justice4nifong: Crystal Mangum's Motion for Default and Summary Judgment

Sunday, March 11, 2018

Crystal Mangum's Motion for Default and Summary Judgment

374 comments:

«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 374 of 374

Anonymous said...: Kenny or Sidney or both continue to post anonymously to create the illusion that they have support.; March 17, 2018 at 4:49 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny, to take it up to 200:

If I called Houston Baker, a Black gang of 88 gangster a farm animal, would you consider that a racist comment?

Houston Baker once referred to one of the INNOCENT Caucasian Lacrosse players as a farm animal. If you believe that was not a racist comment, then explain why, without resorting to the dodge that certain academics have proclaimed that black on white racism is impossible.; March 17, 2018 at 4:57 AM
Anonymous said...: UdaPubes Ubes.; March 17, 2018 at 5:09 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny or Sidney or both continue to post anonymously to create the illusion that they have support.; March 17, 2018 at 5:10 AM
Anonymous said...: Right now Sidney and Kenny are too intimidated to post; March 17, 2018 at 5:26 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous Anonymous said...
Right now Sidney and Kenny are too intimidated to post

March 17, 2018 at 5:26 AM

Hah! "Intimidation" is not a word in my dictionary. That should be evident by my fierce advocacy for Mike Nifong and Crystal Mangum early on.

The reason I haven't been commenting recently is because I've been extremely busy. Working on a sharlog, writing letters, and making sure that the State is not able to do anything else sneaky and underhanded to try to prevent Mangum's case from moving forward in court. In case you didn't know it, the State cheats.; March 17, 2018 at 8:09 AM
Anonymous said...: What Kenny calls Sidney's Christian forbearance is actually Sidney's reluctance to confront truths which do not mesh with his racist guilt presumption.

And as Kenny indulges in reluctance to confront truths which do not mesh with his own guilt presuming racism, he indulges in hypocrisy when he says he is unlike Sidney because he does not show Christian forbearance.; March 17, 2018 at 8:10 AM
Anonymous said...: Sidney Harr:

"
Anonymous Anonymous said...
Right now Sidney and Kenny are too intimidated to post

March 17, 2018 at 5:26 AM

"Hah! 'Intimidation' is not a word in my dictionary. That should be evident by my fierce advocacy for Mike Nifong and Crystal Mangum early on."

HAH yourself! Your fierce advocacy hasn't gotten Nifong's license back for him, had not prevented Crystal from going to trial or getting convicted, has not gotten Crystal released from prison, has convinced no one except your wacko-lyte Kenny that the Lacrosse players were guilty, has not convinced anyone that Crystal is innocent. Your advocacy has been as fierce as someone hurling popcorn at me from a range of 100 yards.

So far as words in your dictionary, you may claim justice is a word in your dictionary. Considering the injustices you have tried to inflict on the innocent Lacosse players, on AG Cooper, on Daniel Meier, on Officer Bond, on DA Loin Freeman, you have no comprehension of what justice means.

Justice for Nifong would have been a criminal conviction, a stiff fine, a long prison term and a seven figure civil judgment against him.

The reason I haven't been commenting recently is because I've been extremely busy. Working on a sharlog, writing letters, and making sure that the State is not able to do anything else sneaky and underhanded to try to prevent Mangum's case from moving forward in court. In case you didn't know it, the State cheats."

You do not know what cheating is, considering you remain willfully ignorant of how Nifong cheated in the Duke Rape Hoax. The only one who cheated in Crystal's(actually your) recent lawsuits is you, via your probably deliberate improper service of process and then trying to get a judgment against the defendants by denying them their right to defend themselves; March 17, 2018 at 8:36 AM
Anonymous said...: Hey, Sidney, how long to your failed attempt to flabbergast happens?; March 17, 2018 at 10:30 AM
Anonymous said...: Hey Sidney, where are all the supporters Kenny says you and he have?; March 17, 2018 at 10:31 AM
Fake Kenhyderal said...: Why do you take time to respond to meaningless posts when there are are questions unanswered that would advance discussion of the current topic?

For example, the questions regarding your methods of delivering your complaints to the defendants.; March 17, 2018 at 1:04 PM
A Lawyer said...: (1). When an innocent person you care about is falsely incarcerated you will not "throw in the towel" after setbacks. You will persist even though roadblocks are constantly thrown up at every juncture by a Justice System which will do anything to keep from acknowledging culpability for injustice.

Yes, but the "setbacks" Mangum has suffered have been due to Dr. Harr's sabotaging of her cases at every turn. Isn't it time he stopped and let someone competent help her?

(2) I do not believe that Dr. Harr set out to deliberately effect an unacceptable service and I speculate neither do you.

After all the lawsuits he has filed, why hasn't he learned to read the Rules of Civil Procedure? They're available on-line, and are written in English. If he really didn't consult them, then he was grossly negligent. If he's not deliberately sabotaging Mangum's cases, he's sure acting like he is.

all that has apparently happened is there is a cop-out for Ms. Bond to deny she has been informed.

The U.S. Supreme Court has held, time and again, that a defendant receiving actual notice of the lawsuit is irrelevant if service of process was not made in a manner authorized by the Rules of Civil Procedure.; March 17, 2018 at 2:05 PM
Anonymous said...: My personal opinion, Sidney tried to Nifong the defendants in Crystal's(actually his) lawsuits, in the sense of getting a judgment against them by depriving them of the opportunity to defend.; March 17, 2018 at 2:24 PM
Anonymous said...: Sidney Harr:

"In case you didn't know it, the State cheats".

And Sidney does not cheat by trying to get a judgment against the defendants by depriving them of their right to defend.

Sidney:"
It has been more than sixty (60) days and still no reply from either of the defendants... Officer Marianne Bond or the Durham District Attorney's Office. It is understandable as their defense is dramatically wanting."

I say again, it is obvious that what is "dramatically wanting" is the merit of Crystal's(actually your) suits. Otherwise you would not have resorted to cheating.

You are indulging in what your wacko-lyte Kenny calls projection:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection:

"Psychological projection is a theory in psychology in which humans defend themselves against their own unconscious impulses or qualities (both positive and negative) by denying their existence in themselves while attributing them to others.[1] For example, a person who is habitually rude may constantly accuse other people of being rude. It incorporates blame shifting.

According to some research, the projection of one's unconscious qualities onto others is a common process in everyday life".; March 17, 2018 at 2:36 PM
Anonymous said...: Ken,

You have been lying about your communication with Kilgo. If you do not come clean, I will expose you for the fraud you are.; March 17, 2018 at 6:49 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous March 17, 2018 at 6:49 PM

"Ken,

You have been lying about your communication with Kilgo. If you do not come clean, I will expose you for the fraud you are."

No need for that.

Kenny has already exposed himself as a fraud.; March 18, 2018 at 3:05 AM
Anonymous said...: Kehyderal:

Here is an alternative explanation for you.

Regarding the male DNA found on Crystal's rape kit which did not correspond with her known sexual history:

CRYSTAL DID NOT DISCLOSE HER ENTIRE CONSENSUAL SEXUAL HISTORY.

Here is a fact which support my alternative explanation:

SBI Crime lab testing revealed no evidence of semen on the rape kit materials, and the rape kit materials tested negative for Alkaline Phosphatase, a marker for semen. That says the DNA found on Crystal was not deposited at the Lacrosse party.

I can not locate this but I did read that DNA Security also tested for markers of semen and found none.

What the DNA proved was 1) the accused Lacrosse players did not rape Crystal, and1 2) Crystal had sex with unidentified men BEFORE the Lacrosse party.

Since my alternative view is supported by factual evidence and yours is not, your view is discredited.

That Sperm Fraction DNA was found is irrelevant. Any woman having unprotected sex with a man will have sperm fraction DNA on her regardless of whether or not the sex was consensual.; March 18, 2018 at 5:31 AM
Anonymous said...: UdaUbes Pubes.; March 18, 2018 at 7:21 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny or Sidney or both continue to post anonymously to create the illusion that they have support.; March 18, 2018 at 7:21 AM
kenhyderal said...: Dr. Anonymous said: "SBI Crime lab testing revealed no evidence of semen on the rape kit materials, and the rape kit materials tested negative for Alkaline Phosphatase, a marker for semen. That says the DNA found on Crystal was not deposited at the Lacrosse party"................................................. No it does not. "Forensic Science in Depth Tutorial- Unit on Sexual Assault and Semen Persistence " A number of factors, however, complicate the interpretation of any given sample. Considerable variation in baseline endogenous vaginal acid phos-phatase levels occurs not only between individuals, but also within a single individual. Pregnancy, phase of the menstrual cycle, bacterial vaginosis, use of certain feminine hygiene products or other contaminants may produce elevated endogenous acid phos-phatase values. Measurable acid phosphatase activity in vaginal samples declines after semen deposition because of drainage and dilution from vaginal secretions. The rate of decline is quite valuable. There is little consensus in the literature regarding a reliable threshold level to consistently separate endogenous vaginal acid phophatase from seminal. There is also no agreement on the time frame in which acid phos-phatase analysis is useful for forensic purposes following deposition. Reports vary from as short as 3 h to as long as 72 h. Because physiologic, temporal, quantitative and methodologic variables all potentially affect measured values, the interpretation of a specific specimen should be in the context of the database and experience of the forensic laboratory performing the test.; March 18, 2018 at 8:58 AM
Anonymous said...: Udaman kenhyderal.; March 18, 2018 at 9:15 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

Part 1:

"Dr. Anonymous said: "SBI Crime lab testing revealed no evidence of semen on the rape kit materials, and the rape kit materials tested negative for Alkaline Phosphatase, a marker for semen. That says the DNA found on Crystal was not deposited at the Lacrosse party"................................................. No it does not. "Forensic Science in Depth Tutorial- Unit on Sexual Assault and Semen Persistence " A number of factors, however, complicate the interpretation of any given sample. Considerable variation in baseline endogenous vaginal acid phos-phatase levels occurs not only between individuals, but also within a single individual. Pregnancy, phase of the menstrual cycle, bacterial vaginosis, use of certain feminine hygiene products or other contaminants may produce elevated endogenous acid phos-phatase values. Measurable acid phosphatase activity in vaginal samples declines after semen deposition because of drainage and dilution from vaginal secretions. The rate of decline is quite valuable. There is little consensus in the literature regarding a reliable threshold level to consistently separate endogenous vaginal acid phophatase from seminal. There is also no agreement on the time frame in which acid phos-phatase analysis is useful for forensic purposes following deposition. Reports vary from as short as 3 h to as long as 72 h. Because physiologic, temporal, quantitative and methodologic variables all potentially affect measured values, the interpretation of a specific specimen should be in the context of the database and experience of the forensic laboratory performing the test."

If you really read my comment I referred to ALKALINE phosphtase. I admit I can ot document it but do recall reading that the rape kit was negative for Alkaline Phosphatse and that Alkaline Phosphatase was a marker for Semen. I concede I could be wrong so go ahead and gloat. It still means nothing.

Prt 2 to follow.; March 18, 2018 at 10:17 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

Part 2:

from http://what-when-how.com/forensic-sciences/sexual-assault-and-semen-persistence/"

"Acid phosphatase is not a single enzyme but an array of related isoenzymes from a variety of sources. The forensic interest in acid phosphatase in the evaluation of sexual assault evidence is based on the fact that acid phosphatase activity in human semen is 500-1000 times greater than in any other normal bodily fluid. Unfortunately, the use of acid phosphatase as a marker for semen is compromised because the vagina is also a source of the same type of acid phosphatase. Since seminal and vaginal acid phosphatases cannot be reliably discriminated qualitatively, the only approach to differentiating azoospermic semen from vaginal secretions is by quantitative analysis. Finding a ‘significantly’ elevated acid phosphatase level is consistent with the presence of semen."

Unless an elevated level of Acid Phosphatase would have been consistent with semen. Was there an elevated level of Acid Phosphatase? The SBI report, no evidence of semen, and that is fact, suggests no elevated level of acid phosphatase was found.

The NC SBI protocol for testing for semen includes not only the test for Acid Phosphatase but other tests for Semen, the Christmas Tree stain, the RSID test for Semen.

https://dfs.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/dfs/page_content/attachments/FBS07%20Sperm%20Search.pdf describes what the Christmas tree stain is and shows what a positive stain is.

https://ncforensics.wordpress.com/2011/10/19/forensic-tests-for-semen-what-you-should-know/ gives information as to the reliability of the Christmas Tree Stain.

http://www.ifi-test.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Semen-DualBuffer.pdf: "RSID™-Semen is designed for fast, easy, and reliable detection of human semen from a variety of samples encountered by forensic laboratories including clothing, bedding, vaginal swabs, prophylactics, and stained surfaces. The test will detect as little as 1 µL of human semen, and test results are complete within 10 minutes.

Part 3 next.; March 18, 2018 at 10:50 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

Part 3:

I repeat, the report of the SBI crime lab was no evidence of semen.

You might ask, how do we now that the SBI crime lab did the tests?

Check out http://reason.com/archives/2010/08/23/north-carolinas-corrupted-crim, which takes you to North Carolina's Corrupted Crime Lab.

This report details how the NC SBI Crime lab worked to get prosecutors incriminating evidence against defendants, why would the SBI Crime lab not do the tests, why would the SBI crime lab have reported back exculpatory evidence in that kind of environment?

Regardless of my aditted gaffe in my comment of March 18, 2018 at 5:31 AM, the bottom line is that the SBI crime lab found no evidence of semen on the rape kit, and your anonymous rapist alternative explanation is discredited. No factual evidence that the DNA wsa deposited at the Lacrosse party, no opportunity for Crystal to engage in sex after the party, that all does mean the DNA was deposited on Crystal's person before the party and that she did not disclose her entire consensual sexual history.

I guess I owe you thanks, for giving me the opportunity to show how thoroughly discredited your anonymous rapist alternative explanation is.; March 18, 2018 at 11:03 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

Epilogue:

THANK YOU KENNY. THANK YOU KENNY. THANK YOU KENNY. THANK YOU KENNY. THANK YOU KENNY.

STEW STEW STEW STEW STEW STEW STEW STEW STEW STEW AND STEW AGAIN.; March 18, 2018 at 11:05 AM
Anonymous said...: Clarification of part of Part 2:

"Unless an elevated level of Acid Phosphatase had been found Acid Phosphatase results would have been meaningless. Only an elevated Acid Phosphatase would have been consistent with semen. Was there an elevated level of Acid Phosphatase? The SBI report, no evidence of semen, and that is fact, suggests no elevated level of acid phosphatase was found.; March 18, 2018 at 11:16 AM
Anonymous said...: UdaUbes Pubes.; March 18, 2018 at 12:21 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny or Sidney or both continue to post anonymously to create the illusion that they have support.; March 18, 2018 at 12:22 PM
kenhyderal supporter said...: I'm proud to call kenhyderal my friend.; March 18, 2018 at 12:42 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal has no friendses.

Everybody hates Kenhyderal

We hates Kenhyderal

We hates Kenhyderal forever.

Kenhyderal wants our precious

Gollum; March 18, 2018 at 1:58 PM
guillermo said...: Kenny,
I hope you're aware of what you've accomplished -- all because you refused to take my advice. You once had so many friends on this blog, and now you're fighting with almost everyone. Sidney and I are now your only two friends.
Take my advice: you know I only want what's best for you.
Once again, it may help if you discuss this with your parents and older siblings.
Let me know what you think.; March 18, 2018 at 3:16 PM
kenhyderal said...: Dr. Anonymous said: "I guess I owe you thanks, for giving me the opportunity to show how thoroughly discredited your anonymous rapist alternative explanation is"...........................Since there was DNA extracted from sperm that means semen was at one time present. That there was no finding of semen is meaningless. The outside limit for it to be detected is 72 hours. Crystal gave a complete account of her whereabouts throughout that period and prior to it. The only client falling into that time frame refused to provide a DNA sample but denied any sexual contact with Crystal. Keep in mind three unexplained DNA samples were identified. Also keep in mind the DNA of her boyfriend and her regular driver were found and that was information she had provided.; March 18, 2018 at 9:31 PM
kenhyderal said...: Guillermo said: "You once had so many friends on this blog, and now you're fighting with almost everyone".......... Crystal is my friend.; March 18, 2018 at 9:37 PM
guillermo said...: Kenny,
I wouldn't count on Crystal. I realize you're in love with her, but she doesn't love you.
Be very careful!; March 18, 2018 at 10:15 PM
Anonymous said...: ssKenhyderal:

"Dr. Anonymous said: "I guess I owe you thanks, for giving me the opportunity to show how thoroughly discredited your anonymous rapist alternative explanation is"...........................Since there was DNA extracted from sperm that means semen was at one time present. That there was no finding of semen is meaningless."

Another example of how you try to bullshit your way around and through FACTS which do not mesh with your racist guilt presumption, your obsession with believing this woman who you say you like and respect had been brutally gang raped. I do not deny that semen was at one time present The issue is when it was put there. If Semen had not been put there at the party, and that is what she alleged in her police statement, then she could not have been raped at the party

"The OUTSIDE(emphasis added) limit for it to be detected is 72 hours. Crystal gave a complete account of her whereabouts throughout that period and prior to it."

The Lacrosse party happened LESS than "The outside limit for [semen] to be detected". The Lacrosse party was well within "The outside limit for [semen] to be detected" If Crystal had been raped at the party, evidence of semen WOULD, according to you, have been detected on the rape kit. There was no evidence of semen on the rape kit. Ergo, there was no evidence that semen had been deposited "within The outside limit for it to be detected".

"The only client falling into that time frame refused to provide a DNA sample but denied any sexual contact with Crystal. Keep in mind three unexplained DNA samples were identified. Also keep in mind the DNA of her boyfriend and her regular driver were found and that was information she had provided."

So? The results of the SBI crime lab testing, again, was no evidence of semen on the rape kit. That proves unequivocally that no semen had been deposited on Crystal at the time of the party. So far as Crystal's consensual sex history, the inescapable conclusion is, she did not disclose her complete entire consensual sexual history. Why? Because she knew it would discredit her allegation of rape?; March 19, 2018 at 2:49 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"Guillermo said: "You once had so many friends on this blog, and now you're fighting with almost everyone".......... Crystal is my friend."

If a woman really is your friend you would not obsess upon believing she had been brutally gang raped.; March 19, 2018 at 2:51 AM
Anonymous said...: Clarification for Kenhyderal:

If a woman really is your friend you would not obsess upon believing she had been brutally gang raped IN THE FACE OF ZERO EVIDENCE SHE HAD BEEN RAPED.; March 19, 2018 at 2:55 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

Explain this:

"The outside limit for it(semen) to be detected is 72 hours."

What does it mean other than Semen can be detected on a woman as long as 72 hours after it had been deposited.

No evidence of semen was found on Crystal's rape kit.

What else could that mean other than whenever semen had been deposited on Crystal it was 72 hours or more BEFORE the rape kit was collected.

That takes the time of semen deposition outside the time frame in which the Lacrosse party happened.

Ergo, as the rape Crystal described in her police statement was a rape in which semen was deposited, she lied about being raped. The absence of evidence of semen on the rape kit proves no rape happened at the Lacrosse party.

Your alternative interpretation of the facts remained thoroughly discredited.; March 19, 2018 at 3:41 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny, how does it feel that your friend Crystal lied about being raped.

Sidney, the rape kit testing results proves Crystal lied about being raped.

So much for your claim that no one ever proved Crystal lied about being raped.; March 19, 2018 at 3:54 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhydera:

Thank you yet again for giving me the opportunity to further show your belief that there were unidentified rapists at the Lacrosse party is thoroughly discredited and debunked.

THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU and THANK YOU again.; March 19, 2018 at 6:28 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

If you haven't fallen off the Turnip truck, it is because you never had the ability to climb on it in the first place.

It does not change the fact that you are a black on white guilt presuming racist with the ethics and morals of a Scottsboro persecutor.; March 19, 2018 at 6:56 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

Why did Nifong go looking for DNA evidence which would incriminate the Lacrosse players after getting none from the SBI crime lab?

When Nifong got the results from DNA Security, which results exonerated the men he had indicted for first degree forcible rape. Did Nifong seek to find out who the men were who did deposit their DNA on Crystal? No. He concealed that evidence.

Did that show that Nifong believed there were unidentified rapists at the party? No.

Nifong's actions after getting the results from DNA Security discredit you alternative explanation of why the DNA was there, your explanation being that there were unidentified rapists at the party.; March 19, 2018 at 7:03 AM
guiowen said...: Kenhyderal,
A good question would be, why did your friend Fat Kilgo not tell good old Mike Nifong about the mystery rapists?
Unfortunately, so far as I can tell, Kilgo is in no shape to answer questions about this. I can imagine his answer: "Spin Ubes"!; March 19, 2018 at 9:36 AM
kenhyderal said...: Dr. Anonymous said: " "The outside limit for it(semen) to be detected is 72 hours."...........................Yes but it may be undetectable after as little as three hours"; March 19, 2018 at 10:11 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"Dr. Anonymous said: " "The outside limit for it(semen) to be detected is 72 hours."...........................Yes but it may be undetectable after as little as three hours"

Still adds up to no PROOF that the DNA found on Crystal was deposited at the Lacrosse party.

To determine when the DNA was deposited it would have to be determined who the donors were and when they had sex with Crystal, and Nifong did not want to do that, which does indicate that Nifong himself did not believe in anonymous rapists.; March 19, 2018 at 10:20 AM
JSwift said...: Kenny,

Congratulations. Your master trolling is on full display for all to admire.

You find a quote that indicates that semen generally is undetectable after 72 hours and may be undetectable in as little as 3 hours. Because Mangum's SANE examination was a few hours longer than the 3 hour minimum, you correctly conclude that it is possible that semen from a gang rape at the party may have degraded by the time of the exam. I agree with you that the short delay until the SANE exam means that you cannot conclude with absolute certainty that Magnum was not raped at the party.

You then argue that because probabilities are subjective, one cannot state whether or not degradation at the low end of the range is highly likely or highly unlikely. The conclusion reached by most readers (i.e., that a rapid degradation is a low probability event) is only an opinion and thus proves nothing.

Finally, because you post under a pseudonym and have self-identified, your opinion is more valid than the opinions of all other posters. Your opinion is that it is highly likely that Magnum was raped at the lacrosse party and a rapid degradation of the semen does not disprove that. If any reader doesn't accept that opinion, then that reader is an asshole.

Well done, Kenny! Well done.

John D. Smith
New York, NY; March 19, 2018 at 10:37 AM
guillermo said...: Kenny,
How wonderful! You have three friends here now: Sidney Harr, John Smith, and Guillermo.
Good going!; March 19, 2018 at 10:55 AM
Anonymous said...: From http://projects.nfstc.org/workshops/resources/literature/Screening/27_The%20persistance%20of%20seminal%20constituents%20in%20the%20human%20vagina.pdf:

"SUMMARY
The persistence of spermatozoa, seminal acid phosphatase, choline and seminal bloodgroup
antigens in the human vagina after sexual intercourse has been studied and the
following results obtained.
1. Spermatozoa were usually found up to 3 days after intercourse and were
occasionally found up to 6 days afterwards. Smears without spermatozoa were obtained
from swabs taken as early as 28 hours, but remained rare until 2 days after intercourse.
2. Seminal acid phosphatase sometimes remained detectable up to 3 days after sexual
intercourse. The test was most useful on swabs taken within 1 day and rarely useful after
2 days.
3. Choline was usually only detectable on swabs taken within 1 day of intercourse and
even within this time many negative results were obtained. The probability of positive
results declined swiftly after 14 hours.
4. Seminal blood-group antigens were only detected at a useful level on swabs taken
within 48 hours of intercourse. The chances of obtaining a positive result decreased
swiftly with an increasing time interval after intercourse."

The failure to find any evidence of semen or sperm on Crystal's rape kit materials indicates overwhelmingly that no semen was deposited on Crystal's person at the Lacrosse party.; March 19, 2018 at 11:18 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

This is regard to your reference to Dr. Manly's exam on which she saw a whitish fluid in Crystal's genital tract. It is from the URL I posted in my previous comment:

"Semen is usually identified by the presence of spermatozoa. There are widely varying
estimates of the time that spermatozoa survive in the vagina. Pollack1 in his survey of the literature gives various estimates from 30 minutes to 17 days. More recently Sharpe2mstated that non-motile spermatozoa are usually found for 1 to 12 hours after intercourse, exceptional1y for 18 to 24 hours, and in one unique case they were found 3 to 4 days after intercourse Morrison3 stated that they could be found up to 9 days after inter-course."e

NO markers for sperm were found on Crystal's rape kit. Considering the time frame, when the party happened, when the rape kit evidence was gathered, the absence of sperm markers is significant and does not show that semen was deposited at the party. To establish a rape had happened at the party, the Prosecution had to establish semen was deposited on Crystal's person, and Crystal did allege in her police statement that her assailants did deposit their semen on her.; March 19, 2018 at 11:28 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

This is from the same URL I gave in my comment of March 19, 2018 at 11:18 AM:

"Spermatozoa, as the most unequivocal and longest surviving seminal-constituent in the
vagina, are the most useful indications of the presence of semen, remaining sometimes
for as long as 3-4 days after seminal AP and choline have ceased to be detectable."

I say again, the SBI crime lab testing showed no evidence of any marker for sperm.

That says that no one deposited sperm on Crystal at the Lacrosse party. There was no rape at the Lacrosse party.; March 19, 2018 at 11:38 AM
Anonymous said...: No matter how you spin it, Kenny, your anonymous rapist alternative explanation has been and remains discredited.; March 19, 2018 at 11:50 AM
FakeKenhyderal said...: Sidney Harr:

Why do you take time to respond to meaningless posts when there are are questions unanswered that would advance discussion of the current topic?

For example, the questions regarding your methods of delivering your complaints to the defendants.; March 19, 2018 at 12:34 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "I say again, the SBI crime lab testing showed no evidence of any marker for sperm".............................Dead wrong. The DNA found was extracted from sperm.; March 19, 2018 at 1:34 PM
kenhyderal said...: JohnD said: "The conclusion reached by most readers (i.e., that a rapid degradation is a low probability event) is only an opinion and thus proves nothing".................... It was at a minimum 6 1/2 hours and most likely more than 9 hours that the rape kit was prepared.; March 19, 2018 at 1:50 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"Anonymous said: "I say again, the SBI crime lab testing showed no evidence of any marker for sperm".............................Dead wrong. The DNA found was extracted from sperm."

Was it found by the SBI crime lab or was it found by DNA Security.

Answer the question, providing the man has not had a vasectomy, could a woman have sex with a man and not have DNA from sperm.

The question is, when did the sperm fraction DNA get there. The SBI testing definitively ruled out the Party as the time of the sperm deposition. Otherwise there would have been evidence, like an elevated Acid Phosphatase, a positive Christmas tree stain, a positive RSID-Semen.

No matter how you try to spin it, your alternative anonymous rapist explanation has been and remains discredited.; March 19, 2018 at 1:50 PM
guillermo said...: Kenny,
Be careful, other people are getting angry at you again.; March 19, 2018 at 1:56 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"JohnD said: "The conclusion reached by most readers (i.e., that a rapid degradation is a low probability event) is only an opinion and thus proves nothing".................... It was at a minimum 6 1/2 hours and most likely more than 9 hours that the rape kit was prepared."

Read my comment of March 19, 2018 at 11:18 AM.

It takes days for evidence of sperm, evidence of elevated acid phosphatase to disapear following sex/ That it was 6 1/2 to 9hours to collect the rape kit materials is irrelevant.

The results of SBI testing of the rape kit materials rules out the Lacrosse party as the site of the DNA deposition on Crystal.

Your anonymous alternative explanation of how the DNA got there remains thoroughly discredited.; March 19, 2018 at 2:07 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhydeal:

What at all is unusual about finding sperm fraction DNA on a woman who has had sexual intercourse? Nothing.

Read the references I have given.

Determining the time of sperm deposition from a rape kit depends on finding more than DNA. It requires finding an elevated Acid Phosphatase, a positive Christmas tree stain, a positive RSID-Semen.

Those markers persist for days after intercourse, consensual or forced.

Your alternative anonymous rapist explanation remains and always has been thoroughly discredited.; March 19, 2018 at 2:16 PM
JSwift said...: Kenny estimates: It was at a minimum 6 1/2 hours and most likely more than 9 hours that the rape kit was prepared.

Thanks for your estimate. That seems consistent with my earlier statement that the delay for the SANE examination was a few hours longer than the 3 hour minimum. 6 1/2 to 9 is much closer to the 3 hour limit than to the 72 hour limit.

As I understand the article you quoted, sperm almost never is degraded more quickly than 3 hours (i.e., there is a probability of degradation of approximately 0% at 3 hours) and is almost always degraded by 72 hours (i.e., there is a probability of degradation of approximately 100% at 72 hours). I assume that the longer the time period, the higher the probability of degradation. In other words, the probability of degradation increases with the passage of time.

Although your quotation did not specify how the probability of degradation increases with time, I thought it would be useful to consider a simple straight line model. The difference between 3 hours (0% probability) and 72 hours (100% probability) is 69 hours. 10 hours (a little more than the 9 hours you estimated) is 7 hours longer than the 3 hour minimum, or a little more than 10% of the total 69 hour difference. If the probability of degradation increased linearly with time (a simplified model I raise only for illustration), the probability of degradation would be about 10.14% (equal to 7 divided by 69). I would think that many readers might consider 10% to be a "low probability event" (the term to which you appeared to be objecting).

While I understand that a discussion of probabilities will be subjective and my straight line model is undoubtedly too simplistic, it does appear that you are too quick to imply that other readers are assholes because they hold a different opinion than you.

John D. Smith
New York, NY; March 19, 2018 at 3:14 PM
Anonymous said...: Udaman John D. Smith.; March 19, 2018 at 3:40 PM
kenhyderal said...: "I imply no such a thing. Here's another reference with an even shorter time-line Analyses of post-coital vaginal swabs show that AP activity will markedly decrease after 24 hours and diminish after 48 hours. Jean-Pascal Allery et al , Rapid detection of sperm: Comparison of two methods, 10 Journal of Clinical Forensic Medicine 5, 6 (2003)"; March 19, 2018 at 3:47 PM
JSwift said...: Kenny estimates again: Analyses of post-coital vaginal swabs show that AP activity will markedly decrease after 24 hours

Isn't 6 1/2 hours to 9 hours less than 24 hours? Total degradation in 9 hours still seems like a low probability event.

John D. Smith
New York, NY; March 19, 2018 at 3:58 PM
guillermo said...: Kenny,
What are you doing? Why don't you follow my advice?; March 19, 2018 at 4:28 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhuyderal:

""I imply no such a thing. Here's another reference with an even shorter time-line Analyses of post-coital vaginal swabs show that AP activity will markedly decrease after 24 hours and diminish after 48 hours. Jean-Pascal Allery et al , Rapid detection of sperm: Comparison of two methods, 10 Journal of Clinical Forensic Medicine 5, 6 (2003)"

http://projects.nfstc.org/workshops/resources/literature/Screening/27_The%20persistance%20of%20seminal%20constituents%20in%20the%20human%20vagina.pdf:

"SUMMARY
The persistence of spermatozoa, seminal acid phosphatase, choline and seminal bloodgroup
antigens in the human vagina after sexual intercourse has been studied and the
following results obtained.
1. Spermatozoa were usually found up to 3 days after intercourse and were
occasionally found up to 6 days afterwards. Smears without spermatozoa were obtained
from swabs taken as early as 28 hours, but remained rare until 2 days after intercourse.
2. Seminal acid phosphatase sometimes remained detectable up to 3 days after sexual
intercourse. The test was most useful on swabs taken within 1 day and rarely useful after2 days.
3. Choline was usually only detectable on swabs taken within 1 day of intercourse and
even within this time many negative results were obtained. The probability of positive
results declined swiftly after 14 hours.
4. Seminal blood-group antigens were only detected at a useful level on swabs taken
within 48 hours of intercourse. The chances of obtaining a positive result decreased
swiftly with an increasing time interval after intercourse."; March 19, 2018 at 4:35 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

Your guilt presuming racism establishes nothing as fact.; March 19, 2018 at 4:36 PM
JSwift said...: Kenny claims: I imply no such a thing

Are you willing to concede that an opinion that the unidentified male DNA came from prior undisclosed sexual activity on Mangum's part is not unreasonable?

John D. Smith
New York, NY; March 19, 2018 at 4:45 PM
guiowen said...: Kenny concedes nothing. Such things would be out of context.; March 19, 2018 at 6:00 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

Who is this dude Guillermo?; March 19, 2018 at 7:35 PM
kenhyderal said...: John D said: "Total degradation in 9 hours still seems like a low probability event"................. I was also questioning your straight line hypothesis by showing that degradation is most likely front end loaded and 72 hours is most likely anomalous. Even Dr. Anonymous' quote shows that; March 19, 2018 at 8:50 PM
kenhyderal said...: John D said: "Are you willing to concede that an opinion that the unidentified male DNA came from prior undisclosed sexual activity on Mangum's part is not unreasonable?"........... No I'm not. The reason being I know Crystal and I have full confidence that she told the truth. Her statements are bolstered by the expected DNA finding of her identified consensual history. She is not a devious person and is most often naively frank.; March 19, 2018 at 8:59 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "Who is this dude Guillermo?" Don't know, don't care. Obviously a troll.; March 19, 2018 at 9:00 PM
guillermo said...: Kenhyderal,
How can you say that? You know all I do here is in your best interest.; March 19, 2018 at 10:16 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"John D said: "Total degradation in 9 hours still seems like a low probability event"................. I was also questioning your straight line hypothesis by showing that degradation is most likely front end loaded and 72 hours is most likely anomalous. Even Dr. Anonymous' quote shows that"

No it doesn't.

Markers for semen and sperm persist for days following intercourse.

The Rape kit materials were taken within hours of the alleged rape. The SBI Crime Lab reported no evidence of semen(FACT).

The only time the unidentified DNA could have been deposited on Crystal's person was BEFORE the Lacrosse party took place.

Your alternative anonymous rapist explanation has been and remains totally discredited.; March 20, 2018 at 2:58 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"John D said: "Are you willing to concede that an opinion that the unidentified male DNA came from prior undisclosed sexual activity on Mangum's part is not unreasonable?"........... No I'm not."

You just showed yourself to be anything but reasonable, not at all unsurprising in that it comes from a black on white guilt presuming racist with the morals and ethics of a Scottsboro persecutor, all of whom showed themselves to be racist and anything but reasonable.

The reason being I know Crystal and I have full confidence that she told the truth. Her statements are bolstered by the expected DNA finding of her identified consensual history. She is not a devious person and is most often naively frank."

Kenny, these are FACTS. Crystal alleged she had been raped at the party, and that her assailants had deposited their semen on her. Markers for semen and sperm persist for days in the female genital tract following intercourse. The rape kit materials were taken hours after intercourse. The rape kit materials showed no evidence of semen. Crystal did not engage in sex after the party. "Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth"(attributed to Sherlock Holmes-Sidney delusionally thinks he is capable of Sherlockian deduction).

What "must be the truth" is that the DNA found on Crystal via the DNA Security testing of the rape kit was deposited on Crystal before the party, probably days before the party.

One still wonders what kind of gratification you get from obsessing with the idea that this woman, who you call friend, had been brutally gang raped.; March 20, 2018 at 3:16 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

An hypothetical situation for you to consider:

Suppose you testified in Crystal's murder trial as to Crystal's good character. In a criminal trial the prosecution can not go after a defendant's character UNLESS the defense introduces evidence that the defendant is of good character.

Had you testified to Crystal's character, you would have opened the door to the prosecution introducing evidence that Crystal was not of good character, evidence she lied when she accused the Lacrosse players of rape, actual evidence she had set Milton Walker's clothes on fire, that she had stolen the taxi cab and tried to run down a Deputy.; March 20, 2018 at 3:23 AM
Guillermo said...: Kenny, my friend, it is you who is a troll.; March 20, 2018 at 3:26 AM
Anonymous said...: One more question for Kenhyderal:

You seem to think it significant that sperm fraction dna had been found on Crystal's person.

Crystal was sexually active, something you admit when you refer to her consensual sexual history.

How can a woman get sperm fraction DNA in her genital tract other than by having intercourse?

You can talk about Crystal's admitted consensual intercourse history, but, yet again, the SBI testing of the rape kit demonstrated conclusively she had not been subjected to forcible intercourse at the party, and the inescapable conclusion is that the sperm fraction DNA got there before the party, and Crystal did not divulge her entire consensual sexual history.

One reason may be, it would have discredited her allegation of rape.

Another is, she was a prostitute, prostitution is illegal in NC, and revealing her history would have opened her up to prosecution.; March 20, 2018 at 3:30 AM
Guillermo said...: Please explain your last post. What evidence do you have?; March 20, 2018 at 3:39 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"John D said: "Are you willing to concede that an opinion that the unidentified male DNA came from prior undisclosed sexual activity on Mangum's part is not unreasonable?"........... No I'm not. The reason being I know Crystal and I have full confidence that she told the truth. Her statements are bolstered by the expected DNA finding of her identified consensual history. She is not a devious person and is most often naively frank."

Which is the same thing as saying that the Lacrosse defendants should have been presumed guilty solely n the word of Crystal Mangum. I remind you that Crystal alleged a gang rape in which her assailants had left their DNA on her. Te only male DNA found on Crystal did not match the DNA of the men she had accused. Although youtrust her, this FACT shows her word was not at all reliable.

Leave it to a black on white racist who believes innocent Caucasian(William Cohan's description) men should be convicted of a felony sex crime based only on the unreliable word of a black accuser. I remind you, you are on record that the defendants should have been tried before a jury of Crystal's peers, a jury i=biase towards a guilty verdict.; March 20, 2018 at 5:47 AM
JSwift said...: Kenny answers my question whether he is willing to concede that an opinion that the unidentified male DNA came from prior undisclosed sexual activity on Mangum's part is not unreasonable: No I'm not. The reason being I know Crystal and I have full confidence that she told the truth.

In other words, anyone who holds an opinion different than Kenny is being unreasonable. That is another way of saying that anyone who holds an opinion different than Kenny is an asshole.

John D. Smith
New York, NY; March 20, 2018 at 7:11 AM
Anonymous said...: For JSwift:

This might be a laugh for you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DNDqpmsXH2I

A perfect retort for Kenny, in my humble opinion.; March 20, 2018 at 8:08 AM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "Another is, she was a prostitute, prostitution is illegal in NC, and revealing her history would have opened her up to prosecution"........................Libel. Tell us your name you craven coward.; March 20, 2018 at 8:48 AM
guillermo said...: Kenny,
Please stop fighting. Anonymous 3:30 said "One reason may be..."
It is better if you don't get into such insulting discussions, It is because of this that you have lost so many friends.
If you won't take my advice, at least consult with your parents or older siblings.; March 20, 2018 at 9:39 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"Anonymous said: "Another is, she was a prostitute, prostitution is illegal in NC, and revealing her history would have opened her up to prosecution"........................Libel."

What I said, albeit in different words, is that I believe Crystal did not divulge her entire consensual sexual history, and that one possible explanation is she was a prostitute, and prostitution is illegal in North Carolina(see http://statelaws.findlaw.cthaom/north-carolina-law/north-carolina-prostitution-and-solicitation-laws.html), and revealing her entire consensual sexual history would open her up to prosecution. i add, I made that statement because I do believe she was a prostitute. I expressed an opinion. Sidney Harr has expressed an opinion that the Lacrosse players were guilty of raping Crystal-he did that each and every time he proclaimed Crystal was the"victim/accuser" in the "Duke Rape Case", and there is zero evidence that Crystal was ever raped, and I say again you have provided no evidence, just your opinion of what the facts meant. So you seem to be saying you are entitled to your opinions and Zidney is entitled to his opinions but someone who holds different opinions is not and should be liable to civil prosecution. You graphically, out of your own words confirm JSwift's opinion of you, "In other words, anyone who holds an opinion different than Kenny is being unreasonable. That is another way of saying that anyone who holds an opinion different than Kenny is an asshole."

Why is that not selective justice, that those of us who hold opinions different from yours should be prosecuted but you should not?

"Tell us your name you craven coward."

STEW KENNY STEW KENNY STEW KENNY STEW KENNY STEW KENNY STEW KENNY STEW KENNY STEW KENNY STEW KENNY STEW KENNY STEW KENNY STEW KENNY STEW KENNY STEW KENNY STEW KENNY.

It is has been more than 12 years since the Duke Rape hoax became news and you so far have provided zero proof that Crystal had ever been raped, why should I or any one else worry about what you think of me.

You seem to care more about what I think about you, what I think about the woman who you believe had been raped even though there is not and never will be any evidence she had been raped.; March 20, 2018 at 11:08 AM
Anonymous said...: kenny said:

"Crystal is my friend."

Crystal wouldn't know you if she ran over you while driving a stolen car in a drunken stupor on her way to visit a John.; March 20, 2018 at 11:19 AM
Anonymous said...: Ken Hyderal:

You are still a black on white guilt presuming racist with the morals and ethics of a Scottsboo persecutor.

Stewart Kenneth.; March 20, 2018 at 11:31 AM
guillermo said...: Kenny,
Do you understand what's happening? Why do you insist on fighting?; March 20, 2018 at 12:09 PM
Anonymous said...: kenny said:

"Crystal is my friend."

Crystal wouldn't know you if she set you clothes on fire and threatened to stab you in a fit of anger.; March 20, 2018 at 1:18 PM
Anonymous said...: kenny said:

"Crystal is my friend."

Crystal wouldn't know you if she falsely accused you of rape.; March 20, 2018 at 1:19 PM
Anonymous said...: kenny said:

"Crystal is my friend."

Crystal wouldn't know you if she stabbed you in the back - "in self-defense".; March 20, 2018 at 1:20 PM
kenhyderal said...: John D said: Kenny is being unreasonable. That is another way of saying that anyone who holds an opinion different than Kenny is an asshole".............. Logic John D.; logic!; March 20, 2018 at 1:29 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"John D said: Kenny is being unreasonable. That is another way of saying that anyone who holds an opinion different than Kenny is an asshole".............. Logic John D.; logic!"

Is it logical to believe Crystal had been raped when there is zero evidence that she ever told the truth when she alleged she had been raped?; March 20, 2018 at 1:58 PM
JSwift said...: Kenny @1:29:

You misquoted me. If you are going to criticize my comment, you should at least provide the quote in full. I was stating my opinion regarding the substance of your arguments.

John D. Smith
New York, NY; March 20, 2018 at 2:07 PM
Anonymous said...: JSwift said...

Kenny @1:29:

You misquoted me. If you are going to criticize my comment, you should at least provide the quote in full. I was stating my opinion regarding the substance of your arguments.

John D. Smith
New York, NY"

Kenny just has an alternative understanding of what you said.; March 20, 2018 at 2:19 PM
guillermo said...: Kenny,
Now you're even fighting with John D. Smith. You're once again down to two friends: Sidney and guillermo.
Please think before you get into these quarrels.; March 20, 2018 at 3:12 PM
JSwift said...: Guillermo:

Do you think I am wrong to complain that Kenny misquoted me? Or should Kenny avoid misquoting others?

John D. Smith
New York, NY; March 20, 2018 at 3:41 PM
Guillermo said...: To the poster at 11:08:

If you are saying that there was some whoring going on, you owe it to us to provide evidence.; March 20, 2018 at 3:42 PM
guillermo said...: John Smith,
You are right to complain about Kenny misquoting you. Kenny knows he should not misquote anyone. The trouble is, he prides himself on being a "fighter", and he misquotes people in furtherance of his "fights". I try to keep him from doing this, but he does not hear my advice.; March 20, 2018 at 4:24 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous Guillermo said...

To the poster at 11:08:

If you are saying that there was some whoring going on, you owe it to us to provide evidence."

Read what I wrote about the possible explanations why Crystal would not divulge her complete consensual sexual history.

What Kenny said was that the male DNA found on her did not match the DNA of any partner with whom she admitted she had consensual sex.

Read my other comments about the SBI testing of the rape kit. The rape kit materials were collected within hours of the Lacrosse party. The report of the SBI crime lab was no evidence of semen, blood, saliva. After sex, markers for semen persist in the female genital tract for days. As the SBI testing of the rape kit material found no evidence of semen in Crystal's genital tract hours after the alleged rape, that did mean that Crystal did not have sex at the Lacrosse party, forced or otherwise. She did not have sex in the hours after she left the party. DNA Security found Male DNA on her person, on and in intimate areas of her body. The only possible explanation is that she did have sex before the party, probably days prior to the party. If that DNA did not match the DNA of men with whom she admitted she had sex, and it did not come from anyone who had attended the party, the only explanation is that she did have sex with other men who she did not identify. In other words, she did not divulge her complete consensual sexual history.

I gave two possible explanations as to why she would not divulge her complete consensual sexual history:

Explanation 1 would be she would have discredited her story of being raped at the party.

Explsnation 2 would be, she was engaged in prostitution, which is illegal in North Carolina, and she did not want to expose herself to criminal prosecution.

To rephrase, there is a possibility she was engaged in prostitution. If that was indeed the case, and I said if, then I ask, would she have owned up to that illegal activity?; March 20, 2018 at 5:04 PM
The Great Kilgo said...: Kenhyderal, please help me! This fel;kjijci; March 20, 2018 at 7:44 PM
Guillermo said...: Kenny,

Do you accept this explanation?; March 20, 2018 at 7:45 PM
kenhyderal said...: John. D said: "In other words, anyone who holds an opinion different than Kenny is being unreasonable. That is another way of saying that anyone who holds an opinion different than Kenny is an asshole"........... There. My response is the same as it was at 1:29 PM 3/20/18; March 20, 2018 at 8:43 PM
guillermo said...: Kenny,
Why do you insist in fighting?
And all this for a woman who doesn't even remember that you exist!; March 20, 2018 at 9:27 PM
Anonymous said...: dKenhyderal:

"John. D said: "In other words, anyone who holds an opinion different than Kenny is being unreasonable. That is another way of saying that anyone who holds an opinion different than Kenny is an asshole"........... There. My response is the same as it was at 1:29 PM 3/20/18"

Kenny again engaging in DENY DUCK DODGE EVADE AVOID.; March 21, 2018 at 12:57 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

With regard to, the DNA found on Crystal did not match the DNA of the men with whom whe had sex.

How did you determine that?

The existence of that DNA was unknown to anyone except Nifong and his cronies until December of 2006, months after the DNA was discovered and Nifong sure did not try to find out who the DN came from.

How about you prove you actually examined the records of Crystal'activity. Or is it just another incidence of you trust Crystal.

If that is the case, you are not credible.; March 21, 2018 at 1:03 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal

You have on multiple occasions commented on this, that Dr. Julie Manly found a whitish fluid in Crystal's genital tract which she assumed was semen.

The report of the SBI crime lab on the rape kit materials was, no evidence of semen, blood or saliva.

The results of the SBI testing of the rape kit materials does confirm that Crystal did not have sex, forcible or otherwise at the Lacrosse party.

If that fluid actually had been semen, and if it had been deposited on Crystal at the Lacrosse party, the rape kit materials would have tested positive for markers of semen, elevated acid phosphatase, positive christmas tree stain, positive RSID-Semen.; March 21, 2018 at 2:39 AM
Anonymous said...: UdaUbes Pubes.; March 21, 2018 at 4:44 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny or Sidney or both continue to post anonymously to create the illusion that they have support.; March 21, 2018 at 4:44 AM
Anonymous said...: Why is g posting as guillermo?; March 21, 2018 at 5:28 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal comment of March 19, 2018 at 1:50 PM

"it was at a minimum 6 1/2 hours and most likely more than 9 hours that the rape kit was prepared."

If that does not mean you believe that markers of Semen had deteriorated to the point of undetectability during that time interval, then what does it mean?

If the fluid found in Crystal's Genital tract in the ER was semen, then the rape kit materials were taken when semen was present. The rape kit materials showed no evidence of semen. Ergo, the fluid found in Crystal's Genital tract, which you say was assumed to be semen, was not semen. Ergo, semen had not been deposited on Crystal's person at the Lacrosse party, regardless of Crystal's allegation that she had been subjected to a gang rape in which the perpetrators had deposited their semen.

It adds up to, your anonymous rapist alternative interpretation is, always was and always will be thoroughly discredited.; March 21, 2018 at 6:38 AM
Anonymous said...: DKenhyeral:

Again about Crystal's alleged consensual sexual history.

When was said history taken?

I point out to you again, the existence of the DNA found on Crystal in the wake of her alleged rape was not public knowledge until approximately 9 months AFTER she made her rape allegation. Between the rape allegation and the outing of Nifong's concealment of exculpatory evidence, what reason would there be to take Crystal's consensual sexual history? None.; March 21, 2018 at 6:42 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

Your words from your comment of March 16, 2018 at 3:38 PM:

"A white exudate which Dr. Manley assumed to be semen was found on Crystal's person when she was examined. (FACT)"

I say again, if that fluid was Semen, it would have meant that the rape kit materials were taken when Semen was present in Crystal's genital tract.

The Rape Kit materials should have tested positive for markers of semen.

The Rape kit showed no evidence of semen.

What could that mean other than the fluid observed in Crystal's Genital tract was not semen?

What could that mean other than Semen had not been deposited on Crystal's person at the Lacrosse party?; March 21, 2018 at 8:34 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

Let's get back to the issue of Crystal's consensual sexual history.

Right after the rape exam at the DUMC ER, no one was aware of the DNA evidence found on Crystal. If that was when her history was taken, how could her history be compared to the DNA found on her.

After it was revealed, almost 9months after the rape exam that corrupt DA Nifong tried to convict the Lacrosse defendants by concealing evidence which established their innocence, did he ever question her about her consensual sexual history? I doubt it. That would have discredited his case against the Lacrosse defendants who he was so determined to convict. He also did not want to attract attention to his concealment of he exculpatory, innocence establishing evidence.

So how can you be so sure the DNA found on Crystal was ever compared to the DNA of each and every man with whom she had sex?; March 21, 2018 at 1:06 PM
Anonymous said...: More for Kenhyderal:

Again regarding the "white exudate which Dr. Manley assumed to be semen":

You have posted about this before. I remember years ago pointing out to you that Dr. Manley did not do a wet mount. Your response was, that would only be be CYA medicine. You yourself did assume the fluid was Semen.

So I say again, if the fluid was Semen, the rape kit materials were taken when semen was present on Crystal's person. If that had been the case, then the delay between the party and the rape examination at the DUMC ER is irrelevant. Markers for Semen should have been detectable. No markers for semen were found on the rape kit.

Give us a reason why other than there was a delay of hours between the alleged rape and the collection of the rape kit materials.; March 22, 2018 at 2:10 AM
Anonymous said...: UdaPubes Ubes.; March 22, 2018 at 3:20 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny or Sidney or both continue to post anonymously to create the illusion that they have support.; March 22, 2018 at 3:21 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

I will make it simple for you.

Said "white exudate which Dr. Manley assumed to be semen", either the fluid was semen or it was not.

If it was semen than the rape kit materials were collected when Semen was present. If it was not Semen then the rape kit materials were connected when Semen was not present.

The SBI Crime lab found no evidence of semen on the rape kit materials.

Which of the above scenarios would account for the findings of the SBI crime lab?; March 22, 2018 at 4:46 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny, I can feel you cringing trying to bullshit your way around and through these facts which do not mesh with your guilt presuming racism.; March 22, 2018 at 5:50 AM
Anonymous said...: CRINGE KENNY CRINGE KENNY CRINGE CRINGE CRINGE; March 22, 2018 at 6:27 AM
kenhyderal said...: "Whites accused you of causing trouble when all you were doing was acting like a normal human being instead of cringing"--- Rosa Parks.; March 22, 2018 at 9:23 AM
FakeKenhyderal said...: "Have you ever been hurt and the place tries to heal a bit, and you just pull the scar off of it over and over again." --- Rosa Parks.; March 22, 2018 at 9:29 AM
kenhyderal said...: Dr. Anonymous said: If it was semen than the rape kit materials were collected when Semen was present"........................ Not necessarily. Dr. Manly arrived at the Hospital at 9:00AM and commenced the physical exam where she saw a whitish fluid she thought to be semen. The exam took much longer than usual because Crystal was screaming in pain. The exam was never totally completed. It was mid-morning before the rape kit was completed and fixed. Ample time for the semen to be dissipated by natural vaginal secretions. This quote id from the lawsuit "Whatever the cause, Levicy and Manly did not document the presence of the white fluid nor do any tests to identify the substance".; March 22, 2018 at 10:20 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"Dr. Anonymous said: If it was semen than the rape kit materials were collected when Semen was present"........................ Not necessarily.

Kenny, read what I said, IF it wss Semen".

Dr. Manly arrived at the Hospital at 9:00AM and commenced the physical exam where she saw a whitish fluid she thought to be semen. The exam took much longer than usual because Crystal was screaming in pain. The exam was never totally completed. It was mid-morning before the rape kit was completed and fixed. Ample time for the semen to be dissipated by natural vaginal secretions."

I have given you documentation, which you willfully ignore. more of your Nifngoan way of supporting yur guilt presuming racism, that markers for semen, elevated acid phosphatase, sperm, markers for sperm persst for days.

"This quote id(sic) from the lawsuit 'Whatever the cause, Levicy and Manly did not document the presence of the white fluid nor do any tests to identify the substance'."

I say again I recall pointing out to you that Dr. Manley did not do wet mount to determine if motile sperm were present and you replied that wet mount would have been CYA medicine. I also recall you making a statement to the effect that Dr Manley was an experienced gynecologist who was capable of recognizing semen(then when I pointed out that Dr. Manley at the time was a first year emergency statement your response was I was tryingto discredit Dr. Manley), and I stand my ground on that.

Your repeated referrals to Dr. Manley seeing a white exudate which she assumed to be Semen, your most recent one I have quoted on this blog entry, says you did presume the fluid to be semen, "A white exudate which Dr. Manley assumed to be semen was found on Crystal's person when she was examined. (FACT)", from March 16, 2018 at 3:38 PM, which you called a fact whih you nterpreted as evidence Crystal had been raped. What you said in the same commen, "There is EVIDENCE(emphasis added), from which I conclude she has been raped." You were assuming that the fluid WAS semen.

You do not at all do a very effective way of bullshitting your way around and through facts which do not mesh with your guilt presuming by indulging in DENY DUCK DODGE, AVOID EVADE what you actually first believed.

The issue remains. If the fluid was semen, which you did initially believed, markers for semen would have been present on the rape kit materials. There were no markers. The fluid was not semen and no one deposited semen on Crystal at the party.

Your anonymous rapist alternative explanation was, is, always will be, remains thorougly discredited.; March 22, 2018 at 11:57 AM
Anonymous said...: , Kenhyderal:

How does this quote from your latest post, "This quote id(sic) from the lawsuit 'Whatever the cause, Levicy and Manly did not document the presence of the white fluid nor do any tests to identify the substance'."

mesh with this quote from your comment of from March 16, 2018 at 3:38 PM, "A white exudate which Dr. Manley assumed to be semen was found on Crystal's person when she was examined. (FACT)"?

Doctor Manly did document that this fluid was present. What she did not do was document what it was, by doing a wet mount. I do recall, when I pointed out to you that she did not do a wet mount, you said that would have been only CYA medicine. If that was not you presuming the fluid was semen, then what was it. I concede if you ask me to copy and paste the quote I am not able to do so in a very timely fashion since it happened many years and hundreds, if not thousands of comments ago. However, I still stand my ground on this.; March 22, 2018 at 12:05 PM
FakeKenhyderal said...: Anonymous@ 12:05

It's simple...

It's a FACT that kenhyderal assumed the white exudate to be semen, and attributed that assumption to Dr. Manly to make his FACT seem more plausible.; March 22, 2018 at 12:36 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

Your quote, "This quote id(sic) from the lawsuit 'Whatever the cause, Levicy and Manly did not document the presence of the white fluid nor do any tests to identify the substance'."

First it is said that Dr. Manly and Nurse Levicy did not document the presence of the fluid.

The it is said they did not do any tests to identify the substance.

If they never documented the presence of the substance in the first place how could they do tests to identify what it was?

If there was no white substance in Crystal's Genital tract, no markers for semen on the rape kit material, how is that evidence that Crystal had sex with anyone at the Lacrosse party, let alone forcible sex/; March 22, 2018 at 12:39 PM
kenhyderal said...: Nothing but semantics. True to form, as a rabid Duke |Lacrosse Apologist you accept nothing, question all and attack everything. Here is the bottom line. Dr. Manly saw a whitish fluid, she assumed to be semen (This is a Fact) Dr. Manly did not test the fluid to confirm it was semen (This is a fact) By the time the rape kit was fixed there was ample time for semen to dissipate and therefore the lab tests would find no seminal acid phosphatase.; March 22, 2018 at 1:23 PM
JSwift said...: Kenny states: By the time the rape kit was fixed there was ample time for semen to dissipate and therefore the lab tests would find no seminal acid phosphatase.

That is probably correct, but the remaining time was not particularly long. I believe the probability of total degradation was still fairly low. The quotations you and Dr. anonymous have cited are consistent with that conclusion. Dr. Anonymous goes further than I do; he claims the SANE examination proves with certainty that semen was not deposited at the party, but rather was deposited earlier.

However, I recognize that a low probability is all you require for your argument. You believe Magnum tells the truth, and unless there is evidence that proves with absolute certainty that a statement is false, all parties must accept her statement as absolute fact. Any failure to accept it as fact is patently unreasonable. Anyone who is unreasonable is not acting in good faith and is therefore an asshole. You are justified in being so smug because you are arguing with assholes.

John D. Smith
New York, NY; March 22, 2018 at 1:38 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"Nothing but semantics. True to form, as a rabid Duke |Lacrosse Apologist you accept nothing, question all and attack everything."

I accept nothing from you because you present nothing.

"Here is the bottom line. Dr. Manly saw a whitish fluid, she assumed to be semen (This is a Fact) Dr. Manly did not test the fluid to confirm it was semen (This is a fact) By the time the rape kit was fixed there was ample time for semen to dissipate and therefore the lab tests would find no seminal acid phosphatase."

Again, the reference I have given shows the markers for semen persist for days. There were no markers of semen found on the rape kit, and that would mean Crystal was not subjected to sex at the Lacrosse party, forcible or otherwise. The hours between the alleged rape and the time of collection of the rape kit materials was not enough time for the evidence of Semen to dissipate.

Why did you say years ago that if Dr. Manly did do a test for semen, specifically for motile sperm, it would have been CYA medicine?

Why did you say that Dr. Manly's fnding a white fluid in Crystal's genital tract was a fact which you interpreted as evidence of rape. This is from your comment of March 16, 2018 at 3:38 PM.; March 22, 2018 at 1:48 PM
kenhyderal said...: DR. Anonymous said: "Why did you say years ago that if Dr. Manly did do a test for semen, specifically for motile sperm, it would have been CYA medicine?"............ That was a blanket statement in response to a question as to why she did not do a confirmation on what she assumed to be semen. One explanation I proffered was the pressure Dr. were under to reduce costs by relying on clinical experience. (eg Do you do a CT scan on a kid who falls off a bike?). If you are not 100% confident you might to CYA, liability-wise. In this case there was no fear of a subsequent lawsuit if she was wrong and it was documented. At a later date she was able to agree with the Defence that there was the alternate possibility of a undiagnosed and symptomless vaginal infection.; March 22, 2018 at 8:51 PM
kenhyderal said...: Dr. Anonymous said: "Why did you say that Dr. Manly's fnding a white fluid in Crystal's genital tract was a fact which you interpreted as evidence of rape.".................... Like you I can make an interpretation of the meaning of facts. This explanation fits with what Crystal has told me happened.; March 22, 2018 at 8:54 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

“DR. Anonymous said: "Why did you say years ago that if Dr. Manly did do a test for semen, specifically for motile sperm, it would have been CYA medicine?"............ That was a blanket statement in response to a question as to why she did not do a confirmation on what she assumed to be semen.”

So you admit you made the statement. If it was an answer it was a rather inappropriate answer. It is standard procedure in an ER in the situation for the examining physician to do a wet mount and it is by no means CYA medicine.

“One explanation I proffered was the pressure Dr. were under to reduce costs by relying on clinical experience. (eg Do you do a CT scan on a kid who falls off a bike?).”

More bullshit you are purveying to get your way around and through facts which do not mesh with your guilt presuming racism. If your concern about Crystal and her alleged rape was genuine you would not have said a wet mount was just CYA medicine, you would have said a wet mount was necessary to confirm Crystal had been raped. If Dr. Manly had done a wet mount, and it showed the presence of motile sperm, You WOULD NOT have said it was CYA medicine. The presence of Motile sperm would have confirmed the fluid was semen, and that would establish that Crystal had been ejaculated upon at the party, which is what she alleged.

“If you are not 100% confident you might to CYA, liability-wise. In this case there was no fear of a subsequent lawsuit if she was wrong and it was documented.”

Wrong. In today’s medico-legal climate, no doc is ever 100% sure he/she will not be sued. The legal experts are free to disagree with me but a lot of medical malpractice suits are not only filed but taken to court in cases in which the Doc was not negligent. I was at one time threatened with a lawsuit. The situation was, a ward clerk forged my name on a chart to a procedure note because the Doc who did the procedure forgot to sign it. The patient had no case but he saw my name and threatened to sue me.

“At a later date she was able to agree with the Defence that there was the alternate possibility of a undiagnosed and symptomless vaginal infection.”

Which means that you were wrong when you said a wet mount would have been CYA medicine. To have dismissed the possibility of the fluid being semen without doing a wet mount in an alleged rape victim would have been negligence, if it had been subsequently confirmed the substance had been semen.

And nothing ever confirmed Crystal had semen in her genital tract when she was examined in the ER.; March 23, 2018 at 2:27 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

Dr. Anonymous said: "Why did you say that Dr. Manly's fnding a white fluid in Crystal's genital tract was a fact which you interpreted as evidence of rape.".................... Like you I can make an interpretation of the meaning of facts. This explanation fits with what Crystal has told me happened.”

And it has been established beyond a doubt what Crystal told you was a lie.; March 23, 2018 at 2:29 AM
Anonymous said...: Clarification:

"Which means that you were wrong when you said a wet mount would have been CYA medicine. To have dismissed the possibility of the fluid being semen without doing a wet mount in an alleged rape victim would have been negligence, if it had been subsequently confirmed the substance had been semen,"

should have been

Which means that you were wrong when you said a wet mount would have been CYA medicine. To have dismissed the possibility of the fluid being semen without doing a wet mount in an alleged rape victim would have been negligence, if it had been subsequently confirmed the substance had been semen.You would not have said the confirmatory procedure was CYA medicine.; March 23, 2018 at 3:44 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

I say this again.

You do not look at the entire picture. You pick out something from the picture which supports your racist guilt presumption and ignore everything which does not.

You cite something which says it is a possibility markers of semen can dissipate in a matter of hours. You ignore a lot of other references which establish that it takes days for markers of semen to dissipate completely and then declare that semen was present in Crystal's genital tract post party.

The facts, and you like to use the term fact, are no evidence was found on the rape kit materials that semen was present. The entire picture says, semen was not deposited on Crystal at the party.

The other part of the rape exam is this: Crystal alleged she had been physically brutalized at the party. The physical exam showed no evidence she had been beaten. There was the finding of diffuse vaginal edema, but that was not at all specific for or indicative of vaginal trauma. The only other findings were small, healed, non bleeding scratches.

Once again I say, you anonymous rapists alternative explanation was,is, and always will be totally discredited.

There is also this Kilgo thing. You can not document Kilgo's anonymous Lacrosse player exists. You can not document that Kilgo ever told you about some anonymous Lacrosse player. You have said you believe Kilgo because his hearsay agrees with what Crystal told you. And it has been established what Crystal told you is not the truth.; March 23, 2018 at 3:57 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

This is how you get things wrong.

You argue that there was semen on the rape kit which dissipated.

You say you believe Crystal's allegation because it meshes with what Crystal told you.

That is saying Crystal's allegation proves semen was present on the rape kit.

WRONG!!!

The presence of semen and markers of semen on the rape kit would corroborate Crystal's allegation. Crystal's allegation does not corroborate the presence of semen on the rape kit.

The FACTS are, the rape kit materials were collected within hours of the alleged rape, well withing the time frame during which evidence of semen deposition took place, and Crystal did allege semen deposition took place. There was no evidence of semen deposition on the Rape kit materials. The rape kit examination did not corroborate Crystal's allegations.

The only possible credible explanation is, Crystal did not tell the truth when she alleged she had been raped.; March 23, 2018 at 5:59 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: HEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP!!
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENTS.

First, apologies for not being active recently in responding to comments, but I have been extremely busy with very important projects which I am confident will result in Crystal's imminent release from custody and her exoneration. Also, I plan on posting another one of my "humble but brilliant opinion" sharlogs... I am aiming for its posting to be no later than tomorrow... Saturday, the 24th.

Alert: Crystal Mangum critics and detractors, now is the time for you to dust off your crying towels... and if you don't have one, get one. Soon.

As you were.; March 23, 2018 at 7:14 AM
FakeKenhyderal said...: Sidney Harr -- Why haven't you addressed the questions regarding your methods of delivering your complaints to the defendants?; March 23, 2018 at 7:25 AM
A Lawyer said...: I have been extremely busy with very important projects which I am confident will result in Crystal's imminent release from custody and her exoneration. [...]Alert: Crystal Mangum critics and detractors, now is the time for you to dust off your crying towels... and if you don't have one, get one. Soon.

How many times have you said that before?; March 23, 2018 at 8:22 AM
kenhyderal said...: Dr. Anonymous said:" The facts, and you like to use the term fact, are no evidence was found on the rape kit materials that semen was present................... The Defence was not as certain as you because they made a point to confront Dr. Manly and make her concede that an exudate from a undiagnose(and apparently symptomless) vaginal infection could explain the presents of this whitish fluid which she assumed to be semen; March 23, 2018 at 10:11 AM
Anonymous said...: kenny:

How does the defense effectively challenging the questionable testimony of Dr. Manly re: her alleged observation of exudate demonstrate they were uncertain that they were uncertain of the fact that semen wasn't present? They proved not only that there no semen present, but they got Dr. Manly to concede the substance she claimed to have observed could have been something else not related to a sexual assault. The defense completely and thoroughly decimated Mangum's false accusation, the DA's case and the supposed medical evidence.

Hypothetically speaking, even if Mangum's lies were true and she was brutally raped, how is that a defense to the charges against her for murdering Mr. Daye, or a basis for challenging her murder conviction?

Troll on, kenny, troll on.; March 23, 2018 at 12:13 PM
FakeKenhyderal said...: FACT -- Mangum told authorities she last had sex a week before the incident.

FACT -- Sperm fraction from a vaginal swab (DSI # 15775) - revealed an autosomal DNA mixture consistent with Mangum's profile. The Y -STR analysis revealed a male profile consistent with that of Matthew Murchison, Mangum's boyfriend. (DSI May 12 Report)

Given these 2 facts we can come to either (or both) of these conclusions:

1) Sperm analysis from vaginal swab can be accurate for much greater than 72 hours. (In the FWIW dept, Y - STR analysis has been completed on 120 year old samples)

2) Crystal Mangum lied about her sexual activities.; March 23, 2018 at 1:00 PM
kenhyderal said...: Sperm both motile and un-motile persist for days and weeks. Semen a physiological fluid is washed away. The deposition of DNA extracted from sperm cant be timed, The presence of semen markers can indicate it's recent deposition with a time bracket of 3 to 72 hours. The rape kit was completed 9 plus hours after the alleged rape. I believe Crystal and so did the DA.; March 23, 2018 at 1:14 PM
guiowen said...: And we all know who the DA was. Good old Mike! Good old Kenny!; March 23, 2018 at 1:19 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"Dr. Anonymous said:" The facts, and you like to use the term fact, are no evidence was found on the rape kit materials that semen was present................... The Defence was not as certain as you because they made a point to confront Dr. Manly and make her concede that an exudate from a undiagnose(and apparently symptomless) vaginal infection could explain the presents of this whitish fluid which she assumed to be semen"

BULLSHIT!!!

The Lacrosse players and their attorneys were confident they were innocent. That they questioned Dr. Manly happened NOT because they were uncertain of their innocence.

Considering the NTO, NC LAW whoever requested the NTO had to have probable cause to believe those to be subjected to the NTO would be suspects. In all her inconsistent stories, Crystal never claimed to be raped by the entire Lacrosse team. The Durham DA did not have probable cause to believe each and every Caucasian Lacrosse team player would be a suspect. The players could have successfully fought the NTO. They did not. They complied with it. That each and every Caucasian member of the Lacrosse team complied with the order meant each and every Caucasian member of the Lacrosse team was confident with their innocence.; March 23, 2018 at 1:31 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"Sperm both motile and un-motile persist for days and weeks. Semen a physiological fluid is washed away. The deposition of DNA extracted from sperm cant be timed, The presence of semen markers can indicate it's recent deposition with a time bracket of 3 to 72 hours. The rape kit was completed 9 plus hours after the alleged rape."

More BULLSHIT!!!!

Regardless of whether or not the interval was 3 hours or 72 hours, there was no evidence on the Rape Kit materials that Crystal was raped. There were no markers for sperm on the rape kit materials. If the time of deposition of DNA can not be timed, then you can not claim that any DNA found on Crystal had been deposited at the party.

"I believe Crystal", which is again saying that Crystal's word alone established that a rape occurred. It was not enough to establish a crime had occurred.

"and so did the DA."

Again, BULLSHIT!!!

If the DA was so confident that Crystal had told the truth, why did he refuse to look at Reade Seligmann's alibi evidence? The reason is that Reade Seligmann's alibi would discredit Nifong's attempt to have Reade Seligmann indicted. Why did Nifong conceal the DNA evidence which proved the Lacrosse players were innocent? Because he wanted to prosecute the Lacrosse players, regardless of guilt or innocence. Why did Nifong not identify the men who had deposited their DNA on Crystal. That would have further established the Lacrose players were innocent.; March 23, 2018 at 1:40 PM
FakeKenhyderal said...: Dr. Brian Meehan found the DNA of Michael Murchison, along with the DNA of....himself, while testing the rape kit DNA swabs.

What he did not find is the DNA of of ANY of the Duke LAX accused -- even though Crystal Mangum alleged a semen-depositing rape.

Kenny, it denies all plausibility that the week(?) old DNA of the boyfriend survived and was found from the rape kit while NO DNA from ANY lacrosse player was identified.; March 23, 2018 at 1:58 PM
Anonymous said...: Sidney Harr:

"First, apologies for not being active recently in responding to comments, but I have been extremely busy with very important projects which I am confident will result in Crystal's imminent release from custody and her exoneration."

How many times have you been confident of Crystal's "imminent release from custody and her exoneration."? Enough times that you have exceeded the limit of Imminent many times over.

"Also, I plan on posting another one of my "humble but brilliant opinion" sharlogs... I am aiming for its posting to be no later than tomorrow... Saturday, the 24th."

As your last sharlog was neither humble nor brilliant, how can you publoish another one?

"Alert: Crystal Mangum critics and detractors, now is the time for you to dust off your crying towels... and if you don't have one, get one. Soon."

I don't own one. I would never buy something I will ever use.; March 23, 2018 at 2:47 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said:Kenny, it denies all plausibility that the week(?) old DNA of the boyfriend survived and was found from the rape kit while NO DNA from ANY lacrosse player was identified."......................Guests of the Lacrosse Players who remain unidentified. Lacrosse Players who were no where near the party were tested. Smokescreen? Durham Police failed to compile a list of those who were present. DA Nifong, though, felt he could convict for sexual assault and kidnapping those Players who were also involved.; March 23, 2018 at 3:08 PM
guiowen said...: Good old Mike thought5 he could coonvict. Guess not!; March 23, 2018 at 4:02 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

“Anonymous said:Kenny, it denies all plausibility that the week(?) old DNA of the boyfriend survived and was found from the rape kit while NO DNA from ANY lacrosse player was identified."......................Guests of the Lacrosse Players who remain unidentified.”

You have offered zero evidence that there were any unidentified party attendees, and you have the obligation to prove that since you are the one who asserts it. Kilgo’s hearsay is not evidence. The fact the anonymous lacrosse player has not come forth is evidence he does not exist. You, yourself, can not document that Kilgo ever told you anything about an anonymous Lacrosse player so why should anyone believe you?

“Lacrosse Players who were no where near the party were tested. Smokescreen?”

No. The players who were not there were ordered to give samples for DNA analysis via the NTO obtained by the Durham DA office. Why would the Durham DA office order testing of any Lacrosse player to give samples for DNA analysis as a smoke screen to protect other Lacrosse players from prosecution.

Durham Police failed to compile a list of those who were present.”

I say, since at this point, YOU are the one asserting that unidentified party attendees raped Crystal, it is up to you to provide the evidence that there were unidentified rapists at the party. The lack of evidence of semen on the rape kit says Crystal was not subjected to sex at the party rules out the presence of unidentified party attendee rapists.

“DA Nifong, though, felt he could convict for sexual assault and kidnapping those Players who were also involved.”

No he did not. Nifong had three Lacrosse players indicted for and charged with first degree forcible rape. The fact is that Nifong had in his custody evidence which showed that, if there had been a rape the people he had indicted for first degree rape could not have done it. He prosecuted them for first degree forcible rape anyway. He concealed that evidence rather than evaluate it, showing he did not believe that any anonymous party attendees raped Crystal.

You are sure desperate as you are recycling, not once but over and over, a discredited version of the events.; March 23, 2018 at 4:23 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal(agau=in):

The Defence was not as certain as you because they made a point to confront Dr. Manly and make her concede that an exudate from a undiagnose(and apparently symptomless) vaginal infection could explain the presents of this whitish fluid which she assumed to be semen”.

I say again, if Dr. Manly believed she saw Semen in an alleged rape victim’s genital tract, she was obligated to do a wet mount. The defense attorneys, I believe, would have been cognizant of that fact. It was not coercion to ask Dr. Manly if she had done a wet mount and Dr. Manly would have had to admit, no she hadn’t. What happened is that the defense attorneys gave her the results of the SBI analysis of the rape kit materials and asked her if, in view of that, could the fluid be something other than semen, and Dr. Manly admitted it could be. No one coerced her to change her story, which is what you implied.

The only people involved the Duke Rape Hoax who tried to coerce people to change what they said worked for the prosecution, the police offices who tried to coerce Moez Elmostafa to back off from his statement which supported Reade Seligmann’s alibi.

You once said Nifong believed he could discredit Reade Seligmann’s alibi in court. If that were true, he would never have tried to coerce Moez Elmostafa to change his statement supporting Reade Seligmann.; March 23, 2018 at 4:35 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

What would have happened if the Duke rape case had gone to trial and Dr. Manly had been called to testify for the prosecution?

Would she have been asked about her findings. She would have said somewhere in the course of her testimony she saw a white fluid in Crystal's Genital tract. When asked what the fluid was she would have answered she had assumed it was semen.

Then on cross examination she would have been asked, how do you know it was semen. She would have said she had assumed it was. Then maybe the defense counsel would have asked is there a test you could have done to confirm it was semen. She would have had to answer a wet mount. The next question might have been how do you do a wet mount, and she would have described how to do a wet mount. Then the defense might have asked, what did you see when you did a wet mount. If she had answered, I saw motile sperm, then the defense could have asked, where is that documented in the record, and the defense would have had the records. The defense could have handed her its copy of the record and asked her to show where the wet mount result was documented, and she would not have been able to show that.

The defense would not have had to pressure her at all. She would have made a poor witness for the prosecution all on her own.; March 23, 2018 at 6:09 PM
Anonymous said...: Sidney Har:

Your last post about another humble but brilliant sharlog, which was a lie your last sharlog was neither humble nor brilliant, suggests Crystal's(actually your) motions for default and summary judgment have failed.; March 24, 2018 at 3:52 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

A difference between you and me. If a woman I knew had been raped I would be wishing it had not happened.

You have zero evidence that Crystal was raped. Your belief she was does not establish she had been raped. Looking at part of the picture rather than the whole picture does not establish she had been raped. The whole picture establishes zero evidence she had been raped.

You, de facto, are wishing, in the face of zero evidence that Crystal had been raped, that she had been raped; March 24, 2018 at 8:25 AM
kenhyderal said...: Dr. Anonymous said: "A difference between you and me. If a woman I knew had been raped I would be wishing it had not happened"....................... Au contraire. This could be the only way you and I are similar. I believe she was raped though primarily because she told me she was and secondarily because of evidence I have heard.; March 24, 2018 at 10:19 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"Dr. Anonymous said: "A difference between you and me. If a woman I knew had been raped I would be wishing it had not happened"....................... Au contraire. This could be the only way you and I are similar. I believe she was raped though primarily because she told me she was and secondarily because of evidence I have heard."

Crystal lied to you.

So far as the evidence you have heard that is irrelevant. You look only at the part of the evidence you want to see. The totality of the evidence adds up to zero evidence that Crystal was raped, Crystal alleged a semen depositing rape, the rape kit materials, taken well withing the time frame in which markers of semen would be detectable, showed no evidence of semen, and the extremely remote possibility that it might have been there and then dissipated does not at all establish that semen was there, the only DNA found on Crystal did not match the DNA of anyone who attended the party and you yourself have conceded it was not possible to establish said DNA had been deposited at the party, no evidence of unidentified party attendees.; March 24, 2018 at 11:04 AM
guiowen said...: Well, Kenny has a fourth-hand report that some non-players at the party took Crystal into a bathroom.; March 24, 2018 at 11:35 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

You are on record that the male DNA found on Crystal came from unidentified party attendees who raped Crystal and you base this on what Guiowen accurately describes as "a fourth-hand report that some non-players at the party took Crystal into a bathroom."

But then you concede that the timing of the DNA deposition on Crystal can not be determined. If it can not be determined beyond a reasonable doubt that the DNA was deposited on Crystal at the party, how is that evidence that a rape happened at the party?; March 24, 2018 at 12:14 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny, I say again, you can not even document that you ever received said fourth hand report, which is why I believe you fabricated the report.; March 24, 2018 at 12:15 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny. let's get back to the rape exam and the rape kit materials.

You said that Dr. Manly observed a white fluid in Crystal's genital tract which she assume was semen. I do recall once your saying Dr. Manly was an experienced gynecologist which statement did imply that her assumption should be taken as solid evidence. She was an year emergency resident at DUMC at the time. Check out https://www.topnpi.com/nc1871526475/dr-julie-manly. She graduated from Medical School in 2003. Her internship year was then, 2003-2004. Her first year of residency would have been 2004-2005. In March of 2006 she would have been in her second year of residency.

Now you admit that Dr. Manly did not actually document the fluid was semen. You still seem to think the presence of said fluid was evidence of rape. Without documentation it was semen it is not evidence of rape. That the rape kit tested negative for any evidence of semen is evidence the fluid was not semen.

In the outside chance that semen was there and then dissipated before the rape kit materials were taken, how would that in and of itself have established a rape took place? It wouldn't.; March 24, 2018 at 12:38 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

Consider this:

https://www.campussafetymagazine.com/university/how-to-disprove-or-prove-sexual-assault-without-physical-evidence/:

"Look for a serial pattern of behavior from the accused by contacting others who may have been victimized by that person, while being careful not to marginalize the accused".

This comes from a web site which discusses how to prove a sex crime with no physical evidence.

Sidney likes harp on the behavior of the Lacrosse team. While the Coleman report did document questionable behavior on the part of Lacrosse team members, it was not behavior unique to the Lacrosse team. Professor Coleman reported that the team did not have any history of sexual harassment or assault. The women's Lacrosse team supported the accused players throughout their detail. No other women ever came forth to accuse the Lacrosse players of the behavior Sidney described. With Harvey Weinstein, Kevin Spacey, Matt Lauer, Dustin Hoffman, Bill Cosby, after one woman came forward a number of women came forward.

Your belief means nothing. You have zero factual evidence Crystal was ever raped.

P.S. In her police statement Crystal did allege she had been beaten and brutalized by her alleged assailants. There would have been evidence of that. There was no such evidence on the physical exam. The only evidence of trauma was a number of small, non bleeding, healing scratches. This alleged rape was described by the police and by the accusing witness as one which did leave behind physical evidence.; March 24, 2018 at 1:03 PM
kenhyderal said...: Guiowen said: "Well, Kenny has a fourth-hand report that some non-players at the party took Crystal into a bathroom"......................... I do have a first hand report from Crystal. Kilgo's report to me was second hand. It's the majority of you who rely on 3rd and 4th hand reports mainly from Duke Lacrosse Apologists; March 24, 2018 at 1:24 PM
JSwift said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; March 24, 2018 at 2:01 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"Guiowen said: "Well, Kenny has a fourth-hand report that some non-players at the party took Crystal into a bathroom"......................... I do have a first hand report from Crystal."

But no factual evidence that Crystal's first hand report was the truth.

"Kilgo's report to me was second hand. It's the majority of you who rely on 3rd and 4th hand reports mainly from Duke Lacrosse Apologists"

Kilgo's anonymous Lacrosse player has not emerged in the 12+ years since the alleged rape, meaning said Lacrosse player does not exist. And, as you can not document that Kilgo ever told you about an anonymous Lacrosse player, it is likely you fabricated the story to feed your guilt presuming racism. Making unfunded claims about why Kigo disappeared or why said Lacrosse player did not come forth establishes neither that said Lacrosse player exists or that Kilgo ever told you about said Lacrosse player.; March 24, 2018 at 2:20 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

I remind you, sadi Duke Lacrosse apologists defend innocent men who were falsely accused of a crime which never happened and then wrongfully prosecuted.

You are an apologist for a convicted criminal/false rape accuser/convicted murderess.

You think you are on the moral high ground.

Your moral high ground lies several thousand feet below sea level.; March 24, 2018 at 2:22 PM
Anonymous said...: JSwift:

I just want to say this again. Kenny can provide no documentation that Kilgo ever made any statement to him about an anonymous Lacrosse player. Kenny has given three different accounts of how Kilgo gave him the information, 1) Kilgo posted it on J4N and then took down all his posts, 2) Kilgo gave him the information via an email which Kenny lostm 3) Kilgo told him via by both a J4N post and an email. He came up with number 3 after he was told he had given two different accounts.; March 24, 2018 at 2:27 PM
Anonymous said...: Sidney, thus far your supposedly humble and brilliant sharlog does not exist. Your previous sharlog was neither humble nor brilliant, so how can you post another one.; March 24, 2018 at 2:29 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous Anonymous said...
Sidney Har:

Your last post about another humble but brilliant sharlog, which was a lie your last sharlog was neither humble nor brilliant, suggests Crystal's(actually your) motions for default and summary judgment have failed.

March 24, 2018 at 3:52 AM

Actually I have yet to see a Response from the defendants regarding Mangum's lawsuit. Not surprising as the defendants have no defense.; March 24, 2018 at 3:27 PM
Anonymous said...: Udaman Sid.; March 24, 2018 at 5:17 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny or Sidney or both continue to post anonymously to create the illusion that they have support.; March 24, 2018 at 5:18 PM
Kenhyderal Supporter said...: I ‘m proud to call kenhyderal my friend.; March 25, 2018 at 5:54 AM
Kenhyderal Supporter said...: Now is the time for all of kenhyderal’s supporters to rally and provide him with their support.; March 25, 2018 at 6:02 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny or Sidney or both continue to post anonymously to create the illusion that they have support.; March 25, 2018 at 7:46 AM

«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 374 of 374 Newer› Newest»

Sunday, March 11, 2018

Crystal Mangum's Motion for Default and Summary Judgment

374 comments:

Facebook Badge

Subscribe!

Labels

Blog Archive

About Me