Innocence

Decades of Exoneration Stats Show Blacks More Likely to Be Wrongfully Convicted

Everything from official misconduct to bad eyewitness identifications to false confessions played roles.

|

Exoneration Chart
National Registry of Exonerations

America saw another record year for the number of prisoners being exonerated, according to the National Registry of Exonerations, a project of University of California Irvine Newkirk Center for Science & Society, University of Michigan Law School, and Michigan State University College of Law.

For 2016, 166 people were exonerated of crimes and released from prison, 52 of them for murder. Of all the exonerations, 70 cases involved official misconduct of some sort, and in 74 of the cases, convictions came from guilty pleas. And in 94 cases (also a record) it turned out that no actual crime occurred at all. These were mostly drug cases but also some child sex abuse cases. Most famously, the San Antonio Four, four women convicted in 1998 in a fabricated satanic child sex abuse ring scandal, were released in 2016 after it finally became clear the crimes never occurred.

This year researchers decided to go back over its entire history of reporting exonerations dating back to 1989 to examine the role of race in wrongful convictions. It turns out it's a big role. Try to contain your surprise. The analysis focused on the three types of crimes that have, over time, produced the greatest number of exonerations in the registry: murder, sexual assault, and drug crimes. Here's some of their calculations from 27 years of data pulled from the study's executive summary:

  • African Americans are only 13 percent of the American population but a majority of innocent defendants wrongfully convicted of crimes and later exonerated. They constitute 47 percent of the 1,900 exonerations listed in the National Registry of Exonerations.
  • Innocent black people are about seven times more likely to be convicted of murder than innocent white people. A major cause of the high number of black murder exonerations is the high homicide rate in the black community, the report notes, but obviously the innocent people are not responsible or contributors to the rate. Black prisoners who are convicted of murder are about 50 percent more likely to be innocent than other convicted murderers.
  • African Americans imprisoned for murder are more likely to be innocent if they were convicted of killing white victims. Only about 15 percent of murders by African Americans have white victims, but 31 percent of innocent African-American murder exonerees were convicted of killing white people.
  • The convictions that led to murder exonerations with black defendants were 22 percent more likely to include misconduct by police officers than those with white defendants.
  • Based on exonerations, a black prisoner serving time for sexual assault is three-and-a-half times more likely to be innocent than a white sexual assault convict. The major factor for the disparity appears to be mistaken eyewitness identification by white victims.
  • Assaults on white women by African-American men are a small minority of all sexual assaults in the United States, but they constitute half of sexual assaults with eyewitness misidentifications that led to exoneration.
  • African-American sexual assault exonerees received much longer prison sentences than white sexual assault exonerees, and they spent on average almost four-and-a-half years longer in prison before exoneration. It appears that innocent black sexual assault defendants receive harsher sentences than whites if they are convicted, and then face greater resistance to exoneration even in cases in which they are ultimately released.
  • African Americans are about five times as likely to go to prison for drug possession as whites—and judging from exonerations, innocent black people are about 12 times more likely to be convicted of drug crimes than innocent white people. Reminder: Despite what some people believe, stats show that blacks and whites use drugs at about the same rate. Blacks are more frequently stopped, searched, arrested, and convicted—including in cases in which they are innocent.
  • Since 1989, more than 1,800 defendants have been cleared in "group exonerations" that followed 15 large-scale police scandals in which officers systematically framed innocent defendants. The great majority were African-American defendants who were framed for drug crimes that never occurred. The most recent of these group exonerations was just last year. Three police officers in East Cleveland pleaded guilty to federal crimes amid accusations of planting drugs and stealing cash from dozens of suspected drug dealers, all black. A conviction integrity unit at the Cuyahoga County prosecutor's office has begun vacating and dismissing the cases involved. So far they've identified 43 defendants affected.

A reader examining the studies cannot help but come away with the impression that government official misconduct combined with the obsession with the drug war (which feeds the need for results, which therefore encourages the misconduct) play a massive role in putting innocent people away. This is not to dismiss issues of race and how it affects jury decisions and eyewitness accounts—but many police and prosecutors are more than willing to use and abuse those issues to get "results."

Read the exoneration report for 2016 here. Read the special report on the relationship between race and wrongful convictions here.

Advertisement

NEXT: New York Times Thinks Businesses Are Dogs That Need Pre-emptive Choking From Government

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. The law is the law and all laws must be enforced at all times even if the suspect is innocent or the crime never actually happened otherwise it would be anarchy like under Obama

  2. Decades of Exoneration Stats Show Blacks More Likely to Be Wrongfully Convicted

    Too bad that’s so heavily outnumbered by the number of blacks being sent to prison.

  3. African Americans are only 13 percent of the American population but a majority of innocent defendants wrongfully convicted of crimes and later exonerated. They constitute 47 percent of the 1,900 exonerations listed in the National Registry of Exonerations.

    That paragraph makes me very skeptical of this entire thing. The study is comparing apples to oranges. You can only be exonerated if you are first convicted. So it doesn’t matter what percentage of the overall population blacks and whites are. It matters what percentages of those convicted of murder. A quick check of wikipedia finds that 52.2% of those convicted of murder are black. They make up 47% of those exonerated. So, they actually are exonerated at a lower percent than you would expect given the percentage of blacks convicted of murder.

    That paragraph is completely misleading and wrong, and obviously so. What else did the authors lie about?

    1. If blacks are exonerated out of proportion to their percentage of the population it’s evidence of racism.

      If blacks are not exonerated in proportion to their conviction rate it’s evidence of racism.

      It’s racism all the way down.

      1. What is funny is that Shackford read the executive summary and it never dawned on him what crap this report is. They really must not teach critical thinking in college anymore.

        1. H&R is quantity over quality.

          If he’s going to take the time to digest the whole report, he’s going to save that for a print article.

        2. If only you had a doll so you could show all of us where Shackford touched you.

      2. Occam for the win!!!

    2. math is hard.

      blacks are also murdered at a much higher rate than whites.

      because racism.

      1. heart of darkness?

    3. John,

      First off, the 47% figure is for all exonerations, not just murder. But that’s besides the main point of this post.

      You’re missing an important point here. If the black people commit and are convicted of murder at a higher rate (which is true), and the racial composition of exonerated individuals matches those convicted of murder, than innocent black people are necessarily more likely to be convicted of murder than innocent white people. You jumped to conclusions so fast after seeing this point that you didn’t actually think things through.

      Let’s illustrate with a hypothetical example using easy numbers:

      Let’s take a society with 100,000 people, 10% of whom are black and the rest white. Let’s assume there are 100 murders a year, 20% of them committed by black people (and assume conviction rates are the same regardless of race). Over 10 years, you have 1000 murders, 200 committed by black people and 800 by white people. Let’s assume 10% of convicted people are innocent, regardless of race. So 20 black people and 80 white people are wrongfully convicted over 10 years. In this example, innocent black people are about twice as likely to be convicted of murder as innocent white people. 20/10,000 = 0.2% and 80/90,000 = 0.09%.

      1. First off, the 47% figure is for all exonerations, not just murder.

        The murder exoneration rate is found on page one of the report. It is 50%, which is still below the 54% of blacks convicted of murder.

        . If the black people commit and are convicted of murder at a higher rate (which is true), and the racial composition of exonerated individuals matches those convicted of murder, than innocent black people are necessarily more likely to be convicted of murder than innocent white people.

        No. That is completely wrong. You can’t be wrongfully convicted unless you are convicted in the first place. The universe of numbers we are talking about here is people convicted of murder. Of those, 54% are black. Some number of those people convicted are wronging convicted and later exonerated. Of the people exonerated, 50% are black. So blacks underrepresented in the exonerations. If both races were equally likely to be exonerated, then 54% of the exonerations should be black instead of 50%.

        The fact is black people commit a hugely disproportionate number of murders. So yes, a hugely disproportionate number of people convicted and later exonerated are black. Unless you can show me that white people are committing murders and just getting away with it, facts which are clearly not in evidence in the report, the fact that more black people end up in prison for murder means nothing except that black people commit more murders.

        1. “No. That is completely wrong. You can’t be wrongfully convicted unless you are convicted in the first place. ”

          Holy shit you are dense. I even illustrated an easy to understand example to prove the point and you still failed to grasp it. Read my claim again. Read the example. The example proves my point. If black people are convicted of crime at a higher rate, and the percentage of those convicted who are innocent are about the same across racial categories, then it logically follows that a random, innocent black person is more likely to be wrongfully convicted of murder than a random white person. Take a deep breath and follow the logical claims, it is true.

          “Unless you can show me that white people are committing murders and just getting away with it, facts which are clearly not in evidence in the report,”

          This does not need to be true in order for black people to be more likely to be wrongfully convicted of murder.

          1. If black people are convicted of crime at a higher rate, and the percentage of those convicted who are innocent are about the same across racial categories

            The percentage of those found innocent are not the same or even about the same across racial categories. They vary.

            Your argument if idiotic. Yes, the number of black people who are wrongly convicted is a higher percentage of the black population than the number of white people wrongfully convicted. But that is a product of more black people committing murder and being convicted in the first place, not of racism. More black people as a percentage are charged and convicted of murder. That is because black people commit murder a lot more often than white people. So of course more of them are going to be wrongly convicted.

            You call me dense? You can’t even understand the causality going on here.

            1. “The percentage of those found innocent are not the same or even about the same across racial categories. They vary.”

              That may be true, but what evidence do you have that black people are less likely to be innocent? The study seems to show that at worst, it’s pretty similar to the conviction rates (didn’t you yourself cite a 54% statistic for convictions that’s similar to the 50% for exoneration)?

              “Your argument if idiotic. Yes, the number of black people who are wrongly convicted is a higher percentage of the black population than the number of white people wrongfully convicted. But that is a product of more black people committing murder and being convicted in the first place, not of racism. More black people as a percentage are charged and convicted of murder. That is because black people commit murder a lot more often than white people. So of course more of them are going to be wrongly convicted.”

              Wow, that’s putting a lot of words in my mouth. A lot of people in this thread, including you, have seemed to have trouble grasping the notion that innocent black people could be more likely to be convicted even if the % of exonerees was similar to the % of those convicted of murder. I pointed out the logical flaws in that argument. I made no argument as to whether or not racism is the source of the issue.

              1. That may be true, but what evidence do you have that black people are less likely to be innocent?

                The fact that blacks are only 50% of those later exonerated despite being 54% of those convicted.

      2. Let’s take a society with 100,000 people, 10% of whom are black and the rest white. Let’s assume there are 100 murders a year, 52 of them committed by black people (and assume conviction rates are the same regardless of race). Over 10 years, you have 1000 murders, 520 committed by black people and 480 by white people. Let’s assume 10% of convicted people are innocent, regardless of race. So 52 black people and 48 white people are wrongfully convicted over 10 years. In this example, innocent black people are a little more likely to be convicted of murder as innocent white people. even though they commit murder at over twice the rate as white people

        Let’s use easy–but REALISTIC numbers instead.

    4. Probably because you are stuck at African Americans

  4. It’s sad that SJW politics taints everything.
    I’m sure there is great data in this. But why the hell do they lead with this farcical comparison? How does it make sense to compare exonerations to the general populace and not the convict populace? Only a SJW would think that is meaningful.
    “?African Americans are only 13 percent of the American population but a majority of innocent defendants wrongfully convicted of crimes and later exonerated. They constitute 47 percent of the 1,900 exonerations listed in the National Registry of Exonerations.”

    African Americans are ~40% of the prison population. But I guess 40% versus 47% exoneration isn’t as impressive a number, so they need to put in some more bias. Stupid.

  5. LITERALLY READ THE VERY NEXT BULLETPOINT.

    1. Unfortunately Scott, these guys hate you personally so there’s really nothing you can do. I recommend just telling them to fuck off.

      1. The report is crap. I don’t see how liking or disliking Shackford changes that.

        1. Maybe, just maybe, you haters think the report is crap because Shackford reported it. It wouldn’t be the first time.

          1. I don’t pay any attention to the authors. I couldn’t tell you which is which or who is who.

            But this executive summary is nonsense.

          2. If you can explain why the flaws pointed out are not true, then do so. Otherwise, stop wasting everyone’s time, because you have nothing to say.

      2. Scott told John to fuck off a couple weeks ago. John is still here, stalking Scott. Why Reason hasn’t banned that troll is a mystery.

        1. Because they haven’t gotten around to banning you. Please whine some more. Come on, do something stupid and get yourself banned like you always do.

          In the meantime, your tears and bitching are lovely.

    2. The next bullet point doesn’t make any sense. If blacks are exonerated at lower proportions than whites, how do they come up with metric that innocent blacks are convicted at 7 times the rate of whites?

      Is it because there is no correlation between exoneration and innocent conviction?

      And with 10,000 murders per year, and 200 exonerations, that seems like a really low percentage. Is that because a very small number of innocent people are convicted, or because a low percentage of innocent people, once convicted, are exonerated?

      I find it problematic to extrapolate anything from this data.

      1. See my post below. Their claim about black prisoners is based on a percentage that includes manslaughter convictions in the definition of “murder”. The exonerations that they site to are for exonerations of murder convictions and do not include exoneration for manslaughter, which almost never happens.

        Scott didn’t read the report and apparently lacks the analytical ability to see the flaws in the report even if he did.

        1. “Analytical ability?” This from a guy who thinks trade deficits are real and doesn’t understand the first bit of Econ 101, and whose principles changed with the election.

          1. Yes, If you would like me to try and explain international trade, sure. But that is not the subject here. And since you can’t seem to grasp the problems with this report, I doubt you are trainable on the subject of international trade.

            Sorry kid, but you seem to have a few limitations.

            1. Numbah one limitation is laughing at your econ ignorance and lack of principles.

              And for someone who claims to stick to the high road, principles, and the topics at issue, you sure engage in a lot of personal attacks. Me, I am proud of giggling over your incompetence. It’s half the fun.

              1. We are talking about murder rates and you somehow think that relates to economics and international trade.

                You are a moron. Stop wasting people’s time. You don’t even understand this report much less why it is flawed. So instead of adding anything constructive you just shit all over the thread.

                Do you ever get tired of being stupid and not knowing anything? I hold stupid people in contempt. I will never understand people like you who seem to pride themselves on it.

      2. How many murder convictions, as opposed to murders?

    3. The all-caps doesn’t change that fact that the second bulletpoint is an tortured word-soup designed to make the first bulletpoint sound legitimate.

      It’s stupid and is indicative of the SJW taint in everything. I have no doubt that the data shows a lot of racism in the justice system.
      but data isn’t good enough…they needed to sexy-up the leading bullet point with a farcical comparison to make it sound better.

      That is stupid and should be mocked. It taints the entire work.

      1. If you look at the data in the report and properly analyze it, there isn’t much evidence of racism there, at least not in regards to innocent defendants.

      2. numbers are not evidence, correlation does not equal causality

    4. I’d play it cool Scott, you’re tossing blood into the water here.

    5. The bullet point that you reference doesn’t say much. It can be read about 15 different ways. What are the actual numbers?

    6. No. The next point does not address the issue at hand. Even if it did, you led with a completely meaningless statistical comparison in your first point. You do realize that %age exonerated really has nothing to do with %age of population, right?

      You literally needed to provide 1 number to back-up the point about the effect of racism that you were trying to make: Black people’s %tage of TOTAL CONVICTIONS. You skipped that piece of data though and went straight from population %age to exoneration %age. Your second point DID NOT provide this number (nor did any of your other points). As John points out, that’s likely because the proper data was not even included in the study, which is just sad.

  6. And then there is this. On page 4 of the report, it states, . Forty percent of defendants imprisoned for murder are African American/. To support this the report cites to a report on US prisoners. But if you go to the report you find that the measure for murder according to the footnote “Includes nonnegligent manslaughter”. So again, they are comparing apples to oranges. The exoneration rate is for murder convictions. But the percentage is for murder and manslaughter convictions.

    This report is just crap. I mean complete crap.

    1. Nonnegligent manslaughter often gets included with murder when giving the murder rate. What % of this category does nonnegligent manslaughter include? Is there a massive change to the data here?

      1. It wasn’t included in the exoneration figures the study used. Here is the registry that the report used to compile the exoneration figures

        http://www.law.umich.edu/speci…..llist.aspx

        Note, that they separate out manslaughter and murder. The figures cited to by the report only include murder charges, not manslaughter. The report is comparing two different and unrelated figures.

    2. Yeah, it makes African Americans appear to be less guilty than what you can accept.

  7. Since 1989, more than 1,800 defendants have been cleared in “group exonerations” that followed 15 large-scale police scandals in which officers systematically framed innocent defendants. The great majority were African-American defendants who were framed for drug crimes that never occurred.

    I think that says more about the corrupt nature of big city police departments than it does about race.

    1. I’m not sure. Corrupt police departments don’t normally go after white people.

      Well, maybe they do in the name of meth. And if they don’t have enough black people to sustain a corruption industry.

      1. My point is that I doubt those corrupt cops would have had any problems framing white people if there had been any in the community to frame. The victims of these mass scandals are overwhelmingly black because big cities are overwhelmingly black.

      2. They’ll go after anyone that looks like a potential drug bust. Cops operate in much larger numbers in the hood which is disportionatally populated with blacks. Some scraggly white dude comes driving through in his rusty old beater car he better signal and come to complete stops.

  8. I’d like to see cost of defense attorney added into that mix. How much of this is being able to afford decent council?

    1. I doubt that most of the white guys convicted of murder were any better able to afford decent council than the black ones.

  9. H&R should have a preprint server where the commentariat can shred blog posts and they can be revised before public release.

  10. One of my pet reformation ideas is that anyone who tampers with evidence, lies, or otherwise contributes to false prosecution should be punished per the maximum punishment of the crime at stake. Frame someone for a 5 year crime, you do 5 years, even if the actual false sentence was only one year or probation. I don’t include false identification unless it is intentional, but I don’t trust eyewitnesses anyway unless they knew the person beforehand.

    It especially rankles me when cops lie on the stand and violate the 4th amendment and at most get desk jobs or have to find a new police job.

    1. Except that relies on the cops and DAs to enforce.

      They won’t prosecute a cop even when it means a minor penalty. This will just make it even less common.

      1. This…….Always comes to this bullshit

      2. Eh, I also believe in victim prosecution only, no government cops or prosecutors.

  11. The funny thing about this report is that when the numbers do go their way, they suddenly figure out how to properly use them. The section on sexual assault states

    Fifty-nine percent of sexual assault exonerees are African Americans, four-and-a-half times their
    proportion in the population; thirty-four percent are white. Unlike murder, these numbers are way
    out of line with the racial composition of sexual assault convictions. As of the end of 2014, 22%
    of American prisoners convicted of sexual assault were black, 44% were white and 19%
    Hispanic.24 Judging from known erroneous convictions, a prisoner serving time for sexual assault
    is three-and-a-half times as likely to be innocent if he is black than if he is white.

    1. LMAO.

    2. The problem is that the report later says that 86% of rape exonerations involve rapes where the accused is a stranger and his identity was at issue. So the raw numbers don’t tell you anything. Not all rapes are exonerated at the same rate. So you can divide rapes into two categories, those where the defendant was a stranger and his identity was at issue, and those rapes where he either wasn’t a stranger or his identity was not at issue.

      So to do a proper comparison, you need to weight the numbers. What percentage of those who are convicted in cases where the identity of the perpetrator is at issue at trial are black and what percentage is white? And then look at the numbers for the total convictions where the identity of the perpetrator is not at issue. Then take those percentages and weight them based on the fact that 86% of the exonerations are the former. I can’t find those numbers. Maybe they don’t exist. But without them, the comparison is useless, because there is no way to know if the number of black exonerations isn’t higher because blacks are a higher percentage of those convicted in stranger rape cases.

      1. So another example of shotty statistics and false conclusions?

      2. Granted, one could argue that blacks are more targeted for stranger rape but again that’s a leap because you don’t know how each case was investigated. Location of crime, witnesses, area demographics, victim statements, and so on.

        This is why i find all these stats 100% worthless. So many variables and so many unknowns. I generally ignore all of these stats because they are generally useless and shotty because they lack proper depth and enough information.

        1. I agree. The are totally worthless. The other thing that the report doesn’t consider is how people get exonerated. Maybe there is something about the process that skews towards black convicts and against white convicts. Who knows?

          1. That was something I considered before I even read down this far — that there might be more organized efforts at exoneration that proceed from the assumption of racial bias, and thus concentrate on black convicts. Alternatively, those efforts might simply concentrate for the sake of convenience on urban areas, where the convict pool is disproportionately black. If you’re a poor rural white schmuck who got railroaded… Well, you’re just an outlier, and we can’t spare the resources to look into your case.

            1. That is another….great point with the 1000 other possible variables ignored :/

              Social science can be science but we late the data to come to any reasonable conclusion.

    3. so it’s back to Dred Scott and the 3/5ths proportionality?

    4. Jesus… this pretty much seals the deal on the shoddy statistics…

      Unlike murder, these numbers are way
      out of line with the racial composition of sexual assault convictions. validate our assumptions, so we will include them in our report.

      FTFY.

  12. The only way to know if blacks are more likely to be wrongfully convicted is to first determine x, where x is the total number of wrongful convictions, and then break it down by demographic.

    Exonerations only show us a subset, y, of x. Since x is unknown, and unknowable, it is a fallacious leap to assume that the proportion of blacks in y is equal to the proportion of blacks in x.

    It seems more likely that there is a bias towards exonerating blacks versus non-blacks. That does not, however, translate into a conviction bias against blacks.

  13. It is because they are black obviously! They are harder to see at night! This just proves blacks were made for crime and military raids! They blend in! The perks of being black!

    /sarc

    1. Eyewitness identifications are, on average, indeed more accurate for white faces than for black faces.

      1. I think it depends on the person. Take the average ignorant white or black male and an Asian is an Asian but someone who like me can reasonable tell the difference from 8 difference ethnic Asians I can give you a good eye witeness account. Hell I could probably identity an Asian better than a white.

        It is all situational.

  14. Wouldn’t it be all too telling if they examined the rates at which the crimes are re-investigated and anyone else is ever convicted, if a crime was even found to exist. Often police search for Occam’s razor and ignor other plausible leads to their own detriment. Our criminal justice system is quick to convict without deference to the idea of allowing 1000 guilty men free before jailing one innocent. This is all done in the name of security. Maybe if we weren’t all such pansies and willing to defend ourselves, families and those we care about a lot of freedom could be restored instead of usurped in the name of safety and security.

    1. and how many innocent angels can dance on the head of a pin or on a pin head?

  15. What this comes down to is the simple fact that a group that is statistically more prone to crime is also more prone to wrongful convictions, which is what you would expect.

    What point are you actually trying to make?

  16. No, what you mean is, the justice system is biased in favor of letting black people go.

  17. A lot of throwing around of the “innocent” tag, in the article.
    An exoneration doesn’t necessarily mean that the individual is innocent, just that there might have been some later-discovered evidence that cast enough doubt on the conviction for a judge to overturn it.
    These didn’t go before a jury, that weighs the full spectrum of evidence before coming to a verdict of innocence, but are similar to situations where an appeals court sets aside a conviction, based on some technicality, or other.
    Frequently, exonerations are due to errors in DNA analysis, when the DNA evidence may not have been a mitigating factor for the jury, when they weighed the evidence.
    The judge making the ruling, in a later proceeding, has no idea what the jury thought was important in proving the guilt of the one they convicted. That the initial jury isn’t included in a later review of the case is one of the bugs in our “judicial” system.
    These people may have been freed, but let’s suspend the idea that they all were “innocent”.

  18. Blacks are exonerated more than whites because the people who operate exoneration groups are FAR more likely to seek out black inmates rather than white.

    Three is ‘racism’ on display here, just not the type that fits properly.

  19. Missing from this article is any analysis of WHERE the exonerations occurred.
    Would it be surprising to discover that places like Chicago, Baltimore and D.C were over represented in wrongful convictions? After all, they are liberal strongholds where the State’s primary concern is raising revenue to pay for votes, and not justice.

  20. Do You want to get good income at home? do you not know how to start earnings on Internet? there are some popular methods to earn huge income at your home, but when people try that, they bump into a scam so I thought i must share a verified and guaranteed way for free to earn a great sum of money at home. Anyone who is interested should read the given article…
    _____________)_)???_+_+_+_+ https://www.cashneways.com???

  21. I can see what your saying… Raymond `s article is surprising, last week I bought a top of the range Acura from making $4608 this-past/month and-a little over, $10,000 this past month . with-out any question its the easiest work I’ve ever had . I began this five months/ago and almost straight away started bringing in minimum $82 per-hr .
    _++_+_+_+_+_+____________________ https://www.cashneways.com

  22. just as Phillip implied I am alarmed that someone can get paid $6887 in one month on the computer . published here…………. https://tinyurl.com/2dayjob-com

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.