justice4nifong: Wheel of conspiracy in the conviction of Crystal Mangum

Wednesday, April 23, 2014

Wheel of conspiracy in the conviction of Crystal Mangum

331 comments:

1 – 200 of 331 Newer› Newest»

Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Anyone want to take bets on how long it takes the Judge to boot Sid's latest frivolous lawsuit? And then how long it takes Sid to come on here ranting about the corruption in the system (even though everyone with legal training has told him he has no case - apparently ALL lawyers are wrong)?

I do hope Walt makes it so he can give us the real story, since we know Sid will be making a lot of his version up.

It was a rough session in court. At least I was able to present oral arguments. I hope for some relief for my complaint against Duke which was never given a chance in court. The complaint against the State may have been a bit of a stretch, so I am not surprised that it was dismissed. The only reason I filed against the judge was in hopes that he would not be appointed to the case again. So having it dismissed was not exactly fatal, unless he is re-assigned to hear the case.

I did not see any visitors, so I doubt that Walt was in attendance.; April 23, 2014 at 10:57 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid - one of the main reasons you lose all of your lawsuits is that you are an idiot and refuse to learn.

It has been explained to you repeatedly that the Larceny of Chose In Action CANNOT form the basis for the Felony Murder Rule. You notice, the State didn't even ask for the Jury to convict on those charges, but still sought 1st Degree on Premeditation and deliberation. The Jury was not even instructed on the felon murder rule.

But, you continue to spout your demonstrably wrong theories and wonder why no one but Kenny and paranoid Duke-hater take you seriously.

You claim to be intelligent and capable of study, perhaps if you showed that you could comprehend evidence, people might take you seriously. You can't, so they don't.; April 23, 2014 at 11:07 AM
Anonymous said...: Oh, and the surgeon report never says anything about removing the Spleen, and Dr. Nichols is clearly referring to the cut to the spleen being removed, not the spleen itself.; April 23, 2014 at 11:09 AM
Anonymous said...: What is this now, Sid 0 for ??? Exactly how many lawsuits have you filed?; April 23, 2014 at 11:30 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

Your rant on the Wheel of conspiracy against Crystal Mangum shows only that you are incredibly stupid and totally ignorant.; April 23, 2014 at 2:05 PM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

Name one respectable, knowledgeable physician who says the autopsy report on Reginald Daye was fabricated. You do not count either as respectable or knowledgeable. The information available on line shows you are a minimally trained questionably competent person with an MD degree, nothing more. Your advocacy for the guilt of the Lacrosse players in view of the overwhelming evidence that there was no crime, that Crystal fabricated her allegations, makes it res ipsa loquitur that you are anything but respectable.; April 23, 2014 at 2:09 PM
Anonymous said...: I still think the paranoid Duke troll is really SIDNEY posting anonymously. Did anyone but me notice that the posts from the paranoid Duke troll stopped when SIDNEY started focusing on his frivolous lawsuit against Duke?; April 23, 2014 at 2:11 PM
Whatchoo tawkin 'bout, Sidney? said...: kenhyderal @ April 22, 2014 at 3:30 PM said...

Her tests at Duke were negative for opioids, cocaine and GHB.

Crusty wasn't tested for drugs when she was at DUMC the morning of March 14th, 2006. Drug testing was apparently frowned upon at DUMC in rape cases since the defense would obviously have access to that information.

It was only after Nifong, with no basis in fact, started claiming that she might have been drugged that she was tested.

A 5-drug panel that didn't even test for the drugs Nifong had claimed, and was done so long afterward that the tests were meaningless.; April 23, 2014 at 2:20 PM
Anonymous said...: It's amazing, there really is absolutely nothing new in the latest FLOG. I am impressed with the design and work that goes into making them, but the content is absolutely nothing new, and contains things that have been thoroughly debunked (like the Felony Murder rule, which was NOT at play in this case, which has been repeatedly explained here, but you ignore things you disagree with, even if demonstrably true - which that was, as it was NOT the theory of First argued by the State, nor was it in the jury instructions).

As to Daye abusing her previously, both the DA and the Defense attorney asked Mangum if Daye had ever struck her before, raised his voice, or anything else (because a witness had testified to hearing repeated arguments, and loud noises like people being thrown into the wall), and she explicitly denied any prior abuse or issues - so how is that her lawyer's fault if she wouldn't tell the full truth on the stand?

Plus, you've also been told there is no such thing as a "pre-trial" motion to dismiss in criminal cases, which is why one wasn't filed. They clearly had "probable cause" which is an incredibly low standard, so there were no pre-trial Motions to Dismiss.

But, again, facts and applying them to the law have never been your strong point, if they were, you may actually learn something and be able to win a lawsuit, instead you hide behind blaming everyone for corruption.

It's easier to not even try (even if you pretend you are), so when you lose it wasn't your failure, it was everyone else's.; April 23, 2014 at 2:36 PM
Anonymous said...: “It’s Crystal Mangum. THE Crystal Mangum! I told him she was trouble from the damn beginning.”; April 23, 2014 at 4:22 PM
Anonymous said...: kenhyderal:

Crystal, had no way of knowing whether a person was a Player or a Guest. Kilgo's friend and informant was a Player. This Player, according to Kilgo, claimed he had no involvement whatsoever but was a wittness to the rape, perpetrated by non-Player, Guests. He claimed the perpetrators were aided and abetted by certain Players who helped restrain Crystal. If this is so, these Players are guilty, as well, of kidnapping and sexual assult. When DNA results failed to implicate any of the Players the threats of DA Nifong to prosecute those who withheld information held little fear. It's my understanding that it's not fear of prosecution but conscience(à la Raskolnikov) that is causing Kilgo's friend this moral dilemma betwenn loyalty to his former team mates, jeopardizing the on-going civil suits and "doing the right thing"

Malek Williams
Hillside H.S.
Class of 1996; April 23, 2014 at 5:58 PM
Anonymous said...: KEN-Malek-HYDER-Williams-AL strikes again.; April 23, 2014 at 6:17 PM
kenhyderal said...: I am the author of that old post (May 2012) and Malek Williams is a plagiarist; April 23, 2014 at 9:46 PM
Anonymous said...: KEN-Malek_HYDER-Williams-AL again goes into denial. He assumes a fact not in evidence, that anyone would want to plagiarize one of his posts.; April 24, 2014 at 9:05 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

Wendy Murphy once predicted a Nifog book would emerge which would blow the lid off this case. Thus far, Wendy Murphy has not bought into Cohan's book. Neither has Nancy Grace. That should tell you something about the quality of Cohan's authorship, or lack thereof.; April 24, 2014 at 9:31 AM
Anonymous said...: Maybe all the positive reviews of William Cohan's book come from Cohan, himself, maybe writing the reviews and paying others to post them. Just about all the positive reviews are from people who have never reviewed a book for Amazon before.

And maybe the pro SIDNEY comments appearing on J4N have been written by SIDNEY himself and posted anonymously by SIDNEY. He denies it. None of those comments have appeared since SIDNEY has been occupied with his frivolous lawsuit.; April 24, 2014 at 12:25 PM
Anonymous said...: Sidney:

Can you tell us more about your court appearance yesterday?

What claims were dismissed? What claims remain? Were you sanctioned? What is next?; April 24, 2014 at 12:36 PM
Anonymous said...: And maybe the pro SIDNEY comments appearing on J4N have been written by SIDNEY himself and posted anonymously by SIDNEY. He denies it. None of those comments have appeared since SIDNEY has been occupied with his frivolous lawsuit.

I've always figured that. He's such a narcissist, he has to go back and forth. Hell, for all I know I'm Sid. I get so confused sometimes. I need paranoid Duke hater to loan me some tinfoil.; April 24, 2014 at 2:16 PM
Anonymous said...: kenhyderal,

Kilgo told me that some anonymous member of the Lacrosse team told him that Crystal was raped on the night of 13/14 March 2006. And what Kilgo said was, told to him, by a LaX Player, who is a friend of his and was present at the party and who gave his DNA, that non-player attendees, unknown to the Police and untested where involved in the sexual assult on Crystal with some team members also complicent. Kilgo's information, came from a first hand witness and not from the orhestrated spin, designed to bolster the trial lawyers civil suits. This propaganda is what most posters here depend on.

Malek Williams
Hillside H.S.
Class of 1996; April 24, 2014 at 5:28 PM
Anonymous said...: KEN-malek-HYDER-Williams-AL strikes again. Does anyone really believe anyone would want to plagiarize one of KENHYDERAL's posts?; April 24, 2014 at 5:54 PM
kenhyderal said...: Those posts are mine. Anyone can look back and confirm that. On more then one occasion Dr. Harr, as the host of this Blog, has confirmed that The Anonymous Poster who re-posts my offerings and signs himself Malek Williams, a Classmate of Crystal come from an entirely different IP Address. There is no Malek Williams in Crystal's High School Graduating Class. I've complained to Dr.Harr about this plagiarism and asked him to exercise his prerogative, as Blog host, not allow this and delete these posts. Since they were posts of mine and made months before they tend to confuse the present discussions. I am not sure why Dr. Harr allows this, despite my protestations. It may not be obvious to new Posters but it certainly is not to him or two those perverse anonymous posters who also know that this mischief making troll is not me but they, out of perversity, pretend that he is.; April 24, 2014 at 9:40 PM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:

No one in his or her right mind would plagiarize one of your posts. The only people on this blog not in their right minds are you and SIDNEY HARR. Think about it.; April 25, 2014 at 4:21 AM
kenhyderal said...: You know better and pretending you do not calls your honesty into question. Given this to be the case it's not surprising you post your lies anonymously; April 25, 2014 at 9:42 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Oh, and the surgeon report never says anything about removing the Spleen, and Dr. Nichols is clearly referring to the cut to the spleen being removed, not the spleen itself.

Congrats. You've just earned the award for the most ridiculous explanation in history of the planet earth. Nichols, himself, said that the spleen was removed. What part of "removed" do you not understand. He didn't say "a part of the spleen was missing because it had been resected..."

Far out there, fella.; April 25, 2014 at 9:44 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
KENHYDERAL:

No one in his or her right mind would plagiarize one of your posts. The only people on this blog not in their right minds are you and SIDNEY HARR. Think about it.

Sorry, but you got that backwards.; April 25, 2014 at 9:46 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
And maybe the pro SIDNEY comments appearing on J4N have been written by SIDNEY himself and posted anonymously by SIDNEY. He denies it. None of those comments have appeared since SIDNEY has been occupied with his frivolous lawsuit.

I've always figured that. He's such a narcissist, he has to go back and forth. Hell, for all I know I'm Sid. I get so confused sometimes. I need paranoid Duke hater to loan me some tinfoil.

Patting myself on the back is not my modus operandi... not my style.; April 25, 2014 at 9:48 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Sidney:

Can you tell us more about your court appearance yesterday?

What claims were dismissed? What claims remain? Were you sanctioned? What is next?

The defense motions to dismiss were granted with the exception of the motion to dismiss my case against Duke. My motion to compel the State to investigate (which I knew was a long shot) was dismissed, too.; April 25, 2014 at 9:50 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: HEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP!!
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT REGARDING THE LAW LIBRARY.

After extensive research, it has been determined that NO law library is open that is accessible by the public... only lawyers!! There also is NO library within the Wake County Courthouse.

If you believe this to be in error, let me know.

As you were.; April 25, 2014 at 10:00 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: P.S. I better add that there is no law library in Raleigh that is open to the public!; April 25, 2014 at 10:01 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"Sorry, but you got that backwards.(that SIDNEY and KENHYDERAL are the only posters on this forum who are not in their right minds)"

I got it right. You are too incredibly stupid to recognize it.; April 25, 2014 at 10:08 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"Patting myself on the back is not my modus operandi... not my style."

You are too incredibly stupid to realize it is.; April 25, 2014 at 10:10 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"The defense motions to dismiss were granted with the exception of the motion to dismiss my case against Duke. My motion to compel the State to investigate (which I knew was a long shot) was dismissed, too."

Now we may get to see you make an ass out of yourself in open court. Then all the other asses in the world will distance themselves from you.; April 25, 2014 at 10:12 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

Aren't you being a little inconsistent. Why does someone who believes he is a law unto himself, who believes he is above the law, need a law library?; April 25, 2014 at 10:14 AM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:

"You know better and pretending you do not calls your honesty into question. Given this to be the case it's not surprising you post your lies anonymously"

No. I am calling your honesty and your intelligence into question. You are answering the questions in my favor. You are demonstrating you have neither.; April 25, 2014 at 10:17 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid said:

"The defense motions to dismiss were granted with the exception of the motion to dismiss my case against Duke. My motion to compel the State to investigate (which I knew was a long shot) was dismissed, too."

Thanks for the update. With respect to Duke's motion to dismiss your lawsuit, was the motion denied, or did the Court reserve decision on it (meaning that Court will issue a written decision at a later time)?; April 25, 2014 at 10:26 AM
Anonymous said...: Then got to NCCU in Durham. It's what, 30 miles away?; April 25, 2014 at 2:14 PM
Anonymous said...: Or use the Internet ... Google Scholar has a LOT going for it.; April 26, 2014 at 4:03 AM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:

The likelihood that Malek has spoken with Kilgo is just as great as the likelihood that you have.; April 26, 2014 at 4:48 AM
Anonymous said...: WHERE

IS

THE

GREAT

KILGO?; April 26, 2014 at 7:08 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Sid said:

"The defense motions to dismiss were granted with the exception of the motion to dismiss my case against Duke. My motion to compel the State to investigate (which I knew was a long shot) was dismissed, too."

Thanks for the update. With respect to Duke's motion to dismiss your lawsuit, was the motion denied, or did the Court reserve decision on it (meaning that Court will issue a written decision at a later time)?

My previous response may have been a little confusing regarding Duke's motion to dismiss. It was not granted at court, but the judge said that he would review it before reaching a decision. So there's no guarantee that my lawsuit will be heard in court.; April 26, 2014 at 7:55 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Then got to NCCU in Durham. It's what, 30 miles away?

First, why should I go 30 miles away to get access to a library (I have no car) when it is only a 30 minute walk to the Federal Courthouse law library?

Are you even certain that that library is open to the public? The Supreme Court law library isn't, and there's no law library in the new Wake County Courthouse. There's be a lot of misinformation regarding law libraries.

Second, can you give me a logical and legitimate reason why a layperson who is acting Pro Se in a federal lawsuit should not have access to the law library at the Federal Courthouse?; April 26, 2014 at 8:00 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"...can you give me a logical and legitimate reason why a layperson who is acting Pro Se in a federal lawsuit should not have access to the law library at the Federal Courthouse?"

Easily

You are not a lawyer. You are a delusional megalomaniac misusing the legal system to further your own delusions and harass people you dislike.; April 26, 2014 at 8:06 AM
Anonymous said...: I think that it is imperative that I explain in greater detail about the brave individuals who make up the Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong. The organization, which was formed in June 2008 with just two people, has recently seen a steady increase in its membership. Those who join the Committee come from all walks of life, varying backgrounds, and a diversity of cultures. They have different social-justice interests, however what they all have in common is the belief that former Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong was selectively and unjustly disbarred by the North Carolina State Bar because of his handling of the Duke Lacrosse case. He is the only prosecutor to be disbarred by the North Carolina State Bar since its inception in 1933. This is an outrage when one considers that other prosecutors have conducted themselves far more egregiously than Mr. Nifong’s alleged misconduct. The Committee members are united in their goal of seeing that the State Bar unilaterally and unconditionally reinstates Mr. Nifong’s license to practice law in the state of North Carolina without restrictions.

What makes members of the Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong special is that they backup the conviction of their commitment by courageously lending their names and faces to a cause that is at odds with the State of North Carolina, at odds with the biased media, and at odds with the misguided public which has succumbed to the Jedi mind tricks of the media. Members have the freedom to contribute what legal and moral efforts they wish in pursuing the Committee’s goal of Mr. Nifong’s reinstatement. This may be in the form of letter writing, participating in peaceful demonstrations, or engaging in debates.; April 26, 2014 at 8:09 AM
Anonymous said...: I see that SIDNEY anonymous is back at it.; April 26, 2014 at 8:37 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"...there's no guarantee that my lawsuit will be heard in court.

You assume, because you file a lawsuit, you have a right to a court trial. You are wrong. That is why in civil suits you have pre trial conferences, discovery, pre trial motions. In that process, if you can not demonstrate you have a case, you do not go to court.

You think you are above the law, that you are a law unto yourself, which goes a long way to explaining your delusional megalomania, why you go around praising yourself and patting yourself on the back.; April 26, 2014 at 9:06 AM
Anonymous said...: kenhyderal,

I am sorry that my recent posts upset you. I thought it was obvious that I am doing everything humanly possible to locate Kilgo, his friend and the other unknown witnesses who attended the lacrosse party. If you would like to help me in my search, I will welcome your assistance.

Malek Williams
Hillside H.S.
Class of 1996; April 26, 2014 at 9:10 AM
Anonymous said...: KEN-Malek_HYDER-Williams_AL strikes again.; April 26, 2014 at 9:48 AM
kenhyderal said...: OK Malek, do you want to exchange e-mail addresses or do you want to collaborate with me, in public, through this blog? If your name was not Malek Williams when you were at Hillside, Crystal would be interested in knowing who you were then.; April 26, 2014 at 10:02 AM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: " I see that "SIDNEY anonymous" is back at it.... No, this is another case of plagiarism. This was a post made by Dr. Harr in March of 2010. This smacks of another troll attack by the same person who plagiarizes me and styles himself as Malek Williams. Dr. Harr, do you not have the ability to curb such abuses? Helping Crystal, as I am sure you appreciate, should not be a game. It's a serious and critical undertaking; something that morality and Justice demands.; April 26, 2014 at 10:13 AM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:

Maybe the poster is Kilgo's non existent Lacrosse player friend.

I ask again, who would want to copy and paste your posts besides you. Who would want to copy and paste SIDNEY's posts except SIDNEY? You know-the same SIDNEY who says he is not into self adulation or patting himself on the back while trying to tell the world that it is dazzled by his brilliance?; April 26, 2014 at 11:27 AM
Anonymous said...: NCCU's law library is open to public patrons Mon-Fri. Call them at 919-530-5189 for details. Keep in mind, they cannot give you legal advice.; April 26, 2014 at 1:00 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
SIDNEY HARR:

"...can you give me a logical and legitimate reason why a layperson who is acting Pro Se in a federal lawsuit should not have access to the law library at the Federal Courthouse?"

Easily

You are not a lawyer. You are a delusional megalomaniac misusing the legal system to further your own delusions and harass people you dislike.

First, I do not dislike Duke University. I very much dislike the way they treated me.

However, your response does not answer the question proposed... at least not logically.; April 26, 2014 at 1:48 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
NCCU's law library is open to public patrons Mon-Fri. Call them at 919-530-5189 for details. Keep in mind, they cannot give you legal advice.

Thank you. That would be fine if I lived in Durham... but I don't. I live in Raleigh. I might try to use it in the future, but it is still not fair that I should inconvenience myself when a perfectly good law library is within walking distance of my home. If there is a legitimate reason for barring Pro Se litigant laypeople from using the Raleigh Federal Courthouse law library, then I would like to know what it is.; April 26, 2014 at 1:52 PM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"First, I do not dislike Duke University. I very much dislike the way they treated me."

This ridiculous frivolous lawsuit you filed loudly says you do.
'
However, your response does not answer the question proposed... at least not logically."

Yes it does. You are too incredibly stupid to realize it.; April 26, 2014 at 2:00 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "I ask again, who would want to copy and paste your posts besides you. Who would want to copy and paste SIDNEY's posts except SIDNEY?" ......... Get serious. Either use a little common sense or stop being so disingenuous. Why would I or Dr. Harr re-post our own words anonymously when we have already posted and signed them months before. Posted here they are not in context to the current discussion and in fact create a diversion. It's only being done for disruption and not in any way to add to the discussion; April 26, 2014 at 2:02 PM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

" If there is a legitimate reason for barring Pro Se litigant laypeople from using the Raleigh Federal Courthouse law library, then I would like to know what it is."

You have already been told a legitimate reason. You are not a lawyer and are trying to use the legal system to harass people you do not like.

You have not answered the question. Since you believe you are above the law and a law unto yourself, why do you think you need a law library.; April 26, 2014 at 2:03 PM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

You also said that Shan Carter was just minding his own business when he was dealing illegal drugs on the street and illegally packing a firearm.; April 26, 2014 at 2:04 PM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:

"Why would I or Dr. Harr re-post our own words anonymously when we have already posted and signed them months before".

The both of you are incredibly stupid and think you can create the impression you have a lot of support for your views.; April 26, 2014 at 2:06 PM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"If there is a legitimate reason for barring Pro Se litigant laypeople from using the Raleigh Federal Courthouse law library, then I would like to know what it is."

Maybe you should tell us why you should be allowed to use the law library. He who asserts must prove. Just because you assert does not mean you have given any proof.; April 26, 2014 at 2:08 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "The both of you are incredibly stupid and think you can create the impression you have a lot of support for your views"..... If that's the best you can come up with it demonstrates, for all too see, that you are either being dishonest or it's you that is "incredibly stupid"; April 26, 2014 at 2:32 PM
Walt said...: Anon at 1:00 PM wrote, correctly: "Keep in mind, they cannot give you legal advice."

Sid's problem has always been his unwillingness to take advice.

Walt-in-Durham; April 26, 2014 at 3:19 PM
Walt said...: Sid wrote: "Second, can you give me a logical and legitimate reason why a layperson who is acting Pro Se in a federal lawsuit should not have access to the law library at the Federal Courthouse?"

You filed, pro se, a frivolous law suit in the Middle District of North Carolina. Raleigh is located in the Eastern District. I see no reason why the Eastern District should have to support your litigation in the Middle District.

I also think you are crying crocodile tears. When the Supreme Court law library was open to the public you never utilized it. When Campbell first moved to Raleigh, their law library was open to the public in the evenings, and you never used it. You have never given any hint that you utilize any of the online resources that are free. For example, all the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure are available for free on line. All the NC disciplinary rules are available online. Yet you never once have given even the slightest hint that you ever consult those resources. Several of us have written here to describe the problems with your legal theories, yet you have disregarded us as well.

If we look at your record in California, it's no better. You filed and lost numerous lawsuits there too. That was before security concerns closed so many law libraries.

Finally, when you do use some online resources, like you did when you filed a motion to force the Prosecutor to take action citing a provision in the Insurance Code that applied to the department of Insurance, your reasoning is faulty.

No, it's not a lack of access to a law library that is the problem here. You don't take advice well and you don't have good judgment. All the law books in the world aren't going to fix that problem.

A lawyer could fix the problem, but you don't want to listen to a lawyer. Frankly, you remind me of the man who has a leaky faucet who refuses to hire a plumber. Instead, he goes to the K-mart and complains that they don't have any good plumbing books in their magazine aisle.

Walt-in-Durham; April 26, 2014 at 3:33 PM
Anonymous said...: kenhyderal said...
"OK Malek, do you want to exchange e-mail addresses or do you want to collaborate with me, in public, through this blog? If your name was not Malek Williams when you were at Hillside, Crystal would be interested in knowing who you were then."

Now, this is exciting...Kenny and Malek will be working together to find Kilgo.; April 26, 2014 at 4:29 PM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:"Anonymous said: "The both of you are incredibly stupid and think you can create the impression you have a lot of support for your views"..... If that's the best you can come up with it demonstrates, for all too see, that you are either being dishonest or it's you that is "incredibly stupid'"

No, I am being incredibly insightful in recognizing that you and SIDNEY are incredibly stupid.; April 26, 2014 at 8:02 PM
Anonymous said...: here's some tin foil - you need it

how much does duke pay you again to be an evil duke troll and a crazy one at that - top rate? But not enough to afford tin foil? you could ask them for a raise ya know - you do such a fine job at what they pay you for. here - i'll even give you a recommendation for a raise - make sure duke gets it.

blah; April 27, 2014 at 2:51 AM
Anonymous said...: The facts of this case so far simply reinforces the pattern that duke will harm another in the same manner as they harmed the many in the lacrosse case, (or this case), will think they can get away with the harm even though they must take responsibility for the harm if made to do so by law, will corrupt the legal system to assist in getting away with the harm and not taking responsibility for the harm - even in very obvious ways, and then will wait to see if they can get away with that as well until or unless they are required to take responsibility for any of the harm that they do or have done ... by law

... and they do it with a duke evil devil grin as their symbol of reason or right to do what they do ... for the sport and the game ... because that is all that any of this is to them ... and that is what they are.; April 27, 2014 at 4:53 AM
Anonymous said...: There is really no way to stand on the side of duke in all these cases, as what they do is intentional, malicious, harmful, and so opposite of what one would expect based upon a normal concept of right and wrong for the average USA citizen when considering the fields and practices where dukes services are protected by professional expectations, mandates, and laws that they help to develop and set in place, yet never seem to respect nor follow for the protection or wellbeing of the citizen.

To do so would put most in harms way, if only in that they are required to shutter their own conscious when dealing with duke to retain their own civil and legal humanity and values - which could be deemed a harm too heavy to bear for some, and probably, ultimately, for many.

It is hard to watch what they do that causes harm and agree with them in any way.; April 27, 2014 at 4:56 AM
Anonymous said...: seriously, you are a troll ... nothing else

i want to know the truth of duke's 'professional' services since it effects everyone in this state and has put someone in jail for their mistakes ... you however want to annoy everyone here and patronize me to give you reason to not look truly insane as you repeatedly troll this blog to 'tell' your duke-sided version of thangs and so you can continue to feel justified in your trolling of everyone here - go evil duke troll ... go ...; April 27, 2014 at 4:59 AM
Anonymous said...: Malpractice, by definition, isn't "intentional" and Duke, like all healthcare organizations, gets sued for malpractice all the time, and pays out lots and lots of money for harm caused by malpractice. What's your point?

UNC harms a lot of people with Malpractice, so does WakeMed, Bowman Gray, and all the rest. They try to prevent it, but mistakes happen. They aren't doing them intentionally.

But, Duke, like all the rest, do a lot more good than harm, unfortunately harm sometimes happens. Accidents happen, and when they do, the harmed people can sue for their damages.; April 27, 2014 at 7:12 AM
Anonymous said...: that doesn't exactly bring Mr. Daye back or get Ms. Mangum out of jail for their mistake that they must take responsibility for by law but don't because they're duke ... does it?

no

no your right

so - what's up with that and duke?

eh?; April 27, 2014 at 10:06 AM
guiowen said...: To the 10:06,
There may have been malpractice. If so, you can be certain the Daye family has already taken this up with Duke Medical. You might try asking them about it, but I doubt they'll tell you.
As for Crystal, she might get out on a successful appeal. However, I see slim chance of that. The jury believed that she stabbed Daye maliciously. This sent him to the hospital. If not for this, Reggie would not have died.
You might of course try telling Crystal's lawyer your theory that Duke killed Daye on purpose so as to frame Crystal. If so, this might absolve Crystal of guilt; she would then be guilty only of malicious attack and might get out of jail very soon. I see little chance of this, but hey, why not try?
Go for it!; April 27, 2014 at 11:22 AM
Anonymous said...: Whatever q... the system is as fracked up for her as it was for the duke players, and duke is at the helm in highest duke disregard of all instead of the people for the people, which is all too obvious, so you justify that if you can since duke just shrugs bout thangs and grins on as usual. Of course, you seem to do the same, so perhaps you can enlighten us on why exactly is this done by duke, et. al.

blah; April 27, 2014 at 1:22 PM
Anonymous said...: Is SIDNEY anonymously posting again? I say that is a definite possibility.; April 27, 2014 at 3:20 PM
Anonymous said...: kenhyderal,

We should use this blog to locate Kilgo, because Dr. Harr could be of great help.

I did not use the name Malek at Hillside. Many of my friends called me J.

Malek Williams
Hillside H.S.
Class of 1996; April 27, 2014 at 4:45 PM
guiowen said...: Hey, this is great. Maybe J. Williams and Ken Edwards can locate and subpoena Kilgo. That should be fun!:-); April 27, 2014 at 5:42 PM
Anonymous said...: KEN-Malek-Hydr-Williams-AL strikes again.; April 27, 2014 at 5:45 PM
kenhyderal said...: Malek said: Many of my friends called me J."..... What name would Crystal know you by?; April 27, 2014 at 9:34 PM
kenhyderal said...: For God's sake Dr. Harr, I implore you to censor the ignorant racist @ 7:35 and I call on all posters to support me in this. Frequently sickening type of posts like this appear and you allow them to stand. Your argument that this exposes this ignorant person to ridicule does not hold water with me. I for one am offended and you should also give consideration to the feelings of Crystal and all others who care for her. I notice that Liestoppers, in response to Cohan's book has once again revved up it's scurrilous attacks on Crystal. You can't stop lies by printing lies; April 27, 2014 at 9:50 PM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:

"I notice that Liestoppers, in response to Cohan's book has once again revved up it's scurrilous attacks on Crystal."

No they don't. Truth does not add up to "scurrilous attacks".

"You can't stop lies by printing lies".

You seem to think by printing lies over and over you can subvert the truth. All part of your campaign to have the law give your favorite murderess a pass for her crime.; April 28, 2014 at 4:08 AM
Anonymous said...: If the 'law' would do their jobs 'right' for the people, the people wouldn't have to do it for them, like the lacrosse guys and their supporters at various blogs who make their way to this blog eventually and treat everyone like you do evil duke troll - you wouldn't have to do that if the 'law' was the 'law' in duke / durham. When the only law is dukes' games where they kill, rape, murder, lie, deceive the 'masses' continuously, etc., etc. - quess that is what happens. People 'scream' lot bout it and some people take it all out on whatever convenient scrape goat they can find since the 'law' doesn't 'work' - which to you is this blog.

Since the 'law' is the real problem, perhaps you can give all others a break and direct your ample critique energy at the true problem - duke and the 'law'. Do you think you would be able to do any good for the people if you did so?; April 28, 2014 at 5:40 AM
guiowen said...: Anonymous said,
"... perhaps you can give all others a break and direct your ample critique energy at the true problem - duke and the 'law'. Do you think you would be able to do any good for the people if you did so?"

Well, you've been doing this for over a year now. Have you done any good for the people?; April 28, 2014 at 6:14 AM
Anonymous said...: has your using this blog for your scrapegoat done any good g...?; April 28, 2014 at 6:19 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: kenhyderal said...
For God's sake Dr. Harr, I implore you to censor the ignorant racist @ 7:35 and I call on all posters to support me in this. Frequently sickening type of posts like this appear and you allow them to stand. Your argument that this exposes this ignorant person to ridicule does not hold water with me. I for one am offended and you should also give consideration to the feelings of Crystal and all others who care for her. I notice that Liestoppers, in response to Cohan's book has once again revved up it's scurrilous attacks on Crystal. You can't stop lies by printing lies

Even my tolerance for crude obnoxious comments has a limit. I will begin removing the worst of the worst... beginning with the one you recommended.; April 28, 2014 at 6:57 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: guiowen said...
To the 10:06,
There may have been malpractice. If so, you can be certain the Daye family has already taken this up with Duke Medical. You might try asking them about it, but I doubt they'll tell you.
As for Crystal, she might get out on a successful appeal. However, I see slim chance of that. The jury believed that she stabbed Daye maliciously. This sent him to the hospital. If not for this, Reggie would not have died.
You might of course try telling Crystal's lawyer your theory that Duke killed Daye on purpose so as to frame Crystal. If so, this might absolve Crystal of guilt; she would then be guilty only of malicious attack and might get out of jail very soon. I see little chance of this, but hey, why not try?
Go for it!

gui, mon ami, it was not the stabbing that was responsible for Daye's death... it was the esophageal intubation. Had not Duke staff intubated Daye in his esophagus he would not have died.

Comprende?; April 28, 2014 at 7:00 AM
guiowen said...: Sidney, amigo mio,
Yo comprendo muy bien lo que dices. Otra cosa es que no estoy de acuerdo contigo.; April 28, 2014 at 7:09 AM
guiowen said...: to the 6:19,
I'm not trying to do any good. I just enjoy talking to Sidney.; April 28, 2014 at 7:11 AM
Anonymous said...: seriously g... you are an ...; April 28, 2014 at 7:21 AM
guiowen said...: Anonymous said...

"seriously g... you are an ..."

AN ANGEL?
Thank you!; April 28, 2014 at 8:57 AM
Anonymous said...: nope, try again

go for the number of dots this time g...; April 28, 2014 at 9:20 AM
guiowen said...: Oh, an ACE! Thank you!`; April 28, 2014 at 10:24 AM
A Lawyer said...: Had not Duke staff intubated Daye in his esophagus he would not have died. Comprende?

Had Mangum not stabbed Daye, he wouldn't have been at Duke to be intubated.

Comprende?; April 28, 2014 at 11:06 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"Even my tolerance for crude obnoxious comments has a limit. I will begin removing the worst of the worst... beginning with the one you recommended."

Meanwhile you show a lot of tolerance for obnoxious comments about people you do not like, for example, the innocent, falsely accused Lacrosse players and AG Roy Cooper who found after an exhaustive investigation that the Lacrosse players you dislike did not commit any crime.; April 28, 2014 at 11:51 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"gui, mon ami, it was not the stabbing that was responsible for Daye's death... it was the esophageal intubation. Had not Duke staff intubated Daye in his esophagus he would not have died."

It was the stabbing which was responsible for Reginals Daye's death. You again show how incredibly stupid and incompetent you are.; April 28, 2014 at 11:54 AM
Anonymous said...: Consider the irony:

SIDNEY HARR says he disapproves of obnoxious comments on his blog.

Bur he blogs over and over again that innocent men should be convicted of committing a crime which never happened because they were accused by a black woman.

He blogs that said false accuser should get a pass for murdering her boy friend.

He blogs that the Attorney General of North Carolina who thoroughly investigated the allegations against the Lacrosse players and found that no crime had happened(SIDNEY has admitted he is not familiar with the facts of the case) should not have stated his belief that the Lacrosse players were innocent.

He also has blogged that the New Black Panther Party, when they demonstrated in Durham to influence the judicial system to find the innocent Lacrosse players guilty, were just expressing their First Amendment rights.

SIDNEY HARR, who never completed a residence, never obtained board certification in any specialty is more capable of determining the result of an autopsy he never attended better than the experienced, board certified pathologist who performed it.

SIDNEY also claims that self aggrandizment is not his style.; April 28, 2014 at 12:24 PM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:

Who says academicians have proven that black on white racism does not exist:

Check this out:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/22/us/a-drivers-bloody-run-in-with-an-angry-detroit.html?WT.mc_id=D-E-OTB-AD-RSS-NYTNOW-MOSTSHARED-OS-0414&WT.mc_ev=click&WT.mc_c=__CAMP_UID__&bicmp=AD&bicmlukp=WT.mc_id&bicmst=1396310400000&bicmet=1401408000000:

10 year old black boy darts into the street. White truck driver hits him accidentally. He gets out of his truck to render assistance. A black mob descends upon him and beats him senseless.

Did race baiter Al or race baiter Jesse denounce this racially motivated attempted murder? No.; April 28, 2014 at 2:30 PM
Anonymous said...: The judge said your interpretation of the law was wrong in this case a lawyer ... why do you not understand the bit about preventable malpractice not being the fault of anyone but the person(s) committing the preventable malpractice.

The intubation malpractice was preventable - therefore unless Ms. Mangum was standing there ready to save Mr. Daye from Duke's malpractice, but failed to, there is no way she is responsible for what Duke did wrong since that is the only way she could have prevented what they should have but didn't.

Since she does not have the medical skills needed to prevent what they should have but didn't, there is doubly no way she could have prevented what they could have but didn't.

That is just simple plain logic - one that is usually expected in the court of law. Why is it so hard to understand for some here?; April 28, 2014 at 2:52 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous April 28, 2014 at 2:52 PM

You are incredibly stupid, just like SIDNEY HSRR, which gives me the impression you ARE SIDNEY posting anonymously to create the false impression that people out there support your idiocy.; April 28, 2014 at 3:17 PM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

You say you object to obnoxious posts.

Recently you posted a number of articles claiming s convicted drug dealer felon, who was dealing illegal drugs on the street while illegally carrying a concealed firearm, who chased down and killed another drug dealer who confronted him, in the process killing an innocent 8 year old boy, should have gotten a pass for what he did. If that is not obnoxious, what is?; April 28, 2014 at 3:20 PM
guiowen said...: To anonymous 2:30,
You don't understand. Kenhyderal is a master debater. This means that any word he uses means exactly what he wants it to mean, no more, no less. In this case, Kenny wants "racism" to mean "any time a white person mistreats a black".
That being so, it is clear that black-on-white racism cannot exist.
Please do not annoy Kenhyderal as he is a master debater.; April 28, 2014 at 3:31 PM
guiowen said...: To anonymous 2:52,
And yet the judge let them convict the poor benighted woman. Is there no justice in this world?; April 28, 2014 at 3:36 PM
kenhyderal said...: @ Anonymous 2:30 PM. Thanks for informing me of this incident, I was not aware of. It seems it's being dealt with appropriately. I don't see racism as a factor in this unfortunate situation and those who took the law into their own hands are being properly dealt with. I doubt if the thugs who beat the driver were motivated by feelings that they, as African Americans were racially superior to people of other races and by virtue of their race were entitled to mete out justice upon him.; April 28, 2014 at 3:49 PM
Anonymous said...: Of course if Ms. Mangum actually instructed the docs to commit preventable malpractice she would then hold some responsibility for the death by preventable malpractice, that is if she were in a position to instruct the docs to do anything at all and they were in a position to legally place blame on her for her instructions that they followed. That would be another logical reason that she might be held responsible for his actual death, but even then the docs judgement to follow those orders would be questionable and not beyond ultimate responsibility.; April 28, 2014 at 4:18 PM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:

"@ Anonymous 2:30 PM. Thanks for informing me of this incident, I was not aware of."

It is the kind of incident of which you chose to be unaware.

"It seems it's being dealt with appropriately. I don't see racism as a factor in this unfortunate situation and those who took the law into their own hands are being properly dealt with. I doubt if the thugs who beat the driver were motivated by feelings that they, as African Americans were racially superior to people of other races and by virtue of their race were entitled to mete out justice upon him."

Not what you would have said had the victim been black and the perpetrators were white, showing again that you are a blatant unrepentant racist.

You, as you usually do, have lived down to my expectations.; April 28, 2014 at 5:55 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous April 28, 2014 at 4:18 PM:

You ARE incredibly stupid, the kind of incredible stupidity KENNY and SIDNEY are accustomed to showing.; April 28, 2014 at 5:58 PM
Anonymous said...: It seems to be considered a badge of honor or some great deed to be considered worthy for an individual to sacrifice their integrity, intelligence, better judgement, moral decency and even future and present careers in order to insure that duke is seen in history as the winner, or at the least, definitely not responsible for anything 'wrong' in any more than the least (if that).

Like with the lacrosse players, they were expected to take the blame even if they personally were not responsible for whatever by some duke people; or Cohen writing a book that immediately gets questioned about the true intent or even the intent of having a trial that should have happened but didn't but now it is; or like Dr. Nichols obviously producing such a fraudulent and corrupted autopsy report; or all Ms. Mangum's lawyers in this case doing whatever they did or didn't do to assist in allowing her time in jail; or the duke people who haven't pointed out the discrepancies themselves in the autopsy reports or made public any settlement that they did or did not make with the Daye family and the reasons for their decisions for whatever they did or did'nt do about the malpractice in terms of taking legal responsibility as is law; or the evil duke troll gang doing their thang and thinking its ok; ... etc.

Of everything seen so far from these cases, that aspect of moral / ethical decay is the most obvious. What is truly amazing is that the charades and duke centered / driven harm can and does continue for so long even when what they are doing is so obvious to so many, and so many are harmed by what is done or not done on duke's behalf.; April 28, 2014 at 6:10 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous April 28, 2014 at 6:10 PM:

You are incredibly stupid.; April 28, 2014 at 6:22 PM
Anonymous said...: Stop bullying me evil duke troll; April 28, 2014 at 6:26 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous April 28, 2014 at 6:26 PM:

You are incredibly stupid.; April 28, 2014 at 6:50 PM
Anonymous said...: well if'n you are so smart to judge the stupidity or not of what was written, than please do enlighten us all as to why ya'll do that - sink so low that the only thing that can be done by ya'll is to kick the can down the road once again cuz ... why?

seriously, at this point the whole thing is one major joke that would actually be funny if people hadn't been killed, murdered, raped, falsly accussed of duke's mistakes and imprisoned, lives destroyed and lost, ... etc., etc., etc.

so ... kick the stupidity can once again will ya ... eventually maybe we'll all laugh bout all the destruction ... (doubt it though); April 29, 2014 at 3:40 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous April 29, 2014 at 3:40 AM

You are incredibly stupid.; April 29, 2014 at 4:09 AM
Anonymous said...: I love how Sid (in all his personalities) still ignores that the only thing that would keep Mangum out of prison was self-defense. Once the jury rejected that, anything else related to the intubation and the rest was simply a manslaughter v murder question. It the stabbing was not in self-defense, Mangum is convicted of a crime and since Daye died, it would be some level of manslaughter, at a minimum, and possibly murder. But for all Sid's talk of Crystal going free - self-defense was the only guilty/not guilty path in this case (of some crime).; April 29, 2014 at 4:35 AM
Walt said...: Anonymous at 4:18 wrote: "Of course if Ms. Mangum actually instructed the docs to commit preventable malpractice she would then hold some responsibility for the death by preventable malpractice,...."

That is not an accurate statement of the law. You may wish that killers could go free because of an intervening act of malpractice, but that is not and has never been our law. Argue to change the law, if you have a good argument to make, but don't write such an untrue claim as you did above and expect anyone to believe it. You are not correctly stating the law as it exists now, or ever did.

Walt-in-Durham; April 29, 2014 at 6:08 AM
Anonymous said...: Well you certainly don't Walt. I explained it from the view of logic. What's your odd reasoning, and if you were in the same position as Ms. Mangum what logic would you use to get yourself unwrongfully accussed, (or law - hey what a novel idea)? seriously ...

blah; April 29, 2014 at 6:46 AM
Anonymous said...: How many different personalities does Sid have on here?

We have:
Sid
Sid/Kenny
Sid/Guiowen
Sid/Anonymous blah Duke tinfoil conspiracist
Sid/Duke troll
Sid/Me

The only ones who I think aren't Sid are Walt and A Lawyer.; April 29, 2014 at 7:32 AM
Anonymous said...: so your saying you are sid and me?

seriously - you are not me.

but you could be g... and the evil duke troll and the nonretired nondoc, even the lawyer for that matter, but Dr. Harr? naw you are only not you, or are you?; April 29, 2014 at 7:54 AM
Anonymous said...: Oh, c'mon ... you know we are both Sid ... you can stop pretending!; April 29, 2014 at 8:55 AM
Anonymous said...: So, hotshot harr, how much money did you win from duke, huh? Oh, didn't win? golly, too bad....; April 29, 2014 at 9:12 AM
Anonymous said...: Another great piece from KC today. check it out....; April 29, 2014 at 9:38 AM
Walt said...: Anonymous at 6:46 AM wrote: "Well you certainly don't Walt. I explained it from the view of logic."

Your logic ignores the case law and jury instructions of this state.

"What's your odd reasoning[?]"

The law of this state, and ever other state in the union.

...and if you were in the same position as Ms. Mangum what logic would you use to get yourself unwrongfully accussed[?]"

First, I don't stab people with whom I have a dispute. I don't resort to violence. Thus, I would not find myself in her position.

Second, she was not wrongfully accused, other than the larceny which was a stretch. The other charges were amply supported by evidence.

I have written that a very generous plea offer was made some time ago. Considering she had the best bargainier in the business as her attorney and he exhausted the legal options with the independent medical exam, her best defense was to use Van's legendary abilities to get a plea. Unfortunately for Crystal, she rejected the best advice of the bargainer in the local bar.

"seriously ... blah"

That is what passes in your world for cogent argument?

Walt-in-Durham; April 29, 2014 at 10:57 AM
Anonymous said...: the jury instruction from the judge was not what you argued about for years Walt, the blah is cuz your advice on this blog is bs and just another example of what is wrong with the justice system in this state

so ... yeah

blah; April 29, 2014 at 1:04 PM
Anonymous said...: here walt i'll kick the stupidity can way down the road for ya

run and get it and give it a whack on its way walt

run em, run em walt, yeah ... watch you go

give it a good kick now

we're all watching ya run em

evil duke troll is waiting down the road for his turn at the game again so kick it that way

blah; April 29, 2014 at 1:22 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous April 29, 2014 at 1:04 PM

You are incredibly stupid.; April 29, 2014 at 1:52 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous April 29, 2014 at 1:22 PM

You are unbelievably stupid.; April 29, 2014 at 1:54 PM
guiowen said...: To the 1:04 and 1:22,
Please mind your manners. Your disrespect detracts from the blog, and hurts Sidney.; April 29, 2014 at 2:15 PM
Break the Conspiracy said...: Anonymous @4/28 2:52pm did not provide an accurate summary of Judge Ridgeway's instructions to the jury. It appears that Anonymous 1:04pm and 1:22pm relied on the inaccurate summary to unfairly criticize Walt.

Judge Ridgeway did not instruct the jury that "preventable malpractice" is not the responsibility of anyone but the person committing such preventable malpractice.

On the contrary, he explained that the stabbing must be a real cause, a cause without which the death would not have occurred. He stressed that the stabbing need not be the sole cause or the last cause, but merely an act, that joined together with other actions, resulted in death. Importantly, he instructed the jury that medically negligent treatment does not excuse the defendant from criminal responsibility for death.

These instructions are consistent with the discussions of State v Welch and State v Holsclaw. It appears that Walt and A Lawyer have provided accurate information on this subject.

See the following link.

Http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tal1cruO5hDU

The jury instructions begin at about 35 minutes.

The instructions about proximate cause begin at about 48 minutes.; April 29, 2014 at 2:26 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous A Lawyer said...
Had not Duke staff intubated Daye in his esophagus he would not have died. Comprende?

Had Mangum not stabbed Daye, he wouldn't have been at Duke to be intubated.

Comprende?

C'mon, A Lawyer. You very well know that judge's instructions to the jury said that they need to find that the stabbing was the proximate cause of Daye's death. The stab wound brought Daye to the hospital, but it was not the proximate cause of Daye's death... ergo, the conviction must be overturned.

No?; April 29, 2014 at 2:29 PM
Anonymous said...: http://www.youtube.com/Ta1cruO5hDU; April 29, 2014 at 2:30 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Break the Conspiracy said...
Anonymous @4/28 2:52pm did not provide an accurate summary of Judge Ridgeway's instructions to the jury. It appears that Anonymous 1:04pm and 1:22pm relied on the inaccurate summary to unfairly criticize Walt.

Judge Ridgeway did not instruct the jury that "preventable malpractice" is not the responsibility of anyone but the person committing such preventable malpractice.

On the contrary, he explained that the stabbing must be a real cause, a cause without which the death would not have occurred. He stressed that the stabbing need not be the sole cause or the last cause, but merely an act, that joined together with other actions, resulted in death. Importantly, he instructed the jury that medically negligent treatment does not excuse the defendant from criminal responsibility for death.

These instructions are consistent with the discussions of State v Welch and State v Holsclaw. It appears that Walt and A Lawyer have provided accurate information on this subject.

See the following link.

Http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tal1cruO5hDU

The jury instructions begin at about 35 minutes.

The instructions about proximate cause begin at about 48 minutes.

Hey, Break.

You didn't finish the remainder of what Judge Ridgeway said when talking about medical malpractice or negligence. He said it would not be an issue except in the event that it was solely responsible for death. The esophageal intubation was the sole cause of death and without it, Daye would not have wound up brain dead.; April 29, 2014 at 2:32 PM
Anonymous said...: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ta1cruo5hDU; April 29, 2014 at 2:35 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Walt said...
Anonymous at 6:46 AM wrote: "Well you certainly don't Walt. I explained it from the view of logic."

Your logic ignores the case law and jury instructions of this state.

"What's your odd reasoning[?]"

The law of this state, and ever other state in the union.

...and if you were in the same position as Ms. Mangum what logic would you use to get yourself unwrongfully accussed[?]"

First, I don't stab people with whom I have a dispute. I don't resort to violence. Thus, I would not find myself in her position.

Second, she was not wrongfully accused, other than the larceny which was a stretch. The other charges were amply supported by evidence.

I have written that a very generous plea offer was made some time ago. Considering she had the best bargainier in the business as her attorney and he exhausted the legal options with the independent medical exam, her best defense was to use Van's legendary abilities to get a plea. Unfortunately for Crystal, she rejected the best advice of the bargainer in the local bar.

"seriously ... blah"

That is what passes in your world for cogent argument?

Walt-in-Durham

Larceny a stretch...? Are you kidding? There's no way one could stretch that... especially after Daye stated that he gave the cashier's checks to Mangum. The larceny of chose in action charges were used to make the murder charge first degree by using the felony murder rule.; April 29, 2014 at 2:35 PM
guiowen said...: Sidney said,
"The esophageal intubation was the sole cause of death and without it, Daye would not have wound up brain dead."

Sidney, I know that's what you've been saying for some time now. Unfortunately the jury did not agree with you.
The fact that the jury did not agree with you is not cause for overturning the conviction.; April 29, 2014 at 2:40 PM
Anonymous said...: Dr. Harr, do you know how the appeal is progressing? Can you please provide updates on the appeal and investigation in sharlogs once you hear word if possible?

Thank you.; April 29, 2014 at 2:40 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
SIDNEY HARR:

You say you object to obnoxious posts.

Recently you posted a number of articles claiming s convicted drug dealer felon, who was dealing illegal drugs on the street while illegally carrying a concealed firearm, who chased down and killed another drug dealer who confronted him, in the process killing an innocent 8 year old boy, should have gotten a pass for what he did. If that is not obnoxious, what is?

Your account of the incident is far from accurate. I see nothing obnoxious in stating the logical... Shan Carter shot the drug dealer in self-defense. The bullet that killed the boy was accidental. I don't believe either of those deaths are worthy of the death penalty. As for imprisonment, Carter has already served more time than recommended for involuntary manslaughter in the boy's death.

Hope this provides some elucidation for you.; April 29, 2014 at 2:41 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Dr. Harr, do you know how the appeal is progressing? Can you please provide updates on the appeal and investigation in sharlogs once you hear word if possible?

Thank you.

It is my understanding from Crystal that the appeals defense attorney hasn't even met with her yet. I don't know what Crystal's attorney is planning. She hasn't invited me to come by her office to give assistance in Crystal's case. She said she would when she had time.

I'll post what's going on as soon as I find out.; April 29, 2014 at 2:44 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: guiowen said...
Sidney said,
"The esophageal intubation was the sole cause of death and without it, Daye would not have wound up brain dead."

Sidney, I know that's what you've been saying for some time now. Unfortunately the jury did not agree with you.
The fact that the jury did not agree with you is not cause for overturning the conviction.

Mon ami, thanks to Meier, the jurors never heard about the esophageal intubation! If they would've, I believe there would've been a different outcome.; April 29, 2014 at 2:46 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
The judge said your interpretation of the law was wrong in this case a lawyer ... why do you not understand the bit about preventable malpractice not being the fault of anyone but the person(s) committing the preventable malpractice.

The intubation malpractice was preventable - therefore unless Ms. Mangum was standing there ready to save Mr. Daye from Duke's malpractice, but failed to, there is no way she is responsible for what Duke did wrong since that is the only way she could have prevented what they should have but didn't.

Since she does not have the medical skills needed to prevent what they should have but didn't, there is doubly no way she could have prevented what they could have but didn't.

That is just simple plain logic - one that is usually expected in the court of law. Why is it so hard to understand for some here?

An interesting way of looking at it.; April 29, 2014 at 2:48 PM
Anonymous said...: The larceny of chose in action charges were used to make the murder charge first degree by using the felony murder rule.

It was not - as has been noted to you repeatedly - with citations to the law and jury instructions, the Larceny of a Chose in Action, a non-violent Class H felony - CANNOT, COULD NOT, and DID NOT form the basis for felony murder.

The fact you keep harping on this shows you realize what a joke this entire blog is, because even when you are demonstrably wrong, you keep going back to it to try and prove your points.

You clearly are NOT interested in anything that helps Crystal, you are a bitter old man upset she didn't get LWOP, who will do everything he can to jeopardize her appeal.; April 29, 2014 at 2:55 PM
Anonymous said...: The fact none of you know how to use Google astounds me ...

Information on the appeal (which was filed, and is progressing, despite what folks on here want to claim):

Docket Sheet:

http://appellate.nccourts.org/dockets.php?court=2&docket=2-P2014-0153-001&pdf=1&a=0&dev=1

Copy of the Motion for Extension:

http://www.ncappellatecourts.org/show-file.php?document_id=151987

If you folks really care and aren't too lazy to actually look it up - you can follow the appeal yourself at the North Carolina Court of Appeals website - the electronic filing site. I will leave it to you to figure out the search function.

http://www.ncappellatecourts.org/; April 29, 2014 at 2:59 PM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"The stab wound brought Daye to the hospital, but it was not the proximate cause of Daye's death... ergo, the conviction must be overturned."

The stab wound was the ause of death. Ergo, you are incredibly stupid; April 29, 2014 at 3:07 PM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HAEE:

"The esophageal intubation was the sole cause of death and without it, Daye would not have wound up brain dead."

Without the stab wound,the need for intubation would never have arisen. Ergo, Reginald Daye would not have died if not for the stab wound. Again you show you are no retired physician but a questionably competent person with an MD degree.; April 29, 2014 at 3:11 PM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR;

"Your account of the incident is far from accurate."

It is absolutely accurate

"I see nothing obnoxious in stating the logical..."

You logical? Oh come now.

"Shan Carter shot the drug dealer in self-defense."

By his ow testimony, Shan Carter pursued and shot Tyrone Baker after Tyrone Baker had fled.

Once again you show how unbelievably stupid you are.; April 29, 2014 at 3:16 PM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"She hasn't invited me to come by her office to give assistance in Crystal's case. She said she would when she had time."

If she were intelligent she would never find the time.; April 29, 2014 at 3:17 PM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"Mon ami, thanks to Meier, the jurors never heard about the esophageal intubation! If they would've, I believe there would've been a different outcome."

You show again that Crystal's defense attorney should never find time for you.; April 29, 2014 at 3:20 PM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"An interesting way of looking at it."

No, an incredibly stupid way of looking at it, showing again you are but an incompetent person with an MD degree.; April 29, 2014 at 3:22 PM
Anonymous said...: Where is Kenny the troll?; April 29, 2014 at 5:55 PM
Anonymous said...: Where is Kenny the troll?; April 29, 2014 at 5:56 PM
Anonymous said...: W
h
e
r
e

i
s

K
e
n
n
y

t
h
e

t
r
o
l
l
?; April 29, 2014 at 5:57 PM
Whatchoo tawkin 'bout, Sidney? said...: Good news! Kwazy Twacy Kwine back in the news with her appeal to SCOTUS!

Ex-Durham DA petitions US Supreme Court to win job back

She's trotting out her old 'freedom of speech' crap. Meanwhile, the Cline cases that were the subject of the Twisted Truth series continue to be investigated and appealed.; April 30, 2014 at 5:48 AM
Whatchoo tawkin 'bout, Sidney? said...: "The North Carolina State Bar delayed a disciplinary hearing for Cline until her appeals were exhausted. No date has been set for the hearing, which will determine if she violated rules requiring lawyers to be honest and trustworthy.."

May the appeal be denied soon, and the NC State Bar hammer fall swiftly and firmly on Kwazy Twacey's punkin' haid.; April 30, 2014 at 5:53 AM
Walt said...: Sid wrote: "Mon ami, thanks to Meier, the jurors never heard about the esophageal intubation! If they would've, I believe there would've been a different outcome."

Thanks to none other than Sid, the state knew exactly what the defense independent medical examiner would say, that is, she agreed with the state's medical examiner on the cause of death. That testimony would have only served to assure the jury that Dr. Nichols was correct. Meier did the best he could with the treacherous release of the defense evidence caused by Sid Harr. With friends like Sid, Crystal doesn't need any enemies.

Speaking of enemies, Sid again threatens to hand over to the state whatever strategy Crystal might have on appeal: "I'll post what's going on as soon as I find out." From the time you breached the attorney client privilege and revealed the defense independent medical exam to now, you have worked over-time to undermine Crystal's chances in this case. At the risk of being repetitive, with friends like you, Crystal doesn't need any enemies.

Walt-in-Durham; April 30, 2014 at 7:19 AM
Anonymous said...: Yep, Walt, is 100% correct. sidney is screwing over sister, yet again. He violated her medical privacy rights by sharing medical information....and soon he will run his ignorant racist mouth about her appeal. whatever it takes to get his racist asshat face in view.....at her expense.; April 30, 2014 at 7:34 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
SIDNEY HARR;

"Your account of the incident is far from accurate."

It is absolutely accurate

"I see nothing obnoxious in stating the logical..."

You logical? Oh come now.

"Shan Carter shot the drug dealer in self-defense."

By his ow testimony, Shan Carter pursued and shot Tyrone Baker after Tyrone Baker had fled.

Once again you show how unbelievably stupid you are.

Let me interject a bit of edification for you. The first two bullets Shan fired struck Tyrone Baker from the front. Baker then turned and ran, and Shan followed a short distance to prevent Baker from using the corner of the grocery building for cover from which to return fire. The subsequent shots fired by Carter were in Baker's general direction to persuade Baker to continue running and allow Carter to get into his car and get away. None of the bullets fired after the initial first two struck Baker.

Let me know if further elucidation is required.; April 30, 2014 at 8:26 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Walt said...
Sid wrote: "Mon ami, thanks to Meier, the jurors never heard about the esophageal intubation! If they would've, I believe there would've been a different outcome."

Thanks to none other than Sid, the state knew exactly what the defense independent medical examiner would say, that is, she agreed with the state's medical examiner on the cause of death. That testimony would have only served to assure the jury that Dr. Nichols was correct. Meier did the best he could with the treacherous release of the defense evidence caused by Sid Harr. With friends like Sid, Crystal doesn't need any enemies.

Speaking of enemies, Sid again threatens to hand over to the state whatever strategy Crystal might have on appeal: "I'll post what's going on as soon as I find out." From the time you breached the attorney client privilege and revealed the defense independent medical exam to now, you have worked over-time to undermine Crystal's chances in this case. At the risk of being repetitive, with friends like you, Crystal doesn't need any enemies.

Walt-in-Durham

Not to be disrespectful, Walt, but what you just commented doesn't make sense.; April 30, 2014 at 8:28 AM
Anonymous said...: None of the bullets fired after the initial first two struck Baker.

No they struck and killed an innocent kid whose life you consider completely and totally meaningless. I guess it was his own damn fault for being there that day and Shan Carter has no responsibility whatsoever.; April 30, 2014 at 8:36 AM
Anonymous said...: The "boy" had a name. Demetrius Greene. He had a life until Shan Carter callously took it away.

There's a special place in hell for Shan Carter, and my hope is that he'll be there soon.; April 30, 2014 at 9:00 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"Let me interject a bit of edification for you. The first two bullets Shan fired struck Tyrone Baker from the front. Baker then turned and ran, and Shan followed a short distance to prevent Baker from using the corner of the grocery building for cover from which to return fire. The subsequent shots fired by Carter were in Baker's general direction to persuade Baker to continue running and allow Carter to get into his car and get away. None of the bullets fired after the initial first two struck Baker."

You lie.

According to Shan Carter's testimony he fired the first two shots into the pavement. Tyrone Baker then fled. Shan Carter ran after him and continued firing. Then Tyrone Baker fell. The first two shots did not hit him.

From http://www.aoc.state.nc.us/www/public/sc/opinions/2003/479-01-1.htm

“Defendant(Shan Carter) testified that he POINTED HIS GUN TOWARDS THE GROUND(emphasis agged0 and intended only to force Baker away so that defendant could get to his car and leave.”

And “After defendant fired the first shot, Baker turned and ran around the corner, moving down 10th Street. According to defendant, ‘[Baker] ran and I went behind him shooting at him.’”

And “As Baker ran down 10th Street, defendant followed him around the corner, continuing to fire between four and six shots. At some point, Baker ran in front of or near the Greene car in an attempt to cross 10th Street. During the course of the shooting, two of the bullets from defendant's revolver struck Baker, one in the leg and one in the torso.”

Tyrone Baker collapsed AFTER he fled. I say again, if Tyrone Baker had taken two hits from a .357 Magnum(the weapon Shan Carter was carrying illegally), one in the thigh and one in the chest, he would have been unable to flee.

That you claim Shan Carter hit Baker with his first two shots is yet more evidence of your gross incompetence.

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stopping_power

“A manstopper is any combination of firearm and ammunition that can reliably incapacitate, or ‘stop’, a human target IMMEDIATELY(emphasis added). For example, the .45 ACPpistol round and the .357 Magnum revolver round both have firm reputations as ‘manstoppers.’”; April 30, 2014 at 9:09 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid said:

"Not to be disrespectful, Walt, but what you just commented doesn't make sense."

Walt's comment make perfect sense.

Prior to Mangum's trial you released the conclusions of an expert witness retained for the defense. The witness's conclusions were extremely damaging to Mangum and her defense and alerted the prosecution that they were correct with regards to Mr. Daye's cause of death. By so doing you severely impaired the ability of Mangum's attorney to negotiate a plea deal. You also urged Mangum to reject amy plea deal on the baseless belief that Mangum's expert would change her conclusions once called to the stand. You subsequently exorciated Mangum's attorney for not using the damaging evidence against his own client at her trial.

You now have threatened to repeat the same conduct in Mangum's appeal, by stating that you would release any documents given to you regarding her appeal.

Can it be any wonder that Mangum's attorneys won't have anything to do with you? Your theories and strategies regarding Mangum's case are legally unsound and, frankly, bat shit crazy. Additionall, you have shown no regard for protecting Mangum's interests, especially where her interests conflict with yours. Your interests appear to be limited to proving you are right and drawing attention to yourself, regardless of the effect it has on Mangum.

But who cares, right? It's not like you are the one going to prison for your mistakes and bad advice.

If further explanation is required, let me know.; April 30, 2014 at 9:55 AM
Anonymous said...: A defense strategy in this case is questionable since Duke's own medical records show that they killed Mr. Daye with their own preventable malpractice, and Mr. Daye himself admitted to attacking Ms. Mangum requiring her actions of self-defense and that he gave her the cheques to pay rent.

As soon as the discrepanicies in the autopsy reports were found that did not support the facts from the medical records, the DA should have stopped the prosecution of Ms. Mangum and investigated the medical examiner instead and/or Duke.

In a non-corrupted justice system, that is what would be expected by law (for the people).; April 30, 2014 at 10:03 AM
Anonymous said...: Mr. Daye himself admitted to attacking Ms. Mangum requiring her actions of self-defense and that he gave her the cheques to pay rent.

Which was argued - the Jury disagreed on the self-defense, but agreed on the Larceny of the Checks (which had NOTHING to do with Felony Murder).; April 30, 2014 at 10:26 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous April 30, 2014 at 10:03 AM

You are incredibly stupid.; April 30, 2014 at 10:28 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"Not to be disrespectful, Walt, but what you just commented doesn't make sense."

You are being disrespectful, in addition to showing how thoroughly deluded you are.; April 30, 2014 at 10:32 AM
Anonymous said...: The fact that Duke has not taken responsibility for their own preventable malpractice as required by law and ethics to prevent the wrongful accussation of Ms. Mangum for a murder she did not commit, (since she is not responsible for their preventable malpractice that killed Mr. Daye's brain requiring removal of life support at some subsequent point that ended in death as expected from the brain death caused by Duke's preventable intubation errors), the possibility that Duke committed this preventable malpractice in order to have Ms. Mangum falsly imprisoned for murder is supported at this time - since that is what they just did with the assistance of the medical examiner and the justice system.; April 30, 2014 at 10:35 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous April 30, 2014 at 10:35 AM

You are incredibly stupid.; April 30, 2014 at 11:14 AM
Anonymous said...: at least i'm incredibly stupid by your continued estimation, by most others', you are just plain stupid

yah; April 30, 2014 at 11:22 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous April 30, 2014 at 11:22 AM

How about you are incredibly pathetically stupid?; April 30, 2014 at 11:51 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous April 30, 2014 at 11:22 AM

How about you are unbelievably and abysmally stupid.; April 30, 2014 at 11:53 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous April 30, 2014 at 11:22 AM

How about your stupidity is beyond comprehension?; April 30, 2014 at 11:54 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous said:

"The fact that Duke has not taken responsibility for their own preventable malpractice as required by law and ethics to prevent the wrongful accussation of Ms. Mangum for a murder she did not commit . . .."

You do not know whether or not Duke accepted responsibility for any malpractice they may have committed in their treatment of Ms. Daye. As has been explained ad nauseum, medical malpractice, even if proved, is not a defense to the charges against Mangum. She is still responsible for her conduct.; April 30, 2014 at 11:55 AM
Anonymous said...: If the trial was done 'right' instead of the corrupt example of nonjustice that has become typified and even expected in the duke / durham justice system, this matter would have been resolved by now without any need for further questioning. However, since it hasn't been yet, there is a very obvious counter to your reasoning, and that is the fact that there is a law that states duke is responsible for their own malpractice.

Could you imagine what they would do, (being duke and what they do), if they could get away with malpractice on any patient that was in an altercation, accident, natural disaster, or anything that could be blamed on someone or something else other than their own preventable malpractice.

e ... gad

That is why the law is not how you are interpreting it, which is different from what the judge stated to begin with one would assume.; April 30, 2014 at 1:40 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous April 30, 2014 at 1:40 PM

You are abysmally stupid,; April 30, 2014 at 1:46 PM
Anonymous said...: 2nd degree or 1st degree murder would be the cop shooting the 100 lb. kid the second time when he was already shot and pinned down by 2 other cops on top of him, and basically dead cuz the cop couldn't spare the time it would take not to kill him, but one nonlethal self-defensive stab wound that was successfully treated with surgery with no expectation of death as a result as documented in the Duke medical records, no.; April 30, 2014 at 2:15 PM
Anonymous said...: To anonymous at 1:40:

Just because the outcome was not what you wanted doesn't mean the trial wasn't done right.

The matter could have been resolved much sooner if Mangum had accepted responsibility for her actions and accepted a plea agreement.

Duke is certainly responsible for any malpractice they commit. No one disputes that. I am sure they get sued all the time. However, Mangum is also responsible for her criminal acts. As has been explained before, Duke's alleged malpractice is not a defense to the charge on which Mangum was convicted. Simply wishing the law was otherwise does not make it so. Atthe very least, we all should be able to agree that everyone in Durham is better off while Mangum in prison.; April 30, 2014 at 2:47 PM
Anonymous said...: Probably no one would agree since she doesn't provide medical / legal / political / educational / and judicial services, etc., to everyone like Duke does. There is no comparison between what Ms. Mangum did to protect herself from Mr. Daye, and what Duke has done to many innocents for their own benefit and monetary gain, and to Mr. Daye.; April 30, 2014 at 3:00 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous April 30, 2014 at 3:00 PM

With each post you show how totally stupid one can be.; April 30, 2014 at 3:06 PM
Whatchoo tawkin 'bout, Sidney? said...: Anonymous @ April 30, 2014 at 2:47 PM said...

At the very least, we all should be able to agree that everyone in Durham is better off while Mangum in prison.

Including, and especially, her poor chirrens.; April 30, 2014 at 3:07 PM
guiowen said...: To the 3:06,
Why do you bother arguing with the 3:00? He's just doing this to get your goat.; April 30, 2014 at 3:17 PM
Anonymous said...: If you go back over to one of the other blogs you might find that crowd of people there more than here probably. Why do you argue the same thing and think you have convinced anyone here to begin with? Seriously, you are right, it is stupid to argue with you because your only concern is to cause harm to Ms. Mangum and anyone else who appears to help her or holds differing views than you on these matters in any way.

If you go over to one of the other blogs your hatred might be more accepted there, I do not know. Try it, let's see if it is. Let us know what happens. Try Amazon too while you're at it. Kick the stupidity can a bit there why don't ya and see what happens.; April 30, 2014 at 3:28 PM
Anonymous said...: Where is Kilgo?; April 30, 2014 at 4:08 PM
Anonymous said...: Has anyone seen Kilgo?; April 30, 2014 at 4:09 PM
Anonymous said...: Kilgo phone home.; April 30, 2014 at 4:10 PM
Anonymous said...: I can help you find Kilgo.

I first met Kilgo in 1998 in Bremerton Washington. I reconnected, by reaching out to him, when his name became public in 2007. I had read about the Duke Lacrosse Case but I did not realize the witness was my old friend. In doing research on the case I discovered Dr. Harr's blog and in June 2010 I introduced Dr. Harr to Kilgo.; April 30, 2014 at 5:02 PM
guiowen said...: Hey, Kenhyderal,
Go for it!; April 30, 2014 at 5:06 PM
A Lawyer said...: However, since it hasn't been yet, there is a very obvious counter to your reasoning, and that is the fact that there is a law that states duke is responsible for their own malpractice.

Yes, by law, Duke is responsible for its malpractice-- but they are responsible to their patient (or the patient's estate, if the patient dies), not to anyone else. Certainly not to Mangum.

Could you imagine what they would do, (being duke and what they do), if they could get away with malpractice on any patient that was in an altercation, accident, natural disaster, or anything that could be blamed on someone or something else other than their own preventable malpractice

They can't. Any patient who is the victim of malpractice can sue them. That Mr. Daye's family didn't sue Duke doesn't mean that Duke is not responsible, it just means that Mr. Daye's family doesn't believe Duke committed any malpractice. That's their call, not yours or Mangum's.

And even if they had sued Duke and won, that would not be admissible in Mangum's criminal trial, because it is not relevant.; April 30, 2014 at 8:47 PM
kenhyderal said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; April 30, 2014 at 9:35 PM
kenhyderal said...: Like Dave Evans, Kilgo is a Duke Alumnus and I'm pretty sure Dave knows which one of his innocent teammates is Kilgo's friend.; April 30, 2014 at 9:39 PM
guiowen said...: Go for it, Kenny!
The 5:02 knows Kilgo. All you have to is go to Durham, get a subpoena, and force Kilgo to tell you who his friend (call him A) is. You can then subpoena A and force him to tell you the names of the two lacrosse players (call then B and C) who brought the mystery rapists to the party. You can then subpoena B and C, and force them to tell you the names of the mystery rapists.
Isn't that great? and all thanks to the 5:02.
Say, it's possible you might have met both the 5:02 and Kilgo when you were in Bremerton. You'd have a pleasant meeting with several old friends (Kilgo, the 5:02, and Crystal). Wouldn't that be great?; April 30, 2014 at 9:51 PM
Anonymous said...: If this case actually does rest on your interpretation of the law that differs from what the judge stated as jury instruction, and an appeal trial is seen that continues the massive coverups in this case, perhaps this case will have to go the supreme court for clarification and to get Duke to comply with the law and hold them responsible for their actions, and get the ME investigated as needed (possibly 400 plus autopsy needing investigation, or even more, like all of duke's questionable patient deaths that they did not take responsibility for, and certainly all that were reviewed by the ME or similar).; May 1, 2014 at 3:24 AM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:

"Like Dave Evans, Kilgo is a Duke Alumnus and I'm pretty sure Dave knows which one of his innocent teammates is Kilgo's friend."

No he doesn't, because Kilgo's anonymous Lacrosse player friend does not exist.; May 1, 2014 at 3:55 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous May 1, 2014 at 3:24 AM

You really are a deluded nut case. Go get help.; May 1, 2014 at 3:57 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous @3:24am:

You are mistaken. The judge's instructions to the jury were entirely consistent with the interpretation of the law provided by Walt, A Lawyer, Lance and others.; May 1, 2014 at 4:53 AM
Anonymous said...: There was no trial proving or disproving that part of the law as it applies to this case obviously, (since it was a coverup event). Perhaps the Appeals Court will clear up the issue a bit.

Anyway, obviously ya'll then disagree as to the malpractice bit, and totally ignore the ME role in the coverup of the malpractice which indicates even more that the preventable malpractice was to blame or there would be no need for the fraud and coverup by the ME to begin with.; May 1, 2014 at 5:23 AM
Whatchoo tawkin 'bout, Sidney? said...: Anonymous @ May 1, 2014 at 5:23 AM said...

There was no trial proving or disproving that part of the law as it applies to this case obviously, (since it was a coverup event). Perhaps the Appeals Court will clear up the issue a bit.

The issue of the autopsy will be a non-starter on appeal.

Face it, Crusty is going to do at least 14, and maybe the max if she goes all cray cray in prison.; May 1, 2014 at 6:32 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
A defense strategy in this case is questionable since Duke's own medical records show that they killed Mr. Daye with their own preventable malpractice, and Mr. Daye himself admitted to attacking Ms. Mangum requiring her actions of self-defense and that he gave her the cheques to pay rent.

As soon as the discrepanicies in the autopsy reports were found that did not support the facts from the medical records, the DA should have stopped the prosecution of Ms. Mangum and investigated the medical examiner instead and/or Duke.

In a non-corrupted justice system, that is what would be expected by law (for the people).

An enlightened comment by an objective, intelligent person which bears repeating.; May 1, 2014 at 7:30 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: HEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP!!
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT!

The next sharlog is under production and will hopefully be posted by early next week. It will contain important transcripts from the trial.

As you were.; May 1, 2014 at 7:32 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR:

"An enlightened comment by an objective, intelligent person which bears repeating."

Boy are you stupid and deluded.; May 1, 2014 at 7:44 AM
Anonymous said...: SIDNEY HARR

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

SIDNEY again desperately shouting, hey everybody, pay attention to me.; May 1, 2014 at 7:46 AM
kenhyderal said...: The apologists at Duke Lacrosse Liestoppers are going ballistic these days and over reacting wildly since the Cohan book was published. They are pouring over every word in his book looking for things they can attack and adding his name to their target list, as someone to be discredited like Crystal, DA Nifong, Dr. Harr and Nurse Levicy etc. It all smacks of fear and desperation that their carefully crafted meta-narrative is starting to show cracks. Their strategy of exaggerating any sort of miniscule contradiction they can point to and then labeling Cohan as a liar, hoping to distract from the broader picture, reminds me of how Charlene Franks sought to confused Crystal on crime scene minutiae in order to label her as a liar. Obviously the broader question is was she defending herself from an attack; May 1, 2014 at 10:02 AM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:

"The apologists at Duke Lacrosse Liestoppers are going ballistic these days and over reacting wildly since the Cohan book was published. They are pouring over every word in his book looking for things they can attack and adding his name to their target list, as someone to be discredited like Crystal, DA Nifong, Dr. Harr and Nurse Levicy etc."

Hardly. Crystal, Corrupt DA NIFONG, SIDNEY HARR and Tara Levicy all discredited themselves. William Cohan has joined them as a blatant liar.

"It all smacks of fear and desperation that their carefully crafted meta-narrative is starting to show cracks. Their strategy of exaggerating any sort of miniscule contradiction they can point to and then labeling Cohan as a liar,"

Cohan may believe what he writes, but he is getting himself information from a bunch of people who are documented liars. KENNY's ignorance and racism do not change that fact.

"hoping to distract from the broader picture,"

No, Cohan is trying to get people to disbelieve the documented true broader picture, that Crystal Mangum lied about being raped and corrupt DA NIFONG tried to convict three innocent men of the non existent crime.

"reminds me of how Charlene Franks sought to confused Crystal on crime scene minutiae in order to label her as a liar. Obviously the broader question is was she defending herself from an attack"

The answer is, she was not.; May 1, 2014 at 10:11 AM
Anonymous said...: Cohan may believe what he writes, but he is getting himself information from a bunch of people who are documented liars. KENNY's ignorance and racism do not change that fact.

"hoping to distract from the broader picture,"

No, Cohan is trying to get people to disbelieve the documented true broader picture, that Crystal Mangum lied about being raped and corrupt DA NIFONG tried to convict three innocent men of the non existent crime.

Cohen is just trying to sell books, and controversy sells books. He's not interested in much else. I doubt he really cares one way or the other about Mangum or Duke - he felt it was an interesting subject to write on, and he could make money doing it, so he did. Now he keeps controversy stirring to keep selling his book.; May 1, 2014 at 10:37 AM
Anonymous said...: Ken Edwards aka Kenhyderal whiffs again.; May 1, 2014 at 11:01 AM

«Oldest ‹Older 1 – 200 of 331 Newer› Newest»

Wednesday, April 23, 2014

Wheel of conspiracy in the conviction of Crystal Mangum

331 comments:

Facebook Badge

Subscribe!

Labels

Blog Archive

About Me