PART IV - A CROOKED SPECTACLE
1. Jose Baez - December 2016 - page 2
2. Girls in Jail - 2016 to 2019 - page 6
3. Julie Madara - 2016 to 2019 - page 8
4. Maletta Young - 2017 to 2019 - page 17
5. Kaylee Simmons - 2017 to 2019 - page 21
6. The Four Motives - December 14, 2016 - page 32
7. Scott Love Morals - 1986 to present - page 37
8. Caught Red-Handed - January 2019 - page 39
9. Trial by Legal Secretary - 2019 - page 42
10. Kingdom of Liars - 2016 to 2019 - page 50
11. Trial Outtakes - 2019 - page 58
12. Christmas in Whoville - Summer 2019 - page 62
13. Mandi May Jury - October, November 2019 - page 66
14. The Small Details - December 2016 - page 71
15. The Big Picture Narrative - October, November 2019 - page 72
16. Jurors and Google - November 2019 - page 79
17. What Really Happened - December 14, 2016 - page 81
18. Young Girls And Old Men - December 2016 - page 95
19. Long Story Short - 2016 to 2019 - 96
20. Dead at 21 - 2100 - page 98
IV - 1
1. JOSE BAEZ - December 2016
One of the enduring features of the Seminole County jail is girls get to read stories about the other girls in jail, in the
newspaper. It is another example of shameless dishonesty, with no motive but to take the life of a young girl, that no
one will even admit this small persistent fact. Every person associated with Mandi's case, from state attorneys to
deputy sheriffs to jail employees to 15-time incarcerated felons, will tell you with a straight face that the jail
employees examine every newspaper thoroughly and removed every story that ever mentioned an inmate, so this
never happened.
The state attorney included as discovery, a recorded phone call from jail on December 30, 2016. In the phone call,
Mandi talks with her mother about stories about her own case, in the newspaper available inside the jail that day.
The state attorney also included as discovery, a recorded phone call from the jail where Julie Madara mentions
reading about another inmate in the newspaper. There were also stories in the newspaper when Mandi was in the
Orange County jail, when she was first arrested. Eventual jailhouse witness Kaylee Simmons swore that eventual
jailhouse witness Julie Madara was always the first to read the newspaper, where she could find the details of
allegations against other inmates.
In the December 30, 2016 phone call, Mandi and her mother were in a panic about the false accusations against
Mandi which were being spread online and in the newspaper. Mandi was crying out loud on the phone. The news
stories were read in jail by Julie Madara, who then made a false claim that Mandi confessed to the exact crime she
was accused of, but which there was no hard evidence of. What Mandi and her mother didn't know, is the false
accusations were provided to the newspaper by someone that had been paid to help Mandi, attorney Jose Baez.
The December 30, 2016 newspaper stories first appeared online on December 28 or 29, 2016. They had details and
images of Mandi's arrest affidavit, which I had just handed to the tattooed receptionist at the Orlando office of
attorney Jose Baez during my lunch break on December 28, 2016. Madara's claimed confession from Mandi
included multiple details from this arrest affidavit including 1) Mandi applied to Dollhouse based on somehow
knowing the amount of money Mulrenin would have in his pocket at the end of the night, and 2) Mandi was "in
contact" with Mulrenin in a struggle immediately prior to him going over the balcony.
The actions of attorney Jose Baez, to whom I gave my trust and my money, and who had a duty of care to Mandi,
led directly to Julie Madara's confession scam, and Mandi's resulting conviction and two life sentences.
I first contacted the Orlando office of Jose Baez within a few days of Mandi being arrested, probably around
Thursday December 22, 2016. The female I talked to gave me the name of a different female who would call me
back. The name of the second female was a short white-girl name like "Jen." After a few days I was finally able to
talk to that second female. Within two hours of talking to that employee of Jose Baez on the phone, there were
suddenly new news articles and blog posts about Mandi's case on the web, including one on caseyanthony.com.
At the time, I was a web and traffic and news and clicks junky. People had been paying me to put up new web sites,
and generate traffic for new web businesses, since 2001, going back to when the web was young and traffic was up
for grabs. When Mandi got arrested, I was sitting in front of a computer every waking minute of every day, working
on a contract for the oldest cloud-hosting company in Florida. I had been searching the web for news and pages with
Mandi or Scott or Mulrenin's name in them, approximately every 30 minutes since Mandi got arrested. As an expert
on web marketing and search-engine optimization, I was qualified to locate and make note of new web content
when it appeared, authoritatively and exhaustively.
At the time I began soliciting the Baez law firm, it was around a week after Mandi's arrest. Mandi's facebook had
been closed, and there had been no new online content with Mandi's name in it for days. When there are no new
stories or blogs for many days, and then one gets indexed by search engines as live user content at
caseyanthony.com within less than two hours of me talking to the female at the office of Jose Baez, I know the
female at the office of Jose Baez made the blogger at caseyanthony.com aware of the story. The business plan of
caseyanthony.com was to drive clicks based on content associated with legal activities of Jose Baez.
It is not clear to me that having blogs repeat the accusations against Mandi helped her case. And the evidence is that
IV - 2
it actually hurt her case by stirring up anger at Mandi based on false information.
After several calls to the Orlando phone number of Jose Baez, I was finally able to talk on the phone to the female
who was originally named as the appropriate contact who would call me back. She asked someone between phone
calls, and told me I think $120,000 as a ballpark estimate of what hiring Jose might cost. I think she was a little
vague at first around $100,000. Then she talked to someone and got a firm response. $120k was the firm number.
She said paying in installments was acceptable. I told her how much I would pay up front, and how long it would
take to pay the rest. Again she confirmed with someone else, and said this was acceptable, it was a standard
arrangement.
After talking to this female on the phone around December 26, 2016 about how much Jose Baez might charge, and
agreeing that I could pay it, I finally got an appointment for a consultation. She said I needed to pay $1000 in
advance to talk to Jose Baez. Though the other attorneys promoted by the Orlando office with his name on it, were
offering free consultations.
The reason I contacted Jose Baez was not because he got a not-guilty verdict for Casey Anthony, when she was
obviously guilty. I knew Mandi was not guilty. I contacted Jose Baez because after Casey Anthony, his career
strategy seemed to be only taking on cases where the defendant was not guilty or there was a reasonable doubt, to
pad and protect his record.
I was a high-tech stalker who often knew exactly what Mandi had been doing every day. I knew she was not guilty
of what she was accused of. I thought the difference between the outlandish accusations, and what actually
happened, was the ideal raw material for Jose Baez to continue to build his reputation. The difference between the
crazy accusations and the truth, would provide Jose with a lot of material to strut around and be zealous about, and
prevail in court.
I went to the Orlando office of Jose Baez on December 28, 2016, the day before my consultation, to pay the $1000.
I got a copy of the arrest affidavit from the Seminole Clerk of Courts, and brought it with me. I gave my copy to the
young tattooed female at the office of Jose Baez. I did this because she said it would be helpful to provide Jose
information on the case. Within hours of my leaving the office, the exact copy I left at the office of Jose Baez, with
the exact markings and orientation of the pages that came off the copy machine at the Seminole County courthouse,
appeared at WESH.com with a story titled something like "new details in the case."
There were no new public details in the case. The arrest affidavit had been available in person, through the court
clerk at the Seminole County criminal courthouse, for days. Court records were not available online until a few
months later.
And there had been no new web stories on Mandi's case for at least a few days, maybe a week. In fact, there had
been no new news stories since the first time I brought the case to the attention of the female on the phone at Jose's
office. So it is was obvious beyond any doubt that the female at Jose Baez's office scanned and emailed the arrest
affidavit I brought her, to WESH the second I walked out the door. They also somehow got it at a site called
lawnewz.com that immediately pushed a new story based on the arrest affidavit soon after I left their office.
After nothing for many days, there was an immediate flurry of news stories based on the arrest affidavit which I
brought to Jose Baez's office to help Mandi. It is not clear that promoting a bunch of news stories repeating the false
accusations helped Mandi. Based on people I have spoken to, it hurt her case.
The clerk at the Seminole courthouse printed the arrest affidavit on a printer behind the counter. She then redacted it
by hand, crossing out personal information with a pen, before she handed it to me. I gave that original copy to the
tattooed receptionist at the Orlando office of Jose Baez. After she scanned it in to email to Jose, I told her to keep
the original and give me a copy, to make sure it did not hurt his eyes to read a bad copy. So the copy I got was
produced from the same scan that she sent to the media. As a result, I was able to match the copies which
immediately appeared online to my own. My own copy matched the copies which appeared online not only based
on the flaws and markings from the Seminole courthouse, but based on the additional scanning artifacts produced at
the office of Jose Baez, the imperfections, and the angle of the lines relative to level.
IV - 3
At the time, I assumed I would hire Jose Baez. So I had no choice but to trust his decision to push the accusations
out to the media, before I even met him. I texted Mandi's mother about how I didn't like all the news stories, but I
had to accept the wisdom of a paid expert with more experience than me, if that is how he chose to manage the case.
So the day came for my $1000 consultation with Jose Baez, and I was told Jose is not here but he is coming. Sean
Landers will meet with me instead. Sean seemed like a good and smart lawyer, but he does not charge $1000 for a
consultation, his are free like every other lawyer in Orlando. After I spoke with Sean at length and he took many
notes, Jose walked in and spoke briefly. Jose obviously had no idea about the case. Jose started out by running off
two or three stock lines about the law.
Jose used his three inane lines to brag how whatever the victim says, we can attack his credibility. In fact the victim
was dead and won't be saying anything. This was about three quarters of the way through my consultation. But
whereas everybody on Jose's receptionist's tip list knew the victim was dead, Jose did not.
Jose then went on to quiz me over whether the defendant had family, and what their jobs are, how much money they
have or make. So I basically paid $1000 to 1) have someone promote news stories about Mandi doing terrible things
which she didn't do, 2) talk to a free-consultation lawyer Sean Landers, 3) hear Jose recite a few lines that were so
generic and irrelevant it was embarrassing, and 4) be quizzed about how much money the defendant's family has.
After I mentioned I was giving the defendant a lot of money to spend on food from the jail commissary, Jose told
me that she might "blow up" and I "might not want her any more."
Jose said this was a problem for him. He said if he took the case, and I lost interest in the defendant and I didn't
want to pay him, the judge might not let him withdraw from the case. Jose was too busy with the Hernandez case
and stated that even after that, he had no interest in criminal cases as there was "no money in it." He said he wanted
to do a civil case.
I told Jose this had nothing to do with my personal interest in the defendant. It was based on my personal interest in
the truth, which my interest in the defendant put me in a position to know. I was there because I knew something
about the case, I knew the defendant was falsely accused, and truth and justice are of value to me. I was pursuing
abstract ideals, not sex. Sex is as common as sociopathic self-absorbed Jewish attorneys with catholicized names.
Though not specifically for them, I can guess, just based on Jose's cheezy BMW jacket which he wore to match his
BMW.
At first it was hard to put Jose's "no money in it" in context, in a consultation I paid $1000 for. Jose made his
generic comments about strategy to win a criminal case, and then he offered the caveat there was "no money in it,"
It came across like "during the trial we can question the victim's credibility, but there is no money in it." Was he
speaking figuratively, was he telling me his own strategy would be ineffective? It took me a moment to put together
he was not characterizing his strategy to get a not-guilty verdict as ineffective. He was saying getting a not-guilty
verdict in Mandi's case literally would not produce any money. He thought it was useful to point out that a winning
verdict in a civil case produces money.
I was told it would be $120,000 to hire Jose, or I could hire Sean Landers for "about half that" $60,000. I said I
already told the receptionist I was ready to pay according to the terms she relayed to me. Jose told me they would
look into the case and call me. They never did. I sent several emails and made several calls to the office, and got no
response.
I have since met people around town who read the news stories set up by the female working at Jose's office, and as
a direct result of the broader promotion of this misinformation, had been demanding the defendant's head in every
avenue available to them. The news stories Jose's receptionist directly created were read by girls in the jail, recycled
as gossip, and presented at trial as confessions from the defendant. And it delayed the trial by years in the process.
To me, this seems unethical. I got swindled out of $1000. I have since done what I promised Jose I would do, I have
spent over $100,000 on lawyers in Mandi's case. I did not get what was promised to me, and in fact they hurt the
defendant immeasurably through their active promotion of dirt in the press.
IV - 4
The things Jose said in his "consultation" were so inane and misplaced, I have since come to suspect he provokes a
favorable impulse from jurors only by seeming harmless and pathetic. It looks like he has mild microcephaly from
zika or something. And his eyes are close together. The effect is he strikes you as too stupid and earnest, to lie or
have sinister intentions. He looks a victim of injustice just standing in front of you. The jury will give this pathetic
man whatever he is up there passionately asking for like a shoeless beggar, just to make the world more fair.
On the other hand, he wore a cheezy BMW jacket that seemed a little childish, a little beneath a famous forty-six-
year-old millionaire trial lawyer. I could see how those dumb fuck Seminole jurors might be on his same
wavelength and think that was a really cool jacket. This guy for real had a bourgeois BMW and matching jacket to
swindle me out of my $1k.
Logo items are common expressions of aspirations by idiots. Like a kid riding the city bus might wear a jacket with
a picture of a car on it. An undergraduate at UCF might wear a baseball cap with the name of a law firm on it. Jose
owned the BMW and still wore the jacket. Do NFL players wear their jerseys to Walmart?
Normally lawyers like to pose in suits with law library books behind them. This guy came representing car wax and
lawsuits. And sending news stories with details of the false accusations against the defendant, into the jail. And with
a proposed strategy to discredit the testimony of a dead person.
IV - 5
2. GIRLS IN JAIL - 2016 to 2019
I had an educational experience with girls in jail. Mandi gives them my number. She is eager to please them. She
tells them I once gave her $15,000 in cash which I never did, and that I am going to buy her a $100,000 car when
she gets out of jail. They call me thinking I will buy them a car also. Usually they call after they get out of jail, but I
get a lot of calls from in jail also.
A girl who got moved from the Osceola County jail to Seminole County was desperate to make contact with her
dear friend who was still in Osceola County. The girl in Osceola County had cancer in her stomach, and was
probably near death. That was my understanding of the emotional importance to the Seminole girl, who was worried
about her sick friend and wanted to make contact. Osceola was a heroin dealer. Seminole passed over $1 million in
counterfeit in a dozen counties, including Osceola and Seminole.
I tried to find the Osceola girl on the jail website, but she had been released. So we tried multiple phone numbers for
her and left messages. Finally after a lot of messages explaining how Osceola's dear friend was trying to reach her,
someone picked up during a message on an old-timey landline answering machine, and said "Don't call here any
more." I believe it was Osceola's mother. So I waited like a week, and tried again.
Finally Osceola picked up the phone and talked to me. She said she refused to talk to Seminole, because she had
since learned from other girls in Osceola, how Seminole was actually a sick evil sociopathic mentally-ill liar.
The pictures Seminole showed in jail of her own baby daughter, were really pictures she had stolen. Seminole
stalked the child of another girl in Osceola jail and took pictures with the other girl's child, claiming the child was
her own. Seminole stole something, or did a number of other evil and lying things. Osceola spent everything she
had to make Seminole a jail birthday cake the day she left Osceola, and Seminole had betrayed Osceola with these
lies.
There was some secret about Seminole that was so awful and shocking, Osceola did not even want to tell me. She
said if she told me, I would never want to talk to Seminole again. She finally revealed the terrible secret to me.
Seminole... HAS SUGAR DADDIES! This from a heroin dealer.
Osceola then explained to me how she had swallowed a piece of metal in jail, and got beat up by a guard, and
needed to go to the hospital straight from the jail when she got released. And she finally had surgery to cut the metal
out of her stomach. She said it was like a piece of a fork that accidentally fell in her food in the jail kitchen. Osceola
said she was in the hospital recovering from surgery, and that is why she could not respond to my phone calls for a
week. I never mentioned cancer to Osceola. She did not know Seminole told me she had cancer.
Based on facebook pictures and other facts I had accumulated, I was able to prove to Osceola that the pictures of
Seminole's baby daughter really were her daughter. Even though the girls in jail were way out ahead of me, warning
Osceola that Seminole had multiple fake facebook pages full of fake pictures, to trick guys to send her money. And
the other evil things Osceola had learned about Seminole were also lies, told by the other girls in jail who were
actually lying. Except the sugar daddy part was true.
Whether Osceola had cancer, or got beat up by a guard and swallowed a piece of metal from a kitchen tool, I could
not possibly guess. Though I gave it a lot of thought. Seminole's story about the cancer was sincere, and is what
motivated her emotional impulse to contact Osceola. Osceola's metal story had elaborate details, but they seemed
improbable. But nothing about Osceola's activities or life plans matched someone who has advanced cancer. She
talked about working a job and some other things in a casual manner, not like someone who was dying.
After six months of thinking about it, I finally came up with a theory about which jail girl was telling the truth, and
whether Osceola really had cancer. Osceola is a drug person, her business is contraband. Osceola probably had a
piece of metal contraband which she swallowed during a search. It could have been a pipe, or something used to
create a spark and light a contraband cigarette, who knows. She hid it in her mouth. When the guards said "open
your mouth" she swallowed it.
IV - 6
Osceola's story, which she then told in jail to explain her medical problem, was that she had cancer. Seminole was
worried because she knew Osceola had a pipe stuck in her stomach and was in extreme pain. But Seminole told me
the lying story about cancer, because she assumed Osceola was still in jail, and all her communications with me
were monitored. Osceola then told me the semi-true story that it was a piece of metal stuck in her stomach, because
she was actually at home. But she still didn't tell me the contraband part.
The point is, girls in jail tell complicated elaborate stories. And there is no way for a stranger to determine what is
true, or if any of it is true, even after thinking about it for six months. People who deal with girls in jail all the time,
such as prosecutors, must have already figured this out a long time ago. So any plan to use testimony from girls in
jail, by someone who is familiar with girls in jail, is a blatant and conscious plan to use lies. And to exploit the
naivete of jurors, who are not familiar with girls in jail.
Prosecutors put the word out in the jail that they need witnesses, when the case is big in the news, and they don't
have anything. I got hints from a number of girls that they had been pressured to come up with stories about Mandi,
and other girls in jail. Like a girl who knew Ishnar Lopez-Ramos, suddenly denied having met her. She was
paranoid somehow the prosecutors would bring her dropped charges back, to try again to pressure her to testify.
Another girl who knew Mandi suddenly said like she had no idea what Mandi was even charged with. She had fear
in her voice, fear of prosecutors ratcheting up her charges and holding her, to pressure her to testify.
Perhaps as many as 12 girls in jail provided prosecutors different stories where they claimed Mandi confessed to
them. Which is not surprising, given Mandi was an invited guest of Mulrenin who arrived and left without Scott,
and could not have been in contact with Scott. There was no other way for prosecutors to prove Mandi's mind
contained a plan to collude with Scott and rob Mulrenin. Of those probably 12 jail girls who made up some
confession story, I only ever found out what four actually claimed Mandi told them. And of those four, only two
made it to the stand at Mandi's trial.
The first was Julie Madara, a forty-something self-described indulgent addict who burglarized people's homes, and
sold their heirlooms for drugs. She had convictions for 15 felonies and 2 misdemeanor crimes of dishonesty, and
was facing a 10-year sentence, when she learned Mandi knew many of the same people as her, and began
researching Mandi's case on her own. Madara is an alcoholic, with a stunted cranium that suggests her mother was
also an alcoholic. Madara blamed Mandi's attorney for losing one of her cases a few years earlier, and wanted
revenge.
The second was Maletta Young, a habitual offender who had been selling drugs and getting felonies at least since
she was 20. 10 years later around age 30, Maletta was convicted for selling every drug except marijuana at once -
fentanyl, heroin, cocaine, meth, pills - while possessing a loaded firearm as a convicted felon, and extra bullets in a
drug baggie, and also for arranging an aggravated home-invasion battery where she stepped over the body of the
helpless victim who had been kicked in the head. Maletta was an informant on an unknown number of cases, was
released without bond, and got just two years for everything I just listed. Maletta got 21 new felony charges just
between Mandi getting arrested and Mandi's trial, and ended up not testifying for some reason unknown to me.
The third was 18-year-old Kaylee Simmons looking at five total felony convictions, including carjacking and
kidnapping, and facing a minimum of 10.5 years and a maximum of life. Kaylee Simmons was a proud teen lesbian,
a sort of retarded savant who could probably remember the second she was born but garbled certain words, a child
sexual abuse and trafficking victim, and was just downright creepy and unfortunate. I can't imagine what kind of
sick men paid to stick their dicks in that haunted-house character. She was also Mandi's best friend in jail until they
got caught kissing on camera and separated. Kaylee made a deal to provide secret information on four different
cases. One of the cases, Tina Poirier, told Mandi that Kaylee just went into her cell and read her police report.
The fourth story about Mandi came from Ishnar Lopez-Ramos, the infamous love-triangle murder-for-hire case in
Kissimmee. She wanted to kill her boyfriend's new girlfriend. They kidnapped the wrong person by mistake, a total
stranger, an innocent mother. They put a bag over her head and beat her anyway. The prosecution offered Lopez 60
years. Then she wrote a document claiming to have confessions from three or four different cases, and they offered
her 40 years. Nothing came of it by the time of Mandi's trial. Like all the other girl's stories, Lopez said some pretty
random details. Lopez said the victim in Mandi's case was a manager at Cleo's, the wrong strip club, Scott Love
owned a car, and Mandi's case involved two guns. Girls in jail know the prosecution wants a gun in Mandi's hand.
IV - 7
3. JULIE MADARA - 2017, 2019
One of the more sickening moments in the trial came when this disgusting alcohol-stunted hag Julie Madara
claimed Mandi saw her as a mother figure, and laid her head on Madara's lap and called her "Mama Jules." I have
never seen Mandi remotely role-play the child-mother role. Mandi has no concept of a caring mother, Mandi's
mother is hard, not affectionate. Mandi has no concept that she is a different age from old people. Mandi doesn't
want a mother. Mandi sees herself as the mother who needs to do the caring, Mandi never ever ever sees herself as
the baby and never asks to be taken care of. Mandi absolutely never uses word "mama" like a latin person, neither
the word nor the concept. It would probably be "mommy" but Mandi never said that word either. Mandi never calls
me daddy or anything sick like that, I would puke. She sees me as a little brother.
I wouldn't be comfortable around the person Madara describes, not in any role like that. And a person like Madara
describes wouldn't be comfortable around me. Mandi never treats old guys in the strip club like they are any older
than her. Mandi doesn't have the social concept of it, she does not recognize or comprehend whatsoever that an old
person should care about her. She sees old women as sex partners. She's sees herself in competition with her
stepmother. I am sure she saw Mulrenin as a little brother. Mandi is somehow colorblind to age. Mandi never knew
that she was a child.
In her first month in Florida prison, Mandi probably had sex with women whose total age exceeds 200 years. And
like her boyfriends outside of jail, her girlfriends in jail all seem to have an eight-year-old son. Are you surprised
there are aggressive sociopaths in prison just like Mandi gave herself to on the outside, and Mandi spends all day in
prison on drugs? To me it's the least disturbing thing at this point.
Madara said Mandi Jackson called her "Mama Jules" and confessed to her on a mattress under the stairs in the
Seminole County Jail. The other girls in jail told me the only thing Mandi would have been doing under there with
Madara is having sex with her. Reality is dissonant. Non-reality is projecting your own life experiences - your
"common sense" as prosecutor Stone told the jury - onto a stranger called Mandi Jackson. Non-reality is ignoring
the truth in favor of your own preconceptions, like Detective Sprague.
It is more likely a conversation like Madara described, took place with Kaylee Simmons, in February of 2017 before
Kaylee could have met Mandi. Kaylee was sexually abused as a child, and is used to being treated like or playing
the role of a victim, of a child. Mandi played the mother role, telling me Kaylee had a hard life and needed a break
on her sentence. Mandi tried to get me to send money to feed Kaylee's sister's kids. Madara said the person who
cried on her lap and confessed was "Kaylee" multiple times at Mandi's trial, despite Madara previously claiming she
and Kaylee never met.
At Madara's deposition, Madara quoted the girl in her confession as saying "I'm only 19 years old. I have my whole
life ahead of me and I have this now." On September 21, 2016, when Kaylee was arrested, she was 19. When
Kaylee supposedly met Madara right before Madara sent her letter to the prosecutor, Kaylee had just turned 20 a
few days earlier, whereas Mandi had been 21 for 9 months. At Mandi's trial, Kaylee said "I've been my whole life in
here." Though like many things, it is not in the transcript. It was around when she said "actually growing up,
because, you know, I never got that chance. I never had an ID or anything." For contrast, Mandi never mentioned
any concept of a future life different from and better than the present. Mandi thought she was always an adult.
After interviewing Julie Madara at Lowell prison, the prosecution claimed Mandi Jackson made the following
statements to Julie Madara:
1. Mandi Jackson and Scott Love, and a person named Christopher Dahl, devised a plan by which Mandi Jackson
would take the money of the manager of Dollhouse, James Mulrenin.
2) Scott Love reluctantly agreed to participate in this plan
3) Pursuant to this plan, the defendant obtained employment at Dollhouse,
4) Mandi Jackson went to James Mulrenin's residence, at which Mandi Jackson and James Mulrenin drank and
IV - 8
ingested cocaine
5) Mandi Jackson placed a substance in the drink of James Mulrenin for the purpose of impairing/incapacitating
James Mulrenin.
6) Mandi Jackson opened the front door of the residence and allowed Scott Love into the residence
7) A struggle with James Mulrenin ensued within the residence during which Scott Love shot James Mulrenin in the
leg
8) James Mulrenin attempted to leave the residence but was unable to do so because Scott Love was standing in
front of the front door holding a gun
9) James Mulrenin went to the balcony at which a struggle took place while James Mulrenin, Mandi Jackson, and
Scott Love were on the balcony, during which James Mulrenin went off the balcony
10) Mandi Jackson and Scott Love panicked, took James Mulrenin's wallet and credit cards and used James
Mulrenin's credit cards to make a purchase or purchases.
The prosecution must have felt a little hesitant describing exactly what Madara said, and wanted to keep it general.
They knew it was lies, and just wanted to scare Mandi into taking a 25-year deal. Because Madara expanded on
some pretty odd things in a deposition a year later, including:
A) The plan to target Mulrenin was based on Mandi saying Mulrenin "carried a lot of cash on him." Mandi "said he
carried -- she specifically said 13,000 dollars, he's always got, like 13,000 dollars in his pocket."
B) Mandi Jackson specifically slipped the drug "G" in Mulrenin's drink to incapacitate him, which Madara said was
the same drug Mandi got arrested with in Georgia.
Finally at trial, Madara recited the "shot while fleeing" narrative from Sprague's police report. She said they tried to
tie Mulrenin up with duct tape but he resisted and stood up. So they shot him, and he ran off the balcony. Just like
when everyone else says it, Madara's story is inconsistent with the fact that he sat in the recliner and bled for a few
minutes, further from the balcony than the supposed bullet hole. And the duct tape is the circumference of his thigh,
and has blood in two spots that match the entry and exit wound. In theory they could have shot him, and then tried
to tie him up. But Madara's story doesn't match that possible story. Madara's story matches Detective Sprague and
prosecutor Stone's impossible story.
Understand Madara's confession is worthless to any sane person in normal circumstances. Lead Detective Sprague
was present for Madara's original statements at Lowell prison. He said at trial that he did not even bother to
investigate them. He said at trial the name "Christopher Dahl" was not even familiar to him, he had no recollection
of Madara saying that name. The only purpose of writing down the statements of a 15-time felon, was to overwhelm
and intimidate Mandi Jackson while they kept her drugged in isolation for 6 months, to force her to testify against
Scott Love in exchange for a 25-year sentence. They locked Mandi in isolation and slipped Madara's subpoena
under the door, thinking it would scare her. Mandi had no idea what is was or why.
The basic idea of what happened, that Mandi went to Mulrenin's apartment and did cocaine, and Scott showed up
and shot him in the leg, is not in dispute. Mandi also told her mother on the recorded jail phone that Mulrenin was
on G, and the jail girls in the day room literally have nothing better to do than eavesdrop on phone calls. But right
away, you start to see problems with the parts of Madara's story which police had no proof of and desperately
needed, the parts where Madara tries to say Mandi planned to rob Mulrenin.
There is no reason for Mandi to apply for and get and work a job with her real name, and go to Mulrenin's
apartment for two hours and tie him up in duct tape, to stick him up for money he "carried on him." They can do
that right on the sidewalk. Unless the truth of what Madara says doesn't matter, and you just want to hear a 15-time
felon who is getting out of prison early for saying it, say Mandi is guilty.
IV - 9
$13k does not fit in your pocket even straight from the bank. Certainly not in a GQ man's money clip. 130 used
$100 bills obtained as revenue in a strip club will stack two inches high. Madara is correct there was $13,000
involved in this case. $13k is the amount police found in Mulrenin's storage closet, $13,000 is the number that
appeared in the police report, $1300 is the number Mini-Jim quoted to me at Gator's Sodo, and that 13 number also
appeared in a newspaper article that all the girls read in jail.
Only problem is, Mandi had no way of knowing there was $13k hidden in Mulrenin's balcony closet in a boot box.
Probably not even Mulrenin knew there was $13k in his boot box. until the police counted it. The cash was jumbled
together with different denominations in different stacks of different sizes, some inside a bag, some inside an
envelope. Certainly no one other than Mulrenin could know that exact number 13. Anyone describing the money
they thought Mulrenin had, might guess 10 or 20, but not 13.
Most of the money in the boot box in his closet was in a black plastic bag. But there was some money outside the
bag that looked like he could have just thrown it in there, that looks like maybe $2500. Maybe the missing witness
was right, maybe Mulrenin really did leave with $2500 and just threw it in there without putting it in the bag. But
that means at the beginning of the night when Mandi supposedly planned the robbery, there would have been only
$11k in there not $13k.
Suppose that extra $2500 outside the main bag was already in the box before that night. If you somehow got a look
inside the open box, that is all you would see. You would see something that looked like maybe $2500 depending
on what bills are really in the stacks, and a black plastic bag. And if the stacks actually contain $1's and $20's, it's a
lot less than $2500.
It is not until you open up the black plastic bag next to the money, that you see there is more money inside. And it is
not until you actually see what bills are inside the stacks and count them, that you know how much it is total. That
would take at least a few minutes to get a rough count. And some of the money is in paper bands and old rubber
bands, which would be hard to replace after counting. So nobody but Mulrenin can even know there is that much
money in there, much less the exact amount.
It is not credible that someone would dress up as a stripper, drive to the far side of Orlando, apply for a job with a
stranger, work an entire night with the hope that stranger might invite her home, drive her boyfriend to another
county at 5AM, and drink with a reputed rapist in his apartment for two hours, based on a rumor about how much
money that stranger might have in his pocket at the end of the night. Or even in a box. Especially not when every
strip club in Florida has high-rollers waving more cash around than a neanderthal strip-club manager will ever hope
to pocket. You think a stripper needs to be tipped off to find a guy carrying cash? Only in the land of pure idiots,
Seminole County. Everyone in the strip club has more cash than the manager.
No matter how you look at it, Madara's claim about Mandi confessing a plan with the detail of the $13k mentioned
in the police report is not credible. $13k cannot be the plan, it can only be the accusation after the money is counted
by police. Madara is reciting an accusation, not a confession.
But the jury surely never had the chance to perform anything like the analysis I did here, and may have just taken it
at face value. It's just garbage, Mandi simply never said it, not in his pocket because she couldn't predict and it
wouldn't fit, and not in his box because she couldn't know. It is not possible she said what Madara claims. But
garbage is the standard of government employees to take a young girl's life. Does it matter that they can just pay
Madara to say nonsense and take a young girl's life?
According to witnesses on the ground who clearly saw Mulrenin on his illuminated balcony before he jumped, he
was alone out there and not in a "struggle" as stated by Madara. This is also what Mandi told her mother on the
recorded jail phone. Police found work boots and the "Don't Tread On Me" shirt which they said Scott Love was
wearing on video at The Lofts. Neither had any blood, or any DNA of James Mulrenin. But there was blood from
Mulrenin's leg on the floor, sofa, duct tape, cable ties, sliding glass door, and front door. Mulrenin did NOT go over
in a struggle as claimed by Madara.
It was Madara who said at trial, Mandi confessed to seeing Mulrenin hit his head on the railing five stories below.
Evidence is he hit first hit the railing with his legs, and then hit his head on the wall, below the railing and out of
IV - 10
sight from the balcony. The way his legs were snapped, his head would have shattered if it hit that railing. His head
only had a cut on it, his skull was not even fractured. Didn't stop prosecutor Stone from leading the medical
examiner outside her expertise, to say the cut on his head could have come from hitting the railing. Meanwhile it
was dark and nobody was even on the balcony to see much less leaning over. And even if they had been, his whole
body would have obscured what part hit first.
There is also the general problem that Mandi seemed to already know James Mulrenin. She didn't just meet him that
night to set him up based on a tip from Chris Dahl in Madara's story. During her video interview, Neisha Cintron
described Mandi and Mulrenin as having an unusually close working relationship for two people who just met, right
from the beginning of the night. And cell tower records show Mandi at Mulrenin's house four times that week,
including a longer visit the previous Saturday than the night he died. So this pure theory that Mandi went to the
Dollhouse and met Mulrenin that night, for the purpose of robbing him, doesn't fit with actual evidence that Mandi
already knew Mulrenin for a while.
We also know Mandi does not use G to incapacitate people which was the center of Madara's story. Mandi does not
even think G can be used to incapacitate people.
Mandi Jackson participated in at least 8 different people taking G that I know of: Chris Dahl, herself, James Arnold
(I'm assuming), me, my neighbor from across West Muriel Street, Tywaun's best friend, the freaky lady whose
house they lived in, and boyfriend Tywaun. In none of these instances did Mandi ever expect G to incapacitate
anyone. Quite the opposite, Mandi Jackson wants to be fucked like a racehorse on G. At my house, she took G
continuously from maybe 11 AM to 4 PM. Not only did she not become incapacitated, she drove home and had sex
with three more people, in two sessions.
Six of those eight people Mandi participated in taking G, were guys. None of those six guys gave her a dollar after
taking G. She did not attempt to take money from any of them, or expect to get money from any of them, on the day
they took G. Mandi Jackson expected G to make a guy rowdier, and harder to handle. She expected it to make
Tywaun's best friend more vigorous. When he couldn't stay hard, she was disappointed the G didn't work, and
blamed his problems on cocaine.
I may have even taken G the day I fucked her upstairs at her mom's townhouse around June 2, 2016. Mandi took G
that day. I know she would have offered it to me. Her little brother's friends were there, her mom was there, her
mom's boyfriend James was there. Her mom said somebody saw Mandi squirting something in her mouth.
I saw Mandi taking G when nobody else was there. Combine that with what her mom said, she was taking it all day.
I fucked her for at least 30 minutes, so loud the people downstairs could hear. Then we carried her furniture down
the stairs together, out to my truck together, and unloaded it at my house together. Dresser, trunk, mattress, two
people. She was up to around 115 pounds that day when she took G and carried furniture. She had been putting on
weight from her new anxiety medication. She was buying too much Lucky Charms with those Walmart gift cards I
gave her.
After she took G and we had sex and we carried her furniture, she took all the bolts out of the top of her car engine
to try to find where oil was leaking from Then after all that, she took a brief nap from either exhaustion or her
anxiety medication. Then she woke up, put the screws back in her engine, tied the loose plastic parts above the
engine with duct tape, and hurried home to her boyfriend around 9 PM. That was a day on G for Mandi.
Julie Madara's central claim, that Mandi Jackson drugged Mulrenin with G with the expectation that he would
become incapacitated, or easier to rob in any way, is impossible. Everything in Mandi Jackson's prior behavior and
experience with G made it impossible for such an idea to exist in her head.
There is not much documentation of G on the web, because it does not do much. There is 10 million times more
written about kratom and CBD oil. But what little documentation there is on G shows it has been taken in the form
of gas-station sexual-enhancement placebos with names like "InnerG", "NRG3", and "Thunder Nectar." In other
words people expect it to give them more energy, to make them rowdier, to have more fun, to do crazier things.
This idea that anybody, much less Mandi, could think G would incapacitate someone and make him easier to rob, is
IV - 11
a complete invention by a sick felon, preying on gullible people who have no idea about anything, to get out of
prison. And Florida rubes are so dumb, this is how their justice system works. They free felons who invent nonsense
to victimize the innocent. Because some crazy hemp-oil grade science, and a moral panic about a drug with the
same letter. Mandi may as well incapacitate Mulrenin with a fucking mood crystal.
Mandi doesn't need to let Scott into the apartment, any more than a bank teller needs to let a robber into the bank.
She can just wait until Mulrenin is in the shower, or falls asleep, and take any money she knows about herself.
Fucking old guys, is how Mandi Jackson gets their money, she doesn't need a gun. A girl is born naked with
everything she needs to take a guy's money. Mandi has total confidence in her own ability to please a guy out of his
money. But there is no way Mandi is going to apply for and get and work a job, to steal rumored money she has
never even seen, in a world with a billion guys who will all pay money to fuck her in the first five minutes. She only
needs to walk down the sidewalk. A guy with a Mercedes will drive up, not a Chrysler 300.
There was also some allegation that Mulrenin went home with a lot of money because Dollhouse had a big night.
But Mandi could not have known Dollhouse would have a big night, and Mulrenin would therefore go home with a
lot of money, when she first applied. Both Gorewitz and cell towers have Mandi first coming to Dollhouse around
8:30 PM.
The part about Chris Dahl putting a reluctant Scott Love up to a robbery, didn't fit with what I knew about both their
personalities and habits. Something was fishy, I was recognizing something. I barely got to the bottom of Madara's
list of allegations when I suddenly realized: This was the same story Mini-Jim Ferrara said they invented in
Dollhouse on the night of December 14th. Madara was reciting the drugged-and-thrown-off-balcony story. Madara
started with the standard stuff in the newspaper and police report. But the part Madara added herself was the
drugged-and-thrown-off-balcony story.
Even the part about Scott standing by the front door holding a gun fit with the Dollhouse story. If Scott was really
there to rob, he would either be standing by Mulrenin at the sofa, or going through the cabinets and boxes. The
Dollhouse employees did not include Scott in their first theory. They wondered how "petite" Mandi (according to
Cintron) could win a "struggle" and throw Big Jim off the balcony? Scott standing by the door with a gun was
something made up after, to add Scott into their original theory of Mandi drugging Big Jim and throwing him off
the balcony.
This story was never in the papers. It only even went around as gossip for a few days, and only in a small local area
of people who worked at Dollhouse. The news said it was a suicide the day it happened. Then the news said it was a
murder, and Mulrenin fell or was fleeing. The news available to the public went from suicide, to fell or fleeing, to
shot-while fleeing, which Sprague started telling people on December 20th, and first appeared in papers around the
30th. At no point did the news ever say Mulrenin went over the balcony in a struggle. Even when I was on facebook
on December 19th, the one or two Dollhouse girls who were still saying Mulrenin was thrown off the balcony, were
quickly corrected based on what was in the news that day.
I immediately thought Madara had to get this story from someone who was at Dollhouse, in the brief window from
December 14 to December 19th. I immediately predicted Madara must know or have contact with someone in
Conway. The story was so familiar to me as what Mini-Jim had said. Madara must have heard it from someone
local, and Madara probably thought she really had secret local information that the outside world was not privy to.
Do you think I was over-confident? Do you think anybody could have read the story about Mandi getting arrested
with GHB, and invented the same theory as they invented at Dollhouse, that Mulrenin was drugged and went over
the balcony in a struggle? Do you think I was paranoid, to assume Madara must have gotten this story from
someone in Conway?
It only took me about five minutes on Google, to prove I was right. Madara lived on the same street as Chris Dahl.
in the closest white neighborhood to Dollhouse. It was the same street as Dahl's ex-wife's family, Jessica Shearer.
Chris Dahl's ex wife hated the new stripper Mandi, whom Chris was living with, when Chris got custody of their kid
back. Jessica Shearer's family supposedly loaned Chris the $30,000 to bond out of jail, when Chris got arrested in
Georgia the same time as Mandi. Madara's family was friends with Jessica Shearer's family and knew all of the
details about Mandi. And they blamed evil strippers for Chris Dahl's troubles. They blamed Chris Dahl's coke slut
IV - 12
sex slave Mandi for Chris Dahl getting arrested in Georgia.
What was really twisted, was that Madara had the same attorney as the guy she accused of conspiring in a first-
degree murder. When Madara claimed Mandi confessed to her that Chris Dahl planned the robbery, Madara and
Chris Dahl both had the same lawyer, Adam Reiss. Is that an insignificant chance coincidence? Or too big to be a
coincidence?
Remember, Chris Dahl hired Adam Reiss the week before Mulrenin died, for his September 1 Orange County meth
arrest. Madara's attorney at that time Chris Smith, worked in the same office as Adam Reiss. So it may have even
been Madara's family that recommended Adam Reiss to Chris Dahl, through his ex-wife.
In February of 2017, Adam Reiss was about to sign a suspended sentence deal for Dahl's September 2016
trafficking arrest. If Dahl got arrested for anything, the suspended sentence would immediately become a real prison
sentence. At the same time in February 2017, Adam Reiss drove the whole way to Seminole County to meet with
Julie Madara, in place of her attorney at the time Chris Smith for her Seminole case 2014CF003700.
In all of Mandi and Scott Love's three years of court dates, which often have 200 different defendants in a single
court session, I have never seen Adam Reiss work any other case in Seminole County. Even worse, Madara is
indigent and has been using public defenders, whereas Chris Dahl is a cash client. So why is Reiss driving an hour
each way in rush-hour traffic to another county where he doesn't usually take cases, to have a broke person invent
stories about his cash client?
Adam Reiss was working for Chris Dahl, when he made the unusual trip to Seminole County to talk with Julie
Madara. Remember also, when Scott was arrested and interviewed he acted like he knew nothing about what
happened. But Scott said Mandi was a stripper would know James Mulrenin. He said it was Mandi and some other
guy on the video at Walmart. And remember also Mandi was probably delivering cocaine from Chris Dahl to
Mulrenin the night he died, and she was probably also giving all her hooker earnings to Chris Dahl while Scott went
hungry. So anyone can see, Scott was looking for an angle to blame Mandi and Chris Dahl for what happened.
All three times Mandi did cocaine while having sex with me, it came from Dahl's house. Cell tower records show
Mandi went to Dahl's house on the way to Mulrenin's apartment, and then ended up back at Dahl's house, the
morning after Mulrenin died. So Chris Dahl immediately knew he was in jeopardy as the person who sent Mandi to
Mulrenin's house in a cocaine deal, when Mulrenin got shot. And Chris Dahl knew there might not even be evidence
that weirdo Scott Love was there, and Chris might get blamed for it. So right from the day it happened, Chris Dahl
might have been telling his family and friends, who were also Madara's family and friends "I know what happened.
Scott Love went over there to rob him, I didn't go with them. I knew about it, but I was at home the whole time."
There is a good chance Madara did not know Adam Reiss was working for Chris Dahl when she started talking to
him. In her deposition, Madara said she told Reiss what she knew about Mandi's case, and asked Reiss to help her
figure out what happened. I believe Reiss heard through the grapevine or from Madara's attorney Chris Smith, that
Madara was talking about Jackson's case. Madara was reading crime stories about her home neighborhood in the
Orlando Sentinel in Seminole County jail, before Mandi transferred to Seminole from Orange County where Mandi
was arrested.
Remember, so far as Adam Reiss knows, Chris Dahl is himself the victim of lies. It started when Chris Dahl
supervised a hooker named Tiffany to make a false police report against a guy named Barton. Then James Arnold,
and Barton, and probably also Tiffany, told police all the meth in James' car belonged to Chris. Chris Dahl then told
the court the weed in his bedroom belonged to Tiffany.
So I believe Reiss drove up to Seminole County to find out what Madara knew about the night Mulrenin died, to see
if there was any chance of Chris Dahl getting arrested for drugs again. That would make the suspended sentence
Dahl was about to sign, a bad deal. I believe Reiss humored Madara, and said "Yeah, Chris Dahl told me what
happened. He talked to Mandi that night. Word is Mandi got a job that night with a plan to rob Mulrenin .So she
drugged him and somehow won a struggle and Mulrenin went over the balcony." There was nothing about Chris
Dahl drug dealing in the story Madara came up with after talking to Reiss.
IV - 13
Reiss then substituted himself for Chris Smith and became Madara's new lawyer in her Orange County case 2014-
CF-013059-A-O. This enabled Reiss to talk to Madara about the case, and protect whatever he said with attorney-
client privilege. He was still Chris Dahl's lawyer also. I doubt Madara paid him a dollar.
Reiss probably had no idea what Madara would do next. In March 0f 2017, even though she had an attorney,
Madara wrote two letters by herself. One was a request for a sentence reduction, which a Google search showed was
about 90% lies. The other was a letter to the Seminole County prosecutor, where Madara claimed she had secret
inside information about Mandi's case. Madara wrote in her letter that the prosecutor should contact her new
attorney Adam Reiss, to get the secret inside information. Reiss was the one who could best tell prosecutors the
secret inside information Madara had obtained. The prosecutors went to talk to Madara at Lowell prison, and
Madara said it was Adam Reiss' other client, Chris Dahl, who set up the robbery. Remember, Madara probably
didn't known Reiss was Dahl's attorney.
You may wonder where the final part of Madara's story came from, Chris Dahl planning the robbery. Chris Dahl
setting up the robbery was not in the police report, and it was not in the GHB story invented at Dollhouse. But there
was an identical story, at Julie Madara's sentence hearing, for her Orange County case 48-2013-CF-12278-A-O. At
Madara's Orange County sentencing for burglary, she whined how a drug dealer in her neighborhood - e.g. Chris
Dahl - was the one who forced her to rob people. So now she just replaced herself with Mandi, in her same story.
Madara wrote the letter to prosecutors in March 2017, where she claimed Chris Dahl's attorney Adam Reiss had
inside information that Mandi confessed to her. But Madara's claim was never revealed to Mandi's attorneys until it
showed up in the docket as a supplemental discovery in September 2017. Two things happened almost immediately.
First Adam Reiss put in a petition to seal Chris Dahl's Orange County case 48-CF-011304-O (see 2016-CF-011305-
A-O) so nobody would know he was Chris Dahl's attorney when his other client Madara came up with her secret
information about Chris Dahl. Second, Mandi's attorney Carrie Rentz stopped answering calls from me and Mandi's
family, and requested the Seminole court appoint a some random Seminole attorney Russell McLatchey to advise
Mandi on a conflict of interest. Because Carrie was also Julie Madara's attorney in three cases in Orange County in
2009 and 2013. McLatchey's office was like three miles up 434 from Carrie Rentz and co-counsel Bark.
Mandi's case was delayed month after month, while McLatchey was supposed to be advising Mandi whether to
dump Carrie for having an ethical obligation to her previous client Julie Madara. Finally in January 2018, Orange
County granted the petition to seal Dahl's case, and hide that Reiss was Dahl's attorney. Early in February the Dahl-
Reiss case disappeared from the public records, and Mandi's case suddenly resumed. Mandi's lawyers were back in
court literally within a few days of Dahl's case going off the record. Mandi's lawyers suddenly came to Judge
Nelson's next available hearing date to settle the Madara-Rentz conflict.
It was obvious to me they were waiting for Chris Dahl's case to seal. I assumed the purpose must be so that Chris
Dahl could safely testify how Madara's entire story was nonsense. I thought Chris Dahl was going to show up in
court with Adam Reiss and tell the real story, that Mandi had known Mulrenin for a year and had been dating him,
and was delivering a bag of weed or something the night he died. I thought Mandi's lawyers had been arranging all
this, for Dahl to save Mandi by explaining how Madara lied, and what really happened.
Imagine my shock, when Reiss showed up in court not as Dahl's lawyer telling the truth, but as Madara's lawyer
representing her story about Chris Dahl conspiring in a murder. Reiss had gotten Madara to sign a waiver of
confidentiality, which meant Carrie no longer had an ethical conflict under the rules of The Bar. Russell McLatchey
advised Mandi that Carrie no longer had a conflict, and Mandi kept Carrie Rentz as her attorney. Meanwhile Mandi
was in isolation this whole time and could hardly make a phone call, and had no idea what was going on.
Madara signed that she understood how it was in her best interest, to sign a waiver releasing her previous attorney
Carrie Rentz from any ethical or confidentiality obligations. It was never made clear how this could possibly be in
Madara's best interest. It delayed Mandi's trial, where Madara hoped to testify. It freed Carrie to use any confidential
information she might have, as an adversary at Madara's parole hearing or something. And because Carrie was
Mandi's attorney, it let Mandi's attorneys use Madara's recorded jail phone calls about Carrie, where she lied and
made up nasty stories about Carrie cheating on her husband and having sex, as evidence of Madara's bias, and
propensity for malicious gossip.
IV - 14
It was all a complete scam. First, Carrie does not even need a confidentiality waiver. She is immediately relieved of
any ethical obligation to Madara when Madara commits a crime, in this case perjury. Second, the rules of evidence
do not even permit Carrie to say any confidential information obtained from Madara, they are only allowed to
"impeach" Madara's credibility with specific types of public information.
I knew exactly what happened. I had already paid Carrie $80,000, and still owed her another $20,000 for $100,000
total. If her previous client being a witness disqualifies Carrie from the case, she immediately loses $100k.
Meanwhile, Adam Reiss wants to control Madara's testimony, on behalf of his actual paying client Chris Dahl. It
was a very shady setup Reiss was engaged in. In exchange for Rentz looking the other way, and never telling
anyone Reiss was also Dahl's attorney, Reiss got the waiver from Madara which enabled Carrie to keep her
$100,000. It was a quid pro quo at the expense of Rentz's client Mandi. Reiss and Madara basically paid Rentz
$100,000 to look the other way.
Carrie Rentz was diagnosed with a major medical problem at this time. She had to go through surgery, she couldn't
take on any new cases, she was strapped for cash. She probably had to do whatever Adam Reiss told her to do for
that $100,000, to keep from losing her house and her office. And Bark is very loyal to Carrie, he did what he had to
also.
Carrie knew Adam Reiss was Chris Dahl's attorney when his other client Madara made up the story about Mandi
confessing. But Carrie never provided that information to McLatchey who was supposed to advise Mandi on the
conflict. Carrie never admitted to knowing it whatsoever. And Mandi never knew what was really going on. It also
came out that Madara blamed Carrie for bad legal advice, which Carrie provided in exchange for visits to a nail
salon owned by Madara's mother. Madara thought her previous conviction was Carrie's fault, and wanted to
sabotage Carrie as revenge. But McLatchey never got that information to advise Mandi, and Mandi never knew.
Mandi's lawyers never brought up Adam Reiss' name at trial. They said the jailhouse witnesses were lying about a
"Chris Dahl" being involved, he was some irrelevant person who had nothing to do with anything. They asked lead
Detective Sprague on the stand at Mandi's trial "Have you ever known of anyone named Chris Dahl to be in any
way involved in this case?" No.
Of course the jurors went straight back to the jury room, and punched the last number Mandi called into their
tablets. One juror was using a tablet right in the jury box during bench conferences, and everyone was too strapped
for cash to risk shutting down the trial over it. So I am sure those girls who were using their devices the whole trial,
saw Chris Dahl's name pop up for the phone record as the last person Mandi talked to before going to Mulrenin's
house. So Mandi's attorneys covered for Reiss, the jury found them to be liars hiding Chris Dahl's involvement,
nobody cared that the jurors broke the rules all day and lied about it, and Mandi got two life sentences.
Mandi's lawyers would say they did it for two reasons, 1) A Seminole jury will convict you of first degree murder
for hanging out with drug dealers, and 2) Mandi's lawyers were afraid not just Madara, but Chris Dahl, would testify
against Mandi to protect himself. If that is the case, Mandi should have known what was going on, before deciding
whether Carrie had a conflict of interest. Mandi never heard anything about any theory that Chris Dahl might testify
against her to protect himself from drug charges, and that is why they had to protect Reiss and Dahl in exchange for
a confidentiality waiver worth $100,000. To this day Mandi imagines Chris Dahl is her best friend in the world and
would never do anything like that.
I could not contact Mandi in isolation to tell her to dump Carrie for accepting a bribe. So I wrote her a letter, and I
wrote a complaint to the Florida Bar. Mandi was sedated 23 hours a day in isolation, she thought I was joking. The
Florida Bar told me it had all been settled appropriately by Mandi's conflict attorney McLatchey. They said the
court approved of it, and I had no right as a third party to complain or have contact with Mandi in jail. What The
Bar did not know, is that the relevant information of Madara's attorney being Chris Dahl's attorney, and Madara
being motivated by a grudge against Mandi's attorney who did legal work in exchange for facials from Madara's
mother, was never shared with McLatchey to advise Mandi properly in light of the full facts.
Carrie had her own conflict, having just been bribed by Adam Reiss by allowing her to keep her $100,000 by
getting the confidentiality waiver from Madara. And Adam Reiss had a huge conflict, so that there is no way he
could advise Madara honestly, without being influenced by his obligations to Chris Dahl. But Russell McLatchey
IV - 15
never knew what was really going on, and never told Mandi. It was just a setup between attorney friends, at the
expense of their incompetent indigent clients.
It also came out in the recorded jail phone calls that Madara was reading news stories not just about Mandi
(including the ones from Jose Baez's receptionist) but also about all the other inmates in jail, and was a nasty
gossiper. But who would assume otherwise of a 15-time felon alcoholic known for burglarizing family heirlooms
and stealing her best friend's car?
Mandi had sex with Santa Claus-looking degenerates, and gave all the money to Chris Dahl. To pay his mortgage or
his property tax or whatever. Because Chris Dahl has a sad dog that doesn't bark, and Mandi is a child sex-abuse
victim with a brain injury. So that was Mandi's psychology, she fucked old guys so she could give the money to
Chris Dahl.
Then on Wednesday December 7, 2016, Chris Dahl took the money Mandi gave him, and hired the office mate of
family friend Julie Madara's lawyer, local libertine Adam Reiss. Adam Reiss then went to the Publix on Central
Boulevard, and bought organic sprouts for his bucktooth airhead sugar baby, with the money Mandi originally got
for having sex with decrepit hippie scumbags just like him. And he spent the rest of Mandi's earnings on gas to
Seminole County in place of Chris Smith, to coach Julie Madara to lie and say Mandi is a murderer, to protect Chris
Dahl's suspended drug sentence he was about to sign.
Mandi Jackson gave her body to pay Adam Reiss. He then turned around and used that money she produced, to
falsely accuse her of murder, and unjustly take the life of a young girl whose body paid for his groceries. Sick and
obscene members in The Florida Bar!
If Mandi's lawyers had their way, Mandi would get two life sentences and nobody would ever know Madara's
lawyer was Chris Dahl's lawyer. Nobody would ever know that's how Madara got her gossip story from Conway,
while the real story, the truth about Dahl and Mulrenin's drug dealing, remained hidden. Except the jury probably
saw that name "Chris Dahl" pop up in the phone record as the last number Mandi called, and thought Mandi's
lawyers were lying that Chris Dahl had nothing to do with it, and Madara's story was true.
-----------
I had some more thoughts a year after I first wrote this, on why Carrie Rentz never protested on the record that any
evidence was suspect, and only gave subtle hints (except the Dollhouse video which was probably altered by Big
Mike not police).
Star witness Julie Madara claimed Chris Dahl set up the murder. But lead Detective Ben Sprague claimed on the
stand at trial, to not even recognize the name Chris Dahl. Sprague also claimed to not recognize, or know the name
of, the dog walker who let his murderer into the building.
In a rational world, the lead detective would have looked up the name Chris Dahl, immediately after Julie Madara
said Chris Dahl set up the murder. And in a rational world, Sprague would have immediately seen Chris Dahl's
attorney Adam Reiss was also Julie Madara's attorney, the same attorney Madara's letter said to contact, for Chris
Dahl's attorney to tell Sprague what Chris Dahl did. Was Sprague willfully blind?
In a rational world, Lead Detective Sprague would realize Mandi's attorney Rentz took a bribe to hide that Madara's
story came from popular local attorney Adam Reiss. And in a rational world, Mandi's attorney Rentz would then
keep quiet about Sprague and Athaide - and Rentz's local friend Smolarek - faking all the evidence.
So maybe Rentz had her own secrets - and she knew her peers knew her secrets - and that is why she did not reveal
any of the secrets of her peers, how the evidence was altered and staged. Maybe it was not an explicit quid pro quo,
but an influence on her decision making. People who live in glass houses don't throw stones.
IV - 16
4. MALETTA YOUNG - 2017 to 2019
One of the many bizarre events in this case is Maletta Young's attorney, at the time she made her deal to testify
against Mandi, was also Scott Love's attorney, Kenneth Hamburg. Scott Love's other attorney Michael Nielsen, told
me Hamburg was doing the day-to-day busy work in the case, while Nielsen was busy with another trial across the
state. So Hamburg would have immediately been paid as much as $100 an hour, to write the motions that one of his
clients Maletta Young's statements, were unreliable hearsay and could not be used against his other client, Scott
Love.
Maletta Young's false claim that Mandi confessed, also made it harder for the state to offer Mandi a fair deal to
testify against Hamburg's other client, Scott Love. Of course Hamburg had an ethical obligation to withdraw from
one of the cases, and specifically to withdraw from the case where he knew his client was lying. Hamburg withdrew
from Maletta Young's case. But only after he already got paid twice for what she said, shielded his own client from
what his other client said, and saved Love from Mandi being offered a fair deal by having Young say what she said.
Maletta Young is an interesting character. She had been getting arrested for drug felonies at least as far back when
she was 20. In 2017 when she was 30 and she was already a convicted felon, she got arrested for an aggravated
home-invasion battery which she set up. Before that case was even settled while she was out on bond, they kicked in
her door and caught her dealing fentanyl, heroin, cocaine, meth, suboxone, amphetamine, lorazepam, and codeine.
She also had a loaded gun and extra bullets in a drug baggie, as a convicted felon and habitual offender. For all that,
the Seminole County prosecutors let her out without posting bond, and gave her two years.
At Maletta's deposition, she said she had to testify against Mandi because she couldn't set people up buying drugs as
an informant any more. She would have liked to do more buys, more police stings to get more reduction in her
sentence. But it was not possible. Everybody knew she was an informant. Maletta saw it posted on the Seminole
Clerk of Court website, that she was working with police. And she assumed everyone else saw her case there also.
Maletta said in her deposition she was not doing the same things any more, she was not talking to the same people,
she was not selling drugs. Drugs were just not a part of her life any more, and she could not buy them because no
drug people would talk to her. The material publicly available about Maletta, which said she was an informant and
which people read about her on the Seminole Clerk of Court website, had ruined her ability to be a drug user.
Judge John Galuzzo set Maletta's two-year sentencing for Friday October 5, 2018. He must really be impressed with
his own voice, because he gave Maletta specific instructions "DEFENDANT MUST APPEAR ON TIME TO
NEXT COURT DATE" and "DEFENDANT IS NOT TO BE ARRESTED OR COMMIT ANY NEW LAW
VIOLATIONS." So on Friday October 5, 2018, Maletta showed up late, and Judge Galuzzo told her to come back
Monday. And then on Monday Maletta came back and got her two year sentence, and was taken straight from the
courthouse to the jail.
And then on Tuesday, someone tipped off the jail that Maletta brought drugs to her sentencing before Judge
Galuzzo, and had smuggled them into the jail. They caught her with five small balloons that she was carrying
around the jail in her mouth, and two large balloons in her cell, containing buprenoprhine, naloxone, meth,
alprazolam, and fentanyl. While those charges were pending, Maletta told her boyfriend to mail her suboxone in the
jail which he did, and she got caught and charged for that also. You could not hope to outdo Maletta Young's
persistence and determination to commit drug felonies over the years and put peoples live at risk. For all that,
including dealing fentanyl in the Seminole County jail, they gave Maletta another three years.
Maletta's unique story about what Mandi confessed to her, seemed to fit with her unique circumstances. Of the
people who claimed Mandi confessed, Maletta was the only one who was out on bond. The story Maletta told,
seemed to come from the clerk web site and from Google, not from Mandi or Madara. Maletta's story largely
contradicted what the other girls claimed Mandi confessed.
MALETTA: Mandi went to Rachel's to meet the manager and rob him.
Mulrenin had not been the manager at Rachel's since like 2001, when he was famously arrested for racketeering and
IV - 17
prostitution. He was the manager at Rachel's North primarily from 2010 to 2012. All that was available in Google if
you searched for Mandi's case, and then searched the victim's name, James Mulrenin. Back in 2017 when Maletta
came up with her story, Rachel's was the main strip club name that was in Google for James Mulrenin. For his
racketeering and prostitution, that he was known for. But if you talked to Mandi instead of talking to Google, she
would have told you Mulrenin was the manager of Stars and Dollhouse.
Unless Mandi somehow knew Mulrenin primarily from when she worked at Rachel's for an extended period the
previous summer. But if that is the case, then she already knew Mulrenin, and this idea the other jailhouse witnesses
tell, that she came in as a stranger and Mulrenin liked her on the first night he met her, would be false.
MALETTA: They beat Mulrenin up.
Mulrenin went down five floors in the dark, hit a railing with his legs hard enough to bend it, smacked his head into
a wall, and landed on the ground below. One of the other jailhouse witnesses said Mandi confessed to somehow
seeing Mulrenin hit his head on the railing, five stories below in the dark, despite original witnesses saying
Mulrenin's balcony was clearly lit and he was alone. Through all that, the only spot on Mulrenin's whole body that
had no marks, was his face.
You and I know when people beat someone up, that means you punch him in the face. Maletta knows that too.
Maletta's victim had lacerations, a broken nose, and a possible fractured jaw, from being struck in the face with
hands and feet. You think 100-pound Mandi is going to beat up 250-pound Mulrenin with body blows? You think
Scott Love holding a gun is going to punch Mulrenin in the stomach to get him to comply? No. But Mulrenin's face
was not marked.
Under the law, "assault" is just threatening someone. Most people don't know the legal term for actually striking
someone is not assault, it is "battery." That's what Maletta Young did to her home-invasion victim. Maletta looked
Mandi up on the clerk website, and saw Mandi was charged with "burglary of a dwelling with an assault or battery."
So Maletta just assumed Mandi did the same thing Maletta did in her "aggravated battery" case. Both Mandi's
charges and Maletta's charges included the word "battery," And Maletta's victim was beat up. And Maletta assumes
assault means beating someone up.
But James Mulrenin was not beat up. Maletta made a rookie mistake, after reading Mandi's charge on the Seminole
Clerk website and comparing it to her own.
MALETTA: Mandi had done the same thing with her boyfriend in the past, where "she used to go down and get
johns and he would come in and rob them."
Did Mandi leave those johns a resume with her name on it?
Mulrenin was not a john. He was her boss. He was a pimp. He was in her same social circle. He had her real name,
and her father's real name and phone number as her emergency contact, on a job application. Did Mandi tell Maletta
why cell tower pings had her at Mulrenin's house four times just that week?
There are many common traits of strip club managers. They are aggressive and strict with the girls. Robbing a strip
club manager would be like pickpocketing a bank robber. Hookers steal watches from fat drunk guys from
Minneapolis, passed out in $400 hotel rooms. Hookers do not steal from pimps. Mandi has been robbed by drug
dealers and pimps, and she would not expect to be able to rob one easily.
You would think if Scott had been sticking a gun in guy's faces to get more than the standard $250 hooker fee, he
might have been able to afford his own phone to at least coordinate when to come in. I wish Mandi had robbed
some johns, instead of trying to be nice to people in Seminole County.
MALETTA: Mandi left something open so Scott Love could come in and rob Mulrenin.
This was alleged in two places 1) in Mandi's police report which Maletta said at deposition she had in the room with
her in jail, and 2) in the arrest affidavit which was on the same Seminole Clerk web site Maletta blamed for
IV - 18
exposing her as an informant. In both places the allegation was proved wrong. It eventually came out the freight
door was not inadvertently left open as police wrote. The undisclosed video showed Love came in behind a dog
walker who swiped the door open. Police also wrote they believed Mandi left the door unlocked so Scott could gain
access to the apartment when she and Mulrenin went into the garage. But the deleted video showed Mandi entered
the garage ahead of Mulrenin, so Mulrenin would have been the last one out his door. The video showed Mulrenin
walked faster than Mandi walked in heels, and ahead of her.
If Mandi were inside the apartment, it would be "she unlocked the door" or "she opened the door" not "she left it
open." Detective Sprague's theory that Mandi and Mulrenin had to leave the apartment so that Scott could get in,
never made any sense.
MALETTA: Mandi pretended to Mulrenin she would come over for sex, but her true intent was to rob him.
How is Mulrenin going to believe it, when a hot 21-year-old blonde girl shows up as a complete stranger, and says
she will come over to his house and have sex with him? Mandi was not a desperate 30-something hispanic single
mom. I remember that second night I fucked her, she had that "too good to be true" t-shirt. Guys never believed
Mandi would really have sex with them, until she proved it. Not even Chris Dahl that first night she went to his
house and did a mountain of cocaine. Everybody the first time they met Mandi was thinking "What is the scam,
what is the trick here?" She was a flawless young girl. A lot of guys missed out because they never would have
guessed.
The only way Mulrenin would believe a promise from Mandi to have sex with him, and not be suspicious or
skeptical, is if he already knew who Mandi Jackson was, from everyone else at the strip clubs who knew her. I
know her. And I knew Mulrenin. To me it is not credible that the girl who never says no, who is proud of being up
for any sexual challenge, and the guy who is known for aggression and date rape and having sex with 100's of new
employees, could spend two hours alone in an apartment drinking vodka together, and not have sex. Mandi does not
lead a guy on. Maletta had the wrong person.
In Barbara Mellinger's deposition, Mandi's lawyers asked if Mellinger saw Mandi dance on stage or do a private
dance. They asked if sometimes dancers don't get paid for dances, and if Mellinger saw Mandi close out her funds
and get paid that night. They were talking about dancer dollars which strip clubs sometimes sell customers with
credit cards to pay for dances. Mandi's lawyers have no idea what a private dance is or about credit-card
chargebacks or how strippers get paid. So obviously Mandi told her lawyers she did a private dance for dancer
dollars, and didn't get paid that night. Barbara Mellinger said none of the girls got to cash out their dancer dollars
that night.
I already told you how forcing girls to come back the next day for their money at Stars, was creating an opportunity
for Mulrenin to make them earn it a second time. So it is most likely Mulrenin told Mandi if she came over to his
house and brought him some cocaine or weed from Chris Dahl, he would give her the money she was owed for her
dancer dollars. It was most likely Mulrenin who thought he was tricking Mandi with his veteran scheme that he used
on 1000 girls already.
But Mandi did not look like a girl who would go for that trick. She had a BMW, not a bus ticket. Remember, this is
the girl who Chris Dahl thought looked too young and innocent to try to have sex with the first night. And I thought
she was an underage sex sting. Mulrenin would not waste his time with this scheme to get a girl to his house, he
would not come down to the curb looking eager like he did on video, unless he had actual information that Mandi
was a lot easier and more willing than you would guess if you didn't know her.
Mulrenin's confidence that getting her to this house would pay off, could not have come from Mandi saying she
would go upstairs and have sex with him that night. Or he would not have needed a trick to get her to the curb first,
and come down with a drink and talk to her through the window, and only then to get her to come upstairs. He
probably knew from the previous Saturday night when she came, exactly how it would go. Maybe Scott was not
there Saturday.
If Mandi promised sex (and Mulrenin was some gullible old guy who never met a girl before), Mulrenin would not
need to go through the drink-at-the-curb thing. They would just drive right in. And if Mandi didn't promise sex, and
IV - 19
Mandi really was a stranger, there was nothing whatsoever to make Mulrenin believe some random 21-year-old in a
BMW is going to come the whole way up I-4 and fall right into his "come upstairs for a minute" ploy. Mulrenin had
to know her and not have been promised anything by her, the opposite of what Maletta claimed.
When Mandi first heard about Maletta's claims, she was in isolation, half sedated on drugs, and in desperate misery.
She said Maletta "said shit I didn't even say." As well as I can ever tell from just her tone that Mandi is telling the
truth, Mandi was telling me the truth when she said that. Why not put me on the stand? Or if Mandi lied to me, then
wouldn't she also lie to a stranger in jail like Maletta?
Did Maletta just make up that stuff about Mandi robbing johns? I think that was Mandi's reputation among the
"mean girls" in the jail. I warned Mandi in January of 2017 not to say things to sound like she was tougher than she
was, or those jealous bitches would use it against her.
Mandi refused to talk to me for a year after she got arrested at my house, even when I was putting hundreds on her
jail commissary account. Finally in May of 2017 she called me, and I paid for her lawyer. But she didn't tell the girls
in jail she fucked me 57 times. She told them I was some stupid old guy whom she basically tricked and took my
money. Sugar babies and girls who cheat on their boyfriends are looked down on in the jail.
After the girls in jail read the newspaper stories, Mandi was famous. Girls would come in and spend the night in jail,
and they would see the little blonde girl who murdered the strip club manager. They would say "Are you the one
who murdered the strip club manager?" And it is my theory that Mandi would say yes. Because she often asked if I
could mail more pictures of her. Because she met friends in jail who wanted a picture of her to keep. I think they
wanted the pictures not because they were friends, but because Mandi was a famous murderer. So I stopped mailing
them.
It was August or September 2017, around the time of the hurricane, Mandi called me from jail. And she started
saying mean things, like I was too old to have sex and I was so old I needed Depend adult diapers. And I could tell
there were girls listening in the background and she was putting on a show of being mean to me. Because it was
embarrassing for her that she had to depend on an old sugar daddy giving her money for sex. And she would prefer
they think she bullied me and robbed me, than that she had sex with me for money. Me or Mulrenin.
Then Maletta got arrested and came into the Seminole County jail on September 13, 2017. So she was either one of
the girls who was listening in the background when Mandi said she tricked me and took advantage of me, or she
heard it from another girl who was. Mandi kept it a deep dark secret that she liked Mulrenin and cheated on Scott.
And the girls in jail thought she really was swindling old guys, in my case $100,000 for her lawyer, an amount large
enough to drive a year of gossip among broke girls in jail.
Maybe Mandi told the girls in jail "This guy thinks he is going to get sex for paying for my lawyer. But he is not."
Reality was the opposite. Mandi did not want me to pay, for fear I would demand something in return.
You can spend 1000 hours reading what I have written here, and go look at all the evidence, and you tell me if
Maletta is telling the truth that Mandi confessed to her. The jury is expected to figure stuff out like this after hearing
about it once. And with 99% of what I have written here hidden from them based on the rules of evidence. And then
sent into a room to remember and sort out everything they just heard. It is a designed scam, to give the jury
mindbenders which no honest person can really expect them to sort out and make sense of. It is just a scam to
insinuate guilt and confuse the jury.
Maletta ended up not testifying for the prosecution, and I don't know the reason why. Mandi's lawyers almost
brought Maletta over to testify at the trial as part of their defense.
There was some talk of whether Maletta would be brought over to the courthouse in the same bus as the other
jailhouse witnesses, and whether they would have a chance to talk and get their stories straight. Prosecutor Stone
made sort of a joke that he did not want Maletta talking to the other girls.
So whatever Maletta was going to say in the end, it does not seem like it would have been favorable to the
prosecution.
IV - 20
5. KAYLEE SIMMONS - 2017 to 2019
Kaylee Simmons was the 20,000th person to accuse Mandi Jackson of having GHB. The previous 19,999 were
wrong. In all my time in Miami and Orlando, I have never even heard of anyone having GHB. Guys would drug
girls every night on Ocean Drive in Miami. You would see girls stumbling along the sidewalk, with two or three
guys following halfway up the block. A handsome rich kid with a Ferrari even tried to drug my niece. But that was
rohpynol. These places are full of meth, cocaine, heroin, pills, mushrooms, LSD. But I never heard of anyone in
Florida having GHB.
Kaylee Simmons had five felony convictions. She was facing up to life in prison, starting from age 18. Though
realistically she probably would have only got 10 1/2 years. Another girl in jail told her she could get a lower
sentence if she got "information" about other people's cases. Kaylee also heard from Mandi about how Julie Madara
made up a completely wrong story about Mandi to get a sentence reduction.
Kaylee offered the prosecution "information" on a total of four cases. One, Tina Poirier, told Mandi that Kaylee
read her police report in her cell. Another involved Kaylee's co-defendant. His lawyer told Mandi's lawyer Bark that
at her deposition, he caught Kaylee lying "50 times, 50 different ways." Kaylee told Mandi that Kaylee was lying
about what her own co-defendant did, to seem innocent. Kaylee knew from her own case what it would take to tie a
young girl to what a guy did. Another of the four cases Kaylee claimed to have "information" about was settled
before Kaylee testified. At the end of it, Kaylee got a 6 1/2 year sentence.
Mandi told me Kaylee has like a mental disability. She can't say certain words like "enemy" or "facade." And her
mom is a drug addict and her uncle(?) raped her when she was a tot. I talked to Kaylee on the phone once or twice,
and there was something off like she is half retarded. Like she can remember the minute and second she was born,
but has no idea what humor is. She says she was born in Palm Beach and grew up near Orlando. But her accent and
way of talking is something so backwoods and provincial and just creepy, it could not even really exist except in a
movie.
Kaylee is also proud of being a lesbian, and extremely violent. Like she just cuts loose and starts violently beating
on people in every jail they put her in. It has nothing to do with her being a trafficking victim, her brain is just wired
up wrong. It's sad and unfortunate. She is on her own planet.
The creepiest moment in Mandi's trial was when they put Kaylee up there in like John Lennon glasses. Jail has not
treated her well. She is probably on meds, and she looks like she is 16 going on 60. She looked blankly out of those
crazy glasses and said "I've been my whole life in here!" This was around Halloween, and she was creepier than any
haunted house character.
Kaylee knows she is a zoo animal. All the defendants in Seminole County are. Kaylee said her goal in life was "to
be an independent woman." Like she heard that line somewhere and was reciting it, with no idea what it meant or
what planet she was on. It was just sad to see the prosecutors drag this little brain patient around in chains, and
coerce her to lie for their amusement like a monkey.
Kaylee said so many things about Mandi's case that make no sense, I could write a whole book about it. It was like
she was talking about an imaginary friend, not Mandi. But rather than rewrite the entire book here, I will give you a
sampling of what Kaylee originally claimed on tape Mandi told her, right after she claimed Mandi confessed to her.
KAYLEE: The plan was for Scott Love to come in apartment and rob the manager
Did you know in Seminole County, carjackers can get out of prison just by saying fourteen words?
KAYLEE: Scott Love drove Mandi Jackson to the Dollhouse
Love has no car, no license, and literally cannot drive. He has tickets for improper backing, for crashing in his own
driveway, and crashing a motorcycle a block from his house. Mandi is a former amateur cart racer with the top lap
time at K1 Speed who owns her own BMW. Gorewitz watched Jackson arrive at Dollhouse, park, and walk in, and
IV - 21
said Love was not with her. Cintron saw Jackson get her car keys back from Gorewitz at the end of the night.
Jackson was recorded on video arriving, parking and leaving, and Love was not with her. The guy Kaylee was
arrested with did drive Kaylee to meet male customers when she was a hooker.
KAYLEE: They (Mandi Jackson and Scott Love) had gun; it was the same gun Mandi Jackson got in trouble with
in Georgia; At deposition, Kaylee added that police in Georgia gave Mandi the gun back and it was a black Glock
The gun which Mandi admitted Scott Love used to shoot Mulrenin was a 38 revolver.
Mandi's car was packed to the top of the seats when she got arrested in Georgia. Probably because they put
everything from the rental car that crashed in her car. Monroe County Sheriff's deputies watched for at least 30
minutes in the rain while I unloaded all the stuff from Mandi's car at the impound. She had stuff from her passenger
James, a backpack with oversized clothes and a Sunpass beloning to T, and a dog and dog food belonging to Chris.
One of the many things in her car when she got pulled over was a semi-automatic handgun. I think it might have
been like a Ruger 9mm.
Mandi's passenger in Georgia James Arnold was a convicted felon. She also had a dog named Blue in the car. James
Arnold told Mandi he was a registered sex offender. He told her to say the gun in her car was hers because if a
registered sex offender got caught with a gun, they would both get arrested and Blue the dog would go to the pound.
Police arrested Mandi and took the gun because they mistook a liquid in her car for the illegal drug GHB. When the
lab report said the liquid was not an illegal drug, they dropped all charges and returned Mandi's car.
Mandi never asked for the gun back because it was not hers, and she has no interest in guns. A Monroe County
Sheriff's deputy specifically told Mandi, in my presence, that they would not give her the gun back because they did
not think it was hers, and did not have any evidence to show it was hers. At the time, I was a little surprised the
police had such a confident opinion the gun did not belong to Mandi. Years later I realize Mandi's dad probably
called them to complain, and explained clearly the gun did not belong to Mandi. Monroe County Sheriff still has
that gun, and they can tell you it was not a black Glock or a revolver.
I once watched Mandi discuss with her mother, her fear that her pimp might shoot her whole family. They
mentioned that Mandi's dad should be safe because he had a lot of guns at his house. I was curious and asked what
type of guns her father had. Mandi had no idea, to her they were just guns. Mandi was never someone who thought
a particular brand of gun, such as a Glock, was cool. Mandi's mother dated police who probably carried Glocks, and
Mandi did not think they were cool or have any interest in them. Mandi killed people with her pussy.
KAYLEE: At Walmart self checkout, Mandi Jackson signs "fuck you"
It doesn't exist.
I have written software for retailers to get a signature using an Ingenico credit card terminal, store the signature in
an Oracle database, and transmit it to the processor and cardholder's bank. I know from my experience writing
software to comply with payment rules, that this signature is carefully stored by all three parties, and the retailer is
required to store and transmit the signature to get paid. The record of the cardholder signature can easily be
retrieved. All lawyers in Mandi Jackson's case, defense and prosecution, agree that no record of Mandi Jackson
signing "fuck you" exists. The "fuck you" signature never happened. Kaylee's statement has no bearing on reality.
KAYLEE: Manager's apartment is "gone through" (at deposition Kaylee said "they're looking throughout the
apartment" and at trial she said "go through" the apartment)
According to police, Mandi and Scott were in Mulrenin's apartment for almost two hours. According to Kaylee,
they only did “a line” before Scott supposedly came in "as soon as they got to the apartment."
Smolarek photographed storage boxes still sitting packed on the top shelf of Mulrenin's closet. Nobody took them
down and ransacked them. None of the storage areas, such as the laundry area, are disturbed. Nobody lifted the
mattress to check under it. According to patrolman Uzzi the bed was made when he came in. Neither the bed
drawers, nor any other drawers or cabinets, were found open when police entered. Nobody took the weed or the
IV - 22
long pipe, or the white iphone, in plain sight on the kitchen counter. Nobody took the $20 bill, two bags of cocaine,
and a pill, off the first shelf in the first kitchen cabinet. Nobody took a large amount of weed and cocaine in a mug
on the second shelf of the first kitchen cabinet. Nobody took the large pile of cash in a tin in the kitchen cabinet.
Nobody took the weed in the freezer. Nobody took a second white iphone, or the ipad, on display in the kitchen.
Remember, Mandi was portayed as broke and desperate, Neisha Cintron said she had no money. Police found
something like $6 when they arrested her. Police photographed weed in Mandi's car. The Dollhouse video shows
Mandi smoking weed with Cintron after closing. There was weed on Mulrenin's kitchen counter, but not in his
blood test. If Mandi was doing drugs with Mulrenin - using that rolled up $20 bill to snort cocaine, using that pipe
on his counter to smoke weed - she would have known these things were in his kitchen. But she did not take them.
KAYLEE: Mandi Jackson drove her car to manager's apartment; Scott Love hid in back of car
Jackson is supposedly seen talking to Mulrenin at the curb through her driver's side window, before he supposedly
walks around and gets in her passenger seat. Jackson is seen driving into Mulrenin's building with Mulrenin in her
passenger seat. Mulrenin is 6"1 and the seat appears to be way back. Smolarek photographed the car a few days
later, with the passenger seat way back, and the back seat cluttered with junk. It appears the dress Jackson bought
from Neisha Cintron last thing before she went to Mulrenin's house, and the stripper shoes she wore at the club, are
still on top of the junk. Love is 6' tall. The back seat of a BMW 328i is small. There is no way Love could hide in
the back seat and not be visible to Mulrenin as they drove into his garage.
According to the video provided by police, Love arrived and entered Mulrenin's building separately from Mandi. So
Love would have been out of the car before the car arrived at the building, and before anyone could have seen him.
Therefore, Love would not have had reason or occasion to hide in the back seat.
There is a video that is best interpreted as Scott Love walking into the fifth-floor garage, searching for Mandi's car,
and finding it. That is how it is described in one of the video timestamp files typed by police "Lofts
Powerpoint.pptx". It says Scott "walks around appears to be looking for the BMW".
KAYLEE: Mandi Jackson parked her car, went to manager's apartment, and left door unlocked.
At least 30 minutes after Jackson parked and entered, Mulrenin and Jackson left the apartment, and entered again.
So it makes no sense Jackson would mention parking her car, in a story about leaving the door unlocked when they
entered much later. Mulrenin walked with Jackson every time police video shows them entering, so Mulrenin would
have operated his own door for Jackson to enter. Evidence is Love did not come in until almost two hours after
Mandi parked her car. Kaylee makes the two hours between parking and Love coming in, and the entries and exits
in between, vanish.
KAYLEE: They (Mandi Jackson and the manager) did a "line" and went to balcony; Mandi Jackson kept manager
busy on balcony; Scott Love entered apartment and went into a room; Mandi Jackson saw Scott Love poke his head
out of room; Scott Love comes out of room and says it's a stickup;
You don't want to stick Mulrenin up on the balcony, where neighbors can see and hear. So you would not take him
to the balcony to get ready for a stickup. You want to stick him up in the kitchen. It is a tiny apartment with a tiny
balcony, that is separated from the living room by glass. So you can see the front door clearly from the balcony.
Mandi has no way to know when Love is about to enter. And Love has no way to know when Mulrenin is on the
balcony. Because Love does not have a phone, and Mandi did not call or text anyone while she was there.
There are enough empty bags in a mug in the kitchen, to suggest they did a lot of lines, And evidence is Scott Love
did not come in for almost two hours. Certainly Mandi did not keep Mulrenin busy on the balcony for two hours. So
why wait for two hours, and how does Love know two hours later when Mandi takes Mulrenin to the balcony?
When did Mulrenin stash his cocaine, the rolled-up $20 bill used to snort it, and the plastic card used to cut it, in the
kitchen cabinet? Did he stash it before stepping a few feet away to the other side of the glass on the balcony? Why
stash the cocaine to go to the balcony, when he can still see the kitchen where the cocaine was stashed, from the
balcony? If Mulrenin didn't stash the cocaine, why did Scott or Mandi stash the cocaine and the rolled-up $20 bill
IV - 23
used to snort it, instead of taking it? Why does Mandi need Scott to come in, when she can just take the cash after
Mulrenin goes to bed?
KAYLEE: Mandi Jackson received a text from "Chris" informing her that the manager of the Doll House had
money and drugs and was a "good lick"
When you say "the manager of the Doll House" rather than "Jim" you are talking about a stranger.
How could Chris Dahl know if Mulrenin has money or drugs in his pocket or house on a given night? Are you
really going to apply for a stripper job with your and your father's real name, work all night, bring your boyfriend to
another county at 5AM, hang out drinking vodka and smoking weed with a known date rapist for two hours, and
stick a gun a guy's face where people on all sides can hear, based on a rumor that a complete stranger has money or
drugs?
Did Mulrenin report his illegal drug inventory to strangers? Was Chris Dahl psychic to know Dollhouse was about
to have a good night, or Mulrenin has money in his closet in another county?
All evidence and background I know, says Chris Dahl was Mulrenin's drug dealer, and Mulrenin profited from Dahl
selling drugs inside Dollhouse. A drug dealer would know when a customer has drugs and cash. But all evidence
and background I know, says Jackson delivered drugs to Mulrenin's apartment four times just that week. So Jackson
would know firsthand if Mulrenin had drugs and cash. Chris Dahl could not tell Jackson something that Jackson
would already know, and Chris Dahl would not know.
Let's suppose Chris Dahl went to a party at Mulrenin's apartment, and saw cash and drugs. Mandi's cell tower
records have her at Mulrenin's apartment four times that week. Mulrenin's job as manager at Dollhouse would have
nothing to do with it. It would be "Jim, the guy whose house we have been at all week, the guy whose house we
have gone to already without any of us ever working a single day at Dollhouse, has money and drugs. If you can go
to his house or meet with him one more time, like you already have all week without ever applying to Dollhouse,
you can steal it."
Remember from the cell towers, Mandi did not go out and do her strip-club pattern on Sunday. On Monday the strip
clubs are usually empty also. But Barbara Mellinger said there were some big customers at Stars on Monday. And
Mellinger also revealed two years later what she previously kept secret for some reason, that Mandi also applied to
Dollhouse on Monday. Chris Dahl's girlfriend Dalindy worked at Stars. So it is possible and perhaps even likely,
that Chris Dahl texted Mandi on Monday, and said there were some big customers at Stars and she should come in
and strip. So Mandi immediately came looking for Mulrenin who was her friend with benefits, and would be the
only way she could get hired for night shift and start working that same night. Mandi's lawyers have hinted Mandi
worked at Stars on previous nights. If so, maybe she got there too late on Monday and they wouldn't let her work, so
she went looking for her friend Mulrenin.
When I told Mandi how Kaylee said "good lick" Mandi said "What? Good what? Lick??" It is not just Mandi.
Nobody has ever heard the term "good lick" being used like this. I could not find it on Google.
KAYLEE: The manager liked her (Mandi Jackson)
This is the idea that Mandi walked in as a complete stranger, and Mulrenin liked her enough to hire her, start her
late, and bring her back to his house within a few hours of meeting her for the first time.
The manager did two things that are never done, especially not by an angry control freak like Mulrenin: 1) He never
let a new girl start night shift instead of day shift, 2) He never let any girl, and in this case a new girl, start work
after arriving after 9:00, in Mandi's case around 11:00. Neisha saw Mandi change dresses under the unusual direct
supervison of Mulrenin. The other employees saw Mandi and Mulrenin sitting together all night. The video has
Mulrenin kissing Mandi.
Mulrenin was also known as the manager of Stars, including by Michelle Ervin who processed his rental application
at The Lofts. Jackson spent time at Stars with Chris Dahl and the manager around Halloween of 2015 when she
IV - 24
applied for a job. Chris Dahl was a domestic partner with Stars bartender Dalindy Luckett. Another strip-club
employee, Ignacio Ernesto Ramos Moran, rented a room at Chris Dahl's house like Mandi did. Stars/Dollhouse are
run as a single business, where paying at one gets you into the other. Cell tower records show Mandi at
Stars/Dollhouse for 26 hours just the week Mulrenin died. Cell tower records show Jackson looping between drug
dealer Chris Dahl's house and Mulrenin's apartment four times just the week Mulrenin died. Jackson was familiar to
many employees at Stars and Dollhouse. Mandi listed stripping at other clubs on her application, where Mulrenin
was familiar with most of the managers at those other clubs.
Do you think with all these details, and the hundreds of hours Mandi and Kaylee spent together as best friends,
Mandi might have mentioned to Kaylee why her cellphone was at Mulrenin's apartment four days that week, and
what she was doing for 26 hours at Stars/Dollhouse that week?
I've seen Mulrenin take advantage of broke girls for sex, their first day at work. That's what it looked like to me,
anyway. That was day shift, and there was no public kissing. Mulrenin did not give Mandi the same slut-off-the-
street treatment.
My understanding of Mulrenin's policy is pretty simple. If you are going to give your number to guys you meet in
the club, or if he even hallucinates you are giving out your number, or touching their dicks through their pants, or
meeting them in the parking lot or whatever, then you are required to have sex with Mulrenin also. And then if
Mulrenin brings a rich guy and tells you to sit with him, you are going to sit with him. And you are going to tip
Mulrenin at the end of your shift, I would guess at least $50. Mandi didn't fit that arrangement, She didn't meet any
other guys that night. She supposedly spent the whole time with Mulrenin. She didn't owe him sex, she didn't look
vulnerable.
It is not credible to me, that Mandi was a stranger to Mulrenin when she came to work that night. The person who
knows why Mandi's phone was at Mulrenin's apartment four times that week, is the person who knows Mandi. That
person is not Kaylee, it is Mulrenin.
Mandi liked Mulrenin better than she ever liked me. She is like a dog that eats garbage. Poisoned garbage.
Disgusting. And I am not the only person who thinks so.
Let's pause for a quick inventory of girls who knew some inside information in this case and had a potential to be
influencers, and wanted Mandi gone: 1) Chris' girlfriend and Stars bartender Dalindy, Mandi had sex with her
boyfriend, 2) Chris older sister Carrie who OD'd in 2019, blamed Mandi for being a bad influence on her meth-
dealer little brother after he bought Mandi a drink and served her a mountain of cocaine when he was 32 and she
was 20, 3) Chris ex-wife Jessica who is friends with Julie Madara whose kid moved in with Chris when Mandi was
living there, 4) Scott's ex girlfriend who was jealous of Mandi, 5) Barbara Mellinger who lost money because her
manager got sloppy with the town slut, 6) and now her best friend Kaylee. Most of these people and especially
Dalindy probably knew Mandi was no stranger to Mulrenin, but they wanted her gone.
On the other side, the only people who care that Mandi didn't do what she is accused of are me and her family.
When it's your kid, I won't be there.
KAYLEE: They (Mandi Jackson and the manager) took the party back to the manager's apartment; it was a high
rise;
Video shows Mulrenin coming out to the curb with a drink to appear more inviting, and Jackson parking
perpendicular to the garage entrance to meet him. He talks to her from outside the car briefly, through her open car
window. She then does a partial U-turn to enter. This suggests neither Mandi nor Mulrenin was certain she would
go upstairs when she arrived. So it was not already set up back at Dollhouse, that she would go up to Mulrenin's
apartment.
Mandi does not use the word "party" and I confirmed that she doesn't, on the recorded line at the jail. Like "good
lick" this is Kaylee's creepy dialect.
IV - 25
In Barbara Mellinger's deposition, Mandi's lawyers implied Mandi told them she did a private dance for dancer
dollars. Mellinger said none of the girls got to cash out their dancer dollars that night, just like I remembered from
when Mulrenin took over Stars. Neisha Cintron said Mandi had $0 when she got her car keys back. Most likely
Murenin held out the promise of giving Mandi the money she was owed for her dancer dollars, as a strategy to get
her to come to his house. And Mandi had no choice but to come because she was broke, and no choice from Scott
but to bring him.
KAYLEE: Manager was tied/bound with duct tape (Kaylee Simmons thinks Mandi Jackson said duct tape) behind
his back; Manager cursed out Mandi Jackson and got up; Scott Love shot the manager in the leg and said next time
bullet will be in head; Manager breaks free and goes to balcony
The manager would have been something like lying down sideways on the sofa, according to the bullet path claimed
by police. So the manager would have been talking to the back cushion or the wall, and definitely facing away from
Love, when Love shot him.
Are you really going to break free of duct tape, under threat of being shot in the head after you have already been
shot, and jump five storeys, when you could just give them the money? If Kaylee's story were true, Mulrenin would
not have made it to the balcony. There would be a second bullet missing from the revolver, and Mulrenin would
have a bullet in his back.
Remember, this is all with an open balcony door next to other balconies, plus apartments above and below, on both
sides, and across the hall. Russell Songer and Denise Smith saw Mulrenin alone at the railing and said "Don't jump,
don't jump." Mulrenin's neighbor heard the name Denise and someone asking for help in the field after Mulrenin
went over. But nobody ever heard Mulrenin call for help like someone was going to kill him.
I have done a recreation of the duct tape found at the scene. It matches duct tape wrapped twice around the thigh of
a man Mulrenin's height and weight, with a loose tear end, and blood in the spot that matches the entry and exit
wound on Mulrenin's thigh. The repeated duct tape loop circumference is significantly larger than anything I could
produce binding a large man's wrists. So this duct tape was used to attempt to stop the bleeding on Mulrenin's thigh,
while he was seated facing forward in the recliner, with his bleeding left leg elevated on the left side.
KAYLEE: Julie Madara was testifying against Jackson; Mandi Jackson and Julie Madara had same lawyer
This is one thing Kaylee has a clear and accurate understanding of.
KAYLEE: Police messed up; they dumped out drinks that contain GHB
I have been all over the strip clubs around Conway for years, and nobody ever had GHB. Jackson has never had
GHB in her life. There was no GHB. The idea that Mandi Jackson ever had GHB was a complete invention of
police in Georgia. There was zero GHB, and the charges in Georgia were dropped because there was zero GHB. But
this GHB story went into Google, and has been regurgitated by idiots talking about Mandi Jackson for years now.
You and I know butanediol G is Mandi's favorite sex-related placebo. She told her mom on a recorded call from the
jail, that G is the drug Mulrenin was on. Mulrenin had boxes showing he got viagra and testosterone straight from
India. He could have gotten butanediol from the same web sites. If he did, Mandi would have driven straight over
there like she did to my house, when I got some butanediol.
If Mandi Jackson had G in her drink, she was DEFINITELY there to fuck him, not to rob him.
But Mandi, and everyone else I have heard of taking butanediol, takes it intentionally right in their mouths.
Mulrenin was a sex addict, with three different kinds of needles in the drawer under his bed. He was already known
to be on caffeine, testosterone, alcohol, cocaine, and viagra. So I assume he would want to see the butanediol go
straight into Mandi's mouth like she herself wants it to, so he could fuck her like a piece of defrosted chicken like I
did.
There is an old Orlando Weekly article that mentions GHB at Rachel's, back in 2001 when Mulrenin got charged
IV - 26
with racketeering. It states "Some of the dancers in the sex shows were high on tequila shots and GHB, a liquid drug
that provides a temporary euphoria similar to ecstasy." Does that mean it actually happened, or happened more than
once? No. But if Mulrenin's girls were using GHB like weed all day, back before there was a moral panic over it,
that might explain why Mulrenin likes to take G in drinks. For him, the placebo effect could come from putting it in
a drink the same way they did with actual GHB back in the old days.
When I told Scott's lawyer Michael Nielsen I was familiar with Mulrenin, he asked if I knew anything about him
drugging girls. I said I knew he demanded sex from every girl who applied and most ran the other way. Some didn't
run away and had sex with him, supposedly a large number (though still not enough to fill a strip club) but I had no
idea what happened behind closed doors or how it happened. All I knew is he was a wooden person with stunted
social development who did it with coercion not charm. But there could be some short latina single moms who were
attracted to him.
The point is, Scott must have told his lawyer that Mulrenin drugged Mandi. I know Mandi likes the G on her tongue
to feel it burn. If the G really was in their drinks, that was Mulrenin's own meme, maybe a habit he developed back
in the old days, or from girls who actually did drug customers in the strip club. Nobody else in Conway takes G that
way.
Since the effect of G is primarily psychological and it doesn't actually do anything, the effect is strongest when you
go through the actual ritual of putting it in your mouth. The whole point of a placebo is lost if you don't know you
are taking it. Putting it right in your mouth is half the excitement. Unless you are reenacting a ritual from back in the
old days when Mandi was in diapers, GHB was still legal, and Mulrenin's mustache was only 20 years out of date.
But I know this is Seminole County, the land of fantasy, where cute little girls slip GHB into the drinks, against the
wishes of their aging sex-addict bosses who want nothing to do with crazy drug sex.
KAYLEE: The defense is or was that the manager tried to drug her (Mandi Jackson)
There is no tried. It is certain that Mandi Jackson was fucked up out of her mind on drugs, as was her boss who paid
for the drugs and gave them to her, with the intention to get her sloppy and have sex with her.
But for all Love knows, Mulrenin drugged Jackson against her will. Who knows what Mandi told him. It is a fact
that Mulrenin lured many young girl with drugs like rat poison. He had two bags of weed and a pipe in his house,
and his smoke detector was disabled, but he had no weed in his own blood test. The weed was for the girls, like the
straws. This is just business as usual with old guys and strippers. Is there a world where old guys and strippers don't
do drugs and fuck? Mulrenin lured Jackson away from Love with drugs. It is pure craziness to deny this.
The half white pill with Mulrenin's hastily stashed cocaine suggests Mulrenin could have drugged Mandi against her
will. Mulrenin had cocaine, caffeine, alcohol, and viagra in his blood, nothing that looks like a white pill. So maybe
that pill was only chopped into the cocaine he gave to Mandi. You might say half a pill is not going to incapacitate
anyone. But many pills are constructed to release drugs slowly, over 12 or 24 hours. If you chopped it into powder,
and snorted 12 hours worth of drugs straight into your brain at once, it might be enough to knock you down.
Of course police didn't test the pill, because it couldn't help them prove Mulrenin was shot while fleeing. But it was
capsule shaped and the half had a “U”, suggesting the missing half contained 5mg of codeine. Mulrenin had no
codeine in his blood, that pill was used to drug Mandi. And, having just taken her nightly meds when she got off
work, Jackson probably fell asleep by accident on Mulrenin's sofa and was there when Scott came in.
If Mandi had been on anxiety meds back when I knew her, she probably would have passed out, her pimp would
have had to knock eventually, and I would have shot him. The anxiety meds were a bigger difference than the
difference between me and Mulrenin, or the difference between her pimp and Scott Love. She was on anxiety meds
the day she took G and we moved her furniture and she passed out briefly. But unlike Scott Love, her boyfriend was
at work that day. So she had time to wake up and hurry home.
Having had sex with Mulrenin, Jackson had to blame something. So she probably told Love it was the drugs that
made her do it, and that she didn't really like Mulrenin, she truly liked Love. Jackson would prefer not to tell
IV - 27
everyone "Yeah, I cheated on my roommate with this old Gary Ridgway impersonator because I am a coke whore
and I needed a job. And he had a cool suit." Just getting right down to the facts, it really was the drugs! She has
CTE and needs weed! Mandi wasn't at my house that night, because I don't do drugs.
Meanwhile police found tampons on top of the junk in Mandi's room. So poor Love probably could not even get
lucky that week.
KAYLEE: Chris Dahl "has a small dick" (this came out at Kaylee's deposition, I think it became "tiny" at trial)
My best guess is it was maybe Sunday October 18, 2015 when I reported Mandi's pimp to the DCF. And she met
the mystery white guy "Chris" with the manager at Stars around Tuesday October 27 or November 3, 2015. It was
about a week or two after that, when she came to my house with a cut inside the top right of her vagina. She said she
cut herself accidentally with her own fingernail. She told me I had to fuck her left to right to steer clear of the cut.
I asked "Did some big guy tear you up? Was it Chris?" This is before I saw he was a little Jewish-looking guy with
the gayest mohawk in human history.
She said "No, his dick is exactly average size."
Remember, Chris was the guy who gave Mandi "sex the way sex was meant to be" for the first time when she took
G. Dalindy Luckett said something similar when she lived with Chris. Can you do that with a small or tiny dick?
Would Mandi call someone who did that small or tiny, to a female friend? (Full disclosure: Two women with like
20-year fraud sentences both claim to have rung Mandi's bell the hardest with no dick.)
I have a theory about the quality of Kaylee's facts. The Seminole County jail commissary used to sell a large dried
pepperoni. But they discontinued it, supposedly because the girls were using them as dildos. They continued selling
the same pepperoni in a smaller size. They stopped selling the bigger ones right about a month before Kaylee
claimed Mandi made her confession. So Mandi probably held up the smaller-size pepperoni and made a joke like
"We don't have Big Jim Mulrenin any more, but we still have little Chris Dahl."
Kaylee is on her own planet, and probably does not understand jokes like this. But it is very valuable for the jury to
hear whatever comes out of Kaylee's crazy head, to determine whether Mandi Jackson was a principal in an armed
robbery.
That's enough of Kaylee's statements that she claimed Mandi told her. You get the idea.
Now you and I know Kaylee's claimed confession is full of nonsense that directly contradicts physical evidence, and
should never be allowed in a courtroom run by serious people. The jury has one week to hear and remember
testimony from more people than they will ever remember, and none of it is written down for them to refer back to.
To say this is a distraction, doesn't even begin to describe how it undermines the ability of the jury to think straight
and try to make honest sense of the real evidence. But the jailhouse witness is a magical death ray to kill a young
girl like Mandi, and here is why.
Kaylee can basically go up on the stand and tell her story straight through. The prosecutor only has to prompt her by
saying "What happened next?" a few times.
But to show how Kaylee's story is wrong by comparing it to the facts like I just did, you have to go through dozens
of witnesses and pieces of evidence all over the place. You can't just say things in court, and insist they are true.
You have to have a witness say each thing, and the witness says it is true.
So by saying Kaylee is a witness of what Mandi said, she can tell any story straight through. But you need a witness
to dispute each problem with her story, and say it's not true. It normally takes an entire trial to tell a whole story,
using 20 witnesses and 100 items of evidence over a period of days. But a claimed confession can tell the entire
story in 120 seconds.
Suppose Kaylee says "The sky was yellow and the sun was green."
IV - 28
Then you have to argue to the judge to let you introduce an expert witness. "Professor Fassbender, can you tell the
jury what you do for a living?" I am an astrophysicist. "And what does that mean?" I study large gaseous bodies.
"Like the sun?" Yes, technically the sun is a medium-sized gaseous body, but it also includes plasma. "And what
color is the sun?"
Prosecution: "Objection, your honor. Professor Fassbender is an expert on astrophysics, not on colors or human
vision."
To say Kaylee is wrong, Scott didn't drive Mandi to Dollhouse, you need a witness from the Department of Motor
Vehicles to say Scott's license was suspended, and introduce a document that says so. And you need the valet parker
Gorewitz to say he saw Mandi drive up and Scott wasn't in her car. And you need manager Big Mike to say this is
the authentic video from Dollhouse. And then you can show a video clip from Dollhouse of Mandi driving up, and
walking in alone.
So you need to go all over the place with dozens of witnesses and documents, to dispute something Kaylee recited
straight through in a single, easy-to-understand story. By the time you are done, you will have told Kaylee's story a
second time. The jury can't remember all those pieces of evidence, or which piece of paper you compared to which
thing Kaylee said. All they can remember is her story.
And that is why even though Kaylee's story is total nonsense, the prosecution reduced her possible life sentence to
6.5 years, in exchange for using lies to take the life of her best friend, Mandi.
When DNA analysis was invented, a lot of people on death row were found to be innocent. The Florida Supreme
Court wanted to know how that happened. They discovered that something like 50% of death-penalty cases
exonerated by DNA, involved jailhouse witnesses. More than 140 people have been exonerated in murder cases
involving jailhouse witnesses since 1966, when the Supreme Court allowed the scam. People don't want felons
voting except in the one area felons are best at: taking the lives of the innocent.
Do you think there was any penalty for the jailhouse witnesses who committed perjury to take a person's life, or for
the prosecutor who suborned the perjury, in a death penalty case that was overturned by DNA? Of course not. The
prosecutor's peers are not going to prosecute him for victimizing an innocent person in such a heinous manner. And
the prosecutor is not going to prosecute the jailhouse witness whom the prosecutor himself coerced to victimize
other people in jail. Because they are a magic death ray for lazy crooked prosecutors, to use total nonsense in the
courtroom, to take an innocent person's life.
The authors of the fifth amendment did not hope to form a nation where criminals escaped justice. They envisioned
the type of crooked prosecution used against Mandi Jackson. But people who run Seminole County courtrooms are
not on the level of the people who wrote the fifth amendment. And prosecutors who use coerced confession scams
today, when they have real evidence like fingerprints and video and DNA, have to be 100 times lazier and more
crooked.
The obvious solution is for the legislature to create a new independent Police and Prosecution Commission to
punish morally sick members of the executive branch who suborn perjury and victimize the innocent. But of course
the Florida Supreme Court came up with a worthless judge-oriented solution, which is all they could do themselves
in the judicial branch. They recommended the use of a jury instruction.
The Florida Supreme Court said to put somewhere in the fine print, that jurors might use caution when listening to
felons. But then the prosecutor stood up in front in front of Mandi's jury and said Kaylee Simmons would never lie,
because if she did she would get life in prison. She is the only witness in the whole trial, with such a strong
disincentive to lie. It is completely false, and the opposite is true. But the jury is never instructed with the truth, that
there is no penalty for perjury, and prosecutors actually like it and use it and suborn it all the time.
All you need is for another girl to read Mandi's arrest report in jail. And that girl can recite in two minutes, what
would normally take the prosecution 10 witnesses and 50 pieces of evidence to present. People out on bond don't
have this problem, they go home and get their relatives to say they were in Kentucky the night of the crime.
IV - 29
But girls in jail without bond have no control over their body or possessions. They can get their cell searched, or
thrown in isolation, or transferred any time. Their discovery documents can be thrown in a pile in the day room, and
all the girls get into it. And then a girl says I am looking at 50 years, what can I do? And a guard, or another girl
tells her just recite what is in those documents, and say Mandi confessed it. Suddenly the prosecution doesn't need a
dozen witnesses, just one.
Of course it doesn't even look like Kaylee actually read Mandi's report, at least not very diligently. Too many things
are wrong. When I told Mandi that Kaylee agreed to testify, Mandi asked me "What did she say?"
Mandi's tone was not like if you just drank from a mystery jar and dropped dead. "What was in the jar?!?" It was
more like if you took a bite of candy and threw it in the trash. Mandi expressed a sincere puzzled curiosity. "What
did it taste like?" Mandi was really puzzled to know what Kaylee could have claimed Mandi told her.
Me: You told her you took the party back to Mulrenin's house. But I know you don't use the word party.
Mandi: Yeah, I don't say party.
Me: She said Scott drove you to Dollhouse that night.
Mandi: NO. Yada yada yada...
Me: She said you signed "fuck you" at the Walmart self checkout.
Mandi: Laughter.
Me: You told her Mulrenin was a good lick.
Mandi: What?
Me: Good lick.
Mandi: Good what?
Me: L-I-C-K.
Mandi: What does that mean?
Mandi told me stories about Ishnar "Nish-Nosh" Lopez-Ramos, the Kissimmee mommy-killer in jail. She said when
Lopez got angry at another inmate, Lopez joked that she was going to get a plastic bag, like she did to her murder
victim. Mandi told me this story in a tone of jealousy. How can Lopez go around threatening to put bags over
people's heads, and nobody claims she confessed? Where Mandi didn't say anything, and everyone is saying Mandi
is the one who admitted to it.
Do I think Mandi could have told Kaylee that entire nonsense story to humor her, and claim to be an armed robber
just like Kaylee? Absolutely not. But I think Mandi could have said "Yes, we robbed him, so now you tell me what
you and your boyfriend really did in your case." It's possible.
They spent 100's of hours together, and I think Mandi told Kaylee bits and pieces of things that happened. But the
day at the end of their relationship when Kaylee claims Mandi confessed the whole story at once, came after Mandi
found out Julie Madara said Mandi confessed, and after Maletta Young said Mandi confessed. And after Mandi told
Kaylee the stories the other girls made up. And after Kaylee's lying defense in her own case had reached its dead
end.
Do you think Mandi didn't learn to keep her mouth shut after two alleged confessions already? Or do you think
Kaylee is the one who learned from the other two girls? If you are thinking about the answer to that question, you
IV - 30
have fallen for the scam. I already showed you everything Kaylee said was nonsense.
I cannot overstate how creepy it was, to see Kaylee's attorney Mira Berry grinning in the back of the courtroom,
while Kaylee recited nonsense statements that blatantly contradict physical evidence, for the purpose of taking her
best friend's life. Of course Mira Berry is one of two well-known female defense attorneys in the area. And it
pleases her to see her own client do better at the expense of Mandi's attorney Carrie Rentz. It's all sport, the clients
are dirt.
Every lawyer in Seminole County has a psychology that the defendants are subhuman and not worthy of rights, they
are just worthless hamsters to be pushed around like 10-cent poker chips. It is some kind of class-system
psychology, where the lawyer girls think they are little princesses and the defendants are their pigs on a farm.
I already saw Mira Berry grinning at me 18 months earlier, before I even knew who it was. She is a creepy woman
who is unhappy about something, and has some kind of axe to grind. If you are at all pretty, I recommend against
hiring her. Or maybe God just cursed her with a face where she is grinning like a smug idiot all the time.
Often the passage of time is needed to gain perspective, and appreciate the historic nature of events, which at the
time seemed almost nothing. The use of statements of Kaylee Simmons in a murder trial, and the money and the
energy and the lives spent over statements that came from the mouth of one of the the most useless and unfortunate
examples of 46 chromosomes ever created by God, and the weight they were given at the intersection of so many
people's lives, is one of the lowest moments in recorded history.
Kaylee was a child sex-abuse victim and underage hooker, but somehow managed to attract interest from people
with an even lower use for her. She went from being used by some old guy in her family, to being used by strangers
in motel rooms, but that wasn't the bottom. Then she met the government employees of Seminole County, and that
was the bottom. That is as low as a person can go, the most a human being can be demeaned at least in the United
States.
At some point in 2019, Mandi's lawyers asked for the recorded phone calls of Kaylee Simmons. I guess the State
Attorney's office was angry about it. Because while the state is obligated to provide them, the statements of Kaylee
Simmons are beneath anyone wasting their time on, other than for those patronized rubes on the jury to take the life
of another brain-damaged tramp. It is beneath the importance of the crude mammals that work in the state attorney's
office to bother with the phone calls of Kaylee Simmons.
I remember the day some mediocre woman came behind me in Seminole courtroom 5D, to yap with displeasure
over Mandi Jackson's lawyers requesting the recorded statements of Kaylee Simmons. Going to that courtroom,
and witnessing an adult female employed by the taxpayer, expend such calories over nonsense statements with no
bearing on reality of half-retard Kaylee Simmons, is lower than going to the zoo. Going to that courtroom, and
observing such low behavior of a woman concerning her day with the statements of Kaylee Simmons, is like
watching cows eat grass from an airplane.
Committing crimes against young girls like Mandi Jackson is as common as rain in human history. But there is
always some rational incentive, whether sexual, or the general incentives of war. And the pursuit of common
incentives such as kidnap and rape, was weighed against the risk of being burned alive. Coercing nonsense
statements from a half-retard to keep a sick fat girl locked in a box, for no incentive but only from being dumb as
bricks and evil, I believe is a unique event. Committing this against a young girl Mandi Jackson for no incentive
worth recording but only stupidity, is an aberration in human history, a new low point.
It is well suited to the participants. For some people, winning a football game in high school was a high point. For
some people, getting a job feeding monkeys at the zoo is a high point. For people like Mira Berry, who really did
nothing for Kaylee Simmons who was left to fend for herself, being a bystanding stooge for the coercion of perjury
from and against indigent incompetents, is probably the high point of a life and career.
Half of these registry attorneys are just a name, just a person with a copy of Microsoft Word and that name at the
bottom of some legal templates, which name means your Constitutional right to an attorney has been satisfied. They
are just menial laborers on the Seminole Railroad. Do not let your innocent children wander into Seminole County.
IV - 31
6. THE FOUR MOTIVES - December 14, 2016
There are many things about a person like Mandi, that jurors aren't going to understand from their own life
experience. They don't know how the girls Mulrenin exploits for sex, always have another guy waiting somewhere
and he knows it. They also have no experience with how young girls make older guys wait outside.
College guys who date girls their same age, married people, "normal" people who report for jury duty, do things as
a couple. If you visit a friend, you visit together. The closest thing they might know to the world Mandi and
Mulrenin lived in, is picking up a kid at school. It's not like when you go pick up your fiance at the airport, and you
wish you could go out to the gate and meet her. When you pick up your kid at school, you wait outside.
People with an ordinary life experience like an ordinary couple, people who have never had sex with a stripper or
hooker or a girl less than half your age, can be too quick to assume Love and Jackson are colluding, even though
Love and Jackson are never seen on video together. Jurors have no idea what they are looking at. They have never
been there. The key to guessing what Love is doing there and his state of mind - his motive - depends on the timing.
Just like if someone saw you on video outside your kid's school.
My first experience with a younger girl making me wait outside, was when I was 27. That 19-year-old girl Sparrow
picked me up hitchhiking in her red Ford Explorer with her Brittany Spaniel named "Brit." She stayed at my house
for a few days, we had sex a bunch of times. If you are a normal college hippie, you are going to feel sort of like a
couple at that point. You sort of expect to do things together.
She had been telling me about her best friend forever, Jen, who lived in Golden. So on our second day after she got
her car, she brought me on a road trip to visit her bff Jen in Golden. It was two hours away. She called Jen from a
pay phone up the street or something, and then we went to Jen's house. But I don't really know, because Sparrow
surprised me by telling me to wait in the car!
They apparently talked about some very important life and boyfriend issues. Like Jen had a sugar daddy apparently,
but Sparrow didn't know they broke up. And Sparrow was there to tell Jen she broke up with her fiance, and was
living with her new older guy, me. So Jen knew something about older guys.
The whole trip took at least nine hours. We left midday, and got back at night. At the end of it, I could not confirm
that her friend Jen even existed. I never laid eyes on her, and she never saw me. I am not sure why Sparrow even
brought me. Probably for fun and companionship. But also for gas money, and to make sure my door wouldn't be
locked when she got home.
I had normal girlfriends prior to that, long-term girlfriends, where 100% of our friends were friends in common.
Normal girlfriends want to introduce you to their friends, and know if their friends approve. If not they will dump
you. Girls who screw much older guys know people won't approve. They do things in private and march to the beat
of their own drum.
I went to Sparrow's parents house. Her dad dropped a giant nickel-plated revolver on the kitchen counter in front of
me. I am not sure why. Her mom dropped a strange line completely out of the blue. It was something like
"Sparrow's father never did anything inappropriate when she was a child, we gave her a good home!" I took it to
mean he fucked her. And she kept it secret.
The next day, Sparrow and Brit and I went to visit an older girl in Fort Collins who was a model. I was looking
forward to meet a model girl. Again, Sparrow was driving. Again, I was told to wait in the car, out in the street in
some bland suburban development. Sparrow didn't want the older model girl seeing me.
Maybe I am geeky, maybe I seemed too old. Maybe Sparrow was really meeting with a guy, but I don't think so. I
think she was smoking weed in there. They didn't want to share with me. She was smoking her friend's weed, but
bringing me in would be imposing too much. I guess it was probably around the 30-minute mark, that I started to
get maybe a little irritated. I was tempted to go knock. But I didn't.
IV - 32
So after only three or four days of knowing a younger girl, I had lurked in a dark car at night in Golden, and I had
sat casing a suburban house in Fort Collins with drug use going on inside. What if a crime happened in there? I
would be in prison right now.
I was an unemployed 27-year-old man. Would you believe that an adult male looking suspicious in a dark street was
there because a teenager told him to wait and he has no idea why? And he was not even buying drugs, not doing
anything illegal? I know from experience, if you are doing that and a house gets broken into a block away while you
are minding your own business, you get arrested.
Sparrow was the younger of two sisters. Sparrow had paranoid hallucinations. She thought people on the radio were
talking directly to her, her parents were following us, and there was a video camera hidden in the radar detector I
put in her car. But none of that affected her ability to be bossy and strict, and tell me to wait outside when she
visited people
For whatever reason, girls do this. And do it more, when there is an age gap. A juror who has been a pea in a pod
with someone his same age he met in college, doesn't know. He might get angry at a girl who did this strange and
inappropriate thing. Like I said, I was 27 when this first happened to me. Maybe Scott Love is a little cooler than I
am, or more pushy, or just didn't meet a younger girl, and it first happened to him at age 30 with Mandi. Maybe it
never happened to you.
But you have to understand this behavior is as standard between young girls and older guys, as schoolkids who
leave their parents waiting outside at a friend's house. It does not indicate there is anything sinister like a robbery
going on. It is more a sort of compartmentalization, or elevated privacy, than a trait of dishonesty.
Marrying someone your same age and getting divorced is not taboo. Hanging out with an older guy who treasures
you and forgives you and won't disappoint you is taboo. So keeping taboo male friends hidden becomes a habit, and
part of a hidden subculture.
When I met that first Russian stripper and she lived with me, we used to go around South Beach on foot. So it was
harder to make me wait outside. But if I came in the store she always got angry. The person behind the counter at
the phone store would say "Oh, you are together, you know her?" I explained "I'm her friend" and she got angry. I
tried "I'm her roommate" and she got angry. I tried "I'm her boyfriend" and she got angry.
After I threw her out and she went back to LA, she called me one time. She said she was with a guy or using his
phone or something, and the guy she was with was "something like a friend." I was 10 years older than the Russian
stripper, the same amount Scott Love is older than Mandi. If Neisha saw Scott that night she met Mandi at
Dollhouse, would Mandi have said Scott was "something like a friend?"
Relationships like this are not likely to end well. But the jury has to accept that even though they seem strange, they
exist. And it is not illegal to compartmentalize your life and your taboo relationships with guys who are "something
like a friend."
My niece used to make me wait outside when I drove her around South Beach. She even disappeared with my car
for two whole days before I got angry. If you are a geeky uncle, you might at least have that mainstream experience.
My same-age girlfriend left me outside Nieman Marcus for two hours. I am sure many people have that mainstream
experience. Did you get angry left waiting? Did you go into the store and fetch her? Were you there to rob the store?
You are allowed to wait in a department store parking lot. Are you allowed to wait in a suburban street? How about
inside an apartment parking garage?
My sister introduced me to a beautiful young girl in New York City, 10 years younger than me, who had an
unattractive secret. She was desperate to get a job, meet a fireman, and have a normal life. I drove her to a guy's
apartment in the West Village, a young guy wanting to be TV producer. I let her visit with him for two hours
without interfering.
I sat in my car with my dog, next to like a fire hydrant in the West Village, for two hours while she did who knows
IV - 33
what in there. Every minute after 30 minutes I was itching to go knock. But I knew how important it was to her.
Someone who has kids will know an experience like that, waiting outside while a child does something that only the
child thinks is important.
A stripper from Showgirls Cutler Bay stayed at my house in 2008. I picked her up after work. She said she met a
nice old guy with a lot of money, would I mind if she went to visit him? She implied it would pay the rent money
twice. But I had plenty of money to pay my rent. I don't need someone who is staying with me to get some old guy's
money. Disgusting! So I said no way!
But girls really get a sense of self esteem from earning some money, and from bringing joy to someone who likes
them. More than from me just giving her money. So she said how about if you drive me there, and you can wait in
the car while I visit with him in the hotel for only like an hour. And you can wait outside the whole time.
Disgusting!
I said no. But I had money and a car. If I didn't have the car, there is not much I can do. If she has the car it is going
to happen anyway. And I would have to accept going with her as the best deal I can get.
So suppose I didn't have the car or rent, and I therefore had no choice but to ride along while my stripper roommate
visits some old guy at a motel in South Miami. Does that mean I am there to rob him? Is the old guy being taken
advantage of, or tricked? How long would I wait before I went and knocked? What would the old guy do if I did
knock?
What if after two hours, that stripper came out and told me "The old guy didn't give me the money he promised me.
So we are stuck in this parking lot with no gas to get home. Plus I borrowed $75 to bring him a bag of cocaine, and I
owe that also. Gosh my pussy is sore." If it was you, are you sure you wouldn't run in there and split his head open?
Would that make the stripper an accomplice to a burglary?
Mandi always left guys waiting when she had sex with me. She left Primo at Popeyes and Burger King and
Walmart. She left Chris Dahl and his friends at Publix. She left her mom and little brother in the street outside her
house. She left poodle boy at her mom's house, and Tywaun at Ale House.
In all cases where it was another guy, meaning in all cases except her mom or her little brother, Mandi hid it from
me. She didn't want me to know there was a guy waiting. In almost every case, her phone would start lighting up at
some point, when the time got a little stretched. It lit up the most with Primo, who knew she was having sex with
me, after an hour or two. Other than Primo, and even with Primo sometimes, she didn't want the other guys to know
what she was doing with me. And almost always, they did not know.
From my personal experience waiting for girls like Mandi, I am able to know two things:
1) Mandi has pattern of making guys wait while she is with another guy.
2) The motive of the other guy is revealed by the timing. When did he arrive? How long did he wait?
That is why it is so unfortunate in Mandi's case that the video was tampered with, and they didn't get Mulrenin's last
cell tower ping, for example. Because they don't want to reveal the true timing of when Love went in. But for jurors
with a different life experience it wouldn't matter anyway, they would still have no idea what they are looking at.
When I first heard of this event, I immediately knew what happened. Mandi left a guy up the street at Denny's
probably - just like the very first night I met her at Starlite - and somehow the guys didn't stay separated. I
remembered that look of terror when I told her I got to Starlite early, and Mandi thought I could have seen Captain
Primo, or we might even have almost bumped into each other. And my best guess, is Mandi had that same look of
terror, when Mulrenin came face-to-face with Scott.
My first surprise came when I read somewhere that Love went straight in after Mandi. He didn't wait 15 minutes, or
30 minutes. To me, this indicated Love was already angry when Mandi kicked him out of the car. He got out of the
car and immediately did exactly what she didn't want him to do.
IV - 34
Love then did what Mandi could not have expected he would do, given the building looks very secure, and unit 515
seems very remote, from the outside. This timing indicated a jealous and angry boyfriend right from the start. My
best guess was Love then somehow fell asleep in the lounge or stairwell for over and hour. He then woke up cold,
angry, out of cigarettes and weed, and out of patience. It is a little hard to make 90 minutes disappear, but I did not
yet have any reason to doubt the story about when he first went in.
The next surprise came when I saw the video, with Love entering before Jackson. It made no sense in any scenario.
In a robbery, for example, she would drop Love off and make sure he got inside the building, before telling
Mulrenin to come outside. Jackson would enter past the garage camera slowly, to give Love time to hide or do
whatever he was doing. She drove fast. This video could not be any well-ordered plan to rob.
At that point, my best guess was that Jackson dropped Love off at Denny's. He then ran across the empty lot to
watch her enter. And he arrived before her because she had to drive around a one-way street or something. This plan
indicates a curious Love, who wants to see and lay eyes on the person Jackson is meeting with. This might indicate
a suspicion that Jackson has been cheating on him, but Love is not sure with whom. Maybe Love expected to see
me, the violent stalker known as David, come out of that building.
The next surprise came when I saw there was a dog in the garage much later, and also one at the freight door when
Love enters. And both video clips were hidden by Lead Detective Sprague. If that is the same dog, then it would
match Jackson's pattern perfectly, as well my own experience. In this case Love would have waited a while before
entering. 20 minutes is about as long as a guy might be willing to wait outside in the cold with no car to sit in. Or he
might try to find Jackson's car almost immediately, so he could wait in the car.
This would indicate a patient Love, who just wants to wait for Jackson. But the time grows too long and his mind
grows reckless, wandering around the building. And eventually the sun is about to rise, people are leaving for work,
and he has no choice but to knock on Mulrenin's door. Maybe Jackson fell asleep on Mulrenin's sofa.
Or if the video timestamps are way off, maybe Love came much later. Maybe he was somewhere else, and
borrowed a motorcycle when someone told him where Jackson was. This would indicate a jealous Love, with an
intent to trespass and do harm to both Jackson and the guy she was with. Or at least tell them who is boss.
If you are married, and you never met strippers, it will be alien to you. You will say why is this guy waiting outside?
These two lovers are setting this third guy up.
Even if you know better, you will still be lost as to Love's motive unless you are sure about the timing. Which you
never can be, given the extreme efforts to originally provide a video with no timestamps. And to substitute instead a
conspicuously large number of files containing notes of the missing timestamps.
So whether Love is angry, curious, patient, or murderous, depends on how long he waited and where. But a juror
who has no experience with young girls making older guys wait, no knowledge of how Mandi Jackson keeps guys
separated, and not even a video timeline he can trust, cannot possibly figure this out.
And so a young girl is given two life sentences based on hunches from aggressive felons paid to lie.
-------------
Four years later, I am ready to abandon the idea faked by police, that Scott arrived with Mandi. I know 100% the
video was edited and Scott got there later. I believe he got there much later, after 6AM. So how did Scott know
where Mandi was, and how did he get there?
Theory, shot in the dark: Dalindy Waugh. Dalindy worked as a bartender at both Rachel's North and Stars. She was
married to a guy in Seminole County. She therefore knew Mulrenin, and where he lived. I believe I saw her getting
out of zippy little car, maybe a black Honda Acura, parked by Chris Dahl's house. So Dalindy still went back and
forth to Seminole County every night. Dalindy claims to be an addict. So when she started working at Stars, she met
Chris Dahl and later moved in with him.
IV - 35
So when Mandi left Scott at Chris Dahl's house to go cash out her dancer dollars at Mulrenin's house, Dalindy knew
where Mandi was going. Dalindy probably hated Mandi, because Mandi's goal in life was to marry Chris Dahl and
snort all his cocaine. That was probably also Dalindy's goal. Dalindy may have also had some kind of history with
Mulrenin. So when Mandi fell asleep on Mulrenin's sofa or her phone battery went dead, and Scott needed to get to
work, Dalindy was perhaps driving home to Seminole County from Chris Dahl's house. Dalindy drove Scott to
Mulrenin's house and sent him up to knock on Mulrenin's door. Dalindy was then in a position to shape the gossip
about what happened, and get rid of Mandi permanently.
I even saw the Dalindy car, and Mandi's car, parked in the same spot across from Chris Dahl's driveway, on
different days, the week before Mulrenin died. That is two girls, and one parking spot.
Just a theory. But it cures all the things I was not previously able to explain.
I know what some of you might think: Dalindy set up the robbery! There was no robbery. There is zero evidence of
a robbery. There is tons of evidence there could not have been a robbery. The only evidence of a robbery is the
jailhouse witnesses. Jailhouse witnesses are a known scam. Or a known miracle! And these jailhouse witnesses told
stories that were impossible in all ways.
IV - 36
7. SCOTT LOVE MORALS - 1986 to present
Mandi is so accustomed to being shadowed by a pimp, I always just assumed she left Scott waiting up the street or
something. But the idea has grown on me that Scott showed up later on his own. There is no question the video
timestamps are some nonsense cooked up by police.
Guys are motivated by morals to do a lot of different things. A suicide bomber believes he is doing the right thing.
Male supporters of Bernie Sanders for President think charging rent is immoral and landlords should be in prison.
Even a guy who robs a bank, may believe he is fighting economic injustice, or subverting a conspiracy of the rich. I
knew a guy who stole clothing from stores all over South Beach because he thought they were immoral, but would
not steal from Walmart.
There is evidence Scott Love is a common morals-oriented person. I saw in some of his family-court documents,
and on his facebook page, how he is a social person who likes to attach himself to groups, and parrot the things they
say. It could be the local church, or a political party, or a biker gang or militia. He wrote a soliloquy on facebook
where he argued he had been treated unfairly. When he was arrested for test-riding the motorcycle he was working
on without a license, he told the cop that Hillary Clinton is the real criminal.
So what might have Scott believed, that would lead him to think knocking on a strange guy's door with a gun would
be justified? You have to begin by believing Mandi is vulnerable, and an irresponsible person could do permanent
damage to her. Mandi is not like a normal drug addict or bipolar person. She is much simpler than that. She is like a
flag in the wind that can go from happy to sad and back in a few minutes. But it is easy to confuse her with a
schizophrenic person, or a drug addict, or a suicidal person, who are all fragile and can take a bad psychological
turn and have their lives ruined from one night of rule-breaking.
There is also the idea that Mandi was being sexually taken advantage of, which is very much agaist the law in
Florida. Scott may have found out she was using this drug "G." Mandi said everyone in Conway knows what G is. I
know my neighbor from across West Muriel street knew what G is. And Mulrenin's valet parker "Mini-Jim" knew
what G is. But Scott is not from Conway. And Scott does not seem sexually oriented to me like the people at the
strip clubs. One of Scott's girlfriends claimed he was into pills at some point. A person who is into real drugs and
not a sex worker, would likely not have much use for this substance "G" whose benefits are mostly myth like a fad
supplement.
Mandi pretty much describes me as a jerk who spends all day walking his two dogs. Pretty much the last things I
ever did with Mandi, so far as Scott knows, are give her G and have sex with her, attack her with a machete, and lie
about her and get her arrested at my house. So when Scott sees a guy walking two black-and-white dogs go into the
building where Mandi is, he follows him in. Then there is a dog walker in the garage with Mandi, and next thing
Scott is knocking on Mulrenin's door.
People who don't know what G is seem to quickly assume it is GHB, and Scott could easily have become confused
like anyone else. So if Scott somehow knew Mandi was taking G, he may have thought I was giving it to her, and
then sexually abusing her to the extent she is incapacited and not capable of consent. But how would Scott know
Mandi is on G, to get stirred up by this idea that she is helpless and being raped or taken advantage of in there?
If Scott was stalking Mandi in Mulrenin's garage, or even just waiting for her, he may have seen her go out to her
car and get the G. Mandi likes to drive around drinking G all day. And since she was hanging out with Chris Dahl,
he would have been likely to provide her some to drive around with. Supposedly guys who do coke can't get hard. If
Mulrenin couldn't get hard, Mandi might have gone to the garage to get the G from her car, based on her belief that
G could help Mulrenin overcome that.
If Scott was waiting at Chris Dahl's house, Chris Dahl may have told Scott Mandi was over at Mulrenin's house
taking G. Maybe Dahl wanted to stir the pot. Or if Scott became possessed with the idea Mandi was hanging out
with me again, he might remember the last thing I did with Mandi was give her G.
Maybe his loyal girlfriend being gone for two hours, was all Scott needed to believe Mandi was restrained or
IV - 37
incapacitated in some way.
There is no question Mulrenin was breaking the law using cocaine. And Mulrenin was corrupting a vulnerable
person, Mandi, into breaking the law, by luring her with it. And Mulrenin was taking advantage of a broke young
female employee, by bringing her home. Realistically, Mandi is a brain-damaged slut who drives around in circles
all day, and there aren't enough bullets in the world to think that you can fix it by going to her boss's apartment with
a gun. But having a screw loose and becoming confused about what to do and what is moral, is not the same as
premeditated armed robbery.
It is generally accepted that Adolf Hitler is more evil than a bank robber. People who invent and spread this fake
idea that Scott Love went to Mulrenin's apartment with a plan to rob him, are extremely evil in my mind. They are
aggressive people with no conscience, who use propaganda to invent a sensational story and incite a mob against a
person in an irrational way for sport. To me people who operate like that are much more sick and dangerous, than
one guy with a screw loose who thinks there can be a good outcome from trespassing with a gun when his retarded
girlfriend is cheating on him with her boss. Or even being raped by her boss, in his mind.
Or there could have been some other motivation which Scott perceived as moral. Something beyond just being
cheated on. The only evidence Scott went there to rob Mulrenin is a psychological analysis, of him using the credit
cards, or of his posture. I know Scott is a kleptomaniac, but he is also a whiny hardhead whose impulses are
confused. I look at the tape and I don't see any rational plan.
I think Mandi was just gone too long, and Scott didn't have a phone to reach her. So Scott went looking for her and
knocked on Mulrenin's door. Maybe the sun was coming up and Scott needed a ride somewhere. Mulrenin was
coked-up and drunk and went batshit on the wrong trespasser, and was rude to his girlfriend.
I think Scott was carrying a gun, but not with any plan to use it. Mandi had a lot of guys in her life, and Scott
wanted to compete. He can't buy the biggest house or the fastest car. So he tries to stand out by being the coolest
and toughest guy by carrying a gun. Scott is trying to be gangster with that "don't tread on me" sweatshirt. It's a
gimmick, like the hat and the beard and the tattoos. Scott is a genuine hardhead. But he didn't carry that gun to shoot
it any more than a businessman wears a Rolex to tell time. The dude literally had no car. That gun was the only
metal accessory he could afford.
People feel very free to invent or believe a hypothesis, about Scott going there to rob Mulrenin. Or about Scott
wearing booties, which is not really supported by the evidence. And they feel justified to invent or believe it without
real evidence, to lock Mandi in prison for 70 years from the age of 21. They imagine Mandi drugged Mulrenin, with
the intent to rob him. They imagine it based on pure gossip and nonsense, and take her life based on a hunch.
But they assume Scott must have done what he did for money? They can imagine a robbery, but Scott can't imagine
a rape? Scott cannot become similarly possessed with visions of the terrible, criminal things Mulrenin must be
doing? Scott can't imagine or hypothesize the worst, that Mulrenin drugged Mandi to rape her? Mulrenin truly was
an awful person. And Mandi truly was a vulnerable person. And Scott's lawyer was about to tell that story, and the
jury was ready to hear it. But they never did, for reasons I will get to.
Prosecutor Stewart Stone is a bizarre and psychologically incomplete person, who obsessively stares at Mandi with
the blank look of a kitten looking at a leaf, every time Mandi cries in court. He has no attachment to the truth, but
only mindless aggression. Prosecutor Stone is much sicker and more evil, than some clown who gets into a fight and
shoots a guy in the leg when his girlfriend is cheating with her boss.
A world without the pursuit of truth and only aggression is what the public justice system is supposed to mitigate.
Not me, but I feel like I have been drafted into it by circumstance. The last thing I ever wanted my life to be wasted
doing, is attempting to write the truth about this idiot Scott Love. I might as well be dead wasting my time trying to
get the truth out in some irrational shithole Seminole County. But you can't let evil, and chaos, and Democrats
elected at the end of it, prevail.
IV - 38
8. CAUGHT RED-HANDED - January 2019
Scott Love's trial started out as a disaster for the prosecution. Both defense and prosecution, in their opening
statements, said Mulrenin was shot. By the time the jury was done hearing from witnesses at the Lofts, they were no
longer even sure he was shot.
The prosecution did a half-assed job of coaching the Lofts witnesses to say Mulrenin was shot while fleeing. In
reality, the first person witness to Mulrenin being shot was the medical examiner two days later. So the jury was
confused if the people at the Lofts who witnessed Mulrenin die, were supposed to provide proof that he was shot,
which they didn't.
Scott Love's jury was surprisingly normal and intelligent people compared to the average person in Seminole
County. It was like every different person from the office of a small business in a high-tech field. Like maybe the
CEO, some programmers, the receptionist, and a person who cleans the office. And there were some other normal
office people or maybe medical workers on the jury.
I met one of the jurors, she was a young black girl who loved mysteries, and movies like "Minority Report." She
was just cool and smart. I was extremely impressed, and relieved that of all the lowlifes in Seminole County, the
people who report for jury duty are a functional subset. It was clear to these jurors, the prosecution was over-selling
the planned robbery narrative.
Prosecutor Stone set the tone with a non sequitur, when he said Mandi and Mulrenin's DNA being on the same
straw was evidence that this was a planned robbery. The defense said it was a consensual gathering. From that point
forward, the jury ignored the prosecution's explanations of each piece of evidence, and began looking for their own
explanations of all the evidence.
Jurors doubts were reinforced when bartender/manager Mellinger casually invented that one of the job applications
in Mandi's car, was the same one Mandi gave Mellinger at Dollhouse two years earlier. The court spent 20 minutes
arguing because there were two job applications, and neither was found at Dollhouse. Then the court basically said
okay we want you to pick one of these two identical applications, and lie and say you recognize it as the same one
Mandi gave you. The prosecution could have just said "Do these applications look basically the same as the one
Mandi gave you two years ago?" But they were determined to have her lie and say "This is the one!"
Another one was a piece of paper with Mulrenin's address on it. It looks like somebody probably wrote it down as
the billing address, to try to use his credit card online. But Stone said Mulrenin's address on a piece of paper was
evidence they "targeted him" for a robbery. There are millions of addresses written on paper at this moment, and
none of them are used to target someone for an armed robbery. It doesn't even make sense, and the jury saw that.
As a hooker, Mandi wrote down hundreds of addresses where guys had cash. In theory they would all be good
places to rob. Going to any place requires having an address. You can't go to a restaurant without having the
address. So having an address cannot be evidence of an intent to do armed robbery. Why does every house and
business in the world even have an address, why would they need one, what is the use, it just exposes them as easy
targets for armed robbery.
I have never even seen that in a movie, someone write down the address of a bank before an armed robbery. You
have to go to the bank, see it, think about it, before you get the idea you want to rob that bank. So when you first
decide to rob it, you have already seen it and know where it is. It is only by going to places, and seeing them, that
you first get the idea they would be a good place to rob.
In movies, they are forced to spoon-feed the plot using contrived devices like addresses on paper. Directors dislike
these "expository scenes" which are necessary to show the viewer what is happening, because they are unrealistic
and awkward. Prosecutor Stone's presentation in court that day came across as awkward and contrived, an amateur
B-movie screenplay.
It certainly made no sense that Mandi wrote down Mulrenin's address to go there and do an armed robbery. Because
IV - 39
there is no way for her to know there is money in a boot box in a closet at an address she has never been to. But the
prosecution made a great effort to present Mulrenin's apartment as being like a bank branch, by showing some
money which police found hidden in a boot box in his closet, and hiding everything else. So there was no alternate
reason to be there, the address had only cash, the address equaled cash. It was like a board game with a square
called "cash" on the board.
The prosecution showed the money which police found in Mulrenin's closet, even though its existence can be taken
as proof Scott and Mandi had no idea it was there. The defense then tried to show some marijuana, and other things
that were right in Murenin's kitchen. The prosecution objected, and the judge wouldn't let them show it. The defense
pointed out the judge already let them show money hidden in a closet that obviously nobody knew about. The judge
said well, you could have objected.
The few photos the jurors saw from inside Mulrenin's apartment were small and blurry. So the jurors had pretty
much no idea what was in Mulrenin's apartment or what it even looked like, what the layout was or what went on
there. All they knew is that it had money in it. In reality it was a drug den filled with needles and viagra. But it was
presented to the jury as an antiseptic bank branch, somehow known, but not known, to have money in it.
So the jury saw some irrelevant cash which it is certain Mandi had no idea was in Mulrenin's apartment. And the
jury never saw the actual motive for Mandi being there, to smoke weed. But Scott Love's jury was still skeptical of
the B movie plot, because they knew the prosecution wasn't telling them the real story about what happened with
the girl and the boss and her boyfriend.
The idea that Mandi went home with her boss to commit an armed robbery at his apartment while drinking vodka,
and shoot him and tie him up in duct tape with all the neighbors watching and listening, and Scott wore booties like
"Mission Impossible," was outlandish. It was like a paranoid fantasy. And Prosecutor Stone came across like a crazy
hallucinating person, which he is. He actually hallucinates guilt whether it is there or not, I have seen in many cases.
But it made the jurors desperately hungry to know what really happened.
So when Smolarek went up there with what should have been a simple lie, that she found bloody gloves in Mandi's
car with Scott's DNA on the inside, the jury didn't immediately swallow it. It wasn't the inside-outside "wearer
DNA" thing where the gloves could be inside out. They probably accepted that Smolarek knew what was the inside.
It wasn't even that the gloves were found in two different groups. The jurors did not have clear photographs to see
that. It probably wasn't that there were only stains on some of the gloves. All it was, is the jurors were puzzled why
there were five gloves and two DNA swabs, and from that Smolarek said Scott was the wearer, and Mulrenin's
blood was on the outside.
When the DNA expert went on the stand, the jurors revealed their confusion about which swab came from which
glove, and why exactly, and what the fuck? Unlike Smolarek, the jurors had a genuine curiosity what happened that
night. So the prosecution recalled Smolarek as a witness, to clarify what DNA swab came from what glove. And
Scott's lawyer objected to calling Smolarek back, and he was miserable through it because he knew it was a scam.
He said something like "Come on, these gloves are not even the same color." And Smolarek came back on the
stand, and she lied, as I have detailed elsewhere.
But that was pretty much the end of the prosecution's presentation, Smolarek saying that all the gloves were in one
ball and Scott's DNA was on the inside, and Mulrenin's blood was on the outside. Up until then, there was no proof
Scott was even in the apartment. And the robbery narrative was outlandish. But now the defense was faced with a
total scam, and no good idea how to deal with it. So they made the absolutely disastrous decision to put Scott up
there and say some even more ridiculous story to explain the fake evidence.
Scott said they got into an argument, and Mulrenin was shot in the leg by accident with his own gun. Which could
very well be true. After 4,000 hours looking at the evidence and testimony in this case, I cannot disprove that story.
Scott said he then went out of there with Mulrenin's blood on his hands from the scuffle, and transferred it to the
handle bars of his motorcycle which he used to arrive separately from Mandi. If Scott did arrive on a motorcycle,
the dog walker at the freight door would have seen it. I do know the existence of that dog walker was concealed by
police.
IV - 40
Scott said he then used gloves to do mechanical work on motorcycles, and that is how the blood got transferred
from the handlebars to the rubber gloves he was wearing. I had a warehouse space next to two mechanics and an
auto body shop. They all left inside-out surgical gloves in the trash every day. And I know Scott did rebuild a
motorcycle. And the gloves from the zip-tie package do appear to have some generalized grunge on them. But
Love's story was just too far-fetched and ridiculous.
They asked Scott what about the duct tape? Scott said he had no idea how it got there. He said the duct tape was not
there when he left. They asked what about Mulrenin going over the balcony? Scott said Mulrenin was still in his
apartment when Scott left, he had no idea why Mulrenin went over the balcony or when.
The jury was dying for Scott to go up there and save them from the prosecution's lies. They were starved to know
what really happened to tie together all these inconsistent odds and ends. Why would they wipe the blood off the
couch but leave the duct tape and cable ties? Why would they wear gloves and booties to commit a perfect crime,
but then walk around on camera and leave the gloves and booties in the car? Why would they plan to hogtie her
boss who knows her name, in an apartment where everyone can hear?
And Scott went up there and straight lied to them. He left them knowing even less than when he started. And they
were angry at him for it. And they thought oh my god, this motherfucker really did it! He really did use bloody
gloves in some kind of murder! Otherwise he would have told us what really happened, why make up such a stupid
lie? Who would have ever guessed, before he came up here with such sketchy lies. Of course he knows how the
duct tape got there.
Love's tone was also too dry. He told a story about some crazy events. But he expressed no emotion, like he had no
stake in what happened. Like he didn't care. It was just a flat tone, even as he discussed Mulrenin coming with a
gun. You cannot expect someone who has never done something before, like bake a cake or testify in his own
defense in a murder trial, to get it right the first time he tries.
I hurried to the bathroom, after holding it in eager anticipation of Scott's testimony. A juror came into the bathroom
behind me. He said "Wow, that didn't go very well! That was a bad decision by his lawyer to put him on the stand!"
I said maybe his lawyer thought he was a sympathetic character because his girlfriend was cheating on him.
So they convicted him on all counts, and he got life in prison without parole. And it all went back to Smolarek's
fake bloody glove "wearer DNA" evidence, which there was no honest explanation for because it never happened.
The sad part for Love is he is really good at whining. Mandi wouldn't have been with him if he wasn't. Catering to
whining like a crying baby is the daily bread of her relationships. The first thing I noticed on Love's facebook page
was a whiny post about how nobody is perfect and people are mean to him or something. And you hear it in his
police reports whining and shouting when he gets arrested, about how it is unfair and his girlfriend did it not him.
The prosecution played some phone calls from jail where Love whined and consoled his family (and which Judge
Nelson said she wouldn't admit until someone from the jail testified he was read his miranda rights or something,
which never happened). He was supposed to be admitting guilt even if indirectly, but he came off as very
sympathetic. If Scott summoned that same tone on the stand which I expected him to, the jury would have been
sympathetic to him.
I still think if Scott told jurors the truth, that Mandi used the duct tape to bind Mulrenin's wound after their supposed
scuffle, and that Mulrenin fell off his balcony because he was completely out of it on drugs and alcohol (and
labyrinthitis which Scott has no idea about), Scott would likely have walked out of there. Because it made more
sense than the prosecution's outlandish fantasy. And the jury was in a receptive state at that point. But that fake
"wearer DNA" got in their heads and they panicked.
IV - 41
9. TRIAL BY LEGAL SECRETARY - 2019
Having never seen a criminal trial before, the most shocking thing to me was how the jury was given very little
information and never had any idea what really happened. I used to tell people don't assume you know what
happened in a criminal case just based on what you read in the newspaper. Unless you are there at the trial, you
don't know what the truth is. It turns out that the truth doesn't come out at trial, the jury is left with no clue. The jury
never would have guessed one tenth of the evidence that existed which they were deprived of.
Scott Love's jury was surprised that nobody even tried to give them an honest account of what happened. Like there
was no adult in the room. They expect if the defendant is guilty, the defense will paint a different picture from what
really happened. They didn't expect the prosecution to also make up crazy things and accusations not supported by
the evidence, and exaggerate, and tell them something different from what was right in front of their face. This was
not the sort of geeky truth-seeking process that writers idealize in television shows. It was a ridiculous crooked
spectacle. The jury was shocked by it. But I guess it is business as usual in a criminal trial, which people outside the
law world would never guess.
I was shocked at how little of the evidence the jury actually sees. Each side presents only a tiny subset of the
evidence, in an effort to contrive a storyboard that is, at best, simpler than the truth. There were 100's of pictures of
the crime scene, but I don't think the jury even saw 10. Witnesses changed their stories or left things out, and the
jury never knew. The jury never saw a floor plan of Mulrenin's apartment, or a diagram of his apartment building.
Some of this is just practical constraints of time and money. But a lot of it is case law and the rules of evidence. The
rules of evidence also don't give jurors a copy of the testimony, so they can't even remember what they heard. In
longer trials, this has a disproportionate impact on their ability to consider small details of what people said.
Judges with competing agendas have spent years trying to rig the process by adding new rules to make individual
cases come out how they want them to. They have redefined and destroyed the Constitutional right to a trial by jury
because they can. One judge will say "I want the case to come out this way, so I am making a new rule that you
can't show the jury this." Another judge will say "I think that is unfair based on the outcome I want, so to balance it,
I am going to say you are not allowed to show the jury this other thing. Or I am going to broadly interpret what you
said, to use it in the situation I want to use it in. Or you have to give the jury this instruction of how to read this
evidence which fixes the outcome in this case."
You don't need me to tell you Mandi went up to Mulrenin's apartment to smoke weed. The prosecutor in Mandi's
closing argument said "Use your common sense." There was a pipe and loose marijuana in plain sight, in plain use
on Mulrenin's kitchen counter. The smoke detector was disabled on a table. Mulrenin did not test positive for
marijuana. Smolarek photographed marijuana in Mandi's car. The Dollhouse video shows Mandi smoking
marijuana with Neisha Cintron. So your common sense tells you that Mandi's motive for being at Mulrenin's
apartment was to smoke marijuana.
Only problem is case law will not let Mandi's lawyers show that marijuana in Mulrenin's kitchen to the jury. Won't
let Mandi's lawyers ask Smolarek if she found marijuana in Mandi's car. The prosecution's theory, according to their
witnesses, is that Mandi was there for two hours, and ransacked the apartment to steal things of value, including
things hidden in boxes in closets. The defense's theory is that Mandi left without taking things of value. But a
photograph of marijuana, which is Mandi's motive for being there, with direct relevance to proving and disproving
the prosecution and defense's version of events, is not allowed to be shown to the jury. Some judge somewhere did
not like the outcome of a case where the jury knew that some participant, probably the defendant, used marijuana.
So there is marijuana that is in plain use in plain sight in the kitchen. It is clearly the central activity in that room
that night. Jury is not allowed to see it. Cash in a box in a closet which obviously Mandi did not know about? Jury is
allowed to see that. Jailhouse witness who was in another county when Mulrenin died, read the police story in the
newspaper in jail, and is threatened with prison if she doesn't say Mandi confessed to it? She can tell the jury the
entire story of the crime, including the content of text messages that the most advanced technology could not get out
of Mandi's phone. Marijuana that was actually in Mulrenin's apartment and in use the night he died is hidden from
the jury. While a jailhouse so-called witness, who was nowhere near the scene of the crime, is put front and center
as the primary witness of what happened in there that night.
IV - 42
Prosecutor Stone said in Mandi's closing argument "Use your common sense." If I were the defense, I would have
said "Objection, not in evidence." The entire case law and rules of evidence are designed specifically to prevent
jurors from using their common sense. Evidence is only allowed which is consistent with a specific preconceived,
articulated narrative. You cannot guess what happened, beyond what the lawyers tell you happened, because the
rules of evidence are not designed help you come to third conclusions not promoted by prosecution or defense. It
was impossible, based on the evidence allowed, for the jurors to ever guess Mandi's true motive for being at
Mulrenin's apartment. Strippers are chimneys when it comes to smoking weed. For the jurors, it was cash or
nothing.
I lived in Miami before George Zimmerman shot Trayvon Martin. I saw black teenagers from North Miami going
around punching strangers in the face. It was a popular thing in a certain demographic. I even heard a black teenager
punch a toddler in the face in the dark, and then explain to his parents the logic of why he did it. I heard bone hit
bone, tot crying, parents objecting, and a black teenager explaining.
If I were to use my "common sense" that is what I would say Trayvon Martin did to George Zimmerman. But Judge
Nelson blocked the defense from mentioning Trayvon's reputation for punching people. And "the knockout game"
was not in the national news yet, a Sanford jury would not have heard of it. So Judge Nelson deprived the jury of
the opportunity to use common sense. But Mandi's jury was instructed by prosecutor Stone to use common sense,
even though they knew less about Mandi and Mulrenin than Sanford jurors know about North Miami. Because
Mandi's prosecutor knew the specifics of the evidence and testimony before the jury did not prove guilt beyond a
reasonable doubt.
According to Judge Recksiedler, the defense is not allowed to question witnesses on general information, or present
general evidence which might be relevant to understanding what happened. They can only present true facts and
items even in the vicinity of the crime, if they can articulate to the judge exactly how this information fits into the
specific defense narrative of exactly what happened. This presumes every defendant can have an all-knowing
attorney who is smarter than the defendant and the judge and every juror. The prosecution was not limited in this
way. The prosecution was allowed to present ribs hollowed out from organ donation, an address on paper with no
known criminal use, and a receipt for an engagement ring, that in no way contributed to any narrative that Mandi
planned or was a principal in a robbery, or that Mulrenin was dead. We know he is dead.
Mulrenin's bed drawer was filled with viagra - blister packages, boxes, loose and broken pills - in a way that could
be fairly characterized as a reckless and careless. His bedroom had blackout curtains. He had antibiotic eye drops.
He punched the elevator button 8 times after the door was already closing, he rubbed his eyes, and he almost
bumped into a wall on his way to the curb. It may be that neither the female defendant, nor her female attorney, nor
the female judge, had any idea that viagra can caused blurred vision, tunnel vision, sensitivity to light, and retina
damage. So they cannot articulate that narrative, to show evidence of it to the jury. But there could be five men on
the jury who all have experience with exactly those symptoms, and who in their "common sense" believe vision
problems from excessive viagra coud have contributed to Mulrenin going over the balcony.
Recksiedler would not have admitted any theory that Mulrenin went over the balcony because of viagra. The
prosecution would have objected as "not in evidence." This is the same prosecution that said Mulrenin jumped from
the fifth floor because he saw there was some soft grass and he was about to be shot, when no such thing was in
evidence. There cannot be any rational reason to jump to your certain death from the fifth floor. Certainly not soft
grass. So any medical theory, every drug, any idea should have been admitted, ahead of the argument which cannot
be supported by anything in evidence, that jumping was a rational conscious reaction to something Scott Love or
Mandi Jackson did. Did he fall because he was blind, or did he jump from five floors because there was soft grass?
Recksiedler only wanted evidence to support one of those theories.
It is assumed jurors will bring some knowledge with them, such as how an elevator works. What about knowledge
that strippers like weed, to a sufficient level to explain Mandi's motive for being in Mulrenin's apartment? Does a
girl who went to law school know that strippers like weed? Is it possible a girl on the jury would know more about
strippers and more about illegal drugs and more about prostitution, than any of the attorneys in the room who must
argue about what evidence is relevant to understanding what happened? Is it possible a defense attorney could know
his client is not guilty, but a juror could still discover proof of innocence which the defense attorney never even
IV - 43
thought of? Is that part of the right to a trial by jury? Or is your right to a trial by jury limited to what a lawyer can
articulate, when there were not even public defenders at the time the Bill of Rights was written?
What does the color of Mulrenin's dissected brain have to do with whether Mandi was a principal in a robbery?
More than the fact that there was weed that was not taken from the apartment?
An attorney has to be extraordinarily thoughtful and creative, and spend a lot of time, to think how every piece of
evidence might be useful to any person in the jury to understand what happened. There are 12 jurors from all walks
of life. It is safer to just show more evidence and err on the side of providing jurors everything that might be useful
to them, than to assume attorneys have infinite wisdom, infinite creativity, and perfect communication, to determine
and include exactly what is useful and what isn't. But Judge Recksiedler does not see it that way. She clearly intends
to restrict evidence in a way that deprives jurors of any opportunity to use their own common sense.
In a circumstantial case, there may be key pieces of evidence that no attorney recognizes the significance of. But
someone out of twelve jurors, with common and provincial knowledge, may see the significance. In circumstantial
cases you need to show more evidence. Every item in Mulrenin's house, every item in every cabinet, is part of the
murky circumstances surrounding his death. Everything could have something to do with what went on in there, if
we don't know what went on in there. But prosecutor Stone argued it was not a circumstantial case, because Mandi
confessed to it. In Judge Recksiedler's courtroom, a jailhouse witness can be totally discredited, and still change the
outcome of a case by changing the narrative and Recksiedler's preconceptions, and what evidence she allows or not.
A jailhouse witness can literally say "What I am about to say is a lie, Mandi confessed to me that she used a knife."
At that point, the prosecution is now allowed to show every knife in central Florida, because they have a narrative
for it. If the defense wants to show a screwdriver in Mulrenin's drawer, Recksiedler wouldn't allow it. I could lie on
the stand and say I hid a camera in Mulrenin's apartment, I saw Mandi looking in the drawers. Everybody would
know I was lying. It's not just that Mandi's lawyers are less shameless than prosecutor Stone and would never put
me up there to do that. It's that they know Recksiedler still would not allow the defense to show what was in the
drawer. If Recksielder would have allowed it, then Mandi's lawyers were ineffective in the game that Recksiedler
created, by not introducing their own liar to affect what evidence was allowed.
Millions of people have been shot for reasons other than robbery. Everyone accepted that Scott and not Mandi shot
Mulrenin in the leg. Once Mulrenin went over the balcony, they could have stolen every item in his apartment
without it being a robbery. We know Mandi is at the apartment, and she must have known the address to get there.
The only evidence Mandi planned a robbery is that the jailhouse witness said she did. But even if the jailhouse
witness is totally discredited, Judge Recksiedler allowed an address on a piece of paper because it corroborates the
prosecution's theory, introduced by a liar. If there is no lying jailhouse witness, there is no planned robbery theory to
corroborate, and no use for the paper. If you want to argue with that, then you concede the outcome of the case is
dictated by the outcome of an argument about what evidence the jury is prevented from seeing, and not by letting
the jury weigh the facts.
If the jury is limited to seeing only a small slice of the evidence as Scott and Mandi's juries were, then their decision
is inherent in what few items of evidence they got to see. They had extreme tunnel vision. If the jury is limited to
seeing specifically the crumbs of evidence that a defense attorney can win an argument with the judge to present, or
even win an argument with an appeals judge, that is not trial by jury. That is trial by judge and lawyer. The jury
should see all the evidence that has some possibility of being relevant, for it to be a trial by jury. That includes
evidence which might create a bias such as evidence the victim was violent or used drugs. Because the defendant,
not the victim, and certainly not any prosecution witness, is guaranteed a trial by jury under the Constitution. That
includes evidence the defense attorney might be tongue-tied in explaining, but just has a hunch it is relevant. That
includes every single piece of evidence in sight or in probable use in the room where the crime took place. It is not
for the judge, or even for the lawyer, it is for the jury.
Recksiedler allowed the jury to see a piece of paper from Mandi's bedroom with James Mulrenin's address on it, that
nobody knows who wrote it or when or why. I think someone tried to use his credit card online and needed the
billing address. The defense said it should be disallowed because there is no relevance or foundation without
knowing where the address came from or how it was used. We already know and admit Mandi was at that address.
Prosecutor Stone argued that because the note was on the same dresser where a gun was found in a closed drawer,
IV - 44
the note implied that address was written down in an advance plan to go shoot someone at that address.
But remember, there were many items in closed drawers and cabinets at that address, such as needles and marijuana
and testosterone and things no one will ever know about. Literally any item in a closed drawer at Mulrenin's address
could be contemplated as a reason for writing it down. The defense asked to show marijuana at Mulrenin's address
which he could have been selling, and they wrote down his address to go buy it. Judge Recksiedler would not allow
the jury to see marijuana at that address. The jury was barred by the judge, from contemplating alternate totally
invented reasons for writing down Mulrenin's address, other than the cash hidden a balcony closet which Mandi
could not have known was there.
The loose marijuana and pipe on the kitchen counter were part of a constellation of evidence that showed why
Mandi put on a jacket, why neighbors heard arguing, whether Mulrenin went over the balcony in a struggle as
Madara claimed, whether Mandi tricked Mulrenin into to taking her home as alleged, and whether the apartment
was ransacked as Kaylee claimed. Why did Mandi put on a jacket? Because it was cold. Why was it cold? Because
the balcony door was open before dawn in December. Why was the balcony door open? Because the smoke detector
was disabled on the table, meaning the place was filled with smoke. Why was the place filled with smoke? Because
that is how much marijuana use goes on in Mulrenin's apartment. So much, that the same neighbor who testified
hearing a commotion, testified smelling marijuana for years. Even though it is smoked out of sight, in the opposite
end of the apartment. Therefore the commotion the neighbor heard, like the marijuana he smelled, was not on the
balcony. It was inside, and possibly on the opposite end of the apartment in the kitchen or at the front door.
Mulrenin did not test positive for marijuana. Why was Jackson, all by herself, smoking so much marijuana that
Mulrenin gave to her, to set off the fire alarm? Why, when her intention was to trick him and commit a robbery? Do
you trick a man, by letting him feed you so much marijuana that you set off a fire alarm and freeze? Was there
something in the apartment other than cash, that could be of value to Mandi, that she knew was there, that could be
her motive for being there? Something right in the kitchen that she didn't take when she left? Not so far as the jury
knows, the judge won't allow it.
Mulrenin tested positive for recent cocaine use, not fully metabolized. There was a mess of loose cocaine hastily
stashed in the room where he was supposedly murdered, and many full and empty bags. Love's lawyers wanted to
include these plain facts in their narrative by showing a picture of the cocaine, and say Mulrenin was doing cocaine
that night. The prosecution wanted to block this, on the idea that unless a jailhouse witness claims Mulrenin
confessed to doing cocaine in the room with Scott and Mandi, he could have done it before they came or some other
place or time or who knows what. Without a jailhouse witness, it is impossible to say Mulrenin did cocaine that
night. Recksiedler said of the cocaine in Mulrenin's blood and kitchen "There was no evidence of whose it was."
But Recksiedler allowed one picture of cocaine, after much objection.
Later in the trial, the prosecution wanted to show a blurry partial picture of a credit card that fell on the floor of a car
in another county five days later. It was totally immaterial to the matter in dispute, that Scott Love robbed James
Mulrenin. It contributed not even a crumb of extra support to the prosecution's narrative. They had video of Love
using Mulrenin's credit cards, and a wallet with Mulrenin's credit cards and a picture of Love's son, among many
other things. The credit card had nitrous cartridges on the floor next to it. The same Judge Recksiedler who had to
be begged on hands and knees to show any drugs at the scene where Mulrenin was supposedly murdered, had zero
hesitation to show drugs in the defendant's car another time and place. Her argument sounded like she was stoned.
Alison Smolarek, who took the unclear photo of the drugs on the floor next to the credit card, had just referred to
bullets as "cartridges." A juror who saw the drug picture from the car asked what the "cartridges" on the floor were.
The court did not allow the question to be answered. So in fact, they misled at least one juror that there were bullets
on the floor of the car, to save the case from being reversed for showing irrelevant illegal activity by the defendant.
Judge Recksiedler allowed every piece of evidence that could possibly contribute to an opinion the defendant was
guilty. That was her standard of relevance for the prosecution. More simply, she allowed every piece of evidence
the prosecution wanted, that could show the defendant in a bad light. I cannot think of any item the prosecution
wanted that was disallowed. The prosecution was never pressed to articulate how something that happened at a
pawn shop several days later, was evidence that Mandi was a principal in a planned burglary. The prosecution only
argued that it was relevant to show Mandi used Mulrenin's cards at Walmart. It had already been proven very
IV - 45
clearly that Mandi used Mulrenin's cards at Walmart, and it was never disputed she did, every party already
conceded it was true. The conclusions of "common sense" were inherent in and limited by the evidence that was
permitted and denied.
Recksiedler did not allow, for example, Scott Love to show restraints on Mandi's bed at home that show she either
likes to be tied up, or is at least willing to submit to being tied up. Love's defense had a theory, which very well
could be true, that Mulrenin used cable ties to tie Mandi up in a sex fetish. But even though this was directly
relevant to the defense's theory and even to corroborate Love's testimony, and very well may have been true based
on what I know, Judge Recksiedler did not allow it. That wasn't all that was denied to the defense. But even if they
had shown every item Love's lawyer had the creativity to include in his narrative, it still would have been
insufficient to give the jury a full picture of what happened, the scene and the participants, to where they could use
their "common sense."
The court showed the jury Mandi Jackson was at a pawn shop several days later. Remember, Mandi Jackson was
accused of planning a robbery and tying Mulrenin up with cable ties. None of the fairly ordinary events the
prosecution used to show her character, indicate that she would tie a man up in cable ties. Using stolen credit cards
at Walmart is the most common thing on Earth, it happens 1000 times a day, and in none of those cases did the
person using the cards tie someone up in cable ties. So almost any piece of evidence, that would corroborate any
theory of why there were some cable ties, would be helpful. But Judge Recksiedler would not allow the jury to see
restraints on Mandi's bed, because Judge Recksiedler has a preconception they are not relevant, before the jury gets
to decide for themselves why there were cable ties.
When Love's attorney wanted to ask police if they found any restraints in her bedroom, the judge wouldn't let him.
When Love's attorney wanted to show the jury the weed in Mulrenin's kitchen, the judge wouldn't let him. The court
thought the secret cash locked away in a box in an outside closet was relevant to the jury understanding why Mandi
went there that night. The court thought the fact that Mulrenin has a battery conviction and Mandi is a freaky
submissive slut with CTE and a compulsive need to self-medicate, and Mulrenin had marijuana that he doesn't use
himself, marijuana and a pipe in plain use in plain sight in his kitchen when Mandi was there, were not helpful to
the jury understanding why she was there.
The jury saw photos of the inside of Mulrenin's hollowed out ribs from organ donation for no reason. It was
supposed to show he had a broken neck, when I am sure there was an xray that would make more sense to the jury.
The jury saw every random thing in Scott's bedroom, except the restraints on the corners of the bed that showed
Mandi would give in to Scott Love when he caught up with her.
The prosecution fought all day to hide the marijuana, and hide the fact that Mandi was on psychotropic drugs for
depression and anxiety. Recksiedler allowed the psychotropic drugs in the jury instruction, only after Bark promised
he would never mention it out loud in his arguments. They were not allowed to present Mandi as who she was, a
depressed person who needs drugs to be happy. Then they told the jury "Use your common sense. A stripper would
never go home with an old guy for any reason you know about. The only reason she would go home with this guy is
to rob him." Judge Recksiedler agreed with this theory, in judging that the jury should not be allowed to see any
evidence of other activities or fetishes.
Mandi Jackson is freaky as fuck, and likes for old men to put a gun to her head. I told people that long before this
case ever happened. I have a theory it is a childhood rape reenactment fetish. And James Mulrenin was an extreme
creepy weirdo sex addict control freak, regardless of how that is whitewashed after his death. Evidence was allowed
and denied based on a preconception that cute young girls are prudes who lead guys on and trick them out of their
money, and James Mulrenin was a normal old guy. Does your common sense tell you who Mulrenin was, what he
was like? Yes, you assume he is a decent guy. And common sense was a misleading substitute for allowing actual
evidence of what he was like.
Reality is always much more complicated than a simple allegation. I can show you a picture of a screw and a
screwdriver, and then say I spent the entire day screwing in screws. Reality is that I spent the day petting my dogs,
taking a shower, going to the refrigerator 19 different times, throwing away some trash, falling asleep, getting nine
phone calls, scratching a sticker off my laptop, and at least 200 other things. It is literally impossible for me to
present to you a narrative of what I actually did with my day. The evidence in Love and Jackson's trial was like
IV - 46
presenting the jury with a world that consisted entirely of a screw and a screwdriver. Every other item is relevant to
the narrative of what really happened. Every drug there, every cabinet that was not opened, every item that was not
stolen or disturbed, is relevant to alternate theories.
The evidence is the narrative, you don't need to say it. If the defense wants to show a piece of evidence then by
definition it supports their narrative. We think Mulrenin jumped because there was soft grass. We think they wrote
down that address to go shoot him. We don't think she went there to rob him, we think she went there to stare at that
marijuana. We don't think she went there to rob him, we think she went there to contemplate what it is like for a
man to have convictions for racketeering and battery. Which one of those do you think Judge Recksiedler would
allow? And who has the right to a trial by jury, the prosecution, or the defendant? Recksiedler has a preconception
that Mandi went there to rob him is the only true, unbiased fair narrative, before the jury gets to weigh the relevance
of facts, true facts, themselves.
All the jury saw was Mandi meet Mulrenin, they did cocaine, Mulrenin was shot, there was some cash in his closet,
and Mandi used his cards at Walmart. The video was edited and deleted before the defense ever got it, to hide the
possibility of understanding what really happened that night. The labels on the cell tower map were limited to what
was alleged. Even Neisha Cintron committed perjury to simplify the narrative greatly compared to what actually
happened. The narrative of what really happened, literally includes every single other item in Mulrenin's apartment.
It is more than anyone can articulate. Every other item is an alibi. Judge Recksiedler's thought process never would
have allowed the defense to present any of it, and was biased towards the prosecution's narrative, and towards guilt.
Recksiedler's process of denying the defendant the opportunity to present his defense worked great for another trial
of hers, a guy named Greg Lepera. He got convicted of drunk boating manslaughter. But he is a well-known
businessman who is politically connected in Seminole County, and Recksiedler sent him home with a suspended
sentence. Of course there is no point for Lepera to appeal her decisions. Recksiedler's process worked not so great
for Mandi who only sucked a guy's dick in Seminole County, and got two mandatory life sentences without the
possibility of parole.
Scott's jury was presented with a choice between two simple competing narratives, neither with much correlation to
the truth. It was sort of disrespectful and the jurors knew they were being snowed. Of course it is disrespectful
toward the defendant and the victim and their families. But I never knew before that lawyers and judges have a total
disdain for the sentiments, the morals, the tendencies, the intellectual capacity of the jury. They see the jury as a
bunch of benighted superstitious bumpkins. It may be the safest assumption. And then after hiding the truth to
manipulate and protect the sentiments of the jury all day, with a contrived set of crumbs of so-called evidence,
Stone says "use your common sense." The jury has no idea. By design.
When the jailhouse witnesses claimed Mandi confessed, Scott's lawyers immediately said that is hearsay, can't use it
in court against Scott. And the judge agreed. If the truth matters, it is just garbage gossip from the jailhouse where
nobody expects anybody to tell the truth, and nobody has any incentive to tell the truth. Mandi and Scott are
guaranteed equal protection under the 14th amendment. They were accused of equal collusion in the same crime.
There is no difference in the credibility of what the jailhouse witnesses said Mandi did, versus what they said Scott
did. The only difference between Mandi and Scott, is Mandi's right against self incrimination in the 5th amendment,
particularly when locked in jail and being asked questions. But case law says the same evidence, the jailhouse
witnesses, can be used against Mandi, and not against Scott.
I guess the idea is that Scott Love would be denied his Constitutional right to confront the witness, because Mandi
won't come to the stand and testify. Elected State Attorney Phil Archer and Mandi's first judge, the respected Debra
Nelson, both agreed Mandi could be compelled to unlock her cellphone, after being granted immunity from using
that as evidence that she owned the cellphone. When Mandi's lawyer asked one of the jailhouse witnesses if she
discussed the elements of the crime of burglary with her attorney, the judge said you can't ask that. Attorney client
privilege of this small fact, overrides Mandi's right to confront witnesses under the sixth amendment. So certainly
Mandi could have been subpoenaed by Scott's lawyers, and confronted in court about her supposed confessions. At
least to the same extent Mandi could be coerced to unlock her cellphone, or a jailhouse witness can be confronted
about what her lawyer told her to say.
The jailhouse witness can go up there and say anything, Mandi used a black glock, Mandi let Scott Love into the
IV - 47
apartment. But the defense is not even allowed to tell the jury what crime that jailhouse witness was convicted of
and plead guilty to. Armed robbery, breaking into homes? Can't say it. Jailhouse witness can lie and say "Mandi
called me Mama Jules." Julie Madara claimed at a sentence hearing that a drug dealer forced her to rob people,
same thing she says Mandi confessed to.
But the defense can't tell the jury who this witness is, why she is in jail, what else she has done, what she has said in
the past. According to Judge Recksiedler, case law won't let them. Some judge in some case didn't like the outcome
when the jury knew what crime some participant, probably the defendant, had been convicted of. And that judge
decided that his agenda is more important than Mandi's Constitutional right to put true facts in front of the jury for
her defense.
Mandi's lawyers were not allowed to ask the other witnesses "Did anybody provide you a benefit for testifying here
today? Like they provided to the jailhouse witnesses?" Why can't they ask? Judge doesn't like it? Judge knows
where this is going? Judge has a preconception that they weren't provided a benefit? Nobody alleged that these
witnesses were provided a benefit? Nobody alleged that Mandi used a black glock. No sane honest person anyway.
The major points of Kaylee Simmons' testimony, such as Mandi used a black glock, directly contradicted physical
evidence in the case. And the judge had no problem letting the prosecution ask Kaylee questions, when the judge
knew Kaylee's answers had no bearing on reality and would be more likely to confuse the jury. So it was a trial by
judge.
The fact that Mandi's lawyer Bark is not alleging the witnesses were bribed, and prosecutor Stone is alleging Mandi
planned a robbery, is immaterial so far as the jury is concerned. It is not a reflection of any fact, it is only a
reflection of Bark being less shameless than Stone. At the point where Mandi is presumed innocent, there should be
no preconception that Mandi planned a robbery. So the jury can no more become confused that the witnesses were
bribed, than confused that Mandi planned a robbery. Whether one is confusion, and the other is a fair concept to
leave the jury with, depends on the preconception that Mandi planned a robbery. Judge Recksiedler weighed and
blocked or admitted testimony in light of her preconception that Mandi was guilty, and the witnesses were not
bribed. That is a trial by judge. Does the judge know the witnesses weren't bribed, any more than she knows
whether Mandi planned a robbery or used a black Glock?
The least we can say is the witnesses know whether they were bribed or not. Whereas the jailhouse witnesses were
not inside Mulrenin's apartment and don't know what happened in there. Judge Recksiedler is used to civil court,
where the lawyers agree to a long list of facts before it ever gets to the jury. In a criminal trial, the judge and the
prosecution can't agree in advance on what the truth is before the jury hears it. The jury is the finder of fact. The
witnesses need to tell the jury whether they were bribed, what the judge or the prosecution thinks is irrelevant.
What if a witness was given a plane ticket to come from out of state to testify? Is that a benefit? Judge thinks that's
too complicated. The jury can't figure out if a witness who was flown in to testify was given a benefit. Can't confuse
the jury with mindbenders like that. But the judge thinks its okay to ask Kaylee what Mandi told her, when she
knows Kaylee is going to say Scott hid in the back of the car and Mandi used a black Glock and signed "fuck you"
at Walmart. All of that is extremely confusing for the jury because it's impossible. Actually, the prosecution agreed
to not have Kaylee say Mandi signed "fuck you" at Walmart. Judge would have allowed it even though she knows
the "fuck you" signature doesn't exist.
This is supposed to be a trial by jury, not a trial by Judge. Not a trial by what the prosecution tells the judge they
want the jury to hear. Its the defendant's right to choose what the jury hears, that is his right to a trial by jury. If the
prosecution can't prove their case when a jury hears a witness was flown in from out of state, if the best evidence
they have is that fragile and hard to understand, maybe they should let the defendant go. If the jury is that fucking
dumb to not understand that, the judge should have declared a mistrial.
Prosecutor Stone told the jury "Just because witness Madara says Mandi says Mulrenin took this drug G, doesn't
mean it happened." We can't get a correction like that, if a witness like Scott Jones accidentally says he received a
benefit for testifying? Prosecutor Stone can't tell the jury "Hold on, just because Scott Jones said he got a benefit for
testifying, doesn't mean he did." The judge wasn't going to let some crazy thing like that happen, when it is the
defense asking to use their Constitutional right to question witnesses in front of the jury. The jury is there to hear
what the Defendant wants to tell them. But Judge Recksiedler says no, the jury is here to hear any crazy confusing
IV - 48
thing the prosecution wants to have a witness say, even if it contradicts physical evidence, and then tell the jury
what parts to believe. Even if the prosecution says don't listen to the witness, there was no drug G. But if the defense
wants to ask a witness if they received a benefit, it is too crazy and confusing, and doesn't fit with the evidence. It
doesn't fit with Judge Recksiedler's preconceptions of fact.
The jailhouse witness is a plain scam and the judge knows it. It's worse than hearsay. Half the things Kaylee said in
her deposition were complete nonsense. Even Prosecutor Stone agreed Kaylee is a liar, when he admitted there was
no "fuck you" signature. So the judge knows letting Kaylee testify is a complete scam. But asking the other
witnesses if they received a benefit? Oh, that would be weird. Just rubs her wrong. Paying liars to lie in front of the
jury doesn't rub her wrong. But asking people a simple question? No, that seems kind of contrived to convey
accurate information to the jury and win a case in court. Maybe on some weird planet where they allow a trial by
jury, but this is a trial by judge where case law dictates the outcome. Julie Madara can accuse the defendant of
drugging the victim, but you can't even tell the jury the true fact of what crimes Julie Madara was convicted of. That
would create a jury bias against the witness, and there is some kind of bill of rights for the witness that supersedes
the right of a 21-year-old girl to get a trial by jury with full facts ahead of a life sentence with no parole.
The jailhouse witness is a neat trick. Police are not allowed to say to a defendant "Confess, or you will spend a year
in prison." If they could it would save a lot of gas, because police would never leave the jail again to do actual
investigations. So instead they say to another defendant "Claim this person confessed to you, or you will spend a
year in prison." It is no more complicated than that. In fact it is even less complicated than it would first appear,
given the jail is filled with 100 career liars and known victimizers of the innocent, looking for angles to beat the
system. And they are all familiar with things like arrest affidavits, the clerk web site, what happens to people who
lie on the stand - nothing - and the elements the prosecution needs to prove specific crimes like burglary.
The same people who don't want felons to vote, want them to take the lives of strangers into their hands, and will
release them from prison in exchange for doing so. It is not like there was some evidence of Mandi's guilt which
was suppressed, and the prosecutors needed the jailhouse witnesses to make up for it. They had no compelling
reason to believe Mandi was guilty. All they had was jailhouse witnesses who were known by all parties involved to
be lying.
IV - 49
10. KINGDOM OF LIARS - 2016 to 2019
The strangest thing is how no lawyers in the room, judge prosecution or defense, feel any attachment to the truth,
and no shame. You can go in a web politics forum where people who love and hate President Trump argue all day,
and wish death on each other. But a person who Loves President Trump will not want to be caught lying by
someone who hates President Trump. And each side will want to argue that his passionate political position, his
wish for the literal suffering and death of his adversary, is based on the truth. But lawyers in a courtroom will do
whatever they can get away with, with no shame or sanction from their peers for lying.
At Mandi's trial, in his closing argument, prosecutor Stone told the jury the gun was Mandi's gun. All the lawyers in
the room know that is almost certainly not true. An anonymous person in a web forum would be ashamed to make
an assertion that all his peers and adversaries know is almost certainly not true. But the prosecutor in a criminal trial
does not seem to be at all worried that the judge or defense lawyers will think he is a lying scumbag. And the judge
does not seem to care if the outcome is just or even based in truth. She sees herself as a legal secretary.
It probably got to a point in the 60's or 70's where it was no longer even possible to try to bring out the truth at trial,
because of case law. Rather than telling the truth, you were forced to tell whatever story you could come up with, to
fit with whatever evidence you were allowed to present. And from that point it is just a sport of liars. And of
jailhouse informants and expert witnesses. And of people manufacturing whatever kind of evidence the rules don't
forbid, to have any hope to get anything done. Old-fashioned lying is the one kind of evidence that higher courts,
rules of evidence, and case law, can't prevent you from introducing, How is a higher court going to determine if you
lied? No chance.
Witness Neisha Cintron can go up there and straight lie "I didn't meet Mandi until the end of the night. Mulrenin
never took employees home with him." Doesn't matter. Jackson Athaide said "911 call came in at 6:30." Prosecutor
Stone says "Just because Mandi told jailhouse witness Madara there was a drug named G doesn't mean it's true."
Denise Smith said she ducked a gunshot right before she reported a suicide to 911. Even Judge Recksiedler was
fooled about when the murder victim actually died, and thought he was alive in the hospital for two days. Barbara
Mellinger completely invented, straight-up made it up right in front of Scott's jury "This is the job application that
Mandi gave me." They don't even pretend that the witnesses aren't making it up. Only Mellinger didn't make it up.
She lied about not knowing why there were two applications.
When a crime-scene technician lies on the stand, I get excited. So I pointed out Smolarek's new lie about the gloves
to Mandi's lawyer Bark. He said "Yeah, but it doesn't matter because none of it's Mandi's DNA." To me it matters,
because the whole system is a car with marshmallow wheels. But lawyers are like female veterinarians after 10
years tossing family dogs in the freezer all day. It doesn't bother them that it is not what people hope for.
The lawyers in the courtroom, the judge, the prosecution, the defense, are part of the same professional
organization, The Bar. They are not going to try to police or harass their peers for dishonesty. As a practical matter,
there is no ultimate arbiter to determine what the truthfulness of any statement is. Are they going to have a separate
trial for every fact every lawyer supposedly lied about? No they are not, and so there is no benefit to go after your
peers. All they have to do is deny lying and say you are the one lying, and it would dead-end there. As a practical
matter, standing up for the truth would be hopeless endeavor, you would just make enemies.
Prosecutors have almost unlimited power to produce whatever evidence they want. The police go and tell witnesses
"This evil guy shot this nice guy, he is evil, and it demands justice. Do you want to help us get justice by making a
statement about what you saw?" Yes, I saw it. I saw this evil guy shoot this nice guy. It really is that easy to
manufacture evidence. They don't even need to tell jailhouse witnesses you will get life in prison unless you say the
defendant confessed to the exact thing he is accused of.
Or, if the witness doesn't catch on and say the story the cop wants told, the cop just doesn't write his name down.
The defense attorney six months later, has no chance of finding that witness. That's not a rogue cop. That is state
attorney Phil Archer's LEO of the year Ben Sprague. He hid the statements from Lofts witnesses who didn't say
what he wanted, until the defense was lucky to find out about some of them a year and a half later on June 20, 2018.
Sprague ignored the witnesses at Dollhouse who said they saw Love. Sprague never asked that dog walker what
IV - 50
time did you let Love in that freight door. Not that we know about. Instead Sprague lost the video, so the defense
couldn't know to ask the dog walker either. They didn't know there was a dog walker who let Love in until two and
a half years later!
Where is the statement of any witness who said Mulrenin left Dollhouse with more than $2500? It is front and
center in Sprague's arrest affidavit. Sprague: "According to witnesses Mulrenin left the club with a substantial
amount of cash totaling upwards of $2500." I have not seen one statement from one witness who said this. What
happened to those witness statements? According to Mellinger, they had $7000 cash at closing. According to Carico
the club was closed, Mulrenin was in the office doing books and smoking in a bad mood, and then he got angry at
the girls who were still there, and left. Somewhere in there has to be another witness. Was there $7000 - $2500 =
$4500 left the next day? And if so who had that $4500?
Mulrenin told Barbara Mellinger, or told some unnamed person who then told Mellinger, that none of the dancers
got to cash out their dancer dollars from credit cards, because there weren't enough cash receipts. Presumably
Mellinger then went home. Mandi was still there. According to Dollhouse video with Neisha and Mulrenin, and her
recorded phone call with her mother, Mandi stayed long after closing. Someone other than Barbara Mellinger said
he witnessed Mulrenin had $2500 in dancer dollars that he got tipped, and cashed them out when he left. That same
witness would know if Mulrenin told Mandi to come to his house and he would cash out her 100 dancer dollars or
whatever little she had, where none of the other girls would know about it and demand to cash out their dancer
dollars also. But the name of that witness is unknown.
There is a video statement from Gorewitz at 1:00 PM on 12/28/2016, and a video statement from Carico and
Cintron at 4:00 PM on 12/28/2016. There are no video statements from any time in between, and there is no
statement from Big Mike. This is Big Mike who said somebody saw Love at Stars the previous night, and heard
Jackson was at Dollhouse looking for Mulrenin even though Big Mike wasn't there. He would probably know
Jackson was at Stars all week and was at Mulrenin's house all week, and had been fucking Mulrenin. And if Big
Mike said that to Sprague, Sprague would throw that statement away because it was not consistent with Sprague's
narrative. So we have no statements from Big Mike and many others.
Is it more likely Sprague threw away some witness statements? Or is it more likely Mandi went out dressed in
stripper clothes every night that week according to her roommate, and cell towers show there is no place she could
have been except Stars and Dollhouse for 26 hours at night that week, and yet not a single witness who saw her
there ever thought to tell police, or tell anybody police talked to, that she was there all week? And we have no idea
who provided this $2500 number Mulrenin supposedly got in dancer dollars tips. Mulrenin's own list says eight
dancers with 16 actual boobs only made $4960 in dancer dollars tips.
Barbara Mellinger, the Dollhouse bartender/manager, did a deposition in February of 2019, where she revealed
Mandi came into Dollhouse and applied the previous night December 12, 2016. Mellinger said this is why Mandi
filled out two job applications. Mellinger said she already knew this, when she went on the stand at Scott Love's
trial and acted like she had no idea why there were two job applications. They asked her on the stand did a girl come
in and apply? Mellinger said yes. She didn't say the girl came in and applied twice. The lawyers argued over how
Mellinger could authenticate two applications, when Mellinger only said Mandi came in and filled out one.
Mellinger misled the court. She did not tell "the whole truth."
After more than two years, this is the first time this was revealed by any witness that Mandi was at Dollhouse the
previous night! Mellinger said she knew this from "rumor." She didn't want to say who said it, she thought it is
funny to hide facts and witnesses while Mandi sits in jail without bond. Everybody at Dollhouse had to know this,
and had to know who said it, who was the source of it, who saw Mandi there the previous night. Sprague
interviewed valet parker Gorewitz, he didn't say Jackson came in the previous night. Sprague interviewed assistant
manager Carico, he didn't say Jackson came in the previous night. Somebody said it, and they kept it a secret. You
don't think Sprague said "Mandi murdered your boss" and somebody said to him "She was here on Monday also"?
Why wouldn't Sprague help witnesses keep secrets? Why wouldn't Sprague throw away witness statements? Who or
what institution is going to stop him? Nobody. I guarantee you he can throw away witness statements all day, and
nobody cares. When you or your family member gets arrested, nobody will care when police throw away witness
statements and hide the names of witnesses. There is not an institution in Florida to punish or audit it, or do
IV - 51
anything whatsoever to prevent it. You show me that institution.
Denise Smith's 911 call was thrown away. That enabled her to go from a story with no gunshot, to a story with a
gunshot five minutes before Mulrenin came out, to a story with a gunshot right before Mulrenin came out at Mandi's
trial.
Sprague threw away the name of the dog walker who let Love in the building. I am sure Michelle Ervin said his
name. And Sprague threw away any witness statement the dog walker might have made. And Sprague threw away
the video of the dog walker (and "lost" the hard drive) until two and a half years later when I bugged them and
Athaide accidentally put it back in. And Sprague threw away the timestamps on the video of Love going in behind
the dog walker. And in place of that name and that witness statement and that video and those original timestamps,
Sprague substituted a file hand-typed by Detective Dean called "Lofts Video Review by Dean.docx". Detective
Dean who wasn't even there, and not the person who was there and let Love in, is now the witness of what time
Love came through that door.
It is comedy. But on the island populated only by children that is Seminole County, that is taken as serious police
work. That is the standard of excellence of a "detective."
Remember, Mandi May is Buffalo Bob. She tied up a guy, tortured him, shot him. It's like State Attorney Phil
Archer just locked up Charles Manson. Mandi will serve a longer sentence than Manson. Do they not care there is a
"rumor" Mandi was at Dollhouse the previous night, like Tex Watson was at Sharon Tate's house the previous
night? Do they not want to know whom Mandi talked to or met with the previous night? Is it possible someone at
Dollhouse tipped Mandi off about Mulrenin's cash box, or helped Mandi plan the shocking crime? Nobody cares.
And the reason they don't care is because they know it's all a scam. The Dollhouse people know Mulrenin tricked
Mandi to come over and probably raped her, and not the other way around. And the police know Smolarek's glove
and bootie evidence is a scam.
Sprague wrote an arrest affidavit that said we need to arrest Mandi Jackson because WITNESSES said Mulrenin left
with $2500 cash. And then he never provided any evidence or witnesses, which I am sure would have existed, to
support his central theme. Instead they said fuck it, here are some jailhouse "witnesses" making up garbage two
years later about the Manson family hiding in cars and using black Glocks and drugging people and ransacking the
apartment and signing "fuck you" like "healter skelter." Original case is a scam? Fuck it, we will just pay some girls
to invent crap, Mulrenin had $13k in his pocket.
They literally replaced Sprague's missing $2500 witness with 15-time lying felon Julie Madara who simply said
$13k. People are psychic in this case to count money they have never seen. I don't doubt someone literally handed
Madara Sprague's police report and said "Say Mandi confessed to this" to save Sprague the embarrassment. Or to
save Phil Archer the embarrassment of making Sprague LEO of the Year.
Who in a planet of 8 billion people is going to stop some mediocre old scumbags with a crooked scam to take some
young girl's life for sport? Nobody. Human beings live and die like animals.
When it comes to employees of the state, it is like a Nazi wall of propaganda. The technician at the Florida
Department of Law Enforcement Christine Murphy, who matched the bullet Smolarek planted in front of the love
seat, to the gun Smolarek staged underneath the bra, was discovered to have done a lot of things wrong in her work
matching bullets to guns. So they had to fire her. But the primary institution for investigating wrongdoing and
pursuing justice in the State of Florida is allergic to the truth, and can't let it be used to protect the innocent.
If they tell you exactly what Christine Murphy did and fire her for it, that truth is admissible at trial. So the Florida
Department of Law Enforcement will provide you with a shamelessly dishonest letter that Christine Murphy simply
*retired*, and she did so with the highest respect of her peers and a reputation for excellent work. And according to
case law, that is all you are allowed to tell the jury. Who is going to stop the executive branch from lying and
victimizing the innocent by hiding the truth from the jury? The voter?
Don't get me wrong, I am not trusting local attorneys to come up with their own rules of evidence in each case.
They are even crookeder and stupider than the pointy-head ideologues in the high courts, in addition to having the
IV - 52
constraints of time and money. The poorer defendant with the worse lawyer, would lose the case right in front of
some backwoods judge based purely on local politics, before the jury even saw the first piece of evidence.
I am just saying case law and rules of evidence have gotten too complicated and ambitious, to where the process has
been corrupted and the right to a jury trial has been lost. The rules of evidence should be simple and conservative, to
where a "judge" can throw out anything out that suits him, but only be forced to do so by a higher court in some set
of broad original circumstances which I wouldn't even know, beyond coerced confessions. Except only the
defendant has an extraordinary and unique Constitutional right to show anything he wants in his own defense.