justice4nifong: Harr's humble, yet brilliant opinion -- Daniel Meier: Expert or quid pro quo?

Thursday, March 1, 2018

Harr's humble, yet brilliant opinion -- Daniel Meier: Expert or quid pro quo?

317 comments:

«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 317 of 317

Anonymous said...: Now to start a new page of Comments:

Kenhyderal:

"Guiowen said: "Boasts about how he belongs to the "soon to be the majority"................I'm not an American."

And the United States is grateful to you and thankful to you for that.; March 8, 2018 at 12:09 PM
Anonymous said...: Four legs good, two legs bad! (Kenhyderal); March 8, 2018 at 12:22 PM
kenhyderal said...: Guiowen said" "Non-caucasians agree with Kenny; Caucasians disagree. Why don't you just say: Non-caucasians good, Caucasians bad"....................Read the response of A Reasonable Man. I was trying to point out that a majority of visible minority Americans see the present American Justice System as unfair to them, especially those of them without resources and when they soon are in the majority things will politically change for the better. Americans of all ethnicities recognize the unfair discrepancies but so far, not unusual for Americans, they are laggards in making progressive change. (eg Single payer universal health care, sensible gun control legislation, a fairer system of Justice); March 8, 2018 at 1:29 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"Guiowen said" "Non-caucasians agree with Kenny; Caucasians disagree. Why don't you just say: Non-caucasians good, Caucasians bad"....................Read the response of A Reasonable Man. I was trying to point out that a majority of visible minority Americans see the present American Justice System as unfair to them, especially those of them without resources and when they soon are in the majority things will politically change for the better. Americans of all ethnicities recognize the unfair discrepancies but so far, not unusual for Americans, they are laggards in making progressive change. (eg Single payer universal health care, sensible gun control legislation, a fairer system of Justice)"

While I acknowledge the problems with the US Justice system, the exposure of Crystal as a false rae accuser and the exposure of corrupt Nifong are not part of those problems, as you and Sidney imply. It is fact that Crystal got a number of breaks in her crominal career.

As you proclaim you are not a US Citizen, and you live in Dubai rather than across the border from us, what legitimizes you as a spokesperson for any group in Amereica?

And why do you keeping ducking, dodging, evading, avoiding the issue, what was the event which sent Reginald Daye to the hospital, interrupting his alleged need for a daily massive dose of ethanol and allegedly exposing him to a potentially fatal case of DTs?; March 8, 2018 at 1:52 PM
guiowen said...: Kenny,
In other words, things will change because non-Caucasians are all very good, whereas Caucasians are all bad. (Well, except for Nifong and Cohan).
You are really making it clear that you see things through the prism of race. If that isn't racism, then what?
And please don't come up with some quote to the effect that since you are powerless, you cannot possibly be a racist. You are an obvious counterexample to this.; March 8, 2018 at 1:52 PM
Anonymous said...: Another oops:

I should have said, "While I acknowledge the problems with the US Justice system, the exposure of Crystal as a false rape accuser".; March 8, 2018 at 1:54 PM
g said...: By the way, Kenny, I don't see that A Reasonable Man has written anything that contradicts me. But maybe you interpret everything in a way that makes you look good?; March 8, 2018 at 1:55 PM
g said...: By the way, Kenny, about your wonderful health care system: have you noticed that since 1923, the only Canadians to win a Nobel Prize in medicine have received it for work done after they moved to the United States?; March 8, 2018 at 1:58 PM
kenhyderal said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; March 8, 2018 at 4:17 PM
kenhyderal said...: Guiowen said: "By the way, Kenny, about your wonderful health care system: have you noticed that since 1923, the only Canadians to win a Nobel Prize in medicine have received it for work done after they moved to the United States?"........ Jesus was born in a stable but he's not a horse. "A Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian". Justin Trudeau; March 8, 2018 at 4:20 PM
kenhyderal said...: Dr. Anonymous said: And why do you keeping ducking, dodging, evading, avoiding the issue, what was the event which sent Reginald Daye to the hospital, interrupting his alleged need for a daily massive dose of ethanol and allegedly exposing him to a potentially fatal case of DTs?"........................ Crystal's defensive action, sent him to hospital. My point is, because it was that by circumstance, and not some other reason requiring hospital admission, his fate, in this instance had no singular medical nexus to his wound. Therefore, common sense would say, in this case a Welch ruling has no validity. Read the Welch Case and try and find application to Daye's situation. Then re-read Judge Ridgeway's instruction to the Jury which, in the wake of Meier's poor performance and Coggins-Franks aggressive prosecution the Jury got it wrong. I duck nothing.; March 8, 2018 at 4:22 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"Guiowen said: "By the way, Kenny, about your wonderful health care system: have you noticed that since 1923, the only Canadians to win a Nobel Prize in medicine have received it for work done after they moved to the United States?"........ Jesus was born in a stable but he's not a horse. "A Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian". Justin Trudeau"

And because you call yourself an advocate for justice does not make you one, especially when one considers you track record which can be summed up as, presume the Lacrosse defendants on the word of the accuser, even though there is no evidence the accuser ever told the truth she had been raped.; March 8, 2018 at 4:30 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"Dr. Anonymous said: And why do you keeping ducking, dodging, evading, avoiding the issue, what was the event which sent Reginald Daye to the hospital, interrupting his alleged need for a daily massive dose of ethanol and allegedly exposing him to a potentially fatal case of DTs?"........................ Crystal's defensive action, sent him to hospital."

Wrong. Crystal's action was not defensive. She alleged Reginald Daye attacked her, and Reginald Daye did admit he had broken the Bathroom door and pulled out some of her hair. The police found no evidence on her consistent with the beating she had alleged she had received, and neither did Sidney Harr, even though he said he did, and that comes from the documents Sidney published illegally, and Crystal stabbed Reginald Daye in the back as he tried to leave the scene.

"My point is, because it was that by circumstance, and not some other reason requiring hospital admission, his fate, in this instance had no singular medical nexus to his wound."

You are deluded, denying, ducking, dodging, avoiding, evading the fact that the stab wound inflicted on him by Crystal put him in the hospital. If he was a chronic alcoholic and his death was due to his need to consume daily a massive amount of alcohol, access of which was interrupted when he went into the hospital, Crystal was still the perpetrator of the event which put him in the hospital

"Therefore, common sense would say, in this case a Welch ruling has no validity."

Which is an irrelevant statement since whether or not Welch applies is based on legal principles and legal expertise, something anyone with common sense would realize.

"Read the Welch Case and try and find application to Daye's situation. Then re-read Judge Ridgeway's instruction to the Jury which, in the wake of Meier's poor performance and Coggins-Franks aggressive prosecution the Jury got it wrong. I duck nothing."

Well, in compliance with the principle of the one who asserts that the Welch ruling does not apply, it is up to you to show it does not apply. Since you have no legal expertise to determine whether or not it applies, your commons sense statement is not relevant. You should get an attorney to make your case. So far as the attorneys who have posted on this blog, they have said that Welch does apply.; March 8, 2018 at 4:48 PM
JSwift said...: It is probably useful at this point to summarize the arguments made by Kenny and Sidney. As we all know, both Kenny and Sidney rely primarily on an intellectually dishonest rhetorical device known as "Argument by Assertion." Neither actually tries to persuade.

In essence, their argument on almost any subject can be summarized as follows: "That is my opinion. If you don't accept it, then you are an asshole."

Of course, they don't actually call those who disagree with them "assholes." However, their smugness and self-righteousness is readily apparent. Kenny prefers to label those who disagree "apologists" or "haters." Sidney prefers to label those who disagree with him "Carpetbagger Jihadists," "conspirators" or people in need of elucidation.

Kenny's comments provide numerous examples. Consider:

The Welch case is not applicable to Crystal's murder trial. That is his opinion. If you don't accept it, then you are an asshole.

Despite using the model jury instructions drawn from the Welch case, Judge Ridgeway clearly instructed the jurors that Welch is inapplicable. That is his opinion. If you don't accept it, then you are an asshole.

A lawyer's opinion on legal issues is no more valid than his own, despite his lack of legal training. That is his opinion. If you don't accept it, then you are an asshole.

It is unnecessary to cite other cases. That is his opinion. If you don't accept it, then you are an asshole.

Crystal acted in self-defense. That is his opinion. If you don't accept it, then you are an asshole.

Crystal's testimony in her murder trial provided a compelling case that she acted in self-defense. That is his opinion. If you don't accept it, then you are an asshole.

Crystal always tells the truth. That is his opinion. If you don't accept it, then you are an asshole.

Crystal was drugged at the lacrosse party. That is his opinion. If you don't accept it, then you are an asshole.

Crystal was raped by mystery rapists at the lacrosse party. That is his opinion. If you don't accept it, then you are an asshole.

Although he became involved in the case far earlier than is normal, Mike Nifong cannot be blamed for the "botched" investigation. That is his opinion. If you don't accept it, then you are an asshole.

It is unnecessary to respond with evidence to support his opinion. It is unnecessary to respond to criticisms of significant weaknesses in his opinion. He provided his opinion. If you don't accept it, then you are an asshole.

Despite an undistinguished medical career, Sidney Harr is "brilliant," and Sidney's opinion is thus more valid than that provided by any expert in the trial. That is his opinion. If you don't accept it, then you are an asshole.

He posts under a pseudonym in an account registered with Google. Therefore his opinion is more valid than that provided by anyone else. That is his opinion. If you don't accept it, then you are an asshole.

John D. Smith
New York, NY; March 8, 2018 at 5:28 PM
Anonymous said...: Sell, Kenny I could not find the Welch Decision.

I did find this:

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

If I understand the situation, and intervening cause breaks the chain of causation.

This is from J4N, MONDAY, MAY 9, 2011: "Daye underwent emergency surgery on April 3, 2011, for his stab wound and was on the mend and on the verge of discharge when he suddenly went into a coma around April 9th or 10th."

My recollection is, Reginald Daye was exhibiting signs and symptoms right before the adverse event, fever, tachycrdia, disorientation. If that was true, at the time Sidney was saying he was doing well and the prognosis was for a full recovery, he was not doing well, not headed for a full recovery.

Judging from the records Sidney posted on line, Reginald Daye vomited and aspirated after he was administered intra gastric contrast via ng tube. Why would he be administered intra gastric contrast? The most common reason is, for an addominal ct with contrast.

From https://www.healthline.com/health/abdominal-ct-scan#purpose:

"Abdominal CT scans are used when a doctor suspects that something might be wrong in the abdominal area but can’t find enough information through a physical exam or lab tests.

Some of the reasons your doctor may want you to have an abdominal CT scan include:

abdominal pain
a mass in your abdomen that you can feel
kidney stones (to check for size and location of the stones)
unexplained weight loss
infections, such as appendicitis
to check for intestinal obstruction
inflammation of the intestines, such as Crohn’s disease
injuries following trauma
recent cancer diagnosis

The most likely reason why an abdominal ct with contrast would have been done in Reginald Daye was the possibility of infection. Can you come up with a reference which says that an abdominal ct scan with contrast is indicated for suspect DTs?

All the above conditions are serious conditions. Regardless of the indication, the attempt to do and abdominal CT scan says Reginald Daye was not doing well at the time it was ordered and not on his way to full recovery.

That no infection was found after the adverse event was irrelevant. The CT scan was indicated by Reginald Daye's symptoms and the risk of intra abdominal infection caused by the stab wound inflicted by Crystal. What was relevant at the time of the symptoms, the treating physicians had to find out whether or not he had an infection. No one would have known he did not have an infection was to have done an evaluation, and a CT of the abdomen was a way to do it.

Bottom line, the aspiration, the fatal outcome was the consequence of Crystal's act.

Again, considering what you have said, and I say it this way, if Reginald Daye were at risk of DTs if he had been put into the hospital and deprived of his needed daily massive dose of ethanol, what put him in that situation other than the stab wound inflicted by Crystal?

Either way, infection or DTs there was no intervening cause. Maybe the lawyers can interpret. I think the legal principle is, if it had been negligent treatment for DTs, Reginald Daye would not have been exposed to that risk had Crystal not stabbed him. Another way to say it, a murderess does not get a pass for causing the death of her victim because the treating physicians were unsuccessful for saving his life.; March 8, 2018 at 5:42 PM
Anonymous said...: Udaman g.; March 8, 2018 at 6:13 PM
guiowen said...: Kenny,
Glad to see you're still able to come up with meaningless statements. Well done!; March 8, 2018 at 6:18 PM
guiowen said...: Kenny,
The health system in Canada simply does not allow people to make advances in medicine. These Canadians moved to the United States because they understood this problem. What I am saying is, not that they're not Canadians, but that it is the United States system that leads to worthwhile advances. Canada can then use all that we in the USA developed at great expense. Thus Canada takes advantage of our work.; March 8, 2018 at 6:43 PM
Anonymous said...: UdaUbes Pubes.; March 8, 2018 at 7:04 PM
Anonymous said...: Udaman g.; March 8, 2018 at 7:23 PM
A Reasonable Man said...: JSwift- I had given this some thought as well. The best construction I can put on it is that both Kenhyderal and Sidney are trying to introduce a Rashomon effect by proxy.

I state "by proxy", because neither of them were involved in any of the events leading up to the situation Crystal Mangum now finds herself in.

Both are simply hoping that some random third party will see their comments here and assume there's some validity to their arguments.; March 8, 2018 at 7:46 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "The most likely reason why an abdominal ct with contrast would have been done in Reginald Daye was the possibility of infection"...................................................................... Yes, yes, yes. In Daye's case it was a diagnosis of acute alcohol withdrawal with impending delirium tremens that sent him into the ICU. The procedure was done to eliminate the other possible diagnosis of an occult intra-abdominal post surgical infection. There was none and so the presumptive diagnosis stood and the nexus with the successfully repaired wound was absent.; March 8, 2018 at 8:55 PM
guiowen said...: Oh, God! Here's Kenny trying to pull another fast one! I must say he's good at looking things up and then claiming they prove all his idiotic theories.; March 8, 2018 at 9:12 PM
kenhyderal said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; March 8, 2018 at 9:29 PM
kenhyderal said...: @JSwift the celebrated logician. In the assertions about my views you make in your review, you do not hold yourself or other Duke Lacrosse Apologists to the same standards of logic as you hold those who do not buy into the Duke Lacrosse meta-narrative; your caveat notwithstanding. No we don't label you with crude epithets but in the words of Dr. Harr we do believe you do need some elucidation at least about the possibility that it's not exactly as has been portrayed Rashomon effect?. Unlike many here I do know the difference between a fact and an opinion. There are no alternative facts but there are alternative opinions on what the facts mean or what they prove. B.T. W., in case you have forgotten my name is Ken Edwards with kenhyderal as my user name. I am a long time friend of Crystal Mangum. I have had the same google account since 2003 I trust you are JSwift and no I don't believe you are an asshole. I introduced Crystal to Dr. Harr when I stumbled upon his blog.; March 8, 2018 at 9:35 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny, was that you at 9:29?; March 8, 2018 at 9:36 PM
guiowen said...: Kenhyderal, I'm afraid most of us doubt that you know the difference between fact and opinion.; March 8, 2018 at 9:42 PM
guiowen said...: Kenny,
Remember how you accused me, back in 2016, of making up stories because -- in your opinion -- they could not be true? Something about context, whatever that means.; March 8, 2018 at 9:46 PM
kenhyderal said...: Evidence suggests that Crystal was laying on her back with Daye on top of her choking her to death. In desperation she picked up one of the myriad knives he had thrown at her that was lying close by with a free arm and reaching around his massive body plunged it into his back. Even Walt in Durham conceded at one time that the angle of penetration suggested this version instead of her chasing down a fleeing Daye.; March 8, 2018 at 9:47 PM
kenhyderal said...: @ Anonymous 9:29 Yes correcting a typo; March 8, 2018 at 9:49 PM
guiowen said...: Kenny,
We've already established that it was Crystal who threw the knives around the room. She did this after poor old Reggie left. She managed to erase her prints, of course, but was unable to put Reggie's prints on them; March 8, 2018 at 9:51 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"Anonymous said: "The most likely reason why an abdominal ct with contrast would have been done in Reginald Daye was the possibility of infection"...................................................................... Yes, yes, yes. In Daye's case it was a diagnosis of acute alcohol withdrawal with impending delirium tremens that sent him into the ICU."

So why did the treating physicians give him intra gastric contrast? Give a reference which says, intra gastric administration of x ray contrast material is indicated in the treatment of DTs. And again I ask, what specifically put him in the hospital, cut off from his alleged need foa amassive daily dose of ethanol. According to you, deprivation of his daily massive dose of ethanol is what put him ast risk of DTs.

"The procedure was done to eliminate the other possible diagnosis of an occult intra-abdominal post surgical infection. There was none"

How could the treating physicians have known that without doing the evaluation? The averse event happened because of the evaluation.

"and so the presumptive diagnosis stood"

I concede that.

"and the nexus with the successfully repaired wound was absent." You are mis stating the case. The nexus between the stab wound and his death put him in the hospital and exposed him to the risk of infection and to the risk of DTs.

To rephrase, what you are doing is 20/20 hindsight, and it amounts to, since the evaluation showed no infection, the evaluation was not necessary.; March 9, 2018 at 2:13 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"@JSwift the celebrated logician. In the assertions about my views you make in your review, you do not hold yourself or other Duke Lacrosse Apologists to the same standards of logic as you hold those who do not buy into the Duke Lacrosse meta-narrative; your caveat notwithstanding."

Apologists for the Duke Lacrosse players defend men who were falsely accused of a non existent crime and wrongfully prosecuted. You are an apologist for the convicted criminal who falsely accused them. And as there was no metanarratiive in the Duke Rape hoax, your statement is irrelevant and illogical.

"No we don't label you with crude epithets but in the words of Dr. Harr we do believe you do need some elucidation at least about the possibility that it's not exactly as has been portrayed Rashomon effect?."

Let's go through this again. What was alleged was a brutal gang rape in which the perpetrators had deposited thier DNA. The only DNA found on Crystal in the wake of her allegation did not match the DNA of the men Nifong had indicted for and charged with first degree forcible rape. On physical exam Crystal had no evidence of the brutal beating to which she alleged she had been subjected. You chant that the DNA found on Crystal did not match the DNA of her known sex partners. What you leave out, Nifongian style, is that there is no evidence establishing the DNA had been established at the Lacrosse party. The SBI testing of the rape kit showed no evidence of semen. If I am correct, DNA Security tested for markers of semen and found none. You chant about unidentified rapists but have given not factual evidence of any-kilgo's allegation is not evidence but hearsay. And you have gone on record as saying you need no evidence of rape because you trust Crystal, which is a Scottsboro persecutor's attitude. There was no rape. And your insistence on, there was a rape, is based solely on racist guilt presumption.

"Unlike many here I do know the difference between a fact and an opinion."

Your track record on this bog says you do not, e.g. you treat Kilgo's allegation of unidentified rapists as fact, and it is not.

"There are no alternative facts"

So why do you deny the fact, supported by factual evidence, that no rape of Crystal ever happened.

"but there are alternative opinions on what the facts mean or what they prove."

Your alternative opinion on what the facts show demonstrates you do not understand the facts, either that or you are in denial, probably because your obsession with believing this woman whom you claim to like and respect had been brutally gang raped.

"B.T. W., in case you have forgotten my name is Ken Edwards with kenhyderal as my user name. I am a long time friend of Crystal Mangum. I have had the same google account since 2003 I trust you are JSwift and no I don't believe you are an asshole. I introduced Crystal to Dr. Harr when I stumbled upon his blog."

What relevance does this have to your obvious denial of the truth and your rather vicious chacterization of innocent men as gang raping brutes? Is that not labelling those innocent men with a more than crude epithet?; March 9, 2018 at 2:32 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"Evidence suggests that Crystal was laying on her back with Daye on top of her choking her to death. In desperation she picked up one of the myriad knives he had thrown at her that was lying close by with a free arm and reaching around his massive body plunged it into his back. Even Walt in Durham conceded at one time that the angle of penetration suggested this version instead of her chasing down a fleeing Daye."

The issue here is called credibility.

You are describing a scenario in which a much larger assailant is on top of a much m=smaller woman trying to "choke her to death" and she has the strength to grab a knife, reach around his much larger body while being choked to death and driving that knife into his back with enough force to drive the knife through his chest wall, through his diaphragm and into his abdomen with enough force to lacerate his colon. We have gone through this before. When a defendant claims self defense, the defendant assumes the burden of proving self defense, and, this ismy personal experience as a surgeon who has treated stab wounds of the chest, that the story you put forth is not credible. The jury did not find that story credible. That is why it was rejected by the jury.

The other issue is, according to what Sidney posted about the case, Crystal showed nothing which required medical attention, no evidence of the trauma which would have resulted from such an attack.

Put it another way. Do you really think a small woman with a larger man on top of her choking her to death would have the strength to grab a knife and stab him the way you say Crystal had stabbed him?

Finally, the description of Reginad Daye's action was not that he was fleeing but that he turned his back to Crystal to leave the scene.; March 9, 2018 at 3:18 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

A post script to my ast comment:

I onc treated a man with a stab wound of his chest. His wife tried to kill him. She was much smaller than her husband(iI saw her when I testified at her trial). He was not n tp of her choking her at the time he was stabbed. She was unable to inflict a fatal wound n=on him.

whether or not you believe that is irrelevant.

After all, you believe in the face of zero evidence and on the sole basis that you trust Crystal, she had been raped.; March 9, 2018 at 3:23 AM
Anonymous said...: Udaman Ubes.; March 9, 2018 at 3:30 AM
Anonymous said...: Udaman Pubes.; March 9, 2018 at 3:31 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny or Sidney or both continue to post anonymously to create the illusion that they have support.; March 9, 2018 at 3:31 AM
Anonymous said...: Very clever Ubes.; March 9, 2018 at 3:33 AM
Anonymous said...: uda clever man pubesubs to post anonymously for sid and kenny.; March 9, 2018 at 3:43 AM
Anonymous said...: more typo corrections:

Kenhyderal:

A post script to my ast comment:

I once treated a man with a stab wound of his chest. His wife tried to kill him. She was much smaller than her husband(I saw her when I testified at her trial). He was not on tp of her choking her at the time he was stabbed. She was unable to inflict a fatal wound n=on him.

whether or not you believe that is irrelevant.

After all, you believe in the face of zero evidence and on the sole basis that you trust Crystal, she had been raped.; March 9, 2018 at 3:45 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny, you would be correct, for once in your life, that I am not very effective correcting typos:

e.g.I should have typed, He was not on top of her choking her.

Too bad you are not correct in most of the stuff you post here.; March 9, 2018 at 3:48 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

More on your claim that Reginald Daye was on top of Crystal trying to choke her to death.

Oxygen deprivation will result in unconsciousness in a matter of minutes.

You alleged Reginald Daye was depriving Crystal of oxygen.

Would she have had the time to look for a knife before she passed out?

Would she have been trying to get Reginald Daye's hands off her neck rather than looking for a knife?

If she were on the verge of unconsciousness would she have been able to look for a knife in the first place?

The point is, if that was Crystal's story it was not credible.

In any trial, an this applies to prosecution and defense, no one's testimony is assumed to be credible. Each side has the opportunity to impeach the testimony of the other side's witnesses.

This takes us to your stance on alternative explanations. You HAVE argued that when Crystal gave an alternative explanation for the facts, that raised reasonable doubt about her guilt. Wrong. That argument is an argument that Crystal's testimony should have been accepted at face value, that the prosecution should have been denied the opportunity to impeach it.

And just for my edification, not yours, I say, it gets back to the caveat on waiving the right to testify. If a defendant waives that right, anything the defendant says can be used against the defendant. You have speculated that the Lacrosse defendants might have refused to testify and you did speculate that was because they were guilty. Part of the right not to testify is that no one may infer guilt from that.

You really are not an advocate for justice when it comes to Caucasian men(William Cohan's description), now, are you.; March 9, 2018 at 5:17 AM
A Reasonable Man said...: @Kenhyderal "Evidence suggests that Crystal was laying on her back with Daye on top of her choking her to death. In desperation she picked up one of the myriad knives he had thrown at her that was lying close by with a free arm and reaching around his massive body plunged it into his back. Even Walt in Durham conceded at one time that the angle of penetration suggested this version instead of her chasing down a fleeing Daye."

Evidence suggests that Crystal Mangum stabbed Reginald Daye in a fit of rage, thus starting the chain of events that ultimately lead to Mr. Daye's death.

That is the evidence Crystal Mangum was convicted with.

You were not a witness to these (or any other events -- i.e Crystal Mangum stealing a cab, Crystal Mangum starting a fire and threatening her then-boyfriend), yet you continually chose her side of the story, or believe her outright lies. Why is that?

I suggest you step back and take an objective look at the evidence. One can be your friend and still do evil things.; March 9, 2018 at 5:40 AM
Anonymous said...: Hey Sidney:

How about you weigh in.

Your wacko-lyte Kenny says a much larger Reginald Daye was on top of a much smaller Crystal Mangum, his hands "choking the life" out of her.

How long would it have taken for her to pass out?

Would she reaching for a knife or fighting to get Reginald Daye's hands off of her?

Would she have had time to find a knife before she passed out?

Would she have had the strength while being choked to death to reach around a much larger Reginald Daye and drive a knife into his back and inflict the serious wound she did.

And if it was DTs that caused his death, what put him into sudden alcohol withdrawl if not the stab wound inflicted on him by Crystal Mangum.

As I told Kenny, Crystal's story was not at all credible. That was the reason the Jury rejected it. If Daniel Meier had heard the story, he would have realized the story was not credible and would have urged her to stay off the stand. That was the act of a concerned attorney, not the act of a turncoat attorney who was trying to sabotage her.; March 9, 2018 at 6:13 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

Let's have another go at this:

"Even Walt in Durham conceded at one time that the angle of penetration suggested this version instead of her chasing down a fleeing Daye."

What was alleged was not that Crystal was "chasing down a fleeng Daye". What was alleged was that Reginald Daye left to walk out of the apartment and Crystal stabbed him after he turned his back to her. There was no chasing.; March 9, 2018 at 6:17 AM
Anonymous said...: Regarding your assertion that Duke influenced Crystal's murder trial to shield itself from civil iability:

I researched the situation, does a if there is malpractice treating a murder victim, does a murder conviction shield the treating doctor or institution from civil liability?

I could not find anything.

This gets back to something like your irrelevant claim that no one ever proved Crystal lied when she claimed she had been raped.

Have you ever found anything which says a medical institution which commits malpractice in the treatment of a murder victim is shielded from liability if the perpetrator is convicted of murder.

My impression is, a murder conviction would not shield an institution or a treating physician from civil liability in a murder case.

Why do you believe it would?; March 9, 2018 at 6:47 AM
FakeKenhyderal said...: Sid -- When are you going to post the documents denying CGM's appeal and motion for bail/release pending appeal?; March 9, 2018 at 7:19 AM
A Lawyer said...: Sid -- When are you going to post the documents denying CGM's appeal and motion for bail/release pending appeal?

I join in that request. Or don't you believe in transparency on this blog?; March 9, 2018 at 8:18 AM
kenhyderal said...: Guiowen said: " We've already established that it was Crystal who threw the knives around the room. She did this after poor old Reggie left. She managed to erase her prints, of course, but was unable to put Reggie's prints on them"........................When was this established? Are you making the ridiculous claim Crystal calmly and calculatingly staged and manipulated the scene before leaving? Have you come up with this in an attempt to bolster your version of events to explain the evidence that was found?; March 9, 2018 at 9:56 AM
Unknown said...: Kenny,
There were no fingerprints on the knives. How do you think that happened? Clearly, someone erased the fingerprints. Who would have erased them? Don't tell me it was Reggie: if he had had the opportunity to erase them, he would have simply put the knives back in the kitchen cabinet.
I realize that you feel anything that goes counter to your story is ridiculous.
Too bad, Kenny!; March 9, 2018 at 10:37 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhydral:

Watching this documentary, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bj88-97ESZI:

Crystal showed no injuries consistent with the beating she alleged she had received.

Reginald Daye was stabbed in the back.

Crystal alleged she had used the mattress in the bedroom to shield her. The mattress had no marks consistent with knives being thrown at it.

In another video, showing investigators going through the apartment, it is noted that the mattress had not been moved.

You then claimed what Crystal did was to lift up a corner of the mattress. That seems not to be what she claimed.

As Guiowen has pointed out that there were no fingerprints on the knives. After being stabbed, Reginald Daye was on his way to the hospital, so how could he have wiped the knives clean. It would have been difficult for a man bleeding profusely from a stab wound to the back to be able to wipe a number of knives clean of fingerprints. Reginald Daye's blood was found on only one knife, the one used to stab him.; March 9, 2018 at 11:43 AM
Anonymous said...: For Sidney and Kenny:

Something else problematic about th Reginald Daye murder, and this gets back to the #MeToo movement. After the initial allegations came out against Harvey Weinstein, Matt Lauer, Bill Cosby, Kevin Spacey, Dustin Hoffman, other women stepped forward with allegations. Reginald Daye had relationships with other women. He has been dead for almost 7 years. No other women have come forward to testify that he was violent.

You might say they were afraid to come forward, intimidated not to come forward. Without factual evidence that would be just another uncorroborated allegation, and the two of you have a history of passing off uncorroborated allegations as fact.; March 9, 2018 at 12:17 PM
A Reasonable Man said...: @Kenhyderal "Evidence suggests that Crystal was laying on her back with Daye on top of her choking her to death. In desperation she picked up one of the myriad knives he had thrown at her that was lying close by with a free arm and reaching around his massive body plunged it into his back..."

Proof Kenhyderal is a firm believer in the old adage, "Never let the truth get in the way of a good story"; March 9, 2018 at 12:34 PM
kenhyderal said...: Guillermo said: "There were no fingerprints on the knives. How do you think that happened? Clearly, someone erased the fingerprints. Who would have erased them? Don't tell me it was Reggie: if he had had the opportunity to erase them, he would have simply put the knives back in the kitchen cabinet.
I realize that you feel anything that goes counter to your story is ridiculous.
Too bad, Kenny!".......................... Did you watch the fingerprint testimony? There were no useable fingerprints on the knives because of the rough handles. The expert did not suggest they had been cleaned; March 9, 2018 at 1:35 PM
Unknown said...: Kenn7y,
There were, in fact, no fingerprints.
Apart from this, there were no knife marks on the mattress.
Your narrative simply does not fit the evidence.; March 9, 2018 at 2:15 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"Guillermo said: "There were no fingerprints on the knives. How do you think that happened? Clearly, someone erased the fingerprints. Who would have erased them? Don't tell me it was Reggie: if he had had the opportunity to erase them, he would have simply put the knives back in the kitchen cabinet.
I realize that you feel anything that goes counter to your story is ridiculous.
Too bad, Kenny!".......................... Did you watch the fingerprint testimony? There were no useable fingerprints on the knives because of the rough handles. The expert did not suggest they had been cleaned"

So how do you know Reginald Daye was the one who was throwing the knives?; March 9, 2018 at 2:44 PM
Anonymous said...: Even if there were fingerprints on the knives ... what would it prove? It was their house - their fingerprints would be on a lot of stuff in the house.; March 9, 2018 at 3:21 PM
Unknown said...: Kenny,
Your problem is you probably have not met many women in your life.
If you had, you would understand what happened here. Women generally feel they should not let men get away with anything.; March 9, 2018 at 3:35 PM
guillermo said...: Kenny.
I think I understand what happened to you.
When you were very young, you fell in love with a good-looking young woman, who did not return your sentiments.
You have since been trying to reach her and perhaps gain her love.
This might or might not happen, but remember women can be very hard on their male friends. Just be very careful, or God knows how you'll wind up.; March 9, 2018 at 4:10 PM
Anonymous said...: Udaman Guillermo.; March 9, 2018 at 8:05 PM
kenhyderal said...: Guillermo said: "Apart from this, there were no knife marks on the mattress"...........As he threw a steak knife at Crystal as she cowered between the bed and the wall she lifted the corner of the mattress up to protect herself. The knife could penetrate a sold object like a wall or a human body but would bounce off the raised mattress and leave no mark. At one point though, in his frustrated rage, he plunged a knife into a couch cushion breaking the blade; March 9, 2018 at 9:33 PM
kenhyderal said...: @ Guillermo Owen and fake Guillermo: Go and practice your amateur psychiatry elsewhere. Here you are only making yourself look pathetic.; March 9, 2018 at 9:38 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"Guillermo said: "Apart from this, there were no knife marks on the mattress"...........As he threw a steak knife at Crystal as she cowered between the bed and the wall she lifted the corner of the mattress up to protect herself."

Not at all supported by the evidence, found by the investigators who checked the apartment following the stabbing of Reginald Daye, th mattress was undisturbed. Your initial desription was that Crystal lifted up the whole mattress to shield herself. When apprised of what the investigators found you changed your story tom she lifted up a corner. Trying to bullshit your way through and around facts which you do ot like never has and never will work.

"The knife could penetrate a sold object like a wall or a human body but would bounce off the raised mattress and leave no mark."

You know nothing about mattresses. A knife hurled at a soft object like a mattress would penetrate it.

"At one point though, in his frustrated rage, he plunged a knife into a couch cushion breaking the blade".

Where did you get that information? From Crystal? Crystal has a track record of being a non credible witness, e.g. the multiple contradicting accounts she gave of the rape which never happened.

Do you know what credibility means?; March 10, 2018 at 2:41 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"@ Guillermo Owen and fake Guillermo: Go and practice your amateur psychiatry elsewhere. Here you are only making yourself look pathetic."

No, he is helping you make yourself look pathetic.; March 10, 2018 at 2:42 AM
Unknown said...: Kenny,
I'm giving you advice which you may or may not take. I realize sometimes it's hard to take advice which goes against your inner feelings. I'm only hoping that you won't find yourself, some years hence, saying, "If only I'd followed Guillermo's advice ..."
I'd be much happier if you said, "I'm so glad I took that advice..."
You don't have to trust me, of course. Discuss it with someone closer to you -- your parents, an older sibling, ---.
Good ;luck with this.; March 10, 2018 at 7:55 AM
Anonymous said...: Udaman Guillermo.; March 10, 2018 at 8:22 AM
Anonymous said...: Pretrial publicity about Crystal Mangum:

Part 1:

In a video on Crystal Mangum's murder trial, Daniel Meier says, to the effect, that Crystal received so much notoriety from the Duke Rape Hoax that even a Jay Walking ticket would have attracted a lot of unfavorable publicity. There should have been a change of venue.

Look at what Mike Nifong did in the Duke Lacrosse incident.

What Nifong could have done:

Mike Nifong could have said, Let's not rush to judgment, as did a Georgia prosecutor did when Steelers quarter back Ben Rothilsberger(sp?) was accused of a sex crime in his jurisdiction.

What Nifong did:

Nifong, before any investigation, went public saying a crime had happened, an that members of the Lacrosse team were the perpetrators, and that the crime was racially motivated;

Nifong went public with statements to the effect that if anyone he accused of the crime retained a lawyer it was indicative of guilt(why would anyone need a lawyer if one was not formally charged with anything and ha done nothing, the perps rich daddies would buy them expensive lawyers to get them off);

Nifong went public with a statement to the effect that if anyone he had accused did not talk to the authorities it was indicative of guilt(good legal advice but not good moral advice). The 5th Amendment and the Miranda decision guarantee an accused the right to not talk to the authorities. Crystal availed herself of her Miranda rights when she was arrested, and no one said that was an indication of guilt;; March 10, 2018 at 8:30 AM
Anonymous said...: Pre tria publicity about Crystal Mangum:

part 2:

What else did Nifong do:

Nifong got evidence which his own DA office said was exculpatory, no semen, blood, saliva on the rape kit materials, no DNA match to any member or the Lacrosse team. He went to NCCU and announced to a community forum that he was going to prosecute anyway, that the lack of DNA meant only that the perpetrators of the crime left behind no evidence. But then he hired DNA Security to find DNA evidence which would be inculpatory. He got back DNA evidence which was unequivocally exculpatory, the only male DNA found on Crystal did not match the DNA of the men he had indicted for forcible first degree rape. He, in violation of NC State and Federal law, concealed that evidence from the men he had indicted.

So far as the racist aspect, the NC NAACP enabled Nifong's wrongful, guilt presuming prosecution via the list and torts it blamed on the Lacrosse players, many of them wrong, items not at all supported by the facts, With regard to change of venue, Regarding Irwin Joyner, whom Sidney cited as a legal expert, Consider this: fdom http://www.webcommentary.com/php/ShowArticle.php?id=gaynorm&date=061229 "NCCU Law Professor Irving Joyner, who is monitoring the Duke case for the North Carolina NAACP, yearned months ago for a jury trial of the Duke case in Durham. He believed that a Durham jury may convict when jurors elsewhere would not: "This case originated in Durham and should be tried here" and Mr. Nifong 'still has a viable shot at victory before a jury in Durham.'"

Irwin Joyner wanted a trial held in a venue which would be more likely to bring in a guilty verdict; His exact quote, quoted in The Duke Lacrose Case A Documentary History and Analysis of the modern Scorrsboro by R. B. Parrish, Copyrighted by R.B. Parrish 2009, ISBN-13: 978-1439235904ISBN-10: 1439235902 "Irwin Joyner: A Durham Jury may see things differently than would an Orange or Wake County jury because the Durham jury will probaly have more Africans on iton it than would be involved in other countries on North Carolina....This case originated in Durham and should be tried here", page 275.

All the notoriety affecting Crystal did not come from any group of Duke Lacrosse apologists or from any vendetta against Crystal. THE PERSON SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE NOTORIETY SUFFERED BY CRYSTAL MANGUM WAS MIKE NIFONG AND NO ONE ELSE. NIFONG HAD NO PROBABLE CAUSE TO PROSECUTE ANY MEMBER OF THE LACROSSE TEAM FOR RAPE, BUT HE DID SO ANYWAY.; March 10, 2018 at 8:32 AM
Anonymous said...: UdaUbes Pubes.; March 10, 2018 at 8:54 AM
Anonymous said...: This is for Kenny:

Also from The Duke Lacrose Case A Documentary History and Analysis of the modern Scorrsboro by R. B. Parrish, Copyrighted by R.B. Parrish 2009, ISBN-13: 978-1439235904ISBN-10: 1439235902

Page 36:

"The suspect was driving a blue taxi cab...She was completely left of center wirhin my sight wirhour any lights on the vehicle. She then crossed back right and off the road into the shoulder and turning up dirt...the suspect was then traveling SOUTH IN THE NORTHBOUND LANE(emphasis added)...She traveled east until it came ro a dead end . She then attempted to turn left and tun through the fence but was unable to and it appeared that she was unable to go any further. I put my vehicle in park and exited it, and approached the subject-telling her to turn the car off and get out.

When she saw me approach, she was laughing and put the vehicle in reverse and backed across the road and into the woods. Ir appeared she was stuck. I had to run around my vehicle ro get back to the driver's side door, and I began to approach the vehicle she putit in drive and drove towards me. I jumped out of the way to the right and she missed me. The suspect then struck the right rear quarter of my patrol vehicle....then proceeded west on Bear Creek Parkway, almost striking Deputy Goss in his vehicle"

Then the deputies pursued her and boxed her in, forcing her out of her car.

On Page 37:

"She was given an alcosensor and submitted giving a 0.19 reading and at the same time, while getting all the information together, the suspect passed out and was unresponsive"

This police report by Deputy John Carroll was generated on 2002, roughly 4 years before Crystal became "THE CRYSTAL MANGUM". Her account was generated more than two years after she became "THE CRYSTAL MANGUM".

As the deputies documented she was intoxicated at the time of the incident, how is her account reliable? Could she even recall more than 6 years after the event what had happened.

This was not something by anyone to discredit Crystal because of the Duke Rape Hoax.; March 10, 2018 at 9:07 AM
kenhyderal said...: Guillermo said: "I'm giving you advice which you may or may not take"...................Huh?? What advice is that Mr. Counsellor? Where exactly are you coming from and what is your motive? If you want to discuss the Duke Lacrosse case or the Reginald Daye Case I'm prepared to participate with you but if you want to practice psychology or psychiatry find someone that's more gullible.; March 10, 2018 at 9:13 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"Guillermo said: "I'm giving you advice which you may or may not take"...................Huh?? What advice is that Mr. Counsellor? Where exactly are you coming from and what is your motive? If you want to discuss the Duke Lacrosse case or the Reginald Daye Case I'm prepared to participate with you but if you want to practice psychology or psychiatry find someone that's more gullible."

Meaning Kenny does not want to confront truths which do not mesh with his guilt presuming racism or his obsession with imagining Crystal had been raped.; March 10, 2018 at 9:19 AM
guillermo said...: Kenny,
I'm sorry you won't take my advice I could say I'm only trying to help you, but I realize this only upsets people, so I won't say it. I still recommend you discuss it with someone closer to you. Maybe your father could give you some valuable insight into your problem.
I just hope this doesn't come back to haunt you.; March 10, 2018 at 9:34 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

Regarding your delusion that "many" people believe the Lacrosse defendants are guilty because they never went to trial, you assertion that Crystal had a right to have her claim adjudicated, you do agree, do you not,that a criminal defendant has a right to a fair, objective, trial.

Irwin Joyner advocated that the Lacrosse defendants should be tried by a jury which would return a guilty verdict.

Nifong wanted to conceal evidence which exonerated the defendants, meaning he did not want the jury to see that evidence.

How could the Lacrosse defendants have gotten a fair and objective trial in Durham?

Or do you believe Caucasian(William cohan's description) are not entitled to a fair, honest, objective trial?; March 10, 2018 at 9:46 AM
Anonymous said...: Sidney Harr:

You have posted on many occasions that no one proved Crystal had lied about being raped.

Who, if anyone had an obligation to prove Crystal lied?; March 10, 2018 at 1:30 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said" "Also from The Duke Lacrose Case A Documentary History and Analysis of the modern Scorrsboro by R. B. Parrish, Copyrighted by R.B. Parrish 2009, ISBN-13: 978-1439235904ISBN-10: 1439235902". ..................................This was a poorly referenced book written in 2009 by a guy in Arizona. In comparison with the Scotsboro Case and the Tawana Brawley case, he cobbled together news reports about The Duke Lacrosse Case from sources such as the blog Johnsville News, where he, apparently, copied and pasted what you have posted here, written back 1n 2006. A time when the Duke Lacrosse Defence were trying their best to discredit Crystal and they found and widely circulated this incident, reported in a highly sensationalized version, in the Herald-Sun 1n 2002, the morning after. Parrish, misinterpreted the Johnsville report in that this was nit the actual Police Officer Carroll's notes but what the Herald Sun had said they contained. Johnsville News' actual cited source was not the police report but the record of charges filed and their disposition. The Judge saw through this over dramaticversion and gave her a cursory sentence mainly because of her BAC.; March 10, 2018 at 2:04 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "Who, if anyone had an obligation to prove Crystal lied?".................... The accused. Duke lacrosse defenders like Dr. Anonymous are always demanding the I prove Crystal was telling the truth. Here's my take it is the Duke Lacrosse Defence that must prove Crystal lied. It is the Prosecution that must prove that she told the truth. It is a Grand Jury that must decide id there is sufficient evidence to go to trial then it is a Jury of Crystal's peers who must decide.; March 10, 2018 at 2:15 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"Anonymous said" "Also from The Duke Lacrose Case A Documentary History and Analysis of the modern Scorrsboro by R. B. Parrish, Copyrighted by R.B. Parrish 2009, ISBN-13: 978-1439235904ISBN-10: 1439235902". ..................................This was a poorly referenced book written in 2009 by a guy in Arizona. In comparison with the Scotsboro Case and the Tawana Brawley case, he cobbled together news reports about The Duke Lacrosse Case from sources such as the blog Johnsville News, where he, apparently, copied and pasted what you have posted here, written back 1n 2006. A time when the Duke Lacrosse Defence were trying their best to discredit Crystal and they found and widely circulated this incident, reported in a highly sensationalized version, in the Herald-Sun 1n 2002, the morning after. Parrish, misinterpreted the Johnsville report in that this was nit the actual Police Officer Carroll's notes but what the Herald Sun had said they contained. Johnsville News' actual cited source was not the police report but the record of charges filed and their disposition. The Judge saw through this over dramaticversion and gave her a cursory sentence mainly because of her BAC."

Kenny again tries to bullshit his way through and around facts he does not like.; March 10, 2018 at 3:16 PM
Anonymous said...: Considering Kenny considers William Cohan;s totally undocumented screed as the definitive account of the Duke Rape Hoax, it is obvious Kenny can not recognize what documentation is.; March 10, 2018 at 3:18 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"Anonymous said: "Who, if anyone had an obligation to prove Crystal lied?".................... The accused."

Wrong. In a criminal case the accused are required to prove nothing. The prosecution has the obligation to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accuser(in the Duke Rape Hoax this was Crystal) told the truth. However the burden of proof falls on the defense when the defense advances something like self defense or an alibi.

"Duke lacrosse defenders like Dr. Anonymous are always demanding the I prove Crystal was telling the truth. Here's my take it is the Duke Lacrosse Defence that must prove Crystal lied."

What legal source can you cite that says the defense in any criminal case "MUST(emphasis added)" prove the complaining witness lied?

"It is the Prosecution that must prove that she told the truth."

Incomplete. "the Prosecution....must prove that she told the truth" BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT.

It is a Grand Jury that must decide id(sic) there is sufficient evidence to go to trial"

Regarding Grand Juries:

http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-procedure/how-does-a-grand-jury-work.html:

"The grand jury plays an important role in the criminal process, but not one that involves a finding of guilt or punishment of a party. Instead, a prosecutor will work with a grand jury to decide whether to bring criminal charges or an indictment against a potential defendant -- usually reserved for serious felonies."

and:

"While all states have provisions in their laws that allow for grand juries, roughly half of the states don't use them. Courts often use preliminary hearings prior to criminal trials, instead of grand juries, which are adversarial in nature. As with grand juries, preliminary hearings are meant to determine whether there is enough evidence, or probable cause, to indict a criminal suspect."

The Grand Jury in North Carolina is a totally secret procedure, no records of the proceeding are kept and only the prosecution can present evidence.

If Nifong had sought a warrant instead of a Grand Jury indictment it would have triggered a probable cause hearing:

(http://defendermanuals.sog.unc.edu/sites/defendermanuals.sog.un;c.edu/files/pdf/Ch%203%20Probable%20Cause%20Hearings%202d%20ed%202013_0.pdf

and https://www.nielsen-legal.com/blog/2016/05/probable-cause-hearings-and-grand-jury-indictment.shtml

In a probable cause hearing am accused and his counsel may cross examine prosecution witnesses and present evidence.

Why did Nifong go the Grand Jury route. Considering his deliberate concealing of evidence which exonerated the defendants, his refusal to look at Reade Seligmann's solid alibi evidence, his motivation was to prevent the accused from presenting exculpatory evidence.

One can reliably infer from the facts, that Nifong did not want to see Reade Seligmann's alibi evidence. that Nifong deliberately concealed evidence which exonerated the defendants, Nifong did not present the entire picture of the case to the Grand Jury.

"then it is a Jury of Crystal's peers who must decide"

More evidence you are a guilt presuming racist.

In a criminal case the jury must be a jury of the ACCUSED's peers who must decide.

https://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=1079:

"jury of one's peers n. a guaranteed right of CRIMINAL DEFENDANTS(emphasis added), in which "peer" means an "equal."

Crystal did not have any right to have the case go to trial, let alone have a Jury of her peers decide the case.

Would you say the Scottsboro boys should have been tried by a jury of the peers of the false accusers?

Your take is another instance of trying to bullshit your way around and through facts you do not like.; March 10, 2018 at 4:04 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"Duke lacrosse defenders like Dr. Anonymous are always demanding the I prove Crystal was telling the truth. Here's my take it is the Duke Lacrosse Deft yalence that must prove Crystal lied."

Why do you back off from proving Crystal told the truth?

Why are you on the record that you need no proof because you trust Crystal. The most credible explanation is, you CAN'T prove she told the truth, and say the accused should have been presumed guilty.

I refer again to the Scottsboro boys. Should the Scottsboro boys have been required to prove the accusers lied?; March 10, 2018 at 4:11 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

What would you think if Crystal had been indicted by a NC Grand Jury which kept no record of its proceedings and only heard from the prosecutiom?; March 10, 2018 at 4:21 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"Parrish, misinterpreted the Johnsville report in that this was nit the actual Police Officer Carroll's notes but what the Herald Sun had said they contained. Johnsville News' actual cited source was not the police report but the record of charges filed and their disposition."

What was quoted was the Deputy's actual official report.; March 10, 2018 at 4:27 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

part 1:

http://johnsville.blogspot.com/2006/04/duke-rape-accuser-crystal-gail-mangum.html

The Johnsville News quoted Deputy John Carroll's actual police report.

Also from the Johnsville News:

The incident began at a topless dance club [Diamond Girls] while the woman was performing for a taxi driver, McCrae wrote.

"As she was feeling him up and putting her hands in his pockets she removed the keys to his taxi cab, without him knowing," the officer said. "He [the cabbie] told her he would drive her home but needed to go to the restroom first. While in the restroom he was advised that she was driving off in his taxi cab."

McCrae said he chased the woman at speeds up to 70 mph in a 55-mph zone until she finally stopped.

"As I began to approach the vehicle she put it in drive and drove towards me," McCrae added. "I jumped out of the way to the right and she missed me. The suspect then struck the right rear quarter of my patrol vehicle."

Another chase ensued, but the woman finally was apprehended after having a flat tire, according to McCrae.

The officer said she registered a blood-alcohol concentration of 0.19 on a portable sensing device -- more than double North Carolina's 0.08 legal threshold for impairment.

And while being questioned, the dancer "passed out and was unresponsive," McCrae said.

She was taken to the emergency room at Duke University Hospital, McCrae's report indicated."; March 10, 2018 at 4:42 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

part 2

"The episode started at the Diamond Girls club on Angier Avenue in Durham. According to Larry W. Jones, the owner of Diamond Girls, the woman appeared at the club that night and "tried out," giving lap dances to a few men.

Jones said the manager at the time did not offer the woman a job because she was "acting funny."

She started dancing for a taxi driver, whom she asked for a ride, according to a report from the Durham County Sheriff's Office. While dancing, she took the keys from the driver's pocket without his knowledge and, minutes later, drove off in his taxi.

The cab driver called 911 and a sheriff's deputy responded and saw the blue 1992 Chevrolet Caprice heading east on Angier Avenue near Page Road. The headlights were off and the woman was driving on the wrong side of the road, according to the deputy's report.

The woman sped up to pass the officer, and he began to chase the taxi, which ran a stop sign and veered across the road, weaving across a grass median, onto the shoulder and back. The car sped from Angier Avenue onto U.S. 70, the report said.

According to the report, the woman drove down the center of the highway, a 55 mph zone, at 70 mph, heading into Raleigh. She kept speeding, drove the wrong way down Brier Creek Parkway and turned into a dead end, where she tried to drive the taxi through a fence.

The sheriff's deputy said he got out of his car and told the woman to turn off the car. She laughed, backed up the car, then drove forward again and nearly hit the deputy, the report said.

The taxi slammed into the deputy's car and kept going, turning back onto Brier Creek Parkway into oncoming traffic, the report said. Another deputy continued to chase her until the taxi got a flat tire. Officers boxed in the car, pulled the woman out and arrested her.

Her blood alcohol level was 0.19, according to court records, more than twice the legal limit to drive in North Carolina.

The woman was charged with driving while impaired, driving with a revoked license, felony speeding to elude arrest, felony assault with a deadly weapon on a government official, and felony larceny of a motor vehicle. Court documents and her criminal and driving records show that her driver's license had been revoked before the incident, but they do not indicate why.

Under a deal with prosecutors, she pleaded guilty to four misdemeanors in the car chase: larceny, speeding to elude arrest, assault on a government official and DWI, according to court records. She was required to serve three consecutive weekends in jail and was placed on two years' probation. She paid restitution and court costs, and completed her probation."

That you tell a different story based on Crystal's account drawn up after she had become "THE CRYSTAL MANGUM" the same Crystal Mangum who told multiple, contradictory accounts of what happened to her on the night o 13/14 March 2006, who admitted in December of 2006 she could not recall if she had been raped(in her police statement of April of 2006 she said she had been penetrated) is not credible.

If all those people who believe the Lacrosse defendants are guilt actually exist, they are free to post here.; March 10, 2018 at 4:46 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

Considering your latest about juries and who has the obligation to prove anything in a criminal trial, your argument that a jury of the accuser's peers and not a jury of he defendants peers should determine the verdict, res ipsa loquitur gross errors and misunderstandings of the judicial process, you have less than zero credibility as a commenter.; March 10, 2018 at 4:58 PM
guillermo said...: Kenny,
The Duke lacrosse case dates back to 2006, and was adjudicated in 2007. The Daye murder case dates back to 2011, and was adjudicated in 2013. I see no reason to reopen them now. It does seem to me that they are getting into you head and affecting your behavior. You are fighting with everyone around. I really feel you should try to get over this. Have you discussed this with your parents or other family members, as I recommended? Please think this over.; March 10, 2018 at 5:07 PM
JSwift said...: Kenny claims: Johnsville News' actual cited source was not the police report...

Johnsville News:

Deputy John Carroll's police report of Crystal Mangum's 2002 arrest:

The suspect was driving a blue taxi cab [which she had stolen at a topless club]. She was completely left of center within my sight without any lights on the vehicle. She then crossed back right and off the road into the shoulder and turning up dirt. [After traveling 70mph in a 55mph zone,] the suspect was then traveling south in the northbound lane . . . She traveled east until it came to a dead end. She then attempted to turn left and run through a fence but was unable to and it appeared that she was not going to go any further. I put my vehicle in park and exited it, and approached the suspect—telling her to turn the car off and get out.

When she saw me approach, she was laughing and put the vehicle in reverse and backed across the road and into the woods. It appeared that she was stuck. I had to run around my vehicle to get back to the driver’s side door, and as I began to approach the vehicle she put it in drive and drove towards me. I jumped out of the way to the right and she missed me. The suspect then struck the right rear quarter of my patrol vehicle . . . and then proceeded west on Briar Creek Parkway, almost striking Deputy Goss in his patrol vehicle.

[Police pursed Mangum and eventually boxed in her vehicle]

... was boxed in. Deputy Goss and I approached the vehicle with our guns drawn, pointing at the suspect, giving verbal commands to exit the car. She refused until we were directly next to the car.

She then opened the door and would not get out, with her hand on the steering wheel and leaning out to the rear of the car. She finally got out of the car and laid down on the ground. She was taken into custody at that time. I put her in the back seat of my vehicle. She kept attempting to lay down but was advised to sit up. She was given an alcosensor and submitted, giving a 0.19 reading, and at the same time, while getting all the information together, the suspect passed out and was unresponsive.

https://johnsville.blogspot.com/search?q=mangum+taxi

Kenny, this excerpt appears to directly contradict your comment.

John D. Smith
New York, NY; March 10, 2018 at 5:26 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

Just a couple more:

Should a mafia don on trial be tried by a jury of other mafia dons?

Should the case against Crystal have been decided by a jury of Reginald Daye's pees?; March 10, 2018 at 5:38 PM
Anonymous said...: Did Reginald Daye pee on the jury?; March 10, 2018 at 7:16 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny, who’s your daddy?; March 10, 2018 at 7:36 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny doesn’t know who his daddy is.; March 10, 2018 at 7:38 PM
kenhyderal said...: John D. Said: "Kenny, this excerpt appears to directly contradict your comment"..........................This is reported in Parrish's book as if it is the actual Police Notes when it is the Court Reporter McCrae citing what Carroll presented in Court. The Judge questioned the story and sentenced Crystal accordingly. Crystal had entered a guilty plea. There were no police notes in 2006 when Johnsville News, as a Duke Lacrosse Apologist blog, reported on this incident, after The Duke Lacrosse Defense had dug it up as part of their effort to discredit Crystal. It's source was McCrae in the Herald Sun story. What Johnsville links to is the official Court Record showing the charges and the sentence.; March 10, 2018 at 8:19 PM
guiowen said...: Kenny,
Why do we not believe anything you say?; March 10, 2018 at 8:55 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"John D. Said: "Kenny, this excerpt appears to directly contradict your comment"..........................This is reported in Parrish's book as if it is the actual Police Notes when it is the Court Reporter McCrae citing what Carroll presented in Court. The Judge questioned the story and sentenced Crystal accordingly. Crystal had entered a guilty plea. There were no police notes in 2006 when Johnsville News, as a Duke Lacrosse Apologist blog, reported on this incident, after The Duke Lacrosse Defense had dug it up as part of their effort to discredit Crystal. It's source was McCrae in the Herald Sun story. What Johnsville links to is the official Court Record showing the charges and the sentence."

The testimony came from the deputies. It camee in 2002 before Crystal became THE CRYSTAL MANUM. She was drunk. She did not have a licensr. The cab river did call 911 and report his cab had been stolen. The incident was not concocted by the Duke defense to discredit Crystal. So far as the judge, he gave Crystal a break. I say, considering th case of Michael Jermaine Burch who raped a white woman and then while out on a bail of less than $400K raped another woman and then was allowed to plead to a lesser charge, it is not uncommon in Durham to give defendants, including black defendants a break.

Your strategy of DENY DENY DENY DUCK DODGE AVOID EVADE DOES NOT WORK.; March 11, 2018 at 3:32 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny:

A Duke Apologist blog is defending innocent men falsely accused of and wrongfully prosecuted for a crime which never happened. You are an apologist for a woman who is a convicted criminal/false rape accuser/convicted murderess. You do not argue from the moral high ground.You argue from the sub sea level immoral low ground.

And considering your assertion that it should have been a jury of Crystal's peers who should have decided whether or not the Lacrosse players were guilt, you are a guilt presuming racist. Should Michael Jermaine Burch have been tried by a jury consisting of the peers of his victims?; March 11, 2018 at 3:38 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny, how about you?

Suppose you were accused of some felony, rape, murder or what have you.

Should you be tried bu a jury of your supposed victim's peers, or should you be tried by a jury of your peers.

Do not DUCK DODGE DENY AVOID EVADE. ANSWER THE QUESTION.; March 11, 2018 at 3:40 AM
Anonymous said...: UdaPubes Ubes.; March 11, 2018 at 4:37 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny or Sidney or both continue to post anonymously to create the illusion that they have support.; March 11, 2018 at 5:05 AM
Anonymous said...: More for Kenhyderal:

You are on record on this blog for the following:

You need no proof that Crystal had been raped because you trust her.

The defendants had an obligation to prove themselves innocent.

The jury at their trial should have been a jury of Crystal's peers.

In our country, and I concede this does not always happen, a defendant must be presumed innocent until and unless proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, the prosecution, not the defense, has the obligation to prove, and the defendant is entitled to a fair trial, which does mean the jury must not be inclined one way or the other at the start of the trial towards guilt or innocence.

You advocate that the defendants had an obligation to prove, that they should have been presumed guilty solely on the word of Crystal, that the jury deciding their fate should be sympathetic to Crystal and not unbiased.

You rant and rave that Crystal did not receive a fair trial.

You have no concept of what a fair trial is.; March 11, 2018 at 5:10 AM
JSwift said...: Kenny,

As I recall, RB Parrish used the name Quasimodo when commenting on Liestoppers. Quasimodo was one of the commenters on Liestoppers with the best grasp of the facts of the Lacrosse case.

Kenny, why is the reliance on Carroll's court testimony inappropriate?

When did you interview the Judge to determine his reasoning?

John D. Smith
New York, NY; March 11, 2018 at 6:46 AM
kenhyderal said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; March 11, 2018 at 8:36 AM
kenhyderal said...: He intimated that these were direct quotes from the actual physical notes of Carroll when they were actually what the Court reporter heard and included in his highly sensationalized report in the Herald Sun. If it was characterized like it was reported, why did the Judge impose such a minimal sentence. According to Crystal the Judge questioned Carroll and was skeptical of what he had to say about the incident, other then driving over 0.8. The charge of assault on a public employee is the charge a protester gets if he spat at a policeman. The way it was reported it sounded like it was attempted vehicular homicide. Duke Lacrosse Apologists dismiss the light sentence as Crystal getting an unbelievable break something not very likely for a minority in North Carolina; March 11, 2018 at 8:37 AM
Anonymous said...: Udaman kenhyderal.; March 11, 2018 at 9:27 AM
JSwift said...: Kenny asks: If it was characterized like it was reported, why did the Judge impose such a minimal sentence.

If I recall correctly, Crystal's guilty pleas to several misdemeanors was part of a plea bargain with the prosecution. After all, if she decided to plead guilty, there would have been no trial. When did Carroll testify? Was it part of a sentencing hearing?

I would guess that the prosecution offered Crystal the plea they did because she was a first time offender, never having been in legal trouble before and, according to her attorney, Woody Vann, she expressed remorse. It appears that Vann provided excellent representation in that case. Kenny, drunk driving is a serious offense. It is illegal because it is potentially dangerous.

It is interesting that you and Sidney have vilified Vann because he believe that Welch applied in Crystal's murder case. Sidney views that as part of a conspiracy; you apparently believe Vann has no common sense.

John D. Smith
New York, NY; March 11, 2018 at 10:06 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"He intimated that these were direct quotes from the actual physical notes of Carroll when they were actually what the Court reporter heard and included in his highly sensationalized report in the Herald Sun."

He intimated nothing. He said, as did the Johnville blog, this is how the deputies reported the incident. If you have another account of what happened, post it.

"If it was characterized like it was reported, why did the Judge impose such a minimal sentence. According to Crystal the Judge questioned Carroll and was skeptical of what he had to say about the incident, other then driving over 0.8."

It has been explained to you, Crystal got a break and it is not at all that a black defendant gets a break from the Durham courts, as the Michael Jermaine Burch case shows. If black people do not get breaks from the courts, then explain why Michael Jermaine Burch was not prosecuted with the same intensity as were the innocent Duke defendants.

It was more than a BAC of 0.8. The cab drive reported his cab had been stolen, Crystal had a suspended license, it was documented she was driving 70 in a 55 MPH zone which does put people at a greater danger of death or serious injury-had she crashed into someone at 70 MPH the consequences would have been much greater than if she had crashed into someoned at 55.

It was documented she was driving on the wrong side of the road, increasing the chance of a head on collision.

"The charge of assault on a public employee is the charge a protester gets if he spat at a policeman. The way it was reported it sounded like it was attempted vehicular homicide."

It was reported that way because it was attempted vehicular homicide.

Duke Lacrosse Apologists dismiss the light sentence as Crystal getting an unbelievable break something not very likely for a minority in North Carolina"

As has been explained to you, black people do get breaks in Durham NC.

Why do you dismiss all the evidence which shows unequivocally that Crystal never told the truth when she alleged she had been raped?; March 11, 2018 at 10:51 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny, you insist that the account detailed above was fabricated by the people who were defending the innocent Lacrosse defendants from false charges and from actual malicious prosecution to discredit Crystal.

The so called Duke Lacrosse apologists(a characterization applied to them by an apologist for a false rape accuser/convicted criminal/convicted murderess) did nothing to distort the incident. The only one indulging in deliberate distortion of the public record is you.; March 11, 2018 at 10:56 AM
Anonymous said...: Ken,

I hate to be the one to break the news to you, but you are nothing more than an apologist for Crystal Mangum.; March 11, 2018 at 12:21 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny:

Your attitude towards is Nifongian, if you consider this a compliment, then you do not comprehend what a fair trial is.

You highlight whatever supports your case but then suppress and conceal what does not, the way Nifong tried to suppress the factual evidence which clearly, unequivocally that no rape of Crystal ever happened at the Lacrosse party.; March 11, 2018 at 12:34 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: "The cab drive reported his cab had been stolen".....................No he denied that he asked her to drive his taxi to his home because he was impaired. The charge was Misdemeanor larceny not grand theft auto and it related to her taking the keys from his jacket which she admitted to but she insisted that it was with permission. He was trying to protect his job as a taxi driver.; March 11, 2018 at 3:36 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal:

"Anonymous said: "The cab drive reported his cab had been stolen".....................No he denied that he asked her to drive his taxi to his home because he was impaired. The charge was Misdemeanor larceny not grand theft auto and it related to her taking the keys from his jacket which she admitted to but she insisted that it was with permission. He was trying to protect his job as a taxi driver."

Kenny again trying to bullshit his way around and through facts he does not like. According to the deputies responding to the incident reported the cab driver dialed 911 and reported his cab had been stolen.

Crystal got a break.

It was documented that Crystal was so drunk at the time of the incident, which was 4 years before she became THE CRYSTAL MANGUM. Her account was generated 2 years after she became THE CRYSTAL MANGUM. It is doubtful she could have recalled the incidents at the time as she was not coherent at the time. At the time her account was published, Vincent Clark and Crystal were trying to deny FACT that she was not raped at the Lacrosse party.; March 11, 2018 at 3:48 PM
JSwift said...: Kenny claims: No he denied that he asked her to drive his taxi to his home because he was impaired. The charge was Misdemeanor larceny not grand theft auto and it related to her taking the keys from his jacket which she admitted to but she insisted that it was with permission. He was trying to protect his job as a taxi driver.

When did you interview the taxi driver?

John D. Smith
New York, NY; March 11, 2018 at 4:21 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny, Crystal was so drunk she passed out and was unresponsive.

Six years later how well could she recall the events very accurately when she was impaired.

Here's a scenario for you. One of the Lacrosse players time travelled back to 2002 and gave her a date rape drug.

There was no evidence she was given a date rape drug in 2006.; March 11, 2018 at 4:25 PM
Anonymous said...: John D.Smith

Kenny did not interview the cab driver or stay in a Holiday Inn Express. However he did read the account in Last Dance for Grace, written by Crystal under the "guidance" of Vincent Clark after she had been outed as a false accuser.; March 11, 2018 at 4:28 PM
Anonymous said...: UdaUbes Pubes.; March 11, 2018 at 6:40 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny or Sidney or both continue to post anonymously to create the illusion that they have support.; March 11, 2018 at 6:42 PM

«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 317 of 317 Newer› Newest»

Thursday, March 1, 2018

Harr's humble, yet brilliant opinion -- Daniel Meier: Expert or quid pro quo?

317 comments:

Facebook Badge

Subscribe!

Labels

Blog Archive

About Me