Crump and the ABC Clip

Considering I’ve already expressed much of what I have thought on this issue already at the treehouse I will simply repost some of that here as well. So some of this will be a repeat for you all.

There were seven clips from Crump’s recorder that O’Mara uploaded to his site…

Clip 1 – 2:21
Clip 2 – 5:13
[–ABC Clip–]
Clip 3 – 10:29
Clip 4 – 15:04
Clip 5 – 15:11
Clip 6 – 15:47
Clip 7 – 17:42
END —19:30

Thanks to Nettles18 and friends for the Transcript

http://gzlegalcase.com/index.php/press-releases/78-11th-supplemental-discovery

The ABC clip ends at the start of clip 3. Listen from 10:25 onward in the video above for the transition of the combined clips.

ABC Clip: http://abcnews.go.com/US/video/hear-phone-conversation-18622033

As you can see/hear there is no part of the ABC clip on Crumps recorder which was given to the State.

My first concern was why do we not have this ABC clip, or at least part of it, in the discovery that should have come from Crumps recorder. Crump says in his affidavit;
http://www.cfnews13.com/content/dam/news/static/cfnews13/documents/2013/02/Ben-Crump-deposition-affidavit-0205.pdf

fdbhsdbnfgnf

It is clear from 5:51 of my video to 6:25 that Crump is about to record DeeDee.

We hear a beep at 6:25. Is that a beep coming from Crumps recorder as he hits record? I do not think so.

I don’t think the beep @10:27 is his recorder either, that actually sounds like a beep from a fire alarm with a low battery or something like that. Also it happens before Crump says “1,2,3″ so if he started the tape before that we would hear that part on Clip 3 of the discovery but we don’t.

From the manual of Crump’s recorder it talks about beeps. One area is that you can turn the beep on/off for operation, it says: “A beep will sound to indicate that an operation has been accepted or an error has occurred.”

Digital Voice Recorder Sony Model number: ICD-BX112
http://esupport.sony.com/US/p/model-home.pl?mdl=ICDBX112&template_id=1&region_id=1&tab=manuals#/manualsTab

I have the next Sony model up from that one, which has USB capability(Crumps does not), and it has a beep option as well. When I hit record it will beep. When I hit stop it will beep. When I hit pause during recording it will beep.

The beep on my recorder sounds just like the beeps we hear in the clips from Crumps Recorder.

There are three different tones of beeps on my recorder that I can hear. 1) “an operation has been accepted” such as hitting Play/Record 2) going through the various menu options 3) “an error has occurred” such as hitting record while in play mode will make the recorder beep four times in quick succession and Alarm, the alarm function has many quick succession of four beeps each in a row.

You can hear the beeps from going through the various menu options in this video here from the same model as Crumps recorder.
@1:18

Here is a video that features the same recorder I have:
Menu beeps @ 1:20 onward REC beep @2:32 onward

Listen to just the ABC clip and you will hear just one beep at the end. It comes just after he says “1,2,3” and is rather faint. That is Crump pressing record on his device.

Now in the clips from the evidence we also hear beeps and this is why.

Crumps recorder does not have USB capability or a removable media card. So in order to get the sound from it you have to do one of two things. 1) Press play on the device and record the sound coming out of it with a microphone from another device. 2) Place a mini jack into the device and record into some other device.

Number 2 is the preferred method. However the FBI and FDLE both used method 1. Why I don’t know but the result is a lower quality audio.

Now when they used that method they also captured beeps while pressing play on the device. And so that is why you hear a beep in those clips.

Here is clip 3 and notice you can hear the beep at the beginning. Just before that beep there is another subtle sound; that of the agent pressing record on whatever he’s pressing record on, then he presses play on Crumps device resulting in the beep.
http://184.172.211.159/~gzdocs/documents/0113/w8_interview/w8_recordingA3_red.mp3

So let’s go back to the ABC clip. Remember at 5:51 of my video to 6:25 it sounds like Crump is about to record DeeDee talking, she begins talking and ends her story at 9:01 then Crump says “Okay, I’ma, I’ma hold for a second”. Crump saying that gives me the impression he was going to stop the recorder at that point.

So it would seem we would have a clip in the discovery that is apx. 2m41s but we don’t. Why?

Well, Crump could say he simply and mistakenly did not hit record on the recorder at that point and that is why we do not have that clip.

I do not hear the beeps that should come from Crumps recorder before or after DeeDee was talking.

So for the particular issue of why that was not on Crumps recorder, Crump is in the clear.

Let’s move on to the second issue.

I want to consider now the two segments before and after DeeDee talks where Crump is doing most of the talking.

It is from those two segments where we may have the other issue of concern. The question is; does within those two clips lay perjury or some other nefarious thing. I don’t know. We have to take them in account when reading the affidavit.

So let’s listen to segment 1

And now consider that in light of this first statement:

Crump aff 1

Let us do the same for segment 2

Clearly they were speaking. However Crump goes on to elaborate:

Crump aff 2
Crump aff 3

I think it could be reasons A and D that may do away with any perjury concern. It seems ambiguous enough to explain away what Crump is doing in those two segments.

But what about some other nefarious thing?

If one listened to the ABC clip out of context it may give one the impression that Crump is telling DeeDee what to say, but is he?

If we listen to segment 1 and listen to what Crump says, it sounds like he’s telling her to say that Trayvon went to the store around six to get some snacks for his little brother. But once we combine the ABC segment with the other clips we can see that before Crump said this DeeDee said it. She says it in clip 2 at 2:52 and 3:19 of the video. So this takes care of segment 1.

In segment 2 Crump wants her to talk about the part where she says she could hear George say “What you doing in here”. He goes on to say he wants her to start from where she said Trayvon said he lost George. Crump also mentions the part where she tells Trayvon to run. On the face of it this seems easy because DeeDee in the same ABC clip just before this told Crump all of this. But there’s problems.

Crump phrases it “What you doing in here” but DeeDee didn’t phrase it that way. She said she heard George say @8:36 “What you talkin about”. She also never said Trayvon lost George. She said Trayvon TRIED to lose George.

Something else strange happens in the second segment at 9:03. Crump says “OK. I’ma, I’ma hold for a second. I just want to ask the part about the alt[I think “altercation”], when you say you heard the other person, [unintelligible], you know, like you told Mr. Tracy and Miss Sybrina there, when you say he loud, it was like, “What you doing in here,” and stuff…”

Told Tracy and Sybrina? How could that be? Let’s step back a moment.

Crump says in his affidavidt:

ghdghjdghjgj

So the night before the interview with DeeDee is the first time Crump learned of DeeDee talking to Trayvon.

In Crumps presser on March 20, 2012, announcing DeeDee to the world, he said:

Mr. Martin on Sunday evening was working with his cell phone account trying to figure out Trayvon’s password and he looked on it and he saw who the last person was that Trayvon Martin talked to while he was alive. He called me late Sunday night and told me that he had called the young lady and he told me and I was just utterly shocked when he told me the time that they had talked. They had talked all day…
http://www.wftv.com/videos/news/lawyer-presser-pt-1-in-trayvon-martin-case/vGcBx/

@1:15

So somewhere in between late Sunday night and before the interview the next day DeeDee told Tracy and Sybrina the story of what she heard?

Sybrina stated to investigators:

Photobucket
page 37
http://cbsmiami.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/documents-given-to-the-defendant_r.pdf

So late sunday evening Tracy called and talked to DeeDee who Told Tracy the story then Sybrina also called DeeDee and DeeDee told her the story as well then they do the phone interview the next day but somewhere Crump hears the DeeDee story from Tracy and Sybrina before the interview.

Oh, but there’s a problem. Tracy said in his statements to investigators(page 40 SAA):

Photobucket

Whoops, that’s obviously not true.

So going back and listening to the entire interview that we currently have it makes more sense now why Crump is saying some of the things he says. It’s because he has heard the story before though perhaps not from DeeDee rather Tracy and Sybrina.

And if we go back now to segment 2 we can see why Crump phrases DeeDee’s words of “What you talkin about” into “What you doing in here” because that’s what Crump probably heard from Tracy and Sybrina. Notice immediately after Crump says that to DeeDee she changes what she said earlier to “What you doing around here”. Her story will also morph into Crumps words to express that Trayvon had lost George as opposed to what DeeDee said that Trayvon tried to lose him. But of course Trayvon couldn’t because of George’s superman like powers.

Advertisements

55 thoughts on “Crump and the ABC Clip

  1. I’ve a theory as to why Crump left out the part that ABC filled in. Simply that parts of her story didn’t line up with DD2’s. A big one is jacket vs hoodie. You can’t have her say jacket, that would NOT work to foster the branding of the story; as in marketing. And plaza? Are we to believe that TM said plaza? Mail thing… shed as DD2 said is more sellable.

    This is about selling a story and ABC part, the part left out by Crump, contradicted too much of what DD2 said and the branding of the hoodie. Simply Marketing 101.

  2. She came about so Late – because Crump was waiting for facts to develop and Zimmerman’s side to speak.

    He waited as long as he could, and it’s Crump’s Puppet.

    .

  3. Everyone seems to agree that DD was on the phone with TM at roughly the time of the incident.

    How do we know this? I mean we have the call records, but how accurate are the times?

    I don’t find DD credible. But if she heard anything, wouldn’t she have called the police? My suspicion is either that she wasn’t on the phone with TM or she was, but she heard something that indicated TM was about to start a fight.

    On the other hand, she places the altercation near the father’s house, contrary to all the other evidence. This really wasn’t in the media narrative prior to her statement. If Crump wanted to coach her testimony in a certain way, that’s not what he would do. He doesn’t strike me as a genius, but he knows the location of the body.

    • Don’t put me in the camp that says she was on the phone with Mr. Martin. Quite the opposite. I’ve said for months now that the is ZERO PROOF that she was on the phone. ZERO PROOF.

      How do you not know he was talking to someone else. Anyone else. A guy, some other girl, a drug connection? How do you KNOW that any of these could NOT have been on the phone.

      There are so many reasons why this stinks of a set up. Her mentioning “ice tea” is a biggie, the fact that he never went under a “mail shed”, her over detailing of events and then leaving out important stuff, her being 16 then 18, her two different illnesses of which she lied about going to the hospital. But what makes me NOT believe the existence of “DD” the most is that this whole story broke just days after the release of the NEN and 911 calls plus the fact that Tracy was giving the police report. Crump and Juleson now had outlines and notes from which to write a scrip.

      The problem was time. As time went by this past year, the DD story began to unravel to where we are today.

      So, NO I do NOT believe “DD” was on the phone with him that night. There is only a MAYBE that someone talked to him at all right now.

    • Aside from the question of who was on the phone, the question of whether the records show the last call continued until the altercation is of interest.

      We worked this out on TalkLeft a while ago, with a lot of input from DiwataMan.

      The calls are recorded by start time and length of call. Both are rounded by up to 59 seconds, not to the nearest minute, but in favor of the phone company.

      That means the window for the start of a call is a full minute, and the window for the end of a call is a minute and 59 seconds.

      The window for the start of Martin’s last call, is 7:12:00-12:59.

      The window for the end of the Martin’s last call, is 7:15:01-16:59.

      The first 9:11 call connected at 7:16:11.

      I think the altercation would have begun about half a minute to a minute before the first 911 call. (I think a full minute is a stretch, but it’s a round figure.) That leaves a window of about 10-40 seconds for the call to disconnect before the altercation began.

      • “The window for the end of the Martin’s last call, is 7:15:01-16:59”

        Are you sure? I was told that if I go over a minute, say 1:30, I get charged for 2. I call at 7:12 and talk of 30 seconds, it will show the call ending at 7:13 and I get charged for a one minute call. That means her call should have ended at 7:15:59 or before. Based on a reasonable timeline Trayvon probably approached George around 7:15:25 give or take 10 seconds.

        It fits in the timeline of DD’s call, if she called and if the call actually took place.

  4. Starting at 4:35 of the ABC clip, Crump says: “I want you to, ah, tell about how he said, how Trayvon said ‘I thought I lost him and then….’ I want you to start off right there: ‘I thought I lost him and then he CAUGHT UP.’ I want you to do it loud and slow so I can get it.”

    It’s shameless how Crump trys to put words in the mouth of W8, even fabricating direct quotes for Trayvon.

    I don’t see W8 being called by the prosecution, even without her lies. As Mark Martinson pointed out, W8 gets the location of the start of the controntation all wrong.

    • Crump also said he was not aware if ABC made a recording but the clip that someone posted on the March 20th online article indicates that Mr. Crump is wearing an ABC microphone. His voice is clear on that recording.

      Who, besides Mr. Crump, can verify if ABC put a microphone on him? Depose Mr. Crump!

          • I misunderstood about the ABC mic that you mentioned Crump wearing.I was hoping there was visual of it- not just audio. Sorry- I should have read it closer the first time.

            • Mr. O’Mara said in an interview after court he heard there was a camera there. Wouldn’t it be awesome if Gutman did video-tape it?

              I wonder why ABC continues to delay in producing what they know. I was surprised to read, the motion to compel ABC to produce their recording is still outstanding.

              • I thought you meant camera on when I read your other post. That truly would be awesome! I would personally like to see Gutman lose his job over the underhanded stuff he has pulled, but I have a hunch he is just a pawn in reserve right now. Who knows, maybe he is cooperating with defense behind the scenes??

              • There is a possibility that ABC is helping the defense as part of a settlement or in order to get a favorable settlement. The tape also served another purpose, unlike the barely deciferable tapes release by the prosecution, you could hear DD and an argument can be made that their reporting was based on her testimony, thereby minimizing damages.

                • ABC had best come up with audio of W8 saying she is Trayvon’s girlfriend, in light of their reporting. It isn’t on what we’ve heard so far. Which may lead some to believe it was fabricated by the reporter and the lawyer.

                • That would be my guess, too. Tie it all together as part of a settlement so that all sides win. It can’t be that hard to do that. The details now may be money and how much responsibility ABC will accept.

                  • That small snippet has certainly helped the Defense, and they might have other things as well, that they may leverage, parental permission, more of Crump coaching, tapes of Gutman’s own conversations with DD, etc. The fact that an answer by ABC has not been filed, or the Defense is actively pushing the issue, may be indications of some behind the scenes negotiations.

              • Speaking of the camera, they have directional mikes and are able to record just sound not just video and sound. Is this was pointed at Crump that might be the source of the recording.

          • Perhaps, IDK. Another thing I noticed, I was re-reading the transcripts you posted, thanks, something got my attention, she did not say Ice Tea at the beginning she said Arizona, which would be correct slang.
            The other thing that got my attention is that she said that GZ said “what you talking about” twice before it was changed to “what you doing around here”.
            Combine that with having talking on speaker, I am thinking there is someone on her end, either directing her or feeding her lines. The whole conversation is weird in that there are pauses on her end, that to me indicate coaching. Sometimes Crump is asking one question but she starts talking about something else, is almost as if she is having a conversation on the side.

  5. I’t shameless. He’s saying, in effect, “whenever you are asked about this make sure you say ‘I thought I lost him and the caught up.'”

  6. Note at 12:18 of clip 3, W8 says Trayvon started to explain himself in response to “What you doing around here?” and an unknown male voice who is close to the microphone says ok. This stops W8 from talking and the “noise” on the call picks up.

    A few sentences later, Mr. Crump is asking if she realized that Trayvon was shot at 7:17 and W8 says she found out the next day and again an unknown male voice says o.k. and she doesn’t elaborate and Mr. Crump asks about if Trayvon was scared (totally change in direction).

    A group on facebook spent this weekend trying to come up with a transcription of the clips. Here’s a link to our efforts.

    http://sdrv.ms/WD0AVX

    Let me know if you can improve upon it and I’ll incorporate the changes.

  7. I emailed the support team at the defense about the document links not working. I got a reply they are moving the links to another site and it should be done by the end of today. gzdocs.com

  8. At 9:03 mark of Crump’s March 21st press conference, Crump admits Trayvon was trying to look in the car.

    Who told him that? It’s not on W8’s recorded statement he gave to FDLE.

    What else isn’t on there?

          • Thanks! I can tell you in transcribing Crump’s telephone interview with W8, that detail wasn’t recorded in the interview.

            Mr. Crump gave a sworn affidavit that nothing was spoken that wasn’t recorded. Something is afoot.

            • So I am wondering why such a sworn affidavit does not now subject him to a deposition. If he lied and we know he did, as should Nelson, what happens now? Isn’t it pretty serious when an officer of the court lies and then actually documents it in a sworn affidavit?

              How many slaps on his behind is that worth?

  9. Pingback: The Crump Saga Continues «

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s