Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Add Reply
CRYSTAL MANGUM TRIAL; December 2010
Topic Started: Nov 29 2010, 12:59 PM (56,626 Views)
jewelcove

I'm getting the impression that some jurors are trying to argue that this honor student, college graduate (that got an "A" in a hard class) and published author couldn't figure out that if you light a pile of clothes (fuel) in a small room, leave the fire unsupervised, that the fire most likely will get out of control.
Edited by jewelcove, Dec 16 2010, 05:51 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

Judge Beatty is partially responsible for this charade that's taking place in Court. If Durham Cty and the City had been ordered to pay damages done to RDC because of Nifong and Crystal's false accusation and property taxes had gone up commensurate with these damages, this jury would be a bit more serious in the role they are taking here. Instead of trying their best to make sure Crystal slides under the "letter of the law", the jury would use some common sense regarding the fire. Swift and sure justice is the only way people like Crystal and cities like Durham will ever get it. Judge Beatty could help that by moving a bit more swiftly in the lawsuits.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
sceptical

Speculation-- is the jury interested in finding Crystal guilty of neglect towards her children because that would trigger an investigation by the state children's services?

What do we want from this trial? I don't think the goal is retribution. In my mind, proper care for the three kids is most important, followed by psychiatric and drug abuse treatment for Crystal. A long prison term would just cost the taxpayers money, in addition to that which was spent before she met bail.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

I think the court can accomplish both. Prison time for Crystal in my opinion would be a just punishment. The state and county has had ample opportunity to investigate Crystal's neglect of the children and appear to have not done so. Plenty of people are investigated without first being tried for a felony. I vote prison time. Sorry

No amount of drug rehab will help Crystal unless she really wants it and unless she is willing to change her lifestyle. If the jury is falling for that working mother, college graduate, honor student bullshirt, they are too stupid to serve on a jury.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
nyesq83
Member Avatar

sceptical
Dec 16 2010, 05:42 PM
Speculation-- is the jury interested in finding Crystal guilty of neglect towards her children because that would trigger an investigation by the state children's services?

What do we want from this trial? I don't think the goal is retribution. In my mind, proper care for the three kids is most important, followed by psychiatric and drug abuse treatment for Crystal. A long prison term would just cost the taxpayers money, in addition to that which was spent before she met bail.
Is proper care even an option in this trial - I think not - for a woman who refuses it anyway?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
cks
Member Avatar

First and formost - her children should be placed in a loving home where they will be treasured and their needs will be met. Second, Crystal should be punished for her crimes and should be given the opportunity to enter a drug rehab program with psychiatric counseling. Perhaps down the road she can become a fully functioning and contributing member of society.

Her enablers do Crystal no favors by constantly insisting that she is a victim and providing her the wherewithal (be it emotional or financial) to continue in her destructive ways. I believe that in the end, a just God will demand answers from Crystal (and from Mike Nifong, President Brodhead, Sue Wausiolek, etc). While it would be a great source of satisfaction to see all the miscreants receive their comeuppance in a public manner - I have little faith that the justice system of North Carolina is up to the task.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kbp

I've followed tons of child cases and have never heard of a jury deciding if there was neglect. It has ALWAYS been a judge in a Family Court, closed to the public and never with a jury.

This must be some criminal charge. If accurate, I'd love to know what criminal charge there is for neglect. I know of specific crimes that can be abuse, but none that are only neglect.

This is strange for me to follow what a jury is doing there that relates to a neglect charge.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
chatham
Member Avatar

sceptical
Dec 16 2010, 05:42 PM
Speculation-- is the jury interested in finding Crystal guilty of neglect towards her children because that would trigger an investigation by the state children's services?

What do we want from this trial? I don't think the goal is retribution. In my mind, proper care for the three kids is most important, followed by psychiatric and drug abuse treatment for Crystal. A long prison term would just cost the taxpayers money, in addition to that which was spent before she met bail.
You may be on to something. No one really can predict a jury. But if I was on it I would be leery about SS taking responsibility of the children and sending crystal to some kind of mental health treatment. Mental health in this state is broke and not very good. But for sure, the jury could be thinking about some of that. All of durham, and elsewhere, know that crystal has some mental problems because of previous news stories.

I personally believe that crystal needs some kind of mental health treatment that is meaningful. I am not sure that it will be available. But IMO prison will only delay another episode of lawlessness. But based on the presentation of this case, I do not believe the jury can do anything but declare guilty or not guilty as a verdict. There are no other options available.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mason
Member Avatar
Parts unknown
sceptical
Dec 16 2010, 05:42 PM

What do we want from this trial? I don't think the goal is retribution. In my mind, proper care for the three kids is most important, followed by psychiatric and drug abuse treatment for Crystal. A long prison term would just cost the taxpayers money, in addition to that which was spent before she met bail.
.
However, there shouldn't be a Crystal Exemption.

If you doubt this Exemption from the law, then go out steal a car and try to run over a Cop multiple times and get away with a slap on the wrist.

Or Lodge an accusation that costs the State better than 6 figures and have that accusation disproved about 5 different ways - and then have the state ignore your lawlessness and associated costs by saying that one of the State people thought you may have actually believed your story.

How many times has Durham Justice looked the other way with Crystal and then just had some Cops go by and check on her kids?

Durham is the only area I know of that seems to be promoting the idea that you can lie to their Cops when you are arrested or caught breaking the law - and continue lying.

What purpose does it serve society to allow people to give false statements, false reporting, and fake Id's, addresses, SSN, and DOBs?


.




Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

I have a friend who is a wonderful husband and father. He has a child who is autistic and attends a special school for autism and learning disabilities. Out of the blue, he received a call from Child and Family Services notifying him that they had received a complaint for neglect and wanted to come out to his home for an interview. Child and Family Services (or Dept. of Social Services as they may be called) refused to tell him who had lodged the complaint and upon which grounds. He, of course, complied with the interview and the woman who came to his home upon completion of the investigation apologized for having put the family through the trouble. She said that by law they are required to investigate every complaint. My friend later found out that an AA counselor, a recent graduate in psychology, and a first year employee of the school had lodged the complaint that the family wasn't giving the child enough medication.

When good people can be investigated at will, it begs the question "why not Crystal".
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mason
Member Avatar
Parts unknown
chatham
Dec 16 2010, 06:12 PM
sceptical
Dec 16 2010, 05:42 PM
Speculation-- is the jury interested in finding Crystal guilty of neglect towards her children because that would trigger an investigation by the state children's services?

What do we want from this trial? I don't think the goal is retribution. In my mind, proper care for the three kids is most important, followed by psychiatric and drug abuse treatment for Crystal. A long prison term would just cost the taxpayers money, in addition to that which was spent before she met bail.
You may be on to something. No one really can predict a jury. But if I was on it I would be leery about SS taking responsibility of the children and sending crystal to some kind of mental health treatment. Mental health in this state is broke and not very good. But for sure, the jury could be thinking about some of that. All of durham, and elsewhere, know that crystal has some mental problems because of previous news stories.

I personally believe that crystal needs some kind of mental health treatment that is meaningful. I am not sure that it will be available. But IMO prison will only delay another episode of lawlessness. But based on the presentation of this case, I do not believe the jury can do anything but declare guilty or not guilty as a verdict. There are no other options available.
.
She hasn't hit bottom yet.

She still gaming the system and getting off with her lies and victim badges. In short, it's still working for her.


Why wouldn't you or I request a Jury Trial for this type of charge and then direct your Lawyer to disqualify so many and to object so often in court and then present so little of an actual defense?

Answer: because we couldn't afford it (well, you know what I mean).

Crystal doesn't pay a penny. Didn't have to pay a penny to get Bailed out either.

Crystal hasn't hit bottom.

In fact, she has a collection of groupies that give her money, buy her clothes, and do other things for her.


.
Edited by Mason, Dec 16 2010, 06:30 PM.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kbp

Just for the record, if a child protective service alleges you abused or neglected your child(ren), it is not a crime and you do not get an attorney paid for by the state.

Maybe NC is differnt. Every state is a little bit different than others.

The abuse/neglect may be some sort of crime in NC. In any criminal case I have seen, another crime is evidence of abuse/neglect, like some form of assault for instance.

I wish I understood what 'neglect' Crystal is being charged with.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
MikeZPU

I don't know why I got my hopes up that this jury might hold Mangum
accountable for her egregious actions.

The defense only called one witness to the stand -- as Tony said, it was
a very weak defense.

Despite the fact that she initially lied to the cops under questioning, and
then admitted to setting the fire in the bathroom, and slashing the tires
of Milton's car and smashing the windows, the jurors wanted to know
"what constitutes a lawful arrest?"

To think of Steve Matherly and company celebrating the verdicts that
we know are coming ... makes me ill.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mason
Member Avatar
Parts unknown
MikeZPU
Dec 16 2010, 06:40 PM

The defense only called one witness to the stand -- as Tony said, it was a very weak defense.

Despite the fact that she initially lied to the cops under questioning, and then admitted to setting the fire in the bathroom, and slashing the tires of Milton's car and smashing the windows, the jurors wanted to know
"what constitutes a lawful arrest?"

.
And her Witness was problematic!

If someone states that they wanted 911 called because they thought Crystal and the kids were in danger - why does Crystal tell the Cops to leave at the Door?

If her kids were even fighting with the Ex-Boyfriend, why does Crystal tell the Cops to leave - thereby, as her story goes, leaving the kids and her in Danger?

To me, it's pretty clear, the Truth hasn't come out yet as to what exactly was going on there. I know Milton was leaving her.

.

Edited by Mason, Dec 16 2010, 06:50 PM.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quasimodo

Quote:
 
http://www.durhamwonderland.blogspot.com/

[Update, Thurs., 10.17am: The Mangum case has gone to the jury. And here's a remarkable update from the twitter feed of H-S reporter Matthew Milliken, who covered the trial yesterday: "Jackie Wagstaff [a race-baiting former school board member, and outspoken Nifong supporter] overheard during recess: 'They are not understanding the nature of the black household.' Not sure if she's referring to [the racially-mixed] jury." Only in Durham could we get the insinuation that a mother burning clothes in a room near to where her children were sleeping is part of the "nature of the black household."]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · DUKE LACROSSE - Liestoppers · Next Topic »
Add Reply