Behind the Redactions: Epstein’s Edits and UnitedHealth’s Power, Plus Justice for American Idol’s Robin Kaye and Musician Thomas DeLuca

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
This program features the individual opinions of the hosts, guests,
and callers, and not necessarily those of the producer, the station,
it's affiliates, or sponsors. This is True Crime Tonight.

Speaker 2 (00:19):
Welcome to True Crime Tonight on iHeartRadio. We're talking true
crime all the time. We've made it to Wednesday, July sixteenth,
and we have a stacked night of headlines. So we're
going to be digging into this alleged parent killer, Sarah
Grace Patrick. We spoke about her a little bit last night.
One of her family members, surviving family members, I might add,

(00:41):
is speaking out in her defense. Also, we're going to
be discussing the very tragic case of American Idol music
producer Robin Kay and her husband double murder in California,
and some new developments happening in that case.

Speaker 3 (00:55):
And also we have award.

Speaker 2 (00:57):
Winning Emmy Award winning journalist and legal analyst Michael Bryant
will be joining us to talk about our two favorite topics,
Epstein and Karen Reid.

Speaker 3 (01:09):
So buckle up.

Speaker 2 (01:10):
I'm Stephanie Leidecker, and I head of f KT Studios
where we get to make true crime podcasts and documentaries
and I get to do that with Courtney Armstrong and
Body move in.

Speaker 3 (01:20):
And we also want to make sure we're.

Speaker 2 (01:21):
Hearing from you, so please, you've been so great about
calling in and leaving us talkbacks, keep them coming eight
eight eight three one Crime again, eight eight eight three
one Crime. And you could also hit us up on
our socials as always, at True Crime Tonight show on
Instagram and TikTok or at True Crime Tonight on Facebook.

(01:43):
And also you could leave us a talk back. You
guys are getting so good about doing this. Basically, you
download the iHeart app. It's free, top right hand corner,
press a button and you get to leave a little
voice memo and boom, you are on the show. So
please keep the conversation coming. So Body headlines they are
a buzz in tonight.

Speaker 3 (02:02):
So they are.

Speaker 4 (02:03):
But it's kind of hard to pick which one to
lead with. I don't know, So here's what we decided.
Here's what we decided on that Pam Bondie. She is
the United States Attorney General, and today she fired the
US prosecutor who put Jeffrey Epstein and Going Maxwell behind bars.
However failed to prosecute Diddy to the full extent.

Speaker 3 (02:25):
So that's the number one headline right now. We're going
to get into that a little bit later, and.

Speaker 4 (02:29):
Then additionally, we want to kind of go over the
metadata and the video and the absence of this client list.
It's kind of like the perfect storm of controversy. Yeah, exactly,
it's the United perfect story is So just a brief
quick summary before we bring our guest on board. The
Wired magazine initiated a forensic analysis, a digital analysis of

(02:52):
the video that the Department of Justice released. And the
video is basically the surveillance of Epstein's cell. Okay, so
the camera's kind of pointing into the shoe area, which
is where Epstein was housed, well, the exterior of the
cereal yes, yes, not the inside. You can't even really
see his door. It's kind of hokey, Okay, they call

(03:12):
it the shoe. That's so cool. The shoe so interesting.

Speaker 3 (03:15):
I learned that from watching an HBO show. Anyway, So
the wire, the.

Speaker 5 (03:20):
Wire, I was gonna say, are we on the wire?

Speaker 4 (03:22):
No, it was actually called OZ but anyway, even SCARIERUS
was scary, Yeah, as was so good. Anyway, So it's
pointing at the shoe and there's obviously a minute missing
from the timestamp. They're so free it jumps from eleven
to fifty eight in fifty eight seconds to midnight, so
there's a minute and two seconds missing. Well, that set

(03:42):
up bread flags obviously, and there's also an aspect ratio change,
so the video kind of it's small and then it
gets a tiny bit bigger at the jump. So that
initiated an investigation from Wired magazine and they found that
actually three minutes are missing from this video and it
edited with something like twenty three times and saved over

(04:03):
a three hour period, and that kind of thing should
not be happening if and because the reason it's such
a big deal is the DJ said that this was
the raw footage. So if somebody says to me, raw footage,
I'm expecting an extraction from the surveillance system, unedited, uncut
on everything, That's what I'm expecting.

Speaker 3 (04:23):
That's what it is. That's the term. Yeah, that is
exactly right.

Speaker 4 (04:27):
Well, to give us some more insight, some expert insight
on this whole Jeffrey Epstein situation, we're bringing in Michael Bryant,
like Stephanie said, he is an Emmy Award winning legal
analyst and former trial attorney. You might have seen his
expert opinion on and commentary on LAWNG, Crime Court TV,
and his current streaming show Justice Served. Michael, Welcome so

(04:49):
much and thank you so much for being here. So
what do you think about all of this?

Speaker 3 (04:53):
Yes, hi, Michael, we're so much.

Speaker 6 (04:55):
Well, Hi, big guys. It's great to be which I
appreciate the in Bye. Here here's here's my in depth
legal analysis. First of just the video it's a joke.
I mean, come on, I don't know what's more embarrassing
the fact that they thought we would buy it, you know,
as is here it is, here's the row, or that
nobody would investigate the metadata. It just floors me that

(05:17):
they would think we're How stupid do they think we are?
By day? I mean the government, you think we're really stupid?

Speaker 2 (05:23):
That the scariest part that they must just imagine us
to be such fools and lemmings in the most basic way.
I mean talk about not assuming that any of us
are sophisticated. I mean as a whole, which is I
think maybe you know the tip of the iceberg.

Speaker 6 (05:39):
Yeah, I don't know if it's naive or stupidity or arrogance.
You know, here we're the big bad government. We're going
to spoon feed you what we want and shut up
and we're moving on.

Speaker 3 (05:48):
Yeah.

Speaker 4 (05:48):
I feel insulted, I feel gas lit, and it makes
me wonder, like what else they've been lying to us,
you know? And I'm not that person. I am not
a person that's like, we conspiracy. But this isn't even
a conspiracy. This is reality. This is actually happening. Right.

Speaker 6 (06:01):
Here's the weird part because there could be absolutely nothing
to show and nothing to see here folks, right, that
could be the truth. But the fact that they give
us this massaged video of nothing, I mean, I'd rather
watch a painting and there's nothing there to be looking at.
And you mentioned the location of the cell. I'm going
to tell you, guys, the best reading you can do

(06:24):
is the one hundred and twenty two pages of the
Inspector General's report. It was done back in June of
twenty twenty three. The death was in twenty nineteen, very elaborate.
It has photos that for those who've seen the video
they can then put it together. Go oh okay, I
see that they have some diagrams. What they'll find is
from that platform, that second level that looks down into

(06:44):
that hole where the guards are across the other side
of the room. To the right, outside, far outside the
camera's eye is a short flight of stairs up to
the tier that actually has Epstein's cell. So you're seeing nothing.
We're seeing some people come and go, some blurs and
blogs coming and going. But it's useless. It's really useless.

(07:06):
You do see him the prior evening being walked back
to a cell. I think it's him. It's somebody with
gray hair. It could be my grandmother. I'm not sure,
but it's somebody being walked across the floor toward his cell.
Otherwise it's useless. But read that Inspector General report if
you really want some detail about the things that are
not visible from that right.

Speaker 4 (07:28):
And I should note that that twenty twenty three report
that you're talking about, the dj I OIG report did
note that there were chronic camera failures at this facility,
including outages in the shoe area.

Speaker 6 (07:43):
Yeah, right is shoe By the way, is the segregated
housing unit. It's full sound, but it's segregated housing unit.
I also could be Sacred Heart University, but it's not.

Speaker 3 (07:53):
Yeah, so here's a hoping.

Speaker 6 (07:54):
So that's part of the deal with this, you know
this one minute or more that's missing. And Pam Bondi,
Attorney General Pam Bondi suggested, well, that's the way the
system worked. Let me get some older footage for you
to prove that's what happened. I mean, it sounds a
lot like the Karen Read case, which we may or
may not get into tonight, but oh we will.

Speaker 3 (08:13):
Who are holding you hostage? Michael, buckle up.

Speaker 6 (08:17):
We're gonna back to nineteen sixty eight. What kind of
equipment do you have that you know that it's so
beat up that you have to yell down the hallway
for a guy to bring another reel of videotape. Go on, Dad,
we need to change out that take nights. It's ridiculous
to suggest that, as a matter of course, the technology
required this one minute lapse in time.

Speaker 7 (08:35):
Right.

Speaker 6 (08:36):
But Michael, it may mean nothing, but it doesn't smell good.

Speaker 5 (08:41):
No, it definitely doesn't. And listen, this is true crime tonight.
If you want to ask any questions to legal analyst
Michael Bryant, give us a call eighty eight three one crime.
My question is, Michael, you just mentioned how Pam BONDI said, oh, yeah,
it's the one minute lapse, and it happens every single night,
totally normal. And then you know, forty eight hours after

(09:03):
making that declarative statement, then obviously we learned it was
the extra three minutes. Do you think we'll even get
a further clarification or another step back or is it
just to be left alone.

Speaker 3 (09:15):
At this point?

Speaker 6 (09:16):
I doubt And to be honest, if I were in
their position, I'm glad I'm not, But if I was
in their position, I would be moving on. They're going
to get peppered with more questions and they can come
up with whatever answer they want, But I don't think
we're ever going to get anything definitive that'll be satisfying. Well,
I wonder government.

Speaker 4 (09:33):
Is it possible that's one of the reasons they got
rid of Comy Mare and Kmy more in Kmy like
people are talking about that now instead of the video
and no clients.

Speaker 6 (09:44):
Hard to tell, and to be honest, that yeah, don't
get me into that list thing. It's hard to tell
if that issue is directly related to this, because you know,
I'd have to know more about her history because they
have been gutting the agency of various difference to you know,
January sixth, and a number of other matters. So it

(10:05):
would have surprised me if it was related to this note.
But I just don't know for.

Speaker 2 (10:09):
Sure, right like my Spidey sense, it's Steph, my spidy sense,
just reading from the top line, because this actually just broke,
you know, so recently before we started this show. Is
that Maureen Comy, who was you know, also was really
trying to get justice against you know, Sean Diddy Combs.
Also now this Epstein of long ago Geelane Maxwell Epstein's

(10:31):
you know air quotes right hand woman. You know, she
has been trying to get some hearings on the book
she wants to get released. You know, if there is
no client list, why is she behind bars? Does the
absence of Maureen Comy influence that in any way?

Speaker 6 (10:46):
No, I don't think it means the thing. I think
she has a loser of a case anyway. She's trying
to get the Supreme Court to review her case. And
her argument is way back in two thousand and eight
in Southern Florida in federal court there, they gave Jeffrey
Epstein to pass, gave him the lightest possible sentence you
could get. And the deal included protection for any quote

(11:09):
co conspirators, So she's relying on that. But the fact
is Southern District in Florida is not going to do
anything to the district in New York. You don't get
to control the rest of the country from one district
with that agreement. And that's what's been failing as she's appealed,
appealed to appealed, And I don't even think the Supreme
Court is going to look at it. I guess how
many cases the Supreme Court is requested to look at

(11:30):
every year? Just pick a number. Come in.

Speaker 4 (11:35):
Five thousand. Oh, I meant that they actually look at my.

Speaker 6 (11:39):
Okay, okay, I'll give you a reset on that. So
five thousand are dumped on them to say, here, take
a look at this. How many do you think they
look at a five thousand a year? Give or ten
about one hundred round number. So that's some horrible odds.
They only are They only do two things at the
Supreme Court level. They decide issues that are in conflict
with different states. It's different jurisdictions, right. They need to

(12:01):
straighten things out and make a rule that everybody follows
or it's something of first impression. I guarantee a non
prosecution agreement from one district court being imposed or attempted
to be imposed in another is nothing new and exciting
to the Supreme Court. So this would be shocked if
they even look at it.

Speaker 4 (12:20):
So this non prosecution agreement, that is the we won't
prosecute any of your co conspirators. That's that agreement, right, correct, Okay, correct?

Speaker 6 (12:29):
I do want to make sure the same crimes, the
crimes in Florida, these are crimes in New York, different district,
different crimes. It's it's a loser, but I think I
applaud the zealous representation.

Speaker 3 (12:40):
Of course.

Speaker 4 (12:41):
Of course, so she didn't have a habeas corpus route
to go down.

Speaker 6 (12:45):
Well, yeah, that's what she's been relying on. Is and now,
of course there is some coincidental connection to wait, there's
no list, Well, there's no list, how can I have
been convicted? Well, you don't have to have more than
one person to be convicted of transporting people across state
lines for prostitution minors, because they listed Jeffrey Edstein as
the recipient, right, Well, he's the recipient, then it doesn't

(13:08):
matter if there's no other people.

Speaker 5 (13:09):
Oh man, thank you so much for that clarity. Listen,
keep it here. We have more with Michael Brian on Epstein.
We're going into Karen Reid Keep It Here, a true
crime tonight.

Speaker 8 (13:19):
We're talking true crime all the time. We also have
a very special guest with us. He's by proxy KT Family.

Speaker 2 (13:35):
Lisa Bryant, your lovely, incredibly smart wife, was joined you know,
joined us on Sunday to talk about Epstein. We're dying
to know what happens at the dinner table with you guys,
because it must be all crime, all the time. So
we're so happy to have you here. We're so happy
to have you back with us. And again you're a
legal analyst and also trial attorney and post of your

(13:57):
own show. So we're talking about seen in some of
these shenanigans that are happening right now. And of course
this Maureen Comy park Court. I know you had a
question first up.

Speaker 3 (14:06):
Yeah, I have a question.

Speaker 5 (14:08):
Actually it goes to the autopsy and what happened there.
This was a big topic that we had a lot
of callers call in yet last night and we were
hoping maybe for some clarity and our understanding is you
have kind of a unique connection because your co host
is Linda Kennedy Baden and her husband's doctor Baden, the

(14:29):
pathologist who we've all seen on TV. Do you have
any insight into he thinks about the autopsy.

Speaker 6 (14:37):
Well, we know that he decided that in his opinion,
it wasn't suicide. And you know, I also educated both
by him, and I've known him for years, even before Linda,
his wife, became my co host, back in the day
when I worked at Extra and when I was at
Core TV. You know, anytime somebody was murdered when I
was an Extra, you know that hard hitting news program anytimes.

Speaker 3 (14:56):
Don't knock it. I watch every I watched you on it,
that's the one.

Speaker 6 (15:03):
But you know, anytime somebody died, let's get Bryan on that.
So I got a lot of experience with him and
with Cyril Weck, who was you know, kind of his colleague.
He just passed away at nineteen three a few months ago,
and so I always respected new Michael Boden, and so
you know he did the JFK review of that autopsy.
The guy's been around twenty thousand autopsies. So Mark Epstein,

(15:24):
who we interviewed the other night on TV. You can
see that on our YouTube channel. Sorry for the poor.

Speaker 3 (15:31):
More and more and more.

Speaker 6 (15:32):
Okay, so yeah, you guys will look it up in
the library. Fascinating interview and we'll get in some of
the details he told us. But that was the connection
because the family of Jeffrey Epstein, and that's really Mark
reached out to doctor Boden said hey, we want somebody
on our side watching this. So he attended the autopsy
so he was able. It wasn't just a lot of

(15:54):
times the forensic pathologists will look at photos, read reports
and you know, come up with an opinion that they
exec in court as a result. But when you're actually
in the room, it really adds, you know, some credibility
to the opinion. There's that, I'm sure everybody's learned the
anatomy now the neck better than they ever thought they'd
need to. There's the hyoid bone, which is that bone
that's kind of in the atoms apple regions, which virtually

(16:16):
all pathologists will tell you is not normally broken in
two places, especially as a result of hanging. It's normally
by strangulation. So I mean, in a nutshell, that's his conclusion,
and there's lots of others. There's petiquia in the eye,
which is little broken blood vessels. Those generally happen, again
from strangulation, not from hanging. And remember this, if it

(16:39):
was a hanging, was what's called an incomplete hanging. That
means you're not dangling from a rope off something ceiling.
You know, your feet are not touching the ground. You
are kind of leaning into the ligature, which is a
very different kind of hanging and less violent certainly, and
it has different characteristics. So all of those things together

(17:00):
told this guy who's done this before that no, this
was homicide, not suicide.

Speaker 3 (17:05):
Wow.

Speaker 2 (17:06):
I mean it seems like we keep hearing that time
and time and time again, which again goes back to
the initial thought of we're feeling sort of gas lit
in a little bit misled. Whether there is a client
list or there's not a client list. The lack of
transparency has just gotten under everybody's you know, under everybody's
skin in a very meaningful way.

Speaker 6 (17:24):
Yeah, it's insulting, and I don't think we need to
get hung up on the list, you know, like, oh here, here,
I have it in my hand. Can you hear that?
I have in my hand the list. It says, you know,
Jeffrey Ebstein's lists of very bad men. Yes, I mean
that's not the list, you know, it's cording some memorialization
somewhere in digital form, whatever it may be. There's something

(17:47):
I know people talk about the flight logs, and that's
certainly some evidence of people going to, oh, we just.

Speaker 2 (17:53):
Cut off a little bit, but we have a talk back.
We should go to that right now.

Speaker 9 (17:56):
Well, what I find the most frustrating right now currently
about the stuff is now being told by this administration
that they're saying, why are we still talking about it?

Speaker 10 (18:06):
This is so old?

Speaker 3 (18:07):
This just needs to go away?

Speaker 9 (18:09):
And that just makes me feel even more guess lit,
how can we say that something of this magnitude and
trafficking women all across the world is just no big deal,
nothing to see here, Let's move along. Why are we
still talking about it?

Speaker 4 (18:24):
Yeah, and this is something that a lot of people
think won a presidency, So this is not just you know,
something that we're being told to ignore now. And people
ran on this and I think you know, Donald Trump's
base is rightfully upset with him about this. And again,
presidencies are won and lost on things like this, and

(18:46):
they made such a big deal about this for what
the last five six year years, and now we're being told, eh,
it was a hoax, Like what, yeah, that's a hoping.
What else is a hoax?

Speaker 6 (18:57):
Right?

Speaker 2 (18:57):
So I guess that's the problem. The lie on top,
the lie on top, So the lie only makes it harder.

Speaker 4 (19:02):
And the more they dig their heels into our talkback point,
the more I get angry, like, what do you mean?

Speaker 3 (19:08):
It's very upsetting. So I completely agree. We have another
talkback right after.

Speaker 10 (19:11):
Oh another word, Hello, this is Emil. And again I'm
curious what the protocol is when there's a suspected suicide
in prison or deaths in general. Because I know there's
protocol to try to avoid those things. What is the
protocol for when it happens. Is there pictures that are

(19:32):
taken of the scene, Does an emmy come out to
the scene. I'm curious about a lot of this with Epstein, such.

Speaker 2 (19:39):
A great question. You know, I think we temporarily lost Michael.
He'll be joining us very shortly to probably weigh in
on some of this. Court's giving me the thumbs up.

Speaker 5 (19:47):
Yeah, Michael, we were debating this very question ourselves and
had no answer any inside information of it of if
an emmy actually came or if any prime scene photos
were take in with the actual body.

Speaker 6 (20:03):
Yeah, there definitely were crime scene photos taken and they
looked kind of stagy. And I'm assuming that I was
my call was dropped from some government interference. That's my second. Yes,
me so. And these are some of the questions that
Mark Epstein had because he was told that there was
video of not just the cell, but of transporting Jeffrey

(20:28):
Epstein on a gurney from the cell to the infirmary
where the emmy ultimately body and began that process. So
he's asking, where is that? Why can't I have that footage?
There also was this story about how, remember they found
his body six thirty ish that morning, they were he

(20:48):
was still alive for a number of hours until I
guess maybe they got the story straight that they wanted
to tell. So what was that about? Who was in
the infirmary? Just give us, you know, the names, give
us talk about a list. Give us the names of
people that were in the infirmary. And what about there
were fourteen other detainees or inmates on that tier. Who
were they? And did you get statements from them? We

(21:10):
know that in that inspector General report there were a
couple of the inmates that did give statements. They were anonymous.
The two of them said very interesting things. We learned
that the guards were they're surfing the way, ever, sleeping,
not doing their job, and nobody did a walk around
after ten thirty. Two of these inmates said they saw

(21:31):
somebody on the tier at between twelve thirty and one
that is totally unidentified and could not have been the
guards who admit they didn't do their job. And if
you see that video, there's one point where there's somebody
in a hoodie that's on that tier that over Yeah,
hoodie guy. So they're just those kinds of questions make
you just wonder who's hiding what. And again, might be

(21:55):
perfectly innocent and just inept, but human beings are suspicious,
true crime. Human beings are really suspicious.

Speaker 3 (22:03):
Yes, that is the truth.

Speaker 5 (22:04):
I have actually a quick follow up, Michael, this is Courtney.
I'm not sure if I understood you correctly. Did you
say that Jeffrey Epstein was alive for X amount of
hours or did I misunderstand?

Speaker 6 (22:16):
No, that's what we were led to believe that there
was a period of time when it's clear. Now we
know that he was dead when they found him, but
there was some early reporting still alive, and it was
hours later before he passed away in the infirmary. I
don't know why they would do that. Why were his
clothes changed? Why was he not in his jail clothes.
He was in some sort of like pajamas or something,

(22:38):
a hospital going He.

Speaker 2 (22:39):
Was like in that weird hospital outfit. Yeah, like, why
was that? Who changed his clothes?

Speaker 6 (22:43):
Yeah, who's a dead body and you're changing his clothes?
Because why? There's too many of those things that make
people who are far smarter than me wonder who's hiding what?
And maybe it is at the highest levels, you know.
I know you guys were talking about the Trump effect,
and I think he's an idiot for continuing to talk
about it. You know, it's you know, the Barber streisand
effect where she complained about people flying drones over her

(23:05):
house and guess what people started doing flying drones over
her ass. So you know, by his continuing to talk
about it, from his perspective, it ain't going away. It's
not the right thing to do.

Speaker 2 (23:16):
Yeah, totally fair and I know, listen, you're also obviously
such a big expert on the Karen Reid developments too,
so we don't want to jump around too too much.
But we are hoping you're staying with us because we
obviously want to be talking a lot about that as well.
That's another case that's got us all.

Speaker 3 (23:32):
You know, we're all spun up about the Karen Reid case. Twos.
Oh you know, where do we go from there? Body?

Speaker 4 (23:38):
Well, I mean, there's a lot to go into with
Karen Reid. I don't know if we can get into
it before the commercial.

Speaker 3 (23:42):
But the reason teaser?

Speaker 6 (23:44):
Do you have a teaser?

Speaker 4 (23:45):
Let's do a teaser. What do you know about this
federal grand jury? The juror pleading guilty to talking to somebody.
Do you know anything about this?

Speaker 6 (23:54):
Yeah, so we do know that she was on the
grand jury at about the time they were looking into
the Karen Reid case. So remember this is a woman,
she's now she never got indeted. It was on an
information that she pled guilty to disseminating information about witnesses
or evidence or both that came before the grand jury.
And obviously that's not a good thing. And as she's

(24:16):
taking this plea deal. She's only accused until the plea
deal is accepted and to clap on the risk plea deal.
So we're trying to figure out what that means. The
question is, was she involved in the Karen Reid case's
decision making.

Speaker 4 (24:28):
Well, let's stay tuned for that. This is True Crime
Tonight on iHeartRadio. I'm body movin and we're going to
be back with Michael Bryant on how the Karen readcase
is sparking larger conversations around.

Speaker 3 (24:38):
The First Amendment.

Speaker 4 (24:39):
Stay right here a True Crime Tonight where we're talking
true crime all the time.

Speaker 3 (24:52):
It's kind of explosive right now.

Speaker 2 (24:53):
Our minds are getting blown by, of course Michael Bryant,
who is also a former trial attorney, and you know
he has been weighing in on some of these big cases,
Epstein being one of them, and also now Karen Reid. Michael,
welcome back. Thank you for sticking with us, because again
we have so much to get.

Speaker 4 (25:10):
Too and we are obsessed with you, by the way, Yes,
thank you so much.

Speaker 3 (25:14):
I wish you could hear us during the break. Thank
you for bringing all this down immediately.

Speaker 4 (25:19):
Oh no necessary, Hey, it's my First Amendment right to
be obsessed with you.

Speaker 6 (25:23):
Okay, I'm big on the first Amendment.

Speaker 3 (25:27):
I know we're going to get into that a little bit.

Speaker 4 (25:29):
So I'm going to just give a brief overview of
Turtle Boy just very quickly. So Turtle Boy is a
independent like journalist, like kind of like boots on the
ground guy who's basically started ringing the alarm bells about
the possible corruption in Canton, Massachusetts in regards to the
Karen Reid case. And in doing so, he basically he's

(25:50):
being charged, by the way, and I should add real
quick that he's plugged, not guilty to these charges. He's
being charged with a couple felonies, and they're pretty serious, right,
Witness intimidation, bail violations, violating a restraining order, which I
believe he got acquitted of. Those charges have been dropped,
I believe, and please correct me if I'm wrong. And
because he was basically harassing witnesses and intimidating witnesses and

(26:18):
he's so he's in some hot water. He just got
two additional charges and was in court I think on
July seventh of last week. So Turtle Boy is in
some hot water, But again he is pleading not guilty.
He says he's not guilty of any of these things,
and he's staunchly defending himself. Well, just recently online he's
been kind of being accused by you know, social media

(26:39):
people who are you know, anti Karen Reid, of being
involved with this grand juror who was leaking information from
the grand jury to someone. Now officially we don't know
who that someone is, and Turtle Boy is vehemently denying
that he's that person. So it's want of in defense
of him, I want to say that he is vehemently
denying these these allec What do you think about all this, Michael.

Speaker 6 (27:03):
Yeah, it's been quite an adventure for him and for
what he's done for the case. Aiden Carney which is
Turtle Boy's name, And I was up at that hearing
on the seventh, which was another journey through the circus
that is I call it the triangle of terror up
there Stoughton, Adam and Canton. It is just scary all
and the cops overlap the different jurisdictions and they're all

(27:24):
kind of they got issues on edge to Aiden. Yeah,
oh yeah. And for Aiden, you know, he came along
and started he's more like a gonzo kind of journalist,
Hunter S. Thompson, getting your face kind of So he
was going to people he felt were involved when he
started learning more about the case, and you know, confronting them, Hey,
you were involved with death with Karen Reid, weren't you?
And so they have a statue in Massachusetts. You know,

(27:45):
it's wrong to intimidate witnesses anywhere, not suggesting people should,
but generally you can't threaten them physically. You can't threaten
them financially, like I'm gonna ruin you early. But in
Massachusetts they've added emotional injury as an injury, and it's
it's based on the subject. So it's based on what
I think. So if you say something and my feelings
get hurt and that's my opinion, Hey there are my feelings,

(28:09):
I can ask them to bring a charge against you
for oh my gosh. So that is the thrust of
most of these charges seventeen. Originally he was just arraigned
on the just last week, the seventeenth charge, and I
happened to be in town that night when that happened.
It was an incident outside the dn E Pizza which
is owned by Brian Albert, Brian Chris Albert, the Alberton family.
I don't know if you've heard the phrase Mick Alberts,

(28:30):
which is Malcolm of Jen McCabe and Matthew McCabe and
then all these all these Alberts. So it was a
nothing thing. He was goofing around outside their pizza place,
and they had cameras and anyway, that was the seventeenth charge.

Speaker 3 (28:42):
I've seen that video, right, yeah, oh yeah.

Speaker 6 (28:44):
It's just him and another guy named Will just goofing
around and Will I was broadcasting live.

Speaker 4 (28:50):
Well to be fair, called the murderers. Yeah, yeah, I
mean joking around. Yeah, but you're accusing somebody of murdering somebody.

Speaker 6 (28:58):
Sure, not nice? Nice things?

Speaker 3 (29:00):
Not nice?

Speaker 6 (29:02):
I don't know, right, of course, of course it is.
You know, you can say it's defamation. That might be,
but that's not a criminal charge.

Speaker 4 (29:08):
No, I agree, it's civil, right, I.

Speaker 6 (29:10):
Totally agree, So you know, get over yourself. He also
was charged because he told people to tell the truth.
He was yelling at them when they went into a hearing,
tell the truth. That's intimidation right anyway, So well.

Speaker 4 (29:21):
He's also being they're saying that he riled people up
to intimidate them too.

Speaker 2 (29:26):
But again, had he not riled people up, Turtle Boy himself,
had he not done that, agree, Karen Reid would still
be sitting behind bars as we speak, potentially for life.

Speaker 6 (29:36):
It's very possible, you know. And now he's the one.
He's looking at one hundred and five years.

Speaker 3 (29:40):
Oh my god, I didn't know.

Speaker 6 (29:41):
Doubt. I think the judge, Judge Doolan, who is now
handling this has I won't use the word that I
use on our show, but he realizes his first degree stupidity.
I use a different word, but I think he sees
that the charges are less than solid and so we'll
see how it plays out. There's another hearing up there
in another week or so, go up for that as well. So, yeah,

(30:01):
he's got his own issues and now the bullseye from
the Commonwealth has been trained on him.

Speaker 4 (30:06):
Can you explain what the illegal wiretapping is about that
he's been charged with.

Speaker 6 (30:10):
Well, it has to do with some of the phone
calls that he recorded.

Speaker 3 (30:14):
Oh okay, that is silly.

Speaker 6 (30:16):
Yeah, And there's also remember in a one party state
is maybe more than people care about, but it's really
kind of important in a one party state, and that
would be like New York or Nevada. And I say
this because when I was at Extra, I did a
lot of undercover stuff. You know, one party state. I
don't need anybody's approval if I say it's okay to
record you and not tell you that's okay, because I

(30:37):
am the one party and I'm saying it's okay is
important for me. There you go, yeah, And we did
a lot of undercover stuff there. And there's you know,
California and many other states. Most states, including Massachusetts, there
are two party states. Which means unless you advise the
person that you're recording that you are recording and get
their approval, that's illegal wired tapping. So that's connected to

(30:59):
the pizza place where they have cameras at the pizza place,
some of them record audio. So this allegation of wiretapping
goes both ways. The pizza owners and others that have
been recorded without quote without their permission.

Speaker 4 (31:13):
So that's ceasing really overbroad in kind of an overreach
to charging with wire trapping for a CCTV camera.

Speaker 6 (31:20):
The whole pile of charges, they really are ridiculous. When
I went into this, I was at Long Crime at
the time of the first trial, started learning about this.
I heard about this guy, Turtle Boy, and I'm like,
I'm not going down that hole. I don't care about
some social media guy. And then I started learning more
and more about it. At the same time, I'm learning
about solo cups and leaf blowers collecting evidence, like, oh,

(31:41):
what's going on here? And so as I learned more
about the Karen Read case, I learned more about his
connection and the fact that he really brought it to
the public's attention. And on the day of the verdict,
I'd like to take a touch of credit for this,
but on the day of the verdict, the fact that
place was packed with people is because he began the
process two years earlier. They were there because I and

(32:02):
a couple of other folks sued the massachusettsts Police for
violating our First Amendment rights by creating this buffer zone.
And the first few days it was a ghost town
until we won in court and they had people had
to be two hundred feet on either side of the courthouse.
It was a joke and I was accosted by a
Massachusetts policeman and we filed the lawsuit as a result,
and we ultimately won and it was about a week

(32:23):
or so before the verdict. So for that last week
things kind of got a little more supportive for Karen.
I'll put that right.

Speaker 4 (32:30):
So, is Turtle Boy's First Amendment basically being violated then?

Speaker 6 (32:34):
Because he I mean, is that there he's a journalist, right?
You know, some folks have, you know, kind of an
old school definition for journalism. You know, if you don't
have a you know, like a fedora on with the
press card at the brim, you know you're not prep
I mean, I'm a little tech you about that because
all the stuff I've done and I couldn't get a
press credential from Boston to do the Karen Read case.

(32:55):
Oh you're killing No, I'm just ridiculous. And then some
of the people that did it, I'm like, really, I
know this.

Speaker 4 (33:02):
Is a criminal case, but there's no like anti slap
or you know, slap is strategic litigation against public participation
for those that don't know. So, is there any kind
of slap defense that Turtle Boy can bring up anything
like that.

Speaker 3 (33:15):
That would help him?

Speaker 7 (33:16):
Not?

Speaker 6 (33:17):
Really, it's I think the First Amendment and any sort
of another thing they don't have in Massachusetts. They don't
have a shield law there, so you know, reporters are
kind of more dangling. A shield law for those who
may know is very specific protection against journalists to identify sources.
They don't have to do that. There's no such law
in Massachusetts. It's whatever the court thinks at a given time,

(33:38):
and so that makes it a little more dangerous for
journalists because they can go to jail more easily. So
I think he's relying primarily on the First Amendment because
it's pretty solid footing.

Speaker 4 (33:49):
Well, yeah, it stood for the test of time. So yeah,
that is the best argument to make. I just wasn't
sure if he could invoke the strategic law in his favor.

Speaker 3 (33:58):
I wasn't sure, but I know that's normally a civil thing. Yeah.

Speaker 2 (34:01):
We're also so curious with the latest with the what
did you call them, the mcabes, mcalts, the mcalberts, the
mcal You know, there's been such you know, conversation about
them post to the verdict. Have there been any developments
on that front that you're aware of.

Speaker 6 (34:15):
No, not yet. You know, this theory about the grandeur,
you know, maybe there's some connection there, maybe there's some
something to spiral out out of that. Well, the thing is,
you know, they gave her she was sentenced or will
be when she takes the plea deal to one day
one day time, served, one hundred dollars administrative fee, and
two years of supervised probation, far less than what you

(34:36):
could get. So I'm thinking, why do they even bring
that up to give her a slap on the wrist. Well,
maybe it's because she's got some deal. Maybe there's something
working in the background that may involve others that we
hear so much about, but nothing has happened. Just don't know.
It's premature. We just don't know yet.

Speaker 3 (34:51):
And that's what everybody's speculating.

Speaker 4 (34:52):
Everybody's saying she's got some kind of deal to work
with the investigators. On what side, We don't know, but
it's very interesting.

Speaker 5 (34:59):
Yeah, definitely something that we're all going to be following.
It's so I know, it just happened to think yesterday
and cannot.

Speaker 6 (35:06):
Wait, and it's happened so fast. I mean, she was
on the grand jury up until March of twenty twenty threes.
I think she began on there in August twenty two,
so she was right there in the heart of the
Karen Reid case. Again. We don't know for sure that
this is related, but the things are starting to kind
of line up.

Speaker 5 (35:22):
Yeah, something to watch and listen. Everyone needs to be
watching you, Michael. Everyone should be catching currently streaming show
Justice Serve TV with our award winning legal analyst former
trial attorney Michael Bryant.

Speaker 3 (35:37):
You have been so great.

Speaker 6 (35:39):
Yeah, yeah, pleasure.

Speaker 3 (35:41):
And love to your wife. We love her very very much.
So again, you guys are a dynamic duo.

Speaker 5 (35:47):
I'll set up with her for a little bit longer, honestly,
hopefully you'll come back. We'll talk more inside Jury Duty
Grand Jury.

Speaker 2 (35:56):
Thank you again to Michael Bryant for joining us earlier
in the show. If you've missed any of the show,
by the way.

Speaker 3 (36:01):
It's all good.

Speaker 2 (36:02):
You can catch us right after as a podcast. And
we also want to keep hearing from you, so call
us at eight eight eight three one Crime, or you
could always leave us a talk back by downloading the app,
pushing the right hand corner button and boom you're on
the show. Speaking of which, we have a talkback right now.

Speaker 9 (36:19):
Hey, ladies, love the show. I listen every day since
the beginning. I just want to say on the Epstein stuff.
I've been following it for several years. You know, with Biden,
he never interjected himself with DJ stuff. You really try
to remain impartial. So I kind of understand that backlash there.
But with Trump, I mean he ran on it. He
interjected himself with a partner with Bonnie to release this thing.

(36:40):
But my question is, do we think that Maxwell is
still on suicide wash it, especially with all this picking up?
I hope, so, Hi, this is Kim again. I looked
it up and yes, that we deal was originally in
two thousand and eight for Epstein. So if Galamb participated
in any of this poor behavior after two thousand and night,

(37:04):
then she is indeed guilty and woe indeed need to
stay in prison.

Speaker 11 (37:08):
Right?

Speaker 3 (37:09):
How smart are ore?

Speaker 4 (37:11):
I know?

Speaker 2 (37:11):
Crime crewers here, I thank you so much for those talkbacks.
They were like back to back episodes of greatness, and
they were so start first, go ahead.

Speaker 4 (37:19):
The first one spoke about Gallaine being on suicide Watch,
and I understand she was on suicide Watch in twenty
twenty twenty two, and I just found a photo of
her from July tenth of this year, so just what
six seven days ago and she's out in the yard
at the prison, so she can't so she's not on
suicide watch.

Speaker 3 (37:39):
No, she's getting exercise.

Speaker 4 (37:41):
In fact, she was getting exercised, so she's not currently
on suicide watch. But her family says she's pretty despondent
because she does believe she did not get a fair deal.
So but again that's you know who knows.

Speaker 3 (37:52):
Says it, every inmate behind bars.

Speaker 2 (37:54):
I was just gonna say, everybody says that, right, Yeah,
I have an idea. How about you don't aid in
a bet this second trafficking of underage girls or any
girls for that.

Speaker 3 (38:02):
Matter, Yeah, how about that? Then you don't need to
worry about it. And then the second talk back, I'm sorry, Courtney,
did you want to say.

Speaker 5 (38:08):
Oh, I was gonna say a not just aid to
help out, totally participate in and she was a participant absolutely,
and she was even in some cases the soul abuser
of some victims.

Speaker 3 (38:22):
So in any case, and.

Speaker 4 (38:23):
Then the second talkback was talking about the non prosecution agreement,
and of course the Florida ruled that Ebstein has plea
they would not prosecute anybody that was affiliated. But as
we just learned, it doesn't apply to the District Court
in New York from our wonderful friend. That was just
on Michael Bryant, the attorney formal triantal attorney, amazing expert

(38:44):
that knows the stuff way better than us, right, and
he just said it doesn't apply, so that that argument,
according to him, with the Supreme Court is moot and
she won't have an abas corpus route to go.

Speaker 3 (38:57):
We'll see always forget.

Speaker 2 (38:58):
I don't know abeas corpus means, is anyone to have
like the layman's version of that.

Speaker 4 (39:03):
I'm going to pull it up right now so it's useful.
In fact, the Menenta's brothers are using hypeous cord.

Speaker 2 (39:08):
Yes, we're mailing it up right now because I use
that word and I don't exactly know what it means,
and I want to make sure that I don't ever
do that.

Speaker 5 (39:15):
It literally means like of the body or you what
is it you have the body?

Speaker 3 (39:20):
I can't even spell it.

Speaker 2 (39:21):
Maybe I'm sorry everybody, but I could just if I
don't be.

Speaker 3 (39:26):
Sure I'm not the only one.

Speaker 5 (39:27):
But basically what it says is you shouldn't have my
I shouldn't be in detention.

Speaker 3 (39:32):
Right my body is being unlofty held cat.

Speaker 2 (39:36):
That's correct, what goes to market. But are you two lawyers?
It is the Latin term meeting of quote. You shall
have the body end quote.

Speaker 4 (39:44):
Very good, all right, So you're detaining me illegally my body.
I don't want to be here. If I have autonomy
over my body, I should not be here.

Speaker 3 (39:52):
Fair enough, and listen, we're gonna come right back because
we also.

Speaker 2 (39:54):
Want to get to Luigi. Also this alleged parent killer.
We're talking true time tonight. It's been kind of an
explosive night so far, talking a lot of things about
Epstein and of course Karen Reid. So if you've missed

(40:17):
any of the show, no worries, just catch us right
after as a podcast. But the phones have been ringing
and the talkbacks have been coming, so please join the conversation.
Eight eight eight three one Crime again eight eight eight
three one Crime. Later in the show, we're also a
little bit of an update on Luigi behind bars in
New York. We're getting some details from his former cellmate,

(40:38):
and also this insane story of this young girl who's
now been accused of killing her mother and her stepfather.
So we're going to start unpacking that as well, but
first we have a talkback. A.

Speaker 12 (40:50):
Hi, this is Sarah that left the talk back about
grooming and Audie. No, I don't disagree with you. I
think you're right. I think that miners should have their
own designated term for it. I'm just wondering if maybe
that means we need to add a new term something
that all of these other things fall under that really
they're downright brainwashing of vulnerable people.

Speaker 11 (41:12):
Right, yeah, hello ladies, my name's Amanda. And on the
subject of grooming, how I think it's different from manipulation
and coercion is like when you're manipulating somebody, you're trying
to coerce them, You're holding something over their head, you're
threatening them, you're in their ear, trying to get them
to do something. Well, when it comes to grooman, I
think you're trying to mold them. You're trying to shove

(41:34):
them into the ideal of how you want them to do,
versus you know, trying to get them to do something.

Speaker 3 (41:41):
I love it.

Speaker 2 (41:42):
This is the best when the community is weighing in.
Thank you, Crime Crew Club. I don't know, we need
to get a name for you. We need to foremost
so let's.

Speaker 4 (41:50):
Get your crime tonight, botties.

Speaker 3 (41:51):
I don't know. Yeah, exactly, thank you, ladies.

Speaker 2 (41:54):
And by the way, I guess it we should kind
of try to think of that even now, because you're right,
the coercion part of it is very big piece. And
maybe if body, I guess, what would you call this
other version of adult grooming and manipulation?

Speaker 3 (42:07):
You know that is just plain coercion.

Speaker 4 (42:09):
No, I think it is heavier than just coercion andtional coercion.
I think the way the second talk back, by the way,
I loved her accent.

Speaker 3 (42:17):
I'm obsessed with it.

Speaker 4 (42:18):
The molding.

Speaker 3 (42:18):
That's what they're what groomers are doing.

Speaker 4 (42:20):
They're molding these children and manipulating them to do something
they want. Now, I don't know what the word is,
but maybe we do need another term. As the first
talkback said, I think they combined those two.

Speaker 3 (42:33):
Yeah, those are two really smart thoughts, really smart. I
just don't know the word.

Speaker 7 (42:38):
I don't know.

Speaker 5 (42:39):
And I actually I thought about this quite a bit
after our conversation yesterday, and I pushed back pretty hard bodies. Okay, no, absolutely,
but may have more thoughts, and you know, thinking about
an adult with full capacity and everything else, you know, yeah,
what is the line? And I don't know, maybe it
shouldn't be like how much people do it all time?

(43:00):
Of course, you know, we just spoke recently with Andrea,
the host of Betrayal, which ps is a fabulous, staggeringly
wonderful podcast and the stories feature adult women who end
up and maybe some men in future series in future seasons,
but and women who end up turning their lives just

(43:23):
bit by bit and changing themselves. And listen, I think
we've all seen it either in our own lives or
our friends' lives or our friends friends lives. So I
don't know, I might be loosening my thought on the
grooming for adult.

Speaker 2 (43:35):
Like my brain goes to, yeah, maybe this is you know,
I'm answering the question for all of us here. So
like my brain went to remember that documentary The Tinder Swindler,
when like somebody was like the end of being like
swindled from a distance over love and suddenly is like
emptying their cash accounts. And these were smart women, like
very very clever women. So yeah, maybe there's an adult

(43:56):
and a young child version. Because even sex trafficking sometime
times falls under a different category. If you're talking about
adults who are you know, sex workers by trade?

Speaker 3 (44:07):
Is crossing a line or state line?

Speaker 2 (44:10):
Is at the same as you know what we're hearing
about in the Epstein case, where it's you know, girls
as young as twelve thirteen years old that are being
you know, shipped to an island in a helicopter by
Gilaine Maxwell, having their passport taken away and you know,
left there against their will.

Speaker 3 (44:24):
Perhaps right that you know, what's the line?

Speaker 2 (44:27):
I don't know, but I feel like this crime club
could probably come up with some suggestions.

Speaker 4 (44:31):
So let's start studying some lat Let's get it going, everybody.
Let's start studying some Latin and come up with a
proper term. Yeah, because it is bad, it's not and
I'm not you know, my whole point with that wasn't
it that you know, these women it's their fault or
you know, by any start.

Speaker 3 (44:46):
Of the imagination.

Speaker 4 (44:47):
I just think that you know, children and vulnerable people
need a little bit more protection than fully capable adults.
And I think grooming, whether it's not that word or
I just think it should.

Speaker 3 (44:59):
Be reserved for the vulnerable. Yeah, I think that's interesting,
and I think that you make a really fair point.

Speaker 4 (45:05):
And shout out by the way to Felicity Morris, the
director of Tinder Swindler. She was my producer on donov
l Katz.

Speaker 7 (45:12):
Oh.

Speaker 3 (45:12):
I loved it.

Speaker 2 (45:13):
Yeah, I thought it was so interesting because again, it
just shows how somebody of sane, great mind could really,
you know, could really be turned upside down, just a
great choss of you know, love. Yeah, that was a
great show anyway. Yeah, not that I'm making those two
assertions that you know, young girls being essentially sexually assaulted
has anything to do with losing your money and falling

(45:33):
in love.

Speaker 3 (45:34):
But yeah, there's there's a line. Yeah.

Speaker 4 (45:36):
So now we're going to be turning though to a
really tragic headline that has said in us all. An
arrest has been made in the fatal shooting of Robin Ka.
She was the longtime music supervisor for American Idol and
her husband, musician Thomas de Luca, in Therencino, California home.

Speaker 3 (45:54):
The suspect is a.

Speaker 4 (45:55):
Twenty two year old Raymond Bouderian, and he was apprehended
after allegedly burglarizing the residents and fatally shooting the couple
during a confrontation. So authorities believe the killings were a
random act, and the case remains under investigation.

Speaker 2 (46:10):
Yeah, it's really tragic, beyond because that's a beautiful area.
If you don't know, in Sino California, it's you know,
it's very safe, or at least it used to be
very safe, right, And there's you know, these beautiful, big
homes and you know, it's neighborhoods, people with families, et cetera.
It's not sort of it's like Hollywood adjacent a little
bit kind of the suburbs, if you will. I worked

(46:32):
on American Idol season one, and although I didn't have
actual crossover with Robin during my time there, I have
met her many times, and she's really beloved in the industry,
and it's an incredible loss.

Speaker 3 (46:45):
Well, she's been a long time, right, she's been with
the American Idol.

Speaker 2 (46:49):
For a really long yeah, since two thousand and nine,
I believe. And you know, that's an incredible staff too.
If you're a fan of the show, they know how
to do it. You know, they run a really tight
ship there and it's a real family affair. So many
people that work there have been there since the very
very beginning, so you're not just losing even a coworker,
you know, it's really like losing a family member. So
you know, genuinely our hearts go out to Robin and

(47:11):
her family and obviously her husband's family. You know, there
were seventy year old couple that are at the time
of their lives and you know, built such a beautiful
life together and it shouldn't be this way.

Speaker 4 (47:21):
Right, So surveillance footage and forensic evidence led to his arrest,
while his identification and arrest and the LAPD had previously
responded to a possible burglary at the address, but no
signs of force entry, so there is no evidence to
suggest that he was involved in any like massive burglary ring.

(47:42):
But the front door apparently was unlocked.

Speaker 2 (47:45):
The front door is unlocked, right, I guess that's the lead.
You know, we don't live in a time or a
place any longer where doors can be unlocked, And even
if you think you're in the corner of the world
where that doesn't happen, lock your doors, close your windows,
and look out for your neighbors.

Speaker 3 (47:59):
Right.

Speaker 4 (48:00):
So you're listening to true crime tonight on iHeartRadio where
we talk true crime all the time. I'm Buddy movin
And I'm here with Stephanie and Courtney and we're talking
about the tragic death of an American idol producer, Robin
And now we're going to be moving into Luigi.

Speaker 3 (48:15):
Courtney, what do you have for us?

Speaker 5 (48:17):
So, Luigi Mangione, he's been out of the news for
a minute. We can all recall that there was nothing
but Luigi when he was arrested and charged with first
degree murder as an act of terrorism for allegedly killing
United Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson. So about a month ago,

(48:38):
the New York Post released a video and it was
on X by Michael Dadia, and he says that he
quickly became friends with Mangeo and while they were both
at the MDC Brooklyn, while they were both imprisoned there
being held, and he shared a bunch of details about
Mangione's daily life. And apparently Michael said to Luigi and

(49:03):
I quote, Yo, it's an honor to meet you, and
Luigi said he was one of the first kids who
came in here and knew who I was or even cared.
And also that Luigi had a job and he was
cleaning showers as his job. So just little sort of tidbits.
But another thing he did say, which is interesting, and

(49:24):
we've heard this in many, multiple of the cases we followed,
in Coburger and in pikes In and many others, that
when Luigi isn't cleaning showers or running laps, allegedly he
is scouring the news for his name.

Speaker 2 (49:40):
Oh really, Well, wouldn't you do the same thing if
you're behind bars and you're trying to get out. I
don't necessarily think that's so surprising.

Speaker 3 (49:46):
It's true, you.

Speaker 2 (49:47):
Know, Like, honestly, they have a lot of time on
their hands and they're fighting a federal case. By the way,
what a who's who is in that prison? That's where
Diddy is being haused obviously, Sam Bankman. Now, Luigi, that's
a real Brooklyn spot. Nothing to be excited about. I
hear the conditions are, you know eh, But yeah, I
don't find that so surprising. Of course he's watching everything

(50:08):
and anything about him.

Speaker 3 (50:09):
Yeah, I guess I would too, I guess.

Speaker 5 (50:11):
And Luigi himself had posted an electronic communication from jail
and he listed things he was thankful for, so if
you are curious, those things include the Bureau of Prisons
Music catalog, chicken Thursdays and sweet Baby raised barbecue sauce,
and the thousands of books and letters people have mailed him.

Speaker 4 (50:34):
Yeah, I mean, he's really quite the sensation, right. I
feel so divided about it so closely at the beginning.
And you know, what was interesting about Luigi I think
we could all agree, is that he was so popular
and beloved.

Speaker 7 (50:46):
Right.

Speaker 2 (50:47):
He came from a huge Italian family. You know, we've
seen photographs with him and all of his cousins. You know,
they have that magnanimous smile, as does he. And you
know he was popular in high school, you know, valedictorian
and you know, went to Ivy League schools. He was, like,
you know, beloved and had a ton of friends. Unlike

(51:08):
a Brian Coburger in the Idaho case, who was you know,
sort of an odd outcast. This guy was living the life, right.
So this is a real left turn for him. You know,
there's been a lot of speculation, and it's merely a speculation.
We do not know this for a fact, that maybe
there was a psychotic break of sorts, or yes, he
had had some a back injury that may have led

(51:30):
him to find healthcare as.

Speaker 3 (51:32):
His big cause.

Speaker 2 (51:34):
But he didn't even have United Healthcare and kind of
bums me out because you know, he's kind of being
applauded for murdering somebody regardless of the healthcare stuff.

Speaker 3 (51:42):
And I know we're going to get into that deeper.

Speaker 2 (51:44):
I just don't think like the Timothy Shallomey lookalike contests
and things, and you know, free Luigi is really helping.
You know, I feel for his family. I feel for
him now he's stuck behind bars till the end of
days with a back ache and a bad bed, and
I'm glad he's you know, cleaning up around himself in
the prisons. But like what a waste and like, what

(52:05):
can we possibly take from this case that's positive?

Speaker 5 (52:09):
Well, there a playwright in San Francisco took from him
the fact that Luigi the Musical should be a thing
put on stage, and well, yeah, it's a satirical comedy.
It discusses themes of violence. It's also joined by versions
of Diddy and Sam bankmin Freed. All of them were inmates.

(52:31):
As you pointed out Stephanie at the very popular MDC Brooklyn.

Speaker 2 (52:35):
And listen, we really appreciate you calling in eight eight
eight three one crime and for leaving your talkbacks. In fact,
we have one.

Speaker 3 (52:43):
Now, Hey, lady is My.

Speaker 13 (52:44):
Name's Brittany from Canada. I just want to say that
I love what you do. I'm a huge true crime
fan and I always look forward to new episodes. I've
listened to the Piked and Massacre and of course the
Idaho murders.

Speaker 3 (52:54):
Body.

Speaker 13 (52:55):
I love your documentary on Luca Magnotta. My sister was
actually on the jury, so I got to hearing. Oh
my god, bonus points because you girls have Joseph Scott
morian on often love him and his podcast. Anyway, keep
it up.

Speaker 3 (53:08):
Can't wait to see what's to come.

Speaker 13 (53:09):
Bye.

Speaker 4 (53:10):
I did not pay her to do that. I didn't
pay her to do that either, but I love her.
She seems awesome. I was gonna say, I mean, I
think that's.

Speaker 3 (53:20):
So that's so like.

Speaker 4 (53:21):
I love that and I love Canada obviously, I love Canada. Wow,
thank you so much. That was so nice. That's so
interesting that she was actually in the hearing. I thought
her sister was on the jury. That's crazy.

Speaker 3 (53:32):
It's a small world.

Speaker 2 (53:33):
What a small or not so small world. So she's
hat to thank you book interesting.

Speaker 3 (53:38):
Why do we have another talkback? Right now.

Speaker 7 (53:40):
Bye, Hey, y'all, I just kind of want to get
y'all's perspective and thoughts on these violent criminals being able
to change their names and kind of form these new identities.
Lock with the Hillside strangler, and we saw this in
other cases too. Luck with Carla Hamulke, Canada's most hated woman,
kind of just has a disservice to the victims, in

(54:01):
my opinion, and it can kind of put the community
in a bad position.

Speaker 13 (54:05):
What are y'all thoughts?

Speaker 4 (54:06):
You know, the fact that Karla Homolka is out walking
around and you know she's working at like a school
or something like.

Speaker 3 (54:12):
Which is.

Speaker 4 (54:15):
Why are you kidding me? I do actually, but I
want you to explain. We're going to get into it.
We have to cover this case. But just to start
this case, so her and her husband killed basically a
bunch of girls in Canada and one of them was
her sister, and she basically lied about her involvement, and
then after she was basically acquitted of the crime, they

(54:37):
found video of her doing the killings.

Speaker 2 (54:40):
Can you imagine, And by the way, as a result,
she can't be tried again because that would be double
jeopardy I'm it's that's accurate because it's in Canada, not
the y.

Speaker 4 (54:49):
Yes, they have similar things. Yeah, there's similar things there. Yeah,
that's very much.

Speaker 2 (54:53):
Like that movie that I always get the wrong name
for Usual Suspects or Primal.

Speaker 3 (54:57):
I love this game.

Speaker 6 (54:58):
I get this.

Speaker 3 (54:58):
This game never gets old, the one with Ed Norton.

Speaker 2 (55:01):
But yeah, where he tricks them and then gets off
and then after we see the video of her and
she's like, yeah, sorry, and then she changes her identity.

Speaker 3 (55:11):
What a great question, by the way, great talk back.

Speaker 4 (55:13):
Yeah, so they were but you know they were called
the Kenon Barbie Killers.

Speaker 3 (55:16):
Oh they're so disgusting. Are so disgusting?

Speaker 4 (55:20):
Yeah, so, but back to her original question, was the
name changing, And yeah, they shouldn't be allowed to do that.
You know, they shouldn't be allowed to assume a new identity,
especially somebody like you know, Ken Bianki, which I'm not
going to call him his actual name, screw the call.
It's Ken Byanki, and he should not be allowed to
change his name. I completely agree with our talk about.

Speaker 2 (55:40):
By the way, that Kenon Barbie case. It is and
I say this so very rarely. I think it is
one of the most gruesome, hideous cases of all time.
And I'm really glad that you alerted that to us
because we should do a full night shoa.

Speaker 3 (55:53):
That case is really believable.

Speaker 4 (55:56):
Luca took a picture with his mother, who is a
blondehaired woman, and it was kind of like far away
and he pretended he was dating Karla Hamolka.

Speaker 2 (56:04):
Oh, what a bunch of sickos. Yeah, isn't that like
in the basement of the house on Thanksgiving? And it
was it was so too much. Yeah, that's a tale
for a different time. If you're not familiar with that case,
I have to, you know, not eat that day because
it's so incredibly nauseating. But yeah, they were just like beautiful,
beautiful couple air quotes.

Speaker 3 (56:22):
I say that in air quotes. Yeah, great question. I agree.
They should not be allowed to change their names and
she did.

Speaker 2 (56:27):
Did they change their physical identity? Which she's working at
a restaurant locally and like a school or something. I
haven't checked in on her like a long time. It's
been like five or six years since I checked up
on her.

Speaker 3 (56:39):
I thought I was sure she was in prison.

Speaker 2 (56:41):
No what, I don't know why I thought that, because
I do know the video after the fact was sort
of like a big jaw dropping moment in that Yeah,
she couldn't be prosecuted in the same way again.

Speaker 4 (56:51):
Yeah, a lot the revisisting. Yeah, it's been a long
but good talk back. Thank you so much for that.

Speaker 5 (56:58):
Wow, and good for us to cover since I didn't
even remember by name.

Speaker 3 (57:02):
Oh yeah, it was a really big, big block about
It's so gruesome. Yeah.

Speaker 5 (57:07):
So back on the Luigimian June train for a moment.
United Healthcare has been back in the news and there
was a really big article and then a bunch that
followed the one in particular that struck a nerve with me.
It was a New York Times this a guy named
David Enrich, and United Healthcare has been using these really

(57:27):
aggressive legal tactics and intimidation in order to silence critics.
This includes journalists, activists, and investors. And they are justifying
the censorship by citing concerns about safety following the murder
of Brian Thompson by Luigiman Gione.

Speaker 4 (57:46):
Oh so they're saying, you're putting us in danger by
criticizing us publicly.

Speaker 3 (57:52):
Yes, but aren't they I'm just playing devil's advocate here.
The play along.

Speaker 2 (57:57):
A man was murdered in it's the streets of New
York City, and everybody, there's a big part of our
country that has applauded that and this, regardless of the
healthcare stuff. And I don't begin to know the ins
and outs, and I'm glad we're discussing it.

Speaker 3 (58:12):
It was in a cold blooded.

Speaker 2 (58:14):
Kill, and he did have a family and two sons,
and you know that should not be applauded as an
in general note my humble opinion. But that said, I
know the healthcare system specifically does need everything.

Speaker 5 (58:29):
I just think it's such a wildly dangerous precedent to set.
And of course, Stephanie, I underline that no nobody should
be murdered for any reason. However, I do not think
that multimillion and billion dollar companies like as I see it,
I see it ethically the opposite way that they are
using this death of Brian, this murder of or killing

(58:53):
of Brian Thompson, in order to keep everyone quiet about
what their industry is actually doing. So that's my problem
with it.

Speaker 2 (59:02):
So the whole breakdown of the I know you're following
this very closely, is Luigi Mangione was all worked up
because he felt as though this particular healthcare company was
basically employing bots AI to very quickly dismiss health care
claims that in some cases were life and death right.
So imagine you're on dialysis and you really need that

(59:25):
medicine or you need a life saving surgery that now
suddenly AI is deciding you're not able to get despite
the fact that you have health insurance and despite the
fact that you pay your probably very high premium like the.

Speaker 3 (59:38):
Rest of us. It's absurd.

Speaker 2 (59:40):
So he was very worked up about this cause although
he didn't have this particular health care plan, which I
find interesting and comes from a pretty affluent family, but
that's not here nor there. So okay, two problems exist.
One right in healthcare, we need to adjust. It seems
incredibly dangerous to just be having bots in I dismissing

(01:00:01):
life saving care in so many cases, and that seems.

Speaker 3 (01:00:05):
To be there was a big uptick of that.

Speaker 2 (01:00:08):
So yeah, this is kind of opening the door to
that larger conversation where do we go from here?

Speaker 3 (01:00:13):
Like what is the solve?

Speaker 5 (01:00:14):
Well, I do not think the solve is shutting down documentaries.
Like one example, there was this docuseries Modern Medical Mafia,
and in it, United Healthcare was criticized for their pharmacy
benefits managers and accused them of literally operating like organized
crime to raise prescription drug prices.

Speaker 3 (01:00:34):
Oh wow, it's true. True.

Speaker 2 (01:00:37):
We were looking closely to this well, working on something
that I also got kabashed.

Speaker 5 (01:00:42):
Really yes, so and that video here's where I think
it gets so dangerous. So that docuseries was removed from Amazon,
Prime Video and Vimeo after United Healthcare sued and sent
warm and Warm legal warnings defamation and violation of the

(01:01:03):
platform policies. Oh my gosh, Now we all know what
the legal vetting that you need to go through to
get a documentary onto air, and how they can really
help expose stuff that's going on Alah Epstein as a
prime example right now. But that's the problem is that

(01:01:25):
United Healthcare is using the death of Brian Thompson to
stop they Also they've targeted so many critics, you know,
journalists like I said, Oh, the surgeon from Texas, doctor
Elizabeth Potter. They literally called her in the middle of
a breast reconstruction surgery, and so obviously she thought it

(01:01:47):
was incredibly urgent and it was about covering the insurance,
and she said, you know, she let this be known publicly,
said insurance is out of control in a video. I
have no other words. We can all agree getting a
call when you're midcut and you're a surgeon to stop
it is something you should be allowed to say. Yeah,

(01:02:08):
United Healthcare differed. So I don't know, Boddy, what do
you think.

Speaker 4 (01:02:11):
I'm just disgusted. Actually they okay. First of all, they
called her in the middle of surgery and to make
that call, So she stopped the surgery to take this call.
I don't understand how that works. Well, doctor calls and like.

Speaker 5 (01:02:25):
Well, having watched Dr and I know you watched Gray's Anatomy,
but having watched R yes, you can step out if
it's something incredibly urgent and take a call. And this
doctor thought it was incredibly urgent.

Speaker 4 (01:02:38):
So did they send Okay, So she made a video
and I guess she talked about her concerns about this happening. Yeah,
something happened. Did she see me or something like? What happened?

Speaker 5 (01:02:49):
So she was sent a defamation letter. And after that,
and after the video and the defamation letter, any attempts
on her part to negotiate in network status were stalled
after that point, after that video.

Speaker 4 (01:03:03):
Okay, well, I don't want to say. What I'm really
thinking is I don't want to get my own letter.

Speaker 3 (01:03:06):
No, I know, let me just say the same.

Speaker 2 (01:03:08):
We had a scenario too, Courtney and I right when
this all broke. We were like really rushing on something
that seemed extremely timely and you know, we don't need
to go super into it, but it did get kabashed.
And by the way, you know, look, you think about it,
the amount of money and time it takes to you know,
squash stories and put out, you know, information to make

(01:03:31):
you know, a certain company look better, like a healthcare company,
why not just take that same time and resource and
put it toward making the company more efficient. And I'm
sure the shared goal for everybody is for health, right,
Like you need some life saving efforts, you need some
life saving surgeries, medicines, you're paying for it. Like it

(01:03:53):
does seem like a broken system in that regard. I
know that's like a wishful thing, but it's bummer.

Speaker 4 (01:03:59):
I mean, I think if you're doing things that are critical,
you should be open to criticism.

Speaker 3 (01:04:04):
Mm hmmm.

Speaker 2 (01:04:05):
And right, it wasn't, like, you know, a cosmetic lip job,
but you know this was something. If I'm not mistaken,
it was a misectomy that was required for something cancerous.

Speaker 3 (01:04:14):
Even think about that, I like that. I really don't know.
This is really sad.

Speaker 4 (01:04:18):
But next we're going to be digging into the deeper
into why relatives of Sarah Grace Patrick believe she's been
wrongly accused of her parents' murder.

Speaker 3 (01:04:26):
And later we're turning the mic over to you.

Speaker 4 (01:04:28):
Give us a call at eighty eight eight thirty one
crime on your thoughts on any of tonight's.

Speaker 3 (01:04:32):
Stories, keep it right here, true crimes.

Speaker 2 (01:04:34):
And we have a couple of crazy cases about parents side.
We will get into that in a moment, but we
also have a talkback, so let's go to that real quick.

Speaker 14 (01:04:54):
Kiff from Kentucky, do you think that the Menindez brothers
will get proba instead of just going free for a while,
or do you think they'll be free and clear or
remain in prison for good. I personally think they should
be out, but I'm great to hear your take.

Speaker 3 (01:05:11):
Have a good night. Yeah, that's a hate, great question. Yeah,
I think they'll go on parole. I think they'll be
on parole, So you think they'll be released within the
next month.

Speaker 4 (01:05:21):
Well, their hearing isn't until August twenty first, so I
don't necessarily think they're going to get habeas corpus relief
as the requesting. I think that that will eventually be
denied and they're going to have their parole hearing on
the twenty first and the twenty second, and I think
they'll be granted parole and be out by September.

Speaker 5 (01:05:38):
Why do you think the habeas corpus, which if you
were listening earlier, we actually literally just define habeas corpus
It means you shouldn't have my body in this prison
right in their basic translation.

Speaker 4 (01:05:49):
And they're asking for that relief because of that letter
that was not allowed to be presented in court.

Speaker 3 (01:05:54):
Am I correct about that?

Speaker 10 (01:05:55):
So?

Speaker 4 (01:05:56):
Yeah, So this letter was written before the murders to
cousin of the brothers, and this letter was I think
Lyle explaining to his cousin about the abuse that they
were suffering. And so it's documented before the murders and
it wasn't allowed to be presented at trial, and they're
saying basically that it had if it had been allowed

(01:06:18):
at trial then they would never have been convicted.

Speaker 2 (01:06:21):
However, if even if they had been convicted, it would
have been time served by now, So regardless, they should
be out. Here's my only like other side to that.
And I get really conflicted on this one because I do.
I feel a lot of compassion for them and their circumstances. Yeah,
I also just feel like the origin story of them
and the sexual abuse that they endured by their dad,

(01:06:42):
by their account, and of course this letter would reinforce that.
You know, does everybody get that same look? You know,
there are many, many, many many prisoners that are serving
very scary sentences for doing very dastardly horrible things and
have maybe a similar origin story. And that's just makes
me feel like it's a little unfair because the Menanda's

(01:07:03):
brothers were so sensationalized, and maybe for a good reason
in the Ryan Murphy scripted series, which was you know,
of course very good obviously a very good documentary made
about them that I think really shed a light on
these new developments. Probably and I believe it was Campfire
that made that documentary. Had they not, chances are this
wouldn't have seen the light of day. And are we

(01:07:25):
cherry picking because of fame a little bit, and I
feel bad for those who are also not going to
get that same luxury. And frankly, we can't give that
to every behind.

Speaker 4 (01:07:36):
Bars, but maybe this is a good start, fair, right,
So I agree with you. I do think that the
Menanda's brothers are getting a little bit of fair treatment,
let's say, But I do think that we can't overlook
it just because of that.

Speaker 3 (01:07:49):
Yeah, that's that's totally fair.

Speaker 4 (01:07:51):
Yeah, that's At the same time, I do agree with
you that there's I'm sure there's plenty of women and
men in prison who have suffered abuse and murdered their spouse, husband, wife,
you know whatever, parents, cousins, I don't know, and are
dealing with similar situations that aren't getting that treatment, right,
But I don't think we should overlook the Menendez brothers
just because they are famous.

Speaker 3 (01:08:13):
Yeah, right, that's fair.

Speaker 5 (01:08:15):
And of the multitude, which is it's very sad. There is,
of course a multitude of people who suffer extreme abuse.
How many of them get the kind of attention that
they got before the initial trial, when the empire world
was looking at them and painting them as rich party boys,
and so it's kind of both sides of the coin

(01:08:38):
in this and looks.

Speaker 2 (01:08:39):
It also does show the importance of content, right, you know,
looking at cases through a fresh lens, you know, is
sometimes extremely meaningful, and you know this would be an
example of that. Obviously kind of gets me divided though,
so but yeah, it's such a great question, but.

Speaker 4 (01:08:55):
It's a slippery slope too, Like if you look at
who's in prison, did you know somebody who maybe got
addicted to crack cocaine killed the gas station attendant? Well,
did he get addicted to crack cocaine because he was
abused by his parents?

Speaker 3 (01:09:07):
Like, however, do you know what I mean? Like, it's
a what is the chain of events? You know, like
murder to some degree? I mean I don't know.

Speaker 2 (01:09:14):
I don't know the end the minute I say it,
I like unsay it in my head, in my heart.
So it's a great talk back though, and a really
great question. We're seeing this a lot in the news
right now too, because you know, Courtney, you're following this
new case of course of Sarah grayce Patrick.

Speaker 3 (01:09:29):
And that's a tough one. Body. Do you want to
jump in?

Speaker 2 (01:09:31):
I see you pointing out yourself right now. Let's go, yo,
got tied up and put in the corner.

Speaker 4 (01:09:37):
Courtney, I'm still on my brain, ye body, Courtney and
I both talking about this one actually, But yeah, so
this is about Sarah Grace Patrick. Of course we started
talking about her earlier this week. She was arrested for
being a suspect in the murder of her mother, Kristen Brock,
who was forty one, and her stepfather, James Brock, who

(01:10:00):
is forty five. They were found shot to death in
their bed. Their five year old daughter, who is Sarah
Grace Patrick's half sister, found them. Sarah Grace Patrick herself
made the nine one to one call to report the incident,
claiming she and her younger sister found the bodies. So
after the murders, Sarah posted, you know, multiple emotional TikTok

(01:10:22):
you know videos mourning her parents, describing her life as
a horror movie in dealing with this, which of course
you know would.

Speaker 2 (01:10:29):
Be no matter how or didn't kill them.

Speaker 3 (01:10:33):
It's a horror show, yeah, exactly, exactly.

Speaker 4 (01:10:35):
And she was expressing feelings of like missing her, you know,
her mom, and you know, having to go to the funeral,
and like she can't believe this is her life now.
And she was also reaching out to I know of
at least two TikTokers that she reached out to that
create true crime content on that platform, asking them to
cover this case. And the authorities say they have a

(01:10:58):
mountain of evidence against her, but have not disclosed any
of those details to the public, so we don't know
what the evidence is. The sheriff office has not ruled
out additional suspects or arrest either, which makes it even
more complex, right, And they encourage the public to send
in public tips, so it tells me, yeah, they have
a lot of evidence, but they are also suspect that

(01:11:18):
there might be other people involved, but they don't.

Speaker 3 (01:11:21):
Have enough to arrest somebody. That's what it tells me.

Speaker 2 (01:11:25):
Yeah, And like again, I know her father, living father
and his wife are kind of standing up for her
right so they have a very different opinion on it.

Speaker 3 (01:11:35):
They do.

Speaker 4 (01:11:36):
In fact, they just spoke with the Daily Mail on
the internet and an article yesterday details how the biological
father again it was her stepfather that she killed, her
stepfather and her biological mother, her biological father of Sarah,
is basically saying that he doesn't think that she's capable

(01:11:57):
of doing something like this now.

Speaker 3 (01:11:58):
Of course every parent is going.

Speaker 4 (01:12:01):
To say something like this, that's you have when I'm
reading this article, That's what I'm thinking in my head.
He has largely maintained, you know, his silence around this arrest.
But he is the one that actually drove her to
the police station to turn herself in.

Speaker 3 (01:12:12):
Which is a tough spot.

Speaker 7 (01:12:17):
You know.

Speaker 4 (01:12:17):
We talk about this a lot. YEA his girlfriend because
his name is Donnie. I can't He's got to. It's strange,
it's hard to pronounce. It's d O N I E L.

Speaker 3 (01:12:29):
Donnelle.

Speaker 4 (01:12:30):
His girlfriend, her name is Katie Okay, And she said
this is in quotes, Sarah Grace maintains her innocence. We
believe her, meaning the girlfriend and the dad, we believe her.
We are all supporting her. It's a very difficult time.
After that, we will speak to the press to make
sure we advocate for Sarah Grace. For now, we are

(01:12:52):
going to sit back for a second, just to make
sure everything is in her benefit and not in her hindrance,
and added that Sarah is due to meet with her
lawyers this coming Monday, and of course I think that's
actually really smart of them not to speed your things
get twisted and you didn't say that this time. Why
didn't you say this? So I think it's probably smart
for them to be quiet.

Speaker 5 (01:13:13):
I totally agree and listen, we'd love to hear your
thoughts on this case. It is a tragedy. No matter
what happened, two people are dead. A now seventeen year
old girl, Sarah Grace Patrick, is in a lot of trouble.
Whether he tried as an adult, she will be tried
as an adult. We want to hear your thoughts on that.

(01:13:34):
I mean, what do you think should she be tried
as an adult? Assuming we get to the court case
eight at eight to three to one crime. But I
do think body, you are totally correct that I don't
feel like the pictures painted because that's really two rather
disparate things. One mountain of evidence.

Speaker 3 (01:13:52):
We have her.

Speaker 5 (01:13:53):
Maybe there's something else and we really want all your tips.

Speaker 3 (01:13:57):
Right.

Speaker 2 (01:13:58):
It's also it is following the same logic that you
guys just we just were talking about with the Menendez brothers.
Is there something more sinister behind the scenes in Sarah
Grace Patrick's life that maybe would inform the why even
if she did and if there was a why, would
you guys care. Why do we care so much about

(01:14:19):
the Menendez because they had a very difficult origin story.

Speaker 3 (01:14:23):
What if she does too, what.

Speaker 4 (01:14:25):
Do I care? Yes, we don't know, and I hate
to go there because you know, these are victims of
a murder and I don't want to know without any
evidence at all.

Speaker 3 (01:14:34):
Also, a seventeen year old girl, and I was sixteen
at the time.

Speaker 4 (01:14:38):
It was sixteen. Now here's the other thing. This happened
in February. And if they have a mountain of evidence,
why did it take five months to arrest her. I
think there's a lot of things we just don't know
yet about this, And I think that that's one thing
that makes it really intriguing for me at least, is
there's just what's missing? And I love that question what's missing?
So her public defender filed the motion for bond just

(01:15:00):
so we all know, to be set so that she
could be really some bailed, but a hearing has not
been scheduled for that yet. Multiple family members has said
that the home has been searched, with Dennis Nolan, who
is Sarah's maternal grandfather, and speculating they were looking for
the missing gun. Apparently there's a missing gun, So we're
going to probably hear more about that soon. Now. Sarah's

(01:15:23):
grandmother on her father's side, Donna Arnette, told a Daily
Mail of her son's part break and worry over her
granddaughter's arresting. All he can do is cry. I mean
this podcast, not this part of dad. And what is
Sophie's choice to have to make? You know, we talk
about this offline all the time. What would you do
if your favorite family member, your child, your sibling, your

(01:15:44):
parent committed a vicious crime and you were told they
did you know?

Speaker 2 (01:15:49):
Would you hide them? Would you you know, ate in
a bait, bet them? And I think he handled equally
as perfectly as you can, assuming she's you know, driving
your loved one to turn himself in, to stand with
them and stand behind them with love. But still, you know,
they have to face the piper. You if you take
somebody's life, there is real recourse for that and period

(01:16:11):
the end, And it just seems very difficult for all involved.

Speaker 5 (01:16:15):
Yeah, it is, and we'll obviously be following this as
new information comes out.

Speaker 3 (01:16:19):
And what a night it has been. And I'm just
saying this was your favorite show.

Speaker 4 (01:16:23):
Yeah, this is my Alaric my friends, and we haven't
even talked about Idaho and it's been my favorite, my
favorite show so far.

Speaker 3 (01:16:32):
Sorrow.

Speaker 2 (01:16:33):
Yeah, the hearing for tomorrow the Idaho student murders will
be pretty explosive, So we'll obviously be following that very closely,
and we'll updating you tomorrow. And yeah, we're going to
get into Gary Coleman later in the week. We also
are going to continue to follow this this particular case.
I mean, I just think there's probably a lot more
context to this.

Speaker 3 (01:16:52):
Sarah Sarah Grace Patrick case.

Speaker 2 (01:16:54):
And also we haven't even got to the potential serial
killer in Maine that keeps getting pushed and how at
the dentist who allegedly has killed his wife with you know,
eye drops.

Speaker 3 (01:17:04):
There's more on that to come.

Speaker 2 (01:17:05):
So the night just kind of got stacked this evening,
so definitely tune in tomorrow. Reminder, we're gone on Friday,
but we are back on Sunday, So Sunday through Thursday
live two hours and if you missed any of the show,
just catch it as a podcast.

Speaker 3 (01:17:20):
We actually have a talkback right now.

Speaker 15 (01:17:23):
Hey, if y'all are looking for another case to cover,
there's the James Craig a Colorado dentist who poisoned his wife.
His trial is starting shortly, and I think it might
be interesting to dive deep.

Speaker 3 (01:17:39):
Yes, are we being tapped? Are we being tapped right now?
That is so opening statements.

Speaker 4 (01:17:45):
And just began, and we're learning through these opening statements,
so kind of using this Bowden defense, which basically is
that the cops jumped the gun and without really they
Basically what it means is they had their suspect in mind,
him the husband, and did the investigation based around the
fact that he did it instead of investigating the murder.

(01:18:06):
And they're saying in their opening statements that she was
suicidal and she.

Speaker 5 (01:18:11):
Probably did it herself, and that she poisoned her own
protein shakes with eye drops and arson arson that he
sent to himself.

Speaker 2 (01:18:22):
Excuse me, Yeah, this is a troubling one because yes,
does the you know, he's really leaning into the idea
of tunnel vision. By the way, great talk back. You
are definitely in our heads, howe. You are a part
of the crew, and yeah, you are officially on the team.
But yeah, we're doing a deep dive into that case tomorrow.
We were planning on starting it today actually, and Frankly,

(01:18:44):
the night just got away from us, he did.

Speaker 3 (01:18:45):
So yeah, much more on that to come.

Speaker 2 (01:18:47):
We'll be curious to hear more of your thoughts because
that's a trial that is about to heat up in
a very real way.

Speaker 3 (01:18:53):
So yeah, thank you for the tip.

Speaker 4 (01:18:54):
Yeah, definitely, And then don't forget tomorrow the gag order.
We just kind of touched on that briefly. I wanted
to mention real quick there was a motion file today
by the state in this state of Idaho versus Brian Koberger,
the Idaho student murderers, and they are saying in this
motion that they are not going to object to the
gag order being lifted early, which.

Speaker 2 (01:19:16):
Is ridiculous if they even have a gag order. But
nonetheless my two cents, but yes, we will be We
will be there and reporting all the ins and outs
tomorrow night. So yeah, thank you for the great show.
And also again to Team Bryant, to Michael Bryant of
course and his wife who was you know, who also
made the documentary Filthy Rich that we talked to on Sunday.

(01:19:39):
It's a family affair there. They're all undercover.

Speaker 4 (01:19:41):
All I want to go to their dinner parties yeah, exactly.

Speaker 3 (01:19:44):
That's the TV show.

Speaker 5 (01:19:45):
And Michael Bryant really, if you haven't seen it, you
should catch his show Justice Serve TV. It's excellent.

Speaker 2 (01:19:52):
Great, well, listen, We're going to be here tomorrow night,
same time, same place, and again we want to hear
from you, so please hit us up. Make sure you
leave us those talkbacks. It could be at any time
of day. Just download the iHeart app, pushed a little
right hand button in the top corner and boom, your
opinion will be heard. Do we have any more talk
box to go to or none? Not anymore?

Speaker 3 (01:20:14):
We don't rap. The music's playing us out. We don't
even have Oh my goodness, we listen. Goodbye.

Speaker 2 (01:20:19):
Yeah, time to say goodbye. You're listening to True Crime Tonight.
It's been a great one. This is True Crime Tonight,
All crime, all the time. Listen you guys, stay safe
out there. Good night, Thank you everyone.

Speaker 3 (01:20:30):
Good night,

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Crime Junkie

24/7 News: The Latest

Stuff You Should Know

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Behind the Redactions: Epstein’s Edits and UnitedHealth’s Power, Plus Justice for American Idol’s Robin Kaye and Musician Thomas DeLuca

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}Crime Junkie

24/7 News: The Latest

Stuff You Should Know

All Episodes

Behind the Redactions: Epstein’s Edits and UnitedHealth’s Power, Plus Justice for American Idol’s Robin Kaye and Musician Thomas DeLuca

Crime Junkie