09 September 2012


It was brought to my attention that this post was too long, so I decided to split it into 2 parts. The post remains unchanged; just a little easier to read. Part 2 follows.

      So! Here we go again. Late posting and off message. Again!

       This month was going to be about The Social Media Conspiracy (it ain't 

what it sounds like. Think: “we are our own Big Brother”).  

     I was just tidying it up a bit when my wife turned on a true-crime show 

about Marty Tankleff1.

       In 1990; with no evidence other than a falsified - and un-signed confession 

coerced from him by an unscrupulous detective, Marty Tankleff was charged 

with the 1988 murder of his mother and father. At trial he was convicted and 

sentenced to two consecutive terms of 25 years to life in prison. 

     In 2003 after hearing from 20 new witnesses, an appellate court finally 

overturned his conviction. He was 34 years old and 17 of those years; exactly 

one half of his life were spent rotting in a New York prison for a crime he 

didn't commit. 

     First his parents are murdered and then, before this 17 year old kid has 

time to grieve and process his tragic loss, he is charged with and convicted of 

double homicide. 

     Marty was sure that the police would quickly realize their mistake and go 

get the real killer. 

     He was wrong.

     If you think that this is an isolated or even an infrequent situation, think 


      We've all seen the cop movies where the bad guy talks too much and the 

completely upstanding detective takes down the confession, the bad guy signs 

it, goes away for 20 or so years and justice is served.

      What we see almost as often is some cynical, bitter, tired old cop who 

wants to get a conviction at any cost. To this end he will lie to, trick, 

threaten, manipulate and intimidate some green young kid or mentally 

unstable person and get them to sign a confession that they (the suspect) 

probably hasn't even had a chance to read and maybe doesn't know what they 

confessed to.

      I wanted to know if any of these “Innocent but Convicted” stories had even 

the slightest grain of truth or if they were just a lot of bull concocted by 

ratings-hungry TV drama writers or spun by the convicts themselves. 

      Here's what I found. Look at the facts and decide for yourself.

     From 1973 through Jan, 20122, 140 inmates from around the country were 

released from death row after having been acquitted at a re-trial, having all 

charges dropped or been given an absolute pardon because new evidence 

proved they were innocent. 

     That's almost 4 per year. Every year. For at least the last 40 years. Note 

that these were just the people on death row AND only the ones that 

were able to get exonerated and released. 

     Hundreds; maybe thousands more have served 20 plus years for crimes 

they didn't commit3. How many innocent people have been murdered by the 

justice system we will never know. 

      Don't think it could ever happen to you? Listen to me very carefully. 

Every day, people in this country are sent to prison...or worse... for crimes 

they never committed. Many of them have never committed any crime. It 

absolutely can happen to you!

      I don't care if you are 15, 25 or 75. Men or women; it doesn't matter. You 

may be white, black, red or purple. If you are arrested or even just 



Then memorize and repeat these words.

 I have done nothing wrong, but I believe that it is in my best interest to consult with an attorney before I speak to you.” 

     This is all you should say unless and until your lawyer tells you different.
     Once you ask for a lawyer, the questioning is supposed to stop4. If they 

continue to question you they are breaking the law. Don't expect to get them 

thrown in jail, though. It doesn't work that way.

      If you are being questioned, interviewed, interrogated or whatever they 

choose to call it the police are NOT your friends. They are NOT there to help 

you. They WILL lie to you5. They WILL try every trick in their very large 

book6 to trip you up and get you to confess to a crime whether you have 

commited  a crime or not. I can't stress this enough.

      If you are a witness to or a victim of a crime, you must tell the police 

what you saw and/or heard. Stick to the facts and don't talk about anything 

BUT the crime you saw or suffered. If you are questioned about anything else:



Don't volunteer anything. 

Don't try to sound like a hero. 

Don't offer an alibi. 

Don't talk. Period!!! 

That's why you have a lawyer.

At least that's my opinion. What's yours?

PS: Look for "The Social Media Conspiracy" in October


Have a conspiracy you'd like me to research? Got a question about 

crypto? Post a comment HERE and I'll do my best to post the answer.

If you wish to unsubscribe from this blog, please send an email to pyrate02@gmail.com with the word “UNSUBSCRIBE”in the subject line.

06 September 2012


And here is part 2. Yes: the citations have been renumbered.
 There is another major item that the police, prosecutors and even a lot of 

judges don't want you or anybody else to know about.

     The concept is most commonly known as the "Fully Informed Jury” or 

Jury Nullification.

If a juror accepts as the law that which the judge states then that juror has accepted the exersize of absolute authority of a government employee and has surrendered a power and right that once was the citizen's safegaurd of liberty.
George Bankroft -- History of the Constitution

  "In criminal cases juries remained the judges of both law and fact 

for approximately fifty years after the Revolution. However, the 

judges in America, just as in England after the Revolution of 1688, 

gradually asserted themselves increasingly through their 

instructions on the law. We recognize, as appellants urge, the 

undisputed power of the jury to acquit, even if its verdict is contrary 

to the law as given by the judge and contrary to the evidence." U.S. v Moylan, 417 F.2d 1002,1006 (1969)1

        The fact is that, in complete opposition to what most cops and judges will 

tell you, the jury is the highest and final legal authority in America. 12 

people can, no matter what the facts, evidence and/or instructions from the 

judge, acquit any defendant according to their conscience. No on can 

challenge this decision and jurors cannot be punished in any way for 


       In a nutshell: ”You are NOT obligated to enforce a bad law! You do 

NOT have to send people to jail who you don't think deserve to go 

there, regardless of what the law says!2

      If it wasn't for jury nullification, slavery would still be legal. So would 

burning witches. Prohibition would still be in force and you could be fined for 

driving on Sunday.

     In this great country of ours both houses of congress have to vote on and 

pass legislation. Then, if the president signs it, it becomes the law of the  


The police and courts enforce the law. 

     If someone thinks that the new law violates the constitution, our Supreme 

Court will review it and either decide that it is ok, or they may strike down 

part or all of it. 

    Theoretically, that's it. If you violate a law, you're punished with fines, jail 

or death.

       Sometimes though, a bad law will make it through all those check points 

and still be law. When that happens, there is still one more place where a 

law can be struck down. The Jury.

  “William Penn may have thought he had settled the matter. Arrested in 1670 

for preaching Quakerism, Penn was brought to trial. Despite Penn's 


admitting the charge, four of the 12 jurors voted to acquit.The judge sent the 

four to jail "without meat, drink, fire and tobacco" for failing to find Penn 

guilty. On appeal, however, the jurors' action was upheld and the right of 

 juries to judge both the law and the facts -- to nullify the law if it chose -- 

became part of British constitutional law.3

     Watch this 3 minute video from Maui County Citizens for Democracy

talking about your rights and duties as a juror.

Jury acquittal of a defendant who is technically guilty, but who does not 

deserve punishment, is called "jury nullification." In the American legal 

system, the jury's power to nullify is unquestionable. The District of Columbia 

Court of Appeals -- the second highest court in the United States -- explains 

 that the jury has an "unreviewable and irreversible power...to acquit in 

disregard of the instruction on the law given by the trial judge..." U.S. v. 

Dougherty, 473 F.2d 1139 (1972)4

      Serving on a jury is seen by many (including my wife, quite recently) as a 

nuisance and a burden. Some people will try everything they can think of to 

avoid serving and fulfilling their patriotic obligation. 

     Recently, I heard a line in a TV drama [Law and Order, I think] with a 

defense attorney saying “Do you really want to leave your future in the hands 

of 12 people too stupid to get out of jury duty?”.

       Serving on a jury should be seen as an honor. Without juries, we have no 

system of justice. Any tyrant could subject us to oppressive and unjust laws 

and we would be powerless to fight them. Jury duty is absolutely as 

important  as voting. Those two actions are what set us apart as a free 

country and are without a doubt, the most important and admirable things 

we can do as Americans.

     Please. If you are called to serve on a jury, do it. Serve with pride. Give it 

your best. Help keep America great.

At least that's my opinion. What's yours?

See also:
Fully-Informed Juries

Have a conspiracy you'd like me to research? Got a question about 

crypto? Post a comment HERE and I'll do my best to post the answer.


If you wish to unsubscribe from this blog, please send an email to  


pyrate02@gmail.com with the word “UNSUBSCRIBE”in the subject line.