| CRYSTAL MANGUM TRIAL; December 2010 | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Nov 29 2010, 12:59 PM (56,662 Views) | |
| LTC8K6 | Dec 3 2010, 07:31 AM Post #91 |
|
Assistant to The Devil Himself
|
Crystal sure seems to be charmed... |
![]() |
|
| Kerri P. | Dec 3 2010, 08:15 AM Post #92 |
|
I heard on the morning news that they're having a very hard time finding a jury for CGM. I guess that a lot of folks in Durham want to see her in prison after what she did to CRD. What happened to her being the darling of Durham? Edited by Kerri P., Dec 3 2010, 08:16 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| sceptical | Dec 3 2010, 08:27 AM Post #93 |
|
It goes both ways. Crystal has her supporters, especially in the black community, who might ignore the facts in this particular case involving arson etc. because it does not fit into their narrative of Crystal as a "victim" of society. Similarly, the prosecution, under that joke of a DA Tracey Cline, has decided to ignore Crystal's long history of lying by putting the lacrosse case off limits-- a blatant way to ignore the facts about Crystal's credibility. What prosecutor gives away the ability to impugn a witness's credibility? Incredible! |
![]() |
|
| Quasimodo | Dec 3 2010, 08:31 AM Post #94 |
|
This is the sort of thing the media ought to be reporting--and isn't. Remember how they reported on the smallest detail about the accused lax players--their homes, the bank their bail bond money was drawn from, etc.? Now: silence... Edited by Quasimodo, Dec 3 2010, 08:31 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Quasimodo | Dec 3 2010, 08:33 AM Post #95 |
|
A lot of people in the Durham establishment will be sleeping easier at night after hearing that. |
![]() |
|
| abb | Dec 3 2010, 08:33 AM Post #96 |
|
And where's Bo(o)b Ashley? |
![]() |
|
| Quasimodo | Dec 3 2010, 08:34 AM Post #97 |
|
Is she going to want a change of venue? (Sorry, I forgot those are not available in Durham--Durham problems need "a Durham solution", according to the NAACP.) |
![]() |
|
| abb | Dec 3 2010, 08:46 AM Post #98 |
|
http://www.newsobserver.com/2010/12/03/840060/state-wont-raise-lacrosse-matters.html#story_tab_comments#disqus_thread comments section |
![]() |
|
| Quasimodo | Dec 3 2010, 08:50 AM Post #99 |
|
Great-- maybe a member of the gang of 88 (or of like mind)? When was there a Duke committee to study the way the faculty overreacted and pilloried their own students? Or the effect of false charges on innocent students? Or on the targeting of Duke students by Durham police (more than 30 times the number of alcohol citations as received by NCCU students)? (Sorry--I forgot; Duke never formed any committees to study those aspects...) Edited by Quasimodo, Dec 3 2010, 08:54 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Walt-in-Durham | Dec 3 2010, 09:01 AM Post #100 |
|
The North Carolina Rules of Evidence prohibit the introduction of evidence of prior crimes to prove the character of a person to show that she acted in conformity therewith. Character evidence may, however, be admissible for other purposes, such as proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake, entrapment or accident. Ev. Rule 404(b). I think the newspaper report is incomplete about what the State agreed to. The only thing the ADA agreed to was that Rule 404(b) applies if Chrystal testifies in her own behalf. If she opens the door, the ADA can and will use her character to impeach her testimony. Walt-in-Durham |
![]() |
|
| ~J~ is in Wonderland | Dec 3 2010, 09:02 AM Post #101 |
|
~J~ is in Wonderland
|
We welcome your comments on this story, but please be civil. Do not use profanity, hate speech, threats, personal abuse, images, internet links or any device to draw undue attention. Read our full comment policy. Loading comments... Problems loading Disqus? Like Dislike * Community Disqus * About Disqus Glad you liked it. Would you like to share? Share No thanks Sharing this page ... Thanks! Close Add New Comment Required: Please login below to comment. * * * * * Post as … Showing 10 comments Sort by Subscribe by email Subscribe by RSS Real-time updating is enabled. (Pause) 0 new comments were just posted. Show Thanks for posting. Would you like to edit your profile? * RoroCA [Moderator] Today 06:50 AM Ms. Mangum seems to be about a low as an individual can be in life. Between the Lacrosse players and if I remember correctly another incident that happened when she was younger, who in their right mind could find any compassion for her. She brought extreme embrassment to our state and she allegedly did this crime. Lock her up and throw the key away. Flag touchofgrey and 3 more liked this Like Reply Reply * ma75unc [Moderator] Today 06:41 AM Why is this still news? The woman ruined the Duke Lacrosse Players Lives. She has a drug problem, is a prostitute, has custody of her children, she has a published biography, is mentally ill, and is a victim. Where are Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton now? She needs them......... Flag 3 people liked this. Like Reply Reply * Cicero01 [Moderator] Today 07:02 AM When "Friends of Crystal Mangum" asked why Mani Dexter never requested change in venue, she would not answer them nor her client Crystal Mangum. Flag 1 person liked this. Like Reply Reply * mrcrosby [Moderator] Today 07:40 AM in reply to Cicero01 P.S. I doubt thay Crystal Mangum has any friends and I also doubt that she has the smarts to ask a question like why the enue was not changed. She would hae to know what "venue" means, and I honestly doubt she does. Flag Like Reply Reply * mrcrosby [Moderator] Today 07:36 AM in reply to Cicero01 an attorney is not compelled to answer the questions that friends ask.. In fact, I would not even recognise that a question has been asked to me, if it were someone other than my client. It is no ones business how a defense is structured. As far as Mangum asking her attorney the question. Maybe Mani does not feel that Mangum has the intellect to deal with the answer Flag Like Reply Reply * touchofgrey [Moderator] 29 minutes ago This isn't news, just a waste of our taxpayer dollars. Pathetic. Flag Like Reply Reply * erinkellymatherly [Moderator] 47 minutes ago mrcrosby - I guess that's pretty close to using your real name if we assume that m and r are initials and crosby is the last name. I really do appreciate that you didn't simply hurl invective in your post. You're right, bringing up the Klan is my way of pointing out the racism in this case and the Duke Lacrosse case. Others may state their opinion so I feel I can state my opinion as well. In my opinion the kind of hateful rhetoric used on Ms. Mangum is, to a very great extent, based in racist thoughts and actions. Racists might hate based on race but they are not all ignorant. One thing some race haters have learned is that they can no longer use the N word or call for lynching someone like they did years ago. Today they have to be more careful so they use code words and phrases. I think it is important to call something by a name that doesn't hide what it really is. Referencing the Klan does this succinctly. There are some who think that simply referencing the Klan is a form of invective. I disagree. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck then... Steven Matherly Flag Like Reply Reply * erinkellymatherly [Moderator] Today 07:26 AM Rora CA and ma75unc The comments of RoraCA and ma75unc are examples of the kind of blind hatred that used to be reserved for the Klan and other hate groups. Now it seems it is mainstream to express these sorts of views - especially anonymously! Do your wives/husbands or parents know that you talk like this? If you are so sure of what you are saying why don't you use your own name on these posts. Steven Matherly Durham, NC PS: It sure would be nice to get some comments on what I have said here instead of simply insulting me - but that may be too much to ask. Flag Read more: http://www.newsobserver.com/2010/12/03/840060/state-wont-raise-lacrosse-matters.html#story_tab_comments#disqus_thread#ixzz173bc6atF |
![]() |
|
| ~J~ is in Wonderland | Dec 3 2010, 09:06 AM Post #102 |
|
~J~ is in Wonderland
|
[/b] I guess we know the door will be open then. She blames all of this on her fame on the frame. Thanks Walt! Edited by ~J~ is in Wonderland, Dec 3 2010, 09:07 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Mason | Dec 3 2010, 09:17 AM Post #103 |
|
Parts unknown
|
. Well, I think we can see where this is going, the Jury will have to believe Crystal's word over the Police testimony - or vice versa. So you have a dispute - Crystal says A, the reporting officers say B. The two stories are very different, no misunderstandings here, someone is lying. At that point, with the case hinging on Crystal's word, it would be nice to have Crystal answer about her criminal past and other items in evidence in the State's case file, including a compelling list that show she is simply unable to tell the truth. . |
![]() |
|
| Jack_Webb | Dec 3 2010, 10:40 AM Post #104 |
|
A prosecutor who wants to make his case disappear as fast as possible. |
![]() |
|
| MikeZPU | Dec 3 2010, 11:43 AM Post #105 |
|
Thanks Walt! And well put ~J~ !!!
|
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
![]() ZetaBoards gives you all the tools to create a successful discussion community. Learn More · Sign-up Now |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · DUKE LACROSSE - Liestoppers · Next Topic » |







3:33 AM Jul 11