Episode Overview
Podcast: Amy Robach & T.J. Holmes Present
Episode: MA Man Admits To Disposing Of His Wife’s Still Missing Body, But Says He’s Not Guilty Of Murder
Date: November 19, 2025
In this gripping episode, Amy Robach and T.J. Holmes break down the shocking and complex case of Brian Walsh, a Massachusetts man who pled guilty to dismembering and disposing of his wife Anna Walsh’s never-recovered body—while maintaining he did not kill her. As jury selection gets underway, Amy and T.J. sift through the evidence, legal twists, and personal tragedies intertwined in this real-life mystery.
Key Discussion Points & Insights
The Charges and Legal Strategy
- Brian Walsh's Plea: As his trial began, Brian Walsh pled guilty to disposing of his wife’s body and misleading police, but denied murdering her (04:00).
- “He pled guilty to the lesser two, but denies...any guilt towards murdering his wife.” — Amy Robach (03:27)
- No Body Recovered: Anna Walsh, 39, disappeared on New Year's Day 2023; her body has never been found.
- Jury Challenge: The prosecution must argue murder without a body, complicating the case.
- “There is no body in this case. And prosecutors will tell you that’s a tough uphill climb with a jury.” — T.J. Holmes (09:21)
Suspicious Evidence
- Physical Evidence:
- Bloody knife and blood found in the Walsh basement.
- Surveillance video allegedly shows Brian dumping heavy trash bags in a dumpster now known to be incinerated. Some recovered bags contained a hatchet, hacksaw, Tyvek suit, towels, Anna’s purse/boots, and her COVID vaccination card. (05:54–06:53)
- Digital Evidence:
- Damning internet searches on Brian’s computer and his son’s iPad, all dated immediately after Anna’s disappearance:
- “How long before a body starts to smell?”
- “How to stop a body from decomposing.”
- “10 ways to dispose of a dead body if you really need to.”
- “How long for someone to be missing to inherit.”
- “How long does DNA last?”
- “Can identification be made on partial remains?”
- “What happens when you put body parts in ammonia?”
- “Can you be charged with murder without a body?” (07:33–09:18)
- “It’s almost like if he wanted to make an argument that he’d been set up, I would listen because I would not think anyone’s that stupid... You know better than this.” — T.J. Holmes (08:44)
- Damning internet searches on Brian’s computer and his son’s iPad, all dated immediately after Anna’s disappearance:
- Financial Motive:
- Anna had recently taken out a $2.7 million life insurance policy, naming Brian— not her sons—as sole beneficiary. (10:13–10:35)
- “Life insurance policies usually do point to a potential motive.” — Amy Robach (10:48)
Additional Motives & Circumstances
- Marital discord:
- Investigators report Anna was having an affair and told a friend she planned to leave Brian, a motive the prosecution plans to highlight (11:09).
- “You go with a life insurance, you go with an affair, you go with dismemberment, you go all these Google searches... All this adds up to what we have seen plenty of times before.” — T.J. Holmes (11:45)
- Defense Position:
- Brian’s defense: Admits disposing of body, but not murder. Prosecution must prove the manner of death.
- “He’s just pleading guilty. But he’s not filling in the details. He’s not explaining anything. And as a member of a jury, I would imagine that kind of feels like a pretty easy two plus two equals four situation.” — Amy Robach (13:04)
- Jury Instructions:
- Legally, jurors must decide based on reasonable doubt, not intuition.
- “Legally, you are not allowed to say, come on, man, as a juror.” — T.J. Holmes (13:34)
Case Context & Aftermath
- Brian Walsh’s Prior Conviction:
- At the time of his wife’s disappearance, Brian was awaiting sentencing for art fraud involving fake Andy Warhols, resulting in 37 months prison. (20:12–20:57)
- The Children:
- The couple’s three sons, aged 2, 4, and 6 at Anna’s disappearance, are now in state custody. (21:08)
- “Because now, yes, mom is missing, presumed dead, and dad is behind bars...they are all now in state custody. It is such a tragic story.” — Amy Robach (21:08)
- Fitness for Trial:
- Brian was recently deemed competent after mental health evaluation following a prison stabbing and a claim of PTSD. (21:36–22:03)
Court Proceedings
- Jury Selection: As of recording, 9 out of 16 jurors had been seated; trial testimony scheduled to begin December 1st after Thanksgiving recess (22:03–22:19).
Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments
- “You need to know these things. They want to know how a person died, where this person... Sometimes that is going to be a challenge.”—T.J. Holmes (09:21)
- “All of these shows we watch, these little episodes about love and relationships ending in murder. Everything, every detail you have said here is a part of these stories.” — T.J. Holmes (11:45)
- “He pled guilty to the lesser two, but denies...any guilt towards murdering his wife.” — Amy Robach (03:27)
- “It’s almost like if he wanted to make an argument that he’d been set up, I would listen because I would not think anyone’s that stupid...” — T.J. Holmes (08:44)
- “As a member of a jury, I would imagine that kind of feels like a pretty easy two plus two equals four situation.” — Amy Robach (13:19)
- “Legally, you are not allowed to say, come on, man, as a juror.” — T.J. Holmes (13:34)
Timeline of Key Segments
- [02:47] — Case Introduction: Brian pleads guilty to body disposal, not murder.
- [03:23–05:11] — Details of Anna’s disappearance and initial police involvement.
- [05:54–06:53] — Physical evidence (knife, bags, items in trash).
- [07:11–09:18] — Digital evidence and Google searches.
- [09:21–10:35] — Legal challenges of “no body” cases; discussion of life insurance.
- [11:09–11:45] — Marital issues, possible motive.
- [12:39–13:34] — Burden of proof, jury deliberations, the logic test for jurors.
- [19:21–22:19] — What happens to the children, Brian’s previous fraud conviction, mental fitness, trial scheduling.
Summary
Amy Robach and T.J. Holmes offer an incisive, suspenseful look at a high-profile murder case where a man admits to everything except the killing itself. With no body, but a mountain of circumstantial and digital evidence, they probe the gaps in the story, the challenges for prosecutors, and the immense tragedy for Anna Walsh’s children. The podcast leaves listeners with a chilling, open-ended legal drama that’s as much about what isn’t known as what is—and shows how both the justice system, and a jury’s common sense, will ultimately be put to the test.