Podcasts about defendants

7 Hours and 59 MinutesPG-13Thomas777 is a revisionist historian and a fiction writer.Here are episodes 17 throught the Livestream Q&A of the World War 2 series with Thomas777 in one audio file.Episode 17: The Nuremberg Proceedings Part 1 w/ Thomas777Episode 18: The Nuremberg Proceedings Part 2 w/ Thomas777Episode 19: The Nuremberg Proceedings Part 3 - The Defendants w/ Thomas777Episode 20: The Trial of Hermann Göring Part 1 w/ Thomas777Episode 21: The Trial of Hermann Göring Part 2 - The Cross-Examination w/ Thomas777Episode 22: The Final Episode in the WW2 Series - The Verdicts at Nuremberg w/ Thomas777Livestream Q&AThomas' SubstackThomas777 MerchandiseThomas' Book "Steelstorm Pt. 1"Thomas' Book "Steelstorm Pt. 2"Thomas on TwitterThomas' CashApp - $7homas777Pete and Thomas777 'At the Movies'Support Pete on His WebsitePete's PatreonPete's SubstackPete's SubscribestarPete's GUMROADPete's VenmoPete's Buy Me a CoffeePete on FacebookPete on TwitterBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-pete-quinones-show--6071361/support.

As the discussion intensifies, the conversation shifts from global threats to the heart-stopping realities inside a true crime courtroom. What begins as a reflection on bioweapons, lab research, and the dangers of modern terrorism quickly turns into a raw, unfiltered reaction to a high-profile trial entering its third day. Jennifer Coffindaffer, a former FBI special agent known for her deep insight into criminal behavior, reacts in real time to disturbing Google searches revealed in court and the increasingly unsettling demeanor of the defendant.  Her response is immediate and blunt. As the camera stays fixed on the courtroom feed, she calls out the chilling smile on the defendant's face and describes it as the look of a psychopath, a moment that electrifies the chat and underscores the gravity of what is unfolding. The livestream becomes a blend of breaking news analysis, psychological insight, and courtroom tension as viewers ask the central question: is he really the manipulative figure he appears to be, or is there more to uncover as evidence continues to roll out?  Coffindaffer's commentary captures the emotional pulse of day three, where behavioral cues, digital footprints, and trial strategy converge. She speaks openly about her passion for being inside the courtroom, her love of observing proceedings firsthand, and her plan to report live from court as the trial advances. The energy grows as she prepares to head out the door, leaving viewers with the sense that the next updates may be even more explosive. Blending true crime storytelling, expert analysis, and the immediacy of unfolding legal drama, this final segment delivers a cinematic close to a gripping discussion that spans global biohazards all the way to the intimate tension of a high-stakes criminal trial. For audiences drawn to missing person cases, criminal psychology, and breaking courtroom developments, this is a moment-by-moment immersion into the world behind today's most compelling true crime headlines. #truecrime #breakingnews #courtroom #JenniferCoffindaffer #trialcoverage #psychology #forensicanalysis #crimewatch #justice #legalnews Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872

This Day in Legal History: SkidmoreOn December 4, 1944, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in Skidmore v. Swift & Co., a case interpreting the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The plaintiffs were firefighters employed by a private company who sought overtime pay for time spent waiting on the employer's premises, even when not actively fighting fires. The Court ruled that such “waiting time” could qualify as compensable work depending on the circumstances — a fact-intensive inquiry rather than a rigid rule. More significantly, the Court declined to treat the Department of Labor's interpretation of the FLSA as binding. Instead, Justice Jackson, writing for the Court, articulated what became known as “Skidmore deference,” explaining that agency interpretations are entitled to respect based on their “power to persuade,” not their authority.This approach emphasized judicial independence while still valuing agency expertise, setting a flexible standard for reviewing administrative interpretations. For decades, Skidmore shaped the way courts evaluated regulatory guidance, particularly where statutes were silent or ambiguous. That changed in 1984, when the Court decided Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. NRDC, introducing a more deferential, two-step test that often required courts to uphold reasonable agency interpretations. Chevron effectively sidelined Skidmore, making agency interpretations more binding than persuasive.That more restrained approach to agency interpretation—Skidmore's “power to persuade”—quietly persisted in the background during the decades-long dominance of Chevron deference. But on June 28, 2024, in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, the Supreme Court formally overruled Chevron, declaring that courts must exercise independent judgment in interpreting statutes, even when those statutes are ambiguous. The Court emphasized that the Administrative Procedure Act assigns to the judiciary—not agencies—the duty to “decide all relevant questions of law” and interpret statutory provisions without default deference to agency views. In doing so, the Court explicitly endorsed the Skidmore model of respect rather than deference, reaffirming that agency interpretations may still inform judicial decisions, but only to the extent they are persuasive. So, 80 years after Skidmore was decided, its modest, judge-centered vision of statutory interpretation has once again become the law of the land.A group of former federal employees filed a proposed class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, alleging the Trump administration unlawfully removed them from their jobs due to their work in diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs. The plaintiffs claim the dismissals were politically motivated and violated their First Amendment rights as well as Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.According to the complaint, the reductions in force went beyond typical administrative turnover, instead constituting a deliberate effort to punish perceived political opponents. The plaintiffs argue they were targeted because they held, or were believed to have held, roles connected to DEI initiatives, which President Trump vocally opposed. The lawsuit points to executive orders that allegedly discriminated against women, people of color, and nonbinary individuals.Defendants named include the White House, Justice Department, CIA, Defense Department, Federal Reserve, Labor Department, and Treasury. The plaintiffs are seeking reinstatement, back pay, restoration of seniority, and attorneys' fees.Trump, Agencies Hit With Ex-Federal Workers' Political Bias SuitUnder President Trump's second administration, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is on track for its lowest number of earnings fraud and auditor liability enforcement actions since the Reagan era. So far in 2025, only 20 such cases have been filed—far below the historical average of 79 per year since Trump's first term began in 2017. The decline is attributed to leadership changes, a 43-day government shutdown, shifting agency priorities, and a shrinking SEC staff due to retirements and buyouts.SEC Chair Paul Atkins has emphasized targeting only the most harmful and deliberate frauds, deprioritizing minor or technical violations. Enforcement has also slowed due to procedural constraints, including legal challenges limiting the use of in-house judges and forcing more cases into federal court. Despite the drop in formal actions, former officials and commission watchers caution that investigations continue behind the scenes and could yield future penalties.The agency did finalize some notable settlements early in the year, including $19 million from American Electric Power and $8 million from GrubMarket. However, enforcement activity has since dropped steeply, marking the largest first-year decline following a presidential inauguration since the 1980s.SEC's Earnings Fraud, Auditor Liability Cases Plunge Under TrumpU.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced it will stop processing green cards and related immigration benefits for individuals from 19 countries named in a June Trump administration travel ban. This expanded restriction follows a separate decision by the State Department to suspend visa processing for Afghan nationals after a deadly shooting involving two National Guard members in Washington, D.C.The new USCIS policy affects several types of applications, including those for permanent residency, green card replacements, travel documents, and requests by permanent residents to maintain status while abroad. The halt applies regardless of when the applicant entered the U.S. The agency cited national security concerns as the reason for the changes and indicated all affected individuals may face renewed interviews or screenings.The travel ban currently includes countries such as Afghanistan, Iran, Somalia, Venezuela, and others, with reports suggesting the administration plans to expand the list to about 30 nations. The memo emphasized that individuals from these “high-risk countries of concern” who arrived in the U.S. after January 20, 2021, are subject to re-evaluation.Trump Travel Ban Limits Extend to Green Cards, Other Benefits This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

As part of our Hidden Killers 2025 Year in Review series, we turn our focus to one of the most bizarre and psychologically chilling trials unfolding in America: Lori Vallow Daybell, the self-proclaimed prophet who's decided she's the best person to defend herself in court. Already convicted in Idaho for the murders of her two youngest children, Tylee Ryan and JJ Vallow, and the conspiracy to murder her husband's former wife, Tammy Daybell, Lori is now facing justice in Arizona for the murder of her fourth husband, Charles Vallow. But this time, there's no defense team to shield her — because Lori fired them. She's representing herself. In this special, Tony Brueski sits down with psychotherapist and author Shavaun Scott to unpack the chilling psychology behind Lori's decision, exploring how delusion, narcissism, and religious grandiosity collide in a courtroom setting. Lori's behavior — confident, defiant, and disturbingly serene — may seem erratic, but Scott explains how it fits a pattern of pathological self-belief common among cult leaders and high-control personalities. During her recent pretrial hearing, Lori insisted on moving forward with trial despite her own forensics expert not being ready, demanded to exclude incriminating statements from her deceased brother Alex Cox, and even tried to subpoena journalist Nate Eaton — the reporter who's covered her saga from day one. She also hinted at testifying in her own defense, setting the stage for one of the most surreal spectacles in recent legal history. But beneath the theatrics lies a darker psychology. Lori isn't just defending herself legally — she's defending her identity as a “divine messenger.” Scott breaks down how shared psychosis (folie à deux) between Lori and her husband Chad Daybell fueled a belief system that justified murder under the guise of prophecy. Together, they turned apocalypse fantasies into fatal decisions. As jury selection looms and Arizona prosecutors prepare to argue their case, Tony and Shavaun explore whether Lori's self-representation is a strategy, a symptom, or both — and how her religious delusions continue to warp her sense of accountability.

As part of our Hidden Killers 2025 Year in Review series, we turn our focus to one of the most bizarre and psychologically chilling trials unfolding in America: Lori Vallow Daybell, the self-proclaimed prophet who's decided she's the best person to defend herself in court. Already convicted in Idaho for the murders of her two youngest children, Tylee Ryan and JJ Vallow, and the conspiracy to murder her husband's former wife, Tammy Daybell, Lori is now facing justice in Arizona for the murder of her fourth husband, Charles Vallow. But this time, there's no defense team to shield her — because Lori fired them. She's representing herself. In this special, Tony Brueski sits down with psychotherapist and author Shavaun Scott to unpack the chilling psychology behind Lori's decision, exploring how delusion, narcissism, and religious grandiosity collide in a courtroom setting. Lori's behavior — confident, defiant, and disturbingly serene — may seem erratic, but Scott explains how it fits a pattern of pathological self-belief common among cult leaders and high-control personalities. During her recent pretrial hearing, Lori insisted on moving forward with trial despite her own forensics expert not being ready, demanded to exclude incriminating statements from her deceased brother Alex Cox, and even tried to subpoena journalist Nate Eaton — the reporter who's covered her saga from day one. She also hinted at testifying in her own defense, setting the stage for one of the most surreal spectacles in recent legal history. But beneath the theatrics lies a darker psychology. Lori isn't just defending herself legally — she's defending her identity as a “divine messenger.” Scott breaks down how shared psychosis (folie à deux) between Lori and her husband Chad Daybell fueled a belief system that justified murder under the guise of prophecy. Together, they turned apocalypse fantasies into fatal decisions. As jury selection looms and Arizona prosecutors prepare to argue their case, Tony and Shavaun explore whether Lori's self-representation is a strategy, a symptom, or both — and how her religious delusions continue to warp her sense of accountability.

I am Rolf Claessen and together with my co-host Ken Suzan I am welcoming you to episode 169 of our podcast IP Fridays! Today's interview guest is Prof. Aloys Hüttermann, co-founder of my patent law firm Michalski Hüttermann & Partner and a true expert on the Unified Patent Court. He has written several books about the new system and we talk about all the things that plaintiffs and defendants can learn from the first decisions of the court and what they mean for strategic decisions of the parties involved. But before we jump into this very interesting interview, I have news for you! The US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is planning rule changes that would make it virtually impossible for third parties to challenge invalid patents before the patent office. Criticism has come from the EFF and other inventor rights advocates: the new rules would play into the hands of so-called non-practicing entities (NPEs), as those attacked would have few cost-effective ways to have questionable patents deleted. The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) reports a new record in international patent applications: in 2024, around 3.7 million patent applications were filed worldwide – an increase of 4.9% over the previous year. The main drivers were Asian countries (China alone accounted for 1.8 million), while demand for trademark protection has stabilized after the pandemic decline. US rapper Eminem is taking legal action in Australia against a company that sells swimwear under the name “Swim Shady.” He believes this infringes on his famous “Slim Shady” brand. The case illustrates that even humorous allusions to well-known brand names can lead to legal conflicts. A new ruling by the Unified Patent Court (UPC) demonstrates its cross-border impact. In “Fujifilm v. Kodak,” the local chamber in Mannheim issued an injunction that extends to the UK despite Brexit. The UPC confirmed its jurisdiction over the UK parts of a European patent, as the defendant Kodak is based in a UPC member state. A dispute over standard patents is looming at the EU level: the Legal Affairs Committee (JURI) of the European Parliament voted to take the European Commission to the European Court of Justice. The reason for this is the Commission’s controversial withdrawal of a draft regulation on the licensing of standard-essential patents (SEPs). Parliament President Roberta Metsola is to decide by mid-November whether to file the lawsuit. In trademark law, USPTO Director Squires reported on October 31, 2025, that a new unit (“Trademark Registration Protection Office”) had removed approximately 61,000 invalid trademark applications from the registries. This cleanup of the backlog relieved the examining authority and accelerated the processing of legitimate applications. Now let's jump into the interview with Aloys Hüttermann: The Unified Patent Court Comes of Age – Insights from Prof. Aloys Hüttermann The Unified Patent Court (UPC) has moved from a long-discussed project to a living, breathing court system that already shapes patent enforcement in Europe. In a recent IP Fridays interview, Prof. Aloys Hüttermann – founder and equity partner at Michalski · Hüttermann & Partner and one of the earliest commentators on the UPC – shared his experiences from the first years of practice, as well as his view on how the UPC fits into the global patent litigation landscape. This article summarises the key points of that conversation and is meant as an accessible overview for in-house counsel, patent attorneys and business leaders who want to understand what the UPC means for their strategy. How Prof. Hüttermann Became “Mr. UPC” Prof. Hüttermann has been closely involved with the UPC for more than a decade. When it became clear, around 13 years ago, that the European project of a unified patent court and a unitary patent was finally going to happen, he recognised that this would fundamentally change patent enforcement in Europe. He started to follow the legislative and political developments in detail and went beyond mere observation. As author and editor of several books and a major commentary on the UPC, he helped shape the discussion around the new system. His first book on the UPC appeared in 2016 – years before the court finally opened its doors in 2023. What fascinated him from the beginning was the unique opportunity to witness the creation of an entirely new court system, to analyse how it would be built and, where possible, to contribute to its understanding and development. It was clear to him that this system would be a “game changer” for European patent enforcement. UPC in the Global Triangle: Europe, the US and China In practice, most international patent disputes revolve around three major regions: the UPC territory in Europe, the United States and China. Each of these regions has its own procedural culture, cost structure and strategic impact. From a territorial perspective, the UPC is particularly attractive because it can, under the right conditions, grant pan-European injunctions that cover a broad range of EU Member States with a single decision. This consolidation of enforcement is something national courts in Europe simply cannot offer. From a cost perspective, the UPC is significantly cheaper than US litigation, especially if one compares the cost of one UPC action with a bundle of separate national cases in large European markets. When viewed against the territorial reach and procedural speed, the “bang for the buck” is very compelling. China is again a different story. The sheer volume of cases there is enormous, with tens of thousands of patent infringement cases per year. Chinese courts are known for their speed; first-instance decisions within about a year are common. In this respect they resemble the UPC more than the US does. The UPC also aims at a roughly 12 to 15 month time frame for first-instance cases where validity is at issue. The US, by contrast, features extensive discovery, occasionally jury trials and often longer timelines. The procedural culture is very different. The UPC, like Chinese courts, operates without discovery in the US sense, which makes proceedings more focused on the written record and expert evidence that the parties present, and less on pre-trial disclosure battles. Whether a company chooses to litigate in the US, the UPC, China, or some combination of these forums will depend on where the key markets and assets are. However, in Prof. Hüttermann's view, once Europe is an important market, it is hard to justify ignoring the UPC. He expects the court's caseload and influence to grow strongly over the coming years. A Landmark UPC Case: Syngenta v. Sumitomo A particularly important case in which Prof. Hüttermann was involved is the Syngenta v. Sumitomo matter, concerning a composition patent. This case has become a landmark in UPC practice for several reasons. First, the Court of Appeal clarified a central point about the reach of UPC injunctions. It made clear that once infringement is established in one Member State, this will usually be sufficient to justify a pan-European injunction covering all UPC countries designated by the patent. That confirmation gave patent owners confidence that the UPC can in fact deliver broad, cross-border relief in one go. Second, the facts of the case raised novel issues about evidence and territorial reach. The allegedly infringing product had been analysed based on a sample from the Czech Republic, which is not part of the UPC system. Later, the same product with the same name was marketed in Bulgaria, which is within UPC territory. The Court of Appeal held that the earlier analysis of the Czech sample could be relied on for enforcement in Bulgaria. This showed that evidence from outside the UPC territory can be sufficient, as long as it is properly linked to the products marketed within the UPC. Third, the Court of Appeal took the opportunity to state its view on inventive step. It confirmed that combining prior-art documents requires a “pointer”, in line with the EPO's problem-solution approach. The mere theoretical possibility of extracting a certain piece of information from a document does not suffice to justify an inventive-step attack. This is one of several decisions where the UPC has shown a strong alignment with EPO case law on substantive patentability. For Prof. Hüttermann personally, the case was also a lesson in oral advocacy before the UPC. During the two appeal hearings, the presiding judge asked unexpected questions that required quick and creative responses while the hearing continued. His practical takeaway is that parties should appear with a small, well-coordinated team: large enough to allow someone to work on a tricky question in the background, but small enough to remain agile. Two or three lawyers seem ideal; beyond that, coordination becomes difficult and “too many cooks spoil the broth”. A Game-Changing CJEU Decision: Bosch Siemens Hausgeräte v. Electrolux Surprisingly, one of the most important developments for European patent litigation in the past year did not come from the UPC at all, but from the Court of Justice of the European Union. In Bosch Siemens Hausgeräte v. Electrolux, the CJEU revisited the rules on cross-border jurisdiction under the Brussels I Recast Regulation (Brussels Ia). Previously, under what practitioners often referred to as the GAT/LuK regime, a court in one EU country was largely prevented from granting relief for alleged infringement in another country if the validity of the foreign patent was contested there. This significantly limited the possibilities for cross-border injunctions. In Bosch, the CJEU changed course. Without going into all procedural details, the essence is that courts in the EU now have broader powers to grant cross-border relief when certain conditions are met, particularly when at least one defendant is domiciled in the forum state. The concept of an “anchor defendant” plays a central role: if you sue one group company in its home forum, other group companies in other countries, including outside the EU, can be drawn into the case. This has already had practical consequences. German courts, for example, have issued pan-European injunctions covering around twenty countries in pharmaceutical cases. There are even attempts to sue European companies for infringement of US patents based on acts in the US, using the logic of Bosch as a starting point. How far courts will ultimately go remains to be seen, but the potential is enormous. For the UPC, this development is highly relevant. The UPC operates in the same jurisdictional environment as national courts, and many defendants in UPC cases will be domiciled in UPC countries. This increases the likelihood that the UPC, too, can leverage the broadened possibilities for cross-border relief. In addition, we have already seen UPC decisions that include non-EU countries such as the UK within the scope of injunctions, in certain constellations. The interaction between UPC practice and the Bosch jurisprudence of the CJEU is only beginning to unfold. Does the UPC Follow EPO Case Law? A key concern for many patent owners and practitioners is whether the UPC will follow the EPO's Boards of Appeal or develop its own, possibly divergent, case law on validity. On procedural matters, the UPC is naturally different from the EPO. It has its own rules of procedure, its own timelines and its own tools, such as “front-loaded” pleadings and tight limits on late-filed material. On substantive law, however, Prof. Hüttermann's conclusion is clear: there is “nothing new under the sun”. The UPC's approach to novelty, inventive step and added matter is very close to that of the EPO. The famous “gold standard” for added matter appears frequently in UPC decisions. Intermediate generalisations are treated with the same suspicion as at the EPO. In at least one case, the UPC revoked a patent for added matter even though the EPO had granted it in exactly that form. The alignment is not accidental. The UPC only deals with European patents granted by the EPO; it does not hear cases on purely national patents. If the UPC were more generous than the EPO, many patents would never reach it. If it were systematically stricter, patentees would be more tempted to opt out of the system. In practice, the UPC tends to apply the EPO's standards and, where anything differs, it is usually a matter of factual appreciation rather than a different legal test. For practitioners, this has a very practical implication: if you want to predict how the UPC will decide on validity, the best starting point is to ask how the EPO would analyse the case. The UPC may not always reach the same result in parallel EPO opposition proceedings, but the conceptual framework is largely the same. Trends in UPC Practice: PIs, Equivalents and Division-Specific Styles Even in its early years, certain trends and differences between UPC divisions can be observed. On preliminary injunctions, the local division in Düsseldorf has taken a particularly proactive role. It has been responsible for most of the ex parte PIs granted so far and applies a rather strict notion of urgency, often considering one month after knowledge of the infringement as still acceptable, but treating longer delays with scepticism. Other divisions tend to see two months as still compatible with urgency, and they are much more cautious with ex parte measures. Munich, by contrast, has indicated a strong preference for inter partes PI proceedings and appears reluctant to grant ex parte relief at all. A judge from Munich has even described the main action as the “fast” procedure and the inter partes PI as the “very fast” one, leaving little room for an even faster ex parte track. There are also differences in how divisions handle amendments and auxiliary requests in PI proceedings. Munich has suggested that if a patentee needs to rely on claim amendments or auxiliary requests in a PI, the request is unlikely to succeed. Other divisions have been more open to considering auxiliary requests. The doctrine of equivalents is another area where practice is not yet harmonised. The Hague division has explicitly applied a test taken from Dutch law in at least one case and found infringement by equivalence. However, the Court of Appeal has not yet endorsed a specific test, and in another recent Hague case the same division did not apply that Dutch-law test again. The Mannheim division has openly called for the development of an autonomous, pan-European equivalence test, but has not yet fixed such a test in a concrete decision. This is clearly an area to watch. Interim conferences are commonly used in most divisions to clarify issues early on, but Düsseldorf often dispenses with them to save time. In practice, interim conferences can be very helpful for narrowing down the issues, though parties should not expect to be able to predict the final decision from what is discussed there. Sometimes topics that dominate the interim conference play little or no role in the main oral hearing. A Front-Loaded System and Typical Strategic Mistakes UPC proceedings are highly front-loaded and very fast. A defendant usually has three months from service of the statement of claim to file a full statement of defence and any counterclaim for revocation. This is manageable, but only if the time is used wisely. One common strategic problem is that parties lose time at the beginning and only develop a clear strategy late in the three-month period. According to Prof. Hüttermann, it is crucial to have a firm strategy within the first two or three weeks and then execute it consistently. Constantly changing direction is a recipe for failure in such a compressed system. Another characteristic is the strict attitude towards late-filed material. It is difficult to introduce new documents or new inventive-step attacks later in the procedure. In some cases even alternative combinations of already-filed prior-art documents have been viewed as “new” attacks and rejected as late. At the appeal stage, the Court of Appeal has even considered new arguments based on different parts of a book already in the file as potentially late-filed. This does not mean that parties should flood the court with dozens of alternative attacks in the initial brief. In one revocation action, a plaintiff filed about fifty different inventive-step attacks, only to be told by the court that this was not acceptable and that the attacks had to be reduced and structured. The UPC is not a body conducting ex officio examination. It is entitled to manage the case actively and to ask parties to focus on the most relevant issues. Evidence Gathering, Protective Letters and the Defendant's Perspective The UPC provides powerful tools for both sides. Evidence inspection is becoming more common, not only at trade fairs but also at company premises. This can be a valuable tool for patentees, but it also poses a serious risk for defendants who may suddenly face court-ordered inspections. From the perspective of potential defendants, protective letters are an important instrument, especially in divisions like Düsseldorf where ex parte PIs are possible. A well-written protective letter, filed in advance, can significantly reduce the risk of a surprise injunction. The court fees are moderate, but the content of the protective letter must be carefully prepared; a poor submission can cause more harm than good. Despite the strong tools available to patentees, Prof. Hüttermann does not view the UPC as unfair to defendants. If a defendant files a solid revocation counterclaim, the pressure shifts to the patentee, who then has only two months to reply, prepare all auxiliary requests and adapt the enforcement strategy. This is even more demanding than at the EPO, because the patentee must not only respond to validity attacks but also ensure that any amended claims still capture the allegedly infringing product. It is entirely possible to secure the survival of a patent with an auxiliary request that no longer covers the defendant's product. In that scenario, the patentee has “won” on validity but lost the infringement case. Managing this tension under tight time limits is a key challenge of UPC practice. The Future Role of the UPC and How to Prepare Today the UPC hears a few hundred cases per year, compared with several thousand patent cases in the US and tens of thousands in China. Nevertheless, both the court itself and experienced practitioners see significant growth potential. Prof. Hüttermann expects case numbers to multiply in the medium term. Whether the UPC will become the first choice forum in global disputes or remain one pillar in parallel proceedings alongside the US and China will depend on the strategies of large patentees and the evolution of case law. However, the court is well equipped: it covers a large, economically important territory, is comparatively cost-effective and offers fast procedures with robust remedies. For companies that may end up before the UPC, preparation is essential. On the offensive side, that means building strong evidence and legal arguments before filing, being ready to proceed quickly and structured, and understanding the specific styles of the relevant divisions. On the defensive side, it may mean filing protective letters in risk-exposed markets, preparing internal processes for rapid reaction if a statement of claim arrives, and taking inspection requests seriously. Conclusion The Unified Patent Court has quickly moved from theory to practice. It offers pan-European relief, fast and front-loaded procedures, and a substantive approach that closely mirrors the EPO's case law. At the same time, national and EU-level developments like the Bosch Siemens Hausgeräte v. Electrolux decision are reshaping the jurisdictional framework in which the UPC operates, opening the door for far-reaching cross-border injunctions. For patent owners and potential defendants alike, the message is clear: the UPC is here to stay and will become more important year by year. Those who invest the time to understand its dynamics now – including its alignment with the EPO, the differences between divisions, and the strategic implications of its procedures – will be in a much better position when the first UPC dispute lands on their desk. Here is the full transcript of the interview: Rolf Claessen:Today's interview guest is Prof. Aloys Hüttermann. He is founder and equity partner of my firm, Michalski · Hüttermann & Partner. More importantly for today's interview, he has written several books about the Unified Patent Court. The first one already came out in 2016. He is co-editor and author of one of the leading commentaries on the UPC and has gained substantial experience in UPC cases so far – one of them even together with me. Thank you very much for being on IP Fridays again, Aloys. Aloys Hüttermann:Thank you for inviting me, it's an honour. How did you get so deeply involved in the UPC? Rolf Claessen:Before we dive into the details, how did you end up so deeply involved in the Unified Patent Court? And what personally fascinates you about this court? Aloys Hüttermann:This goes back quite a while – roughly 13 years. At that time it became clear that, after several failed attempts, Europe would really get a pan-European court and a pan-European patent, and that this time it was serious. I thought: this is going to be the future. That interested me a lot, both intellectually and practically. A completely new system was being built. You could watch how it evolved – and, if possible, even help shape it a bit. It was also obvious to me that this would be a complete game changer. Nobody expected that it would take until 2023 before the system actually started operating, but now it is here. I became heavily interested early on. As you mentioned, my first book on the UPC was published in 2016, in the expectation that the system would start soon. It took a bit longer, but now we finally have it. UPC vs. US and China – speed, cost and impact Rolf Claessen:Before we go deeper into the UPC, let's zoom out. If you compare litigation before the UPC with patent litigation in the US and in China – in terms of speed, cost and the impact of decisions – what are the key differences that a business leader should understand? Aloys Hüttermann:If you look at the three big regions – the UPC territory in Europe, the US and China – these are the major economic areas for many technology companies. One important point is territorial reach. In the UPC, if the conditions are met, you can get pan-European injunctions that cover many EU Member States in one go. We will talk about this later in more detail. On costs there is a huge difference between the US and the UPC. The UPC is much cheaper than US litigation, especially once you look at the number of countries you can cover with one case if the patent has been validated widely. China is different again. The number of patent infringement cases there is enormous. I have seen statistics of around 40,000 infringement cases per year in China. That is huge – compared with roughly 164 UPC infringement cases in the first year and maybe around 200 in the current year. On speed, Chinese courts are known to be very fast. You often get a first-instance decision in about a year. The UPC is comparable: if there is a counterclaim for revocation, you are looking at something like 12 to 15 months for a first-instance decision. The US can be slower, and the procedure is very different. You have full discovery, you may have juries. None of that exists at the UPC. From that perspective, Chinese and UPC proceedings are more similar to each other than either is to the US. The UPC is still a young court. We have to see how influential its case law will be worldwide in the long run. What we already see, at least in Germany, is a clear trend away from purely national patent litigation and towards the UPC. That is inside Europe. The global impact will develop over time. When is the UPC the most powerful tool? Rolf Claessen:Let's take the perspective of a global company. It has significant sales in Europe and in the US and production or key suppliers in China. In which situations would you say the UPC is your most powerful tool? And when might the US or China be the more strategic battleground? Aloys Hüttermann:To be honest, I would almost always consider bringing a case before the UPC. The “bang for the buck” is very good. The UPC is rather fast. That alone already gives you leverage in negotiations. The threat of a quick, wide-reaching injunction is a strong negotiation tool. Whether you litigate in the US instead of the UPC, or in addition, or whether you also go to China – that depends heavily on the individual case: where the products are sold, where the key markets are, where the defendant has assets, and so on. But in my view, once you have substantial sales in Europe, you should seriously consider the UPC. And for that reason alone I expect case numbers at the UPC to increase significantly in the coming years. A landmark UPC case: Syngenta vs. Sumitomo (composition patent) Rolf Claessen:You have already been involved in several UPC cases – and one of them together with me, which was great fun. Looking at the last 12 to 18 months, is there a case, decision or development that you find particularly noteworthy – something that really changed how you think about UPC litigation or how companies should prepare? Aloys Hüttermann:The most important UPC case I have been involved in so far is the Syngenta v. Sumitomo case on a composition patent. It has become a real landmark and was even mentioned in the UPC's annual report. It is important for several reasons. First, it was one of the first cases in which the Court of Appeal said very clearly: if you have established infringement in one Member State, that will usually be enough for a pan-European injunction covering all UPC countries designated by the patent. That is a powerful statement about the reach of UPC relief. Second, the facts were interesting. The patent concerned a composition. We had analysed a sample that had been obtained in the Czech Republic, which is not a UPC country. Later, the same product was marketed under the same name in Bulgaria, which is in the UPC. The question was whether the analysis of the Czech sample could be used as a basis for enforcement in Bulgaria. The Court of Appeal said yes, that was sufficient. Third, the Court of Appeal took the opportunity to say something about inventive step. It more or less confirmed that the UPC's approach is very close to the EPO's problem-solution approach. It emphasised that, if you want to combine prior-art documents, you need a “pointer” to do so. The mere theoretical possibility that a skilled person could dig a particular piece of information out of a document is not enough. For me personally, the most memorable aspect of this case was not the outcome – that was largely in line with what we had expected – but the oral hearings at the appeal stage. We had two hearings. In both, the presiding judge asked us a question that we had not anticipated at all. And then you have about 20 minutes to come up with a convincing answer while the hearing continues. We managed it, but it made me think a lot about how you should prepare for oral hearings at the UPC. My conclusion is: you should go in with a team, but not too big. In German we say, “Zu viele Köche verderben den Brei” – too many cooks spoil the broth. Two or three people seems ideal. One of them can work quietly on such a surprise question at the side, while the others continue arguing the case. In the end the case went very well for us, so I can speak about it quite calmly now. But in the moment your heart rate definitely goes up. The CJEU's Bosch Siemens Hausgeräte v. Electrolux decision – a real game changer Rolf Claessen:You also mentioned another development that is not even a UPC case, but still very important for European patent litigation. Aloys Hüttermann:Yes. In my view, the most important case of the last twelve months is not a UPC decision but a judgment of the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU): Bosch Siemens Hausgeräte v. Electrolux. This is going to be a real game changer for European IP law, and I am sure we have not seen the end of its effects yet. One example: someone has recently sued BMW before the Landgericht München I, a German court, for infringement of a US patent based on acts in the US. The argument is that this could be backed by the logic of Bosch Siemens Hausgeräte v. Electrolux. We do not know yet what the court will do with that, but the fact that people are trying this shows how far-reaching the decision might be. Within the UPC we have already seen injunctions being issued for countries outside the UPC territory and even outside the EU, for example including the UK. So you see how these developments start to interact. Rolf Claessen:For listeners who have not followed the case so closely: in very simple terms, the CJEU opened the door for courts in one EU country to rule on patent infringement that took place in other countries as well, right? Aloys Hüttermann:Exactly. Before Bosch Siemens Hausgeräte v. Electrolux we had what was often called the GAT/LuK regime. The basic idea was: if you sue someone in, say, Germany for infringement of a European patent, and you also ask for an injunction for France, and the defendant then challenges the validity of the patent in France, the German court cannot grant you an injunction covering France. The Bosch decision changed that. The legal basis is the Brussels I Recast Regulation (Brussels Ia), which deals with jurisdiction in civil and commercial matters in the EU. It is not specific to IP; it applies to civil cases generally, but it does have some provisions that are relevant for patents. In Bosch, a Swedish court asked the CJEU for guidance on cross-border injunctions. The CJEU more or less overturned its old GAT/LuK case law. Now, in principle, if the defendant is domiciled in a particular Member State, the courts of that state can also grant cross-border relief for other countries, under certain conditions. We will not go into all the details here – that could fill a whole separate IP Fridays episode – but one important concept is the “anchor defendant”. If you sue a group of companies and at least one defendant is domiciled in the forum state, then other group companies in other countries – even outside the EU, for example in Hong Kong – can be drawn into the case and affected by the decision. This is not limited to the UPC, but of course it is highly relevant for UPC litigation. Statistically it increases the chances that at least one defendant will be domiciled in a UPC country, simply because there are many of them. And we have already seen courts like the Landgericht München I grant pan-European injunctions for around 20 countries in a pharmaceutical case. Rolf Claessen:Just to clarify: does it have to be the headquarters of the defendant in that country, or is any registered office enough? Aloys Hüttermann:That is one of the open points. If the headquarters are in Europe, then it is clear that subsidiaries outside Europe can be affected as well. If the group's headquarters are outside Europe and only a subsidiary is here, the situation is less clear and we will have to see what the courts make of it. Does the UPC follow EPO case law? Rolf Claessen:Many patent owners and in-house counsel wonder: does the UPC largely follow the case law of the EPO Boards of Appeal, or is it starting to develop its own distinct line? What is your impression so far – both on substantive issues like novelty and inventive step, and on procedural questions? Aloys Hüttermann:On procedure the UPC is, of course, very different. It has its own procedural rules and they are not the same as at the EPO. If we look at patent validity, however, my impression is that there is “nothing new under the sun” – that was the title of a recent talk I gave and will give again in Hamburg. Substantively, the case law of the UPC and the EPO is very similar. For inventive step, people sometimes say the UPC does not use the classical problem-solution approach but a more “holistic” approach – whatever that is supposed to mean. In practice, in both systems you read and interpret prior-art documents and decide what they really disclose. In my view, the “error bar” that comes from two courts simply reading a document slightly differently is much larger than any systematic difference in legal approach. If you look at other grounds, such as novelty and added matter, the UPC even follows the EPO almost verbatim. The famous “gold standard” for added matter appears all over UPC decisions, even if the EPO case numbers are not always cited. The same is true for novelty. So the rule-based, almost “Hilbertian” EPO approach is very much present at the UPC. There is also a structural reason for that. All patents that the UPC currently deals with have been granted by the EPO. The UPC does not handle patents granted only by national offices. If the UPC wanted to deviate from EPO case law and be more generous, then many patents would never reach the UPC in the first place. The most generous approach you can have is the one used by the granting authority – the EPO. So if the UPC wants to be different, it can only be stricter, not more lenient. And there is little incentive to be systematically stricter, because that would reduce the number of patents that are attractive to enforce before the UPC. Patent owners might simply opt out. Rolf Claessen:We also talked about added matter and a recent case where the Court of Appeal was even stricter than the EPO. That probably gives US patent practitioners a massive headache. They already struggle with added-matter rules in Europe, and now the UPC might be even tougher. Aloys Hüttermann:Yes, especially on added matter. I once spoke with a US practitioner who said, “We hope the UPC will move away from intermediate generalisations.” There is no chance of that. We already have cases where the Court of Appeal confirmed that intermediate generalisations are not allowed, in full alignment with the EPO. You mentioned a recent case where a patent was revoked for added matter, even though it had been granted by the EPO in exactly that form. This shows quite nicely what to expect. If you want to predict how the UPC will handle a revocation action, the best starting point is to ask: “What would the EPO do?” Of course, there will still be cases where the UPC finds an invention to be inventive while the EPO, in parallel opposition proceedings, does not – or vice versa. But those are differences in the appreciation of the facts and the prior art, which you will always have. The underlying legal approach is essentially the same. Rolf Claessen:So you do not see a real example yet where the UPC has taken a totally different route from the EPO on validity? Aloys Hüttermann:No, not really. If I had to estimate how the UPC will decide, I would always start from what I think the EPO would have done. Trends in UPC practice: PIs, equivalents, interim conferences Rolf Claessen:If you look across the different UPC divisions and cases: what trends do you see in practice? For example regarding timelines, preliminary injunctions, how validity attacks are handled, and how UPC cases interact with EPO oppositions or national proceedings? Aloys Hüttermann:If you take the most active divisions – essentially the big four in Germany and the local division in The Hague – they all try to be very careful and diligent in their decisions. But you can already see some differences in practice. For preliminary injunctions there is a clear distinction between the local division in Düsseldorf and most other divisions. Düsseldorf considers one month after knowledge of the infringement as still sufficiently urgent. If you wait longer, it is usually considered too late. In many other divisions, two months is still viewed as fine. Düsseldorf has also been the division that issued most of the ex parte preliminary injunctions so far. Apart from one special outlier where a standing judge from Brussels was temporarily sitting in Milan, Düsseldorf is basically the only one. Other divisions have been much more reluctant. At a conference, Judge Pichlmaier from the Munich division once said that he could hardly imagine a situation where his division would grant an ex parte PI. In his words, the UPC has two types of procedure: one that is fast – the normal main action – and one that is very fast – the inter partes PI procedure. But you do not really have an “ultra-fast” ex parte track, at least not in his division. Another difference relates to amendments and auxiliary requests in PI proceedings. In one recent case in Munich the court said more or less that if you have to amend your patent or rely on auxiliary requests in a PI, you lose. Other divisions have been more flexible and have allowed auxiliary requests. Equivalence is another area where we do not have a unified line yet. So far, only the Hague division has clearly found infringement under the doctrine of equivalents and explicitly used a test taken from Dutch law. Whether that test will be approved by the Court of Appeal is completely open – the first case settled, so the Court of Appeal never ruled on it, and a second one is still very recent. Interestingly, there was another Hague decision a few weeks ago where equivalence was on the table, but the division did not apply that Dutch-law test. We do not know yet why. The Mannheim division has written in one decision that it would be desirable to develop an autonomous pan-European test for equivalence, instead of just importing the German, UK or Dutch criteria. But they did not formulate such a test in that case because it was not necessary for the decision. So we will have to see how that evolves. On timelines, one practical difference is that Düsseldorf usually does not hold an interim conference. That saves them some time. Most other divisions do hold interim conferences. Personally, I like the idea because it can help clarify issues. But you cannot safely read the final outcome from these conferences. I have also seen cases where questions raised at the interim conference did not play any role in the main oral hearing. So they are useful for clarification, but not as a crystal ball. Front-loaded proceedings and typical strategic mistakes Rolf Claessen:If you look at the behaviour of parties so far – both patentees and defendants – what are the most common strategic mistakes you see in UPC litigation? And what would a well-prepared company do differently before the first statement of claim is ever filed? Aloys Hüttermann:You know you do not really want me to answer that question… Rolf Claessen:I do! Aloys Hüttermann:All right. The biggest mistake, of course, is that they do not hire me. That is the main problem. Seriously, it is difficult to judge parties' behaviour from the outside. You rarely know the full picture. There may be national proceedings, licensing discussions, settlement talks, and so on in the background. That can limit what a party can do at the UPC. So instead of criticising, I prefer to say what is a good idea at the UPC. The system is very front-loaded and very fast. If you are sued, you have three months to file your statement of defence and your counterclaim for revocation. In my view, three months are manageable – but only if you use the time wisely and do not waste it on things that are not essential. If you receive a statement of claim, you have to act immediately. You should have a clear strategy within maybe two or three weeks and then implement it. If you change your strategy every few weeks, chances are high that you will fail. Another point is that everything is front-loaded. It is very hard to introduce new documents or new attacks later. Some divisions have been a bit generous in individual cases, but the general line is strict. We have seen, for example, that even if you filed a book in first instance, you may not be allowed to rely on a different chapter from the same book for a new inventive-step attack at the appeal stage. That can be regarded as late-filed, because you could have done it earlier. There is also case law saying that if you first argue inventive step as “D1 plus D2”, and later want to argue “D2 plus D1”, that can already be considered a new, late attack. On the other hand, we had a revocation action where the plaintiff filed about 50 different inventive-step attacks in the initial brief. The division then said: this does not work. Please cut them down or put them in a clear hierarchy. In the end, not all of them were considered. The UPC does not conduct an ex officio examination. It is entitled to manage the case and to tell the parties to limit themselves in the interest of a fair and efficient procedure. Rolf Claessen:I have the feeling that the EPO is also becoming more front-loaded – if you want to rely on documents later, you should file them early. But it sounds like the UPC is even more extreme in that regard. Aloys Hüttermann:Yes, that is true. Protective letters, inspections and the defendant's perspective Rolf Claessen:Suppose someone from a company is listening now and thinks: “We might be exposed at the UPC,” or, “We should maybe use the UPC offensively against competitors.” What would you consider sensible first steps before any concrete dispute arises? And looking three to five years ahead, how central do you expect the UPC to become in global patent litigation compared to the US and China? Aloys Hüttermann:Let me start with the second part. I expect the UPC to become significantly more important. If we have around 200 cases this year, that is a good start, but it is still very small compared to, say, 4,000 to 5,000 patent cases per year in the US and 40,000 or so in China. Even François Bürgin and Klaus Grabinski, in interviews, have said that they are happy with the case load, but the potential is much larger. In my view, it is almost inevitable that we will see four or five times as many UPC cases in the not-too-distant future. As numbers grow, the influence of the UPC will grow as well. Whether, in five or ten years, companies will treat the UPC as their first choice forum – or whether they will usually run it in parallel with US litigation in major disputes – remains to be seen. The UPC would be well equipped for that: the territory it covers is large, Europe is still an important economy, and the UPC procedure is very attractive from a company's perspective. On sensible first steps: if you are worried about being sued, a protective letter can make a lot of sense – especially in divisions like Düsseldorf, where ex parte PIs are possible in principle. A protective letter is not very expensive in terms of court fees. There is also an internal system that ensures the court reads it before deciding on urgent measures. Of course, the content must have a certain quality; a poor protective letter can even backfire. If you are planning to sue someone before the UPC, you should be extremely well prepared when you file. You should already have all important documents and evidence at hand. As we discussed, it is hard to introduce new material later. One tool that is becoming more and more popular is inspection – not just at trade fairs, where we already saw cases very early, but also at company premises. Our firm has already handled such an inspection case. That is something you should keep in mind on both sides: it is a powerful evidence-gathering tool, but also a serious risk if you are on the receiving end. From the defendant's perspective, I do not think the UPC is unfair. If you do your job properly and put a solid revocation counterclaim on the table, then the patentee has only two months to prepare a full reply and all auxiliary requests. And there is a twist that makes life even harder for the patentee than at the EPO. At the EPO the question is mainly: do my auxiliary requests overcome the objections and are they patentable? At the UPC there is an additional layer: do I still have infringement under the amended claims? You may save your patent with an auxiliary request that no longer reads on the defendant's product. That is great for validity, but you have just lost the infringement case. You have kept the patent but lost the battle. And all of this under very tight time limits. That creates considerable pressure on both sides. How to contact Prof. Hüttermann Rolf Claessen:Thank you very much for this really great interview, Aloys. Inside our firm you have a nickname: “the walking encyclopedia of the Unified Patent Court” – because you have written so many books about it and have dealt with the UPC for such a long time. What is the best way for listeners to get in touch with you? Aloys Hüttermann:The easiest way is by email. You can simply write to me, and that is usually the best way to contact me. As you may have noticed, I also like to speak. I am a frequent speaker at conferences. If you happen to be at one of the conferences where I am on the programme – for example, next week in Hamburg – feel free to come up to me and ask me anything in person. But email is probably the most reliable first step. Rolf Claessen:Perfect. Thank you very much, Aloys. Aloys Hüttermann:Thank you. It was a pleasure to be on IP Fridays again. Some of your long-time listeners may remember that a few years ago – when you were not yet part of our firm – we already did an episode on the UPC, back when everything was still very speculative. It is great to be back now that the system is actually in place and working. Rolf Claessen:I am very happy to have you back on the show.

As part of our Hidden Killers 2025 Year in Review series, we turn our focus to one of the most bizarre and psychologically chilling trials unfolding in America: Lori Vallow Daybell, the self-proclaimed prophet who's decided she's the best person to defend herself in court. Already convicted in Idaho for the murders of her two youngest children, Tylee Ryan and JJ Vallow, and the conspiracy to murder her husband's former wife, Tammy Daybell, Lori is now facing justice in Arizona for the murder of her fourth husband, Charles Vallow. But this time, there's no defense team to shield her — because Lori fired them. She's representing herself. In this special, Tony Brueski sits down with psychotherapist and author Shavaun Scott to unpack the chilling psychology behind Lori's decision, exploring how delusion, narcissism, and religious grandiosity collide in a courtroom setting. Lori's behavior — confident, defiant, and disturbingly serene — may seem erratic, but Scott explains how it fits a pattern of pathological self-belief common among cult leaders and high-control personalities. During her recent pretrial hearing, Lori insisted on moving forward with trial despite her own forensics expert not being ready, demanded to exclude incriminating statements from her deceased brother Alex Cox, and even tried to subpoena journalist Nate Eaton — the reporter who's covered her saga from day one. She also hinted at testifying in her own defense, setting the stage for one of the most surreal spectacles in recent legal history. But beneath the theatrics lies a darker psychology. Lori isn't just defending herself legally — she's defending her identity as a “divine messenger.” Scott breaks down how shared psychosis (folie à deux) between Lori and her husband Chad Daybell fueled a belief system that justified murder under the guise of prophecy. Together, they turned apocalypse fantasies into fatal decisions. As jury selection looms and Arizona prosecutors prepare to argue their case, Tony and Shavaun explore whether Lori's self-representation is a strategy, a symptom, or both — and how her religious delusions continue to warp her sense of accountability.

As part of our Hidden Killers 2025 Year in Review series, we turn our focus to one of the most bizarre and psychologically chilling trials unfolding in America: Lori Vallow Daybell, the self-proclaimed prophet who's decided she's the best person to defend herself in court. Already convicted in Idaho for the murders of her two youngest children, Tylee Ryan and JJ Vallow, and the conspiracy to murder her husband's former wife, Tammy Daybell, Lori is now facing justice in Arizona for the murder of her fourth husband, Charles Vallow. But this time, there's no defense team to shield her — because Lori fired them. She's representing herself. In this special, Tony Brueski sits down with psychotherapist and author Shavaun Scott to unpack the chilling psychology behind Lori's decision, exploring how delusion, narcissism, and religious grandiosity collide in a courtroom setting. Lori's behavior — confident, defiant, and disturbingly serene — may seem erratic, but Scott explains how it fits a pattern of pathological self-belief common among cult leaders and high-control personalities. During her recent pretrial hearing, Lori insisted on moving forward with trial despite her own forensics expert not being ready, demanded to exclude incriminating statements from her deceased brother Alex Cox, and even tried to subpoena journalist Nate Eaton — the reporter who's covered her saga from day one. She also hinted at testifying in her own defense, setting the stage for one of the most surreal spectacles in recent legal history. But beneath the theatrics lies a darker psychology. Lori isn't just defending herself legally — she's defending her identity as a “divine messenger.” Scott breaks down how shared psychosis (folie à deux) between Lori and her husband Chad Daybell fueled a belief system that justified murder under the guise of prophecy. Together, they turned apocalypse fantasies into fatal decisions. As jury selection looms and Arizona prosecutors prepare to argue their case, Tony and Shavaun explore whether Lori's self-representation is a strategy, a symptom, or both — and how her religious delusions continue to warp her sense of accountability.

This week we go into the dark heart of American Gestapo: Gregory Bovino's Border Patrol, which pushes ICE to become even more aggressive in his fascist feverdream.  Here to help us make sense of this hellscape is Nick Schwellenbach, a Senior Investigator at the Project on Government Oversight and former Communications Director at the U.S. Office of Special Counsel–a government agency set up after Watergate, meant to protect us from the next Nixon–more on that in this week's bonus show out Thursday.  Bovino grew up a Border Patrol fanboy idolizing fascist fiction and now stalks American cities in a Nazi-style trench coat with a taxpayer-funded film crew glamorizing his violent raids. Like Trump is a showman, Bovino is cruelty as a recruitment tool to consolidate power. Under his un-checked leadership, his border patrol army operates deep inside the U.S., smashing car windows, kidnapping U.S. citizens, and rounding up tens of thousands of people, including veterans and children, into detention centers where deaths are spiking at unprecedented rates.  With the help of questions submitted by a Gaslit Nation listener (thank you, Isabel!) we go into all the pressing questions about Bovino's Border Patrol and also ICE, including what happened to the children who disappeared under Trump's first term and what can be done to protect vulnerable immigrants today? As you listen to this episode, which opens with a clip of Bovino justifying shooting protesters with pepper balls, keep in mind Republicans gave ICE, which works closely with Bovino's Border Patrol, $75 billion over the next four years. They're also operating under aggressive weekly quotas. But is their war chest also for general population control?  For our bonus episode this week, we look at the safeguards that could have prevented Trump's return and why they didn't. To listen to the bonus, subscribe to our Patreon at the Truth-Teller level ($5/month) or higher. We are extremely grateful to our listeners who are keeping us afloat during a very difficult economic time. Every bit of support helps give us the freedom to be independent and tell the truth, so thank you again for making Gaslit Nation possible! If America climbs out of this black hole, it will be because people like you, our Gaslit Nation listeners, refused to look away. Want to hear Gaslit Nation ad-free? Join our community of listeners for bonus shows, exclusive Q&A sessions, our group chat, invites to live events like our Monday political salons at 4pm ET over Zoom, and more! Sign up at Patreon.com/Gaslit! EVENTS AT GASLIT NATION: December 1st 4pm ET – Deaf Republic by Ilya Kaminsky + Total Resistance by H. Von Dach – Poetry and guerrilla strategy: tools for survival and defiance. Minnesota Signal group for Gaslit Nation listeners in the state to find each other: join on Patreon.  Vermont Signal group for Gaslit Nation listeners in the state to find each other: join on Patreon.  Arizona-based listeners launched a Signal group for others in the state to connect, join on Patreon.  Indiana-based listeners launched a Signal group for others in the state to join, join on Patreon.  Florida-based listeners are going strong meeting in person. Be sure to join their Signal group, join on Patreon.  Gaslit Nation Salons take place Mondays 4pm ET over Zoom and the first ~40 minutes are recorded and shared on Patreon.com/Gaslit for our community Show Notes:   Where ICE Has Taken The Most People | On The Grid | WIRED https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uD9ETC80HDA NPR report: This year was the deadliest since 2005 for people in ICE custody  https://www.expressnews.com/news/border-mexico/article/ice-deadliest-year-npr-21119815.php Big Budget Act Creates a "Deportation-Industrial Complex": The result will be a lopsided, enforcement-only machine that will be hard to dismantle. https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/big-budget-act-creates-deportation-industrial-complex   Man arrested by Ice dies in jail cell in Long Island, New York: This article is more than 1 month old Officials in Nassau county confirmed death of 42-year-old man to Newsday but declined to share details https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/sep/19/ice-death-long-island-ny   Trump officials launch ICE effort to deport unaccompanied migrant children https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-administration-directs-ice-agents-find-deport-unaccompanied-migrant-2025-02-23/ Federal judge says border patrol chief admitted he lied, in ruling limiting federal agents' use of force in Chicago https://www.cnn.com/2025/11/06/us/gregory-bovino-deposition-chicago-immigration   Greg Bovino's Border Patrol Agents Use Disproportionate Force, Data Shows https://www.pogo.org/investigations/greg-bovinos-border-patrol-agents-use-disproportionate-force-data-shows   Fighting for a government that serves the people. https://www.pogo.org/   8-year-old girl dies in Border Patrol custody in Texas, as agency struggles with overcrowding https://apnews.com/article/border-patrol-child-custody-death-harlingen-2e2b27eeb3da669ee17241b8b3ee9ee2   Detainee Death Reporting https://www.ice.gov/detain/detainee-death-reporting   CBP Fatal Encounters Tracker https://www.aclutx.org/en/cbp-fatal-encounters-tracker   FACT FOCUS: Claims that more than 300,000 migrant children are missing lack context https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-misinformation-migrant-children-missing-7ab0cea2fd2238346197429e952baa8b   How they did it: The New York Times exposes migrant child labor exploitation across 50 states https://journalistsresource.org/media/migrant-children-labor-abuse-goldmith/   Homeland Security agents rescue migrant teen sisters from sex traffickers — after they arrived in US as unaccompanied minors https://nypost.com/2025/04/29/us-news/hsi-agents-rescue-teen-migrant-sisters-from-sex-traffickers/   Gaps in Sponsor Screening and Followup Raise Safety Concerns for Unaccompanied Children https://oig.hhs.gov/reports/all/2024/gaps-in-sponsor-screening-and-followup-raise-safety-concerns-for-unaccompanied-children/   Trump's False Claim of Missing Immigrant Children  https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/07/16/trump-false-claim-missing-immigrant-children   Under Joe Biden, Have 85,000 Undocumented Children Gone 'Missing'? https://www.newsweek.com/under-joe-biden-undocumented-children-missing-1812728   Democratic Women's Caucus Open Letter https://juliabrownley.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/dwc-letter-to-dhs-on-ice-impersonators-and-women-s-safety.pdf   How ICE Raids Are Making It Easier for Civilian Men to Assault Immigrant Women: Kylie Cheung argues in this op-ed that a rash of cases of men dressing as plainclothes ICE agents and assaulting immigrant women is possible because ICE agents operate with impunity. https://www.teenvogue.com/story/men-dressed-as-ice-agents-to-assault-immigrant-women-horrifying-trend   Houston man pretended to be ICE agent to rob driver, charging docs allege https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/crime/article/houston-ice-agent-robbery-20395157.php   North Dakota man accused of impersonating an ICE officer when jail staff released an inmate to him https://apnews.com/article/north-dakota-immigration-williston-ice-agent-f89f0f070e5c39cd763a5018017ff332 US sees spate of arrests of civilians impersonating Ice officers https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jun/28/civilians-impersonating-ice-officers   ICE Annual Report Fiscal Year 2022 https://www.ice.gov/doclib/eoy/iceAnnualReportFY2022.pdf Border agent charged with child sex trafficking, fraud in Cochise County https://tucson.com/news/local/border/article_5e596767-4575-485b-88e8-0a6265e5bb41.html The Green Monster: How the Border Patrol became America's most out-of-control law enforcement agency. https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/10/border-patrol-the-green-monster-112220/ FBI Warns of Criminals Posing as ICE, Urges Agents to ID Themselves: In a bulletin to law enforcement agencies, the FBI said criminal impersonators are exploiting ICE's image and urged nationwide coordination to distinguish real operations from fakes. https://www.wired.com/story/fbi-warns-of-criminals-posing-as-ice-urges-agents-to-id-themselves/ How a tragic family secret turned Greg Bovino from a quiet country boy into the force of Trump's unflinching border patrol crackdown https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15288355/greg-bovino-border-patrol-family-secret-donald-trump-immigration.html Revealed: Trump administration retreats on combating human trafficking and child exploitation https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/sep/17/trump-human-trafficking-programs-cut Trump administration takes hundreds of migrant children out of their homes, into government custody https://archive.ph/qc65g#selection-2109.7-2109.106 Oversight Agency Says 32,000 Unaccompanied Children Are Missing. But Are They? https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/blog/are-32000-unaccompanied-children-missing/  Judge rules against Department of Homeland Security: "Given the inconsistencies between the BWC footage and the use of force reports, with the BWC footage undermining what agents put in their reports, the Court cannot rely on Parra's [who is Bovino's deputy] broad generalizations of protesters' actions or Defendants' responses to those actions. Turning to Bovino, the Court specifically finds his testimony not credible.  Bovino appeared evasive over the three days of his deposition, either providing "cute" responses to Plaintiffs' counsel's questions or outright lying." "To the extent that agents use ChatGPT to create their use of force reports, this further undermines their credibility and may explain the inaccuracy of these reports when viewed in light of the BWC footage." https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ilnd.487571/gov.uscourts.ilnd.487571.281.0_3.pdf

Two National Guard troops patrolling Washington, DC not far from the White House are shot. A suspect, also shot is in custody; Judge in Georgia dismisses the election interference criminal case against President Donald Trump and co-defendants at the request of the prosecutor. We will talk with USA Today Justice Department reporter Aysha Bagchi (11); Vice President JD Vance and his family serve an early Thanksgiving meal to U.S. troops at Ft. Campbell on the Kentucky/Tennessee border; almost two dozen states led by Democratic Attorneys General sue the federal government over SNAP food aid program restrictions for certain immigrants; latest on the U.S.-led peace plan talks to end the war between Ukraine & Russia. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Matthew 6:9-13 Praying according to God's Purpose: “Kingdom come, will be done,” Praying on Purpose – in alignment with God's purpose What would your neighborhood look like if each person received God’s love? What would your neighborhood sound like if each person shared God’s love with others? In what ways would the daily interactions change if each person shared God’s value on peace? What needs would be met and what challenges would be overcome if each person looked to Jesus as Savior King? “Our Father in heaven, may your name be kept holy. May your Kingdom come soon. May your will be done on earth, as it is in heaven. Give us today the food we need, and forgive us our sins, as we have forgiven those who sin against us. And don't let us yield to temptation, but rescue us from the evil one.” – Jesus in Matthew 6:9-13 “We can approach God with confidence, honestly confessing our need and heart condition. At the same time, we can learn to speak faith and align our heart, emotions, and confession with the Word of God. We can learn to pray the prayer of faith.” – Wendell Smith “Confess your sins to each other and pray for each other so that you may be healed. The earnest prayer of a righteous person has great power (as it is working) and produces wonderful results.” – James 5:16 “I urge you, first of all, to pray for all people. Ask God to help them; intercede on their behalf and give thanks for them.” – 1 Timothy 2:1 “'Don't be afraid, Daniel,' he said to me, ‘for from the first day that you purposed to understand and to humble yourself before your God, your prayers were heard. I have come because of your prayers. But the prince of the kingdom of Persia opposed me for twenty-one days. Then Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me after I had been left there with the kings of Persia.” – Daniel 10:12-13  CSB Prayer Topics for the church? God's instrument for His purpose here and now! Pray according to God's Kingdom / Jesus Movement Purpose. Pray for the lost. Praying for God's purpose > current events. This service has been helpful to me, in keeping up with the news. The free account has been better than several paid services I’ve used. For local news I use a digital subscription to The Baltimore Banner and for the USA, The Pour Over: https://www.web.thepourover.org/subscribe?ref=Kw6vI7VQq4 Corruption? “So don't judge anything prematurely, before the Lord comes, who will both bring to light what is hidden in darkness and reveal the intentions of the hearts. And then praise will come to each one from God.” – 1 Corinthians 4:5 (CSB) Praying for the miraculous, according to God's value system & power, over famine/war What should we do?  Plan it. Pursue it. Weekly Prayer Calendar ideas Closing Prayer: “O God, we acknowledge that too often we have not had confidence in Thy power to bring light out of darkness, good out of evil; by faith we believe through Thy chosen one Jesus the Carpenter, People's Leader, Chosen One, Prisoner, Defendant, Condemned Man and Confident Man, that good will indeed overcome evil, love overcome hate, and life overcome death.” – M. Moran Weston 1972 Good Friday Declarations of Awareness “Loving Savior and Ever Present Friend, we thank you this morning for the opportunity to pray for ourselves and for others. We know that no prayer goes unanswered. We trust you Lord, and we love you. We know that you will be steadfast – Oh thank you Jesus.” – Nancy Lynne Westfield I Must Tell Jesus 

11-20-2025 NiaLena Caravasos Learn more about the interview and get additional links here: https://usabusinessradio.com/shame-and-guilt-hindering-the-defense-of-white-collar-defendants/ Subscribe to the best of our content here: https://priceofbusiness.substack.com/ Subscribe to our YouTube channel here: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCywgbHv7dpiBG2Qswr_ceEQ

For this episode, I had originally planned on telling multiple, shorter stories. Then I read one article:GI's plead not guilty in murder hearingsTwo Ft. Lewis soldiers pleaded innocent in Superior Court today to unrelated first-degree murder charges stemming from the deaths last week of another soldier and a 28 year old Graham housewife. Steven Paul Criss, 19, offered his plea in the slaying last Thursday of Jacob Kim Brown, 22, an Army infantryman, whose bullet-riddled body was found in a ditch near Roy later in the day. Brown was reported to have left his Olympia home to meet a man for discussion of a debt. Trial of Criss was scheduled for November 29 by Judge James V. Ramsdell, who refused to set bail. Also pleading innocent was Sgt. 1C Richard Michael Wallingford, 33, of E. Madison St. who was accused of the gunshot slaying last Wednesday of Cindy Ann Barajas of 119th Ave E. Graham. Mrs. Barajas had been shot in the back of the head. Wallingford, whose arraignment was continued last Friday when he appeared in court in an apparently dissociative state, was scheduled for trial November 22. Bail was denied. Attorneys told the court Friday that the defendant had refused to give authorities anything more than his name, rank and service serial number. Putting those key names into the Newspapers.com search engine, I was able to find the details surrounding both unusual cases and decided I would tell those stories. Finding these cases, featuring stories of victims I've never heard of or read about is one of my favorite aspects of using Newspapers.com. Today I'll be telling you the stories of Jacob Brown, Peter Zito Jr., Donald Barton and Cindy Barajas- the forgotten victims, lost to the back page.For more details and photos, you can visit our blog at Murderintherain.comOregon Journal Thu, Oct 03, 1974 · Two Teenagers Shot Dead On Oak Hills Parking Lot - Detectives suspect decades-old disappearance, murder are intertwined | Forest Grove News-Times - The News Tribune - October 12 1976 - Obituaries - The News Tribune Sat, Oct 09, 1976 - Olympian Slain, Tacoman Held - The News Tribune Fri, Dec 10, 1976 -Army gives GI life for murder - KIRO-Killer Army vet charged in 1974 double murder of Oregon teens - Cold Case Solved: Man Arrested for 1974 Murders of Two Teenagers | Washington County, OR - Looking into the Unforeseen with a Local Author - Seeking Justice for 1974 Murder - The News Tribune Tue, Oct 12, 1976 - GI's Plead Not Guilty in Murder Hearings - The Spokesman Review Sept. 15 1962 - Weddings - 47° 4' 57.4028" N 122° 35' 53.3814" W - The News Tribune October 7 1976- A Daughter's Murder a Father's Grief - The News Tribune October 7 1976 - Solider Held in Fatal Shooting of Woman - The News Tribune October 7 1976 - Portrait of a Father's Grief - Spokane Chronicle December 20 1960- Entering Military - Spokane Chronicle Sept. 10 1962- Weddings - Spokane Chronicle May 3 1978- Courts - Cynthia Ann Woods Barajas (1947-1976) - Find a Grave Memorial - The News Tribune Fri, Oct 08, 1976- Obituaries - The News Tribune Thu, Oct 07, 1976 - Solider held in fatal shooting of woman - Tri-City Herald Sun, Oct 10, 1976 - Defendant gives name, rank, serial number - The News Tribune Sat, Oct 09, 1976 - Silent Suspect Gets Continuance - The News Tribune Fri, Oct 29, 1976- Murder Trial Reset - The News Tribune Mon, Jan 10, 1977 - Sergeant stands trial for death of young woman  -  The News Tribune Tue, Jan 11, 1977 - Defense will claim insanity - The News Tribune Thu, Jan 13, 1977 - Suspect threatened to kill self - The News Tribune Wed, Jan 12, 1977 - Gasoline-Soaked Wallingford admitted killing, deputy testifies -The News Tribune Mon, Jan 24, 1977 - Cindy Ann and Steve- who speaks for them?The News -Tribune Mon, Jan 24, 1977 - GI Murder Sentence Delayed - The News Tribune Thu, Jan 27, 1977- convicted murder given life sentenceOur Sponsors:* Check out Kensington Publishing: https://www.kensingtonbooks.comSupport this podcast at — https://redcircle.com/murder-in-the-rain/exclusive-contentAdvertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brands

A Wisconsin woman convicted in the high-profile “Slender Man” stabbing was taken into custody late Sunday after fleeing a supervised group home, authorities said.

A Wisconsin woman convicted in the high-profile “Slender Man” stabbing was taken into custody late Sunday after fleeing a supervised group home, authorities said.

A Wisconsin woman convicted in the high-profile “Slender Man” stabbing was taken into custody late Sunday after fleeing a supervised group home, authorities said.

Following January 6th, Jake Lang served four years and six days in jail before being pardoned by President Trump. He's now demanding accountability with a lawsuit against Christopher Wray and the FBI. Mr. Lang sits down with Washington Times Commentary Editor Kelly Sadler on Politically Unstable to discuss what happened on January 6th, his treatment in prison, and his pursuit of justice.

The criminal legal system often misunderstands—and mishandles—people with intellectual disabilities. Law professor Katie Kronick explains how and why these individuals so often fall through the cracks in a system built around efficiency and rigid rules. She breaks down the stakes with real examples, including a high-profile death penalty case now before the Supreme Court, and shares ideas for building a criminal justice system that recognizes and respects the needs of defendants with intellectual disabilities. For more on this topic:  Read Kronick's amicus brief for the Supreme Court case Hamm v. Smith Check out her essay in the Sentencing Matters Substack: Why is it So Hard for Courts to Adjust to Advancements in Knowledge of Human Behavior? Read her op-ed in the Baltimore Sun: The Criminal Legal System Is Failing People With Intellectual Disabilities

In the early morning hours of October 8, 1964, thirty-four-year-old housewife and mother of three Lucille Miller placed a frantic call to the San Bernardino Sheriff's Department to report that there had been a car accident on remote Banyan Street and her husband had been killed. When deputies arrived at the scene, the car was still in flames and, as Lucille had described, her husband Gordon “Cork” Miller was in the passenger seat, nearly unrecognizable from the extent of the fire damage.The evidence at the scene appeared to support Lucille's version of events; the car had gone off the road while they were driving and caught fire. Lucille managed to get out of the car, but Cork was unconscious and she was unable to get him out. Less than twelve hours later, however, Lucille's story began to fall apart and by the end of the day she was arrested for the murder of her husband. At first, the case against Lucille Miller seemed relatively straightforward; she killed her husband for the insurance money and to pursue a relationship with another man. But as the investigation unfolded and investigators began digging into the Miller's lives, the story became significantly more complicated and no one seemed able to decide whether Cork's death was in fact a murder.Want to buy our GORGEOUS Tarot Deck designed by the incredibly talented Marisa Aragón Ware? This deck is a limited edition, so be sure to PREORDER before you miss your chance by visiting morbidtarot.com! Thanks to our friends at Relatable for dreaming this into existence!RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THIS EPISODE: The Frightful Fandom Podcast,  Follow @Jiggysawgirl on tikTok !The Horror Chronicles Podcast Follow @horror_chroniclesDude, It's Entertainment!  Podcast Follow @dude_its_entertainment References2014. A Crime to Remember (season 2, episode 6). Directed by Elise Greven. Performed by Elise Greven.Hartsfield, Jack. 1964. "Alta Loma crash scene sifted by detectives." San Bernardino County Sun, October 9: 16.—. 1965. "Defendant tells her story of 'death night'." San Bernardino County Sun, February 17: 1.—. 1965. "Hayton denies telling loves to Mrs. Miller." San Bernardino County Sun, February 9: 1.—. 1964. "Mrs. Miller charged with murder." San Bernardino County Sun, October 14: 1.—. 1965. "Mrs. Miller's views of Hayton recorded." San Bernardino County Sun, February 2: 1.—. 1964. "No charges filed; divorce action told." San Bernardino County Sun, October 10: 11.—. 1965. "Uproar sweeps court as verdict announced." San Bernardino County Sun, March 6: 1.Hertel, Howard. 1965. "Miller slain for money, trial told." Los Angeles Times, January 20: 29.—. 1965. "Mrs. Miller pictured as boasting of 'romance'." Los Angeles Times, January 29: 2.Hertel, Howard, and Art Berman. 1964. "Judge rules Miller murder case mistrial; re-set Jan. 11." Los Angeles Times, December 8: 2.Hertel, Howard, and Tom Goff. 1964. "Dentist's wife indicted for car fire death." Los Angeles Times, October 21: 2.Los Angeles Times. 1964. "Dentist dies in auto blaze; wife arrested." Los Angeles Times, October 9: 3.—. 1964. "Dentist under drug influence, jury will hear." Los Angeles Times, October 20: 3.Lucille Miller v. State of California. 1968. 392 U.S. 616 (Supreme Court of United States, June 17).Miller, Debra J. 2006. "A mother's crime."  Los Angeles Times, April 2. Cowritten by Alaina Urquhart, Ash Kelley & Dave White (Since 10/2022)Produced & Edited by Mikie Sirois (Since 2023)Research by Dave White (Since 10/2022), Alaina Urquhart & Ash KelleyListener Correspondence & Collaboration by Debra LallyListener Tale Video Edited by Aidan McElman (Since 6/2025) Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

A January 6 defendant has been granted a second pardon. AP correspondent Donna Warder reports.

Fr. Ramil Fajardo joins Patrick to discuss Annulments (4:11) what is marriage in the Catholic Church? (11:01) what is a declaration of nullity? (19:29) Patricia - A lot of young couples getting married by someone on the internet who has the capability to marry them. When this is considered out of the church, can they get it blessed in the church and is it a validated marriage? (28:11) Break 1 (30:40) Lisa - A couple of people I know left marriage after 22 years due to abuse. She left for 3 years and he never got counseling. 3 priests told her to stay in that marriage, but there was a lot of abuse. Is that God's call to go back to a marriage that's abusive? (38:06) Break 2 George - Regarding defender of the bond. Does not contact the defendant regarding a response to a petitioner. The comments/scenario given by the petitioner is not accurate with these particular problems in it. Defendant should be given the opportunity to respond to the petitioner. It will not be done according to canon law. (42:51) Vince - My fiancé and I are trying to get married. Her husband passed. My wife I married 30 years ago is still alive. She became catholic through RCIA. We're told we can't because my divorce has to be annulled. What do we do?

As the jury gets a glimpse into defendant Devyn Michaels after police interviews are heard in court, the panel questions what the jury may think of Michaels, a former adult film star who is accused of bludgeoning and decapitating her ex-boyfriend.#CourtTV - What do YOU think?Binge all episodes of #OpeningStatements here: https://www.courttv.com/trials/opening-statements-with-julie-grant/Watch the full video episode here: https://youtu.be/SHY4hLpwpQIWatch 24/7 Court TV LIVE Stream Today https://www.courttv.com/Join the Investigation Newsletter https://www.courttv.com/email/Court TV Podcast https://www.courttv.com/podcast/Join the Court TV Community to get access to perks:https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCo5E9pEhK_9kWG7-5HHcyRg/joinFOLLOW THE CASE:Facebook https://www.facebook.com/courttvTwitter/X https://twitter.com/CourtTVInstagram https://www.instagram.com/courttvnetwork/TikTok https://www.tiktok.com/@courttvliveYouTube https://www.youtube.com/c/COURTTVWATCH +140 FREE TRIALS IN THE COURT TV ARCHIVEhttps://www.courttv.com/trials/HOW TO FIND COURT TVhttps://www.courttv.com/where-to-watch/This episode of the Opening Statements Podcast is hosted by Julie Grant, produced by Eric Goldson, and edited by Autumn Sewell. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Speakers: Judge Sandra Engel retired from the bench in September of 2022. She served as a Bernalillo County Metropolitan Court Judge for over 16 years. She currently sits on the bench as a senior judge. She received her B.S. in Marketing from the University of Alabama and received her J.D. from the University of Alabama School of Law in 1993.  After moving to New Mexico, she spent a few years in private practice handling both civil and criminal cases, acting as a guardian ad litem, CASA and respondent's attorney in child abuse cases. She was an Assistant City Attorney for the City of Rio Rancho, handling primarily DWI cases, and served as Assistant District Attorney for the Second Judicial District, Bernalillo County for 10 years prosecuting misdemeanor and felony cases.As a judge, she presided over a large misdemeanor criminal docket.  In addition to the duties of her regular criminal docket, she also had been heavily involved in specialty courts. She created, implemented, and presided over the Community Veterans Court; a specialty treatment court designed to help effectuate treatment for Veterans coming through Metropolitan Court.  She created and implemented the Courts to School Program where Defendants are sentenced in front of high school and college students with the purpose of educating and deterring the students from drinking and driving.  She also served as Presiding Judge of the Domestic Violence Early Intervention Program (EIP). She served as presiding judge over the criminal division of the Metropolitan Court and served as chief judge as well, managing a C-Suite and staff of over 300 employees.  In 2021, Judge Engel became an executive leadership coach, working with law students, judges, attorneys, and business leaders. She completed her coach training and received her certification from ICF as an Associate Certified Coach (ACC) and is currently pursuing her PCC. She has completed the Train the Trainer Program through the Justice Coaching Center and now trains and supports the implementation of coaching programs in judiciaries around the nation. She specializes in leadership/ performance coaching and transformational transition coaching. She regularly presents at legal conferences in the areas of leadership and well-being.Pamela Moore, LPCC, CCTP currently serves as a Licensed Professional Clinical Counselor, Certified Clinical Trauma Professional and Director of the State Bar of New Mexico's Legal Well Being Department where she educates the legal community on positive health and well-being and assists in providing resources and services to any legal professional struggling with mental, emotional or behavioral issues.  Ms. Moore served as an advisory member to the National Commission on Lawyer Assistance Programs in 2019, 2020, and again in 2026 and is the current New Mexico representative for the Institute for Well Being In Law. Eduardo Ramirez is an Assistant Public Defender with the Law Offices of the Public Defender in the Hobbs Office. Eduardo joined the LOPD family in February of 2021 after relocating to New Mexico at the end of 2020. Eduardo earned his law school degree from the University of Colorado Law School, graduating in May 2019. He is the first in his family to not only graduate from college, but also law school. Since as far back as he can remember, Eduardo has always had a passion for helping individuals who are underprivileged and impoverished. Growing up in poverty himself, he saw many people struggle with the criminal justice system and just how important effective representation is. As an adult, Eduardo has learned the importance of self-care, to continue representing clients to the best of his ability. He helps with their criminal case but also makes efforts to better their lives. Eduardo is a zealous advocate, and his goal is to eventually rid the notion of a “public pretender.” Luckily, he has amazing mentorship and colleagues down in Hobbs who help him, and he would not be the attorney he is, without them! Outside of work, Eduardo enjoys being involved in the community, caring for his various plants, and his lovely Pit Bull, Izabel.Disclaimer: Thank you for listening! This episode was produced by the State Bar of New Mexico's Well-Being Committee and the New Mexico Lawyer Assistance Program. All editing and sound mixing was done by the State Bar of New Mexico and/or the State Bar Foundation. Intro music is by Gil Flores. The views of the presenters are that of their own and are not endorsed by the State Bar of New Mexico. The content is not intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment or legal advice. Always seek the advice of your physician or other qualified health provider with any questions you may have regarding a medical condition.The views expressed in this podcast are solely those of the participants and not intended as statements on behalf of their employers.

The connections between defendant Devyn Michaels and convicted killer Robert Baker, who were both former adult stars, are addressed. Michaels is accused of bludgeoning and decapitating her ex-boyfriend while she was married to his son.#CourtTV - What do YOU think?Binge all episodes of #OpeningStatements here: https://www.courttv.com/trials/opening-statements-with-julie-grant/Watch the full video episode here: https://youtu.be/4NhZPQK3-nwWatch 24/7 Court TV LIVE Stream Today https://www.courttv.com/Join the Investigation Newsletter https://www.courttv.com/email/Court TV Podcast https://www.courttv.com/podcast/Join the Court TV Community to get access to perks:https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCo5E9pEhK_9kWG7-5HHcyRg/joinFOLLOW THE CASE:Facebook https://www.facebook.com/courttvTwitter/X https://twitter.com/CourtTVInstagram https://www.instagram.com/courttvnetwork/TikTok https://www.tiktok.com/@courttvliveYouTube https://www.youtube.com/c/COURTTVWATCH +140 FREE TRIALS IN THE COURT TV ARCHIVEhttps://www.courttv.com/trials/HOW TO FIND COURT TVhttps://www.courttv.com/where-to-watch/This episode of the Opening Statements Podcast is hosted by Julie Grant, produced by Eric Goldson, and edited by Autumn Sewell. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

This foiled plot is a stark reminder of how domestic terrorism is changing. It highlights a trend that security experts have been warning about for years: radicalization is happening more and more online, in a decentralized way. Young, disaffected individuals are finding extremist communities, consuming propaganda, and forming conspiracies without ever meeting in a physical training camp. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Am I the Genius? is the show where you get real answers to questions you've always wondered but didn't think to ask. Subscribe on YouTube - youtube.com/@amithegenius?sub_confirmation=1 Am I the Jerk? on Instagram - instagram.com/amithegenius Am I the Jerk? on Spotify - ⁠⁠⁠https://open.spotify.com/show/0uEkxvRMpxLuuHeyPVVioF?si=b279dadfe593432b⁠⁠⁠ x.com/amithejerk facebook.com/amithejerk SUBMIT YOUR OWN STORIES HERE ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠http://amithejerk.com/submit⁠⁠⁠ Mint Mobile - Get this new customer offer and your 3-month Unlimited wireless plan for just 15 bucks a month at MINTMOBILE.com/AITJ Quince - Keep it classic and cool — with long-lasting staples from Quince. Go to Quince.com/AITJ for free shipping on your order and three hundred and sixty-five -day returns. EveryPlate - Dig into these flavor-packed meals your household will love. New customers can enjoy this special offer of only $1.99 a meal. Go to everyplate.com/podcast and use code AITG199 to get started. Green Chef - Head to Greenchef.com/50AITJ and use code 50AITJ to get fifty percent off your first month, then twenty percent off for two months with free shipping. Lola Blankets - Get 35% off your entire order at Lolablankets.com by using code AITJ at checkout. Uncommon Goods - To get 15% off your next gift, go to UncommonGoods.com/AITJ Don't miss out on this limited-time offer. Uncommon Goods. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Did you know Britain's courts are in crisis? After years of cuts by politicians, pandemic disruption and operational failures, The Standard's special report explores the spiralling backlog of court cases that define our broken justice system. Defendants and victims talk about the impact of being trapped, waiting years - sometimes until 2029 or 2030 - for their cases to even come to court. The Standard's Courts Correspondent Tristan Kirk reports on this shameful decline, and how jury trials could be axed as a possible solution. It comes as Justice Secretary David Lammy is under fire, as two criminals were mistakenly released from HMP Wandsworth by mistake - with prison governors called in for crisis talks. He went on to admit that the government has a "mountain to climb" in tackling the prisons crisis, as it emerged that 40 more inmates may be wrongly freed before Christmas. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Journalist Jesse Bogan of the Marshall Project reports on the case of Megan Jolly, a 52-year-old woman who has been jailed at the St. Charles County Justice Center for nearly two years. Jolly is among more than 500 Missouri defendants deemed mentally incompetent to stand trial and are waiting for a state-mandated treatment to restore competency. The backlog has surged since 2013, leaving many in limbo. Bogan discusses why the Missouri Department of Mental Health is “continually at absolute bed capacity for competency restoration”. He also gives further details on Jolly and other defendants awaiting psychiatric treatment.

Send us a textDespite some popular perception, Holocaust perpetrators are rarely cartoonish pure evil characters.  In fact, many of them understood their guilt and actively sought to weave false narratives to exonerate themselves or avoid prosecution. The story of Franz Lucas is one such narrative.  In this episode, I talk with Andrew Wisely about Lucas, an SS doctor at multiple concentration camps.  We discuss his complicity in the Holocaust as well as his attempts to avoid prosecution in post-war German society.65Andrew Wisely is Associate Professor of German at Baylor University.Wisely, Andrew.  The Trial of a Nazi Doctor: Franz Lucas as Defendant, Opportunist, and Deceiver (2024)Follow on Twitter @holocaustpod.Email the podcast at holocausthistorypod@gmail.comThe Holocaust History Podcast homepage is hereYou can find a complete reading list with books by our guests and also their suggestions here.

A judge in Colorado apparently paid the $1 bond of a defendant before him when his attorney indicated she did not have a dollar - which many people believe violated the rule on impartiality for judges. https://www.lehtoslaw.com

Today... Shirley Koch is appealing her fifteen-year prison sentence in the Sunset Mesa body-selling fraud, arguing that her lesser role and minimal contact with victims don’t justify such a harsh punishment. And later... Montrose County voters will decide whether to recall Commissioner Scott Mijares and replace him with Kirstin Copeland, with the outcome hinging entirely on the recall vote.Support the show: https://www.montrosepress.com/site/forms/subscription_services/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Speakers: Judge Sandra Engel retired from the bench in September of 2022. She served as a Bernalillo County Metropolitan Court Judge for over 16 years. She currently sits on the bench as a senior judge. She received her B.S. in Marketing from the University of Alabama and received her J.D. from the University of Alabama School of Law in 1993.  After moving to New Mexico, she spent a few years in private practice handling both civil and criminal cases, acting as a guardian ad litem, CASA and respondent's attorney in child abuse cases. She was an Assistant City Attorney for the City of Rio Rancho, handling primarily DWI cases, and served as Assistant District Attorney for the Second Judicial District, Bernalillo County for 10 years prosecuting misdemeanor and felony cases.As a judge, she presided over a large misdemeanor criminal docket.  In addition to the duties of her regular criminal docket, she also had been heavily involved in specialty courts. She created, implemented, and presided over the Community Veterans Court; a specialty treatment court designed to help effectuate treatment for Veterans coming through Metropolitan Court.  She created and implemented the Courts to School Program where Defendants are sentenced in front of high school and college students with the purpose of educating and deterring the students from drinking and driving.  She also served as Presiding Judge of the Domestic Violence Early Intervention Program (EIP). She served as presiding judge over the criminal division of the Metropolitan Court and served as chief judge as well, managing a C-Suite and staff of over 300 employees.  In 2021, Judge Engel became an executive leadership coach, working with law students, judges, attorneys, and business leaders. She completed her coach training and received her certification from ICF as an Associate Certified Coach (ACC) and is currently pursuing her PCC. She has completed the Train the Trainer Program through the Justice Coaching Center and now trains and supports the implementation of coaching programs in judiciaries around the nation. She specializes in leadership/ performance coaching and transformational transition coaching. She regularly presents at legal conferences in the areas of leadership and well-being.Pamela Moore, LPCC, CCTP currently serves as a Licensed Professional Clinical Counselor, Certified Clinical Trauma Professional and Director of the State Bar of New Mexico's Legal Well Being Department where she educates the legal community on positive health and well-being and assists in providing resources and services to any legal professional struggling with mental, emotional or behavioral issues.  Ms. Moore served as an advisory member to the National Commission on Lawyer Assistance Programs in 2019, 2020, and again in 2026 and is the current New Mexico representative for the Institute for Well Being In Law. Eduardo Ramirez is an Assistant Public Defender with the Law Offices of the Public Defender in the Hobbs Office. Eduardo joined the LOPD family in February of 2021 after relocating to New Mexico at the end of 2020. Eduardo earned his law school degree from the University of Colorado Law School, graduating in May 2019. He is the first in his family to not only graduate from college, but also law school. Since as far back as he can remember, Eduardo has always had a passion for helping individuals who are underprivileged and impoverished. Growing up in poverty himself, he saw many people struggle with the criminal justice system and just how important effective representation is. As an adult, Eduardo has learned the importance of self-care, to continue representing clients to the best of his ability. He helps with their criminal case but also makes efforts to better their lives. Eduardo is a zealous advocate, and his goal is to eventually rid the notion of a “public pretender.” Luckily, he has amazing mentorship and colleagues down in Hobbs who help him, and he would not be the attorney he is, without them! Outside of work, Eduardo enjoys being involved in the community, caring for his various plants, and his lovely Pit Bull, Izabel.Disclaimer: Thank you for listening! This episode was produced by the State Bar of New Mexico's Well-Being Committee and the New Mexico Lawyer Assistance Program. All editing and sound mixing was done by the State Bar of New Mexico and/or the State Bar Foundation. Intro music is by Gil Flores. The views of the presenters are that of their own and are not endorsed by the State Bar of New Mexico. The content is not intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment or legal advice. Always seek the advice of your physician or other qualified health provider with any questions you may have regarding a medical condition.The views expressed in this podcast are solely those of the participants and not intended as statements on behalf of their employers.

Ohio lawmakers want to make sure your chatbot doesn't become your spouse Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

*Content Warning: Institutional child abuse, body-image abuse, disordered eating, attack therapy, cultic abuse, grooming, medical trauma, death, alcohol use disorder, psychological and physical trauma, child labor, distressing themes.  *Free + Confidential Resources + Safety Tips:  somethingwaswrong.com/resources    Snag your ticket for the live Home for the Holidays event here: https://events.humanitix.com/swwxtgi  Check out our brand new SWW Sticker Shop!: https://brokencyclemedia.com/sticker-shop  *SWW S23 Theme Song & Artwork:  The S24 cover art is by the Amazing Sara Stewart Follow Something Was Wrong: Website: somethingwaswrong.com  IG: instagram.com/somethingwaswrongpodcast TikTok: tiktok.com/@somethingwaswrongpodcast  Follow Tiffany Reese: Website: tiffanyreese.me  IG: instagram.com/lookieboo *Sources  “DeSisto School.” Unsilenced, www.unsilenced.org/program-archive/us-programs/massachusetts/desisto-school/ “Exhibits in Desisto Investigation.” Scribd, Scribd, www.scribd.com/document/324581177/Exhibits-in-DeSisto-Investigation “Off-Broadway's Inappropriate Extends Again to Jan. 30.” Playbill, Playbill, 2 Dec. 2021, playbill.com/article/off-broadways-inappropriate-extends-again-to-jan-30-com-86238 Radio, WAMC Northeast Public. “Controversial School for Troubled Teens to Close.” WAMC, 16 Feb. 2012, www.wamc.org/new-york-news/2004-04-13/controversial-school-for-troubled-teens-to-close Secretary of Labor, Plaintiff, Appellee, V. A. Michael Desisto, Defendant, Appellee,the Desisto Schools, Inc., Defendant, Appellant.Elizabeth Dole, Secretary of Labor, Plaintiff, Appellant, V. A. Michael Desisto, et al., Defendants, Appellees, 929 f.2d 789 (1st Cir. 1991) :: Justia, law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/929/789/124165/

Opening Statements breaks down defendant Dustin Duren's body language after he took the stand. Duren is charged with the murder of Caitlyn Naffziger, but he said he acted in self-defense. Dog The Bounty Hunter is now tracking Ellen Greenberg's case.#CourtTV - What do YOU think?Binge all episodes of #OpeningStatements here: https://www.courttv.com/trials/opening-statements-with-julie-grant/Watch the full video episode here: https://youtu.be/KjAj_O4liUUWatch 24/7 Court TV LIVE Stream Today https://www.courttv.com/Join the Investigation Newsletter https://www.courttv.com/email/Court TV Podcast https://www.courttv.com/podcast/Join the Court TV Community to get access to perks:https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCo5E9pEhK_9kWG7-5HHcyRg/joinFOLLOW THE CASE:Facebook https://www.facebook.com/courttvTwitter/X https://twitter.com/CourtTVInstagram https://www.instagram.com/courttvnetwork/TikTok https://www.tiktok.com/@courttvliveYouTube https://www.youtube.com/c/COURTTVWATCH +140 FREE TRIALS IN THE COURT TV ARCHIVEhttps://www.courttv.com/trials/HOW TO FIND COURT TVhttps://www.courttv.com/where-to-watch/This episode of the Opening Statements Podcast is hosted by Julie Grant, produced by Eric Goldson, and edited by Autumn Sewell. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Jake Lang has been to the Supreme Court before. That was last year, when he led the case that saw the justices knock out one of the key criminal charges the Biden Justice Department used against those at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. Now Mr. Lang is back, asking the justices to revive another case of his — a lawsuit alleging police brutality on that fateful day. He spoke to 'Court Watch' host Alex Swoyer about his legal challenges.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation wrapped up a massive federal investigation on October 23 2025 that took down 30+ people across 11 states for illegal gambling and sports-betting schemes. One major case, dubbed “Operation Royal Flush,” involved rigged high-stakes poker games backed by Mafia families—complete with manipulated shuffling machines, even X-ray tables to cheat players. Billups, head coach of the Portland Trail Blazers, was arrested in Oregon for participating in one of the rigged games; prosecutors say he acted as a “face card” to lure bettors and was paid to attend games he knew were fixed.In a related but separate probe, the FBI also charged players and coaches for using inside information from NBA teams to place bets. For example, Terry Rozier of the Miami Heat was accused of providing confidential team info so that bets could be placed advantageously. Billups wasn't charged for this insider betting part, but he is facing serious wire-fraud and money-laundering charges for the poker ring.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

When a senior married couple falls victim to a deadly home invasion, the police search for answers from the family - including an adult daughter in a complicated marriage to a former professional athlete.Sources:1. Bandur, Michelle. “Dan Serafini Tahoe Murder Trial Updates on June 24 | Defendant's Wife Testifies.” KCRA, KCRA, 24 June 2025, https://www.kcra.com/article/dan-serafini-tahoe-murder-trial-updates-june-24/65172103.2. Daniel Serafini's Wife Seeks Divorce After His Conviction for Her Dad's Murder. PEOPLE, 21 Aug. 2025, https://people.com/daniel-serafini-divorce-wife-erin-spohr-11795450.Longmire, Becca. “Ex-MLB Player Danny Serafini Found Guilty of Murdering Father-in-Law.” People.Com, PEOPLE, 15 July 2025, https://people.com/ex-mlb-player-danny-serafini-found-guilty-murdering-father-in-law-11772204.3. Mitri, Lysée. “Sisters Sue Each Other over Inheritance of Tahoe-Area Parents after 2021 Murder.” KCRA, KCRA, 27 Oct. 2023, https://www.kcra.com/article/tahoe-2021-murders-sisters-sue-over-inheritance/45659191.4. Neumann, Sean, and Chris Spargo. “Instead of Being Sentenced Today, Ex-MLB Player Daniel Serafini Might Get a New Trial.” People.Com, PEOPLE, 18 Aug. 2025, https://people.com/sentencing-delayed-mlb-player-daniel-serafini-new-trial-11792825.5. Reed, Darrin. Bar Rescue. 2011.6. “Robert Gary Spohr (1951-2021) - Find a Grave Memorial.” Find a Grave - Millions of Cemetery Records, https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/282348876/robert_gary-spohr. Accessed 29 Sept. 2025.7. SF Gate. https://www.sfgate.com/renotahoe/article/california-lake-house-fortune-mlb-player-murder-20302902.php. Accessed 27 Sept. 2025.8. Spargo, Chris. “Daniel Serafini Landed in Prison Because of Babysitter Mistress' Mistake.” People.Com, PEOPLE, 8 Aug. 2025, https://people.com/daniel-serafini-murder-mistress-samantha-scott-11787493.This Week's Episode Brought to You By:AquaTru - 20% off your purifier - https://aquatru.com/ code: LOVEJones Road- Use code Love at jonesroadbeauty.com to get a Free Cool Gloss with your first purchase!Mint Mobile - Mobile wireless for just $15/mo - http://mintmobile.com/lovemurderCure - 20% off your first order - https://www.curehydration.com/lovemurderFind LOVE MURDER online:Website: lovemurder.loveInstagram: @lovemurderpodTwitter: @lovemurderpodFacebook: LoveMrdrPodTikTok: @LoveMurderPodPatreon: /LoveMurderPodCredits: Love Murder is hosted by Jessie Pray and Andie Cassette, researched by Sarah Lynn Robinson and researched and written by Jessie Pray, produced by Nathaniel Whittemore and edited by Kyle Barbour-HoffmanSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

4. Saddam's Trial and Maliki's Revenge Abdullahad saw Saddam twice—as powerful youth icon then frail defendant in a trial that became "parody of justice," allowing Saddam to re-dignify himself in Arab consciousness. After December 2006 execution, Saddam's body went to Maliki's house, revealing "petty sectarian mentality." Civil war ended with Sunni defeat, former resistance figures like Hamid who opposed Al-Qaeda disappeared, and hundreds of thousands of educated Iraqis fled.

7 Hours and 59 MinutesPG-13Thomas777 is a revisionist historian and a fiction writer.Here are episodes 17 throught the Livestream Q&A of the World War 2 series with Thomas777 in one audio file.Episode 17: The Nuremberg Proceedings Part 1 w/ Thomas777Episode 18: The Nuremberg Proceedings Part 2 w/ Thomas777Episode 19: The Nuremberg Proceedings Part 3 - The Defendants w/ Thomas777Episode 20: The Trial of Hermann Göring Part 1 w/ Thomas777Episode 21: The Trial of Hermann Göring Part 2 - The Cross-Examination w/ Thomas777Episode 22: The Final Episode in the WW2 Series - The Verdicts at Nuremberg w/ Thomas777Livestream Q&AThomas' SubstackThomas777 MerchandiseThomas' Book "Steelstorm Pt. 1"Thomas' Book "Steelstorm Pt. 2"Thomas on TwitterThomas' CashApp - $7homas777Pete and Thomas777 'At the Movies'Support Pete on His WebsitePete's PatreonPete's SubstackPete's SubscribestarPete's GUMROADPete's VenmoPete's Buy Me a CoffeePete on FacebookPete on TwitterBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-pete-quinones-show--6071361/support.

October 15, 2025- Counties are on the hook for ensuring criminal defendants are mentally fit to stand trial, with the competency restoration process being costly and time consuming. We consider reforms to the process, including changing who foots the bill, with Dr. April Aycock, director for the Office of Mental Health in Monroe County, and Laura Kelemen, director of Community Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services for Niagara County.

A defense expert testified to Bionca Ellis' extensive history of mental health problems, but is that enough to prove insanity? Plus, Donna Adelson faces sentencing for the murder-for-hire of Dan Markel. #CourtTV - What do YOU think?Binge all episodes of #OpeningStatements here: https://www.courttv.com/trials/opening-statements-with-julie-grant/Watch the full video episode here: https://youtu.be/8OAFATgilIUWatch 24/7 Court TV LIVE Stream Today https://www.courttv.com/Join the Investigation Newsletter https://www.courttv.com/email/Court TV Podcast https://www.courttv.com/podcast/Join the Court TV Community to get access to perks:https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCo5E9pEhK_9kWG7-5HHcyRg/joinFOLLOW THE CASE:Facebook https://www.facebook.com/courttvTwitter/X https://twitter.com/CourtTVInstagram https://www.instagram.com/courttvnetwork/TikTok https://www.tiktok.com/@courttvliveYouTube https://www.youtube.com/c/COURTTVWATCH +140 FREE TRIALS IN THE COURT TV ARCHIVEhttps://www.courttv.com/trials/HOW TO FIND COURT TVhttps://www.courttv.com/where-to-watch/This episode of the Opening Statements Podcast is hosted by Julie Grant, produced by Eric Goldson, and edited by Autumn Sewell. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

In this final segment, we tackle the eerie silence surrounding Richard Allen's current status in the Oklahoma prison system. Even his wife Kathy—who hasn't seen him since the conviction—is still waiting weeks into a background check just to visit. Advocacy groups and legal experts can't even find his inmate listing. So the question becomes: where is Richard Allen? And why is he being kept so hard to reach? Tony, Stacy, Todd, and Bob explore the systemic fog that has enveloped Allen since his sentencing. With no transparency, no accountability, and no updates—even his appellate attorneys are struggling to get access. This isn't just legal red tape. It's a case study in how a person can be swallowed by the prison system, with safeguards eroded under vague “safekeeping” orders and bureaucratic runarounds. We also discuss the bigger picture: is the state trying to disappear Richard Allen to avoid scrutiny? Are they protecting a conviction at the expense of basic human rights? Or has the machine simply stopped caring what happens to the man at the center of one of the most contested murder trials in recent history? This is a wake-up call for anyone who believes due process is still alive and well in America. #RichardAllen #DelphiMurders #PrisonSystemFailure #InmateRights #TrueCrime #HiddenInmate #Disappeared #WrongfulConviction #DelphiCase #HiddenKillers Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872

In this final segment, we tackle the eerie silence surrounding Richard Allen's current status in the Oklahoma prison system. Even his wife Kathy—who hasn't seen him since the conviction—is still waiting weeks into a background check just to visit. Advocacy groups and legal experts can't even find his inmate listing. So the question becomes: where is Richard Allen? And why is he being kept so hard to reach? Tony, Stacy, Todd, and Bob explore the systemic fog that has enveloped Allen since his sentencing. With no transparency, no accountability, and no updates—even his appellate attorneys are struggling to get access. This isn't just legal red tape. It's a case study in how a person can be swallowed by the prison system, with safeguards eroded under vague “safekeeping” orders and bureaucratic runarounds. We also discuss the bigger picture: is the state trying to disappear Richard Allen to avoid scrutiny? Are they protecting a conviction at the expense of basic human rights? Or has the machine simply stopped caring what happens to the man at the center of one of the most contested murder trials in recent history? This is a wake-up call for anyone who believes due process is still alive and well in America. #RichardAllen #DelphiMurders #PrisonSystemFailure #InmateRights #TrueCrime #HiddenInmate #Disappeared #WrongfulConviction #DelphiCase #HiddenKillers Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872

In this final segment, we tackle the eerie silence surrounding Richard Allen's current status in the Oklahoma prison system. Even his wife Kathy—who hasn't seen him since the conviction—is still waiting weeks into a background check just to visit. Advocacy groups and legal experts can't even find his inmate listing. So the question becomes: where is Richard Allen? And why is he being kept so hard to reach? Tony, Stacy, Todd, and Bob explore the systemic fog that has enveloped Allen since his sentencing. With no transparency, no accountability, and no updates—even his appellate attorneys are struggling to get access. This isn't just legal red tape. It's a case study in how a person can be swallowed by the prison system, with safeguards eroded under vague “safekeeping” orders and bureaucratic runarounds. We also discuss the bigger picture: is the state trying to disappear Richard Allen to avoid scrutiny? Are they protecting a conviction at the expense of basic human rights? Or has the machine simply stopped caring what happens to the man at the center of one of the most contested murder trials in recent history? This is a wake-up call for anyone who believes due process is still alive and well in America. #RichardAllen #DelphiMurders #PrisonSystemFailure #InmateRights #TrueCrime #HiddenInmate #Disappeared #WrongfulConviction #DelphiCase #HiddenKillers Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872

In this final segment, we tackle the eerie silence surrounding Richard Allen's current status in the Oklahoma prison system. Even his wife Kathy—who hasn't seen him since the conviction—is still waiting weeks into a background check just to visit. Advocacy groups and legal experts can't even find his inmate listing. So the question becomes: where is Richard Allen? And why is he being kept so hard to reach? Tony, Stacy, Todd, and Bob explore the systemic fog that has enveloped Allen since his sentencing. With no transparency, no accountability, and no updates—even his appellate attorneys are struggling to get access. This isn't just legal red tape. It's a case study in how a person can be swallowed by the prison system, with safeguards eroded under vague “safekeeping” orders and bureaucratic runarounds. We also discuss the bigger picture: is the state trying to disappear Richard Allen to avoid scrutiny? Are they protecting a conviction at the expense of basic human rights? Or has the machine simply stopped caring what happens to the man at the center of one of the most contested murder trials in recent history? This is a wake-up call for anyone who believes due process is still alive and well in America. #RichardAllen #DelphiMurders #PrisonSystemFailure #InmateRights #TrueCrime #HiddenInmate #Disappeared #WrongfulConviction #DelphiCase #HiddenKillers Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872

In this final segment, we tackle the eerie silence surrounding Richard Allen's current status in the Oklahoma prison system. Even his wife Kathy—who hasn't seen him since the conviction—is still waiting weeks into a background check just to visit. Advocacy groups and legal experts can't even find his inmate listing. So the question becomes: where is Richard Allen? And why is he being kept so hard to reach? Tony, Stacy, Todd, and Bob explore the systemic fog that has enveloped Allen since his sentencing. With no transparency, no accountability, and no updates—even his appellate attorneys are struggling to get access. This isn't just legal red tape. It's a case study in how a person can be swallowed by the prison system, with safeguards eroded under vague “safekeeping” orders and bureaucratic runarounds. We also discuss the bigger picture: is the state trying to disappear Richard Allen to avoid scrutiny? Are they protecting a conviction at the expense of basic human rights? Or has the machine simply stopped caring what happens to the man at the center of one of the most contested murder trials in recent history? This is a wake-up call for anyone who believes due process is still alive and well in America. #RichardAllen #DelphiMurders #PrisonSystemFailure #InmateRights #TrueCrime #HiddenInmate #Disappeared #WrongfulConviction #DelphiCase #HiddenKillers Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/@hiddenkillerspod Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/tonybpod Listen Ad-Free On Apple Podcasts Here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/true-crime-today-premium-plus-ad-free-advance-episode/id1705422872

In a four-page court order that is one for the ages, Judge Steven Merryday "struck" for the record Donald Trump's complaint that he filed in his absurd $15 billion defamation suit against The New York Times.Judge Merryday, appointed to the federal bench by President George H.W. Bush. eviscerates Trump's legal filing, saying it does not comport with the Rules of Civil Procedure. The judge notes: "The reader must endure an allegation of 'the desperate need to defame with a partisan spear rather than report with an authentic looking glass' and an allegation that 'the false narrative about 'The Apprentice' was just the tip of Defendants' melting iceberg of falsehoods.' Similarly, in one of many, often repetitive, and laudatory (toward President Trump) but superfluous allegations, the pleader states, 'The Apprentice' represented the cultural magnitude of President Trump's singular brilliance...'"So, yeah, the judge threw out the blathering, bloviating, nonsensical pleading, and gave Trump's lawyers 28 days to try to do it right, in accordance with the rules of procedure.For nightly live Law Talks, please join Glenn on Substack: glennkirschner.substack.comIf you're interested in supporting our all-volunteer efforts, you can become a Team Justice patron at: / glennkirschner If you'd like to support Glenn and buy Team Justice and Justice Matters merchandise visit:https://shop.spreadshirt.com/glennkir...Check out Glenn's website at https://glennkirschner.com/Follow Glenn on:Threads: https://www.threads.net/glennkirschner2Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/glennkirschner2Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/glennkirsch...Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/glennkirschn...TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/glennkirschner2See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

*Content warning: substance use disorder, death, distressing and mature topics, drug use, institutional child abuse, emotional, physical and sexual violence of adolescents, childhood abuse, grooming.  *Free + Confidential Resources + Safety Tips:  somethingwaswrong.com/resources    *SWW S23 Theme Song & Artwork:  The S24 cover art is by the Amazing Sara Stewart Follow Something Was Wrong: Website: somethingwaswrong.com  IG: instagram.com/somethingwaswrongpodcast TikTok: tiktok.com/@somethingwaswrongpodcast  Follow Tiffany Reese: Website: tiffanyreese.me  IG: instagram.com/lookieboo *Sources  "Academy at Ivy Ridge Withdraws From World Wide Association of Specialty Programs & Schools." PRNewswire, January 1, 2006 https://web.archive.org/web/20120925185503 Bruening, Lexi, "District Attorney: dozens of Ivy Ridge abuse complaints pour in after documentary." 7 News, WWNY, March 11, 2024 https://www.wwnytv.com/2024/03/11/district-attorney-dozens-ivy-ridge Chomik, Alexandra, "TORTURE CHAMBER What was the Academy at Ivy Ridge?" The U.S. Sun, Mar 6 2024 https://www.the-sun.com/tv/10592100/what-was-academy-at-ivy-ridge  Editor, Letter to the. “Letter to the Editor: Bob Lichfield Offers Rebuttal to Allegations in Netflix Documentary.” St. George News, 27 Mar. 2024, www.stgeorgeutah.com/opinion/letter-to-the-editor-opinion/letter-to-the-editor-bob-lichfield-offers-rebuttal-to-allegations-in-netflix-documentary/article_c6e27554-f37b-555a-b4be-2c31f617c546.html. "Former Academy at Ivy Ridge students meet in Ogdensburg, rally outside city hall" 7 News, WWNY, April 27, 2024 https://www.wwnytv.com/2024/04/27/former-academy-ivy-ridge Hill, Michael, "Netflix docuseries on abuse allegations at New York boarding school prompts fresh investigation." InfoTelNews, April 03, 2024 https://infotel.ca/newsitem/us-boarding-academy-abuse-claims  Kenton, Luke, "'ABUSER UNMASKED' Amy Ritchie is named as the Ivy Ridge ‘predator' by four alleged victims who claim sexual abuse & sick grooming cycle." The Sun UK, March 23, 2024 https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/26880799/academy-ivy-ridge-abuser-amy-ritchie “Key to His Schools' Success? It's God, Founder Says.” Los Angeles Times, Los Angeles Times, 13 July 2003, www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2003-jul-13-na-toughbar13-story.html Kubler, Katherine, creator and director. The Program: Cons, Cults and Kidnapping. Netflix, 2024 https://www.imdb.com/title/tt31183637/  Mitchell, Max, "IDirector: Ivy Ridge to close until fall" Watertown Daily Times, MARCH 12, 2009 https://web.archive.org/web/20160530232325 “Riot at Cult School Finally Helped Close It after Abused Students Fought Back.” The US Sun, The US Sun, 28 Mar. 2024, www.the-sun.com/news/10623840/academy-ivy-ridge-riot-cult-school-closed-abuse-netflix/.  Rutherford, Diane, "NYS saw serious problems at Ivy Ridge in 2006, says letter obtained by 7 News." 7 News, WWNY, Mar. 12, 2024 https://www.wwnytv.com/2024/03/12/nys-saw-serious-problems-ivy-ridge Semple, Kirk, "Melee Keeps Spotlight on Hard Life at Academy." The New York Times, June 8, 2005 https://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/08/nyregion NewsNation. “Teens' Alleged New York Boarding School Sexual Abuser Identified: Report | Banfield.” YouTube, 22 Apr. 2024 www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_oKRuKXdAQ.  “UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK, BRUCE DUNGAN, et al., Plaintiffs v. THE ACADEMY AT IVY RIDGE, et al., Defendants.” April 22, 2008 https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-nynd Warner, Greg, "Riot at Ivy Ridge School for Troubled Teens." NCPR, May 19, 2005 https://www.northcountrypublicradio.org/news/story Winters, David, "Ivy Ridge, home sold for $2.8m." Watertown Daily Times, APRIL 25, 2009 https://web.archive.org/web/20140130123642 7 News. "Former Academy at Ivy Ridge Students Meet in Ogdensburg, Rally Outside City Hall." YouTube, 27 Apr. 2024, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LRNMUgnUkNw 

After just over three hours of deliberations, a Florida jury finds Donna Adelson guilty on all counts — but could more charges be coming in the case? In Utah, a woman is charged with killing her husband. Now, she's admitted to her role in the plot — and says her mother and brother were involved, too. Updates on the Burning Man murder and the Wisconsin kayaker who faked his own death. Plus, when should a defendant take the stand in their own defense?Find out more about the cases covered each week here: www.datelinetruecrimeweekly.comTo learn more about Dateline LIVE in Nashville on Sept. 28, and to get tickets, go here: https://www.nbcnews.com/dateline-event