Posted on 02/20/2010 9:16:59 AM PST by Left Blue NJ for Red SC
Crystal Gale Mangum, progressive heroine and the accuser in the infamous Duke Lacrosse Rape Case, is in the news once again:
Durham police arrested Mangum for attempted murder, arson, and identity theft after responding to a domestic disturbance call: Durham police arrested Duke lacrosse accuser Crystal Gale Mangum, 33, late Wednesday after she allegedly assaulted her boyfriend, set his clothes on fire in a bathtub and threatened to stab him.Authorities charged her with attempted first-degree murder, five counts of arson, assault and battery, communicating threats, three counts of misdemeanor child abuse, injury to personal property, identity theft and resisting a public officer. …
Mangum is the author of the memoir “Last Dance for Grace.” She was a student at North Carolina Central University in 2006 and also worked as an exotic dancer when she performed at the now infamous Duke lacrosse party.
It was there, she claimed, that three white members of the team trapped her inside a bathroom and raped and sexually assaulted her.
That’s right. The darling of the race-baiters, like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, class-baiters and Feminists is cuckoo pants and criminal herself. Allegedly. (I’ll use allegedly; pity no one surrounding the Duke rape case hoax, including prosecutor Michael Nifong, gave the lacrosse players that same courtesy) We all knew she wasn’t the angelic victim the Left portrayed her to be. But, what’s worse, so did the Left.
You see, to the Left, the truth does not matter. What matters is their ultimate agenda and the narratives they have set – in stone – to further the same.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsrealblog.com ...
Those “poor kids” are already becoming the same kind of hood rat their mother is.
They just keep breeding meal tickets for welfare and other benefits. They get everything free. We pay. I’d rather support her in prison than in the enjoyment of her home and life.
YUCK! ;)
Mangum to appear on arson, assault charges
02.21.10
By JOHN McCANN and KEITH UPCHURCH
DURHAM — Crystal Mangum, who falsely accused three Duke University lacrosse players of rape in 2006, is due in Durham County District Court this morning to face multiple charges, including attempting to kill her boyfriend.
At today’s preliminary hearing, Mangum also may get a court-appointed attorney to represent her.
(snip)
Female version of Rodney King except it’s only a matter of time before she’s on a slab.
I don’t think anybody is suggesting that. The DA not making their case does not equate to a fabricated accusation.
“Updated: Within hours of this post, the Duke African & African American Studies Department pulled the ‘listening statement’ (.pdf) file off their website.”
Such gross hypocrisy. The fact that they still had the Listening statement up on the board shows just how far they’re going to teach anti-white racism in academia.
I fully understand the difference, but I would be hard pressed to put that difference into words that would be unambiguous and legally binding. My concern is simply this: Any attempt to spell out when the false-accusation card in is play would likely be either overly broad or unnecessarily restrictive. The overly broad situation would be worse - because some accusers who had a case would be caught up in the retribution.
I’m just being cautious.
Her cousin is a drag queen? Is she one?
She’s a man, baby.
I used to have some pictures. Calling Maggief!
“I’m just being cautious.”
Cautious? We pay legislators to write laws clearly. We manage to sort out first-degree murder from second-degree, voluntary manslaughter from involuntary, and so forth. The jury is the trier of fact. They determine what the facts are and whether or not that fact pattern supports the charges levied by the prosecutor.
We waste plenty of money, court time and investigative resources prosecuting these false accusation cases and defendants are forced to muster extremely expensive defenses. They may spend several years of their lives in fear and trepidation and even behind bars awaiting trial. A false allegation of a serious crime is a vicious, evil act and deserves a severe penalty both as punishment and as a deterrent. It is one of the vilest of crimes.
The Duke lacrosse case cost the three families a total of about $2,000,000 to defend, caused those boys and their families tremendous grief and anguish, and cost Duke University and the City of Durham millions in civil litigation and awards and the case against the city is still going on. The pig whore who started the whole thing walked off scot-free after the attorney general declared the boys innocent because NO CRIME OCCURRED. Mangum supposedly had mental issues so they didn’t pursue charges against her, but really the reason they didn’t was because she’s black and had been presented as a victim in the lying media for so long they were afraid blacks would riot in the streets if they charged her. The reason she made the story up in the first place was to keep from going to jail that night and to “get paid by the white boys.” The university, the city management, Durham Police Department, Mike Nifong, the media, academia, the sports media and all the black “anger” groups were in on it, including the NAACP, New Black Panthers, black churches, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and all the local black race baiters, whores and shit-stirrers. To this day, some refuse to admit they were wrong and, in the case of black “anger” groups, still insist this pig was raped by those “privileged white boys.” Some of the “privileged white boys” on the lacrosse team were the sons of firemen and blue collar families and were attending on scholarships and loans. The only “rape” was committed by the above-named groups and the victims were those three boys. There are hundreds, perhaps thousands, of such false accusations every year, many advanced by the Feds (think Scooter Libby), so the Duke case was no anomaly. It was so well known because it was a media magnet/blitz/circus because of the race angle pumped up by all the usual suspects named above through their narratives and agendas.
I’m just being succinct.
You have much more faith in the skill of lawmaking politicians than I do. I expect that any such law would fall under the “I can’t define it, but I know it when I see it” rule. Which puts the legal system aquarely under someone’s subjective thumb.
I fully understand that the Duke case was a travesty - a clear load of horse manure. But the “false accusation law” would need to rule in this clear violation, while erring on the side of caution - unless you propose to do away with the presumption of innocence?
Why don’t you give writing such a clean and clear law, just to show how easy it is? Remember, it’s only lives and reputations on the line.
Nobody said anything about doing away with the presumption of innocence......except perhaps you in your zeal to protect false accusers. Continuing to protect false accusers absolutely curtails the presumption of innocence for the falsely accused. It’s completely lopsided and half-baked. The falsely accused stand to lose everything they have, including their reputation and ability to make a living in the future as well as having to sell and/or mortgage everything they own to pay for a vigorous defense. What if they’re 60 years old and it’s too late for them to start over and make all that back again? And you’re suggesting someone who leaves this destruction in their wake be given a pass because we, the people, are too stupid to sort out what the law should be and when and how it should be enforced?
Why don’t we just do away with all criminal codes out of fear of “putting the legal system squarely under someone’s subjective thumb” or someone’s interpretation that criminal statutes are not clearly defined?
As for writing the law, I would define the crime in the exact legal terms needed as making an accusation to a law enforcement officer, including the prosecuting attorney of a district, a specific criminal act that did not occur. There should be more than one section, including misdemeanor status for a general false report (”I was robbed” when, in fact, no such robbery happened at all), felony staus when it’s done for financial reasons, e.g. insurance scams, and felony status WITH SERIOUS ENHANCEMENT when the perpetrator escalates the charge by identifying a particular suspect (”Joe Dokes, who works at Burger King on Main St., robbed me”) or from a photo array. This definition alone completely eliminates the problem of misidentification from the equation because the crime is defined as false accusation, not misidentification. If somebody really is raped or robbed and misidentifies the perpetrator from a photo array or thinks maybe it was the pizza delivery guy who came to their house three nights earlier that week (”The guy who robbed/raped me kind of looked like the guy who delivered our pizza last Tuesday night”), this hypothetical statute would never come into play at all.
There are already laws against falsely reporting a crime, but the punishment is very weak. They are low-level misdemeanors. If a falsely reported crime gets beyond the investigation phase and a suspect is named by the “victim”, there should be a severe penalty reflecting serious felony status. If the “suspect” is actually arrested before it’s discovered that it’s a false report and accusation, the “victim” should serve the maximum penalty attached to the crime charged against the “suspect.”
We take financial crimes very seriously in this country and manage to throw the the book at people who crookedly or corruptly impoverish their victims. We need to take the desecration of someone’s reputation, freedom, pursuit of happiness and threat of financial ruination through legal fees just as seriously as we do corrupt financial practices.
It ain’t rocket science.
Now you’re just acting stupid.
My point is that the legal definition of such an aggravated false accusation is not easily defined using English. Your faith in the ability of politicians to excel in the English language is astounding - and incredibly naive. As an example of my point, I cited the famous instance where a judge, in trying to define “pornography” said “I can’t define it, but I know it when I see it”.
The judicial system is very broken, including the power of corrupt or politically motivated indictments of “ham sandwiches” such as Tom Delay in Texas. And yet you feel it is very easy to write a clear and unambiguous law that cannot be used to feather some political DA’s nest, building a career by breaking people he or she finds convenient.
If you don’t believe that happens, you are hopeless.
The sad part is we actually agree on the need for the law - but you disagree that the law needs to err on the side of caution because lawmakers and law enforcers aren’t perfect. In your world, they must be.
How unimaginatively naive.
You are welcome to the last word. I’ll not reply again. In my judgment, there is no use in trying to explain these few facts to you.
Anyone with an open mind knew precious was lying within 2 weeks of her allegations. But, it was bigger than precious. It was about politics, race and gender. Everyone had a chance to bite the apple, even the drag queen.
Women do not lie about rape. Ask Nancy Grace and Georgia what's her name. A sex worker (mother, student, dancer) can be raped by a bunch of swaggering lacrosse players. I know because the N&O told me so. /s
A coach was fired. A lacrosse season canceled. Students were suspended after being hung out to dry by a university that valued being on the 'right' side of race and gender issues more than the future of three students who were being FRAMED by the entire system. An honest cop was targeted because he told the truth. Ed Bradley was vilified. Three young men faced 20 years in state prison because one DA pimped one skanky whore to an eager city.
No one had enough sense or courage to ask the $64,000,000 question: Why in the world would they even want to touch a skanky exotic dancer/ho with a tampon string hanging between her legs. There ain't enough beer in the world. And yet while Bernie Madoff will leave prison only for his grave, Nifong got one day in jail and precious wrote a book.
Come on, you know she can’t write.
LMAO!!!
Your thinking is a lot like that of a lefty who’s really a conservative who hasn’t yet been mugged.
Get charged with a serious false accusation of a crime that was never committed and see how your opinion works out for you then.
If that comes about, I hope you’re rich, very rich, but you seem too stupid to be rich, unless you inherited it.
Following your reasoning through its trajectory, there should be no criminal statutes, since they’re all subject to the same LE and prosecutorial abuse.
Ah, how I love the smell of anarchy in the morning.
Agree 100% with all you said. But tell it to MortMan who thinks our system is too fragile to handle statutes that would punish false accusers such as filthy whores like Mangum.
Any news on this latest case with her - arson, attempted murder, etc..?
MortMan..ping to 54 :-)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.