tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post8204954537192536226..comments2024-02-24T05:19:10.949-05:00Comments on Durham-in-Wonderland: Duke's Factual, Semi-Factual, & Non-Factual Responsekcjohnson9http://www.blogger.com/profile/09625813296986996867noreply@blogger.comBlogger39125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-21878485305682588422011-05-24T10:23:03.744-04:002011-05-24T10:23:03.744-04:00In discussing Levicy you state: "...what the ...In discussing Levicy you state: "...what the accusing witness was reporting largely on the accusing witness’s demeanor and complaints of pain rather than on objective evidence.” [emphasis added] But Duke now claims that “Nurse Levicy specifically admits that she remains both objective and neutral during such examinations.” [emphasis added]"<br /><br />I believe you are confusing objective medical findings with "objective" meaning unbiased.<br /><br />Objective medical findings are those that can be seen, felt, or tested for without relying on the patient's statement. A bruise you see upon examination is objective; saying your are in pain is subjective. A patient's history is subjective, unless the examiner has seen the event.<br /><br />So when the nurse says she was reporting on the basis of the patient's appearance (demeanor) and complaints she is admitting that there was no observable, independently verifiable evidence of a physical condition causing the pain.<br /><br />Her second statement is that she was personally unbiased regarding the result of the examination. <br /><br />An examiner is supposed to be objective (without bias) while reporting a patient's complaints even if the complaints are not accompanied by objective (independently verifiable) findings.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-48561456898878958222011-04-22T04:51:37.158-04:002011-04-22T04:51:37.158-04:00They were both paid $800, may have left the amount...They were both paid $800, may have left the amount at 610, but were paid!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-29272181065055457882011-04-21T21:16:32.782-04:002011-04-21T21:16:32.782-04:00So delicious! So it was "Dean Sue" that ...So delicious! So it was "Dean Sue" that offered "walk the plank" Covington! Brodhead was deeply involved. Other SANE nurses had the professional pride to refuse to work with Levicy. <br /><br />Stories fall off the front page that everyone wants to follow. This one just keeps on giving, even as the New York and Los Angeles Times have "moved on" from their slanted and inept coverage.<br /><br />Please--another book! This may be more absorbing than the last one.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-65141075988125027662011-04-21T06:26:08.887-04:002011-04-21T06:26:08.887-04:00Anon @ 4/19 7:25 AM - "the boys could have p...Anon @ 4/19 7:25 AM - <i><b> "the boys could have prevented the problem; they could have paid her (CGM.)"</b></i><br /><br />There is some truth to that, unfortunately.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-91158151187927805992011-04-19T21:12:43.227-04:002011-04-19T21:12:43.227-04:00Duke Univeristy claims they allowed the pot banger...Duke Univeristy claims they allowed the pot bangers and their threatening harrasment. Remember th signs CASTRATE THEM. Well why did they not use that same peotocol when Nifong was runnning for office. Students were just trying to get other students to regiater to vote. Duke Umiversity and the campus police shut them down right away. Where was Freedom of speech then.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-82308312953258982652011-04-19T16:02:39.351-04:002011-04-19T16:02:39.351-04:00To the 3.14:
I obtained the response through my p...To the 3.14:<br /><br />I obtained the response through my pacer account, but it's subsequently been downloaded & posted at the Liestoppers discussion board.<br /><br />To the 1.08:<br /><br />It's the policy of Duke Hospital (along with most other major hospitals around the country) to have sexual assault accusers examined by a SANE, not an RN or a SANE-nurse-in-training. That's why Levicy's lack of credential mattered. (Why Duke Hospital violated its own policy & didn't have Mangum examined by a credentialed SANE is not explained by the Duke response.) In turn, in sexual assault trials, the testimony of SANEs carries considerable weight, since they are presumed to have had special training in how to examine sexual assault "victims." (Dr. Manly was not a SANE, and had no particular background in sexual assault treatment.)<br /><br />Of course, in the end, Levicy would have been a "fact" witness. That's what makes her constant shifting of the "facts"--always in ways that propped up the case of Nifong & the DPD--so chilling.kcjohnson9https://www.blogger.com/profile/09625813296986996867noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-19259758658435777362011-04-19T15:14:46.277-04:002011-04-19T15:14:46.277-04:00Is the university's factual response available...Is the university's factual response available online? Would be interested to see the document. <br /><br />(sorry if I overlooked a link above -- didn't see any)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-49135719260262322052011-04-19T13:19:26.095-04:002011-04-19T13:19:26.095-04:00An excellent summation, as always, KC. I must adm...An excellent summation, as always, KC. I must admit that I found the entire Duke response to be chuckle-inducing, if not laugh-out-loud ridiculous in parts.hetherflyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10058889729931375735noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-79304237856159163002011-04-19T13:08:21.747-04:002011-04-19T13:08:21.747-04:00Nifong is the monster here and did persue this cas...Nifong is the monster here and did persue this case in spite of all evidence to the contrary. <br />Dr Manly did the exam, not the nurse so it did not matter what ever her credintals were except for RN. RNs assist the Doctors. The Judge was very clear that the nurse owed NO duty to the public or folk targeted by the Police and only has a duty to the patient. Clearly, the SANE person is not Sherlock Holmes in white stocking nor are they anything but FACT witness. "Yes, I bagged her clothes". "No, the SBI Lab interprets the finding, not me".Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-9644011201580543532011-04-19T11:27:07.311-04:002011-04-19T11:27:07.311-04:00Question about the difference in standards between...Question about the difference in standards between Federal Circuits - are there any indications this could be appealed to SCOTUS? it seems like (mind you, not a lawyer myself) that clear discrepancy in standards between Federal Districts would be prime material for SCOTUS to rule on.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-38260603667400650882011-04-19T09:55:31.592-04:002011-04-19T09:55:31.592-04:00Thanks for the thorough recap. One other nitpick:...Thanks for the thorough recap. One other nitpick: "Under this conception of the law, a SANE nurse could lie at will about an exam, and there would be no way to challenge her in a civil suit." I don't think that's accurate. A court could still order health records or testimony in a civil suit. Basically, the HIPAA Privacy Rule says no disclosure generally. But then there are lots of ways to get disclosure, such as via court orders in either a criminal or civil case.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-85062844953372084212011-04-19T07:25:43.073-04:002011-04-19T07:25:43.073-04:00One schmuck (a lefty/progressive investment banker...One schmuck (a lefty/progressive investment banker) told me that "the boys could have prevented the problem; they could have paid her (CGM.)"<br /><br />That pretty much sums up the attitude of the professional left.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-63127577207782857812011-04-19T07:16:01.393-04:002011-04-19T07:16:01.393-04:00Without Levicy, Nifong would likely not have proce...Without Levicy, Nifong would likely not have proceeded. Here we appear to have an attention-starved, histrionic person with a virulent agenda, driving an investigation in order to meet some deep and dark psychological need.<br /><br />One wonders how Levicy has avoided criminal charges, and one also wonders if she's going to show up one day like CGM, charged with a crime that she cannot run away from.<br /><br />Levicy, like CGM, should have been charged with a criminal offense. Perhaps it is too late, with the usual limitations being used as an excuse?<br /><br />Better late than never. She should be charged, at least with making a false report - among other things.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-36440478837905987662011-04-18T23:47:11.780-04:002011-04-18T23:47:11.780-04:00And now, poor pitiful Crystal is in jail on first ...And now, poor pitiful Crystal is in jail on first degree murder charges. NOW her "handlers" want to talk about her mental illness. Doesn't do a lot for the LAX boys.<br />Maybe Mikie can get special permission so he can "defend" her again!!afnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-57610105267581407242011-04-18T20:05:54.788-04:002011-04-18T20:05:54.788-04:00Superb analysis and evaluation, KC!
This issue ...Superb analysis and evaluation, KC! <br /><br />This issue will surely fade from public view -- sometime after all the briefs and evidence have been presented, a verdict has been reached, appeals have run out, and the commentators have moved on. That is, sometime in the twenty-second century.<br /><br />Meanwhile, it has raised issues that absolutely must be deal with -- even if it continues to feed the firestorm.<br /><br />Gus W.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-88396878331956966812011-04-18T12:48:06.721-04:002011-04-18T12:48:06.721-04:00I read on the "just4ni" site that the au...I read on the "just4ni" site that the author believes somebody shot Daye full of air through an IV and murdered him. Of course, that makes sense! somebody snuck into the ICU, and killed Daye so that the death could be pinned on Mangum. What in the world is this guy smokin'?? Perhaps, according to this kook, Duke itself is behind the "murder" of Daye as some kind of tactic to divert attention to itself during this period. <br />Broadhead needs to hire this fellow. What a PR genius! <br />Keep at it, K.C., your analysis is my daily bread.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-80772829813795891912011-04-17T15:51:02.338-04:002011-04-17T15:51:02.338-04:00@ 12:46, Correct you are! And won't it be fun ...@ 12:46, Correct you are! And won't it be fun to watch.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-58513581301645387062011-04-17T15:19:20.417-04:002011-04-17T15:19:20.417-04:00The alarm bells still ring today: see the recent n...The alarm bells still ring today: see the recent non-prosecution of the Philadelphia Black Panthers by Eric Holder's Federal Dept. of Justice.<br /><br />- a member of the only remaining non-protected thus targeted class.Greg Toombshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08093911019916154110noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-83865613611764279912011-04-17T14:45:24.080-04:002011-04-17T14:45:24.080-04:00Is this anywhere near going to trial?
David In TN...Is this anywhere near going to trial?<br /><br />David In TNAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-30705635401302822332011-04-17T12:46:20.867-04:002011-04-17T12:46:20.867-04:00I believe by alleging there was evidence of rape, ...I believe by alleging there was evidence of rape, they are opening the door to all the evidence that there was no rape.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-72548059384451887282011-04-17T06:31:31.674-04:002011-04-17T06:31:31.674-04:00R.R. Hamilton: Good argument about the "privi...R.R. Hamilton: Good argument about the "privity requirement" vis-a-vis SANEs. It makes a lot of sense. I would add that a negligent -- and certainly a malicious SANE -- also will harm justice and any effort to bring it about. <br /><br />Barbara Seville: Nice job with your comparisons! There is no doubt about it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-5577168336588904712011-04-17T05:08:30.183-04:002011-04-17T05:08:30.183-04:00To the 6:16PM: That's why Afirmative Action ha...To the 6:16PM: That's why Afirmative Action has to end; that's why the EEOC has to be dissolved. A single group has now been targeted and, in the persecution of that group, un-American activities have been committed and condoned because of the ever increasing expansion of the 'law'. As each worker's group, i.e., college professors, union workers, environmentalists, etc., walk more and more in lockstep to dismantle this Republic by focusing on the targeted group, the hollow ring of jackboots can be heard.<br /><br />Big AlAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-56601445580809821212011-04-17T02:16:32.073-04:002011-04-17T02:16:32.073-04:00KC,
You are relentless.
I am so glad I am not on...KC,<br /><br />You are relentless.<br /><br />I am so glad I am not on the opposite side of any issue with you.<br /><br />Jim Peterson<br /><br />(p.s., thank you)Jim In San Diegonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-79018920429454124552011-04-16T18:16:54.769-04:002011-04-16T18:16:54.769-04:00“The Duke University Defendants admit that some in...“The Duke University Defendants admit that some individuals who were employed by Duke University engaged in their constitutional right of free speech by participating in gatherings such as the one that occurred on Sunday, March 26, 2006.” <br /><br /> “Duke University admits that it follows a practice of academic freedom and that faculty and students are free to exercise their individual First Amendment right to free speech.”<br /><br />---------------------------<br /><br />Suppose that the targeted group of students had been, say, Jewish (rather than miscellaneous white males,) and that Duke employees had demonstrated against them under a large purple banner urging "Gas them!!" (rather than the notorious "Castrate!!!" banner.) Or that the students had been African-American, and Duke employees had "engaged in their constitutional right of free speech" by assembling under a banner reading "Lynch them!!"<br /><br />Then further suppose that a significant group of faculty members, plus several whole departments, had exercised their "rights to academic freedom and free speech" by purchasing and signing an ad which expressly thanked those demonstrators for unleashing their anger and "not waiting," and urged the community to "turn up the volume" against the targeted (Jewish or African-American) students.<br /><br />Can anyone really believe that the university wouldn't have fired those employees? Told them that, while they might have the right to engage in free speech, however vile, without government interference, Duke nonetheless had the right to dispense with their services as employees? <br /><br />And can anyone believe that the university would have taken no action in response to such a faculty ad -- not even issued a statement dissociating the university from it -- on the grounds that "academic freedom" allows Duke professors to applaud mobs calling for violence (whether gassing, lynching or castration) against Duke students?Barbara Sevillenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-39554787964572647592011-04-16T16:59:01.028-04:002011-04-16T16:59:01.028-04:00Just some random thoughts:
1. In a sane world, J...Just some random thoughts:<br /><br />1. In a sane world, Jamie Gorelick would be in jail either for robbing the taxpayers by falsifying records at Fannie Mae or for unlawfully prohibiting cooperation among the federal government agencies which were charged with preventing 9/11.<br /><br />2. Someone above asked if this case will ever go to trial. I have said before, about the original lawsuit, and repeat: Duke will pay almost any amount of money to avoid having the public spectacle of the testimony of the moral degenerates on its faculty. <br /><br />3. Think of the tens of millions of dollars that Duke could be spending on improving its educational functions instead of paying professional prevaricators if only it had had a President like my fellow South Texan, John Silber. (About one hour after the publication of the infamous newspaper ad, the Gang of 88 would have felt like they had just gone through Hell while wearing napalm bodysuits.)<br /><br />4. The virulent, identity-based hatred propagated by the race-sex-class college faculty continues unabated. My daughter is a University of Florida freshman who took a class called "Human Sexuality" last semester. The faculty member (I cannot call such persons "professors") in charge, in noting that Houston had recently become the first major U.S. city to elect an openly lesbian mayor, could not -- of course not! -- refrain from informing the students that Texans are generally despicable Neanderthals. I told my daughter that she should make a formal complaint and that I would do so if she did not; she begged me not to "get her in trouble"(!!!) and said that she would instead use her anonymous student end-of-class review to raise the issue.<br /><br />4. Regarding "Observer's" comment that it was wrong for the AG not to hold Mangum accountable for her false accusation: Yes, a man has now been murdered as a result of that decision. Three years ago I was among the few clamoring for Gorelick (and Franklin Raines and other Fannie Mae banker crooks) to be publicly handcuffed and frog-walked out of her office. Think of the hundreds of billions (or trillions?) of dollars that America might have saved by making such an example of financial fraudsters! It is very important that these people be brought to the same justice they would face if they were conservatives.<br /><br />5. Lastly, and mostly for the attorneys, regarding the court's finding that Levicy did not owe a duty of diligence to anyone beyond Mangum, due to "privity": I have been dismayed in recent years as the "privity requirement" has been stretched so beyond reason as to swallow justice. Obviously, in the Levicy matter, a negligent sexual assault examination would harm "reasonably foreseeable third parties" like the accused Lacrosse Team members. Where one's negligence will undoubtedly harm reasonably foreseeable third parties, privity should not be a barrier to a cause of action.<br /><br />R.R. Hamilton<br /><br />P.S. Good job of analysis, KC.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com