THE FOUR POINTS OF MISINFORMATION

I have noticed that someone over on the Facebook page seems to be getting the same four points of information wrong in the same way as a comment I have seen in a number of other places by a certain person. I wonder why that is?

In a way that is good since that means that at least some of the measures I put in place are working and people are too lazy to do their homework. 

As I keep saying:

"If you want the right answer, you must first ask the right question."

MURT

A LITTLE DOSE OF COMMON SENSE

The detractors at the other sites seem to have little or no knowledge of the rules of evidence as to what is admissible or not admissible   in a trial. Case in point are the so called PM'S that found their way into the discovery.


The Pm's are NOT admissible for the following reasons:


First: They are hearsay:
Hearsay is information gathered by one person from another concerning some event, condition, or thing of which the first person had no direct experience.

In order to be admissible the PM'S would have to be supported by DIRECT EVIDENCE:

Direct evidence supports the truth of an assertion (in criminal law, an assertion of guilt or of innocence) directly, i.e., without an intervening inference.

NEXT, IS THAT THEY ARE IRRELEVANT  OR  IMMATERIAL

Irrelevant Evidence:

That which does not support the issue, and which) of course, must be excluded.

B. Immaterial Evidence:

Immaterial evidence is evidence that is not directed to any factual proposition at issue under substantive law. Materiality is judged against the elements necessary to prove a claim, an element of a claim or a defense. As a rule of substantive law, it is determined by the law applicable to the case. 

Now just exactly what is discovery? 

Discovery is a process that allows the parties (state and criminal defendant in criminal cases; and plaintiff and defendant in civil cases) to learn the strengths and weaknesses of each other's case--for example, by obtaining the names and statements of witnesses the other side intends to call at trial.

This paragraph regarding discovery is interesting:

Limits on What Can Be Discovered

Virtually any bit of information that might have even a slight connection to the lawsuit is fair game for discovery. But this enormous latitude sometimes leads to abuse. Lawyers might try to pry into subjects that have no legitimate significance for the lawsuit, or that are private and confidential, serving only to annoy or embarrass the parties. Fortunately, there are some legal limits on this kind of probing, and some protections to keep private material from being disclosed to the public.

Since the pm conversations were meant to be PRIVATE:

Title XLVII CRIMINAL PROCEDURE AND CORRECTIONS Chapter 934 SECURITY OF COMMUNICATIONS View Entire Chapter 934.03  Interception and disclosure of wire, oral, or electronic communications prohibited.-- (1)  Except as otherwise specifically provided in this chapter, any person who: (a)  Intentionally intercepts, endeavors to intercept, or procures any other person to intercept or endeavor to intercept any wire, oral, or electronic communication; (b)  Intentionally uses, endeavors to use, or procures any other person to use or endeavor

Florida has the strictest privacy laws in the country. The law covers EVERY form of communications INCLUDING e-mails or PRIVATE (instant) MESSAGES.

 Neither the defense nor the Prosecution can use the PM'S at trial because they were obtained illegally.

Last but least:

NOTHING I SAID OR WAS PURPORTED TO SAID IN THE PM'S IS A CRIME. AS ONE DETECTIVE PUT IT:

"THERE IS NO LAW AGAINST BAD TASTE."

MURT

Evidence is put forth in a trial to prove an issue of fact and often the parties in a case have conflicting explanations of what the facts are. If evidence put forth does not offer support or proof on an issue in the trial, that evidence is deemed irrelevant and is thus inadmissible

Read more: What Is Material Evidence? | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/about_5417733_material-evidence.html#ixzz0qpVAvsou

 
 

THE ADMISSION

WELL, WE NOW KNOW THE TRUE REASON FOR THE EXISTENCE OF THIS PAGE:

"Yvonne, this page came into existence AFTER they used my grand daughter as a weapon. Come at me, fine. Go after my 2 yr old grand daughter and you're going to set me off."



NOTICE THAT SHE SAID "THEY" AND NOT HIM.

THIS MEANS THAT I AM BEING PUNISHED FOR THE ACTIONS OF OTHERS. RATHER THAN GOING AFTER WHOEVER MADE THAT COMMENT OR COMMENTS, SHE GOES AFTER ME....WHY?

SHE SEEMS TO HAVE FORGOTTEN THIS:

COPYRIGHT © 2009,2010

Wednesday, May 26, 2010

AN OPEN LETTER TO PRINCESS, MCHELLE AND EVERYONE CONCERNED

I have been observing with growing concern at the increasing number of incidents where innocent children are being used on chats in arguments between us.

This has to stop, NOW!

Princess:

I ask that you reconsider your decision, stand your ground and reopen Beaconhell.

Michelle:

I can imagine that there is a deep loving and close bond between you and your grandchild.

I deeply regret any pain that has been caused you by the actions of whoever posted about your granddaughter in that chat.

Everyone:

We all are supposed to be here as advocates for the missing and exploited children.

We are all supposed to be here to find ways to keep children from harm and to protect them.
T Children should not be used as weapons in our disputes with each other.

MURT 

THIS WAS WRITTEN BEFORE THE FACEBOOK PAGE WAS OPENED. I STATE AGAIN, HERE AND NOW THAT IF I EVER FIND OUT THAT THE PERSON WHO MENTIONED EITHER MICHELLE'S GRANDCHILDREN IN A BAD LIGHT OR THREATENED PRINCESS, I WILL TURN THIS INFORMATION OVER TO THE BOTH OF THEM.

I DO NOT CONDONE BRINGING INNOCENT CHILDREN INTO THIS DISPUTE. THE DISPUTES SHOULD REMAIN WITHIN THE PERSONS CONCERNED AND NOT OUTSIDERS.

THIS IS A PROBLEM WITH A VIGILANTE. SHE IS THINKING FROM EMOTION AND NOT FROM THE KIND OF DETACHMENT FROM THE INCIDENT NEEDED TO CONDUCT A PROPER INVESTIGATION.

AS FOR WHO IS MAKING ALL OF THOSE COMMENTS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE DISPUTE, I SUGGEST A LONG HARD LOOK AT MS. REBECA SOWERBY AKA CRIMINJUST. THIS PIECE OF WORK HAS A HABIT OF PLAYING BOTH SIDES, JUST ASK YOUR BFF PRINCESS.

MY SO CALLED "SKIRTS" HAVE SUSPECTED HER FOR QUITE SOME TIME. SHE HAS ISSUES WITH ANNIE BEING ON  "MY SIDE" AND THIS IS THE KIND OF STUNT SHE WOULD PULL.

INVESTIGATE PROPERLY BEFORE JUMPING TO CONCLUSIONS, MICHELLE. YOU ARE BEING PLAYED AND ALLOWING YOUR HATE TO BLIND YOU TO IT.

MURT 

THAT'S A REALLY, REALLY, BIG GARAGE

IS MCNUTT NOW SUFFERING FROM MEMORY LOSS?

MS MCNUTT (MICHELLE MCKEE THE SO CALLED EDITOR OF IN COLD BLOG) SEEMS TO HAVE FORGOTTEN WHAT STARTED THIS MESS ALMOST A YEAR AGO. SHE SEEMS TO FORGET THE LITTLE "GUEST AUTHOR BIT WITH HER BFF PRINCESS OF THE NOW DEFUNCT BEACONHELL.COM

SHORTLY AFTER THAT AFTER I STARTED MY TWITTER ACCOUNT, I BEGAN TO BE FLOODED WITH ICB FOLLOWERS.

NOW SINCE I NEVER EVEN HEARD OF ICB UNTIL THAT GUEST AUTHOR CRAP, WHY WOULD I BE GETTING ICB FOLLOWERS ON MY TWITTER ACCOUNT? 

WHEN I CALLED HER ON IT SHE WROTE AN EXPLETIVE FILLED RANT ON BEACONHELL.

SHE ALSO DOES NOT REMEMBER THAT THE DETECTIVE SHE WAS "CONTACTED" BY  IN HER SO CALLED POSITION HAS A LAST NAME THAT STARTS WITH A "D."

THAT MUST BE THE REASON FOR HER MISTAKING MY DD ACRONYM FOR DREAMIN DEMON. 

SHE ALSO SEEMS TO FORGET WHO IT WAS THAT STARTED ALL OF THE GRADE SCHOOL NAME CALLING.

AND AS FOR THE OTHER BLOG? SHE SEEMS TO HAVE FORGOTTEN, IN HER DRUNKEN STUPOR AS REPRESENTED BY THE GLASS IN THE BACKGROUND, ABOUT YET ANOTHER BLOG WITH HER NAME AND PHONY RESUME THERE ALONG WITH THE BOOK COVER OF HER BOY TOY CORY MITCHELL. 

NO MATTER. SHE IS A STRANGER TO THE TRUTH AND CERTAINLY SUCKS AS AN ANAYLIST WHICH IS WHY SHE IS PROBABLY NO LONGER IN THE FIELD.

MURT

NOT MY WORDS, BUT THAT OF LIAR MCKEE

THIS BANNER THAT APPEARS AT THE TOP OF THE FACE BOOK PAGE IS A PRIME EXAMPLE OF HOW SHE IS ABLE TO INFLUENCE THE OPINIONS OF EASILY MANIPULATED PERSONS SUCH AS THAT OF FLOSSIE:

Murt and Murtwitnessone and MurtwitnessoneLive and Murthavenflorida

I could just be being hopeful here but... it appears as though my Internet menace has been without his computers for the last 24 or more hours. Nothing but a Blackberry. Wondering if "mabie" someone from the office where that nice detective I talked with showed up yesterday AM & retrieved them. ((crossing fingers)) - Michelle McKee8 hours ago

 

WITH THIS LITTLE "HEADLINE" SHE GIVES PEOPLE THE MISTAKEN IMPRESSION THAT "SOME ACTIONS" OF LAW ENFORCEMENT AGAINST ME MIGHT HAVE OCCURRED. 

 

IN A WAY SHE IS FORCING THE DEBATE. IF I STAY AWAY, SHE CAN CLAIM THE POLICE ARE AFTER ME. IF I POST REBUTTALS, SHE CAN CLAIM BULLYING. IT IS A NO WIN SITUATION.

 

REMEMBER FOLKS, MICHELLE IS THE EDITOR OF A WRITER'S BLOG AND CLAIMS TO BE A PROFESSIONAL AUTHOR HERSELF.

 

SHE WOULD HAVE THE BACKGROUND TO USE ALL SORTS OF PROMOTIONAL TRICKS AND HAVE THE ABILITY TO CONTROL THE BIAS OF THE FACEBOOK PAGE.

 

THE FACEBOOK PAGE AND THE OTHER BLOGS SHE HAS CREATED ARE EXAMPLES OF THE EXTREMES THIS WOMAN WILL TO TO TO SMEAR SOMEONE WHO HAS NO EXPERIENCE IN PROFESSIONAL WRITING AND THE KIND OF PROFESSIONAL  SPIN SKILLS AT HER DISPOSAL. 

 

THIS IS WHY SHE WILL NOT GO AFTER PAT BROWN AND THE OTHER FAMOUS AUTHORS SHE HAS ISSUES WITH. WITH THEM, SHE IS OUT MATCHED. WITH ME, SHE HAS IT EASY.

 

MURT 

MICHELLE MCKEE, EDITOR OF IN COLD BLOG, A VIGILANTE?

I HAVE BEEN GETTING ALL SORTS OF E-MAILS, PM'S AND SO ON REGARDING AN ASPECT OF MICHELLE MCKEE THAT A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT AND VICTIMS OF.

HER VIGILANTE ANTICS. MS. MCKEE, AMONG OTHER THINGS, SEEMS TO WANT TO PLAY COP.

HER EFFORTS TOWARD ME ARE A CLEAR INDICATION OF THIS.

SHE RECENTLY STATED ON THE IMPERSONATOR FACEBOOK PAGE THIS COMMENT:

finding justice for a mother who has been waiting a very long time.

 

I WONDER IF THAT "JUSTICE" WILL INCLUDE FRAMING AN INNOCENT VICTIM FOR A CRIME HE MIGHT NOT HAVE COMMITTED?

 

I FULLY INTEND TO FIND OUT WHAT SHE IS UP TO AND WARN ANY POTENTIAL VICTIM OF HER ACTIONS. 

MS. MCKEE SHOULD STICK TO EDITING, FIND A JOB AND LEAVE THE POLICE WORK TO THE POLICE.

HER CONSTANT TARGETING OF INNOCENT VICTIMS MUST STOP.

MURT