May 11, 2026 • 30 mins
Gary & Shannon Overtime Hour 1 (05.09) - Gary & Shannon go deep on prediction markets, AI-generated reality, and a true crime story that somehow keeps getting darker.
• Prediction markets are exploding → from politics to sports to global events
• But where’s the line between “investing,” entertainment, and straight-up gambling addiction?
• Gary & Shannon discuss why these platforms hit the same dopamine buttons as casinos — especially for people already vulnerable to compulsive betting
• Then: AI-generated content is becoming nearly impossible to spot
• Texts, articles, social posts → what’s still actually written by humans anymore?
• And even people who regularly use AI are struggling to identify what’s real
• Plus: Netflix’s Should I Marry a Murderer? sparks a larger conversation about manipulation, trauma, police accountability, and what happens when someone discovers the person they love may be capable of something horrific
• The bigger question → when do you trust your instincts… and when do you convince yourself to ignore the red flags?
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Listen
Watch
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
This is Gary and Shannon and you're listening to KFI
A M six forty, the Gary and Shannon Show on
demand on the iHeartRadio app.
Speaker 2 (00:09):
And we go to overshew Gary and Shannon, Gary Hoffman.
Speaker 3 (00:15):
And we want to work some over time this weekend.
Shannon Farren think she's the reason there are directions on
the Shampooba. You know.
Speaker 2 (00:22):
I to picked more mute, hoping for something a little
more original Monday Saturday with Gary and Shannon. This is a.
Speaker 1 (00:31):
Gary and Shannon exclusive, something we put together just for
you weekend listeners. I was watching The Real Housewives of
Beverly Hills Reunion Part.
Speaker 2 (00:40):
Two as you are wont to Do.
Speaker 1 (00:42):
As I Am one to do, and Kyle Richards was
talking about dating and she was talking about how social
media ruins lives. Essentially that she was in the context
of her having a divorce with her husband, and just
the people's ability to get a hold of you whenever
they want to get a hold of you, even if
(01:02):
they don't know you, they know how to find you,
things that people are sending you.
Speaker 2 (01:08):
You know, all of it.
Speaker 1 (01:09):
It just it just opens a Pandora's box. She's arguing,
and I don't know if that's because she's seeing all
of the behavior of her you know they're not divorced,
but of her ex, you know, because people are sending
her pictures of him with girls in like nightclubs and stuff,
and it's you know, it's like, why do.
Speaker 2 (01:29):
I need to see that? It was a simpler time.
Speaker 1 (01:31):
It was a simpler time. And so she was saying
that when she is interested in someone now and she
finds out that they're not on social media, that she's like,
what a grain flag Like that is so refreshing to
have somebody not on social media that is not you know,
focused on what other people want or think or anything
or tell them who they are and all those things.
Speaker 2 (01:52):
It's which is fine. I think about the comparisons. So
I have plenty of friends who say that they're not
on social media.
Speaker 3 (01:58):
They don't.
Speaker 2 (01:58):
They've never had Facebook counts or Twitter anything like that.
That's not the way they it's not part of their career,
it's not part of their social socialization. It's none of that.
But they've also fallen prey to what we have the
other ways that we have kind of cut off communication.
They don't answer the phone, they don't make phone calls,
(02:20):
they don't talk to people that it is. You can
be a luddite when it comes to social media, but
you should still have those connections. You should still be
someone who is connected to the people that you're around.
And I think about the difference between say, our parents
in the I don't know, early eighties, just as a
time they didn't have social media obviously, but they were
(02:42):
constantly around other people and you constantly have neighbors. They
were always on the phone with relative at.
Speaker 1 (02:48):
Least two best friends, dudes that he would call. Yeah,
like I remember him talking on the phone to these dudes.
Speaker 2 (02:55):
I think in the last calendar year there are two
dudes too that I have called on the phone.
Speaker 1 (03:02):
Yeah, period only you need that's a couple best friends.
Speaker 2 (03:06):
I mean one time each one of them one time,
ye maybe yeah, just because of the way we communicate
now is so different.
Speaker 1 (03:12):
Right, But it is nice to know that somebody is
not influenced by social media.
Speaker 2 (03:17):
Yeah, like I can't if you found somebody. Here's a
question because a couple of days ago, producer and from
the Morning Show had asked about my daughter and she's
twenty three, is she dating anybody? And I said, well, yeah,
but not as Siria, not too serious as of yet.
And she says, what do you know about this guy?
And I know where he's from, like I know his hometown,
but I don't know a whole lot about him. I
(03:37):
haven't met him and I've never had a chance to
speak to him obviously. But she said, don't you look
online for his stuff? Like don't you go through his
social media? And I said, well, that's one of the
reasons I have you for is that you'll if I
bring up his name within which a minute, you are
going to find out.
Speaker 1 (03:54):
I think I didn't even need a last name on
that one.
Speaker 2 (03:56):
No, no, no, you just but within tell it like what, Adam,
you had a pretty in Sax's done a pretty clear
dossier on this kid, right uh and some eras you know,
some potential yellow flags like yeah, I want to ask
him about this or about this post or about that hobbity.
Speaker 1 (04:11):
You know what's a weird thing too, is I'm okay
doing that for your daughter, but like I think it's
creepy when somebody does that for their perspective, like match,
Like if if I have a girlfriend who you know,
she's on the apps and she meets a guy and
(04:32):
she doesn't do the whole like dossier treatment for whoever,
because it's creepy if you like, go and google everything
about somebody, it's like you're supposed to learn all that
information through dating. Right, You're not supposed to know all
that stuff about someone just because it's available. It's like
this weird, but.
Speaker 2 (04:49):
That would be really hard. Yeah, I mean dated my
wife for two years two and a half years before
we got married, but that was thirty years ago, and
obviously that's that kind of information never existed.
Speaker 1 (05:01):
I don't think that you would have done that. I
don't think that you would have done a deep dive
on your wife before you went out on a first
date with her, after like exchanging texts and stuff. I
don't think you would have searched the internet to find
out all about her, would.
Speaker 2 (05:13):
You have to? I think I would have done a
preliminary search. I mean I don't need the full.
Speaker 1 (05:17):
Wait, do guys do that? Do guys do that too?
Speaker 2 (05:20):
Do the whole likes you see someone online, you're you're
going to find out just a little bit about them, right,
I don't need that. I can't And you're right, I
don't need the full dossier, because there is fun in
finding out about that stuff, right, but there's so much
of it that is of depending on how they depending
upon who you're talking to. Yeah, some people would lay
(05:40):
it all out there in the first place. Right now,
I would know going into it, there's potential minefields, like
she's she's fresh off of a break or even if
the breakup was a year ago, whatever did she scrub
all that stuff from her accounts? Or if I go
back far enough, am I going to see her having
a blast with this guy that she thought was her
(06:02):
number one, she thought was her soulmate? And then there's
you know, a year's worth of three months worth of depression,
three months worth of girl power, three months of I'm
back on it, and three months of like I give up.
You've got women? She gave up? You really do? That
was pretty good. Fought her right when she gave up.
Speaker 1 (06:20):
Here's the thing that I would be wary of. While
I love the idea of dudes, dudes or girls or
whatever whatever you're into that are not on social media,
Like I think that's very attractive. You're just living your life.
I find it a little suspicious, Like, why don't I
know more about you, because there's so much information available
(06:42):
about everybody, like why don't I know what bands you
like or what festivals you go to or who you
hang out with? Are you a serial killer? So you
know there's that too.
Speaker 2 (06:55):
Go back to what you said earlier, which is that
you didn't have you wouldn't have a problem looking up
for someone like my as the protective anti thing, just
just to give just some outside perspective on this thing,
just to give some eyeballs, just so the and perhaps
just so that guy knows, hey, there's other people watching
out for her kind of thing. Would you do that
(07:15):
for an adult friend of yours, Yes, I mean not
an adult, but I mean somebody that's closer to your age.
Speaker 1 (07:21):
Yes, And sometimes I do that and I don't even
tell the person all the information I found.
Speaker 2 (07:26):
And that I think is probably the best way to
handle it, because there is you want them to be
able to find out. I mean, if it's if it's
good hopefully, if it's obvious red flag stuff, you would
you could say something. But if it's just like oh,
he's he apparently has a place in Switzerland, or I
don't know what you'd find out that would be with
worth of withholding from them.
Speaker 1 (07:46):
But that sounds nice. I'd like a place in give
you his number.
Speaker 3 (07:51):
Yes, you're listening to Gary and Shannon on demand from
KFI ams Exporting.
Speaker 2 (08:02):
There are a couple different stories today about these prediction
markets and the prediction markets. We've talked about Calshi Polymarket.
There are a few others out there, but those are
the two biggest ones. And how it is that you
are to I guess look at them if you're not
going to gamble on them, because that's that is what
(08:22):
you're doing, basically, is gambling. You're betting on a certain thing,
the percentage of that thing happening, whatever it might be.
Speaker 4 (08:29):
It's Las Vegas online, No, it's well, it depends.
Speaker 2 (08:32):
If you ask these prediction markets, they say it's not.
They say it's more of a stock exchange than it
is a simple gambling site. But there are plenty of
people that are used to hucks are gambling exactly. Yeah,
So you know, depending on how it is that you're
using are you using it for entertainment? Do you like
to go to Vegas and play blackjack? This ian okay,
(08:54):
So it comes down to semantics. It can and here's
here's probably the best indicator from me gambling addicts who
say these prediction markets are gambling, I mean they know,
they know what they get, they know the high that
they chase when they're dropping hundreds of dollars or thousands
or more on gambling sites and sports books. They're exactly
(09:19):
the people who would be good at determining whether this
was the same kind of thing. Now legally, yes, there
are going to be differences. You can argue semantics over
it and still get caught up in the legal weeds
about whether it's technically gambling or not. But it's giving
these people, specifically this portion of the population, the exact
same dopamine hit that they were getting before in normal,
(09:43):
straightforward gambling sites.
Speaker 5 (09:45):
Right. So this has sparked the high stakes debate, and
by the way, it's playing out in courts and legislatures
all over the country. Operators of the companies believe they
should be regulated like the stock exchange to your point,
because the federal law and they're customer to customer structure.
Sports books and state officials think they should be supervised
the same way as sports gambling platforms.
Speaker 2 (10:08):
So there's an article today from the Washington Post that
looks at a couple of admitted gamblers, a gambling addicts
who have been fighting their addiction, a soccer and a
tax account tax account. They have gone through the process
of Gambler's Anonymous, They've sought treatment, they've had to make amends,
(10:29):
they've done all this whole process. One of the steps
that they've gone through is what they refer to as
a self exclusion program. Different states offer this to gambling addicts.
Gambler's Anonymous, et cetera programs where you can sign up
to disallow yourself from signing up for sports books. They
(10:50):
will not accept your email address, you cannot log in,
you opt out to see yourself reporting yourself basically yes, okay,
but at least it's an acknowledgment. Hey I can't.
Speaker 5 (11:00):
So it's like going into a liquor store and saying,
I'm an alcoholic, please do not sell me alcohol when
you come in.
Speaker 2 (11:06):
Here, But to actually go into the liquor store to
say it, Yes, it's funny, yes, right, but it is
that kind of a thing. Okay, So that's what they're saying.
And while you can ban yourself from different gambling facilities
and apps and things like that, there's there's First of all,
no adoption of a nationwide system for that, and there
(11:29):
is no there's no way to do this for these
prediction markets. Now here's where this also becomes very suspect.
And Mark Ronner saw this headline as well, and we
were talking about it during the break. There top tier traders,
that tiny little slice of people who make the most
(11:52):
money on these prediction markets one percent point point one
percent of the ones that make the specific amount. But
I mean either one percent point one percent about seventy
percent of the typical losers. I'm sorry there, I jumped
ahead there. Seventy percent of typical users are losers. Users
(12:16):
lose money seventy percent. Now, think think of the worst
odds in Vegas, the worst. I only know enough about
blackjack to say that it can be a pretty close cut.
That's probably one of the most even games when it
comes to odds. And even then, you're talking about forty
six forty seven percent odds in your favor four And
(12:42):
when you're playing millions and millions and millions of dollars
a day, the numbers are going to suss out they're
winning for three to four percent every single day period.
This is and that's that's just three percent. This is
seventy percent of users that are losing money. So someone's
(13:05):
cooking the books here. The gains in the prediction markets,
anybody who's winning heavily concentrated among a very small percentage
of those people that are very sophisticated traders. There are experts,
there are high frequency firms. They, among other things, will
try to figure out which of the prediction market pieces
(13:28):
are underpriced or mispriced or something like that, and then
take advantage of those things. But the thing is, this
isn't even a numbers game. This isn't even blackjack where
the cards have value and everybody agrees on those values.
This is this is given the odds getting on emotion.
Speaker 4 (13:48):
The seventy percent who are using you're not paying attention.
The odds are stacked against you. Yeah, because you stop
giving your money away. But it doesn't feel that way.
That's the other thing about it doesn't feel that way.
You're talking about it from a very logical perspective, which
is the math doesn't mask.
Speaker 2 (14:07):
Really doesn't make sense for you to go in there
knowing that you have about a thirty percent chance of winning.
If it was I'm not a gambler.
Speaker 1 (14:16):
So if you're not going to be that.
Speaker 2 (14:17):
Percent, you would go, well, you know, i'm gonna win some,
I'm gonna lose some. In this case, it's going to
be I'm gonna win some and then I'm going to
lose some, and then I'm going to lose some, and
then I'm going to lose some, and then I might
win one, but then I'm gonna lose one and lose
another and lose another. This is less gambling than it
is a donation when you look at the math. Yeah, excellent,
point it. Zero point one percent of the accounts on
(14:39):
polymarket have earned sixty seven percent of the profits. Boy,
those must be super smart people, right well, always getting
it right. I have been known to gamble, not to
a problem, and I've also known some degenerate gamblers. I
don't know anybody who's gotten into the into the prediction
(14:59):
mark yet. I don't know anybody, because I've clearly I
don't know the one percent of the one percent, But
I don't know anybody who's made money on them. I
don't know who gets involved with them. We look at them,
I mean, Matt'll go through and will print out kind
of what the prediction markets say about public sentiment, for
you know, who's going to win the governor's seat was
(15:20):
something like that. But that's not a poll in the
traditional sense, and it's more just dealing on people's emotion,
what their feelings are, and how are you going to
bet money on that. People are doing it left and right.
Bets are being placed right now. Somebody's making insert bed
word tons of money right now on those.
Speaker 1 (15:43):
That was a good one. We've got more best of
moments on the way. Don't go anywhere.
Speaker 3 (15:48):
You're listening to Gary and Shannon on demand from KFI
AM six forty.
Speaker 1 (15:55):
Christy Buckley is the profiled person in the Wall Street Journal.
They're talking about these security cameras and how they're relying
on AI and sometimes it's great and sometimes it's not.
Christy was at work when her security camera pinged her
phone and now this security camera is aimed out of
her living room window, and the security camera told her
(16:20):
that her neighbor's house is on fire. So remember she's
at work and she's like fih, So she hurries out
to a She probably said the word oh, that was
me swearing, ohs going fur. She hurries out to a hallway,
and she says, I was going to yell, and if
I was going to yell, I didn't want to do
it in the office. She's a federal contractor in Houston.
(16:44):
So then she plays the video that her security camera
had sent her and the flames of the neighbor's home
were actually the red brake lights of her neighbor's car.
Speaker 2 (16:57):
She said she loves the ability of the camera that
she uses to tell her that the bird that it
sees is a specific kind of bird in this case
of bluejay, or that the guy that's there's a human
by that truck. It's a man in a white T
shirt walking alongside a Ford F three point fifty. Because
the cameras can turn, the computers can determine what the
(17:18):
camera actually sees.
Speaker 1 (17:19):
But it seems like they are notoriously wrong. Cameras have
tagged humans as bears and turkeys. Users have said the
devices have also registered a bear when it was a
raccoon or a dog, or even a flag in the wind.
At least one corgi was called a pig.
Speaker 2 (17:35):
That would be cool.
Speaker 1 (17:36):
If your camera's like, there's a pig outside your door,
that would be so cool.
Speaker 2 (17:39):
I'd be yeah, show be the pig. This gets cooler.
She said there was one time her dog thor pitbull,
marked at a cat outside and the cat did that
thing where it jumped straight up.
Speaker 1 (17:49):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (17:50):
The alert that she got from her camera was there's
a ninja cat outside your house. Oh, that's awesome, And
she said she looked at it obviously was a big letdown.
Is just a regular non ninja cat?
Speaker 1 (18:02):
That's really cool. You know there's something there for bumber Puss,
isn't there? Ninja cat? Ninja something ninja trained?
Speaker 2 (18:10):
Does Earth exist in this space warse? Sure? Oh, okay,
I guess you're right, because Ukraine.
Speaker 1 (18:16):
Why would you ask that question? Well, what made you think, Oh,
if there was no Earth, there would be no ninjas. Yeah,
like ninjas don't exist, Sure they do. You're thinking too literally.
Speaker 2 (18:32):
I have the Ring app, so I have cameras around
the house that are the Ring app And when the
newest thing that they've been doing is along these same
lines where if I have regular people come in or
come to the house, whether it's the kids or my
wife or the mailman or whoever come to the front door,
(18:53):
I can tag that person and tell the camera, Oh,
that's mailman Bob, or that's that's neighbor Gerald or something
like that, so that anytime that person comes to the door,
it's not just there's someone at your front door. It
would say neighbor Jerald is at your front door or something.
It will identify it based on who I've said. That
(19:15):
is my wife, that is my neighbor, that is my thing.
Speaker 1 (19:19):
Here's something I'm work shopping right now. Biractar the hero
of Space Wars along with mister bumber Puss. Biractar is
half man, half alien because his mother was an alien.
Now she was a ninja warrior alien ninja warrior. She okay,
which makes one of the reasons why Biractar and mister
(19:40):
bumber Puss are so sympatico because bumber Puss is also
trained as a ninja cat.
Speaker 2 (19:46):
So, so in your world, mesia is similar to and
I don't want to say that you're stealing it from anything,
but it would be similar to like jedis, I'm glad
that you brought from different planets and places and species
in that.
Speaker 1 (20:03):
Whole thing and kind of speak the same language. Well,
I mean they're trained in the same When you say
I'm stealing to steal something, I would actually have to
have knowledge of what it was I'm stealing. I'm not
stealing anything because I have no knowledge of the Jedi people.
Speaker 2 (20:16):
That's what you're going to say in copyright court.
Speaker 1 (20:18):
I've shown enough evidence that I don't know anything about
Star Wars. Well, there's been numerous times that I have
exhibited the lack of knowledge of Star Wars.
Speaker 2 (20:31):
I will say this, I do think that.
Speaker 1 (20:34):
Furthermore, you would be my first witness in my defense
because you know above anyone true I know nothing. Do
not get me involved in the legal fight.
Speaker 2 (20:44):
Oh you're involved.
Speaker 1 (20:46):
You want to make that money. If you're going to
want to make that money, then you've got to be
involved in.
Speaker 2 (20:50):
The legal fight. The other thing that's going on with
AI is that so many people are using it for writing,
and actual human writers are going out of their ways
to do things to make you comfortable with the fact
that they are not AI, or to prove to you,
the reader that whatever you're reading was not produced by
(21:11):
artificial intelligence. Sarah Suzuki Harvard for one of them. She
said she doesn't usually write overly exuberant prose, but she'll
use very casual language, like hey, yo, for real do
a bunch of exclamation points in her writing. She says
it feels gross to do it, but it's what you
(21:31):
have to do to sound human. There was a story
that I saw over the weekend that suggested that so
many people are now using words that they find in
chatch ept or grock or clawed, any of these things,
that those large language models have been using specific words
(21:54):
that show up out of proportion compared to what human
language and human writers use those words. I can't remember
their examples, but it would be something like the word median,
for example, Okay, overly used. It's overly used. When these
things develop a story or you prompted it, it would come
(22:15):
up with and use the word media, and we as
humans wouldn't necessarily use it.
Speaker 3 (22:19):
Now.
Speaker 2 (22:19):
I don't know who studies the chatch ept responses versus
human you know words and which wonders are up here?
Speaker 1 (22:27):
More? That must to be who programmed the Southwest Gate
agent talking points about how people shouldn't line up next
to the stansions. Yeah, not a word you come across,
but they described this as being.
Speaker 2 (22:44):
She said that she's fears being accused of wielding machine
made material and that's why she has to do this.
She has to be careful about it. And you know,
as we've seen in other what do you call it arenas,
the use of AI has dominated and people use it
even if it's just as the idea generator in the
(23:06):
first place. That is you can see that coming through
and I think you mentioned it many times. We talk
about what you watch on Wednesday, and some of these
shows that are just it appears like the writing is
just flat and awful.
Speaker 3 (23:20):
You're listening to Gary and Shannon on demand from KFI
AM six forty.
Speaker 2 (23:28):
It's time for True Crime Tuesday. That stories that your
hair are real. The story is true true, No, it
sounds made up.
Speaker 3 (23:39):
I don't know.
Speaker 2 (23:42):
Gary and Shannon present Crime all right, new Netflix show.
If you are a Netflix fan, they do these documentaries
better than anything. I mean, this is the continuation of
what I thought the old investigated what's the name of
the channel Investigative TV.
Speaker 6 (24:03):
Or something is that where they have dateline.
Speaker 2 (24:05):
Yeah, they use one of those. They have all the
forensic files, they have all of those. This is the
better version of that. And Netflix has done ever since.
They the one where the guy well, anyway, they're spectacular
these true crime dramas and documentaries they put together are
really great. The latest one is called Should I Marry
(24:28):
a Murderer? It's just a radio station. Should I Marry
a Murderer? Three part documentary which shows the woman who
learns the past of her fiance and then catches him. Now,
it's a weird story. This woman thirty two years old.
(24:50):
She is a forensic pathologist, does autopsies day and night.
She gets out of an abusive relationship. She wants to
love again.
Speaker 6 (24:58):
I feel like those two things are very key to.
Speaker 1 (25:00):
Why this happened to her.
Speaker 2 (25:02):
Yes, oh absolutely, does.
Speaker 6 (25:04):
You know autopsies all day and night?
Speaker 2 (25:06):
Yep?
Speaker 6 (25:07):
And she just got out of an abusive relationship.
Speaker 2 (25:09):
She meets up with a guy named Sandy Alexander McKellar
and they kick it off five week whirlwind romance. But
before they tie this that they tie the knot. She
says to him, is there anything that I need to
know about you? I mean, now, clearly that should be
part of the process that you do. Anyway, that's why
(25:32):
you don't get engaged after five weeks. But she asks him,
is there something that you need to tell me that
might hinter hinder our future? Together.
Speaker 6 (25:43):
This is when people usually say, yeah, I shoplifted when
I was sixteen, right, yeah, I do.
Speaker 2 (25:48):
I did you know? I spent seventy two hours in
jail because of the thing. On spring break.
Speaker 1 (25:52):
I stole my mom's car.
Speaker 2 (25:54):
You know, I did a little heroine, not a lot,
just a little, just enough, just try for two weeks whatever,
whatever the thing is, right, that's when the secret comes out.
In this case, Sandy's secret was he had killed somebody
in a drunk driving accident, and that he and his brother,
(26:14):
who was in the truck with him, ended up taking
the guy's body and burying it to hide it, and
they never told anyone. So she decides to investigate, and
with the help and blessings of the local police department,
she ends up living with this fiance and the guy's brother,
(26:37):
the guy who helped him commit this horrible act for
nine months, basically just collecting evidence from them as they
spilled their guts to each other and she found out
more information. He even took her to the place where
they buried the body.
Speaker 6 (26:54):
But imagine if you murdered someone, how good it would
feel to finally come clean.
Speaker 2 (27:01):
It hasn't helped me at all, She said that she
was close to an emotional breakdown, that her mental health
made her unable to work. Yeah, because she's hiding this
secret that she's trying to catch the guy. Basically, so
what turns out again? This is the three three episode
(27:23):
docuseries on Netflix. Trial finally takes place, using the evidence
that she was able to gather against Sandy McKellar. Robert
pled guilty for covering up the murder. He was sentenced
to five years. Sandy also pleads guilty to both manslaughter
and the cover up and is sentenced to twelve years. Now,
the widow of the guy that they killed issued a
(27:46):
statement saying they were never going to forgive these brothers
that they had taken. Tony was the name of the
guy that dad killed. I think he's in his early
sixties and left the family for three and a half years,
not even knowing where he was. Now, the woman is
finally moving forward with her life. She says, all of
this is in the rear view since the sentencing. I've
worked hard to rebuild and regain control of my life,
(28:07):
and it's finally in a place where I felt strong
and confident, she says. She hopes by speaking out and
sharing what happens, she can start a conversation about greater
protection for victims and witnesses and why a far deeper
understanding of mental health within the police and court system
is so desperately needed.
Speaker 6 (28:25):
How does that conversation come up when she's dating someone new.
Speaker 2 (28:30):
I'm the one you saw on that Netflix documentary. Well
that again, maybe it goes past five weeks. Maybe that's
part of the reason.
Speaker 6 (28:39):
I told you this looks so messed up, it's probably
going to be good.
Speaker 2 (28:45):
Here's the thing, and it's funny that you said that
if it's just a normal like love gone wrong or
he you know, she killed him or he killed her
or he killed her brother something, that's not enough. The
fact that she was, like you said of forensic pathologist,
she's doing autopsies all day. She comes out of the
abusive relationship to find this guy who there's no sign
(29:08):
that he was abusive or anything like that, but clearly
had this secret. And the way she describes how he
told her when she asks this question what she thought
was probably going to be an innocuous question. There's a car,
a police car that's driving by as she's asking the question,
and he starts breaking down sobbing, and she thinks that
(29:30):
she stumbled onto something awful, which she did.
Speaker 6 (29:33):
But she had to have been scared living with him
knowing that she was, you know, investigating collecting evidence.
Speaker 1 (29:39):
Is what if he caught her?
Speaker 6 (29:40):
Yeah, well we're going to find out.
Speaker 2 (29:42):
Well, and he didn't murder this guy. I mean it
was technically a vehicular manslaughter.
Speaker 6 (29:47):
Anyone who can take a body and bury it and
lie about it could murder.
Speaker 2 (29:51):
Come on, it's true. And if he's trying to keep
up appearances the whole time. All right. Another case, this
one is from here in California. A Kentucky jury urry
came down hard on a guy from California hired by
a CHP captain to kill her husband. What's wrong with
you people? This is more normal? Yes? This is? This
is This doesn't qualify as Netflix documentary, at least not yet.
(30:15):
You've been listening to The Gary and Shannon Show. You
can always hear us live on KFI AM six forty
nine am to one pm every Monday through Friday, and
anytime on demand on the iHeartRadio app
This is Gary and Shannon and you're listening to KFI
A M six forty, the Gary and Shannon Show on
demand on the iHeartRadio app.
Speaker 2 (00:09):
And we go to overshew Gary and Shannon, Gary Hoffman.
Speaker 3 (00:15):
And we want to work some over time this weekend.
Shannon Farren think she's the reason there are directions on
the Shampooba. You know.
Speaker 2 (00:22):
I to picked more mute, hoping for something a little
more original Monday Saturday with Gary and Shannon. This is a.
Speaker 1 (00:31):
Gary and Shannon exclusive, something we put together just for
you weekend listeners. I was watching The Real Housewives of
Beverly Hills Reunion Part.
Speaker 2 (00:40):
Two as you are wont to Do.
Speaker 1 (00:42):
As I Am one to do, and Kyle Richards was
talking about dating and she was talking about how social
media ruins lives. Essentially that she was in the context
of her having a divorce with her husband, and just
the people's ability to get a hold of you whenever
they want to get a hold of you, even if
(01:02):
they don't know you, they know how to find you,
things that people are sending you.
Speaker 2 (01:08):
You know, all of it.
Speaker 1 (01:09):
It just it just opens a Pandora's box. She's arguing,
and I don't know if that's because she's seeing all
of the behavior of her you know they're not divorced,
but of her ex, you know, because people are sending
her pictures of him with girls in like nightclubs and stuff,
and it's you know, it's like, why do.
Speaker 2 (01:29):
I need to see that? It was a simpler time.
Speaker 1 (01:31):
It was a simpler time. And so she was saying
that when she is interested in someone now and she
finds out that they're not on social media, that she's like,
what a grain flag Like that is so refreshing to
have somebody not on social media that is not you know,
focused on what other people want or think or anything
or tell them who they are and all those things.
Speaker 2 (01:52):
It's which is fine. I think about the comparisons. So
I have plenty of friends who say that they're not
on social media.
Speaker 3 (01:58):
They don't.
Speaker 2 (01:58):
They've never had Facebook counts or Twitter anything like that.
That's not the way they it's not part of their career,
it's not part of their social socialization. It's none of that.
But they've also fallen prey to what we have the
other ways that we have kind of cut off communication.
They don't answer the phone, they don't make phone calls,
(02:20):
they don't talk to people that it is. You can
be a luddite when it comes to social media, but
you should still have those connections. You should still be
someone who is connected to the people that you're around.
And I think about the difference between say, our parents
in the I don't know, early eighties, just as a
time they didn't have social media obviously, but they were
(02:42):
constantly around other people and you constantly have neighbors. They
were always on the phone with relative at.
Speaker 1 (02:48):
Least two best friends, dudes that he would call. Yeah,
like I remember him talking on the phone to these dudes.
Speaker 2 (02:55):
I think in the last calendar year there are two
dudes too that I have called on the phone.
Speaker 1 (03:02):
Yeah, period only you need that's a couple best friends.
Speaker 2 (03:06):
I mean one time each one of them one time,
ye maybe yeah, just because of the way we communicate
now is so different.
Speaker 1 (03:12):
Right, But it is nice to know that somebody is
not influenced by social media.
Speaker 2 (03:17):
Yeah, like I can't if you found somebody. Here's a
question because a couple of days ago, producer and from
the Morning Show had asked about my daughter and she's
twenty three, is she dating anybody? And I said, well, yeah,
but not as Siria, not too serious as of yet.
And she says, what do you know about this guy?
And I know where he's from, like I know his hometown,
but I don't know a whole lot about him. I
(03:37):
haven't met him and I've never had a chance to
speak to him obviously. But she said, don't you look
online for his stuff? Like don't you go through his
social media? And I said, well, that's one of the
reasons I have you for is that you'll if I
bring up his name within which a minute, you are
going to find out.
Speaker 1 (03:54):
I think I didn't even need a last name on
that one.
Speaker 2 (03:56):
No, no, no, you just but within tell it like what, Adam,
you had a pretty in Sax's done a pretty clear
dossier on this kid, right uh and some eras you know,
some potential yellow flags like yeah, I want to ask
him about this or about this post or about that hobbity.
Speaker 1 (04:11):
You know what's a weird thing too, is I'm okay
doing that for your daughter, but like I think it's
creepy when somebody does that for their perspective, like match,
Like if if I have a girlfriend who you know,
she's on the apps and she meets a guy and
(04:32):
she doesn't do the whole like dossier treatment for whoever,
because it's creepy if you like, go and google everything
about somebody, it's like you're supposed to learn all that
information through dating. Right, You're not supposed to know all
that stuff about someone just because it's available. It's like
this weird, but.
Speaker 2 (04:49):
That would be really hard. Yeah, I mean dated my
wife for two years two and a half years before
we got married, but that was thirty years ago, and
obviously that's that kind of information never existed.
Speaker 1 (05:01):
I don't think that you would have done that. I
don't think that you would have done a deep dive
on your wife before you went out on a first
date with her, after like exchanging texts and stuff. I
don't think you would have searched the internet to find
out all about her, would.
Speaker 2 (05:13):
You have to? I think I would have done a
preliminary search. I mean I don't need the full.
Speaker 1 (05:17):
Wait, do guys do that? Do guys do that too?
Speaker 2 (05:20):
Do the whole likes you see someone online, you're you're
going to find out just a little bit about them, right,
I don't need that. I can't And you're right, I
don't need the full dossier, because there is fun in
finding out about that stuff, right, but there's so much
of it that is of depending on how they depending
upon who you're talking to. Yeah, some people would lay
(05:40):
it all out there in the first place. Right now,
I would know going into it, there's potential minefields, like
she's she's fresh off of a break or even if
the breakup was a year ago, whatever did she scrub
all that stuff from her accounts? Or if I go
back far enough, am I going to see her having
a blast with this guy that she thought was her
(06:02):
number one, she thought was her soulmate? And then there's
you know, a year's worth of three months worth of depression,
three months worth of girl power, three months of I'm
back on it, and three months of like I give up.
You've got women? She gave up? You really do? That
was pretty good. Fought her right when she gave up.
Speaker 1 (06:20):
Here's the thing that I would be wary of. While
I love the idea of dudes, dudes or girls or
whatever whatever you're into that are not on social media,
Like I think that's very attractive. You're just living your life.
I find it a little suspicious, Like, why don't I
know more about you, because there's so much information available
(06:42):
about everybody, like why don't I know what bands you
like or what festivals you go to or who you
hang out with? Are you a serial killer? So you
know there's that too.
Speaker 2 (06:55):
Go back to what you said earlier, which is that
you didn't have you wouldn't have a problem looking up
for someone like my as the protective anti thing, just
just to give just some outside perspective on this thing,
just to give some eyeballs, just so the and perhaps
just so that guy knows, hey, there's other people watching
out for her kind of thing. Would you do that
(07:15):
for an adult friend of yours, Yes, I mean not
an adult, but I mean somebody that's closer to your age.
Speaker 1 (07:21):
Yes, And sometimes I do that and I don't even
tell the person all the information I found.
Speaker 2 (07:26):
And that I think is probably the best way to
handle it, because there is you want them to be
able to find out. I mean, if it's if it's
good hopefully, if it's obvious red flag stuff, you would
you could say something. But if it's just like oh,
he's he apparently has a place in Switzerland, or I
don't know what you'd find out that would be with
worth of withholding from them.
Speaker 1 (07:46):
But that sounds nice. I'd like a place in give
you his number.
Speaker 3 (07:51):
Yes, you're listening to Gary and Shannon on demand from
KFI ams Exporting.
Speaker 2 (08:02):
There are a couple different stories today about these prediction
markets and the prediction markets. We've talked about Calshi Polymarket.
There are a few others out there, but those are
the two biggest ones. And how it is that you
are to I guess look at them if you're not
going to gamble on them, because that's that is what
(08:22):
you're doing, basically, is gambling. You're betting on a certain thing,
the percentage of that thing happening, whatever it might be.
Speaker 4 (08:29):
It's Las Vegas online, No, it's well, it depends.
Speaker 2 (08:32):
If you ask these prediction markets, they say it's not.
They say it's more of a stock exchange than it
is a simple gambling site. But there are plenty of
people that are used to hucks are gambling exactly. Yeah,
So you know, depending on how it is that you're
using are you using it for entertainment? Do you like
to go to Vegas and play blackjack? This ian okay,
(08:54):
So it comes down to semantics. It can and here's
here's probably the best indicator from me gambling addicts who
say these prediction markets are gambling, I mean they know,
they know what they get, they know the high that
they chase when they're dropping hundreds of dollars or thousands
or more on gambling sites and sports books. They're exactly
(09:19):
the people who would be good at determining whether this
was the same kind of thing. Now legally, yes, there
are going to be differences. You can argue semantics over
it and still get caught up in the legal weeds
about whether it's technically gambling or not. But it's giving
these people, specifically this portion of the population, the exact
same dopamine hit that they were getting before in normal,
(09:43):
straightforward gambling sites.
Speaker 5 (09:45):
Right. So this has sparked the high stakes debate, and
by the way, it's playing out in courts and legislatures
all over the country. Operators of the companies believe they
should be regulated like the stock exchange to your point,
because the federal law and they're customer to customer structure.
Sports books and state officials think they should be supervised
the same way as sports gambling platforms.
Speaker 2 (10:08):
So there's an article today from the Washington Post that
looks at a couple of admitted gamblers, a gambling addicts
who have been fighting their addiction, a soccer and a
tax account tax account. They have gone through the process
of Gambler's Anonymous, They've sought treatment, they've had to make amends,
(10:29):
they've done all this whole process. One of the steps
that they've gone through is what they refer to as
a self exclusion program. Different states offer this to gambling addicts.
Gambler's Anonymous, et cetera programs where you can sign up
to disallow yourself from signing up for sports books. They
(10:50):
will not accept your email address, you cannot log in,
you opt out to see yourself reporting yourself basically yes, okay,
but at least it's an acknowledgment. Hey I can't.
Speaker 5 (11:00):
So it's like going into a liquor store and saying,
I'm an alcoholic, please do not sell me alcohol when
you come in.
Speaker 2 (11:06):
Here, But to actually go into the liquor store to
say it, Yes, it's funny, yes, right, but it is
that kind of a thing. Okay, So that's what they're saying.
And while you can ban yourself from different gambling facilities
and apps and things like that, there's there's First of all,
no adoption of a nationwide system for that, and there
(11:29):
is no there's no way to do this for these
prediction markets. Now here's where this also becomes very suspect.
And Mark Ronner saw this headline as well, and we
were talking about it during the break. There top tier traders,
that tiny little slice of people who make the most
(11:52):
money on these prediction markets one percent point point one
percent of the ones that make the specific amount. But
I mean either one percent point one percent about seventy
percent of the typical losers. I'm sorry there, I jumped
ahead there. Seventy percent of typical users are losers. Users
(12:16):
lose money seventy percent. Now, think think of the worst
odds in Vegas, the worst. I only know enough about
blackjack to say that it can be a pretty close cut.
That's probably one of the most even games when it
comes to odds. And even then, you're talking about forty
six forty seven percent odds in your favor four And
(12:42):
when you're playing millions and millions and millions of dollars
a day, the numbers are going to suss out they're
winning for three to four percent every single day period.
This is and that's that's just three percent. This is
seventy percent of users that are losing money. So someone's
(13:05):
cooking the books here. The gains in the prediction markets,
anybody who's winning heavily concentrated among a very small percentage
of those people that are very sophisticated traders. There are experts,
there are high frequency firms. They, among other things, will
try to figure out which of the prediction market pieces
(13:28):
are underpriced or mispriced or something like that, and then
take advantage of those things. But the thing is, this
isn't even a numbers game. This isn't even blackjack where
the cards have value and everybody agrees on those values.
This is this is given the odds getting on emotion.
Speaker 4 (13:48):
The seventy percent who are using you're not paying attention.
The odds are stacked against you. Yeah, because you stop
giving your money away. But it doesn't feel that way.
That's the other thing about it doesn't feel that way.
You're talking about it from a very logical perspective, which
is the math doesn't mask.
Speaker 2 (14:07):
Really doesn't make sense for you to go in there
knowing that you have about a thirty percent chance of winning.
If it was I'm not a gambler.
Speaker 1 (14:16):
So if you're not going to be that.
Speaker 2 (14:17):
Percent, you would go, well, you know, i'm gonna win some,
I'm gonna lose some. In this case, it's going to
be I'm gonna win some and then I'm going to
lose some, and then I'm going to lose some, and
then I'm going to lose some, and then I might
win one, but then I'm gonna lose one and lose
another and lose another. This is less gambling than it
is a donation when you look at the math. Yeah, excellent,
point it. Zero point one percent of the accounts on
(14:39):
polymarket have earned sixty seven percent of the profits. Boy,
those must be super smart people, right well, always getting
it right. I have been known to gamble, not to
a problem, and I've also known some degenerate gamblers. I
don't know anybody who's gotten into the into the prediction
(14:59):
mark yet. I don't know anybody, because I've clearly I
don't know the one percent of the one percent, But
I don't know anybody who's made money on them. I
don't know who gets involved with them. We look at them,
I mean, Matt'll go through and will print out kind
of what the prediction markets say about public sentiment, for
you know, who's going to win the governor's seat was
(15:20):
something like that. But that's not a poll in the
traditional sense, and it's more just dealing on people's emotion,
what their feelings are, and how are you going to
bet money on that. People are doing it left and right.
Bets are being placed right now. Somebody's making insert bed
word tons of money right now on those.
Speaker 1 (15:43):
That was a good one. We've got more best of
moments on the way. Don't go anywhere.
Speaker 3 (15:48):
You're listening to Gary and Shannon on demand from KFI
AM six forty.
Speaker 1 (15:55):
Christy Buckley is the profiled person in the Wall Street Journal.
They're talking about these security cameras and how they're relying
on AI and sometimes it's great and sometimes it's not.
Christy was at work when her security camera pinged her
phone and now this security camera is aimed out of
her living room window, and the security camera told her
(16:20):
that her neighbor's house is on fire. So remember she's
at work and she's like fih, So she hurries out
to a She probably said the word oh, that was
me swearing, ohs going fur. She hurries out to a hallway,
and she says, I was going to yell, and if
I was going to yell, I didn't want to do
it in the office. She's a federal contractor in Houston.
(16:44):
So then she plays the video that her security camera
had sent her and the flames of the neighbor's home
were actually the red brake lights of her neighbor's car.
Speaker 2 (16:57):
She said she loves the ability of the camera that
she uses to tell her that the bird that it
sees is a specific kind of bird in this case
of bluejay, or that the guy that's there's a human
by that truck. It's a man in a white T
shirt walking alongside a Ford F three point fifty. Because
the cameras can turn, the computers can determine what the
(17:18):
camera actually sees.
Speaker 1 (17:19):
But it seems like they are notoriously wrong. Cameras have
tagged humans as bears and turkeys. Users have said the
devices have also registered a bear when it was a
raccoon or a dog, or even a flag in the wind.
At least one corgi was called a pig.
Speaker 2 (17:35):
That would be cool.
Speaker 1 (17:36):
If your camera's like, there's a pig outside your door,
that would be so cool.
Speaker 2 (17:39):
I'd be yeah, show be the pig. This gets cooler.
She said there was one time her dog thor pitbull,
marked at a cat outside and the cat did that
thing where it jumped straight up.
Speaker 1 (17:49):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (17:50):
The alert that she got from her camera was there's
a ninja cat outside your house. Oh, that's awesome, And
she said she looked at it obviously was a big letdown.
Is just a regular non ninja cat?
Speaker 1 (18:02):
That's really cool. You know there's something there for bumber Puss,
isn't there? Ninja cat? Ninja something ninja trained?
Speaker 2 (18:10):
Does Earth exist in this space warse? Sure? Oh, okay,
I guess you're right, because Ukraine.
Speaker 1 (18:16):
Why would you ask that question? Well, what made you think, Oh,
if there was no Earth, there would be no ninjas. Yeah,
like ninjas don't exist, Sure they do. You're thinking too literally.
Speaker 2 (18:32):
I have the Ring app, so I have cameras around
the house that are the Ring app And when the
newest thing that they've been doing is along these same
lines where if I have regular people come in or
come to the house, whether it's the kids or my
wife or the mailman or whoever come to the front door,
(18:53):
I can tag that person and tell the camera, Oh,
that's mailman Bob, or that's that's neighbor Gerald or something
like that, so that anytime that person comes to the door,
it's not just there's someone at your front door. It
would say neighbor Jerald is at your front door or something.
It will identify it based on who I've said. That
(19:15):
is my wife, that is my neighbor, that is my thing.
Speaker 1 (19:19):
Here's something I'm work shopping right now. Biractar the hero
of Space Wars along with mister bumber Puss. Biractar is
half man, half alien because his mother was an alien.
Now she was a ninja warrior alien ninja warrior. She okay,
which makes one of the reasons why Biractar and mister
(19:40):
bumber Puss are so sympatico because bumber Puss is also
trained as a ninja cat.
Speaker 2 (19:46):
So, so in your world, mesia is similar to and
I don't want to say that you're stealing it from anything,
but it would be similar to like jedis, I'm glad
that you brought from different planets and places and species
in that.
Speaker 1 (20:03):
Whole thing and kind of speak the same language. Well,
I mean they're trained in the same When you say
I'm stealing to steal something, I would actually have to
have knowledge of what it was I'm stealing. I'm not
stealing anything because I have no knowledge of the Jedi people.
Speaker 2 (20:16):
That's what you're going to say in copyright court.
Speaker 1 (20:18):
I've shown enough evidence that I don't know anything about
Star Wars. Well, there's been numerous times that I have
exhibited the lack of knowledge of Star Wars.
Speaker 2 (20:31):
I will say this, I do think that.
Speaker 1 (20:34):
Furthermore, you would be my first witness in my defense
because you know above anyone true I know nothing. Do
not get me involved in the legal fight.
Speaker 2 (20:44):
Oh you're involved.
Speaker 1 (20:46):
You want to make that money. If you're going to
want to make that money, then you've got to be
involved in.
Speaker 2 (20:50):
The legal fight. The other thing that's going on with
AI is that so many people are using it for writing,
and actual human writers are going out of their ways
to do things to make you comfortable with the fact
that they are not AI, or to prove to you,
the reader that whatever you're reading was not produced by
(21:11):
artificial intelligence. Sarah Suzuki Harvard for one of them. She
said she doesn't usually write overly exuberant prose, but she'll
use very casual language, like hey, yo, for real do
a bunch of exclamation points in her writing. She says
it feels gross to do it, but it's what you
(21:31):
have to do to sound human. There was a story
that I saw over the weekend that suggested that so
many people are now using words that they find in
chatch ept or grock or clawed, any of these things,
that those large language models have been using specific words
(21:54):
that show up out of proportion compared to what human
language and human writers use those words. I can't remember
their examples, but it would be something like the word median,
for example, Okay, overly used. It's overly used. When these
things develop a story or you prompted it, it would come
(22:15):
up with and use the word media, and we as
humans wouldn't necessarily use it.
Speaker 3 (22:19):
Now.
Speaker 2 (22:19):
I don't know who studies the chatch ept responses versus
human you know words and which wonders are up here?
Speaker 1 (22:27):
More? That must to be who programmed the Southwest Gate
agent talking points about how people shouldn't line up next
to the stansions. Yeah, not a word you come across,
but they described this as being.
Speaker 2 (22:44):
She said that she's fears being accused of wielding machine
made material and that's why she has to do this.
She has to be careful about it. And you know,
as we've seen in other what do you call it arenas,
the use of AI has dominated and people use it
even if it's just as the idea generator in the
(23:06):
first place. That is you can see that coming through
and I think you mentioned it many times. We talk
about what you watch on Wednesday, and some of these
shows that are just it appears like the writing is
just flat and awful.
Speaker 3 (23:20):
You're listening to Gary and Shannon on demand from KFI
AM six forty.
Speaker 2 (23:28):
It's time for True Crime Tuesday. That stories that your
hair are real. The story is true true, No, it
sounds made up.
Speaker 3 (23:39):
I don't know.
Speaker 2 (23:42):
Gary and Shannon present Crime all right, new Netflix show.
If you are a Netflix fan, they do these documentaries
better than anything. I mean, this is the continuation of
what I thought the old investigated what's the name of
the channel Investigative TV.
Speaker 6 (24:03):
Or something is that where they have dateline.
Speaker 2 (24:05):
Yeah, they use one of those. They have all the
forensic files, they have all of those. This is the
better version of that. And Netflix has done ever since.
They the one where the guy well, anyway, they're spectacular
these true crime dramas and documentaries they put together are
really great. The latest one is called Should I Marry
(24:28):
a Murderer? It's just a radio station. Should I Marry
a Murderer? Three part documentary which shows the woman who
learns the past of her fiance and then catches him. Now,
it's a weird story. This woman thirty two years old.
(24:50):
She is a forensic pathologist, does autopsies day and night.
She gets out of an abusive relationship. She wants to
love again.
Speaker 6 (24:58):
I feel like those two things are very key to.
Speaker 1 (25:00):
Why this happened to her.
Speaker 2 (25:02):
Yes, oh absolutely, does.
Speaker 6 (25:04):
You know autopsies all day and night?
Speaker 2 (25:06):
Yep?
Speaker 6 (25:07):
And she just got out of an abusive relationship.
Speaker 2 (25:09):
She meets up with a guy named Sandy Alexander McKellar
and they kick it off five week whirlwind romance. But
before they tie this that they tie the knot. She
says to him, is there anything that I need to
know about you? I mean, now, clearly that should be
part of the process that you do. Anyway, that's why
(25:32):
you don't get engaged after five weeks. But she asks him,
is there something that you need to tell me that
might hinter hinder our future? Together.
Speaker 6 (25:43):
This is when people usually say, yeah, I shoplifted when
I was sixteen, right, yeah, I do.
Speaker 2 (25:48):
I did you know? I spent seventy two hours in
jail because of the thing. On spring break.
Speaker 1 (25:52):
I stole my mom's car.
Speaker 2 (25:54):
You know, I did a little heroine, not a lot,
just a little, just enough, just try for two weeks whatever,
whatever the thing is, right, that's when the secret comes out.
In this case, Sandy's secret was he had killed somebody
in a drunk driving accident, and that he and his brother,
(26:14):
who was in the truck with him, ended up taking
the guy's body and burying it to hide it, and
they never told anyone. So she decides to investigate, and
with the help and blessings of the local police department,
she ends up living with this fiance and the guy's brother,
(26:37):
the guy who helped him commit this horrible act for
nine months, basically just collecting evidence from them as they
spilled their guts to each other and she found out
more information. He even took her to the place where
they buried the body.
Speaker 6 (26:54):
But imagine if you murdered someone, how good it would
feel to finally come clean.
Speaker 2 (27:01):
It hasn't helped me at all, She said that she
was close to an emotional breakdown, that her mental health
made her unable to work. Yeah, because she's hiding this
secret that she's trying to catch the guy. Basically, so
what turns out again? This is the three three episode
(27:23):
docuseries on Netflix. Trial finally takes place, using the evidence
that she was able to gather against Sandy McKellar. Robert
pled guilty for covering up the murder. He was sentenced
to five years. Sandy also pleads guilty to both manslaughter
and the cover up and is sentenced to twelve years. Now,
the widow of the guy that they killed issued a
(27:46):
statement saying they were never going to forgive these brothers
that they had taken. Tony was the name of the
guy that dad killed. I think he's in his early
sixties and left the family for three and a half years,
not even knowing where he was. Now, the woman is
finally moving forward with her life. She says, all of
this is in the rear view since the sentencing. I've
worked hard to rebuild and regain control of my life,
(28:07):
and it's finally in a place where I felt strong
and confident, she says. She hopes by speaking out and
sharing what happens, she can start a conversation about greater
protection for victims and witnesses and why a far deeper
understanding of mental health within the police and court system
is so desperately needed.
Speaker 6 (28:25):
How does that conversation come up when she's dating someone new.
Speaker 2 (28:30):
I'm the one you saw on that Netflix documentary. Well
that again, maybe it goes past five weeks. Maybe that's
part of the reason.
Speaker 6 (28:39):
I told you this looks so messed up, it's probably
going to be good.
Speaker 2 (28:45):
Here's the thing, and it's funny that you said that
if it's just a normal like love gone wrong or
he you know, she killed him or he killed her
or he killed her brother something, that's not enough. The
fact that she was, like you said of forensic pathologist,
she's doing autopsies all day. She comes out of the
abusive relationship to find this guy who there's no sign
(29:08):
that he was abusive or anything like that, but clearly
had this secret. And the way she describes how he
told her when she asks this question what she thought
was probably going to be an innocuous question. There's a car,
a police car that's driving by as she's asking the question,
and he starts breaking down sobbing, and she thinks that
(29:30):
she stumbled onto something awful, which she did.
Speaker 6 (29:33):
But she had to have been scared living with him
knowing that she was, you know, investigating collecting evidence.
Speaker 1 (29:39):
Is what if he caught her?
Speaker 6 (29:40):
Yeah, well we're going to find out.
Speaker 2 (29:42):
Well, and he didn't murder this guy. I mean it
was technically a vehicular manslaughter.
Speaker 6 (29:47):
Anyone who can take a body and bury it and
lie about it could murder.
Speaker 2 (29:51):
Come on, it's true. And if he's trying to keep
up appearances the whole time. All right. Another case, this
one is from here in California. A Kentucky jury urry
came down hard on a guy from California hired by
a CHP captain to kill her husband. What's wrong with
you people? This is more normal? Yes? This is? This
is This doesn't qualify as Netflix documentary, at least not yet.
(30:15):
You've been listening to The Gary and Shannon Show. You
can always hear us live on KFI AM six forty
nine am to one pm every Monday through Friday, and
anytime on demand on the iHeartRadio app
Gary and Shannon News
Popular Podcasts
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.
Bleep! with Ana Navarro
Fear thrives in silence and confusion. Ana Navarro rejects both. Her voice is an antidote to today’s chaos. Her new podcast, Bleep! with Ana Navarro, takes on today’s most pressing issues with the voices most connected to it: decision-makers, political leaders, cultural shapers, and people on the frontlines of the story. The conversations acknowledge the emotions we all feel—despair, sadness, fear— but emerge with knowledge, perspective, and hope. The belief is simple: fearless dialogue can transform fear into courage, and courage into change. When fear dominates the headlines, this show digs deeper. Because information, debate, and conversation don’t just ease fear, they give us power to shape the future.
Hey Jonas!
Hey Jonas! The official Jonas Brothers podcast. Hosted by Kevin, Joe, and Nick Jonas. It’s the Jonas Brothers you know... musicians, actors, and well, yes, brothers. Now, they’re sharing another side of themselves in the playful, intimate, and irreverent way only they can. Spend time with the Jonas Brothers here and stay a little bit longer for deep conversations like never before.