Definitely going to be interesting to see what if anything does come of any of it. I wonder if there will be some clap back at MS for their broadcasts, or if there will be anything from authority figures to the lawyers involved etc... Not sure what sort of timeline it might take for anything to come of it.
MS has not broadcast or published discovery They are exposing a covert group who had access to discovery only the Defense could have provided. There are strict protocols for sharing discovery and this isn't that.
Actually that is also a good point - I do wonder now if RA also told anyone else he'd been at the trails that day before he spoke to LE. I wonder if he tested a story on someone, and then enhanced or altered it based on their reactions? If witness statements can be affected by talking to a co-witness, I wonder if a witness statement from the perp can similarly affected by sharing his version of events with neutral parties who weren't there? I wonder if there is any research on this and will go searching for it when time permits. It must be a thing, surely, right? MOOOOOO.
Ok, so in theory, it is possible perhaps, that the people providing the information to MS might be doing exactly what people are mad that they think others are doing (eg: putting info in the public, tainting public opinion etc)?
I am not sure - I believe MW took photos of some sort from the office of RA's lawyer, and then provided that photo / those photos (not sure which) to someone in Texas, who then provided them to someone else and some youtubers and podcasters. This link seems to agree that I have it right:
To be clear, I wasn't asking to see evidence that RA provided info to anyone else before he gave his statement. I was asking in general - since we know that witness statements can be influenced by things such as talking to people before talking to police, talking with co-witnesses, how questions are asked etc etc etc... then I wondered if similar things can affect statements given by a guilty party (any guilty party, doesn't have to be RA in particular). Was just a theoretical question more than anything, not a literal one.
HA!!!
We can't really know for sure though why the person in receipt of the photos sent out by MW actually killed himself. We know only that he was in receipt of the photos from someone MW sent them to who then forwarded them to him. We know he was asked for an interview by LE, and then he committed suicide. It is possible that being in receipt of those photos played a role in his suicide but how do we know this for certain? We don't know what else may have been going on for him at time, or what his past life experience was. We don't know what the photos were even really of that might have led him to make his decision to suicide. We don't know what his past mental health status may have been, or whether any alcohol or drugs may have been consumed prior to his suicide. We don't know if he had long dealt with suicidal ideation or not, or even if he had made prior attempts.
I'd be so much more impressed if the "whistleblower" hadn't gone to a social media creator to blow the whistle though, and had instead gone to an actual authority who could DO something about it all! I'd be even MORE impressed if we were to find out that the content creators in question went to the authorities and filed a report - I could understand them putting it out in public if the powers that be had refused to listen to their concerns. That would make sense. But as it is, I just can't really get behind these creators as a good thing for either side of the case really. Maybe I'll eventually be pleasantly surprised.
None of the prior leaks coming out of this DT's office have been fake. So why would I think this one was?
Oh dear, we're back to they resigned vs JG tossed them without a hearing. Spartygirl, you know I love your posts, and I love the discussions had around here, even when we don't all agree, so this is NOT specifically directed at you, even though I'm replying to your comment, and have mentioned you. I'm more using your post a jump off to say, wow, we're going in big circles. I sure hope next week brings some clarity to the issues, and perhaps a beginning to resolution in some of them!!
Well, do we know yet what exactly what MW took photos of and sent around online? I guess I'm asking, is it possible that whatever he took from the attorney's office may not have been *actual* crime scene photos? Could they have been some representation of what the scene looked like vs actual crime scene photos? If the photos were actually taken by LE originally AND unaltered, then yes, they'd be actual crime scene photos. But if they were altered, or somehow changed and were recreations / imaginings or a theory of something, then they may have not even be real crime scene photos in the first place. Unless a judge could see what the original un-edited CS photos were, vs whatever MW snapped photos of an sent out, then I'm not sure the photos were really from the original actual crime scene. I'm not sure I'm articulating this really well, so I hope I make some sort of sense here. To me, given how minor his charges seemed, and that he was given a diversion program instead of some big scary sentence, it just seems that whatever he "leaked" couldn't have been really a breach of the order (no contempt against him?). Couldn't have been as horrible a thing as MS made them out to be really or I'd have expected bigger repercussions for him. Again, I've done my best to articulate my thoughts, but I get they may still be unclear.
That sounds logical in theory, but I think PM had seen enough to know that crossing this group would land him in Motta's " zone of pain."
