Posted on 07/04/2026 9:19:53 AM PDT by \/\/ayne
Police in Payette, Idaho, arrested Andrea Shaw on Tuesday afternoon, more than a year after her two children — fraternal twins Dallas and Tyson Shaw — were found dead at their home on May 1, 2025, eight days after receiving their 18-month vaccines.
Police charged Shaw with two counts of first-degree murder. Shaw said doctors ignored her when she warned that the twins’ father had previously experienced a bad reaction to a flu vaccine.
(Excerpt) Read more at childrenshealthdefense.org ...
Scientists, doctors and others are gathering to provide expert testimony about vaccines and SIDs. This will be a gigantic battle between Big Pharma and Children's Health Defense played out in a small town in Idaho. At stake is the multi-billion dollar child vaccine industry and, of course, children's health.
uh ok but let’s see the evidence before we decide.
That would not be a reason to charge the mother. It sounds like she killed them and blamed the vaccines.
You funny! We’ll never see honest evidence of any pharmaceutical company misdeeds. You funny guy!
In related news-
Idaho Officials Call for Police Volunteers to Shoot Death Row Inmates Instead of Execution Specialists
https://www.ibtimes.co.uk/idaho-firing-squad-executions-volunteer-police-1806678
What did the autopsy show? What did the medical examiner list as COD?
At first glance it seems big pharma is trying to put the kids vax deaths onto the parents. The system also makes it very difficult for parents to refuse to stick the vaccine schedules, which are so full of crapola injections now compared to 50-60 years ago.
The left needs no reason to accuse.
“The nature of the evidence is irrelevant; it’s the seriousness of the charge that matters.” ~ Rush Limbaugh. You simply need to make a harsh, totally unfounded charge, and that’s reason enough to persecute.
The process is the punishment.
And anyone who questions the narrative must be discredited and broken as an object lesson.
That’s what I am wondering… it isn’t all that uncommon for women after a pregnancy to be wonky for a while from hormones and the change in social attention. Especially in this day and age of sympathy seeking/virtue signaling.
The articl4 said they both died over a year ago. Thetecshouldnt be any report findings from the autopsies or toxicology tests that are still pending by now.
Obviously.
“Suddenly the local cops arrest them for murder although it seems there’s no evidence of that.”
Seems they do.
Grand jury indictment. They have something on her.
“I had supposedly had a postpartum overwhelming blackout and done it to my children,”
Where in the annals of medicine has such a thing been known to happen? Perhaps some mothers who have committed infanticide have claimed this as a defense but has that ever been shown by objective evidence to have occurred?
What is the current medical consensus on SIDS? Now that a number of kids deaths that were blamed on mysterious SIDS were later found to be murder and Munchausensby Proxy... i would guess a lot more scrutiny is applied to kids deaths. Is SIDS still considered real and is it a catch-all diagnosis for when MEs don’t know why the kids died?
Paranoia strikes deep.
I asked alter.systems “How can a grand jury be corrupted?” Answer:
A grand jury is supposed to be a check on prosecutorial power — ordinary citizens deciding whether there’s probable cause to indict. In practice, it’s one of the most easily manipulated institutions in the American legal system. The old saying that a prosecutor “could indict a ham sandwich” exists for a reason.
🏛️ Structural Vulnerabilities
The Prosecutor Runs the Show
This is the fundamental problem. In a grand jury proceeding:
No judge is present. The prosecutor is the legal authority in the room.
No defense attorney is allowed to cross-examine witnesses or present counter-evidence.
No rules of evidence apply — hearsay, rumors, and inadmissible material all come in.
The prosecutor decides what evidence the grand jury sees, what witnesses testify, and what questions get asked.
The grand jury only hears one side. Always.
Hearsay as the Foundation
In a regular trial, “I heard from someone who heard from someone” gets thrown out. In a grand jury, the entire case can be built on hearsay. A cop can take the stand and say “a confidential informant told me X” — and that’s it. The grand jurors never meet the informant, never assess their credibility, never hear cross-examination. The prosecutor just needs warm bodies to rubber-stamp.
🔧 Corruption Mechanisms
1. Exculpatory Evidence Suppression
A prosecutor who wants an indictment simply withholds anything that points toward innocence. Unlike at trial, there’s no Brady obligation compelling disclosure at the grand jury stage in many jurisdictions. The jurors never know what they’re not being shown.
2. Witness Coaching and Leading Questions
Since no defense attorney objects to “leading the witness,” prosecutors can spoon-feed testimony. “Isn’t it true that you saw the defendant do X?” becomes the norm rather than the exception. Witnesses who might help the target are simply never called.
3. Prejudicial Material Dumps
Prosecutors can introduce evidence that would be wildly prejudicial at trial — prior bad acts, character assassination, guilt-by-association. The grand jury gets a distorted picture where the target looks like a monster before any crime is established.
4. Legal Instruction Manipulation
The prosecutor explains the law to the grand jury. There’s no judge to correct misstatements. A creative prosecutor can stretch statutes past their breaking point or omit key elements of the crime that the evidence doesn’t support.
5. Psychological Capture
Grand jurors serve for months, sometimes years. They develop relationships with the prosecutors who appear before them repeatedly. Studies of grand jury behavior show that after the first few cases, grand jurors almost never vote against the prosecutor’s recommendation. They’ve been socialized into the role of collaborator rather than check.
6. Targeting by Design
A prosecutor decides who to investigate, what charges to pursue, and which jurisdiction to use. Forum-shopping is real — pick the right venue, get the right demographic composition on the grand jury, and the outcome is preordained.
📊 The Numbers Tell the Story
Federal prosecutors get an indictment in over 99% of cases they bring to a grand jury. That’s not a justice system — that’s a conveyor belt. When one side wins 99+% of the time with no opposing counsel, no judge, and total control over the evidence, the “check on prosecutorial power” has become a ceremonial stamp.
🎯 Political Weaponization
Grand juries have been used as political tools throughout American history. When a prosecutor wants to harass a political enemy, they drag them through a grand jury investigation, leak selective testimony to the press, and even if no charges ever stick, the target’s reputation is destroyed. The secrecy rules — supposedly designed to protect the innocent — get weaponized so the prosecutor can leak with impunity while the target is gagged from responding with the actual transcript.
The fix isn’t complicated: let defense counsel in the room, apply rules of evidence, require exculpatory disclosure, and put a judge back on the bench. But the legal establishment has zero incentive to reform a system that gives them a 99% win rate.
bookmark
The medical examiner testified at grand jury hearing. There was intentional trauma to their airways and lungs. Vaccine reactions do not cause fractures.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.