http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/
ON THE ELECTRODYNAMICS OF MOVING BODIES, by A. Einstein, June 30, 1905: "From this there ensues the following peculiar consequence. If at the points A and B of K there are stationary clocks which, viewed in the stationary system, are synchronous; and if the clock at A is moved with the velocity v along the line AB to B, then on its arrival at B the two clocks no longer synchronize, but the clock moved from A to B lags behind the other which has remained at B by tv^2/2c^2 (up to magnitudes of fourth and higher order), t being the time occupied in the journey from A to B."
The moving clock experiences acceleration at the start of its journey from A to B so Einstein's conclusion is unjustified. Yet the acceleration phase is easy to remove. Let us assume that both the clock at A and the clock at B remain stationary but a third clock, moving with constant speed v, consecutively passes them so that its reading can be checked against theirs. For the third clock Einstein's relativity does indeed predict that it runs slow, as judged from the stationary system.
The last phrase, "as judged from the stationary system", is crucial and reminds us of another prediction of Einstein's relativity: As judged from the third clock's system (the one in which the third clock is regarded as stationary), it is the clock at B that runs slow. That is, observers in the third clock's system are entitled to regard their own clocks as stationary and the clock at B as "the moving clock" from John Norton's scenario:
http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/teaching/HPS_0410/chapters/Reciprocity/index.html
John Norton: The figure shows the bare essentials of the moving clock and all the other clocks spread out through space. The moving clock agrees with the reading of the leftmost clock--my wristwatch--as it passes by. However when it passes the rightmost, it now reads much less:
http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/teaching/HPS_0410/chapters/Reciprocity/clocks.gif
Clearly, Einstein's 1905 conclusion that the moving clock "lags behind" the stationary one CANNOT be derived from the postulates of special relativity if the scenario is acceleration-free. What follows from the postulates is that either clock runs more slowly than the other, as judged from the respective system.
Pentcho Valev