Posted on 08/15/2006 2:41:50 PM PDT by abb
DURHAM, N.C. -- A cab driver who has supported an alibi offered by one of the three Duke lacrosse players charged with rape had his own court appearance Tuesday for a larceny charge.
Moezeldin Elmostafa, 37, appeared briefly before a Durham County District Court judge who set a trial date of Aug. 29. Prosecutors also changed the charge against Elmostafa to aiding and abetting misdemeanor larcency.
Elmostafa was arrested in May after he surfaced as a potential alibi witness for Reade Seligmann, one of three players charged with raping a woman at an off-campus party the night of March 13.
The 2003 warrant accused Elmostafa of stealing five purses worth about $250 from a Durham department store. Elmostafa denies the charge, and has said he helped store security locate a woman after he picked her up from the store and drove her home. The woman later pleaded guilty to larceny.
Durham prosecutors said in May the warrant for Elmostafa's arrest was discovered in a routine background check of witnesses in the Duke lacrosse case.
Mostafa has said Seligmann, of Essex Fells, N.J., called for a ride at 12:14 a.m. on March 14, and was picked up five minutes later. The defense has argued those times help establish that Seligmann left the party without having enough time to participate in the 30-minute assault described by the accuser. Seligmann's attorney has also presented cell phone, ATM and dorm keycard records to help establish that timeline.
(Excerpt) Read more at dwb.newsobserver.com ...
He seems to want to be seen as one of those touchy, feely men in touch with their sensitives selves.
Remember the story about his prosecution of a rapist and later the perp thanked him? According to Nifong it was because he treats all defendants with respect.
It would be interesting to look at his time in traffic court and see how the dismissed charges and probabtions compared.
No pics of the bathroom?
I am disappointed. ;-D
"she won't be terribly credible"
If this is a bench trial (misdemeanor?), she doesn't have to be credible; only the judge has to believe her, and (like the judge in DC ) his mind may already be made up--the driver is guilty.
So, no matter how many pretty and legal-sounding words he may couch it in, the fix will still be in.
The FBI should be on this by now--should have been in Durham 4 months ago. Where are they?
Do we know the judge in who heard the cabbie's case?
Sadly, I remember a few months ago AG Gonzales saying they preferred to let the Justice System run it's course before becoming involved.
I looked, could not find it.
Why does Bushfan come to mind---hope not.
I was thinking of ringing the bell to see if I could use it, but the tags on the door made me think no one was home.
:)
I am amazed no pics of the bathrooms, even taken through the windows, have not appeared on line. (HINT!) LOL
I am back in Portland now. Durham is a hot, humid memory at this point. I did get indoor pics of Cameron Indoor and the Dean Dome! LOL
"Sadly, I remember a few months ago AG Gonzales saying they preferred to let the Justice System run it's course before becoming involved."
Rot. Run it like it did in Scottsboro? Only an honorable judge saved a man's life at the end.
Run it's course like it did in the segregated south?
The Justice Dept. intervened all the time then.
Gonzales would be in Durham in a heartbeat holding a press conference if the KKK had been there threatening muslim defendants' lives.
I wouldn't let him get away with that dodge for a minute.
"I am amazed no pics of the bathroom"
If all the houses have the same diminsions, even the bathroom from a neighboring house would do. (HINT!)
Ms. Hawkins apparently has been quickly adjudicated. Here sentences are:
1. Sentence Begin Date: 07/21/2006 Projected Release Date: 09/12/2006 POSSESSING STOLEN GOODS
2. Sentence Begin Date: 09/12/2006 Projected Release Date: 12/25/2006 DRIV LICENSE REVOKED Consecutive to the sentence above.
3. Sentence Begin Date: 12/25/2006 Projected Release Date: 04/08/2007 POSSESSING STOLEN GOODS Consecutive to the two sentences above.
Conviction Date: 04/06/2006. I believe that the difference between her conviction and sentence beginning date is due to her being on probation and having it revoked.
Those sentences are cpnsecutive, not concurrent, so she didn't get any deal in that respect. Mostafa's trial date has been set for 8/29 I think it was. That means she's still in custody during that trial. Maybe Nifong promised her a modification of the other two sentences to concurrent if she testifies against Mostafa like a good little inmate.
Mostafa is entitled to a jury trial even in the People's Republic of Durham.
I don't know why the defense hasn't filed in fed court yet, except that it may be a timing issue pertaining to discovery and the filing of subsequent motions that should be exhausted on some issues before filing in fed court.
He was Master of the Plea Deals....
I can confirm that a local News Channel (ABC 11) reported at 11:00 pm EST that prosecutors have new Surveillance Video that prompted them to change the charges against Elmostafa.
My take:
Since the charges were DOWNGRADED (from misdemeanor Larceny to AIDING and ABETTING Misdemeanor Larcency) - does this mean that Prosecutors have surveillance video showing Hawkins stole the goods and Elmostafa had NOTHING TO DO WITH IT.
Is this the Media taking Nifong's statement about money being found consistent with the woman's story - and then running to print articles that $400.00 was found inside the residence on the bathroom floor?
I'm thinking the Prosecutor was forced to change the charges when the Department Store provided them with irrefutable evidence. They didn't want the Loss Prevention guy from Hechts running to the Media or selling a story.
It's a theory.
There is ample opportunity for the DA to provide favorable terms to Sally Hawkins. Does anyone here doubt that?
Any of those sentences can be shaved or be suspended. The possibilities are endless.
This woman has been arrested over 100 times, is that Right?
One FIVE minute meeting with Nifong or an ADA and we already know from Kim Roberts the agreement will be approved.
I find it hard to believe new video has surfaced.
Nifong is a proven liar.
It could be a lame attempt of a bluff.
Like another poster said earlier - what's a video going to show, other than the cabbie picking up the fare?
I tend to agree with posters who have compared this to other misleading statements from the DA's office about evidence in the Duke case.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.