Does the expression ‘Someone, who took his while presumed innocent, will get bail any time soon’ sound natural? [closed]

Solution 1:

Yes, the title and sentence fragment you use do sound wrong.

But in context, the interpretation is really that 'his' is an elision of 'his perpwalk'. So with that as context you should read (and it is understandable as:

[something] lowered the odds that Mr. Strauss-Kahn, who took his [perpwalk], while presumed innocent, will get bail

It doesn't sound great anyway, but that at least makes sense and in context a native English reader would realize that 'his' refers to 'his perp walk'.

I feel like it is more coherent to have said either:

[something] lowered the odds that Mr. Strauss-Kahn, while presumed innocent, will get bail.

or

[something] lowered the odds that Mr. Strauss-Kahn, who took his [perpwalk], will get bail.

The primary problem though with the sentence is not with 'his', which can be made sensical with context, but with 'any' which is ungrammatical. 'Any' is used with negated verb - what is expected here is 'some':

Someone... will get bail some time soon.

Keeping everything the same but changing 'any' to 'some' changes the sentence from ungrammatical to grammatical.

Solution 2:

As with many clauses, it is necessary to read the surrounding text to provide the appropriate context.

The comparison here is between Roman Polanski, who was found guilty, and Dominique Strauss-Kahn, who has not been tried yet and is therefore entitled to a presumption of innocence under the law.

We can fill in the implied direct object as follows:

...Mr. Strauss-Kahn, who took his [perp walk] while presumed innocent...