More Yalies Testify Against Khan In Yale Rape Case

More Yalies Testify Against Khan In Yale Rape Case

Spread the love

In the criminal case of State of Connecticut v. Saifullah Khan, two more Yalies testified against defendant Khan.  These two recent Yale graduates spent many hours in the hot seat.  One Yale grad already landed a high powered job in Washington DC.  The other one is applying to medical school.

Annmarie McDaniel was the first to take the witness stand.  Annmarie works for Anne Stewart Strategies, a Washington DC firm that raises millions of dollars for non-profits and liberal politicians.  On cross examination Norm Pattis, the attorney for Khan, tried to ask Annmarie questions about Donald Trump. Norm also tried to ask her whether she did any work for Republicans. The State objected.  The Judge told Norm no questions about the Donald or about Republicans.

Annmarie testified that she watched Khan’s accuser get groped by Khan at Woosley Hall during the Halloween concert.  Annmarie was seated in the balcony and looked down and saw the victim getting groped by Khan.  She said the victim tried to fight off the Khan.  Annmarie said that when Khan put his arm around the victim’s shoulders, the victim recoiled.  Annmarie testified that when Khan put his hand on the victim’s thigh, the victim took it off.

Annmarie graduated from Yale in 2016.  She majored in women’s gender and sexuality studies.  Norm snidely questioned Annmarie about her major, implying that she was biased against Khan. The Judge told Norm his questions were irrelevant.  For some unknown reason Norm asked Annmarie to define the word “microaggression.”  Annmarie gave a lengthy explanation about what the word meant.  She said that if you make a comment about a person’s hair, you may really be insulting the person’s race.  I never heard of this word.  According to Wikepedia, a microaggression is the “casual degradation of any marginalized group.”  When I was locked up in Federal prison I never experienced microaggression but I most definitely experienced macroaggression.  Macroaggression is defined as “large-scale overt aggression toward those of a different race, culture, gender, etc..”  I was constantly under attack in Federal prison because I was a blogger.  I’m not sure why Norm was asking Annmarie about microaggression. Norm didn’t connect microaggression to anything in the trial.

After Annmarie saw Khan groping the victim in the theater, she sent text messages to her friend Tabitha.  Tabitha was the victim’s dorm mate.  Annmarie sent texts to Tabitha telling her that the victim was in danger and to keep an eye on her. Tabitha was not at the concert at the time.  Tabitha was supposed to meet the victim at Elevate after the concert.  The victim never made it to Elevate.  The victim was walked back to her dorm room with Khan. Khan allegedly had the victim’s phone.  When Tabitha sent text messages to the victim, responses came back saying that she was ok and wasn’t going to Elevate.  Tabitha thought the victim was responding, when in reality it was Khan who was responding, according to the testimony thus far.

Norm ended his cross examination of Annmarie with questions about whether she knew anything about Shabtai or Rabbi Shmuly Hecht, who operated Shabtai.  Annmarie testified that she didn’t know anything about Shabtai or Shmuly Hecht.

The lawyers and judge have finally figured out how to properly pronounce the word Shabtai.  I wanted to ask the judge if I could provide a tutorial to the goyim lawyers, but decided against it because of time restraints.  My time is still focused on the Goat case, I have to start preparing an appellate brief.  Speaking of Goats, the Goat’s attorney David Grudberg, who is suing me for defaming the depraved monster he represents, wished Norm good luck in the Khan case on Norm’s Facebook page.  Norm has been posting articles about the Khan case on his Facebook page every day.  It’s called lawyer marketing.  Norm would rather try this case than hammer out a plea deal. Norm can’t resist the free advertising.  Norm has a conflict of interest. Norm would rather try the case for the free publicity rather than work out a plea deal.  A guilty verdict after a trial could result in a lengthy prison sentence for Khan.  A plea agreement could result in less jail time.

The next witness to take the hot seat was Tabitha Spencer Salmon.  Tabitha lives in Philadelphia.  Tabitha graduated from Yale in 2016 and majored in ecology and evolutionary biology.  Tabitha testified that she currently works as an Emergency Medical Technician and moonlights at a dog kennel.  Norm is a big fan of dogs, so he didn’t try to ask her on cross examination about why she prefers dogs over cats.  Norm has pictures of himself with his black Lab on his website. Tabitha is trying to get into medical school, not unlike the victim.  Tabitha was good friends with the victim.  They shared a dorm room for a few years while at Yale.

Tabitha didn’t have tickets to the Yale Symphony Orchestra for the midnight Halloween concert.  Tabitha’s plans were to go to Shabtai with the victim, walk with the victim to the Halloween concert, and then meet with the victim later that night at a bar called Elevate, on Crown Street.  Tabitha testified that she wasn’t familiar with Shabtai.  She said:  “it was a fraternity house, society house, I wasn’t sure what that building was.” Most people in the New Haven Jewish community cannot figure out what Shabtai is all about.

Tabitha said she went with the victim to Shabtai for the Challah-ween party.  The lawyers are now stumbling over the word Challah.  They figured out how to pronounce Shabtai but cannot figure out how to pronounce Challah.

Tabitha testified that the only food offered at the Shabtai party was chicken wings and bread.  Tabitha testified that she had three chicken wings.  Tabitha testified that the victim ate two or three chicken wings.  Tabitha testified that she had two rum and cokes with the victim.  She said that the vcictim was not much of a drinker.  Tabitha admitted that she is a moderate drinker.  Her drink of choice is whisky sour, whisky coke, or straight whisky.  She also testified that she had half a cigar when the cigars were passed around at the Shabtai party.

Tabitha was dressed casually in court, unlike Annmarie McDaniel.  Tabitha was decked out in thick glasses, black pants, a ponytail, and a purple shirt.  She had a deep, serious voice.  She answered the questions directly and didn’t veer off topic, unlike Annmarie.  Annmarie tried to tell the lawyers that the times they were asking her about were written next to her cell phone text messages.  The lawyers and judge rolled their eyes.  A layman trying to tell them how to enter the evidence? The nerve! The judge nicely told her to apply to law school if she wanted to be a lawyer.

Tabitha testified that Richard Gayler flirted with the victim when they all walked to Woosley Hall after Shabtai.  She said the victim had her arm around Gayler, because she was too drunk to walk.  Tabitha testified that the victim ended up dating Richard Gayler a month after the alleged rape, but the relationship only lasted a few weeks.

Norm asked Tabitha a bunch of questions about Khan’s attire at Shabtai.  Khan was at the door at Shabtai checking people into the party.  Tabitha testified that Khan was wearing a suit.  Norm argued with her, “Wasn’t he wearing a tux??”   Tabitha said no, a suit.  Norm persisted:  “What about a cummerbund, was he wearing a cummerbund??”  Tabitha said no, no cummerbund.  Norm got mad:  “Are you sure he wasn’t wearing a cummerbund??”  Tabitha said, “I am sure he wasn’t wearing a cummerbund.”  Norm shook his head, waved his arms, put his head down, and snickered. Another gotcha moment down the toilet.

Norm also asked Tabitha some questions about Rabbi Shmuly Hecht’s wife.  He asked Tabitha if the Rabbi’s wife told her to go out and mingle and dance when she was at Shabtai.  Tabitha looked confused by the question.  Norm dropped it.

There is a high probability that Rabbi Shmuly Hecht will be called to testify in this case by the State of Connecticut, or possibly by the defense.  It is not clear whether Khan will testify in his defense, or refuse to testify and take the Fifth Amendment.

2 thoughts on “More Yalies Testify Against Khan In Yale Rape Case

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.