Analyst wrote:
Saw that great work at Talk Left
,
Contains interesting speculation, but imo overlooks a few things.
TL at page 5:
Perhaps at this juncture, the end of tape 2, he used Gutman's phone to call her back.
Gutman’s phone may have had an internal recording device, which he activated before
giving it to Crump. If so, and Crump forgot to repress the record button on his recorder, or
mistakenly assumed he had pressed it, Gutman’s phone could have recorded for five
minutes while Crump’s recorder did not. (I don’t doubt Gutman also brought other recording
equipment to record the conversation, but it seems to me from the quality of the ABC clip,
that this came from Gutman’s phone.) Interestingly, Crump says in his affidavit that to this
day he doesn’t know if Gutman actually recorded anything. (Footnote 5 of the Affidavit.)
Thus, Crump may attempt to excuse his failure to record the five minute segment of his
interview with Witness 8 that was recorded by Gutman by claiming he simply forgot to
press the record button on his device when he called her back using another phone, or that
he thought he had pressed it, and was simply mistaken.
Me:
Yes, you can dowload apps to record calls on Iphones and Android phones, but Gutman tweeted that he recorded the call, and not just 5 minutes of the call. Why wouldn't ABC use the professional recording gear they had with them? Also, MOM stated that ABC had a better quality audio 25 minute recording, not just a 5 minute recording. See Motion For Reconsideration, paragraph 16.
I don't think Crump can claim that he forgot to record because of the beep pattern and 1, 2, 3 countdown before starting to record. I think Crump knew exactly what he was doing: coaching the witness prior to recording.
TL at page 6:
Some of the missing statements, which are in the ABC recording, are quite memorable.
Me:
Yes, particularly W8's statement about the man going to beat Trayvon.
TL at pages 6-7
I think her first version, in which Zimmerman responds to Trayvon’s question by asking
“What are you talking about?” is pretty close to what Zimmerman told Detectives Serino
6and Singleton the night of the shooting.
[snip]
It sounds to me like both George and Witness 8 were providing a shorthand version of
something that went like:
Me:
I don't think W8's story is at all similar to what Z told the cops. Sounds to me like W8's story is completely fabricated.
TL at page 8:
I think Crump may have been so nonplussed by Witness 8's first rendition of how
Zimmerman responded to Travyon’s question, that in coaching her back to the version he
expected to hear, he unwittingly threw his clients under the bus.
Me:
Crump will intentionally, rather than unwittingly, throw Sybrina and Tracy under the bus if the shizzle hits the fan as evidenced by the CYA affidavit Crump filed with the court.
TL at page 9:
When interviewing Witness 8, Crump says to her, “I understand you had to go to the hospital.” How would Crump have known that before she told him? The likely answer, in my view, is he heard it from Sybrina.
Me:
Crump seems to swear that he learned that in the un-recorded preliminary portion of the interview. See Crump Affidavit, paragraph 19 h.
TL at page 10:
It’s possible, but it all sounds very rushed to me. I think it is more likely Tracy discovered
Witness 8 before the 18th, possibly through phone records provided by Crump’s
investigator, and Witness 8's conversion from a person who had told no one about her
connection to Trayvon that night, including the police, to a person ready to disclose all
during an interview in the presence of the media, took well more than 24 hours.
Me:
Why does Tracy need Crump's investigator to discovery Tracy's own online T-Mobile phone records (which say "Welsome tracy") ? I thinkTracy would have discovered the phone records not later than around March 5 when the cop asked him for the phone PIN. Seems to me that TL fails to connect the dots regarding the timing of obtaining release of the NEN and 911 calls followed by the deus ex machina production of W8 who "blows Zimmerman's absurd self-defense claims out of the water."
TL at page 11
Why would she would lie about going to the hospital? It seems that she first told the hospital
lie to Sybrina Fulton, probably during the visit to Sybrina’s apartment in March. Maybe
Sybrina mentioned not seeing her at the wake, and feeling embarrassed, Witness 8 made
up the excuse of being in the hospital.
Me:
Ronquavis said he met her at the funeral. I think the hospital lie was fabricated to cover early discovery of W8 followed by delay to obtain release of NEN and 911 calls, concoct W8's story and coach W8. The "embarrassed" lie is a further lie fabricated to explain the hospital lie. TL is not connecting the dots. Why didn't W8 know that her own cell phone was Simple Mobile and anonymous? Yes, you can conceive of innocent explanations for each lie, taken in isolation. But when you look at the big picture, the innocent explanations fall apart.
TL at page 12:
I don’t think Crump lied.
Me:
yougottabekiddingme
TL at page 12:
How much of her story is based on her independent memory, as opposed to a blending of her memory of events with what she later learned from the media and the Martins and Crump?
Me:
As near as I can tell, 100% of her story is fabricated from information obtained from the media, Martins and Crump.
TL at page 13:
A small example: She never mentions a mail area to Crump when describing how Trayvon
stayed under a covered place while it was raining. She calls it a “plaza” and then a “shade.”
She’d never been to the Retreat at Twin Lakes. It was only after the media published
maps of the complex, that she came to describe the sheltered place to the prosecutor as a
mail area.
Me:
She called it an apartment shade on March 19. She never described it as a mail area. She said "mail thing" on April 2. BDLR described it as a mail area. BDLR led her throughout the April 2 interview. "Described . . . to the prosecutor" improperly imbues the April 2 farce with an aura of legitimacy.
TL at page 13:
While her lie about the hospital might not be directly related to her version of events the
night Zimmerman was attacked and Trayvon was shot, it shows she lied to the prosecutor,
Crump and Sybrina Fulton. The jury will learn she told a lie, not once, but three times. The
jury is bound to wonder, was she lying then, or is she lying now?
Me:
W8 will obviously not repeat the lie on the stand, so my understanding is that her prior inconsistent hearsay statements will not be admitted for impeachment, since there would be nothing to impeach if she didn't repeat the lie on the stand. Also, I don't think evidence of specific lies are admissible to show a character of untruthfullness. So how will the jury learn that she lied about the hospital three times?
Login
FAQ
Do not go gentle into that good night.
LOLOLOL and Crumpy saying "Bu, bu, bu buttt.. See!! W-9 said Z's are raaaaaccist" 
