← MK True Crime
MK True Crime
A Summer Dive Into In The Well, with Mark Geragos, Matt Murphy, and Megyn Kelly
00:54:20
In The Well hosts Mark Geragos and Matt Murphy are taking a summer break this week! Please enjoy this special episode featuring past discussions with the hosts and Megyn Kelly on the Tyler Robinson preliminary hearing, Blake Lively, and much more! Mark Geragos: https://geragos.com Matt Murphy: https://www.mattmurphylaw.com Follow MK True Crime on all social platforms: YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/@MKTrueCrime X - https://x.com/mktruecrime Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/mktruecrime TikTok - https://www.tiktok.com/@mktruecrime
Loading summary
Transcript117 lines
- [00:01]
Megyn Kelly
Oregon parks make an Oregon summer. But what makes an Oregon park well, Oregon Lottery gameplay helps no matter the game Megabucks, video lottery or keno funds from lottery games help support parks projects across the state, ensuring they stay safe, accessible and open for all. In fact, discover state park scratches are in stores now. It's the perfect way to put a little bit of Oregon's parks in your pocket. The Oregon Lottery. Together we do good things. Must be 18 or older to play. Lottery games are based on chance and should be played for entertainment only.
- [00:30]
Mark Garagos
Now is your time to get into a new Dr. Horton home by taking advantage of its national red tag sales event going on right now through Sunday, August 2nd. Stop by any of its participating communities and find select red tag homes at incredible pricing. So whether you're buying your first home or looking for an upgrade, you don't
- [00:49]
Matt Murphy
want to miss the red tag sales
- [00:51]
Mark Garagos
event going on right now. Discover the Dr. Horton Difference at drhorten.com Dr. Horton, America's builder and equal housing opportunity builder.
- [01:05]
Matt Murphy
Hello and welcome to in the. Well, the MK True Crime Channel is taking a summer break this week, but we wanted to share a very special episode featuring yours truly, Mark Aragos and Megyn Kelly. Enjoy and we'll be back next week. Hope to see you all then. Going back to the bullet, this is one of those things that's been driving me crazy, Megan, this, this whole time. The defense filed a brief where they basically suggested to the world that the bullet didn't match. Okay. And I've got the quote written down. But they, they write that that's something the defense can do, whatever. And the prosecution came out and they got in trouble because they, they not only said it was inconclusive, but they went on TMZ with Mark's buddy Harvey Levin, who got him in trouble. And, and he said, we are very confident in the rest of our evidence. And the judge said that that violated the, you know, the bounds of the court order. And he kind of slapped him on the wrist and he said, but we're not going to dump the death penalty on that. The best way, I think, to think about this bullet, this was a large bullet that fragmented upon entry. Okay. And I don't know if this was a frangible round. They haven't made that public yet. But there are certain bullets that are designed to disintegrate. Some are used for hunting. They call them varmint rounds. I've never heard of a.36 varmint round, but they must exist. And that's never been made public. The Best way to think of it, Megan, is like if you have a murder scene and you have the killer who picked up, like, a wine glass, for example, and you know that there's a fingerprint on the wine glass, and then the wine glass shatters into a million pieces, you're going to get an inconclusive result for that, too. And a bullet is similar the way they do the ballistic comparisons. That's kind of how that works. You can't get a fingerprint off shattered glass. What nobody's really been talking about is that there are more than one ways. There's more than one way to ballistically match a firearm. And one of them is with expended shell casings. And he cycled the casing. The casing found at the scene matched the rifle. Okay? So it's not just the bullet, and that rifle has his DNA on the trigger. So there's plenty of forensic evidence. And, Megan, you're exactly one of these experts is going to say exactly that. I examined it, and that wasn't the bullet, and it couldn't have been. It couldn't have been fired from that gun. We're going to see something like that either in this phase or in actual trial.
- [03:33]
Mark Garagos
The defense is going to come right back, and they're going to say, of course his DNA is on that gun. He used that gun before. That was a gun from his house. And of course there are casings that match it, because he wasn't the one who planted the casing. Somebody else threw the casings there. If you've got George Zinn, who's over there confessing, and at the front, just coincidentally, you think it's a long stretch to have somebody throw some casings. I mean, none of that. I get the fact that the inconclusive bullet is something that people have run with, but I promise you that the prosecution, and you know this, Matt, that's why he went on to tmz. He was worried. He is worried that the, The. The. The. The public has taken that and run with it. And that is. That's a significant, significant doubt. If, if you get. By the way, as you know, if you've got a battle of the experts, what did jurors do with that? I can't tell you how many times they tell me how we discounted the experts and we didn't come to that conclusion.
- [04:45]
Matt Murphy
So, yeah, it's exactly right.
- [04:46]
Megyn Kelly
I mean, it'd be a lot. It'd be a lot more helpful for the defense if they didn't have the alleged confessions. You know, the text messages to Lance Twigs, the discord messages, and whatever he may or may not have said to police. Be a lot more helpful if they just had a bullet that couldn't be conclusively matched. But they have more than that. I will show you this sound bite from Rob o', Neill, who I adore. And he is, of course, a former Navy SEAL sniper who not only shot Osama bin Laden in the face, but has been on some of our most daring and dangerous missions as part of SEAL Team 6 for the past 20 plus years prior to his retirement. And here's what he said. This is not. He has no dog in this hunt. And this is what he said about this wound on Charlie and this guy.
- [05:39]
Mark Garagos
Just for me. I mean, it was off it right from the beginning for me. From. Do we not guard rooftops anymore? Assassinations, Assassination attempts all over the world.
- [05:49]
Matt Murphy
Why are we looking at rooftops?
- [05:51]
Mark Garagos
And then when I was sent the. I was sent the video with this at the same message where they said Charlie Kirk was just shot. When I watched that horrific video, he was obviously dead before he hit the ground. But the questions immediately started to come to me. That. But that was not an entry wound that we saw. We saw an exit wound. So where'd that bullet come from? You don't bleed like. And I've shot guys closer than the camera was. And an exit. An entry wound doesn't like that.
- [06:14]
Matt Murphy
An exit wound.
- [06:14]
Megyn Kelly
Dust. I could play you 20 videos like that from gun experts.
- [06:21]
Matt Murphy
Yeah, I, I love that guy too.
- [06:23]
Megyn Kelly
Megan.
- [06:23]
Matt Murphy
I can tell you right now, he's wrong. I watched that video. That's an arterial bleed from a. From an entry wound. They. They recovered the entire bullet on the inside, just in. It's heavily fragmented and damaged. So. Love him. I think he's an American hero. He's dead wrong on that one. And he's never. He's never tried or presented this, this type of evidence in front of a jury or slog through extra testimony.
- [06:45]
Megyn Kelly
Well, I'm glad. I'm glad to hear you disagree. That's what we're here for. But what about Matt? You've heard, you know, many people believe that a.30 06 and that gun and that level bullet would never have not had an entry, an exit wound. That. The fact that there was this alleged surgeon who said, oh, Charlie's got like a superman like spine. He was so strong that his bones stopped it. That's why there wasn't an exit wound. And many people just said immediately, that's utter bullshit.
- [07:18]
Matt Murphy
We don't Believe that Mark Garagos, my friend, has seen probably more autopsies than I have after 17 years in homicide. Bullets do weird things. And this thing fragmented. They recovered the whole thing. And when you hit bones, bullets break apart. And I don't care if it's a 30 out six. That's the thing. They'd never released what kind of ammunition it was. But this was an anti rifle. If this was antique ammo to boot, you know, who knows? But they. There is no mystery here other than speculation and kind of nonsense. I mean you see this all the time in homicide cases, Megan, where sometimes the bullets go right through and it looks like they're pristine. Sometimes they will hit a bone and shatter and stay inside. Sometimes little rounds spin around, bank all over the place inside a human body. You know, we part of our. Used to go watch the autopsies on our homicides and it's, it is. You'd be amazed the things that different bullets will do. And there we go. That's a, that's a Mauser, I believe it's a Mauser 98. That is a rifle that was designed well over 100 years ago. It's still that and that's a really old one, but they still make those because it's, it's a simple design and it works. But ammunition, depending on the ammunition, they design certain rounds to break apart to shoot coyotes. It's literally called varmint ammunition. And there's no, you know, it's not like they got in there and didn't, you know, couldn't account for the weight or the grains. Apparently it's all inside his body. It hit his spine. Viva's right. He was dead instantly or very close to it, thank God. But, but yeah, this is the kind of stuff that the conspiracy theories and these are a bunch of people who, who haven't. Haven't witnessed autopsies, haven't seen him. Bullets pulled out of human bodies before. And the only person who might have seen more of them than me is probably my friend Mark Erragos right there at the bottom.
- [09:20]
Megyn Kelly
And do you agree with him, Mark?
- [09:22]
Mark Garagos
Yeah, the, the math as usual is spot on the, the issue of what a bullet will do. In fact, I have, I have cross examined I can't tell you how many ballistics experts and when they talk about, you know, they shoot bullets into water. They shoot bullets. You should see how they testify as to how they test guns and how they test casings and things of that nature. And I have used exactly what Matt has said as a, as fodder for cross examination, saying, by the way, lay the foundation. Have you ever been to an autopsy? Have you seen what bullets do for you to say that you can try to recreate it by shooting it into a long trough of water or something else is just complete and utter nonsense. Because it's almost as if I've actually had ballistics experts admit to me that bullets have a mind of their own. I mean, I've actually had that statement repeated back to me on cross examination. That doesn't mean, however, that the defense is going to not run with that. The defense has an obligation to run with that. The defense has an absolute duty, zealous advocacy to kind of plumb the depths of that because God only knows what is going on here. I mean, this has not been, I think Matt would probably admit if this were, wouldn't admit that he's ever had this situation down in Orange county, but he probably, if I was out with him at Crimecon in Vegas, would admit that he has chastised investigators for doing stuff like this before. Because this is not. You're not.
- [11:14]
Megyn Kelly
What do you mean? Doing stuff like what?
- [11:16]
Mark Garagos
This is not a primer on a really good investigation, number one. And I, I don't want to be the armchair quarterback second guessing, but this, this once again has all the earmarks of some people in over their head, at least initially. There was a lot of things that were done here that I think are going to come out during this preliminary hearing and the defense is going to bring out as to what investigators did or didn't do. Now is your time to get into a new Dr. Horton home by taking advantage of its national red tag sales event going on right now through Sunday, August 2nd. Stop by any of its participating communities and find select red tag homes at incredible pricing. So whether you're buying your first home or looking for an upgrade, you don't
- [12:04]
Matt Murphy
want to miss the red tag sales
- [12:05]
Mark Garagos
event going on right now. Discover the Dr. Horton Difference at Dr. Horton.com Dr. Horton America's Builder and equal housing opportunity builder choice hotels get you more of what you value. Here's a little tune to help you remember. Same drive, different day don't you wish you were getting away? Pack your bags and come on through Texas, Ohio, Alaska, we're up there too Comfort Inn, it's calling your name Save on the stain oh, and free waffles are yours to claim well, I hope you like my little song book direct@sourcefieldtails.com
- [12:47]
Megyn Kelly
Megan, I wanna hear more on that. But Viva, I want you to Weigh in.
- [12:49]
Mark Garagos
Well, when I hear people say this, you know, a 3006 would always leave an exit wound. It's impossible, inconceivable that it wouldn't. And then I. Martin Luther King Jr. And then you people. Then people like, well, I don't believe that report either, because you're believing. Fed Salop, if you believe that that bullet actually killed Martin Luther King. So you're having an argument with people who basically push unfalsifiable theories where if you say it always leaves an exit wound, there's probably a few soldiers from World War II that can testify that a 3006 doesn't always leave an exit wound. Then you say, Martin Luther King got shot in the face. And if they believe it, they say, oh, well, that hit his jawbone. Okay, so a jawbone can stop it, but not a spine or a spine. Well, not the spinal cord, but not the spine, bones. And then you say, well, I don't believe the Martin Luther King got shot in the face with the.30 06 either. So therefore, I stand by my. It could never have been a 30 06. Anybody saying that. And I'm not a gun expert. I'm not an ammunitions expert by any means. I was a lawyer for 13 years. My question has always been, do you know the condition of the ammo? If you don't know the condition of the ammo, you are not in a position to definitively say how the ideal ammo would perform and what it would do to a human body.
- [13:59]
Megyn Kelly
So this is big. They finally arrested this guy. We've been waiting for it since her body was in the trunk of his car. But, Matt, up until now, they hadn't been able to link him to the crime, at least not in a way that they felt was sufficient for charges to be brought. Do we know what changed?
- [14:16]
Matt Murphy
Well, what they did is they conducted an investigative grand jury, Megan, which is really interesting. Mark and I were talking a little bit about this yesterday. Essentially, there's two functions for a grand jury. One, you can seek an indictment. The other is you can actually use grand jury subpoenas to bring in reluctant witnesses that don't want to speak to the police and essentially force immunity on them and make them talk. And Mark knows the. The DA Involved in this. I don't know her, but apparently she's a. She's a heavy hitter, according to Mark. And they've been working this case up for a long time. This is advanced prosecute, prosecutorial work. And. Yeah, and they. They apparently have put together this case, the the complaint itself tells quite a story with lying in wait and the stabbing and killing a witness. And it makes it appear as if they've got the. They got the goods here to show that he killed her because he was engaged in a sexual relationship with her. They knew each other or began seeing each other when she was only 13 years old, which is 288 under the California penal code. And it all kind of fits. I know Mark has some different theories on it. Mark. Mark probably has a better inside track on the case than I do, but this is very, very interesting and he's in kind of an understatement. He's in a lot of trouble.
- [15:34]
Megyn Kelly
He's 21 currently. So by any measure, you know, having sexual relations with a 13 year old would be illegal. So, yeah, that's the alleged motive. But what we. What we last heard, Mark, was it was April 23, 2025, that he invited her to his home in the Hollywood Hills. Celeste was her name, Celeste Rivas. And she arrived there. She was never seen again. But then on September of 2025, that's when her remains were found in the trunk of a car that was registered to him. And so we kind of knew that they were having an affair. That's. That there wasn't like proof positive of it, but it seemed very clear from their little videos together. They were definitely friends. They were with a lot, with each other a lot. But, you know, getting from that to he's the one who put her in the trunk of that car is. That's. That's where cases are made or fall apart.
- [16:25]
Mark Garagos
Well, Matt's right, as usual about a lot of things. And in this case, he's right about the fact that the DA involved, Beth Silverman is a. To say she's tenacious is an understatement. I think, though, that there is a lot more going on here and let me kind of set the stage for it, because I don't know that I' never seen this all before. Not only did they have a medical examiner, we know today or yesterday when the published reports were that the exam was released, and there was information as of December of last year that the medical examiner had come to the conclusion that the cause of death was use of a sharp instrument, that there were fingers that were severed, and they had a toxicology that at least showed the presence of drugs. You combine that with the fact that what's being reported today also, if true, is that there was child porn, meaning images of females who were under 18 on David's phone. All of that would have been known to the DA last year. Which leads you to why was the. Why did the LAPD go in months ago, get rebuffed first and then successfully later muzzle the medical examiner to the point where the medical examiner, something I've never seen before, came out publicly and pushed back against that, put on his website a statement saying that this is not transparent, that this shouldn't happen. Not once, but twice did he do that. And then yesterday, after the DA asked that the medical report be released, he thanked his partner. Agenc going to wildly speculate here that what happened was they arrested him on Thursday so that. I think the LAPD did that so that they could force the DA to file this case. They did not have a criminal complaint. They did not have an indictment when they arrested him. There's this weird violation, I think, constitutional violation, where you can arrest somebody on a Thursday and not put them before a magistrate until a Monday, which is beyond what the supreme court says for 48 hours. That that forced the DA to come in heavy and file this case on Monday. The defense did something, I think, very astute. They said, that's fine. You can dump terabytes of information on us. We're ready for trial. Which was in contrast to what happened in the Reiner case, where they dumped terabytes of information and the public defender said, hey, I need two or three months. I don't have enough time. I think that this. The ball's back in the DA's court, and the DA may go get an indictment at this point.
- [19:25]
Megyn Kelly
Matt, what do you make of that? That she was dragged to a kicking and screaming by cops who were like,
- [19:29]
Matt Murphy
it's time, you know, I had a conversation with Harvey Levin on TMZ about this. And of course, that's Mark's. Mark's partner on another podcast, which is
- [19:39]
Mark Garagos
sort of, by the way, he called
- [19:40]
Megyn Kelly
me where Mark is always right, you're always right, and Harvey's always wrong.
- [19:45]
Mark Garagos
And by the way, Harvey even called me a slut to his words for doing Megyn Kelly true crime with Matt. I told him.
- [19:53]
Matt Murphy
Yeah, I told him the mark was
- [19:55]
Megyn Kelly
cheating on him is one to talk. I have another ransom, though. How many 50, 000 podcasts can I tease it on?
- [20:02]
Matt Murphy
Yeah, please.
- [20:04]
Mark Garagos
I was slut shamed, so I'll leave it at that.
- [20:06]
Matt Murphy
Yeah, well, yeah, I'm honored that you're sledding it out. I will be doing all I can to lure you away from that man, just so we can set the record straight. So.
- [20:17]
Megyn Kelly
Yes, so we.
- [20:18]
Matt Murphy
Yeah, we We, Harvey and I went back and forth a little bit on that and he was actually very pleasant.
- [20:23]
Mark Garagos
Megan.
- [20:23]
Matt Murphy
I'd never been on the show before, but I took sort of the day I took a counter position and he agrees with Mark on this. You know, I, I think I had some dealings with Nathan Hockman and it's. All of mine have been very positive. This is, it is unusual. I've never seen it done quite that way, but I think you can. And they've got, you know, they've been working on this thing for months and months and I think that one move certainly is refusing to waive time. But on the other hand, there's a thing in California called Prop 115 where you can just throw on, you can put on hearsay statement to establish probable cause. All the, all the DA needs to do here is basically call the lead and maybe one or two other witnesses regarding what happened in front of the grand jury and they get the ball over the net on that and then they're just in the discovery phase. That's what I would do if I was them. You kind of, you want to know
- [21:15]
Mark Garagos
what I would do back, Matt and you and I discuss this. There's this little known provision in the penal code called 866. California Supreme Court said if you're going to go and try and just put on a bare bones prelim, the only way we're going to say that that gives you due process is if the defense can make an offer to the court and say we're going to call witnesses because we don't think you're telling the whole truth. And that's what I would do. If they try to barebones what we call 115 prelim, which by the way Murphy pioneered down in Orange County. I can't tell you how many times he hoist me on a 115 prelim. But 866 is if you can convince the judge, then your witness, you can put the witness on. I don't think the DA is ready to put these witnesses on in and subject them to the cross examination. We'll see soon enough.
- [22:09]
Megyn Kelly
Yeah, I, I mean maybe it's just me, but it doesn't seem like that confusing or complicated a case. If she's got child sexual abuse materials on his phone, Matt, and he's not getting out, he's going to have additional charges filed against him and I don't know if they can prove murder. But it's very, very bad that he was having sex with a 13 year old girl who is now dead and dismembered in the back of his car. That alone would be pretty circumstantial but I'll bet you there's more.
- [22:38]
Matt Murphy
So. Yeah, well I read the corners reports yesterday and one of the interesting things about this is that she was essentially the decomp was very advanced and so she was basically a skeleton inside the car but they, they left her tube top on and there were cuts in the tube top indicating and I'll bet you anything that there's going to be when we get the full report there's going to be nicks on the ribs underneath that. So I think they're going to be
- [23:03]
Mark Garagos
able to prove a murder.
- [23:04]
Matt Murphy
I don't know if they're going to be able to prove that he was the killer or not but he certainly under the theory that they're advancing was the one that stood to gain. But and Mark has had this experience and I have two juries, if you get in child pornography that case you are, you're basically on third base and all you need is a base hit prosecution wise because the jury will hate him so much for just such as the child pornography. And it fits. Look, that's corroborative to this idea that they were having a sexual relationship. And also if that's true and of course we haven't seen it yet, I think that the vast majority of public sympathy for this guy is going to evaporate overnight. If that's true, hopefully we'll never see those images if anybody has it.
- [23:48]
Mark Garagos
Yeah, choice hotels get you more of what you value. Here's a little tune to help you remember. Same drive, different day don't you wish you were getting away? Pack your bags and come on through Texas, Ohio, Alaska we're up there too come comfort in it's calling your name Save on the stay oh, and free waffles are yours to claim well, I hope you like my little song book. Direct@sourcehotels.com Feeling stuck with rising ad costs and flat results, Realize Taboola's advertising platform for businesses unlocks growth beyond search and social. Taboola's algorithm engages with high intent users on the open web, accelerating their path to conversion. Powered by an AI model trained on over 500 billion monthly signals, Realize delivers smarter prospecting with privacy safe targeting. The result, higher conversion rates and scalable funnel at lower cost. To learn more, visit realize.com podcast.
- [25:02]
Matt Murphy
Listening to those people in the previous segment as I'm sitting in the green room waiting to come on and the septum rings and all that, the railing against federal law enforcement. These are some of the people that are most dedicated to getting sex offenders arrested, putting them in prison, and then ultimately deporting them if they're not here legally. Right. And in 2023, ICE arrested 4,390 sex offenders. It's a part of their job. That was the last year of Joe Biden and nobody said a frigging word. Because back then, shockingly, we all kind of agreed. It's a bit of a bipartisan issue. We're gonna protect kids who aren't political at all. Children deserve the protection of all adults, regardless of what side of the political aisle they're on. Right? So in 2024, last year, first year of President Trump, ICE arrested 16,552 sex offenders. And that is their priority. They had a special operation in the state of Florida called Operation Dirtbag. And that's the federal law enforcement officials, the women and men that do that are critical to protecting our kids. And these people that think it's a good idea to block their cars, they have no idea who they're going after. They prioritize sex offenders and violent felons and gang members, but particularly given how many there are these federal agents in ICE and other federal agencies prioritize sex offenders. And there should be. There should be no rational debate about that. So somebody that goes and drives.
- [26:36]
Megyn Kelly
I wonder, Matt, if they said, like, I wonder if Tom Homing came out and Kristi Noeman said, we're making an announcement. We are now for the next six months, only targeting child sex offenders. Only child sex, sex molestator or molesters, what would they do? I mean, it would be a very interesting experiment to see whether the same, you know, Karen Antifa's would stay out there.
- [27:01]
Matt Murphy
You know what? I think they probably would because they're so. These people are so crazy. I don't know if it's the septum rings that's making them mad, because every time you look, it's like they got a ring hanging out of their nose.
- [27:11]
Megyn Kelly
It is related to being extremely homely.
- [27:14]
Matt Murphy
It is maybe, maybe so. I don't know. But it's. But as a Look, as a prosecutor, it is maddening to me because I know the work that ICE agents are doing as a sexual assault prosecutor. And same thing with the FBI. They devote a tremendous amount of resource to that. And the idea that somebody is blocking them again, they're like, they think they're doing good. I think their motivations, I want to believe that they're. That they think they're doing the right thing, but they're so friggin stupid because they don't understand what ICE is actually attempting to accomplish. And at the end, the people who benefit are their own children. It is maddening to me.
- [27:49]
Megyn Kelly
Yes, exactly. I don't understand how a mother could get out there and try to stop these arrests of these molesters. All right, I want to keep going because I don't have that much time. I've got to ask you about Renee Good's wife. We played the video earlier of her antagonizing that cop, and now we know from his own camera on his iPhone that she was the one who said, drive, baby, drive. She told the wife to do it. And we also know that the two of them had been working together to train to antagonize ice. She was part of the perpendicular parking that the. That Renee Goode did earlier, we believe.
- [28:25]
Matt Murphy
So.
- [28:26]
Megyn Kelly
Could there be charges against Renee Goode's wife?
- [28:29]
Matt Murphy
Yes, there could be charges against her wife. And, and not even for. For the aiding and abetting or the encouraging of driving forward. But this is. She keeps being referred to as a protester. And from a purely legal breakdown. Okay, she comes from Colorado. I've read that she's a paid protester. I haven't seen the evidence on that or not. But when you get together with a group of people, including just one other person in your car, and you decide you're going to go out and you're going to impede federal agents attempting to arrest violent felons or sex offenders, that is. That's a conspiracy. It's two or more people agreeing to go and commit a crime. And if it's federal agents and you cross state lines, it is a federal felony. It's a conspiracy to do that. So before we even get to what she was yelling in the car, that by itself is really problematic. Protesting, in my mind is you're standing on a corner with a bullhorn waving flags or signs that you've written with your Sharpie. That's.
- [29:30]
Megyn Kelly
Wait a minute, though, Matt. I don't know if she crossed state lines. They lived in Colorado, then they moved to Canada after Trump was elected, according to the reports, and then moved to Minneapolis. I guess Canada wasn't all it's cracked up to be. But does that change things? Wouldn't the feds have jurisdiction anyway? Because it was a federal office?
- [29:46]
Matt Murphy
They would absolutely have jurisdiction anyway. There's multiple theories to get there, and I don't know. And again, I haven't. I've only Seen what the rest of us have, what's been released online. I haven't been able to. Able to read any. You know, I don't think any real documents have been released yet. But here's another thing just to keep in mind. A lot of the analysis on this. I defend police officers now, Megan, That's. That's the bulk of my practice, as you know. And the. A lot of the. A lot of the discussion out there is what was. What was this woman thinking when she was driving forward? What was she thinking? Surely she wasn't trying to kill him legally. There's a case called Graham v. O'. Connor. It's in 1989 US Supreme Court case that talks about how we analyze use of force by police officers. And it is a seminal. It's a seminal case in American jurisprudence. And essentially it stands for the proposition that it must be viewed from the position of the police officer when he or she perceived the threat. Okay. Did they reasonably.
- [30:45]
Megyn Kelly
Is it subjective?
- [30:46]
Matt Murphy
It is. It's a mix. Really good question. Only a lawyer would ask that. It is a mix of objective and subjective circumstance.
- [30:54]
Mark Garagos
Okay.
- [30:54]
Matt Murphy
And it is.
- [30:55]
Megyn Kelly
I remember that from criminal procedure.
- [30:56]
Matt Murphy
That's right, it is.
- [30:57]
Megyn Kelly
Just explain to the audience what that means.
- [30:58]
Matt Murphy
Yeah. So it's known as the. It's. This is the. It's the 2020 hindsight rule, colloquially, that's what this case is known. And that is we don't pick apart the actions or thoughts of that particular police officer. You have to look at it objectively. What would a reasonable police officer in the shoes of that officer feel as far as perception of a threat? And she drove her car forward. We got. I saw that. Like, she actually hit him with her car. So it all boils down to any shooting of a mother is tragic. Right. That is sad. But the legal analysis of that is what would a reasonable police officer in the position of that federal agent feel as this woman and that federal agent had personally been dragged by another car within the last year and severely injured,
- [31:45]
Megyn Kelly
which would be relevant.
- [31:46]
Matt Murphy
And it's a mix of that officer's individual experience, their fear of what's going on, along with the objective circumstances that the officers face with. And there was a great clip. I don't know if you saw this, the chief of Chicago pd, of all places. And I was kind of surprised. He went on a rant talking about how if you're blocking federal agents intentionally, that's how people get ambushed. Like, anybody, any of your viewers, whoever in the military.
- [32:14]
Megyn Kelly
We found out it was from October, but it Was the point was totally well taken.
- [32:17]
Matt Murphy
Right.
- [32:18]
Megyn Kelly
But there was, there's another Supreme Court case that says it doesn't matter if, if the shooting, if the first bullet was justified because cops are trained to shoot to kill. If, if they're firing their gun, they're trying to kill. There's no shooting in the leg nonsense like we see in the movies. But there's another Supreme Court precedent that says you, you don't start evaluating the second and the third bullet when they all come together like that. That's not because a lot of people saying. But the second shot and the third shot, Matt, are the reason to charge this guy.
- [32:48]
Matt Murphy
Yeah, number one, that's exactly what the Supreme Court prohibits. Okay, that is hindsight 20 20. That's dissecting something in a rapidly evolving situation. That person has to make split second decisions for their own safety and the safety of other officers and the safety of other protesters too. So it's a split second thing. And the, the next thought here, Megan, is what's the end game? You know, there's a, there's a thing known as officers created jeopardy, which is something I've been dealing with on a case. I have a homicide case in Los Angeles county right now where an innocent police officer has been, has been charged with a homicide for shooting the gang member in 2018 because the guy high on meth, sitting in a stolen car, murder suspect in a separate case, all of a sudden reaches for what anybody would think was a sawed off shotgun. Later it turns out to be a BB gun. And BLM gets involved. And they took a principled stand. Jackie Lacy, who's a friend of mine, former DA of la, took a principled stand, refused to file because he was innocent. George Gascon comes in, files that case. Now you got a guy who is a model police officer, number one in his academy class, father of two kids, Little league coach, one of the best cops I've ever worked with in 33 years, and he gets charged with a homicide. Imagine this for those circumstances. And I'm going to win it one way or another. We have a new da, Nathan Hockman, who is solid. Okay, but. And I'm hoping they're going to dismiss it. But what is the end game here? You've got the governor, you've got the mayor, all calling for this agent to be prosecuted with murder. And first of all, there's a whole procedure that they're going to have to survive in order to do that. Where it's called a federal removal order. A federal judge gets to make the call whether or not he was acting reasonably essentially in conformity with his duties, which I think that's gonna be tough for any prosecution to get around. But these people that keep talking, freaking Tim Walls and all these people, it's we don't do mob justice in America or we're not supposed to anyway. And the mayor who keeps blabbing like I think that they at the very least if they're ever successful in getting a murder prosecution against him, there's no way that's going to be in Minneapolis and it's going to be in some other county like we saw in Coburger where they, where they have to remove it from the local area. But it is. What's the next step? So do we just start prosecuting our cops? Is that the idea? So and so if we have a Democratic president who's trying to get sex offenders or, or Somalian fraudsters out of the country, then it's okay. But if it's a Republican that we don't like, then all of a sudden
- [35:22]
Megyn Kelly
the same agency, by the way, thank God the feds have taken control of the investigation. Taking a look at the two men featured in this Leaving Neverland quote unquote documentary. Wade Robson was they both met Michael when they were children. Wade was this Michael Jackson look alike from Australia who got folded into Michael's orbit. I think he won a contest and met him and might have appeared in like a, a music video with him and went on to become a well known choreographer. Stayed close with the Michael Jackson estate with Michael himself. Said very, very nice things about Michael his whole life actually testified under oath that Michael never laid a hand on him. Both in the 1993 accusations that one didn't go to trial but did testify or told the sheriff nothing, absolutely nothing with me. And then in 2003 in your case Mark was again a witness for Jackson under oath. Nothing, nothing, nothing. Then comes this documentary again in quotes Leaving Neverland. And he has a very different story here is part of it. This is viewer warning disturbing and I must say for the record we took out the most disturbing parts just because it's very dark but you can imagine it sat seven and then him guiding
- [36:42]
Mark Garagos
me to do the same thing with him so moving my hands to touch his penis which you know, was erect. And I remember him putting my hands on his head when he was down there. I'll never forget the, the, the feeling of his hair. I was rough almost like a, like a Brillo pad, like this roughness and he's down There and
- [37:25]
Megyn Kelly
you know, with
- [37:26]
Mark Garagos
his, his mouth on, on my, you know, seven year old penis.
- [37:34]
Megyn Kelly
Okay, Mark. So I have to say when I watched the, the movie, I was horrified and I found him very credible. And then I started to research him and let's just say less so. So he sued the Jackson estate reportedly after he found out that he was not going to get this job with Cirque du Soleil and their production of Michael Jackson. Like they, Cirque du Soleil had licensed some Michael Jackson songs and they were sort of rehabilitating the MJ name and he thought he was going to get a role with them and didn't and reportedly had some sour grapes over it. And then lo and behold, said I was a victim too and filed a lawsuit against the estate. And in the deposition testimony he had to give in the context of the civil case was asked, did you ever write anything about these allegations that you're making now? And he claimed under oath he testified, no, never. But it turned out he had written a whole book alleging that he'd been molested. The defense team demanded the copies of it. My information was he did have to produce what he had and that took a motion and a judge ordering it. And he wiggled out. He tried to wiggle out of doing it. And then they actually got some of the metadata from the drafts from the publishing companies. They went the defense team to publishing companies saying, did you get a pitch to book about Michael Jackson by Wade Robson? And they did. And they got their hands on other versions of the book and his story differed version to version. And then there was testimony of him earlier that made clear he didn't remember the details. But by the time he got around to this documentary, again in quotes, his memory was crystal clear for all of the abuse allegations. All of which left me with a lot of questions, with all due respect to this man, because I don't know whether this happened and I don't want to attack somebody who may have been molested, but I just have to be honest, did not find the story credible at all when, when it was said and done. Your thoughts?
- [39:44]
Mark Garagos
Well, the, the experience I've had with leaving Neverland is famously. They have a clip of me coming out and saying, I'm going to land on you like a ton of bricks or something along those lines. The implication being is that I was coming out and attacking the. The.
- [40:06]
Megyn Kelly
Oh, we have this. Hold on, I'll show the sound bite. This is from the documentary Leaving Neverland. It's you sat and I.
- [40:12]
Matt Murphy
A news clip of Mark Garagos, who initially represented Michael in 2003 in the Criminal case, is manipulated to appear as if he's threatening an accuser. After Michael's arrest.
- [40:23]
Mark Garagos
He will land on you like a ton of bricks. We will land on you like a hammer. If you do anything to besmirch this man's reputation, anything to intrude on his privacy in any way that's actionable, we will unleash a legal torrent like you've never seen.
- [40:43]
Matt Murphy
In fact, he was talking about a completely different legal case in which he
- [40:47]
Mark Garagos
and Michael were secretly videotaped on board a charter aircraft. Disclosed that those two video cameras, which also apparently had automatic audio on them, were surreptitiously placed in there, were recording attorney client conversations.
- [41:04]
Megyn Kelly
So just to make clear, Mark, that was. There was a rebuttal to Leaving Neverland called Lies of Leaving Neverland. It's on YouTube now. And that was one of the lies they were pointing out that they perceived in the documentary as regards. You keep going.
- [41:17]
Mark Garagos
Correct. And that was one of. It was so offensive to me when Leaving Neverland came out, because what I had described there in the press conference in real time, and what I was so angry about was they had filmed my conversations with him, attorney client, which are sacrosanct, and they were marketing it. In fact, Greta Van Susteren was the one who called me the next day saying, this guy, this lawyer has got the tape and he's shopping it for a million bucks. And I called the lawyer, said, have you lost your mind? And he said. He said, well, this is my client's lottery ticket. I went into court immediately, got a court order. Before I could execute the court order to go get it, the FBI was there, they seized it from the lawyer, and this guy was indicted who had done the surreptitious taping. So it was a wild situation to then take that and manipulate it. One of the reasons sometimes these documentaries drive me crazy, because it's great to tell a story, and documentaries can be some of the most effective storytelling there is. But you shouldn't really manipulate the facts to the point that you've just literally tell a story that is not true. And that's why it was.
- [42:34]
Megyn Kelly
So no, then. Then it's a docudrama and not a documentary. And that's. Yeah, so they did that. If they played fast and loose like that with you, what did they do with. With these other two men who are featured in it? And I just think. I don't know whether those. Those facts are fatal to Wade Robson's claim, which has been resurrected because California passed one of those laws like New York did, where claims that were out of time and were sort of dead claims could be resurrected for a brief period of time if they related to sexual abuse. And Wade and James Safechuck took advantage of that and got their claims against the MJ estate resurrected. They go on to this day as a result. Well, but I do know that as a, as a journalist or a storyteller doing a documentary, you must include the credibility problems in your documentary and let the audience decide. And this guy did not do that on either one of these men, which is a failing. It is a fatal flaw in the presentation.
- [43:37]
Mark Garagos
By the way, if you're in a jury trial and this happened, say that this kind of manipulation happened. You would get a jury instruction that says a witness who is willfully false in a material part of his testimony, he or she can be and should be disbelieved in others. I was thinking this morning, it's funny, Megan, that I, before I did this, I was watching the closing argument in Harvey Weinstein's third trial here in New York in the Manhattan court Mark Agnifolo was giving it. I ran into, speaking of podcasts, Arthur Idalla, who tried it the second, the second time, and he sends his regards. And I was thinking as I sat there about this, the accuser in this third trial and such damaged goods. No matter what you, you say, given the testimony, given the medical records, the accuser is clearly has mental health issues that are off the charts. So the argument becomes, when you're analyzing it, did the abuse cause this or is the. Are the mental health chicken or eg, is it the mental health that is causing the person to make the accusation? And those kinds of determinations should be left up to jurors in the courtroom and viewers in documentary. To your point, why ignore things that could be credibility issues? Let people decide based on a fulsome record as opposed to a skewed argument or kind of a rhetorical device.
- [45:21]
Megyn Kelly
Yes, absolutely, there was in that lies of Leaving Neverland, they pointed out this thing I just mentioned about how Wade's deposition reveals that he had to ask his mom to remember details about the alleged abuse. And that was at an earlier point in time than when he's with Leaving Neverland, remembering them all. He's got great details. He's a good storyteller. He can really take you there if you watch the documentary again in quotes. Boy, he really adds a lot of color. None of which he remembered years earlier when he was under oath and asked to tell this story. So it's. There are a lot of questions. James Safechuck, he made equally disturbing allegations in the piece Leaving Neverland. The knock against him is that he was reportedly facing a serious lawsuit that hit right before he sat down for that documentary and was facing some financial, some serious financial threats. And that would have incentivized his filing a civil suit, as he did, and participating with this, quote, documentary. And again, that may not move you at all, but it should be disclosed by a filmmaker in any event. Here's James Safechuck in part again with a viewer warning on the disturbing nature of what he's going to say. Inside eight.
- [46:43]
Mark Garagos
At the train station, there's a room upstairs and we would have sex up there too. What happened every day. It sounds sick, but it's kind of like when you're first dating somebody, right? And you do a lot of it. So it was very much like that. He liked if I rubbed his nipples. So we would do stuff. And then in the end, when he wanted to ejaculate, he would, he would finish himself. You'd be in the hotel room and he would pretend like somebody was coming in and you had to get dressed as fast as possible without making noise. So not getting caught was a big, like just kind of fundamental. It was very much a secret. And he would tell me that if anybody found out, his life would be over and my life would be over.
- [47:59]
Megyn Kelly
He did say there that he remembers the abuse in Michael Jackson's train station. He had like a, you know, know,
- [48:05]
Mark Garagos
like I was just going to say, you know, you mentioned Matt Murphy and my podcast partner, Matt Handle. In fact, Matt and I faced off on a number of sex crime prosecutions. And Matt, I'm going to channel him and say that he would say the, that some of those things have the kind of insignia or indicia of what he has seen repeatedly and what I've seen coming at clients who were accused as well. So it's a very tough situation. I don't think there are any easy answers. And the, the look back statutes which you referenced, which are these statutes that revive statutes of limitations that have already expired, they actually started when the, in the criminal context and there was a case stocker where they said you can't prosecute somebody criminal when you're going to take away their liberty after the statute has expired. But they left open the issue on these civil cases and some of these civil cases and these look back statutes present real problems from my standpoint. When you're trying to relitigate these later on, years later, when somebody didn't have
- [49:23]
Megyn Kelly
notice, like the defendant is dead.
- [49:26]
Mark Garagos
Yeah. And now you've got the estate and you've got. And you don't see it happening against somebody who's a. To quote my other podcast and close friend Adam Carolla, you never see people coming after the empty bags. So there is that as well. So it really is a conundrum.
- [49:46]
Megyn Kelly
It reminds me of the Christine Blasey Ford situation against Brett Kavanaugh where it's like, how is the guy supposed to defend himself 30 years later on, you know, what he did or did not do on a particular day? Now in that case where you're dealing with a form with a. With a would be Supreme Court justice. So it just so happened he did have detailed day planners, even from his time as a teenager.
- [50:14]
Mark Garagos
I wrote a little song to remind you. Choice hotels get you more of the experiences you value. The Cambria Hotel's got it all. A rooftop bar, have a ball. Bring a date, your squad or even your mom. Book direct a choice hotel. Feeling stuck with rising ad costs and flat results, Realize, Taboola's advertising platform for businesses unlocks growth beyond search and social. Taboola's algorithm engages with high intent users on the open web, accelerating their path to conversion. Powered by an AI model trained on over 500 billion monthly signals, Realize delivers smarter prospecting with privacy, safe targeting. The result, higher conversion rates and scalable funnel at lower cost. To learn more, visit realize.com podcast.
- [51:12]
Megyn Kelly
So, Garagos, I haven't heard your take on the Nancy Guthrie case. What is it?
- [51:17]
Mark Garagos
Not that. Not that different from my friend and partner, Matt Murphy. Be this sheriff. I think, you know, all roads lead to this sheriff. And I think that, you know, it's not a surprise that I have some criticism of law enforcement. But in this particular case, this may be kind of a blueprint for how you don't investigate a case, how you don't handle the messaging around a case. And it's a tragedy anyway. Everybody has their heart goes out to it, but this sheriff has just been atrocious, in my opinion.
- [51:52]
Megyn Kelly
Do you have any theory, Garagos, just given your lifetime in, you know, criminal defense work on whether this was a likely kidnapping, a likely murder, you know, and then I always have the body.
- [52:03]
Mark Garagos
I always thought that the focus on the family first, which I understand and I get, but I thought that being a bicoastal elite and living between LA and New York, I missed what people were saying initially who were on the ground there, that look, this is. You're very close to the border. These things happen. I think there was another, I will call it similar case, but something that had kind of the earmarks of a. Of an abduction and that it probably was a stranger abduction for money at a certain point. And it spiraled out of control because of the super sizing of the case itself.
- [52:44]
Megyn Kelly
Interesting. Okay, so, Matt Murphy, you have been covering this from the beginning. And yesterday here on our show, we. We dropped a bit of a bombshell ourselves where we found video of Nancy Guthrie's bedroom, which aired on the Today show in 2013. I mean, we were stunned to see it ourselves. We're putting together this Nancy Guthrie bit, and we were doing some deep research, and there it was in 2013. There's Nancy, look at this, standing in her bedroom. This is in the house from which she was taken back in 2013, though. And it shows her bed. It shows the nightside table. It shows the window right next to the bed. Very tight quarters there. And in this long back and forth she did with the Today show anchors on the set of the Today. And to me, I wondered whether law enforcement even knew this existed, because you and I, after having looked at this, could credibly convince law enforcement that we knew what Nancy bedroom's, what Nancy's bedroom looked like, how it was set up. And if we wanted to write, let's say, a demand for ransom in bitcoin and send it in and sound credible, we might take a detail from the outside of the house that was readily identifiable to anybody, like the floodlight that was dangling, and couple it with a few details from the inside of Nancy's bedroom, which we had seen thanks to a little bit of research prior to sending our notes and convince somebody that we were the kidnappers.
- [54:06]
Matt Murphy
Well, that's right. I mean, there's, as they say, the Internet lives forever. Right. And, you know, I think that, number one, I totally agree with Mark that all roads lead back to this sheriff. And look, I want to be fair, Megan, but this has been a clown show from day one. You've got really good law enforcement on the ground, especially in the FBI. But I've dealt with Pima county on a big murder case out of Orange county, and they were top notch. They were absolutely professional. I don't know what has happened to Pima county since.
- [54:41]
Megyn Kelly
Well, reportedly a bunch of cops fled and did not like working for him and that he's lost a lot of his more experience.
- [54:46]
Matt Murphy
Yeah. Who could have ever guessed that based on the performance that we've seen. I mean, it's just. I mean, I think Mark put it perfectly. It's. It's just, it's so sad. But yeah, all. So many of these, I think all of them. But if not every single one of them, most all of these ransom notes were all fake. All the stuff to the Mark's friend, Harvey Levin, I think those were all fake.
- [55:12]
Megyn Kelly
And the Nancy Guthrie home video adds to that possibility. That's my point is like, did they know, did the sheriff know that? Because they were like, oh, they had a detail like where her watch was. I mean, I could easily say her watch was on the small bedside table right next to her bed with the old style sort of lantern looking lamp feet away from a window that was over a bookshelf that had electronics on it. I mean, I guarantee you Chef Nanos did not know about that video and could easily have bought the whole thing as credible evidence that this guy had been in her room.
- [55:45]
Matt Murphy
Well, well, Chris Nanos demonstrated the entire nation that he didn't know what a DNA mixture was in one of his interviews, which when he said the lab is having problems with the mixture in Florida, which is there's some lab director who's pulling his hair out or her hair out when he heard. When they heard that, which is just, it's absurd. So this guy is, you know, I don't know how old he is. I don't know what the deal is, but it just. There are hardworking women and men in law enforcement on the ground level on this that probably haven't slept a full eight hours since this thing started. And they're being missserved. I think the family's being misserved. And you call in the media, you got to expect the loonies are going to come out and say the vampires abducted her. You got a lot of well meaning people that are to come in with tips, trying to help that almost never go anywhere. And Mark and I have dealt with a million of those where it's like I heard noises down the street and it turns out it's the raccoons in the trash can again. Or I heard a lady screaming, but it could be my neighbor's wife. You know, you deal with all those, you got to devote resources to those. And now in the modern era, we have scammers who attempt to take advantage and profit from the apoplectic grief of families that are going through the worst thing that a family can go through. And at the helm of this sinking ship is this guy that keeps taking the microphones Although I think he stopped doing that a little bit. He's doing one on one interviews, and now he's coming back blasting the media on stuff. He brought the media in at the very beginning of this, and I've got no criticism of that. But it's like, dude, you gotta be prepared to answer some questions, know your evidence, and take a little bit of heat and criticism that goes with the job.
- [57:25]
Megyn Kelly
Mm. I mean, honestly, every missing person, their family in this nation would give anything to have the kind of media coverage of the case that Nancy Guthrie has received. The media is a blessing, not a curse. There's some downside, I don't deny that. But it's way more upside in having this much media attention on the case because they. They require 400 officers. That's how we got 400 officers on Nancy Guthrie. It wasn't just because Savannah was the dodge. It's because the media was constantly out there, constantly peppering them with demands for more information. So please spare me on the media blame. And I don't love the media, even just because I'm a part of it. I wouldn't say this if I didn't actually believe it.
- [58:05]
Mark Garagos
Feeling stuck with rising ad costs and flat results, Realize Taboola's advertising platform for businesses unlocks growth beyond search and social. Taboola's algorithm engages with high intent users on the open web, accelerating their path to conversion. Powered by an AI model trained on over 500 billion monthly signals, Realize delivers smarter prospecting with privacy, safe targeting. The result, higher conversion rates and scalable funnel at lower cost. To learn more, visit realize.com podcast.
- [58:36]
Megyn Kelly
Breathe in. Feel the sense of calm that comes from having up to $300 in overdraft protection with Goto bank now.
- [58:43]
Mark Garagos
Did you say $300?
- [58:44]
Megyn Kelly
Yes. Now back to our breathing.
- [58:47]
Mark Garagos
So if I overspend my balance, Goto bank has my back up to $300.
- [58:51]
Megyn Kelly
Yes. Can we breathe out now?
- [58:53]
Mark Garagos
Less worries, more zen.
- [58:55]
Megyn Kelly
With over $300 in overdraft protection, tap to open an account today. Eligible direct deposits and opt in required for overdraft protection fees. Terms and conditions apply.