Speaker 1: Hey, that folks, closing arguments are done and the jury
Speaker 1: is deliberating and the so called grief author murder trial
Speaker 1: are also called the poisoned husband murder trial. But jury
Speaker 1: deliberations got underway and it didn't take long before things
Speaker 1: got interesting. And with that, welcome to this episode of
Speaker 1: Amy and TJ. Rose. We expect and always gets interesting
Speaker 1: when you get notes from the jury. Didn't expect one
Speaker 1: this quickly.
Speaker 2: Yeah, this one happened ten twelve minutes into jury deliberations,
Speaker 2: so no time at all and kind of a confusing note,
Speaker 2: but seems like they were able to give them some instructions,
Speaker 2: but they were already asking questions.
Speaker 1: You know what this said to me, they are really
Speaker 1: taking this seriously, because we looked at the note and
Speaker 1: saw what they were asking, Like, what exactly are they asking?
Speaker 1: What does that mean? What did it say again? Factual
Speaker 1: stipulation question mark And that was all it said. They
Speaker 1: sent a note according and again as we record, there's
Speaker 1: the jury only got the case literally minutes ago, and
Speaker 1: they said before they even got into the jury room
Speaker 1: for the most part, they handed a note to a
Speaker 1: bailiff asking a question about a factual stipulation something. They
Speaker 1: expected the judge to give them some instruction and he
Speaker 1: forgot to do so maybe, but I thought it was cool, like, wow,
Speaker 1: they are really.
Speaker 3: They're on top of it.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's what it said.
Speaker 2: They on top of things, and I think that's probably
Speaker 2: good news for both sides and the fact that you
Speaker 2: want a fully engaged jury that is ready to really
Speaker 2: carefully go through all the testimony.
Speaker 1: So they had to. We had an episode one right
Speaker 1: before this, going through the prosecution's closing argument. They did
Speaker 1: get a rebuttal. We'll get into that a little bit,
Speaker 1: just didn't take as long, but now we'll go through
Speaker 1: what the defense Their theme, I guess was during their
Speaker 1: closing argument and roll it was pretty clear pretty early
Speaker 1: they tried to humanize her and they harped on this
Speaker 1: point reasonable doubt. They are beating that into the ground.
Speaker 1: What is reasonable doubt? And they're trying to put every
Speaker 1: bit of evidence into question.
Speaker 3: That's right.
Speaker 2: In fact, they said, if you think she maybe did it,
Speaker 2: if you think she probably did it, if you think
Speaker 2: it's very likely that she did it, you still have
Speaker 2: to find Corey Ritchin's not guilty.
Speaker 3: I thought that was interesting, which.
Speaker 1: Actually isn't the legal threshold, right, But they kept telling
Speaker 1: the jury everything the lawyer's saying closing is not evidence.
Speaker 1: But the lawyers can say what they want to say.
Speaker 1: And yet Rome they're beating this thing into the ground
Speaker 1: reasonable doubt, reasonable doubt. Did you think it was effective?
Speaker 1: They were essentially saying everything that the prosecution is telling you,
Speaker 1: we have a reasonable explanation on the other side that
Speaker 1: counters it.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 2: Yes, And I think they made the point very clear
Speaker 2: that there was no direct evidence.
Speaker 3: This was all circumstantial.
Speaker 2: There is no way that the state or prosecutors could
Speaker 2: actually without.
Speaker 3: Doubt tell jurors how.
Speaker 2: How Eric Richins ingested the lethal dose of fentanyl. And
Speaker 2: that is true. And then I also thought it was interesting.
Speaker 2: It seemed a little hokey. They had some visuals up,
Speaker 2: but the defense started with the state looks at facts
Speaker 2: one way and sees a which but if you look
Speaker 2: at those same facts another.
Speaker 3: Way, you will see a widow.
Speaker 2: And so they were asking the jury not to take
Speaker 2: all of the examples of how she grieved, how she reacted,
Speaker 2: what she said and did in that body cam footage,
Speaker 2: what she sounded like in that nine one one call.
Speaker 3: They were trying to make the point you don't know
Speaker 3: how one person grieves versus another.
Speaker 1: You know, they spend less go to that because they
Speaker 1: spend a lot of time on that, And it makes
Speaker 1: a fair point, does it not? Robes? How are we
Speaker 1: don't send a woman to prison for the rest of
Speaker 1: our life punish her because she's not grieving the way
Speaker 1: you think she should grieve. It's the worst moment of
Speaker 1: her life and you're going to judge her for it.
Speaker 1: That's a fair It's kind of a reasonable point, is
Speaker 1: it not.
Speaker 3: Yes?
Speaker 2: And they had to go there because the prosecution putting
Speaker 2: up that video the next day of shots and laughter
Speaker 2: and celebrations where Corey Richards and her friends say they
Speaker 2: were celebrating Eric Richon's life, but it looks like she's.
Speaker 3: Celebrating his death.
Speaker 2: And that is certainly how prosecutors tried to present it
Speaker 2: to the jury. And it does feel icky watching, but
Speaker 2: that was just another example of how they were saying
Speaker 2: to the jury. The defense was, you, every person grieves differently,
Speaker 2: every person reacts differently.
Speaker 1: And this is where the defense attorney injected herself into this.
Speaker 1: She actually said she lost her a number of years back,
Speaker 1: and she said based on what I have learned in
Speaker 1: this case. I didn't grieve appropriately. She didn't go into details,
Speaker 1: but she put herself into it, and that was a
Speaker 1: moment at least you sit up. And that was a
Speaker 1: personal story there about how one grief. Bro I don't
Speaker 1: know what to do with that. What is one supposed
Speaker 1: to do when they grieve? I can tell you I've
Speaker 1: seen grief. I've seen it up close. I've seen it
Speaker 1: in movies, I've seen it in real life videos. You
Speaker 1: get a general idea of how people behave when they grieve.
Speaker 1: But I don't know. I thought that was a fair point.
Speaker 1: How can I judge her put her in prison the
Speaker 1: rest of her life because I say, how she's supposed
Speaker 1: to react to her husband being dead.
Speaker 2: I thought the defense scored points with that, and I
Speaker 2: do think they scored points by really bringing that home
Speaker 2: that did such an individual experience, and just this they
Speaker 2: were truly trying to humanize her throughout it all, talking
Speaker 2: about how when she left Eric initially this is when
Speaker 2: she claims he died, and she did know it because
Speaker 2: she went to go laid down with her child because
Speaker 2: her child was having nightmares, because her child needed her.
Speaker 2: They were trying to create the mother, the human, not
Speaker 2: this black widow, this premeditated evil woman who was trying
Speaker 2: to kill her her husband for money.
Speaker 1: I thought some of that. There were several times where
Speaker 1: it was obvious where they said she did this just
Speaker 1: like any parent would kind of a thing, and it
Speaker 1: was obviously. I don't know how effective it might have been,
Speaker 1: but this was happening, Robes, this was okay, fine, let's
Speaker 1: do this now and right. She's innocent to proven guilty.
Speaker 1: But a big part of this in the conversation in
Speaker 1: the last couple of days have had to do with
Speaker 1: her reactions, how she has behaved in the courtroom and
Speaker 1: the faces she has made and whatever else. And the
Speaker 1: prosecutor used that in his clothing Robes today it look,
Speaker 1: how do you judge what she was doing? I don't know.
Speaker 1: But what she was doing today was smirking. She was
Speaker 1: reacting sarcastically even in some of her faces and reactions
Speaker 1: to what she was hearing from the prosecution. How that
Speaker 1: plays for a jury, I don't know. But today she
Speaker 1: almost in her reaction Robes kind of countered the sweet
Speaker 1: lady they were trying to create in the narration.
Speaker 2: I agree, So just as we could see her face.
Speaker 2: You know, the jury is looking at her face, and
Speaker 2: while the prosecutor was giving his closing arguments, she was
Speaker 2: rolling her eyes. She had a smug look on her face,
Speaker 2: and look, I imagine I was trying to give her
Speaker 2: some grace and say, Okay, if someone was saying the
Speaker 2: worst possible things about me, I don't have a poker face.
Speaker 2: I likely probably would roll my eyes too, maybe out
Speaker 2: of frustration and annoyance, and just like, are you kidding me?
Speaker 2: That is not what happened, That is not what I did.
Speaker 2: That is not so there could be that, and you
Speaker 2: could give her that. But I have seen Look, there
Speaker 2: are there's rolling commentary in a lot of these feeds,
Speaker 2: and a lot of people watching this just at home,
Speaker 2: just people who like to watch trials. They were all
Speaker 2: commenting on someone needs to wipe that look off her face.
Speaker 3: I don't think it. Definitely wouldn't. It didn't do her
Speaker 3: any good.
Speaker 2: And I guess the only hope would be if you're
Speaker 2: the defense is that you're looking at it saying, well,
Speaker 2: what would that be like if somebody were making up
Speaker 2: lies about me? Yeah?
Speaker 3: That was It didn't look good.
Speaker 1: Oh my god, you know, I've just had a flashback
Speaker 1: to a stand up. How do you react when you're innocent?
Speaker 1: How do you behave when you're innocent and you're being
Speaker 1: accused of something? She doesn't. People can judge it, and
Speaker 1: people are the way you said, but she she's not
Speaker 1: coming off necessarily as an innocent woman. She's coming off
Speaker 1: smug in some of this, and that is the best
Speaker 1: way to put it. She needs to wipe that look
Speaker 1: off her face.
Speaker 2: That's what people were saying, because what it ends up
Speaker 2: looking like you're seeing, you're getting a window into her
Speaker 2: personality that she's used to being right, She's used to
Speaker 2: getting things her way, she's used to not having to
Speaker 2: There's just this like entitlement about her reactions that make
Speaker 2: her not likable.
Speaker 3: And that is what I was saying.
Speaker 1: And the problem is that Robes plays into the storyline
Speaker 1: of the prosecution of who she is. It actually is
Speaker 1: matching up. Let's talk about this video you mentioned a
Speaker 1: second ago. You said during it, like earlier during this drin,
Speaker 1: I might have missed this video, but to see it
Speaker 1: this is the day after or then yeah.
Speaker 3: The day after the day after he died.
Speaker 1: Bro, this is this is what they ended with so
Speaker 1: the the video is of her who took this video,
Speaker 1: By the.
Speaker 3: Way, I think they were just there were some of
Speaker 3: her friends.
Speaker 2: I don't know if there were some of Eric's friends,
Speaker 2: but the couple's friends, the kids, the sons. I I
Speaker 2: remember when I first saw it, thinking, even if that
Speaker 2: is something people do where they celebrate someone's life the
Speaker 2: next day after someone tragically and suddenly dies, it seems
Speaker 2: like a tough emotion to feel that quickly when something
Speaker 2: is so sudden. Like I understand if somebody was slowly
Speaker 2: dying of cancer and you prepared for it, and when
Speaker 2: they passed, you could celebrate, like there'd be a different feeling.
Speaker 3: But this was shocking.
Speaker 2: This was sudden, this was unexpected, and these poor kids
Speaker 2: are reeling. And to see adults taking shots, laughing and
Speaker 2: going to Eric, it just seemed so out of touch
Speaker 2: tonally to even put it mild and it was friends,
Speaker 2: it was her, okay.
Speaker 1: And this is so this after the defense finished with
Speaker 1: their closing, the prosecution gets the last words, so they
Speaker 1: get a rebuttal. They get to come back up and
Speaker 1: kind of close things out and robes this is what
Speaker 1: that video they used. That's one of the last things
Speaker 1: the jury sees before they go into deliberation. That is
Speaker 1: impactful to me because I'm seeing it for the first time.
Speaker 1: Fully today hopes her husband died the day before. You
Speaker 1: see laughter, giddy. This looks celebratory. I've been to funerals
Speaker 1: we call them, yes, celebrations of life, and they are
Speaker 1: parties and they are they have good energy and joy,
Speaker 1: but they don't look like this. This looked like not
Speaker 1: a celebration of his life, but a celebration of his death.
Speaker 1: That's two different things. That's how it comes off. Judged
Speaker 1: for yourselves with robes and I don't know what context
Speaker 1: you put this in for this to make sense.
Speaker 2: That's I think that was a really, really tough visual
Speaker 2: for them to actually be able to fully explain. Now, Look,
Speaker 2: it wasn't just Corey. Her friends were there too. So
Speaker 2: if she were doing it like with her and her
Speaker 2: three or four of love her, but there were several people,
Speaker 2: several adults there, So look, I don't know she was saying.
Speaker 2: I believe the defense attorney was saying, She's Irish and
Speaker 2: they celebrate life and this is part of what so
Speaker 2: you know, culturally speaking, I couldn't I wouldn't. I've never
Speaker 2: seen anything like that, but they say that's part of
Speaker 2: what they do.
Speaker 1: Well, stay here, folks. The defense had answers for everything.
Speaker 1: They really did have a let me explain approach to
Speaker 1: the whole case if you will, we'll explain that. And
Speaker 1: one guy sat in that courtroom today and had his
Speaker 1: entire reputation eviscerated by the defense. Stay here, are continuing
Speaker 1: here on Amy and TJ. That lead investigator had a
Speaker 1: It was tough to sit through that. Today the defense
Speaker 1: giving their closing arguments in the Cory Richion's trial, and
Speaker 1: they went after really, they went after the rich and
Speaker 1: family to some degree, saying that they were responsible for
Speaker 1: putting the police down this wrong path and pushing the
Speaker 1: investigation and making sure it was Corey Richins who was charged.
Speaker 1: But Ropes. She went after the lead investigator and they
Speaker 1: kept doing cutaways of him in the courtroom. This was uncomfortable.
Speaker 3: That was when it got uncomfortable.
Speaker 2: They just stayed on Detective Jeff O'Driscoll's face, who has
Speaker 2: sat I think in court I believe every single day
Speaker 2: through all the testimony. But he got to hear Yes,
Speaker 2: the defense attorney take a tactic that we've seen many, many,
Speaker 2: many defense attorneys take just of course, attack the investigation,
Speaker 2: attack the lead investigator, say that he didn't do his job,
Speaker 2: that he created a theory, that he decided what happened
Speaker 2: and then found evidence to fit his theory.
Speaker 3: We see this all the time.
Speaker 2: And so just go after the investigators, go after the
Speaker 2: police to deflect from any culpability your client may have.
Speaker 1: Does that work? I mean, is that effective? I don't
Speaker 1: know this jury as much as we watched of this case,
Speaker 1: which and I really do believe we saw at these
Speaker 1: ninety percent of all the timemoni in this case, I mean,
Speaker 1: wrote Rose, they were paying attention closer than we are.
Speaker 1: I'm always surprised by jury's I have no idea what
Speaker 1: these folks are under.
Speaker 2: That lead investigator came off to me as a straight shooter,
Speaker 2: like he just came off as a guy. Now he
Speaker 2: got a little testy with the defense. He was definitely
Speaker 2: not willingly helping them in any way. Well, he was defensive,
Speaker 2: he was a little defensive, but he was getting attacked. Sure,
Speaker 2: but yes, he definitely got eviscerated in the closing argument
Speaker 2: today and then in her let me explain moment, I
Speaker 2: actually appreciated some of this, and I thought some of
Speaker 2: this did land, especially when she was explaining why Corey
Speaker 2: deleted messages, why she searched about whether or not police
Speaker 2: could find deleted messages once they took your phone, and
Speaker 2: she said this, she was having an affair. She didn't
Speaker 2: want her husband's family to know that she was having
Speaker 2: an affair. She didn't want police to know she was
Speaker 2: having an affair. So, yeah, she was deleting messages. That
Speaker 2: made sense to me again that I could get that now,
Speaker 2: it also.
Speaker 1: Makes sense she might delete them because the affair gives
Speaker 1: motive for the murder. Just all kinds of stuff. This,
Speaker 1: This is why I don't like circumstances cases.
Speaker 3: This is tough.
Speaker 2: And then in terms of the suspicious searches that they
Speaker 2: said she found, including about expensive female.
Speaker 3: Or sorry, what was it.
Speaker 2: It was jails or prisons, rich for the rich, And
Speaker 2: they were saying, yeah, she was being investigated for murder.
Speaker 2: She was nervous, she was concerned, she started looking at
Speaker 2: what her options. By me, that was a little tougher
Speaker 2: for me.
Speaker 1: Okay, I didn't know where he was a little.
Speaker 3: Tougher for me.
Speaker 2: But then when she said that, Look, we didn't know
Speaker 2: what they were going to say about the housekeeper and
Speaker 2: Carmen Lauber and how they were going to get around
Speaker 2: this testimony that Carmen Lawber said that she got pills,
Speaker 2: she got drugs for Corey Richards. Well, they basically admitted
Speaker 2: that she asked Carmen for pain or if she asked
Speaker 2: Carmen for pain pills, that doesn't mean she asked her
Speaker 2: for fentanyl. And it certainly doesn't mean that she killed
Speaker 2: her husband. That's fair, Okay, that's one of the things.
Speaker 1: They have an answer for everything. Is it reasonable? I
Speaker 1: don't know if this, this collection, this preponderance of evidence,
Speaker 1: all taken together, is circumstantial enough that I am really
Speaker 1: supposed to not use my common sense.
Speaker 3: You're supposed to use your common sense.
Speaker 1: But I don't know. This is why I hate circumstantial cases.
Speaker 2: I was confused too, because when the defense told the
Speaker 2: jury what we said at the beginning, even if you
Speaker 2: think she probably did it, you still cannot convict.
Speaker 1: You can't. That's the whole point. You don't have to
Speaker 1: be convinced one hundred percent. That is the thing. And yes,
Speaker 1: the defense, excuse me, the prosecutor got up, and that
Speaker 1: was the first thing in his rebuttal. He put up
Speaker 1: a graphic, Actually, what reasonable doubt means and what you're
Speaker 1: supposed to consider, and it doesn't mean there there are
Speaker 1: very few things that you know beyond a reasonable doubt
Speaker 1: excuse me, of absolute certainty. There's almost nothing that's not
Speaker 1: the I'm not one hundred percent you're not an alien, right,
Speaker 1: I'm pretty sure. But can I know that one hundred percent?
Speaker 2: No?
Speaker 1: I don't so. No, it's that reasonable doubt thing is
Speaker 1: so fat, it's this slighty. It seems some weird scale.
Speaker 1: I'm just a smoking gun kind of a juror.
Speaker 2: Well, yes, it's wonderful when you can actually have fingerprints,
Speaker 2: forensic evidence that puts you on the scene with motive.
Speaker 1: CSI every single episode, but this case did not have that.
Speaker 2: And I actually really liked I will say, just from
Speaker 2: the effectiveness of it. The way the prosecutor ended his rebuttal,
Speaker 2: this was the final sentence the jurors heard, see through
Speaker 2: her facade, check her ambition, and do not let her
Speaker 2: get away with murder.
Speaker 3: I thought that was effective.
Speaker 1: I don't know, you know it so far what I've
Speaker 1: seen from this jury, they they are taking this job seriously.
Speaker 1: And oh yeah, by the way, and utah, it's a
Speaker 1: jerors eight eight. So they just let four alternates go today.
Speaker 1: So they yes, they had twelve sitting there, but four
Speaker 1: alternates were sent home. They are still supposed to be
Speaker 1: on standby in case somebody gets six but out sick.
Speaker 1: But out there it's only eight.
Speaker 3: That is fascinating. And look the other thing.
Speaker 2: So where we have the prosecution telling the jury don't
Speaker 2: let her get away with murder, you have the defense
Speaker 2: attorney telling the jurors, and she said this more than once,
Speaker 2: to be brave, be courageous, find Corey Richins not guilty.
Speaker 3: And so it was just.
Speaker 2: Fascinating how they were appealing to the jury's emotions. Be brave,
Speaker 2: be courageous, don't send this innocent woman to prison. On
Speaker 2: one hand, and on the other you have quite the opposite. Basically,
Speaker 2: check her ambition, see.
Speaker 3: Through her facade.
Speaker 1: What's your prediction.
Speaker 2: I am going to predict that she is going to
Speaker 2: be found not guilty. I'm sorry, wooh, that was wrong.
Speaker 2: I am going to protict that she is going to
Speaker 2: be found guilty. M look on murder charges. I don't
Speaker 2: know about the attempted murder. I don't know that that
Speaker 2: was as strong in terms of what I saw and
Speaker 2: heard from the testimony, But I feel like once they
Speaker 2: convict her of murder, they're.
Speaker 3: Probably just going to find her guilty.
Speaker 1: Here, Oh yeah, we murder, We forget there's fraud and
Speaker 1: all kinds of other stuff.
Speaker 2: And once she find her guilty of the big charge,
Speaker 2: aggravated murder, it probably the rest will follow.
Speaker 1: I don't know what I would if I was forced
Speaker 1: to put money on it. I would go probably a
Speaker 1: hung jury first after that, not guilty after that guilty.
Speaker 1: I don't know why. There's something about these types of
Speaker 1: cases and these types of defendants sometimes robes. We've seen
Speaker 1: Karen Reid that juries can be very sympathetic. Now she
Speaker 1: is not necessarily a sympathetic character. They didn't say, well,
Speaker 1: she was abused, or he was cheating on her, or
Speaker 1: I mean, even though he was, but she was cheating
Speaker 1: as well. I'm just saying she doesn't. They didn't make
Speaker 1: the case that she is some battered woman kind of
Speaker 1: a thing, so that might play into it, But I
Speaker 1: just circumstantial cases are so hard for me.
Speaker 2: I know I would the media the cases that immediately
Speaker 2: came up Karen Reid and Casey Ans. Those are Casey Anthony.
Speaker 2: Remember that one also surprised me. That was a not
Speaker 2: guilty verdict. That shocked me beyond belief. But you never know,
Speaker 2: No one ever knows what juries are going to do.
Speaker 2: We'll find out that, I guess in a little well,
Speaker 2: we'll jump on, of course if anything were to happen.
Speaker 2: But it looks like most likely the jury will keep
Speaker 2: deliberating until court ends for the day. They are two
Speaker 2: hours behind us here on the East Coast, so likely
Speaker 2: the jury will pick back up with the deliberations tomorrow.
Speaker 3: Warne.
Speaker 1: What didn't he tell them though? What was it? He
Speaker 1: told him that he was giving them so long, going
Speaker 1: to check in with him.
Speaker 2: He was going to check in with them, and the
Speaker 2: timing was it would have been six thirty Eastern time,
Speaker 2: four thirty Mountain time, to see if they wanted to
Speaker 2: keep on deliberating or go home for the night. So
Speaker 2: if anything develops, of course we would jump on. But
Speaker 2: I think it's fairly safe to presume that they will
Speaker 2: likely go home and read every and begin deliberating.
Speaker 3: Again tomorrow morning. So we will, of course.
Speaker 2: Stay on top of this trial for you. As always,
Speaker 2: we appreciate you listening. Thank you so much. I made
Speaker 2: Robock alongside TJ. Holmes.
Speaker 3: We'll talk to you soon.