Wrongful Murder Conviction of Peter Wilson

Season 19, Episode 65 of The Adventures of Pipeman. Tune in at 1PM ET 10/01/25 to W4CY Radio at w4cy.com.

Imagine waking up one day and losing everything all because a rogue cop has illegally searched and seized your belongings, came up on 400k, and has the perfect position to frame you for a murder you didn't commit so he can keep the money. March 31st, 1996 is a day Mr. Wilson will never forget. This is the day he lost his education, career, home, money, and eventually his freedom to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Join us to hear the gruesome details and the forensics he hopes to set him free with a Writ of Habeas Corpus. 

Click Here to Subscribe to The Adventures of Pipeman for PERKS, BONUS Content & FREE GIVEWAYS! 

Take some zany and serious journeys with The Pipeman aka Dean K. Piper, CST on The Adventures of Pipeman also known as Pipeman Radio syndicated globally “Where Who Knows And Anything Goes.”  
 
Would you like to be a sponsor of the show?
Would you like to have your business, products, services, merch, programs, books, music or any other professional or artistic endeavors promoted on the show?
Would you like interviewed as a professional or music guest on The Adventures of Pipeman, Positively Pipeman and/or Pipeman in the Pit?
Would you like to host your own Radio Show, Streaming TV Show, or Podcast?  

PipemanRadio Podcasts are heard on Pipeman Radio, Talk 4 Media, iHeartRadio, Pandora, Amazon Music, Audible, Spotify, Apple Podcasts, and over 100 other podcast outlets where you listen to Podcasts.

The following are the different podcasts to Follow, Listen, Download, Subscribe:
•The Adventures of Pipeman
•Pipeman Radio
•Pipeman in the Pit – Music Interviews & Festivals
•Positively Pipeman – Empowerment, Inspiration, Motivation, Self-Help, Business, Spiritual & Health & Wellness

Click Here to Subscribe for PERKS, BONUS Content & FREE GIVEWAYS!

Follow @pipemanradio on all socials & Pipeman Radio Requests & Info at www.linktr.ee/pipemanradio

Stream The Adventures of Pipeman daily & live Mondays, Tuesdays, Wednesdays at 1PM ET on W4CY Radio & Talk 4 TV. 

Download, Rate & Review the Podcast at The Adventures of Pipeman, Pipeman Radio, Talk 4 Media, iHeartRadio, Apple Podcasts, YouTube & All Podcast Apps.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:04):
Hey, you have done to censure?

Speaker 2 (00:09):
Wow, crazy young Wake of America.

Speaker 1 (00:22):
It's time for the Adventures of Pipe Man on W
four C. Why do com wes Pond Beach is number
one Internet radio station.

Speaker 3 (00:28):
Here's your host, the vipe Man.

Speaker 1 (00:31):
This is the pipe Man here on the Adventures pipe
Man W four C Y Radio. And Man, this is
a very special live show because it's one of my
favorite subjects. It's people that are criminals and people that
people think are criminals they are not criminals. That's a
bigger part for me, to be honest, because there are

(00:54):
way too many innocent people in jail, in prison. Uh
and then like it's like sometimes after thirty years they're like, oh,
we just figured out it wasn't really you. Sorry. Here's
ten bucks to get a bus ticket and enjoy your life.
And I think that's one of the problems right there,

(01:14):
you know. But we have some solutions because we have
one of the most renowned experts of our network in
true crime, the infamous legendary Nanette Barto. How are you.

Speaker 3 (01:33):
I'm doing well?

Speaker 2 (01:34):
Thank you?

Speaker 3 (01:35):
How about yourself?

Speaker 1 (01:36):
Good? I didn't even write that speech down. It just
all came to me right as.

Speaker 3 (01:41):
I was talking right off the tongue.

Speaker 1 (01:44):
Yeah, I mean because it's true though, like listen, I
talked to you off the air, like Jesus Christ. She
knows way too much about this stuff. But that's a
good thing, because there's too many people there that don't
know way too much. But this is a special episode
because normally you talk about the Zodiac Killer. Yes, who

(02:11):
may or may not be a friend of mine. I can't.
I cannot confirm nor deny, but in case he's listening,
I'm a friend, I just say it so. But this
is something that's near and dear to my heart because
Nanette is going to stand up for somebody who doesn't

(02:36):
deserve to be where they are, and we're going to
find out why. So take it away, Nanette.

Speaker 2 (02:44):
Well, I was contacted about two and a half years
ago by a client who wanted me to look at
some handwriting and determine whether or not a particular person
had written an entry in an evidence log. And of
course he was questioning the officer that had arrested him
in a murder case. So I'm going to back it

(03:07):
up to where he was and what has happened, and
then we can discuss the evidence as it unfolds Somewhere
at the end of February, my client had sold a
very expensive piece of art for about three hundred thousand dollars.
He had been a renter of a room of the victim,

(03:28):
hawkjew Kim since September of nineteen ninety five, and in
February of nineteen ninety six, she had indicated that she
was having problems selling a house in San Jose. She
needed some investment money and asked him to borrow on
a personal guarantee the three hundred thousand that he had

(03:48):
just sold the piece of art for, and in exchange,
he would live at her place rent free for I
think it was about nine months, so March through December
of nineteen ninety he was supposed to be able to
live there rent free, and that would offset the interest
that she would have paid had she taken the loan
out through a bank. So on March first he entered

(04:13):
into that contract with her, and he gave her three
hundred thousand dollars, and by March thirtieth March thirty first
of nineteen ninety six, Hawk Dukim was dead. She was
in the midst of actively putting together an investment deal
for a I want to say it was a video

(04:33):
store or something to that notion. She was getting ready
to purchase a business, which is what she had indicated
she was going to be doing with that money, which
was investing it. On March thirtieth of nineteen ninety six,
mister Wilson sold a second piece of antique arc for
about four hundred thousand dollars, and this was on a
Friday evening, so of course he didn't have an opportunity

(04:56):
to take that money to the bank and put it
into his safety deposit box, which meant that he had
it stored in his backpack in his bedroom. Saturday comes around,
which is March thirtieth, and he is off to have lunch,
and after eating his lunch, he discovers a woman has
left her purse at the diner, and he attempts to

(05:19):
track her down gives it to the bus boy. The
bus boy can't find her, and ultimately the purse is
delivered to the owner of the sandwich shop that he
is eating at. He leaves from the sandwich shop at
approximately one thirty five in the afternoon and he begins
his walk home, which takes him approximately twenty five minutes
about five minutes into his walk, he stops. He calls

(05:40):
the yellow Cab and he asks for them to pick
him up at his place of residence, in which case
he then continues his walk until he gets home. When
he gets home, he notices there's a vehicle in the
driveway that has a car cover over it. He doesn't
recognize the vehicle, and he knows that his landlord doesn't
put a car cover on her car and herbim is gone,

(06:02):
so he gathers his things, he waits for the yellow cab.
Yellow cab doesn't show up, so he calls them back
and he indicates, you know, they were supposed to be
here at two. It's now two minutes past two. Where
where's this cab? And it turns out that the dispatcher
had actually given the wrong address to the taxi cab,
so he was on the other side of town. By
the time he made it to the actual location where

(06:24):
he was supposed to pick up mister Wilson, it was
approximately two four, two five pm and mister Wilson, you know,
grabs all of his belongings and loads them up in
the cab and they are off to San Francisco. When
they get to San Francisco. The caby is not very
familiar with the streets there, finds himself to be frustrated
driving in circles. Ultimately, mister Wilson tells him, I'd like

(06:46):
you to just take me to the Coltran station where
he can just catch a bus or whatever he needs
to into the city to find his friends. Once they
get there, the cab driver accidentally slams mister Wilson's hand
in the car door, which tears off a fingernail and
breaks the finger. He's bleeding profusely, it's not stopping, so

(07:08):
he ultimately ends up at the hospital in San Francisco,
where they address his needs by way of obviously controlling
the bleeding and splinting the broken finger, and he's there
from approximately four pm until about ten o'clock at night,
in which case he's discharged. Once he gets discharged, he
finds himself something to eat. He makes it back to

(07:28):
the bus station and he purchases a ticket at approximately
eleven thirty in the evening, and that ticket is for
a twelve ten ride home, which is going to take
approximately an hour from San Francisco to Palo Alto. He
makes it back to the bus station in Palo Alto
or the Coltran station, and he makes his walk home.
By the time he gets home, it's approximately two thirty

(07:51):
two forty five in the morning, and he decides he
needs something to eat and drink at this point in time,
so he gets up, he leaves to the seven eleven
and and I'll mind you in his particular room that
he has, he has a back door entry, so he
doesn't have to come through the house. He can come
through the back door and not have to see anybody.
And that's what he did when he got home, and

(08:12):
of course when he left to go to seven eleven,
he did the same thing, not to disturb anybody else
who might be sleeping in the house. When he gets
back and he's done eating, he needs to use the restroom,
which causes him to have to walk into the actual
house itself, and on his way to the bathroom, he
notices that the basement door is wide open, the light
is on, so he looks downstairs and he sees his

(08:33):
landlord at the bottom of the stairs. That's pretty much
what kicks off the events of him then ultimately being
arrested for this murder.

Speaker 1 (08:44):
Before you go on, can I give some sound effects
of what we have that happened already.

Speaker 2 (08:50):
Yeah, that's the one I was looking for. He ultimately
has another roommate in the house, and that roommate, William Coleman,
I guess was in his room when Peter started yelling.

(09:12):
Mister Wilson started yelling for mister Coleman to come in
a dress and to help him with hawk jew Kim.
That she is at the bottom of the steps and
that looks like she might be knocked out or injured
what have you, but please come help, And he's yelling
through the door and banging on mister Coleman's door. Ultimately,
when he pops the door open, he finds Coleman standing
on the other side of the door, fully dressed, shoes, pants,

(09:35):
sweatshirt like he's getting ready to go somewhere at forty
five three fifty in the morning. Another thing about hawk
jew Kim is you're not allowed to wear shoes in
the house. So here we have mister Coleman fully dressed
with shoes on in the house, which is something that's
completely abnormal because they're not allowed to wear shoes in
the house. He explains to mister Coleman that he wants

(09:58):
him to call the police. He asked him on a
couple of occasions. Mister Coleman finally makes it out into
the house, looks down the stairwell, sees Hawk Jukim sitting
down there, and approximately three point fifty three am he
calls the police, which of course they then come out
and we know where this is heading, right, everybody in
the house is now a suspect.

Speaker 1 (10:21):
Hold on, I have one more, I have another sound
effect for this part. Okay, you ready, Okay, let's find
out what happens next now.

Speaker 2 (10:41):
Well, basically, the gist of all of the transcripts and
everything that I've read thus far states that when the
police officers arrived that we're supposed to do the forensic walkthrough,
basically take pictures of everything, start tagging everything and marking everything.
Because Hawk Juwkim is dead at the bottom of the stairs.
She has a four by twelve beam that's laid across

(11:03):
her chest, which evidently Wilson attempted to try and remove
from her, but was incapable of doing that because he
just suffered the injury to his hand via the cab door.
Either way, the officers that were supposed to begin taking
the forensic pictures and everything, receive a phone call from

(11:23):
their I don't know if it's their sergeant or their
captain or whoever it is, instructs them to stop what
they're doing and head back to the police department, because
at this point in time, they've now taken mister Coleman
and mister Wilson down to the police department and they've
been instructed to come back and do the forensics on
these two individuals, which really doesn't make any sense because
securing the crime scene, I would have thought would have

(11:45):
been the most important thing to do, taking pictures, tabbing
down things, identifying all of this. Have somebody else at
the police station do this work with these two individuals
is what I think. I In the process, they took
mister Wilson's backpack, which I indicated had four hundred thousand

(12:06):
dollars in it. It also had the purchase of his
ticket back from San Francisco.

Speaker 3 (12:11):
It had the.

Speaker 2 (12:14):
He had a note inside of there where he wrote
down the scenario that occurred at the sandwich shop that
talked about the woman that had left the purse the
time that it happened. So it's basically exculpatory evidence.

Speaker 1 (12:26):
That is now as a question about that, why did
he have notes of that? Like if I had a
scenario like that happened to me, and I'm asking because
it's what listeners probably thinking, like I wouldn't to take
a note.

Speaker 2 (12:41):
Okay, So you know, interestingly enough, he is a Stanford
student at this time. He's thirty one years of age,
and he's going to Stanford University and he's also working
inside the pharmacy at hospitals. So I think that in
his own mindset, taking notes is just something that you
do when something occurs that.

Speaker 1 (13:00):
Makes sense, that makes a lot of sense. That's kind
of like breaking news right right.

Speaker 2 (13:05):
Well, and if this person and if this person was
to come back and want to say that something was
missing from this purse, he's also you know, marked down
all of the information.

Speaker 1 (13:19):
We'll see that makes sense. Like I would definitely like
make pictures and stuff, because you never know. Sometimes there's
people out there that would do that on purpose to
try and get somebody in trouble, you know, like leave
their purse, oh, you know, and say somebody steals it
and somebody they bet on that somebody is a good

(13:42):
samaritan and then all of a sudden, it's like, oh, well,
I had three hundred thousand in that person, it's gone now,
or something like.

Speaker 2 (13:51):
Right right, well, And that's what made this so interesting
is that I was completely unaware of the money in
his backpack when I was doing this. I can wondering
what was the motive for this officer to have framed him.
So Basically, when he's ordered back to the police department
and he brings his backpack before he is walking out
of the room after they've processed him, forensically, officer rips

(14:16):
the backpack off of his back. Now, mind you, this
is now March thirty first, nineteen ninety six, which is
a Sunday, and the officer proceeds to illegally search and
seize items out of the backpack. Mister Wilson never saw
this backpack ever. Again, by the way, which doesn't make
any sense at all. Yeah, if everything is on the

(14:37):
up and up, why would he have never seen his
backpack While he was being detained, he wanted to make
a phone call and he asked to use the address
book out of the inside of his backpack, and the
arresting officer, Michael Yore, indicated as long as you're going
to allow me to search the backpack, I'll let you
have your your address book in mister Wilson or Wilson

(14:58):
is no, you're not, so you my backpack. And I'm
sure that his resistance to that search was because of
that four hundred thousand dollars that was inside of it.

Speaker 1 (15:07):
Now I have a question there again playing I'm gonna
play Devil's advocate here because this is what my people
might be thinking. But it's like, well, if he didn't
do anything wrong, why is he worried about his backpack
game search? I mean, I know what my answer is,
but I want to hear what you have to say.

Speaker 3 (15:25):
Four hundred thousand.

Speaker 1 (15:26):
Dollars okay, but if you have documentation that you sold
a piece of art and the money was in there,
like I know what I would say. I would basically say, well,
because there's four hundred thousand cash, and they're not going
to believe a word I say, because it's cash in
a backpack, and who carries that kind of cash in
a backpack. That's that's why I wouldn't want them to

(15:51):
search it.

Speaker 2 (15:52):
If possibly the other side of it makes me believe
that who he was, I mean again, thirty one year
old student at Stanford working for the medical industry, he
probably knew his rights, and he knew that they had
no right or probable cause to search his backpack, and
he didn't want them to do that. So, I mean,
I've never really specifically asked that question in general to

(16:14):
be able to answer why he didn't want it searched.
But he didn't want it searched, and that was his right,
was to not have it searched. Yeah, Unfortunately Michael Yore
violated those rights and he did search that backpack on
the thirty first of March, and.

Speaker 1 (16:29):
When he should be enough to release them, by.

Speaker 3 (16:31):
The way, should have been.

Speaker 2 (16:33):
Yeah, that was an legal search and seizure. The search
weren't was not granted until the following Monday, and that's
because the judge isn't in until Monday. So if anybody's
ever gone to jail on Friday through Sunday, you know
you're not getting out of your Monday when you see
a judge.

Speaker 3 (16:47):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (16:48):
Rude, And I gotta say too, Okay, So I do
find that a lot of things with California happened this way.
Like I had my own experience as a teenager where
a cop illegally searched me as a teenager walking down

(17:08):
the street with no probable cause and found some green
stuff stuffed down my pants. Okay, and but I also
knew the law, and so I knew you can only
go a thumb's reach at that point in time, and
so I made sure it was. Yeah, it was a

(17:30):
lot longer than a thumb for sure. So then when
I go to court for this thing, I literally go
into court with the whole illegal search and seizure thing.
I lose. I leave the courtroom in Calabasas get and
get on the on ramp of the one oh one
hitchhike back to Aga because I had no vehicle because

(17:52):
I was a teenager, and the police officer picked me
up like to get me a ride. And the first
thing he says to me is like, come on, I
do this every day. You think you're going to win
that legal search and seizure thing. There lies the problem
right there. And so that's why I'm telling the story,

(18:14):
because that other officer in your case felt like, Eh,
it goes to court. I can beat that. We deal
with this all the time. I'm going to do whatever
I have to do to convict this person, and.

Speaker 3 (18:28):
Sure enough, he literally did so.

Speaker 2 (18:30):
Basically, the handwriting that I was tasked with was the
handwriting found atop the police report notes, which were copies
of the train ticket and the note that was done
inside the sandwich shop, and it specifically said in handwriting
taken from backpack March thirty first, nineteen ninety six. So

(18:52):
that's the information that I had on top of both
of these documents, one with the receipt, one with the
actual note. And then there were three evidence logs. The
three evidence logs that came in were atrocious. If if
our police departments are handling evidence logs in this manner,
I'm scared. I'm scared for everybody, because, yeah, there should

(19:14):
not be three versions of an evidence log. There should
be one version that is chronologically ordered that everything took
place in the proper manner, the right chain of command.
We're looking at three different logs that purport different information
with wide out and obliterations and rewritings. And then on

(19:35):
one of these evidence logs is its states removed one
vial of blood. Now, whenever I see something where somebody
specifically states one, that means there was more than one.
But that's not the testimony the officers gave in trial.
The officers in trial, except for the technician or the
lab technician who actually drew the blood, the other police

(19:56):
officers said there was only one vile of blood taken
from mister Wilson. The labjack indicates he pulled two vials
of blood, one for DNA typing and one to determine
whether or not he was on the drugs or alcohol
or anything else like that. So I'm tasked with those
two headers taken from backpack and removed one vile of blood.

(20:17):
After doing the cross referencing and comparison of the handwriting,
I found that it was absolutely the arresting officer's handwriting
Michael Yore. Based on other evidence logs that were in
taken on Coleman, and other investigations and research done with
other witnesses, that this handwriting was absolutely Michael yours.

Speaker 3 (20:39):
Now we see that they.

Speaker 2 (20:40):
Obtained the search weren't on April first, nineteen ninety six.
Now everything starts to look legitimate because there are police
reports where another officer who has to join in with
the arresting officer to do this search of the backpack.
He indicates small US currency, not this four hundred thousand
dollars that my client says is in his backpack, but

(21:02):
small US currency does not mention the receipt does. So
this officer has written up a log of what they've
pulled out of this backpack, but it doesn't talk about
this handwritten note from the sandwich shop. There's no receipt
from the caltrans there's no talk about this four hundred
thousand dollars that was in the backpack. Now, on April first,

(21:23):
all the forensics is taken by a second officer down
to the lab because now the lab is open on Monday,
so lab is not open on the weekends, just like
the judge is not in chambers on the weekend. So
in this particular batch of forensics that has taken to
the lab, it indicates a vile of blood.

Speaker 1 (21:42):
Again.

Speaker 2 (21:42):
So now we've got one vile of blood that's been
removed in the officer's handwriting, and we've got one that
has shown up with another officer to the forensic laboratory.
My assumption at this point is is that the individuals
or the police officers that were supposed to be taking
forensic pictures were called off of that task because Michael

(22:02):
Yore has discovered this four hundred thousand dollars in my
client's backpack, and he is now determined to actually set
him up.

Speaker 3 (22:10):
For this murder.

Speaker 2 (22:11):
So he removes one of the bials of blood on
Sunday and he takes it back to the house and
he splashes. I just found out from a medical examiner's
report this last week that he splashed two drops. So
two drops of blood have convicted this man for almost
thirty years and put him away in prison. Which I
would think that if anybody had two full drops of

(22:33):
blood come out of them, you were likely bleeding pretty heavily,
and there would be more than just two single drops.

Speaker 3 (22:41):
Way, that means.

Speaker 1 (22:42):
Maybe he was checking his diabetes.

Speaker 3 (22:47):
You don't even get that much in the interim.

Speaker 2 (22:53):
He goes through trial and it is a hung jury
on the first trial. This second trial occurs in two
thousand and At this point in time, the DA Linda
Condron is the UH prosecuting District Attorney for the for US.
I'm gonna say it's oh gosh, it's San Jose, Santa
Clara County, So Santa Clara County DA. She in the

(23:17):
second trial convinces the judge that there should be no
information in regards to third party culpability introduced to the
jury that would just confuse them and take too much time.
That's this man's only defense is that somebody else did it.
But she's able to get it wiped off the board.
She's able to get her forensic medical team to testify

(23:38):
erroneously to the actual forensics that involve seamen and motile
sperm riga mortis. These doctors all absolutely testify in a
manner that later in other cases they testify in the adverse.
So it's interesting to note that she was capable of
getting all of the third party culpability information taken off

(24:00):
the table, and that she had her own forensic team
do their job as they did well.

Speaker 1 (24:05):
She all one hundred thousand dollars can pay off a
lot of people too.

Speaker 2 (24:10):
I started to wonder where the payoff was and if
she was down for that, But it turns out that
this particular year she convicted mister Wilson, she also got.

Speaker 3 (24:18):
A seat as a judge.

Speaker 2 (24:20):
Huh, So for her it may have just been about
closing a case. And let's not forget this is Palo Alto.
This is one of the supreme places in the Bay
Area to actually live. Lots of big money there, So
the crunch to close cases and to you know, identify
suspects and crimes are really the pressure's.

Speaker 3 (24:39):
Really on there.

Speaker 1 (24:40):
Well, it's it happens everywhere too. That, like you know,
no matter what the case is, is if they find
something that could close the case, so people stop bothering
them about an open case. They will go to whatever
they have to and that's that. And they don't want
to once they've figured out that they've they're closing in case,

(25:02):
they don't want to hear anything else. And that's terrible.

Speaker 3 (25:05):
Correct correct.

Speaker 2 (25:07):
Well, in the process, not only has the backpack gone
missing and the exculpable evidence, but the copies that were
made in which case Officer your had written taken from
backpack on March thirty. First, these pages go missing from
the police report altogether. They have been replaced. So one
is labeled page nine in the police report. That page

(25:29):
has been removed from the police report and nine A
has been inserted. And in nine A it says, I
removed this page and it has a very funky set
of initials on it. The more I look at this handwriting,
it looks to me that it is also Officer Your's handwriting,
so he's removed a piece of exculpable evidence. The next

(25:50):
page is page one twenty six, and that has been
removed and one twenty seven has been inserted in its place,
and it merely again says I removed page one twenty
six with some initials on it. So the police file
handed over to the defense team doesn't contain any of
these of this information. And as much as mister Wilson

(26:10):
has proclaimed I was here, I was here, I was here,
I had evidence, it was in my backpack, it was
nowhere to be found in approximately twenty seventeen, I think
it is. He makes a request for his police file.
He gets first time ever he gets his entire police
file presented to him. He notices these pages that says,

(26:31):
I removed page nine and I removed page one twenty six.
So he then hits up his defense attorney and says,
did you get these pages? And the defense attorney says, no,
I got the ones that you got that say these
were removed. So he made a specific request to Palo
out to police department. And this is what I love
about shift changes and people filing things is that eventually

(26:53):
this stuff will come out because nobody knows how to
cover it all up. So somebody brand new, does have
no doesn't have any background on this case whatsoever, absolutely
finds page nine and page one twenty six and submits
it to my client. He is now in possession of
the actual evidence that supports Michael Yore had illegally searched, seized,

(27:14):
and removed that evidence and also threw that evidence basically
away in terms of the actual trial itself, so that
it wasn't available to the defense. The DA failed hugely.
There was a cigarette butt found in the basement next
to the suspect or to the victim. This was not
tested to my knowledge for DNA. The victim was found

(27:36):
half nude, waist up, robe to the left, shoes off
to the side. Her pants and her underwear were pulled up. However,
there was a leaf from the basement that was stuck
to her butt, which means that at some point her
butt was naked on that floor to have collected that leaf,
and then the perpetrator redressed her by putting her underwear
in her sweats on, which allowed that leaf to see say,

(28:00):
stuck to her buttox and tell actual autopsy, so.

Speaker 1 (28:04):
That actual leaf, not a tattoo, actual.

Speaker 2 (28:08):
Leaf match other leaves found in in the base.

Speaker 1 (28:12):
I just want to make sure because there's people, let's
say that, like baby, it's a tattoo and that's why
it's there.

Speaker 3 (28:18):
So it's obvious.

Speaker 2 (28:19):
It's obviously looking like a rape and the forensic rape
kit has identified seminal fluid and a motile sperm. Now,
if anybody knows anything about motile sperm, I had to
do my own research because I had to make sure
that what.

Speaker 3 (28:31):
My client was saying was true.

Speaker 2 (28:33):
Motile sperm only stays motile for approximately twelve hours and
then the tails begin to break and fall off. Only
a couple conditions can prolong that, and that's going to
be a cool or refrigerated area, in which case the
basement was a cool place, so we're gonna have a
little bit of a longer time before that tail breaks.
And then she was immediately taken and put in a
refrigerator until the following morning when she was pulled out

(28:56):
for autopsy, so again keeping things a little bit cooler,
but still not allowing that time frame to back itself
all the way up an entire day. So they tried
to state that mister Wilson had killed his landlord between
twelve forty eight pm and one fifty eight pm, so
within an hour and ten minutes when he's actually gone.

(29:18):
So that note that he had for his sandwich shop
indicated he was there at one thirty in the afternoon,
So smeck dab in the middle of when he's supposed.

Speaker 3 (29:27):
To be committing this crime.

Speaker 2 (29:31):
That I don't know if the forensics was ever completed
on the sperm or the seamen, but that information and
whether or not it had been ran, had never been
given to the defense either, so that was withheld from
the defense.

Speaker 3 (29:43):
So she was trying to.

Speaker 2 (29:44):
Make the claim that there was not a rape, there
was not a third party, when we have all this
forensic evidence that suggests there was.

Speaker 1 (29:51):
Is it possible that the Motown sperm came from Studio
fifty four?

Speaker 3 (29:57):
How what is Studio fifty four?

Speaker 1 (30:00):
You don't know. Studio fifty four. It's like the most
famous discothech ever in the world in New York City,
where there would definitely be a lot of Motown sperm. Oh,
you didn't say. You didn't say Motown.

Speaker 3 (30:16):
No Motown, motol It's able to move the.

Speaker 1 (30:23):
Whole different story. What wouldn't that be mobile?

Speaker 3 (30:27):
Well they call it motile.

Speaker 2 (30:28):
I don't know why, probably because mobile indicates getting up
and walking or a vehicle or.

Speaker 1 (30:34):
You know what, how do you notice sperm can't walk?
Maybe that's why it Maybe that's why the tail broke
because it was.

Speaker 2 (30:45):
Walking, it bouncing like tigger. Now this one was fully intact,
so obviously DNA could be obtained from it. And in
light of all of this, you know, forensic evidence that
was not tested and then shoved aside. And then I've
read the transcripts in which case the DA had indicated

(31:06):
that this is a waste of time, and the judge
almost sounded like he was kind of against her when
he said, this isn't about time. We have the time
to try this correctly. But she was still successful at
getting the judge to tell the jury, or for the
judge to decide that the jury would not hear about
rape or third party because of the two drops of

(31:26):
blood that was found at the scene that did track
back to my client. So after I completed the handwriting examination,
I received a letter from a independent forensic lab that
had looked at the results of the DNA that was
ran back in that timeframe, and they indicated that it
was strangely similar the degradation. So basically, when DNA or

(31:50):
blood or saliva or whatever sits out in the air,
it degrades breaks down right, So when the blood is
drawn from his own that degradation level is going to
be a lot less because it goes directly into a tube,
so it's not open to the air, it's not open
to all these other factors. The degradation level of these

(32:11):
DNAs together were identical, which leads the forensic lab to
believe that the blood that was found at the stine
of the crime was in fact the blood that came
out of the vial that was taken from his arm.
So basically they splashed these two drops down on the
ground and then immediately turned around and picked it back
up for the forensic testing. And which case it did

(32:34):
not have the time to degrade like her blood did
because she had been beaten about the head, she had
lacerations all over her head and there was blood pretty
much everywhere. But the fact that the degradation level of
these of this DNA was identical indicates that yes, it
came from that vile. We have proof that the police
officer removed that vile of blood, so he definitely framed

(32:56):
my client. And now that I finally know the motive
is four hundred thousand dollars, everything started to make sense.

Speaker 1 (33:02):
Yeah, that only makes sense. Now I have a question,
real quick, serious one though. Wouldn't a blood spat splatter
expert like Dexter wouldn't I was going serious butt right,

(33:23):
But seriously though, wouldn't a blood splatter and splatter expert
be able to know that the blood that was dropped
was dropped and not like from the scene in the crime.

Speaker 2 (33:37):
I don't know that blood splatter experts were something that
they had back in nineteen ninety six. Quite honestly, we'd
like to believe that these sciences have been around for
as long as we've seen, like with Dexter, But the
real the realism is is that they haven't been And
I want to say it wasn't even until the early

(33:58):
nineteen nineties that we even had had what they called
was link analysis, when they start to actually link murders
from different areas and time frames to a single person.
So it was like they had link blindness because the
proximity in the time was so distant they didn't know
to put the two together because one person had actually
committed that crime. So they're even the serial killer notion.

(34:20):
I want to say, not until the late eighties, maybe
even early nineties, did we even understand the word or
term serial killer.

Speaker 1 (34:28):
Hm. Interesting, Yeah, so.

Speaker 2 (34:30):
I don't think they had blood splatter experts, but even then,
and I don't know how they splashed the two drops.
I don't know if they literally just you know, put
it upside down, which could appear as though if somebody
had if he had torn his fingernail, let's say, on
this four by twelve four x eight by twelve piece
of wood, then you would have suspected that there would

(34:53):
have been a lot more blood in the general vicinity.

Speaker 1 (34:58):
To tell where it went, Like somebody would be able
to analyze that specific action and know where the blood went.
Whoever was planting the blood wouldn't be able to know
that exactly well.

Speaker 2 (35:13):
And his hand was completely bandaged, so mind you, he
had just spent six hours at the emergency room having
his hand addressed from the cab door, and the bandages
did not have any sign of blood on them. So basically,
the police officer who noted that he had this bandaged hand,
took him to a hospital where they then this reminds

(35:34):
me of The Departed, where Leonardo DiCaprio punches the guy
out and brings his hand, and then Jack Nicholson wants
to find out whether or not he's got a wire
in it, so they bust his hand open, you know,
all broken in the cast. So this is what's going
through my mind when they say they take him to
the hospital. They have to dismantle this bandage, this crutch

(35:56):
on his hand, all of these things so that they
can do a proper forensic test. They did nail scrapings,
they tested the bandage, they did everything. Not an ounce
of her blood, not an ounce of Hawk Jo Kim's
blood is found on his bandage tamp which is freshly bandaged,
by the way, and he has he has the witnesses
from the yellow cab who testifies on his behalf, the

(36:18):
medical examiner at San Francisco Hospital testifies on his behalf.
Everybody is on his side, with the exception of the
police officer in the DA.

Speaker 1 (36:27):
And if they need me, I'm glad to go there
and stick my finger to check my sugar level and
drop some blood. To show that might have been what happened.
So if you let him know if he needs me
and do that, I will well.

Speaker 2 (36:43):
Mister Wilson thinks that mister Coleman is actually the one
who perpetrated this crime. Mister Coleman indicated when he got
home that night that her BMW was in the driveway,
so that explicitly shows that when mister Wilson was home
before he got the cab ride to S Francisco, that
his landlord wasn't home. But by the time mister Coleman

(37:04):
got home, her BMW was there and the car that
had the car cover in it was no longer in
the driveway, so that indicates that at a minimum, she
was alive. She also had conversations and phone calls between
her and her niece, which happened one at twelve forty
eight pm. She tried to reach her niece, her niece
didn't wasn't home. Her niece then tried calling her back,

(37:25):
not getting any answer, kind of scenario, so it indicates
that she was still alive. The theory that they tried
to put forth is that mister Wilson was attempting to
steal her house. But I read the personal contract that
they created or the guarantee for the three hundred grand,
and the house was not leverage, so it wasn't like
this thing said if you fail to pay me back,
I get titled to your house. This was just a

(37:48):
personal guarantee like somebody had given you or loans you
five thousand dollars with no collateral. So that whole notion,
and they did actually have a document examiner come in
on this case and testify to the fact that she
had she had filled out the rent receipts and signed
them for him because he was paying her cash, and
she absolutely, one hundred percent signed this personal guarantee. So

(38:11):
they tried to say that in this hour and ten minutes,
mister Wilson forced her under duress to fill out these
receipts and to sign this personal contract for the three
hundred thousand dollars right before killing her. But the handwriting
shows that it's been written freely and openly, so it
doesn't suggest that she was under duress or having any

(38:33):
issues at the time that it was written, and the
document examiner testified to that.

Speaker 3 (38:38):
So their story and what I mean, there's even news.

Speaker 2 (38:42):
Articles in which case they attempted to say that he
was trying to steal her house from her. So they
are literally even in the media chastising him and trying
to make him look bad in order to facilitate the
case that they want, which is to seal the deal
on him and to close this case on him for
murder that he didn't commit.

Speaker 1 (39:00):
Has anybody talked to other inmates that he associates with
while always incarcerated, because you know, with all the research
I do watching these crime shows, you know, you know

(39:23):
the inmates, if they're guilty, they slip up at some
time and share it with their bunkie or somebody in
the jail.

Speaker 2 (39:31):
That's what made this case so unique for him to
be reaching out. And by the way, in most cases
I don't get I don't get paid for people reaching
out to me from prison, and that's typically because they
don't have any means, they don't have anybody who supports them,
and they literally are probably guilty of their case. I've
never really found one where the individual thirty years later
is still trying to fight.

Speaker 3 (39:52):
For his innocence.

Speaker 2 (39:53):
I thought that to be kind of a tickler in
my brain, just to begin with, who is still trying
to fight after thirty years of maintaining innocence, and so
of course you have to take a look at it
for what it's worth. Now, mister Coleman, he was also
a suspect. He had been arrested, he had been put
on an ankle monitor. This man cut that monitor off

(40:15):
and left the country.

Speaker 1 (40:17):
Oh well, guilty, guilty, you know. Wait wait, wait guilty
here ept, where's my guilty?

Speaker 3 (40:37):
You need a gabble?

Speaker 1 (40:39):
What's the best thing I could do? Short notice and
short this is my gavel.

Speaker 3 (40:46):
Don't break your heart machine, No, no.

Speaker 1 (40:49):
It's it. It's this. Let see because this is so interesting,
you know, I like bring that out like sometimes in
my ship why my co hosts she's really boring, So
I'll just at some point soci'll be quiet. But this

(41:11):
is very interesting here, okay, because it is I say
it in the MEAI show, all joking aside, they're you know,
the system's not perfect, obviously, but there are so many
scenarios of people in prison that shouldn't be in prison.
And once you're here's what I know, once you're under

(41:34):
the DOJ, you don't really have rights. Aymore so to
your point what you're saying, like it doesn't even matter.
There's a lot of times a judge can rule in
your favor, and DOJ has final say of whether to
release you or not. Once you are incarcerated, your chances

(41:54):
of exercising rights to get out diminish dramatically because nobody
cares you're guilty, and like they lock you up and
like you're forgotten yesterday's news and you go away to
your point.

Speaker 3 (42:10):
Oh, which brings to my point.

Speaker 2 (42:12):
When I wanted to get in there and do that
interview with him, I went back and looked at the
response from the individuals that are in charge of that,
and they said, no, non news media. So and the
news is already weaponized against these individuals. In most cases,
they could climb on whatever bandwagon that information is leaked

(42:33):
to them, and they sell that to the public. We're
looking at Liz last week, they're purportedly stating that they
saw the yogurt murders in Texas, which to me blows
me away because they claim that they've done this through DNA,
which I can buy that. Okay, DNA can solve crimes,
but then, how in the heck did you wrongfully convict
two people who spent fifteen years in prison for a

(42:56):
crime they didn't commit back in two thousand when you
had DNA.

Speaker 1 (43:01):
Well, I could answer that because I've had attorneys before that.
When they sent me their billable hours, right there in
black and white, it said they went to TCB at
y yogurt to discuss the case and charge me for
that again, So maybe maybe the real yogurt killers were

(43:24):
having yogurt discussing the case, and that's I don't know.

Speaker 2 (43:31):
Well, these these district attorneys, Yes, their job is to
prosecute a live criminal. They're also their job is to
uphold the law for those that are innocent, not to
compound to make it worse, to make it hard for
them to present their case to forensic to hire forensic witnesses,
to to erroneously testify to a jury in regards to forensics.

(43:55):
That's complete crap. So this this DA now, having been
a judge for the last twenty some years. To my knowledge,
I believe she might still be practicing as a judge
in some capacity, but she needs to be taken off
the bench. Every case that she's ever handled, her touch
needs to be looked at along with this officer Michael Yore,

(44:17):
because if he took this four hundred thousand dollars, which
is exactly what the client is say, and he did.
Then he's done this to other people and god.

Speaker 1 (44:24):
Wait, absolutely, now here's my question. Like, here's another thing too.
It's very coincidence become a judge because I know for
a fact that when prosecutors prosecute cases, they get bonuses
and promotions, so that she did, even if there wasn't

(44:45):
a payoff. Listen, now I'm a judge, Okay.

Speaker 2 (44:49):
I believe that what I read in regards to her
receiving that seat was that it hadn't even officially been
up for voting for yet, so she was just given
it by the governor at that time. Oh wait, and
you know what's even crazier is that some of the

(45:11):
cases that I read, some of the articles, not cases,
but the articles on cases that she's heard. Is that
she's now known to be a very stiff, strict person
on the bench who indicates that if a prosecutor is
not ready, their witnesses aren't available, or they don't have
everything together when trial comes, they force thetion. She forces

(45:31):
the prosecution to dismiss the case. But here she was,
and maybe this is her retribution. Maybe this is her
way of trying to make up for what she knew.
She did to obtain that seat. But she withheld information,
She didn't present the forensics. She had witnesses get up
there and testify to untruce in regards to forensics. And

(45:54):
now she sits high and mighty on the bench expecting
more from the process secuters beneath her. Then she afforded
the very people that she prosecuted back when she was
a prosecutor.

Speaker 1 (46:06):
He should have met, he should have never rejected her advances.
That's all I'm saying.

Speaker 3 (46:12):
The Zodiac killer.

Speaker 1 (46:15):
Nothing like a woman's scorn, okay, And don't do it
to a judge if you are a you know, somebody
that got arrested because just do whatever the judge tells you.

Speaker 3 (46:29):
Well, and the other side of it.

Speaker 2 (46:31):
If mister Coleman wasn't guilty, but I have to believe
that he was fully aware. He lives inside the house.
He doesn't have a separate entrance to his door. He
would have noticed that basement door being opened because it's
always closed. There's a draft that comes up from it,
and they've always been instructed to keep the door closed.
He would have seen that the light was on. So
if he didn't commit this crime, albeit him sitting by

(46:52):
and watching what they were capable of doing to mister Wilson,
I probably would have cut off an ankle monitor and
skeat outled myself too, because they were able to convict
somebody who was completely innocent, went through the means, And
of course they stipulate at the second trial that yes,
mister Coleman is not present for the jury to hear.
They then do a mock play inside the courtroom reading

(47:15):
his testimony, the prosecution playing herself, the defense attorney playing himself,
and then some stranger I think an officer or somebody
else is reading the answers of mister Coleman, which was
from the first trial.

Speaker 1 (47:29):
It's it positive impossible that mister Coleman framed mister Wilson.

Speaker 3 (47:35):
Uh.

Speaker 2 (47:35):
You know what, from everything that I can tell, all
he really did was lie about his involvement with mister Wilson,
trying to get his attention, him not answering his bedroom door,
him being fully dressed like. He lied about a whole
bunch of things that make him look guilty. But he
didn't say anything in his transcripts that would have indicated
that mister Wilson was guilty. Problem is now is that

(47:58):
our second suspect is gone, and he's gone and left
the country and they don't have anybody else to look at.
They got to solve it on. I think that the
second officer yours saw the four hundred thousand in that backpack.
There was no way mister Wilson was getting out, no way.

Speaker 1 (48:13):
Or was it that the officer just really didn't like Slipknot.

Speaker 2 (48:18):
Ha ha, yes, slipnot And that's not the real mill mister
Wilson playing with Slipknot now, but you can't tell because
there's a mask on.

Speaker 1 (48:27):
But the real mister Wilson is sitting in jail cell
because some police officer didn't like slipknots music. That's that's
my analysis.

Speaker 2 (48:39):
Well, I'm hoping that at any point I know that
he has filed for rid of habeas corpus. My issue
that I have with it is that he has to
do this petition through Santa Clara County, which is exactly
where this DA was and prosecuted individuals. And I'm not
sure if she then became an actual I think she
did maybe become an actual judge in Santa Clair County.

(49:01):
So I'm concerned about them doing what's right on behalf
of this individual who is innocent.

Speaker 1 (49:08):
Oh, I'm concerned too, because seriously, I mean, when you
file for appeal, especially a habeas corpus, most of the
time it ends up going back to the judge that sentenced.

Speaker 2 (49:22):
You, and that judge is not going to be available anymore.
Obviously after thirty years of him being in prison. I
don't think that it's going to go back to that
same judge. However, it's going to reflect on somebody who
was a judge. It's going to reflect on that da,
that prosecutor who made sure that this man was ultimately

(49:42):
convicted of a crime that he did not commit.

Speaker 1 (49:45):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (49:45):
Now, whether or not she was paid or for her,
it was a notch in the belt in order to
get that seat as a judge. She has plenty of
motivation as well.

Speaker 1 (49:54):
Well. I've also heard I don't know if you've had
this experience, but I've heard that a lot of times,
especially in the federal court system criminal court system, is
that a bunch of judges cut together ahead of time
of cases and they are a determined guilt or not

(50:15):
guilt in so many words.

Speaker 3 (50:17):
Isn't that sick?

Speaker 1 (50:19):
Yeah, you know, and it's like, okay, it's like a
bunch of them, Okay, let's decide what to do with
this case.

Speaker 2 (50:27):
That's as if to presume that every single prosecutor doesn't lie,
every single prosecutor is for their citizens.

Speaker 3 (50:37):
Yeah.

Speaker 2 (50:37):
Yeah, that there's nobody nefarius in that field or in
that arena.

Speaker 3 (50:42):
Which I think.

Speaker 1 (50:43):
Is the problem is prosecutors they're paid to convict people.
They're not paid to defend them.

Speaker 2 (50:51):
Or they are they actually are. They take an oath
to the United States. I mean that means even the
criminal you have to be on the up and up,
you have to provide all the evidence, whether it exculps
them or enculps them. You have to provide all of
that evidence to the other side. They're the ones that

(51:11):
maintain control and chain the custody of the forensics from
the time that the police department steps in and starts
collecting that stuff all the way through the testing and
into the hands of the prosecutor when they actually go
to trial. They are obligated to provide every single result
to the other side. Because what if we have a
scenario just like this where we have an officer that's

(51:32):
on the take and an individual who's being framed for
a murdered that they didn't commit. He had the right
to know about the DNA testing on the cigarette butt
on the semen. The prosecutor tried to play it off
like like, oh, she could have had sex mutual or
consensual sex up to three days before, which is complete
bs sperm ISONI mobile for the twelve hours.

Speaker 1 (51:54):
To be there for three days.

Speaker 3 (51:56):
No, the leaf wouldn't have been there at all.

Speaker 2 (51:57):
She had had consensual sex, the leaf never have made
it underneath her underwear and underneath her sweats.

Speaker 1 (52:03):
Okay, So I want to point something out to you. Unfortunately,
there's so much more to talk about here. Unfortunately we're
past to fifty bands and we didn't even get to
your slide show yet.

Speaker 2 (52:13):
Ah well, I only had that up in case we
wanted to view any of the evidence that I put together.
But I have about an eighty seven slide PowerPoint presentation
that's put together where I've compiled the evidence, the transcripts,
what the DA's done with the officer's done, and what
has been wrongfully done to mister Wilson. And like I
told you it was gonna be hard pressed just to
get the facts out in fifty minutes.

Speaker 1 (52:34):
Well, yeah, and the next time I do a Jerry
Lewis marathon, a telethon, then we'll have time. Then we'll
have time to go through the ninety slides.

Speaker 2 (52:47):
Free Peter Wilson. He needs this rid of habeas corpus.
This man needs his life back. He spent thirty years
in press.

Speaker 1 (52:54):
I want family guy back, Family guy back. Man.

Speaker 2 (53:05):
Seriously, you better call it quits, mister pass fifty minutes.

Speaker 1 (53:09):
Yeah, I do have to call it quits. But I
do want to say, seriously, we have to stop this
crap where people spend time in prison just because the people,
the people investigating, get lazy. We won't even say anything controversial,
you know. Sometimes it's just laziness. Okay, we did our job.

(53:29):
We're not gonna do anymore. And I think, you know,
I think before you put somebody in prison, especially for
that long period time, you better be one hundred million
percent sure of what you're doing, you know, or you're
gonna be crooked, obviously. But listen, that's the problem too,

(53:51):
when you get in a position of power. You even
see it with criminals Okay, aim position of power, people
start feeling like they're unt touchable. So maybe this officer
who got the four hundred thousand dollars hypothetically, then maybe
he just felt like he had the system down and

(54:15):
knew he could get away with it, which, obviously, if
that is the case, he did get away with it. Uh.

Speaker 2 (54:22):
You know what's even crazier is that I read an
article that listed about four or five other murders that
occurred during around the timeframe of Hawkjuwke Kim, in which
case there were people who had actually planned the murder
out to steal money from family.

Speaker 3 (54:36):
Or what have you.

Speaker 2 (54:37):
These individuals only did five to ten years for murder
for pre planned murder, and we've got mister Wilson, which
this wouldn't have been a pre planned murder obviously, even
if he had committed it, it wasn't pre planned. Is
thirty years with no chance parole. I think the DA
had to have known that Michael Yore was dirty while

(55:00):
in such a sentence.

Speaker 1 (55:02):
Yeah, absolutely, Oh hold on, I got yeah, Okay, she's
gonna be over there in a couple minutes. Okay, so
we got to talk to the other engineer because you're
you're on my show, but you're gonna be doing your
show in a couple of minutes. So I'm just letting
them know. Okay, then that's working on another crime right now.

(55:27):
She'll work on your crime in a couple minutes. Okay.
So anyway, thank you for having me here.

Speaker 2 (55:37):
I do appreciate getting this information out.

Speaker 3 (55:40):
I get a good cause this guy.

Speaker 1 (55:42):
Yeah, yeah, I like having fun, but it's a good cause.
And I always feel bad for people like that, because
what and what are you gonna do if you find
out it's true that he was framed or whatever.

Speaker 3 (55:55):
It is true.

Speaker 2 (55:56):
We've already got the DNA evidence, We've got the handwriting evidence.

Speaker 3 (56:00):
Reached out to Julie Watts Julie Watts.

Speaker 2 (56:02):
On CBS thirteen News investigative Journalists. She asked me for
some information. I provided her with my PowerPoint presentation. I've
not heard back from her. I've reached out to people
such as the Innocence Project. I just received a letter
back from them this last week stating that they couldn't
help with the rid of Habeas Corpus, but they believe
that he is innocent and thanking me for working on

(56:24):
this project. And you know this is much like the
Zodiac case and the fact that the FBI says we
don't have the resources. The only person who's going to
do it is uninet. We appreciate you for doing it, well,
thank you guys, but I'm not getting paid for this.
I'm only out here to see that justice is fulfilled.

Speaker 1 (56:38):
See. That's why I love about you, because you're like,
You're like a real life superhero.

Speaker 2 (56:45):
Neat me in any where's my sound effects?

Speaker 3 (56:52):
Blah blah blah blah, but here? All right?

Speaker 1 (56:58):
Okay, so hold on, we have one more sound effect
for you. Hold on, let me find it here. How
about we just do my closing song? There you go? Ready?
Are you ready for this? Ready?

Speaker 3 (57:18):
This is the man.

Speaker 1 (57:20):
He's gotta.

Speaker 3 (57:27):
Play that play that.

Speaker 1 (57:35):
Man?

Speaker 2 (57:36):
Yeah?

Speaker 3 (57:40):
Why ready?

Speaker 1 (57:44):
That was That was a festival an interview impromptu pipe
man song they wrote right during the interview, so we
had to include it on this. But seriously, thank God
for people like you, because it makes me so sad
that people like mister Griff Wilson. I was about to say,
mister Griffin foiled by my own joke that I really

(58:12):
my heart goes out to him, because that's what I
was starting to say before is like, even if he
gets freed, what do you do after that much time passes?
You came in like I think of Shawshank Redemption and
what's his name? Game released at like eighty some odd
years old.

Speaker 2 (58:28):
You know, bro, the guys in the Yogurt shot murders
that got released after fifteen years, they suffered with the
stigma over their head for having been killers that they
were for the last fifteen years. So you're right, you
can't work once the media has weaponized themselves against you.

Speaker 3 (58:45):
You're screwed.

Speaker 1 (58:47):
Yeah, no matter what, and then you know you can't
really function in society. Who's going to hire you? Who's
going to do this?

Speaker 3 (58:54):
Exactly?

Speaker 1 (58:54):
Basically a lot of these inmates. Bravo to him for
standing up for himself, because by this point a lot
of these inmates won't even try anymore because they're already
set in their lifestyle now they and they know that
where they are might be better off than being outside.

Speaker 2 (59:12):
You know, it can become institutionalized if you're in there.
How do you come out and actively become a productive
member of society when you don't even recognize society anymore?

Speaker 1 (59:23):
No, especially as quickly as society changes nowadays.

Speaker 3 (59:27):
He didn't even have cell phones then, exactly.

Speaker 1 (59:30):
That might come. No Internet, no cell phones, no social media,
he wouldn't know what to do, like set. And that's
why there's a recipitism rate is so high because people
that ends up happening to they're just like, I just
just send me back supposon.

Speaker 3 (59:46):
Yeah, all right, you rock.

Speaker 1 (59:49):
Everybody. Make sure to tune into Nanette because she is
the bomb and she's gonna hit the road jack while
she finding the Zodiac. Yes, so check her out and man,
you rock. There's her show right up there, and there's

(01:00:11):
her boyfriend up there in the top right. And thanks
thanks for listening to the adventures of pipe Man here
on W four c Y Radio.

Speaker 2 (01:00:22):
Take care everybody, Thank you for listening to the Adventures
of Pipemin. I'm w for c u I Radio.