December 7, 2025 • 17 mins
New filing from December 5th, 2025 where the state argues why the Walk The Dog Letter should be admitted into evidence during her February 2026 trial.
Recap of hearing on December 5th - https://youtu.be/PFh4VUucjMA?si=1j-aRSTdUbrvN_Bp
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/pretty-lies-and-alibis--4447192/support.
Recap of hearing on December 5th - https://youtu.be/PFh4VUucjMA?si=1j-aRSTdUbrvN_Bp
- 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):
Want you know, alibiers. Welcome to another episode of Pretty
Lies and Alibis. I'm Gigi. Is Saturday, December sixth, we
are going to go over the newest filing in the
Corey Ritchins case. I have several more from the last
few weeks, and I'm hoping to get through those this
weekend before trial starts back on Monday. For Brian Walsh,
I updated a very short video yesterday just going over
(00:24):
what happened at the hearing yesterday. The video for that
has not dropped yet. I had a friend of mine
in the courtroom who was kind enough to give me
a rough outline of everything that was talked about. But
if that video drops, I'll look through it and see
if there's anything of substance there to do an additional episode.
I also have several other documents that we have not
(00:45):
gone through there from the last few weeks when I
was taking time off, so I'm hoping today and tomorrow
to start knocking those out in some additional episodes. But
for today, we're going to read the State's reply in
support of its motion to determine admissibility of the Walk
the Dog letter. But first I thought it would be
a good idea to reread that walk Dog letter, because
(01:07):
we forget these things and it's always good to have
a refresher. And this was found in her cell during
a search, so let's jump in at the top. It says,
in big letters, walk the dog to the side of that,
but take vague notes so you remember. And just a
reminder Sky that she refers to in this letter is
her former attorney. Sky is saying, even if the gummies
(01:30):
have fentanyl in them, the prosecutor will say, I tried
to put the fentanyl in the gummies so Eric would
have them. Stupid, I know, but that's what she's thinking.
We will still test them though. However, she wants to
link Eric to getting drugs and pills from Mexico, so
we need some kind of connection. Her private investigator is
(01:50):
doing some research on the ranch slash cartel place Eric
would stay at. Here is what I'm thinking. But you
have to talk to Ronnie. Ronnie is her brother. You
would probably have to testify to this, but it's super short,
not a lot to it. You will need to tell
Sky at the meeting next week. And she starts with
what she wants her brother to testify to upon information
(02:13):
and belief, and she puts in parentheses just like they say.
A year prior to Eric's death, Ronnie was over watching
football one Sunday and Eric and Ronnie were talking about
Eric's Mexico trips. Eric told Ronnie he gets pain pills
and fentanyl from Mexico from the workers at the ranch.
Not to tell me because I would get mad, because
(02:34):
I always said he just gets high every night and
he won't help take care of the kids. There are
pictures in my phone of Eric passed out on the
floor or in the chair. Ronnie should have text from
Eric talking about getting high as well. Eric told Ronnie
he keeps them in an allergy pill bottle in his
work truck so I wouldn't find them. Ronnie never told
(02:54):
me about the conversation. Eric finally told me and asked
if Carmen could get him some carman, being the housekeeper
that ultimately got Corey the Fitannel, Eric never wanted anyone
to know he had an issue, especially get caught. He
always wanted Corey to go down for him. When they traveled.
Eric would put his drugs in Corey's bag at the
airlines right before they board it. That way, if they
(03:17):
were caught Corey got in trouble, not him. Once they
got to wherever they were going, Eric would pull the
drugs out of her bag and it would cause a
huge fight. She was pissed. He would risk her going
to jail for his drug use. He just would laugh
about it. Eric couldn't ruin his image that he had
drug issues, so he would do whatever he had to.
(03:38):
Ory has never done any type of pills. Didn't like
them rarely. She would consume THCHC only if Eric begged
her because it was a special occasion. There's a little
star here and it says reward this. However, he needs
to to make the point, just include it all. The
connection has to be made with Mexico and drugs. Ronnie
will have the messages to prove Eric confine it in
(04:00):
him about getting high. He can be short and to
the point, but has to be done upon information and belief. Lol.
They never found pain pills or fentanyl in my house
because he hid it in an allergy bottle in his
work truck and Cody emptied out the work truck within
a week. Cody was his business partner, so they were
never found. When you talk to Ronnie about this, meet
(04:22):
up with him in person. I worry sometimes your house
and phone are bugged. Maybe drive down to Salt Lake
and meet him after work without Brie. Scott has to
make the connection between Eric and Mexico because that makes
the most sense in her mind. If it's Ronnie's information
and belief about the conversation over football, she can use
that as a connection. Tell Ronnie don't overanalyze it. It
(04:46):
was a quick two minute conversation, lol. Tell him I
need him to do this. Bring me home and then
we will get those damn bitches. Also, please text Lotto
or call. Tell him do not text me anything about
us doing things together ever, like church, skiing, trips, nothing
that puts us together. It doesn't look good. We're so
(05:08):
close to the end. Let's push through. Have the conversation
with Ronnie before he meets with Sky. Then tell him
to tell Sky at the meeting about the conversation. Hang
in there, We're almost there. Love you to the moon.
At the bottom, it says, take vague notes of all
of this, so you remember before you walk the dog.
I saw a commercial yesterday Utah mortgage Relief. Google them please.
(05:32):
It's for people behind on their mortgage. Can you see
if they can help it all on Marissa's house. Please,
we have to get hers, yours and Chelsea's taking care
of asapp try to go to that place and commas.
What about asking Lotto to do a loan solely in
his name and not have you on there. I know
he can do a home equity line of credit on
(05:52):
his house in hideout. Not sure if he would, but
I know he has like a million in equity. Maybe
he just doesn't know about a heelock, which is a
home equity line of credit. If he wants to help me,
taking care of these loans is most important. I don't
give a crap about the yotels. Remember I told you
one way to get it Katie is to go through
(06:14):
my phone and find a picture of her girls, even
with the boys. By the way, Katie is Eric's sister.
Print fifteen copies and send them out anonymously to different
media companies. Obviously, don't email the pictures so it's not traceable.
She would be livid if it got out to the public.
You would just have to do it sneaky and be careful.
(06:34):
She would try and trace it back to you if not.
No worries guys having my girls do the first interview
with Good Morning America. Please tell Chelsea to bring up
that he hasn't been to church in the thirteen years
she has known him, and Eric would brag to her
about how much he drank and did pills in high school.
Tell Kelsey to say Eric always wanted Corey to go
(06:55):
down for him. For example, he would put drugs in
her suitcase when we would try together, so if anyone
got caught, it was Corey. He would put it in
her bag right before they left the house, so Corey
didn't know. Then when we would land wherever, Eric would
take them out of her bag and Corey would be
pissed and they would argue about it. Have Kelsey to
say how Eric didn't care and would just laugh about
(07:18):
it and say, well, I can't get in trouble, as
if it was okay that I got in trouble. Have
Selma talk about Eric in Spain not being able to drink,
so he was looking for drugs the entire time, and
explain the drink the waitress gave him and how I
called his doctor and went to the pharmacy immediately. Have
Ali talk about how the sisters have always been jealous
(07:40):
of me, because anything they could do, Ory could do
better being a mom, college, stay at home wife until
she built a million dollar company, a nice house, car, everything,
everything she had they wanted. This comes down to jealousy, money,
and Eric's partying that they don't want want to acknowledge,
and sadly, an accidental overdose. Lastly, don't forget to work
(08:05):
on the gun receipts. We want to file charges and
let the prosecutor not do anything about it to use
in our defense. Will you buy a box of Crest
white strips, open them up, put them in an envelope,
and have Sky give them to me. You can tell
her what's in the envelope. I'm sure she won't care.
I'll make sure they can't be found in my cell
(08:25):
My teeth are yellow from so much coffee and tea
all day. And she puts a little sad face there.
I love you, I love you, I love you. Hang
in there, We're getting there slowly. You're the best mom
in the whole world. I'm so lucky to have you.
So that was the walk the Dog letter, and that
is the subject of a lot of filings because obviously
the defense doesn't want that in so let's read the
(08:48):
State's reply and support of its motion to determine admissibility
of the Walk the Dog Letter. The first section statement
of new matter. The defendant's response to State's motion to
determine the ad missile ability of the Walk the Dog
Letter overreaches legally and factually as set fourth in the motion.
The first three pages of the Walk the Dog Letter
(09:08):
are admissible because the defendants consciousness of guilt is relevant,
more probative than unfairly prejudicial, improves her intent, land and
identity in causing Eric Rigins's death. Part two argument rebutting
new matter. The defendant's rule four oh two argument is
legally unsupported and factually accurate. So what is four to
(09:31):
O two is about? Admitting evidence like letters, texts, emails,
motive or intent, consciousness of guilt, contradictions to a witness testimony?
And what about when a judge may not allow four
oh two evidence to come in? It could be because
the facts are not tied to any issue in the case,
which clearly isn't the case here. Character evidence unrelated to
(09:55):
permitted purpose, and anything that doesn't make a fact more
or less probable. The next section, the argument rebutting new matter.
The defendant's rule four to two argument is legally unsupported
and factually inaccurate. The defendant asserts that the Walk the
Dog letter is not relevant because statements made in a
vacuum cannot possibly be relevant. The defendant does not cite
(10:19):
authority for this assertion because it's not true. Indeed, the
defendant's consciousness of Gill is revealed in her writing the
Walk the Dog Letter, not in anyone reading it. The
Walk the Dog Letter speaks for itself, as statements do
all the time, and the consciousness of guilt it reveals
tends to make it more likely that the defendant caused
(10:40):
Eric Richand's death. Accordingly and set forth in the motion,
the Walk the Dog Letter is relevant. Moreover, contrary to
the response, the Walk the Dog Letter was not eternally
locked in a vacuum. Rather, there is a strong inference
that defendant intended to convey it to another individual. First
is and to her mother. The day before authorities recovered
(11:03):
the Walk the Dog Letter from the defendant's jail cell,
she rehearsed sending letter number two to her mother using
Homewave's video feature to bypass the jail's normal mail screening
a homewave video is essentially a FaceTime on the tablets
they have there in jail. Regardless, it simply does not
(11:23):
matter that authorities seize the letter before the defendants sent
it to her mother. In State versus Braun, the defendant
wrote a letter during his murder trial that was intercepted
by jail staff and subsequently introduced against him at trial.
The defense objected to relevancy and argued that the quoted
parts of the letter are vague and subject to more
(11:43):
than one interpretation. The state offered the letter as relevant
to establish an inference of defendant's consciousness of guilt. In
ruling on relevancy, the trial court found that the letter
reasonably could be construed as an attempt to engage a
fellow inmate to take action against a trial witness in
order to stop him from testifying. Further, the Oregon Supreme
(12:07):
Court found the state's interpretation of the letter to be reasonable,
if not compelled. It held that the letter was relevant
to establish an inference of defendant's consciousness of guilt for murder,
and the defense was free to argue at trial that
the letter had in fact had another meaning. See also
State versus Culthurst. Admission of an instruction about a written
(12:29):
escape plan entitled Brainstorm, found during a routine search of
the defendant's belongings at a correctional facility, was relevant to
consciousness of guilt, they said another case, State versus Helatier,
a written prayer found on defendant person at the time
of her arrest generally acknowledged my sins and my guilt
was relevant to consciousness of guilt. The next section, defendant's
(12:53):
rule four h four argument is logically erroneous and factually contradicted.
The defendants sites three cases where courts admitted evidence of
threats of physical harm to show an attempt to influence
a witness and thus consciousness of guilt. She then argues
that the court should not admit the walk the Dog
letter because it does not include a threat of physical
(13:14):
harm and thus cannot give rise to a consciousness of guilt. Clearly,
a jury could find the walk the Dog letter shows
an attempt to influence a witness and thus consciousness of guilt,
even though it does not contain a threat of physical harm.
The defendant asserts that the walk the Dog letter is
not consciousness of guilt evidence because the statements in this
(13:36):
letter can just as easily be interpreted as a reminder
as to what the defendant's brother and truthfully testify about.
This interpretation, however, is highly unlikely, given the defendant's lengthy
and repeated explanation that the Walk the Dog letter is
a sloppy, rough draft of a quote freaking book wholly
(13:56):
unconnected to Eric Richand's death. Accordingly, as set fourth in
the motion, the Walk to the Dog letter is admissible
because the consciousness of guilt that it reveals proves the
defendant's intent, plan, and identity in causing Eric Richand's death.
The next section, the defendant's rule four oh three argument
is legally imprecise and logically erroneous. Under Utah rule of
(14:21):
Evidence four o three, a district court may exclude otherwise
relevant admissible evidence if its probitive value is substantially outweighed
by a danger of unfair prejudice. They cite State versus Blackwing.
At the outset, the court must indulge a presumption in
favor of admissibility. They also cite State versus Johnson. The
(14:43):
probative value of evidence is judged by the strength of
the evidence and disability to make the existence of a
consequential fact either more or less probable, and the proponent's
need for the evidence in applying rule four oh three's
balancing test raises like substantially outweighed unfair prejudice and rouse
(15:03):
the jury to overmastering hostility. Matter, the defendant does not
argue from these legal standards, but instead cuts single words
from these phrases and reassembles them to fabricate a more
obliging standard. Put artfully, as set fourth in the motion,
the defendant's own words revealing her consciousness of guilt are
(15:24):
highly probative because they bear directly on her agency in
causing Eric Rich's death and are not the subject of
alternative proof. And any prejudice arising from her own words
is not unfair because they are her own words and
not the type of words that would rouse the jury
to overmastering hostility. And even if unfair, the danger of
(15:47):
any unfair prejudice does not substantially outweigh the probative value
of her own words revealing her consciousness of guilt. Moreover,
contrary to the response presenting the walk the Dog letter
to the jury will not confuse and mislead jurors into
thinking that they are deciding a witness tampering case instead
of an aggravated murder case. Jurors are smarter than that. Accordingly,
(16:11):
a set forth in the motion the Walk the Dog
Letter passes Rule four h three's balancing test, or the
conclusion the Court should determine that the first three pages
of the Walk the Dog letter, as redacted, consistent with
the Court's privileged determination, is admissible for trial as a
statement of a party opponent. That was dated December fifth,
(16:32):
So that was the filing. Like I said, I have
several more to go through, so I'm hoping to knock
those out this weekend. And just a reminder, her trial
is coming right up in February. And one thing I
did put on the update from the hearing yesterday is
not to expect much publicly as far as filings. The
defense is filing a lot of things under seal and
(16:54):
Judge Mrazik is okay with that due to the fact
that we are so close to trial. So we'll see
what happens. But that is it for this episode. I
hope you guys have a good rest to your afternoon
and we will see soon
Want you know, alibiers. Welcome to another episode of Pretty
Lies and Alibis. I'm Gigi. Is Saturday, December sixth, we
are going to go over the newest filing in the
Corey Ritchins case. I have several more from the last
few weeks, and I'm hoping to get through those this
weekend before trial starts back on Monday. For Brian Walsh,
I updated a very short video yesterday just going over
(00:24):
what happened at the hearing yesterday. The video for that
has not dropped yet. I had a friend of mine
in the courtroom who was kind enough to give me
a rough outline of everything that was talked about. But
if that video drops, I'll look through it and see
if there's anything of substance there to do an additional episode.
I also have several other documents that we have not
(00:45):
gone through there from the last few weeks when I
was taking time off, so I'm hoping today and tomorrow
to start knocking those out in some additional episodes. But
for today, we're going to read the State's reply in
support of its motion to determine admissibility of the Walk
the Dog letter. But first I thought it would be
a good idea to reread that walk Dog letter, because
(01:07):
we forget these things and it's always good to have
a refresher. And this was found in her cell during
a search, so let's jump in at the top. It says,
in big letters, walk the dog to the side of that,
but take vague notes so you remember. And just a
reminder Sky that she refers to in this letter is
her former attorney. Sky is saying, even if the gummies
(01:30):
have fentanyl in them, the prosecutor will say, I tried
to put the fentanyl in the gummies so Eric would
have them. Stupid, I know, but that's what she's thinking.
We will still test them though. However, she wants to
link Eric to getting drugs and pills from Mexico, so
we need some kind of connection. Her private investigator is
(01:50):
doing some research on the ranch slash cartel place Eric
would stay at. Here is what I'm thinking. But you
have to talk to Ronnie. Ronnie is her brother. You
would probably have to testify to this, but it's super short,
not a lot to it. You will need to tell
Sky at the meeting next week. And she starts with
what she wants her brother to testify to upon information
(02:13):
and belief, and she puts in parentheses just like they say.
A year prior to Eric's death, Ronnie was over watching
football one Sunday and Eric and Ronnie were talking about
Eric's Mexico trips. Eric told Ronnie he gets pain pills
and fentanyl from Mexico from the workers at the ranch.
Not to tell me because I would get mad, because
(02:34):
I always said he just gets high every night and
he won't help take care of the kids. There are
pictures in my phone of Eric passed out on the
floor or in the chair. Ronnie should have text from
Eric talking about getting high as well. Eric told Ronnie
he keeps them in an allergy pill bottle in his
work truck so I wouldn't find them. Ronnie never told
(02:54):
me about the conversation. Eric finally told me and asked
if Carmen could get him some carman, being the housekeeper
that ultimately got Corey the Fitannel, Eric never wanted anyone
to know he had an issue, especially get caught. He
always wanted Corey to go down for him. When they traveled.
Eric would put his drugs in Corey's bag at the
airlines right before they board it. That way, if they
(03:17):
were caught Corey got in trouble, not him. Once they
got to wherever they were going, Eric would pull the
drugs out of her bag and it would cause a
huge fight. She was pissed. He would risk her going
to jail for his drug use. He just would laugh
about it. Eric couldn't ruin his image that he had
drug issues, so he would do whatever he had to.
(03:38):
Ory has never done any type of pills. Didn't like
them rarely. She would consume THCHC only if Eric begged
her because it was a special occasion. There's a little
star here and it says reward this. However, he needs
to to make the point, just include it all. The
connection has to be made with Mexico and drugs. Ronnie
will have the messages to prove Eric confine it in
(04:00):
him about getting high. He can be short and to
the point, but has to be done upon information and belief. Lol.
They never found pain pills or fentanyl in my house
because he hid it in an allergy bottle in his
work truck and Cody emptied out the work truck within
a week. Cody was his business partner, so they were
never found. When you talk to Ronnie about this, meet
(04:22):
up with him in person. I worry sometimes your house
and phone are bugged. Maybe drive down to Salt Lake
and meet him after work without Brie. Scott has to
make the connection between Eric and Mexico because that makes
the most sense in her mind. If it's Ronnie's information
and belief about the conversation over football, she can use
that as a connection. Tell Ronnie don't overanalyze it. It
(04:46):
was a quick two minute conversation, lol. Tell him I
need him to do this. Bring me home and then
we will get those damn bitches. Also, please text Lotto
or call. Tell him do not text me anything about
us doing things together ever, like church, skiing, trips, nothing
that puts us together. It doesn't look good. We're so
(05:08):
close to the end. Let's push through. Have the conversation
with Ronnie before he meets with Sky. Then tell him
to tell Sky at the meeting about the conversation. Hang
in there, We're almost there. Love you to the moon.
At the bottom, it says, take vague notes of all
of this, so you remember before you walk the dog.
I saw a commercial yesterday Utah mortgage Relief. Google them please.
(05:32):
It's for people behind on their mortgage. Can you see
if they can help it all on Marissa's house. Please,
we have to get hers, yours and Chelsea's taking care
of asapp try to go to that place and commas.
What about asking Lotto to do a loan solely in
his name and not have you on there. I know
he can do a home equity line of credit on
(05:52):
his house in hideout. Not sure if he would, but
I know he has like a million in equity. Maybe
he just doesn't know about a heelock, which is a
home equity line of credit. If he wants to help me,
taking care of these loans is most important. I don't
give a crap about the yotels. Remember I told you
one way to get it Katie is to go through
(06:14):
my phone and find a picture of her girls, even
with the boys. By the way, Katie is Eric's sister.
Print fifteen copies and send them out anonymously to different
media companies. Obviously, don't email the pictures so it's not traceable.
She would be livid if it got out to the public.
You would just have to do it sneaky and be careful.
(06:34):
She would try and trace it back to you if not.
No worries guys having my girls do the first interview
with Good Morning America. Please tell Chelsea to bring up
that he hasn't been to church in the thirteen years
she has known him, and Eric would brag to her
about how much he drank and did pills in high school.
Tell Kelsey to say Eric always wanted Corey to go
(06:55):
down for him. For example, he would put drugs in
her suitcase when we would try together, so if anyone
got caught, it was Corey. He would put it in
her bag right before they left the house, so Corey
didn't know. Then when we would land wherever, Eric would
take them out of her bag and Corey would be
pissed and they would argue about it. Have Kelsey to
say how Eric didn't care and would just laugh about
(07:18):
it and say, well, I can't get in trouble, as
if it was okay that I got in trouble. Have
Selma talk about Eric in Spain not being able to drink,
so he was looking for drugs the entire time, and
explain the drink the waitress gave him and how I
called his doctor and went to the pharmacy immediately. Have
Ali talk about how the sisters have always been jealous
(07:40):
of me, because anything they could do, Ory could do
better being a mom, college, stay at home wife until
she built a million dollar company, a nice house, car, everything,
everything she had they wanted. This comes down to jealousy, money,
and Eric's partying that they don't want want to acknowledge,
and sadly, an accidental overdose. Lastly, don't forget to work
(08:05):
on the gun receipts. We want to file charges and
let the prosecutor not do anything about it to use
in our defense. Will you buy a box of Crest
white strips, open them up, put them in an envelope,
and have Sky give them to me. You can tell
her what's in the envelope. I'm sure she won't care.
I'll make sure they can't be found in my cell
(08:25):
My teeth are yellow from so much coffee and tea
all day. And she puts a little sad face there.
I love you, I love you, I love you. Hang
in there, We're getting there slowly. You're the best mom
in the whole world. I'm so lucky to have you.
So that was the walk the Dog letter, and that
is the subject of a lot of filings because obviously
the defense doesn't want that in so let's read the
(08:48):
State's reply and support of its motion to determine admissibility
of the Walk the Dog Letter. The first section statement
of new matter. The defendant's response to State's motion to
determine the ad missile ability of the Walk the Dog
Letter overreaches legally and factually as set fourth in the motion.
The first three pages of the Walk the Dog Letter
(09:08):
are admissible because the defendants consciousness of guilt is relevant,
more probative than unfairly prejudicial, improves her intent, land and
identity in causing Eric Rigins's death. Part two argument rebutting
new matter. The defendant's rule four oh two argument is
legally unsupported and factually accurate. So what is four to
(09:31):
O two is about? Admitting evidence like letters, texts, emails,
motive or intent, consciousness of guilt, contradictions to a witness testimony?
And what about when a judge may not allow four
oh two evidence to come in? It could be because
the facts are not tied to any issue in the case,
which clearly isn't the case here. Character evidence unrelated to
(09:55):
permitted purpose, and anything that doesn't make a fact more
or less probable. The next section, the argument rebutting new matter.
The defendant's rule four to two argument is legally unsupported
and factually inaccurate. The defendant asserts that the Walk the
Dog letter is not relevant because statements made in a
vacuum cannot possibly be relevant. The defendant does not cite
(10:19):
authority for this assertion because it's not true. Indeed, the
defendant's consciousness of Gill is revealed in her writing the
Walk the Dog Letter, not in anyone reading it. The
Walk the Dog Letter speaks for itself, as statements do
all the time, and the consciousness of guilt it reveals
tends to make it more likely that the defendant caused
(10:40):
Eric Richand's death. Accordingly and set forth in the motion,
the Walk the Dog Letter is relevant. Moreover, contrary to
the response, the Walk the Dog Letter was not eternally
locked in a vacuum. Rather, there is a strong inference
that defendant intended to convey it to another individual. First
is and to her mother. The day before authorities recovered
(11:03):
the Walk the Dog Letter from the defendant's jail cell,
she rehearsed sending letter number two to her mother using
Homewave's video feature to bypass the jail's normal mail screening
a homewave video is essentially a FaceTime on the tablets
they have there in jail. Regardless, it simply does not
(11:23):
matter that authorities seize the letter before the defendants sent
it to her mother. In State versus Braun, the defendant
wrote a letter during his murder trial that was intercepted
by jail staff and subsequently introduced against him at trial.
The defense objected to relevancy and argued that the quoted
parts of the letter are vague and subject to more
(11:43):
than one interpretation. The state offered the letter as relevant
to establish an inference of defendant's consciousness of guilt. In
ruling on relevancy, the trial court found that the letter
reasonably could be construed as an attempt to engage a
fellow inmate to take action against a trial witness in
order to stop him from testifying. Further, the Oregon Supreme
(12:07):
Court found the state's interpretation of the letter to be reasonable,
if not compelled. It held that the letter was relevant
to establish an inference of defendant's consciousness of guilt for murder,
and the defense was free to argue at trial that
the letter had in fact had another meaning. See also
State versus Culthurst. Admission of an instruction about a written
(12:29):
escape plan entitled Brainstorm, found during a routine search of
the defendant's belongings at a correctional facility, was relevant to
consciousness of guilt, they said another case, State versus Helatier,
a written prayer found on defendant person at the time
of her arrest generally acknowledged my sins and my guilt
was relevant to consciousness of guilt. The next section, defendant's
(12:53):
rule four h four argument is logically erroneous and factually contradicted.
The defendants sites three cases where courts admitted evidence of
threats of physical harm to show an attempt to influence
a witness and thus consciousness of guilt. She then argues
that the court should not admit the walk the Dog
letter because it does not include a threat of physical
(13:14):
harm and thus cannot give rise to a consciousness of guilt. Clearly,
a jury could find the walk the Dog letter shows
an attempt to influence a witness and thus consciousness of guilt,
even though it does not contain a threat of physical harm.
The defendant asserts that the walk the Dog letter is
not consciousness of guilt evidence because the statements in this
(13:36):
letter can just as easily be interpreted as a reminder
as to what the defendant's brother and truthfully testify about.
This interpretation, however, is highly unlikely, given the defendant's lengthy
and repeated explanation that the Walk the Dog letter is
a sloppy, rough draft of a quote freaking book wholly
(13:56):
unconnected to Eric Richand's death. Accordingly, as set fourth in
the motion, the Walk to the Dog letter is admissible
because the consciousness of guilt that it reveals proves the
defendant's intent, plan, and identity in causing Eric Richand's death.
The next section, the defendant's rule four oh three argument
is legally imprecise and logically erroneous. Under Utah rule of
(14:21):
Evidence four o three, a district court may exclude otherwise
relevant admissible evidence if its probitive value is substantially outweighed
by a danger of unfair prejudice. They cite State versus Blackwing.
At the outset, the court must indulge a presumption in
favor of admissibility. They also cite State versus Johnson. The
(14:43):
probative value of evidence is judged by the strength of
the evidence and disability to make the existence of a
consequential fact either more or less probable, and the proponent's
need for the evidence in applying rule four oh three's
balancing test raises like substantially outweighed unfair prejudice and rouse
(15:03):
the jury to overmastering hostility. Matter, the defendant does not
argue from these legal standards, but instead cuts single words
from these phrases and reassembles them to fabricate a more
obliging standard. Put artfully, as set fourth in the motion,
the defendant's own words revealing her consciousness of guilt are
(15:24):
highly probative because they bear directly on her agency in
causing Eric Rich's death and are not the subject of
alternative proof. And any prejudice arising from her own words
is not unfair because they are her own words and
not the type of words that would rouse the jury
to overmastering hostility. And even if unfair, the danger of
(15:47):
any unfair prejudice does not substantially outweigh the probative value
of her own words revealing her consciousness of guilt. Moreover,
contrary to the response presenting the walk the Dog letter
to the jury will not confuse and mislead jurors into
thinking that they are deciding a witness tampering case instead
of an aggravated murder case. Jurors are smarter than that. Accordingly,
(16:11):
a set forth in the motion the Walk the Dog
Letter passes Rule four h three's balancing test, or the
conclusion the Court should determine that the first three pages
of the Walk the Dog letter, as redacted, consistent with
the Court's privileged determination, is admissible for trial as a
statement of a party opponent. That was dated December fifth,
(16:32):
So that was the filing. Like I said, I have
several more to go through, so I'm hoping to knock
those out this weekend. And just a reminder, her trial
is coming right up in February. And one thing I
did put on the update from the hearing yesterday is
not to expect much publicly as far as filings. The
defense is filing a lot of things under seal and
(16:54):
Judge Mrazik is okay with that due to the fact
that we are so close to trial. So we'll see
what happens. But that is it for this episode. I
hope you guys have a good rest to your afternoon
and we will see 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.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.