Harr Law School: Manner of Death 101 and Examination
Note: The exam should be operational. You will need to enter your e-mail address to get the test results back immediately. No scoring on the essay portion, so if you answer the essay question by commenting on the blog site.
HEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP! IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT!!
It was well past midnight when I decided to toss the towel. Some of the links on the Directory table haven't been hooked up, but the buttons in the text work... and that's what's important.
Dr. Caligari said... Enough with the crying towel posts. They're not funny, and you've posted so many of them that didn't come true that your credibility as a prognosticator on legal issues is now nil.
September 11, 2020 at 8:49 AM
Hey, Dr. Caligari.
Yes, I have fallen short on several predictions but I believe this is the beginning of the end of the wrongful incarceration of Crystal Mangum. What did you think about Representative Willingham's letter to NC DHHS Secretary Dr. Mandy Cohen? She ignored me, but do you think she'll ignore Mr. Willingham?
Can you tell us when we might expect Mangum to be freed and exonerated?
Abe Froman Chicago, IL
September 11, 2020 at 9:47 AM
Hey, Abe.
With letters like Representative Willingham's along with pending legal action by myself and Crystal, I am extremely confident that she will be released from prison by Christmas. I am more than 50% confident that she will be released by Thanksgiving. If Dr. Cohen moves reasonably time-wise regarding a review of Dr. Nichols' autopsy report, I would not be surprised if she was released by Halloween.
I would expect her exoneration would follow shortly after her release because she would not be released unless it can be proven that she's absolutely innocent... something of which the officials and state are already aware.
kenhyderal said... @ Dr. C and @ Sausage King: You two are informed and intelligent enough to know that that eminent Forensic Pathologist Dr. Cyril Wecht believes Reginald Daye's death was not a homicide. I suspect even Dr. Roberts would concede, given Wecht's expertise vs her own and that of Dr. Nichols, that this is the case. This information has been given to Gov.Cooper and to AG Josh Stein. My question to you two as Americans why it does not outrage you that an innocent person is being imprisoned for political reasons and to selfishly and sinfully save face for them.
Blogger Dr. Caligari said... You two are informed and intelligent enough to know that that eminent Forensic Pathologist Dr. Cyril Wecht believes Reginald Daye's death was not a homicide.
As you know, I have often been critical of Dr. Harr's legal strategies but, when he first published Dr. Wecht's statement, I congratulated him and told him that, for the first time, he and Mangum had a potentially-winning issue.
I was then away from this board for a while but, when I returned, I found nothing had changed. Why wasn't Dr. Wecht's affidavit filed in court as the basis for an MAR? Why is Dr. Harr wasting time with not one, but two frivolous lawsuits (the WRAL suit and the malicious prosecution case) instead?
September 12, 2020 at 8:29 AM Delete
Hey, Dr. Caligari.
I received Dr. Wecht's October 25, 2019 report on October 27th or 29th. On October 31st I manually filed on Crystal's behalf a MAR based on Dr. Wecht's report in Durham. The clerk of court's office used all manner of delaying tactics to keep the MAR from the judge (including burying it). I managed to force the MAR on the judge who denied it using esoteric legalese reasoning. The judge denying the MAR was trial Judge Paul Ridgeway... the same judge who continues to keep from Crystal Mangum the 18-page document he deemed relevant to her case at trial.
If you read the Malicious Prosecution Reply (to defendants' Motion to Dismiss) that is now in federal court, then I think you will appreciate its value. My lawsuit against WRAL-5 News, if successful as I expect, will accrue to Crystal's benefit as well.
@ Dr. Caligari: Why do you suppose Gov. Cooper and AG Stein have done nothing. Cooper is a Dr.of Law and Stein a Harvard Law School Graduate. They have all the facts. Dr. Harr is a retired physician who gets sanctioned by the Law Society while seeking justice for Crystal. This with the acquiescence of all those with the power and duty to see that justice is served. But, of course, that would come at the cost to them losing face. That's far more important to them than the life of a poor black mother of three who, thanks to the Duke Lacrosse Defense, this 'me too" heroine was made a pariah in the eyes of an uninformed public. Cooper caved under pressure from powerful interests and misled public opinion and in declaring the accused innocent made Crystal to wrongly appear to be a person worthy of disrespect. History will not be kind to those who knew the truth and did nothing.
Blogger guiowen said... Kenhyderal, Please stop whining Instead, help Sidney hire a lawyer. With any luck, you can have Crystal's crime reduced to assault with a deadly weapon, which should get her out. But you and Sidney have to do something. And please, no more of that "I'm a man of limited means" junk.
September 12, 2020 at 3:56 PM
Hey, gui, mon ami.
As I said, hiring an attorney is not the answer. The answer for Mangum to receive justice may very well hinge on publicizing the truths of Mangum's innocence. Attorney's fees would be wasted as she has already made her case Pro Se.
I am uncertain as to the "inept" meaning of your comment. For a reply, I would require more specification.
Meanwhile, I would be very much interested in your opinion about Representative Willingham's letter to NC DHHS Secretary Dr. Mandy Cohen. Do you think she will reply to him... a legislator?
In your opinion, do you feel that a review of Dr. Clay Nichols' autopsy report on Reginald Daye is warranted?
HEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP! IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT!!
Only four of fourteen links on the Directory page are operational. Time permitting they should all be working by day's end. This is not a crucial matter, as you are aware. Most important are the links in the text that do work.
Also, consider yourself enrolled in the Harr Law School. I plan on having an exam on the subject matter posted in the near future. Passing grades may even be rewarded with Certificates of Accomplishment. There will be more on Harr Law School in the future, where our motto is "We may not have the prestige of Harvard, but we have the spunk of UC Berkeley."
Sidney, I'm glad to see that you finally got someone in some position of authority to look at the case,and ask the court to take another look. How much good this will do has yet to be seen. My question is, why didn't you tell us about this sooner? This letter was written on September 9, and you must have known about it that same day,if not sooner. But instead of telling us then,you keep it a secret until you've put together some schlog. Apart from Willingham's letter, I see nothing in the schlog that you haven't told us about, many times, in the past.
guiowen said... Sidney, I'm glad to see that you finally got someone in some position of authority to look at the case,and ask the court to take another look. How much good this will do has yet to be seen. My question is, why didn't you tell us about this sooner? This letter was written on September 9, and you must have known about it that same day,if not sooner. But instead of telling us then,you keep it a secret until you've put together some schlog. Apart from Willingham's letter, I see nothing in the schlog that you haven't told us about, many times, in the past.
September 14, 2020 at 10:43 AM
Hey, gui, mon ami.
Actually, instead of the court, I am trying to get the NC DHHS Secretary to review the autopsy report by Dr. Nichols. Sure that you just misstated. It should not have been so difficult to get such a letter, but believe me... it was tremendously hard as groups such as NAACP, ACLU, NC Legislative Black Caucus, Southern Christian Leadership Conference, and others should have been willing to simply make a request... especially in light of Dr. Wecht's report. Anything involving Crystal Mangum takes courage because she has been so politicized, and I am deeply appreciative and indebted to Representative Shelly Willingham for his letter. Ideally it would not have been necessary had Dr. Cohen had the courage to respond to me rather than ignoring me.
Yes, Representative Willingham's letter is the substantially new tidbit in this shar-entry which was produced to put its importance into perspective. The real question I have is: Will Dr. Cohen respond to Representative Willingham? Another question, if she does is: Will she agree and order that Dr. Nichols' autopsy on Reginald Daye be reviewed? I would like to know what you think.
There was a slight delay, less than a week, before the letter by Representative Willingham was made public on this site, but it was not nefarious as may be interpreted from your comment. Because the letter was sent by a third party to a third party I just wanted it to be sure it was received before I published it publicly on this site. Just a courtesy; nothing more.
Anonymous said... I'd rather enroll in Dr. Caligari's Medical School.....
September 14, 2020 at 11:05 AM
Hey, Anony.
Sorry to break it to you, but you're already enrolled. Every human being on this planet who is at least 18-years old is enrolled in the Harr Law School. But, unlike Trump University, no tuition is required. Now whether or not one elects to study assignments, turn in homework, or take examinations is up to each individual student. However, in order to receive Certificates of Accomplishment, make the Dean's list, or even receive a diploma, one's participation is required.
HEY, EVERYBODY, LISTEN UP! IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT!!
First, all of the links on this shar-flog are now operational.
Second of all, if I am able to figure out the code properly, an exam will be uploaded covering the course on Manner of Death 101. So study hard as it'll be a closed book test.
Third of all, there's more good new on Mangum's case... taking place next week. It'll be a tremendous breakthrough if things pan out as expected.
"If you read the Malicious Prosecution Reply (to defendants' Motion to Dismiss) that is now in federal court, then I think you will appreciate its value. My lawsuit against WRAL-5 News, if successful as I expect, will accrue to Crystal's benefit as well."
Have you posted these documents somewhere? If not, how do you expect anyone to read it?
Also, what makes you think your lawsuit against WRAL will be successful? Can you post links to any documents from the case that support your expectation?
@ Nifong Supporter: Did you ever score my Manner of Death Exam? I'm not completely up to par on the Dottie Amtey case so I' curious as to how I did closed book.
HEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP! IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT!
First of all, apologies for not responding with more frequency. The fact is that I have been extremely busy recently, both with advocacy work for my fiancee, working on lawsuits, working on a shar-video, and working on secret projects.
The one secret project had to do with a legislator writing the Department of Health and Human Services seeking a review of Dr. Clay Nichols' autopsy report of April 14 2011. The letter by Representative Shelly Willingham was sent on September 9, 2020, and to my knowledge there has been no reply.
As with that secret project, I have a second secret project about which I cannot divulge until it has been produced and released. I can tell you, with regards to the second secret project that it has been pretty much completed, but I cannot tell when it will be ready for public consumption. Hopefully I will be able to reveal the secret project within the first or second week of October. It should be sometime soon. In the meantime I am busy working on the lawsuits.
The paucity of my comments are inversely related to how busy I am and not related to the success or failure of my projects. I will try to better comment more timely to comments, time permitting.
"The paucity of my comments are inversely related to how busy I am..."
Paucity (noun) = the presence of something only in small or insufficient quantities or amounts.
Inversely related = when an increase in one variable causes a reduction in the other variable.
I believe what you're attempting to state is that either: The number of your comments are inversely related to how busy you are... Or: The paucity of your comments are directly related to how busy you are.
Apparently your command of the English language is a well-developed as your command of the legal system.
Sid's too busy getting his "School of Law" operational, Kenny -- cut the man some slack. He has his priorities, and apparently your comments aren't one of them.
It is very disturbing to learn that kenhyderal’s comments are not being posted. Please correct this oversight so that we can all continue to learn from his cogent comments.
HEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP!! IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT!
Sorry that I haven't been responding to comments recently. But have been very busy on many aspects of Crystal's lawsuit, my lawsuit, and efforts to free and exonerate my fiancee. Will take time to respond to comments now before getting back to work.
Dr. Caligari said... Actually, instead of the court, I am trying to get the NC DHHS Secretary to review the autopsy report by Dr. Nichols.
Maybe the Harr School of Law can cover the question: What power does the DHHS have to release a convicted and incarcerated inmate?
Answer: None.
October 3, 2020 at 1:33 PM
Hey, Dr. Caligari.
You are correct. DHHS Secretary has no power to release Mangum, but she has the ability to see that a review is conducted of Dr. Nichols' autopsy report. Dr. Wecht's review of Dr. Nichols autopsy report deemed that the manner of Daye's death was an accident. If the manner of death is an accident, then one cannot be prosecuted for murder, and the ramification in Mangum's case is that she's served nearly nine years for a crime she not only did not commit but for a crime that never even took place. So that is my strategy.
Would you like a countdown to the dismissal of Crystal’s lawsuit?
October 3, 2020 at 8:38 AM
Hey, Abe Froman Supporter.
Regarding a countdown, I am ambivalent. Either way is fine. Because of one potential success that has not yet been revealed, I am certain that Mangum will not spend a tenth consecutive Christmas in prison.
It is very disturbing to learn that kenhyderal’s comments are not being posted. Please correct this oversight so that we can all continue to learn from his cogent comments.
October 2, 2020 at 5:41 AM
Hey, kenhyderal supporter.
It is disturbing to miss posting anyone's comment... especially kenhyderal's. The biggest problem I have, as stated before, is not being able to tell when a comment has been posted. So if I fail to post a comment immediately, when I come across it again I will just assume that it's been posted. There's no way to better assure that all comments are posted than to publish them immediately... which I try to do, but obviously fail to do at times.
Why are you not providing updates regarding the lawsuits? We can only assume that the cases are not going well for you and will be dismissed in the near future.
Lance The Intern said... Dr. Harr - Thanks to COVID-19, I have a little free time on my hands. Send me your court documents, and I’ll post them and provide a link to everyone.
Just so everyone is clear - I will post those documents, but will not provide a platform for you to make comments regarding them.
October 1, 2020 at 3:43 PM
Hey, Lance the Intern.
Thanks for the offer, but as it is I am still working on my lawsuit. Although it might not seem like much, getting documents from my lawsuit scanned and sent takes time and energy I just don't have. Just replying to comments takes a lot of time and effort because I want to do my best in responding. If my schedule slows, I will reconsider.
Anonymous Anonymous said... Sid -- Why aren't you posting any of the documents for your WRAL case?
October 1, 2020 at 9:14 AM
Hey, Anony.
Am busy... that's the reason I don't post documents about the WRAL lawsuit. It is moving forward though... but as it is, I am working on a document I need to file within five days.
Anonymous said... Sid's, sorry, I mean Crystal's, lawsuit will be dismissed by the end of next week.
October 1, 2020 at 3:31 PM
Hey, Anony.
In the federal court system the magistrate judge makes a recommendation to the district court judge. I don't see that happening by the end of next week.
Wait....NOW you’re alleging attempted kidnapping? You filed this lolsuit 3 times, and never once brought up that claim.
And yes, it was frivolous. You didn’t file suit against the one person who could have been considered a “state actor” in the situation. Walt attempted to explain this to you multiple times.
What, exactly, does your frivolous Duke lolsuits have to do with your WRAL case anyway?
If the manner of death is an accident, then one cannot be prosecuted for murder, and the ramification in Mangum's case is that she's served nearly nine years for a crime she not only did not commit but for a crime that never even took place. So that is my strategy.
Comprende?
Mangum has already been prosecuted, and convicted. So, even assuming you get a determination that the autopsy report was erroneous, the ramification in Mangum's case will be zero. The only way she gets released early is a gubernatorial pardon, a state court grant of an MAR, or a federal court grant of a writ of habeas corpus. Anything not aimed at one of those three results is wheel-spinning.
@ Dr. C: Wrongly prosecuted and convicted. Determination that the autopsy report is erroneous by who else? This was determined even before the trial by Dr. Harr and his determination was widely disseminated at that time, including to Crystal's appointed Defense Lawyers. This determination has now been confirmed by world famous Forensic Pathologist and medicolegal scholar Dr. Wecht. Gubernatorial pardon? The Governor knows the truth but fails to act. The AG knows the truth but fails to act. These cowards only want to save face and not admit their failure by finally "doing the right thing". They want to hide behind their arcane legal processes that only expensive Lawyers, unaffordable to the innocent Crystal, can navigate. They've proscribed Dr. Harr from acting on her behalf. When "the arch of the moral universe bends" (TO) not "towards justice" this will bring disgrace upon them and cost the taxpayers of NC millions. You know this Dr. C. Where is your outrage?
ORDER AND JUDGMENT signed by JUDGE CATHERINE C. EAGLES on 10/5/2020; that: 1. The motion to dismiss filed by the Durham District Attorney's Office, Doc. [13], is GRANTED for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and all claims against the office are DISMISSED without prejudice. 2. The motion to dismiss filed by Marianne Bond, Doc. [9], is GRANTED for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and lack of personal jurisdiction, and all claims against her are DISMISSED without prejudice.
It's kinda funny, after all his lawsuits, Sid still doesn't understand that he's not special and the laws do still apply to him, especially as it relates to service and statutes of limitations. Of course, that gives him the false belief that his underlying claims have merit (they don't), but this was entirely predictable.
"The ball is now in the court" of the broken and defunct NC Justice System. I doubt if Dr. Wecht would advise anyone to proceed down the tortuous and time stalling path you all want to see followed; until Crystal gets a parole so that "face can be saved by" the culpable. The facts are clear. No one has any doubt or needs any advice about what should be done now.
@ Anonymous 10-5-20 7:55 PM Surprise surprise what could one expect from the broken unjust NC Justice System. Justice be damned, just use "gobbledygook" to justify our preferred outcome and then let's go on our merry way. We can, with slight, keep our self serving construct going.
Kenny -- if the federal lawsuit has been dismissed, how can "The ball [be] in the court" of the NC Justice System?
"No one has any doubt or needs any advice about what should be done now."
I do -- what should be done?
Is it safe to assume that your "I doubt if Dr. Wecht would advise anyone.." comment is your way of saying that you did not (and will not) ask world famous Forensic Pathologist and medicolegal scholar Dr. Wecht what should be done with his report?
Anonymous said: "what should be done"..... Governor Cooper should order AG Stein to free Crystal immediately b.t.w. She does not need a pardon because she committed no crime; quite unlike the Duke Lacrosse Players whom he declared innocent.
@ Anonymous: Dr. Wecht's report was clear. I surmise he would expect this informed opinion to be passed on to those with the responsibility to see that Justice is served. I suppose you have another opinion that believes he would direct those with Crystal's unfortunate position in mind to proceed through the slow and arcane system that frequently denies justice by delay
I'll surmise that means "No you did not (and will not) ask world famous Forensic Pathologist and medicolegal scholar Dr. Wecht what should be done with his report."
....And Kenny, this shouldn't need to be explained to you, but an order from Governor Cooper freeing Crystal Mangum Would BE a pardon. EVEN IF the criminal charges against Crystal Mangum were dismissed, this would be a pardon -- in this case a "pardon of innocence".
Which brings up a good point, has Sid tried getting Dr. Wecht's report to the Governor's Clemency Office? I can't find any indication here that he has...
"It's not the terminology that's gobbledygook it's rationale of the content."
The rationale (that is, the set of reasons or the logical basis for a course of action ) are not defined anywhere on this blog (because Sid refuses to post any of the case-related documents).
How can you possibly come to the conclusion that the content is "gobbledygook" when you haven't even read it?
Kenny, why would Cooper order AG Stein to free Crystal? Cooper runs the Department of Adult Corrections, not Stein. The AG has no role in the release.
It amazes me that after all these years, you and Sid still don't do basic research to even understand how things work, which is proof that neither of you cares about helping Crystal, you are both just two more men in the long line of those who take advantage of her and abuse her.
@ Anonymous 5:50 No research needed. I understand how things work there; stretch things out as long as possible. Delay is a way to deny justice but still avoid culpability for serving up injustice. Have a specific slot for everything. That way you can have plausible deniability for not acting justly. If the vomit hits the floor it's Housekeeping's job, if it stays on the bed it's Laundry's job. Why would Cooper free Crystal? Because he has the power to do so and he knows she is innocent. Why wont he because he will lose face; more important to him then the life of a poor black mother of three.
With you Crystal hating Duke Lacrosse apologists the game goes on. He knows she is innocent and he can free her. You can't pardon someone for a crime that never happened . As Anonymous told me, "words matter". But, Crystal's life is more important than semantics. I know you are suggesting that he tells her, " go get a Lawyer and go through our slow justice delaying justice denial construct. Maybe by then you'll have reached your possible parole date. If you're freed then we wont have to compensate you for your wrongful conviction and for cruelly destroying your life".
Ronnie Long is still waiting for a pardon from Governor Cooper. His conviction was for a crime he was never guilty of, and he spent 44 years in prison.
@ Anonymous: No I didn't know that. Thank you for informing me. But, keep in mind, Crystal is going to need to be compensated for what was wrongly taken away from her.
Anonymous said... Wait....NOW you’re alleging attempted kidnapping? You filed this lolsuit 3 times, and never once brought up that claim.
And yes, it was frivolous. You didn’t file suit against the one person who could have been considered a “state actor” in the situation. Walt attempted to explain this to you multiple times.
What, exactly, does your frivolous Duke lolsuits have to do with your WRAL case anyway?
October 4, 2020 at 7:22 PM
Hey, Anony.
When the 2010 incident at Duke Law School took place, I considered it basically to be a discrimination action against me... I was too naive to understand the severity of the incident at the time. Although I was aware that the Duke plan was to have me arrested, it was not something about which I focused. It really wasn't until after the federal troops without identifying emblems went to Portland to quell the unrest and swept up individual citizens off the street and placing them in unmarked vans, opened my eyes.
Had Professor James Coleman not intervened, I would have been essentially kidnapped (involuntarily taken away by actions of security guard and campus police). The only question is what those behind the kidnapping had in mind. The worst being that I could have been made to disappear... all for being a supporter of Mike Nifong and black.
So, yes, the incident was a failed kidnapping.
The 2010 Duke incident and its subsequent lawsuits were about the 2010 failed kidnapping incident. The July 4, 2016 article by WRAL stated that my Duke lawsuits were about the 2006 Duke Lacrosse criminal case in which I had no standing is blatantly false. WRAL's refusal to correct the inaccuracies of their article led to the lawsuits.
Comprende? Let me know if more elucidation is required.
Dr. Caligari said... If the manner of death is an accident, then one cannot be prosecuted for murder, and the ramification in Mangum's case is that she's served nearly nine years for a crime she not only did not commit but for a crime that never even took place. So that is my strategy.
Comprende?
Mangum has already been prosecuted, and convicted. So, even assuming you get a determination that the autopsy report was erroneous, the ramification in Mangum's case will be zero. The only way she gets released early is a gubernatorial pardon, a state court grant of an MAR, or a federal court grant of a writ of habeas corpus. Anything not aimed at one of those three results is wheel-spinning.
October 5, 2020 at 8:43 AM
Hey, Dr. Caligari.
Thanks for comments... in fact, I have seriously taken them into consideration.
Anonymous said... Now, I'm far from any legal expert, but to me, it's simple, Kenny and Sid --
Ask world famous Forensic Pathologist and medicolegal scholar Dr. Wecht what he would do next, then follow his advice.
I mean, he was thoughtful enough to review the information Sid sent, surely he would offer a recommendation as well....
I thought of that as soon as I read Kenny's comment -- Why haven't you guys? If you have, what was his advice? Did you follow it?
October 5, 2020 at 1:39 PM
Hey, Anony.
Dr. Wecht is the ultimate professional. As an expert in forensic pathology, he reviews cases, including autopsy reports. For Ms. Mangum's case, I retained his services per his established protocol. Additionally, and more importantly, Dr. Wecht is not an advocate, so he doesn't get involved with strategies, etc. He provides a written report. He did give a Skype interview on the report with Bill Young of CBS-17 News.
Anonymous Anonymous said... " I surmise....I suppose...."
I'll surmise that means "No you did not (and will not) ask world famous Forensic Pathologist and medicolegal scholar Dr. Wecht what should be done with his report."
....And Kenny, this shouldn't need to be explained to you, but an order from Governor Cooper freeing Crystal Mangum Would BE a pardon. EVEN IF the criminal charges against Crystal Mangum were dismissed, this would be a pardon -- in this case a "pardon of innocence".
Which brings up a good point, has Sid tried getting Dr. Wecht's report to the Governor's Clemency Office? I can't find any indication here that he has... October 6, 2020 at 3:20 PM
Hey, Anony.
Yes, Governor Cooper, A.G. Josh Stein, Durham D.A. Satana Deberry, and many other officials have been sent Dr. Wecht's report. I received no reply from any of them.
Anonymous said... Ronnie Long is still waiting for a pardon from Governor Cooper. His conviction was for a crime he was never guilty of, and he spent 44 years in prison.
October 8, 2020 at 9:21 AM
Hey, Anony.
Roy Cooper doesn't seem to be anxious, as governor, to pardon Ronnie Long, yet, as attorney general, he expeditiously declared the three Duke Lacrosse defendants "innocent."
HEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP!! IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT!
GREAT NEWS: Things are going well regarding my second secret project and it will be disclosed weeks prior to Thanksgiving... So, stay alert. I believe it will be a game-changer.
You haven't contacted the Governor's Clemency Board, nor did you ask world famous Forensic Pathologist and medicolegal scholar Dr. Wecht what the best course of action would be once you had his report in hand.
That's on you, Sid -- Don't blame others for your failings.
Sidney said, "it will be disclosed weeks prior to Thanksgiving." Let's assume you mean at least two weeks prior to Thanksgiving. I expect to have it by November 12. Don't let us down, Sidney!
It appears that you failed to respond to the comment posted on October 5 at 7:55 p.m. Were the motions to dismiss granted in Crystal’s case? If so, will you appeal or re-file the lawsuit?
The July 4, 2016 article by WRAL stated that my Duke lawsuits were about the 2006 Duke Lacrosse criminal case in which I had no standing is blatantly false.
You need to re-read your Complaint in the Duke lawsuit. It starts out with a long recitation of the Lacrosse case. If all of that was irrelevant to your lawsuit, why did you include it? If it wasn't irrelevant, then your lawsuit was, at least to some extent, "about the 2006 Duke Lacrosse criminal case."
Dr. Harr, North Carolina is a swing state this year. I have been using a lot of my free time to volunteer for get-out-the-vote efforts on behalf of the Biden-Harris ticket. I would urge you to do some canvassing or other volunteer work relating to the election, instead of wasting your time on frivolous lawsuits.
As a Canadian, I would have preferred a Bernie- Alexandria ticket. I do hope, however, Dr. C. is successful in electing Biden-Harris. We keep hoping America will finally get universal single payer health care, Criminal justice reform, civilized gun laws, immigration reform, electoral reform, eliminate the so-called Citizens United and finally some Constitutional reform, to make America a real democracy. A nation where the people (Demos) rule( one man= one vote) and where a bicameral, totally un-democratic, oligarchical Senate is reduced to advocacy and providing sage advice. Distinguished legislators with life long tenure not having to raise hundreds of millions from the wealthy to get elected where they can wield power. Not a place where Wyoming vote with 1/2 a million can tie California with 35 million
Anonymous Anonymous said... You haven't contacted the Governor's Clemency Board, nor did you ask world famous Forensic Pathologist and medicolegal scholar Dr. Wecht what the best course of action would be once you had his report in hand.
That's on you, Sid -- Don't blame others for your failings.
October 9, 2020 at 6:42 AM
Hey, Anony.
The Clemency Board has made it perfectly clear that it will not move until Crystal Mangum is cleared of the crime by the courts. Keep in mind that the Clemency board is not an autonomous entity.
Regarding Dr. Wecht, I am just grateful that he was willing to review Crystal Mangum's murder case. That, in and of itself, took courage and is not something many forensic pathologists would undertake... especially because of the politicization of the case by the State and media. Dr. Wecht's integrity is boundless and he insists on maintaining his objective standing by not getting involved in the management of a case. He is an unbiased analyst, not an advocate.
He did give a twenty-minute Skype interview with CBS eleven months ago... but neither he nor anyone else can force the news station to broadcast it.
guiowen said... Sidney said, "it will be disclosed weeks prior to Thanksgiving." Let's assume you mean at least two weeks prior to Thanksgiving. I expect to have it by November 12. Don't let us down, Sidney!
October 9, 2020 at 8:23 AM
Hey, gui, mon ami.
As with so many projects, I can only carry them so far. Most of the time those responsible for the final product drop out and leave me with nothing to show for my efforts. However, those individuals with whom I am working with I find to be extremely courageous and reliable... and I anticipate an outstanding end-product. Although the product might not be available for consumption by November 12th, it should be ready sometime shortly thereafter. Of what I feel assured is that it will be presented during the month of November.
Anonymous Nifong Supporter Supporter said... Dr. Harr,
It appears that you failed to respond to the comment posted on October 5 at 7:55 p.m. Were the motions to dismiss granted in Crystal’s case? If so, will you appeal or re-file the lawsuit?
October 11, 2020 at 5:16 AM
Hey, Nifong Double-Supporter.
Yes to both questions. However, as of today's date at this time I have yet to even see the order.
Why aren’t you providing updates on the lawsuits? What are you hiding from us?
Have the cases turned into another dumpster fire?
October 11, 2020 at 11:10 AM
Hey, Dr. A.
I am only one person juggling two lawsuits, advocating for my fiancee's freedom, and working on a shar-video. I barely can afford time to respond to comments. The reason I don't provide updates on the lawsuits is because I am busy working on them.
Don't know about a dumpster fire, but I do plan on prevailing.
Dr. Caligari said... The July 4, 2016 article by WRAL stated that my Duke lawsuits were about the 2006 Duke Lacrosse criminal case in which I had no standing is blatantly false.
You need to re-read your Complaint in the Duke lawsuit. It starts out with a long recitation of the Lacrosse case. If all of that was irrelevant to your lawsuit, why did you include it? If it wasn't irrelevant, then your lawsuit was, at least to some extent, "about the 2006 Duke Lacrosse criminal case."
October 11, 2020 at 4:51 PM
Hey, Dr. Caligari.
Yes, my original Complaint against Duke did begin with a long recitation about Mike Nifong and formation of the Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong. But if you consider the logic you will understand the necessity of providing groundwork for my premise that Duke individusal targeted me not only because I am black, but because I am black AND a Nifong supporter. If my complaint omitted mention of Nifong and his involvement in the Duke Lacrosse case, then the adjudicators would lack motivation for the drastic actions Duke took against me, as surely it doesn't try to put black individual in jail for merely attending an event open to the public. My Complaint would have lacked meaning without the mention of Nifong, but my legal action was against Duke for its malicious and premeditated failed attempted kidnapping on April 14, 2010... an incident about which the WRAL online article did not mention.
Dr. Caligari said... Dr. Harr, North Carolina is a swing state this year. I have been using a lot of my free time to volunteer for get-out-the-vote efforts on behalf of the Biden-Harris ticket. I would urge you to do some canvassing or other volunteer work relating to the election, instead of wasting your time on frivolous lawsuits.
October 11, 2020 at 6:22 PM
Hey, Dr. Caligari.
Like kenhyderal, I applaud your get-out-the-vote efforts on behalf of Biden-Harris; quite admirable. However, what has obviously slipped your mind is that Crystal Mangum is my fiancee... in other words, I love her. My time and energies are devoted on working towards her immediate release from prison as she has underlying health conditions which place her life at risk from a coronavirus infection. I'm just not fighting for her freedom, but I'm fighting for her life.
Thankfully you and other intelligent and aware individuals are fighting to preserve our democracy and hopefully prevent it from slipping into an autocracy, but there is no one fighting for Crystal Mangum. Although you may consider my objectives unobtainable, I believe that with truth and justice on my side, they are attainable.
We try to be nice and not call you an idiot, but then you post stuff like this:
As a Canadian, I would have preferred a Bernie- Alexandria ticket.
I assume by Alexandria, you mean Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez? The 31 year old Congresswoman from New York? The one who is still 4 years away from being able to serve as President or Vice President (which have a 35-year old age requirement)? (Oh, and today is her birthday).
You really do just spout off with zero research, and zero understanding of what you are talking about. This is a major reason no one takes you seriously. You put in zero effort, you just sit behind your keyboard and blast out random nonsense.
Either do research or stop wasting everyone's time.
@ Anonymous 4:54 10-13-20 : Thanks for informing me of the age of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. I knew of the qualifications for the US Presidency but I was not aware that AOC was that young. What I was trying to get across was she, like Senator Sanders, has a progressive understanding of where America is so deficient and backward and she has a strong desire to get needed reforms for suffering Americans. As a Canadian it never occurred to me to check her age. I dare say, without googling, you would not know the age of Justin Trudeau or Angela Merkel. I suspect she will be a major contributor to bringing America to a happier, safer and more just place.
Of course you were unaware, because you refuse to do research. That was the entire point. You just post random stuff without checking and then wonder why people don't believe you.
Yes, my original Complaint against Duke did begin with a long recitation about Mike Nifong and formation of the Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong. But if you consider the logic you will understand the necessity of providing groundwork for my premise that Duke individusal [sic] targeted me not only because I am black, but because I am black AND a Nifong supporter. [...M]y legal action was against Duke for its malicious and premeditated failed attempted kidnapping on April 14, 2010... an incident about which the WRAL online article did not mention.
Let me know if further edification is required.
No further elucidation is necessary. The WRAL article is literally true, and hence not libelous. Not to mention that your claim is time-barred and precluded by res judicata.
@ Anonymous 10:26AM 10-13-20 No, I don't refuse to do research. I simply judged it unimportant in this instance. I'm not in competition with Wikipedia. My hypothetical dream ticket was not meant to be taken any way other than to expressing what I judge to be serious American backwardness in so many areas. Areas that progressive people like those two understand, progress is long overdue; in many cases, generations out of date.
You have expressed the opinion that WRAL did not libel Dr. Harr when they characterized his lawsuit against Duke University as being about the 2006 Duke Lacrosse case. In your comment, you noted that Dr. Harr's long recitation of that case in his filing makes the statement by WRAL literally true and hence not libelous.
I am not lawyer, so I do not understand what is necessary to prove libel. I would appreciate your thoughts on Dr. Harr's initial discussion on this blog of his treatment at Duke and his April 26, 2010, proposal to settle his claim against Duke.
His initial discussion on this blog focused entirely on his claim that he had been mistreated and almost arrested because he was a supporter of Nifong. Despite the advice of commenters on this blog that Nifong supporters were not a protected class, and that he would be better off claiming racial discrimination, he focused entirely on the Nifong Supporter discrimination. Only when it became clear that, as commenters had advised, Nifong supporters were not a protected class and that he had no legal claim along those lines did he realize that he was also the victim of racial discrimination. As I said, I am not a lawyer, but I wonder how a court would evaluate the lack of an initial claim of racial discrimination, but one that only was added later.
Similarly, the claim that the incident was an attempted kidnapping has been added only in the past several weeks, more than six years after the incident. It appears to have been added as a result of inaccurate information about arrests by unrelated parties recently. I expect a court essentially will ignore this recent additional claim.
On April 26, 2010, Dr. Harr enlisted his friend, Dr. Michael Munger, a Professor at Duke, to deliver a letter in which Dr. Harr offered to settle the claim against Duke. The letter made no reference to racial discrimination.
Dr. Harr asked that Duke hold a press conference in which they would make the following points:
1. Dr. Harr experienced harassment due to his pro-Nifong beliefs and membership in the Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong; 2. Duke will not tolerate harassment of Nifong Supporters and members of the Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong or others based on unpopular beliefs; 3. Duke will respect First Amendment rights that includes wearing Justice for Nifong tee shirts; 4. Duke holds no animus or ill will towards Nifong, his family and supporters, and they are to welcomed on campus and treated with respect; and 5. "Duke University's position is that Mr. Nifong, in prosecuting what is known as the Duke Lacrosse case, was performing his duties as prosecutor and there is no evidence to suggest any other motivations."
His proposal letter also contained a long paragraph that summarizes Dr. Harr's opinion regarding Nifong's conduct in the lacrosse case.
As you can see, only 1 out of the 5 points Dr. Harr wanted covered by Duke in its press conference dealt with Mr. Nifong's conduct in the lacrosse case.the other 4 points only dealt with Dr. Harr's support of Nifong's conduct in that case.
None dealt with claims of racial discrimination or attempted kidnapping.
Does this proposal strengthen Dr. Harr's case against WRAL? It is clear that Dr. Harr was focused not on the Duke lacrosse case, but only on his mistreatment due to his opinion about Nifong's conduct in that case.
I have provided the link to the settlement proposal below.
Does this proposal strengthen Dr. Harr's case against WRAL?
Not at all.
First, Dr. Harr's case against WRAL was already decided and dismissed. The dismissal was affirmed on appeal. So his new lawsuit is barred, regardless of the merits.
Second, WRAL's article was about Dr. Harr's lawsuit, not about a private settlement offer. As I pointed out above, the article was literally true, and hence not libelous.
Duke's defense that he was violating their non-soliciting regulations is really a laughable trumped up excuse for their violation of his freedom of speech. Universities have such regulations to protect vulnerable students from banks, credit card companies, insurance companies and other predatory businesses who know that naive University Graduates are probably a good risk. Send out persuasive salesmen to hook them young and hook them early. Such regulations are never meant to protect students from unpopular ideas or thought judged to be inimical to the Alma Matter.
Can Sidney bring charges against Duke for attempted kidnapping?
No.
First, private individuals cannot bring criminal charges, only prosecutors can.
Second, Dr. Harr cannot bring a civil suit against Duke for "attempted kidnapping," because there is no such civil cause of action and, more importantly, he already sued Duke for the same incident and lost. Res judicata bars a new suit based on the same incident, even if it is based on a new legal theory.
Finally, even if Dr. Harr had never sued Duke before, any claim would by now be barred by the statute of limitations.
Please ignore guiowon’s frivolous post. He is attempting to make mischief and disrupt the serious discussion by kenhyderal and Dr. Harr of issues of the utmost importance.
Yes, my original Complaint against Duke did begin with a long recitation about Mike Nifong and formation of the Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong. But if you consider the logic you will understand the necessity of providing groundwork for my premise that Duke individusal [sic] targeted me not only because I am black, but because I am black AND a Nifong supporter. [...M]y legal action was against Duke for its malicious and premeditated failed attempted kidnapping on April 14, 2010... an incident about which the WRAL online article did not mention.
Let me know if further edification is required.
No further elucidation is necessary. The WRAL article is literally true, and hence not libelous. Not to mention that your claim is time-barred and precluded by res judicata.
October 13, 2020 at 1:02 PM
Hey, Dr. Caligari.
As you know, the WRAL article stated that I was a "Durham man." Is that statement true? That is one of two objectionable falsehoods (of four in the article) about which my lawsuit was based.
You have expressed the opinion that WRAL did not libel Dr. Harr when they characterized his lawsuit against Duke University as being about the 2006 Duke Lacrosse case. In your comment, you noted that Dr. Harr's long recitation of that case in his filing makes the statement by WRAL literally true and hence not libelous.
I am not lawyer, so I do not understand what is necessary to prove libel. I would appreciate your thoughts on Dr. Harr's initial discussion on this blog of his treatment at Duke and his April 26, 2010, proposal to settle his claim against Duke.
His initial discussion on this blog focused entirely on his claim that he had been mistreated and almost arrested because he was a supporter of Nifong. Despite the advice of commenters on this blog that Nifong supporters were not a protected class, and that he would be better off claiming racial discrimination, he focused entirely on the Nifong Supporter discrimination. Only when it became clear that, as commenters had advised, Nifong supporters were not a protected class and that he had no legal claim along those lines did he realize that he was also the victim of racial discrimination. As I said, I am not a lawyer, but I wonder how a court would evaluate the lack of an initial claim of racial discrimination, but one that only was added later.
Similarly, the claim that the incident was an attempted kidnapping has been added only in the past several weeks, more than six years after the incident. It appears to have been added as a result of inaccurate information about arrests by unrelated parties recently. I expect a court essentially will ignore this recent additional claim.
On April 26, 2010, Dr. Harr enlisted his friend, Dr. Michael Munger, a Professor at Duke, to deliver a letter in which Dr. Harr offered to settle the claim against Duke. The letter made no reference to racial discrimination.
Dr. Harr asked that Duke hold a press conference in which they would make the following points:
1. Dr. Harr experienced harassment due to his pro-Nifong beliefs and membership in the Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong; 2. Duke will not tolerate harassment of Nifong Supporters and members of the Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong or others based on unpopular beliefs; 3. Duke will respect First Amendment rights that includes wearing Justice for Nifong tee shirts; 4. Duke holds no animus or ill will towards Nifong, his family and supporters, and they are to welcomed on campus and treated with respect; and 5. "Duke University's position is that Mr. Nifong, in prosecuting what is known as the Duke Lacrosse case, was performing his duties as prosecutor and there is no evidence to suggest any other motivations."
His proposal letter also contained a long paragraph that summarizes Dr. Harr's opinion regarding Nifong's conduct in the lacrosse case.
As you can see, only 1 out of the 5 points Dr. Harr wanted covered by Duke in its press conference dealt with Mr. Nifong's conduct in the lacrosse case.the other 4 points only dealt with Dr. Harr's support of Nifong's conduct in that case.
None dealt with claims of racial discrimination or attempted kidnapping.
Does this proposal strengthen Dr. Harr's case against WRAL? It is clear that Dr. Harr was focused not on the Duke lacrosse case, but only on his mistreatment due to his opinion about Nifong's conduct in that case.
I have provided the link to the settlement proposal below.
guiowen said... Can Sidney bring charges against Duke for attempted kidnapping?
October 14, 2020 at 3:57 PM
Hey, gui, mon ami.
With regards to the "kidnapping," when the incident initially happened in April 2010, I considered it mostly a discrimination case... based on my secular views of being a Nifong supporter and my race being African American. I believe that both factors were required for Duke's aggressive behavior and that either factor itself would not have resulted in the mistreatment. To rephrase, neither a white Nifong supporter nor a black non-committed towards Nifong would have risked being arrested.
At the time of the incident in 2010, the implications of what had happened had not sunken in and I viewed the mistreatment essentially as discrimination... not really dwelling on what would have happened had I actually been arrested. Full enlightenment for me about how I flirted with life-threatening danger became evident to me after recent George Floyd protesters in Portland, Oregon were swept up by unidentified federal troops and placed in unmarked vans. This is the kind of stuff that happened in "V for Vendetta," my favorite movie. After the Portland incident, I realized that the attempted arrest of me was, in actuality, a kidnapping. To knowingly unlawfully arrest someone is defined as a kidnapping. I could have been held in jail indefinitely while my plight was suppressed or maligned by the media... I could have just disappeared or wound up dead in custody with the manner of death being ruled a suicide... the possibilities are endless and dark.
Unlike in "V for Vendetta," it was a business (Duke University) behind this premeditated kidnapping, and not the government... which makes things even scarier. And unfortunately, as in my fiancee's case, the media, medical examiner's office, civil rights/social justice organizations, and politicians would all be complicit.
What happened to me at Duke University should be of concern to all Americans who value freedom and justice for all individuals.
guiowen said... Dr, C, Is it possible that Sidney could persuade the D. A. to file criminal charges against Duke?
October 15, 2020 at 9:41 PM
Hey, gui, mon ami.
Fortunately Law Professor James Coleman prevented the kidnapping... so that crime was not committed.
Although I believe strongly that Duke individuals plotted to kidnap me, I have no direct evidence of that... unlike the strong evidence I have in Crystal Mangum's case. Additionally, there's definitely no appetite for the Durham D.A.'s office to investigate such a conspiracy against Duke University... ergo, I would not even approach D.A. Deberry on that issue. As it is, she has consistently ignored me about Crystal Mangum's case... even with Dr. Wecht's exonerative report.
nonymous said... That motion will be denied, and your entire lawsuit tossed. You can't keep refiling the same lawsuit over and over. You will be sanctioned again.
Sadly, that's all true. This latest lawsuit is, in the words of one federal appellate judge, "frivolity squared."
Dr. Caligari said... nonymous said... That motion will be denied, and your entire lawsuit tossed. You can't keep refiling the same lawsuit over and over. You will be sanctioned again.
Sadly, that's all true. This latest lawsuit is, in the words of one federal appellate judge, "frivolity squared."
October 21, 2020 at 8:54 PM
Hey, Dr. Caligari.
What both you and Anony seem to have overlooked is the fact that the case has been scheduled for mandatory mediation in the Federal Court... presumably prior to any summary judgment ruling. I anticipate that any mediation or settlement conference will address the merits of the case and eschew any res judicata arguments. If based on merits, I am confident that I will prevail.
I anticipate that any mediation or settlement conference will address the merits of the case and eschew any res judicata arguments.
You anticipate incorrectly. WRAL will talk at the mediation about nothing but res judicata.
If based on merits, I am confident that I will prevail.
You can't "prevail" at a mediation. A mediation is only an attempt to see if the parties will settle. WRAL has no incentive to settle, because they will surely win based on res judicata.
The fact that Sid/Kenny don't seem to even understand what mediation is shows how ridiculous they really are, and that they don't take this seriously. Sid purport to be a doctor - you'd think he'd know how to look up words.
The mediator makes zero decisions, he tries to get the parties to agree. I still say this gets dismissed long before the mediation, but if they go to mediation, WRAL will say "if he dismisses immediately we won't seek sanctions."
Sid will blather a bit, but that's where WRAL will stand.
He will refuse to dismiss (and the mediator can't make him). Mediation will impasse (look it up Sid). And WRAL will get their motion to dismiss and sanctions at the next hearing.
That's if it makes it to mediation, which I still suspect it won't.
Well, I heard Mister Harr b*tch about her Well, I heard ol' Sid put her down Well, I hope Sid Harr will remember A Durham man don't need him around, anyhow Sweet home Durham County Where the skies are so blue Sweet home Durham County Lord, I'm coming home to you In Raleigh NC they love the Governor (boo, boo, boo ) Now we all did what we could do Now Cunninghamgate does not bother me Does your conscience bother you? Tell the truth
Dr. Caligari said... I anticipate that any mediation or settlement conference will address the merits of the case and eschew any res judicata arguments.
You anticipate incorrectly. WRAL will talk at the mediation about nothing but res judicata.
If based on merits, I am confident that I will prevail.
You can't "prevail" at a mediation. A mediation is only an attempt to see if the parties will settle. WRAL has no incentive to settle, because they will surely win based on res judicata.
October 22, 2020 at 1:58 PM
Hey, Dr. Caligari.
If defendants argue res judicata only, that will be a losing strategy. It's always been my position that the doctrine was not relevant because it requires that the initial ruling be based on merit. Judge Collins' ruling on July 17, 2017 was not based on merit. It is impossible to tell what his ruling is based upon because he didn't say in his one-page/two-paragraph/four-sentence Order.
Anonymous said... The fact that Sid/Kenny don't seem to even understand what mediation is shows how ridiculous they really are, and that they don't take this seriously. Sid purport to be a doctor - you'd think he'd know how to look up words.
The mediator makes zero decisions, he tries to get the parties to agree. I still say this gets dismissed long before the mediation, but if they go to mediation, WRAL will say "if he dismisses immediately we won't seek sanctions."
Sid will blather a bit, but that's where WRAL will stand.
He will refuse to dismiss (and the mediator can't make him). Mediation will impasse (look it up Sid). And WRAL will get their motion to dismiss and sanctions at the next hearing.
That's if it makes it to mediation, which I still suspect it won't.
October 23, 2020 at 4:56 AM
Hey, Anony.
I don't know from where "sanctions" magically came. What I anticipate will happen is that the mediator will try to convince defendants to settle with me because the merits and facts of the case are on my side.
kenhyderal will not post his comments on the motion because he is well aware that WRAL’s lawyers monitor Dr. Harr’s blog. Therefore, kenhyderal refuses to allow the lawyers to have advance notice to prepare their defense. This is the same approach that he has adopted with his secret plans to win Crystal a new trial and to sue North Carolina for compensation. Given kenhyderal’s results to date, why do you expect him to alter his strategy?
If defendants argue res judicata only, that will be a losing strategy. It's always been my position that the doctrine was not relevant because it requires that the initial ruling be based on merit. Judge Collins' ruling on July 17, 2017 was not based on merit. It is impossible to tell what his ruling is based upon because he didn't say in his one-page/two-paragraph/four-sentence Order.
Did you ever read Rule 41(b) of the North Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure?
It says (bolding added): "Unless the court in its order for dismissal otherwise specifies, a dismissal under this section and any dismissal not provided for in this rule, other than a dismissal for lack of jurisdiction, for improper venue, or for failure to join a necessary party, operates as an adjudication upon the merits."
Dr. Caligari said... If defendants argue res judicata only, that will be a losing strategy. It's always been my position that the doctrine was not relevant because it requires that the initial ruling be based on merit. Judge Collins' ruling on July 17, 2017 was not based on merit. It is impossible to tell what his ruling is based upon because he didn't say in his one-page/two-paragraph/four-sentence Order.
Did you ever read Rule 41(b) of the North Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure?
It says (bolding added): "Unless the court in its order for dismissal otherwise specifies, a dismissal under this section and any dismissal not provided for in this rule, other than a dismissal for lack of jurisdiction, for improper venue, or for failure to join a necessary party, operates as an adjudication upon the merits."
October 24, 2020 at 8:43 PM
Hey, Dr. Caligari.
Yes, I am familiar with the rule... and personally, I believe it should be the other way around. Be that as it may, there is a reason why some judges use "with prejudice" rather than not mention prejudice... both achieving the same outcome. "With prejudice," it seems to me would be used to emphasize the strength of the ruling. For example, Judge Holt used with prejudice in her ruling against me based on res judicata. Collins' ruling on the other hand did not mention prejudice because he knew that it lacked merit. In an Order that is only one-page/two-paragraphs/four-sentences long that provides no reasons in support, he should have at least utilized prejudice to reflect on the merits of the case.
No Kenny, I saw it and Sid has no clue when/why it would be used, he’s wrong, of course, but it’s not worth explaining it to him (or you), cause you refuse to learn.
Anonymous said... Your personal beliefs don't matter, the law does. You keep thinking you are special and the rules that apply to everyone else shouldn't apply to you.
You aren't special.
You will lose, again.
October 25, 2020 at 6:10 AM
Hey, Anony.
As kenhyderal points out, the part of the comment to which you refer was an opinion. I don't believe that I am special... to the contrary and that is the problem. What I want is to be treated like everyone else... I want the same for Crystal. Unfortunately Neither Crystal nor I are being fairly treated.
Systemic inequity in the criminal justice system is, unfortunately, a reality and that is what Crystal and I have faced consistently. If a judge summarily dismisses a plaintiff's case (as in my case against WRAL), the plaintiff should be entitled to an explanation for the ruling from that judge. That never happened in my case.
HEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP!! IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT!
Just got important news. My second secret project will be revealed the first week of November 2020. This will be extremely beneficial, I believe, in helping Crystal receive justice. Can't give an exact date of the reveal, but will let you know when I know or when it is available. So, stay tuned.
Sidney, We're waiting with bated breath. You had promised something "weeks before thanksgiving. This would actually be three weeks before thanksgiving. Very good!
Now that you are about to reveal the second of your secret projects, do you think it is time for Kenny to share with us the details of his secret plans?
I have lost track of how long it’s been since Kenny first mentioned his secret plans. However, this much is clear—between Kenny’s stories about his internet friend Kilgo and his references to his secret plans, he has no credibility.
Maybe you can convince him to be honest and candid, but I doubt it.
Durham Man, You have to understand that Kenny never lies. I know this is true because he told me so himself. The problem is that, because of context, he misunderstands half of what other people tell him, and forgets half of what he says.
Re: Guiowen 10:19AM 11-1-20 Guiowen is nothing but a broken record who never has an original though. For those who do not go back seven years, when I accidentally misspoke by denying I had said something regarding Canadian troops in Afghanistan and he was able to find in a different thread and a different context where I did use the said words he has, by intimation, been labeling me as a liar. For over a decade him and I have been exchanging on this blog and he never wins argument with me. When he caught this one misstatement he seized on it and, over the years, he just can't let it go. Guiowen; after seven years, can't you comer up with something better. I do know you've been here long enough to know all the facts, so you do know Crystal is innocent and is being falsely imprisoned but, like your cowardly Governor, you want to save face and pretend that justice was done.
Kenny, Why are you angry with me? The other people on this blog accuse you of lying. I make it clear to them that you do not lie. I am the only person here who covers your back. I never criticize you for making untrue statements, because I realize that you only do so because of context. You are very ungrateful.
So, Kenny, tell us about your adventures with the Canadian forces in Afghanistan. Were you really heroic there? Is that the reason that they're paying you to loll about on the beach in Dubai?
ReplyDeleteHEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP!
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT!!
It was well past midnight when I decided to toss the towel. Some of the links on the Directory table haven't been hooked up, but the buttons in the text work... and that's what's important.
Study hard because there will be an exam.
ReplyDeleteDr. Caligari said...
Enough with the crying towel posts. They're not funny, and you've posted so many of them that didn't come true that your credibility as a prognosticator on legal issues is now nil.
September 11, 2020 at 8:49 AM
Hey, Dr. Caligari.
Yes, I have fallen short on several predictions but I believe this is the beginning of the end of the wrongful incarceration of Crystal Mangum. What did you think about Representative Willingham's letter to NC DHHS Secretary Dr. Mandy Cohen? She ignored me, but do you think she'll ignore Mr. Willingham?
Anonymous said,
ReplyDeleteSid,
Can you tell us when we might expect Mangum to be freed and exonerated?
Abe Froman
Chicago, IL
September 11, 2020 at 9:47 AM
Hey, Abe.
With letters like Representative Willingham's along with pending legal action by myself and Crystal, I am extremely confident that she will be released from prison by Christmas. I am more than 50% confident that she will be released by Thanksgiving. If Dr. Cohen moves reasonably time-wise regarding a review of Dr. Nichols' autopsy report, I would not be surprised if she was released by Halloween.
I would expect her exoneration would follow shortly after her release because she would not be released unless it can be proven that she's absolutely innocent... something of which the officials and state are already aware.
ReplyDeleteWorthy of repeating.
kenhyderal said...
@ Dr. C and @ Sausage King: You two are informed and intelligent enough to know that that eminent Forensic Pathologist Dr. Cyril Wecht believes Reginald Daye's death was not a homicide. I suspect even Dr. Roberts would concede, given Wecht's expertise vs her own and that of Dr. Nichols, that this is the case. This information has been given to Gov.Cooper and to AG Josh Stein. My question to you two as Americans why it does not outrage you that an innocent person is being imprisoned for political reasons and to selfishly and sinfully save face for them.
September 11, 2020 at 3:49 PM
ReplyDeleteBlogger Dr. Caligari said...
You two are informed and intelligent enough to know that that eminent Forensic Pathologist Dr. Cyril Wecht believes Reginald Daye's death was not a homicide.
As you know, I have often been critical of Dr. Harr's legal strategies but, when he first published Dr. Wecht's statement, I congratulated him and told him that, for the first time, he and Mangum had a potentially-winning issue.
I was then away from this board for a while but, when I returned, I found nothing had changed.
Why wasn't Dr. Wecht's affidavit filed in court as the basis for an MAR? Why is Dr. Harr wasting time with not one, but two frivolous lawsuits (the WRAL suit and the malicious prosecution case) instead?
September 12, 2020 at 8:29 AM Delete
Hey, Dr. Caligari.
I received Dr. Wecht's October 25, 2019 report on October 27th or 29th. On October 31st I manually filed on Crystal's behalf a MAR based on Dr. Wecht's report in Durham. The clerk of court's office used all manner of delaying tactics to keep the MAR from the judge (including burying it). I managed to force the MAR on the judge who denied it using esoteric legalese reasoning. The judge denying the MAR was trial Judge Paul Ridgeway... the same judge who continues to keep from Crystal Mangum the 18-page document he deemed relevant to her case at trial.
If you read the Malicious Prosecution Reply (to defendants' Motion to Dismiss) that is now in federal court, then I think you will appreciate its value. My lawsuit against WRAL-5 News, if successful as I expect, will accrue to Crystal's benefit as well.
ReplyDeleteWorthy of repeating.
kenhyderal said...
@ Dr. Caligari: Why do you suppose Gov. Cooper and AG Stein have done nothing. Cooper is a Dr.of Law and Stein a Harvard Law School Graduate. They have all the facts. Dr. Harr is a retired physician who gets sanctioned by the Law Society while seeking justice for Crystal. This with the acquiescence of all those with the power and duty to see that justice is served. But, of course, that would come at the cost to them losing face. That's far more important to them than the life of a poor black mother of three who, thanks to the Duke Lacrosse Defense, this 'me too" heroine was made a pariah in the eyes of an uninformed public. Cooper caved under pressure from powerful interests and misled public opinion and in declaring the accused innocent made Crystal to wrongly appear to be a person worthy of disrespect. History will not be kind to those who knew the truth and did nothing.
September 12, 2020 at 11:41 AM
ReplyDeleteBlogger guiowen said...
Kenhyderal,
Please stop whining Instead, help Sidney hire a lawyer. With any luck, you can have Crystal's crime reduced to assault with a deadly weapon, which should get her out. But you and Sidney have to do something. And please, no more of that "I'm a man of limited means" junk.
September 12, 2020 at 3:56 PM
Hey, gui, mon ami.
As I said, hiring an attorney is not the answer. The answer for Mangum to receive justice may very well hinge on publicizing the truths of Mangum's innocence. Attorney's fees would be wasted as she has already made her case Pro Se.
ReplyDeleteAbe Froman Supporter said...
Sid,
Are you really as inept as you appear to be?
September 13, 2020 at 7:03 PM
Hey, Abe Froman Supporter.
I am uncertain as to the "inept" meaning of your comment. For a reply, I would require more specification.
Meanwhile, I would be very much interested in your opinion about Representative Willingham's letter to NC DHHS Secretary Dr. Mandy Cohen. Do you think she will reply to him... a legislator?
In your opinion, do you feel that a review of Dr. Clay Nichols' autopsy report on Reginald Daye is warranted?
ReplyDeleteHEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP!
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT!!
Only four of fourteen links on the Directory page are operational. Time permitting they should all be working by day's end. This is not a crucial matter, as you are aware. Most important are the links in the text that do work.
Also, consider yourself enrolled in the Harr Law School. I plan on having an exam on the subject matter posted in the near future. Passing grades may even be rewarded with Certificates of Accomplishment. There will be more on Harr Law School in the future, where our motto is "We may not have the prestige of Harvard, but we have the spunk of UC Berkeley."
Sidney,
ReplyDeleteI'm glad to see that you finally got someone in some position of authority to look at the case,and ask the court to take another look. How much good this will do has yet to be seen.
My question is, why didn't you tell us about this sooner? This letter was written on September 9, and you must have known about it that same day,if not sooner. But instead of telling us then,you keep it a secret until you've put together some schlog. Apart from Willingham's letter, I see nothing in the schlog that you haven't told us about, many times, in the past.
I'd rather enroll in Dr. Caligari's Medical School.....
ReplyDeleteNice anonymous @11:05!
ReplyDeleteLet's keep this going.....
Kenhyderal's Kanadian Klown Kollege
Abe's Sausage Seminary
Lance's Intern Academy
Tinfoil's Cyberbullying Techno-College
ReplyDeleteguiowen said...
Sidney,
I'm glad to see that you finally got someone in some position of authority to look at the case,and ask the court to take another look. How much good this will do has yet to be seen.
My question is, why didn't you tell us about this sooner? This letter was written on September 9, and you must have known about it that same day,if not sooner. But instead of telling us then,you keep it a secret until you've put together some schlog. Apart from Willingham's letter, I see nothing in the schlog that you haven't told us about, many times, in the past.
September 14, 2020 at 10:43 AM
Hey, gui, mon ami.
Actually, instead of the court, I am trying to get the NC DHHS Secretary to review the autopsy report by Dr. Nichols. Sure that you just misstated. It should not have been so difficult to get such a letter, but believe me... it was tremendously hard as groups such as NAACP, ACLU, NC Legislative Black Caucus, Southern Christian Leadership Conference, and others should have been willing to simply make a request... especially in light of Dr. Wecht's report. Anything involving Crystal Mangum takes courage because she has been so politicized, and I am deeply appreciative and indebted to Representative Shelly Willingham for his letter. Ideally it would not have been necessary had Dr. Cohen had the courage to respond to me rather than ignoring me.
Yes, Representative Willingham's letter is the substantially new tidbit in this shar-entry which was produced to put its importance into perspective. The real question I have is: Will Dr. Cohen respond to Representative Willingham? Another question, if she does is: Will she agree and order that Dr. Nichols' autopsy on Reginald Daye be reviewed? I would like to know what you think.
There was a slight delay, less than a week, before the letter by Representative Willingham was made public on this site, but it was not nefarious as may be interpreted from your comment. Because the letter was sent by a third party to a third party I just wanted it to be sure it was received before I published it publicly on this site. Just a courtesy; nothing more.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous said...
I'd rather enroll in Dr. Caligari's Medical School.....
September 14, 2020 at 11:05 AM
Hey, Anony.
Sorry to break it to you, but you're already enrolled. Every human being on this planet who is at least 18-years old is enrolled in the Harr Law School. But, unlike Trump University, no tuition is required. Now whether or not one elects to study assignments, turn in homework, or take examinations is up to each individual student. However, in order to receive Certificates of Accomplishment, make the Dean's list, or even receive a diploma, one's participation is required.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous said...
Nice anonymous @11:05!
Let's keep this going.....
Kenhyderal's Kanadian Klown Kollege
Abe's Sausage Seminary
Lance's Intern Academy
Tinfoil's Cyberbullying Techno-College
September 14, 2020 at 2:21 PM
Haha, Anony. Very clever, and so funny I almost forgot to laugh.
ReplyDeleteHEY, EVERYBODY, LISTEN UP!
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT!!
First, all of the links on this shar-flog are now operational.
Second of all, if I am able to figure out the code properly, an exam will be uploaded covering the course on Manner of Death 101. So study hard as it'll be a closed book test.
Third of all, there's more good new on Mangum's case... taking place next week. It'll be a tremendous breakthrough if things pan out as expected.
As you were.
"If you read the Malicious Prosecution Reply (to defendants' Motion to Dismiss) that is now in federal court, then I think you will appreciate its value. My lawsuit against WRAL-5 News, if successful as I expect, will accrue to Crystal's benefit as well."
ReplyDeleteHave you posted these documents somewhere? If not, how do you expect anyone to read it?
Also, what makes you think your lawsuit against WRAL will be successful? Can you post links to any documents from the case that support your expectation?
Abe's Andouille Akademie
ReplyDeleteAbe's Helzel Hochschule
Abe's Saumagen Schule
ReplyDeleteTHE GREAT KILGO said...
kenhyderal,
Can I reach you at kenhyderal@yahoo.com?
I also am waiting for a tweet from @kenhyderal.
September 6, 2020 at 8:55 AM
Kenny,
Is that you tweeting as @kenhyderal? The tweets certainly are interesting.
The tweets seem to amount to stalking.
ReplyDeleteKenhyderal,
ReplyDeleteI would like to follow your tweets.
Kenny,
ReplyDeleteWhat have you been hiding from us?
@ KHS I am not on twitter. I think that's Nikki.
ReplyDeleteYo Sid, where is the additional good news you told us you would post this week? You never fail to over promise.
ReplyDelete"Third of all, there's more good new on Mangum's case... taking place next week. It'll be a tremendous breakthrough if things pan out as expected.
ReplyDeleteWell? I know the week's not over, but the suspense is killing me.....
Yo Sid, why won’t Kenny tell us who Nikki is?
ReplyDeleteAnony,
ReplyDeleteSidney never promised that things would pan out as he expected.
@ Nifong Supporter: Did you ever score my Manner of Death Exam? I'm not completely up to par on the Dottie Amtey case so I' curious as to how I did closed book.
ReplyDeleteYo Kenny,
ReplyDeleteWhile you are waiting for your test results, why don’t you tell us who Nikki is?
@ Dr. A. It's sheer speculation on my part but she is a TG person who would know my user-name.
ReplyDeleteWell...Sid disabled his little exam, Kenny -- so you may never see your score. Just go ahead and give yourself 100%. I'm sure Sid will, anyway.
ReplyDeleteHey Sid -- How about instead of trying to fix your silly little test, you take some time to respond to these questions?
The work week is now over. What was the “good news” on Mangum’s case?
ReplyDeleteSid,
ReplyDeleteWould you like a countdown?
Yo Sid, we are still waiting for you to announce the tremendous breakthrough. Why the delay?
ReplyDeleteI guess things just didn't pan out as Sidney expected.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteHEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP!
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT!
First of all, apologies for not responding with more frequency. The fact is that I have been extremely busy recently, both with advocacy work for my fiancee, working on lawsuits, working on a shar-video, and working on secret projects.
The one secret project had to do with a legislator writing the Department of Health and Human Services seeking a review of Dr. Clay Nichols' autopsy report of April 14 2011. The letter by Representative Shelly Willingham was sent on September 9, 2020, and to my knowledge there has been no reply.
As with that secret project, I have a second secret project about which I cannot divulge until it has been produced and released. I can tell you, with regards to the second secret project that it has been pretty much completed, but I cannot tell when it will be ready for public consumption. Hopefully I will be able to reveal the secret project within the first or second week of October. It should be sometime soon. In the meantime I am busy working on the lawsuits.
The paucity of my comments are inversely related to how busy I am and not related to the success or failure of my projects. I will try to better comment more timely to comments, time permitting.
As you were.
"The paucity of my comments are inversely related to how busy I am..."
ReplyDeletePaucity (noun) = the presence of something only in small or insufficient quantities or amounts.
Inversely related = when an increase in one variable causes a reduction in the other variable.
I believe what you're attempting to state is that either:
The number of your comments are inversely related to how busy you are...
Or:
The paucity of your comments are directly related to how busy you are.
Apparently your command of the English language is a well-developed as your command of the legal system.
As you were.
I see the grammar police are here. It's the difference between feeling your nuts and feeling you're nuts
ReplyDeleteIs this comment from the @kenhyderal on twitter? it seems like it is...
ReplyDeleteRegardless, words mean things, Kenny.
Use them incorrectly to your own disadvantage.
Just read some of Sid's "legal documents" if you don't believe me.
Come on, Sid!
ReplyDeleteI posted a legitimate question about your WRAL case, and you never approved it or responded. Do we need to check the obits?
Dear Dr. Harr On Sept.28 I responded to Anonymous at 9:26 AM and so far you have not posted it.
ReplyDeleteKenny,
ReplyDeleteThe problem is that, because of context, you forgot to send your comment.
Sid -- Why aren't you posting any of the documents for your WRAL case?
ReplyDeleteYet another motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim has been submitted by the defendants in the Mangum v. Bond et al case.
ReplyDeleteMaybe some day Sid will get around to posting those documents as well.
But I doubt it.
Sid's too busy getting his "School of Law" operational, Kenny -- cut the man some slack. He has his priorities, and apparently your comments aren't one of them.
ReplyDeleteSid's, sorry, I mean Crystal's, lawsuit will be dismissed by the end of next week.
ReplyDeleteDr. Harr - Thanks to COVID-19, I have a little free time on my hands. Send me your court documents, and I’ll post them and provide a link to everyone.
ReplyDeleteJust so everyone is clear - I will post those documents, but will not provide a platform for you to make comments regarding them.
Dr. Harr,
ReplyDeleteIt is very disturbing to learn that kenhyderal’s comments are not being posted. Please correct this oversight so that we can all continue to learn from his cogent comments.
Sid,
ReplyDeleteWould you like a countdown to the dismissal of Crystal’s lawsuit?
Actually, instead of the court, I am trying to get the NC DHHS Secretary to review the autopsy report by Dr. Nichols.
ReplyDeleteMaybe the Harr School of Law can cover the question: What power does the DHHS have to release a convicted and incarcerated inmate?
Answer: None.
ReplyDeleteHEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP!!
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT!
Sorry that I haven't been responding to comments recently. But have been very busy on many aspects of Crystal's lawsuit, my lawsuit, and efforts to free and exonerate my fiancee. Will take time to respond to comments now before getting back to work.
As you were.
ReplyDeleteDr. Caligari said...
Actually, instead of the court, I am trying to get the NC DHHS Secretary to review the autopsy report by Dr. Nichols.
Maybe the Harr School of Law can cover the question: What power does the DHHS have to release a convicted and incarcerated inmate?
Answer: None.
October 3, 2020 at 1:33 PM
Hey, Dr. Caligari.
You are correct. DHHS Secretary has no power to release Mangum, but she has the ability to see that a review is conducted of Dr. Nichols' autopsy report. Dr. Wecht's review of Dr. Nichols autopsy report deemed that the manner of Daye's death was an accident. If the manner of death is an accident, then one cannot be prosecuted for murder, and the ramification in Mangum's case is that she's served nearly nine years for a crime she not only did not commit but for a crime that never even took place. So that is my strategy.
Comprende?
ReplyDeleteAnonymous Abe Froman Supporter said...
Sid,
Would you like a countdown to the dismissal of Crystal’s lawsuit?
October 3, 2020 at 8:38 AM
Hey, Abe Froman Supporter.
Regarding a countdown, I am ambivalent. Either way is fine. Because of one potential success that has not yet been revealed, I am certain that Mangum will not spend a tenth consecutive Christmas in prison.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous kenhyderal supporter said...
Dr. Harr,
It is very disturbing to learn that kenhyderal’s comments are not being posted. Please correct this oversight so that we can all continue to learn from his cogent comments.
October 2, 2020 at 5:41 AM
Hey, kenhyderal supporter.
It is disturbing to miss posting anyone's comment... especially kenhyderal's. The biggest problem I have, as stated before, is not being able to tell when a comment has been posted. So if I fail to post a comment immediately, when I come across it again I will just assume that it's been posted. There's no way to better assure that all comments are posted than to publish them immediately... which I try to do, but obviously fail to do at times.
Sid,
ReplyDeleteAnd are you giving us another Namath guarantee that Crystal will be released before Christmas? By the way, I am referring to Christmas of 2020.
Sid,
ReplyDeleteWhy are you not providing updates regarding the lawsuits? We can only assume that the cases are not going well for you and will be dismissed in the near future.
Sid,
ReplyDeleteAs they say down my way, you’re all hat and no cattle.
ReplyDeleteLance The Intern said...
Dr. Harr - Thanks to COVID-19, I have a little free time on my hands. Send me your court documents, and I’ll post them and provide a link to everyone.
Just so everyone is clear - I will post those documents, but will not provide a platform for you to make comments regarding them.
October 1, 2020 at 3:43 PM
Hey, Lance the Intern.
Thanks for the offer, but as it is I am still working on my lawsuit. Although it might not seem like much, getting documents from my lawsuit scanned and sent takes time and energy I just don't have. Just replying to comments takes a lot of time and effort because I want to do my best in responding. If my schedule slows, I will reconsider.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous Anonymous said...
Sid -- Why aren't you posting any of the documents for your WRAL case?
October 1, 2020 at 9:14 AM
Hey, Anony.
Am busy... that's the reason I don't post documents about the WRAL lawsuit. It is moving forward though... but as it is, I am working on a document I need to file within five days.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous said...
Yet another motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim has been submitted by the defendants in the Mangum v. Bond et al case.
Maybe some day Sid will get around to posting those documents as well.
But I doubt it.
October 1, 2020 at 9:17 AM
Hey, Anony.
Haven't even seen the Motion to Dismiss in Crystal's case. Will be busy working on it when I get it... not working on posting it. Don't have the time.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous said...
Sid's, sorry, I mean Crystal's, lawsuit will be dismissed by the end of next week.
October 1, 2020 at 3:31 PM
Hey, Anony.
In the federal court system the magistrate judge makes a recommendation to the district court judge. I don't see that happening by the end of next week.
“Scanned and sent”? Do you type these documents up on an IBM selectric?
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteHEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP!!
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT!
Enclosed is a link to a short YouTube shar-video that I just completed. It was produced as part one exhibit for my lawsuit against WRAL-5 News.
LINK to shar-video on incident that initiated my Duke lawsuits.
... the lawsuits Judge Eagles called frivolous.
Will be filing tomorrow in my case.
As you were.
Wait....NOW you’re alleging attempted kidnapping? You filed this lolsuit 3 times, and never once brought up that claim.
ReplyDeleteAnd yes, it was frivolous. You didn’t file suit against the one person who could have been considered a “state actor” in the situation. Walt attempted to explain this to you multiple times.
What, exactly, does your frivolous Duke lolsuits have to do with your WRAL case anyway?
If the manner of death is an accident, then one cannot be prosecuted for murder, and the ramification in Mangum's case is that she's served nearly nine years for a crime she not only did not commit but for a crime that never even took place. So that is my strategy.
ReplyDeleteComprende?
Mangum has already been prosecuted, and convicted. So, even assuming you get a determination that the autopsy report was erroneous, the ramification in Mangum's case will be zero. The only way she gets released early is a gubernatorial pardon, a state court grant of an MAR, or a federal court grant of a writ of habeas corpus. Anything not aimed at one of those three results is wheel-spinning.
@ Dr. C: Wrongly prosecuted and convicted. Determination that the autopsy report is erroneous by who else? This was determined even before the trial by Dr. Harr and his determination was widely disseminated at that time, including to Crystal's appointed Defense Lawyers. This determination has now been confirmed by world famous Forensic Pathologist and medicolegal scholar Dr. Wecht. Gubernatorial pardon? The Governor knows the truth but fails to act. The AG knows the truth but fails to act. These cowards only want to save face and not admit their failure by finally "doing the right thing". They want to hide behind their arcane legal processes that only expensive Lawyers, unaffordable to the innocent Crystal, can navigate. They've proscribed Dr. Harr from acting on her behalf. When "the arch of the moral universe bends" (TO) not "towards justice" this will bring disgrace upon them and cost the taxpayers of NC millions. You know this Dr. C. Where is your outrage?
ReplyDeleteNow, I'm far from any legal expert, but to me, it's simple, Kenny and Sid --
ReplyDeleteAsk world famous Forensic Pathologist and medicolegal scholar Dr. Wecht what he would do next, then follow his advice.
I mean, he was thoughtful enough to review the information Sid sent, surely he would offer a recommendation as well....
I thought of that as soon as I read Kenny's comment -- Why haven't you guys? If you have, what was his advice? Did you follow it?
Crystal’s federal lawsuit was dismissed today, why aren’t you posting that Sid?
ReplyDeleteORDER AND JUDGMENT signed by JUDGE CATHERINE C. EAGLES on 10/5/2020; that: 1. The motion to dismiss filed by the Durham District Attorney's Office, Doc. [13], is GRANTED for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and all claims against the office are DISMISSED without prejudice. 2. The motion to dismiss filed by Marianne Bond, Doc. [9], is GRANTED for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and lack of personal jurisdiction, and all claims against her are DISMISSED without prejudice.
ReplyDeleteIt's kinda funny, after all his lawsuits, Sid still doesn't understand that he's not special and the laws do still apply to him, especially as it relates to service and statutes of limitations. Of course, that gives him the false belief that his underlying claims have merit (they don't), but this was entirely predictable.
ReplyDeleteShockingly, no response from either Sid or Kenny. I'll keep asking until I get a response.
ReplyDeleteHave you asked world famous Forensic Pathologist and medicolegal scholar Dr. Wecht what he would do next? Did you follow his advice?
"The ball is now in the court" of the broken and defunct NC Justice System. I doubt if Dr. Wecht would advise anyone to proceed down the tortuous and time stalling path you all want to see followed; until Crystal gets a parole so that "face can be saved by" the culpable. The facts are clear. No one has any doubt or needs any advice about what should be done now.
ReplyDelete@ Anonymous 10-5-20 7:55 PM Surprise surprise what could one expect from the broken unjust NC Justice System. Justice be damned, just use "gobbledygook" to justify our preferred outcome and then let's go on our merry way. We can, with slight, keep our self serving construct going.
ReplyDeleteKenny -- Is the medical terminology Dr. Harr used in his profession "gobbledygook"?
ReplyDeleteOr is "gobbledygook" just a term you use for data you don't agree with?
Have you asked world famous Forensic Pathologist and medicolegal scholar Dr. Wecht what he would do next, yet?
Let us know his response -- we'll attempt to help you decipher any "gobbledygook".
Kenny -- if the federal lawsuit has been dismissed, how can "The ball [be] in the court" of the NC Justice System?
ReplyDelete"No one has any doubt or needs any advice about what should be done now."
I do -- what should be done?
Is it safe to assume that your "I doubt if Dr. Wecht would advise anyone.." comment is your way of saying that you did not (and will not) ask world famous Forensic Pathologist and medicolegal scholar Dr. Wecht what should be done with his report?
How unfortunate for Crystal Mangum.
Kenhyderal,
ReplyDeleteIs there any way we can get you to stop whining?
Remember, we'll even forgive your racism if you stop whining.
Anonymous said: "what should be done"..... Governor Cooper should order AG Stein to free Crystal immediately b.t.w. She does not need a pardon because she committed no crime; quite unlike the Duke Lacrosse Players whom he declared innocent.
ReplyDelete@ Anonymous 11:24 It's not the terminology that's gobbledygook it's rationale of the content.
ReplyDelete@ Anonymous: Dr. Wecht's report was clear. I surmise he would expect this informed opinion to be passed on to those with the responsibility to see that Justice is served. I suppose you have another opinion that believes he would direct those with Crystal's unfortunate position in mind to proceed through the slow and arcane system that frequently denies justice by delay
ReplyDelete" I surmise....I suppose...."
ReplyDeleteI'll surmise that means "No you did not (and will not) ask world famous Forensic Pathologist and medicolegal scholar Dr. Wecht what should be done with his report."
....And Kenny, this shouldn't need to be explained to you, but an order from Governor Cooper freeing Crystal Mangum Would BE a pardon. EVEN IF the criminal charges against Crystal Mangum were dismissed, this would be a pardon -- in this case a "pardon of innocence".
Which brings up a good point, has Sid tried getting Dr. Wecht's report to the Governor's Clemency Office? I can't find any indication here that he has...
Sid's latest WRAL filing can be found here
ReplyDeleteKenhyderal --
ReplyDelete"It's not the terminology that's gobbledygook it's rationale of the content."
The rationale (that is, the set of reasons or the logical basis for a course of action ) are not defined anywhere on this blog (because Sid refuses to post any of the case-related documents).
How can you possibly come to the conclusion that the content is "gobbledygook" when you haven't even read it?
Well -- Apparently you're too lazy to approve my reply to Kenhyderal.
ReplyDeleteToo bad for your readers, Sid.
I'm not going to rewrite it, so don't bother asking.
Kenny, why would Cooper order AG Stein to free Crystal? Cooper runs the Department of Adult Corrections, not Stein. The AG has no role in the release.
ReplyDeleteIt amazes me that after all these years, you and Sid still don't do basic research to even understand how things work, which is proof that neither of you cares about helping Crystal, you are both just two more men in the long line of those who take advantage of her and abuse her.
@ Anonymous 5:50 No research needed. I understand how things work there; stretch things out as long as possible. Delay is a way to deny justice but still avoid culpability for serving up injustice. Have a specific slot for everything. That way you can have plausible deniability for not acting justly. If the vomit hits the floor it's Housekeeping's job, if it stays on the bed it's Laundry's job. Why would Cooper free Crystal? Because he has the power to do so and he knows she is innocent. Why wont he because he will lose face; more important to him then the life of a poor black mother of three.
ReplyDeleteI didn't say he couldn't free her, I said he wouldn't tell Stein to do it. It's Cooper's call - Stein has nothing to do with it.
ReplyDeleteYou really are an idiot.
Kenhyderal
ReplyDeletePLEASE STOP WHINING!
Instead, DO SOMETHING!
What do you want Cooper to do, Kenny? You’ve said she doesn’t need a pardon. That’s the ONLY power he has to free her.
ReplyDeleteWith you Crystal hating Duke Lacrosse apologists the game goes on. He knows she is innocent and he can free her. You can't pardon someone for a crime that never happened . As Anonymous told me, "words matter". But, Crystal's life is more important than semantics. I know you are suggesting that he tells her, " go get a Lawyer and go through our slow justice delaying justice denial construct. Maybe by then you'll have reached your possible parole date. If you're freed then we wont have to compensate you for your wrongful conviction and for cruelly destroying your life".
ReplyDeleteOk Kenny -- How does Cooper free her without issuing a pardon?
ReplyDeleteRonnie Long is still waiting for a pardon from Governor Cooper. His conviction was for a crime he was never guilty of, and he spent 44 years in prison.
ReplyDeleteYou know there is such a thing as a Pardon of Innocence, right Kenny? Oh, no, that's right, you don't do research.
ReplyDeleteI repeat, you really are an idiot.
@ Anonymous: No I didn't know that. Thank you for informing me. But, keep in mind, Crystal is going to need to be compensated for what was wrongly taken away from her.
ReplyDelete@Anonymous 9:21; Has Ronnie Long now been compensated?
ReplyDeleteKenhyderal --
ReplyDeleteTo the best of my knowledge, he has not. The pardon from Governor Cooper is required in order for him to receive any compensation.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous said...
Wait....NOW you’re alleging attempted kidnapping? You filed this lolsuit 3 times, and never once brought up that claim.
And yes, it was frivolous. You didn’t file suit against the one person who could have been considered a “state actor” in the situation. Walt attempted to explain this to you multiple times.
What, exactly, does your frivolous Duke lolsuits have to do with your WRAL case anyway?
October 4, 2020 at 7:22 PM
Hey, Anony.
When the 2010 incident at Duke Law School took place, I considered it basically to be a discrimination action against me... I was too naive to understand the severity of the incident at the time. Although I was aware that the Duke plan was to have me arrested, it was not something about which I focused. It really wasn't until after the federal troops without identifying emblems went to Portland to quell the unrest and swept up individual citizens off the street and placing them in unmarked vans, opened my eyes.
Had Professor James Coleman not intervened, I would have been essentially kidnapped (involuntarily taken away by actions of security guard and campus police). The only question is what those behind the kidnapping had in mind. The worst being that I could have been made to disappear... all for being a supporter of Mike Nifong and black.
So, yes, the incident was a failed kidnapping.
The 2010 Duke incident and its subsequent lawsuits were about the 2010 failed kidnapping incident. The July 4, 2016 article by WRAL stated that my Duke lawsuits were about the 2006 Duke Lacrosse criminal case in which I had no standing is blatantly false. WRAL's refusal to correct the inaccuracies of their article led to the lawsuits.
Comprende? Let me know if more elucidation is required.
ReplyDeleteDr. Caligari said...
If the manner of death is an accident, then one cannot be prosecuted for murder, and the ramification in Mangum's case is that she's served nearly nine years for a crime she not only did not commit but for a crime that never even took place. So that is my strategy.
Comprende?
Mangum has already been prosecuted, and convicted. So, even assuming you get a determination that the autopsy report was erroneous, the ramification in Mangum's case will be zero. The only way she gets released early is a gubernatorial pardon, a state court grant of an MAR, or a federal court grant of a writ of habeas corpus. Anything not aimed at one of those three results is wheel-spinning.
October 5, 2020 at 8:43 AM
Hey, Dr. Caligari.
Thanks for comments... in fact, I have seriously taken them into consideration.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous said...
Now, I'm far from any legal expert, but to me, it's simple, Kenny and Sid --
Ask world famous Forensic Pathologist and medicolegal scholar Dr. Wecht what he would do next, then follow his advice.
I mean, he was thoughtful enough to review the information Sid sent, surely he would offer a recommendation as well....
I thought of that as soon as I read Kenny's comment -- Why haven't you guys? If you have, what was his advice? Did you follow it?
October 5, 2020 at 1:39 PM
Hey, Anony.
Dr. Wecht is the ultimate professional. As an expert in forensic pathology, he reviews cases, including autopsy reports. For Ms. Mangum's case, I retained his services per his established protocol. Additionally, and more importantly, Dr. Wecht is not an advocate, so he doesn't get involved with strategies, etc. He provides a written report. He did give a Skype interview on the report with Bill Young of CBS-17 News.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous Anonymous said...
" I surmise....I suppose...."
I'll surmise that means "No you did not (and will not) ask world famous Forensic Pathologist and medicolegal scholar Dr. Wecht what should be done with his report."
....And Kenny, this shouldn't need to be explained to you, but an order from Governor Cooper freeing Crystal Mangum Would BE a pardon. EVEN IF the criminal charges against Crystal Mangum were dismissed, this would be a pardon -- in this case a "pardon of innocence".
Which brings up a good point, has Sid tried getting Dr. Wecht's report to the Governor's Clemency Office? I can't find any indication here that he has...
October 6, 2020 at 3:20 PM
Hey, Anony.
Yes, Governor Cooper, A.G. Josh Stein, Durham D.A. Satana Deberry, and many other officials have been sent Dr. Wecht's report. I received no reply from any of them.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous Anonymous said...
Well -- Apparently you're too lazy to approve my reply to Kenhyderal.
Too bad for your readers, Sid.
I'm not going to rewrite it, so don't bother asking.
October 6, 2020 at 5:05 PM
Hey, Anony.
If your comment has not been posted, all I can suggest is to resubmit. I try to publish comments as soon as I am aware of them.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous said...
I didn't say he couldn't free her, I said he wouldn't tell Stein to do it. It's Cooper's call - Stein has nothing to do with it.
You really are an idiot.
October 7, 2020 at 2:53 PM
Hey, Anony.
Let's try to keep the dialogue civil.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous said...
Ronnie Long is still waiting for a pardon from Governor Cooper. His conviction was for a crime he was never guilty of, and he spent 44 years in prison.
October 8, 2020 at 9:21 AM
Hey, Anony.
Roy Cooper doesn't seem to be anxious, as governor, to pardon Ronnie Long, yet, as attorney general, he expeditiously declared the three Duke Lacrosse defendants "innocent."
ReplyDeleteAnonymous said...
You know there is such a thing as a Pardon of Innocence, right Kenny? Oh, no, that's right, you don't do research.
I repeat, you really are an idiot.
October 8, 2020 at 11:45 AM
Hey, Anony.
Your comment somehow slipped passed. Please refrain from disparaging other commenters in the future. Thanks.
ReplyDeleteHEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP!!
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT!
GREAT NEWS: Things are going well regarding my second secret project and it will be disclosed weeks prior to Thanksgiving... So, stay alert. I believe it will be a game-changer.
As you were.
You haven't contacted the Governor's Clemency Board, nor did you ask world famous Forensic Pathologist and medicolegal scholar Dr. Wecht what the best course of action would be once you had his report in hand.
ReplyDeleteThat's on you, Sid -- Don't blame others for your failings.
Sidney said,
ReplyDelete"it will be disclosed weeks prior to Thanksgiving."
Let's assume you mean at least two weeks prior to Thanksgiving. I expect to have it by November 12. Don't let us down, Sidney!
Dr. Harr,
ReplyDeleteIt appears that you failed to respond to the comment posted on October 5 at 7:55 p.m. Were the motions to dismiss granted in Crystal’s case? If so, will you appeal or re-file the lawsuit?
Yo, Sid,
ReplyDeleteWhy aren’t you providing updates on the lawsuits? What are you hiding from us?
Have the cases turned into another dumpster fire?
The July 4, 2016 article by WRAL stated that my Duke lawsuits were about the 2006 Duke Lacrosse criminal case in which I had no standing is blatantly false.
ReplyDeleteYou need to re-read your Complaint in the Duke lawsuit. It starts out with a long recitation of the Lacrosse case. If all of that was irrelevant to your lawsuit, why did you include it? If it wasn't irrelevant, then your lawsuit was, at least to some extent, "about the 2006 Duke Lacrosse criminal case."
Dr. Harr,
ReplyDeleteNorth Carolina is a swing state this year. I have been using a lot of my free time to volunteer for get-out-the-vote efforts on behalf of the Biden-Harris ticket. I would urge you to do some canvassing or other volunteer work relating to the election, instead of wasting your time on frivolous lawsuits.
Dream on, Dr. C.
ReplyDeleteAs a Canadian, I would have preferred a Bernie- Alexandria ticket. I do hope, however, Dr. C. is successful in electing Biden-Harris. We keep hoping America will finally get universal single payer health care, Criminal justice reform, civilized gun laws, immigration reform, electoral reform, eliminate the so-called Citizens United and finally some Constitutional reform, to make America a real democracy. A nation where the people (Demos) rule( one man= one vote) and where a bicameral, totally un-democratic, oligarchical Senate is reduced to advocacy and providing sage advice. Distinguished legislators with life long tenure not having to raise hundreds of millions from the wealthy to get elected where they can wield power. Not a place where Wyoming vote with 1/2 a million can tie California with 35 million
ReplyDeleteAnonymous Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteYou haven't contacted the Governor's Clemency Board, nor did you ask world famous Forensic Pathologist and medicolegal scholar Dr. Wecht what the best course of action would be once you had his report in hand.
That's on you, Sid -- Don't blame others for your failings.
October 9, 2020 at 6:42 AM
Hey, Anony.
The Clemency Board has made it perfectly clear that it will not move until Crystal Mangum is cleared of the crime by the courts. Keep in mind that the Clemency board is not an autonomous entity.
Regarding Dr. Wecht, I am just grateful that he was willing to review Crystal Mangum's murder case. That, in and of itself, took courage and is not something many forensic pathologists would undertake... especially because of the politicization of the case by the State and media. Dr. Wecht's integrity is boundless and he insists on maintaining his objective standing by not getting involved in the management of a case. He is an unbiased analyst, not an advocate.
He did give a twenty-minute Skype interview with CBS eleven months ago... but neither he nor anyone else can force the news station to broadcast it.
ReplyDeleteguiowen said...
Sidney said,
"it will be disclosed weeks prior to Thanksgiving."
Let's assume you mean at least two weeks prior to Thanksgiving. I expect to have it by November 12. Don't let us down, Sidney!
October 9, 2020 at 8:23 AM
Hey, gui, mon ami.
As with so many projects, I can only carry them so far. Most of the time those responsible for the final product drop out and leave me with nothing to show for my efforts. However, those individuals with whom I am working with I find to be extremely courageous and reliable... and I anticipate an outstanding end-product. Although the product might not be available for consumption by November 12th, it should be ready sometime shortly thereafter. Of what I feel assured is that it will be presented during the month of November.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous Nifong Supporter Supporter said...
Dr. Harr,
It appears that you failed to respond to the comment posted on October 5 at 7:55 p.m. Were the motions to dismiss granted in Crystal’s case? If so, will you appeal or re-file the lawsuit?
October 11, 2020 at 5:16 AM
Hey, Nifong Double-Supporter.
Yes to both questions. However, as of today's date at this time I have yet to even see the order.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous Dr. A said...
Yo, Sid,
Why aren’t you providing updates on the lawsuits? What are you hiding from us?
Have the cases turned into another dumpster fire?
October 11, 2020 at 11:10 AM
Hey, Dr. A.
I am only one person juggling two lawsuits, advocating for my fiancee's freedom, and working on a shar-video. I barely can afford time to respond to comments. The reason I don't provide updates on the lawsuits is because I am busy working on them.
Don't know about a dumpster fire, but I do plan on prevailing.
ReplyDeleteDr. Caligari said...
The July 4, 2016 article by WRAL stated that my Duke lawsuits were about the 2006 Duke Lacrosse criminal case in which I had no standing is blatantly false.
You need to re-read your Complaint in the Duke lawsuit. It starts out with a long recitation of the Lacrosse case. If all of that was irrelevant to your lawsuit, why did you include it? If it wasn't irrelevant, then your lawsuit was, at least to some extent, "about the 2006 Duke Lacrosse criminal case."
October 11, 2020 at 4:51 PM
Hey, Dr. Caligari.
Yes, my original Complaint against Duke did begin with a long recitation about Mike Nifong and formation of the Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong. But if you consider the logic you will understand the necessity of providing groundwork for my premise that Duke individusal targeted me not only because I am black, but because I am black AND a Nifong supporter. If my complaint omitted mention of Nifong and his involvement in the Duke Lacrosse case, then the adjudicators would lack motivation for the drastic actions Duke took against me, as surely it doesn't try to put black individual in jail for merely attending an event open to the public. My Complaint would have lacked meaning without the mention of Nifong, but my legal action was against Duke for its malicious and premeditated failed attempted kidnapping on April 14, 2010... an incident about which the WRAL online article did not mention.
Let me know if further edification is required.
ReplyDeleteDr. Caligari said...
Dr. Harr,
North Carolina is a swing state this year. I have been using a lot of my free time to volunteer for get-out-the-vote efforts on behalf of the Biden-Harris ticket. I would urge you to do some canvassing or other volunteer work relating to the election, instead of wasting your time on frivolous lawsuits.
October 11, 2020 at 6:22 PM
Hey, Dr. Caligari.
Like kenhyderal, I applaud your get-out-the-vote efforts on behalf of Biden-Harris; quite admirable. However, what has obviously slipped your mind is that Crystal Mangum is my fiancee... in other words, I love her. My time and energies are devoted on working towards her immediate release from prison as she has underlying health conditions which place her life at risk from a coronavirus infection. I'm just not fighting for her freedom, but I'm fighting for her life.
Thankfully you and other intelligent and aware individuals are fighting to preserve our democracy and hopefully prevent it from slipping into an autocracy, but there is no one fighting for Crystal Mangum. Although you may consider my objectives unobtainable, I believe that with truth and justice on my side, they are attainable.
Kenny,
ReplyDeleteWe try to be nice and not call you an idiot, but then you post stuff like this:
As a Canadian, I would have preferred a Bernie- Alexandria ticket.
I assume by Alexandria, you mean Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez? The 31 year old Congresswoman from New York? The one who is still 4 years away from being able to serve as President or Vice President (which have a 35-year old age requirement)? (Oh, and today is her birthday).
You really do just spout off with zero research, and zero understanding of what you are talking about. This is a major reason no one takes you seriously. You put in zero effort, you just sit behind your keyboard and blast out random nonsense.
Either do research or stop wasting everyone's time.
@ Anonymous 4:54 10-13-20 : Thanks for informing me of the age of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. I knew of the qualifications for the US Presidency but I was not aware that AOC was that young. What I was trying to get across was she, like Senator Sanders, has a progressive understanding of where America is so deficient and backward and she has a strong desire to get needed reforms for suffering Americans. As a Canadian it never occurred to me to check her age. I dare say, without googling, you would not know the age of Justin Trudeau or Angela Merkel. I suspect she will be a major contributor to bringing America to a happier, safer and more just place.
ReplyDeletekenhyderal,
ReplyDeleteKeep those cogent comments coming.
Of course you were unaware, because you refuse to do research. That was the entire point. You just post random stuff without checking and then wonder why people don't believe you.
ReplyDeleteAnony,
ReplyDeletePlease don't be so hard on Kenhyderal. It's just that, because of context, he has no idea what he's talking about.
ReplyDeleteYes, my original Complaint against Duke did begin with a long recitation about Mike Nifong and formation of the Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong. But if you consider the logic you will understand the necessity of providing groundwork for my premise that Duke individusal [sic] targeted me not only because I am black, but because I am black AND a Nifong supporter. [...M]y legal action was against Duke for its malicious and premeditated failed attempted kidnapping on April 14, 2010... an incident about which the WRAL online article did not mention.
Let me know if further edification is required.
No further elucidation is necessary. The WRAL article is literally true, and hence not libelous. Not to mention that your claim is time-barred and precluded by res judicata.
Udaman kenhyderal.
ReplyDelete@ Anonymous 10:26AM 10-13-20 No, I don't refuse to do research. I simply judged it unimportant in this instance. I'm not in competition with Wikipedia. My hypothetical dream ticket was not meant to be taken any way other than to expressing what I judge to be serious American backwardness in so many areas. Areas that progressive people like those two understand, progress is long overdue; in many cases, generations out of date.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteDr. Cagliari:
You have expressed the opinion that WRAL did not libel Dr. Harr when they characterized his lawsuit against Duke University as being about the 2006 Duke Lacrosse case. In your comment, you noted that Dr. Harr's long recitation of that case in his filing makes the statement by WRAL literally true and hence not libelous.
I am not lawyer, so I do not understand what is necessary to prove libel. I would appreciate your thoughts on Dr. Harr's initial discussion on this blog of his treatment at Duke and his April 26, 2010, proposal to settle his claim against Duke.
His initial discussion on this blog focused entirely on his claim that he had been mistreated and almost arrested because he was a supporter of Nifong. Despite the advice of commenters on this blog that Nifong supporters were not a protected class, and that he would be better off claiming racial discrimination, he focused entirely on the Nifong Supporter discrimination. Only when it became clear that, as commenters had advised, Nifong supporters were not a protected class and that he had no legal claim along those lines did he realize that he was also the victim of racial discrimination. As I said, I am not a lawyer, but I wonder how a court would evaluate the lack of an initial claim of racial discrimination, but one that only was added later.
Similarly, the claim that the incident was an attempted kidnapping has been added only in the past several weeks, more than six years after the incident. It appears to have been added as a result of inaccurate information about arrests by unrelated parties recently. I expect a court essentially will ignore this recent additional claim.
On April 26, 2010, Dr. Harr enlisted his friend, Dr. Michael Munger, a Professor at Duke, to deliver a letter in which Dr. Harr offered to settle the claim against Duke. The letter made no reference to racial discrimination.
Dr. Harr asked that Duke hold a press conference in which they would make the following points:
1. Dr. Harr experienced harassment due to his pro-Nifong beliefs and membership in the Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong;
2. Duke will not tolerate harassment of Nifong Supporters and members of the Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong or others based on unpopular beliefs;
3. Duke will respect First Amendment rights that includes wearing Justice for Nifong tee shirts;
4. Duke holds no animus or ill will towards Nifong, his family and supporters, and they are to welcomed on campus and treated with respect; and
5. "Duke University's position is that Mr. Nifong, in prosecuting what is known as the Duke Lacrosse case, was performing his duties as prosecutor and there is no evidence to suggest any other motivations."
His proposal letter also contained a long paragraph that summarizes Dr. Harr's opinion regarding Nifong's conduct in the lacrosse case.
As you can see, only 1 out of the 5 points Dr. Harr wanted covered by Duke in its press conference dealt with Mr. Nifong's conduct in the lacrosse case.the other 4 points only dealt with Dr. Harr's support of Nifong's conduct in that case.
None dealt with claims of racial discrimination or attempted kidnapping.
Does this proposal strengthen Dr. Harr's case against WRAL? It is clear that Dr. Harr was focused not on the Duke lacrosse case, but only on his mistreatment due to his opinion about Nifong's conduct in that case.
I have provided the link to the settlement proposal below.
http://justice4nifong.com/direc/irepoDirec/irepoB/irB7.htm
Does this proposal strengthen Dr. Harr's case against WRAL?
ReplyDeleteNot at all.
First, Dr. Harr's case against WRAL was already decided and dismissed. The dismissal was affirmed on appeal. So his new lawsuit is barred, regardless of the merits.
Second, WRAL's article was about Dr. Harr's lawsuit, not about a private settlement offer. As I pointed out above, the article was literally true, and hence not libelous.
Can Sidney bring charges against Duke for attempted kidnapping?
ReplyDeleteDuke's defense that he was violating their non-soliciting regulations is really a laughable trumped up excuse for their violation of his freedom of speech. Universities have such regulations to protect vulnerable students from banks, credit card companies, insurance companies and other predatory businesses who know that naive University Graduates are probably a good risk. Send out persuasive salesmen to hook them young and hook them early. Such regulations are never meant to protect students from unpopular ideas or thought judged to be inimical to the Alma Matter.
ReplyDeletekenhyderal,
ReplyDeleteThank you for posting another cogent comment.
This is one more reason why I am proud to call kenhyderal my friend.
ReplyDeleteCan Sidney bring charges against Duke for attempted kidnapping?
ReplyDeleteNo.
First, private individuals cannot bring criminal charges, only prosecutors can.
Second, Dr. Harr cannot bring a civil suit against Duke for "attempted kidnapping," because there is no such civil cause of action and, more importantly, he already sued Duke for the same incident and lost. Res judicata bars a new suit based on the same incident, even if it is based on a new legal theory.
Finally, even if Dr. Harr had never sued Duke before, any claim would by now be barred by the statute of limitations.
Dr, C,
ReplyDeleteIs it possible that Sidney could persuade the D. A. to file criminal charges against Duke?
Dr. C,
ReplyDeletePlease ignore guiowon’s frivolous post. He is attempting to make mischief and disrupt the serious discussion by kenhyderal and Dr. Harr of issues of the utmost importance.
ReplyDeleteDr. Caligari said...
Yes, my original Complaint against Duke did begin with a long recitation about Mike Nifong and formation of the Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong. But if you consider the logic you will understand the necessity of providing groundwork for my premise that Duke individusal [sic] targeted me not only because I am black, but because I am black AND a Nifong supporter. [...M]y legal action was against Duke for its malicious and premeditated failed attempted kidnapping on April 14, 2010... an incident about which the WRAL online article did not mention.
Let me know if further edification is required.
No further elucidation is necessary. The WRAL article is literally true, and hence not libelous. Not to mention that your claim is time-barred and precluded by res judicata.
October 13, 2020 at 1:02 PM
Hey, Dr. Caligari.
As you know, the WRAL article stated that I was a "Durham man." Is that statement true? That is one of two objectionable falsehoods (of four in the article) about which my lawsuit was based.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous Harr Supporter said...
Dr. Cagliari:
You have expressed the opinion that WRAL did not libel Dr. Harr when they characterized his lawsuit against Duke University as being about the 2006 Duke Lacrosse case. In your comment, you noted that Dr. Harr's long recitation of that case in his filing makes the statement by WRAL literally true and hence not libelous.
I am not lawyer, so I do not understand what is necessary to prove libel. I would appreciate your thoughts on Dr. Harr's initial discussion on this blog of his treatment at Duke and his April 26, 2010, proposal to settle his claim against Duke.
His initial discussion on this blog focused entirely on his claim that he had been mistreated and almost arrested because he was a supporter of Nifong. Despite the advice of commenters on this blog that Nifong supporters were not a protected class, and that he would be better off claiming racial discrimination, he focused entirely on the Nifong Supporter discrimination. Only when it became clear that, as commenters had advised, Nifong supporters were not a protected class and that he had no legal claim along those lines did he realize that he was also the victim of racial discrimination. As I said, I am not a lawyer, but I wonder how a court would evaluate the lack of an initial claim of racial discrimination, but one that only was added later.
Similarly, the claim that the incident was an attempted kidnapping has been added only in the past several weeks, more than six years after the incident. It appears to have been added as a result of inaccurate information about arrests by unrelated parties recently. I expect a court essentially will ignore this recent additional claim.
On April 26, 2010, Dr. Harr enlisted his friend, Dr. Michael Munger, a Professor at Duke, to deliver a letter in which Dr. Harr offered to settle the claim against Duke. The letter made no reference to racial discrimination.
Dr. Harr asked that Duke hold a press conference in which they would make the following points:
1. Dr. Harr experienced harassment due to his pro-Nifong beliefs and membership in the Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong;
2. Duke will not tolerate harassment of Nifong Supporters and members of the Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong or others based on unpopular beliefs;
3. Duke will respect First Amendment rights that includes wearing Justice for Nifong tee shirts;
4. Duke holds no animus or ill will towards Nifong, his family and supporters, and they are to welcomed on campus and treated with respect; and
5. "Duke University's position is that Mr. Nifong, in prosecuting what is known as the Duke Lacrosse case, was performing his duties as prosecutor and there is no evidence to suggest any other motivations."
His proposal letter also contained a long paragraph that summarizes Dr. Harr's opinion regarding Nifong's conduct in the lacrosse case.
As you can see, only 1 out of the 5 points Dr. Harr wanted covered by Duke in its press conference dealt with Mr. Nifong's conduct in the lacrosse case.the other 4 points only dealt with Dr. Harr's support of Nifong's conduct in that case.
None dealt with claims of racial discrimination or attempted kidnapping.
Does this proposal strengthen Dr. Harr's case against WRAL? It is clear that Dr. Harr was focused not on the Duke lacrosse case, but only on his mistreatment due to his opinion about Nifong's conduct in that case.
I have provided the link to the settlement proposal below.
http://justice4nifong.com/direc/irepoDirec/irepoB/irB7.htm
October 14, 2020 at 11:25 AM
Hey, Harr Supporter.
You brought up excellent points in your comment (e.g., regarding the Proposal... which I used in my latest motion filed Friday, October 16th).
ReplyDeleteguiowen said...
Can Sidney bring charges against Duke for attempted kidnapping?
October 14, 2020 at 3:57 PM
Hey, gui, mon ami.
With regards to the "kidnapping," when the incident initially happened in April 2010, I considered it mostly a discrimination case... based on my secular views of being a Nifong supporter and my race being African American. I believe that both factors were required for Duke's aggressive behavior and that either factor itself would not have resulted in the mistreatment. To rephrase, neither a white Nifong supporter nor a black non-committed towards Nifong would have risked being arrested.
At the time of the incident in 2010, the implications of what had happened had not sunken in and I viewed the mistreatment essentially as discrimination... not really dwelling on what would have happened had I actually been arrested. Full enlightenment for me about how I flirted with life-threatening danger became evident to me after recent George Floyd protesters in Portland, Oregon were swept up by unidentified federal troops and placed in unmarked vans. This is the kind of stuff that happened in "V for Vendetta," my favorite movie. After the Portland incident, I realized that the attempted arrest of me was, in actuality, a kidnapping. To knowingly unlawfully arrest someone is defined as a kidnapping. I could have been held in jail indefinitely while my plight was suppressed or maligned by the media... I could have just disappeared or wound up dead in custody with the manner of death being ruled a suicide... the possibilities are endless and dark.
Unlike in "V for Vendetta," it was a business (Duke University) behind this premeditated kidnapping, and not the government... which makes things even scarier. And unfortunately, as in my fiancee's case, the media, medical examiner's office, civil rights/social justice organizations, and politicians would all be complicit.
What happened to me at Duke University should be of concern to all Americans who value freedom and justice for all individuals.
Dr. Harr,
ReplyDeleteWhy did you not post a copy of your latest motion? We are all very interested in the status of your lawsuit against WRAL.
If kenhyderal has a chance to review your filings, I am sure he will provide you cogent comments.
ReplyDeleteguiowen said...
Dr, C,
Is it possible that Sidney could persuade the D. A. to file criminal charges against Duke?
October 15, 2020 at 9:41 PM
Hey, gui, mon ami.
Fortunately Law Professor James Coleman prevented the kidnapping... so that crime was not committed.
Although I believe strongly that Duke individuals plotted to kidnap me, I have no direct evidence of that... unlike the strong evidence I have in Crystal Mangum's case. Additionally, there's definitely no appetite for the Durham D.A.'s office to investigate such a conspiracy against Duke University... ergo, I would not even approach D.A. Deberry on that issue. As it is, she has consistently ignored me about Crystal Mangum's case... even with Dr. Wecht's exonerative report.
ReplyDeletekenhyderal supporter said...
Dr. Harr,
Why did you not post a copy of your latest motion? We are all very interested in the status of your lawsuit against WRAL.
If kenhyderal has a chance to review your filings, I am sure he will provide you cogent comments.
October 18, 2020 at 6:15 AM
Hey, kenhyderal supporter.
I took the time from working on my shar-video to upload my motions filed in the WRAL lawsuit on the following LINK to Motion and Memorandum in support of Court Hosted Settlement Conference
That motion will be denied, and your entire lawsuit tossed. You can't keep refiling the same lawsuit over and over. You will be sanctioned again.
ReplyDeleteDr. Harr,
ReplyDeleteThank you for posting your motion. I look forward to reading kenhyderal’s insightful and cogent comments.
kenhyderal,
ReplyDeleteAfter Dr. Harr went to all the trouble of posting his motion, the least you can do is provide him comments.
We are waiting on you and even Dr. Harr has a limit on his patience.
nonymous said...
ReplyDeleteThat motion will be denied, and your entire lawsuit tossed. You can't keep refiling the same lawsuit over and over. You will be sanctioned again.
Sadly, that's all true. This latest lawsuit is, in the words of one federal appellate judge, "frivolity squared."
ReplyDeleteDr. Caligari said...
nonymous said...
That motion will be denied, and your entire lawsuit tossed. You can't keep refiling the same lawsuit over and over. You will be sanctioned again.
Sadly, that's all true. This latest lawsuit is, in the words of one federal appellate judge, "frivolity squared."
October 21, 2020 at 8:54 PM
Hey, Dr. Caligari.
What both you and Anony seem to have overlooked is the fact that the case has been scheduled for mandatory mediation in the Federal Court... presumably prior to any summary judgment ruling. I anticipate that any mediation or settlement conference will address the merits of the case and eschew any res judicata arguments. If based on merits, I am confident that I will prevail.
Nifong Supporter Supporter,
ReplyDeleteI am certain we will hear from kenhyderal today. It takes time for him to prepare his thoughtful and cogent comments.
I anticipate that any mediation or settlement conference will address the merits of the case and eschew any res judicata arguments.
ReplyDeleteYou anticipate incorrectly. WRAL will talk at the mediation about nothing but res judicata.
If based on merits, I am confident that I will prevail.
You can't "prevail" at a mediation. A mediation is only an attempt to see if the parties will settle. WRAL has no incentive to settle, because they will surely win based on res judicata.
The fact that Sid/Kenny don't seem to even understand what mediation is shows how ridiculous they really are, and that they don't take this seriously. Sid purport to be a doctor - you'd think he'd know how to look up words.
ReplyDeleteThe mediator makes zero decisions, he tries to get the parties to agree. I still say this gets dismissed long before the mediation, but if they go to mediation, WRAL will say "if he dismisses immediately we won't seek sanctions."
Sid will blather a bit, but that's where WRAL will stand.
He will refuse to dismiss (and the mediator can't make him). Mediation will impasse (look it up Sid). And WRAL will get their motion to dismiss and sanctions at the next hearing.
That's if it makes it to mediation, which I still suspect it won't.
Well, I heard Mister Harr b*tch about her
ReplyDeleteWell, I heard ol' Sid put her down
Well, I hope Sid Harr will remember
A Durham man don't need him around, anyhow
Sweet home Durham County
Where the skies are so blue
Sweet home Durham County
Lord, I'm coming home to you
In Raleigh NC they love the Governor (boo, boo, boo )
Now we all did what we could do
Now Cunninghamgate does not bother me
Does your conscience bother you? Tell the truth
ReplyDeleteDr. Caligari said...
I anticipate that any mediation or settlement conference will address the merits of the case and eschew any res judicata arguments.
You anticipate incorrectly. WRAL will talk at the mediation about nothing but res judicata.
If based on merits, I am confident that I will prevail.
You can't "prevail" at a mediation. A mediation is only an attempt to see if the parties will settle. WRAL has no incentive to settle, because they will surely win based on res judicata.
October 22, 2020 at 1:58 PM
Hey, Dr. Caligari.
If defendants argue res judicata only, that will be a losing strategy. It's always been my position that the doctrine was not relevant because it requires that the initial ruling be based on merit. Judge Collins' ruling on July 17, 2017 was not based on merit. It is impossible to tell what his ruling is based upon because he didn't say in his one-page/two-paragraph/four-sentence Order.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous said...
The fact that Sid/Kenny don't seem to even understand what mediation is shows how ridiculous they really are, and that they don't take this seriously. Sid purport to be a doctor - you'd think he'd know how to look up words.
The mediator makes zero decisions, he tries to get the parties to agree. I still say this gets dismissed long before the mediation, but if they go to mediation, WRAL will say "if he dismisses immediately we won't seek sanctions."
Sid will blather a bit, but that's where WRAL will stand.
He will refuse to dismiss (and the mediator can't make him). Mediation will impasse (look it up Sid). And WRAL will get their motion to dismiss and sanctions at the next hearing.
That's if it makes it to mediation, which I still suspect it won't.
October 23, 2020 at 4:56 AM
Hey, Anony.
I don't know from where "sanctions" magically came. What I anticipate will happen is that the mediator will try to convince defendants to settle with me because the merits and facts of the case are on my side.
Good luck with that strategy, Sid.
ReplyDelete@ Anonymous 7:29 10-24-20 :"Does your conscience bother you? Tell the truth."Lynyrd Skynyrd
ReplyDeleteKenny,
ReplyDeleteThat wasn't 10-24-220. It was 10-23-20.
kenhyderal supporter,
ReplyDeletekenhyderal will not post his comments on the motion because he is well aware that WRAL’s lawyers monitor Dr. Harr’s blog. Therefore, kenhyderal refuses to allow the lawyers to have advance notice to prepare their defense. This is the same approach that he has adopted with his secret plans to win Crystal a new trial and to sue North Carolina for compensation. Given kenhyderal’s results to date, why do you expect him to alter his strategy?
If defendants argue res judicata only, that will be a losing strategy. It's always been my position that the doctrine was not relevant because it requires that the initial ruling be based on merit. Judge Collins' ruling on July 17, 2017 was not based on merit. It is impossible to tell what his ruling is based upon because he didn't say in his one-page/two-paragraph/four-sentence Order.
ReplyDeleteDid you ever read Rule 41(b) of the North Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure?
It says (bolding added): "Unless the court in its order for dismissal otherwise specifies, a dismissal under this section and any dismissal not provided for in this rule, other than a dismissal for lack of jurisdiction, for improper venue, or for failure to join a necessary party, operates as an adjudication upon the merits."
ReplyDeleteAnonymous Durham Observer said...
Good luck with that strategy, Sid.
October 24, 2020 at 7:30 AM
Hey, Durham Observer.
Thanks for the well wishes.
ReplyDeleteDr. Caligari said...
If defendants argue res judicata only, that will be a losing strategy. It's always been my position that the doctrine was not relevant because it requires that the initial ruling be based on merit. Judge Collins' ruling on July 17, 2017 was not based on merit. It is impossible to tell what his ruling is based upon because he didn't say in his one-page/two-paragraph/four-sentence Order.
Did you ever read Rule 41(b) of the North Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure?
It says (bolding added): "Unless the court in its order for dismissal otherwise specifies, a dismissal under this section and any dismissal not provided for in this rule, other than a dismissal for lack of jurisdiction, for improper venue, or for failure to join a necessary party, operates as an adjudication upon the merits."
October 24, 2020 at 8:43 PM
Hey, Dr. Caligari.
Yes, I am familiar with the rule... and personally, I believe it should be the other way around. Be that as it may, there is a reason why some judges use "with prejudice" rather than not mention prejudice... both achieving the same outcome. "With prejudice," it seems to me would be used to emphasize the strength of the ruling. For example, Judge Holt used with prejudice in her ruling against me based on res judicata. Collins' ruling on the other hand did not mention prejudice because he knew that it lacked merit. In an Order that is only one-page/two-paragraphs/four-sentences long that provides no reasons in support, he should have at least utilized prejudice to reflect on the merits of the case.
Just my opinion.
Your personal beliefs don't matter, the law does. You keep thinking you are special and the rules that apply to everyone else shouldn't apply to you.
ReplyDeleteYou aren't special.
You will lose, again.
@ Anonymous 10-25-20 6:10 ... Did you miss Dr. Harr's, "be that as it may" ?
ReplyDeleteNo Kenny, I saw it and Sid has no clue when/why it would be used, he’s wrong, of course, but it’s not worth explaining it to him (or you), cause you refuse to learn.
ReplyDeleteDr. Harr,
ReplyDeleteIs kenhyderal correct about the lawyers for WRAL lurking on your blog?
ReplyDeleteAnonymous said...
Your personal beliefs don't matter, the law does. You keep thinking you are special and the rules that apply to everyone else shouldn't apply to you.
You aren't special.
You will lose, again.
October 25, 2020 at 6:10 AM
Hey, Anony.
As kenhyderal points out, the part of the comment to which you refer was an opinion. I don't believe that I am special... to the contrary and that is the problem. What I want is to be treated like everyone else... I want the same for Crystal. Unfortunately Neither Crystal nor I are being fairly treated.
Systemic inequity in the criminal justice system is, unfortunately, a reality and that is what Crystal and I have faced consistently. If a judge summarily dismisses a plaintiff's case (as in my case against WRAL), the plaintiff should be entitled to an explanation for the ruling from that judge. That never happened in my case.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous kenhyderal supporter said...
Dr. Harr,
Is kenhyderal correct about the lawyers for WRAL lurking on your blog?
October 27, 2020 at 5:41 AM
Hey, kenhyderal supporter.
I do not know if WRAL attorneys are visiting my blog site... but if I were in their place, I would closely monitor it.
ReplyDeleteHEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP!!
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT!
Just got important news. My second secret project will be revealed the first week of November 2020. This will be extremely beneficial, I believe, in helping Crystal receive justice. Can't give an exact date of the reveal, but will let you know when I know or when it is available. So, stay tuned.
As you were.
Sidney,
ReplyDeleteWe're waiting with bated breath. You had promised something "weeks before thanksgiving. This would actually be three weeks before thanksgiving. Very good!
Sid,
ReplyDeleteNow that you are about to reveal the second of your secret projects, do you think it is time for Kenny to share with us the details of his secret plans?
I have lost track of how long it’s been since Kenny first mentioned his secret plans. However, this much is clear—between Kenny’s stories about his internet friend Kilgo and his references to his secret plans, he has no credibility.
Maybe you can convince him to be honest and candid, but I doubt it.
Durham Man,
ReplyDeleteYou have to understand that Kenny never lies. I know this is true because he told me so himself.
The problem is that, because of context, he misunderstands half of what other people tell him, and forgets half of what he says.
Yes, I am familiar with the rule... and personally, I believe it should be the other way around.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately for you, the judge will decide according to what the Rule says, not what you personally think it should say.
Sid....Er, Crystal Mangum is appealing the Oct 5 order and judgment signed by Judge Eagles.
ReplyDeleteWhen do we get to see that appeal?
Re: Guiowen 10:19AM 11-1-20 Guiowen is nothing but a broken record who never has an original though. For those who do not go back seven years, when I accidentally misspoke by denying I had said something regarding Canadian troops in Afghanistan and he was able to find in a different thread and a different context where I did use the said words he has, by intimation, been labeling me as a liar. For over a decade him and I have been exchanging on this blog and he never wins argument with me. When he caught this one misstatement he seized on it and, over the years, he just can't let it go. Guiowen; after seven years, can't you comer up with something better. I do know you've been here long enough to know all the facts, so you do know Crystal is innocent and is being falsely imprisoned but, like your cowardly Governor, you want to save face and pretend that justice was done.
ReplyDeleteKenny,
ReplyDeleteWhy are you angry with me? The other people on this blog accuse you of lying. I make it clear to them that you do not lie. I am the only person here who covers your back. I never criticize you for making untrue statements, because I realize that you only do so because of context. You are very ungrateful.
A sarcastic man is a wounded man.
ReplyDeleteI am really wounded by Kenhyderal's ingratitude. I am the only person here covering his back,and how does he thank me?
ReplyDeleteSo, Kenny, tell us about your adventures with the Canadian forces in Afghanistan. Were you really heroic there? Is that the reason that they're paying you to loll about on the beach in Dubai?
ReplyDeletekenny is the Tommy Flanagan of Joe Isuzus.
ReplyDeleteAbe Froman
Chicago, IL
Abe,
ReplyDeletePlease don't accuse Kenny of lying. You know that, when he tells an untruth, it's only because of context.
Kenny,
ReplyDeleteAren't you happy that I'm covering your back? Can you imagine what people would say about you, if not for my remarks?