So, you are saying Elmo's attorneys subpoenaed them to be there - and then stood up twice in the courtroom and said to the Judge - WHY ARE THEY HERE? WHY ARE THEY HERE?
It was on the 6:00 am news today. ELMO's attorneys refuted the ADA assertion that this case has nothing to do with the Duke case by asking the Judge - why the detectives were there.
I believe he was referring to Clayton and Linwood. We know why Himan was there.
The assertion by the ADA that Elmo's case had nothing to do with the LAX case is laughable. I think the judge pretty much ignored the whole thing, dismissing the charges because the only physical evidence (the tape) was exculpatory. What a waste of time and transparently vindictive. If this case goes to trial, add witness intimidation to the long list of Nifong buffoonery to come out during testimony.
Before this is over, Nifong will end up on a defense witness list on the prosecutorial misconduct defense.
I found something on it in the paper:
(Linwood) "Wilson said HE ASKED the investigators to be in the courtroom since Loflin's motions mentioned them."
""Why are they here? Supposedly they know zero about Hecht's, so why are they here?" Loflin said"
WHO does Linwood work for?
Ok, then I guess Nifong has once again sunk even lower than I could imagine.
"Why are they here?" could have been asked in a sense of saying, "Ask yourself why these officers are here testifying. It's because this was a warrant used to try to intimidate Elmo into modifying his future testimony in the Duke case and they participated in it and made certain statements that revealed the true motive for the arrest, that's why they are here!" as a means of amplifying what they said.