Here was the Palfrey verdict form:
Notice that the foreman and all 12 jurors had to sign the Rezko verdict form and in Palfrey's verdict form, only the foreman had to sign the form. Also, the foreman spoke after Deborah Jeane Palfrey's verdict to discuss the jurors' deliberation. The jurors reached a verdict in Rezko's trial in 12 days whereas the jurors in Palfrey's trial reached a verdict (in a very first prostitution case under federal stature guidelines of RICO) in less than 8 hours.
4 comments:
SPB this is just one piece of information that shows Jean's case was fixed. The foreman of Jean's case knows the case was fixed. The truth always comes out. The jurors in the Rezko trial had Rico charges and took time to understand what that means. Rico is difficult to understand, I've heard Judge's say they have to study it. The Rico Act is a class training of it's own like Tort Law. But in Jean's case 12 jurors with little to no background in law could figure it out in less then half a day and only one vote. If Law Student could do that a person could Graduate in one day. After learning that the Grand Jury was tainted it's no surprise that the jurors were too. Look how proud the Foreman was with his background working in the court. It's clear the Prosecutors knew they would win their case by fixing the jury and the Judge, that's a slam dunk. I hope someone speaks up and allows the truth to come to light. No it can't bring back Jean but it will clear her name. One person who knows and has seen what these criminal people did is God. So if they don't answer here they will have to answer to Him.
I hope someone does speak up, not just to clarify what happened, but to make sure nothing bad happens in the future.
From what I understood from previous posts nothing was presented to the jury in terms of evidence concerning the RICO charge in the course of the prosecution, but the jurors found her guilty of violating RICO all the same. If I'm wrong about that, please clarify and tell me.
Anon,
Good question. Under the RICO, federal racketeering such as prostitution, gambling, money laundering, bribing a public official and so on falls under that crime. In the Palfrey case, you are right. Prosecutors never outline in a timeline on federal racketeering and money laundering of Jeane's company for the 13 years that it was operating. She was never audited in the 13 years that she had been in business and never questioned.
In addition, in her indictment, she was charged, under RICO, of running a prostitution business for 13 years. In the verdicvt form, one of the counts stated if the jurors found a pattern of racketeering activity occurred after March 2002. Notice it said after March 2002 a specific timeframe. What happened in 1993-February 2002? That wasn't explained.
If you look at the Brent Wilkes case, the prosecutors clearly showed through their evidence and government exhibits of checks, transactions, and email exchanges that Wilkes committed moneylaundering and bribes with a public official, Dusty Foggo, amd others. Something smell funny in how the jurors found her guilty on all counts and only one vote unanimously in less than 8 hours.
Kittybowtie:
We hope to seek the truth so that this would never happen again and the law needs to be corrected.
Post a Comment