On Monday, July 15, 2024, when I went to the Office of Administrative Hearings to drop off a document, I first learned that on Tuesday, July 9th, Judge Nelson granted the Respondent DHHS' Motion for Summary Judgment... throwing a lifeline to the State to keep it from being embarrassed at a hearing. The move didn't surprise me, especially after striking Mangum's Response in Opposition of Respondent's Motion for Summary Judgment... effectively removing the motion I manually and timely filed for Ms. Mangum on July 1st.
So, the hearing scheduled for August 9th has been cancelled by the judge.
Anonymous said... Damn Sid. If you're not going to respond to any comments/questions or provide any updates, why not remove the need to have the comments moderated?
We can at least keep ourselves entertained while we're waiting for you to do something.
July 24, 2024 at 1:46 PM
Hey, Anony.
I haven't been responding because I've been extremely busy with the recent turn of events... although I wasn't surprised by the judge granting the State's Motion for Summary Judgment. Clearly, the State did not want to face Mangum... even through video conference from prison.
He's come to a dead end on lolsuits for CGM...There's no one left to file a lolsuit against, and CGM will lose this one.
Harr v. North Carolina Judicial Standards Commission will go nowhere.
So what next?
Here's an idea...NC is part Appalachian Mountains. VP nominee JD Vance wrote a book, "Hillbilly Elegy", that had a number of disparaging comments about Appalachians (especially men). As a bonus, I'm sure you could work in Mike Nifong, since he's a man.
As a Durhamanian, on the behalf of other Durhamanians, you should file a libel suit against JD Vance.
July 19, 2024 at 5:41 AM
Hey, Anony.
First, I live in Raleigh... have never lived in Durham.
I do not think you made a case for why I would have standing to file a lawsuit against J.D. Vance.
Dr. Harr -- We've been over this too many times. You're not a lawyer, and since you're not a co-petitioner in this contested case, your acts on Crystal Mangum's behalf are the embodiment of unauthorized practice of law.
Unauthorized practice of law is illegal. You know this.
If, in this contested case, the defendant committed an illegal activity in the process of creating and filing their motions, would you expect the judge to ignore it?
Crystal Mangum could have avoided Judge Nelson's decision simply by writing and filing her own motions.
It's her fault for letting you do this instead, and your fault for convincing her to let you do it.
Going forward, expect ANY legal assistance you perform on Crystal Mangum's behalf to be thrown out. This includes any motions you create or file, or any new lawsuits you attempt to bring on her behalf.
If Crystal Mangum ever does get a lawyer, expect them to exclude you from ANY lawyer-client discussion. Expect them to hold her to this same standard and not discuss any lawyer-client information with you.
You found out the judge granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment almost 2 weeks ago and you’re just now posting about it? What could you possibly have been doing since? Any legal actions you attempt on CGM’s behalf are going to get thrown out.
Former Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong was brutalized by the state and the media for his actions in doing the right thing in prosecuting the Duke Lacrosse case. Courageously prosecuting the Duke case in the true sense as a “minister of justice,” he butted heads with the Powers-That-Be who demanded that the charges against the student/athlete/partygoers be dropped. As a result, the state went through extraordinary means to make an example of Mr. Nifong… something which they did very well, as is evidenced by the fact that there is little if any movement to go against the P-T-B’s will by offering support to Ms. Mangum.
Tyrone Rugen You found out the judge granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment almost 2 weeks ago and you’re just now posting about it? What could you possibly have been doing since? Any legal actions you attempt on CGM’s behalf are going to get thrown out.
By all means, enlighten us. July 26, 2024 at 6:22 PM
Hey, Tyrone Rugen.
My first priority has always been to get Crystal out of prison... then to get her exonerated. Lower on my list is to make announcements on my blog site. It would take time to produce the blog that I wanted. As you know, the blog just posted Judge Nelson's Final Decision... sans notations and a dissection of the ruling.
Anyway, I have been active on several fronts when first learning about the Nelson ruling.
Dr. Harr -- Short of hiring Crystal Mangum a lawyer and stepping out of the way, there's nothing you can do from a legal standpoint that will get Crystal Mangum out of prison.
Your first priority has always been to keep Crystal incarcerated so she is a captive audience for your nonsense. All of your efforts are geared towards making her think you are trying to help, and increasing her isolation and victimization as they repeatedly fail, and you use that to convince her you are the only one who cares. It's typical abuser behavior.
If she were to ever read this blog, and see how many times you were told that your efforts were harmful, and were told what you can do to help, and yet you refused to do so, she'd be horrified.
I am grateful for all of your contributions to this blog site, even the ones that are nonsensical and unenlightened. Regardless, varying views make the site worthwhile and provides fodder upon which our brains can ingest.
@ Anonymous 7-30-24 8:12 AM : Your anonymous post is disgraceful and abusive. As an abettor and defender of the wrongful incarceration, easily provable to be so by anyone, of Crystal Mangum, by your rotten corrupt Cooper Government and it's disgraceful D.O.J, you resort to projection. by accusing those who genuinely seek to correct this unjust conviction and wrongful imprisonment of an innocent Black African American of, exactly what those charged with admisistering equal justice for all in NC, are themselves guilty of but for nefarious political reasons, resort to trick they can find to see that in this case justice will be denied and Crystal will be kept right where they want her. They correctly fear the truth will kill them politically.
According to NCDPS, inmate visitation is limited to no more than 1 visiting session per week.
So yeah -- Sid IS increasing CGM's isolation by taking her visitation time away from family and friends to deal with his nonsense.
I'm sure she only allows this to happen because Sid's convinced her that he can do something for her, when in fact he knows he can't.
And their so-called "engagement"? Fake. She's not going to marry a man old enough to be her grandfather -- especially one with as little income as Sid.
Sid's been told for years that his activities were unlawful practice of law. CGM has had a bevy of lawyers. They've all stopped any actions on her behalf because of Sid, and she can't get new lawyers because of him.
@ Tyrone 7-31-24 11:40 : Crystal, her Family and her friends are all appreciative of Dr. Harr. You know nothing of them and it's presumptive and mean-spirited of you to speculate about and put a negative interpretation on Crystal and Dr. Harr's relationship. Honi soit qui mal y pense .
CGM could be visiting with her family, instead of meeting with Sid so he can encourage her to go along with his worthless lolsuits.
Shame on the one who doesn't see something bad in Sid's actions. August 6, 2024 at 10:00 AM
Hey, Tyrone Rugen.
Don't understand your logic. You think it's better for me to do nothing rather than file lawsuits? The only problem with the lawsuits is that the judges are like Aileen Cannon... they're biased against Ms. Mangum. Especially in the contested case hearing.
dhall Dr. Harr -- What errors of fact did you find in the "Undisputed facts" section? What errors in the "conclusions of law" section?
Finally, did you read the statutes or case law referenced in this document? August 5, 2024 at 8:30 AM
Hey, dhall.
What I found problematic with the "undisputed facts" section is that Judge Nelson cherry-picked certain so-called facts as happened, but were not truthful. For example, an undisputed "fact" is that Dr. Nichols said the Daye died secondary to complications of a stab wound to the chest. Technically, this is undisputed, but the reality of the statement is false.
Also Judge Nelson omitted several significant undisputed facts such as that immediately after Daye's cardiac arrest his Glasgow Coma Score was three... the worst possible rating. Nelson never even mentions the esophageal intubation.
Under "conclusions of law," the most obvious problem is that Judge Nelson stated that there were no genuine issues of material difference. That is an absurd statement. There are significant differences of opinion regarding facts of the case which should exclude granting a motion for summary judgment against Mangum.
Also, what is misleading, if not actually false, is that Judge Nelson claimed that Ms. Mangum did not file a response to the State's Motion for Summary Judgment. Just because the judge did strike Mangum's Response to the State's Motion for Summary Judgment, does not really reflect the truth as a fifteen-page response was timely filed.
Keep in mind, the respondent filed for a Motion for Summary Judgment on June 21, 2024 out of shear desperation. The State did not want to go to trial. An impartial judge would have dismissed the motion for summary judgment and allowed the hearing to take place. Why not allow the hearing to proceed, which is what the contested case hearing in the NC Office of Administrative Hearings is supposed to do?
I did review some of the citations, i.e., Summey v. ..... Not particularly relevant to this case... for example, the Summey case did not have briefs and evidence struck from the record.
Will you appeal the decision of the Office of Administrative Hearings?
August 5, 2024 at 5:33 AM Hey, Nifong Double-Supporter.
Yes.
One question I have regards the filing deadline for the appeal. Ms. Mangum has thirty days by which to file an appeal from the time she is served the Final Decision on Summary Judgment. The Final Decision was filed on July 9, 2024, but Ms. Mangum signed receipt of the legal mail on July 25, 2024.
I tried to get clarification on the deadline for filing by questioning the law clerk, but was told that she could not give legal advice and that I should consult an attorney.
In your opinion, when should the deadline be for Mangum to file her appeal?
kenhyderal @ Nifong Supporter: Dear Dr. Harr: Did you receive my reply to Anonymous 8:12 AM on July 30th? July 31, 2024 at 7:13 PM
Hey, kenhyderal.
Recently have been busy, and therefore haven't been checking for comments as frequently in the past. I believe I published your response. Will try to check for comments more frequently.
Read the second paragraph in the section of the opinion regarding appeals and then read the certificate of service. If you have any other questions, you should ask Kenny.
"an undisputed "fact" is that Dr. Nichols said the Daye died secondary to complications of a stab wound to the chest. Technically, this is undisputed... ...Also Judge Nelson omitted several significant undisputed facts..."
My question has nothing to do with what was omitted. Just to be clear -- you find no errors with the undisputed facts as stated in Judge Nelson's ruling. You wish there were more (why?) but the would still be undisputed.
"Judge Nelson claimed that Ms. Mangum did not file a response ". Correct me if I'm wrong -- didn't YOU file the response? Didn't you write the response? You're not involved in the petitioned case. Any document you create and file isn't valid, and should be struck. -- Just as any document created and filed for the defendant not created by the defendant or their legal counsel should be struck.
Finally, you can't file an appeal -- Only Crystal Mangum can. You can't write her appeal -- only she or her counsel can.
Anonymous “dhall, Of course Sid can file an appeal. Why would you think otherwise?”
While technically he could file (I guess- technically either you or I could, too), since he’s not a lawyer and not a co-petitioner in the case, his appeal would mean as much as yours or mine.
The 3 of us have no standing in this case. It’s why “Mangum’s“ response to the State's Motion for Summary Judgment was struck. It wasn’t “Mangum’s”, it was Dr. Harr’s. He wrote it. He filed it.
In Harr v. North Carolina Judicial Standards Commission, the NC Judicial Standards commission has filed a motion to Dismiss for lack of jurisdiction and a motion to Dismiss for failure to state a claim.
Sid on August 9: Mark September 8th on your calendar. Crucial event will take place.
Sid on September 10: I clearly failed to take into consideration the evil behavior of the justice system. Undoubtedly 2025 will be the year that elusive justice in Mangum's case will finally be corralled.
WRT the motions to dismiss in Harr v. North Carolina Judicial Standards Commission, a Rule 12 letter was issued to Sid. He has until 9/2/2024 to respond.
Anonymous WRT the motions to dismiss in Harr v. North Carolina Judicial Standards Commission, a Rule 12 letter was issued to Sid. He has until 9/2/2024 to respond. August 13, 2024 at 9:16 AM
Hey, Anony.
Thank you for the heads up. I have not yet received a copy of the brief. Will pick up a copy from the courthouse this morning.
In 27 days you will owe us an explanation for why the crucial event(s) you told us would take place on 9/8/24 did not happen.
Abe Froman Chicago, IL August 13, 2024 at 8:34 AM
Hey, Abe.
The September 8th event is out of my control, but I am confident that said event will be broadcast on cable television channel. If I am able to get a link to the advertising trailer, which is supposed to air this week, I will post it in the comment section.
dhall Anonymous “dhall, Of course Sid can file an appeal. Why would you think otherwise?”
While technically he could file (I guess- technically either you or I could, too), since he’s not a lawyer and not a co-petitioner in the case, his appeal would mean as much as yours or mine.
The 3 of us have no standing in this case. It’s why “Mangum’s“ response to the State's Motion for Summary Judgment was struck. It wasn’t “Mangum’s”, it was Dr. Harr’s. He wrote it. He filed it. August 11, 2024 at 10:24 AM
Hey, dhall.
For the sake of argument, lets stipulate that I drafted, printed, and manually filed Ms. Mangum's Petition for Judicial Review. The fact remains that it is her petition with her name in the citation and signed on the document... not mine.
For a response to the petition being based on who authored and prepared the document, rather than one based on the merits of the substance contained therein, reflects on the weakness of said response.
"For the sake of argument, lets stipulate that I drafted, printed, and manually filed Ms. Mangum's Petition for Judicial Review." For the sake of argument?? Are you saying that you DID NOT draft, print, and file this petition? That you're only agreeing "for the sake of argument"?
Your "crucial event" is some TV show, and all you provide is the date and not even the channel or the name of the show? You told us ahead of time about the Lethally Blonde episode on Investigation Discovery.....
Prince Humperdinck Your "crucial event" is some TV show, and all you provide is the date and not even the channel or the name of the show? You told us ahead of time about the Lethally Blonde episode on Investigation Discovery..... August 14, 2024 at 10:55 AM
Hey, Prince Humperdinck.
The name of the show featuring Crystal Mangum is "Snapped: Behind Bars." It will air on the Oxygen Channel on September 8th.
As soon as I am able, I will provide a link to the advertising promo trailer which should be airing this week.
HEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP!! IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT!
Update on the documentary about Crystal: Date of broadcast: September 8, 2024 The channel: Oxygen The series: Snapped: Behind Bars Episode title: What is the Truth LINK: Online promo ad
I will provide a link to the promo trailer as soon as it is available.
A cable TV show from 2018? That's your "crucial event"?
It is not going to have any effect on Mangum's situation. It didn't have an effect on her situation in 2018. It won't have any effect now. The case is over. This countdown is officially over, too. The next crucial event in Mangum's case will occur in February 2026, when she is released from prison.
Prince Humperdinck Why in the world would you create your own "promo" ad? It doesn't even reference the correct episode - that episode you've referenced is from 2018!
Was this another "Biden moment"? August 16, 2024 at 7:20 AM
Hey, Prince Humperdinck.
I what I did was cut and paste from the online Oxygen True Crime screen. The episode referenced is about the documentary that is scheduled to air on September 8, 2024, I don't really understand your statement.
Damn Sid - the episode in your “cut and paste” job literally shows it’s for season 24, episode 7. Google “Snapped season 24 episode 7”. It originally aired in 2018 and the episode was titled “What is the Truth”. If anything, they’re replaying this old episode on September 8 - not making a new one.
Anonymous A cable TV show from 2018? That's your "crucial event"?
It is not going to have any effect on Mangum's situation. It didn't have an effect on her situation in 2018. It won't have any effect now. The case is over. This countdown is officially over, too. The next crucial event in Mangum's case will occur in February 2026, when she is released from prison.
Abe Froman Chicago IL August 16, 2024 at 7:07 A
Hey, Abe.
Don't know what's supposedly going on with the documentary. Will have to check it out.
HEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP!! IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT!
There seems to be a conflict in the Snapped: Behind Bars schedule for September 8, 2024. It appears that two subjects, Crystal Mangum and Felicia Barden, are scheduled at the same time. I will have to look into it and get back with you.
You really can’t research or figure things out, can you? Snapped on Sept. 8 is about Felicia Barden. Snapped: Behind Bars on September 8 is about Crystal Mangum. They are 2 separate shows.
No wonder you can’t read statutes (which are clear that the Senior Resident Judge can handle MARs, and there never was felony murder, and all the other nonsense you get wrong), you can’t even understand a website and show titles.
"I have decided not to comment on the documentary. One Anony commenter correctly ascertained the reason why, so I did not publish it."
Lost me there, Sid. So the anonymous commenter identified the issue with the documentary, and you decided not to publish this anonymous user's comment?
Nifong Supporter Supporter -- Dr. Harr stated that he was interviewed for the 2018 "Snapped" episode here in the comments section. This interview did not air, and was (to the best of my knowledge) never shown anywhere . Fellow J4N members Victoria Peterson and Jacqueline Wagstaff were interviewed as well. The "Bonus Clip" video with Peterson and Wagstaff (along with others) can be found on YouTube .
With regards to the motions to dismiss in the Harr v. North Carolina Judicial Standards Commission case, my understanding is that, per N.C.G.S. § 7A-375(e), the Commission and its staff are immune from a civil action "that is based upon conduct undertaken in the course of their official duties".
I don't see Dr. Harr getting around this statute, and I expect this case to be dismissed shortly after he files his response to the motion to dismiss.
Prince Humperdinck "I have decided not to comment on the documentary. One Anony commenter correctly ascertained the reason why, so I did not publish it."
Lost me there, Sid. So the anonymous commenter identified the issue with the documentary, and you decided not to publish this anonymous user's comment? August 19, 2024 at 6:17 AM
Hey, Prince Humperdinck.
That is absolutely correct. Because the commenter identified the issue regarding the documentary, I did not publish his comment.
<"Yes. The case was dismissed by Judge Dever based on statute of limitations technicality." While the statute of limitations may seem like a technicality to you, acting in a timely manner is the responsibility of the plaintiff. You and CGM didn't. Rather than admitting you failed in your responsibility, you try to blame it on the court and the judge. Typical Sid.
Did the commenter violate the kenhyderal rule (or whatever it is called)? If not, why don't you want us to know the issue regarding the documentary? You were the one that brought it up and teased it as a "crucial event" that "has the potential to significantly help Crystal be released and exonerated." What went wrong?
Update on the documentary about Crystal: Date of broadcast: September 8, 2024 The channel: Oxygen The series: Snapped: Behind Bars Episode title: What is the Truth
"Don't believe everything you read on the internet" - Abraham Lincoln
Sid has filed his response to the motion to Dismiss in the Harr v. North Carolina Judicial Standards Commission case. He also filed a motion to Amend/Correct the complaint.
Sid -- will you make the documents you filed in the response and the amended complaint available for us to read?
In my humble yet brilliant opinion, I believe the documentary is worthwhile in bringing attention to the case. If we are fortunate, we will see an interview with Sir Kenneth (Kenhyderal) Edwards and Dr. Harr wearing their Justice for Nifong tee-shirts. Not allowing them to wear those tee-shirts would be upsetting and unnecessary.
The Oxygen Channel website summary of the September 8 episode refers to a “jailhouse interview” with Crystal. When did the interview occur? Who conducted the interview?
Apparently Sid is "too busy" (doing what?) to respond to the questions regarding his case against the NC JSC. If you look at his so-called "exhibits", there are letters to/from various legal resources/state/law school resources. None of these documents have anything to do with the NC JSC, and none could possibly address the NC JSC motion to dismiss.
Which is a good reason why he's keeping quiet about them -- he knows that they don't address his failure to properly allege one or more of the required elements of the action he's requesting from the court, or that there is no factual basis for the claim established by his complaint.
Just as there's no factual basis for his claim that there is an "issue" with the Oxygen CGM documentary...
Did the commenter violate the kenhyderal rule (or whatever it is called)? If not, why don't you want us to know the issue regarding the documentary? You were the one that brought it up and teased it as a "crucial event" that "has the potential to significantly help Crystal be released and exonerated." What went wrong?
Abe Froman Chicago, IL August 20, 2024 at 8:22 AM
Hey, Abe.
Very shortly I will give an explanation and everyone will understand my issues with the documentary and whether or not it is an original or rerun. In retrospect, I probably should never have even mentioned it.
dhall Dr. Harr - I would like to see your response documents in the NC Judicial Standards Commission as well. Will you post them soon? August 26, 2024 at 7:18 AM
Hey, dhall.
Have been busy. Want to file a motion in the next day or two. Will have breathing room after that.
I think the Response is important, and approximately eight pages in length and with not too many exhibits, so I am sure that I can have it posted sometime this weekend.
The Oxygen Channel website summary of the September 8 episode refers to a “jailhouse interview” with Crystal. When did the interview occur? Who conducted the interview?
August 26, 2024 at 5:14 PM
Hey, Anony.
I was pretty much out of the loop with the production, so I know very little of the specifics. Haven't previewed it, and don't know what the documentary will present.
Anonymous Sid has filed his response to the motion to Dismiss in the Harr v. North Carolina Judicial Standards Commission case. He also filed a motion to Amend/Correct the complaint.
Sid -- will you make the documents you filed in the response and the amended complaint available for us to read? August 23, 2024 at 12:03 PM
Hey, Anony.
I believe I will be able to have the Response posted by this weekend.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous Anonymous said...
Sid,
Is there a hearing scheduled?
July 25, 2024 at 9:55 AM
Hey, Anony.
On Monday, July 15, 2024, when I went to the Office of Administrative Hearings to drop off a document, I first learned that on Tuesday, July 9th, Judge Nelson granted the Respondent DHHS' Motion for Summary Judgment... throwing a lifeline to the State to keep it from being embarrassed at a hearing. The move didn't surprise me, especially after striking Mangum's Response in Opposition of Respondent's Motion for Summary Judgment... effectively removing the motion I manually and timely filed for Ms. Mangum on July 1st.
So, the hearing scheduled for August 9th has been cancelled by the judge.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous said...
Damn Sid. If you're not going to respond to any comments/questions or provide any updates, why not remove the need to have the comments moderated?
We can at least keep ourselves entertained while we're waiting for you to do something.
July 24, 2024 at 1:46 PM
Hey, Anony.
I haven't been responding because I've been extremely busy with the recent turn of events... although I wasn't surprised by the judge granting the State's Motion for Summary Judgment. Clearly, the State did not want to face Mangum... even through video conference from prison.
Blogger Nifong Supporter said...
ReplyDeleteAnonymous Anonymous said...
Poor Sid.
He's come to a dead end on lolsuits for CGM...There's no one left to file a lolsuit against, and CGM will lose this one.
Harr v. North Carolina Judicial Standards Commission will go nowhere.
So what next?
Here's an idea...NC is part Appalachian Mountains. VP nominee JD Vance wrote a book, "Hillbilly Elegy", that had a number of disparaging comments about Appalachians (especially men). As a bonus, I'm sure you could work in Mike Nifong, since he's a man.
As a Durhamanian, on the behalf of other Durhamanians, you should file a libel suit against JD Vance.
July 19, 2024 at 5:41 AM
Hey, Anony.
First, I live in Raleigh... have never lived in Durham.
I do not think you made a case for why I would have standing to file a lawsuit against J.D. Vance.
Have not received a response in the federal case.
July 25, 2024 at 7:58 PM
Sid - Why didn’t Mangum file a response to Dr. Aurelius’ motion for summary judgment?
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteSid:
Is it time to release your secret projects?
Dr. Harr -- We've been over this too many times. You're not a lawyer, and since you're not a co-petitioner in this contested case, your acts on Crystal Mangum's behalf are the embodiment of unauthorized practice of law.
ReplyDeleteUnauthorized practice of law is illegal. You know this.
If, in this contested case, the defendant committed an illegal activity in the process of creating and filing their motions, would you expect the judge to ignore it?
Crystal Mangum could have avoided Judge Nelson's decision simply by writing and filing her own motions.
It's her fault for letting you do this instead, and your fault for convincing her to let you do it.
Going forward, expect ANY legal assistance you perform on Crystal Mangum's behalf to be thrown out. This includes any motions you create or file, or any new lawsuits you attempt to bring on her behalf.
If Crystal Mangum ever does get a lawyer, expect them to exclude you from ANY lawyer-client discussion. Expect them to hold her to this same standard and not discuss any lawyer-client information with you.
You found out the judge granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment almost 2 weeks ago and you’re just now posting about it? What could you possibly have been doing since? Any legal actions you attempt on CGM’s behalf are going to get thrown out.
ReplyDeleteBy all means, enlighten us.
ReplyDeleteDr. Harr:
I would like to remind your readers that I am proud to call kenhyderal my friend.
ReplyDeleteKenhyderal Lay Advocate:
Please assist kenhyderal and explain how DA Nifong was mistreated in his disbarment proceeding.
Thank you.
Right on kenhyderal.
ReplyDeleteFormer Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong was brutalized by the state and the media for his actions in doing the right thing in prosecuting the Duke Lacrosse case. Courageously prosecuting the Duke case in the true sense as a “minister of justice,” he butted heads with the Powers-That-Be who demanded that the charges against the student/athlete/partygoers be dropped. As a result, the state went through extraordinary means to make an example of Mr. Nifong… something which they did very well, as is evidenced by the fact that there is little if any movement to go against the P-T-B’s will by offering support to Ms. Mangum.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteKenhyderal Lay Advocate:
Thank you for your thorough response. I am sure kenhyderal appreciates your taking the time to enlighten us.
Tyrone Rugen
ReplyDeleteYou found out the judge granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment almost 2 weeks ago and you’re just now posting about it? What could you possibly have been doing since? Any legal actions you attempt on CGM’s behalf are going to get thrown out.
By all means, enlighten us.
July 26, 2024 at 6:22 PM
Hey, Tyrone Rugen.
My first priority has always been to get Crystal out of prison... then to get her exonerated. Lower on my list is to make announcements on my blog site. It would take time to produce the blog that I wanted. As you know, the blog just posted Judge Nelson's Final Decision... sans notations and a dissection of the ruling.
Anyway, I have been active on several fronts when first learning about the Nelson ruling.
Hope this response has been edifying.
Dr. Harr -- Short of hiring Crystal Mangum a lawyer and stepping out of the way, there's nothing you can do from a legal standpoint that will get Crystal Mangum out of prison.
ReplyDeleteCompletely unrelated question...Has the comments section of Blogger changed for anyone else?
ReplyDeleteYour first priority has always been to keep Crystal incarcerated so she is a captive audience for your nonsense. All of your efforts are geared towards making her think you are trying to help, and increasing her isolation and victimization as they repeatedly fail, and you use that to convince her you are the only one who cares. It's typical abuser behavior.
ReplyDeleteIf she were to ever read this blog, and see how many times you were told that your efforts were harmful, and were told what you can do to help, and yet you refused to do so, she'd be horrified.
You are a disgrace and an abuser.
I am grateful for all of your contributions to this blog site, even the ones that are nonsensical and unenlightened. Regardless, varying views make the site worthwhile and provides fodder upon which our brains can ingest.
ReplyDelete@ Anonymous 7-30-24 8:12 AM : Your anonymous post is disgraceful and abusive. As an abettor and defender of the wrongful incarceration, easily provable to be so by anyone, of Crystal Mangum, by your rotten corrupt Cooper Government and it's disgraceful D.O.J, you resort to projection. by accusing those who genuinely seek to correct this unjust conviction and wrongful imprisonment of an innocent Black African American of, exactly what those charged with admisistering equal justice for all in NC, are themselves guilty of but for nefarious political reasons, resort to trick they can find to see that in this case justice will be denied and Crystal will be kept right where they want her. They correctly fear the truth will kill them politically.
ReplyDeleteDoesn't appear to be any movement on Harr v. North Carolina Judicial Standards Commission since June 19, 2024.
ReplyDeleteAny updates, Sid?
Anonymous @July 30, 2024 at 8:12 AM:
ReplyDeleteAccording to NCDPS, inmate visitation is limited to no more than 1 visiting session per week.
So yeah -- Sid IS increasing CGM's isolation by taking her visitation time away from family and friends to deal with his nonsense.
I'm sure she only allows this to happen because Sid's convinced her that he can do something for her, when in fact he knows he can't.
And their so-called "engagement"? Fake. She's not going to marry a man old enough to be her grandfather -- especially one with as little income as Sid.
@ Nifong Supporter: Dear Dr. Harr: Did you receive my reply to Anonymous 8:12 AM on July 30th?
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeletekenhyderal:
Do you agree with Kenhyderal Lay Advocate’s analysis of how DA Nifong was mistreated in his disbarment proceeding?
Kenny --
ReplyDeleteSid's been told for years that his activities were unlawful practice of law. CGM has had a bevy of lawyers. They've all stopped any actions on her behalf because of Sid, and she can't get new lawyers because of him.
THAT is disgraceful and abusive.
Kenny, somewhere there is a tree whose sole purpose is to produce the oxygen that you breathe.
ReplyDeleteI think it’d be the gentlemanly thing for you to find that tree and apologize to it.
@ Tyrone 7-31-24 11:40 : Crystal, her Family and her friends are all appreciative of Dr. Harr. You know nothing of them and it's presumptive and mean-spirited of you to speculate about and put a negative interpretation on Crystal and Dr. Harr's relationship. Honi soit qui mal y pense .
ReplyDelete@ The Prince 8-3-24 5:34 You've lost me? Please explain the relevance of this to me.
ReplyDeleteDr. Harr:
ReplyDeleteWill you appeal the decision of the Office of Administrative Hearings?
Dr. Harr -- What errors of fact did you find in the "Undisputed facts" section? What errors in the "conclusions of law" section?
ReplyDeleteFinally, did you read the statutes or case law referenced in this document?
ReplyDeleteHEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP!
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT!
Apologies for not responding to comments recently. Have been extremely busy. Should be freed up enough to respond no later than Thursday, August 8th.
As you were.
1 visitation per week, Kenny.
ReplyDeleteCGM could be visiting with her family, instead of meeting with Sid so he can encourage her to go along with his worthless lolsuits.
Shame on the one who doesn't see something bad in Sid's actions.
The Marshall of the Royal Airforce (and member of Most Noble Order of the Garter ), Sir Kenneth (Kenhyderal) Edwards, hath spoken.
ReplyDeleteKenhyderal:
ReplyDeleteWe are still waiting for your explanation regarding how DA Nifong was mistreated in his disbarment proceeding.
Dr. Harr:
ReplyDeleteWhat is the status of your secret projects?
ReplyDeleteTyrone Rugen
1 visitation per week, Kenny.
CGM could be visiting with her family, instead of meeting with Sid so he can encourage her to go along with his worthless lolsuits.
Shame on the one who doesn't see something bad in Sid's actions.
August 6, 2024 at 10:00 AM
Hey, Tyrone Rugen.
Don't understand your logic. You think it's better for me to do nothing rather than file lawsuits? The only problem with the lawsuits is that the judges are like Aileen Cannon... they're biased against Ms. Mangum. Especially in the contested case hearing.
ReplyDeletedhall
Dr. Harr -- What errors of fact did you find in the "Undisputed facts" section? What errors in the "conclusions of law" section?
Finally, did you read the statutes or case law referenced in this document?
August 5, 2024 at 8:30 AM
Hey, dhall.
What I found problematic with the "undisputed facts" section is that Judge Nelson cherry-picked certain so-called facts as happened, but were not truthful. For example, an undisputed "fact" is that Dr. Nichols said the Daye died secondary to complications of a stab wound to the chest. Technically, this is undisputed, but the reality of the statement is false.
Also Judge Nelson omitted several significant undisputed facts such as that immediately after Daye's cardiac arrest his Glasgow Coma Score was three... the worst possible rating. Nelson never even mentions the esophageal intubation.
Under "conclusions of law," the most obvious problem is that Judge Nelson stated that there were no genuine issues of material difference. That is an absurd statement. There are significant differences of opinion regarding facts of the case which should exclude granting a motion for summary judgment against Mangum.
Also, what is misleading, if not actually false, is that Judge Nelson claimed that Ms. Mangum did not file a response to the State's Motion for Summary Judgment. Just because the judge did strike Mangum's Response to the State's Motion for Summary Judgment, does not really reflect the truth as a fifteen-page response was timely filed.
Keep in mind, the respondent filed for a Motion for Summary Judgment on June 21, 2024 out of shear desperation. The State did not want to go to trial. An impartial judge would have dismissed the motion for summary judgment and allowed the hearing to take place. Why not allow the hearing to proceed, which is what the contested case hearing in the NC Office of Administrative Hearings is supposed to do?
I did review some of the citations, i.e., Summey v. ..... Not particularly relevant to this case... for example, the Summey case did not have briefs and evidence struck from the record.
Nifong Supporter Supporter
ReplyDeleteDr. Harr:
Will you appeal the decision of the Office of Administrative Hearings?
August 5, 2024 at 5:33 AM
Hey, Nifong Double-Supporter.
Yes.
One question I have regards the filing deadline for the appeal. Ms. Mangum has thirty days by which to file an appeal from the time she is served the Final Decision on Summary Judgment. The Final Decision was filed on July 9, 2024, but Ms. Mangum signed receipt of the legal mail on July 25, 2024.
I tried to get clarification on the deadline for filing by questioning the law clerk, but was told that she could not give legal advice and that I should consult an attorney.
In your opinion, when should the deadline be for Mangum to file her appeal?
ReplyDeletekenhyderal
@ Nifong Supporter: Dear Dr. Harr: Did you receive my reply to Anonymous 8:12 AM on July 30th?
July 31, 2024 at 7:13 PM
Hey, kenhyderal.
Recently have been busy, and therefore haven't been checking for comments as frequently in the past. I believe I published your response. Will try to check for comments more frequently.
Sid,
ReplyDeleteRead the second paragraph in the section of the opinion regarding appeals and then read the certificate of service. If you have any other questions, you should ask Kenny.
Yes it was published 3 days later
ReplyDelete"an undisputed "fact" is that Dr. Nichols said the Daye died secondary to complications of a stab wound to the chest. Technically, this is undisputed...
ReplyDelete...Also Judge Nelson omitted several significant undisputed facts..."
My question has nothing to do with what was omitted.
Just to be clear -- you find no errors with the undisputed facts as stated in Judge Nelson's ruling. You wish there were more (why?) but the would still be undisputed.
"Judge Nelson claimed that Ms. Mangum did not file a response ". Correct me if I'm wrong -- didn't YOU file the response? Didn't you write the response?
You're not involved in the petitioned case. Any document you create and file isn't valid, and should be struck. -- Just as any document created and filed for the defendant not created by the defendant or their legal counsel should be struck.
Finally, you can't file an appeal -- Only Crystal Mangum can. You can't write her appeal -- only she or her counsel can.
dhall, Of course Sid can file an appeal. Why would you think otherwise?
Delete
ReplyDeleteHEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP!!
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT!
Mark September 8th on your calendar. Crucial event will take place.
As you were.
It’s time for Abe to start another countdown.
DeleteAbe,
ReplyDeleteWhere are you?
If Abe is unavailable, I am ready,
DeleteFake Abe Froman
Chicago, IL
kenhyderal:
ReplyDeletePlease answer Doctor Harr’s question. Does the deadline for filing an appeal run from July 9 or July 25?
Anonymous
ReplyDelete“dhall, Of course Sid can file an appeal. Why would you think otherwise?”
While technically he could file (I guess- technically either you or I could, too), since he’s not a lawyer and not a co-petitioner in the case, his appeal would mean as much as yours or mine.
The 3 of us have no standing in this case. It’s why “Mangum’s“ response to the State's Motion for Summary Judgment was struck. It wasn’t “Mangum’s”, it was Dr. Harr’s.
He wrote it. He filed it.
Sid: What should we be expecting on September 8?
ReplyDeleteSid,
ReplyDeleteYou have 28 days to explain why the crucial events you told us would take place on 9/8/24 did not happen.
Abe Froman
Chicago, IL
Welcome back, Abe. Udaman.
DeleteIn Harr v. North Carolina Judicial Standards Commission, the NC Judicial Standards commission has filed a motion to Dismiss for lack of jurisdiction and a motion to Dismiss for failure to state a claim.
ReplyDeleteSid on August 9:
ReplyDeleteMark September 8th on your calendar. Crucial event will take place.
Sid on September 10:
I clearly failed to take into consideration the evil behavior of the justice system. Undoubtedly 2025 will be the year that elusive justice in Mangum's case will finally be corralled.
Sid:
ReplyDeleteAre you releasing your secret projects on September 8?
Sid:
ReplyDeleteHave you filed your Petition for Judicial Review?
Sid,
ReplyDeleteIn 27 days you will owe us an explanation for why the crucial event(s) you told us would take place on 9/8/24 did not happen.
Abe Froman
Chicago, IL
WRT the motions to dismiss in Harr v. North Carolina Judicial Standards Commission, a Rule 12 letter was issued to Sid.
ReplyDeleteHe has until 9/2/2024 to respond.
DeleteAnonymous
WRT the motions to dismiss in Harr v. North Carolina Judicial Standards Commission, a Rule 12 letter was issued to Sid.
He has until 9/2/2024 to respond.
August 13, 2024 at 9:16 AM
Hey, Anony.
Thank you for the heads up. I have not yet received a copy of the brief. Will pick up a copy from the courthouse this morning.
Sid,
ReplyDeleteThis could be the hammer that we have been expecting for several years.
Sid,
ReplyDeleteIf you post the Rule 12 letter, dhall will give you plenty of advice about how to respond.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous
Sid,
In 27 days you will owe us an explanation for why the crucial event(s) you told us would take place on 9/8/24 did not happen.
Abe Froman
Chicago, IL
August 13, 2024 at 8:34 AM
Hey, Abe.
The September 8th event is out of my control, but I am confident that said event will be broadcast on cable television channel. If I am able to get a link to the advertising trailer, which is supposed to air this week, I will post it in the comment section.
ReplyDeleteA Durham Man
Sid:
Have you filed your Petition for Judicial Review?
August 13, 2024 at 5:25 AM
Hey, Durham Man.
I filed, on behalf of Ms. Mangum, her Petition for Judicial Review with the Wake County Superior Court on August 8th.
ReplyDeletedhall
Anonymous
“dhall, Of course Sid can file an appeal. Why would you think otherwise?”
While technically he could file (I guess- technically either you or I could, too), since he’s not a lawyer and not a co-petitioner in the case, his appeal would mean as much as yours or mine.
The 3 of us have no standing in this case. It’s why “Mangum’s“ response to the State's Motion for Summary Judgment was struck. It wasn’t “Mangum’s”, it was Dr. Harr’s.
He wrote it. He filed it.
August 11, 2024 at 10:24 AM
Hey, dhall.
For the sake of argument, lets stipulate that I drafted, printed, and manually filed Ms. Mangum's Petition for Judicial Review. The fact remains that it is her petition with her name in the citation and signed on the document... not mine.
For a response to the petition being based on who authored and prepared the document, rather than one based on the merits of the substance contained therein, reflects on the weakness of said response.
Follow me?
Only if she actually signed it. You signing her name doesn't make it hers.
DeleteDo you think that that any action taken by the defendant that violates § 84‑2.1 should just be judged based on it's merits?
ReplyDelete"For the sake of argument, lets stipulate that I drafted, printed, and manually filed Ms. Mangum's Petition for Judicial Review."
ReplyDeleteFor the sake of argument??
Are you saying that you DID NOT draft, print, and file this petition? That you're only agreeing "for the sake of argument"?
Your "crucial event" is some TV show, and all you provide is the date and not even the channel or the name of the show? You told us ahead of time about the Lethally Blonde episode on Investigation Discovery.....
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeletePrince Humperdinck
Your "crucial event" is some TV show, and all you provide is the date and not even the channel or the name of the show? You told us ahead of time about the Lethally Blonde episode on Investigation Discovery.....
August 14, 2024 at 10:55 AM
Hey, Prince Humperdinck.
The name of the show featuring Crystal Mangum is "Snapped: Behind Bars." It will air on the Oxygen Channel on September 8th.
As soon as I am able, I will provide a link to the advertising promo trailer which should be airing this week.
ReplyDeleteHEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP!!
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT!
Update on the documentary about Crystal:
Date of broadcast: September 8, 2024
The channel: Oxygen
The series: Snapped: Behind Bars
Episode title: What is the Truth
LINK: Online promo ad
I will provide a link to the promo trailer as soon as it is available.
As you were.
Dr. Harr-- The promo ad you created is for Snapped Season 24 episode 7 which was about Crystal Mangum when it aired on October 7, 2018.
ReplyDeleteThe Snapped episode airing on September 8th 2024 (Season 34, Episode 10) is apparently about Felicia Barden.
Here's the link to IMDB's episode guide.
A cable TV show from 2018? That's your "crucial event"?
ReplyDeleteIt is not going to have any effect on Mangum's situation. It didn't have an effect on her situation in 2018. It won't have any effect now. The case is over. This countdown is officially over, too. The next crucial event in Mangum's case will occur in February 2026, when she is released from prison.
Abe Froman
Chicago IL
Abe,
DeleteTake one for the team. We need the countdown.
Why in the world would you create your own "promo" ad? It doesn't even reference the correct episode - that episode you've referenced is from 2018!
ReplyDeleteWas this another "Biden moment"?
Kenny:
ReplyDeleteCould this be the breakthrough you have been waiting for? Perhaps Governor Cooper and AG Stein are fans of Snapped: Behind Bars.
ReplyDeletePrince Humperdinck
Why in the world would you create your own "promo" ad? It doesn't even reference the correct episode - that episode you've referenced is from 2018!
Was this another "Biden moment"?
August 16, 2024 at 7:20 AM
Hey, Prince Humperdinck.
I what I did was cut and paste from the online Oxygen True Crime screen. The episode referenced is about the documentary that is scheduled to air on September 8, 2024, I don't really understand your statement.
Damn Sid - the episode in your “cut and paste” job literally shows it’s for season 24, episode 7. Google “Snapped season 24 episode 7”. It originally aired in 2018 and the episode was titled “What is the Truth”. If anything, they’re replaying this old episode on September 8 - not making a new one.
Delete
ReplyDeleteA Durham Man
Kenny:
Could this be the breakthrough you have been waiting for? Perhaps Governor Cooper and AG Stein are fans of Snapped: Behind Bars.
August 16, 2024 at 9:38 AM
Hey, Durham Man.
I believe the documentary has the potential to significantly help Crystal be released and exonerated.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous
A cable TV show from 2018? That's your "crucial event"?
It is not going to have any effect on Mangum's situation. It didn't have an effect on her situation in 2018. It won't have any effect now. The case is over. This countdown is officially over, too. The next crucial event in Mangum's case will occur in February 2026, when she is released from prison.
Abe Froman
Chicago IL
August 16, 2024 at 7:07 A
Hey, Abe.
Don't know what's supposedly going on with the documentary. Will have to check it out.
ReplyDeletedhall
Dr. Harr-- The promo ad you created is for Snapped Season 24 episode 7 which was about Crystal Mangum when it aired on October 7, 2018.
The Snapped episode airing on September 8th 2024 (Season 34, Episode 10) is apparently about Felicia Barden.
Here's the link to IMDB's episode guide.
August 16, 2024 at 5:46 AM
Hey, dhall.
Thanks for the link. It shouldn't surprise anyone of the power and deceit of the government to manipulate the media. Will have to investigate.
ReplyDeleteHEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP!!
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT!
There seems to be a conflict in the Snapped: Behind Bars schedule for September 8, 2024. It appears that two subjects, Crystal Mangum and Felicia Barden, are scheduled at the same time. I will have to look into it and get back with you.
As you were.
You really can’t research or figure things out, can you? Snapped on Sept. 8 is about Felicia Barden. Snapped: Behind Bars on September 8 is about Crystal Mangum. They are 2 separate shows.
DeleteNo wonder you can’t read statutes (which are clear that the Senior Resident Judge can handle MARs, and there never was felony murder, and all the other nonsense you get wrong), you can’t even understand a website and show titles.
Sid,
ReplyDeleteDid you sue Oxygen a few years ago?
Sid:
ReplyDeleteIs it possible that Rae Evans intervened and cancelled the show about Crystal?
Dr. Harr:
ReplyDeleteDid the Oxygen Channel interview you and kenhyderal for the episode on Snapped: Behind Bars that reviews Crystal’s case?
Dr. Harr,
ReplyDeleteWas the episode on Snapped: Behind Bars one of your secret projects?
ReplyDeleteHEY, EVERYBODY... LISTEN UP!!
IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT!
I have decided not to comment on the documentary. One Anony commenter correctly ascertained the reason why, so I did not publish it.
Anyway, I am focusing on the lawsuits in front of me and Ms. Mangum.
As you were.
"I have decided not to comment on the documentary. One Anony commenter correctly ascertained the reason why, so I did not publish it."
ReplyDeleteLost me there, Sid. So the anonymous commenter identified the issue with the documentary, and you decided not to publish this anonymous user's comment?
Nifong Supporter Supporter -- Dr. Harr stated that he was interviewed for the 2018 "Snapped" episode here in the comments section. This interview did not air, and was (to the best of my knowledge) never shown anywhere . Fellow J4N members Victoria Peterson and Jacqueline Wagstaff were interviewed as well. The "Bonus Clip" video with Peterson and Wagstaff (along with others) can be found on YouTube .
ReplyDeleteWith regards to the motions to dismiss in the Harr v. North Carolina Judicial Standards Commission case, my understanding is that, per N.C.G.S. § 7A-375(e), the Commission and its staff are immune from a civil action "that is based upon conduct undertaken in the course of their official duties".
ReplyDeleteI don't see Dr. Harr getting around this statute, and I expect this case to be dismissed shortly after he files his response to the motion to dismiss.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous
Sid,
Did you sue Oxygen a few years ago?
August 18, 2024 at 9:15 A
Hey, Anony.
Yes. The case was dismissed by Judge Dever based on statute of limitations technicality.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous
Sid:
Is it possible that Rae Evans intervened and cancelled the show about Crystal?
August 18, 2024 at 10:08 AM
Hey, Anony.
Doubt it.
ReplyDeletePrince Humperdinck
"I have decided not to comment on the documentary. One Anony commenter correctly ascertained the reason why, so I did not publish it."
Lost me there, Sid. So the anonymous commenter identified the issue with the documentary, and you decided not to publish this anonymous user's comment?
August 19, 2024 at 6:17 AM
Hey, Prince Humperdinck.
That is absolutely correct. Because the commenter identified the issue regarding the documentary, I did not publish his comment.
Dr. Harr -- Why wouldn't you let us know the issue regarding the documentary? I (and I'm sure others as well) would like to know the issue with it.
ReplyDelete<"Yes. The case was dismissed by Judge Dever based on statute of limitations technicality."
ReplyDeleteWhile the statute of limitations may seem like a technicality to you, acting in a timely manner is the responsibility of the plaintiff. You and CGM didn't.
Rather than admitting you failed in your responsibility, you try to blame it on the court and the judge. Typical Sid.
Sid,
ReplyDeleteDid the commenter violate the kenhyderal rule (or whatever it is called)? If not, why don't you want us to know the issue regarding the documentary? You were the one that brought it up and teased it as a "crucial event" that "has the potential to significantly help Crystal be released and exonerated." What went wrong?
Abe Froman
Chicago, IL
"Because the commenter identified the issue regarding the documentary, I did not publish his comment."
ReplyDeleteI think that's about the worst thing I've ever heard.
How marvelous.
Kenhyderal Lay Advocate:
ReplyDeleteWhat are your views regarding the documentary that Sid believes will be broadcast on Snapped: Behind Bars?
Update on the documentary about Crystal:
ReplyDeleteDate of broadcast: September 8, 2024
The channel: Oxygen
The series: Snapped: Behind Bars
Episode title: What is the Truth
"Don't believe everything you read on the internet"
- Abraham Lincoln
Sid has filed his response to the motion to Dismiss in the Harr v. North Carolina Judicial Standards Commission case.
ReplyDeleteHe also filed a motion to Amend/Correct the complaint.
Sid -- will you make the documents you filed in the response and the amended complaint available for us to read?
In my humble yet brilliant opinion, I believe the documentary is worthwhile in bringing attention to the case. If we are fortunate, we will see an interview with Sir Kenneth (Kenhyderal) Edwards and Dr. Harr wearing their Justice for Nifong tee-shirts. Not allowing them to wear those tee-shirts would be upsetting and unnecessary.
ReplyDeleteIt’s time for Abe to resume the countdown.
ReplyDeleteDr. Harr - I would like to see your response documents in the NC Judicial Standards Commission as well. Will you post them soon?
ReplyDeleteSid:
ReplyDeleteThe Oxygen Channel website summary of the September 8 episode refers to a “jailhouse interview” with Crystal. When did the interview occur? Who conducted the interview?
Apparently Sid is "too busy" (doing what?) to respond to the questions regarding his case against the NC JSC. If you look at his so-called "exhibits", there are letters to/from various legal resources/state/law school resources. None of these documents have anything to do with the NC JSC, and none could possibly address the NC JSC motion to dismiss.
ReplyDeleteWhich is a good reason why he's keeping quiet about them -- he knows that they don't address his failure to properly allege one or more of the required elements of the action he's requesting from the court, or that there is no factual basis for the claim established by his complaint.
Just as there's no factual basis for his claim that there is an "issue" with the Oxygen CGM documentary...
ReplyDeleteAnonymous
Sid,
Did the commenter violate the kenhyderal rule (or whatever it is called)? If not, why don't you want us to know the issue regarding the documentary? You were the one that brought it up and teased it as a "crucial event" that "has the potential to significantly help Crystal be released and exonerated." What went wrong?
Abe Froman
Chicago, IL
August 20, 2024 at 8:22 AM
Hey, Abe.
Very shortly I will give an explanation and everyone will understand my issues with the documentary and whether or not it is an original or rerun. In retrospect, I probably should never have even mentioned it.
ReplyDeletedhall
Dr. Harr - I would like to see your response documents in the NC Judicial Standards Commission as well. Will you post them soon?
August 26, 2024 at 7:18 AM
Hey, dhall.
Have been busy. Want to file a motion in the next day or two. Will have breathing room after that.
I think the Response is important, and approximately eight pages in length and with not too many exhibits, so I am sure that I can have it posted sometime this weekend.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous
Sid:
The Oxygen Channel website summary of the September 8 episode refers to a “jailhouse interview” with Crystal. When did the interview occur? Who conducted the interview?
August 26, 2024 at 5:14 PM
Hey, Anony.
I was pretty much out of the loop with the production, so I know very little of the specifics. Haven't previewed it, and don't know what the documentary will present.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous
Sid has filed his response to the motion to Dismiss in the Harr v. North Carolina Judicial Standards Commission case.
He also filed a motion to Amend/Correct the complaint.
Sid -- will you make the documents you filed in the response and the amended complaint available for us to read?
August 23, 2024 at 12:03 PM
Hey, Anony.
I believe I will be able to have the Response posted by this weekend.