Michael Mead was accused of murdering Lucy Johnson and has been found "not guilty" by a jury. This is his public statement as the Gazette made the decision to release it without editing. For the purpose of Statement Analysis, it is first published, as is, and then it is published again, with emphasis (bold type, underlining, italics) with Statement Analysis followed in bold type. For the sake of time, the analysis is general, with only major points touched upon. Prior to this morning, I have not heard of this case, but received a request by a commentator for analysis.
We expect to find in the letter of an innocent man a simple denial, First Person Singular, past tense, event specific, without qualification. It is found early (and sometimes often) in the statements of those who are not only judicially "innocent" but did not do it. It is the theme of an innocent statement and is strong, and stands alone. Even in the most emotional of cases, the denial is found without sensitivity indicators.
Possessive pronouns are key to Statement Analysis. We learn to say "my" and "mine" as young as two years of age, and as possessive creatures, by 4, it is instinctive and tells the truth. Humans will take instinctive ownership of what belongs to them. OJ Simpson said, "to those of you who believe in my guilt..." which is something a truly (de facto) innocent person will never do.
In fact, Statement Analysis recognizes that 80 percent or more of statements have inadvertent confessions embedded within them with the possessive pronoun "my".
Even a pre-speech infant says "my" with hands and motions.
There are two things we should look for:
1. The innocence of "I didn't do it" plainly, strongly, without qualifiers.
2. The imbedded confession of a pronoun.
These two indicators can tell us whether or not he killed Lucy Johnson with accuracy, even if we do not know a single detail of the case.
"Out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks" and words give us away, whether we are innocent or guilty. These words are eternally true.
Analysis Question: Did Michael Mead murder Lucy Johnson?
In January 2009 this clip was in the Gazette:
Lucy Johnson's fiancé shot her twice in the head and set fire to her Gastonia home to cover up the killing, Gaston County Police said.
Police on Friday arrested Michael Lane Mead, 39, of 825 Saville Road, Fort Mill, S.C., and charged him with first-degree murder, first-degree arson and first-degree burglary in the July 16 slaying and burning of her home. He remains in Gaston County Jail without bond.
Johnson, a 31-year-old nurse at Kings Mountain Hospital, had two children and was pregnant with a third. Mead was believed to be the father, said Gaston County Police Capt. Calvin Shaw.
"I don't know that you ever bring closure to it," Shaw said. "I know that's the term we always use, but I think it will start some of the healing. It won't bring total closure because we're still missing Lucy - Lucy's not here. We hope it helps the family."
Police had interviewed Mead and considered him a person of interest early in their investigation. Test results from the State Bureau of Investigation's Raleigh crime lab links him to Johnson's killing, but Shaw said he couldn't discuss the specific evidence.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Read more: http://www.gastongazette.com/news/first-29078-degree-johnson.html#ixzz1SMchhnwv
Michael Mead releases public statement
Editor’s note:
Michael Mead has requested that his public statement about the not-guilty verdict in the Lucy Johnson murder trial be run word-for-word and unedited in its entirety.
The Gazette has chosen to honor his request.
"I would like to personally thank the 15 jurors who rendered a just and fair verdict. Thank you for the time, dedication and hard work they put in for the past 7 weeks. The jury unanimously voted to acquit. I have never waivered in my claim that I was innocent and I have feel vindicated by verdict. The jury was comprised of a variety of people from the community. Many jurors were college educated and some have gone on to earn Masters Degrees and higher. Even the alternates would have voted not guilty and I think that speaks volumes. After the verdict was read, I was able to thank the members of the jury and I did, personally. Again I thank them all for giving an innocent man his life back.
I want to thank my lawyers Lisa Andrew Dubs and Jason White and my investigator, Captain Steve Ehlers, for believing in my case and me. Ms. Dubs did not have to take this case. I will never be able to thank them enough. There will never be enough adjectives to describe how I feel about them. They have my gratitude for life, because they have saved my life. I am truly speechless when I try and describe what they mean to me. In my opinion one of Lisa’s peers should nominate her for 2011 Lawyer of The Year. She would certainly have my vote. Without fearless attorneys the scales of justice would be on-sided. They are all three lifelong friends now, and I owe them my life and future forever. My parents also wanted to thank them all for their hard work, time, dedication, and devotion to this case for 19 months.
Not a day passes that I don’t miss Lucy. Lucy represented one of the happiest times in my life. It was amazing to be with her. She loved life. She was a wonderful mother and I was always impressed with how she interacted with her children, Lauren and Caison. Lucy was outspoken and she loved to laugh. We both loved music and we rarely watched TV; however, we did enjoy reruns of "I Love Lucy". With all I have been through, I have never regretted the time I was lucky enough to share with Lucy. She will always be in my heart, until the day I die. I would endure all that I have been through again if I could hold her one last time. She was happy and content in our relationship. She had finally found someone who was stable, reliable, and dependable. She often compared me to her father in that way. I loved playing with Caison and Lauren. I think of them both often, and I miss them. I know Lucy is watching over them. She treated Christian, my son, as if he was her own, and he too loved her. My immediate family accepted Lucy, Caison and Lauren into our family with open arms. My family also mourns the loss of Lucy and the baby.
Michelle Dye, Lucy’s biological mother, was not a part of Lucy’s life while we were together. Lucy told me her mother hadn’t been in Lucy’s life since she was 15. Often, Lucy refused to speak about her mother and their troubled relationship. To this day I cannot understand why Michelle Dye has behaved in the way she has. She has done everything in her power to seek the spotlight and spread misinformation about the facts of this case. She has attacked me personally many times in the media and on the Internet. Even given the way she has acted, and her strained relationship with Lucy, she is still a grieving mother who has lost a daughter. I will pray that she is able to come to terms with her behavior and find some peace in her life.
The Gaston County Police Department and District Attorney’s Office have ruined my life. They have done many things in this case that are unacceptable. Not only were they negligent in how they have handled this investigation; but, in my opinion, they have purposely ignored facts, manipulated the media, and mishandled evidence that would have exonerated me from the beginning. They spent their resources trying to make a case against me rather than trying to solve the murder of Lucy and my unborn child. This type of prosecutorial "tunnel vision" is outrageous. It is the third largest reason innocent people end up in prison according to the NC Innocence Project. It is only through having endured what I have that I fully understand how horrifying that fact is. You can’t imagine what it’s like to be crucified daily for someone else’s crimes, to face the possibility of being put to death. The stress and pressure was monumentality hard on me, my son Christian and my immediate family.
At my bond hearing, Locke Bell made statements about facts and evidence I have never seen. He indicated the State had evidence that was never produced. I believe he misled the Court and Grand Jury. William Stetzer told outright lies at my bond hearing in an attempt to keep me falsely incarcerated. I am surprised Mr. Bell did not appear once at the trial. After all of his statements about me, in Court and out, I find it odd he did not prosecute me. I do not believe he felt strongly about my guilt, despite his public statements to the contrary. I believe he knew they had arrested the wrong man and did not want to be associated with this trial. Mr. Bell has legal, moral, and ethical obligations to seek out exculpatory information, that I believe he purposefully ignored.
Detective Bloom and Eddie Meeks presented a convicted child rapist, Randy Waterson, as a witness against me. I believe they did so knowing Mr. Waterson was lying and perjuring himself. Randy Waterson was convicted of raping a 6-year-old girl eight times while holding her mother at gunpoint. While I was in jail and awaiting my bond hearing, Mr. Meeks would have you believe I confessed to Mr. Waterson. After reading a newspaper article in prison two weeks after the trial had started, Mr. Waterson concocted a story with several inconsistencies yet was allowed to take the stand and testify against me. I have always maintained my innocence, yet the State contends I would confess to a man sentenced to 146 years in prison for raping a child 8 times. At the end of the day, Mr. Waterson got what he wanted; a transfer to a safer facility. This was a desperate attempt to convict an innocent man, and quite frankly, unforgivable.
The District Attorney’s Office must provide any and all exculpatory evidence they obtain. This is the type of evidence that would have reaffirmed my innocence. Rather than provide much of this type of evidence to my attorney, they tried to hide it or destroy it. They even admitted to losing important evidence; evidence that would have been in my favor. Often investigators on this case would recreate their case notes, even after several years had passed. I believe there is evidence that will prove Captain Shaw, Sergeant Reynolds and Detective Bloom were out to get me. I believe evidence was purposely ignored and even destroyed in this case. I do not mean evidence favorable for the State but evidence that would have been in my favor. In my opinion, the evidence presented by the Gaston County Police Department and District Attorney’s Office was not even enough to establish probable cause. I simply do not understand why I was arrested. Sergeant Reynolds told outright lies to the Grand Jury to get an indictment and circumvent my right to a probable cause hearing. They have Sergeant Reynolds present to the Grand Jury, but not once did he show his face at my trial. Even more absurd.
I have heard the Gaston County’s District Attorney’s Office quoted as saying this case is closed. That is unacceptable. Lucy and my child deserve justice. This case should be turned over to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, since it’s an "interstate crime"; meaning two states. The minute I was cleared by a jury of my peers, they have to reopen the case. Detective Bloom admitted under oath that James Spelock Jr. was not ruled out as a suspect in this case. How they could try me when they had not ruled out all other suspects is unfathomable to me. Nonetheless, I believe there is ample evidence of Mr. Spelock’s guilt. I know beyond all doubt that James Spelock Jr. is responsible for Lucy’s death and the death of my unborn child.
Lucy and Mr. Spelock were engaged in a bitter custody dispute over Caison. Lucy had told me, and others, Mr. Spelock had threatened her numerous times. Lucy was going to expose Mr. Spelock’s alternative lifestyle in Court. There was a ton of evidence found indicating James Spelock ordered transsexual outfits and visited transsexual websites. His personal Sony Vaio notebook showed transsexual history all the way back to the beginning of 2006, long before he met Lucy Johnson. The evidence shows Mr. Spelock was unaccounted for at the time of the crime. There is witness testimony of Mr. Spelock’s strange behavior that early morning. James Spelock Jr. had the motive, intent, ability, and ill will necessary to commit these crimes. There is more evidence available against James Spelock Jr. than there ever has been against me, there was never one piece of evidence against me. There is enough evidence to get a Grand Jury indictment for First Degree Murder and Arson right now against James Spelock Jr.
I challenge Locke Bell to step up and do the right thing. I do a lot of work in Gaston County. Some of the finest people I’ve ever met work at the Freightliner Mount Holly Truck Plant and the Freightliner Gastonia Parts Plant. The people of Gaston County are honest, hard working, good people. Their tax dollars have been wasted. They did not need to be. I encourage Locke Bell to do the right thing. We all want justice for Lucy and our child; nobody more so than me. Until James Spelock Jr., is arrested, tried, convicted and put on Death Row in Raleigh justice in this case will never been done. I pray daily for justice to prevail. He has gotten away with murder for three years, just like he said he would."
Read more: http://www.gastongazette.com/articles/mead-59182-michael-public.html#ixzz1SMbQfIUi
Michael Mead's Statement with emphasis:
"I would like to personally thank the 15 jurors who rendered a just and fair verdict. Thank you for the time, dedication and hard work they put in for the past 7 weeks. The jury unanimously voted to acquit. I have never waivered in my claim that I was innocent and I have feel vindicated by verdict. The jury was comprised of a variety of people from the community. Many jurors were college educated and some have gone on to earn Masters Degrees and higher. Even the alternates would have voted not guilty and I think that speaks volumes. After the verdict was read, I was able to thank the members of the jury and I did, personally. Again I thank them all for giving an innocent man his life back.
In the first paragraph, we find the word "personally" repeated, indicating sensitivity. Both times the word is used in correlation to the jury. This indicates that in the subject's mind, he reached a personal connection with the jury, which likely indicated eye contact, facial expressions, body language, etc. The education level of the jurors is a sensitive issue to him and may be manipulative rather than simply saying "I didn't do it." If the subject is a sociopath, he would be impressed with his own lies to fool such educated people. Innocent or guilty, the education level is sensitive to him. This alerts us to be on guard for any narcissistic indicators.
Note that he claims to know what alternates would have voted. Was there a personal connection with them as well?
Note that he made a "claim" that he was innocent. We know that all people are innocent until proven guilty. For him, it was a "claim" which should be noted carefully. Note that he "feels" vindicated; not that he is vindicated.
Pronouns, especially possessive pronouns are vital, as is anything stated in the negative.
In Statement Analysis, we look for someone innocent to say "I didn't do it" in plain language, not that they are "innocent." OJ Simpson and Casey Anthony were judicially "innocent" but could not say "I didn't kill..."
I want to thank my lawyers Lisa Andrew Dubs and Jason White and my investigator, Captain Steve Ehlers, for believing in my case and me. Ms. Dubs did not have to take this case. I will never be able to thank them enough. There will never be enough adjectives to describe how I feel about them. They have my gratitude for life, because they have saved my life. I am truly speechless when I try and describe what they mean to me. In my opinion one of Lisa’s peers should nominate her for 2011 Lawyer of The Year. She would certainly have my vote. Without fearless attorneys the scales of justice would be on-sided. They are all three lifelong friends now, and I owe them my life and future forever. My parents also wanted to thank them all for their hard work, time, dedication, and devotion to this case for 19 months.
Note that the lawyers believed in his case and then himself. Note that he is "truly" speechless, yet has many words to offer. Note that his parents "wanted to thank" them, but he does not say that they did thank them. This is a subtle weakness.
Not a day passes that I don’t miss Lucy. Lucy represented one of the happiest times in my life. It was amazing to be with her. She loved life. She was a wonderful mother and I was always impressed with how she interacted with her children, Lauren and Caison. Lucy was outspoken and she loved to laugh. We both loved music and we rarely watched TV; however, we did enjoy reruns of "I Love Lucy". With all I have been through, I have never regretted the time I was lucky enough to share with Lucy. She will always be in my heart, until the day I die. I would endure all that I have been through again if I could hold her one last time. She was happy and content in our relationship. She had finally found someone who was stable, reliable, and dependable. She often compared me to her father in that way. I loved playing with Caison and Lauren. I think of them both often, and I miss them. I know Lucy is watching over them. She treated Christian, my son, as if he was her own, and he too loved her. My immediate family accepted Lucy, Caison and Lauren into our family with open arms. My family also mourns the loss of Lucy and the baby.
Note that anything presented in the negative is important; it is of special importance, that is, something we call "sensitive" to the subject. He reports "I don't miss Lucy" in the negative. Note the emphasis of the pronoun, "I" is repeated often here, as central.
Note that it would be interesting to learn more about how she compared him to her father. Her father is not named here, but introduced. It is likely an indication of strain in the family.
Note that only his "immediate" family "accepted" Lucy. This tells us that she was only "accepted" (strain) and that other family, not "immediate" did not accept her.
Michelle Dye, Lucy’s biological mother, was not a part of Lucy’s life while we were together. Lucy told me her mother hadn’t been in Lucy’s life since she was 15. Often, Lucy refused to speak about her mother and their troubled relationship. To this day I cannot understand why Michelle Dye has behaved in the way she has. She has done everything in her power to seek the spotlight and spread misinformation about the facts of this case. She has attacked me personally many times in the media and on the Internet. Even given the way she has acted, and her strained relationship with Lucy, she is still a grieving mother who has lost a daughter. I will pray that she is able to come to terms with her behavior and find some peace in her life.
Extra words are those in which a sentence works without. Extra words provide valuable insight. Note that Michelle Dye is introduced as Lucy's "biological" mother and that she was not part of Lucy's life "while we were together" indicating not only insult towards Michelle Dye, but that likely there was strain in the relationship of which the subject (Mead) may have been the cause.
Note that he reports in the negative what he "cannot understand" and that she spreads "misinformation" which is soft language; and not "lies" or "incorrect" information. In a murder trial, soft language should be noted always as minimization. After insulting her by reducing her to only "biological" mother, he acknowledges that she "still" is a grieving mother.
The Gaston County Police Department and District Attorney’s Office have ruined my life. They have done many things in this case that are unacceptable. Not only were they negligent in how they have handled this investigation; but, in my opinion, they have purposely ignored facts, manipulated the media, and mishandled evidence that would have exonerated me from the beginning. They spent their resources trying to make a case against me rather than trying to solve the murder of Lucy and my unborn child. This type of prosecutorial "tunnel vision" is outrageous. It is the third largest reason innocent people end up in prison according to the NC Innocence Project. It is only through having endured what I have that I fully understand how horrifying that fact is. You can’t imagine what it’s like to be crucified daily for someone else’s crimes, to face the possibility of being put to death. The stress and pressure was monumentality hard on me, my son Christian and my immediate family.
Note that activities in his prosecution are "unacceptable" but not wrong. Note that it is only "in my opinion" that they ignored, etc. Note that as he wrote of the "third largest reason innocent people end up in prison" he uses passive language and calls them "people" and "someone" but not "I", nor "me".
"you can't" is 2nd person, distancing language, and he does not say that he was crucified daily only that "you" can't imagine that. The language is distancing. He did not say he was "crucified daily" and we cannot say, therefore, that he was. This is an example of the internal stress of lying being avoided while still attempting to deceive.
At my bond hearing, Locke Bell made statements about facts and evidence I have never seen. He indicated the State had evidence that was never produced. I believe he misled the Court and Grand Jury. William Stetzer told outright lies at my bond hearing in an attempt to keep me falsely incarcerated. I am surprised Mr. Bell did not appear once at the trial. After all of his statements about me, in Court and out, I find it odd he did not prosecute me. I do not believe he felt strongly about my guilt, despite his public statements to the contrary. I believe he knew they had arrested the wrong man and did not want to be associated with this trial. Mr. Bell has legal, moral, and ethical obligations to seek out exculpatory information, that I believe he purposefully ignored.
This is an embedded confession. See analysis in this blog by searching on pronouns. Pronouns show ownership and are instinctive. Here, the subject takes ownership of guilt in the murder of Lucy Johnson.
Detective Bloom and Eddie Meeks presented a convicted child rapist, Randy Waterson, as a witness against me. I believe they did so knowing Mr. Waterson was lying and perjuring himself. Randy Waterson was convicted of raping a 6-year-old girl eight times while holding her mother at gunpoint. While I was in jail and awaiting my bond hearing, Mr. Meeks would have you believe I confessed to Mr. Waterson. After reading a newspaper article in prison two weeks after the trial had started, Mr. Waterson concocted a story with several inconsistencies yet was allowed to take the stand and testify against me. I have always maintained my innocence, yet the State contends I would confess to a man sentenced to 146 years in prison for raping a child 8 times. At the end of the day, Mr. Waterson got what he wanted; a transfer to a safer facility. This was a desperate attempt to convict an innocent man, and quite frankly, unforgivable.
Deception indicated. Note that he embeds "I confessed" but note also that he has the need to denigrate the man he spoke to. The need to insult the witness is sensitive rather than say "I did not confess to..." or "I did not speak to..."
Note within the deception is the softer language of "inconsistencies" which actually gives credibility to the man he confessed to. Note how much detail is dedicated to the witness' crimes.
Note the consistency of distancing language: this was used to attempt to convict "an innocent man", and not "me." This is the avoidance of internal stress of lying by using passive or distancing language.
The District Attorney’s Office must provide any and all exculpatory evidence they obtain. This is the type of evidence that would have reaffirmed my innocence. Rather than provide much of this type of evidence to my attorney, they tried to hide it or destroy it. They even admitted to losing important evidence; evidence that would have been in my favor. Often investigators on this case would recreate their case notes, even after several years had passed. I believe there is evidence that will prove Captain Shaw, Sergeant Reynolds and Detective Bloom were out to get me. I believe evidence was purposely ignored and even destroyed in this case. I do not mean evidence favorable for the State but evidence that would have been in my favor. In my opinion, the evidence presented by the Gaston County Police Department and District Attorney’s Office was not even enough to establish probable cause. I simply do not understand why I was arrested. Sergeant Reynolds told outright lies to the Grand Jury to get an indictment and circumvent my right to a probable cause hearing. They have Sergeant Reynolds present to the Grand Jury, but not once did he show his face at my trial. Even more absurd.
Note that he can own "innocence" because of the jury verdict. Note the early lessons in Statement Analysis that show claims of "innocence" are not to be substituted with "I didn't do it" in various forms. The names of investigators is likely an indication that he not only knows he cannot be tried again, but that he plans to make money off of this murder. Truly innocent people (not just judicially innocent) speak little of evidence because of the strength of an innocent conscience.
I have heard the Gaston County’s District Attorney’s Office quoted as saying this case is closed. That is unacceptable. Lucy and my child deserve justice. This case should be turned over to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, since it’s an "interstate crime"; meaning two states. The minute I was cleared by a jury of my peers, they have to reopen the case. Detective Bloom admitted under oath that James Spelock Jr. was not ruled out as a suspect in this case. How they could try me when they had not ruled out all other suspects is unfathomable to me. Nonetheless, I believe there is ample evidence of Mr. Spelock’s guilt. I know beyond all doubt that James Spelock Jr. is responsible for Lucy’s death and the death of my unborn child.
The jury did not find that he didn't do it, but only "cleared" him.
Note that another man is accused by Mead of killing his girlfriend and unborn child, yet uses the polite "Mr. Spelock" We should, therefore, expect to see him reported as "Mr. Spelock" or the shortened "Spelock". Any change should be noted as sensitive.
Lucy and Mr. Spelock were engaged in a bitter custody dispute over Caison. Lucy had told me, and others, Mr. Spelock had threatened her numerous times. Lucy was going to expose Mr. Spelock’s alternative lifestyle in Court. There was a ton of evidence found indicating James Spelock ordered transsexual outfits and visited transsexual websites. His personal Sony Vaio notebook showed transsexual history all the way back to the beginning of 2006, long before he met Lucy Johnson. The evidence shows Mr. Spelock was unaccounted for at the time of the crime. There is witness testimony of Mr. Spelock’s strange behavior that early morning. James Spelock Jr. had the motive, intent, ability, and ill will necessary to commit these crimes. There is more evidence available against James Spelock Jr. than there ever has been against me, there was never one piece of evidence against me. There is enough evidence to get a Grand Jury indictment for First Degree Murder and Arson right now against James Spelock Jr.
This is an acknowledgement that there was evidence against the subject. This is not something we would expect to see from someone who didn't do it. He then repeats "evidence" with the denial, showing the increase of sensitivity. Before this denial, he says there was "more", which is a word used to compare. The denial is an indicator of deception, as the sensitivity itself is explained by the subject. Repetition shows sensitivity, and here the sensitivity is: a. acknowledgement of evidence. b. contradiction statement
This is an acknowledgement that there was evidence against the subject. This is not something we would expect to see from someone who didn't do it. He then repeats "evidence" with the denial, showing the increase of sensitivity. Before this denial, he says there was "more", which is a word used to compare. The denial is an indicator of deception, as the sensitivity itself is explained by the subject. Repetition shows sensitivity, and here the sensitivity is: a. acknowledgement of evidence. b. contradiction statement
I challenge Locke Bell to step up and do the right thing. I do a lot of work in Gaston County. Some of the finest people I’ve ever met work at the Freightliner Mount Holly Truck Plant and the Freightliner Gastonia Parts Plant. The people of Gaston County are honest, hard working, good people. Their tax dollars have been wasted. They did not need to be. I encourage Locke Bell to do the right thing. We all want justice for Lucy and our child; nobody more so than me. Until James Spelock Jr., is arrested, tried, convicted and put on Death Row in Raleigh justice in this case will never been done. I pray daily for justice to prevail. He has gotten away with murder for three years, just like he said he would."
Note that there are many indications of deception within his statement as well as the embedded confession of guilt and having confessed to an inmate.
please note:
Michael Mead did not say "I didn't do it" in any form.
Michael Mead used the possessive pronoun to take ownership of guilt.
Michael Mead appears to have embedded that he confessed his crime to an inmate, of whom he spends an inordinate amount of time attempting to discredit the witness.
The change of language especially towards another male, appears to indicate deception on his part.
In his statement, Michael Mead indicates guilt of the murder of Lucy Johnson. It would be interesting to learn if he is a narcissistic sociopath, who believed he was able to manipulate the jurors, as many liars believe themselves capable of accomplishing.
Michael Mead did not say "I didn't do it" in any form.
Michael Mead used the possessive pronoun to take ownership of guilt.
Michael Mead appears to have embedded that he confessed his crime to an inmate, of whom he spends an inordinate amount of time attempting to discredit the witness.
The change of language especially towards another male, appears to indicate deception on his part.
In his statement, Michael Mead indicates guilt of the murder of Lucy Johnson. It would be interesting to learn if he is a narcissistic sociopath, who believed he was able to manipulate the jurors, as many liars believe themselves capable of accomplishing.
Source URL: https://wallpaper-com.blogspot.com/2011/07/lucy-johnson-murder-michael-mead.html
Visit wallpaper-com for Daily Updated Hairstyles Collection
No comments:
Post a Comment