NP Rank:
Gang Stalkers on Former VP Candidate John Edward's Jury Trial?
Gang Stalkers on the Edward's Jury?
The jury's behavior drew attention Thursday when the four alternates all wore canary-yellow shirts. On Friday, they all wore bright red shirts, as did two of the 12 jurors deliberating the case.
Kieran J. Shanahan, a former federal prosecutor who has attended nearly every day of the trial, said he has never seen such unusual behavior as the color-coordinated clothing
"It's seems harmless when the alternates are doing it, but if the jurors are doing it, that's a concern," said Shanahan, now a Raleigh defense attorney. "This case has enough issues already."
Full article:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/26/john-edwards-trial-jurors_n_1547691.html
What are the odds that all four alternate jurors randomly wore canary yellow shirts one day, and then bright red shirts the next. Lets start with the unusual colors. On a crowded bus one might expect one passenger to be wearing an off color like canary yellow or bright red. A cop could probably identify a person on a crowded bus with say fifty passengers with just the description of that shirt color. So we will say it is a one in fifty (1/50) chance for a single incidence.
The thing about patterns is that they multiplicative. So if you toss a fair coin once you have a 1/2 chance of heads, twice 1/4, thrice 1/8, etc. Here, [1/50 x 4] x [1/50 x 4] gives you 0.0000000000000001 or one quadrillion. Now, some gang stalking Deniers who cyber-patrol this site will tell you it is less, but ask someone with a math background. This can not be a coincidence.
So what is really happening?
The answer is a gang stalking technique called intentional psychological sensitization. One of the best definitions of sensitization is found below:
Sensitization
This is getting targets sensitive to an everyday stimuli. Eg. Colors, patterns or everyday actions. Eg. Red, stripes, pens, whistles, loud coughing, clapping, waves, keys jingling.
Eg. Joe will be mobbed at work and as part of that daily mobbing his coworkers will loudly cough at him every time they harass him by calling him names like loser, worthless, lame, demented. They will slander him and have others as they are slandering him show disgust by glaring and coughing at him.
Out in public they will follow him loudly and obnoxiously coughing at him. When he goes to stores they will get others to do the same. After months or years of this, Joe has become sensitive to this stimuli and it can be used to harass him without the names and the glaring looks. The association has been formed because of all the other harassment.
Source: http://whosarat.websitetoolbox.com/post?id=1487064
These aberrations are the normality in the twisted world of gang stalking. The same former federal prosecutor named above also noted a juror being flirtatious with Edwards from the jury box to the extent that it was unlike anything she had seen in her legal career.
So now gang stalking has invaded the Federal legal system, and it seems Edwards can expect a legal mockery of a trial. If Edward's legal team do not ask for a mistrial, on these facts, then they are setting him up for the conviction.
Most Recommended Comment
Crowd Power
Recommendations (4)

Anonymous users (4)

Most RecentMost Recommended Comments (97)
- Sign In or Join to post comments
Master Mind (not verified)at 18:55 on May 26th, 2012
Not gang stalking as it seemed to Kieran J. Shanahan, a former federal prosecutor, an eye witness, that the behavior was pro Edwards which included overtly flirtatious behavior of smiles and winks from those wearing the similar colored clothing. Much like cheerleaders in uniform. Their behavior would indeed seemingly support a desire to create the climate for a mistrial and have Edwards get off scot free.
at 19:20 on May 26th, 2012
Their behavior would indeed seemingly support a desire to create the climate for a mistrial and have Edwards get off scot free.
Not necessarily scott free. The government can still bring charges after a mistrial. A mistrial may give him leverage for a low-end plea.
at 12:26 on May 27th, 2012
This story brings to mind one of my first in-person visits to the Philadelphia field office of the FBI, back in 2007 or 2008, as I recall. While I was waiting in the lobby, a man in a dayglo-green T-shirt emerged from the back office, crossed the lobby and exited down the hall. I had been stalked repeatedly in days prior by persons wearing the same color, and I clearly was "sensitized" to this strange performance at the FBI field office. Interestingly, I could not help but notice after another in-person pleading to the Philadelphia FBI, shortly after Barack Obama was elected president, that his picture was missing from the spot next to a picture of VP Joe Biden (whose picture apparently was not "disappeared"). The Philadelphia field office shortly thereafter named a new "special agent in charge" (SAC), and subsequent in-person pleadings went better -- but to this day, I have seen no evidence that the office has responded to my serial pleas for a hate crimes investigation into what has happened to this former mainstream media journalist over the past eight years (and counting). More at http://NowPublic.com/scrivener and at http://VicLivingston.blogspot.com -- that is, is you don't get a "website not available" message, as apparently is happening to many would-be readers of mine.... an indication of a massive cover-up of serial human and civil rights violations by persons who fear truthful reporting.
- Sign In or Join to post comments
observing thread (not verified)at 20:45 on May 26th, 2012
I agree with the thinking here and add that it might be that the liberal machine is looking for a complete wash on any sentence and need a "history" in the judicial environment that while doesn't outright condone Edwards behavior gives reason to have a conviction that does not levy any real punitive fines or time behind bars. Edwards gets his slap on the wrist and everyone goes home believing justice has been served. The created "judicial environment" become the lasting story with the MSM. Writing articles about bra-less women swooning over the pews showing both Edwards and Obama in photo-shopped Elvis pics with crowds of women tearing at their cloths sobbing in ecstasy. Obama has a election to win. [ At any cost ] , and Obama has enough questions being asked about his 2008 election campaign and connections relating to both financial contributions and his relations to suspect persons.
- Sign In or Join to post comments
Master Mind (not verified)at 08:09 on May 27th, 2012
I know that I was staggered when reading about the lengths Obama has gone too, inserting himself and his decisions into the history of American Presidential politics. Obama has gone back as far as Pres. Coolidge and amended each of the Presidents biographies by inserting a comparative Obama passage. Here is an example from Coolidge's amended bio. “On Feb. 22, 1924 Calvin Coolidge became the first president to make a public radio address to the American people. President Coolidge later helped create the Federal Radio Commission, which has now evolved to become the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). President Obama became the first president to hold virtual gatherings and town halls using Twitter, Facebook, Google+, LinkedIn, etc,” And from FDR's amended bio, “On August 14, 1935, President Roosevelt signed the Social Security Act. Today the Obama Administration continues to protect seniors and ensure Social Security will be there for future generations.” At the bottom of Reagan’s biography, for instance, the White House tried to plug the “Buffett Rule.” Did you know, it asks, that “In a June 28, 1985 speech Reagan called for a fairer tax code, one where a multi-millionaire did not have a lower tax rate than his secretary. Today, President Obama is calling for the same with the Buffett Rule.”
at 21:04 on May 26th, 2012
That's funny you have this bizarre projection about the ODDS of this then proceed to talk about absolutes like math.
Why don't you use a real figure like a million times complete bull s h i t still equals complete bull s h i t?
No duh it's no accident they all wore the same colored shirts. Surely they planned to do it. Just as I and a half dozen other boys agreed in sixth grade to wear white T shirts, Levis 501s, and suede wallabees the next day in school. We were gangstalking and didn't know it I guess.
Once again Keith Labella is here "educating" people about something that is allegedly happening to someone else but not HIM. The end result can only cause people to freak themselves out over nothing and the rational public to laugh with contempt at anyone saying this happens to them.
But I'm starting to come around to this thing asociated in some form to "COINTELPRO", but not in the way Peacefrog, this close ally of the late Ted Gunderson who filed the document he and Ted authored in Federal Court and lied to protect its feigned legitimacy, would like you to know.
http://www.fluscam.com/CIA_FBI_COINTELPRO.html
That's not my site and I have no affiliation with it, but WOW if only 10% of it is true....
http://my.nowpublic.com/world/gang-stalking-ret-fbi-chief-swears-rogue-military-fbi-program
http://my.nowpublic.com/world/gang-stalking-former-fbi-division-chief-speaks-out
I guess we should not be surprised at the lengths he went to to protect his lord and master and fellow disciple of the loyal order of Beelzabubb! All joking aside he viciously attacked a number of people questioning Gunderson's motives and continues to watch over the spectre of evil even after his death.
at 05:27 on May 27th, 2012
Batvette,
I guess in your illogical, disturbed mind you can equate the behavior of you and your friends in grammar school with jury misconduct that affects the legitimacy of the Federal criminal Court system. That makes sense for you.
- Sign In or Join to post comments
commenting anonymously (not verified)at 09:10 on May 27th, 2012
As the author of the article correctly notes, this is about "jury misconduct that affects the legitimacy of the Federal criminal Court system." It's not a joking matter and one must question the intelligence and/or motives of anyone who would trivialize or excuse it.
at 01:47 on May 28th, 2012
Oh Really? Then why is he callling this "gang stalking"??
It serves only to confuse and mislead. It's not clear that anything at all is going on here but four jurors trying to get a little attention being cute wearing the same clothes.
Just as we were doing in sixth grade.
Note the number of sock puppet posts above and below almost all from the same disturbed individual appearing as multiple individuals- trying desperately to both discredit the person of anyone critical of disinformation as well as provide confusing dialogue to divert the issues.
All part of the Peacefrog Disinformation Machine.
Get a life or get back on your meds.
- Sign In or Join to post comments
An observer (not verified)at 05:11 on May 28th, 2012
batvette wrote: "four jurors trying to get a little attention being cute wearing the same clothes. Just as we were doing in sixth grade." en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juror%27s_oath Juror's take an oath. They are supposed to be adults, not 6th graders. This is a federal trial, not a playground for kids.
- Sign In or Join to post comments
Another observer (not verified)at 05:56 on May 28th, 2012
Written by "batvette" --- "All part of the Peacefrog Disinformation Machine. Get a life or get back on your meds." Some might suggest that you go outside and play with your friends now. This is a big boy's blog. Serious topic, serious discussion.
at 12:52 on May 28th, 2012
^^^^^^^^^^ my allegations confirmed in absolution.
Peacefrog and/or an ally relentlessly trolling his articles, pretending to be a number of individuals, discrediting critics of his disinformation stream. Sock puppet activity like this is not tolerated in most internet forums, and is treated with contempt by legitimate users.
- Sign In or Join to post comments
Says it all (not verified)at 19:18 on May 28th, 2012
batvette on NowPublic at 04:22 on November 15th, 2011 said "I'll discredit one life story at a time if need be. Where is yours?" The article How Widespread is Gang Stalking, page 3 of the closed comments thread.Continue reading at NowPublic.com: How Widespread Is Gang Stalking? | NowPublic News Coverage, Page 3 my.nowpublic.com/world/how-widespread-gang-stalking#ixzz1vyiyGhQi
at 05:27 on May 28th, 2012
I'm calling it gang stalking because they are using the technique of sensitization that is well known to legitimate gang stalking targets. This behavior seems bizarre to those unaware of gang stalking, presumably the judge and attorneys in the case. To those who have experienced gang stalking, this behavior of color coordination is immediately recognizable by their experience with anchoring, psychological sensitization, etc. In fact, the color bright, red has a specific association to sensitizing targets.
at 12:40 on May 28th, 2012
I'm calling it gang stalking because they are using the technique of sensitization that is well known to legitimate gang stalking targets.
No, it is something that people are "educated" by pretenders like you to believe is part of a psychological conspiracy to ruin them. You have never documented any such event as it allegedly happened to you and thus without any first hand knowledge of anything like this are merely engaged in disseminating disinformation hoping to perpetuate a group delusion, obfuscating any real crimes that may be happening and assisting the program by multiplying its power. You're only terrorizing people further by making people believe the program is everywhere doing everything.
You imply I am the enemy for "minimizing gang stalking" yet what you do is exactly what the program must do to exact control and ruin people- convince them they are powerless and its abilities are limitless. Since you cannot personally endorse ANY of the "tactics" you are providing as disinformation and rely on vague claims of others you never personally identify, it is ridiculous to believe you are anything BUT a pretender. A pretender with an agenda which terrorizes targets, misleads them in multiple directions with conflicting claims about who is responsible, and recruits the mentally ill to join real targets and adopt their stories as their own.
All the while never describing how these crimes are experienced by you.
This screams agent provocateur and if this IS COINTELPRO related, use of such tactics is a cornerstone of that program.
I would advise legitimate targets who are not merely interested in validating delusions for the sake of their vanity to only ally with other targeted individuals who are candid about their personal experiences and whose activism has consisted of describing actual crimes that happened to them and not finding things as happened to others and calling them their own.
at 13:25 on May 28th, 2012
Batvette writes:
I would advise legitimate targets who are not merely interested in validating delusions for the sake of their vanity to only ally with other targeted individuals who are candid about their personal experiences and whose activism has consisted of describing actual crimes that happened to them and not finding things as happened to others and calling them their own.
English Translation: Personalize this situation as if the only thing that matters is your own experience, when it is clearly a phenomenon being experienced by countless thousands of Americans in every state, city and town in the country. By doing this, I am assured that no one will listen to you, and you will be chasing your own tail, since it is clear to ALL TARGETS that the official government line is to ignore you. Therefore, I am persuading you to engage in fruitless "activism". BTW, I can't be too careful about it, so when you do give your personal account, I will honor my word as a sociopath, and discredit each story "one by one".
- Sign In or Join to post comments
Says it all (not verified)at 19:19 on May 28th, 2012
batvette on NowPublic at 04:22 on November 15th, 2011 said "I'll discredit one life story at a time if need be. Where is yours?" The article How Widespread is Gang Stalking, page 3 of the closed comments thread.Continue reading at NowPublic.com: How Widespread Is Gang Stalking? | NowPublic News Coverage, Page 3 my.nowpublic.com/world/how-widespread-gang-stalking#ixzz1vyiyGhQi
- Sign In or Join to post comments
anon com (not verified)at 05:41 on May 29th, 2012
Batvette: "..if this IS COINTELPRO related, use of such tactics is a cornerstone of that program." (Isn't batvette the guy who has repeatedly and rather vigorously asserted that COINTELPRO has "nothing to do with" GS? And he states that he was misled. What's he doing besides disrupting these threads?)
- Sign In or Join to post comments
Says it all (not verified)at 19:17 on May 28th, 2012
Batvette on NowPublic at 04:22 on November 15th, 2011 said "I'll discredit one life story at a time if need be. Where is yours?" The article How Widespread is Gang Stalking, page 3 of the closed comments thread.Continue reading at NowPublic.com: How Widespread Is Gang Stalking? | NowPublic News Coverage, Page 3 my.nowpublic.com/world/how-widespread-gang-stalking#ixzz1vyiyGhQi
- Sign In or Join to post comments
Truth2 (not verified)at 19:27 on May 28th, 2012
Batvette is here to disrupt and discredit: batvette on NowPublic at 04:22 on November 15th, 2011 said "I'll discredit one life story at a time if need be. Where is yours?" The article How Widespread is Gang Stalking, page 3 of the closed comments thread.Continue reading at NowPublic.com: How Widespread Is Gang Stalking? | NowPublic News Coverage, Page 3 my.nowpublic.com/world/how-widespread-gang-stalking#ixzz1vyiyGhQi
- Sign In or Join to post comments
Who is this guy? (not verified)at 09:57 on May 29th, 2012
batvette on batvette: www.nowpublic.com/world/gangstalking-tis-targeted-individuals-manifesto (You decide.)**"Gangstalking TI's (targeted individual's) Manifesto" by batvette **
- Sign In or Join to post comments
? (not verified)at 06:34 on May 27th, 2012
???
- Sign In or Join to post comments
? (not verified)at 06:36 on May 27th, 2012
????, in reference to "batvette's comment.
- Sign In or Join to post comments
What are the odds? (not verified)at 08:15 on May 27th, 2012
www.nostasi.com/expertsforcourtcases.html ~~Who would I call as witnesses in a lawsuit against Gang Stalkers?~~1. The authors of the book, "Mobbing Emotional Abuse in the American Workplace" who testify about Mobbing in court cases 2. Col. Anthony Shaffer who has stated "anchoring" is used in the Government's PSY-OPS program3. Ron Wyden who has exposed that our government is interpreting the Patriot Act in the area of surveillance in "stunning" ways 4. The ACLU who has a web site devoted to surveillance going on all over the United States5. The Bill of Rights Defense Committee who accuses the FBI of participating in COINTELPRO II6. Dr. Pamel Lutgen-Sanvik who has done research on mobbing 7. A mathematician with expertise in the probability of coincidences8. Robert B. Dilts, one of the developers of Neuro-Lingusitic Programming
- Sign In or Join to post comments
anonymously written (not verified)at 08:51 on May 27th, 2012
What a bunch of gobbledygook, batvette. (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gobbledygook) This is a guy who says that he's a victim of gang stalking, but he does little to try to get it out into the open. In fact, he tries to discredit those who do.
at 01:11 on June 4th, 2012
If there was any doubt Peacefrog's articles are just a magnet for crazies and have NO positive result for this situation, just look above at the schizo sock puppet trying to discredit the messenger. Yeah that's 5 different people.
- Sign In or Join to post comments
anonymous posting (not verified)at 22:28 on May 26th, 2012
Most enlightened people have been aware for the longest time that wiki was a disinfo tool. That's nothing new. COINTELPRO is active not as a program as such as per the original under Hoover but, as a method used by interested groups intent on rewriting events under wiki and then using those rewrites to bolster their arguments in other papers thus spreading the message/disinfo into the creditable journals and the world of fact. Many universities have reminders to students not to use wiki as a source and have deemed wiki to hold a "systemic bias".
- Sign In or Join to post comments
anon posting (not verified)at 04:39 on May 27th, 2012
[ www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/26/john-edwards-trial-jurors_n_1547691.html ]"There's some tension in the John Edwards trial -- between the former senator and a female alternate juror. The alternate, who on Friday wore a "revealing red top with a single strap and and exposed right shoulder," is flirting with Edwards. ABC News described it thus: The juror clearly instigated the exchanges. She smiles at him. He smiles at her. She giggles. He blushes.The flirtation has become so obvious that even Edwards’ attorneys have to work to suppress their laughter at the absurdity of it all.
- Sign In or Join to post comments
anon posting (not verified)at 04:46 on May 27th, 2012
Wrong link supplied, above. Sorry. [www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/25/john-edwards-trial-juror-flirting_n_1546496.html] The article says that "Edwards' attorneys have to work to suppress their laughter at the absurdity of it all." If Edwards' attorneys didn't want a mistrial, why wouldn't they tell their client to "knock it off" -- it has to make him look terrible in the eyes of many of the jurors. Furthermore, shouldn't any inappropriate behavior by an alternate juror result in dismissal of that juror?
- Sign In or Join to post comments
Mistrial a near certaintly? (not verified)at 06:26 on May 27th, 2012
It's all very bizarre. I gather that Edwards typically wears a green tie, but on Friday wore a red one. "At times during breaks in deliberations, some jurors have gestured toward alternates..." "The judge in the John Edwards case abruptly stopped deliberations and sent the jury home for the holiday weekend..." In another article (LA Times), it was reported that the judge has instructed the attorneys to report early on Tuesday, in case she needs to speak to them about a juror matter (paraphrasing). From the Washington Post article, "The sight of all four alternates in red drew titters from an audience that had already noted that Edwards had ended his streak of wearing a green tie to court for four straight days. NBC’s Lisa Myers asked Edwards whether he was wearing his lucky tie on Thursday, and he responded with a smile, “I’m not saying’.” The color he chose on Friday? You guessed it: red.(www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2012/05/25/gJQA4gF4pU_story.html )