Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Add Reply
N.C. A&T University...three years ago; Remember this...from school newspaper
Topic Started: Apr 19 2011, 01:47 PM (876 Views)
Joan Foster

The YARD

The A&T Register ncatregister.com Wednesday, April 16, 2008

Woman behind Duke lacrosse scandal speaks out

Accuser talks to Aggies about being a student again after controversy surrounding trial faded

Alexandria Harper
Contributor

It was called a scandal but made into mockery.

The Duke lacrosse case hit radio and television stations by storm in 2007. Reporters from media outlets around the country scrambled to provide day to-day updates on Crystal Gail Mangum, the accuser, and three Duke Lacrosse players; Reade Seligmann, Collin Finnerty and David Evans, the accused.

Mangum, a former exotic dancer and escort, accused these men of sexual assault in Mid-March of 2006.

The investigation dragged on for over a year and was finally dismissed by Attorney General Roy Cooper.

The case was never argued in court and Mangum has yet to have her say about what happened. She still believes she needs to set the record straight.

On Thursday, April 2, Mangum made a surprise visit to Crosby Hall. Her appearance was only made known to a few select students enrolled in Dr. Myra Shird’s Argumentation and Debate class.

Preparations for Mangum’s visit were ongoing all semester. Students researched details of the case but were never really sure if Mangum would actually appear.

As Mangum took her seat, silence overtook the classroom. Students, eager to ask questions, began organizing notes and uncapping pens to write down her responses.

The class was witnessing history as this was the first time Mangum addressed a live audience to tell her story.

Dressed in a beige blouse and black necklace, Mangum read a prepared statement. She gave an overview of her position and then opened for questions One of the first questions asked was how she got the job dancing for the Duke Lacrosse players that night.

Mangum said, “I worked for an escort service connected to the nightclub and was hired to dance at the party.” Once her involvement was made clear, another student asked where and how did the attack take place.

Mangum said, “She was sexual assaulted by three men from behind and then sodomized by what she believed to be a broom stick.”

James Blocker, a senior Liberal Studies major, touched on a very sensitive issue when he asked, “Was the attack racially motivated?”

Mangum responded, “I was sexually assaulted by three people and they used racial slurs.”

In the heat of discussion a student posed a hypothetical question.

One said, “46 out of the 47 Duke Lacrosse players were DNA tested for possible semen excretion into the accuser’s body

The 47th member was not tested because he was black. Is it possible this 47th member could be the missing link in this case?”

Mangum said, “Absolutely not, my attackers were white.”

The same student wanted to know what Mangum thought about the CBS interview of Kim Roberts done by the late Ed Bradley.

Roberts, a second dancer present at the party was asked of Mangum’s condition after the alleged sexual assault took place.

Roberts said, “She [Mangum] obviously wasn’t hurt, she was fine.”

The student went on further to ask Mangum, “Why would she say that.”

Mangum replied “I believe Kim Roberts was paid off to not say anything.”

As questions of intent and motive were answered students left the discussion feeling a bit unsure of what to believe. Mangum’s powerful in class testimony altered many minds.

Some undergraduates more skeptical of Mangum’s commentary and felt there was no substantive evidence to prove her story. All students did however agree that justice was not served.

Missing DNA evidence found throughout the house was ruled out before police properly evaluated it. Assumptions regarding both the lacrosse players and Mangum character distorted much of the facts.

District Attorney Mike Nifong was disbarred due to his mismanagement of the case. These missing pieces combined made for a nasty situation.

Mangum however is looking forward. The soon to be N.C. Central alum, is set to publish a book entitled “The Last Dance for Grace” and hopes to set the record straight.

Mangum said, “She is striving to get her PhD and to open a group home for sexually assaulted women.”

the Yard
Edited by Joan Foster, Apr 19 2011, 01:48 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
nyesq83
Member Avatar

Professor's class Argumentation:

Argumentation theory, or argumentation, is the interdisciplinary study of how humans should, can, and do reach conclusions through logical reasoning, that is, claims based, soundly or not, on premises. It includes the arts and sciences of civil debate, dialogue, conversation, and persuasion. It studies rules of inference, logic, and procedural rules in both artificial and real world settings.
Argumentation includes debate and negotiation which are concerned with reaching mutually acceptable conclusions. It also encompasses eristic dialog, the branch of social debate in which victory over an opponent is the primary goal. This art and science is often the means by which people protect their beliefs or self-interests in rational dialogue, in common parlance, and during the process of arguing.
Argumentation is used in law, for example in trials, in preparing an argument to be presented to a court, and in testing the validity of certain kinds of evidence. Also, argumentation scholars study the post hoc rationalizations by which organizational actors try to justify decisions they have made irrationally.
WIKIPEDIA
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Joan Foster

The Shird Preface

The preface to the Mangum Opus was penned by a North Carolina A&T professor named Myra Shird—perhaps best known on campus for abruptly resigning her department chairmanship in the middle of the semester last year. Shird’s preface is . . . eye-opening.

Shird reflects on her introduction to the case, and the negative reception from the media she claims serial fabricator Crystal Mangum received:

Public ridicule? Should I even know the victim’s name so early in the investigation? Aren’t their [sic] laws that protect the victim [sic]?

Shird appears unfamiliar with basic U.S. law: there are no “laws” dealing with topics such as knowing “the victim’s name so early in the investigation.” (A side note: most college professors know the difference between when to use “there” and when to use “their.”)

Shird continues,

I can only imagine that every word out of the accused mouths was orchestrated . . . On the other hand, there was no one “real” there for the accuser.

The “accused mouths”? What is she talking about? (This, again, is the writing of a college professor.) And the assertion “there was no one ‘real’ there for the accuser”? Did Mangum have “unreal” associates?

As has become customary with those associated with the Nifong/Mangum effort, Shird plays fast and loose with the facts. “The Friends of Duke,” writes she, “raised millions to assist the Duke players with their defense.”

More here:

http://durhamwonderland.blogspot.com/2008/10/shird-preface.html
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
cks
Member Avatar

It strikes me that one of the most important qualifications to be a defender of Crystal Mangum is to have no grasp of either rudimentary English grammar rules or to have learned how to spell.

:SarC: These are the reasons why those who contribute to this board fail to appreciate how difficult it is for the erstwhile exotic dancer, mother of the year, and scholar of Durham.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Joan Foster

cks
Apr 19 2011, 02:34 PM
It strikes me that one of the most important qualifications to be a defender of Crystal Mangum is to have no grasp of either rudimentary English grammar rules or to have learned how to spell.

:SarC: These are the reasons why those who contribute to this board fail to appreciate how difficult it is for the erstwhile exotic dancer, mother of the year, and scholar of Durham.
cks,

As I have told you MANY times...the multifunctional fractional expulsion of gaunt, often gauche didactic while sometimes spastic or spasmodic can only be appreciated by those with historic and histrionic yet improvident theoretic insight.



(How’d I do? Is Duke hiring?)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Acc Esq

This can help: http://www.elsewhere.org/pomo/
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
cks
Member Avatar

Joan Foster
Apr 19 2011, 02:59 PM
cks
Apr 19 2011, 02:34 PM
It strikes me that one of the most important qualifications to be a defender of Crystal Mangum is to have no grasp of either rudimentary English grammar rules or to have learned how to spell.

:SarC: These are the reasons why those who contribute to this board fail to appreciate how difficult it is for the erstwhile exotic dancer, mother of the year, and scholar of Durham.
cks,

As I have told you MANY times...the multifunctional fractional expulsion of gaunt, often gauche didactic while sometimes spastic or spasmodic can only be appreciated by those with historic and histrionic yet improvident theoretic insight.



(How’d I do? Is Duke hiring?)
You are getting there...need to work on the spelling though!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
cks
Member Avatar

Acc Esq
Apr 19 2011, 04:07 PM
Just reading the first sentence brought on a migraine! :uhoh:

Once again, further proof why I never was an English major.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Joan Foster

Alright, you two... I'll work at it. GEEESH...this is a tough crowd.

:roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao:

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
MikeZPU

Joan Foster
Apr 19 2011, 02:59 PM
cks,

As I have told you MANY times...the multifunctional fractional expulsion of gaunt, often gauche didactic while sometimes spastic or spasmodic can only be appreciated by those with historic and histrionic yet improvident theoretic insight.

(How’d I do? Is Duke hiring?)
If you'd be willing to offer a course on "Multifunctional Fractional Expulsion"
Duke will hire you with immediate tenure :)



Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

MikeZPU
Apr 19 2011, 06:43 PM
Joan Foster
Apr 19 2011, 02:59 PM
cks,

As I have told you MANY times...the multifunctional fractional expulsion of gaunt, often gauche didactic while sometimes spastic or spasmodic can only be appreciated by those with historic and histrionic yet improvident theoretic insight.

(How’d I do? Is Duke hiring?)
If you'd be willing to offer a course on "Multifunctional Fractional Expulsion"
Duke will hire you with immediate tenure :)



Actually, Duke may be more interested in "Multisexual Frequent Impulses".
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Duke parent 2004
Member Avatar

Obscurity and vagueness of expression are always and everywhere a very bad sign; for in ninety-nine cases out of a hundred they come from vagueness of thought, which again springs almost invariably from an original incongruity, inconsistency, and thus incorrectness of the thought itself. When a correct idea arises in the mind, it strives for distinctness and will not be long in reaching this; for what is clearly thought out easily finds its most appropriate expression. Whatever a man is capable of thinking can always be expressed in clear, intelligible, and unambiguous words. Those who construct difficult, obscure, involved, and ambiguous sentences certainly do not know what they want to say; on the contrary, they have of it only a dull consciousness that is still struggling for an idea.

Those words appeared for the first time more than 150 years ago in Arthur Schopenhauer’s essay “On Authorship and Style.” Schopenhauer was especially determined to deflate the academic reputations of three of the murkiest philosophers of his day—namely, Hegel, Fichte, and Schelling.

Clearly the academic obscurantists are still very much with us, but the Schopenhauers not nearly as conspicuous. Yet even today's plague of deconstructionists and “post-modern” literary critics, with their smug insistence on putting the word “truth” in quotation marks, cannot undermine the deep truth in Quintilian’s maxim: “A man will be the more obscure, the more worthless he is.”

:mede:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Joan Foster

Duke parent 2004
Apr 19 2011, 07:43 PM
Obscurity and vagueness of expression are always and everywhere a very bad sign; for in ninety-nine cases out of a hundred they come from vagueness of thought, which again springs almost invariably from an original incongruity, inconsistency, and thus incorrectness of the thought itself. When a correct idea arises in the mind, it strives for distinctness and will not be long in reaching this; for what is clearly thought out easily finds its most appropriate expression. Whatever a man is capable of thinking can always be expressed in clear, intelligible, and unambiguous words. Those who construct difficult, obscure, involved, and ambiguous sentences certainly do not know what they want to say; on the contrary, they have of it only a dull consciousness that is still struggling for an idea.

Those words appeared for the first time more than 150 years ago in Arthur Schopenhauer’s essay “On Authorship and Style.” Schopenhauer was especially determined to deflate the academic reputations of three of the murkiest philosophers of his day—namely, Hegel, Fichte, and Schelling.

Clearly the academic obscurantists are still very much with us, but the Schopenhauers not nearly as conspicuous. Yet even today's plague of deconstructionists and “post-modern” literary critics, with their smug insistence on putting the word “truth” in quotation marks, cannot undermine the deep truth in Quintilian’s maxim: “A man will be the more obscure, the more worthless he is.”

:mede:
Now that's a keeper, DP.

I'd love to print that up and slide it under quite a few faculty doors.

:bman:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
cks
Member Avatar

Joan Foster
Apr 19 2011, 07:49 PM
Duke parent 2004
Apr 19 2011, 07:43 PM
Obscurity and vagueness of expression are always and everywhere a very bad sign; for in ninety-nine cases out of a hundred they come from vagueness of thought, which again springs almost invariably from an original incongruity, inconsistency, and thus incorrectness of the thought itself. When a correct idea arises in the mind, it strives for distinctness and will not be long in reaching this; for what is clearly thought out easily finds its most appropriate expression. Whatever a man is capable of thinking can always be expressed in clear, intelligible, and unambiguous words. Those who construct difficult, obscure, involved, and ambiguous sentences certainly do not know what they want to say; on the contrary, they have of it only a dull consciousness that is still struggling for an idea.

Those words appeared for the first time more than 150 years ago in Arthur Schopenhauer’s essay “On Authorship and Style.” Schopenhauer was especially determined to deflate the academic reputations of three of the murkiest philosophers of his day—namely, Hegel, Fichte, and Schelling.

Clearly the academic obscurantists are still very much with us, but the Schopenhauers not nearly as conspicuous. Yet even today's plague of deconstructionists and “post-modern” literary critics, with their smug insistence on putting the word “truth” in quotation marks, cannot undermine the deep truth in Quintilian’s maxim: “A man will be the more obscure, the more worthless he is.”

:mede:
Now that's a keeper, DP.

I'd love to print that up and slide it under quite a few faculty doors.

:bman:
The sad fact, Joan, is that they would not understand what Schopenhauer said. It would be a waste of paper and effort.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kbp

Any record of what Crystal said to the "Argumentation and Debate class" might be of interest to a prosecutor. The string of false accusations seemed to have grown a little that day, judging from the very limited quotes we have from her.

Of course that starts with a prosecutor that is interested, for I doubt it has much value in the way of evidence.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
ZetaBoards gives you all the tools to create a successful discussion community.
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · DUKE LACROSSE - Liestoppers · Next Topic »
Add Reply