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

Old July 1st, 2010 #581
Hadding
Senior Member
 
Hadding's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,247
Hadding
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Linder View Post
IF the government cut, spliced, used whatever technique to synthesize a recorded statement they could use to prosecute Steele, THEN Steele's most effective defense would be for his WIFE to tell the jury that she did not believe it was her husband speaking.
At first I assumed that Steele might be innocent in the way that Hale was innocent, with the evidence being a matter of interpretation.

Biased interpretation of evidence is something that we have seen many times. That kind of defense would be prima facie credible with me. "Mission Impossible" on the other hand is an unusual claim that requires demonstration. "Mission Impossible" is where Steele lost my confidence.

If it is a "Mission Impossible" production then the recording must be unambiguously incriminating.

Steele was trying to get his wife to block the recording's admission as evidence.

Steele did not have confidence that his wife would conclude on her own that the recording is not real. Therefore he had to order her. He was explicitly instructing her to lie, to put aside her own perceptions and repeat his prescribed mantra, "That is not my husband's voice." He forbade her even to say that it might be him.

If it's really not his voice then an expert could easily show that, by examining the waveforms created with the pronunciation of specific letters. This technology has been around for decades.

Steele's calculation, I think, was that he had a better shot at ordering his wife to prevent the recording from being admitted than at getting an expert to debunk it after it was admitted. Steele is afraid of this recording.

The simplest explanation for all this is that the recording is genuine.

I wish I could believe in Steele's innocence but his behavior so far does not inspire confidence.

Last edited by Hadding; July 1st, 2010 at 09:40 AM.
 
Old July 1st, 2010 #582
Leonard Rouse
Celebrating My Diversity
 
Leonard Rouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: With The Creepy-Ass Crackahs
Posts: 8,156
Leonard Rouse
Default

Jesus Christ, Hadding. . .did Steele run over your dog or something?
 
Old July 1st, 2010 #583
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,352
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hadding View Post
At first I assumed that Steele might be innocent in the way that Hale was innocent, with the evidence being a matter of interpretation.

Biased interpretation of evidence is something that we have seen many times. That would be prima facie credible. "Mission Impossible" on the other hand is an unusual claim that requires demonstration.

If it is a "Mission Impossible" production, however, then the recording must be unambiguously incriminating.

Steele was trying to get his wife to block the recording's admission as evidence. Steele did not have confidence that his wife would conclude on her own that the recording is not real. Therefore he had to order her.

Steele's calculation, I think, was that he had a better shot at ordering his wife to prevent the recording from being admitted than at getting an expert to debunk it after it was admitted. Steele is afraid of this recording.
It continues to be interesting that you pretty much never show up here except when a prominent person on our side is under fire, and then you take very obvious pleasure in putting the very worst construction on their motives.
 
Old July 1st, 2010 #584
MikeTodd
Pussy BŁnd "Commander"
 
MikeTodd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: land of the Friedman, home of the Braverman
Posts: 13,329
MikeTodd
Default

As to Steele's use of the term "Mission Impossible" I wouldn't read too much into it.
Given the circumstances he was in I think he can be forgiven for indulging in hyperbole.
__________________
Worse than a million megaHitlers all smushed together.

Last edited by MikeTodd; July 1st, 2010 at 09:44 AM.
 
Old July 1st, 2010 #585
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,352
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Quote:
Biased interpretation of evidence is something that we have seen many times. That kind of defense would be prima facie credible with me. "Mission Impossible" on the other hand is an unusual claim that requires demonstration. "Mission Impossible" is where Steele lost my confidence.
I don't believe for a minute you even considered Steele wasn't guilty. Your entire posting history shows that you are a wimp full of resentment against the world in general and prominent WN in particular. You appear not to even realize how obvious your gloating Schadenfreude is. Unless of course there's an even darker motive at work.

Quote:
If it is a "Mission Impossible" production then the recording must be unambiguously incriminating.

Steele was trying to get his wife to block the recording's admission as evidence. Steele did not have confidence that his wife would conclude on her own that the recording is not real. Therefore he had to order her.
If the government did manufacture a recording implicating Steele, what is the best way to defend against it? For his wife to say, yeah, that's his voice...but he didn't mean it, or it's a fake, or would it be to deny that it was his voice in the first place. Denial is much stronger than admitting + bizarre or unprovable assertion. My read is that Steele is telling his wife that IF she wants to help him, there is ONE thing for her to do: say it's not his voice. Anything less than that will probably result in him being imprisoned for years. This blather about him "forcing" her - he's in prison. He can't do anything. If she truly believes he intended to murder her, then all she has to do is testify that way. BUT, if she does not, then, as trial lawyer husband informed her, the thing to do is deny it's his voice on the recording.
 
Old July 1st, 2010 #586
OTPTT
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 9,896
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Linder View Post
I don't believe for a minute you even considered Steele wasn't guilty. Your entire posting history shows that you are a wimp full of resentment against the world in general and prominent WN in particular. You appear not to even realize how obvious your gloating Schadenfreude is. Unless of course there's an even darker motive at work.
Thank you for these observations. I thought I was alone.
 
Old July 1st, 2010 #587
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,352
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OTPTT View Post
Thank you for these observations. I thought I was alone.
The internet is a good thing, but it's also a sick fucking masque for deviants of a thousand disorders to prance in mask.
 
Old July 1st, 2010 #588
monamontgomery
Junior Member
 
monamontgomery's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 43
monamontgomery
Default

Quote:
Are you sure that Alex is not abusing, intimidating, threatening, etc you?
Sure he is. He doesn't like me. And he's very emotionally involved in the Steele case. And it's his forum. I have feelings like everyone else and I don't like being granny bashed but I'm a big girl and I like Alex and I appreciate this forum.
 
Old July 1st, 2010 #589
MikeTodd
Pussy BŁnd "Commander"
 
MikeTodd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: land of the Friedman, home of the Braverman
Posts: 13,329
MikeTodd
Default

You should really get back to your knitting.
And if you find yourself in need of an opinion let some man give you one.
Have a nice day.
__________________
Worse than a million megaHitlers all smushed together.
 
Old July 1st, 2010 #590
OTPTT
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 9,896
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeTodd View Post
You should really get back to your knitting.
And if you find yourself in need of an opinion let some man give you one.
Have a nice day.
You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to MikeTodd again.
 
Old July 1st, 2010 #591
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,352
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by monamontgomery View Post
Sure he is. He doesn't like me.
I don't know you. Therefore, I don't like or dislike you. Having observed your tapes and your posts here, I don't like your behavior, particularly given you're apparently claiming to be a lawyer. You asserted something that is flat false, and when pressed on it, you run away and start trying to convert a valid point into an emotional problem. That's pretty standard female behavior.

Again, where's your response to my refutation of your claim that it is perjury if Steele's wife denies it is his voice on the recording?
 
Old July 1st, 2010 #592
OTPTT
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 9,896
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Linder View Post
Again, where's your response to my refutation of your claim that it is perjury if Steele's wife denies it is his voice on the recording?
It's perjury if one makes a statement under oath that was material to a case and then makes another statement contrary to the first under the same circumstances.
 
Old July 1st, 2010 #593
Hadding
Senior Member
 
Hadding's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,247
Hadding
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Linder View Post
I don't believe for a minute you even considered Steele wasn't guilty. Your entire posting history shows that you are a wimp full of resentment against the world in general and prominent WN in particular. You appear not to even realize how obvious your gloating Schadenfreude is. Unless of course there's an even darker motive at work.
You don't know the whole history of my comment on this matter. Initially I was arguing to Giles that Steele could be innocent. The email that Giles got and read on his show immediately after the story broke, pointing out that Hale was not really convicted by the evidence presented, and that this could be the case with Steele, was from me.

I sent this to Giles on 21 June:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hadding to Giles
I could be mistaken, but I don't believe that these people asserting that the allegedly incriminating recording is fraudulent have had a chance to hear it.

Assuming that Steele has any case at all, my guess is that this is going to be, as in the case of Matt Hale, a matter of interpretation.

There really is no recording of Hale telling informant Tony Evola to do anything. Evola asks Hale if he wants him to "get the rat" and we are supposed to accept Evola's claim that Hale nodded. The only other evidence is circumstantial: the fact that Hale tolerated Evola's presence after he had suggested such things. It suggests that Hale regards contemplation of illegal violence as not out of the question. But, on another occasion Hale had responded to Evola by saying that he was going to work within the law.

Basically Hale is guilty of acquiescence to badgering from an FBI informant. We need to wait to find out if Steele did even that much.

It's really jumping the gun to assert that the recording is a fraud without knowing the precise content.
Steele's resort to the Mission Impossible story was a turning point for me. That is much more far-fetched than what I expected.

I am willing to believe that somebody was late for work because of an accident slowing traffic, because I have seen that happen. I am less likely to believe that it was because of being abducted by gray aliens. Extraordinary claims require at least a reasonable proof, not just a say-so.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Linder
If the government did manufacture a recording implicating Steele, what is the best way to defend against it? For his wife to say, yeah, that's his voice...but he didn't mean it, or it's a fake, or would it be to deny that it was his voice in the first place. Denial is much stronger than admitting + bizarre or unprovable assertion. My read is that Steele is telling his wife that IF she wants to help him, there is ONE thing for her to do: say it's not his voice. Anything less than that will probably result in him being imprisoned for years. This blather about him "forcing" her - he's in prison. He can't do anything. If she truly believes he intended to murder her, then all she has to do is testify that way. BUT, if she does not, then, as trial lawyer husband informed her, the thing to do is deny it's his voice on the recording.
My preference is for the truth. Anything other than the truth is going to be more easily shot down.

If Steele uses the Mission Impossible defense in court, he is going to have to prove it. I doubt that he will use it in court. I think this was an argument for his wife.

Steele did put as much pressure on her as he could under the circumstances, in the form of guilt. He said that his life was in her hands. He assumes that if the recording is admitted as evidence, he will be convicted and that she will have to explain to their grandchildren, etc.

Last edited by Hadding; July 1st, 2010 at 10:22 AM.
 
Old July 1st, 2010 #594
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,352
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OTPTT View Post
It's perjury if one makes a statement under oath that was material to a case and then makes another statement contrary to the first under the same circumstances.
The point is, there is zero risk of perjury in this case. And someone who apparently claims to be a lawyer is saying there is. It appears to me that "Mona Montgomery" is doing what she accuses Steele of - trying to intimidate the witness.

It is not a matter of opinion, it is a matter of fact, that the FBI routinely falsifies testimony and manufactures evidence. It also murders people.

That being the case, the assumption in any even vaguely political case should be that the FBI is misrepresenting the facts. That is the only rational way to approach the matter.
 
Old July 1st, 2010 #595
OTPTT
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 9,896
Default

Kind of odd how Hadding, Giles, and Mona seem to be working in concert.
 
Old July 1st, 2010 #596
Hadding
Senior Member
 
Hadding's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,247
Hadding
Default

You guys assume that the recording is the only evidence. It may be.... Steele's conversation with his wife implies that.

If the recording is the only evidence, and a "Mission Impossible" falsification is possible, so good that it can't be debunked, then Steele's best defense will be to bring in a forensic audio expert to say that the claim of an undetectable, Mission Impossible falsification is credible, thus invalidating the recording as sufficient evidence for a conviction.

In that case resort would have to be made to witnesses and material evidence. If there isn't any such evidence then he gets off.

Last edited by Hadding; July 1st, 2010 at 10:34 AM.
 
Old July 1st, 2010 #597
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,352
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Quote:
If Steele uses the Mission Impossible defense in court, he is going to have to prove it. I doubt that he will use it in court. I think this was an argument for his wife.
If it's not his voice, then there's no need to disprove it.

Quote:
He said that his life was in her hands. He assumes that if the recording is admitted as evidence, he will be convicted and that she will have to explain to their grandchildren, etc.
That's true whether the recording is real or manufactured. If it's the latter, then he would be a fool not to dispute it, and the best way to do that would be simply for his wife to say it's not him. There is nothing the government can do if she claims it's not him on the tape, and it is interesting that out of the blue we have people show up and suggest that she would risk prison herself by not going along with government claims.
 
Old July 1st, 2010 #598
Tintin
∞ 𐌙 λ
 
Tintin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 7,497
Tintin
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hadding View Post
At first I assumed that Steele might be innocent in the way that Hale was innocent, with the evidence being a matter of interpretation.
Who do you suspect is/was more dangerous in the eyes of the ZOG, Steele or Hale? Obviously Steele.

The ZOG obviously thought about plans to set Hale up, made a decision to initiated a specific plan, looked for someone that could instigate the plans, approached the person and convinced them it would be in their best interest to join up with the ZOG, successfully executed the plan, massaged the plan the through the legal system, and Hale was found guilty and sent to jail. This cannot be denied.

Why is it hard to believe that the same the is being done to Steele? It reasonable that Steele would have thought so. Obviously he is smarter and will not be tricked as easily as Hale. So if you were trying to set Steele up how would you do it? How would you connect him to a crime? Finger print, visual (picture, video), DNA, voice recording, eye witness? Which one of those would be the easiest to forge? What motive for their be for a crime you could likely set somebody up for? Killing a wife for the money sound pretty obvious. Can you think of another crime that would have a plausible motive? And how would you construct the set up to get the FBI in. Yea, have the evil husband want the mother-in-law, how happens to live in another state, dead.

Really try to think of another scenario that the ZOG would executes that could have Steele sent to jail. This may not be easy if Steele is a guy that spends most of his time sitting around the house on a farm.

Also think of how far the government went to get Randy Weaver. And then ask yourself who is more dangerous to the ZOG, Steele or Weaver.

Quote:
Biased interpretation of evidence is something that we have seen many times. That kind of defense would be prima facie credible with me. "Mission Impossible" on the other hand is an unusual claim that requires demonstration. "Mission Impossible" is where Steele lost my confidence.
Monday morning quarterbacking Steele performance in the jail recordings is not really productive. Steele had spoken to his wife approximately two hours before he spoke to her in the recording we heard. Obviously at that time he knew of the recording but was puzzled as to why the AG office was going to play them for his wife. In those two hours he had to think about what his wife told him, process the information, and a light went off in his head. He then had to get the police to allow him to make another phone call. It seems that he tried spent some time contact his wife, but failed. Then finally contact is son, and then later is wife.

So imagine what those two hours were like for him. Only at the moment his wife picked up the phone did he know he was going to be able to make his points. He had not time to say to himself: let me think this through and come up with the best possible explanation to give my wife then ask the police for permissions to make another phone call.

And on top of that, he did not know how long he would be able to speak to his wife.

To criticize his performance under that pressure or to use his performance to determine his quilt or innocence is fucking ridiculous.

The "Mission Impossible" and "Like a rhinoceros in the road ..." phrases were used to drill his two main points into the listeners head. They may sound childish or silly or whatever, but I suspect they we effective. Maybe under less stressful situation with more time Steele could have done better. The only arrogance and naivety would lead a men less then Steele to believe he would have done better.

Quote:
If it is a "Mission Impossible" production then the recording must be unambiguously incriminating.
So you have had two weeks to think about, how would you have done it in a non-incrinating manor?

Quote:
Steele was trying to get his wife to block the recording's admission as evidence.
No shit Sherlock.

Quote:
Steele did not have confidence that his wife would conclude on her own that the recording is not real.
That way you state that you must believe that if the ZOG was to set Steele up that they would produce amateurish evidence that his wife would obviously detect. You are implying that if the ZOG was to go through all the effort to set Steele up they would not be using the highest quality equipment, not use the most advanced techniques and not have the most talented Izreally audio professional to making the recording.

Quote:
Therefore he had to order her. He was explicitly instructing her to lie, to put aside her own perceptions and repeat his prescribed mantra, "That is not my husband." He forbade her even to say that it might be him.
Your use of the word "mantra" is quite telling. Maybe he could have used a little more finesse. But did he break the law? If he had wouldn't the FBI be adding charges? His use "Mission Impossible" impossible implies that he believe the recording are fake, and if they are fake it is not a "lie" for him to tell is wife to say "That is not my husband".

Quote:
Steele's calculation, I think, was that he had a better shot at ordering his wife to prevent the recording from being admitted than at getting an expert to debunk it after it was admitted.
That is obvious. But there are problems here. For example, what if these are "Mission Impossible" quality forgeries? What if the experts are in some way tampered with. If the ZOG has gone this far, why would you think that they would not intimidate an expert.

But isn't the other side guilty of the same thing. The FBI must have more confident that Steele's wife can authenticate the recording then their expert.

Quote:
Steele is afraid of this recording.
No FUCKING SHIT! Every NW better be afraid of the recording. If ZOG pulls this off other NW will be sitting duck.

Quote:
The simplest explanation for all this is that the recording is genuine.
Thats true. And that surely will be the closing statement of the prosecuting attorney.

Quote:
I wish I could believe in Steele's innocence but his behavior so far does not inspire confidence.
Steele performance was exceptional given the situation.
 
Old July 1st, 2010 #599
Leonard Rouse
Celebrating My Diversity
 
Leonard Rouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: With The Creepy-Ass Crackahs
Posts: 8,156
Leonard Rouse
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hadding View Post
Steele did put as much pressure on her as he could under the circumstances, in the form of guilt. He said that his life was in her hands. He assumes that if the recording is admitted as evidence, he will be convicted and that she will have to explain to their grandchildren, etc.
Assuming innocence, it is the FBI, et al, who have put the pressure on Steele's wife by creating this situation.

To characterize Steele's jailhouse call to his wife, on whom the US Attorney's case seems to hinge, as some sort of mere guilt trip (and therefore circumstancial evidence of his guilt) is the kind bullshit you would rail against in other discussions.

You're like a dog with a bone on this "Mission Impossible" thing. I don't get your problem. If you don't like his metaphor, fine. But this was a man under extreme duress, speaking to a woman--his wife--under just as much duress (if not more). He didn't make any extraordinary claim. He was speaking to his shell-shocked wife, who very likely holds his life in her hands, and who will naturally be pressured or fooled by the government to toss him to the wolves, even if innocent.

But you're right, there's nothing Mission Impossible about it. The entire tale put out by the government reeks more of Car 54, Where Are You?

Last edited by Leonard Rouse; July 1st, 2010 at 10:51 AM.
 
Old July 1st, 2010 #600
Tintin
∞ 𐌙 λ
 
Tintin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 7,497
Tintin
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by monamontgomery View Post
Sure he is. He doesn't like me. And he's very emotionally involved in the Steele case.
I don't like you because you are destroying my fantasy that women become sane when they get older. Now I know it is life long curse that men must live with.
 
Reply

Tags
edgar steele

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:33 AM.
Page generated in 0.18830 seconds.