The Root Cause of Tre'Shun Miller's Murder: It's never what "they" tell you, part 2 of 3

“Until you realize how easily it is for your mind to be manipulated, you remain the puppet of someone else's game.”

― Evita Ochel

This is part two of a three-part series of articles related to the murder of Tre'shun Miller. Part one identifies main stream media's narrative. To recap, the following is a condensed summary of that narrative:

Good cop stopped bad driver. Good cop smelled marijuana. Good cop called for backup to search. Bad man-passenger tried to get away. Two good cops chased bad man. Bad man had a gun and injured a good cop. The other good cop shot and killed bad man.


Now I will ask you to temporarily suspend what you've been TOLD by main stream media (in the green highlights), and look a little closer.

1. An officer pulled over a female driver for failing to use a turn signal.

The reality is the driver of the vehicle actually DID signal prior to turning. However, per the police officer she didn't signal 100 feet PRIOR TO turning.

The officer's exact words:

"I know you turned it on before you turned. You gotta have it on 100 feet both prior to turn, ok?"

Here is a 30-second video clip that shows exactly what the police officer said to the driver, in his own words, using the body camera he was wearing.

Most of the reports simply state the incident began with "a traffic stop." But those who got more detailed, got it wrong. This misinformation was perpetuated several times both on local TV PROGRAMS, and in written reports such as this one from Star-Telegram.com:

"An Arlington police officer stopped a black Toyota Corolla when the driver did not use a turn signal."

While this detail seems trivial, the reporting error speaks volumes to main stream media's dependence on the state, in particular, the public information officers (PIO's).

Moreover, should the public take the officer's word for the allegation that the driver didn't signal 100 feet prior to turning? How do we know if that's even true?  Why has a dash cam to prove this claim not been revealed?

Everything a law-enforcer says must be discerned for truthfulness, given that the vast majority of police officers have been known to perjure themselves, almost always with zero consequences.

Don't take my word for it, hear it from Mayor Oscar Goodman himself. He is a former Las Vegas Mayor and long-time defense attorney. In an extraordinary interview on You Tube's Valuetainment, Mayor Goodman asserts that "in just about every" case he defended, law enforcers perjured themselves, and not once was any one of them penalized for it.

This is why everything said by a PIO, or parroted by main stream media, should be taken with a grain of salt.

Let's continue.

2. The passengers in the car were criminals.

Notice the date of the other "shooting" incident is 2017. Since  Tre'shun was killed in January of 2019, the so-called "2017 shooting," could have taken place one to two years earlier. Whether Tre'shun was 17, 18, or 19 doesn't really matter. But if he had been a minor, it would not as easily have served the narrative that Tre'shun was an evil, fully grown villain.

One of the first reports that surfaced about Tre'shun's killing was published by Star-telegram on January 13, 2019, two days after Tre'shun's killing. That article is titled: "Suspect killed by Arlington police was awaiting drug possession hearing, records show."

The inference is that Tre'shun was a "druggie." Perhaps an IV heroin user, right? If you read on, you discover that, "Treshun Miller, 20, had a pretrial hearing on Feb. 14 in County Criminal Court No. 7 on a possession of marijuana charge which Arlington police say occurred in November, court records showed."

Interestingly, it appears that was an Indiana case, not Texas. Did Tre'shun get out on bond for a petty marijuana possession? Or are we to believe he was out on bond for something far more sinister?

According to Dallas' WFAA Channel 8 News, "Friday night wasn't Miller's or Lawson's first interaction with Arlington police. Miller was the getaway driver and Lawson was a passenger in his car during a 2017 shooting at Stonebriar Centre in Frisco, police said. Neither one was the alleged shooter. Arlington police arrested the two of them in that case."

Okay, so both Tre'shun and the female driver in Tre'shun's killing incident were implicated in another crime two years earlier. They were both "arrested."  But were they charged? And if so, what for?

The PIO stated, "...the passengers and driver had been out on the street on bond. He expressed frustration about a court system that allows offenders to leave jail on bond who then may put the public at risk."

Yet, no where was I able to find a conclusive reason why Tre'shun is said to have been "on bond."

Could the bond be related to his alleged participation in the September 2017 shooting?  As far as I can tell to date, no one has outright said Treshun was on bond due to the 2017 shooting.

Here's one interesting clue found in Star-telegram as it reports about the incident that got Treshun killed:

An Arlington police officer stopped a black Toyota Corolla when the driver did not use a turn signal. Prior to the stop, Chief Will Johnson said the officer did a routine check on the license plate and found the car had been involved in a November drug case.

The driver and passenger in the front seat — Jessica Lee Lawson and Tre’Shun Miller — had been released from jail on bond in that case, he said.

Okay, so the case where Tre'shun was the getaway driver took place in September.  But the previous report indicates that Tre'shun was released on bond for a "November drug case" 

Can you see how the information is twisted and confused to give the false impression that Tre'shun was out on bond over a different shooting case?

So what exactly was Tre'shun on bond for? All we know is he was associated with charges that were identified by the license plates on the car that was stopped for not using a turn signal 100 feet prior to turning.

Are you still feeling that Tre'shun was a hardened criminal?

3. The arresting officer called for backup to search the vehicle because he smelled marijuana.

Should police be trusted to be accurate "smellers" or to even be truthful about their claims? First off, the best way a cop can know what marijuana smells like is he or she has seen it, smelled it, and/or used it.  Of course, the statist argument is that cadets might have had special training with special, legalized privileges to recognize the plant. But the assumption that a cop who claims to know how marijuana smells because of his legal training is just as ludicrous as a 30 year old prostitute who claims she's still a virgin.

Items 4-8 of the moments that led to Tre'shun's killing appear to be factual as viewed on police dash cams and body cams. (You can review the screen shots for items 4-8 in part one.)

4. Two police officers showed up to assist the arresting officer, one was a female to search the female driver.

5. While the female cop was searching the female driver, the other backup cop went to the passenger's side to get the front passenger, Tre'Shun, out. At that time, he fled.

6. The two male officers chased Tre'Shun and the female officer stayed put with the rest of the suspects.

7. Tre'shun shot the assisting officer in the pelvis causing him to be injured and hospitalized.

8. The arresting officer shot and killed Tre'Shun.

Four out of the nine points are credible.  Therefore, no need to question the entirely of the story, right?  Let's move on.

9. Two+ ounces of marijuana were found in the car.

There is no reason to disbelieve the allegation that 2.05 oz. of marijuana were found.  And clearly the reason to include the digital scales to news reports is to infer that one or more of the passengers were involved in the sale and distribution of the marijuana. Was Tre'shun, selling? Or was he associating with such assumed dealers? Regardless, the intent here appears to be to justify the killing of the victim, based on nothing more than conjecture.

Findings of police searches should ALWAYS be challenged. Police have been known to plant evidence to frame suspects.  But what would be the point in this case? It's clear Tre'shun had a gun and shot at police. That's damning enough, in light of the fact that any attempt to kill a police officer in Texas warrants the death penalty.

Former Governer of Texas, Rick Perry is very proud that he values the life of a police officer as much as the life of a child.

He said, "If you come into our state and you kill one of our children, you kill a police officer,... you will face the ultimate justice in the State of Texas. And that is, you will be executed.

Here is a clip of that statement:




Inaccuracies and inconsistencies undermine main stream media's veracity, thus it's legitimacy. One or two errors alone does not constitute some type of "conspiracy." But hopefully by the time you finish this series of articles you will get a different perspective into how exactly main stream media manipulates the truth to formulate public opinion.

That's it for this part of the analysis.  If you've been keeping up, hopefully by now you are getting a deeper understanding of what types of questions to ask yourself whenever television PROGRAMS offer reports of police abuse - or any other type of governmental abuse.

In part three, I will identify the various techniques used by television PROGRAMS to get their viewers to react to feelings rather than to facts. These tactics are arguably the most powerful forms of mind control. And to recognize it is to shield yourself.

One question I keep asking myself is this:  why does main stream media seem to be so protective of the establishment? I hypothesize that one reason might be money. Television stations get lots of money when a government agency runs an ad on their stations. If a television station were to put a bad light on government, why would the bureaucrats who control tax revenue want to give that money to those who don't treat them with kid gloves? In short, police agencies and television reporting PROGRAMS have an incestuous relationship.

That's one rationale that makes sense to me.  What other reasons can you think of? I'd love read your ideas in the comments below as well as any feedback related to my coverage of this topic. I'm certainly not a law expert nor do I care to be one. But I do value any errors brought to my attention and I will fix them to the best of my ability.

I don't really care that much about man's law. I care more about the fact that everybody's programmed. Let's break free.

TigerLily