Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Trial date set for Duke lacrosse witness (DukeLax Cabbie to be Nifonged)
Raleigh News and Observer ^ | August 15, 2006 | Staff

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 ...


TOPICS: Chit/Chat
KEYWORDS: duke; dukelax; durham; lacrosse; nifong
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 281-300301-320321-340 ... 921-922 next last
To: old and cranky

I think we better quit before we get hunted down!


301 posted on 08/17/2006 12:46:52 AM PDT by Mike Nifong (Somebody Stop Me !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 296 | View Replies]

To: SarahUSC

It has to be a rubber stamp - how could this be turned down?

Nifong is proposing it along with the Defense.

We'll have to see how long it takes for the rubber stamp, but this has got to speed things up.

I'd like to see whatever it is that caused Nifong to give up so much - OR did a Judge like Titus tell Nifong he was inclined to rule against him on some of the major motions if he didn't sign on.

It has turned into quite the HOT POTATO, but Nifong still embraces the case and his methods it seems.


302 posted on 08/17/2006 12:52:30 AM PDT by Mike Nifong (Somebody Stop Me !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 300 | View Replies]

To: Mike Nifong

I think there was probably alot of behind the scenes pressure on Nifong to go along with this both from the defense and court officials. Titus is up for election in November so I doubt he wanted this case. And I think Nifong's buddy Stephens made it clear he didn't want it either. Like you said the whole case has become a hot potato. Maybe Nifong realized this was the best he could do.

As strange as it sounds going forward with the case is probably the easy road for Nifong now. If he drops it he'll have to admit he made a mistake and there will be a backlash from what supporters he has left. He'll also have to answer some tough questions about his tactics and about the fact that he brought the charges for political reasons. If he goes forward no matter what happens he can always say that he wanted to give the accuser her day in court blah blah blah, you know.... And I think this is a personal vendetta on his part to some extent and has been from day one.


303 posted on 08/17/2006 1:18:05 AM PDT by SarahUSC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 302 | View Replies]

To: JLS; maggief; Protect the Bill of Rights; pepperhead; abb; All; SarahUSC; old and cranky; ...


Let me offer this,

One would think that a non-Durham Judge would not be one's first choice for unprotected prosecution. I'm confident that an agreement did take place and Nifong has signs, symptoms, and injuries consistent with having his ass kicked. It seems this case is a Durham Problem that demands a Person (county) Solution!


304 posted on 08/17/2006 1:25:17 AM PDT by Mike Nifong (Somebody Stop Me !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 295 | View Replies]

To: All

http://www.heraldsun.com/durham/4-761776.html
Lacrosse rape case laywers, court OK judge

By John Stevenson : The Herald-Sun
jstevenson@heraldsun.com
Aug 16, 2006 : 7:16 pm ET

DURHAM -- Defense lawyers, District Attorney Mike Nifong and court administrators have settled on Osmond Smith as an ideal judge to take over all facets of the Duke University lacrosse rape case from here on out.

Smith's selection was agreed upon during an afternoon meeting in the Durham County Superior Court judges' chambers Tuesday, sources familiar with the discussions said Wednesday.

No one who attended was willing to discuss the meeting on the record.

Smith's name was sent for approval Wednesday to N.C. Supreme Court Chief Justice Sarah Parker, who must first decide whether the controversial lacrosse case is to be declared "exceptional." If so, Parker then would determine whether Smith is the right judge to shepherd the litigation through all proceedings, including a trial that is expected to occur next year.

It isn't known how quickly the chief justice will make a decision.

Meanwhile, a preliminary lacrosse hearing now scheduled for Monday might be put on hold until Parker weighs in, court officials said.

Smith is from Person County but rotates through various nearby counties every six months, as do all Superior Court judges. Attorneys and judicial colleagues describe him as a soft-spoken, highly competent, no-nonsense man without any apparent trace of arrogance or flamboyance in his demeanor.

Last year, Smith presided over the high-profile Raleigh trials of two brothers accused of killing a Marine Corps officer and a Chicago businessman during a football tailgate party at N.C. State University in 2004. Both suspects were convicted.

In the Duke case, three lacrosse players are charged with raping and sodomizing an exotic dancer during an off-campus party at 610 N. Buchanan Blvd. in mid-March.

Collin Finnerty, Reade Seligmann and David Evans are free under $100,000 bonds as they await trial.

The investigation attracted widespread media attention and created an avalanche of controversy, with many national television pundits and other critics complaining that Nifong rushed to obtain indictments without conducting an adequate investigation -- and without uncovering apparent flaws in the accuser's story.

If the case is declared "exceptional" by the state Supreme Court, it reportedly would be a first-ever designation of that kind for a criminal issue in Durham.

The designation would require one judge to handle every detail from now until the end of a trial.

With only one judge making all the decisions, consistency and efficiency would be improved, officials predict.

Because Superior Court judges rotate from county to county every six months, the lacrosse case already has had two judges for preliminary proceedings: Ron Stephens and Kenneth C. Titus.

Without the "exceptional" label, another judge would take over in January and presumably would conduct the trial.

Meanwhile, Titus has made it clear that some critical decisions should be made by the trial judge and not by him. But under the current rotation system, a trial judge wouldn't be here for nearly five more months.

An "exceptional" designation" would bypass the rotation pattern and put a hand-picked judge on the bench immediately.


http://www.heraldsun.com/opinion/hsletters/

Editorial missed point about write-in campaign

The "strange" district attorney's race described in an August 14 editorial can be better understood with a few more facts. However, before clarifying those facts, I must correct a misstatement contained in the editorial. I have not "joined a vocal chorus" that thinks the Duke lacrosse rape case is "flimsy." I have consistently said that I would be obliged to re-examine the entire case in order to be able to determine if I would try it or not.

I was correctly quoted as saying that I would not have mounted a write-in candidacy had County Commissioner Lewis Cheek decided to accept the position.

However, my decision was not based upon my predisposition to vote for Cheek, as might be inferred from the editorial, but was based upon concerns about the manner in which the DA's office has been run. These concerns deserve the critical scrutiny that a political campaign can provide. More specifically, voters deserve a campaign in which we discuss the issues, get to know the candidates and then make a choice.

When, for very understandable reasons, Cheek decided he would not accept the position, I decided to run and I believe this campaign will demonstrate that I am the best-qualified candidate for district attorney. The right to vote for the candidate of your choice to represent you in a public office is one of the most important and fundamental rights we have. I question how pleased we will be with ourselves and how we will be perceived if we ask the governor to intervene for us and select our DA. I believe that a DA, so selected, will not feel the same sense of moral obligation to the people, as a DA who is elected by the people.

If voters really want a different DA and greater respect for the criminal justice system in Durham, vote for .

STEVE MONKS
Durham
August 17, 2006

The revolving door

Durham Police Chief Steve Chalmers spoke truth this week about the revolving doors at the jail. Cops make arrests and criminals are out on bond before sundown.

Take the case of the unnamed 17-year-old reported on in the Tuesday paper. He beat up, imprisoned, kicked, then hit a 17-year-old girl in the face. He was arrested, now awaits bail.

Here's the history on this 17-year-old. He's a drug dealer. He was arrested last month for drug possession and is now back on the streets. I won't print the exact location (see the July police record) of his arrest, but it was at an event where there were 300-plus kids, ages 7-17.

He intended to sell drugs to these young kids. Thank God I intervened and had police escort him out. During the pat down, numerous pre-bagged drugs, ready for sell, were found on him. He was seconds away from selling to kids. He's never allowed back at our establishment.

Unfortunately, he's still a threat while he goes through the revolving Durham court system. He'll create more crimes. A 17-year-old with intent to sell is bad, but it's made worse that his intent was to sell drugs to 7-13 year-olds. In the court system it's no big deal. They turned him loose and he allegedly beat up a 17-year-old girl. What's it going to take to get him off the streets?

JERRY RAY
Durham
August 17, 2006


305 posted on 08/17/2006 2:39:35 AM PDT by abb (The Dinosaur Media: A One-Way Medium in a Two-Way World)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 304 | View Replies]

To: All

Star of a blogging drama (Ruth attacks the bloggers)
http://www.newsobserver.com/102/story/476025.html


306 posted on 08/17/2006 2:45:38 AM PDT by abb (The Dinosaur Media: A One-Way Medium in a Two-Way World)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 305 | View Replies]

To: abb

I really dislike Ruth. Her "We know you know" attack on the lacrosse players is enough to put her in a permanent Hall of Shame. And she can quote me on that.


307 posted on 08/17/2006 3:05:24 AM PDT by SarahUSC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 306 | View Replies]

To: abb

Ruth Sheehan still belives Nifong. Isn't she part and parcel of the media that blindly accepted that the AV was strangled and only a miracle and her great strength of will allowed her to break free and flee the house - lucky to be alive?

Isn't she part of that group that ran to print those stories and report on the air that $400.00 was found on the bathroom floor just as the woman had told police - after Nifong led them to believe that?

Has Ruth been paying attention for the last 5 months? Is she had, she'd be very leary of believing anything that Nifong or his "evil minions" offer up.


308 posted on 08/17/2006 3:19:57 AM PDT by Mike Nifong (Somebody Stop Me !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 306 | View Replies]

To: Ken H

Perhaps Mr. Bradley needs a few emails.


309 posted on 08/17/2006 5:16:42 AM PDT by maggief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 288 | View Replies]

To: Mike Nifong
The man who's DNA was found in the AV is due in Durham Criminal Court tomorrow.

Also, Kenneth McNeil (Crystal's ex) is due in court on August 24. He is also due in court on October 3.

http://www1.aoc.state.nc.us/www/servlet/calendars.Criminal.do?county=310&court=CR+&defendant=mcneil&start=0&navindex=0

310 posted on 08/17/2006 5:40:16 AM PDT by I want to know
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 280 | View Replies]

To: gopheraj

marky mark


311 posted on 08/17/2006 5:54:29 AM PDT by gopheraj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 310 | View Replies]

To: Protect the Bill of Rights
Asshole's answer? (Told you I was in a bad mood). The lesson learned was to cooperate with the police. Tell them everything. If you are sincere, sooner or later the cloud of suspicion will lift.

Yeah 10 years later and after your fn' death. I hope Nancy overdoses one night on those sleeping pills she must take to be able to sleep after sliming all the people she does.
312 posted on 08/17/2006 6:14:44 AM PDT by pepperhead (Kennedy's float, Mary Jo's don't!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 267 | View Replies]

To: Mike Nifong
If I'm wrong - I'll say so, but I can't help think that 60 minutes piece will be half fluff

I don't know, as much as CBS has been through in the last few years they might be gun shy. Maybe their lawyers will tell them they don't want to be sued by the Duke 3 and be careful on what they do. And at this point in time it is thought by most in the MSM that Nifong is full of it. They might just do the right thing here.

313 posted on 08/17/2006 6:21:54 AM PDT by pepperhead (Kennedy's float, Mary Jo's don't!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 275 | View Replies]

To: abb

Thank goodness for the bloggers! The irony of MS Sheehan's blog is everything she has written would never have come to light had she had her way, "We know you know"!

Imagine if we were left to rely on the drive by media on this case--the Laxers would be finished and Cash Michaels would be extolling the virtues of the pot bangers.

Ms. Sheehan is just angry because bloggers do a better job of investigating than her beloved newspaper.


314 posted on 08/17/2006 6:27:16 AM PDT by Neverforget01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 306 | View Replies]

To: pepperhead

Was it CBS that had the exclusive with Kathy Seligmann?


315 posted on 08/17/2006 6:28:49 AM PDT by Neverforget01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 313 | View Replies]

To: Neverforget01

Yes: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/06/22/national/main1740399.shtml


316 posted on 08/17/2006 6:35:31 AM PDT by GAgal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 315 | View Replies]

To: Neverforget01; Mike Nifong; abb
from the article in 305:

The investigation attracted widespread media attention and created an avalanche of controversy, with many national television pundits and other critics complaining that Nifong rushed to obtain indictments without conducting an adequate investigation -- and without uncovering apparent flaws in the accuser's story.

Is there a bigger hypocrite than this John Stevenson? He makes his living with words. I believe those words were chosen carefully. Did he agree with the pundits? Mmmm....maybe. Did he disagree with the pundits? Mmmmm...maybe. That sentence was designed not to piss anyone off.

If it were not for people like us who truly believed in their innocence these boys would not have a chance.

317 posted on 08/17/2006 6:56:25 AM PDT by Protect the Bill of Rights
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 314 | View Replies]

To: GAgal

Thank you GAgal- That article refers to the AV's computer too. We're still not sure why Nifong took it right?


318 posted on 08/17/2006 7:04:33 AM PDT by Neverforget01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 316 | View Replies]

To: Protect the Bill of Rights
If it were not for people like us who truly believed in their innocence these boys would not have a chance.

I honestly believe that. The pot bangers and the NBPP would have railroaded these kids. Nifong was counting on nailing these kids to get elected and Durham was with him because of town/gown issues. It was a slam dunk.

Nifong hadn't considered bloggers.

319 posted on 08/17/2006 7:08:34 AM PDT by Neverforget01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 317 | View Replies]

To: Neverforget01

"If it were not for people like us who truly believed in their innocence these boys would not have a chance."

Absolutely true. Durham operated in the dark and they could have continued that way, with nobody watching the judges' rulings or bringing the true facts out to light. The MSM would have reported only what they were spoonfed and what they were already programmed to believe anyway.

It's only the relentless spotlight of the Internet focusing on their every move that has made them run--caught like cockroaches in the beam.


320 posted on 08/17/2006 7:29:04 AM PDT by CondorFlight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 319 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 281-300301-320321-340 ... 921-922 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson