The Trayvon Hoax (2019): Obvious Witness Fraud Exposed? | Under the Docs 005

The 2019 film “Under the Docks” directed by Joel Gilbert, explores the Trayvon Martin case, focusing on the manipulation of witness testimonies. The film suggests that the case was distorted to support a narrative of systemic racism, which influenced American politics. Gilbert’s investigation, based on phone records and interviews, reveals inconsistencies in the testimonies, particularly from Trayvon’s supposed girlfriend, Rachel Gentel. The film argues that these discrepancies indicate corruption during the trial, which was overlooked due to political advantages.
The text discusses a complex situation involving Diamond Eugene, Rachel Jantel, and Trayvon Martin. Diamond, who was in contact with Trayvon when he was shot, didn’t want to be involved in the trial, so her half-sister Rachel was presented as Diamond. The text also suggests that Trayvon’s mother wrote a letter pretending to be Diamond and got the real Diamond to sign it. The author of the text believes that Trayvon was upset and possibly under the influence of drugs at the time of the incident, which may have contributed to the altercation that led to his death.
The text discusses a documentary that investigates a high-profile case, highlighting the importance of thorough investigation and not just relying on media narratives. The filmmaker, Joel, is praised for his production quality and dedication, such as analyzing phone records and visiting locations. However, his approach is also criticized for being quirky and potentially insensitive, with his use of vernacular and humor in a serious case. Despite his political bias, the documentary presents objective evidence, like handwriting analysis, but also includes questionable methods like trying on weaves to understand a character.
The documentary about the Trayvon Martin case is praised for its thorough research and presentation of new information. It delves into inconsistencies in the case, including voice and handwriting analysis, and suggests that key figures may have been dishonest. Despite some elements that may not appeal to all viewers, the film is considered well-paced and engaging. The documentary is seen as a good example of investigative journalism, showing that one person can uncover significant information.

Under the docks, yeah, under the docks. Buried people breaking the locks Footage got clip they erase all the shots. They collect the dots. Under the docks. Under the docks, yeah, under the docks. Under the docs is back the Trayvon Hoax Unmasking the Witness Fraud that divided America. The 2019 film directed by Joel Gilbert and narrated by Joel Gilbert. This is a book turned into a documentary and it follows the Trayvon Martin case kind of like we did in the previous episode of the George Floyd case. But in this scenario they’re focusing specifically on the witnesses of the Trayvon Martin trial and they kind of show the narrative of the media, but basically that there was a lot of witness manipulation going on.

Yeah, I’ll take responsibility for recommending this particular documentary because I actually saw this one when it came out, not knowing that it had anything to do with the book. Never heard of Joe Gilbert before either. I really. We’ll get into his backstory a little bit, a little bit later on. But this happened a one city away from me. So it was all over the news and I was kind of starred for any new information on this whole trial and. And I was sick of just getting all the same details over and over from whatever respective news outlet you might be getting it from.

I’m also a huge fan of understanding things in retrospect like five, ten years after the fact and not right then and there as new details are breaking. Every single day is the worst way to get information. So this is a. A pretty decent summary of the overall case in general. And. And then it also claims that they’ve got brand new breaking information that hadn’t been revealed prior to then. You’re absolutely right. And to kind of wrap it up in a premise, it’s Trayvon Martin case where it was fabricated or manipulated to support the narrative of systematic racism.

Kind of makes sense because at the time 2012 you had all of this BLM stuff that we’ve never heard before and it really changed the course of American politics. And. And this film explores what would happen if that didn’t happen. And I’ll actually. We’ll get controversial right away. You don’t have to watch the entire video. He explains what the Trayvon hoax is and he’s. They state specifically that the Trayvon hoax is a three step process. One, the media repeats a story that a black person is attacked by a white male because of skin color. That’s verbatim from this documentary.

Two, that they say the white male represents all of America to invoke fear in the black community and Three in order to fix it, vote Democrat. That’s the Trayvon hoax. That is verbatim. That is a quote directly from the documentary. So if you’re wondering what does a Trayvon hoax mean, that’s what the claim is. I would suggest that the subtitle, right it’s like dot dot dot, it’s actually about witness manipulation and the, it’s about the witness hoax more than the rest of the case. So I don’t know if you’re going into this and like they’re going to prove that, you know, no one even died that day.

It was like a grassy. No, that’s not what this video is. It doesn’t change any of the outcome. It doesn’t change a whole lot of anything. It just shows that there was clear corruption that happened during the trial that was overlooked by anyone that probably even realized this because it was advantageous politically. So that’s sort of the, the summary of this movie in the show, sliding the course. The key claims and premise of this film that it ds into Trayvon Martin’s case, like we said, exploring the witnesses, kind of giving you a background of some of these witnesses and a background of George Zimmerman and you know, background of Trayvon Martin and his family and extension.

And to his credit, joke really gets into interviews and, and finding evidence and really not just making wild claims. Like we kind of like, you know, got on the offer Floyd on the last episode for not doing that, he did the opposite and where he came with a lot of information but a lot of it backed up and it was more based on traditional investigated journalism. And I just want to do a shout out too that almost all the footage in this documentary is entirely original. There’s very little news clips or here’s an image that was downloaded on the website or on, you know, online.

It’s pretty much all just Joel like himself and then going on these interviews and going out and doing sort of like on the town, investigative journalist style. But it’s a one man show. So some of the key claims is they, they talk about his phone records and Joel gets a FOIA for the phone records which is like 750 pages and he literally has a giant binder that he’s going through checking like I think it was nearly 3,000 text messages, 15,000 contacts. So many hours of conversation. He doesn’t have like a transcript but transcript of the conversations but he has how long they were, the duration and how many times they called.

That claim is, is incredible to me, just him going through that. I was just like, this had to take a long time to go through. Like some of the other documentaries we’ve seen, they kind of just rush through things and they’re slapping stuff at you. You could tell he took his time and really did thorough work. And the phone records part really, because you. He goes off first how Trayvon’s dad didn’t want to release the phone records to the police, how the defense was trying their hardest not to let the phone records go to discovery. So there.

They knew that there was something with these phone records. And that’s like, to me, is where it really starts warming up in this documentary. Yeah, I mean, the, the key claims are all derived directly from these phone records. Without the phone records, there’s no movie, there’s no claims. There’s nothing really for it to be based around the, the eventual claims that he gets into. They do kind of work out from stuff that he put together from the phone records that have nothing to do with the phone records themselves. The actual prosecution using some of like the wrong people literally.

And that part is kind of proven through the phone records because he’s saying, look, here’s the person that says that there is girlfriend that’s nowhere on his phone records, and here’s the chick that was actually his girlfriend that he was talking to at that time. And here’s proof that these two people are not the same. And furthermore, here’s proof that the prosecution knew that these people weren’t the same and just ended up coaching this sort of standin. Someone that literally pretended and went back through and remade all the same statements that were in the phone records, but they basically hire someone that’s related to the person that doesn’t want to come in and talk about it.

And another claim they talk about. And like we said, the main theme is witness fraud. And they went back to some of his cousins and, and friends that like, you know, they might have been in some gangs. Bad pictures, stuff that you could maybe say, ah, that’s hearsay. Right. But there is a, a lot of evidence, a social media evidence too. He went with these phone records. He’s able to go through, check their Facebooks, check their Twitters and, and showing a little, you know, a bird’s eye view of who these people really are. And, you know, that might not be the total story of them, but it paints a different picture than the narrative that we were given.

And one of the key, the main key fraud witness was Rachel Janetto. Wait, what? I’m terrible with Rachel Gentel. And she was supposed to be Trayvon’s girlfriend and the last person to speak to him before, while this whole incident, right. While the fight was going down, that he’s like, call you back. Boom. And the whole case is based on her testimony. So if you have the wrong person, this whole case is thrown out. But everything was brought from Crump saying, like, hey, I have a recording of her. I have kind of like, this is what went down.

Little words of every. She kind of followed a whole script. You could tell she was coached. And Joel breaks down through the film a lot of interesting facts, and he goes the extra mile by getting, like, someone to analyze the handwriting because there’s a letter that the mom has that she reveals, but not until. Right. I think it was deposition. Right. Right before then she opened. She’s like, oh, I had it in my Bible. And it’s a letter from Trayvon’s girlfriend, who’s supposed to be Rachel. And then it turns out that Rachel has learning disabilities. She can barely read and write.

She may have, like, been in one of a lot of after school programs or, like, short bus. Will you, if you will? Yeah. So some of those specific claims there is that Trayvon Martin’s actual girlfriend at the time was a chick that went by the name Diamond Eugene, and that Diamond Eugene is the one that was talking to him as he got shot by George Zimmerman. And then later we find out that Rachel Jantel is the half sister of Diamond Eugene. They’re related by their mother with different fathers. Right. And Diamond Eugene did not want to.

To go in for a deposition. She want to be part of the trial. She was kind of. They even show Joel shows that her social media is. Even the days when we know that she’s under stress because prosecutors are calling her and all of Trayvon’s friends are calling her. And we got the phone records. She’s out there posting just like, something completely unrelated. Oh, I can’t wait to get my nails done. Or I can’t wait to, like, watch some show. Like, I’m just paraphrasing some of these, but it was this deliberate outward appearance of saying something to hide the fact that you’re deep involved with another aspect of this nationwide case.

She wanted absolutely nothing to do with it, so the prosecutors realized we can just get her sister. So that’s not a. A specific claim that this film makes, but the insinuation is that somebody. I don’t know who ends up volunteering Rachel Jantel to act as if she were Diamond Eugene. But like you said, she is the lynchpin of this entire case, she claims to be the one that was talking to him at the time, so that she’s got the context as to what he was saying and what he was seeing, since Trayvon’s unfortunately not here to say what he saw and heard.

So it was all based on Zimmerman’s sort of response to that. Rachel Jantel, who was not talking to Trayvon Martin, was not his girlfriend, was kind of unrelated this case up until the actual event happened. And then there’s one other kind of major claim made towards the end that the mother, she writes a letter to herself as if it was written by Diamond Eugene, the one on the. The actually on the phone with Trayvon, and then gets the real Diamond Eugene to sign the letter that she wrote to herself. That’s. I know that sounds convoluted, but not only is that sort of the.

The claim that this documentary makes, they make very compelling evidence that kind of says all that’s true, which it blows my mind that this was like brand new information to me. And the real rabbit out the hat, not even just claim, but proof is. So he. There’s a big chunk of the film where he’s searching for the real Diamond Eugene. Well, he goes through tons of high schools and gets. Buys yearbooks. Like that’s why I said true. Investigated journalism. And he finds the real Diamond Eugene, which is Britney Diamond Eugene. And he actually has an interaction with her where he.

Where he. Because she’s a fashion model now, because mind you, this is 2019. So this is what, six years or so after the, the events. And he’s able to find who she is. He interacts with her, says she’s. He’s gonna buy a bunch of stuff off her. He gets her DNA from her. Licking a bunch of envelopes with. He had a bunch of fake names because the names that he got were specific to what were in the letter that were written that the mom wrote for herself. And he goes and analyzes the handwriting and he sees that the, the signature is the same.

And, and it just baffles me that nobody else seen this. Like when he comes out six years later with some bombshell like, you know what I mean? It’s not like just like where other films may. Hey, this could, this guy could be connected. He’s like, here’s the real girl, here’s how I found her. You know, you can find her too. And to your point earlier, where he kind of goes through the timeline of the Twitter and then she was also like, he even proved like, hey look, she’s Stress eating. Oh, I need donuts and cupcakes. Right around when we knew that, he shows the phone records of Trayvon’s friends blowing her up.

Like, probably. We’re assuming this is where we don’t have all the context, but you can assume that they’re trying to coerce her into, like, hey, you need to go talk to Benjamin Crump, and we need to get this thing solved. But the plot twist is that she’s actually in another relationship with somebody, an older fellow about 18 years old that has two jobs. And she’s one of these women that Joel kind of like, dances around, that she’s some narcissistic woman that needs a bunch of attention from him, and he’s working two jobs. And instead of just kind of being a grown up because she’s a 16 years old and trying to be, like, mature about it, she kind of goes to what she is as a kid and she starts talking to Trayvon Martin.

And that paints a whole different story of what happened that night. And. And plus, one of the other, I guess, major claims of this movie is giving some extra context about what actually happened that night. How did the altercation begin in the first place? And that it’s because this chick was Diamond Eugene, the real Diamond Eugene was cheating on her main boyfriend, and Trayvon was the side piece. Right. And she realized that she was just playing with Trayvon and she was just trying to get her main boyfriend jealous about it so that he would give her more attention.

And Trayvon was hip to this. Trayvon even has the phone records saying, like, you’re playing with me. Stop playing with me. And that. That was what they were arguing about. That was like, the day. The night that all this was transpiring. So while they’re on the phone, there’s some animosity based on the context of these text messages. And then on top of that, a couple of the claims the movie makes, and I. I criticized this on the last episode, all for Floyd, about these ad hominem attacks. So I gotta kind of, like, delineate a little bit in this one.

So there are some absolute ad hominem attacks. They kept. Keep mentioning how he smokes weed and all his friends smoke weed. I mean, I don’t even know why marijuana use even factored into this documentary whatsoever. It was there specifically for anyone that’s like, oh, that hoodlum, you know, they’re. They’re breaking the lawn smoking weed. So. But they also goes into the fact that they were into taking codeine and lean and that one of the common ways that you would take codeine and Lean is you would mix it with one of your favorite drinks and you would put some Skittles in it to add some kind of sweetness to it.

So that the. The claim that Trayvon Martin was just going to the store for an iced tea and some Skittles, that 100. True. That is objectively true. That’s the only reason he went to the store. It’s like he was going to rob it. But the dot, dot, dot is that. And maybe he was gonna go and put that into some Lean. Although that doesn’t necessarily get proven at any point that that night he was on Lean or that he was even planning on mixing the iced tea and the Skittles. The dude legitimately could have just like Skittles and iced tea.

So. But that’s one of the other claims, is that he’s angry. He’s on the phone, he’s got this Skittles and iced tea, and maybe he’s on Lean and marijuana. And that this was the culmination of this altercation, that he’s already angry. He had gotten suspended from school for getting in the fights three times. And they also give a little bit extra information that these fights were not just him and, like, a bully in the schoolyard. One of them was a full grown teacher, One of them was a full grown bus driver. And then the third incident might have involved bringing a gun to school.

So again, I don’t know if that’s necessarily ad hominem and that he had a whole bunch of different text messages talking about, like, World Star and wanting to fight people and everyone, all of his friends and his girlfriends in his life telling him, like, bro, you got to chill out. You got to stop getting into fights all the time. And. And then this is the. The mental space that he was in at this time, fighting with his girlfriend that he knows is cheating on him, looking for a fight, constantly doing, like, the World Star thing. And then, bam, this opportunity kind of presents itself, and it’s the perfect storm where he’s getting antagonized.

He’s not backing down, the other guy’s not backing down, you know, George Zimmerman. And this is kind of what led to the whole thing, but no real new information about the event itself. Just the fact that we’re talking felonies here, right? Like, this could send people to prison. If it were looked into enough about putting false witnesses on the stand knowingly by a prosecutor, that could rock that guy’s entire career. Yeah, he’s done that, that, that to me, that’s the, the biggest claim. And all the other one is like, kind of like looking into. I think it depends on the person that’s looking into it.

I think Joel has a little bit of different background, so if he sees anything like, oh, that’s a gangster, like, you know what I mean? Like, like you said, like, oh, he smokes weed, man. I’m like, well, this is not reefer madness, man. You know, like, it doesn’t really have any weight on the case whatsoever. Hidden Treasures. For me, the film challenges, you know, the viewers to really assess how these huge cases come out, right? Like how. How you, the OJ The John, Ben and Ramsey’s, like, all these huge cases that the media run with. It highlights how you have to really thoroughly investigate and take a pause.

Like you said, like, you don’t just, oh, man, I just heard blah, blah, blah happen. Take a little bit, take some time to actually find and connect for real. Not just speculate, but actually find those threads to tie together. And I think the hidden gem for me in this film is just tying so many threads together with, with the witnesses and actually finally, like having a great payoff where you’re like, yes, okay, Britney Diamond Eugene does exist. Like, this other overly large mentally challenged woman is not Trayvon’s real girlfriend. And there’s actually proof for us as some of the conspiratorial people to be like, hey, look, court systems are a little bit all.

Not all there and straightforward that things can be manipulated and the media helps that the, the hidden treasure. For me, this is a great example of what I look for in a documentary. And I’m. And I’m not saying that this is the best documentary you’re ever going to see. I’m just saying that what, what makes me consider a documentary being really good is presenting like new bombshell breaking information that would shock anyone, even someone not emotionally attached to this case one way or the other to say, look at how blatant this, you know, obvious government corruption is within the court system.

How many people could have known about this and just let it ride its course and then here’s all the ramifications of it. But man, the. The hidden treasure was just seeing a. The production quality that Joel brings, as cheesy as he is and is like all the things that he does and the B roll he decides it is so chi. I’ll get into that in my sort of my cons here. But despite how cheesy it is, it is incredibly well produced. It feels like you’re watching an actual documentary or you’re. You put it on TV and they’re doing a special report on some AAA news network.

Like it literally has that level of production quality and the pacing and the inflection as he’s talking. It’s like the guy absolutely knows what he’s doing. So he’s kind of a like a one man wrecking ball that I would watch out for. Don’t get on Joel’s bad side. And then the other huge ones, man, the phone records, the 3, 000 pages or whatever it was, I kind of feel that was theatrical that he just had that as a prop to make this video and get footage of himself. But the fact that he actually went through it all and made these connections and figured out who the different people were and crafted a narrative that he was easy to communicate to you.

Watching it, like, you actually understand like life in the last like five to ten days of all these people’s lives. Trayvon Martin and all of his friends and the two different diamond you, the real one and the fake one, you know, Rachel Gentel actually getting inside their heads and crafting a cohesive narrative is not something easy to do with just a dump of, of data that you got from the government. It doesn’t come preserved in this nice little narrative. And then the other huge one is not only going on location, which he also maybe didn’t have to do, but he goes to Miami and he literally just drives to every single high school and purchases a yearbook and then sits in his room with, you know, 20 yearbooks open and just looks through every single one to try and find this diamond Eugene.

So I think that that was really the hidden treasure was seeing that he went the extra mile, the top notch production quality. And it had absolutely groundbreaking claim that I had never heard before. And I think he’s still the only one that really is. No one’s really ran with that either. For me, the overboard kind of going off of what you said, he’s a little quirky, you know what I’m saying? It’s like a older white, like as a. He’s like going through the urban addiction. To me, it’s funny. I’m just saying for other people it might not do so well with.

Right. I think like to get this information to other crowds sometimes it might not play off as well because people are going to spin it as like. Like he doesn’t understand the culture and this and that and like a lot of the stuff like even like what are you doing? It’s humorous. And I think that’s his quirky way, but I think that that might miss, with a few people, his quirkiness of trying to get these jokes across. Well, especially because this is a fairly serious case that really did rock a lot of people’s worlds. So some of the cheesiness and campiness comes across as almost unsympathetic.

And I. And I say almost because overall, man, I could see someone from either extreme political, you know, polls taking offense or almost like, being smarmy about this, like. Like basking in it a little bit because he. He can kind of lean into some of it. But in his credit, at the very end and throughout the whole movie, he never is really disparaging about any of the people. Maybe Rachel Chantel, the exception. He implies that. That, like, she was kicked in the head, essentially. But aside from that particular claim, he’s pretty respectful of Trayvon and actually makes this insinuation of would he have wanted all of this to happen, this.

All this fallout based on what ultimately were, you know, fabrications and corruptions in government? Who knows? But that was like, the. The lingering question. My cons are minor, but I got a whole list of them. So aside from the. The B roll footage, he also does voiceovers for every single text message. So when you got Trayvon texting Diamond Eugene or, like, one of his friends, and there’s. They’re saying, like, they’re talking in, you know, black vernacular, essentially, which is why he brings out this, like, this hood urban dictionary. He pretends like he doesn’t know what the N word is.

So then, you know, he. He really, like, leans into this real hard. And. And he does not shy. Like, if. If it pulls up two text messages that are essentially all you ebonics, Joel is reading it all in ebonics and, like, doing female voices and male voices. And so I. I’m almost talking about it as it’s a. It’s a pro now, but I guess it was in my con column just because, like, again, the. The. The content here, he could have had serious actors read these lines out, but he didn’t for comedic effect. Yeah, and that’s funny you mentioned, because that was the last thing I wanted to mention because, hey, go give that thing that fa.

Like, the way he said it, he tried to use, like, a stereotypical voice, but not. Well, like, you know what I mean? It’s not like he was. He was trying to do, like, a urban, like, accent, but it was humorous to me, and. But I could see that it rubbing other people the wrong way. Especially if you’re going into this particular documentary feeling a certain way. He does not add any credibility to someone that’s going to be already skeptical that there’s, like, an inherent bias in it. And there clearly is. I mean, Joe, you look into Joel Gilbert’s background.

He’s essentially, you know, going to, like, Turning Point USA conventions and going to Republican national conventions and stuff. So make no doubt about it that there is bias from the standpoint. But the claims he makes are completely objective. I mean, he sends in handwriting samples and he goes and hires a handwriting expert that signs. You know, like, hires the guy to actually do the analysis, presents the analysis to the viewer and even shows, look, here’s these letters that don’t match. Here’s these letters that don’t match. Here’s the implication. Here’s what my evidence is. So it goes all the way through that.

But then, like, you’ve got these cons where right after you finish getting your mind blown that he just did handwriting analysis. Now he’s in a freaking weave store and he’s putting on, like, weaves and, and making the claim, well, I know that Diamond Eugene wears a weave, so maybe if I go to a weave store and I try in a bunch of weaves and get this B roll, then I’ll. I’ll be able to get into her head and I’ll be able to connect to her and find her. And then he also starts going around Miami asking everyone if they know a voodoo priestess.

And. And then he runs into somebody that is willing to take like two or three hundred dollars from him and say that they do voodoo. And then they essentially do like, a card reading and tell him that this Diamond Eugene he’s looking for has like a, like a black heart or just some evil. It’s clearly just humorous B roll. But I, again, like, as it’s entertaining, it’s just there to kind of stretch out the story a little bit. It’s not adding any new information. It’s. And at worst, it’s going to turn somebody off that was already on the fence if this even came across.

That said, I don’t think that you’re going to accidentally come across this movie or click on the Trayvon Martin hoax and not realize what you’re getting into. But it’s. It’s definitely worth watching. Regardless of what you think about the case, take a deep dive. The. The misrepresentation of the witnesses is like, the key theme that we’re, like, going back and forth of. Like, you have Brought about and I talked about. They analyzed the actual handwriting, but they even analyzed the voices, which I thought was interesting. Like he went really in depth on proving. And this was before he found who Britney Diamond Eugene really was.

But comparing the original voice that Crump had to on the tapes, and to his credit too, he foiled everything. He even had the original like tape recording tapes that Crump was using where he’s coaching because like, ah, say that again. Didn’t you mean this? Didn’t you mean this? And then he analyzes that voice with Rachel Genteel’s voice and you could see the difference. And to me that’s the deepest dive of where he. This is what you want in an investigation to flick. You don’t want it to be like, well, maybe this happened. Maybe this. Well, what about this question? He goes, he asked the question.

He painted it thoroughly through interviewing Zimmerman himself, painting the story again, his bias leans in a little bit. You know, obviously he’s more conservative, valued. You can see that a little more when he’s talking to Zimmerman, you know, painting the picture of like, oh man, he just takes care of, you know, he has little brothers and he’s in one of those programs where they’re helping all these kids. And then he paints the picture of Trayvon maybe you know, not being. Being a kid that’s kind of engaging in the gangster stuff, but the real middle of it where he is showing, hey, look at these phone records.

Look at all this evidence they missed. They didn’t. All this stuff to me was kind of like mocking the court system in a sense, because it’s like even kind of plays that game when he meets Britney, Britney Diamond Eugene and he gives her that statue of the, the eyes of justice. And she doesn’t because she’s graduated now as a criminal, I forgot what the degree of. Off the top of my head. But like a criminal. She was looking in the criminal law, but she downplays it every time that he brings it up. She’s like, yeah, I don’t really want to do that.

And, and she didn’t know what that was. And then the, the blind lady of justice is right there. And I think it was poking fun at the court system because he did all the work that they should have done. And he. The same joke to the bailiff. He asks the bailiff, oh, tell me about this lady lady, you know, justice. And the bailiff’s like, I don’t know anything about that. And he, I mean that made the documentary for a reason, because it’s Making this underhanded sort of comment. So again, it’s well edited in that way. To me, what holds up in this film is.

Is pretty much all the evidence that we just have been going over the phone records, the voice analyze. Analyzing the voice, the handwriting analyze. Like you can see that. Like, to me, it’s hard to argue against. I don’t know how you debunk that. And the proof that maybe the parents. Maybe not proof, but the speculation that the parents knew more about this than they revealed is true because he brings up the incentives like the mom has to be lying because she has the. The Trayvon sh. Marketed it and ready to sell. And, and that like she would lose the money from her house.

Like there’s money involved that they would. The family would actually lose if everything got put out as the real truth and a political career now where. That’s the new trajectory that she’s on. So, yeah, the. That’s the big sort of claim or deep dive too, is showing not only here’s all these inconsistencies, but here’s some very damning evidence that the mother committed fraud. And I, I would assume perjury. I think all this falls under perjury. That the mother perjured herself, that Rachel Jantel perjured herself, and that the prosecutor, prosecutor at the helm of all this was essentially completely fraudulent throughout it.

Now, if ultimately George Zimmerman was found not guilty of this. Right. But if he were found guilty, this is the kind of information that maybe would have come back out and maybe would have led to being overturned. But it’s scary that no one knew how this cad. This was not a slam dunk for either side in that case. So, yeah, the. The biggest deep dive here is that he is very thorough with his research. And ultimately the claims that mean anything are all very objective. They’re based on objective information and not on him being sort of campy and smarmy.

Sink or swim. What you got on this? Sink or swim? This one swims for me, man. This one does everything that I hope a documentary does. This isn’t necessarily saying that it’s a 10 out of 10 or anything. I’m just saying that the claims that are made are backed up. It presents new information that I hadn’t heard before. It does it in an entertaining way. It’s well paced. The only downsides is that you kind of feel like you are now a boomer a little bit more now than you were before you started it. Like boomer humor has somehow invaded your system and you’re not going to shake that off so easily.

However. Yeah, this is definitely a swimming. This is swim for me too. I think it’s one of the higher, better quality documentaries. Not just on how it was filmed but it was nice to see traditional investigative journalism kind of like, you know, especially in this. I know it was a few years back now, but the fake news narratives, it’s nice to see people out there actually doing their due diligence. And he’s all by himself and he proves that you could do it. So this definitely swims for me. I think that bout wraps it up. I think we’re gonna finish this racial saga with one more because we like to connect it all here at under the Docks.

This one is definitely going to be much more light hearted. Some people will still take offense to it but hey, that’s the world. We live under the docks yeah under the docks Buried deeper we breaking the locks under the docks under the docks yeah under the docks.
[tr:tra].