The D4vd Homicide Probe, Epstein’s Grand Jury, and the Luigi Mangione CEO Murder Case

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 Wednesday, December tenth, everybody, and yes,
we have a stacked night of headlines.

Speaker 3 (00:29):
So many things to get to.

Speaker 2 (00:30):
Huge development in the case against David the pop star.
We've been talking about this so much. Fourteen year old
Celeste revs Hernandez. Perhaps she will have justice soon? Will
there be an arrest? Also, body per your request. Last night,
we are finally getting those unsealed twenty nineteen Epstein documents.

Speaker 3 (00:49):
They were listening.

Speaker 2 (00:51):
This is major. They were listening, so we have so
much to unpack with that. And then also this Diddy
documentary Do not get me started. Everyone desperate to talk
about it more than words can say. So I'm waiting
for everybody to catch up. But I can say a
few of you guys have seen you.

Speaker 4 (01:07):
Most of it. I'm so proud.

Speaker 2 (01:08):
I don't know how everyone's found at the time, but
I personally really appreciate it. And also powerful, powerful testimony
in the accused wife killer trial Brian Walsh, including some
new details about what happened on that infamous New Year's Eve.
And plus it's Wednesday, our most favorite trial attorney, Jarrett
Farentino is here to break down all of the cases

(01:30):
we just discussed, and also the Luigi Mangioni case. We
know we've all had lots of questions throughout the week.
We've gotten yours as well, so thank you for the talkbacks.
We will be getting to them as quickly as possible.
I'm Stephanie Leidecker here with my True Crime mates Courtney
Armstrong and body move it.

Speaker 3 (01:47):
What's up? What's up? Court You good? Awesome, I'm ditty
it up, I tell you what. We're all a little
bit up, yes, very very fired up.

Speaker 2 (01:56):
And of course we have producer Taha and Sam and
Adam in the control room. I'm so gang. We got
Jared Farantino in the house. Welcome jareded and yeah, we're
all a little ready to rumble. So let's start with
the talk.

Speaker 5 (02:07):
Hey, True crimton I, it's Corey recording in New York
City for a quick talkback, and i'd love your thoughts on.

Speaker 6 (02:12):
The David case.

Speaker 5 (02:13):
To my understanding, this case is all circumstantial. But what
I keep wondering is could other aspects, like the concealment
of Celeste's body, or his involvement with Celeste, who was
a fourteen year old girl, be pursued on their own
and could that help push the murder investigation forward.

Speaker 3 (02:31):
I'd love to hear your take. Oh my gosh, great talkbout,
Such a good talkback.

Speaker 7 (02:38):
So he's in this relationship, he's you know, he's he's
twenty something years old, and he's in this relationship with
a thirteen year old going into fourteen year.

Speaker 3 (02:46):
Old girl allegedly.

Speaker 7 (02:48):
Right, his friends all thought they were in a romantic relationship,
you know, they thought she was a student at USC,
they thought she was nineteen.

Speaker 3 (02:55):
Didn't think anything of it.

Speaker 7 (02:57):
Oh my gosh, she's not only is she under age,
but you know, she's found in the front of his tesla.
Can the State of California pursue charges against him for
that relationship, the concealment of her body, arrest him, hold
him in jail, and work on the murder investigation while
all that's going on.

Speaker 4 (03:15):
Yes, great question. We're desperate for the answer.

Speaker 8 (03:18):
What do you think, Jared, you're starting off with an
easy one tonight, right.

Speaker 3 (03:24):
Gee, that's a question, but a good question, it's a
great question.

Speaker 8 (03:28):
The short answer is yes, you can break up these
investigations with the hopes that you break through the wall
that is surrounding David right now, start getting people talking.
Put him provided he's guilty of these things. Right, it
looks like their relationship appears to be more than friends, Okay,
and people are recording they were romantically involved. If that's

(03:50):
the case, a crime was committed. If he was involved
in her dismemberment, and the concealment of her body also
a separate crime. But as we discussed last week, as
a prosecutor, you may want to do these things together.
So as you look, we don't run on time or money.
I understand people get impatient, but the case, as you

(04:12):
put these things together take time. I would want all
of this together. I would want a jury to hear
the entire situation. They were romantically involved, potentially that led
to a motive for the killing and ultimately the concealment.
It is part of a large story. So strategically you
could break it up, but I would prefer given the
opportunity to take it together so.

Speaker 7 (04:33):
They see the totality of all the evidence presented at once.

Speaker 8 (04:36):
Rightly, because if you're prosecuting him, imagine he's accused and
charged with this murder, their relationship and the aftermath are
one hundred percent critical components of the case anyway.

Speaker 2 (04:50):
Right, makes total sense. But one added layer to that
that I'm just so curious about. It does, in fact seem,
based on reports that we're seeing today, that David the
pop star is a specs at this point and that
it is a homicide. Right, So that's a big step
forward because we've all been waiting for some of this information,
and you know, likely it seems like there is an
arrest to come and Courtney will give us the real

(05:12):
rundown of what happened today. All that to be said,
if this is a person who could have killed fourteen
year old Celeste or dismembered her body or taking her
little body, her little dead body, even if he didn't
kill her and toss her in the fronk which is,
you know, abbreviated trunk in a tesla and toss her

(05:33):
in a trunk and leave her there for potentially months,
doesn't that make him dangerous to society. Like the idea
of this person being still at large, it feels wild
to me that they haven't brought them into custody just
to keep other people safe.

Speaker 8 (05:48):
Well, Stephanie, you still are required to prove the crime.
There's no doubt anybody capable of those things presents a
danger to society. And that's something you can argue at
his bail hearing if we get there, because someone is
under investigation for a pretty awful crime, they cannot be
pulled in and should not be pulled in just for

(06:09):
that fact. Now, if you can get them on something
else and say easy, we could put like remember John
Wayne Gacy, they got him from sac joint right. So again,
I don't know that you want to play those kind
of games with the bail rules in California.

Speaker 4 (06:23):
Totally fair.

Speaker 9 (06:24):
I have one question on that, if I may, sure,
if understanding you don't know the inside investigation, you are not,
you know, a detective on the case.

Speaker 3 (06:33):
In a situation like.

Speaker 9 (06:34):
This, would a suspect be being watched by investigators?

Speaker 3 (06:38):
Would they be being tailed he could.

Speaker 8 (06:41):
Dig I mean potentially, yeah, I would imagine he's being
looked at pretty hard, whether or not he's being surveilled.
It's entirely possible. I mean, I've been part of investigations
that the suspect knew they were a suspect and were
being surveiled. May have known they were being surveilled quite honestly.
But yes, I mean, it would be wise to watch

(07:02):
him now if he's especially if they're closing it.

Speaker 7 (07:05):
You know, Stephanie were talking about it's danger he could
possibly pose if he did, in fact, you know, dismember
her potentially and put her in this front for many
months and whatnot, but necessarily maybe didn't kill her. And
immediately I was like, Brian Wells Junior right on the loose.

Speaker 2 (07:21):
It's like they're getting another playbook right now by watching
the Brian Walstride exactly. You know, that's three year of
jail time versus a life sentence is pretty unbelievable, right
I No body you were following closely, whatever the new
developments were today, I don't want to bury the lead.

Speaker 7 (07:38):
Okay, So there's a couple there's a couple updates there.
They're small and they're quick, but they're kind of monumental
a little bit, and I kind of want to there's
some things that were mentioned that I'm like, oh, what
the heck? Okay, So a grand jury witness in the
select the grand jury is happening right now like it
started my th, I believe Monday, and a grand jury
witness in this celestory of his death investigat faces imminent arrests.

(08:01):
We're refusing to testify and being uncooperative. The witnesses, only
identified as female, was compelled to provide evidence regarding the
discovery of Celestie. Was his body in David's vehicle. So
this all went down in like a courtroom hallway. The
witness had come, the witness that tells us about this
came out, and the prosecutor, her name is Beth Silverman,

(08:25):
approached and informed the attorney. Now the attorney's name is
Evan Jenis Okay. Now she is the attorney for Robert
Morgan Roth.

Speaker 3 (08:36):
Okay.

Speaker 7 (08:36):
Robert Morgan Roth is David's like manager, he's day to
day guy, like he's day He's the whole tour too mistaken.
So Evan is out there, she's the lawyer for Robert Okay, who,
by the way, is in the you know, testifying as
the grand jury. And Beth is the prosecutor comes out
and tells his attorney, Hey, I'm going to ask the

(09:00):
judge to compel this witness and attach this body attachment
to compel her to come into court. And my understanding
of a body attachment that orders authorities to take the
witness into custody and physically bring her to the courtroom
to testify for the grand jury, is that right?

Speaker 4 (09:19):
D imagine?

Speaker 8 (09:21):
Yes. So if that's what they call it in California,
she's a material witness. Okay, So she has either given
push but they can't compel her testimony. She can still
assert her Fitendment right, which is her constitutional right to
do so. But if she's given the prosecution the run around,
she's not coming in when they call her, she's not
responding to their communications with her attorneys. There's only one

(09:44):
way to compel testimony at that point. You hold them
as a material witness, and you could get bail set
on that person if that's what's going on with this
particular witness, But it would not be to force them
to speak. Sure, you can compel them to appear they
go under oath, but that Fifth Amendment right is parents.

Speaker 3 (10:02):
Yeah.

Speaker 7 (10:03):
So it's interesting to note that the attorney for the manager.
This Evan Jennis is also the attorney for this witness. Okay,
so she's somehow connected to the tour maybe or.

Speaker 8 (10:15):
Well, that could start to present a problem. So if
you have a witness who's giving the prosecution a problem, okay,
and then Robert is not giving a problem. Correct, You
now have dual clients that are at loggerheads. In one sense,
you are on board with the prosecution. You have a
client who's now fighting that's hot ethical suit. Somebody's got

(10:36):
to do something here. I think she needs to get
her own lawyer.

Speaker 9 (10:39):
Oo oh, man, if you are just joining us, we're
talking about the case of pop star David and how
he is a suspect in the murder of Celeste Revs Hernandez.
We'd love to hear from you. Ay, day three to
one crime and we are being schooled by Jarrett Faar

(10:59):
and you know who breaks everything down, No legal ease
at all?

Speaker 3 (11:04):
Body? Was there a couple of other was there another upstate?
So Monday?

Speaker 4 (11:09):
Okay?

Speaker 3 (11:09):
So that was today Monday?

Speaker 7 (11:11):
The same Robert Morgan rod the you know, he's the
day to day manager for David, also testified before their
grand jury and again this happened in the hallway. I
guess the place to be if you want the scoop
is the hallway of the courthouse that they're all at.
So he comes out from the grand jury and he's
on the phone and people, you know, there's people mulling around,

(11:32):
and obviously people are there to get the dirt, you know,
the tea.

Speaker 3 (11:35):
They want the dirt.

Speaker 7 (11:37):
And he is heard on the phone saying that the
prosecutor was kind of hounding him on why he didn't
call the police, right, And his response on the phone
to whoever he was talking to was, I didn't really
feel I had to. It wasn't really my responsibility, and
I just wanted the tour to continue.

Speaker 3 (11:56):
So here's what that.

Speaker 7 (11:57):
Tells me, right, Okay, So that's I just set the table,
all right, now, let's talk. Okay, call the police for
what number one? Did he know Celeste was in there?
But again, Celeste was found while David was on tour.
All right, So they're on tour, right, they're somewhere and

(12:18):
celestis found. Why would the manager have to call the
police unless he knew something?

Speaker 2 (12:26):
Right, But that's the question even if he knew, because
we talked about this a bit even in the Brian Coburger,
Idaho massacre case. Let's just say a family member or
somebody knows or has a hunch that's something the fairious
has happened. Are they compelled to have to call the police?
I don't think so.

Speaker 3 (12:45):
So I don't know.

Speaker 2 (12:46):
I mean, that's not a moral question, it's more of
a legal question. Morally, of course, morally sure, yeah, But
from a legal standpoint, this guy's running the show. It's
a worldwide tour, tons of money on the line. Is
this really his problem to deal with? I'd like to
say yes, but I think legally the answer is no.

Speaker 8 (13:05):
It's still an awful question to have to answer if
you knew something and didn't so yes, So legally he's
not obligated. But obviously that questions bothering him. He's getting
hounded about it. They're putting the onus on him to
have done the right thing and called the police for whatever,
either that Celeste was missing or that she was killed.
So let's assume it was one of those two things.

(13:28):
Even though they're not legally obligated, it doesn't look good
in front of a jury when you didn't do the
right thing.

Speaker 4 (13:33):
Exactly.

Speaker 7 (13:34):
I'm kind of wondering if it has something to do
with do you guys remember the email that I told
that we were talking about way back when happened, that
got sent to one of the other managers, John Marshall,
Josh Marshall, And I'm kind of wondering that has something
to do with that, because that email said, Hey, you
know this girl's missing and she's in David's custody. You
need to know about this, and Josh Marshall denied it.

(13:55):
We've seen proof that it exists, and I'm kind of
wondering that it has to.

Speaker 3 (13:58):
Do with that.

Speaker 7 (14:00):
I'm more interested in why that question was asked, not
necessarily the answer, but I want to know why that
question was asked. And I think it was asked because
the Wour managers knew Celeste was missing, they knew she
was under age, and she knew that they were in
contact with David. Why didn't you call the police otherwise?
I mean, otherwise the question doesn't make sense. It doesn't

(14:20):
make sense to ask that question otherwise.

Speaker 3 (14:22):
I don't know, And I would.

Speaker 8 (14:23):
Think more along the lines that's why they're asking the questions.
That's going to do to Robert is beat him up. Inside,
he's going to be like I should have done something,
you know, and clearly it's bothering him, And those are
the kind of things you're looking for a reaction in
the hall I'd have somebody in that hallway, I'd be.

Speaker 3 (14:41):
I mean a plane ticket and go camp out there.

Speaker 4 (14:43):
Myself.

Speaker 2 (14:44):
I wouldn't do that, But in fact, I whoever overheard
this story, I'm like, my first thought was that it's
a convenient plant means, and that seems totally appropriate, Like
you should be in there listening to these conversations, because
that's where the real conversation seemed to be happening.

Speaker 4 (14:59):
Kind of frankly astounding, it's too okay.

Speaker 7 (15:02):
So that happened on Monday, this this whole thing with Robert,
and then today was the confrontation in the hallway with
the other lawyer saying, you know, I'm going to compel
this witness to you know, attend them do this body attachment.
So and then they ran back into the grand jury,
and we don't know what happened, and we also don't

(15:22):
know why. I just want to clear it up. We
don't know why he was asked that question. We're just
theorizing about that.

Speaker 3 (15:29):
Stay at tuned.

Speaker 9 (15:30):
We will be following closely and after the break, we're
so lucky Prosecutor Jared Farantino is sticking with us and
we're going to be talking about Epstein's grand jury materials
and the new Diddy doc that more true crime tonight.

Speaker 2 (15:55):
Welcome back to True Crime Tonight on iHeartRadio. We're talking
true crime all the time. Stephanie Leidecker here with Courtney Armstrong,
Body move in, and our very favorite prosecutor, Attorney Jarrett Farantino,
is back with us tonight.

Speaker 8 (16:08):
Listen.

Speaker 4 (16:09):
There's a ton to get through. So if you have.

Speaker 2 (16:11):
Any questions, I want to jump in and join the
conversation live eight eight eight to three one Crime, or
you could always leave us a talk back on the
iHeartRadio app, it's free, or you could always hit us
up on our socials and we will read your dms
on the show. So this Epstein saga continues, and Jarrett,
I'm starting to feel I'm starting to feel like we're
getting closer to full transparency. Big day, big announcement today, Boddy,

(16:36):
you were saying it last night. Why don't we have
the grand jury testimony and information from the trial that
would have been had Jeffrey Epstein not taken his life
allegedly behind bars in twenty nineteen. Remember he was in
jail waiting for his upcoming big trial prior to taking

(16:57):
his life.

Speaker 4 (16:58):
So or you know, which obviously didn't happen.

Speaker 2 (17:01):
That seems to be some important stuff and up until
now it has been sealed, sealed, sealed until today, so
big development. Courtney Armstrong fill us in well, well, well,
a federal judge in New York has ordered the release
of those grand jury records and so apparently, allegedly we

(17:21):
will be finding out about what was going to be
in the prosecution's case against Jeffrey Epstein's twenty nineteen sex
trafficking case.

Speaker 9 (17:30):
This is the federal case versus the state case in
Florida in two thousand and seven. So it's the trial
that never was, and we're going to hear the files
from the from the jury, the grand jury. So this
all falls under the newly enacted Epstein Files Transparency Act.
It's really you know, this was you know, judge three

(17:52):
of three, So we've had to count down nine nine
days and we are counting, that's right, And if you're
kind of trying to remember the case. Jeffrey Epstein was
charged with federal sex trafficking in twenty nineteen, but he
did die under suspicious circumstances while awaiting the trial, and

(18:14):
he and his associate Gillaane Maxwell were both convicted of
sex trafficking underage girls and overage girls. Gilane is now
serving a twenty year sentence. So Judge Berman granted the
DOJ's request to unsealed the twenty nineteen grand jury records,

(18:35):
and he just said that the Epstein File Transparency Act
language is really clear and it has to be done.
He again emphasized victims' rights, saying that the Act must
be carried out in line with the unequivocal right of
Epstein victims to have their identity and privacy protected. And

(18:56):
he also noted that the survivors wrote to the court
insisting to disclosure cannot come at the expense of the privacy, safety,
and protection of sexual abuse and sex trafficking victims.

Speaker 3 (19:10):
So this is a really big deal.

Speaker 2 (19:13):
And just to put a footnote on that, Yes, of course,
if anyone is a victim that hasn't already come forward publicly,
their names will in fact be redacted and by redacted,
we just mean like imagine a black sharpie kind of
covering their name and any identifying information for the victims.
But that does not include, yes, there's like a fancy

(19:35):
way of doing it, but just so you're picturing it
in your head.

Speaker 3 (19:38):
But that should not be redected.

Speaker 2 (19:41):
Is other names or businesses or corporations or banks, et
cetera that can hide under this idea of victims.

Speaker 3 (19:50):
Unless that's of a different investigation.

Speaker 8 (19:53):
Right, that is true, Stephanie. So it actually specifically lists
like politicians for example, or individuals cannot be protected or
redacted to protect their political or business interests. It's actually
in the act. So this Act is really well written.
And one thing I think that's worth noting that there

(20:15):
was an objection to releasing this grand jury testimony I
know in Florida and I know everyone you talked about
it on last night's show, was there was an objection
to say, But the Act doesn't specifically say grand jury
testimony can be released, and it wouldn't because grand jury
testimony is the most coveted and confidential testimony in all

(20:37):
of the land. Okay, so you wouldn't just carp Blanche
say any and all grand jury testimony. Now what is
grand jury testimony. It's documents, it's sworn testimony of actual witnesses,
it's phone records, travelogues. All of the things that are
specifically listed as disclosable the Act fall within grand jury testimony.

(20:58):
But they did the right thing. Arment of Justice went
to these judges and asked for it to be unsealed.
Even though you are the Department of Justice, you don't
have access to sealed records from a grand jury unless
the judge says you have them. So they're interpreting the
Epstein Disclosure Act very broadly. That's a good signed, Stephanie.

(21:19):
I know we have some cynics among us that I'll
see that information is going to come out. What's in there?
Who knows, But there is an agenda to disclose this stuff.

Speaker 2 (21:31):
And that's huge, you know what I mean, Like, that's
a huge win. And yes, I sit among cynics, by
the way, who I love and I understand and.

Speaker 3 (21:41):
I do I know.

Speaker 2 (21:42):
I don't think it's actually just you. I think there's
more than a just you. I think everyone's appropriately feeling
like this is an impossible hill to climb, and I
can only imagine for victims and their loved ones. This
seems like, again an unimaginable hill to climb, but it's
a pretty big win today, So let's take that win again.
Who knows what's in these files.

Speaker 3 (22:03):
It's not like we're looking to catch somebody in the act.

Speaker 2 (22:06):
I think we're just looking for transparency and for some
justice for the victims the end. So again, there's no
like no one has a huge gotcha in their head
of who it should be. Although body just acknowledge that
she in fact does.

Speaker 4 (22:21):
That's fine.

Speaker 3 (22:21):
Everybody may have their that's fair, totally fair. No.

Speaker 7 (22:26):
I mean, if our leaders are, you know, doing this
kind of stuff behind the scenes, I want it called out.

Speaker 3 (22:31):
I don't think, you know, I don't want to live
in that world.

Speaker 7 (22:34):
You know, we live in the United States of America,
the you know, greatest country in all the world, and
I don't want our leaders and you know, people empower
positions to do these kinds of things and get number one,
get away with it and number two, worst of all,
profit from it, like I just.

Speaker 3 (22:52):
Or cover up for somebody else who So if there
are people.

Speaker 7 (22:55):
That are profiting from this kind of thing and getting
away with it, I want them to be in the files.

Speaker 3 (23:01):
I want them called out.

Speaker 9 (23:04):
So, Jared, I have a question or a clarifying question.
I was so glad to hear you say that specifically
in the Act it says that you know, you can't
be protected because of politics or business, So that's great.
There was something that I believe was written in one
of the first two judges in their notes and said that,

(23:26):
you know, the Transparency Act still allows the DOJ to
withhold or attact certain records, and that includes the victims'
identities as we discussed, or invade someone's privacy. So I'm
curious how widely that can be.

Speaker 8 (23:46):
I think the privacy the judge is talking about there
is the privacy of those victims or anybody who may
have come forward with the sexual abuse claim. So that
they're not talking because that flies in the face of
an action section of the law. So I would think
the privacy interests they're trying to protect is you know,

(24:06):
we have the race shield law, the sexual assault confidentiality laws,
so that's what they're talking about. They're not talking about
your privacy of what went on in a bedroom and
the Epstein estate that would not You're not sure. I
mean at that point, you could plug everything into it.

Speaker 3 (24:23):
Right right.

Speaker 9 (24:24):
Okay, Well, I'm so see, Stephanie, I'm so glad that
I had that question answered, because that is absolutely where
it went. That every dirt bag in a bedroom doing
dirt bag things can be like you're a Vadim Prodsey,
you know, Jared.

Speaker 7 (24:38):
You had said that, you know, the DOJ's being you know,
a little broad with you know, getting these grand jury transcripts,
and it's good, that's a good thing. Could they also
be broad in saying, oh, well, this is this leader's privacy,
this congressman's privacy, we don't want to you know.

Speaker 10 (24:54):
Could they be brought with that too, They could try,
But it specifically says, and it's specifically it says, you
cannot use the fact that this would damage someone's reputation, okay,
as a reason not to avoid disclosing.

Speaker 3 (25:12):
That's the thing that's huge, huge.

Speaker 8 (25:15):
The law actually says an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy
right after the victim stuff. So if you read it together,
it applies to the victim, not necessarily a politician or
a business leader who would have their sexual proclivities released
for the world. What's a that.

Speaker 2 (25:35):
Okay, By the way, you're listening to True Crime tonight.
If you're just joining us, thank you for jumping in.
We're talking about Epstein and the new information that is
massive that the twenty nineteen grand jury testimony and anything
that was involved in that particular a grand jury case
will now be released in the public and perhaps that

(25:56):
we'll have some new information and shed some light. Nine
days in counting, we are all saying, so, what's the
chance we're going to have some sort of an explosion in.

Speaker 3 (26:06):
God forbid or up before then?

Speaker 2 (26:09):
But we are counting, right, so I feel confident that
we're etching toward the truth.

Speaker 3 (26:16):
Let's go to a talk back right now.

Speaker 6 (26:18):
Hi, ladies, my name is Danielle. I am from Nova Scotia, Canada.
You guys are talking about at Stein, his allegedly having
killed himself in jail and talking about how his jail
sentence was basically sleepover jail and he was allowed out.

Speaker 8 (26:37):
During the day.

Speaker 6 (26:39):
So it just occurred to me, and maybe I'm wrong,
but if he killed himself in jail during a sentence
like that, if he had planned on killing himself, why
wouldn't he just wait till he was out during the
daytime where it would be much easier to commit suicide.

Speaker 2 (26:58):
Totally a good question, but for the clarity, and maybe
we weren't that clear about it. You know, he was
in prison twice, so the first time back in two
thousand and seven, two thousand and eight, and when he
was serving his sentence in West Palm Beach, which was
a cushy sentence, that's the one that he got to
go home and basically just slept in jail. Now fast

(27:19):
forward to twenty nineteen, he's indicted again, there's been a
grand jury testimony, et cetera. He's awaiting trial in a
cell in New York, and at that point takes his
own life. So there were just two different two different times.
In the clunker is the clinker or the clunker. Well,
being in the clinker, I think you're in the Yeah,

(27:42):
the sound.

Speaker 7 (27:43):
Very because that's what the that's the sound it makes, right,
clink oh clink.

Speaker 2 (27:48):
That it sounds horrifying, It sounds petrifying. So Jared, what
is your prediction? Do you have any predictions? And I
know this is not a legal question, but I have
two of them for you. One, do you have any predictions?
Because I know we're in we're in new territory, right,
this is extremely new. As you mentioned, grand jury testimony
is so sacred, so the fact that this is in

(28:10):
fact being released is pretty major. Even if there are
some hiccups to come, I do think it's a win
for the moment for victims. And the second question is
what in the hell was the dentist chair doing on
that island surrounded by masks?

Speaker 4 (28:25):
Do you have a legal opinion on that?

Speaker 8 (28:27):
Well? Two things. The entire police look like a nursing home.

Speaker 3 (28:33):
A nursing home.

Speaker 8 (28:34):
It's yeah, I don't know what. Like I looked at
those pictures, I'm like, it looks like you're looking at
like pleasant. Where was Sophia Patrillo before?

Speaker 3 (28:42):
Yeah? Yeah, right, it did have that feeling. It did.

Speaker 8 (28:45):
Yeah, And uh so that was It looked like a
very hospital medical setting for a spot on an island.
It's just a sense I had. The second thing is
what am I expecting? Here's the thing. I believe that
there are politicians, partisan politicians that have had access to

(29:05):
these materials for some time. If they had damning information
on their political opponents, much of it would have been
out already. So knowing the game a little bit, I'm
somewhat suspicious, Like I don't know that we're going to
get a lot of smoking guns. I am hopeful that
the intentions are in the right place. There is a

(29:26):
desire for disclosure. I just feel like this has been
kept under wraps for so long, and there are people
that have this information and it's remained field. That's suspicious
to me. I would think it would have been out
against Look, we had a presidential racist since then. I
just think it would have come out.

Speaker 2 (29:45):
Is it possible that it's because it's damning on both
sides so equally, I would.

Speaker 8 (29:51):
Think, so that's certainly a possibility. I don't know more
than the average person on what it could be. I
just look at like the Democratic part has released certain
information from their congressional investigation right now, it appears to
go one way. It was involved President Trump. I would
imagine if the other side had damning information, they would

(30:11):
have released it as well. So that's why I'm saying
I don't know. I think if these pieces of information
have been in the hands of powerful politicians that don't
have any blowback from it, it may have come out already.

Speaker 2 (30:23):
I would imagine, And I'm that's really cure here, and
it's a great observation going on a limb. Like you know,
first of all, the nursing home assessment of those photographs
is so accurate, like how many old men were at
this island? Number one? But likely you know we are,
We're talking about Bill Clinton, We're talking about different parties.
You know, Trump's the latest on the show, and he's

(30:45):
the one that campaigned on it. But prior to that,
and prior to Trump's entrance, there were many players in
the mix, which is why I say I'm sticking to
my theory.

Speaker 4 (30:55):
Follow the money.

Speaker 2 (30:56):
I think all parties have been benefiting financially in some
way that we are unaware of, and it's affecting policy
at a world level the likes of which we have
never seen before in our generation.

Speaker 3 (31:09):
Ooh, yeah, this is the new Watergate, right that you think?

Speaker 2 (31:13):
M Yeah, I think it's money and money, money, money, money, money, money, money. Jared,
We're crazy for having you here, because again we've been
stacking up some questions from listeners, so we're going to.

Speaker 3 (31:22):
Toss a few at you right away.

Speaker 11 (31:24):
Hey, ladies, love the pod. I view the Luigi case
more like I viewed the Karen Reid case, because there
seems to be a lot of mishandling. There are a
lot of reports that came out day of that seem
to not fully see true. There's stuff about the backpack,
the stuff about the police and turning on and off
body camera. That's just how I feel.

Speaker 7 (31:48):
Well, lucky for you, we have basically an expert in
Pennsylvania law with us, oh right, Jarrett Farantino. He is
an attorney barred in the state of Pennsylvania and not
barred like he can't be. There's bard, you know, the
bar in Psylvania.

Speaker 2 (32:05):
He's a smarty pants lawyer who's passed the bar.

Speaker 3 (32:08):
Right right, So she's saying that, you know, there's she
seems like there's some tomfoolery going on with the backpack
and and whatnot. What would you take, Jared.

Speaker 8 (32:19):
Well, first of all, kudos for bridging the gap between
Luigi and Mangione and Karen Reid.

Speaker 3 (32:24):
Right, Yeah, I don't. Is Michael Procter fit in somehow?

Speaker 8 (32:30):
Oh god, I hope, I hope not. But I look,
I get the concern, but I don't see it. I
don't see you know, if this was so the Karen
Reid sentiment is there is a police cover up and
there's things going on. Remember this police cover up would
have you would have to believe involved the Altoona Police Department. Okay,

(32:53):
where Mangioni happened to be sitting in the corner of
a McDonald uh in those moments, And the body camera
footage is available, it's being displayed right now in court
in New York. So the reality is I get the concern,
but that concern is addressed and allied by the video
evidence being shown in court right now in New York.

Speaker 3 (33:18):
Agree, that's totally fair. That's totally fair.

Speaker 4 (33:21):
Interesting though, that's interesting.

Speaker 2 (33:24):
So I have one fast question on the Luigi case, Jared.
You know, just in terms of if somebody, if I'm
walking into a restaurant and I seem suspicious or I
resemble an active shooter that the country is looking for,
is it plausible that the police can come in and
ask to look in my bag? What would I say
in that situation or what should I say?

Speaker 8 (33:43):
Well, they can certainly ask, They can ask at any point,
So the answer is yes, But what should you say?
You know, you have the right to say no, and
they can't get in that bag unless they get to
an arrest where they search your bag incident to that arrest,
like we discussed, and that's really the issue that is

(34:05):
being litigated on now. We're on day six. So if
they take you into custody for some reason and they
searched that bag without a warrant, it's a search incident
to arrest. And then we fall back on was that
bag in your immediate grab area, were they secured, Was
it truly a proper warrantless search. Was there a concern

(34:25):
for officer safety that was legitimate. That's really how they
would get in that bag, or they would take you
and articulate some reason, put it in a warrant affidavit
and get an actual warrant in the bag, which is
also an option.

Speaker 2 (34:38):
So they have to go back to the district into
the police office, get a warrant and hope that I'm
still at the McDonald judge.

Speaker 8 (34:45):
Well, they could and so that's what that would have been.
Would have been involved if they secured man gi owned
and had to get a warrant. The exigency here was
they're saying, we had a concern that there was potentially
an explosive in that bag or something that could harm
people in the restaurant. So yeah, it is ludicrous to
think we're going to stop leave the bag here. You

(35:08):
could conceivably secure the place. It's not beyond the realm.
But what makes the most sense under the law, there
is a concern, a safety concern, a legitimate one. That's exigency.

Speaker 9 (35:21):
I mean, I certainly agree, although the defense is hoping
nobody else does so if you're not totally up to speed.
Luigi Mangione is charged with the murder of United Healthcare
CEO Brian Thompson. This took place on a morning in
Manhattan about a year ago, and after the shooting, which

(35:43):
was caught on tape and appears to have been motivated
by a gripe against the healthcare system, there was a
five day man hunt leading to the arrest of Luigimanngione
in this McDonald's in Altoona, where now all of these
issues are rising of whether or not the police officers,
the local police officers Altoona, who got called by the

(36:06):
McDonald's manager because he looked like the guy that the
whole world was looking for one year ago.

Speaker 3 (36:12):
He was the same outfit that was on the TVs everywhere.
Literally the mask and everything changing out truly the day before.
What an idiot.

Speaker 9 (36:22):
I have a question, Jared, and I don't know if
this is splitting cares or not. So there were several
items that were not found at the McDonald's. So the
officer said they found oddly wet gray underpants with a
fully loaded magazine in it, several other items, but other

(36:45):
things were left that were not discovered until the search
happened back at the police department. So once you're arrested,
if if I'm arrested and I have a bag of stuff,
isn't everything on my or is everything on my person
kind of fair game for the police to look through

(37:05):
at that point?

Speaker 8 (37:07):
So everything on your person is, yes, once you're taken
into custody. The bag like the backpack, and that is strange.
They found certain things in McDonald's, but when they took it. Now,
I've been present when backpacks are searched, okay, and a
backpack like that has a lot of compartments. When the
forensics guy comes into our gal comes in to search
that backpack, it is a tedious process. They turn that

(37:30):
thing out, They look at every orifice of this backpack.
And I promise you did you ever lose your keys
in one of those backpacks.

Speaker 2 (37:37):
Oh oh yeah, fifteen times a day, that including moment.

Speaker 8 (37:43):
And I'm like, I would sit at the table and
be like, you're not done with that thing yet, you know.
So I think there was clearly a more extensive search.
You know, initially there was a sweep of that bag
for an explosive device and a firearm, and then a
more intense search was And I think that helps the officers.
I think that that shows, hey, we weren't looking for

(38:04):
every in every nook and cranny. We're usual, be established,
we're safe.

Speaker 9 (38:09):
Okay, So they okay, that is that is very interesting
to know in a great key analogy, by the way,
because who hasn't been.

Speaker 3 (38:16):
There, But here's okay, here's a piggyback.

Speaker 9 (38:20):
So it was officer Christy Wasser who went through the
bag and again found you know, the loaf of bread
and the loaded magazine, but again it was at the
police station. Then it was the loaded handgun, the silencer,
the SIM cards, and the notebook aka manifesto manifesto and

(38:41):
the map with instructions to evade law enforcement. So he
at that point has been arrested and you know, his
bag is at the thing. Is that all fair game
because it was opened and discovered at the police station
after his arrest.

Speaker 8 (38:58):
Yes, I think so. I think it is because they're
inventorying those I have to inventory, right, Yeah. So let's so,
let's just say he had a million dollars in that bag, right,
and they just discard it in the corner and it vanishes,
and Mangioni comes down the pike and says he had
a million bucks in there. You have to inventory property. Now,
that's not only what they were doing. They were also

(39:19):
looking for items to tie him to that cart. Clearly,
so it's fair game if you have a good inventory policy.
But again there's always that extra layer if you can
get a warrant, get one, so you've avoid this sixth
day hearing. Is what I would say.

Speaker 2 (39:36):
So, and what I would say if somebody wanted to
open my backpack to find my keys without a warrant,
I would say, call my lawyer, Jared Farantino, right.

Speaker 8 (39:47):
And in the commonwealth, that would be the best thing
you could say.

Speaker 3 (39:50):
Right, understood, understood, understood.

Speaker 7 (39:52):
In the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Can they phone it in?
Can they phone in a warrant?

Speaker 8 (39:58):
No, you have to know, you could appear virtually, you
could do that, but you have to prepare that appid
David you yeah, so, and you you appear before our
district justices there are I hate to say our lower court,
but there they are, the judges for a collection of
little towns shirkly. But you can do that over the phone,

(40:20):
but at some point they have to execute then actual documentation,
feel it.

Speaker 7 (40:25):
I only asked because I know in in the Idaho case,
they phoned in a warrant from Washington, UH to search
that storage locker they had found the t for in
Brian Coberger's apartment. So I just wondered, if you know, hey,
can they pick up the phone and say, hey, Judge,
I need to you know, I got this guy?

Speaker 3 (40:40):
You know, can I get this?

Speaker 8 (40:41):
At some point it physically has to go in front
of the judge and they testify under usually on video.
But you have to be careful with that.

Speaker 4 (40:49):
Okay, all right?

Speaker 12 (40:50):
Well, in an imaginary world, if that backpack isn't used
as evidence, if they can't for some reason, we can't
use the backpack, is the proper secution completely screwed at
this point? Like, is there some world there a way
to work around it.

Speaker 8 (41:06):
Well, there's there's It's not great, obviously, you want the weapon,
you want the manifesto, but there is Remember, we were
looking for Mangeoni. We the people were looking for Mangioni
before he was found. There's evidence linking him to this crime.
There's evidence linking him to the shooting. There's evidence linking
him to New York at that time. So there is

(41:28):
evidence that would tie him to the shooting of Brian Thompson.
But believe me when I tell you this evidence is
obviously critical and necessary for the prosecution.

Speaker 7 (41:38):
I even want to say there's evidence looking him to
the backpack that he left behind in Central Park, So
they don't know he left behind a backpack in Central
Park and it was full of monopoly money. And you know,
we all everybody was looking up this backpack. It's like
a seven hundred dollars backpack. It's very unique. And I
want to say that we heard early on that there's
some like a gum wrapper be with his gum in it,

(42:01):
with his DAN I might be speaking out.

Speaker 3 (42:04):
There is there's something to that.

Speaker 2 (42:06):
Yeah, DNA and there's DNA on that my understanding. And
also he checked into the hostel with that same fake
I D. So that's something I am using that fake
I D and also placing him in New York at
that time. Obviously there's the CC footage, so it's.

Speaker 7 (42:21):
More circumstantial stuff. But the circumstantial cases are one all
the time.

Speaker 3 (42:26):
I mean, not every case has DNA and physical evidence
right like it happens all the time.

Speaker 8 (42:31):
But tah, that's a great question. I mean, I'm wondering that.
And you when you were in a situation like this,
you have to prepare for the worst case scenario and
work back when you say to yourself, if this is out,
what do we got? You know, what do we do it?
Do we take? That would be a it would be
appealed to. I mean, it would fight to keep this
in pre trial.

Speaker 7 (42:49):
I would think, did you guys see did you guys
see the notes that he that he wrote like stay
ahead of the FBI?

Speaker 3 (42:56):
And oh yeah, it's like a camp. It's your eyebrows
they don't work.

Speaker 2 (43:01):
Nine years old, I was like, honestly, a nine year
old wrote that list.

Speaker 7 (43:05):
I'm a list maker. No, I do the same thing. Listen,
I don't know why about I'm a list of maker?

Speaker 3 (43:13):
This about you? You're a great list maker.

Speaker 2 (43:15):
But your list isn't like get out of bed, no,
on your socks, you know, like it's you know, breathe.
It was a pretty elementary list of things to do,
like there are some yes, stay ahead.

Speaker 3 (43:28):
Don't get caught.

Speaker 2 (43:29):
Oh forgot that that's not on the list, you know,
like there was. It was odd that to the list.
I don't mean to make a life, but your lists
are very very smart.

Speaker 7 (43:38):
No, I just mean, like, you know, I understand making lists.
I understand the concept, but like, do you really need
a list to pluck your eyebrows?

Speaker 4 (43:45):
Like just do it?

Speaker 9 (43:46):
Yeah?

Speaker 3 (43:47):
I got.

Speaker 9 (43:47):
This is not in defense of anything except for pre planning.

Speaker 3 (43:51):
I guess, which is you know.

Speaker 9 (43:53):
If you assume you're going to go through with everything
that allegedly he did, I would assume that my mind
would be very crazy, and I actually would put down
a list of like, okay, you have to remember to
pluck your you know, crazy defining eyebrows. Jared uh In
a case like this where allegedly we see LUIGIMGNGIONI go

(44:17):
with a gun and shoot CEO Brian Thompson on the street,
is is not guilty? Like how how do attorneys do
that with a straight face, and I'm not trying to
be funny.

Speaker 8 (44:28):
Well, here's how they do it. We're having a six
day trial on whether or not the police followed proper
constitutional protocol for them for what could be the moder right.

Speaker 4 (44:39):
I guess that's that's how they do.

Speaker 8 (44:40):
It, you know. Like and one of the things you
were all discussing last night that was profound. You're like,
in one sense, this guy wants to be allegedly this badass,
you know, Robinhood right. In another sense, he's hiding behind
his lawyers. Well, his lawyers are preparing to defend it.
What are we defending? Is the backpack in? Or is

(45:01):
it out? And the only way it's in is if
they followed the constitution and properly secured it. So you
can plead in the alternative, you can fight on multiple fronts.
The and filios are fighting the constitutionality of that search.
MANGIONI will still be able to say, you know, if
he wants to be that guy, but he's saying government,

(45:22):
if you're gonna get me, you got to do it
the right way now.

Speaker 2 (45:25):
And to add to that, even the footage of the
shooter allegedly allegedly alleged, allegedly Luigi Mangioni on camera and
you know, right and bright light man murdering uh the
CEO of the United Healthcare Brian Thompson. You know, they
could also just line up six lookalikes they can get,

(45:45):
you know, allegedly they get James Frinco and all the
other lookalikes. You have, Timothy Shallome, all the people that
everybody says he looks like, you know, any one of
his ninety five cousins that all have very similar features.
It's a very good looking family. You know, they have
many Mangionis. You know, is it possible that you're, like,
I don't know, looks a lot like a lot of people.

Speaker 3 (46:07):
Is that probably a tactic they will take.

Speaker 8 (46:10):
Well, again, it's not his face in the shooting. It's
from behind, its right behind. The whole crime. Is not
his fate, That's right.

Speaker 9 (46:18):
Okay, here's another one that we will continue following closely.

Speaker 3 (46:23):
So listen.

Speaker 9 (46:24):
Coming up, we have the new Diddy doc that is
igniting a firestorm, and we're going to break down a
lot of the legal fallout with Jarrett Farentino who is
sticking around. And later we've got Brian Walsh True Crime Tonight.

Speaker 2 (46:50):
true crime all the time. I'm Stephanie Leidecker here with
Courtney Armstrong. Body move in, and of course we have
great Jared Farantino, the prosecutor himself in the hot seat
answering all of your burning questions, so keep them coming.
Oh my goodness, Diddy, Diddy, Diddy, We're finally gonna discuss Diddy.

Speaker 3 (47:12):
Let's go to a talkback right now.

Speaker 13 (47:14):
Hello, True Time today. Just catching up on some episodes
I missed. Man, you guys have to watch the whole
Diddy documentary.

Speaker 3 (47:23):
Serious thingy.

Speaker 13 (47:24):
It made me so man, and I really want to
know all the things you guys think about, all the
things that you don't know yet. I'm not gonna spoil it,
but oh my god, oh my god, oh my god,
watch it.

Speaker 3 (47:36):
And tell me things. I love you guys, bye, we
love you too, And oh my god, is right.

Speaker 9 (47:41):
First of all, that was fabulous. Second of all, Stephanie,
was that you throwing your voice to put on to
watch it and be like, you have.

Speaker 3 (47:48):
To watch it. That's me.

Speaker 4 (47:50):
Every single interaction that I've had, I have.

Speaker 3 (47:53):
Received like seven texts from Stephanie every day. Have you
watched Dan? Have you watched Everybody's very busy and has
like real jobs all day, myself concluded, but it's all
I want to talk. I don't know if I'm at
the valet guy has to do.

Speaker 2 (48:06):
I'm at the grocery store asking the cash register attendant,
did you see the Diddy doc?

Speaker 4 (48:11):
I just think it's so wild.

Speaker 3 (48:13):
I finally did it.

Speaker 9 (48:14):
I finally fair briefly, if anyone is unclear of what
the talkback was referring to. Now, Netflix has released Sean
Combe's The Reckoning and it's a four part documentary and
it examines the rise, the power, the collapse of Shawan
Didty Combs. It's got crazy allegations of abuse, manipulation, misconduct.

(48:40):
The series also has never before seen footage that I
know we're going to be talking about. It has interviews
with former insiders, commentary from a couple of jurors in
his federal trial, which I thought was sures very well.

Speaker 4 (48:56):
I thought, don't get me started.

Speaker 3 (48:57):
That they were included was very cool. I thought it
was us cool with the had to say.

Speaker 9 (49:01):
But this documentary that Fitty sent put out is sparking
a bunch of legal questions and even more backlash from
Sean dis Combs's team.

Speaker 3 (49:12):
So, okay, Stephanie, let it out.

Speaker 4 (49:15):
Okay, I need first questions.

Speaker 2 (49:16):
I'm going to go straight to legal questions and keep
my opinions to myself for a hot second because that
is a hard task.

Speaker 3 (49:22):
And then we have to talk about some of the important.

Speaker 2 (49:24):
Just themes that I think we're so powerful and well
laid out. My first question to you, Jared is at
the and by the way site spoiler alert here if
you haven't watched. I'm going to try to talk around
it in a way because we will probably continue to
talk about this and other other nights. But I try
my best, you know, so slightly slight. I'm going to
be as careful as I can be, so top of

(49:47):
the show. Right away, we see this unseen footage that
is basically Sean Combs Diddy hired his own personal private
like documentarian or camera guy to kind of follow him
in these last days prior to his arrest. So we
know that he flew to New York City, he was
staying at the Hyatt Hotel the Parkayatt, where he was

(50:09):
ultimately arrested, and this documents the six days leading up
to his inevitable arrest, and allegedly there's about one hundred
and forty hours of footage and that they're only using
a very small sample of what.

Speaker 4 (50:22):
Was actually shot.

Speaker 2 (50:23):
Obviously, did he intended this to be in what was
maybe his documentary that he was going to make some day.
And the speculation is that whoever this videographer was was
maybe unpaid, and then somehow it got into fifty cents
hands and he paid for it.

Speaker 3 (50:41):
And now here it is front and center.

Speaker 2 (50:43):
It starts with him talking to his lawyer on speakerphone,
Mark Agnifilo, I think is how you say it? Mark
Agnifilo is his attorney, very high profile, obviously did a
very good job. Did he got fifty months as opposed
to a life sentence, so he could essentially thank.

Speaker 4 (50:59):
His lawyer or for his life.

Speaker 2 (51:01):
And yet here he is, unbeknownst to the lawyer, who
has some sense of there being a sacred conversation between
lawyer and client, didd he has U has a video
camera on it, and there's there's actually they're they're taping
it unbeknownst to the lawyer. To me, that is so
amongst the many egregious things to come. But how wild

(51:23):
is that as an attorney? Is that not a foul
ball from Jump Street? Jared, if you're the lawyer, are
you losing your mind?

Speaker 8 (51:31):
Well, here's the thing that was mind blowing that foot
you go from a guy who holds the key to
the city to being held up in a hotel room
looking out the window at the cops car. Yeah great,
I mean so I promised you last week, Stephanie, I
was going to watch it. I watched it. I was
rude to it. And let me tell you, as an
attorney though, here's what here's Mark and Filio is in

(51:53):
that documentary too, though personally he so you know, there
are exchanges when they're both pre that are filmed, which
makes me wonder if he would mind so much. But
that attorney client relationship is so sacred. Those conversations about
managing the perspective of the public. That's what the conversation

(52:13):
was about, about hiring somebody to look out for his reputation,
his pr person and did he's expressing doubt, wanting to
believe what Anfilio's telling him, and he's saying, we got
to get somebody. I feel like I'm getting beat up. Here.
Here's the problem. There's other people in the room and
he's on speakerphone. So the attorney client privilege is already

(52:35):
destroyed with the presence of these third party individuals. Now
add to it, there's did he had cameras around him
all the time, so of course he wanted to document
his downfall too and maybe make a buck, So he's
filming this exchange. The attorney client privilege adds to that conversation,
totally destroyed. As a lawyer, that's a nightmare situation scenario.

Speaker 3 (52:57):
I'd be horrified.

Speaker 2 (52:58):
And I've heard for some like inside sourcing that you know. Listen,
I'm sure Netflix is getting hit with legal letters and
a cease and desist and you know, lawsuit, lawsuit, lawsuit
from Camp Diddy. But you know, if your main man,
who is your main lawyer, who's heading up your entire
legal team, whose life and death is giving all of

(53:19):
their life to your case, what a junkie way to
treat that person from Jump Street, you know, I talk
about like biting the hand that feeds you. Potentially even
his teenagers were right there, like laying on the couch.

Speaker 3 (53:31):
I hated it.

Speaker 2 (53:32):
I hated it from the start, and it just it
took me on a ride of rage.

Speaker 8 (53:39):
It was so real, though, wasn't it. And I'll tell.

Speaker 3 (53:42):
You you can see the desperation.

Speaker 8 (53:45):
Like I don't think there was anything his attorney said
that was in appropium, and they were nothing I thought
like so so from a shame standpoint, he could say, Look,
I didn't know I was being recorded in that instance,
but I stand by what I said to the full circle.

Speaker 3 (54:01):
His wife is Luigi's lawyer, right exactly.

Speaker 8 (54:04):
Yes, Karen, they both are Luigi's lay Oh, they.

Speaker 3 (54:06):
Both are, Okay. I didn't know if he was either.

Speaker 8 (54:08):
Okay anyway, Karen and Mark. I've heard it said both ways.

Speaker 3 (54:12):
I've said it.

Speaker 2 (54:13):
I say it wrong every time. But I just want
to just jump ahead to the thing that I thought
was one of the more powerful of the many powerful moments.

Speaker 3 (54:21):
Very rare.

Speaker 2 (54:22):
Do you have a documentary that just hits you with
so much information, so much real footage from the time,
so many receipts, Like just when you thought someone said something,
suddenly you're seeing the actual receipt with the actual time stamp.
I mean, that was really really well laid out, and
it really ties up in the end and I thought,
Aubrey O'Day, who is not getting a lot of play

(54:43):
right now in the press.

Speaker 4 (54:44):
Surprisingly, I just want to say it out loud.

Speaker 2 (54:47):
I was really brought to tears seeing a woman having
to read something which seems like for the very first
time out loud as she says, and just you see
it in her eyes, like she's like it's all kind
of crash in at the same time, and her saying,
I don't even want to know the truth. I can't
get under this pile. I'll never get under him getting

(55:09):
out from under this the weight of Diddy, And I
don't want to know any more if this is true
or not true, even as I get a little choked up.

Speaker 4 (55:17):
Yeah, me too, victim.

Speaker 3 (55:19):
I thought it was so strangely.

Speaker 2 (55:23):
Intimate and took so much courage, and I really want
to applaud her for it too, making out.

Speaker 7 (55:29):
And for some reason it gave me comfort. I know
that like literally insane, but you know she's avoiding the truth, right,
she doesn't want to know, Yes, and listen, I've been there.

Speaker 3 (55:40):
Absolutely so human.

Speaker 7 (55:42):
And it's so human, it was so real. I empathized
with her. I thought she she just was great, and
I thought she was very brave for doing that, like yeah, and.

Speaker 2 (55:51):
Really well spoken, tied it up so so so well.
I was sort of like the wind had gotten knocked
out of me. So sending so much love to all
of the victims who put their life on the line
to tell their version of the story is.

Speaker 4 (56:04):
Not an easy task. Not an easy task.

Speaker 9 (56:08):
I okay, since Jared we have you on borrow time,
I'm going to hop in real quick with illegal.

Speaker 4 (56:14):
Yes, Quidney Armstrong hit it.

Speaker 9 (56:16):
So in this series, there are some really really serious
allegations I mean that are just stated as fact black
and white, you know, abuse, financial schemes, murder for higher plot.
Many haven't been proven at all in a courtroom. So
what would that look like? How hard would it be
for Diddy to win a defamation case against Netflix or welly?

Speaker 8 (56:42):
So one thing you said, Courtney, these things haven't been
proven in the courtroom, but that doesn't mean they're not true. Okay,
So let's say for a moment, an ultimate defense to defamation,
for example, is truth. Okay, It's like, prove me wrong.
Let's litigate whether or not you didn't pay this guy,
you assaulted this person. Let's have the conversation in court.

Speaker 3 (57:05):
You have to discover it too, right.

Speaker 8 (57:08):
That's the other thing. If it goes to court, everybody
gets deposed. We're gonna get all the documents. So they're
almost baiting that. They're like, you know, so you and look,
we're talking here in a public form. We have to
be cognizant and respect people's rights. Okay, But Diddy, he's

(57:28):
a public figure. Okay, so the standard applied to a
public figure is a little different. He has to have
a higher threshold for certain claims that could be made
against him. Okay, So he could be detained to a
certain extent because he's a public figure. He then has
to show there was malice in the defamation. It's not

(57:49):
true and I was damaged. Okay. When someone who's a
private citizen, they don't necessarily have to meet all of
those burdens. So let me say this. There was a
lot said, but there was a lot documented established, Like
I never walked the way by saying, oh, that is
so beyond the pale. There's no way you did this.

Speaker 2 (58:08):
You know, by the way, it's so true. And also
its first hand account. You know when we make our docs,
and Jerry, you know this as well, having been on it.
You know, it goes through such a legal lens. We
have the scariest lawyers that have to take out anything
that could possibly feel slanted or uneven or be considered slander.
You know, you don't want to accuse a person of murder,

(58:30):
but again sometimes you also don't want to accuse or
out somebody from their shame or you know, if they're
not ready to tell their story of victimhood, you don't
want to share it on their.

Speaker 4 (58:39):
Behalf, et cetera, et cetera.

Speaker 2 (58:42):
Every single person had the exact same theme, right down
to Kirk Burrows at the end, I was tolored every
step of the there's not on The list is so
long that it's shocking, and you can't really say that
the person who's speaking their truth is a liar, right
and you have to like prove them wrong. So did

(59:04):
he has a high threshold here, we hope.

Speaker 8 (59:07):
So that's in a separate defamation claim. Now, if you
look at Burrows, many of the people that talk Little
Rod and those people they've sil they've filed civil claims,
so they're already litigating whether or office is true, which
I think is a point where noted like there are
allegations made against Ditty and people in his inner circle.

(59:28):
That's already in litigation with some of the people making
the allegation in the dock. Again, they're just reaffirming allegations
they lodged at Ditty in court already. Now they haven't
been needed out. I mean, look at the numbers in
the documentary. They say, how at one hundred hundreds of
could have been filed against Is that insane?

Speaker 3 (59:48):
Well we were.

Speaker 2 (59:48):
Even saying this when the trial was going on, but
it just becomes a footnote, right. But now that you're
seeing the faces, you're seeing the pain, You're seeing the agony,
the years of grief, the trauma that people have to
cover because they're so ashamed. And you also see the
grooming and how simple it is to get sucked in.

Speaker 12 (01:00:07):
And I have one question for j Yeah, seeking of faces,
one of the two faces that stood out to me
the most were seeing the jurors that actually spoke in
the documentary. I don't want to give away too much,
but they told a little bit about the case and
what they went through. Are there limitations to what a
juror can say after a trial publicly? And could they

(01:00:30):
say something that could maybe have a cause for another
trial of some sort.

Speaker 8 (01:00:36):
Well, there's really not limitations other than they can't if
they said they lied in the Vlais deal process, that's
a problem. If they should not discuss specific jurors what
their role was in the back room during deliberations. But
other than that, unless they say there was a piece

(01:00:56):
of evidence they weren't supposed to consider, they like they
did something on awful. It's pretty much their game. We
would run down after trials and find jurors, you know,
in the courtroom lobby and say like, what'd you think
of this, and like I would love to hear from
jurors what of course, not if they had any bad
to say, of course, right, But again they are not
limited and what they can say provided there's not an

(01:01:19):
all out assault on the process, whether there was a
lie of misrepresentation or they're talking about another juror.

Speaker 2 (01:01:27):
Last question, obviously again not a big spoiler alert, but
you know, you're kind of squarely saying that he called
the hit on Tupac and you know, land his best
friend Biggie to the death and also made him pay
for his own funeral. The stepfather or Biggie's stepfather has
come out I think publicly and said that funeral piece

(01:01:47):
might not be accurate. But all that to be said,
those are huge allegations. Is it possible that did he
may face charges with this?

Speaker 3 (01:01:57):
Keith D or Keith d D? Yeah, Keith D.

Speaker 4 (01:02:02):
That's how.

Speaker 3 (01:02:04):
How unpool am I? Keithy D. It's honestly, I should
be I should be shot right now.

Speaker 4 (01:02:09):
I'm sorry.

Speaker 3 (01:02:11):
Talk about it.

Speaker 4 (01:02:12):
But that said, you know his trial is in January.

Speaker 2 (01:02:16):
Is it possible that Diddy is going to get roped
up into this? Can you stick with us because we're
going to have to come back and get the answer.
I know it's late, Jared, You're the greatest.

Speaker 4 (01:02:24):
Stick with us true Crime tonight.

Speaker 3 (01:02:26):
We still have Jared because we also have to talk.

Speaker 4 (01:02:28):
About Brian Walsh more on that. Stay with us.

Speaker 2 (01:02:42):
Welcome back to True Crime tonight on iHeart Radio. We're
talking true crime all the time. I'm Steph here at
the Courtney and Body, and of course we have the
great Jared Farantino, our favorite prosecutor in the house, answering
all of our questions. Right now, we're yapping about the
puff Daddy Doc also known as the Sean Cone, the
Reckoning on Netflix. If you haven't watched it, please do.

(01:03:03):
We will be continuing our conversation. We have a talkback
right now.

Speaker 14 (01:03:07):
Hey, ladies, just wanted to make a quick comment about
the Diddy documentary after watching. I mean, my goodness, the
audacity of this man for everything that he did, for
him to think that he could just film himself to
make himself look better later and to be like, do
what you need to do, justin because God told me
to do nothing. I'm sorry, excuse me? What Sopha Cocta right?

(01:03:31):
I love the show, ladies. Thanks, it is so Cocta
it is.

Speaker 2 (01:03:35):
There's no better way to say thank you for the
greatest talk back.

Speaker 3 (01:03:39):
But yes, this guy the God complex.

Speaker 2 (01:03:41):
He has a camera guy following him all the time
and he's still a jerk on.

Speaker 7 (01:03:46):
Cass recording with Little Rod. By the way, I loved
him in the documentary so good. And I don't know
if it was like the peach sweater, but I just
want to him and you know, he's with Lilron. They're
recording and he's talking a little Ron and he's like,
you know you can think of me is like the
son of God. I was like, bro, really, what are
you thinking, and he's like a maniac looking at the

(01:04:06):
camera and he's like yelling at the camera, and I'm like,
you're a meniac.

Speaker 3 (01:04:11):
Like how about the guy too.

Speaker 2 (01:04:12):
That was like writing the song forgetting his name, the
song lyricist, and he was trying to make him call
and he was like, uh, he had the greatest imitation
of all time.

Speaker 8 (01:04:22):
Oh my god.

Speaker 2 (01:04:22):
It's like we all know those songs and you're hearing
sort of the backstory to how those songs happen.

Speaker 3 (01:04:27):
How untalented did he really was? Right?

Speaker 7 (01:04:31):
He couldn't rap, he couldn't sing, he didn't know anything
about music. He basically just paid people to do things
for everything. He didn't really pay people though, right Like
he stuffed people right.

Speaker 2 (01:04:43):
Insurance himself in their video and then pays himself.

Speaker 7 (01:04:46):
I will never forget those those that award show. When
shuld Knight said that, I will. I watched it live
and I was like, and I was a big West
Coast girl, you know, I grew up in California.

Speaker 3 (01:04:56):
Of course I'm like, yeah, Dobacco snoop whatever.

Speaker 7 (01:04:58):
And should Knight said that, I was, I mean literally
screaming in my living room. I was like, oh my god,
because everybody knew who he was talking about. Everyone knew
who he was talking about.

Speaker 3 (01:05:07):
Wow, so what is ahead legally speaking?

Speaker 2 (01:05:10):
So there's some big accusations aside from the many who
had been victimized by him first hand accounts. They have
their civil lawsuits that I hope they all win so
much money and everything in anything that they're wishing for
money will never give back what's been taken from them.
But now on a criminal side, you know, he's been
squarely blaming he's been squarely blamed for Tupac's death. We

(01:05:33):
know the person who actually is about to stand trial
in January, keithy D.

Speaker 4 (01:05:39):
That's a pretty big trial.

Speaker 2 (01:05:41):
He's basically saying, yep, did he made me do it
or said.

Speaker 3 (01:05:44):
He was doing He took it back. Though he took
it back, it was like, is he just afraid he's
going to get killed? That's why you think it back?

Speaker 7 (01:05:51):
Well, keffy D's kind of like I want to be
almost a little bit, you know, and it's kind of
like he's saying that he, you know, was preuss in
this profferer and that he shouldn't have said that.

Speaker 3 (01:06:02):
But he also like I think he said it in
a book too, though.

Speaker 4 (01:06:05):
No, that's how we got arrested.

Speaker 3 (01:06:07):
I don't feel like that's why I got arrested. So
I don't know.

Speaker 7 (01:06:10):
I'm going to go to this trial. I've already decided
it's going to be in Las Vegas. I think it
starts in February. I have to recheck, but I'm going
to go to this trial. I'll be reporting live on
the scene.

Speaker 3 (01:06:19):
How's that?

Speaker 8 (01:06:19):
Yeah?

Speaker 4 (01:06:20):
Like you, you're like on the beat.

Speaker 2 (01:06:22):
You're going to do all the one with the hallways
standing outside by the way, Artisa. We were trying to
get her on the show, the social influencer. Back to Jarrethy,
I won't get I'm getting.

Speaker 3 (01:06:31):
Side, Jared.

Speaker 2 (01:06:33):
Is it possible that during this fifty months that Puffy
is currently behind bars serving the sentence for whatever nonsense
he's serving it for, should be much longer. Is it
possible that it's going to get more charges thrown on
him criminally because of this documentary?

Speaker 8 (01:06:50):
Well, that's what I was thinking the whole time I
was watching, and I was thinking, is there another case
being put together? The truth is, I don't know, It's
entirely possible. The thing about keep D keep D, there
was a time he would tell anybody who would listen,
he killed Tupac right at the behest of didy, right,
but when he recn't. Now now he's on trial, he

(01:07:11):
can't say he did it because now he's pleading not
guilty and attempting to defend himself. So the question is
how do you put that case together without keepd and
how credible is he after giving the profit statement okay,
then recanting it down the road. So that's the problem
the link. Did he one thing about him? He's been

(01:07:34):
very lucky. In addition to his wealth and his success,
a lot of things have gone his way. And there's
another example of something that went his way.

Speaker 7 (01:07:45):
You know, Yes, and Eric Martin ripped the guy or
is it the guy who was supposed to pay kfy
D for this hit?

Speaker 3 (01:07:53):
Right, died of cancer. So there's that missing link too, right,
So it's going to be really hard to prove that
Sean Combs aka did he had really anything to do
with tu Puck.

Speaker 8 (01:08:04):
And Keithy's nephew is passed too, right, Yeah, killed. Here's
a situation where time does not make your takes any better.
You know, justice delayed is justice denied. That's why because
people die, people memory faith and this is you can
bet he's going to have that defense team, so those

(01:08:25):
charges ever come. I do think though, if you believe
what was said in that documentary, this is a man
who lived his life running a follow of the law,
and in the end he's only going to be held
accountable for two pounds of transportation in aid of prostitution.

(01:08:45):
That doesn't seem right.

Speaker 3 (01:08:48):
It doesn't seem right.

Speaker 2 (01:08:49):
We've seen him just beating Cassie, his you know, beautiful
ex girlfriend, you know, to the floor. I mean, that's
just such a tip of the iceberg, right, But man,
just what I thought I didn't like him. Then it
would be two seconds later in the documentary and I
was like.

Speaker 3 (01:09:04):
Oh, boy, I really don't like him.

Speaker 2 (01:09:06):
Boy, I gotta tell you, I really don't like him.
And it just continues to pound. But I listen, if
I'm like a juror I'm like press play on the documentary,
there's my whole pace.

Speaker 9 (01:09:18):
I have another question about something legal in the dock,
which is there's one point, without giving away a thousand details,
where someone alleges that they were in the studio and
there were multiple people there, including Diddy and his son,
and then that Diddy, his son and another man went
into a bathroom, closed the door, there was a shot

(01:09:40):
herd and the man who's recounting this story then sees
this man and is allegedly putting towels on his wounds
and at the behest of Diddy's bodyguard this man. The
story turns into, oh, you know, basically drag this man
to the street and this didn't happen here. And you
see in the newspaper the next day shot outside of

(01:10:01):
you know studio.

Speaker 3 (01:10:03):
Okay, a little fishy, like criminally fishy. What what does
the law do with that?

Speaker 2 (01:10:08):
Justin Colms is completely brought into this, you know, Puffy's son.

Speaker 3 (01:10:13):
What does that mean?

Speaker 2 (01:10:14):
Like is he's basically squarely being accused of a crime.
This is now Diddy's son. If I'm the son, I'm
not so happy.

Speaker 8 (01:10:24):
Well the other today's photographs of what they said was
inside the bathroom, right the.

Speaker 3 (01:10:29):
Video.

Speaker 8 (01:10:30):
Yeah, so look again, then that is a strong accusation
that was made that that shooting occurred inside and when
only three people were in the room, two people came
out and they happened to be father and son. So
look that that is a bold accusation. And I don't
know if that could be proven, who knows, you know,

(01:10:51):
it's just he set the scene and it looks like
if he set that scene, that looks like it was
bought hookline and think of that that shooting occurred outside.

Speaker 4 (01:11:01):
Oh wow.

Speaker 2 (01:11:03):
And even the idea that you're paying for press and
I thought it was also pretty compelling.

Speaker 4 (01:11:07):
Another legal question.

Speaker 2 (01:11:09):
The social media influencer I think her name is Tisa.
I love her by the way. She's also on the dock.
We tried to have her on the show. I followed
her during this time too. She's excellent, and she basically
says that, Yeah, the legal team was going out and
trying to give transcriptions of the trial with some highlights
that would be really helpful for the defense if she

(01:11:30):
wouldn't mind, you know, using her influence in her social
media posts, and that others were doing that.

Speaker 3 (01:11:36):
You don't think that that happens, but of course it does.

Speaker 4 (01:11:40):
But it's so gross.

Speaker 2 (01:11:41):
And I guess that's what social media is, these paid
platforms where what's all.

Speaker 3 (01:11:46):
Pr, right, I mean, that's all it really is, sales
and PR. Yeah, yeah, And I.

Speaker 12 (01:11:51):
Found that interesting at the beginning of the.

Speaker 3 (01:11:53):
Door, It's very interesting.

Speaker 12 (01:11:54):
Nobody cares about CNN, like you need to get out
there and get people out.

Speaker 3 (01:11:57):
Of social media. You needed buzz out.

Speaker 12 (01:12:00):
Everybody in the world is going to see that. That's
the people I want to sell, right to Karen.

Speaker 8 (01:12:04):
Reid, let's we bring up you know, and as a prosecutor,
you want to be focused on those jurors. That's that's
the thing that matters. But any prosecutor who tells you
they're not cognizant or considering what's going on outside is lying.

Speaker 3 (01:12:21):
Is it illegal though to do that?

Speaker 2 (01:12:22):
I would have assumed it's illegal to bring out transcripts
from a trial that and give highlights and feed that
to the media or to super fans with a camera
who are on social media.

Speaker 3 (01:12:34):
That's totally appropriate.

Speaker 8 (01:12:36):
It is these are people who just couldn't get into
the courtroom. That's publication, so you can bring it's not
grand jury testimony, but that's a good question. So it
is public and it's a fair game. Now you're highlighting,
you're giving a thumbnail like this is good. You know, this.

Speaker 2 (01:12:52):
Is where you know he says he loves his mother,
has his bible. When he has his Bible in his hand,
use that, you know, sketch. Wow did he I don't know.
I don't know that there's a comeback from this one.
And I feel mad at myself for having been a
fan back in the day. But we didn't know, Like

(01:13:12):
we didn't know obviously, But what the hell is Jlo
thinking right now? If she just that's the biggest exhale
that she's not in it? Well, documentary said one word
like versty.

Speaker 12 (01:13:26):
There's nothing like, there's something odd to me that she's
not in it.

Speaker 3 (01:13:30):
And I'm not.

Speaker 12 (01:13:31):
Such a big part of his life early on, you're
not a fan of Jennifer Lopez. I think she's a
Oh well, we'll have to discuss that off air because
I disagree that might.

Speaker 7 (01:13:41):
Jlo Jenny's block and she doesn't even know nobody even
knows anyway.

Speaker 9 (01:13:46):
Okay, so Jared as as an attorney, what did anything
else kind of raise your hackles watching this documentary or drop?

Speaker 3 (01:13:56):
Drop your jaw is my jaw and everyone's jaw? I
think dropped watching Look.

Speaker 8 (01:14:01):
I mean, obviously I'm moved by the victims. I too
was moved by a little rod too. I was like,
he's the guy who's little man talking about you know,
he was hanging with the king of his industry. He's
owed this money. It was the love album of all things,
right with the love album.

Speaker 3 (01:14:21):
I was rooting for him.

Speaker 8 (01:14:22):
I was moved by him everybody, but I could not
escape that imagery of him puff Daddy with the key
to the City of New York and to go to
contract that with how it all ended, you know, that's
to me was just so stark.

Speaker 2 (01:14:39):
Oh, you are not kidding, You are not kidding, Like
victim after victim after victim, and then the downfall and
then the Biggie stuff. You know again, I think that's
when I kind of really came on the scene to
really love him.

Speaker 3 (01:14:52):
Was I loved his love of Biggie let alone. You know.

Speaker 2 (01:14:55):
Now, the backstory is a little different than than it seems,
and I guess that's the case. We see that this
is I think it's so important that everyone's watching it
because I do think it shows grooming and what it's
like to be a victim who's afraid to come forward.
And I think we're seeing those those same sentiments in
the Epstein case as well.

Speaker 4 (01:15:13):
Right, So the timing.

Speaker 3 (01:15:15):
For this documentary is particularly important. I think. I agreed.

Speaker 8 (01:15:19):
I really enjoy you to please, sorry, buddy, I think
you saw that. I see a lot of correlation between
the Cosby case and this case. You know, yes, Bill
Cosby was a television star, but he was beyond that.
He was very wealthy, he was influential in education. Did
he was very much like Cosby? He exceeded like like

(01:15:39):
your grandmother knew who did he was? And that's exact
like he transcended he did the rap world. Okay, but
when you look at that, how if you're a victim
of sexual assault to that person holding the key to
the city, who's worth half a billion dollars, what do
you do? Who do you talk to? You don't believe.

Speaker 2 (01:15:58):
You, Nobody believes you, and nobody is the answer, will
believe you. And I think this is why things like
today and case files and grand jury testimony in the
Epstein files being being made public. I think is such
an important piece of the puzzle for victims because honestly,
if you look back on this last year, if you're
a victim and you come forward, really not much great

(01:16:20):
came out of that for any of them, including in
the Diddy case. People put their lives on the line
to take the stand to be public about their their
most horrible moments and the shame that comes with that.

Speaker 3 (01:16:30):
Then to get the public bashing that.

Speaker 2 (01:16:32):
They get, then they get no one even believes them,
or even if they do believe them, nobody cares. And
this is an example and a reminder that we really
do care.

Speaker 7 (01:16:42):
Yeah, and you mentioned the grooming Stephanie and how appropriate
is at this time and the Little Rod segment of
the grooming. I thought it was so well done because
like little Rob was doing a job. You know, he
got this, He won this gig. He was very talented.
He created the song that did he wanted, the style
that did he wanted. He got basically hired to do this.

(01:17:05):
They worked for a very long time on it, and
you know, Little Rod's like, you know, this is going
to change my life, my kids, my grandchildren, this is
going to change my life. And you can see how
Little Rod was being strung along, that carrot is being
dangled in front of him. This is going to change
your life. You want those shoes, You got to jump

(01:17:27):
this high. You can see the grooming happening live like
almost right Like I just thought it was that part
of the documentary and the visualization of the grooming was
so well done, and I immediately understood it, like, I
just think they did a fabulous job.

Speaker 2 (01:17:44):
With that, because many don't get that part of it. No,
they don't outsider looking in it's like what land were
you living in?

Speaker 4 (01:17:49):
Like what I have to do?

Speaker 2 (01:17:50):
Come under that this was able to happen to you,
And you're like, it's hard to explain, but when you're
probably in the beehive, it's really hard to see it.

Speaker 4 (01:17:57):
And by the way, it's a system.

Speaker 7 (01:18:01):
Right, Jarrett, thank you so much for joining us tonight.
We'd be lost without you. We love you very much.
You can find more of Jarrett on Instagram and YouTube
at Jarrett Farentino and pre order his upcoming book on Amazon.
It's called Mothers, Murders and Motivation. Stick around because we've
got a lot more to get into. Stick around true
Crime Tonight.

Speaker 2 (01:18:32):
true crime all the time. I'm loving this show and
I'm so glad we're digging into all things Diddy. And
we also still have to get to accused killer, accused
killer wife Brian Walsh back in court today.

Speaker 4 (01:18:47):
This guy.

Speaker 2 (01:18:48):
But let's just to put a cap on all things
Diddy for the moment, because I know we'll continue this conversation,
so again, please give us your thoughts as they come.
But any other last minute thoughts from you guys about
the doc.

Speaker 7 (01:19:03):
I'm gonna watch it again because I mean it really,
I really did enjoy it. It was very well done.
And I you know you mentioned Aubrey Day. I thought
she was just phenomenal.

Speaker 3 (01:19:13):
In hapercorn Clark.

Speaker 9 (01:19:15):
It was.

Speaker 7 (01:19:15):
It was very interesting to see, you know, we had
we had heard about the things that they had said
when they were testifying, but actually seeing them and seeing
them say things, and you can see that they're real
people with real emotions and real souls. Like it's just
it's so good and I implore many, many, many people
to watch.

Speaker 3 (01:19:35):
It's very good, I.

Speaker 2 (01:19:36):
Think for victims everywhere. It's such an important story. Two
other quick things we wanted to say. One, I couldn't
stand the fact that he had that guy following him
around with the with the necklace.

Speaker 3 (01:19:47):
The chain off and was holding the phone for him.
But is this guy, this guy following him around this job?

Speaker 2 (01:19:54):
Yes, that job called exactly a handler or a butler.
It's disgusting. And then we're those two jurors. I think
both of them said so much, and I, you know, again,
not to I don't want to disparage them, but like
the gentleman juror Boyd, does he say so clearly with
which I know many people feel this way, but like Boyd,
does he not understand the cycle of abuse? Like that

(01:20:16):
is a clear example of somebody who does not understand
what domestic abuses like with the fear or the shame
and the silence that comes with And is hearing him
say it so clearly?

Speaker 3 (01:20:29):
It was like, huh, I wonder if he watches this back?

Speaker 4 (01:20:31):
Will will he hear it differently?

Speaker 3 (01:20:33):
Do you think?

Speaker 2 (01:20:34):
I'm sure he'll watch it. And then the other juror too,
who seemed like a super fan. I feel for her
because she's getting a lot of a lot of bashing
online and I never like that either.

Speaker 3 (01:20:44):
I don't like it lashing of any of them, but
she does seem a little biased and.

Speaker 2 (01:20:49):
It seems like, you know, yeah, did He's a really influential,
charismatic guy, apparently even when he's standing trial, because she
seemed to have like, you know, inside I with him.
And again I wonder if she watches this documentary and
hears herself and see things, sees things differently.

Speaker 3 (01:21:07):
Now you would hope he would help. It would cause
some reflection. Did she sneak in and how did she
sneak into that? How did that?

Speaker 8 (01:21:14):
Yeah?

Speaker 9 (01:21:16):
I don't know the thing that And this is about
seventy seconds into it. When did He is again being
followed by a camera of his own, asking.

Speaker 3 (01:21:27):
For a movie that doesn't exist.

Speaker 9 (01:21:29):
I mean, Stephanie, he is the definition of megalomaniac, which
we talking about all the time.

Speaker 3 (01:21:33):
That is meal mad I am God. Yeah, but he.

Speaker 9 (01:21:38):
What he says is when he's speaking to his lawyer
in terms of what kind of pr people you need,
said we need people who've dealt with the dirtiest of
the dirtiest of the dirt. And he is referring to
himself in welcome to the documentary.

Speaker 8 (01:21:57):
Now.

Speaker 2 (01:21:57):
The two things that they didn't touch upon, which I'm
sure there'll be more of this, you know. The The
assertion is that there's more to come, and that there's
a season two. Whether it's centered around Diddy, we don't know,
but according to fifty cent, there's a second documentary underway.
They didn't get too deeply into kim Porter his deceased
wife and her mysterious death, which has long been speculated about.

(01:22:22):
She sort of just died in her sleep from unusual,
unknown causes.

Speaker 4 (01:22:27):
Always has been interesting to me.

Speaker 3 (01:22:28):
Speaking of Yes.

Speaker 7 (01:22:30):
Speaking of kim Porter, I texted you guys earlier today
one thing I'd watch. I was right in the middle
of the documentary. I'll be sure. He looks amazing.

Speaker 3 (01:22:40):
He looks great.

Speaker 7 (01:22:41):
Yeah, totally unrelied. But oh, Mike, I was like, that's
not al be sure. He looks better today than he
did back. He looks so good. Good for you, Alby, sir,
I'm happy.

Speaker 3 (01:22:50):
Good for you.

Speaker 4 (01:22:50):
I'll be sure, but I'll be sure.

Speaker 2 (01:22:52):
Specifically has been very public about his assertion, so I'll
be sure. Just for the play along, you guys, remember
Albi Shore from yester year, a famous singer. He had
a child with his then girlfriend, I think, or maybe
it was his wife, Kim Porter. So kim Porter who
later goes on to be with Ditty. So essentially the

(01:23:12):
accusation from Albi Shore is that Ditty basically stole kim
Porter from Albi Shore, and Kim and Albi Shore had
already had a child together. Quincy and al be sure
after kim Porter's death, which was not that that long ago,
probably five years ago, six years ago, maybe twenty eight.

(01:23:33):
She died of like mysterious circumstances or had some sort
of a heart condition.

Speaker 4 (01:23:37):
She died in her sleep, essentially.

Speaker 2 (01:23:39):
Albi Shore is the one that was saying he thinks
that it's really suspicious and he wants that to be
looked into. When he wanted to have her body exhumed,
and he was squarely also pointing his finger at Ditty
saying that there was a cause of death related to him.

Speaker 4 (01:23:55):
And then it kind of went away.

Speaker 2 (01:23:56):
But Albi Suore has been pretty prominent saying that, and
I've seen it many times in press, so I was
surprised that that was not added.

Speaker 4 (01:24:04):
I wonder if that's still to come.

Speaker 7 (01:24:05):
Well, they might have, I mean maybe the production company
or even Netflix themselves were like, and there's.

Speaker 2 (01:24:10):
Really notice tells boy killer stories, right, but there's there's
still a lot to unpack with that.

Speaker 4 (01:24:16):
And also that interesting.

Speaker 2 (01:24:17):
You know, we talked about this many many months ago
when we were covering the trial real time that when
kim Porter Diddy's X, who he has several children with,
including his beloved twins, when she died.

Speaker 3 (01:24:31):
Corey.

Speaker 2 (01:24:32):
Corey, who is Chris Jenner's current boyfriend, was like somehow
at the crime scene and they were yeah, he was there,
and there were sometimes multiple There's a photograph of him,
and there seemed to have been two cause of death reports,
which is also kind of unusual. So anyway, that's the
the scatterbuch.

Speaker 3 (01:24:53):
What is it? This scuttle b Maybe we should about that.

Speaker 2 (01:24:57):
Yeah, Like I've just been super curious. I thought that
that rabbit hole so so many times. So that was
something that I was expecting to be in there. And yeah,
j Loo seemed to not get too much coverage. Obviously
she was at the nightclub for that infamous shooting. I'm
always so curious, like what happens behind the scenes where
things silent?

Speaker 3 (01:25:14):
Her too, what happened? He has Keisha his sister.

Speaker 12 (01:25:17):
Like they almost made it seem like he's an holy child,
Like I think.

Speaker 2 (01:25:20):
They genuinely did do that. She he does have a sister.
She does somehow work in business. She's been very private,
has a family of her own in a different last name.
I think she goes by Keisha Combs and has really
virtually stayed out of the spotlight, although KK who we've
talked a lot about, is like the Gilain Maxwell of
Combs Enterprises who stayed out of the trial altogether.

Speaker 3 (01:25:43):
This last time.

Speaker 2 (01:25:44):
She's in the documentary, and I can't imagine that she's
not getting sucked into a lot of civil lawsuits as well.

Speaker 3 (01:25:50):
Oh absolutely.

Speaker 7 (01:25:52):
I mean people even went to her and told her
what was going on, and she was just like, yeah,
you know what I mean, Like she didn't hear it. Yeah,
I think we're gonna hear from her for sure.

Speaker 4 (01:26:02):
Sickening.

Speaker 8 (01:26:04):
Wow.

Speaker 7 (01:26:04):
This is true crime tonight on iHeart Radio, where we're
talking true crime all the time. We're right in the
middle of kind of like unpacking the Diddy documentary and
out on Netflix right now. It's called Sean Comb's The Wreckinging.
If you want to weigh in, hit us up on
the talkbacks, download the iHeart Radio app with the little
microphone and boom you're on the show. We have like
a few minutes left and I have got to tell
you guys what happen today.

Speaker 3 (01:26:23):
Yes, in Brian Walsh trial.

Speaker 7 (01:26:26):
So today was the eighth day in the murder trial
for the accused Massachusetts wife killer Brian Walsh. Court testimony
today focused on like the personal relationships and activities that
Brian Walsh and the victim in this case, Anna Walsh,
in the days leading up to her quote unquote disappearance.

Speaker 3 (01:26:43):
Okay. Brian Walsh is on trial for the first degree
murder of his wife.

Speaker 7 (01:26:48):
Her name is Anna, Anna sorry, Anna Walsh, who went
missing January of twenty twenty three. The prosecutors are alleging
that Brian Walsh killed Anna, while the defense is arguing
that the victim died of sudden, unexplained death. Brian Walsh
has pled guilty to dismembering her and misleading police, but

(01:27:08):
he has pled not guilty to her murder. So today
the main testimony today, Oh, it was very emotional. It
was all like friends and whatnot of Brian and Anna.

Speaker 3 (01:27:20):
Okay.

Speaker 7 (01:27:21):
And the first one his name is Jen I'm sorry,
Jem Mootlu and he was a close friend to both
the accused of Brian Walsh and of course the victim,
Anna Walsh. They and he spent New Year's Eve with
a couple, which was just like literally the day before
she went missing, right, Okay, So he said that, you know,

(01:27:42):
I'm going to summarize this very quickly. He said, everything
was fine, he said, there were no problems. The night
was great. They they they took pictures. Anna was texting
during the evening and suggested, hey, let's take a picture
and they sent it to her little boyfriend will Fasto.
That was pretty interesting, and Jem said that he observed

(01:28:03):
no problems that night. But he did say that he
knew about the that there were some marital issues and
that her travel schedule because she was traveling a lot
for work, was taking a toll on the marriage, and
it was distressing that Brian had to remain in Massachusetts
with the children.

Speaker 8 (01:28:18):
Again.

Speaker 3 (01:28:18):
Brian was getting ready to go.

Speaker 7 (01:28:19):
To jail for this federal art fraud okay, so he
really couldn't travel. So that was causing a lot of
strain on the marriage and it was he was very
emotional in the stand. Jem was, it was pretty sad.
One thing that was interesting that I definitely want to
get it in before we wrap up. There was a
the federal probation officer that Brian had been assigned testified
today as well. She was his probation officer in this

(01:28:43):
federal art fraud case, okay, and she said that, you know,
during this time Brian was this home confinement with specific
approved windows for leaving.

Speaker 3 (01:28:54):
Okay, so when he.

Speaker 7 (01:28:56):
Needed to leave the house, he needed to get approval
because he was basically arrests. Okay, and remember the one
of the defenses things is Brian even made reservations at
the dinner for us first while the federal probation officers like,
he never got approval for that.

Speaker 3 (01:29:15):
Wood go to Low's, He probably got approval for that.

Speaker 4 (01:29:19):
I have to go to Lows to get some equipment
to go pack up.

Speaker 7 (01:29:22):
Wouldn't say I had to go to Low's to my
hack saw, you know, So yeah, I got it.

Speaker 4 (01:29:27):
I thought that was that interesting.

Speaker 7 (01:29:29):
He had to have permission to go to the grocery store,
but not other non essential items like he didn't he
he probably had to get approval for it. So yeah,
that's uh ooh scary. Anyway, I thought that was very interesting.
Another person that testified today was Anna's close friend Alyssa Kirby,
and she described the victim as like a sister to her.

(01:29:51):
They were very close. She recalled that Anna was at
a breaking point on December twenty ninth, showing that she
was really upset while driving back two Massachusetts from her
job in DC. And Anna wanted Brian to take responsibility
for his legal situation. Anne was exploring ways to get
her children to be with her in DC full time.

Speaker 9 (01:30:12):
She had set up if I remember correctly, she had
set up spaces for them to stay.

Speaker 3 (01:30:17):
She wanted them so desperately.

Speaker 7 (01:30:19):
Yeah, she did, so, you know, basically the the oh,
by the way, the most important thing the state, the
Commonwealth of Massachusetts rusted today. So we're going to start
hearing from the defense next. It's going to be very
interesting to hear what their defense is going to be.

Speaker 2 (01:30:35):
I can't waite care poor Anna to shreds because she
was married to this super monster clown and she had
a job in a different city and probably had she
had probably fallen for somebody who treated her nicely and
wanted to move her kids out of this you know,
hell hole that she was in with him.

Speaker 4 (01:30:52):
They're going to rip the shreds.

Speaker 7 (01:30:53):
And speaking of hellhole, the friend that testified today, Alissa,
she said that she knew that Anna and Brian hadn't
been intimate for almost a year and that Anna was
like really depressed because of his situation and what a
scumbag she married.

Speaker 3 (01:31:08):
Yeah, she didn't say I'm paraphrasing right, right, right.

Speaker 7 (01:31:11):
But she also said that she knew that Anna had
like this little crush on will you know, her little
boyfriend that she had. I keep saying a little boyfriend.
I don't know why, but her boyfriend that she had.
But she did not know that about an affair, which
was interesting to me that Anna never confided in her about.

Speaker 12 (01:31:31):
The friend that she was not having, you know, a
relationship with her husband.

Speaker 2 (01:31:35):
But everybody her friend appened on the stand after her death,
you know, like to just take to the grave like
that is like she did. If she did know, she
did the right thing by not saying on the stand.
But I think that's what's going to come, is they're
going to rip her to shreds, you know, her memory

(01:31:55):
to shred well.

Speaker 9 (01:31:56):
I hope not, Stephanie, because also that would particularly makes
the defense look bad because they're saying that Brian Walsh,
the accused murderer, had no knowledge right of that's affair.

Speaker 3 (01:32:11):
Taking away the motives, So that would be a real I.

Speaker 7 (01:32:13):
Forgot something really important. I think this This federal probation
officer's testimony was very good, and one thing that she
said was that Brian Walsh requested on January first, he
was going to need to leave the house to help
his mother. Okay, keep that in mind. Keep that in mind.
He made that request on December twenty second.

Speaker 3 (01:32:34):
Oh advance, and he went to her house. That's all
the dumping that side of his mother's house.

Speaker 7 (01:32:42):
So I think that the I think what the Commonwealth
is trying to do is show like the premeditation, like
the things that he that he was planning.

Speaker 3 (01:32:49):
Yeah, interesting, it makes sense.

Speaker 2 (01:32:51):
Can you imagine you're at the New Year's Eve party
with them, knowing, well, now that the guy that you
were celebrating New Year's Eve with had already plotted a
days prior to kill the woman that you're also spending
time with.

Speaker 7 (01:33:03):
Right and on j She also said that January second,
he left the house unauthorized leave, and that Brian said, oh,
he was just picking up the kids. So I think
but I think that's when he made the Low's trip.

Speaker 3 (01:33:15):
Wow. I think I have to go back and look.

Speaker 2 (01:33:18):
But I think that's what anyway, not try to tear
her to shreds or like saying we're going to.

Speaker 7 (01:33:23):
See, we're going to see, we're going to see starting tomorrow,
property we believe tomorrow, I believe I'm going to be
very interested to see if they mentioned Michael Proctor at all.

Speaker 4 (01:33:33):
That was a really good update.

Speaker 2 (01:33:34):
Right seriously, within the I know I'm never going to
ask a question because I'll derail us. But man, this
has been an action packed night. I feel like I
want to talk for ten more hours. Make this show
never stop. We're going to do a twenty four hour marathon. Well,
I guess tomorrow. We'll be back tomorrow. Obviously it's Thursday,
so we will be back tomorrow. Definitely following all of

(01:33:56):
the above cases. Obviously Brian Walsh's case, Luigi case, you
name it, we're following it. Keep those questions coming court,
anything you want to say in your final words here
for this evening, be

Speaker 9 (01:34:08):
Well, everybody, all right, good night, everybody, good night, good night,

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

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;}The D4vd Homicide Probe, Epstein’s Grand Jury, and the Luigi Mangione CEO Murder Case

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;}Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

Betrayal: Weekly

All Episodes

The D4vd Homicide Probe, Epstein’s Grand Jury, and the Luigi Mangione CEO Murder Case

Stuff You Should Know