The Whole Truth Project Looks At The Anthony Porter Case - Part IX - The Grand Jury Testimony Of Cara Rubinsky
On February 22, 1999, NU Journalism student Cara Rubinsky testified before the Grand Jury.
Here are some interesting points of her testimony:
* She interviewed Alstory Simon in Milwaukee along with student Shawn Armbrust while David Protess waited outside in the car
* Simon told her that the murders were very painful for him and that he had not been in Washington Park that night. He said that he and his wife were walking with Jerry and Marilyn towards the park when he saw a group of men on the other side of the street. He thought it looked like trouble and warned Jerry and Marilyn not to go in the park. He and his wife left and went and bought ice cream and brought it to the kids at home.
* Here's how Rubinsky described what David Protess did at the end of her Simon interview:
Q: And you were with the professor and Simon the entire time the professor talked to him?
A: I think the professor asked us to walk away at the end for a minute, but I don't think he said anything - I'm not sure if he said anything further or not.
[Why did Protess ask the students to "walk away"?]
[Was Protess going to say something to Simon that he didn't want to the students to hear?]
[Seems very odd, to say the least]
Q; Well, do you know why he asked you to walk away?
A: I think he wanted to make eye contact - tried to make eye contact with Alstory. We could hear what he was saying, and he didn't say anything else about a book or movie deal.
[She thought Protess asked her to "walk away" so he could make eye contact with Simon? That makes no sense. Why would she have to walk away for Protess to make eye contact?]
[When the ASA asks her why Protess asked her to walk away, why does she deny, at the end of her answer that Protess said anything about a book or movie deal? That wasn't the question. Seems like a very odd response]
Then there was the following discussion about book and movie deals:
Q: Do you know what was said?
A: At the very end I just think that, you know, our professor gave him his card and said please get in touch with me. I don't know the exact words, but it was something to that effect.
Q: Did you professor explain to Alstory Simon that he might be writing a book about this case?
A: I don't think so, no.
Q: Did he say anything to Alstory Simon about the fact that there might be a movie made about this case?
A: No.
Q: Did he ever use the words "book deal" or "movie rights" in your presence?
A: Not that I recall hearing, no.
Q: Did you ever hear your professor say those words to anybody in connection with this case?
A: To anybody?
Q: Anybody in the world, on the planet?
A: Yeah, I mean we talked about it.
Q: Okay. When you say we talked about it, who talked about it?
A: In our group. We had a group meeting. We have gotten calls from a few agents. We personally have. So we sat down and talked about how we would handle those things. This is after Anthony was out of prison already.
[Hmm. . . so they were talking about book or movie deals with agents]
* She was present for the interview of Inez Simon, which started at her home, then continued at a restaurant, then they went to a grocery store and bought her groceries, and then the interview continued at the home of Shawn Armbrust's parents in Brookfield, WI.
* Somebody paid for Inez Simon and her family to stay at a Holiday Inn and for her meals when she came to Chicago to be on TV.
Then there was this discussion about alibi witnesses:
Q: Did you ask Anthony Porter about his alibi witnesses at trial?
A: I did not, no.
Q: Did Shawn Armbrust in your presence?
A: No.
Q; Did Daniel Sanders talk about alibis?
A: No.
Q; Did you ask Anthony Porter whether or not he saw Alstory Simon in the pool the night Jerry Hilliard and Marilyn Green were shot?
A: No, because I think Anthony said he wasn't - he told us that he wasn't in the park that night.
[Hmm. . . . if Porter wasn't in the park, what about all the people who said they saw him in the park that night???]
Q: And you were trying to determine whether or not he had committed the crimes that he was convicted of and almost killed for?
A: We weren't - I mean, that wasn't the purpose of the interview. It was just to meet him.
[Why wasn't that the purpose of the interview?]
As to that alibi issue, again, here's more:
Q: And again, you didn't talk to him about his alibi?
A: No.
Q: Did you read a full set of the police reports that you obtained from Mr. Sanders?
A: Yes.
Q: Did you read the reports that contained interviews with Kenneth Edwards, Michael Woodfork, Mark Senior, and Eugene Beckwith?
A: Yes,
Q: Did you make any attempt to interview any one of those four people?
A: No.
[Really? No attempt to interview the people who had seen Porter in the park, and the guy (Edwards) who said he saw Porter pull the trigger???]
Even a grand juror seemed to pick up on the theme that Protess and the students were not actually seeking the true facts:
GRAND JUROR: Based on the professor's reputation, did you at any time feel that it was in your best interest so that you would be better off finding this man innocent?
A: No.
GRAND JUROR: So you were never attempting to find innocence, you were trying to find facts?
A: Yes.
[If that were really true, why didn't Protess, Rubinsky and the rest of the group fail to interview all the witnesses who saw Porter in the park at the time of the shooting???]
Hmm. . . what do you think?
Were David Protess and his students seeking all the facts, i.e., the truth, or was their mission trying to establish Porter's innocence as advocates?
