Kohberger Gag Order Dropped by Judge, Menendez Brothers Breakthrough, and Decker Hunt Escalates

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 made it to Thursday, July seventeenth. Everybody,
We're so glad you're here. And yes, we have a
stacked night of headlines. So huge day in the Brian Coberger,
Idaho student murder's case, there was a hearing today and
the gag order has been officially lifted, so we will

(00:42):
be breaking down all of those developments. And also there's
been some new developments in the Travis Dekker case. You'll
remember he's the one who was accused for allegedly killing
his three daughters. There's been some newly released footage of
him days prior to those murders and it's pretty spook
and very telling. And also we're going to be following Boh,

(01:04):
the Menandaz Brothers. We have a very special guest with
us tonight. We have Robert rand here. Yet again, he's
been following this case and working on it closely with
the Menandaz Brothers since the day after the murders. So
he's the guy knows all of the newest things that
are happening in that case, will they walk free? So
we're looking forward to having him join. Also, we want

(01:27):
you to join the conversation, so please do eight eight
eight to three one Crime. You can call us anytime
or please leave us a talk back. All you have
to do is download the iHeart app, hit the button
in the right hand corner, leave us a little message,
and boom, you're on the show. You can also hit
us up on our socials at True Crime Tonight's show
on TikTok and Instagram, or at true Crime Tonight on Facebook.

(01:49):
I'm Stephanie Leidecker and I head of KAT Studios, where
we get to make true crime podcasts and documentaries and
I get to do that every night here with Body
Movin and Courtney Arms Strong. Ladies, it has been a day.
It's an exhausting day of hearings. Oh and by the way,
I know we mentioned this several days ago. The Blake
Lively hearing that was set for today has also been pushed,

(02:12):
so just as a heads up, we're not covering that
for the night. So, first and foremost, Robert, welcome to
the show. We're so happy to have you back.

Speaker 3 (02:21):
Thank you for having me back. And there recuring quite
a number of developments in the case since we last spoke.

Speaker 4 (02:29):
That is so true, pretty exciting developments, right.

Speaker 3 (02:32):
Robert, Well, I started covering this case almost thirty six
years ago. There's twentieth nineteen Elgus. Twenty twenty five is
the thirty six year anniversary of the killing, and now
here we are on the possible edge of the brothers

(02:53):
being released from prison. And I always knew this day
would happen. I just wasn't sure what.

Speaker 5 (03:01):
I can't imagine how gratifying this must be for the
literal decades of time you have spent working on the case, Robert,
So kudos first of all, and second, yeah, can you
explain to people who maybe don't know all of the
nuances what is going on for them and what might
potentially change for the Menandez brothers.

Speaker 3 (03:22):
Sure, so there are two headlines right now. On May thirteenth,
Eric and Lyle Menendez were resentenced from life without parole
the original sentence to fifty years to life, and that
makes them immediately eligible for parole and both brothers will

(03:42):
touched by individually before the California Pearl Board August twenty
first and August twenty second. So that is their first
path to walking out the prison the eighth and that's
the one that people have been hearing about since last fall.
The newest headline came out over the weekend on Saturday.

(04:05):
Strangely enough, it was revealed that a Spirit Court judge
ruled that on the habeas petition that the brothers filed
in May of twenty twenty three, and the recencing and
the habeas tition are completely different court filings. The habeas

(04:29):
with the original court pilt from May twenty twenty three,
deals with the evidence there's new evidence, and the habeas
deals with that. And what happened was that the DA's
office kept asking for extensions to reply to the habeas,
and originally they were doing this for a year and

(04:50):
a half before George Gaston was voted out of office
and replaced by Nathan Ackman. And so this really came
as a adlies to people over the weekend because Judge
William Ryan ruled that he believed the information that was
laid out in the habeas and there's a I mean, eventually,

(05:16):
if that ruling were to hold up and he would
continue to rule that way, the brothers could actually walk
out of jail the next day.

Speaker 2 (05:25):
And if anyone's not familiar with this case, just to
bring anybody up to speed, you know, Lyle and his brother,
of course, were accused and convicted for killing their parents
back in nineteen eighty nine, Kitty and Jose Menendez, and then, look,
it was a very brutal killing. It was also sensationalized
at that time. Since then, there's been a documentary that

(05:47):
was very well received, also a scripted series about them,
and you know, listen that may have really helped move
the needle for Eric and Lyle Menendez. Now they're being
housed together, and look, I would have to assume this
last inch must be the hardest because you know, in
their minds, they must assume they're going to be free

(06:08):
very soon or are they just kind of rolling with
the punches. I know you're very close with them and
have a very special relationship.

Speaker 3 (06:17):
They are both hopeful, but they're not counting on anything.
Their case was not in court for twenty years and
then our documentary Menendez plus Menudo Voice Betrayed came out
on Peacock in May of twenty twenty three, revealing new
evidence about a nefarious connection between Jose Menendez when he

(06:40):
was head of our Shay Records in the nineteen eighties
and the Latin boy band Menudo, which sounds like, you know,
an incredible story, and it is, and so it's been
really it's in a few years for me and for

(07:00):
the case.

Speaker 4 (07:01):
Well, Robert, this is kind of like your life's work, right,
so this must be kind of a feeling for you too.
I mean, of course the men and his brothers are
probably anxious and excited, but for you yourself as well, right.

Speaker 3 (07:14):
Well, what's incredible about Judge Ryan's ruling over the weekend
saying that he believed the new evidence and you know
that that was the way he ruled. That's incredibly validating
not only for me personally, but we had a team
of over one hundred people that worked on this documentary, Wow,

(07:34):
including our showrunner director Esteraeis, and it really caught all
of us by surprise. But basically a spirit court judge
ruled that he actually believed the new evidence, and that
is huge. That's a major development for Eric and Lyle

(07:56):
I mean their first path freedom is still the recent
and seen followed by the appearance in front of the
pro board. But normally people are not are turned down
the first time they go to board and the pro
board turns them down, then they can't apply for another
three years. And so now the Habeas is suddenly looking

(08:20):
like a much stronger path of freedom.

Speaker 6 (08:25):
Yeah, it sure seems so, Robert.

Speaker 5 (08:27):
I have a couple of questions for you, and listen,
if anyone else has any questions for Robert about the
Menandez brothers, give us a call.

Speaker 6 (08:34):
We're at eighty eight to three to one crime.

Speaker 5 (08:37):
So I wanted to speak with you. I was reading
your book today, Robert, and specifically i'man.

Speaker 2 (08:44):
Award winning journalist. By the way, nothing to shake a
stick at, Robert.

Speaker 6 (08:49):
But it was really interesting.

Speaker 5 (08:51):
So as far as I understand, it's really two main
pieces of evidence that support the claim that's supporting the
Habeas corpus, and one of them is the former Menudo
member of filing an AffA, David, you know, claiming that
he was raped, as we just spoke about in your
fabulous documentary, Robert. And then also was that letter that

(09:14):
Eric wrote back in nineteen eighty nine to his cousin Andy.

Speaker 6 (09:19):
So a couple of things.

Speaker 5 (09:21):
First, I'd love you to remind us of how you
were the one to actually find that letter. And second,
if you can talk through a little bit the relationship
that this cousin, who was only also a teenager at
the time, and what this case also did to him.
I believe you said you viewed him as a sixth
victim of this crime, which great question.

Speaker 2 (09:40):
Yeah, that's a really good question.

Speaker 3 (09:42):
So what happened was that in around the two thousand
and nine twenty ten March, Keno, the mother of Andy Kano,
said to me. She made a very cryptic remark, She said, someday,
after my mother dies, I'm going to tell you something
that I've never told you before. And that turned out

(10:06):
to me that she was an eyewitness to her mother
sexually molesting her young brother, Jose when he was around three,
four or five years old, And so that was kind
of a shock. And then later in the fall of
twenty seventeen, I was working on the Dick Wolf NBC

(10:29):
series order True Crime The Mennis Murders.

Speaker 4 (10:33):
Also very very very great. By the way, your work.

Speaker 3 (10:36):
Is coridinary, it's a very good telling of the story
because unlike Monsters, the Netflix series, which had a lot
of viewers, the Dick Wolf series was almost ninety eight
percent accurate. It was almost like a documentary. And unfortunately,
in Monsters, there were a number of things that weren't true.

(11:00):
There were a number of falsehoods, and but that didn't
stop the huge Netflix audience of three hundred million subscribers
from watching it. And then there was a documentary that
came out on Netflix a few weeks later, which actually
I was in. I was interviewed in that, and so
I'm grateful to Netflix that they created the series and

(11:25):
the documentary. But I've been thinking of sending Ryan Murphy,
the producer of the scripted series, a bouquet of dead
flowers because I was family with Anne Schwart, who is
the expert on the Jeffreys Dahmer case. She covered the
Dahmer trial. She was in his living room the night

(11:46):
he was arrested. And unfortunately, mister Murphy playediarized scenes from
both of our books. But that's all the story.

Speaker 2 (11:54):
With the black dead flowers, that's a nice elegant touch. Robert,
do you have ill will? Do you have a feeling?

Speaker 4 (12:00):
Yeah?

Speaker 5 (12:03):
I think we all learned we need to stay on
Robert's good side and listen.

Speaker 6 (12:07):
That means all of us.

Speaker 5 (12:09):
And when we come back, I want to ask you
immediately about a plane ride confession in the Menandez case
that was absolute news to me in reading your book.
And then also want to find out how the brothers
are doing today. And yes, yeah, so that and much
more is going to be happening after the break and

(12:32):
stick with us and Robert rand Later in the show,
we're going to be getting into the trial of the
Colorado dentist who allegedly murdered his wife. Give us a
call always eighty eight three to one Crime keep it
here on True Crime Tonight.

Speaker 2 (12:55):
Big day today in the land of true crime. Brian Coburger,
the now guilty killer of four incredible Idaho students, was
in court today for a hearing and the gag order
has been officially lifted, so we'll be unpacking more on
that later. Also, as I mentioned earlier, Travis Decker accused

(13:15):
of allegedly killing his three daughters. There's some really haunting
video that's come out of him in the days prior
to the murders that will also be discussing and that
dentist who is now standing trial for allegedly killing his
wife with eyedrops. It appears that is another one that
this is a story that is just starting and likely

(13:37):
not going to stop for anytime soon. But first, we
have a very special guest. Robert rand is joining us
back again. He's an Emmy Award winning journalist. He's been
following the Menendez brother's case since the day after the trial.
So we're talking decades at this point. If you're not
familiar with that case, both of these brothers were accused

(13:58):
of killing their parents, Kitty and Jose Menendez back in
nineteen eighty nine. Really an overkill, And listen, I got
a lot of sensational press back in the day, which
you know may have really worked against them. And now
cut to years and years later. You know, Robert, because
of your great work, this wonderful documentary that you did

(14:20):
for Peacock, new evidence has now come forward and that
evidence might set them free. You know, you had, so
welcome back, Robert. You had said something earlier that I
just want to go back to. Did I hear this correctly?
So you're saying that Jose Menendez, the father killed by
his sons who have now they seemingly have proof that

(14:42):
they were being sexually abused as young boys, and that
was really the orige and story to why these murders
even happened, and maybe that was all precluded from their trial.
You had mentioned earlier that maybe the dad was also
being abused as a young boy his mother is Did
I hear that correctly? Or was that a different Jose

(15:03):
in the family.

Speaker 3 (15:04):
Yes, no, no, that is correct that in my book
the menenous murders actually one third of abuse victims grew
up to abuse themselves.

Speaker 4 (15:15):
Generational trauma.

Speaker 3 (15:18):
Right, But this was really a story. This is a
story about a dysfunctional family and two parents who raised
a couple of troubled kids. And there was three years
between when the brothers were arrested in March or nineteen
ninety and when the case finally went to trial in
July ninety three. There were legal issues surrounding the brother's

(15:42):
relationship with a therapist who they had recorded a tape
with and who had notes from their therapy sessions, and
so by the time the case finding a trial after
three years, the general opinion of the public was Erica
Menendez were a pair of greedy rich kids who killed

(16:03):
Alzie Harriet on a Sunday night in Beverly Hills and.

Speaker 2 (16:06):
Beautiful Beverly Hills exactly. That's how I remember it back
in the day.

Speaker 3 (16:11):
And the problem was that in the La County DA's office,
they have a dozen people that do nothing but pr
and their job is to put out the spin, their
spin of the stories, so that jurors will kind of
be preconditioned before they ever walked into a courtroom. And

(16:32):
so for three years, the only story the public heard
was about greedy, rich kids, and so that was the
general opinion about Eric and Lyle, and that was never
the real story. I had the luxury of being a
book author that I was able to spend quite a
bit of time with family members, with Eric and Lyle themselves,

(16:54):
and I learned a lot before the trial ever started.
And then during the trial, which was six months long.
The first trial, there were almost sixty witnesses, teachers, coaches,
family members, friends of the family who told a very
detailed story of the dysfunction in this family. And so

(17:16):
the first trial ended there was two juries, one for
each brother because some of the evidence that applied to
one or the other. The first trial ended in two mistrials.
All the women voted for manslaughter, all the men voted
for murder. I interviewed all the jurors after the first trial,
and all the men told me some version of well,

(17:38):
a father would never do that. And I think that
we've learned in the past thirty years. Society has evolved.
You know, now we have the hashtag metia movement, the
hashtag MENTU movement. We've evolved, and we understand that these
things do go on, and not just to girls, but

(18:00):
to boys as well.

Speaker 2 (18:02):
And by the way also, you know, probably to further
that point, not that it's great in any gender obviously,
captain obvious, but you know for boys especially too, they
don't even have the verbal capability. Sometimes a shame that's
attached to that. You know, we're seeing this more and more,
and thank goodness, where hopefully there's more of a climate

(18:22):
where victims feel like they can in fact come forward
and be heard and listened to. But back in those
days that was sort of blasphemy, and you know, maybe
they were real. They've been a real influence on that,
I would imagine, even from behind bars.

Speaker 3 (18:37):
Right, and the challenge that we had putting the Menendez
Manu documentary together was we were only able to get
in the end one victim, Roy Roussello, who came forward
and told a very detailed story of what he suffered
at the hands of Jose Menendez and also he was

(18:59):
less by the creator of at Ghetto Ideas. And in fact,
the LAPD has an active investigation Intodas following a complaint
that Roy Roussello made against Diaz, and I thuink what's happened.
I mean, we were actually talking to a half dozen

(19:21):
other former members of Menudo that we believe were victims
of Jose Menendez and at gto Diaz, and we were
very close to getting to sell of them to come
forward and go on camera, and in the end they
all said no. And the reason is that they are

(19:43):
all members of Ernudo Reunion bands, they are all married,
they have children, and I completely understand they didn't want
to dredge up this information from their past. And some
people take these secret of being molested to their grave.

(20:03):
And as Roy told us in the documentary, he was
very ashamed. And some people said, well, where was Roy
Roussello thirty years ago? Why didn't he come forward and
appear in court? And I can tell you exactly where
Roy was. He was living in Brazil, basically hiding out.

(20:24):
He had been born and grown up in Puerto Rico
when he was in Minuto, and he was aware that
the Menndes trial was going on, but he was ashamed.
He didn't want to come forward.

Speaker 6 (20:38):
You know, that's sadly common.

Speaker 4 (20:40):
Yeah, that's just so common. You're listening to true Crime
tonight on iHeartRadio. I'mbody move in with Courtney Armstrong and
Stephanie Leidecker and we are joined by Menandez Brothers expert
Robert rand and we've been talking about all things Menandez.
Give us a call at eight eight eight thirty one
Crime if you have any questions, or give us a
talk back on the iHeartRadio app. And I understand we

(21:02):
have a Menendez brother's talk back. Can we go to
that real quick?

Speaker 7 (21:06):
Hi?

Speaker 8 (21:06):
I'm relatively new to the Menenda's case, and I was
just wondering how people who support them justify their behavior
after the murders, because even if they did have a
very valid motive, it still just seems really strange that
they would go on the spending spree. And I'm just

(21:28):
wondering if they've ever given any sort of explanation or
justification for that behavior.

Speaker 4 (21:35):
So valid, That is so valid because that's honestly a
problem I have with that's.

Speaker 2 (21:40):
Just it's maybe a trauma response.

Speaker 4 (21:42):
What do they say about it?

Speaker 3 (21:43):
I can answer that question very easily. Eric and Lyle
Menendez never got a penny from the estate of their parents.
What they did receive five weeks after the killings was
a distribution from an US policy that they didn't even
know about. Their aunt, March Keno, was a financial planner

(22:05):
in Florida and she had sold Jose a lifetures policy.
So five weeks after the killings, she came to Beverly
Hills and she handed each brother a check for a
quarter million dollars. And what I say is, if you
give any eighteen or twenty one year old a quarter

(22:25):
million dollars to me, the sprides would be if they
don't go out and buy a nice car, or buy clothes,
or you know, go out.

Speaker 4 (22:34):
To be fair to the talkbacker, The way it's portrayed
in the media and in many shows and whatnot is
that it was almost immediate, and it was you know,
they went to the record company where you know jose
Menend's work and demanded like dispersements and it was like
immedia and they went and bought Porsches and jewelry, and
the way it's portrayed in some of these shows, right,

(22:54):
it seems like it happened almost immediately, but you're seeing
it was like five weeks and it was like a
quarter of a million, and you know that kind of
tracks that kind of tracks with the reality.

Speaker 3 (23:05):
And I think what you also need to understand this
was a very wealthy, upper class family. Sure, the family,
all the members of the family had always spent a
lot of money, so them going out spending money is
was not unusual for the family.

Speaker 2 (23:24):
I'm really glad we're talking about this too, because Robert,
to your point, you know, victims everywhere throughout the world,
we might add, we hear this on a daily basis,
male or female, the shame that's attached to that. Even
just talking about this now, I'm really just glad that
we can say this officially. If you've been the victim
of any sort of abuse, the shame has to be

(23:46):
put aside. The silence does change nothing. And I guess
it's these types of stories too, that you know, Thank goodness,
we're actually hearing this from you. It's actually very moving.

Speaker 3 (23:57):
And one other key fact about the spend Main Street.
In August ninety two, a year before the brothers went
on trial, the Ella County DA's office went to a
grand jury with evidence of murder for financial gain and
the grand jury did not indicte the brothers on those charges. Wow.

(24:17):
And yet that didn't stop the prosecution for a moment
because they knew the media loved that story, greedy Richards.
They knew the public loved that story, and so they
just kept talking about greedy Richards, even though they never
got the indictment that they tried to get from the
grand jury.

Speaker 4 (24:34):
Wow. Well, we're going to continue our conversation with Robert
Rand about the menandas brothers, and in the second hour
we're going to break down the implications of the judge
in the Idahoster murderer's case lifting the gag order. We
have answers to your burning questions. Stay right here at
True Crime Tonight, where we're talking true crime all the time.

Speaker 2 (25:02):
Tonight we've had this extraordinary guest, Robert Rand, who was
an Emmy Award winning journalist also a documentarian. Please check
out his documentary on Peacock about the Menendez brothers plus Menudo,
and also as an author who really has basically solved
this big riddle about the Menendez brothers, meaning because of

(25:24):
your work, Frankly, Robert, the Menendez brothers who have been
serving time behind bars since you know, the early nineteen
ninety I believe, or ninety one, right, they were accused
and later convicted of killing their parents, Kitty and Jose Menendez.
Kind of a sensational case back in the day. And
you know, now we're learning that they were being sexually

(25:45):
abused by Dad, and that information existed even back in
the day, and it was maybe purposefully left out of
the hearings and the trial, and they've been extraordinary citizens
behind bars. They were hoping to be home by Thanksgiving,
and now it's looking like any day now or maybe
a month from now, or I'm curious what your prediction

(26:08):
on that would be, that they may, you know, finally
walk free and get to go home to their families.
Kind Of also important to note that, you know, the
family members his aunts, uncles, people connected to the parents,
family members connected to them, really have stood by them
and are frankly begging for their release, and I think
that says a lot and it also sheds a lot

(26:30):
of insight into these types of origin stories of abuse
that are happening behind closed doors. We do not know
what happens behind closed doors. Even the glitsiest places in
Beverly Hills could have heinous things happening to children and
as a result, you know, they took their lives have
been lost. So I know, Courtney, you had a burning

(26:51):
question that you wanted to ask.

Speaker 6 (26:54):
Robert.

Speaker 5 (26:54):
I am dying to know if you've had occasion to
speak with attorney Cliff Gardener and also either or both
of the Benandez brothers.

Speaker 3 (27:05):
I actually spoke to Cliff Gardner, who I've known waiting
twenty years, a couple days ago, and Cliff told me
that what I said earlier, that actually, the first time
inmates go in front of the California pro Board, it's
unlikely that they will be recommended to be released, but

(27:26):
it could happen. This case has had so many twists
and turns over the past nine months, anything could happen.
And if the pro Board recommends that they be released,
then there's a four month procedure before it goes to
Governor Gavin Newsom. So around Christmas time, Gavin Newsom will

(27:49):
have thirty days to either go along with the pro
board and release them or turn them down, and so
that will be very interesting development obviously. But now with
this ruling by Judge Ryan about the behavius, now we
have a very active second path to freedom.

Speaker 4 (28:10):
The tone of this judge it sounds like he is
actually kind of on the Menindez brother's side, right. He
has basically told the prosecution you have to answer on
why this evidence wasn't allowed. And this creates like the
prima fache case, which means that this is accepted as
correct until proven otherwise. So it feels to me very

(28:33):
like positive in pro Menendez.

Speaker 3 (28:36):
It looks very encouraging for Eric Delyisle. But they're still,
as Mark Errago says, they are cautiously optimistic. Right. They've
been incarcerated for thirty five years, So imagine if you've
been in prison for decades and suddenly you have a
sliver of an opportunity which has actually grown to a

(28:58):
major opportunity to be released. And one of the most
interesting things that former DA George Gascon said in October
when he announced that he was starting the resentencing initiative
was that he said, Eric Halilmnandez never thought they would
be released from prison, and yet they chose a path

(29:21):
of redemption. They chose to be of service and help
their fellow inmates. And when I met them two months
after the killings, five months before they were arrested, they
were young, immature college kids, and now they are fifty
four and fifty seven, so they are very different people
to me. They are not the cartoon characters that you

(29:44):
see portrayed in some of the movies on TV. And
one key thing that people need to understand is that
the two juries at the first trial heard a completely
different set of evidence than at the s second trial.
The first thing trial Judge Stanley Westberg did was he

(30:04):
kicked the TV cameras out. Kortiv carried the entire first
trial for six months gable the gattle. And in the
second trial, the first thing the judge did was kick
the TV camera out. And the second most important thing
he did was he severely limited the defense to the

(30:25):
witnesses they could put on. Instead of sixty witnesses, we
only heard from twenty five witnesses in the second trial
from the defense, and also the judge severely limited what
the witnesses could say, and they.

Speaker 4 (30:41):
Were tried together on this time. Right, That was another
really big difference because the first trial they were tried separately,
is that correct, and then the second one they combined them.

Speaker 2 (30:49):
Let's talk about that.

Speaker 4 (30:50):
That's interesting and what's a little different.

Speaker 3 (30:53):
The reason they had two juries in the first trial
was some of the evident only applied to one brother
or the other. Right, It was a situation where juries
were being moved in and out of the courtroom depending
on who the witness was. And in the second trial,
after the brothers were convicted in March of ninety six

(31:13):
first degree murdered, then they had what's called the pedaly phase,
in which the jury basically had two choices, life of
up Roll or the death ely. And in that pedally phase,
the defense got to put on all of those witnesses
who were not allowed in second trial, and more of

(31:34):
the jurors told me off the record after the second trial,
if they had heard those witnesses in the guilt phase
of the trial, they wouldn't have voted for murder.

Speaker 6 (31:45):
So, oh my gosh.

Speaker 5 (31:48):
So the implications are literally life changing for the Menendez brothers.
So this ruling, it sounds like, you know, we'll finally
have its day in court.

Speaker 6 (31:58):
We're here with Robert Rand.

Speaker 5 (32:01):
We are talking about the Menendez brothers, who Robert Rand
has been working with and following and covering in books
and documentaries that have literally shifted their lives. If you
want to ask him any questions, We're at eighty eight
three to one crime.

Speaker 3 (32:16):
Oh quick side. I was texting with the actor Coopercouch
play who was just nominated for an Emmy another.

Speaker 2 (32:24):
Emmy Award, potential winner.

Speaker 3 (32:26):
For playing Eric Menendez. And if you only watch one
episode of Monsters, watch episode five. It is one take
with Coopercouch doing forty five minutes straight and it's incredible.
And for that episode alone, he should have been nominated,

(32:47):
and he was, and he's very excited. And also he
has been an outspoken supporter of Eric and Lyle Menendez.
So shout out to Coopercouch.

Speaker 2 (32:58):
I heard they hugged when they first met for the
very first time, the actor and then obviously the real
life person.

Speaker 3 (33:06):
Well, like I said, the real life people, they are
not cartoon characters to me, right, you know, whenever I
go to visit Lyleman and us. We always hug when
we see each other. And the interesting thing is we
never talk about the case in person. We just talked
about life. Oh really, I want to ask, when you

(33:27):
visit a prison in California, you're not allowed to take
anything but fifty dollars in one dollar bills to use
the machines and your car keys. You can't take a
tape recorder, you can't take a notepad or a pen.
And so when I want to talk to a litle
about facts from the trial, we do it over the phone.

(33:47):
When I see them in person, we just talk about life.

Speaker 2 (33:50):
How is their life?

Speaker 3 (33:52):
Their life is actually remarkable that they have, as I said,
they have been of service to their inmate community. They
created what's called a green space project in which they
have painted the giant mural on the inside of their
prison yard, and it's remarkable to see it in person. Also,

(34:16):
Eric Menandez created a hospice program at one of the
prisons he was at earlier, and so they're both teaching classes. Also,
both brothers in the past year gotten their BA degrees.
F U see her. They now have a program where
you can take college courses over zoom and both brothers

(34:39):
are now college graduates, and you know what they studied. Actually,
the only degree that you can take from U see
her write in is sociology.

Speaker 2 (34:50):
Oh okay, Wow, that's so interesting. And I know, you
know they're going to go hopefully you know, I know
this would be very important for you as well to
their own fan and you know, one is married, one
no longer. I always thought it was interesting that I
believe they're divorced now, But how is it Lyle one
of their exes that you know, she went to law

(35:12):
school and like really is one of the biggest staunchest,
you know, defenders of her now ex But it kind
of speaks to the fact that they're so beloved.

Speaker 3 (35:22):
Well, actually they are separated, they're not divorced. And Lyle
is married to a lovely woman who is an employment
law attorney, and she moves to San Diego about a
year and a half ago to be close to him. Well,
and she runs his public Facebook page which has over

(35:42):
one hundred thousand supporters on it.

Speaker 2 (35:45):
Yeah, she really dedicated her life to this. Wow.

Speaker 3 (35:49):
Yeah. What's interesting is that the Facebook page is not
a free lends brother's page. It's a page for supporters
of childhood abuse.

Speaker 2 (36:00):
Wow.

Speaker 4 (36:01):
Oh really?

Speaker 6 (36:02):
Oh so doing good upon good upon good.

Speaker 2 (36:06):
Out of dark upon docupon dark, you know, and I
guess that's the moral of the tale.

Speaker 3 (36:11):
Well, the reality of the story is very different from
the myth of the story.

Speaker 5 (36:17):
And Robert, we appreciate you being with us here so
much to give us. You know, what does go on
behind the myth? And everyone who's interested in diving deeper
into the decades of research that Robert has been doing
can read his book It's the Menendez Murders, or watches
documentary Menandez and Menudo boys portrayed that is on Peacock.

Speaker 2 (36:40):
You know one thing we didn't get back to, and
I think one of you knows the answer to this
was Courtney. You had mentioned it earlier, this confession that
happened on a plane.

Speaker 5 (36:51):
Oh, my goodness, and yes that was I Honestly, I
got so caught up when Robert was telling us about
sort of their present day lives that I lost track
of my own question. But I read this in Robert's
book on the Menandez brothers that on a plane ride
after Lyle was arrested first, and then a very few

(37:12):
days later Eric was and he needed to take a
plane ride.

Speaker 4 (37:15):
He was an Israel, right, he was an Israel and
he had to take a plane.

Speaker 5 (37:19):
Comeback, right, and then when he landed he had to
take another I think it was a excuse flight. Yes,
but he was on a flight with his cousin Andy,
who he wrote the letter to, and he was only
about sixteen at the time, and on this plane, which
was fairly empty, Eric confessed to his cousin Andy.

Speaker 6 (37:42):
That they had murdered their parents.

Speaker 5 (37:46):
And his cousin Andy that confession, oh to himself. Yeah,
so he literally, Eric literally confessed and actually he tried
to say something because his Aunt Marta, Andy's mother, was
also on the plane and she had said that Eric
sort of put his head on her shoulder and was

(38:07):
crying and said out to tell you something, and she said,
I don't want to know.

Speaker 4 (38:11):
Well, it's important to know. Andy is the cousin that
got the letter about you know that that basically might
set them free. And Aunt Marta is the aunt that
said Jose was also abused.

Speaker 2 (38:27):
Right, So Aunt Martha is Jose's sister sister, that's my understanding, Yes, yes,
Aunt Martha, so Marta and Jose. Now the Menanda's father
who'd been slain or murdered by the boys. They're siblings,
and then they have a mother and that mother is
sexually abusing Jose aunt Mark deceased dad, and then that

(38:51):
deceased dad, previously to his death by his sons, was
molesting them.

Speaker 4 (38:58):
And they wrote a letter to the cousin, MARTA's son Andy,
prior to the murders letting him know, hey, this is
going on in our life, like yep, you know.

Speaker 2 (39:08):
And that's the letter that of course Robert really has
to Robert. Goodness, I mean, yours a procredible work he's done,
Roberts Robert might.

Speaker 4 (39:17):
Be the reason, one of the reasons and one of
the major reasons that this is all happening, especially this
habeas corpus problem.

Speaker 2 (39:25):
That's incredible.

Speaker 5 (39:26):
Yeah, yeah, it's just it's a letter founding that because
Robert rand has stayed in touch with the family and
was that Aunt Martha's house, and right there.

Speaker 2 (39:35):
What a tough spot. You know, I would hold a secret,
would take that very seriously when I was growing up,
that dirty secrets like this, But like you know, when
someone shares something with you, you hold it very coveted.
What a burden to.

Speaker 4 (39:46):
Bear yeah, I can't imagine. I don't know if we hence,
I don't know if we have time for this. But
we had a call and unfortunately that a drop. His
name was Leo. I am sorry Leo, and he wanted
to know. According to the control room, he asked, if
this case were to happen today, what kind of impact
would social media have on it?

Speaker 3 (40:08):
Now?

Speaker 4 (40:08):
I thought that was a really good question.

Speaker 2 (40:10):
Well, social media today also had a really big impact
on even these recent developments decades later, right, because remember
there was like a resurgence of all things Menendez brothers,
post to the documentary, post the script the scripted series
was a little like erotic but like it. Regardless like
post that, there did seem to be this like TikTok

(40:31):
praise for the Menendas, Free the Menendez What a great question, Leo.
I would imagine it would have had a big impact. Yeah,
I like the pleasure, the pressure exactly. Well, listen, we're
going to be right back. There's more of this to come.
We also want to break down this this recent development
with this dentist who's standing trial for killing his wife.

(40:51):
This is true crime tonight. We're talking true crime all
the time. Welcome back to true crime Tonight on iHeartRadio,
We're talking true crime all the time. I'm Stephanie Leidecker,
and I head of KT Studios, where we get to

(41:11):
make true crime podcasts and documentaries, and I get to
be here every night with Body Movin, our crime analyst.
You'll also remember her from Netflix's Emmy Award winning documentary
Don't f With Cats. And also Courtney Armstrong, producer and
crime expert, also the voice of so many of our podcasts,
the Piked and Massacre and The Idaho Massacre and many

(41:34):
many more and more need more to come, so listen.
We've been talking a lot about the Menandez Brothers, but
also switching gears. The Idaho Killer. I guess we can
really officially say Brian Coberger, the murderer and killer of
four incredible Idaho students, was in court today. There was
a hearing and essentially the gag order has been lifted.

(41:59):
So also we'll get to that in a moment. But
later in the show, we're also digging into this dentist
who's now standing trial for allegedly killing his wife with
arsenic and eyedrops. Plenty to discuss on that one, so Idaho.
Obviously this is a case that it's incredibly close to
our hearts, you know, first and foremost, we're so with

(42:19):
the victims' families.

Speaker 3 (42:20):
We know.

Speaker 2 (42:21):
Just it was a zoom today, which was kind of
jarring for me personally. We just finished up the documentary
airing on Peacock. I hope you'll watch it, and just
seeing Brian Coberger, knowing now what he has done, by
his own admission, sitting on his zoom in some like
random maroon like sweatshirt. He kind of looked like he

(42:44):
was just at like some ordinary job interview vibe, not
saying a word. It seemed so basic, and I don't know,
it just made me enraged. And having watched it all day,
we were texting one another and I guess I got
to ask, what do you guys think?

Speaker 4 (43:01):
Body?

Speaker 2 (43:02):
You're up first?

Speaker 4 (43:03):
You know, see, we were texting earlier and I sent
a screenshot of this and I was like, and I
was like, the little like vomited mojis. You know, yeah, it.

Speaker 2 (43:13):
Was so maddening. It is.

Speaker 4 (43:15):
Yeah, it was very weird. Well, so the judge, Judge Hitler,
has lifted the non dissemination order in the Brian Coberger case.
Now you know there will be no trial, so there's
no need to have it. After pleading not guilty for years,
you know, the last two and a half years, he's
been saying he's not guilty, even going so far as
to say it wasn't me, but it might have been
these four people, right like, yeah, all this drawn out,

(43:38):
and now he's taking this plea deal saying that he
intentionally killed you know, these four precious souls and in
exchange for the state dropping the death penalty. That's just
like a brief summary. So last couple of days, the
prosecution withdrew their opposition after acknowledging there will be no
trial and there's like no need to protect like the
jury pool. The judge said that's fine, and they're going

(44:01):
to Basically what it boils down to is the judge
has released the people who couldn't speak to be allowed
to speak. So that would be like, for instance, Chief Fry,
Chief Fry would now be free to speak if he
so chose people like that. The documents will remain sealed
until after the sentencing on the twenty third, but he's

(44:26):
going to start redacting some of those sealed documents to
be unsealed, and it's going to start from the newest
going back to the oldest. So he's going to start
from now going back, and it could take many, many months.
So we're not really expecting to get anything anytime soon.
There's not going to be like a big document dump,
I don't think. However, I do think there might be

(44:48):
some interviews coming up with some of the people that
have been gagged. It is important to note that the
defense filed emotion I think it was yesterday in opposition
they did not want this gag lifted. They said, basically,
what it boils down to is that things happen. It's
sentencing and if something to you know, inflammatory, happens in

(45:10):
an interview or comes out in the media, it could
inflame tensions even more and put Brian Coberger at risk.
Who cares?

Speaker 2 (45:19):
I think I shouldn't say that. I mean, I'm sorry,
looking No, you're right, you're right though I know you're right,
but no, no, I mean, yeah, really.

Speaker 4 (45:27):
Get does he still get a vote? But does he
still get a vote?

Speaker 5 (45:31):
At risk? Before the sentencing? But what am I not
understanding because not for nothing that.

Speaker 2 (45:35):
He's not doing anything come out later?

Speaker 6 (45:39):
What is the difference because.

Speaker 4 (45:41):
The parents that let's just say, for instance, the parents
and people most affected by this these murders won't be
face to face with him without bar being in between
them physical danger. Do you guys remember the victim impact
statements for Jeffrey Dahmer.

Speaker 2 (45:58):
Of course, I think it was.

Speaker 4 (45:59):
The mother or the sister of one of the victims
almost attacked him.

Speaker 2 (46:02):
Yeah, I'm by the what by the way, who didn't
relate you?

Speaker 4 (46:06):
Possibly?

Speaker 2 (46:07):
But I don't care where you stand on law and justice.
If Jeffrey Dahmer ate your sibling or your child. Having
to be in a courtroom, and I'm not being facetious
when I say this, being in the same room breathing
the air, the same air as the person who took
the life of someone you love so much, that is
a tough spot. Yes to your point, but like, let

(46:29):
him have it, let him at it. If he's not
going to give an allocation, and actually an allocation just
for anyone who's not aware, that's basically a trade, right
like Brian Colberger would be basically forced to give real
details about the who, what, where, why and when or
what led up to it. What was the day, where
is the weapon? What what what? What?

Speaker 6 (46:50):
What?

Speaker 2 (46:50):
We all have questions, the families have questions, and typically
an allocution would be used as a bargaining chip for
a plead. So you're not going to die by a
firing squad, perhaps, but in exchange for that, you're not
going to have a death sentence. But what you're gonna
have to do is share some of the details that

(47:11):
we've been wasting our time chasing, so that maybe families
can have some semblance of closure, and maybe other humans
in the world, male or female, could maybe learned something
from this psychopath about what to look for in the world.
But now this guy's like, mum's the word. I see
him on a zoom today, I'm like, is he just

(47:32):
sitting there as though he's like a guest on a zoom?

Speaker 5 (47:36):
He looked like advertising executive.

Speaker 4 (47:39):
He looked like he exactly.

Speaker 2 (47:40):
I was like, he looks like he's been invited to
a regular zoom at the office here, you know, at
any of the zooms that we.

Speaker 4 (47:46):
All do all day.

Speaker 2 (47:48):
And it's just really upsetting. I think the allocation thing
is really sickening. And if somebody wants to take him out.

Speaker 4 (47:52):
I took it a little different. Sorry, I'm sorry, I no,
I so appreciate your perspective, but I took it a
little different. I enjoyed seeing him in that McDonald's looking
sweatshirt in that plain, horrible looking room with it basically
you know, the titles of everybody's names at the bottom,
and his just said eighty a Ada County, eighty A.

(48:13):
Oh my gosh, Ada County jail, and the microphone was muted.
I loved it. I was like, he's not getting the recognition,
and he just he just was staring at the camera
like I don't even think he was blinking like it
was I'm seeing.

Speaker 6 (48:27):
I did not period.

Speaker 4 (48:28):
Also, I'm just saying I enjoyed seeing his identity ripped
from him, is what I'm saying. I would like to
see him Hannibal Lecter style. Well night on the twenty
and on the twenty third. He's not going to be
able to wear any of his fancy clothes. He's going
to be in an orange jumpsuit or a maroon sweatshirt
whatever they have, I don't know what they are better,

(48:49):
and he's going to be probably handcuffed and shackled.

Speaker 2 (48:52):
Yeah yeah, why was he not handcuffed and shackled. He
just looked like it was a casual day at the office. Well,
we don't know that he wasn't he was, We didn't.
We just saw his face. He didn't look stressed, and
I need him to be.

Speaker 4 (49:01):
Like I'm dressed. We're getting little heated.

Speaker 2 (49:03):
I'm sorry stress and as well above, I shouldn't be
wishing anything like that. And I don't mean too. I'm
not related to him. I just it's just no, in general,
this is not just Brian Coburger. It's anybody who has said, yes, Dahmer,
oh my god, you know, people who have taken the
lives of loved ones so viciously, and you know, to
get up there. We saw this in the piked and massacre,
sitting in there and watching the people that you know,

(49:26):
we've really grown to love in a town have to
sit and share air with the person who took their
loved ones lives and by the way, so palously like
h It keeps me up to this night.

Speaker 4 (49:38):
And I'm not even related to them. No, I can
only imagine we are all with you one hundred percent,
Like I think all of us have some kind of
strange affection for this town. These people, these families, you know,
country does the whole world country. Yeah, I'm not saying
us specifically, like everybody. We love these people and we

(49:59):
care about them, and we're angry about what happened to
these young, bright souls that had an amazing future ahead
of them, you know, and it's infuriating, it's absolutely infuriating.
But I kind of wanted to touch base on some questions.
A lot of people have questions because, like the judge
mentioned the fact that Brian Coper could possibly appeal, and

(50:21):
that like send into an uproar. Now, you know, I
was thinking about this when we were talking about Menendez.
They got life without parole, right, Well, guess what they're
on proy They have a parole hearing coming, Like anything
can happen.

Speaker 2 (50:33):
Jake Wagner back to that guy's that clown is getting out.
They're like, yeah, well we'll cross that bridge. Maybe the
parole things a little bit too much, Maybe he should
have parole parole. This guy has admitted to Katie killing
you know, multiple people in cold blood, one of whom
he shared a child with. And they're like, well a second.

Speaker 4 (50:54):
Thought, maybe maybe well what's.

Speaker 2 (50:57):
A cross that for a life thing? We'll worry about
the parole thing. Later are you eating?

Speaker 5 (51:02):
So you know, I'm so curious, what do you guys think?
What does everyone think about sort of changing, like when
things just change and you know you have life without
the possibility of parole. And in the instant Stephanie was
just mentioning with Jake Wagner. Then another judge comes in
and is like, well, maybe it will be different. We

(51:24):
want to hear your thoughts on that eighty to eight
to three to one crime or you can always send
us a talkback either way changing sentences.

Speaker 4 (51:31):
I wanted to kind of touch based on some of
those things, so we our producer reached out to Jarrett Farantino,
our friend. He's a veteran trial attorney who's handled some
of Pennsylvania's like most high profile murder cases. He's now
a national legal analyst and true crime expert. He also
co hosts the YouTube series Prime Time Crime and he's

(51:52):
also the host of the podcast True Crime Boss. He
answered some of those questions for us, because you know,
we all have questions, right and here we go. I'm
just gonna go through them real quick. Number one, what
is Jared's take on the gag order being lifted is
a common and he has two kind of part answers,
and he says, usually judges keep the gag order in
effect until sentences, until sentence, because most judges view cases

(52:16):
as still pending until sentencing itself, all right, so anything
can change. Maybe a plea gets withdrawn, I'm not sure,
but until sentencing is concluded, they usually leave it in place.
The second part, Jared expressed that there is no harm
in keeping it for a few more days, and that
theoretically Brian Coberger could rescind his plea and still go

(52:38):
to trial, at which point the gag order being lifted
would impact the ability for a fair trial.

Speaker 5 (52:44):
So yes, that's a really yeah, that's a really great
legal point.

Speaker 4 (52:49):
Right. So if Brian Coberger, for whatever reason, is able
to withdraw his plea now that the gag order has
been lifted, say Chief Fry went on dateline tonight, Not
that he is, but say he and was like blah
blah blah blah. You know he did all this, it's
terrible whatever. Now the jury pool is one hundred percent tainted, right,
and it could affect So Jared's basically saying, eh, he

(53:12):
probably should have waited, but he's not questioning the judge.

Speaker 6 (53:15):
He's not like dis of.

Speaker 4 (53:15):
Course he's the best. But the insight, there's a bunch
of more questions. It's we want to hear all of them. Well.
Another one is the case that's being referred to about
the possible appeal. The judge said because of Garza the
Idaho in the Supreme Court case, they're referencing that Brian

(53:36):
Koberger will still be able to appeal, and that sent
everybody into a frenzy.

Speaker 2 (53:40):
Right.

Speaker 4 (53:42):
Just so if you're just joining us, we're kind of
going over some questions that I saw and you know
that we have been seeing on the internet about the
gag order being lifted. And just as a recap, we
got with Jared Garantino. He's our friend and he's a
he's a former homicide prosecutor. He is the co host
of the YouTube series Primetime Crime and the host of

(54:05):
podcast True Crime Boss, and he we asked him some
questions and number one, I'm just going to go over
very quickly. Number one, what was his take on the
gag order being lifted? Is a comment and to summarize
what he said, he said, not really usually judges keep
the gag orders in place until sentencing because most judges
view cases are still pending until sentencing itself. Jared expressed

(54:27):
that there's no harm in keeping it for a few
more days. Again, sentencing is in like five days between
the next yeah, next Wednesday, next week from yesterday, So
what's the harm in keeping it just for a few
more days because theoretically Coburger could rescind his plea and
still go to trial, at which point the gag order
being lifted could impact the ability for a fair trial

(54:49):
for him.

Speaker 5 (54:49):
So do you know, can I say one thing body
you have on that judge Hipler, who does seem actually
like a real measured guy. Yeah, he sure does something
that stood out to me, and now I think I
understand the rationale behind it was that he's vacating the
gag order. But he's going to do it in batches

(55:10):
once they're reviewed or the court documents, and that's the
court document, that's the court documents, so all seals.

Speaker 6 (55:16):
He's going to really.

Speaker 4 (55:19):
Going to make sure that there's no like personal information
in them, like perhaps like a witness's data, birth address,
you know, things like the public does not need to
know there's sensitive information in those documents, and there also
might be information that they just don't want out, so
it's going to take a really long time. He's starting
from the most recently filed motions, the sealed motions, redacting

(55:43):
those and releasing them, and moving to back to you know,
Brian Kober was arrested December thirtieth or twenty twenty two,
so he'll go all the way back in time into
those now. The second question we asked was when Judge
Hitler was giving his judgment, he mentioned that under Garza
the Idaho, that Brian Coberg could still have the chance

(56:07):
for appeal, and that kind of sent everybody into a
frenzy because we all thought that Brian Coberger is being
sentenced to prison with life without the possibility of prole
and he has to waive all the appeals. Well, when
you say that, it sounds very finite, but it's not
if what this is, what this means and this is

(56:29):
according to Jarrett Farantino. Jarrett says that the Supreme Court
case Garza the Idaho allows anyone to appeal even if
they waive their right to do so, but they have
to prove that there was a serious problem with their
lawyer involved. In the trial. The defendant must show deficient

(56:50):
performance and resulting prejudice by their own lawyer. And he
adds he seriously doubts that this is a route Coburger
could take. We all know Ann Taylor has been an
incredible lawyer for us, right, yeah, so an incredible waste.

Speaker 2 (57:06):
Of time too. And you know we saw him stand
there and say.

Speaker 4 (57:10):
Yes, yes, yeah, but that's all yes us, Yes.

Speaker 2 (57:13):
I did it. I did it. I did it. You know, like,
what could he possibly was he going to do? Take back?
Now he's going to do take backs? Sorry, I didn't
mean it. That's a I don't think you can do that.
And Ann Taylor, you know, like her, hate her, So
she's not nobody hates you, Antaila, nobody. Of course, she's
a very respected defense attorney. And you know, with having
death sentence provisions as an attorney is a very big deal.

(57:35):
So no joke.

Speaker 4 (57:37):
But you know, you're defending a mass murderer at this point. Well,
and you know, like we were just talking about the
Menenda's brothers. They were sentenced to life without the possibility
of parole, and you know, this is what Steve Consalves
has been kind of upset about with with this case now,
Steve Consolves as a reminder, is Kaylee Consalis's father, and
she is one of the victims. She is one of

(57:58):
the four students that were murdered by Brian Coberger. I
can say that confidently now. And you know, his whole
thing is like, you know, death is final, this isn't
and that's been his biggest problem. And by the way,
how you disagree like they don't know? Of course not
especially when we just spent we just spent an hour
talking about the Menanda's brothers. Of course not.

Speaker 2 (58:16):
Right, but to that point, I'm just going to go
on a limb here, just just so let's just say
Brian Tomorrow was like, actually, it was not easy being me.
It was very, very difficult in fact, and there was
all kinds of hideous things that happened to me from here,
there and everywhere. And therefore that was not in the
trial because it ever came up, or we didn't have

(58:39):
a trial because I was somehow pressured to pressure to confess.
But really, my origin story is very toward and it
might shape how you all will feel about me, So
maybe I can get off right.

Speaker 4 (58:55):
Oh hell no, that's that's kind of all.

Speaker 2 (58:58):
I mean, I'm paralleling stories here because again this is
why I'm very impressionable, because when I'm talking about the
men and his brothers with Robert Rand, I'm like.

Speaker 4 (59:05):
Yeah, they let him free. They should be free immediately tomorrow.
It's been too long.

Speaker 2 (59:10):
And now I'm like, Brian Coberger, that's son of a
If he dare say that there is a problem in
his childhood that's somehow caused him to murder four people,
I would say, throw away the key. Hell is not enough. Well,
the big again, I guess I get to what we're
cherry picking.

Speaker 4 (59:24):
The big difference here is that Kaylee Consolve is, Madison Mogan,
Xana Kernodle, and Ethan Chapin did not do anything to
Brian Coberger to shape his childhood. Well, he might say
they did.

Speaker 2 (59:35):
He was like, you know what I had it to
one time. There was a blonde person that was very
nasty to me and the blondes and that's it's giving me.
It's giving me an urge.

Speaker 3 (59:46):
You know.

Speaker 2 (59:46):
I'm just saying, like, where does a line you know,
like this is these are insultingly horrible crimes. Again, I'm
just seeing it from all sides. I'm like out talking
myself right now, devil advocating the devil itself. So I
don't mean to.

Speaker 4 (59:59):
Course, I mean this is and we're all emotionally charging,
so emotionally charged by it we are. Yeah, it's upsetting. Yeah,
I can definitely see why Steve is upset, is what
I'm trying to say. I mean, I certainly can, because
this kind of stuff can happen. However, Jarrett, the trial attorney,
you know, the prosecutor who has successfully prosecuted homicide cases,

(01:00:20):
says that this is likely not going to be a
possibility for Brian Coberger, but it's always you know open.
The other question we asked, what will be the most
interesting information that the public can expect that will be
revealed once reviewed by the judge?

Speaker 2 (01:00:36):
Yeah? Right, so what's the question I'm dying to hear it?

Speaker 4 (01:00:39):
Well, Jarrett said that evidence the defense. He thinks that
the most interesting stuff that will be released is stuff
the defense wanted removed.

Speaker 2 (01:00:48):
Right, So that's so he's so smart, yeahte the best.

Speaker 4 (01:00:52):
So, like, for instance, one of the things that that
they wanted removed.

Speaker 6 (01:00:56):
Was internet Internet.

Speaker 2 (01:00:59):
Yeah, oh yeah, when he was drugging, Oh hey, it's
just some pornography when everyone's drugged and passed out and unable,
they're not even alive. Oh okay, that's not a tell.

Speaker 6 (01:01:10):
And it's a tell.

Speaker 2 (01:01:11):
So if anybody you love is watching pornography where the
person who is being sexualized is drugged and passed out
or dead, that is a tell. That is a very
big red flag. So just so we're all hearing it.
If that is something that you're doing, let's get some
talking to for that, because it's not it's not okay, right,

(01:01:33):
And also if somebody you know is doing that, it's
also not okay, and let's get some help. Again.

Speaker 4 (01:01:38):
I'm being a little nuts. Sorry, you're emotionally charged, and Stephanie,
it's okay, we all are. I mean, I think Courtney
feels the same way. I mean, we've all talked about
this case for the last two and a half years
and we have, you know, feel sucker punched by so
fooled out by the way. How pretty is Courtney. I'm
strong in this believe.

Speaker 3 (01:01:58):
I know.

Speaker 2 (01:02:01):
You're a shining star and a very dark conversation.

Speaker 6 (01:02:04):
Well, thank you.

Speaker 5 (01:02:06):
I did want beautiful body. So you mentioned Steve Gonsalvez.
Kaylea Gonsalvez's father's perspective, which is important to note. I
think it's also important to note that several other of
the victim's families feel very differently and are happy to
not go through the trial.

Speaker 4 (01:02:26):
Yeah, and I don't blame and have to relive and
to get their lives here.

Speaker 2 (01:02:30):
And we should reference the covid family too, like let
them like move on with their lives too. They've also
been right away in this mess.

Speaker 4 (01:02:37):
So the other the last question was do the families
know the info that has thus far been under the
gag order? You know, Steve Gonsolves has been very vocal
about you know, he goes on YouTube channels, He goes
on like News Nations and CNNs and you know, court
TVs and all these shows, and he talks about things
and he drops little tidbits of information, right, And so

(01:03:00):
people are wondering, does the family already know the stuff
that's been under gag And the answer to that, and
I've actually been saying this too, is that no, they're
considered members of the public. However, I do know like
that Steve Gonsalves has hired like private attorneys and he
has worked with you know, production teams and authors and

(01:03:21):
whatnot that are doing intensive research into the backstory of
like Brian Coberger and this crime in particular, where he
has gotten bits and pieces of information. Now how much
of it is true, I don't know, but thus far, no,
they do not know what's been under gag. It's all
they're considered members of the public. So those are the
questions we asked, and those are the answers.

Speaker 2 (01:03:43):
Yeah, I'm gonna have sits like very close obviously in
the documentary. Stephen Gonzalvez Junior, also known as Gonzo, is
on our doc too, and like, look, we should all
have a brother and a father that are that riled up, right, Okay, yeah,
do something like that to my family. You think I
won't be screaming from the rooftops, I you know, woof yeah,

(01:04:04):
I know. I And again this is like I think
we're all so psychotically attached to this case, not just
the three of us, of course we are as well,
but just like you know, everybody is, who's you know,
hearing our voices right now because it's so emblematic of
real grief. You know, nobody wants to be in that seat,

(01:04:25):
and we really just hope that they're feeling our love
because you know, we have to look out for each
other and like this kind of stuff cannot continue. And
Brian Coburger does not get a vote in mind.

Speaker 4 (01:04:36):
And I'm going to say, I'm grateful for the plea,
and I'm grateful for the plea because the surviving roommates
and you know Hunter who was a hero that day
and found things, they're not going to have to get
up there and testify.

Speaker 2 (01:04:49):
So I agree that's a fair point.

Speaker 6 (01:04:52):
That's right.

Speaker 5 (01:04:52):
Well, listen, stick around. We have a lot more. We're
going to be talking about what's doing in Colorado.

Speaker 6 (01:04:59):
With the dent this dentist, yeah, who was.

Speaker 5 (01:05:02):
Accused of murdering his wife, and we're going to dig
into all of those details. Give us a call. We're
at eighty eight three to one crime Keep it here
on True Crime tonight.

Speaker 2 (01:05:23):
We've gotten a little bit heated and we're taken it
down a notch because we're going to talk about the
dentist in Colorado accused of poisoning his wife allegedly, allegedly
allegedly with eyedrops and some sort of cyanide, and it
all sounds very, very terrible. That trial is officially underway.
By the way, they were married for what twenty three

(01:05:44):
years and had six children together. You'll be shocked to
know that he had met somebody else and they had
been texting back and forth. In fact, this very unknowing woman.
I've seen an interview with her in many places. I
want to go visit him because unbeknownst to her that,
you know, he had a wife in the hospital who

(01:06:05):
has been being poisoned allegedly by him. So it's one
of those poor tales where there were some financial stresses
allegedly by the family.

Speaker 4 (01:06:15):
Perhaps after twenty.

Speaker 2 (01:06:17):
Three years and his wife, you know, baring him six
children and him you know, wanting to explore a different relationship.
He claims she was, you know, just depressed and just
not herself and maybe took her own life, or if
he took her life. Maybe I'm getting this backward. I
think the stick is he only killed her because he

(01:06:41):
did not want her to die without him, So for
sure saying that riddle backward.

Speaker 5 (01:06:48):
Yeah, it's really has been sort of dueling depictions of
the marriage, which we're going to get into in a second.

Speaker 6 (01:06:54):
But there is a talkback that we wanted to go to.

Speaker 9 (01:06:58):
Great Stephanie and Body. I listen every day. I love
the show Courtney and Stephanie. I've listened since the Pike
County massacres, and your voices are super soothing. I've been
thinking a lot about this grooming thing, and I think
what's applicable is coercive control, which is used a lot
in domestic violence cases. Patterner acts of assault, threats, humiliation,

(01:07:20):
used to intimidate, abuse, humiliate, or punish your victim.

Speaker 2 (01:07:26):
I think that covers it. By the way, dead on,
you know, this is quite a great talk back, Thank
you for calling. This is in reference to the Gleen
Maxwell conversation we were having last night just about grooming,
and you know, Body had brought up a great point
that you know, grooming as a term should really be
used for underage children, and I wasn't totally totally there yet,

(01:07:48):
and we were trying to figure out a new term
or a new way of having like adult grooming. And
you know that's very true, Koen is the jam. That's
a very good point.

Speaker 4 (01:07:59):
Yeah, doesn't seem as sinister though it needs to be
a more sinister word, because what people are doing to
adults is terrible. It's worse than coercion, but I just
don't think it's as serious as grooming. Does that make sense?

Speaker 3 (01:08:11):
Like?

Speaker 8 (01:08:12):
Right?

Speaker 4 (01:08:12):
But she had a better word for it, which was
I blocked out. Can hear it again? Coercive a course
of control? Because that is the thing, coercive control? How
about coercive abusive control? Because I like whis's going with this? Yeah,
it's co wors of control.

Speaker 2 (01:08:31):
She's right, She's right. I think we have to rename this.
So okay, so we're going to do a talkback to
the talkback is can you give us Well, we'll meet
you there. You're one hundred percent right now? Can you
up that a little bit? Let's make it a little
bit more sinister and a little bit more dark, because
we want somebody to be able to say I was

(01:08:53):
blah blah coercively controlled in this situation, and therefore they
need to go away till the end of days. Because also, yeah,
I think we're all saying the same thing. What's the
next anti of that?

Speaker 3 (01:09:06):
Right?

Speaker 2 (01:09:07):
Yeah? I thank you for the talk back so much, and.

Speaker 5 (01:09:09):
Grooming boy, this really has struck a nerve, And honestly,
the dialogue has been so interesting to watch sort of
back and forth and building upon each other anyway.

Speaker 2 (01:09:21):
Yeah, but I think we're gonna let's get some legislation
going for this next.

Speaker 4 (01:09:24):
So this is tier learning among community, the crime crew.

Speaker 2 (01:09:28):
We're going to actually create the perfect term, and that
perfect term that will be scary and deadly and very important.
You know who knows like that becomes part of the language.
And in that case, you know, nobody wins because it's
based on such a tragic thing, but maybe there's real
justice to be had. That's a good point.

Speaker 6 (01:09:48):
Absolutely. We have another talkback.

Speaker 7 (01:09:51):
WHOA Hi, This is Jason in South Carolina. There is
no way that Trump is on Epstein's list. If he was,
the Biden administration would have released the list before the election,
probably last October. There's no way that Trump is on
Epstein's list.

Speaker 2 (01:10:10):
By the way, go ahead.

Speaker 4 (01:10:11):
That's a good point. He's alone in this one because
I do think that's a fair point. But I also
kind of go back to the mutually assured destruction. I
think they're all on you know, I don't think there
and I was thinking about this, I don't know that
there is a list. I think it might be a
list that could be made from all the files, right,
Like if you read all the files. You could probably

(01:10:32):
pull out names of people that you know were on
the island, or you know how whatever you want to say.
But I can't imagine that Jeffrey Epstein had like a
little black book and he was like, Okay, this is
a proverbial.

Speaker 2 (01:10:44):
List of sorts to that point. So it's a very
good point. And uh, and will taken, I might add,
because yes, if we're using this list as some sort
of political fodder, right, and you know, the previous administration
could have used it to maybe get one step further,
of course they would have released it. And I guess
the other side of that would be, and I don't disagree,

(01:11:06):
the other side of that would be unless everybody's on
the list. So it's like the standoff of like that's
what I say. It's infamous, Like everyone's kind of like
cock blocking each other.

Speaker 4 (01:11:15):
It's kind of like we have nukes, Russia has nukes,
but we're never going to we're going to which.

Speaker 2 (01:11:21):
Is such weird context to like we were talking about
this a little bit earlier too, of the infamous debate
between Trump and Hillary Clinton in the nominee at the time,
Remember they were on stage and they were like you're
such a weird thing, right, he was kind of a right, Yeah,
I was just meanwhile, you know it's been alleged, you
know that maybe her husband, you know, everybody seems to

(01:11:43):
be involved in a very bad thing. And yeah, that's
such a good point. A listen, thank you for the
talk about because we it's a very fair point. And
then maybe furthermore, parks in everybody's house.

Speaker 4 (01:11:55):
You're listening to True Crime tonight and iHeartRadio. I'm body
Moved and I'm here with Courtney and stuff, and we're
going to jump into this dentist story. If you have
anything to add give us at eighty eight eight thirty
one crime. Yeah, at last, Courtney, what's going on? Yes?
Give me.

Speaker 5 (01:12:10):
It is day three in the trial of the dentist
James Craig.

Speaker 6 (01:12:14):
This is out of Aurora, Colorado.

Speaker 5 (01:12:17):
And he's been accused of poisoning his wife in her
protein shakes.

Speaker 6 (01:12:22):
The most innocuous thing to start a day.

Speaker 5 (01:12:25):
And there he was using cyanide and I drops and
a couple of other things. And they were married for
twenty three years. As Stephanie said, they have six kids.
He is absolutely pleading not guilty to first degree murder
along with several other charges. And the other charges include
solicitation to commit murder and solicitation to commit perjury.

Speaker 4 (01:12:47):
Now where do those come from?

Speaker 6 (01:12:48):
So this guy has a bunch of layers. Well, he
didn't mean to interrupt you.

Speaker 4 (01:12:52):
I'm sorry. I just said no, no, no, you're go ahead.

Speaker 5 (01:12:54):
I think actually, you know a lot more about the
solicitation to commit murder.

Speaker 4 (01:12:58):
I don't actually we talking about Let's say, I'm looking
at a photograph of this lovely family.

Speaker 2 (01:13:03):
I'm looking at a photograph of them right now.

Speaker 4 (01:13:05):
Oh I do.

Speaker 2 (01:13:06):
By the way, this guy with his beautiful wife of
twenty three years and their six beautiful children. What a mess.
What a mess.

Speaker 4 (01:13:15):
So the solicitation to commit murder, I just remembered. Isn't
he accused of soliciting somebody that killed the lead investigator
that was investigating the murder. Okay, that's where that.

Speaker 2 (01:13:25):
Was behind from behind bars, I might add this, I
don't know me.

Speaker 5 (01:13:31):
Yeah, and this guy not only had he been poisoning
her allegedly.

Speaker 2 (01:13:38):
By the way, we have to say that everybody sometimes,
you know, we do have to say that because you.

Speaker 4 (01:13:44):
Know, he's not previcted, right, and he's only accused, right.

Speaker 6 (01:13:48):
He is only accused. Yep, it's only day three of
the trial.

Speaker 5 (01:13:51):
But allegedly not only was he poisoning her on the daily, that.

Speaker 6 (01:13:57):
He also, if it's true, what a horrible I don't know.
Dirt bag is the only thing that comes to mind.

Speaker 5 (01:14:03):
I'm sure there's a legal term, but that he actually
gave his wife the final dose of poison after she
already had been admitted to the hospitals and doctors are
trying to figure out what the heck is wrong with
this woman because she had all these mysterious ailments, And
so can you imagine you've already put your wife in

(01:14:25):
twenty three years.

Speaker 6 (01:14:26):
Yeah, you've been poisoning.

Speaker 5 (01:14:27):
Her on the daily, She's already in the hospital, and
now you go in with the last dose to really.

Speaker 2 (01:14:33):
To get a mill tale.

Speaker 4 (01:14:34):
It's important to note too, I read this, I think this.
I read this yesterday in People magazine like the People
website that in the probable clause Abiday at the PCA,
the wife told her sister that Craig, the dentist, was
obsessed with pornography and had like a bunch of affairs
and tried to drug her years earlier. So this was

(01:14:56):
like his sex attempts.

Speaker 2 (01:14:58):
Sense ye, why does Sidey sense everybody out there? The
Spidey said.

Speaker 4 (01:15:02):
When she discovered he tried to poison her, he told
her something like he wanted to die by suicide and
he didn't want to put her through the pain of
missing him.

Speaker 2 (01:15:14):
Right, that's the riddle, right, you just nailed it. That's
what I got. I think backward earlier. Can you repeat
that again, because I just meanie, I blocked out again?

Speaker 5 (01:15:22):
No, true, Yeah, years prior he had been poisoning his wife.

Speaker 6 (01:15:29):
It came to be known, and then when found out.

Speaker 5 (01:15:32):
He was like, oh, sweet darlin, it was for your
own good, because really, I'm so sad I want to
kill myself and I don't want you to have to
live to see it, or to live without me.

Speaker 4 (01:15:43):
And it should be known that they are members the
Church of Jesus Christ of Later day Saints, and they
take you know, I'm not trying to cast an umbrella,
but you know, they do take marriage very seriously, and
divorce is you know, incredibly frowned upon in the church.
And it is possible that that he had an influence
on her staying with him.

Speaker 5 (01:16:03):
Right, certainly religious listen for damn, poor kids.

Speaker 4 (01:16:09):
Oh my goodness.

Speaker 5 (01:16:10):
But also this dentist attorney is saying that, oh, you know,
she knew all about the cheating, but because of their religion,
that you know, she wanted to stay together and she
knew about it all the time, that it was nothing secret,
It wasn't wasn't hiding.

Speaker 4 (01:16:27):
Anymore horrifying, And he did try to orchestrate false testimony,
and according to the prosecution, he solicited another inmate to
lie on the stand, specifically to claim that Angela, his wife,
had suicidal thoughts and had previously talked about self harm.

Speaker 2 (01:16:45):
How is a person behind bars?

Speaker 4 (01:16:47):
No, they don't know. I don't know.

Speaker 2 (01:16:48):
I try to figure that out.

Speaker 5 (01:16:49):
There's a lot We're going to cover this from top
to bottom. There are allegations of deep fake videos within the.

Speaker 2 (01:16:59):
Still kind of dang, I like I'm eating up these
details right now, because like, this is going to be
one of those cases that we follow for a very
long time, right and again, we don't know what the
outcome will be. But this family looks so beautiful the
photograph of them. Yeah, and the phones are ringing off
the hook right now.

Speaker 4 (01:17:16):
We have some grooming updates. We've started a swell. Go ahead,
you go first, Okay, it's it's a very quick update.
There's been a new video released on the Travasdecker. Travistecker
is accused of killing his three beautiful young children, daughters.
And there's been a new video body cam footage basically
of police interacting with Tratasdecker three days before the daughter's vanished,

(01:17:38):
and he was acting very nervous and he was fidgety.
And that's the update. That's it.

Speaker 2 (01:17:44):
Yep, okay, so cool.

Speaker 4 (01:17:45):
Okay, So while we're live, all right, I got a
notified that our friend Spud. Shout out Spudi. She says,
A great term that we could use is coercive malignant manipulation.

Speaker 2 (01:18:01):
Okay, so let's soft lunch. We're soft lunch. I think
team is coming together. Say it once more, coercive malignant manipulation.
If you have any ideas, give us a call, leave
us a talk to.

Speaker 4 (01:18:13):
This is the adult. You are starting a swell.

Speaker 2 (01:18:16):
Yes, we're starting a swell. We're going to change legislation.
It started here, by the way. Great suggestions tonight. So
I still haven't gotten it down to a science. What
is it again?

Speaker 5 (01:18:25):
Coersive malignant manipulation and I feel like this should go.
In all of this grooming talk that we've been doing,
I've been thinking a lot about people who get scammed.
Even let's take love and relationship out of it, but
people who phone solicit and pray on the elderly, play
on people you know.

Speaker 2 (01:18:46):
Who who are in scammer. Now I landed out. I
you know, we have to all be looking out for
each other.

Speaker 5 (01:18:54):
So and I feel like so often in those cases
it's only and I've heard a couple of investigators speak
about large cases that they followed and just how horrible
and deplorable that people literally.

Speaker 6 (01:19:08):
Ruin, you know, as some lonely eighty year.

Speaker 5 (01:19:09):
Old lady wipe out every dollar she's ever made. But
since this you know, imaginary eighty year old lady does
give the money, then everything needs to only be persecuted
or prosecuted. Rather it's always mail fraud or something like that.

Speaker 4 (01:19:26):
But isn't that a little different.

Speaker 2 (01:19:28):
So again, now that we're mincing, suddenly we're legislation now,
But like I think it should be because grooming is
implying like there's sexual deviance, there's sexual abuse, Maybe there's
grooming to murder. I mean, maybe I'm wrong, I changed
my vote.

Speaker 5 (01:19:44):
Or I just think that this term it really seems
to me to fit as a course any because it is.
It is coercive, like those scams which are so pervasive.

Speaker 4 (01:19:57):
Oh the romance scams.

Speaker 6 (01:19:59):
Too, Oh terrible sad.

Speaker 4 (01:20:01):
Those are the ones that make me so sad because
these people are so lonely, and you know, they just
want love. And you know, the guy reaches out and
he's a doctor and he's trapped in this country and
he's a treasure and it's buried, but he can't get
to it unless she can't it my treasure. And these
women and men too, I just my heart bring she was.

Speaker 2 (01:20:18):
A widow maybe, and she's been heartbroken and she's saving
her pennies for war woman who thought that like it
was like she thought she was dating Tom Cruise.

Speaker 5 (01:20:27):
Hold On, I'm going to mess up the celebrity. But
do you remember what I'm talking about?

Speaker 2 (01:20:30):
No, but I'm a hook line and sinker again eating
it up.

Speaker 5 (01:20:34):
It was a woman who and this was over the
course of quite a bit of time. Hold On, I
think that Taha in the control room maybe knows.

Speaker 6 (01:20:43):
They are He is nodding, right, yeah, nodding how.

Speaker 2 (01:20:46):
Happy are we that Top is back from his gallop
panting and Madrid.

Speaker 5 (01:20:50):
Absolutely, in any case, we will This celebrity is not
coming to me. But it was like tragic and this
poor woman felt she lost everything.

Speaker 2 (01:20:59):
Yeah right there she was being groomed, but she wasn't
being groomed, she was being let's make it a little
bit more active. How would you do it? One of
the too smarty pans.

Speaker 5 (01:21:08):
Coersively, maniglantly, manignantly, mandignantly manipulated.

Speaker 2 (01:21:14):
Yes, yes, okay, we want to hear from you. What's
your take, what's your vote? We're back on Sunday, so
we're not here tomorrow. Remember Sunday, we will be here
talking true crime all the time. Have a great night,
Stay safe, everybody,

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;}Kohberger Gag Order Dropped by Judge, Menendez Brothers Breakthrough, and Decker Hunt Escalates

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

Kohberger Gag Order Dropped by Judge, Menendez Brothers Breakthrough, and Decker Hunt Escalates

Crime Junkie