Jury Duty - Is There Racial Prejudice?

I have seen a lot of change over the past fifty years in U.S. civil rights and how all people are treated today. In the past 50 years, the rate of black Americans killed by police has dropped 70 percent. With all the countries around the world I have travelled to, you cannot ever show me how any other country is a greater place to live. We, the people, live under the U.S. Constitutional rules of law which offer us the greatest individual freedom. So contrary to the headlines about the White-Black racial divide, read what are the real statistics.   

• In 2012, 123 African-Americans were shot dead by police. There are currently more than 43 million blacks living in the U.S.A. In 2012, 326 whites were killed by police bullets. Those are the latest stats available.

• In 2013, blacks committed 5,375 murders in America; whites committed 4,396. Whites comprise 63 percent of the population; blacks 13 percent. So, anyone -- anyone thinking clearly can see that the homicide rate among blacks way out of proportion thus, the police intrusion into black precincts. Since, in a whopping 90 percent of black homicides, the dead person is another black or the offender himself.

Because of all the demagoguery on how racial our jury system is, I am writing this article to let others look into what a sequestered jury in an isolated room sees and how they make their decisions to arrive at their final verdict. It was not a scripted Perry Mason or Matlock TV show with perfect plots revealing everything or even having complete answers to all open questions before a final verdict either, but it certainly was a real life lesson in how our legal system under Constitutional Laws affords every citizen due process. I do encourage everyone to serve as a juror to see firsthand how objectively law is conducted as fairly as humanly possible.

I served as the jury foreman and just signed off on the verdict document for a criminal case in a felony trial that convicted the defendant. It was not a slam dunk, easy decision process as twelve people were attempting to become one in their final decision to unanimously decide a defendant's fate.

Behind the closed doors of the jury room, due process of law works. During our deliberations process all jury members, Americans living within a racially diverse culture, never promulgated nor mentioned it and was not in any deference to the defendant either--it was a moot point. The volume of physical evidence, testimony by several witnesses, points of law and jury instructions truly focused our ultimate decision. We were there to determine the merits based on just facts in the case.

We examined the inconsistencies and flaws of the case from both sides, the defense and the prosecutor. On weighing the details, we discovered omissions of evidence or facts that were holes in the State's arguments which were questionable to allow reasonable doubt of the charge made. It lead to a logical conclusion that the Prosecutor was either directed by the court or a point of law to deliberately prevent certain evidence to be presented to the jury; i.e., past criminal records, allowable testimony by witnesses or lines of questioning leading to the jury to consider incomplete information. One glaring realization popped up; it was not a neat, tidy TV Courtroom drama with all of the facts laid out for the right or wrong decision--this was reality TV on steroids.

In our desire to maintain balance, in review of the Defense attorney's case presented the alleged suspect was not the defendant. It was claimed that another party was solely responsible for the crime of vehicular theft who then gave his keys over and lent the vehicle to the defendant who mistakenly believed the party was the legal owner. As the defendant took the stand, the Defense attorney noted he was taking the stand, which is not required or any admission of guilt if not taken. The defendant answered all his questions forthrightly and seemingly honest too.

During the Prosecutor's cross-examination, however, a serious breakdown occurred. The defendant could not offer the vehicle owner's last name or whereabouts, a key witness's full name or address, a cousin's name corroborating an alibi and a solid timeline account without questionable lapses. Since criminal records were allowable evidence, the prosecutor in cross examination of the defendant asked about his three prior felony convictions. He admitted to these prior felony convictions too. They were objected by his defense attorney, acknowledged by the judge and overruled to be allowed to stand in evidence in his testimony. It offered the jury an opportunity to evaluate further the defendant's moral turpitude and character in assessing his veracity on the witness stand while he was testifying.   

Our jurist instructions directed we jurors to not tweet, blog, IM, Google, Facebook, discuss anything to anybody or even to fellow jurors until jury deliberations and then, only then, after the case has been decided and adjudicated with our final verdict all findings are public record open to all discussions.

I did not hear or see any jurors who broke their solemn oath to uphold their word to defend the law, we all relied on just the evidence as it was presented in court.  

In the first polling around the table, eight were for guilty and four were for not guilty. It was at that point, and for the next two hours, that after exhaustive views proffered by all, lengthy debates and two more polls taken that distilled our decision down to a guilty verdict, "Beyond a reasonable doubt." 

I stood up in court and gave out the verdict from the jury box to the bailiff who199th District Court - McKinney, TX passed it over to the Judge to read. Needless to say, the defendant was glaring and staring me down while the verdict was read as I looked right into his bloodshot, red eyes. He then slowly sat down, put down his elbows on the table and buried his face into his open hands while woefully shaking his head. 

After the trial I was informed about his rap sheet that went back over twenty years but only the past ten years was admitted into evidence about all of his prior violations, incarcerations and fines. Due to rules about prejudicial facts not directly related to the current case any past litigations and motions allowed to establish the accused defendant's past is only limited to the current past decade during the trial proceedings or in front of a jury. In general, any past criminal actions can tarnish any defendant's credible personal integrity about telling the truth. Any older facts also could deny a defendant's right to a fair trial if not based on just the facts in the current alleged crime that he is specifically accused of committing on the pending trial docket.

FYI: At the Colin County, Texas Courthouse I observed that all ethnicities, ages, genders, backgrounds, education and income levels were represented in this American judicial due process of law. It included everyone like the sheriff's deputies providing security, jury room and office staff assisting in selection and the courtroom bailiff who was extremely accommodating in allowing the jury to discharge its duties uninterrupted. 

Our jurist, the Honorable Judge Angela Tucker was a woman, black, intelligent adjudicator who conducted a well ordered court room with the proper decorum, dignity and respect that our Constitutional legal system deserves.

Mr. Chris Fredericks, Asst. D.A. Prosecutor, and Mr. Mark O'Brian Jr., Defense attorney, presented an amalgam of evidence that offered defendant testimony, character witnesses, physical evidence, victim testimony and relevant facts that would affect our jury decision. They were professionals who clearly represented both sides fairly in the case while allowing each side to be heard. We the jury, therefore, legitimately decided a just verdict.

On our panel of jurors was a genial group with diverse views, strong opinions and sharp, critical thinking skills. They autopsied the case and dissected under a microscope the facts, evidence and legal conclusions postulated by the defense and prosecution to determine if the charges were correct as charged.

Now, see what we, the jury, were presented with as evidence and the facts we relied upon to render our verdict. 

Arrested: Patrick Deyone Lee

DOB: 09/08/1972 

Gender: Male
Race: Black
Date Arrested: 11/13/2013
County Arrested: Collin, TX
Other Information: A Police Field Unit arrested Patrick Deyone Lee on Wednesday, 11/13/2013 at 10:30 am at a traffic stop while actively being tracked by GPS from Dallas to Plano after the vehicle he was driving was reported stolen in Dallas at 7:00 am on the same morning. The vehicle was physically first spotted by Plano police officers as it was slowly exiting a back alley behind residential homes onto a residential street.

The arrestee stated that a Mike, aka Black, no known surnames, had been been paid twenty dollars for gas by Patrick Lee to use said vehicle during the morning hours to be returned by noon and gave him the keys. The vehicle had no signs of damage due to broken glass, ignition wires jump-started or any tampered steering lock column that lead Patrick Lee to believe Mike wasn't the owner. Patrick Lee said his own vehicle needed brake shoes which prevented him from driving it and that morning he just checked prices at an Auto Zone store to buy them for a local mechanic to repair his car brakes. 

The arrestee further offered to arresting officers that during that morning he was driving around Plano neighborhoods for over an hour attempting to locate a Kim, no known surnames. Kim was a co-worker of Patrick Lee's fiancée, Kimberly, who worked at a senior health care home services company who promised Patrick Lee a list of her elderly clients who could possibly hire him for handyman jobs or lawn maintenance services.

Patrick Lee also stated that after his single visit one week earlier with his fiancée, he could only recall Kim had a one story brick house with a pickup parked out front in the driveway off a major street in an unfamiliar city since he had maybe driven through it three or four times ever. There was no known address or phone numbers for Kim available because he lost Kim's numbers in his cell phone directory. The police requested to examine his cell phone and discovered it had no directory setup for anyone indicating his questionable claim of storing Kim's number. Furthermore, he was driving over unannounced in hopes of seeing Kim so she could not be called to corroborate any appointment to explain his presence in that Plano neighborhood that day.

Patrick Lee's mother and fiancée, Kimberly, who he lived with corroborated at the trial the defendant's timeline for that morning. He drove his mother to work at 6:30 am, returned home and watched TV with Kimberly until 8:30 am and picked up loaner car at 9:00 am from Mike or Black.

Earlier that morning Patrick Lee's mechanic who lived nearby testified he saw Black in the car and was impressed with the aftermarket chrome wheels and stereo sound system; even Kimberly testified they lived in a quiet apartment nearby too with many elderly and thought it out of place to hear loud music and looked out her window to see the boosted car with shiny wheels and boom box speakers blasting. Their testimonies indicated that this car was new to them, to their neighborhood and to Black which meant he, the owner, newly acquired the vehicle. The mechanic further testified of talk on doing the brake repair with Patrick Lee; but to date has not fixed it.

The true owners of the said vehicle did not know any Mike or Black, Kim, Patrick Lee or Kimberly. The owners or others did not witness this criminal act of auto theft with any suspect involved or during the commission of the alleged crime. The owner had started his vehicle engine to warm it up in front of his house, left the keys in the ignition and ran back inside for a cup of coffee only to return to find it stolen. The owners, however, during the morning in question did not give any permission to anyone to drive their motor vehicle. So, the Penal Code offense charged was in fact: Theft, Unauthorized Use of a Vehicle, a state jail felony level, 31.01 PC statute. It's a state jail felony if the value of the service stolen is $1,500 or more but less than $20,000.

The exact statute reads as follows: 

Sec. 31.07. UNAUTHORIZED USE OF A VEHICLE.

(a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly operates another's boat, airplane, or motor-propelled vehicle without the effective consent of the owner.

(b) An offense under this section is a state jail felony. 

Two "Points of Law" that, we, the Jury had to consider in this case: In this section of law, the statute uses the phrase “without effective consent of the owner." This is a straight-forward fact that the owner had given consent. This language, however, also raises the possibility of "a mistake of fact defense." This law means: If the defendant subjectively and reasonably believes he or she had consent to take the property, the defense could be applicable.--Patrick Lee, therefore, implies that he relied upon by Mike or Black's action to give him the car keys that the vehicle was his to loan out for the twenty dollars. 

Court Proceedings and Findings

The entire scenario presented by Patrick Lee during the course of the evidence presented was debunked by the Prosecutor, the Defendant's own testimony and his witnesses. It was "proven beyond a reasonable doubt" he was guilty as charged: 

• There's no proof of Mike or Black ever residing where the car was picked up.
• Car keys taken explain absence of broken windows or hot-wired ignition.  
• Allegedly Mike or Black moved to New Orleans 11/13/2013, never to return.
• Due to no provable owner's consent, "Mistake of Fact Defense" was negated.
• No brake repairs were done even while waiting on bail for a year for the trial.
• No Kim never came forward to say she offered Patrick Lee work references.
• Suspicions raised on aimless mid-week, morning cruises in residential area.  
• Patrick Lee's timeline allowed periods to steal and drive away vehicle.
• The owners "did not give permission to anyone" to drive their motor vehicle.
• Patrick Lee admitted he was a convicted felon on three past counts.

Punishment Phase:

It was conducted by the Honorable Angela Tucker, the presiding judge, and the defendant, Patrick Lee, pled TRUE to all counts.  Punishment was assessed 5 years confinement in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice system. 

Post Trial Information: 

Note: These are the three prior felony convictions cited in the trial phase; however, this listing does not include previous records of past arrests, convictions, sentences and incarcerations. It was further disclosed afterwards that the defendant's criminal record spanned twenty years which included burglary and assault as well as other infractions of the law.

Date Arrested: 07/14/2009

County Arrested: Dallas
Other Information: The Fugitive Unit arrested Patrick Deyone Lee at a parole office in Dallas on a warrant issued by the Texas Department of Criminal Justice Parole Board on June 26, 2009, for a parole violation for absconding from a halfway house. Lee was sentenced to five years in prison after being convicted in 1996 in Dallas County of sexual assault of a child, a 16-year-old girl. At the time of his July 14, 2009, arrest, Lee was on parole for failure to comply with sex offender registration requirements in the Dallas County case. Lee was sentenced to three years in prison after being convicted in 2007 for the registration violation.

Information current as of 2012-12-04 14:06:41

Date Arrested: After 2013-01-01 (Approx.)

County Arrested: Dallas

Other Information: Patrick Deyone Lee had been arrested and charged as a felon carrying a concealed weapon.

You Are All Certifiably Insane About the Internet!

Are you all nuts??

How loud should a cry be to wail loudly enough to be heard? - Your lives are going to be CHANGED FOREVER if Obama gets his way! - NO LIE! 

• Do you all realize that if you think the NSA, National Security Agency, scandal was intrusive in monitoring your emails, phone calls and text messages by the United States government then you haven't considered a global U.N. bureaucracy that will have power to reject any nation's citizen's ability to say, "No!", to Internet monitoring and content bans. - Scary? Oh, it's going to happen fast too!

• Do you all realize that if you think the Somali pirates taking ships and crews as hostages to exact "fees" and "just tolls" through their waters was extortion implicit in allowing safe passage and controlling strategic territories past their own weapons then you haven't considered a United Nations that has long craved for the power to tax all Internet traffic over the world-wide-web of seas of information while users are navigating around the U.N. software censorship mines?  

As far back as 2001, a U.N. report, "Financing the Global Sharing Economy," proposed that the U.N. be given authority to levy a tax on "speculative currency transactions" with a projected revenue stream north of $150 billion. Should the U.N. get control of the Internet, $150 billion will be "chump change" growing into $Trillions to go into the United Nations treasury, International Banks and pockets of crooked U.N. Directors and Member nations.  

It would enable a chokehold on the global economy and a vast stream of revenue that would make the U.N. even more unaccountable than it already is now. All this would start out modestly with a fee, never called "a tax," maybe a small transaction fee for certain types of traffic. But if history is any guide, the run-up to big dollars will be stunningly rapid. One need only reference the increases in U.S. federal revenues and expenditures after passage in 1913 of the 16th Amendment establishing the federal income tax. The top 1913 rate of 7% more than doubled by 1916 to 15%, then rocketed to 67% in 1917 and 77% in 1918. It always starts small--AND never ends!

Power follows the money, and bureaucratic appetites are voracious. Who will there be to stop the process, after all? Where is the elected legislative body that will answer to the world's population that finally pays these "fees"? Among the many disingenuous justifications being touted for this colossal strategic mistake is that 'No Government Control' will be imposed on the Internet--BULLSHIT! --What does the 'One World Global Body,' the U.N. Government agency, call itself then?

Can anyone doubt that within just the next few decades the Internet will be the essential infrastructure for participation in even the smallest segment of the global economy? The revenue potential associated with controlling the "rivers" of the 21st-century-and-beyond will be enormous and will finance an ever-expanding international bureaucracy, likely under the aegis of the United Nations.

Get Off Your Asses & Email Your Representatives!

 ~ It is a Non-Partisan Issue ~

~ Americans Owe their Freedom to our Laws -  So does the Internet ~

To Email your U.S. Congressional Representatives. 

Click on: https://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/map Enter your home "Zip Code" and it will list by their Names and Internet sites. Click on to their individual "Official Website" and type into their email message box: "Do Not transfer ICANN to UN" and send--it's that easy and it will take a second to do it too! 

You Are Crazy if You Don't Email Congress!

Please Send this out to your Friends Now!

It's Black & White in Brown Shooting

The grand jury decision about the Michael Brown shooting in Ferguson, MissouriMichael Brown at 7 Eleven stealing cigars. found that officer Darren Wilson acted in self-defense as the physical, forensic and witness evidence had proven beyond a reasonable doubt there was no criminal act committed. Still, many people of color feel the judicial system has dissed them again like in the Treyvon Martin shooting jury decision. However, again the legitimate protesters were drowned out by the mob rioters as they burned, looted and destroyed the neighborhood stores and property. The true protesters complaints were lost instead in this thuggish maelstrom spinning out of control in their community. This is the end result of a residual human tragedy to this shooting chaos and lawlessness.     

Factoids:  

• Interesting parallels between Michael Brown and Treyvon Martin were: 

Both were in 7 Eleven convenience stores shown on video tapes. TreyvonTreyvon at 7 Eleven buys "drank" items.  Martin was buying a bag of Skittles candy and can of Arizona Ice Tea to mix with some Robitussin cough syrup he had to make "drank" or "lean", hood slang for cough syrup drink, to get his drugged Ecstacy-like high. Michael Brown preferred his "drank" with Hawaiian Punch and vodka. He stole a box ($49.95) of 'rellos', hood slang for cigarellos, during his strong arm robbery snatching them from the store owner's hands and leaving prior to his shooting. 

Both had been smoking marijuana prior to their killings. Coroners in bothTrayvon smokes dope.cases suggested that marijuana could play into cognitive decision making in regard to their reckless, aggressive actions. 

Both had come from broken, dysfunctional homes, no father figures or real discipline and schooled-illiterate. Michael Brown on his family he posted a message on Facebook that it was wrong “how yo own family dont wanna see you do good.”

Both were under active disciplinary actions taken against them. Treyvon was suspended from school for breaking into school hall lockers, stealing and vandalism. MichaelMichael with vodka, punch, cash & gun.
 Brown 'who was on his way to College' was arrested and charged back on Nov. 2, 2013 with Burglary, Armed criminal action and Assault with the intent to do great bodily harm all stemming from one incident. He was out on bail and scheduled for a September trial date, one month before he was killed.

• Officer Wilson tried to get out of his vehicle to talk to Brown and he slammed the door on Wilson and punched him in the face and a struggle ensued. Wilson drew his weapon in the car while being pushed down on the driver's seat and firing into Brown's hand. Brown began running off as Officer Wilson gave chase and then Brown stopped turned back charging again toward Officer Wilson as he fired again stopping Brown. 

• As Obama believes, "Never let a crisis go to waste." So, the U.S. Justice Department simultaneously is conducting two civil rights investigations: one into whether Wilson, who is white, violated Brown's black civil rights, and the other into the Police Department's overall track record with minorities. Many analysts say the federal investigation into Wilson's actions will lose steam since it is very difficult to prove that Wilson or the Department intentionally acted with black bigotry.

The American public's short attention span is now focused amid all of the media hype and political fanfare pointed at Black racial tensions and civil rights issues. Many politicians will push for recognition of their own "race bait" issues and accomplishments. Hopefully the black constituency will pay closer attention to their facts, not only to what was promised on in the past but on who has never delivered up to now, which is almost every politician with another government welfare program.

There is a growing plea for responsibility in many black communities to participate in bringing about changes in their own neighborhoods themselves with education, churches and businesses.  That voice of reason can grow since: 

• Many nearly illiterate students have been sold a "con line" by politicians to get a higher college education only to fail. Putting the emphasis instead on trade schools and vocational centers which must be brought into the mainstream jobs market sector for training these workers who will never have a college degree with no hope of ever getting one for themselves due to poor public schools. 

• Planning for future generations for the possibilities that will exist for their children if charter schools are allowed to flourish and local schools to run by themselves.

• Integrating Church faith-based education personal values into curriculums. The integration of the family core offers stability, opportunity and a firm structure to anchor their lives for a more secure future.   

The slaves were freed under the Emancipation Proclamation Act of 1863 and then 100 years later assured under the Civil Rights Act of 1963 of their Constitutional rights. It's now 2014, fifty years later that these liberties under freedom have been instituted. Isn't it time to recognize that it's over 150 years later and something is definitely wrong here? The blacks have up to now really done nothing to bring themselves up out of poverty, illiteracy, joblessness, gangs, drugs and out-of-wedlock children. Is there a pattern here, like blaming Whites for discrimination and while getting on more Federal government programs that feed this downward spiral going to nowhere? Has throwing more money at it done anything yet?

What are other races doing?--like the Vietnamese, Chinese, Indians, Japanese, Italians, Germans, English, French, Spanish, Greek, etc. who are not rioting, then where are they anyway?--Doing everything else to get ahead like getting educated, trained, jobs, married families, living life all while building their country and their own futures. Wow! What an American lifestyle concept!--And these young people are doing it right now today in all less than the last 150 years too.

Confused on Obama Immigration Executive Order?

Here is a liberal, Democrat that I have debated politics with for many years. He, like so many on both sides need a refresher course in the U.S. Constitution 101. He emailed his understanding on Fox News coverage after Obama's November 20, 2014 announcement of his Executive Order on Immigration: 

"I watched good ol’ right-wing FOX News last night to get both sides of Obama’s Immigration Proclamation and soon discovered that most the commentators, instead of waving torches & pitchforks, just don’t believe that he violated the Constitution or any other Federal Laws. They called him all kinds of names of course (except for the N word), but as they say, “Sticks and stones…” As for that Teabagging Texan: Louie Gohmert (who looks like his name sounds) well he went a bit off his rocker blaming that product of miscegenation [racial segregation] for the destruction of our sacred Constitution, the Ebola pandemic, ISIS @ the Texas/Mexican border and the demolition of the Alamo by illegal aliens. The poor guy needs a cowboy hat…" --Steve W.

Many voters are confused when hearing de facto immigration amnesties were awarded by both Presidents Reagan and H. W. Bush which were Presidential Executive Orders proclaimed constitutionally legal. Now, Obama acting on his Executive Orders for passing immigration amnesty into law himself has no constitutional authority or legality. Some voters haven't fully understood what happened when Obama enacted his Presidential Executive Order. So what is going on here? It's very simple if you get through the CBS, CNN and Fox News political hype.

President Obama has been frustrated that no Bill for an Immigration Law was passed by the Congress and Senate since 2008 when he has been in office. So, Obama decided that 2014, after his final Presidential Election and the Midterms to avoid obvious heated political angst, was a perfect time to "enact" (the big key word here) his own Immigration Law by Executive Order. There is only one problem, the "President has no authorization to legislate (make) or enact (pass) any laws." He can only use his own Presidential pressure politically, a bully pulpit like all the other Presidents, to push any Bill passed through both the House of Representatives and Senate of Congress to his desk.

So now, Congress is the legislative body that has sole power to enact laws that go onto the President's desk to sign it or veto it--that's Obama's sole role. Within his Presidential Executive powers, he governs by Constitutional laws that allow certain discretions to amend, addend, clarify or extend the conditions within the adopted Bill he signed into law which still can be overridden by another branch of government. 

Now you can see how an "enacted law" is the body of a law adopted by the people or legislative bodies. They include: Constitutions as adopted by the people; Statutes (ordinances/laws) passed by legislative bodies; and Regulations passed by administrative bodies that have the force of law. The President can in the end of all the legislation, by "law-makers", either choose to accept or reject their Bills.

While a president's executive power is broad, it is not without limits. The Constitutional system of checks and balances provides both the judiciary and Congress with power to override executive actions; i.e., by a Supreme Court decision or a 2/3 Senate majority.

So, the power of the purse is the ability of Congress to manipulate and control the actions of the President by withholding funding, or putting stipulations on the use of any federal funds by having control over budgets and taxation. NOTE: It does not mean closing down the entire government as President Obama screams out loudly about the "close-down boogeyman" to scare the "stupid" voters while burning the "Party of No" pejorative with red-hot branding irons into the hide of Republicans. 

Our U.S. Constitution needs to be taught to every immigrant if they are to understand why they flock over the border fences to live here to make a better life - It all starts by learning to speak and read English. - ¿Sabes cómo hablar y leer Inglés?

Hey Stupid, "There's a Sucker Born Every Minute!"

The "Stupid Voter" Obamacare Instructions Comic BookWhat I've got to say about all of the political scamming while selling Obamacare is like what P.T. Barnum said, "There is a sucker born every minute." It is ironic that you are a sucker if you believed P.T. Barnum had said it since history misdirected this quote. Barnum never did say it and actually was said by his competitor, but it's not so with Jonathan Gruber. Today with the advent of video tape, there is no more doubt who says what anymore, especially if you are like Jonathan Gruber doing the "grubering", lying to the voters. 

So it appears that friends, albeit a dwindling number, of MIT professor Jonathan Gruber may soon have to put his face on milk cartons to locate the economist. After a series of frank but embarrassing statements on his strategies behind the Obama Administration’s passage of Obamacare, Gruber has moved from the status of “disfavored” to “disavowed” to “disappeared.” Both President Obama and Minority Speaker of the House Pelosi don't know him when they say, "Gruber who?" His golden word "stupid" will live on though, ad nauseum, throughout the upcoming 2016 Presidential Election ads season. 

"Now here's the rest of the story"...

P. T. Barnum is most often associated with the circus sideshow and the display of freaks. While this is true, he is also the founding force behind one of America's most famous circuses: Barnum & Bailey Circus. Barnum is also affiliated with the famous quote "There's a sucker born every minute." But history has misdirected this quote, Barnum never did say it. Actually, it was said by his competitor. 

From 1866 until 1868 Mr. George Hull, of Binghamton, New York studied archaeology and paleontology. Over this period of time Hull contemplated how to pull off a hoax. It seems that many an evangelist at the time had been preaching that there were giants in the earth. In June of 1868 Hull traveled back to Fort Dodge, Iowa where there was a gypsum quarry he had recalled seeing two years earlier. Even then, he had noticed that the dark blue streaks running through the soft lime rock resembled human veins. Realizing this its appearance was tailor-made for his hoax and it was easy to carve, Hull hired a group of quarry workers to cut off a slab measuring twelve feet long, four feet wide and two feet thick.

In November, Hull had his gypsum wrapped in canvas and hoisted onto a wagon. Since the nearest railroad was forty miles away, it proved to be a long, difficult job. He then had the slab of gypsum shipped by rail to Chicago where he had hired a stone cutter named Edward Burghardt to carve a giant. Burghardt and his two assistants, were sworn to secrecy and agreed to work on the piece in a secluded barn during their off hours and Sundays. The instructions were to carve the giant as if it had died in great pain, and the final result was an eerie figure, slightly twisted in apparent agony, with his right hand clutching his stomach. All of the details were there; toenails, fingernails, nostrils, sex organs and so forth. Even a needlepoint mallet was used to add authentic-looking skin pores. When the carving was done, sulfuric acid and ink were used, possibly smudged like printer ink, to make the figure look aged.

The giant finished, Hull then had the figure shipped by rail to the farm of William Newell, his cousin, located near the town of Cardiff, New York. In the dead of night, Hull, Newell and his oldest son buried the giant between the barn and house. They were instructed to say nothing about it and that Hull would let them know in about a year of what the next stage was.

Luckily, about six months later, on another farm near the Newell's, some million year-old fossil bones were dug up. Newspapers around the country reported the finding. Hull was filled with glee in reading the accounts.

True to his word, one year after burying the giant, Hull sent word to his cousin on October 15, 1869, to start the next stage of the hoax. Newell hired two laborers to dig a new well near his home. Newell directed them to the exact spot he wanted the well dug and went back into the house to wait -- anxiously. Sure enough, well into the day, the two laborers rushed up to the house to announce their discovery: a giant turned to stone! The laborers and both Newell's carefully excavated the area surrounding the giant.

News of this amazing discovery spread throughout the valley and soon wagon loads of neighbors streamed into Newell's farm to see the giant. By mid-afternoon, Newell erected a tent around the "grave" and started charging 25 cent admission. Two days later, the Syracuse Journal (New York) printed an article about the discovery. Being greedy, Newell raised the price to 50 cents, and a stage coach company made four round trips a day from Syracuse to the Newell farm. Thousands came every day. Among the visitors were clergymen, college professors and distinguished scientists. Before long, the expert's opinions split into two theories; one side claimed it was a true fossilized human giant and the other side pronounced it an authentic ancient statue. No one asserted that it was a fake!

About ten days after the discovery, and about the time the Cardiff Giant, as the papers had named it, started receiving national attention, Hull sold two-thirds interest in the giant for $30,000 to a five-man syndicate in Syracuse, the head of which was a banker named David Hannum. The syndicate moved the giant to an exhibition hall in Syracuse and raised the admission price to a dollar a head. Unknown to them, P. T. Barnum sent an agent to see the giant and make an assessment. The particular Sunday the representative saw the giant, the crowds were abnormally large -- about 3,000 people. The agent wired the news back to Barnum and Barnum instructed him to make an offer of $50,000 to buy it. Hannum turned his offer down.

The Cardiff Giant was the most talked about exhibit in the nation. Barnum wanted the giant to display himself while the attraction was still a hot topic of the day. Rather than upping his offer, Barnum hired a crew of workers to carve a giant of his own. Within a short time, Barnum unveiled HIS giant and proclaimed that Hannum had sold Barnum the original giant and that Hannum was now displaying a fake!

Thousands of people flocked to see Barnum's giant. Many newspapers carried the version that Barnum had given them; that is, Hannum's giant was a fake and Barnum's was authentic. It is at this point that Hannum -- NOT BARNUM -- was quoted as saying "There's a sucker born every minute." Hannum, still under the impression that HIS giant was authentic, was referring to the thousands of "fools" that paid money to see Barnum's fake and not his authentic one.

Hannum brought a lawsuit against Barnum for calling his giant a fake. When it came to trial, Hull stepped forward and confessed that the Cardiff Giant was a hoax and the entire story. The judge ruled that Barnum could not be sued for calling Hannum's giant a fake since it was a fake after all. Thereafter, Hannum's name was lost to history. Barnum was left with the misplaced stigma of being the one to say "There's a sucker born every minute."