Monday, February 16, 2009

Regarding Mr. Elmostafa, taxi cab driver

Some responders to this blog have brought up the taxi cab driver Mr. Elmostafa as being intimidated by the Duke Lacrosse prosecution. Well, I did a little research into this, and what I learned is that Mr. Elmostafa was paid a visit by Reade Seligmann and his father, Mr. Seligmann. From what I gather, the purpose of the visit was to help Mr. Elmostafa "remember" his earlier cab client, and to get additional assurances that their stories would be compatible. Now I was not at that meeting, so I do not know what monies were exchanged or what promises of payment or favors were made by the wealthy Mr. Seligmann to the poor cab driver from Sudan who was applying for citizenship in America. This meeting, which was not publicized in the media, could have far reaching implications into what statements he made later to the police and the media.

As far as Mr. Elmostafa being arrested on an outstanding warrant, it is pretty much standard practice for law enforcement officials to run a police background check on anyone they come in contact with in the course of an investigation. To attribute his arrest to District Attorney Mike Nifong and accuse him of trying to force him to make false statements is unfounded and without basis. That may be his opinion, or the opinion of Mr. Seligmann. I don't know.

I have yet to hear how the information that multiple unidentified DNA was recovered from the rape kit has any bearing on the guilt or innocence of the Duke LAXers. Furthermore, I have difficulty in believing in the objectivity in media types who refer to the extraneous and irrelevant DNA information that Mr. Nifong allegedly withheld as "key DNA evidence."

The bottom line is that Mr. Nifong is the only prosecutor to be disbarred by the NC State Bar since its inception. Other prosecutors, including Bill Wolfe (who was responsible for the 39 month incarceration of James Johnson on charges of murder, rape, kidnapping, and armed robbery... charges which were later dropped), are being shielded by the State Bar and NC Attorney General Roy Cooper. The only reason for the "accessory after the fact" trial against James Johnson is to protect prosecutor Wolfe from the complaint of prosecutorial misconduct that was filed with the State Bar by the NAACP.

Although James Johnson was innocent of the charges for which he was held without a trial, the guilt or innocence of the Duke Lacrosse defendants will most likely never be known because the Attorney General quashed the ongoing investigation into the crimes that were committed at the Duke Lacrosse party.

33 comments:

tenvax3d0c said...

Mr. Harr

Could you share your source of information about Mr. Elmostafa with us.

As I recall, none of that came up in Mr. Nifong's ethics trial. None of Mr. Nifong's supporters ever said anything about such a meeting, not even Nancy Grace or Wendy Murphy.

I say you are fabricating this, just like Mr. Nifong fabricated a case against the Duke students

tenvax3d0c said...

Mr. Harr

Here is another question. Why was Mr. Elmostafa asked if he wanted to change his story about Reade Seligman before he was prosecuted?

unbekannte said...

Justice4nifong, you must have gotten this rather unbelievable Elmostafa story from Victoria Peterson, injustice58 or from kilzy.

I have a suggestion for you. Why don't YOU take and pass a basic biology course and learn something about DNA.

Regards Ubes

JSwift said...

Your goals of restoring Nifong’s license to practice law and rehabilitating his reputation require that additional information be made available.

As a result, the Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong should take the lead in demanding that discovery in the civil lawsuits must begin without further delay, with all information made public as soon as it is available.

Without further supporting evidence, your quest will surely fail.

Cooper’s description of Nifong as a “rogue” prosecutor will stand unchallenged. Nifong will be seen as the prosecutor who indicted three young men with “no credible evidence” that the crimes for which they had been charged had even occurred. He will be seen as the prosecutor who indicted solely on basis of the flimsy allegations of a complaining witness whose stories changed with each telling, all of which contradicted the physical and medical evidence available; a fatally flawed identification procedure he designed that violated every standard possible; and the unsupported statements of a SANE-in-training, whose statements contradicted the results of the SANE examination itself.

The charges from Nifong’s disbarment hearing will be used to depict Nifong. He will be seen as the prosecutor who callously used the lives of three young men to further his electoral prospects, win an election and increase his annual pension by a few thousand dollars.

Unfortunately for your objectives, the information currently available from limited sources does not contradict Cooper’s conclusion. Inexplicably, in his defense at his disbarment hearing Nifong did not provide any additional evidence to support his actions.

As you have complained, the public has been limited in the information it has received: several witness statements (including those by Crystal, Kim and the captains); a summary of the medical reports (but not the actual reports); two DNA reports; three identification procedures; cell phone records; photographs; ATM records; fast food receipts; the case reports filed by Himan, Gottlieb and other DPD officers; the defense filings and hearings in the original case; the AG’s summary report (but not his evidence file); the evidence introduced in Nifong’s disbarment and criminal contempt hearings, including the depositions and/or testimony of Nifong, Gottlieb, Himan, Wilson, Ripberger, Levicy and Meehan; and the presentation by defense lawyers to the Whichard commission, which presentation demonstrated differences in Crystal’s varying accounts and used the records from cell phones and cameras to virtually eliminate any time an attack could have occurred.

Discovery from the civil suits can change that. We can learn the full truth.

Nifong and the DPD will finally have an opportunity to question the lacrosse players under oath. They can expose all of the evidence. Through their own depositions and testimony, they will be able to discuss their own activities in great detail. At last, under cross-examination Crystal Mangum can tell her story for all to hear.

The Committee on Justice for Mike Nifong must take the lead in moving discovery forward and in gaining the public release of this information.

I urge you to apply pressure on Durham and Duke to end their roadblocks. Durham and Duke are using the uncertainty of legal proceedings to delay the release of crucial information.

You need the full truth in your search for justice for Nifong.

kilgo said...

"Cooper’s description of Nifong as
a “rogue” prosecutor will stand unchallenged."

JSwift- we have some bad data here.

Are you faking your data to fit your theory
or just letting Ekstrand do it for you?

Yes, the Seligmanns visited with Elmo.

Such bad memories around here.

Amazing how they whipped out that
complicated airtight alibi days after
the indictment. How long do you think
they were working on it?

unbekannte said...

Hey Kilzy

You said you would explain inculpatory DNA evidence to me once I passed high school biology. I say again, I have met that requirement and more. When will you explain? You claim to have extensive knowledge of this subject.

While you are on another subject, how about you give the specific time and date of the Seligman/Elmostafa meeting meeting.

Regards

Ubes

tenvax3d0c said...

Mr. Harr

If this claim, of a meeting between Mr. Elmostafa and the Seligman family, is true, it would be in the best interest of Mr. Nifong and his cause to reveal every detail of it to the public.

Any reluctance on your part to so would indicate the meeting never happened and your claim is a fabrication.

kilgo said...

C'mon people, this is not open-heart surgery.

Cosby and Elmo, April 19, 2006.

COSBY: Well, his father showed up here.
And when he saw the call, near the house,
right, about a block away from the house,
he said, “This is for sure my son's cell phone
number”?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, ma'am.

COSBY: One hundred percent?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: One hundred percent.
He was jumped outside the—up inside the
(INAUDIBLE) and he's happy.

COSBY: He was jumping up and down?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Jump up and down.
He says, “Yes, I know my son called for
a taxi at this time.”

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12405338/

Of course the lax hustlers would rather you
forget a great deal about Elmo and his interviews, right guys?

By the way, how many pocket-books did
Elmo receive from Hawkins, after the 41 second Hecht's heist?

unbekannte said...

Hey Kilzy

Are you claiming expertise in cardiac surgery to go along with your expertise in inculpatory dna?

regards

Ubes

tenvax3d0c said...

Mr. Harr
Kilgo

I have read the script of that MSNBC show, the entire script.

You are hopelessly delusional if you believe that show to be a documentation of a meeting between Mr. Elmostafa and the Seligman family. If you were to openly accuse the Seligman family of paying off Mr. Elmostafa on the basis of that show, you would find yourselves paying them a judgment for libel.

unbekannte said...

Hey kilzy

Hey, head blogger for the Justice4Nifong gang of 3

I left a post about you on Durham in Wonderland. Here are a couple of questions for you.

Wendy Murphy was a guest on that April 19, 2006 MSNBC broadcast. Murphy supported "decent(?)" "honorable(??)" "minister of justice(???)" Mike Nifong's prosecution of the innocent Lacrosse players. Murphy never made the claim that the Seligman Family ever met with Mr. Elmostafa and never suggested that the Seligman family paid off Mr. Elmostafa. Why is it such a firm Nifong supporter, who was there when the supposed Elmostafa/Seligman meeting was revealed to the public, never made an issue of it? Why did "decent(?)" "honorable(??)" "minister of justice(???)" Nifong never make an issue of it. Reade Seligman's attorneys wanted to present their alibi to "decent(?)" "honorable(??)" "minister of justice(???)" Nifong but he refused to meet with them. Why would he refuse to hear Reade Seligman's alibi when the means to impeach it had already been given to the public? You people are really too easy to shoot down.

You do notice, don't you, that Wendy Murphy has distanced herself from "decent(?)" "honorable(??)" "minister of justice(???)" Mike Nifong. Why has she done that?

unbekannte said...

Hey, Justice4Nifong gang of 3 head blogger:

You need to make a correction to this post. You say:

"Although James Johnson was innocent of the charges for which he was held without a trial, the guilt or innocence of the Duke Lacrosse defendants will most likely never be known because the Attorney General quashed the ongoing investigation into the crimes that were committed at the Duke Lacrosse party."

The NC Attorney General got involved in the case after the NC State Bar filed ethics charges against Mike Nifong, something initiated by people other than AG Roy Cooper. "Decent(?)" "honorable(??)" "minister of justice(???)" Mike Nifong asked the Attorney General to take over the investigation. Rather than quashing the investigation, the AG's office conducted a very thorough investigation, which included talks with cgm, something "decent(?)" "honorable(??)" "minister of justice(???)" Mike Nifong was reluctant to do(it is documented he never talked to her directly until months after the indictments - even Wendy Murphy admits this), Based on this investigation, the North Carolina Attorney General found no crime had occurred during the "Duke Lacrosse party". With no crime, there should have been no trial. The Prosecutorial Ethics which you have cited state clearly it is a violation of those Ethics for a prosecutor to prosecute without probable cause. When no crime has been committed, there can be no guilt, only innocence.

Since you state with such certainty that a crime did occur at the "Duke Lacrosse party", please make public the evidence you have. Because the prosecutor had the defendants arrested and charged is not evidence. If it were, there would have been no prosecutorial misconduct in any of the cases you have cited, including the James Arthur Johnson case. If you want to make a case for a crime, you are going to have to present evidence stronger than the evidence presented on your blog of the supposed Elmostafa/Seligman meeting.

Regards

Ubes

unbekannte said...

justice4nifong gang of 3 head blogger:

You need to ignore Josef Goebbels.

Repeating a lie no matter how many times will not make people believe you. The scarce number of comments supporting your distorted agenda should have convinced you by now.

kilgo said...

Here are some more nuggets
from Elmo and Rita:

COSBY: You picked them up on the corner. Then you came to this bank?

MOSTAFA: I came to the Wachovia bank machine, yes.

COSBY: And who took out money from the machine?

MOSTAFA: Reade.

COSBY: Reade Seligmann?

MOSTAFA: Yes. He came out this side door and he went to the machine down there, where he take some money out.

COSBY: And how long did it take to drive here?

MOSTAFA: From the corner, about two or three minutes.

COSBY: Did you notice anything unusual about their behavior? Was he drunk at all?

MOSTAFA: No, I guess he‘s a little bit, but not that much drunk.

COSBY: Just a little drunk?

MOSTAFA: Yes. Not drunk so he can‘t get out and can‘t get inside my car.

- - -

COSBY: You made a second pick-up that night near the house, one actually at the house. What did they say in the cab that was unusual to you?

MOSTAFA: I remember one guy, he said in a loud voice, She just a stripper.

COSBY: Did you think he was complaining or something bad happened with the stripper?

MOSTAFA: I have no idea. I don‘t have any information about what was going on in the house.

COSBY: Now that you look back?

MOSTAFA: Yes, when I look back, he look like he mad of the stripper, or that the stripper, she going to call the police and she just a stripper.

COSBY: Did it seem to you that someone had been raped in the house and they were talking about a rape?

MOSTAFA: No. My mind couldn‘t go that far away. But it looked to me like somebody got hurt, but what kind of harm or what kind of—I have no idea.

Justice58 said...

Repeating a lie no matter how many times will not make people believe you.




You should follow your own advice & practice what you preach....Hello!

After having the Attorney General declare someone innocent, Why would anyone continue to try & convince others of said innocence after 3 long years? What is the point? Unless...


MMMMM HUH

unbekannte said...

Injusticen 58:

You suggesting any one is a liar is like Eliot Spitzer prosecuting someone for patronizing a prostitute.

tenvax3d0c said...

Mr. Harr:

Who ever appointed you as any kind of supreme arbiter for the Duke LaCrosse case?

Kilgo:

There is nothing in that MSNBC interview to suggest that Reade Seligman or his family ever paid off Mr.Elmostafa. You are more deluded than I thought and should seek psychiatric help.

kilgo said...

tenvax stated:

"As I recall, none of that came up in Mr. Nifong's ethics trial. None of Mr. Nifong's supporters ever said anything about such a meeting, not even Nancy Grace or Wendy Murphy."

ubes chimes in:

"Justice4nifong, you must have gotten this rather unbelievable Elmostafa story from Victoria Peterson, injustice58 or from kilzy."

CNN's version: Thursday, April 20, 2006

Mostafa said he first learned about the importance of the cab ride about a week ago, when one of Seligmann's defense attorneys called him, quizzing him about the timing of the night's events.

He said Seligmann and his father visited the cab company Monday.

"His dad did all the talking," Mostafa said, and he wanted to know which cab driver drove his son.

He said that during their meeting, Reade Seligmann listed the times of his phone call to the cab company and recounted the side trips to the bank and restaurant, and the end of the trip at his dorm.

"Everything he said matched what happened, and I told them I am the cab driver," Mostafa said.

Defense lawyers contacted him again and asked him if he would be willing to testify about the cab ride.

"I said 'yes,' " Mostafa said, adding that he had not been contacted by police.

When asked if anyone had tried to pay him for his story or if anyone had offered to pay him, Mostafa said, "No."

"Even if they offer, I won't take it," he said.

tenvax, ubes...are all newbie lacrosse hucksters as ignorant as you are?

and just where is KC Johnson, the world's leading lacrosse rape scandal authority on this, ubes?

big help he is.

tenvax3d0c said...

Kilgo:

Where is there anything that supports the allegation, that the Seligman Family paid off Mr. Elmostafa?

If you or Mr. Harr know anything more about the case than Professor Johnson, I wish you would share that knowledge. So far, all you have been able to do is make allegations totally unsupported by any had data.

unbekannte said...

From Kilzy:

"and just where is KC Johnson, the world's leading lacrosse rape scandal authority on this, ubes?"

KC Johnson posted an entry about this outlandish allegation on his blog today. Here is a quote:

"He[Sidney Harr] also penned a post wildly alleging the bribery of Elmostafa, a theory so bizarre even Nifong never made it."

Maybe we ought to dub the head blogger of the Justiice4Nifong gang of 3 Sidney Harr de Harr Harr, for all the credibility he has.

Regards,

Ubes

PS

Hey, Kilzy. When are you going to tell me all about inculpatory DNA, like you promised you would?

unbekannte said...

Hey, Kilzy:

According to Barry Saunders, Harr-de-harr-harr is a doctor. Maybe he can explain Inculpatory DNA evidence to me since you are so reluctant to do so.

Regards

Ubes

unbekannte said...

Hey Injustice58:

When I once asked you about the DNA evidence in the case, you told me to go ask cgm. cgm, I say again, has been silent about the DNA, as silent as Nancy Grace was after overwhelmingly reelected Attorney General Roy Cooper announced the Duke defendants were innocent.

Kilzy claims to have extensive, thorough knowledge about DNA. Maybe he could explain it to you.

Regards

Ubes

tenvax3d0c said...

Mr. Harr, Doctor Harr, whatever the case may be:

It is truly astounding that you regard the DNA evidence of intimate contact between Ms. Mangum and other unidentified males as of no value to the defendants.

Ms. Mangum said her assailants did not use condoms, they ejaculated on her, and then there were claims that she was wiped off with a towel. If I recall, DNA was found on the towel which COULD have been from David Evans. That was called evidence supporting Ms. Mangum's claims.

However, the rape kit, when examined by the state crime lab had no evidence of blood, semen or saliva, no evidence of any material which would have been left by such a rape. The DNA found on Ms. Mangum's person by DNA security was old DNA, not fresh DNA. Again, it did not match the DNA of any of the accused.

It meant that if a rape did happen, it did not happen at the party at 610 Buchanan Avenue, and it was not perpetrated by members of the Lacrosse team.

Further, it was highly doubtful that the Lacrosse players could have wiped her off. How could they, by wiping her off with a towel, have removed their DNA but left behind DNA from other men who were not Lacrosse players.

If you are a physician, and if this is how you approach your patients, it is a wonder you have never been brought up on disciplinary charges.

unbekannte said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
unbekannte said...

Hey, Harr de Harr Harr:

There is a post on Liestoppers by Bill Anderson suggesting "Decent"(?), "Honorable"(??) "Minister of Justice"(???) Nifong and his wife Cy Gurny are behind your blog.

Your protestations to the contrary, it is not illogical that "Decent"(?), "Honorable"(??) "Minister of Justice"(???) Nifong would try to pull something like this to salvage his reputation. If so it must be driving Cy and Mikey crazy that this blog has accomplished nothing that will benefit them. Don't you wonder when they will pull their support?

I wonder if Kilzy is really Mike Nifong and Injustice58 is really Cy Gurny.

Regards

Ubes

PS Can you tell me anything about inculpatory DNA? Kilzy and Injustice58 sure can not. All Kilzy does is call people names when he is presented with a truth he can not handle.

tenvax3d0c said...

Mr. Harr,

If I were your friend, which I am obviously not, I would advise you to say no more about DNA. Even a layman can understand the exculpatory value of that evidence to the Defendants. When you proclaim it had no value, you look totally and utterly ignorant.

I think it was Benjamin Franklin who said it is better to keep one's mouth closed and to be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt.

ChickyGirl said...

ten stupidly asked:

"Here is another question. Why was Mr. Elmostafa asked if he wanted to change his story about Reade Seligman before he was prosecuted?"

ten,

Who asked him that and where is your proof?

tenvax3d0c said...

Chicky Girl:

Readers Digest reported Mr. Elmostafa's story when it chose him as its hero of the year. You must not have been following the case too closely if you are unaware of what happened to Mr. Elmostafa.

Are you another one claiming the Duke defendants are guilty simply because they are well off caucasian males? That is not only stupidly gross but also grossly racist.

tenvax3d0c said...

ChickyGirl

"The detective asked if I had anything new to say about the lacrosse case," Elmostafa said. "When I said no, they took me to the magistrate."

This came from a News and Observer article on Mr. Elmostafa's arrest, "Published: Thu, May. 11, 2006 12:30AM".

Mr. Harr

This is a quote from Professor KC Johnson's blog, from Wednesday, August 30, 2006.

"Regarding Elmostafa, Wilson claimed that the warrant's discovery was routine, the sort of check he does on every witness; "it has nothing to do with putting any kind of pressure on him," said the investigator. But Nifong's office was blindsided by revelations that the accuser had previously filed a charge that she was gang-raped by three men.

Is Nifong's investigator seriously claiming that he does a more thorough background check on potential alibi witnesses for the defense than for his office's own chief witness?

2.) Nifong's office has repeatedly denied any connection between the arrest and the lacrosse case. Yet the notes of Inv. B.W. Himan revealed in court yesterday showed that "Mr. Nifong wanted to know when we picked [Elmostafa] up." This note enhances the credibility of Elmostafa's claim that when Inv. R.D. Clayton picked him up, "The detective asked if I had anything new to say about the lacrosse case. When I said no, they took me to the magistrate."

Is Nifong's office seriously claiming that the district attorney wants to be informed each and every time Durham police serve a 2.5-year-old misdemeanor warrant?"

The issue is your claim that Nifong's arrest if Mr. Elmostafa was the result of standard procedure, nothing more.

Any comments?

unbekannte said...

Hey Harr de Harr Harr

Looks like you have another deluded, uninformed supporter of "decent"(?) "honorable"(??) "minister of justice"(???) Mike Nifong contributing to your forum(????).

What's the name? ChickenGirl?

regards,

Ubes

unbekannte said...

Hey Harr de Harr Harr

If "decent"(?) "honorable"(??) "minister of justice"(???) Mike Nifong is the only prosecutor ever disbarred in North Carolina, he sure made the effort to deserve it.

Regards, Ubes

Jaspreet Singh said...

We provide Luxury Tempo Traveler, Cab/Car Rental &Tourist Taxi in Chandigarh with disciplined and well backuped experience drivers having extensive route knowledge & smoke free luxury AC vehicle.

Jaspreet Singh said...

Nanuan Tours & Travels Cab offers efficient, hire a taxi in Chandigarh to meet the transportation needs of residents, visitors and our corporate clients. Our extensive service area includes Panchkula, Mohali, Chandigarh, Haryana, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Punjab, Himachal Pradesh, Jammu & Kashmir.