Author Topic: Witness 8 Letter Dated 3/19/12  (Read 25086 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline nomatter_nevermind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5449
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Witness 8 Letter Dated 3/19/12
« Reply #30 on: March 30, 2013, 02:39:34 PM »
Are we in agreement that it was written the day of DD's interview with Crump and prior to it? At least as far as we have evidence of when it was written?

That is what we have been told.

Offline MJW

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1304
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Witness 8 Letter Dated 3/19/12
« Reply #31 on: March 30, 2013, 02:43:32 PM »
What doesn't seem logical to me is that BDLR says:

Quote
Witness 8 did everything she could to keep from being identified, including using her nickname so she would not be subjected to what is now happening to her. See attached letter Witness 8 gave Victim's mother, Sybrina Fulton, prior to the recorded phone call with Trayvon Martin's (sic) attorney, Benjamin Crump.

What in the content of the letter supports the assertion that "Witness 8 did everything she could to keep from being identified"? If, as some have conjectured, the redacted writing is a nickname to keep her identity secret, why would it need to be redacted? And though I now agree with nomatter_nevermind that the redaction isn't too long to be a full name, I think it's too long to be a normal nickname, especially "DeeDee."

Offline cboldt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1262
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Witness 8 Letter Dated 3/19/12
« Reply #32 on: March 30, 2013, 02:47:02 PM »
Could someone refresh my memory? Where was DD when she was interviewed by Crump and who was with her? What was the address? Was she at her address that both the state and she refused to give out?

I think her location at that time is undisclosed, and maybe unknown.

Offline nomatter_nevermind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5449
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Witness 8 Letter Dated 3/19/12
« Reply #33 on: March 30, 2013, 02:49:35 PM »
Where was DD when she was interviewed by Crump and who was with her? What was the address? Was she at her address that both the state and she refused to give out?

I don't think the answers to any of these questions have been made public.

Offline FromBelow

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 497
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Witness 8 Letter Dated 3/19/12
« Reply #34 on: March 30, 2013, 02:53:12 PM »
Here's my theory: I don't think Crump would have invited the media unless he was confident the interview would take place. It would be quite embarrassing for him if this soon to be star witness was a no show with the media bearing witness to his inability to provide what he evidently said he was going to provide to get them to show up. I think he had someone with DD to guarantee it would take place. I think that person wrote the letter for DD.

Offline nomatter_nevermind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5449
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Witness 8 Letter Dated 3/19/12
« Reply #35 on: March 30, 2013, 02:55:00 PM »
I think it's too long to be a normal nickname, especially "DeeDee."

I wouldn't assume 'Dee Dee' was the name de la Rionda had in mind. I don't know that W-8 has ever used that name, or Crump for that matter. It was Gutman who felt the need to use a pseudonym for her.

Has Crump ever said W-8 was Trayvon's 'girlfriend'? I think that meme may be all on Gutman too.

Offline cboldt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1262
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Witness 8 Letter Dated 3/19/12
« Reply #36 on: March 30, 2013, 02:59:45 PM »
Has Crump ever said W-8 was Trayvon's 'girlfriend'? I think that meme may be all on Gutman too.
From his March 20 presser, this is Crump speaking ...
She is a minor. Her parents are very worried about her.  She is traumatized over this. This was her really, really close personal friend. They were dating. ...
In fact, she couldn't even go to his wake she was so sick. Her mother had to take her to     the hospital. She spent the night in the hospital. She is traumatized beyond anything you could imagine. And we all were teenagers, so we can imagine how that is when you think somebody's really special, and you call it puppy love or whatever you want to call it. Then suddenly and tragically, this is taken away and you have, unfortunately, a first-hand account of it. So I will ask you again on behalf of the family and on behalf of the young lady's family if you would please respect their privacy. She is a minor.

Offline nomatter_nevermind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5449
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Witness 8 Letter Dated 3/19/12
« Reply #37 on: March 30, 2013, 03:04:22 PM »
From his March 20 presser, this is Crump speaking ...

I knew Crump said 'dating' and 'puppy love'. I was asking if he ever said 'girlfriend'.

Offline FromBelow

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 497
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Witness 8 Letter Dated 3/19/12
« Reply #38 on: March 30, 2013, 03:19:15 PM »
I knew Crump said 'dating' and 'puppy love'. I was asking if he ever said 'girlfriend'.

What's the significance if any? Even if he didn't say that exact word isn't it implied by "dating" and "puppy love"? Would any reasonable person think that she wasn't his girlfriend given such a representation of their relationship?

Offline cboldt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1262
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Witness 8 Letter Dated 3/19/12
« Reply #39 on: March 30, 2013, 03:22:48 PM »
I knew Crump said 'dating' and 'puppy love'. I was asking if he ever said 'girlfriend'.

Even if he did (and I don't see where he did), his meaning and your meaning might not be the same meaning.  She's a girl, and Crump did say she was his friend.  He added "dating" and "puppy love," which nearly everybody would take as an indication of more than casual friends, neighbor friend, etc.

Offline TalkLeft

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1125
  • Rate Post +0/-0
    • TalkLeft: The Politics of Crime
Re: Witness 8 Letter Dated 3/19/12
« Reply #40 on: March 30, 2013, 03:25:22 PM »
What difference does it make?  It's what he was trying to communicate, whatever word he used. He portrayed them as romantically and emotionally very close. And he never corrected the media's continual referral to her as his girlfriend.

Quote
She is traumatized over this. This was her really, really close personal friend. They were dating. And so it's a situation where to know that you were the last person to talk to the young man who you thought was one of the most special people in the world to you, and know that he got killed moments after he was talking to you, is just riveting to this young lady.

In fact, she couldn't even go to his wake she was so sick. Her mother had to take her to the hospital. She spent the night in the hospital. She is traumatized beyond anything you could imagine. And we all were teenagers, so we can imagine how that is when you think somebody's really special, and you call it puppy love or whatever you want to call it. Then suddenly and tragically, this is taken away and you have, unfortunately, a first-hand account of it. So I will ask you again on behalf of the family and on behalf of the young lady's family if you would please respect their privacy. She is a minor.

Offline cboldt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1262
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Witness 8 Letter Dated 3/19/12
« Reply #41 on: March 30, 2013, 03:25:47 PM »
Here's my theory: I don't think Crump would have invited the media unless he was confident the interview would take place. It would be quite embarrassing for him if this soon to be star witness was a no show with the media bearing witness to his inability to provide what he evidently said he was going to provide to get them to show up. I think he had someone with DD to guarantee it would take place. I think that person wrote the letter for DD.

The circle of embarrassment would be very tight.  If the witness doesn't show that night, then there is no news story.  The only press present was Crump's good friends from ABC.

Offline cboldt

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1262
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Witness 8 Letter Dated 3/19/12
« Reply #42 on: March 30, 2013, 03:32:23 PM »
What doesn't seem logical to me is that BDLR says:

What in the content of the letter supports the assertion that "Witness 8 did everything she could to keep from being identified"? If, as some have conjectured, the redacted writing is a nickname to keep her identity secret, why would it need to be redacted? And though I now agree with nomatter_nevermind that the redaction isn't too long to be a full name, I think it's too long to be a normal nickname, especially "DeeDee."

If the nickname is one this person actually uses, then it is redacted to eliminate the possibility that Witness 8's identity will become public that way.  I think the redaction is presented to the defense as well.  In other words, the defense doesn't know what's under the redaction.

Offline FromBelow

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 497
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Witness 8 Letter Dated 3/19/12
« Reply #43 on: March 30, 2013, 03:37:59 PM »
The circle of embarrassment would be very tight.  If the witness doesn't show that night, then there is no news story.  The only press present was Crump's good friends from ABC.

Still, failure to provide the 'scoop' he promised would be embarrassing. In any case I'm sure MOM asked DD where she was and who was with her. We may find out at some point. If Crump did have someone with her would it really matter? It wouldn't be illegal. Even if that person did write out the letter for DD that wouldn't be illegal either. AFAIK. As long as it isn't a misrepresentation of what DD wanted to be written anyway.

Offline TalkLeft

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1125
  • Rate Post +0/-0
    • TalkLeft: The Politics of Crime
Re: Witness 8 Letter Dated 3/19/12
« Reply #44 on: March 30, 2013, 03:43:32 PM »
Matt Gutman aired this report on March 19, the day Crump took her deposition. In it, he has a sit-down interview with Tracy and Sybrina. It's the same weekend that the 911 calls were released pursuant to the lawsuit Crump filed. I'd bet Crump was in Sanford that weekend, not Tallahassee, and he went from Sanford to Miami for the interview with Witness 8.

Gutman got so many things wrong in the report and it is so biased. But it may explain why Crump chose him for the Dee Dee interview.  Were the Martins in Sanford over that weekend for the release of the 911 calls? There's a clip of a news conference with them and Crump that appears to be in Sanford.

 

Site Meter
click
tracking