Speaker 1: Previously on Queen of the Cohn.
Speaker 2: Other companies would start calling and they'd say, oh, well,
Speaker 2: you know, like you're going to need this to add
Speaker 2: to your business if you want to get it like
Speaker 2: on the front page, like we can help with say
Speaker 2: the technical aspect one was like five thousand dollars. I
Speaker 2: was like, well, I just spent like ten thousand dollars
Speaker 2: during who we need to spend more? But still thinking, yeah,
Speaker 2: this is part of the business, this is what I
Speaker 2: need to do. I went ahead, of course and did it.
Speaker 1: Jenshaw's telemarketing scammers extract their toll on thousands of unsuspecting
Speaker 1: victims across the country.
Speaker 3: And that's what's scary because it could happen to anybody
Speaker 3: job if it really can, it could happen to anyone
Speaker 3: in the world.
Speaker 1: And as the FEDS build their case against the outspoken
Speaker 1: housewife of Salt Lake City.
Speaker 4: The defendant primarily acted as a lead broker responsible for
Speaker 4: selling victim information to other sales floors.
Speaker 1: Jenshaw proclaims her innocence to know, but text messages recovered
Speaker 1: from her cell phone once jen realizes the Feds are
Speaker 1: onto her, tell a decidedly different story.
Speaker 5: Text like, holy fucking shit, delete the salescripts from the
Speaker 5: Google drive.
Speaker 1: I'm Jonathan Walton and this is Queen of the con
Speaker 1: The Unreal House episode five. You have the right to
Speaker 1: shut the fuck up.
Speaker 4: We know that the Feds, who were looking at this
Speaker 4: long before the public knew there was going to be
Speaker 4: an indictment for Jenshaw, they obviously watched the show.
Speaker 1: Former prosecutor and current host of The Emily Show podcast,
Speaker 1: Emily D.
Speaker 4: Baker, I might not have ever left prosecute if the
Speaker 4: Feds had been like Emily, we need someone who just
Speaker 4: understands reality TV to help us just navigate. If my
Speaker 4: job as a prosecutor was just to watch reality TV
Speaker 4: and be like, this seems shady that's going on there,
Speaker 4: I might not have left because it's it's so funny
Speaker 4: how many of these cases are now ending up in
Speaker 4: federal prosecutions.
Speaker 1: And Jen's federal prosecution makes front page news across the country.
Speaker 2: Escalating accusations against Real housewife Jen Shops.
Speaker 6: Well, now this real housewife faces some very real federal
Speaker 6: charges that could land her in prison for a long time.
Speaker 7: Accused of being an alleged senior participant in a nearly
Speaker 7: decade long telemarketing scamp.
Speaker 1: And after her spectacular arrest while shooting The Real Housewives
Speaker 1: of Salt Lake City for Bravo, We're looking for Jen Saw.
Speaker 4: She just left.
Speaker 1: Wow, have like swat team and stuff?
Speaker 4: What about her?
Speaker 1: On March thirtieth, Genshaw is charged by the FEDS with
Speaker 1: one count of conspiracy to commit wirefraud victimizing ten or
Speaker 1: more people over the age of fifty five, a charge
Speaker 1: that carries a maximum sentence of thirty years in prison.
Speaker 1: She's also charged with one count of conspiracy to commit
Speaker 1: money laundering, which carries a maximum sentence of twenty years
Speaker 1: in prison. Interestingly enough, this case is being prosecuted by
Speaker 1: the Southern District of New York, even though most of
Speaker 1: Jenshaw's telemarketing exploits originate in and around the state of Utah.
Speaker 1: How does New York factor into the Genshaw story.
Speaker 4: It seems that she had a branch of her business
Speaker 4: based in New York. Seem like she had one of
Speaker 4: these sales floors in New York. It's very interesting to
Speaker 4: me to see there was a period of her life
Speaker 4: where she and her husband were living separately. I want
Speaker 4: to know what was going on during this period.
Speaker 1: So, based on public records and court filings, Jainshaw's relationship
Speaker 1: with Coach went through some rocky territory because in twenty seventeen,
Speaker 1: after twenty three years of marriage, Genshaw suddenly Opson moves
Speaker 1: to New York City to start her own scammy telemarketing
Speaker 1: business called Mastery Pro Group. And according to a filing
Speaker 1: by her own legal team, it's this stint in New
Speaker 1: York that caused their client to get wrapped up in
Speaker 1: all this craziness her attorney's right to the court.
Speaker 7: It's as if the Genshaw who spent time in New
Speaker 7: York with a group of dead beat criminals and fraudsters,
Speaker 7: and the Genshaw in Salt Lake City are two different
Speaker 7: people with little in common. One was a perfect daughter, mother,
Speaker 7: and wife in Salt Lake City. Then there was the
Speaker 7: other Genshaw. This Genshaw threw caution and whirls to the
Speaker 7: wind as she spent more and more personal and professional
Speaker 7: time with a group of unsavory frogsters while living in
Speaker 7: New York, a world separated both geographically and emotionally of
Speaker 7: her life in Salt Lake City, so she felt freed
Speaker 7: from the strictures of her usual life. Also, in New York,
Speaker 7: Jen wasn't a place where people of color were not unusual.
Speaker 7: For the first time, Jen could walk down the street
Speaker 7: and see that people viewed her as beautiful, powerful, and successful.
Speaker 7: This added to her desire to be accepted and integrated
Speaker 7: into the life of these New York men.
Speaker 4: She really did blame it on the bad crowd she
Speaker 4: fell in with in New York. But when you're married
Speaker 4: and have two kids, just upping and moving across the
Speaker 4: country to live there and being like and then I
Speaker 4: fell in with a bad crowd, I just don't believe it.
Speaker 4: You had to have a reason to go. You had
Speaker 4: to have a purpose to be there. I think they
Speaker 4: knew they were going to run the business there. Why
Speaker 4: they chose New York, I don't know. That's where the
Speaker 4: Southern District of New York is. If you're going to
Speaker 4: get prosecuted by for fe that is the first prosecutor's
Speaker 4: office you want to avoid. Why didn't you just stay
Speaker 4: in Utah go to Wyoming. I don't know. No shade
Speaker 4: to the US attorneys in Wyoming, but this is a
Speaker 4: lot of what the Southern District of New York.
Speaker 1: Does Emily's right. The Southern District of New York is
Speaker 1: unrivaled in the amount of fraud cases they prosecute, and
Speaker 1: they have a ninety five percent conviction rate. But Jen's
Speaker 1: legal team goes on to squarely lay the blame for
Speaker 1: everything Jen is accused of doing on her duplicitous New
Speaker 1: York cohorts, writing in a memo to the judge.
Speaker 7: Mishaw originally started to work in telemarketing on the legitimate
Speaker 7: and legal side of the business, and was slowly drawn
Speaker 7: into working with a group of men who were committing fraud.
Speaker 7: These men recognize in Mishaw a talent for organization, hard work,
Speaker 7: and relationship building, and they took advantage of her skills
Speaker 7: to further their own criminal name.
Speaker 1: Yes, but that's not true at all, because, according to
Speaker 1: court records and the Federal Trade Commission, Jenshaw's involvement with
Speaker 1: these fraudulent telemarketing schemes dates all the way back to
Speaker 1: two thousand and six, and her time at Prosper Inc.
Speaker 1: More than a decade before she ever opened her own
Speaker 1: bogus telemarketing company in New York City. So Jenshaw's attorneys
Speaker 1: are wrong. I have spent literally days reading over hundreds
Speaker 1: and hundreds of these court documents and these filings in
Speaker 1: these motions. I'm not a lawyer, but it appears to
Speaker 1: me her and her many legal teams were just throwing
Speaker 1: anything at the wall to see what would stick.
Speaker 4: Well, that's kind of their job with a client who
Speaker 4: is saying, I have the money, I'm paying you, I'm innocent,
Speaker 4: let's go. And of course we don't know what Jenshaw
Speaker 4: said to her attorneys, but we can imagine based on
Speaker 4: what she has said publicly, based on how forceful her
Speaker 4: own convictions were.
Speaker 1: And boy, who are her convictions forceful? From Bravo's Housewives Reunion.
Speaker 8: Show, I'm fighting this.
Speaker 1: I am innocent to Adam Nule's up in Adam podcast.
Speaker 8: I'm innocent. I'm not the only one that's gone through this.
Speaker 8: You know, there are nearly ten thousand people a year
Speaker 8: that are wrongly accused and convicted of a crime they
Speaker 8: did not commit.
Speaker 1: In fact, for more than an entire year, as the
Speaker 1: case against Jenshaw makes its way through the criminal justice system.
Speaker 1: In court appearance after court appearance after court appearance, Jenshaw
Speaker 1: is steadfast and adamant that she did nothing wrong, and
Speaker 1: even goes so far as to publicly imply that the
Speaker 1: charges against her are racially motivated.
Speaker 8: It's easy for people to accuse a person of color,
Speaker 8: a female person of color here in America today. You
Speaker 8: can look at the statistics.
Speaker 6: We see her throwing out all these other tactics of like, well, oh,
Speaker 6: I'm a woman, I'm a woman of color, I'm a
Speaker 6: woman of religion.
Speaker 1: That's Zach Peter, host of the No Filter with Zach
Speaker 1: Peter podcast.
Speaker 6: I think she thinks that she's the smartest person ever.
Speaker 6: You know, she threw out every single card she could
Speaker 6: possibly put on the table to try and get any
Speaker 6: sort of, you know, sliver of you know, empathy, remorse,
Speaker 6: any sort of slack that she could get from people.
Speaker 4: And then she leaned into biases and prejudices that exist
Speaker 4: for people and made them question themselves, are you being
Speaker 4: persecuted because you're a woman. Are you being persecuted because
Speaker 4: you're a person of color? Are you being treated unfairly?
Speaker 4: And she leaned into all of that to make those
Speaker 4: around her question themselves if they questioned her, because then
Speaker 4: if they questioned her, they're the asshole. And it was very,
Speaker 4: very effective, but The thing that hurt me the most
Speaker 4: watching was her mom cashing out her retirement fund.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that was something. Jenshaw's mother reportedly cashed out her
Speaker 1: retirement for more than a million dollars by some accounts,
Speaker 1: to help Gen pay for her legal defense.
Speaker 4: Whatever she needs to do to survive is what she
Speaker 4: is going to do. And that's what we saw happen
Speaker 4: in this case, and it's what we see happen in
Speaker 4: so many fraud cases. They will survive at the cost
Speaker 4: of everyone around them, and it does not matter what
Speaker 4: the relationship is.
Speaker 1: And keep in mind, lawyers in federal criminal cases cost
Speaker 1: way more than lawyers for local city or state cases.
Speaker 4: Because the weight of the government evidence oftentimes is overwhelming.
Speaker 4: In these cases, it's a lot of information. Yes, the
Speaker 4: defense has a lot to catch up on, but that's
Speaker 4: kind of the difficulty of a federal prosecution and the
Speaker 4: difficulty of federal criminal defense.
Speaker 1: And when prosecutors turn over discovery to the defense, mean
Speaker 1: all the evidence they have against Jenshaw. It consists of
Speaker 1: two hundred and twenty seven gigabytes of data and more
Speaker 1: than one point three million documents.
Speaker 4: The one point three million documents are independent documents but
Speaker 4: some of those documents have thousands and one of them
Speaker 4: hundreds of thousands of pages. The one point three million
Speaker 4: documents are independent documents, but some of those documents have
Speaker 4: thousands and one of them hundreds of thousands of pages.
Speaker 1: So to say, going into this Jenshaw and her legal
Speaker 1: team are at an immeasurable disadvantage is a gross understatement.
Speaker 4: And of course, as we know from earlier discussions and
Speaker 4: earlier documentation, Jenshaw and her first assistant Steward Smith, are
Speaker 4: coming into this prosecution towards the end of this. What
Speaker 4: we learn in these emotions is that this is the
Speaker 4: third set of cases with regard to this overall scheme.
Speaker 4: There have been two other cases that have gone to trial.
Speaker 4: There have been tens or twenty plus defendants that have
Speaker 4: already pled or been convicted in these schemes.
Speaker 1: And that's actually the reason Jenshaw and her assistant Stuart
Speaker 1: Smith ultimately get caught here. Federal prosecutors brought several criminal
Speaker 1: cases against other telemarketing scammers tangentially involved with Jenshaw years earlier.
Speaker 3: And actually it tied into another investigation that we had
Speaker 3: which is even spawning on to additional investigations.
Speaker 1: That's Ricky Patel. He's the Homeland Security special agent overseeing
Speaker 1: the Jenshaw case.
Speaker 3: This happens so often, unfortunately, that there's so many tentacles
Speaker 3: that this ties into right one corporation or company if
Speaker 3: you want to call them actual companies one, I'll use
Speaker 3: the word froster. One froster is and many times tied
Speaker 3: to another frauster who's then tied to another froster, which
Speaker 3: continues this whole perpetual problem.
Speaker 1: It sounds like from an investigative point of view, it's
Speaker 1: like a game of whack a mole. You get one,
Speaker 1: another one pops up, then another one pops up, then
Speaker 1: another one pops up.
Speaker 3: That's a great way to put it right. And the
Speaker 3: reason that is is it's so lucrative because they're so
Speaker 3: good at what they do. We talk to victims who
Speaker 3: are shamed at times for feeling like I can't believe
Speaker 3: I fell victim to this. Where these people are professional connartists.
Speaker 1: This is a rampant problem, and that, believe it or not,
Speaker 1: gives the government a weird advantage here because several of
Speaker 1: the many lower level telemarketing scammers who get busted by
Speaker 1: the Feds agree to lead them to the ring leaders
Speaker 1: of the operation, ring leaders like Jenshaw in exchange for
Speaker 1: the possibility of lighter sentences or in some cases, probation.
Speaker 4: So Jenshaw is coming right at the tail end as
Speaker 4: this is running up for trial, and her legal team
Speaker 4: has quite a mountain to climb with the evidence turned
Speaker 4: over by the government. The government is in a little
Speaker 4: bit of an easier position because they've been living with
Speaker 4: these cases for years now.
Speaker 1: But what jen Shaw and her legal team lack in
Speaker 1: preparation they more than make up for with unadulterated HUTSPA
Speaker 1: because they file multiple motions again and again and again
Speaker 1: asking a federal judge to dismiss the criminal case against
Speaker 1: jen for reasons that are just ludicrous for starters, Jen
Speaker 1: writes this insane declaration to the.
Speaker 5: Court in twenty seventeen, I was the victim of multiple
Speaker 5: crimes by an individual known to me who stole money
Speaker 5: from me, violated an order of protection issued by a judge,
Speaker 5: and assaulted me, causing my physical injuries.
Speaker 1: Okay, so, according to jen some guy in New York
Speaker 1: robbed and assaulted her back in twenty seventeen when she
Speaker 1: was living there away from her husband. Was she dating
Speaker 1: this guy or in business with him, or was he
Speaker 1: just some rando on the street, Jen doesn't say. She
Speaker 1: goes on to write.
Speaker 5: On March thirtieth, twenty twenty one, I was arrested in
Speaker 5: Salt Lake City, Utah, while on the road on my
Speaker 5: way to recording an episode of Real Housewives of Salt
Speaker 5: Lake City for the Bravo Network.
Speaker 1: But this is a lie, because now we all know.
Speaker 1: Jen was actually arrested after fleeing the Real Housewives set,
Speaker 1: not driving to it. After she gets that mysterious phone
Speaker 1: call and tells everyone another lie, that she has to
Speaker 1: go her husband is in the hospital with internal bleeding. Anyway,
Speaker 1: Jen continues writing.
Speaker 5: Shortly before I was stopped, an unknown person called me
Speaker 5: and said that my husband had told this unknown person
Speaker 5: to call me. The unknown caller told me to head home.
Speaker 5: I immediately tried calling my husband, but he did not
Speaker 5: pick up even after I called more than once. I
Speaker 5: began to worry for him. Soon after, I received another
Speaker 5: phone call, this time from a nine to one seven number.
Speaker 5: The caller explained that his name was Detective Christopher Bastows
Speaker 5: and that he was with the New York Police Department.
Speaker 5: I was confused why an NYPD detective would be calling
Speaker 5: me as I was in Utah at the time. My
Speaker 5: first thought and apprehension was that the call must be
Speaker 5: related to my order of protection against Individual One.
Speaker 1: Individual one is the guy who she claims rob then
Speaker 1: assaulted her in New York back in twenty seventeen.
Speaker 4: So Jenshaw is arguing that because she had this interaction
Speaker 4: with this person in New York, and because she has
Speaker 4: a restraining order against this person, she was very confused
Speaker 4: when she got called by a detective in New York
Speaker 4: while she was driving in Utah.
Speaker 5: Jen continues, Detective Bastos did not tell me why he
Speaker 5: was calling, but instead told me to pull over, and
Speaker 5: minutes later he pulled up in a car with other agents.
Speaker 5: I was walked to the back of the car, placed
Speaker 5: in handcuffed, and told that they had a warrant for
Speaker 5: my arrest. I was at this point very confused and
Speaker 5: emotionally off balanced from the strange series of events, and
Speaker 5: thought I may have been the victim of false identification.
Speaker 5: I repeatedly asked Detective Basso's clarification questions, including am I
Speaker 5: under arrest and am I going to jail, which were
Speaker 5: phrases I used interchangeably and thought of as the same thing.
Speaker 5: Detective Bastos never answered either question, but repeatedly said words
Speaker 5: to the effect of, we just want to talk to you,
Speaker 5: and I promise, we just want to talk to you.
Speaker 5: He also told me more than once, we just want
Speaker 5: to make sure you're okay. Detective Bastos's statements led me
Speaker 5: to believe I might be in danger and that the
Speaker 5: police might be there to help me. I was still
Speaker 5: so confused, however, because I had been placed in handcuffs.
Speaker 5: I was at this point consumed with a desire to
Speaker 5: know why I had been placed in handcuffs and apparently arrested.
Speaker 1: Okay, so here she's admitting she knew she was quote
Speaker 1: apparently arrested, which makes where she's going with the rest
Speaker 1: of her fragmented diatribe incongruous.
Speaker 5: Detective Bassos drove me to the ice headquarters and brought
Speaker 5: me to a break room with a circular table in
Speaker 5: three chairs. Detective Bassos and an HSI agent handcuffed me
Speaker 5: to one of the chairs and then joined me at
Speaker 5: the table. Detective Bassos read me miranda warnings from a
Speaker 5: printed paper He also handed me a copy to sign.
Speaker 5: As I read along, she's.
Speaker 1: Talking about her Miranda rights. You know the whole You
Speaker 1: have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can
Speaker 1: and will be used against you in a court of
Speaker 1: law routine.
Speaker 5: Although I heard the words Detective Bastos read clearly, my
Speaker 5: contact lenses, which were in my eyes, were dry, and
Speaker 5: I did not have my reading glasses, so my vision
Speaker 5: was blurry and I was unable to read the paper
Speaker 5: in front of me.
Speaker 1: She's pulling out all the stops.
Speaker 5: Even while being read my rights. I did not fully
Speaker 5: understand what was going on after I signed the waiver,
Speaker 5: even though I could not read it. But before Detective
Speaker 5: Bassos began his questioning, I informed the detective that my
Speaker 5: contact lenses were blurry. Detective Bastos and the agent found
Speaker 5: my contact solution in my bag, uncuffed me, and allowed
Speaker 5: me to fix the contact. They then read cuffed one
Speaker 5: of my hands of the chair and began the interrogation.
Speaker 5: I was never told and did not suspect that the
Speaker 5: entire conversation was being recorded.
Speaker 1: So she's sitting in ice headquarters, handcuffed to a chair,
Speaker 1: being questioned by the NYPD and by federal agents and
Speaker 1: she doesn't think it's being recorded. Maybe she's never seen
Speaker 1: Dateline or watched the local news or seen that show Cops. Anyway,
Speaker 1: Jen continues, writing, I did.
Speaker 5: Not know the purpose of the conversation or what, if anything,
Speaker 5: I was being charged with until close to the end
Speaker 5: of the one hour and twenty minute interrogation.
Speaker 1: So at this point Jen's attorneys actually try and use
Speaker 1: this entire false flag fiasco that Jen lays out in
Speaker 1: her declaration to the judge as grounds to dismiss the
Speaker 1: criminal case against her outright and just so you know,
Speaker 1: not giving Miranda rights to a perpetrator in custody is
Speaker 1: enough to actually get a criminal case dismissed. But reading
Speaker 1: the defense's motion out loud, as Emily D. Baker does
Speaker 1: on her YouTube show, it kind of sounds like an snlscatch.
Speaker 4: The defense says, quote Miss Shaw was consumed with a
Speaker 4: desire to know why she was placed in handcuffs and
Speaker 4: apparently arrested. She could not handle the officers not answering
Speaker 4: her questions. Can you picture this playing out? If you've
Speaker 4: watched Housewives of Salt Lake City and you've watched Genshaw
Speaker 4: on TV, you have a vivid image in your mind
Speaker 4: right now of Genshaw wanting answers from these police officers
Speaker 4: that aren't giving them her And she said that consumption
Speaker 4: with desire to know, that curiosity is why she waved
Speaker 4: her Miranda rights, So maybe then they'd give her some
Speaker 4: fucking answers. They gave her answers. You're being placed in
Speaker 4: handcuffs and we have a warrant for your arrest. I
Speaker 4: don't know what else you need to know, because that
Speaker 4: shit's pretty clear you're under arrest. They then took her
Speaker 4: to the ice headquarters, took her to a break room
Speaker 4: and handcuffed her to a chair. They read her her
Speaker 4: Miranda warnings. They also then had her sign and read along.
Speaker 4: She said, quote this is the defense motion because in
Speaker 4: Genshaw's declaration, she says, yeah, I heard them, but but
Speaker 4: I was consumed with desire to know. I was so
Speaker 4: curious I had to wave my Miranda rights. Curiosity made
Speaker 4: me wave my Miranda rights. Guess what, that's not illegal
Speaker 4: grounds for an involuntary waiver. Your own damn curiosity is
Speaker 4: not enough for a judge to say, oh, yes, you
Speaker 4: are clearly coerced by the government to wave your miranda rights. Now,
Speaker 4: that's not coercion, that's just you being curious. Curiosity and
Speaker 4: coersion they both start with and see they're different words,
Speaker 4: and we'll get into the dry contact defense.
Speaker 1: Emily D. Baker is reading now from Genshaw's clown car
Speaker 1: crazy motion to dismiss. So this is what the defense
Speaker 1: motion says.
Speaker 4: Although she heard the words, Detective Bastos read Misshaw's contact
Speaker 4: lenses which were in her eyes. Thank you for the
Speaker 4: clarification that we're not talking about contact lenses laying on
Speaker 4: a table. Mischelle's contact lenses, which were in her eyes,
Speaker 4: were dry, and she did not have her reading glasses,
Speaker 4: so her vision was blurry and she was unable to
Speaker 4: read the paper in front of her. Even while being
Speaker 4: read her rights. Mischaw did not know what was going on.
Speaker 4: You've been told that there's a warrant for your arrest,
Speaker 4: that you're under arrest. You got handcuffed at the back
Speaker 4: of your car, placed into a police vehicle, taken to
Speaker 4: ICE headquarters, placed in a room with two officers, and
Speaker 4: handcuffed to a chair wherein they're reading you your miranda rights.
Speaker 4: What confusion. I'm confused that you are confused The defense
Speaker 4: goes on to say that Jen believed the only way
Speaker 4: she was finally going to get an answer was to
Speaker 4: sign the paper and wave her rights. Here's just a tip,
Speaker 4: just a tip. You're not going to get answers from
Speaker 4: the police that are interrogating you. That's literally not what
Speaker 4: they're there to do. They're there to get answers from you,
Speaker 4: not the other way around. And even if they give
Speaker 4: you answers, they don't have to give you true answers.
Speaker 4: They're not obligated to tell you the truth about anything.
Speaker 4: They're not obligated at that point to tell you what
Speaker 4: you're charged with. They're obligated to tell you that you
Speaker 4: have a right to an attorney, and you have the
Speaker 4: right to shut the fuck up. And if you choose
Speaker 4: not to shut the fuck up, well then it's kind
Speaker 4: of game on. But what they're not going to do
Speaker 4: is answer your questions just because you're curious. It's not
Speaker 4: what they do. So you know, most of the time,
Speaker 4: if you're really worried about it, just shut the fuck up.
Speaker 1: And as Real Housewives fans know all too well, Jen
Speaker 1: Shaw is unable to shut the fuck up. She talks
Speaker 1: to investigators for more than an hour.
Speaker 3: At that point in time, it's pretty obvious as to
Speaker 3: what's happening.
Speaker 1: Right, Homeland Security Special Agent Ricky Patel.
Speaker 3: We were there and my agents undoubtedly discussed what was happening,
Speaker 3: and just like we deal with anyone else, there was
Speaker 3: no difference in, Hey, you're the rest for whatever charges,
Speaker 3: and here's what's going on. And then of course the
Speaker 3: whole process that we have place, it's pretty ironed out
Speaker 3: as far as getting mirandized and you know, reading your
Speaker 3: rights to you and the processing situation. So for her
Speaker 3: to not know that she was under arrest, that doesn't
Speaker 3: really jive well with me.
Speaker 1: In the end, the judge in Genshaw's case denies her
Speaker 1: attorney's preposterous motion to dismiss, and then suddenly, out of nowhere,
Speaker 1: Genshaw's entire legal team quits in a huff, writing to
Speaker 1: the court.
Speaker 7: I respectfully submit this declaration is support of my letter
Speaker 7: motion for my firm to withdraw as counsel in this matter.
Speaker 4: If you don't tell your attorneys the entire truth at
Speaker 4: the beginning, you are never going to get the result
Speaker 4: that you anticipate, and you're going to spend a lot
Speaker 4: of money doing it, and now we know from other
Speaker 4: filings that her attorneys haven't entirely been paid, which when
Speaker 4: you are taking on a fraud defendant, you need to
Speaker 4: make sure, especially after the government has seized assets, that
Speaker 4: you are getting paid by someone, whether it is the
Speaker 4: defendant of family member, what have you. But the attorneys
Speaker 4: did make that move to withdraw based on the fact
Speaker 4: that they had not been paid, which doesn't surprise me.
Speaker 1: How does that even happen? I thought attorneys work, you
Speaker 1: have to give them a.
Speaker 4: You generally have to give them a retainer. But I
Speaker 4: don't know how much of a retainer they required. I
Speaker 4: don't know if the attorneys were persuaded by Jen's personality
Speaker 4: or if they saw a great way to elevate their
Speaker 4: own profile. This is a high profile case. This is
Speaker 4: going to have our name being covered because we've covered
Speaker 4: all of these motions, and if you've seen the letter filings,
Speaker 4: they have the law firms logo very boldly across the top.
Speaker 4: They know that these things are going to be discussed.
Speaker 4: So how they choose to get paid at the beginning,
Speaker 4: what their retainer is, and how they stay up on
Speaker 4: payment is really between them and their client. But there
Speaker 4: might be a lot of reasons why they said, oh,
Speaker 4: we'll go with the smaller retainer and some of the publicity.
Speaker 4: But here's the thing. Publicity and exposure does not pay
Speaker 4: your more, your bills, your staff. It just doesn't go
Speaker 4: to the grocery storem and be like, but don't you
Speaker 4: know who I am? Hear all my groceries. It doesn't.
Speaker 4: It doesn't work that way. And it's funny how how
Speaker 4: often we hear this where people are like, but I'm
Speaker 4: gonna tag you in an Instagram post. It's like, okay,
Speaker 4: but what does that actually tangibly do. There's no guarantee
Speaker 4: it will comfort or not. So now you need to
Speaker 4: get paid for the work that you do.
Speaker 1: I'm gonna try that with my landlord. I'm gonna tag
Speaker 1: you on Instagram.
Speaker 4: Don't you know who I am? It should be enough
Speaker 4: to be in my presence. It's so funny how frequently
Speaker 4: this happens.
Speaker 1: It's August twenty twenty one now, and Jen Shaw manages
Speaker 1: to hire a new law firm to represent her in
Speaker 1: this sprawling telemarketing fraud case. Presumably she's paid them a
Speaker 1: hefty retainer. She still swears she's innocent and out of
Speaker 1: the gate, her new attorneys pull a move so bold
Speaker 1: and so reckless to get the case dismissed that it
Speaker 1: strikes fear and terror in the hearts and minds of
Speaker 1: every newsgathering organization in the country. Jenshaw's attorneys are now
Speaker 1: demanding that ABC News turnover hundreds of hours of raw
Speaker 1: interviews and all the notes they took for their Hulu
Speaker 1: documentary The Housewife and the Shawshocker, so they can use
Speaker 1: it to try and get Jenshaw off, and a federal
Speaker 1: judge is actually considering it. Panicked, an ABC News producer
Speaker 1: steps up to the plate and makes an eleventh hour,
Speaker 1: impassioned plea to the judge in Genshaw's case, urging him
Speaker 1: not to allow this dangerous precedent to be set, writing,
Speaker 1: I have.
Speaker 9: Worked as a journalist for almost thirty years. If sources
Speaker 9: are under the impression that I and other journalists could
Speaker 9: be forced to produce all of our work product about
Speaker 9: our conversations at any time, it would be very difficult,
Speaker 9: if not to effectively report about such matters.
Speaker 4: If a federal judge grants this motion, it could open
Speaker 4: a Pandora's box. It's not how it's supposed to work,
Speaker 4: and there are protections in place. Four journalists and that
Speaker 4: is why everyone's eyes are on this motion.
Speaker 1: Next time on Queen of the con All the cell
Speaker 1: phones I found in her closet. She had a lot
Speaker 1: of cell phones, yes, like how many? Like at least
Speaker 1: maybe ten? And boy, oh boy, those cell phones tell
Speaker 1: prosecutors everything they need to know about Jenshaw and her
Speaker 1: unlikely alter ego.
Speaker 6: Her name was Becky White.
Speaker 1: She was Becky with the good hair. There's good hair.
Speaker 6: Because she was stealing it from all these elderly people.
Speaker 1: Portions of public statements from court records were dramatized verbatim
Speaker 1: in this appen. Queen of the Khan The Unreal Housewife
Speaker 1: is a production of AYR Media and iHeartMedia, hosted by
Speaker 1: me Jonathan Walton. Executive producers Jonathan Walton for Jonathan Walton
Speaker 1: Productions and Elisa Rosen for AYR Media. Written by Jonathan Walton,
Speaker 1: Segment producer Gregory Harvey, Senior Associate producer Jill Pshesnik, Coordinator
Speaker 1: Melena Krowlevski. Sound design by Tim Mulhern, Edited and mixed
Speaker 1: by Tim Mulhern. Supervising producer Victoria Chang. Audio engineer Justin
Speaker 1: Longerbeam Studio engineer Maximo Abraham. Mastered by Victoria Chang. Legal
Speaker 1: Council for AYR Media, Johnny Douglas Executive producer for iHeartMedia,
Speaker 1: Maya Howard Voice acting by Courtney Hettrick and Milan Faxis.
Speaker 1: If you're enjoying Queen of the Khan, click that share
Speaker 1: button and send it to your friends and family. Also,
Speaker 1: if you can leave us a five star review in views,
Speaker 1: really help other listeners find us court records, police records,
Speaker 1: the Department of Justice, Homeland Security, victim interviews, interviews with investigators,
Speaker 1: ABC News, Time Magazine, US Weekly, TMZ, People, Access, Hollywood,
Speaker 1: and Bravos. Real Housewives of Salt Lake City were the
Speaker 1: sources used for this season of Queen of the Khan