The Brian Walshe Trial Day 7: “At Least One Hundred And Ten Sextillion Times More Likely”

Summary

---

Amy Robach & T.J. Holmes Present:

The Brian Walshe Trial Day 7: “At Least One Hundred And Ten Sextillion Times More Likely”
Date: December 9, 2025
Podcast: iHeartPodcasts | Amy Robach & T.J. Holmes Present

---

Episode Overview

This episode dives deep into Day 7 of the highly publicized Brian Walshe trial, where he stands accused of murdering his wife, Ana Walshe. Amy Robach and T.J. Holmes break down the day's court proceedings—highlighting the complexities, confusion, and courtroom strategies at play, especially around critical DNA evidence. The hosts express their frustration with the prosecution's overly technical presentation and discuss how these details could impact the jury and the outcome of the case. The episode provides thoughtful analysis, colorful commentary, and memorable courtroom exchanges.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. A Slow and Confusing Yet Crucial Day

• Technical DNA Testimony Dominated:
  Much of the day was devoted to highly technical DNA evidence, which attempted to link blood found on discarded items to both Brian and Ana Walshe.
• Confusion for Jury and Observers:
  Both Amy and T.J. comment how the scientific presentations were so complicated (“sextillions,” “inclusionary,” “exclusionary”) that even seasoned trial watchers struggled to follow—raising concerns for how well jurors could understand and weigh the evidence.
• Potential Issue for Prosecution:
  The hosts discuss how failing to clearly state the significance of the DNA results in layman's terms may undermine the prosecution's case.

2. How DNA Evidence Was Presented

• The Tyvek Suit & Other Key Items (04:03–06:44):
  Prosecution tried to link blood found on a Tyvek suit and slippers (items discarded by Brian) to both Brian and Ana, but expert testimony was clouded by scientific jargon.
• Statistical Language – A Missed Opportunity:
  Forensic experts spoke in terms of unimaginable odds (“one in one nanillion,” “sextillion times more likely”), but nobody distilled this to plain language for the jurors.
• Example of Overly Technical Testimony:

  "The DNA profile from this item is at least 110 sextillion times more likely if it originated from Anna Walsh and an unknown individual than if it originated from two unknown, unrelated individuals. And this provides support for an inclusion."
  —State Crime Lab Witness, quoted by Amy Robach (11:16)

3. Defensive (and Defensive) Simplicity

• Defense's Clarity Stands Out (09:41–10:41):
  Defense attorney Larry Tipton cut through the complicated explanations. He had the expert admit she couldn’t say when or how the DNA got on the evidence:

  "So you can't say how or when any of this DNA got on there, despite the blah, blah, blah?"
  –Larry Tipton, recounted by Amy Robach

• Defense Summation Lands Better:
  The defense reframes complex testimony into simple, memorable conclusions—something the prosecution fails to do, which the hosts believe could influence jurors.

4. Impact on Jury Understanding

• Prosecution’s Weakness Is Communication:
  Both hosts stress that scientists may need to be technical, but it’s the prosecutor’s job to translate:

  "Fine, the scientist is going to speak the way scientists speak, but as then the prosecutor, can you not follow up and say so? Is it fair to say... it would be astronomically unlikely... for this to be anyone else's DNA but Anna Walsh’s?"
  —T.J. Holmes (06:44)

• Memory and Comprehension:
  People remember simple, relatable exchanges, not “fever dream” technical monologues:

  "If you are hearing something complicated, you will not remember it if it doesn’t land, if it doesn’t make you feel something, or if it doesn’t connect with something in your brain, you will forget it, but you will remember the exchange with Larry Tipton and her."
  —T.J. Holmes (10:17)

5. No Forensic Evidence in the Bedroom

• A Big Point for the Defense (18:49–21:20):
  Despite the prosecution’s claims, the only blood evidence was found in the basement—not in the bedroom or nearest bathrooms, which aligns (to a degree) with Brian’s version that Ana died in bed, possibly from natural causes.
  • Tipton pressed the crime lab expert into admitting:

    "There was nothing forensically significant in that bedroom."
    —Highlight by Amy Robach (20:14)

• Hosts’ Take:
  The jury is likely to remember this admission, more so than any DNA statistical analysis.

6. Surveillance Footage and Clean-up Kit

• Striking Visual Evidence (21:26–22:30):
  Surveillance video shown in court documents Brian buying “clean up” items (Tyvek suit, rugs, other supplies) after Ana’s disappearance.

  "We have video of him buying them. We see him putting together what by his own admission was a... body disposal kit if you will."
  —Amy Robach

7. Debate Over How to Frame Anna’s Fate

• Was it a 'Murder', 'Unexplained Death', or 'Disappearance'? (22:37–22:53) The hosts discuss uncertainty in the official and media framing:

  "Isn't that crazy that we don't know if... there was some debate about the death of Anna Walsh. The murder of Anna Walsh. The disappearance of Anna Walsh..."
  —Amy Robach

8. Upcoming Key Witness and Procedural Notes

• Delayed Testimony from Potentially Crucial Witness (23:41–25:40):
  • Anna Walsh’s former boss (and friend to both Anna and Brian), Jem Mutlu, is scheduled to testify the following day.
  • He was the last person (besides the family) to see Anna alive.
  • The judge decided Jem’s questioning initially would happen outside of the jury’s presence, possibly to screen for prejudicial testimony:

    "If there was tension, if they were fighting, if they seemed brisk... all of that will really be super important."
    —Amy Robach (25:19–25:35)

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On Jury Comprehension:

  “There are points they were trying to make that I didn’t get and I didn’t get. Rose, look, we have legal folks who are helping us. We are not legal experts, but, Rose, we watch a lot of trials. We were like, what is she talking about? What are they talking about?”
  —Amy Robach (03:42)

• Summarizing the Forensic Testimony:

  “That sounds like a fever dream I had last night. What? Is that so. Yes, that is our point, everyone.”
  —T.J. Holmes (13:39)

• On Prosecutorial Communication:

  “They are not hitting the points they need to hit. And you're. Yes, I know it's legal in this law, but you got 12 everyday people there that you are talking to about sextillions. A man killed his wife, chopped her up. And you're talking to me about... I'm trying to understand sextillions…”
  —Amy Robach (05:02)

• On Prosecution vs. Defense Strategy:

  “But the defense has been brilliant at that. The defense has absolutely used prosecution witnesses and their complicated ways of saying things. But what you're saying is that there's a chance basically this and then the answer would just be correct.”
  —T.J. Holmes (09:14)

• Hosts’ Frustration:

  “We kept turning to each other screaming, like, what is she talking about? Like, is this a joke right now?”
  —Amy Robach (10:41–10:53)

---

Timeline of Key Segments

• 02:45–03:21 — Overview: Day was slow, boring, and confusing despite the gruesome subject matter.
• 03:21–06:44 — DNA evidence attempt: Prosecution’s technical explanations; Tyvek suit and other items discussed.
• 07:39–10:41 — Discussion: The gap in communication between technical expert and jury comprehension; defense exploitation.
• 11:15–13:45 — Actual quotes from expert illustrating the “sextillion” confusion; hosts’ reactions.
• 18:49–21:20 — Defense highlights lack of forensic evidence in the bedroom; impacts narrative.
• 22:12–22:53 — Surveillance evidence: Brian’s purchases; hosts note the “murder kit.”
• 23:41–25:40 — Upcoming critical testimony and legal procedure discussion.
• 25:58–26:46 — Wrap-up: Boring but important day; sets up the following day’s critical testimony.

---

Tone and Style

Amy and T.J. are animated, exasperated, and determined to make sense of the legal complexity for their audience. They use humor (“That sounds like a fever dream I had last night”), speak with candor about their confusion, and voice concern over the effectiveness of the prosecution’s case. The episode maintains an accessible, conversational tone, making even technical legal proceedings approachable.

---

Conclusion & Takeaways

• Day 7 was surprisingly confusing and technical, centered on DNA evidence.
• Prosecution failed to translate overwhelming statistical evidence into plain English for jurors.
• Defense took advantage of this confusion, driving home simple, memorable points.
• The only forensic blood found was in the basement, not the bedroom—a win for the defense’s narrative.
• A crucial witness is scheduled for Day 8—potentially a turning point in the trial, with legal wrangling over his testimony.
• The hosts highlight how courtroom communication matters as much as the science itself in a high-stakes jury trial.

---

Transcript

[Podcast Announcer]

This is an I Heart Podcast guaranteed.

[TJ Robes]

Human on December 19. Based on the best selling novel the Housemaid, Amanda Seyfried and Sydney Sweeney star in a wildly entertaining thriller about a live in housemaid and the wealthy Winchester family.

[Amy Robes]

The Housemaid is a twisted world where perfection is an illusion and nothing is as it seems. The shocking twist will leave you guessing until the very end. Can you keep a secret?

[TJ Robes]

The Housemaid Rated R only in theaters December 19th. Get tickets now.

[Amy Robes]

Weight loss is easy when you have the right prescription. At Gimme Care, you can Access physician prescribed GLP1 treatment for just $130 a month. That's the same price at all doses.

[TJ Robes]

No insurance, no hidden fees, no in person visit. You can message your physician anytime through the online portal and if you're eligible, your medication ships right to your door in discree packaging.

[Amy Robes]

Get started today. Gimme Care that's G I M M.

[TJ Robes]

E care eligibility required. Results vary. You're juggling a lot. Full time job, side hustle, maybe a family. And now you're thinking about grad school. That's not crazy, that's ambitious. At American Public University they respect the Hustle and they're built for it. Their flexible online Master's programs are made for real life because big dreams can deserve a real path. Learn more about APU's 40 plus career relevant master's degrees and certificates at APU APUS. Edu APU built for the Hustle hey.

[Amy Robes]

Audiobook lovers, I'm Cal Penn. I'm Ed Helms. Ed and I are inviting you to join the best sounding book club you've ever heard with our new podcast Irsay the Audible and iHeart Audiobook Club. Each week we sit down with your favorite iHeart podcast hosts and some very special guest to discuss the latest and greatest audiobooks from audible. Listen to Earsay on America's number one podcast network, iHeart. Follow Earsay and start listening on the free iHeartradio app.

[TJ Robes]

Today a GLP1 helped you lose weight, but now you're noticing unwanted facial changes.

[Amy Robes]

Yeah, the weight came off, but facial volume loss and dull sagging skin are making you look older. That's where the next phase of your weight loss journey journey comes in.

[TJ Robes]

There's before weight loss, after weight loss and then the after after.

[Amy Robes]

Yeah, help restore and refresh your facial skin and reclaim your natural looking youthful glow.

[TJ Robes]

To learn more, visit faceafterweightloss.com that's faceafterweightloss.com hey there folks.

[Amy Robes]

It is Tuesday, December 9th and how in the world can a Murder trial in which a man is accused of killing his wife and cutting her up and. And disposing of her body. How is it possible that trial got boring today? And with that, welcome to this episode of Amy and TJ Robes. This isn't. We don't need. The trial is what it is. We don't need to be entertained, necessarily. But this might be an issue for the prosecution. This might be an issue for this jury. Today was a slow and frankly confusing day in a lot of ways.

[TJ Robes]

But unfortunately for the prosecution, it was an important day because they are trying to establish DNA. And yes, I know that can get technical, but it got more technical than it seemed like it needed to. But they're trying to link Brian Walsh's DNA with Ana's DNA on some specific items.

[Amy Robes]

And. Okay, they lived together. They were. They were married. They're in the same house. I'm saying there are points they were trying to make that I didn't get and I didn't get. Rose, look, we have legal folks who are helping us. We are not legal experts, but, Rose, we watch a lot of trials. We were like, what is she talking about? What are they talking about? What is happening?

[TJ Robes]

Right. I know that they were able to establish. Although I only know this because reading later how it was described, because listening to the testimony, as the jurors did, we listened to it. It was confusing. But they were trying to put together that Tyvek suit that was found in the trash can that had blood on it. They were able to say that both Brian's DNA and Ana's DNA were both on that Tyvek suit.

[Amy Robes]

But.

[TJ Robes]

But they didn't actually say it like that.

[Amy Robes]

No.

[TJ Robes]

When the forensic scientists were testifying, they were using terms like non. A billion times more likely to be Anna's than not. But a third party's. Could be a gazillion trillion, quadruple. What did she say? There was like a. There was a number I've never heard of before.

[Amy Robes]

There was a nanny and a sextillion. The million was the one followed by 30 zeros. And there was a. You all. Look. I'm. Look.

[TJ Robes]

How many zeros was that?

[Amy Robes]

This was. It was bizarre. I cannot wait till we talk to Allison again. Treason. Our attorney. We've been talking to a criminal defense attorney about this. She has been very critical of the prosecution in saying they are not hitting the points they need to hit. And you're. Yes, I know it's legal in this law, but you got 12 everyday people there that you are talking to about Sextillions. A man killed his wife, chopped her up. And you're talking to me about. I'm trying to understand sextillions and inclusion and all this stuff. Okay, let me go back a little bit. Day seven of the testimony. Yes, let me go back. It's day seven, right, Robes. But to your point, this was, quite frankly, could have been one of, or maybe should be one of the biggest days. We're talking about DNA evidence, correct.

[TJ Robes]

That is linking blood from Anna Walsh and blood from Brian Walsh on things he threw away, like a Tyvek suit, like slippers of hers. There was another item that they were able to then, yes, the blood commingled. But it wasn't that obvious. The way they were testifying, it was confusing. I was like, wait, there's a third unknown party. Wait, what? And then they didn't even say it's statistically overwhelmingly Anna Walsh's blood. Yes, that would have made sense.

[Amy Robes]

Robes, you just hit it didn't. Okay. We have seen so many attorneys do that. So they're telling this jury that this DNA, there is a one in one nanillion chance that it would be something other than this, and it's exclusionary and that all these terms. What they're trying to say is there is no chance in hell that this is anybody's DNA other than Anna Walsh. And we never hear that.

[TJ Robes]

Yes. Could they say it is astronomically in favor of this being Anna Walsh's blood? Like, astronomically, as in there's almost zero chance that this is anyone else's DNA but Anna Walsh's. Why can't they say that? And by the way, fine, the scientist is going to speak the way scientists speak, but as then the prosecutor, can you not follow up and say so? Is it fair to say that it would be astronomically unlikely for this to be anyone else's DNA but Anna Walsh's? That's correct. Like, I needed the prosecutor to sum it up and make it very clear and hit it home that this was Anna Walsh's DNA. But she didn't follow up. She would just move on and say, how do you collect all the cells? Where do the cells come from? What? I don't need to know that. I don't actually need to know the scientific process by which you do it. I just want to know what the results are in layman's terms.

[Amy Robes]

See, I don't want to argue with these legal minds. Right. There's some things they have to cover in the process to prove that, yes, this is done correctly and this is how it's done. Fine. I understand. We'll sit through that. But to your point, Robes, nobody ever put it in context for the juror. And so as a juror and an observer, you and I are, we are left to put it in context for ourselves. And if you leave me to understand what an inclusionary and exclusionary result is based on a sextillion DNA sample you got that has three different, different mixtures that you didn't tell me what the other two were. What the actual hell am I supposed to do?

[TJ Robes]

You know what exactly. And I will say this. You and I were listening to it as journalists. It's interesting because yes, we are not legal experts. However, we know what it's like to question someone. And when someone over explains or under explains or makes a complicated statement, it's our job then to follow up and get clarity so that the people at home, our audience can understand what they just said. So we actually, although we're not lawyers, we still have experience in getting to the point and making things clear. And even if people speak in very complicated scientific terms, it was our job to make it simple for the people listening. And that often is in a follow up question.

[Amy Robes]

And the follow up sometimes can only has to be. So what you're saying is, and just.

[TJ Robes]

Make it plain, simple and then that scientist will say say yes, correct. In fact, the defense has been brilliant at that. The defense has absolutely used prosecution witnesses and their complicated ways of saying things. But what you're saying is that there's a chance basically this and then the answer would just be correct. So basically now the lawyer gets to frame what the juror hears and the expert can just say yes or no to.

[Amy Robes]

Oh my God, Robes, to that point, he did this with a witness today. Who? Larry Tipton. God love him, he's got a stinker of a case, but he is make turning himself into a magician. Right now to your point, the same woman who was up there from the state crime lab talking about all these non million whatever it was, sex deal, he got up there and said plain as day to her. So you can't say how or when any of this DNA got on there, despite the blah, blah, blah. She said that's correct.

[TJ Robes]

And you know what? And if I didn't understand all the things she was saying to the prosecution, I won't remember them. You know, like think about it. If you are hearing something complicated, you will not remember it if it doesn't land, if it doesn't make you feel something, or if it doesn't connect with Something in your brain, you will forget it, but you will remember the exchange with. With Larry Tipton and her. Because it was simple and easy to understand.

[Amy Robes]

That simple. He nailed it. Okay, you all think we are. Okay, we're not going overboard here. We actually were listening closely, and we were kept turning to each other screaming, like, what is she talking about?

[TJ Robes]

Like, is this a joke right now?

[Amy Robes]

It was really that. So they had several folks from the state crime lab. They came up and talked about the evidence that they were assigned and how they went about reviewing and storing and even the process of extracting DNA and how fine, you have to go through it. But this is what we're talking about, folks. This. She was the last witness of the day, right?

[TJ Robes]

Correct.

[Amy Robes]

The lady, okay, she was from the state crime lab. The boss, really, of the other guys from the state crime lab. I'm just reading the quote. I'm not giving the other context. Her quote was this. The DNA profile from this item is at least 110, sextillion times more likely if it originated from Anna Walsh and an unknown individual than if it originated from two unknown, unrelated individuals. And this provides support for an inclusion.

[TJ Robes]

That is how she was speaking. And the entire time, okay, fine. That's how she speaks. She's scientifically correct now, as the prosecutors say. So what you're saying is it is almost overwhelmingly, assuredly, Anna Walsh's DNA on that item, and then she would have said, correct.

[Amy Robes]

Okay, well, we are not.

[TJ Robes]

Look, I'm just needed that.

[Amy Robes]

We're just making sure. We are not. These are career prosecutors. They know what they're doing. And fine, I am nothing but a layperson, and that is who's sitting in that jury. And I am listening to this. I've been through. I've listened to more trials than these folks have, I assure you. And I'm listening and going, wow, wow, wow. What are we doing? This guy who says he chopped up his wife but didn't kill her, who has all these searches that say how to get rid of a body after a murder, and you're making me question his guilt or innocence.

[TJ Robes]

I know. It was. We kept. We actually. So that. What you just read. You all trust us. It was that going on and on and on to the point where, like, look, if you had one or two answers like that. Fine. No, the answer. She was answering all questions in that exact type of way for, like, 30 minutes at least. We kept looking to the going, oh, my gosh, I don't even know what's happening right now. We were so Confused.

[Amy Robes]

Can I give you another doozy?

[TJ Robes]

Yes.

[Amy Robes]

This is from our witness from the state crime lab. When we do these calculations for the likelihood ratio, we're relying on the DNA profile observed in that evidence item. The more data we have there, that means more. Of these 26 locations where we observe the DNA profile, the higher the statistic will be for an inclusion because there is more support and data. When there is limited support for inclusion, that means the data for that contributes in that mixture. So it doesn't mean everyone in that mixture had less DNA, just that one had less for comparison. So the statistic is lower because of it. That is a direct quote.

[TJ Robes]

I just. That sounds like a fever dream I had last night. What? Is that so. Yes, that is our point, everyone.

[Amy Robes]

She's smart, that's what.

[TJ Robes]

Oh, brilliant.

[Amy Robes]

Does her job beautifully.

[TJ Robes]

I would almost argue for this trial. Too smart.

[Amy Robes]

Too smart for the.

[TJ Robes]

I need you to simplify. I just wanted actually. In fact, there was one time when the prosecutor said, so what does that mean? And I thought, oh, fine. But when she answered what she meant, it was even more confusing. So I was like, okay, that's not working. Prosecutor, you need to actually say what she meant and ask her if. Am I right? And that's the only way because that scientist could only speak like a scientist.

[Amy Robes]

All right. Well, folks, a lot of the action today happened with the jury out of the room. There was a lot of sidebars today. There was a delayed start to the day. The day ended early as well. And we're getting word that tomorrow they're going to have a delayed start as well. Why? What's going on? Stay here. We'll explain.

[TJ Robes]

On December 19. Based on the best selling novel the Housemaid, Amanda Seyfried and Sydney Sweeney star in a wildly entertaining and twisted thriller where perfection is an illusion and nothing is as it seems.

[Amy Robes]

Trying to escape her past, Millie, played by Sydney Sweeney, accepts a job as a live in housemaid for the wealthy Nina, played by Amanda Seyfried and Andrew Winchester, played by Brandon Sklinar.

[TJ Robes]

What begins as a dream job quickly unravels into something far more dangerous. A sexy, seductive game of secrets, scandal and power.

[Amy Robes]

The housemaid is full of shocking twists that will leave you guessing until the very end.

[TJ Robes]

Can you keep a secret? The housemaid is a theatrical experience you do not want to miss.

[Amy Robes]

The Housemaid Rated R. Only in theaters December 19th. Get tickets now. Weight loss is easy when you have the right prescription. At Gimme Care, you can Access physician prescribed GLP.1 treatment for just $130 a month. That's the same price at all doses.

[TJ Robes]

No insurance, no hidden fees, no in person visit. You can message your physician anytime through the online portal and if you're eligible, your medication ships right to your door in discreet packaging.

[Amy Robes]

Get started today. Gimme care that's G I M M.

[TJ Robes]

E care Eligibility required Results vary. You're juggling a lot. Full time job, side hustle, maybe a family. And now you're thinking about grad school. That's not crazy, that's ambitious. At American Public University they respect the hustle and they're built for it. Their flexible online master's programs are made for real life because big dreams deserve a real path. Learn more about APU's 40 plus career relevant MA degrees and certificates at APU APUS. Edu APU built for the Hustle.

[Pets Best Insurance Narrator]

The following ad is sponsored by Pets Best Insurance Services. You knew right away he's perfect. The one for you. Those puppy dog eyes, that cute little button nose. You don't even mind the drool. When you find your perfect match in a dog or cat, the love is unconditional. Your budget, on the other hand, has realistic limits. Help protect your heart and your wallet with pet insurance from Pets Best. With plans starting from less than a dollar a day, you can get up to 90% cash back on eligible vet bills. Pets Best makes it easy to pick a plan that works for you and your bank account. Find the perfect match for your Perfect [e-mail] Pet insurance products offered and administered by Pets Best Insurance Services LLC or underwritten by American Pet Insurance Company or Independence American Insurance Company for terms and conditions visit www.petsbest.com. policy products are underwritten by American Pet Insurance Company, Independence American Insurance Company or Ms. Transverse Insur and administered by Pets Best Insurance Services LLC. $1.00 a day premium based on 2024 average new policyholder data for accident and illness plans. Pets Age 0 to 10 20th Century.

[Podcast Announcer]

Studios presents the upcoming comedy Ella McKay from Academy Award winning writer director James L. Brooks whose legendary credits include as Good as It Gets, Terms of Endearment, Broadcast News and the Simpsons. Emma Mackey plays Ella McKay, a passionate, idealistic young woman who juggles her family and work life in a heartfelt comedy brim with hope about the people you love and how to survive them. Ella is highly intelligent and caring, finding purpose in taking care of and defending others, whether that be the public or even more difficult, her family. Ella McKay features an all star cast including Emma Mackey, Jamie Lee Curtis, Jack Loudon Kumail Nanjiani Ayo Adebury, Julie Kavner, Spike Fern, Rebecca Hall. With Albert Brooks and Woody Harrelson. It's a perfect holiday comedy about an imperfect family. Ella McKay. Only in theaters this Friday. Get your tickets now.

[TJ Robes]

Welcome back, everyone. We are talking about day seven of the Brian Walsh trial. And I feel like maybe this is the most animated we've been because we were so annoyed by how unnecessarily confusing most of today was. And, yes, the prosecution, I think, technically laid out the points it needed to. But our takeaway was the defense kept it simple and brought a couple of things home that really landed. First of all, can't prove how or when any of that DNA got on any of these items. And number two, where's the blood they used? Incredibly sensitive. And he dumbed it down. Didn't get all specific about how sensitive these blood tests are. And the fact that there was no evidence of blood in their bedroom, in their bathroom, in any of the bathrooms near the bedroom. The only place that police found evidence of blood was on the basement floor. I thought that was. See, that's what I remember. Remember it because it was simple and I could understand.

[Amy Robes]

And, you know, okay, we go back and we just. I'm not gonna ask us to do this here live, but I'm thinking back to this trial in the moments that mattered. And another one of them that mattered was when he got the prosecution witness up there from the state crime lab, one of those guys, and Tipton from the defense got to him. Admit.

[TJ Robes]

Yep.

[Amy Robes]

There was nothing forensically significant in that bedroom. I remember that moment like that is what the jury's gonna go in there with. Look, we are not making any kind of determination about guilt or innocence.

[TJ Robes]

Oh, God, no.

[Amy Robes]

In the least bit. But we are watching this thing play out and talking to legal minds who are watching and are concerned, confused. Who started at the beginning. Like, I wouldn't want this case. Now they're looking at what Tipton has done and how the prosecution has handled this. And they're going, wait a minute. Yeah, wait a minute. How are we saying wait a minute?

[TJ Robes]

Right? Because it's significant, because Brian Walsh's story is that Anna Walsh died while she was in bed. They were going to bed after their New Year's Eve party. He went back down to cleanup, and when he came back, she had died. She was dead in the bed. So the fact that there's no forensic evidence in the bedroom, in the bathroom, you know, it supports his version of events, bottom line, at least a little.

[Amy Robes]

At Least a little. I mean what would the prosecution theory have to be? That all of the violence took place in the basement?

[TJ Robes]

Yes. Yes. Or that he strangled her.

That would be the only other perhaps but he did. Why did he remove rugs? Why did he purchase new rugs which we saw the surveillance video that was also eerie of him in Home Goods buying new rugs. We saw that surveillance video and they had some folks from home Goods. Again, all I could think of is we love that store and we were there all the time.

[Amy Robes]

I was just about to ask you.

[TJ Robes]

And they were asking what is HomeGoods? Well, it's a store where you buy goods for your home I believe is what he answered which did make me laugh. But pretty much everyone knows who what home goods is and I just can't imagine they're excited about being a part of this trial.

[Amy Robes]

Yeah. Didn't we plan on going? No, that was. We're going to Marshalls. Well same family.

[TJ Robes]

Yes, same family. Tjx he went into a description about how it is a whole family. The series of stores and these videos are.

[Amy Robes]

They are we keep saying eerie to watch. We have seen now we talked about all these items he went and he bought. We have video of him buying them. We see him putting together what by his own admission was a. What's the better way to put it? It was a body disposal kit if you will. All the items he clean up after.

[TJ Robes]

A murder kit is basically what it was. Or he says after a sudden unexplained death that he didn't want to be responsible for.

[Amy Robes]

Isn't that crazy that we don't know if Right. There was some debate about the. The death of Anna Walsh. The murder of Anna Walsh. The disappearance of Anna Walsh. I've seen it put these several different ways like what should we be saying we don't know if she was murdered.

[TJ Robes]

The unexplained death of Anna Walsh. I guess right now that's all we can say with certainty.

[Amy Robes]

Well today got off to a slow start. I say slow but a delayed start. The jury didn't get in there till well past half hour past when they were supposed to but there have been a lot of things robes that the judge and the attorneys have been going over like a lot There been a lot of sidebars in this and I guess the next ropes is this not and you please explain to me I didn't. I didn't pick up on this but they are starting tomorrow. She told the jury they don't have to come in until 10 o' clock tomorrow normally start at 9 until 10 because she has work to do with these attorneys. And some of that work has to do, I suppose. Robes with. We talk about fast out the. The lover of on a Walsh taking the stand being the most important witness. This next guy.

[TJ Robes]

Yeah. So this is, I believe, Anna Walsh's former boss, but considered a friend to both Anna and Brian. His name is Jem. I don't know how to say his last name. Mutlu. Mutlu. But his first name is Jem and he is significant because he was the only person outside of the Walsh family. He was the last person to see Ana alive. And he watched the two of them interact all evening. So look, if the prosecution's theory is. And we do know, because William Faustow testified to this, that he did, they texted each other at midnight, Ana and William saying, happy New Year. Happy New Year. I would think that the prosecution might try to say that that's when he saw the texts, or that's when he could have snapped in that moment and went crazy. But it would be obviously such a window into what led up to the new year and what happened afterwards with Jem's testimony. So the. The judge said that he needs to be questioned first without the jury present.

[Amy Robes]

Why?

[TJ Robes]

I don't know why, but they said that that needs to happen without the jury. So that's why he was supposed to testify today and they pushed it to tomorrow. So they can do this without the jury.

[Amy Robes]

So they're going to question him. So. Right. What he. As he's being questioned. This is not an official part of the trial because the jury's not in the room. So are we essentially deciding whether or not. I say we. The judge deciding whether or not what she hears is going to be okay for the jury then to hear?

[TJ Robes]

Yeah. There must be some concern.

[Amy Robes]

Critical.

[TJ Robes]

Yes. About what he's going to say. And I don't know who's more concerned about what he's going to say, the prosecution or the defense. I don't know, but it's. He. He saw them interacting that entire evening. If there were. If there was tension, if they were fighting, if they seemed brisk with one another, all of that will really be super important.

[Amy Robes]

The Bolster case.

[TJ Robes]

Right.

[Amy Robes]

But what if he says they were loving, is loving and having a good time?

[TJ Robes]

Because if the prosecution says, if it happened the way they might say it happened, that once Jem left after the new Year one maybe he saw the phone and everything changed, who knows? But he can say how much they were drinking, he could say how much like all of that will matter.

[Amy Robes]

Folks, again, one of the certainly one of the most boring and confusing days turns out to be one of the most important and fascinating that's leading into the next day. This, this case, I mean we knew it was going to be a doozy, but this is a fascinating one to watch. We're keeping a close eye. Again, they don't start until 10am tomorrow at least far as the jury goes, but we will be able to see what's happening I believe so at 9am so we are on it for you folks. Stay here again, top right corner of that Apple podcast app where you see our show page, a little button that says follow. You click that and you can automatically get our updates coming to you. Folks, we always appreciate you spending some time with us and I think you're right. Robes. I can't believe it. We were wondering like, oh, this is going to be a drab slow day. It's just DNA evidence and now I'm.

[TJ Robes]

We got all worked up.

[Amy Robes]

I don't know why I'm so worked out. But folks, we appreciate you as always for my dear Amy Robot. Come DJ Holmes. We will be talking to you all very, very soon.

[TJ Robes]

Weight loss doesn't have to be complicated. Gimme Dot Care gives you access to physician prescribed GLP1 treatments for just $130 per month. One flat price at all doses.

[Amy Robes]

No insurance, no hidden fees, no in person visit. Message your physician anytime from your secure online portal and if eligible, your medication ships in discreet direct to door packaging.

[TJ Robes]

Start your journey at Gimme Care. That's G I M M E Care.

[Amy Robes]

Eligibility required results vary.

[Podcast Announcer]

20Th Century Studios presents the upcoming comedy Ella McKay from Academy Award winning writer director James L. Brooks. Emma Mackey plays Ella McKay, an idealistic young woman who juggles her family and work life in a story about the people you love and how to survive them. Featuring all star cast including Emma Mackey, Jamie Lee Curtis, Jack Loudon, Kumail Nanjiani, Ayo Adebiri. Julie Kavner. With Albert Brooks and Woody Harrelson. Ella McKay Only in theaters Friday.

[Amy Robes]

With a moustache, a taco in one hand and ordering a ride in the other means you're stacking cash back. Nice. Get up to 5% cash back with Venmo stash on your favorite brands when you pay with your Venmo debit card. From takeout to ride shares, entertainment and more. Pick a bundle with your go tos and start earning cash back at those brands. Earn more cash when you do more with stash Venmo Stash terms and exclusions apply. Max $100 cash back per month. See terms at Venmo Me Stashterms. Honestly, honestly, honestly, no one wants to think about HIV, but there are things that everyone can do to help prevent it. Things like prep. PREP stands for Pre Exposure Prophylaxis, and it means routinely taking prescription medicine before you're exposed to HIV to help reduce your chances of prep can be about 99% effective when taken as prescribed. It doesn't protect against other STIs, though, so be sure to use condoms and other healthy sex practices. Ask a healthcare provider about all your prevention Options and visit findoutaboutprep.com to learn more. Sponsored by Gilead hey audiobook lovers, I'm Kalpen. I'm Ed Helms. Ed and I are inviting you to join the best sounding book club you've ever heard with our new podcast, Irsay, the Audible and I Heart Audiobook Club. Each week we sit down with your favorite iHeart podcast hosts and some very special guests to discuss the latest and greatest audiobooks from audible. Listen to Earsay on America's number one podcast network, iHeart. Follow Earsay and start listening on the free iHeartradio app today.

[Podcast Announcer]

This is an iHeart podcast. Guaranteed human.