Witness Laura Buchanan Backs Out

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted by ThinkTank
I don't know about the different case numbers???
But, the missing pages from the transcripts of the TES searchers may be a human error (according to MuzikMan who has the complete Discovery). MM will try to load the full transcripts soon.

nums24 said:
I believe they are intentionally omitted, look at the handwritten discovery page numbers on the bottom of the page, they are sequential.
Click to expand...

Right ... but MM said this info is duplicated in another section of the Discovery and the full transcripts are in the other section, and MM thinks it is merely a mistake when the Discovery was page numbered and was loaded onto the discs. MM has all of the Discovery, but we only have whatever the media outlets chose to publish. CFN appears to have published different parts of the Discovery that WESH and WFTV did not publish.
 
nums24 said:
This has really piqued my curiosity: http://www.cfnews13.com/static/articles/images/documents/courtmotionsTQS.pdf

In this document - http://www.cfnews13.com/static/articles/images/documents/TxEQSworkers2.pdf we have 2 new case numbers 10-86155 and on page 2, handwritten, upper right corner 10-86122. The plot thickens....
Click to expand...

The page that has the handwritten Case # of 10-86122 - is from the law office of Laura's attorney ... is it possible that office made a mistake when writing the case number? Is the Case # 10-86122 listed anywhere else, other than from the law office of Ray Brown?
 
ThinkTank said:
Originally Posted by ThinkTank
I don't know about the different case numbers???
But, the missing pages from the transcripts of the TES searchers may be a human error (according to MuzikMan who has the complete Discovery). MM will try to load the full transcripts soon.



Right ... but MM said this info is duplicated in another section of the Discovery and the full transcripts are in the other section, and MM thinks it is merely a mistake when the Discovery was page numbered and was loaded onto the discs. MM has all of the Discovery, but we only have whatever the media outlets chose to publish. CFN appears to have published different parts of the Discovery that WESH and WFTV did not publish.
Click to expand...
So would that mean that there's no longer an investigation of LB?
 
ThinkTank said:
The page that has the handwritten Case # of 10-86122 - is from the law office of Laura's attorney ... is it possible that office made a mistake when writing the case number? Is the Case # 10-86122 listed anywhere else, other than from the law office of Ray Brown?
Click to expand...

Of course, I was wondering that myself. I only saw that number on that 1 page, so far.
 
ThinkTank said:
The page that has the handwritten Case # of 10-86122 - is from the law office of Laura's attorney ... is it possible that office made a mistake when writing the case number? Is the Case # 10-86122 listed anywhere else, other than from the law office of Ray Brown?
Click to expand...
There's handwriting stating "new case"-pdf. page 9

ETA: sorry...think we're talking about 2 different things
 
I'm reading along, fascinated.

There's another LB deposition we haven't seen yet, right? Is it possible after that she was given immunity for certain information she may have given? She's not a big fish and she may have implicated others?

Or am I all wet...
 
RR0004 said:
Well, I think we all kinda figured out that LB was in big trouble with the papers that were found...or should I say not found. A form with no number...really?

ETA: is the doctored form- the one that has LB's name on top as team leader-is that the one they said had no number? I'm trying to figure out what's missing...I thought I did see printed form numbers. Does anyone know what they are specifically talking about?
Click to expand...

The "questioned" TES form is the one that has Laura B as Team Leader, but has Laura's last name misspelled in the "Personnel Assigned" boxes - misspelled "Buchenen", and also has "Ann Whitley" - which is Ann(e) Pham's maiden name (and only Laura knew Anne's maiden name), and also has "Dan Mitchell" instead of "D(o)n".

The "questioned" TES Field Team Activity Form has the DATE at the bottom blocked out because a "sticky note" was placed there, which says "Laura ... Mort".
 
jennyb said:
I'm reading along, fascinated.

There's another LB deposition we haven't seen yet, right? Is it possible after that she was given immunity for certain information she may have given? She's not a big fish and she may have implicated others?

Or am I all wet...
Click to expand...
No...she probably did try to save herself...but if she was given immunity that's a d*n shame. What she did was unconscionable.
 
ThinkTank said:
The "questioned" TES form is the one that has Laura B as Team Leader, but has Laura's last name misspelled in the "Personnel Assigned" boxes - misspelled "Buchenen", and also has "Ann Whitley" - which is Ann(e) Pham's maiden name (and only Laura knew Anne's maiden name), and also has "Dan Mitchell" instead of "D(o)n".

The "questioned" TES Field Team Activity Form has the DATE at the bottom blocked out because a "sticky note" was placed there, which says "Laura ... Mort".
Click to expand...
Thanks. In her depo...don't remember which one...LDB mentioned on a couple of occasions that there was no number on the page...whereas the other forms (whatever they were looking at) had numbers. Did TES number reports (pages) they handed over? There was a form in Laura's possession (at least at the depo) that didn't have "a number".
 
RR0004 said:
No...she probably did try to save herself...but if she was given immunity that's a d*n shame. What she did was unconscionable.
Click to expand...

I agree, these types of deals really sicken me. But it seems to happen all the time. Lee got some kind of partial immunity. The Anthonys tried to get it, don't know if they were successful.

Seems if the SA got some quality info from LB in exchange for immunity they'd consider it a deal worth giving.

I wouldn't be surprised if in the last deposition, she suddenly got "un-flakey" and lucid, regained her memory and spilled her guts to save her sorry self.

I do dislike the deal-making though. I'd vote for "no deals" with criminals EVER if it were up to me.
 
nums24 said:
They are listed as rebuttal witnesses, so I'm not sure they are required to, but they certainly have the right to.
Click to expand...
The defense would be absolutely insane to put LB on stand. I think the SA is playing a mean game of chess.
 
about the sticky note on the TES form that Laura's attorney faxed to LDBurdick:

Aug 30, 2010 Status Hearing
LDBurdick asks Judge Perry to put a deadline on turning over evidence, photos
LDB - not in amended Order - docs and tangible evidence - Order is silent for production of those things - as we receive discovery or tangible, been disclosing them - items that I requested - photos, docs in her possession at time of depo, her lawyer faxed to us, ask that Court consider adding deadline for docs and tangible, photos, video depos, stmts already taken of witnesses just listed today.
Baez not decided to use particular witness, becomes a problem, if decision made at last minute.

Judge - also asking that I disclose exhibits? items introduce at trial?
those usually come in at deposition and may offer at trial

LDB - requesting if things like records, photos, stmts, items of tangible evidence that could be using at Hearing or trial, if deadline on the production of those, I could be prepared

(clip)

LDB - things I am concerned about - things
during depo of Laura Buch on Aug 16th - she in NJ - had docs from TES she had a third doc in her possession that LDB did not have, Mason did not have them, her lawyer had to FAX that to us, I determined it was not in TES items - somehow this witness had a doc that was not provided, we did not have, complicated our ability to continue - wait for FAX

Judge - Defense didn't have it?

LDB - it was faxed to me - with sticky/post it note on it that said "From Laura to Mort" - Defense investigator
Laura sent this doc to Mr. Smith - this witness had it
witness had looked at aerial photos and a map - not provided to us either
had to suspend deposition - reschedule Oct 13th [NOTE: depo completed Nov 17, 2010]
 
jennyb said:
I agree, these types of deals really sicken me. But it seems to happen all the time. Lee got some kind of partial immunity. The Anthonys tried to get it, don't know if they were successful.

Seems if the SA got some quality info from LB in exchange for immunity they'd consider it a deal worth giving.

I wouldn't be surprised if in the last deposition, she suddenly got "un-flakey" and lucid, regained her memory and spilled her guts to save her sorry self.

I do dislike the deal-making though. I'd vote for "no deals" with criminals EVER if it were up to me.
Click to expand...
If she revealed any info about the defense...this trial won't be happening in May.
 
RR0004 said:
The defense would be absolutely insane to put LB on stand. I think the SA is playing a mean game of chess.
Click to expand...

I bet they nailed her but good in that last deposition. Scared her straight. They had their ducks in order, she had a different attorney, and they played hardball. OK I'll say it right now. I think she gave them Cindy Anthony on a silver platter.
 
Gosh - what a great read! That Laura, what a hoot! Foul mouthed little gal, that's for sure.

In this transcript, she tells a fellow searcher she is in Florida to attend a Law Enforcement seminar. And her phone rings a lot. And she tells the others in her car that "it's her boyfriend" calling her all the time.
http://www.cfnews13.com/static/artic...scriptsTQS.pdf

I would think there (or is it "they're or is it "their"? I'll have to ask Laura!) may be some tense moments in the house once Mr. B has had a chance to read these transcripts.
 
ThinkTank said:
about the sticky note on the TES form that Laura's attorney faxed to LDBurdick:

Aug 30, 2010 Status Hearing
LDBurdick asks Judge Perry to put a deadline on turning over evidence, photos
LDB - not in amended Order - docs and tangible evidence - Order is silent for production of those things - as we receive discovery or tangible, been disclosing them - items that I requested - photos, docs in her possession at time of depo, her lawyer faxed to us, ask that Court consider adding deadline for docs and tangible, photos, video depos, stmts already taken of witnesses just listed today.
Baez not decided to use particular witness, becomes a problem, if decision made at last minute.

Judge - also asking that I disclose exhibits? items introduce at trial?
those usually come in at deposition and may offer at trial

LDB - requesting if things like records, photos, stmts, items of tangible evidence that could be using at Hearing or trial, if deadline on the production of those, I could be prepared

(clip)

LDB - things I am concerned about - things
during depo of Laura Buch on Aug 16th - she in NJ - had docs from TES she had a third doc in her possession that LDB did not have, Mason did not have them, her lawyer had to FAX that to us, I determined it was not in TES items - somehow this witness had a doc that was not provided, we did not have, complicated our ability to continue - wait for FAX

Judge - Defense didn't have it?

LDB - it was faxed to me - with sticky/post it note on it that said "From Laura to Mort" - Defense investigator
Laura sent this doc to Mr. Smith - this witness had it
witness had looked at aerial photos and a map - not provided to us either
had to suspend deposition - reschedule Oct 13th [NOTE: depo completed Nov 17, 2010]
Click to expand...
The "notes" page (which was total bs)?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 187 more.
Total: 580 (members: 188, guests: 392)

Online statistics

Members online
188
Guests online
392
Total visitors
580
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
606,730
Messages
18,209,697
Members
233,947
Latest member
scyna0895
Back
Top