The DeeDee and the Phone

the deedee

I just want to make it clear again where I’m at on these issues since they have come up again on my blog.

The DeeDee

I believe there is only one girl who talked to Trayvon on Feb 26, 2012 who we have come to know as DeeDee and that same girl is the only one who did all interviews and depositions with all parties involved.

What I have found in life is that when it comes to such mysteries such as we have seen in the case of DeeDee is that when the answers are finally found those answers are often, well how does one put this, well, emotionally what happens is this overtaking feel of “what the hell was I thinking” sort of thing and a deflation of expectation.

Sometimes the answers are so stupidly simple and not nefarious it makes you wonder how the hell you can miss it. But to be fair it is quite understandable how such things can happen. When so much is hidden, manipulated and lied about one finds themselves going down roads less traveled.

The Phone


The phone in evidence is the phone Trayvon was using that night. The same phone Trayvon was talking to DeeDee on. The same phone the Defense got DeeDee’s texts from they showed her in her deposition. Simple as that.

Oh, one last little thing I often see come up. The address and phone number Bernie wanted redacted from the defenses motion is not Trayvon’s. Again, the phone number is not Trayvons. The address is not Trayvons. Both were listed as Tracy’s contact info listed in the SPD report for Trayvon.


37 thoughts on “The DeeDee and the Phone

  1. ‘What I have found in life is that when it comes to such mysteries such as we have seen in the case of DeeDee is that when the answers are finally found those answers are often, well how does one put this, well, emotionally what happens is this overtaking feel of “what the hell was I thinking” sort of thing and a deflation of expectation.’

    How about anticlimactic?

    • That’s a good one, sure. But I was also trying to speak to what happens to our thought process as we go down that road and the things we find ourselves saying and when we look back on it afterword, that sort of thing. I didn’t want to dwell on it.

    • I’ll answer that seeing I was one of the more prolific and staunch writers of the 2 DD’s campaign.

      Listening to both Crump’s and BALDR’s interviews, they for me sounded like two completely different persons. I think that she may have been either high or tipsy in the latter making her speech pattern change. Then there was the mix up of ages. That was a biggie as to evidence of 2 DD’s. Then the fact that the reason’s for the hospital visits were different; peeing vs. high blood pressure. The changes and additions to the meme that the 2nd DD was telling. Then just the entire secrecy surrounding the issue made it appear as though they were hiding that very fact of a second, older DD.

      So the was some validity to way it was possible that there were 2.

      I changed my mind after finding out the information from the day of the first DD depo.

      • I listened to different versions of the Crump interview and listened and transcribed her statement when interviewed by BDLR last April. To me it was clearly the same person. Also, to me, there was never a mix-up on ages, as I have never given much credence to ANYthing Crump says, beginning with his letter to the justice department. He is a snake who makes a statement he KNOWS will be inflammatory and carry with it a connotation that is worse than the truth, but he leaves himself plausible deniability. For example, in the letter to the Justice Department, he stated that he believed a family member was at the police station the night of the shooting and Zimmerman was released shortly afterward. His intention was CLEARLY to imply something improper, and it worked. Because this is how people began believing that Robert Zimmerman, Sr. MUST have intervened on his son’s behalf with State Attorney Wolfinger, but the reality was that Zimmerman’s WIFE (a family member) DID go to the police station to bring some clothes, and when she got there, Zimmerman left with her. Crump has a habit of lighting the match and then acting like he did nothing wrong when the dynamite explodes. Hes a snake.

        • On EVERYTHING you said about Crump, I agree. I was just answering your question as to why those of us had believed there were 2. Heck, at one time I thought there were 3. 🙂

  2. The dead “heart ” phone was found at the scene. Most believe it was the one sent to California. Tracy (through Crump) did display “a” cell phone bill. But, WE don’t have DeeDee’s phone or text records to confirm the connection (presumably MOM does). SO (very unfortunately) … as of yet, WE don’t know who called who … on what phone … or from what location!
    However, we have learned that Sanford police did a cell tower location map showing “some” phone was not always near Retreat View Circle. SO, since Trayvon did not have wings … or a car … or a driver’s license, whichever phone was floating around Sanford Florida that fateful night … was not solely being used by Saint Skittles … to talk with someone who has trouble remembering her age.

    • Yep. I don’t think it’s at ALL clear yet which phone was which, and who was or wasn’t on one of the phones at a given time. And HUGE news today, in the State’s discovery release. I’m not talking about the one rather confusing voice analysis by the one organization; or the absolutely laughable voice analysis by the other guy. What I’m talking about is the mention, in both of the reports, of not only audio, but VIDEO of Trayvon recovered from “his phone”. Is that referring to the “heart” phone, or something else? And if the Defense is only just now getting this info themselves… oh boy.

      • Jello, Thanks for the response … and I missed the part about TM having VIDEO on “his phone”! But, what I really wanted was some input from Sundance or Diwataman as to how a cell tower could be not anyway near the walking St. Skittles’ phone. I know I keep harping on this, but (with West’s new evidence release) aren’t we more and more sure there was an accomplice … with a car?

            • There’s no doubt he walked back in the direction he came but from what I can tell they also pulled out in that same direction, probably picked him up and drove around.

              • You’ve spent far more time analyzing the video than me and know it far better, but I would have thought if he was catching a ride with them they would have walked together to the car. I’m not really sure TM interacting with the 3 stooges theory is the only explanation for people using/having $1 bills or for why TM appeared to be looking back at them before continuing his walk. From my less informed perspective it seems there could be many far more mundane explanations.

                • I’m not saying TM didn’t catch a ride with them, just saying there doesn’t seem to be much evidence to support it. Seems to me that if they got together for a while they would have probably shared a blunt, but TM’s THC level was far to low AFAIK.

          • Could be, except in your video it appears he’s leaving (walking away from the store) while the Stooges are still inside. Not sure about that, of course. MY theory is that when George first saw Trayvon (near the “cut through”) he wasn’t so much casing houses (at least not as a first priority), as he was watching and waiting for a meet-up…. either someone walking through to meet him, or to drive up and pull over on the road just outside.

        • Yeah, in my opinion, Trayvon was either in a car part of the time, or the phone that was picked up by that cell tower was in someone’s possession other than Trayvon. And I’m not sure I’m ready to say that Stephen was there at Twin Lakes the same time George and Trayvon were there, but I’m also not ready to discount it completely.

          • Well, you would think…

            HOWEVER, remember that we only just yesterday discovered there ARE videos of Trayvon of ANY kind (as the “audio analysts” reports mentioned). What’s on those videos we don’t yet know, but they COULD be fights. Especially when you consider the way parts of it is described… “mocking utterances” by Trayvon. Who knows what it is, but I’m very anxious to find out.

            (Now if you’re talking about a video of George’s confrontation with Trayvon, now that’s a different matter. All I’m talking about is possible EARLIER videos of Trayvon involved in some kind of violence.)

            • Yes, I was “talking about a video of George’s confrontation with Trayvon,” but not necessarily on Martin’s phone.

              However I strongly suspect the defense saw any videos that Martin had on his phone when they first examined the phone.

              They left you and me out and kept that to themselves. Maybe they are just picking on us.

              • I guess maybe you missed my post on O’Mara. People think O’Mara’s only job here is to defend George. Those people are wrong.

                From day one he set out to quell discovery release in a mission to “calm things down”. People say it’s not his job to fight the powers that be that got us where we are today but clearly that is exactly what O’Mara BELIEVES he is doing by his slow roll of getting discovery from the state, his snail like approach at his own discovery; the idea being to stretch this thing out as long as possible to “calm things down” and to “let the community heal”, both naive positions mind you, and hiding the fact that he’s even talking to certain people that would indicate that it’s something nefarious to the character of the black child merely because he’s black because gee, O’Mara’s been fighting “racial discrimination” in the judicial system his entire career you think he wants to be part of that now, “bashing” the black person?

                His secondary approach has been this pathetic attempt to remain in the good graces of the very people that put his client where he is today e.g. the Capehart article and other writings regarding race and little quotes on how him and Crump would be on the same side of the podium. Let that sink in. He and Crump would be doing what Crump did to George because O’Mara believes like Crump only just not for George in O’Mara’s case.

                So these people who think O’Mara’s only job here is to defend George are clearly missing a lot of what is actually going on in this case and what O’Mara is actually doing. How many interviews has he done? Hundreds? Sound like he’s merely trying the legal case to you?

                So when you ask yourself why we don’t know this or that you’ll now know why. When you ask yourself why we know this about George but not this about Trayvon now you know why. When you ask yourself why did it take the defense so long to do something that obviously should have been done many months ago now you’ll know why.

                • Exactly! Why does everyone know George’s every step, but MOM (who now has BDLR’s suppressed evidence) still allows Trademark’s path to be a mystery. In his tan pants and tan sneakers, (and “a” cell phone which would have records of a call with somebody) and with a furtive glance back, TM hurried away from the 3 Amigos … and their blunts. Why? MOM (finally) has the nearby security camera footage, records of at least one of Trayvon’s phones and a video of Tracy saying his son came in the back gate … so why the mystery? If the Amigos dropped TM off at the cut-thru then there would be security camera footage and a cell phone ping log record of their path. If they dropped him off at the back gate, then Crump/DeeDee’s profile/chase account is toast. Oh, and BDLR is flapping away trying to get TM’s drug history suppressed.
                  My theory? MOM wants to keep his street “cred” so he doesn’t want to besmirch St. Skittles BGI memory. He wants a lawyerly win by solely documenting BDLR’s lack of evidence. What he doesn’t want to do is drag yet another black teenager (with a car, blue jeans, red Jordans and a violent cousin) before the television cameras … and prove this whole thing was just a garden variety drug deal gone bad.

                  • I think early on, MOM was definitely concerned about his “street cred”… but not so much any more. Have we not read the petitions, filings, motions over the past few months? Those were not written by a man who is hoping to remain friends with certain types of individuals. As I’ve said before, MOM has been burning bridges at a pretty good pace recently. And I’m as frustrated as anyone at not seeing some of the discovery. While Bernie is mainly to blame, no doubt MOM has kept some stuff hidden too. And it could be for nefarious reasons, I suppose, but has anyone thought of this?: Maybe everything is waiting until after Crump is deposed?… Maybe some things HAVE to stay secret, so that Crump doesn’t see what’s coming?

                • I am surprised you would direct your lengthy comment toward me.. beginning with this: I guess maybe you missed my post on O’Mara.

                  I have not missed very much in the case. If you will recall, there was a time that I expressed agreement with SD’s opinions of MOM (and yours.) I observed the heated discussions that resulted and listened intently to both sides, especially when people I greatly respected were banned or left the blog. I chased a couple of them down and then communicated with them privately to learn more about their opinions. One was your wife, Nettles.

                  There came a time when I understood both sides. I decided to go silent and sit on the sidelines rather than engage in arguments which no one would “win” and served to create animosity, some of it quite hateful. It was not the different opinions that bothered me but rather the heated exchanges and the fact that it divided us.

                  That does not mean that I am “fair weathered” and changed to neutrality for ulterior selfish motives. It means that I evolved and became a little bit wiser. What’s worse than a fool is an angry fool.

                  I feel awful that the family has read those discussions and I closely noticed their response. George’s supporters began to openly disrespect each other and began discussions that I thought were inappropriate even mocking MOM and each other as they had been doing with BLDR.

                  I can argue both sides with conviction but I am choosing to stay in the bleachers for now.

                  A couple of people in the hierarchy mistakenly called me out, even ridiculing me in public so I said “Screw this.” I would say to them the same thing you just said, “I guess maybe you missed all of my previous posts on O’Mara and forgot how I once openly supported SD.”

                  I have read and commented to you about everything you have said about MOM and even once asked you to show some proof of his actions to support your conclusion, which you did.
                  Do you have me confused with someone else?

                  • I like you a lot, Jordan. And sometimes I think you may be the wisest person on these blogs. Your avatar is right on. (Where’d you find that, anyway? 😉 )

                    • (Where’d you find that, anyway? 😉 ) I think that avatar found me with a little help from you.

                      Thanks for your kind words but there are several who post that are pretty damn wise. Wisdom SHOULD come with maturity and age but that is not always the case.

  3. The 2 DD theory considered was a voice recorded v. the in-person statements given. We’ll need the audio experts from Bernie to reach an empirical conclusion on this one!

      • As I was reading that, I thought it was a joke. I’m serious. I thought LMPapa or someone had someway convinced Bernie to file some of his “theories” in an official court document. I was waiting and waiting to see the cockatoo mentioned. I still can’t believe what I read…

  4. I thought that there were two DeeDees because the one interviewed by Crump and Gutman was very talkative, was able to form complex sentences and was eager to provide information, but the one interviewed by Bernie was very reluctant, made lots of unintelligible utterances, and could barely string two words together. I still think they are different women. The age discrepancy only bolstered (and still bolsters) my belief that there are two DeeDees.

    Regarding Reich’s bizarre analysis, I did find it interesting that he wrote this:

    The other male speaker was identified tentatively as Trayvon Martin from the audio track of a digital video file present on Mr. Martin’s cell phone.

    “Identified tentatively”? He’s not certain that it’s Trademark? But he’s employing it for his analysis regardless? Does the Defense have this recording?

  5. Pingback: Trayvon’s Girlfriend(s)? | DiwataMan

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )


Connecting to %s