Friday, July 20, 2007

Cooney Presentation

Begins with photograph of the "false accuser"--12.30am photo. Mangum is laughing, four minutes after calling escort service, holding purse and Dave Evans' shaving kit.

Urges the committee to look at the AG's report--clear that players were innocent, no credible evidence, AG found evidence DPD never uncovered.

Cooney--described by Joe Cheshire as the "best PowerPoint attorney in North Carolina"--has put together a PP presentation for the committee, running through the AG's report.

"Inconsistencies so significant and so contrary to the evidence"--as the AG noted.

Himan probably the person in the DPD who knows the case best. (Cooney urges the committee to look at the Bar depositions of Himan, Gottlieb, etc.)

Cooney quotes Himan deposition statement: "I came to the conclusion that . . . she was not telling the truth about anything."

Question for committee: "We know three innocent men were prosecuted for a crime that never took place. Did that come about solely because a DA pushed forward unethically, or did that come about because of deficiencies in the investigation"--and were these caused by human error or by systemic problems?

Wants to share with the committee what he did with the SP's--but can't show everything, because Mangum's mental health issues remain under seal. Some 2000 pages of material.

Cooney: when he came onto case, saw that Mangum gave varying statements, so did a checklist. Proved that there were serious inconsistencies in her statements.

Cooney now reviews the who/what/when inconsistencies, laying out the chart below: It examines who allegedly did what to Mangum, as well as the marital status of her “attackers”:
  • A green X corresponds to the story that Mangum told Tara Levicy on March 14, 2006.
  • A blue Y corresponds to the story that Mangum told Gottlieb and Officer Ben Himan on March 16, 2006.
  • A red Z corresponds to the story that Mangum provided in her April 6, 2006 official statement.


Oral

Anal

Vaginal

Married

Matt

X

YZ

XZ

X

Brett


YZ

YZ


Adam

XY

X


Z

Mangum, in short, described three quite different “attacks.” Of course, when she was asked about the “attack” on December 21, she would come up with a fourth different story. And when the special prosecutors would ask her about the “attack,” she would come up with a fifth, entirely different, story.

Defense consulted Dr. Anne Burgess--one of leaders in rape treatment. Sent her all the records, asked her, and she said: after working with hundreds of rape victims, having worked with FBI, having written a textbook--had never seen a real victim change her story as much as Mangum did. Burgess said there was "something terribly wrong" with what Mangum told the police.

When Cooney was hired, Reade Seligmann asks him, "Who am I?" Was never entirely clear from Nifong who was Matt, Adam, or Brett.

21 comments:

Anonymous said...

2000 pages!

Add this on top of everything else we now know about our Precious "African Queen" (and also Kim) and compare this with the LAX players.

Quite a contrast -- almost as stark as the contrast in how they were treated, but in exactly the opposite direction. Wonderland indeed, and we all live here...

Anonymous said...

The evidence is there but will the Committee take the easy “PC” way out and not do anything with it?

Anonymous said...

I presume that Cooney (and the other defense attorneys) approach this hearing with the perspective that they must do all the Committee's actual work. KC, is it your impression that if they do, in fact, "all the necessary work" that the Committee will have no choice but to cleanse the DPD? Or, instead, is this just a wasted effort in window-dressing?

Anonymous said...

WRAL.com is live streaming the hearing.

inman said...

I'm listening to the presentation.

This is amazing. Very persuasive / compelling. If someone doesn't go to prison for this abuse of police power, then I'd vote for kicking NC out of the union.

Anonymous said...

The XYZ Affair....

Anonymous said...

Inman

Can you get back to me on my 12:52 am, 7/20, post on Hochberg thread? If you could post it here, or on any other of today's threads, I'd appreciate it.

Polanski

Anonymous said...

Defense counsel made a similar presentation to the Florida Bar earlier this month. An interesting point is that the fake fingernails led to the discovery of the exculpatory DNA evidence.

http://tinyurl.com/28zmx8

Anonymous said...

God, I never heard the Reade Seligman statement before: "Who am I?" It's no wonder all of these attorneys were able to believe 100% in their clients' total innocence from the start. How can a question like that not make you livid all over again at what these criminals did to these young men.

Anonymous said...

Interesting. Penny Burgess is a big name in sexual assault. Her statement is strong.

So why is Crystal still walking the streets? Why does she still have custody of her children? She started it all. She is as guilty, if not more so, than any LEO.

inman said...

P

What do you have in mind? What type of organization do you envision? And what would be the stated objective?

I'd prefer to find some theory of a tort and pursue litigation (I wonder if I could get them on "wrongful graduation"?). That'd put their underwear in a bunch.

Unfortunately, I don't think there is such a theory.

I

Anonymous said...

Whoever named Panties the "African Queen" is a genius. I love it. Please identify yourself.

Inman: the objective of the report is to demonstrate the deleterious effect AAAS and women's studies departments are having on students, in particular, and America, in general.

That's why I want to document the following in report:

1. total cost, as well as % of operating budget, of all political studies

2. examine how these unrigorous, ideologically driven "studies" are nothing more than academic camouflages for antiwhite racism and antimale sexism.

3. document the relationship of these departments to out-of-control affirmative action.

4. document much more worthy academic subjects that are grossly underfunded because of the presence of the above-referenced parasitical "studies"

Inman, we have an opening here to lay a lot of leather on the jaw of this crap. I have a lot of work approaching, and I'm getting frustrated that no one is seizing the moment.

Polanski

Anonymous said...

I would be willing to bet that most mentally ill people who have been institutionalized for YEARS don't have 2000 pages of medical details.

Why would anyone put any credibility in a statement from this person? Personally, if she said the sun was shining, I would probably be forced to go outside and check.

Even slapstick cops aren't gullible enough to believe crap like that. Stupid is as stupid does. Stupid did a lot of investigative work at DPD and DDA's office.

P a t h e t i c.....

AF

mac said...

2000 pages!
She could make Mary Mapes look believable!

Couple questions:
At what age did CGM enter the mental health system?
Was her family involved?

Anonymous said...

AF

How much do you want to bet that the 2000 pp of medical documentation primarily focuses on her substance-abuse issues?

Again: If this woman is so gravely mentally impaired, then how is she maintaining sole guardianship of her chilluns?

P

No justice, no peace said...

Polanski, you are correct, CGM must have charges filed against her.

What are the ramifications of the AG's findings? Do they mean any charges cannot be filed against her?

mac said...

P,
They don't care about black kids,
until they need to be put into the
system.

What a tragedy to have a "mother" like that!

mac said...

3:32 NJNP
I think the AG's findings, with regard to future
criminal trials, were mostly advisory.
The main intent of the SP was to look into the charges
against the young men.
Don't think it rules out possible
charges, it meant that he wasn't
disposed to do so. IMO.

Anonymous said...

Mac

You may be right, but there's still a disconnect here. Mangum should be prosecuted. Any agency we could email that you could recommend?

P

Anonymous said...

Anne Burgess is in her own way just as much as a monster as Nifong. I assume we are talking about the same Anne Burgess whose unfounded theories about international sometimes-Satanic "sex rings" fueled the persecutions of innocent people at Wenatchee and other emblematic travesties of the 80's day care hysteria? If even Burgess acknowledges Mangum's testimony is not believable, it emphasizes just how egregiously bad the police conduct was, as well as establishing that there's finally some form of sexual hysteria that even Burgess can't buy into. Still, it rankles to see a figure responsible for so much persecution and injustice being held up as simply a "leader in rape treatment" as if she herself had not done so much to destroy the lives of innocent people.

inman said...

Polansi @ 3:13

Does the state have the right to remove children from the home of their parent(s)? And if so under what conditions? Surely, prostitution ...hmmm...excuse me very much....I meant "exotic" dancing is something that even a Durham social worker would find a justifiable offense.

And, by the way, what does "exotic" mean?