:I am a first time CAT:RFU respondent so pardon any minor policy violations.  However, as a newbie, I have an unbiased perspective of this whole process, so you may get a more equitable review than an admin who has "heard it all before."

 I have valid contributions - A quick review at  shows this is not the case.  In your month you have no notable contributions so your plea for the benefit of the doubt based on other contributions will fall on deaf ears.
 I have been here for a month - Irrelevant.  Especially given lack of productivity.
 I swear I don't know anything about this "Systemex" thing. - True or not your own lack of respect for WP evidenced by your curious responses is probably enough to generate support for a block.  I.E., even if you are a totally new user, you have not set about improving the encyclopedia, which is the expectation.
 I am innocent - you have made more nonconstructive statements in your brief month as Bookish than is warranted.  Further, you seem to be trolling.
 I am only being targetted since I commented on that deletion article - The block reasons seem to be a.)suspected sockpuppet, b.)non-constructive edits.  Ask yourself, do you think constructive wikipedians want others around who seek attention by writing in such an unprofessional manner.  I actually gave thought to jesting in my response on the very AfD you were reprimanded for.  I don't like being involved in a debate with a person who doesn't help others to understand his position.  Your response could have been acceptable if you had said the version of the page that you voted on is crap because the x y and z claims are so baseless that they must be a joke.  The woman has a www.imdb.com page that is referenced on the page.  It is conceivable that because of its brevity you might have been confused about its veracity and validity.  However, she is noted in the msnbc.com page that you should have seen as referenced.  There is little reason to question whether a Veronica Finn exists meeting the description on the page version you saw.  The only way to improve the encyclopedia on contestable issues is if everyone attempts to enlighten others on why changes should be made.  Saying this page is crap does not help. 

 I apologize if the wrong conclusion has been reached regarding your editorship.  However, I believe it was correct and it is certainly supportable.  I support the original unblock denial.