Only 8 more days until the Turtle Rider Cup at Kettle Brook Country Club in Paxton. You can still register and join us for this fundraiser by signing up for an individual ($175) or a foursome ($150 per person). Included is 18 holes of golf, a cart, a meal of food, a shirt, and some light entertainment afterwards. The weather looks to be great, and it's for a great cause - JUSTICE! Sign up today: https://t.co/i5zWja4euJ
Welcome to the next stop along the bunnies’ journey of valid truths and freedom. Today we are going to dig into yet another example of how Jess uses wordplay to be dishonest without technically lying.
On Jess’ show a couple days ago she was talking about how she used to support Aidan’s innocence but now that Aidan has embarked on his own valid truth journey she feels differently. She was expressing her doubts about Cosgrove as special prosecutor and said “I certainly wish that there was a young whipper snapper of an attorney who could come in here and really put on a clinic with this case but that’s not gonna happen.” Then one of her “fans” messaged her saying that she was throwing her principles out the window because her hating Aidan doesn’t justify her now saying that she wants him to go to jail and Jess responded to that very fair criticism by gaslighting the fuck outta that person and her whole chat.
The person who messaged her said that Jess had said that she *wants* Aidan to go to jail which is exactly what Jess said when she was saying that she wished the CW would replace Cosgrove with a skilled prosecutor who could “put on a clinic”. But Jess switched what the person said from “want” to “should” so she could lash out at them and claim that they were lying about what she had said. Jess said “I never said that I think Aidan should go to jail!” Jess knows that the person said “want” not “should” but she pretended like the person said “should” so she could act outraged and not have to acknowledge that the person was 1,000% right - Jess is throwing all of her principles out the window simply because she’s butthurt.
Today’s lesson shows us that she doesn’t give a fuck about her bunnies beyond the attention that they can give her and she is more that happy to publicly throw any one of them under the bus in order to save herself.
@TheLinzerShow@60Minutes I’m sorry the man who had his whole family slaughtered didn’t have the reaction you think you would if your family was slaughtered
Michael Desronvil, the Lindsay Clancy holdout juror lauded as a "hero" and "patriot" by those who believe she should've been convicted of first degree murder, was arrested for assaulting his ex-wife because he refused to let her comfort their crying baby, and four years later beat up his minor nephew who called police on him because he blamed the teenager for ruining his life. He now lives in Bridgewater in an apartment where he is refusing to pay rent for the last 6 months. Story: https://t.co/LIONIzifR6
Remember when I suggested there was jury intimidation in order to get the lone holdout to break in the Lindsay Clancy trial?
Now go back and listen to what Devlin admitted compared to what the holdout is now saying.
Coupled with defense counsel Reddington allegedly texting with “turtleboy”, a man facing multiple felony counts of juror intimidation, who doxxed the holdout.
And an activist juror forewoman.
Yeah…
@JhnAdmz@thevivafrei Cool headline. I’ve never been charged with jury tampering or intimidation. Also there was no jury when I was arrested because the trial was a year away
Fascinating. 3 years later… The talking heads are saying the same thing about TB lol.
Friendly reminder, mainstream media sucks.
P.S. Aidan will be acquitted because the CW has to overcome First Amendment protections and prove every element beyond a reasonable doubt.
Merica. 🐢
‼️‼️‼️Missing Person ‼️‼️‼️
Please if you have seen her or know anyone in the Boston area please share or contact the Boston or Saugus police.
She has been missing since last week.
I have serious concerns about crowdfunding jurors, but I am especially opposed to crowdfunding a juror based on the position he took in deliberations.
Turning jury service, and specifically a particular vote, into something financially rewarding is abhorrent to me and frankly goes against everything the judiciary is supposed to stand for. I know public confidence in that ideal is already badly strained, but this makes it worse.
The largest of these fundraisers is framed around his role as the holdout, and the total climbed substantially after he went public with his defense of his vote. The moment that money becomes a reward for a particular vote, you create an incentive that has no place in a jury room, and every juror in the next high-profile trial will know it.
Counsel's handling has not helped. In roughly a day he went from calling the existing fundraisers "100% FAKE," to clarifying that unauthorized "does not in any way mean unappreciated," to announcing that he will establish an "authorized, consolidated, and official fundraiser for our Heroic Holdout moving forward."
This is less than two weeks out from a status hearing on whether the Commonwealth retries this case.
As it stands, we essentially have no framework for what happens when strangers send a discharged juror six figures immediately after trial because of the position he is publicly credited with taking. This has never been addressed previously by our laws, because it never had to be. I would argue that this seems like a great time to do so.