December 10, 2025 • 8 mins
The state lists prior bad acts of Kouri's they want the jury to hear including draining her kids college savings accounts.
The state wants to keep out Kouri's claims that Eric abused drugs in high school, calling it hearsay and pointing out she didn't meet Eric until 10 years after his high school graduation.
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/pretty-lies-and-alibis--4447192/support.
The state wants to keep out Kouri's claims that Eric abused drugs in high school, calling it hearsay and pointing out she didn't meet Eric until 10 years after his high school graduation.
- ALL MERCH 10% off with code Sherlock10 at checkout - NEW STYLES
- Donate: (Thank you for your support! Couldn't do what I love without all y'all)
- PayPal - paypal.com/paypalme/prettyliesandalibis
- Venmo - @prettyliesalibis
- Buy Me A Coffee - https://www.buymeacoffee.com/prettyliesr
- Cash App- Prettyliesandalibis
- All links: https://linktr.ee/prettyliesandalibis
- Merch: prettyliesandalibis.myshopify.com
- Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/PrettyLiesAndAlibis
- (Weekly lives and private message board)
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/pretty-lies-and-alibis--4447192/support.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Which you know alibiers. Welcome to another episode of Pretty
Lies and Alibis. I'm Jiji, good to have you here.
As Wednesday, December tenth, I wanted to go over a
couple of filings in Corey Richins case. To the best
of my knowledge, these motions have not been ruled on,
so let's jump in. The first is the state's second
(00:20):
notice of intent to offer four h four B evidence.
This was filed November twenty sixth, and the evidence they
want to present at her trial. The defendant's financial crimes.
The probable cause statement in State versus Richins discloses several crimes, wrongs,
and other acts. Next up Circle R documents. In twenty
(00:41):
twenty two, Rman Lauber was a participant in the Wasatch
County Drug Court. In April twenty twenty two, the defendant
drafted two letters verifying as purported manager of the Circle
R Ranch that Carmen Lauber performed community service at the ranch.
Eric Richins's father owned is a Utah corporation named Circle
(01:02):
R Livestock Incorporated and operates the ranch, but the defendant
was not involved with the Circle OUR Ranch whatsoever. Carmen
Laubert never performed community service at the ranch. Next on
the list is the guild email. I've asked a few people,
but we cannot figure out what this is. It's very possible.
(01:22):
We haven't heard this yet, so we'll see when it
goes to trial. Next up is a big one college
savings accounts. The defendant emptied her children's college savings and
five to twenty nine accounts to fund her business and
to forestall complete financial collapse. Bully Moly, they cide a
case right versus Corey Richins. The defendant, through Kay Richins
(01:44):
Realty LLC, sold a home to I'm not going to
say their names in twenty twenty. They sued the defendant
in Fourth District Court, State of Utah in November of
twenty twenty two her material misrepresentations and omission made in
her disclosures about the homes condition. Next is C and
E distributions intended for quarterly tax deposits. From time to time,
(02:10):
CNE Masonry LLC made distributions to Eric Richins representing estimated
quarterly taxes due. The defendant took these payments and did
not remit the tax. Instead, she spent the money. She
then misrepresented to their accountant that the payments had been made.
The next is Raymond James and bb and T proof
(02:32):
of funds. The defendant provided proof of funds documents to
lender Sierra West, reportedly from Raymond James and BB and T,
indicating large account balances. The defendant did not have accounts
with Raymond James or BB and T. The documents supported
her application for financing her purchase of the Midway mansion.
(02:54):
Next is Shell Companies in obtaining various accounts receivable loans.
The defen listed non operating Shell companies as having receivables. Hey,
what the biggest one on that it's empty in her
kids college funds. That's bad. The next motion is the
state's motion to exclude evidence that the victim abused drugs
(03:15):
in high school. They have requested a hearing for this.
The State of Utah requests the court exclude any evidence
that Eric Richins abused drugs in high school. This evidence
is not admissible because it's not relevant and any probative
value is substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice. Moreover, it is
improper character evidence and likely hearsay statement of relevant facts.
(03:40):
Eric Richinds graduated high school in two thousand. Eric and
the defendant met in approximately twenty ten. In July twenty
twenty two, the defendant told Eric Richards's father, Gene Richins,
that Eric abused his mother's prescription drugs in high school.
Gene denies that Eric abused his mother's prescription drugs in
high school, and they get to the argument any evidence
(04:03):
that Eric Richards abused drugs in high school is not
relevant when the relevance of evidence depends on whether a
fact exists. Proof must be introduced sufficient to support a
finding that the fact does exist. Evidence is relevant if
a it has any tendency to make a fact more
or less probable than it would be without the evidence,
(04:25):
and b the fact is of consequence in determining the action,
and they cite UTAH Rules of Evidence four O one.
Irrelevant evidence is not admissible, and that's UTAH Rules of
Evidence four O two. The evidence that Eric Richins abused
drugs in high school is unreliable because the defendant's testimony
is seemingly the only source of the evidence, and her
(04:48):
testimony is contradicted by Gene richards testimony. Regardless, any evidence
that Eric Richins abused drugs as a teenager over two
decades before his death does not make any fact in
this case more or less probable. It is too temporarily
remote and not part of a continuing course of conduct,
Even more so when evidence shows he did not use
(05:12):
drugs in the intervening two decades, As the defendant explains,
when Eric had knee surgery in twenty sixteen, he refused
to take painkillers when he struggled so bad and hurt
so much. He said he was so terrified of getting
hooked on that crap again because it made him so high,
he would only take ibuprofen. Accordingly, any evidence Eric abused
(05:36):
drugs in high school is inadmissible under rule four O two.
The next section. Any probitive value to any evidence that
Eric abused drugs in high school is substantially outweighed by
the danger of unfair prejudice. The court may exclude relevant
evidence if its probitive value is substantially outweighed by a
(05:56):
danger of one or more of the following unfair prejudice,
confusing the issues, misleading the jury, undue delay, wasting time,
or needlessly presenting cumulative evidence. The next section, any evidence
that Eric Richins abused drugs in high school is improper
(06:16):
character evidence. Evidence of a crime, wrong, or other act
is not admissible to prove a person's character in order
to show that on a particular occasion, the person act
in conformity with the character they cite Utah Rules of
Evidence for a four B one. This evidence may be
admissible for another purpose, such as proving motive, opportunity, intent, preparation,
(06:43):
lan knowledge, identity, absence of mistake, or a lack of accident.
The only reason to offer evidence that Eric abused drugs
in high school is to argue that he abused drugs
at the time of his death. This is precisely the
use that rule for four prohibits, and none of its
exceptions apply. Accordingly, any evidence that Eric abused drugs in
(07:06):
high school is inadmissible under rule four oh four. The
next section, any evidence eric abused drugs in high school
is likely hearsay. The defendant appears to be the only
source of evidence that Eric abused drugs in high school,
and the defendant did not know him in high school
or the ten years after his high school graduation. The
(07:27):
defendant could not possibly have personal knowledge about Eric Richards
when he was in high school. Accordingly, the defendant's testimony
in any other similar situated person's testimony that Eric Richards
used drugs in high school is inadmissible under rule aight
oh one C conclusion, the court should exclude any evidence
(07:47):
that Eric abused drugs in high school because it's not relevant.
Any probative value is substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice. It
is improper character evidence, and it is likely. Here's that
was filed November twenty sixth. So that's it for this episode.
I do have a few more that are a little
more lengthy, but kind of tired tonight, so I'm gonna
(08:09):
call it a day after I get this out, and
when I have time in the evenings, I will put
out some more of these just so we can get
caught up. Hope you guys have a good rest of
your evening and we will see you soon.
Which you know alibiers. Welcome to another episode of Pretty
Lies and Alibis. I'm Jiji, good to have you here.
As Wednesday, December tenth, I wanted to go over a
couple of filings in Corey Richins case. To the best
of my knowledge, these motions have not been ruled on,
so let's jump in. The first is the state's second
(00:20):
notice of intent to offer four h four B evidence.
This was filed November twenty sixth, and the evidence they
want to present at her trial. The defendant's financial crimes.
The probable cause statement in State versus Richins discloses several crimes, wrongs,
and other acts. Next up Circle R documents. In twenty
(00:41):
twenty two, Rman Lauber was a participant in the Wasatch
County Drug Court. In April twenty twenty two, the defendant
drafted two letters verifying as purported manager of the Circle
R Ranch that Carmen Lauber performed community service at the ranch.
Eric Richins's father owned is a Utah corporation named Circle
(01:02):
R Livestock Incorporated and operates the ranch, but the defendant
was not involved with the Circle OUR Ranch whatsoever. Carmen
Laubert never performed community service at the ranch. Next on
the list is the guild email. I've asked a few people,
but we cannot figure out what this is. It's very possible.
(01:22):
We haven't heard this yet, so we'll see when it
goes to trial. Next up is a big one college
savings accounts. The defendant emptied her children's college savings and
five to twenty nine accounts to fund her business and
to forestall complete financial collapse. Bully Moly, they cide a
case right versus Corey Richins. The defendant, through Kay Richins
(01:44):
Realty LLC, sold a home to I'm not going to
say their names in twenty twenty. They sued the defendant
in Fourth District Court, State of Utah in November of
twenty twenty two her material misrepresentations and omission made in
her disclosures about the homes condition. Next is C and
E distributions intended for quarterly tax deposits. From time to time,
(02:10):
CNE Masonry LLC made distributions to Eric Richins representing estimated
quarterly taxes due. The defendant took these payments and did
not remit the tax. Instead, she spent the money. She
then misrepresented to their accountant that the payments had been made.
The next is Raymond James and bb and T proof
(02:32):
of funds. The defendant provided proof of funds documents to
lender Sierra West, reportedly from Raymond James and BB and T,
indicating large account balances. The defendant did not have accounts
with Raymond James or BB and T. The documents supported
her application for financing her purchase of the Midway mansion.
(02:54):
Next is Shell Companies in obtaining various accounts receivable loans.
The defen listed non operating Shell companies as having receivables. Hey,
what the biggest one on that it's empty in her
kids college funds. That's bad. The next motion is the
state's motion to exclude evidence that the victim abused drugs
(03:15):
in high school. They have requested a hearing for this.
The State of Utah requests the court exclude any evidence
that Eric Richins abused drugs in high school. This evidence
is not admissible because it's not relevant and any probative
value is substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice. Moreover, it is
improper character evidence and likely hearsay statement of relevant facts.
(03:40):
Eric Richinds graduated high school in two thousand. Eric and
the defendant met in approximately twenty ten. In July twenty
twenty two, the defendant told Eric Richards's father, Gene Richins,
that Eric abused his mother's prescription drugs in high school.
Gene denies that Eric abused his mother's prescription drugs in
high school, and they get to the argument any evidence
(04:03):
that Eric Richards abused drugs in high school is not
relevant when the relevance of evidence depends on whether a
fact exists. Proof must be introduced sufficient to support a
finding that the fact does exist. Evidence is relevant if
a it has any tendency to make a fact more
or less probable than it would be without the evidence,
(04:25):
and b the fact is of consequence in determining the action,
and they cite UTAH Rules of Evidence four O one.
Irrelevant evidence is not admissible, and that's UTAH Rules of
Evidence four O two. The evidence that Eric Richins abused
drugs in high school is unreliable because the defendant's testimony
is seemingly the only source of the evidence, and her
(04:48):
testimony is contradicted by Gene richards testimony. Regardless, any evidence
that Eric Richins abused drugs as a teenager over two
decades before his death does not make any fact in
this case more or less probable. It is too temporarily
remote and not part of a continuing course of conduct,
Even more so when evidence shows he did not use
(05:12):
drugs in the intervening two decades, As the defendant explains,
when Eric had knee surgery in twenty sixteen, he refused
to take painkillers when he struggled so bad and hurt
so much. He said he was so terrified of getting
hooked on that crap again because it made him so high,
he would only take ibuprofen. Accordingly, any evidence Eric abused
(05:36):
drugs in high school is inadmissible under rule four O two.
The next section. Any probitive value to any evidence that
Eric abused drugs in high school is substantially outweighed by
the danger of unfair prejudice. The court may exclude relevant
evidence if its probitive value is substantially outweighed by a
(05:56):
danger of one or more of the following unfair prejudice,
confusing the issues, misleading the jury, undue delay, wasting time,
or needlessly presenting cumulative evidence. The next section, any evidence
that Eric Richins abused drugs in high school is improper
(06:16):
character evidence. Evidence of a crime, wrong, or other act
is not admissible to prove a person's character in order
to show that on a particular occasion, the person act
in conformity with the character they cite Utah Rules of
Evidence for a four B one. This evidence may be
admissible for another purpose, such as proving motive, opportunity, intent, preparation,
(06:43):
lan knowledge, identity, absence of mistake, or a lack of accident.
The only reason to offer evidence that Eric abused drugs
in high school is to argue that he abused drugs
at the time of his death. This is precisely the
use that rule for four prohibits, and none of its
exceptions apply. Accordingly, any evidence that Eric abused drugs in
(07:06):
high school is inadmissible under rule four oh four. The
next section, any evidence eric abused drugs in high school
is likely hearsay. The defendant appears to be the only
source of evidence that Eric abused drugs in high school,
and the defendant did not know him in high school
or the ten years after his high school graduation. The
(07:27):
defendant could not possibly have personal knowledge about Eric Richards
when he was in high school. Accordingly, the defendant's testimony
in any other similar situated person's testimony that Eric Richards
used drugs in high school is inadmissible under rule aight
oh one C conclusion, the court should exclude any evidence
(07:47):
that Eric abused drugs in high school because it's not relevant.
Any probative value is substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice. It
is improper character evidence, and it is likely. Here's that
was filed November twenty sixth. So that's it for this episode.
I do have a few more that are a little
more lengthy, but kind of tired tonight, so I'm gonna
(08:09):
call it a day after I get this out, and
when I have time in the evenings, I will put
out some more of these just so we can get
caught up. Hope you guys have a good rest of
your evening and we will see you soon.
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.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by Audiochuck Media Company.
The Brothers Ortiz
The Brothers Ortiz is the story of two brothers–both successful, but in very different ways. Gabe Ortiz becomes a third-highest ranking officer in all of Texas while his younger brother Larry climbs the ranks in Puro Tango Blast, a notorious Texas Prison gang. Gabe doesn’t know all the details of his brother’s nefarious dealings, and he’s made a point not to ask, to protect their relationship. But when Larry is murdered during a home invasion in a rented beach house, Gabe has no choice but to look into what happened that night. To solve Larry’s murder, Gabe, and the whole Ortiz family, must ask each other tough questions.