If I was in the jury and encountered a defendant so mild-mannered and so seemingly gentle and pure and good and who told me to listen carefully to the PROSECUTOR, then and there I would be thinking GUILTY! AS! SIN!

@OneGaurdian

7 ай бұрын

There is definitely such a thing as overselling it.

@TactileTherapy

7 ай бұрын

Thats why youre not on a jury. Your feelings are the last thing that should be a factor when CONVICTING a human being

@kitb7624

7 ай бұрын

@@TactileTherapyjuries are randomly picked, then the lawyers pick the rest. If the prosecutor thinks you may convict, for whatever reason, they will try to include you in the trial jury.

@TactileTherapy

7 ай бұрын

Good thing the outcome of a trial is determined by more than what a prosecutor wants@@kitb7624

@yucol5661

7 ай бұрын

@@TactileTherapyjuryarent oucked in their fitness to think objectively. They are picked on how much the lawyers think they’ll benefit and how good they guess who will vote which way.

If only judges could go: "I'd dismiss this as evidence... if it werent for that smug grin you just pulled. Good job, you just screwed yourself."

6:53 -- "We waited for FIFTEEN MINUTES," and she shakes her head like it was a HUGE inconvenience. This, after just having said they were half an hour late themselves, but blowing that off as if 30 minutes of keeping someone else waiting is nothing because "We're busy people." The entitlement just oozes from her.

@CarolFremel-my4hs

6 ай бұрын

Ooh, shocking

@YeshuaKingMessiah

6 ай бұрын

So many ppl think this way

@bluecollarlit

3 ай бұрын

I noticed how she said FIFTEEN MINUTES about 20 seconds before arriving at this comment, haha! And them having martinis during this visit. (Did they offer the guest a refreshment?)

Anyone who represents theirselves in a court of law has a fool for a client.

@fromthehaven94

7 ай бұрын

And in this episode, a juror, too.

@jacoblesher453

4 ай бұрын

And an moron for a lawyer

@Wolfie713

Ай бұрын

*themselves Also, they have a fool for an attorney.

@scottkamps1270

Ай бұрын

"And with God as my witness...I AM THAT FOOL!" - Gomez Addams

@Wolfie713

Ай бұрын

@@scottkamps1270 Sit down Cousin Itt.

Personally, if I saw a man defending himself in court, that raises some red flags to me. Didn’t Ted Bundy do that?

The villain in this episode really pissed me off, he was an unrepentant, shameless, murderous psychopath who got his comeuppance at the end of the episode.

@GreyDoofus88

7 ай бұрын

In a way he escaped justice.

@t-rexcellentreviews1663

7 ай бұрын

@@GreyDoofus88not for very long though, eventually one of his potential victims got the better of him when it came to killing.

@fromthehaven94

7 ай бұрын

By the juror who believed him enough to hang the jury. Until she didn't.

@GreyDoofus88

7 ай бұрын

@@t-rexcellentreviews1663 Though he should've been rotting in jail for his misdeeds. Instead as a result of his unbridled arrogance, he wound up getting himself out of his own mess yet again. Clearly not in the way he intended, but he still cheated in my opinion.

Policeman: Security tapes are gone.. Lenny: Now what am I gonna watch tonight? xDD

The amount of times the detectives break the laws throughout this series is mind boggling. I love all the smartass comments I've gotten over this, y'all are petty.

@dermothoran1814

7 ай бұрын

I'm sure that they were "dancing on the head of a pin", so to speak. That probably happens quite frequently in serious criminal cases. 🤔

@JumbleOfPeople

7 ай бұрын

It happened more as the series went on. I think it was a new way to bring complications into the series, because the more 'standard' problems had already been used.

@MisterJinKC

7 ай бұрын

The toothpick was actually legal. If there is reasonable belief that someone will destroy evidence its covered under exigent circumstances. Not saying i agree with it, but it's still the truth.

@dustinjenney9736

7 ай бұрын

@@MisterJinKC I'll have to look into that.

@Cheeeseyboi

7 ай бұрын

Just wait until you see the actions of Officer Voight

It doesn't take much to see the Ron Wolf sense of humor in this episode. This episode aired in 2001. The defense attorney was played by Kier Dullea..who also portrayed astronaut Dave Bowman in the film 2001 a Space Odyssey. And the actor playing the defendant was doing a flawless impression of HAL, the psycho computer in 2001 A Space Odyssey

@Cor6196

7 ай бұрын

Good call! The total lack of human affect that makes him seem so robotic. It's a great piece of acting (director: "you're a psychopath, divorced from normal expressions of emotion, keep your dialogue monotone, your face blank") that makes him so chilling. And those hypnotic, super-human eyes! You have to read them so closely!👍🏻

@whiskeredcrocodile

3 ай бұрын

Keir Dullea, YES! Thanks! I thought I knew the guy.

@shyyou93

3 ай бұрын

Im sorry @marcdoherty6039, I cant do that

@verdandex

3 күн бұрын

That's such an awesome connection! Never thought I'd see a 2001 and L&O crossover

The judge shouldn’t have thrown out the tapes. The cops are allowed to prevent someone from going into a property while they wait for a search warrant.

@mariyannag9508

7 ай бұрын

Quite wrong, police are NOT allowed to do that, which is exactly why the evidence was tossed..

@garcia207

7 ай бұрын

There was a real life case where the judge suppressed a lot of evidence from the Jury and the killer was given a lighter sentence. Look up the trial of Dominique Dunne’s case. She was a young actress that was killed by her boyfriend. She is best remembered as the older sister from Poltergeist.

@JustAJinx-ci6hg

7 ай бұрын

wait what?@@garcia207

@ccvv1119

6 ай бұрын

@@garcia207he’s so trashy and then he had the nerve to say the jury should have convicted him of murder after he suppressed evidence!!!

@garcia207

6 ай бұрын

@@ccvv1119 especially when the Judge had the jury removed to hear the testimony from what I believe was the Defendant’s former girlfriend. She had testified similar abuse and Dominique’s killer had made a mad dash to escape the courtroom. He was actually tackled by the bailiffs. The judge ordered that the witness could not testify before the jury. After the verdict the jury was told about the other witness and they said if they were aware of what had happened, they would have given him a harsher sentence. So sad.

So... Could we blame the building manager for having a toothpick, which gave the detective ideas? And if Stabler were there, how would it have gone differently? 😂

Anyone else hear a snake hissing when Morriston talks? I sure do.

RIP Jerry Orbach.

I started giggling uncontrollably at work yesterday and when my bestie asked wtf was so funny, I had to explain…unprovoked, for no reason, my brain tried to imagine Lenny Briscoe (trenchcoat and all) singing, “Flabby, fat and lazy, you walked in and upsie-daisy!” 😂

For the record, police have every right to prevent a suspect from entering a premises while waiting on a search warrant. The warrant is required to SEARCH, not to protect possible evidence. And regardless of whether the evidence was suppressed or not, no one is allowed to lie on the stand.

@kingschesthafl1702

7 ай бұрын

This is completely false.

@sonrouge

7 ай бұрын

​@@kingschesthafl1702en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illinois_v._McArthur You're welcome.

@jonah.donohue

7 ай бұрын

​@@kingschesthafl1702Show me proof

@bofoshow5189

7 ай бұрын

Do you understand the meaning of “search AND seizure”? It is illegal to hold a person in police custody without probable cause, and you most certainly cannot hold them because you think you are about to find probable cause later.

@sonrouge

6 ай бұрын

​@bofoshow5189 If the police are waiting for a search warrant to arrive, then they've already presented probable cause and gotten a judge to sign off on it. And preventing possible evidence tampering isn't searching or seizing. And the defendant wasn't under arrest and therefore wasn't in police custody.

8:43 Funny what McCoy says there as I immediately thought of the Darrell Brooks case and how he attempted to do that very thing but the Judge and Prosecutor did an amazing job to make sure that didn't happen

Do the police need better training even in the movies? In most states, you can prevent someone from entering a building as you wait for a search warrant. Even if they can't in NYC the judge is unlikely to throw the evidence because they did not enter the apartment before they have they got the search warrant. They just block him from entering. The constitutional warranty is not a protection for the "right to destroy evidence", but for unlawful searches: again they did not enter before the warrant arrived. It's nonsense.

@nataliehill1472

7 ай бұрын

The issue was that they acted on the warrant before they obtained it by taking the landlords toothpick and unlocking the property

@emily_stewart

7 ай бұрын

​@@nataliehill1472The toothpick wasn't used to unlock the property though, it was used to prevent the defendant from being able to unlock it himself which is why they then asked for tweezers to remove the toothpick so that the door could be unlocked once they had the warrant in hand.

@sonrouge

7 ай бұрын

@@nataliehill1472 Acting on the warrant would be entering and searching, not preventing the suspect from entering the premises.

@josephhodges9819

7 ай бұрын

@@nataliehill1472 Could be argues that they had a valid warrant already but it was not there to be presented. If the warrant showed up at the apartment a few minutes after the suspect it means it was probably signed 30 minutes prior.

@draco84oz

7 ай бұрын

Was the constitutional warranty in the 4th ever tested in the courts? It could be that the episode was made before that case was finalised

Classic Law & Order. A great episode.

@Linzo24

7 ай бұрын

one of my favorites in the series.

This was a great episode.

An actual Law and Order clip! Like water in the desert! Oh well, see you in another month😂

@jugemujugemu4690

7 ай бұрын

yeah i only really like original Law and Order, never cared for SVU

Keep the original Law & Order clips coming.

@Enr227

7 ай бұрын

Keep all original seasons of law and order on Peacock. Come on Peacock!

@ValdezJu

7 ай бұрын

The first 5 seasons with original cast member, Chris North, are my favorites!

I miss Lennie 😭😭

I really wish their clips would show the major points and ending like they used to...

That poor baby girl 😭😭😭😭

@Disneyfan82

7 ай бұрын

She was an innocent child. What monster would do something pure evil?

@BethHarmon-yh8ms

7 ай бұрын

@@Disneyfan82 I still don't understand what he had to gain by killing the little girl. Must have been a psychopath as well as a con man. (SPOILER ALERT) If it's any consolation, he gets his by the end of the episode when the juror he romanced into getting him an acquittal kills him in self-defense.

@GreyDoofus88

7 ай бұрын

@@BethHarmon-yh8ms Yet he escaped doing time for the murders.

@BethHarmon-yh8ms

7 ай бұрын

@@GreyDoofus88 Karma caught up with him though.

@GreyDoofus88

7 ай бұрын

@@BethHarmon-yh8ms It did indeed. But given that it was his own arrogance which cost him his life, who is left to answer for his crimes?

What a creep. That juror also.

@draco84oz

7 ай бұрын

That juror ultimately decided the case - Morriston started dating her during the trial, and, as the chairperson, she was able to convince enough of the jury to cause a deadlock, only to get dumped the moment the trial was over. Morriston then broke into her house to kill her, but she was able to kill him in self-defense.

@tweety25m

7 ай бұрын

@@draco84ozThanks for that summary! I was looking for a part two on this

@t-rexcellentreviews1663

7 ай бұрын

@@draco84ozultimately justice was served, do you think he always planned to kill her to cover up lose ends or only did so when he realised she was talking to District Attorneys Office.

@B1izzardHawk

7 ай бұрын

​@@t-rexcellentreviews1663probably planned to kill her the whole time. Clearly he put little value in any life that wasn't his own. Not to mention he knew that hell hath no fury like a woman scorned, dumping her after using her like that would make her determined to confess being compromised.

@jonah.donohue

7 ай бұрын

​@@draco84ozWhich is illegal and they could've retrailed him easily

Dave Bowman made a special appearance, transforming from Star Child to Keir Dullea, to deliver this terrific performance as defense counsel.

The first time I watched this episode, that guy gave me the creeps from the get-go. And I CAN'T stand his voice

Hold on, is that . . . . . Keir Dullea? from 2001 A Space Odyssey? Haven't seen him in a long while!

does Tim Guinee often play these soft spoken characters? His Tomin in Stargate SG1 started off like that.

@SY-ok2dq

6 ай бұрын

In this, Guinee doesn't look or sound like the murderer of 4 people. It's a departure from other roles he's played, where he's been cast as very decent, gentle, plain spoken, stoic types like in the film "Sweetland" (his character wasn't very talkative but he had that gentle and decent quality) and in this Chris Carter (X Files) sci fi TV series called "Strange World" (might still be up on KZread). However, I also saw him in this 90s British TV mini-series called "Comics" on KZread a while ago. He plays a very different kind of character, this foul-mouthed, angry, hard-living stand-up comic. Bit of a strange series... I'm surprised it even got made for TV.

judge bradley was such an awesome recurring character

Ohhh this episode. This guy utterly creeped me out. I can hear his voice - without even watching the video.

@t-rexcellentreviews1663

7 ай бұрын

No offence to anyone but people who talk like, that sort of mild mannered, eerily emotionless tone of voice that never seems to change its register no matter what, is just unnerving to me.

Wish the full series was on peacock

Just one word 😲

Curious, can a search warrant be delivered electronically? Do the cops have to present the warrant on paper?

@kingschesthafl1702

7 ай бұрын

Yes it has to be paper, as silly as it is.

@voidcadet

7 ай бұрын

In 2001 (this episode) they needed it hand delivered. Nowadays in many states, once the warrant has been issued it can be sent electronically to any officer involved in the search. However, you need a hard copy to attach to the inventory of property seized. Many patrol cars have a printer connected to their MDC (mobile data computer, looks like a laptop).

@Khrystyna853

Ай бұрын

All well and good, but it has to be signed by a judge first. That's the hard part...

They should have both,the eletronic copy and a paper copy for backup.that might help.

I thought the guy looked familiar. Saw him in an episode of NCIS where he was a hitman for a bunch of corrupt corporation guys. Had the cover that he was a pastor at their local church and a wife and 2 sons. That had to he an awkward conversation to tell them your husband was a monster that was a murderer for hire

“Hubris” - easily one of the Top 2 episodes of Season 11. Marsden had the jury foreperson looking like the lady the Merovingian gave the cake to in Matrix Reloaded. Jeez lady, try to make it less obvious 😂.

Captain joe west before he joined star city pd lol

The difference between legal, technical innocence and moral Innocence. It is the machinations of the law that was designed to protect the innocent that are used by the well-read (most especially politicians) to wiggle out of justice. This is exactly what breeds vigilantes.

The funny thing is they didnt need to secure the apartment since they could detain the guy on suspicion of destroying evidence. They couldnt arrest him, but they could detain him for up to 45 minutes as long as they kept him busy.

Laws must of changed, now you can secure a dwelling prior to a search warrent denying access to the target

Everyone is a law expert. Except no one on this thread actually is. Except me of course.

Exigent Circumstances also state the prevention of destruction of evidence. The officers were in their duty to secure the apartment to make sure nothing was touched until the warrant arrived, which was a minute after the person arrived.

I thought Joe Pera was taller ...

Oh my he wait 15 minutes it was hell oh the pain

Why did the video had to end before we got to hear the jury's verdict.

@MikeMJPMUNCH

7 ай бұрын

It was hung jury so he was set free but then he attempts to kill the jury woman, at 11:42, and she kills him in self defence

@oddeyesrebellion923

7 ай бұрын

​@@MikeMJPMUNCH Unbelievable, he was able to smooth talk some of the jury members into believing him and him laying eyes on his next victim in one day. That's just heinous.

@t-rexcellentreviews1663

7 ай бұрын

@@oddeyesrebellion923I think it was more of case of he realised she was going to talk to the District Attorneys Office after they broke up, which would potentially mean a new trial, so he decided that she need to die to cover any loose ends, but ultimately, he caught at a bad time, when she was doing her dishes and she managed to grab a knife and turn the tables on him.

The episode is called “Hubris”

Especially in court if he is acting as an attorney he needs to speak up sheesh

Episode?

It was one of those episodes where I think the writers wanted to make us angry just to prove they could.

That guy was creepy AF

I honestly don't understand why some people choose to represent themselves during a court case.

I just started watching Law and Order.. what is the name of the actor with Lennie when they investigate the murder at the jewelry shop?? Ive seen him before

@jonathanbeeson8614

7 ай бұрын

Detective Ed Green was played by actor Jesse L. Martin.

@iluvpepi

4 ай бұрын

Gawd I hate that stupid, soft voice of that creep. I know… it’s just a tv show.

I don't know you. But if I was a part of a popular jury, and the accused got up to begin his defense instead of his lawyer, that would inmediately make me think: "Ok. There is something sketchy about this guy."

@bluecollarlit

3 ай бұрын

Excuse me for asking, but what is a "popular jury"? I have never heard that phrase before.

@Khrystyna853

Ай бұрын

And, that is why you would be disqualified as a juror.... There is absolutely nothing "sketchy" about someone representing themselves. You have a right to do so.

@adamdaniel8909

Ай бұрын

The heck is popular jury...?

@adamdaniel8909

Ай бұрын

Also this is why you will never be on jury duty...

Sam Waterson- god

hallowed be the ori.

it really shouldnt matter if the evidence was obtained 'illegally'. if its legit evidence it should ALWAYS be admissible.

Stop lying theses seasons are not available on peacock

What was the verdict?

@thomaschitham3487

7 ай бұрын

The conman managed to seduce and start dating the forewoman of the Jury and get her to influence the rest to acquit him. However, after he broke up with her the day after the trial ended, she came forth to testify against. Before the day they would testify to the judge, however, the conman broke into her home in the night and tried to kill her to prevent her from talking, causing her to kill him in self-defence.

@aggressiveattitudeera887

7 ай бұрын

A mistrial was declared because Morriston had enamoured the jury forewoman.

@FTFCHRIS

7 ай бұрын

Not guilty because he seduced one of the jurors but the juror ends up going to the DA and confesses about it. Then the bad guy ends up dying because he tried to strangle the juror he seduced from behind and got stabbed by her because she had a knife or scissors.

@sapphireseptember

7 ай бұрын

Urgh. Arsehole!

@dietotaku

7 ай бұрын

@@FTFCHRIS well at least the fucker got what was coming to him.

Angie!!

Why did he kill his wife and daughter?

@MikeMJPMUNCH

7 ай бұрын

It wasn't his wife and daughter, the woman was his girlfriend Gail and she found out the necklace he gave her was registered to his ex-girlfriend who had disappeared in mysterious circumstances. So he was trying cover his tracks for previous crime as he was a con man with a police record.

If the tapes were admitted as evidence, would the judge allow them to taint his objectivity then? The point of the tapes is objectivity. Who writes this stuff?

@Khrystyna853

Ай бұрын

If the tapes WERE allowed in, they would, as you say, "be" the objectivity; they wouldn't "taint" the objectivity, in that circumstance... Who writes your stuff?

I never liked that judge

@adamdaniel8909

7 ай бұрын

Why thought...? Just curious...

I'd immediately know he's guilty as soon as he started talking.

@adamdaniel8909

Ай бұрын

That's why you are going to get jury duty...

The police had every right to search morriston's apartment because they were waiting on a search warrant. Still though no evidence was tainted after the search was conducted.

The cops were standing there. He could not have destroyed anything before the warrant got there.

@YouTubeallowedmynametobestolen

7 ай бұрын

If he had gone into the apartment, and they could not (until the warrant came), he could have burned the tapes.

Does the verdict have to be unanimous? Because in those last few seconds he seems to have honed in on one susceptible juror to appeal to emotionally. If he can get her to say, "Not guilty," does he get off?

@feverspell

7 ай бұрын

Yes. Conviction or acquittal requires a unanimous verdict.

@YouTubeallowedmynametobestolen

7 ай бұрын

@@feverspell Thank you, feverspell. I wasn't sure.

I’ve rarely ever heard of motions to suppress actually working in this show. Otherwise I’ve never seen a judge approve them.

@martakavaliauskaite4566

5 ай бұрын

It often used sometimes it works sametimes it doesn't in law and order episodes it is often used

Someone PLEASE tell me if he got sentenced

@martakavaliauskaite4566

5 ай бұрын

No he charmed one juror but later he wanted to kill her and she killed him in self defense

@TheBatugan77

Ай бұрын

I know. But I won't TELL you! 🤡😄😆😀

what episode is this/

@TheBatugan77

Ай бұрын

Correct!

I hate that I can't download law and order. I have a mental illness that makes me unable to leave the house so I have to rely on download (besides, I don't think copies are available in my country anyway). My doctor told me it wud help if I owned it and got a sense of justice. I'm trying to becoz guess what? The man who assaulted me didn't just get away with it, I was punished instead of him. Don't u just love Africa?! I used to.

I know the defendant wasn't a serial killer, but he gave off Ted Bundy vibes.

@innag6888

4 ай бұрын

most likely modelled on him. and, yes, he clearly was a serial killer

Would be nice if we could actually pay to watch this episode

@starlingswallow

7 ай бұрын

😂😂😂

@lenitaa7938

7 ай бұрын

You can! Law and Order site!

@erikabutler6893

7 ай бұрын

@@lenitaa7938 I only see seasons 21 and 22 there.

@erikabutler6893

7 ай бұрын

And I can't even watch the Season 22 videos! It says it's no longer available!@@lenitaa7938

What was the outcome?

@TheTCMfan

7 ай бұрын

The jury foreman the blonde at 11:43 forced a mistrial because the defendant flirted with her outside the courtroom and convinced her that he was innocent but afterward he dumped her. She tells the DA they go to arrest him but he’s already dead cause she killed him

@tagz12345

7 ай бұрын

He flirted with a juror and she kept voting not guilty so they declared a mistrial. He broke up with her 2 days after the trial ended so she realised her mistake, so they were supposed to retry and jury tampering. It ended with the juror killing him in self-defence because he confronted her at her house and tries to strangle her with a wire.

@JackiePhillipsTheSocialPet

7 ай бұрын

@tagz12345 Ok. I have seen that one when it first came out and I watched it on TV. Thanks

What was the final outcome

@vadapallichaitu8799

6 ай бұрын

He flirts with Jury foreperson to get mistrial. He then dumps her and she comes to her senses and blows whistle. Meanwhile he snucks into her apartment to kill her to tie up loose ends. She stabs him with pair of shears killing him in the process.

@rachelgarber1423

6 ай бұрын

@@vadapallichaitu8799 Thanks for the update

@BrianKitching-wv5nh

5 ай бұрын

​@vad 7:44 apallichaitu8799 thanks for the reply.I am new to this show. She did right stabbing him,I guess it was self defense, to stop him from harming others.

@cheapcraftygirlsweepstakes2338

5 ай бұрын

@@vadapallichaitu8799Perfect ending!

Was he based of Ted bundy or something.

@MikeMJPMUNCH

7 ай бұрын

Yeah this episode was based on Ted Bundy and The Gillian Guess case

I hate the whole evidence suppression thing. I thinks it’s absolutely ridiculous that evidence can be suppressed, if you don’t want the evidence that shows your guilty to be used then don’t do the crime. It’s shouldn’t matter how evidence is gotten, evidence is evidence

@ianknight5120

7 ай бұрын

It's meant to disincentivise the Police from committing crimes. In this situation it looks ok, but what if they just broke into an apartment and then tried to justify it after the fact?

@RLucas3000

7 ай бұрын

It’s there to stop the police from planting evidence. For example, the police could have found the tapes in the shop, brought them over to his apartment, then planted them there to ‘discover’. The reason these laws are in place is because cops have done stuff like that in the past. Trump whines about all the rules businesses have to follow, but they are there to stop companies from hurting people as they did in the past. We have the Food & Drug act because companies used to put foreign matter and even poisons in food, until they began to be regulated by the government in the early 1900s.

@Mortal209

7 ай бұрын

@@ianknight5120 Not just that, but also Police will plant evidence without having a warrant and this is to prevent it thought it doesn't really work out because now they just plant it WHILE searching with or even without a warrant.

@mlbaldwin1978

7 ай бұрын

@@MrMonkey2150 its slippery slope time!

@boredlawyer3382

7 ай бұрын

The 4th amendment gives you the right not to have the cops enter your property, or search your property, unless they have a warrant. The issue is, if they violate your rights, what recourse do you have. The rule in the US is the exclusionary rule: evidence gathered in violation of the defendant's rights is excluded. Many disagreed with that rule. Benjamin Cardozo, one of the most brilliant jurists in American history, pithily summed up the objection: "the criminal is to go free because the constable has blundered." The other side of the debate is, without the exclusionary rule, the police would just ignore the 4th Amendment, and break into your house at will. (The exclusionary rule has many details and exceptions. For one thing, only the owner of the property can object. If the cops break into a house owned by A, and find evidence that implicates B, B has no standing to complain, and the evidence will come in. That one has been on several Law and Order episodes.)

I wonder if real life cops,in some cases break the laws like they do here?

@zb3495

4 ай бұрын

All the time.

@TheBatugan77

Ай бұрын

What do you have to hide?

Spoilers please

@ventusprincess

7 ай бұрын

@@dewlewdrop3375 Long one please

@MrMonkey2150

7 ай бұрын

Mistrial but he was killed by a member of the jury when she went to the DA

WOOHOO

👑👑🔥🔥👏🏾👏🏾🖤🖤💜💜🧡🧡❤❤✌🏾✌🏾

😊😊

😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊

.

😊😊😊😊😊😊😊

@user-pe9vt1gi5f

8 күн бұрын

😊

@user-pe9vt1gi5f

8 күн бұрын

😊😊😊😊

@user-pe9vt1gi5f

8 күн бұрын

😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊

@user-pe9vt1gi5f

8 күн бұрын

😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊

@user-pe9vt1gi5f

8 күн бұрын

😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊

Tic Toc I wish you would stop ending your videos without conclusions, are we the public suppose to draw our own conclusions, its happening more often than not. I want to pay for a full video not half. At the moment looking at the bottom of a toilet bowl has more interest. Clean it up.👎👎👎👎👎👎👎

I’m on the defense attorney and judge’s side here, those tapes *had* to be suppressed. Fruit of the poisonous tree.

Face book bobby g his think said I love you so much are my boyfriend's mean two lol better about if I am going sing my cell phone. Muse when together date with take and soda we going wendy chicken sandwich fresh fill cola coke chocolates pie lager drink

@MortenGallagher

Ай бұрын

???????

This fiction is designed fantastic escapism for the purposes of selling the audience's attention to advertisers Nothing more

@sheg1969

7 ай бұрын

Don't forget to renew your MENSA membership