[MUSIC]
Hello, everyone, and welcome to Positively Legal. I'm Mark Eiglarge, one of your co-hosts for the show. And my bio says, I'm a former prosecutor. I'm a veteran criminal defense attorney. I'm an author.
I'm a, what an avid pickleball player. Beaker. All that stuff, thank you. But it's not about me. Let's talk about Jana, who's my co-host.
What about you, Jana? So, I'm John Spilbore, a criminal defense attorney, and founder of Jana Spilbore Law. I am also an avid shoe shopper. Of course, very important.
Pretty much that's it, that's it. That qualifies you to talk about murder and appeals and things like that. Yeah. So, all right. So, on a serious note, we have some really interesting legal happenings going on right now,
including Brian Coberger, sure everyone will remember him. He's back. He is so back.
“He's the person who murdered four college students in the worst way,”
played guilty to avoid the death penalty. Well, now he is challenging his conviction in the University of Idaho murders, a year after pleading guilty to them. Does this man really believe in his innocence? Or is he playing some sort of sick and twisted game?
We're going to talk all about it. Well, he's certainly sick and twisted. There are others who argue that Lindsey Clancy is sick and twisted. Some say she's just sick. And that's the Massachusetts woman who killed her three children, ages five, three and eight months.
Her husband testified in her murder trial. We're going to talk about that opening statements happened. I am excited and eager to hear what my co-host thinks about what's going down in that trial. But first, it's happy our time, Jonathan. Yeah, grab them if you got them.
Grab them if you got them. Always water for me.
Well, you know, and it's always happier when you get to talk about, you know, guns and attempted
murder cases, which we, yeah. We need to get an update from you. I have some questions for you, Mark in case for those of you who are just tuning in. My esteemed colleague, Mark Eiglarge, is representing Antonio Brown. Who's that?
He is a former. You don't even know. And I fell play, right? He's not currently. Correct.
Correct. He's about 30. He just turned 38. He had an illustrious career, both with the Pittsburgh Steelers and then he played a little bit for New England.
And then Tampa Bay, Tom Brady, welcome them onto the team. And then this is fact. It's not an opinion. The video's there.
If you look on YouTube, he, during a game in the third quarter for his reasons.
He has stated those, and then the NFL has their reasons. He pulled off his pads and then ran off the field. And that was the last time he played. And quit. Wait.
But yeah. I don't know this. Okay. Well, that's an interesting way to. It's one would argue it's crazy and people are pointing to that as evidence of his
CTE. Who would just throw away their Hall of Fame career that way and leave Tom Brady who's just so good looking. Really? Why would you leave us there?
I knew that would get you. I knew it. Is that the Bradley Cooper category for you? You know what? I'm going to say.
I'm not going to say. I'm going to say. And you know what?
“I think Tom Brady is probably a little more fun.”
Then Bradley Cooper and that counts for some. Very controversial. Really? We'll have to. I get your opinion.
Folks, that's the first thing we'd like you to weigh in on in the comments.
It's just, it's just a wrong, it's just wrong. It's right or wrong. I mean, Tom Brady's either hotter than Brad Cooper. Please let us know your thoughts. Yeah.
It's very important that we settle this and issues in the Middle East and World Hunger all in the same category. Okay. Very, very compelling. Anyway, we do want to bring people up to speed on what you're doing because this is an
interesting case for me because we don't do things in New York the way you do things in Florida. Yeah. Because we're more polite. You.
Among other things. Slightly. You are representing Antonio Brown in this attempted murder case and what we normally don't do here, you do there and that is you got to depose the alleged victim. Yes.
We don't get to do that. The way it works here, very liberal discovery here. The state lists their witnesses.
“They have to provide to us because it's not trial by ambush, right?”
I'm waiting for my cousin Vinnie reference from you here. You, I was able to get the discovery.
I was able to get the discovery for the prosecutor to which his significant o...
said what?
They have to give it to you.
It's called disclosure, you dickhead. Thank you very much. Mark the time. I enjoyed that again. So we get discovery and they list their A witnesses.
There are B witnesses and they're C witnesses. A's are those who really have some major stuff to reveal. C's would be like the toxicologist who's just saying the stuff is cocaine or whatever. But the major witnesses like the alleged victim and other eyewitnesses who might have seen my client do the things that they're alleging or support my theory, they've got to
list this A witnesses. So we've been trying to set depositions and very few people have come in and spite of being served with a subpoena to come in. People just don't want to be involved in this case. It's been challenging.
Unfortunately the judge pushed our standard ground hearing off indefinitely until we can get discovery done. But I did have the chance of taking this guy's deposition. We went about two hours and that's when he said, you know what, there's a big storm coming where I live.
He lives in New Orleans now and I'd like to put a pause on this so I can get my family out of town and I said, sure, okay, so we'll come back to do some more. So we did half of his depot. Well, and we can meet him a little bit because we do have a shot where the victim is talking on camera.
It's it. I don't know if it's shortly after the incident or it appears so in the stop, but we'll
“see is that the, it's not one, why don't we place that one?”
First off, I turned myself in.
I was trying to get down and the people in NFL was calling them out of the state police and the governor and all these people here because of the whoop, the liberation demonstration of the people who are like, and I don't understand, but we still to this day, first of the Netherlands, humbling them. People are still suffering because it's the day and all these in the world and making
a publicity big whoop about getting a rescue for a protest is more important. Whoop, and all the people that's dying constantly, and people that's dying here, I come in in the world as right to turn myself in, I see all the difference right at the ethnicity people working around in the hood, the sixth wall in the city, I'm like they haven't known all this change.
Every all the lip ears is in here, all the back folks in here, I'm like, man, look, we're going to look at him. So we've got to have some internal problems, we need to fix, and we got to go with him. So I'ma feel saying, stand in solidarity with my new Orleans brothers and sisters that I grew up with, and everybody else that's like me, and my Muslim brothers and sisters were
suffering and Palestine, some day, Gaza and all over the world. I would get that kind of answer when I would just say something like, so what brought you to the event that my client was at, and he would go on for like two minutes, and I would say, well, thank you for that. Let's get back to my question.
It was one of those, Johnna.
“Well, I think the guy intended well, I think if I'm giving him every benefit out, but it”
just took forever.
You think he can you, can you always try to see the good stuff, what did he just say in that
stock? I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I'd like to trail off.
I didn't understand the thing of the word yet. We know that he was arrested during Kendrick Lamar's Super Bowl performance when he days earlier applied to be one of the extras on the field, and then he planned to run around with a flag protesting various causes. Some that I think he mentioned in that's found by I think, and then he was arrested.
You see him violently resisting, and he was arrested for that, and he was found guilty, and I think he's awaiting sentencing in New Orleans. All that I think becomes relevant in my case when my client's arguing, stand your ground self defense against this guy who showed up to encounter him. So hanging on, that was actually sought to, so let me apologize to our producers.
Let's run one where we can see some of the melee, and hear what got. But let's understand, let's set it up, though, just so people know what it is. Aiden Ross, who my kids adore, he's a famous live streamer, he's made a fortune, live streaming, and he was holding a exhibition boxing match in my amy, and my client was
“invited, and he was live streaming with Aiden Ross, so I believe the alleged victim would”
have known that my client was there, and my client and the alleged victim have a history, and it's not been a good history. In fact, the alleged victim sued my client, because my client got him arrested and Dubai, where the alleged victim spent 30 days in a really rough and tough Dubai prison with no due process allegedly, according to the alleged victim.
So you can see why that, and other reasons why he's pretty pissed, and my client, what why he'd want to engage my client during this boxing event, and he wasn't invited to
It, he just showed up, and then there was my client, and then this is what ha...
Go ahead.
“Hey everybody, just a talk and you want to get on your security guards.”
Okay, I'm going to say very chaotic.
Are those the two shots that he is charged? Yes, that was up and charged. Yes, so you've got this happening under the cardboard area, and then you see the alleged victim. Oh, this.
It's crazy, but the alleged victim does leave and go onto the sidewalk, and they believe that my client has a gun in his left hand, which they're correct. He does have a gun. They're saying that he grabbed it from a security guard. No, he's saying that he has a concealed weapons permit, and he pulled it out in situations
like this when he's being confronted, and he's worried about his life, and then he went to run onto the sidewalk to get to his rental car parked on the street and worried that either this guy, the alleged victim, or others who were in his pussy, understand that my client didn't know how many were there, who was confronting him, what their intentions were.
My client pulled this. Go ahead. Did he know that this victim? Did he recognize this victim? Did he see him in the crowd earlier?
Oh, yeah. I know he came right up to him. Yeah. Oh, yeah. Yeah.
Yeah.
And if my client was the one who threw the first punch, it's only because he knew it was coming.
He saw the alleged victim stuff as jewelry into his shirt and approach him. I mean, you don't do that. Do you personal sign? I'm going to, I'm going to cut you. Look at you.
You street savvy. That's right. You knew that, right? Right. You know that.
That's how it goes down. That's what you do. That's what you do. What do you do? You stuff your nails and a little fist to protect your nails.
What do you do? No, no. I go, please. Somebody please hold the product. I can't put it on the sidewalk.
And then you reach your fan to the bottle. What do you do?
And then the Amazon glasses are a last.
Yeah. Yeah. They start flying. Yeah. They say, they say you live the privilege life.
I defend you. I say, you are street savvy and you're from the outdoors. The way you take the fan to the bottle and you smash it to the ground and say, you want to piece of me, whatever you do up there, John. All the time.
Yeah, that's you. That's so you. What was the quietest? I forget. Okay.
Don't respond to it. What was I saying?
“This is an interesting video of what, I mean, you don't normally get this, right?”
The charger guy, the two shots go up, see him doing it on this video, but he's charged with it. And now in the victim, I didn't know until today that there was a history between the victim and your client. That's big to me.
That's true. That makes a huge difference. Good. But it does. But the Florida criminal procedure is allowing this to go, I mean, are you okay with it
taking so long? Are you okay with having to depose this victim numerous times because he's busy and has to get back to New Orleans, are you okay with that? We have been going two hours. We're all exhausted.
You know what? It was a fine time to pause. I wasn't going to say, no, I don't care about this storm coming for you and your family. We're just going to keep going another two, three hours. It might take two or three more times.
I'm not rushing this thing. I want to know what I was saying. No, what I would have said. What is it? Tell me.
I am the storm. Who are the trailer park? Hi. I'm the storm. You know what?
That's from. No, but that sounds awesome. Just say it's from you. I love it. That's done.
And from Yellowstone. But she could be me. Yeah. I really. The warm.
Whatever's happening. Oh, cool.
“I think it's time to lighten it up and talk about it.”
About three dead kids, you want to do that? Nice segue or as I like to say, Segu. Okay. Let's do this. I didn't apologize.
That was inappropriate. What I said. I have a little bit of a change of heart from last week. Well, let's set it up. What are we talking about?
Who is Lindsey Clancy? You want me to set it up? You want to set it up. Go ahead. Set it up.
Okay. So she's from Massachusetts. She's charged with killing her three kids ages five, three and eight months. It's not a who done it. She did it.
She did it. There she is. She did it. A mother who was labeled a great mother otherwise was suffering from postpartum. Depression slash psychosis.
And she's alleging that she was sick and didn't know right from wrong when she did
This.
And contrary to some other high profile cases, I think like the Andrea Yates case and some others.
“It's not like after the fact after you did this.”
Now we we tell people something that there was no evidence of previously. This woman really did seek help. She did get treatment. She was hallucinating. She was hearing voices.
She did report to others that she was hearing voices telling her to do horrible things to her kids. I mean, this is very well documented. Well, there's no way the Andrea Yates though. So it was Andrea Yates.
She was not guilty by reason of insanity. But go ahead. Okay. The others who who came up with it after the fact, you know, I get those so confused. And it's crazy that there's enough of them that they start to blend.
That's part of the problem. Yeah. Yeah, foreshadowing from my rant. All right. So where are we?
And so so it's a very narrow issue. It's number one under Massachusetts law. Didn't she suffer from a mental defect or disease? Okay, I don't even know that the state should be challenging that.
“The question is, was it at the time causing her to essentially not know right from wrong?”
I'm not tracking the exact language here. But essentially, she didn't know right from wrong. And so the state's going to point to every single thing, including her own attempted suicide to show that she wanted to take herself out. Right?
We can get to all the factors. I don't want to take them all away from you. When you throw some out, we can hear some of the, why don't we hear some of the prosecutors opening. And then we'll talk about that.
Okay, let's do that. Yeah, you want to do that? All right. So let's start with sought three and let's go with that. This was not a woman in the throes of psychosis on January 24th, 2023.
This was a woman who acted intentionally, rationally, and swiftly to accomplish a very specific bowl to kill. You'll see in here evidence about all the things that she did that day, what she did in the days leading up to this incident, leading to the murders. You'll hear her spending time with her family and friends.
You'll hear her appearing to be in good spirits and doing better for all intensive purposes. On that very day, you'll hear she interacted with people at the doctors office. She came home and took care of the kids. She talked to people on the phone and the attacks message. The evidence will show you she was not psychotic that day.
Johnna, in that clip, we did not show the one line that this prosecutor said, where I'm telling you my face lit up, because it was one of the greatest lines I've heard. Which was? You ready? Here we go.
Yeah. For the jury.
We are here because they are not powerful.
Powerful. Dude. Powerful. Right. It's hitting your heart.
Isn't it? Like me? Right? Oh, yeah. I thought that was brilliant.
Now, I would have like more pauses. She actually ran through when she gets to the part where how she wrapped the exercise bands around each of her kids. She kind of ran through that with a lack of emotion like she'd been living with it probably for so long.
She doesn't understand these jurors are hearing it for the first time.
Take your time. Start off with first she, you know, she, I don't know which one she started with. So she started with her eight-month-old Dawson and Dawson, and she did do a good job saying it. Dawson liked X, Y, and Z, like humanizing each one, and Kallen liked, you know, these
types of things like chicken fingers, and whatever, whatever, and five-year-old Korra who liked, I mean, she did great job humanizing them, but I needed more emotion, I needed her to connect with it, I needed her to be pausing and taking her time. But substantively, I thought she did a very effective job. Well, she doesn't have an overly complicated job because there is some, there is ample
evidence of planning. And for me, and probably for members of the jury, if she gets through, if she can convince these jurors of the planning part of this, then does the psychosis defense, does the insanity
“defense for lack of a bit of word, go out the window?”
And that's going to be the hope, I think, because what we know is she killed these children in a horrific way, wasn't just, like, she put a pillow over their head, she strangled them with exercise band.
And I had to Google something I never thought I'd ever have to Google.
How long does it take the average child to die when they're being strangled?
I mean, what?
I mean, even though I'm texting that, I'm putting that, I'm not texting, but I'm inserting
that into the word search, I'm going, oh, I got involved, like I'm going to, somebody's coming after me for that, you know? But I had to look that up and analyze that, and yeah, it's a horrific crime. But let me ask you this, John, can't somebody hear voices, be clearly psychotic as a result of postpartum and plan out some things because the voices are telling them to do something.
“Why is that inconsistent with not knowing right from wrong?”
That is planning equal knowing right from wrong. You know, it's kind of like, it just, it is, right?
This is what people imagine.
If you're in the throes of some sort of psychotic break, I think part of what a jury is going to believe is that you are not thinking at all rationally. And when you plan something, that shows that you are thinking rationally and not just planning how she killed her three innocent children, but there's going to be evidence that earlier in the day, she was playing with them, earlier than day, she was making snowmen.
And she earlier in the day, she got her husband out of the house in order to commit this crime according to the prosecution by planning how long he would be gone if she sent him to a far away take off. Yes. Yes. And the suicide too didn't work in the precious bland case where the judge found her not guilty by recent insanity. She also tried to kill herself. But here's a woman who also attempted suicide jumped out the window and
it turned out to be hard snow. And so she's forever a quadriplegic. She, that's irreversible. So it's here from the defense attorney. I like this guy. I mean, he's an old timer. There is no question. I'm intrigued by him. But he was more passionate than the prosecutor. And he was like a bull and believable and credible. I like them. Let's see if sought for supports what I saw. Go ahead. This is going on with your husband trying very hard to get the
“help she needed. She went and saw a doctor by the name. By the way, remember the open”
in the government says she shopped a rental for doctors, I guess, that she wanted to get doctors to, I don't know, give her drugs or something. You can hear evidence that she went online and she looked for someone that was into the neonatal post-baby delivery because she knew that she was in trouble. She couldn't sleep. She hadn't some. It wasn't just, you know, when you get up in the middle of the night because she phones on it, she couldn't
sleep. It didn't only get too well as a night, three hours in the night if she's lucky. It's time went on and said, "Timber, she went and see doctors' tops." Jennifer Tufts is the name of the doctor. Jennifer Tufts then gave her a prescription to Zola, which is a anti-depressant. It's one of those SSI rats. She didn't take the Zola for a couple of weeks because she's breastfeeding. She was afraid to have the baby. Have anything to do with drugs
but ultimately couldn't do it any longer. Took the Zola. It was sporadical control. I'll because we didn't hear evidence because she was bipolar. You know, give a bipolar person Zola, but she got it.
Janna, he did an amazing job. Not a silly in that clip, but he went on and on and on.
New every fact about what she had done. We're going to be talking about this case. I want to keep talking about it because it's one or the other. I mean, this woman loved her children and may likely spend the rest of her life in prison for killing them and then the question is, well, why? If it wasn't psychosis and mental illness, well, why'd she do it? And I don't know that anyone's going to be able to answer that. So I would kind of lean into that.
We have limited time left. In fact, we're already up against a break here, but let's bring
“in the husband. Can we do that? The X factor here, I think. And you tell me, if it's not”
a huge thing for the defense, is that her then husband, Patrick Clancy, is supporting her and is testifying in this case, okay? Let's look at, um, SOT 7, where he talks about how way before this incident occurred, she was already getting thoughts about harming the kids. What's the son of that? He said she had thoughts of harming in the kids, is that correct? Yeah. And did she tell you, um, whether or not she had specific thoughts of how she would
harm the kids? No. And she didn't describe that as hearing this external voice telling her to harm the kids, correct? Correct. She told you she was having intrusive thoughts herself
Of having, of harming the children, correct?
going to harm the kids? I, I didn't ask it in that way. I, it was the same thing as that
do you have a plan and is it disturbing to you? And, uh, she said no, and then she said yes. And as a result of her telling you this, that she had thoughts of harming the kids, what did you do? Um, her parents came up and, um, I think I asked her at some point, you know, do you feel like
“you need to be kept away from them? And she said no. And then, you know, I was very confusing because”
the minute later she was making the lunch or playing with them or, you know, getting the right for that or whatever it was. John, they're suing civilly. The many entities that failed her because there were signs and I think this was preventable. I do. I don't know if the husband could have done anything differently because she was seemingly so normal that day, which is what the prosecutors using against her and what I think you used against her too when you were arguing. You know,
she was so normal. Well, okay. So what does that come both way look? I admit that could come both ways. Yeah. All right. So so he was, he was very emotional. We'll, we'll cover it next week. I'm sure that this trial won't be over by next week. And even if it is, I think we need to discuss it further. We'll, you know, come back next week and we'll talk more about that. Okay.
“Let's wrap up this segment. Yeah. This guy needs a, that's it. He's walking a very, very, very”
fine line and interesting that he's supportive of his wife. But he was called, obviously, in the prosecutions case, probably why we were hearing some, uh, leading questions across exam questions, even though he was a direct witness, but we will. We'll put it in that till next week. This is a very intriguing case. And it's going to be like watching a tennis mark match. Sometimes my feel like we're on one side. Sometimes we may feel like we're on the other. I can't wait to see what the jurors,
what the jurors do with this one. All right, co-burger Brian co-burger is back. I'm not surprised at all. I really don't need it. All right. We're going to talk about it. But what? Some are saying they're shocked because he waived his right to appeal and here he's back with an appeal. We're going to discuss that, determine whether he's going to prevail or not, and you want to stick around for that, be back in just a few moments.
Welcome back to positively legal. Earlier this week, convicted killer Brian co-burger did a 180 and proclaimed his innocence. Mark, how surprised are you? Not at all. This is a guy who 15 minutes of fame wasn't enough. He wants his 16th minute. Maybe he also realizes that being in a cell all day long, is it getting him anything? No attention. Maybe he wants more suitors. Maybe he wants more donations. Maybe he wants a trip to the courthouse. Maybe he really delusioned believes that
whatever he wrote in his chicken scratch, make carry the day, and make get him an evidentiary hearing, and maybe he can argue like he wrote that he was forced threatened and coerced to take this plea
bargain that he's actually innocent. And there's always people who believe that stuff, Janna.
Were you surprised? No. I was not surprised. I was more surprised if I'm being completely candid with you. I was more surprised that he pled guilty in the manner in which he pled guilty. It was kind, you know, they were all geared up for trial. It was a long time coming, and then all of a sudden add the blue. He decides to take responsibility, although let's remember in a very odd way. He was not required to alicute, which is bizarre. Explain what that is. Explain what that is, and then
“I want to know from you. I really don't know in New York. That's what's great about doing the show”
with someone who practices in different state, which you have expected for him to alicute first to find alicute. All right. So I guess in most states, including your crazy state, Mark, of Florida, whenever a defendant pleads guilty to something, and it can minor to murder, doesn't matter.
When they plead guilty, they are also required to basically admit the facts that are incorporated
into whatever their pleading guilty, too. So usually either the judge or the prosecutor will go through the facts of the case. On such and such a day, did you murder this college, too, not such a day, did you? And how did you do it? Did you take a knife? Did you stab? Okay. And then after that, what did you do? You stabbed another student. Yes, you did, and you did that with a knife, didn't you? Yes, you did. And so for a couple of reasons, I imagine. So you can further
ensure, and we're going to get to this in a second, but you can further ensure that it is a
Knowing and voluntary plea number one.
for the victim's sake, it's taking responsibility in that sense. But, but the victims want that one
“question answered. Why? Why did you do it? And what a judge in New York ever asked someone that or”
is it more about, like here in Florida, to find out that there is a factual basis to accept that that's it. So we do that here, too. The judge will just say, I've read the arrest after David, and I'm finding a factual basis. Does it defend stipulate to a factual basis solely for purposes of plea? Yes, we do judge. And then that's it. And we typically do that on a arrangement. But for the plea, our judges around here are stickers that there has to be an allocation. And maybe that's
by design, because the other thing that happens at a plea, and it happened in the co-burger plea, is that the judge will ask the defendant a series of questions again to further ensure that this plea is knowing and voluntary. They did it in co-burger. And not only did they do it in co-burger, he actually had to check boxes on a fork to ensure the court that, yep, this is voluntary nope. Nobody made me any promises. Nope. I'm not under any drugs or anything that's clouding my
judgment. I'm all good with this judge. Check your check here, check your sign here. Here you go. Yeah, what you did. Okay. And just for the few people who don't know who co-burger is, because we didn't say who he is and what he did. And maybe my father gets him confused with Manjoni or something like that. And my father does watch this. Dad, co-burger killed four people on a college campus in a brutal way with a knife and the DNA matched his DNA matched a sheath
that was left on the bed. They are the victims, beautiful people, prime of their lives.
Look at me getting choked up because that looks like my kids. But here's the first question
that people have janna. Why is he back? He waved his right to appeal. Shouldn't that have done a janna? Why is he here? He did wave his right to appeal. That's usually baked into the cake when you when you take a plea whether it's a small one or a big one. This technically, let's if we can take an exacto knife to it, isn't exactly an appeal. It is a request for a post-conviction motion. And basically, the motion is to take back the plea. In other words, he takes vaccines.
He wants to take it back for a number of reasons, not the least of which that he includes in his handwritten motion here is he was basically co-worst provided disinformation was given a line of crap. This is according to him, not me. Even a line of crap on why he should take this plea.
His parents were always in the room when he was talking with his attorneys. They told him life
on death row was going to be terrible, but apparently life in prison without the threat of death was going to be a walk in the park. It was going to be fun, Mark. It was going to be just a joy
“to be with all the other inmates. That's what he's told, right? And for that reason you're on,”
or he should be able to take back his plea because this is all a line of crap. Let me just and listen, we're not dealing with the defendant who is writing this motion on toilet paper and doesn't have a command of the English language. Let me just a couple of things from a text, I guess, that he wrote. He said, over a year later, it is self-evident that in state V. Co. Burger talking
about himself in the third person, like George from Seinfeld, "Justice was not served." Unanswered
questions seem to multiply with each piece of discovery on sealed and the public demands the truth. The public demands the truth. This is what this asshole is saying. The public, you know what the truth is? The truth would be finding out why he did what he did and how he did what he did. That would be the truth. And that's where I am rubbed it the wrong way because when this guy took this plea and was not required to admit a damn thing, I said to myself, self, he is going to hold that
information. He's going to dangle it like a carrot someday. And he has to say, "You know what? Do better by me and I will give you the facts of this case." I will tell you why I did what I did. I will tell you who I killed first, second, third and fourth. But no, but now look, and here he is.
“Here he is, priming that pump. And that's what chaps my bind. Oh, okay.”
I have this case. Thank you for the visual of your chaps on your bind or whatever that was. Okay, so first, I don't know if you join me in saying that defendants should have the right to file a motion like this. That's right. Right. Let's start with that because you're saying, well, somebody pled guilty. Yes, but let's say, and obviously there are these types of motions because there have been random defense lawyers who pressure and threaten somebody, you know,
For whatever reason, right, and/or they're innocent.
you look at the four corners of what he wrote. Do you believe there is sufficient facts alleged
that the judge won't similarly dismiss this? If the judge doesn't, that's first part of my
question, then I look at it as well. Then the, he'll ask the prosecutors to respond along with the defense lawyers. But does he similarly just dismiss it? Look at and go, yeah, not enough. He probably won't do that only because in an abundance of caution, he will bend over backwards to make sure that coberger has the right to fully submit this request to fully submit the motion.
“I think the judge will consider it, and I also agree, he's going to deny it. That doesn't mean he”
doesn't have the coberger, doesn't have the right to make it. That doesn't, it also doesn't mean that he's going to win it. I agree with you, by the way. In fact, last night on live TV, I was asked by Chris Cuomo, what are the chances or something? I said, I think his chances are the same as seeing big foot riding on a unicorn. Wow. Yeah, because there's no evidence. His lawyers who fought like hell to spare his life, he should be kissing their touches. He should be hugging them.
He should be praying for them every day because they saved him from death row where politically
everybody wanted him to go. I never thought that they would wave death here because it was a
very unpopular thing to do, but they did it. And here he should be thrilled instead, be careful what you wish for, buddy, because John, I tell the people, what happens if and the very unlikely event. This judge ever does grant this motion and allows him to withdraw his plea. What happens? So, the death penalty will be back on the table. So, he could very well go through another trial, which the victim's families are probably not going to want. That concerns me. And then at the
right, and they do have a say in this, it's not the be all end-all, but they do have a say. And then the death penalty could be back on the table. But let's look at this from another perspective,
because we see this all-time mark. When somebody gets sentenced to a long period of time, 20 years
“life really doesn't matter. You literally have nothing but time on your hands. And that's why”
with there's so many motions out there. Hey, be as corpus, all these motions, where it inmates file motion, have to motion the toilet papers to raw. You know, I don't get to wear socks that are bleached. The hot dogs are too, they do this. They don't have any other outlet. And so they do it. But this guy, because of the fame and the notoriety, because how heinous this case was, because there is a Netflix special coming out, haha. Oh, coincidence. Yeah. He's now decided that
he's going to rear his ugly head and try to get, like you said, another 15 minutes of fame. I don't think it's a coincidence that Netflix is coming out with the show at the same time. He's drafting his motion without the help of an attorney. So not if, but when this judge denies this motion, because I'm confident that'll happen, one of the things that Judge will do is point to
“the plea colloquy. Yeah. That happens in New York. It happens in Florida. It happens in state”
court. It happens in federal court. Judges don't just say, oh, you want to plead guilty. And you want to take probation like the state's offering you, or hey, you want to go and get life. There is something called a plea colloquy with a judge asks a series of questions. Hmm. To ensure that someone is freely and voluntarily, knowingly and intelligently, giving up certain cherished constitutional rights, including but not limited to their right to go to trial,
confront the witnesses against it, them testify on their own behalf, up here to a higher court. Did anybody force you, threaten you? Cours you to go to your right. So you're doing so freely and voluntarily. Have you had enough time to talk to your lawyer? Do you need any more time to talk to your lawyer? Are you satisfied with his or her services? Yep. If you're not a U.S.ist and you could be deported blah, blah, blah, blah, in this case, this judge asked questions. Let's go to slot number nine
and hear some of the questions. I watched this live and I was writing it down and he asked the right questions. I don't know if a slot has it all. Let's see what it's got. Go. I'm a co-burger. I need to ask you some questions this afternoon or I guess it's this morning still. I do this to ensure that you understand the nature of the charges which I understand you're going to plead guilty as well as the possible consequences to you of your guilty please. I want to make sure your plea is given voluntarily
and I want to make sure that you actually committed the crimes to which you're pleading guilty because I don't want you to plead guilty to a crime you didn't commit. If you attempt to plead guilty today
For some reason I don't you're playing Jingle then it is possible that really...
today could be used against you later at trial. Do you understand that? Yes. All right. Thank you.
“And while you're standing actually, why not you take the oath from the clerk?”
Sorry, Judge, I'm a psychopath and I don't take oath and follow them. All right. And Mr. Coburg, just to make it easier, you don't need to stand when you speak to me. I appreciate you. Oh, thank you for making it easier for convenience. You can remain seated. All right. That's his way of saying sit down because anyway, he went on and on and on and asked and like are you satisfied with your lawyers? You know, have you had enough time? Are you pleading guilty because you are guilty?
Yes. He said those words, John, I wrote them down. If ever there was a time where he was being
framed like the Mona Lisa, right? He would have said it at that time. If wait, Judge, I mean, I'm pleading guilty, but there are a bust load of nuns that saw me at a different place in time and my lawyers who've been threatening and coercing me, they're not willing to advance that on my behalf. That would have been the time to say it, John. Well, I'm saying you're going to have said here. I'm upset. Not really. I've seen it happen. I've seen please go south because the defendant
refuses to say yes when they're supposed to say yes or no when they're supposed to say no. And
most judges will say, okay, sending it down for trial, seeing a week, right? It didn't happen here.
It didn't happen here. And you know, I don't know what kind of coercive listen, it's not coercive to tell a defendant that death row was going to be far worse than Jen Pop in a prison for the rest of your life. It's not coercive to do that. Now, he does include, I will say this. He didn't include in his motion that he believes there was a Brady violation. I don't think he said it that way,
“but he said he can't watch the Brady bunch. What, what did you say about Brady who's Brady?”
Excalipatory evidence that was not. So why don't you explain that to people? You don't know what Brady means. You smarty pants. Brady is the seminal case where the prosecution, the prosecution and every case has a duty, a indeligable duty. You said, duty to present any sort of expulpatory evidence that exists, expulpatory meaning it'll help you not in culpatory. They have to give it to you. They must give it to you. If not, your conviction would certainly get overturned.
He's alluding to that in his hand written. Oh, he says those words. Oh, that must mean it's true, Johnna. He says he says those words. But like you said, this judge will give him wide birth. This judge will give this motion's consideration, and this judge will probably very efficiently deny it. Well, my, so, so I agree with you. And in addition to the plea colloquity, like most courts, I don't know if they do it there in New York, but certainly you're in Florida.
There's a plea sheet, a sheet with the list of questions. Yeah. And let's take a look at what co-burger sign. Some of the, well, his allegation. One of them is that he was coerced and he was threatened. So let's look. Did the judge address that in his little sheet? And the question was 19. Number 19 on a sheet has your attorney or anyone else forced or coerced you in any way into accepting the plea agreement. That's no. No. Next question have any promises been made to you
that have influenced your decision of plea guilty. No. No. There's another question. Do you want your attorney to take any further action on this case? What did he say, Johnna? No. Right. And it just goes on and on. So I mean, in what universe does he think flyably, he can get the judge to overturn this? It doesn't matter. It doesn't matter whether he thinks
“it'll actually happen. The fact is he's making the motion. He's back in the legal spotlight.”
Yeah, I can make a motion too. Get outta here. Go back to jail. Here's my motion, Johnna. Go back to jail. And stop messing with these victims in all seriousness. Stop messing with them. You know, I said yesterday also publicly that I truly wish that these families can somehow reach a level spiritually. Yeah, I'm talking spiritually because it's positively legal. Hear me out that his actions don't cause them that same visceral reaction, you know, that negative reaction. And I understand
why it does. I think it probably would for me. But I'm hoping that they're at a place where they say,
What?
in any way going to ruin a second of my precious remaining time, merely because this guy chose
“to write a meritless motion and file it with the court. I agree. The family of these victims,”
they have have a strength that I don't know if I would have. And I'm happy for them that they have it and they'll see through this. And they will probably maybe they'll just turn to buy night. They're not going to give him the time of day. Although, although, I will say, I bet you if you privately could ask them, if you had one wish, what it be to know, to know from him or to know from some way how this happened. What do they do? They want to know. I found out through
someone else that, yeah, they want to know. And they're upset that they didn't get that answer.
Right. So that that is the impetus to closure. And I do hope these families at some point get that they deserve. Right. All right. Speaking of closure, we do need to wrap this up. And real quick, though, real quick before you tease the final segment. Yes or no, does he get an evidentiary hearing? Meaning will we see the defense lawyers on the stand being questioned? Will there be witnesses to support? It's it's a simple yes or no. You got to make the
prediction. I know it's tough. I don't want you to ask me that question. I'm asking you. It's tough. Who knows? I'm going, I'm going now. I'm going thumbs down. I'm hoping that happens because that really will be a spectacle and not good for the families. I'm hoping no. I'm going to go with no today. I'll go with no. I'll just go with no. And you know what? If the judge is wrong, many, many
“months down the road, some appellate court will say no, you need to have an evidentiary hearing. And”
then you can do it. It's okay. Yeah. That's true. That's true. But I'm going to say that's it. That's a no from me. Okay. Simon Cal, okay. Next up on a little bit of a lighter note. And Air Force lawyer is facing possible jail time. And the end of his career after wait for it. A pool party. Day two. Welcome back to Positively Legal. And this is my favorite segment, this part because we get to go off the record and rant a little bit and I get to hear Jana pick some random topic.
She never shares with me and then just goes off. But before we do that, we're going to talk about
a lawyer. That's right. A lawyer who's dedicated in the military has had a long career. And he rented out his $1.5 million home in a swanky, nice neighborhood. And he, I added swanky. I have no idea.
“But I'm thinking that a $1.5 million home in the hood. You know, it's not in a bad place, right?”
Okay. So he rents out his house for what he believed was going to be a fundraiser and even had security there. But instead of there being the, I think like limited numbers, like 40 people he thought would be there. This guy, Alex Simpson, who's 42 years old, he got in a lot of trouble because like hundreds of people showed up, okay? And they were twerking and they were working and they were doing things that pissed off the neighbors. And the neighbors called the police and you would think
Jana, you would think would you not that the police came and warned him and told him, listen, you got to, you know, shut the thing down, right? And did they do that, Jana? No, no, no, they didn't Jana. Shouldn't have, Jana, what happened, Jana? Well, you would think because he's an adult, right, that she said, hey, the neighbors don't like this. You're violating the noise ordinance. I don't know, there's an anti twerking rule in this neighborhood. I don't know, like, but I don't
know, whatever the problem was, but no, like, they charged this guy. What? Yeah, they did with just certainly with just a civil ordinance, right? A non-criminal ordinance, please tell me that, Jana, they're low level crimes, but they're crimes. And we call them violations here. They're low level crimes, but even with a low level crime, you can do a small amount of jail time. I think this guy's facing possibly 90 days. It could be a right possibly public, public nuisance,
breach of the peace, disturbing the peace, and worse, his careers on the line now. Yeah, that's the military lawyer. Yes. Right. He hired the security team. There's a name. There's a
Word that when people put out the party and then let others know about it.
there's something to some word? I forget what it's called. There's a word that that means that
that so many people hear about the party and then show up and it shouldn't happen. But, but there's no reason that he foresaw that happening. New was going to happen, but it did, Jana.
“Yeah, it did. And that's unfortunate. Now, look, you want to, you want predictions?”
Well, we're before predictions, before predictions, let's get all the facts out, right? So let's go to Satin. Let's meet Alex Simpson. Let's hear what he has to say. But in the today, it was a poor party. Things didn't go right at the let out and at the conclusion of it. We've acknowledged that things have been handled. I think now, one for it, you know, having multiple
court dates and potential criminal charges and records is just a bit too much for this.
We want to apologize again, and so I got blown out of proportion, which wasn't that bad to not in my eyes. I think that's one of the things that bothers me most about everything that's happening right now is that, you know, please did come. Please did talk to the people at the party. I'm including riding, including, you know, our security professional that we had on-site, and every toe that things were fine, noise levels were not too high, and that, you know,
things were okay. Being towed, you know, by officers that responded on the scene that things were okay, and then some of the days later receiving, you know, citations, misdemeanor, criminal charges, is a bit, you know, confusing. So this neighbor, Brian Holmer, who lives nearby, told a local news outlet that it was a twerk fest. His words, that there were females on top of vehicles wearing thongs. It was completely inappropriate. I think we have some video of that. Let's,
let's see if we can run that. And, and apparently, the neighbor's driveways were swamped with cars, and other partygoers said that the attendees were being sexually explicit. Here's my question to you, Janna. You notice the color of most of the people in attendance, including the person who got cited, and do you think that that might have had something to do with the neighbor's frustration? I don't know if this was a racist, if this is provoked by any sort of racist animus by a neighbor,
if thrown it into the discussion, because I think it might be. I wonder if they would have reacted the same way if everybody was twerking and white. I think that the neighbor is a prude and a stick in
“the mud. And, yeah, and that's what I think as so many neighbors are. I mean, look, they're neighbors.”
Right? I don't know. So, I would hope that it wasn't racially motivated. Torking isn't against the law. Pool parties aren't against the law. So, you're a little loud. Cops can come and shut it down, send everybody home. Okay. That's fine. Janna, the guy is facing bigger than it was. He's facing a $500 fine and up to 90 days in jail. No, you got a 180 bucks. I think to rent out his house for what he thought was a charity,
a fundraiser. Listen, there, but for the grace of God, my kids maybe have a party, whatever. I say, you can invite some friends. It goes viral, because my kids are popular. They are adults, but they kids come. There's hundreds of kids. They're doing drugs, whatever. And all of a sudden, I get sighted criminally. That could happen, Janna, criminally. Right. And I'll fly down to Florida and I'll represent you. Would you discount how much you charge
me? Maybe 20% would you do? Absolutely not. I know what you're worth. I'm going to charge you double. You are heartless and I don't like you. Anyway, time to rent. I have a new rent. It's about Janna. It's a stingy. Changing it on the fly. I hope for the best for this guy. He's not going to go to jail. It's okay. Yeah. I hope it gets dismissed. At least like a diversion and then they get
a dropped and then it doesn't affect this career. Anyway, Janna, I want to hear you rant. What did you pick this week? Let's do it. Okay. And you may have even seen this in in your neck of the woods. It was a story that came out of the New York Post and it was about
“two lawyers who got caught making out on a bench in broad daylight. How do we know?”
Because a tick-tocker caught him. Here's why we should be mad. First, about public displays of
affection, A.K.A. P.D.A.s. Who needs them? Seriously, what purpose do they serve? Are they a romantic demonstration of your undying love and affection? Or a selfish, selfish scratching of your libido's itch? Tomato, tomato, as far as I'm concerned. And for that reason, I don't need a front row seat. Get a room. Granted, not all P.D.A.s are created equal. Take handholding. Doesn't bother me unless your whimsical palm sharing prevents me from getting past you on a busy
City sidewalk or blocks the entire airport escalator when you decide to stop ...
without breaking formation. Have a little situational awareness why don't you and demonstrate your
“oneness off to the damn side. Next, there's the cursory kiss. A peck, if you will.”
Tolerable? I suppose, in the same way a single mosquito bite is tolerable. I mean, I'd rather not suffer the itch, but I can move on from it easily enough until that peck turns into multiple pecks. I want step behind a pair of newlyweds on a plane who spent five hours incessantly pecking. It was painful, not because I could see it so much as I could hear it. That puckering sucking sound of even a brief kiss when it's not on your own lips is oddly annoying.
Multiply that sound a thousand times over during a cross country flight and you too will be
looking to set the toilet paper on fire just to land the plane early. Finally, there is what we
witnessed with these two lawyers, apparently taking a break from their briefs on a New York City bench for all the world to see. That level of face sucking in public is 100% inappropriate, 100% of the time, but especially for lawyers. Frankly, no client wants to imagine
“their attorney jerking off between court appearances. What is that on your ear?”
No, your left ear. Is that a hair gel? Yeah, great. I just ran out. Not the confidence builder, you know. Show me an attorney who is so easily distracted by love or hate or a hangout for that matter, and I'll show you an attorney who loses a lot. But for the rest of the world, so many things are socially wrong with making out in public. Tongues, for example. Unless you have four legs or covered in fur, I don't want to see yours at all,
but especially when it's touching another person's tongue. Look, I'm no prudent. I made passionate,
fiery Leo with an unyielding appreciation for hot men, but you will never witness that appreciation
on TikTok because it ain't your business. And I ain't going to make it your business by slobbering all over some dude in public. Now, speaking of the TikTok, the influencer who captured that ill-time immature make-out session between grown-ass lawyers, you're a dick, a total TikTok dick, and you know it. That's your thing. I get it. So go ahead. Keep up the shitty work. Just don't be surprised when you get sued, Pan Day Ho. And that's all right. Yes, and if Tom Brady was on a random
bench in Central Park, it's going to take a moment. You'd slobber with that boy so loud. It would make us all sick. Yeah, I guess it's situational, right? Yeah. All right. Let's get serious for my rant. If you see something, say something. We hear that all the time at our local airport here in Hollywood slash Fort Lauderdale. If you see something, say something. It primarily deals with human trafficking, but it really can apply to so many other situations and circumstances. If you see a stranger,
or a family member or a friend, engaging in activities that could harm them or others, say something. If you see it, say something. Many feel like it's an active betrayal. If I turn a friend in or a family member in, but it's actually the greatest act of love imaginable. It's not betrayal. I'm saying all this by the way, because I've seen way too many tragedies, whether it be a mother killing her precious offspring, because she's going through something horrible.
“And I'm not saying in the case of the Lindsey Clancy case, that's what happened. I'm saying in some”
others, maybe they're preventable, or the kid who winds up shooting up a school, because he's knee deep in obsession over guns and violence and rhetoric that you know is not serving him well. Say something. Some parents say, well, it's just a phase. It's a phase that their kid is obsessed with mass shooting and starts to stock pile weapons. It's just a phase they'll get through it. I say you have a moral obligation to intervene. You can't sit back anymore. We know these tragedies
are going to continue. Let's try to prevent some of them. You say, well, what if I'm wrong?
I'll flip that and have you ask the following question instead?
I'd rather attend a family gathering and be uncomfortable than meet with everybody at a funeral.
“So don't worry about people getting angry with you or worrying that your relationships are going to”
be awkward if you get it wrong. I'd rather you have the sense that you saved people's lives because you spoke up. So if you see something, say something, and we need to start saying it in our own homes and in our own lives, because sometimes the people closest to the danger are the only ones who have a chance to stop it. Mark. Talk to me. Fucking pro found man. Oh my goodness.
For real. I thought it was, what am I going to do? But if one person thinks about it, just one.
Sometimes the person you said, sometimes the person closest to the danger is the only one who can stop it. Is that the good? Yeah. The exact quote, John, I was sometimes the people closest to the danger are the only ones who have a chance to stop it. Chills. Right? Really? This rant is probably going to save somebody's lives. Whereas my rant, well, you know. No, I mean, they do not underestimate the significance of stopping people from kissing in public. It's just, it's really, it's like a
school shooting. I, is what you're saying. When I become president, no more kissing in public. That's
it. Well, good luck with that. All right. Well, you know, and I'm, I am actually upset that we're done talking, John, because it's going to be a week. And I won't get to speak with you, because Lord knows you'll charge me for the time. If I call you that anyway, I'm going to wrap this up. And thank you. I'm extremely grateful for you. I am also grateful because I'm positively legal. We end with gratitude. Okay. I'm grateful for my wife, my three spectacular kids. We had a wonderful
dinner last night. We got them all together. And it was just wonderful. And I'm extremely grateful for the last breath that I took that I get to do this wonderful show. John, what are you grateful for? Wow. I am grateful also for this wonderful show. I don't want to be repented. I want to find new
“you should have three new things a day. You should start your day with three things that you're”
great for. And I suppose people are going to have them on repeat. But I am grateful for my beautiful office, my beautiful co-workers, and my, my beautiful view. I have been loving every morning to a beautiful view. And I say thank you every day before my feet hit the floor. Fantastic. Do you know that every night before you go to sleep and I've been doing this for over 15, 20 years? I open up my iPhone. I'm not preaching. I'm just telling you what I do. And if you want guys want to do it,
you do it too. Open up the note section of your iPhone. You simply write the date and the top. You can do three things. Studies show that three things can change your psychology. You don't
“need five things. I do five things. Five things for which you're most grateful. The only thing I”
will tell you is be extremely detailed and also do not repeat. So what started 20 years ago is as I'm grateful for my wife has evolved to I'm grateful for my wife for cooking me a healthy chicken teriyaki dinner with broccoli and allowing me to rub her feet on the couch while we watch the date line murder mystery about a woman who kills her husband. Like it's detailed and I get to go back and relive those experiences and it changes your psychology right before you go to sleep.
So I'm a huge believer in gratitude and attitude of gratitude, Jonathan. Thank you. I'm extremely grateful for you. And we are looking forward to next week. Lots more to talk about. Lots more fun and analysis on all these wonderful legal topics keeping it positively legal. We look forward to seeing you next week. I hope you choose to have a wonderful week. Take care.
