While investigating posts in my earlier Toumai Blog — I was looking for the first post where I mention how I arrived at the name Toumai. I became distracted so wasn’t able to find the from the Goran language from the Djurab desert of Africa, it’s a name given to babies born in the dry season and means “hope for life”… it is a cryptic combination of my name “May” (also sometimes spelled as “Mai”), and so leaving the first half “Tou” (a cryptic “Two”), the name of my inner twin.
In the search one post stood out because of this films theatrical poster ad for the film “THE ACCUSED”:
Monday, March 8, 2010
The film is loosely based on the 1983 gang rape of Cheryl Araujo.
As you can see, once again only one eye of each person is revealed. Under the title the ad states: THE FIRST SCREAM WAS FOR HELP, THE SECOND IS FOR JUSTICE. Note from my blogs post:
It seems to me that the poster above should include a third scream: "
The first scream was for help, the second is for justice, the third is for the soul... a scream that can't be heard, butt will shake the living earth.
It’s worth reading the entire post. It’s also interesting to note a relationship to “bark” and “scream”— sounds emitted by living creatures that communicate. I would say that it’s safe to say that we can tell by the bark and scream whether it’s meant to convey fear, anger, pain, joy.
My sense is that the inner twin world are screaming, … and it’s NOT for joy.
I discovered that Netflix had put out a documentary series on a number of crimes, one of which covers the trial:
In 2020, the Araujo case was featured as an episode of the Netflix documentary series Trial by Media; the episode "Big Dan's" explores the effect that the broadcasting of the trial had on Araujo, the New Bedford community, and American society at large
According to Araujo’s wiki page, she was killed in a car crash, that blood alcohol tests revealed her to have been drunk at the time, and although this may be true, her two daughters who were in the vehicle at the time, claim to remember that a white van ran them off the road:
In 2019, author Karen Curtis' book The Accuser: The True Story of the Big Dan's Gang Rape Victim was released. Curtis interviewed Araujo's daughters in 2006 and they remember a "white van ran them off the road." Curtis obtained the FHP accident report which confirmed the girls' story.
After watching the episode, Netflix brought up this ad for another true story, that also reveals one EYE of two individuals. THAT peaked my curiosity, as they knew it would.
I then googled a site revealing a list of Fathers With the Most Children, and because it was a long one, I limited my search to names that stood out, and where one in particular stood out above any others:
It was the middle name Bello, that contains the word “bell” and “bellow, via the “Word in Name” pattern cluster and the “Add a Letter to a Name Makes a Word” pattern cluster, with the cryptic “bellow” having significance — “bellow” is in line with “scream” and “bark”.
Note from his wiki page:
Muhammadu Bello Abubahkar Masaba Bida (28 January 1924 – 28 January 2017)
He passed away on his birthday, another addition to the “Birthday Blues” pattern cluster.
Note the etymology of bellow:
bellow(v.)
early 14c., apparently from Old English bylgan "to bellow," from an imitative PIE root *bhel- "to sound, roar." Originally of animals, especially cows and bulls; used of human beings since c. 1600. Related: Bellowed; bellowing. As a noun, "a loud, deep cry," from 1763.
I then turned to the Bello Name wikipedia page. Perusing the lists, I found only one who was born and/or passed away during a year with 3 identical consecutive numbers :
- Brayan Bello (born 1999), Dominican baseball player
DO NOTE THE “BRAY” in his first name!! Note the etymology:
bray(v.)"utter a loud and harsh cry," c. 1300, from Old French braire "to cry,"…bray(n.)"a harsh cry," especially that of an ass, c. 1300, from bray (v.)
I get the sense that the inner twin world are not just referring to solely a human vocal reaction to a situation, butt of all creatures on earth.
Note from the films wiki page:
In an interview, Foster explained that the rape scene was meticulously rehearsed beforehand to ensure there would be no unpleasant surprises during filming. She has stated that she does not remember shooting the scene and completely blacked out, even breaking blood vessels in her right eye from crying during the process.
Also on the films wiki page, another name stood out from the soundtrack section:
I do happen to know a Gina— Gina Welling, who plays a role in my Court Case, in that I asked her to provide an Affidavit in order to speak on behalf of Cathy’s two witnesses — Barbara Sawatsky and Christine Scott who have testified on the stand that they had witnessed me Kick Cathy in the chest. This was a lie conjured up in order to help Cathy gain leverage in a property settlement via a “Tort of Family Violence”. It’s not hard to see that Barb and Christine expect and had made prior arrangements for a monetary kick back (pun intended)!!
As it turns out, the Judge would not allow me to subpoena Gina, … because for some reason, civil courts here in Canada will not allow a Party to bring in witnesses to impugn the character of the other parties witness. This makes absolutely no sense whatsoever— Cathy can bring in witnesses to falsely accuse me of a crime and I can’t impugn their character… as in prove that they had attempted to steal from Gina Welling (among others and including Cathy…, hence why we stopped hanging out with them years ago).
On googling, AI brought up the following:
In civil trials, parties are generally restricted from using evidence of a witness's bad character to impeach their credibility, unless the witness's character is directly in issue. This is a key principle designed to maintain fair and efficient legal processes.
- The common law rule is that a party cannot impeach a witness's credibility by presenting general evidence of bad character. This is often referred to as "oath-helping" and is meant to prevent parties from bolstering their own witnesses' credibility before it's been attacked.
- There are exceptions to this general rule. For example, if a witness is deemed "adverse" by the court, the party may contradict their testimony or show they made conflicting statements. Additionally, if the character of a litigant is directly at issue (e.g., in a defamation case), evidence of their character may be admissible, but with specific controls on how it's presented.
- The restriction on using bad character evidence is based on several rationales. It helps to keep trials focused on the relevant issues and avoids unnecessary confusion or unfair surprise to the litigants. In criminal cases, the liberty interest of the accused is often considered a strong reason to allow evidence of good character, while in civil cases, the focus is on managing litigation and preventing issues from becoming too complex.
- The emphasis is on assessing the credibility of a witness's testimony, not on their general character. Courts want to ensure that the jury or judge hears the facts relevant to the case, rather than being influenced by irrelevant information about a witness's personal history or reputation.
No comments:
Post a Comment