December 8, 2025 • 20 mins
The Brian Walshe trial wrapped up its 6th day of testimony with a number of eerie visuals and evidence. Jurors saw Brian Walshe shopping for dismemberment supplies within hours of Ana Walshe’s death, even bringing their child with him to a follow up visit to the store. We also heard and saw photos of blood stains found in the Walshe home on rugs and towels, on a knife and on the basement floor, but as Amy and T.J. discuss, the defense continued to score points in cross examination.
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 (00:02):
Hey there, folks. It is Monday, December the eighth and
day sixth of testimony and the Brian Walsh trial is
now in the books. Evidence a lot of it was
going over in court today, including some pretty remarkable, some
pretty eerie videos of Brian Walsh not long after he
(00:24):
says his wife died. And with that, welcome to this
episode of Amy and TJ and Robes were talking about. Yes,
this case. One big deal about the case is that
he admitted to cutting up and disposing of his wife's body.
These videos show him buying the tools.
Speaker 2 (00:37):
It's you said, eerie, That's a really good way to
put it. And when he is at Low's. I believe
that was on January first, in the afternoon, so we
are talking within hours of his wife dying. We see
him with a mask and blue latex gloves purchasing all
(00:59):
of the items that he used. And we can say
this because he's admitted to it to chop up, dismember
his wife's body. So yes, I was actually even watching
the Low's employee unknowingly being a part of this where he's,
like I said, can you imagine after the fact, now
(01:21):
he's watching this surveillance video that's being played in quarter,
or at least is aware of it. And he's holding
and touching these items and selling them to this man
who is going to use them for the most despicable, disgusting,
unthinkable act. It's just the idea of it, just it
all hits you when you watch the surveillance video.
Speaker 1 (01:38):
Yeah, we'd heard about some of the video. We've been
hearing about video that shows him throwing stuff in the dumpster.
Well we saw that stuff today and then surveillance video.
I guess one that's most head scratching in bizarre robes
is that one of them, he is actually entering the
store with a young child. They blur out the child's face.
We have to assume it's one of his kids. But
(02:01):
to think he made a run to the store on
that day to continue buying cleaning items and the woman
he just chopped up. He took that woman's child with
him to the store to collect these ideas. That was again,
the videos were the most fascinating part of the day.
Speaker 2 (02:18):
I know, I looked at you and I said, can
you even imagine that kid's going to know at some
point in his life, Daddy took me to the store
to get things to clean up my mom's body. It's
it really it doesn't seem like anyone that we know
or that we love, or even when we think about
(02:38):
what we're capable of. Could you bring a child, the
child of the mother you just or were about to
dismember that I don't know why that takes it to
a whole other level, but it just does.
Speaker 1 (02:51):
All right. So that was certainly some of the highlights
of the day. We'll give you more about those videos
in a second, but the day started today. They continued
with the examiner who was on last week at the
end of the day on Friday, but the medical examiner
was back up. Also. We talked about so much of
the evidence and so much of these surveillance videos that
we'll get to but ropes the medical examiner, and as
(03:12):
to be expected when over a lot of the evidence
and blood was found downstairs. We found some blood on
the hack saw, we found blood on a night the
piece of rug, all these things. That stuff is to
be expected. They had to get all these things in evidence.
But then the guy, now we've been kind of in
awe of Larry Tipton, the defense attorney, He got up
(03:34):
and started making points that nobody seemed to push back on,
and these points seemed to be even bigger because of
that he had this was he turned the medical examiner,
the prosecution's witness, into his It.
Speaker 2 (03:48):
Did feel like, yes, at some points, the medical examiner
was testifying on behalf of the defense. That is what
it felt like, because Yeah, Tipton got the medical examiner
to admit that he cannot make a definitive finding on
the cause and manner of Anna Walsh's death as long
as he doesn't have the body. So he's like, yeah, confirmed, jury,
(04:11):
are you listening. The medical examiner is telling you that
no matter what, the prosecution cannot tell you the cause
or manner of Anna Walsh's death.
Speaker 3 (04:22):
Period. That's a pretty big issue for the prosecution.
Speaker 1 (04:27):
Yeah, it is a big issue because they know every
single one of those jurors. They want a couple of things.
They want a motive, and they don't want to know
how she died. Everybody agrees she dead, but how does
she die? That's a very important question. But Robes, he's
sitting up this idea of the sudden, unexplained death. It
is everybody agrees, it's so so so rare, so rare.
(04:49):
So the medical examiner is sitting up there and Tipton,
the defends attorney, is listing off all these ways somebody
could possibly die unexpected unexpectedly. He reels off, what is this, robes, asphyxia,
sexual activity, illness, somebody could even have sudden, unexplained death
(05:09):
because of an extended trip, extended travel road dress. He
asked this guy all these things, and the guy just said, Yep,
that's an option, Yep, that could be true, Yep, that
could happen too. He never said yeah, but it's really
really rare.
Speaker 2 (05:24):
He didn't qualify or quantify it at all. He just
kept agreeing with Tipton that that was possible. Yes, that's possible,
and he even said in young, otherwise healthy people, yes
that could happen. And the fact the crazy thing is,
then the prosecution didn't say, we'd like a redirect and
have him explain just how unusual all of those specific
(05:47):
rare occasions are. But when you have the defense attorney
listing all of those rare occasions in a long list,
it sounds like it happens all the time.
Speaker 1 (05:57):
So I do not remember a moment he qualified it.
So if you didn't know any better, and you're hearing
about sudden and explained death. Oh, all it can happen
because of that what you're hearing, you think are all
the options. So I hear like, oh, there are ten
possibilities for how she could have died from sudden with
no qualifying yet happens in point zero zero, zero point
(06:20):
one cases or whatever.
Speaker 2 (06:22):
Right, And when that follows the medical examiner himself saying
that he can't tell the jury how Anna Walsh died. Now,
don't you have to consider all of this laundry list
that the defense just laid out that the medical examiner
agreed with. Don't you have to consider that as possible?
And how does that play into reasonable doubt? It's all
(06:43):
very effective, and it certainly was today listening to it, and.
Speaker 1 (06:46):
The actually the defense didn't didn't actually have that active
of a day. The prosecution kept putting up a number
of witnesses essentially just to get evidence into testimony who
weren't evidence into the trial. These folks weren't necessarily folks
that the defense had anything to refute. We had an
employer of Ano Walsh testified, a Walgreens employee, a liquor
(07:07):
store employee, a Low's employee. But in getting the some
of this evidence in let's start with the Walgreens employee Robes,
they showed surveillance video of him buying band aids and
antibiotic cream. Then you go to the liquor store in Robes.
This was the one where I think I might have
tapped you and said, look at this.
Speaker 2 (07:24):
You did, yeah, because we were you know, we're working,
we're watching, and all of a sudden, you see pretty
undeniably Brian Walsh walking with black trash bags and putting
them in this dumpster. There was something so so eerie
about that as well. To know what was inside those bags,
(07:44):
or what was possibly inside those bags, it's just it's
so unsettling to see it.
Speaker 1 (07:50):
And we've been hearing about this very video for quite
some time. But you see him plain as day, and
they had the liquor store employee up there. They were
trying to do is make clear that he had no
other reason to be there, because this was on January one,
it was closed. The no reason for him to be there.
Speaker 3 (08:07):
The liquor store was closed on New Year's Day.
Speaker 1 (08:10):
But they have a dumpster on site, and sure enough,
he's in his car dumping this stuff. Now, the other
person they got out there was an employee of Lows.
He made a couple of stops at Lows. But in
one of those stops, the one we were talking about robes,
you can see him with the gloves. A couple of
employees are helping him, so we are. He looks like
he's doing a total home makeover. The baskets are full
(08:34):
of stuff, and this is essentially his body removal kit.
Speaker 2 (08:39):
That's what you actually said, Oh my gosh, just look
what's in those baskets. It is a body removal kit
of buckets and tarps and mops and just a lot
of cleaning supplies. It was really disturbing to see it
all in his shopping cars.
Speaker 1 (08:58):
I haven't seen or heard anyone explain why he had
the mask on.
Speaker 3 (09:02):
Now.
Speaker 1 (09:02):
I don't know if he had a medical issue he
was trying to cover his face that night, But this
was post This wasn't during those times.
Speaker 3 (09:08):
I didn't hear anyone directly address it.
Speaker 2 (09:10):
But I was thinking because then in later surveillance videos
he doesn't have a mask of gloves on, but in
that first one he did, and I was wondering if maybe, yes,
he was worried about being caught, it had just happened.
He didn't want anyone to know it was him, So
I was thinking that might be the case. And then
maybe he started to let his guard down. Maybe he
thought his story was working, Maybe he thought he had
(09:31):
it all figured out, and so he didn't feel as
nervous about being seen in public, because yeah, he was
pretty covered up, although he has such a very specific
stature and look like you can tell one hundred percent
that it was him. And the other thing that was interesting,
it's the only time every person who was testified, Well,
there was one today who said he was emotional when
(09:52):
he was talking about Anna, when he was calling the
work her work security guard. He said he was very
emotional for a moment. But almost everyone who's just describe
Brian in phone conversations, in police interviews, and even in
the surveillance video we've seen, he seems cool, calm and
collected as if well, you would never think something was wrong.
(10:12):
You would never think his wife was missing, you would
never think the love of his life is somehow gone.
But in that first surveillance video in Low's where he
has the mask and the rubber gloves on and it's
within hours I guess of her dying. He was antsy.
You said, Look, oh my gosh, it's the only time
he looked physically nervous.
Speaker 1 (10:32):
Even in court. We haven't seen him be anything but cool.
I mean, he was shifting his weight back and forth
on his feet. He seemed to be in a hurry.
He wanted to get the hell out of there. It
was the first time we've seen it, and we can
imagine why at that point in by very early morning hours,
this first video we're seeing the other they had a
(10:52):
CBS employee up there. This is the video I mentioned
this one. I think this is one robes that there's
I don't think about this video. You see him as
so plain as day, clear as day. Had these images
of him when you know at least he admitted what
he's been doing at home, right, You see this guy, like,
(11:14):
what is going on? How is he able to keep
it together.
Speaker 3 (11:17):
Right and just act normal.
Speaker 2 (11:19):
It's weird to see because you just think that there'd
be something that would give you away because of what
you had just been taking a part of the most gruesome,
horrific thing you can imagine having to do, and the
panic he must have felt to try and cover up
what had happened, and ugh to think about just going
(11:41):
out in the world and acting like you're just going
and making a Walgreens run for some band aids for
your kids. But actually there is a very different story
unfolding at your home.
Speaker 1 (11:50):
Hi, right, folks, Well, there was a final witness of
the day and again on cross examination, the defense was
able to get him to admit something pretty major. Will
explain what that was. Also, one of our dear legal
friends will explain why she says the prosecution is absolutely
(12:10):
blowing it. Stay here, we continue now, folks, Day six
of the Brian Walsh trial. What's the latest again, Robe,
They were the prosecution was ahead of schedule, right, I
thought it was a two or three week trial. But
(12:31):
right now they're certainly on or ahead of schedule.
Speaker 2 (12:34):
Correct, they are ahead of schedule, according to the judge.
When she wrapped up or was telling the jurors to
enjoy their weekend, she did say it looks like the
prosecution is slightly ahead of schedule. She had warned them
there could be up to four four and a half
weeks of testimony. She says she now thinks there will
be just two more weeks of testimony, so she thinks
a total of three, so she thinks it's been shortened
(12:56):
by even as much as a week.
Speaker 1 (12:58):
But skin close to Chris it.
Speaker 2 (13:00):
It is well, no, at this point, if there are
two more weeks of testimony, that means the jury would
get this case the week of Christmas, which.
Speaker 3 (13:09):
I don't know if they're willing to do that.
Speaker 2 (13:11):
I don't know if they would say, hey, we'll reconvene
January third, I don't know. That seems like a tall
order to ask these jurors to remember everything, to go
through Christmas and New Year's, to not talk about it
with family members all they know that they're on this
high profile case. That seems like such an unreasonable ask
because obviously they would not sequester the jurors during this time,
(13:33):
and that's just going to piss everybody off. So and
I don't know, it really is going to be right
at it's going to butt up directly to the holiday
and think about you know, this isn't just about Christmas
Day or Christmas Eve.
Speaker 3 (13:49):
These jurors have.
Speaker 2 (13:50):
Kids and families who probably have Christmas pageants and specials
and parties and events, and it's just it's a tough
time of year to be on a jury.
Speaker 1 (14:00):
Also missing work many of them maybe, and missing out
on money, missing out on check. I mean, you get
paid for jury duty.
Speaker 2 (14:07):
But it's oh, I don't even know what it is now,
but what is it? Fifty dollars a day something?
Speaker 1 (14:11):
It's not. Yes, it's not a living wage. We should
say the last the State Crime Lab was the guy
was up today again going through a lot of stuff
that was found, putting evidence into UH and to the trial.
But Robes the cross examinator examinator is what I call
Lipton Tipton.
Speaker 2 (14:31):
Excuse me, Jeeseus's Larry Tipton. But it's easy to say.
Speaker 1 (14:34):
Not Lipton. We should start calling him Lipton.
Speaker 3 (14:36):
No, let's not because his name is Terry. No, Larry Tipton.
Oh my gosh, you just got me to say.
Speaker 1 (14:42):
I didn't get you to No.
Speaker 2 (14:44):
Okay, you put it in my head. It's messed up
and removing it to Larry Tipton.
Speaker 1 (14:48):
He is tipping the scales of justice.
Speaker 3 (14:49):
How about that now you'll always remember?
Speaker 1 (14:51):
Okay? But yeah, Tipton he's talking to the State Crime
Lab guy and got him to admit something pretty significant
after he went through all of this testimony with the prosecute.
I found this, and I found this, he said, And
he got him to admit he did not find anything
forensically significant in that bedroom that suggested how she died,
(15:14):
who killed her, if she was murdered, what meant? Nothing
in there that actually helped prove any case. And he
had to admit that, yes.
Speaker 2 (15:22):
And he also got him to admit that because police
had been coming in and out of that home for days,
that there was no way to be able to prove
any of the blood stains that were found in the
basement on the concrete. When did they get there, could
someone else have brought them in? How do we know
when those blood stains occurred? And whether or not the
(15:45):
crime scene was just completely compromised because of the amount
of traffic that was coming in and out of that
home by police themselves. So he, once again Tipton did
his job, and he did it very well. After hearing
all of this, it actually it sounds awful to say
the testimony about bloodstains can get boring, but after a
while it's the same thing over and over and over
(16:05):
and over again. And then all of a sudden, when Tipton,
I said, wow, shift and energy. He comes in with
the mission and he knows exactly what he's trying to
disprove or at least bring into question, and he brought
it home.
Speaker 1 (16:18):
He makes you sit up and you wonder where he's going,
what point he's making. And again, I know this isn't
supposed to be the point, but every lawyer will tell
you that theatrics it better. Of course it matters. So
we're listening to a monotonous voice going through this and
that nothing is compelling at least, yes, it has to
be entered into evidence. I understand, but man, to your point,
(16:40):
we almost Okay, time to gather around. We gotta really
pay attention.
Speaker 2 (16:43):
Now because actually, yes, I have to make myself focus
when the prosecution is up, when Tipton's up, I am.
Speaker 3 (16:50):
I'm listening intently.
Speaker 1 (16:52):
Again, this is not a criticism, just a reality of
the experience that we're having watching this thing. So you
can guess a lot of other people are too. In robes.
We say the reality in our experience. We're not being
critical of the prosecution, but we are talking to people
who are someone who has become a dear deer resource
for us here. Recently, Alison Treesel, an attorney with a
(17:15):
lot of criminal defense experience. We were talking to her today,
wrote she did not mince her words about just how
shocked she is and how poor of a job the
prosecution has been doing on several major points.
Speaker 2 (17:30):
Yes, she talked about missed opportunities. Yes, missed opportunities just
in emphasizing certain things that, yes, you want the jurors
to pay attention. You want the Jewis to remember things
like he searched for murder instead of just going he
searched for murder.
Speaker 3 (17:44):
There is a difference.
Speaker 2 (17:45):
She was even noticing just the decision to be monotone
and to not punch home certain words that you want
the jurors to keep in their heads when they think
about this case and associate with Brian Walsh.
Speaker 3 (17:57):
But also just in.
Speaker 2 (18:00):
Pointing out some of this evidence and really driving at
home and then following up she said she would just
let things go, and then when the defense made a point,
she had an opportunity to redirect and just chose not to.
She was aghast, and she said she was screaming at
the monitor.
Speaker 3 (18:18):
Like why would you not have followed up with that?
Speaker 2 (18:20):
So's she was taking us point by point by point
in discussing where the prosecution has repeatedly dropped the ball
in her eyes and has basically handed huge wins over
to the defense that she could have reclaimed had she
followed through with a follow up.
Speaker 1 (18:35):
Someone I forgot about that point about this not even strategy.
It's almost so many of those searches were dramatic all
their own. How do you make them boring? They went
through like some of them are so outlandish that all
you have make the point Like Jesus he said what
he read like, that's all you have to do. That's
(18:56):
not strategy, that's just that's not a great legal strategy.
She said. It's just you're not talking to them. And
I guess reacting as a human being the way we
all are to what we're seeing, you're almost treating it
like it's nothing and leaving it for them to interpret
whether or not it's a big deal. When you don't
act like it's a big deal.
Speaker 2 (19:16):
I think Alison suggested, maybe she was treating it like
it was a slam dunk when this case is not.
Now if you want to listen to our whole interview
with her, please you can check out on Amy and
TJ presents our latest Our latest episode has our full
interview with Alison Triesol.
Speaker 3 (19:32):
You should check it out.
Speaker 2 (19:33):
She is brilliant when it comes to interpreting what we're
seeing in the courtroom. So it's really a fun episode.
If you're really into this trial, highly suggest you check
it out.
Speaker 1 (19:40):
But you had something good?
Speaker 3 (19:42):
Oh no, please go ahead. No, I'm just wrapping it up.
Speaker 1 (19:45):
Oh no, no, no, I could talk to you about this
off camera camera, I mean off mike.
Speaker 3 (19:49):
Sorry, were you used to being on camera?
Speaker 1 (19:52):
Off mic? Don't anybody take that and run with it?
Speaker 2 (19:54):
Okay, just tolelease, don't no, no, we're hoping to get
cameras in the podcast. Yes, will be broadcast podcast, all right,
So we are going to obviously keep our eye on
this trial. We will continue to bring you updates as
they are warranted. But so far, every day there has
been a lot to say, so thank you for listening everyone.
I'm Amy Roeboch alongside TJ. Holmes, and we will talk
(20:17):
to you soon.
Hey there, folks. It is Monday, December the eighth and
day sixth of testimony and the Brian Walsh trial is
now in the books. Evidence a lot of it was
going over in court today, including some pretty remarkable, some
pretty eerie videos of Brian Walsh not long after he
(00:24):
says his wife died. And with that, welcome to this
episode of Amy and TJ and Robes were talking about. Yes,
this case. One big deal about the case is that
he admitted to cutting up and disposing of his wife's body.
These videos show him buying the tools.
Speaker 2 (00:37):
It's you said, eerie, That's a really good way to
put it. And when he is at Low's. I believe
that was on January first, in the afternoon, so we
are talking within hours of his wife dying. We see
him with a mask and blue latex gloves purchasing all
(00:59):
of the items that he used. And we can say
this because he's admitted to it to chop up, dismember
his wife's body. So yes, I was actually even watching
the Low's employee unknowingly being a part of this where he's,
like I said, can you imagine after the fact, now
(01:21):
he's watching this surveillance video that's being played in quarter,
or at least is aware of it. And he's holding
and touching these items and selling them to this man
who is going to use them for the most despicable, disgusting,
unthinkable act. It's just the idea of it, just it
all hits you when you watch the surveillance video.
Speaker 1 (01:38):
Yeah, we'd heard about some of the video. We've been
hearing about video that shows him throwing stuff in the dumpster.
Well we saw that stuff today and then surveillance video.
I guess one that's most head scratching in bizarre robes
is that one of them, he is actually entering the
store with a young child. They blur out the child's face.
We have to assume it's one of his kids. But
(02:01):
to think he made a run to the store on
that day to continue buying cleaning items and the woman
he just chopped up. He took that woman's child with
him to the store to collect these ideas. That was again,
the videos were the most fascinating part of the day.
Speaker 2 (02:18):
I know, I looked at you and I said, can
you even imagine that kid's going to know at some
point in his life, Daddy took me to the store
to get things to clean up my mom's body. It's
it really it doesn't seem like anyone that we know
or that we love, or even when we think about
(02:38):
what we're capable of. Could you bring a child, the
child of the mother you just or were about to
dismember that I don't know why that takes it to
a whole other level, but it just does.
Speaker 1 (02:51):
All right. So that was certainly some of the highlights
of the day. We'll give you more about those videos
in a second, but the day started today. They continued
with the examiner who was on last week at the
end of the day on Friday, but the medical examiner
was back up. Also. We talked about so much of
the evidence and so much of these surveillance videos that
we'll get to but ropes the medical examiner, and as
(03:12):
to be expected when over a lot of the evidence
and blood was found downstairs. We found some blood on
the hack saw, we found blood on a night the
piece of rug, all these things. That stuff is to
be expected. They had to get all these things in evidence.
But then the guy, now we've been kind of in
awe of Larry Tipton, the defense attorney, He got up
(03:34):
and started making points that nobody seemed to push back on,
and these points seemed to be even bigger because of
that he had this was he turned the medical examiner,
the prosecution's witness, into his It.
Speaker 2 (03:48):
Did feel like, yes, at some points, the medical examiner
was testifying on behalf of the defense. That is what
it felt like, because Yeah, Tipton got the medical examiner
to admit that he cannot make a definitive finding on
the cause and manner of Anna Walsh's death as long
as he doesn't have the body. So he's like, yeah, confirmed, jury,
(04:11):
are you listening. The medical examiner is telling you that
no matter what, the prosecution cannot tell you the cause
or manner of Anna Walsh's death.
Speaker 3 (04:22):
Period. That's a pretty big issue for the prosecution.
Speaker 1 (04:27):
Yeah, it is a big issue because they know every
single one of those jurors. They want a couple of things.
They want a motive, and they don't want to know
how she died. Everybody agrees she dead, but how does
she die? That's a very important question. But Robes, he's
sitting up this idea of the sudden, unexplained death. It
is everybody agrees, it's so so so rare, so rare.
(04:49):
So the medical examiner is sitting up there and Tipton,
the defends attorney, is listing off all these ways somebody
could possibly die unexpected unexpectedly. He reels off, what is this, robes, asphyxia,
sexual activity, illness, somebody could even have sudden, unexplained death
(05:09):
because of an extended trip, extended travel road dress. He
asked this guy all these things, and the guy just said, Yep,
that's an option, Yep, that could be true, Yep, that
could happen too. He never said yeah, but it's really
really rare.
Speaker 2 (05:24):
He didn't qualify or quantify it at all. He just
kept agreeing with Tipton that that was possible. Yes, that's possible,
and he even said in young, otherwise healthy people, yes
that could happen. And the fact the crazy thing is,
then the prosecution didn't say, we'd like a redirect and
have him explain just how unusual all of those specific
(05:47):
rare occasions are. But when you have the defense attorney
listing all of those rare occasions in a long list,
it sounds like it happens all the time.
Speaker 1 (05:57):
So I do not remember a moment he qualified it.
So if you didn't know any better, and you're hearing
about sudden and explained death. Oh, all it can happen
because of that what you're hearing, you think are all
the options. So I hear like, oh, there are ten
possibilities for how she could have died from sudden with
no qualifying yet happens in point zero zero, zero point
(06:20):
one cases or whatever.
Speaker 2 (06:22):
Right, And when that follows the medical examiner himself saying
that he can't tell the jury how Anna Walsh died. Now,
don't you have to consider all of this laundry list
that the defense just laid out that the medical examiner
agreed with. Don't you have to consider that as possible?
And how does that play into reasonable doubt? It's all
(06:43):
very effective, and it certainly was today listening to it, and.
Speaker 1 (06:46):
The actually the defense didn't didn't actually have that active
of a day. The prosecution kept putting up a number
of witnesses essentially just to get evidence into testimony who
weren't evidence into the trial. These folks weren't necessarily folks
that the defense had anything to refute. We had an
employer of Ano Walsh testified, a Walgreens employee, a liquor
(07:07):
store employee, a Low's employee. But in getting the some
of this evidence in let's start with the Walgreens employee Robes,
they showed surveillance video of him buying band aids and
antibiotic cream. Then you go to the liquor store in Robes.
This was the one where I think I might have
tapped you and said, look at this.
Speaker 2 (07:24):
You did, yeah, because we were you know, we're working,
we're watching, and all of a sudden, you see pretty
undeniably Brian Walsh walking with black trash bags and putting
them in this dumpster. There was something so so eerie
about that as well. To know what was inside those bags,
(07:44):
or what was possibly inside those bags, it's just it's
so unsettling to see it.
Speaker 1 (07:50):
And we've been hearing about this very video for quite
some time. But you see him plain as day, and
they had the liquor store employee up there. They were
trying to do is make clear that he had no
other reason to be there, because this was on January one,
it was closed. The no reason for him to be there.
Speaker 3 (08:07):
The liquor store was closed on New Year's Day.
Speaker 1 (08:10):
But they have a dumpster on site, and sure enough,
he's in his car dumping this stuff. Now, the other
person they got out there was an employee of Lows.
He made a couple of stops at Lows. But in
one of those stops, the one we were talking about robes,
you can see him with the gloves. A couple of
employees are helping him, so we are. He looks like
he's doing a total home makeover. The baskets are full
(08:34):
of stuff, and this is essentially his body removal kit.
Speaker 2 (08:39):
That's what you actually said, Oh my gosh, just look
what's in those baskets. It is a body removal kit
of buckets and tarps and mops and just a lot
of cleaning supplies. It was really disturbing to see it
all in his shopping cars.
Speaker 1 (08:58):
I haven't seen or heard anyone explain why he had
the mask on.
Speaker 3 (09:02):
Now.
Speaker 1 (09:02):
I don't know if he had a medical issue he
was trying to cover his face that night, But this
was post This wasn't during those times.
Speaker 3 (09:08):
I didn't hear anyone directly address it.
Speaker 2 (09:10):
But I was thinking because then in later surveillance videos
he doesn't have a mask of gloves on, but in
that first one he did, and I was wondering if maybe, yes,
he was worried about being caught, it had just happened.
He didn't want anyone to know it was him, So
I was thinking that might be the case. And then
maybe he started to let his guard down. Maybe he
thought his story was working, Maybe he thought he had
(09:31):
it all figured out, and so he didn't feel as
nervous about being seen in public, because yeah, he was
pretty covered up, although he has such a very specific
stature and look like you can tell one hundred percent
that it was him. And the other thing that was interesting,
it's the only time every person who was testified, Well,
there was one today who said he was emotional when
(09:52):
he was talking about Anna, when he was calling the
work her work security guard. He said he was very
emotional for a moment. But almost everyone who's just describe
Brian in phone conversations, in police interviews, and even in
the surveillance video we've seen, he seems cool, calm and
collected as if well, you would never think something was wrong.
(10:12):
You would never think his wife was missing, you would
never think the love of his life is somehow gone.
But in that first surveillance video in Low's where he
has the mask and the rubber gloves on and it's
within hours I guess of her dying. He was antsy.
You said, Look, oh my gosh, it's the only time
he looked physically nervous.
Speaker 1 (10:32):
Even in court. We haven't seen him be anything but cool.
I mean, he was shifting his weight back and forth
on his feet. He seemed to be in a hurry.
He wanted to get the hell out of there. It
was the first time we've seen it, and we can
imagine why at that point in by very early morning hours,
this first video we're seeing the other they had a
(10:52):
CBS employee up there. This is the video I mentioned
this one. I think this is one robes that there's
I don't think about this video. You see him as
so plain as day, clear as day. Had these images
of him when you know at least he admitted what
he's been doing at home, right, You see this guy, like,
(11:14):
what is going on? How is he able to keep
it together.
Speaker 3 (11:17):
Right and just act normal.
Speaker 2 (11:19):
It's weird to see because you just think that there'd
be something that would give you away because of what
you had just been taking a part of the most gruesome,
horrific thing you can imagine having to do, and the
panic he must have felt to try and cover up
what had happened, and ugh to think about just going
(11:41):
out in the world and acting like you're just going
and making a Walgreens run for some band aids for
your kids. But actually there is a very different story
unfolding at your home.
Speaker 1 (11:50):
Hi, right, folks, Well, there was a final witness of
the day and again on cross examination, the defense was
able to get him to admit something pretty major. Will
explain what that was. Also, one of our dear legal
friends will explain why she says the prosecution is absolutely
(12:10):
blowing it. Stay here, we continue now, folks, Day six
of the Brian Walsh trial. What's the latest again, Robe,
They were the prosecution was ahead of schedule, right, I
thought it was a two or three week trial. But
(12:31):
right now they're certainly on or ahead of schedule.
Speaker 2 (12:34):
Correct, they are ahead of schedule, according to the judge.
When she wrapped up or was telling the jurors to
enjoy their weekend, she did say it looks like the
prosecution is slightly ahead of schedule. She had warned them
there could be up to four four and a half
weeks of testimony. She says she now thinks there will
be just two more weeks of testimony, so she thinks
a total of three, so she thinks it's been shortened
(12:56):
by even as much as a week.
Speaker 1 (12:58):
But skin close to Chris it.
Speaker 2 (13:00):
It is well, no, at this point, if there are
two more weeks of testimony, that means the jury would
get this case the week of Christmas, which.
Speaker 3 (13:09):
I don't know if they're willing to do that.
Speaker 2 (13:11):
I don't know if they would say, hey, we'll reconvene
January third, I don't know. That seems like a tall
order to ask these jurors to remember everything, to go
through Christmas and New Year's, to not talk about it
with family members all they know that they're on this
high profile case. That seems like such an unreasonable ask
because obviously they would not sequester the jurors during this time,
(13:33):
and that's just going to piss everybody off. So and
I don't know, it really is going to be right
at it's going to butt up directly to the holiday
and think about you know, this isn't just about Christmas
Day or Christmas Eve.
Speaker 3 (13:49):
These jurors have.
Speaker 2 (13:50):
Kids and families who probably have Christmas pageants and specials
and parties and events, and it's just it's a tough
time of year to be on a jury.
Speaker 1 (14:00):
Also missing work many of them maybe, and missing out
on money, missing out on check. I mean, you get
paid for jury duty.
Speaker 2 (14:07):
But it's oh, I don't even know what it is now,
but what is it? Fifty dollars a day something?
Speaker 1 (14:11):
It's not. Yes, it's not a living wage. We should
say the last the State Crime Lab was the guy
was up today again going through a lot of stuff
that was found, putting evidence into UH and to the trial.
But Robes the cross examinator examinator is what I call
Lipton Tipton.
Speaker 2 (14:31):
Excuse me, Jeeseus's Larry Tipton. But it's easy to say.
Speaker 1 (14:34):
Not Lipton. We should start calling him Lipton.
Speaker 3 (14:36):
No, let's not because his name is Terry. No, Larry Tipton.
Oh my gosh, you just got me to say.
Speaker 1 (14:42):
I didn't get you to No.
Speaker 2 (14:44):
Okay, you put it in my head. It's messed up
and removing it to Larry Tipton.
Speaker 1 (14:48):
He is tipping the scales of justice.
Speaker 3 (14:49):
How about that now you'll always remember?
Speaker 1 (14:51):
Okay? But yeah, Tipton he's talking to the State Crime
Lab guy and got him to admit something pretty significant
after he went through all of this testimony with the prosecute.
I found this, and I found this, he said, And
he got him to admit he did not find anything
forensically significant in that bedroom that suggested how she died,
(15:14):
who killed her, if she was murdered, what meant? Nothing
in there that actually helped prove any case. And he
had to admit that, yes.
Speaker 2 (15:22):
And he also got him to admit that because police
had been coming in and out of that home for days,
that there was no way to be able to prove
any of the blood stains that were found in the
basement on the concrete. When did they get there, could
someone else have brought them in? How do we know
when those blood stains occurred? And whether or not the
(15:45):
crime scene was just completely compromised because of the amount
of traffic that was coming in and out of that
home by police themselves. So he, once again Tipton did
his job, and he did it very well. After hearing
all of this, it actually it sounds awful to say
the testimony about bloodstains can get boring, but after a
while it's the same thing over and over and over
(16:05):
and over again. And then all of a sudden, when Tipton,
I said, wow, shift and energy. He comes in with
the mission and he knows exactly what he's trying to
disprove or at least bring into question, and he brought
it home.
Speaker 1 (16:18):
He makes you sit up and you wonder where he's going,
what point he's making. And again, I know this isn't
supposed to be the point, but every lawyer will tell
you that theatrics it better. Of course it matters. So
we're listening to a monotonous voice going through this and
that nothing is compelling at least, yes, it has to
be entered into evidence. I understand, but man, to your point,
(16:40):
we almost Okay, time to gather around. We gotta really
pay attention.
Speaker 2 (16:43):
Now because actually, yes, I have to make myself focus
when the prosecution is up, when Tipton's up, I am.
Speaker 3 (16:50):
I'm listening intently.
Speaker 1 (16:52):
Again, this is not a criticism, just a reality of
the experience that we're having watching this thing. So you
can guess a lot of other people are too. In robes.
We say the reality in our experience. We're not being
critical of the prosecution, but we are talking to people
who are someone who has become a dear deer resource
for us here. Recently, Alison Treesel, an attorney with a
(17:15):
lot of criminal defense experience. We were talking to her today,
wrote she did not mince her words about just how
shocked she is and how poor of a job the
prosecution has been doing on several major points.
Speaker 2 (17:30):
Yes, she talked about missed opportunities. Yes, missed opportunities just
in emphasizing certain things that, yes, you want the jurors
to pay attention. You want the Jewis to remember things
like he searched for murder instead of just going he
searched for murder.
Speaker 3 (17:44):
There is a difference.
Speaker 2 (17:45):
She was even noticing just the decision to be monotone
and to not punch home certain words that you want
the jurors to keep in their heads when they think
about this case and associate with Brian Walsh.
Speaker 3 (17:57):
But also just in.
Speaker 2 (18:00):
Pointing out some of this evidence and really driving at
home and then following up she said she would just
let things go, and then when the defense made a point,
she had an opportunity to redirect and just chose not to.
She was aghast, and she said she was screaming at
the monitor.
Speaker 3 (18:18):
Like why would you not have followed up with that?
Speaker 2 (18:20):
So's she was taking us point by point by point
in discussing where the prosecution has repeatedly dropped the ball
in her eyes and has basically handed huge wins over
to the defense that she could have reclaimed had she
followed through with a follow up.
Speaker 1 (18:35):
Someone I forgot about that point about this not even strategy.
It's almost so many of those searches were dramatic all
their own. How do you make them boring? They went
through like some of them are so outlandish that all
you have make the point Like Jesus he said what
he read like, that's all you have to do. That's
(18:56):
not strategy, that's just that's not a great legal strategy.
She said. It's just you're not talking to them. And
I guess reacting as a human being the way we
all are to what we're seeing, you're almost treating it
like it's nothing and leaving it for them to interpret
whether or not it's a big deal. When you don't
act like it's a big deal.
Speaker 2 (19:16):
I think Alison suggested, maybe she was treating it like
it was a slam dunk when this case is not.
Now if you want to listen to our whole interview
with her, please you can check out on Amy and
TJ presents our latest Our latest episode has our full
interview with Alison Triesol.
Speaker 3 (19:32):
You should check it out.
Speaker 2 (19:33):
She is brilliant when it comes to interpreting what we're
seeing in the courtroom. So it's really a fun episode.
If you're really into this trial, highly suggest you check
it out.
Speaker 1 (19:40):
But you had something good?
Speaker 3 (19:42):
Oh no, please go ahead. No, I'm just wrapping it up.
Speaker 1 (19:45):
Oh no, no, no, I could talk to you about this
off camera camera, I mean off mike.
Speaker 3 (19:49):
Sorry, were you used to being on camera?
Speaker 1 (19:52):
Off mic? Don't anybody take that and run with it?
Speaker 2 (19:54):
Okay, just tolelease, don't no, no, we're hoping to get
cameras in the podcast. Yes, will be broadcast podcast, all right,
So we are going to obviously keep our eye on
this trial. We will continue to bring you updates as
they are warranted. But so far, every day there has
been a lot to say, so thank you for listening everyone.
I'm Amy Roeboch alongside TJ. Holmes, and we will talk
(20:17):
to you soon.
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.
My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark
My Favorite Murder is a true crime comedy podcast hosted by Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark. Each week, Karen and Georgia share compelling true crimes and hometown stories from friends and listeners. Since MFM launched in January of 2016, Karen and Georgia have shared their lifelong interest in true crime and have covered stories of infamous serial killers like the Night Stalker, mysterious cold cases, captivating cults, incredible survivor stories and important events from history like the Tulsa race massacre of 1921. My Favorite Murder is part of the Exactly Right podcast network that provides a platform for bold, creative voices to bring to life provocative, entertaining and relatable stories for audiences everywhere. The Exactly Right roster of podcasts covers a variety of topics including historic true crime, comedic interviews and news, science, pop culture and more. Podcasts on the network include Buried Bones with Kate Winkler Dawson and Paul Holes, That's Messed Up: An SVU Podcast, This Podcast Will Kill You, Bananas and more.
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