[ Home | Contents | Search | Post | Next | Previous | Up ]
From: [email protected]
Date: 6/13/01
Time: 11:32:32 PM
Remote Name: 205.188.197.32
Kari was quite right about the envelope identification. I tried to respond to this on May discussion, then gave up
Clark showed Crawford only pictures on an envelope before GJ and prelims, and not even the side with writing on it. She asked her to icdentify it from those pictures, which was totally absurd. But Crawford, of course, obliged.
Crawford was finally shown the actual envelope during the trial, which is what you referred to. You should then also note how within the space of a couplke of pages Crawford changes what wording was written on the envlope, and the order in which the words were placed on it.
Now this could simply ahve been due to Crawford's memory lapse of not correctly recalling what she had written on the envelope, only to discover the actual words upon seeing the envelope, except for one critical thing.
During Crawford's previous appearances, on at least one occasion, Clark asked the leading questiont that specified the wording appearing on nthe envelope, and merely asked Crawford to confirm it, which she did. Clark's questions cannot be based on memory lapse. The prosecution had the envelope, and if Clark asked a leading question that specified the wording on it, it had to be ased on seeing what was written on the envelope. So how could that wording change?
Unless we are talking about two different envelopes.
Prien