Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Cabbie who figured in (Duke) lacrosse case sues
Herald-Sun ^ | August 30, 2007 | John Stevenson

Posted on 08/30/2007 5:09:23 AM PDT by abb

DURHAM -- Durham cabbie Moezeldin Ahmad Elmostafa is suing a department store chain and a security guard over a shoplifting charge that figured heavily in the now-ended Duke lacrosse case.

As it turned out, Elmostafa beat the shoplifting rap and was known among lawyers as the "hero of the lacrosse case" for becoming a defense alibi witness and standing up to former District Attorney Mike Nifong and Nifong's then-investigator, Linwood Wilson.

Nifong recently resigned and was stripped of his law license for misconduct in the lacrosse scandal. Wilson also lost his job.

Elmostafa's lawsuit was drafted by lawyer Tom Loflin and filed in Durham County Superior Court just before the close of business Wednesday.

The named defendants are Hecht's Company Inc.; May Stores X Inc, with which Hecht's is now merged; and Jonathan Massey, a former Hecht's security guard who originated the shoplifting charge against Elmostafa at Northgate Mall.

Attempts to reach the corporate defendants for comment were unsuccessful Wednesday evening. Likewise, someone at Massey's house said he was working and wouldn't be home until after midnight.

Defense lawyers had accused Nifong of belatedly bringing the misdemeanor shoplifting charge against Elmostafa as a pressure tactic in the controversial lacrosse case.

The alleged shoplifting incident was in 2003, but Elmostafa wasn't formally accused until May of last year.

The charge came shortly after Elmostafa signed a sworn affidavit saying lacrosse suspect Reade Seligmann was in Elmostafa's taxi around the time an exotic dancer claimed she was raped by Seligmann and two others during a party at 610 N. Buchanan Blvd. in mid-March 2006.

Elmostafa said he drove Seligmann to a bank machine, a fast-food restaurant and a Duke dorm.

When the shoplifting incident came up in court a year ago this week, Elmostafa testified that he merely gave a cab ride to a woman who later pleaded guilty to stealing several handbags from the Hecht's store at Northgate Mall. He claimed he didn't know what the woman was up to and didn't aid or abet her thievery.

Elmostafa was acquitted.

Nifong denied there was any connection between the shoplifting and lacrosse cases.

But lawyer Loflin contended Nifong had used the shoplifting incident "to gain a tactical advantage over [Elmostafa], to try to pressure him into changing his evidence to favor the prosecution in the lacrosse case."

Massey, the former Hecht's security guard, was accused in Wednesday's lawsuit of obtaining the shoplifting warrant against Elmostafa "maliciously and without probable cause."

Massey knew the allegations he was making against Elmostafa were false but made them anyway, according to the suit.

The suit added that Massey's actions "were done willfully, wantonly, intentionally and with actual malice, or with reckless disregard and [indifference] as to the truth and consequences of said actions. ..."

Hecht's and May Stores are "vicariously liable" because Massey worked for them, the suit said.

The lawsuit seeks compensatory and punitive damages.

Rape charges against the lacrosse defendants -- Seligmann, Collin Finnerty and David Evans -- were dropped by Nifong in December after the accuser changed her story. All remaining felony charges were tossed in April by state Attorney General Roy Cooper, who declared the three men innocent and rebuked Nifong for prosecuting them in the first place.

Today, Nifong is scheduled to be the defendant in a contempt hearing that could bring him a 30-day jail term and a fine of up to $500, or both. He is accused of lying about DNA evidence favorable to Seligmann, Finnerty and Evans.

URL for this article: http://www.heraldsun.com/durham/4-876754.cfm


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: duke; dukelax; durham; nifong
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-72 next last
To: abb

So Nifong is guilty of two counts of false and malicious prosecution. Why he isn’t in jail tells me that our “justice” system is broken.


41 posted on 08/30/2007 8:13:23 AM PDT by Leftism is Mentally Deranged
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrEdd

I went to the site you referenced. it reinforces, not alters, the points I made above.

The store brought the facts about the cabbie to the prosecutor/police LONG BEFORE the Duke incident with the stripper. In fact, the Statute of Limitations is even alleged to have run out.

What Nifong edid was go back and find the stale/old allegations, unrelated in an way to the Duke stripper incident, and then brought these stale charges against the cabbie, in obvious retaliation for the cabbie assisting the accused student in exonerating himself.

So — my point — what did HECHTS do wrong here? They weren’t colluding or assisting Nifong’s wrongdoing.

Can you show me where Hechts has dirty hands in this?


42 posted on 08/30/2007 8:19:14 AM PDT by WL-law
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Leftism is Mentally Deranged

His hearing is taking place right now on CourtTV. So maybe he will be soon. We can only hope.


43 posted on 08/30/2007 8:19:30 AM PDT by Sue Perkick (And I hope that what I’ve done here today doesn’t force you to have a negative opinion of me….)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: WL-law
The warrant appears to have been amended at the time of Elmo's actual arrest - long after the original charges were resolved. Hecht's security employee did the amending.

No tears for Hecht's.

44 posted on 08/30/2007 8:23:37 AM PDT by MrEdd (Keeping my foot on the necks of liberals since 1980.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: WL-law
Yeh, I'm not following the logic here either. This was an outstanding warrant/accusation from 2003 or 2004, not something filed at the request of Nifong or during the timeframe of the LAX "scandal".

I also wonder if he's past the timeframe in which he could have sued Hechts anyway. This is at least three years old.
45 posted on 08/30/2007 8:32:07 AM PDT by NorthFlaRebel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: NorthFlaRebel
the time for statute of limitations didn't start running until the warrant was closed - after Elmo's trial. Elmo is comfortably in statute.
46 posted on 08/30/2007 8:35:56 AM PDT by MrEdd (Keeping my foot on the necks of liberals since 1980.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Dudoight

This is beyond belief! They tried to intimidate the cab driver by a false charge to get him to retract his witness statement?


IIRC the cab driver is a LEGAL immigrant and they threatened deportation.


47 posted on 08/30/2007 8:36:47 AM PDT by Grizzled Bear ("Does not play well with others.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: MrEdd

Maybe someone from the DA’s office approached the security guard at the height of the rape situation and asked him to help revive the shoplifting charge. It’s obviously not out of the realm of something Nifong would do.


48 posted on 08/30/2007 8:38:29 AM PDT by Tex Pete
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: MrEdd

I still think he has a tough road ahead tying Hecht’s to this. The security guard seems to have done this, on his own accord, well after the shoplifting incident had been resolved in court. If he ammended his statement, and lied on the witness stand(which it appears he did), I don’t see how this is going to make Hecht’s liable. His employment does not matter if he perjured himself on the stand.


49 posted on 08/30/2007 8:40:19 AM PDT by NorthFlaRebel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: abb

Oh you have GOT to be kidding me... Nifong is like the gift that keeps on giving...


50 posted on 08/30/2007 8:43:35 AM PDT by John123 ("What good fortune for the governments that the people do not think" -- Adolf Hitler)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: abb

Thanks for the ping!

Just found this news....

Duke Lacrosse Prosecutor Pleads Innocent
http://apnews.excite.com/article/20070830/D8RBDU380.html


51 posted on 08/30/2007 8:53:22 AM PDT by toldyou
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: toldyou
live coverage of Fong trial

http://www.nbc17.com/midatlantic/ncn/news/live_video.html

52 posted on 08/30/2007 8:58:22 AM PDT by MrEdd (Keeping my foot on the necks of liberals since 1980.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: MrEdd

Thanks so much! I had no idea it was on. I just switched to CourtTV and it’s there, too.

Do you have any idea how long it will last? Darn, I have an appointment for a haircut and have to leave now. ARGH! Of all days...

Thanks again!


53 posted on 08/30/2007 9:16:22 AM PDT by toldyou
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: toldyou

scheduled for 2 days


54 posted on 08/30/2007 9:25:20 AM PDT by MrEdd (Keeping my foot on the necks of liberals since 1980.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: MrEdd

something funny is going on — a mike is open to a private conversation at

http://www.nbc17.com/midatlantic/ncn/news/live_video.html


55 posted on 08/30/2007 10:12:44 AM PDT by WL-law
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: WL-law

it’s still on, even though they’ve been alerted — too funny — it’s the prosecutor talking to his assistant.


56 posted on 08/30/2007 10:17:11 AM PDT by WL-law
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: WL-law

they know they were on, but don’t realize they’re still on


57 posted on 08/30/2007 10:17:51 AM PDT by WL-law
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot
This is just for contempt...

Sooner or later, someone will put him behind bars for a very long time.

58 posted on 08/30/2007 10:31:02 AM PDT by Sacajaweau ("The Cracker" will be renamed "The Crapper")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Rb ver. 2.0
“Unfortunately it isn’t the City/County of Durham that’s being sued.”

This suit is all about getting a quick settlement. the department store will not want the publicity of a trial and will settle quickly. then if they want they can use the money to go after the county. Nifong is going to cost Durham county millions before this is all over.

59 posted on 08/30/2007 10:35:58 AM PDT by monday
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: WL-law
“Of course, Hechts is the target because it has the deep pockets. Is that what is being applauded here, then?”

and was negligent in that they hired a dirt bag security guard who apparently had no one over seeing his corrupt actions. The fact he no longer works for them suggests he may have been fired over this. They are liable, just not as liable as Nifong and Wilson and their own dirty security guard.

60 posted on 08/30/2007 10:52:08 AM PDT by monday
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-72 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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