A comment from Jim

Someone named Jim responded to my last post, and it was a troubling comment, and an interesting one.  Jim stated that he believes Dean is guilty and he was a juror.  He says that after trial he found out that Dean's story changed from the first trial.  Since this is not true at all, because Dean never testified in the first trial, we wonder who would have mis-informed Jim this . (the prosecutor?)
 We would love to talk with you Jim if you are willing, so we can find out what other mis-information the prosecutor has told you so that you felt right about voting guilty.  Please send us another message if you are willing.   There was so much misconduct in these two trials which made the jury believe things that just were not so.
We hope as time goes by, that you will reflect more on the evidence and non-evidence, the coaching of snitches who are now walking free, and then realize that you are in denial, not us who have known Dean forever, and have lived through this nightmare.
 You can read through the whole trial on the blog, and maybe it will refresh your memory. From reports from other jurors, we know that the men pushed for the verdict and the others were like dazed sheep.  I guess you were one of those, and you want to believe that you were right because, this will stay on your karma for eternity.
 Please contact us again to let us know who told you this lie and what else they have told you.
Deans first trial was totally different with multiple co-defendants, and all remained mum, because they were still under the brainwashed impression that there was no alternative.  No one wanted to be a snitch, and Dean certainly and naively thought the evidence would set him free. He always thought it would.  That is why he returned from Australia, Europe, and the Caribbean for his second trial.  He could have disappeared, but he had faith that intelligent people would see through the crap and follow jury rules about doubt.
   Because Dean never testified, his attorney only showed that jury in the first trial, how mistakes in DNA typing can be made, and the one doing his test was written up for her mistakes and had to go back for re-training.  He left it at that.  The blood spot was very tiny, yet the D.A. with confusing language and direct, led the jury to believe that there were oodles of it.  That was smoke, and our attorney in the second trial did not make that clear to you.
  We his family never found out the truth until we were able to visit him in prison and talk without being recorded, months after the first trial.  We never got to meet with him and talk privately before or during the first trial.  Until, I could talk to Dean, I thought there was evidence tampering, and I still do not rule that out. I wanted to explore that, but the second attorney said it was not necessary. Dean could finally tell us what he told you in trial.  Of course we didn't have his words twisted and the truth bent like you did from the prosecutor.
 Deans biggest mistake was not coming forward right away and telling the police the truth, and helping them solve the case.  But, stupid young gang members just do not do that.  Ones, who really are afraid of serving life in prison (like Roy, who was threatened with that for the crime he committed.), will cooperate with cops. Salazar was a professional snitch, probably still is. Who knows. How did you miss in the trial that both Roy and Salazar , who were in different prisons when interviewed, both said that Raffie and Willie did the crime.?  It wasn't until they were given no deal, and Deans name was thrown in there multiple times, that they switched their story to Raffie and Dean.  
 The point is, life in prison without parole is not what Dean deserves, and we have faith as more and more truth comes out, that he will get out too.
  Maybe one day, you can help make it right for Dean.  Again, please contact us and let us know what else the prosecution team told you after the trial.