonymous said...: No. Malpractice is a civil, not criminal matter. It is also not relevant to the Mangum prosecution. This has been explained time and time again.; February 12, 2014 at 6:40 PM
Anonymous said...: that doesn't make sense; February 12, 2014 at 6:42 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous said:

"well - wasn't sure if there was some private duke lacrosse team hero worship going on or not at duke - you say no - and i certainly do not know"

No. You asked if they were "considered by duke to be duke hero's to be esteemed, admired, and held in highest regard by all of duke now?" They never were. In fact, Duke went out of its way to persecute and shun them. There is no reason to believe they are now.; February 12, 2014 at 6:42 PM
Anonymous said...: that is NOT what what said and you know it.

why do you consistently do that when anyone can look up a few posts and see that is NOT what was said at all?

???; February 12, 2014 at 6:55 PM
Anonymous said...: you do that ALL the time

why?; February 12, 2014 at 7:01 PM
Anonymous said...: you make up your own little reasons to troll people - and you aren't even right about what your trolling about - and everyone can watch you doing it and know you are wrong to begin with

you do that a LOT

why?; February 12, 2014 at 7:04 PM
Anonymous said...: Stop bullying me you evil duke troll.; February 12, 2014 at 7:14 PM
Anonymous said...: seriously?

that's your answer

DO NOT troll me again ... ever

thanks; February 12, 2014 at 7:17 PM
Anonymous said...: The quoted language in my post at 6:42 PM are your exact words. If you didn't mean to say what you said, just admit it. It'sno big deal. THis is a blog, not a doctoral thesis. People misspeak all the time. Otherwise, own it.; February 12, 2014 at 7:22 PM
Anonymous said...: are you too lazy to go look at it yourself again or what?; February 12, 2014 at 7:25 PM
Anonymous said...: I looked at it again. My quotes were 100% accurate (I must admit that some of the credit for my perfect quoting belongs to "cut and paste." Yay me!; February 12, 2014 at 7:43 PM
Anonymous said...: you are a bully evil duke troll; February 12, 2014 at 7:46 PM
Anonymous said...: why do you choose to cut and paste to create only your own little trolling agendas anyway?

quess ya just can't stop can ya?

did you achieve nontrollhood for even ONE day in your little experiment to see if you could - i don't think you did, but maybe i missed that time; February 12, 2014 at 7:55 PM
kenhyderal said...: Walt said: "The instruction said that "medical negligence or neglect does not excuse the defendant unless the neglect was the sole cause of death."........ Ah, but it was. And, a full investigation of this medical misadventure would confirm that ( medical negligence in the treatment of alcoholic withdrawal unrelated to the stab wound); February 12, 2014 at 9:00 PM
Anonymous said...: If the grand jury had seen how repulsive Crystal Mangum was they probably never would have indicted those guys.No way any white man would ever want to have sex with her.It just isn't physically possible.; February 13, 2014 at 3:01 AM
Anonymous said...: Blacks sure do like to stab people.; February 13, 2014 at 3:03 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny, where is your evidence?

You are only expressing your opinion. As noted earlier, your opinion has no value. When you posted that Crystal was raped by mystery rapists, you effectively asked others not to take you seriously. We don't.; February 13, 2014 at 5:06 AM
Anonymous said...: Walt said: "The instruction said that "medical negligence or neglect does not excuse the defendant unless the neglect was the sole cause of death."........ Ah, but it was. And, a full investigation of this medical misadventure would confirm that ( medical negligence in the treatment of alcoholic withdrawal unrelated to the stab wound)

Why do you continue to believe there was NOT a full investigation? The Defense had experts (that's called an investigation), and after a full investigation, Dr. Roberts agreed with Dr. Nichols conclusion on the cause of death - so whether she found malpractice or not, she, according to Crystal, concluded that the stabbing was a proximate cause of the death.

Just because you disagree with the conclusions of that investigation (and the results aren't shared with you) doesn't mean it didn't happen.

Of course, all this has been explained before, and you will just continue to ignore it and whine.; February 13, 2014 at 6:00 AM
Anonymous said...: Can y'all believe the evil Duke allowed all this snow and ice to get dumped on us? It's all a plan to cause injuries and increase their patients. First they manipulated mental health, then they started intentionally injuring people who are admitted for their political agenda, now they are controlling our weather!

Maybe Anonymous was right ... maybe they are evil ... they are Devils after all!; February 13, 2014 at 6:04 AM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "You are only expressing your opinion. As noted earlier, your opinion has no value. When you posted that Crystal was raped by mystery rapists, you effectively asked others not to take you seriously. We don't"........
No "mystery" rapists. The perpetrators were present at the Duke Lacrosse Party. Some Players involved who left no DNA. No one has ever seen a list of all who were present at this party because no such investigation was ever done. Ridiculing Crystal's accusations has been a constant strategy. Mystery rapists, levitation, suspended animation, bathroom size etc. etc. Use such ridicule to try and distract from the horrendous behaviour of these delinquents.; February 13, 2014 at 9:46 AM
guiowen said...: Kenhyderal,
Please stop whining. No one believes your ridiculous story.; February 13, 2014 at 9:53 AM
Anonymous said...: Ken:

When you and Sid lie about the fake rape case it makes anything you say about the Mangum murder case less believable.

A person's credibility is an important asset. Once lost it is difficult to regain. These are lessons Crystal learned the hard way when she decided to testify in her murder trial. You should make an effort to learn them, too.; February 13, 2014 at 10:26 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

Let me add to the 10:26 comment. It is not just lies that make you less believable. Outrageous stories like the mystery rapist story have the same effect.

People tend not to believe liars. They also tend not to believe those who create preposterous scenarios they ask others to accept as reasonable.

The rest of the 10:26 comment is valid. You, Sidney and Crystal would do well to heed it.

Kenny, as you rebuild your credibility, you must provide credible evidence to support your opinions and claims. Otherwise, people will justifiably ignore you. If so, you may as we'll not post.; February 13, 2014 at 11:19 AM
Anonymous said...: Neither Sid nor Kenny have ever had credible evidence. Kenny just makes stuff up out of whole cloth, and while Sid has a lot of evidence, the outlandish conclusions he then draws, and his inability to assimilate new information discredits everything else he has.

Yes, there were discrepancies in the autopsy report and the operative report - but Sid refuses to believe there was a logical, non-criminal, explanation. Plus, he simply ignores the law when it contradicts one of his claims.

If you can't respond to people who poke holes in your argument (like Daye's prior record), but just ignore it, or come up with a more outlandish conspiracy (Crystal did lie, but it's because she was coached to lie), you have ZERO credibility.

No wonder no one but Kenny and whiny Duke-hater Anonymous takes you seriously.; February 13, 2014 at 11:56 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny claims: No "mystery" rapists. The perpetrators were present at the Duke Lacrosse Party. Some Players involved who left no DNA.

Earlier you had claimed the perpetrators were non-Players who did leave DNA, and their DNA as what was found on and in Crystal, but never tested.

It does seem like there is a "mystery" as to who these alleged rapist were. "Mystery rapists" seems appropriate. Even you don't know how to describe them.; February 13, 2014 at 1:08 PM
kenhyderal said...: I had one typo in my statement Some Players "were" involved who left no DNA. The way the term Mystery Rapists has been used purposely suggests that Crystal invented such ghosts. This along with interpreting what she testified to, while describing her frightening assault, as levitating and to being assaulted by large numbers of burly athletes while her and all were squeezed into a tiny bathroom are all designed to suggest she was hallucinating. The same thing went on here, about the mattress, she raised the corner of to deflect knives being hurled at her, as if she picked up a mattress like a massive shield. Then claiming, because the mattress was found still on the bed, that she must be lying. Victims like Crystal are easy targets for cruel heartless bullies who take perverse pleasure in picking on the very vulnerable.; February 13, 2014 at 2:19 PM
Anonymous said...: Of course, an alternate explanation, accepted by Cooper, the special prosecutors, Himan, Baker, and ultimately Nifong,was that Crystal's allegation was false (in the sense that it was not true, and not necessarily implying she was lying).

When there is no credible evidence to support her allegation and much to contradict it, the most logical explanation is that the allegation was false, not that the unidentified attendees you invent with no credible evidence were the mystery rapists.; February 13, 2014 at 2:34 PM
guiowen said...: Kenhyderal,
It is true that there some people here who dislike Crystal immensely -- mainly, these are people close to the lacrosse players, or perhaps friends and family of Reginald Daye.
Most of us here, however, really don't have a stake in what happens to Crystal; we simply want justice to be done. We do enjoy watching you tie yourself up in knots with your ridiculous theories, or with your attempts to tell us that you can let "sacrilege" mean anything you want it to mean -- there is actually some web site that says the word doesn't have to mean exactly what the dictionary says.
In any case no one whose opinion matters believes what you say.; February 13, 2014 at 2:41 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

Did you listen to her testimony? She was asked if she simply lifted the mattress, she said no, she PULLED I OFF THE BED and hid underneath it. When asked how it got replaced, she said that Daye or someone else must have put it back. She explicitly stated it was pulled completely off the bed.; February 13, 2014 at 2:45 PM
kenhyderal said...: Guiowen: See http://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/sacrilegious; February 13, 2014 at 3:15 PM
Anonymous said...: Ken:

No one suggests Mangum was hallucinating. She simply lied about being raped. It has been proven that she lied. You do yourself no favors when you repeat her lies and invent fantastic stories about mystery rapists.

Mangum has stopped lying about being raped. You should, too.; February 13, 2014 at 3:17 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous 2:45:

Kenny's analysis of Crystal's testimony is consistent with his analysis of her rape allegation: you must take any statement (or portion of a statement) as true unless you can prove that it cannot possibly be true.

While there is no evidence (other than Crystal's allegation itself) to support the mystery rapist theory, one cannot prove with absolute certainty that it could not possibly be true. Thus, in Kenny's mind, it confirms Crystal's allegation (or at least part of her allegation).

In the same way, although the details of her testimony regarding the mattress are inconsistent with the physical evidence, that does not prove that she did not shield herself with the mattress in a different way than she claimed. Thus, in Kenny's mind, it confirms Crystal's self-defense claim.

The most interesting thing about Kenny's repeated defense of the mystery rapist theory in the last couple of threads is that he was warned that his outrageous claims destroyed his credibility and made it unlikely that anyone would believe his other claims.

He likes to talk. He doesn't care if he is ignored.; February 13, 2014 at 3:24 PM
Anonymous said...: Guiowen:

I found Kenny's complaints about sacrilegious comments about Dr. King to be quite interesting.

King, as Kenny notes, is widely admired and respected. I believe the reason for this admiration is that King appealed to the noble aspirations of most Americans, who look forward to post-racial society in which a person's character is more important than the color of their skin.

Kenny tells us that rather than impose our own biases on our image of King, we should look to the actions of his colleagues.

Rather than the inspiration many of us gain from King's words and actions, Kenny tells us that King should be viewed as a race hustler like Jesse Jackson.

And Kenny complains about saclrilege.; February 13, 2014 at 3:46 PM
guiowen said...: Kenhyderal,
First of all, you said to look the word up in ANY dictionary. Second, even in what you're citing now,
"Sacrilegious means very disrespectful towards something sacred."
In other words, you still seem to be saying that MLK is sacred.
Well, maybe to you, he is. Not many would agree with you.; February 13, 2014 at 3:50 PM
guiowen said...: To Anonymous 3:46,
Kenhyderal seems to think using King's words for any purpose that Kenny doesn't like is ipso facto disrespectful.; February 13, 2014 at 3:54 PM
kenhyderal said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; February 13, 2014 at 4:42 PM
kenhyderal said...: @Anonymous 3:46 : Now that Rev Dr. King's greatness is universally acknowledged everyone has jumped on the bandwagon. Many of these are the moral descendants of people who during Dr. King's lifetime considered him also to be a "race baiter". The Rev. Jesse Jackson is one of his disciples. Dr. King's family know this. Similarly those who know Crystal Mangum do not recognize the caricature so recklessly portrayed of her. We know her as a, beautiful, kind and moral person who has struggled valiantly against the odds.; February 13, 2014 at 4:46 PM
Anonymous said...: kenhyderal said...

"Similarly those who know Crystal Mangum do not recognize the caricature so recklessly portrayed of her. We know her as a, beautiful, kind and moral person who has struggled valiantly against the odds."

Bahahahahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahahahahaha

Bahahahahahahahahaha; February 13, 2014 at 5:18 PM
Anonymous said...: Mangum's past has been too well documented for anyone to portray her as a "beautiful, kind and moral person." She is a persn who has made some terrible decisions and done bad things that have hurt people - herself and her children included.

Mangum no doubt has a story to tell and it is probably worth listening to. I am willing to give her the benefit of the doubt and attribute some of that to circumstances beyond her control (i.e., mental health issues) or circumstances that she let get out of control (drugs). I think others would be willing to do the same.

If you have a case to make on Mangum's behalf you should make it without lying. You do Mangum and yourself no favors by being transparently dishonest.; February 13, 2014 at 5:28 PM
kenhyderal said...: Your back-handed empathy for Crystal is disingenuous. Crystal is not a drug addict and that is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Characterizing her as a drug addict has been one of the vile slanders that have hurt Crystal; February 13, 2014 at 8:42 PM
guiowen said...: Kenny,
None of us really care whether she's an addict.
It is too bad that people of your ilk led her to think she was untouchable. Your posturing made her believe that any story would be accepted as true, so long as there were no photographs showing it to be false. And if there were such proof: why, clearly Duke must have paid someone to doctor the photos. Now you see the consequences of this, and your only reply is to blame us for it.; February 13, 2014 at 9:06 PM
Anonymous said...: Someone (friends, family, the police, courts, etc.) needed to step in and stop Mangum's pattern of dangerous and destructive behavior. No one did. Instead, they ignored it, made excuses for it and even lionized her. This is the predictable result. Congratulations, I guess.; February 14, 2014 at 6:21 AM
Anonymous said...: The predictable results is that duke the duke / durham justice system AND the ME's AND the public defender's office show their corrupted unjust deadly patterns of deciet and disrepect of the legal system and the people once again, and still expect the people to accept what their doing without complaint.; February 14, 2014 at 8:02 AM
kenhyderal said...: Guiowen said: "It is too bad that people of your ilk led her to think she was untouchable. Your posturing made her believe that any story would be accepted as true, so long as there were no photographs showing it to be false. And if there were such proof: why, clearly Duke must have paid someone to doctor the photos. Now you see the consequences of this, and your only reply is to blame us for it.........Untouchable for what??? Photographs of what??? Any story about what??? Crystal did nothing wrong and she has been hounded, pilloried and ostracized. The unjust smears made it hard for her to get work and find accommodation. This, in desperation, led her to seek help from people like Walker, a schizophrenic and Daye an alcoholic. You are incapable of understanding because of the dishonest propaganda you've subconsciously bought into, which colors any inclination, however genuine, you may have for empathy for Crystal.; February 14, 2014 at 8:45 AM
Anonymous said...: A beautiful (ugh), kind (as in a conviction for child abuse) and Moral (pardon me while I throw up in my mouth) person?
Mangum is a convicted murderer.....; February 14, 2014 at 10:25 AM
Lance The Supreme Poster of Enlightenment said...: Kenyderal -- Just to be clear. Crystal's poor choice of men predates Walker -- going back to at least 1993.

As for work, she's been working as an "exotic dancer" since 2002, which predates the Duke LAX incident by at least 4 years.

To state that it's "hard for her to get work and find accommodation" simply ignores her own history and poor life choices.

Making these excuses for her is simply enabling her.; February 14, 2014 at 12:58 PM
guiowen said...: Kenhyderal,
You accepted all of Crystal's wild stories as true. The car she stole? "Oh the cab driver gave her the keys so she could drive him home; it's just that she didn't realize he wasn't in the car."
Speeding? "Oh, she was just driving a very few miles over the limit." Running down a police officer? "Oh, she was just being friendly and he stepped in her way." The fact that there was no DNA from the LAX players no her? "Oh, it's just that there were three non-players who had been brought to the party by two of the players, who are known to one of the players, who's a friend of the Great Kilgo" The Great Kilgo disappeared? "Oh it's clear that some lawyers are after him to shut up." What if she contradicts herself, and what if her claims are contradicted by the physical evidence? "Oh, these are just minor discrepancies, and anyway you can't expect someone to remember things after a night of terror." In any case, no need to worry, the master debater Ken Edwards will clear up all such problems.

Unfortunately for Crystal, she believed you. It's funny that if you and Sidney had taken my advice (insincere, you will doubtless say), Crystal would probably be out by now. Thanks to your (no doubt sincere) advice, she's up the river (in gaol, as you would say) for the next ten years.; February 14, 2014 at 12:59 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
You now think that Crystal lied in her testimony? You just broke Kenhyderal's heart.

Based upon what Mangum told me and the incident a week prior to the stabbing in which she was taken to an urgent care clinic after being abused by Daye, I find it hard to believe her statement that they had never fought prior to the third. I believe that she was coached to say this by her attorney.; February 14, 2014 at 1:24 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: As the commenter that followed you stated, there is plenty of evidence presented in the flog to show that Mangum was not responsible for Daye's death.

As for Dr. Nichols being a liar, he did perjure himself when he stated that the spleen was removed during the April 3, 2011 surgery... because that statement contradicts his observations about the spleen during his autopsy. Can you explain that in a way that Nichols is not a liar?; February 14, 2014 at 1:30 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Remember, only self-defense would have gotten Mangum a NG. The causation would be the manslaughter v. 2nd v. 1st. Sid ignores the self-defense, or hides behind spurious arguments like inadmissible dismissed criminal charges and alleged abuse that Crystal denies (because apparently Sid thinks she was a liar).

And, Dr. Roberts (the vaunted expert Sid keeps citing), who reviewed the autopsy, and the complete medical records (something Sid admits he's never done), ultimately concluded, according to Crystal herself, that while there were issues with the autopsy, the ultimately conclusion, that Crystal died of a complication from the stab wound, was correct.

And, remember, SID could be totally right about the esophageal intubation, and the rest - and Daye still would have died from complications from the stabe wound, because but-for the stab wound, he wouldn't have been in the hospital for that issue. But, Walt has explained that many, many times, and you, and Sid and the rest of the la la land dwellers simply ignores that fact because it doesn't fit your paranoid world view.

Unless Duke committed an INTENTIONAL act (killing Daye on purpose), it wouldn't cut off the chain of events started by Crystal stabbing Daye (but, again, that's been explained ad nauseum and you refuse to listen.

It is very probable that Daye was intentionally killed in order to have Mangum charged with murder. Mangum has been vilified to O.J. Simpson proportions here in North Carolina... and especially at Duke University and its hospital. How many patients do you think actually wind up brain dead due to an esophageal intubation? ..also considering the intubation was performed by someone experienced enough to administer a paralytic agent.

Yes, Daye could've been purposely killed, but don't expect an investigation into that possibility.; February 14, 2014 at 1:39 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Lance The Supreme Poster of Enlightenment said...
Sid -- It's been my experience that organs removed during surgery end up with a pathologist at some point for analysis.

As a former ER physician wouldn't you agree?

It stands to reason then that Mr. Daye's spleen could have been removed during surgery AND still been "present" at the autopsy.

Yes, it is possible that Daye's spleen could've been sent to pathology if it was removed at his April 3, 2011 operation. The problem is how did Dr. Nichols get the weight and description of the organ that was removed eleven days earlier?

Nichols got the weight and description of the organ from observing it at autopsy. It was present and not removed... which goes along with what the operative report states. I do not recall seeing any pathologist report on the spleen. Also, Dr. Nichols had plenty of opportunity to photograph the allegedly perforated organs or defensive injuries to Daye's left upper extremity... but he didn't. That's because they did not exist. The only lesions were to the colon, and a small lesion to the spleen.; February 14, 2014 at 1:54 PM
Anonymous said...: Why would Duke want to kill a person they supported so vigorously in the lacrosse case?

Assuming Duke had an interest in seeing Mangum convicted, why would they want to kill the state's best witness against her?

What did Duke and its hospital have to gain by incarcerating Mangum?

What evidence do you have to support such an irresponsible and unprofessional accusation?

You are making no sense.; February 14, 2014 at 1:54 PM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

If someone "coached" you to lie, would you? I know I wouldn't.

Did Mangum tell you that her lawyer told her to lie, or are you bearing false witness again?

Do you think anyone coached Mangum to lie about the lacrosse payers raping her, or did she come up with that lie all on her own?; February 14, 2014 at 1:58 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Walt said...
Sid wrote: " you should enter my "Enlighten Sid Contest."

You have consistently refused enlightenment. I don't expect you to change now.

In other words, Walt, you have no explanation of how Dr. Nichols could describe an organ at autopsy that was allegedly removed eleven days prior to his death. Why don't you just admit that you cannot come up with an explanation instead of accusing me of lacking mental processes to receive enlightenment.; February 14, 2014 at 1:59 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Why would Duke want to kill a person they supported so vigorously in the lacrosse case?

Assuming Duke had an interest in seeing Mangum convicted, why would they want to kill the state's best witness against her?

What did Duke and its hospital have to gain by incarcerating Mangum?

What evidence do you have to support such an irresponsible and unprofessional accusation?

You are making no sense.

Pay attention. Elucidation follows.
Duke's motive for killing Daye would be to have Mangum convicted of a more serious charge than assault... and spend appreciably more time in prison.

Duke's hostility towards Mangum is because she was the accuser of the three Duke Lacrosse defendants.

Duke Hospital's desire for saddling Mangum with a lengthy incarceration is a vendetta-driven payback for her role in the Duke Lacrosse case.

These observations are reached through simple logic and Sherlockian deduction. It's elementary.; February 14, 2014 at 2:05 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Sid:

If someone "coached" you to lie, would you? I know I wouldn't.

Did Mangum tell you that her lawyer told her to lie, or are you bearing false witness again?

Do you think anyone coached Mangum to lie about the lacrosse payers raping her, or did she come up with that lie all on her own?

Mangum did not tell me that she was coached to lie about anything. That is just my opinion about what happened, as her so-called defense attorney did his best to undermine her case.; February 14, 2014 at 2:08 PM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

But Duke supported Mangum in the lacrosse case and was hostile towards it players. Its hostile actions against the players cost Duke many millions of dollars. Did you not follow the lacrosse case?

And if Duke wanted to incarcerate Mangum why in the world would they kill the state's best witness against her? It makes no sense.

What did Duke gain by Mangum's incarceration? Why would they murder someone for no gain?

You don't even make out a circumstantial case.; February 14, 2014 at 3:25 PM
kenhyderal said...: Nifong Supporter said: "
Based upon what Mangum told me and the incident a week prior to the stabbing in which she was taken to an urgent care clinic after being abused by Daye, I find it hard to believe her statement that they had never fought prior to the third. I believe that she was coached to say this by her attorney"........ To what end? Was the statement of O'Briant about the alleged previous incident ever investigated? What would be the motive for wanting to conceal this event if it took place?; February 14, 2014 at 3:36 PM
Anonymous said...: kenhyderal said...
"Your back-handed empathy for Crystal is disingenuous. Crystal is not a drug addict and that is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Characterizing her as a drug addict has been one of the vile slanders that have hurt Crystal"

A

s
a
r
c
a
s
t
i
c

m
a
n

i
s

a

w
o
u
n
d
e
d

m
a
n; February 14, 2014 at 5:15 PM
A Lawyer said...: Pay attention. Elucidation follows.
Duke's motive for killing Daye would be to have Mangum convicted of a more serious charge than assault... and spend appreciably more time in prison.

Duke's hostility towards Mangum is because she was the accuser of the three Duke Lacrosse defendants.

Duke Hospital's desire for saddling Mangum with a lengthy incarceration is a vendetta-driven payback for her role in the Duke Lacrosse case.

These observations are reached through simple logic and Sherlockian deduction. It's elementary.

Is there a special committee of the Board of Trustees who decides who "Duke" wants to "saddle with a lengthy incarceration"? How does that committee communicate that decision to the individual doctors at the hospital? Why do those doctors follow those instructions?

I think further elucidation is required.; February 14, 2014 at 8:46 PM
kenhyderal said...: Guiowen said:"it's just that she didn't realize he wasn't in the car." Guiowen said: "Oh, she was just being friendly and he stepped in her way." Guiowen said: "Oh, it's just that there were three non-players who had been brought to the party by two of the players, who are known to one of the players, who's a friend of the Great Kilgo" .... Just more examples of flippancy and sarcasm from Guiowen, which seem to show utter contempt for those he considers lesser then himself.; February 14, 2014 at 8:51 PM
guiowen said...: Kenny,
I'm merely repeating your tall stories, to explain why you got Crystal into such a mess.; February 14, 2014 at 8:58 PM
kenhyderal said...: I've said nothing of the kind and you know it.; February 14, 2014 at 9:10 PM
guiowen said...: Kenny, tell me, did she really steal the car?
Haven't you told us all about the three non-lacrosse players, and how Kilgo could help you find them?; February 14, 2014 at 9:24 PM
guiowen said...: So, Kenny, how come she had DNA from five men, none of whom were lacrosse players?; February 14, 2014 at 9:34 PM
kenhyderal said...: She was given the keys by the intoxicated owner and directed to drive it to his home. When contacted by the Police while still drunk in the club he denied this. The charge ended up being misdemeanor larceny not grand theft auto and the sentence reflected what everyone knew; the taxi-driver was not telling the truth; February 14, 2014 at 9:44 PM
kenhyderal said...: Two were accounted for by her sexual history in the days preceding. She gave a full and accurate account of that history and this did not include the agency clients whose names and phone numbers were all on record The Lacrosse defence, slanderously tried to suggest that she had engaged in prostitution. No attempt was ever made to identify the DNA found. Again I say that no comprehensive list of people in attendance was ever developed or if it was it was suppressed. Testing all the Players, even those known to be not present was a done for appearance.; February 14, 2014 at 9:55 PM
guiowen said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; February 14, 2014 at 10:05 PM
guiowen said...: Real smart of the taxi driver, wasn't it? I guess if I'm drunk and can't drive I'll just ask someone to take my car so I can walk home once I've slept it off.; February 14, 2014 at 10:07 PM
guiowen said...: That still leaves at least three DNAs unexplained, doesn't it? Kilgo had such a GOOD explanation!; February 14, 2014 at 10:22 PM
guiowen said...: In any case, Kenny, isn't it amusing that your loving advice got that poor benighted woman sent up the river for another then years, whereas if she'd take my cruel advice she'd probably be out by now?
Isn't life funny?; February 14, 2014 at 11:17 PM
Anonymous said...: What cruel advice was that?; February 15, 2014 at 2:58 AM
Anonymous said...: Guiowen's first cruel advice was for Crystal to accept a plea offer for a lesser charge. Sidney claimed she had been offered a plea for time served.

Guiowen's second cruel advice was that Crystal should not testify. Guiowen cruelly predicted that Crystal would make a terrible witness who ran a real risk of making things even worse for herself.; February 15, 2014 at 5:16 AM
Anonymous said...: Guiowen's third cruel advice was that Crystal should not take Sidney's legal advice. Kenny was content to have Sidney orchestrate her defense while he rode camels in the desert.; February 15, 2014 at 5:23 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny whines: The way the term Mystery Rapists has been used purposely suggests that Crystal invented such ghosts.

No, Kenny. You completely misunderstand the comments about Mystery Rapists.

Most posters have simply concluded that Crystal lied. That is the most straightforward explanation of why her allegation is not supported by physical and medical evidence. A few accept the AG's explanation of mental issues. None use the term Mystery Rapists to criticize Crystal.

Kenny, the term Mystery Rapists is used entirely to ridicule you. You concoct a preposterous story of Mystery Rapists to support your expressed view that Crystal's general rape allegation must be accepted as true--even if the details are false--because an explanation remains possible.

Kenny, when you advanced this ridiculous theory, you invited ridicule. You effectively asked others not to take you seriously.

Now you make a similar argument, albeit in a situation with far higher stakes. You now argue that Crystal's general self-defense claim must be accepted as true--even if the details are false--because it cannot be proven false.

Kenny, if Crystal is your friend as you claim and if she accepted your ridiculous advice, you owe her an apology.; February 15, 2014 at 5:48 AM
Anonymous said...: Do you have proof of this plea deal you speak of?

What was it based on?

Which lawyer was giving advice during the plea deal offering you mention?; February 15, 2014 at 6:13 AM
Anonymous said...: No. Sidney reported the offer.

Sidney reported that the prosecution offered the plea because they had no case and would be embarrassed to take the case to trial.

More seriously, many prosecutors, including those in Durham, overcharge defendants and use plea bargains. I was not surprised at a possible plea.

Woody Vann was Crystal's attorney when Sidney reported this.; February 15, 2014 at 6:21 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: IMPORTANT NOTICE... EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY!!

All comments that waste vertical space without actually inserting letters to make words and sentences, will no longer be acceptable.

Up to this time, I have been my usual tolerant self... but unfortunately some commenters insist on going a bridge too far. This rule is a variant of the kenhyderal policy which is in place to make this blog site a better place in which to have electronic dialogue.

As you were.; February 15, 2014 at 10:26 AM
Anonymous said...: Sidney,

May I suggest another policy?

Insist that posters who offer opinions be required to defend those opinions by providing facts. In other words, require posters to engage in honest debate. honest debate is what will improve the quality of this blog.

There are a number of posts in this thread that violate that principle.; February 15, 2014 at 10:39 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous said: Sidney,

May I suggest another policy?

Insist that posters who offer opinions be required to defend those opinions by providing facts. In other words, require posters to engage in honest debate. honest debate is what will improve the quality of this blog.

There are a number of posts in this thread that violate that principle.

If Sidney held to that rule, he'd never be able to post.; February 15, 2014 at 12:34 PM
Anonymous said...: Nifong Supporter said...

"IMPORTANT NOTICE... EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY!!

All comments that waste vertical space without actually inserting letters to make words and sentences, will no longer be acceptable.

Up to this time, I have been my usual tolerant self... but unfortunately some commenters insist on going a bridge too far. This rule is a variant of the kenhyderal policy which is in place to make this blog site a better place in which to have electronic dialogue.

As you were."

????

????

????; February 15, 2014 at 5:52 PM
Anonymous said...: I am the rectifier.; February 15, 2014 at 7:01 PM
Anonymous said...: Sid is the rectifier.; February 15, 2014 at 7:02 PM
Anonymous said...: sid, what have you rectified?; February 15, 2014 at 7:03 PM
Anonymous said...: Every now and again it seems as though the readers and commenters of this blog site get derailed about the purpose of the Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong and its members. Once again, let me put the train back on track to avoid the discourse of distractions and the obstacles of obfuscation… so we can locomotion along the rails to enlightenment.

As we near our four anniversary this coming June, our mission statement and resolve has been steady, uncompromising, and one which follows the light of truth. The fundamental beliefs upon which this organization was founded have been and remain based upon the following principles: (1) former Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong was selectively and unjustly persecuted and disbarred by the North Carolina State Bar because of his handing of the Duke Lacrosse case; (2) Mr. Nifong handled the Duke Lacrosse case well within the acceptable standards of a state prosecutor; (3) that Mr. Nifong is the only prosecutor to be disbarred due to professional misconduct is an outrage, especially when considering prosecutors Tom Ford (Gregory Taylor and Carletta Alston cases), Bill Wolfe (James Arthur Johnson case), Michael D. Parker (Floyd Brown case), and David Hoke (Alan Gell case), just to name a few. Our group’s focus remains committed to encouraging the NC State Bar to unilaterally and unconditionally reinstate Mr. Nifong’s license to practice law in the state without restrictions. Although Mr. Nifong has expressed that he never intends to practice law again, it is the contention that his license to practice law was unjustly taken by the Bar, and that it needs to man up and do the right thing by reinstating it.; February 15, 2014 at 7:15 PM
Anonymous said...: Members of the Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong, I believe, are some of the most courageous people in the state, because they lend their names and their faces to a righteous cause that is widely unpopular with the public because of contamination of the news that is broadcast and published by biased media-types… the big wigs in the upper echelons who determine what stories to follow, which stories to ignore, and what spin to give. Instead of remaining silent in the face of blatant anti-Nifong injustice, like most politicians, media outlets, and many civil rights organizations, members of the Committee speak loudly by their demonstration of courage. There are many ways to put it, but I like the saying attributed to President Abraham Lincoln who stated: “To sin by silence makes cowards of men.” One thing is certain… the members of our group, currently one shy of two dozen, are not cowards.

The Committee is, and always has been an inclusive organization, welcoming brave individuals who coalesce around the principles recited above with respect to former Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong. No one has been turned down for membership, and dues and/or investment of time or money is not required. All that is required is the heart to seek justice for Mike Nifong, which at its most primal form would be the reinstatement of his law license. Potential members are not vetted or required to provide personal information about themselves, their political leanings, or their ideologies on other topics. Likewise, our group is extremely tolerant of others and we do not discriminate with respect to granting membership.

It is not expected, or even desired that everyone who joins the group hold the same beliefs or opinions on issues other than Mike Nifong’s mistreatment by the state and the media. Gay and lesbians, people of all races and colors, worshippers of all religions as well as atheists, Democrats and even Republicans are all invited to join.

Some commenters are quick to cast some Committee members as homophobes or racists, but I find that these labels are often made without substance. There are people who might not agree with same-sex relationships or who might have a problem with gay and lesbians getting married, but that, at least to my way of thinking, does not categorize them as being homophobes. Personally, I have no problem whatever with gay and lesbian relationships. I have no problem with civil union between couples of the same sex and I do not object to the term “marriage” being used to define such relationships. To my mind marriage is an institution in which two individuals are fully and lovingly committed to one another regardless of their sexes. Not only that, but I believe that the liberal tolerance towards gays and lesbians is growing and gaining greater acceptance.

Hopefully this blog will put issues about homophobia and racism to rest, and the future blogs can be devoted to issues of criminal justice… such as the vendetta prosecutions of Crystal Mangum, the racist pardon policy that the governor’s office has used to deny pardons to Erick Daniels and Shawn Massey, the anti-Nifong discrimination by Duke University against me, and other important issues facing Tar Heelians who believe in the principle of “equal justice for all” instead of those who follow the tenet of “selective justice based on Class and Color.”; February 15, 2014 at 7:15 PM
Anonymous said...: Secrecy is employed by the greedy to conceal from others their outrageous, insatiable, gluttonous appetite for money and the possessions and power it can purchase. Whenever transactions are made in which pertinent details are omitted or withheld, it is a sure bet that the reason for its concealment is an attempt to shield from view unreasonable and outlandish terms benefiting one or both parties. For any transaction that is legitimate and on the up and up, and void of excessive, over-the-top compensation, there is no need to withhold terms, especially financial, of the agreement.

Transparency in contractual matters is the honorable policy and one which best serves the interests of all. Transparency is the policy by which the Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong conducts its business and to which it strictly adheres.

Unlike the Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong, the Carpetbagger families of the Duke Lacrosse defendants and their avaricious attorneys demanded that the terms of their settlement with Duke University be cloaked in secrecy. Carpetbagger attorneys were successful in shaking down Duke University for a total of $60 million for their clients because they imposed upon Duke University a vow of secrecy regarding its financial settlement until the financial transfer had been completed and it was too late. At the crossroads, Duke elected to abide by its agreement with the Carpetbagger attorneys even though adhering to that agreement was in conflict and violation of its agreement with its insurance company and resulted in a breach of contract with its insurers. As a proximate result of withholding terms of its settlement from its insurance company, Duke University forfeited coverage which it might have been entitled had it reached a reasonable agreement.

Due to Duke Lacrosse defendant Reade Seligmann’s attempt to evade paying taxes on his windfall settlement, the Internal Revenue Service slapped a $6.7 million plus tax lien against him, and it was only through this public filing that tax experts were able to accurately calculate the payout that Duke University made to the Duke Lacrosse defendants nearly four years earlier… $20 million per defendant… a $60 million total.

Greed, unfortunately is widespread, and arm in arm is the secrecy that is in place to conceal it. A prime example is the recent dispute between players and owners of the National Football League. The owners of the teams, who are basically nothing more than parasites living off the gridiron gladiators who destroy their bodies and brains in a brutal sport, risk strangling the lucrative enterprise in order to squeeze every last cent they feel that they can. The owners want billions of dollars off the top of $9 billion annual revenue claiming that they need it for “operating expenses.” However, when the players ask to actually “see” the operating expenses, secrecy jumps into the mix and the owners refuse to open their books. The same secrecy employed by attorneys for the Duke Lacrosse defendants (Joseph B. Cheshire V, James Cooney, and Wade Smith).

; February 15, 2014 at 7:16 PM
Anonymous said...: I would have more respect for the owners of the NFL teams if they just came forward and admitted that they want all of that money because they are greedy. Instead, they expect the football players, the football fans, and the public in general to believe that they are really not greedy… that cost of living expenses, oil problems in Libya, natural disasters, and other expenses which they have no control over, have raised costs of operations to the point that they need all that money in order to barely break even with just a minimal profit. In other words, the NFL owners believe that the American people are idiots. For the most part, Americans aren’t idiots… they’re just apathetic. They know the owners are in it, not for the love of the game or to provide family entertainment… but because they’re greedy. That, greed, is why they do not invest any of their excessive profits in supporting the wounded and injured players after they retire or are forced by injury to retire. The owners care not a whit about the Alzheimer’s or other debilitating brain damage that the players suffer. The owners will continue to demand as much money as they can from the hardworking ticket buying fans. And the owners will continue to extort from cities taxpayer money to build palatial stadiums with luxurious skyboxes and offices which deprives cities of revenue for the services and programs most in need to help the poor and disenfranchised.

Of all of the teams in the NFL, the current world champions, the Green Bay Packers, have the best model… a team that is not owned by one person or one family in the private sector, but by a community. I believe that all sports teams should be owned by municipalities, and that profits should be used to help support its citizens through social programs and help its fans by providing tickets at reasonable prices.

The owners should open their books, but they won’t because they have something to hide… proof of their greed. Just as in the Duke Lacrosse case, when Attorney Jim Cooney refused to divulge the amount of the settlement payment given to the Duke Lacrosse defendants by the university, he wanted to hide from the public proof of the greed of the Carpetbagger families and their attorneys. Shameful.

Transparency is the answer in all issues… whether you’re talking about legal settlements, arbitration in professional sports, or contracts involving the purchase of an automobile through financing by the automaker.; February 15, 2014 at 7:17 PM
Anonymous said...: I would have more respect for the owners of the NFL teams if they just came forward and admitted that they want all of that money because they are greedy. Instead, they expect the football players, the football fans, and the public in general to believe that they are really not greedy… that cost of living expenses, oil problems in Libya, natural disasters, and other expenses which they have no control over, have raised costs of operations to the point that they need all that money in order to barely break even with just a minimal profit. In other words, the NFL owners believe that the American people are idiots. For the most part, Americans aren’t idiots… they’re just apathetic. They know the owners are in it, not for the love of the game or to provide family entertainment… but because they’re greedy. That, greed, is why they do not invest any of their excessive profits in supporting the wounded and injured players after they retire or are forced by injury to retire. The owners care not a whit about the Alzheimer’s or other debilitating brain damage that the players suffer. The owners will continue to demand as much money as they can from the hardworking ticket buying fans. And the owners will continue to extort from cities taxpayer money to build palatial stadiums with luxurious skyboxes and offices which deprives cities of revenue for the services and programs most in need to help the poor and disenfranchised.

Of all of the teams in the NFL, the current world champions, the Green Bay Packers, have the best model… a team that is not owned by one person or one family in the private sector, but by a community. I believe that all sports teams should be owned by municipalities, and that profits should be used to help support its citizens through social programs and help its fans by providing tickets at reasonable prices.

The owners should open their books, but they won’t because they have something to hide… proof of their greed. Just as in the Duke Lacrosse case, when Attorney Jim Cooney refused to divulge the amount of the settlement payment given to the Duke Lacrosse defendants by the university, he wanted to hide from the public proof of the greed of the Carpetbagger families and their attorneys. Shameful.

Transparency is the answer in all issues… whether you’re talking about legal settlements, arbitration in professional sports, or contracts involving the purchase of an automobile through financing by the automaker.; February 15, 2014 at 7:18 PM
Anonymous said...: When the carpetbagger families of the Duke Lacrosse defendants declared jihad against former Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong because he had the nerve to charge their boys with a crime, the media, judges, state officials all made full commitments to assist in their vindictive cause. As stated in her call to arms which aired on CBS – TV’s “60 Minutes,” defendant mom Rhea Evans made clear their mandate… to see that Mike Nifong and his family “pays” every day for the rest of his life.

The North Carolina State Bar went above and beyond the call of duty, and are deserving of special carpetbagging recognition. First, it trumped up a flimsy ethics complaint that was so weak, that even they had to amend it a second time and re-file. The State Bar’s action was necessary in order to get the dedicated D.A. Nifong off the Duke Lacrosse case, and into friendly hands. Unbeknownst to Mr. Nifong at the time, the Attorney General’s Office was in bed with the carpetbagger crew, following its every directive to the tee… such as later carrying out the dismissal of the Duke Lacrosse case and innocent promulgation of April 11, 2007.; February 15, 2014 at 7:19 PM
Anonymous said...: The State Bar’s F. Lane Williamson, who headed up the grievance panel, at the risk of sounding ridiculous, went so far as to claim that Mike Nifong pursued the Duke Lacrosse case for the political purpose of being elected to the district attorney position to which he had been appointed. What makes this widely held motive so laughable is the fact that simple math would point out that the way to assure victory in the May 2006 primary was to dismiss the Duke Lacrosse case, not pursue it. Williamson and Duke Lacrosse defense attorney Kirk Osborn, among others seemed to believe that by wooing the black vote, Mr. Nifong would win the primary. Nothing could be further from the truth, and the voting results confirmed that. Of the African Americans who made up 38.2% of the total registered voters, they accounted for only 34% of those who voted in the primary. Fewer blacks turned out percentage-wise. Of the white voters who comprised 56.3% of the total registered voters, they accounted for a whopping 63% of the voters for the May 2, 2006 primary. A higher turnout of white voters percentage-wise. Yet, Mike Nifong won, proving wrong the WTVD ABC 11 Eyewitness News poll that proclaimed the primary race was a dead heat with Nifong requiring a huge black turnout in order to beat chief rival Freda Black. ABC 11 News deserves a lot of credit for this Jedi Mind-trick, for its poll and coverage convinced many that Nifong would benefit by pursuing the Duke Lacrosse case. The fact is, that pursuing the Duke Lacrosse case presented a tremendous impediment for him to overcome on his way to victory.

Besides disbarring Mr. Nifong, the North Carolina State Bar decided to turn the knife in his back while simultaneously pouring salt in his wounds. They decided to send Mr. Nifong an invoice to cover the costs of holding the five day hearing to disbar him. The bill amounted to eight thousand, eight hundred ninety-seven dollars and 91 cents ($8,897.91), with payment due within ninety days. According to the Bar’s counsel, Katherine E. Jean, the Bar is given this authority under regulation: 27 NCAC 1B .0109(8). She informed me that this regulation was used when it fined David Hoke and Deborah Graves for their disciplinary hearing held years earlier… however they were billed a total of $702.10… an amount which they shared, each paying half. Even though David Hoke’s actions against Alan Gell were far more egregious than anything Mr. Nifong was accused of doing in the Duke Lacrosse case, Hoke got off paying $350.05, whereas Mr. Nifong faced a tab that approached nine thousand dollars. The disparity in the amounts of the fines can be attributed to but one thing…the carpetbagger jihad against Mike Nifong. How many other attorneys have been sent an invoice by the State Bar to pay for the costs to discipline them? Not many, I bet. I was only given the one example other than Mike Nifong.

All I can say is, “How shameful.” Selective persecution against Mike Nifong has sadly been widespread among state agencies, especially the unregulated State Bar.; February 15, 2014 at 7:20 PM
Anonymous said...: The well publicized events in recent months which culminated in the exoneration of Gregory Flint Taylor, wrongly incarcerated for 17 years of a life sentence, fails to express the true magnitude of the problem of wrongful murder convictions in the state of North Carolina. Fortunately the death penalty was not imposed for Mr. Taylor, however, the number of people wrongly incarcerated in capital murder cases is staggering. That is one reason that the former director of the Durham based nonprofit Center for Death Penalty Litigation (CDPL), attorney Ken Rose, is one of the state’s leading advocates for doing away with the death penalty.

Ken Rose’s heroic actions in leading the appellate defense of Levon “Bo” Jones is chronicled in the book “The Last Lawyer,” by John Temple. Jones was sentenced to death for a 1987 murder despite no confession, no informant testimony, no physical evidence, no fingerprints, and no DNA evidence. Through the efforts of Ken Rose and others on the CDPL team, Levon “Bo” Jones was eventually found to be innocent of the murder which nearly cost him is life. Jones is one of but close to a dozen North Carolina inmates who have been on death row, but were later exonerated. Alan Gell, who was successfully prosecuted by prosecutor David Hoke (in large measure due to withholding exculpatory evidence from Gell’s defense attorneys), is another. In fact, the Tar Heel State is third, trailing only Illinois and Louisiana in the number of death row inmates ultimately found to be innocent.

Statistics over a six year period, beginning in July 1, 2001, show that there were 2,612 potential capital first degree murder charges filed. Of these individuals, 396 were later exonerated, a breakdown of this group is as follows: 272 charges were dismissed without leave to reinstate the charges; 9 no true bill was found; 40 no probable cause was found; and 75 were found to be not guilty. (Information from a report by NC Indigent Defense Services entitled: “FY07 Capitol Trial Case Study: PAC and Expert Spending in Potentially Capitol Cases at the Trial Level – December 2008,” and contained in the NC Indigent Defense Services website.)

This averages out to more than sixty innocent people arrested and charged in potential capital cases every year, and accounts for more than 15% of the potential capital cases. And, as you can imagine, they all served time in jail. Unfortunately the media does a poor job in educating the masses about this issue, and the public outrage is thereby minimized.

The death penalty should be removed as a sentencing option if this state and this country is be considered one of civility and compassion. It’s one thing to wrongfully take 17 years of a man’s life, but quite another to wrongfully take a man’s life.; February 15, 2014 at 7:21 PM
Anonymous said...: The “Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong”’s official domain web site, www.justice4nifong.com, is now activated. It basically consists of one introductory page with a link to the geocities web site, www.geocities.com/justice4nifong. As has been mentioned earlier, the new web site is undergoing a change in format and structure which, I believe, will present our case for equal justice in a more cohesive, organized, and interesting presentation. Our goal is to have the new web site up and running by mid January 2009 (until then, please continue to visit the geocities site).

The new web site will contain the same research and investigative reports (and more), as well as related documents, information about members of the “Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong”, and, of course, the comic strip “The MisAdventures of Super-Duper Cooper.” “Super-Duper”’s Episode II, titled “To Hell and Back: Travails of the Un-Indicted Duke LAXers,” is now complete and will be presented on the new web site in the near future. In addition, multimedia will be an integral part of the new site.

We will continue to utilize the web site to bring attention to North Carolina’s selective injustice to Mike Nifong, and others, such as, James Arthur Johnson, Theodore Williams, and Alan Gell. And, of course we will continue our crusade for “equal justice for all North Carolinians,” which begins with justice for Mr. Nifong.

www.justice4nifong.com is a web site which will be state of the art, cutting edge, and, in essence, an organic creation… continuing to change, grow, and improve.; February 15, 2014 at 7:22 PM
Anonymous said...: When the carpetbagger families of the Duke Lacrosse defendants declared jihad against former Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong because he had the nerve to charge their boys with a crime, the media, judges, state officials all made full commitments to assist in their vindictive cause. As stated in her call to arms which aired on CBS – TV’s “60 Minutes,” defendant mom Rhea Evans made clear their mandate… to see that Mike Nifong and his family “pays” every day for the rest of his life.

The North Carolina State Bar went above and beyond the call of duty, and are deserving of special carpetbagging recognition. First, it trumped up a flimsy ethics complaint that was so weak, that even they had to amend it a second time and re-file. The State Bar’s action was necessary in order to get the dedicated D.A. Nifong off the Duke Lacrosse case, and into friendly hands. Unbeknownst to Mr. Nifong at the time, the Attorney General’s Office was in bed with the carpetbagger crew, following its every directive to the tee… such as later carrying out the dismissal of the Duke Lacrosse case and innocent promulgation of April 11, 2007.

The State Bar’s F. Lane Williamson, who headed up the grievance panel, at the risk of sounding ridiculous, went so far as to claim that Mike Nifong pursued the Duke Lacrosse case for the political purpose of being elected to the district attorney position to which he had been appointed. What makes this widely held motive so laughable is the fact that simple math would point out that the way to assure victory in the May 2006 primary was to dismiss the Duke Lacrosse case, not pursue it. Williamson and Duke Lacrosse defense attorney Kirk Osborn, among others seemed to believe that by wooing the black vote, Mr. Nifong would win the primary. Nothing could be further from the truth, and the voting results confirmed that. Of the African Americans who made up 38.2% of the total registered voters, they accounted for only 34% of those who voted in the primary. Fewer blacks turned out percentage-wise. Of the white voters who comprised 56.3% of the total registered voters, they accounted for a whopping 63% of the voters for the May 2, 2006 primary. A higher turnout of white voters percentage-wise. Yet, Mike Nifong won, proving wrong the WTVD ABC 11 Eyewitness News poll that proclaimed the primary race was a dead heat with Nifong requiring a huge black turnout in order to beat chief rival Freda Black. ABC 11 News deserves a lot of credit for this Jedi Mind-trick, for its poll and coverage convinced many that Nifong would benefit by pursuing the Duke Lacrosse case. The fact is, that pursuing the Duke Lacrosse case presented a tremendous impediment for him to overcome on his way to victory.; February 15, 2014 at 7:25 PM
Anonymous said...: Besides disbarring Mr. Nifong, the North Carolina State Bar decided to turn the knife in his back while simultaneously pouring salt in his wounds. They decided to send Mr. Nifong an invoice to cover the costs of holding the five day hearing to disbar him. The bill amounted to eight thousand, eight hundred ninety-seven dollars and 91 cents ($8,897.91), with payment due within ninety days. According to the Bar’s counsel, Katherine E. Jean, the Bar is given this authority under regulation: 27 NCAC 1B .0109(8). She informed me that this regulation was used when it fined David Hoke and Deborah Graves for their disciplinary hearing held years earlier… however they were billed a total of $702.10… an amount which they shared, each paying half. Even though David Hoke’s actions against Alan Gell were far more egregious than anything Mr. Nifong was accused of doing in the Duke Lacrosse case, Hoke got off paying $350.05, whereas Mr. Nifong faced a tab that approached nine thousand dollars. The disparity in the amounts of the fines can be attributed to but one thing…the carpetbagger jihad against Mike Nifong. How many other attorneys have been sent an invoice by the State Bar to pay for the costs to discipline them? Not many, I bet. I was only given the one example other than Mike Nifong.

All I can say is, “How shameful.” Selective persecution against Mike Nifong has sadly been widespread among state agencies, especially the unregulated State Bar.; February 15, 2014 at 7:25 PM
kenhyderal said...: I would encourage the new poster, obviously a member of the Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong, who posted between 7:15 PM and 7:25 PM on Feb.15,2014, to chose a user-name, in order to avoid confusion and, better yet, to reveal who they are. I applaud this person, though, for their insightful comments Ken Edwards aka kenhyderal; February 15, 2014 at 8:34 PM
guiowen said...: Kenny, the Green Bay Packers were superbowl champions in 2011. That should give you some idea as to when the 7:17-7:18 comments were written. The 7:22 comments were originally written in 2008, etc., etc., etc.; February 15, 2014 at 9:38 PM
kenhyderal said...: Oh-oh another Malek Williams. These posts were before my time.; February 15, 2014 at 9:42 PM
Anonymous said...: In Duke / Durham - since Duke has so much money and provides so many lawyers, doctors, politicians, nurses, leaders, wall street stock brokers, journalists, etc., etc., - by their very nature of who and what they are - the justice system should be more situated to assist those who must face the challenges placed upon them due to the undue influence that Duke has on their life, health, society, legal system, justice system, governmental lobbying and legislative influence backed by unlimited money, etc., etc., etc., - not less (as in having to rely on people with no legal degrees or experience to assist in their defense instead of competent non-conflicted, non-corrupted lawyers in a competent non-conflicted, non-corrupt justice system).

What Duke / Durham has and is now is still as big a joke as everyone has been laughing and arguing about since the lacrosse case, as proven by this case so far.

The fact that the malpractice and autopsy reports were not handled professionally from the start by the DA, judges, duke, the MEs, and the lawyers proves that there exists the very real possibility of people believing Duke would kill Mr. Daye to frame Ms. Mangum for murder, and Duke thinking its chances were better - as always - in chaos, nontruth, confusion, divisiness, and continued harm and threat of harm to many or any.

That is not justice - and neither Ms. Mangum, Dr. Harr, or anyone else has to stand for it.; February 16, 2014 at 4:57 AM
Anonymous said...: From the standpoint of a citizen witness to this case and this blog coupled with what is known about duke from the news, etc., it is sad to watch such an esteemed and revered for its potential institution of higher learning and research for the betterment of health and social welfare for all people seen in reality as such as you see in this case, this blog and its constant legal struggles because of duke and duke / durham justice system (with cases that are handled in ways that create such unprofessional, unjust, and outrageously corrupt and malicious persecution, harm and results), and other distrubing items in the news that coupled together by connecting dots and seeing what they really do and how they really do it ... really makes a person stop and wonder ... are they different in anything else that they do?; February 16, 2014 at 4:58 AM
Anonymous said...: The only thing proven was that he received one non-lethal knife wound in self-defense from his attack - the rest was not proven beyond reasonable doubt.

That is what i said - that is what i meant.

You can troll all you want and change what i said to mean whatever you want - but that is not what i said and not what i meant - and now - you know it.; February 16, 2014 at 4:59 AM
Anonymous said...: It is telling that duke has the type supporters it has on this blog instead of a reasoned, legal, professional, concerned reply from duke and resolution to all the issues that are left to be settled only individually in the minds of all its patients and patrons, students, employees, fans, etc., etc., etc., about this case and the lacrosse case, etc., but not in the court of law nor for the people involved in the cases or for the people in general.

When you actually have people INSISTING duke is beyond reproach even though everyone is left to reproach or not reproach at will based upon what they know or don't know after seeing what is going on through the absence of anything reasoned or legal about what duke is doing in this case(s) to indicate any other reason other than to reproach what they are doing while continuing to watch them not take responsibility nor concern for what they are doing while they are continue to do what they do (or don't do) - and thus leaving all to be reproached by those who do not reproach - or vice versus - because it is duke - afterall ... the only thing left is to question duke and the duke / durham justice system - what the frack are you doing?

Why is that?
Is that the way duke always is?

That IS what you read and see in the 'news' about them afterall - over and over and over again - so it is not just a fluke for duke - it IS who they are and what they do to many.

Perhaps they calculate that doing as they do will bring their desired results. So - really - you have to wonder - what does duke REALLY want and why do they do what they do?; February 16, 2014 at 5:00 AM
Anonymous said...: So, Duke keeps a list of people it wants to kill/harm, and just waits until someone on that list shows up? And, they are powerful enough that NO ONE in the organization, not the nurses, doctors, orderlies, no one, will speak up, and in fact they will carry out these killings, for which they could be charged with, and convicted of, murder, just because Duke asks?

And you say you aren't paranoid.; February 16, 2014 at 5:01 AM
Anonymous said...: Their the ones feeding these kids really unsafe meds that make them sick or kill them so their coffers can be fed (for their own benefit only) - and telling them to call the cops and say they're a danger in order that they may be placed in a jail like hosp. so they can then mess with the kids' meds and minds even more to again continue to feed their coffers - (since there is NO community care available) - or to get them killed by the cops or arrested and put in privatized jails - where they also use them to research the meds on graduated levels of 'freedom' - thereby causing them more illness and insuring that: ... yup - they'll be back ... until their dead ... psy corps. & co; February 16, 2014 at 5:03 AM
Anonymous said...: Dr. Harr,

You ask everyone to do something about the injustice of this case.

Do you actually think that if anyone else writes to duke that it will change anything?

Wouldn't the people to write to be someone in the justice system or legal system, etc.? They are the ones responsible for enforcing the laws for the people, not the people per se. Therefore, if they do not reply or do their jobs in this case to uphold justice for all in this case, then they too will be held responsible for their actions or non-actions. That is what the justice system is for. It must be made to work for the people, not against them. You writing them and showing their responses will do more for the people in this case than writing duke apparently.

Duke can't and won't do that for the people - nor will they assist in this case apparently in disregard of their own legally mandated responsibilities to be accountable for their own malpractice, etc..

Who are the people in the justice system that you could write to, (even again), about this case? What are their responsibilities in this case, and why are you writing them? You are talking about many years in jail for Ms. Mangum for a death committed at the hands of Duke. Writing duke isn't going to change that.; February 16, 2014 at 5:04 AM
Anonymous said...: Given the expertise of the last lawyer in corporate hospital administration with none in criminal defense - and his unwillingness to question dukes medical malpractice nor the ME's discrepancies in the actual defense of Mr. Mangum - it is quite easy to see that this trial should be retryed or dismissed on grounds the durham public defenders office could not or would not provide a competent non-conflicted and experienced in the criminal defense of murder lawyer to assist Ms. Mangum in her constitutional right to a fair and equal trial. The assignment of his services for Ms. Mangum based upon his lack of legal criminal defense experience, and his hospital management expertise and business and personal affiliations seems akin to fraud (to say the least).; February 16, 2014 at 5:05 AM
Anonymous said...: This case so far shows that duke and the lawyers who align with them in this case have no regard for justice for the people of the USA - as all could be effected by this obvious lack of respect for the people of the USA and the justice system which they uphold and give power to with their nationally supported and authorized constitution of the USA that mandates a fair and equal trial and justice system ... for all.; February 16, 2014 at 5:06 AM
Anonymous said...: That's disingenuous and bs as usual.

I for one am standing for a fair and equal trial for Ms. Mangum or anyone in USA, esp. in duke/durham/nc justice system when duke is involved in this case or any other case - especially because their medical services, politics and policy making and professional services, etc., effects all in NC and USA.

You on the otherhand seem interested only in insuring that Dr. Harr and any other that questions duke and the duke/durham/nc justice system be disparaged and dissed - once again.

that's all

...

as usual; February 16, 2014 at 5:06 AM
Anonymous said...: Well, given that we are both "Anonymous" it's actually us talking to ourselves ...

But, no, what I'm saying is those things were investigated, it was a fair trial, you just don't like the outcome, and Sid just doesn't like that he doesn't have the answers to his questions. But, Mangum does, her lawyers do, and the people who had a need to know did.

You can either assume that everyone but Sid is corrupt and incompetent (which you clearly do), or you can assume that the people who actually know the law, and know how to conduct trials did their jobs, got the answers to Sid's questions, and then proceeded as they did, because the answers were not helpful.

Sid can ask all he wants, but I don't assume that everyone else is corrupt and didn't look into these issues.

Remember, and I know you (me? we seem to be the same person), Sid, and many others want to ignore this: if everything Sid says about the intubation and malpractice is right - since the ONLY reason Daye was in the hospital was because Crystal stabbed him, that (and her) is still A proximate cause of the death, even if not THE main cause. The law in NC on that issue is harsh, and ignoring it or pretending it isn't doesn't change that fact.

Had Daye not been stabbed, he would not have been in the hospital. Unless it was an intentional act by Duke, it doesn't change the outcome. Medical Malpractice is NOT an intervening cause, no matter how many times Sid says it.; February 16, 2014 at 5:07 AM
Anonymous said...: ya know ... when i read some of your posts i find it hard not to just stop reading right away and point out the obvious to you

1. We are not just talking to ourselves - that seems to be a problem of yours - assuming different identities as your own - like pretending to be meier back there ...

ok - that is you with THAT problem - not any of your other made up personas

i will read more of it later; February 16, 2014 at 5:08 AM
Anonymous said...: basically by the evil duke troll mob that you like to continually incite here and on other blogs - for your own amusement - yes

so ... what else is new?

seriously
you only fool yourselves
bet ya even duke would want you to stop - or meier for that matter

at least don't troll me anymore
thanks; February 16, 2014 at 5:08 AM
Anonymous said...: Dr. Harr,

I understand what you are trying to do as far as getting the truth about the reports into court, but the only way to do that is to get the court to present them and review them and your claims - not Duke.

Duke will not do it, they can't, and they won't ... not for you and not for anyone else unless they are made to in trial. That is the way it is.

She is in jail - you have to go to the court to get her out of jail - not to Duke.

If you go to the court you can record what they do here in response to your letter (or don't do) ... but first you have to know what to do.

Maybe start by asking the DA - what should I do? That would be interesting to know his reply.

And then - look for the next step that is the right one in the chain of court ot justice systems - that is the only way to do it with justice in mind. It is what it is.; February 16, 2014 at 5:09 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous said...

Secrecy is employed by the greedy to conceal from others their outrageous, insatiable, gluttonous appetite for money and the possessions and power it can purchase. Whenever transactions are made in which pertinent details are omitted or withheld, it is a sure bet that the reason for its concealment is an attempt to shield from view unreasonable and outlandish terms benefiting one or both parties. For any transaction that is legitimate and on the up and up, and void of excessive, over-the-top compensation, there is no need to withhold terms, especially financial, of the agreement.

Transparency in contractual matters is the honorable policy and one which best serves the interests of all. Transparency is the policy by which the Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong conducts its business and to which it strictly adheres.

Really? You post Anonymously, and blame others for hiding behind secrecy, and claim to support transparency? No wonder you can't see the truth when it slaps you in the face. Sid is a loon.; February 16, 2014 at 5:39 AM
Anonymous said...: Stop being disingenuous. Let's have honest discussion. You know full well that this person is making mischief here by copying old posts of mine and passing them off as his own views. Once again I call on Dr. Harr to exercise his duty and put a stop to such abuses.; February 16, 2014 at 6:42 AM
Anonymous said...: Yes, they are old posts ... but your old posts include posts as "anonymous" calling for transparency.

This blog has always been a joke, now it's just getting sad.; February 16, 2014 at 7:49 AM
Walt said...: Sid wrote: "In other words, Walt, you have no explanation of how Dr. Nichols could describe an organ at autopsy that was allegedly removed eleven days prior to his death. Why don't you just admit that you cannot come up with an explanation instead of accusing me of lacking mental processes to receive enlightenment."

No Sid, I have enlightened you dozens of times and you've yet to pay up. You are a deadbeat.

Pay up, deadbeat.

Walt-in-Durham; February 17, 2014 at 6:46 AM
Anonymous said...: BORING BORING BORING BORING.
...wonder if Sister has a new, uh, sweetheart, in the big house yet?..."; February 17, 2014 at 11:05 AM
Anonymous said...: Walt,

Check out the Motion Sid filed in his frivolous lawsuit on Friday. He is nothing if not delusional.

At a minimum, he is giving the Court plenty of ammunition to impose a gate-keeper order on him.; February 17, 2014 at 12:46 PM
Anonymous said...: Oh brother, more bullshit from the racist asshat, harr.; February 18, 2014 at 8:22 AM
Lance The Supreme Poster of Enlightenment said...: Sid -- Why do you have a picture of a dog for the planned parenthood link?

I mean -- 70% of their patient care is split evenly between contraception and STD testing*.

Couldn't you find a more appropriate picture -- like a used condom or a syphilis-infected penis?

(*2009 numbers); February 18, 2014 at 10:25 AM
A Lawyer said...: Check out the Motion Sid filed in his frivolous lawsuit on Friday. He is nothing if not delusional.

At a minimum, he is giving the Court plenty of ammunition to impose a gate-keeper order on him.

Walt, Do you have these documents? Will you be linking to them on your blog?; February 18, 2014 at 12:41 PM
Anonymous said...: A Lawyer ... Sid actually posted a link to it on his Flog main page. It's right under the main video that says "Motion to Compel The State to Investigate" the autopsy.

Because, in a completely unrelated lawsuit it's perfectly legal and rational to ask the Court to Order something that has nothing to do with the case (and something that was already done, Sid just is mad he hasn't gotten the results).

Now, the one he posted is unsigned, and not file stamped, so perhaps he wasn't actually delusional enough to file it, but Walt would probably be able to tell that.; February 18, 2014 at 1:29 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Lance The Supreme Poster of Enlightenment said...
Sid -- Why do you have a picture of a dog for the planned parenthood link?

I mean -- 70% of their patient care is split evenly between contraception and STD testing*.

Couldn't you find a more appropriate picture -- like a used condom or a syphilis-infected penis?

(*2009 numbers)

When I was at a march against GOP policies recently volunteering for Planned Parenthood by canvassing within the crowd, I saw this adorable dog with a Planned Parenthood sticker on his head. I thought it was cute, so I took several photos of the dog and decided to use it for the link. It's that simple.; February 18, 2014 at 4:38 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Given the expertise of the last lawyer in corporate hospital administration with none in criminal defense - and his unwillingness to question dukes medical malpractice nor the ME's discrepancies in the actual defense of Mr. Mangum - it is quite easy to see that this trial should be retryed or dismissed on grounds the durham public defenders office could not or would not provide a competent non-conflicted and experienced in the criminal defense of murder lawyer to assist Ms. Mangum in her constitutional right to a fair and equal trial. The assignment of his services for Ms. Mangum based upon his lack of legal criminal defense experience, and his hospital management expertise and business and personal affiliations seems akin to fraud (to say the least).

You are absolutely correct. Daniel Meier couldn't have been a worse choice to represent Mangum. He did a great job protecting Duke University Hospital and shielding its involvement and responsibility for Daye's death. He critically hurt Mangum's cause by having her refuse to allow Dr. Roberts to testify and by going along with Dr. Nichols' statement that a complication from the stab wound was responsible for Daye's death.

Meier, furthermore was accused by another one of his criminal defendants (Spencer C. Young) of sabotaging his case.; February 18, 2014 at 4:52 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
A Lawyer ... Sid actually posted a link to it on his Flog main page. It's right under the main video that says "Motion to Compel The State to Investigate" the autopsy.

Because, in a completely unrelated lawsuit it's perfectly legal and rational to ask the Court to Order something that has nothing to do with the case (and something that was already done, Sid just is mad he hasn't gotten the results).

Now, the one he posted is unsigned, and not file stamped, so perhaps he wasn't actually delusional enough to file it, but Walt would probably be able to tell that.

Do you actually believe that I would spend the time to write an eighteen page motion and not file it? Believe me, I filed it on February 14, 2014.

For me to incorporate the stamped title page and the page that I signed would've taken substantial amount of time. I was more interested in getting it posted so that its contents could be viewed. The time stamp and signature don't contribute to the context of the motion.; February 18, 2014 at 5:06 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Walt,

Check out the Motion Sid filed in his frivolous lawsuit on Friday. He is nothing if not delusional.

At a minimum, he is giving the Court plenty of ammunition to impose a gate-keeper order on him.

Answer me this: Do you think that the Attorney General's Office should investigate the Nichols autopsy report?; February 18, 2014 at 5:11 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Dr. Harr,

I understand what you are trying to do as far as getting the truth about the reports into court, but the only way to do that is to get the court to present them and review them and your claims - not Duke.

Duke will not do it, they can't, and they won't ... not for you and not for anyone else unless they are made to in trial. That is the way it is.

She is in jail - you have to go to the court to get her out of jail - not to Duke.

If you go to the court you can record what they do here in response to your letter (or don't do) ... but first you have to know what to do.

Maybe start by asking the DA - what should I do? That would be interesting to know his reply.

And then - look for the next step that is the right one in the chain of court ot justice systems - that is the only way to do it with justice in mind. It is what it is.

When I went to Duke, I appealed to its conscience... especially by addressing the clergy. I knew that it was a long shot with little opportunity of succeeding. I have actually gone to Court, including the motion to compel the State to investigate the Nichols autopsy report.

And I have written twice to Orange County D.A. Jim Woodall, and in 2012 I wrote to Durham D.A. Leon Stanback seven times. I have never received a response from any of my letters.; February 18, 2014 at 5:23 PM
Anonymous said...: Dr. Harr,

is it possible to get a lawyer to file suit against Duke for inciting hate crimes and everything else that they have done since and during and in the decision to cause the lacrosse case and perpetuate the hate - including up to the possibility of harm by medical and professional practices at the hands of duke and hateful harm perpetuated, supported, demanded, and expected of duke et al.?; February 18, 2014 at 7:02 PM
A Lawyer said...: A Lawyer ... Sid actually posted a link to it on his Flog main page. It's right under the main video that says "Motion to Compel The State to Investigate" the autopsy.

Thanks, Anon.; February 18, 2014 at 8:30 PM
A Lawyer said...: I saw this adorable dog with a Planned Parenthood sticker on his head. I thought it was cute, so I took several photos of the dog and decided to use it for the link. It's that simple.

Looks like my older dog. Thanks for posting the pic, Dr. Harr.; February 18, 2014 at 8:32 PM
A Lawyer said...: Do you actually believe that I would spend the time to write an eighteen page motion and not file it? Believe me, I filed it on February 14, 2014.

Where in those 18 pages do you: (1) cite the law that permits a federal court to order a state attorney general to investigate anything, or (2) explain why you, as distinct from any other citizen, have any stake in this issue?

Dr. Harr, there is this thing called "jurisdiction." You should try to learn something about it before you venture into court unassisted. Otherwise, court cases will not end well for you (which I believe has been the case in the past).; February 18, 2014 at 8:40 PM
kenhyderal said...: @ Nifong Supporter: I directed a question to you on February 14 at 3:36 PM for which I never received your answer to. One other thing has been bothering me is that in your Christmas blog where you wished Christmas greeting to those who post you included Kilgo. Do you have reason to believe or knowledge that he is still lurking here?; February 18, 2014 at 9:11 PM
Anonymous said...: You have to understand the politics of social control for the benefit of research politics to understand the constant fight over planned parenthood.

When cell stem research focused on tissues taken from aborted fetuses - planned parenthood was safer from political manipulation.

Now that cell stem research focuses on tissues taken from the umbilical cord - research politics demand that there are more umbilical cords and less fetuses to use for research, regardless either way of the health of either the mother, child, or society.; February 18, 2014 at 10:39 PM
Anonymous said...: From reading his website, Spencer Young is as crazy and deluded as you, so not sure anything he says is relevant. Oh, and what he's mad about isn't his charges (Meier got his felony dismissed) he's mad that Meier wouldn't prosecute the DA and Judge for unrelated issues, even though that's not something a defense attorney does.

Young also believes that Mike Nifong and Crystal Mangum are two of the most evil and corrupt individuals on the planet and he's celebrating her conviction.

Funny how Sid likes to cherry-pick things. Claims he believes in evidence, but really just takes what he wants, ignores the rest, and pretends he has a clue.

Walt is right, he's been enlightened many times but refuses to see it. He will never pay up.

The day he says anything relevant or remotely legally accurate on this blog is the day hell will freeze over and pigs will fly.

It is amazing that a few people still don't seem to realize what a joke this blog and Sid are.; February 19, 2014 at 4:13 AM
Anonymous said...: according to national geographic - hell already froze over and melted again - so thats already been done; February 19, 2014 at 4:23 AM

«Oldest ‹Older 1 – 200 of 429 Newer› Newest»

Monday, February 10, 2014

Deception in a grand conspiracy corrupts and hijacks the North Carolina justice system

429 comments:

Facebook Badge

Subscribe!

Labels

Blog Archive

About Me