Friday, January 15, 2021

MANGUM V. WRAL-5 NEWS: Libel and Defamation

144 comments:

Anonymous said...

Let's review..

What is North Carolina’s statute of limitations for bringing a defamation lawsuit?

One (1) year. North Carolina’s statute of limitations runs for one year, meaning time is of the essence when lodging a defamation claim. N.C.G.S. § 1-54.

But, when does the statute start ticking?

Under North Carolina law, the statute will start to toll (or tick) on the date of publication, regardless of when damage results or identity of the author is discovered (or when the plaintiff discovers that defamatory statements were made)

Anonymous said...

The statute of limitations on defamation has long passed. This lawsuit will be dismissed on the pleadings. It's even more ridiculous and frivolous than most of your nonsense.

Anonymous said...

Let's review..

What is North Carolina’s statute of limitations for bringing a defamation lawsuit?

One (1) year. North Carolina’s statute of limitations runs for one year, meaning time is of the essence when lodging a defamation claim. N.C.G.S. § 1-54.

But, when does the statute start ticking?

Under North Carolina law, the statute will start to toll (or tick) on the date of publication, regardless of when damage results or identity of the author is discovered (or when the plaintiff discovers that defamatory statements were made).

Note -- Per your comment from January 14, 2021 at 7:20 AM, I will continue to re-submit this comment until posted.

Anonymous said...

Let's review..

What is North Carolina’s statute of limitations for bringing a defamation lawsuit?

One (1) year. North Carolina’s statute of limitations runs for one year, meaning time is of the essence when lodging a defamation claim. N.C.G.S. § 1-54.

But, when does the statute start ticking?

Under North Carolina law, the statute will start to toll (or tick) on the date of publication, regardless of when damage results or identity of the author is discovered (or when the plaintiff discovers that defamatory statements were made).

Note -- Per your comment from January 14, 2021 at 7:20 AM, I will continue to re-submit this comment until posted.

A Durham Man said...

Sid,

What can we say? You have outdone yourself. Even by your standards, this lawsuit is a complete joke.

And why are you incentivizing WRAL to pursue sanctions against you in your case?

Anonymous said...

Sid’s just upset that WRAL and James F. Goodmon's Motion to Dismiss to dismiss in his latest lolsuit were granted and all other motions pending on the docket were DISMISSED AS MOOT, and the Clerk of Court was DIRECTED to close the case.

Anonymous said...

Sid KNOWS (due to his previous experience) that the statute of limitations provides an absolute defense to these claims.

This is, at best, a poor attempt to draw attention yet again to Cyril Wecht’s work. And it will fail.

Why? Because a doomed to failure civil lawsuit is NOT the appropriate venue for this document.

Kenhyderal, you claim to be a friend of Crystal Mangum. A true friend would at least encourage her to find a lawyer and try to make the best of this mess that Sid has placed her in.

Sid, if you truly cared for Crystal Mangum, you would hire her a lawyer and stop what you’re doing.

kenhyderal said...

How else to get Dr. Wecht's finding to the attention of the general Public? All those in authority know the truth. All Crystal haters on this and other blogs know the truth It's only political pressure from citizens that will bring about Justice. Until then injustice will be perpetuated at the expense of Crystal's life in order to save the reputation of incompetent, lying, guilty cowards.

Anonymous said...

Kenny,

There are legal processes to go through, which have repeatedly been explained to you and Sid. However, the two of you want to scream for special treatment, rather than follow the rules.

You each daily prove that you don't care about Crystal, you and Sid are emotionally abusive towards her with your lies and games.

Either get a lawyer, or demand Sid follow the rules, and the outcome may be much better. Keep lying to Crystal and pretending that Sid is helping, and it won't.

Anonymous said...

I just told you how else. Encourage and assist her to hire a real lawyer to find a way out of this mess Sidney has placed her in by filing multiple frivolous lolsuits.

dhall said...

Maybe Crystal can say that Sid mislead her into believing he was working with a lawyer, and get all his frivolous lawsuits thrown out due to his unauthorized practice of law?

kenhyderal supporter said...

Right on kenhyderal.

I’m proud to call kenhyderal my friend.

A Durham Man said...

So Sid, your case against WRAL was dismissed and you didn’t tell us? Are you going to appeal?

Anonymous said...

Why hasn’t the J4N Facebook page been updated since 2012?

kenhyderal said...

Crystal is indigent and the majority of her supporters are people of limited means. She has had several Lawyers who did absolutely nothing for her. This is how poor people are denied justice in the US. Why should she need a Lawyer when the AG and the Governor both know she is innocent and is being wrongly incarcerated. These people don't want Crystal out of Gaol. People should ask their self why. They want to save face and avoid disgrace and they are more than willing to do so at the expense of a poor black single mother of three. Are you saying a North Carolina Lawyer, any Lawyer, for a fee could immediately spring Crystal out of gaol by following a set of arcane procedures each one chargeable. Get real. Who are these people? No, none of them want any part of it. Take on the NC Law Society, Duke, Cooper and Klein not to mention the Carpetbaggers, no thanks not for the infamous Crystal Mangum.

kenhyderal supporter said...

Right on kenhyderal.


I’m proud to call kenhyderal my friend.

Anonymous said...

Mangum should ask Cyril Wecht (or his son, David) for legal assistance. Granted, David is a judge now, but I bet he probably knows a lawyer or two....

Anonymous said...

Why hasn’t Sid responded to any comments? It’s not like he needs to work on this or his own WRAL lolsuit....

Anonymous said...

FYI -- Since Sid no longer bothers to keep readers updated on his legal...exploits, here's the opinion and order from Judge Myers for Sid's WRAL case.

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nced.180838/gov.uscourts.nced.180838.30.0.pdf

Nifong Supporter said...


HEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP!
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT!!

I apologize for not responding to comments more frequently. As you know, it usually takes me quite some time to respond to all of the comments... and time is not something I have. Am working on a secret project that will take me several weeks to a month to complete. There is also the possibility of a second secret project that may come through. Working on these projects keeps me busy... not to mention the lawsuits.

Will try to respond more frequently to comments in the future.

As you were.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
FYI -- Since Sid no longer bothers to keep readers updated on his legal...exploits, here's the opinion and order from Judge Myers for Sid's WRAL case.

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nced.180838/gov.uscourts.nced.180838.30.0.pdf

January 19, 2021 at 10:36 AM


Hey, Anony.

Thanks for providing the link to the Opinion/Order regarding my lawsuit against WRAL.
Actually commenters were aware of the outcome before I was. I just received the Opinion/Order this morning at the post office.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Why hasn’t Sid responded to any comments? It’s not like he needs to work on this or his own WRAL lolsuit....

January 18, 2021 at 8:41 AM


Sez who? First of all, there's been no ruling on Crystal Mangum's lawsuit against WRAL. As far as my lawsuit goes, I have not finished studying the Opinion.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous Anonymous said...
Mangum should ask Cyril Wecht (or his son, David) for legal assistance. Granted, David is a judge now, but I bet he probably knows a lawyer or two....

January 18, 2021 at 6:59 AM


Hey, Anony.

What Crystal does not need is a lawyer. What she could use is fair treatment by the courts.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous Anonymous said...
Why hasn’t the J4N Facebook page been updated since 2012?

January 17, 2021 at 1:08 PM


Hey, Anony.

I have found the Facebook interface to be too complicated and confusing... so I basically just stopped using it. Also, kept forgetting the password. It became a pain in the neck.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous Anonymous said...
Sid KNOWS (due to his previous experience) that the statute of limitations provides an absolute defense to these claims.

This is, at best, a poor attempt to draw attention yet again to Cyril Wecht’s work. And it will fail.

Why? Because a doomed to failure civil lawsuit is NOT the appropriate venue for this document.

Kenhyderal, you claim to be a friend of Crystal Mangum. A true friend would at least encourage her to find a lawyer and try to make the best of this mess that Sid has placed her in.

Sid, if you truly cared for Crystal Mangum, you would hire her a lawyer and stop what you’re doing.

January 16, 2021 at 7:17 AM


Hey, Anony.

Crystal has had attorneys in the past and they allowed her to get convicted for a crime that never took place. Her attorneys would not meet with me to discuss the manner of Daye's death... which was an accident and not a homicide. Despite that, the innocence projects, NAACP, and ACLU won't touch her case.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous Anonymous said...
I just told you how else. Encourage and assist her to hire a real lawyer to find a way out of this mess Sidney has placed her in by filing multiple frivolous lolsuits.

January 16, 2021 at 1:33 PM


Hey, Anony.

I did not place her in the mess... Four attorneys, with trial attorney Meier and appellate attorney Ann Petersen are the ones who allowed her to be convicted for a non-crime. Media silence about the truths of Mangum's innocence and Governor Roy Cooper, D.A. Satana Deberry, and others refusal to meet with me are keeping her wrongly incarcerated. Judges and lawyers are working to keep her imprisoned for the purpose of shielding Duke University Hospital's responsibility for Daye's death... the media enabling it all. kenhyderal is insightful enough to know this and has been stating so for quite some time.

Anonymous said...

Come on, Sid! Why no response regarding your plans to deal with the statute of limitations? The first comment here shows that the statute clock starts when the comments were made, not from when any damage was made or from when they were discovered.

How are you possibly going to deal with this in a manner that helps Mangum in any way?

Anonymous said...

Although apparently filed on 6 January, I can't find any reference to this lolsuit except for this blog.

Nothing on Sid's favorite, pacermonitor, and nothing on the previously linked courtlistener.

What gives Sid?

Anonymous said...

It was filed in Wake County Superior Court ... it won’t be electronic. It’s state court, Sid won’t file it federally until he loses in State court, which will happen for all the reasons stated.

Anonymous said...

Sidney said: "I did not place her in the mess..." That is true but at this point it seems you like her to be in this "mess" as you can continue to write and file lawsuits to hearts content. I would think someone who wants to help her would:

1.) Get married now(do not use COVID as an out), so you can file lawsuits as the husband.
2.) Get her family involved, not just you. If they will not support her, then you have to ask the question, why is that?
3.) I understand your not wanting a lawyer, but could you not look for a lawyer who would help you in making the correct decisions(after married). Yes, you would have to pay for this advice. But maybe you like making legal mistakes so the filings can continue ad nauseam. You are like a drug addict, addicted to filing lawsuits no matter how fruitless they will be.
4.) Stop using the Duke lacrosse case and the media as scapegoats. You are trying to reverse the guilty of murder and the Duke case and media have nothing to do with the stabbing and resultant verdict. Your lawsuits are way overboard on this and need to be simple and concise. i.e. advice from a lawyer.
5.) Finally, at this point you seem to be just throwing lawsuits against the wall, hoping to get some kind of media attention. The media will not save Mangum, you must know this by now. And stop the secret project stuff. Someone who really wants to help someone does not go around boasting about secret projects. Secret projects are like flying saucers and you are not a child by any means.

Anonymous said...

Poster @ 12:56:

Regarding your first point, what difference does it make if Sid files his frivolous lawsuits as a husband?

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous Anonymous said...
Sidney said: "I did not place her in the mess..." That is true but at this point it seems you like her to be in this "mess" as you can continue to write and file lawsuits to hearts content. I would think someone who wants to help her would:

1.) Get married now(do not use COVID as an out), so you can file lawsuits as the husband.
2.) Get her family involved, not just you. If they will not support her, then you have to ask the question, why is that?
3.) I understand your not wanting a lawyer, but could you not look for a lawyer who would help you in making the correct decisions(after married). Yes, you would have to pay for this advice. But maybe you like making legal mistakes so the filings can continue ad nauseam. You are like a drug addict, addicted to filing lawsuits no matter how fruitless they will be.
4.) Stop using the Duke lacrosse case and the media as scapegoats. You are trying to reverse the guilty of murder and the Duke case and media have nothing to do with the stabbing and resultant verdict. Your lawsuits are way overboard on this and need to be simple and concise. i.e. advice from a lawyer.
5.) Finally, at this point you seem to be just throwing lawsuits against the wall, hoping to get some kind of media attention. The media will not save Mangum, you must know this by now. And stop the secret project stuff. Someone who really wants to help someone does not go around boasting about secret projects. Secret projects are like flying saucers and you are not a child by any means.

January 24, 2021 at 12:56 PM


Hey, Anony.

Thank you for your suggestions and advice.
Regarding (1), It was my intention to get married as we've been engaged for years. After Dr. Wecht's report came out in late October 2019, I thought Crystal's release would be imminent. When it didn't happen by early 2020, we began the process for a prison wedding when it was halted due to coronavirus. The prison chaplain stopped the paperwork process for our wedding because he was instructed to by the warden... this obviously coming from higher up. It is the State that doesn't want me to marry Crystal.
Regarding (2), Crystal's father passed away, and her mother is elderly and not able to defend her daughter. Crystal's sister went missing in North Dakota years ago and is presumed dead, and her three children (though two are young adults) are not in position to advocate for her.
Regarding (3), I do not know of an attorney who would give me advice in Crystal's best interests. A civil rights attorney with the NAACP that I contacted for help e-mailed me the other day saying, "If you love her, keep still." This advice when my fiancee is the victim of a no-crime wrongful conviction.
Regarding (4), the media has collectively refused to give any coverage (except for the WOMEN & CRIME podcast) about Dr. Cyril Wecht's exonerative report... suppressing the story to conceal Duke University Hospital's role in Daye's death.
And, regarding (5), the libel and defamation lawsuit against WRAL is legitimate as its reports falsely claim that Daye died of a "stabbing death."

Anonymous said...

Sidney, it can be done. You just need to try harder.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/coronavirus-prison-wedding-marry_n_5fbbe6f9c5b68ca87f7db6e0

kenhyderal said...

@ Anonymous 12:56 PM 1-24-21. What an unkind thing to say. I assume that you, like most informed people, know that Crystal is being wrongly incarcerated and because of this you should be outraged. You should also know who those are, who really want to keep Crystal in prison and will use any obscure reason they can utilize to come up with a way to deny it, her innocence be damned. This is a evil disgrace and Cooper and Klein could correct it in 10 minutes. Know why they wont? It's because they want to save their face, knowing it will bring utter disgrace upon them and because of what they did, it will cost the taxpayers a lot of money Political suicide for them so use filthy politics in an attempt to save themselves.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Poster @ 12:56:

Regarding your first point, what difference does it make if Sid files his frivolous lawsuits as a husband?

January 25, 2021 at 5:30 AM


Hey, Anony.

Filing anything on Crystal's behalf would give me more standing and acceptance if I were her husband. As her fiance, I have more standing than if I were her boyfriend... and as her boyfriend, negligibly more standing than merely a friend or acquaintance.

The State Bar would also be more accepting of my legal involvement as Mangum's husband, too.

These issues are not lost on the State, and that is why the State ordered the prison chaplain to immediately halt work on the marriage process... using the coronavirus pandemic as a pretext.

guiowen said...

Actually, Kenny, the true reason that they won't help Crystal is that they are sick and tired of your whining. I've tried to cover your back, but you pay no attention to what I tell you. I realize that it's all because of context, but you should try to be more responsible in what you do. In fact, it might be best for you, from now on, to consult with me before you post your messages.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Sidney, it can be done. You just need to try harder.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/coronavirus-prison-wedding-marry_n_5fbbe6f9c5b68ca87f7db6e0

January 25, 2021 at 8:41 AM


Hey, Anony.

Thanks for the Huff-Post link. What you didn't mention is that the case presented in that Huff-Post story took place in a Washington State prison. As you may know, different states have different prison protocols and differing state COVID-19 protocols. Crystal asked the chaplain repeatedly about moving the marriage process forward and I have written to the prison chaplain, as well. The North Carolina state's obstruction preventing Crystal and my prison wedding is set in concrete, not mud.

Nifong Supporter said...


kenhyderal said...
@ Anonymous 12:56 PM 1-24-21. What an unkind thing to say. I assume that you, like most informed people, know that Crystal is being wrongly incarcerated and because of this you should be outraged. You should also know who those are, who really want to keep Crystal in prison and will use any obscure reason they can utilize to come up with a way to deny it, her innocence be damned. This is a evil disgrace and Cooper and Klein could correct it in 10 minutes. Know why they wont? It's because they want to save their face, knowing it will bring utter disgrace upon them and because of what they did, it will cost the taxpayers a lot of money Political suicide for them so use filthy politics in an attempt to save themselves.

January 25, 2021 at 10:32 AM


Hey, kenhyderal.

What you say is absolutely correct and bears repeating.

Nifong Supporter said...


HEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP!
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT!!

This morning I returned a call to counsel for WRAL-5 News. I was reminded that "the courts have spoken" with regards to my lawsuits (in which defendants' Motions to Dismiss were granted) and was told that WRAL was considering filing a lawsuit against me seeking sanctions. The call to me was a courtesy to see if I would agree to settling out of court before the complaint against me was filed.

Naturally, I quickly responded that I would be more than willing to try to reach a settlement with a proviso that WRAL would publish a correction to the libelous and defamatory July 4, 2016 online news article. Before I could mention anything about my court cost, and other reasonable conditions, I was interrupted by the attorney who indicated that my demands were a non-starter. So, as we left it, we were at an impasse and it appears that WRAL-5 News may file a civil lawsuit against me.

I wouldn't count on the mainstream media covering this legal war (it hasn't to date), but this blog site will.

As you were.

A Durham Man said...


Sid,

You have been warned a number of times in comments posted on this blog that your actions were exposing you to a risk that WRAL would seek sanctions against you. You casually dismissed the warnings and claimed that there was no basis for sanctions. As they say, it appears that you poked the bear one time too many.

Good luck defending WRAL’s lawsuit.

guiowen said...

Sidney,
After losing a lawsuit, you actually expect the defendants (who have defeated you)to give you everything you were asking for? WOW!

kenhyderal said...

@ Guiowen 1:21 PM 1-25-21.The person whose back you are covering is Roy Cooper and if Justice prevails, you will go down in disgrace along with him

guiowen said...

Kenny,
I rather doubt that Cooper needs anyone to cover his back. I understand that, because of context, you believe that that is the case.
Please don't be so ungrateful, after all I've done for you. DO AS I TELL YOU, and you can probably get your little friend out. Otherwise, you can just wait another five years.

guiowen said...

Here we go again:

Sidney: "I have some powerful arguments that will get CGM free within two weeks if not sooner."
Sidney: "Please, everybody, tell me the color of your favorite crying towel."
Kenny: "The evil Duke lacrosse apologists have been successful up to now, but will now suffer as the arc of justice bends in Crystal's direction."

Some time later:
Others: "So tell us Sidney how things went?"
Sidney: "I clearly failed to take into consideration the evil behavior of the justice system, and/or the way CGM's attorneys betrayed her!"
Kenny: "What can you expect from the U.S. system? This would never happen in Canada, or any other reasonable country! Reform reform! Drain this swamp!"

Anonymous said...

Sidney said: "The North Carolina state's obstruction preventing Crystal and my prison wedding is set in concrete, not mud."

Perfect for another lawsuit. You might have a chance on this one.

Anonymous said...

The NC DPS COVID-19 visitation policy doesn't seem terribly restrictive -- At first glance, it seems in line with current hospital visitation policies as of October 1, 2020 (all visits were suspended from March 16 2020 to October 1 2020).

I don't see anything specific about "marriage" in the current policy, but I do see that "Visitation will not be permitted if the prison is experiencing a significant outbreak of COVID-19 or if the facility is on Red Status.". There's no place I can find online that identifies a NC Prison's COVID-19 "status" -- I assume you'd have to call the facility to find that out.

With that in mind, what specific reason(s) are they citing to stall your wedding? Have the pointed to a specific section of the policy and stated that your wedding could not continue due to possibe violations of that section?


For those who may be interested in reading the NC DPS policy, I found it here:
https://www.ncdps.gov/news/press-releases/2020/09/18/limited-prison-juvenile-justice-facility-visitation-resumes-covid-19

Anonymous said...

Oh -- Here's the Policy and Procedures (as of 9/9/2020 ) for inmate marriage requests:

https://files.nc.gov/ncdps/F-.-0300_09_09_20.pdf

Are you or Crystal Mangum meeting all the requirements/considerations? If so, I see no reason (unless it somehow violates the COVID-19 visitation policy) why they aren't allowing your wedding.

Anonymous said...

Sid,

We are all looking forward to seeing a copy WRAL’s complaint after you are sued. Will you post a copy here?

Dr. Caligari said...

The court, in dismissing Dr. Harr's lawsuit against WRAL, relied on the Rooker-Feldman doctrine-- exactly as I predicted when he filed the suit.

Nifong Supporter Supporter said...

Dr. Harr,

I know you will not allow yourself to be bullied by WRAL.

Sidney strong.

Anonymous said...

Thank you Captain Obvious. You should be very proud of yourself.

kenhyderal said...

Whenever they prefer to dismiss something or for that matter allow something they can always come up with a doctrine precedent to bolster their desire Readers may want to check this criticism of that doctrine https://ir.law.fsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://ca.search.yahoo.com/&httpsredir=1&article=1117&context=lr

Anonymous said...

kenny,

You should have read the article before you cut and pasted it. If you had, you would know it's not a criticism of the Rooker-Feldman doctrine. To the contrary, the author posits that the doctrine should be extended further.

You have managed to crap yourself with embarrassment yet again.

Thank you for the entertainment and for reminding us one more time why no one should take you seriously.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL


Anonymous said...

You read the document you linked Kenny?

It's not a criticism about the doctrine, rather it's a criticism about how the various circuits interpret the doctrine.

It actually supports the Fourth Circuit's use of the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, and recommends that all Circuit's adopt the approach used by the Fourth Circuit.

guiowen said...

Kenhyderal,
Please stop whining! If you really want to get Crystal out, stop whining! Do something! Help her get a lawyer!

kenhyderal said...

@ Abe I refer you though to citation 12 12. See, e.g., Barry Friedman & James E. Gaylord, Rooker-Feldman, from the Ground Up, 74 NOTREDAMEL. REV. 1129, 1133 (1999) (“Our conclusions may be summarized simply: Feldman itself should be overruled. The Rooker-Feldman doctrine should be ab-olished.”); Thompson, supra note 10, at 862 (calling for “the end to recognition of Rooker-Feldman as an independent doctrine of federal court jurisdiction”).

kenhyderal supporter said...

A sarcastic man is a wounded man.

Anonymous said...

Kenny? Kenny?

Perhaps you can clarify your reading of the article?

guiowen said...

Abe,
Please don't get angry with Kenny. He's really a good guy. It's just that,because of context, he misunderstands half of what he reads.

Anonymous said...

Kenny - That appears to be a misquote from "Rooker-Feldman from the Ground Up":
https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=1658&context=ndlr

What THAT document (rather than the one you linked) actually states is:

"Thus, our conclusion is simple. Feldman should be overruled,
and the Rooker-Feldman doctrine is going to have to be renamed or abandoned."


The Supreme Court interpreted Rooker and held that lower federal courts do not have appellate jurisdiction over state court judgments.

Try again.

kenhyderal said...

@ Anonymous 2-1-21 8:37 PM Anonymous? Anonymous? Perhaps you can clarify your question?

Anonymous said...

kenny,

You cited the article as a criticism of the Rooker-Feldman doctrine. It is not. Instead of admitting your error, you lie and now claim you were referring to a footnote within the article referring to a separate article by a different author. That's absurd on it's face. If you meant to refer to the article in the footnote, you would have referred to it directly, instead of to another reaching an entirely different conclusion.

Beyond that, had you read the second article (instead of skimming it for a phrase that, if taken out of context, might support your failed argument), you would have seen that the criticism of the doctrine is for reasons unrelated to Sid's case. More specifically, the author of the second article acknowledges that the law pre Rooker-Feldman precluded a party from relitigating a state court case involving the same parties in federal court. The author's argument is that Rooker-Feldman is superfluous and unnecessary in such cases. Nothing the author of the second article says would have saved Sid's failed lolsuit from dismissal.

An honest man acting in good faith admits his mistakes. Only someone who is deeply dishonest or acting in bad faith does not. This is why nobody takes you, or anything you have to say, seriously.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL

kenhyderal supporter said...

kenhyderal,

I posted at 8:37 p.m.

If I might give you a friendly piece of advice, I suggest that you read more carefully before you post.

But I’m still proud to call kenhyderal my friend.

Anonymous said...

It’s about time for Captain Obvious to weigh in regarding kenny’s legal research.

kenhyderal said...

@ Abe the Sausage King :Abe you're pretty loose with ad hominem attacks; calling me deeply dishonest or acting in bad faith. What is deeply dishonest are those, who know, with absolute certainty, that Crystal is innocent and is being wrongly incarcerated and who fail to speak out. I am puzzled as to where it is you consider me to be acting in bad faith. I know the discredited Crystal detractors want to catch me in trivial "gotcha moments" then play these up to the hilt hoping it will discredit me. You've seen it again and again here on this blog. It's a standard that the Crystal detractors are not being held to by you or most others here. For example, something that is consequential not trivial, how many here after seeing Dr. Wecht's expert opinion have said, "hey it look like we were wrong and Dr, Harr was right all along". As you suggest that's what honest people should probably have done.

kenhyderal said...

Dear Dr. Harr I did post a response to the substance of Abe's critique of 3-2-21 4:20 AM It was sent before this second the post directed at him at 2:23 PM. Did it go astray?

guiowen said...

Kenny,
Let me explain. If you make a false statement, and someone claims you are lying, that is NOT an "ad hominem" attack. I understand now that your false statements are not lies, but simply mean that,because of context, you misunderstand some things and forget much of what you yourself have said. Ever since then, I have tried to cover your back, but you make it difficult for me to help you. That is why I have suggested that you check with me before posting your comments.

guiowen said...

Kenny,
Please note that Wecht's opinion does not exonerate Crystal; it says that she is not guilty of murder,but she would still be guilty of assault with a deadly weapon. What I still don't understand is why you do not help her to hire a lawyer. This could indeed get her out of jail. Your claim,that you are "a man of limited means," translates to "I'm not going to spend money to help her."

Anonymous said...

Too bad Sid won't rely on his good friend, James Coleman...
https://law.duke.edu/wrongfulconvictions/

Wake Forrest used to have an Innocence and Justice Clinic...Have you tried reaching out to them?

How about you, Kenny?

kenhyderal said...

@ Abe 2-3-21 4:20 AM ( to replace my 2-3-21 post, apparently lost) Abe, the point I was trying to make was and I quote, "Whenever they prefer to dismiss something or for that matter allow something they can always come up with a doctrine precedent to bolster their desired result" I may have chosen a poor citation to make my point but it pales beside the Legal System citing imprecise and hardly applicable precedents to come up with the result they favor instead of a Judge having to give due consideration and thought in weighing what decision would be just to a unique case or telling a jury because of this precedent this is decided. It's one more reason the Legal System and it's practitioners are so despised. Examples abound; the predatory American Insurance Industry is a perfect example They have Lawyers draw up contracts in legalese full of barely interpretable fine print that permit them to collect premiums but escape claims Or like the gobbledygook of the doctrine precedent used to dismiss Dr. Harr. Lawyers revel in this system, as they know BS baffles brains. I have zero experience in any jurisdiction with the legal system either civil or criminal but I did not just fall off the turnip truck either and like most common men I know when I'm being "snowed" The system does not want to give Justice to Dr. Harr and they can easily produce a half-baked reason to deny it.

kenhyderal said...

@ Guiowen 2-4-21 What false statement was that? Guiowen, like Abe just did, you've seized on some trivial statement I've made trying and make it into a "gotcha moment" and suggesting by me doing so that I'm a liar, in hopes this will discredit me, while, all along, ignoring the Crystal detractors, here, who make critical misstatements about her. It's an obvious double standard. This is just another technique used by dishonest Lawyers. For example badgering Prosecutor, Coggins Franks, confusing Crystal about what direction she was facing while being under a death threatening attack by Daye then labeling her in court a liar, over and over again, before the jury

kenhyderal said...

@ Guiowen: The deadly weapon you refer to was a knife, one of many,,that Daye, in a drunken rage, hurled at her with murderous intent.

guiowen said...

Kenny,
Calm down! I'm only trying to help you! I go out of my way to point out that you never lie, and somehow this angers you.
One of your false statements was your claim, in September 2016,that "This conversation between him and I never happened." There are several others (e.g. the claim that Mike Nifong never charged the lacrosse players with rape, the claim that there were secret guests at the lacrosse party, etc.) but I don't think I need to go over all of these. I do my best to cover your back on these, but somehow you just get upset about this.
Your claims manage to get just about everyone here angry at you. This is why you should consult with me before posting any comments.

guiowen said...

Kenny,
She stabbed him with the knife. If Daye had hurled it at her,his fingerprints would have been on the knife. The only explanation I can see for this is tat Crystal got the knives,spread them all over the floor,ad wiped them clean to erase her fingerprints.

Anonymous said...

I did a quick google lookup of this site and "Innocence Project"...The most recent comment I could find was from 2018(!):
"Nifong Supporter said...

Anonymous Anonymous said...
The Innocence Project represents convicted individuals in cases where there is strong and compelling evidence of their actual evidence. My understanding is that the Innocence Project took a look at Mangum's case and decided it didn't meet their criteria. Make of that what you will.

August 29, 2018 at 2:19 PM


Taking a break from working on my shar-video (which I plan to post to YouTube) to respond. The Innocence Inquiry Commission under to [sic] different executive directors responded with letters as to why they would not take Mangum's case. The NC Center on Actual Innocence did not respond. The Innocence Project of Barry Scheck fame, I believe was contacted... not sure. The innocence program of NCCU Law School did not respond and the school was quite hostile when I went there seeking help for Crystal. The NAACP and ACLU also ignored pleas for assistance for Mangum.

That these groups and individuals refused to help Mangum in no way diminishes the merits of her case.
August 29, 2018 at 4:18 PM"


It certainly appears that these entities have not been contacted with information regarding the Wecht document.

I would also note that both the NAACP and ACLU would be the appropriate resources for assistance due to CIVIL matters.

Mangum's current situation is a CRIMINAL matter.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ny, Ken-ny , Ken-ny

kenhyderal said...

Guiowen said: "She stabbed him with "the" knife. If Daye had hurled it at her,his fingerprints would have been on the knife"................ The knife ?? There were 21 of them scattered all around the apartment, including 4 with broken blades. They got there because Daye was hurling knives at her with murderous intent. They were unable to obtain the fingerprints of him, or of Crystal, from the one she grabbed off the floor, with him on top of her choking her to death, which she poked him with or from any of the others. This was because these kitchen knives were not suitable to lift fingerprints from Your theory that Crystal took time to casually wipe clean these knives and scatter them all about to stage a crime scene is ludicrous. After stabbing him she instantly up and fled for her life

guiowen said...

Kenny,
Crystal stabbed him, and he fled to his nephew's apartment.
Why would Crystal then flee for her life?

Nifong Supporter said...


guiowen said...
Kenny,
Crystal stabbed him, and he fled to his nephew's apartment.
Why would Crystal then flee for her life?

February 6, 2021 at 7:53 AM


Hey, gui, mon ami.

You have things out of sequence. After Crystal poked Daye with a steak knife, he got from atop her and she gained her feet, grabbed her purse, and fled from the apartment; fearing for her life. After Mangum had left, Daye walked over to his nephew's apartment.

The prosecution scenario in which Daye leaves first and Mangum is in the doorway and tells the boyfriend of Aykia Hanes that "everything's okay" and then slams the door shut, makes absolutely no sense. Aykia Hanes' boyfriend was never interviewed by police and did not testify at trial. Prosecution scenario makes no sense whatsoever.

guiowen said...

Sidney,
Nice story, but I doubt it.

guiowen said...

Sidney,
As far as I'm concerned, Aykia Haines had no reason to lie. I know you did your best to get her charged with perjury, but your attempt was about as successful as so many other of your tries to get Crystal fee.

guiowen said...

Sidney,
Here's how I see it. I wrote this five or six ears ago:

Reginald Daye was angry, and he perhaps threw a knife. At some point he realized he was acting improperly, let Crystal go, and started to walk away. Crystal, who had in the past been told that she could attack her boyfriends and they would never testify against her, decided to let Reggie see that he could not get away with mistreating her. She therefore stabbed him. The only problem is she actually killed him, so it was no longer a question of whether he would testify against her.
Too bad, Reggie! Too too bad, Crystal!

kenhyderal said...

Guiowen said: "At some point he realized he was acting improperly, let Crystal go, and started to walk away" Realized he was acting improperly, give me a break. Twice her size and extremely intoxicated and in a jealous rage, this is the same guy who kicked down the bathroom door where Crystal had sought refuge from his knife wielding assault and was dragged out by her hair.

A Durham Man said...

Sid,

Did WRAL sue you?

guiowen said...

Kenny,
Some of us, at times, realize when we are doing something wrong. You,unfortunately, fail to do so. Please stop trying to make Reginald look bad.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous A Durham Man said...
Sid,

Did WRAL sue you?

February 8, 2021 at 5:34 AM


Hey, A Durham Man.

Checked post office this afternoon and have not yet received a lawsuit. Fingers are crossed.

kenhyderal said...

@ Guiowen 2-8-21-6:53 AM -------- What you are doing wrong is pretending that Crystal was justly convicted of murder and I know,full well, you realize this is not the case, so pretending that it is, is doing something wrong, on your part. It was Reginald Daye's own maniacal actions that made him look so bad, not anything I have ever said about him.

A Durham Man said...

Sid,

Beware, the hammer is about to drop.

Anonymous said...

WRAL won't sue you - they will just file for sanctions in your lawsuit.

guiowen said...

Kenny,
I agree Crystal should only be incarcerated for assault with a deadly weapon. I have told you how to get her out. Unfortunately you would rather whine than actually do something. You claim to be her friend, but are unwilling to spend any money on her behalf. Shame on you!

guiowen said...

Kenny,
I agree Crystal was guilty of assault with a deadly weapon, not murder.
I have told you how to get her out, but you wold rather whine than spend a penny on her behalf. Shame on you!

Anonymous said...

Kenny -- What you are doing wrong is not contacting ANY of the various Innocence Projects with the Wecht report.

Instead, you're apparently relying on SID (who's NEVER won a legal battle, BTW) to file meaningless lolsuits to somehow free Crystal Mangum.

A true friend would take a copy of the Wecht Report and reach out to the various Innocence projects and AT LEAST have the evaluate it, and come back with a statement why this document would/would not help in granting Crystal Mangum her freedom.

None of this has happened. Why is that?

kenhyderal said...

@ Anonymous 2-9-21 @ 9:15 I have full confidence in Dr. Harr. He, being in North Carolina, has far more capabilities and accomplishment than have I. Plus, as Fiancé of Crystal, he has greater standing than myself, as an old friend.

Anonymous said...

7 + years in prison and NUMEROUS failed lolsuits later, and Sid still has your "full confidence"?

Sid, you're being played. Kenhyderal is obviously NOT a friend of Crystal Mangum, and he obviously continues to encourage you down these paths simply because they are NOT leading to Crystal Mangum's eventual freedom.

Do yourself a favor -- humble yourself, contact your friend James Coleman, and ask him if there's anything the Innocence Project can do with the Wecht report to assist Crystal Mangum.

Even if it means taking yourself out of any further legal activities on her behalf.

Nifong Supporter said...


HEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP!!
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT!


Click to access latest on HARR v. WRAL-5 NEWS, et. al.


As you were.

Anonymous said...

A. Libel and defamation are state-law claims, not federal ones.

B. WRAL did not deprive you of your "Seventh Amendment Right to a jury trial" as you have claimed

C. federal district courts lack subject-matter jurisdiction to review state-court judgments

This latest attempt, like the previous ones, will fail.

As will the CGM defamation lawsuit.

You're welcome.

Anonymous said...

Sid,

We knew you wouldn’t let us down.

kenhyderal said...

@ Anonymous 11:001 2-10-21 Unlike you, Dr. Harr and Crystal are not naive people easily "played" so, your assumptions are unfounded and without merit. I take it that you do agree Crystal is innocent and being wrongly incarcerated. All those in charge of the broken Justice System there also know this and they are in a position to instantly correct this gross injustice. You ask why I do nothing instead of asking why these gangsters have violated their oath of office. You are the one being "played" into defending this outrage and in tacitly supporting those there who practice Law and profit lucratively feeding on this, broken and corrupt system.

Anonymous said...

Kenhyderal --
Let us assume that, for the sake of argument, Crystal is innocent and being wrongly incarcerated.

What SPECIFICALLY have you done other to connect Sid to Crystal?

How SPECIFICALLY has that connection helped Crystal?

What SPECIFICALLY do you see in Sid's failed lolsuits (and they are Sid's, not Crystal's) that have helped Crystal?

What SPECIFICALLY is wrong with the suggestion to take the Wecht report to the Duke Innocence Project (which, as one reader recently pointed out, has been successful in getting innocent people like Ronnie Long out of jail)?

FWIW, I truly don't expect you to answer.

kenhyderal said...

@Anonymous. FWIW I try to answer each and every post directed at me and have done so for many years. You are forgetting that Duke is responsible for the death of Reginald Daye, which has been covered up by them. Don't ever believe that Duke did not note the conviction of Crystal for murdering Daye and this conviction was not greeted with a sigh of relief for getting them off the hook. Duke will have tremendous leverage not only with the Project participants who would fear revealing findings that would place their institution in a bad light. Same with the surgeons who fixed Daye up but, would not want to lose their hospital privileges. That would be my view but I would leave such a decisions up to Dr. Harr in whom I have complete confidence. I know the reasons for lack of a resolution and it's no because of incompetence by Dr. Harr. The whole system from the AG & The NC Law Society, on down, want Crystal where she is and they have convinced the many unfamiliar with the facts that they have done what's right thing. Dr. Harr has informed all, who have power to correct it, of the absolute innocence of Crystal and they wont, as the African American saying goes, "do "the right thing" That's what him & Crystal are up against and people like you, who do know the facts, are complicit.

kenhyderal said...

@Anonymous. FWIW I try to answer each and every post directed at me and have done so for many years. You are forgetting that Duke is responsible for the death of Reginald Daye, which has been covered up by them. Don't ever believe that Duke did not note the conviction of Crystal for murdering Daye and this conviction was not greeted with a sigh of relief for getting them off the hook. Duke will have tremendous leverage not only with the Project participants who would fear revealing findings that would place their institution in a bad light. Same with the surgeons who fixed Daye up but, would not want to lose their hospital privileges. That would be my view but I would leave such a decisions up to Dr. Harr in whom I have complete confidence. I know the reasons for lack of a resolution and it's no because of incompetence by Dr. Harr. The whole system from the AG & The NC Law Society, on down, want Crystal where she is and they have convinced the many unfamiliar with the facts that they have done what's the right thing. Dr. Harr has informed all, who have power to correct it, of the absolute innocence of Crystal and they wont, as the African American saying goes, "do "the right thing" That's what him & Crystal are up against and people like you, who do know the facts, are complicit.

Anonymous said...

kenhyderal claims: Don't ever believe that Duke did not note the conviction of Crystal for murdering Daye and this conviction was not greeted with a sigh of relief for getting them off the hook. (Emphasis added.)

This statement is incorrect.

Crystal's conviction for murder DID NOT eliminate DUMC's legal exposure for the esophageal intubation. Crystal has criminal responsibility for Daye's death unless there was an intervening cause. Even though Crystal was convicted of murder, DUMC had ongoing civil responsibility for medical malpractice. More than one party can have responsibility for his death.

Please correct your error.

Anonymous said...

....And you fail to answer even one of my questions.

Let’s again assume that Duke University has a vendetta against Crystal Mangum to such a degree that the Innocence Project is not an option, even though James Coleman is a good friend of Sidney.

What SPECIFICALLY is wrong with the suggestion to take the Wecht report to the Wake Forrest Innocence Project?

kenhyderal supporter said...

Right on kenhyderal.

Anonymous said...

Kenny,

You continue to be an idiot and refuse to listen and learn.

As has been stated repeatedly: it's largely undisputed that Duke made a mistake that contributed to Daye's death. However, legally, their malpractice does not constitute an independent intervening event that cuts off Crystal's liability as a proximate cause - even if not the proximate cause.

We don't know if Daye's family ever sued Duke or reached a settlement - Crystal's case, and conviction, would have nothing to do with this, nor would it change Duke's liability. They either committed malpractice or they didn't.

Duke could care less about Crystal, or her conviction. It's irrelevant to them. You singular obsession with them is bizarre, and unhelpful.

But, again, unless Duke intentionally killed Daye, and made it look like just a mistake to frame Crystal, nothing about this case or trial changes Duke's liability at all, nor does anything Duke did change Crystal's ultimate liability.

If you are incapable of learning and comprehending just stop talking and admit you aren't helping Crystal. If you are capable of comprehending and learning - do it, and start taking steps that could actually help Crystal (as has repeatedly been explained here), and stop beating dead horses.

Anonymous said...

Ken-ny Ken-ny Ken-ny

kenhyderal said...

@ Anonymous 5:44, 6:01 and 7:15 .....There is no error to correct. Duke still has liability but as long as Crystal has been blamed instead of them they will not face embarrassment and legal liability as long as Crystal is imprisoned for murdering Daye; providing, that is, they have not already settled in secret with the Daye Family. In the opinion of Dr. Wecht, Duke made a serious mistake, one that probably constituted malpractice and made the proximate cause of death an accident cutting off Crystal's liability for homicide and making the accident the only cause of death. If anyone knows this and has all along it's been Duke. Not coming forward while blame was assigned to Crystal is immorality on their part. The embarrassment of this, is one more reason for them benefiting from Crystal's continued false imprisonment for murder. It may also be something that would negate their malpractice insurance coverage.

Anonymous said...

In the opinion of Dr. Wecht, Duke made a serious mistake, one that probably constituted malpractice and made the proximate cause of death an accident cutting off Crystal's liability for homicide and making the accident the only cause of death.

You have misstated Wecht's opinion.

The Wecht conclusion that you and Dr. Harr erroneously emphasize is that the intubation was an accident. Roberts also reached this conclusion, although she did not use the word "accident" to describe the errant intubation. Malpractice almost always is accidental. Accidental malpractice by itself does not cut off legal liability. Dr. Wecht did not reach the conclusion you mistakenly attribute to him.

Dr. Wecht concluded that Crystal's legal liability was cut off by an intervening cause that occurred prior to the intubation. However, I thought that his explanation in his report was not particularly compelling and would appreciate a more detailed discussion as to how and why he reached this conclusion. This conclusion, and not the accidental nature of the intubation, is the key finding in Wecht's report that could help Crystal. I do not understand why you and Dr. Harr ignore this important conclusion.

Please correct your error.

Anonymous said...

...And yet you still SPECIFICALLY choose not to answer the questions posed to you.

No wonder there are those here that consider you a troll.

kenhyderal said...

@ Anonymous. I stand corrected. Yes, the bottom line, though, is he concluded that the cause of death was accident and not homicide, ergo Crystal was wrongly charged and wrongly convicted of murder. You can't convict for murder when the death was an accident and not a homicide. Some might consider it quite presumptuous on your part to find his conclusion uncompelling but I will await hearing your medicolegal qualifications. Like all Crystal Mangum haters you practice the Duke Lacrosse Defenders playbook of admit nothing, deny everything and attack all that's being proffered. It's hard for anyone who knows Crystal to grasp why so many are so invested in seeing her punished. Is it revenge for the Duke Lacrosse Case or have you all been manipulated by the skillful propaganda to despise her that originated from their Defense and from the Carpetbagger jihad?

Anonymous said...

The statute of limitations has long expired on any malpractice claim Daye's family would have against Duke. They either already reached a settlement, or the claim is over.

Unlike Sid, most people accept the statute of limitations and don't keep filing frivolous lawsuit after frivolous lawsuit just so they can whine about injustice.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...

In the opinion of Dr. Wecht, Duke made a serious mistake, one that probably constituted malpractice and made the proximate cause of death an accident cutting off Crystal's liability for homicide and making the accident the only cause of death.

You have misstated Wecht's opinion.

The Wecht conclusion that you and Dr. Harr erroneously emphasize is that the intubation was an accident. Roberts also reached this conclusion, although she did not use the word "accident" to describe the errant intubation. Malpractice almost always is accidental. Accidental malpractice by itself does not cut off legal liability. Dr. Wecht did not reach the conclusion you mistakenly attribute to him.

Dr. Wecht concluded that Crystal's legal liability was cut off by an intervening cause that occurred prior to the intubation. However, I thought that his explanation in his report was not particularly compelling and would appreciate a more detailed discussion as to how and why he reached this conclusion. This conclusion, and not the accidental nature of the intubation, is the key finding in Wecht's report that could help Crystal. I do not understand why you and Dr. Harr ignore this important conclusion.

Please correct your error.

February 14, 2021 at 6:19 AM


Hey, Anony.

It is you that misstated Dr. Wecht. He said that the MANNER of death was an ACCIDENT. kenhyderal and I agree with Dr. Wecht on that and believe the CAUSE of death was the errant esophageal intubation of Daye which directly led to his brain-death... although I am not so certain that the misplacement of the endotracheal tube by Duke medical staff was an accident.

The main point you have failed to comprehend is that the misplaced endotracheal tube was an INTERVENING act that replaced the stab wound and its successful surgery as being liable for Daye's brain death or actual death. To be clear, the entirety of the alcoholic withdrawal/delirium tremens and its treatment was an intervening cause. Had Daye not lapsed into delirium tremens and/or had the initial intubation been properly placed in the trachea, Mr. Daye would most assuredly been discharged from the hospital with a full recovery.

Let us know if further elucidation is required.

kenhyderal said...

@ Anonymous (Gee I wish I knew who I was talking to) 2-14-21 1:26 PM. You're wrong. Unlike most here, I respond to each and every question directed to me. But, your demand that questions posed here get answered does not seen to apply to Crystal detractors. Any way, tell me what question of yours do you think have I specifically refused to answer? Not saying you are always going to like my answers, though

Anonymous said...

You haven't answered ANY of the questions I asked, Kenny -- as I pointed out.

But just so you and I are clear:

What SPECIFICALLY have you done other [than] connect Sid to Crystal?

How SPECIFICALLY has that connection helped Crystal?

What SPECIFICALLY do you see in Sid's failed lolsuits (and they are Sid's, not Crystal's) that have helped Crystal?

What SPECIFICALLY is wrong with the suggestion to take the Wecht report to [one of the Non-Duke University] Innocence Projects?




kenhyderal said...

@ Anonymous 2-15-21 3:07 The most important thing I have done is to introduced Crystal to Dr. Harr and to Justice4Nifong. That connection, thanks to Dr. Harr, has, against the odds, proven that Crystal has been wrongly convicted. Otherwise the broken and corrupt US. Justice System, the one that incarcerates more people then any other country, would have treated her as just one more black life that does not matter. She was a poor black mother of three, up against powerful forces, as in Duke, the Duke Lacrosse Team advocates, the Carpetbagger Jihad and their "dream team Lawyers plus the gutter press. Anything other I have done for Crystal is nobodies business and not something I would trumpet on a public blog. Dr. Harr is a crusader against injustice and he fights it, head on, wherever he sees it, both in and out of Court. Like Crystal, he is facing powerful odds. If I am not mistaken Dr. Harr has sought the help of some innocent projects but I guess most of these find Crystal too unpopular, thanks to the widespread number her foes have successfully pinned upon her, to lend there name to help exonerate her. I leave that action up to the judgement of Dr. Harr. After all, he has already proven her innocent. If the Justice System, who already know this, wont act for Dr. Harr, are they likely to act for an Innocent Project?

kenhyderal supporter said...

Dr. Harr,

The anonymous poster is badgering kenhyderal. It is time for you to monitor the comments more closely. kenhyderal deserves to be treated with respect.

Thank you for addressing this problem.

Anonymous said...

Kenny - You are mistaken.

Sid has not approached any of the various Innocence Projects with the Wecht Report.

A true friend would question why that is so, as Crystal Mangum approaches her 8th year in prison.

kenhyderal said...

I can defend myself, thanks.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
Kenny - You are mistaken.

Sid has not approached any of the various Innocence Projects with the Wecht Report.

A true friend would question why that is so, as Crystal Mangum approaches her 8th year in prison.

February 16, 2021 at 7:05 AM


Hey, Anony.

I don't know where you get your information, but you need a new source as your statement is false. The link to two letters I wrote to Lindsey Guice Smith, executive director of the NC Innocence Inquiry Commission, and the letter written to her by Crystal Mangum is below. For your information, I also hand-delivered a packet (which included Dr. Wecht's report) to Jamie Lau, the director of the innocence project at Duke University Law School on November 15, 2020. The innocence project director at the NCCU Law School was extremely hostile towards me, so I did not bother with it. I also know that Christine Mumma, the executive driector of the NC Center on Actual Innocence, is also not interested in Crystal's case so I did not approach her about Dr. Wecht's report.

LINK to my letters to NC Innocence Inquiry Commission

Anonymous said...

PART 1 OF 3

Sidney claims: The main point you have failed to comprehend is that the misplaced endotracheal tube was an INTERVENING act that replaced the stab wound and its successful surgery as being liable for Daye's brain death or actual death.

You misstate the law.

Medical mistakes, including malpractice, are NOT intervening causes that cut off legal liability. Dr. Wecht did NOT conclude that the errant intubation itself was an intervening cause. Although the esophageal intubation led directly to Daye's brain death, and Dr. Wecht correctly termed the death an "accident," Crystal nevertheless would have been criminally responsible for that accidental death unless there had been a prior intervening cause. Dr. Wecht and Dr. Roberts are in agreement on this point.

Dr. Wecht disagrees with Dr. Roberts on a critical point.

Dr. Wecht concluded that the onset of delirium tremens constituted an intervening cause, and it was the treatment for that intervening cause that resulted in the errant intubation. This intervening cause eliminated Crystal’s legal liability for Daye’s death. Dr. Roberts apparently dismissed delirium tremens and did not conclude that there had been an earlier intervening cause. This difference is critical.

I believe that you have used Dr. Wecht’s report ineffectively because you have focused on the wrong conclusion. You have emphasized a conclusion on which Dr. Wecht and Dr. Roberts agree, focusing on the words “accidental” and “manner” of death. The intubation per se, even though a “accident,” does not eliminate Crystal’s responsibility for Daye’s death. In all of your flings and communication of Dr. Wecht’s report, you misstate the law and Dr. Wecht’s conclusion. In doing so, you lose credibility.

Despite its critical importance, you totally ignore Dr. Wecht’s conclusion that delirium tremens represented an intervening cause. This conclusion—and not the conclusion that Daye’s “manner” of death was an “accident”—is what eliminates Crystal’s legal responsibility.

Anonymous said...

PART 2 OF 3

Several years ago, Walt identified Welch as important case law. He explained the doctrine that medical malpractice is NOT an intervening cause and expressed the view that this doctrine is applied broadly. You and kenhyderal simply disagreed with Walt’s conclusion and then ignored that legal issue entirely.

You and kenhyderal should should explain why you both believe that your efforts are more effective when you completely ignore the most important legal issue raised in this case.

You fail to address this issue in your legal filings and other communications. You ignore this issue when Welch is cited by opposing counsel. You ignore this issue when Welch is cited in court opinions. You should have learned that it is insufficient simply to state your opinion. You cannot expect other parties merely to accept your opinion as fact.

As I noted to kenhyderal in the post you quoted, I did not find Dr. Wecht’s discussion of delirium tremens as an intervening cause to be particularly compelling. Although I have no medical expertise and recognize that Dr. Wecht is a world renowned expert, he is not infallible. Given (i) the importance of this issue and (ii) the fact that he and Dr. Roberts reach conflicting opinions regarding delirium tremens, I would like further information.

Kenhyderal resorts to ad hominem attacks far too quickly: a request for additional information does not make one a “hater.” Ad hominem attacks are not effective in achieving a goal.

Part of this information is an analysis of the Welch precedent. Walt expressed the view that the doctrine was applied quite broadly. I suspect that he overstated its applicability. As a result, I would like to see what limits have been applied in other court cases. Importantly, can delirium tremens be an intervening cause as Dr. Wecht has concluded? I could understand that result, but I will not rely on your unsupported assertion.

This is the role of legal research. Both you and kenhyderal (despite his world class googling skills) have steadfastly refused to conduct any legal research. You prefer to ignore the issue even when Welch is cited in legal filings. Kenhyderal prefers to post snarky (and often misleading) comments about what he believes is the overstated role of precedent in the law.

Anonymous said...

PART 3 OF 3

Ignoring this issue is not effective. You and kenhyderal have served Crystal poorly as a result.

I blame you for refusing to consider the advice you have consistently received on this blog. You have simply rejected Welch as applicable, largely, I suspect, because you did not like the outcome. You simply repeat over and over and over again the same arguments that have not been convincing. You don’t learn from your mistakes, preferring to blame an extensive conspiracy for your lack of success. Paranoia is not an effective legal strategy.

I place even greater blame on kenhyderal.

Unlike you, I believe he understands the issue raised in Welch. He understands the importance of Dr. Wecht’s conclusion that delirium tremens was an intervening cause, specifically noting that conclusion in one of his responses. Despite his understanding of this issue and the fact that he is perhaps the one poster on this blog that you trust, he has declined to offer you any advice as to how you could refine your arguments to make them more effective. He prefers to post snarky comments and ad hominem attacks and to simply parrot your ineffective arguments and conspiracy theories than to offer any substantive advice.

I find that unforgivable.

You and kenhyderal overstate the importance of Dr. Wecht’s report. While Dr. Wecht is a world renowned expert, his report is an opinion. I believe that the opinion merits further review and should support the request for a hearing to conduct such review. An opinion, however, does not “prove” Crystal’s “absolute innocence.” While I understand why you and kenhyderal are tempted to use hyperbole to make your claim, its use may detract further from your credibility.

You and kenhyderal have proven that you are unwilling and unable to serve Crystal’s interests effectively. Like most other posters, I urge you to hire an attorney.

You have accused attorneys (including various innocence projects) of not serving Crystal’s interests and of being in Duke’s pockets because they did not accept your opinion that Welch was not applicable to this case. At that time, the conclusion of Dr. Roberts, Crystal’s medical expert, was that there was no intervening cause. The application of Welch would result in Crystal’s ongoing responsibility for Daye’s death.

The situation has changed. Dr. Wecht provides an opinion that the onset of delirium tremens was an intervening cause that supports the elimination of Crystal’s responsibility. If there are limits to the applicability of Welch, an attorney can understand how best to make this argument; you and kenhyderal have utterly failed to do so.

Hire an attorney.

kenhyderal said...

Anonymous said: "Kenhyderal resorts to ad hominem attacks far too quickly: a request for additional information does not make one a “hater.” Ad hominem attacks are not effective in achieving a goal"....... Talk about projection. Both myself and Dr. Harr are the greatest recipients of ad hominem attacks over the years on this blog most likely even by you on this very thread, although when one posts anonymously you can never sure who it is. If my impressions are correct, ad hominem attacks against me such as nazi racist liar troll sadist are many fold compared with those ever made by me. It should no longer take an Attorney to show Crystal is innocent of murder and Dr. Harr has always made the claim going back 7 years that Daye's DT's were an intervening cause. Those with the power to correct this miscarriage don't really have to be convinced of anything. They know all the facts and for their own reasons chose not to act. It was all contained in the information given to the Governor and to the AG Stein Cooper a JD and Stein a Harvard Law Graduate. Don't tell me they need to be convinced by an Innocent Project or a Private Attorney arguing this

kenhyderal supporter said...

No need to thank me, kenhyderal. I am always happy to cover your back because I am proud to call you my friend.

guiowen said...

K.H. supporter,
Thank you for your help in covering Kenny's back. As you know, I have spent several years doing this. If it wasn't for me, people would think he was a liar. Fortunately I've been able to explain that he never lies; it's only because of context that he forgets half of what he says, and misunderstands half of what others tell him.
So, thank you for your cooperation on this matter. It's very important that people understand what a great guy Kenny is.

Anonymous said...

kenhyderal:

Perhaps Cyril Wecht can provide an opinion that the mystery rapists who raped Crystal at the lacrosse party were space aliens.

https://www.ufocasebook.com/alienautopsyfilm.html

kenhyderal supporter said...



guiowen,

A sarcastic man is a wounded man.

guiowen said...

K. H. supporter,
Please, no more sarcasm! You and I are on the same team.

kenhyderal supporter said...


guiowen,

Nothing that kenhyderal has posted indicates that he considers you to be his friend. However, I have said many times that I am proud to call kenhyderal my friend.

What makes you think that we are on the same team? Have you ever been to Bremerton?


guiowen said...

K H S,
We're both covering his back!

Anonymous said...

kenhyderal supporter,

What greater proof can there be of guiowen's unwavering affection for kenny than the fact that he has stood by kenny's side and defended him even though kenny has not reciprocated or even acknowledged the friendship? We should all be so lucky as to have a friend and trusty and true as guiowen. I get choked up just thinking about it.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL

guiowen said...

K H S,
Think of a little boy who is constantly getting into trouble at school. One of his teachers does his best to keep him safe, but scolds him once in a while. The little boy then goes home and tells his parents that he hates the teacher, etc. The parents must then decide whether they are on the same team as the teacher.

kenhyderal said...

The anonymous post at 2-22-21 doesn't sound like the "real" Sausage King. Getting choked up over me seems to be right out of character. An imposter?? I would of thought Abe was wise enough to see through Guiowen's insincerity and sarcasm. At any rate, there are real issues at hand here and such games seem quite inappropriate.

kenhyderal supporter said...



Right on kenhyderal. Thank you for setting the record straight.

guiowen said...

Kenny,
I am wounded by your ingratitude.
Please consult with me before posting any more messages; it's the only way I can keep you out of trouble.

Anonymous said...

I would have (or would've) thought you'd know how to write correctly.

But here we are.

guiowen said...

Anony,
Please don't criticize Kenny. It's just that, because of context, he forgets what figure of speech "of" is. This is why I ask him to check with me before posting any messages.

kenhyderal said...

@ Anonymous 2-23-2i 11:59 AM..... Thanks for the correction. I should've been more careful. I'm no grammarian but I do feel confident I would've been understood by those I tried to communicate with, which is of primary importance in dialogue. As you intimate, though, poor grammar, although rarely affecting understanding, could've left the impression that the writer is poorly educated. One of those that Donald Trump professed to love.

kenhyderal supporter said...


kenhyderal,

Ignore the grammar police and continue to post your cogent comments.


guiowen said...

Kenny,
I realize it's only because of context, but you don't seem to realize that the verb "have" can be used rather than some contraction.
Once again, I wish you would consult with me before posting notes. It's hard to cover your back if you don't take my advice.

kenhyderal supporter said...


kenhyderal,

Those of us who have studied carefully your countless posts on Dr. Harr’s blog would never think that you are poorly educated. You have an in depth understanding of complex legal and medical concepts, which will be even more apparent when you share with us your secret plan for winning a new trial for your dear friend Crystal.

Dr. Caligari said...

Dr. Harr:

The U.S. Supreme Court today unanimously held that a dismissal of a case based on a Rule 12(b)(6) motion constitutes a "judgment on the merits" for purposes of barring a subsequent suit.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/19-546_7mip.pdf

Please keep this in mind in your future court arguments.

Anonymous said...

Damn, and you know SCOTUS only did that because Duke paid them off cause this ruling screws Crystal.

It's amazing how high and deep the anti-Crystal hatred goes - it's now reached the Supreme Court!

Nifong Supporter Supporter said...


Dr. Harr,

Have you discussed with kenhyderal his secret plan to win a new trial for Crystal? This is incredible news.