Tuesday, January 16, 2007

The Special Prosecutor Route

Two days out from Roy Cooper’s announcement that the AG’s special prosecutions division would assume control of the case, it’s worth offering some tentative conclusions.

1.) Having Nifong off the case is an unqualifiedly positive development, since in recent weeks the “minister of justice” had displayed increasingly erratic behavior.

Nifong offered shifting explanations for why he and Dr. Brian Meehan didn’t turn over exculpatory DNA evidence (from a public statement that he didn’t know about it; to a claim that he wanted to protect the privacy of players he had labeled “hooligans”; to an assertion he overlooked the material in his excessive workload). He forbade the media or the public from attending his swearing in.

Most ominously, the production of Linwood Wilson’s December 21 “notes” raised the question—as Jim Coleman pointed out—of whether the district attorney had veered into the realm of criminal conduct. Given this record, it’s hard to imagine what Nifong would have done next had he remained on the case.

2.) At this stage, only two options remained: Nifong dismissing the charges himself; or Nifong turning the matter over to a special prosecutor. Of the two, the special prosecutor option was clearly the better one.

The recent statements of Nifong’s critic-turned-attorney, David Freedman, provided a good sense of the false-bravado rhetoric that would have framed any Nifong-orchestrated dismissal. “He feels very disappointed that he can’t go on for her,” Freedman told the New York Times. “Mike at this point, as a result of the bar complaint, doesn’t want to be a distraction to the case or take away from the prosecution of the case, which the witness still feels very strongly about.”

By contrast, a special prosecutor will undertake a full review of the case—conducting, as Coleman noted, the “kind of thorough investigation Nifong should have done to determine whether there is any basis to go forward.”

Such an inquiry should give the lie once and for all to the “something-must-have-happened” mantra. Moreover, it will undercut those like Group of 88 members still intent on glorifying the accuser, who was recently described by the Group's Cathy Davidson as a “single mother who takes off her clothes for hire partly to pay for tuition at a distinguished historically black college.”

3.) A special prosecutor provides the best chance for an immediate investigation of “whether there was manipulation of evidence and statements,” as defense attorney Joseph Cheshire hoped.

In his press conference, Cooper made clear that Nifong’s recusal will end the involvement anyone associated with the district attorney’s botched investigation. This means no Linwood Wilson, no Victoria Peterson, no Sgt. Gottlieb, no Tracey Cline, no Inv. Clayton, no Police Chief Chalmers. (Well, I suppose we never had Police Chief Chalmers.)

Odds would seem high that Wilson and Gottlieb, at the very least, have already hired attorneys.

4.) Every reason exists to believe that the special prosecutor appointed by Cooper, Jim Coman, will be fair.

The defense attorneys have been perfectly candid in giving their opinions throughout the case, and they were consistent in their praise of Cooper’s taking over the case in general and the appointment of Coman in particular.

Joe Cheshire: “We’re very heartened by it. He should have done it weeks or months ago. For the first time, someone who is honest and objective and doesn’t have an agenda will look at this case. We feel confident that when they do, these young men will be exonerated and this case will be dismissed.”

Brad Bannon: “From day one we’ve wanted a prosecutor who would follow the evidence and then make his decision, instead of letting his decision direct the evidence. We are absolutely confident in the ability of the Special Prosecution Office to review the evidence objectively and competently.”

Jim Cooney: “I’m looking forward to working with an objective and competent prosecutor. We will cooperate completely and fully, so we can end this prosecution.”

Both Cheshire and Cooney went up against Coman in the latter stages of the Gell prosecution; if they had any concerns that Coman would treat this case fairly, surely they would have expressed them publicly.

5.) In the end, this case is a straightforward one.

Nifong’s recent machinations have simplified Coman’s job. Because Nifong dismissed the rape charges but retained those dealing with sexual assault and kidnapping, the theory of the crime now revolves around the accuser’s December 21 statement.

But that statement is demonstrably untrue. It contradicts not only the other witnesses’ testimony and all of the accuser’s previous tales, but also the case’s unimpeachable electronic evidence (cell phone records, photos, etc.).

Moreover, as 60 Minutes hinted at last night, it appears that the accuser’s medical records are far more severe than what previously had been revealed, calling into serious doubt her reliability as any type of witness.

To put such a witness on the stand would constitute suborning perjury. Every reason exists to believe Nifong would have done so. No reason exists to believe than Coman will.


Anonymous said...

There is a disturbing pattern developing in DIW-land.

KC eminently reasonable and (nearly) flawless in his posting from Olympus (OK, Brooklyn).

And then us slobbering mortals slugging it out in the comments...

(KC: I hope with the hoax winding down you have some time now to work on that damn book)

Anonymous said...

As I understand the SCOTUS decision concerning the University of Michigan's affirmative action decision, the intended beneficiaries are NOT student of African heritage but are, instead, those of European heritage who most stand to reap the benefits of multiple cross-ethnic interactions within a diverse student body.

Perhaps if the wisdom of the sage Justice O'Connor had been more forcefully applied at all universities - both public and private - the three men currently accused of felonious sexual assault and kidnapping would have been better prepared, more informed and certainly more culturally attuned on how to appropriately interact with an African-American military veteran, honor student and devoted mother.

Anonymous said...

Is KC writing a book solo or in collaboration with Stuart Taylor as has been mentioned previously?


Anonymous said...

I think you nailed the suborning perjury part. Nifong already was in deep, so he would have figured that he would roll the dice one more time and put Crystal on the stand. If he was going down, he was going down, and maybe Crystal could convince one juror to vote guilty.

Coman, on the other hand, is not going to let Crystal Gail Mangum bring him down. The guy would like to keep his law license, and too many eyes are on this case for the prosecution to engage in shenanigans, or at least the present prosecution.

Good analysis across the board. Kathleen Eckelt did a great job today of laying out the medical situation with Crystal.

Anonymous said...

what are you saying, 11:58?

Anonymous said...


It will be interesting to see whether you can keep posting at least once a day while the NC AG's office reviews the three cases. Durham seems to be a moonbat factory par excellence, so maybe you can. I'm hoping the dawn of Coleman's Enlightenment will rob you of material, but I'm not betting the back 40 on it.

Cochise's Enchilada

Anonymous said...

No reason exists that Coman will?
KC, can you come up with any reasons that existed for Coman to prosecute Gell? If so, do share them with us.

Anonymous said...

Bill: I agree with KC as well. They cannot place her on the stand and ask beyond "Please state your name." With the public glare, even the remotest chance she commits perjury (which as we know is a definite when she opens her mouth) argues that this case should be Dismissed. Ethically, I think it is untriable for the prosecution.

Stay warm up there BTW. I hear snow is finally coming. At least Wisp will be happy about it.


Anonymous said...

Hail Coleman the Sun King!

(in the French enlightenment sense, not the Jeffries sense, of course)

Anonymous said...

JLS says....

There are three things the special prosecutors can do. They will be criticized no matter what they do. These three things are:

1. Continue on towards trial. I thinks this is the most unlike choice and if they do this they will suffer great criticism from around the country.

2. Dismiss the charges and exonerate the defendants with a statement that their is no evidence a crime was committed against Mangum at the part. If they do this they will suffer loud criticism from certain racists locals.

3. Dismiss the charges but fail to make a statement exonerating the defendants. They may see this as the expedient way, but if they do this they will be criticized from all sides. The local racists will not be happy and those that have looked at the evidence will criticize them for not making a statement exonerating the defendants.

Of course the locals are LOCAL. A Democrat AG if he wants to run for a future statewide office and his employees may well consider that although they will claim they did not. The rest of us are not local.

BTW, lots of leaks to the press today, WRAL and the N&O, that more charges indeed will be forthcoming this week from the Bar against Nifong.

Anonymous said...

At least, Coman isn't Nifong. Coman and his partner should be given the benefit of the doubt but should be closely watched. No one will put up with any shenanigans. Meanwhile, Nifong's fraudulent case against the lacrosse players hasn't been dismissed. At this point, that is Judge Smith's fault.

Anonymous said...

The whole truth will be extracted now.....concerning the behavior of Nifong and the DPD.

Joe Cheshire will see to that.


Anonymous said...

11:58, I know not weather to issue a high five or undeserved debasement for your outstanding comment! One the lefties would create signs of no less! Well until somebody told them what it actually meant! HAR HAR!!!

Now that's sum funny sh-t right there!

BTW Bannon has a killer of a review on the BAR hearing from the Gall case over here..


Anonymous said...

12:17 - I expected that. He made a material misrepresentation to the Court when he certified he had provided all evidence. Oops.

This may be what the finally nail him on.


Anonymous said...

JLS says...

I really believe the AG may well have picked two special prosecutors who have a bit of black mark next to their names, Gell and tape erasing, who could use the aura of fairness they will get when they dismiss this case.

While the AG's office has to conduct their own review of the evidence, he has to know the odds are his office will dismiss these charges.

I hope I am right about the AG's reason to select these two. And I a heartened by the defense attorneys reactions as Prof Johnson is.

Anonymous said...

JLS says...

re: Esquire

I have been wondering if we do get more Bar ethics charges this week, could they be for the material misrepresentations you mentioned and other things in the summer hearings and not be about the failure to disclose exculpatory evidence yet?

Anonymous said...

Just skimming some news.......I am embarrassed for the people of Durham as their "leaders" have been out today "celebrating the dream"--(whatever the eff that is). These people live in a dreamworld.

They go about as if everything is normal and that they have behaved like decent people......as Mayor Bell opined that the system works......the lacrosse players are presumed innocent until proven guilty.

And, oh yeah.......he "empathizes" with their parents.

Unworldy in its sterility and indecency.


Anonymous said...

Stand by, folks. Debrah is approaching her standard racist drivel. Her second post almost got there, or maybe it did get there. Hard to tell. I realize she is almost certainly a Group of 88 troll, but if you keep your distance, she kinda grows on you. Sorta like a pet rattlesnake.

Of course, the thing to remember about a pet rattlesnake is that it is a rattlesnake.

Cochise's Enchilada

Anonymous said...


What did you expect from Bell?

He is one of the most brazenly corrupt pols in state history

He founded his real estate "non-profit" corp in 1972 and since that time has continuously served as County Commissioner or Mayor, routinely voting on his own projects (that awarded his own corp city and county grant money and gov't property)

Only when we called him on it this year (after 3 decades of blatant COI) has he started to recuse himself.

Now he has to recuse himself on nearly every friggin vote on developmental projects.

He has always lived off Duke and city money. He will praise Brodhead to the last (or until the second Brodhead is replaced)

Anonymous said...

You're right, Conchita, Debrah loves disrepectin the brothas and sistahs.

King was an OK commie.

Anonymous said...

12:34am Atlanin:

Here's the link to Kathleen Eckelt's Forensics Talk:

Duke Lacrosse Accuser 's Psychiatric History - A 'Perfect Storm'?

Anonymous said...

To 12:39AM--

I am familiar with some of what you have mentioned. UDI is his current gravy train. He "left the room" --cough!--when the city council voted to hand over thousands more to UDI, where his current salary is taken.

You know all about the imbecilic George Williams, I assume. I read where he is back on the taxpayer gravy train.

BTW....did you see that butt-ugly daughter of Bell's in the N&O when they covered her wedding?

One of his friends told me that Bell's current wife---who was handed a political payback job back in the 90's by the Gov for Bell's delivery of the black vote---was cruising around with him while he was still married to his first wife.


These people are hilarious in their faux decency and piety....as they live like animals.

But well-funded animals.

(I now know what the old man Frank Kenan was trying to do a decade ago to clean up Durham. I criticized him at the time.....before I got to know more about the place.)

Oh...but they still haven't scored a prison sentence yet...a...la former Atlanta Mayor Bill Campbell....a former Raleigh resident.


Anonymous said...


"3.) A special prosecutor provides the best chance for an immediate investigation of “whether there was manipulation of evidence and statements,” as defense attorney Joseph Cheshire hoped."

If the SP got to defendant Nifong's office quickly enough Friday night.

Anonymous said...

11:58pm Anon:

"...how to appropriately interact with an African-American military veteran, honor student and devoted mother."

The term 'veteran' is generally reserved for persons who have completed their full military commitment w/ an honorable discharge. Crystal did neither.

Honor student? She apparent was a 'B' student - perhaps that qualifies for honors at NCCU, but nowhere else.

Devoted mother? Who has custody / provides for her kids (all 3 born out of wedlock)? Who cares for them while she's out day & night turning tricks?

Anonymous said...


Perhaps if the wisdom of the sage Justice O'Connor had been more forcefully applied at all universities - both public and private - the three men currently accused of felonious sexual assault and kidnapping would have been better prepared, more informed and certainly more culturally attuned on how to appropriately interact with an African-American military veteran, honor student and devoted mother.

What sort of training do you need to deal with a falling-down-drunk prostitute?

Anonymous said...

"Only when we called him on it this year (after 3 decades of blatant COI) has he started to recuse himself. "

Such actions took citizens 30 effin years to call the man on? and you what expect him to pay somebody back? But instead make him your mayor?

Learn to have the guts to call our an a$$hole the day you learn they are indeed one!

Such should have happened the very day nifong filed the complaint!

Newyorkstateofmind said...

Debrah 11:59

From what I've gleaned and heard KC and Taylor are indeed collaborating together on a single book. From a marketing and synergistic point of view, their partnering on this makes a lot of sense:

KC has his own developed legal theory and legal history fount of knowledge developed through his teaching and research, while Taylor's deep and much respected and MSM-credentialed commentator status as a legal eagle gives the book the JD imprimatur. And KC's I'm sure going to develop a substantial national following through this blog; is well on his way toward that no doubt.

BTW Debrah, appreciated your post on the next-door thread acknowledging my comments about Christopher Hitchens. And your added thoughts about him so well comport with all that I love about the guy.

Anonymous said...

I've thought ever since he stepped down that Nifong, while he may have been leaning towards bailing for a while, only made the final decision to bail after he had his sitdown with Crystal and realized that she was stark raving mad and would make a horrible spectacle of herself on the stand. The specter of "suborning perjury" may have entered his mind at that juncture, sealing his decision.

Anonymous said...

"New York State of Mind"---

Glad I came back before shutting down the computer. You are always a nighthawk, aren't you?

Thanks for answering my question. So many comments are made that I wasn't sure if Stuart Taylor would be working with him or not.

Oddly enough, I have never seen KC. Each time he is on a talk show or something I miss it.....

....however, I am very familiar with Stuart Taylor.

I suppose we'll have to tune into Paula Zahn Tuesday night out of curiosity.

Glad to see you in real time for a change!

Nite. :>)


Anonymous said...

That Crystal is so mentally ill does not come as a surprise to me. I have frequently reminded some of the harsher folk on the board, that Crystal is a poor,sad,sick, demented soul. We do not have to like her but a little emphaty will help.Upon reviewing particular race statements Nifong.I am more aware why the black community defended this woman so much and were so enraged. He was shameful in using the race card. Because of his position as DA many people naturally believed him. There is a lesson here - I just do not know what it is.

Newyorkstateofmind said...

As Bill Anderson and some others have noted, the potential for suborning perjury charges attaching to anything CGM would realistically say if testifying essentially guarantees she won't testify.

Much of the nub of the problem is that, apart from the fact that her 12/19 official statement is a now an at least blogosphere-exposed crock, as legal proceedings against Nifong from quarters various are developed and implemented, his witness coaching and related shennanigans may well be part of the list of particulars laid against him. Were this to happen, for Coman to be floating some version on behalf of CGM as to what happened, while that very version (apart from the derivative exposure of her lies through independent means), in all its alternating and contradictory variations, was being deconstructed in a hearing and/or proceeding against Nifong...this is a scenario we just will not see, because Coman will make sure that, for all the other reasons he has to keep CGM off the stand, this one just got put toward the top of his list.

Anonymous said...

I don't think Crystal has any intention of showing on February 5th. Yes, she is on some heavy duty meds but they don't make her a robot. My quess she has been on and off these meds (typical of bipolar and other serious dx).She will need to be stabilized on her medication - hopefully, that is going on now. Mental illness is a torture chamber for the person experiencing it and theit families.

Newyorkstateofmind said...

Debrah 1:29

I'm actually on West Coast time (California and all that); tomorrow night I'll try to log on sooner.

Anon 1:29

In agreement. I think the blogosphere played a role here to, as this and related Duke Three blogs created a more stressful atmosphere for everyone connected with the case. As Nifong continued to sweat about his circumstances, doubtless he put this on CMG at some level, and even if CMG tried to focus only on Durham and MSM-apologias for her situation, the blogger angle in its exposure of the big fraud going on with this case probably created lots of stress for her as well, possibly making her so edgy she complained yet again to Nifong that she wanted to back out; that she wanted to back out at least a couple of times is documented. Now I suspect she will stay with this nonsense until the special prosecutor pulls the plug on it.

Anonymous said...

1:29am Anon:

"I've thought ever since he stepped down that Nifong, while he may have been leaning towards bailing for a while, only made the final decision to bail after he had his sitdown with Crystal..."

I think he made the final decision to bail when Freedman told to him to cut the crap and recuse.

Anonymous said...

JLS says....

Re Anon 1:29 and NYStateofMind

I don't that the most recent version attributed to Mangum is any indication of her state of mind. That was a story made up by Nifong and Wilson in a lame attempt to weave a narative around the known facts and save their butts. Sadly it is more a window into the mind of a stark raving mad DA.

But he finally wised up and hired an attorney. That is what got him to recuse. His attorney told him that the first step towards getting him out of this hole if it is possible is for Nifong to stop digging it deeper. He recuse the very week he hired an attorney.

Anonymous said...

JLS says...

re: GPrestonian

You beat me by nine minutes mainly because you are more concise.

Anonymous said...

will the new prosecutors ask for a delay of the Feb. 5 hearing? That's the question

Anonymous said...

JLS says...

re: 11:55

If the leaks of further charges against Nifong on Thursday pan out, this could be a very busy week. And Professor Johnson could have no problem blogging every day for this and maybe next week.

Then it will be time to anticipate a decison from the AG's office. We can review the evidence as publically known while anticipating that. Also you never know when another civil suit will come down. We have seen the first but hardly the last civil case filed. [I just wish I could get this test bank I am working on done.]

Newyorkstateofmind said...

1:45 gprestonian

Clearly Nifong was ultimately going to accede to whatever Freedman recommended; though in this sort of situation decisions are rarely made on the motion of a quick diktat. This isn't the old Soviet Union as you know, where important decisions often were made in mere minutes; if you've read my comments elsewhere, I compare Nifong's machinations to the Russians only by way of leaving the Russians on the better side of the comparison.

If only to protect his future testimony to who knows how many panels of the "what did he know, when did he know it" variety--and in the following case what did he do when, it would have made huge sense for Nifong to have had one last conversation with CGM before recusing, if for no other reason so he can later claim that he made sure before exiting the case to ensure her rights as "victim," including some speech to her about how he'll ensure that the new prosecutor protects her rights, however bogus her victim status in the real world is.

Or he may have wussed out and not said a thing to hear. Definitely can't rule that out, given how craven the guy is.

Anonymous said...

JLS says....

re: 2:03

The defense has said there is no way they could oppose such a request.

Of course the new prosecutors could show up to throw the ball in the judge's court. If he tosses the ID and bars an in court ID as tainted, then they can toss in the towel without offending the local racist who want a trial no matter what.

Of course showing up would require they argue for this identification process. I am not sure I would want that one the public record if I were them.

Newyorkstateofmind said...

2:03 anon asks

"will the new prosecutors ask for a delay of the Feb. 5 hearing? That's the question"

Several angles here. Coman keeps the suppression hearing for 2/5, under the theory that the new team will carry this case awhile strictly for show, and to avoid a bit longer being subjected to the "no justice, no peace" rallies which are sure to follow the dropping of the charges--though I must say between much of talk radio and much of the Internet exposing thoroughly what a crock this "case" is, these rallies may be tepid and listless affairs, more like a Columbus Day parade--aren't those illegal yet the uber liberals are wondering--than the hellfire mini-riot they are wont to organize.

Coman may ask for an extension simply to give the appearance of taking this case seriously, which if he were, he would likely want more time to prepare.

I think he wants out of this road show as soon as possible. Ideally for him, he looks the equivalent of "presidential" by comporting himself with dignity for the next few weeks, making as few public statements as possible, and then lets the case implode 2/5.

Newyorkstateofmind said...

JLS 2:07

Good theory on why this case might not even make it to the 2/5 suppression theory.

Nifong having recused himself from the case, there is an expectation that the new team takes a fresh look at the evidence.

The question will be whether under NC law a handed-off case such as this one opens the new prosecutor to the option to withdraw more or less right away if after a review of the relevant evidence he decides the case does not merit prosecution.

Anonymous said...

JLS says...

re: NY State of Mind

Every state or federal the prosecutor can dismiss any charge they want at any time. Of course their boss has to go along if it is an assistant DA because the DA technically holds this power.

But no law can force the state to go forward. For one thing the defendant would certainly not object to a case being dropped. And despite all the noise about sexual cases, the victim is not a party and has no standing to object to charges being dismissed.

So NC law is not an issue here. The new prosecutors can fax in a dismissal of the charges today when the court house opens, if they want. They won't because of all the reasons of appearance already discussed here, but they can.

Anonymous said...

I have the ANSWER!!!!

Since everyone refuses to accept the accuser's latest account of the case due to all the "fact" and "evidence", I have put my considerable creative talents, which were honed at Duke University, to the test and come up with a viable explanation for the latest account.

No DNA from the players. DNA present from 4-5 other male sources. This is an easy one.
Possible Explanation:
The accuser had not had sex prior to the party. The DNA that the players left in and on her from the rape was wiped away with a towel(magic?). As Ms. Roberts was driving the accuser to the Kroger, the accuser propositioned people by the side of the road or simply stuck her rear end out the window and allowed men waiting to cross the street or just any homeless man who happened to be around to "make love" and/or sodomize her at red lights. She also could have propositioned anyone coming out of the Kroger with their beer and ice cream when Ms. Roberts was in the Kroger requesting that the police come to get the accuser out of her car.

No players, accused or not, believes that anything could have happened at the party. There is no corroborating testimony for the accuser's story. This one, too, is easy, because I am very creative.
Possible Explanation:
The accuser, according to reports by 60 Minutes and others, had serious emotional problems. She reported to have been on Flexeril and alcohol that night. Perhaps she remembers the incident incorrectly. Perhaps the players followed Ms Roberts's car to the Kroger. Perhaps, when Ms. Roberts entered the Kroger, the players raped and sodomized the accuser in the car, wiped her down, then left while the accuser had sex and allowed sodomy to be performed on her by 4-5 other men who happened to be picking up beer and ice cream at the Kroger.

One of these two explanations needs to be presented at trial. This accuser must have her day in court, and according the Heir Broadhead, the players need their opportunity to be "proven innocent". I would like to offer my services to the special prosecutor for both opening and closing statements in the case.

Anonymous said...

After reading Bradley Bannon's letter to the bar about the Alan Gell case, I'm much less confidant than KC.

I mean, how far down the list did they go before settling on someone with a history of withholding exculpatory evidence in a death penalty murder case? AND getting away with it??

They - all of them, from Nifong down - are the prosecution. So long as the wall of silence stays up, they are untouchable.

I am SO glad I don't live in NC anymore.

Anonymous said...

I do wish that a number of bloggers and newspaper writers would come to understand that Depakote is NOT an anti-psychotic medication. Seroquel is so in most of the articles summing up the 60 minutes episode they have all been 'half right'.

Depakote was originally used to treat seizures but began to be used heavily in those suffering from mood disorders. Other anti-seizure medications used are Lamictal, Tregretol, Neurontin (they were sued for off label pushing for mood disorders and others - not effective, etc. Lithium Carbonate (generally Lithobid, ie, extended release) is the older medication but works well for some (as in better than the anti-seizure meds).

Depakote does not work for everyone so CGM could have been taking it and still have been having wild mood swings. Of course her drug use/self-medication would have negated any beneficial effects from Depakote.

Note: I have used Depakote and found it to not be effective. I take Lithium and Lamictal (the latter allows a lower lithium dose with Lamictal compensating and giving some of the lost 'emotions' to the individual).

These are expensive medications (seizure meds). Lamictal will run you 300/month. Lithobid is much less expensive.

CGM DOES NOT HAVE BIPOLAR DISORDER. Her likely diagnosis is schizoaffective disorder bipolar mood type IF paranoia exists (ie not on some really bad manic episode that was exacerbated by taking say aphetamines - drug psychosis).

Seroquel is used to control the psychotic elements of the disorder and is not a medication one would 'wish' to take. It is also quite expensive (slightly less than 10/day).

Then again she could have 'plain' bipolar disorder if she took Seroquel during and after her hospital visit for what I believe was a psychotic episode/extreme mania. She would have continued taking it to avoid repeats. She would have stopped once it was no longer a concern (ie a few weeks, maybe a few months).

if it's long term then her drug use (flexeril, alcohol, whatever else) just makes her episodes much much worse.

Anonymous said...

To 2:49
Oh, come on. What percent of people with a diagnosis of BPD have all of their symptoms and issues neatly fit inside the classic descriptions? Psych diagnoses are rarely so tidy in the real world.
The strongest fact I discern in her med history is this: Seroquel is given to people who suffer severe mania and/or delusions/dis-ordered thinking. Nobody presribes it to folks who do not occasonally talk crazy and say out-of-touch-with reality BS. In the context of this case, that is significant, IMHO.

Anonymous said...

also called NIFONG'S RETREAT

Though the college party got bawdy
The DA’s work was too shoddy
To make out of race
A plausible case,
Or to graduate Magnum cum laude.

Anonymous said...

I don't think even Nifong or Wilson are stupid enough to have suggested the Dec 21 Statement version. Now, Victoria Peterson, there's someone who would suggest it. I wouldn't be surprised, if we learn, she has been the primary handler of the FA and the "coach". She wouldn't care for the FA, but anything to try to keep the case going!

Anonymous said...

Before this all ends, I would love a KC-delivered analysis of Nifong's actions...to wit, why Nifong waited nine months before talking to the Supposed Victim (I can surmise, but as a non-lawyer it would be interesting to understand what he was and/or wasn't opening himself up to legally), why he took responsibility of the investigation (a fair analysis of Chalmers disappearance would need to be part of this), and why Gottlieb would write his fascinating straight-from-memory account of the events the way he did.

Some actions in this Hoax defy logic.

Anonymous said...

Everyone is so positive this case is over. I wish I felt that way.
When I see a prosecutor in NC rise above racial politics then I will believe it.

Anonymous said...

I wish I could share your optimism.

Coman is, in my opinion, guilty of attempted judicial murder, continuing the death-penalty case against Gell when it was obvious the man was innocent, and then on top of that working to avoid any serious penalty for the original malicious prosecutors, and speaking publicly in favor of concealing exculpatory evidence provided it was called something else.

Winstead is a former accomplice of Nifong in another malicious prosecution of an innocent man for rape, in which she, just like some of Nifong's Durm police co-conspirators in the present case, destroyed important audiotape evidence.

Why couldn't NC find a prosecutor with clean hands to take over the case? The state has already thumbed its nose at the U. S. Constitution, among other things by adopting a "case management" system amounting to a systematic denial of the right to a speedy trial. And now it appoints as successor to Nifong a pair with records like these two! Federal investigation and oversight is desperately needed.

It is true that there were favorable statements about the new special prosecutors from the defense lawyers, but what else could they say? They made favorable statements about Oz Smith, too, and he proved to be a considerable disappointment, taking no decisive action in months and months on the case, and by disallowing the bill-of-particular motions inviting Nifong to go on changing his story over and over again to fit the evidence as it emerged, and so making himself indirectly responsible for the latest Linwood-Crystal fabrication.


Anonymous said...

Disturbing is a very accurate word to describe Nifong's behavior.

It's scary to think about the lengths and the deceptions that he has taken to keep this case alive. What shocks me are the reports that he was actually surprised about the State Bar's charges and he was even more surprised that his fellow DA's didn't come to his support.

I used to think, "Nifong knows what he's doing, he's a smart guy who, unfortunately, got caught up into a situation he was unprepared for, he painted himself into a corner and now has too much pride to admit he made a mistake". But now I'm thinking it's much, much worse - that he actually is so unethical and so incompetent that he actually does NOT think he did anything wrong.

His behavior is so unapologetic, so unrepentant. It really is terrifying to think what a person like this would have done without the public exposure to his vile deceit.

Anonymous said...


I think the Gell situation actually helps the defense.

This case will be under a microscope and the new prosecutor will be very relunctant to be TWICE thought of as rogue prosecutor.

The media, Alberto Gonzalez, Congressmen, top notch defense lawyers - we're all watching. He will be much more sensitive to the accusation of prosecurial misconduct because of his past and, I predict, will bend over backwards to avoid that appearance this time.

Anonymous said...

"CGM DOES NOT HAVE BIPOLAR DISORDER. Her likely diagnosis is schizoaffective disorder bipolar mood type IF paranoia exists (ie not on some really bad manic episode that was exacerbated by taking say aphetamines - drug psychosis)."

Ordinarily, I would identify myself in this post, but am not doing it for obvious reasons. My wife has been diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder and it creates some very interesting situations in our house. As long as she stays on her medicine, she is fine.

She got off her medicine almost 12 years ago, and the results were pretty bad. I won't go into what happened, except to say we were dealing with full-blown psychosis.

Give the numerous stories that Crystal has given, I would say that psychosis is involved, and I would be surprised if police and prosecutors are not aware of the situation. This prosecution exists for one reason, and that is because Nifong wanted to win an election, and the only way he could do it was to get indictments and prosecute the accused.

The prosecutorial misconduct in this case is massive, far greater than what is public right now. I think that the other prosecutors stepped into the case in order to keep us from finding out just how dishonest many of them really are. I doubt a single prosecutor in North Carolina really cares whether or not the three accused are innocent. Like Nifong, they care only about themselves, and so they have thrown him under the bus in order to keep from being run over themselves.

Anonymous said...

If they are going to do a thorough investigation, do you think they will look into the DPD slipping into the dorms questioning the lacrosse players without attorneys, using bulling tactics and what about that email that came from a lacrosse players computer when he was in class, stating he was going to confess. This was the tactic that Nifong and the DPD were strongly using at that time to try and scare and bully them. I want to know if a DPD typed that email on a lacrosse players computer and sent it falsely claiming to be the student. I'm sure cameras on the outside of the dorms and witnesses will be able to narrow down the time they saw the police enter the dorm and when the email was sent. Even fingerprints on the computer may be picked up. DNA possibly. Gottlieb and Haim or any of the henchmen for Nifong should be tested. That is criminal behaviour by an officer of the law.

Anonymous said...

What is the evidence that Sam Hummel was involved in the student protests? Are there photographs, quotations in newspapers, what?


Anonymous said...

I don't think this case is ethically untriable (which is a different question on whether or not it is ultimately winnable). There is currently admissible evidence that she was sexually assaulted and kidnapped; it just so happens that the evidence will be impeached immediatly after the moment it is offered. Further, there is some evidence that she was physically assaulted, but of course, it has a much more logical explanation than will be offered on direct.

The way I see it, there are three ways this case doesn't go to trial:
1) The line-up is suppressed, [most likely],
2) The Court, in its discretion, dismisses all charges with prejudice as a sanction for the government's misconduct in the case, [I find this to be less likely],
3) The Special Prosecutor elects, over the alleged victim's objection, not to take this to trial [I find this to be least likely].

If the evidence is deemed inadmissible, then obviously they fail to meet their burden. If however, the Government has admissible evidence of the charged offenses, this case goes forward (although not very far).

Anonymous said...

To 8:57 AM:

Those are very good points. As others have said, there is a lot of police and prosecutorial misconduct that has not seen the light of day, or has been minimized because of the larger issues.

I always have been curious about this particular case, because if this came from the police -- and I suspect it did -- then someone committed a crime by, in effect, planting "evidence."

As for Sam Hummel, I have a one picture of him (that most of you have seen) holding signs outside the house on Buchanan Ave. He and his mother are out there in a demonstration. Hummel and the others follow the typical leftist pattern of interpreting events purely by symbolism, and then becoming enraged when someone demonstrates to them that they have their facts all wrong. I am sure that he either is still trying to promote the rape fiction, or he has moved onto something else.

Anonymous said...

Who was the one holding the "Castrate" sign?

Anonymous said...

8:57 Anon & 9:10 Bill Anderson:

Hummel's posts are all over the Travis Park listservs, and/or the Yahoo Group 'DurhamResponds' as well. (the 2 may be the same thing, yahoo groups act like listservs if you use them only via email)

M. Simon said...

anon. 11:55PM,

I resemble that remark.

Anonymous said...

To 8:57 and to back up Bill Anderson at 9:10 : I know Ann(e) Hummel. It WAS Mrs. Hummel in the picture that Bill mentioned. I have not seen young Sam (I believe he is a Jr., his father is Sam Hummel as well) since he was 15 or so, but it was Sam. Also, check back on Liestoppers discussion board, they have many pics of Sam at Potbanger Rally, also, they have links to comments Sam made -

Anonymous said...

Does anyone else think that CGM keeps changing her story because it helps her lawyer get her off any future charges based on mental illness? The more she changes her story, the wilder the stories become, the stronger her mental illness defense will become.

Anonymous said...


You are kidding, right? They called an escort service who sent a druged-up gal wtih mental problems with 4 or 5 other guys DNA in her panties and rectum to perform sexually suggestive dance for their benefit.


Anonymous said...

To All,

I posted LAST week that my bar buddy said new charges would be coming this week. SERIOUS charges. I get the feeling they may refer the case for criminal prosecution. Just a guess, I have NO information on that, but he will have NEW charges. I will be leaving town, Friday for 2 weeks, so I will not be able to pass on any Bar Buddy scoop. Sorry.


Anonymous said...

from a non-lawyer/retired professor: KC mentioned that it is likely Wilson and Gottleib have hired attorneys. So a question for the lawyers: what happens if they take the 5th or refuse to cooperate with the special prosecutor? Certainly they have a right to not incriminate themselves, but they work in law enforcement. What would be their job status then? In NC, can they continue to work if they refuse to cooperate with the special prosecutors?

Anonymous said...

Lets not forget that Kim Roberts an african american was the first person who brought race into this with her fantastic lie about her and her "BLACK girlfriend" were walking, driving past a house and people on the porch were yelling racial remarks at them.

Anonymous said...

2:06am Newyorkstateofmind:

Points well taken, but I just don't think that Crystal's wishes or opinions mattered too much to Nifong re: his recusal. Hard to belive that Freedman didn't tell Nifong that his immediate recusal was a requirement of Freedman's accepting Nifong as a client.

Anonymous said...

I believe that the accuser's mental illness likely prevents her from realizing the damage her actions have caused. I am painfully well acquainted with someone who has fixed complex delusions due to Alzheimers. Even though some of the details of these delusions change from time to time, the core assertions remain completely intact and have for several years. The person having the delusion, I can assure you, is ABSOLUTELY conviced of her own veracity and continues to function pretty well cognitively. In fact, other people who are not aware of the problem readily believe her stories. I expect she would pass any lie detector test easily. I may be off base. Alzheimers is not the same thing, of course, as these other disorders, but the delusional aspect sure sounds familiar.


Anonymous said...

Like Photios, I don't take the defense attorneys' statements about the integrity of Coman as anything but smoke up his ass. They certainly aren't going to trash him now since he has prosecutorial discretion. On the other hand it's hard to imagine anyone could be as bad as Nifong, and the case is pretty well painted into a corner. Plus, the political pressure to go forward is less present; there are pressures in either direction.

Doesn't suborning perjury require a prior knowledge that the witness is going to lie on the stand? Is it a possible, if perverted, defense for the lawyer to say I didn't know wtf she was going to say on the stand because she had so many prior versions?

Anonymous said...

KC, et al:

I agree that the idea of the SP re-investigating (OK, I' being kind here w/ the use of 're-' :) will be a good thing, and at least forestall some of the blowback from the Durham community in the event that it's decided to drop the charges. There is a certain (indeterminate in size but not insignificant) segment of the Durham community that will be satisfied only with a conviction at trial, so there's no point trying to please them.

The continuance of the Feb 5 hearing would seem to be a given if the SP does embark on a full investigation of the March 13-14 allegations, but... the SP could easily prepare for the Motions that are to be heard on Feb 5 (specifically the fauxto ID suppresion) without completing their entire investigation before then.

Lotta political considerations swirling around, but consider this:

If the Feb 5 hearing is held, and the IDs are suppressed (thus causing the charges to be dismissed by the Judge), the results could well be construed as 'it's all Nifong's fault' for failure to allow DPD to perform a proper ID session.

If the Feb 5 hearing is continued, the SP investigates and ulimately decides that the allegations have no merit (thus resulting in the SP dropping charges), the results can & will be construed as suggesting that they're 'blaming / not believing the "victim" '.

Heheh, of course, as I'm typing this, it may have already hit the wires that the SP has moved for a continuance! lol

Anonymous said...

moved for a continuance--the judge should not grant the continuance if the defendants object

the occasion for the continuance was caused by the prosecution's issues . . . .

Anonymous said...

10:00am Kemp:

"I will be leaving town, Friday for 2 weeks, so I will not be able to pass on any Bar Buddy scoop. Sorry."

Not acceptable. Cancel your trip (or prepay your buddy's drink tabs so he'll talk to you on the phone :).

"I get the feeling they may refer the case for criminal prosecution."

I would think that that could be done only after the hearing is held by the DHC?

Anonymous said...

Was all this because Nifon wanted to show Joe, Brad, Wade, Kirk and the boys what "real lawyering" was all about? Nothing from Kerry and Butch as of late. Any news on the lab?

Anonymous said...

10:38 Anon:

"moved for a continuance--the judge should not grant the continuance if the defendants object"

Does Judge Smith have the stones to deny a Motion for Continuance from the SP?

I suspect that the whole Feb 5 ballet has been worked out in advance. By that I don't mean that the results of any SP investigation have been predetermined, but that Judge Smith has been told to grant a continuance.

Anonymous said...


I am going on a silly cruise and will have no way to get to bar buddy. I could leave him my club number, he probably knows it already, but it would still require him to post his scoop, which, I am sure you understand, wouldn't be exactly kosher. Calling him from a ship won't do either, we're just out of luck unless I can deputize a friend to pump him for information. Then he'd have to email me, blah blah, we're out of luck. Spy has come in from the cold!


Anonymous said...

My friend is an upstanding citizen, a teacher, and great father, he is battling for joint custody of his child, and the courts (most likely because he is male)have battled him every step of the way
How is it that this woman has custody of her children?

Anonymous said...

Someone very close to the case the other night told me that while Coman might have the Alan Gell baggage, he was MUCH better than other prosecutors who might have been assigned, and they are not wanting to see Coman bashed on the blogs. I have said some things about Coman that are less-than-nice, but will acede to the defense request.

That being said, the attorneys in the Gell case were not angry at Coman the way they were with David Hoke and Debra Graves, who conspired to hide exculpatory information. Coman pursued a case for political reasons (you know, the state can never be wrong no matter how wrong it is), but did not cheat during the trial itself, and Gell was acquitted.

There is no way that Coman can get away with "Nifonging" the case, as there are too many eyes on him. Many of the Democrat politicians of North Carolina are absolutely frightened of this case because they don't like the choice they face: offend the blacks and leftists, or offend everyone else who is against prosecutorial misconduct.

Since blacks and leftists are not going to vote for Repubicans anyway, the safer choice for the Democrats is to keep from offending everyone else. Thus, they will find a way to dispose of this case without taking it to trial.

As K.C. has pointed out, Coman is experienced enough to know that Crystal is not telling the truth, and he is not going to risk his career by openly suborning perjury.

Anonymous said...

The fact that there was no DNA connecting the 3 lax players, but there is DNA connecting others that had sex with the FA, the timeline, alibi's & 60 different stories by the accuser are not hidden facts...Isn't it the job of the prosecutor to decide if it is likely that a crime has been committed?
On this alone the special prosecutor should dismiss the charges, what's to think about?

Anonymous said...

Bill: Agreed. Coman is smarter than Nifong. He's not going to risk his career for this accuser.


Michael said...

re: Hman

[The strongest fact I discern in her med history is this: Seroquel is given to people who suffer severe mania and/or delusions/dis-ordered thinking. Nobody presribes it to folks who do not occasonally talk crazy and say out-of-touch-with reality BS. In the context of this case, that is significant, IMHO.]

It can be given to those that suffer from hallucinations and intrusive thoughts too on a regular basis.

For those that don't know, delusions are when you believe the sensory messages and hallucinations are when you have the sensory messages but you know that they're not real. Intrusive thoughts are things that come into your mind but don't have a sensory basis.

Could someone fake psychosis, depression, bipolar symtoms? Probably. But if you have the symptoms and are willing to take the drugs to combat them, then it's unlikely that you're faking it as the drugs are expensive and all of them have side effects, potentially including instant death (Geodon has this property).

Now would a person be responsible for their actions? I think that's really hard to say. If the person had a fairly mild case of hallucinations, then maybe not. If they had severe hallucinations which caused a tremendous amount of pain and someone else was perceived to be causing them, then you could get a violent reaction.

If someone is delusional, then I'd say that they weren't responsible. But I'd think that you'd need to have someone pretty familiar with the patient in order to determine what their problems are; if that is possible.

I know what psychosis feels like as I had it a few times many years ago. Most likely stress-related. It was only for 30 minutes each time and went away by itself. There are other potential causes (PTSD, Post-Partum, High Stress) though they don't occur as frequently as schiz, bipolar, depression.

I have some experience with schiz
from family members.

Anonymous said...

I think that at year end will be looking back and reflecting about the riot in Durham.

Anonymous said...

It seems like this is getting overanalyzed. The people involved in this case have all shown their true colors and the hoax is obvious. What I would like to get opinions on is what is the end result civilly, criminally, and professionally for certain players ie: the lacrosse kids, the false accuser, nifong, broadhead, pressler, and all those professors

For example:

I think each lacrosse player will attend different schools, and be multimillionaires after civil settlements with Duke etc

I think Nifong will be disbarred and sued civilly by each Duke family and will likely be ruined financially.

Id love to know opinions from others regarding all these people.

Anonymous said...

Riots in Durham? What a racist remark.

On the other hand, do anticipate a lawsuit by G88 against Duke for inviting the victims to return and "thereby creating a racist working environment" for the oppressed minority members of the faculty.

Anonymous said...

Read We're Watching You at Crystal Mess.

LAX hooligans? BAH! Judicial Hooligans! Criminal 'Justice' Hooligans! Shenanigans with the lives of US citizens.

Any case I look at from now on, I will be certain that 'something happened' on the prosecutor's side.

Anonymous said...

Is police chief Chalmers related to superintendent Chalmers?

Jamie said...

The bar in NC is sure set pretty low, any way you want to take that. What do the lawyers tell the accused about this replacement prosecutor-"well, okay, but he's the honestest we got"? Pathetic.

As for Brodhead, for goodness' sakes. That one statement "...whatever they did do was bad enough" should be enough to fire him. Mebbe you can't scorch every one of the 88 termites, but what the heck is Brodhead still doing there?

Come to think of it, why is anyone sitting still for the "review" of this case to take more than about a day? Why let anyone save face? Good God.

Sorry, there is only one word. Pathetic.

Anonymous said...

You will see in any long line of government dictatorships that there is one dictating family that will step out of line compared to the previous dictators, help themselves to a bit too much, stay a bit too long, behave so conspicuously like pigs, and generally make it really bad for all the upcoming corrupt ruling families. Then you will see the all the corrupt ruling families, past and upcoming, openly denounce this current ruling family as "corrupt" and demand that they step down from power.

So Nifong's fellow DA's are now concerned that Nifong has ruined it for them, that Nifong may have been a bit too greedy and was a bit too corrupt that he threatens the other DA's future ability to get away with more 'civil,' lessor corruption.

Anonymous said...

I may have missed prior posts but has anyone EVER comprehended what Nifong and Meehan were trying to say about not turning over the exculpatory evidence to "protect the privacy of the players?" What? Did they really mean to say that? If any players DNA had been present there would have been no "privacy" to protect - they would have found their much wished for smoking gun. With other male DNA present what privacy issue did they perceive?

It would be too much to hope for Nifong on the witness stand trying to explain...

Anonymous said...

Re: anon 8:24

That Alberto Gonzales is "watching" should make me hopeful, but in fact worries me.
He currently sits idly while Scooter Libby is being Knifonged
by the Feds' own out-of-control special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald. This makes the pajamahadeen, a.k.a. blog hooligans, tremendously important.

Anonymous said...

This has to be one pathetic state we live in if they cannot find a special prosecutor who has no ties to the Gell case. Who in their right mind would think of appointing anyone to the Duke case who has any ties to the Gell case. Please explain the logic. It is professional incompetence.

Anonymous said...

get DNA samples from Nifong, Meehan, Gottlieb and Brodhead!

Anonymous said...

Betcha that new baby of hers has Knifong's eyes.

Anonymous said...

Fitzgerald case is very similar to this one. He knew from one 1 who the leaker was and that Wilson had lied. Still, he went on to jail reporters and intimidate every conservative he could find (the original leaker of the witch hunt, Armitage was left alone).

I think prosecutors are really dangerous. Besides, they are intouchable. Fitzgerald and Nifong will probably run successfully for Congress/Senate in 2008.

Anonymous said...

12:31 Anon:

"...what Nifong and Meehan were trying to say about not turning over the exculpatory evidence to "protect the privacy of the players?" What? Did they really mean to say that?"

That can be attributed to timing.

They didn't have time to come up with something better.

Anonymous said...

“As the public criticism of Mr. Nifong escalated, his fellow district attorneys began to hear rumblings that some state legislators were threatening to seek new oversight laws for all district attorneys."

What would an honest prosecutor have to fear from legitimate oversight? Is there some specific reason that accountability to fairness and following the laws is a problem?

Anonymous said...

Crystal will be acting real wacko now on purpose to see is she can get off on unstable and mental illness. Guess what, there are witnesses she was bragging about getting alot of money from those rich white boys. She won't be able to hide behind her drug addicitions. Many people take those drugs she was prescribed. Are they then all considered unstable, and emotional unfit? All Crystal is, is a pathalogical liar.

Anonymous said...

re: 1:04 PM

Quote taken from Lie Stoppers: Nifong's Ripples Reach General Assembly

Anonymous said...


I strongly disagree with your analysis of Ms Mangum's mental illness. If she had a debilitating mental illness--like paranoid schizophrenia--she would be unable to attend school, service johns, and care for her children.

You argue that she didn't realize the consequences of her actions. Assuming she was psychotic that night and was not cognizant of the consequences of her lies, then how would you explain the fact that she still wants to proceed to trial?

My theory is that she suffers from typical bipolar illness, which is something I have struggled with for many years. It's a terrible disease, but it should not exonerate an individual for responsibility for antisocial behavior.

Ms Mangum's real problem is her sociopathic personality--she's probably always been a selfish, immoral bitch always out for herself. By the way, who was tending to her children when she was stripping?

It is extremely dangerous to condescend to the mentally ill, because if they are sociopaths, like Ms Mangum, they'll fuck you if given the opportunity.

Society has to hold them accountable for their actions.


Anonymous said...

Betcha that new baby of hers has Knifong's eyes.

Those would be lying eyes?

Anonymous said...

RP is right. I have friends who are bi-polar, and they lead relatively normal lives. They don't lie to police, falsely charge people with crimes, and wreak havoc.

Crystal has made decisions that have created horrible consequences for many, many people. Think of all of the people who have been affected by her single lie. No, maybe she did not understand the consequences that first night, but when she gave the interview with the N&O, she knowingly crossed the line, and she continues to cross it.

Anonymous said...

1:34 PM

Bill, if she knew there was no possiblity to make money off of her lie (as in a civil suit), would she continue? Thanks.

Anonymous said...

Photios @ 7:25 AM,

Are you certain that Judge Smith denied a Motion for a Bill of Particulars? You may be right, but I do not remember reading about a hearing on any such Motion. When was the hearing held?

Cochise's Enchilada

Anonymous said...

Cochise's Enchilada,

Are you a babe, or just incredibly gay?--LOL

Love your name!


Anonymous said...

Do you think this case will have an effect on the growing RTP economy ? I know it may seem like a stretch to some but if NC is perceived as a judicially corrupt state that panders to certain special interest groups , is it possible that the growth of startups may be curtailed in some way ? I know there is corruption everywhere but it appears that NC may be above the norm. Just a thought

Anonymous said...

Photios @ 7:25 AM,

I was able to find a news story saying that Judge Smith denied a Motion for a Bill of Particulars in September (apparently it was during the first hearing over which Smith presided). The story was rather sparse and it was Smith's first hearing, so that seems to be only limited, if any, evidence that the Judge will not be fair in this case.

Cochise's Enchilada

Anonymous said...

No, No, No - do not generalize based on two of Crystal's reported medications. There are people out here like me, licensed professionals, with over 30 years of service who have been prescribed both drugs. I would like you folks hold back the stereotypes of mental illness based on the drugs. Physicians often prescribe medications for off label reasons. POP psychiatry is not becoming of this blog.

Anonymous said...

re: RP at 1:18

[I strongly disagree with your analysis of Ms Mangum's mental illness. If she had a debilitating mental illness--like paranoid schizophrenia--she would be unable to attend school, service johns, and care for her children.]

I have a close relative with paranoid schizophrenia. He didn't finish his Phd but was awarded a masters in biochem I think. Take
a look at a synopsis of the movie
A Beautiful Mind for an example
of someone highly accomplished with

There's a wide variety of possibilities and experiences with mental illness.

Anonymous said...

We don't have enough data to make even a good guess about her psychopathology. She has been hidden from view unlike the lax players. I have known many people with the dx of bipolar disorder who are extraordinary in amazing ways. I think I remember reading an article that stated that five of our past U.S. presidents were bipolar. The range within that dx in capacity to function is enormous.

Newyorkstateofmind said...

RP 1:18 said

"It is extremely dangerous to condescend to the mentally ill, because if they are sociopaths, like Ms Mangum, they'll fuck you if given the opportunity.

Society has to hold them accountable for their actions."

Substitute out "mentally ill" with "paroled convicted felons who just want a second chance," or "illegal aliens who are here as a goodwill gesture to 'do the work Americans just won't do'," or "misunderstood teenagers who didn't mean to bring a gun to school," and you have the veritable nub of what we are up against as a society, a situation which RP clearly understands and rightly decries.

In writing the above, I do not mean to imply that we should never individuals in marginalized circumstances some leeway to show the their good intentions, for the large number of individuals who, whatever the circumstances, do indeed possess some good intentions.

"Trust but verify" needs to be the watchword in all this.

Anonymous said...

12:31 - you are trying too hard. Nifong and Meehan averred that they were attempting to protect the players' privacy because Meehan conceded to a conspiracy to withhold evidence contrary to both governing law and his established policies and the privacy angle was simply the most immediate and flimsy lie that each embraced. That's all. And yes, you are correct in that it is incomprehensible to logically discern what not disclosing evidence of DNA from other member not affiliated with anyone on the team to any of the players would compromise their privacy rights. But that is the case with most lies spun off the top of one's head.

Guaunyu said...

The Feds have refused to investgate Nifong. Thanks, Alberto Gonzalez, for proving that whether it's through unconstitutional eavesdropping or through the denial of due process, the Constitution is just as "quaint" to you as the Geneva Conventions.


Anonymous said...

A little personal aside,
I have an AA sometime girlfriend. I have ended that relationship, which was perfectly consensual, because I do not want to be in an unfortunate position in future. I do not have that concern with other women I dtae.

Anonymous said...


Feds won't investigate at least not now.

Nifong is off the case, the kids are out on bail.

State AG is having the case reviewed.

Not surprised, Feds usually come in when everthing else has played out.

Anonymous said...


Sorry, but I have to say she's a lucky woman. From your post it appears you assumed that because of her race that she is more likely to claim you assaulted you sexually. She deserves a better boyfriend.

Anonymous said...

Correction, meant to say:

"more likely to claim you assaulted HER"

Anonymous said...

So much for due process. Wonder what the law school had to say. this Group of 88 seems like some bs the affirmative action hires conjured up in a trance state!

11:52 PM
The above comment was posted on June 27 by Jakemeister. This is to my knowledge the first post on KC's blog. The worm has turned.

Anonymous said...

GS: Exactly. They will wait until the case is dead to do their work. People should not freak about this, because an overly active Fed. poking into every legal affair at the state level is not a good thing. That violates a state's own sovereign rights in these matters.


Anonymous said...

My sense is that the Bush Administration is scared to death of being called "racist" by Congressional Democrats. Furthermore, it would be much easier to go after a more "righteous" cause of discrimination against blacks than against three white students.

The Bush Administration is not exactly courageous, and with its own problems in Iraq, I doubt that the DOJ is going to want to jump into this one. One thing I have learned in all of my years writing about the federal criminal justice system is that it is purely politics driven. U.S. attorneys love to go after high-profile cases, but cases that bring political benefits to themselves.

If you want to get a sense of just what a sewer the federal "justice" system is, read the Bill Moushey series written almost a decade ago:


It really is an eye-opener, and I will guarantee you that the DOJ culture is no different now than it was when Moushey wrote this series. I have had friends caught up with this DOJ, and all I can say is that the Bush DOJ is just as dishonest as anything that Janet Reno could give us -- and that is saying something.

I do believe that the feds have a legal case to make here, but will never get the backbone to do what is right. Some things never change.

Anonymous said...

Esquire 4:23 -

OK, but does the NC state judiciary have the wherewithal to handle federal crimes, i.e., civil rights abuses?

Anonymous said...

4:35 - By what I have seen .... No.

In an odd twist of history gone mad, such an impetus must come from the Federal Government. They must take the lead to ensure civil rights are respected.

Pretty ironic, don't you think?


Anonymous said...

One of the definitions of "compassionate conservatism" is to allow liberals to lawlessly run roughshod over anything of or pertaining to conservatives under the false assumption that liberals can be "won over" to your way of thinking. Hell, Democrats can't even agree with George Bush on what day it is.

Anonymous said...

4:46 re conservatives vs. liberals on this case.


"Hell, Democrats can't even agree with George Bush on what day it is."

The same could have been said about Republicans and Clinton, and yes liberals and Ronald Raygun. (Can you tell which end of the political spectrum I'm on?)

Sign me "liberal against Duke 3 persecution".

BTW usually a hallmark of conservative thought is avoidance, when possible, of federal interference in local affairs.

Guaunyu said...

Bill Anderson wrote:
"My sense is that the Bush Administration is scared to death of being called 'racist' by Congressional Democrats."

Seriously? You think Bush gives a rat's a** what Congress says? His statements regarding the course of policy in Iraq suggest that he and his administration will do exactly what they please regardless of Congressional thinking.

Guaunyu said...

Esquire wrote:

"GS: Exactly. They will wait until the case is dead to do their work."

I'd agree with you, except if they had any intention of possibly investigating after the case is dismissed and the bar does it's work, they'd have held off on sending the letter. They would simply have refused to comment publicly, and through back channels would have told Rep. Jones to sit tight.

No comment would have meant "maybe." The letter means "no."

Anonymous said...


In this case, yes. Not because it respects Congress, but because the Bushies have so many other battles with Congress that they don't want to be bogged down here. I cannot say I respect the president, and I cannot imagine him wanting to do the right thing in this case. Like so many other politicians, Bush and his cronies would like the Duke case to disappear. Do you really think he cares if these guys are guilty or innocent? I doubt he does.

Anonymous said...

The invasion of Stupid. Vapid. Off topic. Wannabe cable news pundits. Say goodbye to thoughtful comments, hello to the screaming heads who are intimately acquainted with the thoughts and motivations of all national politicians, especially those with whom they think they disagree.

Guaunyu said...


Rant much?

Anonymous said...


Coincidentally, bipolar illness is genetically related to schizophrenia.

You claim you have a high-functioning schizophrenic relative. Curious, how high functioning was this person after age 25?

My mother was a concert pianist and paranoid schizophrenic. She was finished by age 25.

Thanks for the feedback.


Anonymous said...


You should do your homework. Hispanic women are the group most likely to file false police reports, which is explained by the prevalence of wife beating and antifemale violence in the Hispanic community.

If you need to visit actuarial charts vis a vis girlfriends, suggest you visit high-class hookers.


Anonymous said...

re: RP at 5:25

He was high-functioning until late 30s/early 40s. Things went quickly downhill after that. Medications back then weren't very good compared to today.

I loosely follow the work on schiz/bipolar/depression and sometimes read the conversational newsgroups to see how people cope with it.

I have spoken to people that have schiz and that live independently with it on medication. The medication is far from perfect but people can lead somewhat normal lives with support.

I'm a bit surprised that CGM's family didn't provide much more support. I realize that it can be hard when a teenager wants independence but people with these kinds of problems could use steering in life.

Anonymous said...

The DOJ really could not intervene at this point because, from a purely technical/legal standpoint, the system is working.

The 3 kids were accused of 3 serious crimes and released on very non restrictive bail. They have competent lawyers who are doing their job well. One charge has been dropped. The DA has been charged with ethics violations while the case was in progress (something that’s unheard of). Now he’s off the case. A hearing is set that could deprive the prosecution of bulk of their case, rendering it worthless. The case has not been dismissed if for no other reason than the defense has not moved for dismissal. Perhaps they will if the ID is thrown out.

So again, from a purely technical basis, the system is working as designed. If the DOJ was to jump into this case (which appears headed for dismissal), it would open up demands for the DOJ to get involved in all sorts of criminal prosecutions, before there is even a conviction or acquittal. You have to realize that this case has gotten a lot of press coverage, but there are 10s of thousands of other cases in progress right now. Think of all the demands on the DOJ if a precedent was set in this case, before any resolution has been reached.

I didn’t bother mentioning any political headaches like being accused of “protecting rich white boys” etc. because the DOJ, at this point would have a hard time overcoming the fact that this case seems to show the system working, albeit slowly and tortuously.

If and when the charges are dropped, it’s assumed that the accused will then use the same system to recoup damages from those who caused them harm.

Anonymous said...


If Bush would have the Dept of Ed sit on their hands re: Title IX abuse and "misinterpretation" , what makes you think they would stick their necks out on this case??

All he cares about is the War and how he can go down positiviely in the record books after having mucked up so bad. Why the Republicans keep going back to these guys (the Bushies), I have no idea.

Anonymous said...


I wouldn't let Bush manage a whorehouse. I'm quite serious.

It's an outrage that the people who enter politics in the US are such lightweights.

Read Barack (superstar) Obama's "The Audacity of Hope" to get an appreciation of how stupid and overrated contemporary politicians are. Makes me pine for Nixon.


Anonymous said...


Your last post was well-put.

Anonymous said...

johnboy 5:48 -

I disagree. The disposition of the prosecution of this case has nothing to due with the evidence that a Federal Crime has been committed, namely, the civil rights of these boys have been violated.

Anonymous said...

No I do not.

But I will defer to your Olbermannesque riposte, in which you put on the shoe that apparently fits.

Anonymous said...

RP 5:58 -

Assuming I agree with you, where are the political stars today? Is it because the best and the brightest don't want to enter the cesspool we call politics?

Anonymous said...

Someone should start holding Rachel Sullivan, the LIU sociology professor who has been commenting in this blog resposible for her irresponsible and potentially libelous comments on this case. She makes Karla Holloway look reasonable.

Is Rachel Sullivan a tenured sociology professor at LIU?

How can she get away with the filth that she has blogged on this case?

1. “Updates on Duke Lacrosse Team Racist Rape”

2. “However, if you this story you get a better idea of what most likely went on. A group of young wealthy White men felt that it was ok to assault this woman, raping her and yelling racial slurs at her. ”

3. “I wonder if these guys were thinking about how much power they had over this young women when they yelled racist slurs and when they physically and sexually assault this women? I also wonder if those guys who remained silent were more concerned about protecting their buddies than stopping this terrible assault. ”


Is LIU aware of this?

Anonymous said...

Incendiary charge by Cash Michaels:


Anonymous said...

Smith denied a motion for a bill of particulars back in the fall. Since he hinted at the time that he might grant a similar motion at a later date, many commentators did not hold it too much against him. However, we have since seen that by not pinning Nifong down to a bill of particulars at that time, he was in effect inviting him to fabricate an entirely new scenario, with a different timeline, and different roles for the different alleged assailants than anything in Crystal's statements as revealed that far. Nifong and his agent Linwood Wilson took full advantage of this invitation in December, and it remains open for Nifong's replacements to take further advantage of it now. So it by now should be obvious that the refusal to grant the bill of particulars motion was in fact a major contribution to keeping the hoax alive. --Ph.

Anonymous said...

I went to Rachel's Tavern, and she still has the "Duke Rape" link at the bottom, but the last entry was on April 5, 2006. In reading through the site, it was pretty typical of what we see on college campuses these days. All of the same trendy folk marxism and the like.

As for the Duke case, she would be like Yolanda Carrington or Cash Michaels in that they contend that there was a rape no matter what the facts might say, and if the facts don't warrant a rape, then that is because someone tampered with the "evidence." These are people who would believe Crystal if she said that the three men dropped from the sky in spacesuits.

As I read her post again, I realize she is yet another typical college professor. Their name is Legion.

Anonymous said...

Bill. She has continued blogging on the case on other blogs. The latest I could find was in June. I have also told that she references the "Duke Rape" in her Sociology 101 class at LIU. THe fact that she is exposed to impressionable 18 year olds does not bode well for society.


Anonymous said...

Great article by Charles Murray in "Opinion Journal," entitled "Intelligence in the Classroom." It addresses NCLB, but it could have just as easily addressed the academic--uh huh--welfare crisis at Duke.

Bon appetit!


Anonymous said...


I am simply crestfallen that you will be unable to relay inside "bar buddy" insights!

Have a good trip.


Ooops.....gotta check out the Paula Zahn charade now.


Anonymous said...

7:06pm -- However, we have since seen that by not pinning Nifong down to a bill of particulars at that time, he was in effect inviting him to fabricate an entirely new scenario, with a different timeline, and different roles for the different alleged assailants than anything in Crystal's statements as revealed that far.

So are you saying Judge Smith gave Mike Nifong the rope to hang himself? Not sure that was the plan, but it sure worked out, didn't it?

Besides--how are the defendants hurt by having CGM's story change from one that's 98% impossible (theoretically, someone could have a friend in the phone company to jinx records, etc.) to one that is downright absurd? I don't think dismissal was likely before the Feb. 5 hearing anyway; letting the prosecutor offer more varied and interesting stories helps the defense much more than the prosecution.

Anonymous said...


Yes, the intrusive nature of politics repulses the talented.

Can you believe Clinton thought he was being clever with his, "It depends what is, is comment"?

Bill, "is" is a copulative verb. It means equal, you stupid cracker--LOL


Anonymous said...

Lawyer in Durham, here.

KC is 100% correct. Coman, and his ass't. Winstead, will do a good job and give us in NC a little better reputation for fair justice, if not swift justice.

Nifong's personal journey to Hell ain't going to get any prettier.

Anonymous said...

Durham lawyer here again: Not sure where the allegation came from regarding Winstead's lack of good faith; can you cite the specific case name and reference you have?

I know Coman's brother, and have found him to be an upstanding guy, as I have heard his brother, the Sp. Prosecutor, is.

Don't throw bombs at J. Smith; he's got the onerous task of letting everybody fully plead the case, and if there are any statement of facts to the point of the last hearing to support the charges, he has to let them be aired.

He hasn't heard the motions to dismiss yet, so give him a break. He can't act until the time is right.

Coman is not going to pull unethical bullshit, a la Nifong, so you can rest assured the comments of defense counsel were honestly expressed.

Anonymous said...

To 9:27 PM Durham Lawyer-

The problem I have is how you define "ethical" or what it takes to be considered "upstanding". From what I've read, it looks like the NC AG's office feels that withholding information that impeaches a witness is not considered excuplatory, in violation of US law. So committing this violation still allows a prosecutor to be "ethical" or "upstanding". Where am I wrong here? Thanks.

Anonymous said...

duke09parent---You are always a whiney liberal fuck. Always with an agenda. Who the fuck cares about your tedious bullsh!t?

Anonymous said...

Cash Michaels is just a big old fat hog.So stupid it's painful. He should sit down and get to know Jackee or Jack. Crystal's macho cousin. As much lard as Cash is packing neither will find out where the xx and the xy chromosomes begin or end.


Anonymous said...

Dear Vice President Burness and Dr. Holloway:

I read with interest your comments in Cash Michaels column on the Wilmington Journal site: (http://wilmingtonjournal.blackpressusa.com

Rather than take 6th person hearsay, I chose to go right to the source, an important witness interviewed by the late Ed Bradley on “60 Minutes”. Ms. Kim Roberts, the “other” stripper, seems to disagree with you. Please focus on her statements that are in bold font. They do not support your version. (It seems that maybe you took Crystal Gail Magnum for her good word and as Mike Nifong has realized, that is not the best thing to do).

Duke Parent

p.s. I have included the provocative, racial taunt by Ms. Roberts that led to the uncalled for use of the “n” word by one or two students. Also, the final racial slur has been confirmed by the next door neighbor. Interestingly, it is a paraphrase of a joke by an African-American comedian, Chris Rock, but alas that is a whole other story.

The excerpt from the “60 minutes” interview with Ed Bradley and Kim Roberts (copied from the CBS transcript):

"She (Crystal Gail Magnum, the accuser) goes on to say that when both of you went back in the house, she says, 'They were excited and angry. They were screaming, 'We’re going to f you black bitches,'" Bradley says.

"I just don’t remember it that way at all," Roberts says.

Those are not the only questionable statements "Precious" has made in this case. She has given different accounts about the number of men who raped her, saying at one point that night it was “five guys,” “three men,” and at one point, she said "no one had forced her to have sex.”

A photograph, taken at 12:31 a.m., shows "Precious" standing outside the back door of the house. The team captains told police she was pounding at the door around that time, but they wouldn’t let her in. Seven minutes later, at 12:38 a.m., she was lying face down on the porch, apparently passed out. At 12:41 am, she was being helped to Roberts' car by some of the players and the night appeared to be coming to an end.

At that point, Roberts says "Precious" was "out of it."

Asked if "Precious" was conscious at that point, Roberts says, "I don't know. I'd say she was semi-conscious because she was helping them along in the walking process to get to the car."

As Roberts prepared to drive away with "Precious," she described one ugly final encounter with a lacrosse player who made a rude comment about Roberts' appearance.

Asked how she responded, Roberts says, "I don't know if I can say that on 60 Minutes.

"I called him a little dicked white boy," she recalls laughing. "And how he couldn't get it on his own and had to pay for it. So, he was mad. And it ended with him callin' me the n-word. And it echoed, so you heard n….. once, and then you heard, n….., n….., n….. .

Roberts acknowledges that her taunting provoked that remark but tells Bradley, "But when I think about it again, I say he could’ve said black girl. You know what I mean? He could’ve said black girl. He didn’t have to go that route."

A neighbor also told police he overheard a player yelling in Roberts' direction “Thank your grandfather for my cotton shirt.”

Anonymous said...

Mr Nifong clearly used this case to direct attention away from the REAL crimes to gain his office, and Durham is a quagmire of corruption!
What news has the world been told of the Durham Sheriff's deputies actions?! Murder for hire, trafficking women for prostitution, counterfeiting, and cocaine trafficking....Crimes against humanity, yet nobody is in jail?!
Durham has become a town of it's own, a modern day "Wild West," and the citizens have been duped into believing their city to be respectable and safe?!
The stench of corruption reaches into almost every public office, and nobody is willing to stand up and bring out the truth, for fear...
Who can you trust when the leaders are liars and criminals?!

Anonymous said...

How must the grand jury that indicted these boys feel.they were lied to and used by Nifong.has anybody even heard from them or are they afraid to come forward?

Anonymous said...

to 11:58PM

you failed to mention this woman is also mentally ill,suffering from bi-polar disorder and either off her meds or dangerously mixing them with alcohol and muscle relaxants.

Anonymous said...

a victim never lies but not all accusers are victims.perfect.