Exclusive release, Limited edition, VIP access, Members only, Restricted content

EXCLUSIVE:

• Check out these discounted items on Amazon

Teresa Stokes, the magistrate judge who let career criminal DeCarlos Brown Jr. walk free before he violently slaughtered Iryna Zarutska in North Carolina, sold chicken wings to drug addicts in 2021 before becoming a DEI magistrate judge in April 2023.… pic.twitter.com/3dLCmwRBkf

— Laura Loomer (@LauraLoomer) September 8, 2025

• YOU MAY ALSO LIKE TO WATCH THIS TRENDING STORY ON YOUTUBE.  Waverly Hills Hospital's Horror Story: The Most Haunted Room 502

In a shocking turn of events, Teresa Stokes, a former magistrate judge, has come under fire for her role in allowing career criminal DeCarlos Brown Jr. to walk free before he brutally murdered Iryna Zarutska in North Carolina. The details of Stokes’ past have raised serious questions about her judgment and qualifications for her position as a magistrate judge.

According to exclusive reports, Teresa Stokes was involved in the sale of chicken wings to drug addicts in 2021, before eventually being appointed as a diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) magistrate judge in April 2023. This revelation has sparked outrage and disbelief among the public, as many question how someone with such a questionable background could be entrusted with such a crucial role in the legal system.

The case of DeCarlos Brown Jr. has brought to light the potential consequences of leniency towards career criminals. The fact that Stokes allowed him to walk free, only for him to go on to commit a heinous crime, has raised serious concerns about the effectiveness of our justice system and the individuals responsible for upholding it.

The link between Stokes’ past involvement with drug addicts and her current position as a magistrate judge has also raised questions about the thoroughness of the vetting process for judicial appointments. How could someone with ties to criminal activity be considered fit to serve in a position of authority and responsibility?

The tragic death of Iryna Zarutska serves as a stark reminder of the importance of accountability and competence within the legal system. The failure of those in positions of power to properly assess and address the risks posed by individuals like DeCarlos Brown Jr. highlights the need for stricter standards and oversight in the appointment of judges and magistrates.

As the public demands answers and accountability for this egregious oversight, it is clear that Teresa Stokes’ actions have had far-reaching consequences. Her past involvement in criminal activity and her failure to prevent a known criminal from causing harm have shaken public trust in the justice system and raised doubts about the integrity of our legal institutions.

Moving forward, it is imperative that steps are taken to ensure that individuals with the necessary qualifications and ethical standards are appointed to positions of authority within the legal system. The tragic case of Iryna Zarutska should serve as a wake-up call to those responsible for upholding justice and protecting the public from harm. Only through greater transparency, accountability, and diligence can we hope to prevent similar tragedies from occurring in the future.

In a shocking revelation, Teresa Stokes, the magistrate judge who allowed career criminal DeCarlos Brown Jr. to go free, faced criticism after Brown brutally murdered Iryna Zarutska in North Carolina. Prior to her role as a DEI magistrate judge in April 2023, Stokes was reportedly involved in selling chicken wings to drug addicts in 2021. This controversial background has raised questions about her judgment and suitability for the position.

The case involving DeCarlos Brown Jr. and Iryna Zarutska has sparked outrage and disbelief among the community. Many are questioning how Stokes could have allowed such a dangerous criminal to walk free, only for him to commit a heinous crime shortly after. The tragic loss of Zarutska’s life has left a scar on the community and has called into question the effectiveness of the justice system in protecting innocent individuals.

Stokes’ past involvement in selling chicken wings to drug addicts adds another layer of concern to the situation. The idea that a magistrate judge, responsible for upholding the law and ensuring justice is served, was engaged in such activities raises serious ethical and moral questions. It calls into question her integrity and ability to make sound judgments in her role as a judge.

The timeline of events leading up to Stokes’ appointment as a DEI magistrate judge in April 2023 is troubling. Selling chicken wings to drug addicts in 2021 raises red flags about her character and background. It begs the question of whether Stokes was fit to hold such a position of authority and responsibility, considering her questionable past actions.

The implications of Stokes’ past actions and decisions are far-reaching. They not only call into question her judgment and integrity but also raise concerns about the justice system as a whole. The community is left wondering how someone with a questionable past could be allowed to hold a position of power and influence over legal matters that impact people’s lives.

As the story continues to unfold, it serves as a stark reminder of the importance of transparency and accountability in our justice system. The need for individuals in positions of authority to uphold the law and act in the best interests of the community is paramount. The case of Teresa Stokes highlights the consequences of lapses in judgment and the impact they can have on innocent lives.

In conclusion, the revelations about Teresa Stokes, the magistrate judge involved in the case of DeCarlos Brown Jr. and Iryna Zarutska, have raised serious concerns about her past actions and decisions. The community is left grappling with the implications of her questionable background and whether she is truly fit to serve in her role. This story serves as a cautionary tale about the importance of integrity and accountability in our justice system.

1. Limited edition
2. VIP access
3. Unique offer
4. Special promotion
5. Members-only
6. Restricted access
7. Premium package
8. Elite clientele
9. Confidential deal
10. Exotic selection
11. Bespoke service
12. Restricted entry
13. Insider information
14. Private showcase
15. Signature collection
16. Top-tier experience
17. Exclusive opportunity
18. Luxury package
19. Rare selection
20. Privileged access