Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Add Reply
CRYSTAL MANGUM TRIAL; December 2010
Topic Started: Nov 29 2010, 12:59 PM (56,596 Views)
jmoo

http://www.newsobserver.com/2010/12/17/868180/crystal-mangum-verdict-may-be.html


Judge declares mistrial on Mangum's felony arson charge

By Jesse James DeConto - Staff writer

<snip>


Over the past 10 months, Peterson and others have complained about Mangum’s treatment, which included an attempted murder charge, $1 million bond, the 88 days in jail and a no-contact order with her children.

“There did seem to be a lot of severe charges for what the evidence showed,” said jury forewoman Shauna Mitchell.

The trial began with Jones warning Jackie Wagstaff, a controversial former city councilwoman and school board member who supports Mangum, not to interfere with the proceedings; she had exchanged hellos with a potential juror. And it ended with Wagstaff jailed for 10 days for contempt of court Friday after she said, “This is ridiculous,” as Jones was sending the jury back to deliberate. Mangum’s attorney, Mani Dexter, had repeatedly asked Jones to declare a mistrial because the jury was split on the arson charge.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mason
Member Avatar
Parts unknown
.
I'm appreciative of the thoughtful analysis (Thanks Walt, sceptical, and numerous others).

The Herald-Sun person did a good job tweeting to us also. I think Abb is warming up to him.

And for God's sake, someone get CKS some heat.



Eta: Thanks to those that braved the court proceedings!



Edited by Mason, Dec 17 2010, 08:55 PM.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jmoo

Well, evidently I was wrong....


From the N&O

The Durham County District Attorney’s office may or may not agree. Nine of 12 jurors thought Mangum was not guilty of first-degree arson, resulting in a hung jury and a mistrial. Prosecutor Mark McCullough said he’ll decide next month whether to retry her on that charge. In the meantime, Jones rewarded Mangum custody of her three children, which another judge had taken in August.



http://www.newsobserver.com/2010/12/17/868180/crystal-mangum-verdict-may-be.html
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mason
Member Avatar
Parts unknown
jmoo
Dec 17 2010, 08:54 PM
Well, evidently I was wrong....


From the N&O

The Durham County District Attorney’s office may or may not agree. Nine of 12 jurors thought Mangum was not guilty of first-degree arson, resulting in a hung jury and a mistrial. Prosecutor Mark McCullough said he’ll decide next month whether to retry her on that charge. In the meantime, Jones rewarded Mangum custody of her three children, which another judge had taken in August.



http://www.newsobserver.com/2010/12/17/868180/crystal-mangum-verdict-may-be.html
.
That's a new one on me. I thought the DSS investigation was a totally different track and that was handled in family court.

She gets convicted of contributing to the Delinquency but gets her kids right back tonight?

If this report is true, I have to question whether that Judge did see all that mugging and play acting and that Baliff wasn't in on it.

Why have DSS case handlers and evaluators if a Judge that's never seen her kids or been to the residence is going to rule on it without their input?

.
Edited by Mason, Dec 17 2010, 09:00 PM.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
~J~ is in Wonderland
Member Avatar
~J~ is in Wonderland
jmoo
Dec 17 2010, 08:54 PM
Well, evidently I was wrong....


From the N&O

The Durham County District Attorney’s office may or may not agree. Nine of 12 jurors thought Mangum was not guilty of first-degree arson, resulting in a hung jury and a mistrial. Prosecutor Mark McCullough said he’ll decide next month whether to retry her on that charge. In the meantime, Jones rewarded Mangum custody of her three children, which another judge had taken in August.



http://www.newsobserver.com/2010/12/17/868180/crystal-mangum-verdict-may-be.html
HUH?

Is this correct? Plus she got her kids back??
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mason
Member Avatar
Parts unknown
.
That Jury foreperson looked with disdain on one half of the courtroom crowd, even when they held a door for her or said Good Morning (remember the Jurors use the same entrances and metal detectors, etc.), but was real friendly with 3-4 of the Friends of Mangum.

The non-black ADA couldn't very well question prospective jurors aggressively in racial terms in front of the black judge; however, the Public Defender was unencumbered in a Durham court by going after white prospective jurors.

.

Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Kerri P.
Member Avatar

I fear for those kids being back in that nut jobs care. Durham is truely in Wonderland.
Edited by Kerri P., Dec 17 2010, 09:06 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
LaDukie

:thud:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kbp

cks
Dec 17 2010, 08:10 PM
Two technicians later and still no heat. The day began with my furnace working - a tech was scheduled for routine maintenance. He cleaned everything and changed the filter - and that is when my problems began. Sometimes I ruly believe it is best to leave well enough alone. The third tech has been here now for over an hour and the temp has only risen two degrees. I fear it is going to be a long cold night.
I have 'zone heating', so if one furnace goes out, the next helps to cover the loss. I'm not sure if it is a design for the layout or size of my house or some economical reason, but it has been handy in the past.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rusty Dog
Member Avatar

Well, do we trust the AP and the N&O? Too bad the twitterer stopped before the end.

Has he put anything up on the Herald Sun?

.

I thought the vote was heading for conviction, but I'm not sure that was said exactly. But if the vote was 7-5, 8-4, and then 9-3 for acquittal, I'm surprised the defense attorney didn't want to hold out for one more day. She was very anxious for a mistrial.

I will repeat, do we trust the AP and the N&O to get the details right?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
cks
Member Avatar

~J~ is in Wonderland
Dec 17 2010, 08:18 PM
cks
Dec 17 2010, 08:10 PM
Two technicians later and still no heat. The day began with my furnace working - a tech was scheduled for routine maintenance. He cleaned everything and changed the filter - and that is when my problems began. Sometimes I ruly believe it is best to leave well enough alone. The third tech has been here now for over an hour and the temp has only risen two degrees. I fear it is going to be a long cold night.
Tell him to check the line.
Remember I had the same problem this week.
2 differant repairmen -and it was down to 56 in my house.

Finally, he found the line had ice in it. It was frozen solid.
Third tech is the charm - thinks the problem is the filter (not the right size - need to have a special custom size) and that the blower is encrusted. They will come out on Tuesday and take blower apart (in the daylight) and clean it thoroughly. However, for now, heat is working again and emp is set a little higher so that house is finally warm. I am always chilled as it is so having the temp down to 62 was akin to being at the North Pole.
Temp is now at 70 so I am slowly thawing. As my children (all who live in the south) told me this evening, there is a reason why they gravitated to the warmer climes - even when the furnace fails, it is still livable.

WHat did warm my heart is that Ms. Wagstaff is behind bars.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kbp

cks
Dec 17 2010, 04:40 PM
Mason
Dec 17 2010, 04:37 PM
.
What If
I wanted to burn my girlfriend's bedroom (just her belongings in that room) and not hurt her - but I end up burning down the Apt. Complex and I didn't know her Cat was under the bed.

My intention was only to burn all her belongings.

No one would listen to that Defense for a minute.

.
I would since I subscribe to the mantra that the only good cat is a dead cat. (Sorry, feline lovers, I can't abide cats and they seem to love me - go figure). :laughin: :laughin:
My guess would have been that one or more of the three 'NG' votes felt that a fire in a tub would be somewhat contained.

Posted Image

OOPS! Wrong tub, but the idea is similar ...bottom and sides contained.

The loadS of clothes changes that theory in my mind, but maybe the jurors felt she wouldn't have known it would end up like it did

...or maybe those jurors were raised and educated to be fans for victims!
(you know I mention the tub theory because it is that little piece in the back of my mind that keeps telling me that I am not certain she knew it would burn the house down ...with her children in it!)


**************************
**************************


KIDS
If the child protective services had not gotten involved when the charges first came about, for the LE is supposed to call them when children at a crime scene are given to some person other than the parent being arrested, they will most likely never get involved.

They are guitly of not watching out for the children, and therfore, guilty of taking them later makes it obvious to the public they did not do their job earlier. D***ed if you do, D***ed if you don't situation, and it's not good PR now!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
cks
Member Avatar

okay - so now I am totally confused. If the vote was 9-3 in Mangum's favor, why would her attorney want a mistrial instead of her client declared not guilty? Second, how in God's name could Crystal who was convicted on the other charges get her kids back?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mason
Member Avatar
Parts unknown


“It’s a victory,” Peterson said of the judge and jury’s decisions.



Just read the narratives of Crystal's days (and nights) given by Crystal's Drivers in the Duke Lacrosse case. She is incapable of watching those kids. She was always dumping them on someone else. She's home for 4-5 hours a day, and then she's back at the Park getting high and then off to the Streets and Hotel rooms to 6:00 am and it starts all over again.

That why I said that it is the enablers that keep Crystal fat in her Street lifestyle.



Edited by Mason, Dec 17 2010, 09:24 PM.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mason
Member Avatar
Parts unknown
cks
Dec 17 2010, 09:13 PM
okay - so now I am totally confused. If the vote was 9-3 in Mangum's favor, why would her attorney want a mistrial instead of her client declared not guilty? Second, how in God's name could Crystal who was convicted on the other charges get her kids back?
.
Very strange, indeed. It's goes 8-4 then 9-3, you'd think the Harvard lawyer would want them to continue, but she's trying to shut down the show as fast as Possible.


:confus:
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Create a free forum in seconds.
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · DUKE LACROSSE - Liestoppers · Next Topic »
Add Reply