Podcast appearances and mentions of John Doe

In the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, Michael Ejiawoko has filed a civil lawsuit against Sean “Diddy” Combs, Vici Properties Inc., Wynn Resorts Ltd., and Northwood Investors LLC, along with unnamed John Doe and Roe entities. The complaint, Case No. 2:25-cv-6750, alleges that Combs committed sexual battery in violation of California Civil Code §1708.5, and that the corporate defendants knowingly benefited from or facilitated the misconduct. The filing asserts that the defendants participated in or enabled a civil conspiracy that allowed acts of abuse and exploitation to occur under their watch or within their properties. Ejiawoko is seeking damages and has demanded a jury trial, signaling an intent to publicly challenge what he describes as a pattern of predatory conduct and corporate complicity.The complaint further invokes the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (18 U.S.C. §1595), suggesting that Combs and the associated corporate entities may have violated federal anti-trafficking laws by facilitating or profiting from a network of coercive sexual exploitation. This elevates the case beyond a state-level civil matter into potential federal jurisdiction, where penalties and liabilities are significantly higher. The inclusion of major hospitality and investment corporations such as Wynn Resorts and Vici Properties indicates that Ejiawoko's legal team aims to expose not only individual misconduct but also the broader systems and business relationships that may have enabled Combs's alleged criminal behavior to persist.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1. Sexual Battery (Cal. Civ. Code § 1708.5) 2. Civil Conspiracy 3. Violation of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (18 U.S.C. § 1595) DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Case 1:24-cv-07973 is a civil lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The plaintiff, identified only as John Doe, brings serious allegations against music mogul and entrepreneur Sean "Diddy" Combs. This case seeks both compensatory and punitive damages for a sexual assault that allegedly took place during a Cîroc Vodka party in Los Angeles. The event was organized by the Cîroc brand, which was heavily marketed by Combs as its celebrity spokesperson. Combs also claimed to have an ownership stake in the liquor brand, further linking him to the event and its management.Key AllegationsNature of the Assault: The plaintiff asserts that he was targeted and assaulted by Combs during a Cîroc-sponsored party, which was marketed as an exclusive and high-profile event. According to Doe, the assault occurred while he was present at the event for professional reasons, under the impression that he was in a safe, controlled, and celebratory environment. Doe alleges that Combs leveraged his power and influence as host and brand ambassador to initiate and carry out the assault.Cîroc Party Context: Cîroc Vodka parties, including the one where the assault allegedly took place, were widely known for their glamorous reputation. These events were part of a broader marketing strategy that emphasized luxury and exclusivity, often attended by celebrities, socialites, and other high-profile individuals. The plaintiff argues that the event's atmosphere was used by Combs to manipulate the situation and create a sense of safety and familiarity, making it easier for him to commit the alleged assault.Doe's Experience and Damages Sought: John Doe contends that the assault has resulted in severe physical, emotional, and psychological distress, affecting his personal and professional life. He is seeking substantial compensatory damages to address the personal harm suffered and related expenses. Additionally, he is pursuing punitive damages to hold Combs accountable for what he describes as a deliberate, malicious act, meant to both punish the defendant and deter similar behavior in the future.Legal ImplicationsBroader Context of Allegations Against Combs: This lawsuit is part of a growing number of sexual misconduct allegations against Combs, many of which span several years and involve multiple accusers. The claims portray a pattern of alleged sexual violence, intimidation, and abuse of power by Combs within high-profile events and settings that he controlled or influenced.Combs' Response and Defense: Combs has consistently denied all allegations of sexual misconduct, including the claims brought by John Doe in this case. His legal team has publicly criticized the lawsuit, calling it part of a coordinated effort to tarnish Combs' reputation and extort financial settlements. Combs' defense strategy will likely focus on discrediting the plaintiff's claims, disputing the details of the alleged incident, and emphasizing his reputation as a businessman and cultural icon.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.630242.1.0_1.pdf

In the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, Michael Ejiawoko has filed a civil lawsuit against Sean “Diddy” Combs, Vici Properties Inc., Wynn Resorts Ltd., and Northwood Investors LLC, along with unnamed John Doe and Roe entities. The complaint, Case No. 2:25-cv-6750, alleges that Combs committed sexual battery in violation of California Civil Code §1708.5, and that the corporate defendants knowingly benefited from or facilitated the misconduct. The filing asserts that the defendants participated in or enabled a civil conspiracy that allowed acts of abuse and exploitation to occur under their watch or within their properties. Ejiawoko is seeking damages and has demanded a jury trial, signaling an intent to publicly challenge what he describes as a pattern of predatory conduct and corporate complicity.The complaint further invokes the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (18 U.S.C. §1595), suggesting that Combs and the associated corporate entities may have violated federal anti-trafficking laws by facilitating or profiting from a network of coercive sexual exploitation. This elevates the case beyond a state-level civil matter into potential federal jurisdiction, where penalties and liabilities are significantly higher. The inclusion of major hospitality and investment corporations such as Wynn Resorts and Vici Properties indicates that Ejiawoko's legal team aims to expose not only individual misconduct but also the broader systems and business relationships that may have enabled Combs's alleged criminal behavior to persist.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1. Sexual Battery (Cal. Civ. Code § 1708.5) 2. Civil Conspiracy 3. Violation of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (18 U.S.C. § 1595) DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Send us a textJono Matt is BACK to get us started for our annual “Spooky Season,” here on the program! We're getting it started with our lust for discussing his choice “SE7EN,” (d. Fincher 1995) Starring: Morgan Freeman, Brad Pitt, and Gwyneth Paltrow.  At times we have a lot of pride in our loud opinions of this movie, at others we become gluttons for information. You may yourself envying the fun we have in this deep dive on the Andrew Kevin Walker written thriller, and greedy for even more by the end! And that's understandable, but please keep your wrath to a minimum. Just relax, lie down, and give into the soothing relaxation provided to you by The Review Review, and don't do a single thing. 9/30!**All episodes contain explicit language**Artwork - Ben McFaddenReview Review Intro/Outro Theme - Jamie Henwood"What Are We Watching" & "Whatcha been up to?" Themes - Matthew Fosket"Fun Facts" Theme - Chris Olds/Paul RootLead-Ins Edited/Conceptualized by - Ben McFaddenProduced by - Ben McFadden & Paul RootConcept - Paul Root

Frank is joined by Phil to break down Peacock's Twisted Metal, from its surprisingly heartfelt character work to the tournament arc and deep cuts that longtime players will recognize. We talk John Doe's search for identity, the show's “happy sociopath” version of Sweet Tooth, how Season 2 levels up the stunts and car combat, and why adding new lore can actually respect the games. If you skipped this one because “cars with guns,” we make the case for why it's worth your time. Timestamps and Topics 00:00 Introductions and why Twisted Metal was the pick for this episode. 00:36 What the show adapts from the games and where it departs, especially with John Doe. 02:11 The core premise: post apocalyptic courier job, a shot at life behind the walls, and the road to San Francisco. 03:29 Game lore 101: Calypso, wishes with a twist, and character specific endings. 07:00 Sweet Tooth as chaos engine, why the Joker style wildcard works on TV. 09:05 Samoa Joe in the suit, Will Arnett on the mic, and why the voice swap lands. 10:58 Axel and other fan favorites enter, with connected backstories that actually pay off. 13:42 Game venues reimagined with in world logic, HUDs and objectives that make sense. 18:48 Car combat talk: practical vs CG, why Season 2's action feels better. 21:07 “Silly” weapons that get smart uses and Chekhov's missile moments. 23:03 Budget glow up from Season 1 to Season 2 and early success on Peacock. 24:04 John and Quiet's chemistry, then the Season 2 relationship reset. 28:05 The sister storyline, tough choices, and consequences after the wish. 30:40 Minion reworked, identity twists, and a setup that begs for Season 3. 33:40 Adaptation philosophy: build new stories that feel like the game. 41:31 What other game adaptations can learn from Twisted Metal. 45:06 Fun facts: ratings, production notes, and stunt work. Key Takeaways Twisted Metal balances weekly mayhem with character arcs, making the world feel lived in instead of gimmicky. Sweet Tooth is written as a charmingly off kilter sociopath, and the Samoa Joe and Will Arnett combo sells the menace and the laughs. Season 2 embraces the tournament and deepens game lore while explaining gamey elements inside the story. Practical stunts plus targeted CG keep the car combat crunchy and readable. Smart departures from canon create stronger relationships without losing the game's tone. Quotes “It's a show about a character trying to find his worth in a post apocalyptic world.” “Sweet Tooth is a happy sociopath. It's off putting and I love him for it.” “They nailed the cross between practical and CG. The car combat was better than I expected.” “Give me new stories that live in the game's world, not a beat for beat retelling.” Call to Action If you enjoyed this breakdown, follow and rate the show. Drop a review on Apple Podcasts, share the episode with a friend who loved the games, and tag us with #ChallengeAcceptedPod so we can shout you out next week. Links and Resources GeekFreaksPodcast.com is our home base and the source of all news discussed on our shows Watch Twisted Metal on Peacock Follow Us Geek Freaks: Facebook, Threads, Twitter, Instagram Challenge Accepted: Instagram, TikTok, Twitter Listener Questions What did the show get right compared to your favorite Twisted Metal entries? Send your thoughts and questions for the next episode, and we will feature a few on air. Apple Podcasts Tags Geek Freaks, Challenge Accepted, Twisted Metal, Peacock, TV review, video game adaptations, Anthony Mackie, Sweet Tooth, car combat, post apocalyptic TV

In 1993, Amarillo attorney and former judge David Glenn Lewis vanished on Super Bowl Sunday, leaving behind turkey sandwiches, laundry in the wash, and a recording of the game on his VCR. Eleven years later, he was shockingly identified as a John Doe found 1,600 miles away in Washington state. How did he get there—and why? Sources: David Glenn Lewis (1953-1993) - Find a Grave Memorial 1993 hit-run victim is finally identified David Glenn Lewis: Cross Country Conundrum Sponsors: AquaTru Head to AquaTru.com now and get 20% off your purifier using promocode CREEPERS. AquaTru even comes with a 30-day best-tasting water guarantee or your money back. Quince Go to quince.com/creepers for free shipping on your order and 365 day returns! Happy Mammoth Right now, you can try Prebiotic Collagen Protein and Hormone Harmony risk-free AND get 15% off your entire first order with code CREEPERS at checkout. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Dana and Tom with 5x Club Member, Peterson W. Hill (Co-Host of the War Starts at Midnight podcast) discuss the crime noir thriller, Se7en (1995) for its 30th anniversary: directed by David Fincher, written by Andrew Kevin Walker, cinematography by Darius Khondji, music by Howard Shore, starring Morgan Freeman, Brad Pitt, Gwyneth Paltrow, R. Lee Ermey, John C. McGinley, and Kevin Spacey.Plot Summary: Se7en, directed by David Fincher, is a dark crime thriller about two detectives trying to stop a serial killer. Detective Somerset (Morgan Freeman), an older cop close to retirement, is partnered with Detective Mills (Brad Pitt), a younger officer new to the city. They begin investigating a series of murders where each crime represents one of the seven deadly sins: gluttony, greed, sloth, lust, pride, envy, and wrath.The killer, John Doe, carefully plans each murder as a twisted lesson about human corruption. Somerset and Mills struggle to keep up as the crimes grow more shocking and disturbing. The case takes a personal turn when Doe finally surrenders, leading the detectives to a final trap that tests their morals.The movie explores themes of justice, morality, and the darkness of human nature. Its bleak atmosphere and shocking ending leave a lasting impact, making Seven one of the most powerful crime films of the 1990s.Guest:Peterson W. Hill - Co-Host of the War Starts at Midnight podcast@petersonwhill on IG, Letterboxd, and TwitterPrevious Guest on Gone Girl (2014), Parasite (2019), Fight Club (1999), Ben-Hur (1959), Up in the Air (2009), The Shop Around the Corner (1940), La Dolce Vita (1960), The Social Network (2010) Revisit, Pather Panchali (1955)Chapters:00:00 Introduction, Cast and Background for Se7en04:57 Welcome Back Peterson09:11 The Impact of Se7en on the Crime and Horror Genres17:09 Relationship(s) with Se7en21:52 Plot Summary for Se7en23:10 What is Se7en About?29:41 All-Time Film Twist...

Originally Recorded August 15th, 2025Check out the band Auburn's music: https://www.auburn.org.uk/https://open.spotify.com/artist/1w188ub8juelXd487MgYzUThe song played at the end is “John Doe.” This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit musicallyspeaking.substack.com

John Doe 1 v. NCAA

Det er flere i musikk-Norge som griner på Maiden-konsert. Bli med til øvingsrommet på Rotvoll og møt Stian Lundberg. Blidfisen er ikke den som stikker seg fram veldig ofte. Kanskje mest fordi han, som oftest, sitter bak trommene i utallige band og teaterforestillinger. Johndoe er vel bandet han har spilt i lengst og den gjengen er for tiden i ferd med å røre på seg igjen, til tross for at Stian har oppdrag så det monner. Det er jazz, rock, country, teater, undervisning og what not. Når Motorpsycho trenger vikar er det gjerne Stian de plinger på. Det er også soloprosjekt (sjekk ut "Stian Lundberg" på en strømmetjeneste nær deg), det er Ida Jenshus, det er Charlie Rackstead and the Sticklesbergen Ramblers, Sugarfoot, Moving Oos, Rasmus Rohde og noe jazz her og der. Her viser det seg at Stian og undertegnede har bortimot kliss lik oppvekst når det gjelder Maiden: No Prayer for The Dying, Fear of the Dark, 80-tallskatalogen - deretter en pause i Blaze-æraen før det ble grinings på konsert i 1999. Deler han pallen med kompis Kenneth Kapstad om tittelen "verdens største Nicko-fan"?

This conversation delves into the complexities of conflict of laws, focusing on jurisdiction, choice of law, and the recognition and enforcement of judgments across borders. It highlights the importance of understanding these principles for future legal professionals, especially in an increasingly interconnected world. The discussion contrasts the legal frameworks of the US and EU, explores the nuances of jurisdiction, and emphasizes the practical implications of enforcing judgments internationally.Imagine a scenario where a business dispute arises between parties located in different countries. The question of which country's laws apply and which court has the authority to hear the case becomes crucial. This is where the field of Conflict of Laws steps in, providing a framework to address these complex issues.Jurisdiction: Jurisdiction refers to the authority of a court to hear a case. In cross-border disputes, determining jurisdiction can be challenging. Courts often consider factors such as the location of the parties, the place where the contract was executed, and the nature of the dispute. As legal scholar John Doe notes, "Jurisdiction is the cornerstone of any legal proceeding, especially in international cases."Choice of Law: Once jurisdiction is established, the next step is to determine which country's laws will govern the dispute. This is known as the choice of law. Courts may apply various principles, such as the law of the place where the contract was made or the law of the place where the harm occurred. Jane Smith, a renowned legal expert, emphasizes, "The choice of law can significantly impact the outcome of a case, making it a critical consideration in international disputes."Recognition of Judgments: After a court renders a judgment, the question arises as to whether other jurisdictions will recognize and enforce it. The recognition of judgments is essential for ensuring that legal decisions have practical effects across borders. International treaties and agreements, such as the Hague Convention, play a vital role in facilitating the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments.Conclusion: Conflict of Laws is a complex and dynamic field that addresses the challenges of cross-border legal disputes. By understanding the principles of jurisdiction, choice of law, and recognition of judgments, parties can navigate the intricacies of international litigation more effectively. As global interactions continue to increase, the importance of Conflict of Laws will only grow.Subscribe Now: Stay informed about the latest developments in international law by subscribing. Don't miss out on expert insights and analysis!TakeawaysUnderstanding conflict of laws is fundamental for legal professionals.Jurisdiction is the first question a court must answer.Choice of law determines which country's laws apply to a case.Recognition and enforcement of judgments are crucial for justice.The US and EU have different approaches to jurisdiction.Public policy can limit the application of foreign law.Renvoy is a complex but rare concept in English law.Domicile is key in family law matters.The Brussels and Lugano Conventions streamline jurisdiction in Europe.Practical issues like currency and costs affect enforcement.conflict of laws, jurisdiction, choice of law, recognition of judgments, international law, legal principles, US law, EU law, family law, enforcement

This conversation delves into the complex doctrine of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing in contract law. It explores its foundational principles, historical development, and practical implications across various contexts, including insurance and employment contracts. The discussion emphasizes the importance of understanding both the functions and limitations of good faith, as well as the comparative perspectives between US and English law. Practical guidance for law students and legal practitioners is provided, focusing on drafting, advising, and litigation strategies related to good faith claims.In the realm of contract law, the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing is a fundamental principle that ensures fairness and honesty in contractual relationships. Imagine entering into a contract with the expectation of mutual benefit, only to find that the other party is acting in bad faith. This covenant serves as a safeguard against such scenarios, promoting trust and integrity.The Essence of the Covenant: The implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing is not explicitly stated in contracts but is inherently understood to be part of every agreement. It requires parties to act honestly and fairly towards each other, ensuring that neither party undermines the contract's purpose. As legal scholar John Doe notes, "This covenant is the backbone of contractual fairness, preventing parties from exploiting loopholes to the detriment of the other."Real-World Applications: Consider a scenario where a supplier deliberately delays shipments to pressure a buyer into renegotiating terms. Such actions would violate the covenant, as they undermine the contract's intent. Courts often intervene in these cases, emphasizing the importance of good faith in maintaining contractual balance.Understanding the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing is crucial for anyone involved in contractual agreements. It not only fosters trust but also ensures that contracts serve their intended purpose without manipulation. As you navigate the complexities of contract law, remember that this covenant is your ally in promoting fairness and integrity.Subscribe Now: Stay informed about the latest in contract law by subscribing.TakeawaysThe implied covenant of good faith is a foundational principle in contract law.Good faith requires parties to act honestly and fairly in their contractual obligations.It is not a subjective moral obligation but a legal standard.Good faith cannot override express terms of a contract.Claims for breach of good faith must be distinct from express breaches.Insurance contracts have a heightened duty of good faith, leading to tort liability.California has unique approaches to good faith in employment contracts.Relational contracts require a higher degree of cooperation and trust.Good faith serves as a gap filler in contracts, addressing unforeseen issues.Documenting everything is crucial for proving or disproving bad faith. contract law, good faith, fair dealing, legal principles, implied covenant, contract disputes, law students, legal analysis, historical context, comparative law

Twisted Metal Season 2: Episode 361 - Get ready for some MAYHEM! Start your engines and get ready to ride, we're hitting the road to talk all things Twisted Metal Season 2! Peacocks number 1 show returns, but does season 2 hit the gas or slam on the breaks? Tune in to Normies Like Us to find out! We are Normies Like Us... and we thank you for playing Twisted Metal. Insta: @NormiesLikeUs https://www.instagram.com/normieslikeus/ @jacob https://www.instagram.com/jacob/ @MikeHasInsta https://www.instagram.com/mikehasinsta/ https://letterboxd.com/BabblingBrooksy/ https://letterboxd.com/hobbes72/ https://letterboxd.com/mikejromans/

"John Doe has the upper hand now!" But does he still?Justin, Jon, and special guest Alia discuss this classic thriller, 30 years after its release. Royalty Free Music: "8 Bit Win!" By HeatleyBros ⁠⁠⁠⁠youtu.be/vX1xq4Ud2z8⁠

The premise is almost deceptively simple: two police detectives - a rookie and a veteran - hunt a serial killer around an unnamed city who has been who has apparently been using the seven deadly sins as his motives for each victim, each one also displayed at the murder scene to signify that one particular sin.  Of course as directed by three-time Oscar-nominee David Fincher (Fight Club, Zodiac, The Social Network, Gone Girl), it became a highly influential phenomenon.....a grisly horror classic featuring one of the most talked-about gut-punch endings of all time.  It also helped that it starred two movie stars at the peak of their powers: Oscar-winner Morgan Freeman as the veteran Detective Somerset and Oscar-winner Brad Pitt as the rookie Detective Mills.  Plus Oscar-winner Gwyneth Paltrow as Tracy Mills....AND Oscar-winner Kevin Spacey as John Doe.  Now approaching this film's thirtieth anniversary, let's join our two intrepid detectives on the trail to find out........WHAT'S IN THE BOX. :o   Host: Geoff GershonEdited By Ella GershonProducer: Marlene GershonSend us a textSupport the showhttps://livingforthecinema.com/Facebook:https://www.facebook.com/Living-for-the-Cinema-Podcast-101167838847578Instagram:https://www.instagram.com/livingforthecinema/Letterboxd:https://letterboxd.com/Living4Cinema/

Let the games begin! Alexis Hejna from Honeysuckle Rose Creations joins Jayson Teasley to look at the second season of the hit adaptation of the video game franchise. Let's see some carnage, cars, and of course, clowns!Twisted Metal is an American post-apocalyptic action comedy television series developed by Rhett Reese, Paul Wernick and Michael Jonathan Smith. Based on the vehicular combat video game franchise published by Sony Interactive Entertainment, the series stars Anthony Mackie, Stephanie Beatriz, Joe Seanoa, Will Arnett, Thomas Haden Church, and Anthony Carrigan.In a post-apocalyptic wasteland, John Doe (portrayed by Mackie), a talkative milkman with amnesia, is given a mission to traverse the desolate United States to deliver a mysterious package with unknown contents. He faces a life-altering opportunity but must confront ruthless marauders in deadly and destructive vehicles to secure a chance at a better future.Development by Sony Pictures Television and PlayStation Productions began in May 2019 with a full season being ordered by Peacock in February 2022. The first season was released on Peacock with all ten episodes on July 27, 2023. In December 2023, the series was renewed for a second season which premiered on July 31, 2025.Disclaimer: The following may contain offensive language, adult humor, and/or content that some viewers may find offensive – The views and opinions expressed by any one speaker does not explicitly or necessarily reflect or represent those of Mark Radulich or W2M Network.Mark Radulich and his wacky podcast on all the things:https://linktr.ee/markkind76alsohttps://www.teepublic.com/user/radulich-in-broadcasting-networkFB Messenger: Mark Radulich LCSWTiktok: @markradulichtwitter: @MarkRadulichInstagram: markkind76RIBN Album Playlist: https://suno.com/playlist/91d704c9-d1ea-45a0-9ffe-5069497bad59 

In the intricate world of law, the doctrines of preclusion play a pivotal role in ensuring judicial efficiency and fairness. Imagine a world where the same case could be tried repeatedly, leading to inconsistent verdicts and wasted resources. This is where claim preclusion and issue preclusion come into play, acting as gatekeepers to prevent such chaos.Claim Preclusion: Claim preclusion, often referred to as "res judicata," prevents parties from relitigating a case that has already been resolved. Once a court has issued a final judgment on the merits, the same parties cannot bring another lawsuit based on the same claim. As legal scholar John Doe notes, "Claim preclusion ensures that a final judgment is truly final, providing closure to the parties involved."Issue Preclusion: Issue preclusion, or "collateral estoppel," is slightly different. It prevents the re-litigation of specific issues that have already been decided in a previous case, even if the current case involves a different claim. Jane Smith, a renowned legal expert, explains, "Issue preclusion focuses on the specific questions that have been conclusively determined, ensuring consistency across different cases."Understanding these doctrines is crucial for anyone navigating the legal system. They not only uphold the integrity of judicial decisions but also save time and resources. As you delve deeper into the legal landscape, remember the importance of these doctrines in maintaining order and justice.Subscribe Now: Stay informed about the latest legal insights and updates. Subscribe for more in-depth articles and expert analyses.preclusion, issue preclusion, claim preclusion, legal analysis, law school, bar exam, judicial economy, fairness factors, mutuality, non-mutual issue preclusion

Today we are honored to share a rare and special conversation with one of Los Angeles' original punk icons - Exene Cervenka of the band X. As the co-lead vocalist, a core songwriter, poet, and artist, Exene has helped define a genre and inspire generations.  X Began shaking up the music scene nearly 50 years ago, and now, after decades of groundbresaking work, they're preparing to take their final bow. Their farewell album, Smoke & Fiction, dropped last year to critical acclaim - and now John Doe, Billy Zoom, DJ Bonebreak and Exene are hitting the road one last time with their final tour kicking off September 19th, joined by the legendary Los Lobos.  Side note: we have two other archived interviews featuring John Doe of X and Steve Berlin of Los Lobos.  Find our show notes and more information on our website: www.rockandrollconfessional.rocks  

Understanding the Importance of Service of Process in Civil LitigationImagine being sued and not even knowing about it until it's too late. This is where the service of process comes into play, ensuring fairness and transparency in civil litigation. In this post, we'll delve into why this legal procedure is crucial for justice.The Role of Service of Process: Service of process is the procedure by which a party to a lawsuit gives appropriate notice of initial legal action to another party, court, or administrative body. This ensures that the party being sued is aware of the proceedings and has the opportunity to present their case. As legal expert John Doe states, "Without proper service, the entire legal process can be compromised."Ensuring Fairness and Due Process: The service of process is a fundamental aspect of due process, a constitutional guarantee that legal proceedings will be fair. It prevents cases from proceeding without the knowledge of all parties involved, thus safeguarding the rights of the defendant. Jane Smith, a seasoned attorney, emphasizes, "Service of process is not just a formality; it's a critical step in upholding justice."Challenges and Considerations: While the concept is straightforward, executing service of process can be complex, especially in cases involving elusive defendants or international parties. Legal professionals must navigate these challenges to ensure compliance with jurisdictional rules and regulations.Understanding the importance of service of process is essential for anyone involved in civil litigation. It upholds the principles of fairness and transparency, ensuring that justice is served. For more insights into legal procedures, subscribe now to stay informed.

In this episode of the Red Eye Report, we discuss the Oklahoma City Bombing and John Doe #2. Sketchy....Also in show the, Teddy nerds out on some Shinobi and Cracker Barrel adopts a bar of soap as their logo. theredeyereport.com facebook.com/redeyereport

Sean "Diddy" Combs is facing three new lawsuits from anonymous male plaintiffs who allege drugging and sexual assault incidents between 2019 and 2022. The lawsuits describe encounters where Combs allegedly provided the men with spiked drinks, leading to unconsciousness and subsequent sexual assaults at various locations, including his East Hampton residence and Manhattan hotels. One plaintiff claims he was assaulted after being drugged during an afterparty at a Manhattan hotel, with parts of the incident reportedly recorded. Another plaintiff, a long-time employee of Combs, alleges he was assaulted during a meeting at a Times Square hotel to discuss unpaid compensation. The third accuser states he was drugged and raped by Combs and associates at a 2020 party at the East Hampton property.Combs' legal team has denied the allegations, calling them fabricated and expressing intent to challenge the claims and seek sanctions against the plaintiffs' attorneys. These lawsuits add to a series of legal challenges for Combs, who is also facing federal charges of sex trafficking and racketeering. Attorney Thomas Giuffra, representing the three plaintiffs, revealed that over 60 individuals have come forward with similar allegations, though only these three cases have been filed after vetting. The plaintiffs are seeking damages and jury trials, with their identities kept confidential due to safety concerns and fears of intimidation. Combs has pleaded not guilty to the federal charges and awaits a trial scheduled for May 2025.(commercial at 8:19)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Diddy's 'perverted three word excuse when victim woke up while being raped' | Daily Mail OnlineSean "Diddy" Combs is facing three new lawsuits from anonymous male plaintiffs who allege drugging and sexual assault incidents between 2019 and 2022. The lawsuits describe encounters where Combs allegedly provided the men with spiked drinks, leading to unconsciousness and subsequent sexual assaults at various locations, including his East Hampton residence and Manhattan hotels. One plaintiff claims he was assaulted after being drugged during an afterparty at a Manhattan hotel, with parts of the incident reportedly recorded. Another plaintiff, a long-time employee of Combs, alleges he was assaulted during a meeting at a Times Square hotel to discuss unpaid compensation. The third accuser states he was drugged and raped by Combs and associates at a 2020 party at the East Hampton property.Combs' legal team has denied the allegations, calling them fabricated and expressing intent to challenge the claims and seek sanctions against the plaintiffs' attorneys. These lawsuits add to a series of legal challenges for Combs, who is also facing federal charges of sex trafficking and racketeering. Attorney Thomas Giuffra, representing the three plaintiffs, revealed that over 60 individuals have come forward with similar allegations, though only these three cases have been filed after vetting. The plaintiffs are seeking damages and jury trials, with their identities kept confidential due to safety concerns and fears of intimidation. Combs has pleaded not guilty to the federal charges and awaits a trial scheduled for May 2025.(commercial at 8:19)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Diddy's 'perverted three word excuse when victim woke up while being raped' | Daily Mail Online

A skeleton in the woods. A decade-old missing persons case. No clothing, no wallet—just scattered bones, a handgun, and one unusual clue: a custom brass belt buckle engraved with an eagle. It was the one thing friends and family could describe without hesitation, and it was all Dr. Priya Banerjee needed to confirm an identity and bring long-awaited closure. In this episode, Dr. Priya Banerjee joins Sheryl McCollum to explore how jewelry, tattoos, piercings, and other personal effects can crack a case wide open. From thin gold chains to infrared-revealed tattoos, shotgun-damaged accessories to telling purse contents, Dr. Priya recounts cases proving that meticulous documentation isn’t just procedure—it’s often the key to solving cases. Highlights (0:00) "Dead men do tell tales.” —the investigative value of jewelry, piercings, and tattoos (1:45) Purse contents: receipts, bus passes, and the kind of intel you can’t Google (4:00) The thin gold chain that confirmed an identity (5:30) Belt buckles don’t lie: solving a decade-old missing persons case (9:00) A John Doe’s everyday markers: custom belt buckle, company ring, 70s tattoos (10:30) Tattoos and piercings that shout “this is who I am”—from faith and hometown pride to game-day loyalties (17:30) Medical examiners and law enforcement: the investigative dream team About the Hosts Dr. Priya Banerjee is a board-certified forensic pathologist with extensive experience in death investigation, clinical forensics, and courtroom testimony. A graduate of Johns Hopkins, she served for over a decade as Rhode Island’s state medical examiner and now runs a private forensic pathology practice. Her work includes military deaths, NSA cases, and high-profile investigations. Dr. Priya has also been featured as a forensic expert on platforms such as CrimeOnline and Crime Stories with Nancy Grace. She is a dedicated educator, animal lover, and proud mom. Website: anchorforensicpathology.comTwitter/X: @Autopsy_MD Sheryl McCollum is an Emmy Award–winning CSI, a writer for CrimeOnline, and the Forensic and Crime Scene Expert for Crime Stories with Nancy Grace. She works as a CSI for a metro Atlanta Police Department and is the co-author of the textbook Cold Case: Pathways to Justice. Sheryl is also the founder and director of the Cold Case Investigative Research Institute (CCIRI), a nationally recognized nonprofit that brings together universities, law enforcement, and experts to help solve unsolved homicides, missing persons cases, and kidnappings. Email: coldcase2004@gmail.comTwitter/X: @ColdCaseTipsFacebook: @sheryl.mccollumInstagram: @officialzone7podcast

In a long-overdue act of transparency, a federal judge ordered the names of roughly 170 individuals—once shaded behind the label “John Doe” or “Jane Doe”—to be unsealed in court filings stemming from Virginia Giuffre's defamation lawsuit against Ghislaine Maxwell. The documents revealed luminaries like Bill Clinton (previously “Doe 36”), Prince Andrew (“actually Jane Doe 162” in context of testimony), hedge fund titan Glenn Dubin, modeling mogul Jean-Luc Brunel, and others represented alongside Epstein's victims, employees, and passersby.Rather than simple exposure of identities, this unmasking lifted the curtain on how deeply entrenched Epstein's network was, reaching into the upper echelons of finance, royalty, and politics.But make no mistake: public exposure doesn't mean public accountability. Unsealing the names confirmed countless high‑profile connections, yet it stops short of revealing misconduct or initiating investigations. In many cases, the inclusion in these documents wasn't tied to wrongdoing—people merely appeared in correspondence or witness lists. Still, the moral stain lingers. If Epstein's proximity wasn't disqualifying, what is? That these names remained cloaked so long—until a lawsuit ended in 2024—speaks volumes about the protection privilege continues to afford the powerful.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Over 170 of Jeffrey Epstein's high-profile associates will be NAMED in court documents set to be unsealed in the first days of 2024 | Daily Mail OnlineBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In a long-overdue act of transparency, a federal judge ordered the names of roughly 170 individuals—once shaded behind the label “John Doe” or “Jane Doe”—to be unsealed in court filings stemming from Virginia Giuffre's defamation lawsuit against Ghislaine Maxwell. The documents revealed luminaries like Bill Clinton (previously “Doe 36”), Prince Andrew (“actually Jane Doe 162” in context of testimony), hedge fund titan Glenn Dubin, modeling mogul Jean-Luc Brunel, and others represented alongside Epstein's victims, employees, and passersby.Rather than simple exposure of identities, this unmasking lifted the curtain on how deeply entrenched Epstein's network was, reaching into the upper echelons of finance, royalty, and politics.But make no mistake: public exposure doesn't mean public accountability. Unsealing the names confirmed countless high‑profile connections, yet it stops short of revealing misconduct or initiating investigations. In many cases, the inclusion in these documents wasn't tied to wrongdoing—people merely appeared in correspondence or witness lists. Still, the moral stain lingers. If Epstein's proximity wasn't disqualifying, what is? That these names remained cloaked so long—until a lawsuit ended in 2024—speaks volumes about the protection privilege continues to afford the powerful.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Over 170 of Jeffrey Epstein's high-profile associates will be NAMED in court documents set to be unsealed in the first days of 2024 | Daily Mail Online

In the September 2024 episode of the Lex Fridman Podcast, Donald Trump discussed the ongoing controversy surrounding Jeffrey Epstein's confidential files and client list. He stated that, if re‑elected, he would have “no problem” releasing additional Epstein‑related documents and said he would “probably” make the client list public—positioning the release as a matter of transparency subject to his re‑election.That promise—to “have no problem” unsealing the Epstein files if re-elected, voiced on the Lex Fridman podcast—now rings hollow given his administration's actions. Despite that pledge, no substantive new revelations have been made. The Department of Justice, led by AG Pam Bondi, released heavily redacted materials in February and claimed there's no client list—an assertion that infuriated many supporters and was declared “a lot of redacted nothing” by critics. Even under mounting pressure—including subpoenas from the House Oversight Committee and investigations into Clinton, Comey, and others—the administration has shifted from transparency to deflection, labeling the entire Epstein files saga a “Democratic hoax” and telling supporters not to dwell on it.Also..A Business Insider analysis of unsealed court records revealed that Donald Trump is identified as John Doe 174 in a set of Jeffrey Epstein-related documents. These “Doe” placeholders were used to anonymize nearly 200 individuals mentioned in the files—ranging from Epstein's wealthy acquaintances to others referenced in passing. The revelation stemmed from a 2024 court order that unsealed previously redacted information, including the specific identity behind Doe 174.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Trump suggests he'll release Jeffrey Epstein ‘client list' if elected (nypost.com)source:It Sure Looks Like Donald Trump Is Doe 174 in Epstein Documents (businessinsider.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

John Doe returns to the Power Chord Hour to talk about the upcoming X and Los Lobos tour, the making of the final X record Smoke & Fiction, what a band looks for in a producer and how that changes later in a bands career, what new songs have translated live the best and much moreJOHN DOEhttp://www.xtheband.comhttps://linktr.ee/theejohndoehttps://xtheband.bandcamp.com/album/smoke-fictionhttps://www.instagram.com/xthebandofficialhttps://www.instagram.com/theejohndoePCHInstagram - www.instagram.com/powerchordhourTwitter - www.twitter.com/powerchordhourFacebook - www.facebook.com/powerchordhourYoutube - www.youtube.com/channel/UC6jTfzjB3-mzmWM-51c8LggSpotify Episode Playlists - https://open.spotify.com/user/kzavhk5ghelpnthfby9o41gnr?si=4WvOdgAmSsKoswf_HTh_MgDonate to help show costs -https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/pchanthonyhttps://cash.app/$anthmerchpowerchordhour@gmail.comCheck out the Power Chord Hour radio show every Friday night at 8 pm est/Tuesday Midnight est on 107.9 WRFA in Jamestown, NY. Stream the station online at wrfalp.com/streaming/ or listen on the WRFA app.

In the September 2024 episode of the Lex Fridman Podcast, Donald Trump discussed the ongoing controversy surrounding Jeffrey Epstein's confidential files and client list. He stated that, if re‑elected, he would have “no problem” releasing additional Epstein‑related documents and said he would “probably” make the client list public—positioning the release as a matter of transparency subject to his re‑election.That promise—to “have no problem” unsealing the Epstein files if re-elected, voiced on the Lex Fridman podcast—now rings hollow given his administration's actions. Despite that pledge, no substantive new revelations have been made. The Department of Justice, led by AG Pam Bondi, released heavily redacted materials in February and claimed there's no client list—an assertion that infuriated many supporters and was declared “a lot of redacted nothing” by critics. Even under mounting pressure—including subpoenas from the House Oversight Committee and investigations into Clinton, Comey, and others—the administration has shifted from transparency to deflection, labeling the entire Epstein files saga a “Democratic hoax” and telling supporters not to dwell on it.Also..A Business Insider analysis of unsealed court records revealed that Donald Trump is identified as John Doe 174 in a set of Jeffrey Epstein-related documents. These “Doe” placeholders were used to anonymize nearly 200 individuals mentioned in the files—ranging from Epstein's wealthy acquaintances to others referenced in passing. The revelation stemmed from a 2024 court order that unsealed previously redacted information, including the specific identity behind Doe 174.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Trump suggests he'll release Jeffrey Epstein ‘client list' if elected (nypost.com)source:It Sure Looks Like Donald Trump Is Doe 174 in Epstein Documents (businessinsider.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In this special episode of Retirement Planning Redefined, John and Nick welcome their first-ever guest, Nicole Cleland of Legacy Protection Lawyers, to kick off a new estate planning series. Nicole shares key insights into what estate planning really involves, who needs it (hint: it's not just for the wealthy), and how proper planning can help avoid confusion and conflict later. They cover the differences between estate planning and elder law, the importance of incapacity planning, and how assets actually pass after death.   Learn more about Nicole and Legacy Protection Lawyers Contact info: www.legacyprotectionlawyers.com Phone 727-471-5868   Helpful Information: PFG Website: https://www.pfgprivatewealth.com/ Contact: 813-286-7776 Email: info@pfgprivatewealth.com   Disclaimer: PFG Private Wealth Management, LLC is an SEC Registered Investment Advisor. Information presented is for educational purposes only and does not intend to make an offer or solicitation for the sale or purchase of any specific securities, investments, or investment strategies. The topics and information discussed during this podcast are not intended to provide tax or legal advice. Investments involve risk, and unless otherwise stated, are not guaranteed. Be sure to first consult with a qualified financial advisor and/or tax professional before implementing any strategy discussed on this podcast. Past performance is not indicative of future performance. Insurance products and services are offered and sold through individually licensed and appointed insurance agents.     Marc: Once again for another edition of Retirement Planning Redefined with John and Nick from PFG Private Wealth, and we've got a special show this week. We're going to be talking about understanding estate planning. We've got a little series planned around this. We've got some special guests coming up also. So really looking forward to today's conversation. John's going to be joining me along with Nicole Cleland, who is our special guest from Legacy Protection Lawyers based outside of St. Petersburg, Florida. And we're going to have a great conversation around understanding those estate planning basics and some other details and information. So it's going to be an excellent episode, so stay tuned and we'll get right into it. John, my friend, how are you this week, buddy? What's going on?   John: Hey, I'm doing all right. I'm excited to have Nicole as our first guest that we've ever had on our podcast here.   Marc: Yeah, our very first guest here on this, so it's excellent to have Nicole here. Nicole, welcome in. How are you?   Nicole: I'm doing great. Thank you both for having me. I'm really excited to be here today.   Marc: Absolutely. So we'll jump in real quick. Just tell us a little bit about you and your firm, what you guys do.   Nicole: Sure. So we are a boutique trust and estates firm, meaning this is all we practice is trust and estates. We do primarily planning, and secondary administrations of estate planning documents, and we also do a little bit of litigation and a little bit of tax planning as well. So we do have a trust and a estates only litigation lawyer and a tax lawyer with us too.   Marc: Okay, excellent. And Bill McQueen is going to be joining us as well on probably the next episode, so we'll get into some conversation with him. But for now, let's just kick things off and get started. Although I do have to ask, I was looking at the website and I see that you are a super lawyer. What is a super lawyer?   Nicole: Yeah, it means that we get a cape every year.   Marc: Nice.   Nicole: No, a super lawyer designation is a designation that you receive from other lawyers in the area and about 5% of practicing attorneys get this designation. So I'm very honored to have been a rising star super lawyer for seven years now, I think.   Marc: Awesome.   Nicole: And yeah, it's nice to know that the professionals that I work with enjoy working with us in our firm too.   Marc: Yeah, that's great. John, you need something like that? You need super advisor or something.   John: I don't know if there's a super advisor, but if there is one, I'm about to see how I can get that.   Marc: There you go.   John: I feel like got as much work as I do, I need a cape as well.   Marc: There you go. Yeah, capes are good. Well let's get into our conversation here. So I wanted to kick things off with just a really simple question for you, Nicole, because a lot of people, I think it's probably changed through the years and you can maybe talk about that as well, but people, I think around estate planning, even financial advisors, tend to think that, well, this is for the ultra wealthy. Those kinds of things are for people that really have a lot of money, and I don't think that's the case. So explain, do you really need an estate plan and if so, why? Can you give us some kind of parameters and some breakdowns on that?   Nicole: Yeah, that's a really great question. And I think a lot of people do think estate planning means you have to have a large estate, but that's really not all estate planning is, I kind of think of it as twofold, you've got planning on the incapacity side and then you've got planning on the after-death side. So you don't really have to have a lot of wealth, or really any wealth, to do estate planning, because if you're incapacitated, you might have very specific wishes on your care, whether that's through any sort of long-term incapacity, through any end-of-life care wishes, whether it's where you want to live, how you would like to be buried, things like that. So it's not necessarily always based around dollar amounts, and I'm sure you all see this and sometimes you have the most complex cases that really aren't the super ultra-high net worth people.   It could just be your run-of-the-mill, middle-class American that has very specific wishes in terms of they've got a blended family, or stepchildren, or maybe a child that has addiction issues. So it can really be more broad than, "Hey, I have all this money and I need a plan for taxes." It's really more complex than that.   Marc: Gotcha. Okay. Is there a difference between estate planning attorneys and elder law? I think people get those confused as well.   Nicole: Oh my gosh, yes, there is a difference. And that's a big one we get too. And for us, the estate planning is planning for... What I say is, you've got tax planning, you've got incapacity planning, asset protection planning, and kind of encompassing all of that, just your run-of-the-mill estate planning, meaning how you would want to plan for things after your passing. But elder law is a little bit more on the incapacity side and planning for one day potentially needing Medicaid, so thinking more of the disability planning. That's how I sort of equated in my mind is you've got an elder law lawyer that's a little bit more on the disability planning side, but a lot of elder law attorneys still do estate planning, but there is a slight distinction between the two and that is important to note.   Marc: Great point. All right, good. What makes an effective estate plan?   Nicole: Oh, that's a fun one too because I like to say the one that works is the one that we have no hiccups with after the testator, or the creator of the plan, has passed away. And that's sort of the hard part on estate planning is my best witness is no longer here to verify that this is what they wanted. So I would say that the best estate plan is one that you can keep family harmony at the end, as much as possible, at least preserve it or maintain that family harmony as much as possible, and administer and execute that settler or that testator's intent. Really kind of making sure that that is the theme throughout the whole administration.   John: So Nicole, you mentioned incapacity, what type of planning goes into that because that comes up quite a bit with Nick and I's clients, where it's coming up where we'll talk about beneficiaries and the estate stuff, but I'll say the incapacity planning is not my strong suit. So I think from our listeners standpoint it'd be good to hear, what does that include?   Nicole: Yeah, that's also a great question because a lot of people, when they think of themselves in the incapacitated context, they think of themselves more in, there was an emergency, I had a bad accident and now I'm on life support for a week and then I'm deceased and then I've passed. And the reality is that's not what happens to most people, especially as we're aging and living longer, more people are experiencing longer bouts of incapacity. And with that, a lot of family members don't really know what that person wanted, where they would've wanted to live, what kind of care they would've wanted to receive.   So when I'm talking to clients about incapacity planning, I try to tell them, don't think of yourself in the context of, "Oh, there was an emergency, I'm out for a week and then I'm gone. I want you to think of it as you've developed some sort of dementia, you've developed some sort of condition where we're going to have long-term incapacity.So when you're thinking about who should be making those types of decisions on your behalf, think about it in the context of you've just signed these people up for a part-time job, if not full-time job." When you're thinking of these individuals, a lot of people default to their children, which is usually best for most people, but it isn't for everyone. And I think it's important for people to sort of think of themselves, which is really hard to do in the situation that they've gotten, they will need long-term care, not the short-term one-week care, but really that long-term care piece, and it's really hard to think of yourself in that boat.   Marc: That makes sense. And documentation has got to be crucial in all of this, right?   Nicole: Absolutely. There's no statutory authority or person that can make any sort of financial or legal decision if you become incapacitated. There is a healthcare statutory order, but it's just spouse, then parents, then children, there's no one after that. So if you're an elder person with no children, not married, you don't have that default person, so it's really important that you do have documents in place. But for most people, whenever you're thinking of who to name in this role and what documents you should have in place, it's so important that you really have a robust plan and documents that really spell out all of the things that you want your named agent to do because there are certain types of statutory forms. So you can look on Florida Statute and just look online and find a statutory form for a living will, but if you present that form that was created by lawyers to a doctor, that doctor's not going to be able to honor that living will. It's not clear enough, it doesn't really express what someone's true intent might be.   So sometimes there is a disconnect between what the lawyers prepare and what the doctors are executing, or what the bank is executing under a durable power of attorney or something like that. And it's important you have a lawyer that's preparing your documents that knows both, that really can make the connection between the different areas of your life in any sort of end-of-life care incapacity situation.   John: When you're meeting with clients, I'm assuming this comes up quite a bit, when someone's having an issue picking who their power of attorney or health care surrogate is, what kind of advice could you provide for that?   Nicole: Yeah, great question too. I tell clients, think of two things when you're considering who you should name in these roles. And the first condition I say, is you want someone who's going to have the time because most people want to name their more intelligent child or, "This child is very smart, they're a doctor, they're a lawyer, they're going to know what to do. They're very smart." But those people typically don't have the time. They're too busy, they've got a family of their own, full-time career, other obligations outside of their job and family that even though they could probably do and be fine with it, they usually don't have the time that's needed to devote to something like this. So I always say, look for someone who's going to have the time. And then two, you're going to want someone who's going to know when to ask for help.   And I always tell clients too, is when we have people do things that are bad, it's not because they're a bad person. Most people aren't doing things to be evil or have any bad intent behind the action, but it's because they didn't know when, or they didn't want to ask for help. I think people still have that, "I want to save money, I don't ask the professional for help." Or, "I think I can do it. I don't need to ask all of these people for advice and things like that." And I think if you have someone who's going to know their limitations, then they're going to get advice, they're going to get opinions from people, and they're going to get a little bit more well-rounded approach on how to provide for mom or dad's care, or whatever it is, or whatever person that we've got here, making decisions on your behalf.   So I would say those two things is, someone who's going to have time, someone who's going to know when to ask for help, because again, it's not always our children, but usually it can be, but it's something where they really need to, if they're comfortable, have that conversation with that person. And that's sort of sometimes a hard conversation to have, especially if you have children that are, "I don't want to talk about it, we don't need to talk about this." But it's really important that you do talk about it because what you don't want is you don't want to name John Doe, and then when John Doe is being called to serve, he's completely taken off guard, he has no idea what to do, he's not prepared. So it's nice to kind of have these conversations with your prospective agents just so that they can start asking questions that they might need to know the answer to one day.   Marc: Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. I mean, certainly you want to get people in the loop on these things and when you're setting up all your documentation and putting the basics together, I guess we should probably switch and talk a little bit about some of the assets then, because that's where people get confused and kind of wonder about the different rules that are in place. So how does property pass at your death? I guess we can start there.   Nicole: Whenever someone dies, there's really three ways that property can be transferred. The first way is by operation of law, and a good example of that is if you own something jointly with rights of survivorship with someone. So for example, if I own my house joint with my husband, when I die, by operation of law, he will own the home. Nothing else has to occur. He doesn't have to record anything, that's his house.   The second way that property passes is through contract law, and a good example that would be a beneficiary designation. So if you've got a life insurance policy, you could have a contract with that company that says when you die, whatever the death benefit that life insurance policy would be, that would be paid to your named beneficiaries. Another example of a contract is A trust. A trust is a contract you have with typically yourself as trustee, and we could talk a little bit more about trusts later today too. But the third way that property passes is through probate, and probate is really just a fancy court-supervised process of transferring assets out of someone's individual name to your heirs. And if you have a will, then your will says who your beneficiaries are. But if you don't have a will, then the state of Florida tells you who your beneficiaries are.   So really rounding out, how does property transfer whenever someone dies? Those three things are in order of priority, so joint ownership usually supersedes beneficiary designations or other types of contracts, and then both of those items supersede your will. So a lot of people don't realize this, but your will only governs assets that go through probate, and your will would only kick in if you have probate assets. So that's why sometimes when we talk about estate planning, it may be where you really need to confirm with a professional what your estate plan is, because whether you have a will or not, you have an estate plan in place, you just may not know what it is.   Marc: You have the state's plan, right?   Nicole: Correct.   Marc: Yeah, I was always taught, and tell me if this is accurate, that a will just means you will go through probate.   Nicole: I love that. Actually, that's a great phrase there that I should probably start using.   Marc: There you go. You're welcome.   Nicole: Absolutely. Yeah. Your will only is going to govern those assets that have to go through probate, which if you've done other type of planning, you may not need probate, and so you may not need your will. There are, of course, other reasons to do one, but yeah, that phrase is right on point.   Marc: You can jot that down.   John: And Nicole, I think going to get onto some of this stuff deeper in the podcast or maybe next week, but something that always comes up, is how long does someone expect probate to last?   Nicole: Yeah, really good question. I used to say most probates are anywhere from 6 to 12 months. Since COVID, it's been more 12 to 18 months, and I used to kind of say that the 6 to 12 month mark was really dependent on the court process and where the court's cue is and how backlogged they are. I am finding, I think the longer I practice, that your probate administration is probably 60% to 80% indicative of how efficient, and organized, and on top of it your executor or personal representative is. Because if you've got someone who's going to take charge, hop on things, get things done, it can be more on the 12-month mark. But if you have someone who's sort of dragging their feet, and it's, again, part of the grieving process for people. Some people need to dive into stuff, others need to take time to process before they can dive into stuff.   But I would say now probably more 12 to 18 months because I think people are busy, I think people sign up for a lot of things and maybe don't necessarily know they've been signed up for this, but it definitely can take I think more 12 to 18 months now.   Marc: All right, well I want to ask, is a will part of that advanced directive as part of that incapacity conversation? Is that part of that documentation you want to have?   Nicole: A will is what we call an ambulatory document, meaning it actually isn't a valid document until after the testator has passed away. So I sort of joked earlier that when you have an estate plan, your best witness is gone by the time we're effectuating that estate plan, and that's sort of the case with the will. So when it comes to most people's estate plan, when we think about what's included in all of those documents, those legal documents we would prepare, the will is the after-death document, the advanced directives are the pre-death documents. And most estate plans are going to have, at the very least, a durable power of attorney and a healthcare surrogate, with the durable power of attorney being the person that makes financial or legal decisions on your behalf, and your healthcare surrogate being the document where you name someone to be your healthcare proxy or who's making healthcare decisions on your behalf.   So part of a robust advanced directive packet, you should really have those two documents, and a few more if it is your wish to have the additional documents. One of the probably more common questions I get on the incapacity planning side is people generally don't want to be kept on life support, they want that pull the plug document, which we call your living will. That's a document where if you have no cognitive function that you do not want any life-prolonging procedures. You want all of those heroic measures withdrawn so that you can pass naturally, but a lot of clients get that confused with a DNR. A DNR is different, that is what I call heart function. So a DNR is also on yellow paper, it's signed by your doctor, and a lot of doctors typically don't like to sign those types of, Do Not Resuscitate or DNR documents, unless you have some sort of terminal condition.   So that's why, circling back to the beginning, really kind of making sure that your client, if they have a lot of these end of life or incapacity specific wishes, that they're talking to all of their professionals, not just a lawyer but their doctors and things like that.   Marc: Well look, we're doing this multiple part series on estate planning, obviously a wealth of information here from Nicole. So if you've got some questions, you need some help, definitely make sure that you're reaching out and having conversations with qualified professionals and talking about the situations that you're in and what you might need. So if you'd like to get in touch with the team at Legacy Protection Lawyers, visit them online at legacyprotectionlawyers.com, or call them at (727) 471 5868. Again, (727) 471 5868. And don't forget to subscribe to the podcast, you can catch future episodes as they come out because we are doing a multi-part series on this so there'll be more information to come. And you can find all of that, of course, at John and Nick's website, pfgprivatewealth.com. And don't forget to subscribe to us on whatever podcasting app you like using, like Apple or Spotify and so on and so forth. Nicole, thank you so much for being here and sharing a lot of great information with us.   Nicole: Thanks for having me. This has been fun.   Marc: Been excellent. And John, of course, thank you for being here, my friend, and facilitating as well. Hope you have a great week.   John: Thanks, appreciate it. Have a good one.   Marc: We'll see you next time here on Retirement Planning Redefined with John and Nick.  

Twisted Metal is Peacock's high-octane post-apocalyptic action comedy based on PlayStation's beloved video game series. Following in the footsteps of The Last of Us, this marks Sony's second major video game adaptation. Season 2 kicked off with three episodes—“PRSRPNT,” “DOLF4C3,” and “T3STDRV”—which premiered on Thursday, July 31. Set months after John Doe's dramatic realization about New San Francisco, the story introduces Anthony Carrigan as Calypso, unveils a new Raven, and finds Quiet allied with Dollface's ruthless gang. Tune in as we discuss standout moments, character developments, interesting production details, as well as our rating. Welcome to Today's Episode!

John Doe v. University of Southern Indiana

It's This Week in Bourbon for July 25th 2025. Luca Mariano files for chapter 11, Kentucky's Attorney General files a lawsuit against Temu, and Sazerac releases Sazerac Rye 100.Show Notes: Luca Mariano Distillery files for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. Kentucky AG sues Temu over privacy, forced labor, and IP theft, naming Buffalo Trace & Churchill Downs. Sazerac sues "John Doe" for impersonating Master Distiller Harlen Wheatley on social media. Whiskey House of Kentucky inks long-term supply deal with Germany's Berentzen-Gruppe. Buffalo Trace launches Sazerac Rye Whiskey 100 Proof. 15 STARS introduces new First West line with Small Batch, Toasted Oak, and 8-Year-Old Bourbons. Support this podcast on Patreon Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On this episode of the podcast, investigative journalist and former “America's Most Wanted” news director Margaret Roberts joins Amanda Head to unravel explosive details surrounding the Oklahoma City bombing. Roberts spotlights disturbing gaps in the FBI's investigation — particularly the mysterious disappearance of “John Doe Number Two,” a man seen with Timothy McVeigh whose identity remains unresolved. Even more shocking: Roberts raises the possibility that the elusive figure may have been a federal asset.The duo discuss the suspicious murder of Kenneth Trentadue — brother of Jesse Trentadue — and how his death might tie into a broader government cover-up. Roberts' new book, “Blowback” digs deep into these connections and what they reveal about the state of modern journalism and government transparency.You can learn more or buy a copy of this great new book at: BlowbackBook.com. You can also follow Margaret on X (formerly Twitter) by searching for her handle: @BlowbackBook.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Can you hear me now? That's the question that I have for the legacy media that has consistently protected Bill Clinton when it comes to his deep ties to Jeffrey Epstein.For over four years we have stood on this mountain top shouting into the wind about Jeffrey Epstein and Bill Clinton and now, finally, after years of tooth and nail struggles, we are about to get the receipts.According to reports, Bill Clinton AKA John Doe 36 will be named over FIFTY times in the court documents that are expected to be unsealed this coming week when the documents hit the docket and once that happens, we will dive into the whole entire lot of them.One thing is for sure:Bill Clinton is now on the clock.(commercial at 10:28)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Bill Clinton 'will be named as John Doe 36' when a list of Jeffrey Epstein associates from court filings are made public next week | Daily Mail Online

Rebel Highway (1994)Episode 6: "Shake, Rattle & Rock!" Original Airdate: 26th August, 1994 Jeff and Cheryl cruise down Rebel Highway with Episode #6, "Shake, Rattle & Rock!" Written by Trish Soodik Directed by Allan Arkush Starring:  Renée Zellweger as Susan  Jenifer Lewis as Amanda  Max Perlich as Tony  John Doe as Lucky  Patricia Childress as Cookie  For Real as Sireena and the SirensLatanyia Baldwin as Sireena  Necia Bray as The Sirens  Josina Elder as The Sirens  Wendi Williams as The Sirens  Mary Woronov as E. Joyce Togar  Stephen Furst as Frank  Ruth Brown as Ella  Gerrit Graham as Lipsky  Dick Miller as Officer Paisley  P. J. Soles as Evelyn Randall  Dey Young as Kate Rambeau Sr  William Schallert as Judge Boone  Nora Dunn as Margo  Howie Mandel as Danny Klay  An Arkoff / Hill / Kutner Production View the Shake, Rattle and Rock trailer here. You can rent Shake, Rattle and Rock on Prime Video, Fandango at Home, or Apple TV+. Visit our website - https://aippod.com/ and follow the American International Podcast on Letterboxd, Instagram and Threads @aip_pod and on Facebook at facebook.com/AmericanInternationalPodcast   Get your American International Podcast merchandise at our store. Our open and close includes clips from the following films/trailers: How to Make a Monster (1958), The Brain That Wouldn't Die (1962), I Was a Teenage Werewolf (1957), High School Hellcats (1958), Beach Blanket Bingo (1965), The Wild Angels (1966), It Conquered the World (1956), The Abominable Dr. Phibes (1971), and Female Jungle (1955)

We're back in the Labyrinth and things are getting… sharp.

Can you hear me now? That's the question that I have for the legacy media that has consistently protected Bill Clinton when it comes to his deep ties to Jeffrey Epstein.For over four years we have stood on this mountain top shouting into the wind about Jeffrey Epstein and Bill Clinton and now, finally, after years of tooth and nail struggles, we are about to get the receipts.According to reports, Bill Clinton AKA John Doe 36 will be named over FIFTY times in the court documents that are expected to be unsealed this coming week when the documents hit the docket and once that happens, we will dive into the whole entire lot of them.One thing is for sure:Bill Clinton is now on the clock.(commercial at 10:28)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Bill Clinton 'will be named as John Doe 36' when a list of Jeffrey Epstein associates from court filings are made public next week | Daily Mail OnlineBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The greatest Man-on-the-Street interview, MAGA Epstein turmoil, Eli Zaret joins us, Justin Bieber's SWAG, Air India crash, Quarterback on Netflix, Donald Trump v. Rosie O'Donnell, and Maz skipped his workout. Drew has the hiccups again. Eli Zaret drops by to discuss the ‘Big Dumper', the MLB All Star Game, a crazy auto-tune National Anthem before the Baltimore Orioles game, Detroit Tigers struggles, Jacob Misiorowski skips the line, the newest Tiger, Netflix's Quarterback highlights, NCAA Basketball Tourney to 72 teams, RIP Joe Coleman, RIP Lee Elia and his rants, WNBA complaining, Jake Paul vs Piers Morgan, Antonio Brown's best life and more. Tom Mazawey missed a workout and is still sore. Amon-Ra St. Brown's father John Brown is a fan of breeding. Ethan Klein is suing multiple content creators. So they started GoFundMes. Trump News: Jeffrey Epstein's client list debacle may take down Donald Trump. Ghislaine Maxwell may spill. Donald Trump vs Rosie O'Donnell Part 74. Ellen has Rosie's back. Trump overstayed his welcome on stage as Chelsea F.C. won some boring soccer match the FIFA Club World Cup. Secret Service has suspended six after the one year anniversary of Trump's assassination attempt. LA Mayor Karen Bass loves herself some illegal immigrants. Illegal minors are working our California fields. The damn Menendez brothers may be on the verge of getting out of prison… again. X CEO, Linda Yaccarino, has left the company. Hyperbaric Oxygen chambers are killing machines. Pilot error is the cause of the Air India crash. Curtis Jones may be the best man-on-the-street possibly ever. Melinda French Gates is a mean mother. This golf fight has gone super viral. The beaten has apologized for his actions. Candace Cameron vs her body. The Detroit Tigers have lost every game since Maz sat behind home plate. Music: Justin Bieber drops a surprise album: Swag. It sucks. Kanye West bungled a concert in China. John Doe vs the taste of Diddy. Trey Songz attacked a cameraman. Gayle King vacationed with Oprah and Kris Jenner. Barbie has diabetes now. If you'd like to help support the show… consider subscribing to our YouTube Channel, Facebook, Instagram and Twitter (Drew Lane, Marc Fellhauer, Trudi Daniels, Jim Bentley and BranDon).

In the case of John Doe v. Sean Combs et al., the Combs defendants filed a reply memorandum in further support of their partial motion to dismiss the complaint. They argue that several of the plaintiff's claims—including those related to alleged events occurring outside the statute of limitations—should be dismissed as time-barred. The defense maintains that the plaintiff has failed to provide sufficient factual support to sustain certain causes of action, including claims under the Trafficking Victims Protection Act and various state law allegations. They also contend that the complaint improperly lumps together multiple corporate entities without specific allegations connecting each to the alleged conduct.Additionally, the Combs defendants assert that the complaint is vague and fails to meet the pleading standards required under federal law. They emphasize that the plaintiff has not sufficiently linked Sean Combs or the named corporate entities to actionable misconduct that would justify moving forward on all counts. The reply brief reinforces the argument that certain claims—particularly those not tied to clearly identified actions or dates—lack the specificity needed to survive a motion to dismiss. As such, they request the court to dismiss the relevant portions of the complaint while allowing only properly pleaded claims to proceed.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.629905.61.0.pdf

In the case of John Doe v. Sean Combs et al., the Combs defendants filed a reply memorandum in further support of their partial motion to dismiss the complaint. They argue that several of the plaintiff's claims—including those related to alleged events occurring outside the statute of limitations—should be dismissed as time-barred. The defense maintains that the plaintiff has failed to provide sufficient factual support to sustain certain causes of action, including claims under the Trafficking Victims Protection Act and various state law allegations. They also contend that the complaint improperly lumps together multiple corporate entities without specific allegations connecting each to the alleged conduct.Additionally, the Combs defendants assert that the complaint is vague and fails to meet the pleading standards required under federal law. They emphasize that the plaintiff has not sufficiently linked Sean Combs or the named corporate entities to actionable misconduct that would justify moving forward on all counts. The reply brief reinforces the argument that certain claims—particularly those not tied to clearly identified actions or dates—lack the specificity needed to survive a motion to dismiss. As such, they request the court to dismiss the relevant portions of the complaint while allowing only properly pleaded claims to proceed.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.629905.61.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

An anonymous plaintiff, referred to as John Doe, has filed a lawsuit alleging that in September 2020, during a listening session in L.A. for a Biggie project, Diddy supplied ketamine to attendees. According to the complaint, the gathering took place in a warehouse where items belonging to the late Notorious B.I.G. were stored. The plaintiff says he ended up alone with Diddy, who allegedly watched pornography, pulled a Biggie shirt from the rack, masturbated into it, ejaculated on the garment, then tossed it onto the plaintiff—leaving behind semen and reportedly remarking, “RIP Biggie.” The suit also recalls a separate alleged incident from 2005, where Diddy supposedly forced the plaintiff into unwanted sexual contact. The lawsuit cites sexual battery and emotional distress and seeks damages.Diddy's legal team has strongly denied all allegations, describing them as false and unsubstantiated, and said they intend to vigorously defend him. This disturbing accusation adds to a growing list of similar claims that have emerged amid his ongoing legal saga—including federal sex trafficking convictions and more than 90 other lawsuits alleging sexual misconduct spanning decades.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Diddy Allegedly Masturbated Into Biggie Smalls' Shirt, Lawsuit Claims | Us Weekly

An anonymous plaintiff, referred to as John Doe, has filed a lawsuit alleging that in September 2020, during a listening session in L.A. for a Biggie project, Diddy supplied ketamine to attendees. According to the complaint, the gathering took place in a warehouse where items belonging to the late Notorious B.I.G. were stored. The plaintiff says he ended up alone with Diddy, who allegedly watched pornography, pulled a Biggie shirt from the rack, masturbated into it, ejaculated on the garment, then tossed it onto the plaintiff—leaving behind semen and reportedly remarking, “RIP Biggie.” The suit also recalls a separate alleged incident from 2005, where Diddy supposedly forced the plaintiff into unwanted sexual contact. The lawsuit cites sexual battery and emotional distress and seeks damages.Diddy's legal team has strongly denied all allegations, describing them as false and unsubstantiated, and said they intend to vigorously defend him. This disturbing accusation adds to a growing list of similar claims that have emerged amid his ongoing legal saga—including federal sex trafficking convictions and more than 90 other lawsuits alleging sexual misconduct spanning decades.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Diddy Allegedly Masturbated Into Biggie Smalls' Shirt, Lawsuit Claims | Us WeeklyBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In this wide-ranging discussion, the hosts recount the hauntingly similar tragedies along Texas's Guadalupe River—where summer camps repeatedly ignored flood risks, leading to deadly disasters decades apart. They condemn media efforts to pin the floods on political figures and highlight evidence that staffing shortfalls at the National Weather Service were misrepresented. The conversation then pivots to the unresolved mysteries surrounding Jeffrey Epstein's client list, exposing how an anonymous “John Doe” intervened in court to keep names sealed from the public. Together, these stories illustrate a theme of preventable catastrophe, media distortion, and powerful interests shielding the truth.

No one is united, And all things are untied, poetic lines that emotionally personalize the political, are the opening lines of X's The World's a Mess, It's in My Kiss and now this Modcast #583: The Decline of Western Civilization Contd. As poignant now as they were in 1980 when written by Exene Cervenka and John Doe of X. Now, they again resonate with what is happening in the world. Happy birthday America, such as it is. Carve out a bit of time and listen to the whole podcast start to finish. I'm trying something a little bit different and would love to hear what you think. Leave a comment on the modcast homepage at mistersuave.com. As always find a complete track list, a bonus third set of songs, and all the important links to all the important stuff over on the modcast homepage at http://www.mistersuave.com/2025/07/modcast-583-decline-of-western.html.And keep up with me between modcasts:Subscribe - iTunesX (formerly Twitter) - @mistersuaveBluesky - @mistersuaveFacebook - facebook.com/modmodworldInstagram - instagram.com/mrrobsuaveTune in - iHeart RadioAnd listen on Mod Radio UKWhat is Mod? Mr. Suave's Mod, Mod World is one of the web's original modcasts celebrating mod-influenced music from past eras including #mod #powerpop #punkrock #garagerock #northernsoul #britpop #acidjazz #lounge #exotica #ska #modrevival & more. Featuring over 500 mod friendly music mixes since 2006.

According to a lawsuit, Combs allegedly sexually assaulted a Los Angeles businessman during a Cîroc Vodka party in 2022. The businessman claimed that Combs made inappropriate advances and assaulted him during the event. An athlete, who was present at the party, reportedly intervened during the alleged assault.This allegation is part of a series of accusations against Combs, with multiple individuals coming forward with claims of sexual assault and misconduct. Combs has denied these allegations, and his legal team has stated that he intends to defend himself against these claims..Let's dive in!(commercial at 8:11)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:'Well known' athlete intervened as Diddy groped young man at Ciroc vodka party, lawsuit claims | Daily Mail OnlineBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

July 1st: Michelle Garvey Killed (1982) When a Jane or John Doe is identified it is a real win in a case. A chance to give a family closure and a chance to rework a stalled case. On July 1st 1982 the body of a young girl was found. And, though it would take decades to find out who, exactly, she was, her identity gave her grieving family just some of the answers they needed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Michelle_Garvey, https://unidentified-awareness.fandom.com/wiki/Michelle_Garvey, https://www.khou.com/article/news/investigations/investigations-who-killed-michelle/285-408484935, https://www.masslive.com/news/2014/01/female_killed_in_1982_texas_ho.html, https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2537464/Connecticut-runaway-14-finally-identified-body-Texas-field-1982-solving-30-year-old-murder-mystery.html Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

John Doe, a former employee of Reign, made serious allegations against Sean Combs, detailing instances of sexual harassment, coercion, and a hostile work environment. Doe claims that Combs engaged in inappropriate behavior during work-related events and meetings, creating an atmosphere of fear and manipulation. The allegations include unwelcome sexual advances, pressure to partake in illicit activities, and retaliation when Doe attempted to resist or report the misconduct.Doe further alleges that Reign's management ignored or dismissed his complaints, allowing Combs' behavior to continue unchecked. He describes a pattern of intimidation, where Combs leveraged his power to silence those who opposed him, including threats to derail careers and reputations. The case underscores the broader issue of systemic abuse of power in the entertainment industry, with John Doe seeking legal action not only for personal justice but to support other victims who may have experienced similar treatment.(commercial at 9:32)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

In March 2025, a professional photographer filed a lawsuit against Sean "Diddy" Combs in the New York State Supreme Court, alleging sexual battery. The plaintiff, identified as John Doe, claims that during a commercial shoot in late 2022 or early 2023, Combs invited him into his trailer under the pretense of discussing career opportunities. Once inside, Combs allegedly pressured Doe to engage in sexual acts, suggesting that compliance would advance his career. The lawsuit details that after Doe refused, Combs threatened him with physical violence and expelled him from the trailer. Doe asserts that he returned to work, grappling with the trauma of the encounter.Combs' legal team has denied the allegations, stating that he has "never sexually assaulted or sex trafficked anyone—man or woman, adult or minor." They assert confidence in the judicial process and anticipate prevailing in court. This lawsuit adds to a series of legal challenges Combs faces, including multiple allegations of sexual misconduct and assault spanning several decades. As of now, Combs remains incarcerated on unrelated charges, with a trial set for May 2025.On March 14, 2025, Sean "Diddy" Combs appeared in Manhattan federal court, pleading not guilty to a superseding indictment that expands previous charges to include allegations of forced labor. Prosecutors assert that between 2004 and 2024, Combs exploited his business empire to coerce employees into grueling work conditions and threatened those who resisted, as part of a broader sex trafficking and racketeering conspiracy.During the hearing, Combs, 55, appeared with noticeable physical changes, sporting gray hair and a beard. The court discussed the admissibility of a hotel surveillance video from 2016, allegedly showing Combs assaulting his former girlfriend, Cassie Ventura. His defense contends the footage is misleading and manipulated. Combs has been detained without bail since his September 2024 arrest, with his trial scheduled to commence on May 5, 2025.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Episode 151 Doe ID: Anthony Gulley In December, 2001, a pair of men cutting firewood in Canton, Ohio made a gruesome discovery not far off into a field from a county road. They found a skeletonized body with no identification. A medical examination concluded that the body was likely that of a young African-American woman between the ages of 22-31, and about 5”7” tall. Later DNA analysis would prove that the victim was actually Male, and not Female. By that point, valuable time and resources had been spent trying to match the victim to case of missing women. DNA and genealogy would also later reveal that the John Doe was actually, a man named Anthony Bernard Gulley who went missing on September 11, 1994 along with his car from Pontiac, Michigan. His vehicle was found burned out the next day over 200 miles away in Akron, Ohio. Police quickly uncovered a suspect in the disappearance of Anthony Gulley; a man he knew named George Frederick Washington who had an extensive criminal record. Washington died via a self inflicted gunshot wound after a shootout with police in 1994. Washington had reportedly told someone that he had killed Anthony Gulley in a hotel room and then dumped his body in a river. When Gulley's unidentified body was found on land, and not water, (and thought to be the remains of a woman), police didn't connect the discovery to Gulley. Now, Anthony Gulley has his name back, and this is his story.     To listen to every episode of DNA: ID ad-free and get other benefits, simply  visit our channel page on Apple Podcasts to get started with an AbJack Insider subscription. Of course, you can also support DNA: ID with a Patreon subscription. Follow us on these social media outlets: Facebook - X FormerlyTwitter - Blue Sky - Tik Tok - Twitch - Youtube - Instagram Find all of our links in one spot at our Linktree:  linktr.ee/dnaidpodcast For all things DNA: ID, visit the show's homepage Visit this link to buy DNA ID Merch

Why are so many boys falling behind—and what's driving them into the darkest corners of the internet? As girls continue to outperform boys in school and college, a growing number of young men are slipping through the cracks—struggling with loneliness, identity, and emotional isolation. Rachel, a single mom, shares how her 11-year-old son was pulled into red-pill ideology by online influencers. Gabriel, a former incel, reveals how rejection and bullying led him to embrace “looksmaxxing,” while "John Doe", a current incel, says he feels invisible and hopeless. Doctoral Researcher of Evolutionary Psychology at the University of Texas, Austin, William Costello, who has interviewed more than 150 incels, says we must look beyond stigma and start addressing the root causes. Dr. Phil breaks down the toxic online culture shaping this generation—and what parents must do now to pull their sons back from the edge.   Thank you to our sponsors! MASA Chips: Visit: https://MASAChips.com/MERIT/  and use code MERIT for 25% off your first order.   Preserve Gold: Visit: https://drphilgold.com/   Get a FREE precious metals guide that contains essential information on how to help protect your accounts. Text “DRPHIL” to 50505 to claim this exclusive offer from Preserve Gold today.   Jase Medical: Get emergency antibiotics at https://Jase.com/  & use code PHIL for a discount   Sombrosa: Visit now: https://sambrosa.com/ and use code "MERIT" for 25% off your first order! Wake up rested and invigorated! 

#1 ACS #656 (feat. John Doe, Alison Rosen and Bryan Bishop) (2011)#2 ACS #712 (feat. Dana Gould, Alison Rosen and Bryan Bishop) (2011)#3 ACS #723 (feat. Erin Brokovich, Alison Rosen and Bryan Bishop) (2011)Hosted by Superfan GiovanniRequest clips:Classics@adamcarolla.comSubscribe and Watch Clips on YouTube:https://www.youtube.com/@AdamCarollaCornerSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.