Ideas and Input on Creating a Case Reference Library

[ThoughtElf]

Hi SOTS,We should be able to hammer out where/how here on this thread.

Panama's Wiki idea rocks, and will provide excellent search capabilities, but I also agree with you that I am not sure we want it open entirely to the public. Aside from who will use it, we don't want just anyone to have the ability to edit what we post, KWIM?

If people are strongly opposed to a Wiki due to security issues, we can still adopt Panama's logical, clear, search tagging structure and build the reference library here - in the PL or Jury Room, which would be members only.

Let's see what people think.

 

[WholeLottaRosie]

Hi SOTS,We should be able to hammer out where/how here on this thread.

Panama's Wiki idea rocks, and will provide excellent search capabilities, but I also agree with you that I am not sure we want it open entirely to the public. Aside from who will use it, we don't want just anyone to have the ability to edit what we post, KWIM?

If people are strongly opposed to a Wiki due to security issues, we can still adopt Panama's logical, clear, search tagging structure and build the reference library here - in the PL or Jury Room, which would be members only.

Let's see what people think.

I think this is an awesome idea, but, I agree, I wouldn't want to see the defense or something using it.

 

[sleutherontheside]

ThoughtElf.....once again....neither of us sleep.*

 

[ThoughtElf]

Bringing this over from the other thread, so people can start to check out Panama's great suggestion and the work done as an example:

Ok, so I went ahead and did this wiki thing. It's just an overview/example. This sort of thing is basically just fun for me to set up, so if it seems like not the best idea, totally say so. If you guys are open to it, any and all suggestions are appreciated. Then we could set up a non-sandbox version and then open it up for editing. But, again, just say the word if it should be abandoned so as to put all reference library efforts into ThoughtElf's database.

The organization of the whole thing stems from tags. I explained my vision (heh) on the home page.

Here it is:
http://referencelibrarysandbox.wetpaint.com/

ETA: Perhaps if we went with the wiki idea, a legitimate wiki might be better than the wetpaint thing. I think there would be more robust categorization and functionality. Though, on the other hand, there would be more intensive maintenance and issues of hosting, etc. Hard to say.

Here is what Panama outlined as a potential structure. Whether we use a wiki, do it here, or create a collaborative database, the groundwork Panama laid is sound and we should think about adopting it:

I envision that each document should have a set of tags like the following:

<document type>, <involved character #1, e.g. interviewer>, <involved character #2, e.g., interviewee>, <date released/doc dump it was included in>, <date of the thing itself>, <genre?>, <theme>, <any others, really>.

For example:
interview, Jimmy Policeman, Joe Doe, doc dump 04/04/09, 01/03/09, FBI

As for the character category, if more than two characters are involved, we can always just add more in the tags. And really, there's no problem with additional tags based on content. The main issue, as far as I see it, is that we don't have different tags for the same thing. So, we should NOT have a "KC" tag and a "Casey" tag.

We should probably make/have a template for Document pages. Each should have some basic info on it. I kind of did that for the first example document on the left.

THE RED TEXT BELOW IS WHAT WOULD APPEAR ON THE "Home" PAGE, perhaps after a brief intro describing how to edit the thing, and stating that editors should only use the existing tags.

It is just an example of possible tags and categories. I think the most important thing is that we come up with a master list of tags IN ADVANCE, and stress that anyone editing the thing should not use any other tag, ever.

(Except for "Interview", I didn't make the tags links yet, but they would be links.
If the tag is "word", the link should be: http://referencelibrarysandbox.wetpaint.com/tag/word
If the tag is "word1 word2", the link should be: http://referencelibrarysandbox.wetpaint.com/tag/word1+word2)

The categories of tags aren't especially important, except in terms of finding the desired tag on the page right here. This is good since some of the tags themselves are IMHO difficult to categorize.

btw, the tags aren't case-sensitive.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Tags, by category of tag:
(click a tag to bring up a list of all documents in that category. After clicking on a tag, you can use the search box at the top of the page to find documents with tagA+tagB+tagC)

Document type: Interview, Evidence, Court Motion, Article, Photos, communication,

Document release: 06/05/09 doc dump, 06/05/09 doc dump, 06/05/09 doc dump, 06/05/09 doc dump, ...

Character: KC, LA, GA, CA, TL, JB, JG, Yuri, Nancy Grace,

Date: 06/01/09, 06/01/09, 06/01/09, ...

Themes: grand jury, cell phone, forensics, ...

Other: FBI, Chloroform?, thing1, thing2, sex, drugs, rock n' roll, ...
----------------------------------------------------------------

 

[LetJusticePrevail]

Go to bed ThoughtElf and SleutherOnTheSide!

Bringing this over from the other thread, so people can start to check out Panama's great suggestion and the work done as an example:



Here is what Panama outlined as a potential structure. Whether we use a wiki, do it here, or create a collaborative database, the groundwork Panama laid is sound and we should think about adopting it:

[/color]

 

[Marigold]

Hi SOTS,We should be able to hammer out where/how here on this thread.

Panama's Wiki idea rocks, and will provide excellent search capabilities, but I also agree with you that I am not sure we want it open entirely to the public. Aside from who will use it, we don't want just anyone to have the ability to edit what we post, KWIM?

If people are strongly opposed to a Wiki due to security issues, we can still adopt Panama's logical, clear, search tagging structure and build the reference library here - in the PL or Jury Room, which would be members only.

Let's see what people think.

I hope I don't set off anyone's hinky meter, but I would strongly suggest that if you do put it here, that you would make it very difficult for new people to get access to it. I may be paranoid, but I can envision someone from the defense coming here and making a few posts in order to gain access to the reference room. Maybe make it so you have to be a member here for six months, with X amount of posts, etc.

Personally, I would have access so tight that I would only allow in people after they'd been here six months and I had talked to them on the phone. I would also put it on a separate domain name, one that is totally unrelated to the case, something that no one would guess like www.biggreenkangaroo.com or something similar. But that's just me, cautious to a fault.

About wikis: I am currently creating a wiki for a business site I own and am using this: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/MediaWiki . It's free, very easy to use and it allows me to set permissions so that I can pick and choose who is allowed to edit/add/delete.

 

[ThoughtElf]

Go to bed ThoughtElf and SleutherOnTheSide!

So not gonna happen. I can't speak for SOTS (nor would I, she is wittier than I am,) but I have been gone since Monday and have pages of WS goodness to catch up on.

And I am hoping this thread is going to generate some cool discussion for the day-time dwellers. (How the heck do they stay up when it is sunny out? icky.)

 

[sleutherontheside]

Oh...I have been transformed into a vampire. WS has reset my sleep / wake clock. I have found that I do my best and wittiest posting during the hours of 12 AM and 5AM. Sad isn't it?

 

[ThoughtElf]

I hope I don't set off anyone's hinky meter, but I would strongly suggest that if you do put it here, that you would make it very difficult for new people to get access to it. I may be paranoid, but I can envision someone from the defense coming here and making a few posts in order to gain access to the reference room. Maybe make it so you have to be a member here for six months, with X amount of posts, etc.

Personally, I would have access so tight that I would only allow in people after they'd been here six months and I had talked to them on the phone. I would also put it on a separate domain name, one that is totally unrelated to the case, something that no one would guess like www.biggreenkangaroo.com or something similar. But that's just me, cautious to a fault.

About wikis: I am currently creating a wiki for a business site I own and am using this: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/MediaWiki . It's free, very easy to use and it allows me to set permissions so that I can pick and choose who is allowed to edit/add/delete.

I love that this thread has wheels.

Excellent input. Like MediaWiki, WikiDot.com is also a good option with security settings: http://www.wikidot.com/

I have several 'random' domain registrations we could use, or we can simply register a new one via GoogleSites & GoDaddy. (cheap like borscht)

Those are easy details to work around. More significantly, there are inherant issues no matter which option members want:

• There is absolutely no way to ensure 'WS pro prosecution' exclusivity regardless. Just as the defense team could slide in as a member here (*grin*), they can just as easily slide in as a member on any Social Media site that we'd use (like any of the Wiki variations suggested.)
• The 'administrator' of any of those created sites for the ref library group has no more ability to vet users than we'd have by putting it here on WS in a members only area
• There are many sources for the defense to access for links, discussion & theory, including WS. Frankly, I don't think it's going to have a significant impact on the outcome or verdict decision of the case no matter what they read or reference.
  (and that is not an open invite or a thrown gaunlet to turn this useful thread into yet another debate about the outcome. Stay on point, pls - thanks :wink
• There is simply no possible way to be that selective if our goal is a collaborative effort, short of going with the database and restricting update/publishing rights to a few well-known potential librarians - and even that is an entirely subjective perspective.
• The more we narrow our focus in an attempt to skew edit rights to only those with a shared vision or agenda, the less likely we are to really make this an all-encompassing reference library for the case - and we might regret that greatly come trial time.

I'm voting for a Wiki of some sort, using Panama's tag structure as a template, but with the ability to control editors/viewers w/o being inordinantly selective. We can always give them a Ref Library TO if they get feisty.

 

[ThoughtElf]

*passes SOTS a nice, warm shot glass of O+*

I was just thinking that I wouldn't understand a single idea here if someone forced me to read it at 9:00 a.m. Pass the plasma, pls.

 

[LetJusticePrevail]

I take my Adderall at 5PM and I am red-ta-go through to 6ish AM. Then it's off to bed to prepare for reviewing of the next days posts.

 

[JBean]

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=72088"]Interview Reference Guide To Finding All Interviews, Motions, Grand Jury and Trials. - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame]


[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=71772"]Official Documents-Audio-Arrest Updates No Discussion - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame]



[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=72183"]Caylee Case Calendar and Linear Timeline - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame]

 

[cecybeans]

OMG Panama awesome - FABulous! This way we can exhibit all relevant tags and allow people to combine them in personally intuitive ways to search.

 

[countzero]

Security is my main concern. Guess it comes with the territory of my background. I don't want to see anyone have the ability to change an original released document, nor be able to add or delete any original documents for -- lets say "Personal" reasons. KWIM I vote for the PL with a sticky for the thread. As for newbies who can't get in .... well I was one once, and I had to read, read, read and post intelligently in order to get into the Private Folders land. So can everyone else. Sorry but we all had to do it. Again, I am not pointing fingers at anyone, but this case has gotten large rather quickly these past few months and if anything, it will get intense in the next six months. I still have to go back and re-read earlier released documents because of a post being incorrect with information.

Anywho, I really like this idea after I spent hours yesterday looking for a specific doc, KC & TL's text messages. I do have it saved on my puter but I changed the file name so I could reference it easily. An :doh: moment. I finally found it but don't remember which thread I needed to reply to. Another :doh: moment.

We are getting ready for another dump of eight CD's from the SAO with 1895 document pages included, photos, photographs, DNA and other docs from the FBI quality unit. These were given to JB on 10.20.09. So, if our brains aren't fried now, mine will be when MM gets them for us.

Enough of my babbling, I need more caffeine.

Oh, as for JB & crew reading these, I don't care. If anything, it only reinforces the fact of KC/CA/GA/LA's guilt and the strong case the SAO has. And if we, collectively, can banish any SODDI or excuse the A's invent ..... point out MAJOR inconsistencies, you can bet your sweet bippy the SAO can and will too.

 

[cecybeans]

I am 100% in support of an index and cross reference system. BUT.....I know that the defense will use our hard work. Is there a way to limit access to any such program to legitimate parties? Wow...I sound paranoid don't I?

I am not worried about the defense using anything - or knowing what to do with it if they do. They can't even use spellcheck. But we should let LE and the SA know - they might find it useful as an inventory and search tool versus some kind of baroque government numbering system.

But once this is assembled, I'm sure it will be very popular and perhaps you'd like to limit it to members-only, at least for the contribution or editing portions. I'm not sure what kind of traffic it will support and if that might be an issue for members as well. I'm sure the word will get out and people will be flocking to see it and search.

 

[countzero]

lol, JBean did it to me again. I begin to reply to a thread and the thread is quietly moved or merged and I haven't a clue where I will land until I look at its title. Funny :crazy: Good thing she is watching out for me. Thanks JBean.

 

[cecybeans]

Panama - my You Are A God comment did not make it from the other thread. I have to repeat the love here. This is a much better way for people to intuitively doc-search once it is set up.

 

[Woe.be.gone]

Though I don't understand half of what is being said here I understand the concept as I used to use the Dewey decimal system at the Library! Somehow we need to make it easier to find specific information.

I know that our Official Documents thread contains all the information that is/has been made available from the case, but with so many documents and interviews and FBI reports released, it is like a tedious day of driving to get to a place you really need/want to go when you want to find something. Especially considering that it's hard to remember anymore when whatever you're looking for may have been released so you have to go through three months worth of stuff to find it, that is, if you ever do. Also there are often a hundred pages or more within the link where you think you might find what you're looking for only to get to the end empty handed so-to-speak. That said, I still appreciate the sources (Official Docs and Media Links and Cell phone logs and Ping Maps, etc.) and know the information is documented - somewhere!

As far as accessability - I think it should be for people who have signed into Websleuths when they read/post here. Also, we can't fear the Defense and ultimately we are ALL after the truth, right? We are not altering the data, we are just recording it.

As bad as it looks for KC, I want to know the truth of what happened to Caylee and also would like those who were/are involved to be brought to justice as well.

Security is an issue imo. People cannot be allowed to enter false information.

 

[panama]

Thanks guys :blushing: Glad I could help

Lemme see... Yeah, as long as someone doesn't mind having to be the gatekeeper to the thing if it needs to be private, an external wiki seems fine. People mentioned some other wikis; probably any would be as good or better than the WetPaint site, I think. I'm not sure how much storage they give you on Wetpaint, but the wiki functionality is somewhat lacking, I think.

On the other hand, I don't really know how these forums work in terms of building parts that don't look like the standard thread, post, etc. set-up. (I know the timeline area is apparently built differently.) But, like people have said, if it's possible to have an isolated area with tags (or something that is functionally equivalent) that don't link to the other currently existing tags, that would definitely make sense, IMHO. Less time would need to be spent on letting people in or keeping people out, and more time could be spent on populating the thing. Also, maybe people would be more likely to use it if it's right here?

Maybe this next thing isn't completely relevant, but it jumped out at me... It's an example of the kind of thing that I think is *exceptionally* useful. It's snipped from JWG's post in the "George/Lexus Contact Pattern" thread.

<snipped>

Following is an inventory of records I have...it may not be complete, but I tried :bang::

• KC ATT Cell Data Records, dated 8/21/2008, discovery pages 432-582. This is an "ATT CDR LIVE w/Cell Sites" report, and is the source of Bond's Exhibit A. It shows a Lexus phone number in the calls that are in question.

• KC Calls June 15-20, pages 2570-2582. This is a LE-generated report (probably from a spreadsheet) that shows Gentiva and the Gentiva number in the calls that are in question. The source of the document is not known.

• KC ATT Cell Data Records, dated 8/11/2008, discovery pages 4334-4496. This is an "ATT CDR LIVE w/Cell Sites" report that was released in the March 5 document dump. It shows a Lexus phone number in the calls that are in question, and all of them have been highlighted.

• KC ATT Cell Data Records, date not shown, discovery pages 4144-4290. This is an "ATT CDR LIVE w/Cell Sites" report that was released in the March 5 document dump. However, this one has additional LE annotations showing names of who was called or had placed a call. It shows a Lexus phone number in the calls that are in question, and it explicitly states that the call was to Lexus of Orlando.

• KC ATT Cell Data Records, dated 7/28/2008, discovery pages 4515-4570. This is an "ATT CDR LIVE w/Cell Sites" report that was released in the March 5 document dump. It shows a Lexus phone number in the calls that are in question.

• An FDLE report entry, dated July 29 (page 4300) lists all of the calls as being to Gentiva and shows the Gentiva phone number. The complete report closes out on December 11, 2008.

• Spreadsheets were included in the April 6 document dump containing KC's cell phone records from ATT. All are copies or subcopies of one another. The file "TRUE FULL COPY of Casey Anthony CELL PHONE records from AT&T.xls" was used as the source input data for our CellLogRev14.xls, replacing the previously hand-edited scanned version that had undergone so many corrections in the past. This file is dated November 3, 2008, and shows a Lexus phone number in the calls that are in question.

The date the report was generated is not known, but it was clearly before November 27, the date of the dump.
​

• Also in the document dump are KC's cell phone billing records, dated July 17, 2008. These records show a Gentiva phone number in the calls that are in question.

(The final two items described above do not have discovery pages associated with them. They are part of a zipped data file that was included in the April document dump.)

Anyway, I guess the fact that this is the kind of thing that we're dealing with is why we all want this reference library in the first place. I just thought it was kind of cool. Perhaps all of these releases are listed or linked to or mentioned in the "guide to finding documents" or other threads, but it's so nice to see all the Casey cell record info together.

Another thought: maybe, for ease of construction, there could simply be a sub-forum with threads whose titles are the tags we would envision having. And people could add documents/links-to-documents to whatever threads they belong in. So the "Interviews" thread would have all interviews. The "Amy H." thread would have her interviews, and her resume, and her SMSs. That kind of thing. It does get complicated because, for example, should there be a "Phone Records" thread, and a "Casey Phone Records" thread, and a "who-ever-else-has-phone-records thread"?... that kind of thing. It wouldn't be optimal, but it could be just fine, and still save everyone a lot of looking-around time. Just brainstorming....

Oh -- even if people haven't decided on a location yet, if people want to do the tagging thing, we could work on coming up with a master list of tags (or decide on their format, e.g., initials vs firstname_lastname, etc.) if that's what people want to do. It's also possible that having a master list isn't as big of a deal as I'm imagining it to be. (I just keep thinking about there being both a Lee_A tag and a LA tag, or a cell_phone and a cell_records tag, and shudder. )

Lastly, I'm almost certain that the moment this reference library is complete, Casey will come forward and say that she and Colonial Mustard killed Caylee in the Study with a Candlestick, if you will, and thus analyzing the case will suddenly become moot and/or less interesting

 

[BionicSurfer]

I know this discussion has moved on to deeper areas but if we need any documents converted from .pdf to .doc or .txt, please let me know. I have the full Adobe package that makes this a breeze.