justice4nifong: Was Reginald Daye's death a murder or an accident?

Sunday, February 8, 2015

Was Reginald Daye's death a murder or an accident?

Click to access 'Grievance filed with State Bar against Ann B. Petersen'

322 comments:

1 – 200 of 322 Newer› Newest»

Anonymous said...: Nothing about the IDS payments to experts? You that afraid to acknowledge when you are wrong?; February 8, 2015 at 12:30 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous Anonymous said...
Nothing about the IDS payments to experts? You that afraid to acknowledge when you are wrong?

Hah! Me afraid...? Not quite. Instead of just looking at the title, try looking at the entire sharlog or reading the transcript.; February 8, 2015 at 12:36 PM
Anonymous said...: Sid - Chris Shella made it clear he was volunteering his services - he wasn't appointed by IDS, and therefore not paid by IDS.

As to reports - you are still an idiot - Investigators don't do written reports - they assist in witness interviews, etc., and are not testifying experts.

You are still obsessed with things that have been addressed and explained to you - but you ignore them.

As to the threat of contempt on the report - where are you getting that? It was given o her, and the Judge didn't say it was confidential. He did say the personnel record of Nichols was confidential, so she couldn't release that - but the report she could do what she wanted. Sadly, you've convinced her it was exculpatory, and it wasn't - you are her worst enemy.

I am glad to see you admit you were wrong on the payments - will you send letters to everyone you contacted earlier admitting you were wrong?; February 8, 2015 at 12:40 PM
Anonymous said...: I like how you still continue to insist that Meier lied to the Court, risking contempt and his law license, about the written report of Roberts. As has been repeatedly explained, since it was not exculpatory (despite your bleating), they didn't want it produced because they didn't want to turn it over to the prosecution. Sadly you deluded her into thinking it was exculpatory, so it was finally produced, and if she gets a new trial, you can be sure the prosecution will use it.; February 8, 2015 at 12:42 PM
Anonymous said...: Why do you still ridiculously and pathetically cling to "felony murder" when that has been thoroughly debunked - you've been shown the statutes, case law, indictments, and jury instructions - all of which show Felony Murder was not an issue in this case.

You want to know why no one takes you seriously? Because you are wrong on things and keep pushing them, which proves you aren't seeking justice or the truth, you have an agenda (your own self-promotion) and you keep going with it.

Felony murder was not involved, and you should stop proving you are an irrational idiot by continuing to claim it was. (Oh, and asking "why did they charge that then" doesn't change that fact.); February 8, 2015 at 12:48 PM
Anonymous said...: It's also been explained to you that the appellate attorney cannot introduce new evidence (you claim she should have hired doctors).

This is where you hurt Mangum - you tell her that the attorneys should be doing X, when they can't - but you delude her, and so she thinks her attorneys are working against her - when in fact, you are wrong.; February 8, 2015 at 12:56 PM
Anonymous said...: There is absolutely nothing new in this Sharlog - you just rehash the same stuff you've been saying, and continue to ignore the comments and proof others provide where you are incorrect - even though you claim to want a "debate" on your blog.; February 8, 2015 at 1:08 PM
Walt said...: Sid, did you watch the trial? The defense did offer the reconstruction into evidence. The State objected and the Judge sustained the objection. That doesn't mean the expert shouldn't be paid.

Walt-in-Durham; February 8, 2015 at 4:39 PM
Anonymous said...: And, the expert was relevant to self-defense - which I realize you told Mangum to ignore - but it would have been helpful for that.

Walt - do you have access to Sid's latest brief that he claims will wow the 4th Circuit (or expose them as in on the conspiracy)?; February 8, 2015 at 5:03 PM
Walt said...: Anon at 5:03 PM wrote: "Walt - do you have access to Sid's latest brief that he claims will wow the 4th Circuit (or expose them as in on the conspiracy)?",

I do. You can read about it at my blog: http://walt-in-durham.blogspot.com/2015/02/the-dukeharr-litigation-continues-on.html.

I have his petition for en banc rehearing linked in my blog post.

Walt-in-Durham; February 8, 2015 at 6:09 PM
Anonymous said...: Anyone see anything remotely new in these? I don't - his response about the funding was predictable, and he doesn't say anything remotely new.

Sid, if you are going to spend so much time, shouldn't you have something better/more to say?

And, shouldn't you stop bringing up things you know are completely wrong? Oh, and if you want to regain any credibility - all of these people you sent letters to about the funding - are you contacting them to let them know you were wrong, or you just gonna leave it on your blog, which they don't read?; February 9, 2015 at 7:03 AM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: "... As far as, drugging kidnapping and assault, there are some who believe that she got one or two of them correct."

No one who looks at the evidence believes that.

"Those who actually raped her were not in the line-up." No, but everyone at the party was in the photo array.

"Their DNA, extracted from sperm and unexplained by her checked out sexual history, was never identified or even attempted to be identified."

Indeed, the DPD did not look far and wide. However, they did get DNA samples from all but one party goer pursuant to the unlawful non-testimonial order.

"... The innuendo being she was engaging in prostitution. ... The poor Minority woman, with no political power, working as an escort could be sacrificed."

You do know that "escort" and "prostitute" are synonyms?

Walt-in-Durham; February 9, 2015 at 9:48 AM
kenhyderal said...: All team members except Devon were tested, along with two non-team members, who happened to appear in photographs. This included team members known to not have attended. No, there never was a definitive list of all who were present. The attempt to make a list was frustrated when all members, on the advice of Counsel, stopped talking. I have been told that there were possibly about 20 non-Players who attended and with all the team members cleared of the rape there is maybe about 18 additional suspects. The DNA extracted from sperm was never sent to a data base. Crystal's agency did not tolerate their contractors engaging in prostitution. They kept names and addresses of clients. The timeline of Crystals movements,in the days proceeding, accounted for all her activities.; February 9, 2015 at 10:26 AM
guiowen said...: I'm sure you've been told all manner of interesting things. Trouble is no one believes you.; February 9, 2015 at 10:54 AM
Anonymous said...: Or no one believes who allegedly told him.; February 9, 2015 at 11:00 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Walt said...
Sid, did you watch the trial? The defense did offer the reconstruction into evidence. The State objected and the Judge sustained the objection. That doesn't mean the expert shouldn't be paid.

Walt-in-Durham

Hey, Walt.

I didn't watch the trial, but I listened to it and got transcripts. I'm not suggesting that the reconstruction expert shouldn't be paid. My position is that his testimony is worthless and that Meier wasted tax-payer money by retaining him. Money would've been much better spent on getting a medical doctor to refute Dr. Nichols.; February 9, 2015 at 12:45 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Anyone see anything remotely new in these? I don't - his response about the funding was predictable, and he doesn't say anything remotely new.

Sid, if you are going to spend so much time, shouldn't you have something better/more to say?

And, shouldn't you stop bringing up things you know are completely wrong? Oh, and if you want to regain any credibility - all of these people you sent letters to about the funding - are you contacting them to let them know you were wrong, or you just gonna leave it on your blog, which they don't read?

Write who? Are you kidding? Why? Listen, in a moment of mental weakness I allowed my brain to think that the defense attorneys might actually be willing to fight for Mangum by challenging the autopsy report by the medical examiner. So I gave the reference of the money paid out to medical doctors much more significance than I should have. I owe myself an apology for even thinking that Mangum's defense attorneys were interested in her well-being more than Duke or the M.E.; February 9, 2015 at 12:52 PM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

The defense did bring in a medical expert. She agreed that stab wound was the proximate cause of Mr. Daye's death and then you let the world know about it.

With all the time you have spent on this case, have you found a single doctor qualified and willing to testify as an expert who would refute Nichols?; February 9, 2015 at 1:04 PM
A Lawyer said...: I have his petition for en banc rehearing linked in my blog post.

Walt,
Thanks for posting that link. Dr. Harr's brief is extraordinarily obtuse. It argues that his first case shouldn't have been dismissed, but that issue is long gone-- the 4th Circuit affirmed the dismissal of the first case and the U.S. Supreme Court denied review, so there is nothing the court can do about it now.

The brief doesn't even mention the reason the second case was dismissed-- the rule of res judicata-- or the reason his appeal was turned down-- he didn't file his objections to the Magistrate's Report in time.

Unless Dr. Harr can show that he did actually file his objections in time (he didn't), or that there is some exception to the rule of res judicata that applies here (there isn't), nothing he argues has any relevance to any issue before the court. I predict a speedy denial.; February 9, 2015 at 1:54 PM
Anonymous said...: "Was Reginald Daye's death a murder or an accident?"

Murder - specifically, it was 2nd degree murder perpetrated by Crystal Mangum.; February 9, 2015 at 5:21 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

Why did you ignore the posters who had sources that confirmed your theory about Crystal being raped by non-players? Didn't one even have a source that provided the names of the rapists?

I'm surprised you weren't interested.; February 9, 2015 at 7:05 PM
Anonymous said...: Still refusing to admit youbare wrong about Felony Murder despite overwhelming proof? You will never be anything but a pathetic joke til you show you can learn.; February 9, 2015 at 7:29 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "Why did you ignore the posters who had sources that confirmed your theory about Crystal being raped by non-players? Didn't one even have a source that provided the names of the rapists"................... This was a cruel hoax by a troll claiming to be Kilgo. I determined he was not Kilgo, by testing him on a question that, if him, he would know the answer to. Trolls like this are sadists and they cowardly hide behind anonymity. I suspect Kilgo has been scared off. At the time he disappeared there were millions at stake.; February 9, 2015 at 9:08 PM
guiowen said...: More likely, he was just mocking you.; February 10, 2015 at 12:44 AM
Anonymous said...: No. A poster other than one claiming to be Kilgo posted that he had a source that confirmed your source. His source even named the unidentified rapists.

You had no interest. I concluded that you were just making up the Kilgo communication.; February 10, 2015 at 4:09 AM
Anonymous said...: By your own admission you sent that incorrect information to a lot of people. Since you aren't correcting it to them, they are left with the conclusion that you are a crackpot uninterested in the truth (which, of course, is exactly what you are as blog readers know).

Why do you keep harping felony murder even though it has been thoroughly explained to you that it wasn't in play?; February 10, 2015 at 5:32 AM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: No. A poster other than one claiming to be Kilgo posted that he had a source that confirmed your source. His source even named the unidentified rapists. You had no interest. I concluded that you were just making up the Kilgo communication"............ If so that Poster can mail his contact information to the Justice4Nifong e-mail address--------------- justice4nifong@gmail.com ----- and Dr. Harr will pass it on to me.; February 10, 2015 at 9:12 AM
Anonymous said...: But, even if someone came forward - unless they went to the police, and the police found them credible, there is nothing that could be done at this point.; February 10, 2015 at 9:49 AM
Anonymous said...: That's the problem - what, exactly, would you do with the information? You would need actual evidence to get the police to re-open the investigation, or do anything. A random person who contacted you through a blog run by a crazy person isn't going to get anyone interested.; February 10, 2015 at 10:50 AM
kenhyderal said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; February 10, 2015 at 1:29 PM
kenhyderal said...: Most likely this is not genuine. This blog is filled with people bent on cruel mischief. Their irrational hatred for Crystal was instilled in them by crafty propaganda, originally emanating from the Duke Lacrosse defence team but now, like goose feathers in a wind storm, has spread far and wide and duped, I would say, most people. All, except those who actually know Crystal,; February 10, 2015 at 1:32 PM
Anonymous said...: I doubt anyone here really hates Crystal - she just isn't that important. She's largely irrelevant to them and their lives, they just like seeing how ridiculous you and Sid can get in putting her on a pedestal and pretending she is really important enough for anyone to care, let alone create a vast conspiracy for her.

The simple truth is that Crystal just doesn't matter to anyone outside of her family and friends, and she, and her "supporters" just can't handle.; February 10, 2015 at 1:32 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Sid:

The defense did bring in a medical expert. She agreed that stab wound was the proximate cause of Mr. Daye's death and then you let the world know about it.

With all the time you have spent on this case, have you found a single doctor qualified and willing to testify as an expert who would refute Nichols?

I am unaware of the defense's so-called medical expert testifying or presenting any information during trial. Notice how the prosecution also stayed away from calling any medical doctors to testify.

As I stated in my sharlog, one can't get from point A (the stabbing) to point B (Daye's death) without going through point X (the esophageal intubation). That's just a fact!; February 10, 2015 at 2:04 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
I doubt anyone here really hates Crystal - she just isn't that important. She's largely irrelevant to them and their lives, they just like seeing how ridiculous you and Sid can get in putting her on a pedestal and pretending she is really important enough for anyone to care, let alone create a vast conspiracy for her.

The simple truth is that Crystal just doesn't matter to anyone outside of her family and friends, and she, and her "supporters" just can't handle.

I don't know about you, but I place value on every human being's life... including yours. If you were wrongly convicted and imprisoned and I felt that I could assist you, I would. Regardless of how you or I may feel, Lady Justice places no less value for Crystal Mangum than she does for an Eve Carson.; February 10, 2015 at 2:08 PM
Anonymous said...: Sid - Dr. Nichols openly acknowledged that the knife wound shouldn't have been fatal and the wound itself was successfully treated. But, that's what complications are - something that arises afterwards. What do you think a doctor would have said differently? He would have said the wound was successfully treated, but there was a complication.

You keep grasping at straws. Dr. Nichols said the wound itself wouldn't have been fatal but for the complications.

I know you keep insisting there weren't any, that it was DTs, but Dr. Roberts said it wasn't, and you admit you didn't have all the records. For all you know - the attorneys did know the complications, and didn't want them brought in.

You are an idiot acting on half information. Just because no one shares information with you doesn't mean the information doesn't exist.; February 10, 2015 at 2:34 PM
Lance the Intern said...: "...one can't get from point A (the stabbing) to point B (Daye's death) without going through point X (the esophageal intubation). That's just a fact!"

So, you agree that without the stabbing, Mr. Daye would not have died.

It would appear that you, Dr Nichols, and Dr. Roberts are all in agreement then.; February 10, 2015 at 2:46 PM
guiowen said...: Sidney said,
"Lady Justice places no less value for Crystal Mangum than she does for an Eve Carson."

Sidney, that's just the point. If Crystal were innocent, I would certainly want to see her out of prison. Lady Justice, as you put it, wants Crystal to be treated as she deserves. Most of us agree. The trouble is that we disagree with you on what Crystal deserves.; February 10, 2015 at 2:51 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "I know you keep insisting there weren't any, that it was DTs, but Dr. Roberts said it wasn't" ...........................Meta-narrative. She said no such thing Anonymous also said: "Dr. Nichols said the wound itself wouldn't have been fatal but for the complications"........... And those complications of the successfully treated stab wound were? A question Defence Attorney Meier didn't care to ask. Before Nicholls declared a nexus of the death to the wound he should have made a determination what that complication was.; February 10, 2015 at 4:18 PM
John D. Smith said...: Kenny,

I acknowledge that neither Nichols nor Roberts identified the specific complication that required intubation. I am interested in learning it as well.

However, I note that you -- and not your critics -- are arguing in favor of overturning a conviction. Your critics note that two experts reached that conclusion. Moreover, they can reasonably assert that other evidence -- evidence not introduced at trial, evidence included in discovery and not posted by Sidney -- further supports the conclusion that complications from the stabbing required intubation.

I find that explanation far more plausible than the vast conspiracy Sidney alleges. Although I concede that public defenders frequently do not provide the same quality defense, you have provided no evidence to support that in this case. You argue that evidence we have not seen may overturn what we know.

I do not find compelling the argument that when the known evidence supports one conclusion, then an observer must focus on the unknown evidence. You want a verdict overturned. In order to do so, you must provide real evidence, not innuendo.

You may enjoy debating the unknown on this blog, but this discussion will do nothing -- absolutely nothing -- to gain Mangum's release.

John D. Smith
New York, NY; February 10, 2015 at 4:44 PM
Anonymous said...: And Kenny and Sid still assume that Meier and the other attorneys never asked about the complications - I suspect it is more likely they asked and realized it wouldn't be helpful to Crystal and didn't ask, and kept advising Crystal to not put Dr, Roberts on the stand - but you and Sid kept lying to her and telling her she should.

Either everyone is corrupt and in a conspiracy or you and Sid are wrong and operating in limited information. I'd go with the latter, as I bet everyone else but you and tinfoil would.

Did still won't admit he's wrong on felony mirder and the prior record - why don't you call him out, or are you as incapable of comprehension as he is?; February 10, 2015 at 4:59 PM
Anonymous said...: The claim that public defenders don't provide the same defense is laughable / they have tons of experience. But irrelevant in any case as none of Mangum's attorney's were public defenders. They were court appointed attorneys - but all in private practice with their own successful firms or part of successful firms. So John D. Smith - you are as guilty of gross assumptions as Sid n general - though you are correct in this case - there is nothing that shows anything but a vigorous defense here - except in Sid and Kenny's fevered imagination.; February 10, 2015 at 5:03 PM
John D. Smith said...: Anonymous 5:03,

I think it probably is true that on average public defenders and many court appointed attorneys are not as effective as the best defense counsel available (in my comparison, I inadvertently dropped a phrase).

For example, I am concerned that less effective counsel may not have had the same success in the lacrosse case as the counsel the defendants retained. I have these concerns in spite of the lack of credible evidence.

My primary point was that Kenny relies on innuendo rather than credible evidence. Some public defenders or court appointed counsel don't do an effective job, therefore Meier didn't do an effective job. Even though two defenders concluded death was an indirect result of the stabbing, the evidence not known would contradict it. Because Meier didn't do a good job, he didn't use the evidence.

Innuendo thus overcomes common sense.

I don't find that compelling.

John D. Smith
New York, NY; February 10, 2015 at 6:41 PM
Anonymous said...: Did you watch the trial?

It was a complete sham!

How can Anyone argue in favor of the trial, the defense by the attorney's, the judge who disallowed the fairness and credibility of his own court room, or duke who provided deadly malpractice and did not take responsibility for it, (for the sake and trust of ALL their other patients if nothing else)?

It is not Ms. Mangum that is viewed the criminal in the minds of many, it is Duke and the health and justice systems they precide over and corrupt as a matter of business plan. It is not Ms. Mangum who might harm 99.99 percent of the public, but it is Duke and systems they precide over and corrupt that harms the public on a massive scale, to include death and maiming, and who must be 'stopped' for the safety and well-being of the public.; February 10, 2015 at 7:53 PM
guiowen said...: TinFoil said,
"It is not Ms. Mangum that is viewed the criminal in the minds of many, it is Duke".

I guess in some cases, three is considered "many".; February 10, 2015 at 8:28 PM
Anonymous said...: in all cases you are considered an evil duke troll it g... tinfoil hat hater blogmonger ... so ... whatever; February 10, 2015 at 9:01 PM
Anonymous said...: Dr. Harr,

Please remove the ad hominem attack at 9:01 pursuant to an expanded kenhyderal doctrine. Thanks.; February 10, 2015 at 9:17 PM
kenhyderal said...: John D. Smith said: You argue that evidence we have not seen may overturn what we know"............The evidence you have seen shows it was a case of medical malpractice that killed Daye. Now the question is can the botched treatment be directly tied to the stab wound without any evidence but with only an assumption that some unspecified, unknown complication occurred making what Dr. Nichols conceded as a survivable wound, require treatment that when it was mishandled led to his demise. Nichols speculates some unknown complication. Apparently he himself has seen no evidence of what that might have been. Dr. Harr speculates it was delirium tremens. His evidence is the stuporous blood alcohol reading on Daye's admission that, due to tolerance, left him still functioning and his history of heavy alcohol consumption.; February 10, 2015 at 9:35 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

Why don't you ask Dr. Roberts? Your speculation will not free Mangum.; February 10, 2015 at 9:50 PM
Anonymous said...: there is no expanded kendryl rule that rules out being called an evil duke troll ...whatever when warranted ... so if Dr. Harr wants to know if it was warranted - calling g... out for being the evil duke troll it g... tinfoil hat hater blogmonger that it is - it was

blah; February 11, 2015 at 1:01 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Sid - Dr. Nichols openly acknowledged that the knife wound shouldn't have been fatal and the wound itself was successfully treated. But, that's what complications are - something that arises afterwards. What do you think a doctor would have said differently? He would have said the wound was successfully treated, but there was a complication.

You keep grasping at straws. Dr. Nichols said the wound itself wouldn't have been fatal but for the complications.

I know you keep insisting there weren't any, that it was DTs, but Dr. Roberts said it wasn't, and you admit you didn't have all the records. For all you know - the attorneys did know the complications, and didn't want them brought in.

You are an idiot acting on half information. Just because no one shares information with you doesn't mean the information doesn't exist.

You can't believe a word Dr. Nichols says... even under oath, as he also stated twice during direct examination that Daye's spleen was removed at surgery eleven days earlier and wasn't available for examination at autopsy... something which turncoat attorney Meier didn't challenge. Can you tell me whether or not Daye's spleen was removed at surgery on April 3, 2011?

Regarding complications, esophageal intubation is not a complication of a stab wound. It is an extremely fatal medical malpractice with brain death occurring within a matter of minutes if not recognized and corrected. Daye was allowed to proceed to cardiac arrest before medical staff realized the errant tube placement.

I would say that an infection secondary to the wound, or complications secondary to shock from blood loss could be categorized as complications of the stabbing, but that is not what caused Daye to become brain dead... and brain death was the reason for his elective removal from life support.

Dr. Nichols couldn't even come up with an alleged "complication."

Surely delirium tremens could not be considered to be a complication of the stab wound.

Let me know if further elucidation is required.; February 11, 2015 at 7:39 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny - it's been pointed out to you whet Dr. Roberts said DTs were ruled out. You keep saying that's not what it says - but you haven't asked Dr. Roberts, or any other doctor, or the attorneys, you just listen to Sid and refuse to consider anything else.

You are wrong.; February 11, 2015 at 7:43 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Lance the Intern said...
"...one can't get from point A (the stabbing) to point B (Daye's death) without going through point X (the esophageal intubation). That's just a fact!"

So, you agree that without the stabbing, Mr. Daye would not have died.

It would appear that you, Dr Nichols, and Dr. Roberts are all in agreement then.

Hey, Lance.

Actually I do not agree with Dr. Roberts and Dr. Nichols. And I do not believe that without the stabbing Daye wouldn't have died. Despite being stabbed (point A), had Daye avoided point X (esophageal intubation), he could have proceeded to point C (discharge from hospital with full recovery).

Comprende?; February 11, 2015 at 7:44 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid, you are still a deluded idiot ... And still refuse to admit you are wrong in legal issues which destroys your credibility.; February 11, 2015 at 7:45 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Kenny - it's been pointed out to you whet Dr. Roberts said DTs were ruled out. You keep saying that's not what it says - but you haven't asked Dr. Roberts, or any other doctor, or the attorneys, you just listen to Sid and refuse to consider anything else.

You are wrong.

What explanation do you have for Daye experiencing severe agitation that required his transfer to the Surgical Intensive Care Unit? Daye was an alcoholic, and on admission to the hospital he had a stuporous blood level alcohol level. He was even treated early-on with sedatives in hopes of warding off DTs... but their efforts were not sufficient.; February 11, 2015 at 7:47 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Sid, you are still a deluded idiot ... And still refuse to admit you are wrong in legal issues which destroys your credibility.

Whatchootalkin'bout? On the extremely rare occasions when I am wrong on legal issues, I will admit to it. I've repeatedly stated that I have no legal training and am not a lawyer. However, that doesn't mean that I don't understand basic law.; February 11, 2015 at 7:50 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Dr. Harr,

Please remove the ad hominem attack at 9:01 pursuant to an expanded kenhyderal doctrine. Thanks.

I am afraid that the comment referenced does not meet standards set under the kenhyderal doctrine for its deletion.; February 11, 2015 at 7:54 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
The claim that public defenders don't provide the same defense is laughable / they have tons of experience. But irrelevant in any case as none of Mangum's attorney's were public defenders. They were court appointed attorneys - but all in private practice with their own successful firms or part of successful firms. So John D. Smith - you are as guilty of gross assumptions as Sid n general - though you are correct in this case - there is nothing that shows anything but a vigorous defense here - except in Sid and Kenny's fevered imagination.

A vigorous defense..? Hah! Blatant sabotage is more like it. The state couldn't even prove that the crime of murder had been committed. That's why the state and the turncoat defense ignored the true medical issues (I don't think I ever heard the words "esophageal intubation" used). Even Dr. Roberts admitted in her report that the initial intubation was esophageal... but Turncoat Meier never mentioned that! Neither has Mangum's appeals attorney Turncoat Petersen.; February 11, 2015 at 7:59 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Sidney said,
"Lady Justice places no less value for Crystal Mangum than she does for an Eve Carson."

Sidney, that's just the point. If Crystal were innocent, I would certainly want to see her out of prison. Lady Justice, as you put it, wants Crystal to be treated as she deserves. Most of us agree. The trouble is that we disagree with you on what Crystal deserves

gui, mon ami,

The state never even proved that a crime was committed by Mangum. First, the cashier's checks were given to her, so the two counts of larceny of chose in action were bogus. Then Daye's death was at best accidental due to medical malpractice with an esophageal intubation... having nothing to do with the stabbing.

Actually, Mangum should've been found not guilty on basis of self-defense alone... although in comparison with the proximate cause of death issue was extremely weak. Consider that Daye busted down the bathroom door, was documented to be intoxicated with alcohol, had a prior history of assault on a female, admitted to pulling Crystal by her hair... not to mention that Crystal had excoriation-puncture wounds to her face and swelling to her lower lip. The stabbing was undoubtedly the final action in the sequence of events.

Not only that, but Daye's credibility is questioned because he told police that he and Mangum got into an argument over money and that she stabbed him and took his money. All lies!!

Face it, gui, any other alleged female assault victim wouldn't even have been charged, and the male, even though stabbed, would've been charged with domestic violence and assault on a female.

End of story.; February 11, 2015 at 8:09 AM
guiowen said...: Sidney, amigo mio,
I'm sorry, but quite frankly, very few people believe your interpretation of the events leading up to Reginald Daye's death.; February 11, 2015 at 8:13 AM
guiowen said...: Tin Foil,
I was just looking through my library and found a copy of a wonderful book, "One, Two, Three ... Infinity" by George Gamow.
According to Gamow, the khoikhoi have the numbers "one", "two", and "three" in their vocabulary. Anything more is "many". You've actually done the khoikhoi one better: for you,it seems, even three is "many".; February 11, 2015 at 8:18 AM
Anonymous said...: You still bring up felony murder - as recently as this sharlog - even though it has been conclusively shown it was not applicable here, wasn't in the indictment, no instruction, and larceny doesn't apply.

Yet you keep bringing it up. You are wrong and won't admit it.

Just like his prior record.; February 11, 2015 at 8:45 AM
Anonymous said...: All that was brought up in the trial and the jury rejected self defense.; February 11, 2015 at 8:47 AM
Anonymous said...: does that make you feel better evil duke troll it g... hatemonger blogmonger? enquiring minds want to know. does edtig... feel better when it puts down others on this blog? hmmmm ???

eh?; February 11, 2015 at 8:49 AM
guiowen said...: Incidentally, TinFoil, if you are a khoikhoi, I apologize. It's not your fault if you can't count; it's just part of your culture, and as we are repeatedly told, all cultures are equal.; February 11, 2015 at 9:07 AM
kenhyderal said...: Guiowen said: "Sidney, amigo mio,
I'm sorry, but quite frankly, very few people believe your interpretation of the events leading up to Reginald Daye's death"...........That requires that they ignore a lot of evidence.; February 11, 2015 at 9:08 AM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "Kenny - it's been pointed out to you whet Dr. Roberts said DTs were ruled out. You keep saying that's not what it says - but you haven't asked Dr. Roberts, or any other doctor, or the attorneys, you just listen to Sid and refuse to consider anything else. You are wrong".......No, I didn't just listen to Dr. Harr. I read what she wrote in her report and she did not say that DT's were ruled out. That is what you, and your like, claim she said. Then, please give us her quote.; February 11, 2015 at 9:17 AM
Anonymous said...: Why don't you ask her to clarify it? I'm sure the lawyers did, and realized it wouldn't be helpful. You and Sid are so convinced it was a hatchet job and betrayal you ignore the obvious. If Dr. Roberts would have been helpful they would have used her.

despite your belief - no defense attorney was trying to help Duke. You and Sid are delusional idiots who are just upset your steady escort is no longer available.; February 11, 2015 at 9:29 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

Unlike you and Sid, rather than just make assumptions and run with them - rational people ask questions and get answers to test those assumptions. You and Sid don't because you don't want to be proved wrong. That's why no one has any respect for anything either of you say.; February 11, 2015 at 9:36 AM
kenhyderal said...: What do you mean I don't ask questions? I question all the assumptions of the meta-narrative. What was done, by Crystal's previous Lawyer, was not shared with her and since he now no longer represent her claims he can not comment. Duke claims all the records have been released to Crystal's Lawyers. These were reviewed by Dr. Harr and are what has raised all the questions that demand answers. These records are incomplete, in as much as the treating professionals needed to be questioned under oath in order to fill in the blanks. Saying there are no further written records is a cop-out. In the opinion of the those who worked on him, what was Daye being treated for, when he was killed? They are not going to come forward and even with Crystal's consent are not going to discuss this unless compelled to do so.; February 11, 2015 at 10:17 AM
Anonymous said...: You ask questions on a blog - you refuse to ask questions of those who can actually answer them. And, even when people here do respond, if it contradicts your narrative, you call them traitors and turncoats and move on.

If you wanted answers you would actually talk to people who can provide them - and then judge. You don't want that - you want to keep believing it's all a Duke plot.; February 11, 2015 at 11:04 AM
Anonymous said...: Dr. Harr admits he doesn't have all the records. He got what Crystal had at that one point in time - and others have reviewed the records and come to different conclusions than Dr. Harr. You say they are lying.; February 11, 2015 at 11:05 AM
Anonymous said...: so what are you trying to say g...?

that you must make yourself feel superior than, (or less than ... whatever), the person you are trolling, unless of course they are from a culture who can't count, than you must (by rules of manners you preach and profess to follow), consider those persons as equals ... but only if they can't count?

... got it.; February 11, 2015 at 2:34 PM
guiowen said...: I'm just sorry you can't count.; February 11, 2015 at 3:24 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "And, even when people here do respond, if it contradicts your narrative, you call them traitors and turncoats and move on if you wanted answers you would actually talk to people who can provide them - and then judge. You don't want that - you want to keep believing it's all a Duke plot".................... I've never at any time used terms like traitor or turncoat. You obviously did not understand my reply. Since Crystal is no longer their client the former attorneys even with her permission will not discuss their former client's files but will only refer to her present Attorney. Duke Hospital will not release information about Daye except to lawful authorities. Besides, they maintain that all information, as incomplete as it was, has been released. What I'm accusing Duke and it's care providers of, is, covering up and concealing the medical malpractice that killed him. If they have confidentially done this with Daye's Family, they also are morally if not legally bound not to allow Crystal to be punished for that error. At this point Petersen has chosen to appeal on the inadmissibility of Walker. Hopefully a new trial will be ordered and a new Attorney will follow up on the defence avenue that maintains there was no homicide by Crystal; February 11, 2015 at 3:37 PM
Walt said...: Sid wrote: "The state never even proved that a crime was committed by Mangum."

Yes, they did. Murder in the Second Degree.

"First, the cashier's checks were given to her, so the two counts of larceny of chose in action were bogus."

The charge was weak, but not bogus. The state had a prima facie case. However, Mangum successfully refuted the state's prima facie case and was acquitted.

"Then Daye's death was at best accidental due to medical malpractice with an esophageal intubation... having nothing to do with the stabbing."

This has been explained to you many, many times. Medical malpractice is not an intervening cause. Further, the intubation had everything to do with the stabbing. Had Mangum not stabbed Daye, he would not have needed any medical treatment. Proximate cause Sid, proximate cause.

"Actually, Mangum should've been found not guilty on basis of self-defense alone..."

Twelve citizens good and true disagree with you. I watched the entire trial on TV replay. They got it right, by the way.

... was documented to be intoxicated with alcohol,..."

Not relevant.

"... had a prior history of assault on a female,..."

Inadmissible evidence.

"... admitted to pulling Crystal by her hair..."

The jury was not persuaded by that fact alone, nor was I.

"... not to mention that Crystal had excoriation-puncture wounds to her face and swelling to her lower lip."

Minor injuries compared to those inflicted on the late Reginald Daye. In the realm of self-defense, the defense must be proportional. The minor nature of her injuries, compared to the force she used indicate a great disproportionality.

"The stabbing was undoubtedly the final action in the sequence of events."

A great deal of doubt, considering the jury rejected that theory completely.

"Not only that, but Daye's credibility is questioned because he told police that he and Mangum got into an argument over money and that she stabbed him and took his money. All lies!!"

Blame the victim.

"Face it, gui, any other alleged female assault victim wouldn't even have been charged, and the male, even though stabbed, would've been charged with domestic violence and assault on a female."

Face it Sid, you're just making that up.

"End of story."

Crystal's story has been of escalating violence when people disagreed with her. That progression ended with her killing someone. Let's hope this is the end of that story. Let's hope that Crystal matures in prison, learns how to manage her anger without killing people and is released to become a productive citizen in about a dozen years.

Walt-in-Durham; February 11, 2015 at 3:47 PM
John D. Smith said...: Kenny,

The evidence we have seen is that medical malpractice may have killed Daye, and we have also seen that two medical experts concluded that Daye's death was the indirect result of the stabbing.

Although your speculation about possible complications may be interesting, it will accomplish nothing for Mangum.

You need a expert opinion.

You and Sidney are close friends of Mangum and are biased. You and Sidney are not experts. You and Sidney have no credibility.

Your expert must conclude that (1) Daye would have survived without the intubation with certainty and (2) the intubation was required to treat a condition that is completely independent of the stabbing. An infection is not independent. DTs exacerbated by trauma is not independent. Speculation will not suffice.

An expert opinion. No more speculation.

John D. Smith
New York, NY; February 11, 2015 at 5:09 PM
Anonymous said...: Once a client always a client. You just don't want answers. They'd tefusr to answer cause you are an idiot.; February 11, 2015 at 6:29 PM
Anonymous said...: Meier would be her attorney unless a court removed him. You really have no clue how this works - yet you advise as if you do.; February 11, 2015 at 6:30 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

You are accusing Duke and medical professionals of covering up the esophageal intubation despite its inclusion in the medical records. If they were covering it up, why wouldn't they have failed to document their error?; February 11, 2015 at 6:37 PM
Anonymous said...: How is Crystal adapting to her new home? Has she made any good friends? Does she like her roommate?; February 11, 2015 at 7:30 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "Meier would be her attorney unless a court removed him. You really have no clue how this works - yet you advise as if you do"............. You mean to tell me that with written permission from Crystal either myself or Dr. Harr would be able to see what investigations he carried out in preparation for her trial. That is extremely strange when he wouldn't even share
le this information with his client. At the time all you experts said he was within his rights to do that.; February 11, 2015 at 9:51 PM
Anonymous said...: I don't mean he'd have to share anything - with or without permission - but he could, and I have no doubt he did explain everything to Crystal - she is just deluded. Just because she is still his client doesn't mean he has to follow her orders and discuss things with non clients, especially when those communications would not be privileged and the people she may want him to share with talk too much.

Of course, it's all moot - you aren't interested in answers so it's not like you would even try ask. You haven't yet, why would you start? You talk big but don't want answers that might shatter your deluded worldview.; February 12, 2015 at 4:01 AM
Anonymous said...: And what experts do you claim she didn't know about?; February 12, 2015 at 4:10 AM
Anonymous said...: Every attorney, and Dr. Roberts herself discussed her findings with Crystal, and explained to her why Dr. Roberts was not helpful - and said she needed to not call her. You don't think anywhere in any of those conversations they didn't explain to Crystal why?

Or, more likely, she kept being deluded by Kenny and Sid? 4 attorneys and Dr. Roberts discussed the findings with Crystal. I guess they all lied.; February 12, 2015 at 7:22 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Every attorney, and Dr. Roberts herself discussed her findings with Crystal, and explained to her why Dr. Roberts was not helpful - and said she needed to not call her. You don't think anywhere in any of those conversations they didn't explain to Crystal why?

Or, more likely, she kept being deluded by Kenny and Sid? 4 attorneys and Dr. Roberts discussed the findings with Crystal. I guess they all lied.

Dr. Roberts acknowledged in her written report that the initial intubation of Daye was esophageal. This is something that the jurors never heard because Dr. Roberts was not called to testify at trial and because her report was not entered by her turncoat attorney.; February 12, 2015 at 8:25 AM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: " You talk big but don't want answers that might shatter your deluded worldview:......... My worldview??? What worldview is that. I want answers about Duke's killing of Daye. US Courts are just one big game. Crystal is not afraid of the truth and doesn't care if the prosecutors and the jury know the truth. Her Lawyers want to conceal the truth because they, like most of the rest of society there, think she is guilty. When an Attorney presumes his client is guilty they don't give a passionate defence. As well, involving the almighty Duke and taking them on is something most there do not have the courage to undertake. In a just and fair system the truth should determine the outcome. The ones afraid of the truth are Duke and the North Carolina Justice system; not Crystal. Keep her off the stand. She might get confused. Hey, this is not a chess game it's a persons future that is at stake. Prosecution, Defence and Defendant should all have the same desire; get at the truth. That is unless the Defendant is guilty, then trickery and flim-flam to confuse a Jury is their strategy. Crystal never confided in her Attorney that she was guilty he just assumed she was. "If the glove doesn't fit you must acquit"; February 12, 2015 at 10:01 AM
Anonymous said...: Crystal stabbed Daye - that was never disputed - the issue is whether there was self-defense, and if self-defense failed, if it was manslaughter, 2nd degree or 1st degree. She had nothing to admit. While she keeps calling it "poking" she stabbed him. That was never in dispute - the issue was always why. The defense argued self-defense. The prosecution said she had a chance to leave, ran to another room, got a knife and came back and stabbed him. The defense said she was being held down and grabbed a knife to get Daye off of her.

The Jury believed the State.; February 12, 2015 at 10:34 AM
guiowen said...: Kenny,
Show us the glove.; February 12, 2015 at 11:07 AM
Anonymous said...: And, if you think Defense Attorneys have to believe in their client's innocence to do their job you are incredibly naive. Their job is to hold the State to its burden.

And, there was no "innocence" to believe in for Crystal - despite your claims, you have not identified anything differently you would have done in the self-defense portion - that was a vigorous defense - if you don't believe so - what else should have been done? The issue was that Crystal's story didn't match the physical evidence, so the jury doubted her story - and the Jury heard how she had done this same thing in the past (or attempted to) with Milton Walker - and so they figured it was her pattern (which is why the defense tried to keep that evidence out).

You love to cat-call from the bleachers, but you are an idiot.; February 12, 2015 at 11:15 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous 11:15:

You are being unfair. Kenny criticized harshly Meier's failure to aggressively cross-examine Daye.; February 12, 2015 at 11:19 AM
Anonymous said...: Guiowen:

Kenny will show us the glove when he gets it. Until then, we will just need to trust him that it doesn't fit.

Unfortunately, we need a trial to see the glove.; February 12, 2015 at 11:24 AM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "The issue was that Crystal's story didn't match the physical evidence, so the jury doubted her story"..................This violent attack by a jealous, drunken, enraged alcoholic occurred, in a small apartment, 31 months before she testified. The prosecution made a big issue of the minutiae of the crime scene; where exactly blood spatter was found ,where in space and time she and Daye were second by second, all from her recollections of the traumatic event. They ignored Daye's admission of the assault when he was interviewed in hospital. There was no effort to discredit or impeach the many discrepancies in his story to police. The idea of him fleeing his own apartment from an attacking, knife wielder when minutes before was trying to stop her from leaving seems self-serving. Keep in mind when she locked herself in a bathroom and tried to call for help Daye, by his own admission, kicked in the door and dragged her out by the hair. Nothing was ever made of Daye's penchant for knife throwing as a sport and why knives were strewn all over the apartment.; February 12, 2015 at 2:20 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: " Their job is to hold the State to its burden".... Yeah, that's what they do; especially when they believe their client is guilty. It is something that by any objective assessment. Meier failed at. The prosecution picking inconsequential inconsistencies in Crystal recollection of this traumatic attack somehow convinced a jury that she was a liar and upstanding citizen Daye's account was the gospel truth. Meier did not effectively counter that naïve perception; February 12, 2015 at 2:32 PM
guiowen said...: Kenhyderal,
Any chance that you can sue Daniel Meier for "pusillanimous defense"?; February 12, 2015 at 2:39 PM
Anonymous said...: Keep in mind when she locked herself in a bathroom and tried to call for help Daye, by his own admission, kicked in the door and dragged her out by the hair. Nothing was ever made of Daye's penchant for knife throwing as a sport and why knives were strewn all over the apartment.

And if you watched the trial Meier stressed that repeatedly - he pushed the self-defense. Nothing came in about why the knives were scattered because when Crystal was asked, she said he threw them at her. When she was asked if he had ever abused her before she said no. Meier can't help it if Crystal lies, unless you are joining the Sid camp that Meier told her too - and if that's true, she jsut needs to file a bar complaint and say that, and if believed, get a new trial. Oddly, while she has filed complaints against Peterson, according to Sid, she hasn't against Meier. She doesn't seem to want to waive attorney/client privilege. It's the idiots and cowards (Sid and Kenny) who pretend to be speaking for her making the attacks.

Kenny, have you ever been right about anything? And how much money have you given Crystal over the years for dates (since that is what escorts do)?

You are an idiot. And a joke. And only Sid and Tin-Foil remotely take you seriously. If you wanted answers, you'd have been at least trying to ask Meier and others questions. Instead you hide behind a blog and think it means something if no one responds to you.

You are a joke. Sid is a joke. This blog is a joke. It's sad how much y'all hurt Crystal with your bullshit. You destroyed her and her defense, and still tell her lies.

Pathetic. Both of you. And deluded, mentally ill idiots, the both of you.; February 12, 2015 at 3:35 PM
Anonymous said...: Meier did not effectively counter that naïve perception

It's been asked before - it will be asked again - on self-defense, what would you have done differently?

The prior record was inadmissible; Crystal denied prior abuse; Crystal testified about alcohol abuse, and it was shown that Daye lied about not drinking much. It was shown that she tried to get away,and locked herself in a bathroom to get away.

The issue is that at the end of the day, it came down to:

Was Daye on top of Crystal and choking her and she found a knife on the floor and stabbed him in the side to get him off of her (she needs to stop saying poking - she buried a knife to the hilt); or

Did Daye drag her out, but then let her go and turn to go away and she ran into antoher room, grabbed a knife, and went after him.

The jury believed the latter. But for the 5 seconds around the stabbing, they both agreed. The problem is that Crystal didn't appear credible on everything else, so the jury believed Daye. Blood was in the hall, no blood on the mattress, no knife cuts in the mattress (though Crystal said he was throwing them at her); mattress on the bed (though Crystal said it was pulled off). a lot of issues.

To believe Daye you simply had to believe the evidence. To believe Crystal, you had to believe a vast conspiracy. She'd have been better off to admit to extreme emotional response/intoxication and fought for manslaughter, if self-defense failed. But, Sid and Kenny convinced her that the stabbing didn't matter, Duke murdered him, so she was free.

Y'all are idiots, and if you think you are Crystal's friends, you are more deluded than any of us think.

Kenny is a joke, and has nothing relevant to say about anything. Everything he posts, we all just need to respond with HA HA, YOU ARE AN IDIOT.

Caust he is.; February 12, 2015 at 3:41 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

Meier has said publicly he thinks the jury got it wrong and it should have been self-defense or manslaughter at worst. Do you think he's lying?; February 12, 2015 at 4:02 PM
kenhyderal said...: Crystal knows who her friends are. I'll let the readers decide who the cowards are, those who anonymously slander her, myself and Dr. Harr or those who are seeking Justice for her. Do you really believe answers to the nay questions I have will be provided to me by Attorney Meier or to that matter to Crystal? Petersen was loath to use an incompetent and inadequate defence by her predecessor as reason for a new trial. That's how it goes when the defendant is poor and a minority; February 12, 2015 at 4:15 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: " Meier has said publicly he thinks the jury got it wrong and it should have been self-defense or manslaughter at worst. Do you think he's lying?"........... Good. Does he blame himself or The Jury.; February 12, 2015 at 4:17 PM
kenhyderal said...: Those who believe that Meier, Petersen, Coggins-Franks Duke's legal advisors etc. don't read this blog are naïve. Their
names come up here on an almost daily basis. People want to know what is being said about them; February 12, 2015 at 4:32 PM
Anonymous said...: You wouldn't know unless you asked and youbare too much of a coward to ask. It's easy to give uo without trying.; February 12, 2015 at 5:09 PM
Anonymous said...: Or the idiots who fed crystal lies and delusions?

You are an idiot.; February 12, 2015 at 5:10 PM
Anonymous said...: I doubt it. In their jobs they deal with a lot of idiots. No one cares what idiots say about them. If they do read it, they laugh at the idiots. If they cared they'd have done something.

You and Sid are jokes, and no one takes you seriously.; February 12, 2015 at 5:11 PM
Walt said...: Sid wrote: "Dr. Roberts acknowledged in her written report that the initial intubation of Daye was esophageal. This is something that the jurors never heard because Dr. Roberts was not called to testify at trial and because her report was not entered by her turncoat attorney."

Sid would very much like to cherry pick what evidence the jury hears. Unfortunately for him, the law and logic views Dr. Roberts as an expert witness, not a fact witness. She did not see day alive. She did not treat him. Thus, she cannot testify as to the facts surrounding his treatment. What she can do is give an opinion, based on the facts of his treatment, about the cause of death. That's the only way Dr. Roberts can testify at all. Unfortunately for Crystal, Dr. Roberts opinion is Daye died as a result of stab wounds inflicted by Crystal.

This is a problem for her. If she wants to put in evidence of the esophageal intubation from Dr. Roberts, Crystal is stuck with Roberts expert conclusion. Roberts expert conclusion agrees with the state Medical Examiner's conclusion.

Two experts, one from the defense and one from the state in agreement amounts to a sure conviction. Thus, Meier and Van were more than correct to keep Roberts off the stand. You see, the only turncoat here is Sid. He was working overtime to assure Crystal's conviction.

Walt-in-Durham; February 12, 2015 at 5:44 PM
Anonymous said...: Sidney, I love your blog.

Regards,
Dirk Diggler; February 12, 2015 at 6:09 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

Why don't you provide a detailed comparison of Daye's statement and Crystal's testimony and show how each compares with the physical evidence. Details.

It is not enough for you to give your summary opinion. What were the specific inconsistencies in Daye's testimony and what were the trivial mistakes Crystal made (the wrong room, mattress on bed not floor, etc). Details.

Try and convince readers with facts. Don't stop with a general opinion. Sometimes it seems like you don't actually want to convince anyone. You just want to whine.; February 12, 2015 at 7:50 PM
kenhyderal said...: I suggest everybody read Daye's interview with Constable Bond. http://www.justice4nifong.com/legal/cgm/blink/blink112912/docu09.htm This contradictory and disjointed, un-sworn "interview" was never dissected by Meier the way Coggins-Franks did with Crystal's sworn testimony; February 12, 2015 at 8:57 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "You wouldn't know unless you asked and youbare too much of a coward to ask. It's easy to give uo without trying"........ Afraid to ask who what? Why would I be afraid to ask anyone anything? I'm guessing, though, you are too afraid to give us your name; February 12, 2015 at 9:21 PM
Anonymous said...: You've admitted you refuse to contact Meier or anyone else. You just claim they won't respond.

You are an idiot.; February 13, 2015 at 3:48 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

What do you hope to achieve through this?; February 13, 2015 at 4:47 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

Are you also upset that Crystal's rape allegation was never "dissected" by Nifong or the DPD? They just decided to indict three young men.; February 13, 2015 at 4:50 AM
Anonymous said...: KENHYDERAL:

"I have been told that there were possibly about 20 non-Players who attended"

You were told that by Kilgo.

That is like a deaf blind man telling you, I Saw and heard everything.; February 13, 2015 at 4:52 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny just likes to rant. He has zero interest in actually accomplishing anything cause he knows that nothing said on a blog can actually do anything to help. Again he's an idiot and a coward who just likes to talk. While Sid isn't helpful at least he does something.

And Kenny, I'm sure none of the folks involved in the case read or care about the blog anymore. If the appeal is granted they will focus on the case again, and probably still ignore this blog.; February 13, 2015 at 6:16 AM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "You've admitted you refuse to contact Meier or anyone else. You just claim they won't respond"...... Is that you Daniel? So, you are claiming they will respond. I don't live in the U.S.A. I introduced Crystal to Dr. Harr and I have full confidence in his ability, there on the spot, to inform the public of the gross miscarriage of justice meted out to Crystal. Only informed Public opinion can counteract this. Powerful interests and their minions, some of them on this blog, are zealously trying to discredit those who seek justice and fairness; February 13, 2015 at 8:50 AM
Anonymous said...: I'm not Daniel I'm John Smith, that's been discussed - I'm saying I have no idea if they would respond or not, but it's the coward's way out to not even try - because you make assumptions about their response.

It's easy to say they won't respond so I won't even try, then cry when they aren't responding to random blog posts they likely aren't even seeing.; February 13, 2015 at 8:58 AM
kenhyderal said...: I did contact Meier's criminal law consultant Sarah Jessica Farber who sat with Crystal and Meier throughout the trial and got no reply.; February 13, 2015 at 9:11 AM
kenhyderal said...: I'm leaving things to Dr. Harr who, unlike me, has medical expertise and extensive experience in the legal system. I admire his skill, courage and dedication.; February 13, 2015 at 9:14 AM
Anonymous said...: I did contact Meier's criminal law consultant Sarah Jessica Farber who sat with Crystal and Meier throughout the trial and got no reply.

She was 2nd chair, not a "consultant." But, ok, she didn't respond, so no one else will - and you can hide behind your keyboard and rant.; February 13, 2015 at 9:41 AM
Anonymous said...: Dr. Harr has no skill ... if he didn't, he wouldn't fail at everything he does.; February 13, 2015 at 9:42 AM
Fake Kenhyderal said...: Kenny -- Why would you contact Sarah Farber, (who has her own law firm), rather than Attorney Meier?; February 13, 2015 at 10:00 AM
kenhyderal said...: ANONYMOUS said "and you can hide behind your keyboard and rant"...........................Who is hiding!; February 13, 2015 at 10:26 AM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "Why would you contact Sarah Farber"............................Because of Crystal; February 13, 2015 at 10:28 AM
guiowen said...: Kenhyderal,
The question was, "Why would you contact Sarah Farber ... RATHER than Meier?"; February 13, 2015 at 11:08 AM
Anonymous said...: Blogger guiowen said...

Kenhyderal,
The question was, "Why would you contact Sarah Farber ... RATHER than Meier?"

February 13, 2015 at 11:08 AM

Because - Kenny doesn't want answers, he wants to whine and cry like a little baby, but not actually accomplish anything. He won't actually seek answers, he will make demands on this blog, and think it means something when he's ignored.

He's an idiot.; February 13, 2015 at 12:18 PM
Fake Kenhyderal said...: Kenny said:
"Anonymous said:................" I am not Anonymous. I am a new superstition entering the unassailable fortress of forever. I am the Fake Kenhyderal. I am legend.; February 13, 2015 at 12:37 PM
Anonymous said...: kenny:

If you can have Kilgo, why can't we have fakekenny?

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; February 13, 2015 at 12:45 PM
Fake Kenhyderal said...: Fake Ken Edwards Fake Dubai U.A.E. a.k.a. Fake Kenhyderal

I post without embarrassment and do not hide under the unidentifiable and cowardly appellation "Anonymous"; February 13, 2015 at 12:51 PM
Anonymous said...: That's why Kenny is an idiot, but Fake Kenny isn't.; February 13, 2015 at 12:56 PM
guiowen said...: So, Kenhyderal,
Why don't you come to NC? Air fare is about $1000. (Unless, of course, you are one of those who only travel first class. Air fare would then be more like $10,000.)
In any case, come to Durham, stand on a street corner, and hand out flyers. That's the way to inform public opinion -- not by posting on this blog.; February 13, 2015 at 2:16 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Meier did not effectively counter that naïve perception

It's been asked before - it will be asked again - on self-defense, what would you have done differently?

The prior record was inadmissible; Crystal denied prior abuse; Crystal testified about alcohol abuse, and it was shown that Daye lied about not drinking much. It was shown that she tried to get away,and locked herself in a bathroom to get away.

The issue is that at the end of the day, it came down to:

Was Daye on top of Crystal and choking her and she found a knife on the floor and stabbed him in the side to get him off of her (she needs to stop saying poking - she buried a knife to the hilt); or

Did Daye drag her out, but then let her go and turn to go away and she ran into antoher room, grabbed a knife, and went after him.

The jury believed the latter. But for the 5 seconds around the stabbing, they both agreed. The problem is that Crystal didn't appear credible on everything else, so the jury believed Daye. Blood was in the hall, no blood on the mattress, no knife cuts in the mattress (though Crystal said he was throwing them at her); mattress on the bed (though Crystal said it was pulled off). a lot of issues.

To believe Daye you simply had to believe the evidence. To believe Crystal, you had to believe a vast conspiracy. She'd have been better off to admit to extreme emotional response/intoxication and fought for manslaughter, if self-defense failed. But, Sid and Kenny convinced her that the stabbing didn't matter, Duke murdered him, so she was free.

Y'all are idiots, and if you think you are Crystal's friends, you are more deluded than any of us think.

Kenny is a joke, and has nothing relevant to say about anything. Everything he posts, we all just need to respond with HA HA, YOU ARE AN IDIOT.

Caust he is.

The problem with the prosecution's case against Mangum is that she was indicted for crimes that did not occur. Daye gave Mangum the cashier's checks, ergo, the larceny of chose in action charge is bogus. Daye's death was due to an esophageal intubation, ergo, no murder was committed.

It's as simple as that!!; February 13, 2015 at 2:49 PM
Fake Kenhyderal said...: Mangum was not found guilty of larceny of chose in action. Ergo her defense did its job; February 13, 2015 at 3:17 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "Did Daye drag her out, but then let her go and turn to go away and she ran into another room, grabbed a knife, and went after him. The jury believed the latter'............. the Jury believed the unbelievable; a larger, stronger, jealous, drunken enraged, Reginald Daye, after kicking in the bathroom door. where Crystal sought refuge and was calling for help he dragged her out by the hair then suddenly released her and fled from his own apartment because she was coming at him with a knife or was it knives; the ones scattered all over the apartment.; February 13, 2015 at 3:42 PM
guiowen said...: Kenny,
Let's see if this is believable:
Reginald Daye loses his temper, grabs CGM by the hair, but then realizing that this is not a good idea, lets go of her, and starts to walk away. CGM has lost her temper, and decides to let him see that he can't treat her this way. (After all, she had done the same to her previous boyfriend and dodged a bullet when the jury could not come to a decision.) She therefore grabs a knife and stabs him.
Does that seem believable? Why or why not?; February 13, 2015 at 4:12 PM
Anonymous said...: I agree Dirk. This blog is fantastic.

Love,
Amber Wave.; February 13, 2015 at 7:13 PM
kenhyderal said...: Guiowen you are totally mischaracterizing that event. The gross overcharge of attempted first degree murder was dropped. Walker a schizophrenic took full responsibility for the encounter stating he was off his medication and hearing voices at the time. She was not convicted of the arson charge. Despite Judge Jones telling the Jury that convicting on the three contributing to child abuse or neglect charges were dependent on her being convicted of the arson charge. With the exorbitant bail that was set she spent time in jail until bail was donated but Judge Jones having read all the character references and the FSS assessment declared Crystal to be a good Mother and he indicated what he thought of the contributing to child abuse or neglect charges by sentencing her to time in custody. He would have done the same thing if she had bailed out on day 1; February 13, 2015 at 9:16 PM
guiowen said...: The fact remains that having lost her temper, she set some clothes on fire, slashed the tires and broke the windows on Walker's car.
I imagine that, with Daye, she felt that she could get away with stabbing him. After all, people like you were telling her what a good mother she was. You would have done her a service if you had explained to her that she had dodged a bullet and might not be so lucky the next time.; February 14, 2015 at 3:00 AM
Anonymous said...: Dr. Harr,

You can add the following to your list of reasons that Duke might have to kill a patient, (especially when the benefit is harm against persons obviously hated by Duke such as Ms. Mangum is), perhaps(?):

WRAL, 2/13/15

"Duke pilot program hopes to cut down wait time for transplants"; February 14, 2015 at 3:02 AM
kenhyderal supporter said...: Right on Malek. Anyone who actually knows Crystal rejects completely the vicious slander, that emananated from The Duke Lacrosse Defence, in an effort to destroy her credibility. These lies are ongoing and widely beleived. None of those who post their poison here have ever met Crystal. I ask them, don't you find it strange that her friends, her professors, her classmates her teachers, her pastor, etc. all have a favorable opinion of her and have provided her with character references. Hearing these references caused Judge Abraham Jones to declared that, from the evidence he heard, he beleived her to be "a good mother" Crystal is not and never was a prostitute. Crystal is not and never was a drug addict or an alcoholic. Crystal was a responsible parent. Crystal was a responsible member of her community. Crystal, having come from humble circumstances, was working hard to build a better like for herself and her children. Her Pastor advised her not to choose exotic dancing and escorting as a way to support herself because, regardless of her character,such a choice can be fraught with peril..; February 14, 2015 at 5:02 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

A bit of advice. When you complain that others are mischaracterizing an event, you should take special care to ensure that your correction is accurate.

You mischaracterized the judge's instructions. While the initial instructions were such that a conviction on the child abuse charges was dependent on a conviction on arson charges, the judge changed those instructions when the prosecution objected.

You have made this error previously, and I have corrected you previously. As a result, i believe this error is deliberate.

I ask that you apologize to the readers on this blog for your attempt to deceive them.; February 14, 2015 at 5:02 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

Thank you for the link to Officer Bond's report. I don't see Daye's statement as particularly "contradictory and disjointed." I found it closer to the physical evidence than Crystal's self-serving testimony.

Perhaps you can provide some elucidation. Daye claimed that when Crystal returned after meeting other men, she frequently had a couple hundred dollars or so. Can you help us understand how she obtained that money?; February 14, 2015 at 5:15 AM
Anonymous said...: Can you find proof that Mr. Daye actually said that - other than the heresay testimony of a durham justice system domestic violence investigator working at duke hospital who didn't record the 'interview'?

Do you just assume all these things that could be questioned and provide reasonable doubt if used as evidence to base judgements are true just because they fit your world, (Ms. Mangum hater or Duke diehard goodfellow), point of view?

If there is one thing that never fails to shine clear when Duke is involved ... it is the hypocrisy they demonstrate blantantly in almost everything they do. Is the hypocratic oath a thing to be mocked and debated at Duke only, or is it already dead and buried?; February 14, 2015 at 5:37 AM
Anonymous said...: No, asshole, I don't have any proof that Daye actually said that other than the police report.

I note that you almost always fail to provide proof of anything. Perhaps you can prove the "obvious hatred" Duke had for Mangum.; February 14, 2015 at 5:44 AM
Anonymous said...: in all cases you are considered an evil duke troll it g... tinfoil hat hater blogmonger ... so ... whatever; February 14, 2015 at 5:44 AM
Anonymous said...: I demand an apology for your despicable ad homine, attack.; February 14, 2015 at 5:47 AM
Anonymous said...: seriously

get fracking real

you are probably the troll who posted that post to look like someone else just so you could then troll it too

and if you are not - (which you are since you do just that continuously on this blog) ... now ya know

blah

p.s. duke sucks nomatter - it's their image - duke - the land of 'duke's evil a... suck - and always will' ville

blah; February 14, 2015 at 5:50 AM
Anonymous said...: I did not post the comment to which I replied.

You owe me an apology for your false accusation.; February 14, 2015 at 5:52 AM
Anonymous said...: I want apologies from the 5:46 and 5:50 posters.; February 14, 2015 at 5:54 AM
Anonymous said...: Tinfoil is on a bender.

Blah!; February 14, 2015 at 6:39 AM
Anonymous said...: Milton walker testified at trial - was not allowed to discuss the presence of the kids or the arson. It was bad for Crystal. That's why the defense objected, and why it's an issue on appeal.; February 14, 2015 at 6:49 AM
Anonymous said...: what the frack g ...

what is your problem?

blah

blah

blah; February 14, 2015 at 7:26 AM
Anonymous said...: What the frack is going on here? I leave for a little while and come back hoping to be elucidated by a nice shlog, but all I find are these evil, mean, hate-filled, nonsensical, crazy making comments from a bunch of insane hate-crime blog mongers.

blah

blah

blah; February 14, 2015 at 7:27 AM
Anonymous said...: Who is this "g" you keep addressing?; February 14, 2015 at 7:28 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 14, 2015 at 7:28 AM
Anonymous said...: I love how you keep copying and pasting old posts. It's funny how it makes Sid and Kenny think they have supporters.; February 14, 2015 at 7:35 AM
Anonymous said...: seriously, the person who is copy and posting regurgitated plagerized posts and then blaming others for what they just
'said - but didn't' so they can make it look like the other is going on a 'bender' or whatever - ya know - doing it on purpose in order to turn around and blame the other for what they just did is so..... dukishly bent

g... that you? you do that a lot.; February 14, 2015 at 7:36 AM
Anonymous said...: Who is g?; February 14, 2015 at 7:42 AM
Anonymous said...: tinfoil, you have set a new standard with your post at 7:36.; February 14, 2015 at 7:43 AM
Anonymous said...: Who is g?; February 14, 2015 at 7:47 AM
Anonymous said...: what the frack is going on with all this fracking going on?; February 14, 2015 at 7:57 AM
Anonymous said...: "g" is an alias used by kenhyderal.; February 14, 2015 at 7:59 AM
Anonymous said...: Thank you for that information; February 14, 2015 at 8:06 AM
Anonymous said...: So say kenhyderal!
Say kenhyderal!
Say kenhyderal!
Say kenhyderal!
Say kenhyderal!
Say kenhyderal!
Say kenhyderal!; February 14, 2015 at 8:10 AM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "You mischaracterized the judge's instructions. While the initial instructions were such that a conviction on the child abuse charges was dependent on a conviction on arson charges, the judge changed those instructions when the prosecution objected"...................... Yes you are correct but, despite that, Judge Jones demonstrated, by how he sentenced her, that his personal view, which reasonable people hold to be correct, had not changed.; February 14, 2015 at 8:42 AM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "g" is an alias used by kenhyderal"............ Ken Edwards aka kenhyderal does not use aliases. The "g" referred to is the poster Guiowen; February 14, 2015 at 8:45 AM
Anonymous said...: sure kenny, we believe you; February 14, 2015 at 9:17 AM
Anonymous said...: g... refers to g... like ken edwards said; February 14, 2015 at 9:20 AM
Anonymous said...: You do realize that she was convicted only of Misdemeanors, right? before you get too excited on the sentence, realize that her maximum possible punishment was only 120 or 150 days (depending on if she was a prior record level of 1 or 2). Time served is incredibly common in that case if you have as much time as she had.

Had she bonded out early and only had a few days, he would likely have done some sort of supervised probation.

Again, your lack of legal knowledge is causing you to tell her things are a lot more positive than they were based on the Judge's actions/sentence.; February 14, 2015 at 9:24 AM
Anonymous said...: Speaking of fracking ...

doesn't duke have a nuclear facility of some type on its campus?

And then there is the duke nuclear plant on Jordon Lake.

Both of these nuclear sites sit upon the ancient fault line that duke supporters are championing to be fracked to pieces ... how smart is that?

???

It is like they want to destroy NC - themselves included.

Why would they want to do that?

Like the coal ash ponds overflowing - they wait until they cause environmental disasters so that they can then turn around and charge the cusomers billions of dollars to fix the problem that they themselves created ... billions.

... that's what sucks about duke and fracking ... and their involvment in politics, the environment, and NC.

Duke is destructive and lives up to its mascot of an evil devil in very real ways.

... and does it so openly and blantantly ... but either gets all in a tiff if anyone points out the obvious issues of safety to the public and the environment ... or simply ignores all complaints ... and pours more money into whatever manipulative device or scheme they are using at any one given moment to continue to achieve their evil goals.; February 14, 2015 at 9:49 AM
Anonymous said...: How about Mortimer and Randolph Duke and what they did to poor Winthrop? They would have ruined the man if it wasn't for Eddie Murphy. And for a dollar. Duke is evil.; February 14, 2015 at 10:47 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Fake Kenhyderal said...
Mangum was not found guilty of larceny of chose in action. Ergo her defense did its job

No. The prosecution never even argued the larceny of chose in action charge. Any half decent defense attorney would've had that ridiculous charge dismissed in the pre-trial phase... like I tried to do and Ms. Mangum tried to do.; February 14, 2015 at 11:48 AM
Anonymous said...: Except there is no procedure for a pre-trial motion to dismiss, which is what even a halfway decent attorney would know. You are an idiot so you again poison Crystal's relationship with her attorneys - by saying they are betraying her by not doing things they can't do.

That's why you are such a disgrace and so bad for Crystal.; February 14, 2015 at 11:51 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
Dr. Harr,

You can add the following to your list of reasons that Duke might have to kill a patient, (especially when the benefit is harm against persons obviously hated by Duke such as Ms. Mangum is), perhaps(?):

WRAL, 2/13/15

"Duke pilot program hopes to cut down wait time for transplants"

It's possible, but plausible? Did you see the movie "Coma"?

In Daye's case, I believe the overriding reason for his demise, if purposeful, was to saddle Mangum with a much more serious criminal charge carrying significantly lengthier prison sentence.; February 14, 2015 at 11:57 AM
Anonymous said...: Duke was strongly supportive of Mangum and her fake rape claim - even after it was clear she made it up. Even after the hoax was exposed and the charges were shown to be false, Duke never came out against Mangum. Instead, it paid millions of dollars to cover up the extent of its role in the advancing Mangum's false rape hoax.

If Duke killed Daye, it more likely was to eliminate the only eyewitness in the criminal case against Mangum. In their wildest dreams, Duke never imagined that Mangum would testify in the criminal case against her or, if she did, that she would do such a poor job coming up with a story that matched the physival evidence.

At least as far as the criminal charges were concerned, Daye's death was a gift to Mangum. Like so many other things in her life, she screwed it up.; February 14, 2015 at 2:44 PM
Anonymous said...: it is probably more possible that duke will destroy itself in a fiery nuclear meltdown and fall deep into an ancient fault opened anew by their evil destructive fracking - all the way to hell ... but not to china - than that; February 14, 2015 at 3:45 PM
Anonymous said...: frack frack frack frack frack; February 14, 2015 at 4:09 PM
Anonymous said...: What the frack is going on with all this fracking going on?

Tinfoil, I think you are confusing Duke University with Duke Energy.

Blah!; February 14, 2015 at 4:32 PM
Anonymous said...: Which Duke is Mortimer and Randolph Duke affiliated with?; February 14, 2015 at 4:34 PM
Anonymous said...: Don't forget the Duke of Cambridge.; February 14, 2015 at 4:44 PM
Anonymous said...: And the Duke of Edinburgh.; February 14, 2015 at 4:45 PM
Anonymous said...: Don't forget the Duke of Cornwall.; February 14, 2015 at 4:59 PM
Anonymous said...: The Duke of Earl ...

Of course he knows Duke Energy and Duke University are different ... But again, makes Sid think people support him and his paranoia.; February 14, 2015 at 5:28 PM
Anonymous said...: What about the Dukes of Hazzard?; February 14, 2015 at 5:47 PM
Roscoe P. Coltrane said...: Gkhuh-gkhuh-gkhuh!; February 14, 2015 at 5:53 PM
Fake Kenhyderal said...: Tinfoil Hat = Victoria Peterson

That's what Kilgo told me.; February 14, 2015 at 5:55 PM
Anonymous said...: My favorite Duke is Duke Ellington. I hope he isn't implicated in this. That would break my heart.; February 14, 2015 at 6:12 PM
Anonymous said...: Tinfoil is kenny posting drunk.; February 14, 2015 at 6:14 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "Which Duke is Mortimer and Randolph Duke affiliated with?".................. Duke & Duke Brokerage out of Philadelphia; February 14, 2015 at 8:24 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "Duke was strongly supportive of Mangum and her fake rape claim - even after it was clear she made it up. Even after the hoax was exposed and the charges were shown to be false, Duke never came out against Mangum. Instead, it paid millions of dollars to cover up the extent of its role in the advancing Mangum's false rape hoax"......................... Because of the reputation of Duke Lacrosse Team the University had reason to suspect their guilt. Similarly Duke hospital found Crystal' claims credible. Duke caved in though when the greedy Duke Lacrosse trial lawyers went after them once AG Cooper, to appease powerful interests declared them innocent . They miscalculated thinking their insurance would do the paying. I believe Duke is either covering up their malpractice that killed Daye or if they have reached a settlement with Daye's Family are immorally allowing Crystal to take the blame for Daye's death; February 14, 2015 at 9:09 PM
kenhyderal supporter said...: Right on kenhyderal. Anyone who actually knows Crystal rejects completely the vicious slander, that emananated from The Duke Lacrosse Defence, in an effort to destroy her credibility. These lies are ongoing and widely beleived. None of those who post their poison here have ever met Crystal. I ask them, don't you find it strange that her friends, her professors, her classmates her teachers, her pastor, etc. all have a favorable opinion of her and have provided her with character references. Hearing these references caused Judge Abraham Jones to declared that, from the evidence he heard, he beleived her to be "a good mother" Crystal is not and never was a prostitute. Crystal is not and never was a drug addict or an alcoholic. Crystal was a responsible parent. Crystal was a responsible member of her community. Crystal, having come from humble circumstances, was working hard to build a better like for herself and her children. Her Pastor advised her not to choose exotic dancing and escorting as a way to support herself because, regardless of her character,such a choice can be fraught with peril..; February 15, 2015 at 4:37 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

You are so full of it.; February 15, 2015 at 4:53 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

Why would Crystal come home with money after she went out with these men, something even she doesn't deny. She says no sex ... Is she really that good at conversation?; February 15, 2015 at 7:12 AM
Walt said...: Sid wrote: "No. The prosecution never even argued the larceny of chose in action charge. Any half decent defense attorney would've had that ridiculous charge dismissed in the pre-trial phase... like I tried to do and Ms. Mangum tried to do."

You have been told previously that there are only a very few enumerated reasons to grant a Motion to Dismiss under 52 NCGS § 15A-954. That section of the North Carolina General Statutes is available free onliine to anyone who visits http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/EnactedLegislation/Statutes/PDF/ByArticle/Chapter_15A/Article_52.pdf. You have no excuse what so ever for repeatedly ignoring the law.

You cannot show even one issue under § 15SA-954 that would justify dismissal. Yet, you persist in claiming the defense somehow failed to do its job. Well, the defense did not fail by not filing a motion to dismiss. The Defense counsel did his job by refusing to file a frivolous motion. A motion that the court would have no choice but to deny. Again, you have sought to damage Crystal's defense and you have impugned the integrity of good lawyers. With friends like you, Crystal doesn't need any enemies.

Walt-in-Durham; February 15, 2015 at 10:20 AM
Anonymous said...: Does it really matter what the lawyers do or did if they didn't get the DA to take care of the fraudulent and questionable state autopsy report immediately? It shows a real lack of concern for the safety of all people that this simple basic step in the justice process is not done because the justice system refuses to acknowledge the facts as detailed in the two autopsy reports and duke medical records. If a lawyer did not take care of that issue, they did not do their job (for anyone).; February 16, 2015 at 2:46 AM
Walt said...: Anonymous at 2:45 AM wrote: "Does it really matter what the lawyers do or did if they didn't get the DA to take care of the fraudulent and questionable state autopsy report immediately?"

Our courts are not star chambers. They operate from evidence. The evidence is the Medical Examiner in fact examined the deceased and from that examination gave an opinion as to the cause of death. While it is abundantly obvious from Dr. Nichols' testimony he was performing too many autopsies, he testified that he did examine Daye, he did take photographs and he did make notes of the exam. From that, he rendered an opinion. Remember, Nichols saw the corpse. He is not just an expert, but also a fact witness.

Dr. Roberts is a pure expert. She did not see the corpse, nor did she treat Mr. Daye while he was alive. Her report renders an opinion though that Daye's death was the result of a stab wound inflicted by Crystal.

From those two experts, there is no evidence for anyone to claim that the autopsy was "fraudulent", no matter how much our poor tin foil hat wearing anonymous poster would like there to be.

The very best defense lawyer in Durham saw and heard Roberts opine that Daye died as a result of Crystal's stabbing. Another very good lawyer, if his billing is to be believed, heard her give the same opinion. Dr. Roberts later produced a written report to that effect. We all, if we cared, watched Dr. Nichols testimony and he opined that Daye died as a result of the stab wound inflicted by Crystal. A very experienced appellate counsel looked at the same evidence and she elected not to pursue it on appeal. So ask yourself, what evidence is there for any other outcome? None. Both experts agree on the cause and effect. There was no fraud in this autopsy.

The real issue in this case is the 404(b) evidence. Failing to understand that dooms your argument to the realm of fantasy.

Walt-in-Durham; February 16, 2015 at 7:29 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous said:

"Kenny,

Why would Crystal come home with money after she went out with these men, something even she doesn't deny. She says no sex ... Is she really that good at conversation?"

I have been told that Mangum was fluent in both Greek and French, whatever that means.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; February 16, 2015 at 8:59 AM
Anonymous said...: Walt, your lawyerly advice and judgements relegates you to the land of walt in wonderland with a duke agenda. What do you think about Duke's medical reports pray tell?; February 16, 2015 at 12:22 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous 12:22:

Why do you rely on ad hominem attacks? Try to convince someone with credible arguments.

Why don't you analyze the medical reports and relate them to the legal doctrine contained in Welch, Holsclaw, Jones and other cases?; February 16, 2015 at 12:27 PM
Fake Kenhyderal said...: Kilgo told me that Anonymous@ 12:22 is actually Jackie Wagstaff.; February 16, 2015 at 12:35 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Walt said...
Anonymous at 2:45 AM wrote: "Does it really matter what the lawyers do or did if they didn't get the DA to take care of the fraudulent and questionable state autopsy report immediately?"

Our courts are not star chambers. They operate from evidence. The evidence is the Medical Examiner in fact examined the deceased and from that examination gave an opinion as to the cause of death. While it is abundantly obvious from Dr. Nichols' testimony he was performing too many autopsies, he testified that he did examine Daye, he did take photographs and he did make notes of the exam. From that, he rendered an opinion. Remember, Nichols saw the corpse. He is not just an expert, but also a fact witness.

Dr. Roberts is a pure expert. She did not see the corpse, nor did she treat Mr. Daye while he was alive. Her report renders an opinion though that Daye's death was the result of a stab wound inflicted by Crystal.

From those two experts, there is no evidence for anyone to claim that the autopsy was "fraudulent", no matter how much our poor tin foil hat wearing anonymous poster would like there to be.

The very best defense lawyer in Durham saw and heard Roberts opine that Daye died as a result of Crystal's stabbing. Another very good lawyer, if his billing is to be believed, heard her give the same opinion. Dr. Roberts later produced a written report to that effect. We all, if we cared, watched Dr. Nichols testimony and he opined that Daye died as a result of the stab wound inflicted by Crystal. A very experienced appellate counsel looked at the same evidence and she elected not to pursue it on appeal. So ask yourself, what evidence is there for any other outcome? None. Both experts agree on the cause and effect. There was no fraud in this autopsy.

The real issue in this case is the 404(b) evidence. Failing to understand that dooms your argument to the realm of fantasy.

Walt-in-Durham

Hey, Walt.

Regarding the photos Dr. Nichols took, the only ones he took outside of Daye's face and left side of his torso were a couple of photos of Daye's lungs -- which didn't show anything... and the chest cavity was not even entered during surgery. One of the sharp criticisms that Dr. Roberts had was the lack of photos taken by Daye. His failure to take photos of perforations to the left lung, diaphragm, left kidney, and stomach places the credibility of his autopsy report in question. If Daye's spleen had been removed surgically, photographs could have demonstrated that. Not only that, but the so-called linear scabbed over "defensive injuries" to Daye's left upper extremity were not even documented. They weren't documented because they didn't exist.

And just like Drs. Nichols and Roberts, you cannot give a distinct narrative of how the stab wound to Daye's left side caused Daye's brain death. Nobody can provide such a nexus between the stab wound and Daye's brain death or actual death without mentioning the esophageal intubation.; February 16, 2015 at 1:04 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous Anonymous said...
Does it really matter what the lawyers do or did if they didn't get the DA to take care of the fraudulent and questionable state autopsy report immediately? It shows a real lack of concern for the safety of all people that this simple basic step in the justice process is not done because the justice system refuses to acknowledge the facts as detailed in the two autopsy reports and duke medical records. If a lawyer did not take care of that issue, they did not do their job (for anyone).

You are absolutely correct... the reasons none of the lawyers wanted to breach the esophageal intubation and problems with discrepancies between the autopsy report and the medical records is because doing so would reveal that Duke University Hospital was responsible for the proximate cause of Daye's death and lead to Mangum's exoneration.; February 16, 2015 at 1:07 PM

«Oldest ‹Older 1 – 200 of 322 Newer› Newest»

Sunday, February 8, 2015

Was Reginald Daye's death a murder or an accident?

322 comments:

Facebook Badge

Subscribe!

Labels

Blog Archive

About Me