Could you further elaborate on the significance of the Mockingbird post by FG? I may be slow on the uptake here!
Oops. I just saw this. I see that you Googled it and have seen the movie. If you're into crime stuff, you really should read the book when you get a chance. It's a classic.
For those who haven't Googled, I can give a quick synopsis. It's basically about a white lawyer named Atticus Finch who is raising two kids on his own in the south during the Jim Crow era. A white woman accuses a black man of raping her and Atticus is appointed by the judge to be his defense counsel since he can't afford to hire a lawyer. The woman and one other sketchy local guy testify and Atticus rips both of their testimonies to shreds and proves without a doubt that they are both lying. The black man is convicted anyway and eventually gets killed in prison.
While all this is going on, Atticus's two kids face ridicule at school from bullies who are mad that a white lawyer is willing to represent a black man who allegedly taped a white lady. It's got a lot of racial undertones.
Without a doubt, FG's reference had to be in relation to him not talking to the police. In Mockingbird, the black guy gets convicted even though he's innocent because the jury is white, the court is packed with white folks, and the supposed rape involves a white woman. I'd assume he'd also liken the ridicule his wife and Williams are getting to that of Atticus's kids, who stood behind their dad while he was defending the guy everyone was automatically assuming was guilty... even though he wasn't and was railroaded by the justice system because he was a black man and the victim was a white woman and well... race does factor into jury decisions... even still today. Sad but true reality.
That's not to say FG isn't guilty. He's using a literary classic that most everyone is familiar with to justify his lack of cooperation in the case. Thing is, Harper Lee wrote "To Kill A Mockingbird" to reflect events she witnessed in her life as a kid in the 1930-40s. It wasn't published until the 1960s, but that's still over 25 years before the first time DNA evidence was used to successfully convict a rapist. Someone needs to tell Floyd that this is 2017, not 1936. Race still matters but if they've got his DNA, he's going to have a few decades worth of free time to expand the list of books he's read for his Facebook profile. It was literally the only book he had listed on his profile and he specifically mentioned it in a status or photo caption, I don't remember which. It was very weird to see. I wish I would've gotten a screen shot!