I don't think it is too sinister.. on other pages it highlights what is clearly typed text.. mises ot signature... so I think it is TRYING to auto detect typed text.. but stuffed up with those few blocks


But...
I do think detailed analysis can only be done properly on the original document itself.. or at the very least a first generation photo of it.

MOM would need a document expert to inspect the document... not sure he has time for that.

Several news stations have been reporting on BDLRs rant. WFTVs Bill Shaffer & Fox35s Diana Tennis have made some pretty funny comments. DT said something like it sounded as if it was written at 2am while drunk LOL LOVE some of the things DT says

My guess is MOM became aware of DD's letter during her depo. BDLR had no choice but to include it in the last discovery dump. I question what was his point in including it his response. Did he think somehow it would be lost among his rant?

It's too bad for her that any normal person would have found "this tragic story" that very night.

No one could have heard what she claims she heard and not try to do something that night ... and they certainly wouldn't have to wait until approached by someone (after the 911 tapes and other information was released) to realize that they was the last person to talk to him alive.

Remember, in context with her letter....Omara had a while back asked for security video from another apartment complex...along with sams and kohls.
So now we kinda have 2 people seeming to be possibly placing trayvon in another location during his hurry home to finish the game. I think Omara has video of trayvon in the complex shes talking about.

Assuming that the letter was written prior to W8 telephone (cough) “oral affidavit” interview by Crump, you can say that this letter represents the state of her mind at that point in time (when the letter was written).

This would mean that a lot of extraneous information that W8 may have learned from the media, from Tracy, from Sybrina, from one of Crump’s associates, from Gutman, from Crump etc, did not impact on her writing of this statement.

Her lack of concern after losing phone contact with TM when combined with this letter allows for speculation that she wasn’t that close to TM. [Some of the questions the MOM probably got an answer to, in the shortened deposition session, was “when” and “how” she learned of TM’s death and “what” she did in reaction to that.

Bear in mind that all of the information that Sybrina learned about the tragedy was second and third hand hearsay. Both Tracy and Sybrina, understandably, when hit with this tragedy would search for the most positive interpretation of events, which necessitated a most negative interpretation of GZ’s actions beginning with the fact that GZ was older and armed, and TM was younger and unarmed.

Both Tracy and Sybrina spoke w/W8 prior to the Crump interview. They would have a lot of questions. A lot of the questions would certainly involve whether she could confirm details that they had learned via hearsay – hearsay that may itself been influenced by what they wanted to hear and discounting that which they did not want to hear.

By asking W8 for confirmation of details, W8 “learns” of “facts” and eventually more “facts” as the Crump/Julison narrative gets up and running. In response, Tracy and Sybrina (likely independently) receive confirmation (in their minds) of certain factors from talking to W8. The “confirmation” then become corroboration in their minds and is relayed as such to Crump who has his own agenda running.

The Crump interview now imprints her memory with a suggested narrative (suggested through the repeated emphasis on certain points and recitation of those points).

W8 has lied to Sybrina about the hospital business and likely gave further false confirmation in response to Sybrina’s questions, which then simply affirmed the preconceptions that Sybrina already had.

BDLR’s rhetorical flourishes are amusing, but his statement-taking is an abomination. Basic investigative procedures are designed to avoid almost everything that BDLR did with W8. In order to get at what a witness truly knows and can recollect, the witness must be interviewed as soon possible in isolation. Granted, that this witness’s memory was trashed by what Crump did, but even at that late stage what BDLR failed to establish as background is unfathomable. And as I have written before, I was speechless to learn that Sybrina was sitting next to W8 while a sworn statement was taken from the witness of such potential importance.

The difference is size of the writing on the W8 letter seems to have been added, but is seems to be the same penmanship, and may have been added on at the same time when the letter was completed. The “Exhibit B” is in print and was likely added by someone else.

It would be helpful to have a color copy of the letter, to see if there are different inks if it was written in ink. It seems like pencil.

Also, we have yet to learn the nature of Gutman’s self-professed prior conversations with W8

We are whistling in the dark here. We really know very very little about her. We have a couple of recordings, this letter, and a smattering of deduced facts.

What I forgot to mention in the above speculation is that the “letter” does not necessarily include everything she may have known or recalled (without outside influence).

In fact you could interpret the letter as a “de minimus” account, actually designed to minimize what she knows in order to avoid being drawn further into the public arena and in attempt to stay out of the case (for any variety of reasons. We also do not know the influence of her parents or close friends on her decision making.

The writing in the letter seems far more articulate than the mumbling heard in recorded form. Once again, it could be due to extreme reluctance at the situation she found herself in.

Lastly, as to memory, many times a witness will give an account, and then, sometimes later will recall other pertinent details that pop into mind as the memory is further processed in the subconscious. Often these latter recollections (if not contaminated by outside influence) are very helpful.

But the handling of W8 is so unbelievably trashed, the trashers (prosecution) could credibly assert that the witness is useless – by virtue of the prosecution’s own dereliction!

Seems there was talk of Trayvon "looking into cars" while in this other complex? Don't want to spread false information, but at this point, it's hard to separate fact from fiction regarding this case.

It seems to be a glaring omission that BDLR would not make such a more specific claim having any legal weight, but would be very vague about exactly what “phone records” are being claimed prove anything. Personally I find this to be suspicious that such a vague statement would be made about the phone records, and it leaves many good questions as to what BDLR is claiming as proof of anything at all.

It's too bad for her that any normal person would have found "this tragic story" that very night.

No one could have heard what she claims she heard and not try to do something that night ... and they certainly wouldn't have to wait until approached by someone (after the 911 tapes and other information was released) to realize that they was the last person to talk to him alive.

Admittedly I haven't followed this case nearly as closely as most. All I've seen on that topic is from the daft post thread here, a nonsense fantasy that included GZ being the leader of a car theft ring and employing TM. Maybe the TM supporters had heard what you remember and were desperately figuring a way to blame GZ. If it helps to track down the info, IIRC it was around page 20 of the daft thread before the current thread. I think it was mid to late January 2013 if that helps to find the info. (I can't access those threads right now.)