Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2025 Poal.co

674

So the Maxwell juror is an employee. This trial was so fixed we now know where this jackazz juror came from. This goes back to when the republicans were caught and we found the Group after 911. HW, GW, JEB, Prince Bandar, Bin Ladin's and more...you would have to be a clown to work for them.

This is the proof the trial was fixed. Mistrial? They should make them live with what they tried to 'fix'.

The Carlyle Group:

All The President's Men (Bush's and Bin Laden's & more) https://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/oct/31/september11.usa4

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/oct/31/september11.usa4

Yes, a coincidence I am sure....

So the Maxwell juror is an employee. This trial was so fixed we now know where this jackazz juror came from. This goes back to when the republicans were caught and we found the Group after 911. HW, GW, JEB, Prince Bandar, Bin Ladin's and more...you would have to be a clown to work for them. This is the proof the trial was fixed. Mistrial? They should make them live with what they tried to 'fix'. The Carlyle Group: All The President's Men (Bush's and Bin Laden's & more) https://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/oct/31/september11.usa4 https://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/oct/31/september11.usa4 Yes, a coincidence I am sure....

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (7).
[–] • 0 pt

What are you talking about??

She was found guilty on 5 of 6 charges.

[–] [deleted] • 1 pt

One juror claims they were sexually assaulted after the trial. During pre trial questioning they neglected to disclose this despite being asked. So $$$ are involved and the juror has insane connections back to Maxwell. Its no doubt a plant. So we are in limbo between this disclosure and the judges reaction. Patel Patriot did a pretty thorough conncet the dots by accident, he was just on a connectivity dig and it was remarkable.

[–] • 2 pts (edited )

One juror claims they were sexually assaulted after the trial. During pre trial questioning they neglected to disclose this despite being asked.

That doesn't make sense. How can they question the person during pretrial about something that happened after the trial?

Forgive me. I'm so far behind on things right now. I'll try to catch up.

EDIT: Oh, I get what you're saying now.... It's the order of your wording that got me confused.