Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Thanks for the smooth transmission LambChop!
For a minute there, I didn't think you'd care how we FEEEEEEEEL (sarcasm)
I bet that DR worked this out with JM beforehand. I don't think she would have done this and gone out on a limb all by herself. I am sure they knew that JW was going to try and call her out as a 'liar' from the interview. So they blocked them and insisted upon an audio version, which points out her distrust of the DT. Which is understandable, because she just got through testifying that she was out of the country during the time they first accused her of being in a physical fight with TA.
So she sounds logical and rational when she says, " let me hear the audio--did you bring it with you? " LOL -WELL PLAYED!!!!!
Rickshawfan, last thread you asked if Det. Smith was taking Flores place tomorrow (re: jensdiaries tweet I posted). Detective Smith is the computer forensic guy for the state. Juan will probably clear up a lot of *advertiser censored* issues, tampering, etc...with this expert. jmo
when the thread closed. I really hate that. But I saw katydid captured much of my comment:
I thought the same thing.
I was also thinking back to my litigation firm days and, as I recall, after a deposition of a witness you would send them the transcript for review and correction. And there were corrections. No one is perfect and words aren't always transcribed correctly. I get the impression DR was never provided with the transcript or asked to approve it as correct. Or else JW would have said that. So, yes, there is every reason to refuse to answer questions based upon an "alleged" transcript of her words.
I too think Juan knew this was going to happen and was in on it-not that it was wrong or anything-she had every right to do what she did. I also wonder if the abrupt end today was because JSS told them to bring the audio. Hope springs eternal that JSS would take a position against something the defense did.
I also like how all this is illustrating that nothing the defense does should be trusted. Their witnesses LIE-that's kind of important. The affidavits are useless. Everything they say is suspect.
Wow, what a day! So much to comment on: the defense finally rests, Deanna's polite snark to JW. She is so impressive and, like others noted on the previous thread, embodies truth, decency, and integrity, all qualities that the DT's witnesses so obviously lacked. I'm sure the jury can't help comparing the quality of the prosecution's witnesses to those the DT offered.
My favourite JM sarcasm of today: email by homing pigeon. :giggle: Gotta love him.
Anyway, I've got some work to do before bed, so I'll lurk you all tomorrow.
Wow, what a day! So much to comment on: the defense finally rests, Deanna's polite snark to JW. She is so impressive and, like others noted on the previous thread, embodies truth, decency, and integrity, all qualities that the DT's witnesses so obviously lacked. I'm sure the jury can't help comparing the quality of the prosecution's witnesses to those the DT offered.
My favourite JM sarcasm of today: email by homing pigeon. :giggle: Gotta love him.
Anyway, I've got some work to do before bed, so I'll lurk you all tomorrow.
By the way, here is Keifer's comment on what was on the transcript page before Willmott actually read it I think. Different take than I got but how did he know what was in the transcript?
Michael Kiefer ‏@michaelbkiefer · 33s33 seconds ago
The page says that she didn't know Alexander was having sex with others. "I don't feel comfortable answering the question from a transcript.
So it appears that her answer of "I don't know" to that weirdly worded question was automatically taken as I don't know if he was having sex with others. Which in itself was a wrong interpretation likely and then it was multiplied by suggesting that meant DR was lying about whether she had sex with him. What a far stretch. Very far.
Did Kiefer got his info from MDLR before it was presented or were some of the other tweets delayed?
MOO
:applause:. . . .Standing O :rose: . . . . . .Deanna and Ziggy . . . . . . . ❤️ My Heroes for the Day! ❤️
(¯`v´¯)
`*.¸.*´
¸.´ ¸.*¨)¸.*¨)
(¸.´(¸. (¸.´(¸¸.¨¯`.¸¸.♥
:fireworks:
By the way, here is Keifer's comment on what was on the transcript page before Willmott actually read it I think. Different take than I got but how did he know what was in the transcript?
Michael Kiefer ‏@michaelbkiefer · 33s33 seconds ago
The page says that she didn't know Alexander was having sex with others. "I don't feel comfortable answering the question from a transcript.
So it appears that her answer of "I don't know" to that weirdly worded question was automatically taken as I don't know if he was having sex with others. Which in itself was a wrong interpretation likely and then it was multiplied by suggesting that meant DR was lying about whether she had sex with him. What a far stretch. Very far.
Did Kiefer got his info from MDLR before it was presented or were some of the other tweets delayed?
MOO
Wait a sec? Did JA meet Abe and Travis at around the same time?