Intervening cause and Crystal Mangum.

Over at Sid's blog, a number of posters, well just two really, continue to misunderstand  and mis-apply the law. In fact, Sid is the worst of the bunch. I think a review of the case law is appropriate in this unhappy matter.

The general facts, most beneficial to the defendant are that Crystal Mangum got in an argument with Reginald Daye. During the course of that argument, Crystal armed herself with a steak knife and used it to stab Daye in the flank. Crystal made good her escape after stabbing Daye. Daye sought medical treatment from paramedics. Ultimately he ended up in Duke University Hospital and was operated on. Daye, was admitted in an intoxicated state, but the operation was initially thought successful. However, some days after the operation, Daye was assessed as in need of intubation. The initial intubation was esophageal and did not restore adequate air flow. Daye was re-intubated and this did restore airflow. After some time passed, Daye had no brain function and his family elected to remove him from life support. Thereafter he died.

Issue

When will an intervening act halt criminal liability?

Rule

A defendant will be held criminally responsible for second-degree murder if [her] act caused or directly contributed to the victim's death. State v. Jordan, 333 N.C. 431, 439, 426 S.E.2d 692, 697 (1993),  State v. Welch, 135 N.C. App. 499 at 503, 521 S.E.2d 266 at ___ (1999). To escape responsibility based on an intervening cause, the defendant must show the intervening cause was "the sole cause of death." Sate v. Holsclaw, 42 N.C. App. 696 at 699, 257 S.E.2d 650 at 652 (1979).

Application

In Welch, the court reasoned: "Defendant contends, based on the testimony of Dr. Stanton, that Lemmons' refusal to accept a blood transfusion was an independent and intervening cause of death, such as to cut off any responsibility defendant may have in the victim's death. However, it is clear from the evidence that Lemmons' act in declining a blood transfusion was not "the sole cause" of death." Id. Indeed, all of Lemmons' injuries resulted from the stabbing inflicted by defendant. Thus, but for defendant's act, Lemmons would not have been in need of a blood transfusion."

In Daye's case, Sid, not Crystal, contends that the esophageal intubation was the intervening cause of death, such as to cut off any responsibility Crystal may have in Daye's death. However, as in Welch, Daye would not have been in the hospital but for Crystal's stabbing of him. He would not have needed surgery. He would not have needed an intubation. Thus, as in Welch, but for the defendant's act, Daye would not have died.

Conclusion

The jury got it right. Daye's death was the result of Crystal's stabbing. Understand, Crystal's lawyers have grasped this since Dr. Roberts gave her report. That's why they refused to raise the issue at trial and they refused to raise the issue on appeal. 

Walt-in-Durham

Mangum appeal briefs are filed.

Readers may recall that on the night of April 2-3 2011, Crystal Gail Mangum stabbed the man she was living with. A few days later, Reginald Daye passed from this life as a result of Crystal's stab wound. She was indicted in April 2011 and after many machinations, went to trial in Superior Court on November 12, 2013. Trial lasted several days and a guilty verdict was finally returned on November 22, 2013. Judge Ridgeway sentenced Crystal to a term of not less than 170 months to not more than 216 months in the custody of the North Carolina Department of Corrections. Readers may also recall that it was Crystal Gail Mangum who falsely accused three men of a rape that never took place. Readers may also recall that Crystal Gail Mangum assaulted her previous live in boyfriend and set fire to his clothes and shoes.

After her conviction, Crystal filed the Record and her Brief with the N. C. Court of Appeals. In her brief, Crystal raises only one issue: WHETHER ADMISSION OF EVIDENCE THAT DEFENDANT CRYSTAL MANGUM ALLEGEDLY ATTEMPTED TO ASSAULT MILTON WALKER IN FEBRUARY 2010 WAS ERROR WHEN IT HAD NO PROBATIVE VALUE TO PROVE ANY
MATERIAL FACT OTHER THAN THE DEFENDANT'S BAD CHARACTER?

Much has been made by Sid Harr at the Justice4Nifong blog about defense counsel's date errors. In fact, Sid missed more errors of counsel when it comes to dates. For example, defense counsel alleges Crystal was indicted on March 18, 2011. Three weeks before the stabbing took place on the night of April 2-3 2011. After reading the defense brief, I must conclude that the drafter was none too careful with dates. None of these issues are fatal to the brief, they just go to a lack of careful drafting. All in all, the state's recitation of the facts in its Brief is more accurate.

The defense raised one issue and one only, that is the prior bad acts admitted under rule 404(b). Hereafter, I will refer to this as the 404(b) evidence. Specifically the defense complained about Milton Walker's testimony about Crystal's threat to harm him with a knife on the night she burned some of his clothes and shoes. Walker's testimony is particularly damaging as it shows a violent temper and a eerie similarity to what she did to Daye. There is no doubt this is why the state offered Walker's testimony. Walker, despite Crystal's attitude toward him, considers himself a friend and did not want to testify. None the less, Walker was compelled to do so and he gave some damning testimony. Testimony that was, for the most part, backed up by a couple of Durham police officers.

In her argument, Crystal's lawyer is really at her best. She does a good job of highlighting why 404(b) evidence is so difficult for a defendant. More importantly, Crystal's lawyer does a good job of hitting all the limits to 404(b) admissibility. What she does not do is argue to overturn the precedents that allow so much 404(b) evidence into the record in North Carolina.  Frankly, this is not the best set of facts to make that argument. The state, as expected, did a good job of countering the argument. After all, the state has the weight of precedent on its side. The one thing going for Crystal is the Court of Appeals review de novo 404(b) rulings by a trial court. De novo is a latin phrase that literally means from the beginning. In law, we understand it to mean the Court reviews this ruling as if the court below had never ruled at all. However, that does not end the 404(b) analysis.

Once the trail court, and the Court of Appeals determine if 404(b) evidence is admissible, then the court must turn to a Rule 403 analysis. Rule 403, in short, says that a court may not admit evidence even if otherwise admissible, if its probative value is outweighed by the prejudice it is likely to cause. However, Rule 403 review is not de novo, but for abuse of discretion. State v. Beckelheimer, 366 N.C. 127, 130, 726 S.E.2d 156, 159 (2012). As you can see, this rule is from the N.C. Supreme Court. Thus it cannot be overturned by the Court of Appeals, or even disregarded. The COA has to follow the Supreme Court's precedent. In an abuse of discretion analysis, the trial court will be affirmed if it has a reasonable basis for the ruling, any reasonable basis. I doubt the COA is going to overturn Judge Ridgeway on this issue.

Don't pay attention to Sid's effort to misdirect your attention. He claims that somehow Duke University had something to do with Daye's death. Crystal does not make that argument. the only argument she makes regards the 404(b) evidence. Sid is just attempting to keep his tiny band of followers distracted from what is really going on. A band that is both easily distracted and wants the distraction.

Of final note, Crystal does not raise any error regarding self-defense or her demonstrative evidence of the door which goes a long way toward the self-defense angle. It appears that she is pinning her whole hopes on 404(b). That's her strongest argument. Unfortunately, by not challenging the self-defense conviction as being unsupported by sufficient evidence, Crystal openly invites the court to engage in a harmless error analysis. That is exactly the opening the state jumped at in the later stages if their brief. Even if the COA is inclined to give her some relief on the 404(b) issue, they will most likely rule it harmless error.

Walt

Crystal Mangum gives an interview

WTVD reporter Tamara Gibbs interviewed Crystal Mangum. Crystal reveals that she has bought into Sid Harr's fantasy about the autopsy inconsistencies. That's called grasping at straws. Of course she's blaming her lawyer. We knew she'd do that. Every guilty person in prison blames their lawyer, for a while. Rehabilitation is a long process. Fortunately for Crystal, she has at least 12 years of rehabilitation left. Hopefully along the way she will make some changes in her life and start making better choices.


One other point from the interview, Crystal is amazed that the jury didn't believe her. Since at least the spring of 2006 she has had a credibility problem. Mostly brought on by her own words not matching actions that were recorded. Dear readers will recall that her initial story about the lacrosse hoax was less than fully believed by Kim Roberts Pittman who called it a "crock." Crystal herself had an impossible time telling the same story to police twice. To the point that police had to use four different lineups to try and get an identification of some suspects. But, those suspects turned out to have alibis or no match with the DNA. At her murder trial, Crystal is amazed the jury didn't believe her. In her interview, she does not recognize that she contradicted all the other witnesses. Now, it is possible that she told the truth and nine other people lied. But, with no physical evidence to back up her story and a definite interest on her part in telling a story different from what everyone else was saying, it is perfectly reasonable for a jury not to believe her.

Crystal Mangum legal research.

I was doing a bit of research on murder in the second degree and came across this from the general statutes: NCGS § 14-17(b)(1)The malice necessary to prove second degree murder is based on an inherently dangerous act or omission, done in such a reckless and wanton manner as to manifest a mind utterly without regard for human life and social duty and deliberately bent on mischief. Specifically: "... a mind utterly without regard for human life and social duty and deliberately bent on mischief." I think that phrase well describes Crystal's life up to this point. From stealing taxi cabs, to escorting, to telling lies about the lacrosse team, to setting Milton's clothes alight, to stabbing Reginald Daye, to flirting with the cops after she stabbed him, that is a mind utterly without regard for human life and social duty and deliberately bent on mischief. Walt-in-Durham

Crystal on cross examination

You have a problem with men?

Caught lying about when met Reginald Daye.

Caught Crystal in numerous inconsistencies about rooms.

Said three children and her moved into Reginald Daye's after knowing Reggie for three weeks.

Crystal denies Reginald asked for money back. Even when Officer Knight and the nephew said they heard Daye ask for his money back.

"So you are saying everyone else is not telling the truth."

It really comes down to either everyone is lying and she is telling the truth, or everyone else is telling the truth and she is lying.

"You [Crystal] took the money orders to give your kids money for their trip to the beach."  An alternate theory for the use of the checks.

Very effective cross examination about the request to Knight to take her away. Again, either Knight is lying or she is.

More effective cross - Crystal isn't sure which bathroom door was kicked in. Not sure which one she locked.

Crystal caught in so many inconsistencies. Look to hear about them on close.

Crystal Mangum testifies

Just now getting around to watching Crystal testify.

 Funniest line: "It was understood I had a lot of male friends."

Shiftiest look: too many to count. But, every time she gets to a difficult question, she looks away from the jury.

The police officer in the parking lot, there's something missing in her testimony. She goes up to him and asks the PO to take her to her "aunt's." For no reason. Hmmmm....there's something missing there.

Then she goes into him hitting her. She never looks at the jury. She does look at the ceiling.

She describes getting her face scratched, but where are the scratches?

The mattress got pulled off the bed? Yet, the police reports and photos have the mattress on the bed. Did Daye, wounded, put the mattress back?

First she says she's hiding behind the knives in the kitchen, then she says she was hiding behind the mattress. She says Daye was throwing knives. But, Daye was not a violent person. Cannot explain how knives got to living room.

Did not call for help.

Kicked in one door, but he entered through the other? Really? Two doors, one gets kicked in, but he uses the other? This dog just don't hunt.

Crystal admits cheating on Daye, many times.

Poked him in the side. Poked? That's what you call an admission against interest.

Can't remember times.

She does smile when she talks about James Williams, the jailer. James told her not to give him any head.

After stabbing Daye, she calls James Williams, her baby daddy and her friend Larry. Finally she called 9-1-1.

Admits to being afraid of the police.

Lied to the police about her address. Can't explain why. Says it was due to past traumatic events.

how afraid were you? In defenseive mode, just trying to survive, but did not intend to kill. That's a problem.

More on Dr. Clay Nichols

An anonymous poster at J4N wrote: "Meier is going to have to build one helluva case if he thinks he can overcome all the evidence presented by the state." I agree. However, Dr. Nichols being the good and even handed physician he is, did leave the defense an opening. He testified that the stab wound was front to back. If I was arguing this case for the defense, I'd be reasonably happy with Dr. Nichols this morning. My self-defense claim just got a lot better. Mind you, Nichols made the state's case and the defense still has to convince the jury that it was self-defense. But, Nichols gave them an opening. He also gave the state a lot of ammunition to counter-attack. Nichols gave an unobjected to opinion that Daye had defensive injuries on his left arm. If I was prosecuting, I would be planning on using that left arm one last time to protect against Crystal's claim of self-defense. Walt-in-Durham

Dr. Clay Nichols testifies

WRAL's continuing coverage of the Mangum murder trial had Dr. Clay Nichols' testimony today.

Nichols was a Medical Examiner with the North Carolina State Medical Examiner's Office. He performed the autopsy on the late Reginald Daye. The most important part of Nichols' testimony was on direct examination where he read his conclusion - Daye died as a result of a stab wound. That combined with Mangum's self defense posture proves the state's case. (She has admitted stabbing Daye.) Now Nichols has given evidence that the stab would caused Daye's untimely demise.

Dr. Nichols also identified, without objection, defensive wounds on Daye's left arm. This will figure in the state's closing argument, if the ADA is worth her law degree.

Daniel Meier, the defense counsel did a good job of cross examining Nichols. He pointed out the inconsistencies between Nichols' findings and the medical records. Specifically Meier pointed out the lack of report on the lung wound or the kidney wound. He brought up the issue of a chest tube. Nichols said very plainly that there were wounds that were sutured regardless of what the post operative report did not say. He also said there was no chest tube in the left side. All told, Nichols was very convincing in his presentation.

Now, the defense will have to bring an expert to attempt to refute Nichols' testimony. However, we know from the breach of attorney - client confidentiality by a supposed supporter of Mangum's that the defense expert agrees with Dr. Nichols. Thus, it will be very difficult for the defense to make a case for an intervening cause.

Crystal Mangum has anger management issues, who knew?

Yesterday's trial session featured Milton Walker testifying about Crystal threatening him with a knife, so says WRAL. The judge allowed the Walker testimony as the prior act could show motive and plan. Crystal needs help. The kind of help that only the Department of Corrections can provide in a custodial setting.

Mangum trial Thursday morning

WRAL is streaming the Mangum trial. So far Daniel Meier has given his opening statement. He is going the self defense route. A risky gambit, but self defense and arguing the facts don't fit the crime charged are the only options open to him. The first bombshell was one of the State's witnesses, Carlos Wilson, Daye's nephew. Wilson testified, before defense counsel could object, that Daye met Mangum while serving jury duty during her December 2010 trial for arson.

Mangum jury seated

A jury has been seated for the Crystal Mangum murder trial, so sayeth WRAL. Attorneys return tomorrow to pick two alternates. Irv Joiner a law professor at North Carolina Central University, said he doubts Mangum will get a fair trial, but he said it all comes down to who is picked for the jury, according to this story by WRAL. Irv owes everyone an apology for his injudicious comments. He should know better. Walt-in-Durham