Reginald Daye died last night.

Crystal Mangum will face new charges today.

Years of sanctuary in the Church of Political Correctness, at the altar of White Guilt that entitles Black Denial, enabled this tragedy. There will be no introspection in the classes of Wahneema Lubiano today, or in Barry Saunders N&O column or in the pulpits of Durham’s Black community on Sunday. No op-ed will shriek out to Mangum’s handlers...”We Know You KNOW!”

Everything that happened to Sister Survivor is always somebody else's’ fault. Professor Lubiano’s silly word-soup prose is at least understandable to that degree.

She asked us years ago:

"What Does A Social Disaster Sound Like?"

Well, here’s a start.

If I lived near Durham, I would walk into Lubiano’s classroom today with the statement Mangum gave to Ben Himan ...her own description of her life as a 14 year old child in the bosom of Durham’s Black community.

“/28/06 - 0918

1.Called victim [Crystal Mangum] in reference to an earlier sexual assault that she reported at Creedmor police department. She stated that she was dating F_____ at the time.

2. She stated that she had ran away from home on previous times and that she had been found hiding at F____'s house after the police came with a search warrant.

3. She stated that she was used by F____ to sell drugs and take the money to him.

4. She stated that when F____ was not there some men would come over, L____, A_____ and S_____. She stated that she would have sex with them when Floyd was not around.

5. She stated later that the men paid F____ to come over and have sex with her.

6. She stated that one day F_____ confronted the victim about the men that were coming over and having sex with her. She stated that she denied it to him and then he brought the three men to the house.

7. She stated in front of her she asked them and they all said that they had been having sex with her. She stated that F____ grabbed her and they went into the bedroom where she stated three men Mr. F____, A____ and L____ “ran the train on her”

She stated she was very scared .

8, In her voice I could sense that she was becoming very emotional, she stated that she did tell some of her family members about it and that she went to Duke Hospital about a week after the incident. “

@@@@@@

This “autobiography” OF A 14 YEAR OLD CHILD...was, of course, available during the Lacrosse Hoax...but this story of the commandeering of a Black child drew no comment from Dick Brodhead. The abandonment of responsibility for this 14 year old by her parents and church and extended Black community...did not drive Professor Lubiano to abandon her own Thesaurus-thumping and go to print again. Nor would the plight of Mangum’s children as she escalated...move any of those in "Our Hearts World" to advocate for their safety.

No, but we did see an example of the enormous energy and passion expended by these folks on...

On a Hoax.

I would ask Lubiano who in the Black community of Durham was “listening” to this 14 year old child as Black men abused her and used her as a drug mule? Where were Crystal's parents, who were so moving in their media interviews when the accused victimizers were white? Where were the Reverends who thundered from their pulpits and marched in the streets and demanded a trial? Where were the Academic Listeners who are paid six-figures to pick at historical scabs?

And where has been their advocacy NOW for Crystal’s children?


"(We) know that the disaster didn’t begin on (April 13th) and won’t end with what the police say or the court decides. Like all disasters, this one has a history. "


Yes, the tragedy of this man’s murder has a “history”... right in Durham’s Black community, its churches, and among the Duke activists. It has a LOUD and VIVID and UNFORGETTABLE history.

Where are all of you when "Whitey" is not in the story? Why are you not out AMONG YOURSELVES...thundering for self-respect, responsibility, and accountability for your own actions and inactions? Why did you push into a Hoax and then leave the story when Mangum’s three children COULD NOT LEAVE?

Mangum, if victimized at 14...was victimized by members of the Black community and failed by members of the Black community. Her children have been victimized and failed by you too.

Mangum, if a paranoid liar at 14 was one again when she accused Collin, Reade and Dave. Many had this knowledge and hid it. You duped your own community. Therefore they and the Lacrosse team were then victimized and failed by you too.

These are YOUR moral failures.

Now Reginald Daye has died.

THIS IS A SOCIAL DISASTER ALL OF YOUR OWN.

In the word-soup of Lubiano’s prose, is there ever any reference to Black responsibility? Or would that jeopardize what appears to be the AA Studies core belief...the Plantation mentality that someone ELSE is responsible for YOU?
Is the issue that Black Academia cannot be introspective because that might be a slippery slope to being underfunded, or to being subjected to EQUAL academic workplace expectations? But, hey, the Gig pays well. The Tenured, but achievement-untroubled Aggrieved.

The Circus that convened to keep Sister Survivor up on the High Wire during the Lacrosse Hoax needs to be have their mouths and faces pushed into the Mirror of Accountability. They need to answer for a Black judge who pronounced Mangum...”a good Mother” and returned her to the street, untreated, to kill.

They need to search their souls about the death of Mr. Daye. One suspects though, that he will be as expendable as Mr. Elmostafa.

This is not our grandfathers’ sins we are talking about now. This is the type of Race Solidarity that excuses Mangum, as Jackie Wagstaff, Durham activist, did...as the inability of other races to understand “the Black household.”

How insulting that should be! But the Duke Listeners, so protective of the sensibilities of their minority students... let that type of ugly rhetoric slide. The “n-word” dirties the mouth it emanates from...but Wagstaffs “philosophy” demeans an entire race. ..and not a peep.

Such is the Mindset of the new purveyors of racism and sexism.They keep us divided so they do not have to provide accountability for those they abandon after the Pity Party. They keep us divided because it puts a buck in their pocket, or a vote after their name.

Like Nifong, they all used Mangum.

http://liestoppers.blogspot.com/2006/11/no-amanda-he-used-her.html

Time after time, her messes were cleaned up and she was deemed...too crazy to prosecute but not to have custody of her children. Too disoriented to be responsible but not to earn a MAGNA CUM LAUDE degree from NCCU?

This woman who spent long nights trolling motels, gyrating on poles till dawn was either genius enough to attend school every day with SUPERIOR excellence...or that degree is nothing more than a racial “high five” making meaningless all others that were truly EARNED at NCCU.


". . .We want the absence of terror. But we don’t really know what that means . . . We can’t think. That’s why we’re so silent; we can’t think about what’s on the other side of this. "

I’ll tell you...on the other side of this... were three innocent young children...sentenced by both stubborn race-Rah! Rah! support or Whitey-Absence apathy...to live their daily lives in real terror..not the “terror” of some Coed at Duke.

Where is are the voices that demanded “absence of terror” for Mangum’s children after her LAST knife-wielding..fire setting episode?

Or the absence of terror for Katie Rouse?

Why is no one LISTENING anymore?

Follow the money..the promotions...the self-interest.

Now a man has died.

Let’s keep the humanity of the victim in front of us, hectored Cathy Davidson...Listener-Apologist Extraordinaire.

Indeed let’s do.

His name was Reginald Daye.

His death is the culmination of a Hoax EVERY ONE of YOU Agenda-istas at Duke and in Durham...aided and abetted

....and then abandoned when it no longer worked for you.

YOUR swagger started long ago...and it has ended.... in a man's death and to your everlasting shame.

Did Duke Police Officers Concealed Exculpatory Evidence?

In the amended complaint filed by Durham attorney Robert Ekstrand he makes a serious accusation against the Duke PD as they followed the Chairman's Directive.

A. To cease all efforts to find evidence of the truth, particularly evidence that contradicted the accuser’s account;

B. To conceal evidence of Duke Police Officers’ prior investigative role in the investigation; pg 140

Following that direction Duke Police Officers "concealed their observations during their interactions with Mangum that tended to prove Mangum’s claim was a fraud"

C. Duke Police Officers Concealed Exculpatory Evidence by Fabricating False and Misleading Hospital “Witness Statements”

466. On or about March 27, 2006, Nifong directed the Duke Police Officers who interacted with Mangum to submit reports of those interactions to his assistant, Sheila Eason. In response, Duke Police Supervising Defendants directed those Duke Police Officers who interacted with or observed Mangum at the hospital to write—not reports—but instead what can only be described as “bystander witness statements” that deliberately concealed their exculpatory observations of Mangum during the early morning hours of March 14th.

467. As a result of The Duke Officers’ statements were all remarkably consistent in substance. They were identical in form. Each one was a one-page statement written on plain paper, and identically styled. The Duke Officers’ statements repeatedly refer to the investigation of Mangum’s claims as “the Durham Police investigation.” They also uniformly disavow any role whatsoever in an investigative capacity; describe their role in the investigation as the functional equivalent of a bystander witness. Among other things, the Duke Police Supervising Defendants directed the officers to:

A. Conceal the fact that the Duke Police had jurisdiction over the investigation;

B. Conceal the fact that the investigation was a Duke Police investigation, until Duke abdicated its jurisdictional responsibility to initiate and conclude an investigation of Mangum’s allegations;

C. Conceal their observations during their interactions with Mangum that tended to prove Mangum’s claim was a fraud;

D. Reveal observations of Mangum’ s behavior only to the extent that the observations tended to enhance the reliability of Mangum’s claim; and

E. Two officers who wrote these “witness statements” have since taken employment at other law enforcement agencies. Their accounts changed significantly when they left the Duke Police Department.

1. Officer Mazurek

468. In his March 29, 2006 “witness statement” as a Duke Police Officer, Mazurek wrote:

“On 03-14-06, I was the Officer in Charge at Duke Hospital. I was informed by security that... a male nurse was evaluating Ms. Mangum. When he tried to gather information about her injuries she started to cry and asked him to leave her alone.... Ms. Mangum ’s shirt appeared to be torn on the left shoulder.... [The Durham Officers] told me that this incident may have occurred at 610 N.
Buchanan involving several Duke Students. After my initial observation of Ms. Mangum I did not have any further contact with her.”

469. After obtaining employment elsewhere, Mazurek was free to reveal the exculpatory information he obtained at DUMC on March 14th, and he did. On November 2, 2006, Mazurek reported, among other things, his belief—formed at the time he observed Mangum—that Mangum was “faking” the whole thing.

2. Officer Falcon

470. In her March 28, 2006 “witness statement” regarding her observations of Mangum, Officer Falcon wrote that Mangum “was shaking, crying, and upset. ... She kept crying out to the male nurse and Durham Officers (in the doorway) that she was violated and raped and that her friend stole her money and left her at the event that she was working at.” Regarding her role in the investigation, Falcon wrote:

“I stood outside the ED Triage area as a Duke Representative, while Durham City proceeded with their investigation.... Not at any time did I direct any questions to Ms. Mangum concerning the investigation by Durham City PD. Not at any time was I a direct party to any investigation(s) of Durham City PD of this alleged incident, other than to assist the outside agency of Durham City PD.”

471. After obtaining employment elsewhere, Falcon was free to report any exculpatory information she obtained at DUMC on March 14th, and she did. On October 30, 2006, Falcon reported, among other things, that an unusual number of Duke Officers, even Major Schwab, were called in shortly after Mangum arrived at the E.D.; she thought it was odd that “all the supervisors met out on the loading and had a meeting.”

472. Further, Duke Police Supervising Defendants had required Falcon to conceal from her written “statement” her recollection that “a Durham Police Sergeant kept going in and out of Mangum’s room, saying ‘I have to conduct an investigation’ ... .” After some time passed, the Sergeant emerged from Mangum’s room, and “he said loudly so everyone around heard him, ‘I think she is lying!’”

3. Officer Day

473. Officer Day had already submitted a bona fide Duke Police Department report on March 14, 2006, before the Chairman’s Directive was issued transforming the Duke Police investigators into bystanders. Day’s original report is therefore not written on plain paper styled as a witness statement; it was written on a pre-printed Duke Police Department standard police report form, it contained a synopsis of much of the exculpatory evidence gathered by Durham Police and Duke Police on March 14th, and concluded that the felony investigation had been closed.

474. Because everything in Day’s report was already approved by the Day Chain of Command and was at odds with the directive to conceal exculpatory material, Duke Police did not submit his original report with the “bystander” statements. Instead, Duke Police sent a “Continuation Report” that the supervisors in the Day Chain of Command directed him to write. Day’s “Continuation” report states:

This narrative is a continuation to an operations report in reference to assisting Durham Police at 610 N. Buchanan Street [sic]. After all Duke Police officers cleared from 610 N. Buchanan Street [sic] I went to the Duke Emergency Department to meet with Lt. Best (watch commander for Duke Police). While standing at the emergency department entrance I overheard the District 2 Sergeant state that the victim (which [sic] was inside the ED) had changed her story several times, and that if charges were filed they would probably not exceed that of a misdemeanor.

In reference to the conversation with Durham Officers I did not speak directly with the victim or with an investigator, nor did I ask questions regarding the case. The information was second hand from the patrol Sergeant standing on the emergency room dock outside the ED."

475. Day’s “Continuation Report” deliberately impeaches his own contemporaneously written report of the events he observed that evening, including his synthesis of all the reports he received from the Durham Police Officers in the transition briefing at the E.D. in the early morning hours of March 14, 2006. The effect of Day’s Continuation Report was to nullify the evidentiary value of his report of the many immediate impressions of the Durham officers who interacted with Mangum throughout the evening and believed Mangum’s claims were a hoax.

The full amended complaint with embedded Video