Showing posts with label Bev Perdue. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bev Perdue. Show all posts

Tuesday, April 30, 2013

The North Carolina justice system is broken, corrupted, and hijacked!



PART ONE


PART TWO


Word count: 1,112

Instead of “equal justice for all,” North Carolina follows a tenet of “selective justice based on Class and Color.” This is manifested by the fact that it is broken, corrupted, and hijacked.
That the system is broken is undeniable in lieu of the numerous incidents of innocent individuals being unjustly incarcerated for months and years, only later to be exonerated. Of few of North Carolina’s wrongly incarcerated include Erick Daniels, James Arthur Johnson, Floyd Brown, Alan Gell, Carletta Alston, and Kenneth Kagonyera.

Distinguished UNC-Chapel Hill law professor Rich Rosen, in a recent paper, cited that the Tar Heel state lagged only behind the states of Illinois and Louisiana in the number of death row inmates found later to be innocent of committing capital crimes.

Of those innocents who have been wrongfully sentenced to death or life include Darryl Hunt, Glen Edward Chapman, Levon “Bo” Jones, Gregory Taylor, and Joseph Sledge… all of whom have been deprived of precious decades of freedom… lost years in the prime of their lives for which no amount of money can compensate.

That the system is corrupted is plainly evidenced by the facts surrounding the trumped up criminal charges against Duke Lacrosse victim/accuser Crystal Mangum. Incarcerated for 689 days prior to making bond to await trial for first degree murder in the death of her boyfriend Reginald Daye, Ms. Mangum was the true victim of a vendetta prosecution as payback for her role in the Duke Lacrosse case.

The events surrounding Daye’s death clearly show that Mangum was physically assaulted in a domestic violence incident and that she stabbed Daye in self-defense. Facts point out that the prosecutors, in charging Mangum in Daye’s death, used a false and fraudulent autopsy report produced by the North Carolina Deputy Chief Medical Examiner Dr. Clay Nichols.

Discrepancies in the medical findings are readily apparent between the autopsy report and all of the other medical records, including the operative report, orthopedic consultation
report, EMS records and other documents found in prosecution discovery.

Comparisons can be made on the following directory which includes the autopsy report as well as other medical records. Clicking the “Notation” button will highlight important passages. Clicking the “Clear notes” button will return to the previous directory where another selection can be made. After completion of viewing the documents, click the “Proceed” button to continue with the flog.

Another problem with the autopsy report is its conclusion that Daye died due to “complications of a stab wound to the chest.” This is not merely misleading or disingenuous, but an outright lie… but a lie that Prosecutor Kelly Gauger required in order to charge Crystal Mangum with murder following Daye’s death. No nexus is presented by Dr. Nichols between the stab wound and Daye’s death.

All indications are that the emergency surgery, for the wound that was not considered to be life-threatening, went well with Reginald Daye’s prognosis for a full recovery.

Dr. Nichols conveniently omitted the events that contributed to Daye’s death that included delirium tremens, an esophageal intubation that precipitated cardiac arrest and brain death, a weeklong comatose state, and the elective removal from life support by the medical staff at Duke University Hospital that resulted in Daye’s demise.

The autopsy report can be compared with other medical records and documents in order to support the premise that the true cause of Daye’s death had nothing to do with the stab wound, but rather the errantly placed endotracheal tube.

That the North Carolina justice system has been hijacked is realized by the fact that the mainstream media, politicians, civil rights organization, and community leaders, despite having full knowledge of the significant problems with the autopsy report and prosecution’s case against Mangum, have elected to remain mute and idle… acting as enablers or conspirators after the fact. No one has Nifongian courage to challenge the blatant and disparate legal mistreatment of Crystal Mangum by the state.

This is the same thing that happened to then Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong six years ago when he prosecuted the Duke Lacrosse case. The state worked with the media in disparaging Mr. Nifong and raining in public contempt against a man who was merely doing his job, but in a dedicated and independent manner.

The subsequent persecution of Mr. Nifong pulled a shroud over the state’s justice system, and it is therefore no wonder that Dr. Clay Nichols would rather commit a criminal act than go against the wishes of the Powers-That-Be… those who have stolen from Tar Heelians the reins of justice.

North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper and former Governor Bev Perdue were made aware of allegations of fraudulence in the autopsy report by Dr. Nichols. The state’s Medical Board was notified about Dr. Nichols’ fabricated autopsy report and has determined not to take action against him. The North Carolina State Bar received complaints against Durham Prosecutors Gauger and Charlene Coggins-Franks and it, likewise, decided not to proceed.

Currently North Carolina is a state where those in positions of power and those with a voice feel compromised because of the example made of Mr. Nifong. The State, the media, and even the defense attorneys for Mangum have as their number one priority to protect the medical examiner and Duke University Hospital… even if it means an unlawful felony conviction and years of imprisonment for an innocent African American mother of three… Mangum.

All avenues at the state level to rectify the injustice against Mangum have been extensive and have been exhausted. It is time for the Federal government to get involved because the state is the problem.

Consider the following for example: this state absolutely adores former Senator Jesse Helms, an unrepentant racist. The media refers to him in glowing terms while ignoring his bigoted past… Congresswoman Renee Elmers wants to name a Federal Building in downtown Raleigh after him. Not only that, but the General Assembly nearly unanimously paid tribute to him (one negative vote), however, this same body cannot drum up enough votes to grant a pardon to former Governor William Wood Holden who had the audacity to confront the Ku Klux Klan and prevent its lynching of African Americans in the 19th century.

Furthermore the state is tossing out the Racial Justice Act and rushing forward to actions necessary to commence executions of the African American majority of death row inmates.

The case against Crystal Mangum is clearly one that represents the state’s justice system of one which acts selectively based on Class and Color.

Lady Justice is demanding that the Federal government intercede on behalf of the defendant, and justice itself. 

Wednesday, January 2, 2013

Ten is not enough

(Note:  UPDATE ON POSTING OF THE SUPER-FLOG)

Work on the Super-Flog is moving along nicely, but because it is such a huge project, its completion is taking longer than anticipated.  The latest ETP [Estimated Time of Posting] is Saturday, January 5, 2013.  It will contain information about the State Bar's action against me, as well as important never-before-seen prosecution discovery that will blow your socks off. 

Please be patient as the Super-Flog will be well worth the wait.

On the last day of 2012, Monday, December 31st, North Carolina Governor Bev Perdue issued pardons of innocence for the group of defendants known as the “Wilmington 10.” For the past seven months she had been under increased pressure to pardon them, as new evidence was unearthed that cast further doubts on the fairness of the criminal trial held forty years ago.

The trial and subsequent convictions of the nine African American men and Caucasian woman stemmed from civil unrest in Wilmington in the early 1970’s over school integration. The ten were charged and convicted of firebombing a white owned grocery store in a black neighborhood and then firing weapons at emergency responders. Amnesty International and journalists questioned their arrest and the fairness of their trials, and in 1978 Governor Jim Hunt commuted their sentences… but he withheld a pardon pending an appeal by prosecutors. Two years later, in 1980, the U.S. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the convictions citing prosecutorial misconduct.

The Wilmington Ten injustice is one that should not have taken forty years to rectify… during which time four of the ten have died, and all have had trouble recovering from the injustice and stigma of being a convicted felon.

I applaud Governor Perdue for pardoning the Wilmington Ten, however, unlike others I do not feel her actions were courageous or heroic. With the mounting evidence turned up by author Tim Tyson which highlighted the many misdeeds and malfeasances of the prosecutor Jay Stroud during the trial, she really had no alternative but to grant a pardon of innocence. Instead of waiting seven months after the petition for clemency was filed before making a decision, Governor Perdue should have acted immediately in granting the full pardon.

The governor was slow to issue a pardon of innocence in the Gregory F. Taylor case too… the only other instance where she granted a pardon during her four year tenure as the state’s chief executive. I wrote her three letters during the months following Taylor’s exoneration by the three judge innocence panel pleading for her to grant a pardon of innocence so that he could pursue compensation for his seven years of wrongful incarceration.

I am in disagreement with all the plaudits heaped upon her by Benjamin Chavis (one of the Wilmington Ten), U.S. Representative David Price, and NAACP State president Dr. Rev. William Barber, II, the editorial board of The News & Observer, and others because Governor Perdue fell woefully short by failing to issue pardons of innocence to Erick Daniels, Shawn Massey, and Glen Chapman… three exonerated black defendants, the first two being denied pardons by the Governor’s Clemency Board, and the latter who was wrongly convicted and put on death row. The innocence of these three men is undeniable, with no forensic evidence connecting them to the crimes for which they were charged, and witness descriptions in the first two incidents being at odds with the defendants. Erick Daniels was fourteen at the time of his arrest on an armed robbery charge in which he was identified by the shape of his eyebrows in a middle school yearbook. He served seven years of a ten to fourteen year sentence before his conviction was tossed during a hearing for a new trial. Shawn Massey, like Daniels, differed dramatically in hair style described by witness to the robbery for which he was convicted. He served twelve years behind bars before an innocence project at Duke University Law School took up his case and successfully affected his exoneration.

Glen Chapman, who has had his petition for a pardon of innocence filed with the Governor’s Clemency Panel for more than a year, has not been issued a ruling.

These three men have had the best years of their lives wrongfully taken from them by a selective justice system that is based on Class and Color. Freedom, is without doubt the most valuable possession a man or woman can possess, and to have it wrenched away without probable cause or credible evidence is devastating. In addition, the wrongful conviction for a felony results in a stigma which has an adverse bearing on the innocent defendant’s life forever.

Erick Daniels, Shawn Massey, and Glen Chapman are all deserving of a pardon of innocence so that they can pursue compensation to which they are entitled by laws enacted by the North Carolina General Assembly. They deserve to be pardoned now… not in another forty years or so. Governor Perdue has had the opportunity to clean up the criminal injustice slate involving the three, but it looks as though she will let it pass. I am not surprised as she as proven to me that she lacks the Nifongian courage to do the right thing. The governor can make all the flowery and political correct speeches she wants to about past and present racial injustices, however, when it comes down to it, it’s nothing more than meaningless talk… as racial injustice continues to run rampant and she, with the opportunity to do something about it, has taken no action. The least she could have done is deliver pardons of innocence for Daniels, Massey, and Chapman.

As far as I am concerned, the governor’s failure to grant pardons of innocence to all thirteen mentioned above represents a disappointing end to a disappointing four year gubernatorial tenure… and leaves her with a disappointing legacy.





Wednesday, September 26, 2012

Prosecution’s not-so-secret weapon v. Mangum’s only weapon

Word count: 2,177

As I have stated before, the trial and inquisition given to Joan of Arc by the English was far fairer and much more humane than the state’s treatment afforded to Crystal Mangum, the Duke Lacrosse case victim/accuser. Ms. Mangum has clearly been subjected to a malign vendetta-driven prosecution by a wide ranging cabal of conspirators with a goal of exacting misguided payback for her role in the Duke Lacrosse case… and you can bet that their pursuit of this persecution is based in part on the fact that she is an African American woman. Those colluding to subvert justice and punish Mangum consist of the medical examiner Dr. Clay Nichols, the mainstream media (which to date has done a magnificent job of concealing the truth from the masses), and the Enablers… individuals and organization who are in positions to help put a halt to the injustices against Mangum, such as the NAACP, but elect to remain silent and do nothing due to lack of will, lack of courage, or both. One of the prosecution’s most valued and no-so-secret weapon is H. Wood Vann, the defense attorney for Crystal Mangum. The fact that he was the Court’s initial choice in appointing a defense attorney, speaks volumes as the entire Tar Heelian justice system has been and is now relying on him to do the bidding of the prosecutors.

Although the State’s initial goal may have been to win a conviction for first degree murder in order to hand Mangum a life sentence, the intervention by the grass roots organization Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong has taken that draconian option out of play and placed the prosecution on defense. The State, representing the city of Durham, is now fighting to extract a plea deal (preferably to a felony) for time served in order to extricate the City of Bull from any civil liability for its malicious prosecution of Mangum. And it is Mangum’s own attorney, Woody Vann, who has been given the mandate to deliver her on a silver platter to Durham prosecutor Charlene Coggins-Franks. You can bet that Mr. Vann will continue to dutifully carry out his assignment as he already indicated that he does not intend to step aside amidst criticism and accusations of some Mangum supporters… accusations against which he has no answer and which include the following:
(1) his failure to file a motion to dismiss the murder charge due to lack of probable cause and a charge based upon a blatantly bogus autopsy report;
(2) his failure to file a motion to dismiss the larceny of chose in action charge due to lack of probable cause;
(3) his withholding important exculpatory evidence from his client including photographs which document her injuries and suggest that Reginald Daye was the aggressor;
(4) his withholding important exculpatory evidence from his client including the report from Dr. Christena L. Roberts which assesses Daye’s cause of death and the autopsy report by Dr. Nichols; and
(5) his testing the waters on behalf of the prosecutors to see if Mangum was ready to accept a plea deal by presenting one to her and advising her to take it… saying that she had a weak case.

For Mr. Vann to suggest that the case for Mangum’s defense is weak when the prosecution is willing to drop a first degree murder charge to assault with a deadly weapon for time served (about 500 days at the time) shows the ludicrous nature of his contentions about the offer. Rest assured that after Ms. Mangum is softened up with more jail time, the plea deal will be offered once more, because the prosecution is not going to take this case to trial, because it has no case. And because, as Mangum’s legal counsel, Mr. Vann holds a position of his client’s trust, he is charged with bringing about her downfall.

On September 18, 2012, Mr. Vann and his collaborators put on a court performance in which he was pretending to valiantly fight to have Ms. Mangum’s bail reduced from $200,000 to $50,000. I felt all along that this event was staged for Mangum’s benefit and that all participants involved in this charade knew that there was absolutely no way in Hades that her bail would be reduced one cent. Vann had been taking a lot of well-deserved criticism from Mangum supporters for not doing anything for his client, so in response he felt forced to put on this little courtroom drama. Mr. Vann’s true allegiances and fidelity are evidenced by his actions in which includes his failure to seek dismissal of the bogus charges against Mangum, his withholding all pertinent discovery and evidence not already in her possession from her, his infrequent visits and lack of communication with his client, and his general lack of urgency and willingness to allow Mangum to unjustly sit in jail separated from her three children. The bottom line is that Mr. Vann has sold his soul to the Blue Devil, as his priorities obviously are to protect Duke University and its hospital from negative publicity.

Because it is obvious to anyone with at least one functioning gray matter neuron that the stab wound inflicted by Mangum was not responsible for Reginald Daye’s brain death and subsequent elective removal from life support a week later and resultant death, the defense and prosecution have even shifted their stories to suggest that Mr. Daye’s brain death was due to a massive aspiration following a bout of emesis. Even the mainstream media is going along with this misdirection by not mentioning the fact that Mr. Daye was improperly intubated by Duke University Hospital staff. This medical mistake that attorneys on both sides and the media are trying to keep covered up led to hypoxia which resulted in brain death and Daye’s comatose state.

In addition to protecting Duke University Hospital’s reputation, Mr. Vann is entrusted with eliminating any legal liability Ms. Mangum has against the city of Durham for bringing a malicious prosecution against her. The privileged Duke Lacrosse defendants, who never spent a single day in jail and who were able to shake down Duke University for $20 million each, feel that they are now entitled to receive $10 million each from the city of Durham just because Attorney General Roy Cooper felt pressured by Joe Cheshire to proclaim that the Duke Lacrosse defendants were “innocent.” Not only that, but the mainstream media has lionized and coddled these boys while viciously attacking Crystal Mangum and labeling her as a liar who is emotionally unstable, violent, irrational and a threat to society. In this backdrop, Ms. Mangum’s attorney is trying to wrangle from her a plea deal that would let the city and its prosecutors off the hook for compensation she rightfully deserves for a premeditated vindictive and malicious prosecution that has deprived her of her liberty for nearly a year and a half and deprived her of contact with her three children who love her and need her.

Whereas Mr. Vann is the prosecution’s not-so-secret weapon against Ms. Mangum, the Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong and Mangum’s supporters are her only weapons against an injustice system bent on making her suffer because of politics related to the Duke Lacrosse case. Legal layperson Sidney Harr, a retired physician who has been sounding the alarm about serious problems with the Nichols’ autopsy report of April 14, 2011 since its release to the public in mid-August 2011, has helped Ms. Mangum draft and file motions to the court to dismiss the charges against her. The result netted by his action has been for the North Carolina State Bar to investigate Harr for the unauthorized practice of law; the action originating from complaints by “more than one journalist,” and whose identities have been hidden by the Bar which assumed the role of complainant for that specific purpose. Then, when Harr filed a Pro se petition for writ of mandamus to order prosecutors to dismiss charges against Mangum for lack of probable cause and to order attorney Vann to desist from withholding evidence and discovery from his client Mangum, the State Bar launched another investigation for unauthorized law practice (this one scheduled to be heard on October 24, 2012). However, all of Harr’s complaints filed with the Bar against prosecutors Kelly Gauger and Charlene Coggins-Franks (for malicious prosecution against Mangum without probable cause) and H. Wood Vann (for withholding evidence and prosecution discovery from his client Mangum) were not acted upon.

What contributes to making this an uphill battle for the Committee and Mangum supporters is the silence and idleness of the enablers – NAACP, the ACLU, the North Carolina Coalition Against Domestic Violence (in Durham), politicians (including those in the North Carolina General Assembly), and civil rights and religious community leaders. It is understandable why people refuse to get involved in trying to help Crystal Mangum… they realize that to do so is politically incorrect and they justifiably fear the consequences. A lesson was learned in 2007 in North Carolina when former Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong was persecuted by the state, disbarred by the State Bar, and crucified in the media because he went forward with his prosecution of the three defendants in the Duke Lacrosse case… that lesson being that acting ethically and with professional integrity will not protect an individual from being mauled by the system. This has even been borne out in this situation as Harr has already been confronted twice by the NC State Bar… actions against him initially instigated by the media.

I am of the firm belief that Dr. Clay Nichols felt under duress to go along with the program and issue a report he knew to be fraudulent in order to wrongly implicate Mangum lest he be subjected to the torturous treatment meted out to Mr. Nifong. The politicizing of Duke Lacrosse related issues have cast a pall over the state’s criminal justice system unlike any other case, forcing some good and decent people to unwillingly take part in corruption and others to look the other way. The timorous NAACP is looking the other way and has been quiet as a dormouse when it comes to the gross injustices against Ms. Mangum… as has the aforementioned enablers. Governor Bev Perdue has been apprised of the injustice against Mangum as has Attorney General Roy Cooper, and they have both elected to ignore the issue and allow an innocent mother of three to remain locked behind bars because of a misguided vendetta.

The Committee is engaged in waging a lonely battle for justice with the enablers being effectively throttled by a statewide reign of political-inspired terror that is ant-Nifong and anti-Mangum. After peeling off the veneer to expose the true nature of the prosecution’s not-so-secret weapon, it is time for Crystal Mangum to jettison Mr. Vann… deadweight that is undermining her case while propping up hopes for the prosecution. For example, Mr. Vann has consistently been inconsistent in his explanations about prosecution discovery and evidence. First he tells Ms. Mangum that he has received Dr. Roberts’ report but will withhold it from her. Then, after confronted by the Committee he states that he has not yet received the report. First he tells Ms. Mangum that he will withhold from her the photographs taken by prosecution related to the April 2011 incident… photographs which document her injuries at Daye’s hand and the other exculpatory evidence. Then, after pressed by the Committee, he told Ms. Mangum that he sent the disc containing the photographs to the printer and they came up blank. The most recent explanation is that the photographs provided by the prosecution show only images of smoke damage to the apartment in the 2010 case… that he has no images related to the 2011 case. Durham Police Forensics report  (Note: the smoke damage was the result of Durham Police officers allowing clothing on fire in a bathtub to burn for fifteen minutes without any attempt by officers to intervene and douse the blaze by turning on the bathtub spigot or shower.) He gave Mangum no indication as to when he would have possession of the above referenced evidence and discovery. He gave her no indication of any action he might take to expedite there retrieval… documents and evidence that holds the key to her release from custody and the dismissal of charges against her as the photos support her claims of self-defense and the Roberts report will undoubtedly reinforce the baseless foundation for the prosecution’s murder charge.

As this justice system tragedy continues to play out, Mangum’s sole supporters will continue to carry the good fight against the state and its not-so-secret weapon… Woody Vann, a wolf in sheep’s clothing who is guarding the hen house. Even so, it is Mangum who will prevail as truth is on her side… and hopefully other current enablers will eventually muster up the courage to do the right thing by moving from the sidelines and take part in this all-important conflict with justice on the line. 

Monday, July 16, 2012

Complaint filed with A.G.O. against Durham prosecutors


Word count: 984

Within hours of posting this blog, Sidney B. Harr, the Lay Advocate for the Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong, filed a formal complaint with the North Carolina Attorney General’s Office against Durham County prosecutors Kelly Gauger, Charlene Coggins-Franks, and Orange County Medical Examiner Dr. Clay Nichols. Dr. Nichols authored the April 14, 2011 Autopsy Examination Report on Reginald Daye which contained may discrepancies in its findings when compared with operative and consultative reports. Furthermore, the conclusion arrived at by Dr. Nichols – that Daye’s death was due to complications of a stab wound to the chest – is without support or documentation. No nexus is established by the medical examiner between the stab wound and Daye’s death.

Filing of this complaint was made with great sadness and reluctance, and unfortunately deemed necessary in the pursuit of justice for Crystal Mangum, the Duke Lacrosse victim/accuser who is wrongfully charged with Daye’s death. Many communications were made with prosecutors Kelly Gauger and Charlene Coggins-Franks, beseeching them to dismiss the baseless charges against Mangum. Letter upon letter was hand delivered to the office of the Durham County District Attorney’s office requesting him to prevent reputations from needlessly being smeared and lives destroyed… but to no avail. Even reaching out to the state’s highest elected executive official, Governor Bev Perdue, went for naught as she ignored the frequent communications pleading for the innocent victim of a vendetta prosecution to be cleared of frivolous charges and granted precious freedom so that she could finally be reunited with her three children.

Problems abound with not only the first degree murder charge, but with the little known/rarely used “larceny of chose in action” charge, as well. Prosecutors provide no credible evidence that Mangum took two cashier’s checks and lack credible evidence that she had intent or made any effort to unlawfully convert the checks for her benefit. In addition, both charges lack motive. Fact is, that like the 2010 arson case, on April 3, 2011, Crystal Mangum was the victim of an assault by an intoxicated Daye. Mangum was noted to have small lacerations around her left eye and a swollen lower lip. In addition, clumps of her hair were found at the scene, and the bathroom door she locked behind her in seeking refuge from Daye, was kicked in by him. What more is necessary to suggest physical abuse? Instead of charging Reginald Daye with domestic violence, assault on a female, false imprisonment, and placing him under arrest, Daye is not charged with a crime and is determined to be a victim of domestic violence.

What happened to Crystal Mangum should bode ill for advocacy groups such as the North Carolina Coalition Against Domestic Violence. However, despite attempts to get the Durham-based activists involved in the injustice, they, like so many others, have elected to remain on the sidelines as spectators. They are ignoring the message being sent by prosecutors that if a spouse is being physically abused and he/she fights back in self-defense, they run the risk of being labeled the aggressor. I am betting that the people at the Coalition believe, however, that the treatment of Crystal Mangum is singular and not a widespread likelihood… something that they can live with as most Durhamians possess animosity towards Mangum as it is.

Attorney General Roy Cooper dismissed charges against the Duke Lacrosse defendants claiming that there was no credible evidence. The question with the prosecution of Crystal Mangum for murder and larceny is where is the credible evidence against her? Regarding the larceny charge, the prosecutors would be hard pressed at best to even prove that a crime was committed.

In dismissing the charges against the Duke Lacrosse defendants, A.G. Cooper questioned the credibility of Mangum, the accuser. In the current murder case against Mangum, there is no doubt that the Autopsy Examination Report of April 14, 2011 by Dr. Clay Nichols is false, misleading, and fraudulent in its findings and conclusion. Mr. Cooper should be questioning how the prosecutors could bring such a charge based on an autopsy report that is totally lacking in credibility… grounds for immediate dismissal.

The number of 106 fatal victims of 2011 North Carolina domestic violence probably erroneously included Reginald Daye. Truth is that Daye’s death should be categorized under “deaths due to medical malpractice.” Mangum prevented herself from being a statistic of domestic violence fatalities when she fought back against her attacker by stabbing him… a non-life threatening wound. The attorney general’s concern about the high incident of deaths due to domestic violence should encourage him to protect all victims of physical abuse, including those who fight back in self-defense.

Although the Duke Lacrosse defendants never spent a day in jail, the day of the filing of the complaint with the A.G.O. marks the 470th wrongful day of incarceration of Crystal Mangum, a true victim of domestic violence and a victim of a vendetta prosecution by Durham prosecutors bent on carrying out a misguided mission to exact retribution against Mangum for her role in the Duke Lacrosse case. It is needless to say that such a perversion and miscarriage of justice against Mangum would not be occurring if Mike Nifong were still the Durham district attorney.

Whether Attorney General Cooper will allow the Durham prosecutors to continue to throw away precious taxpayer dollars on a Carpetbagger jihadist inspired vendetta against Mangum remains to be seen. Hopefully the state will be able to resolve this problem of imperfect justice without interference from the federal government and the national attention that accompanies it. For the sake of Crystal Mangum, victims of domestic abuse, Lady Justice, and all Tar Heelians, A.G. Roy Cooper will do the right thing and see that all criminal charges against Crystal Mangum are dismissed. 


Click on the link below to view the Formal Complaint filed as well as related documents:
LINK: http://www.justice4nifong.com/legal/cgm/agoCOdirec.htm

Tuesday, February 21, 2012

It’s a done deal… Cline is out!



To Access the flog, click on the LINK below.
http://www.justice4nifong.com/direc/flog/flog15.html

Tracey Cline, the Durham County district attorney, will shortly be relieved of her position. The handwriting has been spray-painted on the wall like sickening graffiti for many months. In September 2011, when The News & Observer came out with its three-part series titled “Twisted Truth,” it heralded the official beginning of its smear campaign against Ms. Cline; and anyone with any familiarity with North Carolina politics and law, especially as practiced in Durham, knew back then that her days in office were numbered. I was aware from what I read in the newspaper that Ms. Cline was in the media’s crosshairs long before the publication of their “Twisted Truth” series.

As staff investigative reporter Mandy Locke stated in her article in the Sunday, February 19, 2012 edition of the newspaper, Tracey Cline has uncommon zeal in prosecuting those charged with crimes… and for that reason, she will lose her publicly elected position by virtue of the decision of one man… a superior court judge from Franklin County, Robert H. Hobgood.

According to the Saturday, February 18, 2012 edition of The News & Observer, the hearing that is to hold court, on what I believe to be a pre-determined outcome, will begin on Monday, February 20, 2012… Presidents’ Day… a national holiday.

The removal affidavit process was initiated in mid-January 2012 by Durham Defense Attorney Kerry Sutton. She was critical of Cline because of Cline’s repeated attempts to keep Superior Court Judge Orlando Hudson from hearing any of her criminal cases. Cline believes her attacks against Judge Hudson are a justified reflection of her passion for prosecuting the bad guys whereas her detractors, such as Attorney Sutton, feels Cline’s attacks against a sitting judge are detrimental to the judicial process and puts it in “disrepute.” In specific, Attorney Sutton has referred to some of Cline’s more colorful passages as “venom.”

Three actions by Judge Robert Hobgood since taking control of the proceeding which finds Cline in the hot seat do much to peel away veneers of objectivity and fairness. The alternatives to the decisions taken by the judge would have been preferable, I feel, and made it more likely that a fair and unbiased ruling could be reached. These important decisions are as follows:

One – Judge Hobgood’s decision to immediately suspend Tracey Cline was extremely prejudicial, and uncalled for. There was no impending threat to justice, life, or liberty had Ms. Cline been allowed to remain in her elected position until a determination could have been reached at the culmination of the hearing. Instead the only dividend reaped from this action was to force taxpayers’ monies to go towards paying the salary of an interim D.A. while Ms. Cline is suspended with pay. That is reason enough for allowing Ms. Cline to remain as the district attorney pending a final disposition.

Not only that, but issuing a suspension greatly prejudices the case against Ms. Cline, giving the impression that her conduct was so potentially hazardous that it required her immediate removal. Were I sitting in judgment of Ms. Cline in this matter, I would not have called for her suspension… as a matter of fairness.

Two – Judge Hobgood’s decision to deny Ms. Cline’s attorneys adequate time to prepare is a major disadvantage and handicap to the defendant. It is obvious that her attorneys, who were recently hired out of Pinehurst law firm, have not had time to get up to speed and prepare an adequate and effective defense. Delaying the hearing for several weeks is the reasonable approach in this instance. Denying Cline’s attorneys time to investigate, strategize, and build a case is not justifiable. It is like scheduling a boxing match and not giving one opponent the opportunity to train for the bout.

This is perhaps the main point of the three that bodes ill regarding the chance that Ms. Cline might hang on to her job. My understanding is that Attorney Sutton, who launched the removal process against Ms. Cline, argued against a delay because it would be inconvenient to some people involved. The initial delay of only one week that Judge Hobgood gave Ms. Cline, was stingy; and she required most of that time just to recover from a serious bout of pneumonia. Sutton also chided Cline for not being prepared when in Ms. Cline’s position to find legal representation without any conflict of interest is next to impossible.

I submit that the process of attaining true justice should be placed ahead of expediency and convenience. For Ms. Cline to receive justice in this hearing, it is imperative that she be given ample time to prepare her defense.

Three – Judge Hobgood’s decision to limit the scope of the hearing to statements Tracey Cline made against Judge Hudson. In other words, Judge Hobgood wants to take questionable actions by the media, mainly The News & Observer, and possible mistakes or misconduct by Judge Hudson out of the equation. By not allowing in questions put before journalists, how can she uphold a position that the media acted conspiratorially and with malice? By not being permitted to question the judge’s behavior and rulings in cases which she prosecuted, how can she prove bias on Judge Hudson’s part? Apparently, the only issue Judge Hobgood is willing to consider is Ms. Cline’s harsh diatribe against Hudson… period.

One of the commenters to my blog recently enlightened me with information that North Carolina is one of twelve states without a process for the general public to recall elected officials. The reason for that is because North Carolina is a backward state that has a little know rarely used law to allow a single individual to remove an official who was elected by the people. The more progressive states give the people the power, instead of a single individual, to remove the officials who the masses are responsible for putting into office. When Judge Hobgood removes Tracey Cline as Durham district attorney, he will be defying the will of the people who voted for her.

I believe in treating everyone with respect, be they judge, preacher, pauper, scoundrel, or Republican. Likewise we are all human beings with imperfections and frailties. There are no deities walking amongst us, and that includes those sitting on benches in our courtrooms. I believe in treating them with respect, but I do not feel they should be immune from vigorous criticism.

From what I can ascertain from Attorney Sutton’s complaint, she is appalled at the viciousness of the dialogue Ms. Cline directs at Judge Hudson… but from what I can tell about the judge, his skin is as thick as a rhinoceros, and he can take anything that Tracey Cline can dish out… or anything that I can dish out, although my basic comments about him have been in a lighthearted vein. For an example, I used humor in my comic strip – “The MisAdventures of Super-Duper Cooper” – to criticize his decision to deny Michael Peterson’s defense a new trial when it became known that his prosecutors withheld the existence of a tire iron that could have possibly been a murder weapon. Personally, I felt that that prosecutorial transgression demanded that the murder charge against him be dismissed.

I am not at conflict with Judge Hudson on all of his rulings. He was right on target when he dismissed the charge against African American Erick Daniels and freed him. Although he is deserving of a pardon so that he can receive compensation for the seven years of wrongful incarceration he served after his arrest at age fourteen, the racial-based policies in the governor’s office have denied his petition. The governor refuses to correct this injustice because Durham’s African American political leaders, such as Senator Floyd McKissick, and Representatives Larry Hall and Mickey Michaux, as well as Congressman David Price are enabling this discriminatory behavior by remaining silent.

I can appreciate the passion of Ms. Cline’s rebukes of Judge Hudson, but I cannot speak to the wisdom of them. My verbiage in complaints against U.S. Magistrate Judge P. Trevor Sharp tended to be a little spicy, but most importantly, it was accurate. My encounter with this magistrate judge stems from a lawsuit that I filed against Duke University in April 2011. The media has kept the public in the dark about the discrimination incident the previous year in which Duke University attempted to arrest me for being a Mike Nifong supporter. I complained about Magistrate Judge Sharp because, in making a recommendation adverse to me, he lied about the facts of my case in an attempt to boost the position of Duke University. As things now stand, I await hearing from the U.S. District Court judge about a decision regarding the defendants’ motion to dismiss; one which takes into consideration a recommendation that contains lies and misleading statements from the magistrate judge.

Finally, for anyone to believe that Tracey Cline’s ravings against Judge Hudson are capable of pulling the Durham D.A. Office or the justice system into disrepute is unrealistic. There is reason enough without that to draw such conclusions… specifically the 2010 and 2011 vendetta prosecutions against Crystal Mangum, the Duke Lacrosse victim/accuser.

Like the referee says prior to a coin toss, there are two sides to every coin. The fact that the suspended Durham district attorney has an unbridled zeal when it comes to prosecuting those charged with crimes, could very well be comforting to crime victims, their advocates, and those ensconced in crime-ridden neighborhoods. On the other hand, many defense attorneys may very well prefer going up against a district attorney who is more docile, passive, and compliant than Ms. Cline.

At all costs, justice should be strived for in any court and in every case. However, the outcome of this case is plainly evident. Judge Robert Hobgood is going to remove Tracey Cline as Durham district attorney. It’s a done deal. What is scheduled to proceed in court on Monday, Presidents’ Day, is nothing more than window dressing… a charade to give the appearances of justice being served. It is a deception for the unenlightened.

I would recommend that as soon as the court next convenes, the judge proceeds directly to issuing an order removing Tracey Cline as the elected Durham district attorney without any testimony, witnesses, or evidence. Since the outcome is foreordained and justice irreparable compromised, there’s no sense in inconveniencing anyone by going through the motions of holding a hearing. I am sure that Attorney Sutton would have no objections.


Friday, January 6, 2012

Comic book roles for Governor Perdue and Speaker Tillis

I have an idea for a fantastic super villain for the Batman franchise… North Carolina Speaker Thom Tillis who would be known as “The Trickster.” The antics and shenanigans that he could foment would put the Joker and the Riddler, combined, to shame. Mr. Tillis has been caught with his hand in the hypocritical cookie jar in the past by his shameful bonuses and pay raises to some of the cronies and sycophants on his staff while preaching from the Bible of Conservative Financial ideology. So the reasonable person with at least a scintilla of intelligence has some idea of what to expect from this wily politician. However, last night, he actually outdid himself with his late-night vote… and even though I denounce his vindictively inspired actions against the North Carolina Association of Educators in his early morning overriding veto to weaken the teachers’ labor union, I can’t help but hold a bit of admiration for his “in-your-face villainy.” One thing about Thom Tillis, the man has no shame, as he has proven in the past with his raises to his staff favorites in a time of austerity when state jobs are being eliminated, workloads increased, and salaries slashed.

Mr. Tillis doesn’t pretend to be fair… he doesn’t pretend to believe in the principle of transparent government… he doesn’t pretend to have an ounce of compassion for those in need or tolerance for those of different beliefs and/or opinions. He has shown the ability to boldly act, without any apparent concern for the consequences of his actions which have generated a slew of lawsuits and indignant outrage. That Speaker Tillis makes waves would be an understatement, as he is a veritable one-man tsunami.

A consummate Tea Party conservative, Tillis orchestrated the late-night override of the Perdue veto under a shroud of secrecy. Even his fellow Republicans were unaware of his nefarious plans until the eleventh hour. Then, after stirring up things with his questionable clandestine activities, Tillis has the audacity to proclaim his actions to be legal… and dares the Democrats to challenge them.

I have yet another villain for Batman to confront… Governor Bev Perdue as “Lady Two Face.” She puts on airs to the public that she’s a paragon when it comes to governing under transparency and stakes a claim on being a champion of racial equality and justice. Governor Perdue prides herself, with a big pat on the back, for vetoing the ethically challenged Republicans’ attempt to gut the provisions of the recently enacted Racial Justice Act. However, when it comes to her actions closer scrutiny shows they do not even come close to reflecting her lofty rhetoric about equal justice.

One need look no further than her treatment of petitions for pardons submitted by Erick Daniels and Shawn Massey, two African American men who were unjustly convicted for crimes they did not commit and who served, respectively, more than seven and twelve years of wrongful incarceration. They need a pardon from the governor in order to be eligible for compensation for their years of wrongful imprisonment. But… KAPOW!! No pardon. Both of their petitions were denied by Lady Two Face and her hench-people. And why were they denied, need you ask? For one reason, and one reason only… because of the color of their skin. Make no mistake about it.

If there is a legitimate reason other than racial prejudice for Governor Perdue denying a pardon to Erick Daniels and Shawn Massey, then she and her staff are keeping it top secret… as opaque as a lead-lined vault. When I specifically requested to know from the governor why Daniels’ request for a pardon was denied, her general counsel lied by telling me that the Governor’s office conducted its own investigation which did not clear Daniels of the crime for which he was convicted and served time… but due to “confidentiality concerns” they could not tell me what they were or divulge any information about their investigation. The governor’s office provided me with nothing more than a pathetic excuse which was really intended to keep its racist bias confidential.

Late in 2011, Wake County Democratic Party President Mack Paul authorized a three member panel to find out why the Governor denied a pardon to Erick Daniels. I spoke to two of the three, and they both told me that their efforts to obtain information were rebuffed by the governor’s office… there were no justifications given as to why his pardon request was turned down. In other words, the governor who proclaims to be a proponent of transparent government will even keep results of a criminal investigation hidden from members of the Wake County Democratic Party.

If DC Comics does not take me up on my generous suggestions for these two diabolical additions to their varied stable of villains, then take heart, readers. I can always find a place for them in my strip, “The MisAdventures of Super-Duper Cooper.”


Monday, September 12, 2011

Governor's racist pardon policy denies compensation to wrongly incarcerated African Americans


Click the link below to view interactive flog:

http://justice4nifong.com/direc/flog/flog8.html

Wake County prosecutor Tom Ford prosecuted Gregory Taylor for the 1991 murder of Jacquetta Thomas. Although he lacked evidence against Taylor in the death of the black woman, Ford maliciously pursued the case against Taylor because he would not implicate African American Johnny Beck, who Taylor knew to be innocent.

Ford used perjured testimony from compromised individuals, who faced their own criminal charges and jail time, along with hocus-pocus SBI lab work, to win a conviction against Taylor which carried a life sentence.

It was only after Taylor served seventeen years in prison that his case was brought before the Innocence Inquiry Commission by Attorney Christine Mumma and the NC Center on Actual Innocence, and he was unanimously declared innocent by a three judge panel. This ruling was enough to free Greg Taylor from confinement behind bars, but he required a pardon from the governor in order to receive the maximum compensation of $750,000 from the state for which he was entitled.

Governor Bev Perdue took her time, causing undo stress and anxiety for Taylor and his family, before finally issuing the pardon in May 2010.

Erick Daniels, an African American who spent more than seven years wrongfully incarcerated for an armed robbery he has adamantly and repeatedly said he did not commit, is equally deserving of a pardon so that he can receive compensation from the state as mandated by the General Assembly. In February 2011, the Office of Executive Clemency denied Erick Daniels’ request for a pardon. When I confronted the Governor’s Office about the denial, Mark A. Davis, the general counsel for the governor told me in a letter dated July 26, 2011, that they had conducted their own investigation. According to their findings, they did not definitively establish Mr. Daniels’ actual innocence, and due to “confidentiality concerns,” they could not share details of their investigation.

Mr. Davis lied in that letter, as the Governor’s Office conducted no investigation, and that is why he cannot share any details of it… and not because of “confidentiality concerns.” Furthermore, there was no forensic or scientific evidence to connect Daniels to the crime, he did not even fit the description of the armed masked perpetrator. The robbery victim fingered Erick Daniels based solely on the shape of his eyebrows in a middle school yearbook.

In addition, another man, Samuel Allen Strong, admitted to committing the crime for which Daniels served seven years. Strong not only fit the initial description of the robbery suspect, but had a past criminal record that included armed robbery, and at the time of his confession was in jail on a separate armed robbery incident.

Despite all of the above, and a declaration of innocence from Judge Orlando Hudson, Governor Bev Perdue expects the public to believe that Erick Daniels very likely was involved in the September 2000 crime.

A May 21, 2000 article in The News & Observer titled “Innocent Charlotte man spent 12 years in prison” tells of the wrongful conviction of Shawn Giovanni Massey on charges of a 1999 kidnapping and armed robbery. He served twelve years of a fourteen year sentence, convicted solely on eyewitness testimony. The only problem is that the victim went to the prosecutor with concerns that she had mistakenly identified Massey, because the perpetrator had cornrow braids and Massey did not.

A striking similarity between the cases of Massey and Daniels is that neither man fit the description of the armed robbery perpetrator, who in both instances was described as having cornrow braids. Erick Daniels and Shawn Massey each had closely cropped hair.

Mecklenburg County District Attorney Peter Gilchrist, in rare prosecutorial candor, admitted that his office botched the case by failing to disclose to the defense that the victim expressed doubt about her identification of the defendant… and eyewitness identification was all that the prosecution had with which to charge and convict Shawn Massey on the serious crimes of kidnapping and armed robbery. In other words, there was no forensic evidence tying Shawn Massey to the crime.

Gilchrist did not identify the prosecutor, and The Charlotte Observer writer Gary L. Wright, who was undoubtedly operating under the well-established media PAPEN (Protect All Prosecutors Except Nifong) policy, didn’t apparently make the effort to identify the prosecutor responsible for bringing an eyewitness case to trial and obtaining a conviction without disclosing exculpatory evidence to the defense about the victim’s own doubts about the accuracy of her identification. District Attorney Gilchrist also stated that he thought the prosecutor did not intend to withhold the information from the defense attorney, and that it was nothing more than a case of bad judgment.

It is interesting to note that The News & Observer glosses over such egregious missteps and malfeasances by prosecutors such as this that occur routinely throughout the state; yet use the least provocation to go after Tracey Cline, the African American Durham District Attorney, who worked under the former D.A., Mike Nifong, and has treated him with civility and respect. This has made her a target of Carpetbagger Jihadists… but that is another story.

On his release in May 2010, law professor James Coleman, a co-director of Duke’s Wrongful Convictions Clinic and Innocence Project, drove Massey from the state prison in Greenville to Charlotte where he was reunited with his family.

Although Professor Coleman and I are diametrically opposed in our positions regarding the Duke Lacrosse case and Mike Nifong, I consider him a good friend, and I credit him with preventing Duke University from arresting me on a trumped up charge for being a supporter of Mike Nifong… again, that is another story.

Since being freed, Massey has been unable to land a job, and earlier this year, the governor denied him a pardon. Upon learning that his pardon had been denied, Shawn spiraled downward into a deep depression.

Paul Stam, an Apex Republican, is unsympathetic to the plight of those whose lives have been destroyed by the state through wrongful incarceration, stating, “This is not a welfare issue. The last thing we need to do is to set up a new program just for people who’ve been exonerated.” I strongly disagree as money alone will not help the wrongfully imprisoned adjust once released and not help them emotionally heal from scars inflicted by the state.

The state has a duty to make things right for these innocents. Many experience painful flashbacks and some struggle with relationships. Most all have had difficulty finding employment. As a wrongly incarcerated man for 18 years, Darryl Hunt summed it up when he said about the state, “They put you out with no help as to how to adjust.”

A September 4, 2011, article in The News & Observer by Mandy Locke titled, “Freedom is sweet, but new problems set in,” described the extraordinary challenges which face those exonerated and released after many years of incarceration… a sampling of which follows.

Darryl Hunt at 46 is battling health issues including a stroke after he spent 18 years on death row. He referred to a misconception when he stated, “Everyone assumes we are okay because we are free. There is so much more to it.”

Dwayne Dail, now 43, spent nearly two decades in jail and finds life after prison overwhelming. He suffers from panic attacks and flashbacks to abuses he sustained while incarcerated.

Leo Waters is 62 but feels decades older. He served 21 years in prison for robbery and rape. A disabling back injury sustained in prison forced him out of a job after being released because he frequently called in sick. Since his experience he now keeps to himself and feels uncomfortable around people.

Shawn Massey, now 38, said about his life and situation, “I’m just trying to keep my head above water.”

Even the compensation of $50,000 per year of a wrongful incarceration with a $750,000 maximum is inadequate. Duke University, in a shakedown, shelled out $20 million to each of the Duke Lacrosse defendants even though they never spent a day in jail. Surely the state can do better than it has.

To an objective, rational, and reasonable individual it is evident that Gregory Taylor, Erick Daniels, and Shawn Massey were all unjustly convicted and wrongly served lengthy prison sentences. Of the three, only Taylor has received a pardon and the compensation that he is entitled to as mandated by the General Assembly… which is a pittance when one considers that they were deprived of a human’s most valuable possession… freedom.

The reason for the denial of a pardon for Erick Daniels and Shawn Massey is obvious. It is because of the color of their skin… the fact that they are African Americans. Race is the determining factor in the governor’s decision regarding pardons of innocence. The onus is on the governor to prove otherwise, but to date Governor Perdue who publicly advocates for transparency in government is shielding a racist policy behind a claim of “confidentiality concerns.”

The reason Governor Bev Perdue feels at ease denying pardons to deserving African Americans who have been wrongly incarcerated is because the NAACP, black politicians, black community leaders, black religious leaders, black businesses, black organizations, and black media have remained silent about the blatant and egregious mistreatment of these people of color who are being victimized again by a Democratic governor blocking their access to the compensation to which they are entitled. The African Americans throughout the Tar Heel state are enabling the governor to proceed with carrying out her policies based on race by remaining silent.

State NAACP President William Barber, to my knowledge, has not commented on the denial of a pardon for Durham resident Erick Daniels. Neither has Durham politicians Senator Floyd McKissick, Representatives Larry Hall and Mickey Michaux, or Democratic Congressman David Price.

Prospects do not look good for another request for a Pardon of Innocence that is pending before Governor Perdue, as the petitioner is an African American named Glen Edward Chapman.

An article in the April 3, 2008 News & Observer titled “Another innocent inmate leaves state’s death row” is about Glen Chapman who spent fourteen years on death row for two slayings he did not commit. Again, information that a key witness identified someone other than Chapman was withheld from his attorneys. Furthermore, a forensic report showed that one victim most likely died from a drug overdose rather than due to foul play.

According to the article, defense attorneys stated that the only physical evidence tying Chapman to the one homicide victim was the result of consensual sex with the victim. In addition, it was never reported to defense lawyers that eyewitnesses had last seen the murder victim alive with someone with a history of violence against her in the days after prosecutors claimed she had died.

On August 15, 2011, I hand-delivered a letter to the Capitol Building for Governor Perdue requesting that she give Glen Chapman the pardon he deserves, so that he can receive compensation for the state’s injustices against him.

Later, I received a letter dated August 23, 2011, from Pat Hansen, the Governor’s Clemency Administrator who stated that my comments regarding a possible Chapman pardon would be taken into consideration. The Office of Executive Clemency’s response was appreciated; however, what I found to be extremely disturbing is that the office is apparently under the auspices of the North Carolina Department of Corrections. This seems to represent a grave conflict of interest and one that does not bode well for the interests of justice.

Odds for Glen Edward Chapman receiving a pardon of innocence from Governor Perdue are a long shot when one considers past history and the fact that Mr. Chapman is a man of color.

Equal justice for all demands that Erick Daniels, Shawn Massey, and Glen Chapman receive a pardon from Governor Perdue. That will enable them to receive compensation from the state for their wrongful incarcerations in accordance with law set forth by the state’s legislature. Tar Heelians of good conscience rooted in the principle of “equal justice for all” will accept nothing less. 

Monday, August 8, 2011

“Race played no role” in Governor’s denial of pardon for Daniels


Click Link below to view interactive flog:
http://www.justice4nifong.com/direc/flog/flog6redo.html

Script of flog

On Friday, September 9, 2008, Erick Daniels, at 22 years of age was freed after more than seven years of incarceration after being convicted of a September 21, 2000 armed robbery. His road to freedom had begun in late 2004, when attorney Carlos Mahoney began to appeal Daniels’ conviction. Despite several unsuccessful appeals, including a setback in January 2007 when the state’s Court of Appeals denied his case, Mahoney was undaunted and persevered.

Then in September 2008, state prosecutors, knowing they had a pitifully weak case against Erick Daniels, offered an Alford plea deal… wherein he would deny involvement in the crime but acknowledge evidence existed for his conviction in exchange for his immediate release. Had he accepted the plea deal, Daniels would forever be branded a felon. With faith in his attorney, Daniels refused to accept the deal… he would take his chances with an appeals hearing in hopes of getting a new trial.

During two days of the hearing, in which attorney Mahoney dissected the prosecutors’ case against Daniels like a skilled surgeon, the evidence to support Daniels’ innocence was so substantial and overwhelming, that Superior Court Judge Orlando Hudson took the initiative to dismiss the charges and proclaiming that Erick Daniels was innocent.

Judge Hudson specifically stated, “I would order a new trial if I were satisfied that this defendant committed this crime and the state could prove it. I have no confidence the defendant committed these charges.”

Lending support to Judge Hudson’s assessment was the fact that in 2003 Daniels submitted to a polygraph tests in which he denied robbing the victim, denied pointing a gun at the victim and denied being present when the robbery took place. According to polygraph examiner Steve Davenport, “It is my opinion there were no reactions indicative of deception to those relevant questions.”

Not only that, but a young man who fit the description of the armed perpetrator and had a history of committing armed robberies, had confessed to his attorney that he was responsible for the September 2000 armed robbery for which Daniels was convicted.

Shortly after Daniels was proclaimed innocent by the judge and released, Durham attorney Gladys Harris began filing a petition for a pardon of actual innocence on behalf of Erick Daniels. Such a pardon was a prerequisite for him to be able to receive financial compensation for his years of wrongful incarceration… as legislated at the North Carolina General Assembly.

In 2010, attorney Carlos Mahoney met with Eddie Speas, Will Polk, and Barry Jenkins, and he requested that Governor Perdue grant Daniels’ petition and issue a pardon of actual innocence. To assist the governor, Mahoney even provided a notebook containing pleadings and trial transcripts.

Apparently in February 2011, the North Carolina Office of Executive Clemency denied a pardon of actual innocence for Erick Daniels, but failed to notify him or his attorney. It was only in mid-April 2011 that Daniels accidentally uncovered the panel’s decision. An article titled, “Erick Daniels denied pardon,” in the April 20, 2011 edition of the “Independent Weekly” brought this to my attention, as all other mainstream media outlets ignored the story.

Erick Daniels’ petition for a pardon was not the only one presented to Governor Perdue… she also received one from Gregory Flynt Taylor.

I had been a staunch supporter of Gregory Taylor since 2009 when I first learned through the media of his questionable conviction for the murder of Jacquetta Thomas. Like many others, I admired and was in awe of Greg Taylor’s integrity, principles, courage and ethics. Rather than falsely implicate an African American man, who Greg knew to be innocent, at the urgings of prosecutor Tom Ford in the Thomas murder case, Greg refused, and as a result spent seventeen of his best years behind bars. He was facing life in prison.

Gregory Taylor, who was found innocent of the murder by a unanimous three panel judge during mid February 2010, immediately sought a pardon from the governor after his exoneration.

When a pardon for Taylor was not forthcoming in what I considered a timely manner, I hand delivered a letter to Governor Perdue on April 12, 2010. I questioned the delay in her response to his request for a pardon. No reply was forthcoming.

The following month, on May 21, 2010, I hand-delivered another letter to the Capitol building for the governor. Again, I received no response. However, shortly thereafter an official pardon was granted by Governor Perdue.

On June 1, 2011, a little over a month following the “Independent Weekly” article about Daniels’ petition for a pardon being denied, I hand-delivered a letter to the governor. I pointed out how Erick Daniels had been unjustly convicted, served seven years wrongly incarcerated, and how he, like Gregory Taylor, had been declared “innocent” by a judge or judges.

Finally, I asked the governor to explain why the Office of Executive Clemency denied Daniels’ request for a pardon. I did not hear from her office.

On July 13, 2011, roughly six weeks after the previous letter, I hand delivered another for the governor. In it, I praised her for granting the pardon to Gregory Taylor, although belatedly. Furthermore, I specifically expressed that I did not feel that because Erick Daniels is an African American that he should be disqualified from being given a pardon. I expressed to her that unless I received an explanation for the denial of Erick Daniels’ petition, I would conclude that the decision to deny his request for a pardon was racially based. To this letter, I did receive a reply from the Office of the Governor.

On July 27, 2011, I received a letter from the governor’s office dated July 26th. It was written by her general counsel Mark A. Davis. He vigorously denied that race played any role in Governor Bev Perdue’s decision to deny Erick Daniels a pardon… that it was based on results of their extensive investigation that failed to prove his innocence. Then he stated that “confidentiality concerns” prevented him from sharing details of this investigation with me.

I have many serious problems with Mr. Davis’s reply. First he suggested that the Governor’s Office conducted an extensive investigation. I don’t believe it. If they did, in fact, investigate Daniels’ case as he claimed, then it was an extravagant waste of taxpayer dollars.

Secondly, he averred that due to “confidentiality concerns” he was unable to share results of the investigation. The confidentiality concerns excuse is commonly used to obstruct and to make opaque and keep from the public information that is damaging to officials, be they in the corporate or governmental spheres. However, what I find most hypocritical is the illusion that Governor Bev Perdue places a high value on “transparency.”

Thirdly, and most importantly, the governor decided that the findings of their alleged investigation did not support Erick Daniels’s innocence. By such a statement it is inferred that she approached the Daniels’ case with a presumption of guilt… this, after Judge Hudson dropped the armed robbery charges against Daniels and proclaimed that he was innocent.

What the governor fails to understand is the basic concept found in Civics 101 called the separation of powers. The governor, like the attorney general, belongs to the executive branch of government. Judicial decisions are handed down by those belonging to the judicial branch of government. Proclamations of “innocent” or “guilt,” whether made by the governor or the attorney general, carry no legal weight.

Attorney General Roy Cooper’s April 11, 2007 promulgation in which he declared the three Duke Lacrosse defendants “innocent” is as invalid and irrelevant as Governor Perdue’s claim that Erick Daniels is “guilty” of armed robbery.

To summarize, the entire gist of the governor’s letter was that race played no role in the governor’s decision to deny Daniels’ request for a pardon of innocence, and that the secret extensive investigation they conducted contradicts the ruling of Judge Hudson… but they can’t divulge results of their investigation due to confidentiality concerns.

This letter from the Office of the Governor actually hurt my feelings as my intelligence was justifiably insulted. Mr. Davis’s letter profoundly failed to convince me that the denial of a pardon for Erick Daniels was not based on racism.

The onus remains on the governor to come up with another excuse for denying Daniels a pardon, or to do the right thing by reversing the February 2011 decision, and granting Erick Daniels a pardon of innocence.


Monday, March 8, 2010

HBO picked wrong case for its movie

If you enjoy comedy, especially the kind in which its humor is derived from the contrast of its content with reality, then you won’t want to miss the upcoming TV-cinematic fare offered by HBO about the Duke Lacrosse case. Although I am sure it is going to be marketed as an objective docu-drama about the Duke Lacrosse case, I cannot help but believe that it will be nothing more than just another thinly veiled volley from the carpetbagger jihad against former Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong.

I admire HBO for accepting the inherent challenge of trying to present the beer guzzling, publicly intoxicated, public urinating, spoiled and privileged Duke student athlete partygoers as decent and respectable innocents who are targeted by a ruthless and conniving district attorney for the sole purpose of wooing the black vote as a surefire means of retaining his D.A. position in the May 2006 primary. The entire premise is total folly itself, and actually lends itself as fodder for a hilarious comedy… the only problem is is that this movie is supposed to be taken seriously.

Now I have not read the screenplay, but I believe that the producer’s intention is to sympathetically portray the members of the Duke Lacrosse team in a favorable light by omitting the fact that nearly a third of the 47 lacrosse team roster had had skirmishes with the law (including an assault charge against Duke Lacrosse defendant Collin Finnerty, and an alcohol related charge against Duke Lacrosse defendant and team captain Dave Evans). I would imagine that the made for HBO-TV movie is supposed to tug at its viewers’ heartstrings because of the travails and trauma suffered by the three defendants and their families (although not one of the defendants spent a day in jail and they each received $7 million in an out-of-court settlement with Duke University). Also, remember to disregard reality as the movie will undoubtedly present North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper’s April 11, 2007 “Innocent Promulgation” as a watershed moment that cements the innocence of the three Duke Lacrosse defendants. (Since that day, the media has knowingly embraced that declaration – which they knew to have no legal weight – as a basis upon which to use descriptive terms such as “innocent,” “falsely accused,” and “exonerated” to describe the Duke defendants.)

It is important for the potential viewer of this future movie to enjoy it for its comedic offerings, and not to try and extract anything deep, significant or meaningful from it. Keep in mind that in a range of artistic offerings it is much closer to a Hardy Boys mystery than a time weathered classic such as Victor Hugo’s “Les Miserables.”

Instead of wasting its money to buy the rights for the pitiful story of the Duke Lacrosse boys attending a stripper party and its aftermath, HBO should have waited for a story with real merit to come along. It would not have had to wait long, as a tragic story with a Hollywood ending recently unfolded when Gregory Flint Taylor was released from jail… a free man. After spending 17 years wrongfully imprisoned for a murder he did not commit, all that remains, at this time, is a pardon from North Carolina Governor Bev Perdue. Odds are highly in Greg Taylor’s favor that it will come sooner rather than later.

What would make the Greg Taylor story such an inspirational tear-jerker, is that it is about a man of convictions and moral fortitude who would rather face a lifetime in prison than falsely implicate an African American man who he knew was innocent of a murder. It is about a kind and good natured man with a kind heart and good soul, but with personal demons tied to an addiction to drugs and alcohol. It is a redemptive story of a man, who during his 17 year incarceration in one of the most highly improbable places, prevails over his addiction to crack and beer, and betters himself by taking advantage of the educational opportunities available inside the correctional facilities. It is a story of a loving family that is unified and galvanized to fight and leave no stone unturned in order to free its innocent kin. It is the story of an innovative program, the brainchild of former Chief Justice I. Beverly Lake, that helps many wrongly accused, who are otherwise without hope, get another chance at a justice denied. It is the story about a state’s selective justice system based on Class and Color, and the attempts by two of its prosecutors to keep a man they knew to be innocent confined for the rest of his life. It is the story of a man who took the horrendous hand fate dealt him, and with the help of his family and friends, and religious faith endured.

It is anyone’s guess as to why HBO would want to glorify accused members of the raucous Duke Lacrosse team with its well-earned and deplorable reputation, and highlight the vindictive carpetbagger jihad call for action against Mike Nifong by Rae Evans (mother of Duke defendant Dave Evans).

Rae Evans, whose son did not spend one day in jail, received $7 million in a settlement with Duke University, and is currently trying to appropriate another $10 million from the cash-strapped city of Durham, stated that Mr. Nifong picked on the “wrong” families… and that “he will pay, every day, for the rest of his life.” Contrast this statement with Gregory Taylor who lost 17 years of his life after being convicted (without credible evidence) for a murder he did not commit, who wisely commented shortly after his release that there were times when he wished he could be more angry, but that “it is not a sustainable emotion.” Anger is not a sustainable emotion in a person with a kind heart and a good soul.

My advice to HBO executives is if they wish to have a feel-good and positive impact on viewers, that they select stories that offer substance, hope, and inspiration. The Gregory Taylor story fits the bill, and is as close to a non-fiction “Les Miserable” as you can get.