1
00:00:01,440 --> 00:00:04,680
Speaker 1: Hi, guys, Welcome to another episode of Legally Brunette. I

2
00:00:04,680 --> 00:00:08,520
Speaker 1: will be your host Emily Simpson with my legal sidekick Shane,

3
00:00:09,000 --> 00:00:12,240
Speaker 1: Just Shane. I was super excited about this episode today

4
00:00:12,240 --> 00:00:14,120
Speaker 1: because we actually, I mean, we always have a lot

5
00:00:14,120 --> 00:00:15,960
Speaker 1: of things to talk about, but today I want to

6
00:00:16,000 --> 00:00:18,560
Speaker 1: pack in as much as we possibly can. So we

7
00:00:18,640 --> 00:00:21,200
Speaker 1: have a few updates, just some little things to add

8
00:00:21,320 --> 00:00:25,119
Speaker 1: on the Blake Lively Justin Baldoni case. Also there's a

9
00:00:25,120 --> 00:00:28,400
Speaker 1: little bit more on Gabby Patito, which we've done an

10
00:00:28,440 --> 00:00:32,840
Speaker 1: episode on, and then we will get into a little

11
00:00:32,840 --> 00:00:34,920
Speaker 1: bit more about Karen Reid, some of the things that

12
00:00:34,920 --> 00:00:37,000
Speaker 1: we didn't get into in our first trial, and then

13
00:00:37,159 --> 00:00:41,360
Speaker 1: also get into her retrial. So first of all, let's

14
00:00:41,400 --> 00:00:44,640
Speaker 1: start off with Blake Lively and Justin Baldoni. If you

15
00:00:44,760 --> 00:00:46,920
Speaker 1: don't know a lot about this case, we did some

16
00:00:47,120 --> 00:00:49,680
Speaker 1: earlier episodes on this and I think they were pretty good.

17
00:00:49,800 --> 00:00:52,280
Speaker 1: I read all of the legal documents that were filed,

18
00:00:52,280 --> 00:00:55,720
Speaker 1: and we did a pretty intense deep dive into it.

19
00:00:55,880 --> 00:00:57,560
Speaker 1: And so if you don't know a lot about it,

20
00:00:57,600 --> 00:01:00,320
Speaker 1: I would suggest going back and listening to those episodes.

21
00:01:00,600 --> 00:01:03,440
Speaker 1: But do you recall when we were going through Justin

22
00:01:03,680 --> 00:01:06,880
Speaker 1: Baldoni and the Blake Lively case. One of the first

23
00:01:06,920 --> 00:01:10,280
Speaker 1: things I said was when she filed that original complaint,

24
00:01:10,360 --> 00:01:13,640
Speaker 1: her civil rights complaint with the Civil Rights Department, she

25
00:01:13,680 --> 00:01:18,040
Speaker 1: had attached all of these screenshots of text messages that

26
00:01:18,120 --> 00:01:20,400
Speaker 1: she was not a part of. They were text messages

27
00:01:20,440 --> 00:01:25,240
Speaker 1: between Justin Baldoni, his PR person Jen Abel, and then

28
00:01:25,400 --> 00:01:29,040
Speaker 1: his crisis PR person Melissa Nathan And I do you

29
00:01:29,080 --> 00:01:31,119
Speaker 1: remember me saying, I was like, I don't know how

30
00:01:31,840 --> 00:01:38,120
Speaker 1: they got those text messages, but it looks shady to me. Yeah,

31
00:01:38,160 --> 00:01:41,760
Speaker 1: So the mystery on how they got all those private

32
00:01:41,760 --> 00:01:44,959
Speaker 1: text messages has been solved. It was actually, well.

33
00:01:44,800 --> 00:01:48,120
Speaker 2: Wait a minute, because it's important to know because they

34
00:01:48,160 --> 00:01:50,400
Speaker 2: could have gotten it by asking someone could have this

35
00:01:50,560 --> 00:01:53,320
Speaker 2: able lady could have just given it, right, But you're saying,

36
00:01:53,360 --> 00:01:56,120
Speaker 2: how did they legally obtain it to be able to

37
00:01:56,240 --> 00:01:59,160
Speaker 2: use it in court or for a dB published with

38
00:01:59,200 --> 00:02:01,200
Speaker 2: The New York Time or something like that. So you

39
00:02:01,200 --> 00:02:03,600
Speaker 2: have to explain that it's not just a matter of

40
00:02:03,960 --> 00:02:06,840
Speaker 2: someone gave it to me because they were private messages, right, Yeah,

41
00:02:06,880 --> 00:02:09,519
Speaker 2: so it had to be lawfully obtained.

42
00:02:09,400 --> 00:02:12,240
Speaker 1: Right, And the way that they circumvented that in a

43
00:02:12,480 --> 00:02:16,520
Speaker 1: lawful and I say lawful and quotes is. First of all,

44
00:02:16,520 --> 00:02:19,440
Speaker 1: in order to issue a subpoena and to have subpoena power,

45
00:02:19,520 --> 00:02:22,400
Speaker 1: you have to have an active case with a case number.

46
00:02:23,000 --> 00:02:27,520
Speaker 1: So what they did was she filed a lawsuit and

47
00:02:27,560 --> 00:02:30,639
Speaker 1: this actually comes from this was an article with the

48
00:02:30,720 --> 00:02:33,440
Speaker 1: Daily Mail. It was actually a Daily Mail reporter. I

49
00:02:33,480 --> 00:02:36,200
Speaker 1: believe that was the one that actually kind of solved

50
00:02:36,639 --> 00:02:39,720
Speaker 1: this mystery as to where the subpoena came from, because

51
00:02:39,760 --> 00:02:42,160
Speaker 1: I do recall and I even talked about this in

52
00:02:42,400 --> 00:02:45,440
Speaker 1: the original complaint that she filed her civil rights complaint.

53
00:02:45,440 --> 00:02:47,360
Speaker 1: I believe there was an asterisk down at the bottom

54
00:02:47,400 --> 00:02:50,280
Speaker 1: that said something to the effect of the text messages

55
00:02:50,320 --> 00:02:53,840
Speaker 1: were obtained by subpoena, but the subpoena was never attached,

56
00:02:54,520 --> 00:02:58,000
Speaker 1: so I couldn't figure out what subpoena house.

57
00:02:58,000 --> 00:02:59,800
Speaker 2: It was kind of like a dead end. It was like,

58
00:03:00,680 --> 00:03:03,640
Speaker 2: the subpoena for what case? For what reason? Right? And

59
00:03:03,919 --> 00:03:06,200
Speaker 2: why would it be referenced? Why wouldn't it be required

60
00:03:06,200 --> 00:03:07,000
Speaker 2: to be referenced.

61
00:03:07,120 --> 00:03:09,640
Speaker 1: I don't know, but I just remember thinking that looks

62
00:03:09,680 --> 00:03:13,800
Speaker 1: shady to me. So apparently what she did in order

63
00:03:13,919 --> 00:03:16,680
Speaker 1: to obtain these private text messages, and let's just go

64
00:03:16,720 --> 00:03:17,359
Speaker 1: back a little bit.

65
00:03:17,520 --> 00:03:21,480
Speaker 2: She obtained them. We assumed she obtained them on our own, Yeah,

66
00:03:21,760 --> 00:03:24,160
Speaker 2: and then she had to go backwards right and try

67
00:03:24,160 --> 00:03:26,600
Speaker 2: to make it make a lawful manner in which she

68
00:03:26,720 --> 00:03:28,239
Speaker 2: had rights to them.

69
00:03:28,320 --> 00:03:30,800
Speaker 1: Because if you remember, or you recall, or you listen

70
00:03:30,960 --> 00:03:33,400
Speaker 1: to one of our earlier podcasts on this case, or

71
00:03:33,440 --> 00:03:36,520
Speaker 1: maybe you read it, this all comes down to a

72
00:03:36,520 --> 00:03:39,240
Speaker 1: lot of PR people that are involved in this. And

73
00:03:39,400 --> 00:03:43,320
Speaker 1: jen Abel was Wayfairer's PR person, and she worked for

74
00:03:43,480 --> 00:03:47,240
Speaker 1: Justin Baldoni and did his publicist type of things. She

75
00:03:47,400 --> 00:03:52,400
Speaker 1: also worked for Stephanie Jones for Jones works. Those two

76
00:03:52,800 --> 00:03:58,040
Speaker 1: parted ways, and when they parted ways, Stephanie Jones confiscated

77
00:03:58,240 --> 00:04:01,440
Speaker 1: jen Abel's cell phone and she did it in a

78
00:04:01,480 --> 00:04:04,480
Speaker 1: way according to what Justin Baldoni filed. She did it

79
00:04:04,520 --> 00:04:06,480
Speaker 1: in a way where it was like, come meet us

80
00:04:06,520 --> 00:04:09,200
Speaker 1: at the office, and then she met and then there

81
00:04:09,240 --> 00:04:11,080
Speaker 1: was a security guard and they wanted her to sign

82
00:04:11,080 --> 00:04:13,680
Speaker 1: a bunch of documents and apparently her cell phone was

83
00:04:13,720 --> 00:04:18,640
Speaker 1: confiscated under duress my assumption, which I'm probably right, because

84
00:04:18,640 --> 00:04:20,920
Speaker 1: it doesn't take a genius to figure that out. Stephanie

85
00:04:21,040 --> 00:04:25,080
Speaker 1: Jones confiscates the cell phone, reads all the text messages.

86
00:04:25,600 --> 00:04:28,359
Speaker 1: She and jen Abel are parting ways because jen Abel

87
00:04:28,400 --> 00:04:31,839
Speaker 1: is going to go start her own publicity firm. There's

88
00:04:31,880 --> 00:04:34,360
Speaker 1: some bad blood between the two of them. And then

89
00:04:34,400 --> 00:04:37,279
Speaker 1: Stephanie Jones hands over all these private text messages to

90
00:04:37,320 --> 00:04:41,760
Speaker 1: Blake Lively, Blake Lively's team. So I would guess, and

91
00:04:41,800 --> 00:04:44,960
Speaker 1: I'm probably right, because it just makes sense that they

92
00:04:45,040 --> 00:04:48,160
Speaker 1: had the text messages prior to their ever being any

93
00:04:48,200 --> 00:04:53,599
Speaker 1: subpoena or any lawsuit filed. They just got them, read them,

94
00:04:53,880 --> 00:04:56,640
Speaker 1: and she got pissed about it, right, And she also

95
00:04:56,720 --> 00:04:57,520
Speaker 1: at this time.

96
00:04:57,400 --> 00:05:01,560
Speaker 2: So it's like she was snooping around other people's phones, right,

97
00:05:02,680 --> 00:05:06,040
Speaker 2: being talked about her or whatever, and then she doesn't

98
00:05:06,279 --> 00:05:08,839
Speaker 2: like them, and now she wants to do something about it.

99
00:05:09,040 --> 00:05:11,080
Speaker 1: Right, So I would assume, and this is a legend

100
00:05:11,120 --> 00:05:12,880
Speaker 1: because I don't know this as fact, but I would

101
00:05:12,920 --> 00:05:15,800
Speaker 1: assume she takes all these text messages that have to

102
00:05:15,800 --> 00:05:18,280
Speaker 1: do with Blake and then it ends with us and

103
00:05:18,360 --> 00:05:21,200
Speaker 1: all all of that scenario, and she sends them all

104
00:05:21,600 --> 00:05:25,680
Speaker 1: to Blake's team, who is Leslie Sloane, and Blake sees

105
00:05:25,720 --> 00:05:28,560
Speaker 1: them and her team reads them. And also you have

106
00:05:28,600 --> 00:05:31,680
Speaker 1: to remember during this time period, Blake Lively's reputation was

107
00:05:31,920 --> 00:05:35,560
Speaker 1: just going down. That was right down, because this was

108
00:05:35,640 --> 00:05:40,200
Speaker 1: when the movie was premiering and she was she was

109
00:05:40,760 --> 00:05:42,839
Speaker 1: out promoting the movie, but she was doing it in

110
00:05:42,880 --> 00:05:46,000
Speaker 1: a very flippant way. Remember in the Publisher.

111
00:05:45,680 --> 00:05:51,000
Speaker 2: She she has this campaign for this or pushing this movie,

112
00:05:51,240 --> 00:05:54,080
Speaker 2: doing a bad job for a number of reasons, her

113
00:05:54,480 --> 00:05:58,719
Speaker 2: probably likeabilities going down or approval rating. Right, he's going down.

114
00:05:59,160 --> 00:06:01,400
Speaker 2: And then now she's trying to figure out what to do,

115
00:06:01,520 --> 00:06:04,799
Speaker 2: and so she's snooping around and she looks into text

116
00:06:04,800 --> 00:06:08,640
Speaker 2: messages about her then involved Baldoni, and then now she's

117
00:06:08,680 --> 00:06:11,960
Speaker 2: trying to smear him to save her face.

118
00:06:12,240 --> 00:06:13,760
Speaker 1: Well that's the way it looks to me. And all

119
00:06:13,800 --> 00:06:16,000
Speaker 1: this is alleged because I don't know this as facts,

120
00:06:16,000 --> 00:06:20,400
Speaker 1: but based upon from an outside view, it looks as

121
00:06:20,480 --> 00:06:23,320
Speaker 1: if she got ahold of these text messages and it

122
00:06:23,400 --> 00:06:26,320
Speaker 1: was a way to spin the story so that it

123
00:06:26,360 --> 00:06:28,880
Speaker 1: took the focus off of her having a bad reputation,

124
00:06:28,880 --> 00:06:31,480
Speaker 1: because if you remember, the movie was about domestic violence,

125
00:06:31,680 --> 00:06:34,200
Speaker 1: but she was never addressing the domestic of violence about

126
00:06:34,240 --> 00:06:37,320
Speaker 1: the movie. She was out promoting her hair care line

127
00:06:37,360 --> 00:06:40,000
Speaker 1: and her booze line, and she was saying, where are

128
00:06:40,040 --> 00:06:43,280
Speaker 1: your florals? And she was making it very you know,

129
00:06:43,760 --> 00:06:47,440
Speaker 1: she wasn't taking it seriously. Her reputation started to plummet.

130
00:06:47,440 --> 00:06:49,680
Speaker 1: People were talking negatively about.

131
00:06:49,360 --> 00:06:52,760
Speaker 2: Her seriously though, because wasn't this she wanted to tried

132
00:06:52,800 --> 00:06:55,040
Speaker 2: to do a hostile takeover the movie, and now she's

133
00:06:55,040 --> 00:06:56,000
Speaker 2: not taking it seriously.

134
00:06:56,279 --> 00:06:58,680
Speaker 1: I don't know. I don't know why the marketing plan

135
00:06:58,800 --> 00:07:00,240
Speaker 1: was the way it was. I don't know if that

136
00:07:00,279 --> 00:07:01,839
Speaker 1: was at her direction, I don't know if it was

137
00:07:01,839 --> 00:07:05,880
Speaker 1: at the movies Sony who was the you know, movie studio,

138
00:07:06,000 --> 00:07:08,760
Speaker 1: I don't know. But anyway, her reputation, we know, her

139
00:07:08,800 --> 00:07:12,160
Speaker 1: reputation was plumiting, and there were a lot of articles

140
00:07:12,160 --> 00:07:14,800
Speaker 1: out there that we're talking about how you know, and

141
00:07:14,800 --> 00:07:16,680
Speaker 1: then there were a lot of videos that were resurfacing

142
00:07:16,680 --> 00:07:19,760
Speaker 1: that were showing her being really rude to reporters and

143
00:07:19,840 --> 00:07:22,480
Speaker 1: talking about how she takes over. I mean, she just

144
00:07:22,600 --> 00:07:25,120
Speaker 1: didn't look good. So I think she got ahold of

145
00:07:25,160 --> 00:07:27,520
Speaker 1: these text messages. She found a way to spend the

146
00:07:27,600 --> 00:07:30,000
Speaker 1: narrative to make it look like the reason she looked

147
00:07:30,040 --> 00:07:32,720
Speaker 1: bad was because justin Baldoni and his PR team were

148
00:07:32,760 --> 00:07:36,480
Speaker 1: out there planting these fake stories and you know, creating this,

149
00:07:37,280 --> 00:07:41,040
Speaker 1: you know, conspiracy against her. But they have the text messages.

150
00:07:41,080 --> 00:07:42,560
Speaker 1: Now what do they do? They want to use them,

151
00:07:42,600 --> 00:07:45,119
Speaker 1: They want to file against him. She wants to file

152
00:07:45,160 --> 00:07:48,480
Speaker 1: a civil complaint, and she colludes with The New York Times,

153
00:07:48,560 --> 00:07:51,520
Speaker 1: and she has these text messages. But in order to

154
00:07:51,720 --> 00:07:56,320
Speaker 1: lawfully have these text messages, she has to go back retroactively.

155
00:07:55,600 --> 00:07:58,640
Speaker 2: And she needs them lawfully. Well, New York Times wanted

156
00:07:58,640 --> 00:08:01,600
Speaker 2: them lawfully. They want invase in a privacy or something. Right,

157
00:08:01,640 --> 00:08:04,200
Speaker 2: So for probably for The New York Times to publish it,

158
00:08:04,200 --> 00:08:06,880
Speaker 2: they're saying, well, how did you obtain these right? And

159
00:08:06,920 --> 00:08:09,440
Speaker 2: then she say, in this legal manner.

160
00:08:10,880 --> 00:08:16,440
Speaker 1: The asterisk it says right. So so this Daily Mail

161
00:08:16,480 --> 00:08:19,360
Speaker 1: reporter did some digging and found out that Blake Lively

162
00:08:19,920 --> 00:08:24,800
Speaker 1: has an LLC or something called van Zan. So, I

163
00:08:24,800 --> 00:08:27,240
Speaker 1: don't know, it's just just some ELLC. It's it was.

164
00:08:27,960 --> 00:08:30,280
Speaker 1: I think she used it to buy some furniture in

165
00:08:30,320 --> 00:08:33,240
Speaker 1: Europe or something. I mean, she'd never really done anything

166
00:08:33,400 --> 00:08:37,040
Speaker 1: with it. Apparently, the lawsuit was filed under the name

167
00:08:37,080 --> 00:08:39,760
Speaker 1: of a company called van Zan and was intentionally vague

168
00:08:39,760 --> 00:08:42,640
Speaker 1: and didn't name any defendants, so they filed. So van

169
00:08:42,760 --> 00:08:46,600
Speaker 1: Zan is the plaintiff they file against ten Jane does,

170
00:08:46,880 --> 00:08:51,760
Speaker 1: which means which means named unknown defendants. I looked at

171
00:08:51,760 --> 00:08:53,760
Speaker 1: the cause of actions. It was some things like breach

172
00:08:53,760 --> 00:08:55,600
Speaker 1: of contract and things like that, but it was all

173
00:08:55,720 --> 00:08:59,480
Speaker 1: very vague. So this maneuver enabled Lively's legal team to

174
00:08:59,600 --> 00:09:02,320
Speaker 1: issue subpoena for the private communications.

175
00:09:02,520 --> 00:09:04,199
Speaker 2: And then this poena was issued to who.

176
00:09:04,360 --> 00:09:07,720
Speaker 1: This I believe the subpoena. Well, see they Daily Mail

177
00:09:07,760 --> 00:09:09,679
Speaker 1: says they have the subpoena, but they won't show it.

178
00:09:09,720 --> 00:09:11,240
Speaker 2: Well, what would make sense, Like who do you think

179
00:09:11,240 --> 00:09:11,520
Speaker 2: it was?

180
00:09:11,800 --> 00:09:15,160
Speaker 1: Well, I believe it was issued to Stephanie Jones because

181
00:09:15,200 --> 00:09:18,679
Speaker 1: she confiscated the work phone from gen Able came from,

182
00:09:18,720 --> 00:09:21,000
Speaker 1: because that's where it came from. All these messages came from.

183
00:09:21,120 --> 00:09:25,319
Speaker 2: Jenable basically say like, what's an example paraphrasing, Well, we.

184
00:09:25,280 --> 00:09:26,920
Speaker 1: Talked about this before, and it's also in the New

185
00:09:27,000 --> 00:09:27,480
Speaker 1: York Times.

186
00:09:27,640 --> 00:09:28,880
Speaker 2: I didn't pay attention last nime.

187
00:09:29,240 --> 00:09:32,120
Speaker 1: Clearly you didn't. It has to do with them having

188
00:09:32,120 --> 00:09:35,600
Speaker 1: communications about what they're going to do as far as

189
00:09:36,240 --> 00:09:39,800
Speaker 1: pr and making Blake Lively look a certain way. And

190
00:09:39,800 --> 00:09:42,040
Speaker 1: getting stories out there and meeting with Daily Mail, and

191
00:09:42,360 --> 00:09:44,959
Speaker 1: remember in the New York Times, they kind of remember

192
00:09:45,200 --> 00:09:48,920
Speaker 1: the attorney Brian Friedman, who represents Baldoni, talks about how

193
00:09:48,960 --> 00:09:51,960
Speaker 1: they cherry picked certain text messages to make it look

194
00:09:52,000 --> 00:09:53,920
Speaker 1: like it was a smear campaign, but they didn't really

195
00:09:53,920 --> 00:09:58,240
Speaker 1: show the full context of the messages. So anyway, they

196
00:09:58,280 --> 00:10:01,719
Speaker 1: filed this sham law suit under a company called van Zaan.

197
00:10:01,800 --> 00:10:03,960
Speaker 1: They named these unknown defendants. They say it's for breach

198
00:10:04,000 --> 00:10:07,080
Speaker 1: of contract, so they get a case number. They use

199
00:10:07,160 --> 00:10:09,560
Speaker 1: the case number to issue a subpoena. I assume the

200
00:10:09,559 --> 00:10:11,800
Speaker 1: subpoena went to Stephanie Jones because she then why.

201
00:10:11,679 --> 00:10:13,599
Speaker 2: Would Sephanie like, if you got a subpoena that just

202
00:10:13,640 --> 00:10:17,520
Speaker 2: said van Zam versus John James, give me all your

203
00:10:17,559 --> 00:10:19,000
Speaker 2: text messages.

204
00:10:18,520 --> 00:10:20,960
Speaker 1: Because Stephanie Jones already gave them the text messages.

205
00:10:21,040 --> 00:10:23,920
Speaker 2: Oh that's right, Okay, now she's a question.

206
00:10:24,080 --> 00:10:26,920
Speaker 1: Yeah, so now she just and that's alleged again. I

207
00:10:26,920 --> 00:10:27,439
Speaker 1: don't know that.

208
00:10:27,559 --> 00:10:29,520
Speaker 2: I don't know. We're trying to put pieces together.

209
00:10:30,240 --> 00:10:34,160
Speaker 1: What makes what makes logical sense is that Stephanie Jones

210
00:10:34,200 --> 00:10:37,599
Speaker 1: confiscated the phone, read the text messages, gave them to

211
00:10:37,640 --> 00:10:38,760
Speaker 1: Blake Lively's team.

212
00:10:39,000 --> 00:10:41,480
Speaker 2: Okay, my question is if they issued a subpoena or

213
00:10:41,640 --> 00:10:45,800
Speaker 2: they they could issue a subpoena, they drafted one, and

214
00:10:45,840 --> 00:10:49,120
Speaker 2: then they supposed assuming your version of the facts or

215
00:10:49,160 --> 00:10:51,760
Speaker 2: what took place, right, because I know we're just guessing.

216
00:10:51,960 --> 00:10:55,280
Speaker 2: But then she issues it to Stephanie Yeah, Stephanie Yeah.

217
00:10:55,280 --> 00:10:58,400
Speaker 2: But then we could ask Stephanie did you get the subpoena?

218
00:10:58,840 --> 00:11:01,360
Speaker 2: Was it ever served on you? And then she says

219
00:11:01,559 --> 00:11:04,200
Speaker 2: no or yes? And if it's no, then it's like, well,

220
00:11:04,240 --> 00:11:06,040
Speaker 2: then how did they get the text message? And if

221
00:11:06,040 --> 00:11:08,760
Speaker 2: the answer is yes, I did get a subpoena, then

222
00:11:08,800 --> 00:11:11,040
Speaker 2: it's like, oh, did you follow through and give the

223
00:11:11,120 --> 00:11:15,079
Speaker 2: text messages? And she says no again, then it's like, well,

224
00:11:15,120 --> 00:11:17,280
Speaker 2: then how did they get to text messages? We needed

225
00:11:17,280 --> 00:11:17,920
Speaker 2: these answers?

226
00:11:19,160 --> 00:11:21,480
Speaker 1: Yeah, I would say, all I know is I think

227
00:11:21,480 --> 00:11:24,120
Speaker 1: it's pretty easy to come to the conclusion that they

228
00:11:24,160 --> 00:11:27,000
Speaker 1: already had the text messages. They wanted to use them

229
00:11:27,040 --> 00:11:29,200
Speaker 1: and their initial filing, and they wanted to be able

230
00:11:29,240 --> 00:11:31,120
Speaker 1: to give them to The New York Times right because

231
00:11:31,120 --> 00:11:35,840
Speaker 1: they wanted to collude together to demolish his character, and

232
00:11:35,880 --> 00:11:37,760
Speaker 1: they knew they could do that with the text messages.

233
00:11:37,840 --> 00:11:40,640
Speaker 1: So they come up with a sham scam lawsuit. They

234
00:11:40,640 --> 00:11:43,240
Speaker 1: get a case number, they issue it to Stephanie Jones

235
00:11:43,240 --> 00:11:45,240
Speaker 1: and she's like, Okay, here's the subpoena. I have it,

236
00:11:45,840 --> 00:11:48,000
Speaker 1: So I gave So I gave away these private text

237
00:11:48,000 --> 00:11:49,240
Speaker 1: messages legally.

238
00:11:49,400 --> 00:11:51,800
Speaker 2: Oh that's right, because I keep forgetting off. Stephanie's on

239
00:11:51,880 --> 00:11:52,480
Speaker 2: her side.

240
00:11:52,640 --> 00:11:56,840
Speaker 1: Yes. Otherwise, if they send them to jen Abel who represents,

241
00:11:56,920 --> 00:11:57,840
Speaker 1: that's what I'll donate.

242
00:11:57,960 --> 00:11:59,839
Speaker 2: That's what that's the party I had mixed up, right.

243
00:11:59,840 --> 00:12:04,120
Speaker 1: This is why it's a scam lawsuit, because if they

244
00:12:04,160 --> 00:12:07,480
Speaker 1: had issued the subpoena to jen Able or to Justin

245
00:12:07,520 --> 00:12:10,840
Speaker 1: Baldoni to get his private text messages, his attorney would

246
00:12:10,840 --> 00:12:14,760
Speaker 1: have jumped in immediately and squashed it and said, these

247
00:12:14,760 --> 00:12:18,720
Speaker 1: are private communications. It's too broad, you're asking for too much.

248
00:12:19,080 --> 00:12:20,520
Speaker 1: He would have had objection.

249
00:12:20,400 --> 00:12:25,760
Speaker 2: That the receiving end of the subpoena was also in collusion.

250
00:12:25,240 --> 00:12:31,320
Speaker 1: With Yes, that's what the Lively reynolds exactly right. So

251
00:12:31,480 --> 00:12:33,080
Speaker 1: there we are. I hope you could follow that. I

252
00:12:33,120 --> 00:12:35,240
Speaker 1: know it was a little complicated, but basically what it

253
00:12:35,360 --> 00:12:37,920
Speaker 1: was was just a scam way to get a subpoena

254
00:12:37,960 --> 00:12:40,760
Speaker 1: issued retroactively.

255
00:12:39,920 --> 00:12:41,560
Speaker 2: Should have been called Van Scam.

256
00:12:41,679 --> 00:12:53,400
Speaker 1: Van Scam should have been the LLC. Also, let me

257
00:12:53,440 --> 00:12:55,360
Speaker 1: just give a little timing because this is suspect too.

258
00:12:55,440 --> 00:12:59,439
Speaker 1: The lawsuit, the Van Zaan lawsuit was filed in September.

259
00:13:00,040 --> 00:13:02,040
Speaker 1: If you remember, there were also a lot of online

260
00:13:02,080 --> 00:13:05,240
Speaker 1: sluice during this time when this whole lawsuit came out

261
00:13:05,320 --> 00:13:08,000
Speaker 1: that said that The New York Times that they had

262
00:13:08,040 --> 00:13:10,240
Speaker 1: some data embedded that said it looked like they started

263
00:13:10,240 --> 00:13:13,400
Speaker 1: working on the story in October, which would make sense

264
00:13:13,440 --> 00:13:17,920
Speaker 1: with the timeline. And then she filed in December. When

265
00:13:17,960 --> 00:13:23,720
Speaker 1: she filed her original suit against Baldoni, the subpoena. Four

266
00:13:23,800 --> 00:13:26,120
Speaker 1: days after the suit was filed, a subpoena was sent

267
00:13:26,120 --> 00:13:30,400
Speaker 1: to Stephanie Jones. So four days after the van zan

268
00:13:30,760 --> 00:13:33,880
Speaker 1: suit was filed, they sent a subpoena to Stephanie Jones.

269
00:13:34,000 --> 00:13:40,120
Speaker 1: Stephanie Jones right. Also, the suit, the scam suit was

270
00:13:40,240 --> 00:13:44,160
Speaker 1: dismissed the day after or it was withdrawn, not dismissed.

271
00:13:44,240 --> 00:13:46,240
Speaker 1: Dismissed would be by the court. It was withdrawn by

272
00:13:46,280 --> 00:13:47,320
Speaker 1: her attorneys like.

273
00:13:47,320 --> 00:13:49,200
Speaker 2: Okay, we're done with the suit. Well, we wanted.

274
00:13:49,080 --> 00:13:53,080
Speaker 1: Right Her attorneys withdraw it after she files the complaint

275
00:13:53,160 --> 00:13:57,080
Speaker 1: against Baldoni. So she files the complaint, then they withdraw

276
00:13:57,640 --> 00:13:58,880
Speaker 1: this scam.

277
00:13:58,520 --> 00:14:00,439
Speaker 2: Suit, and then New York Times posted what they posed

278
00:14:00,440 --> 00:14:01,400
Speaker 2: it right.

279
00:14:01,080 --> 00:14:02,719
Speaker 1: So there we are with that. I hope you could

280
00:14:02,720 --> 00:14:03,320
Speaker 1: all follow that.

281
00:14:03,440 --> 00:14:05,520
Speaker 2: Dan a lot of time on their hands, I guess,

282
00:14:05,600 --> 00:14:07,719
Speaker 2: so team to do all this about.

283
00:14:07,480 --> 00:14:10,400
Speaker 1: Donty's attorney, who we all know is Brian Friedman, labeled

284
00:14:10,400 --> 00:14:13,319
Speaker 1: the tactic an abusive process and says that they are

285
00:14:13,480 --> 00:14:17,640
Speaker 1: preparing to respond accordingly. Here's my question though. When I

286
00:14:17,720 --> 00:14:20,320
Speaker 1: first read the complaint and saw the asterisk that said

287
00:14:20,360 --> 00:14:25,280
Speaker 1: there was a subpoena, I wondered why Brian Friedman didn't

288
00:14:25,280 --> 00:14:29,880
Speaker 1: initially go after the subpoena. And I thought about it

289
00:14:29,920 --> 00:14:33,240
Speaker 1: for a while, and my thought process led me to

290
00:14:33,920 --> 00:14:37,479
Speaker 1: what he did was so much better. Instead of attacking

291
00:14:37,520 --> 00:14:40,640
Speaker 1: the validity of the subpoena and how they got the

292
00:14:40,680 --> 00:14:44,400
Speaker 1: text messages, which would possibly make Justin look guilty that

293
00:14:44,440 --> 00:14:47,520
Speaker 1: he's like, hey, hey, don't show those, right, he just

294
00:14:47,560 --> 00:14:50,320
Speaker 1: went and filed a four hundred million dollars lawsuit against

295
00:14:50,320 --> 00:14:52,680
Speaker 1: The New York Times and included all of the texts.

296
00:14:52,760 --> 00:14:56,560
Speaker 2: Instead of being defensive the content or the access to

297
00:14:56,640 --> 00:15:00,000
Speaker 2: the text messages. In fact, that would have been more

298
00:15:00,360 --> 00:15:03,120
Speaker 2: might have been confusing to the public, right because they

299
00:15:03,480 --> 00:15:06,280
Speaker 2: would have been like, Oh, he's denying or he's saying

300
00:15:06,320 --> 00:15:08,280
Speaker 2: that she shouldn't have the text messages. So he did

301
00:15:08,320 --> 00:15:10,920
Speaker 2: talk crap about her. I want her to see it,

302
00:15:10,960 --> 00:15:15,280
Speaker 2: and that's confusing or that takes away from the trying

303
00:15:15,320 --> 00:15:17,160
Speaker 2: to smash her.

304
00:15:17,280 --> 00:15:20,360
Speaker 1: I've always said Brian Friedman is an amazing attorney, and

305
00:15:20,400 --> 00:15:23,160
Speaker 1: if I ever get in trouble legally, he will be

306
00:15:23,200 --> 00:15:26,040
Speaker 1: the first person I call. But I thought that that

307
00:15:26,240 --> 00:15:28,480
Speaker 1: was I don't I'm not going to call Shane, I'm

308
00:15:28,480 --> 00:15:32,040
Speaker 1: going to call Brian Friedman or Alan Jackson Brian Friedman first.

309
00:15:32,640 --> 00:15:35,080
Speaker 1: But I thought it was just a really good legal

310
00:15:35,160 --> 00:15:38,479
Speaker 1: tactic on his end that he didn't attack the subpoena

311
00:15:38,560 --> 00:15:41,440
Speaker 1: right from the beginning, and he didn't go after them

312
00:15:41,680 --> 00:15:43,760
Speaker 1: because he knew. If I know, if I read it,

313
00:15:43,760 --> 00:15:45,760
Speaker 1: and I'm like, how'd they get the subpoena? This is

314
00:15:45,960 --> 00:15:49,200
Speaker 1: this is a joke. Clearly, Brian Friedman knew that from

315
00:15:49,200 --> 00:15:51,280
Speaker 1: the beginning too. The man's a genius.

316
00:15:51,320 --> 00:15:54,680
Speaker 2: If there's a legal reference to another lawsuit in that

317
00:15:54,720 --> 00:15:58,040
Speaker 2: petition or whatever, complaint, he's going to look in Well.

318
00:15:57,920 --> 00:16:00,000
Speaker 1: There's no reference to another lawsuit. There's just a referen

319
00:16:00,240 --> 00:16:01,000
Speaker 1: to a subpoena.

320
00:16:01,120 --> 00:16:02,280
Speaker 2: Yeawsuit.

321
00:16:02,400 --> 00:16:05,400
Speaker 1: Right, So I'm just saying, well, I'm just saying he

322
00:16:05,440 --> 00:16:08,920
Speaker 1: clearly knew, but he didn't attack the validity of it,

323
00:16:08,960 --> 00:16:11,560
Speaker 1: and he didn't go after her in that manner. He

324
00:16:11,880 --> 00:16:15,120
Speaker 1: just sued The New York Times and her for four

325
00:16:15,240 --> 00:16:18,160
Speaker 1: hundred million and included all of the text messages, which

326
00:16:18,200 --> 00:16:20,360
Speaker 1: really worked in his favor because once the public got

327
00:16:20,400 --> 00:16:23,400
Speaker 1: a hold of those legal documents and read everything that

328
00:16:23,440 --> 00:16:28,520
Speaker 1: was included, that's when everything shifted. Anyway, let's move on.

329
00:16:29,240 --> 00:16:30,920
Speaker 1: Oh wait, one more thing on Blake Lively. I don't

330
00:16:30,920 --> 00:16:33,240
Speaker 1: know if you've noticed, but she is in the press

331
00:16:33,360 --> 00:16:34,040
Speaker 1: a lot lately.

332
00:16:34,160 --> 00:16:37,360
Speaker 2: Well, she was like the top one hundred influences, yes, something.

333
00:16:37,240 --> 00:16:40,440
Speaker 1: Which was ridiculous because she also then gave some speech

334
00:16:40,480 --> 00:16:42,280
Speaker 1: in honor of her mother, and I think she had

335
00:16:42,280 --> 00:16:44,160
Speaker 1: something to do with her mom being like a domestic

336
00:16:44,360 --> 00:16:48,440
Speaker 1: violence abuse survivor or something, and I was like, lady,

337
00:16:49,040 --> 00:16:52,080
Speaker 1: a little too late. You had no issue, like you

338
00:16:52,120 --> 00:16:54,160
Speaker 1: didn't want to talk about any of these stories when

339
00:16:54,160 --> 00:16:56,880
Speaker 1: you were promoting, when you were promoting a movie about

340
00:16:56,880 --> 00:16:59,760
Speaker 1: domestic violence. You just wanted to talk about florals and

341
00:16:59,760 --> 00:17:02,760
Speaker 1: your your booze brand and your hair care products. But

342
00:17:02,840 --> 00:17:07,040
Speaker 1: now that your reputation has been like completely plummeted, now.

343
00:17:06,920 --> 00:17:08,439
Speaker 2: All of a sudden, it's like, oh, yeah, did I

344
00:17:08,480 --> 00:17:09,880
Speaker 2: mention my mom was abused?

345
00:17:10,000 --> 00:17:10,160
Speaker 3: Right?

346
00:17:10,240 --> 00:17:12,679
Speaker 1: I mean, give me a break. Also, I think her

347
00:17:12,720 --> 00:17:16,160
Speaker 1: pr turn team is just working overtime right now, because

348
00:17:16,520 --> 00:17:18,280
Speaker 1: all of a sudden, there are all these articles. I

349
00:17:18,280 --> 00:17:20,399
Speaker 1: saw an article about her own people, an article on

350
00:17:20,520 --> 00:17:23,560
Speaker 1: Okay magazine. Now she's in the Time one hundred list.

351
00:17:24,040 --> 00:17:27,040
Speaker 1: I mean they are out there like doing everything.

352
00:17:26,720 --> 00:17:30,680
Speaker 2: Possible, work hard to defend her character, right until she

353
00:17:30,760 --> 00:17:32,440
Speaker 2: stops paying them. Then they don't care.

354
00:17:32,520 --> 00:17:33,960
Speaker 1: Then they don't care. All right, let's move on to

355
00:17:34,000 --> 00:17:36,400
Speaker 1: a little bit about Gabby Patito. I thought this was interesting.

356
00:17:36,720 --> 00:17:37,520
Speaker 1: We also did a.

357
00:17:38,080 --> 00:17:41,439
Speaker 2: What's the next step in the Lively Baldoni case? We

358
00:17:41,520 --> 00:17:42,160
Speaker 2: have to look forward?

359
00:17:42,200 --> 00:17:46,280
Speaker 1: Well, they have well, they're going to start issuing, They're

360
00:17:46,280 --> 00:17:49,240
Speaker 1: going to do discovery and you you bet your butt

361
00:17:49,280 --> 00:17:52,200
Speaker 1: you think Brian Freeman is gonna he's definitely gonna subpoena.

362
00:17:53,560 --> 00:17:56,600
Speaker 2: Yeah, you want to see a subpoena subpoena.

363
00:17:56,800 --> 00:17:59,280
Speaker 1: I'm going to send it to Taylor Swift. You know

364
00:17:59,320 --> 00:18:02,040
Speaker 1: he's going to you know, Taylor Swift. So anyway, I

365
00:18:02,040 --> 00:18:05,600
Speaker 1: also read this morning that Travis Kelcey apparently unfollowed Ryan

366
00:18:05,600 --> 00:18:12,359
Speaker 1: Reynolds on Instagram. So definitely there is some bad blood.

367
00:18:13,160 --> 00:18:16,080
Speaker 1: Now we got bad blood. That's a Taylor Swift song.

368
00:18:16,240 --> 00:18:18,760
Speaker 1: You didn't know that anyway, Okay, on the game, Okay,

369
00:18:19,560 --> 00:18:23,480
Speaker 1: onto Gabby Patito. We also did an episode on Gabby Patito.

370
00:18:23,680 --> 00:18:25,320
Speaker 1: If you want to go back and listen to that.

371
00:18:25,400 --> 00:18:27,240
Speaker 2: I thought that was my case one.

372
00:18:27,320 --> 00:18:29,440
Speaker 1: Gabby Patito is the young girl that went on the

373
00:18:29,520 --> 00:18:32,880
Speaker 1: road trip with the boyfriend and then remember they got

374
00:18:33,080 --> 00:18:35,600
Speaker 1: they got pulled over in Utah by the Moab City

375
00:18:35,640 --> 00:18:38,280
Speaker 1: police and then she ended up being found dead. Remember

376
00:18:38,320 --> 00:18:42,040
Speaker 1: he returned to Florida. His parents were uncooperative. They wouldn't

377
00:18:42,040 --> 00:18:44,320
Speaker 1: work with the police or answer any questions. Her body

378
00:18:44,400 --> 00:18:47,720
Speaker 1: was found in a national park or something, and then

379
00:18:47,800 --> 00:18:51,680
Speaker 1: he ended up being found dead in Florida. So in

380
00:18:51,760 --> 00:18:55,040
Speaker 1: an in a recent interview on The Squeeze podcast, which

381
00:18:55,080 --> 00:18:56,919
Speaker 1: is hosted by Taylor Lautner, I don't know if you

382
00:18:56,920 --> 00:18:59,280
Speaker 1: know who Taylor Lautner is, but I do because I

383
00:18:59,320 --> 00:19:02,840
Speaker 1: was a huge Twilight fan. He is the werewolf, he

384
00:19:02,920 --> 00:19:06,560
Speaker 1: is Jacob. So he has a podcast with his wife.

385
00:19:07,800 --> 00:19:09,480
Speaker 1: So Nicole Schmidt is the mother.

386
00:19:10,200 --> 00:19:11,119
Speaker 2: Taylor swift Woods.

387
00:19:11,400 --> 00:19:14,200
Speaker 1: I don't remember, I think so it was like Taylor

388
00:19:14,200 --> 00:19:18,639
Speaker 1: And that's interesting. Well, his wife's name was Taylor.

389
00:19:18,720 --> 00:19:20,960
Speaker 2: Does how many songs written about him? About him?

390
00:19:21,000 --> 00:19:26,280
Speaker 1: I don't know. Maybe probably anyway, So Gabby Petito, her

391
00:19:26,280 --> 00:19:28,919
Speaker 1: mom's name is Nicole Schmidt, and she went on the podcast.

392
00:19:29,040 --> 00:19:32,199
Speaker 1: She revealed some unsettling details about the events following her

393
00:19:32,240 --> 00:19:36,040
Speaker 1: daughter's disappearance in twenty twenty one. This is a was

394
00:19:36,080 --> 00:19:38,159
Speaker 1: all new information to me because I did watch the

395
00:19:38,200 --> 00:19:40,480
Speaker 1: documentary and we did an episode on it. But this

396
00:19:40,600 --> 00:19:43,680
Speaker 1: was not something that was ever revealed previously. This was

397
00:19:43,720 --> 00:19:47,719
Speaker 1: in a People article. The mom of Gabby Petito stated

398
00:19:47,760 --> 00:19:51,840
Speaker 1: that Brian Laundry's room was completely gutted and renovated shortly

399
00:19:51,920 --> 00:19:55,280
Speaker 1: after he vanished. She claims that very same week Gabby

400
00:19:55,320 --> 00:19:57,119
Speaker 1: went missing, the cops were going to their house to

401
00:19:57,160 --> 00:19:59,360
Speaker 1: try to get a scent from their dogs to look

402
00:19:59,400 --> 00:20:01,520
Speaker 1: for Brian. All his things were gone. His room was

403
00:20:01,560 --> 00:20:04,440
Speaker 1: completely empty. It was just gone. That wasn't something that

404
00:20:04,440 --> 00:20:05,800
Speaker 1: I knew before, and I was wondering, what do you

405
00:20:05,840 --> 00:20:08,919
Speaker 1: think about that? That's when he left, apparently to go

406
00:20:09,040 --> 00:20:13,640
Speaker 1: hiking somewhere in Florida. And remember the cops were looking

407
00:20:13,720 --> 00:20:16,600
Speaker 1: in this reservoir area or something forever. They were looking

408
00:20:16,760 --> 00:20:19,800
Speaker 1: for a long time, weeks they couldn't find him. Then

409
00:20:19,880 --> 00:20:22,560
Speaker 1: his parents pull up in their car and they literally

410
00:20:22,640 --> 00:20:24,520
Speaker 1: just walked to where he and they find him within

411
00:20:24,600 --> 00:20:28,000
Speaker 1: like five minutes or something, which always seemed very suspicious

412
00:20:28,040 --> 00:20:30,440
Speaker 1: to me, But now a court after the mom did

413
00:20:30,440 --> 00:20:34,760
Speaker 1: this interview, she learned that apparently Brian's room was completely

414
00:20:34,840 --> 00:20:39,280
Speaker 1: gutted and renovated before they found him. So my question is,

415
00:20:40,040 --> 00:20:43,720
Speaker 1: do you think the parents knew that he was dead?

416
00:20:43,920 --> 00:20:46,199
Speaker 1: Do you think they knew that he was going to

417
00:20:46,320 --> 00:20:49,920
Speaker 1: kill himself? Do you think they or do you think

418
00:20:49,960 --> 00:20:51,959
Speaker 1: they thought he was going to go on the run

419
00:20:52,119 --> 00:20:53,520
Speaker 1: and then they were just going to pretend like he

420
00:20:53,560 --> 00:20:55,800
Speaker 1: disappeared and they renovated his room or do you think

421
00:20:55,800 --> 00:20:57,879
Speaker 1: they were trying to get rid of DNA evidence so

422
00:20:57,920 --> 00:21:00,480
Speaker 1: they just got rid of everything in his room.

423
00:21:01,760 --> 00:21:05,760
Speaker 2: I think I know as a father, if I always

424
00:21:05,800 --> 00:21:10,000
Speaker 2: thought if one of my kids was missing and suspect

425
00:21:10,080 --> 00:21:14,000
Speaker 2: in a murder case. I would cut the room, oh

426
00:21:14,040 --> 00:21:15,960
Speaker 2: you would, yeah, and turn it into a game room.

427
00:21:16,080 --> 00:21:20,040
Speaker 1: A game room. Okay, so this makes sense, I get it. Yeah, okay,

428
00:21:20,080 --> 00:21:21,040
Speaker 1: what kind of games would you have?

429
00:21:21,280 --> 00:21:24,320
Speaker 2: No, they're in on it. They're murderers. They probably killed him.

430
00:21:25,480 --> 00:21:27,440
Speaker 2: Well I don't know. I don't think it. Might have

431
00:21:27,960 --> 00:21:30,160
Speaker 2: might have killed him. And then said here he is,

432
00:21:30,359 --> 00:21:32,280
Speaker 2: we found him. Look at the suicide note with her

433
00:21:32,320 --> 00:21:32,960
Speaker 2: suicide note.

434
00:21:33,240 --> 00:21:36,760
Speaker 1: Yeah there was, yeah, there was, and apparently he But

435
00:21:36,800 --> 00:21:38,760
Speaker 1: then there was also something he wrote in the journal

436
00:21:38,840 --> 00:21:40,000
Speaker 1: about somehow or he.

437
00:21:40,000 --> 00:21:41,560
Speaker 2: Was going to kill himself and they knew and they'd

438
00:21:41,640 --> 00:21:42,160
Speaker 2: let him do it.

439
00:21:42,640 --> 00:21:44,280
Speaker 1: I don't know, though. His mom was so in love

440
00:21:44,280 --> 00:21:46,359
Speaker 1: with him. Did you remember that letter that she wrote

441
00:21:46,400 --> 00:21:48,720
Speaker 1: to him about wherever the body is buried all helped

442
00:21:48,720 --> 00:21:51,080
Speaker 1: dig the hole. And I mean she wrote him like

443
00:21:51,119 --> 00:21:53,119
Speaker 1: this long love letter about how much she loved him

444
00:21:53,119 --> 00:21:54,800
Speaker 1: and everything she would do for him, and she would

445
00:21:54,960 --> 00:21:57,080
Speaker 1: bring a knife into jail and a cake.

446
00:21:58,520 --> 00:22:01,320
Speaker 2: So sounds like a complex.

447
00:22:01,560 --> 00:22:07,680
Speaker 1: Yeah, So anyway, there was all that. Additionally, Gabby anything, no,

448
00:22:07,760 --> 00:22:08,520
Speaker 1: and you know what I have.

449
00:22:08,480 --> 00:22:09,919
Speaker 2: Had the obstruction of justice.

450
00:22:09,960 --> 00:22:12,480
Speaker 1: Nothing I mean at this point, no.

451
00:22:12,640 --> 00:22:15,800
Speaker 2: Bad parents, just bad parents.

452
00:22:15,119 --> 00:22:19,600
Speaker 1: Just not being morally sound people. But apparently that's not

453
00:22:19,720 --> 00:22:23,120
Speaker 1: a legal action. But you know, I've had so many

454
00:22:23,200 --> 00:22:27,000
Speaker 1: people DM me after our Gabby Patito case, and that

455
00:22:27,160 --> 00:22:30,840
Speaker 1: was the main question was why were his parents not

456
00:22:31,000 --> 00:22:34,439
Speaker 1: charged with anything? And I guess, I mean, when we

457
00:22:34,480 --> 00:22:37,080
Speaker 1: look at it, it looks like obstruction of justice or

458
00:22:37,119 --> 00:22:39,560
Speaker 1: aiding in a bedding or something like that. But I

459
00:22:39,640 --> 00:22:43,400
Speaker 1: don't know, maybe there just weren't enough solid facts there

460
00:22:43,440 --> 00:22:45,560
Speaker 1: to be able to charge them with anything. At the

461
00:22:45,600 --> 00:22:47,040
Speaker 1: end of the day, you can charge them with just

462
00:22:47,080 --> 00:22:51,000
Speaker 1: being shitty people, But as far as from a legal standpoint,

463
00:22:51,080 --> 00:22:52,680
Speaker 1: I guess they just didn't have enough to be able

464
00:22:52,720 --> 00:22:54,040
Speaker 1: to charge them with anything.

465
00:22:54,320 --> 00:22:54,600
Speaker 2: Right.

466
00:22:54,920 --> 00:22:58,399
Speaker 1: Additionally, Gabby Patito's mom mentioned that the van the couple

467
00:22:58,480 --> 00:23:01,439
Speaker 1: used for their cross country trip completely cleaned out, with

468
00:23:01,520 --> 00:23:05,439
Speaker 1: Gabby's belongings packed away and the mattress never recovered. She

469
00:23:05,560 --> 00:23:08,560
Speaker 1: expressed some confusion and concern over what she described as

470
00:23:08,640 --> 00:23:11,760
Speaker 1: strange behavior during that time. So again, that's what we

471
00:23:11,760 --> 00:23:13,679
Speaker 1: were just talking about. Were the parents involved in that?

472
00:23:13,720 --> 00:23:15,199
Speaker 1: Were they the ones that cleaned out the van? Did

473
00:23:15,240 --> 00:23:16,440
Speaker 1: they get rid of the mattress?

474
00:23:16,480 --> 00:23:20,960
Speaker 2: I mean, if they did, it's really suspicious. It's like

475
00:23:21,040 --> 00:23:25,160
Speaker 2: oh what son? Your girlfriend is missing? Okay, let's scrub

476
00:23:25,240 --> 00:23:28,399
Speaker 2: everything and get rid of everything, right, I mean that

477
00:23:28,400 --> 00:23:29,200
Speaker 2: doesn't make sense.

478
00:23:29,560 --> 00:23:33,600
Speaker 1: Well it does if you're trying to hide his involvement. Yeah,

479
00:23:33,680 --> 00:23:36,800
Speaker 1: so I don't know. I think the suspicious thing to me.

480
00:23:37,200 --> 00:23:40,560
Speaker 2: Wait, conspiracy, But I guess there's no evidence for anything.

481
00:23:40,840 --> 00:23:42,760
Speaker 1: I guess not unless they're working on it and they're

482
00:23:42,760 --> 00:23:44,520
Speaker 1: going to get charged with something later down the line.

483
00:23:44,560 --> 00:23:47,080
Speaker 1: But I don't know. So far, there's no charges as

484
00:23:47,119 --> 00:23:51,520
Speaker 1: far as aiding in a bedding or obstruction of justice.

485
00:23:52,000 --> 00:23:54,640
Speaker 1: All right, let us just move on from Gabby Patito.

486
00:23:54,960 --> 00:23:58,040
Speaker 1: And first of all, I have to do a disclaimer.

487
00:23:58,080 --> 00:24:02,639
Speaker 1: Whenever I talk about Scott Peterson, can you not attack me?

488
00:24:03,280 --> 00:24:06,520
Speaker 1: I know everyone hates Scott Peterson. Everyone is one hundred

489
00:24:06,520 --> 00:24:09,760
Speaker 1: percent certain that the man is guilty. Anytime I've brought

490
00:24:09,800 --> 00:24:12,399
Speaker 1: up talking about him or doing a podcast because the

491
00:24:12,560 --> 00:24:17,400
Speaker 1: La Innocence Project has taken on his case, everyone goes

492
00:24:17,520 --> 00:24:20,320
Speaker 1: nuts in my comments and in my DMS, telling me

493
00:24:20,359 --> 00:24:25,240
Speaker 1: he's one hundred percent guilty. So let's just get through

494
00:24:25,359 --> 00:24:27,440
Speaker 1: this with an open mind.

495
00:24:27,480 --> 00:24:30,560
Speaker 2: We're going to imagine. What we're going to discuss is

496
00:24:30,640 --> 00:24:33,800
Speaker 2: them taking on his case. And what they're trying to demonstrate.

497
00:24:34,160 --> 00:24:36,200
Speaker 2: We're not trying to take a side.

498
00:24:36,320 --> 00:24:41,840
Speaker 1: Right and also we're not going to well everyone thinks

499
00:24:41,880 --> 00:24:45,880
Speaker 1: he did. I don't know. I haven't read the filing yet,

500
00:24:45,880 --> 00:24:47,399
Speaker 1: but I'm just going to tell you. We're just going

501
00:24:47,480 --> 00:24:51,200
Speaker 1: to do a little synopsis right now and then I've

502
00:24:52,160 --> 00:24:55,240
Speaker 1: the filing is coming to me. It's a four hundred

503
00:24:55,240 --> 00:24:59,840
Speaker 1: page filing that the Ennocence Project filed basically saying that

504
00:25:00,160 --> 00:25:02,320
Speaker 1: he's innocent and they have all this evidence and things.

505
00:25:02,359 --> 00:25:04,880
Speaker 1: So I haven't read it yet. I'm going to read

506
00:25:04,920 --> 00:25:07,440
Speaker 1: it and then we're going to do a deeper dive

507
00:25:07,600 --> 00:25:10,879
Speaker 1: podcast on it. But for right now, after more than

508
00:25:10,880 --> 00:25:14,600
Speaker 1: a year of independent investigation, the Los Angeles Innocence Project

509
00:25:14,640 --> 00:25:18,480
Speaker 1: has submitted an extensive petition to the California Court of

510
00:25:18,520 --> 00:25:21,880
Speaker 1: Appeals arguing that Scott Peterson is innocent of the two

511
00:25:21,880 --> 00:25:24,400
Speaker 1: thousand and two murders of his wife, Lacey and their

512
00:25:24,520 --> 00:25:28,000
Speaker 1: unborn son. It is nearly a four hundred page filing,

513
00:25:28,040 --> 00:25:30,840
Speaker 1: which again I planned to read. It was submitted on Friday,

514
00:25:30,880 --> 00:25:34,960
Speaker 1: April eighteenth, and claims that Peterson's original trial was flawed,

515
00:25:35,359 --> 00:25:38,520
Speaker 1: asserting that key evidence was never presented to the jury

516
00:25:38,560 --> 00:25:42,520
Speaker 1: and that the investigation was mishandled by authorities. The La

517
00:25:42,600 --> 00:25:46,480
Speaker 1: Innocence Project director, her name is Paula Mitchell, believes police

518
00:25:46,560 --> 00:25:51,440
Speaker 1: press releases included information indicating to the public that police

519
00:25:51,480 --> 00:25:55,200
Speaker 1: did not believe mister Peterson's alibi almost from day one,

520
00:25:55,320 --> 00:25:58,600
Speaker 1: and this created a domino effect that ultimately created a

521
00:25:58,680 --> 00:26:02,560
Speaker 1: tidal wave of media attention focused on mister Peterson as

522
00:26:02,600 --> 00:26:05,600
Speaker 1: the prime suspect in the case. I will tell you

523
00:26:05,680 --> 00:26:08,000
Speaker 1: there are two documentaries out there that I've watched recently,

524
00:26:08,040 --> 00:26:10,320
Speaker 1: and I will say, if you're interested in the Scott

525
00:26:10,359 --> 00:26:13,080
Speaker 1: Peterson case and you want to have an open mind,

526
00:26:13,520 --> 00:26:16,040
Speaker 1: and you're just not one hundred percent convinced that the

527
00:26:16,080 --> 00:26:19,000
Speaker 1: man is guilt, Listen, He's guilty if you're convinced. Even

528
00:26:19,000 --> 00:26:21,600
Speaker 1: if you are convinced, but let's be clear, he is

529
00:26:21,640 --> 00:26:24,160
Speaker 1: one hundred percent guilty of being a shitty human. There

530
00:26:24,200 --> 00:26:26,679
Speaker 1: is no doubt about that. He had an affair. His

531
00:26:26,760 --> 00:26:30,080
Speaker 1: wife was pregnant. He was messing around with what's her name, Amber, He.

532
00:26:30,080 --> 00:26:31,320
Speaker 2: Went fishing on Christmas Eve.

533
00:26:31,440 --> 00:26:35,960
Speaker 1: He went fishing on Christmas Eve. He in his interviews,

534
00:26:36,040 --> 00:26:39,040
Speaker 1: he's not likable. He's not likable at all, he doesn't

535
00:26:39,040 --> 00:26:42,120
Speaker 1: show any emotion. He never looked like he was likable

536
00:26:42,160 --> 00:26:44,840
Speaker 1: to Amber or whatever. Well, I mean he was likable

537
00:26:44,920 --> 00:26:47,880
Speaker 1: in other ways, but I'm saying in interviews and things

538
00:26:47,960 --> 00:26:49,520
Speaker 1: like that, he's not the least bit.

539
00:26:49,400 --> 00:26:51,720
Speaker 2: There's well, no one's going to be likable when their

540
00:26:51,880 --> 00:26:55,399
Speaker 2: their wife is dead, their pregnant wife is dead. And

541
00:26:55,480 --> 00:26:57,800
Speaker 2: he looks suspicious and he's just sitting there going, I

542
00:26:57,800 --> 00:26:59,639
Speaker 2: didn't do it. I didn't do it. I didn't do it.

543
00:27:00,560 --> 00:27:02,240
Speaker 2: I mean he would, he didn't. I don't remember him

544
00:27:02,240 --> 00:27:06,199
Speaker 2: crying right bad. I think he sold her car to

545
00:27:06,560 --> 00:27:08,560
Speaker 2: or something like that. It was just like, what are

546
00:27:08,600 --> 00:27:09,119
Speaker 2: you doing?

547
00:27:09,560 --> 00:27:12,600
Speaker 1: Yeah? I mean, I mean beyond the likability. It's even

548
00:27:12,640 --> 00:27:15,320
Speaker 1: when you watch video clips of when they were out

549
00:27:15,359 --> 00:27:18,640
Speaker 1: searching and he's there, he just kind of like, oh, well.

550
00:27:18,640 --> 00:27:21,360
Speaker 2: Wasn't there a what do you call those things where

551
00:27:21,359 --> 00:27:25,399
Speaker 2: everyone holds candles like a vigil? Yeah, and he was

552
00:27:25,480 --> 00:27:29,119
Speaker 2: like not there or something. And then he was calling

553
00:27:29,560 --> 00:27:31,720
Speaker 2: or he maybe he was, but he was also calling

554
00:27:32,400 --> 00:27:36,840
Speaker 2: his girlfriend and saying he was in Paris on celebrating.

555
00:27:38,400 --> 00:27:39,080
Speaker 2: What is this?

556
00:27:39,400 --> 00:27:41,960
Speaker 1: I'm not okay. The guy is a doucher. There's no

557
00:27:42,080 --> 00:27:44,760
Speaker 1: doubt about that, but let's that's not.

558
00:27:45,000 --> 00:27:47,120
Speaker 2: Maybe there's you know, there's an assumption of risk. If

559
00:27:47,160 --> 00:27:49,960
Speaker 2: you go to a trampoline park, you assume the risk

560
00:27:50,000 --> 00:27:52,160
Speaker 2: of getting injured. May it is an assumption of risk

561
00:27:52,160 --> 00:27:55,040
Speaker 2: when you cheat on your pregnant wife and you go

562
00:27:55,240 --> 00:27:58,840
Speaker 2: fishing on Christmas Eve. You're just going to get cinder

563
00:27:58,880 --> 00:28:01,159
Speaker 2: blocks that you're building in your backyard or whatever it

564
00:28:01,200 --> 00:28:01,840
Speaker 2: was he was doing.

565
00:28:02,000 --> 00:28:04,560
Speaker 3: It was actually in a boat house, so you know,

566
00:28:05,359 --> 00:28:07,639
Speaker 3: and he's like, well, you know what, you didn't do it,

567
00:28:07,680 --> 00:28:09,560
Speaker 3: but you assume the resk that you would look like

568
00:28:09,600 --> 00:28:12,520
Speaker 3: a murderer in the event that she found She was

569
00:28:12,560 --> 00:28:13,120
Speaker 3: found dead.

570
00:28:14,000 --> 00:28:17,040
Speaker 1: So the La Nison's Project argues that there's new scientific

571
00:28:17,119 --> 00:28:20,920
Speaker 1: analysis suggests that the unborn child was actually died later

572
00:28:21,000 --> 00:28:24,200
Speaker 1: than prosecutors claimed a trial, and an expert on water

573
00:28:24,280 --> 00:28:26,960
Speaker 1: currents contends that Lacy Peterson's body could not have been

574
00:28:27,040 --> 00:28:30,800
Speaker 1: dumped in the location the prosecutors originally alleged. Let me

575
00:28:30,840 --> 00:28:34,960
Speaker 1: tell you there is a documentary on Peacock and it's

576
00:28:35,000 --> 00:28:38,840
Speaker 1: called Face to Face with Scott Peterson. If you watch it,

577
00:28:39,280 --> 00:28:41,720
Speaker 1: I believe that you'll be a little more open minded

578
00:28:42,040 --> 00:28:44,400
Speaker 1: about it. So I would suggest doing that there's also

579
00:28:44,440 --> 00:28:45,760
Speaker 1: a good A and E one called.

580
00:28:45,560 --> 00:28:49,440
Speaker 2: The Minded towards the Evidence. Yeah, like, oh, that's kind

581
00:28:49,440 --> 00:28:51,080
Speaker 2: of unclear, right.

582
00:28:51,960 --> 00:28:55,600
Speaker 1: The petition and the Scott Peterson case also introduces new

583
00:28:55,640 --> 00:28:58,760
Speaker 1: witnesses and evidence tied to two separate incidents that occurred

584
00:28:58,760 --> 00:29:01,120
Speaker 1: near the time of Lacey's dissip appearance, including a home

585
00:29:01,160 --> 00:29:05,320
Speaker 1: burglary and a suspiciously burned van in a nearby area. Okay,

586
00:29:05,320 --> 00:29:08,040
Speaker 1: those are I did watch this the documentary, and I'll

587
00:29:08,040 --> 00:29:10,960
Speaker 1: tell you it was very suspicious to me. First of all,

588
00:29:11,600 --> 00:29:15,080
Speaker 1: there were witnesses that saw Lacy Peterson out with her

589
00:29:15,200 --> 00:29:19,400
Speaker 1: dog walking, and the times that they saw her were

590
00:29:19,440 --> 00:29:22,000
Speaker 1: the times that supposedly she had already been kidnapped, So

591
00:29:22,040 --> 00:29:26,080
Speaker 1: there is a very there's a clear inconsistency there. Also,

592
00:29:26,520 --> 00:29:29,160
Speaker 1: there's this van that's found nearby with a mattress in

593
00:29:29,200 --> 00:29:33,080
Speaker 1: it that has blood on it and it was never tested,

594
00:29:33,640 --> 00:29:35,760
Speaker 1: Like why was there not DNA tested? Also, there's a

595
00:29:35,800 --> 00:29:38,960
Speaker 1: by hired hired.

596
00:29:38,680 --> 00:29:40,880
Speaker 2: Who the people in the van?

597
00:29:41,640 --> 00:29:44,760
Speaker 1: You're saying Scott Peterson hired people in a van to

598
00:29:44,880 --> 00:29:47,560
Speaker 1: burn the van and have a you mean to kidnapp her?

599
00:29:47,680 --> 00:29:48,040
Speaker 2: Yeah?

600
00:29:48,120 --> 00:29:50,480
Speaker 1: You think now? You think he hired somebody to kid

601
00:29:50,560 --> 00:29:51,360
Speaker 1: you are stuck on it.

602
00:29:52,720 --> 00:29:56,000
Speaker 2: That's a possibility. Maybe you know people hire people to

603
00:29:56,120 --> 00:29:57,560
Speaker 2: kill others. It's a service.

604
00:29:57,840 --> 00:29:58,760
Speaker 1: Have you looked into it?

605
00:29:58,840 --> 00:29:58,920
Speaker 3: No?

606
00:29:59,800 --> 00:30:00,400
Speaker 1: Are you sure?

607
00:30:01,520 --> 00:30:05,840
Speaker 2: Okay, all right, you can look at my Google search.

608
00:30:06,480 --> 00:30:09,800
Speaker 1: I'm going to I'm going to do a forensic accounting

609
00:30:10,000 --> 00:30:12,600
Speaker 1: on your phone and see what your Google searches are.

610
00:30:12,840 --> 00:30:16,080
Speaker 2: It'll be how to block revolve dot com from my wife.

611
00:30:16,160 --> 00:30:18,880
Speaker 1: Okay, well that would make sense.

612
00:30:19,160 --> 00:30:20,840
Speaker 2: Yes, I hope it's not.

613
00:30:20,960 --> 00:30:23,840
Speaker 1: How to hire people to murder in a van?

614
00:30:24,120 --> 00:30:26,720
Speaker 2: How long can the bodies arrive in the snow? Exactly?

615
00:30:27,760 --> 00:30:29,760
Speaker 1: So. There was a mattress found in that van that

616
00:30:29,800 --> 00:30:32,840
Speaker 1: had blood stains, but a judge previously denied permission to

617
00:30:32,880 --> 00:30:36,240
Speaker 1: test it for Lacy's DNA. Prosecutors said mail DNA was

618
00:30:36,240 --> 00:30:39,640
Speaker 1: already detected and no further testing was needed. However, the

619
00:30:39,640 --> 00:30:42,960
Speaker 1: Innocence Project continues to push for more advanced DNA testing

620
00:30:43,000 --> 00:30:45,640
Speaker 1: and hopes of finding a potential link to the case.

621
00:30:46,280 --> 00:30:48,880
Speaker 1: There is also in this four hundred page up filing,

622
00:30:49,040 --> 00:30:51,600
Speaker 1: there's also one hundred and twenty six page declaration from

623
00:30:51,640 --> 00:30:54,720
Speaker 1: Scott Peterson, who did not testify during his trial, in

624
00:30:54,800 --> 00:30:57,440
Speaker 1: which he maintains his innocence and says he was wrongfully

625
00:30:57,480 --> 00:31:00,760
Speaker 1: convicted of murder. Again. I can't wait to read it.

626
00:31:00,800 --> 00:31:02,880
Speaker 1: That's how big of a wal nerd I am that. Like,

627
00:31:02,920 --> 00:31:05,400
Speaker 1: I'm excited about reading this four hundred page filing and

628
00:31:05,440 --> 00:31:08,680
Speaker 1: the Scott Peterson case and discussing it with you guys

629
00:31:08,760 --> 00:31:10,200
Speaker 1: on a later podcast.

630
00:31:10,520 --> 00:31:12,840
Speaker 2: You know what, I'm not excited about having to print

631
00:31:12,840 --> 00:31:14,160
Speaker 2: four hundred for you.

632
00:31:15,080 --> 00:31:17,239
Speaker 1: Well, you know you're gonna have to because I like it.

633
00:31:17,280 --> 00:31:19,400
Speaker 1: I'm old school. I like it printed out. I have

634
00:31:19,480 --> 00:31:22,120
Speaker 1: to like read it and take notes and use a

635
00:31:22,200 --> 00:31:25,640
Speaker 1: highlighter and the whole thing. So also, just a reminder,

636
00:31:25,680 --> 00:31:28,960
Speaker 1: do you remember that Mark Garrigos was Scott Peterson's attorney.

637
00:31:29,000 --> 00:31:32,040
Speaker 1: I just thought i'd throw that out. Yeah, And also

638
00:31:32,280 --> 00:31:34,040
Speaker 1: Gargos represents the Menindo's brothers.

639
00:31:34,080 --> 00:31:36,000
Speaker 2: A small world. It is a community, it is.

640
00:31:36,640 --> 00:31:40,160
Speaker 1: It is a very small world. In that community. A

641
00:31:40,160 --> 00:31:43,280
Speaker 1: lot of these attorneys overlap. So anyway, I'm just a

642
00:31:43,320 --> 00:31:56,120
Speaker 1: reminder about that. All right, let's go into Karen Reid.

643
00:31:56,280 --> 00:31:58,520
Speaker 1: And the last episode we did was on Karen Reid.

644
00:31:58,520 --> 00:32:00,360
Speaker 1: We did a really in depth episode.

645
00:32:00,720 --> 00:32:07,880
Speaker 2: Karen Reid is on trial for the homicide of her boyfriend,

646
00:32:08,000 --> 00:32:11,760
Speaker 2: John O'Keeffe, who was a Boston police officer. Yeah, correct,

647
00:32:12,320 --> 00:32:15,120
Speaker 2: found dead, is found dead in the snow with forty

648
00:32:15,120 --> 00:32:17,000
Speaker 2: two pieces of tail light around him.

649
00:32:17,120 --> 00:32:19,040
Speaker 1: Yeah, but the forty two pieces of tailight, it might

650
00:32:19,080 --> 00:32:21,680
Speaker 1: have been forty seven. Those didn't show up until a

651
00:32:21,720 --> 00:32:26,400
Speaker 1: subsequent subsequent search, until they were planted, not the initial search.

652
00:32:26,480 --> 00:32:30,160
Speaker 1: If it was showed up later. Anyway, if you want to,

653
00:32:30,520 --> 00:32:32,320
Speaker 1: if you want to listen to our Karen Read episode,

654
00:32:32,360 --> 00:32:34,320
Speaker 1: it's really good. We go into in depth on all

655
00:32:34,360 --> 00:32:36,840
Speaker 1: the evidence. But I just wanted to add a little

656
00:32:36,840 --> 00:32:38,920
Speaker 1: more because that was a long episode. There's so much

657
00:32:38,920 --> 00:32:40,840
Speaker 1: to talk about in this case. There's just a couple

658
00:32:40,920 --> 00:32:43,200
Speaker 1: other things before we go into the retrial that I

659
00:32:43,240 --> 00:32:46,920
Speaker 1: just wanted to discuss. There was here I just want

660
00:32:46,960 --> 00:32:48,760
Speaker 1: to tell you about this. This was in the first trial.

661
00:32:49,080 --> 00:32:51,720
Speaker 1: So several witnesses who were at Albert's house on January

662
00:32:51,720 --> 00:32:54,720
Speaker 1: twenty ninth, twenty twenty two, told investigators that O'Keeffe never

663
00:32:54,760 --> 00:32:56,600
Speaker 1: made it inside the house, which we know that is

664
00:32:56,640 --> 00:32:59,320
Speaker 1: the biggest issue in this case. Did the man enter

665
00:32:59,440 --> 00:33:00,320
Speaker 1: the house or not?

666
00:33:00,960 --> 00:33:03,760
Speaker 2: That would solve well, no, it would answer a lot

667
00:33:03,800 --> 00:33:05,320
Speaker 2: of it would answer a lot.

668
00:33:05,160 --> 00:33:09,600
Speaker 1: Of questions anything, it would answer a lot of questions. So, however,

669
00:33:09,800 --> 00:33:13,600
Speaker 1: Reed's lawyers say okeefe's phone data suggests otherwise, and in

670
00:33:13,640 --> 00:33:15,920
Speaker 1: April twenty twenty three court filing, so this was in

671
00:33:15,960 --> 00:33:19,520
Speaker 1: the first hearing, the defense asserted that John O'Keeffe's Apple

672
00:33:19,600 --> 00:33:22,520
Speaker 1: health data indicated he took eighty steps and climbed the

673
00:33:22,560 --> 00:33:26,680
Speaker 1: equivalent of three flights of stairs at the Fairview Road property.

674
00:33:27,080 --> 00:33:29,760
Speaker 1: So the Fairview Roade property is Albert is Brian Albert's

675
00:33:29,760 --> 00:33:32,280
Speaker 1: house where he was found in the yard.

676
00:33:32,680 --> 00:33:35,000
Speaker 2: So according to the Apple data, it's as if he

677
00:33:35,120 --> 00:33:36,880
Speaker 2: walked and went up a fly the stairs.

678
00:33:36,960 --> 00:33:39,560
Speaker 1: Yes, Now at the house, Brian Albert has a basement

679
00:33:39,560 --> 00:33:43,720
Speaker 1: in the house, which we know about because after John

680
00:33:43,720 --> 00:33:48,280
Speaker 1: O'Keefe's body was found, the basement carpet was replaced, the

681
00:33:48,360 --> 00:33:51,520
Speaker 1: house was sold, and the dog was re homed, so

682
00:33:52,240 --> 00:33:53,560
Speaker 1: we know that.

683
00:33:53,800 --> 00:33:55,280
Speaker 2: And all the phones were thrown.

684
00:33:55,000 --> 00:33:59,520
Speaker 1: At all the phones were thrown, there's no ring footage anywhere. Yes,

685
00:34:00,520 --> 00:34:04,960
Speaker 1: anyway to call this data unreliable is an understatement. This

686
00:34:05,080 --> 00:34:08,399
Speaker 1: is what the prosecutors responded, asserting that those steps were

687
00:34:08,400 --> 00:34:12,080
Speaker 1: recorded before O'Keefe's cell phone location data showed him arriving

688
00:34:12,200 --> 00:34:15,520
Speaker 1: at the home. Prosecutors further noted that the same Apple

689
00:34:15,520 --> 00:34:19,279
Speaker 1: health data indicated O'Keefe took several steps hours after he'd

690
00:34:19,320 --> 00:34:23,359
Speaker 1: been pronounced dead. However, the defense attorney claims that that

691
00:34:23,480 --> 00:34:27,279
Speaker 1: discrepancy could be chalked up to sloppy policing, and we

692
00:34:27,320 --> 00:34:29,760
Speaker 1: know there was a lot of sloppy policing in this case,

693
00:34:30,160 --> 00:34:33,480
Speaker 1: and suggested that the steps are just reflected by a

694
00:34:33,480 --> 00:34:36,880
Speaker 1: police officer walking around with O'Keefe's phone after the fact,

695
00:34:36,920 --> 00:34:37,919
Speaker 1: after he was found dead.

696
00:34:38,000 --> 00:34:40,360
Speaker 2: So anyways, as possible, they killed him and then they

697
00:34:40,400 --> 00:34:41,840
Speaker 2: took his phone when they walk around, what do we

698
00:34:41,880 --> 00:34:42,320
Speaker 2: do now?

699
00:34:42,600 --> 00:34:46,920
Speaker 1: Well after is right? So exactly? Oh so there's that.

700
00:34:47,920 --> 00:34:49,799
Speaker 1: I just wanted to talk a little bit more. This

701
00:34:49,880 --> 00:34:52,960
Speaker 1: is according to the first trial about the DNA on

702
00:34:53,080 --> 00:34:55,000
Speaker 1: the tail light and the hair on the bumper. I

703
00:34:55,000 --> 00:34:56,480
Speaker 1: think we talked about this a little bit in the

704
00:34:56,560 --> 00:34:58,879
Speaker 1: last episode, but let's just go through it again because

705
00:34:58,880 --> 00:35:01,880
Speaker 1: I find it really interesting. The prosecution alleges that O'Keefe's

706
00:35:01,960 --> 00:35:04,719
Speaker 1: DNA was found on broken pieces of tail light from

707
00:35:04,760 --> 00:35:08,640
Speaker 1: Reed's car, and that forensic investigation revealed microscopic pieces of

708
00:35:08,640 --> 00:35:11,920
Speaker 1: tail light on O'Keeffe's clothing. Here's the thing though, in

709
00:35:12,000 --> 00:35:15,319
Speaker 1: the retrial, Alan Jackson claims in his opening statement that

710
00:35:15,360 --> 00:35:18,520
Speaker 1: there was no blood, skin, and no DNA found on

711
00:35:18,560 --> 00:35:22,600
Speaker 1: the actual shards of tail light that supposedly cut John's arm.

712
00:35:22,840 --> 00:35:26,040
Speaker 1: So that's really interesting. So the prosecution claims that there

713
00:35:26,080 --> 00:35:28,879
Speaker 1: was DNA from John O'Keefe found on the tail light,

714
00:35:29,200 --> 00:35:31,439
Speaker 1: So I guess it's on the actual tail light that's

715
00:35:31,480 --> 00:35:33,040
Speaker 1: still on the.

716
00:35:33,000 --> 00:35:36,040
Speaker 2: Car or on the ground, who knows, no, on the

717
00:35:36,080 --> 00:35:37,839
Speaker 2: carcase on the car.

718
00:35:38,040 --> 00:35:42,600
Speaker 1: The defense claims, and this is in his opening statement

719
00:35:42,640 --> 00:35:44,560
Speaker 1: that he just did in the retrial, that there was

720
00:35:44,600 --> 00:35:48,839
Speaker 1: no DNA, no skin, no blood found on any of

721
00:35:48,880 --> 00:35:54,360
Speaker 1: the shards of tail light that were found later. So

722
00:35:54,480 --> 00:35:55,280
Speaker 1: that's the question.

723
00:35:55,640 --> 00:35:58,560
Speaker 2: This is why this case is so normal. Is there

724
00:35:58,600 --> 00:36:02,040
Speaker 2: normally DNA on both the broken pieces on the ground

725
00:36:02,280 --> 00:36:05,279
Speaker 2: and the remain remaining part of the tail light on

726
00:36:05,280 --> 00:36:05,600
Speaker 2: the car.

727
00:36:05,680 --> 00:36:08,160
Speaker 1: Well, that's a good question, except that if you remember

728
00:36:08,280 --> 00:36:10,799
Speaker 1: in the autopsyne you've seen photos of it. I'm sure

729
00:36:12,040 --> 00:36:13,959
Speaker 1: his arm, remember his right arm. I think I'll showed

730
00:36:13,960 --> 00:36:18,960
Speaker 1: your photos. There's puncture wounds and scratches on his right arm.

731
00:36:19,040 --> 00:36:23,279
Speaker 1: So if the prosecution wants to allege that those scratches

732
00:36:23,360 --> 00:36:27,160
Speaker 1: and puncture came from shards of tail light as she

733
00:36:27,320 --> 00:36:31,279
Speaker 1: was backing into him. Then that would only suggest the

734
00:36:31,280 --> 00:36:35,200
Speaker 1: only reasonable conclusion. Conclusion would be right, that there was

735
00:36:35,239 --> 00:36:38,960
Speaker 1: a transfer of scanned DNA blood or something onto those shards.

736
00:36:39,360 --> 00:36:42,080
Speaker 1: If there is no DNA blood or anything on them,

737
00:36:42,160 --> 00:36:46,080
Speaker 1: I find that suspicious, especially with the way his arm looks.

738
00:36:46,480 --> 00:36:49,120
Speaker 1: How else do you explain the scratches and the puncture ones.

739
00:36:49,280 --> 00:36:50,520
Speaker 2: It was a pig, wasn't it.

740
00:36:50,520 --> 00:36:53,680
Speaker 1: It wasn't a pig. It was allegedly, or possibly according

741
00:36:53,680 --> 00:36:55,320
Speaker 1: to the defense, it could have been the dog.

742
00:36:55,840 --> 00:36:56,880
Speaker 2: Yeah, but it was pig DNA.

743
00:36:56,920 --> 00:36:59,200
Speaker 1: But it was pig dna. There was no dog DNA found.

744
00:36:59,200 --> 00:37:00,319
Speaker 1: There was pig DNA.

745
00:37:00,080 --> 00:37:02,040
Speaker 2: Found in those in the area.

746
00:37:02,120 --> 00:37:04,440
Speaker 1: I don't know, but maybe the dog ate some pig

747
00:37:05,080 --> 00:37:06,480
Speaker 1: and then bit him.

748
00:37:06,840 --> 00:37:07,759
Speaker 2: But there were scratches.

749
00:37:08,040 --> 00:37:10,160
Speaker 1: There's scratches and puncture wounds.

750
00:37:11,239 --> 00:37:12,760
Speaker 2: All this results too.

751
00:37:13,600 --> 00:37:15,920
Speaker 1: Reasonable, doubt exactly.

752
00:37:16,120 --> 00:37:17,640
Speaker 2: It'd be a lot easier if they just give us

753
00:37:17,640 --> 00:37:19,720
Speaker 2: the ring footage and they didn't hide all their cell phones,

754
00:37:19,760 --> 00:37:24,240
Speaker 2: and they told the truth, then we'd be done.

755
00:37:23,520 --> 00:37:27,839
Speaker 1: Yeah, the proper people, all right, let's get into the retrial.

756
00:37:28,200 --> 00:37:32,080
Speaker 1: The retrial just started. We've been following it. I don't

757
00:37:32,120 --> 00:37:35,880
Speaker 1: know if you guys have been, but let's start with

758
00:37:35,960 --> 00:37:40,200
Speaker 1: Alan Jackson's opening state. First of all, the prosecution hired

759
00:37:40,560 --> 00:37:41,799
Speaker 1: I don't know if you knew this, but they brought

760
00:37:41,800 --> 00:37:44,319
Speaker 1: in a special prosecutor, so they did not use the

761
00:37:44,320 --> 00:37:48,080
Speaker 1: same prosecutor. His name is Hank Brennan, and he was

762
00:37:48,120 --> 00:37:51,480
Speaker 1: not involved in the original trial. However, I read that

763
00:37:51,800 --> 00:37:55,879
Speaker 1: he represented this mobster name like Whitey Bulger or something.

764
00:37:55,920 --> 00:37:57,359
Speaker 1: We've ever heard that name before.

765
00:37:57,320 --> 00:38:01,720
Speaker 2: Yeah, I have not, so I would remember by cross

766
00:38:01,800 --> 00:38:04,520
Speaker 2: paths with Whitey Bulger Bulger Bulger.

767
00:38:04,560 --> 00:38:08,359
Speaker 1: I believe he was a mobster. And Hank Brennan, who's

768
00:38:08,400 --> 00:38:12,200
Speaker 1: the prosecutor, is now representing the Commonwealth, but he also

769
00:38:12,239 --> 00:38:16,120
Speaker 1: represents so anyway, well, my point is they went they

770
00:38:16,440 --> 00:38:19,520
Speaker 1: found instead of using the same prosecutor they used last time.

771
00:38:19,560 --> 00:38:23,440
Speaker 1: They were like, you're out and we need this guy.

772
00:38:23,960 --> 00:38:26,439
Speaker 1: Yeah they should because they didn't win the last trial.

773
00:38:26,520 --> 00:38:27,239
Speaker 1: It was a hung jury.

774
00:38:27,360 --> 00:38:29,440
Speaker 2: So anyway, I'm just.

775
00:38:29,440 --> 00:38:33,000
Speaker 1: Saying they went and got some guy that hasn't that's notorious,

776
00:38:33,040 --> 00:38:34,960
Speaker 1: that has notoriety. He represented some.

777
00:38:35,120 --> 00:38:38,280
Speaker 2: Yeah, you know, the murder community is a very small.

778
00:38:38,840 --> 00:38:41,279
Speaker 1: Yeah, we talked about this before and the last time

779
00:38:41,280 --> 00:38:44,760
Speaker 1: we recorded, Karen Reid that the most reasonable and logical

780
00:38:44,760 --> 00:38:47,120
Speaker 1: thing that happened that night is that they were drunk.

781
00:38:47,239 --> 00:38:48,840
Speaker 1: She drops him off at the house, and that she

782
00:38:49,000 --> 00:38:50,600
Speaker 1: does back.

783
00:38:50,400 --> 00:38:53,120
Speaker 2: Into him, either purposely or accidental.

784
00:38:53,239 --> 00:38:57,359
Speaker 1: I would say accidentally. But that's the most logical thing.

785
00:38:58,560 --> 00:39:01,279
Speaker 2: I don't know. Well, I'm just saying because tails were

786
00:39:01,320 --> 00:39:02,160
Speaker 2: not found till like.

787
00:39:02,320 --> 00:39:05,719
Speaker 1: I'm not talking about any of the evidence. I'm just saying, no,

788
00:39:05,960 --> 00:39:06,960
Speaker 1: I forget the evidence.

789
00:39:07,080 --> 00:39:07,880
Speaker 2: This is what happened.

790
00:39:07,920 --> 00:39:11,080
Speaker 1: No, forget all the evidence. I'm saying, if you just

791
00:39:11,239 --> 00:39:11,799
Speaker 1: look at it.

792
00:39:11,920 --> 00:39:14,919
Speaker 2: Yes, that's a good opening statement. Yes, please disregard all

793
00:39:14,960 --> 00:39:17,640
Speaker 2: the evidence and the logical conclusion.

794
00:39:17,800 --> 00:39:22,640
Speaker 1: No, I'm saying, if you just look at the story

795
00:39:22,760 --> 00:39:25,399
Speaker 1: from a very from just an outsider, and you're like, Okay,

796
00:39:25,480 --> 00:39:28,880
Speaker 1: they went to a bar, they got drunk, they're driving drunk.

797
00:39:29,239 --> 00:39:32,400
Speaker 1: She drops them off outside this house, and then his

798
00:39:32,480 --> 00:39:34,560
Speaker 1: body's found in the snow and he's dead and he's

799
00:39:34,600 --> 00:39:37,920
Speaker 1: got abrasions all over him. The logical conclusion is that

800
00:39:37,960 --> 00:39:39,960
Speaker 1: she hit him or someone hit him.

801
00:39:40,360 --> 00:39:43,120
Speaker 2: Well, yeah, a logical conclusion that someone hit him. That's correct,

802
00:39:43,239 --> 00:39:43,600
Speaker 2: very good.

803
00:39:43,640 --> 00:39:47,120
Speaker 1: No, I'm saying that's the logical reasonable conclusion that she

804
00:39:47,200 --> 00:39:49,879
Speaker 1: hit him, as opposed to he went inside the house,

805
00:39:49,920 --> 00:39:52,080
Speaker 1: he got beat up in the house, the dog attacked him,

806
00:39:52,560 --> 00:39:53,879
Speaker 1: and there's a whole conspiracy.

807
00:39:54,120 --> 00:39:55,839
Speaker 2: So you're saying he died right there on the lawn

808
00:39:55,920 --> 00:39:56,720
Speaker 2: or where I'm.

809
00:39:56,560 --> 00:40:00,319
Speaker 1: Just saying that is a reasonable conclusion. Is that she

810
00:40:00,480 --> 00:40:02,600
Speaker 1: hit him, or that a snowplow hit him, or that

811
00:40:02,680 --> 00:40:08,759
Speaker 1: another car hit him. However, that does not that reasonable

812
00:40:08,800 --> 00:40:12,399
Speaker 1: conclusion does not stay reasonable when you start to dive

813
00:40:12,480 --> 00:40:16,640
Speaker 1: into the way these busy bees were working that night. Yeah, well,

814
00:40:16,680 --> 00:40:19,719
Speaker 1: you're talking about the cops butt dialing each other at

815
00:40:19,760 --> 00:40:22,280
Speaker 1: two twenty two in the morning, and you're talking about

816
00:40:22,280 --> 00:40:25,040
Speaker 1: how Brian Albert never came out of his house when

817
00:40:25,040 --> 00:40:27,600
Speaker 1: there's a dead there's a dead police officer on his

818
00:40:27,680 --> 00:40:30,960
Speaker 1: lawn with paramedics cops everywhere, and he never comes outside

819
00:40:30,960 --> 00:40:34,160
Speaker 1: to investigate that. Brian Higgins, the ATF agent that was

820
00:40:34,200 --> 00:40:36,640
Speaker 1: there that night at two, at like two point thirty

821
00:40:36,680 --> 00:40:38,719
Speaker 1: in the morning, goes back to his office at the

822
00:40:38,760 --> 00:40:41,759
Speaker 1: Canton Police Department and then calls Brian Albert, and then

823
00:40:41,800 --> 00:40:45,400
Speaker 1: Brian Albert calls him, and then it's just there's a

824
00:40:45,520 --> 00:40:48,320
Speaker 1: lot of like shady things going on.

825
00:40:48,840 --> 00:40:49,400
Speaker 2: That's great.

826
00:40:49,760 --> 00:40:53,040
Speaker 1: So I'm saying there is so much reasonable doubt in

827
00:40:53,080 --> 00:40:55,279
Speaker 1: this case that I honestly can't believe they tried her again.

828
00:40:55,600 --> 00:40:57,719
Speaker 2: THO surprices a dead person on his lawn. But they're

829
00:40:57,760 --> 00:40:58,560
Speaker 2: all shady people.

830
00:40:58,680 --> 00:41:01,640
Speaker 1: There's a lot of shady stuff going on. Anyway. The

831
00:41:01,680 --> 00:41:05,400
Speaker 1: prosecutor hammers down on the fact that one of the

832
00:41:05,440 --> 00:41:10,600
Speaker 1: paramedics who just testified recently and this retrial, claims that

833
00:41:10,719 --> 00:41:13,279
Speaker 1: he heard Reid say I hit him, I hit him,

834
00:41:13,360 --> 00:41:18,600
Speaker 1: I hit him three times. Also, Brennan, the prosecutor, argued

835
00:41:18,640 --> 00:41:22,240
Speaker 1: that there is a black box data from the vehicle

836
00:41:22,840 --> 00:41:25,720
Speaker 1: revealing details that were not brought up in the initial trial,

837
00:41:26,000 --> 00:41:29,080
Speaker 1: and he claims that Reid had shifted her lexus into neutral,

838
00:41:29,239 --> 00:41:31,880
Speaker 1: then reversed, and then pressed the gas pedal to seventy

839
00:41:31,880 --> 00:41:36,879
Speaker 1: five percent acceleration. So the prosecution elosion.

840
00:41:36,520 --> 00:41:38,600
Speaker 2: Why would she say I hit him, I hit him,

841
00:41:38,640 --> 00:41:41,360
Speaker 2: I hit him, Like under what context was that?

842
00:41:41,440 --> 00:41:43,120
Speaker 1: Well, I don't I don't believe that. We'll get into

843
00:41:43,120 --> 00:41:46,399
Speaker 1: that just a little bit. I hate him, yeah, because

844
00:41:46,440 --> 00:41:47,560
Speaker 1: she did call him a perfect.

845
00:41:47,320 --> 00:41:49,080
Speaker 2: Now I'm involved in this murder.

846
00:41:49,120 --> 00:41:55,879
Speaker 1: I so Alan Jackson is the defense attorney. He also

847
00:41:56,000 --> 00:41:57,800
Speaker 1: represented her in the first trial. He actually has a

848
00:41:58,440 --> 00:42:01,200
Speaker 1: would hire yes, Alan Jackson, Brian Friedman. Man there at

849
00:42:01,200 --> 00:42:02,920
Speaker 1: the top of my list. Am I if I'm in

850
00:42:03,040 --> 00:42:05,799
Speaker 1: legal trouble, you guys better watch out, because I'm gonna

851
00:42:05,840 --> 00:42:08,839
Speaker 1: call Alan Jacks. I'm gonna call Brian Friedman. I'm gonna

852
00:42:08,880 --> 00:42:09,759
Speaker 1: take everybody down.

853
00:42:10,160 --> 00:42:10,759
Speaker 2: Don't call me.

854
00:42:11,000 --> 00:42:13,799
Speaker 1: I'm not calling you Alan Jackson. Actually, and I thought

855
00:42:13,800 --> 00:42:15,560
Speaker 1: this was smart. He has a beard in this trial,

856
00:42:15,640 --> 00:42:18,239
Speaker 1: so the footage from this trial doesn't get mixed up

857
00:42:18,239 --> 00:42:20,560
Speaker 1: with the footage or something.

858
00:42:20,600 --> 00:42:22,279
Speaker 2: I think he has a two pay, He's got something,

859
00:42:22,280 --> 00:42:23,520
Speaker 2: and his hair is looking a little.

860
00:42:23,640 --> 00:42:26,040
Speaker 1: He has nice hair. Why because it's good, because he

861
00:42:26,080 --> 00:42:26,640
Speaker 1: has good hair.

862
00:42:26,760 --> 00:42:31,640
Speaker 2: It's just you know, it's it's not he's dying it.

863
00:42:31,760 --> 00:42:33,920
Speaker 2: He's doing something to it. And that's what I noticed.

864
00:42:33,920 --> 00:42:36,160
Speaker 2: And as if I was on the juror, it would

865
00:42:36,200 --> 00:42:38,840
Speaker 2: be really hard to look away because.

866
00:42:38,640 --> 00:42:41,040
Speaker 1: You just noticed that he possibly has a two pay.

867
00:42:41,400 --> 00:42:43,120
Speaker 2: Well, he has something going on with his hair.

868
00:42:44,040 --> 00:42:46,719
Speaker 1: I thought he was a nice looking man. That's all

869
00:42:46,760 --> 00:42:47,040
Speaker 1: I saw.

870
00:42:47,040 --> 00:42:47,719
Speaker 2: It was a nice man.

871
00:42:47,760 --> 00:42:52,000
Speaker 1: I'm sure a nice looking man, all right. He began

872
00:42:52,120 --> 00:42:54,359
Speaker 1: his argument by assuring the jury that the evidence would

873
00:42:54,360 --> 00:42:57,560
Speaker 1: clearly demonstrate that there was no collision with John O'Keeffe.

874
00:42:57,800 --> 00:42:59,960
Speaker 1: He states, John O'Keeffe did not die as a result

875
00:43:00,120 --> 00:43:03,040
Speaker 1: of being struck by a vehicle. The facts, evidence, data,

876
00:43:03,040 --> 00:43:07,640
Speaker 1: and scientific analysis will confirm this, as will the expert testimony.

877
00:43:08,560 --> 00:43:11,520
Speaker 1: Jackson went on to accuse the investigation into O'Keeffe's death

878
00:43:11,640 --> 00:43:16,879
Speaker 1: of being tainted by bias, incompetence, and dishonesty. He specifically

879
00:43:16,920 --> 00:43:21,319
Speaker 1: criticized the former Massachusetts State Police trooper Michael Proctor, who

880
00:43:21,400 --> 00:43:24,759
Speaker 1: was the lead investigator, calling him a cancer in the

881
00:43:24,800 --> 00:43:28,520
Speaker 1: case for failing to properly investigate. Michael Proctor was fired

882
00:43:28,560 --> 00:43:31,000
Speaker 1: after the first trial, obviously because of the way he

883
00:43:31,040 --> 00:43:33,399
Speaker 1: handled the case. It was clear that he was incompetent

884
00:43:33,480 --> 00:43:36,160
Speaker 1: and he was biased. We could we could talk, We

885
00:43:36,200 --> 00:43:43,520
Speaker 1: could do a whole episode just on Michael Proctor. Probably

886
00:43:43,719 --> 00:43:48,960
Speaker 1: mall security. No, he's going to be the security at

887
00:43:48,960 --> 00:43:52,280
Speaker 1: our gate. That's how they go. Yeah, at Ocean Ranch.

888
00:43:52,440 --> 00:43:53,960
Speaker 2: Good. Then if there's an issue, he can cover it

889
00:43:54,040 --> 00:43:57,360
Speaker 2: up for us. Yes, yes, they don't investigate that crap.

890
00:43:57,440 --> 00:43:59,520
Speaker 2: That's not our looking at.

891
00:43:59,440 --> 00:44:03,800
Speaker 1: It exactly, cover all right, so also in his opening statement,

892
00:44:03,840 --> 00:44:05,880
Speaker 1: Alan Jackson goes on to say, you'll see during this

893
00:44:05,960 --> 00:44:09,880
Speaker 1: trial that he deliberately fabricated evidence. He lied in reports

894
00:44:09,920 --> 00:44:12,600
Speaker 1: on warrants, and even under oath, he lied about the

895
00:44:12,600 --> 00:44:15,520
Speaker 1: time he secured Karen Read's vehicle. Why because he didn't

896
00:44:15,520 --> 00:44:17,520
Speaker 1: want it known that he had access to that vehicle

897
00:44:18,000 --> 00:44:20,720
Speaker 1: and the tail light before fragments were discovered at thirty

898
00:44:20,719 --> 00:44:24,319
Speaker 1: four Fairview. When John's body was initially found. There are

899
00:44:24,480 --> 00:44:28,160
Speaker 1: forty seven pieces of red tail light that were not found.

900
00:44:28,160 --> 00:44:31,400
Speaker 2: That's a lot of tail light. No, That's why I

901
00:44:31,400 --> 00:44:33,880
Speaker 2: said it was odd to me, sounds like a hammer

902
00:44:34,520 --> 00:44:35,799
Speaker 2: smashed a tail light.

903
00:44:36,040 --> 00:44:36,279
Speaker 1: I know.

904
00:44:36,400 --> 00:44:39,040
Speaker 2: See I can't get past not his hand or his

905
00:44:39,320 --> 00:44:41,640
Speaker 2: head or whatever. Right, someone put it on the tail

906
00:44:41,760 --> 00:44:42,920
Speaker 2: was went smash.

907
00:44:43,000 --> 00:44:50,719
Speaker 1: Because clearly I'm not a collision re constructionist. However, when

908
00:44:50,760 --> 00:44:55,400
Speaker 1: I think about an SUV backing into a male body,

909
00:44:56,160 --> 00:44:59,600
Speaker 1: I don't feel I can't picture the taillight exploding into

910
00:44:59,640 --> 00:45:03,960
Speaker 1: that many pieces with it. It's a Lexus suv. Yeah,

911
00:45:04,000 --> 00:45:06,479
Speaker 1: I know, I just don't see that. And the fact

912
00:45:06,520 --> 00:45:10,160
Speaker 1: that these pieces showed up later, not during the initial

913
00:45:10,280 --> 00:45:13,799
Speaker 1: search when they first find John O'Keeffe's body. They don't

914
00:45:13,800 --> 00:45:16,040
Speaker 1: find any of these tail light pieces, even though they're

915
00:45:16,160 --> 00:45:18,319
Speaker 1: red and it's snowing out.

916
00:45:18,400 --> 00:45:22,040
Speaker 2: They find them the scene, they're looking for stuff. They

917
00:45:22,040 --> 00:45:24,000
Speaker 2: don't see all the red tail lights.

918
00:45:24,160 --> 00:45:29,279
Speaker 1: Right. So, Also, here's one of the key things that

919
00:45:29,320 --> 00:45:31,520
Speaker 1: I think is going to come out that he alludes

920
00:45:31,560 --> 00:45:34,680
Speaker 1: to in his opening statement. I think they're really going

921
00:45:34,760 --> 00:45:39,480
Speaker 1: to focus on the hypothermia. The medical examiner and the

922
00:45:39,520 --> 00:45:43,799
Speaker 1: first case in the first trial basically says that he

923
00:45:43,880 --> 00:45:50,160
Speaker 1: died from blot force trauma to the head, but also hypothermia.

924
00:45:50,239 --> 00:45:52,560
Speaker 1: I think the defense because they're going to have an expert,

925
00:45:53,080 --> 00:45:56,319
Speaker 1: expert pathologist or someone is an expert on hypothermia come

926
00:45:56,400 --> 00:46:00,800
Speaker 1: in and testify, because when John o'keep's body was found,

927
00:46:01,000 --> 00:46:04,759
Speaker 1: there was no frostbite, there was no cold limbs, there

928
00:46:04,800 --> 00:46:06,839
Speaker 1: was no cold induced injuries to his.

929
00:46:07,040 --> 00:46:09,640
Speaker 2: Organ should there have been by that time.

930
00:46:09,480 --> 00:46:13,319
Speaker 1: Well, based upon the prosecution's timeline, if she hit him

931
00:46:13,400 --> 00:46:15,280
Speaker 1: when she dropped him off at the house at twelve

932
00:46:15,360 --> 00:46:19,080
Speaker 1: thirty and his body wasn't found until six thirty am,

933
00:46:19,239 --> 00:46:22,000
Speaker 1: that's six hours that his body would have been in

934
00:46:22,480 --> 00:46:29,920
Speaker 1: twenty twenty four degree blizzard snow weather. So hypothermia would

935
00:46:29,960 --> 00:46:33,279
Speaker 1: have set in. I read that hypothermia sets in when

936
00:46:33,280 --> 00:46:36,440
Speaker 1: the body starts to be ninety five degrees or less. So,

937
00:46:36,520 --> 00:46:38,640
Speaker 1: if the body laid there for six hours, like the

938
00:46:38,680 --> 00:46:40,680
Speaker 1: prosecution claims.

939
00:46:40,520 --> 00:46:43,480
Speaker 2: I would, ninety five degrees is hypothermia.

940
00:46:43,600 --> 00:46:48,239
Speaker 1: Yeah, sure, yeah, look it up. That's when hypothermia starts

941
00:46:48,280 --> 00:46:48,919
Speaker 1: to set in.

942
00:46:49,280 --> 00:46:49,440
Speaker 2: Ok.

943
00:46:49,560 --> 00:46:53,040
Speaker 1: When the body drops down to ninety five degrees, then

944
00:46:53,080 --> 00:46:55,920
Speaker 1: that's when it starts. That's what I read. If I'm wrong,

945
00:46:56,000 --> 00:46:57,560
Speaker 1: please send me a dam and tell me I'm wrong.

946
00:46:57,560 --> 00:46:58,440
Speaker 1: But I did google it.

947
00:46:58,480 --> 00:46:59,200
Speaker 2: I'll send you a dam.

948
00:46:59,320 --> 00:47:02,759
Speaker 1: Okay, thank you. So I think that is going to

949
00:47:02,840 --> 00:47:06,520
Speaker 1: be a big point of contention or something that the

950
00:47:06,520 --> 00:47:08,640
Speaker 1: defense really pushes. They're going to have experts to come

951
00:47:08,680 --> 00:47:11,520
Speaker 1: in and talk about how the body did not have

952
00:47:12,040 --> 00:47:14,480
Speaker 1: the type of hypothermia that it should if it had

953
00:47:14,560 --> 00:47:16,239
Speaker 1: laid in the snow for six hours, if she hit

954
00:47:16,320 --> 00:47:17,799
Speaker 1: him at twelve thirty in the morning.

955
00:47:17,560 --> 00:47:19,200
Speaker 2: At twenty four miles an hour, if.

956
00:47:19,040 --> 00:47:22,960
Speaker 1: He was brought out and drug out into the lawn

957
00:47:23,600 --> 00:47:26,760
Speaker 1: before he was found at six am, then the temperature

958
00:47:26,760 --> 00:47:28,880
Speaker 1: of his body would make more sense because there was

959
00:47:28,880 --> 00:47:31,440
Speaker 1: no frost bite, there was no frozen limbs, so I

960
00:47:31,480 --> 00:47:34,080
Speaker 1: think that is something that the defense is really going

961
00:47:34,160 --> 00:47:41,120
Speaker 1: to going to push right. Also, Alan Jackson brings up

962
00:47:41,160 --> 00:47:45,080
Speaker 1: in his opening statement that there was unknown male DNA

963
00:47:45,200 --> 00:47:51,760
Speaker 1: from five different sources found on John O'Keefe's shoe, shoe

964
00:47:51,960 --> 00:47:53,920
Speaker 1: on his shoe because his shoe was found his shoe,

965
00:47:54,040 --> 00:47:56,040
Speaker 1: one of his shoes was missing, and then his shoe

966
00:47:56,080 --> 00:47:57,080
Speaker 1: was found at the scene.

967
00:47:57,320 --> 00:47:58,880
Speaker 2: So he had one shoe on and one shoe on,

968
00:47:58,920 --> 00:48:01,920
Speaker 2: shoe on and one shoe was the off shoe located.

969
00:48:02,160 --> 00:48:04,080
Speaker 1: I don't remember exactly, but I think it was in

970
00:48:04,120 --> 00:48:06,280
Speaker 1: the vicinity of his body somewhere.

971
00:48:06,360 --> 00:48:07,960
Speaker 2: I don't know if I guess if he got hit

972
00:48:08,000 --> 00:48:09,960
Speaker 2: by a car and his shoe flew off.

973
00:48:10,040 --> 00:48:12,200
Speaker 1: Well, that's what the prosecution claims like when they talk

974
00:48:12,239 --> 00:48:16,120
Speaker 1: about the reconstruction of how she hit him and his

975
00:48:16,239 --> 00:48:19,320
Speaker 1: injuries and everything. They talk about how a shoe coming

976
00:48:19,360 --> 00:48:21,799
Speaker 1: off is common when you get hit by a car

977
00:48:22,000 --> 00:48:26,520
Speaker 1: whose DNA was Well, it's five unidentified males.

978
00:48:27,040 --> 00:48:28,680
Speaker 2: But why don't they take the DNA of all the

979
00:48:28,680 --> 00:48:30,440
Speaker 2: people at the party and see see.

980
00:48:30,320 --> 00:48:33,239
Speaker 1: That is my question is why did they not do

981
00:48:33,320 --> 00:48:35,000
Speaker 1: that or are they going.

982
00:48:34,719 --> 00:48:39,719
Speaker 2: To do that? How many male DNA specimens do you

983
00:48:39,760 --> 00:48:40,520
Speaker 2: have on your shoe?

984
00:48:40,719 --> 00:48:41,200
Speaker 1: I don't know.

985
00:48:41,320 --> 00:48:44,200
Speaker 2: I mean, what's normal? What's a normal amount of male

986
00:48:46,600 --> 00:48:47,360
Speaker 2: on your shoe?

987
00:48:47,719 --> 00:48:50,560
Speaker 1: Well, why it's unknown on the other shoe, I don't know.

988
00:48:50,600 --> 00:48:51,760
Speaker 1: I only know about the one shoe.

989
00:48:51,840 --> 00:48:53,319
Speaker 2: All I know is to look at the other shoe

990
00:48:53,320 --> 00:48:56,440
Speaker 2: because if the other shoe has five, yeah, then that

991
00:48:56,480 --> 00:48:59,720
Speaker 2: doesn't answer any questions. Why does it matter to be normal?

992
00:49:00,080 --> 00:49:02,399
Speaker 2: But if it's only on one, then it's like, well,

993
00:49:02,400 --> 00:49:03,359
Speaker 2: who was playing with the shoe?

994
00:49:03,400 --> 00:49:05,600
Speaker 1: Okay, here here was my question. And I asked my friend.

995
00:49:05,640 --> 00:49:09,200
Speaker 1: That's who is a Who is a DNA expert?

996
00:49:10,160 --> 00:49:11,960
Speaker 2: I said, expert?

997
00:49:12,040 --> 00:49:13,799
Speaker 1: I do? I do. He's a police officer for a

998
00:49:13,800 --> 00:49:16,000
Speaker 1: long time, then he works wide and then he works DNA.

999
00:49:16,040 --> 00:49:17,200
Speaker 1: Now he teaches forensics.

1000
00:49:17,440 --> 00:49:18,760
Speaker 2: Is he in the Boston Police Department.

1001
00:49:18,760 --> 00:49:20,960
Speaker 1: No, he's not. He's in Ohio. But anyway, so.

1002
00:49:20,920 --> 00:49:21,520
Speaker 2: He's not crooked.

1003
00:49:21,920 --> 00:49:25,480
Speaker 1: No, I asked him. I asked, I was confused as

1004
00:49:25,560 --> 00:49:27,960
Speaker 1: to why it's unknown, And he said, what they do

1005
00:49:28,040 --> 00:49:29,759
Speaker 1: is when they find the male DNA, they put it

1006
00:49:29,800 --> 00:49:31,680
Speaker 1: into CODIS. Do you know what CODIS stands for?

1007
00:49:32,080 --> 00:49:35,960
Speaker 2: No, but it's it's the national database of people that

1008
00:49:36,000 --> 00:49:40,080
Speaker 2: are on the grid. Like if you get take your DNA.

1009
00:49:40,239 --> 00:49:42,520
Speaker 2: If you get arrested, they take your DNA, right if

1010
00:49:42,560 --> 00:49:45,759
Speaker 2: you're connected of a crime or things like that, and

1011
00:49:45,760 --> 00:49:47,600
Speaker 2: then they just hold on to it and then it

1012
00:49:47,640 --> 00:49:48,360
Speaker 2: can be a match.

1013
00:49:48,360 --> 00:49:50,879
Speaker 1: Okay, So let me tell you all what CODIS stands for.

1014
00:49:51,000 --> 00:49:53,359
Speaker 1: So at the next party you go to, you can

1015
00:49:53,719 --> 00:49:57,120
Speaker 1: sound very d us. No, it's co d I S.

1016
00:49:57,320 --> 00:49:58,720
Speaker 1: Let's stand Oh no, hold.

1017
00:49:58,600 --> 00:50:02,799
Speaker 2: On, CEO d I. What's what's the C stand for

1018
00:50:03,600 --> 00:50:08,640
Speaker 2: Combined combined DNA. Wait, where's the O.

1019
00:50:09,080 --> 00:50:10,920
Speaker 1: That's the CEO is for combined?

1020
00:50:10,960 --> 00:50:16,960
Speaker 2: Oh they needed a vowel. Yeah, right, combine DNA United States.

1021
00:50:17,160 --> 00:50:19,040
Speaker 1: No, it's not in you, it's an I.

1022
00:50:19,400 --> 00:50:26,160
Speaker 2: Oh oh combined DNA in the States, it's combined.

1023
00:50:26,160 --> 00:50:28,360
Speaker 1: Okay. See, now you're messing up my party trick that

1024
00:50:28,360 --> 00:50:30,080
Speaker 1: I'm trying to give to other people. So like party

1025
00:50:30,080 --> 00:50:33,560
Speaker 1: trick was better, it stands. Okay, is everyone listening now

1026
00:50:33,560 --> 00:50:35,480
Speaker 1: when you talk about this case, you or you talk

1027
00:50:35,520 --> 00:50:37,279
Speaker 1: about any case, you can be like, I know what

1028
00:50:37,360 --> 00:50:42,560
Speaker 1: code IS stands for. It stands for Combined DNA Index System.

1029
00:50:43,080 --> 00:50:46,399
Speaker 1: So they run the DNA through CODIS, they don't get

1030
00:50:46,440 --> 00:50:50,200
Speaker 1: any hits. That's why it's called unidentified or unknown. So

1031
00:50:50,360 --> 00:50:53,960
Speaker 1: then my question is, why does the defense not take

1032
00:50:54,000 --> 00:50:57,720
Speaker 1: it further, Why do they not test that DNA against

1033
00:50:57,719 --> 00:51:00,279
Speaker 1: the members the male people that were in the house

1034
00:51:00,320 --> 00:51:05,759
Speaker 1: that night, Because if Brian Albert's DNA ends up on

1035
00:51:05,840 --> 00:51:10,480
Speaker 1: John O'Keeffe's shoe, or Brian Higgins or Colin Albert or

1036
00:51:10,480 --> 00:51:12,160
Speaker 1: all these men that were in the house that night,

1037
00:51:12,760 --> 00:51:15,360
Speaker 1: mean that means that he went into the house.

1038
00:51:16,719 --> 00:51:19,040
Speaker 2: Maybe did they hang out all the time? No, was

1039
00:51:19,080 --> 00:51:19,800
Speaker 2: on the other shoe.

1040
00:51:20,000 --> 00:51:22,040
Speaker 1: No, I don't know why you're stuck on the other

1041
00:51:22,040 --> 00:51:25,160
Speaker 1: shoe because one shoe, I don't know, But it's on

1042
00:51:25,200 --> 00:51:26,440
Speaker 1: one shoe because I don't know.

1043
00:51:26,560 --> 00:51:27,920
Speaker 2: Was it his right foot or is left hand? I

1044
00:51:27,920 --> 00:51:29,320
Speaker 2: don't know, is he right footed?

1045
00:51:29,440 --> 00:51:29,920
Speaker 1: I don't know.

1046
00:51:30,080 --> 00:51:32,320
Speaker 2: Okay, those those things kind of help paint it a

1047
00:51:32,320 --> 00:51:34,960
Speaker 2: little bit of a picture. No, it's not smoking gun stuff.

1048
00:51:35,120 --> 00:51:37,799
Speaker 1: It's not a smoking gun. But it would lead to

1049
00:51:37,840 --> 00:51:41,640
Speaker 1: the argument that if those unknown male DNA was anyone

1050
00:51:41,640 --> 00:51:44,320
Speaker 1: that was inside that house, that you could argue that

1051
00:51:44,400 --> 00:51:46,000
Speaker 1: John O'Keeffe was inside the house.

1052
00:51:46,640 --> 00:51:51,200
Speaker 2: I don't know, you could argue that that's possible. But

1053
00:51:51,280 --> 00:51:53,520
Speaker 2: at the same time, the absence of DNA doesn't mean

1054
00:51:53,560 --> 00:51:54,720
Speaker 2: he wasn't inside the house.

1055
00:51:55,400 --> 00:51:59,080
Speaker 1: Okay, I'm just saying, let's get further testing and try

1056
00:51:59,120 --> 00:52:02,040
Speaker 1: to figure out who the male DNA is. Anyway, I

1057
00:52:02,080 --> 00:52:03,400
Speaker 1: don't know if the defense is going to do that.

1058
00:52:03,440 --> 00:52:05,879
Speaker 1: He brings it up in his opening statement. I think

1059
00:52:05,920 --> 00:52:09,520
Speaker 1: it's probably just another thing to add to the reasonable

1060
00:52:09,600 --> 00:52:15,640
Speaker 1: doubt side. Also, I was thinking that before they drove

1061
00:52:15,800 --> 00:52:17,959
Speaker 1: to the Albert's home that night, he was at a bar,

1062
00:52:18,840 --> 00:52:22,319
Speaker 1: so that could be where the unknown male DNA came up.

1063
00:52:22,360 --> 00:52:24,560
Speaker 1: If he goes into the mail, into the men's restroom

1064
00:52:24,560 --> 00:52:26,560
Speaker 1: and walks around, don't you think you get don't you

1065
00:52:26,600 --> 00:52:28,560
Speaker 1: think you get DNA stuck to the bottom of your

1066
00:52:28,560 --> 00:52:31,200
Speaker 1: feet when you're walking around in a bathroom? Does P

1067
00:52:31,400 --> 00:52:32,239
Speaker 1: have DNA in it?

1068
00:52:33,040 --> 00:52:34,360
Speaker 2: I don't think it's your friend.

1069
00:52:34,640 --> 00:52:45,200
Speaker 1: I'll ask him. One more thing that Alan Jackson did

1070
00:52:45,200 --> 00:52:46,719
Speaker 1: at the end of his opening statement that I thought

1071
00:52:46,719 --> 00:52:50,879
Speaker 1: was pretty brilliant. The prosecution keeps arguing that Karen Reid

1072
00:52:50,960 --> 00:52:52,719
Speaker 1: said I did it. I did it. I did it,

1073
00:52:53,239 --> 00:52:56,000
Speaker 1: So at the end of his opening statement, he says

1074
00:52:56,200 --> 00:52:59,520
Speaker 1: there was no collision. Oh, I hit right. You're right,

1075
00:52:59,600 --> 00:53:00,759
Speaker 1: I hit him. I hit him.

1076
00:53:01,400 --> 00:53:03,080
Speaker 2: Whether I think it matters if it's on the left

1077
00:53:03,080 --> 00:53:06,520
Speaker 2: foot or the right foot. You're changing the stories.

1078
00:53:07,080 --> 00:53:09,960
Speaker 1: You're right. So the prosecution alleges that the night when

1079
00:53:10,000 --> 00:53:12,600
Speaker 1: the body was found that she yelled, I hit him,

1080
00:53:12,640 --> 00:53:14,480
Speaker 1: I hit him. I hit him. So at the end

1081
00:53:14,520 --> 00:53:18,880
Speaker 1: of Alan Jackson's opening statement, he says, there was no collision.

1082
00:53:19,120 --> 00:53:22,400
Speaker 1: There was no collision. There was no collision. Let's talk

1083
00:53:22,400 --> 00:53:25,080
Speaker 1: about two of the witnesses in this retrial. And first

1084
00:53:25,080 --> 00:53:28,560
Speaker 1: of all, there was Carrie Roberts, who was with Karen

1085
00:53:28,600 --> 00:53:32,759
Speaker 1: Reid the morning when she found him. So apparently, let's

1086
00:53:32,840 --> 00:53:35,440
Speaker 1: go through this. Carrie Roberts was a friend of both

1087
00:53:35,520 --> 00:53:38,480
Speaker 1: Karen Reid and the victim, John O'Keefe, and she acknowledged

1088
00:53:38,520 --> 00:53:42,440
Speaker 1: under intense cross examination that she had previously given false

1089
00:53:42,480 --> 00:53:45,720
Speaker 1: testimony to a grand jury about a crucial piece of evidence.

1090
00:53:45,920 --> 00:53:47,800
Speaker 1: This was a big thing that came out of this retrial.

1091
00:53:47,880 --> 00:53:50,719
Speaker 1: I saw it everywhere. It was basically like she committed perjury.

1092
00:53:51,000 --> 00:53:54,439
Speaker 1: So let's talk about that. Carrie Roberts had originally told

1093
00:53:54,440 --> 00:53:56,600
Speaker 1: the grand jury back in April of twenty twenty two

1094
00:53:56,960 --> 00:54:00,920
Speaker 1: that she did hear Karen Reid ask Jennifer McCabe to

1095
00:54:01,080 --> 00:54:06,279
Speaker 1: search online for information about hypothermia, specifically referencing the now

1096
00:54:06,400 --> 00:54:09,480
Speaker 1: notorious search how long to Die in Cold? But it's

1097
00:54:09,520 --> 00:54:11,520
Speaker 1: not how long. Remember she's felt it wrong. It was

1098
00:54:11,800 --> 00:54:16,040
Speaker 1: hos haslong to Diane cold. That is testimony that played

1099
00:54:16,080 --> 00:54:19,240
Speaker 1: a role and reads indictment on manslaughter and murder charges

1100
00:54:19,320 --> 00:54:22,520
Speaker 1: back when she was in front of the grand jury.

1101
00:54:23,840 --> 00:54:28,160
Speaker 1: It's very This is actually very important because the discrepancy

1102
00:54:28,320 --> 00:54:31,200
Speaker 1: between what the prosecution and the defense alleges as to

1103
00:54:31,280 --> 00:54:35,520
Speaker 1: when this Google search was made. Remember, the defense claims

1104
00:54:35,560 --> 00:54:39,839
Speaker 1: that Jen McCabe was googling how long to Die in

1105
00:54:39,960 --> 00:54:43,400
Speaker 1: Cold at twenty seven in the morning. Now, if she

1106
00:54:43,560 --> 00:54:45,880
Speaker 1: was googling that at two twenty seven in the morning,

1107
00:54:46,400 --> 00:54:51,080
Speaker 1: that means that she knew that he had been.

1108
00:54:51,000 --> 00:54:53,680
Speaker 2: Well, no, it leads you to think, right, maybe she knew.

1109
00:54:53,719 --> 00:54:54,919
Speaker 2: Maybe it was just a party trick.

1110
00:54:55,120 --> 00:54:55,839
Speaker 1: It's a party trick.

1111
00:54:56,080 --> 00:54:57,400
Speaker 2: She was like doing a little.

1112
00:54:57,120 --> 00:55:00,400
Speaker 1: Trivia, right, like like I like to do yeah with

1113
00:55:00,440 --> 00:55:06,000
Speaker 1: your acronyms. So anyway, the prosecution claims that she didn't

1114
00:55:06,040 --> 00:55:09,000
Speaker 1: google it at to twenty seven, that she googled it

1115
00:55:09,040 --> 00:55:12,040
Speaker 1: at six something in the morning at the direction of

1116
00:55:12,120 --> 00:55:17,160
Speaker 1: Karen Reid saying Google the data that the defense presented

1117
00:55:17,239 --> 00:55:19,279
Speaker 1: said that it was googled at to twenty seven and

1118
00:55:20,080 --> 00:55:21,280
Speaker 1: then it was deleted.

1119
00:55:20,960 --> 00:55:22,719
Speaker 2: And they're saying, no, it wasn't.

1120
00:55:22,880 --> 00:55:26,120
Speaker 1: They're claiming that it's like that her browser was left

1121
00:55:26,160 --> 00:55:28,240
Speaker 1: open or something. I don't know. I don't understand.

1122
00:55:28,280 --> 00:55:31,640
Speaker 2: Oh, they're claiming. Okay, so they're claiming there's another reason

1123
00:55:31,680 --> 00:55:32,960
Speaker 2: why it shows a different time.

1124
00:55:33,560 --> 00:55:36,600
Speaker 1: They're saying she actually googled it later after the body

1125
00:55:36,719 --> 00:55:37,600
Speaker 1: was found.

1126
00:55:37,320 --> 00:55:40,560
Speaker 2: And them saying it was later it was just based

1127
00:55:40,560 --> 00:55:41,319
Speaker 2: on testimony.

1128
00:55:42,040 --> 00:55:44,880
Speaker 1: Well, them saying it later is Jen McCabe saying I

1129
00:55:44,920 --> 00:55:47,799
Speaker 1: didn't google it testimony, it's yeah, I didn't google it

1130
00:55:47,800 --> 00:55:50,080
Speaker 1: at to twenty seven. I googled it at six thirty

1131
00:55:50,080 --> 00:55:54,000
Speaker 1: in the morning when Karen Reid said google hypothermia or

1132
00:55:54,040 --> 00:55:55,160
Speaker 1: how long to die on this se.

1133
00:55:55,360 --> 00:55:58,120
Speaker 2: And why would that's another question. Why would Karen Reid

1134
00:55:58,560 --> 00:56:01,399
Speaker 2: during all this that's going on and say, let's start

1135
00:56:01,440 --> 00:56:03,040
Speaker 2: to investigate his death.

1136
00:56:03,600 --> 00:56:05,520
Speaker 1: Yeah, like you're saying, she just found him dead in

1137
00:56:05,560 --> 00:56:06,960
Speaker 1: the lawn and she's like writing.

1138
00:56:06,719 --> 00:56:08,920
Speaker 2: Around screaming and you're dead and there's blood everywhere, and

1139
00:56:08,920 --> 00:56:10,960
Speaker 2: I'm starting to google, like how many stabs would it

1140
00:56:11,000 --> 00:56:13,719
Speaker 2: take to kill? Yeah? Female, I mean that's like, you know,

1141
00:56:13,800 --> 00:56:16,160
Speaker 2: I'd be calling for help, and I would be, you.

1142
00:56:16,120 --> 00:56:19,920
Speaker 1: Know, right worried. I like how you said that, you

1143
00:56:19,960 --> 00:56:21,560
Speaker 1: sounded very concerned.

1144
00:56:21,200 --> 00:56:23,319
Speaker 2: The emotional Yes, sure, I would be, of course.

1145
00:56:24,200 --> 00:56:28,960
Speaker 1: So basically, Carrie Roberts admits on the stand that she

1146
00:56:30,120 --> 00:56:33,360
Speaker 1: perjured herself in her first in the grand jury testimony,

1147
00:56:33,440 --> 00:56:36,720
Speaker 1: she said that she testified that she heard Karen Reid

1148
00:56:37,000 --> 00:56:40,359
Speaker 1: tell Jen McCabe to google something about hypothermia how long

1149
00:56:40,400 --> 00:56:42,040
Speaker 1: to die in the snow at six point thirty in

1150
00:56:42,080 --> 00:56:45,279
Speaker 1: the morning. And then in this when she's grilled in

1151
00:56:45,320 --> 00:56:48,479
Speaker 1: this retrial by Alan Jackson, she admits that she lied

1152
00:56:48,520 --> 00:56:50,120
Speaker 1: that she did not hear Karen Reid.

1153
00:56:49,960 --> 00:56:53,239
Speaker 2: Say that, and did she say does she explain her.

1154
00:56:53,440 --> 00:56:56,640
Speaker 1: Well, her explanation was that she misunderstood the question the

1155
00:56:56,680 --> 00:56:57,520
Speaker 1: first time around.

1156
00:56:57,640 --> 00:57:00,520
Speaker 2: But that's not a lie. Well, if she no, I'm

1157
00:57:00,560 --> 00:57:03,399
Speaker 2: saying her version, I'm not citing with anyone. But her

1158
00:57:03,480 --> 00:57:09,359
Speaker 2: version is I misunderstood right during this intense investigation when

1159
00:57:09,360 --> 00:57:13,560
Speaker 2: you asked me pointed questions, I misunderstood. Yes, that's shady, right.

1160
00:57:13,920 --> 00:57:16,920
Speaker 1: However, when defense attorney Alan Jackson confronted her with her

1161
00:57:16,960 --> 00:57:20,160
Speaker 1: past statement during trial this past week, Roberts admitted she

1162
00:57:20,240 --> 00:57:24,720
Speaker 1: did not actually hear read make that request. Alan Jackson says,

1163
00:57:24,760 --> 00:57:27,120
Speaker 1: to her quote, you gave a very specific account to

1164
00:57:27,160 --> 00:57:32,080
Speaker 1: the grand jury, didn't you, Jackson asked, referencing her earlier testimony. Yes,

1165
00:57:32,320 --> 00:57:36,440
Speaker 1: Roberts replied, before conceding, I did not hear her ask that.

1166
00:57:36,880 --> 00:57:39,520
Speaker 1: Roberts claimed she did not intend to mislead the grand jury,

1167
00:57:39,520 --> 00:57:42,360
Speaker 1: but instead had misunderstood the question at the time. So

1168
00:57:42,760 --> 00:57:43,480
Speaker 1: that's where that's at.

1169
00:57:43,520 --> 00:57:46,320
Speaker 2: But you know, cal is anyone reliable in this case?

1170
00:57:46,400 --> 00:57:48,120
Speaker 1: Oh? I'm telling you this way. This case I would

1171
00:57:48,160 --> 00:57:51,120
Speaker 1: call this case. This is like another for me, This

1172
00:57:51,240 --> 00:57:53,440
Speaker 1: Karen Reid case is like the case of the century.

1173
00:57:53,480 --> 00:57:55,480
Speaker 1: Like you remember O. J. Simpson was the case of the.

1174
00:57:55,440 --> 00:57:58,720
Speaker 2: Century, well, and that was popular because of it being

1175
00:57:58,800 --> 00:58:01,560
Speaker 2: OJ televine, right, and then it.

1176
00:58:01,520 --> 00:58:04,200
Speaker 1: Was like the lapd and then they were it was

1177
00:58:04,200 --> 00:58:07,240
Speaker 1: like a conspiracy, remember, and they said that they were

1178
00:58:07,440 --> 00:58:10,520
Speaker 1: racist and that they had planted evidence, and then the glow.

1179
00:58:10,800 --> 00:58:12,200
Speaker 2: So this one, are you going to say that this

1180
00:58:12,240 --> 00:58:16,280
Speaker 2: one seems to be famous? Yeah, it's so confusing, And

1181
00:58:16,760 --> 00:58:18,000
Speaker 2: I think it's because.

1182
00:58:18,160 --> 00:58:24,160
Speaker 1: It's the same type of sensationalism where you have very

1183
00:58:24,200 --> 00:58:27,680
Speaker 1: divided sides. There's really no one in the middle. It's

1184
00:58:27,680 --> 00:58:29,960
Speaker 1: like people are either like she is completely innocent and

1185
00:58:30,000 --> 00:58:32,200
Speaker 1: this is a conspiracy, or she hit him and she's

1186
00:58:32,200 --> 00:58:35,080
Speaker 1: a piece of there's not a middle with this case.

1187
00:58:35,480 --> 00:58:40,280
Speaker 1: And there's no smoking gun. There's just nothing that says

1188
00:58:40,400 --> 00:58:42,360
Speaker 1: she did it or she didn't do it. There is

1189
00:58:42,520 --> 00:58:46,600
Speaker 1: tons and tons of evidence and testimony and witnesses and

1190
00:58:46,680 --> 00:58:49,400
Speaker 1: everything just leads you to more confusion.

1191
00:58:49,480 --> 00:58:52,400
Speaker 2: It's almost like it's the perfect crime. The perfect crime

1192
00:58:53,200 --> 00:58:55,520
Speaker 2: is to make it confusing, not to try to get

1193
00:58:55,560 --> 00:58:58,000
Speaker 2: away with it. You know what I mean? A perfect

1194
00:58:58,000 --> 00:59:01,120
Speaker 2: crime is like making evidence it's random, like the next day,

1195
00:59:01,160 --> 00:59:03,760
Speaker 2: maybe she threw her tail light out there. You know

1196
00:59:03,760 --> 00:59:04,960
Speaker 2: what I mean.

1197
00:59:05,080 --> 00:59:09,440
Speaker 1: You would have to be a criminal mastermind to think about.

1198
00:59:08,040 --> 00:59:11,360
Speaker 2: All those things. I'm saying is that if no one

1199
00:59:11,400 --> 00:59:13,560
Speaker 2: should get convicted in this case based on the evidence

1200
00:59:13,560 --> 00:59:15,680
Speaker 2: that we've discussed so far, because there's so much doubt

1201
00:59:15,880 --> 00:59:18,160
Speaker 2: as to anyone having done it, you can't be certain

1202
00:59:18,200 --> 00:59:20,720
Speaker 2: that any one person did it, So in a way,

1203
00:59:20,760 --> 00:59:24,000
Speaker 2: that's kind of a perfect.

1204
00:59:23,280 --> 00:59:26,040
Speaker 1: Well it is. But the thing that is so bother

1205
00:59:26,120 --> 00:59:28,320
Speaker 1: somewhere maybe why people are so invested in this case

1206
00:59:28,400 --> 00:59:30,400
Speaker 1: is that I don't know if we will actually ever

1207
00:59:30,520 --> 00:59:31,680
Speaker 1: know what happened.

1208
00:59:31,960 --> 00:59:33,600
Speaker 2: We won't unless someone comes forward.

1209
00:59:33,800 --> 00:59:36,360
Speaker 1: And there's no ring footage. That's another thing. Like there

1210
00:59:36,400 --> 00:59:38,160
Speaker 1: was a cop that lived across the street. You don't

1211
00:59:38,160 --> 00:59:40,280
Speaker 1: think he had ring footage on his house. He doesn't

1212
00:59:40,280 --> 00:59:43,280
Speaker 1: have any footage. Ryan Albert has no ring footage of

1213
00:59:43,280 --> 00:59:45,160
Speaker 1: that night, even though he's a cop and he dealt

1214
00:59:45,160 --> 00:59:48,360
Speaker 1: with like he dealt with drug dealers and things, and

1215
00:59:48,400 --> 00:59:50,840
Speaker 1: he doesn't have he doesn't have security cameras.

1216
00:59:50,480 --> 00:59:51,640
Speaker 2: On his house. I don't know.

1217
00:59:51,720 --> 00:59:55,040
Speaker 1: I don't know if it's, of course it's standard.

1218
00:59:54,880 --> 00:59:57,560
Speaker 2: The standard for police officers to have cameras in their homes.

1219
00:59:57,720 --> 01:00:00,000
Speaker 1: Yes, I would think so. If you're a police officer

1220
01:00:00,120 --> 01:00:03,200
Speaker 1: and you're dealing with gangs and drugs, you don't have

1221
01:00:03,240 --> 01:00:04,840
Speaker 1: security cameras on your house.

1222
01:00:04,960 --> 01:00:07,120
Speaker 2: They might, but you're acting like it's standard. Like him

1223
01:00:07,160 --> 01:00:08,520
Speaker 2: not having it suspicious.

1224
01:00:08,560 --> 01:00:11,280
Speaker 1: It is suspicious. I think that he I don't know

1225
01:00:11,760 --> 01:00:13,560
Speaker 1: of this exactly. I don't know if he just didn't

1226
01:00:13,640 --> 01:00:16,080
Speaker 1: have if he claims he didn't have any security cameras,

1227
01:00:16,400 --> 01:00:19,080
Speaker 1: or if he had security cameras and it was deleted

1228
01:00:20,720 --> 01:00:21,360
Speaker 1: that I don't know.

1229
01:00:21,480 --> 01:00:23,160
Speaker 2: Everything in this case is suspicious.

1230
01:00:23,200 --> 01:00:24,960
Speaker 1: I know everything suspicious. I mean he threw his phone

1231
01:00:25,000 --> 01:00:27,200
Speaker 1: away the day before he was supposed to be confiscated.

1232
01:00:27,880 --> 01:00:30,280
Speaker 1: Dog Brian Higgins threw his phone out too, before it

1233
01:00:30,320 --> 01:00:32,960
Speaker 1: was supposed to be confiscated. Now you tell me that

1234
01:00:33,000 --> 01:00:35,160
Speaker 1: if there are just some innocent guys inside a house

1235
01:00:35,200 --> 01:00:36,840
Speaker 1: having a party and they don't know what's going on

1236
01:00:36,880 --> 01:00:38,840
Speaker 1: in the front lawn, he just got hit by Cara.

1237
01:00:40,080 --> 01:00:42,600
Speaker 1: Why are they all throwing their cell phones away? Why

1238
01:00:42,600 --> 01:00:45,560
Speaker 1: are they redoing their basement floors and selling the house

1239
01:00:45,600 --> 01:00:46,600
Speaker 1: and rehoming the dog?

1240
01:00:47,120 --> 01:00:49,320
Speaker 2: The dog, I don't know, all right.

1241
01:00:49,360 --> 01:00:51,160
Speaker 1: There was one other witness. This is his name is

1242
01:00:51,200 --> 01:00:54,880
Speaker 1: Timothy Nuddle. The prosecutor Brennan opened his case by calling

1243
01:00:54,920 --> 01:00:59,920
Speaker 1: Timothy Nuddle, a firefighter from Canton, as the trial's first witness. Nuddle,

1244
01:01:00,600 --> 01:01:05,000
Speaker 1: who was a firefighter, recounted that it was a chaotic

1245
01:01:05,040 --> 01:01:07,240
Speaker 1: and emotional scene at thirty four Fair of You, with

1246
01:01:07,320 --> 01:01:10,960
Speaker 1: Karen Reid visibly distraught, yelling and crying while paramedics worked

1247
01:01:11,160 --> 01:01:15,520
Speaker 1: to revive John O'Keefe. During cross examination, Alan Jackson pressed

1248
01:01:15,600 --> 01:01:17,680
Speaker 1: him on the number of times he claimed to have

1249
01:01:17,760 --> 01:01:21,280
Speaker 1: heard Reid say I hit him. While not all testified

1250
01:01:21,440 --> 01:01:25,240
Speaker 1: in this trial that she repeated it three times. Jackson

1251
01:01:25,320 --> 01:01:28,160
Speaker 1: pointed out that during the first trial he said that

1252
01:01:28,240 --> 01:01:29,800
Speaker 1: it was only twice.

1253
01:01:29,520 --> 01:01:32,120
Speaker 2: Why why is there any no have a question? Why

1254
01:01:32,160 --> 01:01:34,560
Speaker 2: is there any bodycam footage of all the first responders?

1255
01:01:34,760 --> 01:01:37,000
Speaker 1: There is, I've watched it, but you can't pick up

1256
01:01:37,040 --> 01:01:39,520
Speaker 1: you can't pick up audio. There's well, I don't I've

1257
01:01:39,520 --> 01:01:42,640
Speaker 1: seen I've seen footage from the car, the car that

1258
01:01:42,680 --> 01:01:43,040
Speaker 1: pulled up.

1259
01:01:43,120 --> 01:01:45,440
Speaker 2: So the bodycam footage that does exist from the police

1260
01:01:45,480 --> 01:01:47,120
Speaker 2: officers isn't really helpful. I don't know.

1261
01:01:47,160 --> 01:01:48,800
Speaker 1: I haven't seen bodycam footage, and I don't know if

1262
01:01:48,840 --> 01:01:50,680
Speaker 1: there is any, And that could be another question.

1263
01:01:50,800 --> 01:01:53,440
Speaker 2: I I don't know.

1264
01:01:53,560 --> 01:01:56,040
Speaker 1: I recamp that I don't know about that. All I'm

1265
01:01:56,080 --> 01:02:00,840
Speaker 1: saying is I have seen footage from when the cops

1266
01:02:00,840 --> 01:02:03,720
Speaker 1: pull up, and there's a it's from the car.

1267
01:02:04,000 --> 01:02:06,640
Speaker 2: I've seen footage from the car, the police car.

1268
01:02:06,720 --> 01:02:09,160
Speaker 1: Yeah, and it shows it shows light dash camp thank you,

1269
01:02:09,200 --> 01:02:11,400
Speaker 1: it shows lights, and it shows Karen Reid running all

1270
01:02:11,400 --> 01:02:14,480
Speaker 1: around and she's yelling'ract she's crazy.

1271
01:02:14,720 --> 01:02:18,080
Speaker 2: Okay, So the not very helpful, right.

1272
01:02:17,920 --> 01:02:21,000
Speaker 1: So the defense continues to question the credibility and accuracy

1273
01:02:21,000 --> 01:02:24,240
Speaker 1: of those statements. Allegedlate made by Karen Reid that morning,

1274
01:02:24,360 --> 01:02:28,520
Speaker 1: especially since neither initial police reports nor hospital records include

1275
01:02:28,560 --> 01:02:31,479
Speaker 1: any mention of her saying that at the scene. That's

1276
01:02:31,480 --> 01:02:35,320
Speaker 1: also very suspicious. If she said I hit him, I

1277
01:02:35,520 --> 01:02:39,080
Speaker 1: hit him, I hit him, and he heard it, I

1278
01:02:39,120 --> 01:02:42,280
Speaker 1: would assume other people heard it as well. And wouldn't

1279
01:02:42,320 --> 01:02:44,360
Speaker 1: it have been in a report. Wouldn't have people questioned

1280
01:02:44,400 --> 01:02:46,720
Speaker 1: her more, wouldn't have someone have written that down.

1281
01:02:47,360 --> 01:02:50,240
Speaker 2: It's very suspicious that someone would even say that, even

1282
01:02:50,240 --> 01:02:53,959
Speaker 2: if they did it. Yeah, it's weird. So even if

1283
01:02:54,400 --> 01:02:58,120
Speaker 2: she hit him, why would she say that. That's not

1284
01:02:58,200 --> 01:03:04,120
Speaker 2: a normal thing. Well, she's questioning herself, like, well, she does.

1285
01:03:04,040 --> 01:03:06,440
Speaker 1: Do that, and I think she admits to doing that,

1286
01:03:06,480 --> 01:03:10,600
Speaker 1: and I think that's actual actually a normal reaction. Because

1287
01:03:11,200 --> 01:03:13,400
Speaker 1: the prosecution and I was going to ask you what

1288
01:03:13,400 --> 01:03:18,000
Speaker 1: you thought about this, The prosecution plays clips from her interview.

1289
01:03:18,120 --> 01:03:21,479
Speaker 1: Remember the series I Just Watched a Body in the Snow.

1290
01:03:21,520 --> 01:03:24,640
Speaker 1: It's like five episodes. It's the it's Karen Reid's first trial.

1291
01:03:25,080 --> 01:03:27,520
Speaker 1: They follow the trial, but they also have interviews with

1292
01:03:27,600 --> 01:03:30,000
Speaker 1: her and Alan Jackson, her attorney. It shows them in

1293
01:03:30,040 --> 01:03:33,560
Speaker 1: the war room, it shows them preparing so the prosecution

1294
01:03:33,800 --> 01:03:37,240
Speaker 1: took clips of her in those interviews in that show,

1295
01:03:37,280 --> 01:03:40,840
Speaker 1: and they're playing them in this retrial, and they're using

1296
01:03:41,440 --> 01:03:44,800
Speaker 1: excerpts of things that she said against her, and she

1297
01:03:44,960 --> 01:03:47,800
Speaker 1: did say things like did I hit him? I was

1298
01:03:47,880 --> 01:03:50,920
Speaker 1: questioning what happened. I drank a lot that night. I

1299
01:03:50,960 --> 01:03:52,960
Speaker 1: didn't know what happened. I didn't know why he was there,

1300
01:03:54,280 --> 01:03:58,919
Speaker 1: And they're showing it as if she's admitting to it. Well,

1301
01:03:58,920 --> 01:04:01,240
Speaker 1: my question is, do you think it's a good idea

1302
01:04:01,280 --> 01:04:04,040
Speaker 1: that she does all these interviews. This isn't normal when

1303
01:04:04,040 --> 01:04:06,200
Speaker 1: someone's on trial for murder. They don't go out and

1304
01:04:06,240 --> 01:04:09,240
Speaker 1: go and just do interviews all the time. And because

1305
01:04:09,360 --> 01:04:13,120
Speaker 1: that's scary, it's Scott Peterson did well. He did like one,

1306
01:04:13,360 --> 01:04:14,880
Speaker 1: He did like a sixty minute one, and then he

1307
01:04:14,960 --> 01:04:18,000
Speaker 1: never did more. But I mean, she does a lot,

1308
01:04:18,040 --> 01:04:20,560
Speaker 1: and they did a whole docuseries on her, and she

1309
01:04:20,720 --> 01:04:22,720
Speaker 1: interviewed multiple times.

1310
01:04:23,000 --> 01:04:26,560
Speaker 2: Maybe she uh, maybe she thought that would be helpful.

1311
01:04:27,040 --> 01:04:30,800
Speaker 1: Here I'll tell you what she said. I also was wondering,

1312
01:04:30,840 --> 01:04:32,680
Speaker 1: did I say that I hit him? Or was it

1313
01:04:32,720 --> 01:04:34,320
Speaker 1: told to me that I said I hit him? And

1314
01:04:34,360 --> 01:04:36,040
Speaker 1: I knew I never could have said that. So the

1315
01:04:36,040 --> 01:04:38,240
Speaker 1: closest I must have said, was did I hit him?

1316
01:04:38,280 --> 01:04:40,120
Speaker 1: I know I said I hit him, but I did,

1317
01:04:40,720 --> 01:04:42,480
Speaker 1: But did I really say it as many times as

1318
01:04:42,560 --> 01:04:45,760
Speaker 1: law enforcement's claiming I said it. That's verbatim what she said.

1319
01:04:45,640 --> 01:04:47,960
Speaker 2: And her maybe it was more like a question like

1320
01:04:48,000 --> 01:04:50,800
Speaker 2: I hit him, I hit him, you know, like people

1321
01:04:50,800 --> 01:04:55,000
Speaker 2: are saying like he's got bloom forced trauma, blah blah blah. Right,

1322
01:04:55,400 --> 01:04:58,040
Speaker 2: was he run over? I hit him? I hit him? Yeah,

1323
01:04:58,040 --> 01:04:59,640
Speaker 2: I hit him. Why would he say three times?

1324
01:05:00,600 --> 01:05:04,400
Speaker 1: I don't know. But anyway, I to me when she

1325
01:05:05,000 --> 01:05:07,800
Speaker 1: was doing when she was talking about that and her interview,

1326
01:05:07,800 --> 01:05:10,480
Speaker 1: when I watched a body in the snow, I thought, oh,

1327
01:05:11,920 --> 01:05:14,960
Speaker 1: probably not a good idea to allow your stream of

1328
01:05:15,000 --> 01:05:18,280
Speaker 1: conscience to start talking like did I hit him? I

1329
01:05:18,280 --> 01:05:19,800
Speaker 1: don't know did I hit him? Or do I just

1330
01:05:19,840 --> 01:05:21,520
Speaker 1: think I hit him because I was totally hit him,

1331
01:05:21,520 --> 01:05:23,040
Speaker 1: But did I hit him? I was like, you need

1332
01:05:23,120 --> 01:05:23,880
Speaker 1: to stop talking.

1333
01:05:24,720 --> 01:05:27,080
Speaker 2: All right. Well, if I'm found dead, you have my

1334
01:05:27,120 --> 01:05:29,200
Speaker 2: permission to keep quiet, Okay.

1335
01:05:29,280 --> 01:05:33,600
Speaker 1: Thank you. Also, in this retrial, the jurors all visited

1336
01:05:33,680 --> 01:05:36,800
Speaker 1: thirty four fair View. They took a field trip. Oh yeah,

1337
01:05:36,840 --> 01:05:39,800
Speaker 1: so on Friday that was last Friday, jurors were transported

1338
01:05:39,800 --> 01:05:42,640
Speaker 1: from the courtroom to the Canton property where John O'Keefe

1339
01:05:42,680 --> 01:05:45,960
Speaker 1: was discovered. The field visit was arranged to give jurors

1340
01:05:46,000 --> 01:05:49,720
Speaker 1: a clear perspective on key physical elements being discussed throughout

1341
01:05:49,760 --> 01:05:52,680
Speaker 1: the trial, including the layout of the scene and Karen

1342
01:05:52,720 --> 01:05:57,520
Speaker 1: Reid's reaction that morning. According to Judge Beverly Conone, the

1343
01:05:57,560 --> 01:06:00,600
Speaker 1: goal was to help durors better visualize the evidence as

1344
01:06:00,640 --> 01:06:01,880
Speaker 1: they evaluate the case.

1345
01:06:02,840 --> 01:06:04,320
Speaker 2: Didn't someone else ow in the home now though?

1346
01:06:04,560 --> 01:06:05,920
Speaker 1: Yeah? Because they sold it?

1347
01:06:05,960 --> 01:06:10,880
Speaker 2: How would that be? Like judge knocks on your door, Likene,

1348
01:06:10,880 --> 01:06:12,840
Speaker 2: we're investigating a homicide that took place here.

1349
01:06:12,920 --> 01:06:14,840
Speaker 1: Well, I think they probably know what was coming.

1350
01:06:14,840 --> 01:06:16,280
Speaker 2: We're not sure if it took place here or in

1351
01:06:16,280 --> 01:06:16,760
Speaker 2: your basement?

1352
01:06:16,920 --> 01:06:19,440
Speaker 1: Yeah? Can we search your basement? Can we do some

1353
01:06:19,520 --> 01:06:22,080
Speaker 1: DNA testing down here? Can we rip up the carpet?

1354
01:06:22,120 --> 01:06:25,960
Speaker 1: Do you mind? During the visit, attorneys from both sides

1355
01:06:26,000 --> 01:06:28,640
Speaker 1: pointed out specific features they wanted the jury to take

1356
01:06:28,680 --> 01:06:31,320
Speaker 1: note of, such as Reed's Lexus suv. So they brought

1357
01:06:31,360 --> 01:06:32,680
Speaker 1: the suv and parked it there.

1358
01:06:33,080 --> 01:06:36,040
Speaker 2: That's the prosecution trying to put plant images in their head.

1359
01:06:36,080 --> 01:06:37,960
Speaker 1: So you're saying, come look at this yard, and he

1360
01:06:38,040 --> 01:06:40,240
Speaker 1: died right here, and here's the suv with a missing

1361
01:06:40,320 --> 01:06:42,520
Speaker 1: tail light parked right in front of the house.

1362
01:06:42,400 --> 01:06:44,040
Speaker 2: Right and then people like, yeah, that could be.

1363
01:06:45,760 --> 01:06:48,360
Speaker 1: During the visit, attorneys from both sides pointed out specific

1364
01:06:48,440 --> 01:06:50,600
Speaker 1: features they wanted the jury to take note of, such

1365
01:06:50,600 --> 01:06:53,600
Speaker 1: as Reed's Lexus suv, as well as a flagpole and

1366
01:06:53,640 --> 01:06:56,720
Speaker 1: a fire hydrant that could factor into theories about what happened.

1367
01:06:57,360 --> 01:07:00,280
Speaker 1: Defense attorney David Yanetti, who is one of Here and

1368
01:07:00,320 --> 01:07:04,440
Speaker 1: Reads other attorneys, encourages jurors to closely examine the suv

1369
01:07:04,560 --> 01:07:07,720
Speaker 1: to understand its size and relation to the scene when

1370
01:07:07,760 --> 01:07:10,320
Speaker 1: they go back to court. Jurors also heard from doctor

1371
01:07:10,400 --> 01:07:13,960
Speaker 1: Gary Faller, a pathologist, who discuss Reads blood test results

1372
01:07:13,960 --> 01:07:16,480
Speaker 1: from the morning of January twenty ninth, twenty twenty two.

1373
01:07:16,960 --> 01:07:19,800
Speaker 1: The test showed her blood alcohol level at point zero

1374
01:07:20,120 --> 01:07:22,840
Speaker 1: nine to three percent, slightly above the legal limit of

1375
01:07:22,920 --> 01:07:27,040
Speaker 1: pointh eight. The defense suggests that that Reads anemia could

1376
01:07:27,040 --> 01:07:32,320
Speaker 1: have impacted the tests accuracy. I don't know, maybe I'm

1377
01:07:32,400 --> 01:07:35,360
Speaker 1: just not smart, but I don't know. I mean, she

1378
01:07:35,480 --> 01:07:37,880
Speaker 1: clearly admits that they had a lot to drink. She

1379
01:07:37,960 --> 01:07:42,440
Speaker 1: does it in the documentary well she talks about this

1380
01:07:42,520 --> 01:07:44,200
Speaker 1: and a double this, and then she does a shot

1381
01:07:44,200 --> 01:07:45,760
Speaker 1: of this, and then this was a double And I

1382
01:07:45,760 --> 01:07:47,760
Speaker 1: mean they drank a lot. He had a roadie with

1383
01:07:47,840 --> 01:07:50,400
Speaker 1: him when they drove to Brian Albert's hat. Here's a

1384
01:07:50,400 --> 01:07:52,480
Speaker 1: cocktail glass that was found next to his body.

1385
01:07:52,480 --> 01:07:53,560
Speaker 2: I'm still umbrella.

1386
01:07:54,040 --> 01:07:59,200
Speaker 1: Maybe I'm so they're clearly drunk and they're drinking a lot.

1387
01:07:59,560 --> 01:08:02,560
Speaker 1: I think it's evident that she's impaired. I think she

1388
01:08:02,680 --> 01:08:07,800
Speaker 1: admits to being impaired. So I just don't understand why

1389
01:08:07,960 --> 01:08:10,760
Speaker 1: that is a key piece of evidence.

1390
01:08:11,080 --> 01:08:14,360
Speaker 2: Why that is a key piece of Yeah, why wouldn't it.

1391
01:08:14,320 --> 01:08:16,960
Speaker 1: Be, Because whether she's drunk or not, the question is

1392
01:08:17,000 --> 01:08:18,519
Speaker 1: whether she backed end to him.

1393
01:08:18,680 --> 01:08:23,040
Speaker 2: Well, because people are impaired when they're drunken, and then

1394
01:08:23,040 --> 01:08:26,519
Speaker 2: they're likely to commit murder. Where maybe she wasn't paying

1395
01:08:26,520 --> 01:08:29,960
Speaker 2: attention and hit him and then drove off. I don't know. Also,

1396
01:08:30,000 --> 01:08:31,639
Speaker 2: they're probably trying to make her look like a drunk

1397
01:08:31,720 --> 01:08:37,280
Speaker 2: just like citizen who killed her boyfriend, right, you know

1398
01:08:37,400 --> 01:08:40,360
Speaker 2: they Yeah, I don't know. This is a It's like

1399
01:08:40,560 --> 01:08:46,000
Speaker 2: the more scientific evidence or or resources that we have

1400
01:08:46,160 --> 01:08:50,320
Speaker 2: to investigate actually in this case, just created more confusion.

1401
01:08:50,560 --> 01:08:52,280
Speaker 1: I agree with that because the more.

1402
01:08:52,560 --> 01:08:56,040
Speaker 2: Scientific evidence, I just be like, he's dead. It's on

1403
01:08:56,080 --> 01:08:59,040
Speaker 2: your lawn. You did it right right now. It's just

1404
01:08:59,200 --> 01:09:00,960
Speaker 2: like and points direct.

1405
01:09:00,960 --> 01:09:03,400
Speaker 1: I know. It's like there's Apple data from his Apple

1406
01:09:03,479 --> 01:09:06,280
Speaker 1: Watch and now they're going there's also I think the

1407
01:09:06,320 --> 01:09:08,519
Speaker 1: prosecution there's something now that has to do with his

1408
01:09:08,680 --> 01:09:13,160
Speaker 1: battery and like how how long it lasted, And it's

1409
01:09:13,520 --> 01:09:17,600
Speaker 1: you know, the the forensics and the DNA and the

1410
01:09:17,680 --> 01:09:21,960
Speaker 1: hypothermia and the body temperature, and there's so much information

1411
01:09:22,160 --> 01:09:25,120
Speaker 1: in this case. It's so hard to decipher. And at

1412
01:09:25,160 --> 01:09:27,639
Speaker 1: the end of the day, we still don't know exactly

1413
01:09:27,640 --> 01:09:29,280
Speaker 1: what happened, and we probably never.

1414
01:09:29,160 --> 01:09:31,920
Speaker 2: Know, not at all, like not at all, not at all,

1415
01:09:32,040 --> 01:09:32,800
Speaker 2: just that he's dead.

1416
01:09:33,160 --> 01:09:37,960
Speaker 1: On the law, right, but there's so much reasonable doubt

1417
01:09:38,240 --> 01:09:41,200
Speaker 1: that I just I can't convict the woman if I

1418
01:09:41,280 --> 01:09:42,800
Speaker 1: was on the jury. People ask me all the time,

1419
01:09:42,840 --> 01:09:44,879
Speaker 1: what do you think, do you think she's innocent or guilty?

1420
01:09:45,280 --> 01:09:47,799
Speaker 1: I don't think innocent are guilty. I think in terms

1421
01:09:47,920 --> 01:09:49,680
Speaker 1: of what if I was on the jury, would I

1422
01:09:49,800 --> 01:09:52,160
Speaker 1: convict her? The answer to that is.

1423
01:09:52,120 --> 01:09:54,799
Speaker 2: No, I wouldn't, based on the legal standard.

1424
01:09:54,880 --> 01:09:56,559
Speaker 1: Based on the legal standard doubt.

1425
01:09:56,840 --> 01:09:59,639
Speaker 2: Yes, So you're not saying innocent, You're saying not guilty.

1426
01:10:00,000 --> 01:10:02,839
Speaker 2: How guilty does not mean innocent. It means not guilty

1427
01:10:02,920 --> 01:10:03,759
Speaker 2: by a matter.

1428
01:10:03,600 --> 01:10:06,439
Speaker 1: Of law exactly, And that's what I'm saying. So I'm

1429
01:10:06,479 --> 01:10:09,040
Speaker 1: not picking aside as to whether I think she did

1430
01:10:09,080 --> 01:10:12,519
Speaker 1: it or did not do it. I'm saying, based upon

1431
01:10:12,720 --> 01:10:15,080
Speaker 1: everything I've read, the evidence presented, if I was on

1432
01:10:15,120 --> 01:10:16,760
Speaker 1: the jury, I could not convict her.

1433
01:10:17,000 --> 01:10:19,280
Speaker 2: Okay, now, if you're not on the jury, who did it?

1434
01:10:19,600 --> 01:10:23,160
Speaker 1: So I still don't know. I have no idea, right

1435
01:10:23,560 --> 01:10:26,640
Speaker 1: all right? Anyway, thanks again for listening. We appreciate it,

1436
01:10:26,680 --> 01:10:28,880
Speaker 1: and if you have questions or comments, please feel free

1437
01:10:28,880 --> 01:10:30,439
Speaker 1: to DM me. I try to read as much as

1438
01:10:30,479 --> 01:10:32,840
Speaker 1: possible and we appreciate you.

1439
01:10:33,200 --> 01:10:38,120
Speaker 2: Thank you.