Media Trials - A Covert Attack on Jury System?
July 2, 2013
Are "Innocent" verdicts discrediting the jury system?
Excessive media coverage suggests this may be deliberate.
"If I had to guess, and I certainly may be wrong, the jury is going to find George Zimmerman innocent. And the media will then cry: "Once again, the jury system has failed!"
By James Perloff
(henrymakow.com)
In what was called "the trial of the century," a jury declared O. J. Simpson innocent of a double murder in 1995, despite powerful evidence of his guilt. It was hard to believe Simpson's famous escape attempt in his blood-stained Ford Bronco was the act of an innocent man. I recall feeling anger toward the jurors who freed him.
More recently, many trials have received disproportionate attention. In 2011, the Casey Anthony case became the subject of furious media coverage. Initially, I wondered if Anthony was a celebrity. But no, she was just a party girl accused of duct-taping her two-year-old daughter's mouth and suffocating her, so she could enjoy her lifestyle unhampered by child care. While the crime was heinous; it did not seem to merit the extravagant media blitz.
During the trial, the media painted an increasingly unsavory portrait of Anthony. But as the verdict approached, I began getting an uneasy feeling: namely, that an "innocent" verdict had been prearranged and would be used to provoke anger toward the jury system, especially among conservatives sympathetic to family values. After the "innocent" verdict was rendered, AOL ran this headline: "Casey Gets Ready to Party."
As in the OJ case, nationwide outrage followed, and new laws--collectively dubbed "Caylee's Law," in honor of Anthony's daughter--were proposed to criminalize parents who failed to report missing children within a mandated time period.
ZIMMERMAN
The latest case to earn undue national publicity is that of George Zimmerman, on trial for the 2012 shooting of 17-year old Afro-American Trayvon Martin. The media is missing no opportunity to fan flames of racial bitterness. For example, this past week, criticisms of the mumbling testimony of witness Rachel Jeantel have been denounced as originating with "racists" who fail to appreciate Black English.
If I had to guess, and I certainly may be wrong, the jury is going to find George Zimmerman innocent. And the media will then cry: "Once again, the jury system has failed!" This time it will be the Afro-American community's turn to get angry at juries. Here's a little "preview" of a CNN panel discussion:
CNN Anchor: "What does this case mean for America?"
Pundit No. 1: "Clearly, the time has come to reexamine the relevance of the jury system--a system designed for the horse and buggy era. Today's criminology methods involve cutting-edge technology, such as DNA testing and cyber-detection, which were unknown to the so-called Founding Fathers. Today, your average jury member simply does not have the expertise necessary to digest these methods. It's time we took these verdicts out of the hands of "Joe Schmo" and turned them over to bona-fide experts."
Pundit No 2: "I agree! We would not have these spontaneous race riots (taking place in the wake of the Zimmerman verdict) had the decision not been placed in the hands of unqualified individuals. Justice and common sense simply cry out for an end to this antiquated system."
Pundit No. 3: "And let's not forget that CNN's new poll shows that Americans don't like the disruption to their lives caused by participating in juries. We're a democracy! Should we ignore the will of the people? Forty-five years ago, participation in military--the "draft"--was required for all young American men. Wisely, we dispensed with that unpopular system and replaced it with an army of professionals. It's high time the jury system went down the same path!"
CNN Anchor: "Well, there you have it, folks. A clear-cut consensus of expert opinion that the time has come to begin the process of rethinking the jury system. Indeed, at a press conference in Washington today, Nancy Pelosi suggested a new law that would..."
CONCLUSION
The entire Bill of Rights is currently under intense assault. Freedom of speech is increasingly disallowed if "politically incorrect." Freedom of religion now takes a back seat to the new civil right called "gay rights." A strangely exponential increase in gun crimes over the past year has led to demands to banish the right to bear arms.
Does anyone think the Illuminati would overlook the right to trial by jury? Nothing becomes a nationally celebrated media case without Illuminati approval--which means these show trials must have a place in their agenda. And of course, these trials also take our attention off the worst criminals--the Illuminati themselves.
-----------------
James Perloff, is the author of The Shadows of Power. His new Kindle book, Truth Is a Lonely Warrior examines the methods used by the Illuminati to create a satanic New World Order. New interview with Perloff.
-
HE ADDS:
Let me make it clear that I am not lumping George Zimmerman with OJ and Casey in terms of personal guilt or credibility. A due finding of "not guilty" in the Zimmerman trial would certainly not discredit the jury system. However, the media will call the verdict racist and use it to fan race riots. This, I believe, is part of a broader scheme of using "show trials" to provoke demands for reevaluation of the jury system, just as shootings are being used to incrementally repeal the Second Amendment. The Illuminati know that the best way to make people give up their rights is to make them think their rights are dangerous.
Let me make it clear that I am not lumping George Zimmerman with OJ and Casey in terms of personal guilt or credibility. A due finding of "not guilty" in the Zimmerman trial would certainly not discredit the jury system. However, the media will call the verdict racist and use it to fan race riots. This, I believe, is part of a broader scheme of using "show trials" to provoke demands for reevaluation of the jury system, just as shootings are being used to incrementally repeal the Second Amendment. The Illuminati know that the best way to make people give up their rights is to make them think their rights are dangerous.
Simplicity said (July 4, 2013):
hi henry, prescience is good.
Some of us could use a little perspective to see this significance.(of jury)
thus:
Red beckman's presentations on the fully informed jury are priceless.
as are the constitution man's presentation, carl miller.
http://www.youtube.com/1s-zHrNPfkQ titled "know your constitution-carl miller"
"red beckman's fully informed jury training part 1"(on youtube) or http://youtu.be/Hu3hYAAopcs.