[writmeister]

I am not sure how this helps the prosecution. The cabdriver never saw the complainant. It seems like a stacking of inferences to get the result the journalist wants the readers to reach.

More importantly, if the cabdriver helps establish Reade Seligmann's alibi and/or Colin Finnerty's alibi holds, then what happens later is not that significant since the D.A. must prove that Seligmann and Finnerty (together with John Doe #3) sexually assaulted the complainant -- since she has made a 100% certainty identification of Seligmann and Finnerty. There is virtually no wiggle room for the D.A. to charge three other party-goers.

[snarkytart]

Agreed. The color of the car and the time of the second call
is really irrelevant. As long as Reade's cell record matches the taxi computerized log, and the receipts from the ATM and restaurant are timestamped accurately.
Then what difference does the second call to the house make. Reade's alibi is relying more on cell records and receipts than the word of the cabby. I am sure the cabby can add some interesting testimony about the behavior of RS in the cab etc, but the time line is laid out by a paper trail.

[snarkytart]

since she has made a 100% certainty identification of Seligmann and Finnerty. There is virtually no wiggle room for the D.A. to charge three other party-goers.

______________

YES!! SO TRUE!

I guess that is something the boneheads in the media always seem to forget as they try and twist the accusers story into fitting the facts of the case.