HairBeanTutu

[Carol Erskine @TheCarolErskine]

SANDRA BIRCHMORE'S VOICE WAS HEARD TODAY. Assistant U.S. Attorney Brian Fogerty delivered what I consider a powerful and compelling closing argument in the federal murder trial of Matthew Farwell. It was meticulous in its presentation of the evidence, but equally important, it was deeply human.

Fogerty accomplished something that had been missing from Sandra Birchmore's story for far too long: He restored her dignity, gave her a voice, and placed responsibility for her exploitation that began as a child, where it belonged.

But for me, the most powerful aspect of this closing argument was what it gave back to Sandra. For years, according to the evidence presented, Sandra lived within a relationship defined by Farwell's power and control. Even after her death, the initial state investigation failed to give her the dignity, and justice she deserved.

Today, although Sandra could not walk into that courtroom or confront Farwell herself, her words, her experiences, her digital footprint, and the physical evidence spoke for her.

For perhaps the first time, the power dynamic was reversed. Farwell could no longer control the narrative presented to the jury. Sandra's life and the evidence of what happened to her were placed before twelve jurors charged with determining the truth.

And there is something even larger here.

Sandra Birchmore's death has brought national attention to the insidious, predatory nature of grooming and sexual exploitation. Grooming can slowly consume a child's identity until the child cannot distinguish manipulation from genuine care. That manipulation often continues into adulthood.

My hope is that Sandra's story will educate hundreds of thousands of parents, teachers, and other trusted adults about the warning signs of grooming and the devastating consequences of failing to recognize them.

Whatever the jury ultimately decides, that is a legacy of extraordinary importance.

We owe Sandra Birchmore not only our compassion, but our gratitude. Her voice, finally heard, may become the voice that saves another child. Sandra Birchmore's voice was heard today. She spoke and we should listen.

[HairBeanTutu @HairBeanTutu]

@GrantSmithEllis @KyleSharkey8 Grant, make sure to tell Will to make them go to TN as is his rights. Make all stories long winded and waste as much of their time as he can!

[HairBeanTutu @HairBeanTutu]

@GrantSmithEllis @KyleSharkey8 Of course they would
Asshats

[Microdots @DropMicrodots]

I was just cited for “what I did to Julie Grant” by that weak Four Rooms show over the following short. The entire video is an edit down of Julie Grant’s own CourtTV episode, just her speaking to her guests. I make no claims, I don’t say a single word. So where’s the infraction. What line did I cross. Was the music too scary?

https://t.co/VfkRiV1Smd

[HairBeanTutu @HairBeanTutu]

Well said

[Bederow Law @Bederowlaw]

I don't think the Clancy defense motion seeking an inquiry on the holdout juror has any chance of success. Nor does the double jeopardy argument. The trial court acted properly in all regards dealing with the issue. But the histrionics/hyperbole and bombastic rhetoric by the juror's attorney towards Reddington and the Constitution ignores the role of a criminal defense attorney and his obligation to provide zealous advocacy. Serious allegations were made by other jurors. Other facts about the questionnaire and whether it was filled out accurately remain unknown. A defense lawyer is seeking to explore those issues to the possible benefit of his client. That is what lawyers do. They argue and put forth arguments to defend constitutional rights. Even for clients who may be awful people and are factually guilty. Heaven help us (and the actually innocent) if they didn't.

[GlammaSooz @GlammaSooz]

The juror is FORBIDDEN from any independent research during the trial or during deliberations.

No one is harassing, threatening or intimidating any juror. The law is the law and you all know this.

His mouthpiece keeps admitting to the holdout breaking the law/jury instructions.

@JonathanTurley @nicksortor

[HairBeanTutu @HairBeanTutu]

@Dan_Donovan_17 @glamma70733 Oh right, in a moment a speaker is never allowed to misspeak. No, not even live and unedited. 🤦🏼‍♀️

[James Sullivan @realjustsully]

“They whispered to her you cannot withstand the storm. She whispered back, I am the storm.”

Winters coming 🥶

#karenread
#johnokeefe

[HairBeanTutu @HairBeanTutu]

@TheCarolErskine @oksanka_luky @CoffindafferFBI Imagine that Coffindufus gets it wrong again

[Carol Erskine @TheCarolErskine]

Please take a moment and read some case law on how this works. This is not the first time this has happened in Massachusetts and there is Supreme Judicial Court case law outlining the exact process in cases like these where jurors have been brought back after a trial ends.

In cases alleging juror misconduct, a judge can deny or allow an evidentiary hearing. It's been the law for 47 years. The defense is "going after" a legally sanctioned process allowed by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court.

[HairBeanTutu @HairBeanTutu]

@GlammaSooz @shandiggies Karma always knows your address! His time will come

[Dan Nardo @dnardo]

#kevinreddington #tedcruz

[ELIZABETH LANE @imelizabethlane]

Why is the media completely bought out? This is why: to make sure you never even want to leave.

The real question is, do you actually want the truth, or are you more comfortable staying in your cell because it’s safe?!

[Grant Smith Ellis @GrantSmithEllis]

"Extraordinary writ available only when no other adequate relief lay at equity or law."

[Emily See @TheEmilySee]

Give me liberty

[Bederow Law @Bederowlaw]

So we have a rogue juror who allegedly is ignoring/misapplying the law, and who may or may not have been "fixed" by promising to follow the court's instruction. If this jury comes back with a guilty verdict after this--2 impasse notes and 2 instructions to jeep at it and 35 hours of deliberations, expect hell to break loose from the defense side. The judge is technically correct: all he can really do is address the substance of the note. Either way, the issue is preserved for appeal if it comes to that. What a mess.

[Kyle Sharkey @KyleSharkey8]

Dawn Light of Sutton
(Per article below)

[HairBeanTutu @HairBeanTutu]

@GlammaSooz Thank you. ❤️

[MazzaMedia @MazzaMedia]

Developing story at a local pizza place in Canton...