12/2/25
11/21/25
OKLAHOMA COLD CASES - Marylyn Teresa Theriault
OKLAHOMA COLD CASES
Marylyn Teresa Theriault
Marylyn Teresa Theriault was found murdered in Sayre, Oklahoma on August 7, 1982. She was twenty-two years old.
Marylyn, born July 16th, 1960, was from Nashua, New Hampshire. Reports indicate that she had last been seen alive at an Amarillo, Texas truck stop the night before she was found. She had no known ties to Oklahoma.
The circumstances of how Marylyn was found are unknown, however what we do know is that her death was brutal. She was found in the Red River, under a bridge on I-40, at mile #23, about a mile southeast of Sayre. Marylyn was unclothed and had either had intercourse or been sexually assaulted shortly before her death. She was found with duct tape wrapped around her face, up to the bridge of her nose, and her ankles were bound by the same tape. Marylyn had duct tape around her left wrist, indicating that she had either been bound at one point by the wrists, or that her killer attempted to do so. She had multiple contusions and abrasions on her face and body. Her cause of death was two-fold, asphyxiation by the duct tape wrapped around her face and she had also been strangled via ligature. All indications are that Marylyn fought her killer for her life.
No one has ever been charged with the murder of Marylyn Teresa Theriault.
If you have any information regarding the murder of Marylyn, please contact the OSBI at 800-522-8017. You can remain anonymous.
More On The Story
Of all the places in the world, what was Marylyn Teresa Theriault doing in Sayre, Oklahoma? It is a question that has hung in the dusty, hot air for over four decades, unanswered and haunting. Marylyn, a twenty-two-year-old woman from Nashua, New Hampshire, was a stranger in that landscape. Her life was brutally severed on August 7, 1982, her body discovered in the Red River, under a bridge on I-40, a mile southeast of a town to which she had no known ties. Her story is not just a cold case file gathering dust; it is a stark portrait of a life interrupted, a family’s enduring grief, and a stark reminder that justice delayed is a weight carried across generations.
Born on July 16, 1960, Marylyn was a daughter of the Northeast, a world away from the arid plains of Western Oklahoma. The last confirmed sighting of her alive was at a truck stop in Amarillo, Texas, the night before she was found. That image—a young woman at a crossroads of the nation, the humming, transient world of the interstate—is the last clear picture we have. Everything after descends into a darkness punctuated by violence. How did she travel the nearly 200 miles from Amarillo to that lonely stretch of I-40? Who did she meet? The highway, a ribbon of concrete connecting lives and livelihoods, became for her a pathway to a predator.
The crime scene reveals a horror that time cannot diminish. Marylyn was found unclothed, discarded in the river. The evidence suggests a savage and personal attack. She had duct tape wrapped around her face, up to the bridge of her nose, a cruel gag that also became the instrument of her asphyxiation. Her ankles were bound by the same tape, and a strip around her left wrist indicated she had been restrained or that her killer had attempted to bind her hands. She was also strangled with a ligature, a chilling redundancy of violence that speaks to a killer’s determination. The multiple contusions and abrasions on her face and body are not just clinical details; they are the silent testimony of a fierce struggle. Marylyn did not go quietly. She fought her killer for her life, scratching, kicking, and resisting with every ounce of her strength against an overwhelming and brutal force.
This is a crucial part of her story. She was not a passive victim but a young woman who confronted her murderer with courage. In those final, terrifying moments, her will to live was etched onto her own body. Yet, her fight was not enough. Her life was stolen, and her body was left under a bridge, a place meant for passing through, not for endings.
For over forty years, the case of Marylyn Theriault has remained in the ledger of the unsolved. No arrest has been made. No one has been held accountable for snuffing out her future—a future that might have held a career, a family, a lifetime of moments both ordinary and extraordinary. The solitude of that crime scene has been replaced by the solitude of a forgotten file, a tragedy known only to a dwindling circle of family, dedicated investigators, and those who stumble upon her story online.
The pain of an unsolved murder is a unique and enduring torment for a family. It is a wound that never closes, a question mark that follows them through holidays, birthdays, and anniversaries. There is no closure, no finality, only the agonizing void of the unknown. The family of Marylyn Theriault has carried this burden since 1982. They have lived with the knowledge that the person who did this to their daughter, their sister, their friend, has walked free, their secret buried, their conscience—if they have one—untroubled by the scales of justice.
But the passage of time does not have to mean the erosion of hope. In fact, it can be an ally. Alliances shift, loyalties fracture, and the heavy weight of a terrible secret can become too much for a conscience to bear, even after decades. The person who committed this crime may have confided in someone. They may have exhibited suspicious behavior in the days following August 7, 1982. They may have left a clue, a fragment of a story, that seemed insignificant at the time but now, viewed through the lens of a determined investigation, could be the key that unlocks the truth.
This is where the collective conscience of the public becomes vital. Someone, somewhere, knows something. It might be a memory of a conversation overheard, a recollection of a person boasting or acting strangely, a detail about a vehicle, or a piece of clothing. It might be a story passed down in whispers, a "skeleton in the closet" of an acquaintance or even a family member. That piece of information, no matter how small it may seem, is the thread that could unravel this entire mystery.
The Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation (OSBI) continues to seek information. Their plea is a direct line to justice. By calling 800-522-8017, a person can provide that crucial thread. They can do so anonymously, without fear of exposure or repercussion. This is not an act of betrayal; it is an act of profound courage and moral clarity. It is a stand for a young woman who was denied the chance to stand for herself.
Marylyn Teresa Theriault was more than a victim. She was a person with a past and a future that was stolen. Her case is a solemn promise that every life matters and that no one is entitled to vanish into the anonymity of a cold case file. For her, and for the family that still waits for answers, we must not look away. We must remember her name, share her story, and urge anyone with even the slightest information to come forward. The bridge on I-40 may have been the end of her journey, but it does not have to be the end of the search for truth. Justice for Marylyn is four decades overdue. It is a debt that must be paid.
#SilenceIsBetrayal #Oklahoma #Sayre #NewHampshire #Nashua #Unsolved #ColdCase #OklahomaColdCases
11/19/25
11/14/25
Domestic Violence Calls Are The Worst Calls
Domestic Violence Calls Are The Worst Calls
I spent 2.5 years in Law Enforcement. The most intense call were 'Domestic' Situations. I was sitting in the passenger seat of the patrol car. We entered a culdesack. A guy runs out of the house and the Senior Officer in the Driver seat said "Get him Duncan!" I exited the cruiser and the guy through a cat at me! I was mad! A CAT?!?! [[Kitty Kitty] I chased him down and strong armed him to the ground. I didn't wanna get dirty!!!
The Thin Blue Line in the Heart of Darkness: Why Domestic Calls Expose Our Fractured Society
To the average citizen, the world of law enforcement is often viewed through the lens of television drama: high-speed chases, dramatic shootouts, and the intellectual pursuit of cunning criminals. But for those who have actually worn the badge and carried the weight of the uniform, the reality is far different, and far more morally complex. The most dangerous, the most volatile, and the most psychologically taxing calls are not the ones that make for glamorous prime-time entertainment. They are the domestic disturbance calls. They are, as any honest officer will tell you, the worst.
The visceral account from a former officer—the call to a cul-de-sac, the frantic suspect, the surreal and jarring moment of having a cat hurled at him—is more than just a wild war story. It is a perfect, albeit bizarre, microcosm of the chaos that defines these situations. The humor in the telling, the cathartic “HAHAAAAAA,” is a classic coping mechanism, a necessary shield against the profound dysfunction and darkness that police officers are asked to confront daily. This story, and the thousands like it that never get told, reveal a deeper truth that conservatives understand: the collapse of the family unit and the erosion of personal responsibility are not abstract social theories. They are crises that land squarely on the shoulders of the first responder, who is increasingly asked to be a warrior, a therapist, a social worker, and a substitute for the civilizing institutions that are failing.
There is no more unpredictable or dangerous environment for an officer than a domestic dispute. Unlike a traffic stop or a robbery in progress, a domestic call is a pressure cooker that has been simmering for hours, days, or years. You are not walking into a crime; you are walking into the raw, unfiltered epicenter of a broken relationship. Emotions are at a volcanic peak, fueled by a history known only to the people in the room, and often exacerbated by substance abuse. As the officer’s story illustrates, the situation is inherently insane. A man throwing a family pet is an act of pure, unhinged desperation. There is no protocol for that. There is only instinct, training, and the imperative to gain control of a scene that is teetering on the edge of violence.
This is where the conservative principle of a strong, well-funded, and respected police force is not a political platitude, but a matter of life and death. Officers entering these heart-of-darkness scenarios need the best training, the clearest legal backing, and the unequivocal support of their community and political leaders. They are the thin blue line not just between order and chaos, but between life and death in the very homes where people should feel safest. The liberal narrative that often seeks to demonize police and paint them as aggressors is not just wrong; it is dangerously naive. It fails to comprehend that the officer running toward the sound of screaming, not knowing if the next thing coming at him will be a cat, a knife, or a bullet, is the only thing standing between a domestic dispute and a domestic homicide.
But the physical danger is only half the battle. The deeper, more insidious toll is
the psychological one. Officers are forced to witness the absolute underbelly of society. They see the children hiding in closets, their eyes wide with a trauma that will shape their entire lives. They see the bruised and broken victim who, out of fear, financial dependence, or a twisted sense of love, refuses to press charges or leave their abuser. This is where the conservative emphasis on personal responsibility and strong families collides with a painful reality. The state, in the form of a police officer, cannot force people to make good choices. An officer can make an arrest, but they cannot heal a broken soul or mend a shattered family. They are left to deal with the symptoms of a cultural sickness they are powerless to cure.
This leads to the frustrating cycle of futility that saps the morale of even the most dedicated officers. It is not uncommon to respond to the same address, for the same people, multiple times in a single month. Each time, the same promises are made, the same resources are offered, and the same legal motions are gone through. And yet, so often, the victim returns to the abuser. This cycle breeds a unique form of cynicism and compassion fatigue. It is the embodiment of the old adage about leading a horse to water. The state can provide the water of safety and resources, but it cannot make the victim drink. This reality underscores the conservative belief that government action is a poor substitute for individual character, strong community bonds, and the moral framework that strong families and faith institutions provide.
Furthermore, the modern expectation that police can solve these deeply rooted social ills is a catastrophic mission creep. The officer in our story was trained to “get him” and “strong arm him to the ground.” He was not trained, nor was it his role, to be a long-term couples counselor, a substance abuse specialist, or a housing advocate. The progressive push to “defund the police” and replace them with unarmed social workers is a recipe for disaster in these very situations. Sending an unarmed social worker into the volatile, weapon-rich environment of a domestic dispute is not compassionate; it is irresponsible and potentially deadly. The solution is not to replace the police, but to better support them and, more importantly, to rebuild the civic and familial structures that prevent these situations from arising in the first place.
The conservative vision for addressing this crisis is twofold. First, it demands a recommitment to supporting law enforcement—ensuring they have the resources, training, and political backing to do their difficult and dangerous job. This means supporting qualified immunity, resisting the rhetoric that vilifies them, and prosecuting crimes against officers to the fullest extent of the law. Second, and more fundamentally, it requires a cultural renewal. We must champion the two-parent family as the most stable and safest environment for children and adults alike. We must reinforce the pillars of civil society—our churches, synagogues, and community groups—that provide the moral guidance and social support that government programs cannot. We must restore an ethos of personal responsibility, where individuals are held accountable for their actions, from the abuser who chooses violence to the adult who chooses to remain in a destructive cycle.
The story that began with a thrown cat is not just an anecdote. It is a testament. It speaks to the bravery of the men and women who run toward the chaos the rest of us flee. It highlights the absurdity and danger they face as they stand on the front lines of our nation’s social decay. And it serves as a stark reminder that the answer to this crisis does not lie in a new government program or a smaller police force. The answer lies in our own homes, in our own communities, and in our own commitment to rebuilding the foundations of character, responsibility, and family that keep societies strong, and keep police calls from descending into a surreal, heartbreaking madness.
#Crime #DomesticViolence
10/26/25
ICE lodges arrest detainer for criminal illegal alien who killed 3 in California while driving 18-wheeler under the influence
ICE lodges arrest detainer for criminal illegal alien who killed 3 in California while driving 18-wheeler under the influence
Singh first entered the US in 2022 through the southern border and was RELEASED into the country under the Biden Administration
#ICE #California #Crime #ILLEGALS
9/8/25
8/14/25
.jpeg)
8/13/25
7/27/25
7/26/25
7/25/25
5/1/25
THE GEORGE FLOYD SITUATION WAS THE ULTIMATE GAS LIGHT. LOOK WHAT IT DID TO THE COUNTRY
THE GEORGE FLOYD SITUATION WAS THE ULTIMATE GAS LIGHT. LOOK WHAT IT DID TO THE COUNTRY.
America went WOKE over George Floyd. The country got GASLIT.
Look what it did to the country. Look ar how we treated each other...It was FAKE NEWS!
Title: Examining the George Floyd Case: Claims, Context, and Consequences
A viral social media post encapsulates several provocative arguments about the George Floyd case:
1. The four Minneapolis police officers should not be in prison and should instead be reinstated.
2. The “knee on the neck” restraint used on Floyd was a trained procedure.
3. Floyd’s COVID-19 diagnosis and fentanyl use—not police actions—caused his death.
The Officers’ Actions: Training, Policy, and Accountability
George Floyd’s Health and Toxicology Report
The Counterfeit Bill and Police Response
Aftermath: Protests, Politics, and “Regime Change” Rhetoric
The Danger of “Gaslighting” Narratives
Conclusion: Truth, Justice, and Moving Forward
#Crime #GeorgeFloyd #Minneapolis #DerekChauvin
WATCH 'THE FALL OF MINNEAPOLIS HERE AND SEE WHAT REALLY HAPPENED
4/27/25
The Upside Down Situation of The Arrest of a Milwaukee Judge
OPINION/COMMENTARY
The Upside Down Situation of The Arrest of a Milwaukee Judge
Help me understand this situation. A Judge in Milwaukee was arrested for trying to help an ILLEGAL, who beat a Woman, sneak out of the Jury exit to avoid arrest by I.C.E.
The Milwaukee Mayor gave a press conference about the arrest. He and every other Democrat is against the arrest. He was asked if he had spoken to the Domestic Violence Victim. He said he had not, and in the same sentence he basically said 'I'm not worried about that right now'. He kept using the phrase "Less Safe", "Less Safe", "Less Safe". In other words he is saying that if a member of the legal system is arrested it will discourage others from participating in the legal system. That is the sentiment of all Democrats. Normal people feel removing an ILLEGAL who commits DOMESTIC VIOLENCE from the country, and arresting the Judge who tries to help him avoid arrest make the community MORE SAFE.
DEMOCRATS do NOT care about YOU unless they can use YOU as a PAWN. If you are a Woman and you are raped, beaten, robbed, killes, or attacked by an ILLEGAL YOU are not the priority. They probably, as we have seen, won't even mention YOUR NAME. And if you ask them to YOU are a RACIST. or in my case, I'm a BIGOT.
For those of you who still wonder why a Black Man won't vote for any Democrat on any level, I try to give you at least ONE(1) reason ... EVERY FREAKING DAY.
DEFUNDING THE POLICE MAKES THE COMMUNITY "LESS SAFE". However, to the average Democrat, having less Police, more DEMOCRAT, and crooked Judges makes the community MORE SAFE. HUH?!?!
#Judge #Milwaukee #Arrest #Migration #Illegal
What Is Meant By and The Importance of "Elements of a Crime" In Regards to Criminal law and Getting a Conviction In a Court of Law?
What Is Meant By and The Importance of "Elements of a Crime" In Regards to Criminal law and Getting a Conviction In a Court of Law?
Understanding the "Elements of a Crime" in Criminal Law and Their Importance in Securing a Conviction
Introduction
In criminal law, the concept of the "elements of a crime" is fundamental to determining whether an individual can be convicted of an offense. These elements serve as the building blocks that the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt to secure a conviction. Without establishing each required element, a defendant cannot be found guilty under the law.
This article explores:
1. What are the elements of a crime?
2. The key components: 'Actus Reus' and Mens Rea
3. Additional elements: Causation and Concurrence
4. The role of elements in securing a conviction
5. Why understanding these elements is crucial for justice
By the end, readers will have a clear understanding of how these principles shape criminal trials and ensure fairness in legal proceedings.
1. What Are the Elements of a Crime?
The "elements of a crime" refer to the specific factors that must be proven to establish criminal liability. Different crimes have different elements, but most offenses require:
- Actus Reus (the guilty act)
- Mens Rea (the guilty mind)
- Causation (a link between the act and the harm)
- Concurrence (the mental state and act occurring together)
If the prosecution fails to prove any one of these elements, the defendant should be acquitted.
2. The Key Components: 'Actus Reus' and Mens Rea
A. 'Actus Reus' – The Guilty Act
'Actus reus' refers to the physical act (or omission) that constitutes a crime. It must be voluntary—if someone commits an act under duress or while sleepwalking, they may lack 'actus reus'.
Examples:
- Theft: Physically taking someone else’s property.
- Murder: The act of killing another person.
- Omission (failure to act): A lifeguard failing to save a drowning person when they had a duty to act.
B. 'Mens Rea' – The Guilty Mind
'Mens rea' refers to the defendant’s mental state—their intent or recklessness when committing the crime. Different crimes require different levels of intent:
Level of Mens Rea Definition Example
Purposeful (Intentional) Defendant deliberately committed the act. Premeditated murder.
Knowing Defendant knew their actions would cause harm. | Selling drugs while aware they could kill.
Reckless Defendant disregarded a substantial risk. Speeding through a crowded area.
Negligent Defendant failed to meet a reasonable standard of care. A doctor ignoring safety protocols.
Some offenses (like statutory rape or traffic violations) are strict liability crimes, meaning 'mens rea' is not required—only the act itself matters.
3. Additional Elements: Causation and Concurrence
A. Causation
The prosecution must prove that the defendant’s actions directly caused the criminal harm. Two types of causation exist:
1. Factual Cause ("But-For" Test)
- "But for the defendant’s actions, would the harm have occurred?"
- Example: If a person shoots another, but-for the shooting, the victim would not have died.
2. Proximate Cause (Legal Cause)
- The harm must be a foreseeable result of the defendant’s actions.
- Example: If a drunk driver hits a pedestrian, the death is foreseeable.
Breaking the Chain of Causation:
If an intervening act (e.g., medical malpractice after an assault) breaks the chain, the defendant may not be liable for the final harm.
B. Concurrence
The 'mens rea' and 'actus reus' must occur together. For example:
- A person who plans to kill someone (intent) but later accidentally hits them with their car (no intent at the time) may not be guilty of murder because the intent and act did not coincide.
4. The Role of Elements in Securing a Conviction
For a conviction, the prosecution must prove every element beyond a reasonable doubt. If even one element is missing, the defendant should be acquitted.
Case Example: People v. O.J. Simpson (1995)
- Prosecutors failed to establish 'actus reus' (DNA evidence was contested) and 'mens rea' (motive was argued but not conclusively proven).
- The jury had reasonable doubt, leading to an acquittal.
How Defense Attorneys Challenge Elements
- No 'Actus Reus': Argue the defendant didn’t commit the act (e.g., alibi evidence).
- No 'Mens Rea': Claim lack of intent (e.g., accidental shooting).
- No Causation: Argue an intervening cause broke the chain.
5. Why Understanding These Elements is Crucial for Justice
A. Prevents Wrongful Convictions
Requiring proof of all elements ensures that only those who truly commit crimes are punished.
B. Ensures Fair Trials
Judges and juries must carefully assess whether each element is met before convicting someone.
C. Guides Lawmakers in Drafting Laws
Clear elements help legislators define crimes precisely, avoiding vague or overly broad laws.
D. Helps Defense Strategies
Understanding these elements allows defense attorneys to identify weaknesses in the prosecution’s case.
Conclusion
The "elements of a crime" are the foundation of criminal law, ensuring that convictions are based on solid evidence rather than assumptions. By requiring proof of 'actus reus', 'mens rea', causation, and concurrence, the legal system maintains fairness and accuracy.
For prosecutors, mastering these elements is essential to securing convictions. For defense attorneys, challenging them can mean the difference between acquittal and wrongful punishment. Ultimately, these principles uphold justice by ensuring that only the truly guilty are held accountable.
Final Thought:
"It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer." – William Blackstone
This principle underscores why proving every element beyond a reasonable doubt is not just a legal formality—it is a moral necessity.
#crime #criminaljustice #elementsofacrime
4/18/25
"Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law"
"Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law":
I know the investigation isn't over in the Texas stabbing death. I understand it was just a kid that allegedly committed the homicide. However, when he was arrested he said "I did it." Then, a Police officer was taking him to the jail/station, the kid asked the officer "Can I use Self Defense?"
African American Parents talk about giving their kids 'The Talk' in regards behavior when coming in contact with the Police. I learned from Law Enforcement that 'if you can keep someone talking long enough the truth will come out'.
Do NOT talk if you don't need to.
"Anything You Say Can and Will Be Used Against You": The Power of Silence in Legal Encounters
The Miranda warning is a staple of American criminal justice: "You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law." Yet, despite its ubiquity in police procedurals and crime dramas, many people fail to grasp the full weight of these words—often to their own detriment.
A recent case in Texas, where a young suspect allegedly confessed to a stabbing homicide by blurting out "I did it," followed by a later question to an officer ("Can I use self-defense?"), highlights a critical reality: what you say during an arrest or investigation can make or break your case. This incident, along with the broader conversations around "The Talk" that African American parents give their children about police interactions, underscores a fundamental legal truth: silence is often the safest strategy.
The Texas Case: A Cautionary Tale
Details surrounding the Texas stabbing death remain under investigation, but one thing is already clear: the suspect’s words may have severely compromised his legal position. His immediate admission—"I did it"—could be used as direct evidence of guilt. Later, his question about self-defense suggests he may have been attempting to justify his actions, but by then, the damage was likely already done.
Why? Because spontaneous statements made under stress are rarely strategic. Law enforcement officers are trained to let suspects talk, knowing that the more someone speaks, the more likely they are to say something incriminating. As the old law enforcement adage goes: "If you can keep someone talking long enough, the truth will come out."
In this case, the suspect’s words may have:
-Waived his right to remain silent without legal counsel present.
-Undermined a potential self-defense claim by making an outright admission before establishing context.
-Given prosecutors ammunition to argue premeditation or lack of remorse.
Had he remained silent and waited for an attorney, his legal team might have been able to construct a stronger defense—whether based on self-defense, diminished capacity, or other factors.
"The Talk": Why Silence is Survival
For many African American families, "The Talk" is a necessary rite of passage—a survival guide for navigating encounters with law enforcement. Unlike generic parental advice about respecting authority, "The Talk" emphasizes:
-Keeping hands visible to avoid appearing threatening.
- Remaining calm even in the face of aggression.
- Speaking minimally, if at all.
This advice isn’t rooted in disrespect for law enforcement but in a harsh reality: words can be twisted, and innocent statements can be misconstrued. The legal system does not always favor the accused, especially when biases, pressure, or fear come into play.
Studies have shown that:
- False confessions are a leading cause of wrongful convictions.
- Minorities are disproportionately affected by coercive interrogation tactics.
- Even innocent explanations can be used to imply guilt (e.g., "Why were you in that neighborhood?").
In this context, silence isn’t just a legal right—it’s a shield.
The Psychology of Confession: Why People Keep Talking
Despite knowing their rights, many people still talk themselves into trouble. Why?
1. Fear and Intimidation – Police interrogations are designed to be stressful, making people desperate to explain themselves.
2. Misplaced Trust – Some believe that if they’re innocent, cooperating fully will help. But officers are not there to exonerate—they’re there to gather evidence.
3. The Myth of Transparency – People assume their honesty will be obvious, but words can be taken out of context or used selectively in court.
Even the Texas suspect’s question about self-defense demonstrates this: he may have thought he was clarifying his actions, but legally, he was potentially handing prosecutors a way to challenge his narrative later.
Legal Strategy: When to Speak (and When Not To)
The Fifth Amendment exists for a reason. While there are rare instances where speaking might help (e.g., providing an alibi to stop an arrest), the general rule is:
DO NOT TALK IF YOU DON’T NEED TO.
Instead:
1. Politely invoke your right to remain silent. Say, "I am choosing to remain silent and would like an attorney."
2. Do not argue, explain, or justify. Anything beyond requesting a lawyer can be risky.
3. Let your attorney do the talking. A lawyer can frame statements in a way that protects your rights.
Conclusion: The Power of Silence
The Texas case is a stark reminder that the justice system is adversarial—what you say will be used against you. Whether innocent or guilty, the safest course is often to say nothing until legal counsel is present.
As "The Talk" teaches, survival in the legal system isn’t just about knowing your rights—it’s about having the discipline to use them. In a world where words can become weapons, silence is the ultimate defense.
#Texas #Stabbing #KarmeloAnthony #Crime #Homocide
2/27/25
2/14/25
Richard Tabler Final Words Before Texas Execution
WOW!!! Ya Gotta Read This!
Richard Tabler Final Words Before Texas Execution
#Texas #DeathPenalty
2/12/25
2/7/25
2/6/25
2/5/25
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)