Author Topic: Witness 8 Letter Dated 3/19/12  (Read 33014 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline FromBelow

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 497
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Witness 8 Letter Dated 3/19/12
« Reply #120 on: April 02, 2013, 08:08:07 PM »
As I suggested earlier in the thread, I am of the opposite view. I think the letter is a negative for W-8's credibility. That the prosecution thinks so too, is evidenced by their releasing it before Easter weekend, and burying it in a document about another matter.

That suggests that their stated reason for including it is a pretext. People usually like for their pretexts to appear to make some sense. And the only way I can make sense of their stated reason, is if the 'nickname' appears on the letter.

Or maybe BDLR just wanted to get ahead of MOM revealing it in a motion by releasing it (mostly for Nelson's eyes, perhaps) with his own 'explanation' and spin.  "We don't want to give the defense stuff because they are in league with racist trolls and encourage doxing." Or some crap like that. It seems like BDLR gets his ideas from internet trolls himself. I've seen all of his arguments and accusations put forward by Trayvon supporters a while back. The Trayvon supporters have also mentioned how they 'send stuff' to BDLR on a number of occasions.

As an aside, I have to wonder to what extent the state still interacts with Trayvon's family and their lawyers. I know the Trayvon supporters very often send things to Natalie Jackson.

Offline nomatter_nevermind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5447
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Witness 8 Letter Dated 3/19/12
« Reply #121 on: April 02, 2013, 10:04:52 PM »
It kind of seems to me that if I were trying to find a quick route to avoid getting rained on, I wouldn't wander into complex if I didn't know my way around. That would apply double if I were on my way back, since I'd have no expectation of finding a direct path from the other community into my own.

'It started to rain so he decided to walk through another complex because it was raining.'

This is a classic example of an 'explanation' that itself cries out for explanation.

If the other complex was the shortest way, why wouldn't Trayvon have already decided to go that way before he left the store? In her interviews she seems to be saying that Trayvon was expecting the rain when he was at the store or as soon as he left it, although I have to grant that those passages are only partly intelligible.

If she meant that he went through the other complex because it had a good place to shelter from the rain, there is no mention of his using such a shelter in the letter.
« Last Edit: April 02, 2013, 10:06:36 PM by nomatter_nevermind »

Offline leftwig

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 532
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Witness 8 Letter Dated 3/19/12
« Reply #122 on: April 03, 2013, 06:53:34 AM »
The next sentence after saying he decided to go walk through another complex, she says "he started walking".  This could mean that he was standing around somewhere (at the store?) contemplating which way he was going to go, then once he decided that route, he started walking.  Or, given the brevity and lack of detail in the letter, it could mean that she left out the details of him stopping somewhere for shelter (either in the complex he was cutting through or RATL) and the "started walking" comment is him leaving that shelter.  She follows up the "started walking" comment with noticing someone following him, so I'd put more faith in the idea that TM had started walking after stopping somewhere on the way back home.  Since he left the store roughly around 6:30 and GZ spotted him in RATL around 7:08, I'd say he could have stopped any number of places for any number of reasons (a store, to meet someone, to take shelter).  In this letter, Dee Dee doesn't tell us.

Other than the new detail about choosing to cut through another complex, the most intriguing part about the letter is what it doesn't contain.

Offline leftwig

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 532
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Witness 8 Letter Dated 3/19/12
« Reply #123 on: April 03, 2013, 08:51:50 AM »
This should have been part of the post above as its a continuing thought, but as I stated above, I think the brevity of the letter and lack of detail makes it intriguing.  IANAL, but I have been a party to a lawsuit.  One of the things my lawyer did was to prepare me for a deposition.  He had me watch this corny 20 minute video then talked to me about how when answering questions from opposing counsel, you wanted to give plain yes or no answers whenever possible and provide as little information as necessary to answer the question.  The reasons behind this are to give the other side as little information as possible to research and to impeach you with at trial. 

I feel this letter was written in just this vein, with the guidance by someone with a legal background telling the author to put in as little as possible, yet enough to fulfill the desired intent.  This is not a letter that W8 would have sat down voluntarily to write to describe the situation as she recalled it.  I am not saying that the letter didn't come from W8 (written by her or dictated to someone else who wrote it) or that they contain statements that were falsified (maybe they do, maybe they don't, I don't know).  But I feel confident that the details that got put in the letter and things that were left out was "suggested" by someone with a legal background.


Offline Evil Chinchilla

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 157
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Witness 8 Letter Dated 3/19/12
« Reply #124 on: April 03, 2013, 10:07:07 AM »
As I suggested earlier in the thread, I am of the opposite view. I think the letter is a negative for W-8's credibility. That the prosecution thinks so too, is evidenced by their releasing it before Easter weekend, and burying it in a document about another matter.
I'm not sure if it was intentional (I'd have to go back and check dates) or serendipity, but the ruckus over RZJR's "racist" tweets gave them way more smokescreen than releasing the letter just before the Easter weekend.

If you went on Google News the day the letter was released and entered "George Zimmerman" or "Trayvon Martin," you got plenty of hits about the tweets, but almost nothing about the letter where W8 couldn't correctly spell the name of someone she stated under oath that she had known since kindergarten.

Unfortunately, that got buried about as badly as the prosecution admission at the 3/5/13 hearing that W8 lied under oath about her hospital visit and had additionally misrepresented her age to make her a minor.

Instead, what was predominantly getting reported from that hearing was that the defense had waived the immunity hearing.  "The state's star witness has lied under oath" got some coverage in those articles, but not nearly enough headlines.

Offline Evil Chinchilla

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 157
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Witness 8 Letter Dated 3/19/12
« Reply #125 on: April 03, 2013, 10:24:24 AM »
'It started to rain so he decided to walk through another complex because it was raining.'

This is a classic example of an 'explanation' that itself cries out for explanation.

If the other complex was the shortest way, why wouldn't Trayvon have already decided to go that way before he left the store? In her interviews she seems to be saying that Trayvon was expecting the rain when he was at the store or as soon as he left it, although I have to grant that those passages are only partly intelligible.
She says "decided to" a couple of other times in that note when she's describing his earliest actions in the narrative-- "Trevon decided to go to the Cornerstore" and "he decided to walk through another complex"-- but later she drops it.

I think it's a DeeDeeism for expressing that "Trevon" communicated his actions to her. If you substitute "told me he was [__ing]" for "decided to [__]," it makes more sense.

I guess if Crump had thought of the importance of these elements at the time the note had been longer, we'd have also gotten "Then Trevon decided to put his hoodie on" and "Then Trevon decided to say 'get off, get off' before the phone hung up."

Offline nomatter_nevermind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5447
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Witness 8 Letter Dated 3/19/12
« Reply #126 on: April 03, 2013, 10:53:39 AM »
I'm not sure if it was intentional (I'd have to go back and check dates) or serendipity, but the ruckus over RZJR's "racist" tweets gave them way more smokescreen than releasing the letter just before the Easter weekend.

That's interesting.

I suspect that it's a lucky coincidence for the prosecution, and that the decision on timing the release was made some time in advance.

Offline nomatter_nevermind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5447
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Witness 8 Letter Dated 3/19/12
« Reply #127 on: April 03, 2013, 06:24:01 PM »
She gives the "decided to find a shortcut" event after she says Martin apprised her that somebody was watching her.

The letter never describes the strange man as 'watching'. He is 'following', then he 'didn't follow him again'. Then the stranger reappeared, and 'started getting closer'.

The 4/2 SAO interview is the most detailed version of the story. In that version, Trayvon first reported the man 'watching him' from a car, as he stood under the mail shade. He said he was about to start walking, and the call dropped. (6:18)

When the phones reconnected, Trayvon told Dee Dee that he was walking, and that 'this man was still following him, behind the car'. Notwithstanding 'still', this is the first time in this narrative that Dee Dee used any variant of 'follow'.

Trayvon put his hoodie on, then told Dee Dee that 'this man is still watching him, like in a car.' To me this suggests that the car stopped while Trayvon was adjusting his hoodie, so that after the hoodie adjustment, the man and the car were no longer following.

It was at this point that Trayvon told Dee Dee that 'he about to run from the back'. Dee Dee suggested, as an alternative, that he 'run to his dad's house'. Trayvon responded that 'from the back' was 'more easier', and he commenced running.

This seems odd to me. If Martin was afraid, wouldn't he just start running, instead of talking it over with Dee Dee? 

I could imagine him getting spooked when the car stopped, thinking the stranger was about to get out and come after him. But he just kept walking, reporting the new situation to Dee Dee and discussing his options.

Offline vegas

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 683
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Witness 8 Letter Dated 3/19/12
« Reply #128 on: April 03, 2013, 07:21:27 PM »
Hard time to imagine a 6 foot male from the mean streets of Miami Gardens being "spooked" by a short, fat guy.
« Last Edit: April 03, 2013, 07:27:46 PM by vegas »

Offline unitron

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1060
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Witness 8 Letter Dated 3/19/12
« Reply #129 on: April 03, 2013, 09:40:18 PM »
Someone elsewhere said that it was a given that the letter had to be disclosed.

Once in the hands of the state, perhaps so, but it made me wonder.

Was Sybrina under any obligation to turn it over to anyone, or even disclose the existence of it?

Offline DebFrmHell

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 954
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Witness 8 Letter Dated 3/19/12
« Reply #130 on: April 04, 2013, 01:43:36 AM »
Someone elsewhere said that it was a given that the letter had to be disclosed.

Once in the hands of the state, perhaps so, but it made me wonder.

Was Sybrina under any obligation to turn it over to anyone, or even disclose the existence of it?

Why would you think that Sybrina Fulton didn't turn that letter over to Ben Crump?  It reads like a statement, a written affidavit, than it does a personal note to the mother of her slain friend.

Why do you think that Crump turned it over to the State until he had to?  He very well could have anticipated that W8 would mention it during her deposition.

Besides who has any idea how many generations of that letter was copied and who had read them beforehand.  You can bet the Defense hasn't seen the original.  It took months for them to get the digital copy of that photo of Zimmerman in the back of the patrol car.

Offline unitron

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1060
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Witness 8 Letter Dated 3/19/12
« Reply #131 on: April 04, 2013, 02:26:59 AM »
Why would you think that Sybrina Fulton didn't turn that letter over to Ben Crump?  It reads like a statement, a written affidavit, than it does a personal note to the mother of her slain friend.

Why do you think that Crump turned it over to the State until he had to?  He very well could have anticipated that W8 would mention it during her deposition.

Besides who has any idea how many generations of that letter was copied and who had read them beforehand.  You can bet the Defense hasn't seen the original.  It took months for them to get the digital copy of that photo of Zimmerman in the back of the patrol car.

I wasn't talking about what she did with it or did not do with it, I was talking about what she was or was not obligated to do with it, legally speaking.

For instance, she had no legal obligation to even let Crump, or Tracy, know that it existed.

But what about the state?


Offline leftwig

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 532
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Witness 8 Letter Dated 3/19/12
« Reply #132 on: April 04, 2013, 12:20:04 PM »
IANAL, but I would assume the only legal requirement would be based on the states or defenses request.  IF the state asks, do you have any correspondence from W8, Sybrina could simply say yes.  Until someone asks her to produce it, she wouldn't be required to turn it over.

Offline MJW

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1304
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Witness 8 Letter Dated 3/19/12
« Reply #133 on: May 04, 2013, 09:27:14 PM »
We learned in the April 30th hearing that the mysterious "letter" was written with the help of a "friend" whose last name W8 didn't know. I assume I can't mention the friend's first name, though it was inadvertently revealed by West.

In his cross-examination of West, BDLR kept hounding him to admit that the defense had no evidence that the prosecutors were aware of the letter prior to learning of it during the depositions at the same time as the defense. West pointed out that BDLR had refused to tell him when he learned of the letter, and during the hearing, BDLR never said that he didn't already know about it before the defense learned of it. I wouldn't be the least surprised to find out BDLR already knew about it.

Part of a Richardson hearing is determining whether any discovery violations were on purpose or inadvertent. I assume that's usually is done by the court or the defense questioning the prosecutors. Perhaps because Judge Nelson determined there was no violation (at least that's what I think she determined), there was no need for any inquiry. Nevertheless, it still seemed like a very one-sided examination.

Offline unitron

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1060
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Witness 8 Letter Dated 3/19/12
« Reply #134 on: May 06, 2013, 04:31:05 AM »
Something cboldt said a month ago over at the Stately Manor that I just now saw got me thinking.

Apparently Bernie said the letter was given to Sybrina.

When Witness 8's existence was discovered the evening of 3/18/12, she was somewhere in the Miami area and so, I'm guessing was Sybrina.

Not sure where Tracy was, but Crump was, I presume, wherever he lives, or at least not in or real near Miami, and so had to interview W8 over the phone.

Could Sybrina have gone to see 8 sometime the next day, the 19th, and gotten the letter and relayed its content to Crump prior to his phone interview?

Or could Sybrina have been told of the letter's existence early the 19th and gone to 8's house to pick it up from 8's mom or somebody while 8 was in school that day?

Perhaps 8 thought that would do, but was contacted later that day and convinced that she needed to let Crump interview her and record it, and maybe she thought that would be the end of it.

But anyway, could Sybrina have gotten the letter early enough to pass some details onto Crump?

 

Site Meter
click
tracking