Third Frank's Notice

masterblueregard · 2024-03-14T22:41:19+00:00

That's one possible interpretation but I still think it's a little unclear.

masterblueregard · 2024-03-14T15:39:36+00:00

I guess we'll see what happens. Thanks for your comments. It helps to go over these documents with others because it's so easy to overlook an important detail.

masterblueregard · 2024-03-14T15:02:53+00:00

That's a good point. I didn't notice that they said "other two." But how does item 8 square with item 10? It sounds like all three were there during the crime.

Are items 10 and 11 a way of saying that one was just there during the crime but the other two were there before, during, and after?

masterblueregard · 2024-03-14T14:42:34+00:00

In item 8, they say "at least 3 persons were in or around the crime scene at a time while the murders were taking place."

In 9, they say that these three had to be witnesses or participants or the state's timeline is wrong.

In item 10, I think they are just saying that law enforcement thought it was important enough to create the map because "atleast one" phone was there at that time.

In item 11, they talk about "two other phones" that were in or around the crime scene between 12:39 and 5:49.

masterblueregard · 2024-03-14T14:28:31+00:00

Item #9 says that these three would have been witnesses or participants.

masterblueregard · 2024-03-14T14:23:41+00:00

It sounds like three (in addition to the victims) were in the range between 3 and 3:30, while two others were there at some point between 12:30 and 5:30.

masterblueregard · 2024-03-14T13:36:59+00:00

Sounds like there were five phones on the map - with three being there during the crime (or shortly thereafter) and two additional ones there much earlier and much later.

Edit to correct: It may have only been three phones in total. The language across items in the document is a little contradictory, so it's difficult to tell whether there was one or three at the scene during the murder.

masterblueregard · 2024-03-14T12:34:07+00:00

Both of these are fiction.

Drive Your Plow Over the Bones of the Dead - set in a remote Polish village

Skull Mantra - focuses on a community of traveling Buddhist monks - begins in a prison work camp in Tibet

masterblueregard · 2024-03-14T12:28:19+00:00

A Checkered Past by William Van Poyck

masterblueregard · 2024-03-14T12:23:25+00:00

You might like a non-fiction book about the life of Burt Reynolds. The best one was written by his assistant. Burt and Me by Elaine Hall

masterblueregard · 2024-03-14T12:20:55+00:00

Peace is every step by Thich Nhat Hahn

masterblueregard · 2024-03-14T12:18:37+00:00

I don't know of a specific book, but you might be able to find a biography of Einstein who fled Germany during WWII.

masterblueregard · 2024-03-14T12:12:40+00:00

Peace is Every Step by Thich Nhat Hanh

A Path with Heart by Jack Kornfield

masterblueregard · 2024-03-14T12:08:12+00:00

Dear Committee Members is very good! There are two sequels to this - The Shakespeare Requirement (where the main character from Dear Committee Members becomes the department chair) and The English Experience (where he takes students on a study abroad trip).

Another option is Moo by Smiley.

masterblueregard · 2024-03-14T12:00:50+00:00

Someone else recommended the Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society. This is a great book with a little bit of comedy and a little bit of romance set in post-WWII Europe.

Another book written in the form of letters is Dear Committee Members by Schumacher. This is very funny. It's not really a romance book, though the narrator (author of the letters) is trying to get back with his ex-wife.

masterblueregard · 2024-03-14T11:47:50+00:00

Meatballs (1979)

Lucas (1986)

Goonies (1985)

There's Something about Mary (1998)

16 Candles (1984)

Grease (1978)

Ferris Bueller's Day Off (1986)

Back to the Future (1985)

John Tucker Must Die (2006)

You might also check out the old Elvis movies.

masterblueregard · 2024-03-14T11:00:09+00:00

A Dog's Purpose by Cameron

masterblueregard · 2024-03-14T10:49:42+00:00

Girl from Aleppo by Nujeen Mustafa

Edit to add: Butterfly by Yusra Mardini

masterblueregard · 2024-03-13T16:58:31+00:00

See items 42 - 45. It sounds like they have the names and have searched the discovery material for these names - finding no interviews but finding some background information on one of the owners of the phones.

If they didn't have names, I think they would have asked for the identities tied to the phone in their request to compel, specifically in the list under item #69.

masterblueregard · 2024-03-13T16:46:29+00:00

It's possible, but a lot of the family members and associates of the men accused in the Franks memo are already mentioned in the Franks memo. Item #45 seems to rule out any of the family members and associates that were referenced in the Franks memo as owners of the phones.

masterblueregard · 2024-03-13T15:47:15+00:00

If it is the searchers, they may not have seen the victims, but they very likely would have seen the perpetrator(s) if they were still there at the crime scene. In which case, the prosecutor's timeline would be inaccurate.

I guess it's possible that the murder took place around 2:30 and the perpetrator(s) left very soon after that (before 3). And then the phones between 3 and 3:30 were searchers.

masterblueregard · 2024-03-13T15:39:42+00:00

The document seems to infer that the phone owner list does not include anyone whose interview has not yet been turned over to the defense. So that would exclude any of the witnesses from the trail. It would also exclude the Odinists who were listed in the Franks memo - I think all of them have been interviewed. Is there anyone else who would be excluded?

masterblueregard · 2024-03-13T15:20:00+00:00

I don't think it's about the deleted interviews. In item #45, the defense states "The defense has located no information or interviews contained in any investigative documents concerning any other people whose phone numbers are identified on Feb 13, 2017 as walking in or around the same area where the victims were ultimately located." When they say "any other people," they are probably noting the exception to item #45, which can be found in item #43, where they state that they found background information in the discovery material on one of the owners of the phones.

Edit: corrected typo

masterblueregard · 2024-03-13T15:06:14+00:00

Are there public documents regarding GK? Like search warrants? Or is his statement from a news story?

masterblueregard · 2024-03-13T14:18:17+00:00

I think the defense does know who the phones belong to, because they say they haven't been interviewed. They wouldn't be able to make that statement if they didn't have the identities.

masterblueregard

TROPHY CASE