Thursday, April 19, 2007

Understanding Levicy

At the Liestoppers forum, SANE nurse Kethra posted a long and highly informative item critiquing the performance of SANE nurse-in-training Tara Levicy. Below are quotes from the relevant sections of Kethra's post.
---------
Tara Levicy was acting as a SANE under the specific direction of Dr. Julie Manly, a fourth-year resident. Both Dr. Manly and Tara Levicy performed a “general physical” examination and documented the results with Dr. Manly doing the vaginal exam and collection portion of the forensic collection. Both found no trauma. The statement Ms. Levicy gave to Sgt. Gottlieb on March 21, 2006 runs contrary to all physical findings:

“I asked her if the exam was consistent with blunt force trauma, and she replied, ‘Yes,’" Sergeant Gottlieb wrote in the notes of his March 21 interview with the nurse. “She stated the victim had edema and tenderness to palpitation both anally and especially vaginally. She stated it was so painful for the victim to have the speculum inserted vaginally that it took an extended period of time to insert same to conduct an examination. I asked her if the blunt force trauma was consistent with the sexual assault that was alleged by the victim. She stated the trauma was consistent with the victim’s allegation.” (Gottlieb’s notes).

The first inherent problem with this statement is that it is given in the first person. That means it looks like Ms. Levicy is speaking as if she did the exam rather than simply watch which we now know is exactly what occurred. However, Ms. Levicy did not disabuse the police of that notion. The second was Ms. Levicy’s inaccurate portrayal of the “extended” vaginal exam. We shall revisit that shortly. The third was the outright lie of blunt force trauma as the record will indicate.

The ONLY part of the SANE that Ms. Levicy was directly responsible for was the clothing collection (done wrong) and the oral swabs as well as the head to toe visual examination. (SANE document) Everything else was performed by Dr. Manly. Yet Ms. Levicy puts herself forth as the person who did the exams. Instead of saying something like “in observing Dr. Manly’s exam, I noted,” she instead makes statements that leave her appearing to be the examiner. This, as any RN will tell you, is very unprofessional and is in fact professional misrepresentation.

Dr. Manly met with the defense in October of 2006. She stated to the defense that NO ONE from the District Attorney’s office OR the DPD had spoken to her as of yet. This is no surprise given Ms. Levicy’s representation to the police of her being the examiner (and Nifong’s incompetence). It is in this interview we find out from Dr. Manly that she had seen a white exudate vaginally and just “assumes” its semen (she forgets to document this small fact however). It is also in that series of interviews she comes up with the alternative explanation from “semen” to a “yeast infection.” The facts are this, a yeast infection is incredibly common, VERY easy to diagnose (even a nurse can figure it out ) and for a Physician who supposedly has done “hundreds” of pelvic exams to mistake a vaginal discharge from yeast as semen is just stunning. The two substances look nothing alike, they smell nothing alike and if Dr. Manly was unsure, then she should have done the fast test for yeast which was not done nor did she employ a wood’s lamp which would have fluoresced semen but not yeast. At the very LEAST a woods lamp should have been employed (semen, fibers, urine and other substances fluoresces under a woods lamp) Needless to say, the slides Dr. Manly produced would have shown nothing but yeast had this gone to trial . . .

Dr. Manly also remembered that the “patient was screaming and resisting the vaginal exam in such an extreme fashion that the vaginal portion took an hour to complete.” This behavior by Crystal Mangum was in direct contradiction to the level of non-injury found. She put on a good show for the examiners needless to say.

Dr. Manly goes on to state, “Mangum was different in several ways. Most rape victims are withdrawn and quiet but cooperative. Mangum, on the other hand, called attention to herself by screaming; Manly had never seen that behavior before, she told defense lawyer Doug Kingsbery in October. Amazingly, Dr. Manly makes no note of the out of character behavior or her observations of that behavior in the formal record as far as I can tell at this time. I would wholly agree with Dr. Manly’s assessment of the normal demeanor of rape victims with one caveat, I have seen screaming behavior but that is from a truly badly injured victim (vaginal/anal tearing) and ONLY before pain meds are offered. None of the findings from the exam support this behavior.

The important part of the above is that Dr. Manly alone is responsible for the vaginal exam and Dr. Manly made ONE notation on the SANE paperwork that being “diffuse edema of the vaginal walls.” Dr. Manly did not make a note as to patient demeanor nor to the extended amount of time the vaginal exam too OR to the finding of a “white exudate.” Dr. Manly did sign the SANE as having participated but Tara Levicy signed the SANE as the examiner. In interviews with the DPD she took credit for Dr. Manly’s examination and in interviews with the DPD did nothing to disabuse them of the notion she was wholly responsible for the exam. These statements were rightfully attributed to Ms. Levicy by the DPD based on what she was quoted as saying, when in fact it was the Physician’s note and examination that she was claiming as her own work.

Ms. Levicy committed on the worst acts an RN and a SANE can commit—that of injecting her opinions and beliefs onto the patient and into the case. Ms. Levicy stepped out of her required role as an impassionate forensic examiner and into the role of a feminist with an agenda. She made stated conclusions not based on an evidence based practice, but instead based on her own personal agenda and skewed world view. No where in the SANE exam or the medical examinations that occurred was there any evidence to support Ms. Levicy’s statements of “Signs consistent with sexual assault during her test.”

There was no evidence to support her statements to Gottlieb on March 21, “I asked her if the exam was consistent with blunt force trauma, and she replied, ‘Yes.’” “She stated the victim had edema and tenderness to palpitation both anally and especially vaginally. She stated it was so painful for the victim to have the speculum inserted vaginally that it took an extended period of time to insert same to conduct an examination. I asked her if the blunt force trauma was consistent with the sexual assault that was alleged by the victim. She stated the trauma was consistent with the victim’s allegation.”

Nor did the evidence support her statements made on January 10, 2007: “Ms. Levicy stated she asked if condoms were used and Ms. Mangum said ‘no’ but wasn’t really sure. Ms. Levicy stated that it was her opinion as a [sexual assault nurse examiner] that ‘victims can never be sure if condoms are used because if they can’t see them how would they know for sure. You can’t feel them so you have to realize there is always a possibility that a condom could have been used.’” Even her own documentation denied this claim.

Instead ALL physical examination documented, directly contradicts these ongoing claims made by Ms. Levicy. Incredibly enough, Ms. Levicy herself notes in the systems examination portion of the SANE “Head, back neck, chest, breasts, nose, throat, abdomen and upper and lower extremities were all “normal” and in the Pelvic Examination portion of the SANE Ms. Levicy writes “Diffuse edema of the vaginal walls” (echoing the actual Physicians findings since she did NOT do the vaginal exam) and recorded “nothing notable” in the subsection for the anal exam.

In DIRECT contradiction to not only her own notes, but those of Dr. Manly and other Physicians and nurses that examined Crystal Mangum, she begins telling her “she was raped” conclusion to DPD. She not only was inaccurate as a forensic examiner but she was untruthful. There is no documentation that supports her claims of “the victim had edema and tenderness to palpitation both anally and especially vaginally” (Gottlieb notes) other than Crystal Magnums’ hour long display of hysterics for the Physician which interestingly is NOT noted in Levicy’s documentation. It is somewhat beyond me that a patient could present like this and the SANE documentation indicate “nothing notable” . . .

Ms. Levicy continues this interjection of personal beliefs into the case as late as January 10 of this year when she is interviewed by Mr. Wilson. In this interview she changes her story, negating her very own documentation “Ms. Levicy stated she asked if condoms were used and Ms. Mangum said ‘no’ but wasn’t really sure (the SANE does not reflect a “wasn’t sure” statement by Ms. Mangum. Ms. Mangum states NO). Ms. Levicy stated that it was her opinion as a [sexual assault nurse examiner] that ‘victims can never be sure if condoms are used because if they can’t see them how would they know for sure. You can’t feel them so you have to realize there is always a possibility that a condom could have been used” She also tows the feminist line of “I wasn’t surprised when I heard no DNA was found because rape is not about passion or ejaculation but about power.” While this statement is true about finding semen and it is true about what rape is, it is not true about DNA. This shows Ms. Levicy’s glaring ignorance of forensics and the most basic of science facts. To add to her own presentation of just how ignorant of basics she is, she calls Mr. Wilson back a few days later and states “A few days later, Levicy called Wilson with second thoughts. She wanted to clarify her statement about rape and power. “Ms. Levicy stated that there are numerous reason [sic] why semen is not found in a victim and include: 1) condoms were used; 2) No ejaculation; 3) It didn’t happen.”

Someone with a modicum of intelligence must have spoken to Ms. Levicy and basically told her the basic facts that she apparently slept through in Nursing 101.

Ms. Levicy, in her zeal to be a big bad forensic nurse, misrepresented to lay persons the true facts in this case. The police depend on us as forensic nurses to give them accurate information with impassionate observation. If you, in a haze of egotistical stupidity, misrepresent the facts and observations to the police, the police believe you. They have to believe us, we are their experts, and we are their teachers and most of all we are their translators. We as SANE nurses translate the medical gobbledygook into plain understandable English. These men and women are NOT medical professionals and depend on us WHOLLY to give the facts and just the facts, ma’am, to them. If we lie, misrepresent, embroider, expand or expound we mislead them and they go down the primrose lane blindfolded.

In Closing:

Ms. Levicy’s actions were unconscionable, unprofessional and the inherent sign of an incredibly biased person and nurse. She alone, is responsible for the start of this witch hunt in my opinion. By not telling the actual facts, by misrepresenting to the police the signs and symptoms of a rape victim, by “embroidering “the true patient findings and historical story, by her sheer ignorance of appropriate forensic evidence collection technique, her sheer ignorance of basic pathophysiology, her sheer ignorance of general medical conditions and the identification of those conditions and by her glaring egotistical need to portray herself as an expert, she sent the police down the trail of deception. Combine that with a rogue prosecutor and shoddy police work (didn’t they read the stupid medical reports for themselves?) she almost put 3 innocent men in jail.

I have no doubt now that she made those statements to the police and as irritated as I am with Sgt. Gottlieb, I have no doubt she made those statements as well given her continued performance as late as January 10, 2007. This nurse needs to turn in her license and stop “helping” sexual assault victims. Until she can learn compassionate investigation, dispassionate factual statements and the difference between right and wrong, she should have no part in nursing. I am guessing she missed the required ethics portion of Nursing School.

220 comments:

1 – 200 of 220   Newer›   Newest»
Anonymous said...

KC Jack Parr was right - "people will tear their own tinfoil, they don't need any help from us." At least, Dr Manly has gone from a trainee to a fourth year Resident. Where is the evidence to support that Gottleib is not lying??? Lots of quessing here.

Anonymous said...

I read earlier that Levicy's undergrad background was in Women's Studies. Is this so?

Anonymous said...

11:09 - Levicy's statements to the press as late as Jan of this year -as noted in the post, seem to corroborate bias and inaccuracy (a nice word for lying).

In a sane (pun intended) legal environment, said SANE would be up on charges for false statements to a police officer.

In a sane legal environment. Not in Durham.

becket03 said...

Levicy needs to be included in upcoming litigation by Rae "Wrong Families" Evans, et al. We need to see Tara perform on the witness stand under cross examination.

beckett

Anonymous said...

KC,

For the first time I completely disagree with you.

The findings were consistent with blunt force trauma and sexual assault. To have said they were inconsistent with blunt force trauma or sexual assault would be crazy, wrong and bad science. Are you saying the nurse should have concluded she was a false accuser on the spot? I thought nurses weren't supposed to offer opinions either way. Vaginal swelling is also consistent with consexual sex, but it would be pretty wrong for a SANE nurse to conclude, you weren't raped because your injuries are consistent with consensual sex.

Its clear she was trying to help the victim's story when she got into the whole 'she couldn't have known it was a condom' supposition, but to criticize her for what's in the report is wrong.

You are over reaching here. I don't really understand why.

Anonymous said...

When did the nurse talk to the press?

Anonymous said...

The only caveat I have is that based on the rest of his work, I wouldn't necessarily hold anyone to a "statement" they gave to Linwood Wilson. It's funny how so many of the people who gave a "statement" to Wilson went back later and contradicted the "statement" that Wilson recorded.

Anonymous said...

Simply wow. KC's attack is so eerily similar to those of the Group of 88. KC is a Group of 88 type in different clothing.

The attack on this woman because she is a feminist is no different than the attack on the Duke Boys by the 88 because they were rich and white.

There is no evidence she did anything wrong and KC is making all sorts of incorrect assumptions, partly because he doesn't understand the job of a SANE nurse.

And, even if the worse case scenario is true and Levicy interjected her opinion into the case during question it is not that big of deal. She was in TRAINING. If she made improper statements then her supervisor should quietly takes her aside and tells her that such statements shouldn't be made and that her role is x,y, and z. This isn't the point were shameful journalists call for her head and question her character in a national story.

But, hey, she is a feminist so she must be attacked and we must assume the worst. KC displays Group of 88 thinking at its worst.

Anonymous said...

I hope Nurse Tara does talk to the press and the tabloids would be great - to the tune of some real money. This simple little exam has been greatly overrated - this is not brain surgery.

annon said...

KC has it pegged. The SANE nures is another Hoax enabler

Anonymous said...

It's also wrong of KC to expect Crystal's behavior to be put in a medical exam, the rape exam is about the physical findings, nothing else.

If and when a case goes to trial the nurse or doctor will testify as to what the complainant's demeaor was: quiet, crying, hysterical, acting strange, intoxicated, whatever.

Extraneous descriptions don't belong in a medical record.

miramar said...

Ms. Levicy, please consult counsel, as you and Duke University Hospital will soon be hearing from the families.

Your BA in Women's Studies and being the producer and director of the Vagina Dialogues really don't cut it here.

I am not making this up:

www.wildmed.com/eLetter/Archive/2003/eletter_august_03.pdf

Anonymous said...

With so many "villains," I think it's appropriate to ask whether Crystal Mangum herself deserves to be villified.

As the A.G. said, she believes her own stories. She is, apparently, nuts.

I contend Mangum is herself a victim of Nifong, Gottleib, Wilson, Levicy, Manly, et al. Certainly my deepest sympathies lie with the Duke players, but Mangum was done no help when "professionals" began to indulge her delusions.

Anonymous said...

This was the heart of the matter. A competent and honest report would have probably stopped the case on the first night.

I think she was driven by a combination of ideology, naivete and inexperience all wedded to a lack of humility that led her to immpose herself in a situation she didn't understand.

This lengthy post indicates that perhaps CGM is more dishonerable the delusional. She probably knows she is lying and the delusional bit is to avoid being punished for her transgression.

Anonymous said...

Here we go again. Duke is going to be sued because the SANE nurse said the exam results were consistent with blunt force trauma and sexual assault.

Her answer was correct, not false, whether you like it or not. What she said to police after the fact and outside of the exam findings itself has nothing to do with Duke and would have been used to impeach her credibility at trial, showing she was attempting to account for inconsistencies in the accuser's statements...no condoms but no DNA..which was outside the scope of her role.

The woman doesn't deserve to be crucified for it.

Anonymous said...

11:32

How do you think that would have happened?

Are you saying you want the nurse to draw conclusions about whether or not a rape occured or not?

Is diffuse edema of the vaginal walls consistent with blunt force trauma and/or sexual assault?

The factual answer is YES. Is it consistent with consensual sex or a yeast infection? Yes also.

Richard Aubrey said...

The attitudes of feminists have to be seen to not be believed.
Check out Feminist Law Profs, or Feministing, just for starters.
These guys will by God be guilty and even if they aren't--mushoutrageprivilegeslobberracismoppressionconfusionwomenobjectified--they are.

Genuine facts are only of interest as they demonstrate the vileness of the patriarchy.
Lord ham ercy.

Anonymous said...

KC did not write this. He clearly pointed out it was written by a SANE nurse.

Kethra, thank you for taking the time to write this. However, I doubt it was "sheer ignorance" as Levicy had received enough training to know better. More likely she follows the standard feminist mantra of women=good, man=bad and therefore reported the findings she wanted to see.

Anonymous said...

Can the lawyers here tell us what the Nurse or Duke would be sued for in this deal?????

Anonymous said...

KC,
Thanks for posting Kethra's review.
Where are all these Levicy supporters coming from?

These hoax enablers can't support Nifong or Crystal any longer since the AG's statement dismissing charges...so now they will try to prop up Levicy.

Look long and hard at Kethra's post regarding Levicy false conclusions. Levicy was outright wrong and needs to be held accountable.

Anonymous said...

~Here we go again. Duke is going to be sued because the SANE nurse said the exam results were consistent with blunt force trauma and sexual assault.

Her answer was correct, not false, whether you like it or not. What she said to police after the fact and outside of the exam findings itself has nothing to do with Duke and would have been used to impeach her credibility at trial, showing she was attempting to account for inconsistencies in the accuser's statements...no condoms but no DNA..which was outside the scope of her role.

The woman doesn't deserve to be crucified for it. ~

Internal "diffuse edema" translated means a little swelling and is NOT sympotmatic of "blunt force trauma" . Please cite your source for such a finding.

When you take into account ALL the facts from the vaginal exam, there can be no accurate finding of "blunt force trauma" not to mention that comment is far outside the scope of practice for an RN to make.

She was wrong.

Anonymous said...

No KC did not write this, but it is clear he supports this article.

Deklan Singh said...

Nobody interviewed the doctor? You've got to be kidding me! How was this a hard thing to determine? The doctors name would be on the exam form?!?!? What the hell? Why not just interview Vitoria Peterson about medical exam? Why not just interview the janitor at the hospital or someone in the waiting room?

"Diffuse edema of the vaginal walls" is not consistent with blunt force trauma.

Not that this is really the biggest of the issues, but palpation NOT palpitation is what one is doing one touches somewhere on a person. The lesson would seem to be that Gottlieb is an idiot.

hman said...

To 11:34
Let us turn this around. Imagine that a SANE nurse was an anti-feminist who said in other forums that "Falsely accusing men of rape is a crime of male-hatred".
And after examining this same client (CGM) she told the cops in the hallway, " There is nothing inconsistent with this being a false accusation done for the sake revenge and money."
You would still say, "What is the big deal?" After all, that would also be true.

Anonymous said...

What am I missing here? She was penetrated energetically and often in her occupation, hence edema, yeast infections, tenderness to palpation are to be expected. That pesky lack of DNA ultimately proved the LAX3 innocent. In fact, they seem to be the only men in her travels that she did not engage in sex.

Anonymous said...

11:22 and 11:24 - you have to remember that this commentary is not KC's... it is from a SANE that reviewed available information. I had to go back an read it again myself because by the end I had forgotten who the author was. It appears to be all from "SANE nurse Kethra"

The only valid comments on this subject have to come from qualified SANE's or doctors. It is too specialized.

The only question that I have is whether SANE nurse Kethra is qualified to make such comments and whether she had access to ALL pertinent documents.

The rest of the comments posted here are all BS.

badbeta said...

KC...change this "Ms. Levicy committed on the worst acts" to "one of the worst acts".

LAL said...

Her job is to provide facts to non-professionals, not mislead them. But that's what she did. Stacking the deck out of "good intentions" is not acceptable. Maybe she was pressured by police who were "sure" of what happened. Maybe she wanted a conviction of the bad, privileged, jocks. Either way its inexcusable.

Juries expect professionals to provide unbiased data and professional conclusions. We defer because assuming there is no "doctor" or "nurse" bias.

Bolstering her report and credibility by conveying exam results as if she took them is worse than cheating on an exam. Offering DNA anlaysis she was not qualified to make is result-oriented over-reaching. Trying to bolster that with feminist dogma about the motives for rape speaks for itself. I don't want to hear a male doctor tell me "women exaggerate these kinds of things," or a sympathetic female nurse present questionable extrapolation as fact.

Does anyone in Durham just do their job without consulting a political weathervane first?

Anonymous said...

There is no evidence she pretended she did parts of the exam that she didn't do. "Kethra's" insistence that she was taking credit for something she didnt' do is nonsense.

She was asked about the rape exam findings and asked if they were consistent with the victim's allegations, she said yes, consistent with blunt force trauma. The term blunt force trauma is a common one in rape exams.

Kethra is also OFF HER ROCKER in her view that non medical findings such as how the victim was acting belong in the medical report or that facts not recorded in the report would have been excluded at trial. Again, ridiculous. The SANE exam is to document forensic and medical findings, not behavior. To say that their recollections of her behavior would not be admissable becuase they weren't in the report is nonsense and significantly undercuts "Kethra's" credibility.

Lost in all this nonsense is the question everyone has forgotten: Why didn't they do a tox report on her????? Who made this decision??? Did Crystal refuse it, did the nurse omit it on her own or what happened here?

This criticism of the nurse is out of all proportion. She signed off on the exam, she conducted parts of the exam herself, she appears to have been present during the ENTIRE EXAM, so only a revisionist nitpicker would conclude she isn't qualified to comment on the exam results that she witnesses and signed off on.

Anonymous said...

Here we have another example of someone (Nurse Levicy) wanting to help but in the end causing tremendous damage not just to the students who were criminally charged, but to every single person that she has provided SANE 'testimony' on, and every person that she will provide testimony on in the future. The phrase that comes to mind is "tainted". If Kethra is qualified to make the comments that he/she(?) does, and those comments are factually supportable, those charged, and their defense lawyers, should be on their kness thanking their God for a gift. I am also reminded of the phrase "the message is more important than the facts". If Kethra's comments stand up to examination, this is another damning incident that will have adverse ramifications for sexual assault victims for years to come.

bill anderson said...

KC,

For the first time I completely disagree with you.

The findings were consistent with blunt force trauma and sexual assault. To have said they were inconsistent with blunt force trauma or sexual assault would be crazy, wrong and bad science. Are you saying the nurse should have concluded she was a false accuser on the spot? I thought nurses weren't supposed to offer opinions either way. Vaginal swelling is also consistent with consexual sex, but it would be pretty wrong for a SANE nurse to conclude, you weren't raped because your injuries are consistent with consensual sex.

Its clear she was trying to help the victim's story when she got into the whole 'she couldn't have known it was a condom' supposition, but to criticize her for what's in the report is wrong.

You are over reaching here. I don't really understand why.

Apr 19, 2007 11:22:00 AM


Had this writer taken time to read what is available, she would have seen that Crystal's behavior was very inconsistent with real rape and trauma victims. As one SANE nurse told me, "She was putting on a show."

Second, the nurse must stay within the ethical bounds of her job, and stay within the ethical bounds of science itself. Levicy did neither.

Third, if the doctor and Levicy did not test for a yeast infection, but the substance found in Mangum's vagina was not semen (which, apparently, was not), then we are dealing with a true botching of an exam. A yeast infection will produce the very things that these examiners observed.

Fourth, Levicy's Jan. 10 comments truly are not within the bounds of her job. They are not within the bounds of the scientific portion of her job, and certainly not within the ethical bounds.

This Hoax should have been stopped DEAD the first night. That it was not is unconscionable, given what we now know.

By the way, while I do not have medical training, I do have a lot of formal training in scientific method and many of my academic publications involve the use of scientific method, so I am familiar with science and its limits.

Anonymous said...

I don't think Kethra IS a SANE nurse. She may be a nurse, one of those old lady nurses who assume drunk women who come in for rape exams are all liars. No SANE nurse would be outraged by the use of the language 'consistent with blunt force trauma'.

Kethra is also wrong that there needs to be some kind of independent evidence to say a patient experienced tenderness when palpitated. The evidence in the nurse/doctor's statement that they witnessed discomfort from the patient when certain procedures were done. Whether or not this 'discomfort' was faked or is supported by other medical findings is a separate issue.

The problem this particular nurse runs into is that, depending on which story Crystal told her...groping/beating/levitation...the rest of the exam does not support those parts of her story: no bruises or swelling or redness where she said she was hit and kicked.

Anonymous said...

How would the SANE nurse have been able to stop the hoax that first night?

Either you want them to refrain from making judgements and stick to medical facts or not.

At the time you had a woman who said she was raped, she appeared to have a lot of tenderness and pain during the vaginal and anal exam, she said she was raped, she had vaginal redness.

Nobody at the time knew she was an escort with a long history of mental illness, previous false allegations or that in fact there was no DNA from anyone at the lacrosse party in or on her or that every subsequent time she told her story she would change it.

This monday morning quarterback on the rape exam is sick. What you are saying now is that women who go to the ER and say they were raped have to PROVE IT, right then and there or their case should never move forward.

Anonymous said...

While Kethra has made some good contributions to the "Liestoppers" blog, she has consistently displayed a degree of certitude which has resulted in incorrect representations. She stated there was no way Dr. Manly would have done the exam and specimen collection because Levicy signed the SANE report, which is in fact what happened. She has also stated with certitude about Dr. Manly's lack of competence, which, as a nurse, she herself in not competent to do. She wasn't there and doesn't have any idea of the character or quantity of white material that was seen on vaginal exam by Dr. Manly. I agree with one poster, Vegas, who made a plea for awaiting the facts rather than indulging in yet another rush to judgement.

Teach1975 said...

Jim Cooney (SP) on liestoppers adds some interesting info concerning Levicy/DNA- it is worth a read. Also KC maybe get KE from Forensic Talk to chime in. Finally, Kethra fthanks or the post.

Anonymous said...

"Kethra is also OFF HER ROCKER in her view that non medical findings such as how the victim was acting belong in the medical report..."
..................................
Are you aware of the multiple times Nifong publicly pointed to the accuser's "demeanor" ...which he said showed she'd been through a "traumatic experience"? Prolific liar that he is, he may have completely made that up, but he did think her behavior was important enough to repeatedly mention it.

Anonymous said...

You missed my point.

Kethra says that the nurse and doctor omitting information on Mangum's demeanor in the rape exam was a mistaken and would have prevented them from testifying about it in court, which is pure nonsense.

Of course an alleged victim's demeanor is going to be part of the evidence!!

I am not surprised a bit that she was screaming during the exam. It supports the idea that she was lying...playing the role of 'rape victim' who was in terrible pain and that she's mentally unstable, because screaming during a rape exam is highly uncommon, just like the doctor said, especially when you don't have any injuries.

Anonymous said...

Silly me, why did I think the purpose fo the swabs was to find DNA if present??? What bloching of the job? It is Dr Manly's swabs that produced the evidence of multiple DNA from others and not the lacrosse team. What do you thinks the labs were testing?

Anonymous said...

OOPS... Forgot the yeast infection - Is this important? .

Anonymous said...

I wonder if Crystal's acting out behavior during the rape exam was a way to try and get them to stop because she knew there was a chance her other partners DNA would be found, showing that she lied about her last sexual encounter?

Anonymous said...

has anyone else noticed that barack obama resembles a monkey?

(not that there's anything wrong with that)

Anonymous said...

A lot of people, because of their preconcieved ideas, let a prostitute manipulate them.

Who would have thought that a prostitute would manipulate people, because after all, in the new PC world, prostitutes are paragons of virtue.

Anonymous said...

I am guessing some very slanderous statements have been made here about the nurse - please demonstrate she missed the ethics course or has no compassion. How did she do the cloths collection wrong? As has been said before, Nurse Tara is a bit player - Dr Manly did the vaginal exam, etc.

jamil hussein said...

I think both Levicy and Crystal should be appointed Angry Studies professors. They have demonstrated all the necessary characteristics of an Angry Studies faculty so this meta-narrative in the context of race, class and gender requires these appointments.

Where can we send the nominations? Should we contact Brodhead directly?

Professor Levicy and professor Mangum deserve this.

Anonymous said...

I was surprised to see Kethra agreeing with the bizarre notion that rape is not about sex (passion or ejaculation) "but about power."

In fact, it is almost always about sex. Even when it includes an element of thrill about power. The drive is sexual. See "Blank Slate" by S. Pinker.

There was a reason why eunuchs were employed in harems and Byzantine palaces. They famously lusted for power, but they never expressed it by rape.

I suspect that this utterly nutty feminist idea about the nature of rape slipped into dogma from social constructionist theory where it seems almost everything is axiomatically driven by a desire for power. Interestingly, it is an idea that only women [who seduce rather than rape] seem truly to believe. It is rare to find a man who does not know that rape is about sex when he draws upon his innermost depths.

hman said...

To 12:21
T. Levicy told cops in the hallway some things that were not in the written report. The cops, not knowing better, apparently ran with it which contributed to the massive damage this case has done.
Can you begin to see why it is so wrong for SANE workers to make speculative remarks to LE? Maybe one an argue that LE should do their own "due diligence" and therefore no blame should attach to the SANE nurse. But policies against making speculative remarks are there for a reason - they help prevent disaster.

Insufficiently Sensitive said...

Hmmm... there's some vigorous counterbattery fire coming in from the coordinates of 11:22, 11:24, 11:28, 11:34, 11:37, and then 12:09, 12:21 and 12:22.

One might postulate that since the AG has made a very strong case for the innocence of the LAX players, the once and continuing accusers and tormenters and demonizers of said players (and those who furnished them their early ammunition) are digging in and preparing to cover their own rosy red rears. They may properly be in fear of civil lawsuits penetrating their politically correct armor.

The best defense is a good offence. Hence these loud denunciations of Kethra's facts and the clear reasoning she uses in making her conclusions about Dr. Manly and our producer and director Tara.

Chicago said...

KC did not write the statement. Someone else did, KC is just pointing out Tara was, at the very least another Nifong enabler.

Chicago said...

Hopefully if their is a civil suit Tara will be called, and under cross, the truth will come out. I am sure she will not fall on her sword, she will likely say Linwood badgered her into the statement, etc.

Anonymous said...

A witch hunt against a SANE nurse who said that vaginal swelling was consisent with blunt force trauma isn't going to help anyone and it is not going to bring about a lawsuit against Duke.

Kethra's 'facts' are full of holes as has been amply demonstrated on this thread. Kethra takes a little knowledge and misapplies it all over the place.

As far as the yeast infection, if there was a small amount of discharge and the swabs were taken to be processed by the labs how is this a dereliction of duty? She was there to do a rape exam, not diagnose the cause of the discharge or the edema.

The shrill accusations against the doctor and the nurse are not much better than the potbangers. A lot of accusation on not much information.

Anonymous said...

Chicago,

No, I don't think Wilson badgered her into the statement. I think she is a do gooder who was trying to prop up the rape complainant, there is no other reason for her nonsensical add-on about condoms.

Sure, rape victims might not know if condoms were used. DUH. But, then the victim would say "I don't know, I'm not sure...I don't think so, but..."

A rape victim who "doesn't know" if condoms were used or not would not say that no condoms were used and would surely not say that one of the condomless rapists ejaculated in her mouth and then she spit it out if she wasn't sure he had a condom on.

Criticizing her for saying diffuse edema is consistent with blunt force trauma is stupid, though.

jim2 said...

11:30 -

Omigod! You're right!

From that url of a 2003 article:

"A few years ago I produced and directed Eve Ensler’s, The Vagina Monologues, a whole
night dedicated to hearing women’s stories about their vaginas."

and

"Tara Levicy Schnitker, WEMT -B, WMA instructor, has her BA in Women’s Studies, and a certificate in Outdoor
Education from the University of Maine. She works for Planned Parenthood as a healthcare associate and is hoping to begin a nurse
practitioner program in the spring."

Anonymous said...

Someone asks why Duke Medical Center has liability in this matter:
First they have deep pockets and much malpractice coverage .
Ms. Levicy was not a qualified SANE nurse whose certification and experience can easily be brought under substantial scrutiny during cross examination .
She apparently signed the SANE examination document under the Physisians signature line ( juries get these details ) .
Her background unfortunately will be ripped up in court...the jury will draw strong conclusions that Women's Studies and producing and directing the Vagina Monologues along with many other facts to be dug up prove conclusively she had an agenda .
After Nifong and Wilson , Ms. Levicy will be, legally , the next most excoriated person in this whole tragic affair....and with good reason .

Anonymous said...

The swabs taken by Dr Manly told the DNA story - End of story.

Anonymous said...

I agreed with a lot of what Kethra has written but I am troubled by her conclusions. I just think she went a bit too far.

As far as the mental state of CGM and any doctor or nurse comments to LE regarding such: there is a section of the SANE form that is for the examiner to list the mental state of the "victim". Neither Many nor Levicy noted anything on the form. For either one of them to provide extraneous comments to LE is unprofessional, unethical and just maybe, civilly liable.

P.S. I also think that Manly's comments vis-a-vis the vaginal discharge were uncalled for. If she noticed it, then why didn't she note it on the SANE form?

Anonymous said...

1:27

Wrong. You are not going to find anything she did relative to the exam itself that was wrong, the idea that Duke or her are open to some kind of lawsuit because she signed the form is idiotic.

Its sad that people don't seem to learn ANYTHING. We all saw the rush to judgement in this case based on lies, inaccuracies and halftruths.

But, instead of learning anything, its all about how Duke is going down because the SANE nurse signed the rape exam and it was her responsibility to expose the hoax that night.

This is no more credible that the inane babbling of the potbangers saying something happened.

Locomotive Breath said...

During the press conference Joe Cheshire said "People who have never seen a woman who wasn't raped". Wonder who he was talking about?

Anonymous said...

Anyone who hasn't been following this blog for a long time should check out the entry Understanding SANE: Tara Levicy from 09 Jan 07.

Anonymous said...

Levicy has a BA in Women's studies, directed The Vagina Monologues, and worked for Planned Parenthood.

The resume of a radical feminist.

Anonymous said...

I'm curious what kind of women you think seek to become SANE nurses?

Women who think rape is an overreported crime? Women who think most rape victims are lying? Women who think girls who drink/party/strip deserve what they get?

Anonymous said...

1:39
What you would like it to be in terms of out come and what it will be are two entirely different matters . If you had any real world appreciation for civil malpractice you would see this as clearly as the nose on your face . This is open and shut and the insurance adjustors know so . They aren't going to litigate a matter that has the kind of damage exposure this stink bomb has . The kid screwed up and thet will recognize it whether you can or not.

Anonymous said...

Um no. You are wrong.

All they have to do is point to the studies on rape injury and lackthereof to substantiate her interpretation that diffuse edema is consistent with sexual assault. Game Over.

Anonymous said...

From Gottleib's notes:
"I asked her if the blunt force trauma was consistent with the sexual assault that was alleged by the victim. She stated the trauma was consistent with the victim’s allegation.”

To what extend did Levicy know the victim's allegations at the time of the examination? Has that been established?

Anonymous said...

Carolyn says:

Anonymous 11:24 - wrote:

"even if the worse case scenario is true and Levicy interjected her opinion into the case during question it is not that big of deal."

My god, it's obvious that it's useless to make you see the horror of what you've just written! Nonetheless, my stomach turns that you can dismiss someone helping corrupt cops put 3 innocent kids in jail for 30 years for a rape that never happened as "NOT THAT BIG OF (A) DEAL"!

Gary Packwood said...

Insufficiently Sensitive 1:12 said...
...Hmmm... there's some vigorous counterbattery fire coming in from the coordinates of 11:22, 11:24, 11:28, 11:34, 11:37, and then 12:09, 12:21 and 12:22.

...One might postulate that since the AG has made a very strong case for the innocence of the LAX players, the once and continuing accusers and tormenters and demonizers of said players (and those who furnished them their early ammunition) are digging in and preparing to cover their own rosy red rears.
::
The team of people who set up the three students just forgot to practice. It is just so important to have a dry run or two so that you get the timing and the script down perfectly.
It is also important not to 'pick' on the wrong family. I heard someplace before. I forget where.
So important now for them to keep their 'rosy red rears' real close to the ground as they crawl around looking for cover
::
GP

Anonymous said...

Nurse Levixy was NOT a SANE Nurse, but a SANE Nurse-In-Training. She didn't not perform the exam but assisted in it. She had NO RIGHT to talk to the Police. PERIOD.

She should have refused the request by Himan to speak to her and referred it to the SANE I/C, but she didn't. Why she didn't I don't know. I can conjecture she wanted to be a part of this, or she was covering her ass because she signed it, she was covering for Dr. Manly and the unit, it was an honest mistake, or she was pushing a personal agenda which seemed to be so much a part of this.

The SANE Exam was poorly done, however the biggest issue is how they handled.

Again, Levicy SHOULD NEVER have talked with the Police but referred this to DR, Manly who performed the exam and had to be chastised by the Defense for not knowing what they were looking at.

THE BOTTOM LINE IS DUKE MEDICAL REALLY SCREWED UP BECAUSE NO SEXUAL ASSAULT HAPPENED

Anonymous said...

Why shouldn't she talk to police? She particpated in the exam.

Duke Medical is not in the business of saying whether or not a rape took place.

This nurse did not say a rape took place.

This nurse said certain findings were in her opinion consistent with sexual assault and with the victim's allegations.

I also haven't seen any evidence the exam was mishandled or that any mistakes were made.

bill anderson said...

As more information comes out about this ordeal, it is going to become increasingly clear that the Levicy advocates on this thread simply are wrong. Wrong.

Tara Levicy overstepped her boundaries as a SANE nurse-in-training, and I can assure you that Kethra is not alone in her evaluation of Levicy's performance. In other words, Kethra is not the only critic here, and I can assure you that some of the critics are very high-powered players.

As I stated before, this affair should have been OVER that first night. There was no medical reason for this to continue, and there were plenty of signs that first night that Crystal was lying.

I also hope all of you keep in mind that the defense was saving its greatest firepower for the trial, and that includes experts testifying on the exam, who gave the exam, the results, and the subsequent actions taken by Levicy. Many readers have no idea just how fraudulent this case really was.

Anonymous said...

Bill,

Can you explain how the case would or should have been over that night as far as the SANE nurse goes?

WTF is wrong with you guys? They didn't even have the DNA results that night. For all anyone knew the DNA from several Duke players could have been found.

This 'it should have been over that night' malarky is unbelievable!!

HOW could the nurse have ended the case that night before any test results came in?

Please enlighten me.

jim2 said...

1:47 -

Yes, I had missed that one, otherwise the women's studies, etc. info would not have been a surprise to me. I just went back there and read through the comments. Seems like TL garnered more sympathy from commenters then. Back then, KC noted that she would be among the most relieved if this did NOT go to trial, as otherwise she would have to face the defense team on the witness stand.

hman said...

To 2:14
It is pretty obvious that Levicys remarks reached Nifong as "The ER people said it was consistent with rape." This tid-bit of information served as a green light (one of the few he actually got) and no doubt served to establish the wrong kind of momentum in this process. This is precisely why SANE people are not supposed to idly chat up police officers with opinions not found in the written reports.
See, a SANE nurse could just have easily come out of the exam that night and told the cops, "What we found was consistent with a false accusation." Because it was, actually. I hope you see why she should not have said that either. Then, maybe, you will begin to grasp the wrongness in what she did do.
In other words, her role was absolutely NOT to support one theory of what happened that night.
But she did, she definitely did.

Anonymous said...

Many readers have no idea just how fraudulent this case really was.

I think that will be detailed in the AG report (presumably delayed due to the VT tragedy).

Alas more casual readers will never have that idea, and for them the "I" word will become encrusted with ideological barnacles.

Anonymous said...

To help out. Nurse Levicy is NOT a SANE Nurse and did not have her certificate. She did not perform the exam but assisted it. She had no right to sign the SANE Exam. Dr. Manly performed most of the exam and Levicy assisted her.

CGM was acting very strange for a potential rape victim. Her stories were swinging wildy from 20 to 5 to 4 to 3 to recanting back to 3 She was saying Kim assisted in the rape, she said 4 dancers were performing, she said told of incredible stories. FANTASTIC lIES!

The Police were there and did not believe her. Officer Shelton proclaimed loudly she was lying. HE WAS RIGHT!

Duke medical sees pychotics and despite the myth, yes some women do report false rapes but they are caught at the SANE Exam. That is one of the benfits of competent SANE Nurses. Dr. Manly & SANE Nurse in Training heard the wild stories, they heard of ejaculations, heard of three guys kicking her, then not, it was all over the place. There was NO physical evidence of an assault. PERIOD! DR. Manly reported that but apparently left the implications of her wildly conflicting allegations based on her lack of physical evidence.

But Nurse Levicy talks with the Police for some unknown reason. She should not have. Whether she goes gossiping telling of the event at Duke medical is something for a court to decide. I don't know if those rumours are true.

The Police & Nifong were out to frame these guys. Levicy speaking to Himan & Gottlieb gave them the FALSE Ammo to get the 23 March NTO.

Yes, The players have a real good case for a lawsuit against Duke Medical, Dr. Manly, and Nurse Levicy!

Anonymous said...

Carolyn says:

Bill Anderson - sorry, but you're wasting your intelligence on arguing facts with these fake rape enablers.

To the enablers, this case has never been about facts - it has been about agenda, self-pity, ambition, greed for an extra $15,000 a year in pension, etc. Facts are realty, truth, justice, etc. The day the enablers made it clear it was 'no big deal' to send 3 innocent young men to jail for 30 years for a rape that never happened proved facts mean nothing to them.

Anonymous said...

These issues have been debated on the Forensics Talk forum, seemingly frequented by many who have strong backgrounds in related professions. My sense is that Kethra has made a good case there, although I can't claim to have gone through all of this material.

At any rate, the point is that these arguments have been peer reviewed, at least in a lose sense.


It is also noteworthy that this particular person, who after all, did have a key role in the affair, has a background that is not suggestive of impartiality. To me, this is another element of the "Perfect Storm" that seems to have hit here and it makes me wonder if such circumstances are typical.

I don't doubt that there was pressure from DPD/DA to embellish, but this person should not have been the one to make the definitive judgment. It is disturbing that there was/is no procedural requirement on whose diagnosis was authoritative, who was the expert, etc. I would hope that the PD/DA would have some sort of check at this stage -- that they would not be able to pick the most favorable statement or anyone involved in the medical work-up and take verbal coments as grounded expert opinion.


There are also questions of supervision at the hospital: who does what, who signs what, etc. The issues here are quality control, taceability, liability, etc. Is seems there should be clear policies and practices and that these did not exist or were not followed.

Is this person refusing comment?

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

Let me try again, a last time.

As far as impartiality, I would suspect that most women who go for SANE nurse training are sympathetic to rape victims, they don't take the training in order to feret out supposed liars.

This SANE nurse never made any definitive judgement. "Consistent with" is not a definitive judgement and it is easily defensible since most rapes dont' result in any injury not even diffuse edema.

It is silly and unrealistic to believe that police investigating cases don't talk to medical personnel involved or that it is some HORRIBLE evil that she verbally gave him some information from the rape exam.

I still haven't seen anything that shows she wasn't supposed to sign off on the exam or that any protocols weren't followed EXCEPT we still don't know why no toxicology screen was ordered, which would have given evidence of what drugs she was on, how much booze she had taken and would have prevented Nifong from alluding to a date rape drug that she was given.

Arguing that she didn't do anything that is going to get her or Duke suied isn't the same as saying what she did was right. She clearly stepped over the line in trying to explain away the condom issue, and even she knew this when she went back and amended her comments. It's also possible that a more seasoned SANE nurse would not have made any comment, but what many of you seem to want, the SANE nurse telling police "I think she's lying" is equally irresponsible especially given what she knew at that time.

We still don't know which story she told the nurse, or if we do I have forgotten. I don't think the nurse got the version of a massive beat down, meaning her lack of bruises wouldn't raise a red flag.

hman said...

To 3:06
As a practical matter, every SANE exam produces results that are "consistent with" a rape/ sexual assault having occurred. Therefore, every SANE nurse could justify saying that, in your world, to every cop after every exam.
If you do not see a problem here, I quit.

Anonymous said...

Of course we need to find out exactly what Levicy said to Himan & Gottlieb. That is a matter for the investigation.

But if you think Gottlieb & Himan will back up her versions quit dreaming. The rats are jumping ship.

Nifong's goose is cooked and the House of Cards around this Hoax will come down.

In the end they all will get their day in court. As it should be.

Anonymous said...

3:16

What's your alternative? The nurse on call makes a judgement about the victim, right there on the spot? The nurse says 'looks like consensual sex to me'.

The exam results are one of many pieces of information used in a rape case. The primary purpose of the rape exam is to collect forensic evidence: DNA, clothing, hair and to document any injuries that may be present. For example, consensual sex rarely results in vaginal tearing, so if you have a tear, while it can still be 'consistent with consensual sex' it would tend to support a rape, depending on one's view and experience.

Vaginal redness, absent any tearing or brusing is pretty light as far as 'injuries' go. However, on it's own, that wouldn't mean no rape occured.

When cases go to court, invariably the SANE nurse says 'it was consistent with sexual assault/blunt force trauma' and the defense will as if it could have been from consensual sex or consensual rough sex, and unless the injuries are really severe, the nurse will say 'yes'.

Anything this nurse said is a minor, minor part of the case and would have been the least of the issues the defense team was focusing on.

Anonymous said...

What will be interesting is AG Cooper's summary report. I think that will help clear the air. Simply put his statement was definitive. There was no sexual assault.

That of course would drawn attention to the SANE Exam competency and Levicy comments.

Anonymous said...

That reason and fact are not sufficient to deter the enablers on this thread is not suprising.

That an expert in the field giving their opinion that the SANE nurse performed poorly is not sufficient to deter enablers on this thread is not surprising.

That the evidence neatly lines up to show that the allegation was a farce and does not deter the enablers is not surprising.

There are no surprises left in this case.

Insufficiently Sensitive said...

It's the professional with the license who should be communicating re examination details with any outside parties such as police or press.

But it appears that Dr. Manly minimized her involvement, leaving our Tara to sign the report (was this standard procedure, or even legal?) and happily chatter away with all and sundry. Now, was this a short-sighted miserly minimization of billable hours by the professional, or did our Tara aggressively jump into the spokesman seat without properly summoning Manly, to express her own experiences and ideologically-loaded set of opinions? Or did (God forbid) Manly give her free rein to go ahead and do so?

Only a discovery process or a trial will shake out all the details of the examination room procedures and communications. But were I Dr. Manly, I'd be lawyering-up big time. It's HER responsibility.

Anonymous said...

1. Some anonymous person posting on an internet forum is not an "expert"

2. Defending the actions of the SANE nurse is not the same as believing Crystal was raped.

hman said...

To 3:26
The "alternative" action to what was done in this case would have been for Levicy to have conformed to what I am virtually certain is their written policy: If you say anything at all to LE, do not elaborate beyond the exact wording of the signed report. Otherwise, large messes are likely to be made. Like this one, for example.

Anonymous said...

Here's what I don't understand.

We have a DA who lied to the court, withheld evidence and directed police to violate procedure.

We have a PI who intimidated witnesses, lied to witnesses [what he told the strip club worker about having 'proof' it wasnt' Crystal on the strip pole] and apparently coached the prime witness to change her testimony to fit new facts.

We have a police officer whose memory report is contradicted by other contemporaneous notes and strangely dovetails with the prosecution's theory, who may also have intimidated witnesses.

Yet, we are outraged at some flunky SANE nurse for saying the injuries were 'consistent with' sexual assault?

I don't get it. Laws were broken, but you want to beat up on this nurse.

bill anderson said...

Levicy also was working with the prosecution as late as January 10 trying to still salvage this case. That should tell you a few things.

A nurse can describe injuries; she is out of bounds to say the injuries "are consistent with rape and sexual assault." Oh, would be that they were! I'm sorry people, but a yeast infection is not a rape. A small, non-bleeding scratch is not "blunt force trauma."

The screaming and hollering did not match the kind of "injuries" that she had. This was a fraud, period.

Again, all I can say is that the defense was well prepared for whatever Tara Levicy was going to say at trial. That is all I will say.

hman said...

To 3:40
Let me explain... I want to beat up on all sorts of people. Levicy is merely todays topic.

jamil hussein said...

3:40
good summary. However, we have had several threads about corrupt DA and DPD. This thread was interesting as it shows that there are other people too who needs to be investigated. Clearly, she broke all the rules and further actions are probably needed.


I am guessing she missed the required ethics portion of Nursing School

or maybe she had former Governor McGreevey (D) as a teacher..
(CBS/AP) Former Gov. James E. McGreevey is teaching ethics, law and leadership at Kean University.
Former Governor, Who Resigned Amid 2004 Scandal, Has Part-Time Job At Kean University

only in bizarro world..

Anonymous said...

Sorry, but diffuse edema is *not* consistent with blunt force trauma; most of the time one will observe petechiae, ecchymosis, contusions (bruising), etc. Diffuse vaginal edema is simply swollen mucous membranes, similar to what one experiences when they have nasal congestion and in the absence of ecchymosis, etc., is quite consistent with yeast infections.

It seems that Levicy was more interested in promoting the feminist agenda than in conducting a valid SANE exam. I certainly hope that she is no longer employed as a SANE nurse, or any other category of nurse for that matter. Let her work in a battered women's shelter where her feminist ideology would be compatible with the other staff.

Anonymous said...

Bill,

What do you think DA's ask these nurses at trial?

Were the injuries consistent with sexual assault?

What do you think she would have answered?

Criticize her for saying something to police before the trial that she would have said at trial doesn't make much sense to me. She was going to be a state witness, the police and DA talk to their witnesses [unless they're pathological liars, in which case they don't].

I'm sure the defense was well prepared for her. I'm sure they would have brought out her level of inexpereince and her past activities to show her bias toward believing all victims. I'm also sure they would ahve asked her if the exam findings were consistent with consensual sex and she would have said yes.

There is a difference between possibly using poor judgement, or even having a bias and failing to follow procedures or being legally liable for some kind of damages.

Anonymous said...

Bill,

What do you think DA's ask these nurses at trial?

Were the injuries consistent with sexual assault?

What do you think she would have answered?

Criticize her for saying something to police before the trial that she would have said at trial doesn't make much sense to me. She was going to be a state witness, the police and DA talk to their witnesses [unless they're pathological liars, in which case they don't].

I'm sure the defense was well prepared for her. I'm sure they would have brought out her level of inexpereince and her past activities to show her bias toward believing all victims. I'm also sure they would ahve asked her if the exam findings were consistent with consensual sex and she would have said yes.

There is a difference between possibly using poor judgement, or even having a bias and failing to follow procedures or being legally liable for some kind of damages.

Anonymous said...

This is trash, libel, and below the normal standard of this blog. Hind sight is 20/20. The report was pretty neutral. There were some "support the woman" ideas that were expressed, that should have been left aside, but this critique is way too harsh. If the nurse observed the exam, what is wrong with reporting what she observed? There is no affirmative misrepresentation, or material omission. Having worked on sex cases as a prosecutor and defense counsel, this work-up by L was pretty unexceptional.

Anonymous said...

I agree.

Also, upon re-reading the material, it appears that it was Gottleib that was asking her leading questions and all she may have done is respond in the affirmative. He asks her if the findings are consistent with sexual assault and she says 'yes'...

The whole diatribe about Levicy misrepresenting herself as the examiner is really, really petty and untrue.

Today's entry is definitely below KC's usual standards.

Anonymous said...

This nurse's testimony can be too easily impeached, now that this is in the record, and for the sake of all future (actual) rape victims, she should be relieved of her duties.

Anonymous said...

To obtain SANE Certification is no big deal. 40 hours of class and 44 hours of working with patients. The garbage man is probably getting more training working the gears of the truck.

jamil hussein said...

(CBS/AP) Former Gov. James E. McGreevey is teaching ethics, law and leadership at Kean

I just realized that Nifong might take up a job at NCCU or Duke. Just like McGreevey, he could teach, ethics, law and leadership. I'm sure Levicy could also teach something at NCCU or Duke.

Anonymous said...

I still haven’t made up my mind about the culpability of Levincy. The big problem is most of the damming information about her comes via Gottleib (no creditability with me). If we can get creditable information about what happened then it should be possible for the professionals in the field amongst us to determine if she behaved ethically.


So for now an open mind and I’m looking forward to more evidence. Hopefully Cooper’s report will clear things up.

Anonymous said...

Some anon idiot says:


The whole diatribe about Levicy misrepresenting herself as the examiner is really, really petty and untrue.

Today's entry is definitely below KC's usual standards.


KC's entry today serves to remind everyone responding to LE that they have a duty to their employer, to themselves, and to others, to follow correct and established proceedure.

I imagine that the DUMC has now informed all personnel that LE questions should not be handled without speaking to DUMC counsel and should be requested in writing.

Universe Nurse said...

Kethra's sarcasm and hysterics turned me off probably because I have been in the business as long as she has, if not longer. Was this an essay written by a professional registered nurse, calmly and factually?

Perhaps KS choose to play a rant today?

People are coming out of the woodwork to question this essay because it is viscious, and possibly inaccurare (what/who is the source for the she said?)

The bottom line is this - the North Carolina Board of Nursing. If they are not shocked, SHOCKED by the SANE-in-Training performance why should I be worried about it?

Anonymous said...

You need to wake up and start living in the real world.

The rape kit is legal evidence in a rape case. The medical personnel who conduct the rape kit and anyone else who interacted with the accuser as part of her rape exam are legal witnesses who should expect to testify at trial.

It is absurd to argue that none of these people should communicate directly with the police and all questions or issues related to an open rape case should be handled by their legal counsel.

Sane nurses talk to police every day about rape cases. The goal here is to help the police collect evidence, not stonewall them by refusing to talk to them.

OMG, get a grip here. I am still waiting on any list of what procedures, specifically the nurse is alleged to have violated.

Anonymous said...

To Anon 3:53

The question of "Were the injuries consistent with sexual assault?" is an objectionable question. At minimum, it is an improper leading question unless the witness is established to be hostile to the prosecution (see FRE 611).

More substantively, based on her "in training" status, Levicy appears to be incompetent to answer this question. The prosecution would have to lay miles of expert foundation before most judges would even entertain allowing this type of opinion question (see FRE 702). Among other things, I would expect a challenge on Daubert grounds.

Also, even if motions-in-limine resolved the evidentiary questions in favor of the prosecution, I would expect most defense counsel, particularly those defending the falsely accused, to object at the time of trial.

A thorough voir dire of Levicy, followed by a timely speaking objection, would quickly turn the advantage to the defense. Even if the judge allowed the testimony, defense counsel by then would have no doubt informed the jury through an objection that the evidence in dispute was consistent with a yeast infection, consensual sex or any number of different possibilities.

Importantly, this type of testimony also would "open the door" to *everything* in the accuser's background that also could explain the disputed evidence. Talk about a side show.

The "consistent with" testimony is absolutely garbage in this case and potentially damning to the prosecution's case. No way they would ask this question at trial.

Gary Packwood said...

SANE Nurse Certification

Why do we need a SANE nurse certification in the USA?

Is there a SANE nurse on duty tonight in some little hospital in Bugscuttle, Mississippi?

Do we have similar certifications for emergency room nurses who see patients with Asthma, Diabetes, Head Trauma or Gun Shot Wounds?

I have worked with RN's almost all of my adult life and the nurses I know are bright, dedicated and quick learners.

Why SANE certification? Is someone trying to create a new profession?

Strange

GP

Anonymous said...

JLS says....,

I have long been interested in this aspect of this case because some people whose views I respect like Prof. Johnson and some of the defense attorneys seem to think Levicy played a role in the hoax. I keep looking for what her role was:

1. I think phyical signs consistent with rape is a true statement.

2. I believe this exam was to collect samples from Mangum not a general physical exam. So I don't see the requirement that the MD note a yeast infection.

3. It seem more to me that Levity later on in talking to the police had chosen sides with her condum opinions.

4. Levity may or may not have made an error talking about "blunt force trama" to Gottlieb, but how is anyone ever going to know since Gottlieb made up entire interviews out of whole cloth.

5. Levity most certainly can legally offer her opinion as to whether Mangum might have been raped. But also Levity was not a police investigator. It was not her job to determine what actually happened. That job belonged to Himan, Gottlieb, Nifong and Wilson.

6. Had Levity reported just the facts that night and not editorialized a single word, does anyone here really think Nifong would not have found this allegation and used it to win the election? I certainly do not think much if anything would have changed.

But given all this I am still ready to hear Levity and the MD speak on this and find out I am wrong and that Levity was the cause of this going forward after the DUMC exam.

Anonymous said...

from the article:
"Dr. Manly met with the defense in October of 2006. She stated to the defense that NO ONE from the District Attorney’s office OR the DPD had spoken to her as of yet."

How is it that Nifong personally spoke with Meehan, the head of the lab, but neither he nor any of his investigators ever bothered to speak with the lead examiner at DUMC? It appears Nifong and his associates stopped asking questions once they got the story they wanted. There was never attempt to conduct a thorough investigation by Nifong. This is why the SP's investigation is so profoundly different in it's findings.

Anonymous said...

4:31

I'm not following you. Are you saying that in most rape trials the SANE nurse isn't asked any leading questions, isn't asked by the prosecution whether or not the findings are consistent, in their experience, with sexual assault? Are you saying the nurse would just have testified to 'diffuse edema' and then been on her merry way. That the defense wouldn't have asked her if the findings were consistent with consensual sex? Nobody would have asked her to draw a conclusion? Or are you saying that since she, herself, doesn't have enough experience to be considered an 'expert' that the judge wouldnt' have let her answer anything that demanded an expert opinion?

Anonymous said...

Uh, yo, "Simply Wow," KC just presented this view, he was not its author.

Anonymous said...

I think the point about the whole affair is that it is a cautionary tale about people letting their ideology get in the way of reason.

Clearly, Levicy was an inexperienced nurse. Furthermore she had very little practical forensic experience. Her background suggests that her degree in women's studies and her directing of the vagina monologues suggest that her perspective on the case was coming more from her academic background than any real life experience with actual rape victims.

This is not to suggest that she was legally or even morally culpable or that Duke should be sued on the basis of her behavior.

The point is that at almost every point along the way people overlooked the obvious to go for the politically attractive and the result was that a lie told by an intoxicated sex worker to avoid mandatory confinement got blown into a fantastic tale of a brutal gang rape. Because of the physical dimension of CGM's story, the entire team had to be involved in the coverup and then the women's lacrosse team had to be enablers because they didn't believe the accusations.

The results of the physical exam may have been consistent with sexual activity of some sort but it certainly didn't support the lie that CGM was telling.

KC is going to write a book about the case. It seems to me that the role played by the SANE nurse is part of that story and her inexperience and ideological predilections are an important part of her role.

I don't agree with those who want to take out their frustrations on nurse Levicy but I don't think one can understand how this happened without considering her role.

A terrible injustice occurred in Durham because a lot of people kept the ball rolling. The same idiotic ideology that propelled this case forward seems to be at work in the refusal of the usual suspects to show any signs of remorse.

I would feel a lot better about nurse Levicy if she acknowledged that she had screwed up.

Anonymous said...

GP
I hope you are being facetious. Of course it is a new profession...it's called Women Never Lie About Rape and all Men (especially white men) RAPE, so we need a customer service agent on-site to make sure someone gets screwed. Oops.

Anonymous said...

Gary Packwood said:

Is there a SANE nurse on duty tonight at some little hospital in Bugscuttle, Mississippi?

Not at the little hospital in Bugscuttle. But the Bugscuttle PD would take a woman claiming to have been raped to the big hospital in Bugscuttle. Actually, the Bugscuttle PD would have recognized a drunk hooker on site and would have to be presented with plausible evidence that she had been raped prior to seeking out appropriate medical professionals.

I know this because I work with the men and women of Bugscuttle PD on a daily basis.

Anonymous said...

" Universe Nurse 4:29 said...
The bottom line is this - the North Carolina Board of Nursing. If they are not shocked, SHOCKED by the SANE-in-Training performance why should I be worried about it?"



How do we know they are not?
How do we know if they have investigated this matter?
Have they released findings if any such investigation has in fact occurred?
Has the DUMC done a review of Dr Manly and Trainee-Nurse Levicy's actions that night?
Is such review available for public review and scrutiny?
How do we know you are a Universe Nurse and not a University Nurse or are even a Nurse at all?

Gary Packwood said...

Anonymous 4:45 said...
GP
...I hope you are being facetious. Of course it is a new profession...it's called Women Never Lie About Rape and all Men (especially white men) RAPE, so we need a customer service agent on-site to make sure someone gets screwed. Oops.
::
Ah. I understand now.
The team that planned this did not expect there to be a problem with the 'customer service' fairy tail. Unfortunately, the distributor (SP) went over the head of 'customer service' and talked to engineering.
Yup. That will get you every time.
::
GP

Anonymous said...

Ugh.

Specially trained rape nurses are needed so that what little evidence there may be is collected and preserved. Before SANE nurses rape victims waited for hours in the regular ER and were seen by usually MALE doctors, maybe you are all so full of hate for Crystal Mangun that you can't see a real rape victim might not want to get a pelvic exam from a man or might not feel comfortable having the exam where other people can see what's going on, or GOD FORBID, might do better with someone who was sensitive to their particular situation, involving more mental harm ususally than physical.

But, by all means, let's throw the baby out with the bathwater. Some drugged up, crazy as a loon sex worker falsely claims rape and now you want to get rid of the SANE programs and the rape shield laws.

Gary Packwood said...

Anonymous 4:53

...I know this because I work with the men and women of Bugscuttle PD on a daily basis.
::
Why you must know Officer Ronny. His Mom Constance and I go way back.
She is so skilled making BBQ, Sorghum and Yellow Corn Bread we all think of her as damn near a Southern Certified Chef. Master Chef that is.
Gollie. Sure is a small world.
::
GP

Anonymous said...


But, by all means, let's throw the baby out with the bathwater. Some drugged up, crazy as a loon sex worker falsely claims rape and now you want to get rid of the SANE programs and the rape shield laws.


Indeed. Since some drugged up, crazy as a loon, sex worker has proven how easy it is to manipulate the system to get innocent young men almost put away for 30 years, clearly we need to make it easier to put more men away for rape so we can achieve feminist targets on rape convictions.

Should be easy to reach the mythical 25% of all men are rapists target, or whatever their current views are.

Anonymous said...

I'm sorry that is sooo stupid.

A non criminal DA would have taken one look at Crystal's mental health history, one look at her drug abuse history, one look at the 12 stories she told and 1 look at the alibi evidence and it would ahve been case over.

A non criminal DA would never have even pushed for an indictment. No charges would ever have been filed.

It isn't "easy" to get a rape conviction, despite what the woman haters think. It's very hard, even with a good record, no mental health issues, no promiscuity, no nothing.

This case is the result of a set of criminals in the DA and DPS office. It has nothing to do wtih SANE nurses, rape shield laws or compassion for rape victims.

Anonymous said...

4:56 I am not universe nurse, but a 45 year Emergency Nurse - We know because the NCStateBoard has no discipline action or complaint against Levicy - there is a link on this thread to them and you can check for yourself. Manly and Levicy did their job 0 collecr forensic evidence - better know as DNA that cleared the boys. Rape claimers were always put in private rooms as soon as they showed up - with a woman with at all times, Male Docs are never left alone with women - Why 0 because some woman might scream "He touched Me."
Sorry KC for posting a lot, but this is really unfair to dedicated Professionals..

Anonymous said...

KC,
we are just spoiled by reading authors here with real names and verifyable credentials.

bill anderson said...

I'm sure the defense was well prepared for her. I'm sure they would have brought out her level of inexpereince and her past activities to show her bias toward believing all victims. I'm also sure they would ahve asked her if the exam findings were consistent with consensual sex and she would have said yes.

You Tara Levicy enablers have no idea who the defense was going to have testify at the trial. I will not name names, but I will hint that the person they had secured is one of the most respected -- if not the most respected -- person in this business. When one of the best experts in the world says that you are out of bounds, perhaps you are out of bounds.

But that will not stop the Levicy enablers on this blog, I realize. No, we had people who were promoting a hoax, and you don't need proof for a hoax, just a few lies will do.

Anonymous said...

Experts are nothing more than hired guns most of the time.

The same expert recruited by Kobe Bryants team testified for Alexandro Avila's defense team.

I predict here and now that nothing happens to this nurse, other than a talking to behind closed doors about reserving judgement.

I resent being called an 'enabler' simply for pointing out that so far, no wrongdoing other than bad judgement has been uncovered.

Anonymous said...

Some of you are not much more rational than the gang of 88 types you despise. I can understand being outraged at this injustice, but everyone is not equally culpable. When I read stuff like this nurse should be fired and she's going to get sued and she opened up Duke Medical Center to a lawsuit I can only laugh. You guys think that anyone who behaved badly is deserving of a lawsuit.

But, back to this nurse, you understand that the SANE exam itself is strong evidence that undercut Mangam's story, right? That the SANE exam documenting the lack of bruises or redness on her body undercut the idea of a strangling, beating, right? That if it wasn't for the freaking SANE exam we wouldn't know that Mangun said no condoms were used!!! The SANE reports of what Mangun said also helped documented one of the stages of her many different stories. Maybe, just maybe this woman was doing her job. Certainly, she should never have made those speculative comments about condoms, but beyond that, I don't see any wrong doing at all.

duke09parent said...

It seems to me that Kethra overstates the case against Levicy. The Jan. 10 atatements were certainly irresponsible. I highly distrust the Gottlieb notes of his conversation with her. From the very beginning, I thought the "diffuse edema consistent with rape" conclusion was benign.

I am not a nurse but I have read thousands of medical charts for litigation. Dr. Manly is vulnerable to cross examination if she says Crystal was screaming all out of proportion to her observed injury. That kid of inconsistency between observed injury and demeanor is usually charted. If it happened there (I have no trouble believing it did) it SHOULD definitely have been charted.

To me the reported physical exam, whoever signed for it, is not remarkable and mostly supports the defense's version (i.e. Crytal had multiple partners over the weekend and maybe one or two on the day of party before she arrived). Why challenge the nurse and doctor who provided the DNA swabs which ultimately provided the best evidence of innocence?

Anonymous said...

There are failures all down the line in this case. It seems that nurse Levicy is one of the people that got the ball rolling with her comments. To say they were insignificant when her words were used by Nifong and everyone to rally the troops. Perhaps, if everyone else did their job right her failure would not be significant. There are points in the process to catch the error. But, like many complex system failures it is not just one person at fault.

sceptical said...

I don't think this discussion has focused adequately on the problems with Dr. Manly in this case. From what I can tell from Neff's article, she saw a whitish discharge and just assumed it was semen. She did not attempt to make a diagnosis by doing a microscopic exam of the specimen. As a physician, she had a duty to the patient to establish a diagnosis and not just be a specimen collector. Her later revelation that the discharge was due to a candida (yeast) infection should have been considered at the time of the exam. This is a common problem which a fourth year OB-Gyne resident should be familiar. Also, Dr. Manly was remiss in inadequately documenting her findings-- she only listed "diffuse edema" and did not document the discharge or other neagtive findings, from what we can tell from Neff's article. Finally, Dr. Manly allowed Nurse Levicy to misrepresent who had actually done the pelvic exam and had collected the samples-- while these tasks were perfprmed by Dr. Manly, the SANE report made it appear that Ms. Levicy had done so.
I fault Nurse Levicy for speaking beyond the limits of her expertise, but Dr. Manly also has some explaining to do for failing to make the correct diagnosis, for inadequate and misleading documentation, and for not reining in Nurse Levicy.

Anonymous said...

4:38

I was simply pointing out that the question of "Were the injuries consistent with sexual assault?" is an objectionable question at trial. FRE 611 generally prevents leading questions, and this is a leading question. A non-leading question, such as “what are the possible causes of vaginal edema?,” would undoubtedly prompt a different and open-ended response from a medical professional.

Although it may seem pedantic, the rule of evidence against leading questions exists for good reason. Attorneys frequently ask leading questions because it is a way of substituting their words for those of the witness. The witness’s answer often doesn’t matter. To ask the leading question is enough.

Also, and more problematic for this specific question referenced above, FRE 701 generally prevents opinion testimony from witnesses who are not qualified as experts. The question posed above seeks a scientific or technical opinion. To answer, the witness would have to be qualified as an expert.

I agree that in some jurisdictions with some judges a SANE would be allowed to testify on the “consistent with” question. I also agree that in many alleged rape cases, the prosecution would love to slip this one into evidence. Good defense counsel, however, through motions in limine, should at least attempt to prevent this question from being asked or answered.

Importantly, Levicy really should not be called as an expert by the state to opine on the “consistent with” question. (Perhaps an MD/ME with an extensive empirical background would be a suitable candidate for this type of testimony.) Rather, her job was to collect physical evidence and document facts, not produce opinions regarding what “could” be possible. By virtue of her SANE training, she had specialized knowledge as to how to collect evidence, not interpret what might have caused the evidence before she could collect it.

Had a trial ever occurred, the prosecution likely would have called Levicy to testify only to the fact that CGM’s vagina showed signs of diffuse edema. They likely would not ask Levicy, in this case, whether the observed diffuse edema was consistent with rape. They either would leave this question for another more qualified expert or, as a matter of strategy, not ask it at all.

The reason: this question throws the door open on whether the CGM’s prior sexual activity was responsible for the diffuse edema (see Rule 412(b) of the NC Evid. Code). Would any prosecutor want to risk this particular accuser’s prior sexual encounters coming into evidence?

Georgia Girl said...

I read KC's column, but not the posts [yet].

A man can have an erection without ejaculating. With his erection (rape), he can rip the walls of the vagina and cause excessive bleeding. No need for a condom, no need for anything ... he's innocent because there's no proof. Always, in this particular senario, the intent is to "prove one's masculinity" ... and of course he would label it "consensual sex" because, afterall, "rape" is a bad word.

Anonymous said...


Finally, Dr. Manly allowed Nurse Levicy to misrepresent who had actually done the pelvic exam and had collected the samples-- while these tasks were perfprmed by Dr. Manly, the SANE report made it appear that Ms. Levicy had done so.

I fault Nurse Levicy for speaking beyond the limits of her expertise, but Dr. Manly also has some explaining to do for failing to make the correct diagnosis, for inadequate and misleading documentation, and for not reining in Nurse Levicy.


Is it possible that Manly did not do the exam? That Levicy did it all, and they, Manly and Levicy, are covering up this very large breach of practice?

Anonymous said...

6:35,

In this particular case I don't see how her prior sexual history, past 72 hours, could have been kept out. Seems to me it would be an exception under the rape shield statute because the DNA evidence is from other donors, and could have been the cause of any vaginal swelling. The only way the prosecution could have kept it out would be not introduce the rape kit evidence at all, right? Also, it could be used to impeach her credibility since she appears to have lied about her last sexual encounter, which she said was her boyfriend, so it could be introduced as evidence that she might have lied about other elements.

At one time I wondered about why Nifong didn't move to exclude the other DNA under the RSL, but I figured out he never intended it to be disclosed. He somehow must have believed the defense wasn't going to figure out the 2000 pages of DNA evidence. More evidence he's a liar and a bad lawyer. Had he given the info to the defense right off and immediately moved to suppress this info. under the RSL it might have kept the public on his side for many more months. It would have been a big rallying cry for the rape advocacy community to stand behind a woman who was promiscious, that even sex workers get raped....We can only be glad he was corrupt and stupid. A little bit smarter and these kids would be going to trial.

Anonymous said...

Gotta read this one.

It's fab!

Victor Davis Hanson

Debrah

Georgia Girl said...

We already "know" that ... you're off thread ... again.

Anonymous said...

It's obvious that Ms. Levicy had her own agenda. She not only irresponsibly offered her own opinions, but in doing so, provided an extra enabling layer for the DPD to continue on their road for all-things-Nifong.

I disagree with anyone who is making excuses for her comments.

Debrah

Anonymous said...

Poor frantic and panting Ms. Levicy opines with the certainty of a seasoned call girl....this little gem:

"....victims can never be sure if condoms are used because if they can't see them how would they know for sure. You can't feel them so you have to realize there is always a possibility that a condom could have been used."

There is always a possibility? Well, there is always a possibility that someone will show up at your funeral in a red dress.....but that's just a possibility.

What a doofus!

Ms Levicy, I don't know how old you are or how long you have been sexually active.....or even if you are sexually active.

I don't know what your sexual preferences are...which way you swing.....or if you're just a cold fish.

But what I do know for sure.....not just a possibility.....is that any woman who is having sex with a man KNOWS if a condom is being used. Yes, it is very easy to "feel" the difference.

Let me qualify my statement of this certainty by saying that we all realize the sexual atrophy that some people might experience which would perhaps alter the sensation of such a quest of nature.

That being said, I find you just about as dizzy--or as much of a liar (pick one)--as the nutcase criminal Crystal Gail Mangum.

Debrah

Georgia Girl said...

7:15, if you will make a point and/or give examples, then maybe one can respect your opinion. As it stands, you seem to parrot what everyone else says.

Take a look at your previous posts in response to KC's columns. Never, and I do mean NEVER, do you offer your own personal experiences or your own historical findings.

Like many here, I'd like to know where you're coming from ... your life style, etc.????

Georgia Girl said...

there ya go again, debrah

Anonymous said...

KC, I have read you blog daily and can't remember posting, but I have one request, one statement and one question.
Request: Bloggers, make a list of whom (confusing about who, whom as to formal or informal language) to blame in order of who deserves the most blame to who deserves the least.
Statement: My son's best friend was visited by Durham detectives a while back. They accused him of breaking and entering because they said his truck was seen leaving the crime scene. They stated that they felt the hood of the truck and knew he had just driven it because it was still warm. They finally left when he showed them that the truck not only wouldn't start , but lacked a gas tank.
Question: I am 56 years old and want to know if I really will be the one responsible for bankrupting the future generation if I collect the social security payments that were promised to me.

Eric said...

I can't imagine Levincy facing any severe consequences for her remarks to Gottlieb or Wilson, just because they both have enough credibility problems coming out of this that all she'd really need to do would be deny that she said some of those things.

Since Gottlieb's notes were written so much later, some of the odd contradictions with the actual report could easily come down to his memory, even independent of any questions about his veracity.

The remarks to Wilson in January, if accurately reported, clearly cross a major ethical line and call all of her previous actions in the case into severe question. Her remarks to Wilson make clear that she's willing to "go the extra mile" to support a specific version of events beyond what is medically known.

The report makes it clear that the patient said "no" to whether condoms were used. Turning that into an "I don't know" and then going farther to assert that the patient couldn't know seems flat out unprofessional and wrong.

Anonymous said...

GG

Whether he ejaculated or not he would leave DNA evidence.

bill anderson said...

Levicy was not a dispassionate bystander. She was an active participant in this hoax, and her Jan. 10 meeting shows that she was still trying to help the prosecution spin a sexual assault case -- where there was none.

She had no business doing that, as least within her role as a trainee. The idea that she just wrote a report and that was it will not fly. She was a major enabler of the hoax.

Anonymous said...

If nurse Levicy was so untainted in this matter I wonder why Nifong chose to leave her off his list of expert witnesses ?

Anonymous said...

debroah, your ignorant histrionic declarations do not suit the subject matter. And, I would suggest that someone being raped might rather be focusing on living through it, or trying to kill her assailant rather than experiencing the exquisite motion of the ocean as you vulgarly suggest.

You are a rank amateur of a woman indeed

Anonymous said...

8:15
Hey there Tara!
Got any more news for us on the rape kit evidence?
:)

Georgia Girl said...

o dear, i'm afraid not. I guess you could call it "gone with the wind".

Gary Packwood said...

Anonymous 5:10 said...
Ugh.
Before SANE nurses rape victims waited for hours in the regular ER and were seen by usually MALE doctors, maybe you are all so full of hate for Crystal Mangun that you can't see a real rape victim might not want to get a pelvic exam from a man or might not feel comfortable having the exam where other people can see what's going on, or GOD FORBID, might do better with someone who was sensitive to their particular situation, involving more mental harm usually than physical.
::
This must be one of those CONCEPTUAL statements we are learning about from the Anger Studies faculty. I hear you saying that CONCEPTUALLY there MIGHT BE people who hate Crystal and those people don't understand that rape victims are less than thrilled about an examination from a male nurse or doctor.
Could be!
Around Christmas time in 1975 I learned about the need for caring women clinicians for rape victims and today when I called Baylor and the University of Texas Medical Schools, I learned they have been teaching about the need for caring women clinicians for female rape victims since the early-1970's.
Both Nursing administrators suggest that if you do know of a hospital that is STILL having a problem with this well know reality you need fill a complaint with the Joint Commission at the address below.
http://www.jointcommission.org/GeneralPublic/Complaint/
And, please don't present as truthful any statement that suggests to students that men don't know that female rape victims need women clinicians.
::
GP

Georgia Girl said...

8:09, I stand corrected. I digressed for a moment into the 60's (another world).

Georgia Girl said...

Levicy's involvement ... did she intentionally contribute to the hoax? Was she smart enough to be that manipulative.

Anonymous said...

Just something to point out...

My wife took a travel contract as a nurse to work at Duke University Hospital (this was a year after the botched transplant on the 17 year old girl). While working there, the mantra among the staff there was "we do things the Duke way"... and she saw some really bizarre things go on there that she wasn't surprised there was not more press coverage about the "misadventures".

Teaching hospitals, like Duke, can either be very good (OHSU in Portland) or not so good. For a Nurse, involved in a SANE exam to make conclusions based on her "experience" is unethical - she should give up her license or the state board of nursing should suspend it. Also, I hope she has access to an attorney...

Anonymous said...

Poster@8:15-Why all the vitriol? In my opinion I could look at Mangum and know that those lacrosse players wouldn't be able to physically get it up if they had even thought about doing such a thing. Forget about forensic evidence.
That woman is nasty.

Georgia Girl said...

Physically "getting it up" is not nearly as important as "pretending to get it up" for the sake of the brotherhood. Surely, you must know that!

Anonymous said...

TO 8:46PM--

¡ Muy excellente !

You are exactly right on all points.

Debrah

Anonymous said...

What many posters here seem to miss is the inherent point of this article.

Ms. Levicy mislead the police. Her statements allowed them to produced the false NTO of March 20th and also gave Nifong his ammunition used in many interviews. It directly contributed to the expansion of this hoax.

Had she kept her comments to what is allowed, the police would have had the actual information of "some slight swelling vaginally, no other injuries and many different stories." She would have been considered "not an accurate historian".

I do not see this article as addressing the legal obligations more than I see it as how Ms. Levicy contributed to the hoax by being dishonest.

Anonymous said...

Its sad that some have become bitter in this event - maybe a book deal would help. The case is over, the guys are Innocent - In large part to lack of Lacrosse DNA found in Dr Manly swabs - Would this have been dropped if there was Lacrosse DNA?

Anonymous said...

Huh?

Universe Nurse said...

bill anderson said... You Tara Levicy enablers have no idea who the defense was going to have testify at the trial. I will not name names, but I will hint that the person they had secured is one of the most respected -- if not the most respected -- person in this business. Apr 19, 2007 5:59:00 PM



Incognito essays are always suspect because obviously the author didn't think highly enough of his own writings or does not posses the credentials necessary to shine a light on a difficult subject.

Anon At 9:15 Levicy mislead the police. Her statements allowed them to produced the false NTO of March 20th and also gave Nifong his ammunition used in many interviews. It directly contributed to the expansion of this hoax.

This conjures an image of the DPD and Nifong taking lessons in corruption from the SANE in training.

UNIVERSE NURSE said...

How do you know I am a nurse?

Because I said so, just like Kethra!

Anonymous said...

Were Scheck and Neufeld going to come out of the woodwork to redeam themselves????

Anonymous said...

Very interesting that this nurse Levicy is being targeted with such hostility. A lot of inaccurate statements being made by commenters who seem to think they are experts about SANEs, rape exams, findings, etc. Did you know that there are no requirements that a nurse or doctor have specialized training in the sexual assault examination and evidence
collection in NC? Did you know that the examination forms allow for the RN and the doctor to document components of the exam and evidence collection? Did you know that these RNs and doctors have both been testifying in rape/sexual assault cases ever since they instituted a process of exams and evidence collections to be completed in hospitals. Did you know that SANE education and training was introduced in NC a little less than 10 years ago?

I have read some of the comments made by Kreatha (sorry if I get the spelling wrong). If he/she is a nurse and has SANE training then we have a big problem here with accuracy and with appropriate interpretation of the exam, the nurse, and the doctor. He/she presents a number of facts which are just wrong. So, if you are judging the nurse and doctor by this person's crituque of the situation, then my best suggestion is that you talk to someone who is an expert in this area because he/she just ain't coming across as one. Sounds like he/she has some personal agenda here. Too much hostility coming across. Think about!!!

Anonymous said...

To Anon at Apr 19, 2007 10:10:00 PM,

The document is well cited in its orignal format with court records and documents.

What "facts" are wrong? The fact that Tara Levicy did not tell the DPD she was not the examiner? The fact that Tara Levicy made a conclusive statement about a procedure she did not perform? The fact that she continued to give misleading information about her level of expertise to the police all the way until January of 2007?

You will have to say which facts are inaccurate and supply documentation to back that up.

As a matter of point, SANE has only been around for a little more than 10 years anywhere. Any nurse or Doctor can do such an exam. However, you get into a legal situation and your work will become suspect since you dont' have the recognized expertise. Hence SANE/SART/SAFE/FE certifications.

I still am interested in what inaccuracies you find and how you know they are inaccurate.

Anonymous said...

Bill, just who is the most respected person in the business??? I will just bet that this person started out new at some point and probably made some mistakes. If she didn't then I would say, bull----!!!!

UNIVERSE NURSE said...

Dr Johnson,
An author with a name might pen an opinion on the issues here. Perhaps these links will help.

You have until 12:01
(just kidding)

http://tva.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/6/4/313
http://www.mass.gov/dph/fch/sane/central.htm
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/ovc/publications/bulletins/sane_4_2001/12.html
http://www.mysati.com/publications.htm
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=10576874&dopt=Abstract

Anonymous said...

To Universe Nurse,

Given the crazy's on the web, I don't blame this author in the least for protecting themselves.

You have as well I note.

Your links are interesting in that they support the author in thier supposition that Ms. Levicy acted outside her scope.

Thank you for the links

Anonymous said...

Universe Nurse - Right On - Kerta has been writing this stuff with a lot of inaccuracies and hostility since Neff emailed that "Kertha was wrong" after his third article. The personal comments made about Nurs Levicy are dispicable.

Anonymous said...

Well actually, SANEs have been around longer than 10 years. Some nurses began this whole process in the late 70's. I believe Virginia began a program around 1991 or 1992.

Nurses who complete SANE training in NC do not have a certification. There is no actual certifying body. Some states have this but not NC. If a nurse completes the didactic and clinical component of the SANE training then he/she gains a certificate of completion. To gain a recognized certification, the SANE in NC will have to take the board certification exam through the IAFN.

Any well-trained SANE nurse or nurse in general receives education and training on the variable emotional responses that a patient may exhibit. To conclude that the patient has not been raped because her response is one of hysteria is a very serious deduction to make. People cope differently. Look it up!!!

One cannot say that a substance is sperm because it lights up with a Wood's lamp. Many things light up with a Wood's lamp. Even dry skin and fungal infection. A wood's lamp is not specific. SANEs have been taught to use Wood's lamps historically but there are ALSs that are much better to use and can be a bit more specific.

As to the white discharge... Sure it could be yeast and it could be other things and obviously there must have been sperm there if some was found with the DNA analysis.

Please point out how many doctors receive the same training or more training on sexual assault exams and evidence collection than most SANEs. Few have this extensive training.

This was a new nurse performing a new function. Did she make mistakes, probably. Guess that makes her human.

bill anderson said...

I have read some of the comments made by Kreatha (sorry if I get the spelling wrong). If he/she is a nurse and has SANE training then we have a big problem here with accuracy and with appropriate interpretation of the exam, the nurse, and the doctor. He/she presents a number of facts which are just wrong. So, if you are judging the nurse and doctor by this person's crituque of the situation, then my best suggestion is that you talk to someone who is an expert in this area because he/she just ain't coming across as one. Sounds like he/she has some personal agenda here. Too much hostility coming across. Think about!!!

Apr 19, 2007 10:10:00 PM


I can tell you that you are wrong, wrong, wrong. I will further say that Kethra has been spot on time and again, and is spot on here.

Kethra IS a professional, and, no, this is not a situation of someone being hostile. It is a situation of a professional watching someone else enable a hoax.

Levicy was much more involve in this case than just helping with an exam. As time goes on, more information will come out. Kethra deserves to be lauded, not attacked.

UNIVERSE NURSE said...

Anon at 10:32 said Given the crazy's on the web, I don't blame this author in the least for protecting themselves. You have as well I note. Your links are interesting in that they support the author in thier supposition that Ms. Levicy acted outside her scope.

I don't buy the 'protect yourself' excuse. Is there a special bounty on SANE experts? Either Kethra is an expert with credentials for all to see while writing as an expert on the subject or not. If not then Kethra belongs here in the peanut gallery providing comment like me, UNIVERSE NURSE!

Glad to know you liked the links, but have you heard from the NC Board of nursing? Has the wretched SANE in training had her license suspended yet?

Anonymous said...

Uhmmmm. I would think that a professional nurse would point out the facts and the deficiencies without attacking an individual with such seemingly hostility.

Gary Packwood said...

Does Durham have a SART? If so, who would be the members? Police? DA? Duke Women's Center? Access Center?
::
"Many communities have created multidisciplinary bodies, such as sexual assault response teams (SARTs), to oversee coordination and collaboration related to immediate response to sexual assault cases, ensure a victim-centered approach to service delivery, and explore ways to prevent future victimization. In localities where SANE programs exist, SANEs must be integral in these community coordination efforts to facilitate comprehensive and effective response".
Reference:
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/ovc/publications/
bulletins/sane_4_2001/6.html

Anonymous said...

Can somebody please tell me what this nurse Levicy did to "enable" this hoax. I see inexperience written all over the statements and critiques but not intentional acts to fabricate the situation.

Anonymous said...

Does anyone know if an complaints against Nurse Levicy have been filed with the NC Board of Nursing?

Is this Public or Private information?

Is an investigation in progress? Can this be verified?

Are decisions of any such investigations or hearings public information?

Anonymous said...

She assister a Doctor in collecting sample and doing an exam. The samples or swabs collected were sent to to DNA labs, where no DNA of the Lax team was found, Two siginificant liars working for the DPD made unsubstatiated statements that she said "The exam was constitant with rape."

Anonymous said...

to Joe Anonymous at 10:50

Google North Carolina Board of Nursing and find out. You will be amazed at what you will find. The Board of Nursing is there to protect you, and me too.

Anonymous said...

Please note - all the Professional Medical people disagree with what was written about Nurse Levicy, except Kertha.

hman said...

To 10:43
When you re-iterate just how impossible it is to rule out that rape/sexual assault occurred you are illustrating how exams in general produce results that are "not inconsistent with" those things. And it is a tiny step to say that every exam could be described as "consistent with" rape/sexual assault. The proper response to this conundrum is, imho, to avoid talking out of turn to LE folks who do not grasp this and will be mislead by hall-way chats.
Here is the main catch, though, in regard to Levicy; she already knew this. It is virtually the first thing they teach anybody in any sort of medicine or nursing - if you put one thing into the written record and try to say a different thing verbally you have transgressed. Someone will always get hurt.
So, why did she do exactly that?

Anonymous said...

In response to hman....lack of experience and guidance.

Anonymous said...

We cannot know until the coming revelations (see Bill Anderson at 10:48 wrong, wrong, wrong)

bill anderson said...

Look up the court documents. They might help.

This case was a fraud, and Levicy helped moved the fraud along.

Anonymous said...

"Please note - all the Professional Medical people disagree with what was written about Nurse Levicy, except Kertha. "

I don't think I have found that to be true on the various forums that have discussed this. You might want to run your opinion by risk management departments at a few hospitals. You might find that they frown upon invalid documentation and medical personel speaking out of turn. Here is a bit of info for you:

Managing Documentation Risk: A Guide for Nurse Managers

Steph said...

I am using this case for a school project. I do not know a great deal about how all of the medical information became available. I thought there were strict rules about how that information gets released but obviously people have access to it. Does anyone know if the actual reports or whatever they call it in medical terms (the recording of the exam by the nurse and the doctor) can be accessed by the public?

Anonymous said...

Steph,

Other than what has been quoted in the existing court documents, the actual medical records are kept under court seal, meaning no one but the Lawyers see them.

You are right that there are strict laws that prevent the publication of the medical data as there should be.

Most of the important documents in this case are published on this web site (scroll down the side) you can also find an excellent timeline for research with documents at www.liestoppers.com

Good luck!

Anonymous said...

11:45 I am retired now, but was a Nurse Manager for 25 years with 95 employees in my Department. Do you really approve of the character assination that Nurse Levicy has undergone, with no proff of the accusations made against her. i heard it on the grapevine does not count,

Anonymous said...

"11:45 I am retired now, but was a Nurse Manager for 25 years with 95 employees in ..."

Kethra cited all of her sources over on Liestoppers as mentioned previously. If you want to go read all of the source information as a nurse and form your own opinion go ahead.

In the best of light Levicy made some mistakes in how she handled things. In the worst light she provided one of the strongest basis for getting the hoax off the ground by her comments. Those comments were later used by others repeatedly in documents to get DNA and to inflame the public. Perhaps, Gottlieb just made up the conversations out of whole cloth. But, that does not explain the continued misinformation in January. It is my understanding that she is to provide findings of facts from the evidence collection, etc and not her opinions. The results of this case might just be an example of why that is true. I don't know what percent of culpability if any we should attribute but she did play a role. Perhaps excoriating her on this forum might be inappropriate. But, the role of the medical team is worth exploring.

Anonymous said...

Gottlieb, Wilson and Nifong have lied about everything in this case - how can anyone believe them now? Nifong also believe in document dumps. Seriously, this is a non issue. As nurses, we don't need to make ourselves bigger than we are - we start off the best. Nothing was stopping. It took a year of concentrated effort by thousands of people and three million dollars. Do we really think this PRN staff nurse was going to hold him up?

Purps said...

Anonymous at 12.09PM:

Kethra is also OFF HER ROCKER in her view that non medical findings such as how the victim was acting belong in the medical report or that facts not recorded in the report would have been excluded at trial. Again, ridiculous. The SANE exam is to document forensic and medical findings, not behavior. To say that their recollections of her behavior would not be admissable becuase they weren't in the report is nonsense and significantly undercuts "Kethra's" credibility.

The SANE Development and Operational Guide states:

"It is important to accurately and completely assess and document the emotional state of the victim and quote important statements made by the victim, such as threats made by the assailant (Antognoli-Toland: 85; Sheridan: 93)." p77 ie - non-medical information (the accuser's statements) ARE documented.

"It is important not to be afraid to include the name of the assailant, just be sure to use qualifying statements such as “patient states” or “patient reports” If the exam findings match the history given by the victim, the nurse should also document that “there is congruence between the victim’s story and her injuries” or “the injuries are consistent with the victim’s account of the assault” (Sheridan: 93)." p77

"Basic Documentation
...
¦ Victim’s general appearance and response during exam." p77

"SANE Protocol (ie the form to be completed by the SANE) – found at page 201 - includes:

Behaviors Observed During Exam:
Controlled ___ Expressive ___ Mixed ___ Agitated ___ Cooperative ___ Fidgeting ___ Fearful ___ Listless ___ Loud ___ Quiet ___ Staring ___ Sobbing ___ Tearful ___ Tense ___ Trembling ___ Yelling ___ Other ___

Response to questions: Pre-Verbal ___ Briefly ___ Readily ___ Reluctantly ___"

So it looks as if Kethra is NOT off her rocker after all. tsk tsk

GrĂ¡inne O'Donovan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Purps said...

Make that last reference p199 of the SANE Guide, instead of p201. At p207, the City of Memphis SANE Exam Report has the following sections:
"4. Emotional State
A. Patient's Behavior ___
B. Patient's Statements ___ "

It has a list of emotional states, similar to the protocol already cited.

Darn. It supports Kethra too!

Anonymous said...

I hope Kethra has consulted a lawyer.

A quick web search indicated "Kethra" is a person, place or thing found in computer games and computer systems.

KC, this person, Kethra, is spewing all over your wonderful DIW. This sounds wrong here.


Kethra said all of this (and more) today about the SANE in training:

Ms. Levicy committed on the worst acts an RN and a SANE can commit—

Ms. Levicy stepped out of her required role as an impassionate forensic examiner and into the role of a feminist with an agenda.

She made stated conclusions not based on an evidence based practice based on her own personal agenda and skewed world view.

she was untruthful.

Ms. Levicy continues this interjection of personal beliefs

Ms. Levicy’s glaring ignorance

To add to her own presentation of just how ignorant of basics she is,

she apparently slept through in Nursing 101.

in her zeal to be a big bad forensic nurse, misrepresented to lay persons the true facts in this case.

Ms. Levicy’s actions were unconscionable, unprofessional and the inherent sign of an incredibly biased person and nurse.

She alone, is responsible for the start of this witch hunt

By not telling the actual facts,

by “embroidering “the true patient findings

by her sheer ignorance

her sheer ignorance

her sheer ignorance

by her glaring egotistical

she sent the police down the trail of deception.

she almost put 3 innocent men in jail.

This nurse needs to turn in her license

Until she can learn compassionate investigation and the difference between right and wrong, she should have no part in nursing.

I am guessing she missed the required ethics portion of Nursing

Austin said...

This isn't Kethra's first post about Levicy. She can seem immoderate because she's been over the field, has mentioned it all before, and is getting angry at what was laid out vs Cooper's "innocent" announcement.

One major issue is that Kethra is taking the Gottlieb notes at face value, when those of us on the outside have more than a few suspicions about him. Further, her staements concern what she knows policy and procedure to be. Levicy couldn't have legitimately signed off on the report, since she was a brand new nurse. Except that she did. All of these obvious policy violations are enervating to a professional.

Kethra has said that she is VERY surprised that no proceedings have been brought against Levicy. She's not a fan of Levicy's behaviour, especially since there appears to be substantial HIPAA violations. Those who are offended by Kethra's approach should go to the liestopper's board and see her contributions to the case, then you can judge her.

Anonymous said...

2:18

If this is a peer review then let us understand who is the peer and exactly what are the facts, and what is Kethra's connection to the case.

Has Kethra reviewed the entire medical record?

Has Kethra been hired as an expert in the field?

Is Kethra an expert?

Is this slaughter something that we accept because Kethra is thought of highly?

What I see here is someone using a pen name who is supposed to be a medical professional, a SANE, confronting another medical professional in an unprofessional manner. Kethra is also critical of Dr Manly's performance.

Does Kethra do peer review on doctors too?

I am not a SANE. I am just amazed that Kethra would attack someone like this. I have no idea if the SANE in training should lose her license, but this kind of public attack might give the licensing board something to think about on Kethra.

Kethra sounds like a man not like a woman.

Ham said...

Just who or what is Kethra? Sounds like he/she/it is in serious need of some help also. I have talked with a friend who is a nurse and has been a SANE for quite a few years. She just reads all of this stuff and feels sorry for the NC folks. She says that some of the information presented by this Kethra is accurate but there are some points that are not. She is also praying that Kethra is not a nurse as she is making nurses look just as bad if not worse than Levicy. As has been stated in other posts, sounds like Kethra has an ax to grind with this Levicy person. Making the regulating body should get both of them.

Anonymous said...

Kethra has no evidence that Levicy misrepresented herself and what she did in the exam.

Kethra has no evidence that her signing the exam was improprer procedure since both Levicy and the MD signed it. Doesn't seem like a cover up to me.

Kethra chides the MD for failing to 'diagnose' a yeast infection during a forensic rape exam; would she chide her for faililng to diagnose a heart condition as well?

Kethra blames the hoax on nurse Levicy but it boggles the mind to think a SANE nurse would have been able to stop the hoax before any DNA results came back in.

Kethra wants the nurse to be brought up on professional charges and fired; yet the only verifiable mistake she made occured in January 2007, nothing to do with her part in the medical exam.

Kethra, is full of sh*t. I know she has been posting as a nurse on this and other cases, and she always overstates things, makes inaccurate statements and is very hostile to anyone with a different point of view: not the hallmarks of a professional.

Anonymous said...

What HIPAA violations?

Anonymous Bosh said...

Personally, I wish KC would turn on at least some partial ISP identifier.

It irks me, as an avid reader and very occasional commentater, when what seems to be one or two folks comment endlessly (and really just repeat themselves) and then shout "See! Look how many posters disagree!"

KC, of course, can see who posts from where...

Anonymous said...

I posted a lot on this thread, I never attempted to look, write or sound like more than one person. Paranoid much?

gwallan said...

Ah Tara.
Womens' Studies grad.
Presenter of a noted, anti-rape production which actually endorses rape - provided it's committed by a woman of course.
SANE nurse!
Say "hello" to Crystal.
And welcome to your very own fifteen minutes of fame.
Bet you didn't expect it to be like this. Real life is much more real than the fantasy worlds of the theatre and Womens' Studies.

Anonymous said...

To Ham at 10:00 a.m.

She is also praying that Kethra is not a nurse as she is making nurses look just as bad if not worse than Levicy.

This is exactly the problem here. Many of the posters complaining about Kethra appear to have some nursing experience. They likely have made, or watched others make, the same mistakes as those Kethra accuses Levicy of making.

These nurses take issue with Kethra's analysis not because it is wrong but because they do not want the profession to be tarnished. They do not want the stink of this case to rub off on all SANEs. This is why, in their opinions, Levicy must be supported and Kethra condemned.

These nurses, however, should get in front of this issue, like the NC Bar against Nifong. SANEs play an important and valuable role. Women are assaulted every day in this country. Now more than ever, SANEs must be viewed as honest brokers that assist in the process of establishing guilt or innocence. They collect and document evidence. Period.

SANEs are not law enforcement. They also are not advocates for every alleged victim who claims to have been assaulted. If SANEs are to be viewed as honest brokers, they should not follow in Levicy’s footsteps. The credibility of the profession depends on it.

Levicy’s uninformed, unsubstantiated, (originally) undocumented, and incomplete opinion (“consistent with”) may very well have set in motion the chain reaction leading to the possible imprisonment for 30 years of demonstrably innocent young men. For its own sake, the nursing profession should be among the loudest voices calling for a thorough investigation into this fiasco.

The reaction from the Levicy defenders, particularly those with nursing experience, seems to be "Oh well, mistakes were made." This is not good enough. These young men were in serious jeopardy because Levicy could not keep her opinions and world views to herself, even as late as January 2007.

The public can and should learn lessons from this debacle. What KC is doing with his board is one very important aspect of the education. Many influential people are reading these boards, and this dialog may help prevent further abominations.

So, to all the nurse practitioners out there, stop blaming Kethra and start looking honestly at what Levicy did and whether it is worthy of criticism.

ME said...

To those in the nursing profession that take issue with SANE nurse Kethra’s analysis and conclusions, you may (or may not) find this additional Levicy and Manly Patient Care analysis of interest.

Anonymous said...

Kerta and Kathleen have been after Nurse Tara for months - at last - they got her for original sin. But not for messing up the physical evidence, which was examined by two labs and not found wanting. Just one answer -"Why was the Doctor in the room?" Because the Doctor was in charge of the event. Just a reminder after a blogger emailed Neff questioning his third artice - Neff emailed back"Kerta was wrong." I will admitt that the Doctor and Nurse signed their names in the wrong place on the DeVinci sheet.

Anonymous said...

To say that we disagree with Kertha, is not blaming her for anything. What was that the 88 were doing?

a Duke Dad said...

miramar -

The link you posted, re: SANE Trainee Levicy's background
www.wildmed.com/eLetter/Archive/2003/eletter_august

has been removed. Guess the truth hurts.

Anonymous said...

a Duke Dad said...
miramar -

The link you posted, re: SANE Trainee Levicy's background
www.wildmed.com/eLetter/Archive/2003/eletter_august

has been removed. Guess the truth hurts.

Apr 20, 2007 6:11:00 PM

I'm still finding it, though the url in miramar's post has been shortened and so won't work; just Google "levicy vagina mirror". It currently comes up third.

Nifong's hat trick said...

Along with other changes that should come about because of this case, "vaginal swelling" should never be used as an indication of rape. If Crystal's swollen vagina hasn't taught us anything, it should have at least taught us that there are way too many other reasons for vaginal swelling.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 220   Newer› Newest»