Murdaugh Conviction Overturned, Kouri Richins Sentenced, and D4vd Video Debate

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. I'm Stephanie Leidecker here with Courtney
Armstrong and body move in and guess what, everybody, It's Wednesday,
May thirteenth, and we have a stack night of headlines.
So do you guys remember the Alex Murdoch murder trial.
He was convicted for killing his wife and his son

(00:40):
that has now been overturned because of the shenanigans by
somebody working the jury pool. We're going to get to that.
Plus again Corey Richins remember her. She's been now convicted
of poisoning her husband. Her sentencing was today, major heartfeld
statements from her. And also that Texas man, I know

(01:02):
you guys talked about it when I was gone, the
Texas man that flew to Italy to evade being charged
for his wife's murder. Also new information there. We have
lots of questions for Jared Farantino. The prosecutor is back
and he is here to answer any of your questions.
Everybody is high fiving and giving a cheering sound.

Speaker 3 (01:24):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (01:24):
Plus, of course we have Taha, our producer, and Sam
and Adam in the control room eight eight eight to
three one crime. If you want to jump in and
join us live, Welcome Jared.

Speaker 3 (01:36):
We have so much to get to. It's a big day.

Speaker 4 (01:38):
This is abb It's been a minute, so I'm anxious
to get to all these things.

Speaker 3 (01:43):
Yeahah, before we go too far, let's go straight to
a talkback.

Speaker 5 (01:48):
Hello, ladies and gentlemen, Happy Wednesday. I sadly just got
a notification that Alex Murdoff's murder got overturned murder conviction
for the murder of his wife and child. I don't
even want to read it. I am so upset, and
you guys please break down. How on earth this is possible?

Speaker 3 (02:12):
Thank you? I just know.

Speaker 4 (02:14):
Hi.

Speaker 6 (02:15):
This is Jody calling from Burlington, Ontario, Canada. I'm calling because, OMG,
you guys, I can't believe that Alec Murdoch's trial has
been thrown out or sentencing has been thrown out and
he is going to be retried.

Speaker 7 (02:32):
I can't wait to hear what you all think of
this and It'll be interesting to see if maybe for him,
the second time's the charm.

Speaker 8 (02:44):
Thank you by hey all, Alicia from New Jersey.

Speaker 9 (02:48):
My feed is filled with Alec.

Speaker 8 (02:50):
Murda, What a crazy day something about his conviction being overturned.
I haven't actually clicked and read any of the articles.
I knew that you guys would be explaining it better
than any of them could, so I look forward to
sharing exactly what is going on.

Speaker 2 (03:06):
Well, all of us were on the exact same page today.
I was losing my mind, and I'm so glad that
Jared is here. Absolutely, everyone everyone's a buzz. Let me
just give a brief setup for everyone who needs to
get caught up. Yeah, today the South Carolina Supreme Court
they officially vacated Alex Murdoch's murdered conviction regarding, of course,

(03:29):
the deaths of his wife Maggie and twenty two year
old son Paul. And this unanimous decision it had to
do with jury tampering.

Speaker 3 (03:38):
So what the Justice.

Speaker 10 (03:39):
Is ruled was that the court clerk Becky Hill, that
she compromised the absolute integrity of the trial that happened
in twenty twenty three.

Speaker 3 (03:49):
This clerk, Becky she allegedly told.

Speaker 10 (03:52):
Jurors not to be quote fooled by the defendant Alex
Murdoch's testimony and instructed them to quote watch him closely.
So the court understandably deemed that this was an unconstitutional
finger on the scales of justice, and so now the
legal battle shifts to preparations for a second trial. Good news,

(04:15):
despite the murder convictions being tossed, Alex Murdoch is not
walking free. He's got other convictions. Jared, what are we
supposed to think?

Speaker 4 (04:25):
Well, just when you think you couldn't dislike anyone more
than you don't like Alec Murdoch, Becky Hill steps right
to the front of the line. Let me say this.
I'm not surprised. I knew this was going to be
a problem when Dick Harpoulian and his team raised it,
because it's not the prosecution's fault. It has nothing to
do with the merits of the case. We're talking about

(04:48):
something our academic group here loved to talk about, and
it's the Constitution. And when you mess with the constitutional
rights of a defendant, especially a defendant who's on trial
for his or her life, you run the risk of
having it overturned. Vacated or the defendants set free. And

(05:10):
in this case, despite the fact that this was a
high profile case, it didn't matter. What Becky Hill did
was undermine the jury process right.

Speaker 11 (05:22):
And we have the Sixth Amendment in this In this country,
the Sixth Amendment guarantees everyone the right to an impartial jury,
and the court of Court tampered with that that constitutional right.
Like Jared, I am completely unsurprised that this happened.

Speaker 2 (05:38):
I'm surprised. I'm surprised. I'm surprised that we're getting to
see this play out. To be honest, Jared, you probably
see this sort of thing pretty much all the time,
not all the time, but you know this is so
in your wheelhouse. You know, for us, both as consumers
or even as people who make documentaries and have been
in documentaries and bodies case, you know, this is real

(06:00):
foul ball for the justice system. So being able to
see such a big, high profile case that has been
covered in so many different ways, this is a two
part thought. It's been covered. I've seen every incarnation of
the Murdock trial. I cannot be medieve Katie Studios has
not been making it this entire time. We just I
think we were just making something else and literally missed it. Yep,

(06:22):
And now I have seen it on this channel, that channel,
this dreamer that I have seen everything and will not
miss it. So we're all kind of playing along a
little bit like we've all followed it closely. I know
I'm not alone in this to see one person's you know, Becky,
to see Becky kind of want that moment with fame

(06:42):
or maybe got caught up in the moment and wanted
to feel bigger in that moment.

Speaker 3 (06:47):
And nobody will know.

Speaker 2 (06:49):
No, no, you just cost a double murder trial to
literally go away. It's unbelievable. And you say he may
never walk, but maybe he will.

Speaker 4 (07:02):
Right, well, well, he has other problems of course, right.
But one of the things I think that Taha has
a potted plant behind him. That's what Becky Hill should
have been. She should have been a potted plant. Nothing
to say, no comment. What happens is she is viewed

(07:22):
as a member of the court. So when you're a
juror and you're in this situation, Becky Hill leads you
in and out of that courtroom every day, and she's
imbued with some authority, and when she says don't be
fooled by Murda. She's saying he's going to lie, and
everything he's saying isn't true, and she's making the decision

(07:43):
for the jury instead of being that potted plant and
keeping her mouth shut. And now I think about Creighton Waters,
the prosecutor in this case, and his team, and certainly
the surviving victims of the extended Murdoch family and friends
of Maggie and Paul. Well, I can't imagine what it's

(08:03):
like to have lived through this trial, build it, and
now have to do it all over again. And it
proves the tightrope that we walk every day. Everybody's got
to do their job under that dome. If they don't,
we're juggling grenades. One goes down, the whole thing blows.

Speaker 3 (08:20):
It's Jared.

Speaker 11 (08:23):
What's the Is there going to be a retrial? Do
you think like our prosecutor is going to seek to
retry this or is there any chance or like without
you know, president, because he's already been convicted of the
financial crimes, right, and so our prosecutor is going to
look at this and go in, we don't really have
a case without, you know, Becky putting her hand on

(08:44):
the scales of justice.

Speaker 3 (08:45):
Let's say, are they.

Speaker 4 (08:46):
Going to work? I mean without the assist of Becky
h So that's a great question. You say, what are
we fighting for. He's looking at sixty years already. Okay,
here's the problem. This is a double murder of a
young and a woman who were unarmed. They were his
There's no turning back here. They're going to retry him

(09:07):
for this and they have to. It's that important. And
who's to say the integrity of the other cases aren't
impacted down the road by some other operation of law
or some change in the law. You have to pursue
this case a double murder. You know, if it was
a Ted Bundy case and he was convicted of eleven
murders and eight twelve one was overturned, I'd say, why

(09:30):
are we tying up our resources when we have other
cases to go after. Yeah, Alec Murda needs to stand
trial again.

Speaker 3 (09:38):
Totally agree. If you're just joining us.

Speaker 10 (09:40):
This is true crime tonight, and we're talking about the
fact that formally convicted murderer Alex Murda his conviction has
been overturned because the court clerk couldn't keep her mouth
shut and she tainted the jury pool.

Speaker 3 (09:55):
We'd love to hear your opinion.

Speaker 10 (09:57):
Eight A eight three one crime, Jared, I have a
question and for you so part of in the in
the trial that now has been overturned, the prosecutors argued
that Murda killed his family to gain sympathy because he
was about to be eminently exposed for drug use and
millions of dollars of financial fraud scheme.

Speaker 3 (10:18):
What a guy. But here is the question.

Speaker 10 (10:22):
In addition to the court clerk Becky Hill being a
problem in overturning this case, the justices of the Supreme
Court of the State, they also noted that the judge
should have been more restrictive regarding testimony about Murda's financial crimes.

(10:42):
How problematic is that since that was sort of a
basis of the argument.

Speaker 4 (10:47):
It's hard to tell. So what the judge is saying,
you were allowed to admit Murda's financial crimes as evidence
of motive of his intention to kill Paul and Maggie.
What he's saying is you went too far when you
let twelve hours of that testimony, and it's like, we
get it. This becomes prejudicial. It's beyond the pale. The

(11:10):
problem here is Courtney, and that's a really that's a
really intuitive question. Alone, would that had been enough to
overturn the conviction? It's not clear that, coupled with Becky
Hill's comments have blown the case up. So I don't
think the twelve hours of financial crimes really would have

(11:31):
in and of itself overturned the case, because remember, Murdoch said,
I'm a thief, not a murderer. He fell on that sword,
and he used that against the prosecution to say, I
admit I did this, but I'm not a killer. So
I think the courts could have overlooked that. Maybe there
would have been a few judges that went the other way.
But the Becky Hill thing is the major disaster on the.

Speaker 2 (11:55):
Heels of just even the start point, which is it's
been covered so much now right There's been a script
version on Hulu with Patricia Arquette.

Speaker 3 (12:03):
I've watched easily.

Speaker 2 (12:05):
Another CNN had a version a b I feel like
everybody had a version.

Speaker 3 (12:08):
Of this case.

Speaker 2 (12:10):
Is it fair that his defense may say there's nowhere
that I can go to get a fair trial at
this point, now that these comments are out, now, didn't
Becky She's like writing a book, Like you know, it's
really hard to put the genie back in the bottle.
So now that these egregious issues arise, and I'm not
putting power to it, it seems like he does have

(12:31):
a tongue going on and is.

Speaker 3 (12:33):
Where he should be.

Speaker 2 (12:34):
But if we're going by the letter of the law,
that seems a bit unfair too.

Speaker 3 (12:38):
From a timing perspective.

Speaker 2 (12:39):
If you're starting to retry something from square one.

Speaker 4 (12:43):
That's definitely going to be an issue. Now, how you
address that issue is are Pollian and the defense team
are going to question the prospective jurors and ask them
those very questions. Have you viewed the documentaries? Have you
reached an opinion? Are you aware?

Speaker 12 (13:01):
Uh?

Speaker 4 (13:01):
What? Are you aware? Are you aware that he's been
convicted before? Things of that nature. Now you have to
watch how you asked that question, because you can taint
the whole pool.

Speaker 3 (13:09):
Again, right or lying conviction?

Speaker 4 (13:11):
Yeah, And based on those answers, though, Stephanie, that's when
the judge is in the best position to know whether
or not you concede a jury. There's no there are
few cases that have received you know, short of oj
Casey Anthony, those cases that have received the kind of
scrutiny that the Murdoch case has received.

Speaker 11 (13:32):
And don't forget too. Becky Hill, you know, also pressured
the jury. She of course told them not to believe him,
you know, play Playko's attention to his body language. But
Jersey testified that they felt pressure because when they were
being escorted to the deliberation room, Becky Hill was like,

(13:52):
this shouldn't take us long. And she said that she
voted guilty because she felt pressure.

Speaker 2 (13:59):
To Jessey, Becky Becky, Becky Becky seems like she was
like Chatty Cass was a small town.

Speaker 3 (14:06):
This is not a popular this is not a popular opinion.

Speaker 11 (14:08):
But I believe the right thing happened today that this
was overturned. I do think he's going to be reconvicted
one hundred percent. But things have to be done the
proper way in this country, and this was a massive
sixth Amendment violation.

Speaker 4 (14:23):
Well, I think the got it right. It sucks, it sucks,
I don't like it. I hate it, but doesn't mean
it's wrong.

Speaker 2 (14:32):
Right one hundred percent, And that's why it's so important
that we discuss it, because is there a universe where
Becky was just caught up in the fame of it all,
or you know, a small town that sort of now
has this influx of attention, and you know she had
a gut on it and wanted to make sure he.

Speaker 3 (14:49):
Didn't get away with it. All those things are.

Speaker 2 (14:51):
Not okay, even if somewhere in her heart the intentions
were right right, real sideways, and it's a hard no.

Speaker 3 (14:59):
And it could host in her book too.

Speaker 4 (15:01):
And you know, there are those jurors that are there's
these vulnerable jurors. They look like like broken winged doves,
you know, a wide eyed looking around, always looking for guides.
And somebody like Becky Hill that just seizes on that moment.
It goes right after that week, Yeah, you know, and
they're always just looking for a guide through the courthouse.

(15:22):
It's like, could I go over here? Could I do
this right? Well, somebody like that seized on the moment
and created this problem.

Speaker 3 (15:29):
That's absolutely right. Well.

Speaker 11 (15:30):
Coming up next, we have Corey Richins, was sentenced to
life after being convicted of poisoning. Her husband was sentinel
attorney Jarrett Farantinos sticking around them and pack it all,
keep it right here.

Speaker 2 (15:52):
Welcome back to True Crime Tonight and iHeartRadio we're talking
true crime all the time. I'm Stephanie Leidecker here with
Courtney Armstrong and move in, and it is it's prosecution Night,
Lawyer Knight. We have Jarrett Farantino here, our very favorite prosecutor,
filling in any questions you may have about the many
things that are happening in real time legally speaking. So

(16:15):
we remember Corey Richins. She's the mom and wife accused
of poisoning her husband with fentanyl and then she went
on to write a children's book to make her kids
feel better with their grief. Well, she got convicted and
today was her sentencing. So where shall we begin with
the setup on this one.

Speaker 11 (16:37):
It is just a little quick summary, I guess right.
So yeah, today, right, just like you said, Corey Richins,
she was sentenced to life without the possibility of parole
following her conviction for the aggravated murder of her husband,
Eric Richins. Today was the hearing. And you know this
is interesting, Today's eric birthday. Today is his birthday and

(17:01):
his wife was basically sentenced today for murdering him.

Speaker 3 (17:06):
I think that there cannot be a coincidence in that.
I know.

Speaker 11 (17:10):
I it's it's so bittersweet, right, it's so nice. So today,
you know, was a lot of harrowing victim impact statements.
I mean, there were a lot of tears shed, you know,
but there were also a lot of faces made by Cory.
She was like rolling her eyes and like mouthing like
what to the to her legal team, And it was

(17:33):
really kind of absurd to watch her today.

Speaker 10 (17:36):
It was so distasteful, actually, and even I kept looking
at her lawyer sitting next to her, just giving the
big eyes that a mother gives of like please stop it,
because Cory would.

Speaker 2 (17:47):
I mean, she was laughing in the face she was,
she was laughing. She was she has lost her mind?
Can we just say that loud and clear? He's kind
of a woman that's seeing that today, And I was
looking for some glimmer of humanity there. All you have
to do is hear the victim impact statements of her
own children to know we are dealing with the cunning

(18:08):
liar of a woman, and her day in court being
marked by her victim's birthday seems extremely serendipitous to me.

Speaker 3 (18:19):
I hope that's to.

Speaker 11 (18:19):
Get into some of the statements. I wanted to ask
Jared Farantino, Yet how, if any, how much do the
victim impact statements, because they're very powerful? Yeah, how much
do they impact sentencing with the judge in a.

Speaker 4 (18:35):
Case like this, where the judge is going to sentence
to life no matter what. It doesn't have impact legally,
it has sledgehammer impact emotional. It's as important to the
victim speaking those words as it is to the judge

(18:56):
to hear them, whether or not they factor into the
judges ultimately sentencing if it's not set by law. I mean,
I've had many cases where it's a first degree murder
conviction automatic life in prison. But the most powerful words
spoken in that courtroom are the victim statements. Because remember,
they've been waiting to confront her in front of everyone

(19:18):
since the beginning. She was on TV, she was the
one who wrote the book. She was the one who
gets arrested and has lawyers around her defending her. She
maintains her innocence. They are mourning their father, they're mourning
their loved one, and she sits there and denies it
and smiles. They need that day to go at her.
Remember the Colberger victim statements, how powerful they are, Like

(19:43):
that is part of the healing process. For victims too.
So to answer your question, it may not have a
tremendous impact on a state mandated sentence, but if the
judge has discretion, I've seen victim impact statements take a
judge into the aggravated range of a sentence when they

(20:04):
have discretion. I've seen judges get emotional. I've seen them
get moved by victims and how can you not right?

Speaker 11 (20:11):
Wow, Well, you know, these were really powerful today, and
I wanted to start out with the sons. You know,
the sons of Eric and Corey Richards, Eric of course
being the victim in this case, and they have three sons,
and they're currently being raised by their Eric's sister, their
paternal aunt, and they submitted statements through a counselor's okay,

(20:34):
and they expressed a lot of fear, like profound fear,
and a desire for their mother, Corey Richards, to remain incarcerated.
We've identified them with their initials and their age. Okay,
so wr he's nine years old. He said, I want
her to go to prison forever. When someone talks about Corey,
it makes me feel hateful and ashamed. What's interesting they

(20:57):
call her Corey. They are so over their mother. It's
so tragic, right a R. He's eleven years old. He said,
you took away my dad for no reason other than greed,
and you only cared about yourself and your stupid boyfriend. Wow.

Speaker 2 (21:14):
By the way, it's accurate, based on court, very accurate.
We heard court testimony, including from the boyfriend. Yeah, Corey again,
she's not being convicted of that, but right man, she
just rode this real hard with the honesty of it all.

Speaker 3 (21:32):
She's today even still.

Speaker 10 (21:33):
Yes court, Oh, I was gonna say she kind of
did get convicted of just that. I mean a lot
of the prosecution was that she murdered her husband, Eric Ritchins,
and it was to get the life insurance money so
she could escape debt and live nicely with the boyfriend.

Speaker 3 (21:50):
So that was a crux of The boyfriend loved her,
I know, for he was like a little heartbroken.

Speaker 13 (21:56):
He was.

Speaker 11 (21:56):
He cried on stand quite a bit. The oldest son
cr he's thirteen, and he said, I think Corey should
get a life sentence because what she did is very
sick because it had no reason to happen, and it
impacted a bunch of people, including me. Like from the
mouth of babes right like such courage these these little

(22:17):
boys had, you know. Then we also heard from the
Richess family, Eric's family, and Eric's father and sisters. They
provided testimony describing the betrayal and the permanent whole left
by Eric's death. Eric's father, Jean Richins, he said his
life was taken from him, not by a stranger, but

(22:37):
by a person he should have been able to trust
with the very most of his life. He was betrayed
in the most unimaginable way, and that is so accurate.

Speaker 3 (22:47):
This your wife.

Speaker 11 (22:48):
Can you imagine the person that you're supposed to like you,
soul me, the person who was supposed to have your
back one hundred percent, the mother of your children to
you like yes.

Speaker 10 (23:00):
Jared, I have a question during putting together a prosecution,
how different is it when the accused is something like
a spouse versus something like a drunken hit and run.

Speaker 4 (23:16):
It's very different because you have family of the defendant
and the victim are one and the same, so oftentimes
they're aligned against the defendant who's accused of taking the
loved one. But I promise you emotions get mixed. You know,
there's some family infighting in those cases, so they present

(23:38):
a special kind of challenge when it comes to managing victims,
and that relationship is difficult to begin with. When they
have relatives on both sides of the courtroom, it gets very,
very complicated.

Speaker 11 (23:54):
Yeah, Katie Ritchan, she's a sister, and she revealed that
Eric states, you know that he's the victim. Eric Eric
stayed in hell quote of the marriage, only to protect
his children from Corey, she said, quoting he told me
he would live his life through hell because he believed

(24:15):
Corey was the most evil person he had ever met.
And Corey's Meanwhile, Corey, when she's saying this, Corey's rolling
her eyes and going what she's sitting.

Speaker 2 (24:27):
The wildest facial expression she did. You were like, not
under selling it at all.

Speaker 3 (24:33):
When you say that.

Speaker 2 (24:34):
No, by the way, when you watch it, she looks
like she's smirkering, smirking and snickering the entire time.

Speaker 3 (24:40):
She was badly behaved, badly behaved.

Speaker 11 (24:44):
Let's let's play a clip of Katie Ritchand's Eric's sister
real quick.

Speaker 12 (24:47):
Corey's selfishness and cruelty did not end.

Speaker 4 (24:50):
With Eric's murder.

Speaker 12 (24:52):
In the time after Eric's death, Corey said nothing but isolate, manipulate, disease, deceive,
and do harm to those voys. Almost immediately after Eric died,
she cut them off completely from our family, from Eric's family.
The isolation was calculated and strategic. Corey used the boys
as bargaining chips with my dad. She repeatedly threatened not

(25:15):
to let him see his grandsons unless he could convince me,
as Eric's trustee of his trust, to captulate to her
legal demands and give her all the trust assets well
isolating the voice, Corey provided them a false and harmful
information about me and my family.

Speaker 11 (25:36):
Man what she used them as bargaining chips. These you know,
these children, you know she wouldn't let them see their
grandfather and aunt unless they turned over.

Speaker 3 (25:48):
The trust like it's disgusting.

Speaker 2 (25:51):
Oh, it's a form of weaponizing your child, you know,
at that point.

Speaker 11 (25:57):
So again, you know, throughout the proceedings, corey behavior was
noted as you know, really dismissive and combative towards the
grieving family members. You know, she spoke when Corey because
she got to speak too, right, the convicted murderer got
to speak, sure, and she spoke about you know, tossing

(26:17):
or I'm sorry the boys. Corey was addressing the children,
Speaking directly to her sons. She urged them to be
like your dad and cautioned them to never apologize or
plead mercy for crimes they didn't commit.

Speaker 3 (26:31):
Let's roll that clip real quick. Disgusting.

Speaker 13 (26:33):
I can beat myself up all day about how I
could have been a better person or made better personal choices,
and I can understand and accept.

Speaker 12 (26:44):
You boys being upset about those things.

Speaker 4 (26:48):
But murder, No, absolutely not.

Speaker 13 (26:52):
I will not accept that and I will not be
blamed for something.

Speaker 9 (26:56):
I did not do.

Speaker 3 (26:58):
Yeah, she's very to.

Speaker 2 (27:01):
This is gaslighting at its finest. Am I accurate about that?
So you're a shared experience. She's been found guilty, there's
mounting evidence against her. The voices of her own boys
should compel her to be loving in some way, even
during this difficult time when she has to face the music.

(27:24):
Her denial and then just kind of putting it on
them about their misinformation is maddening.

Speaker 3 (27:32):
It is maddening, and it is gas lighting. Stephanie.

Speaker 10 (27:36):
Jeez, Jared, how often do you see that? How often
do you see the defendants to say stipulatives like she did?
You know, the jury's cruel in their conviction, like, yeah,
curious experience.

Speaker 4 (27:49):
So you have to remember this. She has to maintain
her innocence here because it's not over in her mind.
She's going to file appeals and continue to fight this.
So there's no very rarely will you see a defendant
post conviction then say you're right, you got me, I
did it. I'm sorry. You know that ship has sailed

(28:10):
before trial, so that's not a surprise to me. And
her misbehavior, remember she doesn't have to perform anymore. There's
no jury and the judge is sending her away for life.
She knows, so she could smirk and misbehave and do
whatever she wants because guess what, she knows the deal
she's getting. What I was surprised is she didn't have

(28:31):
to deny it in front of the court. All she
had to say, or she could have said, I didn't
hurt daddy, I love you guys, you know that, and
sit down and say nothing more. You know the fact
that she goes on and that's the gaslighting part, the manipulation,
jumping on continue.

Speaker 2 (28:47):
Yeah, and by the way, you know, even if she
said I'm so sorry that you boys have had to
go through this experience that must be excruciating during the
time that you're grieving your father and that this situation
is and You've done a good job being.

Speaker 3 (29:03):
Honest, and I'm so proud of you.

Speaker 2 (29:05):
And then get on with the show, because that's a mother,
you know, you put your children's needs before yours.

Speaker 3 (29:12):
Her selfish self is just like.

Speaker 2 (29:14):
Oh, and like, I'm plotting my return for my appeal
and hey boys, you guys figure it out, and with
the facocca aunt that I don't like anyway.

Speaker 3 (29:22):
Well, and.

Speaker 4 (29:25):
That's exactly how a woman who would poison her husband
lie about it for the money.

Speaker 3 (29:31):
I mean, are we surprised.

Speaker 2 (29:33):
I'm really disappointed at the human behavior here. That was very, very,
very terrible.

Speaker 11 (29:39):
She took the opportunity at the same time to make
a lot of digs at Eric's family. She was like
when she was addressing the boy, She's like, I'm paraphrasing,
I'm doing this for memory. I've been begging to see you, guys.
They've kept you from me. Check your check all the
letters I've sent you. I didn't just walk away. I
didn't walk out of your life one day never to return.

(30:02):
And this isn't my fault. They're keeping you from me. Basically, Yeah,
everyone's a victim. She is the greatest victim of all,
is Corey in this case. And by the way, that
does happen.

Speaker 2 (30:12):
Maybe there are victims who find themselves in these situations, but.

Speaker 3 (30:15):
Even her reaction is just like Seals the deal Man.

Speaker 11 (30:19):
Yeah, I totally agree. I just want to add real
quick the summary of her convictions. She also received up
to five years for forgery, one to fifteen years for
each of the two counts of insurance fraud, and five
years to life for attempted murder back in you know,
from that Valentine's Day Sandge incident, because she was convicted

(30:41):
of that the first time, she was going to kill him,
that's right, and it failed. The aggravated murder administrating or
administering five times lethal dose of fentanyl and the cocktail
attempted murder again that twenty twenty two, and the insurance
fought and forgery. I don't think she's going to see
daylight anytime soon.

Speaker 2 (31:00):
Yeah, this was not a great case too. There was
damning evidence, charit was there enough evidence here? Remember there
were the text messages with a woman who was cleaning
for their home and she was buying feanyl from them
and wanted more.

Speaker 3 (31:12):
That's right, she did.

Speaker 4 (31:13):
This was a profoundly strong case against Corey. That she's done.

Speaker 3 (31:18):
She's done. Let it lie.

Speaker 2 (31:21):
So this case about the man who is accused of
killing his wife and then jumping off to Italy to
escape being prosecuted properly here in the United States, this
might work.

Speaker 3 (31:33):
Is that possible? You know, Courtney? Do you want to
fill us in a little bit on the background. Absolutely so.

Speaker 10 (31:39):
The man you're referring to, Stephanie, it's a thirty nine
year old guy named Lee Gilly. He's from Houston, and
he's accused of the twenty twenty four capital murder of
his pregnant wife, Christa Bauer Gilly. And as you said,
he was released on a million dollar bond.

Speaker 3 (31:59):
But guess what.

Speaker 10 (31:59):
The fugitive fled the United States weeks before his trial,
so right before the trial was set to begin, and
he was in a court hearing in Italy on Monday.
And Gilly fought his return to Texas and maintained his
innocence and appealed to Italy's They have a really strict

(32:21):
stance against the death penalty. The judge is ruled Italy
will indeed a rest Gilly. They will keep him in
custody until an extradition hearing. Jared, how often do you
see this? It's got to be real, rare.

Speaker 4 (32:37):
I would think, well, it's rare, but it has happened.
First of all, murderers should not get bail. Let's start there, Okay,
if you start from killing your wife and you reach
that first threshold through a preliminary hearing or there is
some standard set, sit in jail till you get to trial,
because guess what happens when you're staring down the barre

(33:00):
of forever in jail. Don't fail me. Now you're on
the next flight to Canada and then to Italy, which
is what Gilly did here. Right, So you see it often,
and now it becomes it's no longer about this pregnant
young woman that's murdered. It's about the death penalty and
Gilly's rights. Lee, Gilly's rights, not Christas rights. Right, I've

(33:24):
seen it before. It's a very nuanced play. It plays
out in a very nuanced way. Obviously Italy and the
United States have a good relationship. Obviously they would love
to send him back and not have him living off
their penal system for the next several years. But they

(33:46):
have a moral objection to the death penalty and will
not knowingly send someone to their death. That's the problem here.

Speaker 2 (33:55):
Interesting is that though, that is a really interesting line.
So if he was not looking at death, Jared, would
he have been extradited just for life?

Speaker 4 (34:06):
That seems to be the issue. Now Gilly's making an
additional claim saying I'm being set up, there's no evidence
against me. That's not likely to keep him in Italy
for years. The bigger hurdle is this moral situation on
the death penalty. And look, as much as Italy may
be against the death penalty, Texas is for it. Right,

(34:27):
So now you've got Italy versus Texas and the death
penalty in the middle.

Speaker 3 (34:34):
That is fascinating.

Speaker 10 (34:36):
Yeah, and listen, it may be actual years before this
decision is even made because Lee Gilly, he again has
formally requested political asylum. He also has said the poor fugitive,
he can't receive a fair trial in the US and
he only fled to Italy to save his life. But

(35:00):
he could be held in jail for four years or
more because that's how long There is a backlog for
asylum hearings in Italy, political prisoners, refugees from Gaza, and
anyone who's coming from an active war zone, they are
given priority. So how much how much do you think

(35:20):
that was part of the calculation?

Speaker 4 (35:24):
Well, I'm sure. Well, first of all was the strange
thing is he was free and now he's incarcerated. So again,
I know his trial was upcoming, and this seemed to
be the better play. He's not convicted and it delays
the trial. So I am sure in Lee Gily's calculation,
he looked to a nice country that he wanted to

(35:45):
go to. Italy is beautiful this time of year, right,
But also he looked to a country that would create
that hurdle. And I would think the added benefit is,
not only is there an object to the death penalty,
there's a bottleneck in their judicial system in addressing these
kind of cases. So while we're here, why not stay awhile, Oh.

Speaker 2 (36:08):
My goodness, I got to tell you, Jared, this year
alone has taught me that it sometimes doesn't matter the crime.
Sometimes what matters most is the lawyer and how it's
being tried. It's we have seen more cases this year
that we have covered very very closely, it seems to
be more really shocking. Whether it's Luigi Mangioni who's kind

(36:30):
of going through this process where key information is being
left out because police on the scene didn't follow proper protocol,
or you know, Alex Murdoch, as we were just talking about,
you know, the person who's in charge of the jurors
is tampering with the jurors, like you cannot do that.
We're going back to square one. It's shocking, But this

(36:52):
is I guess this is a case in point.

Speaker 4 (36:55):
When you find yourself in a situation like this. I
turned to like a fellow prosecutor and say it's like,
that's not fair, This isn't right. I'd say, oh, you
think you live in a world where being right matters?
You know that should How many times is that not
the issue? Like we're not even talking about the fact
what he did was horrible. You know, he killed his

(37:15):
pregnant wife, like and now his life is what's being
band eat about and fought over, you.

Speaker 2 (37:22):
Know, in this guy's gallivanting in Italy, probably having a
canoli as we speak, and the family again has no justice.
It's unbelievable, frankly, and you know, how does he not
four years four years behind bars in Italy?

Speaker 3 (37:37):
That's much more compassionate. I suppose.

Speaker 4 (37:41):
Family that's worth noting too. This and we've talked about
this in other case we talked about last time. We
talked about Scott Peterson. This is flight, This is consciousness
of guilt right when he's brought back here. Although Lee
Gilly says there's no evidence against him, one additional piece
of evidence against him is you high tailed it out

(38:01):
of here. Yeah, to avoid this very prosecution exhibit A.
You know, like so in a sense, he's hurting himself
while awaiting extradition. We'll get him, he'll be back here,
he will stand trial. But this creates a unique hurdle.

Speaker 2 (38:21):
Can I throw a curveball in this convo? Any more
Murdock questions? Any more questions in general of any of
the cases that we've covered, because we haven't had Jared
even talking about Idaho. And I was curious because you
were in the Idaho documentary and are so close to it,
and with the recent developments of the dateline leak sort
of being pursued. We talked it last night, talked about

(38:44):
it last night that we were shooting Jarrett was in
the documentary that we talked about the Idaho student murders.
I think you had just been shooting your interviews real
time when he actually pled.

Speaker 3 (38:57):
Has there been any like you have any thought that?
In general?

Speaker 4 (39:02):
I think that well Coburger proved one thing, and I
think it relates to the Guthrie case. It's worth noting
when the chief of police walked into that murder scene,
he called the FBI, and he had trained that chief trained,
the Moscow police chief trained at Quantico on major cases.

(39:26):
And when he walked in there, he said, this is
too big for us. Not that we're stupid, not that
we're weak. We're smart enough, and our egos are in
check that we recognize when something is beyond us. That's
not what happened with the sheriff and the Guthrie.

Speaker 3 (39:43):
Case so interesting.

Speaker 4 (39:44):
So many times we have to revisit these cases to say,
what is the lesson we learned here? Right? Bring in
the FEDS early as soon as possible. They have resources
like that can run examinations on cell phones and things
that your local department just doesn't have. Yeah that I

(40:04):
think looking at what's what's come out in Idaho. You know,
in the wake of the plea and the fact that
it's being pursued. Who was talking to Dateline. Yeah, that
was a lot of information evidence got out that should
not have gotten out. That's significant. You can't ignore that
because if it's ignored, what is the point of having

(40:25):
a gag order? What is the point of sanctity of
investigations if we're just going to move on to the
next news cycle.

Speaker 11 (40:34):
But in order for there to have been kind of
any uproar about it, wouldn't motions that and Taylor brought
against you know, or you know, trying to combat that
while it was going on. If the judge denied them,
that would be a reason for appeal. Correct, But that
I don't recall that happening.

Speaker 2 (40:53):
And Ann Taylor's Brian Coberger's defense attorney, who was also
she had pretty she had all of the fancy awards
for the death sentence stipulations, right, So she was a
death sentence Now it did a lawyer that was his
a court appointed defense attorney.

Speaker 3 (41:10):
Is that accurate?

Speaker 4 (41:12):
Yes, So she was death certified as they say, so
what Boddy said? Yes, so the defense did raise that
issue like this, this Dateline special has thrown this case
into chaos. We needed extended continuance, if you remember, and
it raised issues and tainted perspective jurors, right, So that

(41:33):
was addressed in the court room and could have been
a problem, no doubt. But I think the impetus for
why this is being looked into now is because someone
is a leak in that investigation. And if you're going
to move forward with these investigators into other cases, you
better plug that leak. I mean, there's nothing worse than

(41:53):
a shift that's leaking, right, I mean, you can't have
that problem, and it could like I've seen it, you know, Presswood.
No warrants were being served before the cops got there
sometimes and you like, our people are in danger. We
can't have a leak like this, you know, because people
like Becky Hill want their fifteen minutes, right, there's a

(42:14):
lot of pressure under those lights. They try, you know,
they curry favor with the reporters or whatever, and information
gets out. It's important that everybody doesn't necessarily move on.
You've got to look back into these things.

Speaker 3 (42:28):
Right.

Speaker 11 (42:29):
If they find the source of the leak and it's
coming from somebody within the offices of the state, let's say, or.

Speaker 3 (42:35):
Even the offices of the defense.

Speaker 11 (42:38):
Is this an appealable thing that brian co worker can
raise to appeal his convictions.

Speaker 4 (42:45):
I don't think they're looking at it in that regard.
I think that no one disagreed with the fact that
it was leaked and it likely came from the inside.
It was raised in the courtroom. The issue isn't the leak,
because the issue in Brian's situation is did the evidence
exist and was it more likely than not he did
this and did it factor into his decision to plead?

(43:07):
What also factored into his decision to please was he
knows he butchered those young kids, and his mom talked
him into it and every other thing, and he had
failed to successfully move those other motions that Ann Taylor
and her team were trying to get, like knock the eye,
the IgG tech DNA out things like that. So Boddy,

(43:28):
it's a great question could it impact his case? No,
because I think there was no misunderstanding about the admissibility
and that evidence being having the veracity that impacted the case.

Speaker 3 (43:43):
The issues isn't that impossible to know?

Speaker 2 (43:46):
Isn't it impossible to say that, like just to play
Devil's advocate on that is it impossible to say it
would not have had an effect.

Speaker 4 (43:55):
So it was a lawyer.

Speaker 2 (43:56):
It's like exactly that. There was a lot of evidence,
but of its circumstantial.

Speaker 4 (44:02):
But what was the evidence they're saying was leaked? That
was leaked to Dateline.

Speaker 10 (44:07):
Had a location, Yeah, location, his Rellian incendiary pornography searches,
they had stories were leaked of his you know, odd
and questionable behavior before the murders.

Speaker 2 (44:24):
And searches Amazon searches that had the actual sheath on it.
Those were pretty damning. I like lost my breath when
I saw that. Literally the breath was knocked out of me.
And even I was like, oof, he ordered the sheath.
It was hard to come back from and I was
really trying to overcorrect at that point. You were always

(44:45):
the voice of some reason, especially in the documentary on Peacock.
You were so good in it because you grounded it
and just like this is the law, and it's a
scary thing that something like that, a leak or a
busy body, you know, clerk at at the place. He's like, oh,
lights came reaction who gets like carried away and suddenly

(45:07):
is an author and like you know, hawk in a
book and probably is underpaid.

Speaker 3 (45:13):
But this is like sacred territory, it's the court of law.

Speaker 4 (45:18):
Well, and I agree. I just think that because it
was addressed prior to the flea and that extended. Remember
the colloquy, that discussion the judge had with Colberger before
he pled. You understand, you could have picked a jury.
You understand, you could have asked him questions and whether
or not they were tainted by evidence. When he answers
yes to those questions and filled out a form that

(45:41):
said the same thing, I don't think it's going to
be a problem in his underlying case. That's not to
say I don't think it's a big deal and runs
a risk when information gets out. I do. I just
think the way Coburger played out and it got addressed
up front, as opposed to Becky Hill, which came out
after the conviction, different story.

Speaker 3 (46:00):
So true, So true? Oh that's so yeah, that's true.

Speaker 11 (46:03):
That's a really good point. It came after the conviction.
He pled knowing the stateline league correct. And I think
part of the plea was there was no appealable, there's
no appeal to be had. I think that was probably
I'll double check that coming up at the top of
the hour, a resurface video tied to the singer David
is exploding online and people are debating whether it's disturbing

(46:26):
evidence or an Internet overreaction. Attorney dere At Fertino sticks around,
unpack at all, keep it right here.

Speaker 3 (46:32):
Two Crime Tonight.

Speaker 2 (46:44):
Welcome back to True Crime Tonight on iHeartRadio. We're talking
true crime all the time. I'm Stephanie Leidecker here with
Courtney Armstrong and body move in. So this David the
Musician case, obviously, we've been covering it very closely. We
were discussing it last night when Joseph Scott Morgan was here.
He had mentioned that there was this video kind of

(47:05):
breaking news yesterday that kind of you know, implicates kind
of his friend Neo that we have talked about also
on this show, and we mentioned we wanted to get
Farantino's opinion, our favorite prosecutor who was here with us tonight,
to really see the validity of that or hear his

(47:25):
take on it. So it's a big one. I mean,
this case also has gotten incredibly grisly. David also was
only recently arrested, even though it was seven months ago
that this crime not only happened, but you know, the
stakes in it were so high. A dismembered, young, underaged

(47:46):
girl and a very famous musician, even though I was
not familiar with him. So where should we take this, ladies?
I mean, there's so many places that we could go.
Should we start right?

Speaker 9 (48:01):
Yeah?

Speaker 3 (48:01):
And his brother, by the way, he just dropped an album.
How about that?

Speaker 5 (48:04):
Oh?

Speaker 2 (48:05):
Yeah, his brother Okaya, I don't even want to give
it say, but it just seems like you're timing.

Speaker 3 (48:10):
Yeah, David's brother Caleb. He goes by Cova.

Speaker 11 (48:14):
He's eighteen years old now and he's debuted a solo
career under his stage name Cova, and he released a
couple of singles. One is called Imaginary Love and the
other one is called Sex. It's kind of listen. I
think it's a little tone deaf right now, to.

Speaker 4 (48:30):
Be the hits just keep on coming out of that house.

Speaker 3 (48:33):
I mean, can you imagine the parents not this?

Speaker 10 (48:38):
I mean, yeah, this, this guy is eighteen, legal adult,
but jered to your point coming out of that house, like,
what is it not?

Speaker 3 (48:45):
Hey, go ahead and don't do this right now?

Speaker 4 (48:50):
Guess what, because they are reading the room. This is
going to sell. That's the reality of it we're talking about.

Speaker 3 (48:57):
We just said.

Speaker 4 (49:00):
Was not involved COVID and do okay, fine, I get that,
and I'll only give him the benefit of the doubt.
We could talk more about that, but you know, look
from a marketing standpoint, for your brother who's about to
stand trial, probably not the best time to drop your
album and start promoting that when you know you're going
if you go out to promote this album, people are

(49:22):
going to be asking, They're going to be wondering.

Speaker 2 (49:25):
You know, read the room absolutely has such a great
note and tone. Death body to your point is dead on.

Speaker 3 (49:33):
Yea dead on.

Speaker 11 (49:34):
And he you know, he has publicly come and said
and deny these allegations that he helped cover up, you know,
his brother's alleged crimes. And he said that you know,
he hasn't lived with the suspect David for years and
he was not close with him. And you know, there
was this viral like picture video I think of going

(49:56):
around that showed him backstage Kitlo. The brother with the
victim Celestia was Hernandez when he was fifteen, and he
denies any claims that he sneaked into the concert. That
was like kind of the rumor going around, and I'm
quoting here, he said, people have been posting a video
showing me backstage with her at one of David's concerts
when I was fifteen, and I have been wanting to

(50:19):
address it for a while. People have gone as far
as to say that I was sneaking her backstage, which
was which is not true. He is saying that they
were going to get something from a fan to give
to David, and that Celesti was already there. So yeah,
he asserts his innocence. He says he's not even close
to David and that you know his record coming out

(50:42):
is really it was scheduled before David was even rested.

Speaker 14 (50:45):
So but yeah, I mean that's just like a side
I mean right, just playing Devil's Advocacause got into a
couple of arguments with friends over this because I agree
with everything you're saying.

Speaker 9 (50:54):
But the friend was disagreeing and saying, if.

Speaker 15 (50:57):
This person had been working on his album him all
these years and this incident happened, should he now stop
and change his direction.

Speaker 3 (51:05):
Because of it?

Speaker 15 (51:06):
Also, side note, would we be even saying his name
right now if this incident didn't happen? So is it
smart to ride on the heels of something where your
name can be put out there in the public.

Speaker 9 (51:19):
Just boots for thought.

Speaker 10 (51:21):
Yeah, I think it's gross to ride on the cottails.
I think it's exactly what happening. And you know, to
answer your friend, should he not do it? Yeah, I
mean yeah, Unfortunately that's bad timing.

Speaker 2 (51:36):
Your brother has been accused of a hideous murder of
a young girl who allegedly a baby has you know, yeah,
exactly really inappropriate gagabytes of you know, inappropriate stuff also
on his hard drive.

Speaker 3 (51:50):
All of this is not great, and yes, maybe not
the best time for the music launch.

Speaker 2 (51:53):
And you can think your brother, for the behavior that
led your music career, to have to pause for a
hot second, even in the fall, would be more appropriate,
But right now it seems.

Speaker 9 (52:04):
Yeah, no, I agree. I just we're on the same page.
I'm on the same page as you. That wasn't the
old I'm asking for a friend that was really.

Speaker 3 (52:13):
Ah, why are you so entertain?

Speaker 11 (52:16):
In other and other David Knews, this video that Joseph
mentioned last night, you know, we had mentioned. I was like,
I wanted to go listen to it while I did,
And so this video is from a July twenty twenty
five video from a live stream by streamer Sakura, and
it's now gone viral, and it allegedly captures a background
conversation where you know Neo, who is David's best friend,

(52:41):
and he is also the one that they went and
arrested in what I think my wyoming to bring back
to testify for the grand jury. It's where Neo appears
to implicate himself and David in the murder of celast
It's very interesting.

Speaker 3 (52:57):
I went and listened to it.

Speaker 11 (52:59):
It's SubTime, it's a version, and it's it's floating around
the internet, and you can hear a woman off screen
ask about Celeste, and then you hear you killed her,
to which Neo allegedly responds, and it's kind of hard
to hear. It's very faint. Neo allegedly responds, yeah, me
and David. Now, I think here's the thing. Am I

(53:22):
hearing that because that's what I want to hear? Or
did that actually get set? It's hard to know that,
right because there is some confirmation bias going on.

Speaker 2 (53:32):
And is it possible that, yeah, that was in the
ether at the time. Is it possible that it was
a glib way just devil's advocate of you know, yeah, yeah, yeah,
we killed her. Like there he's saying that, like because
there's an investigation, and of course immediate people in her
circle are under that investigation, and they were being glib.

Speaker 11 (53:53):
This was in July before Celeste was found, so this
was two months after the you know, the alleged murder
and two months before she was found, so it was
like right in the middle of you know, it happening.
So they weren't under investigation at this time.

Speaker 3 (54:11):
It's what were you going to say?

Speaker 10 (54:14):
What I was gonna say was putting subtitles under questionable
or garbled audio and having worked on pair and normal
shows for a good amount of time, not saying any
of the ones I did did this. But you can
take something that really is just some kind of sound,
and let me tell you, if you put a subtitle
on it, that is what your brain and ears here.

Speaker 3 (54:38):
So, Jared, what are you example a great example?

Speaker 9 (54:41):
Yeah?

Speaker 3 (54:42):
What do you think, Jared?

Speaker 4 (54:43):
Well, look, if it's legit, obviously it's a pretty compelling
piece of evidence because no one knew she was dead
at that point, right, No one knew Celeste was dead.
If he's acknowledging we killed her. That it's a problem.
Now there's a lot of questions ahead of getting to

(55:04):
that point. Now, you know, is it ai? Was it
legitimately up in July of twenty five? I don't know,
you know, but those are things I would want to know.
I would bring the question him. I would question everybody
in that in the blast zone of that conversation, because

(55:25):
I saw the video. Uh, Sakura is talking with someone else,
and these folks are off camera behind her in another room,
So I'd want to know what they heard, who was
back there? So you those are all things you're doing
to amplify the strength of that video. You know, is

(55:47):
that was there a third person in the room that
heard that conversation. But I then I think, Courtney, you
make a great point with this confirmation biased with subtitles.

Speaker 9 (55:57):
Yeah.

Speaker 4 (55:57):
The second thing is with everything with a today, like
it's so hard to it's getting so good, you just
can't tell. The driver of the on the Zuppruter tape,
the driver of the Kennedy motor Cale uh convertible turned
around and shot in the president, Like I mean, by the.

Speaker 3 (56:19):
Way that gets circulated.

Speaker 2 (56:21):
And this is another case example, but It's very important
because even if that actually is the conversation, now we're
all adding in this doubt about it being AI, so
it immediately becomes very confusing even if they're innocent in
this conversation.

Speaker 3 (56:37):
By the way, the timing is terrible. It's a hard
one to explain away.

Speaker 2 (56:43):
We do know that Neo was involved in the grand
jury during this time period, right, and he kind of
melted down online. If I'm remembering this correctly, he had
posted something was like the summation just you know, paraphrasing
top of head, was like, you know you're the problem,
not me. I'm not going down with you because of
your behaviors. So this dynamic is an important dynamic.

Speaker 15 (57:07):
Right.

Speaker 2 (57:07):
This is the guy that if there were a co conspirator,
or if there were something else or someone else who
could say he was laying in wait. How do you
know if someone's laying wait, if there's not another person
aware of them laying in wait?

Speaker 3 (57:24):
Why did he sounds like the guy?

Speaker 2 (57:27):
And why did he buy two chain saws and an
incinerator for farm land?

Speaker 3 (57:33):
Well, I get the incinerator, but why two chainsaws? Yeah?
Because there were maybe two people and I don't know maybe.

Speaker 2 (57:41):
Or the assumption would be that there would be a
second person and the hope was that Neo would come along.

Speaker 3 (57:46):
I shouldn't say that, I take that back, mail, you
are take that back? Well, we don't know.

Speaker 11 (57:51):
I mean it could be that, you know, he bought
to thinking that he would ask NEO for help, right,
but then chickened out and did never ask Neo. In
neot innocent right, or you know, NEO maybe is involved
in chickened out.

Speaker 3 (58:05):
I don't know. I mean, I certainly don't know.

Speaker 11 (58:08):
But as of right now, Neo has not been charged
with anything, so it's important to note that. And David
also has pled not guilty to these crimes. But I
wanted to ask Jarrett, let's live in a world, JAREDT
where the prosecutors never introduced this video clip in at
trial the upcoming trial, so it's not used as any evidence.

(58:29):
Could jurors still be influenced by seeing it, this viral
compilation that's been released with these subtitles, Could they be
influenced by that?

Speaker 4 (58:38):
Yeah? Absolutely, I mean, of course, this thing has gone viral,
millions of people have seen it. Does it mean necessarily
that a prospective juror has seen it hard to tell,
but we're back to that Vader pre trial examination of
prospective jurors. You're going to have David's defense team is

(58:59):
going to have to ask these folks, have you been
exposed to video? Have you read anything? Have you seen
anything that's caused you to prejudge this entire situation? And
that's the only way, provided they're being honest, you would know.

Speaker 2 (59:14):
Right.

Speaker 11 (59:16):
So, if David were your client, and God forbid, right,
But if David were your client, where would you even
begin to build a defense with so much forty terabytes
I made the comparison yesterday hundred and sixty Apple iPhones
how much I mean, that's a lot of data, right,

(59:38):
there's so much evidence already, even the public even How
do you even begin to build a defense on this?

Speaker 4 (59:44):
Well, I think the first thing you do is you
have to separate that public narrative against what's actually admissible
in court. Just because they've gathered all this evidence in
the investigation doesn't mean it's actually coming in. Assume that
because something is everywhere online or repeated in the media,
it automatically becomes evidence in the courtroom. But that's it's

(01:00:07):
simply not true. That's not necessarily the way it goes
so as is journey, I would look at it and say,
what are we actually going to be dealing with in
front of that jury?

Speaker 11 (01:00:18):
And the preliminary hearing will give them a good idea
a little bit, right, Like that's the advantage of having
a preliminary hearing. The defense gets to attend or a
grand jury, they don't, right, The defense gets to question
witnesses during a preliminary hearing. They get they get a
little taste, don't they Isn't that a good thing to do?

Speaker 6 (01:00:36):
Hearing?

Speaker 4 (01:00:37):
That's the first opportunity the defense sees. This gets to
see the prosecution's hand, but it's limited. Even their right
to question is limit. But as the case gets closer,
they're going to go through all of that evidence looking
for weaknesses, inconsistencies, fabrications, gaps, chain of custody, you name it.

Speaker 3 (01:00:58):
They're a listener.

Speaker 10 (01:01:00):
Lisa actually had a question for you, Jared, which I'm
going to paraphrase, and it had to do with if
there is potentially another person involved in this case, what
do you think about separate versus joint trials? Like, if
there's two trials, can't each defendant just blame the other person.
So what do attorneys prefer? Oh, and listener, Lisa loves

(01:01:25):
producer Ava. Oh yes, we all love producer Ava. We
love you too.

Speaker 4 (01:01:33):
So to Lisa's question, that's a really good question and
an issue that comes up anytime you have two people
looking to stand trial together. As prosecutors, we want to
bring a case together. Number one, you don't want to
do these cases twice because you have limited resources. You
don't want the opportunity for the second trial to have

(01:01:56):
had all of the opportunity to see your witnesses testify,
all of those things. So strategically you want to go
with one shot. The problem is what Lisa said, if
they're blaming each other, you're in a situation where they
have antagonistic defenses. That's a reason to sever trials, right
because how likely one thing I would say, Well, nobody's

(01:02:19):
pointing the finger over at the DA's they're pointing at
each other. Somebody's got to have done this that compromises
their ability to a fair trial.

Speaker 10 (01:02:27):
Thank you, Jarrett, keep it here. Jarrett will be with
us true Crime tonight. Welcome back to True Crime tonight
on iHeartRadio. We're talking true crime all the time, I'm
here with body Moven, I'm Stephanie Leidecker and Courtney Armstrong

(01:02:51):
and Jarrett Farantino, who is giving us all of his
legal advice and opinions on some of the biggest cases,
is here with us yet again.

Speaker 2 (01:03:00):
And so Jared, we're going to go to a talk
back because we actually have plenty that are also coming
for you directly. But you're also a best selling author now,
so we want to get to that too and really
unpack this process because we're so proud of you.

Speaker 3 (01:03:13):
So first up, talk for Jarrett and the team. Mary
date or dump Joe house confessions, statue of limitations or polygraphs?
What this is the greatest game ever? Don't answer? Okay,

(01:03:33):
say to get out so everyone can play.

Speaker 11 (01:03:38):
Mary.

Speaker 4 (01:03:38):
So to marry date or dump? Yes, marry date or
dump statue of limitations polygraphs so you marry statute of limitations. There,
statue limitations is proper, it's consistent. Uh loyal, Uh you

(01:03:58):
know there for you you. I'm not dating anyone in jail,
so I would date a jailhouse confession and dump the
polygraph because it's inadmissible.

Speaker 3 (01:04:13):
Derrek O. Gould on the fly, I love to talk fast.
You never know them, so this is always exciting.

Speaker 10 (01:04:20):
Lisa from Pittsburgh, My heart was panicked flutter because I
thought you were going to ask jareded to do that
for us three hosts.

Speaker 3 (01:04:32):
In a million. Jared, take that out of your head,
just like one of.

Speaker 2 (01:04:37):
Us, yeah, not one of us off, Yeah exactly, that
would be possible choice.

Speaker 4 (01:04:46):
So I would never be able to make that.

Speaker 2 (01:04:48):
We were just before the break, we were just talking
about crime con in Las Vegas, and it was like,
who's going, what's the story, what's the day?

Speaker 3 (01:04:55):
And it was like, oh, Vegas might might be fun.

Speaker 2 (01:04:58):
We have Jared Farantino, the the legal we have Joseph
Scott Morgan, the greatest death investigator of all time, Like,
how bad could this go? Come on, We're in the
safest company imaginable bodies to analyze anything in all things.

Speaker 4 (01:05:11):
Come on, you might be in need of a jail
house confession and a polygraph and have choice.

Speaker 3 (01:05:18):
I could go real sideways. I'm looking forward to right.

Speaker 4 (01:05:24):
I love it.

Speaker 13 (01:05:26):
So.

Speaker 10 (01:05:26):
Stephanie, you mentioned how Jared you have grown in the
time that we've all been hanging out on the show.
You have turned into a best selling author, that's insane
and for anyone who hasn't read it or pre ordered
it yet, Mother's Murders and motivation, none of us can

(01:05:46):
say enough thing about the book, the pros, the structure,
the heart. So how did you first conceive of I'm
going to sit down and write myself a book.

Speaker 4 (01:05:58):
Yes, well, I always wanted to write a book about
my mom. She's my hero. I love her and I'm
sure she's listened more kudos to in the wake of
Mother's Day, right, So she just has just been such
a force in my life. And so I knew that
that was something I wanted to do, and it was

(01:06:20):
such a motivating factor in my career that when I
sat down to say I did this for Mom, and
then I started to put these cases together and I'm like, wow,
there were so many moms along the way, and that
became a theme, you know. I took these five cases
that all had a mom at the center. One who

(01:06:41):
failed her child, whose child was murdered as a result
of her inaction, several whose own children were murdered, and
then Don Drexel, whose daughter Britney was missing for thirteen years.
I represented Don in the final years of the search
for Britney where her body was found and those responsible
were held accountable in South Carolina, not far from Murdoch Country.

(01:07:06):
So that's really what the book is about, and that's
the theme of the book. I don't know that it's
best selling by New York Time standards, but under the
criminal loss section of Amazon were at the top.

Speaker 3 (01:07:17):
So yourself, yeah, I haven't. I happen.

Speaker 11 (01:07:24):
I happen to be Facebook friends with Jared and I've
been seeing some of his pictures on that that he's
been posting, and I'm not even kidding. He did like
a book signing it like a bookstore and the line the.

Speaker 3 (01:07:36):
Line was so long. I was like, oh my. I
was like, that's why I shared it. And I was like,
I know him.

Speaker 4 (01:07:43):
That's my brothers and their wives in that.

Speaker 2 (01:07:45):
Yeahlian, So there's a lot of them. Come on, this
is like a Northeast thing, Like this is all the
cousins and uncles. I'm kidding, but like no, Jared's like
a real Like first of all, we read him doing
the podcast and also doing the documentary, and he's tremendous
in it. And you know, with an ieheart, everybody's always

(01:08:05):
noted you and You're just a real force, Jared, so
so many great things ahead, and being an author that's
a best seller is so cool.

Speaker 3 (01:08:15):
I think purpose fun.

Speaker 4 (01:08:17):
The most fun for this whole thing was like everyone
that's read it comes back and says, I cried, I laughed,
I was angry, you know, and that it sums up
to twenty years. I mean, there were times I'm not
afraid to say I've cried in court, you know, doing
closing arguments. I'm like this Italian emotional basket case. But

(01:08:38):
like that's what I wanted to convey. So the hope
is that you get there. But you'll only know is
if you see that reaction in people. And I got
texts from friends tonight that said, thanks, she's crying. You
couldn't write a comedy. That's what my buddy wrote, so
give me a shout out.

Speaker 2 (01:08:56):
He said, that's like, yeah, like that's like a vaccist thing.
Everybody heckling is love, right, Like that's my show affection.

Speaker 4 (01:09:04):
But the story gets very deep. It's it's very very
hard and brutal. On the crime scenes, I spare no
detail because we didn't have that luxury when we were
pursuing them and prosecuting them, and if you want a
true true crime experience, that's what I wanted to build.

Speaker 3 (01:09:27):
And I have to say in Mother's Murders and Motivation
in your book, you really did build that.

Speaker 10 (01:09:34):
And also in addition to the five cases you talk about,
you also get to see sort of it's your story,
but the story of a prosecutor go from here is
my first crime scene, and this is my and to
go there, Like how what was it like reliving that
journey over those years?

Speaker 4 (01:09:54):
I have to say it wasn't pleasant, like to go back,
because when you go through those things, you don't have
the luxury of time to think about it. When I
was going back through it, and when my wife Nicole
read the book, she was like, we were so young then,
like how did we deal with all that? And I said,
we didn't even realize looking back now and our kids

(01:10:15):
are growing, Like I think. There's there's a part in
the book where I now I'm holding my son and
I say, well, for a person who thought I had
nothing to lose, here's my achilles heel for the rest
of my life. And that's exactly how I felt, you know.
And and there's things like that in the book that
I just was remembering as I was reliving those events.

Speaker 3 (01:10:39):
We're so proud of you. And do you know when
do you know it's done? You know what I mean?

Speaker 2 (01:10:45):
Like, how do you as the process to write a
book to me seems so impressive and difficult and important,
but like you've now you've added legacy to the world.

Speaker 3 (01:10:55):
It exists, So like when do you know?

Speaker 4 (01:10:57):
It's like, Okay, when do I know, like that the
wave of the book ends, I don't, I don't know.
I hope we get a little bit of a run
with It's what's been great is some of the moms
I wrote about have showed up at like signings and stuff,
which has been fun, unexpected. And then we're doing that
show in June. Well there's gonna be some surprises there.

(01:11:19):
But I'm glad that they embraced this. They weren't what
the fact that they were going to be in there.
We were going to be covering their cases. So and
they're all tough. I mean, there are no jokes these moms,
and they loved the fact that if their story was
going to be told, they had input and it was

(01:11:39):
from our side, you know, it was from the side
of the people that fought for them. So that's been
that's been great to reconnect and see them again.

Speaker 3 (01:11:50):
Impressive. You mentioned what's going on in June that we
need to know about.

Speaker 4 (01:11:55):
So I have a live show in northeastern Pennsylvania at
the Kirby Center in Wilkes Barre, Pa for anybody listening
on June seventeen, I'm doing a live presentation of the book.
We're going to talk Coburger. We're going to talk probably
a little Mangione, not that there's much to say, but

(01:12:17):
and then get into the case in the book is
and then a Q and a so, and there's a
lot of interest on the local cases. So this is
where in northeastern Pennsylvania is where the majority of the
cases in the book came from.

Speaker 11 (01:12:32):
And Luigi Mangione has a connection because that's where he
was arrested and picked up and he was arrested in
constitutional problems happened right and.

Speaker 4 (01:12:40):
Colberger great point in Colburger was found ten minutes from there,
So there's yeah, you know, there is that that connection.

Speaker 3 (01:12:50):
Wow, what what what's going on in Pennsylvania.

Speaker 2 (01:12:54):
Pennsylvania is beautiful, but there was distinctions about course, but
like there there was that book. I don't know if
you've read it yet. Chart just about the idea that
maybe there was lead somewhere in the that's more the
Pacific Northwest, I believe, just sort of the environment maybe
leading itself to some of this terrifying behavior.

Speaker 4 (01:13:16):
Well it's fun, you know. We're looking at the Pocono
region in particular. There were two wild cases out of there.
In fact that Colberger came from there. And then there
was a man named Eric Frayne. I don't know if
you if anybody remembers that, no tell us, but he
assassinated a state trooper from the woods and badly injured
another one and then went on the run for forty

(01:13:36):
days in the woods of the Pocono region. And he
has that same look that Colberger does. When Colberger was caught,
it was jarring to me. I'm like, damn, he looks
like Eric frame. They had this blank look on their face.
And believe me, I've seen plenty of mugshots in my day,
and they stared into the very eyes of some of

(01:13:57):
these people. But there was a similarity there. And wouldn't
you know it, they're both from the same area. I'm like,
that can't so maybe that's the next book. I don't know.
I got to look.

Speaker 3 (01:14:10):
That would be very interesting.

Speaker 11 (01:14:11):
We have a DM I want to read and it's
from Karen and it's for Jared okay, and it says,
I think Jarrett Farantino should come to Barnes and Noble
in Albany, New York.

Speaker 3 (01:14:21):
I would like to have my book signed, which I
just received on Friday. So there's a lot. There's the
young demand.

Speaker 4 (01:14:29):
Well, listen, we'll come out to Albany's. And that sounds great,
doesn't it?

Speaker 3 (01:14:34):
That road great, isn't it? Karen and Albany. She's a
fan of jareded.

Speaker 4 (01:14:39):
Well, Karen, you'll have to let us know what you think.

Speaker 3 (01:14:42):
Oh yeah, doesn't keep that coming? So and again?

Speaker 2 (01:14:46):
And are you, as a best selling author, what does
happen next? So you know, maybe there's a crime con
in the future, But do you foresee yourself continuing to
write more? Now that you've gone through this process once?
It seems like a very very maddening process.

Speaker 4 (01:15:04):
It is I would do that. I love to do
this like with all of you, like I love to
talk about this stuff. It's one of the few things
in the world I've ever been good at was prosecuting cases, right,
dare I say so? I love to, now that I'm retired,
talk about it and if it first of all, if
it entertains people, great, But if it informs people and

(01:15:26):
educates people about our system, that is so interesting and
so compelling and often scary. Like I always love to
be able to do that for people that were facing
the system as victims. So to do it on a
larger scale, however, that is physics books is like, I
love to do that stuff.

Speaker 2 (01:15:46):
Because people don't realize how hard it is to navigate
the criminal system in any way, whether it's in if
you're dealing with a breakup or a divorce, or you
find yourself or a loved one dealing with something or
a crime they didn't commit, or if someone ran them.
I'm like, all the legal ease in this you need
advisement in those situations.

Speaker 16 (01:16:06):
And I.

Speaker 4 (01:16:09):
Spoke with a woman today. Her grandson was murdered baby,
he was a baby, the baby. The case is going
to be resolved. She doesn't know the details, doesn't know
the sentence. Isn't communicating with the prosecutors. Now that could
be a function of prosecutors are overworked. All this stuff

(01:16:31):
it's as simple as knowing her rights as a victim
to say, here's what you're entitled to know. Call them,
talk to them, and believe me, they will talk to her.
It's just a matter of the squeaky wheel gets the grease,
and it's little things like that that people don't understand.
Like it's like, get some answers. Don't go in there blind.
Know what you're walking into. And I'm sure she'll find

(01:16:53):
those answers before this proceeding. But it was a simple thing.
And this is someone who's dialed in. She was bright.
You could out she understands the case. She just didn't
understand what her rights were at.

Speaker 2 (01:17:04):
That And sometimes counterintuitive. Also, sorry, courtny, I didn't even
cut you off, But sometimes it's counterintuitive. It doesn't seem
logical sometimes, so even if you are super smart, it's
not necessarily a paint by numbers, and it certainly varies.

Speaker 3 (01:17:20):
Court. You were going to say, what sorry to cut
you off.

Speaker 10 (01:17:22):
Oh, I was gonna say, Jerry, you said that was
a small thing, but it's not. That's life changing to
that woman. Information is such power. So anyway, and you
give that, we.

Speaker 11 (01:17:32):
Just had a caller, We just had a caller call
in and asked. Someone just called to ask when his audio.

Speaker 3 (01:17:39):
Book comes out. Somebody wants to read this book. Jared. Listen,
there's a lot of people that actually.

Speaker 4 (01:17:46):
We're going to do an audiobook too. I don't know
what the end of the summer.

Speaker 3 (01:17:49):
I think, okay, let's pave that up. Come on, I
think that should be.

Speaker 5 (01:17:56):
Audio.

Speaker 3 (01:17:57):
I say.

Speaker 4 (01:17:58):
They say we read it in two days. I'm like,
I don't took me twenty years to get all those stories.

Speaker 9 (01:18:05):
Read it.

Speaker 11 (01:18:06):
Stay tuned for the audiobook, ladies. Thank you so much
for joining us. Jared, another great Wednesday. Anyone who wants more.
Attorney Jared Farantino and best selling author. You can follow
him on Instagram at Jared Farentino and his book Mother's
Murders and Motivation.

Speaker 3 (01:18:21):
It's available on Amazon. Stick around, We've got more to
dig into. Keep it right here.

Speaker 11 (01:18:25):
True Crime Tonight.

Speaker 2 (01:18:36):
Welcome back to True Crime Tonight an iHeartRadio. We're talking
true crime all the time. I'm Steph here with Courtney
and Body Big thanks, of course, as always to Jared Farantino.
He always just brings the realism into his mom and
also we're going to go to.

Speaker 3 (01:18:52):
A couple of talkbacks. Also, we have a birthday talkback
we have to do Tah, we're daylate, we have to
do that.

Speaker 15 (01:19:00):
It's actually not a talk that, it's a DM. So
maybe we'll kickstart with that. Can I read that DM
that someone says for it is birthday related? High true crime.
I was wondering if you could wish my mom Burnetta
Robinson a very happy birthday today.

Speaker 9 (01:19:16):
Courtney read her birthday wish to body and you pronounced
her name right the other week. And she loves the
show so much as do my sister and I. I
would so appreciate a special shout out as she's truly
the best mom ever and always makes.

Speaker 15 (01:19:30):
Everyone around her a little happier. So that actually came
in her birthday would have been yesterday because we got
it this morning. So let's all give a shout out
to her mom, Burnetta Robinson.

Speaker 3 (01:19:43):
Yeah, happy birthday.

Speaker 10 (01:19:46):
You must be a truly fabulous mom, Burnetta if your
daughter is taking the time to write this to make
you a little happier, so clearly that is a trait
that you have passed on to her.

Speaker 3 (01:20:00):
So you deserve all the special shout outs in the world.

Speaker 2 (01:20:02):
Definitely, and a little bit jumped the shark even as
I just said that in body, I know it's Mary's birthday,
your mom's birthday. As I said that, like hey, ta,
I'll play that, it came out of my head and
that is a happy birthday to your mom. Happy birthday
to your mom.

Speaker 13 (01:20:21):
Yeah.

Speaker 3 (01:20:24):
Sorry, is there no will share about Mary? Not right now?
She was the best, not as she was just on
part she was just as good as Burnetta.

Speaker 11 (01:20:36):
How's that happy birthday burnouts?

Speaker 3 (01:20:40):
Yeah, anyway, I'm okay, sorry, okay, moving on.

Speaker 10 (01:20:43):
It's it's love. I say it all the time. It's
love coming out of your eyes. That is what I
always say.

Speaker 9 (01:20:52):
She has the best daughter that we all love. So
we love her and you and sending all out to
you and.

Speaker 3 (01:20:59):
I appreciate it to everyone. Yeah, okay, Taurus Bernetta's chorus,
My mom was a Taurus. We're very strong, moving on,
strong people, moving on.

Speaker 10 (01:21:13):
I bet that body's gonna have an opinion on sixteen A,
so let's go ahead with that one.

Speaker 9 (01:21:18):
Let's do that.

Speaker 4 (01:21:20):
Hi, True Crime tonight.

Speaker 6 (01:21:21):
This is Sarah and Joey from Michigan, and we were
discussing who the ambassador should be if aliens did come down,
and I think it should be Dame Judy.

Speaker 3 (01:21:31):
Dench and Joey.

Speaker 9 (01:21:33):
I think that Shane Gills would be a great ambassador.
I think he has a very concrete understanding of who
we are as Americans.

Speaker 4 (01:21:42):
Just cut straight to the what do you gotta think?

Speaker 3 (01:21:47):
Oh my goodness, this is the greatest question on the planet.
This is the Okay, So the two of them, though,
is it Shane Gills and Dame Duty Dance? Shane? I
think he's a comedian.

Speaker 9 (01:22:01):
Oh yeah, he just about to ask who that is? Okay,
he's a comedian.

Speaker 10 (01:22:04):
He's a comedian, comedian, he's yeah. He just hosted the
roast of Kevin Kevin Hart.

Speaker 9 (01:22:13):
That's right, right, No, he was the host.

Speaker 3 (01:22:16):
Hosted by Yeah, that was like the title of it.

Speaker 10 (01:22:22):
So but let's see those are who would I say? Oh,
I said, I love who was the guy from Reading Rainbow?
Oh my god, LeVar le bar Bar. That pops into

(01:22:43):
my head? I just I loved him growing up. I
love him now. When I listened to him on my
meditation when I go to sleep, he talked. But look, okay,
so that that's who popped into my head, which I
think isn't.

Speaker 9 (01:22:55):
That's a good ques. He does have so background, he
worked on he was in Star Trek, so.

Speaker 11 (01:23:03):
Exactly, I'm in with that. I'm totally in with Lovar Burton.
You know he he auditioned or or was he temporarily
the host of Jeopardy. He did so good I thought,
oh I was rooting for him. I was rooting for him.

Speaker 3 (01:23:17):
I love that question.

Speaker 11 (01:23:18):
Now that was fun. I'm I'm in with lovevar Burton.
What about you, Steph? Who do you think I'm still
recovering from the birthday thing? Sorry, don't feel that, don't
feel bad and I didn't even know, so I'm ignorant.
You were well meaning that was so low it.

Speaker 3 (01:23:38):
Meant a lot to me. Actually, oh yes, you guys
continue actually meant a lot to me, So we will continue.

Speaker 10 (01:23:44):
But like who, okay, just who here hasn't put their
foot in their mouth, even meaning the best intentions that feeling.
But I know that feeling is gnarly and everyone has
felt it and you shouldn't.

Speaker 3 (01:24:02):
Because no, I mean, Lilsa, not at all, Like I mean,
I got you just crazy for you? Yes, it's crazy. Well,
I don't know ta who do you think?

Speaker 4 (01:24:17):
What is?

Speaker 16 (01:24:19):
Uh?

Speaker 9 (01:24:19):
You know what I mean? I was trying to think
of a good ambassador.

Speaker 15 (01:24:22):
I suddenly like, when you mentioned the Jeopardy person, I'm like,
maybe somebody who has a lot of knowledge already so
they could relay that info to the people that are here.
Who's a good diplomatic person I'm trying to think of.
I don't know why Oprah came to mind, card but
she's not Jamie Carter, someone who is in an official
role I think as a better part.

Speaker 3 (01:24:42):
Persona is it Oprah?

Speaker 9 (01:24:44):
Though I didn't say over for a second. I was
just trying to think of someone that might have so
but she's listen, maybe I'm the best choice. Yes, she
might scare anyway. Yeah, yeah, I have to be there.
I was about to put my foot in my mouth,
you see. Of course, image a moment for it was
literally about them.

Speaker 3 (01:25:03):
He's like Martha Stewart for president. By the way, Martha's
skin looks very, very good, and I want that cream.
So does Martha say everything looks good?

Speaker 5 (01:25:15):
Yeah?

Speaker 3 (01:25:16):
Martha Stewart documentary was interesting to.

Speaker 9 (01:25:20):
Watch.

Speaker 15 (01:25:21):
Where we'll circle back to the UFO ambassadors or so,
we'll get back to that one, but maybe in the
meantime we go to another talk back.

Speaker 9 (01:25:31):
How about this one has been on everyone's mind twenty
six A. Uh, let's say that one.

Speaker 10 (01:25:37):
I'm listening to your podcasts as I walk my neighborhood
as usual and stop drone cruises under the bus.

Speaker 9 (01:25:44):
You could totally get this stupid hand up virus whatever
on an airplane. That's close proximity, way more than flipping cruises.
But some people decided to visit a land.

Speaker 4 (01:25:55):
Till who does that on a bird watching expedition?

Speaker 9 (01:25:58):
Like, who does that?

Speaker 4 (01:25:58):
Love you?

Speaker 3 (01:26:01):
But we have given the like who doesn't love a cruise?

Speaker 2 (01:26:05):
But she is right, we have ripped on the cruises
and we should do a little bit of a partial
take back a little bit. Well, we had a well
with you know, listen, there's been a lot of murders
on these cruises, right, so we were searching and.

Speaker 3 (01:26:19):
It's not the cruise.

Speaker 11 (01:26:20):
It's that you're you're stranded in the middle of the
ocean on a little on the vessel, like you know
what doesn't an airplane you are too, You're kind of
up in the air on a vessel.

Speaker 2 (01:26:29):
There's nowhere to go. Yeah, and you glassport. It's like
these these open waters with like nowhere totally to land
is a little scary, but she is so right that
it's like taking a hit and we're not helping.

Speaker 3 (01:26:42):
So no, but I love a cruise. I do too.
I love cruise, I just don't like getting sick on them.
I'm never an incubation period of that's my favorite. I mean,
what do you mean?

Speaker 2 (01:26:56):
But there haven't seen tragedies upon cruises very recently in
the news, right, So he's like white sharks much like
a serial killer.

Speaker 3 (01:27:04):
There's very rare. There's cruises in and out all the time.
And are the pup cruise?

Speaker 2 (01:27:09):
Oh?

Speaker 9 (01:27:10):
I still haven't seen the poop cruise. I gotta see
that one. No, I need to watch it.

Speaker 3 (01:27:15):
It's a great one.

Speaker 9 (01:27:16):
But you're right.

Speaker 10 (01:27:17):
But then we stand corrected, totally heard, and Ga, keep
walking that neighborhood.

Speaker 3 (01:27:21):
You are an inspiration to me. I was walking my
neighborhood the.

Speaker 10 (01:27:26):
Other day and I'm like, it's so great to just
do that, especially if there's something you need, like I
needed to listen to something for work.

Speaker 3 (01:27:32):
I'm like, Okay, get up and walk that. Walk that
ahead and tell me if I did.

Speaker 10 (01:27:38):
Did I tell you guys about the best surprise Wade
ever gave me?

Speaker 3 (01:27:42):
That involved. Oh tell us, Oh no, no, this is he.

Speaker 10 (01:27:47):
Literally, so, wait's my husband and this is right around
when you got married. I think we weren't yet.

Speaker 3 (01:27:53):
He gave me.

Speaker 10 (01:27:54):
I love surprise. I love surprises. If it's like surprise,
here's a magazine, I go nuts. Anyway, he set up,
he came to pick me up. He came to my work.
He had cleared it with my bosses. He came at
noon and said, you are done for the weekend. My
bag was packed in the car. I didn't know where

(01:28:14):
we're going. He took me on a cruise to en Sonata,
and he had packed everything down to uh the DVD
set of Bethany Getting Married from Bravo, which I'm the
oly person who watch. And it was the most thoughtful,
exciting trip I've ever taken because I didn't have to
do a thing.

Speaker 3 (01:28:34):
You are It takes a lot of coordination.

Speaker 2 (01:28:37):
On top of that, you have an amazing, incredible He's like,
you guys are a great couple, and honestly, that is
so sweet.

Speaker 9 (01:28:47):
A cruise it was awesome. It was awesome.

Speaker 3 (01:28:51):
And Sonata.

Speaker 10 (01:28:52):
There were blowholes, there were turos, there was you know,
dancing pictionary.

Speaker 3 (01:28:57):
I'll join any game.

Speaker 2 (01:29:00):
Yeah, I would imagine you're pretty good on the Congo
line too, Right, like the cruise, you have to play
all in. You got to participate flowers on the cruise,
it's like everybody got to join. Put your hand in
the air like you don't care, and that's okay. And
then you eat, you eat, you have more eating for
everyone eating something. Yes, it's wonderful. And then there's ice

(01:29:23):
cream at some point. Can't go wrong, Peter.

Speaker 9 (01:29:27):
I've only I've only done the gay cruises and there's
not as much eating because everyone's learned about their physique.
But they are, they are the best.

Speaker 14 (01:29:35):
They was the most fun and actually I had a
mind was such an unusual one. I was in a
gay cruise that went to the Baltic Sea and one
of our stops was in Saint Petersburg, Russia, and they
actually had to tell all the people on the cruise
ship please dress conservatively because we're going into you know, Russia,
and the idea that some of the gay men don't

(01:29:57):
really understand conservative. I guess because like, okay, I'll wear
my tank top that's been black.

Speaker 9 (01:30:02):
Like they were just still they just didn't I don't know.
It was just the most unusual group of people getting
off touring.

Speaker 14 (01:30:08):
But my weird experience was, I guess they don't see
a lot of black men in Russia, so it's not.

Speaker 15 (01:30:14):
A surprise that they don't see many. But two maybe
it was actually three different people pointed to me and
said Shaquille. They thought I was Shaquille O'Neil.

Speaker 9 (01:30:23):
I'm like wow. So that was my weird cruise experience.

Speaker 3 (01:30:36):
The gates Listen, it's.

Speaker 2 (01:30:42):
The one time that I was gonna signed autographs as
shaq You.

Speaker 9 (01:30:46):
Know I could have gone along with it.

Speaker 2 (01:30:49):
He does a little jump in the air like you's good.

Speaker 3 (01:30:56):
Do you see these sayings Eddie Murphy's my girl like.

Speaker 4 (01:31:00):
All the time?

Speaker 9 (01:31:01):
That's a sporty song. Anyway, do we have time for one?
Do I want to do one more talk back before
we end the night?

Speaker 3 (01:31:15):
Good?

Speaker 9 (01:31:16):
Let's do one more?

Speaker 16 (01:31:17):
Absolutely, Hey everyone, Stephanie from Ohio. I just wanted to
call and give you guys a little bit of a
palette cleanser. But also since you were bringing up the
Palisades fire, I just wanted to let you guys know
if you didn't already, that there is a special Goat
Brigade by San Diego sdgn E that go around and
they help clear a lot of like really dry brush

(01:31:38):
that is high likelihood to catch on fire. So awesome
way to help reduce fires.

Speaker 2 (01:31:43):
Have a great day.

Speaker 3 (01:31:44):
Love you so smart. That is a special gold brigade.

Speaker 9 (01:31:50):
They have.

Speaker 11 (01:31:51):
They have a special goat brigade that goes around and
eats all the dry you know in California that San
Anna's along with the dry.

Speaker 3 (01:31:59):
Brush to fires.

Speaker 11 (01:32:00):
Right, So they have this special goat brigade that goes
and eats all this grass and actual goats.

Speaker 3 (01:32:08):
Yes, some agronym for something no.

Speaker 10 (01:32:11):
Way now brilliant though, I mean, and it's what the
goats want to be doing.

Speaker 3 (01:32:17):
You know, everybody get the goat milk.

Speaker 9 (01:32:20):
And that's a brilliant idea. I've not heard that. I
love that.

Speaker 3 (01:32:24):
Making the world go round.

Speaker 11 (01:32:26):
Yeah, it's by San Diego Gas and Electric and I
think there's three hundred of them and they usually get
deployed in the San Diego area. It's Brush Abatement Goat
Program be a GP, I think is what it's called. Yeah,
it's literally they're called they're called professional goats.

Speaker 3 (01:32:44):
I swear.

Speaker 2 (01:32:45):
That's the most amazing thing I've ever even thought of
the visualis is incredible.

Speaker 9 (01:32:50):
Yeah, goats everywhere.

Speaker 3 (01:32:52):
Productive. What a great productive talk back. Thank you for
sharing that information.

Speaker 4 (01:32:56):
Thank you.

Speaker 15 (01:32:57):
Speaking of the Palisades fires, I've reached out to do
you remember we had a guest on Edward nord Nor
Scott who he was involved with the Uh, he's a
forensic Arson expert.

Speaker 9 (01:33:09):
He's going to be joining us back on the show
in a couple of weeks now, he said. The only
issue is right now he's involved with he's involved with
a couple of cases. Uh, he's with the Palisage case.

Speaker 15 (01:33:22):
But he wants to come back, he said, if he's
going to join us and talk about everything that he
can in the world of Arson.

Speaker 9 (01:33:27):
So we'll bring him back if you guys are up
for it. Yeah, totally.

Speaker 10 (01:33:32):
He's fantastic And it was such a wealth of knowledge
that it is so outside.

Speaker 11 (01:33:39):
To fire. None of us know in a lot of
these cridles are committing crimes with Arson and we just
don't know a lot about it.

Speaker 3 (01:33:47):
Like it's so sneaky. It sneaks up on ye and.

Speaker 2 (01:33:51):
To It's like things like in our area that we're
just not a wid might be part of the problem.

Speaker 15 (01:33:57):
What do we think for tomorrow, well, for tomorrow, we
are going to have a special guest with us. It's
Jordan Siller's of the podcast Blood Trails. It's an interesting one,
all about like crimes that happen outdoors in the woods,
and he's a really interesting expert.

Speaker 9 (01:34:13):
And we're going to follow up with.

Speaker 15 (01:34:15):
The Correspondence Center assassination, all the labs on that. So
everyone join us tomorrow.

Speaker 3 (01:34:20):
Good night, good night.

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Hey Jonas!

Crime Junkie

Betrayal Weekly

.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;}Murdaugh Conviction Overturned, Kouri Richins Sentenced, and D4vd Video Debate

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;}Hey Jonas!

Crime Junkie

Betrayal Weekly

All Episodes

Murdaugh Conviction Overturned, Kouri Richins Sentenced, and D4vd Video Debate

Hey Jonas!