Posted on 04/06/2012 8:43:38 PM PDT by sheikdetailfeather
BANFIELD: And this is one of the things I think that the public that has been so voracious for every single detail on this case. They want to know everything.And in this particular case, I've been in the murder courtrooms that forensics are everything. What do we know about the forensics in this case because heretofore, we got nothing?
SONNER: I'll take that. We don't know anything yet. It hasn't been released. The state attorney is doing an investigation and right now, they opted not disclose that information.
BANFIELD: Have they shared with you at least? Has there been any discovery. I know we are not in a legal situation at this point, but --
SONNER: I'm not going to disclose that. We have been in contact and the disagreement that we're not going -- anything that I do or might know, I'm not going to disclose yet. If there charges filed, (INAUDIBLE) appearance, they are going to plead not guilty, get bond, we'll bond him out, and then we'll do a demand for discovery at which point, the state will have 15 days to respond and give us discovery.
And then we'll go through whatever forensic evidence they have. But that's the biggest problem with this case so far is everyone is jumping to conclusions and I understand. I'm not -- I'm not trying to, you know, putting one down and to be insulting one.
Everybody wants to know what happened, but we need to take a step back and let the evidence come out. So those are all good questions and there are going to be good answers.
I think so, yes. Cutcher is the chatty one. Been on CNN before, now goes on "disguised" for some reason.
The witness narrative last night corresponds quite closely with earlier Cutcher interviews. Same compliant (I have important information the police are disregarding), volunteers same observations about pitch of voice.
She used to be a local anchor here in Calgary many years ago. I never watched her, not because I didn’t like her but because I never watch any of those vacuous oafs.
Cheers,
Jim
CNN’s Banfield Falsely Claims Trayvon Martin Eyewitness Told Her Assailant Was Hispanic
EXCERPT
BANFIELD: And, Craig, she also said that she was quite certain this time and she has been interviewed before, but she seems to have fuller or more robust details at least on what she said witnessed that night.
And she says she was certain that the larger Hispanic-looking man was on top of the boy. That’s her account — the boy, at the time, the shots hang out and that he got up off of that scuffle and started walking towards her.
Maybe they just edited one interview out of the other and kept one as anonimous so they wouldn’t tip their hand.
Once my X couldn’t make an interview. I asked the question and then edited him doing it into the answers on the final play. Wasn’t difficult at all. But could be dangerous if used unethically.
Most of the newsreaders do this sort of crap. The reports are shallow and misleading, full of opinion and conclusion, short on supporting fact.
Not just this incident, across the board. If an issue matters to you, find the raw facts. The media will have the account wrong.
If GZ is the "deeper" voice, TM must sound like Michael Jackson.
" Larger person on top - what is "larger?"
Yep. A taller person in a hoodie would appear "larger".
So far it still sounds like "John" was in the best position to SEE and hear the actual fight.
I can't think of anything the media does "ethically." The code of ethics is a subterfuge, designed to get the public to accept that media has some sort of duty to be objective. It has no such duty, and should not be expected to live up to it. The public will be better off reading competing slander sheets, than to accept the notion that the media strives for balance. The media strives to maintain an ILLUSION of balance, while pushing as far as it can toward imbalance.
Looks like she didn’t get the attention she wanted the first time and demanded a do-over.
Can just hear the conversation:
We’ve interviewed you and we only have people on the show that have new information or can shed a different light on what happened.
Well I’ve got more details...(I’ve listened to all the other interviews/programs)...like uh like (wait till I take another toak on my bong) like I saw the white guy (white shirt was describe by others) on top. Like uh he was bigger...(Yelp 6’3”)...
Like uh I think she’s needing $$$$ for her habit besides the fifteen minutes.
Wonder if she has a rap sheet.....
LOL!!
Sophomoric twits.
Good questions on Cutcher's finances and drug habits. Could be she's just a drama queen, too. No need to dig into her privacy, she's damaged her own credibility.
That MUST be why CNN didn't use her name the second time. Banfield wanted to send her a subliminal message....../rocker
This entire media fiasco is /rocker
Think you’re right about CNN...They had to fill air time and nothing was available so they created it.
As to witness’s past history. If’s she’s witness, it will be an issue and will come out. Was she high that night?
Yes. That video. I really have not even seen it yet. But thanks to your link I will be able to this morning. I kept seeing brief clips of it but have not seen the whole thing. The City of Sanford has all the 911 recordings on their website and there was an emotional woman on one of them feeling she should have helped the person screaming. She was DISTRAUGHT all through the recording and they sent someone there to her place as a result. I BET THE MEDIA FOUND OUT WHO SHE WAS AND WENT TO GET HER TO TALK.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.