Roberta Glass Talks True Crime, Innocence Fraud on the Divulgence Podcast

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
Hey, and welcome back to Divulgence everyone. Today, I have
with me a true crime reporter, ROBERTA.

Speaker 2 (00:07):
Glass. Hey, Roberta, Welcome to the show. How are you.

Speaker 3 (00:10):
I'm well, Thanks so much for having me.

Speaker 2 (00:12):
Thank you so much for your time. It's great to
see you again.

Speaker 1 (00:17):
So I know that obviously you report and research true
crime a lot of a lot of the bigger cases
that you see all over the place in the media
and whatnot. But before we get into specific cases or anything,
let's dive into the main kind of the main topic
of the show, which is something that you've been working

(00:38):
on for quite a few years, which is innocence fraud. Right, Yeah,
So why don't we start by can you tell me
and the viewers and everyone just break down what is
innocence fraud and maybe just give us a little bit
of a background there before we start digging deeper.

Speaker 3 (00:57):
Okay, Well, innocence fraud is I would say, it's getting
guilty murderers. It's usually done about fourteen years after their conviction.
It could be murderers, it could be sexual predators, sexual predators,

(01:18):
and murderers of any kind of criminal out of prison.
About Usually it happens about fourteen years out of their
after their conviction, and the motivation is twofold. One is
an ideology of motivation in that they believe that are
either our justice system is either just so systematically unfair,

(01:41):
or that all these and all these murderers are just
little guys caught up in it, or they're just grifters
who want to clean up in our civil courts where
they can sue for multimillions of dollars for their wrong full,
wrongful conviction that really wasn't wrongful. So they use the media.

(02:08):
The media is often on board with this because if
you write about a wrongfully convicted killer, it's a short
you're on a short list for awards. Also, it's people
are just it's like crack cocaine to to not just Americans,
but internationally, like the Western world is in love with
this story. And if you can make someone look innocent

(02:32):
either by false like pseudo documentaries or podcasts, it will
be it will bring you money. So that's that's how
it's that's how it's done. So there's two folds. It's
the Hollywood side and then there's actually like the legal
side where people are writing books. You know, the Hollywood side,
I'd say people are writing books, movies, podcasts, and then

(02:54):
there's the actual legal side where they do it. And
then they're also teaching it in our university. So they're
leading classes really and sometimes we've had murderers like ad
nonsa Ed and Marty tank Lift, two guilty murderers in
my opinion that I've talked about on my podcast, are
leading classes and having college students and sometimes graduate students.

(03:18):
In the case of there's a very famous Northwestern case
I'll get to an in a second, just remind me.
So they're leading their classes into investigating cases they say
of innocence. So they go back to you know, they
try to get these killers out by hook or crook.

(03:39):
There's a very famous case. There's a documentary about this
that I encourage everyone to watch called The Murder in
the Park where they got a very guilty Anthony Porter,
he was on death row out and out of prison.
These medeal journalism students at Northwest by going back to

(04:03):
the crime scene, the crime scene had been redone. There's
so many things wrong. Uh, they didn't talk to half
the half the witnesses. Then they got the important witnesses
to recant. That's another thing they do in innocent fraud cases.
They just guilt the most like witnessed eyewitnesses. They guilt
them to recant and to get someone out. Uh. So

(04:28):
they got this Anthony Porter out by I won't I
won't ruin it for you, but by by actually railroading
and forcing a false confession out of an innocent man
called all story Simon, and they were they were both.
They both actually got out. But when Anthony Porter went
to get his wrongful conviction money in civil court, the

(04:51):
judge was like, no thanks, he didn't get a dime.
He's like, you did it, which is which is unusual.
Usually they just roll over. I mean in this civil courts,
nobody knows about the case. It's not the prosecutors aren't
to other they're just like they get this very sort
of whitewashed view of the case. Nobody knows about the case.

(05:11):
They put their line on the court. We have a
lower bar of evidence in our civil courts. You just
have to get like fifty one percent more likely than
not to have happened, and they throw their line on
the court. Sometimes, like with Ryan Ferguson, they go from
court to court to court getting turned down. Multiple times,
they find one court that'll say yes, and and then

(05:32):
they get these multimillion dollar payoffs, which when it's written
about in our it's written about with no skepticism. They're
written about as innocent as innocent men who were wrongfully convicted,
no skepticism in our press at all. And and uh,
that's that's how that that's how they clean up with

(05:52):
that with that stuff. But you know, nobody asked like well,
you know, sometimes like in the case of Ryan Ferguson,
his co killer was still in prison. They're like, well,
this is a case of a wrong If he's were
wrongfully convicted, then is accomplice has to be wrongfully convicted too,
But nobody asks like the important questions. It's just kind

(06:15):
of presented and presented to the public. They like to have,
you know, stage these scenes where the killer is getting
out of prison and the it's like jubilation. We had
that with a non saie, like a real you know,
real Hollywood production of when they're getting out and their
killer is crying and people are are celebrating. That's really

(06:37):
key with this movement because people don't want to People
love the feel good story. They don't want to ask like, well,
what if they did it? Uh, maybe they did it.
Maybe there's a family of the victim who's really suffering.
This is not good for I mean, I don't know.
I think you're familiar with the West Memphis three case.

Speaker 2 (06:54):
Absolutely absolutely, yes.

Speaker 3 (06:56):
Yeah, they didn't even tell the victims' families that they
were letting them out on an Alfred play in that case.
I mean that that's another case I would consider it
innocence fraud West Memphis three, Marty Tankliff, Oh gosh, Richard Glossop,
they have a campaign going on for him now, I mean,
there's so many. I've been doing this for eight years
and I've investigated pretty much every massive claim of innocence

(07:21):
that I can find. I haven't found one innocent person yet.
I'm not saying that wrongful convictions don't happen, but of
the big claims of the big of the big celebrated cases,
I haven't found it one case of real wrongful conviction yet.

Speaker 1 (07:36):
So really, okay, So just to go through a few,
you mentioned Ryan Ferguson, you feel that that he had
done it West Mensphters three. Finally, I feel pretty similar
with you on that. What about Amanda Knox.

Speaker 3 (07:53):
Very guilty, very guilty. I mean, there's so much. I
was actually got fooled by that innocence fraud campaign because
I was working at Oprah at the time, and I
got a letter from the friends of Amanda at the
and this is just when it had happened, so it
wasn't really like a famous case. But I got this
letter like dear Oprah, and I'm like the person who's

(08:14):
reading it at Oprah.

Speaker 2 (08:15):
Magnaz.

Speaker 3 (08:16):
There's been this woman and this young woman in Italy,
it's twenty years old, who's gotten arrested for killing her roommate.
But they it's all a big misunderstanding. And then she
had to go back and get underwear because she had
to buy underwear, and they used it against her when
she was buying just like white underwear from dollar bins

(08:39):
on the side of the road, and they said that
this was a sign of her being like a sexually
motivated crime or something. I was totally brought in by
this letter hook line and sinker, and the material in
the US is so poor around that case. You'll never
hear about. You'll hear about the double DA DNA and
knife not so much anymore, which had Amanda. So this

(09:01):
is the murder weapon that was found in her boyfriend's house,
with Amanda's DNA on the handle of the knife and
Meredith Kercher's DNA on the blade. You'll hear about that,
but you won't hear about all the mixed DNA that
lit up under illuminol, i e. Blood. If I don't

(09:22):
put it that way, the Amanda Knox supporters will go crazy.
It's mixed blood, is what it is. But they'll say
it's like mixed like root vegetables. She rubbed root vegetables
on her teeth, at her feet and that's like what
lit up the illuminol. But it's mixed DNA, So mixed
blood of her and Meredith all over the villa, especially

(09:44):
in the in the room of Filamina's room. She had
two other roommates, Filmina and Laura, and that's there's mixed
DNA of Meredith and Amanda, mixed blood in the room
of the stage break in, which is really significant, in
the bathroom, hallway and room of the stage break and

(10:05):
nobody will talk about that. To me, that was really
compelling evidence when I heard of that, and all of
Amanda Knox's consistent lying so when her she said, oh no,
I was, you know, just all night. They She still
doesn't have an alibi to this day, need to this day,
and she's a victed liar.

Speaker 2 (10:24):
She's kind of back in the in the media again more.

Speaker 1 (10:28):
I've seen more posts like, you know, she's out with
a boyfriend and she's getting married married.

Speaker 2 (10:36):
Oh oh, she's married now.

Speaker 3 (10:38):
Really, it's a scary thought, this psychotagic Amanda Box married. Yeah, no,
she's I'm like the last person who I think it's
like me and maybe like a few other people who
just keep on talking about this case because a lot
of other people have like long since moved on to

(10:59):
other case and stop talking about it. But I continue
to talk about it because Amanda Knox will never stop
scrifting off of it. It's now like her career. She's
made millions off of her murder. I feel her murder
of Meredith Kircher that she did with two other people.
That's my opinion on the case, that she's very guilty.

(11:24):
But I was totally brought in and I thought, you know,
I followed it for years, just not having an opinion,
not knowing, going back and forth and sometimes really supporting her.
But there wasn't really good information in this country about
that case for years and years and years. It's much
more in Europe, they had much better reporting. So if

(11:44):
you're getting bad, you know, bad information, of course you're
gonna you know. And Amanda Knox's and to her credit,
Amanda Knox's dad hired a PR agent. I always pronounce
this wrong, but I guess I'll pronounce it wrong again.
Gagerty go googurty Marriott, I think that's closer. For a

(12:07):
million dollars before he ever bought her a lawyer, so wow,
And he said it was the smartest thing they ever did.
So they just propagandized a million dollars worth of propaganda.
They got experts, x FBI people to come out and
say this is a terrible injustice, writers, anyone they could

(12:30):
to talk about it, and then they got politicians and
so eventually what they did is that so she was convicted,
and then the conviction was affirmed, and then it was overturned,
and then it was affirmed again. I think, I believe,
I hope I'm getting that right. And then it goes
up to the Supreme Court and they just throw out

(12:52):
all the DNA evidence of Amanda and raf. But all
the evidence of Rudy Gude, the black man who took
a fast track trial, that somehow is reliable. So all
the evidence against the white defendants is not reliable. But

(13:14):
the black defendants, the same investigators, same lab doesn't make
any sense in that case. So they illegally threw out
all the DNA. That's not the job of the Court
of Castation is to start throwing out evidence. They're just
really supposed to look at the case and see that
it's done correctly. But they just had so much political

(13:34):
pressure on them from America to somehow free this Amanda
Ox that that's how that worked. And she's walking around
talking about her exoneration. Can I talk about her great
exoneration just for a second. So that final court, that
final court, the great exoneration of Amanda Knox that she
likes to talk about. So that final Court of Castation,

(13:56):
after illegally throwing out all the DNA evidence, determined that
she was there at the scene of the crime, and
that she washed Meredith Kircher's blood, the victim's blood, off
of her hands, that it was a crime as done
by multiple attackers. Strangely, Amanda Knox is not looking for
the other real killers because she always says, oh, it

(14:20):
was just Rudy Gooday did it alone. But no quarter
who's ever looked at all the evidence he's ever looked
at this case is determined that this was a crime
done with by one person. There's so many signs of
multiple attackers and I could go through that. But so
that's her great that's her great uh exoneration, that she

(14:41):
was there at the scene of the crime, washed the
victim's blood off her hands and hands and feet too,
not just her hands, right, and that and that she
wrongly accused her boss. So when her alibi, I sort
of got started on this and I didn't finish it.
It's a bad habit I have. But when her boyfriend
pulled her alibi, that's when Amanda Knox falsely accused her

(15:07):
black boss, who she thought would be a stand in
for Rudy Goode because they were both African.

Speaker 2 (15:12):
What do you mean by pulled her alibi? What do
you mean by that?

Speaker 3 (15:17):
So he was there, he broke down and he was talking.
He was talking to the police, and they confronted him
with some inconvenient facts and he said, oh, you're right,
my girlfriend, Amanda told me to tell a bunch of lies,
like you know that we were there all night and

(15:38):
he said you know, uh, and he said no, I
you know, we weren't together. So then they went to
Amanda and said, your boyfriend pulled your alibi. And that's
when she said, my boss, my boss, Patrick Lamumba, who
was very nice to her, ruined his whole life with us.
This is why she's a convicted liar. And even with

(16:00):
changes and laws in Italy, this lying slander conviction still
stands for Amanda Knox. She said, uh, you know, I
was there and I was in the kitchen. I put
my ears to block out Meredith's scream, which other witnesses
heard a loud scream, piercing scream that night. It's a

(16:22):
very important detail that she knew about the murder and
he did it, like and then she wrote a note
and she doubled down on that, but always in a
way that she could have an out, like I'm kind
of confused. I don't know, maybe see these events seemed
dream like, you know, she always was like always playing

(16:44):
with the police, like maybe it happened, maybe it didn't happen,
Like I don't want to fully come to the story,
but I'll write it. I'll say it again that my
boss Patrick Lamonbad did the crime and he so he
sat in jail for two weeks before he got out
on his own alibi. So you know, these progress you know,
she's always going off about these progressive causes and you know,

(17:09):
you know, empathy and you know all these things and
like painting yourself in the best light and her authentic
self and talking in these ways in these interviews. But
she's never really she's never paid Patrick Lumumba the money
she owes him, which was now with interest. She never
apologized to him. She's always blamed the police. She always

(17:32):
blames the police and everyone else for her own actions.
So she's pretty much very much the same personality. All
these killers have the same personality, narcissistic, cruel liars. It's
it's like pretty much same personality, the same thing we
saw with Damien Echols, right, like the police. It was

(17:55):
the police, the police, the police, my terrible treatment in prison,
et cetera, et cetera.

Speaker 2 (18:00):
So yeah, and then it comes.

Speaker 3 (18:02):
Out, are people following this? Am I going too much?
Is it too much? Oh? This is going fast?

Speaker 4 (18:08):
Okay, all right, So moving on from Amanda Knox, what
about the Mendez brothers.

Speaker 1 (18:20):
That being something that's come back. There's been the Netflix
documentary documentary. Uh, you know, obviously they've been in the news.
They're being denied release, it seems like at this point
unless there's been an update recently that I haven't seen.
So what are your thoughts on that and the case,

(18:41):
and also whether or not you feel it's the case.

Speaker 2 (18:45):
Of innocence for it.

Speaker 3 (18:48):
That's I never would have thought that would have become
an innocence fraud case. I mean, they they they admit
they did it. Okay, they admit they did it. Their
defense has always been the abusive excuse, but there's never
been any real evidence that they didn't. They relied on
this one cousin that died of a drug overdose. But

(19:10):
then they said they had this undated letter to this cousin.
But that cousin strangely was the one who visited them
a lot, especially Eric Menendez in prison. Uh so maybe
one could see that they he might have been tailoring
his evidence, giving him a story to tell on the

(19:32):
on the on the on the stand. There's a lot
of I'm not going to go into super detail with
the Menendez brothers. It was the case that got me
interested in true crime because they had lived near me
growing up. They had also been I was a competitive
swimmer when I was younger. They were competitive swimmers. For

(19:54):
some reason, I thought that maybe we had, you know,
been at the same swim meets. I don't know, you know,
I like it before they moved to right maybe I
don't know, that same kind of age, same Yeah, just
was like, you know, I felt like I kind of
understood this, like demanding father. He was a demanding father.

(20:16):
There weren't a lot of people said a lot of
nice things about him, but the evidence is so outrageous,
the story that this new MENUDO member says, So there's
this one journalist I don't I really call him a
propagandas called Robert Rand doesn't like me very much, Like
who uh has been propagandizing for the Menandez brothers for

(20:40):
years and years and years and years and years, very
close with the family, and he's been spinning these things.
If you go back, he went on Megan Kelly's show
an NBC years ago and was like, I have this
evidence and that evidence of a phone call of the
roommate of Lyle Menendez at Princeton before he got kicked
out for cheating, and Megan was like great. Megan Kelly

(21:06):
was like, great, come back on. We'd love to hear
this tape. Never never, never, strangely never came back. We've
never heard this tape ever. This Menudo, I laughed. I
had to laugh through the Menudo. Oh, the Menendez brother
supporters get so angry with me, but I did laugh
through that. For David, it makes no sense, Lyle Menendez.

(21:28):
I mean, I'm sorry. Jose Menendez picked me up in
a limousine and took me to his house when I
was in New York at doing a concert, and then,
you know, preyed on me at his home in Princeton,
New Jersey. Why we wouldn't he get a hotel. He's
got to take you back to his wife and kids

(21:48):
to prey on you in front of his wife and kids.
It's so vague. It's odd and vague, and not the language.
Odd language. I've been through it. I don't believe them.
I don't believe that they were abused in that way.
Do I believe that he was a hard father. Maybe
it's even a terrible father, Jose Menendez. But they were

(22:09):
full grown adults who could have left, who decided not
to leave because they wanted their parents' money, and they
went on a huge spending spree after they shot their
parents brutally. They planned that murder. It was a brutal murder.
They shot their parents. And what we're really seeing in
that case is the result of George Gascone, the legacy

(22:33):
of George Gascone and all these soft on crime prosecutors
that were put in with Open Society, which is George
Soris's of Society's foundation money. They gave a put aside
a whole bunch of money to run former defense attorneys

(22:54):
as district attorneys all over the country, so that what
happened in Los Angeles is that you got a defense attorney,
two defense attorneys talking to themselves in court, and there's
nobody there representing the public or the victim. The concern
of the prosecutor and the defense attorney is entirely the

(23:18):
defendant and how they can help him. So it is
a very dangerous, very dangerous thing that George Gascone did,
with the help of that Open Society Foundation money, is
to really strategize and put all these defense attorneys with
this kind of innocence fraud ideology that they were going

(23:40):
to prosecute the fewest amount of people. Change the laws,
get rid of things like gut enhancements. George Gascone got
rid of the whole department that notified victims' families when
they're loved ones killer came up for parole, to keep
victims' families out of parole hearings because there's such a

(24:02):
powerful voice, so that they could get these killers out
of prison even faster. I mean, they did everything they could.
So the Menendez Brothers is really like the last, I mean,
the last of George Gascon's legacy before he was you know,
hugely defeated, you know, hugely defeated on his you know,

(24:27):
by Nathan Hoffman on his way out. So that's one
of the last things he did, was was work on
releasing the Menendez Brothers. It's it's sick. It's sick, and
it's really been like a TikTok movement, much like Aaron
Reid and other other cases. They've really sold this on TikTok,

(24:48):
gone back and done. I love my favorite thing because
I watched those trials. I watched the first I watched
the first trial. The second trial wasn't broadcast, but I
watched the first trial. But they said like, oh, they
were totally shut out the second trial. They couldn't mention
the abuse. That's not true. They were just limited what

(25:10):
they couldn't mention of the abuse because it was so confusing.
The first trial, it really was like they were both
like defendant and it was almost like a civil trial.
They were like plaintiff and defendant at the same time,
so they were complaining about their abuse and defending themselves
at the same time. It was odd, but there's a

(25:32):
lot of young women in that movement and gay men
who love the way they look or they the way
they looked. They don't like the new And Rosie O'Donnell
that's another as to innocence fraud. Rosie O'Donnell is talking
to Lyle Menendez every night.

Speaker 2 (25:53):
She says, oh, is that what really?

Speaker 3 (25:57):
And Kim Kardashian, who's a big yes, that's right. Yeah.
So I mean they got they had their supporters, just
like a non saaed and Amanda Knox, et cetera, et cetera.
I've not seen one celebrity yet who's advocated for a
victim's family member murder victims family member And on my

(26:20):
eight years of covering this, but they're happy to support
a killer m.

Speaker 1 (26:29):
Just when you're talking about Kardashian and just celebrities, do
you remember Ruben Carter, Oh, yeah, Hurricane, they had Bob
Dylan singing the song all that. I mean, what's your
thoughts on on that?

Speaker 2 (26:45):
Real quick?

Speaker 1 (26:46):
I mean, I'm not very familiar, but based on what
I've seen, it's good possibility he was framed.

Speaker 2 (26:53):
I mean, I don't know, have you done any research?

Speaker 3 (26:56):
No, I have done. Yeah, I can send you some stuff.
It's it's okay, but yeah, I can send you some stuff. Yeah. Dylan, Yeah, No,
He's gotten caught in so many lies. Like there's lies
from like his first book to his second book that
like make no sense. Then there's the contradictions and lies
in that Bob Dylan went and met with him and

(27:19):
and has not sung that song since the seventies. So
I think he had a change of heart, as a
lot of people do. When they talk to Ruben. He
talks a good game, but then when you actually compare
it to the facts of the case, I haven't been
over the facts of that case in a long time.
It's just that he I remember the lights of his

(27:40):
car were very specific. You know, everybody remembers old cars,
the way we used to make old cars, you know,
the way we used to make cars, very specific kind
of tail lights lit up, and then he was pulled over. Yeah, so.

Speaker 2 (27:59):
Well we should we should maybe planned to do. Uh.

Speaker 3 (28:03):
I can review it and get more specific for you.
But I hadn't been over the facts of that case.
I'd never done an episode on that case. I've just
researched it. There's a great website. There's Yeah, there's a
great website on it. And the actual lyrics to the
song are totally untrue too. There's actually a good couple

(28:24):
of videos on YouTube where they go through the lyrics
of Hurricane and do bot it. So yeah, so yeah, all.

Speaker 1 (28:30):
Right, there's uh, there's some meat on that bone for
us that you on That sounds good.

Speaker 3 (28:35):
Are people still interested in that case? I'm shocked.

Speaker 2 (28:38):
I don't know. I mean, I honestly don't know. It's just.

Speaker 1 (28:42):
It just came to my mind, just came to my mind.
So maybe we can dig it out and get it.

Speaker 3 (28:49):
Canadian students got him out, you know, so you know,
my my sister in law who passed away from breast cancer.
I'm sorry, I just happened to think that Canadians are
the most naive culture of people, the sweetest, nicest people,
but there's this deep naivete that runs through the Canadian

(29:12):
culture that it's both endearing and frustrating. That's what I write,
you know, like they're just very they're very sweet, trusting people.

Speaker 2 (29:25):
Uh yeah, it gets.

Speaker 3 (29:29):
You're in Canada, Yeah.

Speaker 2 (29:31):
Yeah, I heard you. Yeah, yeah, I'm in Ontario.

Speaker 3 (29:35):
So you know what I'm talking. Do you think that's unfair?

Speaker 2 (29:38):
Do you think it's that's.

Speaker 1 (29:42):
Speaking from a personal view and then just extrapolating it. Yeah,
i'd say, uh, I'd say that's pretty bang on. Like
I said, I've I get myself into trouble for being
too trusting or too nice, and when things play out,
it's like, damn, you know, maybe I shouldn't have been
so nice and trusting, which is too bad.

Speaker 2 (30:01):
But that's the world.

Speaker 3 (30:02):
That's the world we live in. It's kind of amazing though.
I mean, you know, I don't know, do you know
The Trailer Park Boys? Do you know that show the
Trailer Park Voice or show.

Speaker 1 (30:12):
Of course, I I got to.

Speaker 2 (30:16):
I've met them a couple of times.

Speaker 1 (30:18):
I got to actually when they the very first time
they came to town in Thunder Bay, they brought me
on stage and we got to act out a scene
and oh my god, like I used to love the.

Speaker 2 (30:29):
Trailer Park Boys, Oh my god. So yeah, yeah.

Speaker 3 (30:34):
Right right, So when they came to New York for
their I think it was a stage show, same thing, right,
that probably the same thing you saw they like, they
just put out a thing to all their like fans,
like we're gonna be at a bar. Nobody would do this,
and it was just so Canadian. We're gonna be at
a bar, come by, you know, like come by and
hang out. That's just not for sure, my god, for sure,

(31:00):
Like you're gonna get some crazies. You're gonna get some
crazy there, especially with that show.

Speaker 2 (31:05):
So that's what they're all about, though, right, So, I mean, yeah.

Speaker 3 (31:10):
I know, but it's just try to find an American
version of that, you know, then find that it's it's
that's an endearing, sweet, non consequential unless they you know,
hopefully they don't get hurt doing that, but uh, you

(31:32):
know aspect of it, that's just what I mean, where
it's like really endearing and sweet, but uh, there's other aspects,
like when they're getting involved in Hurricane Carter and that guy, Uh,
his background was so violent. His relationship with women was
really violent. Yeah, it's it's not someone you want to

(31:52):
fool around with. And a lot of people dropped out
of that, that of his supporters and went because of
his own horrible personality, right, h and and they and
there was a whole there's oh yeah, you know we
should talk about it, because there was a whole There

(32:13):
was a whole PR like the the they really maligned
the officer, the police officer in that movie. I don't
know if you've seen the movie. Yes, I like it's
looked like a racist when he was like the most
liberal left wing police officers. Sweet guy. Everyone loved him,
and they shut down Uh they shut down Oh who

(32:38):
is the actor and that helped.

Speaker 2 (32:39):
Me out, Dandy.

Speaker 3 (32:46):
Washington. They shut down his oscar. Yeah, they had an
anti innocent thro PR campaign. They shut down Denzel's oscar
for that because it was so OUTRG like the thing
and that are so outrageous. I mean, anytime they're doing
like just huge claims like you know, well, why did

(33:07):
you can get convicted? Well, I wore black T shirts? Racism,
like they they blame it on a big cause, Like
we know that life doesn't work like that.

Speaker 2 (33:15):
You know.

Speaker 3 (33:19):
That these like these giant things like just sort of
happened to you. I wore black T shirts and I
got arrested, really like I was an outsider. Really like, well,
how does that hold up? Coming back to the West
Memphis three, how does that hold up in a court
of law? How do you charge someone? How do you
do entire two trials for wearing black T shirts and

(33:40):
show a jury excuse me, your honor, they listened to
heavy metal music and wore black T shirts and this
story and the jury I'll vote two juries voted to convict,
and then every appeals court held it up after that.

Speaker 2 (33:54):
Really really, but no, it's satanic panic, right.

Speaker 3 (34:00):
A right satanic panic? How does that work? Even he's
a Satanist. That was the funniest thing to watch, You know,
when you look at people like our friend William Ramsey,
who was at the forefront of this Ed Opperman, It
was the whole reason I talk about, you know, the
subject is because I was a big I was totally

(34:20):
fooled by the West Memphis three with those documentaries. I
don't know were you were you one of the early
people who thought they were guilty or.

Speaker 1 (34:27):
I was still very young around that time. So my
first introduction to them was actually the movie. It seems
like there's always a movie, right and yeah, and then
after the movie is when I started to do some
research and that's pretty much how I looked into bumped

(34:50):
into William Ramsey's stuff. So yeah, but again, like the movie,
just you know, Hollywood gets involved and.

Speaker 3 (35:02):
I'm sorry, didn't go ahead. Now, the documentary filmmakers Sinofsky
and who's the other one that I'm forgetting? Sinofsky and uh,
you know the guy who's done like a zillion of these.
You're gonna tell me in a second, because I'm having

(35:24):
a I'm having a morning of name blockage. I can
see his face in my head.

Speaker 2 (35:32):
These are the directors of the.

Speaker 3 (35:33):
Yeah, of the Paradise Lost documentaries. They said they took
one look at the West at Damien Echols and knew
they were Excuse me, Joe Burlinger, thank you knew they
were innocent. That's some I mean, what is that's some
that's some heavy investigative journalism right there. I just looked

(35:57):
at them. They looked innocent to me, sounds good, but
I mean they know that. You know that that's the
money making way to go is to wrongful conviction. You
can go a million different ways. You're only you know,
the guilty side, you're you're you're stuck with the facts
of the case that never change. But the innocent side

(36:18):
can keep grifting forever, keep going off in a zillion
different directions, go from one grieving step father to the
next grieving stepfather, to side players to the real minutia
of the case that really doesn't isn't important. Just go
off on you know, different tiny little details and tiny

(36:40):
side players and say that they were involved. So yeah,
they can keep grifting off of the story for forever.
So anyway, but with the what was I say that
the early people in the West Memphis three got such
pushback for saying that Damien Echols was the Satanist. They

(37:01):
would just say, oh, ho, you know you religious types
because both of them are Christians, that you're just satanic
panic derangement, satanic panic deragent syndrome. That wasn't really a thing.
But that's basically what they were saying. They would laugh
at him. Yeah he's a werewolf too, blah blah blah,

(37:24):
you guys are crazy. And then he's into Wicca he's
not a Satanist. And then he gets out of prison
on an Alfred plea, which is a guilty play Damien Eckles,
and he has done nothing but written a book about Satanism,
art shows dedicated to Satanism, pictures at Crowley's doorstep. I mean,

(37:49):
everything he's done in his life since being released has
been totally about the cult. He's dedicated the I mean,
they don't deny it anymore now, it's just they've changed strategies.
So now it's, uh, it just it's it's not relevant.

(38:11):
How's the chat doing. Have we lost everybody? Have we
lost everybody?

Speaker 2 (38:16):
Oh no, I think we're going at a perfect pace.

Speaker 3 (38:20):
Okay, lost everybody?

Speaker 1 (38:23):
So what about another one that you know, there's documentaries,
it's been big in the news and all that.

Speaker 2 (38:31):
What about Stephen Avery making a murderer?

Speaker 1 (38:33):
So there were the two cases rad he was put in,
he got out, and then they put him in again
on a different crime.

Speaker 2 (38:43):
And then they're trying to get him out. So do
you think he did both crimes? Do you think? Yeah, okay, yes,
all right, that's interesting because yeah.

Speaker 1 (38:51):
The documentaries do a good job of of that, you know,
painting a whole different picture.

Speaker 3 (38:58):
Yeah, well that first crime they call it, I don't
want to be I'm gonna use sort of YouTube friendly
language and maybe I don't have to, but I just
for you know, the sake of your show. So they
say it was Penny Burnstein was graped, but she was
really attacked, is more like it. And they and both

(39:30):
that alternative suspect that they ended up blaming it on
that they've never pressed any charges. That's a very suspicious
thing where they'll bring up another name and no charges
will ever come on the other person. It'll just sort
of hang there, like the West Wemphis three did with
the stepfathers, especially the second step father. They'll just like

(39:51):
let it hang there, and because they know they're not serious,
it's just a pr kind of stunt. They did that
with Stephen Avery. That was always I'm trying to think
of his name right now. I'm having a real name
blockage this morning. Who was the one that they blame.
I can see his face in my head, the alternate
suspect in that case, that was his on trial, that

(40:14):
was his alternate suspect. Always, thank you, thank you. I
need some help this morning. I'm still drinking my coffee.

Speaker 2 (40:24):
Sorry, Bobby Dassy.

Speaker 3 (40:26):
No, no, no, no, the one they blamed it on. They
blamed the the grape of Penny bernstain on or the
attack of Penny Bernstein on and they say, oh no,
he I mean, they've always made the evidence like much
more suspicious. The only people that really backed up his

(40:46):
alibi were his family. And we know how they roll.
They protect their own yes, yes, and when and so
all of a sudden that hair shows up right, and
it's so this is when DNA technology. I've had the
prosecutor on Ken Kratz multiple times on my show to

(41:09):
talk about it and even talk about So all of
a sudden that hair shows up right and they test
it and it's strangely, the alternate suspect that he used
at his trial with the root on it a pubic hair.
So she wasn't attacked in a way where he ever

(41:31):
had his pants down, So where did that pubic hair
come from with the root on it? And it was
never investigated. So we know that that alternative suspect. I'm
going to sound a little bit tinfoil hattie, but he
was writing the Innocence Project and trying to get out

(41:52):
of his grape cases using them the Wisconsin Innocence Project,
so all they would have had to do is throw
it in his file. That's my feeling on it.

Speaker 2 (42:05):
Huh wow.

Speaker 3 (42:06):
I think there was a manipulation and then that made
the Wisconsin Innocence Project, that made them a lot of
money and a lot of attention and got Stephen Ay out.
Why do you think he's like constantly wants to test
DNA when he knows all the evidence points to him.
Why is he so confident DNA will because it got
him out before. He did it before, and it got

(42:28):
him out before. That's my theory on it. I mean
I've gone into much more detail. I mean, he's kind
of like come and go from my mind these extreme
details of these cases. But I'm not saying that these
wrongful convictions don't happen there. I think there's like Michael Madson, California.
There's like I hope I'm getting his last name correctly,

(42:49):
but there are cases of real wrongful conviction, but not
of these real, big, celebrated cases I have not found.
So they use that to grift and make up a
story for his murder of Theresa Hallback, which all the evidence,
I mean, you have to say that all the evidence
points to him, and that that whole documentary has just

(43:12):
grumbled as far as as far as all the claims
in it have crumbled you, I mean, you has anything
really held up pointing to anyone else in that case.
And Dassy, if you look at the whole interview and
that he's I think even scarier to me than a ray, Yeah,

(43:37):
because like Avery's like you're run of the mill, violent
child and woman, predator killer. He said he was going
to get back at women. He was making like drawing
pictures of dungeons when he was in prison and tortured
dungeons and said he was going to get back at

(43:58):
women when he got out for putting him in prison,
and he did the first chance he got. He was
only out for like a month. And how long was
he out for? Just like not even a year right
before he killed Teresa all that.

Speaker 1 (44:14):
Yeah, I'm sorry, Yeah, I believe it was less than
a year.

Speaker 3 (44:22):
Less than a year. So he's a dangerous predator and
I hope he never gets out. I've interviewed his ex fiancee,
Lynn Hartman, and that's a really fascinating interview. Okay, I'll
encourage people to listen to it. But she got in
a lot of trouble for talking because the Making a
Murderer people were very angry that she was messing with

(44:45):
their money that they were making from from that from
this second documentary and threatened to to to sue her
for a breach of contract. So they know that there's
so much money in these Innocence for Ow documentaries and
they and it's so anybody who goes against the narrative

(45:06):
is going to be public enemy number one. But she
realized that he was, you know, he admitted things to
her that she was a diehard supporter who made or
thinks that he did it. So you can listen to
my interview with her.

Speaker 2 (45:23):
Cool. So yeah, I think.

Speaker 3 (45:25):
It's like, yeah, yeah, it's really good. Yeah, it's a
good it's a good interview. And I've interviewed Ken Kratz
more than more than once, and he's been on my
show in a live stream talking about Karen Reid. Uh.
He's a but I've had two taped interviews with him,
So yeah, uh, and he's talked about that his suspicions

(45:49):
about that hair, So it's not my theory, it's it's his.
It's his suspicions. It doesn't make any sense that it
has the root on it, which is really very rare
that a hare has a root on it. But at
that time, the only way you could test dnate had
to have the bulb on it. Now our DNA testing
has come further, but strangely, there's like this perfect you know,

(46:12):
Pubic care with a root on it. Where did that
come from? Like perfect? And it goes to Gregory Allen.
There you go Gregory Allen aspects name right, it's matching
Gregory Allen, but that was always his alternative suspect. Sorry,
I can get talking. I'm I'm sorry, Am I talking

(46:33):
too much? I can get talking on this subject?

Speaker 2 (46:41):
What about we were mentioning before?

Speaker 1 (46:44):
Adnan said that was very popular with the serial podcast.
Years later, the an HBO documentary came out as well,
So there's been a lot of media surrounding that case.

Speaker 2 (46:59):
Yeah, on that was you obviously.

Speaker 3 (47:03):
My advice to oh yeah, my advice to your audience
is go to the transcripts. They're not releasing the transcripts.
If they're hiding the transcripts. If there's always a reason
why go find the transcripts. The truth is always in
the original trial transcripts. Find them. If you can't find
the trial transcripts, if they're really hidden, look for the

(47:26):
appeal documents from the state and the defense. Look at
both sides. So don't just look at one side. Look
at both sides. Look at the arguments from the state
and the arguments from the defense, and then make up
your mind. But you will not find the whole story
in these podcasts. They left so much out in Cereal

(47:46):
to try to make it an issue of doubt. I mean,
starting off on the idea that it was just an
ordinary day, there's so many things not ordinary about the
day Hamanly went missing. First of all, she went missing.
Your ex girlfriend goes missing. So I mean the fact

(48:07):
that Adnan Sayed had this temporary amnesia that he you know,
or like a sudden onset amnesia or viral amnesia or
some kind of amnesia that he just got should really
should have really set off alarm bells. But Sarah Kane
comes from this ideology where she felt, I believe that

(48:28):
twenty years. They really want to make our prison system
like Europe, where you don't nobody does. And John Fetterman,
who's the governor of Pennsylvania, of the senator in Pennsylvania, sorry,
senator in Pennsylvania, really wants to eliminate life without parole
for everyone, so we don't give life sentences anymore and
cap them off at twenty years like Europe does. Nobody

(48:51):
does like more than twenty or thirty years for even
the most heinous crimes in Europe. So they want to
make our system more like that. So ad Noan sayed
that time, what had he done? Sixteen seventeen years something
like that. They felt like that's enough for strangling Hayman
Lee to death with his, as he says, his own
bare hands. They felt that that was enough. So it's

(49:14):
not that I feel that Sarah Kanig, who made Cereal,
thought he was innocent or had doubt. She just wanted
him out. They believe this kind of what's called brain
overclaimed syndrome, this idea that their brains aren't fully developed,
that they're not responsible for their own behavior because they're
too young. Like that, they just like or don't judge

(49:34):
them for the worst mistake they've ever made, like plotting
out this crime to the detail. Giving your friend Jay
Wilds your cell phone your car is just some kind
of mistake that you stumble upon, like whoops, like falling
or losing your keys or something. Don't judge them for
the worst mistake they've ever made. Kim Kardashian says that

(49:58):
they believe that they're just little guys caught up in
the system and that the real killer is the state.
And this ties in with I mean, we killed the
state kills people via the death penalty, which is very
very different, you know, but they consider like the awesome
power of the state. These are little guys, and they
will make these things also to get rich, and they're

(50:21):
dark personalities themselves, a lot of these journalists and filmmakers,
so they'll side up to advance themselves. They will promote
the innocence of a very guilty killer and revictimize the
victim's family in a way that you know, they don't
really recover from. You know, first they get victimized by

(50:45):
the murderer and or get sentenced to a life sentence
of grief by the killer, and then they're revictimized by
these public campaigns for their love one's killer. That makes
the loved one their loved one totally goes their loved

(51:05):
one and makes the killer the victim, and the victim
is forgotten altogether. It's really a sick, sick, sick six
six six sick uh enterprise. So yeah, when he got

(51:26):
out a NONSI ed. I interviewed the Haymanley's family's lawyer.
The way that they got him out is very much
on the back of the DA was she was leaving
on charged with fraud charges, which eventually she got convicted of.

(51:48):
So they went to her in secret and the judge
in secret. All met in secret. It's called an in
camera meeting, which it sounds like the opposite of what
it is. It's they all meet and there's a record
of that's weird. Isn't that weird? That's weird, and they
all agreed to release a non syed based on really

(52:10):
ridiculous evidence. One of the pieces of evidence was the
DNA on Hayman Lee's shoes, So that's the victim's shoes,
not on her feet even, but the shoes in the
back of her car. And one of the things you
do when you take a forensic class is you test
the bottom of your shoes to see how incredible, how much,

(52:33):
how incredible it is that you pick up so much
DNA that there's DNA everywhere, and so they can keep
going forever on that DNA that she's picked up walking
around on the soles of her shoes. The other piece
of DNA was a new suspect, which is a non

(52:54):
Sayed's mentor's wife talking about a non sed harassing Hayman
Lee before the murder. So one of the new suspects
that they released ad no On Sayed on was Adnan
Sayed himself. It would be hilarious if it weren't so
sad for the Lee family and for justice and fairness

(53:17):
and in general. I mean, it's just outrageous. And the
reason that that conviction got reinstated and he's still a
convicted murderer wasn't overturned is because that they violated. They
wrote Hayman Lee's brother an email and said here's the

(53:39):
zoom link. They didn't tell him that they were letting
out a non Sayed and he was always used to
the das looking after his and his family's interests, the
victim's interest. But now it's this new open society foundation,
soft on crime DA whose total interest is with non

(54:00):
si ed and his family. That he said, you can
come ons, we're gonna have a hearing, and you can
show up on zoom if you wanted. And when he
finally got wind of what it was, he was in California,
he couldn't get there in time, get a ticket in time,
and so it was considered a huge violation of victims' rights,
the way that the judge conspired with the prosecutor who's

(54:24):
really like a defense attorney, and the actual documents that
released him were written by the Innocence Project, the kids
at the I think that's my theory, the kids at
the Innocence Project class, because it's so poorly written, in
oddly written the document that of all these new suspects

(54:46):
and stuff they used to get him out, that the
DA used to vacate his conviction, so his conviction was reinstated,
but they gave him time serve. So he's now a
convicted murderer teaching kids Georgetown University, next to Marty Tanklift,
whose convictions were overturned on technicalities for killing his adopted parents,

(55:08):
Arlene and Seymour tank Clift when they decided when Pormo
decided not to recharge Tanklift, he said, Tanklift, he should
no way should be considered innocent and deserves no money.
That didn't stop him from getting I think thirteen point
three million something.

Speaker 2 (55:25):
Like, oh my god.

Speaker 3 (55:27):
Yeah, he suit everybody, and now he's teaching. And he
also represented Keith Raneri, the Nexium cult guru. He was
his lawyer so on his appeal. So, I mean, he's
done nothing, but he loves the system and loves to
get over on the system, the system that got him.

(55:49):
He spent his time getting all the people that got
him and manipulating the legal system. He said. When he
was in prison, he told his prison mates, you know,
I'm gonna be just like Klaus land Beulow. I'm going
to get out. There's gonna be no evidence against me.
You know, I put the gloves that I wore when
I stabbed my father and mother to death and the

(56:13):
gas can because gas eats up gloves, very leather gloves,
very nicely, and there'll be no evidence left that they
can get me on. And I'm gonna have fun, son
and women. I'm gonna be rich. I'm gonna get out
and be rich. And he's right. I mean, he predicted
it correctly. So he used the same PR agent the

(56:34):
West Memphis three US, Lonnie Surrey when he was in
prison to spin the media, and that was a big
part of why they chose not to reach him. Also
because the laws had changed and they couldn't They could
only retry him on the murder of his father, not
his mother Arlene. So yeah, it's amazing, right, Yeah, it's

(56:58):
an amazing grift.

Speaker 2 (57:00):
Yeah.

Speaker 3 (57:03):
I mean it's kind of like a game. Anytime I
hear like these these PR campaigns for killers, I say,
what are they leaving out? And I go to the
original documents whatever I can find online of the original
trial documents and find out all the stuff that they're
leaving out. And the stuff that they're leaving out is

(57:23):
huge co defendants confessions of you know, it's incredible eyewitnesses,
you know, so much stuff of actual items of clothes
that they wore during the crime, the murder weapon in
their home. So the Innocence Project will come out with

(57:43):
like ten things you should know about a case. But
they're leaving out like the really serious evidence against and
that there Sometimes they take a kernel of something and
either exaggerated or don't give you like the full context
of it, or yeah, like for example, you know, for example,
there's just a case I was investigating of a guy

(58:04):
on death row and they say, they said, the main
witness against him lied on the stand to get the reward,
but he sued for Brady violation. It was shown that
this woman knew nothing about this reward that the prosecutor,

(58:26):
three years after his trial, uh, applied to get this,
you know, five thousand dollars for this woman, you know,
three years after the trial, and she knew nothing about
it at the time, you know. So it's a little
odd that that that she would lie on the stand

(58:50):
in all this incredible detail that that brought in the
details of the co defendants and the and the convicted
killer for this means five thousand dollars. But they're they're
going around and they're selling people on it.

Speaker 1 (59:07):
Lots of grifting, eh, there's a lot of Yeah, it's
a big lots of money flying around in a lot
of these cases, Like what about the Tiger King case.

Speaker 2 (59:17):
Do you look into that one that.

Speaker 3 (59:19):
I don't know a lot of that I love animals.
I'm a big cat lover. If anybody's listened to me knows,
I had a hard time watching that because just of
the abuse of animals I find very difficult. And I
know it doesn't make any sense that I cover all
these murderers, and I just had a hard time watching that.

(59:39):
I really don't like people that keep exotic animals. I
find them very narcissistic. And I didn't I wasn't. Yeah,
I had a hard time with that. The Tiger King,
I know there I liked. Actually, strangely, I like the
film he I think this is the same filmmaker. Correct

(01:00:02):
me if I'm wrong. Who did a film about women
who keep monkeys?

Speaker 2 (01:00:08):
Oh, I don't know.

Speaker 3 (01:00:10):
I like that. It was called Monkey Love. I thought
that was actually a more It was like a portrait
of narcissism of these women who keep monkeys, and they're
just the costs that nobody can keep up with these costs.
They're really cute when they're little, and then they get
to be enormous and just the cost of keeping them.

(01:00:31):
And they're so smart and they and they get and
sometimes they get very aggressive, like the woman. Do you
remember the case of the women who kept that monkey
that or that chimpanzee, and it attacked her neighbor brutally,
and she had to have a face transplant.

Speaker 2 (01:00:49):
Okay, that's all right.

Speaker 3 (01:00:52):
And she she didn't learn her lesson. She adopted, secretly
adopted a champ after this whole thing happened, after she
was feeding it all sorts of different pills to keep
it docile.

Speaker 2 (01:01:08):
Oh my god.

Speaker 3 (01:01:09):
And then and so that they had to kill it.
That's how they all end these chimp stories, with these
when you keep a chimp for too long, when they
grow up and they get strong and go through puberty
and you know, don't have enough simulation and are living
in an unnatural life where there is their animals and they're
not people. They don't strangely get a lot of satisfaction

(01:01:33):
for being dressed up like human beings and yeah, you know,
treated like babies. So she she adopted a secretly adopted
a chimp before she passed on, but she kept it
in secret. God, I mean, she didn't learn a lesson.
I mean that woman.

Speaker 2 (01:01:54):
Yeah, I mean I love animals as well.

Speaker 1 (01:01:57):
I you know, I have a dog and a cat
in the house, and I'm personally though, my thing is turtles.
I love turtles, tortoises. I have two turtles and a tortoise,
And like, as someone who loves animals and loves my animals,
it's like, I know that they're going to grow bigger
and bigger over time, so I know that I'm going

(01:02:18):
to have to accommodate that. There'll be costs involved, So
I need to I need I need to know that
and understand that and know how to properly take care
of them after they grow up.

Speaker 2 (01:02:27):
But yeah, a lot of these people.

Speaker 1 (01:02:29):
That are buying these exotic animals, even people that just
don't regular animals. It seems a lot of people just
they don't know how to take care of them properly
or don't want to take care of them properly. And
it's like, well, what were you thinking when you bought
the animal?

Speaker 3 (01:02:44):
You know, right, they don't they don't want to put
in the time to train a dog or train a
you know whatever. It takes time. So what do you
think the difference between people who keep turtles, Because they're
really amazing turtles. They're like this pre like they're like
little dinosaurs or something. Well, they're kind of amazing. I

(01:03:06):
grew up in the country. So I just remember, it's
really a great detail, getting very close to you know,
just sweet, they're always sweet, or picking them up in
the middle of the road and making sure that they're
ye help them. What do you think the difference is
that people who keep turtles Is the difference between people

(01:03:26):
who keep dogs or cats or something.

Speaker 1 (01:03:31):
Oh, I don't know, to be honest with you, maybe
perverted or you know what, I don't know, it's it's
much more rare. It's much more rare to find people
with turtles, especially in this city.

Speaker 3 (01:03:52):
I mean there's often cuddly you know, you can't like
a cuddle turtle.

Speaker 1 (01:03:57):
Yeah, I mean, like I guess the tortoise, you kind
of can because they're dry.

Speaker 2 (01:04:04):
But yeah, I get, I get what you mean.

Speaker 1 (01:04:09):
But I mean even though I don't, I mean I
could still pick them up and take him for walks
and bring him outside and all that. But I mean
I just get so much joy out of just watching them,
and they helped me.

Speaker 2 (01:04:20):
Calm down and they relax my mind.

Speaker 1 (01:04:22):
And but yeah, as for differences in the people that
own them, I mean, I'm not one hundred percent sure.
I mean I do know what's his name, Owen Schroyer
from people who used to be on Infra Wars.

Speaker 2 (01:04:40):
He has a turtle.

Speaker 1 (01:04:41):
I know he has a turtle, and I mean, I
don't think he's very introverted.

Speaker 2 (01:04:45):
But yeah, I don't know, I have to look into that.

Speaker 3 (01:04:50):
I'm not an They're amazing. They're amazing, but it just
doesn't seem very rewarding to Actually, I don't know for
my view of a cat.

Speaker 2 (01:05:00):
Oh my god, on it, it's still rewarding. Like it's
like even just feeding them every day is rewarding.

Speaker 1 (01:05:06):
Because especially the tortoises, because instead of just you know, yeah,
you PLoP down a plate of food for the dog
or the cat and they eat it up. It's like
you want to watch the meat it because it's just
so cute.

Speaker 3 (01:05:17):
And they, oh, they're very cute when they eat.

Speaker 1 (01:05:21):
Oh my god, when they do everything. Pretty much, that's what.
That's one thing I love about them.

Speaker 3 (01:05:27):
Amazing looking. I'll say that they're incredible looking. Yeah, just
the whole.

Speaker 1 (01:05:32):
Yeah, they're very graceful, very calm usually.

Speaker 3 (01:05:39):
I don't know. What did you think of Tiger King?
Did you? Were you on the free Tiger King bandwagon?

Speaker 2 (01:05:49):
Not necessarily, I mean I did.

Speaker 1 (01:05:52):
I did think like maybe there was something there, but
just like any Netflix documentary, there's always stuff left out, right.
I did interview John Phillips, his current attorney. I kind
of would like to talk to him again to know
what's going on. But yeah, I don't know. I mean,

(01:06:13):
it seems like he pissed a lot of people off
who could have had a hand in making sure that
he got a guilty verdict.

Speaker 2 (01:06:25):
But I mean.

Speaker 1 (01:06:29):
Kind of like you were saying, don't don't blame someone
for their worst mistake or whatever. Well, look at watching
this Tiger King show. You see a whole milange of
characters that are you know, into any everything like drugs,
drug dealing, you know, distortion, abusing animals, probably sex crimes, maybe.

Speaker 2 (01:06:53):
Probably different fraud. It's all sort of different.

Speaker 3 (01:06:56):
Relationship with that was a red flag to me. With
that young boy who ended at all was a big
red flag to me.

Speaker 2 (01:07:03):
He shot the guy that I accidentally shot himself in
the head.

Speaker 3 (01:07:07):
Was it?

Speaker 5 (01:07:07):
Oh?

Speaker 3 (01:07:08):
Was it accidental? For some reason, I haven't seen it
in a long time. It was.

Speaker 2 (01:07:12):
I believe it was the way that's how they portrayed it.

Speaker 1 (01:07:15):
And because apparently he was just playing around with a
gun and he didn't know it was loaded.

Speaker 2 (01:07:21):
He was probably really high, so that help.

Speaker 3 (01:07:25):
I mean that that relationship when you're when you're with
anyone with any any kind of huge age difference, that's
a big red flag of a power and control, course
of control. You know. It's just I know people are
going to say, my uncle married my blah blah blah.
There was a thirty year age difference and they had
a great maybe, So I just don't really believe. I

(01:07:47):
believe there's an element there. It's just not a fair
relationship to the younger person. It's there's always an element
of power and control that you have over someone when
you're when you're there's such a big difference. So yeah,
I think that was a big red flag to me,
and what I know about abuse with people who look

(01:08:09):
for younger people like.

Speaker 1 (01:08:10):
Corecked right, and yeah, there seemed to be signs pointing
to maybe this kid didn't necessarily want to be in
the relationship, or maybe it was conflicted with his own
sexuality and is you know, he's still growing up and

(01:08:32):
you know, developing too. I'm sure, right, he was pretty young, right, so.

Speaker 3 (01:08:38):
In the kind of financial security he could offer someone
like that, it's really just not equal, right and drugs.
It's not equal. It's Hey, have you seen the the
letter that Woody Allen wrote Epstein that's come out? Have
you seen that?

Speaker 2 (01:08:55):
No? Is that recently?

Speaker 3 (01:08:56):
I have a scoop for you on that I find
really interesting about.

Speaker 2 (01:09:00):
So.

Speaker 3 (01:09:02):
My dad was a writer and he was friends with
Woody Allen when he was making, you know, really early on,
like when he was making everything you wanted to know
about sex and take the money and run. They would
go out to lunch together and he would tell my
dad classes for your friends and family. That was his advice,

(01:09:25):
which I think is class like class, being classy, your
classy behavior, you save it for your friends and family,
which I find ironic. The way that he married Sunny
and I also have a connection because my famly, I

(01:09:47):
was very close with Dori Previn, who was married to
Andre Previn. She was like a mentor of mine when
I was growing up, and Mia Pharaoh stole Andre from
her and then stole her style and the way she dressed,
the way she decorated Dory Previn. There's a documentary that's fantastic.

(01:10:08):
I hope everybody sees it, and I hope it gets
I just was shown here in New York for like
one day or a couple of days. It was actually
one day in a film festival. But she's the writer.
She wrote the theme to the Valley of the Dolls.
Her name is Story Previn. She passed on I think
in two thousand February Valentine's Day, twenty and twelve. But

(01:10:33):
she was a brilliant, brilliant, troubled woman and a very
prolific songwriter. And Mia Farroh she was married to Andre
Previn and Mio Faroh. Then they was friends with Dori
and Andrea and then stole Andre from her and married

(01:10:54):
him and adopted kids with him. So and Andre Prevince
said to him, said to Dory, as crazy as you were.
Because Dorry was famously crazy. She was very out about
her problems with mental illness and her she wrote about
her times and mental hospitals. He said, as crazy as
you were, you were nothing compared to how crazy Mia

(01:11:19):
Farrer was. So when Mia Faraoh started uh dating Woody Allen,
I would get I would hear things about, you know,
the relationship from Dory et cetera, et cetera, and Woody
Allen used Dory Previn's record as his defense and said, oh,
Mia Farroh, because he knew that Mia Farah stole the

(01:11:40):
way Dory dressed, stole the way she decorated from her,
really stole her aesthetic. And she said, oh, she made
up this story and she based it on Dory Previn's
autobiographical song. And that was his defense, one of his defenses.
That's stupid, and I actually like kind of believe that
growing up. But then I actually looked at the evidence

(01:12:01):
against Woody Allen where there's like they said, have you
ever been up in an attic? And he was like, no,
never because story Prevan wrote a song with my daddy
in the attic and he plays his clarinet when I despair,
and Alan played the clarinet when Alan said, look see
me and Pharaoh just got this from Doris song. You know,

(01:12:22):
never happened, but we happened to know that there was
babysitters that day with Dylan, who knew that they were missing.
He said, I never went into the attict. I would
never go there. I'm claustrophobic. And then they found his
hair on a painting in the attic and they're like,
what's your hair in the attic on this painting, and
he's like, well, maybe I did just poke my head around.

(01:12:45):
So so what am I going to say about this letter?
I just find it very interesting. We know that psychopaths
talk about food a lot. The entire letter is like
all about food and how he disturbed his guests food.
And I have a book from inscribed to my Dad
from Woody Allen where he's like, you know, to my

(01:13:09):
dad's name, a great writer, but a terrible of orderer
of food. You know, three three what do you call it?
Three appetizers? Question mark exclamation put Woody, you know, something
like that. It's exact. But that's like the gist of

(01:13:30):
how it's signed. But I mean it's all about food,
this thing. I mean, how much more obsessive. I mean,
you can read it to your audience. It's all about food.
And we know that psychopaths talk about food more than
any other subject. I mean it's just bizarre food and sex.

Speaker 2 (01:13:52):
Interesting. It's like George Costanza food and sex.

Speaker 3 (01:13:57):
I mean read, Isn't that the weirdest letter? Is? That?

Speaker 1 (01:14:01):
Is?

Speaker 3 (01:14:02):
That? Is? Wow? Interesting? He's like, I brought my wife
and he's talking about sugny there too. Yeah, It's like
I brought my wife and you've seen pictures. You've seen
that famous picture where they're walking in New York, sune
Epstein and Woody Allen. So you know, growing up, I

(01:14:25):
really thought that Woody Allen was unfairly because I was
so I just loved Dory so much, and and I
knew how crazy Mia Farrow was. Right, But I've come
to the conclusion that pleases no one, which is that
they're both very sick. And I think that Woody Allen

(01:14:47):
did it, and that Mia Pharaoh is very sick. And
I don't think either one of them our good parents.
Seems that like in that case, you have to say
that either Mia Pharaoh is wonderful and like a saint Theresa.
I think there's something very sick when these celebrities adopt
all these children. There's something very wrong with that. Like
if they adopted as many dogs as they did children,

(01:15:09):
we'd say they were a hoarder. But if they adopt
kids and they are rich, we go, oh, they're amazing.
Is incredible, right, So I just happened to think she's
and know that she's not a well person. But I
don't think either is Woody Allen, I thought, I don't know,

(01:15:32):
did you watch the documentary?

Speaker 2 (01:15:34):
Which one are you referring to.

Speaker 3 (01:15:37):
The HBO documentary that.

Speaker 1 (01:15:40):
Came a couple of years ago versus Yes it was
a while back, but yes I did. Yeah, I think
we're for for this in this case where there's smoke,
there's fire, and there's a lot of smoke here.

Speaker 3 (01:15:57):
Yeah, I think so too. I just think the way
that he got with he doesn't see anything wrong with
the way he prayed on signy.

Speaker 1 (01:16:04):
I mean, yeah, definitely sense of entitlement and like what
this is? There's nothing wrong with this?

Speaker 3 (01:16:12):
And oh, I mean you and you could do like
I could do like five episodes or at least a
couple episodes on just his interview with sixty minutes, I
think it was. He never really denies it outright. He
always says like, why would I pick this time to
be a child molester?

Speaker 2 (01:16:33):
Right that you.

Speaker 3 (01:16:35):
Just got caught. We're not saying that you just like
you know what I mean, you just got caught. We
don't know if you've lested children before this or after this.
You just got caught this time. We don't know your history.
Why would I choose this time when I'm in a
contentious blah blah blah, like I love when when this
is something that criminals do, they ask questions, why would

(01:16:58):
I why would I do? Know? You tell us why
you would do it? We don't know. We just know
the evidence goes to you. We don't know all the motivations,
and they know that we don't know all the motivations
or the mechanics of it, like with Amanda Knox, like
I don't know exactly. I know the prosecutors had a
theory because of you know, certain pieces of evidence, and

(01:17:20):
lack of defensive wounds and Amanda Knox's size shoe print
in Meredith Kircher's blood on her pillow, and her women's
size fingerprints, bruises on Meredith Kircher's arm, that there was
a woman strangely around the size of Amanda Knox at
the scene of the crime, and other things, you know,

(01:17:40):
and other things. But and Amanda's DNA, you know, and
Amanda Knox was bleeding at the same time as Meredith Kircher.
But we don't know exactly how it happened. We don't
know exactly why it happened. But they they turn it
around on us to fill in things that we just

(01:18:01):
couldn't know. We just couldn't know all the all the motivations,
all the all the little tiny details, if they're not
in the public domain or there, or they weren't discovered,
we just can't. We can't know it.

Speaker 2 (01:18:18):
All right, Well, let's get into Karen Reid now for
a little bit.

Speaker 3 (01:18:25):
I'm talking for a long I've given you a long time.
Oh my lord, right, we're going for a long time.
Oh no, not that long, just an hour.

Speaker 6 (01:18:33):
Okay, Yeah, I'm good, good, beautiful, okay, so oh sorry,
one second, just unplugged mine.

Speaker 3 (01:18:47):
It's the turtle. Turtles unplugging things.

Speaker 2 (01:18:52):
My bad. Yeah, freaking turtle. Yeah they're not. I mean
they're not.

Speaker 1 (01:18:58):
They're not big enough yet to where I can h that,
to where I can let them run around the house yet.
But they're getting there. They're getting there.

Speaker 3 (01:19:13):
Yeah, I'm gonna piss. I'm gonna piss everybody off. So
I'm gonna piss the Woody Allen supporters off with that opinion,
and the Miya Pharaoh supporters. There's very few of us
who go they're both crazy. They're both crazy and shouldn't
be around children. Both of them like Oh, sorry about
Have you ever seened the list of the way that

(01:19:35):
Mia Pharaoh adopted kids, all her adoptions? No, that's crazy.
I have it on my Facebook. You can go to
my Facebook. I made a list because I had to
when I was doing an episode I think with William Ramsey,
like I had to make a list. It was like
adopted this, you know, had this kid, adopted this kid?

(01:19:56):
You know, adopted this kid, this kid? And two of
them have you know in one you know one of
you know, one ended at all and one of illness.
You know, they haven't, they haven't flourished. And there's a
great book by the Nanny that I read how she

(01:20:16):
treated her adopted children different than you know, her biological
Did she just have that one child or did she
have more than that one biological child? With Woody, who's

(01:20:37):
so who you know has uncovered the Weinstein stuff. Oh
it's so brilliant. Who seemed to have Woody Allen's high
I Q.

Speaker 2 (01:20:47):
I just look in here, it's just three of.

Speaker 3 (01:20:51):
Three of her children. Yeah, she treats very differently than
her adopted Vietnamese children. And yeah, disturbing, I you know,
as someone who grew up like you know, my I
don't think any of these actors, directors should have kids,

(01:21:14):
anyone involved in Hollywood should have kids. They're too narcissistic.
I take that position.

Speaker 1 (01:21:23):
So there's Ronan Pharaoh, sorry interrupted, Moses Farrell, that's right.

Speaker 3 (01:21:32):
No, isn't Moses adopted?

Speaker 2 (01:21:38):
Or is it? Is it Tam Pharaoh?

Speaker 3 (01:21:41):
No, that's adopted adopted? Is Ronan her only real or
didn't she have twins with Andre? Or did she adopt
twins with Andre?

Speaker 1 (01:21:52):
So we got Pharaoh has fourteen children, four biological ten adopted.

Speaker 3 (01:22:00):
Eh, and then she changed all their names, which is
really disturbing after the Woody Allenson, you think she changed
their first names?

Speaker 2 (01:22:13):
Hm hmm.

Speaker 3 (01:22:15):
So that's why it's also confusing.

Speaker 1 (01:22:20):
So Ronan Pharaoh adopted, and this is adopted, adopted, adopted,
adopted cheese.

Speaker 5 (01:22:27):
I don't know, uh hm hm, I don't know. I'm
not there, Jesus, they have so many children.

Speaker 3 (01:22:47):
Yeah, right. Isn't it shocking when you actually see it
written down through it?

Speaker 2 (01:22:52):
Yeah?

Speaker 5 (01:22:52):
Holy cow?

Speaker 3 (01:22:54):
Yeah it doesn't here.

Speaker 1 (01:23:00):
Five children, including Ronan Pharaoh, Moses Farrell, Moses adopted though, Yeah,
I'm not finding.

Speaker 3 (01:23:14):
Roan is her only that's the I think I may
be wrong.

Speaker 1 (01:23:20):
So Dylan also its Dylan adopted to yep, okay, so
maybe it is just brought.

Speaker 3 (01:23:30):
Wow.

Speaker 1 (01:23:31):
Yeah, it would be interesting to see what that all
happens with that.

Speaker 3 (01:23:37):
And his original name was Satchel after Satchel Paige when
he was born, and so then he changed it to
Ronan after the Holes. They all changed their names, which
you know, gry Previn said at the time, now that
now the kids have nothing meaning, not even their name after.

Speaker 1 (01:23:54):
Now celebrity now celebrity children they all go trans too,
So that's something watch out for.

Speaker 3 (01:24:02):
Yeah, I've been talking about that issue from a woman
from a feminist kind of I mean, I don't know,
I don't even consider myself a feminist, but for lack
of a better word, from a feminist perspective, since twenty sixteen,
I was like, where were all these people in twenty
sixteen it was so controversial. You know, if you changed
the name, like the legal meaning of women to include men,

(01:24:23):
it's going to be very bad for women. And we saw,
you know, the consequences in America. It was very very
bad for women, losing our scholarships. Title nine got totally
turned on, It's totally destroyed and we knew it was
going to go that way, and you know, and I

(01:24:45):
was being you know, lectured that I was a terrible
person and I wasn't compassionate enough. But you know, I
had gone to Sarah Lawrence with like one of the
first you know, uh, with a trans guy. You know,
a guy who you know, we had a trans student
was a friend of mine. But the difference back then
was that we understood that transmit that you were, that

(01:25:09):
he was biologically male. He wasn't asking me to see
him as his femaleness as the same thing as biological women.
So that was very different. You know, that was very
different when they started saying that trans women are women.
I mean, it doesn't even make any sense. And you

(01:25:31):
wouldn't even have to be trans they were really women,
they wouldn't have trans, right, So it doesn't really even
make any sense. And the whole sterilizing of children, it's
very but I was, you know, you know, women were
really first one's talking about it. We had to meet
in secret. Antifa, you know, death threats. I still get

(01:25:56):
accused of, you know, some kind of phobias. I find
it funny or right wingness or whatever, but it's dangerous
for women, you know, very dangerous for women to invite
men into spaces where we were vulnerable and pull our
pants down and we're or you know, women were getting

(01:26:17):
you know, going up against men and boxing getting brain injuries,
and no boo about it except a bunch of feminists.
I mean, no one was talking about it except a
bunch of women. And then men kind of got I'm
very happy any man who wants to talk about it,
but they're kind of getting credit for being the pioneers.
They really weren't on the issue. I'm telling you that,

(01:26:41):
except for I mean, uh, you know, Kelly j Keen
was was key. She was you know, she was early
she was talking about it early on certainly, but you know,
Matt Walsh, all those people, those right wingers had glommed
onto it later. Anyway, the move on.

Speaker 1 (01:27:01):
Yeah, okay, sounds good. Okay, So no, that's okay. We
talked about everything on the show, so that's cool. So
last kind of the last topic, let's get into Karen Reid.
You know, like I said, as someone who doesn't have

(01:27:21):
any knowledge on the case, so can you give me
a rundown? And what's I mean.

Speaker 2 (01:27:26):
The status of the case what's going on now? And yeah,
all that kind of stuff.

Speaker 3 (01:27:32):
Okay, Well, Karen Reid was a adjunct finance professor who
was dating a police officer named John O'Keefe. They had
gone out. It was the night before a second biggest
storm in that area. They went out for drinks with

(01:27:52):
friends and they went from one bar to the next,
and then after the bar is closed, they went over
to John O'Keeffe's. Karen Reid drove after drinking quite a bit,
but she seems to be able to All the information
I have is that she can drink and drink and
drink and it doesn't really touch the sides with her.

(01:28:15):
So she drove John O'Keeffe over to their friend's house
just to have a little It wasn't even a get together,
just kind of to hang out after the bars closed
and the home of the Alberts and who were also detective,

(01:28:40):
and Karen Reid was seen in front of the thirty
four fair view of the home Albert home, their hand
on the wheel and and she reversed to John O'Keefe.

(01:29:02):
They obviously had a fight. John O'Keeffe was carrying her
drink from the bar, mixed drink and she reversed into him,
going twenty four up to speeds of twenty four miles
an hour with her foot seventy five percent down on
the gas pedal and left him to die in the
snow and one of the worst blizzards. And instead of

(01:29:25):
saying at this, so the next morning, she wakes up
her niece. John O'Keefe was taking care of his sister
had died a sister, Kristen, had died of brain cancer,
and then Kristen's husband had died of a heart attack.
So these two children, Kaylee and Patrick, were left totally orphaned,

(01:29:49):
and he took them to care for them. As he
calls the fun uncle in his home who was caring
for Kaylee and Patrick. Patrick was over at a friend's house, Callie.
She wakes up her niece, who I believe was like
thirteen years old, wakes her up at I want to say,

(01:30:11):
four point thirty in the morning, and shakes her and
then leaves the room and then comes back and says,
I don't know where John was. I left him at
the bar and he didn't come home. Do you have
So then Jen McCabe and all these other people, So

(01:30:31):
instead of calling nine one one, she starts involving all
these other people to come look for him, and she
pretends to be hysterical and that she doesn't know where
he is, but she doesn't also doesn't look for him,
so she's calling around and then she gets to the
scene she sees him in a pile of snow. She says,

(01:30:51):
like a buffalo on the prairie day. First, they go
back to his home and she meets people out, she
goes out looking for him. Then they go back to
the house, to John o'keef's house. So after she runs
him over, she doesn't go to her home. She goes
to John O'Keefe's home and starts plotting out how she's
going to get away with us before she wakes up

(01:31:11):
the kniece, so she's I believe she was up most
of the night plotting how she was gonna, you know,
cover this up. She also calls him multiple times, swearing
at him, calling him a pervert, saying, no one knows
where you are. Where she clearly just dropped him off
and clipped him, so she didn't hit him like full on,
She kind of clipped him. It's a very unusual run over,

(01:31:32):
and that the defense exploited, so she went on. So
they go to the back to the seat. First they
go to his house to look for him and Karen Reid.
It's a very important detail. It doesn't mean it's not
in everything detail, but it's important detail. John O'Keefe was
a neat freak and insisted everyone take off their shoes

(01:31:55):
when they went to their home. And Karen Reid goes
into his home, runs into his home, and the friends
are taking off their shoes because they know the rule.
But Karen Reid runs ahead and doesn't take off her shoes,
almost as if she knew he was dead and that
rule of taking off the shoes didn't matter anymore. She's
also telling people he's dead, he got hit by a plow,

(01:32:17):
things like that. And then they go back to thirty
four Fairview, and no one sees John o'keeff anywhere, but
she sees him on the side of the lawn, in
the dark corner of thirty four Fairview lawn. She sees
him under a pile of snow. No one else can
see him. You could barely see in front of your face.
It's snowing so hard. It's one of the worst storms

(01:32:39):
and history of Massachusetts second worst storm in Massachusetts history.
But she sees them there and she says, let me out,
let me effin out of the car, and she runs
on him, jumps on him. Everyone seems to know that
he's passed, but Karen Reid has no fear of a corpse,
jumps on him, lifts up her sure, lifts up his shirt,

(01:33:01):
and starts writhing on him to warm him up, but
never clears his airwaves or does nine one one, or
does CPR, or calls nine one one. The people with
her call nine one one. The people with her help
as she's running around screaming, pretending to be hysterical, and
which gets her section, so she never has to answer

(01:33:22):
questions to the police. Strangely, so these are the kind
of very loose facts of the case, and she's put
on so instead of taking responsibility. When she realized that
her first, her lawyer, David Ynetti says that it was
a terrible accident and she loved John O'Keefe, right, That's
what he says to the press outside the courthouse, But

(01:33:48):
quickly it changes to it was a conspiracy. He was
beat up in the home by police officers who left
him on who dumped him on their lawn, like seasoned
detective would do a body on their lawn to hide it.
I guess doesn't make any sense. Beat him up with
no defensive wounds. Strangely, they just beat him up, left

(01:34:10):
him to die. Then he got attacked by a dog.
They so that because he was holding a glass. So
it's an on everything about the wounds that are a
little bit unusual, Like he got a he died from
a terrible head wound, so he hit the hard earth
and then his you know, have you ever seen someone
with a nose job, You know, the pressure gives you

(01:34:34):
black eyes. So the pressure of it gave him black eyes.
And they're like, look he has black eyes. He got
beat up. Look he's got wounds from where the tail
light was smashed. And then they start a police conspiracy.
So they start an innocence fraud campaign with the help
of a blogger named Aidan Carney to spin this story

(01:34:55):
and this tail and first they blame. They start blaming
all these people and spinning the evidence and leaking grand
jury information. So oh, and then they get a federal
investigation into police corruption. Right, so it makes it's a
very typical innocence fraud tactic. So it sounds good on

(01:35:17):
the surface. So you find out that what did this
federal investigation find any corruption? Any no, no corruption, no conspiracy.
Then they had an independent audit also done. The town
paid ridiculous amount of money, hundreds of thousands of dollars
to have an independent audit to look into Karen Reid's

(01:35:39):
arrest and the death of John O'Keefe. They had a
few suggestions of how it could have been done better
in a snowstorm, you know, But they found no corruption
or no framing of Karen Reid. So there's been one
federal investigation into this. Karen Reid got with her contacts
and her lawyer's contacts and one independent They found no

(01:36:01):
But she got up with the help of a judge
who was like another wing of the defense. She went
on trial. The first trial, I thought, actually, now looking back,
the first DA very dry, not fun to watch, but
very dry, but very good. I thought, DA got a

(01:36:22):
hung jury. Second. Second time, they allowed the entire town
to come in front of the courthouse with signs and
they weren't allowed. They weren't they weren't specifically allowed to
say free Karen read, but they were allowed to wear pink,
which is Karen Reid's color, the free Karen Reid color.
And everyone knew why they were there, and they were screaming.

(01:36:45):
As the jury was deliberating, they were like and as
the verdict was coming down, they were like cheering. It
came literally in the courthouse. And so I was the
only one on the Karen read is guilty side to
say I think she's going to get away with this.
I'm very worried she's going to get away with this.
I know innocence broad cases, So this is the first
pre trial innocence fraud case that I've covered on my channel.

(01:37:10):
My friend Martin Pride, who covers innocence fraud in Chicago, says,
hold on, can I just turn off my camera for
a second. I just have to stretch out my leg.
Hold on one second. Hold One says that that these
happen all the time in Chicago, and uh, but this

(01:37:33):
is the first one I've seen here done here. And
they raised over a million dollars for and there's a
lot of YouTube lawyers and grifters and people who've gotten
very rich on T shirts and YouTube channels spinning this case.

(01:37:55):
And they hired oh there's all sorts of things. She
hired defense witnesses, like one of the things that she
likes to do, hold on is is one of the
things she likes to do is hire like she hired
these ARCA defense witnesses and they said they introduced the

(01:38:19):
first story to them is that these ARCA witnesses were
hired by the federal investigation. They couldn't say federal, but
they said another entity and were totally independent and not
paid for by the defense, and that they could have
been used by the prosecutor, but just using only the
information gathered by the defense. They never asked the prosecution

(01:38:40):
for any any anything for their investigation into this this murder.
They determined that John O'Keeffe's injuries couldn't have been caused
by the car. Strangely, they only got, you know, the
information from the defense and they are totally independent. Well,

(01:39:01):
it turns out that they were not independent, that they
were getting paid by the defense. And in the second
trial we found out that they were talking to the
defense attorneys via signal app, which is Karenry's preferred way
of communicating. So it's an encrypted app which she puts
it on auto delete. So the messages get auto deleted.

(01:39:24):
We also there's been a woman just got convicted of
leaking for sat on the grand jury, of leaking grand
jury documents to eighty Aiden Carney, the blogger a friend.

(01:39:47):
All sorts of legality was permitted. They sandbagged the prosecution.
So if you don't want to get viol Brady violation,
so the prosecution and the defense have to hand over
all inf pre trial about their witnesses, and over and
over again, the defense would violate the rules of the

(01:40:09):
court and just say we don't have we just met
these witnesses. We can't talk to them because they were
hired by the federal investigations. We can't hand over any
discovery because we were putting them on the stand. This
is what the judge said, you're putting them on the stand.
Two witnesses you've never talked to. That's essentially it, your honor,

(01:40:31):
We've never talked to them. Turns out totally untrue. Not
only did they talking all the time, but they were
paying for them and they lied to the jury, so
they could have gotten Karen read off on that we
could have actually gotten a conviction possibly without that information
that could have swayed some jurors, and we could have
gotten a conviction the first time, but they lied to
the court and what happened is the judge just chewed

(01:40:55):
them out. That was their sanction and their punishment was
these points wadiers. So the prosecutor got to ask questions
of questions, but they didn't have any information to ask
the right questions before trial. So we had these wadiers
of these basically like questioning these witnesses before they went up.

(01:41:18):
And this happened with so many of the so many
of the defense witnesses. It was so dirty and criminal,
and there's rumors that there might be some federal charges.
I'm not convinced coming down on Karen Reid for witness harassment.
Aiden Karney has multiple counts of witness harassment. But they're

(01:41:40):
so popular, Karen Reid and Aiden Carney in Massachusetts, it's
really hard to think that they'll be ever convicted of anything.
They're really above the law. They've become like folk heroes,
and this is a pattern an innocence fraud. They make
the cops into criminals, and they make the criminals into
folk heroes. So that's sort of like a So now

(01:42:04):
they're being sued Civilly by the Okee family, right and cover.
I'm just continuing to stay on it. I'm just I'm
not exactly sure why. I'm just sort of fascinating. It
feels undone to me, and just the incredible unfairness of it.

(01:42:24):
It was so criminal what I watched. Alan Jackson, he's
a very famous defense lawyer, defended Kevin Spacey. But they
used all sorts of dirty tricks and criminal stuff and
there Karen Read supporters are some of the most vicious,
rabid supporters, very much like the West Memphis three supporters

(01:42:48):
or Steven Avery supporters that you're gonna meet. I put
them at some of the worst of the murderer groupies
out there to come across. They are really they It's
not like they don't want it's interesting. They don't want
any opposition.

Speaker 2 (01:43:04):
You know.

Speaker 3 (01:43:04):
I'm a I consider my channel pretty small in the
grand scheme of things. But they don't want anyone any
opposition out there because they know, I think they know
deep down that the truth is pretty powerful, you know,
even on a small channel, but they don't want anyone
else to speak. But the you know, the innocence fraudsters,
they only want one point of view out there, and

(01:43:26):
they will harass you, insult you, you know, docs, you know,
try to dos people, you know, just be really just nasty.
They're really a nasty bunch. A lot of them are
criminals themselves who have been caught driving drunk themselves. So
Karen Reid was ac quit of all the major charges
but convicted of a driving under the influence and the

(01:43:51):
the the Jory Foreman was talking calling around before the
verdict looking to make deals and make money off of this,
so they knew that if they acquitted her that they
could make money. It was the worst pictory ever. There's
also many problems in this case. But yeah, if they

(01:44:13):
had a better judge, that would have been a big help.
But this judge was like the worst, the worst. Another
wing of the defense.

Speaker 2 (01:44:22):
Really a few more quick questions before you wrap it up.
Is there anything.

Speaker 1 (01:44:29):
Maybe any advice or tips or ideas you can give
to like investigators or journalists or people on the spot
or even people in the public to spot innocent s fraud.
Is that something that you can kind of pick up
on or do you just have to do the research?

Speaker 3 (01:44:51):
Yeah, if you want to be spoon fed, you'll always
be fooled, so I'm actually doing It's funny you should
mention this is a really good question because I'm actually
doing a Patreon episode for my Patreon of people about this.
I don't know if anyone's interested, but I feel figure
it has to be out there somewhere. So, because I
was fooled by West Memphis three Manda Knox, I used

(01:45:13):
to be fooled by these So you have to ask
yourself when you look at a innocence fraud campaign. First
of all, they lie. They lie a lot. If you
can't don't think that these experts will lie, the Innocence
Project will lie. They lie. They do lie, So you
can't do not go for appeals to authority. That is
a big pitfall. Well why would this you know X.

(01:45:36):
They like to use X FBI people, private investigators, UH
lawyers as mouthpieces. Our legal system is decided by average people.
It is not so complicated that you can't figure it out.
You don't need any kind of great degrees to make

(01:46:00):
a decision. The legal documents are easily read and easily
accessible to anybody can figure these cases out just by
reading the documents and looking at the evidence. That's why
our juries decide, you know, decide these cases. So you
don't need to be some kind of expert on anything,

(01:46:21):
but you do have to ask yourself when you look
at these innocent campaigns for convicted killers or accused killers,
what are they leaving out? And if you go to
the actual court documents and make sure and when you
look online and there's only the defense documents out there,

(01:46:43):
that's a red flag. When somehow the documents from the
prosecution are kind of like hidden, it's like you're searching.
All they are is like one defense document after the next.
That's a little bit of a red flag. But find
the prosecute documents, uh, find the filings, find the original
court transcripts if you can, and and read as much

(01:47:11):
as you can before you put your good name behind
a killer and get duped, and especially before you give
any money to any one of these people. It's so
easy to say, well, this sounds good and I'll share this,
But most of the time my experience, uh, you're probably

(01:47:35):
being played, I would say, in these big cases of uh,
these choreographed, you know, propagandized cases, you're gonna you're gonna
you're being played by by a psychopathic killer and you
have to also and encourage people to think about the
victims family members. In the case of the West Memphis three,
they got a few of the victims family members over

(01:47:57):
to their side or to publicly do them. And so
what is fraud? I mean, fraud is making something look
like something it's not. So a lot of times there's
like deeper stories. We know behind how those parents became involved.
They're troubled, they need money. They you know, they got

(01:48:20):
duped by an expert who you know, guilted them. They
guilt them. You know, there's always more to the story
under the surface. That's what I say. So any kind
of fraud is making something look like something it's not.
And I would say that innocence cases of innocence fraud
are no different. The point is to make something be

(01:48:42):
easily digestible for the public on just on the surface,
but when you get just under the surface. So look,
you know, if there's a claim of innocence, look like well,
you know, look at the actual documents and look if
there might be a reason why or has that claim
been been investigated by the courts, by our appeals courts,

(01:49:05):
you know, huge injustices, you know, and is it likely
that all this unfairness happens to one convicted killer, something
so unfair happens over and over again to one convicted killer.
Use your head, yeah, and use your I mean, don't

(01:49:25):
get a spoonfeed. You have to do the work, you know,
a little bit of work, just a little bit of
work to go find their original documents. Go find the
court Document's the most important thing. Don't take my word
for it. I always tell people, don't take my word
for it. Investigate it yourself, look at the facts yourself.

Speaker 1 (01:49:46):
Finally, so we talked about a lot of these different cases.
We talked about how the media plays a big part. Obviously,
the rise of social media, things like TikTok and all this,
all those things, it seems to be even more fuel

(01:50:06):
on some of these fires. So where do you see
innocence fraud evolving in the future, if any, you know,
if at all? And is there anything that the legal
world can do about it to fight it? So to speak?

Speaker 3 (01:50:31):
Well, it's a problem because these lawyers know they don't
want to speak out. One lawyer spoke out kind of tentatively,
John Lewin, who have had on my show about the
Innocence Project, because there was a big case of fraud
in the Southern California Innocence Project where a woman seduced

(01:50:56):
a convicted killer to take responsibility for her client's murder
and she offered him the civil money to do it,
and also was like sending him racy pictures and having
a you know, prison romance with this guy that came out,
this lawyer for the Innocence Project, and he spoke out

(01:51:19):
about you know, innocence fraud. But he said, oh, it's
not my friend at the it's not my friend the
lawyer doing it at the Innocence Project, this Innocence Project,
it's other innocence project. No, they're all doing it. They
all work the same way. It's like not this McDonald's,
you know, not my McDonald's is different, Right, They're all

(01:51:39):
doing the same project. They're all making the same product.
They're all doing the same technique, the same stuff. Uh.
There is not a wealth of guilty people, of innocent
people wrongfully convicted, so they have to spin these narratives
to keep grifting off of. And I think, you know,

(01:52:00):
you have to remember that the beginning of this The
Innocence Project was started by Barry Scheck and new Felt
when Barryshek realized at the Oja Simpson trial that nobody
really understood DNA evidence and that he could manipulate DNA
and make it seem like a much more sure case

(01:52:21):
than it was. And I think that there's been all
sorts of games played with DNA in the cases and
overstating the importance of it, or like I talked about
in Stephen Avery's case, just a sudden appearance of a
piece of DNA and the folder that never really got

(01:52:44):
explored by the courts. So what happened in Stephen Avery's case,
They just rubber stamped him out. They didn't look at
any of the evidence up against the evidence that he
was convicted of. They just said they had this very
ambitious assistant prosecutor who said let him out, and the
court rubber stamped it. And then he got hundreds of

(01:53:05):
thousands of dollars. And that's tax payer money. Your tax
payer dollars often are paying out these very guilty killers.
And a lot of them have not a lot, I
would say, but many of them have reoffended. And when
they reoffend, they don't say, oh, maybe they were guilty
the first time round. We got a guilty killer out.
They say, oh no, they were just traumatized by all

(01:53:28):
their time wrongfully convicted in prison. So they have a
I mean you remember that Joe Rogan story, right, I
mean Joe Rogan had on. Joe Rogan's been pushing innocents
fraud forever. He's deep into it. But he had on
Sheldon Johnson, who they say was basically essentially assessively he

(01:53:50):
was guilty, but he was given it an excessive sentence.
But there's a reason why he was given the excessive
sentence because the judge said, if you do this again,
I'm going to throw the book at you. You've been
in front of my court and I've let you off
two times. You'd come up do this again, try to
kill someone again, I'm gonna throw the book at you.
And he did the third time round. That's why he

(01:54:11):
got such a long sentence. And he came on the
Joe Rogan Show and he said, uh, you know I
learned in prison. I did all these classes and we
have to stop you know, racism, blah blah blah blah blah,
excessive sentencing. You know, played the victim. He was a
gang leader, and not two months after being on Joe

(01:54:35):
Rogan did. He was in the Bronx. His neighbors here,
Sheldon Johnson's friend go hey, man, don't do it. I
have kids and two gunshots. And then he's on CCTV
footage in all these different disguises, one of them a
blonde wagon, glasses going in and out of the apartment.

(01:54:57):
So Joe Rogan just laughed about it without his friend
Josh Dubin all working to get this killer out of
you know, would be killer at that time. I think
he was a just attempted murderer out of prison early.

(01:55:18):
This guy would still be alive. Excuse me for not
remembering his name off the top of my head. I'd
like to remember the victims' names at this time. It's
just I'm having a little but instead they say, you know,
they just laugh and say, oh, it was an unfortunate
incident that happened after we had Sheldon Johnson on. But they,

(01:55:40):
I mean, every like a couple of months. I think, uh,
the biggest pot one of the biggest podcasts in the world.
Joe Rogan Show is pushing this narrative of innocence, and
they've had a Manda Knox on more than I mean totally.
I haven't fully investigated the cases that they put on,

(01:56:02):
but I'm sure anyone could look at those cases. Doesn't
take any kind of specially, doesn't take any kind of
background or anything special to just go find the court
documents and go look at the original court documents of
against their claims that they're making on the show Rogan podcast,

(01:56:23):
and I bet you'll be rather. It used to be
a game I used to do with my friend who
used to come on the podcast with me. She did
the Marty Tankliffe episode with me. We'd say, I'd say, Okay,
here's the claim. I say, I call her up on
a here's the claim of innocence. This is what they
say happened. What do you think happened? What do you
really think the real story is? And she would guess

(01:56:43):
and I said, no, it's worse than that. You know,
murder weapon, they found a blah blah blah. There was
another guy who did it with him who's also in prison.
You know, it's there's they're always leaving something massive out
so you can make it a fun game. What they're
leaving out a lot.

Speaker 2 (01:57:01):
Exactly.

Speaker 3 (01:57:02):
There is a connection between the false the Innocence Project
and the False Memory Syndrome Foundation. They Elizabeth Loftis has
been pushing that and she's a favorite expert of the
Innocence Project. She's on the Innocence Project website, so she
represents guilty predators and pent pals with Jerry Sandusky. She's

(01:57:26):
also testified. I watched her testify in the Glene Maxwell's trial.
I covered that from the courthouse. Glaine Maxwell's trial. Very
much similar kind of claims. They expect you to believe
something really improbable happened and trust the experts with this

(01:57:47):
kind of narrative, like the Innocence Project uses tunnel vision
investigation by the cops, sloppy investigation. Oh what oh that
the DA has to solve the crime so quickly, you know,
it doesn't have time to get it right. They have
to you know, they have a quota and they have

(01:58:08):
to meet their quota. Also some kind of personal vendetta
against the killer. Uh, you know there's always like you know,
kangaroo court. Yeah, of hysterical like massysteria, the town, those

(01:58:35):
kind of things. So, yeah, there is a connection. It's
very similar Grift. So if you've read Ross Chait's book
The witch Hunt, narrative. It's like about innocent fraud with
of around the daycare cases and the eighties and nineties.
Oh okay, like mc martin's great book Martins. Yeah, mc
Martin's and he's a tenured un professor. He's retired now,

(01:58:58):
but he's really writing about all these innocent fraud cases
around daycare cases in the eighties and nineties, capturing the
Freedman's there's another.

Speaker 1 (01:59:11):
Next time. We'll talk about that. But yeah, okay, sounds good. Well,
thank you so much for your time. Can you tell
everyone watching and listening where they can find you, Roberta.

Speaker 3 (01:59:22):
I hope I haven't bored you. Yeah, I can find me.
You can find me on a lot. This is like
really my passion interest. You can find me on the
Roberta Class True Crime Report, anywhere. You can find podcasts. YouTube.
I livestream every night but Monday and Fridays at six
pm Eastern. Where else. Patreon Also, I have a Patreon account.

(01:59:51):
You can find extra content there. All those places on
x at Roberto Glass pod. Those are thank you. Thanks
for thanks for having a conversation.

Speaker 1 (02:00:01):
No, this was a lot of fun. We'll definitely have
to bring you back. We'll have to do something on
the hurricane, and yeah, we'll bring you back regardless though
this was a great, great chat. I appreciate it.

Speaker 2 (02:00:12):
Don't go anywhere.

Speaker 1 (02:00:13):
I'm just gonna pull you out and I'll be we'll
bring it back in a second, Okayer birth, So thank
you so much for coming.

Speaker 2 (02:00:19):
And yeah, we'll have to have you back because this
was a great talk.

Speaker 1 (02:00:25):
I learned a lot and yeah, there's a lot of
people interested in this kind of stuff, and I think, honestly,
I think that this innocence fraud is a great topic
for people to know and understand, especially when they're seeing
these headlines of all these big cases coming out recently
and in the past.

Speaker 2 (02:00:44):
So I do appreciate you coming on. So thank you again.

Speaker 3 (02:00:48):
Thank you.

Speaker 2 (02:00:50):
All right, So.

Speaker 1 (02:00:53):
This is it for today. Everyone, enjoy the rest of
your afternoon. Please check out the Divulgence Podcast on YouTube.
Please subscribe. We're trying to build up the channel. Greatly
appreciate that. You can also check us out on x Yeah,
and if you guys have any ideas for guests, topics,
anything like that, please pass it along to me. Definitely

(02:01:15):
appreciate that. So everyone take care, be well, and stay safe.

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark

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

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Roberta Glass Talks True Crime, Innocence Fraud on the Divulgence Podcast

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark

All Episodes

Roberta Glass Talks True Crime, Innocence Fraud on the Divulgence Podcast

Stuff You Should Know