Holdout Juror in Lindsay Clancy Case, Karen Read Parallels, and the Future of Nick Reiner’s Defense, with Alan Jackson

>> Welcome to this week's "In the Well."

“Boy, if we're not, I'm sandwiched between the two prosecutors who I”

not only revered, but also feared at the same time when they were both DAs in their prospective counties. >> Well, it's just, you know, Allen and I would talk to each other. Like, we, I've known Allen for years. Allen, I've been friends for years, and I would get his advice on cases I was doing.

And when he was a inspector, like, I commiserated with him, I won't reveal any confidence his, but yeah. So, you probably did have to deal with both of us at the same time, one of them. >> I did, I can't imagine a better prosecutor sandwich than send right here with Matt, squeezing you, preferably and literally right now.

>> Exactly, boy, I've told this story before, by the way, for anybody who's watching this. We thought, who better to talk about juries that are hung in Massachusetts and then followed up in the 12th clock, better than AJ, but for those who probably are not in the weeds,

AJ was known for specter, but when I, the first case that I encountered him really and saw

how widely he was, what was Japanese O.J., and I, what was that one year, yeah. And I thought, and I, I remember this the other day, Allen, because of Luigi, because in New York, they still have the double jeopardy protection, unlike California. One of the reasons California eliminated it was because of AJ. And Japanese O.J., the guy, wife was murdered in L.A., he goes back to Japan, they acquitted.

And he taunts the L.A.P.D after that, my told my ex-client. And he steps foot into Guam, not realizing it's an American territory, and goes into Saipan, it says Saipan, not realizing it's an American territory. And I think I'm so smart. Why got a once in jeopardy, I go into department one hundred, the judge buys what I'm selling

“and says, yes, Mr. Gargas, you're right, you know what Allen does?”

He goes back, and he files a conspiracy to commit murder, and the judge says, well, sorry, we got to have a factual hearing on that, and they ended up expediting the guy back here,

but we never got to go to trial, because he died within 24 hours of getting into L.A.P.D.

The city. No, I got a fascinating case. I got to go to Allen Jackson's story, so we had, you know, there's the famous racer, Mickey Thompson, right, Mark, the, yeah, so that was an Orange County, that was an Orange County case, Orange County filing.

And I don't want to write it in front of that, I got curry shorts. What's that? Did Allen try that in front of Terry Schwartz, who'd you, yeah, yes, yes, and pass it behind the scenes. What happens, Mark, is that thing, it was a really tough case, and I had a, I had a relationship

“with his sister, Colleen Campbell, and this poor woman, she lost her son to an Orange County”

case that I got to know her on, and then she also her brother was murdered, and the guy that had an Orange County got cold feet, and he somehow, Allen, I still don't really understand somehow he figures out a way to ship it off to LA, which normally is death to a murder case and Allen Jackson's like, if that, Allen tries it and friggin wins it in LA and kicks everybody's ass.

So yeah, that was, and I gave, yeah, that was the other tough one. If there have been a prediction market Allen, I would have bet against you all day every day on that case. I thought a lot of people would have. A lot of people would have.

Yeah, that was a tough case, and I, it was 19 years old at the time, I tried it. I mean, it was as ice cold as you can get, and the evidence was extraordinarily circumstantial. It was powerful. I mean, there was, motive evidence was, you know, out the, out the, wasu, but, I mean,

we took a, we took a position that, if you could put it this way, it wasn't as much

convicting Michael Goodwin as it was exonerating the other seven and a half billion people

on the planet. There was just nobody else who needed who wanted Mickey Thompson dead, so you're welcome. Yeah. Yeah. Thank you.

And a lot of us were like, you know, LA is where our case was a good a die. Marquez, you know. Yeah. Yeah. Our murder goes up there and it went up in some, on the desk is some lure that's been

there for four and a half years, who just wants to go home for the holidays, like, and that one went up with that on Jackson, and I know now and already I'm like, oh, we got a, we got a fighting shot now, and then he did great work. Yeah. Allen may be the only person on planet that Colleen Campbell loved more than me.

I don't know if that's true.

I look. I'll take it because I love her too. Yeah. I loved her too. I love her memory.

I love her spirit. Amazing woman. But she was, she was a big, big fan of yours, Matt, like just huge fan of yours. You treated her and her family, like they were your own family, and I, I tried to walk in those same, in the same footsteps.

Hey. So let's open it here. Allen. Yeah.

Of my friends, you're the only guy I know that's tried a case in Massachusetts.

“Why do the prosecutor suck so bad in the state of Massachusetts?”

Can you break it for me? It is a, it is a long and storied problem that they've had in Massachusetts or at least in the counties that I've, that I dealt with, the, the county that I dealt with, specifically a Norfolk County, they just got a new DA yesterday. So Tuesday was the election, and Adam Dich did not win a woman by the name of Juna Perkins

won the election. So Michael Morris is out, and Juna has promised to that point, Matt Juna's promised that she's going to do things differently, that it's not going to be this old boys network. It's not going to be, you know, who you know, it's, it's going to be how you, how you prosecute cases where the evidence leads you as opposed to covering for the police, covering

them for the Massachusetts State Police, covering for each other, which has been sort of the calling card of a lot of the DA's offices around there, they're, they're, they're so insular and so invested in their own politics, their own gamesmanship, that they can't get out of their own way. To find example, after example, after example, of people in authority, for instance, not

being prosecuted, giving a, being given a pass, and the, the average citizen who's not part of the, the, the infrastructure, the political infrastructure, the law enforcement infrastructure, the DA infrastructure, the prosecutor, the prostitorial infrastructure, that, those kind of people, they don't get the pass, they don't get the fair shot. So it's, it's been a broken system, Matt, for a long, long time, and my hope is, as of

yesterday, is Perkins brings a whole new breath of fresh air to, to the, at least one very important county. Well, there's an old saying, a great chance he's to say in Orange County, he's a great

judge, politics, and prosecutor, prosecutor power are toxic cocktail always, and it's just,

I would like to see more game, you know, like, like the dedicated, actual, you know, trial lawyers that are, that, you know, that are invested in and supported by an elected DA, so you can have more integrity in the process, born against, you know, like the, you know,

“I think along with that would go to judgment, right?”

Somebody that's a professional dedicated career, like you were, are better at making those calls and making the tough calls sometimes, that's, that's saying no, or I think market agree with this on case like this one, maybe coming in saying, hey, there's some legitimate mental health issues, let's try to work some sort of deal, and I don't know what happened behind the scenes full disclosure on, on, on Clancy, I don't know if they, if they tried

really hard to settle this mark, I, I don't get the, I don't get it at all, right? Like, I don't get the impression they did into Allen's point, you know, talking about it's interest, you bring up the good one case, because there, you've got nothing but motive, and it kind of trumps evidence in my opinion, but here you've got no motive, whatsoever in all kinds of evidence, and that just goes to show you, you know, as we're taping this,

they've recessed for the day, it's apparently 11 to one, given, you know, be interesting when this drops to my own, I'd love to hear where you guys think, given how, Readington was arguing so forcefully to get rid of the one, and how the prosecutor was arguing so forcefully to keep them, I'm assuming everybody in that courtroom thinks it's one person who's already, as bad as pro prosecution as you can get, I mean, is there any other way

to read that? What happened?

“No, I think that's exactly right, I, I think you can also tell by the charge that the judge”

gave, the four person came out, they wrote a note, I don't know what the note said, but immediately thereafter, I, I heard conflicting stories, I wasn't in the courtroom, obviously, I, I was hearing things the same way that you guys were, I heard originally that only a number of jurors were interviewed by the judge, but now I'm hearing that it may have been all 12, including the four person, either way, the judge did do something that's

extraordinary, which is bringing each juror up and questioning each juror independently, even after two, two times that the jurors coming back and saying, look, we're sort of deadlocked, we, we don't know if we can continue deliberating because there's something going wrong, and this particular note indicated this juror is not following the court's instruction on reasonable doubt, which tells me that it's suggestive at least that this

person is digging their heels in on the guilt side, as opposed to either the knock guilty

or can note that this juror is saying, I don't care what the evidence is, she's guilty. As opposed to, okay, we have to, to hold the prosecution to their burden beyond any

“and all reasonable doubt to a moral certainty. I've said this before, the only thing that”

I do appreciate about the Massachusetts justice system. There's not a whole hell of a lot that I do appreciate about it, but I do appreciate this, but they do have one of the strongest and well-thought-out defense, and it should, the, the reasonable down instruction should be differentiated. They have a, a very strong reasonable doubt instruction that includes the phrase moral certainty and, and they embrace that. So my suggestion, at least my gut

is, I think it's a, a hanging jury that's leaning toward the defense. That's also corroborated by what you noted, Mark, that, uh, Readington stood up and said, get rid of this guy, or

this guy, whoever it is. Well, he has got him right. So in our Matt and I always text and

we've also got a larger one. I was saying, how many times, and Matt was compared to the dreamy has about failing a test. How many times you've had, I know I have, where I'm making a

“closing argument, and one of the jurors wheels on me, and I know that I'm under no circumstances,”

am I getting that juror back, and, and I will do anything to get rid of that juror during deliberations, virtually anything, within ethical confines. Readington must, though, people were saying, I heard some, I, he's, you know, oh, he's awfully cocky, he's arrogant. No, he's in that courtroom. He knows who's with him. And who not? And he also read the note, and God knows what the, the four person said in the note, the four person could have said anything.

The four person literally could have said, this person is not understanding the reasonable doubt instruction, and they're just continuing to vote guilty, or whatever. I don't know that that's the case, but it could be. But Kevin Reddington's not stupid. He's been around a few years. He knows what he's doing, and his gut instinct is this juror is not good for the defense. This juror's got to go. And I'll say, you know, they broke for today, I suspect that

if the jurors come back tomorrow at, you know, say an hour into deliberation and say the same thing, look, we're just hopelessly deadlocked. That ain't going to be the end of it. Kevin Reddington is going to bounce off the walls trying to get rid of that juror. He's going to say, I want a hearing. I want the judge to, the court to inquire of every single juror, including this juror, I want the court to, to single out the juror, and potentially allow both the prosecution

and the defense to question that juror, and whether or not he or she is able to or willing to

follow the law. And ultimately, I want that juror removed. It's not fair for Ms. Clancy to have

to go through this again, because of one who accounts to try and juror, who is admitting, perhaps, that he or she is not willing to follow the law. Yeah, it'd be pretty unfriendly, but then they came back and said, that juror was the whole effort not guilty or legally. I know, right, right. I look, you got to, you got to play the odds, right? You got to play the odds, right? You got to play the odds, right? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. It's an odd answer. Megan Kelly, she asked that question.

“I was on her show 15 minutes ago. And she's like, why is everybody assuming it's for the defense?”

And my answer was, because we all watched this trial, watched a, watch a very experienced defense lawyer, school to prosecutors are not ready for prime time. You know, and it's like, without taking a position on where I think this case should land, it's just tough, man, watching the, the process. Because on the other side, you have the death of three little kids, and you just want, I personally, wherever it winds up, I just, I prefer to see better lawyers.

You know, like, like, on the other hand, I pasture you against Kevin Rettington in this thing. You would have been down his fricking throat because he did make more than one mistake.

And these prosecutors just never expected it. What did it? And I saw him make some mistakes.

Actually, then Mark Ergos would not have made. And it looked, I, I, I'm full disclosure, I think it's close and argument sucked. You know, it'll be, it's going to come out on the wash, especially if he wins. But he's talking about the cops. He's going after the prosecutors making a bunch of arguments with less than an hour. Can you guys imagine arguing this case in an hour or less? Like, no, no, I was shocked when he said that the day before Matt, he said,

I can 30 minutes. I was like, what? You talking about 30 minutes? You know, 30 hours. And even, totally, right? If this was, any of the three of us, right? Like, I'm doing, I'm doing two hours on the lawn this, because it's so fricking complicated. Mark, I never talked about this. Right. Last week, Alan, we couldn't, we read through the Massachusetts lawn, that's the Macool rule. Well, we couldn't figure it out. And between the two of us, now it's elaborate.

The different burner trials with mental health as an issue. Right. It's super ambiguous. So

this. Like, of course, they're, of course, they're, of course, they're, I've been promised for your ex-nobody. Explain the water on. Right. Right. No, it's difficult. And you, you bring up a good point. And one of the obvious points about why to, to Megan's question, why, why are we all presuming that this is leaning toward the defense? And you said, because, and, and one of the, the point counterpoints is you do have three very, very innocent little lives, little souls,

little hearts that are gone, and they're never coming back. And that's, that's devastating for all of us.

But that is the very point of why it's one of the best points of why she cannot be convicted, because she's ill. Nobody in their right mind would kill their children, that almost demands a logical inference that she's insane. She was insane at the time. And as a, as a civilized community, we do not punish sick people. And we don't do it. And, and she was very, very, very sick.

“I think the, the evidence was overwhelming that, that she was not in her right mind. She was very ill,”

and can, can accommodate with that. She had also been let down by the, the, the, the medical infrastructure that she begged for help from. You know, it's fun, though. And I can hear you as a

prosecutor, arguing the, taking the opposite and saying, everybody's out of their mind when they're

more, now there's been a thing of course. He's crazy. I can see you. I would look, man, I would love to have, that be something I would have bought tickets for. You versus Kevin Rattington in this case, with you is the day. And we wouldn't have seen, I will, I will not be especially prosecuted. It would have been persuasive, because we've, the three of us have done, I mean, probably 200 murder trials I bet. And there are, everybody's out of their freaking mind, except

for the serial killers and the, and the hitman, everybody's crazy when they do a murder question

“as on this one, and that's the interesting, that's the interesting factual thing, right?”

Was this public? Yeah, I never understood. I suppose it could come back, and it could be 11 to

one for gills, and then we'll all be sitting here saying, well, whatever, it'll be clip for time immemorial, but it could be right along me, but it, yeah, the interesting thing to me is, when people were saying, and even after a couple of weeks of this trial, they're saying that jury must hate her, the jury must hate her, and I, all I kept saying is, what are you talking about? She's paralyzed. She's in a wheelchair. Her kids are dead. She's sobbing uncontrollably.

Her husband is moved on. She's got no life. Her mother-in-law is there. The grandmother to work kid to her babies, that she took their life. You really think the jurors want a killer at the stake? I don't know. What human nature you're in, I mean, is untethered any reality I exist in. Yeah, plus her mom can't have it really well, instead of her sister, and that reflects well on

“her. I think the jury will relate to that. You have one thing, guys, that I did, that I, just about”

lost my mind on is this woman that was videotaping the jurors. You guys hear about that? Oh, my God. You guys have to be here today. I don't know much about it. What happened? Yes. Some were hired nurse who goes in there, says Massachusetts all day long. You take one look at her face. You could pick what, what's he's from, Ellen, you were more familiar than we are, but man, she, yeah, she was videotaping the jurors when they were leaving. And that's one thing

for the viewer. That's, that is the weak link of the judicial system. Our system of justice depends on the integrity of jurors. And that is, um, his adequacy, I, she, look, and I don't know all the facts on it, but that's, you know, that the guys that knock on the doors, the jurors, like that's, that's a place where I believe, punitive, friggin, example, making. And, uh, and I, I don't know if we're gonna see it or not, but that she, like, she came out of the court, Ellen, and she, like,

she was smiling, and she ran through a throng of reporters, and then started doing interviews, and one of them asked her, hey, now you're famous, and she's, she's giggling, and it's like, in my view, they need to frickin hammer that lady, you know, and, yeah, I couldn't even see, but she might not be, like, that kind of stuff cannot be tolerated in, in my opinion, but yeah, doesn't, it doesn't matter. Prolensy, anti-Lensy, pro prosecution, anti-process, it doesn't matter.

There is a, a sanctity of the jury system that has to be protected at all costs. I do agree with that, Matt, that's a, it's a great point. I had heard that someone was indicted, like almost immediately, for having video tapes, one or more of the jurors, uh, who knows what a reasoning is, but if her reason was, because she wanted to get famous, shame on her, it doesn't matter what a reasoning was. Uh, you, you just can't do it. I mean, everybody in the, everybody in the free world knows that

from ever serving, and it's one of the most important. There's only two things you have to do in this

“country, the mandated that you have to do. You know, that nobody can tell you where you're going to live,”

nobody's going to tell you what your job is. You have to pay your taxes, and you have to serve on a jury. That's it. There's the only two things. You know, I'm serving the military. It is sacrosite. So I agree, we can't have a chilling effect like that bullshit, um, happening in or around our jurors ever. Yeah. I just wonder, though, you know, this whole trial has been about the failure of the mental health system, and the accused is a nurse by training. The unhinged woman is a nurse by training. I don't know what's in

the water. It's a medically there in Massachusetts. Well, everybody's in the medical industry out there. You can't swing a cat without hitting someone that's in the medical industry. I mean, it's, it's funny, because math health, math's health is is considered one of the, the premier public health systems, but it's also one of the most criticized public health systems. Everybody out there's like a nurse, or a doctor, or a nurse practitioner, or whatever, everybody. So it is, it's not, it didn't shock

me that this person is also in the medical industry, too. Did we have the moral, marked, did we used to have the moral certainly language in the California? We did. We did, we did. We did, we did. Yeah,

“the fighting, the, when did they get rid of it, Mark, I, I want to see the, I think we were practicing”

when we got rid of it. It was. I, we were, and they did get rid of it, and the cows supreme said that was fine. And mind you, all of my closing argument, props, I had the trash because I had hell, yeah, I'm, I'm big blackers, yeah, a whole bit. I mean, that was, it was, wow, the other thing they don't have in Massachusetts to my understanding, so I wanted to ask you this out because you went

through obviously famously a split. In Karen's first trial, there was a split. And as I remember,

it was heavily tilted towards NG. And in California, you would invite under 1385 the judge to exercise their discretion to prevent the prosecution from refiling. They don't have anything like that is my understanding of Massachusetts. Is that right? No, the judge was I, I, at sidebar with their arguments that were made, I can't go into detail about what the arguments were, but I certainly was aware of, I mean, that I was used to that coming from California, giving the judge's discretion

to say, look, no reasonable juror can come to a determination that she's guilty. So this needs to be dismissed. That was, that fell on deaf ears completely. Yeah. I mean, it was un-un-equifical that that case was going to be re-tried and re-tried quickly. So I was not, I was, I was swimming against the tide, I'll put it that way. So I know people in you and I don't want to put you in an uncomfortable situation. I will just tell you, I'll channel your frustration. That, I watched

clips of that case of your trial. And I was so frustrated for you, for me, with that judge. And I will just say, I, that is, I don't mind a judge who's an equal opportunity, curmudgeon. In fact, I love that. I, I want somebody who's going to hammer me hammer the other side. That's, that's great. But when they, you know, my father used to call them Diaz in a robe. And I, that judge, just, to me was the prototypical Diaz in a robe. You don't have to answer it

if you're still going to continue to practice in Massachusetts. But I could, yeah, I made, I made my, I made my frustrations pretty clear on the record. I'll just stick by that. But I, I, I appreciate where you're coming from. It was, it was a, it was a, it was a, a slog to get through that trial, not just the first time, but the second time as well. It was, it was tough. But I, I couldn't be prouder about how the, the defense team stood up and, and, and kept our shoulders

“back, kept our chin high, conducted ourselves with what I think is professional elegance and dignity,”

just trying the case that was in front of us and doing the very best we could to undermine what I thought was a, a wildly overreaching prosecution with some real significant suggestion of of, of malfeasance on the DA's part, especially the special prosecutor.

Well, you know, the other thing about that case, um, and, you know, I, I, I always think in terms

of my own terms, you know, my, in the 90s, Susan McDougall was kind of a client of mine, but also a heroin and change the trajectory of my career. Maths hurt me. Talk about that.

she had support, uh, at least that appears of her dad and, and just a formidable woman who stood up, uh, look at Matt, Matt's looking off and it did. No, you know, I'm not, you know, the reason I'm laughing, I'm sorry, this is a complete non-secretor, but Alan just so, you know, after listening the tapes in that trial, and I, I got a swear here, guys. So, the viewers can, can earmuff themselves

from her anyhow, but I will never hear the word mother fucker ever again, without Karen Reed's

“voice in my head. I'm not the fucker. Dropping that arc, as she said it, I think was it”

Alan 53 times, or 53 voice males or something like that. It was, I will never hear that term. Again, without Karen Reed and your trial. It was, yeah, there was a lot of voice males. There were only a couple of those, uh, of those bombs dropped, but, um, I looked at her was frustration on her part. She was sitting at the, I, I completely understood it. I understood it and I, I justified it to the jury. Of course she's pissed. Of course she's upset. He didn't come back out. She didn't know

what had actually happened inside that house. And she, uh, she seems, you can answer, not answer, but I just, from a distance and I don't know, or I think I'd talked to her once. Yeah, but I,

she just seems like an incredible woman. And so passed that. She's a powerhouse. She's a powerhouse.

She is unflappable. Uh, she's one of, I've said this many, many times. I think people are probably

“getting tired of me saying it. David said it. Bob, unless he said it, she is one of the brightest people,”

any of us have ever met. I mean, she was an integral member of the defense team. And I don't mean that because she was just the, just the, sort of the face of the defense team or the, the Karen Reed movement. Um, it's because she was actually digging in every single day with evidence, with trial binders, with orders of proof, with outlines, uh, finding evidence that we needed finding points that we needed finding inconsistencies in the evidence and the documents that we're getting. She really

was a, a fifth member of the team legally. She's just very, very bright. Uh, and, and like I said,

a powerhouse of a personality, which is why if she, if she, if she chose to drop that word, Matt, the, the MF word, uh, she's going to do it with an accent and she's going to do it with some piss and vinegar. Uh, I do like, I do like. I do like, I do like, I'm surprised. I'm back then. By the way, just on all of it, it's like, I love an accent in the South, but something about the Massachusetts accent, like the, the thick sort of Bronx accents, another one, but there's just so much, there's so much,

it's colorful, and there's so much character to it. And you see therapies down, Alan, that, that movie with, uh, Kate Winslet, um, what's it called about? I might, I might be outside Baltimore. I might be mixing up my, um, my East Coast cities. Anyways, it's a really good one to cop. It's a cop drama, Kate Winslet plays, uh, a detective, and that's it. Yes. Yes. You said the hardest accent she's ever had to learn for, uh, for a movie role. So Alan, as long as we got you, there's a, um,

there's an over under right now, and whether or not you're coming in on a Nick Rhiner and I, I don't want to put you on the spot, and I don't want to, uh, I don't, I, I don't want to, uh, I don't want you to give away any, wow, he went, he went there, he went there, I was just, he went, he went right to the heart of it, didn't he? I don't want to, it's not AJ, but

“oh yeah, AJ, I don't want to put you on the spot, but why didn't you talk about something?”

I get it with you. You're on her, I would. She's just Christ, that, if that's not putting me on the spot, I don't want to know what put me on the spot is. I would love to see it. I would love, I would love to see you come, come back in on that one, uh, the, and I'd love to come back in. I really would, uh, I think Nick is entitled to the defensive his choice and my hope is, uh, we can, the, the world, uh, flat ends out to a point that we can,

everybody can see their ways clear to, to let our team back on. Well, and I, you know, I want to disabuse people of this, and you maybe you disabuse me, but this idea that somehow he's benefiting from the act that he's accused of. My understanding is, that's absolutely incorrect, right? Absolutely incorrect. It is 100% incorrect. Obviously, the spirit of the law is, if you, you know, the classic example is husband and wife, uh, somebody has, has a will. Uh,

you can't kill the spouse, and then take under the will, or you can't kill up, uh, uh, business partner, and take under a, uh, the business agreement where you're going to get all them out. You, that's the spirit of the law. It, not every idiot understands the, the spirit of that, that rule, uh, the slayer statute. This is money that was his, it was his, it had been his for not years decades. Okay. He did not benefit one way or the other from anybody's death. So it

to this degree. We, we reached out to the trustee, or the, and then ultimately, a lawyer on behalf

“of Nick reached out to the trustees, uh, and said, like, this is not a close legal call. Just,”

make it happen. Uh, he's entitled to this, and then he's entitled to pick whatever lawyer, whether it's me or anybody else. Uh, of his, don't their heels in and said, no, when I help, when I don't understand his, why anybody would be against this? If you're a taxpayer, you're, these are your choices. You either keep the money from him, and the taxpayers pay for his defense, or you give it in the money that was set aside to be given to him, you know, 30 years ago or whatever it was

set aside for him that he's entitled to and taxpayers don't have to do it. It just doesn't even seem to be to your point of close call. Yeah, I don't think it is a close, legally, I don't think it is a close call. It's an obviously it's an emotional case, and it's going to be an extraordinarily high profile. And, and that, you know, as you and I have talked about in a lot of our cases,

“all three of us have had some extraordinarily high profile cases, and all three of us can agree on”

this postula. When it's high profile, the rules of gravity cease to exist. It's just things that normally would, things would be very normal. Yeah, just right out the window. It things that would be totally normal in any other case, becomes like a dog fight.

You just never know where the, where the fight's going to come. And this is the, I always say

right now. God, yeah, God saved me from high profile justice. I've been it, uh, I'm going to keep that the truth. So hey, Alan, next time I'm in LA, let's get dinner again, buddy. Let's, uh, I'd love that. I'd love that. That would be a true pleasure. It's been far too long since I've seen you. Yeah. I agree. Alan, I'll see you at the engine company. Thank you. Yeah, hopefully. Hopefully. Yeah. You guys look great. Nice to chat with you.

So Mark, I, you know, I'm trying to get better at this. I know, I know we are like our pod is kind of new. And so I've been, I've been reading a lot of the comments. And we, a lot of

people were listening to us last week. But man, did we, we got a little bit of heat? You and I. And we

were sure did, didn't we? So you weighed in, um, you know, you, you've got some very strong opinions for, um, for the, for the defense in the linty class case. I have taken what I've considered to be a very neutral position on this one, where it's, I can see, I can see the arguments from the prosecution standpoint. We got three little kids. I can also see, especially in a Massachusetts

“law, your points, Mark, on, on this and I, I think I've taken a really middle road view of this case.”

But man, you and I, Mark, one of the comments was, we're not allowed to talk about this because we're men. Uh, another one, another one that that I got. And this was interesting. It was, oh, bless your heart. This was one of the comments. Bless your heart. You just don't know anybody that's ever had suicidal ideation before. I got that one. And my sister moved to Texas a few years ago. Mark, she had to translate it for me. Bless your heart in Texan means fuck you. Yeah, it's hard.

It's sad to say, how does the lawyer tell you to fuck off? Trust me. Yeah, bless your heart. And you know, uh, we were talking about mental health, mental health in particular, uh, last month, right. And yeah, interestingly, the suicide rates are, I think, quadruple. There were four, four times a amount of American men killed themselves, then American women. And, uh, for that, for that one commenter, um, I will only wish that was true. I only wish I hadn't met anybody that

had ever had suicidal ideation because I've got, I had, uh, I need two guys in high school that killed themselves. I had a buddy that jumped on the bridge. I had a furry brother with killed himself. I know a lot of people who've done that. And it's awful beyond awful, every single time. And, you know, we're, we're in this, we're in this time in America, Mark, where it seems like when people hear something that goes against their emotions or they disagree, um, it rather than

engage in a conversation, um, and this made me think of you, Mark. It, it, it, it's like we have this, this idea now that it did, everybody seems to shut up unless they, unless they, they share the some immutable characteristic, the qualifies them to do that. It's almost like you were I saying, well, you don't know what it's like to defend somebody's been accused of murder. So if you disagree, you're not really wrong or you don't know what it's like to, to see what a, what a strangled

child looks like. And I've seen that and it's awful. And, and I thought about, I thought about you and I, Mark, on, on the cases that we did and look for the viewer, one of the reasons why Mark and I got to be friends is that we, we did listen to each other and I would listen to

only have to hear him out, but in listening to Mark and putting my own ego to this side, a lot of times,

um, I agreed with the things that Mark was saying and as a result, we were able to reach common ground a lot more often than then we weren't. And I thought it was an interesting metaphor for America, Mark, because we got, we got a bunch of crap for, for what we talked about last week

“and, and, and I think it's these people that are driven by emotion and I was thinking about”

positive constructive friendships that get built out of listening to people who might not share the same point of view. And I, I just don't even say that because I watched today, I forget why. Oh, I know why, because I was kind, I would have been knocked off of the show. I was watching J.D. Vance was, I think at the White House briefing room, doing a press conference and taking questions and one of the questions was, how does he feel about Tucker Carlson taking pot shots

at the administration? And for whatever side of the ideological spectrum you're on and whatever your view of J.D. Vance and, you know, as I sit here in LA, I can tell you, you can only guess what the, my bubble says about J.D. But he gave a very similar kind of analysis. He said, Tucker Carlson is my friend, just because we disagree on an issue does not mean that there's some kind of, he didn't say it this way, but I will. Some kind of bloodlust. And you and I have talked

“about this in a different context. We could, and I think about probably by 10 closest friends,”

you being a mountain. We can have a battle royale in a trial where it is, you know, I'm defending somebody, you're prosecuting, you're trying to take that, my client out. I'm trying to protect my client, whatever. But if we do it within the bounds of the rules and the fight, we it increases your respect for the other to the point where that's a bond that lasts forever in my opinion. And when I say my closest to my friends, I can tell you guys who I wanted to come

across a table at, when I first started my initial encounter with them are now guys that I would

kind of fall on a grenade for just because they would do the same for me and we've been through a battle. And we've kind of lost a little bit of that. Don't you think? We have and it seems like that is one of the problems with America right now. Mark, right? It's like we, there's people that they, they feel very strongly about something, feeling is an emotion, you know, whether that's four or against a case or whatever it may be. And it's like they can't engage in good faith,

“discussion or debate anymore. It's just you disagree, you, you need to shut up. And if you don't,”

you're morally in the wrong and you suck, I'm good, you're bad. And it seems like we've just like, I don't know where it's started. And I don't know bring it back. Maybe the world of true crime can help people kind of reach points of common agreement again. But look, I've got two of my best friends in the whole world, one of my group with, I leave his name out, but we're still one of my closest dearest friends. And I had an experience last week, Mark, we're, I had to pull

a guy out of the water. He just had, and it was a traumatic thing. I first of all, I've ever been

involved in giving somebody CPR. First person I wanted to reach out to was this buddy of mine, he's that close. And he was the first person there, my mom had a stroke. It's one of the best human beings I've ever known. Politically, we are very, very different. But I know he's one of the, he's, he's truly one of the best people I've ever met in my entire life. And I know he's motivated by good. And it's like, I don't know what, I don't know when we're going to get back to that,

just kind of as a country. Or even today, this jury is, you know, they're hanging, you know, maybe they won't hang a moral, but it sure looks like they will. And so much that I think can be traced back to people, just not listening to each other, right? And interesting too, when I, you know what I was thinking about, and I wish I had asked that one about it, you know, 11 to one, if it turns out it's for not guilty. And people assume that that means, oh, it's a walk in the park.

If you do it again. And I was thinking in LA, you're, you and I both remember Li Baka. And Li Baka went to trial in federal court, the former sheriff, beloved sheriff in LA County, 11 to one for not guilty. The judge declared a misrial would not exercise, I need discretion. He was convicted

remember who his defense lawyer was? No, I don't know, actually. Who was the current LA County

“D.A. Nate Hockman? I did not know that. No kidding. Wow. Yeah, they tried the first case, 11 to one”

for not guilty. And second time around he was convicted and sentenced to federal prison. So,

and Li Baka, however, when you say Li Baka to me, kind of the sheriff, I always think about him

“telling me, you know, Mark, I run the largest mental health institution in America. It's called”

LA County jail. Well, if Clancy, if Clancy hangs, hopefully some, some cool minds will come together

and they'll work out a disposition here that nobody will be happy with, but that everybody will

“live with. And I just, I don't know. I don't know why every case has to be so politically divided”

down Mark and it just seems like we just, just case after case, we got cheerleaders on the courthouse steps or jeers on the courthouse steps. And I don't know. I, I just hope we get to a point here where people can, can talk to each other again. Yeah. Anyway, I want to thank my co-host Mark here at ghosts and our guests, the, the illustrious Alan Jackson. And thank thanks to you, the viewer, the numbers are great. Subscribe if you haven't yet, we're trying to get to 100,000 viewers.

The goal is by the end of the Labor Day. I don't know if we're going to hit that, but thank you so much for tuning in and I hope everybody has a wonderful weekend.