Loading video...
Video Failed to Load
๐๐ฎ๐ฌ๐ญ๐ข๐๐ ๐๐จ๐ฒ๐'๐ฌ ๐๐๐๐ญ๐ก: ๐๐ฎ๐๐ข๐๐ข๐๐ซ๐ฒ'๐ฌ ๐๐ก๐๐ฆ๐๐๐ฎ๐ฅ ๐๐จ๐ฏ๐๐ซ-๐๐ฉ! The 2014 death of Judge Brijgopal Harkishan Loya screams Foul Play and Judicial WhitewashโHere's the Damning Breakdown from The Caravan's Bombshell Report: ๐. ๐๐ก๐๐๐ฒ ๐๐ข๐ซ๐๐ฎ๐ฆ๐ฌ๐ญ๐๐ง๐๐๐ฌ: Loya, 48, "died" of a heart attack in Nagpur at a wedding. Last chat with wife at 11... show more
21,706 views โข 10 months ago โขvia X (Twitter)
0 Comments
No comments available
Comments from the original post will appear here
![Trooper John Fanning, one of Michael Proctorโs supervisors at the NCDAO State Police Detective Unit (SPDU), reportedly โsupervisedโ the jury at the #KarenReadTrial. As if this conflict alone wasnโt concerning, the fact that Fanning was later under an inconclusive internal investigation by the MSP for โwhether [he] failed to adequately supervise by not taking appropriate action after Trooper Proctor sent inappropriate texts to a group of subordinate members, specifically, if he took any corrective action to address the unprofessionalism and inappropriateness of Trooper Proctor's textsโโthereby making him a potential witness & demonstrating his clear conflict, is incredibly concerning. In the full sit down interview w/ #KarenRead & Attorney Alan Jackson, Ted Daniel asks them about the potential jury tampering that occurred at the first trialโnotably with the ultra curious last minute dismissal of 3 jurors, whose body language, reactions/expressions & outward demeanor appeared favorable to the defense, in addition to the โsupervisionโ of the jury by one of Michael Proctorโs bosses, NCDAO SPDU Trooper John Fanning. It would be dishonest to try to claim that Trooper Fanning had no stake in the outcome of the Karen Read trial. Arguably, anyone with ties to the NCDAO, its SPDU or the Canton Police Departmentโand notably those with close ties to Michael Proctor, like his own supervisor, have clear conflicts of interest in this case. As you may recall, Trooper John Fanning was the lead investigator in the Sandra Birchmore case where he and his investigators concluded that Birchmore committed suicide while allegedly pregnant with a fellow Police Officer, Matthew Farwellโs baby, and wasnโt the obvious victim of murder by that same Officer who also raped and groomed her from a young age as revealed by 30k+ text messages inexplicably โoverlookedโ by Trooper Nicholas Guarino & Fanning. The Feds investigated that โinvestigationโ too and have since indicted Matthew Farwell in Sandra Birchmoreโs murder. Additionally, Trooper Fanning was in one of Michael Proctorโs abhorrent group text message threads where he disparaged Karen Read. Fanning was subsequently internally investigated by MSP for this, and his failure to properly โsuperviseโ Trooper Proctorโinteresting that such a person would be chosen to โsuperviseโ the jury. In a statement from the State Police, they said: โThe Departmentโs internal affairs investigation determined that there was insufficient evidence to prove or disprove the allegation that Lieutenant Fanning violated rules and regulations by failing to uphold the responsibilities of a supervisory member. This allegation has been classified as unfounded.โ Frankly, given the circumstances of this case, it would be concerning if any member of the State Police oversaw and supervised the jury. Why was ANY member of the State Police supervising the jury? Has anyone ever heard of this beforeโPolice Officers from the same agency that investigated, testified against & was a part of the prosecution against a defendant having one of their personnel in charge of and in direct control of the jury? This canโt possibly be a standard practice due to the obvious existing conflict, no? Plus, were it standard protocol, then why wasnโt the defense made aware of this fact until 10 minutes before making closing argument, after a nearly 10 week long trial? โโโ Something majorly stinks about this, and perhaps it sheds some light on something peculiar that one of the deliberating jurors, who was recently interviewed by Aidan Kearney, kept saying in regard to the juryโs deliberative process. Specifically, something that stood out to me from juror Ronโs interview was his repeated use and references of the other jurorsโ use of the term โdistractorsโ to qualify or describe the abundant evidence representing โreasonable doubtโ brought out by the defense at trial. โDistractors.โ Itโs somewhat of a novel term, especially in this context, and is obviously antithetical to a juryโs duty to assess a case based on the proof beyond a reasonable doubt standard, which is inherently intertwined with an assessment of the existence of, or lack thereof, reasonable doubt. There was no evidence or instructions from the court that came out at trial directing jurors to view defense evidence or ARCCA experts, for instance, as โdistractors,โ and the jury is very specifically instructed not to view/consume/bring any outside information into their deliberations. In other words, if theyโre unsure who the ARCCA experts were there on behalf of (the Feds), theyโre specifically told not to โfill in the blankโ with information thatโs not there, or evidence that didnโt come in at trial. So where did the informationโthis use of the term โdistractorsโ come from? Who fed this term and this concept to the jury? The reason why it seems like it was โfedโ to the jury is because it goes against everything the court, Judge Beverly Cannone, instructed them on. So, what prompted the whole โdistractorsโ concept to taint the jurorsโ minds and deliberations? โโโ What immediately came to mind was the jury tampering by court clerk Becky Hill in the Alex Murdaugh murder trial. In that case, according to Murdaughโs attorneys, Ms. Hill โinvented a story about a Facebook post to remove a juror she believed might not vote guiltyโ. Judge Clifton Newman, who oversaw the murder trial, removed the female juror from the panel. According to the Murdaugh defense motion, Ms. Hill had gone to Judge Newman โ the day after Murdaugh testified, not long before closing arguments โ claiming that she had seen a post in the local Facebook group โWalterboro Word of Mouthโ from the jurorโs former husband, Tim Stone. The post purportedly claimed that the juror was drinking with her ex-husband and, when she became drunk, she expressed her views on whether Murdaugh was innocent or guilty. A follow-up post from an account called Timothy Stone apologised for the post saying that he was driven by โSatanโ. Murdaughโs attorneys claimed that the Mr. Stone behind the Facebook posts was actually a random Georgia man who was ranting about his wifeโs aunt โ and has no connection to the case. Additionally, information from jurors had come to the defenseโs attention about inappropriate comments supposedly made to them by Ms. Hill while she was โsupervisingโ themโthe same role as โsupervisorโ that Trooper John Fanning allegedly played in the Karen Read trial. In Murdaughโs case, the jurors were *actually* brought back into the court and were called to the stand one by one and questioned about potential comments that may have tainted their verdict. A female juror, identified only as juror Z, said that Ms. Hill had told some of the jurors to โwatch [Murdaugh] closely.โ โTo me, it felt like ... she made it feel like he was already guilty,โ juror Z said. A separate juror, Juror E, said that he heard Ms. Hill say โwatch [Murdaughโs] body languageโ, but claimed that this did not affect his decision. โโโ There were reports, at the time of the dismissal of the 3 defense-favorable jurors at Karen Readโs trial, that right before closing arguments, Trooper Fanning had reported the information responsible for dismissing these jurors to Judge Cannone. Among that information was reportedly a story about one of those jurors, claiming theyโd been overheard discussing the case while drinking at a bar (or something to that effect)โa story that sounded highly suspicious at the time, particularly given the fact that Trooper Fanning had allegedly had that information weeks before, but never reported it to the court. The similarity in Becky Hill and John Fanningโs โstoriesโ leading to the dismissal of defense-favorable jurors is rather uncanny. โโโ Is it not problematic to have individualsโwith conflicts of interest, who are also potential witnesses, and who seemingly have a vested interest in the outcome of the trialโbe in charge of overseeing and supervising the jury? Iโve attached the referenced MSP Internal Investigative Report for Trooper Fanning to this post (attached in the comments below). Whatโs troubling is that, despite acknowledging in their report that โthese allegations came to light on June 10, 2024, during the trial,โ they didnโt immediately initiate an internal investigation, but instead waited until AFTER the trial ended, July 3, 2024, to launch their internal investigation, almost as if they were planning on not initiating an investigation had Karen Read been convicted, because apparently in that case the misconduct wouldโve been justifiedโฆ or something? It should also be noted that this same practice was employed for most, if not all, of the other Police Officers in this case, whose misconduct was exposed by the defense throughout the prosecutionโs case at trialโwhereby, despite admissions and the existence of evidence of their misconduct, the MSP, NCDAO and Canton PD seemingly did everything they could to avoid initiating any investigations or holding their officers accountable for their misconduct until after the trial endedโwhen they could no longer justify not doing anything. It makes you wonder: Had Karen Read been convicted, do you think theyโd (the MSP, NCDAO or CPD) ever launch any internal investigations into the misconduct of their officers, as evidenced at trial, weeks before? โโโ It should be mentioned that in the Sandra Birchmore case, which Trooper Fanning led the investigation of, despite the Feds spoon feeding the State Police & NCDAO (DA Michael Morrisseyโs Office) overwhelming evidence + probable cause, in addition to punting the ball back to the state to do the right thing and charge Farwell with murderโa state level charge, theyโve refused to take any action to this day. In fact, not only has it now been nearly 6 months since the Feds apprehended & indicted Farwell, but the NCDAO, Fanning and the State Police, aside from taking no action, have made no statements and are still of the official position that Sandra Birchmore killed herself. To try to save face, the NCDAO, through its former spokesperson David Traub, tried to create the impression that the DAโs Office had been long working in collaboration with the Feds to secure an arrest in the Sandra Birchmore case, claiming that โtwo of [the NCDAO SPDUโs] detectives were present at the command post ... while federal authorities were attempting to take Matthew Farwell into custodyโโwhatever that means. This, of course, is patently absurd because the DAโs Office and State Police couldโve โsecured an arrestโ years agoโnobody was stopping them, but instead they framed Sandra Birchmore for her own murder. Spokesperson Traub then had the gall to say that โmuch of the information that they [federal authorities] built on originated with our investigation, including the collection of thousands of text messages.โ (See a collection of statements from the NCDAO on the Birchmore case from reporting over the years, attached in comments below). While the Feds might be somewhat playing along with this narrative, donโt be fooled. Perhaps itโs to appease the very individuals who theyโre investigating for the supposed coverup of Sandra Birchmoreโs murder. Why? If the Feds had actually been collaborating with the State Police investigators from the NCDAO who investigated Sandraโs death, then at the Fedsโ press conference announcing Farewellโs indictment, U.S. Attorney (at the time) Joshua Levy wouldnโt have feigned ignorance when asked who the lead investigator was on the case before his agency got involved (see clip 3 attached). Had the Feds actually been *collaborating* with the State Police & the DAโs Office, John Fanningโs name wouldโve been the first thing uttered out of Josh Levyโs mouth. On a side note: I think this is very telling. Does it mean the U.S. Attorneyโs Office is investigating Fanning? Who knows. But one thingโs for sure: Josh Levy 100% knew who the State Police lead investigator was and he deliberately avoided saying it. This observation is reflected in FBI Special Agent Chenee Castruitaโs 45-page long probable cause affidavit for the arrest of Matthew Farwell, which notably contains ZERO references whatsoever to John Fanning, or any of the other involved State Police investigators for that matter. Thatโs telling. If there was so much โcollaboration,โ like DA Michael Morrisseyโs Office wants the public to think, then not only would USA Josh Levy have had, at the very least, Trooper Fanning up there side-by-side with him at that press conference, but he wouldโve acknowledged him by name in his press conference. Why hasnโt the NCDAO charged disgraced former Stoughton cop Matthew Farwell with murder? Is it yet another case of โpinning it on the girlโ to cover up for fellow Police Officersโ crimes? โโโ Of note, Trooper Fanning grew up in Stoughton, graduating from Stoughton High School in 1998, the same year that Matthew and his twin brother Williamโwho also grew up in Stoughtonโthen 12 years old, became participants in the Stoughton police youth program. As Karen Read points out in the interview with Ted Daniels: โThere were familiarities among players that never shouldโve happened. Thereโs a sleeve of homicide in the Norfolk DAโs office, as there is in the other counties of Massachusetts. And yet, the person assigned to investigate this caseโostensibly investigate this caseโlives a mile down the street from the crime scene.โ (See clip 4 attached). Why is it that when thereโs seemingly crimesโin this case murders, involving cops, that the NCDAO SPDU appears to send the most conflicted Trooper with the closest ties to that cop/those cops? In Officer John OโKeefeโs murder, the Trooper that lives down the street from 34 Fairview and is โsecond familyโ with the Alberts is obviously the last person who shouldโve ever responded to that case, yet he was the lead investigator. Given Trooper John Fanningโs close ties to Stoughton, isnโt it interesting that heโs the one who was the lead investigator of Sandra Birchmoreโs deathโa murder that allegedly involved a former Stoughton cop? What say you?](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1891692661267939807/ext_tw_video_thumb/1891692119082913792/pu/img/XXG39DUZUjLDvF8S.jpg)
