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 ... 381-400401-420421-440 ... 921-922 next last
To: gopheraj

Heads up:
Don't forget to write your local radio and tv talk show hosts about the case.

If they have not been following it except through the MSM,
most of them will have NO IDEA of the arrests taking place in Durham, the witness intimidation, the criminal oligarchy which runs Durham, etc. They will NEVER FIND OUT if they have only the MSM to rely on.

There are hundreds of these local hosts; and there are also hundreds of local opinion columnists in newspapers. Email a couple of them and tip them off to what's going on and where they can find out more about it.

(There will be no fire until somebody lights a match.)


401 posted on 08/18/2006 6:58:04 AM PDT by CondorFlight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 400 | View Replies]

To: abb

That's a good thing, of course, but I still shake my head at this:

"....District Attorney Mike Nifong as well as attorneys for the three defendants -- Collin Finnerty, Reade Seligmann and David Evans -- want the case to be designated as exceptional and to have one judge oversee the case...."

I know NC does it NC's way. But having one judge oversee a case does not seem "exceptional" to me.


402 posted on 08/18/2006 7:05:26 AM PDT by Protect the Bill of Rights
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 398 | View Replies]

To: Ken H
AFAIK, none of the details about the 60 Minutes story is confirmed. I think folks should keep their BS detectors turned on.

Exactly, I took that post copied from another site claiming the segment was in the can with a grain of a salt. For one thing this is a still developing story. For another, I can not imagine 60 minutes doing anything about the so called corruption in Durham. Durham is a Dim city, nobody cares about Durham and as corrupt as Durham might be, it is probably no more corrupt than a 100 other Dim run cities including much bigger ones that someone might care about. Put another way, the Mangum hoax story is interesting, Durham is not.
403 posted on 08/18/2006 7:39:07 AM PDT by JLS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 381 | View Replies]

To: JLS

This on another board.

"For the legal eagles on the board, does the judge review discovery in an effort to understand the legitimacy of charges? Or does a judge simply listen to the arguments of the two sides?

If a judge does review discovery, in this case some 2000 pages, can he/she render an opinion on the veracity of case before it goes to trial. Or, as a grand jury has seen fit to indict is the judge powerless?"

I say the judge can summarily dismiss the case. What say y'all?


404 posted on 08/18/2006 7:43:17 AM PDT by abb (The Dinosaur Media: A One-Way Medium in a Two-Way World)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 403 | View Replies]

To: abb

Maybe Duke could figure out not to throw its students under the bus this year and then the media would not view things at Duke as such a big story.


405 posted on 08/18/2006 7:48:30 AM PDT by JLS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 372 | View Replies]

To: JLS

Maybe they can do a story on how Duke Law school hosted a seminar for incoming freshmen law students with Darryl Hunt, who was wrong imprisoned for 20 years for rape, but cleared when DNA tests were done.

Strangely, NONE of those students or faculty hosting the event have since been bold enough--despite what they said at the time--to utter a peep about Duke students being CLEARED by DNA but still charged, right in their own front yard.


406 posted on 08/18/2006 7:51:28 AM PDT by CondorFlight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 405 | View Replies]

To: JLS; Ken H

BS detector always on.

It has to be, I am the mother of 3 sons.


407 posted on 08/18/2006 7:51:47 AM PDT by Protect the Bill of Rights
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 403 | View Replies]

To: abb


"I say the judge can summarily dismiss the case."

I would think he can quash the original warrants, which
were based on false info.

Quash the flawed (laughable) photo ID.

Dismiss on the basis of no evidence.

(Any of the above will be sufficient, I think.)

That's what any reasonable and fair minded judge, not bent on preserving a corrupt system, would do.

If the judge doesn't do these things, then he should face impeachment and be made to do a perp walk as an accomplice to all the vile doings in Durham.

If he isn't brave enough to do these things, then he should resign and get off the bench.

(JMHO, of course. . .)


408 posted on 08/18/2006 7:56:10 AM PDT by CondorFlight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 404 | View Replies]

To: abb

Is the judge a dem or a rep ????
Does anyone know ?


409 posted on 08/18/2006 7:56:15 AM PDT by DvdMom (Impeach Nifong -)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 398 | View Replies]

To: abb
We can turn this media navel-gazing to our benefit.

Well I noted last evenning on FNC that when various commentators discussed other media over reactions in relationship to the murder of Ramsey they mentioned Richard Jewell in the Atlanta bombings and some other situations but did NOT mention the Mangum hoax against three Duke lacrosse players.
410 posted on 08/18/2006 7:57:51 AM PDT by JLS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 390 | View Replies]

To: DvdMom

"Is the judge a dem or a rep ????"

Bayly in DC was a rep (with a PR making him sound like a cross between Solomon and St. Francis)

Didn't help much.

Corrupt politicians/judges come in all flavors.


411 posted on 08/18/2006 7:58:05 AM PDT by CondorFlight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 409 | View Replies]

To: JLS

See link @ 398. Which I've already email to the NandO's...


412 posted on 08/18/2006 8:00:37 AM PDT by abb (The Dinosaur Media: A One-Way Medium in a Two-Way World)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 410 | View Replies]

To: All

New information.

Single judge appointed to handle Duke lacrosse case
http://www.charlotte.com/mld/observer/news/local/15305522.htm


413 posted on 08/18/2006 8:03:10 AM PDT by abb (The Dinosaur Media: A One-Way Medium in a Two-Way World)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 412 | View Replies]

To: abb

Can the N&O not assign someone who is up on a story to cover the story. The schedule of NC v. Evans, Finnerty and Seligmann is now up in the air and the judge will not be assigned to it when it comes to trial but NOW. That is the whole point.


414 posted on 08/18/2006 8:03:32 AM PDT by JLS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 398 | View Replies]

To: JLS

I would hope so, JLS. BTW, Monday's hearing has been cancelled. See latest article...


415 posted on 08/18/2006 8:04:57 AM PDT by abb (The Dinosaur Media: A One-Way Medium in a Two-Way World)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 414 | View Replies]

To: Protect the Bill of Rights
I know NC does it NC's way. But having one judge oversee a case does not seem "exceptional" to me.

Yep, I think I type yesterday that it now would be handled like it would be every place else in the US.
416 posted on 08/18/2006 8:05:38 AM PDT by JLS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 402 | View Replies]

To: DvdMom

I'm guessing the judge is a demorat .

If the judge was a republican I'm sure it would be a major detail for the corrupt MSM


417 posted on 08/18/2006 8:08:44 AM PDT by DvdMom (Impeach Nifong -)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 409 | View Replies]

To: abb
One other thing about the latest JBR media scrum. Boulder's DA said yesterday that Karr should be, "presumed innocent." When have you ever heard a DA say such a thing?

The DA said that? My god, the guy is on tape saying he did it.

418 posted on 08/18/2006 8:18:09 AM PDT by pepperhead (Kennedy's float, Mary Jo's don't!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 393 | View Replies]

To: JLS

Go figure.

Of my 3 sons 2 were born in NC and one is (GASP!) a Yankee-born in Syracuse.

Don't want to upset other NC natives, but guess what 2 sons lack a bit in the common sense department? Of course, it could be my husband's gene pool. I guess I will never know, LOL!


419 posted on 08/18/2006 8:18:45 AM PDT by Protect the Bill of Rights
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 416 | View Replies]

To: abb

I don't think the new judge will review the evidence and make any judgement about the case. He is not the trier of facts.

But the defense via their motions will force him to review the evidence. The judge could throw out the indictments, I guess, since they were based on evidence collect through a defective warrant. Or the judge could throw out the IDs which are clearly defective and can not be fixed.

So to us nonlawyers it might look like the judge reviewed the evidence, but I think technically that will not be the case. But hopefully the motions will start to be heard.


420 posted on 08/18/2006 8:19:09 AM PDT by JLS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 404 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 381-400401-420421-440 ... 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