On today’s MKD, we kick off the week discussing famous conjoined twins spotted with a newborn, a lawsuit over the release of the Idaho crime scene photos, a man rescued from a slide, an unusual parking lot kidnapping, a rare breast condition, allergies in the Amish community, and a woman's unique way to honor her dead husband.
🎟️ CrimeCon! - Click here
Want to submit your shocking story? Email stories@motherknowsdeath.com
Support The Show:
🖤 Sponsors
🔬 Buy Nicole's Book
🥼 Merch
Follow:
🔪 Nicole
🪩 Maria
📱 TikTok
More Info:
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:08):
Mother Knows Dad starring Nicole and Jemmy and Maria qk Hi.
Speaker 2 (00:21):
Everyone, welcome The Mother Knows Death. We have so many
stories to cover for you guys this week. On today's episode,
we're going to start off with the viral photos that
have been circulating on social media showing can join twins
Abby and Brittany that were seen with a newborn baby
last week. Authlready started releasing crime scene photos from the
Idaho College students' murders, and we're going to get into
(00:43):
these photos themselves, but we're also going to talk about
their family's reaction to it, a freak accident that involved
an unusual rescue on the playground, and the latest up
to date information that has been all over the news
this week about a baby who is allegedly kidnapped from
a parking lot. And then we'll get into some medical stories,
talking about one woman's rare condition that caused her breast
(01:04):
to grow enormous within a short period of time, and
we'll talk about why Amish people have significantly less allergies
than the rest of the population. We'll finish up with
a really cool story about a woman who kept a
very unusual keepsake after her husband's death. All that and
more on today's episode, Let's get started with Abby and Britney.
(01:25):
So last March we had talked about how Abby and
Britzy Hansel, who are probably the most famous example of
modern can join twins. It came out that Abby married
her longtime boyfriend in twenty twenty one, and now Abby
and Brittany have been seen carrying a newborn while out
running errand So I think the biggest question everybody has
is how did this happen? Did they have these babies naturally?
(01:47):
Was it via IVF? Did they have Asaragi? Is the
baby adopted? Or are they just simply babysitting another child?
Speaker 1 (01:53):
What's going on here?
Speaker 2 (01:55):
I don't know, but God, everybody is so curious. Obviously.
I know that from the beginning, We've talked about this
before on this show too, that Abby and Brittany have
been followed a majority of their life on TV on
their lives on TV right, So we know, just based
on what their mother has said from the time that
they were children, that they were capable of having a child.
(02:18):
They had one single reproductive system, but it appeared to
be working at the time, and both of them have
stayed in multiple times that they wanted to be mothers,
So in my opinion, I think that they probably got
a surrogate only because they She put out some kind
of a video recently within the past year, kind of
(02:41):
putting out a teaser that said just married and a
baby on the way or something like that. It was
a link to a news article, and that has had
the public heightened that she might be pregnant. And based
upon how I feel like the paparazzi kind of follow them,
I think unless they just have been in their house
(03:01):
for the past couple of months and just really were
able to hide it. But they are fifth grade teachers
that go to school, and I just have a hard
time believing that if they were pregnant and visibly showing
that the story wouldn't have gotten out sooner.
Speaker 1 (03:17):
I yeah, I understand what you're saying. But also they
did keep it a secret for a couple of years
that they had been married, so like I get.
Speaker 2 (03:24):
But I guess that's not something on your stomach unless
lies like in front of everyone to look at.
Speaker 1 (03:31):
Unless the people in their lives really respect their privacy,
I mean, they should be left alone. This picture was
like somebody in a parking lot that snapped the picture
of them loading a baby in the car. So they
haven't as of when we're recording this, they haven't said
anything about it, And I mean, I guess it's truly
nobody's business, but I'm fascinated to know, because would this
be the first example of conjoined twins that carried a
(03:54):
baby naturally if that was the case.
Speaker 2 (03:57):
No, it's actually happened before, like back in the day,
in the early nineteen hundreds, conjoined twins had a baby,
and it was a really interesting thing because these women.
There's not a lot of documentation on it, obviously because
it's so old, but apparently these women had two vaginas,
but they seem to have had also two separate reproductive organs.
(04:22):
So when the one twin got pregnant on the one
side of the vagina, the other one was still experiencing
menstruation every month, and the one twin that was pregnant
got had what was called hyper emesis gravitorum, which is
when you basically throw up a lot during pregnancy, but
(04:43):
it's more than the normal nausea. It's just it's repeated.
And I think Princess Kate had that right, So one
of the twins had that on one side of the
body and the other one didn't experience any of it,
which is just so oh cool, Like really, if you
think about it.
Speaker 1 (05:02):
It is cool. Like is their condition considered a genetic
thing or it just happens randomly? So I guess what
I'm asking is if they had a baby with a child.
Speaker 2 (05:13):
Now it's it's the same as twins. It's just the
egg doesn't split all the way. Okay, it's the same
exact thing. So I mean I have more questions because
that particular case is really interesting because then if you
want to find the ideology for why that condition occurs
in pregnancy, and you say, okay, you have these these
women that are conjoined, but they have different organs, but
(05:37):
they're still can joined. They have some similar sharing organs
and others not why did one get the nausea and
one didn't, which would indicate to me that it's not
it's not systemic. It might be more confined to the
uterus or something, you know what I mean, like because otherwise,
if they're sharing the same circulatory system and immune system
and everything like that, why did one get the symptoms?
(05:58):
And the other didn't. It's it's just kind of interesting.
But from from Abby and Britney's perspective, I'm just I'm
interested in God so much because think about it, like
we know for now, just because of the marriage certificate,
that only Abby got married, right, So Brittany is not
(06:20):
considered to be part of that couple. If they had
a baby, what you're not You can't put two mothers
on the birth certificate, right, even though she's technically legally
the mother. It's just like all really interesting things because
of how they've been separated their whole life. Like they
(06:40):
both individually have driver's licenses even though technically it's only
one body that drives, right. They both have two brains,
so they're two separate people that share a part of
a spinal cord and some organs. It's just all really interesting.
So they're considered to be separate a lot of different entities.
(07:01):
But they're a teacher and they only get one salary.
Speaker 1 (07:05):
But I believe when they went to college they had
two separate They had two separate they had two separate
tuitions and two separate degrees.
Speaker 2 (07:12):
But then as a which I think that this is
kind of messed up that they only get one salary,
because obviously, from a school's perspective, they're just like, we
have X amount of classrooms and we need X amount
of teachers to fill these classrooms. So it's one body
in the classroom. So you're not going to give one
fifth grade teacher two salaries otherwise, you know, So they
(07:35):
they I guess they accept that, like, hey, the only
way that we're going to get a job is if
we get paid as one person.
Speaker 1 (07:42):
But I just feel like it's a special circumstance, and like, really,
if you want to be fair, they should get two
full time salaries, right.
Speaker 2 (07:50):
Yeah, but but maybe it gives a shit they should
just hire one person. And like, I understand it's a
special circumstance, but like, guess what, I own a business, right, Like,
I'm not paying a double salary if I only need one.
Speaker 1 (08:02):
I'm saying, if you want to think of it as
being fair, you would give them a double salary. But
if you want to try to meet them in the middle,
considering they have a special circumstance, you could maybe give
them a higher salary than the normal teacher. Considering there
are two brains contributing to.
Speaker 2 (08:17):
Teaching, yeah, I'm sure they do, because think about that,
like having to one of they obviously they have two
different personalities, and having like two adults in the room
instead of one is giving more attention to kids. One
might be more disciplinarian than the other. Like, there's definitely
benefits to it. And I'm sure they work something out.
(08:38):
And I'm also sure that they get some kind of
disability perhaps or something like that, just because of the
challenges that I mean, it doesn't really seem like they
have too many challenges, but it's possible that they get
some kind of assistance. Perhaps maybe not, I guess if
they work, but I don't know. It's just it's just
a really it's just a really, like you said, unique circumstance.
(09:03):
But that's why so many people are so interested in it.
Speaker 1 (09:06):
Yeah, definitely all right. So Brian eatn A News Nation
posted on YouTube pretty late last night that the families
of the Idaho murder victims are planning to sue over
the release of any additional crime scene photos after they
released some of them last week. I mean, we're looking
at them. How do you feel about this? I don't
think the photos showed that were released showed anything really shocking.
(09:29):
It just showed the state of the house. There was
this pretty ominous photo of hand prints on one of
the windows. I highly doubt those were Brian Coburgers. And
there was some photos with blood but it didn't show
any of the victims. But I guess they were really
shocked when these photos got released, and they want to
make sure no pictures of their kids get out there.
And I guess I didn't even think about this too,
(09:50):
the bodycam footage from the police that responded to the scene,
because that's going to show the kids exactly how they
were found. Yeah.
Speaker 2 (09:57):
I mean, I like that the police apartments involved, both
in Pullman, Washington and Moscow, Idaho, are being transparent with
the whole case and releasing documents because there is a
lot of public interest in the case. But honestly, especially
as a person that has been covering true crime cases
(10:18):
and writing about it for the past fifteen plus years
of my life, I'm really and just have trained in
forensic the textbooks, everything, Like, I'm really surprised that these
photos were released like this. I just really am. And
you're saying that you don't see anything, I personally see
a lot when I look at them. They upset me
(10:40):
and I am not even related to these people. Because
you're essentially blurring out dead bodies that of how they
were found. The family shouldn't never have to see those.
They could be absolutely triggering to people. Of course, like
everybody just has more big curiosity and wants to see them,
But like I don't like that shouldn't supersede how the
(11:04):
family feels about that.
Speaker 1 (11:06):
I don't think those were the bodies in the photo.
Speaker 2 (11:09):
They are, it's the rooms where they were found. I
know that.
Speaker 1 (11:12):
But if you look at all of the photos collectively,
there are things on the wall blurred out just as
much you really can't see. I really think it was
a personal item.
Speaker 2 (11:21):
Because like there's some blood stain on the floor after
their bodies were removed.
Speaker 1 (11:25):
Like I'm saying, that's what I think is mostly blurred
out is stuff like that in personal articles, not their
bodies themselves. Because this lawyer that was interviewed in this
YouTube video is saying there are much more graphic photos
that have not been released in the pressure.
Speaker 2 (11:39):
Well, but I'm just saying, when you look at that,
think about being a mother and that being your child,
Like do you why does the photo of their last scene,
like something simple like where they put a cup on
the nightstand that was the last time they took a drink,
and where their body was dead, and it's blurring out
where their body was found and their clothes on the
(12:01):
floor and their shoes, like it's it's just it's just
not necessary for the public to see it. I just
don't I don't think it's necessary.
Speaker 1 (12:10):
I understand that, and I'm not saying I disagree with you,
But at that same point, can you argue that about
releasing the details of the state of the house is
found it's just as haunting as it's.
Speaker 2 (12:21):
Definitely not just as haunting. Think about this, like, they've
been through so much. We've been talking about this for years,
about what the family's been through. They shouldn't have to,
Like the only way that they could avoid this is
to never go on social media again, nobody that's related
to any of those people or whatever. Every single time
you go in X, every time you go on Instagram,
(12:41):
they pop up like do you want to see that?
Speaker 1 (12:44):
No?
Speaker 2 (12:45):
I mean you would have to physically find the document
and read it in order to get upset. And trust me,
there's so many accounts and it's it'll it'll die down
in a couple of years and it won't be in
their face as much. But like it's just a lot
different than seeing the picture. And those family members might
not have ever seen the pictures because they don't want to.
(13:05):
Like I personally wouldn't really want to see a picture
of my kid killed in that way. Ever. Yeah, I
don't know.
Speaker 1 (13:13):
Like I'm not saying it's not anybody's business. Like I'm
not saying I disagree with you. I'm just saying, like
you could really analyze every single crime scene and argue
the same thing, why did why does this crime scene?
They they're that they're not able to release the photos.
It should be all or none, No, Like what makes
this one in particular?
Speaker 2 (13:34):
At this one, nobody I know that on the planet
is talking about this one.
Speaker 1 (13:39):
Yeah, but there's other cases too, Like they need to
decide if if crime scene photos are going to be
public record or not. I think it's a good conversation
to have as a whole, if any should be or
none of them should be.
Speaker 2 (13:51):
I have, Like I mean, obviously, like my whole entire
career has been built, my post career after working full
time as a pathologist assistant has been on using photos
to for educational purposes, right for this particular thing, like
if they were using these photos like for in a
forensic book to talk about or even if even if
(14:14):
podcasters or whatever we're using it to talk about different
blood spatter patterns on the wall and like learning things
to teach people about. I feel like that in general
is okay. We're going to talk about that a little
bit later too with the next case too, Like I
really want to talk about the picture situation. I just
I don't think that it needed to be on this
(14:38):
on a file like that. Like normally, if you want
to get autopsy and crime scene photos or things like that,
you would have to be part of the press and
ask for the information and request it and get the
records and all that stuff. It's just like a little
too easy and out there for everyone and just and
of course when it's like that, then every single influencer
(14:59):
could just easy get the picture and post it and
then it's their viral all over the place. And I
don't I personally just don't see why that's necessary besides
pure your morbid curiosity.
Speaker 1 (15:14):
Yeah, but morbid curiosity, Yeah, I understand what you're saying
about educational purposes, But then you're gonna have people that
access it like us for educational purposes, and then somebody
in the news or a podcaster or an influencer or
whoever taking those photos that were intended for educational use
and flipping them to sensationalize them.
Speaker 2 (15:34):
I mean, you just you just have to think about it,
like what, Like I saw the pictures, right, and I
look at it and it gives me. It gives me
a visual of what the house actually looked like and
what the rooms actually looked like. But like, why, why
the why do I have to know that? Like it's
(15:55):
like it didn't change anything in anybody else's mind, And
I look at it like if those family members are
that upset and triggered by it, then like do why
do my feelings of wanting to see it are more
important than their feeling?
Speaker 1 (16:13):
You know what I'm saying, Well, I think this is
the grander problem with this specific case, because they were
shocked when the photos came out. They weren't given any
heads up, and it seems like it was kind of
that way with the Plea deal too. I don't know
who's behind making these decisions personally, I feel like they
should be like, we're gonna release the records and you
should be prepared that this is part of them, or
(16:34):
they should be like, this is what we have to
release legally because it's public information. We can hold these
things back. What do you guys want us to do? Instead,
they open Instagram or the news and whatever, and then
they see these photos like everybody else did last It's
just it's just like I honestly like when they came out,
I was shocked. I feel like it's very atypical. If
(16:55):
you think about a lot of the different crime cases
that we cover. In the grosser room, we have over
like let's say one hundred, over one hundred of these
high profile deaths and stuff like we never saw pictures
of Lacy Peterson, We never even got Lacy Peterson and
Connor's autopsy reports. Do you understand, like it's just weird
(17:15):
that that all of this stuff, Think about the high
profile cases like OJ there were photos of Nicole on
the ground, which I thought was crazy, but they could
have been possibly leaked, like I don't know how they
originally got out there, but just in general, like think
about all of the high profile cases it's just not
(17:37):
typical to release all of the photos that from the
police file in this manner.
Speaker 2 (17:42):
I just thought it was kind of weird.
Speaker 1 (17:44):
Do you think it was an oversight, like somebody did
it by accident when they were grouping the rest of
the documents together that they weren't supposed to be in there.
Speaker 2 (17:52):
No, I don't think so. I just I don't know
like and and all of the rules so they itch.
It varies from state to state. So if you recall
when Bob Saggat died, I guess Florida was a state
that you were able to get the pictures and like
if the press requested the pictures, they could get them.
And remember his wife had to jump in real quick
(18:14):
and be like, I don't want these released. It was
like a specific thing she had to do right after
he died. And I think that all of these rules
were written that these cases are public record before social
media and now that I mean, like, look at it,
like you and I didn't request crime scene photos but
were able to easily pull them up in two seconds
(18:36):
from someone else's account that posted them on X. It's
that easy. It's just kind of maybe it can still
be public record, just not as easily accessible like that
because of social media.
Speaker 1 (18:49):
It just like things need to be reevaluated. But well,
I don't know if a regular person can request those documents.
I think you either have to be categorized as press
or some like an official of sense exactly.
Speaker 2 (19:03):
That's why when they hand it to everyone on a platter,
it's it's kind of dumb.
Speaker 1 (19:07):
Yeah, they just put.
Speaker 2 (19:09):
The link and we're like, hey, anybody want these, here
you go.
Speaker 1 (19:12):
I don't know they're so basically they're expected to go
to court later this week to talk about it more,
and I guess if they lose or the hearing doesn't
go as planned, they could file an appeal to try
to get the photo shut down. And I think ultimately
at this point they know the photos that were released
are forever going to be out there, but they're trying
to prevent the rest of them from coming out because
(19:34):
they're more graphic in nature.
Speaker 2 (19:35):
This case is so weird.
Speaker 1 (19:38):
Yeah, it's just very.
Speaker 2 (19:39):
Weird, Like you know how at first it was just like, oh,
Brian Cooberger is going to be in jail for the
rest of his life, and but then you hear all
these other legal experts saying that's not one hundred percent true.
He could appeal this that there's like a lot of
loopholes that he could potentially get around. And I guess
(20:01):
the more information they put out could could possibly affect
those cases if they come back up right.
Speaker 1 (20:08):
Well really quick. This is another point I wanted to
make about the Karen Reid case for example, Like we
have that one autopsy photo of John O'Keeffe, right, the
scratches on his arm. Yeah, And I don't think that
came out until the trial was televised and somebody simply
screen grabbed the court TV recording.
Speaker 2 (20:29):
It got exactly and they and they said that they
shouldn't have shown that. Like listen, I went to court
a couple of times with the medical examiner, and they
have all the autopsy photos that they put on a
giant screen to show the drawers, right, that this was
what was done, what the medical examiner's describing. There's photos
taken of every single autopsy for this very reason. It's
(20:51):
just it's just very unusual to see something like this,
especially in such a high profile case. It's just I
just think it's very like I think Lacy Peterson's like
a good example of how people were absolutely obsessed with
that case to this day. Okay, let's do another one.
(21:13):
How about the Watts family. We heard the horrible way
that these children were found in these oil containers and stuff.
They never showed us the bodies of the kids. Well,
I think it's just weird.
Speaker 1 (21:24):
I think they should take this as an example to
try to make it not so much. I guess an
ethical gray area where you're releasing them or you're not,
because it has to be one way or the other,
because if you're going to keep releasing them, it doesn't
matter if they're continued to be used for educational use,
because a regular person's always going to get their hands
(21:44):
on them and share them for sensationalized purposes.
Speaker 2 (21:48):
All right, let's talk about the next case, because I
want to talk about pictures with that case as well.
Speaker 1 (21:53):
So over the weekend, a forty year old man went
down the slide in an elementary school playground. He got
stuck and then had to be rescued from the fire department.
Speaker 2 (22:01):
So I saw this article and I thought it was
like My first thought is like, Okay, Gabe has brought
the girls to playground several times and goes on the
slide and stuff with them like this could happen to
any dad, right, Yeah, But so I sent him this
article and we were just kind of laughing about it,
and then it popped up on my Facebook yesterday that
(22:23):
it was a post from the actual fire department, and
I looked at the photos and I really couldnt believe
that these photos were posted on a Facebook page for
a public Facebook page for a fire department. There's I
think nineteen photos of them wanting to show how they
rescued this guy out of it was like the one
(22:45):
that you would see at a playground er McDonald's. That's
a plastic tube that kind of turns like a spiral
sliding board, and the guy was going down it and
must have gotten lodged in it with his body kind
of bent in half. And yes, it was a very
scary rescue because it was hot outside and he's inside
(23:06):
plastic that's cooking and in a confined space, bent and
at risk for position will asphixia at that point. So
I could see why the fire department would want to
show that, because when you approach the scene and the
person stuck, you have to break the slide apart in
order to have access to the person, but also you
know he was having difficulty breathing, and how to get
(23:28):
air to him while they were rescuing because it took
a half hour. That's great, what the and even pictures
from them from the outside of the slide approaching how
to remove this patient or victim, whatever you want to
call him, is fine. My problem is they show pictures
of the slide open with the guy with visible tattoos.
(23:51):
In a very small town, everybody knows who this guy is.
That it could be embarrassing, right It like for a
person to for a like a guy might laugh about it,
but at the same time, like it's kind of embarrassing.
And then so I was talking to Gabe about it
this morning because I'm like, I understand. Let's say, for example,
(24:11):
in the hospital, if a person shows up and has
like a dildo stuck in their butt and a nurse
from across the room took a picture of it and
the guy had a tattoo and you were easily able
to tell who it was, that nurse would be fired
in two seconds for a hip of violation, right, because
it's an identifying factor. It's like posting someone's face or
(24:32):
a body part that you could tell it's them, which
almost getting back to the Idaho thing, that their bedroom,
in my opinion, is an identifying factor in a sense,
you know what I mean. But regardless, so you see
this picture of this guy in this small town on
this Facebook page with his visible tattoo that identifies him.
(24:52):
What are the rules as far as firefighters go of
hippo violations because it's not considered under that same umbrella.
And Gabe actually said to me, he's like, you know what,
I had the same as act feeling. I don't think
they needed to post anywhere near nineteen pictures for that extrication,
and they could have just put one or two of
the outside of the slide if they wanted to show
(25:13):
people how they approached it. And he also thought there
was absolutely no reason there was pictures of the actual
guy being shown. It just was like, it's not necessary
if you're trying to teach firefighters how to do something.
Speaker 1 (25:26):
Basically no, because like you said, it could have been
summed up in one to two photos of them showing
how to dismantle the slide if they wanted to do
it for educational purposes, right, But you didn't need to
have a whole nineteen photo slideshow. That's just completely unnecessary.
And yeah, if they're if they feel they need to
post the person in the photo to accurately represent what
(25:50):
they were doing, they should at least blur out any
identifiable traits like that.
Speaker 2 (25:55):
It's just like I keep thinking about that, Like my
neighborhood itself, my town is pretty small, So if that
happened at our school, and like, let's say the same
exact situation happened, everybody on the Facebook page for my
town would be like, oh my god, who do you
think it was?
Speaker 1 (26:11):
Who do you think it was?
Speaker 2 (26:13):
And and like, dog, you could easily tell who it
is because everybody knows everyone in this town. Somebody knows somebody, right,
It's just like, I don't know it's and it it
to me. It's like, I'm sure this dad's kind of
embarrassed if you have to call the fire department because
you got stuck even having fun with your kids, it's embarrassing. Well,
of course it's embarrassing me, Like, I don't know, I
just it just reminded me of the I mean, it
(26:36):
just it was a good time to talk about the
photo situation. All right, let's move on to this next story,
which is really taking the Internet by storm because honestly,
it's just kind of really weird. This woman, Rebecca Harrow,
said she was at a local store to buy a
mouthguard for her stepson, and before going to the store,
she realized she needed to change her seven month old baby,
(26:56):
Emmanuel's diaper. So, according to the mother, he's changing the
diaper in the parking lot when suddenly she was attacked,
went unconscious and claims when she woke up, the boy
had been taken. So now police are saying her story
is inconsistent and her and her I don't know if
it's her husband, but her and the baby's father are
no longer cooperating with police.
Speaker 1 (27:16):
Duh like it?
Speaker 2 (27:18):
This is how many stories do we have like this?
It really is unfortunate, But the plot has thickened over
the past couple of days, so not cooperating with police.
So apparently this one of the women or one of
the employees that works at this store said that this
mother came in a couple days prior and asked if
(27:41):
there were cameras in the parking lot because she said
that her car had been robbed or something and she
wanted to know if there were cameras unbelievable. Wait, it
gets better. So this person that was working at the
store said that she had a bruise on her eye.
This was a couple days before she said someone punched
(28:03):
her in the face and stole her son. Now this
hasn't been reported on the news. This is just like
hearsay that I've been seeing on a couple of social
media reports. So it might not be one hundred percent accurate.
But as as a pa as somebody that knows bruises,
I could tell you as soon as I saw the bruise,
I was like, that bruise is a couple days old.
(28:24):
It is not. She did not just get this a
couple hours prior to having this press conference.
Speaker 1 (28:31):
Well, you had also sent me something which is also
should be considered hearsay that a TikToker received a message
saying that a person had seen the mother and her
other child, a two year old, at the park the
night before this alleged kidnapping, and she also allegedly had
the black eye at the park as well. But again
this is internet claim, so we don't know if this is.
Speaker 2 (28:52):
Yeah, yeah, I mean, I listen, any person that's ever
had a black eye for any reason. This is like
you don't even know. Have to be a medical person
you know what that looks like. Or you've had a
child that's had an accidental injury when the blood and
the bruise is usually right around where the ocular muscles are,
(29:13):
because that's where the vascular chure would rupture if someone
got punched in the eye, and it would look to
be like on your lower eyelid. Right as the days
go by and gravity takes over and the blood starts
clearing out of your system, it travels down your face,
and her blood is very low underneath of like the
(29:34):
hollows of her eyes, which would indicate to me that
that's not brand new. Do you see what I'm saying
when you look at it like so for me, I'm
just kind of like, yeah, there's more to the story.
You mentioned that you noticed that she had no tears
while she was crying.
Speaker 1 (29:51):
Yeah, when you watch the press conference when she's crying,
she has no tears, which is often pointed out in
high profile cases when people are crying. I just I
don't understand how you could act so hysterical and have
no tears. Sometimes I'll just be talking about a movie
I watched, and I start tearing up, like and I'm
not even upset about anything, it's just like having any
(30:11):
mild emotion. So I absolutely do not understand how she
doesn't have tears. I did not notice the baby's father
had tears when he was pleading for help as well.
That's very unusual to me.
Speaker 2 (30:23):
Well, okay, so let's let's talk about two different things
with the baby's father. Number one. Another thing during the
press conference is that both the father and the mother
were referring to the child as in past tense. He
was he was such a healthy boy, he was, he was.
Why the fuck would you say that if you think
your kid's alive, it's like a Freudian it is, or
(30:45):
it's just like you don't even notice it. But like
if you genuinely think, like if my kid goes to
the store and she doesn't come home in an hour,
I'm not calling police and saying she was so nice.
I don't know what happened. Like, it's just it's just weird.
And there's lots of documented cases of crimes happening where
people do refer to someone in the past, and it's
(31:07):
very interesting, right.
Speaker 1 (31:09):
Yeah, it is interesting and The most glaringly problematic thing
in this guy's past is in twenty eighteen he was
arrested and pleaded guilty to willful cruelty to a child,
and in twenty twenty three was sends to one hundred
and eighty days in jail and forty eight months of probation.
And actually in a couple of weeks he's scheduled to
(31:29):
go in court for an alleged violation of this probation.
So what's going on here?
Speaker 2 (31:35):
So I don't they have another child at the house
that's only two years old?
Speaker 1 (31:43):
Yeah, So the article we were referencing from has said
that they have removed the two year old from their
custody while this investigations be. I mean, they are clearly
the number one suspects right now, Okay, inconsistencies in the story.
They're refusing to take a polygraph test, they lawyered up
pretty quick, they're not crying in the press conference. I mean,
I just think we can't ignore all these signs.
Speaker 2 (32:06):
So that kid, though, the two year old that's at
the house in theory was born in twenty and twenty three,
right or around right? So what who? What kid did
he beat in twenty and eighteen.
Speaker 1 (32:20):
Well there's other kid. I think he has three other
kids from another person.
Speaker 2 (32:24):
So let me let me read this to you too.
You know, a lot of a lot of this stuff
that I that I see online isn't doesn't get collaborated
by news. But now we know that that these independent
reporters are finding things and putting them out there so fast.
(32:45):
But one of the stories that I've seen online was
a report from his twenty eighteen incident with a child
that said that his child was ten weeks old daughter
admitted to Hemmet Valley Hospital. Doctors reported to police that
(33:05):
the little girl had an acute fractured rib six ribs
were healing fractures, a skull, fractured brain, hemorrhage, swelling of
the neck, and a fractured leg bone that was healing.
The combination of the above findings in a pre mobile
infant in the absence of plausible history of significant trauma
to explain the injuries is indicative of abuse, head trauma,
(33:27):
physical abuse, and nutritional neglect.
Speaker 1 (33:31):
What the fuck?
Speaker 2 (33:32):
Like? What? Why? Exactly like? Why is this person allowed
to make more children? Now? Another thing that's really interesting too.
Besides the fact that the parents were talking in the
past tense. They were also saying he was such a
healthy boy.
Speaker 1 (33:50):
Right.
Speaker 2 (33:52):
If you look at photos of this kid, he doesn't
really look I wouldn't say that he just looks like
a normal, healthy baby. They said that he had a
cross eye or a lazy eye. But there's something going
on with this kid. And I don't know if this
kid had a previous history of some kind of head
(34:12):
trauma or something. There just looks like something's going on
there right, a little bit more than just an eye
that is out of alignment, so to speak. Another interesting
thing is that they as the kidnapping, they submitted photos
of the baby, and it's like they set in three
photos of this baby and they're not even like good pictures,
(34:35):
And you're just like, dude, if I go on my
phone right now, especially and I had my kids twelve
and ten years ago, I could probably find in the
course from zero to seven months old, literally thousands of
photos of them. Like you only have three pictures and
they're like blurry.
Speaker 1 (34:54):
I can find ten photos of my friend Rachel's baby
who was born Saturday. By the way, congradulate these, but seriously,
this kid has been in this world for three days
and there's one hundred photos of her already. So these
people have had this baby for seven months and they
have three blurry photos. I don't know what's going on.
(35:14):
Obviously you're innocent, aal proven guilty, but it's not really
looking that great right now. They searched a home with
kidaver dogs didn't come up with anything. The most important
thing to note here is the baby is still missing.
They have no idea where this child is. I would
imagine this kid is not alive still.
Speaker 2 (35:32):
So and then this is another problem that you're going
to face with a little tiny baby and during southern California, Yeah, right,
Like just if it's outside and the elements decomposing and
things like, you'll still be able to see if there
was a history of abuse for sure. And remember we
(35:55):
were even talking about his other child that he allegedly beat.
That the that the dog at the hospital saw healed
rib fractures, and you could tell not only by imaging,
but by looking at it grossly on a skeleton, examining
the bones if bones were broken, because when they heal back,
(36:15):
you could tell when they were broken, especially when they
weren't treated. So say, for example, a kid breaks their
arm and never goes to the hospital and gets it
cast and set. It's going to heal, like really crazy,
and it's apparent what happened. And that's why they note
in it, especially with the last charges he had that
(36:35):
the baby wasn't mobile, meaning not walking yet, because obviously
when children start walking, they fall down the steps and
they do like they get crazy injuries because they're clumsy
and they don't know that they're not supposed to go
close to the steps and things. And then those cases
when you see a child that's got broken limbs like that,
(36:56):
with the exception of being in a car accident, you're
just going to be like, this kid's getting beat because
how else would they get these injuries? They ten weeks old.
You can't even turn around sometimes, right, So it's it's
just it's unfortunate. But I think that we all know
where this is headed. And I think it's also possible
if you beat your kids, that you beat your wife,
(37:17):
and there's a possibility that she's covering for him.
Speaker 1 (37:22):
Yeah, I mean, you don't know what's going on in
their relationship. Is she complicit in it or is she?
Speaker 2 (37:27):
I mean she got a black eye, Someone give her
someone gave her a black eye. We know that's a fact.
It's on her face. Like, I don't know how she
got it, but it got there somehow, either by a
traumatic incident or someone punched her in the face.
Speaker 1 (37:43):
I don't know. I've just at this point and all
of this. You know, I'm reading all the comments, and
usually I don't, you know, engage with internet trolls or
back them at all. But the one comment I saw
repeatedly was this is Casey Anthony two point zero, and
I have to agree, it's looking like that that's the case.
Speaker 2 (38:01):
Yeah, we're that Susan Smith. That was another one where
the mom drove her remember she drove her kids into
a body of water and then said she was hijacked
and someone still their car. Yeah, Like it's it's like
I hate and I hate this. I hate that any
child has to grow up in that situation. It just
also brings up the question that we bring up all
(38:23):
the time, which is just kind of like if you
if you break a ten week old baby's ribs and
head trauma could be from shaking baby syndrome, which is
again something I wanted to bring up with this child's
unusual appearance of his eyes and his like you can't
tell from a video per se, but it just looks
like he's kind of dead behind the eyes. Like I
(38:45):
don't know. You know, you see a picture of a
baby and you could see their life glowing, and it's
just like there's something going on there with the kid, Yeah,
for sure, And you just think about, like how if
a person's capable of that in two thousand and eight,
and all he did was serve some time for it,
like what makes him not be capable of it again?
(39:07):
Or if the child was born with special needs, like
the additional stress that puts on a family.
Speaker 1 (39:14):
I don't know. I think this came up in our
YouTube live a couple of weeks ago when we were talking.
I feel like it was when we talked about that
pedophile that was able to have a child through a surrogate,
that maybe we need to get to a point in
society where when you get pregnant, whether it's natural or not,
you have to have a test to see if you're
like able to or not. I don't want to say able,
(39:37):
because I think of our situation a lot, with you
being so young, having me like that wouldn't have been fair,
and I ended up I think, okay for the boat,
smart questionable at times, but if you have a history
of abusing anybody, especially children, or you're a convicted pedophile,
you should not be allowed to keep us hires.
Speaker 2 (39:56):
Actually like it exactly, Like I I'm always I'm always
against telling people they can't have kids, because then where
do you draw the line, Because obviously some people think
being born into my neighborhood is like poverty, you know,
like it depends on what level. If you live in
(40:17):
a house in Los Angeles, that's millions of dollars, Like
you're going to look down on people like us that
don't have money and think that we don't deserve to
have children either, And like but but like when a
child is going to get hurt or there's a likelihood
of that happening, and there's probably tons of studies done
(40:38):
of how many previous offenders then went on to have
more children and then beat those children too, that you
have to start talking about stuff like that, unfortunately, And
I just I hate where this case is going. And
another thing I wanted to bring up with this case
is like what is up with people? They like if
(41:01):
this is true that she went to the store ahead
of time and like tried to scope out if there
were cameras there, and her and her husband are sitting
there plotting, like how they're going to make up this lie.
Like are people just like really that dumb that they
think that they're going to be able to get away
with something like this?
Speaker 1 (41:18):
Exactly? Like, let me tell you, when I worked at
the bar, right, nobody's asking about the cameras. So if
somebody all of a sudden asked about the cameras and
then a week later they're on the news because their
kids missing and it happened in the same parking lot, yeah,
I'd remember that interaction.
Speaker 2 (41:34):
It's like exactly, like it's just a weird It's just weird.
And like we were, Marie and I were talking about
this yesterday, Like think about someone like Brian Coburger, Like
he had a master's degree and was in a doctorate
program for criminal justice, so he knew way more than
the average person about death investigation. And they were able
(41:59):
to catch him, and they luckily they had that gift
of the of the knife sheaf given to them, but
they have a lot of other evidence with the phone
taps and stuff. So we don't really know because we're
never going to experience this if they would have been
able to catch him without that. But regardless, he did
so much to cover his tracks with turning the phone
(42:21):
off and clearing out this and cleaning that and getting
his car like free of things that they really weren't
able to find a lot of stuff, but they still
were able to get him, and he's still in prison
right now for his crimes. These people are like Joe
Schmoe's off the street, Like they're saying that they didn't
(42:42):
even do an ambler alert because there was no there
was no car description given or a suspect given, like
a description like don't you think that the police were
going to be like, well, who was this? Who was
in the car? Like, well, I don't know, there's just
so much to the story that everybody's going to start
(43:04):
looking into. You didn't think that maybe they were gonna
be able to pull up your old records to see
that you beat a kid before.
Speaker 1 (43:10):
And just because that store doesn't have surveillance doesn't mean
that surrounding stores don't. And they said they're actually looking
at a ton of surveillance they've acquired from the area.
Oh so they can track your steps all morning. I'm
sure one of their neighbors might even have a ring
camera or something where they could see if she loaded
(43:31):
the baby in the car or not.
Speaker 2 (43:33):
There's also yeah, and there's just also other things like
they're going to be checking her cell phone locations, and like,
I mean, just do you watch our show? Do you
watch the news at all? Like do you have any
idea that they're not just gonna be like, oh shit,
some guy came up behind you and punched you in
the head and they took your baby. Okay, go home
with your kid and like live the rest of your
(43:54):
life out, Like what are people thinking?
Speaker 1 (43:58):
Idiot?
Speaker 2 (43:58):
They're just Another thing I want to mention too, is
that I know you're saying the mom doesn't have tears,
but I feel I felt like when she was like crying,
that she seemed to be genuinely like upset. I like
the there was just certain things. I'm not like a
behavioral expert, obviously, but just listening to her, she was
(44:20):
kind of hyperventilating and like.
Speaker 1 (44:22):
Yeah, but like you could argue, like you can argue
any way that she's acting like that. It's story one
this genuinely did happen to her. Story two, the husband
killed the baby and she knows that, but he has
threatened to kill her and the other kid too, So
she's like, I don't know what to do, so I'm
just gonna lie because he told me to Story three,
she's involved in the whole thing. You really just don't know.
Speaker 2 (44:45):
Yeah, no, I know, Like I just I feel like,
I mean, I guess the reason that I was bringing
up is because my personal opinion is that, like story
two is going to be the most likely thing that like,
she's a victim of abuse herself and is scared to
death for her other children and her self.
Speaker 1 (45:14):
This episode is brought to you by the Grossroom. Guys.
Speaker 2 (45:17):
You know, we've been doing this YouTube live and it's
been so much fun. Really, it's better than I thought
it was going to be, honestly, And we're having the
same people in every week asking questions. And one of
the things that we said was, Hey, do you guys
have any ideas or suggestions for doing high profile dissections?
And someone said, oh, could you talk about fibromyalga, So
(45:38):
we did a deep dive on that this week, and
I think that a lot of people in the Gross
Room were having issues similar to that or other issues,
and one of the main themes in it is like
doctors blowing you off when you're having actual problems. So
that was a cool discussion this week. We also had
a Forensic Friday this week, and we talk about what
(45:59):
happens if a person is boiled alive and that story
is outrageous. Did you read that one?
Speaker 1 (46:07):
Right? Extra distory.
Speaker 2 (46:08):
It's just like unbelievable. It's a vintage case. But you're like, okay,
this is exactly how people used to get away with
murder because they weren't able to look at things like
ring cams and cell phone footage and all that stuff.
But yeah, all that and more in the Grosser Room
this week.
Speaker 1 (46:25):
Check it out. Yeah, head over to the Grosserroom dot
com now to sign up.
Speaker 2 (46:31):
All right, let's talk about this case that bigger is
not always better, totally.
Speaker 1 (46:35):
Not in this case. This twenty five year old chick
went on social media. She said that she had a
petite body type with a thirty two A size chest.
So over the next couple of weeks, she started noticing redness,
pain itchiness when she wore bras, and before she knew it,
her boobs ended up growing to a thirty four g cup.
How is this possible?
Speaker 2 (46:56):
So she has a condition that's called gigantomasty, and they
say that it's rare. They said there's only three hundred
cases of it a year. But I personally think, and
I bet you any pathology people that are listening to
me right now think that there's probably more cases of
it that haven't been just recorded, because in working in
(47:20):
surgical pathology, we get breast reductions often, and sometimes they
are so so so big that you can't really think
that it's only three hundred cases a year, because you're like,
I've seen half of them at my hospital, you know
what I mean. It's considered to be from a pathology standpoint,
(47:43):
anything that is bigger than two point five kilograms, which
is five and a half pounds of breast tissue. And
I'll tell you that in like I said, in surgical pathology,
we would get ones that were that were so big
and five and a hal a half pounds is very heavy,
but I've seen a couple that were that big in
(48:05):
my career, so big that you would have to put
one on a scale at a time because it was
just so heavy. And one of the reasons. So when
you're working in surgical pathology, you weigh organs because organs
all have normal weights. Like a heart weighs a certain
amount should it should be two hundred and fifty to
(48:26):
three hundred grams in a woman. So if you get
a heart X plant on a woman and it's like
six hundred grams and we know it's heavy and that's
due to whatever pathology is going on with it, well,
we don't weigh everything. Like a colon, there's no point
to weigh a colon because a colon can vary from
person to person. There's no normal weight for it, especially
because it's full of shit. So if like someone didn't
(48:48):
eat or someone was constipated, or colon would weigh so
much more than another person, so there's no weight for that.
Breasts you would say the same thing because they vary
so much, but we do waigh them because when they
have excessive breast tissue like this. Sometimes it's the difference
between health insurances paying for the surgery or not because technically,
(49:11):
like some women might want to get a breast reduction
because of for cosmetic reasons, but clearly in a case
like this where this petite framed woman had these boobs
that grew so big rapidly. She would have to get
it done because of the strain it was putting on
her muscular skeletal system. So it's important to waive them
(49:32):
in this case. And she was able to get surgery
and now she's the smallest she could go down to
was like a thirty four d or something, which is
still big.
Speaker 1 (49:42):
That's still big, especially if you were used to being
an a cup. I can't even imagine. But they had
cited other people this happened to in this article too,
and one girl said, instead of getting a breast reduction,
she decided to turn to OnlyFans. And she's making a
killing off of it.
Speaker 2 (49:58):
Yeah, she's making over three hundred and fifty dollars a year,
which is which is kind of I mean, uh, do
do you girl?
Speaker 1 (50:07):
Do you like?
Speaker 2 (50:08):
I personally wouldn't want them, just because I can't imagine
how bad your your back would hurt, you know, But
I guess so, we we know plenty of people that
get these rest reduction surgeries, and I guess the biggest
difference between normal hypertrophy of the breast tissue versus this
gigantomassia is that it grows so fast so quickly, and
(50:31):
they don't really know why, but it could be hormone
induced it. I have a case in the grocer room
actually where we talk about a woman that had it
door like dooring and after pregnancy, and she actually ended
up dying from it, which is outrageous, but it happened,
so so yeah, like it. I mean, it's a very
(50:52):
unfortunate thing to happen to someone, and it's a lot
of people would say, oh, like people are paying to
get their boobs bigger, but like they're is obviously a
time where it's too big and it's not better.
Speaker 1 (51:05):
No, absolutely no. All right, So it seems like allergies
have been at an all time high. I mean, you
and I've certainly been dealing with that all weekend. It's
been brutal. But apparently one group of people has some
immunity to them.
Speaker 2 (51:19):
Yeah, so this this was such a cool article about
Amish people. We talk about Amish people's health often because
it's a very controlled group of people that live a
certain way, and when you look at them and compare
them to the normal population, they have sometimes they have
(51:39):
higher rates of health issues and other times they have
more oftentimes they have they seem to have a better
quality of life because they live healthier lives. So for example,
less documented cases of cancer, less documented cases of skin cancer,
despite the fact that they are working outside all day,
(52:00):
a lower rates of autism, things like that. So now
we're talking about allergies and asthma. So as far as
this particular paper goes, it said that fifty percent of
American kids have some form of allergies, and in the
Amish community only seven percent of kids have allergies. And
(52:21):
in America eight to ten percent of kids have asthma,
whereas Amish kids only two percent have asthma. So at
first they were like, okay, well cause you know, oftentimes,
and it's not always, but oftentimes Amish people marry Amish
people and have kids, so a lot of it is
like a kept in the family situation. So you obviously
would think like genetics in a situation like that. But
(52:42):
there's another farming group that they say has similar ancestry
and genetics called the Hutter Rights. Have you I've never
heard of that particular group.
Speaker 1 (52:53):
Yeah, it didn't. It wasn't super familiar to me. I
feel like maybe I've heard about them before. But I
don't know as much culturally as we do about like
the Amish culture of the Mennonite culture, you know.
Speaker 2 (53:04):
So apparently they have similar they do a lot of
the same similar things, except this is how they're trying
to figure out, like where these kids are able to
not have that many allergies. So one of the things
that they don't do is similar. Is Amish people from
the time they are little are in these barns with
(53:26):
their family working on these animals and helping, whereas with
the hutter Rights, those women that are pregnant don't go
in the barnes at all, and when they have children,
the children don't usually start helping until they're about twelve
years old. So that so they were like, okay, that's
a key difference, Like these kids, one kid, one set
of kids, Amish are being exposed to these barns from
(53:48):
the time their little kid, very young kids, and the
other the hutter rights are only being exposed to barnes
over twelve years old. So they determined that then after
they started doing all these studies of testing dust in
Amish people's houses versus hutter rates and things like that,
and they found that there were all these additional microbes
in the dust for Amish people. And furthermore, they took
(54:12):
those types of microbes that were found in Amish dust
and gave them to mice in studies to see what
it was doing. And here it decreased respiratory inflammation and
mice that were exposed to this Amish dust as opposed
to the ones that weren't, which is super interesting. So
(54:33):
I guess the whole point of this study is being like, okay, cause,
like right now, for example, today, my nose is so
swollen and inflamed and running out of my face, and
then I look on the app and it's like, oh,
the dust is really high around here, right, So I
take drugs to make that go away because my nose
is so itchy. They're saying with this, if this is
(54:55):
like an actual thing, that they'll be able to create
some kind of probiotics or something to treat children when
they're so young that they never even get the symptoms
that have to be treated.
Speaker 1 (55:06):
I mean, this would be huge, especially for people like us.
I mean, especially when I was a teenager and in
my early twenties dealing with just seasonal allergies, I just
felt like my face was swollen at all times, so
thinking about something like this would be incredible, especially because
the article pointed out that everything we have now is
(55:26):
really to just manage allergy symptoms, not necessarily cure them.
So if this is something that could be used to
help out, especially people like us, I just can't even
imagine how life changing this would be. Yeah, all right,
let's move on to our last story. So, this woman's
husband suddenly died earlier this year, and she chose a
super cool way to honor him, which was by preserving
(55:48):
his tattooed skin and framing it.
Speaker 2 (55:51):
Yeah, it is. It is so cool. I saw this
on I saw her post actually on Instagram, and I've
heard about this for a while. Actually, one when I
first started my blog before the Gross Room, that was
called iHeart Autopsy, like fifteen years ago. This was one
of the first things that I wrote about because Steve
(56:12):
Tabiri gave me a book about a doctor in Japan
who was seeing patients who had tattoos and was studying
the moles on their tattoos, and during that research he
discovered that syphilis healed on tattooed skin wouldn't recur there.
So this fueled his interest into tattooed skin, and he
(56:35):
was he started asking people, Hey, when you die, can
you leave me your skin, And then it got to
the point where he was telling people he would pay
for them to get full body suits tattooed if they
would promise they would give him the skin afterwards. So
he has this insane collection that he had an insane
(56:57):
collection of photos, but not important, most importantly the actual
skin of people. And you ever see these, like Japanese
tattooed body suits, They're like the coolest thing ever. If
I could go back in time with naked skin, I
would totally get this because I just love the way
it looks so much. But it's essentially like the skin
from in some cases all the way down to the
(57:19):
elbows or wrist down to the knees or ankles of
skin and including entire backskin, front skin. And unfortunately, so
they still have these skins, but unfortunately they're not on
display anywhere right now, but they're they're in Tokyo in
some kind of a museum in the back room kind
of If anybody knows anyone that works there, please let
(57:40):
me know and I will be on the next flight out.
But anyway, so it's been a thing like the Moodor
Museum used to have a couple pieces of tattooed skin
on display. So there's different ways that you could preserve it.
You could do it wet so it stays in a jar,
similar to like if you put i'll colon or a
brain or something thing in a jar, and then you
(58:01):
could do dry, which is what this woman has in
a picture frame. So essentially, I don't know too much
about the process, but I'm assuming it's like the same
exact thing they do with Taxi Army, like tanning the skin,
so it's like a piece of leather basically.
Speaker 1 (58:17):
So I guess this chick found out about it through
Ripley's Believe it or not, and she was really interested
in the process behind it, and her husband was this
huge sports fan. So after his funeral, she marked off
the tattoo she wanted, which was a Pittsburgh Steeler boo.
Were Eagles people.
Speaker 2 (58:34):
I'm not, I don't care you're not, but whatever.
Speaker 1 (58:37):
But that's the tattoo she marked off, and then within
ninety days the company sent it back to her and
she has it now and it's super cool.
Speaker 2 (58:45):
Yeah, So I think they give specific instructions to the
funeral directors on how to remove it and how to
ship it to them, and you know, I am interested
in their process for sure. But it is cool. It's expensive.
Apparently it could cost any from like almost two thousand
dollars to if you had a person that had like
(59:05):
a full bodysuit. You're talking like a lot tens of
thousands of dollars to remove it like that.
Speaker 1 (59:11):
Yeah, I mean, I that's expected because even when you
look at urns and jewelry and stuff you could do
with people's cream aines and stuff, they're everything's expensive in
that world. You know.
Speaker 2 (59:22):
I remember companies like this, we're under fire a little
bit at some point because there's like, of course this
gray area of is this considered to be abuse of
a corpse?
Speaker 1 (59:34):
Well, I don't know. Like in this case, it seemed
like she had brought the idea up to her husband
and he was super into it. So I don't know
if it's like before you die you have to consent
to it or what. Yeah, I'm not sure, but it's
super interesting and it looks pretty cool, and it's a
cool it's like definitely a unique and cool way to
honor somebody. Yeah, it is all right, Let's move on
to questions of the Day. Every Friday at that at
(59:55):
Mother Knows Death Instagram account, you guys could head over
to our story and ask us whatever you want. Could
you catch HIV from a cadaver during an autopsy aka
getting blood into a cut?
Speaker 2 (01:00:07):
In theory, you could, but the probability of that happening
is very low because when the HIV virus hits the air,
it becomes inactive very quickly. So I mean if you
even studies done that show person cutting their finger fresh
with a scalpel blade on an HIV person is not
very high risk and I was never scared of I've
(01:00:31):
done so many autopsies on people that had HIV positive
and was never scared of that. I'm more scared for
HEPSI because that one not only is it more transmissible
at the time of autopsy, but it could live on
countertops for a couple of weeks, like typically it doesn't
(01:00:52):
maybe a couple of days. But think about this, like
if you do an autopsy on a person that has
hepsy on Monday, and then you use the same tools
three days later and you cut yourself with it, you
are at a risk of transmitting it to yourself still,
Like obviously you're going to clean the tools with bleach
after you do an autopsy and stuff, but I mean
(01:01:14):
sometimes things get missed or whatever, and it just would
increase the risk. So I think HEPSI is definitely more
scary for people in autopsy than HIV.
Speaker 1 (01:01:24):
So if you do cut yourself by accident, do you
have to just go get checked out or like that?
Speaker 2 (01:01:30):
Well? I did. I've been caught with hepsy cases plenty
of times because every single time, you know, I have
you know, either in surgical pathology or autopsy. We just
had a really big population of hepsy patients because we
had a big liver transplant. But they can't do anything
(01:01:52):
for you. So you just have to go and document
it and kind of go back and get blood work
and they'll take your blood to see if you have
hepsy or any antibodies for that, and then they'll check
you again in a couple months, and it's just basically
like let's see if it pops up. There's not much
they could do about it. HIV you can take if
you had a note exposure to HIV, you can take drugs,
(01:02:17):
but they are pretty harsh on you. So that and
a lot of people I know don't decide to do
that just because the medications can be so harsh.
Speaker 1 (01:02:26):
All right too, When is SIDS listed as the cause
of death in instances of unsafe sleep suffocations? Any research
on safe sleep conditions preventing a true SID case?
Speaker 2 (01:02:37):
I don't know. I personally, Like I've said this before
on the show, that I don't really think SIDS is
a thing. And it's definitely like I think that they
use it because they just don't. They they can't otherwise
explain it and they have to put something. I just
I don't really think it's a true thing. That that
just like a kid is just dropping dead for no
(01:02:58):
apparent reason. And the reason that I say that is
because there's so many things that have been documented over
the years that say that there's increased risk in certain
demographic socioeconomic conditions. For example, it's more likely to occur
in a baby that was born to a mom of
(01:03:21):
like a teenager as opposed to an older person. They're
associated with co sleeping so much more that so like
that increases the risk of this so much more. People
that smoke during pregnancy is a big one there's just
all these factors. They're more likely to occur in lower
(01:03:43):
socioeconomic status than than a higher one. So if if
they if it was a true thing, it would happen
to a person living in a poorer city and a
person living in a rich city, and like it would
happen in this it would happen to that people that smoked,
people that don't smoke, and stuff. So when you look
(01:04:04):
at factors like that, you're like, okay, well that's that's
that's what's causing SIDS. So a lot of people think
that it's a combination of like there's some kind of
underlying defect that they don't really know what it is yet,
and then there's like this external thing on top of it,
like co sleeping, and the two of them combined are
(01:04:26):
what caused what's called sudden infant death syndrome. But sudden
infant death syndrome is just a diagnosis of exclusion.
Speaker 1 (01:04:35):
All right, This last one's from our girl, Emma. She said, Maria,
I need to know how was the MCR concert. It
was the best night ever. I decided I was going
to go to the New York show instead of the
Philly show because they're playing with Thursday, who are also
one of my favorite bands ever. They're playing with Death
Cab for Cutie too, who I do like. But I
also didn't necessarily need to see live. But that was
(01:04:57):
also their hometown show, so I knew it was going
to be so much better. I bought the tickets last November,
so it was a really long time in between. But
going up there was great. The weather was perfect. They
had the best set lists I've seen so far. I'm
actually really happy I didn't go to the Philly one
because I did not like that set list in comparison
to mine.
Speaker 2 (01:05:17):
And also mL last night we were at the Phillies
game and apparently their stage like ruined the grass of
the Phillies field.
Speaker 1 (01:05:24):
Yeah, the side note there was like a huge Bluebert
was like, what is that on the grass? And it
was clearly a whole outline of the stage from where
they had put it last Friday night. I honestly would
have seen them again, but when I checked tickets in
the middle of the week, they were still going for
hundreds and hundreds of dollars for a seat, and I'm like, well,
(01:05:45):
I just saw them a couple of days ago. But
they played for almost three hours. I thought it was great.
Ricky had a really good time. I went with my
high school friend Austin and his girlfriend as well, and
we had a really great time. It was it was awesome.
I hadn't seen them since I think think the Black
Parade originally came out years and years and years ago
on that original tour, so it was like being a
(01:06:07):
teenager all over again, and it was amazing. I couldn't
have asked for a better experience. And I don't really
go to concerts like that anymore, and I don't ever
really want to, and I could not wait until this happened.
And I had zero complaints. I thought it was incredible.
But to all her sat me with.
Speaker 2 (01:06:24):
She set me a picture and I was like, you
guys are such dorks. Yeah, she made fun of me
the entire time, but I don't know. I thought it
was like, hands down, one of the best nights of
my life. But be honest, it was so it was
so great as somebody that's like that guy I like
still wear eyeliner and have the like emo girl haircut.
Speaker 1 (01:06:45):
Well when they did so the first half of the show,
because it was like the Black Parade Anniversary tour. So
they played that album in full and when they played that,
he had a bunch of makeup on and everything, and
his hair is still long. And then after that album
was done, they took like a couple of minute break
and they came out in regular clothes and just played
(01:07:06):
a lot of their old stuff, which I really liked.
But no makeup that time. But yeah, that was definitely
a thing. Everybody was dressed up in some capacity for it,
and I'm sure the people working at MetLife Stadium were like,
what the hell is going off? I'm sure it's very
different than the Jonas Brothers who played the next night.
Speaker 2 (01:07:26):
Who plays at that stadium?
Speaker 1 (01:07:28):
The Jets and the Giants. They split it.
Speaker 2 (01:07:30):
Oh, okay, so it's kind of it's a football it's
a football field, then.
Speaker 1 (01:07:35):
It's a football field. And I have to say, I
think it's a very nice stadium. I don't really like
Lincoln Financial Field, which is the Eagles Stadium. I think
it's not set up very well. And I found that
The last time I went to MetLife was I saw
the Flyers play the Stadium series their last February, which
was the coldest night I've ever been outside in my life.
(01:07:55):
It was like, seriously zero degrees. But when we were
there it was nice too. Also, they serve Duncan in
the whole stadium, which is very nice.
Speaker 2 (01:08:04):
That's like it like for our Phillies Stadium, Citizens Bank Park,
like they last night. It was chili at the game.
It was definitely not ice cream weather. And they don't
have any no coffee, no hot chocolate, nothing like cozy.
It's just they need to step.
Speaker 1 (01:08:21):
It up a little bit. My one complaint about the concert,
actually I do have a complaint is that I paid
ninety dollars for a hoodie that I know for a
fact I bought for twenty dollars twenty years ago, and
that really far.
Speaker 2 (01:08:34):
Becoming an old person, because that's that's just I think
that's just what a hoodie cost now.
Speaker 1 (01:08:41):
That is ridiculous. I was looking at it. I was
telling Ricky when we were driving there, I was like,
I had, you know, you know, because they were my
favorite band of all time. I had every single shirt
they had at Hot Topic. I had everything, and you know,
when I got to be an older teenager, I was like,
I'm so over them. I only listen to pop punk now.
And then I threw everything out I don't have anything,
(01:09:02):
and I was so bummed about it, and most of
the merch was for the tour or for the Black Parade,
and then I was so excited they had one thing
that was something I had back in the day, so
I wanted to buy it out of nostalgia. And then
I'm like, I can't believe I had.
Speaker 2 (01:09:16):
You can like search Amazon and see if they had
it for five dollars, Like like Louis's Philly shirt he
got off of.
Speaker 1 (01:09:24):
What so everybody could tell it's fake. That was the
worst Philly's shirt I've ever seen.
Speaker 2 (01:09:28):
It so bad. It's actually like it's a It was
like a fake replica of a jersey and are so
we have like retro Phillies colors are maroon and then
the newer ones and the really really old ones are
like a bright red, and the shirt had both colors
on it. I've never seen that ever, and it had
(01:09:49):
it so it's like a traditional baseball jersey and it
had a zipper, and I'm just like, I'm like embarrassed
to even be standing next to you right now with
this shirt on.
Speaker 1 (01:09:59):
When he was walking through the gate yards and yards
away from us, I was like that is the worst
fake journey I've ever seen in my life.
Speaker 2 (01:10:06):
It really is. It's so bad, and he like apparently
just like opened it right before he went to the
game and didn't really think much of it. And you know,
I don't know.
Speaker 1 (01:10:16):
He's color blind too, though. Do you think he can't
see the difference?
Speaker 2 (01:10:20):
I still think he Yeah, it's pot like he might
not be able to see the difference in the color exactly,
but he could tell that the tones are different, once
darker than the other one. I actually was pretty sure
I'm gonna post it on my Instagram later so you
guys could say it it's so bad. It was pretty bad,
but yeah, best and i'd ever I highly recommend everybody
(01:10:41):
see them on the rest of their tour, even though
again the tickets were another thing that I was like,
I definitely paid twenty bucks to see them twenty years
ago and now it was lots of money. But all right, guys,
we are gonna be a crime kind in only two weeks,
which I honestly can't believe. We still don't have our
outfits really picked out, so I guess that's something that
needs to get checked the list this week. I do
(01:11:02):
you do I have some stuff moment today, but we'll see.
I gotta try everything on Please leave us reviews on
Apple or Spotify.
Speaker 1 (01:11:09):
It would be much appreciated. And subscribe to our YouTube channel.
And if you have a shocking story for us, or
if you you know, want I give us some personal
account of what happened to you or whatever, we'd love
to read it on the show and you could submit
those to stories at mothernosdeth dot com.
Speaker 2 (01:11:25):
Yeah, see you guys.
Speaker 1 (01:11:26):
Bye.
Speaker 2 (01:11:31):
Thank you for listening to Mother nos Death. As a reminder,
my training is as a pathologist assistant. I have a
master's level education and specialize in anatomy and pathology education.
I am not a doctor and I have not diagnosed
or treated anyone dead or alive without the assistance of
a licensed medical doctor. This show, my website, and social
(01:11:55):
media accounts are designed to educate and inform people based
on my experience working in pathology, so they can make
healthier decisions regarding their life and well being. Always remember
that science is changing every day and the opinions expressed
in this episode are based on my knowledge of those
subjects at the time of publication. If you are having
(01:12:17):
a medical problem, have a medical question or having a
medical emergency, Please contact your physician or visit an urgent
care center, emergency room, or hospital. Please rate, review, and
subscribe to Mother Knows Death on Apple, Spotify, YouTube, or
anywhere you get podcasts.
Speaker 1 (01:12:37):
Thanks
Mother Knows Dad starring Nicole and Jemmy and Maria qk Hi.
Speaker 2 (00:21):
Everyone, welcome The Mother Knows Death. We have so many
stories to cover for you guys this week. On today's episode,
we're going to start off with the viral photos that
have been circulating on social media showing can join twins
Abby and Brittany that were seen with a newborn baby
last week. Authlready started releasing crime scene photos from the
Idaho College students' murders, and we're going to get into
(00:43):
these photos themselves, but we're also going to talk about
their family's reaction to it, a freak accident that involved
an unusual rescue on the playground, and the latest up
to date information that has been all over the news
this week about a baby who is allegedly kidnapped from
a parking lot. And then we'll get into some medical stories,
talking about one woman's rare condition that caused her breast
(01:04):
to grow enormous within a short period of time, and
we'll talk about why Amish people have significantly less allergies
than the rest of the population. We'll finish up with
a really cool story about a woman who kept a
very unusual keepsake after her husband's death. All that and
more on today's episode, Let's get started with Abby and Britney.
(01:25):
So last March we had talked about how Abby and
Britzy Hansel, who are probably the most famous example of
modern can join twins. It came out that Abby married
her longtime boyfriend in twenty twenty one, and now Abby
and Brittany have been seen carrying a newborn while out
running errand So I think the biggest question everybody has
is how did this happen? Did they have these babies naturally?
(01:47):
Was it via IVF? Did they have Asaragi? Is the
baby adopted? Or are they just simply babysitting another child?
Speaker 1 (01:53):
What's going on here?
Speaker 2 (01:55):
I don't know, but God, everybody is so curious. Obviously.
I know that from the beginning, We've talked about this
before on this show too, that Abby and Brittany have
been followed a majority of their life on TV on
their lives on TV right, So we know, just based
on what their mother has said from the time that
they were children, that they were capable of having a child.
(02:18):
They had one single reproductive system, but it appeared to
be working at the time, and both of them have
stayed in multiple times that they wanted to be mothers,
So in my opinion, I think that they probably got
a surrogate only because they She put out some kind
of a video recently within the past year, kind of
(02:41):
putting out a teaser that said just married and a
baby on the way or something like that. It was
a link to a news article, and that has had
the public heightened that she might be pregnant. And based
upon how I feel like the paparazzi kind of follow them,
I think unless they just have been in their house
(03:01):
for the past couple of months and just really were
able to hide it. But they are fifth grade teachers
that go to school, and I just have a hard
time believing that if they were pregnant and visibly showing
that the story wouldn't have gotten out sooner.
Speaker 1 (03:17):
I yeah, I understand what you're saying. But also they
did keep it a secret for a couple of years
that they had been married, so like I get.
Speaker 2 (03:24):
But I guess that's not something on your stomach unless
lies like in front of everyone to look at.
Speaker 1 (03:31):
Unless the people in their lives really respect their privacy,
I mean, they should be left alone. This picture was
like somebody in a parking lot that snapped the picture
of them loading a baby in the car. So they
haven't as of when we're recording this, they haven't said
anything about it, And I mean, I guess it's truly
nobody's business, but I'm fascinated to know, because would this
be the first example of conjoined twins that carried a
(03:54):
baby naturally if that was the case.
Speaker 2 (03:57):
No, it's actually happened before, like back in the day,
in the early nineteen hundreds, conjoined twins had a baby,
and it was a really interesting thing because these women.
There's not a lot of documentation on it, obviously because
it's so old, but apparently these women had two vaginas,
but they seem to have had also two separate reproductive organs.
(04:22):
So when the one twin got pregnant on the one
side of the vagina, the other one was still experiencing
menstruation every month, and the one twin that was pregnant
got had what was called hyper emesis gravitorum, which is
when you basically throw up a lot during pregnancy, but
(04:43):
it's more than the normal nausea. It's just it's repeated.
And I think Princess Kate had that right, So one
of the twins had that on one side of the
body and the other one didn't experience any of it,
which is just so oh cool, Like really, if you
think about it.
Speaker 1 (05:02):
It is cool. Like is their condition considered a genetic
thing or it just happens randomly? So I guess what
I'm asking is if they had a baby with a child.
Speaker 2 (05:13):
Now it's it's the same as twins. It's just the
egg doesn't split all the way. Okay, it's the same
exact thing. So I mean I have more questions because
that particular case is really interesting because then if you
want to find the ideology for why that condition occurs
in pregnancy, and you say, okay, you have these these
women that are conjoined, but they have different organs, but
(05:37):
they're still can joined. They have some similar sharing organs
and others not why did one get the nausea and
one didn't, which would indicate to me that it's not
it's not systemic. It might be more confined to the
uterus or something, you know what I mean, like because otherwise,
if they're sharing the same circulatory system and immune system
and everything like that, why did one get the symptoms?
(05:58):
And the other didn't. It's it's just kind of interesting.
But from from Abby and Britney's perspective, I'm just I'm
interested in God so much because think about it, like
we know for now, just because of the marriage certificate,
that only Abby got married, right, So Brittany is not
(06:20):
considered to be part of that couple. If they had
a baby, what you're not You can't put two mothers
on the birth certificate, right, even though she's technically legally
the mother. It's just like all really interesting things because
of how they've been separated their whole life. Like they
(06:40):
both individually have driver's licenses even though technically it's only
one body that drives, right. They both have two brains,
so they're two separate people that share a part of
a spinal cord and some organs. It's just all really interesting.
So they're considered to be separate a lot of different entities.
(07:01):
But they're a teacher and they only get one salary.
Speaker 1 (07:05):
But I believe when they went to college they had
two separate They had two separate they had two separate
tuitions and two separate degrees.
Speaker 2 (07:12):
But then as a which I think that this is
kind of messed up that they only get one salary,
because obviously, from a school's perspective, they're just like, we
have X amount of classrooms and we need X amount
of teachers to fill these classrooms. So it's one body
in the classroom. So you're not going to give one
fifth grade teacher two salaries otherwise, you know, So they
(07:35):
they I guess they accept that, like, hey, the only
way that we're going to get a job is if
we get paid as one person.
Speaker 1 (07:42):
But I just feel like it's a special circumstance, and like, really,
if you want to be fair, they should get two
full time salaries, right.
Speaker 2 (07:50):
Yeah, but but maybe it gives a shit they should
just hire one person. And like, I understand it's a
special circumstance, but like, guess what, I own a business, right, Like,
I'm not paying a double salary if I only need one.
Speaker 1 (08:02):
I'm saying, if you want to think of it as
being fair, you would give them a double salary. But
if you want to try to meet them in the middle,
considering they have a special circumstance, you could maybe give
them a higher salary than the normal teacher. Considering there
are two brains contributing to.
Speaker 2 (08:17):
Teaching, yeah, I'm sure they do, because think about that,
like having to one of they obviously they have two
different personalities, and having like two adults in the room
instead of one is giving more attention to kids. One
might be more disciplinarian than the other. Like, there's definitely
benefits to it. And I'm sure they work something out.
(08:38):
And I'm also sure that they get some kind of
disability perhaps or something like that, just because of the
challenges that I mean, it doesn't really seem like they
have too many challenges, but it's possible that they get
some kind of assistance. Perhaps maybe not, I guess if
they work, but I don't know. It's just it's just
a really it's just a really, like you said, unique circumstance.
(09:03):
But that's why so many people are so interested in it.
Speaker 1 (09:06):
Yeah, definitely all right. So Brian eatn A News Nation
posted on YouTube pretty late last night that the families
of the Idaho murder victims are planning to sue over
the release of any additional crime scene photos after they
released some of them last week. I mean, we're looking
at them. How do you feel about this? I don't
think the photos showed that were released showed anything really shocking.
(09:29):
It just showed the state of the house. There was
this pretty ominous photo of hand prints on one of
the windows. I highly doubt those were Brian Coburgers. And
there was some photos with blood but it didn't show
any of the victims. But I guess they were really
shocked when these photos got released, and they want to
make sure no pictures of their kids get out there.
And I guess I didn't even think about this too,
(09:50):
the bodycam footage from the police that responded to the scene,
because that's going to show the kids exactly how they
were found. Yeah.
Speaker 2 (09:57):
I mean, I like that the police apartments involved, both
in Pullman, Washington and Moscow, Idaho, are being transparent with
the whole case and releasing documents because there is a
lot of public interest in the case. But honestly, especially
as a person that has been covering true crime cases
(10:18):
and writing about it for the past fifteen plus years
of my life, I'm really and just have trained in
forensic the textbooks, everything, Like, I'm really surprised that these
photos were released like this. I just really am. And
you're saying that you don't see anything, I personally see
a lot when I look at them. They upset me
(10:40):
and I am not even related to these people. Because
you're essentially blurring out dead bodies that of how they
were found. The family shouldn't never have to see those.
They could be absolutely triggering to people. Of course, like
everybody just has more big curiosity and wants to see them,
But like I don't like that shouldn't supersede how the
(11:04):
family feels about that.
Speaker 1 (11:06):
I don't think those were the bodies in the photo.
Speaker 2 (11:09):
They are, it's the rooms where they were found. I
know that.
Speaker 1 (11:12):
But if you look at all of the photos collectively,
there are things on the wall blurred out just as
much you really can't see. I really think it was
a personal item.
Speaker 2 (11:21):
Because like there's some blood stain on the floor after
their bodies were removed.
Speaker 1 (11:25):
Like I'm saying, that's what I think is mostly blurred
out is stuff like that in personal articles, not their
bodies themselves. Because this lawyer that was interviewed in this
YouTube video is saying there are much more graphic photos
that have not been released in the pressure.
Speaker 2 (11:39):
Well, but I'm just saying, when you look at that,
think about being a mother and that being your child,
Like do you why does the photo of their last scene,
like something simple like where they put a cup on
the nightstand that was the last time they took a drink,
and where their body was dead, and it's blurring out
where their body was found and their clothes on the
(12:01):
floor and their shoes, like it's it's just it's just
not necessary for the public to see it. I just
don't I don't think it's necessary.
Speaker 1 (12:10):
I understand that, and I'm not saying I disagree with you,
But at that same point, can you argue that about
releasing the details of the state of the house is
found it's just as haunting as it's.
Speaker 2 (12:21):
Definitely not just as haunting. Think about this, like, they've
been through so much. We've been talking about this for years,
about what the family's been through. They shouldn't have to,
Like the only way that they could avoid this is
to never go on social media again, nobody that's related
to any of those people or whatever. Every single time
you go in X, every time you go on Instagram,
(12:41):
they pop up like do you want to see that?
Speaker 1 (12:44):
No?
Speaker 2 (12:45):
I mean you would have to physically find the document
and read it in order to get upset. And trust me,
there's so many accounts and it's it'll it'll die down
in a couple of years and it won't be in
their face as much. But like it's just a lot
different than seeing the picture. And those family members might
not have ever seen the pictures because they don't want to.
(13:05):
Like I personally wouldn't really want to see a picture
of my kid killed in that way. Ever. Yeah, I
don't know.
Speaker 1 (13:13):
Like I'm not saying it's not anybody's business. Like I'm
not saying I disagree with you. I'm just saying, like
you could really analyze every single crime scene and argue
the same thing, why did why does this crime scene?
They they're that they're not able to release the photos.
It should be all or none, No, Like what makes
this one in particular?
Speaker 2 (13:34):
At this one, nobody I know that on the planet
is talking about this one.
Speaker 1 (13:39):
Yeah, but there's other cases too, Like they need to
decide if if crime scene photos are going to be
public record or not. I think it's a good conversation
to have as a whole, if any should be or
none of them should be.
Speaker 2 (13:51):
I have, Like I mean, obviously, like my whole entire
career has been built, my post career after working full
time as a pathologist assistant has been on using photos
to for educational purposes, right for this particular thing, like
if they were using these photos like for in a
forensic book to talk about or even if even if
(14:14):
podcasters or whatever we're using it to talk about different
blood spatter patterns on the wall and like learning things
to teach people about. I feel like that in general
is okay. We're going to talk about that a little
bit later too with the next case too, Like I
really want to talk about the picture situation. I just
I don't think that it needed to be on this
(14:38):
on a file like that. Like normally, if you want
to get autopsy and crime scene photos or things like that,
you would have to be part of the press and
ask for the information and request it and get the
records and all that stuff. It's just like a little
too easy and out there for everyone and just and
of course when it's like that, then every single influencer
(14:59):
could just easy get the picture and post it and
then it's their viral all over the place. And I
don't I personally just don't see why that's necessary besides
pure your morbid curiosity.
Speaker 1 (15:14):
Yeah, but morbid curiosity, Yeah, I understand what you're saying
about educational purposes, But then you're gonna have people that
access it like us for educational purposes, and then somebody
in the news or a podcaster or an influencer or
whoever taking those photos that were intended for educational use
and flipping them to sensationalize them.
Speaker 2 (15:34):
I mean, you just you just have to think about it,
like what, Like I saw the pictures, right, and I
look at it and it gives me. It gives me
a visual of what the house actually looked like and
what the rooms actually looked like. But like, why, why
the why do I have to know that? Like it's
(15:55):
like it didn't change anything in anybody else's mind, And
I look at it like if those family members are
that upset and triggered by it, then like do why
do my feelings of wanting to see it are more
important than their feeling?
Speaker 1 (16:13):
You know what I'm saying, Well, I think this is
the grander problem with this specific case, because they were
shocked when the photos came out. They weren't given any
heads up, and it seems like it was kind of
that way with the Plea deal too. I don't know
who's behind making these decisions personally, I feel like they
should be like, we're gonna release the records and you
should be prepared that this is part of them, or
(16:34):
they should be like, this is what we have to
release legally because it's public information. We can hold these
things back. What do you guys want us to do? Instead,
they open Instagram or the news and whatever, and then
they see these photos like everybody else did last It's
just it's just like I honestly like when they came out,
I was shocked. I feel like it's very atypical. If
(16:55):
you think about a lot of the different crime cases
that we cover. In the grosser room, we have over
like let's say one hundred, over one hundred of these
high profile deaths and stuff like we never saw pictures
of Lacy Peterson, We never even got Lacy Peterson and
Connor's autopsy reports. Do you understand, like it's just weird
(17:15):
that that all of this stuff, Think about the high
profile cases like OJ there were photos of Nicole on
the ground, which I thought was crazy, but they could
have been possibly leaked, like I don't know how they
originally got out there, but just in general, like think
about all of the high profile cases it's just not
(17:37):
typical to release all of the photos that from the
police file in this manner.
Speaker 2 (17:42):
I just thought it was kind of weird.
Speaker 1 (17:44):
Do you think it was an oversight, like somebody did
it by accident when they were grouping the rest of
the documents together that they weren't supposed to be in there.
Speaker 2 (17:52):
No, I don't think so. I just I don't know
like and and all of the rules so they itch.
It varies from state to state. So if you recall
when Bob Saggat died, I guess Florida was a state
that you were able to get the pictures and like
if the press requested the pictures, they could get them.
And remember his wife had to jump in real quick
(18:14):
and be like, I don't want these released. It was
like a specific thing she had to do right after
he died. And I think that all of these rules
were written that these cases are public record before social
media and now that I mean, like, look at it,
like you and I didn't request crime scene photos but
were able to easily pull them up in two seconds
(18:36):
from someone else's account that posted them on X. It's
that easy. It's just kind of maybe it can still
be public record, just not as easily accessible like that
because of social media.
Speaker 1 (18:49):
It just like things need to be reevaluated. But well,
I don't know if a regular person can request those documents.
I think you either have to be categorized as press
or some like an official of sense exactly.
Speaker 2 (19:03):
That's why when they hand it to everyone on a platter,
it's it's kind of dumb.
Speaker 1 (19:07):
Yeah, they just put.
Speaker 2 (19:09):
The link and we're like, hey, anybody want these, here
you go.
Speaker 1 (19:12):
I don't know they're so basically they're expected to go
to court later this week to talk about it more,
and I guess if they lose or the hearing doesn't
go as planned, they could file an appeal to try
to get the photo shut down. And I think ultimately
at this point they know the photos that were released
are forever going to be out there, but they're trying
to prevent the rest of them from coming out because
(19:34):
they're more graphic in nature.
Speaker 2 (19:35):
This case is so weird.
Speaker 1 (19:38):
Yeah, it's just very.
Speaker 2 (19:39):
Weird, Like you know how at first it was just like, oh,
Brian Cooberger is going to be in jail for the
rest of his life, and but then you hear all
these other legal experts saying that's not one hundred percent true.
He could appeal this that there's like a lot of
loopholes that he could potentially get around. And I guess
(20:01):
the more information they put out could could possibly affect
those cases if they come back up right.
Speaker 1 (20:08):
Well really quick. This is another point I wanted to
make about the Karen Reid case for example, Like we
have that one autopsy photo of John O'Keeffe, right, the
scratches on his arm. Yeah, And I don't think that
came out until the trial was televised and somebody simply
screen grabbed the court TV recording.
Speaker 2 (20:29):
It got exactly and they and they said that they
shouldn't have shown that. Like listen, I went to court
a couple of times with the medical examiner, and they
have all the autopsy photos that they put on a
giant screen to show the drawers, right, that this was
what was done, what the medical examiner's describing. There's photos
taken of every single autopsy for this very reason. It's
(20:51):
just it's just very unusual to see something like this,
especially in such a high profile case. It's just I
just think it's very like I think Lacy Peterson's like
a good example of how people were absolutely obsessed with
that case to this day. Okay, let's do another one.
(21:13):
How about the Watts family. We heard the horrible way
that these children were found in these oil containers and stuff.
They never showed us the bodies of the kids. Well,
I think it's just weird.
Speaker 1 (21:24):
I think they should take this as an example to
try to make it not so much. I guess an
ethical gray area where you're releasing them or you're not,
because it has to be one way or the other,
because if you're going to keep releasing them, it doesn't
matter if they're continued to be used for educational use,
because a regular person's always going to get their hands
(21:44):
on them and share them for sensationalized purposes.
Speaker 2 (21:48):
All right, let's talk about the next case, because I
want to talk about pictures with that case as well.
Speaker 1 (21:53):
So over the weekend, a forty year old man went
down the slide in an elementary school playground. He got
stuck and then had to be rescued from the fire department.
Speaker 2 (22:01):
So I saw this article and I thought it was
like My first thought is like, Okay, Gabe has brought
the girls to playground several times and goes on the
slide and stuff with them like this could happen to
any dad, right, Yeah, But so I sent him this
article and we were just kind of laughing about it,
and then it popped up on my Facebook yesterday that
(22:23):
it was a post from the actual fire department, and
I looked at the photos and I really couldnt believe
that these photos were posted on a Facebook page for
a public Facebook page for a fire department. There's I
think nineteen photos of them wanting to show how they
rescued this guy out of it was like the one
(22:45):
that you would see at a playground er McDonald's. That's
a plastic tube that kind of turns like a spiral
sliding board, and the guy was going down it and
must have gotten lodged in it with his body kind
of bent in half. And yes, it was a very
scary rescue because it was hot outside and he's inside
(23:06):
plastic that's cooking and in a confined space, bent and
at risk for position will asphixia at that point. So
I could see why the fire department would want to
show that, because when you approach the scene and the
person stuck, you have to break the slide apart in
order to have access to the person, but also you
know he was having difficulty breathing, and how to get
(23:28):
air to him while they were rescuing because it took
a half hour. That's great, what the and even pictures
from them from the outside of the slide approaching how
to remove this patient or victim, whatever you want to
call him, is fine. My problem is they show pictures
of the slide open with the guy with visible tattoos.
(23:51):
In a very small town, everybody knows who this guy is.
That it could be embarrassing, right It like for a
person to for a like a guy might laugh about it,
but at the same time, like it's kind of embarrassing.
And then so I was talking to Gabe about it
this morning because I'm like, I understand. Let's say, for example,
(24:11):
in the hospital, if a person shows up and has
like a dildo stuck in their butt and a nurse
from across the room took a picture of it and
the guy had a tattoo and you were easily able
to tell who it was, that nurse would be fired
in two seconds for a hip of violation, right, because
it's an identifying factor. It's like posting someone's face or
(24:32):
a body part that you could tell it's them, which
almost getting back to the Idaho thing, that their bedroom,
in my opinion, is an identifying factor in a sense,
you know what I mean. But regardless, so you see
this picture of this guy in this small town on
this Facebook page with his visible tattoo that identifies him.
(24:52):
What are the rules as far as firefighters go of
hippo violations because it's not considered under that same umbrella.
And Gabe actually said to me, he's like, you know what,
I had the same as act feeling. I don't think
they needed to post anywhere near nineteen pictures for that extrication,
and they could have just put one or two of
the outside of the slide if they wanted to show
(25:13):
people how they approached it. And he also thought there
was absolutely no reason there was pictures of the actual
guy being shown. It just was like, it's not necessary
if you're trying to teach firefighters how to do something.
Speaker 1 (25:26):
Basically no, because like you said, it could have been
summed up in one to two photos of them showing
how to dismantle the slide if they wanted to do
it for educational purposes, right, But you didn't need to
have a whole nineteen photo slideshow. That's just completely unnecessary.
And yeah, if they're if they feel they need to
post the person in the photo to accurately represent what
(25:50):
they were doing, they should at least blur out any
identifiable traits like that.
Speaker 2 (25:55):
It's just like I keep thinking about that, Like my
neighborhood itself, my town is pretty small, So if that
happened at our school, and like, let's say the same
exact situation happened, everybody on the Facebook page for my
town would be like, oh my god, who do you
think it was?
Speaker 1 (26:11):
Who do you think it was?
Speaker 2 (26:13):
And and like, dog, you could easily tell who it
is because everybody knows everyone in this town. Somebody knows somebody, right,
It's just like, I don't know it's and it it
to me. It's like, I'm sure this dad's kind of
embarrassed if you have to call the fire department because
you got stuck even having fun with your kids, it's embarrassing. Well,
of course it's embarrassing me, Like, I don't know, I
just it just reminded me of the I mean, it
(26:36):
just it was a good time to talk about the
photo situation. All right, let's move on to this next story,
which is really taking the Internet by storm because honestly,
it's just kind of really weird. This woman, Rebecca Harrow,
said she was at a local store to buy a
mouthguard for her stepson, and before going to the store,
she realized she needed to change her seven month old baby,
(26:56):
Emmanuel's diaper. So, according to the mother, he's changing the
diaper in the parking lot when suddenly she was attacked,
went unconscious and claims when she woke up, the boy
had been taken. So now police are saying her story
is inconsistent and her and her I don't know if
it's her husband, but her and the baby's father are
no longer cooperating with police.
Speaker 1 (27:16):
Duh like it?
Speaker 2 (27:18):
This is how many stories do we have like this?
It really is unfortunate, But the plot has thickened over
the past couple of days, so not cooperating with police.
So apparently this one of the women or one of
the employees that works at this store said that this
mother came in a couple days prior and asked if
(27:41):
there were cameras in the parking lot because she said
that her car had been robbed or something and she
wanted to know if there were cameras unbelievable. Wait, it
gets better. So this person that was working at the
store said that she had a bruise on her eye.
This was a couple days before she said someone punched
(28:03):
her in the face and stole her son. Now this
hasn't been reported on the news. This is just like
hearsay that I've been seeing on a couple of social
media reports. So it might not be one hundred percent accurate.
But as as a pa as somebody that knows bruises,
I could tell you as soon as I saw the bruise,
I was like, that bruise is a couple days old.
(28:24):
It is not. She did not just get this a
couple hours prior to having this press conference.
Speaker 1 (28:31):
Well, you had also sent me something which is also
should be considered hearsay that a TikToker received a message
saying that a person had seen the mother and her
other child, a two year old, at the park the
night before this alleged kidnapping, and she also allegedly had
the black eye at the park as well. But again
this is internet claim, so we don't know if this is.
Speaker 2 (28:52):
Yeah, yeah, I mean, I listen, any person that's ever
had a black eye for any reason. This is like
you don't even know. Have to be a medical person
you know what that looks like. Or you've had a
child that's had an accidental injury when the blood and
the bruise is usually right around where the ocular muscles are,
(29:13):
because that's where the vascular chure would rupture if someone
got punched in the eye, and it would look to
be like on your lower eyelid. Right as the days
go by and gravity takes over and the blood starts
clearing out of your system, it travels down your face,
and her blood is very low underneath of like the
(29:34):
hollows of her eyes, which would indicate to me that
that's not brand new. Do you see what I'm saying
when you look at it like so for me, I'm
just kind of like, yeah, there's more to the story.
You mentioned that you noticed that she had no tears
while she was crying.
Speaker 1 (29:51):
Yeah, when you watch the press conference when she's crying,
she has no tears, which is often pointed out in
high profile cases when people are crying. I just I
don't understand how you could act so hysterical and have
no tears. Sometimes I'll just be talking about a movie
I watched, and I start tearing up, like and I'm
not even upset about anything, it's just like having any
(30:11):
mild emotion. So I absolutely do not understand how she
doesn't have tears. I did not notice the baby's father
had tears when he was pleading for help as well.
That's very unusual to me.
Speaker 2 (30:23):
Well, okay, so let's let's talk about two different things
with the baby's father. Number one. Another thing during the
press conference is that both the father and the mother
were referring to the child as in past tense. He
was he was such a healthy boy, he was, he was.
Why the fuck would you say that if you think
your kid's alive, it's like a Freudian it is, or
(30:45):
it's just like you don't even notice it. But like
if you genuinely think, like if my kid goes to
the store and she doesn't come home in an hour,
I'm not calling police and saying she was so nice.
I don't know what happened. Like, it's just it's just weird.
And there's lots of documented cases of crimes happening where
people do refer to someone in the past, and it's
(31:07):
very interesting, right.
Speaker 1 (31:09):
Yeah, it is interesting and The most glaringly problematic thing
in this guy's past is in twenty eighteen he was
arrested and pleaded guilty to willful cruelty to a child,
and in twenty twenty three was sends to one hundred
and eighty days in jail and forty eight months of probation.
And actually in a couple of weeks he's scheduled to
(31:29):
go in court for an alleged violation of this probation.
So what's going on here?
Speaker 2 (31:35):
So I don't they have another child at the house
that's only two years old?
Speaker 1 (31:43):
Yeah, So the article we were referencing from has said
that they have removed the two year old from their
custody while this investigations be. I mean, they are clearly
the number one suspects right now, Okay, inconsistencies in the story.
They're refusing to take a polygraph test, they lawyered up
pretty quick, they're not crying in the press conference. I mean,
I just think we can't ignore all these signs.
Speaker 2 (32:06):
So that kid, though, the two year old that's at
the house in theory was born in twenty and twenty three,
right or around right? So what who? What kid did
he beat in twenty and eighteen.
Speaker 1 (32:20):
Well there's other kid. I think he has three other
kids from another person.
Speaker 2 (32:24):
So let me let me read this to you too.
You know, a lot of a lot of this stuff
that I that I see online isn't doesn't get collaborated
by news. But now we know that that these independent
reporters are finding things and putting them out there so fast.
(32:45):
But one of the stories that I've seen online was
a report from his twenty eighteen incident with a child
that said that his child was ten weeks old daughter
admitted to Hemmet Valley Hospital. Doctors reported to police that
(33:05):
the little girl had an acute fractured rib six ribs
were healing fractures, a skull, fractured brain, hemorrhage, swelling of
the neck, and a fractured leg bone that was healing.
The combination of the above findings in a pre mobile
infant in the absence of plausible history of significant trauma
to explain the injuries is indicative of abuse, head trauma,
(33:27):
physical abuse, and nutritional neglect.
Speaker 1 (33:31):
What the fuck?
Speaker 2 (33:32):
Like? What? Why? Exactly like? Why is this person allowed
to make more children? Now? Another thing that's really interesting too.
Besides the fact that the parents were talking in the
past tense. They were also saying he was such a
healthy boy.
Speaker 1 (33:50):
Right.
Speaker 2 (33:52):
If you look at photos of this kid, he doesn't
really look I wouldn't say that he just looks like
a normal, healthy baby. They said that he had a
cross eye or a lazy eye. But there's something going
on with this kid. And I don't know if this
kid had a previous history of some kind of head
(34:12):
trauma or something. There just looks like something's going on
there right, a little bit more than just an eye
that is out of alignment, so to speak. Another interesting
thing is that they as the kidnapping, they submitted photos
of the baby, and it's like they set in three
photos of this baby and they're not even like good pictures,
(34:35):
And you're just like, dude, if I go on my
phone right now, especially and I had my kids twelve
and ten years ago, I could probably find in the
course from zero to seven months old, literally thousands of
photos of them. Like you only have three pictures and
they're like blurry.
Speaker 1 (34:54):
I can find ten photos of my friend Rachel's baby
who was born Saturday. By the way, congradulate these, but seriously,
this kid has been in this world for three days
and there's one hundred photos of her already. So these
people have had this baby for seven months and they
have three blurry photos. I don't know what's going on.
(35:14):
Obviously you're innocent, aal proven guilty, but it's not really
looking that great right now. They searched a home with
kidaver dogs didn't come up with anything. The most important
thing to note here is the baby is still missing.
They have no idea where this child is. I would
imagine this kid is not alive still.
Speaker 2 (35:32):
So and then this is another problem that you're going
to face with a little tiny baby and during southern California, Yeah, right,
Like just if it's outside and the elements decomposing and
things like, you'll still be able to see if there
was a history of abuse for sure. And remember we
(35:55):
were even talking about his other child that he allegedly beat.
That the that the dog at the hospital saw healed
rib fractures, and you could tell not only by imaging,
but by looking at it grossly on a skeleton, examining
the bones if bones were broken, because when they heal back,
(36:15):
you could tell when they were broken, especially when they
weren't treated. So say, for example, a kid breaks their
arm and never goes to the hospital and gets it
cast and set. It's going to heal, like really crazy,
and it's apparent what happened. And that's why they note
in it, especially with the last charges he had that
(36:35):
the baby wasn't mobile, meaning not walking yet, because obviously
when children start walking, they fall down the steps and
they do like they get crazy injuries because they're clumsy
and they don't know that they're not supposed to go
close to the steps and things. And then those cases
when you see a child that's got broken limbs like that,
(36:56):
with the exception of being in a car accident, you're
just going to be like, this kid's getting beat because
how else would they get these injuries? They ten weeks old.
You can't even turn around sometimes, right, So it's it's
just it's unfortunate. But I think that we all know
where this is headed. And I think it's also possible
if you beat your kids, that you beat your wife,
(37:17):
and there's a possibility that she's covering for him.
Speaker 1 (37:22):
Yeah, I mean, you don't know what's going on in
their relationship. Is she complicit in it or is she?
Speaker 2 (37:27):
I mean she got a black eye, Someone give her
someone gave her a black eye. We know that's a fact.
It's on her face. Like, I don't know how she
got it, but it got there somehow, either by a
traumatic incident or someone punched her in the face.
Speaker 1 (37:43):
I don't know. I've just at this point and all
of this. You know, I'm reading all the comments, and
usually I don't, you know, engage with internet trolls or
back them at all. But the one comment I saw
repeatedly was this is Casey Anthony two point zero, and
I have to agree, it's looking like that that's the case.
Speaker 2 (38:01):
Yeah, we're that Susan Smith. That was another one where
the mom drove her remember she drove her kids into
a body of water and then said she was hijacked
and someone still their car. Yeah, Like it's it's like
I hate and I hate this. I hate that any
child has to grow up in that situation. It just
also brings up the question that we bring up all
(38:23):
the time, which is just kind of like if you
if you break a ten week old baby's ribs and
head trauma could be from shaking baby syndrome, which is
again something I wanted to bring up with this child's
unusual appearance of his eyes and his like you can't
tell from a video per se, but it just looks
like he's kind of dead behind the eyes. Like I
(38:45):
don't know. You know, you see a picture of a
baby and you could see their life glowing, and it's
just like there's something going on there with the kid, Yeah,
for sure, And you just think about, like how if
a person's capable of that in two thousand and eight,
and all he did was serve some time for it,
like what makes him not be capable of it again?
(39:07):
Or if the child was born with special needs, like
the additional stress that puts on a family.
Speaker 1 (39:14):
I don't know. I think this came up in our
YouTube live a couple of weeks ago when we were talking.
I feel like it was when we talked about that
pedophile that was able to have a child through a surrogate,
that maybe we need to get to a point in
society where when you get pregnant, whether it's natural or not,
you have to have a test to see if you're
like able to or not. I don't want to say able,
(39:37):
because I think of our situation a lot, with you
being so young, having me like that wouldn't have been fair,
and I ended up I think, okay for the boat,
smart questionable at times, but if you have a history
of abusing anybody, especially children, or you're a convicted pedophile,
you should not be allowed to keep us hires.
Speaker 2 (39:56):
Actually like it exactly, Like I I'm always I'm always
against telling people they can't have kids, because then where
do you draw the line, Because obviously some people think
being born into my neighborhood is like poverty, you know,
like it depends on what level. If you live in
(40:17):
a house in Los Angeles, that's millions of dollars, Like
you're going to look down on people like us that
don't have money and think that we don't deserve to
have children either, And like but but like when a
child is going to get hurt or there's a likelihood
of that happening, and there's probably tons of studies done
(40:38):
of how many previous offenders then went on to have
more children and then beat those children too, that you
have to start talking about stuff like that, unfortunately, And
I just I hate where this case is going. And
another thing I wanted to bring up with this case
is like what is up with people? They like if
(41:01):
this is true that she went to the store ahead
of time and like tried to scope out if there
were cameras there, and her and her husband are sitting
there plotting, like how they're going to make up this lie.
Like are people just like really that dumb that they
think that they're going to be able to get away
with something like this?
Speaker 1 (41:18):
Exactly? Like, let me tell you, when I worked at
the bar, right, nobody's asking about the cameras. So if
somebody all of a sudden asked about the cameras and
then a week later they're on the news because their
kids missing and it happened in the same parking lot, yeah,
I'd remember that interaction.
Speaker 2 (41:34):
It's like exactly, like it's just a weird It's just weird.
And like we were, Marie and I were talking about
this yesterday, Like think about someone like Brian Coburger, Like
he had a master's degree and was in a doctorate
program for criminal justice, so he knew way more than
the average person about death investigation. And they were able
(41:59):
to catch him, and they luckily they had that gift
of the of the knife sheaf given to them, but
they have a lot of other evidence with the phone
taps and stuff. So we don't really know because we're
never going to experience this if they would have been
able to catch him without that. But regardless, he did
so much to cover his tracks with turning the phone
(42:21):
off and clearing out this and cleaning that and getting
his car like free of things that they really weren't
able to find a lot of stuff, but they still
were able to get him, and he's still in prison
right now for his crimes. These people are like Joe
Schmoe's off the street, Like they're saying that they didn't
(42:42):
even do an ambler alert because there was no there
was no car description given or a suspect given, like
a description like don't you think that the police were
going to be like, well, who was this? Who was
in the car? Like, well, I don't know, there's just
so much to the story that everybody's going to start
(43:04):
looking into. You didn't think that maybe they were gonna
be able to pull up your old records to see
that you beat a kid before.
Speaker 1 (43:10):
And just because that store doesn't have surveillance doesn't mean
that surrounding stores don't. And they said they're actually looking
at a ton of surveillance they've acquired from the area.
Oh so they can track your steps all morning. I'm
sure one of their neighbors might even have a ring
camera or something where they could see if she loaded
(43:31):
the baby in the car or not.
Speaker 2 (43:33):
There's also yeah, and there's just also other things like
they're going to be checking her cell phone locations, and like,
I mean, just do you watch our show? Do you
watch the news at all? Like do you have any
idea that they're not just gonna be like, oh shit,
some guy came up behind you and punched you in
the head and they took your baby. Okay, go home
with your kid and like live the rest of your
(43:54):
life out, Like what are people thinking?
Speaker 1 (43:58):
Idiot?
Speaker 2 (43:58):
They're just Another thing I want to mention too, is
that I know you're saying the mom doesn't have tears,
but I feel I felt like when she was like crying,
that she seemed to be genuinely like upset. I like
the there was just certain things. I'm not like a
behavioral expert, obviously, but just listening to her, she was
(44:20):
kind of hyperventilating and like.
Speaker 1 (44:22):
Yeah, but like you could argue, like you can argue
any way that she's acting like that. It's story one
this genuinely did happen to her. Story two, the husband
killed the baby and she knows that, but he has
threatened to kill her and the other kid too, So
she's like, I don't know what to do, so I'm
just gonna lie because he told me to Story three,
she's involved in the whole thing. You really just don't know.
Speaker 2 (44:45):
Yeah, no, I know, Like I just I feel like,
I mean, I guess the reason that I was bringing
up is because my personal opinion is that, like story
two is going to be the most likely thing that like,
she's a victim of abuse herself and is scared to
death for her other children and her self.
Speaker 1 (45:14):
This episode is brought to you by the Grossroom. Guys.
Speaker 2 (45:17):
You know, we've been doing this YouTube live and it's
been so much fun. Really, it's better than I thought
it was going to be, honestly, And we're having the
same people in every week asking questions. And one of
the things that we said was, Hey, do you guys
have any ideas or suggestions for doing high profile dissections?
And someone said, oh, could you talk about fibromyalga, So
(45:38):
we did a deep dive on that this week, and
I think that a lot of people in the Gross
Room were having issues similar to that or other issues,
and one of the main themes in it is like
doctors blowing you off when you're having actual problems. So
that was a cool discussion this week. We also had
a Forensic Friday this week, and we talk about what
(45:59):
happens if a person is boiled alive and that story
is outrageous. Did you read that one?
Speaker 1 (46:07):
Right? Extra distory.
Speaker 2 (46:08):
It's just like unbelievable. It's a vintage case. But you're like, okay,
this is exactly how people used to get away with
murder because they weren't able to look at things like
ring cams and cell phone footage and all that stuff.
But yeah, all that and more in the Grosser Room
this week.
Speaker 1 (46:25):
Check it out. Yeah, head over to the Grosserroom dot
com now to sign up.
Speaker 2 (46:31):
All right, let's talk about this case that bigger is
not always better, totally.
Speaker 1 (46:35):
Not in this case. This twenty five year old chick
went on social media. She said that she had a
petite body type with a thirty two A size chest.
So over the next couple of weeks, she started noticing redness,
pain itchiness when she wore bras, and before she knew it,
her boobs ended up growing to a thirty four g cup.
How is this possible?
Speaker 2 (46:56):
So she has a condition that's called gigantomasty, and they
say that it's rare. They said there's only three hundred
cases of it a year. But I personally think, and
I bet you any pathology people that are listening to
me right now think that there's probably more cases of
it that haven't been just recorded, because in working in
(47:20):
surgical pathology, we get breast reductions often, and sometimes they
are so so so big that you can't really think
that it's only three hundred cases a year, because you're like,
I've seen half of them at my hospital, you know
what I mean. It's considered to be from a pathology standpoint,
(47:43):
anything that is bigger than two point five kilograms, which
is five and a half pounds of breast tissue. And
I'll tell you that in like I said, in surgical pathology,
we would get ones that were that were so big
and five and a hal a half pounds is very heavy,
but I've seen a couple that were that big in
(48:05):
my career, so big that you would have to put
one on a scale at a time because it was
just so heavy. And one of the reasons. So when
you're working in surgical pathology, you weigh organs because organs
all have normal weights. Like a heart weighs a certain
amount should it should be two hundred and fifty to
(48:26):
three hundred grams in a woman. So if you get
a heart X plant on a woman and it's like
six hundred grams and we know it's heavy and that's
due to whatever pathology is going on with it, well,
we don't weigh everything. Like a colon, there's no point
to weigh a colon because a colon can vary from
person to person. There's no normal weight for it, especially
because it's full of shit. So if like someone didn't
(48:48):
eat or someone was constipated, or colon would weigh so
much more than another person, so there's no weight for that.
Breasts you would say the same thing because they vary
so much, but we do waigh them because when they
have excessive breast tissue like this. Sometimes it's the difference
between health insurances paying for the surgery or not because technically,
(49:11):
like some women might want to get a breast reduction
because of for cosmetic reasons, but clearly in a case
like this where this petite framed woman had these boobs
that grew so big rapidly. She would have to get
it done because of the strain it was putting on
her muscular skeletal system. So it's important to waive them
(49:32):
in this case. And she was able to get surgery
and now she's the smallest she could go down to
was like a thirty four d or something, which is
still big.
Speaker 1 (49:42):
That's still big, especially if you were used to being
an a cup. I can't even imagine. But they had
cited other people this happened to in this article too,
and one girl said, instead of getting a breast reduction,
she decided to turn to OnlyFans. And she's making a
killing off of it.
Speaker 2 (49:58):
Yeah, she's making over three hundred and fifty dollars a year,
which is which is kind of I mean, uh, do
do you girl?
Speaker 1 (50:07):
Do you like?
Speaker 2 (50:08):
I personally wouldn't want them, just because I can't imagine
how bad your your back would hurt, you know, But
I guess so, we we know plenty of people that
get these rest reduction surgeries, and I guess the biggest
difference between normal hypertrophy of the breast tissue versus this
gigantomassia is that it grows so fast so quickly, and
(50:31):
they don't really know why, but it could be hormone
induced it. I have a case in the grocer room
actually where we talk about a woman that had it
door like dooring and after pregnancy, and she actually ended
up dying from it, which is outrageous, but it happened,
so so yeah, like it. I mean, it's a very
(50:52):
unfortunate thing to happen to someone, and it's a lot
of people would say, oh, like people are paying to
get their boobs bigger, but like they're is obviously a
time where it's too big and it's not better.
Speaker 1 (51:05):
No, absolutely no. All right, So it seems like allergies
have been at an all time high. I mean, you
and I've certainly been dealing with that all weekend. It's
been brutal. But apparently one group of people has some
immunity to them.
Speaker 2 (51:19):
Yeah, so this this was such a cool article about
Amish people. We talk about Amish people's health often because
it's a very controlled group of people that live a
certain way, and when you look at them and compare
them to the normal population, they have sometimes they have
(51:39):
higher rates of health issues and other times they have
more oftentimes they have they seem to have a better
quality of life because they live healthier lives. So for example,
less documented cases of cancer, less documented cases of skin cancer,
despite the fact that they are working outside all day,
(52:00):
a lower rates of autism, things like that. So now
we're talking about allergies and asthma. So as far as
this particular paper goes, it said that fifty percent of
American kids have some form of allergies, and in the
Amish community only seven percent of kids have allergies. And
(52:21):
in America eight to ten percent of kids have asthma,
whereas Amish kids only two percent have asthma. So at
first they were like, okay, well cause you know, oftentimes,
and it's not always, but oftentimes Amish people marry Amish
people and have kids, so a lot of it is
like a kept in the family situation. So you obviously
would think like genetics in a situation like that. But
(52:42):
there's another farming group that they say has similar ancestry
and genetics called the Hutter Rights. Have you I've never
heard of that particular group.
Speaker 1 (52:53):
Yeah, it didn't. It wasn't super familiar to me. I
feel like maybe I've heard about them before. But I
don't know as much culturally as we do about like
the Amish culture of the Mennonite culture, you know.
Speaker 2 (53:04):
So apparently they have similar they do a lot of
the same similar things, except this is how they're trying
to figure out, like where these kids are able to
not have that many allergies. So one of the things
that they don't do is similar. Is Amish people from
the time they are little are in these barns with
(53:26):
their family working on these animals and helping, whereas with
the hutter Rights, those women that are pregnant don't go
in the barnes at all, and when they have children,
the children don't usually start helping until they're about twelve
years old. So that so they were like, okay, that's
a key difference, Like these kids, one kid, one set
of kids, Amish are being exposed to these barns from
(53:48):
the time their little kid, very young kids, and the
other the hutter rights are only being exposed to barnes
over twelve years old. So they determined that then after
they started doing all these studies of testing dust in
Amish people's houses versus hutter rates and things like that,
and they found that there were all these additional microbes
in the dust for Amish people. And furthermore, they took
(54:12):
those types of microbes that were found in Amish dust
and gave them to mice in studies to see what
it was doing. And here it decreased respiratory inflammation and
mice that were exposed to this Amish dust as opposed
to the ones that weren't, which is super interesting. So
(54:33):
I guess the whole point of this study is being like, okay, cause,
like right now, for example, today, my nose is so
swollen and inflamed and running out of my face, and
then I look on the app and it's like, oh,
the dust is really high around here, right, So I
take drugs to make that go away because my nose
is so itchy. They're saying with this, if this is
(54:55):
like an actual thing, that they'll be able to create
some kind of probiotics or something to treat children when
they're so young that they never even get the symptoms
that have to be treated.
Speaker 1 (55:06):
I mean, this would be huge, especially for people like us.
I mean, especially when I was a teenager and in
my early twenties dealing with just seasonal allergies, I just
felt like my face was swollen at all times, so
thinking about something like this would be incredible, especially because
the article pointed out that everything we have now is
(55:26):
really to just manage allergy symptoms, not necessarily cure them.
So if this is something that could be used to
help out, especially people like us, I just can't even
imagine how life changing this would be. Yeah, all right,
let's move on to our last story. So, this woman's
husband suddenly died earlier this year, and she chose a
super cool way to honor him, which was by preserving
(55:48):
his tattooed skin and framing it.
Speaker 2 (55:51):
Yeah, it is. It is so cool. I saw this
on I saw her post actually on Instagram, and I've
heard about this for a while. Actually, one when I
first started my blog before the Gross Room, that was
called iHeart Autopsy, like fifteen years ago. This was one
of the first things that I wrote about because Steve
(56:12):
Tabiri gave me a book about a doctor in Japan
who was seeing patients who had tattoos and was studying
the moles on their tattoos, and during that research he
discovered that syphilis healed on tattooed skin wouldn't recur there.
So this fueled his interest into tattooed skin, and he
(56:35):
was he started asking people, Hey, when you die, can
you leave me your skin, And then it got to
the point where he was telling people he would pay
for them to get full body suits tattooed if they
would promise they would give him the skin afterwards. So
he has this insane collection that he had an insane
(56:57):
collection of photos, but not important, most importantly the actual
skin of people. And you ever see these, like Japanese
tattooed body suits, They're like the coolest thing ever. If
I could go back in time with naked skin, I
would totally get this because I just love the way
it looks so much. But it's essentially like the skin
from in some cases all the way down to the
(57:19):
elbows or wrist down to the knees or ankles of
skin and including entire backskin, front skin. And unfortunately, so
they still have these skins, but unfortunately they're not on
display anywhere right now, but they're they're in Tokyo in
some kind of a museum in the back room kind
of If anybody knows anyone that works there, please let
(57:40):
me know and I will be on the next flight out.
But anyway, so it's been a thing like the Moodor
Museum used to have a couple pieces of tattooed skin
on display. So there's different ways that you could preserve it.
You could do it wet so it stays in a jar,
similar to like if you put i'll colon or a
brain or something thing in a jar, and then you
(58:01):
could do dry, which is what this woman has in
a picture frame. So essentially, I don't know too much
about the process, but I'm assuming it's like the same
exact thing they do with Taxi Army, like tanning the skin,
so it's like a piece of leather basically.
Speaker 1 (58:17):
So I guess this chick found out about it through
Ripley's Believe it or not, and she was really interested
in the process behind it, and her husband was this
huge sports fan. So after his funeral, she marked off
the tattoo she wanted, which was a Pittsburgh Steeler boo.
Were Eagles people.
Speaker 2 (58:34):
I'm not, I don't care you're not, but whatever.
Speaker 1 (58:37):
But that's the tattoo she marked off, and then within
ninety days the company sent it back to her and
she has it now and it's super cool.
Speaker 2 (58:45):
Yeah, So I think they give specific instructions to the
funeral directors on how to remove it and how to
ship it to them, and you know, I am interested
in their process for sure. But it is cool. It's expensive.
Apparently it could cost any from like almost two thousand
dollars to if you had a person that had like
(59:05):
a full bodysuit. You're talking like a lot tens of
thousands of dollars to remove it like that.
Speaker 1 (59:11):
Yeah, I mean, I that's expected because even when you
look at urns and jewelry and stuff you could do
with people's cream aines and stuff, they're everything's expensive in
that world. You know.
Speaker 2 (59:22):
I remember companies like this, we're under fire a little
bit at some point because there's like, of course this
gray area of is this considered to be abuse of
a corpse?
Speaker 1 (59:34):
Well, I don't know. Like in this case, it seemed
like she had brought the idea up to her husband
and he was super into it. So I don't know
if it's like before you die you have to consent
to it or what. Yeah, I'm not sure, but it's
super interesting and it looks pretty cool, and it's a
cool it's like definitely a unique and cool way to
honor somebody. Yeah, it is all right, Let's move on
to questions of the Day. Every Friday at that at
(59:55):
Mother Knows Death Instagram account, you guys could head over
to our story and ask us whatever you want. Could
you catch HIV from a cadaver during an autopsy aka
getting blood into a cut?
Speaker 2 (01:00:07):
In theory, you could, but the probability of that happening
is very low because when the HIV virus hits the air,
it becomes inactive very quickly. So I mean if you
even studies done that show person cutting their finger fresh
with a scalpel blade on an HIV person is not
very high risk and I was never scared of I've
(01:00:31):
done so many autopsies on people that had HIV positive
and was never scared of that. I'm more scared for
HEPSI because that one not only is it more transmissible
at the time of autopsy, but it could live on
countertops for a couple of weeks, like typically it doesn't
(01:00:52):
maybe a couple of days. But think about this, like
if you do an autopsy on a person that has
hepsy on Monday, and then you use the same tools
three days later and you cut yourself with it, you
are at a risk of transmitting it to yourself still,
Like obviously you're going to clean the tools with bleach
after you do an autopsy and stuff, but I mean
(01:01:14):
sometimes things get missed or whatever, and it just would
increase the risk. So I think HEPSI is definitely more
scary for people in autopsy than HIV.
Speaker 1 (01:01:24):
So if you do cut yourself by accident, do you
have to just go get checked out or like that?
Speaker 2 (01:01:30):
Well? I did. I've been caught with hepsy cases plenty
of times because every single time, you know, I have
you know, either in surgical pathology or autopsy. We just
had a really big population of hepsy patients because we
had a big liver transplant. But they can't do anything
(01:01:52):
for you. So you just have to go and document
it and kind of go back and get blood work
and they'll take your blood to see if you have
hepsy or any antibodies for that, and then they'll check
you again in a couple months, and it's just basically
like let's see if it pops up. There's not much
they could do about it. HIV you can take if
you had a note exposure to HIV, you can take drugs,
(01:02:17):
but they are pretty harsh on you. So that and
a lot of people I know don't decide to do
that just because the medications can be so harsh.
Speaker 1 (01:02:26):
All right too, When is SIDS listed as the cause
of death in instances of unsafe sleep suffocations? Any research
on safe sleep conditions preventing a true SID case?
Speaker 2 (01:02:37):
I don't know. I personally, Like I've said this before
on the show, that I don't really think SIDS is
a thing. And it's definitely like I think that they
use it because they just don't. They they can't otherwise
explain it and they have to put something. I just
I don't really think it's a true thing. That that
just like a kid is just dropping dead for no
(01:02:58):
apparent reason. And the reason that I say that is
because there's so many things that have been documented over
the years that say that there's increased risk in certain
demographic socioeconomic conditions. For example, it's more likely to occur
in a baby that was born to a mom of
(01:03:21):
like a teenager as opposed to an older person. They're
associated with co sleeping so much more that so like
that increases the risk of this so much more. People
that smoke during pregnancy is a big one there's just
all these factors. They're more likely to occur in lower
(01:03:43):
socioeconomic status than than a higher one. So if if
they if it was a true thing, it would happen
to a person living in a poorer city and a
person living in a rich city, and like it would
happen in this it would happen to that people that smoked,
people that don't smoke, and stuff. So when you look
(01:04:04):
at factors like that, you're like, okay, well that's that's
that's what's causing SIDS. So a lot of people think
that it's a combination of like there's some kind of
underlying defect that they don't really know what it is yet,
and then there's like this external thing on top of it,
like co sleeping, and the two of them combined are
(01:04:26):
what caused what's called sudden infant death syndrome. But sudden
infant death syndrome is just a diagnosis of exclusion.
Speaker 1 (01:04:35):
All right, This last one's from our girl, Emma. She said, Maria,
I need to know how was the MCR concert. It
was the best night ever. I decided I was going
to go to the New York show instead of the
Philly show because they're playing with Thursday, who are also
one of my favorite bands ever. They're playing with Death
Cab for Cutie too, who I do like. But I
also didn't necessarily need to see live. But that was
(01:04:57):
also their hometown show, so I knew it was going
to be so much better. I bought the tickets last November,
so it was a really long time in between. But
going up there was great. The weather was perfect. They
had the best set lists I've seen so far. I'm
actually really happy I didn't go to the Philly one
because I did not like that set list in comparison
to mine.
Speaker 2 (01:05:17):
And also mL last night we were at the Phillies
game and apparently their stage like ruined the grass of
the Phillies field.
Speaker 1 (01:05:24):
Yeah, the side note there was like a huge Bluebert
was like, what is that on the grass? And it
was clearly a whole outline of the stage from where
they had put it last Friday night. I honestly would
have seen them again, but when I checked tickets in
the middle of the week, they were still going for
hundreds and hundreds of dollars for a seat, and I'm like, well,
(01:05:45):
I just saw them a couple of days ago. But
they played for almost three hours. I thought it was great.
Ricky had a really good time. I went with my
high school friend Austin and his girlfriend as well, and
we had a really great time. It was it was awesome.
I hadn't seen them since I think think the Black
Parade originally came out years and years and years ago
on that original tour, so it was like being a
(01:06:07):
teenager all over again, and it was amazing. I couldn't
have asked for a better experience. And I don't really
go to concerts like that anymore, and I don't ever
really want to, and I could not wait until this happened.
And I had zero complaints. I thought it was incredible.
But to all her sat me with.
Speaker 2 (01:06:24):
She set me a picture and I was like, you
guys are such dorks. Yeah, she made fun of me
the entire time, but I don't know. I thought it
was like, hands down, one of the best nights of
my life. But be honest, it was so it was
so great as somebody that's like that guy I like
still wear eyeliner and have the like emo girl haircut.
Speaker 1 (01:06:45):
Well when they did so the first half of the show,
because it was like the Black Parade Anniversary tour. So
they played that album in full and when they played that,
he had a bunch of makeup on and everything, and
his hair is still long. And then after that album
was done, they took like a couple of minute break
and they came out in regular clothes and just played
(01:07:06):
a lot of their old stuff, which I really liked.
But no makeup that time. But yeah, that was definitely
a thing. Everybody was dressed up in some capacity for it,
and I'm sure the people working at MetLife Stadium were like,
what the hell is going off? I'm sure it's very
different than the Jonas Brothers who played the next night.
Speaker 2 (01:07:26):
Who plays at that stadium?
Speaker 1 (01:07:28):
The Jets and the Giants. They split it.
Speaker 2 (01:07:30):
Oh, okay, so it's kind of it's a football it's
a football field, then.
Speaker 1 (01:07:35):
It's a football field. And I have to say, I
think it's a very nice stadium. I don't really like
Lincoln Financial Field, which is the Eagles Stadium. I think
it's not set up very well. And I found that
The last time I went to MetLife was I saw
the Flyers play the Stadium series their last February, which
was the coldest night I've ever been outside in my life.
(01:07:55):
It was like, seriously zero degrees. But when we were
there it was nice too. Also, they serve Duncan in
the whole stadium, which is very nice.
Speaker 2 (01:08:04):
That's like it like for our Phillies Stadium, Citizens Bank Park,
like they last night. It was chili at the game.
It was definitely not ice cream weather. And they don't
have any no coffee, no hot chocolate, nothing like cozy.
It's just they need to step.
Speaker 1 (01:08:21):
It up a little bit. My one complaint about the concert,
actually I do have a complaint is that I paid
ninety dollars for a hoodie that I know for a
fact I bought for twenty dollars twenty years ago, and
that really far.
Speaker 2 (01:08:34):
Becoming an old person, because that's that's just I think
that's just what a hoodie cost now.
Speaker 1 (01:08:41):
That is ridiculous. I was looking at it. I was
telling Ricky when we were driving there, I was like,
I had, you know, you know, because they were my
favorite band of all time. I had every single shirt
they had at Hot Topic. I had everything, and you know,
when I got to be an older teenager, I was like,
I'm so over them. I only listen to pop punk now.
And then I threw everything out I don't have anything,
(01:09:02):
and I was so bummed about it, and most of
the merch was for the tour or for the Black Parade,
and then I was so excited they had one thing
that was something I had back in the day, so
I wanted to buy it out of nostalgia. And then
I'm like, I can't believe I had.
Speaker 2 (01:09:16):
You can like search Amazon and see if they had
it for five dollars, Like like Louis's Philly shirt he
got off of.
Speaker 1 (01:09:24):
What so everybody could tell it's fake. That was the
worst Philly's shirt I've ever seen.
Speaker 2 (01:09:28):
It so bad. It's actually like it's a It was
like a fake replica of a jersey and are so
we have like retro Phillies colors are maroon and then
the newer ones and the really really old ones are
like a bright red, and the shirt had both colors
on it. I've never seen that ever, and it had
(01:09:49):
it so it's like a traditional baseball jersey and it
had a zipper, and I'm just like, I'm like embarrassed
to even be standing next to you right now with
this shirt on.
Speaker 1 (01:09:59):
When he was walking through the gate yards and yards
away from us, I was like that is the worst
fake journey I've ever seen in my life.
Speaker 2 (01:10:06):
It really is. It's so bad, and he like apparently
just like opened it right before he went to the
game and didn't really think much of it. And you know,
I don't know.
Speaker 1 (01:10:16):
He's color blind too, though. Do you think he can't
see the difference?
Speaker 2 (01:10:20):
I still think he Yeah, it's pot like he might
not be able to see the difference in the color exactly,
but he could tell that the tones are different, once
darker than the other one. I actually was pretty sure
I'm gonna post it on my Instagram later so you
guys could say it it's so bad. It was pretty bad,
but yeah, best and i'd ever I highly recommend everybody
(01:10:41):
see them on the rest of their tour, even though
again the tickets were another thing that I was like,
I definitely paid twenty bucks to see them twenty years
ago and now it was lots of money. But all right, guys,
we are gonna be a crime kind in only two weeks,
which I honestly can't believe. We still don't have our
outfits really picked out, so I guess that's something that
needs to get checked the list this week. I do
(01:11:02):
you do I have some stuff moment today, but we'll see.
I gotta try everything on Please leave us reviews on
Apple or Spotify.
Speaker 1 (01:11:09):
It would be much appreciated. And subscribe to our YouTube channel.
And if you have a shocking story for us, or
if you you know, want I give us some personal
account of what happened to you or whatever, we'd love
to read it on the show and you could submit
those to stories at mothernosdeth dot com.
Speaker 2 (01:11:25):
Yeah, see you guys.
Speaker 1 (01:11:26):
Bye.
Speaker 2 (01:11:31):
Thank you for listening to Mother nos Death. As a reminder,
my training is as a pathologist assistant. I have a
master's level education and specialize in anatomy and pathology education.
I am not a doctor and I have not diagnosed
or treated anyone dead or alive without the assistance of
a licensed medical doctor. This show, my website, and social
(01:11:55):
media accounts are designed to educate and inform people based
on my experience working in pathology, so they can make
healthier decisions regarding their life and well being. Always remember
that science is changing every day and the opinions expressed
in this episode are based on my knowledge of those
subjects at the time of publication. If you are having
(01:12:17):
a medical problem, have a medical question or having a
medical emergency, Please contact your physician or visit an urgent
care center, emergency room, or hospital. Please rate, review, and
subscribe to Mother Knows Death on Apple, Spotify, YouTube, or
anywhere you get podcasts.
Speaker 1 (01:12:37):
Thanks
Elvis Duran and the Morning Show ON DEMAND News
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
New Heights with Jason & Travis Kelce
Football’s funniest family duo — Jason Kelce of the Philadelphia Eagles and Travis Kelce of the Kansas City Chiefs — team up to provide next-level access to life in the league as it unfolds. The two brothers and Super Bowl champions drop weekly insights about the weekly slate of games and share their INSIDE perspectives on trending NFL news and sports headlines. They also endlessly rag on each other as brothers do, chat the latest in pop culture and welcome some very popular and well-known friends to chat with them. Check out new episodes every Wednesday. Follow New Heights on the Wondery App, YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts. You can listen to new episodes early and ad-free, and get exclusive content on Wondery+. Join Wondery+ in the Wondery App, Apple Podcasts or Spotify. And join our new membership for a unique fan experience by going to the New Heights YouTube channel now!