Podcasts about juries

The Lindsay Clancy triple-homicide case - of her three children - has riveted the nation for weeks. In my 30-year career as a prosecutor, I had more jury deadlock notes than I could ever count up. Given that the jury in the Clancy case has indicated it may be deadlocked - unable to reach a unanimous verdict - this video explains the law regarding jury deadlock notes, mistrials, and the ensuing decision a prosecutor must make about whether to retry the case. Find Glenn on Substack: glennkirschner.substack.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Three kids are dead. Lindsay Clancy admitted killing them. A Massachusetts jury still deadlocked — and when female jurors went on camera, they didn't defend the children. They attacked the holdout who wouldn't forget how those kids died. In this monologue, Jason plays the juror soundbite that gives the game away: The man “had the hardest time getting off the fact that Lindsay viciously killed her children.” That wasn't a character flaw. That was the job. Jason indicts toxic empathy in the jury room, a culture that centers the killer's feelings over dead kids, and the soft doctrine that devalues the lives of babies and children. Murder is not a mood. ➢ Show Outline 0:00 - The Holdout Juror Who Refused to Convict 1:07 - Toxic Empathy vs Justice in the Jury Room 3:15 - She Snapped Is a Slogan Not a Verdict 6:06 - When Sentiment Swamps Judgment 10:09 - Bullying the Holdout and Fear of Speaking Out 14:47 - Women on Juries and the Mississippi History 21:00 - Secularism and Detachment From Truth 27:34 - Abortion Culture and Devaluing Children's Lives 32:52 - Why One Man Standing for Truth Still Matters ➢ Follow Our GUESTS https://www.youtube.com/@AnthonyWalker1 https://www.youtube.com/@TheShemekaMichelle  https://x.com/TJMoe28  ➢ Subscribe to Jason's other channel https://www.youtube.com/JasonWhitlock?sub_confirmation=1 https://www.youtube.com/@JasonWhitlockHarmony?sub_confirmation=1 https://www.youtube.com/@JasonWhitlockBYOG?sub_confirmation=1 https://www.youtube.com/@JasonWhitlockClips?sub_confirmation=1 ➢ Connect with Jason on Social Media:  https://x.com/JasonWhitlock  https://www.instagram.com/realjasonwhitlock/ https://www.facebook.com/jasonwhitlock ➢ Send Jason an Email FearlessBlazeShow@gmail.com ➢ Support The Blaze Visit https://TheBlaze.com. Explore the all-new ad-free experience and see for yourself how we're standing up against suppression and prioritizing independent journalism. Support Conservative Voices! Subscribe to BlazeTV at https://www.fearlessmission.com and get $20 off your yearly subscription. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On September 4, 2026, the murder trial of Lindsay Clancy ended in a mistrial when a single juror would not convict. This episode of Further. Every. Day. traces trial by jury from the Hebrew elders at the gate to that hung jury in Plymouth County, and asks the question the case is really about: who is fit to judge, and what happened to the standard? We read the primary sources and trace every claim to its origin. The episode covers the biblical origin of judgment in the gates (Deuteronomy, Ruth, and the Mishnah's lesser Sanhedrin of twenty-three), the Athenian and Roman juries, English common law and Magna Carta, the struck jury and the older competence tradition, the American founding and the Sixth Amendment, and the twentieth-century shift from the screened jury to the random fair-cross-section jury (Fay, Carter, Peters, Taylor, Duren, Batson, and the Jury Selection and Service Act of 1968). It then walks the insanity defense from the Roman furiosus and the wild beast test through M'Naghten, Durham, the Model Penal Code, and the Insanity Defense Reform Act to Commonwealth v. McHoul, the exact rule the Clancy jury deadlocked under, and closes on the law of the hung jury and mistrial: manifest necessity, Perez, and Ramos. CHAPTERS 0:00 The Turn and the Trust 2:20 God-Given Responsibility 4:40 The Elders at the Gate 10:40 Ancient Juries: Athens and Rome 15:40 Common Law and the Competent 23:40 The American Inheritance 29:40 When the Qualifications Changed 34:40 Civil Rights and the Qualified Juror 43:40 The Insanity Defense 51:40 When a Jury Is Hung 57:40 The Jury This Week PRIMARY SOURCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY Scripture (KJV): Deuteronomy 1:17; Deuteronomy 16:18; Exodus 18:21; Ruth 4:1-2, 11. Second Temple and rabbinic: Mishnah, Sanhedrin 1:4-6 and 4:1 (the great Sanhedrin of 71 and the lesser court of 23). Classical: Aristotle, Constitution of Athens 63-69 (allotment by kleroterion); Lex Acilia repetundarum (123 BC), lines 12-26; Justinian, Institutes 3.19.8; Digest of Justinian 50.17 (furiosus nullum negotium gerere potest). English common law: Assize of Clarendon (1166); Fourth Lateran Council (1215), Canon 18 (ending clerical ordeals); Glanvill (c. 1188); Magna Carta, clause 39 (1215); An Act for the Better Regulation of Juries, 3 Geo. II c. 25 (1730), the struck-jury statute; William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England, Book III ch. 23 and Book IV ch. 27. American founding: Declaration of Independence (1776); U.S. Constitution, Article III and Amendments VI and VII; Thomas Jefferson to Thomas Paine, 11 July 1789 (Founders Online, National Archives). Jury composition and the civil-rights era: Fay v. New York, 332 U.S. 261 (1947); Carter v. Jury Commission, 396 U.S. 320 (1970); Peters v. Kiff, 407 U.S. 493 (1972); Taylor v. Louisiana, 419 U.S. 522 (1975); Duren v. Missouri, 439 U.S. 357 (1979); Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986); Jury Selection and Service Act of 1968, 28 U.S.C. sec. 1861; President Johnson's signing remarks, 27 March 1968. The insanity defense: Rex v. Arnold (1724), 16 How. St. Tr. 695, the wild beast test; M'Naghten's Case (1843), 10 Cl. and Fin. 200; Durham v. United States, 214 F.2d 862 (D.C. Cir. 1954); Model Penal Code 4.01(1) (1962); Insanity Defense Reform Act, 18 U.S.C. 17(a) (1984); Commonwealth v. McHoul, 352 Mass. 544 (1967). Mistrial and unanimity: United States v. Perez, 22 U.S. (9 Wheat.) 579 (1824); Arizona v. Washington, 434 U.S. 497 (1978); Ramos v. Louisiana, 590 U.S. 83 (2020). Polling and data: Gallup, Confidence in Institutions, U.S. Supreme Court, same question since 1973; Gallup, Trust in Government, judicial branch, 2025; Gallup World Poll, confidence in the judiciary, fielded June to August 2024; Pew Research Center, Supreme Court favorability; National Center for State Courts, State of the State Courts. The Clancy case: Commonwealth v. Lindsay Clancy, Plymouth Superior Court; the jury's deadlock note read in court by Judge William Sullivan on 4 September 2026; reporting from WBUR, NPR, CBS Boston, and the Boston Globe, 2 to 4 September 2026. READ THE RULINGS Ramos v. Louisiana: https://www.oyez.org/cases/2019/18-5924 Carter v. Jury Commission: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/396/320/ Taylor v. Louisiana: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/419/522/ Durham v. United States: https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/214/862/314341/ Commonwealth v. McHoul: https://law.justia.com/cases/massachusetts/supreme-court/1967/352-mass-544-2.html Further. Every. Day. is a documents-driven show that reads the original sources and traces every claim back to the fountainhead. #TrialByJury #LindsayClancy #JurySystem #InsanityDefense #Mistrial #HungJury #Sanhedrin #MagnaCarta #SixthAmendment #RamosVLouisiana #MNaghten #PostpartumPsychosis #NGRI #ChristianWorldview #FurtherEveryDay #Clancy #Jury #Law #History

The Pour Over is a Christ-first, politically neutral news podcast. Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we cover the day's biggest stories in ~10 minutes, and pair the biggest headlines with brief biblical reminders. Every Saturday, TPO Explains does a shallow dive into your most-asked questions. On today's episode: What is a jury? Available to watch on Spotify and YouTube here. Looking to support us? You can choose to pay ⁠here⁠. Thanks to our sponsors: The Voice of the Martyrs: Get a free copy of Tortured for Christ | vom.org/TPO Wild Alaskan: $35 off your first box | code: TPO Safe House Project: Give now | SafeHouseProject.org/TPO New Living Translation: Get your copy | https://links.thepourover.org/NLT_Pod Quince: Free shipping | quince.com/tpo AdelFi: Apply for the Harvest Bundle | https://adelfibanking.com/pourover Upside: extra 25 cents back for every gallon on your first tank of gas | code: TPO Life Recovery Bible: Get your copy | https://links.thepourover.org/Tyndale_Sept2026 LMNT: free 8-pack with purchase | https://links.thepourover.org/LMNT_Podcast Serving Orphans Worldwide: Give a gift to feed a child for a month | https://servingorphans.org/thepourover MORE FROM TPO: ⁠Free newsletter⁠ ⁠Watch TPO on YouTube⁠ ⁠Download the TPO App⁠ Unless otherwise noted, all scripture references are from the Christian Standard Bible (CSB) translation. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

A mistrial has officially been declared in the Lindsay Clancy case after one brave soul defies a jury full of Karens. Escape Your 9-5. Join the F.I.R.E Portfolio Today:https://buy.stripe.com/bJe9AU9awfM8d3C6EK4Vy03Support The Show:https://peddlingfiction.substack.com/

The Government's Chief Victims Advisor has advised that specially trained panels should replace randomly selected juries for sexual violence trials.

Mark is joined by Phil Holloway, host of The Megyn Kelly True Crime Show, former Georgia assistant district attorney, and former police officer, to discuss high-profile legal proceedings and trial dynamics. Phil explains the legal mechanisms surrounding a deadlocked jury in the Lindsay Clancy murder trial, detailing how long a judge can order jurors to continue deliberating, what triggers an Allen charge, and the procedural steps following a potential hung jury or mistrial. They also touch on the Charlie Kirk murder pretrial hearing in Utah and broader legal processes in high-profile criminal cases.

Brian Burke got into corrections in his early twenties, spent four years working inside the New York state prison system, and then spent twenty-nine years as a New York court officer — experiencing the full spectrum of what the American justice system looks like from the person responsible for maintaining order in the room where it all happens. In this episode of Locked In with Ian Bick, he shares what four years in the New York state prison system taught him, what twenty-nine years as a court officer — the juries, the defendants, the prosecutors, the judges, and the heartbreaking and strangest moments the job produced — really looked like from the inside, and what his most significant professional experience actually involved: personally escorting Rex Heuermann — the Gilgo Beach serial killer — throughout his arrest, conviction, and sentencing, and what that specific proximity to one of the most disturbing criminal cases in recent New York history actually revealed about the person at the center of it. _____________________________________________ #officer #truecrimestories #court #newyork _____________________________________________ Thank you to CASH APP for sponsoring this episode: Download Cash App Today: https://click.cash.app/ui6m/6pao71et #CashAppPod Cash App is a financial services platform, not a bank. Banking services provided by Cash App's bank partner(s). Prepaid debit cards issued by Sutton Bank, Member FDIC. Cash App Visa® Debit Flex Cards issued by Sutton Bank, Member FDIC, and The Bancorp Bank, N.A., pursuant to a license from Visa U.S.A. Inc. See terms and conditions for the Sutton prepaid card, Sutton debit flex card, and Bancorp debit flex card. Cash App Green features, Savings, Direct deposit, Round ups, Overdraft coverage and Discounts provided by Cash App, a Block, Inc. brand. Visit cash.app/legal/podcast for full disclosures. _____________________________________________ Hosted, Executive Produced & Edited By Ian Bick: https://www.instagram.com/ian_bick/?hl=en https://ianbick.com/ _____________________________________________ Timestamps: 00:00 Arraignment Shock 00:19 Growing Up in the Bronx 01:28 Childhood and Early Career 02:53 Choosing Law Enforcement 04:48 Starting in Corrections 06:39 First Prison Assignment 09:14 First Prison Experience 10:27 Transfer to Fishkill 11:34 Life at Fishkill 13:05 Working the Shoe 15:50 Shoe Conditions 16:42 Protective Custody 17:45 Perspective from Solitary 18:49 Corrections Experience Helps 20:40 Respect from Other Officers 21:37 Career Plans in Corrections 23:56 Types of Crimes at Fishkill 25:00 Advice from Veteran Officers 25:43 Prison Food and Cooking 28:00 Sponsor: Cash App Green 30:12 Becoming a Court Officer 31:51 Pay and Academy Differences 32:58 Court Officer Academy 33:58 Swearing in Witnesses 34:33 First Court Assignment 35:25 Family Court Cases 37:45 Emotional Family Court 38:50 Typical Family Court Day 39:31 Family Court Volatility 41:11 Celebrities in Family Court 41:54 Opinions on Lawyers 42:49 Divorce Case Stories 43:34 Promotion to the Bronx 44:24 The Amadou Diallo Case 45:45 Bronx Court Duties 46:44 Handling Prisoners in the Bronx 47:24 Building Rapport with Defendants 48:54 A Mob Enforcer Trial 51:13 Jury System and Sequestration 52:24 Juror Conversations 53:51 Predicting Verdicts 55:21 Juries and Social Media 56:34 Officer Conversations and Bets 57:09 Transfer to Suffolk County 58:35 The Tankoff Case 01:01:39 Verdict Reactions 01:02:27 Taking Convicted Felons into Custody 01:03:17 The Samurai Sword Case 01:07:00 Release and Redemption 01:08:31 Weighing Justice 01:09:16 Showing Grace to Vicious Criminals 01:10:08 Vigilante Thoughts 01:10:48 Drunk Driving Cases 01:12:36 The Schwalli Case 01:13:20 Judges Off the Bench 01:14:11 Judges' Sentencing Decisions 01:15:29 Prison Tours with Judges 01:16:21 Prison Tours and Shows 01:17:22 Court Officers vs. Cops 01:18:03 Courtroom Violence 01:19:47 Prosecutors and Their Styles 01:21:03 Defendant Representing Himself 01:22:25 Strange Defendant Behavior 01:23:28 Shocking Case Outcomes 01:24:56 Disturbing Cases 01:25:15 Closed Hearings and Undercover Testimony 01:26:08 Faking Mental Illness 01:27:55 Grand Jury Testimony 01:28:42 Weapons and Contraband in Court 01:29:16 Inmate Fights in Pens 01:30:58 Refusing to Go to Court 01:31:57 Feeding Inmates 01:33:14 Court Day Logistics 01:34:00 System Designed to Plead Out? 01:35:28 Hypothetical: Sharing Information 01:36:01 Fair Judges 01:37:00 The Rex Case Begins 01:39:52 Rex's Initial Arraignment 01:40:26 Rex's Court Appearances 01:43:20 Rex's Personality and Humor 01:45:36 Rex's Family and Background 01:47:49 Rex's Guilty Plea 01:48:56 Fear of Rex 01:49:27 After Sentencing 01:50:20 Rex's Future in Prison 01:52:41 Family and Friends' Reactions 01:54:00 Why Rex Didn't Go to Trial 01:56:06 Retirement After 29 Years 01:57:07 Watching Court Shows 01:57:39 Jury System Critique 01:59:21 Jury Understanding 02:00:04 Fair Trial for Serial Killers 02:00:20 The Valvet Case 02:02:22 Most Important Lesson 02:02:56 Final Thoughts and Thanks _____________________________________________ To advertise on the show, contact sales@advertisecast.com or visit https://advertising.libsyn.com/LockedInWithIanBicka

Should Takapuna Golf Course be a flood storage wetland, and how should Auckland manage feral cats? With fewer than a third of Aucklanders voting in the 2022 and 2025 local elections, Auckland Council has been holding 'citizen juries' to ask residents how they'd solve the challenging issues facing the region. Jessica Hopkins reports.

Robert Nordlander spent over 20 years as a special agent with IRS Criminal Investigation — investigating complex criminal tax and money laundering violations, working undercover operations, executing search and arrest warrants, and building the cases that sent tax evaders and money launderers to federal prison — and in this episode of Locked In with Ian Bick, he finally tells the complete truth about what that career really looked like from the inside. He shares what cases the IRS Criminal Division actually goes after and prosecutes, what it actually takes to put someone in prison for taxes, the different types of money laundering he investigated, why small business owners evade taxes more than anyone else, how cases came to him and what the investigation process actually looked like, some of the most significant cases of his career, and what the new world of influencers and social media income is producing in terms of tax crime that most people never see coming. _____________________________________________ #irs #taxes #truecrimestories #accountant #cops  _____________________________________________ Thank you to CASH APP for sponsoring this episode: Download Cash App Today: https://capl.onelink.me/vFut/ksjh06pb  #CashAppPod Cash App is a financial services platform, not a bank. Banking services provided by Cash App's bank partner(s). Prepaid debit cards issued by Sutton Bank, Member FDIC. Cash App Visa® Debit Flex Cards issued by Sutton Bank, Member FDIC, and The Bancorp Bank, N.A., pursuant to a license from Visa U.S.A. Inc. See terms and conditions for the Sutton prepaid card, Sutton debit flex card, and Bancorp debit flex card. Discounts and promotions provided by Cash App, a Block, Inc. brand. Visit cash.app/legal/podcast for full disclosures. _____________________________________________ Connect with Robert Nordlander: Website: https://www.nordlandercpa.com/ Buy his books: https://www.amazon.com/stores/Robert-Nordlander/author/B0BMZT4CNK?ref=ap_rdr&shoppingPortalEnabled=true&ccs_id=a4257f70-b089-4db0-8020-c9bd7e35d743 Hosted, Executive Produced & Edited By Ian Bick: https://www.instagram.com/ian_bick/?hl=en  https://ianbick.com/ _____________________________________________ Timestamps: 00:00 Meet the Ex-IRS Agent 00:21 Growing Up and Early Career 02:00 From Chips to IRS Agent 03:48 The CPA Advantage 05:40 IRS CI Origins and Its Role 06:34 Stationed in Alabama 07:19 Dad's Blessing and Career Shift 09:03 First Case: Identity Theft 10:50 The IRS 'Funny Box' Explained 12:05 Tax Protesters and False Refunds 13:37 Sentencing for Tax Protesters 14:59 Statute of Limitations for Tax Crimes 15:38 Hiding Income: The Small Business Owner 16:36 How Agents Find Cases 18:40 Data Mining for Evasion 20:47 The Value of IRS CI to Prosecutors 21:09 Drug Dealers and Tax Returns 22:12 Civil vs. Criminal: Making the Call 24:30 Choosing Cases Worth Prosecuting 25:40 Cash App Sponsorship 27:40 Dollar Amounts Drive Cases 29:34 Most Common Businesses for Fraud 30:42 Contractor Cash Schemes 31:32 Investigating Contractor Fraud 32:51 Why Celebrities Don't File 34:14 The Tax Gap and Who's Responsible 35:30 Are Business Owners Honest? 36:50 Influencer Tax Issues 38:12 The Fiji Hotel Example 39:22 Influencer Contracts and Tax 40:20 Ignorance and Willfulness 41:30 Influencer Cases and Richard Hatch 43:08 Tax Preparer Liability 44:42 Return Preparers: No License Needed 45:29 Preparer Mistakes vs. Crimes 46:53 Abuse of Earned Income Tax Credit 48:55 What Happens to the Clients? 50:00 When to Tell a Subject They're Investigated 51:42 Undercover Work and Surveillance 55:27 Common Lies from Suspects 57:37 Finding the Second Set of Books 58:26 Pissed-Off Partners as Informants 58:49 State vs. Federal Cases 01:00:35 The Length of Federal Investigations 01:01:36 Finding Bank Accounts 01:03:40 Using Flight Rosters as Leads 01:05:27 Structuring: The $10,000 Myth 01:07:19 A Surprising Case: Murder and Taxes 01:12:28 Expectations of Repayment 01:13:12 Most Egregious Money Hiding 01:15:40 PayPal, Venmo, and Cash App 01:17:52 Money Laundering Evolution 01:20:51 Cryptocurrency and the IRS 01:24:17 Unreported 1099 Income 01:26:46 Tips and Minor Tax Evasion 01:27:43 Is the System Fair? 01:29:00 The Tax Boycott Myth 01:31:00 Tax Protesters Are Filing 01:34:19 Jury Trials and Complex Cases 01:37:52 Testifying and Simplifying for Juries 01:42:10 Winning at Trial: The Odds 01:44:00 Robert's Role as a Consultant 01:45:58 Retiring from the IRS 01:47:53 Life on the Defense Side 01:52:56 IRS Layoffs and Efficiency 01:56:58 The Most Important Lesson 01:58:52 Truth Has Many Friends 02:00:18 Final Thoughts and Resources _____________________________________________ To advertise on the show, contact sales@advertisecast.com or visit https://advertising.libsyn.com/LockedInWithIanBicka

Dr. Jennifer Tufts, a psychiatrist who spent four years as a resident treating thousands of psychiatric patients — roughly 50 of them dealing with postpartum depression — took the stand again today in the Lindsay Clancy murder trial, this time on redirect from prosecutors. Clancy, 34, of Duxbury, Massachusetts, is accused of strangling her three children — 5-year-old Cora, 3-year-old Dawson, and 7-month-old Callan — with exercise resistance bands inside the family's Summer Street home on January 24, 2023. She faces three counts of murder and three counts of strangulation, has pleaded not guilty, and her attorney Kevin Reddington is building an insanity defense around severe postpartum psychosis and psychiatric overmedication.Tufts told the court she's treated patients in the middle of active psychosis before — she knows what it looks like. And by her account, she didn't see it in Clancy. That's the kind of testimony that doesn't need a dramatic soundbite to matter; it goes straight at the foundation of the defense's entire theory.Then came recross, and things got granular fast. Reddington and Tufts went back and forth over her own clinical notes — not just what was written, but what it actually meant. Two professionals, same document, competing readings. Juries tend to remember exactly this kind of moment, because it's not about who's lying. It's about how much room there is to argue over a diagnosis after the fact.Clancy allegedly attempted suicide after the killings, jumping from a second-story window and leaving her paralyzed from the waist down. Her husband, Patrick Clancy, was out running errands at the time and has since relocated to Manhattan. The trial continues in Plymouth Superior Court, expected to run several more weeks.LinksJoin Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodDisclaimerThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.Hashtags#LindsayClancy #DuxburyTragedy #PostpartumPsychosis #TrueCrime #PlymouthCounty #CoraDawsonCallan #InsanityDefense #KevinReddington #HiddenKillers #Breaking

Long before the First Amendment, John Peter Zenger stood trial for publishing criticisms of New York's then colonial governor. Although the law seemed to guarantee a guilty verdict, a jury refused to convict him. Zenger's trial was an early indication that the American colonists harbored a view of liberty more expansive than that offered to them by the British Crown.   Few people are better suited to explain the case than Michael Tigar. Over a legendary legal career spanning more than six decades, Tigar has argued before the Supreme Court (multiple times), represented civil rights activists and other controversial clients, taught generations of lawyers, and written what has become the definitive stage play about the Zenger trial.  Michael joins us to revisit the Zenger trial and reflect on his own remarkable career from the Berkeley Free Speech Movement and the Chicago Eight trial to jury nullification and lawyers' First Amendment rights.  To read more about Michael's life, check out his memoir.   Timestamps:  00:00 Intro   03:11 The Berkeley Free Speech Movement 09:17 Michael's path to becoming a lawyer 13:44 Defending the Chicago Eight 20:25 The trial of John Peter Zenger 27:03 Jury nullification and the Zenger verdict 37:26 The Zenger play and its legacy 39:52 NYT v. Sullivan and SLAPP lawsuits 44:30 Outro   Enjoy listening to the podcast? Donate to FIRE today and get exclusive content like member webinars, special episodes, and more.  If you became a FIRE Member through a donation to FIRE at fire.org and would like access to Substack's paid subscriber podcast feed, please email sotospeak@fire.org.  

Both Bryan Kohberger and Lindsay Clancy are asking the legal system to accept an account of something nobody else can see, and the two requests could not be less alike. Full conversation on both cases here.Psychotherapist Shavaun Scott joins Tony Brueski. Her background runs through private practice, community mental health, crisis teams, and forensic programs across more than thirty years.Kohberger admitted the University of Idaho murders in open court, waived his appeal, and was sentenced to four consecutive life terms. A year later he filed for post-conviction relief representing himself and told a national newspaper his actual innocence is his truth. The segment covers that phrasing, his allegations against his former attorneys, the effect of a year of silence on a person's self-account, and the timing of his statement against a documentary premiere built around the four students who died.Clancy's trial turns on whether she was criminally responsible. She does not deny killing her three children. The segment covers the prosecution's framing of her treatment history as manipulation, the medication timeline her defense presented, why a stable-looking afternoon is consistent with psychosis rather than evidence against it, and what a not criminally responsible finding actually triggers in Massachusetts.The through-line is not that these two are similar. It is that only one of them is making a claim a clinician could ever evaluate.Scott also takes the question sitting underneath both segments, which is what a courtroom is actually built to evaluate. Juries assess credibility, motive, and behavior. None of those tools were designed for a psychotic illness, and none of them work on a man asserting a private truth about himself a year after saying the opposite under oath.Follow Hidden Killers for continuing coverage of both.For help with postpartum mood disorders, contact Postpartum Support International at postpartum.net or call or text 800-944-4773. If you or someone you know is struggling, call or text 988.LINKSJoin Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/ Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1 Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/ Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspod X Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodDISCLAIMERThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.HASHTAGS#LindsayClancy #BryanKohberger #HiddenKillers #ClancyTrial #IdahoStudentMurders #PostpartumPsychosis #TrueCrime #PlymouthSuperiorCourt #CriminalResponsibility #TrueCrimePodcast

Chase Brown followed his father's footsteps into law went to law school and became a prosecutor at the Suffolk County District Attorney's office. For three years he prosecuted cases dealt with victims and defendants navigated bail issues and a backlogged court system picked juries and offered plea deals that shaped people's lives. Then he left to become a private criminal defense attorney at his father's firm — putting him on the opposite side of everything he had spent three years doing. In this episode of Locked In with Ian Bick, Chase shares the complete truth about what the justice system really looks like from the inside — the cases he will never forget the problems with bail the issues with the jury system the backlog destroying the courts and what working as both a prosecutor and a defense attorney actually revealed about the system he operates in every single day. _____________________________________________ #lawyer #justicesystem #truecrimecommunity _____________________________________________ Thank you to CASH APP for sponsoring this episode: Download Cash App Today: https://click.cash.app/ui6m/6pao71et #CashAppPod Cash App is a financial services platform, not a bank. Banking services provided by Cash App's bank partner(s). Prepaid debit cards issued by Sutton Bank, Member FDIC. Cash App Visa® Debit Flex Cards issued by Sutton Bank, Member FDIC, and The Bancorp Bank, N.A., pursuant to a license from Visa U.S.A. Inc. See terms and conditions for the Sutton prepaid card, Sutton debit flex card, and Bancorp debit flex card. Discounts and promotions provided by Cash App, a Block, Inc. brand. Visit cash.app/legal/podcast for full disclosures. _____________________________________________ Connect with Chase Brown: https://michaelbrownlaw.net/chase-brown/ _____________________________________________ Hosted, Executive Produced & Edited By Ian Bick: https://www.instagram.com/ian_bick/?hl=en https://ianbick.com/ _____________________________________________ Timestamps: 00:00 Chase Brown's Legal Journey  03:00 Early Life, Family, and Career Choices 09:00 Law School Experiences and AI's Impact 17:00 Becoming a Prosecutor: Trials and Skills 26:00 Handling Overwhelming Caseloads 33:00 Courtroom Realities: Early Cases and Lessons 39:00 Body Cameras and Police Accountability 46:00 Plea Deals and Prosecutorial Ethics 52:00 Inside the Prosecutor's Role and Personal Impact 01:00:00 Public Defenders and the Legal Community 01:08:00 Trial Law, Juries, and System Challenges 01:18:00 Memorable Cases and Domestic Violence Realities 01:25:00 Switching Sides: Moving to Criminal Defense 01:31:00 Defending the Accused: Ethics and Morality 01:34:00 Reflecting on Lessons Learned _____________________________________________ To advertise on the show, contact sales@advertisecast.com or visit https://advertising.libsyn.com/LockedInWithIanBicka

W talk with William Snowden, Loyola law professor and director of the Juror Project, about the Liz Murrill indictment saga and what could happen next.

* How grand juries usually work...and what we know about what happened in New Orleans with the Liz Murrill saga * How should you handle it when your kids talk back to you? * $40 for a barrel of oil? What would that mean for the industry in LA? * This rule could harm tons of small business owners. Here's what to know

OA1270 - A good court thingie! A famous case from 1986 gave us the “Batson rule” that prevents the use of “peremptory strikes” to remove people from juries on the basis of race. To this day, racial discrimination in jury selection continues to be a problem. But the Supreme Court recently reinforced the on-going utility of Batson challenges in two decisions… written by Kavanaugh? Tune in to learn about the history and modern application of this important protection of our rights. Swain v. Alabama, 380 U.S. 202 (1965) Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986) J. E. B. v. Alabama ex rel. T. B., 511 U.S. 127 (1994) Flowers v. Mississippi, 588 U.S. 284 (2019) Pitchford v. Cain, 608 U.S. ___ (2026) Batson “Justifications” Catherine M. Grosso & Barbara O'Brien, A Stubborn Legacy: The Overwhelming Importance of Race in Jury Selection in 173 Post-Batson North Carolina Capital Trials, 97 Iowa L. Rev. 1531 (2012). Shamena Anwar, Patrick Bayer, & Randi Hjalmarsson, The Impact of Jury Race in Criminal Trials, 127 Q.J. Econ. 1017 (2011). Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

In this episode of Selective Ignorance, Mandii B is joined by super producer A-King, journalist Jayson Rodriguez headline king Jason “Jah” Lee to tackle a wide range of current events, legal controversies, celebrity culture, and social commentary, unpacking some of the most polarizing conversations shaping public discourse today. The episode begins with a breakdown of the latest headlines and trending controversies [ 03:03 ], before examining the increasingly complicated relationship between audiences and public figures, and how celebrity culture influences public opinion [ 05:57 ]. The crew also explores the role of social media discourse, fandom culture, and online accountability [ 09:02 ], leading into a discussion surrounding Daphne Joy and the court of public opinion, highlighting how narratives are formed and amplified in the digital age [ 11:48 ]. Conversations around victimhood, accountability, and public perception take center stage [ 15:08 ], setting the foundation for a deeper examination of one of the episode’s most significant topics. The hosts then unpack the highly discussed Karmelo Anthony trial, providing context around the case and its broader societal implications [ 17:52 ]. They examine the legal complexities, racial dynamics, and public reactions surrounding the case [ 21:00 ], before diving into the details of the track meet incident that sparked national debate [32:26 ]. The conversation explores questions surrounding violence, personal safety, and accountability [ 35:24 ], while also analyzing the legal framework of self-defense claims and how race can influence perceptions within the justice system [ 41:22 ][ 45:52 ]. Later in the episode, the discussion shifts to a controversial story involving a YouTube couple who faced intense backlash after publicly sharing a difficult pregnancy decision [ 51:38 ]. The hosts thoughtfully explore the complexity of parental choice, disability, morality, and public judgment [ 57:51 ], emphasizing the challenges of navigating deeply personal decisions in the age of social media. The conversation then broadens into a look at celebrity controversies and public reactions [ 01:04:50 ], before examining the growing influence of political opinions expressed by entertainers and public figures [ 01:15:01 ]. The final portion of the episode turns toward sports, culture, and community identity, particularly the excitement surrounding the New York Knicks’ NBA Finals run and its impact on New York City culture [ 01:19:18 ]. The hosts reflect on the unique energy that sports bring to communities, the intersection of fandom and civic pride, and the broader cultural significance of major sporting events. The episode concludes with reflections on New York City’s spirit, community engagement, and future prospects [ 01:29:54 ], tying together a conversation that spans law, culture, politics, sports, and the complexities of modern public discourse. No Holes Barred: A Dual Manifesto Of Sexual Exploration And Power” w/ Tempest X! Sale Link Follow the host on Social MediaMandii B Instagram/X @fullcourtpumps Follow the crew on Social Media @itsaking @jaysonrodriguez @mrhiphopobama Follow the show on Social MediaInstagram @selectiveignorancepodTiktok @selective.ignoranceX/Twitter @selectiveig_podSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Marcus Rowe, Business Director – Public Safety & Forensics at Leica Geosystems, joins the Forensic Focus Podcast to talk about 3D laser scanning, forensic digital twins, and the role of LiDAR in modern crime and collision investigation. Marcus shares his path from military and civilian policing — including a career in forensic collision investigation with Devon & Cornwall Police — into industry, and explains how Leica Geosystems (part of Hexagon) is empowering investigators with tools that capture entire scenes for analysis, courtroom presentation, and cold case review. Marcus and Si also discuss the upcoming Forensics Europe Expo at Olympia on 1–2 July, which is set to bring together senior leaders, practitioners and solution providers from across the forensic community. To learn more and secure a free visitor pass, visit: https://www.forensicseuropeexpo.com. The conversation also turns to Marcus's involvement in the world's largest crash test, featured in the Channel 4 documentary Pile Up. Working blind to the staged scenario, Marcus reconstructed the multi-vehicle collision from post-event scene capture and 3D modelling — at times surfacing detail that the 90 cameras filming the event had missed. #LiDAR #3DScanning #CrashInvestigation #ForensicDigitalTwins #LeicaGeosystems #DigitalForensics #DFIR ⏱️ Timestamps 00:00 Welcome Marcus Rowe 02:44 From Policing to Leica Geosystems 05:35 Leica Conference Highlights 08:43 Forensic Digital Twins Talk 17:55 What to Expect at FEE 22:29 Students and Career Pathways 26:08 World's Largest Crash Test 31:07 LiDAR Explained Simply 34:36 Courtroom Storytelling in 3D 36:02 Real Cases and Proof Standards 38:40 TV Production 41:20 Micron Accuracy Use Cases 42:25 Footprints Without Contact 46:56 From Microns to Kilometers 50:35 VR for Juries and Trust 52:04 Holistic Capture Beats Bias 56:02 FEE Event Invitation 01:00:36 Wrap Up

6/3/26. Co-Host Brian Adams District Attorney David Sullivan: do juries work, how juries work. Hadley 3rd Graders are working hard to make asparagus the official state vegetable. Their idea, their effort! We speak with their teachers Charlene Desjardnis & Elaine Tudryn. Sarah Welch from Hilltown Land Trust: what happened on the beaver dam—and why and WOW! Larry Hott w/ Professor Shoshana Madmoni-Gerber: the great divides in Israel—ethnic, racial & political.

Terry Connors on Grand Juries full 74 Wed, 03 Jun 2026 16:55:06 +0000 QrPsEUuuzrPNhWeRV2eXuIrWnjjTOtk6 news WBEN Extras news Terry Connors on Grand Juries Archive of various reports and news events 2024 © 2021 Audacy, Inc. News https://player.amperwavepodcasting.com?feed-link=https%3A%2F%2Frs

Juries tune out — so Aaron Broussard tries his cases at what he calls "TV pace or TikTok pace," sometimes putting on 10 to 15 witnesses in a single day to keep jurors awake and engaged. The Lake Charles, Louisiana trial lawyer spent his first five years as a self-described "settlement lawyer," handling roughly 200 cases his father's firm didn't want. After attending the Trial Lawyers College, he tried 30 jury trials in five years. His biggest result came this past year: a $35 million wrongful death verdict after a cement truck hit a family on their way to daycare, killing an 8 year-old girl. Broussard joins host Dan Ambrose ahead of TLU Beach to discuss the slippery settlement slope and how he redefines "reasonable" for a jury.Train and Connect with the Titans☑️ Aaron Broussard | LinkedIn☑️ Broussard Knoll Law Firm | LinkedIn | Facebook | Instagram | YouTube☑️ Trial Lawyers University☑️ TLU On Demand Instant access to live lectures, case analysis, and skills training videos☑️ TLU on X | Facebook | Instagram | LinkedIn☑️ Subscribe Apple Podcasts | Spotify | YouTube2026 Programming☑️ TLU Beach, June 3-6, Huntington Beach, CAEpisode SnapshotAaron's father, a lawyer and judge, was shot in his dominant left arm at 18 in 1968 and learned to do everything — including shooting shotguns and fishing — with his right hand.Growing up on the family farm, Aaron's father dictated each day's chores onto cassette tapes that Aaron played back on his boombox every morning.Aaron's first jury trial was a forcible rape case he won by acquittal — and his client paid him by painting the foreclosure house Aaron had just bought.After one good injury case earned his firm more money than his previous 90 cases combined, Aaron started shifting toward higher-quality cases.The Trial Lawyers College transformed Aaron's career: he tried 30 jury trials in the five years after, compared with just one before [44:30].To stop jurors from tuning out, Aaron now runs "speed trials" at TV or TikTok pace — sometimes putting on 10 to 15 witnesses in a single day.Aaron built a written "Sprint process" for his firm designed to move cases rapidly from the filed petition straight to the first set of depositions, eliminating the bottlenecks that leave files sitting in early stages.In his record $35 million wrongful death case, Aaron asked the jury for $90 million against only a $1 million insurance policy.The "equal trade value" damages argument never rang true to Aaron — there's no equal trade for the loss of a little girl — so he now confronts the money question head-on.Produced and Powered by LawPods

Since the start of his second term, President Donald Trump has fashioned the Department of Justice into a tool he can wield against his enemies.So far, Trump has installed his personal lawyer as the top official. He's culled the ranks of career prosecutors. And he's pressured U.S. attorneys into bringing cases against people he considers political enemies.In recent months, grand juries have acted as the last line of defense against his full weaponization of the justice system — refusing to indict in cases where the government hasn't proven a crime has been committed.In this latest installment of our weekly politics series, “If You Can Keep It,” what do recent high-profile grand jury proceedings tell us about accountability at the Justice Department?Find more of our programs online. Listen to 1A sponsor-free by signing up for 1A+ at plus.npr.org/the1a.See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for sponsorship and to manage your podcast sponsorship preferences.NPR Privacy Policy

Topics discussed on today's show: Memorial Day Weekend, Cause of Death for Kyle Busch, Heidi's AC, Music News, Space X Rocket, Gene Editing for Heart Disease, Death, Electric Ferrari, Growing Fruits and Veggies, AI Open Rolls, Encounters with Nature, Fry Spit, Old Age and Health, Millennial Retirement Gap Year, AI Doctors and Juries, AI or..., New Shopping Cart, Special Guest Grant, Pop History Quiz, and Apologies.

Three separate grand juries received testimony in the case against David Anthony Burke, known professionally as D4VD, in connection with the alleged murder of fourteen-year-old Celeste Rivas Hernandez. Witnesses included friends, managers, and family members — individuals allegedly close enough to the defendant and the circumstances to require sworn testimony. Court records indicate Burke's parents and brother were among those subpoenaed. His mother reportedly managed his business finances.According to prosecutors, Celeste was allegedly killed because she threatened to disclose a relationship that reportedly commenced when she was thirteen. The alleged conduct prosecutors describe extends beyond the homicide charge. The case involves alleged interstate and international travel with a minor, alleged financial manipulation including a reported thousand-dollar payment to a classmate to reportedly provide Celeste a new phone after her parents confiscated hers, and alleged systematic isolation from protective adults.The alleged disposal evidence is detailed in prosecution filings: chainsaw purchases reportedly made under a fictitious name, a body bag, a burn cage, and allegations that a second individual may have been involved in the disposal plan before reportedly withdrawing — allegedly leaving the remains in a vehicle for an extended period. Federal jurisdiction questions arise from the alleged transportation of a minor across state lines.Burke's manager was reportedly overheard telling counsel that contacting law enforcement after allegedly learning about the body was not his obligation. Friends reportedly accepted a cover story characterizing the fourteen-year-old as a nineteen-year-old college student. In Burke's Discord server, a participant reportedly referenced the missing girl months after she was reported missing. No one reportedly acted on it.Robin Dreeke applies FBI behavioral analysis expertise to the alleged patterns. Psychotherapist Shavaun Scott examines the psychology of alleged bystander failure in professional environments — the mechanisms of loyalty, financial dependence, and willful blindness that reportedly allow alleged harm to allegedly continue uninterrupted. Burke has pleaded not guilty and maintains his innocence.Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#D4VD #CelesteRivasHernandez #DavidAnthonyBurke #JusticeForCeleste #HiddenKillers #TrueCrime #GrandJury #FederalJurisdiction #ShavaunScott #RobinDreeke

Three separate grand juries heard testimony from friends, managers, and family members of David Anthony Burke — people allegedly close enough to what prosecutors describe that they were questioned under oath. The alleged murder of Celeste Rivas Hernandez is the center of this case. The alleged failures surrounding it are what make it a systemic story.According to prosecutors, Celeste was fourteen when she was allegedly killed because she threatened to reveal a relationship that reportedly began when she was thirteen. Burke's manager was reportedly overheard telling his attorney that contacting police after allegedly learning about the body was not his responsibility. Friends reportedly accepted a cover story that the fourteen-year-old was a nineteen-year-old college student — despite her allegedly being five-foot-two with braces. In Burke's Discord server, someone reportedly posted about the missing girl months after she was reported missing. Court records indicate Burke's mother reportedly managed his business finances. His parents and brother were subpoenaed.Robin Dreeke applies FBI counterintelligence behavioral analysis to the alleged grooming patterns prosecutors describe — the financial manipulation, the alleged thousand-dollar payment to a classmate to reportedly get Celeste a new phone after her parents took hers, the alleged international travel with an adult, matching tattoos, and the deliberate isolation that allegedly severed her from protective adults. He examines whether the alleged behavior patterns fit profiles he's studied across decades of federal cases.The alleged disposal evidence prosecutors describe includes chainsaw purchases reportedly made under a fake name, a body bag, a burn cage, and the question of whether someone else was allegedly involved and reportedly withdrew — allegedly leaving Celeste's remains in a vehicle for months.Psychotherapist Shavaun Scott examines the psychology of alleged bystander failure — why professional loyalty, financial dependence, and willful blindness reportedly allow networks of people to allegedly look away. Burke has pleaded not guilty and maintains his innocence.Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#D4VD #CelesteRivasHernandez #DavidAnthonyBurke #JusticeForCeleste #HiddenKillers #TrueCrime #RobinDreeke #ShavaunScott #GrandJury #BystanderEffect

This week we bring you a special episode from Valerie Pastrana, one of our 2026 Podcast Fellows, who explores ancient Athens as the first democracy, asking where democracy came from, who invented it, and how democratic it really was. Valerie explains that “democracy” (demos + kratos) emerged in late sixth-century BCE Athens but applied only to active male citizens—adult, free, Athenian-born men who completed military training—excluding many residents. Against a backdrop of aristocratic conflict, coups, and crisis, Cleisthenes introduced reforms around 508 BCE to curb elite domination, including a Council of 500 selected by lottery (sortition). The Assembly (ecclesia) met about 40 times a year on the Pynx, with up to 6,000 citizens voting on major decisions and practicing ostracism. Courts (dikasteria) used large citizen juries chosen daily by lottery, with paid jurors and one-day trials. The episode ends with reflection questions and previews a Roman-focused next episode. 00:00 Network Introduction 00:23 Ancient Athens Setup 00:49 What Democracy Means 01:13 Who Counted as People 01:40 Athens Before Reforms 02:25 Cleisthenes Revolution 02:44 Council of 500 Lottery 03:21 Assembly on the Pynx 04:36 Courts and Juries 05:27 Agora Thoughts Reflection Know a student interested in democracy and podcasts? Send them over to our fellowship to apply: https://www.democracygroup.org/fellowship Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Prosecutors convened three separate grand juries in the investigation of David Anthony Burke, known as D4vd, before securing an indictment on charges of first-degree murder with special circumstances, continuous sexual abuse of a child under fourteen, and mutilation of human remains. Burke has pleaded not guilty to all counts. His attorneys say the evidence will show he is innocent.The scope of grand jury testimony included friends, business associates, and family members — a breadth that raises significant questions about the reported proximity of multiple individuals to the alleged conduct. Burke's manager Robert Morgenroth was reportedly overheard stating that contacting law enforcement after learning about the discovery of remains was not his responsibility. Burke's parents and brother were all subpoenaed. Court records indicate his mother reportedly managed business finances. Friends reportedly believed the fourteen-year-old victim was a nineteen-year-old based on what Burke allegedly told them.Psychotherapist Shavaun Scott examines the psychological mechanisms that may explain how a reported network of individuals allegedly close to the defendant may have failed to recognize or act on warning signs — and what the unprecedented number of grand jury witnesses suggests about the reported scope of proximity to the alleged crimes.Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#D4vd #CelesteRivasHernandez #DavidAnthonyBurke #JusticeForCeleste #HiddenKillers #TrueCrime #CriminalPsychology #CelesteRivas #ChildPredator #LosAngeles

Three grand juries. Months of proceedings. Subpoena power. Witness testimony. And not one of them produced an indictment against David Anthony Burke in the alleged murder of fourteen-year-old Celeste Rivas Hernandez. So the DA filed a criminal complaint instead — and defense attorney Blair Berk made sure the courtroom heard that distinction loud and clear before pushing for the fastest possible preliminary hearing.That is not a detail. That is the fault line this entire case may crack along.Trial attorney and former felony prosecutor Eric Faddis — who has sat on both sides of a murder case — breaks down what it means when a grand jury cannot or will not indict, what changes when prosecutors proceed on a complaint, and why Berk's aggressive timeline signals a defense that wants the evidence tested publicly, not protected behind sealed proceedings. Faddis has seen what happens when a prosecution builds a case on volume rather than precision, and he examines whether over forty terabytes of digital evidence is strength or a warning sign that investigators cast an extraordinarily wide net.The felony complaint charges Burke with first-degree murder carrying three special circumstances — including financial gain, which DA Nathan Hochman tied to Burke allegedly protecting an existing music career Celeste reportedly threatened to expose. Faddis challenges whether that framing meets the legal standard or whether prosecutors are stretching a definition to reach death-penalty eligibility. He also dissects the defense's carefully constructed statement — "did not murder" and "was not the cause of her death" as two separate claims — and explains what trial strategy that dual denial sets up.The unsealed autopsy confirmed Celeste died from penetrating wounds to her torso. Prosecutors allege exploitation material was found on Burke's phone and that the abuse began when she was thirteen. Her dismembered remains were found in a Tesla registered to Burke that had been towed from the Hollywood Hills while he was on tour.Robin Dreeke, retired FBI Counterintelligence Behavioral Analysis Program Chief, takes listener questions on the investigative timeline, the year between Celeste's disappearance and Burke's arrest, and what behavioral indicators investigators likely tracked while building a case against someone with significant public visibility. Celeste was reported missing three times. The system had chances. It didn't act.Burke has pled not guilty and is held without bail.Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#D4vd #CelesteRivasHernandez #DavidAnthonyBurke #GrandJury #HiddenKillers #TrueCrime #JusticeForCeleste #BlairBerk #FelonyComplaint #DeathPenalty

There are a few Cannes additions we give a brief rundown on and then it is time to use what YOU, our LISTENERS provided us to once again draft potential Cannes Juries. Using the list of POWERFUL NAMES we each select a 9 person jury and then select a President for that jury. We get into all sorts of questions about what a mononym can mean, how time works in this hypothetical scenario, and why our listeners skewed so heavily towards male coded names when the prompt was "Powerful." MAKES YOU THINK, DOESN'T IT? Our twitter is @CannesIKickIt Our bluesky is @CannesIKickIt See the possible names here Our instagram is @CIKIPod Our letterboxd is CIKIPod Enjoying the show? Feel free to send a few bucks our way on Ko-fi. Thanks to Tree Related for our theme song Our hosts are @andytgerm @clatchley @imlaughalone

David Anthony Burke, known professionally as D4vd, faces first-degree murder charges with special circumstances in the death of fourteen-year-old Celeste Rivas Hernandez, along with counts of continuous abuse of a minor under fourteen and mutilation of remains. He has pled not guilty. Prosecutors allege the killing was motivated by financial gain and say they've amassed forty terabytes of evidence, including a wiretap and exploitation material found on Burke's phone. A preliminary hearing has been set.Robin Dreeke, retired FBI Counterintelligence Behavioral Analysis Program Chief, fields listener questions on the investigative and behavioral dimensions of this case. The questions go to the heart of what your audience is wrestling with: why three grand juries were convened before charges were filed, what the wiretap's existence means for the scope of this investigation, and what the autopsy's findings — including drugs in a minor's system and evidence of dismemberment — reveal about the alleged timeline prosecutors are building.Dreeke also addresses the systemic failures: the year between Celeste's disappearance and Burke's arrest, the four months the autopsy sat sealed, and what the defense's aggressive push for a faster hearing tells us about their strategy. This is expert-level analysis driven by the questions your listeners are already asking.All individuals discussed are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#D4vd #CelesteRivasHernandez #D4vdCase #HiddenKillersLive #RobinDreeke #DavidAnthonyBurke #TrueCrime #GrandJury #JusticeForCeleste #TrueCrimePodcast

Trial attorney Elizabeth Kayatta from Berman and Simmons discusses the importance of tailoring legal strategies for different audiences like juries, judges, and insurance companies. She emphasizes the need for empathy and understanding to effectively communicate with diverse audiences, offering insights on preparing cases, interacting with insurance adjusters, and engaging juries. Key Timestamps: 00:00 – Intro & welcome with Lindsey Busfield and Elizabeth Cayata 00:45 – Elizabeth's background and passion for plaintiff's PI work 02:30 – Tailoring legal strategy for different audiences (jury, judge, insurance) 04:10 – Preparing every case with trial in mind from day one 05:50 – Local jury demographics and county differences in Maine 07:20 – Dealing with insurance companies and AI in claims evaluation 09:10 – Countering AI hallucinations and what insurance tools miss 11:30 – Shifting strategy from settlement talks to trial 13:40 – Organizing records early for jury-friendly presentation 15:20 – Making information digestible using different learning styles 17:10 – Common mistakes: using identical arguments for every case 19:00 – Most impactful: community connections and “this could happen to anyone” 21:20 – Advice for younger attorneys: simplify language, avoid legalese 23:40 – “Rescue dog” analogy for pairing simple and legal terms 25:00 – Closing and call to action See all episodes or subscribe to the Personal Injury Marketing Minute here: https://optimizemyfirm.com/podcasts/. When should an attorney start considering the ultimate audience in a legal case? An attorney should consider the ultimate audience, whether a judge, jury, or insurance company, from the very first contact with a potential case. This early consideration shapes how the case is prepared and presented, ensuring it aligns with potential presentation to a jury in the future. How does an attorney’s trial preparation differ based on the potential audience of the case? Trial preparation for an attorney is guided by the perspective of ultimately presenting the case to a jury. The approach focuses on preparing the case in a manner that is not only persuasive to insurance adjusters or opposing parties but also compelling and successful if it proceeds to trial before a jury. Do attorneys make intake decisions based on the likelihood of a case settling early? Attorneys typically do not base intake decisions on predicting whether a case will settle early or not. Due to uncertainties that may arise later in the case, such as new information from medical records or insurance details, it is challenging to determine early on whether a case will settle or go to trial. How do attorneys address challenges posed by AI tools used by insurance adjusters in evaluating cases? Attorneys must engage with insurance adjusters in a way that neutralizes or addresses the AI-generated information used in case evaluation. By identifying AI misconceptions or oversights in the case details and discussing them with adjusters, attorneys can effectively present the necessary information to influence settlement decisions. What is the transition in an attorney’s approach when a case proceeds to trial after unsuccessful settlement negotiations? Transitioning to trial after unsuccessful settlement negotiations involves organizing case materials early on for jury presentation. Ensuring that medical records, exhibits, and other evidence are meticulously organized in a manner that is easily digestible to a jury is crucial for a seamless transition to trial proceedings. How can attorneys effectively communicate complex legal concepts to a jury in a way that is easily understood? Attorneys should simplify legal terminology by pairing it with everyday language familiar to jury members. By gradually introducing legal terms alongside simple explanations throughout the trial process, attorneys can help jurors comprehend complex legal concepts more easily, leading to a more informed decision-making process.

After a hard-fought trial, sometimes the jury simply can't agree. Speaker A shared a personal story about his very first trial resulting in a deadlocked jury (01:12).Here's what happens step-by-step:The Wait: Both sides anxiously await, sometimes for days, as the jury deliberates (02:40).The Howard/Allen Charge: If the jury is stuck, Ohio courts use the “Howard charge” (federally known as the “Allen charge” or “dynamite charge”), urging jurors to reconsider their positions (03:21).No Verdict? Mistrial: If the jury still can't agree, the judge can declare a mistrial (04:57).What's Next? The prosecutor decides whether to try the case again, often after speaking with jurors to understand the split (05:49).Do-Overs: The Realities of Retrying a CaseSometimes, a case is retried immediately; other times, practicalities and strategy call for a pause (05:41).Speaker A noted how retrying a case can be even harder for the defense: "Have you ever had a term paper deleted by accident? Rewriting it is nauseatingly painful" (07:49).FAQ CornerWhat about Double Jeopardy? A hung jury doesn't trigger double jeopardy—a retrial is possible without violating a defendant's rights (07:12).Does the Speedy Trial Clock Reset? The clock can toll, but other legal considerations come into play (07:26).Hung juries may sound rare, but they're a real and challenging part of the legal process.Submit your questions to www.lawyertalkpodcast.com.Recorded at Channel 511.Stephen E. Palmer, Esq. has been practicing criminal defense almost exclusively since 1995. He has represented people in federal, state, and local courts in Ohio and elsewhere.Though he focuses on all areas of criminal defense, he particularly enjoys complex cases in state and federal courts.He has unique experience handling and assembling top defense teams of attorneys and experts in cases involving allegations of child abuse (false sexual allegations, false physical abuse allegations), complex scientific cases involving allegations of DUI and vehicular homicide cases with blood alcohol tests, and any other criminal cases that demand jury trial experience.Steve has unique experience handling numerous high publicity cases that have garnered national attention.For more information about Steve and his law firm, visit Palmer Legal Defense. Copyright 2026 Stephen E. Palmer - Attorney At LawMentioned in this episode:Circle 270 Media Podcast ConsultantsCircle 270 Media® is a podcast consulting firm based in Columbus, Ohio, specializing in helping businesses develop, launch, and optimize podcasts as part of their marketing strategy. The firm emphasizes the importance of storytelling through podcasting to differentiate businesses and engage with their audiences effectively. www.circle270media.com

Check out Richard Gabriel: https://decisionanalysisinc.com/experience/richard-gabriel/ Read Aquittal - https://www.amazon.com/Acquittal-Insider-Reveals-Strategies-Infamous/dp/042526971X Online Courtroom Project - https://www.onlinecourtroom.org/ Trust in Justice Project - https://www.trustinjusticeproject.org/ Jury Selection Strategy and Science - https://store.legal.thomsonreuters.com/en-us/products/jury-selection-strategy-and-science-sub-13974096 #lawyeryouknow

She's been convicted three times. In two states. By three different juries. She's serving seven life sentences. And Lori Vallow Daybell is still trying to find a way out.Her Idaho appeal is now fully briefed and sitting before the state Supreme Court. Five constitutional claims. A fifty-nine-page prosecution response. And a reply brief that tries to repackage the same arguments the state already dismantled. The defense says the court took her lawyer, violated her rights while she was incompetent, let in prejudicial evidence, and denied her a speedy trial. The state says her lawyer had an irreconcilable conflict because he also represented her co-conspirator husband — who paid for the attorney — and that she caused most of the delays herself through competency evaluations and a venue change she requested.Meanwhile, Arizona told its own story. Lori represented herself in two conspiracy trials and lost both. She was convicted of conspiring to kill her ex-husband Charles Vallow and of conspiring to kill Brandon Boudreaux. One jury came back in three hours. The other in thirty minutes. She called no witnesses in either trial. The sentencing judge said her manipulation was unparalleled in his career and told her she'd eventually fade into obscurity.Every appeal claim follows the same playbook — reframe her own decisions as the system's failure. It's the same logic that turned her children into zombies, her husband into a dark spirit, and murder into a religious mission. The audience changed from a circle of believers to the Idaho Supreme Court. The performance hasn't changed at all. Three juries saw through it. The justices will too.Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#LoriVallowDaybell #TrueCrimeToday #ChadDaybell #JJVallow #TyleeRyan #DoomsdayMom #Appeal #IdahoSupremeCourt #MurderTrial #TrueCrime

A controversial courtroom decision is raising serious questions about the future of justice in America. Following the killing of NYPD officer Jonathan Diller, a jury chose not to convict on first-degree murder—despite eyewitness testimony and video evidence. Now, critics are warning of a growing trend: jury nullification. Some argue activist movements are influencing jurors, while others say it's a long-standing legal principle meant to protect against unjust laws. So what's really happening inside America's courtrooms—and what does it mean for law enforcement, public safety, and the justice system itself?

This was a landmark week for tech accountability in US courts. Juries in New Mexico and California delivered verdicts finding tech giants Meta and Google liable for harms to young users on their platforms, decisions that are projected to open the door to more lawsuits alleging that social media creates addiction or endangers kids.Today's guest sees these developments as positive and in line with the types of thinking he believes will help improve the internet. Olivier Sylvain is a professor at Fordham Law School and the author of a new book titled Reclaiming the Internet: How Big Tech Took Control—and How We Can Take It Back, published by Columbia Global Reports. Justin Hendrix interviewed him at Book Culture, a bookstore on 112th Street in New York City.

Juries in both New Mexico and California found social media giants to be liable for harm to children. Bobby Allyn, NPR technology correspondent, explains what each trial was about, and what it could signal for the future of companies like Meta and Google. Photo: A young woman uses a cell phone. (Credit: Conexões Globais/ Wikimedia Commons CC 2.0)

This week in Hidden Killers' Week in Review, the expert analysis on the Laken Snelling case goes where standard coverage won't. Retired FBI Special Agent Jennifer Coffindaffer and behavioral analyst Robin Dreeke join Tony Brueski to break down a case that sits at the intersection of behavior, law, and accountability in ways most prosecutions don't.The foundation: University of Kentucky cheerleader Laken Snelling gave birth alone at 4 a.m. on August 27, 2025. Her newborn son was found dead hours later by her roommates — wrapped in a towel, inside a trash bag, in her closet. Born alive. Cause of death: asphyxia by undetermined means. A grand jury indicted her on first-degree manslaughter. She's facing up to 31 years.What makes this case analytically significant is the phone record. Deleted labor photos. Week-by-week pregnancy tracking maintained in private. Months of active concealment running alongside a public life that included nationals competition and a TikTok listing "be a mom" as a life goal. Dreeke treats that record as a behavioral document — examining what sustained parallel concealment reveals about intent, how it differs categorically from denial, and why the distinction matters in a prosecution built on conscious disregard. Coffindaffer works the legal side: whether this evidence holds a first-degree manslaughter charge through trial, what the word "guessed" is going to do in court, and how prosecutors need to handle the roommates' 4 a.m. acceptance of "I fainted" before the defense gets to it first.Then there's the jury question neither of them sidesteps. She's 22. No record. A competitive athlete. Juries carry assumptions about who commits these crimes. The only victim in that room had no voice. What does accountability actually look like in a case like this? Laken Snelling has pleaded not guilty and is presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#LakenSnelling #LakenSnellingCase #JenniferCoffindaffer #RobinDreeke #HiddenKillersLive #NeonaticideKentucky #FirstDegreeManslaughter #PregnancyConcealment #KentuckyTrueCrime #TrueCrime2026

Laken Snelling didn't deny the pregnancy. She managed it. Tracked it week by week on her phone. Deleted the labor photos. Competed at nationals. Took what looked like maternity photos with her boyfriend. Posted a TikTok listing "be a mom" as a life goal. And gave birth alone at 4 in the morning without telling a single person.That is not denial. And Robin Dreeke — former Chief of the FBI's Counterintelligence Behavioral Analysis Program — is precisely positioned to explain what it is.Dreeke joins Hidden Killers Live alongside retired FBI Special Agent Jennifer Coffindaffer to apply a rigorous behavioral analysis to the Laken Snelling case — a case where the most important evidence isn't what happened at 4 in the morning, but what the months leading up to it reveal about the behavioral architecture of the person who made those choices.Dreeke walks through the behavioral distinction between denial, dissociation, and active parallel construction — and where the documented record in this case places Snelling on that spectrum. He examines what the TikTok evidence means in a behavioral context, how sustained concealment of this kind is maintained psychologically, and what the phone record as a whole communicates about awareness and intent.He also addresses the jury challenge — the specific behavioral and perceptual problem that emerges when a 22-year-old competitive athlete with no record sits at that defense table. Juries build internal models of what a defendant in a case like this is supposed to look like. When the person doesn't match, Dreeke explains what that mismatch costs the prosecution — and how it's addressed.Coffindaffer grounds the analysis in the procedural record: the charge, the evidence threshold, and what the grand jury's specific finding of conscious disregard means as this case moves toward trial.Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#LakenSnelling #RobinDreeke #BehavioralAnalysis #NeonaticideKentucky #FirstDegreeManslaughter #HiddenKillersLive #JenniferCoffindaffer #TrueCrime #KentuckyTrueCrime #PregnancyConcealment

The boyfriend took the stand and cried. The housekeeper and the dealer told opposite stories about the same drug buy. The phone showed searches about what poison does to a death certificate. And none of it, individually, proves Kouri Richins killed her husband. That is the challenge of a purely circumstantial case — and potentially, it is also its strength.Retired FBI Special Agent Jennifer Coffindaffer joins us live to break it all down from an investigative standpoint.She analyzes Josh Grossman's courtroom appearance — head in hands, wiping tears, listening to text messages read aloud in public, including a message asking if he would marry Kouri if she were divorced right now, sent weeks before Eric's death. What is the FBI trained to look for when a witness appears genuinely conflicted about the person they're testifying against — and how does a jury process that kind of emotional complexity on the stand?She breaks down the digital evidence: Kouri Richins' phone searches for poison, death certificates, and how to delete iPhone messages. What does search history evidence actually mean inside an FBI homicide investigation, and how do prosecutors prevent the defense from successfully reframing it as morbid curiosity?She also addresses the insurance beneficiary attempt — someone tried to shift the policy from Eric to Kouri, and an advisor caught it — and what that kind of pre-death financial move signals to investigators about where someone is in the planning process.Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#KouriRichins #EricRichins #FentanylMurder #UtahMurderTrial #TrueCrimeTrial #MurderTrial2026 #JenniferCoffindaffer #HiddenKillers #TrueCrime #PoisoningCase

Nicole Zagreda is in the trenches every single day as a criminal defense attorney in Yonkers, New York. In this episode of Locked In with Ian Bick, she breaks down the true reality of representing offenders and navigating the complicated mechanics of the criminal justice system. _____________________________________________ IanBick #Lawyer #yonkers #Courtroom #TrueCrime #DefenseAttorney#courtroomdrama #TrueCrime _____________________________________________ Connect with Nicole Zagreda: https://www.linkedin.com/in/nicole-zagreda-401620126 _____________________________________________ Hosted, Executive Produced & Edited By Ian Bick: https://www.instagram.com/ian_bick/?hl=en https://ianbick.com/ _____________________________________________ Shop Locked In Merch: http://www.ianbick.com/shop _____________________________________________ Timestamps: 00:00 The Reality of Being a Criminal Defense Attorney 00:54 Growing Up Between Yonkers and Dutchess County 02:13 My Strict Albanian Upbringing 04:06 How My Childhood Led Me to Law School 05:25 Why I Became a Public Defender 06:39 Struggling in School Before Becoming a Lawyer 07:55 Do Grades Matter for Lawyers and Law School? 08:50 What Law School Is Really Like 10:17 The Biggest Lessons I Learned in Law School 13:36 My First Steps Into the Legal World 15:17 Finding My Identity as a Lawyer 16:07 From Law School to Legal Aid Attorney 20:00 Learning Felony Defense at Legal Aid 24:10 How Defense Attorneys Earn Clients' Trust 27:17 Winning My First Jury Trial 29:23 The Moral Dilemmas of Criminal Defense 31:50 Court of Public Opinion vs the Justice System 34:15 How Juries Decide Criminal Cases 38:40 The Risk of Letting Clients Testify in Court 41:12 Getting Emotionally Attached to Clients 44:07 Burnout in Public Defense Work 47:52 Leaving Legal Aid for Private Practice Law 49:54 The Business of Running a Law Firm 52:46 How Lawyers Build a Client Base 55:27 Advice for New Lawyers 58:09 Visiting Clients in Jail for the First Time 01:00:02 Technology and Evidence in Criminal Trials 01:03:13 What to Look for in a Criminal Defense Lawyer 01:04:31 Trial vs Plea Deal: The Gamble of Court 01:07:30 Judges, Bias, and Courtroom Politics 01:10:04 The Mental Toll of Defense Work 01:13:52 Advice for Future Attorneys Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Nicole Zagreda is in the trenches every single day as a criminal defense attorney in Yonkers, New York. In this episode of Locked In with Ian Bick, she breaks down the true reality of representing offenders and navigating the complicated mechanics of the criminal justice system. _____________________________________________ IanBick #Lawyer #yonkers #Courtroom #TrueCrime #DefenseAttorney#courtroomdrama #TrueCrime _____________________________________________ Connect with Nicole Zagreda: https://www.linkedin.com/in/nicole-zagreda-401620126 _____________________________________________ Hosted, Executive Produced & Edited By Ian Bick: https://www.instagram.com/ian_bick/?hl=en https://ianbick.com/ _____________________________________________ Shop Locked In Merch: http://www.ianbick.com/shop _____________________________________________ Timestamps: 00:00 The Reality of Being a Criminal Defense Attorney 00:54 Growing Up Between Yonkers and Dutchess County 02:13 My Strict Albanian Upbringing 04:06 How My Childhood Led Me to Law School 05:25 Why I Became a Public Defender 06:39 Struggling in School Before Becoming a Lawyer 07:55 Do Grades Matter for Lawyers and Law School? 08:50 What Law School Is Really Like 10:17 The Biggest Lessons I Learned in Law School 13:36 My First Steps Into the Legal World 15:17 Finding My Identity as a Lawyer 16:07 From Law School to Legal Aid Attorney 20:00 Learning Felony Defense at Legal Aid 24:10 How Defense Attorneys Earn Clients' Trust 27:17 Winning My First Jury Trial 29:23 The Moral Dilemmas of Criminal Defense 31:50 Court of Public Opinion vs the Justice System 34:15 How Juries Decide Criminal Cases 38:40 The Risk of Letting Clients Testify in Court 41:12 Getting Emotionally Attached to Clients 44:07 Burnout in Public Defense Work 47:52 Leaving Legal Aid for Private Practice Law 49:54 The Business of Running a Law Firm 52:46 How Lawyers Build a Client Base 55:27 Advice for New Lawyers 58:09 Visiting Clients in Jail for the First Time 01:00:02 Technology and Evidence in Criminal Trials 01:03:13 What to Look for in a Criminal Defense Lawyer 01:04:31 Trial vs Plea Deal: The Gamble of Court 01:07:30 Judges, Bias, and Courtroom Politics 01:10:04 The Mental Toll of Defense Work 01:13:52 Advice for Future Attorneys Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Explore the intriguing dynamics of grand juries and the famous saying, "you can indict a ham sandwich," in this insightful legal podcast episode.So grab your lunch (ham or otherwise) and settle in as the Lawyer Talk team serves up another thoughtful, informative, and entertaining legal discussion!Steve Palmer and Troy dive deep into the world of grand juries and legal process—using the infamous "ham sandwich" saying as their springboard.Have you ever wondered why people say a prosecutor can "indict a ham sandwich"? You're in the right place.Steve Palmer and Troy start by breaking down the purpose and mechanics of grand juries, explaining how they work behind closed doors, the rights of witnesses and targets, and the role of prosecutors.They navigate the reasons why the phrase became so popular (spoiler: it traces back to a colorful New York judge), and explore a recent news story—where a grand jury refused to indict six members of Congress, despite political pressure and public scrutiny.The conversation is lively, packed with real-world anecdotes, law school insights, and a refreshing lack of political bias. By the end of the episode, you'll not only understand the nuts and bolts of grand juries, but you'll see why sometimes, even with all the ingredients, not every "sandwich" ends up on the table.Here are 3 key takeaways:Grand Jury ≠ Trial Jury: As Steve Palmer explains, a grand jury isn't there to determine guilt or innocence, but to decide if there's enough evidence to indict someone. Defense attorneys and the accused often aren't even in the room.The “Ham Sandwich” Origin: The phrase wasn't coined in a legal opinion, but by New York Judge Saul Wachtler—ironically, after his own brush with the system. It highlights how easily indictments can happen if prosecutors push for them.Recent Congressional Case: A recent grand jury refused to indict several members of Congress, despite DOJ efforts—showing that indicting “a ham sandwich” isn't always guaranteed, especially when political and technical factors are at play.Got a question you want answered on the podcast? Call 614-859-2119 and leave us a voicemail. Steve will answer your question on the next podcast!Submit your questions to www.lawyertalkpodcast.com.Recorded at Channel 511.Stephen E. Palmer, Esq. has been practicing criminal defense almost exclusively since 1995. He has represented people in federal, state, and local courts in Ohio and elsewhere.Though he focuses on all areas of criminal defense, he particularly enjoys complex cases in state and federal courts.He has unique experience handling and assembling top defense teams of attorneys and experts in cases involving allegations of child abuse (false sexual allegations, false physical abuse allegations), complex scientific cases involving allegations of DUI and vehicular homicide cases with blood alcohol tests, and any other criminal cases that demand jury trial experience.Steve has unique experience handling numerous high-publicity cases that have garnered national attention.For more information about Steve and his law firm, visit Palmer Legal Defense. Copyright 2026 Stephen E. Palmer - Attorney At LawMentioned in this episode:Circle 270 Media Podcast ConsultantsCircle 270 Media® is a podcast consulting firm based in Columbus, Ohio, specializing in helping businesses develop, launch, and optimize podcasts as part of their marketing strategy. The firm emphasizes the importance of storytelling through podcasting to differentiate businesses and engage with their audiences effectively. www.circle270media.com

D&P Highlight: Juries are really good at handing out other people's money. full 493 Fri, 27 Feb 2026 19:57:00 +0000 P1okXPvobCKITxg4jYiVJhLmwOou4Jod news The Dana & Parks Podcast news D&P Highlight: Juries are really good at handing out other people's money. You wanted it... Now here it is! Listen to each hour of the Dana & Parks Show whenever and wherever you want! © 2025 Audacy, Inc. News False https://player.amp

For much of the twentieth century, Mississippi was a place where racial violence was not merely ignored but actively erased. Witnesses stayed silent. Juries looked away. It was just a different time, they say. James Craig Anderson's murder did not happen in 1955. It happened in 2011. This time, the cameras were watching. This time, the federal government stepped in. This time, the perpetrators pleaded guilty. Progress would be measured not in apologies or promises, but in prison sentences. And unlike so many before him, Anderson's killers were not celebrated, excused, or folded gently into historical amnesia. They were named. They were tried. They were sentenced. Dragged into the light, they could not escape what they had done. Join Cam and Jen on this episode of Our True Crime Podcast entitled ‘Targeted: The Killing of James Craig Anderson.' Listener Discretion by @octoberpodVHS Music by @theinkypawprint Sources: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uRcYtzZS5kE https://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/23/us/23jackson.html?hp http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/18/james-craig-anderson-fbi-investigation_n_930155.html http://www.clarionledger.com/story/news/2014/07/17/hate-crime-indictment-tells-details-five-attacks-one-fatal/12793527/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/family-of-alleged-miss-hate-killing-victim-doesnt-want-death-penalty/ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/18/james-craig-anderson-fbi-investigation_n_930155.html https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VW8dRJ3SNh0 https://www.law.virginia.edu/static/uvalawyer/html/alumni/uvalawyer/spr15/reeves.htm https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/ten-sentenced-in-hate-crime-case https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/03/01/four-white-men-ordered-to-pay-840000-for-jim-crow-style-lynching-of-mississippi-black-man/ https://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2015/02/12/385777366/a-black-mississippi-judges-breathtaking-speech-to-three-white-murderers https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/04/10/james-craig-anderson-case/25563641/ https://www.clarionledger.com/story/news/2015/02/10/deryl-dedmon-two-others-to-be-sentenced-in-hate-crime-tuesday/23166397/ https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/restitution-ordered-jackson-mississippi-hate-crime-case-involving-death-james-craig-anderson Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Non-unanimous jury verdicts were a Jim Crow–era policy designed to silence Black jurors and secure convictions even when the state failed to prove its case. In 2026, over 1,000 people remain imprisoned in Louisiana after being convicted by non-unanimous juries. In this episode of Rattling the Bars, Mansa Musa speaks with Erica Navalance, Associate Director of Strategic Criminal Litigation at the Promise of Justice Initiative, about the case of Lloyd Gray and why the state of Louisiana continues to uphold unconstitutional convictions.Guest:Erica Navalance has worked with both Capital Appeals Project and Promise of Justice Initiative (PIJ) since 2015, but joined PJI full time in 2021 as a senior staff attorney for the Strategic Defense Litigation project, focusing on combatting excessive sentences, capital punishment, and other injustices in the criminal system.Additional links/info:Richard A. Webster, Verite News / ProPublica, What one man's 45-year-old case tells us about the “Jim Crow juries” haunting LouisianaPromise of Justice Initiative, Swastika found on DA file introduced into court, judge grants hearing for PJI client incarcerated for 45 YearsCredits:Producer / Videographer / Post-Production: Cameron GranadinoBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-real-news-podcast--2952221/support.Help us continue producing radically independent news and in-depth analysis by following us and becoming a monthly sustainer.Follow us on:Bluesky: @therealnews.comFacebook: The Real News NetworkTwitter: @TheRealNewsYouTube: @therealnewsInstagram: @therealnewsnetworkBecome a member and join the Supporters Club for The Real News Podcast today!

Donate (no account necessary) | Subscribe (account required) Join Bryan Dean Wright, former CIA Operations Officer, as he dives into today's top stories shaping America and the world. In this final holiday edition of The Wright Report for the week, Bryan shares economic good news, responds to listener questions about immigration, judges, and American identity, and offers a deeper reflection on what it truly means to be an American in a time of division, foreign influence, and cultural strain. Economic Bright Spots After Christmas: New data from Visa, MasterCard, and American Express show holiday spending rose between four and six percent year over year. GDP growth for the third quarter came in at a strong 4.3%, beating expectations. Bryan notes that while wealthy Americans are still doing well, middle and lower-income families continue to struggle with affordability. He argues the data supports Trump's case that tariffs and deportations did not crash the economy, but instead helped stabilize growth and reduce crime. Crime Falls as Deportations Rise: More than seventeen thousand illegal immigrants have been arrested under the Laken Riley Act, with two and a half million deported or self-deported over the past year. Early crime data suggests declines in murder, robbery, and vehicle theft. Bryan cautions the data is still incomplete but says the trend aligns with common sense and historical experience. Military Recruiting Surges: The U.S. military reported its strongest recruiting numbers in fifteen years. Bryan credits leadership changes at the Pentagon and renewed focus on mission and standards, pushing back on critics who predicted chaos under Secretary Pete Hegseth. Judges, Bias, and the Rule of Law: Listener questions focus on Democrat Judge Hannah Dugan's conviction for helping an illegal immigrant escape her courtroom. Bryan explains why jury reluctance to convict shows the cultural divide remains deep. He also defends his practice of identifying which president appointed judges, arguing that judicial bias is real and supported by Supreme Court reversal data. What It Means to Be an American: Bryan expands on Monday's debate about American identity, pushing back on Vivek Ramaswamy's claim that no American is more American than another. Drawing on the Founders, George Washington's farewell address, and the presidency's constitutional requirements, Bryan argues that allegiance, time in the country, cultural assimilation, and freedom from foreign loyalties all matter. He warns that dismissing heritage and lineage risks turning the United States into a fragmented society similar to modern Europe. Listener Questions and Reflections: The episode closes with unscripted questions on Israel, artificial intelligence and future jobs, personal interests, and Bryan's path from the CIA into broadcasting. He encourages young listeners to pursue skills that require judgment and adaptability, citing careers like the Merchant Marines as one example in an AI-driven future.   "And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." - John 8:32     Keywords: holiday economy consumer spending GDP growth, Laken Riley Act deportations crime drop, military recruiting surge Pete Hegseth, Judge Hannah Dugan conviction immigration, judicial bias Supreme Court reversals, what is an American Founders Washington farewell, Vivek Ramaswamy citizenship debate, assimilation heritage American identity, AI jobs future Merchant Marines

Trump's relentless assault on the DOJ's credibility has lead to Grand Juries, Juries, Judges and law students all rejecting the DOJ leading to pile up of losses. Trump's criminal defense team masquerading as the DOJ leadership are also moving closer to possible criminal prosecution and indictment related to the continued obstruction around the Epstein Files coverup and the coverup of the coverup. Federal Judges are ramping up the pace of their blistering orders against the Trump DOJ at a record pace. Public support for lawsuits against the Trump Administration is contributing mightily to Trump's loss record. As the lower courts are “holding the line” against Trump's lawlessness, the need for Supreme Court reform in the next Administration is laid bare for all the Voters to see. And the Legal AF Youtube channel likely gets its ONE MILLIONTH SUBSCRIBER this weekend! All this and so much more as Ben and Popok take the controls tonight of the top rated Legal AF podcast. Support Our Sponsors: Corn Bread Hemp: Head to https://cornbreadhemp.com/LEGALAF and use code LEGALAF to get holiday BOGO savings. Miracle Made: Upgrade your sleep with Miracle Made! Go to https://TryMiracle.com/LEGALAF and use the code LEGLAF to claim your FREE 3 PIECE TOWEL SET and SAVE over 40% OFF. Aura Frames: Visit https://AuraFrames.com and get $45 OFF their BEST-SELLING Carver Mat frames with promo code: LEGALAF Udacity: For 40% off your order, head to https://Udacity.com/LEGALAF and use code LEGALAF Learn more about the Popok Firm: https://thepopokfirm.com Subscribe to Legal AF Substack: https://substack.com/@legalaf Check out the Popok Firm: https://thepopokfirm.com Remember to subscribe to ALL the MeidasTouch Network Podcasts: MeidasTouch: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/meidastouch-podcast Legal AF: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/legal-af MissTrial: https://meidasnews.com/tag/miss-trial The PoliticsGirl Podcast: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-politicsgirl-podcast Cult Conversations: The Influence Continuum with Dr. Steve Hassan: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-influence-continuum-with-dr-steven-hassan Mea Culpa with Michael Cohen: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/mea-culpa-with-michael-cohen The Weekend Show: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-weekend-show Burn the Boats: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/burn-the-boats Majority 54: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/majority-54 Political Beatdown: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/political-beatdown On Democracy with FP Wellman: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/on-democracy-with-fpwellman Uncovered: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/maga-uncovered Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Mark and Gary break down the mounting tension inside a high-profile Los Angeles grand jury investigation, examining the rare public clash between prosecutors, LAPD, and the medical examiner, what it signals about the strength of the case, and why a major development could come sooner than expected. The conversation then shifts to Washington, where the Supreme Court is weighing a challenge that could upend long-standing campaign finance limits and unleash a new era of political spending ahead of the 2026 midterms. Geragos also unpacks the power dynamics behind the Warner Bros., Netflix, and Ellison media battle, exploring how control of major news platforms could reshape both Hollywood and national politics in the years ahead.Watch Beyond A Reasonable Doubt and all Reasonable Doubt video content on YouTube exclusively at YouTube.com/ReasonableDoubtPodcast and subscribe while you're thereSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.