Innocents in Prison Series

Innocent Prisoners Released

A Texas man was proven innocent after 30 years. He had several chances for parole, but refused to admit guilt. The Innocence Project says only 2 other men have served more time than Mr. Cornelius Dupree, Jr. has, before proven innocent. Under TX compensation laws for the wrongly imprisoned, he is eligible for $80,000 for each year behind bars, plus a lifetime annuity. He could receive $2.4 million in a lump sum, not subject to federal income tax. Other exonerated inmates from the Dallas area who collectively served more than 100 years in prison upheld a local tradition by attending the hearing and welcoming the newest member of their unfortunate fraternity.

Ohio agreed to give $1.1 million to a man who was in prison for 18 years for a rape he didn’t commit. Robert McClendon, 54, was released in 2008 after he was cleared by DNA testing. He’s grateful for the settlement, but it doesn’t make up for time spent in prison.

A Florida man was set to be released from prison this week after his defense says DNA evidence shows he was wrongly convicted of murder and rape 26 years ago. Anthony Caravella, 41, was found guilty in the 1983 attack and sentenced to life in prison. Caravella, who is mentally retarded, was 15 at the time. Prosecutors had sought the death penalty for Caravella, who was accused of raping, strangling and stabbing 58 year old Ada Cox Jankowski. She was found dead near a Miramar school. His defense says new DNA tests exclude him as the suspect.

Caravella is expected to be released this week. He confessed to the crime, but his attorney says police beat him to coerce the admission.

Innocent Persons Easiest to Convict

How can innocent people defend themselves from the accusations of the entrenched, hereditary elite? Only by proving a negative preposition, it would seem. “I swear I was not where you say I was two months ago:” The trouble with proving a negative preposition is that it is impossible. The  accuses can only say, “I don’t know” or “I was somewhere else.” Usually, the only possible ‘defense’ is the “I dunno” defense- because the cops and prosecutors usually don’t attack with their accusations until months after the crime was committed. Also, once they choose their target, cops and their ‘experts’ contrive to expand or shift the time of the crime to dodge the alibi of their target, if he has one. (Special judge-imposed, prosecutor-favoring disclosure laws force the targeted accusee to reveal his defense at least ten days before trial. This facilitates the prosecutor and cop efforts to nail their target by allowing them to switch the ‘facts’ to their benefit.)

Because the cops enjoy a monopoly of all the ‘facts’, the crime  scene, even the type of accusations, it is virtually impossible for the  victim of their accusations to escape conviction once targeted. (The  lawyer’s system enjoys approximately a 99% successful conviction rate for  just these reasons. As I’ve said before, to be this good, you have to cheat. As previously explained, the much over-hyped ‘alibi’ defense only works in Hollywood and TV fantasies. The public, and especially jurors, are subtly programed to disbelieve alibi witnesses because they are usually friends or relatives of the target. Jurors automatically assume that they lie for the accuses due to this closeness and fail to realize or take into account the fact that most people spend little time with strangers or enemies.

Another way cops and prosecutors screw innocent persons on alibi defenses is by hiding the expanse of time in which an alibi is required for as long as possible, and by being able to shift the expanse of time by a maximum extent of hours, sometimes even days. This way the prosecutor can increase the number of possible opportunities that their target could have ‘slipped away’ to perform crime. Jurors love to believe any kind of ‘Master Criminal!’ v. ‘Sherlock Holmes’ nonsense the prosecutors and cops typically serve up to them. Worse, furors love especially to thwart such supposed master criminals by convicting them despite a complete lack of real evidence. The prosecutor’s titillating story is ‘evidence’ enough for most jurors. Jurors erroneously believe cops and prosecutors are somehow more honest and worthy of belief than other citizens. Also jurors are universally ignorant of common lawcrat conviction tricks such as lying-by-omission, preservation of ignorance, etc. (I e, when cops lie to the prosecutor, and the prosecutor chooses to believe the lie and weaves it into his conviction stories, the prosecutor, technically, is not himself lying, at least according to common lawyer’s system thought. Lawcrats have many such ruses.) Guilty persona have the advantage over innocent accusees in so far as they have some idea of what occurred despite the cop and courtcrat monopoly of the crime scene, the evidence and the accusations. Because of this knowledge the guilty have a much better possibility of dodging cop and prosecutor/judge shenanigans. They know something of what to expect from the cope and courtcratas and thus can plan a real defense that beats the Hell out of “I dunno” and “What the Hell ar you talking about!?”  defenses.

Yes, innocent persons make much easier targets than the guilty. They  are easy to convict for the above reasons and because they believe the absolute horse shit of “If you’re innocent, you have nothing to fear.” Innocent persons have the most to fear: because they are programed to believe no evil is possible of the cop and lawcrat crew, fully 10% of all convictees are innocent. Cops and lawcrats have absolute power to become absolutely corrupt with time. The system is not evil; the Gluttons of Privilege who control it ARE!


Nothing so upholds the law as punishment of persons whose rank is as great as their crimes” Machiavelli

Tired of the usual, predictable. TV-Hollywood crime-story formula that glorifies cops and lawyers? Want to see how authority REALLY operates? Grisham has done this in his first non-fiction work, and I have cut out all the unnecessary verbiage that he is prone to, so you can get the gist quickly, without wasting a lot of your valuable time on unnecessary characterization, scene-setting or other writer’s devices.

In his book. “The Innocent Man”. Grisham proves over and over the fact that authorities have perverted the law so badly that jurors can be made to convict as readily as dogs chase cars. A similarly revealing book is “The Dreams of Ada”, (Viking Press, 1987), where the author, Robert Mayer, illustrates the skullduggery of police, lawyers, prosecutors, judges and their eager media in obtaining conviction at any cost.

On P. 160. we are shown one of the reasons that “Public Defenders” are worth the nothing that their indigent “clients” pay for them: they resent losing billable hours that they could be getting from paying clients while “defending” indigents forced upon them by the courts and justice.

On p. 197, we meet one of these public defenders. His name is George Briggs, and Grisham’s extensive research uncovers many sad facts about him that are the exact opposite of the praises heaped upon him by other lawyers and judges. It turns out that Briggs is an alcoholic and a drug addict. His alcoholism and drug addiction is well known to the trial judges, most everyone who worked at the courthouse AND the OK Bar Association lawyers who registered him to practice law. Despite this, virtually nothing was done to stop Briggs or to help him. Certainly nothing was done to protect his clients. He reeked of booze. He could often be seen staggering through the hallways. Briggs would urinate on himself and was known to snore in court and to have vomited in the judge’s chambers.

George Briggs was assigned to me at the top of his spiral to ignominy and death in 1972. I can attest that he was flushed and red back then, but mostly I attributed this to his Scottish descent. The judge he worked for, Mermon Potter, was a full-blown drunk, exhibiting a lifetime of alcohol abuse in the rum-blossom on his nose, and the thick mesh of varicose veins on his cheeks and ears. All these lawyers told me that Briggs was “the best!”, and all Briggs did was to lie to me and help scheme up a plan that used my mother’s anguish to convince me to accept their lies and a plea deal that kept them from being exposed for police brutality and abuse of office. Briggs and Judge Hampton pulled this on this teenager in the secrecy of his judges chambers. The entire Osage County courthouse seemed composed mostly of barely concealed despicable scoundrels. It is no wonder to me why, years later, Briggs turned up far away in Ada. No doubt these corrupt lawyers and judges are forced to move on to other places when the citizens they prey upon finally realize that they are paying exorbitant prices for abuse rather than service.

On p. 219, the OK Court of Appeals judges, years too late, declared George Briggs “inadequate as a lawyer and constitutionally ineffective as legal counsel”. In actual fact, he is HARMFUL to his clients.

On p. 229, Briggs is finally disbarred from the lawyers’ union, only after doing untold harm to thousands of his legal victims over decades of malpractice. NONE of his victims’ cases are fixed by the lawyers or judges who lied so smoothly and continuously about his competency or reputation.

On p. 241, we find that desperate-for-conviction, dishonest cops and their lab-tech-lackies threw away hair evidence and demanded more from their target in hopes of getting a “match”.

On p. 292, Grisham uncovers the fact that, when cops and their lablackies can’t force scientific evidence to point at their selected targets, they will often just set it aside for months or years, pretending to analyze it while actually doing nothing more than waiting for a miracle. Such miracles often occur as cops or lab techs finally get the go-ahead to simply manufacture the evidence they desire. In the case that Grisham explores, the cops and their lab techs were already under too much suspicion and scrutiny from past efforts at manufacturing evidence to risk creating more, so instead, they simply pretended it took a year for three people to do one week’s work. It is a common tactic throughout law and investigation to simply steal their targets’ lives through unnecessary and prolonged delays when it is obvious to these people who sit on all the evidence that they have no evidence good enough to convict even in their kangaroo courts. (See: “Juror Groupies” on
On p. 243, Grisham illustrates now the crooked prosecutor and attorney general maximize the delay and waste everyone’s time in order to prevent a new trial after their fraudulent evidence is finally prohibited from use in tricking a second set of jurors into convicting an innocent man. It is truly ASTONISHING how much of your life they can force down the drain, lost forever while they pretend to be very busy. Anyone who takes time to merely sit and watch these parasites perform their legal antics and courtroom rituals will immediately see that it is very much like a lazy, incompetent teacher trying to get a bunch of four-year-olds lined out in nursery school. There is no incentive for being on time with your work completed and ready, and no punishment for endless lame excuses why they are not ready to finally get down to work.

On p. 264. we learn details on how crooked cops use harassment and jail to force a secondary target to lie to jurors, pretending to have seen the cops’ main target using a hose to wash off blood in his back yard in the black of night. This type of manufacturing evidence, called “witness steering” occurs in virtually EVERY CASE brought to jurors in one form or another.

on p. 261, we meet the actual killer. He is the cops’ pet, and eventually gets 40 years for an unconnected crime. (Police snitches eventually get thrown away by cops when they are used up.) Yet Gore is still special. He is given a special job with the city of Purcel Public Works Department instead of prison. He is given his own truck and is often allowed to go home. In my own case, the killer is also the cops’ pet and allowed to run loose or be the jail trustee instead of go to prison, simply because he snitches off other criminals to the cops. Like politicians, the scum with the longest records learn how to manipulate and exploit the system the best.

On p. 269, we find that the crooked cops. “Officers” Dennis Smith and Gary Rodgers, not only put in much work to frame the innocent man, but also DITCHED the exonorative evidence and almost certainly knew that their friendly snitch-pal was the killer! Cops’ ties with their snitches are often VERY tight and lucrative, because they are the same type of personality and get to short their snitches on payment for their snitchery. Also there are many other sources of income they can exploit. In Dallas. TX, two cops fighting over a snitch got one of them killed. (See: “JAILBREAK!”) Two other cops’ snitches seem to have enthralled a rogue FBI cabal for decades, having their pet FBI agents cover up over 30 murders. (See: “Whitey Bolger”, who the FBI is probably helping to stay escaped from justice, as his capture would expose the many crimes of more FBI agents, many of whom are safely retired. Despite being uncovered as worse criminals than many of their targets. Smith and Rodgers are STILL working for the cops, their criminal histories hidden from the new, but unsuspecting, citizens they “serve”.

On p. 273, the Tim Durham case is reviewed. He was falsely targeted for a rape in one of the crookedest counties of OK: Tulsa. Corrupt officials stole the DNA in his case for four years. To show you exactly how vile they are, police hoped to get him killed in their jail by siccing the stupid inmates on him, TWICE! The man was so screwed up that he actually thanked them in the media when he finally forced them to cough up the DNA that proved who the real rapist was. Tulsa authorities actually preferred that the rapist escape justice and punishment forever and run free to be encouraged to commit more, worse crimes rather than let a cabal of criminal cops be exposed for the evidence-stealing, witness-steering crooks they are! For being framed by insufferable varlots and for being twice maimed and permanently injured by gang-beatings instigated by the cops, Durham got only $30,000 for his trouble, and $20,000 for the lawyer.

On p. 274, we find that the cops, pretending to be the Ku Klux Klan, called in anonymous death threats to scare off defense witnesses. Grisham also details how “Officers” Smith, Rodgers, other cops, the prosecutor and their media tools combined to dupe simple church folk into doing their dirty work for them. (P- 278) It is a standard practice of dirty cops to have the common gall to stand on the backs of church members and God to further their attacks on individual targets. (See: “Cop Culture and Training”, the Castleberry case of Tulsa Det- Sgt- Larry Johnson, Circa 1971 where the scurrilous Johnson used his Priest’s sacrament of confession to further his plan, and “Faces of Corruption: Larry Johnson”, et al) Scurrilous “law”-forcing officials are taught to use God and false patriotism and lies as the most effective way to poison the juror pool. The media reporters are usually in bed with these criminal cops, too, helping , like puppets, to gain convictions for the cop/prosecutor/judge teams whom they come to worship. Famously, one scummy reporter was snitched off in this by the Boulder Colorado police chief during a press conference to have lied about there being no footprints in the snow in order to help corrupt cops and prosecutors lie the Ramsey’s into prison. Many years too late, DNA proved them innocent.

When some of the truth is finally ripped from police throats, (p. 276). the corrupt prosecutor races to his news-tools and cries into the media that he and his crooked cops are being “vilified”. The truth so powerfully paints them as the embodiment of evil and graft that the Governor and the judges of the appeals court hide to avoid having to comment.

On p. 278, the corrupt prosecutor finally realizes that there is no further way for him or his crooked cops to lie themselves out of this mess.

He and his news-tools try to act honest and proclaim credit for “not fighting DNA testing”, once it is finally torn from their possession. (They are so extremely warped by their unchecked power that they think it is a virtue when they merely stop actively preventing justice!) Their JOB is to seek justice, and DNA testing is the sure way to end their lying bullshit and force justice out of them.

On p. 280, the innocence project lawyers, whose mountains of persistence finally forced the proof out of the crooked officials’ black hands, decline to answer the prosecutor’s (and cops’) lies in the media. This illustrates the extreme deference that lawyers have for each other, over and above any they may have for the persons victimized so mercilessly by their unduly revered, severely flawed profession. They apparently care just as little for public safety, too.

On p. 290, we see that the killer easily eludes murder charges despite his DNA proving his guilt in the rape-murder.

On the last second of the year time limit, the innocence project lawyers decide to sue the city, the crooked cops, corrupt prosecutor, lying lab techs, etc- (p. 291) The prosecutor tells his media pals that he is “not worried”. He has no reason to be worried, because he and his corrupt, evidence-stealing/manufacturing cops are ABOVE THE LAW due to giving themselves “absolute” and “special.” immunity from all their crimes. Only the people who had virtually NOTHING to do with the crimes used to try and murder two innocent men will pay for it: innocent taxpayers. The lawyers cook up secret deals to keep the facts held hostage, but it is found that the city of Ada escaped justice and punishment, leaving taxpayers to pay half a million dollars for letting their unsupervised cops, lawyers, judges and prosecutors run amok. Divided by 16,000 residents, each pays $31.25, and the scum who did it get to not just escape their crimes, but CONTINUE their corruption as city officials! (p. 297)

Grisham winds down his book by mentioning the exonorees’ book, “The Innocents” (Umbrage Press, 2003). He mentions that it is usual for cops to troll skanky strip clubs and bars for petty criminals that they can coerce into snitchery for them. Drug snitchery is their goal, most times, because it is extremely enriching for them. Their rape-murderer, Glen Gore, was one of these people. He supplied the cops with drugs for their own personal use, he got used by the cops to provide them with drug criminals to jail, and drugs and drug money for them to steal. It is a common phenomenon for such strip clubs and bars to eventually be absorbed into secret partnerships of prosecutors, judges and bondsmen as police are used to find crime in them and cause the businesses to be sold at fire-sale prices to fight cop/ prosecutor attacks of various kinds. (P. 298) Lady Godiva’s in Tulsa is only one famous example of a private strip-bar virtually stolen by a corrupt legal apparatchik. In the 60s and 70s they stole many porn businesses in Tulsa and OKlahoma City for fun and profit, and for political gain, causing many deaths and my own case- (See: “Law-swindled for Life!”)

On pages 86, 90 and 96. Grisham takes an aside to detail how cops trick the unwary and gullible into seeming to “confess”. Here the cops put “dream” “confessions” into the mouths of fools who believed that cops are honest. This is a common tactic of cops, first made famous by FBI cops attacking the Olympic Park Hero. I forgot his name, but I detailed his case somewhere on my site. He was the ex-security guard who found a bomb and warned people away. The FBI stupidly targeted him as the bomber.. and cunningly (vilely), tried to manufacture a “confession” out of him by saying. “Okay, we’ve shit on you for many hours trying to force a false confession out of you. Now we pretend to believe you are innocent. Now we are your friends. Now we need your help. Why don’t you help us make a “training” videotape for other cops like you and us, where you pretend to confess to this bombing?”

The fact is, where too much power is concentrated, there grows abominable corruption- Also, in every case where corrupt prosecutor/cop-teams are permitted to dupe their media tools and juror pools into agreeing to attack and convict innocents, there are culprits who escape punishment and who are thus encouraged to commit more, worse crimes in the future. Grisham then reveals the fact that an ex-police chief was allowed to sneak aboard the jury. This is like letting Timothy McVeigh drive a truck bomb into the pentagon. Every lawyer KNOWS that cops are not allowed on juries and why: they work for the attacking prosecutor/judge team. MORE proof that the entire Ada legal apparatchik is the epitome of corruption is the fact that, when the victim’s public defender was told, he kept this secret from his victim! They may as well have just thrown their target up against the wall and emptied their guns into him as let a stealth cop work his corruption from within the jury. This ALONE would get a new trial in any honest district. The fact that this flagrant breach of elementary legal doctrine was permitted by the appeals court judges proves that they are outrageously corrupt too! (P. 148)

Lastly. Grisham mentions the casual torture of thousands of captive victims at McAlester prison for over 20 years and STILL OCCURRING TODAY!

Lazy, sadistic guards dodge their jobs, giving their victims the choice of freezing cold, scalding hot or no showers at all. (See: “US DOJ Conspires with Priscrats”, “Priscrat Shower tricks” and “Crisp Stymies Civil Rights Lawyers 25 Years:”)

In all, Mr. Grisham does a very good job in exposing multiple instances of casual, legal corruption that have, over time, become standard practice in all US jurisdictions. (See: “Stealth Rights Robbery”, “How Politicians Juke Justice”, “Cop Culture and Training”, “Innocents’ Guide to Avoiding False Conviction”, “How False Convictions are Maintained” and many more.)

The only defense to this casual, routine corruption and built-in bias is to learn its tricks and traps BEFORE it attacks.

Stay safe: be wary:

Telling the Truth

Telling the truth just got more likely! The lawyers, the prosecutors, the judges, even the law professors are running scared! They’re headed for another train-wreck with science that will expose their corruption even better than did DNA technology. Soon, they’ll have a lot harder time lying people into prison, creating evidence and duping jurors into slapping their guilty-buttons.

How is this coming about? Check out the 8-08 Scientific American, page 18, on functional magnetic resonance lie detection. This technology has been improving since 1998, and now poses such a threat to the conviction machine that the lawyer community is suppressing it directly, and with the help of certain media figures. Two law scholars were hired to denigrate the 20 studies and call for a ban on all non-research use of FMRI lie detection technology.

It turns out that science is jumping ahead because two labs reached a lie-detection rate of over 90% and started selling badly-needed service to a badly-abused citizenry. Plus, the British media didn’t help the law’s monopoly on truth by getting millions of people involved through three TV broadcasts on the technology proving that several shaky convictions were likely of innocents. While science was achieving a 97% accuracy rate in detecting lies, the legal scholars were busy doing as they do best, erecting straw men, creating false arguments, throwing up barriers, causing delay, advising caution and showcasing nebulous “danger” that science may suffer a “black eye” in pursuing FMRI lie detection technology as a safeguard against the lawyer’s accusation-and-conviction machines. The absolute last thing the lawyers want is for their profession of opinion and judgment to be quality checked by science and proof.

Try as hard as I might, I could not uncover any scenarios that would lead to any black eye for science. If the lawyers meant the 97% chance of uncovering a falsely-convicted innocent, and the 3% chance that a guilty culprit may get a favorable line in a media broadcast, then I’m prepared to take that chance!

Looks to me like all the black eyes are going to be on the faces of the law. Then the public will see that FMRI technology is perfect for wiping the smirks off the faces of cops and politicians.

Yes, telling the truth is going to get a whole lot more common, real soon. Anyone wishing to help push this valuable technology along should visit my website, and learn more about it by reading “FMRI Lie Detection = Innocent’s lucky day!” the thousands of accusees who forced the authorities to render a trial, complete the jurors, fully 15% of they who were convicted are innocent. This false conviction rate is unacceptable, and the lawyers, prosecutors, judges and cops who are responsible for these atrocities and are concealing them need to start telling the truth.


We innocent-yet-convicted people learned some good news recently, though the popular press and corporate media ignored and/or concealed the important part. The first I heard of it was in some stealth-news in the crawl beneath CNN’s talking heads. It provided almost not traceable facts, saying only to the effect that, “Oklahoma death row inmate, to be executed 3-15-05, will undergo ‘brain fingerprinting’ due to his claims of innocence.” This was Sunday morning, 3-6-05, sneaked in while everyone was asleep and not repeated. The local news-artists maintained a total blackout of this information until the very HOUR of his execution at 6 PM. The 13 corporate media TV and radio stations focused strictly on his crime, the victim and death sentence only. The one PBS TV and radio station briefly mentioned ‘brain fingerprinting’ in a one-sentence monologue before moving quickly on to other matters. No mention was made of any results of the test.

(Author’s note:. I’m wrong. “Brain Fingerprinting” is nothing more than a portable Electro-Encephalagraph (EM). It only tracks brain waves. The cop community has already co-opted and monopolised this technology almost as thoroughly as they have polygraph testing, making it very difficult for innocents to get an objective test free of cop-taint, which biases it toward continued conviction and imprisonment. Apparently this variation on the EEG is useful in that brain waves detectably alter in characteristic ways when the subject recognizes a picture, such as of a crime scene. I apologize to my readers for this false hope. I am still gathering data on fMRI Lie Detection research, and it still sounds very promising despite the fact that my latest information on it is dated 2002.)

When the news-artists say ‘brain fingerprinting’, they don’t mean, “functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging lie detection” (fMRI). This technology first reached the fringe of the popular media in 2002 with an article in Scientific American. Lest year Science News published a short article on it. From my studies, this technology seems infallible, because conscious efforts at lying require creative thought in the left brain to construct end reconstruct the fantasy involved each time it is recalled. Truth-telling primarily resides in the reality-based right brain. The machine is so accurate that it can track high levels of neuron activity in clusters smaller than a cubic centimeter. FMRI is so fast that it generates images almost in real time. Unlike DNA, real fingerprinting and other types of evidence, fMRI lie detection can not be “lost” or planted, plus it is not perishable, nor can it be easily tainted by implantation of false memories. Conscious lying can be detected from adolescence to senility. Coupling this technology with already-existing brain maps promises to begin a renaissance in truth and veracity in govt officials. Also it may get upwards of 300,000 innocents like me out of US prisons in spite of police-theft of DNA and other physical evidence. Even better, it can sound the death bell for manufactured evidence and a slow-down of police-created bogus eyewitnesses as officers have to validate their work and theories. New superconductors recently discovered may even make the sensing ring unobtrusive enough to display the brain images of debating politicians on TV, just below their grinning faces. When the liar-lights appear in their brain images, a siren can go off to drown out their attempts at subterfuge.

For now, though, we have an uphill battle to force judges to accept this technology as reliable. This is already the case for much of the scientific community.

The judges of Oklahoma’s Criminal Court of Appeals (OCCA) are slyly fighting it. (See Slaughter v Ok cr ap 6 2005, Ok Bar Journal, 3-19-05 p. 739 These judges pulled the cops’ standard ploy and blamed their target-victim for his own demise. They claim that Mr. Slaughter “Failed to give (the judges) comprehensive reports” explaining to their Honors exactly how fMRI works. (As if mere wordsmiths and rhetoric-artists could grasp nuclear physics in the week it took them to refuse Mr. Slaughter’s test results and shove him into the grave!) Our excellent judges then offer further excuses/justifications for their rash act by admitting, albeit in endnotes, that they HAD in fact received comprehensive reports. These they used to call into question a mysterious “MERMER effect” of the process that they do not deign to tell us anything about, not even what the initials stand for.

Their Honors further make obvious their agenda to kill Mr. Slaughter quickly by mentioning, only between the lines of their legalspeak, that the Ok Indigent Defense System and/or some other un-named innocence project persons thought so highly of the RESULTS of Mr. Slaughter’s fMRI test of his claims of innocence that they used them as good reason to pay from their own pockets for a very expensive (mitochondrial) DNA test on a hair that ALSO pointed toward his innocence, though fell short of proving it. To dodge this evidence the judges chose to switch from the trial-DA’s story about how the crime may have occurred to concoct a fantasy-like scenario in which the hair somehow became superfluous instead of the primary means of convincing the jurors to pass out a death sentence. All this without benefit of a re-trial in front of jurors who are informed of these new ‘facts’ freshly minted for the occasion by these highly self-esteemed judges. (One of these judges recently had to excuse himself from the court until some shady dealings are cleared up. The other missing judge, Steven Taylor, is the very same crook who stole my escape trial with a cheap ruse in McAlester, Ok in 1996. (See crf-85-121, Pittsburg county court.) Only three judges killed Mr. Slaughter.)

Incidentally, NOWHERE in these judges’ legal ramblings is there any mention of what the actual RESULTS of the fMRI test were. This is not any accidental omission: this is standard lawyer trickery to preserve their Honors’ “plausible deniability”. How, exactly? The judges’ law (rule) proclaims, “Where the record is silent, the findings are to be interpreted in a light most favorable to the state!” Since no one can or will gainsay them, the records vanished and there is zero quality control on them, they just pull the Reagan/Bush defense, saying, “Duh, I don’t know! I was cut of the loop!” This is common lawyer/politician chicanery that always works.

Lastly, these fine judges excused themselves further by throwing their noses high into the air and opining that, (sniff!) “It is not likely that fMRI lie detection could pass a “Daubert Analysis.” This legal technicality is a process in which any federal judge holds a hearing (but, sadly, not often a ‘listening’) on a new technology, then decides whether it is reliable and accepted by a majority of scientists. (This hearing is, of course, held in secret, away from the jurors.) Too bad for Mr. Slaughter that these superb “Bench”-men usurped his right to HAVE a federal judge perform this legal maneuver, which is required by the US Constitution and law under various headings such as FAIR trial, FULL and FAIR review, COMPULSORY favorable witness, JURY determination of the facts and many more.

But this murder of Mr. Slaughter promulgated a slight victory for the rest of us innocent-convicteds. Some where in Oklahoma and possibly elsewhere their was a judge and warden combination legally and politically stupid enough to let this genie out of its judicial bottle to bite the lawyer’s system and politicians’ asses sooner rather then later. Also, a science lab is publishing the results of Mr. Slaughter’s fMRI test and in the future it can, after the judges have been forced to accept and rely on fMRI lie detection, be used to prove they did indeed murder an innocent man.

We have the technology, we have hordes of people who were lied into prison by corrupt officials, and we have the legal door blocked open just a crack with our foot. Soon, gentlemen and ladies, Hell will be a-popping: soon as we get this technology in the public eye and keep it in the spotlight until the media, judges, politicians, even cops have to let it in. Some VERY interesting days are ahead, my friends and supporters. Push this technology to the forefront and live to see how the mighty fall!


Brain activity during simulated deception: an event-related fMRI study; D.D. Langleben, L. Schroeder, J. S. Maldjian. R.C. Gur, S. McDonald, J. D. Ragland, C.P. O’Brien, A. R. Childress in Neuroimage vol. 15 vol 3 p. 727-732, 3-2000 available at 15_2002.pdf (Link Removed)

Marcel Just’s lab center for cognitive brain imaging of… available at http://cog. html

Univ of TX at San Antonio, prof and Dr. Jia-Hong Gao, research imaging center (ric) results in 3-2002 “Human Brain Mapping.”

Director of RIC = Dr. Peter T. Fox. Source: “The News” http://www.uthscsa .edu/opa /issues/new35-16/fmri.html


Innocent persons do not make parole. Why not? Many reasons. First, realize that the parole boards are staffed solely by political patronage winners. Political patronage is a reward dispensed to powerful party loyalists who helped a politician win an election, usually by merely funneling large amounts of cash into politician and party pockets for “campaigns”. Whenever a new politician wins a position in the publics’ trust, there is a type of ‘regime change” that occurs, especially when the winning politician is a member of the opposite party from the previous winner. (Independant or progressive parties are squeezed out by the two main parties.) The winning party politicians customarily force the opposite party officeholders to resign so that their jobs can be given to the winning politician’: cabal. The president of the US, for example, has thousands and thousands of these high-pay, low “work” gravy jobs to give away or use as bribes or rewards for persons who deliver the vote.  Governors have hundreds and hundreds of these jobs to pass out. Politicians often pass out political rewards by creating jobs out of nothing. Commissions and panels are staffed and richly paid to study some inconsequential matter. Favorites are extremely well paid with taxpayer money to act as “consultants”. A1ready overbloated govt bureaucracies are swelled even more to justify paychecks to party hacks, their wives, their kids, kin or friends who often function as nothing more e than seat-warmers, ghost-employees or persons whose “work” consists of merely showing up to collect a paycheck on the first and fifteenth of each month. Taxpayers’ cash is among the easiest things for politicians to pilfer away with and get kickbacks from. This tradition in political life has not been revealed much since Oregon senator Packwood got caught at it many years ago. The gov/media alliance appear to have reached an agreement on this: they do not report it much, and not to any depth, and reporters get to continue to enjoy the many lavish, expensive, gift-packed parties that govt and politicians throw with taxpayer’s money to instill good press relations. In the old days when we did not suffer an insipid, self-muzzling press, this criminal activity by govt officials and politicians was called “graft”, and this custom of wide-open payoffs was called “the spoils system”, possibly because of its mighty moral stench. For a short time there was public debate as to which was better govt, the spoils system, or a merit system, where the most educated and qualified kept or got these jobs. The merit system was found to be much better for every citizen, but was thrown out anyway in favor of the stench system. Also amputated from the commonweal were descriptive terms such as “spoils system” and “patronage”. Now they use the sterile term “Political appointees”.

These moneyed interests who make it on to parole boards are usually described as “prominent businesspersons”. They are also deliberately stacked with persons who have spent long years at the public nozzle in the fields of govt, prosecution or policing. Ordinary persons who make ordinary wages or who perform ordinary work do not get appointed. To cover up this discrimination in a field where justice and fairness requires a peer to be somewhere-involved in oversight, there is occasionally a teacher allowed in.

Because the vocations of govt service are richly rewarded both above and below the table, there is never a shortage of retired judges, ex-prosecutors and washed-up police personnel able to deliver the vote. These jobs often run in families. Any scurrilous buffoon or alcoholic instantly gains the appearance of respectability as soon as he obtains employment in this sector. Such public servants have a steady stream of citizen-supplicants who buy into this mystique and who generally become very appreciative beholden to, and dependant upon, these powerful father figures who protect citizens from “evil” and assist in solving their problems.           Such public servants get gratification from both petting many small egos and getting their own egos constantly petted. Citizens become more helpless and needy. The public servants’ egos swell and they become more manipulative and malanthropic. The resulting synergism creats massive amounts of goodwill and positive thoughts toward public servants in citizens’ minds while it creates arrogance and cunning in public officials. Influence is found to be even more valuable than money, setting the stage for much influencepeddling. (See “Juror Groupies” for more detail on this phenomenon.) The governor appoints these extremely popular vote-getters to his parole board upon the promise that they will do nothing that could embarass him, and that they will share the graft. (See “Parole…”)

Former judges, ex-prosecutors and washed-up police officials all possess a deep, abiding, (yet often well-concealed) hatred and contempt for anyone who has been branded “criminal”, and for the very concept of a criminal possibly being innocent. These parole board members are products of the machine that has as its first precept an invincible belief in its own complete and total infallability.

The machine programs their minds toward “patriotism” that manifests as an extreme self-righteousness in all things the govt uses as its propaganda. The more practical and cynical of these officials are able to sell paroles and other get-out-of-prison technology without any internal ethical problems. The only real problem is getting caught too close to the money used to purchase such relief. Avoiding exposure is made easy for them and their squeamish fellows through the services of lawyers. Innocent persons, or persons too harshly punished by this system of law that is overly-dependant on emotion, can not simply purchase leniency as they do in more straightforward nations. No. In America, one must pay lawyers for the privilege of attempting to purchase a corrected punishment. This adds a layer of safety to the dispensers of influence, and a layer of extra cost to the persons wishing a more fine-tuned punishment. Because Americans are the most over-punished of all citizens of the world, it follows that we also suffer some of the highest costs for attempting to correct overpunishments. Persons with families who have little to spend toward correcting overpunishment are thus shut out due to the excessive expense and the ready abundance of those more able to afford the purchase of corrected punishments. (“Justice” is an overused, virtually meaningless word that has almost nothing to do with the American legal system: This nebulous, amorphous, all purpose word has been denigrated into little more than a device for political propagandists and the media to exploit. It is full of salable emotion, especially in relation to the bereaved.)

Professional influence dispensers will only accept the attentions of lawyers, not the captives whom they represent. Lawyers have a calming influence on clients who become resentful with the process of trying to correct overpunishment and its usual outcome. In almost every case, the outcome progresses through two stages: the lawyers periodically emit hopeful noises along with requests for more money; clients gradually cease to pay more money as no positive, concrete results accrue. Lawyers leave the hope alive, and thus the door for more payment open. Only in cases where payors get irate over the ratio of money spent v. results obtained (commonly $5,000 to zero), is the door finally shut and the lawyers admit that there is nothing “further” they can do “for” their clients.

The market for corrected judgements rises every year with the increasing rate of imprisonment. The market was high in about 1975 when I first became aware of it through a Tulsa newspaper front page headline.

It proclaimed to the entire state that paroles were not for sale for $500. Soon thereafter I watched a friend, who should have gotten the death penalty, buy his way out in increments of $500-$1,000. (This process is detailed in my book, “JAILBREAK!”)

The persons who profit so richly through their sales of parole and leniency products are often called on by the media and legislators to account for their law rate of permitting paroles versus the high number of persons held in captivity by the law industry. To this they reply, “parole was never meant to be a safety valve for prison overcrowding”. (No one pretends that it is, and this non-answer dodges the real function of parole boards: to correct overpunishment routinely obtained through use of emotion and theatrics by overambitious prosecutor/judge teams. Three reasons for such a low rate of sentence correction (currently only 16%/year) are the high salaries that parole board members are paid ( $75,000/year), the high political cost when such corrections are trumpeted by the media, and the general outcry of generic outrage from police/ prosecutor and crime-victim organizations that accompany these announcements.

Govt by emotion is never good, and emotion is the main problem preventing parole board members from doing their jobs and correcting overpunishment. Another excuse they like to use in avoiding their function is to self-righteously proclaim to the press that,    “Parole is not a right, it is a privilege”. In reality, sentence correction by the parole board should be claimed as a right, especially due to the massive amount of rights-thefts by govt employees since the constitution came into effect. More properly, PUBLIC SERVICE is the privilege that nepotistic dynasties of the rich and connected have converted into their right. Also, sentence correction should be demanded as a right due to the judge/prosecutor/cop/ media alliance’s routine use of emotion and corrupt methods to obtain excessive punishments in almost every case. Look outside America and you will see more civilized sentences given almost everywhere. (For analysis of these corrupt methods, see “Innocent’s Guide…” and other essays on

In California, citizens fight for this right. In backward states like OK, we have even more reason to demand sentence corrections. Ways to obtain this right are in the essays, “E-Voting…”, “Pro-Active Civil Rights…’ and “Why Write?”, among others. Citizens should counterattack in the govt’s war on citizens. We are not just the source of their excessive riches, power and privilege, we are their equals, but only if we merely stand up and claim so.

            Resolve to recognize their abuse and refuse to accept it any longer!


Once a false conviction is obtained, the likelihood of an innocent person ever getting an appeals judge to remove it is far less than one percent. Why? The cops, lawyers, prosecutors, judges, legislators and media all choose to make citizens believe that their system of justice is always right, even when it is caught perpetrating numerous acts of criminality and fraud. They do not admit to their crimes; they do not apologize. They deny, delay and disparage their victims. The false front of perfection and infallibility is thrust forward at all costs.

The trouble with false convictions, though, is that their victims tend never to be silent about the legal frauds used to trick jurors into convicting them. We tend to somehow get around the free-speech gags that are placed on us afterward, in prison, and if we have any altruistic bent at all, we expose the legal traps so that, hopefully, no others will have to suffer the same abuse. I’ve already covered how the lawcrats and cops trick jurors into convicting the innocent in my very popular and widely-read treatise, “Innocents” Guide to Avoiding False Conviction”. What I have not covered well enough is the appeals process that maintains false convictions at all costs. I attempt to rectify this fault here.

Appeals judges are faced with the task of silencing innocents, concealing their appeals and feigning an aura of respectability and fairness while doing so. Their first barrier to justice is the standard paper blizzard that all gov’t bureaucracies hide behind when supplicants try to force them to do their jobs. The lawcrats’ paper blizzard is the worst of all, because they have the most at stake: the continued destruction of hundreds of thousands of innocent citizens’ lives. This is why lawyer bureaucracies routinely take years and decades from innocents and very rarely erp anything that even looks like justice from far away. Innocents must determine never to give up, and we must be prepared to continue slamming at the walls within which true justice is held hostage, until death takes us, when necessary. This is a fight more important than any individual.

Their second barrier to justice is the fact that virtually nothing in law is concrete. Everything is subjective. Law is deliberately kept an amorphous, nebulous, flexible thing subject to no fact and many opinions for the express purpose of twisting it to gov’t ends. Gov’t owns the monopoly on law, and no law, or official opinion on law is created without first considering how it will benefit gov’t.

As to how, specifically, lawcrats accomplish this, I have provided an example. Please see the exhibit below, beginning with p. 2(A). This paragraph pertains to federal prisoners only. They have two fewer hoops to jump through than state captives. Innocent federal captives are required by the lawcrats to have somehow uncovered new evidence that would convince judges of their innocence. (“Factfinder” means judge in this instance, and judges are here usurping the jurors’ function, because most “new” evidence is evidence deliberately concealed by the cops and prosecutors from jurors, otherwise no guilty verdict could have been obtained.)

Convincing mere jurors of innocence is as arduous as herding cats that are continuously spooked by cops, lawyers, prosecutors, judges and the media. Convincing judges of innocence is virtually impossible. In the entire history of the US–over two centuries of legal “practice”–innocence has almost never been admitted to by any appeals judges. First, their facade of infallibility makes their throats lock up at the mere word “innocence”. The closest they will come is “not guilty”. When forced, they hide behind neutral words such as “remand”, “reverse”, “rescind”, “acquit”, etc. Only in the past 20 years has there been a “flood” of only about 150 “not guilty” persons released from false and fraudulent convictions The only way that these poor souls ever got away is because lawyerproof DNA has made it scientifically impossible for judges to continue to maintain each individual false conviction. In many cases, science not only proved the victims of legal fraud innocent, but also found the guilty. Judges and prosecutors are happy to leave the innocent in their taxpayer subsidized prisons, but public outcry forced them to prosecute the “newly uncovered” guilty that science kept smacking in their arrogant faces. For this reason ALONE were the 150 extremely lucky innocents finally permitted to leave after wasting years and decades of their lives to convince hardened, cynical judges with appeals to their “reason”.

Think not? Then see p.2 (B). This paragraph is for state prisoners, who make up about 90% of the 150 science-proven innocents previously mentioned. State judge/prosecutor teams, having: the larger task of maintaining 90% of all the fraudulent convictions of innocents, have eased their huge burden by inserting two extra, nearly impossible, requirements for their innocent victims to meet. State innocent-convictees must fulfill every federal requirement. Next, we must convince judges that we are victims of a “Constitutional error”.. This means that the appeals judges must agree with our contention that we were deprived of one (or two, in the case of “ineffective counsel”), of the stipulations in the “Bill o’ Rights:` Hidden underneath this requirement is another requirement: we must not have accidentally “waived” our rights. The primary way that judges and prosecutors determine that we have waived these rights is by noticing that we did not immediately leap up and loudly insist upon them the very moment that a crafty, well-schooled cop or lawyer violates them. The most well-oiled trap door in the lawyer’s system is this one that automatically waives your Constitutional rights before you can even learn that the cop/prosecutor team has trampled upon them. And do NOT expect help from the judge: He is in direct cahoots with them, since he also depends upon your conviction to benefit his profession. This is where ignorance of the law, ignorance of the facts, and ignorance of the cop/lawyer system combine to provide no excuse for the gullible, unwary and the too-trusting. In order to satisfy this requirement, it is often necessary to be clairvoyant and a mind-reader.

On top of this is piled an even more stringent requirement. Proof of innocence is not enough even when coupled with Constitutional errors. One must also prove that the “new” evidence could not be uncovered “earlier”. This is an impossible barrier to justice First, it is usually akin to a miracle that the cop/prosecutor team overlooked, or failed to conceal or de- stroy, the contrary evidence to begin with. Cops and prosecutors know that they can conceal, steal and destroy evidence at whim, .with no possibility of suffering any real punishment even if they do get caught, which is itself highly unlikely. Thus it is standard, routine practice that cops and prosecutors conceal, steal and destroy evidence that is contrary to the conviction of their target. Next, the contrary evidence has a time limit on its “discovery” (the legal term for “uncovery”, because it is usually “lost” within the cop/prosecutor’s files.) Judges and legislators have put a very short time limit on “new” evidence and thus on innocence itself. The cop/ prosecutor team need only steal and conceal the contrary evidence for a single year. Doing so gives the appeal judges the right to waive all your rights to the innocence-proving evidence, due to your lack of “due diligence” in (1) finding that it exists, (2) uncovering the fact that the cops/prosecutor team stole it, and (3) somehow getting it out of their vaults, despite their lies, deceits, delays and refusals. In theory, satisfying paragraphs A or B sound simple if a citizen is truly innocent. In actual reality, however, the barriers to justice are as insurmountable as the lawcrats’ conviction rates are high, (99.55%). As I’ve said for many years, to score this high, you have to cheat. E.g, in over 220 years of operation, the American Lawyers’ System has only released fewer than 200 innocent convictees on appeal and 130 of these occurred in only the past twenty years, and only these because of the rise of IRREFUTABLE-EVEN-TO-LAWYERS DNA evidence.

Evidence of a wholesale, 35-year-long cop/lawcratcheating spree is obvious throughout my case. (see PCR and “exhibits”). Even more cheating is found when one compares the recent tenth circuit “order” (Bauhaus v Reynolds, 07-5094) with the exhibits here. In it the judges pull a very cunning switcheroo to justify their latest fraudulent ruling against this innocent man and for the killer of Mr. Hunt. E.g, the 4th line of p.2, paragraph B requires mere “convincing evidence”. In their “order”, judges Kelley, Hartz and O’Brien switch “evidence” for “proof”, rightfully claiming that I can no longer prove my innocence, now that the cops and prosecutor are proven to have deliberately destroyed the proof, and wrongfully demanding proof where only “evidence” is required. (See the 2nd-to-last paragraph of the 6-21-07 “order” posted elsewhere on my site.) It is slick-lipped pomposity like this that you will find throughout the lawyers’ system. Anyone can be convicted upon “proof beyond a reasonable doubt”, but to become UN-convicted requires proof beyond a shadow of ANY doubt, plus Constitutional error, plus due diligence, plus a year time limit. All this is required AFTER the cops and lawcrats have had every opportunity to steal, conceal, destroy, delay and lie about the innocence-proving evidence. This is more proof that innocence means less than nothing to cop and lawcrat bureaucracies Hell-bent on their own secret agendas of keeping prisons overstuffed and feigning infallibility.

There is no real quality control or oversight on these cops and lawcrats, thus they have juked the system and run completely amok. Jurors used to provide some quality control on them, but have been largely reduced to the function of a rubber stamp for the prosecutor. Citizens have never been in more danger of being convicted by fraud. Citizens need to wake up and FIX GOVERNMENT!