- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| Blog and Media Roundup - Thursday, April 21, 2011; News Roundup | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Apr 21 2011, 05:01 AM (1,139 Views) | |
| Walt-in-Durham | Apr 21 2011, 10:03 AM Post #16 |
|
nyesq83, I suspect this line of reasoning is evolved from the employment cases where courts tend to hold the employee handbook is not a part of the employment contract. Walt-in-Durham |
![]() |
|
| abb | Apr 21 2011, 10:56 AM Post #17 |
|
http://www.indyweek.com/indyweek/erick-daniels-denied-pardon/Content?oid=2412960 Erick Daniels denied pardon by Samiha Khanna Erick Daniels, left, was convicted of a crime he didn't commit. He is pictured here after being freed in 2008. File photo by D.L. Anderson Erick Daniels, left, was convicted of a crime he didn't commit. He is pictured here after being freed in 2008. Erick Daniels has been out of prison for two years, yet closure still seems out of reach. Daniels, 24, spent seven years in prison for a burglary and robbery he didn't commit, but this month the state denied his request for a pardon that could clear his name and make him eligible for compensation for the teenage years he lost behind bars. "I'm in shock," said Daniels, who is still living in Durham. The felony charges still show up on his record, he says, hindering efforts to land a job or get financial aid to continue his education. In court records, the offenses are listed as dismissed, but prospective employers still want an explanation as to how Daniels would even have been accused of a violent armed robbery, he said. "It's explaining someone else's mistake," Daniels said. "It's one of the most awkward things I go through, having to explain myself every time." Daniels was released from prison in 2008, when Durham Superior Court Judge Orlando Hudson found that Daniels' attorney failed to effectively represent him, even withholding evidence that could have freed him—the confession of another man who admitted to being the robber. Hudson's hearing also revealed that after Daniels' conviction, the former prosecutor who handled the case, Freda Black, knew about the other man's confession to the robbery but failed to further investigate. With those findings, Hudson dismissed the charges against Daniels and sent him home to be with his family. But Hudson's findings appear not to have persuaded powers with the N.C. Office of Executive Clemency, the office that grants pardons and commutes sentences in the state. Daniels learned of the outcome just last week, and only by chance. After a restless night, Daniels visited his attorney's office to check a state website that lists the names of people with pending pardon applications. After nearly a year of being on the list, Daniels no longer saw his name. Apparently, the state office had denied Daniels' pardon in February and sent a letter to his attorney, Durham lawyer Gladys Harris, but she hadn't received it. Harris suspects the letter was delivered to an office she had just left, and not to her new address. When she called the state office last week, Harris said she was informed that the pardon had been denied because those granting pardons from the state "do not disturb jury verdicts," Harris said. But according to Hudson's findings, the original trial was flawed by failures of Daniels' attorney, and the exclusion of pertinent evidence. The jury verdict was largely based on the testimony of the robbery victim, who picked Daniels' face, not out of a standard police lineup, but from a yearbook photo. "I just cannot believe that it was denied," Harris said. "I'm still not sure what the reason is." Harris said she was still awaiting the letter explaining the findings. The Independent Weekly made several efforts both this week and last week to reach representatives of the N.C. Office of Executive Clemency directly, through the N.C. Department of Correction and through the office of Gov. Bev Perdue, but the Indy's phone calls were not returned. Harris, the attorney, said the pardon denial can't be appealed, but she was told that if she submits new evidence to show why Daniels should receive a pardon, the office may review the case again. Daniels said he may pursue an expungement of his record, and he still intends to pursue a civil complaint against the City of Durham for the role of its employees in his wrongful conviction. No agreement has been reached and no lawsuit has been filed. Durham City Attorney Patrick Baker said the city has been communicating with Karen Daniel, Erick Daniels' mother, for several years. The city has no further comment, Baker said in an email Tuesday. |
![]() |
|
| Bill Anderson | Apr 21 2011, 11:28 AM Post #18 |
|
I just sent this email to Khanna: Ms. Khanna, Given your role in helping Mike Nifong try to frame people in the lacrosse case, why would you give a damn about innocence, anyway? You deliberately gave a false portrait of Crystal Mangum from the start, and you were nothing more than a mouthpiece for the local authorities. (So much for the idea that the media is a "watchdog" of government.) So, it would seem to me that you would be supporting the state in this latest caper. After all, a lot of people from Durham still claim that the lacrosse players are guilty, and that lack of evidence does not mean a crime did not take place. You endorsed that view yourself, so why do you suddenly turn adversarial toward the state? Could it be your political leanings have something to do with it? Indy Week tried desperately (like you at the N&O as well as the Herald-Sun) to keep the frame going. If I read things correctly, with you and your editors, guilt is a political not a factual construct. And, given that you support the party in power in North Carolina government, what is there not to like about the state's refusal to grant a pardon to an innocent man? I mean, is he really innocent? The state claimed he was guilty, and if your coverage of the Duke case is to be believed, the state can do magic, and the Durham DA's office is omniscient. Yeah, it even told us about a "magic towel" in the lacrosse case, and if there can be a magic towel, then what else is not to be believed from the prosecution? So, your story does not make sense. Yes, the man is innocent and, yes, he deserves a pardon and compensation, and yes, those who falsely imprisoned him should be punished. However, your own journalistic record leaves you morally incapable of writing what you have written. Sorry, but you already have proven that you believe facts don't matter when political considerations are taking place.
|
![]() |
|
| Quasimodo | Apr 21 2011, 12:31 PM Post #19 |
|
Rubbish. I'd sue the state, as the only way to force the bureaucrats to do something. (But I agree with Dr. Anderson that Khanna has no moral right to comment about any of this.) |
![]() |
|
| abb | Apr 21 2011, 12:35 PM Post #20 |
|
http://www.examiner.com/bible-verse-of-the-day-in-durham/crystal-mangum-getting-her-just-deserts Crystal Mangum getting her just deserts By April Banks, Durham Bible Verse of the Day Examiner April 21st, 2011 12:15 am ET Crystal Mangum, the Duke lacrosse players' rape accuser, has been charged with the murder of her live-in boyfriend, Reginald Daye. He died after being stabbed by Ms. Mangum. We don't have the full details surrounding the events that led to the stabbing, but people have already "rushed to judgment". From the numerous comments following the many online articles about this story, I've concluded that most people feel that Crystal is getting her just deserts. Readers are calling it karma. If you think the hatred abounded back during the rape case, just browse some of the recent comments regarding the new charges. Some people want her to get the electric chair, others want to be there when she gets the needle. Heck, some even want to give the injection. Wow! She has to be the most hated woman in America. I wouldn't want to be her. At the same time, I really feel sorry for her. Yes, I feel sorry for her. I'm sorry someone had to die at her hands. But a part of me can't help but believe that we drove her to this place. By we, I mean the media, the Durham community and legal system. I can't imagine what this woman's life has been like, living as the "false accuser". She knows the truth and has to carry that burden everyday of her life. I know some of you are thinking--what about the Duke players? What about how she ruined their lives? Let's deal with that. Exactly how have their lives been ruined? What lasting detrimental effects has this case had on them? How are they suffering? They were found not guilty--and by the Attorney General, for goodness sakes. There is absolutely nothing on their record. They were 100% cleared. They sued and got paid. Last I heard, they are getting ready to sue again--"profiting". Are they strapped with some unflattering label for life? Far as I can tell, they have moved on with their lives. Unfortunately, Crystal Mangum and Mike Nifong didn't fare as well. Mr. Nifong lost his livelihood and Crystal lost her birth name and it seems, any hope for a normal and peaceful life. No doubt, everywhere she goes, she has to fight to be seen as a person and not as the "false accuser". She probably has to constantly dispel negative perceptions of who she is or what she's like. I bet when she took that infamous stripping gig, she had no idea it would end up stripping her of her humanity--"piece of trash"; "animal"; "hood rat";"scum on the bottom of my shoe"; her civil rights--calling 911 and being arrested instead of protected or assisted; and her freedom. This whole situation is simply tragic. |
![]() |
|
| Concerned | Apr 21 2011, 01:00 PM Post #21 |
|
No, Sarah Palin is the most hated woman in America. She's even been blamed for Gabriel Giffords' shooting and called everything in the book. Do you feel sorry for Sarah, too, April? |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Apr 21 2011, 01:19 PM Post #22 |
|
Deleted User
|
According to April, people that commit crimes need to be pitied, not scorned. So just go your merry way, falsely accuse someone of rape and the world will beat a path to your door. Is this sick or what? Great article, Michael Gaynor. Our good friend, Wade Smith has bigger fish to fry at the moment trying to keep John pretty boy Edwards' ass out of jail. |
|
|
| nyesq83 | Apr 21 2011, 01:39 PM Post #23 |
|
"calling 911 and being arrested instead of protected or assisted" Please please please give me ONE instance where CRYSTAL called 911... It is always a third party or neighbor or her kids or a coworker, but SHE never calls 911. So much for our criminal justice major. SHE points the finger at others, after an event where she is the aggressor. It's like the Simpsons episode, when we witness Bart break all kinds of stuff on live TV, and when confronted, he says "I didn't do it" and it becomes his catch phrase. The writers chose the phrase "I didn't do it" because they wanted a "lousy" phrase "to point out how really crummy things can become really popular". It was also an intentional call back to the first season episode "Krusty Gets Busted" where it was a catchphrase of Krusty the Clown. Edited by nyesq83, Apr 21 2011, 02:04 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Walt-in-Durham | Apr 21 2011, 03:05 PM Post #24 |
|
I submitted the following to The Examiner, though it was not published: On the Daye killing, Crystal Mangum deserves the benefit of the presumption of innocence, thus, I will not comment on her latest charge. However, let me comment on your allegation that she and Mike Nifong suffered as a result of her false accusations. Crystal Mangum was not charged with filing a false police report, a crime. She was not imprisioned. She was, initially and long after it was obvious she was lying, believed by the police and prosecutors. It was not until an honest investigation was done and her multiple contradictory stories were compared with the circumstantial evidence that we started to doubt her. And doubt her we should as she told quite the tale, none of it true. Mike Nifong is another miscreant. He lied to the public about what happened. He, if you believe him, never read his own file, yet he made multiple public statements that sounded like he was very familiar with the facts of the case. Nifong lied to the court, not once but twice. Nifong was disbarred for violating his duty as a prosecutor and he was, properly jailed for lying to the court. He most assuredly got what he deserved. Walt-in-Durham |
![]() |
|
| abb | Apr 21 2011, 03:31 PM Post #25 |
|
http://falserapesociety.blogspot.com/2011/04/if-crystal-mangums-rape-lie-had-been.html Thursday, April 21, 2011 If Crystal Mangum's rape lie had been properly punished, Reginald Daye likely would be alive today Crystal Mangum was charged earlier this week in Durham with first-degree murder and two larceny charges in connection with the stabbing death of Reginald Daye. Mangum is best known for falsely accusing three Duke lacrosse players of rape in March 2006. The charges hung over the heads of the innocent young men until April 2007, when North Carolina's attorney general Roy Cooper declared them "innocent." Mangum previously was arrested in February 2010 on charges of attempted murder, arson and child abuse. She was convicted only of misdemeanor charges in connection with that incident and was sentenced to time served. Mangum had made false rape accusations similar to the Duke lacrosse allegations in 1996 that were never prosecuted. See here. Despite all this, incredibly, some still insist on calling her a victim. How many people must this woman destroy before she loses that label? Here's the reality: if Ms. Mangum had been properly punished for her rape lie in the Duke case, she likely would have been in prison at the time she stabbed Mr. Daye. Professor Alan Dershowitz once said this: “Rape is such a serious crime that deliberately bringing a false accusation of rape should be an equally serious crime and women are not being punished for those crimes. I believe that being falsely accused of rape is as traumatic as being raped.” Yet, women like Melissa McEwan, commenting not about Mangum but about the woman who was wrongly charged with filing a false rape report, wrote this "Well, what do you want the police to do—just let women who make false reports GET AWAY WITH IT?! Yes. That is exactly what I want." And Lisa Longstaff of Women Against Rape, and Dr. Kim McGregor, director of Rape Prevention Education, and many others, have made it clear they don't want rape liars charged. The evil attendant to that position is self-evident. Wouldn't it have been fitting to require those women to attend the viewing of Reginald Daye -- to see the sorrow on the faces of his family and friends, to learn about his life, his hopes, his dreams, his struggles? Because if false rape claims were treated the way the "equally serious crime" of rape is treated, Mr. Daye likely would be alive today. Posted by Archivist at Thursday, April 21, 2011 |
![]() |
|
| abb | Apr 21 2011, 03:32 PM Post #26 |
|
http://www.mrc.org/timeswatch/articles/2011/20110421025656.aspx Duke Lacrosse Accuser Charged With Murder, Makes B14; NYT Trumpeted Her Rape Hoax in 5,000-word Lead By: Clay Waters April 21, 2011 14:56 ET It was a tiny item -- a single brief at the bottom of page B14 of Tuesday's sports section, under Lacrosse: “Crystal Mangum, who falsely accused three Duke players of raping her in 2006, was charged with murder in the death of her boyfriend.” The man died two weeks after Mangum stabbed him, and Mangum has now been charged with murder. The Times may prefer to forget that name, but it was far more interested in Crystal Mangum back in 2006. More than any other media outlet, the Times trumpeted her rape accusations against three Duke lacrosse players, accusations that quickly fell apart in a mass of contradictions and shifting stories. Yet even as the case fell apart and other liberal media outlets were backing away, the Times issued a now-notorious, error-riddled 5,000-word lead story by Duff Wilson on August 25, 2006, concluding that there was enough evidence against the players for Michael Nifong, the soon-to-be-disgraced-and-jailed local prosecutor, to bring the case to trial: By disclosing pieces of evidence favorable to the defendants, the defense has created an image of a case heading for the rocks. But an examination of the entire 1,850 pages of evidence gathered by the prosecution in the four months after the accusation yields a more ambiguous picture. It shows that while there are big weaknesses in Mr. Nifong's case, there is also a body of evidence to support his decision to take the matter to a jury. Perhaps most atrocious was former columnist Selena Roberts, who made a habit of slurring the innocent Duke lacrosse players. Even after the players had been all but formally cleared of the sexual assault, she continued to blame white privilege: “Don't mess with Duke, though. To shine a light on its integrity has been treated by the irrational mighty as a threat to white privilege. Feel free to excoriate the African-American basketball stars and football behemoths for the misdeeds of all athletes, but lay off the lacrosse pipeline to Wall Street, excuse the khaki-pants crowd of SAT wonder kids.” Even one of the paper’s overly respectful public editors, Barney Calame, tore a few polite holes into his paper’s coverage in an April 2007 column after the players were officially declared innocent. But blogger KC Johnson, a history professor and expert on the case, lambasted the error-riddled article and Calame's half-defense of it: Calame, in short, appears unable or unwilling to consider how the Times' failure in the lacrosse case -- and having the thesis of a paper's major article publicly dismissed as untrue surely constitutes a failure -- was attributable to reporters and editors allowing their worldviews to distort the facts....Calame avoids mentioning that Wilson's article contained four factual errors -- each of which made Nifong's case appear stronger than it actually was. To date, the Times has left three of these errors entirely uncorrected, and the fourth corrected in a misleading fashion. The Times sorry coverage was a focus of much media debate. Another former Times public editor, Daniel Okrent, called the paper’s coverage “heartbreaking”: “I think The Times' coverage was heartbreaking. 'I understand why they jumped on the story when they did, but it showed everything that's wrong with American journalism.'" |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · DUKE LACROSSE - Liestoppers · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2







3:27 AM Jul 11