[CondorFlight]

Stevensen sure goes as far as he can to slant the article to make it look like Elmo might really have been guilty, but just managed to get off.

He could just as easily have emphasized the unusual nature of the arrest, and then the fact that the first questions to Elmo were about the rape case.

Or he could have shown how the prosecution witness "erred" (to be charitable) about the car door being left open as Elmo "sped away";

Or he could have shown how the two police officers "erred" when they said that the taxi didn't stop at stop signs and raced away (the tape, alas, evidently shows differently)

He could have ended with a quote from the defense lawyer,
that Elmo was innocent in every detail.

Instead he ends with a quote from Ashley, who still believes in the case.

It's too bad the USSR is gone, because he could have applied for a great position with Pravda, the Soviet propaganda and truth-twisting organ, and given this as a great example of his abilities.

[abb]

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/30/arts/television/30media.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
Reflection and Red Faces After the Ramsey Storm

[Ready4Freddy]

Tough to say in this case, certainly looks like a decided lack of evidence (like another case we're discussing :). Guess they were never able to tie the driver to the shoplifter, meaning that they apparently didn't know each other

I noticed that the article said that the defense replayed the surveillance tape 'attempting' to show that the cabbie didn't speed, run stop signs, etc. Did he or didn't he?

Stevensen sure goes as far as he can to slant the article to make it look like Elmo might really have been guilty, but just managed to get off.

Dunno if this has ever been established beyond the cabbie's assertion, prolly didn't come out at trial. Were I a defense atty I certainly would not have brought it up - you just don't know how a local jury would react to that bit of irrelevant (to this case) information.

He could just as easily have emphasized the unusual nature of the arrest, and then the fact that the first questions to Elmo were about the rape case.

[Jezebelle]

Good post, Condor. Stevenson is a perfect example of the wishful thinking mentality driving this case, and the willingness to smear an innocent, disinterested bystander because serendipity puts his testimony squarely in the defense's corner.

The Elmo case really demonstrates the DPD's complete disregard for the truth. What makes no legal sense is that the DPD and the DA's office had access to that video tape, yet they get up on the stand and lie their asses off anyway. They had to know they were going to lose this case, so that leaves pure harrassment as the obvious motive for going forward with the case.