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 ...
So Gottlieb, you say you didn't take any notes at the time. Is that so? - Defense attorney
Yes - Gottlieb
Isn't that convenient? - Defense attorney
It going to be interesting when defense attorneys challenge his memory on any number of issues.
Bissey hated the players.
At one point - when the intoxication issue came up - Bissey spoke out and said that the woman could NOT have been drunk when she arrived because he saw them arrive and walk from some distance - it was inconsistent with his Video testimony to Rita Cosby.
Bissey was never contacted by authorities. He went on shows far and wide for 10 days and then looked up a number and called the DPD and told them He wanted to make a statement.
Like the Cabbie, they weren't interested in what he had to say.
I've been pretty accurate to this point. I look for Kim, Bissey, Kroger Security Guard, SANE and one or two more to change their stories from their original statements when they show up in Court.
If it's a wash - that's a Victory for Nifong in court in front of a Durham Jury.
Lookie here:
from Gottlieb -
"She stated the victim from that point on never changed her statement for over the 6-7 hour time period they were together.”
This was on MARCH 21st. There was no questions about her changing her story - the story hadn't hit the news - it wasn't an issue. But, here Gottlieb seems to be addressing her inconsistent stories when that doesn't become an issue to well over a Month later.
There are advantages, apparently, to turning in your notes later -- MUCH LATER.
And you can edit it with those dramatic statements like tears pooled in her eyes and her face conveyed pain as she ambulated across the room.
We are talking about Durham jury here.
Can anything in Durham be considered normal?
The more you read Gottlieb's NOVEL, the worse it gets.
Now, Durham has more than it's share of crime - does anyone believe a Policemen trying to write while someone talked (trying to keep up), would write this :
The woman spoke for an hour. She talked about her life — joining the Navy and moving to California shortly after finishing high school, marrying a man 14 years her senior, becoming pregnant by a sailor, returning home to North Carolina and getting divorced — and gave a detailed account of the lacrosse party. “Tears ran down her face freely," the Sergeant wrote.
She's 27 and the NYT is telling us that Gottlieb's notes describe her talking about High School, previous marriages, a man 14 years her senior, becoming pregnant by a sailor, returning home, her divorce -- and he notes "Tears falling freely."
This is not writing from a busy police detective in a high crime area - this is a transcript from an Oprah interview !
This belies reality, I'm sorry. Count me out of the fantasy - NYT.
-
** JUXTAPOSE THIS **
Look at the contrasting treatment by the NYT.
First in regard to her having sex during her hotel visits with multiple paying clients:
"The woman denied engaging in sexual activity with those clients, and no evidence has been offered to contradict her."
Then FOUR PARAGRAPHS are written describing how she MAY have been drugged by the players and they print that the "Durham Police have speculated that the test might have found a date-rape drug."
WHY WASN'T THE DRUGGING HANDLED SIMILARLY ?
Instead of the Four paragraphs, they could've just wrote:
The players' lawyers say the woman was NOT drugged, and no evidence has been offered to contradict them.
But, they spend FOUR paragraphs discussing Drugging and the issues surrounding it.
NYT = Hatchet Job
Finnerty was NOT included in two Police lineups given prior to the well known 4/4 lineup.
IF GOTTLIEB NOTED ONE OF HER ATTACKERS WAS TALL and SKINNY, WHY WASN'T THE TALLEST SKINNY KID ON THE TEAM PUT IN EITHER OF THOSE LINEUPS ?
BUSTED !!!!
Re: NYT article
Question: When was the SANE report subpeonaed?
On March 21, a week after an African-American woman charged that she had been raped by three white Duke University lacrosse players, the police sergeant supervising the investigation met with the sexual-assault nurse who had examined the woman in the emergency room. The sergeant, Mark D. Gottlieb, reviewed the medical report, which did not say much: some swelling, no visible bruises.
But the sergeant’s case notes also recount what the nurse told him in response to his questions: that the woman appeared to be in so much pain that it took “an extended period of time” to examine her, and that the “blunt force trauma” seen in the examination “was consistent with the sexual assault that was alleged by the victim.”
//
Inconsistencies:
“The victim was at home alone with her two young children,” the sergeant wrote, noting she walked slowly and in obvious pain. “Her facial expressions conveyed her pain as she ambulated.” She sat so neither hip touched the sofa. “Anytime her bottom touched the sofa cushion while repositioning during our interview, she groaned and had a facial expression consistent with pain.”
During that interview, the woman, who is dark skinned, said bruises were beginning to show from the attack. A female officer took photographs and confirmed that “she had the onset of new bruises present,” Sergeant Gottlieb wrote. (The female officer’s report does not mention bruises.)
//
In Officer Himan’s handwritten notes, the woman described all three as chubby or heavy. Adam: “white male, short, red cheeks fluffy hair chubby face, brn.” Matt: “Heavy set short haircut 260-270.” Bret: “Chubby.” The descriptions in Sergeant Gottlieb’s notes are more detailed and correspond more closely to the men later arrested: Collin Finnerty, 20, a slender 6-foot-3 and 175 pounds with light hair; Mr. Evans, 23, 5-foot-10, 190 pounds and with dark hair; and Mr. Seligmann, 20, who is 6-foot-1 and 215 pounds with dark hair.
Sergeant Gottlieb wrote: “She described the three men as 1) W/M, young, blonde hair, baby faced, tall and lean, 2) W/M, medium height (5’8”+ with Himan’s build), dark hair medium build, and had red (rose colored) cheeks, and the third suspect as being a W/M, 6+ feet, large build with dark hair.”
//
Interesting: Drug dealer and runaway
She had filed the complaint when she was 18, telling the police in Creedmoor, N.C., that four years earlier, her then-boyfriend and two of his friends had raped her when she was a runaway and helping them sell drugs. She told the Durham police that a friend had encouraged her to report her secret so she could hold the men accountable and move on with her life.
y'all want to switch over to the new thread or stay with this one?
That's the whole thing right there. He's even described as being "baby-faced"!! That's the icing on the cake. As if that could be anyone other than Finnerty!! There's no one else on that team that is tall, lean, and baby-faced. And they never put him in a line-up? Come on.
That's the whole thing right there. He's even described as being "baby-faced"!! That's the icing on the cake. As if that could be anyone other than Finnerty!! There's no one else on that team that is tall, lean, and baby-faced. And they never put him in a line-up? Come on.
;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
Who is going to believe the LEAD detective and Supervisor has in his own notes of MARCH 16 - a description that fits Finnerty to a T - says Tall and Skinny -
BUT, they don't put Finnerty in any of the earlier lineups?
------ ----- ACTIONS SPEAK LOUDER THAN NOTES
Let's move over to the new thread. Link here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1689615/posts?page=31#31
Well said, and I would add that it says a lot about a man who is (supposedly) more concerned about some black voters getting hoodwinked in a PRIMARY for a little DA's race than he is about the possibility of three young men being sent to prison for something that never happened and is alleged by a felonious hooker-loser-mental case.
Further, what Michaels is emphasizing, probably unwittingly, is the racist aspect of the black Durhamites having voted for Nifong in the first place because he promised to prosecute three white boys for raping a black Durham girl. He completely refuses to lay any of the blame for this travesty on the black community, and I think they have a lot to answer for. A share of the guilt lies with them as well as with Nifong and a couple of wayward police detectives. Nobody talks about the "Dead man walking" remark made to Reade Seligman in court, nor the white Duke boy who was beaten unconscious at a hamburger stand by black NCCU boys, nor the drive-by threats to white Duke students by black NCCU students, nor Victoria Peterson's great big loud-mouthed race-baiting demands, racist pronouncements and threats, nor the so-called "peace marches" to the lax house which was really just harrassment from the town's black religious leadership, nor the statements from black Durhamites that trying and sentencing them may not be right but it'll make things even. They're all a bunch of reprehensible racists, and Cash Michael is doing nothing more than covering for black Durhamites by creating this strawman scenario in which Nifong somehow owes these innocent, duped people a trial, even though it would be a trial in search of a crime, thereby exonerating them of any hand in what transpired by detaching them from Nifong and the fact that they want(ed) a lynching of these white boys, again no matter whether they're guilty nor whether there was even a crime. I contend that is Michael's reason for this tack in the first place - cover for the black Durhamites who vigorously participated. He may think his sleight of hand isn't obvious, but it is.
Yep. I've been explaining this off and on for some time. Once Mangum became a rape victim, she didn't have to consent, even though she's got a probation order requiring her to consent to substance testing.
She's got a forced-consent probation order for drug testing on her shoulders. She may have been tested and those results are being held pursuant to her probation requirements and thus are not a part of the rape case, at least not at this time.
If some one is too far gone to care for him or herself, such as being passed out cold, the cops in most jurisdiction are required to take them in for liability reasons and because it's a (minor) public offense - public intoxication.
They aren't typed. They're handwritten. Why? Because nobody uses typewriters anymore and computers have an electronic date/time stamp.
He had no choice but to do the notes by hand.
How convenient.
Gottlieb doesn't know it yet, but he has a made a HUGE mistake by generating these convenient notes. The defense is going to eat him alive. My only question is what did they do to the nurse to get her to go along with Gottlieb's new claims, assuming for the moment that she will corroborate Gottlieb's notes with respect to the portion of the notes addressing these claimed "oral" conversations with her prior to the report being released?
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.