Podcast Summary: Ohio Double Murder – Sinister Plan Exposed in New Indictment

Podcast: Drop Dead Serious With Ashleigh Banfield
Episode: Ohio Double Murder: Sinister Plan Exposed in New Indictment | Spencer & Monique Tepe
Date: January 17, 2026
Host: Ashleigh Banfield
Guests: Mark Garagos (criminal defense attorney), Matt Murphy (former senior homicide prosecutor), Jesse Weber (attorney and News Nation host)

Episode Overview

This episode dives deep into the shocking developments in the Columbus, Ohio double murder case of Spencer and Monique Tepe. After a recent grand jury indictment against Dr. Michael McKee—Mo Tepe's first husband and a vascular surgeon—host Ashleigh Banfield and an expert panel break down new revelations, prosecution strategies, and defense challenges. The panel scrutinizes the “quadruple aggravated murder” charges, the implications of a silencer being used, and what’s coming next. Banfield also shares personal news about transitioning her career away from live TV to focus on this podcast full-time.

Main Discussion Points & Insights

1. Ashleigh Banfield’s Personal Update

• [03:59] Ashleigh reveals this is her last night on her News Nation TV show, announcing a full transition to the podcast:
  • “I made a huge decision…to leave live television and to leave TV as a live entity in general. Because I want to focus more on you guys. I want to focus more on this podcast on Drop Dead Serious. This has become such a passion of mine, and I just feel like it’s super authentic, right down to wearing a hoodie.” (Ashleigh, 05:19)

2. The Indictment: 4 Counts of Aggravated Murder (with Only 2 Victims)

• [02:20] Dr. Michael McKee is indicted on four counts of aggravated murder and a single burglary count.
• Ashleigh points out the confusion of "four counts of aggravated murder" with only two victims.
• The indictment references the shooter allegedly using a silencer, an unexpected revelation.

Legal Analysis:

• [07:06] Matt Murphy explains the logic behind four charges:
  • The four counts are based on two alternative legal theories: premeditation and murder during a burglary (a “special circumstance” that can make a defendant eligible for life without parole in states like Ohio and California).
  • “So, what they’re doing is proceeding on two different potential theories…The first two are what we’d call P and D—premeditation and deliberation...Then counts four and five are the same murders but with a different aggravating factor…murders committed during the course of a burglary.” (Matt Murphy, 07:06)
• The fast pace of this indictment surprises both the legal experts and Ashleigh.

Panel Response:

• [08:48] Mark Garagos critiques the prosecution’s strategy:
  • “When you present this to laypeople who are…the jurors, it’s a little bit confusing….You would immediately assume that there were multiple or serial. And when it becomes that it’s theories, that just opens up the defense to all kinds of mischief…Things like this, when you do it this way, end up backfiring on the prosecution.” (Mark Garagos, 08:48)

3. Storytelling vs. “Checkbox” Prosecution Strategy

• [09:51] Ashleigh stresses the need for prosecutors to present a compelling narrative, not just technical legal points.
• Jesse Weber expands:
  • “Being able to tell a clear, concise story about why he would have done this when he hasn’t said anything right now, I think that’s going to be critical for the prosecution.” (Jesse Weber, 10:24)
  • “Remember, he’s charged with aggravated murder. They elevated it to get to life in prison. That’s prior calculation and design—that it was premeditated.” (Jesse Weber, 10:24)

4. What Worries Prosecutors Now?

• [11:28] Matt Murphy notes that the evidence so far looks strong but highlights risks:
  • “I would love to see his Google searches and see what’s in there. There isn’t really a whole lot right now. Based on what’s been released, this looks like a very strong case. The silencer was certainly new…This has all the makings…of one of those cases where you just got an obsessive ex.” (Matt Murphy, 11:49)
• The mention of a NIBIN (National Integrated Ballistic Information Network) ballistics database hit is significant—shell casings from a prior crime scene matched this case.

5. Defense Challenges & Possible Openings

• [13:49] Mark Garagos explains possible defense strategies:
  • “Yes, there are openings…I’ve actually had…an instrumentality found at the scene…We were able to show…that was just from somebody else and a good investigator found that out…I’m not so sure that’s as compelling as it sounds …You don’t know who brought that casing to the scene.” (Mark Garagos, 13:49)
  • Early circumstantial evidence may seem strong until tested in court.

6. The Defendant’s Silence—A Double-Edged Sword

• [15:09] Ashleigh asks Jesse about the importance of Dr. McKee remaining silent:
• [15:46] Jesse emphasizes the strategic wisdom:
  • “Because [anything] could be used against him…Allow his attorney to do the talking. And right now, he doesn’t have to prove anything. What they are going to try and do is dismantle the prosecution’s case any which way they can…” (Jesse Weber, 15:46)

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On the rapid indictment:
  “This is just light speed. He hasn’t even been extradited yet from Illinois, and they’ve already got an indictment waiting for him in the state of Ohio.” (Matt Murphy, 07:06)

• On the confusing charges:
  “The breath went out of any defense attorney who may be lined up to do this case.” (Ashleigh, 08:27)
  “It’s a little kind of anti-intellectual, if you will.” (Mark Garagos, 08:48)

• On the need for narrative:
  “We just need a story that we can wrap our heads around.” (Ashleigh, 09:51)

• On defense strategy:
  “The best day in a lot of these circumstantial evidence cases for the prosecutor is the day they announce it, which is one of the reasons they always want to get a gag order on the defense.” (Mark Garagos, 14:50)

• On defendant’s right to silence:
  “He should never say another damn word. Why?” (Ashleigh, 15:09)
  “If he says anything, it could potentially be used against him…there’s really nothing he should say or could say that I think would help him.” (Jesse Weber, 15:46)

• Personal note:
  “Thank you for bearing with me and my voice. Thank you for listening. Thank you for watching. And remember, the truth isn’t just serious. It’s dropped. Dead serious.” (Ashleigh, 16:53)

Key Timestamps for Reference

• [03:59] — Ashleigh announces TV departure for podcasting
• [02:20] — Details of indictment and surprise silencer revelation
• [07:06] — Legal breakdown of four aggravated murder charges
• [09:51] — Importance of storytelling and jury connection
• [11:49] — Prosecutorial risks and value of forensic digital evidence
• [13:49] — Defense perspective on forensic evidence weaknesses
• [15:46] — Why Dr. McKee should remain silent
• [16:44] — Ashleigh’s final thoughts and summary

Conclusion

This episode dissects the developments in the Tepe double murder case, focusing on the prosecution’s strategic gambits and the defense’s possible counterattacks. Noteworthy is the use of overlapping murder charges and new evidence, sparking debate about their clarity to a potential jury. Banfield's move from TV to podcasting signals her deepening commitment to true crime storytelling, promising more in-depth coverage as the case—and others—continue to unfold.

Stay tuned for future updates on this and other cases as Ashleigh Banfield’s focus sharpens on deep, accessible exploration for true crime enthusiasts.