reSee.it - Related Video Feed

The speaker discusses the challenges of dealing with government actions and the time it takes to resolve them. They mention a lesser-known aspect of their case, where an FBI agent allegedly planned to plant child pornography on their husband's computer. Although this was not carried out in their situation, they express concern about the potential consequences and the fact that they have a young daughter at home.

On September 30th, the speaker and their group went to the FBI to report the state's elected attorney general for a crime. However, they admitted that they did not have any evidence to support their claim.

In December 2020, federal agents approached Jeremy Brown to be an informant, but he exposed them instead. He later got arrested, and his legal team is presenting evidence that the grenades and national defense documents found in his home were planted by the agents. The agents turned off all recording devices during the search, and none of them had body cameras. DNA tests on the grenades did not match Jeremy's DNA, and a dog hair and carpet fiber found on the grenades did not match his dogs or carpet. Criminal counts found on a CD were proven to not be in Jeremy's possession. The government is now targeting people who were in Washington DC on January 6th. Jeremy is fighting for his freedom.

A 15-year-old girl was raped in a school bathroom by a boy in girls' clothes. The Loudoun County School Board covered it up to protect their transgender policy during pride month. Scott Smith, the girl's father, defended her rights at a school board meeting and was condemned internationally. The senator asks the judge if she apologizes to Scott Smith and his daughter. The judge responds that anyone has the right to protest to their school board about such a horrific crime. The senator accuses the judge of being wrong and shameful, and suggests she should resign from her position.

A seven-year-old girl was sexually assaulted at a pool party by a repeat offender. He was facing a century in prison, but Judge Susan Crawford gave him only four years. Now, he's free and lives near a school. This was Crawford's decision. Now Judge Crawford wants a promotion, but her dangerous decisions make her wrong for Wisconsin.

A mother, heartbroken and outraged, confronts former judge Mark Chivarella, whose actions led to her son, an all-star wrestler, taking his own life after being sent to juvenile detention for a minor drug offense. It has come to light that Chivarella accepted money to send kids to detention facilities. He was recently convicted on 12 counts, including racketeering and money laundering, but remains free while awaiting sentencing.

Caught someone stealing apples from the tree. The culprit was caught red-handed. Only four people involved. The person has singes on their eyebrows. They were hiding in the bushes.

On 01/10/2025, Allentown City employee Latarsha Brown reported finding a noose on her desk. The Allentown Police Department, assisted by multiple agencies, launched an investigation. Video surveillance, building access records, and employee interviews were conducted. Employees were asked to provide a buccal swab for DNA testing; all agreed except Brown, who later requested the investigation be discontinued. DNA testing of the noose revealed that Brown's DNA matched the DNA profile obtained from the swabs of both the outer surface and inner knotted portion of the noose. No other person's DNA was found on the evidentiary items. As a result, Latarsha Brown was charged with tampering with or fabricating physical evidence and false reports to law enforcement. A warrant has been issued, but Brown is presumed innocent until proven guilty.

On September 30th, the speaker and their group went to the FBI to report the state's elected attorney general for a crime. However, they admitted that they did not have any evidence to support their claim.

A security guard, who was protecting a doctor, is facing sentencing for his actions during the January 6th incident. Marjorie Taylor Greene wants the U.S. Attorney prosecuting the case impeached. The guard claims that he has not engaged in any violence or destruction. He finds it ironic that the government is withholding 45,000 hours of video footage, which he believes would exonerate him. Despite his requests, the footage has not been released. He questions who the real criminal is when the alleged criminal is asking for evidence to be revealed, but the government is hiding it.

A devastated mother confronts former judge Mark Chivarella, whose actions contributed to her son, an all-star wrestler, taking his own life after being sent to juvenile detention for a minor drug offense. It has been revealed that Chivarella accepted money to send children to detention facilities. He was convicted of 12 counts, including racketeering and money laundering, but remains free while awaiting sentencing.

This person is accused of trying to meet a 13-year-old boy. They deny it, but are confronted and restrained. The person is called a child predator and is warned about their actions. They were caught trying to take the boy for a milkshake.

A man with many contacts was well-liked by children and mothers, never facing any charges or arrests. However, there were two instances where a young child, possibly a girl, agreed to sexual contact but experienced pain due to their young age and small genitalia compared to the man's large genitalia. This created a problem.

A man was convicted of being a pedophile with over 1,000 photos and videos of children, some as young as three, with some content depicting animals raping children and adults. South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson signed off on six indictments, but in a plea deal that took fifteen minutes, five indictments were dropped, leaving one. The man was convicted of one indictment, third degree. For having over a thousand photos and videos of toddlers as young as three, including some with animals, he served one day in jail, which was considered time served. The speaker claims this makes Alan Wilson a pedophile protector and that he shouldn't even be a dog catcher.

In December 2020, federal agents approached Jeremy Brown to be a paid informant, but he refused and exposed their request to the media. As a result, he was arrested in September 2021 after an illegal search at his home. Jeremy's legal team is presenting evidence that the explosive grenades and national defense documents found in his home were planted by government agents. The agents turned off all recording devices and had no functioning body cameras during the search. DNA tests on the grenades did not match Jeremy's DNA, and a dog hair and carpet fiber found on the grenades did not match his dogs or carpet. The evidence suggests that the CD and grenades were planted. Jeremy is fighting for his freedom and American freedom.

The speaker discusses a fascinating case involving a sprinter who faced prosecution. The prosecutors presented evidence, including something hidden under a truck. The crime lab tested a pair of pants, cutting out a part for analysis. However, the evidence was not strong enough, so the speaker plea bargained. They mention an expert who would testify if interested in the case. The speaker also talks about examining fibers and a plea hearing where charges were dropped. The speaker's conversation with someone on the phone suggests a positive outcome, with the speaker mentioning time served in county jail.

Speaker 0 confronts Speaker 1 about planning to meet a 14-year-old boy for sex, revealing he has all the information and can report it. Speaker 1 admits wrongdoing and expresses feeling horrible. Speaker 0 questions Speaker 1's motivations, especially considering his position as a professor. Speaker 1 admits to bringing lube and a douche. Speaker 0 expresses disbelief and seeks understanding. Speaker 1 acknowledges he "fucked up" and may need help. Speaker 0 emphasizes the seriousness of the situation. Later, law enforcement arrives. Speaker 2 explains they cannot make an arrest because Speaker 0 isn't law enforcement. The phone will be taken as evidence, and the case will be referred to the Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force. Speaker 0 questions why the same evidence leads to arrests in Orange County but not San Diego County. Speaker 2 refuses to debate the issue. Speaker 0 suggests this will look bad.

So first, I looked up forensic DNA testing, and look what it is. A PCR test. You can amplify the sample to get any result that you want. Forty percent genetic testing results coming up with false positives? Environmental factors such as heat, sunlight, bacteria, and mold can destroy the DNA evidence. So how would you find it days later? Then I found this one, the science behind genetic fingerprinting. It does not solve crimes. It established whether sample x comes from person y, and then it's up to the courts to determine. this is just an X rayed image of broken DNA, which X rays break DNA. So how can you determine if someone is guilty of something if you don't even know what you're comparing it to? So I don't know about you, but a lot of this doesn't make any sense. What do you think?

The speaker mentions a little-known aspect of their case involving FBI agents planning to plant child porn on their husband's computer. Another FBI agent in a separate case admitted to doing this. Fortunately, it was not carried out in their situation, but the thought of it happening is disturbing, especially considering they have a young daughter at home.

My teammate found a barking dog near a trash can. We stopped and he discovered a baby, less than a year old, who had been stabbed multiple times and thrown into the garbage.

There is an age progression image of Tomok in his twenties, and the aim is to show what Tomok would look like at age 22. In 2015, a Facebook profile titled Tomok's profile was created as a missing-person appeal. When Tomok’s age-progression image was publicized, a message came from a fake account claiming that missing Tomok was now Ryan Pitts and providing his whereabouts. The observer says, upon seeing the photograph, “this is my Tomok.” The two men resembled each other so closely that the Polish police contacted the FBI. The question is whether the FBI did all they could. The answer given is that the FBI checked Ryan Pitts’s birth certificate because he had married and would need a valid birth certificate, and they reported back that the birth certificate was original and that there was no prior information about him, with no verified place or date of birth, and differing dates of birth cited on different sites. All information about Ryan begins from the age of five, according to the statement. The speaker criticizes the FBI, claiming they failed and dropped the case too early without explaining the kidnapping. In researching the family’s past, information was found that Ryan’s grandparents were patrons of an orphanage in their town, suggesting that swapping one child for another would not be difficult. Ryan Pitts is described as a soldier decorated by President Obama; after the decoration, interviews appeared, including one with his grandmother stating that Ryan had to fight for himself since early childhood. The speakers note that the speakers’ husband’s and their own DNA are in general databases; they claim US Army soldiers submit their DNA, and DNA results would be available, but Ryan Pitts does not consent to DNA verification, and only a court could compel it. Ryan Pitts lives in the USA with a wife and a child; if it turns out he is Marcelina’s kid, Tomok, Tomok would lose American citizenship rights and be deported to Poland. They claim he would not have the right to stay because documents of origin would be forged, and he would do everything to avoid tests that would reveal this, threatening the end of his family. The speaker states that they would die without knowing the truth and the ending of the case. To ensure Marcelina’s safety, the speaker concluded that he had to save her by himself and moved into negotiation with the traffickers, asking what deal was needed to stop the child from being sold for organs or to a brothel. They discuss potential deals: money, or an exchange, such as a “slut for a slut” or a body for a body, or even trading an adult for the child, with additional payments or barter. The traffickers are described as caring only about money and being willing to exchange or sell; if an urgent organ sale occurred, they would not hesitate to act. The speaker claims to have solved the problem by taking the baby from traffickers and saving it from being sold, with no one’s throat cut. The mother then chooses to give the baby up for legal adoption, and a Catholic facility is proposed for the adoption. They discuss filling an application stating a reason to facilitate adoption and the need to describe it in words, without detailing the events. They await the court hearing for the mother to confirm consent to adoption. The mother eventually agrees to the statement in court, and the protocol is printed. The exchange ends with the belief that if one child is saved, thousands can be saved.

Speaker 0 confronts Speaker 1 about planning to meet a 14-year-old for sex, revealing they have all the information. Speaker 1 admits fault, acknowledging they "fucked up" and expresses feeling horrible. Speaker 0 questions Speaker 1's intentions, highlighting the presence of lube and a douche in their bag. Speaker 0 struggles to understand why someone like Speaker 1, a professor, would engage in such behavior. Speaker 1 says they need help. Speaker 0 informs law enforcement about the situation. Law enforcement explains that because Speaker 0 isn't law enforcement, they can't use the evidence for probable cause for an arrest. Speaker 1's phone will be taken as evidence, and the case will be referred to the Internet crimes against children task force. Speaker 0 questions why the law enforcement cannot find probable cause when they can in Orange County. Law enforcement refuses to debate the issue.

A father posted a photo of his child in the bathtub, leading to disturbing comments about the child's safety. The speaker, who had access to the server, consulted an attorney who warned about the risk of reporting the incident due to breaking federal law. However, the speaker decided to take their chances and reached out to news stations and attorneys. Despite the interest in the story, no one posted it when it reached the legal stage. Later, the speaker learned about the arrest of Nathaniel Larson, who had kidnapped and raped a 12-year-old girl. The speaker had evidence of Larson's activities and those of 3,000 others, but nothing was done about it.