justice4nifong: Judge's Desired Outcome in Ex Parte Hearing: Part Three

Monday, May 9, 2022

Judge's Desired Outcome in Ex Parte Hearing: Part Three

201 comments:

1 – 200 of 201 Newer› Newest»

Anonymous said...: The hits keep coming.; May 9, 2022 at 11:24 AM
Prince Humperdinck said...: Blah blah blah.

Judges are always going to hear motions to dismiss first. If those motions fail, then the judge will move on to any remaining motions.

How many times do you have to be told this?

Expect the same outcome in the Oxygen Media case.; May 9, 2022 at 6:47 PM
Anonymous said...: Found a video of Kenny getting trolled…

https://youtu.be/Qjxn08k5XNY; May 9, 2022 at 7:05 PM
kenhyderal said...: Yep. In the American Justice System, cases are not judged but are predetermined. Weasel words and arbitrary application of rules and protocol violations are facilely used to justify whatever outcome is desired. Think about it, the idea that when the application to dismiss is heard first, then the case is ruled on, without hearing the other sides' arguments. Anybody here think that is an example of fairness? Even with the statute of limitations being categorical, decency would demand a Judge at least hear the other side. Especially one who had previously claimed there should be leniency allowed for pro-se litigants.; May 9, 2022 at 8:54 PM
Prince Humperdinck said...: Yes it fair. Kenny. If the motion to dismiss stands, the lawsuit is over. Why bother hearing further arguments regarding a lawsuit that has ended?

What you’re asking for isn’t fairness — it’s special treatment.; May 10, 2022 at 4:56 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny -- Sid give you Chuck's email address yet?; May 10, 2022 at 5:57 AM
Prince Humperdinck said...: Check out the link that Anonymous @ May 9 at 7:05pm posted.

It's a parody of the movie (i>Downfall IIRC) about the final days of Hitler.

What's great about it is that Hitler is complaining of being trolled...Watching that while picturing Kenny as Hitler (Kenny has stated that "Nazi is an epithet that frequently gets thrown at [him]" so it's fair game)

Some of the "translated" subtitles (the movie is in German) are spot on:

Kenny (as Hitler): "Also, I will endeavor to improve the reputation of my superior intelligence"

"STOP TROLLING ME!"

That was , Anonymous. Thank you.; May 10, 2022 at 6:52 AM
kenhyderal said...: You might discover I'd be more like Idi than Dolphy.; May 10, 2022 at 10:36 AM
Anonymous said...: I see that Kenny has resumed his master debating.; May 10, 2022 at 11:18 AM
Anonymous said...: Blogger kenhyderal said...
"You might discover I'd be more like Idi than Dolphy."

Both are easily parodied buffoons, so?; May 10, 2022 at 2:42 PM
Dr. Caligari said...: Think about it, the idea that when the application to dismiss is heard first, then the case is ruled on, without hearing the other sides' arguments. Anybody here think that is an example of fairness?

Fairness dictates that the judge not rule on the motion to dismiss before hearing the plaintiff's arguments about that motion. But if the motion to dismiss must be granted, hearing anything else is a waste of everyone's time, and is unfair to, among others, other litigants whose cases need to be heard.; May 10, 2022 at 3:59 PM
kenhyderal said...: @ Anonymous: Dolphy was weak and pathetic but Idi was certainly capable of retaliating against those who would mock him. Just sayin'; May 10, 2022 at 4:37 PM
Anonymous said...: Retaliate away, Kenny.

While you’re retaliating, don’t forget to ask Sid for Chuck’s email address.; May 11, 2022 at 5:32 AM
kenhyderal said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; May 11, 2022 at 7:48 AM
kenhyderal said...: @ Anonymous Just watch me. P.S. I got it now but for the present it's only academic as I'd sooner post here, openly, than by PM's. My open reply to Chuck that got lost, in cyber-space, triggering this exchange seems to be no longer relevant.; May 11, 2022 at 8:34 AM
Anonymous said...: Lil Kenny ---

"Leave me alooooone!"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nxgucAgtr-k; May 11, 2022 at 11:34 AM
guiowen said...: You'd better watch out! Kenny is (a) a fighter, (b) a master debater, (c) Crystal's best friend.
You would be well advised to bend to his wishes.; May 11, 2022 at 11:50 AM
kenhyderal said...: @ Anonymous I'm afraid you will find this Kenny is more like Candyman than Lil Daryl.; May 11, 2022 at 3:41 PM
Anonymous said...: I hear Kenny is a great chef, too. Especially for Christmas turkeys.

He’s a master baster; May 11, 2022 at 6:16 PM
kenhyderal said...: @ Anonymous: Save us you puerile, juvenile, grade school attempts at humuor. This is a blog for grown-ups; May 11, 2022 at 7:23 PM
Anonymous said...: Let me translate Kenny’s May 11, 2022 at 7:23 PM post:

“Leave me alooooone!"; May 12, 2022 at 4:34 AM
Anonymous said...: In actually relevant news...

Oxygen Media filed a response in opposition to Sid/Crystal's motion for Mediation Settlement Conference. It was filed on 5 May (coincidentally, the last day Sid wrote a comment on this blog).

Kody Kinsley filed a motion for Extension of Time to Hold the discovery meeting on 5 May as well. this motion was granted on 6 May.

I'm guessing Sid's too busy with his spoiled cat Adonis to let us know the details.; May 12, 2022 at 3:12 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...
In actually relevant news...

Oxygen Media filed a response in opposition to Sid/Crystal's motion for Mediation Settlement Conference. It was filed on 5 May (coincidentally, the last day Sid wrote a comment on this blog).

Kody Kinsley filed a motion for Extension of Time to Hold the discovery meeting on 5 May as well. this motion was granted on 6 May.

I'm guessing Sid's too busy with his spoiled cat Adonis to let us know the details.

May 12, 2022 at 3:12 PM

Hey, Anony.

Thanks for the info. I was aware of the extension in the Kinsley/DHHS case, but did not know about the Response by Oxygen Media. I spoke to Crystal last night, the 12th, and she had not received anything in the mail from the court about the Oxygen filing.

Once again, a commenter has informed me of court action which has not yet been delivered to Crystal.

I will go to the Federal Courthouse and pick up a copy of the Oxygen filing this morning.; May 13, 2022 at 4:26 AM
Anonymous said...: You have the same resources for this information that I do. I found that information in about 5 minutes.

Put down your spoiled cat Adonis and try to actually do some work.

Why bother picking up a copy of the Oxygen Media filing? It's not like you're going to post it here.; May 13, 2022 at 6:49 AM
Anonymous said...: Given the mail situation at the North Carolina Correctional Institute for Women, you’re better off checking these websites a couple days per week:

https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/41566569/Mangum_v_Oxygen_Media,_LLC_et_al

https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/43575252/Mangum_v_Kinsley_et_al

IIRC, you have 15 days to file any response. By not finding out about the Oxygen Media filing until now, that only gives you and Crystal Mangum 7 days to write and file a response.; May 13, 2022 at 7:38 PM
kenhyderal supporter said...: Dr. Harr,

You need to monitor the comments at your blog more closely. There is no reason to publish posts calling kenhyderal a master debater, a master baster or a cunning linguist. kenhyderal also is not a little man.

kenhyderal deserves better. In the future, I hope you will block these types of posts.

I am proud to call kenhyderal my friend.; May 14, 2022 at 6:54 AM
Nifong Supporter said...: kenhyderal supporter said...

Dr. Harr,

You need to monitor the comments at your blog more closely. There is no reason to publish posts calling kenhyderal a master debater, a master baster or a cunning linguist. kenhyderal also is not a little man.

kenhyderal deserves better. In the future, I hope you will block these types of posts.

I am proud to call kenhyderal my friend.

May 14, 2022 at 6:54 AM

Hey, kenhyderal supporter.

You are absolutely right. In fact, I had been considering doing just that because such comments, usually by Anonys, do nothing more than belittle and take away from the seriousness of the blog site. My bad for not addressing this issue much sooner.

Ergo, I will now institute the kenhyderal supporter doctrine that will exclude the posting of comments submitted mainly to mock and ridicule without any serious intent.

Apologizes to all, and mainly kenhyderal, for oversight about this matter on my behalf. And, in the future, if such objectionable comments slip past me, I will remove them.

Thanks, again, kenhyderal supporter, for bringing this to my attention.; May 14, 2022 at 8:54 AM
kenhyderal said...: @ Nifong Supporter: 4-14-22........ I have broad shoulder and a thick skin, so I really don't need to be protected. I hate to impugn his motives but, unfortunately, I suspect KHS has sarcastically made the post just to once again highlight these assinine, juvenile jokes.; May 14, 2022 at 10:22 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid,

Kenny doesn’t want the kenhyderal supporter rule, so why don’t you drop it?; May 14, 2022 at 8:57 PM
A Durham Man said...: Sid,

This is a great idea. Enforcing the kenhyderal supporter doctrine, along with the demands of your cat, will give you another excuse not to post the filings of the opposing parties in your lawsuits.; May 15, 2022 at 4:36 AM
Fake Abe Froman said...: Sid,

Given your willingness to censor posts, you shouldn’t whine when the media ignores your frivolous lawsuits.

Fake Abe Froman
Chicago,IL; May 15, 2022 at 4:56 AM
A Durham Man said...: Fake Abe Froman,

You forget that Sid has convinced himself that a different set of rules applies to him.; May 15, 2022 at 7:51 AM
kenhyderal supporter said...: Fake Abe,

I am quite surprised, but apparently Dr. Harr has used the kenhyderal supporter doctrine to censor one of my posts.; May 15, 2022 at 8:23 AM
Fake Abe Froman said...: Sid is delusional if he thinks this blog site and his lol suits are serious. It is apparent that he and Kenny are complete jokes.

Go ahead Sid and block all of the posts you think are objectionable. And tell us again, when do you predict Crystal will be released?

Fake Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; May 15, 2022 at 3:15 PM
Doogie Howser said...: Sid censors posts because he can’t handle the truth.; May 15, 2022 at 4:42 PM
Anonymous said...: Sid,

Wouldn't it be easier for you and kenny to text or email each other than to continue to maintain (and censor) the comment section? Then you could spend even more time with your cat.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; May 16, 2022 at 5:16 AM
kenhyderal said...: @ Fake Abe. Keep in mind, Abe, it was Dr. Harr who told us, one and all, right from day one, and despite constant ridicule from guys like you and others, that it was Duke who killed Daye and that Crystal is absolutely innocent of murder. Any who cling to the idea Daye was stabbed to death are either delusional or blinded by hate. It's long past the time that Americans like you stop deluding yourselves, that you have the world's greatest democracy, on earth, where there is equal justice for all under law.; May 16, 2022 at 9:52 AM
Fake Abe Froman said...: Kenny,

You are doing a wonderful job of debating. In fact, you are a master of the art of debating.

However, it seems more than a little odd that you don’t provide Sid any assistance with his numerous lawsuits. Why is that? Sid has complained many times that he is an army of one. Why will you not join Sid’s army?

Fake Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; May 16, 2022 at 1:10 PM
kenhyderal said...: @ Fake Abe: Abe, I have no experise, whatsoever, in matters legal, so, there is little I could do to assist Dr. Harr in his endeavors. I am, though, able to see that the American Justice System is completely broken, as far as providing justice to it's citizens and it's designed for the sole benefit of it's practitioners in colusion with the political "powers that be". I applaud Dr. Harr for taking that on. It's something I would be incapable of. Taking it on is a daunting task because the system, regardless of what is right and true, can, by artifact, produce any result that is desired. What he has accomlished, so far, is to expose it. Having proved Crystal innocent of murder, he has forced the system to dig in and try and ride out their moral disgrace.; May 16, 2022 at 3:49 PM
Anonymous said...: Sid hasn't "proved" anything. All he's offered is conjecture.; May 17, 2022 at 7:00 AM
Dr. Caligari said...: I have no experise, whatsoever, in matters legal, so, there is little I could do to assist Dr. Harr in his endeavors.

Dr. Harr, unfortunately, has no expertise in legal matters either. Despite spending virtually his entire adult life in bringing and losing frivolous lawsuits, he knows nothing about the law and refuses to even try to learn.; May 17, 2022 at 10:01 AM
kenhyderal said...: @ Dr. C. : Every lawsuit, from a common man's perspective, that Dr. Harr has assisted Crystal in filing has been meritorious and presented, factually, in a clear and convincing manner. Unfortunately, despite the obvious merits, the North Carolina Justice System has, for political, immoral facesaving and othetr questionable reasons, dismissed these just lawsuits; not on the basis of merit but on technical grounds. The kind of errors that coulld be found in almost every suit filed by any Lawyyer, on behalf of a plaintif in the State, that is a member of the North Carolina Bar but can be reasdonably overlooked, allowing the suits to go on to court and be judged on the merits. In Crystal's case, they are afraid of the truth and how their treatment of her would cast the, already mistrusted, system into even more disrepute; May 17, 2022 at 3:21 PM
A Durham Man said...: Kenny,

Let’s consider your last comment: “I have no expertise, whatsoever, in legal matters.” Yet, you constantly make statements and arguments regarding the Welch case, Cyril Wecht’s report, the felony murder rule and countless other legal subjects.

In one sentence, you have summed up why no one who reads this blog (other than Sid) takes you or your posts seriously. Congratulations for recognizing the obvious. However, I expect that you will continue to act like a clown and post your comments, which are every bit as frivolous as Sid’s lawsuits.; May 17, 2022 at 4:06 PM
kenhyderal said...: @ Anonymous 5-17-22 10:01 AM I take it then, you believe the world reknown Pathologist and Medico-legal scholar Dr. Wecht was merely speculating when he concured with Dr. Harr and pronounced Daye's death an accident and not a homicide. The facts, not conjecture, indicate proof of this.; May 17, 2022 at 4:26 PM
Anonymous said...: I’ll play your game lil’ Kenny….
Show me 1 civil case filed by a lawyer in North Carolina that was successful even though the statute of limitations had passed before the lawsuit was filed.

I’ll be patiently waiting.; May 17, 2022 at 6:29 PM
Anonymous said...: World reknown Pathologist and Medico-legal scholar Dr. Wecht provided his opinion. Other pathologists provided theirs.

'Facts" are the truth about events as opposed to interpretation.

What we have are three differing interpretations -- one by Dr. Nichols, one by Dr. Roberts, and one by Dr. Wecht -- Not facts.

It comes down to who's interpretation you choose to believe.

"Truth is no longer objectively true. You have your personal truth and I have mine. If you disagree with or criticize my personal truth you criticize me. After all, I am the one who determines truth, so to criticize my truth is to criticize me. A difference in belief is a personal affront..."
- Pastor Rolf Preus; May 18, 2022 at 6:41 AM
kenhyderal said...: @ Anonymous: 5-17-22 6:29 PM I'm not sure how to research that but it is my understanding that the Statute of Limitations, in civil matters, is not absolute and there are circumstances where it can be extended by the Judge for certain exceptions; two of which apply to Crystal. One: When the injured party is legally incapacitated. A person can be considered legally incapacitated when they are incarcerated and therefore be entitled to have the statute of limitation suspended for the amount of time they are in gaol ; since that person may not have the means to collect evidence and file the lawsuit. So, the amount of time a person spends incapacitated will therefore not be counted against the the period prescribed in the statute of limitations. Two : Where the litigant is suffering continuing harm which certainly applies to Crystal.; May 18, 2022 at 9:50 AM
kenhyderal said...: @ Anonymous 5-18-22 6:41 AM Undesputed facts: Daye died of elective removal from life support, as a consequence of irreversible brain damage, as a consequence of cerbral anoxia, as a result of accidental esophageal intubation, as a consequence of treatment for impending delirium tremens, as a conseuences of acute alcohol withdrawal in an alcohol habituated individual. The jury heard none of these facts. What they heard from Nicholls and supported by Roberts were not facts and was not supported by any evidence actual or circumstantial. The Jury was misled that what Nicholls reported was a fact.; May 18, 2022 at 11:03 AM
A Durham Man said...: Kenny,

So, that is your understanding of the statute of limitations, although you have no expertise, whatsoever, in legal matters?; May 18, 2022 at 11:22 AM
Anonymous said...: Ohhh. Swing and a miss, lil' Kenny!

I'm still waiting for you to show me 1 civil case filed by a lawyer in North Carolina that was successful even though the statute of limitations had passed before the lawsuit was filed.; May 18, 2022 at 12:22 PM
Prince Humperdinck said...: Kenhyderal -- What is the basis of your understanding? What source(s) did you use to arrive this conclusion?; May 18, 2022 at 1:48 PM
kenhyderal said...: @ Anonymous 5-18-22 12:22 AM: As I said, "I am not sure how to research this" broad question. Are you saying this has never and can never happen? I infer from your question and your response that you say, " no it never has happened". Despite his ruling, Judge Sternlicht, a Cooper appointee, did say latitude should always be given to a Pro-Se litigant; something he obviously backed away from in the case of Crystal.; May 18, 2022 at 3:34 PM
kenhyderal said...: @ The Prince: 5-18-22 1:48--- By reading and making a layman's interpretation of the North Carolina Statute of Limitations statute. Correct me if you think my interpretation is wrong.; May 18, 2022 at 4:08 PM
kenhyderal supporter said...: A Durham Man,

You are taking kenhyderal’s statement out of context. He was only explaining why he has not assisted Dr. Harr with his lawsuits. We can all see that you are twisting his words.; May 19, 2022 at 4:31 AM
Anonymous said...: Lil Kenny -

You stated “The kind of errors that coulld be found in almost every suit filed by any Lawyyer, on behalf of a plaintif in the State, that is a member of the North Carolina Bar but can be reasdonably overlooked, allowing the suits to go on to court and be judged on the merits.”

“Almost every suit”? That’s a LOT of lawsuits, lil Kenny. Surely you have examples to back up this claim, right? Oh wait, you’re not sure how to research it.
Which means you never researched it,
You made the claim, prove it is true or admit you’re lying.; May 19, 2022 at 5:38 AM
Prince Humperdinck said...: Here is the text of NC General Statutes - Chapter 1 Article 5, which covers the statute of Limitations for libel and Slander:

§ 1-54. One year.
Within one year an action or proceeding -
(1) Repealed by Session Laws 1975, c. 252, s. 5.
(2) Upon a statute, for a penalty or forfeiture, where the action is given to the
State alone, or in whole or in part to the party aggrieved, or to a common
informer, except where the statute imposing it prescribes a different
limitation.
(3) For libel and slander.
(4) Against a public officer, for the escape of a prisoner arrested or
imprisoned on civil process.
(5) For the year's allowance of a surviving spouse or children.
(6) For a deficiency judgment on any debt, promissory note, bond or other
evidence of indebtedness after the foreclosure of a mortgage or deed of
trust on real estate securing such debt, promissory note, bond or other
evidence of indebtedness, which period of limitation above prescribed
commences with the date of the delivery of the deed pursuant to the
foreclosure sale: Provided, however, that if an action on the debt, note,
bond or other evidence of indebtedness secured would be earlier barred
by the expiration of the remainder of any other period of limitation
prescribed by this subchapter, that limitation shall govern.
(7) Repealed by Session Laws 1971, c. 939, s. 2.
(7a) For recovery of damages under Article 1A of Chapter 18B of the General
Statutes.
(8) As provided in G.S. 105-377, to contest the validity of title to real
property acquired in any tax foreclosure action or to reopen or set aside
the judgment in any tax foreclosure action.
(9) As provided in Article 14 of Chapter 126 of the General Statutes, entitled
"Protection for Reporting Improper Government Activities".
(10) Actions contesting the validity of any zoning or unified development
ordinance or any provision thereof adopted under Chapter 160D of the
General Statutes or other applicable law, other than an ordinance adopting
or amending a zoning map. Such an action accrues when the party
bringing such action first has standing to challenge the ordinance;
provided that, a challenge to an ordinance on the basis of an alleged defect
in the adoption process shall be brought within three years after the
adoption of the ordinance.
(11) No suit, action, or proceeding under G.S. 14-190.5A(g) shall be brought
or maintained against any person unless such suit, action, or proceeding
is commenced within one year after the initial discovery of the disclosure,
NC General Statutes - Chapter 1 Article 5 9
but in no event may the action be commenced more than seven years from
the most recent disclosure of the private image.
(12) Repealed by Session Laws 2017-4, s. 1, effective March 30, 2017.
(C.C.P., s. 35; Code, s. 156; 1885, c. 96; Rev., s. 397; C.S., s. 443; 1933,
c. 529, s. 1; 1951, c. 837, s. 2; 1965, c. 9; 1969, c. 1001, s. 2; 1971, c. 12;
c. 939, s. 2; 1975, c. 252, s. 5; 1977, c. 886, s. 3; 1983, c. 435, s. 38; 1989,
c. 236, s. 4; 2001-175, s. 1; 2011-384, s. 1; 2015-250, s. 1.1; 2016-99, s.
2; 2017-4, s. 1; 2019-111, s. 2.5(a); 2020-3, s. 4.33(a); 2020-25, s. 51(a),
(b), (d).); May 19, 2022 at 9:06 AM
kenhyderal said...: @ Anonymous 5-19-22 5:38 What you're suggesting is, each and every lawsuit, filed on behalf of a plaintive, contains no technical errors. Errors that can be routinely overlooked as having no material consequences and need not demand dismissal. That is, unless you are looking for a reason to dismiss, fearing in court it would be successful. What I'm saying is, that common sense tells you that filings even by a Lawyer will likely contain some technical error but without judicial importance.; May 19, 2022 at 9:19 AM
Prince Humperdinck said...: Further documentation (https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/how-long-do-i-have-to-file-a-defamation-lawsuit-in-north-carolina.html)

"..special rules apply if, at the time the allegedly defamatory statement is made, the subject (the person defamed) is under the age of 18 or has been declared insane or legally incompetent. In those situations, since the potential plaintiff is considered under a "legal disability," the one-year "clock" typically won't start running until the period of disability ends (meaning the potential plaintiff turns 18 or is declared sane or competent). This rule can be found at North Carolina General Statutes section 1-17.

And if the person who is alleged to have made the defamatory statement leaves the state of North Carolina before the lawsuit can be filed, the period of his or her absence probably won't be counted as part of the one-year time limit for filing the defamation suit, according to North Carolina General Statutes section 1-21."

If the person who is alleged to have made the "defamatory statement" (the defendant) is incarcerated, the statute of limitations can also be suspended for the amount of time they(the defendant) are in gaol.

None of these appear to apply to Crystal Mangum

See how I cite the actual sources? Can you do the same?; May 19, 2022 at 12:12 PM
Anonymous said...: Lil Kenny -

"@ Anonymous 5-19-22 5:38 What you're suggesting is, each and every lawsuit, filed on behalf of a plaintive, contains no technical errors."

No, what I'm suggesting is that there are no instances of civil cases filed by a lawyer in North Carolina that were successful even though the statute of limitations had passed before the lawsuit was filed.

I asked SPECIFICALLY about this situation. You extrapolating this to mean that there are no technical errors in 'each and every lawsuit" is an example of you moving the boundaries of the discussion because you made a claim that you cannot prove.; May 19, 2022 at 12:19 PM
Anonymous said...: Wanna know why we haven't heard from Sid lately?

Mangum v. Oxygen Media, LLC et al

May 17: ORDER denying (Mangum's) Motion for Mediation Settlement Conference; granting (Oxygne Media's) Motion to Dismiss; denying (Mangum's) Motion for Summary Judgment; denying (Mangum's) Motion for Hearing. Signed by District Judge James C. Dever III on 5/17/2022.

May 18: JUDGMENT - IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that on September 27, 2021 plaintiff filed a Notice of Voluntary Dismissal as to defendant Jennifer Geisser. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, AND DECREED that the court GRANTS defendant's motion to dismiss and DISMISSES WITH PREJUDICE plaintiff's complaint. North Carolina's one-year statute of limitations bars plaintiff's defamation claim. The court DENIES as baseless plaintiff's motion for summary judgment, motion for a hearing, and motion for a mediated settlement conference.; May 19, 2022 at 12:39 PM
Anonymous said...: One more:

Mangum v. Kinsley et al

ORDER denying Motion to Disqualify Judge. Signed by District Judge James C. Dever III on 5/18/2022. Sent to Crystal Gail Mangum at North Carolina Correctional Institute for Women via US Mail.

Sid's the legal version of the 2017 Cleveland Browns....; May 19, 2022 at 12:49 PM
Anonymous said...: You can read the order in the Mangum v. Oxygen Media case here:

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nced.189467/gov.uscourts.nced.189467.30.0.pdf

Here's a nice little tidbit:

"At a.minimum, Harr' s years-long history of baseless federal litigation, his repeated refusals to heed court warnings, and his improper, unauthorized legal assistance to Mangum in this case in seeming violation of an injunction against doing so shows Harr's deep-seated disrespect for the law and the judicial system. The court is deeply concerned about Harr' s inappropriate intrusions into this lawsuit. Nonetheless, the court addresses the issues Harr presents in his letters to the court..."

You can read the judgment here:
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nced.189467/gov.uscourts.nced.189467.31.0.pdf; May 19, 2022 at 1:10 PM
Anonymous said...: One more point -- The court order in the Mangum v. Oxygen Media shows that Oxygen Media sought sanctions or a show-cause order against Sid for his conduct in this case (apparently in their 5 May response). the court denied the request without prejudice.

Since Sid cannot refile the same claim again in this court, it leaves open the opportunity for Oxygen Media to seek further relief if Sid continues his involvement in this case by taking it to another court.; May 19, 2022 at 1:28 PM
Prince Humperdinck said...: Even a stopped clock is correct more often than Sid, but it looks like Sid was right about one thing...

On April 30 he wrote:

"...Some legal action should be taking place soon."; May 19, 2022 at 1:48 PM
Anonymous said...: Excellent work, Sid. You should be proud of yourself.; May 19, 2022 at 4:41 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous Anonymous said...
Wanna know why we haven't heard from Sid lately?

Mangum v. Oxygen Media, LLC et al

May 17: ORDER denying (Mangum's) Motion for Mediation Settlement Conference; granting (Oxygne Media's) Motion to Dismiss; denying (Mangum's) Motion for Summary Judgment; denying (Mangum's) Motion for Hearing. Signed by District Judge James C. Dever III on 5/17/2022.

May 18: JUDGMENT - IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that on September 27, 2021 plaintiff filed a Notice of Voluntary Dismissal as to defendant Jennifer Geisser. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, AND DECREED that the court GRANTS defendant's motion to dismiss and DISMISSES WITH PREJUDICE plaintiff's complaint. North Carolina's one-year statute of limitations bars plaintiff's defamation claim. The court DENIES as baseless plaintiff's motion for summary judgment, motion for a hearing, and motion for a mediated settlement conference.

May 19, 2022 at 12:39 PM

Hey, Anony.

The reason I have not been commenting recently is because I've been busy.

Glad you were able to get a copy of the court documents and provide links.

Prior to learning of the Order by Judge Dever, I filed on behalf of Mangum a Reply today, the 19th. Maybe you can post a link to it, as well.; May 19, 2022 at 5:43 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous said...

Excellent work, Sid. You should be proud of yourself.

May 19, 2022 at 4:41 PM

Meaning? Don't know if you're being facetious, funny, pouring salt in the wound?

Regardless, I am proud of the work that I've done on Crystal's behalf. It's much more than any of the attorneys representing her have done.; May 19, 2022 at 5:47 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: Anonymous Anonymous said...
One more point -- The court order in the Mangum v. Oxygen Media shows that Oxygen Media sought sanctions or a show-cause order against Sid for his conduct in this case (apparently in their 5 May response). the court denied the request without prejudice.

Since Sid cannot refile the same claim again in this court, it leaves open the opportunity for Oxygen Media to seek further relief if Sid continues his involvement in this case by taking it to another court.

May 19, 2022 at 1:28 PM

Hey, Anony.

Of course I will take it to another court. Have you heard of the Fourth Circuit?; May 19, 2022 at 5:50 PM
kenhyderal said...: @ The Prince 5-19-22 9:06 That's the statutory limitation lengths not the the situations as codified where they can be extended.; May 19, 2022 at 7:10 PM
Prince Humperdinck said...: Don’t be surprised when you end up paying their legal fees. I guarantee they’ll be asking for relief and if they do, they will get it. The best option for you is to drop this now. This court order will follow you to any court you attempt to take this case to.; May 19, 2022 at 7:25 PM
Anonymous said...: A reply in the Oxygen Media case? The case is closed. Any reply you made after the 18th is going straight to the circular file.; May 19, 2022 at 7:28 PM
Anonymous said...: Indeed Sid. You’ve managed to win as many cases for Crystal Mangum as any of the attorneys representing her since the murder trial have done.

Definitely something you should be proud of.; May 19, 2022 at 7:34 PM
Prince Humperdinck said...: Read my 12:12 post, Ken.

I’ve shown you my resources, now show me yours.; May 19, 2022 at 9:15 PM
Anonymous said...: Sid and Crystal are pretty much judgment proof.

What’s going to happen is that, thanks to Sid and his silly lolsuits, Crystal Mangum will be recognized as a vexatious litigant (if she’s not already - I’m pretty sure Sid is) and she’ll be required before filing her lolsuits to obtain permission from the court and post security if she gets permission.

She’ll never be able to hire a real lawyer, because any real lawyer could be disbarred for participating in her legal Charlie Foxtrots.

No, the security amount will steadily increase along with the number of lolsuits filed, Sid and Crystal will eventually become dependent on the largesse of their friends and family to pay these securities, and in the end, nothing will change.

Crystal Mangum will eventually be released from prison. Her release will not be due to Sid’s advocacy, although he will undoubtedly claim responsibility.; May 20, 2022 at 5:33 AM
kenhyderal said...: @ The Prince re his 12:12 citation post:... If the Statute of Limitation can be extended if the defendant is incarecerated and in Crystal's case the defendant being a Media Corporation should this extension not also apply to an aggrieved plaintiff who is incarcerated? Enlighten me.; May 20, 2022 at 8:46 AM
Dr. Caligari said...: People who follow this blog know that I have long warned Dr. Harr that he could face adverse consequences for his unauthorized practice of law in violation of the injunction against him.

Dr. Harr, I am not your lawyer, but you need to seek legal representation.; May 20, 2022 at 8:50 AM
Prince Humperdinck said...: "legal Charlie Foxtrots"

Probably the most accurate description of all of Sid's legal activities to date.

Thank you, Anonymous @ May 20, 2022 at 5:33 AM; May 20, 2022 at 12:40 PM
kenhyderal said...: @ The Prince 5-20-22 5:33 AM :-- The majority of African American citizens think that euphemistic adjective better describes the North Carolina Justice System than it does Dr. Harr's valiant efforts to see justice done.; May 20, 2022 at 12:59 PM
Prince Humperdinck said...: The rules for the statute of limitations mean what they state, and nothing more. I see nothing about the plaintiff getting an extension for being in prison.

Those are the NC Statutes I found. I’m willing to admit I’m wrong, just provide a link to your sources and I’ll review them.; May 20, 2022 at 2:58 PM
Prince Humperdinck said...: I’ll note that the court doesn’t agree with your interpretations of the statute of limitations, either. I’m sure Sid took your argument to court in the response he filed after the lawsuit was dismissed.

Yet another example of “Harr's deep-seated disrespect for the law and the judicial system” and his “inappropriate intrusions into this lawsuit.”; May 20, 2022 at 3:19 PM
Anonymous said...: Sid,

Beware, it appears the hammer is about to drop.; May 20, 2022 at 3:27 PM
Attorney S. Powell said...: Sid,

Call my office for an appointment; May 21, 2022 at 8:39 AM
kenhyderal supporter said...: Dr. Harr,

Before you pay money to a lawyer, you should ask kenhyderal for his advice. kenhyderal will be able to evaluate your potential liability.; May 21, 2022 at 3:17 PM
kenhyderal said...: @ The Prince See North Carolina General Statutes section 1-17; May 21, 2022 at 4:42 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

Since you admitted that you have no expertise in legal matters, why are you wasting your time posting comments on the statute of limitations?; May 21, 2022 at 5:26 PM
Prince Humperdinck said...: You should try reading North Carolina General Statutes section 1-17. It does not state what you claim it does.

I can only guess that you came to your conclusion based on the following statement:

“ a1) For those persons under a disability on January 1, 1976, as a result of being imprisoned on a criminal charge, or in execution under sentence for a criminal offense, the statute of limitations shall commence to run and no longer be tolled from January 1, 1976.”

If so, please enlighten us how this applies to Crystal Mangum.; May 21, 2022 at 6:32 PM
kenhyderal said...: @ Anonymous 5-21-22 5:26 PM Despite my lack of qualifications, shared by 99 % of the people, the Justice System is meant to serve, I am of the opinion that in Crystal's case the Statute of Limitations should be extended as Judge Sternlicht previously opined, given her action is a Pro-Se one and also because of her legal disability due to her incarceration. I see in the sister State of South Carolina this is listed as grounds for an extension.; May 21, 2022 at 6:45 PM
A Durham Man said...: Kenny,

What would the result be under Canadian law?; May 22, 2022 at 5:14 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

You did not answer my question. How does posting comments at this blog advance your belief that the Judicial System is meant to serve?; May 22, 2022 at 5:19 AM
dhall said...: I see. In your opinion, Crystal Mangum deserves special treatment by the legal system in North Carolina.

And no, being in prison is not grounds for tolling the statute of limitations in South Carolina. If you’re going to make such claims, provide your sources.; May 22, 2022 at 5:38 AM
kenhyderal said...: @ dHALL : "Under South Carolina law, except in cases of medical malpractice, a minor has one year from the date of his or her eighteenth birthday to file suit. For medical malpractice actions, the statute of limitations may not be tolled more than seven years after the date of the act or omission giving rise to the claim, or one year after the minor's eighteenth birthday, whichever is less. For persons under legal disability such as mental incompetence, the statute of limitations runs from the removal of the disability, with a maximum toll of five years." Aaron Larson Expert Law. Being incarcerated is defines as a legal liability in North Carolina; May 22, 2022 at 9:01 AM
kenhyderal said...: @ A Durham Man Being a non citizen all I can really do is speak out to North Carolina Citizens hoping they will act; May 22, 2022 at 9:04 AM
A Durham Man said...: Kenny,

Your post at 9:04 makes no sense. I asked you to explain how Canadian law would apply in this case.; May 22, 2022 at 3:04 PM
dhall said...: Kenhyderal- This is:

1) For minors;

2) For “persons under legal disability such as mental incompetence”

3) For South Carolina

As I stated, being in prison is not grounds for tolling the statute of limitations in South Carolina. What you’ve posted here does not prove what you claim it does.

In response to “Prince Humperdinck” you wrote that your resource for statute of limitations information was North Carolina’s General Statutes section 1-17.

This statute states:
“ For the purpose of this section, a person is under a disability if the person meets one or more of the following conditions:
(1) The person is within the age of 18 years.
(2) The person is insane.
(3) The person is incompetent as defined in G.S. 35A-1101(7) or (8).
(a1) For those persons under a disability on January 1, 1976, as a result of being imprisoned on a criminal charge, or in execution under sentence for a criminal offense, the statute of limitations shall commence to run and no longer be tolled from January 1, 1976.”

This statute also does not identify incarceration as a “legal disability” (not liability).

Have you asked Dr. Caligari what is considered a “legal disability”? That seems to me a much more prudent decision than simply making up your own definition or citing a resource that does not state what you claim; May 22, 2022 at 4:11 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

You should save yourself from further embarrassment and stop posting about the statute of limitations issues.; May 22, 2022 at 4:12 PM
Anonymous said...: News flash: Kenny used quotation marks in his post at 9:01.

Kenny, do you now understand what it means to plagiarize?; May 22, 2022 at 4:41 PM
kenhyderal said...: @ Dhall 4:12 PM 5--22-22 As you guessed I meant legal disability not liability Thanks for bringing this to my attention , I believe I understant what disability means Lets look at New York 's Civil Practice Law Rules as an example
"Under CPLR 208, the statute of limitations is tolled during a
disability due to imprisonment on a criminal charge or conviction for
a term less than for life.' In Ortiz v. LaVallee,2 a recent Second Circuit
decision, the court was confronted with the question of whether the
tolling provision was intended to apply even where a prisoner had
the legal capacity to bring an action while incarcerated. Plaintiff had
instituted this action under the Federal Civil Rights Act of 1871 Under CPLR 208 It was the contention of the state, that the applicability of CPLR
208 is limited to those situations where New York law would preclude
an imprisoned felon from initiating a suit, 6 and that the New York
"civil death" statute does not debar a state prisoner from suing under
the Federal Civil Rights Act. Thus, since plaintiff had the legal capacity
to bring the action while incarcerated, the toll should not be available.
Rather than adopt the seemingly tenable position of the state,
the court concluded that practical considerations mandated a literal
application of the tolling provision. The decision relied upon the
legislative intent as evidenced by an advisory committee report pertain-
ing to the adoption of CPLR 208. 7 The report alluded to the impeditive
difficulties which a prisoner would be confronted with upon attempting
to bring an action during incarceration. 8
Literal interpretation of CPLR 208 is certainly warranted in view
of the pragmatic considerations" St. John's Law Review 46:355 Perhaps Dr. Harr could cite this decision in his appeal; May 22, 2022 at 8:02 PM
kenhyderal said...: @ Anonymous 5-22-22 4:41 how does one plagiarize a statute or a known fact. If I post here that Washington was the first USA President is it necessary for me to reference The Encyclopedia that told me this. Plagiarism is when you pass somebody elses work as your own. P.S. my own original posts
of my opinions are never written in legalize.; May 22, 2022 at 8:14 PM
Anonymous said...: kenny didn't bother to read NYS CPLR section 208.

NYS CPLR section 208 does not toll the Statute of Limitations due to imprisonment.

Incarceration is not a disability that tolls the statute of limitations in NY. Anyone with a googler can confirm this by googling and reading NYS CPLR 208 or googling "CPLR 208 incarceration."; May 23, 2022 at 3:59 AM
dhall said...: CPLR 208 is specifically about tolling limitations for infants (and the insane). Recent amendments to CPLR 208, along with 214-g and 3403 are collectively known as the Child Victims Act.

Crystal Mangum is not an infant, nor can she be considered a Child Victim by anyone she is currently suing.

A modicum of research would have explained this to you.; May 23, 2022 at 5:35 AM
kenhyderal supporter said...: Right on kenhyderal. Your post at 8:02 reflects some of your best legal research to date and it should silence your critics and the other naysayers.

When Dr. Harr appeals the Oxygen Media decision, I am certain he will rely heavily on your research.; May 23, 2022 at 5:43 AM
Prince Humperdinck said...: You’ve now claimed that NC, SC, and NY statutes all toll the statute of limitations for those in gaol when in fact they do not.

It certainly appears that you are randomly googling phrases and copying the nearest match without bothering to check any details.

Perhaps you’re assisting Sid more than we know, as that seems to be his approach (when he bothers to cite actual case law).

Why not check Canadian (or Ugandan, since you’re an Idi Amin fanboi) law next? I’m sure that will be just as helpful as anything else you’ve done on this blog.; May 23, 2022 at 6:00 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid and kenny's fixation on the statute of limitations problem (which is insurmountable) is puzzling.

Sid/Mangum are suing Oxygen for defamation for saying Mangum fatally stabbed Mr. Daye, even though Mangum was convicted, and is currently in prison for murder, FOR FATALLY STABBING MR. DAYE. That conviction has not been overturned, reversed or set aside.

Sid is trying to collaterally challenge Mangum's criminal conviction in a different court, thru a civil lawsuit against a party that is not in any way related to the criminal case. No court will permit Sid and Mangum to subvert justice in such a manner.

Mangum's criminal conviction is the final word on whether or not (and how) Mangum killed Mr. Daye. Try as they might, Sid/Mangum can't get around it by a civil suit against a media company for a subsequent story about the case. Oxygen's statement that Mangum fatally stabbed Mr. Daye was true when made and remains true now. So, even if there was a way around the Statute of Limitations (spoiler alert - there isn't), any court in which you bring such a silly lolsuit will take judicial notice of Mangum's conviction and toss your case out, post haste.

So, even if you look beyond the Statute of Limitations problem, the underlying case is devoid of any merit. In fact, I believe it is sanctionable as frivolous litigation. But what do I know?

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; May 23, 2022 at 7:08 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenny,

You should not have ignored my post on May 22 at 4:12 pm.; May 23, 2022 at 7:53 AM
kenhyderal said...: @ The Prince 5-23-22 : Prince, are you suggesting someone, incarcerated in North Carolina, does not qualify to toll the Statute of Limitations on the grounds of legal disability??; May 23, 2022 at 9:10 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenyderal -- At one time, victims of child sexual abuse in New York had from 1-5 years from the time they turned 18 to file a complaint to press criminal charges or file a civil claim for damages.

This was changed (as DHall pointed out) with the Child Victims Act, which allows the victims to file until they are 55 years old.

I think you're referencing a case that predates (by quite some time) the CVA, and allows the tolling of the statute of limitations if the victim of child sexual abuse is incarcerated before they turn 23 years old.

It has nothing to do with libel or defamation.; May 23, 2022 at 9:36 AM
Anonymous said...: Forgot to mention -- Kody Kinsley and DHHS had their Motion for Extension of Time approved. The parties have up to and including June 3, 2022 to hold their Rule 26(f) meeting. Dr. Harr, correct me if I'm wrong, but I think this is the 2nd motion for extension of time approved for Kinsley and DHHS.; May 23, 2022 at 10:43 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid -- What have you been busy doing? Another pointless video? Playing with your spoiled cat Adonis?

Elucidate us.; May 23, 2022 at 11:50 AM
Anonymous said...: Something Sid left out of his video From judge Sternlicht (via motions hearing transcript):

"Ms. Mangum, I would add the later happenings whatever they were, don't reset the statute of limitations, and they also don't, under the law, require the media to make any additional reporting. That's just not something the law requires. it's not something that I, as a judge, can require them to do, either."

This is why Sid/Crystal lost both the WRAL and Oxygen Media lawsuits. There's NOTHING about Crystal Mangum's incarceration or Dr. Wecht's opinion piece that reset the statute of limitations.

Stop trying to argue that there is.; May 23, 2022 at 12:35 PM
Anonymous said...: Leave Kenny alooone!

He's endeavoring to improve the reputation of his superior intelligence.; May 23, 2022 at 1:48 PM
Anonymous said...: It took some digging, but DHall's picture is an OLD picture that Sid made during the time he was suing Duke -- It's David (wearing a J4N shirt) battling Goliath (with the Duke Blue Devil on his shield).

Sid do you take requests? I'll sign up for a blogger account if you make me a picture of David (wearing a St. Peter's Peacocks shirt) battling Goliath (with the UK Wildcats logo on his shield)...; May 23, 2022 at 2:19 PM
Anonymous said...: Hey Sid -- While I was trying to figure out Dhall's avatar(? Is that what the kids call it these days?), I came across your http://justice4nifong.com/ website.

Why are you complaining about being an army of one? There's @ 30 people on your committee. Farm some of this sh*t out. It'll give you more time to spend with your spoiled cat Adonis.; May 23, 2022 at 2:26 PM
kenhyderal said...: Dr. Harr, did my posts, replying to Dhall 5:35AM and The Prince 6:00AM, go astray?; May 23, 2022 at 7:20 PM
A Durham Man said...: Kenny,

It is likely that Sid applied the kenhyderal supporter doctrine and refused to post your comments because they are frivolous and lack serious intent.; May 24, 2022 at 4:16 AM
Prince Humperdinck said...: “ @ The Prince 5-23-22 : Prince, are you suggesting someone, incarcerated in North Carolina, does not qualify to toll the Statute of Limitations on the grounds of legal disability??”

I’m saying that being in gaol is not itself a legal disability. The legal disabilities that can toll the statute of limitations are defined, as you yourself have identified.; May 24, 2022 at 5:43 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid isn’t gonna be happy when he’s not allowed to even attend that meeting. They aren’t open to the public; May 24, 2022 at 1:03 PM
kenhyderal said...: @ The Prince 5-24-22 5:43 But, it seems from my reading the NY Court said it was........Quote; "208 is limited to those situations where New York law would preclude
an imprisoned felon from initiating a suit, 6 and that the New York
"civil death" statute does not debar a state prisoner from suing under
the Federal Civil Rights Act. Thus, since plaintiff had the legal capacity
to bring the action while incarcerated, the toll should not be available.
Rather than adopt the seemingly tenable position of the state,
the court concluded that practical considerations mandated a literal
application of the tolling provision. The decision relied upon the
legislative intent as evidenced by an advisory committee report pertain-
ing to the adoption of CPLR 208. 7 The report alluded to the impeditive
difficulties which a prisoner would be confronted with upon attempting
to bring an action during incarceration"; May 24, 2022 at 4:48 PM
Prince Humperdinck said...: We’re talking about:

North Carolina.

Libel and defamation.

As has been explained to you, New York CPLR 208 is specifically about child sexual abuse.; May 25, 2022 at 4:48 AM
dhall said...: Kenhyderal- You asked:

“ Prince, are you suggesting someone, incarcerated in North Carolina, does not qualify to toll the Statute of Limitations on the grounds of legal disability??”

You have posted that your resource for statute of limitations information was North Carolina’s General Statutes section 1-17.

You asked specifically about North Carolina, and you’ve posted the North Carolina resources.

Why are you bringing up New York laws to question a response specifically for North Carolina?

Either post something that details how being in prison in North Carolina is considered a legal disability or admit that you were in error.

I’ll consider any post that you make after reading this that does not address “being in prison in North Carolina considered a legal disability” as an admission that you are wrong.

Further, any post you make that does not address this is an admission that the entire conversation was nothing more than you trolling the readers here.; May 25, 2022 at 5:28 AM
Nifong Supporter Supporter said...: Dr. Harr,

Will you appeal the decision in the Oxygen Media case?; May 25, 2022 at 5:43 AM
Prince Humperdinck said...: Dr. Harr has stated that he will take this to the fourth circuit. which is (IIRC) a United States Court of Appeals.

It will, of course, fail for the same reasons it failed in the North Carolina Eastern District court.

If he does, it will be a complete waste of time and effort...but that's never stopped Sid before.; May 25, 2022 at 8:17 AM
Dr. Caligari said...: (a) Whatever New York or South Carolina say about tolling the statute of limitations has nothing to do with a case filed in North Carolina.

(b) Beyond that, Abe Froman is 100% correct min his analysis:

Mangum's criminal conviction is the final word on whether or not (and how) Mangum killed Mr. Daye. Try as they might, Sid/Mangum can't get around it by a civil suit against a media company for a subsequent story about the case. Oxygen's statement that Mangum fatally stabbed Mr. Daye was true when made and remains true now. So, even if there was a way around the Statute of Limitations (spoiler alert - there isn't), any court in which you bring such a silly lolsuit will take judicial notice of Mangum's conviction and toss your case out, post haste. So, even if you look beyond the Statute of Limitations problem, the underlying case is devoid of any merit.; May 25, 2022 at 9:12 AM
kenhyderal said...: dhall said : "I’ll consider any post that you make after reading this that does not address “being in prison in North Carolina considered a legal disability as an admission that you are wrong"-------- Yes, wrong in NC but when, tested in Court, in New York such an arguement lost because the intent of the Advisory Committee was taken into account by the Judge. Both the Advisory Committee and the Judge understood that otherwise it was unfair. Let's see how the 4th Circuit will rule as literalists or as intentionalists.; May 25, 2022 at 10:03 AM
kenhyderal said...: @ Dr. C re: the quote from Abe: Abe is dead wrong because the conviction is a wrongful conviction. Oxygens's statement that Crystal fatally stabbed Daye was untue when it was made period and that's the case even over and above her conviction. Cause of death, according to all records was and I quote, in sequence, 1. Elective removal from life support 2. Due to brain death. 3. Due to cerebral and cardiac anoxia. 4. Due to accidental errant esophageal intubation. 5. Due to treatment for impending delirium tremens 6. Due to acute alcohol withdrawal in a chronic alcoholic. All they needed to do and failed to do so was to check the known facts, available records, expert opinion and correct their libelous statement. A just ruling against them would help expose to the public Crystal's wrongful conviction.; May 25, 2022 at 10:30 AM
Anonymous said...: DHall -- Apparently you've been reading this blog for quite some time.

Of course Kenny's trolling the readers here. That's what he does.

You should know this by now.; May 25, 2022 at 10:56 AM
dhall said...: “ Yes, wrong in NC…”

You could have just stopped there. The rest doesn’t matter.

Thanks for admitting you’re wrong, though.; May 25, 2022 at 12:12 PM
Prince Humperdinck said...: "Abe is dead wrong because the conviction is a wrongful conviction."

Has her conviction been overturned? Has she been granted a pardon of innocence?

If not, her conviction still stands and Abe is correct.

From Mangum's appeal (highlights mine)
"To begin, our review of the record reveals that there was substantial evidence that defendant acted with the requisite malice to support a second degree murder verdict, particularly the fact that she used a five-inch knife blade to stab and kill Daye. See State v. Robbins, 309 N.C. 771, 775, 309 S.E.2d 188, 190 (1983) (“Second-degree murder is the unlawful killing of a human being with malice, but without premeditation and deliberation..."

The appeals court stated that Mangum stabbed and killed day. Oxygen Media's article was written well after the Appeals Court finding.

You keep confusing what you want with what is.

what you want doesn't matter.; May 25, 2022 at 12:26 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: " Of course Kenny's trolling the readers here. That's what he does" ----This, from a poster who hides behind anonymity; a place of concealment, for trolls here, who snipe at those fighting for justice.; May 25, 2022 at 1:47 PM
Anonymous said...: Kenny- Having a blogger account doesn’t mean you’re not anonymous. Do you know who “DHall” is? All we know about you is who you claim to be. I can create an account, call myself “Ken Edwards” and no one here would know who I really am.

At least Chuck had the guts to identify himself and give both you and Sid his contact info.; May 25, 2022 at 5:04 PM
kenhyderal said...: @ Anonymous 5-25-22 5:04------ Sure, but my Google Account predates my arrival on this blog. Dr.Harr certainly knows who I am and he has my contact information. I am wary of putting my information in public since when I was working with Kilgo, raising money for Crystal's bail, I had evidence Duke Lacrosse Apologists were looking into my background. We all saw how Kilgo took extraordinary steps to disappear and to remove all evidence of his efforts to discredit David Evans.; May 25, 2022 at 8:41 PM
Anonymous said...: I see- You’re anonymity is fine. It’s everyone else’s that’s the problem.

How convenient for you.

Keep hiding behind your pseudonymity, a place of concealment.

Troll.; May 26, 2022 at 4:57 AM
kenhyderal supporter said...: I can confirm that several of my friends and I were contacted by a private investigator who was looking for information regarding youthful indiscretions that kenhyderal committed when he was in Bremerton years ago. However, we all refused to cooperate.; May 26, 2022 at 5:36 AM
kenhyderal said...: @ Anonymous 5-26-22( Pot) I Kenneth D. Edwards (Kettle) am a long-time registered Google account holder. They have my e-mail, phone number and address as does Dr. Harr. My Google account pre-dates my registration on this blog. I was never sure why dhall wanted to interact with me directly rather than through the J4N blog. Did he want to elicit me to convince Dr. Harr to let him do cataloging?; May 26, 2022 at 9:20 AM
Doogie Howser said...: kenhyderal,

You are a sly dog. For your sake, I hope that kenhyderal supporter doesn’t spill the beans.; May 26, 2022 at 10:12 AM
Anonymous said...: I think you're confusing Chuck with DHall...

Signed:

A long-time registered Google account holder.
(They have my e-mail, phone number and address); May 26, 2022 at 1:52 PM
kenhyderal said...: @ Anonymous 5-26-22 1:52 Oops yeah I meant Chuck; May 26, 2022 at 3:25 PM
Pseud Onymous said...: Where's Sid??

We haven't heard from him since the Oxygen Media case was dismissed and his motion to disqualify the judge in the Kinsley/DHHS case was denied.

He's (to date) been approving comments, so he's still alive. Surely the bad news hasn't caused him to go into hiding....

Signed:

Also a long-time registered Google account holder.; May 27, 2022 at 12:52 PM
Nifong Supporter Supporter said...: I believe Dr. Harr has been busy working on part 4 of his shar-video. I look forward to watching it.; May 28, 2022 at 5:07 AM
Harr Supporter said...: Dr. Harr,

Are you preparing your appeal of the Oxygen Media decision? Will you be citing in your filing the New York statute of limitations that kenhyderal discovered in his research?; May 29, 2022 at 5:36 AM
kenhyderal supporter said...: Dr. Harr,

It appears that the New York law that kenhyderal found could be a game changer in your litigation.; May 29, 2022 at 7:54 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid,

If you cite kenny's research, you should note that his source is a 1971 Law Review article talking about an even older regarding a section of the law that no longer exists. In the half century since that article was published, NYS law has been changed and incarceration of the plaintiff no longer tolls the statute of limitations in NY.

In other words, kenny's argument is based on shoddy research, entirely without merit and incredibly dishonest. Plus it's completely irrelevant. NYS's Statute of Limitations - as it exists now or existed in the 1960's and 70's - has nothing to do with the Oxygen Media case.

Consider yourself elucified.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; May 29, 2022 at 8:03 AM
kenhyderal supporter said...: Dr. Harr,

Ignore Abe Froman’s comment. He is relying on minor legal technicalities in his attempt to discredit kenhyderal’s careful research. As kenhyderal has noted many times in his posts, judges have a duty to assist pro se litigants so that they have an opportunity to obtain justice.; May 29, 2022 at 9:32 AM
kenhyderal said...: @ Abe: Just because I don't have any expertise in legal matters, case law research or how to interpret and apply precedent doesn't make me dishonest. I've become jaded because I've seen the way case law is used to justify decisions that seem unjust. For example the imperfectly applied Welsh precedent in Crystal's case. Ordinary people use common sense and the principle, behind the NY decision as to legal disability, that the intent of advisory committee should be taken into account, makes common sense, as does their report which " alluded to the impeditive difficulties which a prisoner would be confronted with upon attempting to bring an action during incarceration". Can you elucidate me as to why that case would not be a precedent but the Welsh case is, without resorting to ad hominem attacks?; May 29, 2022 at 11:57 AM
Nifong Supporter Supporter said...: Abe,

Keep in mind that Dr. Harr has no access to a law library, which is extremely unfair and limits his ability to represent Crystal as a lay advocate. It certainly is not reasonable to expect Dr. Harr to use the library at Duke law school and run the risk of being kidnapped again by Duke. Therefore, I believe that the appeals court will allow Dr. Harr to rely upon the 1971 law review article in his appeal, since it is available on the internet.; May 29, 2022 at 2:24 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: HEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP!
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENTS !!!

Apologies for not commenting sooner and more frequently, but as most all of you are aware, I have been extremely busy.

Shar-video Part Four of Four has been written, narrated, and the soundtrack applied. What remains is the placement of images, music, and sound-effects. I hope to have it posted by the end of the week.

In the meantime I am trying to work on Mangum's Oxygen case in which there will definitely be an appeal to the Fourth Circuit; the appeal to the NC Court of Appeals in the WRAL-5 News libel/defamation lawsuit has the Record on Appeal filed, Mangum's Appeal Brief filed, and is awaiting a Response by the defendants. Although Judge Dever denied the motion to disqualify in Mangum's case against Kinsley/DHHS, the discovery process is taking place currently.

Finally, there's a super secret project underway that I plan to launch in the near future. You'll know about it when it happens.

Now, regarding one of your comments:
RE: The New York Statute of limitations - I haven't had the time to study it. It's on the back burner as the Oxygen case's Notice of Appeal hasn't yet been filed.

A busy week ahead. I will try to keep up with the posting of comments, and will probably next comment in about a week from today.

As you were.; May 29, 2022 at 3:13 PM
Anonymous said...: Sid,

When will the super secret project result in Crystal’s release?; May 29, 2022 at 3:29 PM
Anonymous said...: Welsh precedent? Is that an act of Senedd Cymru?

State v. Welch is a North Carolina case . Theondray Ozell Welch was indicted for the stabbing death of Marina Lemmons.

Then there’s this:
“It is sufficient that the defendant's act in shooting the deceased was a contributing factor which in combination with the subsequent acts of the doctor in treatment proximately caused the death. Even if the doctor was negligent, the defendant will not escape liability.” State v. Jones, 290 N.C. 292, 225 S.E.2d 549 (1976)

Then there’s State v. Holsclaw (42 N.C. App. 696) where the defendant contended that the sole cause of death was the termination of life support systems by medical authorities rather than the shooting of deceased by defendant.

You see what they all have in common, Lil Ken?

What state do you think they’re referring to in “State v.”? New York?; May 29, 2022 at 6:05 PM
kenhyderal said...: @ Anonymous 5-29-22 : Camgymeriad sillafu ydoedd. I don't understand your question ("What state do you think they’re referring to in “State v.”? New York?") Have you found a "gotcha" post where I inadvertatly used that expression? I note that in elucidating me as to Welch and Holsclaw Precidents, like Abe, you can't resist thowing out a perjorative, like "Lil"; May 29, 2022 at 7:34 PM
Anonymous said...: The "State" in State v. Welch and State v. Holsclaw is North Carolina. The decisions in those cases are from the highest court in NC and are how the law is applied in NC today.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL; May 30, 2022 at 5:05 AM
Anonymous said...: Of course you don’t understand the question, Lil Kenny…..

You don't have any expertise in legal matters, case law research or how to interpret and apply precedent.

By all means, Sid should use your research.

You are endeavoring to improve the reputation of your superior intelligence, after all.; May 30, 2022 at 5:18 AM
Anonymous said...: kenny,

Conversely, the authority you cited to is a 50 year old article about an even older case about a provision of the NYS Statute of Limitations that no longer exists. Scholarly articles represent the opinion of the writer. They do not have the force of law (unlike statutes and binding precedent from higher courts).

Beyond that, the article does not purport to address the law in NC. It is about an old NYS law. The law it talks about isn't even the law in NY anymore. Therefore, the article is not relevant in any way, shape or form to Mangum's case or anything else, because it is talking about a law from another state that DOESN'T EXIST. You referred to that article without making any effort to read or understand it, simply because it contained key words you thought helped you. That's just sloppy and lazy research and intellectually dishonest.

The precedent in Welch and Holdsclaw, on the other hand, are still valid and represent the law in North Carolina at the time of Mr. Daye's murder and Mangum's trial and conviction. It is the law in North Carolina to this day. Courts in NC are bound to follow it.

To "ordinary people" Mangum's case makes perfect sense. She stabbed Mr. Daye and he died. Had she not stabbed him he would be alive. Therefore, but for the stabbing, Mr. Daye would still be living. Ergo, the stabbing was a proximate cause of Mr. Daye's death. The law supports this common sense conclusion. There are but a handful of people in the world today who disagree with this assessment and almost all of them are named Sid, kenny or Mangum.

The reason there is no support for Mangum beyond you and Sid is that the public doesn't see her conviction and sentence as unjust. It's not due to lack of effort by Sid. He's taken Mangum's case to everyone - media, judges, lawyers, politicians, various legal and social justice organizations and causes, and the public at large. They have uniformly rejected his characterizations of Mangum and the facts and law of the case.

Abe Froman
Chicago, IL.; May 30, 2022 at 7:23 AM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous said: The decisions in those cases( Welch and Holsclaw) are from the highest court in NC and are how the law is applied in NC-------- Yes, but inappropriately applying them to Crystal's case with totally different facts, in order to come up with a desired outcome, was unfair. Judges and Juries should make decisions based on the unique facts of a case .Anything other is a cop-out. It's a construct designed to keep America the most lawyered nation in the world and shamefully the one with the most people incarcerated ; brutal dictatorships included.; May 30, 2022 at 9:08 AM
Anonymous said...: Right Kenny!

In Holsclaw the victim was shot and subsequently died of brain death and termination of the life support systems.

Reginald Daye was stabbed and subsequently died of brain death and termination of the life support systems.

Totally different facts.; May 30, 2022 at 11:12 AM
kenhyderal said...: @ Abe 5-30-22 7:23 Yeah Abe, it would make sense to ordinary people, like the Jury in Crystal's Trial, if they were not lied to and told by the Pathologist, who did the autopsy on Daye, telling them he died of complications to the stab wound and that was certainly not the case. The medical records show that, absolutely. This was confirmed by possibly the world's most eminent medico-legal expert named Dr. Cyril Wecht; although that was something Dr. Harr had said from the very beginning and I doubt if even you you have the temerity to contradict his clear report report that Daye's death was a accidental medical error. Again, here is where Welch/Holsclaw could come into play but Dr. Wecht shot that down, in his report, saying treatment for his acute alcohol withdrawal, with impending Delirium Tremens, potentially fatal, was a clear intervening cause. Again, I doubt anyone one could question his judgement as a medico-legal expert in this call, certainly not Nicholls or Roberts and given the whole story, the ordinary people of the jury would have found her not guilty of murder. Come on Abe, I know that you know that is true. Time to concede and join in the effort to correct this injustice; May 30, 2022 at 2:11 PM
Dr. Caligari said...: Kenhyderal,

Even if what you just said were true, the way to get a conviction reversed is not by bringing time-barred lawsuits against the media.

And Abe Froman's analysis of the law review article you quoted is exactly right.; May 31, 2022 at 9:43 AM
Anonymous said...: Wasn't Sid and Crystal getting married? I know COVID put those plans on hold, but there haven't been any restrictions or measures imposed by executive order for the general public since the end of July 2021.

Raleigh NC removed the mask requirements while inside buildings within city limits back in February, and Wake County has some of the highest vaccination rates in NC (I'm assuming both Sid and Crystal were COVID-19 vaccinated).

I don't see any specific procedural restrictions regarding marriage at NCCIW (I believe that's Crystal's current residence), other than the standard "marriage requests must be reviewed and approved by the facility head" in place at all NC Department of Corrections prisons.

What's the hold up Sid?; May 31, 2022 at 10:46 AM
kenhyderal said...: @ Dr. C. 31--5-22 9:43 AM : ---- The Governor and the AG, with full power to correct what has clearly been shown to be a miscarriage of justice, wont act for reasons political. The Media in NC fear Duke and refuse to cover it. The Legal profession in NC wont get involved again because of the powers that be. The victim and her supporters are indigent and unable to buy Justice in the broken Justice System. It's going to take the media to finally do their constitutional duty and inform the public. A win in the pro-se libel suit will force the media to cover it and then public opinion will shift from Crystal as a pariah to Crystal as a victim and force the politicians to act. All the AG would have to do is say, "new information that has come to light that require her to get a new trial".; May 31, 2022 at 10:49 AM
Anonymous said...: "It's going to take the media to finally do their constitutional duty and inform the public."

Are you referring to the Canadian Consitution?

In the US, press responsibility is not mandated by the Constitution -- its freedom is.

Crystal Mangum will never win a libel suit that has passed the NC Statute of Limitations. it is time to move on from that strategy.; May 31, 2022 at 11:24 AM
Anonymous said...: I'm sorry to see that you're indigent, lil Kenny.

You appear to have reliable internet access, so you can easily apply for social assistance.

IIRC, you have a mandatory three-week job search period before you can apply, though.

Good luck!; May 31, 2022 at 11:32 AM
Anonymous said...: I found the perfect wedding gift here.

Sid -- We'll need your address to get the gifts sent to you.; May 31, 2022 at 11:38 AM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous 5-31-22 11:24 said: "In the US, press responsibility is not mandated by the Constitution -- its freedom is" Yeah, but surely, along with that right comes responsibility to speak out against a known injustice " "without fear or favor".; May 31, 2022 at 1:40 PM
Anonymous said...: The press has the freedom to report on whatever they want. There’s nothing that can force the media to report on Crystal Mangum.
Continually filing frivolous lolsuits isn’t newsworthy.; June 1, 2022 at 4:31 AM
A Durham Man said...: Kenny,

Have you completed additional research regarding the NC statute of limitations that applies to Crystal’s claim against Oxygen Media? Or, are you recommending that Sid base his appeal on the repealed NY statute and the 1971 law review article?; June 1, 2022 at 4:38 AM
Anonymous said...: Uh-Oh Sid...
Remember when the Wake County Superior Court granted the State Bar's order enjoining you from practicing law?

"The Clerk of Court is sending a copy of the Mangum v. Oxygen Media order to the Honorable Paul Ridgeway, the Senior Resident Superior Court Judge in Wake County Superior Court for any further proceedings in that court."

Source

Please be sure to elucidate us on the outcome of this action.; June 1, 2022 at 8:21 AM
kenhyderal supporter said...: A Durham Man,

Keep in mind that Dr. Harr’s legal adversaries monitor this blog closely. For this reason, kenhyderal has never disclosed his secret plans for winning a new trial for Crystal, along with compensation from the state.

There is little doubt that the attorneys for Oxygen Media check this blog regularly. Therefore, kenhyderal must be discreet in posting his recommendations to Dr. Harr.; June 1, 2022 at 9:52 AM
Anonymous said...: Since Sid appears to be loathe to post this comment, I'll keep submitting it until he does.

If you recall, on Feb 2013 there was an order by Wake County Superior Court enjoining Sid from practicing law.

It hasn't been mentioned on this blog, but in addition to granting Oxygen Media's motion to dismiss, the order states that "The Clerk of Court shall send a copy of this order to the Honorable Paul Ridgeway, the Senior Resident Superior Court Judge in Wake County Superior Court for any further proceedings in that court."

Source

Don't be surprised if Sid faces some significant repercussions for his continued legal work on Crystal's behalf.

Sid -- Please keep us elucidated on this situation.; June 1, 2022 at 11:13 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid -- Feel free to remove my comment @ June 1, 2022 at 11:13 AM; June 1, 2022 at 12:36 PM
kenhyderal said...: Anonymous 6-1-22 4:31 AM said: The press has the freedom to report on whatever they want. There’s nothing that can force the media to report on Crystal Mangum.
Continually filing frivolous lolsuits isn’t newsworthy----------. It would be newsworthy if Crystal prevailed in Court which would surely happen if the system ever let it proceed to a court case.; June 1, 2022 at 8:32 PM
Anonymous said...: If Crystal wants to prevail in court, she should ask Sid to stop filing his numerous briefs and pleadings full of irrelevant material and devoid of any reasonable legal argument.

It appears that Wake County Superior Court is going to step in and put a halt to Sid’s legal actions on her behalf, so she needs to identify an alternative strategy anyway.

You’ve shown incredible legal research acumen, perhaps you’ll step in once Sid’s legal activities for Crystal have been stopped.; June 2, 2022 at 5:06 AM
Harr Supporter said...: Dr. Harr,

When will we learn more about your super secret project?; June 2, 2022 at 5:54 AM
Anonymous said...: Sid -- Put down your spoiled cat Adonis and respond to some of these questions!

What's going on with the wedding?

What's going on with Wake County Superior court now that judge Devers has sent the Mangum v. Oxygen Media court order to them? Have you heard anything?

Given that this order is going to Wake County, do you still plan to appeal the Oxygen Media case to the 4th Circuit?

Will this affect the WRAL appeal?

Mangum and Kinsley/DHHS are supposed to have their Rule 26(f) meeting today. Are you there for that? How did it go?; June 3, 2022 at 9:14 AM
Nifong Supporter Supporter said...: Dr. Harr,

While you are answering questions, please tell us whether you plan to use kenhyderal’s research on the statute of limitations issue when you file your appeal in the Oxygen Media case.; June 3, 2022 at 5:52 PM
Anonymous said...: Where are you, Sid? You claim to be an army of one, but you really are an army of zero.; June 4, 2022 at 3:04 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: HEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP!
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT!!

Just want to take time to respond to a few of the comments made over the past week.

(1) What's the latest on my wedding plans with Crystal?
As you know, Crystal and I had much of the paperwork required for a prison wedding in the Spring of 2020, but the COVID-19 pandemic and the lockdown put a halt to all wedding plans. The prison chaplain could only explain that he had been informed not to proceed further with any work on weddings.

Several months ago, after restrictions had been lightened or lifted, and Crystal was in a Raleigh prison, she inquired about taking steps to see about having a prison wedding, and she was told it would take about a year before work on it could be done.

To me it seemed obvious that the prison was merely putting up road-blocks in the way of our marriage, so we decided not to make any more effort while she was incarcerated... especially with the likelihood that she will be released soon.

(2) What's happened since Judge Dever sent a copy of his order to the Wake Superior Court judge?
I haven't heard anything from the Courts about complaints of my giving legal assistance to Crystal Mangum... and I don't expect to. The State Bar, as well as many in the courts, are aware of the gross ineffectiveness of counsel that Mangum had received and they are qware that Crystal and I are engaged, ergo, I don't think anyone will take umbrage at my involvement under the circumstances.

(3) Do I still plan to appeal Dever's ruling to the Fourth Circuit?
On Friday, June 3, 2022, I filed a Notice of Appeal for the Fourth Circuit... so the answer is yes.

(4) What is the status of the Rule 26(f) meeting in Mangum v. DHHS?
The meeting took place last week, and the Discovery Plan phase should be moving along well.

(5) Do I plan to use kenhyderal's research on the statute of limitations in the appeal to the Fourth Circuit in the DHHS case?
Really haven't had time to study it... too busy working on my super secret project... am days behind schedule already. As far as the Fourth Circuit appeal goes it will probably most likely concentrate on procedural issues.

(6) When will we learn about the super secret project?
The people in the general public will probably learn about the super secret project sometime this month when it goes into effect.

(7) What is your spoiled cat Adonis up to?
Yes, he's extremely spoiled. Still making demands of me, including waking me up between 1:00 a.m. and 2:30 a.m. in order to feed him some tuna. Next weekend I will try to have a link to photos of my beloved feline.

As you were.; June 4, 2022 at 6:07 PM
Anonymous said...: “ To me it seemed obvious that the prison was merely putting up road-blocks in the way of our marriage, so we decided not to make any more effort while she was incarcerated”

Not buying it, Sid…The only “road-block” is that marriage requests must be reviewed and approved by the facility head. That’s it.

“…she inquired about taking steps to see about having a prison wedding, and she was told it would take about a year before work on it could be done.”

Did you inquire about it? If not, why not? Everyone on this blog has seen examples of Crystal’s truthfulness. Even you.

“… so we decided not to make any more effort while she was incarcerated... especially with the likelihood that she will be released soon.”.

Really? We?

Keep dreaming, pal. You’re about as effective now getting Mangum released as you were in 2014.; June 5, 2022 at 2:51 PM
kenhyderal supporter said...: Dr. Harr,

Is it a violation of the kenhyderal supporter doctrine to refer to kenhyderal as “lil Kenny?”; June 5, 2022 at 5:00 PM
Anonymous said...: Sid --
Did you attend the Rule 26(f) meeting?

I know this meeting has to do with discovery (including the discovery of electronically stored information).

Do you know if the contents of this Blog will be part of that discovery? You've been hostile toward the DHHS and previous CMEs. Do you think that may have some impact on discovery?; June 6, 2022 at 8:16 AM
Anonymous said...: "The kenhyderal supporter doctrine...will exclude the posting of comments submitted mainly to mock and ridicule without any serious intent (those posts that refer to Kenhyderal as a "master debater, a master baster", etc).

While the original posts referring to Kenhyderal as "lil Kenny" we very much similar to those, some of the more recent comments (from May 19, 2022 on) do appear to have either serious intent or express concern for Kenyderal.

MOO, I think those are not violating the ""The kenhyderal supporter doctrine".; June 6, 2022 at 3:29 PM
kenhyderal supporter said...: Dr. Harr,

Why won’t you release my response to the post at 3:29?; June 8, 2022 at 9:49 AM
Anonymous said...: Maybe it violated the kenhyderal Supporter Doctrine?; June 8, 2022 at 2:09 PM
Florida Man said...: Can someone tell me how to contact kenhyderal?; June 8, 2022 at 5:56 PM
kenhyderal said...: @ A Florida Man 6-8-22 5:56PM: Post here and I will respond.; June 9, 2022 at 9:11 AM
Florida Man said...: kenhyderal,

A friend of mine asked me to contact you. He told me that you know him as “Kilgo.” My friend would like to share information with you about a party held in 2006 at the Duke lacrosse house. However, he is concerned that, if he cooperates with you, he will become a target for lawsuits filed by the lacrosse players and members of their families.

Do you have a suggestion as to how my friend can proceed without exposing himself to liability?; June 10, 2022 at 10:06 AM
kenhyderal said...: Ask your friend to contact me . If he still knows my e-mail; it is, unlike his, unchanged. If he does not he can e-mail me c/o Dr. Harr who will forward it to me. As a warning I do have a foolproof way to determine if he is the genuine person. There have been a multitude of mischief makers who have purported to be him. One question for you; are you, perhaps, the Player-friend who told Kilgo what he saw?; June 11, 2022 at 10:00 AM
Florida Man said...: kenhyderal,

You have failed to address my friend’s concern about liability. What assurance can you provide that you will not use the information in a way that leads to my friend being sued?

I am not a lacrosse player.; June 11, 2022 at 3:52 PM
Nifong Supporter said...: HEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP!
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENTS!!

This past week has been a busy one. I completed my Super Secret Project, and after that I began to continue work on Part Four of the present shar-video... which is much shorter than the previous Part Three. Currently I am applying images to the soundtrack and should be completed with that in about four or five days. After that I will put all segments together, and it should be ready to upload and to place on disks.

All printing fees have been paid for the NC Court of Appeals appeal against WRAL-5 News... and the Record on Appeal has been accepted by the court and Mangum's brief has been filed.

Regarding the federal appeal on the Oxygen case, the Notice on Appeal has been filed and the fees have been paid. Next, I believe, is to help Crystal draft a brief and file it with the Fourth Circuit in Richmond, VA.

The case involving DHHS is progressing with the Rule 26(f) meeting having been held over the phone with the Attorney General's Office and Ms. Mangum... work is progressing on the Discovery Plan.

Now to respond to a few comments:

(1) Anonymous Anonymous said...
Sid --
Did you attend the Rule 26(f) meeting? No... it was done over the phone between Mangum and the Attorney General's Office.

I know this meeting has to do with discovery (including the discovery of electronically stored information).

Do you know if the contents of this Blog will be part of that discovery? You've been hostile toward the DHHS and previous CMEs. Do you think that may have some impact on discovery?
As far as I know, there is no plan for the A.G.'s Office to utilize my blog site. The final Discovery Plan has not yet been filed. As regards hostility toward the DHHS and CMEs go, I don't know how you conclude that I've been hostile towards them. That's simply not true. Can you give me an example? To answer your question, I don't think that my blog site and its contents will have any impact on the proceedings because I don't think the A.G.O. will want to introduce them into evidence. How could it benefit them?

June 6, 2022 at 8:16 AM
Another question:
(2) Anonymous Anonymous said...
Where are you, Sid? You claim to be an army of one, but you really are an army of zero.
Anony, your comment makes no sense. An army needs to have at least one soldier. If there are no soldiers, then an army does not exist. Can we agree on that?

June 4, 2022 at 3:04 PM

As far as a prison wedding is concerned, there have been too many roadblocks put in place. Prison officials, the chaplain, etc. are not willing to work with us so, my attention is directed on getting Crystal out of prison so we can get married at that time rather than fighting to get married inside prison walls.

My spoiled cat Adonis is behaving himself, laying in his window hammock looking at the Raleigh city skyline. Will try to make sure and have photos of him by next Saturday.

As you were.; June 11, 2022 at 5:57 PM
kenhyderal said...: @ A Florida Man 6-11-22 3:52 PM What grounds would the Lacrosse Players and or their Families have to sue Kilgo if a Player, present at the party, told him he wittnessed a sexual assault on Crystal?; June 11, 2022 at 7:55 PM
Anonymous said...: 2014.
“ Insanity, denial, and delusion rule the NC Medical Examiner's Office”

Your words.

If I used the words “insane”, “delusional” to describe Kenhyderal or Crystal Mangum, would you allow it to be posted?; June 11, 2022 at 9:53 PM
Anonymous said...: Your words.

2014.

“NC Medical Examiner System:
Corrupt, racist, and unregulated”

2016.
“ The NC Medical Examiner's Office cannot be trusted!”

If I write this about Kenhyderal or Crystal Mangum, would you consider it hostile towards them? Would you allow it to be posted?; June 11, 2022 at 10:04 PM
Florida Man said...: kenhyderal,

My friend has posted statements about lacrosse players at this blog that some might consider to be defamatory. You have concluded that the statute of limitations does not apply to Crystal’s claims against Oxygen Media and my friend is concerned that the lacrosse players will rely upon your research to sue him.; June 12, 2022 at 5:46 AM
kenhyderal said...: @ A Florida Man 6-12-22 5;46 AM Totally facetious. Just as I suspected, another mischief maker who makes sport of the injustice and abuse that has been perpetrated on Crystal and on so many minorities in America. Get a life and stop hurting the vulnerable for your own sadistic pleasure.; June 12, 2022 at 8:01 AM
Anonymous said...: The Kilgo story is totally facetious and far more mischievous that Florida Man's poke at you. At least the troll posting as Kilgo had sense enough to disappear and delete all his posts when the truth came out.

What goes around comes around.

Abe Froman
Chcicago, IL; June 13, 2022 at 5:01 AM
Anonymous said...: Kenhyderal is insane, delusional, and cannot be trusted. He's corrupt and racist.; June 13, 2022 at 7:35 AM
Anonymous said...: Crystal Mangum is insane, delusional, and cannot be trusted. He's corrupt and racist.; June 13, 2022 at 9:45 AM
Doogie Howser said...: Welcome back, Dr. A.; June 13, 2022 at 9:52 AM
kenhyderal said...: @ Abe 6-13-22 Kilgo was no troll and despite his irreverant and accusatory posts, he was a person of higher moral standards than the Duke Lacrosse apologists. His abrupt departure was a loss for this blog and for the unending search for American Justice. From what I know of him, I suspect it was not "sense" theat caused him to leave but fear of "the powers that be". Dr. King's message that Justice will eventually prevail is, hopefully, revealed in the famous quote, attributed to Churchill, " Americans will always do the right thing, only after they have tried everything else." Unfortunately, for those like Crystal who are denied justice, the arc is especially long; since most Americans seeme incapable of felicitously admitting their deficiencies and then, eventually, "do the right thing".; June 13, 2022 at 9:58 AM
Prince Humperdinck said...: The post @June 13, 2022 at 7:35 AM violates the Kenhyderal Supporter doctrine, which states:

"...[Sidney Harr] will exclude the posting of comments submitted mainly to mock and ridicule without any serious intent.

Apologizes to all, and mainly kenhyderal, for oversight about this matter on my behalf. And, in the future, if such objectionable comments slip past me, I will remove them..."

Why did you allow it to be posted when it violates a doctrine created on this blog entry?

Either enforce the doctrine or allow all posts submitted mainly to mock and ridicule without any serious intent.; June 13, 2022 at 12:28 PM
Anonymous said...: Abe Froman is sane, non-delusional, and can be trusted. He's neither corrupt or racist.; June 13, 2022 at 12:30 PM
dhall said...: @Prince Humperdinck -

Dr. Harr is allowing those "insane, delusional, and cannot be trusted..." comments to be posted to "prove" he hasn't been hostile toward the NC Medical Examiner's Office and it's CMEs.

If they're not hostile towards Kenhyderal, Crystal Mangum, and himself then it stands to reason that those comments aren't hostile toward anyone or any organization.

I am surprised he let the Crystal Mangum comment be posted.; June 14, 2022 at 8:40 AM
dhall said...: WRT the Mangum v. Oxygen Media appeal, an informal briefing order has been filed (which asks appellant to identify the issues and facts supporting the appeal). This document is due 06/30/2022.

Perhaps Dr. Harr will post it here. I'd be interested in seeing what Crystal Mangum and Dr. Harr define as "issues and facts supporting this appeal".

Dr. Harr has stated that they will be focusing on procedural issues -- but I don't see any issues with Court's procedure. To quote CallM3Chuck, "Not understanding the legal process is no reason to complain about it's performance."

So what other option are there? Will they use Kenhyderal's research on the statute of limitations?

Enquiring minds want to know.; June 14, 2022 at 9:40 AM

«Oldest ‹Older 1 – 200 of 201 Newer› Newest»

Monday, May 9, 2022

Judge's Desired Outcome in Ex Parte Hearing: Part Three

201 comments:

Facebook Badge

Subscribe!

Labels

Blog Archive

About Me