justice4nifong: Libel lawsuit: Harr v. WRAL-5 .. Plaintiff responds

Thursday, March 16, 2017

Libel lawsuit: Harr v. WRAL-5 .. Plaintiff responds

743 comments:

«Oldest ‹Older 401 – 600 of 743 Newer› Newest»

Anonymous said...: Sidney Harr:

"You have things out of sequence. Ann Petersen offered to file a Petition for Discretionary Review (PDR) with the NC Supreme Court, but Crystal was so disappointed with the weak appeal that Peterson filed that she did not accept the offer."

More likely it was you who was disappointed with the PDR(probably because it contained no references to your non meritorious claims of perjury on the part of the ME and your non meritorious claims that Reginald Daye died from malpractice). And you dissuaded her from filing the petition drawn up by her appellate attorney.; April 20, 2017 at 1:47 PM
Anonymous said...: Halo, Everybody, Halo.; April 21, 2017 at 3:13 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous Anonymous said...
Sidney Harr:

"You have things out of sequence. Ann Petersen offered to file a Petition for Discretionary Review (PDR) with the NC Supreme Court, but Crystal was so disappointed with the weak appeal that Peterson filed that she did not accept the offer."

More likely it was you who was disappointed with the PDR(probably because it contained no references to your non meritorious claims of perjury on the part of the ME and your non meritorious claims that Reginald Daye died from malpractice). And you dissuaded her from filing the petition drawn up by her appellate attorney.

Let me clarify my previous comment on this matter. Crystal was disappointed with the original appeal filed by Petersen. That is why she did not ask Petersen to file the PDR. Furthermore, Crystal's PDR was filed before the one filed by Petersen and neither Crystal nor I saw Petersen's PDR prior to Mangum filing hers.

It was clear from the PDR filed by Petersen that it was a rush-job done at the last minute... basically altering a few sentences of the dismal appeal that Petersen filed earlier that was denied.; April 21, 2017 at 4:43 AM
Anonymous said...: Sidney Harr you clarify nothing, other than that you are a delusional megalomaniac.; April 21, 2017 at 4:49 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous Anonymous said...
Meier's letter to Mangum (which Sid posted, then removed) had said that the State had rejected Crystal's offer to plead guilty to time served (something Sid says was offered and rejected, but the letter contradicted Sid, and Mangum has never accused Meier of lying in the letter), but did offer a manslaughter plea, which would have had her only serve another 2 years or so (which she rejected).

Yes, apparently had she listened to her lawyers, she'd be out by now.

I do wonder why Sid took the letter down - perhaps because it directly contradicted many of the lies he continues to tell?

First of all, I do not remove items that I post. There was an instance when I inexplicably lost several postings and their accompanying comments. But, I would never purposely remove the Meier letter, and have no objection to re-posting it.

I believe that Meier's letter was totally false and an attempt to cover the truth of that meeting about the State's offered plea deal that took trial before court that was cleared by Judge Ridgeway. Meier has consistently shown he was capable of acting against the best wishes of his client Mangum... like allowing three jurors with close ties to Duke University Hospital to sit on the jury.; April 21, 2017 at 4:52 AM
Anonymous said...: Sidney Harr:

" Meier has consistently shown he was capable of acting against the best wishes of his client Mangum..."

No he hasn't. That Daniel Meier did not buy into your delusions about malpractice and the autopsy report did not mean he was working against Crystal's interests. He was working against your interests.

"like allowing three jurors with close ties to Duke University Hospital to sit on the jury."

Your hypothesis is, people were trying to protect Duke by covering up malpractice on the part of Duke. There was no malpractice on the part of Duke. I say again, it takes the opinion of a medical expert to establish medical malpractice. A total clinical incompetent like you is no medical expert.

If there were malpractice, as has been explained to you, it would not have relieved Crystal of criminal responsibility for Reginald Daye's death. And what happened in the murder trial would not have shielded Duke from litigation in a civil court.

That your frivolous, non meritorious suits against Duke failed does not indicate that Duke is immune from litigation in civil court.; April 21, 2017 at 6:01 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

If you believe it is in Mangum's interest to stay in prison for as long as the law permits then, yes, Meier did not act in her best interest.

A more reasoned position might be that Meier, by dint of his education and experience in the law, saw problems and pitfalls in Mangum's defense that you and she did not, by virtue of your lack of training, experience and objectivity, recognize and that he did his level best to obtain the best outcome he could for his client given the law, facts and evidence in her case.

One thing is beyond dispute: the outcome of the Mangum's case would have been much different and better for her had she listened to any one of her multiple attorneys instead of you.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; April 21, 2017 at 7:16 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You have 255 days left to exonerate and free Mangum in 2017. It has been 5 weeks and 2 days since you predicted that Mangum would be released within a matter of weeks.

It has been 37 days since the Ides of March 2017, 66 days since February 14, 2017, 111 days since the end of 2016, 294 days since the end of June 2016, 362 days since April 24, 2016, 402 days since the Ides of March 2016, 1,245 days since Mangum was convicted of murdering Reginald Daye and 3,596 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred. Mangum is scheduled to be released from prison in 3,234 days.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; April 21, 2017 at 11:43 AM
Anonymous said...: You believe the letter was totally false, but does Crystal? If she has her attorney lying to her, in writing, she'd have a solid complaint against him. What you believe is irrelevant, the truth matters, and it seems likely the letter contains the truth. And if you aren't trying to hide it, repost it.; April 21, 2017 at 1:04 PM
Anonymous said...: I have a question for Walt and A Lawyer regarding jury selection.

Sidney maintains that Meier's failure to object to the selection for the jury of three people with Duke ties is indicative of his failure to represent Magnum adequately. Sidney's opinion apparently is based on his view that either Duke or Magnum (but not both) can be responsible for Daye's death. As a result, the jury would have been required to choose between them.

Based the caselaw that Walt has posted, it seems clear that the esophageal intubation is generally NOT an intervening cause; both Nichols and Roberts reached that conclusion. Thus, Magnum remains criminally responsible irrespective of whether Duke has civil liability.

As a result, would Meier have been able to exclude the Duke-related persons from the jury for cause (i.e., their Duke affiliation) or would he have been required to use his limited objections other than for cause?

Thanks.; April 21, 2017 at 1:31 PM
A Lawyer said...: As a result, would Meier have been able to exclude the Duke-related persons from the jury for cause (i.e., their Duke affiliation) or would he have been required to use his limited objections other than for cause?

No, he would have had to use a peremptory challenge.; April 21, 2017 at 3:16 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "More likely it was you who was disappointed with the PDR(probably because it contained no references to your non meritorious claims of perjury on the part of the ME and your non meritorious claims that Reginald Daye died from malpractice".......................................... Esophageal intubation not recognized in a timely fashion that leads to cardiac and cerebral anoxia is, by definition, medical malpractice.; April 21, 2017 at 10:05 PM
Anonymous said...: Kehyderal:

"Esophageal intubation not recognized in a timely fashion that leads to cardiac and cerebral anoxia is, by definition, medical malpractice."

In Reginald Daye's case, the complication was recognized and an attempt to treat it was made. Therefore, in spite of ignorant Kenny's ranting, it did not rise to the level of malpractice. Kenny is even less capable than clinical incompetent Sidney to determine what is and what is not malpractice.

What ignorant Kenny also ignores is that Reginald Daye WAS at risk of an intra abdominal infection, and the aspiration which led to the need to intubate happened during an evaluation for an infection. The evaluation would never have been necessary had Crystal not stabbed him. The esophageal intubation did not relieve Crystal of criminal responsibility for Reginald Daye's death.

Kenny has yet to cite a medical reference which says that Delerium Tremens in a patient at risk of an intra abdominal infection precludes the occurrence of infection.; April 22, 2017 at 3:33 AM
Anonymous said...: Halo, Sidney, Halo.; April 22, 2017 at 5:23 AM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: "Esophageal intubation not recognized in a timely fashion that leads to cardiac and cerebral anoxia is, by definition, medical malpractice."

Two points, (1) Medical malpractice is not an intervening cause, and (2) you fail to cite any expert to say that esophageal intubation, not recognized in a timely fashion is malpractice, by definition or otherwise.

A Lawyer wrote: "No, he would have had to use a peremptory challenge."

I concur with A Lawyer.

Walt-in-Durham; April 22, 2017 at 5:31 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny is an expert and his statements require no further support.; April 22, 2017 at 5:35 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous Anonymous said...
Kehyderal:

"Esophageal intubation not recognized in a timely fashion that leads to cardiac and cerebral anoxia is, by definition, medical malpractice."

In Reginald Daye's case, the complication was recognized and an attempt to treat it was made. Therefore, in spite of ignorant Kenny's ranting, it did not rise to the level of malpractice. Kenny is even less capable than clinical incompetent Sidney to determine what is and what is not malpractice.

What ignorant Kenny also ignores is that Reginald Daye WAS at risk of an intra abdominal infection, and the aspiration which led to the need to intubate happened during an evaluation for an infection. The evaluation would never have been necessary had Crystal not stabbed him. The esophageal intubation did not relieve Crystal of criminal responsibility for Reginald Daye's death.

Kenny has yet to cite a medical reference which says that Delerium Tremens in a patient at risk of an intra abdominal infection precludes the occurrence of infection.

Recognizing an esophageal intubation due to a patient going into cardiac arrest is not "timely" intervention. The medical staff was alerted of a possible esophageal intubation by the end-tidal CO2 reading which was negative. That is why they performed a visual assessment with the laryngoscope... however, they misinterpreted it as being placed in the trachea instead of the esophagus.

Also, the reason Daye was moved to the Surgical Intensive Care Unit was because of his severe agitation... not because of a "suspected infection." The bottom line, is that had Daye not been intubated in his esophagus and it allowed to remain there for a significant amount of time, he would never have been brain dead. And, it was his brain death that led to him electively being removed from life-support... which was the direct cause of his death. Had Daye been properly intubated initially, he would have survived his hospital stay.

Consider yourself elucidated.; April 22, 2017 at 5:47 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous Anonymous said...
I have a question for Walt and A Lawyer regarding jury selection.

Sidney maintains that Meier's failure to object to the selection for the jury of three people with Duke ties is indicative of his failure to represent Magnum adequately. Sidney's opinion apparently is based on his view that either Duke or Magnum (but not both) can be responsible for Daye's death. As a result, the jury would have been required to choose between them.

Based the caselaw that Walt has posted, it seems clear that the esophageal intubation is generally NOT an intervening cause; both Nichols and Roberts reached that conclusion. Thus, Magnum remains criminally responsible irrespective of whether Duke has civil liability.

As a result, would Meier have been able to exclude the Duke-related persons from the jury for cause (i.e., their Duke affiliation) or would he have been required to use his limited objections other than for cause?

Thanks

Naturally, I disagree with A Lawyer and Walt on this point. I believe that the jurors related to Duke University and/or its hospital should have been dismissed for cause. Even if not for cause, they were definitely worthy of a peremptory challenge. There are many reasons.

First, Duke University and its lacrosse team were brought under a shameful national spotlight because of 2006 accusations of sexual assault by Crystal Mangum. Certainly there's no love loss by Duke when it comes to Mangum. Additionally, Mangum's contention that malpractice by Duke Hospital staff was responsible for Daye's brain death is germane as to whether or not Ms. Mangum or Duke is responsible for Daye's ultimate death. An innocent verdict on the murder/manslaughter charge, clearly places responsibility for Daye's death on Duke.

There is no way that Duke employees would risk their livelihood by finding Mangum innocent, so turncoat Dan Meier assured that there would be no acquittal in Mangum's case when he allowed the three jurors to be seated.

It's obvious that Nichols would attribute Daye's death to Mangum because he did not want to end up like Mike Nifong... therefore, he committed criminal acts (fraudulent autopsy report and perjury) for the purpose of trumping up the false murder charge against Mangum. It is obvious that he has received immunity from the authorities and preferential media treatment... How else would you explain the failure of the Governor's Office, the NC Attorney General's Office, and District Attorney's Offices to refuse to look into complaints of his alleged criminality in Mangum's case?

And, like Mangum's turncoat attorney, the defense expert witness Dr. Christena L. Roberts, was equally a traitor to her client. Dr. Roberts knows which side of her toast is buttered, so I am sure there was much incentive (implicit or explicit) that colored her written report... which Mangum's attorneys did their best to keep Crystal from receiving.

Hope this answers your questions. Let me know if more enlightenment is required.; April 22, 2017 at 6:08 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You have 254 days left to exonerate and free Mangum in 2017. It has been 5 weeks and 3 days since you predicted that Mangum would be released within a matter of weeks.

It has been 38 days since the Ides of March 2017, 67 days since February 14, 2017, 112 days since the end of 2016, 295 days since the end of June 2016, 363 days since April 24, 2016, 403 days since the Ides of March 2016, 1,246 days since Mangum was convicted of murdering Reginald Daye and 3,597 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred. Mangum is scheduled to be released from prison in 3,233 days.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; April 22, 2017 at 6:30 AM
Anonymous said...: Halo, Sidney, Halo.; April 22, 2017 at 6:31 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous Anonymous said...
You believe the letter was totally false, but does Crystal? If she has her attorney lying to her, in writing, she'd have a solid complaint against him. What you believe is irrelevant, the truth matters, and it seems likely the letter contains the truth. And if you aren't trying to hide it, repost it.

Hah! Why should I try to hide Meier's letter? The reason I don't post many things is because of the time it takes for such an endeavor. Because I believe the Meier letter is so outrageous, I have taken the time to prepare and upload it. It can be accessed by clicking on the link below:

CLICK to access.; April 22, 2017 at 7:00 AM
Anonymous said...: Sidney Harr:

"Recognizing an esophageal intubation due to a patient going into cardiac arrest is not "timely" intervention. The medical staff was alerted of a possible esophageal intubation by the end-tidal CO2 reading which was negative. That is why they performed a visual assessment with the laryngoscope... however, they misinterpreted it as being placed in the trachea instead of the esophagus."

That they did a direct laryngoscopy is evidence they did recognize the problem with the tube and made an attempt to deal with it. According to Dr. Roberts, the problem with the laryngoscopy was that the vomitus obscured the upper airway. That there was a bad outcome in this event does not add up to medical malpractice. I say again, you are a total clinical incompetent and your opinion means nothing.

"Also, the reason Daye was moved to the Surgical Intensive Care Unit was because of his severe agitation... not because of a "suspected infection." The bottom line, is that had Daye not been intubated in his esophagus and it allowed to remain there for a significant amount of time, he would never have been brain dead. And, it was his brain death that led to him electively being removed from life-support... which was the direct cause of his death. Had Daye been properly intubated initially, he would have survived his hospital stay."

So you again document you are a total clinical incompetent. The records you illegally posted said that Reginald Daye's symptoms were fever, tachycardia and disorientation. Those are symptoms of a fulminant infection. And if you can not recognize that a patient who suffered a laceration of the colon is at risk of an intra abdominal infection, you again document you are a complete clinical incompetent. Maybe you should try something I suggested to your even more incompetent Kenny, come up with a citation of some article in a medical journal that documents that delerium tremens excludes the possibility of an infection.

More documentation of your total clinical incompetence. Reginald Daye vomited and aspirated because the treating physicians put contrast into his stomach via an NG tube. One does not administer intra gastric contrast for agitation. One does administer it if one is doing a CT scan to rule out an intra abdominal infection. Reginald Daye was at risk of intra abdominal infection because Crystal stabbed him ad lacerated his colon. The intra gastric contrast, the vomitin, the aspiration and the failed intubation would have never happened had Crystal not stabbed him. All those events do not relieve Crystal of criminal liability for his death. And your total clinical incompetence does not change that.; April 22, 2017 at 9:08 AM
Anonymous said...: Sidney Harr:

"Naturally, I disagree with A Lawyer and Walt on this point. I believe that the jurors related to Duke University and/or its hospital should have been dismissed for cause. Even if not for cause, they were definitely worthy of a peremptory challenge. There are many reasons."

Your qualifications to render an opinion in a legal matter are less than your qualifications to render an opinion in a clinical matter, as is documented by all the frivolous, non meritorious lawsuits you have filed.; April 22, 2017 at 9:11 AM
Anonymous said...: Sidney Harr;

"First, Duke University and its lacrosse team were brought under a shameful national spotlight because of 2006 accusations of sexual assault by Crystal Mangum."

Wrong!!!

The Lacrosse team were brought under national scrutiny, first, because Crystal FALSELY accused them of raping her. You may resort to saying again, no one ever proved Crystal lied. You have never proved Crystal ever told the truth. Second, corrupt Nifong decided to prosecute innocent men, even though he had no evidence that a crime ever happened, even though he had evidence that the men he had indicted for rape could not have committed the crime Crystal described.; April 22, 2017 at 9:16 AM
Anonymous said...: Sidney Harr:

"Mangum's contention that malpractice by Duke Hospital staff was responsible for Daye's brain death is germane as to whether or not Ms. Mangum or Duke is responsible for Daye's ultimate death."

Mangum's contention that malpractice by Duke was responsible for Reginald Daye's death has to be more than a contention. It would have to be established by expert medical testimony that malpractice occurred. You are no medical expert.

And again, the event which resulted in Reginald Daye's death happened because Reginald Daye was placed at risk of an intra abdominal infection. He was placed at risk of an intra abdominal infection because Crystal stabbed him and lacerated his colon. Even if there had been malpractice, it would not have relieved Crystal of criminal liability for Reginald Daye's death.

I add, your belief that Reginald Daye was not at risk of an intra abdominal infection, and that in a patient subjected to that risk, if that patient develops DTs, that excludes the possibility of an intra abdominal infection all show you are no Medical expert.; April 22, 2017 at 9:31 AM
Anonymous said...: Sidney Harr:

"There is no way that Duke employees would risk their livelihood by finding Mangum innocent, so turncoat Dan Meier assured that there would be no acquittal in Mangum's case when he allowed the three jurors to be seated."

More documentation you are a delusional megalomaniacal clinical and legal incompetent.; April 22, 2017 at 9:33 AM
Anonymous said...: Sdney Harr:

"It's obvious that Nichols would attribute Daye's death to Mangum because he did not want to end up like Mike Nifong... therefore, he committed criminal acts (fraudulent autopsy report and perjury) for the purpose of trumping up the false murder charge against Mangum."

It takes mote than the unsupported opinion of a delusional megalomaniacal total legal and medical incompetent to establish criminality on the part of Dr. Nichols.

Your opinions about whether or not Crystal was raped, your opinion that Shan Carter acted in self defense when he chased down and killed Tyrone Baker show you can not recognize criminality.; April 22, 2017 at 9:37 AM
Anonymous said...: Sidney Harr:

" It is obvious that he has received immunity from the authorities and preferential media treatment... How else would you explain the failure of the Governor's Office, the NC Attorney General's Office, and District Attorney's Offices to refuse to look into complaints of his alleged criminality in Mangum's case?"

No it is not obvious.

This is but another example of how incompetent you are as a legal advocate. You are asserting. You must prove. What else could it be, which is the essence of your argument, is not evidence of anything. In your frivolous, non meritorious lawsuits against Duke, you said that they discriminated against you and your evidence was, what else could it have been.

I say again, the opinion of a total legal incompetent establishes nothing, other than that you are a total legal incompetent.; April 22, 2017 at 9:42 AM
Anonymous said...: Sidney Harr:

"the defense expert witness Dr. Christena L. Roberts, was equally a traitor to her client. Dr. Roberts knows which side of her toast is buttered, so I am sure there was much incentive (implicit or explicit) that colored her written report"

Which is just the latest of many unsupported uncorroborated allegations you have made. Are you really so delusional you believe whatever you uncorroborated allegation you make should just be taken at face value?

All your uncorroborated allegations are just proof that you can not prove your allegations. Do you really believe you can get Crystal's conviction overturned with just making uncorroborated allegations?; April 22, 2017 at 9:53 AM
Anonymous said...: Sidney Harr:

"Because I believe the Meier letter is so outrageous, I have taken the time to prepare and upload it. It can be accessed by clicking on the link below:"

How about you specify what was outrageous about Mr. Meier's letter rather than just making another uncorroborated allegation.; April 22, 2017 at 9:57 AM
Anonymous said...: Halo, Sidney, Halo.; April 22, 2017 at 12:48 PM
Anonymous said...: What in the letter is false and outrageous? And, again, ask Walt or A Lawyer - if Meier is lying to his client, especially in writing, that's a serious issue the Bar would address. The fact you claim it is false, but Crystsl does not, is telling.; April 22, 2017 at 1:28 PM
Anonymous said...: kenhyderal will provide us with a complete analysis of the letter tomorrow.; April 22, 2017 at 4:10 PM
Anonymous said...: Halo, kenhyderal, Halo.; April 22, 2017 at 4:23 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny is going to point to a letter written over a year ago, and in response to a letter from Crystal, and clIm he knows Meier still lurks here, and his lack of a response to Kenny is proof he's scared.; April 22, 2017 at 4:50 PM
kenhyderal said...: Huh?; April 22, 2017 at 9:28 PM
kenhyderal said...: Dr. Anonymous. I have said to you for years that a post-surgical infection was a distinct possibility. However, it's something that did not occur, at least it was never documented to have occurred. The presumptive diagnosis was delirium tremens. Do you disagree with that? Do you maintain that there was, not just the possibility of, a fulminating infection? Do you have an explanation as to why, if it was there, it was never documented? If, as you assume it was there, why was the comatose Daye, who was rendered brain dead by suspected medical malpractice, not given any treatment? Why did Dr. Nichols not mention esophageal intubation in his autopsy? Should a cause of death not include the chain of events between the initiating event and the terminal cause of death. Can a ME skip over the entire chain of events? (ie.She stabbed him he died) Not according to the CDC protocol for Death Certificates.; April 22, 2017 at 9:51 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"Dr. Anonymous. I have said to you for years that a post-surgical infection was a distinct possibility."

No you haven't. For years you have been saying only that DTs were the cause of the post op symptoms observed in Reginald Daye, the ONLY cause of the symptoms.

"However, it's something that did not occur, at least it was never documented to have occurred."

Actually that statement is meaningless. Reginald Daye suffered a penetrating injury of his colon, inflicted by Crystal, not in self defense as you and Sidney try to claim. That was followed by aN unavoidable prolonged exposure of his abdominal cavity to colonic contamination. That put him at risk of an intra abdominal infection, and that risk was still there post operatively, it was still there even if he had developed DTs. I say again, I am speaking from hands on experience, something neither you nor Sidney have.

"The presumptive diagnosis was delirium tremens. Do you disagree with that?"

No. Do you disagree with what Dr. Roberts reported, that Mr. Saye was not responding to treatment for DTs. If you did have a modicum of clinical expertise you would recognize that something else might, and I repeat might be going on, that other process being an intra abdominal infection. It was incumbent on the part of the treating physicians to evaluate him for that. Had they not evaluated him for that, that WOULD have been malpractice.

"Do you maintain that there was, not just the possibility of, a fulminating infection?"

Read what is above. Your statement indicates you do believe an intra abdominal infection was not a possibility.

"Do you have an explanation as to why, if it was there, it was never documented?"

Yes. The catastrophic event from which he died occurred while he was being evaluated for an infection and he died before a definite determination could be made. The risk of infection, the need to be evaluated for infection were there because Crystal stabbed him and lacerated his colon.

"If, as you assume it was there, why was the comatose Daye, who was rendered brain dead by suspected medical malpractice, not given any treatment?"

Reginald Daye was rendered brain dead from a complication of treatment, treatment rendered necessary when Crystal stabbed him and put him at risk of an abdominal infection, which complication did not rise to the level of medical malpractice. I repeat, it takes the opinion of an expert medical witness to establish medical malpractice. Neither you nor Sidney qualify as an expert medical witness. How do you know he was not treated for infection? Was he on antibiotics? If he was, he was being treated.

"Why did Dr. Nichols not mention esophageal intubation in his autopsy?"

Probably because by the time of the autopsy the endotracheal tube had been removed and Dr. Nichols would not have any reason to mention that in his autopsy report. And the esophageal intubation occurred as a complication of evaluation for an intra abdominal infection.

"Should a cause of death not include the chain of events between the initiating event and the terminal cause of death. Can a ME skip over the entire chain of events? (i.e.She stabbed him he died) Not according to the CDC protocol for Death Certificates".

Was that on the autopsy report itself. As I recall, Dr. Nichols made that statement in response to a question, a summary of what his autopsy findings were. In that context, what the CDC says about Death Certificates was not applicable in tat situation. At that time Dr. Nichols was not filling out a death certificate.

I close by saying what I have already said to Sidney. You are a clinical incompetent, and your opinions, based on your incompetence, are irrelevant.; April 23, 2017 at 3:57 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

You maintain that Reginald Daye "was rendered brain dead by suspected medical malpractice".

Who suspected medical malpractice? In a couple of words, Sidney Harr>

I remind you that the opinion of medical experts is required to establish medical malpractice. Sidney Harr is no medical expert.; April 23, 2017 at 4:57 AM
Anonymous said...: Halo, kenhyderal, Halo.; April 23, 2017 at 4:58 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You have 253 days left to exonerate and free Mangum in 2017. It has been 5 weeks and 4 days since you predicted that Mangum would be released within a matter of weeks.

It has been 39 days since the Ides of March 2017, 68 days since February 14, 2017, 113 days since the end of 2016, 296 days since the end of June 2016, 364 days since April 24, 2016, 404 days since the Ides of March 2016, 1,247 days since Mangum was convicted of murdering Reginald Daye and 3,598 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred. Mangum is scheduled to be released from prison in 3,232 days.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; April 23, 2017 at 5:39 AM
Anonymous said...: kenhyderal = troll; April 23, 2017 at 7:58 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny is gonna say Dr. Roberts never said that about DTs (even though it's in her report). He will also refuse to talk to her, or anyone who has talked to her to see if that's what she meant - he will just insist he is right, and then say that if he were wrong, Meier, who he knows reads this board, should come on and tell him he's wrong.

Kenny is the laziest abuser in the world - at least Sid does things he pretends will be helpful - Kenny won't even do that. He will just type and whine.

Oh, and then claim that because this is anonymous it isn't true.

Kenny, we all know what you are.; April 23, 2017 at 8:06 AM
Anonymous said...: Stop feeding the troll.; April 23, 2017 at 9:51 AM
Walt said...: Sid wrote: "Naturally, I disagree with A Lawyer and Walt on this point."

While I don't know about A Lawyer, I do know that I have picked many more juries than you. I have also learned the law about jury selection and I think I have a good grasp on the science. So, your belief based on zero experience, no facts, no science and no law remains nothing but an unfounded belief.

"I believe that the jurors related to Duke University...."

Your unfounded belief is not worth the bandwidth used to propagate it.

"First, Duke University and its lacrosse team were brought under a shameful national spotlight because of 2006 [FALSE] accusations of sexual assault by Crystal Mangum." FITFY

"An innocent verdict on the murder/manslaughter charge, clearly places responsibility for Daye's death on Duke."

There you go again seeking to use a litigation to which someone is not a party to fix blame on them. There is a real problem here, your unwillingness to learn.

"And, like Mangum's turncoat attorney, the defense expert witness Dr. Christena L. Roberts, was equally a traitor to her client."

Telling the truth is what Mangum hired Roberts for. If she didn't like the opinion, she could have sought another expert. But no! You were the turncoat who revealed the defense expert agreed with the state, thus foreclosing any possibility of finding, let alone using someone with a differing opinion. You can lie to yourself Sid, but the only turncoat in this whole sorry saga is you.

With friends like Sid, Crystal doesn't need any enemies.

Walt-in-Durham; April 23, 2017 at 12:33 PM
Anonymous said...: Just because someone works for Duke or knows someone who does doesn't mean they are automatically biased in favor of that entity. Plus, despite Sid/Kenny claims, Duke was not a party to the action.; April 23, 2017 at 1:24 PM
Anonymous said...: Halo, Anonymous, Halo.; April 23, 2017 at 2:41 PM
Anonymous said...: dr. harr the evil duke trolls at this website are cyberbullies and should be banned from your blog so that we can discuss the points you make in your posts which show that the durham system needs reform and is controlled by duke and the powers that be who only care about themselves and who have conflicts of interest.; April 23, 2017 at 3:15 PM
Anonymous said...: Sidney Harr or Kenhyderal or both posting anonymously again trying to create the illusion that they have support.; April 23, 2017 at 3:41 PM
Anonymous said...: Halo, Ubes, Halo.; April 23, 2017 at 5:57 PM
guiowen said...: Hello, Crybully Tinfoil!; April 23, 2017 at 8:08 PM
Anonymous said...: Halo, G, Halo.; April 24, 2017 at 3:15 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You have 252 days left to exonerate and free Mangum in 2017. It has been 5 weeks and 5 days since you predicted that Mangum would be released within a matter of weeks.

It has been 40 days since the Ides of March 2017, 69 days since February 14, 2017, 114 days since the end of 2016, 297 days since the end of June 2016, 365 days since April 24, 2016, 405 days since the Ides of March 2016, 1,248 days since Mangum was convicted of murdering Reginald Daye and 3,599 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred. Mangum is scheduled to be released from prison in 3,231 days.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; April 24, 2017 at 3:46 AM
Anonymous said...: g stop copying my posts and then trolling me like the evil duke troll that you are who can't listen to a lawyer and stop being an evil duke troll. what can't you understand about my posts when I tell you to stop being a cyberbully and do not troll me again. and I mean never. do you understand that word you evil duke troll?

Blah

Blah

Blah; April 24, 2017 at 3:59 AM
guiowen said...: Crybully cry!; April 24, 2017 at 5:16 AM
Anonymous said...: Sidney or Kenny or both continue to post anonymously, still hoping to delude the readership into believing they have support for their views.; April 24, 2017 at 7:15 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous Anonymous said...
Sidney Harr or Kenhyderal or both posting anonymously again trying to create the illusion that they have support.

Hah! Not necessary. Already have support of the two most important people... the Man from Nazareth and Lady Justice.; April 24, 2017 at 8:39 AM
Anonymous said...: Sidney Harr:

"Hah! Not necessary. Already have support of the two most important people... the Man from Nazareth and Lady Justice."

HAH!!! yourself. This is the most blasphemous piece of bull shit you have spouted yet.

When did the man from Nazareth ever support falsely accusing innocent men of rape or any other non existent crimes? Never.

When has the man from Nazareth ever passed off the felony murder of an innocent child, perpetrated by a drug dealer who was chasing down and killing another drug dealer, as an unfortunate accidental consequence of self defense? Never.

And considering Micah 6:8, when would the Man from Nazareth condone the wrongful prosecution of innocent men for a crime which never happened? Never.

And regarding Lady Justice, Lady Justice would never have supported the wrongful prosecution of innocent men for a crime which never happened. Your lady is not Lady Justice but Lay Lynch Mob.

How have you shown that Crystal ever told the truth when she claimed she was raped. That no one has proven Crystal lied is meaningless and carries no legal weight. Your repetition of that mantra is but another attempt on your part to Bullshit your way through and around facts you do not like.; April 24, 2017 at 9:08 AM
Anonymous said...: Didn't the Man from Nazareth also say you need to respect laws? You refuse to follow them, or even attempt to learn about them - even when pointed out to you. Even he knows you are a joke.; April 24, 2017 at 10:50 AM
A Lawyer said...: The racist, homophobic troll or trolls at 4:25 and 4:26 A.M. today need to get lost.; April 24, 2017 at 11:46 AM
Anonymous said...: Yet, oddly, the comments don't seem at all out of place on this shlog.

Enough with the virtue signaling. I do not condone comments like the ones A Lawyer complains of, but let's be real: Sid and Kenny invite these sort of commenters and comments with their antics. They may have even authored one or more of them. In any event, it's Sid's problem to deal with. The rest of us should just ignore it. Attention - whether it be positive or negative - is what people who make comments like this crave and attention is what they should be denied.

That's my two cents worth on the subject.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; April 24, 2017 at 2:18 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous A Lawyer said...
The racist, homophobic troll or trolls at 4:25 and 4:26 A.M. today need to get lost.

Hey, A Lawyer.

I want to thank you, and others, such as kenhyderal and others who help police this blog site. (I did delete the two comments that were objected to by A Lawyer.) Although I am exceptionally tolerant (I believe), and not heavy-handed when it comes to censuring comments, there are some communications which cross the line of acceptability.

I respect Abe's view, but I find it hard to see how kenhyderal and myself are enticing hateful and vile speech. I think it fair to say that kenhyderal and I discuss the issues of the Mangum and other criminal cases in what we believe to be objectively and honestly in a manner that is decent and non-inflammatory. Emotions may rise high in cases related to Mangum, Nifong, and the Duke Lacrosse case, but in no way are we inciting vicious speech. Such dialogue benefits no one and is a waste in this forum in which ideas and views can be discussed and debated to the enlightenment of all.; April 24, 2017 at 6:32 PM
Anonymous said...: fy g you evil duke troll and cyberbully who will someday pay for his constant trolling on behalf of the duke gang. All i have to say to you is blah blah blah so go ahead and copy my posts and troll me for your evil duke pleasure; April 24, 2017 at 7:11 PM
guiowen said...: CryBully cry!
You make Ken Edwards sigh:
He's old enough to know better.
So CryBully cry!; April 24, 2017 at 7:52 PM
guiowen said...: So, Sidney,
Why don't you delete Crybully Tinfoil's 7:11 comment (and others)?; April 24, 2017 at 7:56 PM
Anonymous said...: Sidney Harr:

"I think it fair to say that kenhyderal and I discuss the issues of the Mangum and other criminal cases in what we believe to be objectively and honestly in a manner that is decent and non-inflammatory."

How is it being objective and honest when you refer to Crystal Mangum as the "victim/accusr" in the "Duke Rape Case" when you can not prove she told the truth about being raped.

The DUKE RAPE HOAX was all about a corrupt DA prosecuting innocent men of what was a non existent crime just so he could win an election and pad his pension.; April 25, 2017 at 2:39 AM
Anonymous said...: dr harr knows that it is you g the evil duke troll who harasses me like a cyberbully and copies my posts so that you can troll me constantly and then sings the same song over and over about ken edwards and so dr harr will be deleting your posts and then you can find a new blog where you can act like the evil duke troll that you are; April 25, 2017 at 3:29 AM
Anonymous said...: Sidney Harr or Kenhyderal or both again posting anonymously in a futile attempt to fool people into believing they have support.; April 25, 2017 at 3:34 AM
Anonymous said...: Sidney Harr:

"Emotions may rise high in cases related to Mangum, Nifong, and the Duke Lacrosse case, but in no way are we inciting vicious speech."

So you say it is not vicious to accuse innocent men of a ctime which never happened, which you do each and every time you post that Crystal was the "victim/accuser in the "Duke Rape Case".; April 25, 2017 at 3:38 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You have 251 days left to exonerate and free Mangum in 2017. It has been 5 weeks and 6 days since you predicted that Mangum would be released within a matter of weeks.

It has been 41 days since the Ides of March 2017, 70 days since February 14, 2017, 115 days since the end of 2016, 298 days since the end of June 2016, 366 days since April 24, 2016, 406 days since the Ides of March 2016, 1,249 days since Mangum was convicted of murdering Reginald Daye and 3,600 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred. Mangum is scheduled to be released from prison in 3,230 days.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; April 25, 2017 at 5:13 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

Outrageous, inflammatory and ingnorant statements invite outrageous, inflammatory and ignorant replies. It's like putting cheese on the floor and then complaining that the mice took it.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; April 25, 2017 at 5:17 AM
guiowen said...: CryBully cry!
You make Ken Edwards sigh:
He's old enough to know better.
So CryBully cry!; April 25, 2017 at 6:01 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

I don't know if I was clear in my post at 5:17 AM. What I meant to say is that making the sort of outrageous, inflammatory, vile and ignorant statements, insults and accusations that you and kenny routinely make on this website and then wondering why they elicit outrageous, ignorant, vile and inflammatory comments is akin to putting cheese on the floor and then blaming the mice for eating it.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; April 25, 2017 at 8:09 PM
kenhyderal said...: Outrageous, inflammatory, vile and ignorant statements, insults and accusations, eh? That's the way you characterize our expressed belief that Crystal was raped at the Duke Lacrosse Party and that she stabbed Reginald Daye in self defence. Given that standard we could, likewise, characterize your beliefs about those events. We believe we are holding ourselves to a higher standard of discourse so show us examples to the contrary of the charges you made; April 25, 2017 at 9:53 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"Outrageous, inflammatory, vile and ignorant statements, insults and accusations, eh? That's the way you characterize our expressed belief that Crystal was raped at the Duke Lacrosse Party"

Wrong. What is "outrageous, inflammatory, vile and ignorant" is your belief is that innocent men raped Crystal. What makes it "outrageous, inflammatory, vile and ignorant is that there is zero evidence Crystal was ever raped, that Crystal ever told the truth when she claimed she was raped.

"and that she stabbed Reginald Daye in self defence."

Wrong again. Crystal murdered Reginald Daye.

"Given that standard we could, likewise, characterize your beliefs about those events."

Wrong a third time. Said beliefs, that Crystal lied about being raped and that she murdered Reginald Daye are more than beliefs, they are facts. That she was raped, that she acted in self defense are not facts but delusional wishful thinking on your part.

"We believe we are holding ourselves to a higher standard of discourse so show us examples to the contrary of the charges you made".

I am not making the charges but it is self evident that calling innocent men rapists is "outrageous, inflammatory, vile and ignorant".; April 26, 2017 at 3:17 AM
Anonymous said...: g what part of stop trolling me don't you understand? why do you continue to act like a cyberbully and an evil duke troll who posts his little song about ken edwards and who plays drinking games with his friends in the the evil duke troll gang and who doesn't listen to a lawyer when he says to strop trolling me? you are a seriously evil duke troll and a cyberbully and i am telling you for the last time to stop trolling and bullying me like the evil duke troll troll that you are and that you will always be

Blah

Blah

Blah; April 26, 2017 at 3:30 AM
Anonymous said...: Sidney Harr or Kenhyderal or both posting anonymously again posting anonymously trying to create the illusion that they have support.; April 26, 2017 at 4:02 AM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous April 26, 2017 at 3:30 AM:

"i am telling you for the last time to stop trolling and bullying me like the evil duke troll troll that you are and that you will always be"

It is doubtful that this is the last time you will put another idiotic post on J4N.; April 26, 2017 at 4:05 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

I see, again, you believe in the concept of alternative facts, just like Donald Trump.; April 26, 2017 at 4:07 AM
guiowen said...: Crybully Tinfoil,
I'm pleased that you will stop telling me what to do. Thank you!; April 26, 2017 at 4:31 AM
Anonymous said...: kenny:

It's not your beliefs per se that are offensive, but the way you assert those beliefs (and discredit those who hold opposing views).

You and Sid need to find ways to express your beliefs and engage others that do not rely on (a) outrageous, inflammatory, vile and ignorant statements, (b) baseless accusations against those that hold opposing views, and/or (c) demonstrably false statements and easily exposed logical fallacies.

It's not your supposed beliefs that expose your bad faith and motives. It's the manner in which you express them and the arguments you use to advance them that give you away.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; April 26, 2017 at 4:42 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You have 250 days left to exonerate and free Mangum in 2017. It has been 6 weeks since you predicted that Mangum would be released within a matter of weeks.

It has been 42 days since the Ides of March 2017, 71 days since February 14, 2017, 116 days since the end of 2016, 299 days since the end of June 2016, 367 days since April 24, 2016, 407 days since the Ides of March 2016, 1,250 days since Mangum was convicted of murdering Reginald Daye and 3,601 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred. Mangum is scheduled to be released from prison in 3,229 days.

It's still early, but this year is beginning to look an awful lot like last year in terms of your predictions regarding Mangum's imminent release.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; April 26, 2017 at 5:55 AM
kenhyderal said...: Abe your charges are absolutely baseless. As I said, what you find ignorant and offensive are our voiced opinions, that differ from yours. Both Dr. Harr and myself are very often subjected to discrediting slander; something you, of course, find quite reasonable because, those that slander us agree with your views.; April 26, 2017 at 9:39 AM
Walt said...: Abe wrote: "It's still early, but this year is beginning to look an awful lot like last year in terms of your predictions regarding Mangum's imminent release."

Abe has taken the measure of the man and found him lacking. I concur.

Walt-in-Durham; April 26, 2017 at 10:42 AM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: " As I said, what you find ignorant and offensive are our voiced opinions,...." backed up by a lack of facts and a willful ignorance of the law. With friends like you two, Crystal doesn't need any enemies.

Walt-in-Durham; April 26, 2017 at 10:44 AM
A Lawyer said...: It's still early, but this year is beginning to look an awful lot like last year in terms of your predictions regarding Mangum's imminent release.

That is true. I expect the court to very soon deny all three of Mangum's pending motions.; April 26, 2017 at 10:45 AM
Anonymous said...: kenny whined:

"Abe your charges are absolutely baseless. As I said, what you find ignorant and offensive are our voiced opinions, that differ from yours."

It's not your opinions, but the way you express them and the tactics and methods you use to advance them that are offensive. They aren't merely unpersuasive; they are dishonest and repugnant. It is why they have been repeatedly and resoundingly rejected by everyone involved in Mangum's case, or who might be in a position to assist her.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; April 26, 2017 at 11:54 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"Abe your charges are absolutely baseless. As I said, what you find ignorant and offensive are our voiced opinions, that differ from yours. Both Dr. Harr and myself are very often subjected to discrediting slander; something you, of course, find quite reasonable because, those that slander us agree with your views."

From: http://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=1969

"slander. n. oral defamation, in which someone tells one or more persons an untruth about another, which untruth will harm the reputation of the person defamed. Slander is a civil wrong (tort) and can be the basis for a lawsuit."

What are people saying about you which is false and which harms your eputation?

What is true is that both of you persist in saying that the Lacrosse team players are guilty of raping Crystal in the face of the fact that neither of you have ever produced any evidence that the crime ever happened.

The people guilty of slander are you and Sidney.; April 26, 2017 at 12:51 PM
Anonymous said...: I am not posting to tell you to stop trolling me g but only to tell dr Hart's readers that you are an evil duke troll and cyberbully who has serious problems and who is not as witty as he thinks when he copies my posts and then trolls me and sings his ken Edwards song over and over thinking that shows how witty he is when all it shows is that he is an evil duke troll and a cyberbully who dr harr should ban from this blog; April 26, 2017 at 3:32 PM
kenhyderal said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; April 26, 2017 at 3:37 PM
kenhyderal said...: Abe said "They aren't merely unpersuasive; they are dishonest and repugnant." (referring to the way you express your opinions and the tactics and methods you use to advance them that are offensive"................ Can you give an example of me expressing my opinion in a dishonest and repugnant manner?; April 26, 2017 at 3:39 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"Abe said "They aren't merely unpersuasive; they are dishonest and repugnant." (referring to the way you express your opinions and the tactics and methods you use to advance them that are offensive"................ Can you give an example of me expressing my opinion in a dishonest and repugnant manner?"

Not Abe.

Falsely accusing innocent men of a crime is expressing yourself in a way that is repulsive, dishonest and offensive. It is even more so when you do so when having zero evidence that the crime of which you accuse them ever happened.; April 26, 2017 at 4:40 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: guiowen said...
So, Sidney,
Why don't you delete Crybully Tinfoil's 7:11 comment (and others)?

gui, mon ami, I don't know which comment you are referencing. If you provide a date along with the time, I will take a look. But, as a rule, I don't believe Tinfoil's comments have been particularly offensive... as I recollect.; April 27, 2017 at 4:32 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous Anonymous said...
Sidney Harr:

"I think it fair to say that kenhyderal and I discuss the issues of the Mangum and other criminal cases in what we believe to be objectively and honestly in a manner that is decent and non-inflammatory."

How is it being objective and honest when you refer to Crystal Mangum as the "victim/accusr" in the "Duke Rape Case" when you can not prove she told the truth about being raped.

The DUKE RAPE HOAX was all about a corrupt DA prosecuting innocent men of what was a non existent crime just so he could win an election and pad his pension.

The fact is that Crystal has been described as a "victim/accuser" with respect to the Duke Lacrosse case by others in articles written in publications. I don't see what you find so disagreeable in that labeling. She was a "victim" in the case (alleging being sexually assaulted), and she was the accuser. Probably in most instances of alleged sexual assault, the victim is the accuser as well.; April 27, 2017 at 4:40 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous Anonymous said...
Sidney Harr:

"Emotions may rise high in cases related to Mangum, Nifong, and the Duke Lacrosse case, but in no way are we inciting vicious speech."

So you say it is not vicious to accuse innocent men of a ctime which never happened, which you do each and every time you post that Crystal was the "victim/accuser in the "Duke Rape Case"

Using the term vicious with respect to comments made on this site, is in reference to the civility of the remarks... whether or not they are in good taste. It has nothing to do with the merits of the comments. A comment in disagreement with an opinion need not necessarily be vile... its argument can be made civilly. That is the point.; April 27, 2017 at 4:45 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sid:

Outrageous, inflammatory and ingnorant statements invite outrageous, inflammatory and ignorant replies. It's like putting cheese on the floor and then complaining that the mice took it.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL

Hah, Abe. I love your analogy, but unfortunately it is not relevant to the issue in play. Specifically, the comments by kenhyderal, myself, and others who may have a point of view differing from yours, does not automatically make them outrageous, inflammatory, or ignorant. However, even statements that may be considered outrageous, inflammatory, or ignorant does not automatically categorize them as being vile, uncivil, and uncouth. With that inconsideration, even outrageous or inflammatory statements does not give justification to replies that are foul and epithet-laced.; April 27, 2017 at 4:52 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You have 249 days left to exonerate and free Mangum in 2017. It has been 6 weeks and 1 day since you predicted that Mangum would be released within a matter of weeks.

It has been 43 days since the Ides of March 2017, 72 days since February 14, 2017, 117 days since the end of 2016, 300 days since the end of June 2016, 368 days since April 24, 2016, 408 days since the Ides of March 2016, 1,251 days since Mangum was convicted of murdering Reginald Daye and 3,602 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred. Mangum is scheduled to be released from prison in 3,228 days.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; April 27, 2017 at 4:53 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous A Lawyer said...
It's still early, but this year is beginning to look an awful lot like last year in terms of your predictions regarding Mangum's imminent release.

That is true. I expect the court to very soon deny all three of Mangum's pending motions.

Hey, A Lawyer.

I can tell that you're worried that some of Mangum's motions will be granted. The fact that the magistrate judge received the motions more than two weeks ago shows that she is giving them serious consideration. That is something that has never happened before... mainly because Mangum's briefs have been weakly drafted by her turncoat legal representatives. If her motions were so lacking in merit, they would've been dismissed long ago.

I see at least two of them being granted... the Motion to compel the NC State Bar to make a ruling might be a challenging one procedurally. I don't know, as I am not legally trained, but I believe it has a chance.; April 27, 2017 at 5:02 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sid:

You have 249 days left to exonerate and free Mangum in 2017. It has been 6 weeks and 1 day since you predicted that Mangum would be released within a matter of weeks.

It has been 43 days since the Ides of March 2017, 72 days since February 14, 2017, 117 days since the end of 2016, 300 days since the end of June 2016, 368 days since April 24, 2016, 408 days since the Ides of March 2016, 1,251 days since Mangum was convicted of murdering Reginald Daye and 3,602 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred. Mangum is scheduled to be released from prison in 3,228 days.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL

Abe, there's no way in hades that Crystal Mangum is going to spend thousands of days in jail. Realistically, get used to the notion that it will be a matter of days, or a few weeks at the most. I have every confidence that soon the judge will grant her Motion to be released from state custody.; April 27, 2017 at 5:05 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid said:

"Abe, there's no way in hades that Crystal Mangum is going to spend thousands of days in jail."

She is closing in on 2,000 days already. (I believe Mangum was in jail for 500 or so days prior to her conviction, and she has served 1,251 days since her conviction.) She is going to serve her full sentence.

"Realistically, get used to the notion that it will be a matter of days, or a few weeks at the most."

I recall you saying substantially the same thing 6 weeks and one day ago. I'll add this new deadline/prediction to the countdown and we'll see how that goes.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; April 27, 2017 at 5:40 AM
Walt said...: Sid wrote: "Probably in most instances of alleged sexual assault, the victim is the accuser as well."

Except she was not the victim. She was the false accuser.

Consider yourself elucidated.

Walt-in-Durham; April 27, 2017 at 6:19 AM
Walt said...: Sid wrote: "Abe, there's no way in hades that Crystal Mangum is going to spend thousands of days in jail."

Sid, given your lack of experience, dearth of knowledge and failure prone track record, it is you who should get used to Crystal spending thousands of days more in jail.

"I have every confidence that soon the judge will grant her Motion to be released from state custody."

Based on what? Your lack of experience, your unwillingness to learn, your past failures? If Crystal is doing anything other than amusing herself with your ridiculous pleadings and briefs, she is deluding herself. Knowing Crystal the way I do, I suspect she is the one having the best laugh, at your expense. Though most of us who pass by this blog are a close second.

Walt-in-Durham; April 27, 2017 at 6:29 AM
Anonymous said...: Sidney Harr:

"The fact is that Crystal has been described as a 'victim/accuser' with respect to the Duke Lacrosse case by others in articles written in publications. I don't see what you find so disagreeable in that labeling. She was a "victim" in the case (alleging being sexually assaulted), and she was the accuser."

You omit the fact that she was the FALSE ACCUSER,which means she was the VICTIMIZER, nor the victim. That is what makes that labeling vicious and false.

"Probably in most instances of alleged sexual assault, the victim is the accuser as well."

Irrelevant statement as Crystal was not the victim of any sexual assault. You have produced zero evidence any sexual assault happened. You have produced zero evidence that Crystal ever told the truth when she claimed she had been raped, now, have you.; April 27, 2017 at 9:02 AM
Anonymous said...: Sidney Harr

"Using the term vicious with respect to comments made on this site, is in reference to the civility of the remarks... whether or not they are in good taste. It has nothing to do with the merits of the comments. A comment in disagreement with an opinion need not necessarily be vile... its argument can be made civilly. That is the point."

What is civil about falsely accusing innocent men of a crime? What makes that vicious is that you and Kenny accuse innocent men of the crime in the face of zero evidence the crime ever happened in the first place. That's the point.

You have produced zero evidence that Crystal ever told the truth, now, have you.; April 27, 2017 at 9:05 AM
Anonymous said...: Sidney Harr:

"Hah, Abe. I love your analogy, but unfortunately it is not relevant to the issue in play. Specifically, the comments by kenhyderal, myself, and others who may have a point of view differing from yours, does not automatically make them outrageous, inflammatory, or ignorant. However, even statements that may be considered outrageous, inflammatory, or ignorant does not automatically categorize them as being vile, uncivil, and uncouth. With that inconsideration, even outrageous or inflammatory statements does not give justification to replies that are foul and epithet-laced."

What makes your comments obnoxious and vicious, what makes Kenhyderal's comments obnoxious and vicious is not that you and Kenny have a different opinion. They are obnoxious and vicious because you accuse innocent men of perpetrating a crime, in the face of zero evidence that the crime ever happened.

You have provided zero evidence that Crystal ever told the truth when she claimed she had been raped, now, have you.; April 27, 2017 at 9:08 AM
Anonymous said...: Sidney Harr:

"I can tell that you're worried that some of Mangum's motions will be granted. The fact that the magistrate judge received the motions more than two weeks ago shows that she is giving them serious consideration. That is something that has never happened before... mainly because Mangum's briefs have been weakly drafted by her turncoat legal representatives. If her motions were so lacking in merit, they would've been dismissed long ago."

First the statement is irrelevant because Crystal's attorneys were not turncoats. Second, if her motions were meritorious they would have been granted.

"I see at least two of them being granted... the Motion to compel the NC State Bar to make a ruling might be a challenging one procedurally. I don't know, as I am not legally trained, but I believe it has a chance."

Which is an admission on your part that you are blind.; April 27, 2017 at 9:12 AM
Anonymous said...: Sidney Harr:

"Abe, there's no way in hades that Crystal Mangum is going to spend thousands of days in jail. Realistically, get used to the notion that it will be a matter of days, or a few weeks at the most. I have every confidence that soon the judge will grant her Motion to be released from state custody."

How many times since Crystal was convicted have you made that prediction? How many times has it come to pass?; April 27, 2017 at 9:13 AM
A Lawyer said...: Hey, A Lawyer.

I can tell that you're worried that some of Mangum's motions will be granted. The fact that the magistrate judge received the motions more than two weeks ago shows that she is giving them serious consideration.

I'm not worried at all. It matters nothing to me if Mangum is released or remains incarcerated. I post here to provide legal elucidation.

And so far, my predictions have been far more accurate than yours.; April 27, 2017 at 9:30 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You have 248 days left to exonerate and free Mangum in 2017. It has been 6 weeks and 2 days since you predicted that Mangum would be released within a matter of weeks. It has been one day since you said that "it will be a matter of days, or a few weeks at the most" before Mangum is released from state custody.

It has been 44 days since the Ides of March 2017, 73 days since February 14, 2017, 118 days since the end of 2016, 301 days since the end of June 2016, 369 days since April 24, 2016, 409 days since the Ides of March 2016, 1,252 days since Mangum was convicted of murdering Reginald Daye and 3,603 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred. Mangum is scheduled to be released from prison in 3,227 days.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; April 28, 2017 at 2:45 AM
Anonymous said...: that's right dr harr there is nothing wrong with my posts and you should be deleting the posts by the evil duke troll g who cannot stop trollling me like the evil duke troll and cyberbully that he is and always will be and which is very easy for your readers to see; April 28, 2017 at 3:20 AM
Anonymous said...: Sidney Harr:
Kenhyderal:

All this talk of differences of opinion about the Duke Lacrosse incident is irrelevant.

A crime was alleged by Crystal, a semen depositing gang rape. There are only two possible outcomes, the accused were guilty or the accused were innocent. For the accused to be guilty it has to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt that they did it, meaning and I say again, the prosecution has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Crystal told the truth and there is no evidence she ever told the truth.

So, when you talk about your different opinion, you are trying to bullshit your way around and through facts which do not mesh with your presumption of guilt, nothing more.

And presuming innocent men are guilty of a crime when there is no evidence the crime did happen, no evidence that the complaining witness ever told the truth, that IS vicious and obnoxious and, for hat matter, vindictive.; April 28, 2017 at 6:33 AM
guiowen said...: Sidney,
I was specifically referring to the anonymous posting at 7:11 p.m. on April 24 2017.
If you feel that's reasonable for your blog, then all I can say is too bad for you; that's why people don't take your blog seriously.; April 28, 2017 at 8:04 AM
A Lawyer said...: While we are making predictions, here are mine:
1. Mangum's three motions will all be denied.
2. Mangum's habeas corpus petition will be denied.
3. Dr. Harr's federal libel suit will be dismissed.
4. Dr. Harr's state libel suit will be dismissed.
5. All of the above will be affirmed on appeal.

Anyone want to make a side bet on whether my predictions or Dr. Harr's will prove to be more accurate?; April 28, 2017 at 8:07 AM
Walt said...: A Lawyer wrote:
"While we are making predictions, here are mine:
1. Mangum's three motions will all be denied.
2. Mangum's habeas corpus petition will be denied.
3. Dr. Harr's federal libel suit will be dismissed.
4. Dr. Harr's state libel suit will be dismissed.
5. All of the above will be affirmed on appeal."

I concur.

Walt-in-Durham; April 28, 2017 at 10:18 AM
Anonymous said...: "While we are making predictions, here are mine:
1. Mangum's three motions will all be denied.
2. Mangum's habeas corpus petition will be denied.
3. Dr. Harr's federal libel suit will be dismissed.
4. Dr. Harr's state libel suit will be dismissed.
5. All of the above will be affirmed on appeal."

A Lawyer and Walt:

Just for clarification, am I correct in my assumption that the dismissals and denials will be granted without a hearing?; April 28, 2017 at 11:47 AM
Anonymous said...: No. Federal Court can dismiss them without a hearing, the State Court would likely schedule a hearing - and that's up to the parties. Dr. Harr could schedule a hearing if he wanted to (he doesn't, of course), or the Defendants can. Otherwise the case sits in limbo. The Federal Court could just dismiss. So, 1, 2, 3, and 5 will all happen without a hearing. 4 will happen after a hearing.; April 28, 2017 at 12:27 PM
kenhyderal said...: Dr. ANONYMOUS SAID: "There are only two possible outcomes, the accused were guilty or the accused were innocent"........................... Don't you mean guilty, beyond a reasonable doubt, or not guilty.; April 28, 2017 at 1:31 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"Dr. ANONYMOUS SAID: "There are only two possible outcomes, the accused were guilty or the accused were innocent"........................... Don't you mean guilty, beyond a reasonable doubt, or not guilty."

More bullshit from Kenny trying to bullshit his way through and around facts which do not mesh with his guilt presuming wishful thinking.

In this case Not Guilty would not have been applicable. I repeat for dense Kenny. there was zero evidence that the crime ever happened and, as a matter of fact, not as a matter of opinion of the AG or of anyone else's opinion, they were innocent.

I remind dens Kenny he has provided zero evidence that a crime happened or that Crystal ever told the truth when she claimed she was raped.; April 28, 2017 at 1:39 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny:

As there was no evidence that a crime happened, there was nothing that justified taking them to trial.; April 28, 2017 at 1:42 PM
Anonymous said...: Udaman Ubes udaman.; April 28, 2017 at 5:27 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "As there was no evidence that a crime happened, there was nothing that justified taking them to trial:. ............................ Insufficient evidence was developed, due to a poor police investigation. There is doubt in the minds of many, that no sexual assault occurred, because, notes of the AG's investigation into the case are not made public. In order for the public, especially those in the minority community, to believe no crime took place, the complete investigation and not just the AG's conclusions based on what he claims the investigation found needs to be made public. You would think the innocent would benefit from this being done and Crystal the victim/accuser has no objection or trepidation over such a disclosure; April 29, 2017 at 8:54 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"Anonymous said: "As there was no evidence that a crime happened, there was nothing that justified taking them to trial:. ............................ Insufficient evidence was developed, due to a poor police investigation. There is doubt in the minds of many, that no sexual assault occurred, because, notes of the AG's investigation into the case are not made public. In order for the public, especially those in the minority community, to believe no crime took place, the complete investigation and not just the AG's conclusions based on what he claims the investigation found needs to be made public. You would think the innocent would benefit from this being done and Crystal the victim/accuser has no objection or trepidation over such a disclosure".

Kenny, Crystal had the option of filing a civil suit against the Lacrosse players, like the Brown and Goldman families did against OJ Simpson. Considering all the trial lawyers who are on TV advertising that they would fight for what you deserve, If Crystal had a case, any number of trial lawyers would have represented her on a contingency fee basis, meaning whether or not Crystal could have afforded an attorney would not have been a factor. That Crystal did not sue means, more than anything else, she did not have a case.

After she published her book she made public appearances in which she maintained she had been assaulted but she declined to answer any questions.

So Crystal had objections and trepidation over what would be disclosed about her rape allegations.

All this is another iteration of you trying to bullshit your way around and through facts which do not mesh with your guilt presuming wishful thinking. There was no crime.; April 29, 2017 at 10:44 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You have 247 days left to exonerate and free Mangum in 2017. It has been 6 weeks and 3 days since you predicted that Mangum would be released within a matter of weeks. It has been 2 days since you said that "it will be a matter of days, or a few weeks at the most" before Mangum is released from state custody.

It has been 45 days since the Ides of March 2017, 74 days since February 14, 2017, 119 days since the end of 2016, 302 days since the end of June 2016, 370 days since April 24, 2016, 410 days since the Ides of March 2016, 1,253 days since Mangum was convicted of murdering Reginald Daye and 3,604 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred. Mangum is scheduled to be released from prison in 3,226 days.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; April 29, 2017 at 12:43 PM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You have 246 days left to exonerate and free Mangum in 2017. It has been 6 weeks and 4 days since you predicted that Mangum would be released within a matter of weeks. It has been 3 days since you said that "it will be a matter of days, or a few weeks at the most" before Mangum is released from state custody.

It has been 46 days since the Ides of March 2017, 75 days since February 14, 2017, 120 days since the end of 2016, 303 days since the end of June 2016, 371 days since April 24, 2016, 411 days since the Ides of March 2016, 1,254 days since Mangum was convicted of murdering Reginald Daye and 3,605 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred. Mangum is scheduled to be released from prison in 3,225 days.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; April 30, 2017 at 5:16 AM
Anonymous said...: Where

Is

The

Little

Man?; April 30, 2017 at 5:55 AM
Anonymous said...: Where

Is

Ubes?; April 30, 2017 at 6:01 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You have 245 days left to exonerate and free Mangum in 2017. It has been 6 weeks and 5 days since you predicted that Mangum would be released within a matter of weeks. It has been 4 days since you said that "it will be a matter of days, or a few weeks at the most" before Mangum is released from state custody.

It has been 47 days since the Ides of March 2017, 76 days since February 14, 2017, 121 days since the end of 2016, 304 days since the end of June 2016, 372 days since April 24, 2016, 412 days since the Ides of March 2016, 1,255 days since Mangum was convicted of murdering Reginald Daye and 3,606 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred. Mangum is scheduled to be released from prison in 3,224 days.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; May 1, 2017 at 2:43 AM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: "Insufficient evidence was developed, due to a poor police investigation."

Again, Kenny paints with a very broad brush. The lack of evidence developed fall in two main categories:
(1) Identification, and
(2) Alibi.

The DPD did a good job of rounding up suspects, probably too good a job. The DPD interviewed those people who attended the party. Before that, they got a voluntary list of the party goers from the team captains. The DPD did a good job collecting and preserving the physical evidence.

Where they failed was in the identification phase. The DPD had two methods of obtaining an identification of any defendants. (Remember, identification is an element of the crime.) They could use an eyewitness identification or DNA. The DPD failed miserably at obtaining an admissible eyewitness identification. They offered lineup after lineup that failed to comply with state law on the admissibility of lineup identifications. Thus, they had to rely solely on DNA. Unfortunately for the DPD, the State Bureau of Investigation Crime Lab found no matches between the DNA samples taken from Crystal and the people at the party. (The unduly broad nature of the non-testimonial order was never litigated as the results favored the defendants.) The final straw that broke the camel's back, so to speak, was the more accurate DNA testing done by DNASI. That too failed to identify anyone at the party.

The DPD's next failure is really more attributable to the District Attorney's office. They failed to investigate an alibi. Having done so, they did their case a great disservice.

"There is doubt in the minds of many, that no sexual assault occurred, because, notes of the AG's investigation into the case are not made public."

Actually all the AG's investigation was made public except for Crystal's mental health records. You are advancing a straw man argument here. Of course you have been told many times since 2006 that the AG's investigation, except for the mental health records, is public and you continue to ignore the facts. Shame on you. Of course, Crystal can always sign a release and the protected records will be released. Just ask her to do it.

Walt-in-Durham; May 1, 2017 at 7:35 AM
kenhyderal said...: Walt said: "Actually all the AG's investigation was made public except for Crystal's mental health records".................................................... You are wrong about that, Walt. In his The Price of Silence, Note on Sources Section, Wm.Cohan reports AG Cooper’s refusal to be interviewed about the case and also his refusal to share or make public any of the documentary information his investigators Conman and Winstead discovered. Crystal's health records, as are anyone's, confidential and at any rate they are immaterial to her accusation; May 1, 2017 at 10:16 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"You are wrong about that, Walt. In his The Price of Silence, Note on Sources Section, Wm.Cohan reports AG Cooper’s refusal to be interviewed about the case and also his refusal to share or make public any of the documentary information his investigators Conman and Winstead discovered."

The Price of Silence is a book without any references or any source notes. There is no evidence Cohan put together an accurate account of the Duke Rape Hoax, no evidence that Cohan ever did a serious investigation. There is no evidence because, unlike Stuart Taylor and KC Johnson(Until Proven Innocent), Don Yaeger and Mike Pressler(It's not About the Truth) and R. Stephanie Good and Nader Baydoun(A Rush to Injuatice), Cohan did not put any evidence of anything in his book. He just made a series of uncorroborated allegations.

Not surprising that Kenny, who expects that people should accept all his uncorroborated allegations as true, would be an admirer of Cohan's so called book.; May 1, 2017 at 11:12 AM
Walt said...: Kenhyderal wrote: "You are wrong about that, Walt."

No, it is you who is wrong.

"In his The Price of Silence, Note on Sources Section, Wm.Cohan reports AG Cooper’s refusal to be interviewed about the case and also his refusal to share or make public any of the documentary information his investigators Conman and Winstead discovered."

That documentary information had already been released. Cohan is a hack who is complaining that the Attorney General was not paying attention to him. The government long ago made all that documentary evidence public. You can lie about it all you want, but, repeated lies do not make them true.

Walt-in-Durham; May 1, 2017 at 11:32 AM
Walt said...: Anon at 11:12 AM wrote: "Not surprising that Kenny, who expects that people should accept all his uncorroborated allegations as true, would be an admirer of Cohan's so called book."

Ding-Ding-Ding! Ladies and Gentlemen, we have a winner!

Walt-in-Durham; May 1, 2017 at 11:34 AM
JSwift said...: Walt,

I think you misunderstand Kenny's complaint.

Kenny recognizes that the AG issued a fairly detailed report containing a description of the scope of their investigation, the results of that investigation and their conclusions. However, I do not believe the AG ever released the actual case notes of the investigators, any of the additional photographs they obtained, any audio tapes or notes from the interviews they conducted or any of the actual physical evidence they obtained. The report described that evidence, but the evidence itself was not released.

Kenny, who accepts Crystal's statements as true (or at least those portions that have not conclusively been proven false) and harshly criticizes anyone who doubts her truthfulness even when her statements are contradicted by physical and medical evidence and the accounts of other parties, believes that Cooper's report must be regarded as false unless the physical evidence itself is provided to support the conclusions contained therein.

Of course, as we know, Kenny would never be satisfied with a conclusion he did not like. Even if Copper related everything, Kenny would complain that it did not prove with absolute certainty that Crystal was not brutally raped by precisely three mystery rapists at the party because the investigators did prove with certainty that all attendees had been identified.

Kenny, like all who are not convinced that Crystal was not sexually assaulted at the party, is intellectually dishonest.

John D. Smith
New York, NY; May 1, 2017 at 12:18 PM
kenhyderal said...: JohnD said: "because the investigators did prove with certainty that all attendees had been identified" .......................................................... . No, John, they did not Has anyone ever seen a list of attendees? I submit no such list exists. We also have no way of knowing if the report took into account all the information that was developed. To my knowledge no comprehensive list of attendees was prepared. The non-testimonial order turned out to be a complete red-herring. 46 out of 47 team members were tested. Over half of them did not attend the Party and in fact some were even out of State. Two guests, identified by their obvious presence in photographs showing the dance commencement were also tested. These happened to be photographs that bolstered the defence's time-line. There was no Police control over the photographic images. The idea that all attendees are known is absolutely false. Kilgo's Player friend told him there were more non-Players there then Players. The incomplete list produced by the DPD was collated by interviewing individual Players who were there, prior to them seeking Counsel. Even then in many cases they pleaded memory loss.; May 1, 2017 at 9:14 PM
Anonymous said...: Kwbhyswel:

"JohnD said: "because the investigators did prove with certainty that all attendees had been identified" .......................................................... . No, John, they did not Has anyone ever seen a list of attendees?"

Yes they did. Both prosecution and defense agreed that everyone who had been at the party had been identified.

"I submit no such list exists."

So? What you have submitted is that the entity known as kilgo told you that a Lacrosse player told him he had witnessed unidentified party attendees raping crystal. You have never documented that kilgo ever told you anything. I submit you fabricated that story.

"We also have no way of knowing if the report took into account all the information that was developed. To my knowledge no comprehensive list of attendees was prepared."

If you know what information was developed, then by all means tell us what that information was. You have shown you have zero knowledge of who did and who did not attend the party.

"The non-testimonial order turned out to be a complete red-herring. 46 out of 47 team members were tested. Over half of them did not attend the Party and in fact some were even out of State. Two guests, identified by their obvious presence in photographs showing the dance commencement were also tested. These happened to be photographs that bolstered the defence's time-line."

From http://www.dictionary.com/browse/red-herring: Red Herring: "something, especially a clue, that is or is intended to be misleading or distracting."

Explain how the NTO resulted in clues that were misleading. The NTO yielded evidence that no rape had occurred. So you think evidence of innocence on the part of the Lacrosse players distracted from the truth. That is but another manifestation of your guilt presuming wishful thinking.

"There was no Police control over the photographic images."

Define what police control over the images would have been? So far that is another of your meaningless statements.

"The idea that all attendees are known is absolutely false."

Says you, who once said Nifong did not have the indicted players indicted for rape.

"Kilgo's Player friend told him there were more non-Players there then Players. The incomplete list produced by the DPD was collated by interviewing individual Players who were there, prior to them seeking Counsel. Even then in many cases they pleaded memory loss."

Irrelevant statement. You have not proven the list of party attendees was incomplete.

nd once more, you have provided zero documentation kilgo ever told you anything. Which strongly suggests your evidence of unidentified party attendees is a fabrication.; May 2, 2017 at 1:56 AM
Anonymous said...: Udaman Ubes; May 2, 2017 at 3:18 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You have 244 days left to exonerate and free Mangum in 2017. It has been 6 weeks and 6 days since you predicted that Mangum would be released within a matter of weeks. It has been 5 days since you said that "it will be a matter of days, or a few weeks at the most" before Mangum is released from state custody.

It has been 48 days since the Ides of March 2017, 77 days since February 14, 2017, 122 days since the end of 2016, 305 days since the end of June 2016, 373 days since April 24, 2016, 413 days since the Ides of March 2016, 1,256 days since Mangum was convicted of murdering Reginald Daye and 3,607 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred. Mangum is scheduled to be released from prison in 3,223 days.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; May 2, 2017 at 3:45 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny:

The problem isn't that the State didn't investigate Mangum's rape claim. They did. The problem is, the more they investigated, the clearer it became that she wasn't raped or assaulted by the young men she accused, or anyone else. Wild speculation and outrageous claims uncorroborated by any evidence does nothing to change that.

This was a high profile case that was widely covered in the media, thoroughly investigated by the authorities and followed by tens (if not hundreds) of millions of people. If you took all the people who believe "something happened" to Mangum at the Duke lacrosse party, you couldn't even field a bowling team. More people believe the earth is flat than believe Mangum was assaulted. That is how overwhelming the proof is. Nothing you or Sid have said or done changes that.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; May 2, 2017 at 5:16 AM
JSwift said...: Abe:

I don't completely agree with your assessment.

First, I don't believe that Nifong and the Durham Police really investigated Managua's rape claim. I have concluded that they never believed her and simply used the allegations for other purposes. They made far too many "mistakes" in investigating a high profile case to conclude that they made a bona fide effort. Having said that, I agree that despite their lack of effort, there was sufficient evidence to make it clear that she wasn't raped or assaulted at the party by the accused or anyone else. As we know, most of the evidence from the DPD faux investigation has been made public.

The AG's investigation merely confirmed what all knowledgable already knew--Mangum was not raped at the party.

Second, I think you greatly underestimate the number of dishonest people who have concluded that "something happened" to Magnum at the party. Like Kenny and Sidney, none of these dishonest people have presented any evidence to support that opinion. They believe because they want to believe.

John D. Smith
New York, NY; May 2, 2017 at 9:44 AM
Anonymous said...: John:

I am going to push back a little on your claim that the Duke lacrosse rape hoax wasn't investigated. Nifong and the DPD did investigate Mangum's complaint. It was a crooked and one-sided investigation, but it was an investigation nonetheless. They went to great lengths to obtain NTO's, rig the identification procedure, suppress the DNA results, intimidate witnesses, use the press to falsely impugn the players, etc. They changed the theory of the case, the time line and even the charges. They did their utmost to build a case against the lacrosse players, by whatever means necessary, employing every resource at their disposal and using every trick in the book, and still could not sustain a case against the lacrosse players.

The case was also investigated by the players' attorneys, the AG and numerous professional and citizen journalists. Indeed, I submit that you'd be hard pressed to find a rape case in the last 20 years that was investigated and scrutinized more closely and carefully than the Duke lacrosse case. And the more it was looked at the clearer it became that Mangum wasn't raped or assaulted.

Today there is but a handful of people who still claim "something happened" to Mangum and, as you indicate, they are dishonest. Mangum is internationally known for being the woman who falsely accused three men of a rape that did not occur and she is universally referred to as the false rape accuser.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; May 2, 2017 at 10:19 AM
Anonymous said...: Well, and Kenny bases almost his entire opinion on the basis of what he claims an anonymous person on this blog told him (on the blog, not even via e-mail) years ago - that there was a coverup, and one player wanted to come forward.

I mean, many, many more people have told us all on this blog that Kenny and Sid are abusers, and so I tend to believe that.; May 2, 2017 at 12:47 PM
kenhyderal said...: Dr. Anonymous said: "Yes they did. Both prosecution and defense agreed that everyone who had been at the party had been identified".................................In what case was that?; May 2, 2017 at 1:28 PM
kenhyderal said...: Abe said: "The case was also investigated by the players' attorneys, the AG and numerous professional and citizen journalists. Indeed, I submit that you'd be hard pressed to find a rape case in the last 20 years that was investigated and scrutinized more closely and carefully than the Duke lacrosse case. And the more it was looked at the clearer it became that Mangum wasn't raped or assaulted"................These were all one-sided investigations by Duke Lacrosse Defenders seeking to find reasonable doubt about the culpability of the particular Players charged. In this regard, they were highly successful, although, their developed exculpatory evidence was never put to a judicial test since the AG, under the pressure from the powers that be and a concerted propaganda campaign that swayed public opinion against a poor black marginalized woman, caved in.; May 2, 2017 at 1:46 PM
guiowen said...: For God's sake, Kenhyderal,
Stop trying to reopen an old case. In case you've forgotten, it isn't up to the defense to prove the innocence of an accused person. It's up to the prosecution to prove that person's guilt.; May 2, 2017 at 1:52 PM
kenhyderal said...: Abe said: "More people believe the earth is flat than believe Mangum was assaulted".................... There was also time when more people believed in a flat earth than in a round earth. Public opinion is fickle. When subsequent discoveries are unearthed the Duke Lacrosse Defenders will then be the flat-earthers; May 2, 2017 at 1:55 PM
Anonymous said...: No subsequent evidence will ever be uncovered Kenny - the case is closed. No one is looking into it.; May 2, 2017 at 2:13 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"Dr. Anonymous said: "Yes they did. Both prosecution and defense agreed that everyone who had been at the party had been identified".................................In what case was that?"

By that question you show yet again you are incredibly stupid.; May 2, 2017 at 3:03 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"'Abe said: "The case was also investigated by the players' attorneys, the AG and numerous professional and citizen journalists. Indeed, I submit that you'd be hard pressed to find a rape case in the last 20 years that was investigated and scrutinized more closely and carefully than the Duke lacrosse case. And the more it was looked at the clearer it became that Mangum wasn't raped or assaulted'................These were all one-sided investigations by Duke Lacrosse Defenders seeking to find reasonable doubt about the culpability of the particular Players charged."

No they weren't. The medical evidence was, or more properly the lack thereof generated by the ER doctor who examined Crystal. The DNA evidence was generated by the prosecution. That evidence showed that the indicted Lacrosse players could not have perpetrated the rape described by Ceystal. And you, for all your guilt presuming guilt presumption, have provided zero evidence Crystal had been raped.

"In this regard, they were highly successful, although, their developed exculpatory evidence was never put to a judicial test"

The evidence showed the crime never happened. No ethical prosecutor would have ever taken the case to trial.

"since the AG, under the pressure from the powers that be and a concerted propaganda campaign that swayed public opinion against a poor black marginalized woman, caved in."

The only pressure exerted on AG Coper came from a black newspaper, and that was pressure to convict the Lacrosse players.

You really are incredibly stupid, considering the way you expect all your uncorroborated allegations to be accepted as truth.; May 2, 2017 at 3:13 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"Abe said: "More people believe the earth is flat than believe Mangum was assaulted".................... There was also time when more people believed in a flat earth than in a round earth. Public opinion is fickle. When subsequent discoveries are unearthed the Duke Lacrosse Defenders will then be the flat-earthers"

What discoveries have come to light in the 11 years plus since the Lacrosse players were wrongfully accused. None.

If you weren't so incredibly stupid you would realize that most logical, credible explanation is, there are no new discoveries to be uneathed, just like there was no anonymous lacrosse player who told kilgo he had witnessed Crystal being raped.; May 2, 2017 at 3:17 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous 3:03, 3:13, 3:17:

You are being unfair to Kenny. Kenny is not incredibly stupid as you suggest. He is simply dishonest.; May 2, 2017 at 6:25 PM
kenhyderal said...: And the lie is?; May 2, 2017 at 9:37 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"And the lie is?"

This should have been among the lies told by Kenhyderal are?

They include: Crystal was raped; Laacrosse players either perpetrated the rape or participated in it; kilgo told you a lacrosse player told him he had witnessed crystal being raped; the attorneys defending the Lacrosse payers against bogus rape charges organized a campaign to discredit crystal; AG Cooper was pressured to declare the falsely accused Lacrosse players innocent; ther were unidentified party attendees who raped crystal."; May 3, 2017 at 2:51 AM
Anonymous said...: Udaman Ubes; May 3, 2017 at 3:13 AM
Anonymous said...: Whenever a black or a muslim claims to be the victim of a hate crime you can be certain it's a hoax.; May 3, 2017 at 3:35 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You have 243 days left to exonerate and free Mangum in 2017. It has been 7 weeks since you predicted that Mangum would be released within a matter of weeks. It has been 6 days since you said that "it will be a matter of days, or a few weeks at the most" before Mangum is released from state custody.

It has been 49 days since the Ides of March 2017, 78 days since February 14, 2017, 123 days since the end of 2016, 306 days since the end of June 2016, 374 days since April 24, 2016, 414 days since the Ides of March 2016, 1,257 days since Mangum was convicted of murdering Reginald Daye and 3,608 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred. Mangum is scheduled to be released from prison in 3,222 days.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; May 3, 2017 at 4:33 AM
Walt said...: Anonymous at 3:35 AM claimed that any black or Muslim claims of hate crime victimization are certainly a hoax.

That is just not true. While Sid and Kenny certainly resort to propaganda argument techniques of broad generalizations, that should not be taken by you, or anyone else who wants to persuade as an acceptable form of persuasion. Try again.

Walt-in-Durham; May 3, 2017 at 6:57 AM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "This should have been among the lies told by Kenhyderal are?
They include: Crystal was raped; Laacrosse players either perpetrated the rape or participated in it; kilgo told you a lacrosse player told him he had witnessed crystal being raped; the attorneys defending the Lacrosse payers against bogus rape charges organized a campaign to discredit crystal; AG Cooper was pressured to declare the falsely accused Lacrosse players innocent; ther were unidentified party attendees who raped crystal.......................Other than the fact of what Kilgo told me the other examples are all my opinions of what really happened.; May 3, 2017 at 9:52 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"Other than the fact of what Kilgo told me"

You have never documented kilgo ever told you anything.

"the other examples are all my opinions of what really happened."

Wrong. They are the your uncorroborated allegations of what really happened.; May 3, 2017 at 11:17 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

There is quite a difference between an opinion based on a knowledge of the known facts and your opinion based on denial of the known facts.; May 3, 2017 at 11:30 AM
kenhyderal said...: What known FACTS do I deny? Are FACTS not undeniable?; May 3, 2017 at 1:14 PM
kenhyderal said...: Dr. Anonymous said: "You have never documented kilgo ever told you anything."..............How could what Kilgo told me be documented? There are a lot of things that are true that cant be documented eg. Jesus said he was the Son of God and not only do I believe he said that but I also believe it to be true. That was documented by those who heard it and I also believe them, where many do not. I have documented on this blog what I say Kilgo told me.; May 3, 2017 at 1:33 PM
guiowen said...: Kenhyderal,
First you ask "How could what Kilgo told me be documented?" Then you claim "I have documented on this blog what Kilgo told me." WOW!!; May 3, 2017 at 1:47 PM
Anonymous said...: It must be true - Kenny wrote it. If he writes it on this blog, it is as infallible as the word of God. He literally just said that ...

I always thought Sid was the delusional one.; May 3, 2017 at 2:02 PM
kenhyderal said...: Guiowen said: "First you ask "How could what Kilgo told me be documented?" Then you claim "I have documented on this blog what Kilgo told me." WOW!!"...........................Wow indeed! It was a rhetorical question, Guiowen. It was me asking how, other then reporting what he told me, could I document it to the satisfaction of Dr. Anonymous. He gave me no sworn affidavit. I found what he relayed to me, though, consistent with Crystal's account of her ordeal.; May 3, 2017 at 4:27 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said:It must be true - Kenny wrote it. If he writes it on this blog, it is as infallible as the word of God. He literally just said that" ..................... Now, how did infallibility get into this. You didn't catch it but what I said there, in effect, was "it's true that Kilgo relayed this information to me" and what I intimated was simply akin to me swearing to this. No messianic delusion here my this simmer.; May 3, 2017 at 4:40 PM
Anonymous said...: ?K?enhyderal:

"Dr. Anonymous said: "You have never documented kilgo ever told you anything."..............How could what Kilgo told me be documented?"

You at one time claimed kilgo told you that in a post on J4N, but that kilgo vanished from J4N and deleted all his posts.On another occasion you claimed he told you in an email which was deleted. You made two different claims of documentation which has vanished. I say you fabricated the story.

"There are a lot of things that are true that cant be documented eg. Jesus said he was the Son of God and not only do I believe he said that but I also believe it to be true. That was documented by those who heard it and I also believe them, where many do not. I have documented on this blog what I say Kilgo told me."

Welll, those first Christians would not have indulged in advocating bearing false witness against another like you do, so this is meaningless.; May 3, 2017 at 4:42 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

No matter how you try to rationalize your kilgo thing, you did try to pass off what kilgo supposedly, and I say supposedly because you CAN NOT document that kilgo told you anything, as evidence of the presence of unidentified attendees at the party and is the basis of your repetition, no complte list of party attendees was ever compiled.

So you do admit you can not document that kilgo ever told you anything. So why should your claim be taken seriously?; May 3, 2017 at 5:01 PM
Sconnosciuto said...: Allo, Kenhyderal,
Il grosso Kilgo e con me. Non lo potrai mai pu vedere.; May 3, 2017 at 6:48 PM
kenhyderal said...: Dr. Anonymous said: "You at one time claimed kilgo told you that in a post on J4N, but that kilgo vanished from J4N and deleted all his posts"..........................Kilgo didn't specifically tell me, on J4N. He made these claims in scores of posts. I believe you, yourself, were present during his sojourn here. For those who were not, it would be helpful if you would own up to his presence here and confirm the views he expressed, especially those concerning the culpability of David Evans. He claimed he knew more about the events at the Party then anyone else on this blog because he knew a Player who was a witness to the acts. When he was involved in raising bail money for Crystal that's when I gave him my e-mail address and that's where he gave me more specific details about this friend and about his troubled conscience. Unfortunately I did not save his e-mail and when he precipitously disappeared from J4N he also cancelled his e-mail address.; May 3, 2017 at 9:09 PM
guiowen said...: In other words we have to take Kenny's word for all that story.; May 3, 2017 at 9:25 PM
kenhyderal said...: Sconnosciuto said: "Il grosso Kilgo e con me. Non lo potrai mai pu vedere."..............................................Sparisci!; May 3, 2017 at 9:25 PM
kenhyderal said...: Guiowen said: "In other words we have to take Kenny's word for all that story" Just like with MaMaLuJo; May 3, 2017 at 9:31 PM
Anonymous said...: Udaman Kenny; May 4, 2017 at 3:21 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

Dr. Anonymous said: "You at one time claimed kilgo told you that in a post on J4N, but that kilgo vanished from J4N and deleted all his posts"..........................Kilgo didn't specifically tell me, on J4N. He made these claims in scores of posts."

I asked you once when kolgo ever told you that a lacrosse player told him that he had witnessed Crystal being raped. Your response was that kilgo did tell you about that in a post on J4N.

I believe you, yourself, were present during his sojourn here."

Kilgo used to boast that he knew more about the Lacrosse incident than anyone. When challenged to reveal what he knew, to put up or shut up kilgo always backed down.

"For those who were not [here when kilgo was here], it would be helpful if you would own up to his presence here and confirm the views he expressed, especially those concerning the culpability of David Evans."

This is called having people give testimony to events of which they have no first hand knowledge. A totally meaningless statement.

"He claimed he knew more about the events at the Party then anyone else on this blog because he knew a Player who was a witness to the acts."

So how do you verify this claim kilgo made? That he made the claim does not establish it as true. kilgo's history of always backing down when challenged to put up or shut up says this claim is bogus

"When he was involved in raising bail money for Crystal that's when I gave him my e-mail address and that's where he gave me more specific details about this friend and about his troubled conscience."

Again, considering kilgo's penchant for backing down when challenged to put up or shut up, that claim is bogus, something you fabricated.

"Unfortunately I did not save his e-mail and when he precipitously disappeared from J4N he also cancelled his e-mail address."

Which is an admission that you had documentation and now you don't. That, I say again, strongly indicates you fabricated this whole thing, that kilgo never told you anything.

And in this post, I say again, you are just trying to bullshit your way through and around facts which do not mesh with your guilt presuming wishful thinking.; May 4, 2017 at 4:30 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You have 242 days left to exonerate and free Mangum in 2017. It has been 7 weeks and 1 day since you predicted that Mangum would be released within a matter of weeks. It has been 7 days since you said that "it will be a matter of days, or a few weeks at the most" before Mangum is released from state custody.

It has been 50 days since the Ides of March 2017, 79 days since February 14, 2017, 124 days since the end of 2016, 307 days since the end of June 2016, 375 days since April 24, 2016, 415 days since the Ides of March 2016, 1,258 days since Mangum was convicted of murdering Reginald Daye and 3,609 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred. Mangum is scheduled to be released from prison in 3,221 days.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; May 4, 2017 at 5:13 AM
Anonymous said...: Even if Kenny's story is true - and some guy named Kilgo said he had this information - there is zero evidence that it's reliable. Kenny wants to believe it because it fits the narrative he wants to promote, but he disregards physical evidence, and all other evidence that doesn't. He's a joke.

And, where has Sid been? Normally when he's this quiet and absent he got bad news. Wonder which of his motions were denied recently?; May 4, 2017 at 7:54 AM
kenhyderal said...: Dr. Anonymous said: "Which is an admission that you had documentation and now you don't. That, I say again, strongly indicates you fabricated this whole thing, that kilgo never told you anything".................................So, Dr. Anonymous you do admit Kilgo said he knew more about what happened at the Duke Lacrosse Party then anyone else, posting on this blog. Don't tell us you believe what he meant by that, there was no rape. On the contrary, he was the foremost poster here who strongly believed in the guilt of the Players. What speculation do you have for the basis of these claims he made.; May 4, 2017 at 9:32 AM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "Even if Kenny's story is true - and some guy named Kilgo said he had this information - there is zero evidence that it's reliable"..................It is true but we are not talking about the reliability of what he claimed but whether he said it. Dr. Anonymous is using the tried and true Duke Lacrosse defender's strategy of deny everything, concede nothing, no matter how trivial and attack everyone else; May 4, 2017 at 9:44 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny:

You have presented no evidence that Kilgo said what you claim he said.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; May 4, 2017 at 10:41 AM
Anonymous said...: Dr. Anonymous said: "Which is an admission that you had documentation and now you don't. That, I say again, strongly indicates you fabricated this whole thing, that kilgo never told you anything".................................So, Dr. Anonymous you do admit Kilgo said he knew more about what happened at the Duke Lacrosse Party then anyone else, posting on this blog."

No I don't. I said that Kilgo claimed he knew more about the Duke Lacrosse incident than anyone but when he was challenged to show what he knew, to put up or shut up he always backed down, which said his claim about what he knew was bogus.

"Don't tell us you believe what he meant by that, there was no rape."

I believe there is no rape because no one who believes there was a rape can present any evidence there was, any evidence that Crystal ever told the truth when she claimed she had been raped. You have presented zero evidence that Crystal ever told the truth.

"On the contrary, he was the foremost poster here who strongly believed in the guilt of the Players."

Wrong, he was the grossest, biggest bull shitter who posted here, after Sidney and before you.

"What speculation do you have for the basis of these claims he made."

He lied.

If you say prove he lied, I would respond you prove he told the truth. Whether or not a crime happened hangs on not whether the complaining witness or her supporters can be shown to be liars but whether or not it can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the complaining witness ever told the truth.; May 4, 2017 at 11:27 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"Anonymous said: "Even if Kenny's story is true - and some guy named Kilgo said he had this information - there is zero evidence that it's reliable"..................It is true but we are not talking about the reliability of what he claimed but whether he said it."

Wrong. Pure Bullshit.

You were talking about the reliability of what Kilgo claimed. You have vouched for the truth of what kilgo claimed, because it was in agreement with what Crystal said.

" Dr. Anonymous is using the tried and true Duke Lacrosse defender's strategy of deny everything, concede nothing, no matter how trivial and attack everyone else".

Totally irrelevant statement since there was no Duke Lacrosse Defender strategy of "deny everything, concede nothing, no matter how trivial and attack everyone else."

The Duke defense strategy was to show there was no evidence a rape had taken place by showing there was zero evidence that a rape had taken place. And they did, much to Sidney's and Kenny's chagrin.; May 4, 2017 at 11:32 AM
kenhyderal said...: I said to Dr. Anonymous" : "Don't tell us you believe what he (Kilgo) meant by that, there was no rape." and he replied: "I believe there is no rape because no one who believes there was a rape can present any evidence there was, any evidence that Crystal ever told the truth when she claimed she had been raped. You have presented zero evidence that Crystal ever told the truth"............................ We all know what you believe. I asked if you think Kilgo, by his posts, believed there was no rape? Kilgo did not know Crystal. You were here. You have to have to attest, that he claimed Crystal was raped. Yes, I believed the information he provided because it coincides with what Crystal has told me. However, I realize the futility of trying tp convince you of that. What I am trying to do is to convince more objective readers of what Kilgo has said/claimed in his scores of, now deleted, posts; The Duke Lacrosse Players and their friends were guilty.; May 4, 2017 at 1:52 PM
Anonymous said...: kenny said:

"Dr. Anonymous is using the tried and true Duke Lacrosse defender's strategy of deny everything, concede nothing, no matter how trivial and attack everyone else."

I am very familiar with that strategy, but not from any Duke lacrosse defenders.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; May 4, 2017 at 1:54 PM
kenhyderal said...: Abe said: "You have presented no evidence that Kilgo said what you claim he said"................. Were you here contemporaneously with Kilgo? Dr. Anonymous was. Let's see how he and perhaps others respond. Kilgo's words, privately, to me were not much different, in tenor, to what he posted here.; May 4, 2017 at 2:01 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal

"Abe said: "You have presented no evidence that Kilgo said what you claim he said"................. Were you here contemporaneously with Kilgo? Dr. Anonymous was. Let's see how he and perhaps others respond. Kilgo's words, privately, to me were not much different, in tenor, to what he posted here."

Evidence would have been copies of kilgo's J4N posts or a copy of the emmail you claim kilgo sent you. You have not any of that evidence, which strongly suggests you fabricated the story that kilgo ever said anything to you or posted anything about a witness who saw Crystal being raped at the Lacrosse party.; May 4, 2017 at 2:28 PM
JSwift said...: Kenny,

I remember Kilgo's posts on this blog. I provide below a summary of my recollection of those posts, my conclusions regarding Kilgo and what I have been told about Kilgo's departure.

1. Kilgo's posts were virulently anti-player. The posts frequently contained ad hominem attacks directed at the players and posters on this blog who disagreed with Kilgo.

2. Kilgo relied heavily on the intellectually dishonest rhetorical device of argument by assertion and never provided any evidence to support any claim.

3. Kilgo claimed proprietary information regarding the events of the party, but never provided any evidence to support those claims or any explanation of how the information was obtained. Moreover, I do not recall that Kilgo claimed in any post on this board to have an anonymous player acting as the source for that information.

4. Kilgo never claimed on this board that a large number of non-players attended the party or that mystery rapists had raped Crystal. Kilo's allegations were focused on a rape by the defendants.

5. Kilgo had an unhealthy obsession with the theory that Crystal was sodomized by lacrosse sticks. Kilgo ignored the observations by other posters that Crystal would have suffered severe injuries had she been sodomized with lacrosse sticks.

6. I concluded that Kilgo did not actually believe the statements contained in the posts, but made those statements merely to annoy others. In other words, Kilgo was a troll.

7. Based on my own pseudonymous sources, I was told that Kilgo is a woman and that her departure from this board was based on a near tragic event.

As noted in 5 above, Kilgo had an unhealthy obsession with the thought that Crystal was sodomized by lacrosse sticks. One night, she was in a bar and had too much to drink. While drunk, she decided to prove the error of those posters who claimed that Crystal would have suffered severe injuries had she been sodomized with lacrosse sticks. She picked up three young men in the bar and convinced them to go home with her and sodomize her with lacrosse sticks. Tragically, she suffered massive vaginal and anal injuries and almost died. As a result, she was embarrassed, realizing that she had acted somewhat foolishly, but was unwilling to explain to other posters what she had done and to admit that their arguments regarding injuries had been correct. Vowing to leave the board permanently, she deleted all of her posts.

Kenny, I trust that this is consistent with your communication with Kilgo (although I expect that she was too embarrassed to tell you about her experiment with the lacrosse sticks).

John D. Smith
New York, NY; May 4, 2017 at 3:39 PM
guiowen said...: Kenhyderal,
There seems to be no evidence that Kilgo ever told you what you claim he told you. We have your word for it, but unfortunately your word is not enough as you have lied to us in the past. It would help if Kilgo would reappear, but so far as I know, he's either hiding or in the clutches of some Italian character.
Let us, however, assume that Kilgo in fact did tell you what you claim. We have no reason to trust him. For all we know, some lacrosse player stole his girl friend, and he decided he could get back at the lax team with this cockamamie story of the mystery rapists. He then realized he could get in trouble for posting such lies, and decided to erase all that.
In any case, we don't believe Kilgo's story.; May 4, 2017 at 3:39 PM
guiowen said...: JSwift,
I had not heard that Kilgo was a woman. If so, I guess nobody stole her girl friend. She would have some other reason to hate the lax players. Maybe one of them deceived her in some way.; May 4, 2017 at 3:44 PM
JSwift said...: Guiowen,

Unfortunately, my pseudonymous sources did not provide the motivation for her posts. I sensed that she simply enjoyed trolling others.

I hope that Kenny and sidney can learn from her near tragedy. I would certainly encourage them NOT to attempt the same experiment with the lacrosse sticks.

Other than the information from my pseudonymous sources, were my recollections regarding Kilgo's posts constant with what you may remember?

John D. Smith
New York, NY; May 4, 2017 at 3:51 PM
kenhyderal said...: I really expected better from you John D. This is not really a matter for making sport about. I acknowledge Kilgo was outrageous, foul mouthed and over the top in his posts. It was evident he hated the Players. In his mind and mine what happened to Crystal was despicable. He did, on the other-hand, show real compassion towards Crystal and he donated a substantial amount of money to her and her children. He originally donated the money for her bail and when the Hammonds put up the bail gratis the Lawyer in Raleigh who was holding the donations was going to refund the money to the various donors. Kilgo directed that his refund go to Crystal.; May 4, 2017 at 4:56 PM
JSwift said...: Kenny,

I take it that Kilgo did not discuss her lacrosse stick experiment with you.

John D. Smith
New York, NY; May 4, 2017 at 5:06 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"In [kilgo's] mind and mine what happened to Crystal was despicable."

So you are admitting that what you say happened to Crystal is all in your mind, not in the real world.; May 4, 2017 at 5:35 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"I really expected better from you John D"

No one really expects anything better from you.; May 4, 2017 at 5:52 PM
Anonymous said...: Sid:

You have 241 days left to exonerate and free Mangum in 2017. It has been 7 weeks and 2 days since you predicted that Mangum would be released within a matter of weeks. It has been 8 days since you said that "it will be a matter of days, or a few weeks at the most" before Mangum is released from state custody.

It has been 51 days since the Ides of March 2017, 80 days since February 14, 2017, 125 days since the end of 2016, 308 days since the end of June 2016, 376 days since April 24, 2016, 416 days since the Ides of March 2016, 1,259 days since Mangum was convicted of murdering Reginald Daye and 3,610 days since Mike Nifong was disbarred. Mangum is scheduled to be released from prison in 3,220 days.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; May 5, 2017 at 6:08 AM
kenhyderal said...: Guiowen said: "unfortunately your word is not enough as you have lied to us in the past"...............................Can you cite instances in the past where I have supposedly lied?; May 5, 2017 at 8:27 AM
guiowen said...: Kenny,
Remember the time when I mentioned a discussion we had had a year previously, and you denied everything, claiming that I was just making up what you might have said? When confronted with the evidence, you said it.g was just because it was "out of context".; May 5, 2017 at 9:36 AM
A Lawyer said...: . He did, on the other-hand, show real compassion towards Crystal and he donated a substantial amount of money to her and her children. He originally donated the money for her bail and when the Hammonds put up the bail gratis the Lawyer in Raleigh who was holding the donations was going to refund the money to the various donors. Kilgo directed that his refund go to Crystal.

How did he pay this money-- by check? Wire transfer? It should be relatively easy to ascertain his real name and address from the payment records. Then you can speak to him and try to get him to come forward and identify the Lacrosse player who supposedly confessed to him.; May 5, 2017 at 12:52 PM
kenhyderal said...: Oh what a whopper! Give me a break, Saint Guiowen. So, I forgot something I said months before. Do you apply this standard to politicians, to your wife and kids to your parents and siblings. Certainly you do not seem to, to Duke Lacrosse Defenders.; May 5, 2017 at 1:02 PM
kenhyderal said...: @ A Lawyer: The Money was paid to a Raleigh Lawyer Mark Simeon. At Kilgo's direction the money was paid to Crystal by Simeon out of his Trust Account.; May 5, 2017 at 1:10 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"Oh what a whopper! Give me a break, Saint Guiowen. So, I forgot something I said months before. Do you apply this standard to politicians, to your wife and kids to your parents and siblings. Certainly you do not seem to, to Duke Lacrosse Defenders."

What is wrong about defending the Duke Lacrosse team members who were accused of raping Crystal. There was no rape. They were falsely accused

I remind you, you have provided zero evidence that a rape ever took place, that Crystal ever told the truth when she claimed she had been raped.

That the Lacrosse players raped Crystal is one of the grossest lies you have ever told on this blog.; May 5, 2017 at 2:10 PM

«Oldest ‹Older 401 – 600 of 743 Newer› Newest»

Thursday, March 16, 2017

Libel lawsuit: Harr v. WRAL-5 .. Plaintiff responds

743 comments:

Facebook Badge

Subscribe!

Labels

Blog Archive

About Me