Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
He's my Irish accent.
Speaker 2 (00:02):
There.
Speaker 1 (00:02):
Did you catch it? Oh? Yeah, okay, I got you.
So firsty Friday? First Friday? Is that right, mate? Yeah? Mike,
eh yeah, BROV, why is this? Tell me what this is?
Is that a Guinness with no head? Did you know
Michael Jordan once shot for he free free froze in
(00:24):
one game? Oh yeah, I heard he parked his car
in the garage before he got there. Bro Wiki, Brov.
Let's put some more trimp on the bobby then go
eat my baby. Oh that's the wrong place.
Speaker 2 (00:40):
Sorry, Okay, We'll have plenty of fun today, no, no
doubt the Uh it's a Friday.
Speaker 1 (00:48):
We're gonna have fun.
Speaker 2 (00:49):
But we need to give updates, I think appropriately on
things that are happening in the news. Right, that's part
of what we're here for.
Speaker 1 (00:59):
Right.
Speaker 2 (01:00):
We have to talk about this Georgia situation because it's
the son and a father. The son, the fourteen year
old Appalachi High School student. He was a student of
that high school. By the way, we never really I
think clarified that. But he uh, he is his name.
(01:23):
We say his name, right. I know there are gonna
be people that say, stop publicizing that. I think it's
important to get the name out and for the shame
in which you know what I mean. I see that
I understand the idealism behind not yeah, but at the
same time, like can we be pragmatic? Someone is going
to and then it will be everywhere. So well, it's out, okay,
(01:45):
And here's the deal. I don't want everybody just being
like I hate all fourteen year olds because one bad
fourteen year old.
Speaker 1 (01:52):
Not that that's what happens here.
Speaker 2 (01:53):
But we need to talk about the specific person who
did this, which is why we know names like John
Wilkes Booth. So why we know like Benedict Arnold. That's
why we know names like Lee Harvey Oswald. And name
that terrible person, right, John Wayne Gacy. Okay, we know
who these people are. Well, this fourteen year old's name
(02:16):
is cult Gray. Four counts felony murder. He's expected to
be tried as an adult. We said that there is
a death penalty in Georgia. There is a death penalty
in Georgia. However, this morning, when Colt Gray made his
first appearance in front of a judge, which do I
I should say the judge's name?
Speaker 1 (02:37):
Are you ready? Are you ready for the judge's name.
Speaker 2 (02:40):
Okay, Superior Court Judge Curry M. Mingledorf. The second, okay,
no comment, no comment on Curry M. Mingledorf. The second,
we don't pick our names.
Speaker 1 (02:57):
I don't know, I don't know.
Speaker 2 (03:00):
That's a tough one, man, that's a tough one, Superior
Court Judge Curry M. Mingoldorf. The second is that it's
the real name. I'm just reporting what I what I
am seeing here. Anyway, four counts fell any murder, but
it's only life in prison. Judge Mingoldorf said that not
(03:22):
eligible for the death penalty because he committed the crime
under the age of eighteen years old, so there is
a death penalty in Georgia. The judge made it clear
that the most that he could be punished with is
life in prison without the possibility of parole, or life
in prison with the possibility of parole. I'm no judge,
(03:42):
I'm just telling you what I am seeing here. I
don't want to assume that either of those things are
going to be what happens. I'm sure it will be.
It'll be interesting to see exactly how can we ask
just that question? Miss you and me here real quick?
Fourteen year old knows what he's doing, probably appropriate that
(04:04):
he's tried as an adult, Yes or no?
Speaker 1 (04:06):
That factor fiction? True or false? You asking me? Yeah?
Personally Again, I'm not a judge. I don't know. Do
we think that the fourteen year old, especially one who
had been interviewed by federal agencies because he was making
threats on social media in twenty twenty three? Is the.
Speaker 2 (04:26):
Fourteen year old aware enough of what he is doing
to face life imprisonment without the possibility of parole for
this crime.
Speaker 1 (04:36):
It's it's conversations like these that make me glad I'm
not a judge or someone who has to, you know,
leave this to the mingle lines in how we define things.
They go to school for a long time to figure
that out. I mean, you know, there is an argument
there that would say, okay, if you can, you know,
(04:56):
if you're not old enough to vote, if you're not
old enough to die for this cun if you're not
old enough to do a slew of things, and if
you're considered I mean, what does it mean to be
considered a non adult? You know what I mean?
Speaker 2 (05:09):
And that's a I mean legal on a legal standpoint,
He's not even close based on how the government views
him already, right, so that there is a side to
that coin. However, we're talking about he murdered four people,
including two teenagers, and shot nine others who had to
(05:32):
be hospitalized, right, I mean, it's not like he ran
a red light. Yeah, It's like we said, they go
to a lot of school, a lot of training, a
lot of law books and experiences to figure out exactly
what is the appropriate thing to do.
Speaker 1 (05:50):
Here is their precedent to the severity of the crime
impacting how we necessarily view or change the way the
rule works, you know what I mean?
Speaker 2 (06:01):
I think that I just are you saying, maybe, are
there other fourteen year olds that have been accused of.
Speaker 1 (06:07):
Similar crimes and what was there? How was that handled?
Speaker 2 (06:12):
And should we be And then you're gonna get an
argument is this a different situation? If it was like
a domestic issue where a fourteen year old killed like
a parent or killed a neighbor or a single kid
or something away from a school in a moment of
hot anger, is that different in some way than premeditatively
getting a gun, taking it to a school and then
(06:35):
shooting thirteen people, killing four of them. How different are
those things? How different is it between fourteen and fifteen.
How different is it that he was on a list
already and was interviewed by federal agents a year ago?
How different is it if that happens versus not happening now? Now,
this isn't the entire story because his father is also charged.
You want to know what his charges are? Here you
(06:56):
go four counts of involuntary manslaughter, two counts second murder,
eight counts of cruelty to children. Those are the eight
kids that were also shot, how to be hospitalized. An
arrest wart affidavit has said all of those things are
on his charges. He allegedly gave his son a firearm
with knowledge that he was a threat to himself and
(07:17):
others because he paid and bought the gun. It was
his gun, and he had gifted it to his son.
This is the irresponsible parenting part of gun ownership and
just being bad parents. Not that, hey, gifting your son
a gun. I'm not going to say that that's like
outright a terrible thing to do, but if you know
(07:38):
your son a year ago was interviewed for making threats
on social media that were seemingly like what he eventually
would do this week, how are you allowing him to
have possession of a firearm. He knew about this. His
name's Colin Gray, by the way, fifty four years old.
He knew and was also interviewed by the federal agents
(08:01):
about all of that. Yet he still allowed his son
to have possession of this viral. He absolutely is responsible
here anyway. Judge Curry M. Mingoldorf the second said, if
convicted on all accounts, maximum prison sentence of one hundred
and eighty years, because it's like thirty years for the
(08:22):
four counts of involuntary manslaughter each, it's like ten years
for all of the rest of the counts. You add
all of that stuff up, one hundred and eighty years
in prison. And he was having like a like there's video.
They actually had a camera there and people were there
reportings things they were seeing, and he was like having
like a breakdown, Like he was shaking, he was quivering,
(08:44):
he was trembling as he was, his voice cracking as
he was answering the questions from the judge. I don't
think this fifty four year old man understood what he
was in. I don't think he got his son. I
don't think he talked to his son enough.
Speaker 1 (08:56):
I don't think he understood the threat that his son posed,
and he obviously was expecting to be held accountable for
any mistakes that his son made.
Speaker 2 (09:02):
And I don't even know if you can call this
a mistake. He's just a perpetrator of a crime. So
as far as people are saying the and there's a
bit of this, and this goes back to your original
conversation about, Hey, should a fourteen year old be tried
as an adult with and get life in prison without
the possibility of parole? Like what's the point of that, right, Like,
(09:23):
let's be honest, without the possibility of parole, Like what's
going to happen twenty years from now when he's in
his thirties. Is another lawyer going to take up the
case and try to get him and say he's a
changed man and he's ready to be a positive contributor
to society, Like that's what we're going to do here?
Or is the state just going to continue to fund
this person to live without the posibility of parole because
(09:45):
when he was fourteen years old he decided he was
going to shoot up a school. Well, the DA says
there's an argument to be made of like, you got
to start making these people pay. There's got to be
real consequences. Otherwise there's not going to be aligned for
some of these people who are like this guy. They're
not going to know or they're not going to feel
like the consequences match the crime.
Speaker 1 (10:05):
Right.
Speaker 2 (10:05):
Well, the DA says, we're not sending a message with this.
We just want to try to use the tools in
the arsenal of the legal process to prosecute people for
the crimes that they commit. And that's why charging Colin
Gray the father is happened because those are legitimate crimes
based on the fact that he is responsible for his son,
his fourteen year old son, And I think that makes sense.
(10:27):
Am I missing anything there? I think in this case
very appropriate for his father to also be charged.
Speaker 1 (10:34):
Well, can I just bring up aspects to further the discussion. Yes,
if a child can be tried as an adult, yes,
should an adult be allowed to be tried as a
guardian of that guardian of that child? It's a good question.
If we are making the determination that the child is
made an act that makes it possible from a legal
(10:56):
sense to try them as an adult, should we still
look look at the guardian or the parent of this
child that we're now treating as an adult as far
as the legal system goes, and charging them as if
they are solely responsible or partially responsible for the act
made by this person that we're now charging as an adult.
Speaker 2 (11:16):
That is a legitimate conversation. However, this kid can't legally
own his own gun, would not have been able to
have said gun in a legal way without his father
basically in some ways being an accomplice by providing the weapon.
Speaker 1 (11:30):
That makes sense. Yeah, so I think in this case, yes,
you can. Now in a case where the kid steals
a gun from somebody else and the parents had no
knowledge of that, now we're talking something completely different. Two
twenty one.
Speaker 2 (11:42):
If you got thoughts, you can call it four h
two five to five eight eleven ten News Radio eleven
ten KFAB and.
Speaker 1 (11:46):
Were you's songer on news radio eleven ten kfab.
Speaker 2 (11:53):
It is the first court appearance for the Georgia teenager,
Colt Gray, who shot and killed four people, two students,
two teachers in the Appalachi High School a couple of
days ago.
Speaker 1 (12:09):
What was that?
Speaker 2 (12:09):
Was it?
Speaker 1 (12:09):
Tuesday? Wednesday?
Speaker 2 (12:11):
My days are getting bamboozled. I'm not sure I think
it was Wednesday. Anyway, he does that right, It's it's
not great, it's not fun to talk about. But we
need to talk about his appearance because also we know
the charges. Now, we know the punishment, how big the
punishment can be. But not for necessarily just him, but
also his fifty four year old father, who was charged
(12:31):
with up to one hundred and eighty years of a
possible maximum prison sentence based on several counts of involuntary manslaughter,
second degree murder, and cruelty to children. Well, we're getting
your thoughts here. At four h two, five, five, eight
to eleven ten, Sherry is on the phone line. Sherry,
thank you so much for the call. What's going on?
Speaker 3 (12:48):
Hey, Emery, thanks for taking my call. I am just
sixty death over this for everybody concerns because this kid,
people had to know that he was memory ill. I
mean a year ago there was you know, there was
this problem, and I'm.
Speaker 4 (13:05):
Sure that there were things going on before the teachers
just moved him along.
Speaker 3 (13:10):
Didn't you know, attempt to do anything? Obviously, father sure
if tex didn't do anything, I don't know.
Speaker 1 (13:17):
Where the mother is, Yeah, me neither.
Speaker 2 (13:19):
I haven't heard a thing about the mother's he.
Speaker 3 (13:22):
Just both will see it. You know, his life is over.
Speaker 1 (13:25):
Yeah, and as.
Speaker 4 (13:27):
Well as the horrific things that he did. Please understand,
I have not con doing anything but the fact that
you've got a fourteen year old kid and almost makes
me wish the father were being charged. But the four
pounds of murders, because that's basically what I'm sorry, I'm
really found.
Speaker 3 (13:48):
Up about this.
Speaker 2 (13:49):
No, it's okay, Sherry, And I'm glad that you have
these kind of feelings and emotions and decide to call
us because it's good for the conversation. At some point,
I'm with you on everything. At some point we have
to know that the kid had to know better. He
was taught in school somewhere that death is bad and
killing people is bad. Right, But the lack of apparent
(14:12):
judgment from a father figure not just to know the
kid was having issues. They were interviewed by federal agents
a year ago. How many thirteen year olds in this
country have had that happen to them? The father also interviewed.
He knows that happened, and then he gives the kid
a gun and like the kid can do whatever he
wants with this gun. What are we doing here, you
(14:33):
know what I mean.
Speaker 4 (14:35):
Exactly, That's my point, Emory, and the fact that this
was not a saying kid, I'm.
Speaker 3 (14:42):
Going to put that out there. Kid is not the
normal fourteen year old.
Speaker 4 (14:45):
Kids for sure, or we're going to have the issues
at thirteen.
Speaker 3 (14:50):
Oh he he was taught right for wrong. But I'm
not condoning again. But if he's mentally ill, does he know?
I mean I don't know.
Speaker 2 (15:01):
So, So what you're saying, Sherry is you'd rather see
the father take the brunt of the charges here and
the kid, you know, maybe not tried as an adult,
certainly would have a penalty to pay, but not necessarily
life in prison without the possibility of parole.
Speaker 4 (15:15):
Yeah, I amuse the father definitely definitely.
Speaker 3 (15:22):
A crime. I mean, maybe he wasn't the one that
shot excuse me.
Speaker 1 (15:28):
Provided Yep, No, there's no doubt about it. Sherry. I
really appreciate you being so candid with us today. Thanks
for listening.
Speaker 3 (15:35):
Thank you.
Speaker 2 (15:36):
Yeah, I'm feeling her on a lot of that. Does
that change if we can, if we can prove, Matt
that the kid is not mentally all put together, does
that change how we view the crime is? Since in
a sense of him being tried as an adult because
him not being tried as an adult, and now all
of a sudden, the penalties are much much lighter if
(15:56):
he is tried as a jeuvenile, if he is really
you know, mentally like not not in the same capacity
as a normal fourteen year old for whatever reason, which
you would think we'd have this knowledge based on the
fact that federal agents would have talked to this kid
and investigated him a year ago. Does that change how
you view the charges against him?
Speaker 1 (16:17):
Well, in a quarter laws sense, it always does, right
that they can plead for that, yeah, right, that if
it can be determined that the person charged with the
crime could be determined to be unfit to stand trial
because of their you.
Speaker 2 (16:35):
Know, or they committed a crime and not have full
capacity of their own Yeah, like they may not have
understood exactly what the what they were doing, what it meant.
Speaker 1 (16:45):
Yeah, Like, I mean there are legal terms for all
of that that I'm kind of blanking on right now,
but I mean, yeah, it does. Obviously there are terms
and reasons and you would need I'm sure, you know,
And what does that look like? Right?
Speaker 2 (16:58):
Like him having a wouldn't be enough right, like it
would have to be like some serious like he had
diagnosable issues he obviously did not know right and wrong.
And the father who provided the gun, the father who
ignored all of those needs, father that basically didn't have
him under his thumb, he's the one that should bear
the brunt of the blame because he put the kid
(17:20):
in a position to have this happen.
Speaker 1 (17:22):
Well, that's certainly it's one or the other.
Speaker 2 (17:24):
It's either he's tried as as adult and he's got
to be responsible for his own actions, while the father
takes some of it for giving him the gun, or
all of it lands on the father.
Speaker 1 (17:32):
Well, and you would think that at court approved or
appointed psychologist would get involved with determining there's no doubt
that will happen, right, absolutely, and then that does kind
of change the conversation even further, especially if the father
was aware of certain issues. I don't know. I mean,
these are things that.
Speaker 2 (17:52):
It's a little more complex of an issue than a
kid just going in and shooting a bunch of kids
in school. This is a little bit more complex. It'll
be interesting to see how Judge Mingeldorf handles this.
Speaker 1 (18:03):
And Marie Sunman on news radio eleven ten kfab