New D4vd Court Twist, Kristin Smart Search, and Pentagon UFO Files

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. It's Sunday, May tenth. Happy Mothers Day, everybody,
and listen. We have a stack night of headlines. I'm
Stephanie Leidecker and I head U KAT Studios where we
make true crime podcasts and documentaries and we get to
do it with Body move In and Courtney Armstrong and

(00:41):
the three of us get to be here every night,
five nights a week, Sunday through Thursday, alongside, of course
producer Taha and Sam and Adam who are in the
control room in Burbank waiting by the phone. If you
want to join us live eight eight eight three one
Crime Ladies.

Speaker 3 (00:59):
I know we'll we'll get to Mother's Day, but we
have a lot.

Speaker 2 (01:01):
To jump into because you all remember this Kristen Smart
case from decades ago. Well suddenly there's been some new
information and authorities have been looking for her remains. Still
were they lucky at all? Plus Secretary of Commerce. Howard Lutnek.
We remember him a big associate of our current administration.

(01:25):
He finally went before the board to discuss his connection
with Epstein.

Speaker 3 (01:30):
We'll unpack that.

Speaker 2 (01:31):
Plus we're revealing some new documents that are really putting
this arsonist at the heart of the Pacific Palisades fire.
Will this justice really happen? And this trial is legitimately
right around the corner. Plus we have a little true
crime and chill. According to Taha, the phones were ringing
off the hook this weekend. We're unpacking the Gilgo Beach murders.

(01:54):
You know, this house of deadly secrets. So hopefully you've watched.
If not, all good, we will catch you up. But ladies,
Happy Mother's Day. We're sending all of our love to
all of the many mothers who are listening right now,
and for anybody who is missing their mother. They're with

(02:14):
us as well and kicking off this Sunday with nothing
but love.

Speaker 3 (02:19):
Let's what do we talking about this day?

Speaker 4 (02:21):
Yeah?

Speaker 5 (02:22):
Okay, my favorite truth speakers, it's Amanda from Mississippi. Sty
y'all talk about David and the child sexual assault material
and you keep representing it as top one.

Speaker 6 (02:34):
I'm going to.

Speaker 7 (02:34):
Respectfully ask that you guys maybe.

Speaker 5 (02:36):
Change that to sea. Sam Phin gives a conversation that
it is consensual and it's not. It can never be,
so a little more correct to say it's to Sam.
Just a suggestion. I know y'all try to be very fateful,
so I'm sure y'all probably heard the term to the
top pronouncie just comes out so quickly because we've heard
it all our lives. But I'm going to ask that

(02:57):
maybe we change that. See Sam, thanks you, I love
you all.

Speaker 8 (03:01):
Bye, we love you too. Jumping in hot here on
David Popstar.

Speaker 9 (03:06):
I totally agree, by the way, Yeah, that was a knowledgement. However,
when we quote something, we're quoting it. In the Los
Angeles District Attorney, when they were speaking with like the
LA Times and whatnot, they specifically said that term. So
when like we say it, we're just repeating like a quote,
you know what.

Speaker 3 (03:27):
I mean exactly, because yeah, right, I think it's just I.

Speaker 9 (03:31):
Think it's just going to take some time that everyone
like gets on the same page.

Speaker 10 (03:35):
Now.

Speaker 9 (03:36):
I will say though, in the complaint and the brief
that they filed, they do reference it correctly. Right. The
the more correct way, the child sexual abuse material. However,
when they were speaking, they said the child pornography term.

Speaker 3 (03:52):
So, but that's why.

Speaker 2 (03:55):
So and just in case you're not familiar with this case,
we're talking about David Musician who has since been brought
into custody for, you know, allegedly taking the life of
young Celeste Rivas Hernandez.

Speaker 8 (04:09):
You know they met when you know, she was just
such a little girl, twelve years old.

Speaker 2 (04:14):
You know, I'm seeing reports as early as eleven, but
it's somewhere between eleven and thirteen fifteen when her body
was discovered, fourteen years old, when she was actually murdered
and dismembered, and her birthday happened while she was in
the front of David this you know, singer's tesla. This

(04:35):
is a terrible case, and you're right about the specificness
of the term child pornography.

Speaker 3 (04:41):
Yeah, it's a really astue point, it is.

Speaker 11 (04:44):
Yeah.

Speaker 9 (04:45):
So, Yeah, the high profile murder case that we've been
tracking and talking about involving the twenty one year old
David Anthony Burke known as David, it's you know, it's
seen significant legal developments as the preliminary hearing is gonna
it's approaching. Now, David faces really grave charges in connection

(05:05):
with the twenty twenty five disappearance and death of fourteen
year old Celeste Revas Ernandez. His next court appearance, a
status hearing, is coming up on Tuesday on the twelfth,
and then his preliminary hearing. It was May first, but
it's been postponed until Tuesday, May twenty six. So there's

(05:28):
pretty significant hearings coming up that we will definitely be
talking about. And the reason for the delay is that
the defense requested more time to review this massive discovery
estimated to be over forty terabytes of data, including this
sensitive se sam material that has to be reviewed at

(05:49):
a very specific controlled facility, the CUS. You know, David
remains held without bail at the Twin Towers Correctional Facility
in Last Angelus. Now, Stephanie, you were, you know, uh,
gallivanting across the world when this broke, so you missed
the whole breakdown. But yet but it sounds like you're

(06:12):
really caught up. Though it sounds really very caught up.
And I was he listen, this is world news. I
was really following this along too.

Speaker 2 (06:20):
The the details are so much worse than we could
have ever imagined and by the way, they weren't great
to begin with. Let's just you know, remember, this young
girl's dismembered body was found in the front of this
tesla and I say front because tesla's had like a
trunk in the front, not the back like most cars.
And the smell, the decomposition from being in this tow

(06:43):
yard because the car had been towed, was so foul
that finally her body was discovered. As if that's not
bad enough.

Speaker 9 (06:51):
Right, So there's some details, you know, the relationship began,
it's alleged to a began in November of twenty twenty
three when the victims, the last was you know, only
thirteen or twelve or thirteen, and David was eighteen. And
to me, you know that when she went missing, the
police visited him Stephanie, and he said, I don't you know,

(07:14):
I haven't seen her in a long time. And they
were like, you know, she's only thirteen at the time,
and he said, no, I didn't know that. Two days later,
she goes home, right, and David drove to the school, Okay,
drove to the school and against her parents' wishes because
they took her phone away from her when she returned

(07:34):
home against her, he paid reportedly a classmate of his
one thousand dollars to smuggle like a burner phone to celest.

Speaker 2 (07:45):
So this was sort of an obsessive relationship, is if
we're looking at it from an outsider looking And again
these are allegedly allegedly allegedly he's an older person. And
again there have been different reports that were looking at
a twelve year old, thirteen year old. I've seen some
that even say they may have met as soon as eleven,
because it's not entirely sure. If they met online, maybe

(08:05):
they were gaming together. But again, she didn't live very
close to him. If you know the Los Angeles area,
He's coming from the Hollywood Hills, you know, it's not
a very close distance.

Speaker 3 (08:16):
So for him to go out there and.

Speaker 2 (08:17):
Use cash to essentially take her knowing that she's probably
really caught up. You know, this is a young girl
caught up, probably with this fancy celebrity.

Speaker 8 (08:30):
Talk about a terrible scenario. It's a terrible scenario. And
then body I believe in and around the time when
police notified David, the singer of Celeste Hernandez's age that
then he also showed a picture of Celeste.

Speaker 3 (08:46):
From her yearbook. That's what she said.

Speaker 8 (08:50):
That's what the complaints said, which to me says, you know,
if you're in a middle school yearbook, yeh're probably in
middle school. Well listen if you aren't, just joining us.
This is true Crime tonight on iHeartRadio, and we are
talking about the new summary of allegations in the case
of David Burke, who is accused of murdering Celeste Rivas Hernandez.

Speaker 3 (09:13):
We'd love to hear your thoughts.

Speaker 8 (09:14):
We're at eight eight eight three one Crime and there's
actually a DM from a listener that I wanted to share.
It's from Cynthia and she says, questions, in this last case,
did David step on school property in order to find
some student to get the burner phone to her? If
he did the school intercept him and report him to

(09:36):
the police.

Speaker 9 (09:37):
God's a really good question. There's a theory about this now.
Obviously the obviously the police and the prosecutor's office tracked
this down because it's in the complaint. Okay, However, we
don't we're not privy to the details yet. Right we
might learn the preliminary hearing, but right now there's just theories. Okay,
there's a photo that was released very early on when

(10:00):
Celeste's poor little body was found in that front of
that tesla, and it's a photo that was geotagged to
the Lake Elsinore area, Okay, and David is standing in
like a it looks like a parking lot with a
bunch of kids, and he's got something in his hand.
It looks like a phone, maybe a stack of bills.
It's hard to really determine, but it's it's The theory

(10:23):
is that someone knew that this was nefarious and took
a photo of it right away. It's literally it could
be David basically giving this kid the phone to get
to Celeste. Because the user who posted it, who allegedly
took the photo, alleges that David was paying people to

(10:44):
keep celeste age secret. Now, is it possible that they
just got that little minor detail wrong like in it
to relate this incident with the phone.

Speaker 3 (10:53):
We don't know.

Speaker 8 (10:54):
But that's a recognizable guy, though, I mean, the goal
of this pretty recognizable guy who's you know, has emerging,
this big career that's going to happen we know years
later he ultimately is going to go on tour and
make big, fancy music videos.

Speaker 2 (11:11):
There's a lot of people to have in this world.
Why is he targeting this young girl fully with the
knowledge of her age. It's deplorable. And we also know
from some of his friends who have spoken out that
they thought she was nineteen years old and going to USC.

Speaker 3 (11:26):
She had like a fake ID from USC exactly.

Speaker 9 (11:28):
Yeah, and again I just want to reemphasize though, that
that is not what I just mentioned about the photo.

Speaker 3 (11:33):
It's just a theory.

Speaker 9 (11:34):
This is all alleged, Like David has pled not guilty
to this, and he remains innocent until you know, proven
guilty and whatnot. I just want to lay that out
there because again, when we talk about theories on the
internet and whatnot, things get sticky, and so I just
want to say that here's the thing, though, Steph, and
I think you hit the nail on the head. I

(11:55):
really think that this whole incident of him driving from
Los Angeles to you know, to Lake elsnorm what does
it girls?

Speaker 3 (12:02):
Two hours? Maybe?

Speaker 8 (12:03):
Yeah, two and a half maybe. Honestly, it could be
five hours with la tra la percent right now, it's
a long drive. Let's just say that he's the fact
that he's even there to begin with in this photo,
like why is he and that it's in the brief
He really targeted the lust right Like even when she
escaped and went home, let's say, right and she's in

(12:26):
the care of her her parents, they take her phone rightfully,
so you know they were doing what they thought was
to prevent this from continuing to happen.

Speaker 9 (12:35):
He is a predator. He drove that two hours because
he could not stand not being in control of this
little girl exactly. And let's not forget the incinerator that
was although not used, this incinerator that was somehow in
his West Hollywood home. What was that going to be used?

(12:56):
For now?

Speaker 2 (12:56):
The details about her dismemberment, the idea of their being
a kiddie pool involved, and just how.

Speaker 3 (13:03):
Thoughtful he was about that.

Speaker 2 (13:05):
And also to your point, body, just the idea of
him sending an uber to where she was the night
of her unfortunate passing. When he sends her an uber
to come, you know, talk, because she was obviously very
upset about them splitting up, or he film threatened, or
his finances were going to be threatened, she was threatening
the world tour. Well, you know, he sent an uber

(13:27):
to come bring her to the house so that he could.

Speaker 9 (13:31):
Lay in wait to murder her. That's right, he could
lay in wait. That's what they said. They're alleging he
laid in wait. And you know, David's a small guy.
He's a he's a he's a small guy. And you
know we had Stephen Fisher on last week. He's the
private investigator, yeah, that has been hired by the owner
of the property that this all allegedly happened at. And
you know, there were two chainsaws ordered, okay, and so

(13:55):
what Stephen Fisher believes is that one was used of
course with this horror, horror, bold dismemberment, and then one
is one that he found, right, and so Steve Fisher
is opining that, you know, these drives out to Santa
Barbara where they found Celus's passport and whatnot, he thinks
that he thinks that David may have tried to dispose

(14:17):
of one of those chainsaws, and he has been out
there looking for it himself. To Steve Fisher, he's got
his drone and he's looking in the water, he's looking
in the ravines, and he's posting photos for people to
help him and assist him and looking for that.

Speaker 2 (14:32):
He has been such an instrumental force in this investigation
and really it just kind of goes to show it
took such a long time, but boy, between the videos
and the photographs allegedly of underage inappropriate material, and the
amount of things that they have against him, this is going.

Speaker 3 (14:52):
To be a real trial to watch.

Speaker 8 (14:54):
And speaking of the trial to watch, you know, body,
as you said, David Berg's legal team they've completely you know,
saying he's not guilty, and they also maintain that the
evidence will prove he wasn't the cause of it's Lesreevas's death.
There's no alternate theory that they've released, and knowing what

(15:15):
we've seen, it's very hard to imagine how this will.

Speaker 9 (15:19):
Indeed, the autopsy, the medical examiner said that her cause
of death were these puncture wounds with a sharp instrument,
So it wasn't like drugs or anything like that. So
her cause of death came from somebody, if not David who.

Speaker 8 (15:34):
Hmm, that is a great question. Listen, stick around when
we come back. There's new forensic searches that are happening
in the Christen Smart case from almost thirty years ago,
but there are fresh questions to be answered. Keep it
here True Crime Tonight, We're talking true crime all the time.

Speaker 2 (16:03):
Welcome back to True Crime Tonight on iHeartRadio. We're talking
true crime all the time. I'm Stephanie Lai Decker here
with my ladies, Courtney Armstrong and Body move in. Of course,
we have Taha, Sam and Adam in the house as
well waiting for your call, So please join us live
eight eight ah three to one Crime. Happy Mother's Day, everybody.
We hope you're having a beautiful one, had a RESTful one,

(16:26):
and if he didn't, that's fine too. Tomorrow's a whole
new day. Kristin Smart, this is one of those cases
that's been around for decades, harrowing. Her body has never
been found. A man was charged for her murder. We'll
get into the specifics, but first let's go to a talk.

Speaker 12 (16:44):
Back Hi Team Big News in the Kristen Smart Taste Today,
Sheriff's office just presented search warrants to Susan Flores to
be able to search her property as well as the
neighbor's property with ground penetrating radar. That's the house that
Susan was running out at the time of Christen Smart's disappearance,
and the tenants reported that there was a fresh pad

(17:04):
of concrete board and they would hear beeping coming from
underneath it four twenty every morning. That sounded a lot
like a watch alarm.

Speaker 3 (17:12):
First of all, how you guys remember this complex?

Speaker 2 (17:14):
We have the smartest audience could Before we go a
step further, I's two for two of brilliance, right, such
great pieces of information. But yes, this is a fascinating
it is or fascinating discoveries.

Speaker 9 (17:28):
So for those who don't know, you know the disappearance
and murder of Kristen Smart. It's one of California's oldest
and most endearing and high profile cold cases. Right, I
mean I was I think I had just entered college
and I was living in southern California at the time.
But this happened in nineteen ninety six. She was a
cal Poly student and she disappeared after an off campus party.

(17:53):
A fellow student, Paul Flores, he was the last person
that was seen with her. Nothing ever happened for a
really long time. Her case remained unsolved. Nobody was you know,
tried for her disappearance, and you know, they think she
was murdered because there was never a body discovered, but
over twenty five years later, in twenty twenty two, that

(18:15):
same guy, Paul Flores, was convicted of her murder, but
the search for her remains continues on to this day.
And just like our talkback said, due to advances in
forensic testing, investigators returned to the home of the convicted guy,
Paul his mom with a new warrant to search for

(18:35):
her remains. However, bad news, no remains were found.

Speaker 3 (18:41):
They have not. No remains were found.

Speaker 2 (18:43):
However, there did seem to be evidence to suggest her, Yes,
a body was in fact a body. Whether it was
hers or not is still unknown, but that there did
seem to be something about the soil and the gases
that a dead body sort of expelled into the soil
that could last for decades. Remember this guy was not

(19:04):
arrested for twenty five years. Twenty five years, right, I
mean think about it. So Kristin Smart's beautiful family and
if you guys don't remember, I'm sure some of you do.
It was such a big case at the time, it
was worldwide news. She was like a blonde girl, she's
sort of you know, it was sort of like Little
America's sweetheart for a hot moment college student. Everybody was

(19:26):
looking for her, and really it just went nowhere. And allegedly,
this this man, not allegedly, he was ultimately convicted twenty
five years later, and by all accounts, this guy was
a super creep and now is still claiming his you know,
innocence and living out his sentence.

Speaker 9 (19:47):
I'm so glad that you mentioned that because the trial
there were two trials and it featured two juries. While
there was one trial with two juries in one courtroom,
one was for Paul Flora as the student that was
last seen with her and the other who was charged
with the murder right, and the other one was for
his dad, who was charged with accessory. Okay, so the

(20:10):
for Paul Flores, the jury, I'm sorry for the dad,
Reuben Flores. The jury found reasonable doubt regarding his direct
assistance and hiding the body, leading to his you know, acquittal.

Speaker 3 (20:22):
But despite absence.

Speaker 9 (20:24):
Of you know, a body being found, prosecutors successfully convicted
Paul Floors in twenty twenty two using a circumstantial but
very powerful case. And it's important to remember two many
cases are tried to via circumstances.

Speaker 8 (20:38):
Absolutely many are tried with a circumstantial it's harder and
there are fewer cases charged without an actual body, right.
But I have to say, maybe I just had not
heard of this, But I've I've never been aware of
a trial that where two juries are in one courtroom.

Speaker 13 (20:56):
Okay?

Speaker 4 (20:56):
Is that?

Speaker 3 (20:56):
Okay? Actually you haven't either.

Speaker 9 (20:58):
I know there were I know there were two for
the mementoes is the retrial, right, But I didn't. I
don't think they were in the same courtroom courtroom, right, Yeah.

Speaker 2 (21:08):
And by the and even going back to father and son.
So son now twenty five years later, is a man
and has been accused of this crime. He was kind
of a grifter during these last twenty five years prior
to his arrest. Apparently he had moved to Los Angeles,
this is the killer, the accused, and was sort of,
you know, doing a lot of drugs and was you know,

(21:30):
considered by many to be creepy and had had several
just several creepy incidents. Whereas his parents, who had since divorced,
they just thought he was like a shy kid. And
mom who still lives at the house that has this
infamous deck in front of it where a body it
appears as of you know, this weekend, it appears that

(21:52):
a body had been under that deck and was dad helping,
and that's what they thought somehow disposed of the body.
They even think it's possible that they moved the body.

Speaker 3 (22:02):
They moved multiple times.

Speaker 9 (22:04):
Right, So it's I'm so glad you mentioned that too.
You're bringing up all the points I wanted to tap
me stuff head a head. So during the trial, right,
the part of the evidence that convicted Paul was that
archaeologists they found like a soil anomaly under that deck
exactly the same size as a human body, and forensics

(22:27):
tests confirmed the presence of human blood in that soil,
and it matched the theory of long term decomb The
trial included testimony from women alleging that Paul Flores had
drugged and assaulted them in the years after her disappearance
in nineteen ninety six, establishing this like lifelong pattern of

(22:48):
you know, predatory behavior, on top of the fact that
he gave conflicting accounts of that night. So but here,
but here's the thing, what brought them to this place today?

Speaker 3 (23:01):
Right now?

Speaker 9 (23:01):
We know the talkback said today, but she called in yesterday.
This happened, this happened over the weekend. Okay, yep so.
Experts use cutting edge methodology methodology to detect these volatile
organic compounds are called VOCs.

Speaker 3 (23:19):
I wish Joseph was here to help us with this.

Speaker 9 (23:21):
These are gases that are released by human decomposition that
can linger in the soil for decades. While they detected
these compounds and the sheriff Ian Parkinson stated that testing
indicated human remains were there at one time or are
still there. So they had to go look, they had
to go look.

Speaker 3 (23:42):
Wow.

Speaker 2 (23:43):
So so his mom it's knock knock, knocked on the door,
and she thinks years have passed, right, She's put these
to bed.

Speaker 8 (23:51):
The ex husband's not in the mix anymore. Dad, sons
in prison for it, you know, sons serving time. Now
there's a knock at the door and there there they're
in the yard and things up again. I'm thinking to myself,
she's been living in this house that a dead body
allegedly was under the deck. Now I'm reminded of the
Long Island serial killer in that house that we'll get.

Speaker 3 (24:10):
To later in the show.

Speaker 8 (24:11):
These looked like beautiful homes in beautiful places, you know,
the the idea that such devastating things can happen right
under you know, your nose is just so horrifying. Also,
I think it's really remarkable the tenacity that everyone involved,
you know, that they maintained attention on this after nearly

(24:33):
thirty years before this guy was even brought to child Like.

Speaker 3 (24:37):
I just wanted to give big ups.

Speaker 2 (24:38):
By the way, can I just give a double down
on that, Courtney Armstrong? You know what did it? It
was a podcast that there was a podcast with this guy.
His name was Chris Lambert and Dog with a Bone
and listen, he kind of really did shed light investigators
and Kristen's family, the victim. They all say that if

(25:00):
not for this podcast, which got maybe thirty million downloads,
but that sort of really reinvigorated this investigation. And you know, listen,
it sometimes takes a village.

Speaker 8 (25:11):
It sounds like it did very thorough ethical work, and
hats off, that's real important stuff.

Speaker 9 (25:18):
Yeah, he was bringing a lot of pressure, and he
was recruiting witnesses like hey, you know, he was constantly
like trying to get people to talk about it, like
if you were at this party. He tracked down former
students and neighbors who were you know, they were previously
too scared to speak about things.

Speaker 3 (25:34):
You know, again, this happened almost thirty years ago.

Speaker 11 (25:36):
Now.

Speaker 9 (25:37):
He also applied pressure to the San Louis obistpos Sheriff's
office to start dedicating some significant resources to the gold case,
leading to the wire taps that eventually broke us all
the wide open.

Speaker 3 (25:50):
Yeah, it's really remarkable.

Speaker 8 (25:52):
And if you're just joining us, this is true crime
tonight and we're talking about the disappearance and murder of
Kristen Smart. It happened back in nineteen ninety six, and
there's been new attention brought to it. We'd love to
hear your thoughts. Do you have any recollection of when
this case was going on?

Speaker 3 (26:09):
It was huge news?

Speaker 8 (26:10):
Iightit eight three one crime is the number, Stephanie. Yeah,
like there's the one thing to add to that. As
we're talking about it, as we were coming online tonight,
I was thanking God for her, for Kristen's mom on
Mother's Day. Now there's been all of this, you know,
there's interest and suddenly there's you know, a new investigation

(26:33):
and although the ending at this point seems clearly not
a happy one, and that she's already been declared you know, dead.

Speaker 3 (26:42):
They want their.

Speaker 2 (26:42):
Remains, you know, and having some finalities. So I'm sure
these last few days have really stirred things up for
the Smart family and we can only imagine how difficult
that is. So everybody send them some thoughts in prayers.

Speaker 9 (26:56):
There's a statement from them, do you want me to
tell you what? Okay, yeah, he's going to tell you anyway.
So from the Smart family, it says, we continue to
pray for the day when we can finally lay her
to rest in the presence of those.

Speaker 3 (27:08):
Who love her.

Speaker 9 (27:09):
So very very astute what you had said previously. They yeah,
they want her remains, they want, yeah, to lay her
to rest in the presence of people who love her
and not just in some you know, cemented deck you know.

Speaker 3 (27:23):
Yeah.

Speaker 8 (27:24):
And there is one nice legacy, I mean if oh, yeah,
I can call anything nice about this, and that's that
two years after Kristen Smart went missing, the Christen Smart
Campus Security Act was signed into law, and that's to
improve missing persons reporting on campuses. So that was a
big change and it really did fundamentally change the law

(27:47):
in California.

Speaker 3 (27:48):
You know, before then.

Speaker 8 (27:50):
Campus police would treat disappearances as oh, it's an unannounced vacation.
And we all know how important the first forty eight
hours is when someone's missing. And now that act it
requires all publicly funded colleges to have formal agreements with police,
and that brings about immediate professional reporting of violent crimes
and missing persons. M hm oh, and I believe we

(28:13):
have a caller Ava.

Speaker 14 (28:17):
Hello, Hi, this is not producer Ava different Ava in La.

Speaker 8 (28:25):
I love that you welcome other Ava.

Speaker 14 (28:29):
I've called in a few two I've left a few
voice notes, but this is my first time listening live,
so I thought why not especially yeah, because I thought
a notification while you were talking about this case the
crime tell us. So apparently the search was concluded, I
believe yesterday, and they have announced that they did not

(28:51):
find anything and they are no longer going to be
looking there. So really sadly that that is not one too.
They didn't find her, at least at least for now, right.

Speaker 2 (29:05):
Yeah, it doesn't it making mad though they have this
guy behind bars, why doesn't he have to tell if
they have accused this guy and convicted him and he's
you know, oh.

Speaker 14 (29:16):
Yeah, I mean, I mean it's I mean, it was
very it was very fuss Like I just I remember
his dad. I believe like he probably came and helped him,
like move the body. But they have never ever ever
like they're they're so I don't know, they will not
admit that it happened, even though he is, you know,

(29:39):
he has been so guilty. It's you know, it's just
one of those pride or I just I don't know,
not being able to live with the truth of tell
for what you've done.

Speaker 9 (29:50):
I think it's control in some way, and I don't
know if that's the right word, but he still has
control or the emotions of this family because he won't
give up, you know what I mean, Like it's a
way for him distilled cause suffering. Yeah, Ava, thank you
so much for calling. We really appreciate the live call.

Speaker 3 (30:08):
Thank you.

Speaker 9 (30:09):
But yeah, you know, they definitely have not found the body.
The Sheriff's office believe that Christian's smart body was moved
from its original burial site. They believe it was that
deck area under the house that Paul's dad had to
an unknown location, probably multiple times as recently as twenty twenty.

Speaker 8 (30:35):
Wow, how does anyone carry that around? How does anyone
carry that information around? How does anyone get any nice
sleep with knowing that they have done this and it's
are still doing it because you know they have been
found out.

Speaker 2 (30:53):
Right, and you're always looking over your shoulder assuming someone's
going to find you out right, you're kind of on
the lamp or you just disassociate, and that's I guess
the sign of a real psycho.

Speaker 3 (31:05):
No, I totally agree. I listen.

Speaker 9 (31:07):
I do believe though, that the San Luis Obispo Sheriff's
Department is not going to give up there now that
the media has gotten kind of their teeth into this story.
I think that the pressure is only going to keep mounting.
And listen, keep it up, you know, let's find Kristin Smart.

Speaker 3 (31:23):
Let's fine Kristen Smart.

Speaker 2 (31:26):
So a lot's gone on even this weekend, ladies. We
have more UFO things to discuss at some point. I
can't wait to talk to you guys about this recent disclosure.

Speaker 3 (31:36):
Will there be more?

Speaker 8 (31:37):
And then of course the Epstein files. You know, we
have the Epstein File Transparency Act still, you know, slowly
trying to be fulfilled. And Howard Letnik, who we've talked
about on the show many times before, he serves as
Commerce Secretary in Trump's current administration. And you know, he's
been a real controversial figure throughout this whole process, given

(32:01):
his denial of any relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, and then
it kind of came out that there was quite a
bit of proof that that wasn't entirely the case, so
he had to testify and was officially in the hot
seat court.

Speaker 3 (32:15):
Do you want to give us a little background?

Speaker 8 (32:17):
Yeah, absolutely, there is a lot of motion. So the
House Oversight Committee, it's ongoing this investigation and it is
all exploring the crimes and the network of sex trafficker
Jeffrey Epstein and these high profile figures. There's tech moguls,
cabinet members, They've been called to account for years of

(32:39):
interactions that have in fact been revealed as part of
the Epstein Files Transparency Act. So the most recent ones,
there were two I was hoping we could talk about.
One was from Ted Waite, who's Gallaine Maxwell's former partner.
He's a billionaire co founder of a computer company called

(32:59):
gate Wait. And of course Gilaine Maxwell is known as
Jeffrey Ebstein's Titus co conspirator, and she is a convicted
sex offender serving time right now at the time she's
serving is a little bit cushy because she was transferred
to low security.

Speaker 3 (33:17):
But I digress up good sund.

Speaker 8 (33:21):
And so ted wait. The Democrats labeled the session fruitless.
The Republicans argued it provided critical context regarding Gilaine Maxwell's
social maneuvers.

Speaker 3 (33:37):
So that was kind of the takeaway from.

Speaker 2 (33:40):
Yeah, big choker, she had her very wealthy boyfriend, and
that very wealthy boyfriend was sort of in it to
win it with her until the bitter end.

Speaker 3 (33:48):
It appears they were together for a long time.

Speaker 8 (33:51):
Yeah, they were together from about two thousand and three
to twenty ten. And while they were dating Gallaine Maxwell,
you remained on Jeffrey Epstein's payroll, although it up until
two thousand and nine, managing Epstein's properties and caring for
his mother. And here's the point, mother, I've never heard

(34:14):
that before. Really, that's so interesting. By the way, I
want to dig into that.

Speaker 2 (34:20):
Even as you say that, I'm seeing it even right
here in some of the research, I actually never went
down the Epstein mother rabbit hole. That is something Adam
Adam put it on our list.

Speaker 3 (34:31):
Let's tackle that this week.

Speaker 8 (34:34):
I'm writing it on the I'm writing it on my
chalkboard right now.

Speaker 3 (34:37):
I didn't really know.

Speaker 2 (34:38):
I always thought he came from a very humble background
in Brooklyn, you know, beloved mother and father. But the
idea that Gilaine Maxwell was caring for his ailing mom,
whether true or not, that's interesting.

Speaker 3 (34:52):
I sorry, I digress. Bodie's rolling her eyes pretty hard
right now. I don't know that she actually physically took
care of her.

Speaker 8 (34:59):
I mean, I what, you know, she might have paid
her bills and stuff, you know, all things running down.

Speaker 3 (35:06):
Elaine's not being honest about that. That's impossible.

Speaker 8 (35:12):
So Gileen Maxwell's former boyfriend Ted Waite, there was a
lot made of this. Their relationship began. They met at
a dinner in Hong Kong. And at this dinner in
attendance was President Bill Clinton. So and he also Ted
Waite also did confirm that he attended Chelsea Clinton's twenty
ten wedding with Giley Maxwell.

Speaker 3 (35:37):
So he was the one invited, right, she was his.

Speaker 8 (35:39):
Guest's great clarification, yes, exactly, even just to put a
little something into this, just for one quick moment.

Speaker 2 (35:47):
Remember, there was always that infamous painting, And if you
guys haven't seen it, it's worth checking out online. There's
like a huge oil painting that was allegedly in Epstein's
home and it's a Bill Clinton sort of wearing a dress.
It's the infamous Monica Lewinsky blue dress and he's wearing
high heels and it's like Bill Clinton in drag. And

(36:09):
it's such an odd painting to have in your house
if you're Jeffrey Epstein. Clearly shows that there is a
steeped relationship there. And look at that they were all
at the wedding. So I don't know whatever that means.
It means that everybody's sort of they're all connected.

Speaker 8 (36:25):
Yeah, and ps, that's an odd painting for anyone to
have anywhere. Yeah. Other things that came out during the
testimony was Tedwait stated that Gilene Maxwell never brought Donald
Trump up, so that's a piece of information. And Gilaine Maxwell,

(36:49):
she had previously alleged that Tedweight was a target of blackmail,
and she claimed that in two thousand and nine, which
was the time that Jeffrey Epstein was having his troubles
in Florida and was convicted of being a sex offender
in Florida. So at that time, an individual demanded ten

(37:11):
million dollars from Ted Waite, and that was to keep
Gillian Maxwell out of Epstein's burgeoning legal troubles.

Speaker 3 (37:19):
Think about that.

Speaker 2 (37:19):
So also remember the blackmail of it all is really
at the center of this whole curiosity around Epstein, right,
So aside from the fact that nobody has been handled
accountable for thousands of women's pain and suffering and they
deserve justice, that's captain obvious will put that aside. But

(37:40):
you know, Jeffrey Epstein, by many accounts, was the greatest
blackmailer on earth. In fact, even who you're going to
discuss next, Howard Lutnik, the Commerce Secretary, He's even quoted
as saying that Epstein was the greatest blackmailer of all time.

Speaker 3 (37:55):
So what a messy.

Speaker 2 (37:57):
Little web that they were all living at that time.
Two thousand and nine, Jeffrey Epstein's being arrested or pleads
guilty for you know, being with a minor, which you
know he did serve that cushy time for at that time,
so boom, he's an official sex convicted criminal at that point,
even though he actually you know, didn't go to jail

(38:18):
the whole time, he only slept there. But that aside, Now,
Gilaine has this boyfriend. The boyfriend's getting hit up for
all of this money. Ten million dollars is a pretty
steep ask why all the blackmail?

Speaker 9 (38:33):
I mean, because they have money and they're doing bad
things and people know about it. I mean, their targets clearly,
and you know, back then they were probably flaunting a
little a little bit as well. True you know, they're
going to get away with everything because up until that
point they had right.

Speaker 2 (38:49):
And remains sort of that still remains kind of the case.
It feels likely.

Speaker 8 (38:53):
So like they were all a little above the law
or could buy themselves out of trouble, or could you know,
lean on relationships, whether that was political relationships or financial relationships,
anybody in power who could kind of grade on a
curve to make their troubles go away.

Speaker 3 (39:12):
Right.

Speaker 9 (39:13):
This is true crime tonight. We're on iHeartRadio. We talk
true crime all the time. We are right in the
middle of going over the testimony about Jeffrey Epstein. If
you want to win, give us a call. Eighty eight
thirty one crime. Let's get into Howard Lutnik corney.

Speaker 3 (39:26):
Oh, Howard Lutnix. Dig into it.

Speaker 8 (39:29):
So, as Stephanie mentioned, Howard Lutnik indeed is the Commerce Secretary,
and he himself he's also a billionaire. Now, Lutnik has
faced a lot of scrutiny over a decade of communication
with Epstein and all of this stuff that has come
out their communications. It contradicted what he said in two

(39:50):
thousand and five that he severed ties or contracted that
he sever ties in two thousand and five. So there
were three spacific encounters that were at sort of the core.
So in two thousand and five, Howard Lutnick met Jeffrey Epstein,
went to his home and apparently after seeing a massage

(40:14):
table and hearing Epstein's comments about daily massages, Lutnik claims
that both he and his wife decided to never be
in a room with him again.

Speaker 2 (40:26):
And by the way, to add to that, Courtney, I
happened to see this interview live when it happened, and
I was kind of already circling the Epstein scenario, and
I just happened to be watching whatever this was on.
I want to say it was sixty minutes at the time.
So here's Howard Lutnick speaking out as someone who actually
knew Jeffrey Epstein. So my ears really perked up. He

(40:49):
lived in an apartment building directly next to him in
New York City. So remember, Jeffrey Epstein lived in the nicest, biggest,
fanciest townhouse in New York City, and Howard's the neighbor,
And like, Howard did this interview very intentionally and very
purposefully before even Epstein's story was kind of everywhere to

(41:11):
really double down and go out of his way to
say this guy was a total creep.

Speaker 3 (41:16):
You know.

Speaker 2 (41:16):
I went into this apartment and there were massage tables everywhere,
and I was like, how many massages do you have?
And like, as if I'm paraphrasing, as if he immediately
got the ick and was like, I would never be
in this, And this is what's scary about it.

Speaker 3 (41:30):
He was really convincing.

Speaker 2 (41:32):
And I remember thinking, as a viewer, Ah, thank god
there's guys like this around. Thank God, there's all these
Howard lutniks wandering around here keeping the rest of us safe.
Because he was so nice and he was so kind
and he could spot the sheep in wolf's clothing. Meanwhile,
this guy is full online. Why would he even do
that interview? It wasn't as though anybody was.

Speaker 9 (41:54):
It doesn't make sense anyway. It doesn't make sense now,
Like you walk in and there's a massage s table,
so you're so freaked out, Like that's like the weirdest
like excuse I've ever heard. Honestly, I think he's throwing
the wife in there too.

Speaker 2 (42:09):
I don't think that even he said that the wife
was there at the time, but I feel like the
wife gets added to this story so much. I could
be wrong about that, but I really did fall for it.
Like hook Line in Sinker, he presented very well. He
seemed extremely authentic. He seemed like, woof, you know this guy.
You know from a mile away, I could smell it trouble.

(42:31):
I mean, while this guy's visiting him left and right.

Speaker 8 (42:33):
Oh absolutely, after that two thousand and five declaration to
never be in a room with him. Well, cut to
twenty and twelve and Howard Lutnix decides to visit Epstein's Island.

Speaker 3 (42:49):
And he didn't just go it alone.

Speaker 8 (42:51):
He brought his four children and some nannies and they
had a visit to Little Saint James. It was apparently
a one hour lunch, and Lutnik described the invitation as
quote unsettling and the visit as quote inexplicable. How do
you how do you inexplicably with four children and a

(43:12):
couple of nannies end up on a remote island after
you know this as a convicted pedophile. And by the way,
more importantly, why would you go out of your way
for that interview?

Speaker 2 (43:22):
I'm just so confused by it. You know, he obviously
knew that was inaccurate. He obviously knew that at some
point it could have come out. Why would you sit
down for an interview when it wasn't even during a
very controversial time.

Speaker 3 (43:37):
I mean, I only know his name.

Speaker 2 (43:38):
I honestly only know his name because I happened to
catch him in that interview one time, and I always
saw him as a hero.

Speaker 3 (43:46):
Well, then, how well timed was that interview?

Speaker 8 (43:48):
And I think that's a great answer to why he
would have done it, because people would see and think,
what a hero, What a guy loves his wife. Yeah,
he knows the trouble and.

Speaker 3 (43:58):
He's getting out of it exactly exactly I know.

Speaker 8 (44:04):
And then there was one other sort of point that
was hit, so there was referred to as a scaffolding meeting,
and there was a brief encounter regarding renovations in Epstein's foyer.
Lutnick said the meeting was just about scaffolding and renovation
where and according to Lutnik, the construction work was affecting

(44:27):
neighborhood properties, but investigators were questioning whether the interaction was
truly incidental or if it was evidence that the two
men remained in regular contact.

Speaker 3 (44:39):
Which I think is fair.

Speaker 8 (44:40):
I don't find myself in other people's foyers that I
am not talking to exactly.

Speaker 2 (44:45):
And by the way, this is somebody who is, you know,
the Commerce Secretary, and you know that's a that's a
very big job as tariffs, in finances, things that are
affecting everybody in real time.

Speaker 3 (44:58):
So I was really surpri all of this. And I
don't know what the.

Speaker 2 (45:01):
Next step is, if any, but I don't think it's
okay to lie that many times.

Speaker 9 (45:09):
Well, and this scalffolding meeting too. Lutnick said that he
only met with Epstein a handful of times, and he
said the last time that they really met was during
the scaffolding meeting. But you know, the lawmakers, they expressed
a skepticism, noting that email showed that there was correspondence

(45:29):
between the two as late as twenty eighteen, and the
Scalfolding meeting apparently happened, you know, in.

Speaker 3 (45:37):
Twenty twelve or something.

Speaker 9 (45:39):
So there's just a lot of skepticism about the frequency
of these meetings and whatnot. So they just my impression,
this is just my impression. I they didn't believe him,
I don't think.

Speaker 3 (45:51):
Right, yeah, right, wow.

Speaker 8 (45:54):
And Democrats are actually demanding his resignation, but important, you know,
the House, Yeah, it is absolutely offering full support. So
those are kind of the implications. And then humming up
May eighteenth, Tova Novelle. She is the former federal prison
guard who's to be the last person to have seen

(46:17):
Ebstein alive.

Speaker 3 (46:19):
I can't wait to hear from her.

Speaker 2 (46:20):
And she had an interesting kind of wire of some
money I'm allegedly transferred to her from an unknown source.
It may be nothing, but definitely worth listening to. And
also Bill Gates will be up later next month.

Speaker 9 (46:35):
Exciting stuff. I cannot wait May eighteenth. We're going to
definitely tune in for that coming up. Next to prosecutor
say the accused Palisades fire arsonist was fueled by resentment
and an obsession with anti billionaire rhetoric. Keep it right
here to Grand Tonight.

Speaker 2 (47:01):
Welcome back to True Crime Tonight, A and iHeartRadio. We're
talking true crime all the time. I'm Stephanie Leidecker here
with Courtney Armstrong and Body Moving. Happy Mother's Day everyone,
We hope you had a beautiful one. And if you
are missing somebody or just thinking of somebody, or you know,
let's just call it women's Day.

Speaker 8 (47:21):
How's that Women's Day in general? You don't have to
be a mother to love a mother. And hopefully your
week is off to a good start. So let's go
to a talkback.

Speaker 4 (47:34):
Hey everyone, it's Dawn from Staten Island, New York. I
just finished listening to Tuesday Night episode and you actually
mentioned two things that have been on this season of
TLC's My Strange Addiction. A woman who is addicted to
breastfeeding her eight year old child and a woman who
was addicted to her AI boyfriend. And considering it's on

(47:55):
My Strange Addiction, I think most people do find it strange.

Speaker 15 (48:01):
Can you repeat that eight years old?

Speaker 4 (48:04):
Eight?

Speaker 3 (48:05):
At some point? Is that child abuse?

Speaker 4 (48:07):
It? Like?

Speaker 9 (48:08):
Oh, that feels that feels really strange to me. I
don't know, I'm I don't.

Speaker 11 (48:17):
Think to all of us. Eight is a bit unusual.

Speaker 8 (48:21):
Unless you're situation where there's a loss of any food
anywhere and it's a survival of course.

Speaker 2 (48:29):
Yes, that's like different than an addiction. At that point,
that seems yeah, genuinely unsafe.

Speaker 3 (48:36):
Feels like a little child abuse.

Speaker 11 (48:40):
Yeah it is. It's leaning a little abuse like to me.

Speaker 3 (48:42):
But although if it was on the show, I mean
maybe it's not. I don't know.

Speaker 9 (48:48):
Well, it's a feeling that they wouldn't just air like
child abuse, right, Like, no.

Speaker 8 (48:54):
No, I'm sure there is no law against when you
need to stop breastfeeding in school.

Speaker 3 (49:01):
Say law again, there's no law against. I've been been talking.

Speaker 8 (49:09):
I've been talking to my aunts and my mom and
everyone's from Long Island, so that.

Speaker 3 (49:15):
No law. There's no law. We'd like to talk about
the law. That's what we do.

Speaker 8 (49:22):
But yeah, she says, Lung Island old schools away. I
used to to somehow I lost it along the years,
but it always warms my heart.

Speaker 3 (49:30):
So yes, tell us more about the law.

Speaker 8 (49:33):
The law.

Speaker 11 (49:34):
Can we talk more about the ai?

Speaker 13 (49:36):
The other part she brought up, the AI love that
she mentioned is also in the episode of Strange Addiction.

Speaker 11 (49:42):
Because I find that fascinating.

Speaker 13 (49:43):
I was just telling you really briefly, like a friend
mentioned there's a new restaurant in New York where you
can take your AI date or companion, which doesn't make
completely sense to me, but I guess they are hating
a restaurant just to people to say, like, let's go
out on a date. And I guess I imagine you
bring your laptop where your phone or something, you sit
there and have an AI date.

Speaker 11 (50:04):
What's your thought on that. I've never heard of anything
like that, really.

Speaker 2 (50:06):
I mean, we are an an epidemic of loneliness, right,
it's just all coming out of the fact that where
everyone's a little lonesome.

Speaker 8 (50:15):
That just sounds like such a terrible restaurant. Everyone has
that dating.

Speaker 9 (50:19):
Is so awful, like it's and you know, especially in
my age, like it's the worst. It's the worst thing
in the world. It's hard to meet somebody and then
and then you got to see if it's going to work,
and you're playing out. You could spend months and be like,
oh my god, it's not working out. I just think
people are tired of it, and you know, these AI
solutions are fulfilling some kind of need for these people,

(50:41):
and it's interesting that they have a whole restaurant around
it is there that many people to sustain a business
in New York of all places.

Speaker 3 (50:50):
It's crazy.

Speaker 8 (50:51):
There there's a site. It's escaping my it's escaping my
memory right now. But upwards of thirty million people have
signed on, and that is to find their AI companion.

Speaker 3 (51:03):
What million?

Speaker 11 (51:04):
You mentioned that? I think body, we were going to
look into that one.

Speaker 3 (51:07):
We were going to look at it.

Speaker 8 (51:08):
We forgot that now, thank you for bringing it up,
because it is Yeah, Don Don from Staten Island knows
what's up. But so ken with those kind of numbers,
can one restaurant sustain I would argue, I would argue.

Speaker 9 (51:21):
Yes, and listen, you know, because one would think, well,
why don't you just go to like, you know, a
coffee shop or something in front of an AI date?
But if it's more normalized at this restaurant, it might
not feel awkward for that you know, man or woman
who's bringing their AI companion to the date.

Speaker 3 (51:38):
Listen.

Speaker 9 (51:38):
I sound like I sound like a crazy person when
I said, but I'm wondering if that's why.

Speaker 8 (51:45):
Maybe though everybody who goes to this restaurant with their
laptops to hang out with their AI companion. Maybe there
they'll see other single humans and that's an unexpected little
singles mingle. That's what I I kind of like it.

Speaker 3 (52:01):
That's what they should do, seating at the AI companion
restaurant with humans with.

Speaker 2 (52:08):
Actual If you haven't seen the movie Her with Watkins,
Phoenix and Scarlett Johansson, which is essentially what we're talking about,
and that movie was very good and it felt impossible
to imagine a world where that would ever happen, and
here we are. That was like almost a prediction film, which.

Speaker 3 (52:31):
Seemed so far fetched at the time. No, it's happening.
It's happening.

Speaker 8 (52:37):
Interesting, right, Well, yeah, I have an update about the
Palisades fire.

Speaker 3 (52:45):
Oh yeah, yeah.

Speaker 8 (52:47):
So there was a new pre trial memos filed just
at the very end of April, and that memo reveals
prosecutors do intend to argue forcefully that Jonathan Rindernack, that
he was driven by deep resentment of the wealthy, that
he had a fixation on social vigilanteism, and that that

(53:08):
is what led to him allegedly sparking the twenty twenty
five Palisades fire, which we all remember was that only
last year what stuff? Yeah, yeah, yeah, oh my god.
January seventh. It was January seventh. And the allegation is
that on January first, which was New Year's Day of

(53:33):
twenty twenty five, that this particular uber driver who was
you know, kind of cranky and given you know, apparently
had had a recent breakup and was kind of a
jerk according to you know, passengers that had been driven
around by him that night, that he kind of put
on some you know, fire song in his head and

(53:55):
started this fire and out of anger and revenge on that,
you know, this New Year's Eve night into New Year's Day,
and that days later that fire or ember under the
soil traveled the I think eleven miles or so to
the Palisades, and that on the seventh those ambers kind

(54:18):
of were reignited because of said winds.

Speaker 2 (54:22):
That's all been really and again this is close to me. Obviously,
it affected my life as well, having recently moved to
the Palisades and now I live in Nashville, so it's
you know, a major redirection because of this.

Speaker 3 (54:36):
But somehow I don't buy this as.

Speaker 8 (54:38):
Being I don't either necessarily, you know, I can we
flag this out Yeah, he's got this deep seated resentment
for you know, people who are affluent apparently, right, that's
what they're saying, right.

Speaker 3 (54:50):
The prosecutors are alleging.

Speaker 9 (54:53):
Why would he go eleven miles away and start a
fire hoping it would go underground and travel to his
target location where all these millionaires or whatever lived.

Speaker 2 (55:05):
That doesn't make it exactly, and not to mention, you know,
I think they're saying that the intent was to just
start a fire at that first location eleven miles from
the Palisades, okay, and that you know, just by you
know how fire works, unbeknownst to maybe him and anyone else,
that it just happened to travel under the surface. There

(55:25):
is the secondary allegation that the fire chief at the
time had sent everybody home even though there was some
consideration that these ambers maybe weren't fully out now add
January seventh, and again, I don't want to personalize it
too much, so keeping my own feelings out of it.
It was really scary though, because as somebody who was

(55:49):
trying to get out of those fires, there was no
water and everybody was unprepared, and they this what everyone's
been saying is that the you know, the winds were
so we're so high at that point that that kind
of picked up these embers. But in reality, when this
fire broke out, the wind wasn't super high yet that
happened way later, which only exacerbated it that evening.

Speaker 3 (56:11):
So I don't know.

Speaker 2 (56:13):
Part of me is just thinking this guy, he did
obviously start a fire elsewhere, so that should that's a crime, right,
And sounds like it had a bit of a manifesto
and he was, you know, feeling a little bit angry
and a little political and all the things. But it's
at the same issue as the Palisades fire and what

(56:33):
I believe were some real, some real issues with you know, frankly,
people that I voted for that really didn't do the
best to get us all out of their twelve people
lost their lives and people are still suffering in ways
that I think nobody realizes. Still kind of a mess
and it's still coming back from what I can tell.

(56:56):
My two cents, that's my two cents on it.

Speaker 8 (56:59):
Well, well, it's an incredibly valid and invaluable two cents.
And also the defense team is arguing very similar so
Rinderneck's defense team, they maintain his innocence, and what they're
arguing is that the fire Department's failure to extingle, extinguish

(57:19):
those initial hotspots, it actually turns the responsibility onto the
City of Los Angeles.

Speaker 3 (57:26):
Wow, for the events.

Speaker 2 (57:27):
She's not a great thing for them. Yeah, So, and
think about it. We're coming into the mayorial election. You know,
it seems pretty heated there. You guys can speak more
than this to me, but I am following it closely.
You know, this seems like it's a pretty real race,
and current Mayor Bass probably is being called to the
carpet a little bit about how this was all handled

(57:50):
at the time, and perhaps even Governor Newsom is being
kind of associated to this mess, which you know might
not be great. It's not a great look, right So,
so I don't know. I think it seems like there's
a box in a lot of houses right now. And
is it possible that both things can be true? I
can tell you firsthand, no matter how you slice it,
what didn't happen on January seventh in the protocols and

(58:13):
systems that were not in place really have to be
accounted for and corrected because this kind of thing could
happen again any day.

Speaker 3 (58:22):
God forbid.

Speaker 9 (58:23):
It's the defense isn't denying that he's this guy, Jonathan
render Knat started the fire, right, they're not denying that,
but they're saying that it's not his fault because the
fire department in the city should have handled it before
it became you know, a disaster.

Speaker 3 (58:43):
Is that what? That's absolutely no? So what the yeah.

Speaker 8 (58:47):
The defense's argument they maintain that again their client is innocent,
and the argument is that the LA Fire Department is
using him to cover up their negligence. And attorneys are
also pointing to tech testimony from, for example, a firefighter
who reportedly warned their supervisor on January tewod that the

(59:07):
ground was still smol during and contained hotspots the initial fire.
And that was the wait, didn't we have somebody on
I kind of block all day storm fire chief?

Speaker 3 (59:17):
So forgive me, but.

Speaker 2 (59:18):
He was so we should have him back. He was
so excellent and he was kind of he was the
guy and he didn't really buy the story. Again, if
this guy's if the accused is you know, throwing a
match anywhere, that's a crime, right, So this is not
about you know, palisades versus somebody else. Eleven miles away,

(59:38):
and keep in mind, yes, the Palisades has so much affluence.
I can speak for myself. I was renting a house
because I wanted to be near the right school. So
very regular people live there in people who have lived
there for decades and decades and decades, and you know,
in small little places that are just you know, grateful
to be in a safe neighborhood. You know, those are

(01:00:01):
the people that really can't clot ourselves back because they've
lost everything and there's there's no money to be had
or places to build on.

Speaker 3 (01:00:10):
So it's really messy, and I think it.

Speaker 2 (01:00:12):
Does get kind of caught up with Well, luckily everybody
there is so rich they can buy anyone else, and
that is not the case in some cases. I'm sure
it is, but you know there's awful amounts of people
that that is not the case.

Speaker 3 (01:00:27):
For Two.

Speaker 9 (01:00:28):
Yeah, I don't think they should have they should have
like produced a motive with this.

Speaker 8 (01:00:34):
I think it sounds crazy. I think it sounds insane. Well,
and that's also part of what the defense is saying.
The defense is really they publicly mocked the prosecution's theory
because the prosecution's theory part of it was that render nicked.
The accused started this fire because he didn't have a

(01:00:54):
date for New Year's Eve, and the defense journey says
that speaks for itself. But we've given quite a bit
to the defense. The prosecution's case, meanwhile, is again render
Nick the accused he harbored really deep resentment towards the
wealthy residents of the Palisades. He allegedly told investigators that

(01:01:18):
the arson in that area would be an act of
resentment of the rich and a response to being enslaved
by them and into Luigi too.

Speaker 9 (01:01:28):
Locked me up, Locked me up, you know what I mean? Like,
it just seems like insane a little maybe I'm.

Speaker 8 (01:01:36):
I agree with you, I agree, but the but the
prosecution are making light of the alleged fixation on Luigi
and that relationship that failed because he didn't have plans. Interestingly,
just contextually, is that some Uber passengers who rode with

(01:01:56):
the accused that evening they reported that he was indeed
driving erradically and ranting about capitalism, vigilanteism, and anger towards society.

Speaker 2 (01:02:08):
He does sound like he should be off the street
it around. Yeah right, I just don't want his arrest
in this to really kind of make the other stuff
that didn't go correctly or should go to correctly next time,
get washed away.

Speaker 9 (01:02:27):
I'm with you, I'm with you. Well coming up next,
I have been waiting like two weeks for this. We're
finely going to be diving into the chilling finale of
the Gilgo Beach Killer documentary and the disturbing details behind
Rex Huberman's confession.

Speaker 15 (01:02:42):
Keep it right here, True Crime Tonight, I love a finale.

Speaker 8 (01:02:56):
Welcome back to True Crime Tonight and iHeart Radio where
we talk true crime all the time.

Speaker 3 (01:03:01):
I'm Courtney Armstrong.

Speaker 8 (01:03:03):
I'm so thrilled to be with my buddy body Movin
and Stephanie Leidecker on this Sunday Happy Mother's Day one
and all, or, as Stephanie said, happy woman States Today. Listen,
don't forget if you missed any part of the show.
You can always grab us on the podcast Always We
want to hear from you where at eighty eight three
one Crime or you can leave us a talkback. You

(01:03:25):
just go to the iHeartRadio app. There's a little red
microphone in the upper right hand corner. You click it,
you leave a voice memo. Boom, You're on the show.
But now you guys, True crime and chill has arrived
Gilgo Beach.

Speaker 3 (01:03:40):
Yay, we have.

Speaker 8 (01:03:42):
A on of talkbacks. But yes, body just set up
very briefly for anyone who hasn't seen, I've been waiting forever.
Now you want me to set this up? Okay, now
I'm kidding.

Speaker 9 (01:03:52):
All right, So episode four right of the docu series,
it's called It's from Peacock, and it's called The Gilgo
Beach Killer.

Speaker 3 (01:04:00):
House of Secrets. Okay.

Speaker 9 (01:04:01):
This latest episode that was just released, it's called The Confession,
all right, and it's the series finale.

Speaker 3 (01:04:08):
Did you like how I did that?

Speaker 12 (01:04:09):
Now?

Speaker 3 (01:04:10):
Finale? Okay, series finale that aired? I like, you know what?
I now? Much cooler? Yes that it aired? It It
aired and was released in late April. Okay.

Speaker 9 (01:04:23):
I watched it immediately and I've been obsessed about it
ever since. But it follows like this really major real
world breakthrough Confessions where the Long Island serial killer Rex
Huerman changes his plea to guilty and it focuses on
the fallout that you know it happens between him and

(01:04:46):
his family and really specific details of the crimes.

Speaker 3 (01:04:50):
And as I was watching it, I felt like.

Speaker 9 (01:04:53):
I had like behind the scenes, access to things that
were kept very secret, and I literally couldnot take my
eyes off of it. I was transfixed because I've never
seen how this really happens real time as it's happening.

Speaker 8 (01:05:12):
You know, if you haven't seen it, just you know,
spoiler alert alert.

Speaker 3 (01:05:17):
Listen.

Speaker 2 (01:05:18):
It has Asa or Asa, who is Rex Humorman's wife,
and she's sort of been at the center of the
last three episodes as well, kind of her journey. And
if you remember season three, episode three, she was standing
by her man and right, this is somebody that she'd
been married to for years and years and there was

(01:05:39):
no way he could have done this. So this particular
now fourth episode, the confession, As you say, wow, I mean,
I think it's pretty stunning to see just a human
being have to come to terms with something that they
have worked years to deny in their hearts and in
their head. And really the access point seeing her talking

(01:06:02):
with him behind bars.

Speaker 11 (01:06:04):
Yes, that's crazy. I've never seen that in my life.

Speaker 9 (01:06:07):
I've never seen anything like it, and I just thought
it was remarkable.

Speaker 3 (01:06:11):
I thought it was just a.

Speaker 9 (01:06:14):
I kind of viewed it as more not so much entertainment,
but like a learning experience, Like how does this happen?
How do these And that's what I really liked about documentaries.
It's not like Ooh, this is so entertaining. It's more like, Wow,
I didn't know that's how it happened, or that's how
it can happen, and that's how I kind of that's
what I took from.

Speaker 3 (01:06:34):
It was like a learning experience.

Speaker 2 (01:06:36):
And we talked about Asa, you know, his now ex wife,
many many times. Even when we first started the show.
It was kind of can you imagine you know, again,
Courtney and I are New Yorkers. I grew up on
Long Island, so this is, you know, close to the
heart in terms of location and folklore and things that
we've been following for so long. And she was so

(01:06:59):
devote cod And once you heard some of the victims
that got away that Rex had gone on a date
with a social worker who he had paid, who got
a bad feeling and like slipped out the back door.
Their description of him as being ogre Like when you
see him, you know, coming in there from behind bars,

(01:07:20):
you're like, oh, this guy is horrifying. But what you
don't realize is he was an architect in New York
City and he commuted on the Long Island Railroad, just
like the rest of us did, myself included. And you
see his sister and his daughter and his wife, and
it kind of was a real great amount of insight
into you know her, you know, she was just like

(01:07:41):
an abused girl.

Speaker 3 (01:07:42):
Asa his ex wife.

Speaker 8 (01:07:43):
I thought it gave really interesting context about you know,
how she could fall right into his trap.

Speaker 3 (01:07:50):
She was the perfect cover.

Speaker 2 (01:07:51):
You know, she had also been abused, She didn't feel
like she belonged, she had a hard childhood, so some
of this behavior was a may be familiar, which makes
her a perfect target. And she wanted to be loved
and accepted. And you know, he wasn't nearly a scary
looking or didn't look like an ogre at all in
the early days when you.

Speaker 8 (01:08:13):
See photographs of them when they were first in love,
they just looked, you know, like air quotes normal people.
And my heart kind of breaks for her now. And
you know we've always speculated how could she not know?

Speaker 3 (01:08:24):
And I don't know.

Speaker 2 (01:08:25):
By watching this again, it's such important perspective. I really
I really feel for her and the daughter and the
half son.

Speaker 11 (01:08:33):
O, the whole family. Well, we got a lot of
talkbacks yeah, let's go to some of those.

Speaker 10 (01:08:38):
Hi, this is Jessica.

Speaker 16 (01:08:39):
I'm calling from Wisconsin and I am calling about the
true crime and Chill Gilgo Beach episode number four. I
just think it's fascinating that the family agreed to waive
their hip rites and that they're going to study the
serial killer and we're going to find out so much information.

(01:09:00):
You imagine.

Speaker 3 (01:09:02):
Jessica, Jessica and I are besties.

Speaker 9 (01:09:06):
Like she doesn't know it, but we're at her besties.
That was like the whole thing. So for those who
who don't know Rex Huerman's family when this happened, they
were in shock. When when Rex was arrested for being
the Long Island serial killer.

Speaker 3 (01:09:21):
They went into shock.

Speaker 9 (01:09:22):
As one would if your beloved husband who acts totally
normal and is able to separate these identities and just
be a great family man when you're with him, you're.

Speaker 3 (01:09:33):
Going to go into shock when this happens.

Speaker 9 (01:09:35):
So additionally, she had to get an attorney because she
was being you know, like people were like, oh, is
she involved? Right, So she goes to get an attorney
and the attorney recognizes immediately that she's in shock, so
he recommends a therapist that he works with often that
works on the family dynamic. Okay, so this therapist comes

(01:09:55):
and visits them and gets to know the family. So
what they did for this documentary was they signed this
hipA release basically saying that it's okay that the therapist
work with a production company and talk about the things
that they discussed while in therapy, because normally that's covered

(01:10:16):
under you know your patient, you know doctor patient confidentiality.

Speaker 3 (01:10:21):
So they they said, okay, listen for the good.

Speaker 9 (01:10:25):
This is why I'm I'm maybe give them so much
grace because they really did this, I believe for the money,
but additionally to help people understand.

Speaker 3 (01:10:37):
I really do.

Speaker 11 (01:10:38):
I can see that because it really.

Speaker 9 (01:10:39):
Did help me understand them a lot more and offer
them a lot of grace.

Speaker 3 (01:10:45):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (01:10:45):
I mean, typically if you were going to therapy, which
is the part that you're referring to. You know, we've
done this many times too on previous documentaries that we've made.
You know, you can't have a camera in the therapy session.
It's not a reality show. I mean, this is real stakes,
real real players, real dynamics. On the eve of a trial,
you certainly don't want to stir stuff up that either.

(01:11:08):
It might affect a trial, and there are those hippo
laws are really important because his daughter too is in
the mix on this as well, and takes a lot
of bravery to come forward. And I feel like we
saw Asa, especially although the daughter is extremely eloquent as well.
I feel like we saw Asa really kind of like

(01:11:31):
connect the dots real time. You sort of see her
brain kind of melting on itself and even just being
on the other side of it where she's speaking a
little bit more freely and getting some therapy and maybe
this load is being lifted from her shoulders. And she
seems to have a new haircut, like she does sort
of feel so much lighter. Is that the right word.

(01:11:53):
I don't know if what the right word is. Not
that she looks happier and prettier. I don't mean that,
but frankly she does, probably because the piano was offered.
Back said we don't want to minimize the victim's family members.

Speaker 8 (01:12:05):
Also, yeah, and I actually thought that the documentary did
did well by the victims, if that's such a thing,
in terms of making them presents and showing their pictures
and everyone saying their name. So I thought that was
another important piece let's hear.

Speaker 3 (01:12:23):
The talk back.

Speaker 7 (01:12:25):
I watched the fourth episode of the Yogu Beach serial
killer documentary on Peacoks. Sounds like reg Tchiuermann confessed the
attorneys and admitted to guilt early on, and then their
defense strategy was to try to find a loophole in
the laws and the constitution to try to get the
DNA evidence throughout. And to me, that doesn't seem like justice.

(01:12:45):
Those constitutional protections are there, in my opinion, to help
protect innocent people who are charged to crimes they did
not commit. I do believe we have constitutional rights to
be protected in a court of law and defended. But
as Rex human was murdering those innocent limits, where was
their defense? Who was defending them from? Love you all?

Speaker 17 (01:13:06):
Thank you?

Speaker 3 (01:13:07):
Well so true. I'm like cheer my both arms are
up and I'm cheering you right now.

Speaker 2 (01:13:12):
It is so true. It's like so tricky. I mean,
I don't even know why he confessed to in the
eleventh hour. What was the real reason?

Speaker 8 (01:13:19):
Well, the well, the attorney said, you know, there is
a modicum of control in terms of perhaps where you
might have to live out your sentence, So that would
be the quote benefit of Rex Humorman.

Speaker 9 (01:13:36):
Participating, and I think, you know, oftentimes serial killers are egotistical,
narcissists and things like that, and I think that, you know,
one of the benefits that Rex is going to have
moving the Long Island Solar killer is going to have
moving forward is working with the FBI Behavioral Science Unit. Right,

(01:13:57):
He's going to be able to kind of get special
treatment a little bit through that and feel like somebody important, Right,
the FBI is coming to visit me today. You know,
that's like a status, that's a status that one might
kind of enjoy.

Speaker 2 (01:14:17):
I thought it was interesting too with his daughter, who
again was very well spoken and I thought extremely thoughtful,
and it sounds like she had the ability to speak
with her father alone and he was going to confess
to her directly and answer any questions she may have.

Speaker 3 (01:14:36):
And thought to myself, that's a tough one.

Speaker 2 (01:14:39):
As poor girl's going in to like talk to her
kill her dad and then you know, be expected to
ask any questions. And then ultimately she came out and
had an interview where she basically summarized those conversations and
they seemed pretty darn detailed. You know, Basically she's saying, yeah, well,
he said that, you know, it was like a disease,

(01:14:59):
and you yes, and of them, we're killed in the
house where this young girl was living, and you know,
knowing that, you know, she had also been really you know,
brought with all of the.

Speaker 3 (01:15:12):
Celebrity of it.

Speaker 2 (01:15:13):
Remember, this was like one of those cases, a celebrity
in the worst way. You know, this was one of
those houses in those places that everybody was paying attention
to this When he first got arrested, you know, the
media frenzy must have been so intense on her, and
you know, people are unprepared for that. Seems like she
may have also come out of the other side of this,

(01:15:34):
but she was working with her dad at the time,
So this guy was really presenting as two different people,
which I think is why we're all so shocked by it,
because you just can't imagine that that can be so.

Speaker 3 (01:15:48):
Right's su I'm sorry, Courtney, please no, I was gonna say,
let's grab one more talk back. Oh good, Hi.

Speaker 18 (01:15:54):
This is Kim from Pensacola, Florida. Love Love the Show,
Love Everybody on Itha Courtney Stephanie body Moveing fan. I
wanted to get your opinions on Rex and his talks
with the psychiatrist and about the thoughts that he had
some abuse or some kind of trigger early in his
life that set him on this path. I want to

(01:16:15):
see what you guys think.

Speaker 9 (01:16:16):
Thank you, Yeah, I mean I think this is kind
of common, right, And thank you for that, by the way,
Kim from Pensacola.

Speaker 3 (01:16:25):
We appreciate the talk back.

Speaker 9 (01:16:26):
I think this is very common when you see somebody
who's committing like mass murders or a serial killer, that
oftentimes there's some kind of traumatic events early on in
their either their upbringing or their you know, formidable years.

Speaker 4 (01:16:42):
Right.

Speaker 3 (01:16:43):
I think every single I want to say, almost every
single one except for one that you know, we know
of Brian Coberger.

Speaker 8 (01:16:52):
That's why Brian Coberger is so such a loving family, right,
So I think it's I think in most cases you're
going to see that though I don't believe mentally healthy
people do this.

Speaker 11 (01:17:07):
Kind of thing exactly.

Speaker 8 (01:17:08):
Yeah, right, And it seemed there was I thought a
great presence of a forensic profiler, filer John Douglas. Oh,
I love that was so yeah, And I thought he
really brought a lot of insights. So if you haven't
caught this fourth episode, of the series, the therapist goes
to John Douglas to get some insight into the mind

(01:17:29):
of a serial killer, and he seemed pretty one hundred
percent that, yes, there is something in his mind while
he is going through the actions while the serial killers
there is some kind of movie playing in their head,
and it's almost one hundred percent goes back to some
kind of horrible event.

Speaker 13 (01:17:51):
I was just going to say, and what stood out
to me in that part was where he said he
definitely thinks there are other bodies and other people out there.
So that was a part that I couldn't give you
chills thinking there's still people out there.

Speaker 2 (01:18:04):
But it makes me mad that again, why isn't he
forced for you whatever housing he's going to get. Now,
this guy's getting to pick his geography because his brain
is so interesting.

Speaker 3 (01:18:14):
Okay, great, Why.

Speaker 2 (01:18:14):
Shouldn't he have to tell where the rest of these
bodies are? I don't disagree. Ooh sorry, I know. We
got to come right back. Listen, stick with us. We
are going to be right back.

Speaker 8 (01:18:22):
We have some more talkbacks and we'll talk more about
the Gilgo Beach True crime and chill because I think
this was our most our most talked about one yet,
so we'll be right back.

Speaker 3 (01:18:33):
Stick with us.

Speaker 2 (01:18:45):
Welcome back to true crime tonight on iHeartRadio. We're talking
true crime all the time. I'm Steph here with Courtney
and Body and just to put a little topper into
true crime and chill. And by the way, thanks for
the tall back talkbacks everybody. We're glad that everybody is
doing it. Taha is smiling ear to ear, so he
is proud. Let's go to that talk back right now.

Speaker 6 (01:19:07):
Hi, guys, this is producer Ava. I've just been as
watching the House of Secrets episode that we're going to
be discussing, and I just needed to get my two
cents in about this. And I really want to know
what you guys think, because we've never discussed this on
the show, and watching it in the documentary was the
first time I've heard about it. But I feel like
to add such a crazy dimension to the case. I
just very briefly towards the end of the episode, I

(01:19:29):
think it was when the therapist was speaking to the profiler.
She asked him, am I naive for believing that there's
only the eight victims? And what the profiler said was
there's no way. He just started killing when he was thirty,
and it's possible that he killed people in other states
that have the death penalty, and he doesn't want to
admit it because then he could be prosecuted in those
states and be sent into the death penalty as opposed

(01:19:50):
to just life in prison, which is what he's currently
being sentenced to. And then they went on to talk
a little bit about how he had property in South
Carolina and there were a couple people in South Carolina
that had potential connections to Rex Hwerman, the Long Island
serial killer, and people have connected some dots that he
has some additional victims in South Carolina, and that just
really shocked me because A I didn't know that there

(01:20:13):
were potential additional victims. I think it's really interesting that
maybe he just doesn't want to admit to those specifically
because of the death penalty factor. And I also think
it's interesting how confident the profiler was that currently the
first victim that Rex has on the record wasn't until
he was thirty, and he seems like that was very
unlikely not people who kind of fit rex Huoreman psychological

(01:20:33):
profile would probably start murdering early. So just want to
tell you guys think it's the whole thing. Thank you
have a great show.

Speaker 3 (01:20:39):
Yeah, I agree.

Speaker 2 (01:20:40):
I mean, honestly, it does in fact make me mad though,
because that little section of the world where he has
that property is a very interesting pocket of time. And
anyone who's just joining us remembering that Asa his wife
and kids, they would go to Iceland to where she
was from. Excuse me, I got a little frog of
my life. They would go to Iceland on vacation and

(01:21:02):
that's when Rex would do his killing. So again, this
other property is a rabbit hole that I think authorities
are going to go down. But for Rex, he wants
to be cushy and comfy and you know, get to
be popular and not have to deal with maybe having
to transfer and get extradited to another city and go
through the whole process again because that just might get

(01:21:24):
worse for him.

Speaker 8 (01:21:26):
Right, But he's there's no universe where it would be beneficial
to him to confess to murders that he's not accused of.

Speaker 3 (01:21:34):
He's not accused of these, no, but.

Speaker 2 (01:21:36):
He should have to allocute or he should have to
cough something up, you know. Again, like this is a
guy who, at the end of the day is still
calling the shots. Yes, you know, the victim's families don't
have to sit through all of the allegations and hear
all of the testimony. But on some level they also
know a lot. And they know a lot because we've

(01:21:57):
seen even in the documentaries, there's a lot of information
about loss of their family members.

Speaker 3 (01:22:02):
I think they wanted that moment in court.

Speaker 9 (01:22:06):
Yeah, and you know, they they did look into those
possible connections to those unsolved cases in South Carolina and including,
by the way, the one in twenty seventeen, the disappearance
of Julia Anne Bean and she was last seen with
a man driving a vehicle similar to Rex's, and so

(01:22:28):
they did look into it and nothing came from it.
And you know, Steph, you mentioned he should have to allocute.
He did. He did allocute, right, But if he didn't
do those crimes, he's not going to allocute to those crimes, right.
But if he did, he's certainly not going to allocate
cute to those crimes that he's not been accused of either.

Speaker 2 (01:22:46):
No, I mean, he should have to confess to anything
and everything. I'm remembering that one movie Black Sources. The
thing you force them more. Sometimes there is ego attached
to whip because they want to be seen as the
biggest and the baddest of all time, right like.

Speaker 3 (01:22:59):
The look at all the kills I've done.

Speaker 2 (01:23:01):
Absolutely sometimes for a real messy mind, that's considered something
to brag about. But you know, I guess we'll have
to see how that goes. But imagining, you know, there's
missing girls whose families don't know what happened to them,
or they think.

Speaker 3 (01:23:14):
Maybe they just ran away.

Speaker 2 (01:23:16):
I'm working on a case now, and you know, loved
ones only twenty five years later after their sister had
gone missing, they assumed.

Speaker 8 (01:23:25):
That she didn't love them and that they just left.
You know, So sometimes that finality is such a big
piece of the puzzle.

Speaker 3 (01:23:32):
So this is a tough one.

Speaker 8 (01:23:34):
I also thought one thing was really scary and then
I'll zip it.

Speaker 3 (01:23:39):
The daughter.

Speaker 2 (01:23:39):
The daughter was in the chair talking about some of
the things that she had learned from her dad, and
her dad had told her, you know, sometimes he had
to have these lists, which we've talked about to nauseum,
those murder lists and all of his like his little
excel creepy Excel document with oh get the noose and
the nails and all the things he's using on this

(01:24:01):
kill list basically, and that for him it was a
way of sort of staying in the moment and keeping
it real clinical, keeping him on task, because he would
really disassociate. I suppose your brain could just kind of
break it too. Yeah, he said that.

Speaker 9 (01:24:18):
He said it was very compartmentalized, right, like that his
personality when he was the family man, he never thought
about those girls. And then he also told her that
he didn't even consider them human.

Speaker 3 (01:24:33):
That's right. That stood out to me too, was awful.

Speaker 8 (01:24:39):
Yeah, Huberman's daughter when the therapist, oh my gosh, this
poor girl. She's a woman, but early twenties. But when
the therapist pointed out what the daughter had just learned,
that the first victim was killed in their family car

(01:24:59):
in the st and the daughter drove was driven around in
that was unbelievable.

Speaker 2 (01:25:05):
It's just what a sicko. You know, We've had some
real sickos on the show tonight. You know, David the
pop star, you know these are you know, not that
there's anything great when when the ending is murder, but
who this is taking it to the next level. I
hope he never ever sees the light of day and

(01:25:26):
I would frankly enjoy it if that daughter didn't have
to see him anymore. It doesn't seem that that's got
to be unhealthy for her.

Speaker 3 (01:25:33):
Poor them.

Speaker 13 (01:25:34):
Yeah, I don't know how she would compartmentalize that for herself.
But and then one last thing before we ended back
to this day, something I guess we had stuck with me.
Remember we had the guy on Robert Banfield who said
I think there are scores of women that he's so
scores of women. I still to this day think like
that's always stuck with me. There are so many other
people out there that we don't. He studied it closely,

(01:25:55):
and he did firms he feels that I'm one hundred
percent sure there are others. But we'll keep following this
one and talking about it. But in the meantime we
have enough time for maybe when we're talk back about
a topic I dying to cover.

Speaker 11 (01:26:06):
With you guys, let's hit that one.

Speaker 10 (01:26:08):
Hi, Trochrime tonight. This is Sarah from Michigan, and I'm
sure all of our algorithms have done the same thing
and is pushing all this UFO file release. And my
question about the UFO files is it's not the Epstein.

Speaker 17 (01:26:23):
Files where they were like, oh, we have to redact
all the stuff to save the victims privacy. So why
so many redactions on some of the videos I'm seeing?
Just wonder what your opinions are?

Speaker 3 (01:26:36):
Great question, and also why are they so old? Like what?

Speaker 2 (01:26:40):
First of all, why on Friday? I just think Fridays
are such a suspicious day. Always do it, so start
throwing stuff out to the wind. It's like, hey, look
over here. So I always get a giggle frankly when
I see that.

Speaker 8 (01:26:53):
We have been talking about this, right, so we high
dive to everybody that we all called this. Yeah, if
we have a if disclosure happens with an actual alien
sometime in the next two weeks or so, boy, this
would really track for whatever this is supposed to be.

Speaker 2 (01:27:12):
But I don't know why they would have reactions on it.
If you're going to throw it out there, I throw.

Speaker 3 (01:27:16):
It out there.

Speaker 13 (01:27:17):
I did a quick little search and the Pentagon says
most UFO file redactions are meant to protect the military technology,
radar systems, and intelligent intelligence methods, so there is a
logical reason why some of it would be redacted. But
it doesn't stop the critics questioning all of this, But

(01:27:39):
what are your thoughts on everything that we've been seeing
so far?

Speaker 3 (01:27:42):
Well, just to catch anyone up who doesn't know why we're.

Speaker 8 (01:27:45):
Talking about UFOs, which would be a fair question if
you were a familiar.

Speaker 3 (01:27:50):
So, yeah.

Speaker 8 (01:27:51):
On Friday, the Pentagon an office from the Pentagon released
over one hundred and fifty classified files and this all
related to Unidentified Anomalist phenomena UFOs. So these documents which
are hosted on a web page featuring graphics that are
really reminiscent of sort of a nineteen ninety sci fi thriller, right,

(01:28:15):
it's yeah, and it spans decades of military memos and
NASA reports, civilian reports. President Trump himself he characterized the
disclosure as a quote promised fulfilt and stated on truth
Social that the public can now decide from themselves again quote,
they can decide for themselves what the hell is going on?

Speaker 3 (01:28:39):
Shouldn't we get a little guide?

Speaker 8 (01:28:41):
Can't somebody tell us what the hell is going on?

Speaker 3 (01:28:44):
I feel like I think we're given enough.

Speaker 2 (01:28:46):
We have enough work on our hands with the three
and a half million Epstein files, like the White House,
like give us some context or explain what it is
or isn't Or is it scary?

Speaker 3 (01:28:59):
Is it calm?

Speaker 4 (01:29:00):
Like?

Speaker 3 (01:29:00):
Why are we figuring it out?

Speaker 8 (01:29:02):
Well, Stephanie, how else would your mind stay busy if
you didn't have to figure.

Speaker 3 (01:29:07):
It out all of that brain space. Yeah.

Speaker 8 (01:29:10):
Interestingly, former Congressmoman Marjorie Taylor Green she dismissed the release,
as she called it shiny object propaganda that's designed to
distract from economic issues and the war in Iran. So
that is one perspective. That is her perspective. Others Lawmaker

(01:29:31):
Tim Burchett from Tennessee Anna Luna called the release a
massive first step, so you know, everyone is entitled to that.

Speaker 3 (01:29:41):
That is what those first releases were.

Speaker 2 (01:29:44):
Kind of a dud, however, I mean, I guess the
lead is that everybody could agree that it is it's
true that yes, there is extraterrestrial life.

Speaker 3 (01:29:54):
Is that what we're going to hear next?

Speaker 13 (01:29:56):
Well, I mean, I don't know what we've seen so
far confirms that, but I mean we would be very.

Speaker 11 (01:30:02):
Egotistical to think that there isn't some.

Speaker 13 (01:30:04):
Other life out there in the world. So I definitely
think there is something out there. Whether the government is
hiding that information from us is to be said, you know,
for our protection or whatever reason.

Speaker 11 (01:30:17):
But I think there is something out there.

Speaker 13 (01:30:19):
But these what we saw in these files, gives me
no info as to whether that's true or not.

Speaker 8 (01:30:26):
I mean, guys, one of the things that's in this
gigantic release is the fact that in nineteen fifty seven, uh,
the FBI interviewed a man and he reported he said,
I saw a big circular vehicle rising over the ground.

Speaker 11 (01:30:42):
Which could have been.

Speaker 3 (01:30:45):
Goodness, you got that one out nothing. I think. Even
more interesting, though, are the astronauts when.

Speaker 2 (01:30:54):
We talk about it, have you yet have we have
we moved the needle on the astronaut. Well, I want
to get to the scientist still too. That's going to
be a tomorrow thing.

Speaker 8 (01:31:04):
But the astronauts who were out on the Apollo or
what have you, who were seeing things, you know, like
blinking in the distance, that was pretty shocking too.

Speaker 9 (01:31:14):
That was pretty for me. That was very interesting. They
were more interesting than the photos, because I think the
photos were great, duddy, you know, But Apollo eleven, nineteen
sixty nine, right time reference buzz Aldrin. He reported seeing
little flashes inside the cabin and a fairly bright light
source that the crew initially thought might be a laser.

(01:31:37):
Thought that was very interesting. Apollo twelve astronaut Alan Bean
He described particles and flashes of lights sailing off into
space that appeared to be escaping the moon.

Speaker 3 (01:31:50):
Oh my goodness, I'm excited. Though.

Speaker 2 (01:31:53):
If this, what if this energy is like beautiful and positive,
then maybe that's coming to to sort of lend a
helpful hand during these arduous times.

Speaker 11 (01:32:02):
Yes, back, it could be, it could be.

Speaker 3 (01:32:05):
Well.

Speaker 9 (01:32:05):
I tend to believe that there are extraterrestrials out there right.
I think they're much more advanced and probably closer to
the center of the universe than we are. I don't
necessarily know if they've developed the technology yet to bend
you know, space time to get here. However, if they have,
they are obviously more evolutionary advanced than we are, and

(01:32:28):
I believe probably more emotionally advanced. So I tend to
believe that little green men are probably very very nice people.

Speaker 3 (01:32:36):
Or I do too, I should say, Or I.

Speaker 13 (01:32:38):
Think there's a world where they're already here, kind of
blending in as a human like the like the like
the If I were one and I wanted to study humans.

Speaker 11 (01:32:47):
That's what I would do.

Speaker 13 (01:32:48):
But I was just going to go back to real
one quick thing you said earlier about the flashing lights
in the sixties when they saw that it could have
been you know that we hadn't been up there, and
that at that time period could have been reflections of
the sun or different and angles of things that were
shiny and reflective that they hadn't been familiar with.

Speaker 3 (01:33:04):
Just playing devil's advocabe is to what they want. Satellite,
even satellites existed, that's true.

Speaker 11 (01:33:09):
So yeah, but the.

Speaker 9 (01:33:12):
Astronauts to report on it, though you would think that
they would, and by the way it was classified, so
I tend to think that it has a little bit
more merit.

Speaker 13 (01:33:21):
Than Okay, yeah, I don't know, maybe astronauts, and yeah,
I trust the astronauts question.

Speaker 3 (01:33:26):
Also, we know they went to the moon. Oh, I
know they went to the Moon. I don't think that
was fake.

Speaker 11 (01:33:32):
Oh that theory, yes, some I never did.

Speaker 3 (01:33:35):
Many people do, but I don't. Many people do.

Speaker 9 (01:33:37):
I understand. I don't, but I love that. I love
the moon landing me too.

Speaker 8 (01:33:43):
So just to put a little button on this, So,
despite this release, the Pentagon does indeed maintain its recent stance,
and that actually not that recent, back from March twenty
twenty four. They're saying there's currently no verified evidence that
any UFO sightings represent extratrextrial visitors, which does not mean

(01:34:04):
that we can't all dream and, as to quote President Trump,
figure out what the hell is going on out there.

Speaker 11 (01:34:11):
Well done. Okay, guys, we're done the show.

Speaker 3 (01:34:17):
Say it ain't so well?

Speaker 2 (01:34:18):
Listen, everybody, make sure you have a beautiful Monday morning.
Let's get this week going on a good note. Uh tahaw,
what do we have going on tomorrow?

Speaker 13 (01:34:27):
We're gonna have a guest from the podcast Missing joining
in US.

Speaker 11 (01:34:29):
So everyone joined us?

Speaker 3 (01:34:30):
Then good night, perfect, 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;}New D4vd Court Twist, Kristin Smart Search, and Pentagon UFO Files

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

New D4vd Court Twist, Kristin Smart Search, and Pentagon UFO Files

Hey Jonas!