Podcast appearances and mentions of justin sneed

In this case, the court considered this issue: May Oklahoma carry out the execution of Richard Glossip in light of the prosecutorial misconduct and other errors that affected his conviction and sentencing?The case was decided on February 25, 2025.The Supreme Court held that the prosecution's failure to correct false testimony violated the Due Process Clause under Napue v Illinois. A conviction that relies on false evidence, knowingly allowed by the prosecution, requires reversal if there is a reasonable likelihood the falsehood affected the jury's judgment. Justice Sonia Sotomayor authored the 6-2 majority opinion of the Court.The prosecution allowed its key witness, Justin Sneed, to provide false testimony about his mental health and medical treatment. The new evidence showed that Sneed was diagnosed with bipolar disorder and prescribed lithium, facts that were withheld from the defense. At trial, Sneed falsely claimed he was never treated by a psychiatrist and received lithium mistakenly. This falsehood was material because Sneed's testimony was the only direct evidence implicating Glossip, and impeachment of his credibility could have influenced the jury's decision. The prosecution had prior knowledge of Sneed's mental health treatment and still failed to correct the misstatement when it was made to the jury.Correcting this false testimony would likely have changed the jury's assessment of Sneed's reliability. Additionally, the prosecution's violations extended beyond Napue: it suppressed exculpatory evidence, interfered with witness testimony, and allowed destruction of key physical evidence. Given these cumulative errors and their impact on the fairness of the trial, Glossip is entitled to a new trial. The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals' rejection of the attorney general's confession of error was based on a misapplication of federal law.Justice Neil Gorsuch did not participate in the consideration or decision of the case.The opinion is presented here in its entirety, but with citations omitted. If you appreciate this episode, please subscribe. Thank you. 

On January 7th, 1997, the owner of the Best Budget Inn in Oklahoma City, OK was beaten to death with a baseball bat at his motel by admitted killer, thief, and methamphetamine addict Justin Sneed. Mr. Sneed, fearful of the death penalty, falsely accused his boss, Richard Glossip, of masterminding the murder for hire plot in exchange for leniency. Now, Richard sits on death row in Oklahoma. To learn more and get involved, visit: https://linktr.ee/FreeRichardGlossip Wrongful Conviction is a production of Lava For Good™ Podcasts in association with Signal Co. No1. We have worked hard to ensure that all facts reported in this show are accurate. The views and opinions expressed by the individuals featured in this show are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of Lava for Good.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This Day in Legal History: Woodrow Wilson Signs Grand Canyon National Park ActOn February 26, 1919, President Woodrow Wilson signed the Grand Canyon National Park Act, officially designating the Grand Canyon as a national park. This landmark decision aimed to preserve the canyon's breathtaking landscapes, unique geological formations, and rich biodiversity for future generations. Prior to its national park status, the Grand Canyon had been a federally protected reserve, but conservationists pushed for stronger protections. The designation marked a significant victory for the early environmental movement, ensuring that the canyon would be safeguarded from mining, logging, and other commercial exploitation.The Grand Canyon, carved over millions of years by the Colorado River, is one of the world's most iconic natural wonders. Its layered rock formations offer a window into Earth's geological history, dating back nearly two billion years. Beyond its scientific significance, the canyon holds deep cultural importance for Indigenous tribes, including the Havasupai, Hopi, and Navajo, who have lived in and around the area for centuries. The national park designation helped protect these cultural and historical sites, though it also led to conflicts over land rights.The creation of Grand Canyon National Park was part of a broader movement in the early 20th century to protect America's natural landscapes. This movement, championed by figures like President Theodore Roosevelt, laid the foundation for the modern National Park System. Today, Grand Canyon National Park attracts millions of visitors annually, serving as a testament to the enduring importance of conservation efforts.President Donald Trump has ordered the suspension of security clearances and government contracts for the law firm Covington & Burling due to its legal assistance to special counsel Jack Smith. In a memo signed in the Oval Office, Trump accused law firms of using pro bono work to obstruct the government. The directive specifically targets Peter Koski, a Covington partner, and calls for a review of the firm's federal contracts.  Smith recently disclosed that Covington provided him with $140,000 in pro bono legal services as he faces government scrutiny. Covington stated that it represents Smith in a personal capacity and will continue to defend his interests. Legal experts note that security clearances are crucial for private attorneys handling national security matters.  Trump, who has been indicted in two cases led by Smith, referred to the order as the "Deranged Jack Smith signing" and mocked the prosecutor after signing the memo.Trump Targets Covington Security, Contracts Over Work With SmithThe U.S. Supreme Court has ordered a new trial for Oklahoma death row inmate Richard Glossip, ruling that prosecutorial misconduct violated his constitutional rights. In a rare win for a capital defendant, two conservative justices joined the court's three liberals to overturn Glossip's conviction. Oklahoma's Republican attorney general had also acknowledged errors in the case, including prosecutors withholding evidence and failing to correct false testimony.  Glossip was convicted for allegedly orchestrating the 1997 murder of his boss, Barry Van Treese, though the actual killer, Justin Sneed, was the state's key witness. Newly disclosed documents revealed that Sneed had considered recanting, was coached by prosecutors, and lied about his mental health history. Writing for the majority, Justice Sonia Sotomayor stated that correcting Sneed's false testimony would have significantly damaged his credibility.  Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh joined the liberal justices in the ruling, while Justice Amy Coney Barrett partially agreed but wanted the state court to decide if a new trial was warranted. Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented, arguing the case should have been left to Oklahoma courts. Glossip's execution had been blocked nine times before, and his attorney emphasized the ruling as a crucial step toward justice. It remains uncertain whether Oklahoma will retry the case or pursue the death penalty again.Justices Order New Trial in Rare Win for Death Row Inmate (2)A U.S. judge has extended an order blocking President Donald Trump's administration from enforcing a sweeping freeze on federal funding, citing concerns that the policy could be reinstated. U.S. District Judge Loren AliKhan ruled that despite the administration's withdrawal of an initial memo pausing grants and loans, statements from White House officials suggested the freeze was still in effect.  The funding pause, announced in January, aimed to review federal financial assistance programs for compliance with Trump's executive orders, including those ending diversity initiatives and pausing climate-related projects. Nonprofits and small business groups sued, arguing the freeze would cause widespread harm.  AliKhan criticized the policy as legally baseless and impractical, saying it would either halt up to $3 trillion in spending overnight or force agencies to review all grants within a day. She called the administration's actions “irrational” and warned of a potential national crisis. The ruling prevents the government from reimposing the freeze under a different name, marking a legal setback for Trump's efforts to reshape federal spending priorities.Trump blocked from imposing sweeping federal funding freeze | ReutersIn my weekly Bloomberg Tax column, I examine Washington State's new data broker tax, a well-intended but ultimately insufficient approach to curbing exploitative data practices. The legislation treats consumer data like a natural resource, imposing a severance tax on its collection. However, this framework fails to address the real issue: long-term data retention and reuse.  A more effective solution would be a retention tax, which would discourage firms from hoarding personal data indefinitely. Under the current bill, companies pay a tiered tax based on the number of residents whose data they collect. While this sounds like a fair approach, it risks consolidating data power in the hands of large platforms that can absorb the tax and continue selling consumer information without restriction. Worse, the tax may encourage firms to store data longer, giving it an artificial market value that promotes hoarding rather than limiting collection.  Unlike oil or minerals, personal data is not depleted upon use—it can be endlessly repackaged and resold. A retention tax would align economic incentives with privacy concerns, forcing firms to justify prolonged data storage and pay accordingly. Without it, Washington's proposal does little to curb long-term privacy risks and may ultimately entrench the very data exploitation it seeks to prevent.Washington's Data Broker Tax Is a Promising but Inadequate Move This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

This Day in Legal History: Che Guevara ExecutedOn October 9, 1967, Ernesto "Che" Guevara, a prominent figure in revolutionary movements across Latin America, was executed by Bolivian forces after being captured during a failed guerrilla campaign. Guevara was a key leader in the Cuban Revolution and sought to spread Marxist insurgencies throughout Latin America, hoping to ignite similar revolutions. His execution without a trial, carried out with the assistance of the CIA, became a controversial event, raising questions about the legal treatment of non-state actors under international law.Che Guevara's death highlighted the evolving legal frameworks for dealing with insurgencies, guerrilla warfare, and the rights of captured combatants. At the time, international law, including the Geneva Conventions, offered limited protection to guerrilla fighters, whose status as non-traditional combatants fell outside of established norms for prisoners of war. The Bolivian government's decision to execute Guevara without due process sparked widespread condemnation and intensified debates on the legality of such actions.The legacy of Che Guevara's execution extended far beyond his death, as it became a symbol of the broader struggles for political justice, human rights, and the use of state power to suppress insurgencies. His killing underscored the need for clearer international legal standards governing the treatment of insurgents, contributing to later discussions on how to apply humanitarian law to non-state actors and revolutionaries.The U.S. government may seek to force Google to break up parts of its business, such as its Chrome browser and Android operating system, to address what it argues is an illegal monopoly in online search. A judge found in August that Google's dominance—processing 90% of U.S. searches—violates antitrust laws. The Justice Department's proposed remedies aim to end Google's control over search distribution and prevent its dominance from expanding into artificial intelligence (AI). One suggestion is to stop Google from making billion-dollar payments to device manufacturers like Apple to have its search engine pre-installed as the default. Google plans to appeal, calling the proposals radical, and arguing that users choose its search engine for its quality. The company also claims it faces competition from platforms like Amazon. Additionally, a recent court ruling requires Google to allow more competition in its app store. The Justice Department's more detailed proposal will be submitted in November, and Google can respond by December.The antitrust ruling against Google could have significant consequences for smaller companies like Mozilla, which heavily relies on Google's payments to make its Firefox browser financially viable. If Google is forced to stop paying for default search positions, Mozilla could lose a substantial portion of its revenue—more than $500 million annually—putting its future in jeopardy. This would limit Mozilla's ability to compete with larger players like Apple and Microsoft, and could further consolidate market power in the hands of Big Tech.US considers breakup of Google in landmark search case | ReutersWill Google's historic monopoly lawsuit be the death knell for Mozilla and Firefox? | FortuneThe U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments in the case of Oklahoma death row inmate Richard Glossip, who is seeking to have his conviction overturned for a 1997 murder-for-hire. Glossip, now 61, was convicted of paying Justin Sneed to kill Barry Van Treese, the owner of the motel where Glossip worked. Sneed, who confessed to the murder, testified against Glossip in exchange for avoiding the death penalty. Glossip admits to helping cover up the crime but denies commissioning the murder. Newly uncovered evidence suggests that prosecutors withheld information that could have helped Glossip's defense. Oklahoma's Attorney General, Gentner Drummond, now supports Glossip's appeal, acknowledging flaws in the case, though he still believes Glossip should face some punishment. Due to the attorney general's stance, the Supreme Court appointed an outside lawyer to defend the conviction. The justices are expected to rule by June 2025.US Supreme Court to weigh appeal by Oklahoma death row inmate Glossip | ReutersThe U.S. Supreme Court is signaling support for President Biden's regulation of "ghost guns," or build-at-home firearm kits, by likely allowing the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) to regulate these kits as firearms. The rule, introduced in 2022, would require serial numbers, background checks, and record-keeping for gun kits, treating them like fully assembled guns. Challengers, including gun-rights advocates, argue that the rule expands beyond the authority granted by the 1968 Gun Control Act. However, several justices, including Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Barrett, expressed skepticism about the challengers' claims, noting how easily kits can be turned into functioning firearms. The case echoes past legal battles over firearms regulation, such as the one involving bump stocks, and centers on the scope of the ATF's power.Supreme Court Signals Backing for Biden's ‘Ghost Gun' Rule (1) This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

It's our 100th episode!!!! For this very special episode, we are re-doing episode 1 - the Questionable Case of Richard Glossip. Kristin tells Mogab the story of Richard Glossip, who is on death row in Oklahoma for hiring Justin Sneed to kill his boss, Barry Van Treese. His conviction Is based almost solely on Sneed's word, with no good evidence connecting him to this crime. How did the word of an accomplice carry enough weight to secure a death penalty conviction? So much has happened with this case, so much new information has been uncovered, so we are so excited to be re-doing this episode (Mogab double checked that she was not recording through her air pods this time!) Sponsored by: BetterHelp! Visit www.BetterHelp.com/CREEPERS today to get 10% off your first month. Framebridge! Visit www.Framebridge.com and use promo code CREEPERS to save an additional 15% off your first order! FACELESS Start binging new true crime podcast FACELESS now and look for new episodes dropping every Tuesday, wherever you get your podcasts.  Nobody Should Believe Me Your new true crime binge! Listen to Nobody Should Believe Me and explore the fascinating phenomenon of Munchausen by Proxy. New episodes drop every Thursday, wherever you get your podcasts! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

#145 - In 1997, the owner of an Oklahoma City motel was beaten to death with a baseball bat. Shortly into the investigation, the police arrested a teenager, Justin Sneed, for the murder. He quickly confessed to killing the motel owner but told the police someone else hired him to do it. Justin Sneed said that his older friend and manager of the motel, Richard Glossip, was the mastermind behind the murder. Both men were convicted of the murder, and Richard Glossip was sentenced to the death penalty.Can a man be executed solely on the confession of a convicted killer and without any forensic evidence?Support My WorkIf you love the show, the easiest way to show your support is by leaving us a positive rating with a review. You can also tell your family and friends about Forensic Tales.Patreon - If you would like to get early AD-free access to new episodes, have access to exclusive bonus content, snag exclusive show merch or just want to support what I'm doing, please visit our Patreon page: https://www.patreon.com/forensictalesMerchandise - For t-shirts, stickers, hoodies, coffee mugs & more check out:https://www.teepublic.com/user/forensic-talesFor a complete list of sources used in this episode, please visit forensictales.com.Support Us by Supporting Our Sponsors:Anatomy of a Massacre. Subscribe & listen on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.Tosi Snacks. Shop today at https://tosi.com/ and use promo code TALES to save on your order.Smart Passive Income PodcastWeekly interviews, strategy, and advice for building your online business the smart way.Listen on: Apple Podcasts SpotifySupport the show

In Episode 12, Part 1, Kyle and Lisa talk about the January 7, 1997 murder of motel owner Barry Van Treese in Oklahoma City, OK. The motel manager, Richard Eugene Glossip, was convicted of arranging that the murder with motel maintenance man Justin Sneed. After Sneed killed Van Treese, he and Glossip split about $4,000.00 in cash taken from under the front seat of Van Treese's car. Glossip came under suspicion not because of Sneed, but due to the fact that he admitted that Sneed confessed committing the murder to him and multiple inconsistent statements he made to motel employees and police about Mr. Van Treese's whereabouts on the morning after his murder. Kyle and Lisa talked about Glossip's legal proceedings, which included 2 trials, direct appeal and state and federal post-conviction claims.

On January 7th, 1997, the owner of the Best Budget Inn in Oklahoma City was beaten to death with a baseball bat at his motel by admitted killer, thief, and methamphetamine addict Justin Sneed. Mr. Sneed, fearful of the death penalty, falsely accused his boss, Richard Glossip, of masterminding the murder for hire plot in exchange for leniency. Now, Richard sits on death row in Oklahoma where his time is running out. To support Richard Glossip, please email Rande Worthen at: rande.worthen@okhouse.gov and demand that House Bills 2219 and 2220 be heard. https://saverichardglossip.com/ https://www.wrongfulconvictionpodcast.com/with-jason-flom Wrongful Conviction with Jason Flom is a production of Lava for Good™ Podcasts in association with Signal Co No1. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In 1997 in Oklahoma City, a motel owner was brutally murdered in his own motel. Money was stolen from his car in what looked liked a robbery gone bad. Soon after, the maintenance worker Justin Sneed, confessed to the murder. But, in exchange for leniency, he stated that the motel manager Richard Glossip hired him to do the murder. With no physical evidence, Glossip was sentenced to death on the sole testimony of the murderer who gave conflicting statements multiple times. This is the crazy story of how a man is now wrongfully sitting on death row and has been within minutes of execution 3 different times. Join us as we explore the lack of evidence, the hasty investigation, the tunnel vision of the interrogators, the DA who destroyed evidence, and what the real evidence actually points to. Help us to save Richard Glossip. 

Welcome to the first episode of True Crime Creepers! In this episode, Kristin tells Mogab the story of Richard Glossip, who Is on death row In Oklahoma for hiring Justin Sneed to kill his boss, Barry Van Treese. His conviction Is based almost solely on Sneed's word, with no good evidence connecting him to this crime. How did the word of an accomplice carry enough weight to secure a conviction?Just a warning that Mogab's audio quality is not tip top because she accidentally recorded through airpods Instead of the nice mic she has. Whoops. This has been rectified in all other episodes. Sources for this episode: The documentary "Killing Richard Glossip" by Investigation Discovery Richard Glossip entry on Wikipedia "Two truths and a lie: What records, interviews reveal about Richard Glossip’s murder conviction" by Cary Aspinwall Every week we want to highlight an organization that does good work to support the topic for the week. This week, we are highlighting the Ministry Against the Death Penalty. Support the Ministry Against the Death Penalty at https://www.sisterhelen.org/donate/

On January 6, 1997, Barry Van Treese traveled from his home in Lawton, Oklahoma to the Best Budget Inn in Oklahoma City.  His plan was to pay his employees, pick-up receipts from the hotel, travel to Tulsa and do the same and then return to the Oklahoma City property to inspect it and deal with the manager of that property, Richard Glossip.  Glossip had been managing the hotel in Oklahoma City for between eight and nine months and, in the last six months of 1996, Mr. Van Treese and his wife calculated that about $6,000 in receipts was not turned over by Glossip.  The condition of the property was also deplorable, with only about 24 of the 54 rooms habitable.  Glossip was also permitting unregistered guests to occupy rooms, including his brother Bobby, a drug dealer.   In the early morning of January 7, 1997, after Van Treese returned from Tulsa, Glossip sent 19-year old Justin Sneed to murder Van Treese, promising him between $7,000.00 and $10,000.00.  After the murder, Glossip instructed Sneed to move Van Treese’s vehicle, also telling Sneed to get an envelope with cash from beneath the front seat.  When Sneed returned with the money, Glossip took it and split it between them.  Over the next 17 hours, Glossip told conflicting stories to hotel employees and police investigating Van Treese’s disappearance.  Join Lisa O’Brien and Michael Carnahan on Tuesday, October 15, 2019, at 8:30 p.m. Central for Part 1 of State of Oklahoma v. Richard Glossip.  We’ll talk about Glossip’s post-conviction claims, the outcome of state and federal court review, his execution dates, stays of execution and the status of executions in Oklahoma.  We’re a live show and calls are always welcome at (347) 989-1171.  

On January 6, 1997, Barry Van Treese traveled from his home in Lawton, Oklahoma to the Best Budget Inn in Oklahoma City.  His plan was to pay his employees, pick-up receipts from the hotel, travel to Tulsa and do the same and then return to the Oklahoma City property to inspect it and deal with the manager of that property, Richard Glossip.  Glossip had been managing the hotel in Oklahoma City for between eight and nine months and, in the last six months of 1996, Mr. Van Treese and his wife calculated that about $6,000 in receipts was not turned over by Glossip.  The condition of the property was also deplorable, with only about 24 of the 54 rooms habitable.  Glossip was also permitting unregistered guests to occupy rooms, including his brother Bobby, a drug dealer.   In the early morning of January 7, 1997, after Van Treese returned from Tulsa, Glossip sent 19-year old Justin Sneed to murder Van Treese, promising him between $7,000.00 and $10,000.00.  After the murder, Glossip instructed Sneed to move Van Treese’s vehicle, also telling Sneed to get an envelope with cash from beneath the front seat.  When Sneed returned with the money, Glossip took it and split it between them.  Over the next 17 hours, Glossip told conflicting stories to hotel employees and police investigating Van Treese’s disappearance.  Join Lisa O’Brien and Michael Carnahan on Wednesday, October 2, 2019, at 8:00 p.m. Central for Part 1 of State of Oklahoma v. Richard Glossip.  We’ll talk about the evidence implicating Glossip in the murder-for-hire of Barry Van Treese, his first trial and conviction, reversal on direct appeal by the Oklahoma appellate court and his second trial, direct appeal and state and federal post-conviction claims.  We’re a live show and calls are always welcome at (347) 989-1171.  

It’s one man’s word against another’s in the highest stakes game of all: execution for murder. In a compelling and wrenching episode of After Hours AM/The Criminal Code — with hosts Joel Sturgis, Eric Olsen, and secret weapon, forensic psychologist Dr. Clarissa Cole — we discuss the new Investigaton Discovery docu-series KILLING RICHARD GLOSSIP with producer Kevin Huffman. We speak with Kevin in hour 2; at hour 1, Clarissa leads us through the week’s strangest True Crime news. Barry Van Treese, owner of the Best Budget Inn in Oklahoma City, was found beaten to death in a room at the inn on January 7, 1997. A man with no prior felony convictions, Richard Glossip, steadfastly maintains his innocence, insisting that he had no knowledge that anyone planned to kill Van Treese. Justin Sneed, who admitted to killing the victim with a baseball bat and whose fingerprints were found in the room, cut a deal for a life sentence instead of risking the death penalty by claiming that Glossip hired him to do it. With acclaimed filmmaker Joe Berlinger’s cameras following in real time in what could be the final days of his life, KILLING RICHARD GLOSSIP tells the story of a former motel manager sentenced to die for orchestrating a murder he swears he had nothing to do with. KILLING RICHARD GLOSSIP premieres in an exclusive two-night event Monday, April 17th and Tuesday, April 18th at 9/8c on Investigation Discovery. Richard Glossip’s death sentence is based primarily on the testimony of Justin Sneed, the motel maintenance man who was convicted of Van Treese’s murder and sentenced to life without parole

It’s one man’s word against another’s in the highest stakes game of all: execution for murder. In a compelling and wrenching episode of After Hours AM/The Criminal Code — with hosts Joel Sturgis, Eric Olsen, and secret weapon, forensic psychologist Dr. Clarissa Cole — we discuss the new Investigaton Discovery docu-series KILLING RICHARD GLOSSIP with producer Kevin Huffman. We speak with Kevin in hour 2; at hour 1, Clarissa leads us through the week’s strangest True Crime news. Barry Van Treese, owner of the Best Budget Inn in Oklahoma City, was found beaten to death in a room at the inn on January 7, 1997. A man with no prior felony convictions, Richard Glossip, steadfastly maintains his innocence, insisting that he had no knowledge that anyone planned to kill Van Treese. Justin Sneed, who admitted to killing the victim with a baseball bat and whose fingerprints were found in the room, cut a deal for a life sentence instead of risking the death penalty by claiming that Glossip hired him to do it. With acclaimed filmmaker Joe Berlinger’s cameras following in real time in what could be the final days of his life, KILLING RICHARD GLOSSIP tells the story of a former motel manager sentenced to die for orchestrating a murder he swears he had nothing to do with. KILLING RICHARD GLOSSIP premieres in an exclusive two-night event Monday, April 17th and Tuesday, April 18th at 9/8c on Investigation Discovery. Richard Glossip’s death sentence is based primarily on the testimony of Justin Sneed, the motel maintenance man who was convicted of Van Treese’s murder and sentenced to life without parole. No fingerprints, DNA, or witnesses other than Sneed connect Glossip with the crime. Sneed admitted to killing Van Treese, but he claims he did so under pressure from Glossip and for promise of payment. Before his two trials, the state of Oklahoma offered Glossip plea deals that

Richard Glossip takes his case to the appeal court and the U.S. Supreme Court. For the first time we hear from the killer Justin Sneed, whose testimony put Glossip on death row. And - as Sky's Ian Woods reports - just when it seems all hope of a reprieve has gone, there is an unexpected twist.