“I couldn’t understand my lawyer put a woman on the jury who admitted, it’s in the transcript, that her and her husband had seen the stories and read the stories and had already formed a conclusion. Obviously, if you had read the stories, the conclusion would have been that I was guilty. Right? And as far as the public knew, I was still being suspected of all these, you know hundred something rapes, and nobody knew these didn’t exist and nobody knew they didn’t go anywhere.
So as this jury took, I couldn’t understand it. He said, ‘Oh, don’t worry, it will be alright, I know what I am doing.’ The next day we come back, [I] still expecting to present a case, the 22nd of January, [I] still expecting to present a case. They called up a few minor witnesses. The only new witness they put on the case, they were trying to prove that the publishing company didn’t exist, that it was phony, that it was a scam to draw women into it that I could rape and all this type of stuff. This is what the prosecution was trying to prove. There was just too much thousands of dollars yeah, blah, blah, I’ll come and testify and blah blah. Then he turns around and tells my court appointed attorney for the post-conviction that he thinks James Corry, that’s the attorney’s name, did marvelous work for me. Said did the best he could under the circumstances.
Yes, I’m innocent but no attorney could have done better for me. Making himself a witness who wasn’t usable, but he didn’t show up for the trial though he promised. This pastor had files [files? – word unclear] in his hand to set me free and refused to use it. I’ll let you draw your own conclusions as to why. I did not know the full extent of what my attorney had done to me. I was sent to prison. Until Feb. 15, a week or so ago [?]. At the post-conviction in Columbia South Carolina the only two witnesses present were myself, said the attorney for the state. My attorney was testifying for the state. He got on the stand, lied about several things that needed to be true, that I need personally knew to be true. Now he had told me up until then that the reason he didn’t use the lab was that it didn’t show a screen for alcohol and for all these years I had believed him. On the stand however, knowing that it might come oat, he revealed that it did show a screen for alcohol. And he couldn’t give a good reason why he didn’t use it. That is also the time I found out that all the witnesses subpoenaed were sitting outside the courtroom the whole time for two days and he never called them. Then the court-appointed attorney asked him, ‘Would this witness had contradicted Meryl Blackburn? Would this one?’ ‘Yes.’ ‘Would this one?’ ‘Yes’. On and on for the whole time for two days, and he never [?]. And the court appointed attorney kept asking him, ‘Would this have contradicted Meryl Blackburn? With this one?’ ‘Yes.’ ‘And with this one?’ ‘Yes’ and on and on. And yet he kept saying it wasn’t important to present that. It wasn’t important that there wasn’t any witnesses. According to law, the lawyer can refuse to call witnesses.
However, the Constitution says I have a right to have witnesses there. Under South Carolina law, an attorney can override the defendant and not call the witnesses. And that’s what they did to me. So, in essence, my constitutional rights were [blank pause], so I was sent to prison without being able to produce any witnesses.”
Former Illuminati member explains how the Illuminati framed him and put him in prison (7)
“I couldn’t understand my lawyer put a woman on the jury who admitted, it’s in the transcript, that her and her husband had seen the stories and read the stories and had already formed a conclusion. Obviously, if you had read the stories, the conclusion would have been that I was guilty. Right? And as far as the public knew, I was still being suspected of all these, you know hundred something rapes, and nobody knew these didn’t exist and nobody knew they didn’t go anywhere.
So as this jury took, I couldn’t understand it. He said, ‘Oh, don’t worry, it will be alright, I know what I am doing.’ The next day we come back, [I] still expecting to present a case, the 22nd of January, [I] still expecting to present a case. They called up a few minor witnesses. The only new witness they put on the case, they were trying to prove that the publishing company didn’t exist, that it was phony, that it was a scam to draw women into it that I could rape and all this type of stuff. This is what the prosecution was trying to prove. There was just too much thousands of dollars yeah, blah, blah, I’ll come and testify and blah blah. Then he turns around and tells my court appointed attorney for the post-conviction that he thinks James Corry, that’s the attorney’s name, did marvelous work for me. Said did the best he could under the circumstances.
Yes, I’m innocent but no attorney could have done better for me. Making himself a witness who wasn’t usable, but he didn’t show up for the trial though he promised. This pastor had files [files? – word unclear] in his hand to set me free and refused to use it. I’ll let you draw your own conclusions as to why. I did not know the full extent of what my attorney had done to me. I was sent to prison. Until Feb. 15, a week or so ago [?]. At the post-conviction in Columbia South Carolina the only two witnesses present were myself, said the attorney for the state. My attorney was testifying for the state. He got on the stand, lied about several things that needed to be true, that I need personally knew to be true. Now he had told me up until then that the reason he didn’t use the lab was that it didn’t show a screen for alcohol and for all these years I had believed him. On the stand however, knowing that it might come oat, he revealed that it did show a screen for alcohol. And he couldn’t give a good reason why he didn’t use it. That is also the time I found out that all the witnesses subpoenaed were sitting outside the courtroom the whole time for two days and he never called them. Then the court-appointed attorney asked him, ‘Would this witness had contradicted Meryl Blackburn? Would this one?’ ‘Yes.’ ‘Would this one?’ ‘Yes’. On and on for the whole time for two days, and he never [?]. And the court appointed attorney kept asking him, ‘Would this have contradicted Meryl Blackburn? With this one?’ ‘Yes.’ ‘And with this one?’ ‘Yes’ and on and on. And yet he kept saying it wasn’t important to present that. It wasn’t important that there wasn’t any witnesses. According to law, the lawyer can refuse to call witnesses.
However, the Constitution says I have a right to have witnesses there. Under South Carolina law, an attorney can override the defendant and not call the witnesses. And that’s what they did to me. So, in essence, my constitutional rights were [blank pause], so I was sent to prison without being able to produce any witnesses.”