Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: I cannot think of a name

I didn’t get that from her twitters. I did get the feeling that Crump managed the message so that she was not out and out lying. Crump very carefully led her by his questions. What wasn’t said was interesting.

Anyone looking at Crump’s interview and reading the twitters can see the differences. She really didn’t care about Martin. He was that kid in her twitters after he died. The big lie from Crump was that she was so distressed she couldn’t go to Martin’s funeral. Remember Crump got his hooks into the Martins long after the funeral. He had to build a story.

Dee Cee, IIRC, went somewhere with friends on the day of Martin’s funeral. It was just another day for her. Crump blew it because by the time he came on the scene and started the PR effort, the social media content, facebook, twitter, etc. had already been found and cached on a lot of websites. Crump missed all of that.

If the news media had done a cursory internet search they would have been suspicious of the story line. Instead they jumped on the bandwagon and often added their own embellishment. If justice prevails Zimmerman is going to be very wealthy.


14 posted on 12/03/2012 7:19:05 AM PST by meatloaf (Support Senate S 1863 & House Bill 1380 to eliminate oil slavery.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]


To: meatloaf
Here is what gets me about the April 2nd deposition:

For 13 days all we heard from Crump and the Martin attorneys is that DeeDee was 16 years old -- "a minor chile". That point is driven home again and again in every media story.

Then on April 2nd BDLR the prosecutor sits down with her at a deposition and the girl in front of him states for the record under oath that she is 18 years old -- not a minor and not 16.

Did it ever occur to BDLR that the 18 y/o DeeDee in front of him at that time was not the same 16 y/o DeeDee that Crump interviewed on March 19th???

Crump brought this DeeDee to the deposition and was there in the room. Why didn't BDLR stop the deposition right there and ask Crump what the deal is???

The fact that he didn't stop the deposition right there, but then went ahead and used it for his affidavit, and in subsequent copies edited out her age, indicates that he was complicit in this scheme, perpetrating a fraud and fabricating evidence.

15 posted on 12/03/2012 8:08:59 AM PST by Uncle Chip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]

To: meatloaf

Here’s the basic problem with that logic:

If the whole story is about what she “tweeted” then she doesn’t need to be interviewed.

If there is something to the story that requires that she be interviewed, then it is more then tweeting.

If there is something to the story that requires that the defense not be told her true age so that they will not have access to her, then there is something rotten in the woodpile.

Since that is EXACTLY what happened, the only conclusion I can come to is that there IS something rotten in the woodpile. And if they are trying to keep the defense away from this girl, then there must be something about this girl that would help the defense.

Given the media circus the prosecution turned this case into, they’d have paraded her out at a news conference unless it would have somehow benefited the defense.


17 posted on 12/03/2012 9:20:11 AM PST by I cannot think of a name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson