Wild Day for Karen Reads Defense, Weinstein’s Fight, and the Hunt for a New England Killer

Attorney Richard Lydecker, a former New York prosecutor who served in both the Major Crimes and Major Racketeering Bureaus, breaks down the RICO case against Sean 'Diddy' Combs. Meanwhile, Weinstein’s retrial nears closing arguments in Manhattan, and New Englanders are still gripped by fear over 12 mysterious deaths some believe point to a serial killer. Tune in for all the details. 

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

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, where we talk
true crime all the time. Today is Monday, June second,
and we have a stacked night of headlines on our
second live show. Ditty's former rival sug Night gives a
tell all interview to ABC News from prison. We have
more testimony from Mia on the stand at the Ditty

(00:40):
trial tonight and day two in the defense in the.

Speaker 3 (00:42):
Karen Reid retrial.

Speaker 2 (00:43):
I'm Stephanie Leidecker and I head up KAT Studios where
we make true crime documentaries and podcasts, and I get
to do that with Courtney Armstrong, our producer and also
an incredible host and of course our crime analyst.

Speaker 3 (00:57):
Body move in, So body, let's unpack this.

Speaker 4 (01:00):
Ditty stuff is very heavy, So you know, let's we
have to get into it. But I have to have
a little bit of levity. There has to be a
little bit of levity with all this as in Mighty Ditty.

Speaker 3 (01:10):
Can't you see? Sometimes the things.

Speaker 4 (01:12):
Just terrify me, like the things that he's being accused
of is terrifying and for people who are maybe just
learning about this and maybe it's been too much for you,
you know, to kind of thinking that, you know, you
want to catch up on it, it's just been too much.
I'm going to just bring you like a very quick
synopsis of what's been going on. So as a reminder,
Diddy's on trial for allegedly operating a criminal enterprise involving kidnapping, arson, bribery,

(01:38):
and sex trafficking for the last twenty years. He has
pled not guilty to all the charges, and he faces
life in prison if he's convicted. All Right, here's what's
happened so far, and it's just as a background. Diddy
is like I'm sure you guys know who he is,
but he's really well known for being like a music mogul,
right the hip hop of the nineties and the two thousands,

(01:59):
with like Tupac and Big Ye and Shuge Night, like
the whole West Coast, East Coast thing. I'm sure we
all remember that well. He was arrested on September sixteenth
of twenty twenty four in New York City by federal
agents and Since his arrest, he's been held without bail
in New York City and Brooklyn in the federal jail.

Speaker 3 (02:19):
Okay, it's joke.

Speaker 4 (02:21):
It's no joke. I mean this is like federal like
legit prison, right. Well, his trial began in May, so
this is all very recent, okay, and he's currently it's
currently ongoing. We're in the fourth week right now, and
so far the testimony against him has been like pretty damning, okay.
Cassie Ventura, she's his ex girlfriend. She testified for over

(02:41):
four days about a decade of abuse, including like these
drug fueled freak offs and they're like these like sex
orgies performative where Diddy would like watch and film and
force her to do things that she just didn't want
to do. It's just disgusting. It's too much to get
into on the okay. Additionally, rapper Kid Cut he testified

(03:03):
that his car was firebombed with a Molotov cocktail. That's arson, okay.
Federal agents have testified about items recovery during raids on
his home and properties, including firearms and drugs, and four
of his assistants have testified about horrible working conditions, threats
of violence, sexual abuse, getting more drugs, kidnapping even like

(03:25):
he's accused of kidnapping one of them. And then on
top of all of that, enters sug Night, right, enters
sug Knight, who you know, they've been enemies. My whole
like nineteen nineties is developed around you know, sug and
tupacating Diddy and you know remember Snoop Dogg getting up

(03:47):
there and going what you got no love for West Coast?

Speaker 3 (03:49):
Like, you know, it's just very framing my whole youth.

Speaker 4 (03:53):
Well, Intersuge Night, Stephanie, what can you tell us about
what happened?

Speaker 2 (03:57):
Well, inter sug Night from behind bars? Remember he's serving
prison time right now for running over two people in Compton,
and he has a pretty steeped record. So you know,
as we're talking about Suge Knight and I too remember it.

Speaker 3 (04:10):
Well, he was such a big deal.

Speaker 2 (04:12):
And again the Puffy and Suge Night rivalry was really infamous.
In fact, it was allege you know, sug was with
Tupac when Tupac was murdered and that actually there's a
trial coming up for that real soon too. You're right
here in Vegas, right there in Vegas, that's right, Yeah,
and the accused you know, basically alleges that Diddy offered

(04:34):
a million dollars to basically participate in the murder or
killing of Tupac.

Speaker 3 (04:41):
So this is going very far back.

Speaker 2 (04:44):
The fact that Shug is sort of speaking out in
Diddy's trial, I think it is two part One. Is
he a reliable source at this point? What is he
gaining from behind bars, if anything? And then also why
suddenly is he weighing in? I mean, he's been on Cuomo,
he's doing this ABC interview. It is entertaining, and he
is entertaining, no question, But he's also also a violent

(05:06):
criminal and that shouldn't be forgotten.

Speaker 3 (05:08):
Yeah, for sure.

Speaker 4 (05:09):
And you know, I asked, I asked my girlfriend. I
was like, why do you think Sug Knight is coming
to the defense of Diddy? Because she's like my expert
on all things Diddy, she's obsessed with it.

Speaker 3 (05:18):
And she said, she.

Speaker 4 (05:19):
Said, I think that's he's recognizing that people saw things
and didn't do anything about it.

Speaker 2 (05:25):
And that's what he's also saying from a big picture
is that look, Didty's a bad apple, no question per him.
But he's really saying, you got to shake the tree.

Speaker 5 (05:34):
Right.

Speaker 2 (05:34):
There's lots of big apples in this and this is
a very organized system, and yes, Diddy should go down,
but Diddy is the tip of the iceberg, is sort
of the assertion, if you will. Sugar is getting out
of prison allegedly he's up for parole in twenty thirty four.
So he's been calling a lot of networks and journalists

(05:55):
and you know, really trying to rally people from behind bars.
That's also pretty danger you know now that there's this
talk about their potentially maybe being a part in et cetera.
Oh yeah, these are dangerous details. Right, So if you're
like today giving testimony and you're facing your the monster
that you claim has ruined your life. And if this

(06:15):
goes away and did he is acquitted or there's a
you know, a hung trial or something hung jury, what
happens to them? I mean, that's a really dangerous spot
to put somebody.

Speaker 6 (06:25):
It's terrible. But also to your point, Shuge Night really
is trying to it seems like do the opposite. He
was on ABC News this weekend. I believe mm hmm.
And here's a quote. He said, if Colembs is the
only one held accountable for alleged violence and abuse inside
the world a rap, it's not gonna it won't break
the cycle. If you're gonna make Puffy answer, make everyone answer.

(06:47):
So it really does seem like he's trying to shine
a light on the entirety of the rap community.

Speaker 2 (06:52):
Yeah, something that's more systemic, which is probably very true.
I mean, think about it twenty years operating, and again
I'll speak for myself. You know, by while you were
coming up and you know, nineties in your hip hop,
I was probably dancing on a table at a nightclub
listening to Madonna. So you know, this rivalry is something,
of course I always heard about in the background, but really,
until digging in, I didn't really realize.

Speaker 3 (07:15):
Or appreciate just how steeped this history is.

Speaker 2 (07:18):
They had it out for each other, and murder was
something that happened very quickly. So Suge Knight is an insider,
but he's an insider on the other side.

Speaker 3 (07:28):
So is that reliable? Who knows? Do you think it's
motivated by something?

Speaker 2 (07:32):
I mean, he's up for parole, he's been in and
out of prison. I mean it is big business now
to have the infamy and having the FaceTime. I mean,
he's doing a lot of press, he's been on TMC,
he's been on CUOMO, he's been on ABC.

Speaker 3 (07:46):
News, sowhere, he's everywhere. And is that appropriate?

Speaker 2 (07:49):
Are we giving more of a platform for someone who's
also committed very bad things allegedly?

Speaker 3 (07:56):
But look, it is Interestingfted. He's been convicted, it's not allegedly,
he's been.

Speaker 2 (08:00):
And he's been in and out of prison quite a
few times for you know, very violent crimes, including the
one he's you know, serving for now in San Diego.
So he's no joke, but he does have an insider's look.
So as someone who was a part of the beehive,
if you will, you know, is that valid?

Speaker 6 (08:16):
Interesting perspective in any case. So another intersection between sug
Knight and Ditty is Capricorn Clark good call out. Yeah.
Capricorn Clark was sug Knight's assistant who then turned to
be Ditty's assistant. Well, Capricorn took the stand and talked

(08:39):
about the violence and threats that she witnessed while working
for Ditty, and it was staggering. She told jurors that
Diddy said he would throw her into the East River
if she failed a five day lie detective test about
stealing jewelry. Didty was convinced someone who was stealing jewelry
and it might be her.

Speaker 2 (08:58):
Can you imagine the level of paranoia to assume a
that your assistant who you're paying, has stolen jewelry In
this case, you know, he was accusing her of stealing
some luxury jewel and then being taken by your boss
to a warehouse and being hooked up to a light
detector test for by a bodyguard.

Speaker 4 (09:20):
Like, I mean, this is the kidnapping allegations, or some
of the kidnapping allegations, right, because she was forced to
stay there, she was held against her will, which is kidnapping.
This is a predicate act of rico of racketeering. Right,
that's the right deal.

Speaker 3 (09:35):
And one of the things you're.

Speaker 2 (09:36):
Like, yeah, that came up today, you know, I think
they're trying to poke holes in her testimony as well.
So even though Mia has this you know, harrowing account,
by the way, everybody so far has a version of
a harrowing account, it seems like the defense is sort
of poking holes at the fact that maybe some of
the witnesses also on social media or outwardly have posted

(09:58):
things that were very very positive about Ditty in the
years after the alleged abuse, and you know, that's been
kind of discussed a lot online. Bill Maher had talked
about it on his show last night, basically saying, look,
if it's not consensual, if something's not consensual, then you know,
why would you text them? As I'm paraphrasing, but why
would you text somebody or put up on social media

(10:21):
that you know you admire them.

Speaker 3 (10:22):
Et cetera. And I get it.

Speaker 2 (10:24):
I mean that's a I get the optics of that,
and I understand the confusion in that. But you know,
at the end of the day, that's like risk management
if you're a victim of abuse and fearing for your life,
which it appears many of these assistants and employees legitimately
claim to fear for their lives. So a, they're putting
their lives on the line by testifying. And then also

(10:46):
that is pretty scary stuff. So yeah, sometimes you might say, oh,
you know, Ditty's wonderful, but really you're just trying to
sort of play in Ditty's world.

Speaker 3 (10:55):
It's almost like you're yourself safe. The backlash for.

Speaker 6 (10:57):
Safety calm the Beast absolutely and listen. They also testified
they had to have been completely terrified because not only
did she have to procure illegal and prescription drugs for Diddy,
the prescriptions were in her name. That goes to drug trafficking,
which is another Rico predicate, right, And in terms of

(11:19):
violence and terror, she also was forced to accompany Colmbs
to confront kid Cuddy, who you mentioned earlier, Stephanie, and
how she witnessed Combs beat his ex girlfriend Cassie Ventura
after that confrontation happened. So she's seen him beat people.
She's been kidnapped her his will.

Speaker 3 (11:38):
So she's really she's a really important witness.

Speaker 4 (11:41):
She's coroborating all the you know, the Cassie Ventura testimony
and the kid cutting testimony, which are both really important
for those rocketeering charges because both those drug trafficking, sex trafficking,
and arson and kidnapping are all predicate acts of Rico.
And again you only need too to get acts of
Rico to prove Rico.

Speaker 6 (12:03):
Later in the show, at eleven, we're talking about week
seven of Karen Reid's retrial, and if you don't know,
we'll bring you up to speed. We're also going to
have new testimony in the Ditty trial. And a defense
attorney joining us to discuss the severity of some of
the charges, and then we'll be hearing from you. So
keep it right here on True Crime tonight.

Speaker 2 (12:31):
Big updates in the Karen Reid retrial. But first we're
going to go back to Diddy. We had some big
legal questions and decided to maybe give my brother, who's
a great attorney, rich Lidecker, to have him answer some
of the great things that we have for him. So
he'll be joining us later in the show as well.
So body, where should we start. So week four in
the Ditty trial began. We've heard from Capricorn Clark, who

(12:55):
was his former assistant, about the alleged abuse that she received.
But then we also heard now from Mia.

Speaker 4 (13:03):
Okay, we touched on her a little bit in the
first segment, but we're gonna kind of get into more
details now. So she says that she was emotionally and
physically and sexually assaulted by Ditty while working for him.
So today she was cross examined, and of course those
cross examinations are very contentious.

Speaker 5 (13:20):
Right.

Speaker 4 (13:21):
Well, here's some of the things that she's saying. Okay,
so she is saying that, you know, the highs were
really high. Working with Ditty, it was fabulous, but the
lows were like terribly, terribly low. There were times when
she wouldn't sleep for days. She testified that she didn't
sleep for five days one time, and that she was
living on adderall. She said that her her duty is
mainly included, like his social media presence, protecting him, you know,

(13:45):
staying within his eyesight, which is very strange to me,
but okay. She said that he was very violent with her.
She testified several ways in which Combes was, you know,
throwing things at her, throwing her against the wall, and
she also testified that he sexually assaulted her on more
than one occasion. Well, keeping all that in mind, the
defense attorney for Diddy Brian Steele, who by the way,

(14:08):
is best known for successfully defending rapper Young Thug on
racketeering charges.

Speaker 3 (14:13):
That's right, right.

Speaker 4 (14:14):
So he's kind of like a big time guy. He
just got off somebody for this. He's also represented Drake. Wow,
I didn't know. That's that's crazy. Well, anyway, he showed
her a text message that she sent Ditty. She texted
Ditty and said, oh my god, I had a dream

(14:36):
last night. It was a nightmare about r Kelly. She said,
I screamed for you and you came to rescue me.
And Ditty's lawyer is like, listen, if he's doing all
these terrible things to you, why are you texting him?
You know you are my protector.

Speaker 2 (14:51):
Basically, yeah, but that again, that tracks just we were
just talking about. Keep in mind, at that exact same
time we spoke about this briefly last night, Diddy's then
x kim porter, the mother of several of his children,
had also just recently passed.

Speaker 5 (15:05):
Right.

Speaker 2 (15:05):
It was a very unusual time in this Diddy bubble
from what we're told, and she was fearful. So yeah,
why not just you know, please the person keep the
optics cool, let him know.

Speaker 3 (15:17):
That, hey, we're good, we're good, nothing to see here.

Speaker 2 (15:20):
Please don't come after me with a hammer because I'm
afraid from my life and we're cool.

Speaker 4 (15:26):
Right, So, and then you know, she basically said that
the defense is cherry picking. You know these text messages.
There was over fifty text messages he asked her to read,
and they were all very like positive. Mea explained that,
you know, those positive text messages were basically the byproduct
of her being brainwashed, and I think that to your point, Stephanie,
earlier you had mentioned that, you know, it's probably also

(15:47):
like self preservation in a way, right, Like if I'm
positive outwardly, then he's not going to come at me, right, Yeah,
it's kind of like she's protecting herself in light of
everybody else having all these shoes with Ditty. In fact,
he asked her, the defense attorney asked her, why didn't
you tell Cassie to leave Ditty after you witnessed the abuse,

(16:09):
And she replied and said she didn't really felt like
it was her place. She didn't feel like she could.
I remember covering for him when he forced me to
and feeling really terrible about it.

Speaker 2 (16:19):
Right, her Spidey sense was like going crazy. But keep
in mind, Cassie really couldn't leave. There was tapes, there's
visual proof of something really hideous.

Speaker 3 (16:29):
So even if Cassie did leave, he.

Speaker 2 (16:31):
Had threatened her, you know, by her account, and also
had this revenge porn, so there was really nowhere to go.
And allegedly, according to Cassie Ventura's mother, he was also
threatening her family. So imagine you're getting threats to your
mother and to your father and you're fearing for their safety.
He said that he was going to make sure that
mom and dad lost their jobs. So you know, Cassie

(16:53):
was in this bubble. She really couldn't escape it, according
to her testimony. And now you know, this all just
reinforces it. So we're hearing from me it's more of
the same, but it is coroborating something really scary.

Speaker 6 (17:05):
I'm Courtney Armstrong with Stephanie Leidecker and Body movin. We're
talking about the p Ditty case and are about to
hear from a guest.

Speaker 3 (17:12):
Yes, we have a guest.

Speaker 2 (17:13):
It's actually my big brother, who is a very fancy attorney,
Rich Lidecker. He used to be a prosecutor in New
York and he dealt with major crimes, civil crimes, racketeering cases.
He worked as a New York prosecutor, so he's no joke.
He also has his very fancy law firm that has
firms all across the country, and he's going to kind
of break down some of this racketeering stuff for us

(17:36):
in layman's terms. If he's here, Rich, can you hear us?

Speaker 7 (17:40):
Yeah, I think I can hear you all.

Speaker 2 (17:42):
Nice welcome big brother. I'm so happy you're here.

Speaker 7 (17:46):
Thank you very much for having me.

Speaker 3 (17:48):
It's funny.

Speaker 2 (17:48):
When rich was in law school he would do these
mock trials, and then when he started working at the
prosecution's office, I used to go there and sneak in
there and watch him be a trial attorney. And he
used to deal with all these like really scary major criminals.
And he would get up there and say, I'm Richard Leidecker,
and I defend we the people. And I would get
goose pimples from head to toe because he was really

(18:12):
putting away bad guys. So, Rich, I know you've handled
so many racketeering cases. So can you break it down
for us? Because I feel like we're we're getting a
little confused, or at least I am is why would
did he be charged not for rape or sexual assault
or violence domestic violence as opposed to racketeering, which is

(18:32):
this like big scary word.

Speaker 3 (18:34):
But can you break it down? What's the basic terms
for that?

Speaker 7 (18:38):
I think I could sum up as somebody who brought
a lot of these cases myself is you know, racketeering
is one longer sentences, right, so it punishes a group
of criminal acts harder than just the individual acts. And
when you say racketeering, you know, yeah, yeah, I mean
I could give you a thousand cases and all the

(18:59):
legal stuff, but I can just sum it all up
and just think.

Speaker 8 (19:02):
Of like the Godfather, right, and there's an ongoing criminal
enterprise here, it's a family that's in the business. These
are all sort of analogous words in the business of
just committing crime, right, And it's not just one crime
here and there.

Speaker 7 (19:23):
Like the rape, the sexual trafficking, the sexual assault. But
I think the legislatures throughout the country have all came
to the conclusion that when there's an ongoing criminal enterprise,
almost like the MS thirteen gangs that would probably fall
within that same category, that there's a larger danger to

(19:44):
society because of the ongoingness, the coordinatedness. It becomes like
the head of a giant stake. So the sentencing goes up.
And from a prosecutor perspective, so it also broadens the
things you can talk about a trial, right because generally,
if you go rop a bank or shoot somebody, judge says, okay,
at this particular moment, tell me who you shot, tell

(20:07):
me who you robbed, or tell me what you did,
and he limits you under most rules on the evidence
rules to just talking about that little issue. But when
you got to.

Speaker 8 (20:17):
Prove an ongoing criminal enterprise, all of a sudden it
could open up and make relevant like years of time.
That's where you see all the things that you're all discussing.
The ability to put more and more evidence from the
jury comes out. So that and racketeering, you've got to
prove ongoing enterprise as opposed to just the individual crimes.

(20:40):
So you got a lot more to prove, you got
a lot more witnesses. It's a lot more headache, but
the consequences are far larger. And if you bring a
racketeering case, you're likely to plea bargain that down because
the sentencings are so high.

Speaker 7 (20:54):
I mean, you can get twenty the life on these
on these things.

Speaker 2 (20:56):
Yeah, didd he's looking at a life sentence, right, So
is there a thing involved? And again not to get
to in the weeds on the law, but double jeopardy
for example, like say, for example, in an alternate universe
that did he gets pardoned by President Trump again just
putting this out there as a pretend example, could he
then be tried again under the state's law, or is

(21:20):
that considered maybe double jeopardy.

Speaker 8 (21:22):
Well, I think you that's a great question. I think
you should have hit it on the head. And when
you say, under the state's law, right, so generally double jeopardy,
as most of us know, is you can't be put
on trial twice or put at jeopardy twice if you've
been prosecuted once.

Speaker 7 (21:38):
That's enough.

Speaker 8 (21:39):
He got off, He got off. That's it's done. But
the question becomes is when the federal government does it.
Can the states come back and get another bite of
the apple?

Speaker 7 (21:47):
Right? Right?

Speaker 8 (21:48):
And basically I can tell you if the states vary,
and it depends upon the state code. New York, we couldn't.
And a lot of times we would disagree with the
Feds all the time because they would jump in and
take one of our cases and then they dismiss it
or work out a plea bargain, and then we couldn't
go back after them under state laws because our state
law said we couldn't. We couldn't bring the subsequent prosecution.

(22:11):
Some states aren't like that, so it might very well
apply that there might be but I could promise you
it'll be a giant legal brew haha, fight over whether
or not double Jeffardy's attached. It's a very gray, ambiguous
area of the law.

Speaker 3 (22:27):
So interesting. Yeah, I mean, there's been so many antics today.

Speaker 2 (22:30):
It appears, you know, in the testimony even today the
defense attorney and again this is just like online chatter
about today's testimony. They were really saying how the defense
to Diddy was being almost not victim shaming might not
be the right word or term, but in some ways
was kind of being a little aggressive to the witness Mia,

(22:50):
And is that a strategy? Is that bad optics?

Speaker 8 (22:55):
You know, it's funny. I would have said, like, you
could never do that and get away with it, and so.

Speaker 7 (22:59):
I always be polite.

Speaker 8 (23:01):
I would make my points and you know, you kill
them with kindness, but you would never get away with that.

Speaker 2 (23:06):
Thank you for calling in, Richard. We're definitely gonna have
to have you come back. We're going to be discussing
more about the Ditty case and also Karen Reid, the
defense really coming in hot in her new retrial. We're
very divided about this one, and there have been some
really shocking developments today and I can't wait to dig in.

Speaker 3 (23:24):
So, Courtney, where should we begin.

Speaker 6 (23:27):
Okay, we're in the seventh week of this murder retrial
for Karen Reid, and the prosecution has rested. The defense
has just begun, and I got to say, I think
they're coming in really hot, very strong in my opinion.
As a reminder a body, I know you're already, like
Stephanie said, we're divided.

Speaker 3 (23:46):
No, I think I'm moving. I think I'm changing. I
might be changing now. So that is so ironic, let's
find out.

Speaker 6 (23:53):
So just here as a quick reminder, Karen Reid is
accused of running over her Boston Police Office Sir John
O'Keeffe with her SUV after a night of heavy drinking,
and the allegation is that she dropped she went to
the bottom of this driveway and backed her car over
him and knowingly left him for dead. Okay, her defense

(24:18):
is very different, that she dropped him at the bottom
of that driveway, he walked up into the house with
fellow police officers who were having a similarly big night
of revelry and drinking and debauchery. That something went wrong
in there, some kind of altercation that then turned into
those officers planting John O'Keeffe's body in the snow and

(24:42):
framing Karen Reid and being the ones doing the investigation,
they would be the ones to do it. If that's
the case. Again, two sides to every coin. So that's
what's been happening. And today there was some crazy, crazy witnesses.
Jonathan Diamantis. So he is a longtime friend of one

(25:07):
of the police officers named Michael Proctor.

Speaker 2 (25:11):
And he's a big deal because Michael Proctor is the
one that was tossed out of the last trial and
I think let go from the investigation altogether because he
was sending inappropriate texts about Karen Reid during the investigation.

Speaker 6 (25:25):
That's exactly right, and that's what this testimony was. And yeah,
so he Michael Proctor's been knocked off, excuse me, knocked
off the case and let go.

Speaker 3 (25:34):
He's alive, he's not dead, yees o.

Speaker 6 (25:36):
Retty well, but his friend, this man who seemed lovely.
I watched his whole testimony, Jonathan Diamantis. He was friend
since middle school with trooper Michael Proctor. And he couldn't
even read the texts out loud. The one Stephanie that
you mentioned were inappropriate. He got to a point and said,

(25:58):
these are not my words. And there was a quick
sidebar and then it was taken over by the attorney.
But these text messages, they really go to concerns about
the credibility of the officers handling the investigation, and they
were derogatory, They were unprofessional to say the least, and

(26:21):
they were somewhere sexual in nature. You know. Some of
the really tame ones were where Proctor was saying of
Karen Reid, the woman he is in charge of investigating, quote,
she's a whack job. He uses the S word to
describe her, and then goes on to say she's a babe.

(26:43):
She's got a weird Falls River accent though, and no
ass Again, just wildly inappropriate and partial.

Speaker 2 (26:51):
Right, So the idea, if you're the investigator and you
guys are trying to find justice, you want there to
be some partial investigators happening, right. So, I think the
real crux of this case is whether or not there's
some sort of a cover up, if in fact evidence
had been planted. Is she getting a fair trial, Because,
like we talked about last night, the investigation was, you know,

(27:13):
by any standard, was handled inappropriately. You know, as a reminder,
they were collecting specimens from the crime scene in solo
cups and putting them in plastic in paper bags.

Speaker 3 (27:23):
You know, it was the equivalent of the three of.

Speaker 2 (27:25):
Us doing a high stakes operation, which is fine except
for the fact that it's life and death. And in
Karen Reid's case, can you imagine if you're claiming your
innocence because you're now your boyfriend, you know, died and
he was a veteran of the police force in Boston.
These are all his buddies that are doing this investigation.
And that air quotes family of brotherhood. Is that appropriate

(27:49):
when actually bringing something to justice? That brotherhood could also
be considered, you know, kind of like stacking the system
against Karen. Does she really a stand a chance? The
fact is they don't like her, period, and does that
mean they're going to railroad her?

Speaker 3 (28:04):
You know, that's the big question. I don't know, Well,
I've got some concerns about this brotherhood.

Speaker 6 (28:10):
Okay, the next person who was on the stand and
this I've actually never seen anything like it.

Speaker 2 (28:16):
It was it was law, you know, it was right
at us. It seems as though they're actors at this point.

Speaker 6 (28:24):
Yes, so Kelly never takes the stand and she looks professional.
She is an officer and looks like she's going to
be a great witness and then turns into an absolutely
hostile witness. And this officer had all boiled down to
what she saw or did not see. So at the

(28:46):
time that at the time that this happened John O'Keefe's death.
Whether it was who did it, we don't know yet.
She was working that evening dispatch got a call that
there was a body in the snow, and then Kelly
Dover was told to go back into the dispatch room,
meaning get out of her patrol car, go back into

(29:06):
the office. In the office, there are all of these
video screens where you can kind of see what's going
on in the hallways and in a garage. Importantly, very importantly, yes,
and I know, body, I feel like you have stuff
to say about this. But Kelly Dever was saying, I
don't even know why I'm here. I have no connection

(29:27):
to this case. She was saying the word no before
the questions could come out of the attorney's mouth. So,
but she was on call that night and right when
it happened, she said that she had seen officers looking
for a quote oddly long time. I believe that's a
quote at the car that allegedly hit John O'Keefe in

(29:50):
the garage when it happened, so that would be important
that they were looking for way too long. Then turns
out she said, oh no, no, that didn't happen, and
I was already gone from my shift. I never saw anything.
And then she alleges the defense team of trying to

(30:10):
get her to perjure herself.

Speaker 3 (30:12):
She was being a bit indignant as well.

Speaker 2 (30:14):
And I'm not sure I totally appreciate the garage piece
of it. So why is that such a hot ticket item.

Speaker 4 (30:20):
Because the defense well, it's actually I think very true
that the state inverted the video, you know, in that garage,
and it looks like they inverted it to hide the fact.
And I could be incorrect, So somebody call in and
let me know if I'm wrong. They're trying to hide
the fact that there was an officer by that tail

(30:43):
light for way too long.

Speaker 3 (30:44):
And for her to be like.

Speaker 4 (30:45):
I don't know why I'm here, it seems very like, okay,
you know, I'm like rolling my eyes, right, it's just
not you know exactly why you're here, by the.

Speaker 2 (30:54):
Way you know why you're here, and by you giving
all this pause and acting weird and indignant on this stade.
It's also kind of suspicious, right, it makes it more
suspicious likely And to your point, by I forgot about that,
because that's a really important detail because her tail light,
so Karen read has a car that she peeled out
in this snowstorm in the middle of the night, drunk
as a skunk. All of them were, you know, that's

(31:16):
not a formal legal term, but she peels out and
allegedly her tail light is like the smoking gun. That's
where you know, proof that she hit him, killed him,
ran him over, and dipped.

Speaker 3 (31:28):
So now they're saying that they inverted that.

Speaker 2 (31:31):
Video, which would be counterintuitive to some of this these
forensics basically, right, that would basically say.

Speaker 3 (31:38):
Oh, yeah, this all lines up.

Speaker 2 (31:40):
Well not really, it doesn't really line up if the
video has been inverted, like, that's crazy making to me.
That would be like, uh, okay, we're done, let's all
go home now, goodbye.

Speaker 6 (31:51):
That's right. And then so what she attributed her initial
saying she saw the videos, she said, it's a quote
false memory, and yes, she.

Speaker 3 (32:01):
Didn't need to know that. She said it was a
false memory.

Speaker 6 (32:04):
That's right, she said, I didn't and she was blaming
the media actually and saying the media. I've seen videos. Yes,
I'm aware that it's in the you know that things
happen in the garage. Yes, I'm aware there was video,
but she initially was like, I'm not sure if there
were any video screens even in the dispatch.

Speaker 3 (32:23):
That's where she works. That's where she works.

Speaker 2 (32:26):
And by the way, it's a little Boston too, right,
in a great way, because I love Boston from New York.
So you know, it's like snitches get stitches, you know,
we don't, you know, we don't take each other out.

Speaker 3 (32:36):
Certainly if you're at your job. There's like a code.

Speaker 2 (32:38):
You know, I get it, and we all understand it.
But now this is an illegal code at this point.
So you have to speak the truth because these are
really important pieces to this trial.

Speaker 3 (32:48):
And Karen Reid is looking at life behind.

Speaker 4 (32:51):
Bars and her first trial already ended in the mistrial
exactly right. This is her retrial, so like everything's on
the line right now, and they did they're not calling
certain witnesses now.

Speaker 3 (33:02):
I mean it's like the state.

Speaker 4 (33:03):
Learned, Oh Proctor for instance, right, we're not bringing him back.

Speaker 3 (33:07):
So what does the defense do?

Speaker 4 (33:09):
They bring his friend who received those text messages, like
that's this miss the mistrial is definitely giving a leg
up to the defense.

Speaker 2 (33:16):
I think one thing I will say, because you know,
I think that Karen Reid, despite people saying she's unlikable,
I'm just regardless of that, and even regardless if she's
innocent or guilty. I just don't think the investigation was
handled very well. And that to me is the scary
part of this whole story. But at this point, what
happens next, Like how many more things does Karen Reid
have to have in her corner to say there was

(33:37):
a miscarriage of justice, there was a bad investigation. People
are lying on the stand, people are getting called out
like they're in law and order literally, So what happens.

Speaker 4 (33:46):
Well, we're gonna find out. We're gonna find out. Stay tuned.
We want to hear all your thoughts. Call us at
eight eight, eight thirty one Crime and I believe we
have a caller on the line that we're going to
take in the next segment. Stay tuned. The case that
shock the Nation is not over. Stay tuned for Mari
Fallow in the soci.

Speaker 3 (34:00):
Called Dean Stage.

Speaker 2 (34:10):
Let's go to our caller Tina, because she has some
insight or a question regarding Karen Reid.

Speaker 3 (34:15):
Hi, Tina, Hey, how are y'all? Hi? Thanks for Colin.
We're so happy to talk to you. Tell us your question.

Speaker 8 (34:23):
Thanks.

Speaker 9 (34:25):
What do y'all think about the testimony today with the
doctor talking about the dog bite or the puncture wounds
and all of that, because I have a I mean
I agreed with her. What do y'all feel about that?

Speaker 5 (34:40):
All right?

Speaker 6 (34:41):
I love this question so much. This is Courtney, Thank
you for calling. Just for anyone who's knock who didn't
watch the trial like you did today. The person who
testified is a woman named doctor Marie Russell. She's an
emergency doctor and a forensic pathologist. She actually testified and
Karen read first trial and she stated that the wounds

(35:03):
on O'Keefe victim O'Keeffe's arms were likely caused by an
animal attack and most likely a large dog. And I
think I think it was really compelling testimony. I mean,
it certainly speaks to what the defense says, which is
that something did happen to John O'Keeffe inside that home

(35:25):
and that you know, he got bitten potentially it was
then dragged outside and potentially beaten up in a basement
and things.

Speaker 2 (35:33):
And by the way, interestingly, whether this is you know,
just you know, divine timing, serendipitous or odd andsuspicious that
said dog that was at the house that night has
been has been given away. It was you know, it
wasn't a fit for the family, so it's been readopted elsewhere.
So frankly, there's really no dog to actually check any longer.

(35:56):
Which again, is that just you know, convenient? Is that suspicious?
You know? The question really also is on the one hand,
you know again, how I feel about this Karen read thing.
I just think, you know, listen, if there's any doubt,
you know, they're saying, oh it was because they hit
his body, or it was the injuries on his arm

(36:16):
came from the tail light, or it was the glass
that he was holding. Why would he not have scrapes
on his hands? Also, if the glass broke in his hand,
where are those scrapes? And the dog just mysteriously disappearing
seems so suspicious to me personally allegedly allegedly allegedly, but.

Speaker 4 (36:34):
Didn't they didn't they DNA test that though? Isn't there
something with DNA testing like the bite like the quote
unquote bite wounds or no.

Speaker 2 (36:42):
I don't think there is any DNA that I'm aware of.
But if anybody is listening that actually does have that answer,
please I jump in. Tell us, tell us, tell us, Tina,
So do you think guilty or not guilty? Okay, we
don't hear Tina. I'm gonna say that I think Tina
feels like there's a guilty critic InCAR does feel that
she's guilty because the way she asked the question, what

(37:04):
do you think about the dog bites?

Speaker 4 (37:06):
Right right, right, So when you're asking a question and
you're already like coming up with the answer, well that
it's dog bites.

Speaker 3 (37:12):
And I mean, I.

Speaker 4 (37:13):
Think Tina probably feels that Karen Rei is guilty. And
I have to be honest, you know. I know yesterday
I was kind of like on team guilty, but I
might be changing my mind. I'm I'm very open.

Speaker 3 (37:24):
I'm kind of a little divided. Listen.

Speaker 2 (37:25):
I don't think she's getting a fair trial. But one
thing I don't totally get. If this, you know, group
of law enforcement or former law enforcement wanted to place
a body and frame her, how did they know where
she was going and how did they know she wasn't
going to come back.

Speaker 3 (37:39):
So again we.

Speaker 2 (37:40):
Want to make sure we're hearing from you, So jump
in on the conversation, call us at one eight eight
eight three one Crime, or you could always reach out
on our socials at True Crime Tonight's show for TikTok
and Instagram, and also at True Crime Tonight on Facebook,
because again this all starts with you. So later in
the show, we're going to be talking about the Weinstein case,

(38:00):
but first, Didty you know obviously the whole world is
talking about Diddy right now, and again because we're now
tracking this every day, we just want to make sure
everyone's caught up on some of the testimony we've heard
so far, we haven't even covered, for example, the fact
that Didty you know, had his assistant actually testified it
today again for the second time, and then also his

(38:22):
former stylist that was also Cassie, his ex girlfriend's former stylist,
and he also really reiterated the fact that Cassie Ventura
felt as though she was being almost held captive, that
she did not want to participate in the freak Offs anymore,
and that he witnessed didty being extremely violent with her

(38:43):
time and time again and very very controlling. He told
a story that she had her hair up and Diddy
apparently saw her hair up in like a twist and
right away, in this very big fancy event, said no, no, no,
I want her hair down. I want her hair down,
and then forced you know, Deonta to kind of take
her hair down because that's the way he liked her

(39:05):
to be. And again, this is a small thing. It's
very different than you know, getting beaten up. But it
only speaks to the fact that she was not a
willing participant at a certain point, in the fact that
you know did he had threatened her parents and said
that he was going to again release these sex tapes
to her parents' jobs, and that he was going to

(39:28):
make sure that her parents lost their jobs. That in
and of itself could really make you stay in a
horrible situation. Sometimes, if you're the victim of abuse, when
we've heard this many times, you know you're putting your
own self on the line. Okay, made a bad decision.
I had to take the blame for it. This is
again potential victim mentality. But once they start threatening your

(39:49):
circle and your loved ones and your friends, your parents.
Can you imagine? It really feels like there's nowhere to hide, right,
So his testimony I thought was extremely compelling and again
only reinforced today by the recent testimony of Mia Courtney.

Speaker 3 (40:05):
What are you thinking about all this?

Speaker 6 (40:07):
You know, well, he also did assault Deontay Nash. Did
he being Ditty? You know in that hair up hair
down incident, which from everything we've been seeing and that's
been coming out, it seems like even the smallest instances
could really become episodes of explosions for him. So Diddy

(40:28):
lifted Nash up by his jacket off the ground. Again,
that's as salt. You don't put your hands on a
human when they don't want to.

Speaker 4 (40:35):
So it seems like when Diddy didn't have or when
he lost control of something, he lashed out right. And
I have to say, I'm not defending Diddy, but like
you know, Ditty's in charge of Cassie's image, like he's
her manager. He's taking her her thing, and he's going
to be in charge of how she looks and what
her wardrobe is and if he wants a certain style,

(40:57):
that's what Nash should have done. I mean, as her
image manager and whatnot for her music career. I didn't
necessarily think the hair thing was all that compelling. I did, however,
find out, you know, when he lashed out at Nash
for this, that I did find compelling. But the whole
hair up and hair down things, Okay.

Speaker 3 (41:16):
I'm totally with you on that.

Speaker 2 (41:17):
And by the way, that's interesting point I hadn't even
thought of that is like, yeah, he's in the business
of her right, So if they're on a red carpet,
or if they're going to an event that falls under
the jurisdiction of a work event aircraft.

Speaker 4 (41:30):
Yeah, your wardrobe, your makeup, everything your you know, is
managed by your image, your image manager or your manager
who you know, whoever you take advice from in that case,
Like when I was on the like the Mole, for instance,
I had everything to my ear rings had to be
managed by wardrobe. I didn't have any choices, and you know,
I just didn't think that was that big of a deal.

Speaker 2 (41:50):
That's true, But he was trying to defend her, you know,
and defending his friend, because he really did consider Cassie
or relief friend. So that small incidt with the hair
up hair down escalated to Courtney's point.

Speaker 3 (42:03):
Certainly did because he lost control right.

Speaker 6 (42:06):
Right, and even on the mole. Yes, were people in charge,
for sure, But if you got angry, would you lift
them off the ground by their callers?

Speaker 4 (42:16):
I kind of wanted to, not kidding well, and even
though you know, of course not I would never, of
course not.

Speaker 6 (42:23):
No, no rational.

Speaker 2 (42:25):
Person you know would, No rational person would. But we're
not dealing necessarily with a rational person. And you know,
again did he has said that these were drug filled
times and they were all doing a lot of drugs,
whether by choice or being given those drugs. So does
that mean he gets a free pass because he has
a bad memory and is apologetic because his behavior was

(42:46):
terrible while using.

Speaker 3 (42:48):
Does that give him like a leg up? I don't know.
To me, it seems like a joke.

Speaker 6 (42:54):
Well, no, particularly when you're also having the people who
you employ, you know, create full loneous errands for them
to run to go get drugs for him in their
own name.

Speaker 3 (43:06):
And it all speaks to the larger picture.

Speaker 2 (43:08):
And just in case you're just joining us too, you know,
we're talking about the diddy Comb's case, Sean Diddy Combs,
and he's on trial for allegedly operating a criminal enterprise
that involves kidnapping, arson, bribery, and sex trafficking from two
thousand and four to twenty twenty four.

Speaker 3 (43:24):
So that's twenty years.

Speaker 4 (43:26):
Of twenty years the criminal activity that they're trying to prove,
and really all the testimony that we've heard so far,
even bearing the defense having pretty rough questions for the witnesses,
in my opinion, the testimony for you know, the federal
government has been very compelling, very me too.

Speaker 2 (43:46):
Absolutely, yeah, I completely agree. And again they're trying to
poke holes into you know, Cassie Ventura's testimony and a
lot of this testimony, and all I would say is,
you know, yes, sometimes people make a bad decision, but
you have to also look at their choices that they had,
and it seems like Cassie Ventura didn't really have any choices.

Speaker 3 (44:05):
She was trapped. Yeah, she was kind of trapped. That's
so fair.

Speaker 6 (44:09):
Moving to a different Manhattan courtroom, this is as we've
kind of been saying, the summer of trials is heating up.
There's a connection between P Diddy and Harvey Weinstein, whose
retrial is currently going on now. In fact, it starts
closing statements tomorrow as a reminder for folks who may

(44:31):
not have a top of mind. Harvey Weinstein, he really
was an icon and much like Diddy in the nineties,
he was beloved. He was groundbreaking and helped create culture.
I mean, he helmed the ship on American indie films
and cite her House Rules, pulp fiction, Shakespeare in Love,

(44:51):
Goodwill Hunting, stuff that really strings at tugs at your
heart strings.

Speaker 3 (44:58):
He was the guy.

Speaker 6 (44:59):
Yeah, he was the guy.

Speaker 4 (45:01):
He's no longer the guy, though, what else do you
have for us about Weinstein? There, Courtney, so just to
catch people up.

Speaker 6 (45:07):
So he was this icon, of course, revered, and all
of that really came tumbling down from the eighties all
the way up until twenty seventeen. And that is when
Harvey Weinstein was publicly accused of sexual harassment, of assault,
and of rape. And this was by dozens of women,
and I'm sure most of us will remember the Me

(45:28):
Too movement. It really was Harvey Weinstein was kind of
ground zero.

Speaker 5 (45:34):
They'll cosby, Oh, Harvey weins them all of that, right, yes,
And the stick was that he would lure perhaps young
actresses to his hotel room and certain occasions, and you know,
kind of bribe them with potential parts or fame or
or all kinds of stuff that really promised them a

(45:55):
bigger future curry if.

Speaker 3 (45:56):
They anticipated exactly.

Speaker 4 (45:58):
Yeah, you get in good with Harvey Weinstein, Weinstein, Harvey Weinstein,
you know you might get the.

Speaker 3 (46:04):
Next part exactly.

Speaker 2 (46:05):
Or if you don't participate, you'll never get apart ever,
get blackballed.

Speaker 3 (46:10):
And that's a big right. I mean, I don't remember that.

Speaker 4 (46:16):
Okay, that's another subject. Really, we'll get into that in
another year. It's a whale, yes, but years ago what
real disappeared?

Speaker 2 (46:24):
I don't know any of this really, we'll get into that.

Speaker 6 (46:28):
It's a okay, Okay, I don't know. All I have
is Brenda Fraser on the brain right now. So Weinstein
again is in a retrial. He has been behind bars
for convictions of rape and other assaults. But there's a
model named Crystal McKinney, and she filed a sexual assault

(46:51):
lawsuit against puff Daddy Diddy Combs whatever we want to
call him, in twenty twenty four. And this same woman
also filed a complaint against Weinstein this year.

Speaker 4 (47:03):
Oh so we have a common complainer, yeah, correct, or you.

Speaker 6 (47:09):
Know, potential victim.

Speaker 3 (47:11):
That's what I mean.

Speaker 6 (47:11):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, of course I didn't.

Speaker 4 (47:13):
Mean like a complainer, not like a whiner, no, no.

Speaker 2 (47:16):
No, but a common victim in common and is And
that's gotten some you know, criticism, frankly, because is it
possible that one person could you know, be victimized twice
by two very high profile people, thank you obviously, of course, right, So,
but that is the online chatter, and frankly, Weinstein side

(47:37):
is like, oh really this one again, Look how you know,
not credible she is because she's just forever putting a
complaint out There is there value in that? You know?

Speaker 3 (47:47):
That's the I think that's the conversation piece.

Speaker 6 (47:49):
Well, here are some of the specifics of the allegations.
So this happened last year in May when mckinne filed
that lawsuit against colmb's, and her allegation is that he
drugged and sexually assaulted her back in twenty excuse me,
two thousand and three, and that it happened after a
men's Fashion Week event in New York City, which is

(48:11):
certainly a place where he would be well.

Speaker 4 (48:13):
And it's a similar story that we've heard her mother victims,
right okay, yep.

Speaker 6 (48:18):
And then she alleged must much like Brendan Fraser, who
I want to hear about, that Holmes used his influence
to blacklist her in the modeling industry, and that it
resulted in total emotional dispress, distress and even sadly a
suicide attempt.

Speaker 3 (48:38):
Oh the year after. Yeah, well this matters.

Speaker 2 (48:41):
But she's strikingly beautiful, you know. So imagine you have
this big career, a budding career in this really side
steps you absolutely.

Speaker 6 (48:51):
And then, in a separate complaint, and this was just
last month, she accused Weinstein of raping both her and
a friend, and she said that that happened in a
Manhattan hotel, also in two thousand and three, and that
Weinstein had lured her and her friend saying, oh, I've

(49:11):
got acting roles, and then gave him a bunch of
alcohol before the assault. So these are the allegations out there.
So both of these.

Speaker 3 (49:19):
Assaults happened in the same year, twenty one years ago.

Speaker 6 (49:23):
That's right, interesting twenty two and yeah, twenty two years
ago in two thousand and three.

Speaker 2 (49:28):
Oh, okay, twenty two years ago. Interw that's interesting, is right?
And like, what does that really insinuate right that they
were just in this crowd. You know, imagine you got
to remember, you know, going back to Ditty in his
ex girlfriend, Cassie Ventura, she was nineteen when she met Ditty.
He was seventeen years older. Now, imagine you're a young actor,
you want to be in the next big movie. The

(49:49):
Weinsteins ran the show, and you know your allured to
the hotel room plowed with booze. Who knows you know,
you can kind of see how that happens. That's I'm
so glad we get to talk about this stuff, because again,
we don't know that this is how it works if
we don't actually talk about it, not from a place
of judgment. There's a safe place exactly like, let's unpack

(50:10):
it because these are cautionary tales.

Speaker 4 (50:13):
Also, right, well, stick around, We've got so much more
to dig into. We have everyone's most hated mom, Laurie
Valo day Bell, aka the Doomsday Mom.

Speaker 3 (50:25):
Her third murder trial.

Speaker 4 (50:26):
Jury selection has been delayed again, and later we're going
to be talking about a potential serial killer in New England.
Could this be true or just online rumors? Stick with
us here, True Crime Tonight.

Speaker 2 (50:45):
Good old Lorie Valo. So, Laurie Valo, also known as
the Doomsday Mom. Are you guys familiar with this case?

Speaker 3 (50:52):
Oh?

Speaker 5 (50:54):
Yeah, are you? Yeah?

Speaker 2 (50:56):
Come on, so I'll give a little backstory. So let
me see if it's a very torrid tale. So I'm
going to give you my most aggreviated version. Yeah, it's
a whiteboard out. We need like a complete whiteboard and
we should also be tracking this for a while because
it's a very complicated case. But bottom line, Laurie Valo
is this, you know, lovely woman who has a lovely

(51:18):
husband and two children of her own. One of them
is sixteen named Kaylee, her daughter, and then she had
a seven year old son named JJ, who she actually
adopted because the natural mother of JJ thought that Laurie
was such a wonderful mother that he'd be better suited
in her care because he actually had special needs. He
was autistic. So that's how great of a mom and

(51:41):
wife this woman is. So she starts reading these these
novels that have this doomsday kind of this doomsday undertone,
and she gets kind of hooked and so much so
that she's like, I want to find out who this
author is. So she goes to a book signing. By
the way, drives far far away many. Yeah, she like

(52:03):
road trips it to go to a book signing. And
that book signing is by Chad day Bell, and Chad
day Bell writes these very scary books about the afterlife,
and it's you know, scary stuff, quite frankly. And while
she's waiting online to get his autograph on her book,
those two luck eyes and they fall in love. Look

(52:24):
at that divine timing, and just maybe by coincidence, At
that same time, Chad, this author also has a very healthy,
lovely wife who he had been married to for many,
many years. They had adult children at this point, suddenly Tammy,
his wife healthy training for a marathon. She just dies
in her sleep one day. And then, would you believe it,

(52:45):
by coincidence, maybe Laurie who's now back at home with
her two children, her sixteen year old and her seven
year old who's again autistic. Her husband he dies, and
then her kids what are they They suddenly go missing.
And these beautiful children ultimately go missing and are found

(53:07):
dead and buried, having had unspeakable things done to them
in the backyard of said Chad Dave Bell, the boyfriend
and the Apocalypse man and their whole stick was. By
the way, when the kids were missing, You guys might
remember this. When the kids were missing, there was like
a national search, like where are you know, Kate, where
are they?

Speaker 3 (53:27):
It was Casey Anthony esque exactly. We were all concerned.

Speaker 2 (53:32):
Meanwhile, she and her now new boyfriends soon to be husband, Chad,
were gallivanting. There's photos of her in a white wedding dress.
She got her nails done, she was getting a blowout,
and everyone's looking for her children and she was essentially
questions about her children, and she had this like really
really creepy way about how she handled the press. She

(53:52):
almost like she kind of played along with them a
little bit, like I know, they're fine, they're safe. And
then she goes and gets, you know, her hair done.
So the callousness was pretty remarkable. So lo and behold
Needlyssa say they get arrested and Chad, the husband, you
know that she had just married in Hawaii, they get separated,

(54:14):
and you know, the story goes. According to Lori Valo,
is that she believed there was going to be this
doomsday and by participating in the death of her kids,
she was basically guaranteeing them some kind of a great
space in the afterlife. But this is like a crazy
killer mom, right. So she's killed and has been convicted

(54:34):
for her two children again young sixteen and seven years old,
also Charles, her ex husband, also Tammy, who was now
the new husband's wife, who died in her sleep, and
now she's again being charged. I don't mean to laugh,
but it's like, what is Laurie doing with all her
for her time. It's unbelievable. But she's now being charged with

(54:56):
her niece's ex husband's murder as well. So this is
a killing spree, which frankly makes her, you know, a
serial killer. She just also attempted murder. I should say, yeah,
by the way, that's a very big distinction. Thank you
for thank you for sharing that. You're right apparently the
niece and her then you know her, then you know

(55:17):
ex husband. They were driving in a car and somebody
pulled up beside them and it felt like it was
a hit.

Speaker 3 (55:24):
He survives.

Speaker 2 (55:25):
But again, this all seems to tie back to good
old Lorie and good old Chad day Bell. So she's
still going to all of these trials, right. Needless to say,
the Doom's Day was back in twenty twenty.

Speaker 3 (55:36):
She was behind bars.

Speaker 2 (55:38):
I remember this because Courtney, you and I were working
with Nancy Grace at that time, Yes, and we were
doing an episode about this, and again we were like
really down the rabbit hole, but the doomsday date kind
of got in my screwy head. So when it came
to that actual Doom's Day that Laurie had predicted, I
was a little nervous.

Speaker 6 (55:58):
Okay, not to you a countdown. I mean we were
very well aware.

Speaker 2 (56:06):
Well, Laurie's now decided she's representing herself in this PA
because you know, she's completely capable. She's been studying the
law behind bars, and she's decided she's going to represent herself.
And you know, she's still claiming her innocence at the
end of the day. So the trial was supposed to
kick in, but instead Laurie rolls in in a wheelchair

(56:27):
because she's not feeling well and is I guess very sick.
And therefore this trial is delayed yet again. And what
a waste of time and resources. At this point, you know,
she's been convicted many times on very hideous charges. She's
not going to see the light of day any longer?
Why are we wasting the time and energy on Laurie
Valo at this point? And again she's sucking the air

(56:49):
at the courtroom and kind of making a mockery of it.

Speaker 6 (56:53):
A total mockery. Yeah, her and the judge are really
they're beefing at this point. I mean, you know, she
is not only delaying the jury duty. She followed emotion
alleging the judge had personal biased and prejudice and rachel
discrimination against her that's been denied.

Speaker 3 (57:14):
Can you imagine the.

Speaker 6 (57:16):
Nerve personal bias and prejudice and religious discrimination religious because these.

Speaker 2 (57:21):
Are these are her duty day beliefs that she believes
that there is this very sinister afterlife, and she and
those that have now seen their end of days, frankly
thanks to her, that they're promised a better life in
Heaven's above.

Speaker 6 (57:36):
But Stephanie, I think you use the word I think
you use the word mockery. And literally her and the
dudg are going back and forth, and just today Laurie
told the judge, Oh, you're welcome to come to jail
and see how I'm doing, to check fum really sick,
And the judge was like, yeah, quote I'm going to
pass on that.

Speaker 4 (57:55):
Isn't this like the second time that she's been delayed
in these trials like his, And she's done this before
in the previous one when she was convicted of Charles Wallow.

Speaker 3 (58:03):
Yes, she pulled the same stunt. And think about the
costs involved.

Speaker 2 (58:07):
It's jury selection, it's judge times, and when there are
real problems in the courthouses right now, those are real
cases that need jelog thank you, exactly exactly.

Speaker 4 (58:17):
People are literally sitting in jail waiting for their day
in court and they keep getting put behind because.

Speaker 3 (58:23):
Of stupid Laurie Daybill exactly. And listen.

Speaker 2 (58:27):
And there doesn't seem to be any shame in her game,
by the way, either. She still sort of walks the talk.
If you've never seen photographs of her and stuff, she
used to be like, you know, very glamorous. We actually
interviewed people that worked with her at the time, and
she was apparently like the greatest little housewife and she
was very beloved. We interviewed one of the hair stylists

(58:48):
that worked at the salon that she was also a
hairdresser at, and they were like, she was the best.

Speaker 3 (58:53):
She was just.

Speaker 2 (58:53):
Lovely until she met this Chad. Whether that's true or not, well,
of course we'll never know. But talk about a perfect
storm of psycho I mean, how does that happen? How
does that happen?

Speaker 3 (59:05):
Does that?

Speaker 2 (59:05):
Are we attracting that because you know, we're crossing over
into crazy land ourselves and therefore we're getting we're kind
of in that orbit.

Speaker 6 (59:14):
I know. Is it a brainwashing? It is, it's it's
a lot of questions. Was she quote brainwashed or was
she looking for a way there? There has to be
something like I would describe this woman as demonic.

Speaker 4 (59:26):
It's almost like you want to know why so that
you can see if it's happening to you at some point,
Like exactly, I'm so into like the cults and whatnot,
and I worry that, you know, somehow I'm gonna get
like swept up in something like this. I mean that
whenever you would never have well, I know how you know,
I feel like that's why I want to know, like
how did this happen? Why did how did Lorie Dabell

(59:47):
go from this wonderful mother who adopted you know JJ.
She was such a good mom, you know, like that's
how she got JJ.

Speaker 3 (59:55):
How did how did it.

Speaker 4 (59:56):
Go from this to her killing her children exactly and
every somebody else around her allegedly as well.

Speaker 2 (01:00:02):
And keep in mind whether that was accurate or not,
or was she just born with a screw loose? And
now it's like the perfect storm where little by little Kay.

Speaker 4 (01:00:11):
Was always supposed to go crazy at this point, right,
she might have always been a horrible person.

Speaker 6 (01:00:16):
Well, and she was giving off some bad vibes or
whatever you want to call it, because didn't her former
husband didn't he call police or contact police?

Speaker 2 (01:00:27):
Charles, Yes, he did, Charles Charles. He said, my wife
is a nut. She's talking all kinds of crazy. She's
talking about this afterlife and the apocalypse and saying our
kids are zombies. And he was reaching out to authorities,
and then that kind of went sort of nowhere, and
then sure enough, he turns up dead. It was actually

(01:00:48):
Lori Valow's brother that shoots who by the way and
kills him and then he.

Speaker 3 (01:00:53):
Dies by the way.

Speaker 4 (01:00:54):
He died under suspicious circumstances as far as I'm concerned.

Speaker 2 (01:00:57):
Correct, And his wife at the time has gone on
record as saying the night before he died allegedly of
natural causes, he said out loud, I feel like Lori
and you know, chat are going to try to pin
this on me or they're out to get me.

Speaker 3 (01:01:12):
Well, he need too much, he knew too much.

Speaker 2 (01:01:15):
Yeah, he did that video. If we should put this
on the website too. If you've never seen this video
of Lorii, she was literally was her husband is just killed.

Speaker 3 (01:01:25):
Her brother is like it was self defense.

Speaker 2 (01:01:27):
It was self defense. The cops show up. She's new
to the neighbors. The kids are there, the daughter is
right there, and they have this like bodycam footage from
the police and.

Speaker 3 (01:01:37):
She is just like smiling. Her husband just was murdered.

Speaker 2 (01:01:41):
They went to Oh my goodness, it's like jaw dropping
and impossible to imagine.

Speaker 3 (01:01:48):
No, I can't imagine.

Speaker 4 (01:01:49):
I mean they I think she took JJ to Burger
King and yeah, they they kill Racily and the brother, Alex,
who is sitting on the curb, and he's like, yeah,
it was self def and Laurie's just loo so nonchalant,
just kind of easy. She was like, I want to
apologize to the neighbors. Yeah, I want to apologize. I

(01:02:09):
feel terrible. I'm new disgusting.

Speaker 2 (01:02:12):
So we have been talking about all kinds of scary
things in serial killers. We were just talking about Lori Valo,
the Doomsday mom, and you know, she's been charged with
the death of her own children, also her ex husband,
also her new husband's former wife. That's four people. Now
there's a potential fifth. You know, this fifth person wasn't murdered,

(01:02:34):
but it was an attempted murder.

Speaker 3 (01:02:36):
Does that make her a serial killer?

Speaker 4 (01:02:38):
That's such a good question because she's never referred to
as a serial killer.

Speaker 2 (01:02:42):
Yeah, and she always maybe because she's only killing her
own faces.

Speaker 6 (01:02:47):
But we should actually ask an expert about that, because
I believe the definition is what three or more people
makes a serial down period with pulling down. So but
if it's familial versus I don't strangers, So we should
let's plan on getting an expert in here.

Speaker 4 (01:03:03):
Because that's you know, to give us a call. Yeah,
exactly one crime. We had to have a we can crowdsource.
Come on, get up in here. I'm all about the crowdsourcing.
You know, I want to hear about it. Speaking of crowdsourcing,
so you know this is there's a possible Well, there's
a lot of chatter. I wouldn't say there's possible. There's

(01:03:24):
a lot of chatter online, specifically Facebook, that there's a
possible serial killer in New England.

Speaker 3 (01:03:31):
And of course, you know.

Speaker 4 (01:03:32):
I see this across my news feed and I'm digging
right in, right, and so I joined the Spacebook group
and there's like seventy seven thousand people and there are
something We're all chattering about the potential of the serial
killer in Connecticut, like right above like Long Island, you
know where Connecticut is, Yeah, Rhode Island and Massachusetts, which

(01:03:53):
is like like it sounds like a super big area,
but when you look at like where the bodies, you know,
this potential serial killer have been found, they're all pretty
close to one another if you look on the map,
because it's a very condensed area.

Speaker 3 (01:04:07):
The states all run into one another.

Speaker 6 (01:04:09):
Well.

Speaker 4 (01:04:10):
From March of April of this year, so this is
like super current. Investigators have discovered twelve human remains in
this like really small tri state area and few, very
few details have been released. So what's happening is people
are getting news of these bodies being found, and they're
sleuthing on it, and you know, live in these Facebook
groups and then they're sharing their theories about you know,

(01:04:32):
who could who could it be and are they are
they connected? The problem is is that, you know, this
is an active investigation, not a lot of details have
been released about, you know, what happened to these these victims,
and so people are like really jumping to conclusions on
a lot of these theories and whatnot. And in some
cases they're even posting, you know, people's Facebook profiles like

(01:04:56):
disc no, I swear.

Speaker 3 (01:04:57):
That's really dangerous.

Speaker 2 (01:04:58):
This You cannot just go acute seeing people of murder online.

Speaker 3 (01:05:01):
There's no takebacks on that. There's no takebacks.

Speaker 6 (01:05:03):
I mean that the most egregious just to jump in
because this is how dangerous it can get. If you
guys remember back when the Boston marathon bombing occurred and
people were putting out bolos be on the lookout for,
and innocent people were it was really dangerous.

Speaker 2 (01:05:25):
We've heard this time and time again. So you know again,
you know, body, this is right up your alley because
you too sluiced your way into solving a very prolific
serial killing case that we you know, of course followed
along with on your documentary on Netflix.

Speaker 3 (01:05:42):
But you would do it so ethically, right.

Speaker 2 (01:05:43):
I think the other side of that is, you know, yeah,
we can crowdsource, but we should not be interrupting an investigation.
And by the way, law enforcement can't share every detail.
They're connecting these dots, and if they tell too many details,
there's a lot of people that start confessing. I'm working
on a separate case right now. And this is something
that happens where random people sometimes will read in the press, oh,

(01:06:07):
there was a laceration around you know, the leg, and
then they'll go and they'll actually confess to the laceration
around the leg.

Speaker 3 (01:06:15):
I cannot explain why. No, it just happens a lot.

Speaker 4 (01:06:18):
Right and you know, the whole posting of Facebook profiles
and whatnot. That's one of the reasons John Green and
I broke away from that larger group because they were
just posting like random people and we were very, very
very turned off by that. So we kind of broke
away and did our own thing, you know, successfully, but
you know, we had to get away from that. It's
super irresponsible and you have to be very careful when

(01:06:39):
you do these kinds of things. But I want to
I have to reiterate law enforcement is saying that these
crimes are likely not connected. So I don't want anybody
listening in Connecticut or you know what, to get scared.
Law enforcement has not confirmed this, and on top of that,

(01:07:01):
they have said they don't believe one person is responsible
for these So there's you know, through the victimology and whatnot,
they're probably learning that there's probably no connection to these
bodies being found at all.

Speaker 3 (01:07:12):
It's too yeah, law enforcement, man, there, it's tough.

Speaker 2 (01:07:15):
It's a really tough game and line they have to
walk and stuff like this.

Speaker 4 (01:07:19):
Right because they have to protect the public, right, So
they want to be as honest as possible, but they
largely they have to protect the investigation. And to your
point about the cut on the leg, they can't just
be given details a way to you know, the public
because they want a sluice, you know. I mean, I
understand how fun that is to try and figure things out,
but it's such a it's such a fine line and you.

Speaker 3 (01:07:40):
Have to be so careful.

Speaker 4 (01:07:42):
And I would recommend, if anybody cares what I have
to say about it, I would recommend doing this in
private with a trusted group of people. You know that
if you really want to dig into stuff like this,
do it in a smaller setting, because with seventy seven
thousand people in a Facebook group it's nothing but noise.

Speaker 2 (01:07:57):
Exactly, Or there's somebody who's like, oh my ex boy
friends stink, so I accuse him of murder on Facebook.
It's an interesting intersection though, because sometimes that can also
be very helpful, as you know you experienced firsthand. So
if there's a serial killer at large, you know, law
enforcement again they want to protect the investigation, and they're saying,

(01:08:18):
to your point that there's no connection between these cases.
But that's what they also said in Long Island for
the Long Island serial killer, you know, over decades. You know,
they were saying, oh, these are not connected.

Speaker 4 (01:08:29):
The people They're like, well, law enforcement absolutely can lie
to the public about this kind of stuff, certainly, and
you know, so to their point, they're like, you know,
law enforcement's lying. We're going to figure this out. And
I get it. I totally get it, and I am
behind that.

Speaker 3 (01:08:43):
I respect that.

Speaker 4 (01:08:45):
I love the hustle, keep at it. I just think
it's smarter to break off into smaller groups and do
it privately.

Speaker 3 (01:08:51):
That's all twelve. That's a lot.

Speaker 6 (01:08:54):
I will say, there's there's one specific victim that stands
out to me that whether it's the same person or
different people. I feel like this person was either a
hit man or had done this before. And oh, excuse me,
you know I'm getting my thoughts confused. I'm talking about
a man in Connecticut who is charged with the murder

(01:09:14):
of his roommate, a woman who dismembered the remains who
were found in his suitcase.

Speaker 3 (01:09:20):
But that's I mean suitcase. This member. This is insanity.

Speaker 2 (01:09:24):
But that's not connected to these twelve, right or is
that connected to the twelve?

Speaker 6 (01:09:29):
It was in the same area, so that was one
they looked at, thought they looked at.

Speaker 4 (01:09:34):
What was a connected In fact, James Alan Fox, who
is a criminologist at Northeastern University, very prestigious, you know,
he's got those accreditation. He says there is no pattern
to the dump sites, which is interesting. So it's completely random,
which can also be a pattern. But you know, you
have to respect the people who know what they're talking about,

(01:09:55):
and James Alan Fox knows what he's talking about. Additionally, though,
in the same vein Okay, with you know the police
denying that there's a serial killer, there's also chatter of
a possible serial killer in North Hollywood close to us,
right Ooh, scary well, this happened started on April twenty sixth,

(01:10:18):
just past a fifty three year old man, actually a
fifty three year old Menishi Hinda, was found dead in
his apartment after police conducted a welfare check. Okay, Tommy,
prosecutor said he was stabbed with a screwdriver during a
break in. Wow, horrifying, right, Well, the neighborhood, the neighborhood

(01:10:39):
has said this has been an ongoing problem. You know
that people are you know, breaking into their homes and
climbing into the roofs. And in this instance, somebody climbed
through the skylight and then jumped onto the victim's balcony
and tried to attack the sky while police arrested Eric Eskamiya.
He's twenty seven, and he's kind of like some you know, houseless.

(01:11:01):
He's kind of staying at his mom's now and then,
and he was probably probably don't know, breaking in to
probably steal things from this guy's home. And the guy
was home, and so he stabbed him with a screwdriver.

Speaker 3 (01:11:15):
I'm your driver. That's a hideous weapon to be you
know harmed with my goodness.

Speaker 4 (01:11:21):
Right, So here's the thing, though I don't understand yet
how this is a serial killing.

Speaker 6 (01:11:27):
Well, that's what I was gonna ask, is this is
this maybe a place where people are just I don't know,
almost itching for something to happen and making hay where
there is no hay because what seems like a one off.

Speaker 4 (01:11:39):
I don't it does right, Like, yeah, I don't quite understand,
but there is a lot of chatter about it, and
I'm kind I just started digging into this today. Of course,
you know, I gotta roll up my sleeves and whatnot.
But you know, I kind of don't understand why they're
thinking this this guy might be a serial killer. Does
he have other victims that we don't know about maybe,
or you know, what's going on there. But We're going

(01:12:00):
to dig into that more and I'm going to keep
following it and find out. But a lot of people
are saying and they're scared. People are scared, and LAPD
is like, you know, because you know, the county is like, no,
there's no serial killer or what are you guys talking about?
But the people that live in this, in this apartment complex,
I kind of think maybe might be trying to raise
some noise because they might be underpoliced. Wow, we see

(01:12:22):
that a lot, especially in California. You know a lot
of neighborhoods are over policed and some are just completely underpoliced,
and they might be trying to raise some you know,
red flags or white flags saying, you know, we need
help over here.

Speaker 3 (01:12:34):
But it's pretty scary, I'll.

Speaker 6 (01:12:36):
Say, and I think it also it's just kind of
a fascination that many people have, think of the lore
surrounding so many serial killers. They almost can become really
almost rock stars with pictures. And where do you think
this macab you know, this macabre attraction system.

Speaker 4 (01:13:00):
We've talked about this this condition histophrilia I can't actually
pronounce it properly, hystophriblia, where these people are attracted to
these criminals and it's a legitimately like DSMB vibe like problem.
We see it with the Brian Coberger. Brian Coberger's getting
a lot of attention. So you know, we're going to

(01:13:22):
be following all the serial killers and even all the
allegations of a serial killers throughout the show, because that's
what we're all about here.

Speaker 6 (01:13:30):
And when we come back, we are going to be
hearing from you about tonight's stories. Don't forget to give
us a call eighty to eighty three to one Crime
with any thoughts you have on any of Tonight's stories
or anything else you think we should be covering. Keep
it here true crime. Tonight. We talk true crime all
the time.

Speaker 2 (01:13:55):
We were talking a little bit about each other, and
I feel like I want to make sure that you
guys have a moment to sort of share a little
bit about your backstories and how you got into true crime.
Courtney and I we've worked together for you know, over
ten years now, not always in true crime. That only
happened really in the last five years or so since
Katie got started. Prior to that, we were making different

(01:14:17):
types of reality shows and stuff, yeah.

Speaker 6 (01:14:19):
All kinds of it. And Stephanie, it has been beyond
such the greatest pleasure to be working so closely with
you for the past ten years, and we've kind of
done everything every kind of from ratchet reality not to
out ourselves, to really you're really serious and important documentaries.

(01:14:42):
I mean, one that we got to do together was
Murdered and Missing in Montana and we got to go
really deep into the indigenous women and what is going on,
you know, on their territories and just get into it.
So working with Stephanie and also getting to talk to victims'
families has really been a guiding light and body. I

(01:15:05):
know that for you, you have gotten into this from
such a good hearted place and just wanting for justice.

Speaker 5 (01:15:13):
Yeah.

Speaker 4 (01:15:13):
I'm really weird about justice, Like it's almost like an
obsession with me. I'm very if something's unfair, I'm so outraged,
like internally, like even as a child, right like if
if my brother got something and I didn't.

Speaker 3 (01:15:26):
Oh, hell to pay, hell to pay. So yeah, no.

Speaker 4 (01:15:30):
I started in True Crime with the West Memphis three. Yeah,
I was on the original List Serve after that second
Paradise Lost documentary and I was like, oh, these these
kids have been prosecuted unfairly. And then of course obviously
I was in don'f with Cats on Netflix because kittens
were being killed online in a really terrible way and

(01:15:52):
I saw, you know, the future that this guy was
going to move on to animals, and of course got
involved with that. And then you know, I'd done some
other projects for Netflix and a couple for Vice and
True Crime and all that, and it's just been such
a joy. And of course we met at Crime Con
and that was so fun, and I feel like we've
just been working together really well ever since. And I

(01:16:13):
feel like I'm just sitting around with my girlfriends drinking
a cup of coffee. Like I'm literally drinking a cup
of coffee with my girlfriends at the kitchen table, and
we're just talking about all our favorite subjects and body.

Speaker 6 (01:16:22):
Thank you for not outing us that. Stephanie and I
had the most undignified approach to you at crime Con
when we saw you in the green room backstage for
the conferences and we're fangirling about don't have with cats.
So I appreciate that.

Speaker 3 (01:16:39):
I would never I would never do that to you.
I would never do that to you.

Speaker 2 (01:16:42):
That was the best though, in the beginning of an
incredible friendship. So getting to play with you guys, it
is really like just pulling up a chair to the
kitchen table. Yeah, frankly, that's what Katie Studios stands for.
So isn't that adorable Katy Studios kitchen table. I love,
So you guys, pull up a chair and make sure
you stick with us for the you know, the rest
of the week. And we're always going to be here
live Sunday through Thursday nights and listen. We want to

(01:17:04):
hear from you eight eight eight three one crime. Call
us with your ideas, your stories, your opinions, and if
you want us to start some cases, we will do that.
So tomorrow make sure you join us. Tomorrow night we're
going to be covering the Menendoz Boys. They were supposed
to face sentencing on Friday.

Speaker 3 (01:17:21):
Has that been pushed?

Speaker 2 (01:17:22):
And also the connection between BTK he was the infamous
serial killer and Brian Koberger, accused in the Idaho murders.
This is True Crime Tonight where we talk true crime
all the time.