POPULARITY
Categories
18 episodes with trial part
21 episodes with trial part
22 episodes with trial part
15 episodes with trial part
11 episodes with trial part
8 episodes with trial part
10 episodes with trial part
9 episodes with trial part
12 episodes with trial part
7 episodes with trial part
5 episodes with trial part
9 episodes with trial part
10 episodes with trial part
7 episodes with trial part
6 episodes with trial part
6 episodes with trial part
9 episodes with trial part
4 episodes with trial part
4 episodes with trial part
3 episodes with trial part
8 episodes with trial part
4 episodes with trial part
5 episodes with trial part
5 episodes with trial part
6 episodes with trial part
5 episodes with trial part
3 episodes with trial part
8 episodes with trial part
4 episodes with trial part
3 episodes with trial part
4 episodes with trial part
3 episodes with trial part
5 episodes with trial part
4 episodes with trial part
4 episodes with trial part
4 episodes with trial part
4 episodes with trial part
2 episodes with trial part
3 episodes with trial part
3 episodes with trial part
6 episodes with trial part
5 episodes with trial part
4 episodes with trial part
2 episodes with trial part
4 episodes with trial part
7 episodes with trial part
8 episodes with trial part
2 episodes with trial part
4 episodes with trial part
3 episodes with trial part
4 episodes with trial part
5 episodes with trial part
7 episodes with trial part
3 episodes with trial part
May 30, 2024 is a day that will live in infamy! Donald Trump became the first former President of the United States to be brought to court on felony charges and have a jury reach a verdict of guilty. Not to mention that this happened while he is currently running for President again and is the highest polling candidate.The ripple effects of this historical day will be felt indefinitely. The debates will rage over whether or not this was justice or merely political lawfare.In part 5, we cover the instructions from Judge Merchan to the jury for how to deliberate. Most of the instructions were standard fare. However, the section detailing the charges raised serious questions in my mind.The charges were 34 counts of falsifying business records in the first degree to conceal the crime of conspiracy to promote an election by unlawful means. Each juror could determine anonymously if the "unlawful means" was one or more of the following:FECA violation (campaign contributions above the federal limit)falsifying other business recordstax violations (by paying Cohen extra money to cover income taxes)Falsifying business records alone is a misdemeanor.Conspiracy to promote an election by unlawful means is a misdemeanor.The maximum sentence for all 34 charges is 136 years in prison because Trump allegedly paid for an alleged crime in 11 installments.The jury found Trump guilty of all 34 felony counts. A lot has happened since then. Sentencing has moved to September 18th.Sources Cited:Jury instructions from Judge MerchanNY Elec L § 17-152 (2021)Michael R. Sisak, Jennifer Peltz, Eric Tucker, and Michelle L. Price, "Jurors in Trump hush money trial end 1st day of deliberations after asking to rehear testimony," Associated Press, Updated May 29, 2024."D.A. Bragg Announces 34-Count Felony Trial Conviction of Donald J. Trump," ManhattanDA.org, May 30, 2024."Public Statement on the Hunter Biden Emails," Politico, October 19, 2020.Touré, "It makes me so happy to write 'convicted felon Donald Trump'," The Grio, May 31, 2024.Ximena Bustillo, "Trump loses bid to lift New York gag order in response to Harris' campaigning," NPR, August 2, 2024.Scriptures Referenced:Proverbs 25:2Leviticus 19:15-18*** Castle Rock Women's Health is a pro-life and pro-women health care ministry. They need your help to serve the community. Please consider a monthly or one-time donation. ***We value your feedback!Have questions for...
In this episode we revisit and get updates on Franks Tax Trial, including all the the Bugs the FBI planted on him and the problems they could cause for the trial.--Join the Milwaukee Mafia Newsletter and get updates about the Mafia and Gavin https://milwaukeemafia.com/join-the-mailing-list/Got a question about this episode? Email Gavin and Eric at milwaukeemafia@gmail.comExplore the Milwaukee Mafia Wiki: https://milwaukeemafia.com/Become part of the Family: https://www.patreon.com/Milwaukeemafia--Gavin Schmitt is the leading historical expert on the mafia in Wisconsin. He has written several books on the subject and regularly speaks across the country.Get Gavin's Books: https://www.amazon.com/Gavin-Schmitt/e/B00E749XFSBook Gavin for a Presentation: https://gavinschmitt.com/
May 30, 2024 is a day that will live in infamy! Donald Trump became the first former President of the United States to be brought to court on felony charges and have a jury reach a verdict of guilty. Not to mention that this happened while he is currently running for President again and is the highest polling candidate.The ripple effects of this historical day will be felt indefinitely. The debates will rage over whether or not this was justice or merely political lawfare.In part 4, we cover the defense witnesses--such as they were. Trump decided not to testify. The judge's restrictions prevented a campaign finance law expert witness from testifying. After one paralegal briefly showed a chart, Robert Costello was the remaining witness.Costello's testimony resulted in the judge almost throwing out his testimony. Shenanigans or court decorum? You decide.Finally, the trial ended with closing arguments: Todd Blanche for the defense went first, and Joshua Steinglass for the prosecution followed. After a long day, the court adjourned for deliberation the next day.Sources Cited:Emma Colton, "Key Trump witness nixed after Merchan's stringent rulings reveals what his testimony would have been," Fox News, May 21, 2024."Highlights: Trump trial judge admonishes defense witness for 'side eye' and clears press from courtroom," NBC News, Updated May 20, 2024.Kara Scannell, Lauren Del Valle, and Jeremy Herb, "Closing arguments wrap in Trump hush money trial," CNN, Updated May 28, 2024.*** Castle Rock Women's Health is a pro-life and pro-women health care ministry. They need your help to serve the community. Please consider a monthly or one-time donation. ***We value your feedback!Have questions for Truthspresso? Contact us!Mentioned in this episode:Affiliate Link: Answers In GenesisAnswers In Genesis is a Christian apologetics ministry that equips Christians to know and defend their faith effectively. They offer books and videos on creationism, evangelism, apologetics, homeschooling, and much more. Answers In Genesis is also home to the famous Creation Museum and the Ark Encounter.Answers In Genesis
May 30, 2024 is a day that will live in infamy! Donald Trump became the first former President of the United States to be brought to court on felony charges and have a jury reach a verdict of guilty. Not to mention that this happened while he is currently running for President again and is the highest polling candidate.The ripple effects of this historical day will be felt indefinitely. The debates will rage over whether or not this was justice or merely political lawfare.In part 4, we cover the defense witnesses--such as they were. Trump decided not to testify. The judge's restrictions prevented a campaign finance law expert witness from testifying. After one paralegal briefly showed a chart, Robert Costello was the remaining witness.Costello's testimony resulted in the judge almost throwing out his testimony. Shenanigans or court decorum? You decide.Finally, the trial ended with closing arguments: Todd Blanche for the defense went first, and Joshua Steinglass for the prosecution followed. After a long day, the court adjourned for deliberation the next day.Sources Cited:Emma Colton, "Key Trump witness nixed after Merchan's stringent rulings reveals what his testimony would have been," Fox News, May 21, 2024."Highlights: Trump trial judge admonishes defense witness for 'side eye' and clears press from courtroom," NBC News, Updated May 20, 2024.Kara Scannell, Lauren Del Valle, and Jeremy Herb, "Closing arguments wrap in Trump hush money trial," CNN, Updated May 28, 2024.*** Castle Rock Women's Health is a pro-life and pro-women health care ministry. They need your help to serve the community. Please consider a monthly or one-time donation. ***We value your feedback!Have questions for Truthspresso? Contact us!Mentioned in this episode:Affiliate Link: Answers In GenesisAnswers In Genesis is a Christian apologetics ministry that equips Christians to know and defend their faith effectively. They offer books and videos on creationism, evangelism, apologetics, homeschooling, and much more. Answers In Genesis is also home to the famous Creation Museum and the Ark Encounter.Answers In Genesis
Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzman Loera filed a motion for a new trial under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 33, arguing that his trial was compromised by juror misconduct. The motion cites a VICE News interview with an anonymous juror who claimed that jurors violated the judge's instructions by following media coverage of the trial and discussing the case before deliberations. The juror revealed that several jurors had accessed news articles and tweets related to the trial on smart devices, and they discussed these articles among themselves despite the judge's explicit orders not to do so. The juror also admitted that jurors read about allegations of Guzman drugging and sexually abusing underage women, although they purportedly disregarded these claims during deliberations.The defense argues that this misconduct resulted in an unfair trial, thus necessitating a new one. This claim focuses on the potential influence of external information on the jurors' impartiality and the possibility that pre-trial instructions were not adequately followed, thereby compromising the integrity of the trial.(commercial at 8:54)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:EL CHAPO: "MOTION FOR A NEW TRIAL UPON AN EVIDENTIARY HEARING" - DocumentCloudBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.
Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzman Loera filed a motion for a new trial under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 33, arguing that his trial was compromised by juror misconduct. The motion cites a VICE News interview with an anonymous juror who claimed that jurors violated the judge's instructions by following media coverage of the trial and discussing the case before deliberations. The juror revealed that several jurors had accessed news articles and tweets related to the trial on smart devices, and they discussed these articles among themselves despite the judge's explicit orders not to do so. The juror also admitted that jurors read about allegations of Guzman drugging and sexually abusing underage women, although they purportedly disregarded these claims during deliberations.The defense argues that this misconduct resulted in an unfair trial, thus necessitating a new one. This claim focuses on the potential influence of external information on the jurors' impartiality and the possibility that pre-trial instructions were not adequately followed, thereby compromising the integrity of the trial.(commercial at 8:51)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:EL CHAPO: "MOTION FOR A NEW TRIAL UPON AN EVIDENTIARY HEARING" - DocumentCloudBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.
Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzman Loera filed a motion for a new trial under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 33, arguing that his trial was compromised by juror misconduct. The motion cites a VICE News interview with an anonymous juror who claimed that jurors violated the judge's instructions by following media coverage of the trial and discussing the case before deliberations. The juror revealed that several jurors had accessed news articles and tweets related to the trial on smart devices, and they discussed these articles among themselves despite the judge's explicit orders not to do so. The juror also admitted that jurors read about allegations of Guzman drugging and sexually abusing underage women, although they purportedly disregarded these claims during deliberations.The defense argues that this misconduct resulted in an unfair trial, thus necessitating a new one. This claim focuses on the potential influence of external information on the jurors' impartiality and the possibility that pre-trial instructions were not adequately followed, thereby compromising the integrity of the trial.(commercial at 5:58)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:EL CHAPO: "MOTION FOR A NEW TRIAL UPON AN EVIDENTIARY HEARING" - DocumentCloudBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.
Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzman Loera filed a motion for a new trial under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 33, arguing that his trial was compromised by juror misconduct. The motion cites a VICE News interview with an anonymous juror who claimed that jurors violated the judge's instructions by following media coverage of the trial and discussing the case before deliberations. The juror revealed that several jurors had accessed news articles and tweets related to the trial on smart devices, and they discussed these articles among themselves despite the judge's explicit orders not to do so. The juror also admitted that jurors read about allegations of Guzman drugging and sexually abusing underage women, although they purportedly disregarded these claims during deliberations.The defense argues that this misconduct resulted in an unfair trial, thus necessitating a new one. This claim focuses on the potential influence of external information on the jurors' impartiality and the possibility that pre-trial instructions were not adequately followed, thereby compromising the integrity of the trial.(commercial at 8:54)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:EL CHAPO: "MOTION FOR A NEW TRIAL UPON AN EVIDENTIARY HEARING" - DocumentCloud
Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzman Loera filed a motion for a new trial under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 33, arguing that his trial was compromised by juror misconduct. The motion cites a VICE News interview with an anonymous juror who claimed that jurors violated the judge's instructions by following media coverage of the trial and discussing the case before deliberations. The juror revealed that several jurors had accessed news articles and tweets related to the trial on smart devices, and they discussed these articles among themselves despite the judge's explicit orders not to do so. The juror also admitted that jurors read about allegations of Guzman drugging and sexually abusing underage women, although they purportedly disregarded these claims during deliberations.The defense argues that this misconduct resulted in an unfair trial, thus necessitating a new one. This claim focuses on the potential influence of external information on the jurors' impartiality and the possibility that pre-trial instructions were not adequately followed, thereby compromising the integrity of the trial.(commercial at 8:31)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:EL CHAPO: "MOTION FOR A NEW TRIAL UPON AN EVIDENTIARY HEARING" - DocumentCloud
Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzman Loera filed a motion for a new trial under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 33, arguing that his trial was compromised by juror misconduct. The motion cites a VICE News interview with an anonymous juror who claimed that jurors violated the judge's instructions by following media coverage of the trial and discussing the case before deliberations. The juror revealed that several jurors had accessed news articles and tweets related to the trial on smart devices, and they discussed these articles among themselves despite the judge's explicit orders not to do so. The juror also admitted that jurors read about allegations of Guzman drugging and sexually abusing underage women, although they purportedly disregarded these claims during deliberations.The defense argues that this misconduct resulted in an unfair trial, thus necessitating a new one. This claim focuses on the potential influence of external information on the jurors' impartiality and the possibility that pre-trial instructions were not adequately followed, thereby compromising the integrity of the trial.(commercial at 8:54)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:EL CHAPO: "MOTION FOR A NEW TRIAL UPON AN EVIDENTIARY HEARING" - DocumentCloud
Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzman Loera filed a motion for a new trial under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 33, arguing that his trial was compromised by juror misconduct. The motion cites a VICE News interview with an anonymous juror who claimed that jurors violated the judge's instructions by following media coverage of the trial and discussing the case before deliberations. The juror revealed that several jurors had accessed news articles and tweets related to the trial on smart devices, and they discussed these articles among themselves despite the judge's explicit orders not to do so. The juror also admitted that jurors read about allegations of Guzman drugging and sexually abusing underage women, although they purportedly disregarded these claims during deliberations.The defense argues that this misconduct resulted in an unfair trial, thus necessitating a new one. This claim focuses on the potential influence of external information on the jurors' impartiality and the possibility that pre-trial instructions were not adequately followed, thereby compromising the integrity of the trial.(commercial at 5:57)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:EL CHAPO: "MOTION FOR A NEW TRIAL UPON AN EVIDENTIARY HEARING" - DocumentCloud
Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzman Loera filed a motion for a new trial under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 33, arguing that his trial was compromised by juror misconduct. The motion cites a VICE News interview with an anonymous juror who claimed that jurors violated the judge's instructions by following media coverage of the trial and discussing the case before deliberations. The juror revealed that several jurors had accessed news articles and tweets related to the trial on smart devices, and they discussed these articles among themselves despite the judge's explicit orders not to do so. The juror also admitted that jurors read about allegations of Guzman drugging and sexually abusing underage women, although they purportedly disregarded these claims during deliberations.The defense argues that this misconduct resulted in an unfair trial, thus necessitating a new one. This claim focuses on the potential influence of external information on the jurors' impartiality and the possibility that pre-trial instructions were not adequately followed, thereby compromising the integrity of the trial.(commercial at 8:54)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:EL CHAPO: "MOTION FOR A NEW TRIAL UPON AN EVIDENTIARY HEARING" - DocumentCloud
May 30, 2024 is a day that will live in infamy! Donald Trump became the first former President of the United States to be brought to court on felony charges and have a jury reach a verdict of guilty. Not to mention that this happened while he is currently running for President again and is the highest polling candidate.The ripple effects of this historical day will be felt indefinitely. The debates will rage over whether or not this was justice or merely political lawfare.In part 3, we cover the start of the trial and all attempts to lift the gag order, recuse Judge Merchan, delay the trial, or move it to another venue were shot down.We look at the prosecution's witness testimonies, especially the star witnesses Stormy Daniels and Michael Cohen.Sources Cited:Robin Levinson-King & Kayla Epstein, "Who is Juan Merchan, the 'no-nonsense' judge who oversaw Trump's hush-money case?" BBC, May 31, 2024.Jeremy Herb, Kara Scannell, Lauren del Valle, Eric Levenson and Sabrina Souza, "Judge finds Donald Trump in contempt for 10th time over gag order and threatens jail time," CNN, Updated May 6, 2024.Sara Boboltz, "What The Stormy Daniels Testimony Can Tell Us — And What It Can't," Huffington Post, May 8, 2024. (*** Reader discretion advised ***)Ella Lee, Zach Schonfeld, and Lauren Sforza, "Risque Stormy Daniels testimony creates uproar at Trump trial," The Hill, May 7, 2024. (*** Reader discretion advised ***)*** Castle Rock Women's Health is a pro-life and pro-women health care ministry. They need your help to serve the community. Please consider a monthly or one-time donation. ***We value your feedback!Have questions for Truthspresso? Contact us!Mentioned in this episode:Affiliate Link: Blackout CoffeeBlackout Coffee is a coffee company that supports traditional American values of strong families, personal responsibility, and patriotism. Blackout Coffee delivers to active duty military and first responders. Be Awake, Not Woke with their rich and flavorful coffees, teas, and hot cocoas.Blackout Coffee
May 30, 2024 is a day that will live in infamy! Donald Trump became the first former President of the United States to be brought to court on felony charges and have a jury reach a verdict of guilty. Not to mention that this happened while he is currently running for President again and is the highest polling candidate.The ripple effects of this historical day will be felt indefinitely. The debates will rage over whether or not this was justice or merely political lawfare.In part 3, we cover the start of the trial and all attempts to lift the gag order, recuse Judge Merchan, delay the trial, or move it to another venue were shot down.We look at the prosecution's witness testimonies, especially the star witnesses Stormy Daniels and Michael Cohen.Sources Cited:Robin Levinson-King & Kayla Epstein, "Who is Juan Merchan, the 'no-nonsense' judge who oversaw Trump's hush-money case?" BBC, May 31, 2024.Jeremy Herb, Kara Scannell, Lauren del Valle, Eric Levenson and Sabrina Souza, "Judge finds Donald Trump in contempt for 10th time over gag order and threatens jail time," CNN, Updated May 6, 2024.Sara Boboltz, "What The Stormy Daniels Testimony Can Tell Us — And What It Can't," Huffington Post, May 8, 2024. (*** Reader discretion advised ***)Ella Lee, Zach Schonfeld, and Lauren Sforza, "Risque Stormy Daniels testimony creates uproar at Trump trial," The Hill, May 7, 2024. (*** Reader discretion advised ***)*** Castle Rock Women's Health is a pro-life and pro-women health care ministry. They need your help to serve the community. Please consider a monthly or one-time donation. ***We value your feedback!Have questions for Truthspresso? Contact us!Mentioned in this episode:Affiliate Link: Blackout CoffeeBlackout Coffee is a coffee company that supports traditional American values of strong families, personal responsibility, and patriotism. Blackout Coffee delivers to active duty military and first responders. Be Awake, Not Woke with their rich and flavorful coffees, teas, and hot cocoas.Blackout Coffee
Welcome to the "Week in Review," where we delve into the true stories behind this week's headlines. Your host, Tony Brueski, joins hands with a rotating roster of guests, sharing their insights and analysis on a collection of intriguing, perplexing, and often chilling stories that made the news. This is not your average news recap. With the sharp investigative lens of Tony and his guests, the show uncovers layers beneath the headlines, offering a comprehensive perspective that traditional news can often miss. From high-profile criminal trials to in-depth examinations of ongoing investigations, this podcast takes listeners on a fascinating journey through the world of true crime and current events. Each episode navigates through multiple stories, illuminating their details with factual reporting, expert commentary, and engaging conversation. Tony and his guests discuss each case's nuances, complexities, and human elements, delivering a multi-dimensional understanding to their audience. Whether you are a dedicated follower of true crime, or an everyday listener interested in the stories shaping our world, the "Week in Review" brings you the perfect balance of intrigue, information, and intelligent conversation. Expect thoughtful analysis, informed opinions, and thought-provoking discussions beyond the 24-hour news cycle. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com
Hidden Killers With Tony Brueski | True Crime News & Commentary
Welcome to the "Week in Review," where we delve into the true stories behind this week's headlines. Your host, Tony Brueski, joins hands with a rotating roster of guests, sharing their insights and analysis on a collection of intriguing, perplexing, and often chilling stories that made the news. This is not your average news recap. With the sharp investigative lens of Tony and his guests, the show uncovers layers beneath the headlines, offering a comprehensive perspective that traditional news can often miss. From high-profile criminal trials to in-depth examinations of ongoing investigations, this podcast takes listeners on a fascinating journey through the world of true crime and current events. Each episode navigates through multiple stories, illuminating their details with factual reporting, expert commentary, and engaging conversation. Tony and his guests discuss each case's nuances, complexities, and human elements, delivering a multi-dimensional understanding to their audience. Whether you are a dedicated follower of true crime, or an everyday listener interested in the stories shaping our world, the "Week in Review" brings you the perfect balance of intrigue, information, and intelligent conversation. Expect thoughtful analysis, informed opinions, and thought-provoking discussions beyond the 24-hour news cycle. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com
Welcome to the "Week in Review," where we delve into the true stories behind this week's headlines. Your host, Tony Brueski, joins hands with a rotating roster of guests, sharing their insights and analysis on a collection of intriguing, perplexing, and often chilling stories that made the news. This is not your average news recap. With the sharp investigative lens of Tony and his guests, the show uncovers layers beneath the headlines, offering a comprehensive perspective that traditional news can often miss. From high-profile criminal trials to in-depth examinations of ongoing investigations, this podcast takes listeners on a fascinating journey through the world of true crime and current events. Each episode navigates through multiple stories, illuminating their details with factual reporting, expert commentary, and engaging conversation. Tony and his guests discuss each case's nuances, complexities, and human elements, delivering a multi-dimensional understanding to their audience. Whether you are a dedicated follower of true crime, or an everyday listener interested in the stories shaping our world, the "Week in Review" brings you the perfect balance of intrigue, information, and intelligent conversation. Expect thoughtful analysis, informed opinions, and thought-provoking discussions beyond the 24-hour news cycle. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com
Welcome to the "Week in Review," where we delve into the true stories behind this week's headlines. Your host, Tony Brueski, joins hands with a rotating roster of guests, sharing their insights and analysis on a collection of intriguing, perplexing, and often chilling stories that made the news. This is not your average news recap. With the sharp investigative lens of Tony and his guests, the show uncovers layers beneath the headlines, offering a comprehensive perspective that traditional news can often miss. From high-profile criminal trials to in-depth examinations of ongoing investigations, this podcast takes listeners on a fascinating journey through the world of true crime and current events. Each episode navigates through multiple stories, illuminating their details with factual reporting, expert commentary, and engaging conversation. Tony and his guests discuss each case's nuances, complexities, and human elements, delivering a multi-dimensional understanding to their audience. Whether you are a dedicated follower of true crime, or an everyday listener interested in the stories shaping our world, the "Week in Review" brings you the perfect balance of intrigue, information, and intelligent conversation. Expect thoughtful analysis, informed opinions, and thought-provoking discussions beyond the 24-hour news cycle. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com
In the podcast "Hidden Killers With Tony Brueski," retired FBI Special Agent Jennifer Coffindaffer discusses the potential dangers jurors face in the Karen Read trial due to the aggressive and threatening behavior of some supporters. The conversation highlights concerns about juror safety, with Coffindaffer noting that Judge Cannone has impounded juror information to protect them. The discussion also touches on the impact of mob-like behavior on individuals and businesses connected to the case, such as Colin Albert's family pizzeria, which faces severe harassment and financial losses. Coffindaffer emphasizes the need for a change in trial venue to ensure impartiality and reduce the influence of local biases. She also suggests a revised trial strategy, including presenting strong evidence early and addressing emotional aspects of the case. The podcast underscores the complexity of the trial, the societal implications of mob behavior, and the challenges in seeking justice for John O'Keefe. ### Main Points - **Juror Safety Concerns:** Jurors face potential danger due to aggressive supporters. - **Judge's Protective Measures:** Judge Kenoni impounds juror information for protection. - **Impact on Businesses:** Colin Albert's family pizzeria suffers harassment and financial losses. - **Need for Venue Change:** Advocates for moving the trial to ensure impartiality. - **Revised Trial Strategy:** Suggests presenting strong evidence early and addressing emotional aspects. - **Mob Behavior:** Highlights societal implications of aggressive, mob-like behavior. - **Seeking Justice:** Emphasizes challenges in achieving justice for John O'Keefe. ### Relevant Hashtags #KarenRead #JenniferCoffindaffer #TonyBrueski #JohnOKeefe #JurorSafety #MobBehavior #LegalChallenges Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Karen Read Trial, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com
Hidden Killers With Tony Brueski | True Crime News & Commentary
In the podcast "Hidden Killers With Tony Brueski," retired FBI Special Agent Jennifer Coffindaffer discusses the potential dangers jurors face in the Karen Read trial due to the aggressive and threatening behavior of some supporters. The conversation highlights concerns about juror safety, with Coffindaffer noting that Judge Cannone has impounded juror information to protect them. The discussion also touches on the impact of mob-like behavior on individuals and businesses connected to the case, such as Colin Albert's family pizzeria, which faces severe harassment and financial losses. Coffindaffer emphasizes the need for a change in trial venue to ensure impartiality and reduce the influence of local biases. She also suggests a revised trial strategy, including presenting strong evidence early and addressing emotional aspects of the case. The podcast underscores the complexity of the trial, the societal implications of mob behavior, and the challenges in seeking justice for John O'Keefe. ### Main Points - **Juror Safety Concerns:** Jurors face potential danger due to aggressive supporters. - **Judge's Protective Measures:** Judge Kenoni impounds juror information for protection. - **Impact on Businesses:** Colin Albert's family pizzeria suffers harassment and financial losses. - **Need for Venue Change:** Advocates for moving the trial to ensure impartiality. - **Revised Trial Strategy:** Suggests presenting strong evidence early and addressing emotional aspects. - **Mob Behavior:** Highlights societal implications of aggressive, mob-like behavior. - **Seeking Justice:** Emphasizes challenges in achieving justice for John O'Keefe. ### Relevant Hashtags #KarenRead #JenniferCoffindaffer #TonyBrueski #JohnOKeefe #JurorSafety #MobBehavior #LegalChallenges Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Karen Read Trial, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com
In the podcast "Hidden Killers With Tony Brueski," retired FBI Special Agent Jennifer Coffindaffer discusses the potential dangers jurors face in the Karen Read trial due to the aggressive and threatening behavior of some supporters. The conversation highlights concerns about juror safety, with Coffindaffer noting that Judge Cannone has impounded juror information to protect them. The discussion also touches on the impact of mob-like behavior on individuals and businesses connected to the case, such as Colin Albert's family pizzeria, which faces severe harassment and financial losses. Coffindaffer emphasizes the need for a change in trial venue to ensure impartiality and reduce the influence of local biases. She also suggests a revised trial strategy, including presenting strong evidence early and addressing emotional aspects of the case. The podcast underscores the complexity of the trial, the societal implications of mob behavior, and the challenges in seeking justice for John O'Keefe. ### Main Points - **Juror Safety Concerns:** Jurors face potential danger due to aggressive supporters. - **Judge's Protective Measures:** Judge Kenoni impounds juror information for protection. - **Impact on Businesses:** Colin Albert's family pizzeria suffers harassment and financial losses. - **Need for Venue Change:** Advocates for moving the trial to ensure impartiality. - **Revised Trial Strategy:** Suggests presenting strong evidence early and addressing emotional aspects. - **Mob Behavior:** Highlights societal implications of aggressive, mob-like behavior. - **Seeking Justice:** Emphasizes challenges in achieving justice for John O'Keefe. ### Relevant Hashtags #KarenRead #JenniferCoffindaffer #TonyBrueski #JohnOKeefe #JurorSafety #MobBehavior #LegalChallenges Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Karen Read Trial, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com
In the podcast "Hidden Killers With Tony Brueski," retired FBI Special Agent Jennifer Coffindaffer discusses the potential dangers jurors face in the Karen Read trial due to the aggressive and threatening behavior of some supporters. The conversation highlights concerns about juror safety, with Coffindaffer noting that Judge Cannone has impounded juror information to protect them. The discussion also touches on the impact of mob-like behavior on individuals and businesses connected to the case, such as Colin Albert's family pizzeria, which faces severe harassment and financial losses. Coffindaffer emphasizes the need for a change in trial venue to ensure impartiality and reduce the influence of local biases. She also suggests a revised trial strategy, including presenting strong evidence early and addressing emotional aspects of the case. The podcast underscores the complexity of the trial, the societal implications of mob behavior, and the challenges in seeking justice for John O'Keefe. ### Main Points - **Juror Safety Concerns:** Jurors face potential danger due to aggressive supporters. - **Judge's Protective Measures:** Judge Kenoni impounds juror information for protection. - **Impact on Businesses:** Colin Albert's family pizzeria suffers harassment and financial losses. - **Need for Venue Change:** Advocates for moving the trial to ensure impartiality. - **Revised Trial Strategy:** Suggests presenting strong evidence early and addressing emotional aspects. - **Mob Behavior:** Highlights societal implications of aggressive, mob-like behavior. - **Seeking Justice:** Emphasizes challenges in achieving justice for John O'Keefe. ### Relevant Hashtags #KarenRead #JenniferCoffindaffer #TonyBrueski #JohnOKeefe #JurorSafety #MobBehavior #LegalChallenges Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Karen Read Trial, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com
The Alec Baldwin / RUST trial has begun. The prosecution and defense have completed opening statements regarding the October 2021 shooting of cinematographer Halyna Hutchins. We discuss who will be held responsible for the shooting and what may be presented in this New Mexico trial. Learn things that you thought you knew that you may not know on this episode---especially as it relates to Alec Baldwin and his RUST movie production. This and more on this episode of Charlie Crimebuster. Contact me: charliecrimebuster@gmail.com Support: www.peacemakernetwork.com Website: www.charliecrimebuster.com YouTube: www.youtube.com/@CharlieCrimebuster META/Facebook: www.facebook.com/charliecrimebuster X (formerly Twitter.com): www.x.com/C_Crimebuster
In this episode of "Hidden Killers With Tony Brueski," former Felony Prosecutor and attorney Eric Faddis discusses the hung jury in Karen Read's case and its implications. The prolonged deliberation, which lasted over six days, suggested either a defense verdict or a mistrial. Faddis explains that a mistrial is a significant challenge for prosecutors, as it forces them to decide whether to retry the case, negotiate a plea, or drop the charges altogether. He highlights the jury's inability to agree on even lesser charges, suggesting reasonable doubt influenced the decision. Faddis notes the prosecution's potential overconfidence and the possibility that they didn't address key issues effectively. He speculates that the prosecution might consider juror feedback on their split to decide whether to pursue another trial. Faddis also discusses the strategic considerations behind deciding whether to retry a case, emphasizing the need for strong evidence and effective witness preparation. The upcoming status conference on July 22nd will likely determine the next steps, including the possibility of a plea deal for Karen Read to avoid another lengthy trial. The conversation underscores the complexities and uncertainties inherent in the legal process, especially in cases with a hung jury and reasonable doubt. ### Main Points - The Karen Read case resulted in a hung jury after over six days of deliberation. - Faddis explains the difficulties and dissatisfaction for prosecutors dealing with mistrials. - The Commonwealth must decide whether to retry the case, negotiate a plea, or dismiss the charges. - The jury's inability to agree on lesser charges indicates significant reasonable doubt. - Prosecution's potential overconfidence and failure to address key issues may have contributed to the mistrial. - Juror feedback on their deliberation split could influence the decision to retry the case. - Effective witness preparation and addressing key issues are crucial for a successful prosecution. - The upcoming status conference on July 22nd will determine the next steps, including the possibility of a plea deal for Karen Read. ### Hashtags #HiddenKillersWithTonyBrueski #EricFaddis #KarenRead #HungJury #ProsecutionChallenges #LegalProcess #ReasonableDoubt Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com
In this episode of "Hidden Killers With Tony Brueski," defense attorney Bob Motta discusses the mistrial in the Karen Read case, highlighting the complexity and divided opinions surrounding the circumstantial evidence. Motta explains that the prosecution intends to retry the case but faces challenges in finding an impartial jury due to the case's publicity. The conversation focuses on key aspects like the behavior of Trooper Proctor, whose inappropriate comments and early judgment raised doubts about the investigation's integrity. The discussion also examines the significance of the microscopic tail light fragments found in the victim's clothing, which remain a contentious point. Motta emphasizes that the case hinges on whether the jury believes Karen Read hit the victim, a question that may never be definitively answered. The conversation reflects on the potential strategies for both the prosecution and defense in a retrial and the difficulties in achieving a conclusive verdict. ### Main Points: - The Karen Read trial ended in a mistrial due to the jury's indecision and divided opinions. - The prosecution plans to retry the case but faces challenges in finding an impartial jury. - Trooper Proctor's inappropriate comments and early judgment were highlighted as problematic. - The presence of microscopic tail light fragments in the victim's clothing remains a contentious point. - The case hinges on whether the jury believes Karen Read hit the victim, a question still unresolved. - Potential strategies for both prosecution and defense in a retrial are considered. - Achieving a conclusive verdict in the case remains challenging due to its circumstantial nature. ### Relevant Hashtags: #KarenRead #JohnOKeefe #BobMotta #DefenseDiaries #TrooperProctor #Mistrial #LegalStrategy Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com
Hidden Killers With Tony Brueski | True Crime News & Commentary
In this episode of "Hidden Killers With Tony Brueski," defense attorney Bob Motta discusses the mistrial in the Karen Read case, highlighting the complexity and divided opinions surrounding the circumstantial evidence. Motta explains that the prosecution intends to retry the case but faces challenges in finding an impartial jury due to the case's publicity. The conversation focuses on key aspects like the behavior of Trooper Proctor, whose inappropriate comments and early judgment raised doubts about the investigation's integrity. The discussion also examines the significance of the microscopic tail light fragments found in the victim's clothing, which remain a contentious point. Motta emphasizes that the case hinges on whether the jury believes Karen Read hit the victim, a question that may never be definitively answered. The conversation reflects on the potential strategies for both the prosecution and defense in a retrial and the difficulties in achieving a conclusive verdict. ### Main Points: - The Karen Read trial ended in a mistrial due to the jury's indecision and divided opinions. - The prosecution plans to retry the case but faces challenges in finding an impartial jury. - Trooper Proctor's inappropriate comments and early judgment were highlighted as problematic. - The presence of microscopic tail light fragments in the victim's clothing remains a contentious point. - The case hinges on whether the jury believes Karen Read hit the victim, a question still unresolved. - Potential strategies for both prosecution and defense in a retrial are considered. - Achieving a conclusive verdict in the case remains challenging due to its circumstantial nature. ### Relevant Hashtags: #KarenRead #JohnOKeefe #BobMotta #DefenseDiaries #TrooperProctor #Mistrial #LegalStrategy Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com
Hidden Killers With Tony Brueski | True Crime News & Commentary
In this episode of "Hidden Killers With Tony Brueski," defense attorney and former prosecutor Eric Faddis discusses the recent mistrial in the case of Karen Read, who faced charges related to a second-degree murder. The mistrial came after six days of jury deliberations, leading to speculation about the prosecution's next steps. Faddis explains the options available to the Commonwealth, including retrying the case, negotiating a plea deal, or dismissing the charges. He emphasizes the difficulties prosecutors face with a mistrial and the importance of understanding the jury's split to guide their decision. Faddis critiques the prosecution's presentation, suggesting they may have overplayed their hand and failed to make the case clear and digestible for the jury. He highlights the challenges in proving their narrative and the reasonable doubt created by the defense's strong case and potential issues with law enforcement's behavior. The conversation also touches on the potential for negotiations behind closed doors and the likelihood of a plea deal that all parties can accept. **Main Points:** - Karen Read's trial ended in a mistrial after six days of jury deliberations. - The Commonwealth has options: retry the case, negotiate a plea deal, or dismiss the charges. - Mistrials pose significant challenges for prosecutors. - Understanding the jury's split can guide the prosecution's next steps. - The prosecution may have overplayed their hand and failed to present the case clearly. - The defense's strong case and law enforcement issues created reasonable doubt. - Potential negotiations and plea deals could resolve the case. **Relevant Hashtags:** #KarenRead #EricFaddis #HiddenKillers #Mistrial #Prosecution #Defense #LegalAnalysis Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com
True Crime-Episode 13 – The Karen Read Trial (Part III) – The Finale
In this episode of "Hidden Killers With Tony Brueski," former Felony Prosecutor and attorney Eric Faddis discusses the hung jury in Karen Read's case and its implications. The prolonged deliberation, which lasted over six days, suggested either a defense verdict or a mistrial. Faddis explains that a mistrial is a significant challenge for prosecutors, as it forces them to decide whether to retry the case, negotiate a plea, or drop the charges altogether. He highlights the jury's inability to agree on even lesser charges, suggesting reasonable doubt influenced the decision. Faddis notes the prosecution's potential overconfidence and the possibility that they didn't address key issues effectively. He speculates that the prosecution might consider juror feedback on their split to decide whether to pursue another trial. Faddis also discusses the strategic considerations behind deciding whether to retry a case, emphasizing the need for strong evidence and effective witness preparation. The upcoming status conference on July 22nd will likely determine the next steps, including the possibility of a plea deal for Karen Read to avoid another lengthy trial. The conversation underscores the complexities and uncertainties inherent in the legal process, especially in cases with a hung jury and reasonable doubt. ### Main Points - The Karen Read case resulted in a hung jury after over six days of deliberation. - Faddis explains the difficulties and dissatisfaction for prosecutors dealing with mistrials. - The Commonwealth must decide whether to retry the case, negotiate a plea, or dismiss the charges. - The jury's inability to agree on lesser charges indicates significant reasonable doubt. - Prosecution's potential overconfidence and failure to address key issues may have contributed to the mistrial. - Juror feedback on their deliberation split could influence the decision to retry the case. - Effective witness preparation and addressing key issues are crucial for a successful prosecution. - The upcoming status conference on July 22nd will determine the next steps, including the possibility of a plea deal for Karen Read. ### Hashtags #HiddenKillersWithTonyBrueski #EricFaddis #KarenRead #HungJury #ProsecutionChallenges #LegalProcess #ReasonableDoubt Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com
In this episode of "Hidden Killers With Tony Brueski," defense attorney Bob Motta discusses the mistrial in the Karen Read case, highlighting the complexity and divided opinions surrounding the circumstantial evidence. Motta explains that the prosecution intends to retry the case but faces challenges in finding an impartial jury due to the case's publicity. The conversation focuses on key aspects like the behavior of Trooper Proctor, whose inappropriate comments and early judgment raised doubts about the investigation's integrity. The discussion also examines the significance of the microscopic tail light fragments found in the victim's clothing, which remain a contentious point. Motta emphasizes that the case hinges on whether the jury believes Karen Read hit the victim, a question that may never be definitively answered. The conversation reflects on the potential strategies for both the prosecution and defense in a retrial and the difficulties in achieving a conclusive verdict. ### Main Points: - The Karen Read trial ended in a mistrial due to the jury's indecision and divided opinions. - The prosecution plans to retry the case but faces challenges in finding an impartial jury. - Trooper Proctor's inappropriate comments and early judgment were highlighted as problematic. - The presence of microscopic tail light fragments in the victim's clothing remains a contentious point. - The case hinges on whether the jury believes Karen Read hit the victim, a question still unresolved. - Potential strategies for both prosecution and defense in a retrial are considered. - Achieving a conclusive verdict in the case remains challenging due to its circumstantial nature. ### Relevant Hashtags: #KarenRead #JohnOKeefe #BobMotta #DefenseDiaries #TrooperProctor #Mistrial #LegalStrategy Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com
Joaquín "El Chapo" Guzmán, the notorious Mexican drug lord, has filed a motion for a new trial based on several key arguments.Ineffective Assistance of Counsel: El Chapo claims his previous legal team provided inadequate representation. Specifically, he argues that they failed to explore a plea bargain and did not object to government motions regarding classified information Juror Misconduct: A significant part of his motion centers on allegations of juror misconduct. An anonymous juror told Vice News that some jurors had accessed media coverage during the trial, which included prejudicial information about Guzmán. This alleged misconduct, according to El Chapo's defense, compromised the fairness of the trial.Extradition Issues: Guzmán also challenges the legality of his extradition from Mexico, arguing that the agreement stipulated he should be tried in Texas or California, not Brooklyn .Pretrial Detention Conditions: He contends that the harsh conditions of his pretrial detention at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in New York, which included perpetual solitary confinement and constant lighting, impaired his ability to participate in his defense.Despite these arguments, U.S. prosecutors maintain that the juror misconduct claims are based on hearsay and are not credible enough to warrant a new trial. The government also defended the necessity of Guzmán's strict detention conditions given his history of escapes from high-security prisons in Mexico.In this episode, we continue our exploration of the El Chapo Files and the story of one of the most notorious crime bosses in history.(commercial at 7:34)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:El Chapo defense reply motion for new trial - DocumentCloud
Joaquín "El Chapo" Guzmán, the notorious Mexican drug lord, has filed a motion for a new trial based on several key arguments.Ineffective Assistance of Counsel: El Chapo claims his previous legal team provided inadequate representation. Specifically, he argues that they failed to explore a plea bargain and did not object to government motions regarding classified information Juror Misconduct: A significant part of his motion centers on allegations of juror misconduct. An anonymous juror told Vice News that some jurors had accessed media coverage during the trial, which included prejudicial information about Guzmán. This alleged misconduct, according to El Chapo's defense, compromised the fairness of the trial.Extradition Issues: Guzmán also challenges the legality of his extradition from Mexico, arguing that the agreement stipulated he should be tried in Texas or California, not Brooklyn .Pretrial Detention Conditions: He contends that the harsh conditions of his pretrial detention at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in New York, which included perpetual solitary confinement and constant lighting, impaired his ability to participate in his defense.Despite these arguments, U.S. prosecutors maintain that the juror misconduct claims are based on hearsay and are not credible enough to warrant a new trial. The government also defended the necessity of Guzmán's strict detention conditions given his history of escapes from high-security prisons in Mexico.In this episode, we continue our exploration of the El Chapo Files and the story of one of the most notorious crime bosses in history.(commercial at 7:01)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:El Chapo defense reply motion for new trial - DocumentCloud
Joaquín "El Chapo" Guzmán, the notorious Mexican drug lord, has filed a motion for a new trial based on several key arguments.Ineffective Assistance of Counsel: El Chapo claims his previous legal team provided inadequate representation. Specifically, he argues that they failed to explore a plea bargain and did not object to government motions regarding classified information Juror Misconduct: A significant part of his motion centers on allegations of juror misconduct. An anonymous juror told Vice News that some jurors had accessed media coverage during the trial, which included prejudicial information about Guzmán. This alleged misconduct, according to El Chapo's defense, compromised the fairness of the trial.Extradition Issues: Guzmán also challenges the legality of his extradition from Mexico, arguing that the agreement stipulated he should be tried in Texas or California, not Brooklyn .Pretrial Detention Conditions: He contends that the harsh conditions of his pretrial detention at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in New York, which included perpetual solitary confinement and constant lighting, impaired his ability to participate in his defense.Despite these arguments, U.S. prosecutors maintain that the juror misconduct claims are based on hearsay and are not credible enough to warrant a new trial. The government also defended the necessity of Guzmán's strict detention conditions given his history of escapes from high-security prisons in Mexico.In this episode, we continue our exploration of the El Chapo Files and the story of one of the most notorious crime bosses in history.(commercial at 7:11)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:El Chapo defense reply motion for new trial - DocumentCloud
Joaquín "El Chapo" Guzmán, the notorious Mexican drug lord, has filed a motion for a new trial based on several key arguments.Ineffective Assistance of Counsel: El Chapo claims his previous legal team provided inadequate representation. Specifically, he argues that they failed to explore a plea bargain and did not object to government motions regarding classified information Juror Misconduct: A significant part of his motion centers on allegations of juror misconduct. An anonymous juror told Vice News that some jurors had accessed media coverage during the trial, which included prejudicial information about Guzmán. This alleged misconduct, according to El Chapo's defense, compromised the fairness of the trial.Extradition Issues: Guzmán also challenges the legality of his extradition from Mexico, arguing that the agreement stipulated he should be tried in Texas or California, not Brooklyn .Pretrial Detention Conditions: He contends that the harsh conditions of his pretrial detention at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in New York, which included perpetual solitary confinement and constant lighting, impaired his ability to participate in his defense.Despite these arguments, U.S. prosecutors maintain that the juror misconduct claims are based on hearsay and are not credible enough to warrant a new trial. The government also defended the necessity of Guzmán's strict detention conditions given his history of escapes from high-security prisons in Mexico.In this episode, we continue our exploration of the El Chapo Files and the story of one of the most notorious crime bosses in history.(commercial at 7:34)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:El Chapo defense reply motion for new trial - DocumentCloudBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.
Joaquín "El Chapo" Guzmán, the notorious Mexican drug lord, has filed a motion for a new trial based on several key arguments.Ineffective Assistance of Counsel: El Chapo claims his previous legal team provided inadequate representation. Specifically, he argues that they failed to explore a plea bargain and did not object to government motions regarding classified information Juror Misconduct: A significant part of his motion centers on allegations of juror misconduct. An anonymous juror told Vice News that some jurors had accessed media coverage during the trial, which included prejudicial information about Guzmán. This alleged misconduct, according to El Chapo's defense, compromised the fairness of the trial.Extradition Issues: Guzmán also challenges the legality of his extradition from Mexico, arguing that the agreement stipulated he should be tried in Texas or California, not Brooklyn .Pretrial Detention Conditions: He contends that the harsh conditions of his pretrial detention at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in New York, which included perpetual solitary confinement and constant lighting, impaired his ability to participate in his defense.Despite these arguments, U.S. prosecutors maintain that the juror misconduct claims are based on hearsay and are not credible enough to warrant a new trial. The government also defended the necessity of Guzmán's strict detention conditions given his history of escapes from high-security prisons in Mexico.In this episode, we continue our exploration of the El Chapo Files and the story of one of the most notorious crime bosses in history.(commercial at 7:01)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:El Chapo defense reply motion for new trial - DocumentCloudBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.
Joaquín "El Chapo" Guzmán, the notorious Mexican drug lord, has filed a motion for a new trial based on several key arguments.Ineffective Assistance of Counsel: El Chapo claims his previous legal team provided inadequate representation. Specifically, he argues that they failed to explore a plea bargain and did not object to government motions regarding classified information Juror Misconduct: A significant part of his motion centers on allegations of juror misconduct. An anonymous juror told Vice News that some jurors had accessed media coverage during the trial, which included prejudicial information about Guzmán. This alleged misconduct, according to El Chapo's defense, compromised the fairness of the trial.Extradition Issues: Guzmán also challenges the legality of his extradition from Mexico, arguing that the agreement stipulated he should be tried in Texas or California, not Brooklyn .Pretrial Detention Conditions: He contends that the harsh conditions of his pretrial detention at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in New York, which included perpetual solitary confinement and constant lighting, impaired his ability to participate in his defense.Despite these arguments, U.S. prosecutors maintain that the juror misconduct claims are based on hearsay and are not credible enough to warrant a new trial. The government also defended the necessity of Guzmán's strict detention conditions given his history of escapes from high-security prisons in Mexico.In this episode, we continue our exploration of the El Chapo Files and the story of one of the most notorious crime bosses in history.(commercial at 7:11)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:El Chapo defense reply motion for new trial - DocumentCloudBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.
Joaquín "El Chapo" Guzmán, the notorious Mexican drug lord, has filed a motion for a new trial based on several key arguments.Ineffective Assistance of Counsel: El Chapo claims his previous legal team provided inadequate representation. Specifically, he argues that they failed to explore a plea bargain and did not object to government motions regarding classified information Juror Misconduct: A significant part of his motion centers on allegations of juror misconduct. An anonymous juror told Vice News that some jurors had accessed media coverage during the trial, which included prejudicial information about Guzmán. This alleged misconduct, according to El Chapo's defense, compromised the fairness of the trial.Extradition Issues: Guzmán also challenges the legality of his extradition from Mexico, arguing that the agreement stipulated he should be tried in Texas or California, not Brooklyn .Pretrial Detention Conditions: He contends that the harsh conditions of his pretrial detention at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in New York, which included perpetual solitary confinement and constant lighting, impaired his ability to participate in his defense.Despite these arguments, U.S. prosecutors maintain that the juror misconduct claims are based on hearsay and are not credible enough to warrant a new trial. The government also defended the necessity of Guzmán's strict detention conditions given his history of escapes from high-security prisons in Mexico.In this episode, we continue our exploration of the El Chapo Files and the story of one of the most notorious crime bosses in history.(commercial at 7:20)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:El Chapo defense reply motion for new trial - DocumentCloud
Joaquín "El Chapo" Guzmán, the notorious Mexican drug lord, has filed a motion for a new trial based on several key arguments.Ineffective Assistance of Counsel: El Chapo claims his previous legal team provided inadequate representation. Specifically, he argues that they failed to explore a plea bargain and did not object to government motions regarding classified information Juror Misconduct: A significant part of his motion centers on allegations of juror misconduct. An anonymous juror told Vice News that some jurors had accessed media coverage during the trial, which included prejudicial information about Guzmán. This alleged misconduct, according to El Chapo's defense, compromised the fairness of the trial.Extradition Issues: Guzmán also challenges the legality of his extradition from Mexico, arguing that the agreement stipulated he should be tried in Texas or California, not Brooklyn .Pretrial Detention Conditions: He contends that the harsh conditions of his pretrial detention at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in New York, which included perpetual solitary confinement and constant lighting, impaired his ability to participate in his defense.Despite these arguments, U.S. prosecutors maintain that the juror misconduct claims are based on hearsay and are not credible enough to warrant a new trial. The government also defended the necessity of Guzmán's strict detention conditions given his history of escapes from high-security prisons in Mexico.In this episode, we continue our exploration of the El Chapo Files and the story of one of the most notorious crime bosses in history.(commercial at 7:11)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:El Chapo defense reply motion for new trial - DocumentCloud
Joaquín "El Chapo" Guzmán, the notorious Mexican drug lord, has filed a motion for a new trial based on several key arguments.Ineffective Assistance of Counsel: El Chapo claims his previous legal team provided inadequate representation. Specifically, he argues that they failed to explore a plea bargain and did not object to government motions regarding classified information Juror Misconduct: A significant part of his motion centers on allegations of juror misconduct. An anonymous juror told Vice News that some jurors had accessed media coverage during the trial, which included prejudicial information about Guzmán. This alleged misconduct, according to El Chapo's defense, compromised the fairness of the trial.Extradition Issues: Guzmán also challenges the legality of his extradition from Mexico, arguing that the agreement stipulated he should be tried in Texas or California, not Brooklyn .Pretrial Detention Conditions: He contends that the harsh conditions of his pretrial detention at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in New York, which included perpetual solitary confinement and constant lighting, impaired his ability to participate in his defense.Despite these arguments, U.S. prosecutors maintain that the juror misconduct claims are based on hearsay and are not credible enough to warrant a new trial. The government also defended the necessity of Guzmán's strict detention conditions given his history of escapes from high-security prisons in Mexico.In this episode, we continue our exploration of the El Chapo Files and the story of one of the most notorious crime bosses in history.(commercial at 7:34)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:El Chapo defense reply motion for new trial - DocumentCloud
Hidden Killers With Tony Brueski | True Crime News & Commentary
In this episode of "Hidden Killers With Tony Brueski," former Felony Prosecutor and attorney Eric Faddis discusses the hung jury in Karen Read's case and its implications. The prolonged deliberation, which lasted over six days, suggested either a defense verdict or a mistrial. Faddis explains that a mistrial is a significant challenge for prosecutors, as it forces them to decide whether to retry the case, negotiate a plea, or drop the charges altogether. He highlights the jury's inability to agree on even lesser charges, suggesting reasonable doubt influenced the decision. Faddis notes the prosecution's potential overconfidence and the possibility that they didn't address key issues effectively. He speculates that the prosecution might consider juror feedback on their split to decide whether to pursue another trial. Faddis also discusses the strategic considerations behind deciding whether to retry a case, emphasizing the need for strong evidence and effective witness preparation. The upcoming status conference on July 22nd will likely determine the next steps, including the possibility of a plea deal for Karen Read to avoid another lengthy trial. The conversation underscores the complexities and uncertainties inherent in the legal process, especially in cases with a hung jury and reasonable doubt. ### Main Points - The Karen Read case resulted in a hung jury after over six days of deliberation. - Faddis explains the difficulties and dissatisfaction for prosecutors dealing with mistrials. - The Commonwealth must decide whether to retry the case, negotiate a plea, or dismiss the charges. - The jury's inability to agree on lesser charges indicates significant reasonable doubt. - Prosecution's potential overconfidence and failure to address key issues may have contributed to the mistrial. - Juror feedback on their deliberation split could influence the decision to retry the case. - Effective witness preparation and addressing key issues are crucial for a successful prosecution. - The upcoming status conference on July 22nd will determine the next steps, including the possibility of a plea deal for Karen Read. ### Hashtags #HiddenKillersWithTonyBrueski #EricFaddis #KarenRead #HungJury #ProsecutionChallenges #LegalProcess #ReasonableDoubt Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Trial of Karen Read, The Murder Of Maddie Soto, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com
Seeking to Turn Opponents to Allies
Need anything cleared up about the goings on of the Karen Read Trial? The Internets favorite attorney Emily D Baker has got you covered!
Need anything cleared up about the goings on of the Karen Read Trial? The Internets favorite attorney Emily D Baker has got you covered!
SOME LANGUAGE MAY BE OFFENSIVE: Welcome to a special episode of "The Trial of Karen Read," where today, we find ourselves inside the courtroom of the case against Karen Read. As we set the stage, let's briefly summarize the case that has gripped the public's attention. Karen Read is facing charges related to the death of John O'Keefe, whose unexpected passing under mysterious circumstances led to intense police scrutiny. The case hinges on a combination of forensic evidence, alleged motives, and Karen's own statements to the police. Prosecutors argue that Karen had both the means and opportunity to commit the crime, citing contentious relationships and financial disputes as possible motives. The defense counters that the evidence is circumstantial and that Karen's connection to John's death is being misconstrued. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Karen Read Trial, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com
SOME LANGUAGE MAY BE OFFENSIVE: Welcome to a special episode of "The Trial of Karen Read," where today, we find ourselves inside the courtroom of the case against Karen Read. As we set the stage, let's briefly summarize the case that has gripped the public's attention. Karen Read is facing charges related to the death of John O'Keefe, whose unexpected passing under mysterious circumstances led to intense police scrutiny. The case hinges on a combination of forensic evidence, alleged motives, and Karen's own statements to the police. Prosecutors argue that Karen had both the means and opportunity to commit the crime, citing contentious relationships and financial disputes as possible motives. The defense counters that the evidence is circumstantial and that Karen's connection to John's death is being misconstrued. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Karen Read Trial, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com
Hidden Killers With Tony Brueski | True Crime News & Commentary
SOME LANGUAGE MAY BE OFFENSIVE: Welcome to a special episode of "The Trial of Karen Read," where today, we find ourselves inside the courtroom of the case against Karen Read. As we set the stage, let's briefly summarize the case that has gripped the public's attention. Karen Read is facing charges related to the death of John O'Keefe, whose unexpected passing under mysterious circumstances led to intense police scrutiny. The case hinges on a combination of forensic evidence, alleged motives, and Karen's own statements to the police. Prosecutors argue that Karen had both the means and opportunity to commit the crime, citing contentious relationships and financial disputes as possible motives. The defense counters that the evidence is circumstantial and that Karen's connection to John's death is being misconstrued. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Karen Read Trial, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com
Hidden Killers With Tony Brueski | True Crime News & Commentary
SOME LANGUAGE MAY BE OFFENSIVE: Welcome to a special episode of "The Trial of Karen Read," where today, we find ourselves inside the courtroom of the case against Karen Read. As we set the stage, let's briefly summarize the case that has gripped the public's attention. Karen Read is facing charges related to the death of John O'Keefe, whose unexpected passing under mysterious circumstances led to intense police scrutiny. The case hinges on a combination of forensic evidence, alleged motives, and Karen's own statements to the police. Prosecutors argue that Karen had both the means and opportunity to commit the crime, citing contentious relationships and financial disputes as possible motives. The defense counters that the evidence is circumstantial and that Karen's connection to John's death is being misconstrued. Want to listen to ALL of our podcasts AD-FREE? Subscribe through APPLE PODCASTS, and try it for three days free: https://tinyurl.com/ycw626tj Follow Our Other Cases: https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com The latest on The Downfall of Diddy, The Karen Read Trial, Catching the Long Island Serial Killer, Awaiting Admission: BTK's Unconfessed Crimes, Delphi Murders: Inside the Crime, Chad & Lori Daybell, The Murder of Ana Walshe, Alex Murdaugh, Bryan Kohberger, Lucy Letby, Kouri Richins, Malevolent Mormon Mommys, Justice for Harmony Montgomery, The Murder of Stephen Smith, The Murder of Madeline Kingsbury, and much more! Listen at https://www.truecrimetodaypod.com
After a horrific school shooting took place in Oxford, Michigan, prosecutors decided to charge not only the shooter but also the shooter's parents. In this episode, we cover the case against Jennifer Crumbley. Please subscribe to our other podcast, CIVIL, which covers civil cases and trials. Listen now - https://link.chtbl.com/CivilPodcast Sponsors in this episode: AquaTru - Get 20% off any AquaTru purifier by visiting AquaTru.com and entering the code “COURT” at checkout. Progressive Insurance - Visit Progressive.com to get a quote with all the coverages you want, so you can easily compare and choose. SKIMS - Shop the SKIMS T-Shirt Shop at SKIMS.com. Now available in sizes XXS - 4X. Homes.com Post-production for the show is provided by Jon Keur of Wayfare Recording Co. Please support Court Junkie with as little as $3 a month via Patreon.com/CourtJunkie to receive ad-free episodes. Help support Court Junkie with $6 a month and get access to bonus monthly episodes. Follow me on Twitter @CourtJunkiePod or Instagram at CourtJunkie
© 2020-2025 Ivy Podcast Discovery LLC
