| CRYSTAL MANGUM TRIAL; December 2010 | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Nov 29 2010, 12:59 PM (56,624 Views) | |
| MikeZPU | Dec 16 2010, 07:45 PM Post #661 |
|
Joan: you single-handedly re-instilled the Christmas Spirit into me ![]() You are exactly right. I find comfort in the idea of circulating that videotaped interrogation as far and wide and as often as we can -- rub it in their faces. On the day that NC AG Cooper stated that all of the evidence contradicted Mangum's story, and that her own stories were self-contradictory, we have Himan's detailed account of his interactions with Mangum that day. One thing Himan reported is that he asked Mangum if she ever thought about going back to school. And she responded "Every day." That means she was not attending school that semester, which was Spring Semester 2007. Now, if she wasn't attending in the Spring of 2007, we can be sure she wasn't attending in the Spring of 2006, at least not after March 2006. And I think we can surmise she was not attending NCCU during Fall 2006. So how the heck does Mangum graduate Magna Cum Laude in May 2008? Edited by MikeZPU, Dec 16 2010, 08:02 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Payback | Dec 16 2010, 07:45 PM Post #662 |
|
I had to be out 2 hours and am way way behind. Joan Foster says: "She is the burden to bear of the 88, and Brodhead, and the NCNAACP, and Durham's racist and progressive radicals for the rest of her life." Perfect. P. S. Joan again: "Crystal will be enrolled in some local Durham program from here to eternity. She may someday have more credits accrued than the Angry Studies faculty have papers published." This we can improve, for once: ". . . or someday may have more credits accrued than the Angry Studies faculty have papers announced as forthcoming." P.P.S. And MikeZPU, go guy go! Edited by Payback, Dec 16 2010, 07:51 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Mason | Dec 16 2010, 07:45 PM Post #663 |
|
Parts unknown
|
. I just don't think it's that simple. If they do look the other way this time, one has to wonder, how does one person get away with it so many times? Stealing a Car, Trying to Run over a Cop repeatedly, lying to every authority and agency in Durham all while costing taxpayers better than 6 figures. Working the streets during the Day and Hotel rooms at night. All these things this woman does are against the law. The Drug seeking Doctor shopping (Hospital shopping) is against the law. She openly drives without a license. When she grabs a woman by the hair and starts fighting in a Strip club - that is Assault - by the law. If she gets off of the only charge with any teeth, I think she's exempt from the law in Durham. . Edited by Mason, Dec 16 2010, 07:51 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Mason | Dec 16 2010, 07:57 PM Post #664 |
|
Parts unknown
|
. Someone explain to me how she threatens her Boyfriend in the presence of the Cops and her children and doesn't get charged with communicating threats? Crystal continually gets the benefit of the doubt because people impart pure motives to her actions - and she's black and some desperate men like her *** and ****. . . |
![]() |
|
| cks | Dec 16 2010, 07:58 PM Post #665 |
|
I doubt that there will be a guilty verdict as well. Crystal's enablers will paint this as a moral vindication and she (or rather her supporters will since the honors graduate student seems incapable of speaking) will use this to suggest or even outright claim that the only reason why the charges were brought in the first place was because the "Establishment" is against her - that the rich, white, athletic power makers are victimizing poor Crystal again just as they did lo those many (so it seems) years ago. And Crystal, without any meaningful long term help, will continue, as Joan so eloquently stated, as the poster child. |
![]() |
|
| Joan Foster | Dec 16 2010, 07:58 PM Post #666 |
|
Love it,my dear, dear Professor Payback! And Mike...I'm feeling we win either way.
|
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Dec 16 2010, 08:01 PM Post #667 |
|
Deleted User
|
Joan, you are correct on all points for the digestion by rational people. The problem is that we are not dealing with rational people, but agenda driven racists who now proclaim "we don't understand the black household". Excuse me, we don't understand that there is no furniture, that children eat take out food, that clothes are set on fire in bathrubs and when confronted by police criminals remain silent to the detriment of their children. Would Cowbell (the mayor) really want Durham blacks to be depicted this way. I am not disagreeing that Crystal proves every point we have ever made about her on this Board, but sadly that doesn't amount to "a hill of beans" in Durham. |
|
|
| Mason | Dec 16 2010, 08:02 PM Post #668 |
|
Parts unknown
|
. For that matter, how is it that Crystal hasn't been charged with Fraud and Income Tax evasion? She did walk into the Durham Social Services and ask for all kinds of money and compensation to house and feed her kids when the State had removed her kids and she was under court order mandating the kids could not live with her.
|
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Dec 16 2010, 08:06 PM Post #669 |
|
Deleted User
|
Is it possible that "income tax invasion" doesn't apply to those who don't pay taxes and are most probably among the many who received a check from the government because they are considered at the poverty level. Crystal's income is "cash". She has probably never seen the inside of a bank or a checkbook for that matter. Her transations are cash, including the paying of bills. She is not traceable. |
|
|
| ~J~ is in Wonderland | Dec 16 2010, 08:07 PM Post #670 |
|
~J~ is in Wonderland
|
[/b] Joan, I think I have to disagree with you one this statement. sorry The taxpayers of Durham work for CGM. Taxpayers have worked for her probably longer than anyone realizes. Edited by ~J~ is in Wonderland, Dec 16 2010, 08:08 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| cks | Dec 16 2010, 08:14 PM Post #671 |
|
Who has been taking care of her children these past several months? How does she afford the hair weaves, the clothes, the manicures (probably pedicures as well) and all the other accoutrements? Even more, how is maintaining all this and working on her masters (in criminal justice, none the less)? Perhaps the academic requirements for such a degree are not that onerous but I remember when I was in grad school that I spent many, many hours in the library and did not have time for extra-curricular activities, let alone take care of children. |
![]() |
|
| chatham | Dec 16 2010, 08:17 PM Post #672 |
|
Interesting. The clothes never really came into the arson charge other than the medium for burning the tub and walls. 1st degree arson in NC is burning the dwelling, not the material used to start the fire, clothes in this case.. The clothes were the means to destroy the plastic tub and scorch the wall paper off the walls. By definition, the condition of the bath tub and walls proved arson. Assuming they were old newspapers instead of clothes, the charge would be the same. It was not accidental. It was done on purpose and it burned the house that was occupied at the time. The closing argument from the defense was purely emotional arguments. Little damage done, sequestered to the bathroom only, kids were not hurt, other occupiers of the residence were unharmed, it was a small fire and the items that were burned were from the guy that beat up crystal. |
![]() |
|
| kbp | Dec 16 2010, 08:31 PM Post #673 |
|
That's what I keep thinking. I doubt she intended for the structure to burn, just the clothes. The fight was with the owner of the clothes. It will be a shame if the charges were designed for her to get off on all charges she could have faced. |
![]() |
|
| Mason | Dec 16 2010, 08:37 PM Post #674 |
|
Parts unknown
|
. You can do anything and get away with it - if people continually ascribe pure motives and goodwill to your intentions. Think about it. Crystal has made a living of it. From Professors, Cops, welfare agencies, Media, Judges, and on down the line. Think about it. You threaten and scare your family - and they call the Cops - if those Cops come in with the mindset that you are trying to hold your family together, you are going to skate. That's all that's happening here. . |
![]() |
|
| sceptical | Dec 16 2010, 08:44 PM Post #675 |
|
Who decided which charges to file against Crystal? Was it Tracey Cline-- Nifong's protege and back-up prosecutor for the false case against Reade. Cololin, and Dave? Why did they choose first degree arson, rather than second degree arson or burning property, which would have been easier to prove? Was this a result of incompetence (which has not been lacking from the DA's office), or was it a plan to "save' Crystal by over-charging her (they did drop the attempted murder charge)? During the lacrosse hoax, I expressed an opinion that a Durham jury would not convict and that a hung jury would have been the result if the case went to trial. However, I will have to revise that opinion if Crystal gets off with just misdemeanors tomorrow. The evidence seems clear to me-- Crystal intentionally lit a fire in the bathroom which damaged the house and endangered those present, including three children and two police officers. (Whether she wanted to damage the house is irrelevant morally and legally.) Sure sounds like arson to me. Edited by sceptical, Dec 16 2010, 08:46 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · DUKE LACROSSE - Liestoppers · Next Topic » |








3:32 AM Jul 11