Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old June 28th, 2010 #461
OTPTT
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 9,896
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by monamontgomery View Post
The original plan was ...
What would we do if you hadn't come along? Most of us believe in the concept of innocent until proven guilty and have had our own share of 'government' prosecution and persecution. We know the score.

You have two strikes against you:

1. You're a woman, and
2. You're a lawyer.

I'll wait until the trial to form my opinions.
 
Old June 28th, 2010 #462
Tintin
∞ 𐌙 λ
 
Tintin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 7,497
Tintin
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by monamontgomery View Post
In these conversations the plan changed and became a double murder of both Cindy and her mother.

My guess is that the cops got Larry to lead Steele into this second killing. Since Steele had already decided to kill Cindi, Larry would be able to convince Steele to also kill the mother-in-law without being guilty of entrapment. This would make a much stronger case for the prosecution.
It was not the cops. It was the FBI, who just happened by have a special agent hanging in the vicinity of the Steele's farm and Fairfax happen to find who happened to have a free day to act on Fairfax claims with seemingly not evidence and was able to permission to record Steele and who happened to have recording equipment he would hastily put on Fairfax. Again, all of this is to have happened in same day.

How could the "cops" get Fairfax to lead Steele into the second killing when the "cops" never knew about the first killing attempt and only had met Fairfax early that day?

And it was very daring of Fairfax to go along with the recording because how could be sure that Steele was not going to mention the first planned murders, the pipe bombs, or the $10,000 in silver coins that Steele payed Fairfax.

Really cannot imagine Fairfax saying, "Hey Ed, just for fun let kill your mother-in-law also, I'll take her out for as a freebie, that one will be on the house, what do you say?" Maybe Steele would have said: "You fat idiot, you failed to kill my wife last week, why make the situation complex by attempting to kill two people at the same time. Just prove that you can kill my wife then we will start killing all the other people on my list that I showed you. Remember the one I was working on while in the ITU just after my near fatal heart attack? There will be plenty of people for you to kill."
 
Old June 28th, 2010 #463
Donald E. Pauly
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 4,130
Smile Fuhrer Quote

Quote:
Originally Posted by OTPTT View Post
What would we do if you hadn't come along? Most of us believe in the concept of innocent until proven guilty and have had our own share of 'government' prosecution and persecution. We know the score.

You have two strikes against you:

1. You're a woman, and
2. You're a lawyer.

I'll wait until the trial to form my opinions.
The Fuhrer, of Blessed Memory, had a favorite saying:

"Of all the segments of society, the one which lawyers most closely resemble is that of the common criminal.".

Last edited by Donald E. Pauly; June 28th, 2010 at 12:48 PM. Reason: punctuation
 
Old June 28th, 2010 #464
Tintin
∞ 𐌙 λ
 
Tintin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 7,497
Tintin
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by monamontgomery View Post
Larry got scared and went to the police.
Again, Fairfax did not go to the "police" when to to a FBI special agent that just happened ...

Scared of what? Of the Edgar Steele in the mug shot? Fairfax is a big fat guy who day job (when he is not working as a hit man) is manual labor. Did he think Steele was going to add him to the list of people he wanted dead if he did not kill his wife? That Steele has also had a list of hit-men that he would send to pay Fairfax a visit?

Why would Fairfax not just say: "Mr Steele, I just can't go through with the killings. To be honest I rigged the car bombs not to go off. And on top of that I still lost the bomb and don't know where it is at. I'm just not cut out for this type of work. I will return your $10,000 in silver coins. Sorry, I just not the killer I thought I was." Fairfax could have even made up a lie, like, "I think wife knows something, it best I just get out of the picture before she starts talking to your wife" or "the shit has hit the fan at my house, my wife thinks I'm having an affair and won't let me out of her sight."

No, the stupid low IQ fat slob went to the FBI and led them and told him Steele was planing to kill wife and mother-in-law. He led the FBI dangerously close to murder attempt in which he was the murder. See, that is something to be scared about. Anybody with any sense would avoid the FBI like the plague and would do nothing to draw attention to himself after a failed murder attempt.

And if you think about, "a loving husband and father" such a Fairfax, likely would have told his wife what he had done and that he was going to the nearest FBI special agent because he feared for his life."

And if Fairfax was scared of Steele why was he trying to rip Steele off his $10,000 in silver coins by building disabled bombs.
 
Old June 28th, 2010 #465
Contumacyman
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 446
Contumacyman
Default

I still can't see why Steele would be worrying about how his wife might react to the attorney general's private playing of the alleged tape recording to her if Steele knew that he did in fact have that conversation. If Steele had actually had that alleged conversation with Fairfax, then Steele would know already that he would not be able to successfully claim it was a fake - he would know what he said and he would also know that an original tape recording would hold up in court no matter how many experts he hired to dispute it, and no matter what his wife had to say about it.

For Steele to be so worried about how his wife might react suggests to me that he came to realize that the FEDS would never allow him to bring experts in to scrutinize that tape, because they did not intend to claim it had been authenticated - they were simply going to claim that his wife allowed as how "it sounded like ED".

The FEDS would file a motion restricting Ed's defense as per the tape to only what they actually introduce, and, that would be his own wife's immediate response to hearing the tape while in the FED's own tightly controlled setting.

Realizing that, Ed wanted to make sure that his wife did not give them the testimony they would need to avoid authentication. Ed would only care about this if he felt certain that he could defeat authentication, and he could only want to pursue that avenue if he knew for a fact that HE DID NOT HAVE THAT CONVERSATION.

That is why I believe that no such conversation between ED and Fairfax ever took place.

Mona used to have a radio show years ago where she was spot-on about the holohoax and I enjoyed listening to those shows. I don't know why she and Jim Giles are so willing to believe the FED's story here, but, it makes me leary when folks I have shown deference to in the past seem to have swallowed a "big lie" story from a source they know for sure is prone to telling these kinds of whoppers all the time. Jim's own experience should have taught him to NEVER believe anything the govenment robotards ever have to say, even (and especially) under oath.

The proof will come of course if the government allows ED to subject their original "tape" to his own team of audio experts. If they ever allow Ed the right to scrutinize their original tape, and it's authenticity cannot be refuted, then, and only then, will it be appropriate to accept it as a fact.

My prediction is that the government will NOT allow Ed (nor anyone else) to ever subject this original tape to scrutinizing authentication.
 
Old June 28th, 2010 #466
Tintin
∞ 𐌙 λ
 
Tintin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 7,497
Tintin
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Contumacyman View Post
For Steele to be so worried about how his wife might react suggests to me that he came to realize that the FEDS would never allow him to bring experts in to scrutinize that tape, because they did not intend to claim it had been authenticated - they were simply going to claim that his wife allowed as how "it sounded like ED".
Good logic.

And once the wife unwittingly gave a confirmation the FEDS really don't need to have Steele convicted. With the above scenario, Steele would likely be forced to accept a plea for 5 years. That would get Steele out of the picture until Steele was nearly 70. Have him discredit. Allow the $PLC money machine to hit the MSM tour and say we told so, scare and/or confuse other WN.

Wonder what the Attorn Generals office would have done if Steele's wife said, send and MP3 version to my e-mail address and I will listen when I'm relaxed and I will let you know if it is my husband or not.

It seems like, at least in the movies, the FED says, please come downtown to our office and look at the evidence. How often does the FED present evidence remotely.

Are the police going to start doing line-ups over web-cams or sending mug shots of suspects to e-mail accounts? How about morgues having dead confirmed over web-cams?
 
Old June 28th, 2010 #467
Hadding
Senior Member
 
Hadding's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,241
Hadding
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Contumacyman
My prediction is that the government will NOT allow Ed (nor anyone else) to ever subject this original tape to scrutinizing authentication.
You can safely say that Steele does not have confidence in the prospect of an expert debunking the recording in the courtroom.

He also did not have confidence in his wife's ability to spot it as a fraud; therefore he instructed her on how to respond to it.

Steele was telling his wife to refrain from authenticating the recording so that he wouldn't have to deal the questions of authenticity and content in court.

Steele's apprehension doesn't have to be because he expects a corrupt process. It could just as well happen because he expects a fair process, if the recording is genuine.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Contumacyman
The proof will come of course if the government allows ED to subject their original "tape" to his own team of audio experts.
I hope for that! But it remains to be seen whether Steele will expect a court to accept the Mission Impossible argument that he tried on his wife.

What is the precedent for such a frameup as Steele alleges? Who has ever invoked the Mission Impossible defense before a legitimate civilian court? (Again I say: O.J. Simpson is not an acceptable response.)

The Matt Hale case is no precedent, because as far as I know Hale never challenged the recording's authenticity. (The problem in the Hale case as I understand was one of interpretation.)

Is Steele really important enough to draw the attention of an "Impossible Missions Force"?

Last edited by Hadding; June 28th, 2010 at 03:04 PM.
 
Old June 28th, 2010 #468
monamontgomery
Junior Member
 
monamontgomery's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 42
monamontgomery
Default Fairfax got scared when he realized ed was a nut.

Quote:
Scared of what? Of the Edgar Steele in the mug shot?
Not the mug shot. The mug shot was taken after Fairfax went to the cops. Fairfax probably got scared when he realized that he was partnering up with an unstable person and was afraid the two of them would get caught. The cops called in the FBI and Fairfax was trained to wear a wire and get Ed to discuss the murder while the tape was on.

According to the FBI Affidavit, Fairfax told the FBI that six months ago Edgar told Fairfax that he had a list of people he wanted killed, especially his wife and her mother.

Steele gave Fairfax some money to do the killings and make it look like an accident. Steele promised more money when the job was done.

Wednesday June 9th Fairfax talked to Steele in Steele's barn wearing a body recording device.

Thursday June 10th Fairfax talked to Steele again wearing a body recording device.

The murder was planned for Friday, June 11th but he was arrested instead.

A couple of days later Cindi found the bomb under her car and the cops realized Larry Fairfax had not told them that he had planted this bomb and neglected to tell them so he was arrested as well.

By the way, Steele was not a criminal defense lawyer, but a civil lawyer. No wonder he was not able to defend Matt Hale.

Last edited by monamontgomery; June 28th, 2010 at 03:02 PM. Reason: Spelling error
 
Old June 28th, 2010 #469
OTPTT
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 9,896
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hadding View Post
What is the precedent for such a frameup as Steele alleges? Who has ever invoked the Mission Impossible defense before a legitimate civilian court? (Again I say: O.J. Simpson is not an acceptable response.)
Here's some 'precedent' for you. Early 1970s, Wounded Knee.

Quote:
After a nine-month trial, Chief Judge Fred J. Nichols of the Federal District Court of South Dakota dismissed all of charges against Russell Means and Dennis Banks, the two leaders of the American Indian Movement occupation of Wounded Knee, on grounds of governmental misconduct. Six charges had been dismissed earlier for reasons of legal insufficiency and the failure of the prosecution to present enough evidence to warrant submission to a jury. During the course of the trial, Judge Nichols found, among other things, that the FBI had altered or suppressed key documents, committed illegal electronic surveillance, and had probably persuaded law enforcement officials in River Falls, Wisconsin, to drop rape and sodomy charges proffered against the government’s star witness. Moreover, he stated from the bench that the special agent in charge of the Minnesota Division of the FBI (which covers three states, including South Dakota) had perjured himself on the witness stand. At one point the judge took the unprecedented step of impounding all FBI files when it was discovered that many important documents crucial to the defense had been suppressed and altered versions had instead been submitted to the Court. In addition, the Court pointed out that the prosecution had presented one witness who claimed he had observed the defendants commit incriminating acts in Wounded Knee at a time when he was, himself, a prisoner in the Pine Ridge Reservation Jail.
Did the FBI have a court order for the electronic surveillance of Steele?

Last edited by OTPTT; June 28th, 2010 at 03:27 PM.
 
Old June 28th, 2010 #470
Sam Spears
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 117
Default

Whether the wife feels her husband really did try to kill her or not, it is her duty to not let the government get satisfaction. She can divorce him and part ways once the trial is over and he is acquitted.

Giving a hostile 3rd party satisfaction is plain wrong, no matter the situation.

This Mona character is another person who perpetuates the system while proclaiming to oppose it.

If the system is so worthy of replacement, why would anyone cooperate and let the system rule them or follow the system and its rules?

Cooperating with the system means that you deep down inside submit to it's authority and believe it is worthy of ruling you, hence there is no reason to replace the way things are with a new system. This is why nothing will change.
 
Old June 28th, 2010 #471
Hadding
Senior Member
 
Hadding's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,241
Hadding
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OTPTT View Post
Here's some 'precedent' for you. Early 1970s, Wounded Knee.

Did the FBI have a court order for the electronic surveillance of Steele?
That's something, but note that the fraud was exposed. There is a lot of risk in trying to frame somebody. Is Steele worth the trouble?

If they took fragments of recordings of Steele speaking and pieced them together, it should be possible to demonstrate that.
 
Old June 28th, 2010 #472
Contumacyman
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 446
Contumacyman
Default

Exactly that, Hadding.

The Feds never intended to have their fake tape ever subjected to any scrutiny other than to video tape his wife's reaction to hearing it *in their controlled room*.

After that, the original tape gets misplaced or lost somehow, but the video tape of his wife listening and reacting as to how "it kinda sounds like him, but ..." would be introduced as evidence with regards to her testimony ONLY. The Feds would make sure that when they played the tape for her, it would not be clear enough on the video recording they would be making to allow any decisive scrutiny (as to the copy they would be playing for her benefit). They only wanted to be able to introduce that video tape to make sure the jury knows that his own wife thought it "sounded like him".

Instead of not wanting to scrutinize that original tape, Ed is probably biting at the bit to get his own experts to go over it with a fine tooth comb. Ed also knows (provided he never actually had that conversation) that the Feds would have to disallow any outside scrutiny of that tape *AT ALL COST*, so, it was a bewilderment to him as to how they were going to ever get past that hurdle. It was when he realized that the AG had invited his wife for a private hearing, that he could put together their plan, and he wanted to make sure that the FEDS would not be able to use any aspect of that tape without allowing his own experts to have a go at it. Otherwise, why would he care how his wife reacted. Even if she denied it was his voice, the Feds could still introduce it, along with an army of experts to convince even the most skeptical juror, provided it was actually and genuinely a real original tape recording of an actual conversation as they were purporting it to be.

Ed would have gained NOTHING by having his wife deny the tape, if Ed knew he actually did have that conversation because he would know that his wife's denial wouldn't mean squat up against Fed experts to authenticate it.

The only explanation for Ed's instructions to his son and wife was that he saw through thier scheme and wanted to force them to either give up on the "tape", or let him subject it to a thorough analysis by his own experts. They will NEVER allow that, and Ed knows that, because he knows whether or not he actually had that conversation.

Don't you see, it is the veracity, or falsity, of that alleged conversation that makes, or breaks the Feds case.

The only way a person exercising critical thinking here can entertain the notion that Ed actually had that conversation is if the Feds let Ed's experts have a good go at the alleged ORIGINAL tape.

That ain't gonna' happen.
 
Old June 28th, 2010 #473
OTPTT
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 9,896
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Contumacyman View Post
The only way a person exercising critical thinking here can entertain the notion that Ed actually had that conversation is if the Feds let Ed's experts have a good go at the alleged ORIGINAL tape.
Best Evidence Rule

Quote:
The best evidence rule applies when a party wants to admit as evidence the contents of a document at trial, but that the original document is not available. In this case, the party must provide an acceptable excuse for its absence. If the document itself is not available, and the court finds the excuse provided acceptable, then the party is allowed to use secondary evidence to prove the contents of the document and have it as admissible evidence. The best evidence rule only applies when a party seeks to prove the contents of the document sought to be admitted as evidence.
 
Old June 28th, 2010 #474
Contumacyman
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 446
Contumacyman
Default

Yes, there is that rule, but, it gets fuzzy when in practical use. Years ago, I was in court and my opponent introduced a transcript of a phone conversation critical to their case. I objected and asked the judge to disallow the transcript and allow ONLY the tape itself and that we should all have a listen right there in open court. The judge *claimed* he did not have tape player handy, and, just asked my opponent if they would confirm that their transcript was an accurate depiction of the tape - my opponent answered "yes", and the transcript was allowed as evidence. Sure, I had an appeal by that ruling, but, as it turned out, I won the case anyway so I had no need to pursue it. It did teach me an important lesson, though - courts don't always follow their own rules and you be the fool who puts your destiny in the hopes that they will.
 
Old June 28th, 2010 #475
Russ
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 135
Default

If the prosecution produces any form of evidence, such as tapes, the defense has every right to inspect those tapes and have witnesses refute their validity. The Feds know this and it's why they are waiting till the very last moment to introduce them. It's also why Steele is going to need cash for experts in the field of audio recordings.
 
Old June 28th, 2010 #476
Russ
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 135
Default

What is really important in this trial is the Jury. If they get the wrong jury, Ed will be convicted straight up without solid rebuttal evidence of a conspiracy to frame him. Today's stupid public are more likely to believe FBI over reason and truth or evidence. The FBI says so, so he's guilty...is the way most people reason. He's a bad racist who defended bad people is the trial the media has already given him. I will watch and see how it all plays out.
 
Old June 28th, 2010 #477
Hadding
Senior Member
 
Hadding's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,241
Hadding
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Contumacyman View Post
Instead of not wanting to scrutinize that original tape, Ed is probably biting at the bit to get his own experts to go over it with a fine tooth comb.
It seems to me that the exchange between Steele and his wife is all about authentication. He is instructing his wife to refuse to authenticate the recording so that it cannot be admitted as evidence. This directly contradicts your suspicion that he is eager to have his own experts examine the recording.

I'll remember Contumacyman's supposition that the recording will somehow be lost before the trial. This looks like a retreat into fantasy to me. Based on FAITH in Steele's innocence, we shall assume whatever we must in order to defend our faith.

I on the other hand would bet my wisdom teeth that the recording will not be lost. I never would have expected Steele to do something like this, but it's an important lesson of life that people can fool you sometimes.

Last edited by Hadding; June 28th, 2010 at 07:18 PM.
 
Old June 28th, 2010 #478
Contumacyman
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 446
Contumacyman
Default

Well, if the feds do eventually produce the original tape and allow Ed's experts to scrutinize it, then it will be beyond reasonable doubt that Ed did actually have that conversation (unless Ed's experts can make a convincing case that the tape is not an original). But if the Feds ever do that, and if the tape is original and authentic, then what good will it have done Ed to be so intense about having his wife not cooperate with the AG?

If the Feds produce an authentic original tape for Ed's experts, then Ed's goose is cooked - he should have known that all along.

If he actually did have that conersation, then his only hope would be to claim he was "play-acting" or somehow didn't mean what he plainly said on the tape. I am assuming that Ed is not stupid, not uneducated as to how daming authentic tapes can be (irregardless of claims made by his wife), and that he wouldn't be wasting his time and energy on fruitless pursuits.
 
Old June 28th, 2010 #479
Hadding
Senior Member
 
Hadding's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,241
Hadding
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Contumacyman View Post
then what good will it have done Ed to be so intense about having his wife not cooperate with the AG?
This has already been answered. Steele is trying to keep the recording from being admitted as evidence by blocking its authentication.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Contumacyman
If he actually did have that conersation, then his only hope would be to claim he was "play-acting" or somehow didn't mean what he plainly said on the tape.
That is why it remains to be seen whether he will attempt in court the same "Mission Impossible" argument that he used on his wife. He is expecting her simply to take his word and do as he says. Good luck getting a jury to do that.
 
Old June 28th, 2010 #480
Bernie
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,296
Bernie
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Linder View Post
On the other hand, Steele is a master of rhetoric, a trial lawyer with the verbal and financial wherewithal to defend himself, making a setup considerably more difficult than for an average person.
Alex, I take it a Trial Lawyer is the American equivalent to a Barrister in English law, as is practiced in Australia and the other former Dominions and many former Colonies of the British Empire. This makes him something quite special, one only has to read his essays to see it. Such a man is a danger to the PTB so they are using the great BIG lie AH and Dr Goebbels spoke of to eliminate him. He doesn't look a robust man in that photo. I'd say his life is in grave danger. We are at war World wide with a terrible opponent who never sleeps.
 
Reply

Tags
edgar steele

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:03 PM.
Page generated in 0.28872 seconds.