Local News

Lacrosse accuser deemed competent for murder trial

Posted November 1, 2011

— The Durham woman who falsely accused three Duke University lacrosse players of rape in 2006 is competent to stand trial for murder, but a judge refused Tuesday to lower her bond before the trial.

Crystal Mangum, 32, is charged in the death of Reginald Daye, who was stabbed with a kitchen knife during an April 3 argument at his Durham apartment, police said.

Mangum's attorneys sought a mental evaluation in September to determine if she is competent to stand trial, and defense attorney Chris Shella said Tuesday that psychiatrists found that she was competent.

Shella asked that Mangum's bond be cut from $200,000 to $50,000, noting that her family and friends could put together that much to get her out of jail. Shella said Mangum could remain confined to a friend's home until trial.

Getting Mangum out of jail is the only way for her to see her children, Shella said. A court order in a child custody case ruled that the children couldn't be brought to the Durham County jail.

Prosecutors objected to lowering the bond, saying it was already smaller than those set in manslaughter cases, much less a murder case.

Shella tried to portray Mangum as the victim in the April argument, saying she had bruises when she was arrested. Prosecutors noted that Daye was stabbed in the chest.

Daye, 46, and Mangum had been dating for about a month at the time of his death, but his family members said they weren't a couple. They said Daye was only trying to help Mangum get back on her feet and had provided her a place to stay.

Mangum's bond was cut in June from $500,000 to $200,000, and Superior Court Judge Carl Fox said he was concerned that the bond is now low for a murder charge. So, he declined to reduce it further.

No trial date has been set, but Fox said the bond issue should be revisited in January.

In March 2006, Mangum claimed three white players on the Duke lacrosse team trapped her inside a bathroom at 610 N. Buchanan Blvd., where she was performing as a stripper at a team party, and raped and sexually assaulted her.

Her story about the incident was so inconsistent that state officials later declared the players innocent, saying there was no credible evidence against them.

Last December, she was convicted on several charges stemming from a domestic dispute with a former boyfriend.


This story is closed for comments.

Oldest First
View all
  • Mille_NC Nov 3, 2011

    First off it any of you are mothers then you should understand that those children should not have to suffer due to what their mother did, it is hurting them as well by keeping her from seeing them. I also agree with Pirate79 she does have a name and people should use it!

  • IAMAmerican Nov 3, 2011

    She has forfeited all rights by taking a life. She is the lowest form of life and hopefully her kids will learn to forget about the damage she's done to them and others. May you rot in Prison.

  • Scubagirl Nov 2, 2011

    She is where she needs to be, her children are also where they need to be.......away from her!!! Thankfully the judge did not lower her bail.

  • wildcat Nov 2, 2011


  • wildcat Nov 2, 2011

    She should be allowed to see her children. They know where she is and they too want too see their mother. The children do have that right, but its other adults that is keeping the children away from their mother. This will cause these children to grow up and be bitter and angry because they were not allowed to see their on bio mother. That is not right. I hope the people who has them and the law and of course the social services can actually sleep at night with not thought. I pray its eating them up. LET THE CHILDREN SEE THEIR MOTHER EVEN IF SHE IS IN JAIL. THEY KNOW THAT. THE MOTHER SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO SEE HER CHILDREN. WHAT IF THAT WAS YOU?

  • Wendellcatlover Nov 2, 2011

    What a travesty if the judge had lowered her bail so that she could get out "to see her children". Puhleaseeee!! Those children are much better off forgetting they ever knew this woman! Put them in a good, stable home with people who will love them and teach them right from wrong, which is, no doubt, something this woman is incapable of doing.

  • jelly bean Nov 1, 2011

    Competent now? Not when she accused? Our Attorney General has egg on his face for sure for no pursuing charges against her back then.

  • pwilliamson53 Nov 1, 2011

    This woman, doesn't deserve anything. She has cost this state a lot of money. Why should she get her bond reduced? How many times since the lacrosse players case has she been in trouble with the law? She doesn't deserve to be giving anymore breaks. Charge her, send her to jail and put her children in a good home to where they are not subject to anymore of this criminal acts. She's done her crime, now let her do her time.

  • Mr. D3 Nov 1, 2011

    If Jackson & Sharpton believe in this person so much why don't they kick down for her bail? Her attorney says the bond needs to lowered again because that much can't be raised, GOOD!

  • mfarmer1 Nov 1, 2011

    What a pillar of society