Lauren Bright Pacheco | Justice is Not One Size Fits All - DIE-ALOGUE

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:33):
Welcome to Dialogue podcast. I'm yourhost, Rebecca Sebastian, and this is
the podcast where I speak with theleading voices and crime, culture and justice
every single week and we talk ofbig topics about the heart of true crime,
what's underneath the stories? What arewe really talking about when we talk
about true crime. I think oftrue crime as a vehicle to kind of
get close to some really scary,challenging, frustrating topics. That's just a

(00:57):
little primer. If you're new here, go back and listen to previous episodes
and you'll definitely pick up on thethesis if you will, of Dialogue pretty
quickly. And right now, theconversation is around wrongful convictions. We are
on week three of this series andI am learning so much every single week.
We're going to continue the conversation todaywith Emmy Award winning TV producer Lauren

(01:19):
Bright Pacheco. Lauren has created andhosted several true crime podcasts, including The
Happy Face Killer, Murder in Illinois, and she's here today to discuss Murder
in Oregon, which has a wrongfulconviction at the heart of it, a
literal and technical one. Frank Gableis at the heart of the story.
You're going to hear all about himand the recent overturning of his conviction,

(01:40):
and Lauren will update us on thestatus of his case. This series has
honestly been thrilling because it's as thoughwithout planning on my part or there's really
each week and each guest has builton the foundation of the previous episode.
It's been so amazing. And Laurendoes this beautifully today by adding some really
helpful terminology that I suspect you're goingto appreciate as much as I do.

(02:04):
And I'm going to roll a trailerfor her twenty twenty podcast, Murder in
Oregon, and you should also checkout her current show Medical Mysteries, and
stay tuned for a new true crimeseries coming soon that Lauren is producing called
Murder in Miami. Lauren loved meeting. You can't wait to continue the conversation.
Thank you for killing the small talkwith that. Here's a quick trailer
of Murder in Oregan. Then weget right into the conversation. It was

(02:32):
not an accident. It was acar burglary gone bad. I was thirteen.
She sold me for drugs. Itwas an assassination. Dirty cops,
dirty town Salem's the most crap placeany place you can find in the United
States. He was a public officialwho discovered corruption in his own department.

(02:53):
He was stabbed in the heart infront of the building where he worked.
Kevin Bill, We're about to diveinto an unimaginable world of corruption and depravity
that would nearly ruin Phil's career.It seemed unfair to have the paper attack

(03:14):
me, put Kevin's life at risk, tell me to turn around. I
wasn't going to turn around, andthey tell me to get on my knees.
Now you gotta do it. Putit right between my fucking eyes and
expose the cediest underbelly of Oregon,ripping my hair, shoving pills down my
mouth, as having deep ties tothe very people who were supposed to police

(03:35):
it. There was something very bigbeing hidden. Michael Frankie's killers were never
brought to justice, and you'll findout why. This season of Murder and
Oregon premieres October twenty fourth. Listento Murder in Oregon on the iHeartRadio app,
Apple Podcasts, or wherever you getyour podcasts. Lauren, Welcome to

(04:05):
Dialogue Podcasts. So happy to haveyou joined us. For this series Unwrongful
Convictions. I am so happy tobe here and I absolutely love your podcast.
Oh my gosh, thank you somuch. That's really nice. And
may I say back at you,why don't you give our audience from background?
You've done more than just murder andorgan You've created many podcasts. Maybe
share a little about yourself and yourwork. Okay, I am first and

(04:28):
foremost a recovering television producer, andso my background was in daytime television and
I was lucky enough to cross pathswith two guys who were linked up with
How Stuff Works, Man gesh hadTickadoor and Will Pearson. I was working
for the Doctor As show and oneof the contributors that I was working with
was a woman named Melissa jess PersonMoore whose father is Keith Hunter jess Person

(04:54):
the Happy Face Killers, and theyhad an idea to do a podcast focusing
on Melissa's life story and coming toterms with the fact that she learned when
she was fifteen that her father wasa serial rapist and killer. And while

(05:14):
Melissa and I were used to tellingstories in a visual format, neither one
of us had ever taken on apodcast, and for me, it became
such a blessing because in television,particularly daytime television, you're kind of forced
to condense people into palatable, littletwenty second soundbites, and so you really
don't get to the depth of someone'spersonal story. And Melissa and I had

(05:40):
had a lot of the conversations thatyou hear in Happy Face late at night
in a car as we were drivingthrough the countryside to get to a shoot.
So there was an authenticity about thoseconversations that I think resonated with a
lot of people. And so thatwas the first podcast I ever set out

(06:01):
to produce, and to be honest, I had no idea what I was
doing wouldn't be the first podcaster thatstarted that way. You're in a very
good company. But since I camefrom television, I really wanted to create
a story that you could watch withyour eyes closed. Yes, you're getting

(06:23):
at this medium of podcasting, andwhat's so special about it and why it
lends itself to so well to storiesis I think an authenticity you said in
an intimacy that I think can't happenwith a visual format. I think it's
so personal and it's so close literallyto your ears. It's like especially most
of us who listen with headphones.Audio activism. I'd never heard this phrase.

(06:46):
I don't know if you coined itor you're using it, but talk
to me about it because I loveit. I appreciate that I did coin
it, and it is something thatI had struggled to articulate for a long
time. When you talk about theauthenticity the intimacy of podcasting, it's also
a responsibility because to earn someone's earis something I take on a very serious

(07:11):
level. That's why I love thetagline of your podcast that it's It's killed
the small talk, because everybody's timeis valuable, and if you're going to
take someone's time, there should bea reason, and with that comes a
responsibility. And audio activism, tome, is the potential that podcasting has

(07:32):
to create content that makes a difference, particularly in the wrongful conviction realm,
because you have these stories where aperson may have exhausted their appeals, exhausted
everything on a legal level, andpodcasting allows you to tell a very complicated
story like murder and or again,but on a platform that can serve as

(07:57):
a court of public opinion. Soyou see a large number now of wrongful
convictions that have been overturned because ofthe audio activism, of the growing awareness
within a community that an injustice hasbeen committed. And we just saw it

(08:18):
with Cereal, you know, Iam cautiously optimistic that we will see it
with Frank Gable, which is themurder and Oregon case, and an ideal
world will see it again and againand again, because the misconception about wrongful
convictions is that they're not common.Yes, yes, preach. I feel

(08:41):
hopeful as well, as you mentionedthat this will continue to be the case
that podcasts can change what is happeningthe reality around these convictions, But I
also feel really discouraged that it's happeningoutside of our criminal justice system. Like
I'm so happy there's an alternative,but I'm like, we're relying almost more

(09:01):
on this alternative system than we arewhere they're supposed to be getting justice,
and that I don't know how toreconcile. There has to be a coordinated,
parallel journey with criminal justice reform,and honestly, that plays heavily into
audio activism as well. It's raisingawareness. One of your recent podcasts actually

(09:22):
is a great example. The episodethat you did on consent. Oh God,
I learned so much, but somany people learned so much, including
me, And that is something thatI forwarded out as a link to both
my son and my daughter who areof college age, because ignorance isn't bliss,

(09:46):
you know, a knowledge is power. And if we can use the
podcast platform to raise awareness for thingsthat we should all care deeply about as
a society, yep, that's audioactivism. When I saw the term,
I'm like, that's what I've literallybeen using a jillion other words for for
three years of this podcast, andI could have so succinctly used though,

(10:09):
so I will be borrowing them andcrediting you from here on out. But
it's beautiful, it's perfect. It'sdefinitely what we're trying to do and to
amplify people like you who are doingit as well. So, okay,
murder in Oregon, let's get intoit. Because this one is a lot
like the wrongful conviction cases I've seenand heard in a lot of ways,
but there's some really unique elements too. So in January of nineteen eighty nine,

(10:33):
Michael Frankie, who was the thendirector of the Department of Corrections for
Oregon, was stabbed once through theheart outside of the building in Salem where
he worked, the Dome Building inSalem. And he was not only stabbed
once through the heart, it wasdeemed a car burglary gone bad. Keep

(10:56):
in mind that his car was parkedspot that was clearly labeled director of the
Department of Correction. So who intheir right mind would be looking for some
change in a car and try tobreak into the system the car of the
guy who runs the entire correction system. There were red flags immediately, and

(11:18):
the biggest one being that the nightthat he was murdered was the day before
he was supposed to represent a reportin front of a legislative committee on corruption
within his department, and Michael Frankiehad uncovered a rats nest of corruption.

(11:39):
Phil Stamford likes to say, it'salmost like a sweater. You pull one
piece and the entire thing unravels,And so it was highly suspicious in terms
of the timing, highly suspicious alsoin terms of the physicality of the man.
They ended up arrest and charging witha murder fourteen months later. Who

(12:03):
I probably outweigh frank Gable any givenday. At the time of the murder
particularly he was a very slight man. They claimed that he was hopped up
on meth and that gave him thephysical capability to overpower a man who was
six foot four. Played football incollege, and you know, the week

(12:28):
before he was murdered, was playinghighly physical, competitive basketball as well.
He was an athlete, and hewas in great physical shape. So a
lot of things didn't make sense.And unfortunately, the way in which that
conviction went down, I'd love tosay is unique, but I just did

(12:52):
a guest episode for the Wrongful Convictionpodcast and there were eerie similarities, and
we can talk a little bit aboutthat. But there was no physical evidence
that ever linked Frank Gabel to thecrime. He had an alibi. Another
man confessed to the murder, andJohnny Krauss that confession was not allowed in

(13:13):
the trial. To get the conviction, the prosecution rounded up the usual suspects,
and every person who testified it againstFrank Gabel had an incentive to do
so. So we have a prosecutionwho is making the most of incentivizing testimony
from questionable witnesses. But in thiscase they were also using polygraph tests as

(13:41):
witness training tools. They gave onewoman Jody Swearingen, I think nineteen polygraph
tests, so they could almost testher, train her to test in terms
of lying on the stand, andthirty years later or you know, all

(14:01):
of those people have recanted, right, So that is where sadly we see
this. We see these scapegoats.We see people with so little power in
the system, who probably have othermisdemeanors, possibly even felonies, you know,
and they just they throw the crimeon someone they think they can.
You know, that's forgettable. What'sreally unique in this podcast that I loved

(14:22):
was the victim actually is such abig part of the story. I mean,
unfortunately, in a lot of truecrime stories, the victim doesn't get
to be for whatever reason. Ifthere's someone at large, the focus becomes
on the chase and the trial andthe hunt and the conviction. But in
this case, we've got Frank Gablewho was wrongfully convicted. But we have
a Michael Frankie who, like yousaid, he was a whistle blower.

(14:45):
I mean, he was about toblow the lid off of some really bad
stuff that was going on in theDepartment of Corrections. And we get to
know him so well because of hisbrothers Kevin and Patrick. Yes, yes,
I just feel like we got toset just such a strong and clear
sense of who he is. Canyou talk about I mean, did you
just feel so lucky when you gotto meet them and think like they're going

(15:07):
to just help this story so muchcome to light and bring color. I
still consider myself very blessed to haveKevin and Pat very much in my life.
They're just incredible men, very principled, very thoughtful, and were very

(15:28):
comfortable once we built a relationship,allowing themselves to be completely vulnerable within those
interviews. And that's such an honorto be able to interview someone who opens
up as cheesy as it sounds,their heart to you. You know their
emotions, and it remains very painfulfor both of them to revisit the loss

(15:52):
of their brother. He was whilethe middle brother, he was a icon,
a hero to both of them,and they've continued to celebrate his legacy
with that intent. And they bothhave incredible voices. Pat walks around with

(16:15):
an unlit cigar most of the time, but he they're both larger than life.
And Kevin Frankie uses words like anartist uses paint. I mean,
he like a poet absolutely, Andso when he talks about the plane landing

(16:38):
after he found that his brother hadbeen murdered, he got on a plane
and as the plane was landing,you know, the whiskey would go down,
but but the emotions would not.And he says it much more eloquently.
You know, I just kind ofsat and listened as they unfurled their

(17:04):
pain and their trauma in honor oftheir brother and of Frank Gabel. Yes,
their generosity is not just justice fortheir brother, but also for the
man that, through what they havecome to know, was likely not the
person responsible. And that's an incrediblygenerous and brave posture to take. And

(17:26):
they are what's right ideally about whatwe should all strive for in terms of
justice and the system, because theydon't believe in an eye for an eye
when it's indiscriminate. You know,well, you want somebody begal to here's
a person. And we would loveto believe that we've gotten it mostly right

(17:52):
in the United States, but wehave the highest rate of wrongful convictions.
Between four and six percent of peoplein prison today are believed to be innocent.
So if you have five percent ofpeople who are believed to be innocent
in prison. That's one in twentyconvictions is a wrongful conviction. That's incredible

(18:27):
when you break it down to thatlevel. And the beauty of this story
is that Michael Frankie was a visionary. He knew that. He understood that,
you know, the way to keeppeople out of prison was to give

(18:48):
them other options so they didn't haveto commit the crimes that would put them
there. He saw the cycle ofpoverty, He saw the inequality in the
educations system and how it led tobad choices. You know, children who
came from broken families often end upbreaking things further down the road if they're

(19:11):
not given the support and the resourcesthey need. He saw all of that,
and that was in nineteen eighty nine, very progressive, very progressive.
Some of the other red flags youmentioned straight out the gate after his murder
was really how the people his colleagueshit this department responded right. First of

(19:33):
all, there was confusion over ifhe was shot or stabbed. His family
had to hear, you know,confusing miss messages, different stories, and
there are stories about how they discoveredhim I thought were completely suspicious. Can
you talk a little about the playersaround him that were really colleagues and people

(19:55):
that worked for the department, andwhat happened right after his murder. All
right, So go back to wherewe said he was actually stabbed. It
was by the car. And ifyou're looking at the Dome building, there's
a main entrance and then to theleft there's a side entrance which would have
been a shortcut to Mike's office.So Michael Frankie was stabbed once through the

(20:19):
heart, so he lost a tremendousamount of blood and there would have been
a blood trail I think it wasone hundred and fifty feet or so to
the front kind of porch, theycall it the portico. And when his
body was found, and it wasn'tfound for a while, Michael Frankie's body
was in a puddle of blood surroundedby shards of glass because he had tried

(20:44):
to break open the window to getaccess to that. Now, keep in
mind, he would have been wearinga beeper, and so that beeper would
have been going off because people weretrying to locate him, and yet it
took them hours to discover the body. Now that those hours didn't play into

(21:06):
the fact that his life was lost, because it was such what they call
medical terms, an exquisite injury thathe would have died almost instantly. It's
it's amazing that he actually got asfar as he did. Yeah, but
that's suspicious that they there were coworkers who claimed to have checked every single

(21:26):
inch of the building and yet there'sa body on the front porch who smashed
glass. There is probably a beepergoing off incessantly, and so there's a
question as to whether or not peoplewanted his body found more quickly than it

(21:47):
was found right, right, andwhat about I'm not remembering their name or
their role, but they didn't wantto go to his office because they were
afraid of seeing him there having takenhis own life. Yes, so there
was, as we mentioned, alot of corruption that he was going to
expose, and that involved members ofthe staff, close members, because Michael

(22:12):
Frankie had been brought in by thethen governor of Oregon, Neil Goldschmidt,
and he was an outsider in acommunity that had really profited well off of
corruption. Corrections is kind of afamily business, so it's not uncommon to
see a father and a son anda cousin and all working. So it

(22:37):
becomes like the mob, you know, they all protect one another, and
within the Department of Corrections there wasa very real old boys club and they
looked out for one another. Andso there was a power struggle when Frankie
moved in and one of the peoplewho was the assistant age, who had
been for seventeen years kind of callingthe shots within corruption, was pushed out,

(23:03):
and there was a still a veryloyal group within Corrections that was there
to have the pushed out guys backand to do his bidding. And so
the person that you're referring to claimedthat they thought that he was despondent.
They tried to portray a portrait ofMichael Frankie which was not in keeping with

(23:27):
the multiple people that I interviewed,including his own brothers, that his wife
was second wife was leaving him andso he likely could have committed suicide,
which again that probably was the plan. They probably wanted to make it look
like a suicide, and something gotmessed up. There was a struggle,

(23:51):
and Michael Frankie was murdered. Becauseif they were able to say, and
that's why go back to the pointyou made earlier, they didn't know if
he was abed or shot. Hewas supposed to have been shot, but
that's what was My next question wasthat was probably the original plan. It's
cleaner, it's probably more of ashort bet and make it look like a
suicide, so nobody stabs themselves.Yeah, exactly. Yeah, And then

(24:15):
they got into more trouble because carburglary gone wrong. Also weird because all
his personal belongings, including wallets andkeys and types of things, are not
stolen, but his briefcase was missing, which would have held information the floppy
disks because you know, in thosedays, yeah, computer had about as

(24:37):
much memory as unfortunately I do thesedays, seriously, and so there were
a lot of red flags also.You know, in the days after the
murder, there were eyewitness reports ofa great amount of papers being shredded and
carried out of the Dome building,which would have been probably the bulk of

(25:03):
the proof that Frankie had accumulated aboutcorruption within his own department. It's so
cinematic. It does sound like aplot of a movie, and the fact
that it happened, and I alwaysfeel like wrongful convictions just end in tragedy
on all sides. In a podcastfull of really strikingly horrible moments and just

(25:25):
tough things to grapple with. Onedid stand out in the episode about possible
other suspects, we meet a characterby way of other people around him.
Tim Natividad and the interview you didwith a young woman whose mother Melody friended
Melody. Yes, so I guessthe daughter's name is Carr. Carrie's stories

(25:48):
and life experience. I've listened toa lot of Shoe Cry podcasts and like,
I don't know at all. Idon't know. I can find a
place in my brain to like storemost of it because it's familiar, I've
heard it, or I had likenowhere to put that, And maybe if
you want to give color to ouraudience around a little bit of her story
to fits in. Carrie rothschild isthe daughter of a woman named Melody,

(26:12):
and that interview haunted me still does. And I have to tell you that
I am in close contact with Carrie. She is one of the most resilient,
inspiring women. But in a nutshell, her mother wrestled with addiction and

(26:33):
I think some serious mental illness.Yeah, And unfortunately, when you're addicted
to math and you go through allof the resources, you have you look
around, and for Melody, shesaw the potential value in trafficking her own

(26:55):
daughter. And that is what happenedto Carrie. And there is that this
heartbreaking moment because Natividad, who wasthe dealer who carry was traffic to at
the age of thirteen, has anoddly admirable moment where he basically stops that

(27:22):
next progression. And so what thatdid, unfortunately for Carrie, is created
a very painful loyalty. You know, it seemed that this man who had
said, okay, you know,I'll take your daughter in exchange for drugs
and then realized she was a thirteenyear old virgin, that was that was

(27:45):
a bit problematic for him of allthings. Yeah, exactly, he didn't
want he didn't want to cross thatline yet. But the fact that a
mother could sell her child for drugsis something that's very difficult for any of
us to wrap our head around.But unfortunately, it happens much more so

(28:11):
now than it ever did because they'redifferent degrees of trafficking and everybody has,
unfortunately in their hand with a cellphone, a video, and so people
will sell videos of their children beingexploited and abused and it's heart wrenching.
I will say that Carrie is goingto law school amazing. She has worked

(28:37):
for years for a federal law firm, but she has also been a very
outspoken advocate because unfortunately everything festers insilence, particularly crimes of this particular nature,
and so she's willing to be theface and the voice for it,
and she's made a tremendous difference inmany people's lives. I'd love to talk

(29:02):
about the status so you know,the Frank Gable case remains one of the
most controversial cases in Oregon because we'veclearly come to the conclusion that this was
a wrongful conviction right and Frank hadexhausted all of his options on the state
level when a federal defender named NellBrown came into the picture, and Frank

(29:29):
had really done a wonderful job puttingtogether his own defense, and honestly,
it is incredible that he has survivedwhat he endured in prison, on top
of everything he endured in the courtroom. But they were able to have a

(29:49):
judge rule that he did not geta fair trial because they coerced all of
these witnesses who have now recounted,and they also were able to prove that
Johnny Krauss, who would confess tothe that wasn't allowed in trial. So
had the jury known then what weknow now, the likelihood was he wouldn't

(30:14):
have been convicted. You'd think thatthat's enough, right, but it wasn't,
and the doj of Oregon appealed thatjudge's ruling. Luckily, Frank was
let out of prison once Judge Acostamade that initial ruling. Yes, but
the poor man is in purgatory becausethen the case went to an appeal to

(30:40):
the Ninth Circuit Court and again theyupheld Acosta's ruling. So Oregon has I
think until December twenty ninth to decidewhether or not they are going to take
that to the Supreme Court. Andwe found out two weeks ago that while
they are not going back to theNinth Circuit Court, they are going to

(31:06):
appeal to the Supreme courts. Areyou serious and wait for timeline purposes?
What year was it twenty twenty onethat this was ruled, where he was
released or how long has he beenout? So the Acosta ruling came in
twenty nineteen and it ordered the releaseof Frank after nearly thirty years, and

(31:27):
then Oregon appealed to the Ninth Circuit, which affirmed Acosta's ruling in September of
this year. Oh my gosh,and now yes, unfortunately, the Oregon
Department of Justice is going to askthe Supreme Court to reconsider Frank Gable's release

(31:48):
from prison. They then and thensorry, retry him or like to what
ends exactly? The states case hasbeen destroy roid. The ruling from the
Ninth Circuit said that there was misconduct, and the state's defense was, yeah,

(32:09):
well that's kind of just the waythey did it back then. Oh
boy, So is this just aploy to not open a new investigation because
they know who they're going to findand it's not going to be good in
my opinion? One, okay,so a non said was just released and
when he was they had thirty days. I remember the prosecutor saying, I
have thirty days to decide if I'mgoing to retry him, if he's going

(32:31):
to get a new trials. Likewhy is this two years? Three years?
And well it took it took JudgeAcosta a long time. And I
think that the habeas corpus was onehundred and ninety eight pages. Nell Brown
did. It's like a master classin how to dismantle a wrongful conviction.

(32:52):
I am in awe of public defenders, and she is by far the best
in the world. But it wasa good sign that it took that long
initially, because you knew that theywere taking their time and that Acosta wanted
to get this right. I see, and he did, And the Ninth

(33:14):
Circuit Court took their time and theygot it right, got it. But
right now it's hard to imagine whatOregon is doing other than trying to drag
it out because they don't want tohave to compensate Frank for this horrific hell

(33:35):
that they've put him through for overthirty years. But right now he's in
a different kind of hell, becauseit's a purgatory of the worst kind.
I think that that is, honestlyone of the other misconceptions that we have.
We want to believe that our systemis just and that it's fair,
and that it quickly takes responsibility,admits its mistakes, and corrects them right.

(34:00):
With wrongful convictions, your mind willbe blown. You can have a
person that is beyond a shadow ofa doubt innocence yes, and they sit
in prison for another fifteen to twentyyears, because unfortunately, once our system
decides that you're guilty and tunnel visionsets in, you are on a fast

(34:23):
lane to conviction. But if itrealizes that it's made a mistake, yes,
our system moves like a frozen slugand there are very few happy endings
to wrongful conviction stories. And go, you get to walk out into what

(34:44):
into what? Before I let yougo. I'm asking my guests this season
at the close of our chats,how do you define justice? I love
this question? Oh good, Ilove this question because you know, yes,
if you're going to look at thedictionary, being morally correct and fair.
But I think that justice also dictatesa very individual examination into each case

(35:16):
because you have to balance into theequation, and so justice is not one
size fits all because unfortunately, thereisn't a level playing field, and we
all have to work really hard tomake sure that the rules and the laws

(35:36):
apply to everyone. And without that, yeah, we won't have justice.
I love that. That's why Iask it, because of course we could
all look up the definition, butno guest has ever answered it the same
as another, And every time it'slike a diamond. Everyone has a different
facet and I see something different everytime and I hold them all. I
love people's responses. And that wasbeautiful. Thank you, Thank you so

(35:59):
much for killing the small talk.This was overdue and so much fun.
Thank you learn for coming. Ohit's been such a pleasure. And it's
funny. People will tell me thatthey like listening to my voice. I
love listening to your voice. Ohthat's so nice. It's a nice thing
to hear when you do this right, because you're like, well, that's
good, because you know there's alwayspeople who don't. They jam up too,

(36:19):
and it's and it's always funny becauseyou know, nobody likes to hear
the sound of their own voice.Oh no, no, and so but
there is such a wonderful, sparklysincerity and inquisitive interest in your voice.
I find it very engaging. Thankyou so much. That is really kind.
I'm leaving that in okay. Thanksagain for being on today. You're

(36:42):
so welcome. Anytime Dialogue is ayellow tape media production audio engineered by Jason
Ussrie and produced, posted, andedited by me Rebecca Sebastian. If you
love the podcast, please consider becominga diehard by signing up at Patreon dot
com, slash Dialogue other ways tosupport the show. Follow along on social

(37:02):
media. We are at Dialogue Podacross platforms and you can now watch most
episodes on YouTube by subscribing to mychannel Rebecca Sebastian. For more information or
to drop me a note, visitRebecca Sebastian dot com. Until next time,
thank you for listening and killing thesmall talk.

All Episodes

Lauren Bright Pacheco | Justice is Not One Size Fits All

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

On Purpose with Jay Shetty

Ruthie's Table 4

The Joe Rogan Experience

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Lauren Bright Pacheco | Justice is Not One Size Fits All