Defense Claims on Charlie Kirk Murder Bullet, Hawaii Doc Testifies, Inside Harvey Weinstein's Prison Life, with Arthur Aidala

Summary

MK True Crime — April 3, 2026

Episode: Defense Claims on Charlie Kirk Murder Bullet, Hawaii Doc Testifies, Inside Harvey Weinstein's Prison Life (with Arthur Aidala)
Host: Phil Holloway (MK Media), co-host Ashley Merchant
Contributor: Arthur Aidala
This episode tackles high-profile true crime and legal developments, including the latest on the Charlie Kirk murder case, the dramatic Hawaii doctor trial, updates on the Gilgo Beach serial killings, the dual-prosecution of Luigi Mangioni, and life behind bars for Harvey Weinstein.

---

Episode Overview

The episode dives into significant, headline-grabbing criminal cases and legal questions. Veterans of the legal system, Phil Holloway and Ashley Merchant, dissect recent courtroom developments and evidentiary twists—including controversial defense maneuvers, the dynamics of trial publicity, and the realities of high-stakes criminal defense. Renowned New York trial attorney Arthur Aidala joins to offer insider perspectives on the Gilgo Beach, Luigi Mangioni, and Harvey Weinstein cases.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Charlie Kirk Murder Case—Utah

[01:02–11:20]

• Defense Claims over Bullet Evidence

  • Defense Argument: The bullet that killed political activist Charlie Kirk may not match the rifle attributed to defendant Tyler Robinson, despite Robinson's DNA and confession.
    • Defense cites an ATF report stating forensics were "unable to actually identify the bullet...to the rifle."
  • Phil Holloway's Analysis: Dismisses the defense's insinuation, clarifying that inconclusive forensics often result from insufficient bullet fragment; it does not mean the bullet didn't come from the gun.
    • "All it proves is that there's not enough of this bullet fragment left to compare the lands and grooves and do any kind of conclusive analysis." [06:33]
  • Ashley Merchant's Context: Explains such defense tactics are common in death penalty cases—challenging every piece of evidence and seeking delays as strategies to protect the client's life and ensure exhaustive review.
    • "Their job is to keep their client alive as long as possible… Death is different." [04:14]

• Evidence Summary

  • Overwhelming evidence remains:
    • Robinson’s DNA found on rifle, cartridges, trigger.
    • Empty cartridge carries his DNA.
    • Robinson confessed to his roommate.
  • The fragment only provides a red herring; inconclusive ballistics are "not abnormal." [07:52]

• Media & Conspiracy Theories

  • Defense tactics have stoked conspiracy theories online, likening it to "JFK Dealey Plaza" scenarios. [07:20]

• Cameras in the Courtroom

  • Defense motion to ban cameras, alleging TV has shown Robinson in shackles, risking public/jury prejudice.
  • Ashley: Cameras are essential for open courts; defense concern is largely about jury bias in death penalty cases.
    • "Having tried cases where the media has watched, it is very important they do not record conversations with lawyers... I do not think the judge is going to keep cameras out of the courtroom." [09:57]

---

2. Hawaii Doctor Attempted Murder Trial: Dr. Gerhard Koenig

[14:25–29:46]

• Testimony Highlights

  • Son’s Testimony: Dr. Koenig’s son testifies his father admitted, via FaceTime, to trying to kill his wife (Ariel Koenig) after discovering her infidelity.
    • "He said...Ariel, my stepmom, had been cheating on him and that he tried to kill her." [14:56]
  • Visual Evidence: Son recalls seeing blood on his father’s shirt via FaceTime; Koenig explained it as “just her—meaning Ariel’s—blood.” [16:35]

• Defendant’s (Dr. Koenig) Testimony

  • Admits emotional confrontation over the affair; claims Ariel physically attacked him—grabbed his testicles, hit him with a rock—leading him to retaliate.
    • "She grabs me by the testicles, and I'm trying to get her to let go...She hits me with a rock...I hit her with the rock." [26:44–27:16]
  • Tries to explain suicidal comments to son as being misunderstood; says he was repeating “she said I tried to kill her,” not confessing.
  • Claims self-defense, introducing the theory that Ariel tried to kill him, potentially for life insurance proceeds.

• Life Insurance Angle

  • Koenig testifies they both recently obtained life insurance ($250k for her, $1.5m for him).
    • He told Ariel about it just before the hike; defense alludes to possible motive for her to attack him.
    • Jury likely to weigh this with skepticism.

• Legal Analysis

  • Defense appears to be setting up for a “lesser included offense” (passion crime vs. attempted murder), anticipating juror compromise.
  • Visual evidence (bodycam of injured Ariel) is powerful for prosecution.

Notable Quotes:

• Ashley: “The most damaging part... is the fact that he was going to try to commit suicide. Most jurors are going to think you were trying to kill yourself because you had a guilty conscience.” [18:50]
• Phil: “My father used to tell me... better to keep your mouth shut and look like a fool than to open your mouth and prove it to the world.” [19:23]

---

3. Arthur Aidala Segment: Gilgo Beach, Luigi Mangioni, Harvey Weinstein

[33:00–61:41]

a) Rex Heuerman (“Gilgo Beach Killer”)

Rumored guilty plea forthcoming.

• Background: Years-long investigation of sex worker homicides dogged by corruption in local law enforcement.
• New DA Ray Tierney has built an overwhelming case. Digital evidence is “stomach-turning.”
  • "The evidence will be overwhelming... doesn't want to put himself or his family through trial." [33:49–35:57]
• No death penalty in NY; potential plea might be for “life without parole” or possibly manslaughter (25 years)—details not finalized.
  • No guarantee of full public confession; allocution could be minimal.
  • “All he really has to say publicly... I did cause the death of [victim] by [means]...” [37:14–38:24]

b) Luigi Mangioni Dual Prosecution

Explained by Aidala as “so rare.”

• Mangioni faces simultaneous state and federal prosecution for the same murder—a jurisdictional chess game rarely seen.
  • “It's so rare to be charged in two jurisdictions for the exact same place of occurrence.” [50:04–53:24]
• Delay on federal case so state can go first, per NY double jeopardy law.
• Mangioni has generated a fan base, with supporters dressing like video game character Luigi at court.
• Debate over federal courts—jury pool, evidentiary rules, and how they all may favor the prosecution.
• Ashley: “Jury selection in federal court favors the prosecutor... basically, everyone who's breathing, raise your hand.” [52:54]

c) Harvey Weinstein—Inside Prison Life

Aidala offers a candid, at times personal look.

• Weinstein’s prison interview with The Hollywood Reporter: admits to infidelity, denies sexual assault.
  • “Did I ever sexually assault a woman? No. No, I never did that.” (quoting Weinstein) [55:06]
• Aidala critiques the system’s pursuit of Weinstein on minor felony (after years in solitary, will likely die in jail); describes deplorable conditions at Rikers Island.
  • “Harvey's life in prison sucks. There's no way around it. It’s like feces on the wall. It's stinking... Upstate was like the Taj Mahal compared to Rikers.” [61:43]

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On defense tactics in death penalty cases:
  Ashley: "Their job is to keep their client alive as long as possible... You have to Scrutinize every little piece of evidence because your job is going to be scrutinized." [04:14]

• On media coverage and courtroom transparency:
  Phil: "We need sunshine, the best disinfectant." [11:20]

• On the power of suicide implications:
  Ashley: "I'm going to jump because... most jurors are going to think you were trying to kill yourself because you had a guilty conscience." [18:50]

• Arthur Aidala on serial killers' secrets:
  "With these serial killers, a lot of times we don't ever know the full extent of their activity..." [39:20]

• On dual prosecutions (state/federal):
  Aidala: "It's so rare to be charged in two jurisdictions for the exact same tpo (place of occurrence)." [50:04]

• On Harvey Weinstein's infamy:
  Aidala: "Who's got more pretrial publicity than Harvey Weinstein? He's got to be in the top five live literally of all time..." [56:33]

---

Important Timestamps & Segments

• [01:02] — Start of episode; Kirk case intro.
• [04:14] — Merchant on death penalty defense tactics.
• [06:33] — Holloway breakdown of "fingerprinting" bullets.
• [07:20] — Conspiracy theory discussion.
• [09:57] — Cameras in courtrooms debate.
• [14:25] — Switch to Hawaii doctor trial.
• [14:56] — Son testifies about father's confession.
• [20:05] — Defendant’s self-defense strategy detailed.
• [26:44] — Graphic recounting of the alleged attack.
• [33:00] — Aidala joins show; begins New York legal breakdowns.
• [37:14] — Rex Heuerman guilty plea expectations.
• [50:04] — Nuances of Mangioni’s dual prosecution.
• [55:06] — Weinstein’s Rikers life and interview.
• [61:41] — End of Aidala segment; closing.

---

Closing Arguments & Listener Q&A

DUI Law Critique

Ashley Merchant’s personal “rant” and Q&A:

• DUI laws are problematic: harsh consequences can arise from subjective police interpretation and flawed roadside tests ("high error rate").
• Cites real-world cases where innocent individuals were wrongly charged, exposed to grave consequences before being exonerated by toxicology.

Phil Holloway:

• Stresses need for better objective measurement—current methods too reliant on officer opinion; calls for reform.

Cameras & Open Courts

• Phil: “Sunlight is the best disinfectant... We need open courtrooms—audio or sketches are not enough for legit public confidence.”

---

Episode Tone & Style

The conversation is frank, expert, and often tinged with gallows humor and legal war stories. The hosts openly critique procedural failings (junk science in DUIs, the complexity of double prosecution, the politicization of defense tactics) while maintaining respect for the serious stakes of each case. Arthur Aidala’s insider anecdotes add color, credibility, and a dash of old-school New York edge.

---

In Summary

This episode of MK True Crime offers a gripping, in-depth tour of current hot-button criminal cases, demystifying headline legal maneuvers while exposing the human drama and procedural challenges that shape their outcomes. From manipulated evidence narratives and courtroom transparency to the realities of prison life for infamous defendants, Holloway, Merchant, and Aidala reveal the machinery behind the true crime headlines.

---

For listeners who want the straight legal story, peer behind the curtain of media sensationalism, and understand the complexities and ironies of modern criminal justice, this episode is essential.

Transcript

[OnDeck/Lemonade Advertiser]

Ondeck is built to back small businesses like yours. Whether you're buying equipment, expanding your team or bridging cash flow gaps, Ondeck's loans up to $400,000 make it happen fast. Rated A by the Better Business Bureau and earning thousands of five star Trustpilot reviews, OnDeck delivers funding you can count on. Apply in [e-mail] depending on certain loan attributes, your business loan may be issued by Ondeck or Celtic Bank. Ondeck does not lend in North Dakota. All loans and amounts subject to lender approval. Do you love your pets? Do you love suspense? Do you love it when your pets keep you in suspense because they ate something mysterious? And who knows what the vet visit will cost? If you answered yes twice and then no, you should protect your pet with Lemonade Pet Insurance. It can save you up to 90% on vet bills for checkups, emergencies, diagnostics, all the stuff that leaves you financially on the edge of your seat. Get a quick and Easy [e-mail] pet and get your suspense somewhere else, like from a riveting podcast.

[Ashley Merchant]

Foreign.

[Phil Holloway]

Welcome to MK True Crime. I'm Phil Holloway. I'm a criminal lawyer, I'm a former prosecutor and I'm an ex cop. And I can tell you what a great true crime show is because I know one when I see it. And here's what's on our MK True Crime docket. Today we start in Utah. The defense for Tyler Robinson, the man accused of allegedly killing Charlie Kirk, claims that the bullet may not match the rifle that Robinson allegedly used, notwithstanding his DNA and his confession. We will talk about what all this actually means. Plus, out in Hawaii we have Gerhard Koenig, the doctor on trial for allegedly attempting to kill his wife while they were on a hiking trail. He took the stand, by the way, to share his side of the story and what a story it was. Will bring you all of those the details and we have our pal, our friend, our colleague, MK True Crime contributor Arthur Idalla will join us from New York to discuss the Gilgo beach alleged killer who is possibly going to pull a Bryan Coburger and change his plea to guilty. We have all that and then some. I'm joined today by my friend, my colleague, my co host, Ashley Merchant, criminal defense lawyer from Atlanta, Georgia. Ashley, you know you and I have been talking a lot about this case and I'm glad we get to start with Tyler Robinson. This is the story that has the Internet buzzing right now. So we have. Let me set this up. Okay. We've got the lawyers for Tyler Robinson, as I mentioned, he's accused of the assassination of Charlie Kirk last year. His lawyers have recently requested a six month delay in a court hearing. It's called a preliminary or a probable cause hearing. It was scheduled in May, and it's for the purpose of reviewing the evidence to determine if there's enough probable cause to proceed. But they are now suggesting that the bullet that killed Charlie Kirk did not match the rifle. Ashley, now you and I have been around for a while. I know that because we worked together, literally on cases for years and years together and alongside each other. And we've seen a lot of, well, let's just say pleadings filed by lawyers that may or may not necessarily pass the smell test. And I've got a lot I want to talk about about this claim where Robinson's lawyers actually wrote to the judge. They said that the atf, they said, quote, was unable actually to identify the bullet recovered at autopsy during to the rifle allegedly tied to Mr. Robinson. Now, if you just were to. If you were just to read that and not really understand what's going on, and maybe you're somebody who writes headlines for the media, you might get it wrong and say, you know, breaking news, the bullet doesn't match the rifle. You know, we see a lot of that going on, actually. I've got a lot to say, but I want to hear what you have to say about this claim.

[Ashley Merchant]

Yeah, you know, this really isn't a whodunit, Phil. We're not really thinking that he is not the man that assassinated Charlie Kirk. I don't think that's what anybody. I think it's really important to put this in context when you're looking at this headline. This is a death penalty case. And you've got to think about what the defense lawyers are doing in a death penalty case. Their job is to keep their client alive as long as possible. It is, and I have equated it on this show, it is akin to an oncologist. Your client has cancer and your job, you know, you can't fix him, but it is to keep him alive as long as possible. And that's what they're doing. So they are challenging every single little piece of evidence in every way they can. They are trying to cause as much delay as humanly possible as a tactic to try to keep their client along as. As alive as long as possible. And quite frankly, death is different. So as a defense lawyer who has handled death penalty cases, you have a different duty when the state is trying to kill your client. You have to Scrutinize every little piece of evidence because your job is going to be scrutinized. So you can't necessarily blame the defense lawyers for doing this, because they are going to be scrutinized more than anyone. And, you know, if we have the death penalty, we have to sort of accept that this is one of the things that goes along with it, because death is final. And so we have to make sure that everything is right. And that's what's happening here.

[Phil Holloway]

Well, you're right. And, of course, you always bring me back to the center when I get myself worked up, but. And you're right. Look, this is a death case, and all those things you said are true. And I don't blame them for asking for a continuance of the prelim and for everything else. But here's my problem, okay? My problem is that, you know, they're writing these briefs and these motions, and they're saying that the. The analysis could clear their client as early as the preliminary hearing of blame in this murder. And anybody who knows anything about firearms or even has time to check chatgpt about firearms knows. Okay, there's something. Let me just set this up. Okay? You've got. When you've got a bullet that leaves a gun, whether it's a rifle or a pistol, it has something called lands and grooves. And these are specific markings that are on the projectile. And I think we got a picture that we can show that kind of demonstrates kind of what I'm talking about. But this is like a fingerprint, right? This is something that can conclusively match, potentially a projectile, once it leaves a gun to the gun that is suspected of firing it. But here's the thing. It's just like anything. You've got to have enough of it to test, right? And so if you have a very tiny bullet fragment, the results can be inconclusive. So it's disingenuous for a lot of folks in the media and on social media and maybe even these lawyers, depending on how they spin this, for trying to say that this inconclusive test proves that it didn't come from the gun. All it proves is that there's not enough of this bullet fragment left to compare the lands and grooves and do any kind of conclusive analysis. It's not at all surprising. I mean, what if they didn't even have a bullet? What if the bullet was a through and through and it was never recovered? But what's happening now is we're getting the conspiracy theories. It wasn't Tyler Robinson it was a bullet from a different gun. Somewhere else, there was another shooter. You got a. We got a whole JFK Dealey Plaza thing here developing because of one filing by the defense lawyers that is, I think, misleading.

[Ashley Merchant]

I agree. I think that this is, you know, a red herring. I think that this case is not a whodunit. I don't think anybody has a question as to who did it or how they did it. I don't think in this case they're saying it's inconclusive. That means nothing. That means it means nothing. It doesn't help, it doesn't hurt. It doesn't do anything. It doesn't clear their client. It doesn't prove their client did. It doesn't really do anything. But what we still have. And I think it's important to note that it's typical that results in a case like this are going to be inconclusive. That's not abnormal. That's not something, you know, that we really expect to hear when we do get conclusive results. It's kind of rare. But there's so much other evidence. There is really overwhelming evidence that Mr. Robinson is the person that killed Charlie Kirk. There's DNA on the rifle there. He had DNA on the unshot cartridges from the gun. The trigger of the rifle has DNA on it. The cartridge has his DNA on it. The empty cartridge has DNA. He made confessions to a roommate. I mean, there's a lot of different evidence that we have. This is not really a whodunit. So I think this is a more of a situation where the defense is trying to just make sure that they've done their job and they've checked everything out just to make sure. I don't think that this is going to be one of those cases where we've got this smoking gun that comes out and says, my gosh, someone else did it, you know.

[Phil Holloway]

Yeah, well, they've done a good job of stirring up the conspiracy theory crowd. I mean, this. Oh, yeah, you talk about a red herring. That's a great word. But look, there's another thing going on out here. Ashley, did you see. And I'm going to talk more about this later, because this kind of, if you. If you can't tell, closed courts and things like that really, really burned me up. But there's more of an effort now to ban cameras from the courtroom. There's another hearing that's currently scheduled for April 17 on a defense motion to ban cameras from the courtroom. Once again, they're arguing that TV camera operators have shown the defendant in shackles and leg irons and whatnot. And, you know, here's the thing. The judge is, rather than just shutting it down, he's scheduling another hearing on it. What's going on?

[Ashley Merchant]

Right. You know, I have very strong feelings about cameras in courtroom. I believe in cameras in courtrooms, and I know a lot of defense lawyers don't like that. They don't like cameras to be in courtrooms. But I think that that is a vital part of our Constitution to have public trials. And that's what this is all really about, whether or not you're having a fair and public trial, because the public does have a right to know, and they have a right to be involved. Having tried cases, though, where the media has watched, it is very, very important that they do not record conversations with the lawyers. And so I think the media, yeah, they need to be extra cautious. And, you know, they probably had a snafu. And there's things to do. I mean, you have to learn when you have a courtroom, when you're trying a case and there's cameras, you gotta be a little bit more cognizant of it. You gotta make sure you hit that microphone off. You gotta position yourself a little bit more carefully. Most camera people are very good about that. And so I think having, you know, some. Some rules really in place are. Is really the way to go. But this doesn't surprise me. And where I really think this is going is the fact that they don't want their client viewed in the shackles, as you said, Phil. And that is really to the death penalty, because it's a whole lot easier for a jury to vote to execute someone if they are dehumanized. And so if. If the public has seen him in shackles, if they've seen him in this dehumanizing. And it's sub. It's subtle, but it' there. You know, if he's been dehumanized publicly, it's a lot easier to vote to put him to death. So I think that's where this is. But I do not think that the judge is going to keep cameras out of the courtroom.

[Phil Holloway]

Well, look here on this show and all the other podcasts and other true crime shows and television shows, all the media that covers true crime and court cases, we've got video from trials all the time, every day. In fact, let's go ahead and talk about the Gerhard Koenig trial that's going on out in Hawaii. This is one that's televised, right? Or it's, I guess I should say televised is just telling everybody how old I am. Live stream is the way to go now. So anyway, there's cameras, but there's no problem. And we had the Corey Richards case. There was cameras, no problem. It's easy to do, it's not complicated. And by the way, don't even get me started on this topic for another show. But the federal courts need to get on board with this too. We need sunshine, the best disinfectant

[Ashley Merchant]

need

[OnDeck/Lemonade Advertiser]

to restock inventory, cover seasonal dips, or manage payroll. OnDeck's small business line of credit provides immediate access to funds up to $200,000 exactly when your business needs it. With flexible draws, transparent pricing and full control over repayment, you can tackle unexpected expenses without missing a beat. Apply [e-mail] and funds could be available as soon as tomorrow. Depending on certain loan attributes, your business loan may be issued by Ondeck or Celtic bank on Deck does not lend in North Dakota. All loans and amount subject to lender approval.

[Ashley Merchant]

If you're the proud parent of a

[OnDeck/Lemonade Advertiser]

puppy or kitten, you know you can.

[Ashley Merchant]

If you can't pet proof your entire

[OnDeck/Lemonade Advertiser]

life, there simply isn't a sock drawer

[Ashley Merchant]

high enough or a couch cover thick enough. But you can pet proof your wallet

[OnDeck/Lemonade Advertiser]

with Lemonade pet insurance.

[Ashley Merchant]

Whether it's an unexpected accident or a routine checkup, Lemonade can cover up to 90% of the bill.

[OnDeck/Lemonade Advertiser]

Plus they can handle claims in as little as two seconds.

[Ashley Merchant]

So before you turn into a complete

[OnDeck/Lemonade Advertiser]

helicopter pet parent, get a'@lemonade.com Peter, you

[Ashley Merchant]

may have tried everything out there to aid your metabolism and stay healthy. Diets, detox teas, juice cleanses, other so called miracle fixes that are often just hype.

[OnDeck/Lemonade Advertiser]

But let me tell you about Veracity.

[Ashley Merchant]

It's a company founded by a hormonal health coach whose personal experience with metabolic issues inspired her to develop actual holistic solutions for achieving optimal health. Veracity's metabolism ignite formula is the number

[OnDeck/Lemonade Advertiser]

one doctor recommended GLP1 booster and a natural GLP1 alternative.

[Ashley Merchant]

Verasity says it has no side effects, no allergens, and that it's just a plant based blend clinically shown to reduce

[OnDeck/Lemonade Advertiser]

hunger and that it's safe for everyone,

[Ashley Merchant]

including expecting or new moms breastfeeding. You take two capsules with breakfast to

[OnDeck/Lemonade Advertiser]

feel more energized, clear headed and in control.

[Ashley Merchant]

So before metabolism ignites cells out again, consider making the switch to GLP1's the Natural Way. Head to VeracityHealth co. Use the code

[OnDeck/Lemonade Advertiser]

MK for up to 65 off your order again. That's V E R A C I

[Ashley Merchant]

T Y Health Co for up to 65 off. And make sure you use our promo code MK when you check out to get your discount.

[Arthur Idalla]

Earhart.

[Phil Holloway]

Koenig, actually, remember, he's the anesthesiologist who's on trial in Hawaii, accused of allegedly trying to murder his wife. Let's go ahead and. Let's go ahead and run SOT1, which is Gerhard, Dr. Gerhard Koenig's son, testifying that the defendant, Gerhard, admitted that he tried to kill his wife Ariel, when they were on a hike in Hawaii.

[Courtroom Witness]

What did the defendant tell you during that call? As close to word for word as you can remember, that he would not be making it back to Maui and to take good care of the younger kids and that he had that area. My stepmom had been cheating on him and that he tried to kill her. Okay, that's a lot, but I'm going to break that down a little bit. You said he tried. You said the defendant told you he tried to kill Ariel. Is that right? Correct. Did he tell you what happened to Ariel? He did not. Did he tell you where she went?

[Phil Holloway]

No.

[Courtroom Witness]

Did the defendant tell you why he tried to kill Ariel? No. During the 10:42am call, did the defendant tell you anything about what he planned to do next during that call? The next plan that he said was to jump off the cliff.

[Phil Holloway]

That's his son.

[Ashley Merchant]

No, that's. I mean, that's insane to me. That's insane to me. I'm sure it was emotional for everyone, and I know that the defense has been trying to poke holes and say that maybe, you know, he misunderstood what was said, but that's intense. I mean, that's going to be really hard for a jury to disregard that type of testimony. And I know Gare Heart, as actually testified, thank God, because we were waiting for that, but this is going to be really difficult to overcome. He also, I thought was interesting because this was FaceTime. I think we've got sat six where he actually saw the blood on his dad's shirt. That is compelling.

[Courtroom Witness]

What do you say about Ariel and away? She said that she had gotten away and that was all I heard about her location. During this first call at 10:42am did you ask the defendant any questions yourself? I. Yes, I asked what was on his shirt because I looked like I saw splatters of something on his shirt. And he said, oh, it's just her meaning Aries blood.

[Phil Holloway]

You know, that's. That's pretty compelling testimony there. I mean, this is his son testifying about his father saying that, you know, she got away. It's like, you know, this is like the craziest thing. And we have other things we. Gerhardt supposedly said to his son on that same FaceTime call. Ashley, I'm gonna jump, right? I'm gonna go before the police catch me. Let's take a look at site three.

[Courtroom Witness]

During this second phone call at 11:46, what did the defendant tell you, if anything? He asked me if I had told anybody, and I said yes, and I told him who I had told. And then he said that he was just gonna jump and said that a couple times. Okay, to be super exact to your meal, who did you tell the defendant that you told? I told the defense that I told my grandparents and my mother. How did the second call end with him saying. With the defendant saying, I'm gonna go before the police catch me?

[Phil Holloway]

Actually, while you tell our audience what you make of the son's testimony, I want to go ahead and show on the screen while you talk, we have body camera video that shows this. Shows the victim with blood all over her face being attended to by other hikers that were, I guess, in the area that responded to her calls for help.

[Ashley Merchant]

Right.

[Phil Holloway]

But what do you. What do you. What do you make of this? Because we're about to get into testimony now. The defendant himself, the doctor, has taken the stand to contradict his son. So set this up for us.

[Ashley Merchant]

I think the most damaging part of that testimony really is the fact that he was going to try to commit suicide. I'm going to jump because they're going to have. He's going to have to explain that. So when he testifies, he's really going to have to explain why he was so emotional, you know, what was factoring in. Because most jurors are going to think you were trying to kill yourself because you had a guilty conscience. And that's what the state's going to argue. They're going to argue that big time. So he's going to have to explain. I just was so overwhelmed, you know, and convinced the jury that he was just overwhelmed. And that's why he wanted to take his own life. Because typically, you don't want to jump. You don't want to take your own life if you're innocent.

[Phil Holloway]

You know, my father used to tell me something. He used to say that sometimes it's better to keep your mouth shut and look like a fool than to open your mouth and prove it to the world. And this is sometimes the analogy that we as lawyers look to when we help our clients make a decision about whether or not to testify. And so here we have the doctor.

[Courtroom Witness]

Now.

[Phil Holloway]

He's. He's. He's testified, and we've got some of that for you. And his defense? Well, you tell me. But as I understand, actually his defense, he's trying to. Is he trying to say that she was trying to kill him? Is he claiming self defense? What is he doing?

[Ashley Merchant]

Yeah, you know, he is. He's really trying to do that, and he has to testify. I mean, this is a he said, she said. I think one of the things that's really important to kind of update our viewers on is that there was a criminologist that did testify, that ultimately testified and finally was able to link the blood back to the rock. So I think that's a really substantial piece of evidence. The rock that. That we've shown earlier on the show was actually the blood on it was tested, and it was linked back to Ariel. So we've been able to see that that was really her blood. So now we've got him taking the stand, and he's a smart guy. I mean, he's a doctor, so he should be able to put on, you know, withstand some cross examination. But so he took the stand, and you know what? He really.

[Courtroom Witness]

He.

[Ashley Merchant]

He talked about this being an affair. You know, he said he confronted her about the affair. She admitted the affair. She was initially remorseful and that they were really, you know, he thought they were going to work it out. They were going to some type of counseling and thought that they were going to work it out. But I don't know if the jury's going to believe it. And we've got SOT4, which is where he's talking about her actually admitting to the affair to him.

[Courtroom Witness]

I confront her with it, and she's immediately remorseful and doesn't deny anything, admits to it, and is crying. And let me ask you this.

[Phil Holloway]

You say admits to it, and you

[Courtroom Witness]

know, when Ms. Coney testified, she kept

[Phil Holloway]

using the term, what you guys use the term emotional affair. But in that time period, what did

[Courtroom Witness]

she admit to having a. She admitted to having an affair. Yeah. With Jeff Miller. Yeah. She admitted this was a completely inappropriate relationship. And so you make an affair from the start.

[Phil Holloway]

So wait a minute. So you call your client, put him on the stand to confirm the motive that the prosecutor says that he had for this attack. Is that what. Is that what we just saw?

[Ashley Merchant]

That's what we saw. But you know, what else we got into? Which is kind of crazy, and it gives me Corey Richards vibes. We heard some stuff about a life insurance policy. So this was a really interesting, you know, new thing. It seemed like the defense was sort of of setting up that maybe they're going to argue that she was trying to kill him for the life insurance proceeds. So he testified that both he and Ariel had applied for life insurance back in January, which is two months before this attack. $250,000 for her and $1.5 million for him, which, you know, makes perfect sense. He explained it. He makes more money than her. So, you know, I think that makes common sense. But the life insurance was approved, and this is what I think is really, really a big deal. He told Ariel about the life insurance right before the hike, which obviously you have to take his word for it. So whether or not the jury believes him, but that could go in with his theory, you know, that she had motivation to try to kill him. And he testified about that in SOT5.

[Courtroom Witness]

We were kind of working on big picture relationship things, and I was like, oh, shoot, I still have to get life insurance. And so I talked to Arianny, and we both applied for life insurance at the same time at the end of January. Did you get the same amount? No. Why not? The idea was that if one spouse would die, the other one would be able to continue on and live in the same house. And so it was. Since I made significantly more money than she did, it was basically enough money that she could pay off the house if she. If I would die.

[Phil Holloway]

So it was the amount that was decided for her.

[Courtroom Witness]

250,000.

[Phil Holloway]

Okay.

[Courtroom Witness]

And the 1.5 million that you're trying

[Phil Holloway]

to get on your life, was she the beneficiary?

[Courtroom Witness]

Yes.

[Phil Holloway]

And vice versa?

[Courtroom Witness]

Yes.

[Phil Holloway]

Okay. Did you discuss this additional 500 that went through with Ms. Koening and that the email came in and you document. Did you tell her about that before the hike on March 24, 2025?

[Courtroom Witness]

I did, because we were in the parking lot after the coffee shop, and I was on my phone, I was like. And I was like, oh, you know what? My. You know, the last of my life insurance just went through. They're asking me to docusign it. And so I was doing that. All right, we can take that. Just want to let her know that I'm not, like, just texting or something, like, because we were out together.

[Phil Holloway]

Yeah. So she develops this plot, like, you know, instantaneously to, I guess, do him in from the cliffs in Hawaii. Is that what's. So she could get. Not only so she could get the brand new life insurance money that had just been approved. I mean, no red flags there.

[Ashley Merchant]

Right, right, right.

[Phil Holloway]

And so she could, I guess, take her emotional affair maybe to the next level with a different man. Is that what his defense is?

[Ashley Merchant]

It seems like that's what he's trying to do, what I think his lawyers are trying to do. And I actually think they're doing a decent job at this. This is they're trying to muddy the waters. And my guess is we're gonna see some request for something like a lesser included, you know, kind of passion type offense. And for our viewers, you know, lesser included, what happens is the prosecution charges the highest thing they think they can get, like attempted murder. What do you mean by that? It means you have to prove that he actually tried to kill her and wanted to kill her. Well, maybe he was just emotional in the moment. And a lot of times we see, Phil, you know, jurors split the baby. They love to do that. They don't want to go all the way with the state. They don't want to go all the way not guilty. They want somewhere in the middle, and it's kind of an easier verdict for them. So I think they may be setting the stage for that. And we really see that in his testimony in SOT6, where he talks about that she tried to throw him off the cliff, grabbed his testicles and then hit him, and he hit her instinctively. And then actually before we listened to it, that actually fits with the evidence because, you know, her blood has been found on the rock. Now, she was definitely injured, so I think there are some jurors that could believe this whole. Grabbed my balls and I whacked her. Let's see what you think in SOT 6,

[Courtroom Witness]

right after the selfie, I just remember kind of staying at the edge there and looking over the edge and just kind of still in thought about everything that had just happened and what's going on. And then I felt like a shove and I was almost pushed over the edge. You felt a shove? Who shoved you? Every. Did. What did you do right after that? Barely caught myself and turned around and looked at her and was like, what the was that? Like, turned around and was like, what what?

[Phil Holloway]

Like, was like kind of in shock, like, what, what, what was. What the. Was that?

[Courtroom Witness]

Yes. Okay.

[Phil Holloway]

And then did you move towards him?

[Courtroom Witness]

Yeah, I did. I was like, just asking her, like, you know, what was that? And started walking towards her.

[Phil Holloway]

When you start walking towards her, is she saying anything?

[Courtroom Witness]

Not initially. When I Turn around. And I'm asking her, like, what the hell? You know, what the fuck just happened and what's going on? And as I'm starting to walk towards her, she starts yelling. She starts yelling, yeah, help me. Help me. She kind of grabs my wrists and throws herself on the ground and pulls me down with her. So she grabs me by the testicles, and I'm trying to get her to let go of my testicles. And then she hits me with rock on the side of the face. I finally get the rock.

[Phil Holloway]

What'd you do?

[Courtroom Witness]

I hit her with the rock.

[Phil Holloway]

How many times do you think you hit her?

[Courtroom Witness]

I heard two times.

[Phil Holloway]

So, look, I don't want to spend too much time with the mental image here, but. So she's grabbing his testicles in one hand and using this rock with the other, trying to move her.

[Ashley Merchant]

Yeah, it's odd. I think the jury's going to be focused in on that, and I think he could have done a little bit better with his testimony. You know, all the cussing and stuff. Like, he didn't need to do that. You know, he's not reenacting well.

[Phil Holloway]

So he also. He had to address the claims of his son Emil, whose testimony we played just a few minutes ago, earlier in the show. So he has a different explanation of what was said on those FaceTime calls. He says his son Emil misunderstood, and that on the FaceTime, what he really said was that she said, I tried to kill her. Let's check out Sat 7.

[Courtroom Witness]

So I was, like, talking to him about, like, saying goodbye and she had an affair and those things. But then I was also kind of, like, talking to myself, and. And I think I was saying to myself, like, she said, I tried to kill her. She said, I tried to kill her.

[Phil Holloway]

Okay.

[Courtroom Witness]

Were you confessing to him that you had.

[Phil Holloway]

You were trying to kill Ariana?

[Courtroom Witness]

No.

[Ashley Merchant]

That's important. I think that's really important for him to try to explain, and it does make sense. Let's hope that they can really hit that home in closing arguments. It does make sense. It's a highly charged conversation. It's emotional conversation. You know, I'm sure both parties don't completely remember it accurately, and it's. That's a plausible explanation.

[Phil Holloway]

Well, if you say so. I'm not. For one thing, I'm not. I'm not buying it. I. I see. I keep going back to that video of the blood all over her face. And that is going to be, I think, the most important, some of the most important evidence in the case. The jury's not going to forget that. It's hard to forget once you've seen it. She really is very seriously injured. And by the way, right, he is. He's definitely trying to get this, lesser included. He wants to be. Oh yeah, he wants to be found not guilty, but at least be convicted of merely an assault.

[Ashley Merchant]

Right.

[Phil Holloway]

Not an attempted murder. Because then instead of a life sentence, he's looking at only five years. We'll leave it there for the A block here at mkt. It's a hard call.

[Ashley Merchant]

I'm glad I'm not on that jury.

[Phil Holloway]

Coming up next, we have our friend MK True Crime contributor Arthur Idalla. He's joining us from New York and he's going to talk to us about the Rex Heuerman trial, the alleged Gilgo beach killer. We'll have that and more. Stay tuned.

[OnDeck/Lemonade Advertiser]

Ondeck is built to back small businesses like yours. Whether you're buying equipment, expanding your team or bridging cash flow, Gaps on Deck's loans up to $400,000 help make it happen fast. Rated A by the Better Business Bureau and earning thousands of five star Trustpilot reviews, OnDeck delivers funding you can count on. Apply in [e-mail] depending on certain loan attributes. Your business loan may be issued by Ondeck or Celtic Bank. Ondeck does not lend in North Dakota. All loans an amount subject to lender approval.

Do you love your pets? Do you love suspense? Do you love it when your pets keep you in suspense because they ate something mysterious? And who knows what the vet visit will cost? If you answered yes twice and then no, you should protect your pet with Lemonade Pet Inside Insurance. It can save you up to 90% on vet bills for checkups, emergencies, diagnostics, all the stuff that leaves you financially on the edge of your seat. Get a quick and Easy [e-mail] pet and get your suspense somewhere else like from a riveting podcast.

[Phil Holloway]

If you're looking to make smarter choices for your health this year, Riverbend Ranch is a great place to start. Riverbend Ranch steaks are not only delicious, they also contain real high quality protein that helps fuel your body. Beef is a complete protein and it contains all nine essential amino acids that your body needs to function. It also keeps you fuller for longer, reducing cravings and snacking. It's one of the most nutrient dense foods you can eat. It's packed with proteins, iron, zinc and B vitamins that help support energy, strength and overall health. But here's the key. Not all beef is created equal. The Quality of beef depends entirely on how it's raised and where it comes from. And that's where Riverbend Ranch stands apart. For more than 35 years now, Riverbend Ranch has been building an elite Black Angus herd, carefully selecting cattle for exceptional flavor and tenderness. They use Only the top 1 to 2% of the entire population for breeding, which is why their beef tastes noticeably better than the average Black Angus beef. All Riverbend Ranch cattle are born and raised right here in the usa. They never use growth hormones or antibiotics and the beef is processed right at the ranch in their award winning USDA inspected facility. Each steak is aged 21 days to enhance flavor and tenderness. It's a difference you will notice with your very first succulent bite. No shortcuts, no middlemen, just incredible, healthy and flavorful beef shipped directly to your home. Order [e-mail] and use promo code Megan M E G Y N for $20 off your first order.

[Ashley Merchant]

Welcome back to MK True Crime. Joining us now is MK True Crime contributor and New York trial attorney, the fabulous Arthur Adela. So good to see you. Welcome back to the Show, Arthur.

[Arthur Idalla]

Well, 20 bucks gets you fabulous, so it's worth it. Next time when Phil introduces me, I'll slip him 50 and see what that gets me.

[Ashley Merchant]

You are fabulous and we are so excited to see you again. And we've got some pretty cool things to talk to you about that's kind of right up your alley. Couple different things going on. So let's start with your back door. The Gilgo. Is that how you say it? Gilgo Beach. Rex Heuerman. So the rumor that we've been hearing is that he made be entering a plea. And so just for our viewers, he is accused of killing quite a few sex workers. And the rumor now is that he may not stand trial and he may actually take a plea. So what's the latest on that?

[Arthur Idalla]

Well, if you go back to the beginning, this is a case that was going on for years and sadly out in Suffolk county, people who are familiar with New York would know, like that's the Hamptons area, but this is actually a little west of the Hamptons. It's not much. Pretty right in the Hamptons. You know, the case dragged on for a long, long time under several district, district attorneys, one of whom is actually in prison. Yeah, yeah, he got in a little bit of trouble as, as is the police chief. And this Gilgo, the, all these, these homicides kind of were an underlying premise. Like was there a cover up who were they covering up for who was involved with these sex workers? What was the evidence going to unfold in a really tiny way. It was like an Epstein esque kind of thing. Like if we bring this down, if we bring this case to light, like, who else is going to get in trouble? A new district attorney came in. Ray Tierney. He's a former federal prosecutor. He worked in the Brooklyn District attorney's office. He was elected the DA in a little bit of an upset, and he went headfirst into this case. I believe it's seven sad homicides, one after the other. He. This guy had made so many calls to sex workers and massage parlors, the stuff that was found on his computer would make your stomach turn. I mean, horrible, horrible stuff. I'm not talking about like you're run of the mill pornography. I'm talking about real horrible things. I was with the district attorney, Ray Tierney this past Friday working on another case where I'm actually representing the victim's family. So we were not in an adversarial posture. But even when we are, we have an excellent relationship. And yes, he winked at me. He actually didn't wound up having a press conference talking about several of these cases out in Suffolk County. It seems like Ashley and Phil that the evidence will be overwhelming against him and he doesn't want to put. He and his lawyer. I mean, it's not a done deal, but it seems like they're gonna put some plea deal together. I still don't think he's gonna see the light of day.

[Ashley Merchant]

Right, right.

[Arthur Idalla]

You know what the plea is going to be, But I guess maybe it's better than hearing life without parole as opposed to, you know, three or four, you know, 25 to life sentences.

[Ashley Merchant]

Right.

[Arthur Idalla]

I don't know. The district attorney would not tell me what the plea was because it's not. It's not a done deal. And then the judge has to approve it, but it will, at this part of the world, kind of close a chapter on a set of horrific, horrific crimes where that, you know, that have been floating in the, in the atmosphere for quite some time.

[Phil Holloway]

Arthur, I got a question for you. So this is, you know, reminds us of obviously of the Coburger case where everybody was ready for his trial. And then of course, he took a plea deal, avoided the death penalty. First, first question, was the death penalty ever on the table here? And secondly, if. If he does plead out to something, will there be any type of allocution? In other words, are we going to hear him tell the world what he did Are we going to learn the details or are we going to be left ever guessing and wondering about a lot of it, like we did with Kohberger? Because Kohberger was not ever, I guess, required to tell us what all happened or tell us how it happened.

[Arthur Idalla]

So there is no death penalty in the state of New York. So that's an easy question to answer. Unlike the Luigi Mangioni case, which we're going to talk about in a moment, where the feds found some way to find jurisdiction over a straight up murder case, which we'll talk about that in a second, because I think that's garbage here. The feds have not gotten involved in. And a lot of it's got to do with the lack of notoriety and publicity on this matter nationally, although it got tremendous headlines here locally in terms of what his allocution will be, what he has to tell the judge for the judge to accept his plea. Technically, all he has to say is, on this date, at this place, this location, I did cause the death of Sandra Jones by strangulation, shooting her, burying her, drowning her, blah, blah, blah, blah. And that's all he really has to say publicly. And maybe if you're the family of the deceased, that's kind of all you want him to say, but behind closed doors, maybe the only way he catches the deal. And I don't know what kind of deal it is, Phil. I mean, what kind of. What kind of deal.

[Ashley Merchant]

That's what I was wondering, you know, is.

[Arthur Idalla]

But. But he may have to. He may have to go in and proffer or do what's called an attorney proffer. He tell his lawyer. I mean, you know, I don't want to be. I'm making things up, to be clear, but this particular woman, I drowned her. And this particular woman, I strangled her. And this particular woman, I did this to or that too. So that there's. If you want to call that closure for the family. I don't know if.

[Phil Holloway]

Yeah, yeah, I want to feel a

[Arthur Idalla]

lot of closure knowing how my sister, mother, cousin, whatever died. But, yeah, he doesn't have to do much more than just click off the elements of the crime, which is the jurisdiction, the time, although the time doesn't even matter because in a homicide case, there is no statute of limitations, so it doesn't matter really when it was. But it's got to be in the jurisdiction of Suffolk County. He did cause the death of fill in the blank by fill in the blank. And if the judge accepts it, which I'd be shocked if a judge didn't you know? That's the end of that. And off he goes.

[Phil Holloway]

You know, with these serial killers, a lot of times we don't ever know the full extent of their activity. Like, we just. I forget the name of the victim, but I just saw in the news this week that we now have a. Another victim now that has been confirmed to be a victim of Ted Bundy. Okay. And so we. We may never know. This guy is allegedly, I guess I should have to say a very prolific serial killer. And I'm just wondering, though, when. When the. The book is closed on his criminal case, looks like it may be in the near future, will we know the extent of his activities?

[Arthur Idalla]

So, Phil, I mean, it's a great question. And like, normally, right? That's the bartering that goes back and forth. All right, if he tells us where, you know, the bodies are buried in this particular case, we'll give him this benefit. I don't know what benefit the district attorney's office can give him. To your point, there is no death penalty here.

[Phil Holloway]

Yeah.

[Arthur Idalla]

So out on the west coast, you could see. All right, fine. I don't want to die by lethal injection in 10 years. I'll just live the rest of my life in prison. And once we talk about the Harvey Weinstein case a little bit, we could talk and his life in prison. You may want to die before you go to prison for that, for the rest of your life. And you're that young of a person, but here, I don't know what District Attorney Ray Tierney can offer to. To the defendant, except if the defendant just doesn't want to go through it himself, he doesn't want to become a monster himself. You know, another huge case here where this took place was Bernie Madoff, right? The guy who stole billion billions of dollars from owner of the New York Mets. The little old men, husbands and wives, life savings. But basically they said, we'll leave your. Your wife and your boys alone, your son's alone, because we know that they're somewhat complicit. So if you come in, I think he pled within, like three months, you're gonna die in prison. But they. They'll live. And then the way karma lives, one of the kids killed themselves, and one of his sons died of cancer.

[Ashley Merchant]

Oh, my God.

[Arthur Idalla]

So, you know, there is. There is a God on Passover and Easter. But I don't know, Phil, what, what, what the prosecutor here can really offer to him. That remains to be seen. I mean, the only thing I could think of is if he says all Right. Well, let him plead to manslaughter in a flat 25 years, which would mean he's eligible for parole in like 22 years.

[Ashley Merchant]

Yeah, because he's 62.

[Arthur Idalla]

Right.

[Ashley Merchant]

Yeah.

[Arthur Idalla]

So at 84.

[Ashley Merchant]

Right.

[Arthur Idalla]

Maybe he could get out.

[Ashley Merchant]

That seems, that seems kind of an outrageous offer. You know, I'm really curious about this too. And I wonder how the fact that the district attorney, the former one, and the police chief are all in jail now, you know, if there's something that would persuade this plea offer that they don't want to just have to deal with it, you know, it'll be interesting to see.

[Arthur Idalla]

Yeah, I. Again, I, We. The facts are still being. The details are being hammered out. I don't really know what the details can be because it's a slam dunk.

[Ashley Merchant]

I mean, he's like, you never know.

[Arthur Idalla]

Maybe it. Sometimes it could be the family of the. The victims or a couple of the victims. And like, look, these were sex workers, right? So I don't necessarily want my nieces or my daughters or my. Whoever's like, you know, whole sex worker history to be dragged out there and everyone to hear about, like, we'd rather just this go away quietly. But again, on the flip side of the coin, what is the District Attorney, Ray Tierney do, like, where. Okay, I understand you don't want to go to trial, so what can I give this guy? And the only thing I can think of is something like that. It charges them with, man, what, Manslaughter in the first degree. Many times 25 years, which is the maximum. But there's no life at the end. So you. If he lived to 84, 85, they have to let him out. They all run concurrent and they say, look, if you, if you're somehow another, you can live till 85, you'll get to go home. Yeah, that's the only real thing I could see. Unless the defendant himself just doesn't want to put him through or his family. You know, he does have a wife he. Of children. He may not want them to be tortured out there in the public eye.

[Ashley Merchant]

Yeah, I think that's the most likely.

[Phil Holloway]

Yeah, that's. That's great stuff there, Arthur. There's nobody more plugged into the legal scene in New York than. Than you, obviously. And by the way, we're going to talk about your client Harvey Weinstein in a moment. And before we do that, we're going to talk about Manioni and what's going on in that. But before that, Arthur, we wanted to say congratulations to you. You have just surpassed 1000 shows with your radio show, the Arthur Idalla power hour on AM970. The answer in New York. Congratulations, buddy. Congrats.

[Arthur Idalla]

Thank you. I will tell you. I'll tell you both. You know, look, the work that we all do, ego plays a big role with it, right? First of all. Well, I'll. Phil, I'll just speak for you and I when, you know, we lose a lot, right? I mean, Ashley always wins, but we lose a lot. So you got. But I will tell you, on that night, I broadcast my show. It's only an hour. Believe me, it's hard enough to find an hour to do it, but I really enjoy it. But they gave me two hours, and I broadcast live from Times Square.

[Ashley Merchant]

Oh, that's so cool.

[Arthur Idalla]

They put my billboard up, like a digital billboard up of me. And I gotta say, that was like an ego trip.

[Phil Holloway]

I'm like, wow.

[Arthur Idalla]

I mean, I grew up here. I've been going through. I mean, I went through Times Square when it was very.

[Ashley Merchant]

Oh, my God, your face on Times Square. That is literally.

[Arthur Idalla]

I was like, holy cow. That's pretty cool.

[Phil Holloway]

That's very cool.

[Arthur Idalla]

I get to have wonderful, wonderful guests. I mean, yesterday I had Alan Dershowitz on for half an hour. I mean, the time just flew by. There's a very important political publication called City and State. I had the publisher of that on yesterday. Well, and the guests, including Megan, was like my first big guest when I.

[Courtroom Witness]

So cool.

[Arthur Idalla]

When I did the show in. What was it, 2022. 2022. Though, my first two guests were the chief of staff to the mayor of the city of New York and Megyn Kelly. So we. We had a good time. So thank you for mentioning that, Philip.

[Phil Holloway]

Well, speaking of. Speaking of egos, and by the way, Ashley and I'll just. We'll hold our breath waiting on our invitation to your show. But anyway, whenever you want.

[Arthur Idalla]

Whatever you want.

[Phil Holloway]

Speaking of big egos, tell us what's going on with Luigi Mangioni. I hear he's got some delays in his cases.

[Arthur Idalla]

Yeah, I mean, this is a case that has so many oddities to it. Number one, I. Look, I spoke with his family when he first got arrested. I spoke with his uncle for, like, 20 minutes. Great guy, beautiful family. I mean, a beautiful Italian American success story. Came over from Sicily. The grandfather did. He built this empire. They're wealthy. They're everyone in the family. The kid is a Ivy League kid. I mean, it was just beautiful. And after I did some initial analysis of the evidence and looking at the Video and how they caught him in the backpack and all the evidence in there. The uncle was like, arthur, you seem like a straight shooter. Just shoot straight with me. What do you think? I said, I got a great jail consultant who can make Luigi comfortable for the next couple of years, or decades, I should say. But then, guys, I go down to the courthouse. Coincidentally, I've happened to have cases on several times when his case is. When his case is on, and he's got, like, a whole fan base out there.

[Ashley Merchant]

Oh, he has a big fan base out there.

[Arthur Idalla]

It's like. Like, you know, puffy combs. Like, it's crazy. And they're wearing his shirt, and they dress up as the character Luigi from the. From Donkey Kong.

[Ashley Merchant]

They send him money. They're sending him things in jail to

[Arthur Idalla]

know what Donkey Kong is. Phil, you remember the video came.

[Phil Holloway]

Oh, I've got it right behind this wall over here.

[Arthur Idalla]

All right, There you go. So. And, you know, another case that we're not covering right now, but I've been covering all day in the news is a police officer here got killed in Queens. The case went to trial, and yesterday, the jury found the guy. Guy. And it's on video. The jury found the guy not guilty of the murder that's on video, but guilty of aggravated. Aggravated manslaughter. So he'll still spend decades and decades and decades in jail. But, like, all it takes, as you both know very well, is like, one juror to be like, no, no, I'm not convicted of murder. And, you know, I think so in Luigi's case, I'm not convicted of her. I think the health care system is all screwed up and he deserved. Now, yeah, it's easy to say that when we're here talking about it when the. The deceased wife testifies, whether it's because of the body identification, and, you know, they slip out. She's got two children and their kids and how old they are, and she's crying, and she sits in the front row. Let's see how quickly people are to, you know, give Luigi a pass. There's. And look, I've been in this jurisdiction, when I say my whole life, I can say that because I followed in my father's footsteps. So. And he was in the Manhattan DA's office as a prosecutor and then tried. When you used to try a lot of cases in the DA's office, and then as a defense attorney in the US Attorney's office, I could only think of one case where someone was charged with the same exact TPO in both jurisdictions. And even in that case, it was not simultaneous. It was after he was a guy was acquitted in state court, then the feds brought a civil rights case in federal court. But they would, they would piggyback each other. Here, this is the same time, and you have one judge. The federal judge is a brand new judge, more or less the state court judge. He's been around forever. He followed in his father's footsteps. His father, Judge Caro, was a storied judge as well. So they're like having their own little who goes first, who goes second. So. And we could tie it into Harvey. The Harvey Weinstein case is going to trial in two weeks, I think, on. And we'll talk about that.

[Ashley Merchant]

Is it, you think?

[Arthur Idalla]

Well, I think so, because now I think that's one of the reasons why Mangioni got an adjournment, because it's the same trial lawyer, and he was supposed to start that, like, basically two weeks after Harvey's case ended. So basically the federal court judge said, well, we promised the state they'd go first, so I'm going to move things from over to October 13th and let the state figure out when they want to do it. And so the state court judge gave the defense attorneys a little relief and said, you can start September 8th. So the state court, the lawyers for Luigi, because it's the same legal team, are going to have to go from basically September 8th through, let's say, October 8th, and probably longer than that. Just jury selection is going to take a while, and then they'll probably adjourn the federal case a week or two and then try the federal case. But as both of you know better than I, it's so rare to be charged in two jurisdictions for the exact same tpo, place of occurrence. Yes.

[Phil Holloway]

Pause for a second. So just so I understand, make sure I get this right. This is as much for me as it is our audience. So the federal case has to come second, as I understand it, or otherwise New York would not be able to try him due to New York's rather unique double jeopardy law. Is that right?

[Arthur Idalla]

That's. That's what they're saying. And also I think, though, the feds want. The feds. I don't know. I know you guys, they never want to lose. Right? Right. So if the state goes first, they're going to see all the state evidence, they're going to see all the state mistakes. And there's. Now, I will tell you this, guys. Joel Seidman is the prosecutor in the state court. I interned for him in 1990. Okay, so that. And he was. He was like a senior ADA then. I'm not exaggerating. And he is really very, very, very good. He's as thorough as thorough can be. He only has one case probably right now. It's. It's this case.

[Ashley Merchant]

Right.

[Arthur Idalla]

So he's going to do a spectacular job, Hub. And then the feds, they'll be there every day. They'll be getting daily transcript every day. They'll be able to see who the witnesses are when everyone is in the federal court. They're charging him with stalking. They're charging him with. With bs to be honest with you. This is a murder case, period. Amen. It's definitely this guy takes out a gun, shoots him in the back. And people understand. There is no straight up murder in federal court. Straight up murder.

[Phil Holloway]

There's a significant part of our audience, though. I think that will resonate with what I'm about to say, or what I'm about to say, I guess will resonate with them. That's how the English language works. But the idea is that we don't necessarily trust the Manhattan jurors when it comes to this case for all the reasons you just point out, because you got the fan club and you got all the people dressed up, giving him money and all this kind of thing. And so when you have a federal case that's sort of piggybacking it, you. You draw the jury from a larger pool of people. And, you know, you're not just dealing with people coming from Manhattan that's behind the federal charges.

[Ashley Merchant]

A lot more conservative jurors.

[Arthur Idalla]

Well, guys, I'll just tell you who. Who comprises the federal. That Southern district. It's Manhattan and the Bronx. Oh, not exactly a conservative bastion of the Bronx.

[Phil Holloway]

Well, you got to play the cards you're dealt. Right.

[Arthur Idalla]

It is also.

[Phil Holloway]

It's a second bite at the apple for. For.

[Arthur Idalla]

And it's also Westchester county, so the jury pool is not so, so, so different. But yes, there is. There is a difference if you pull. And also, it tends to be the caliber of jurors are a little bit different. But also, and you guys know this better than I, the rules of evidence.

[Phil Holloway]

So different.

[Ashley Merchant]

So different.

[Arthur Idalla]

So favor the prosecutor.

[Ashley Merchant]

Yeah. Oh, my God. And jury selection. Jury selection in federal court favors the prosecutor.

[Arthur Idalla]

Yes.

[Ashley Merchant]

You basically are stuck with who you get.

[Arthur Idalla]

Let's just throw this in the hat. The judge, and I'm not saying she won't be fair. She was a member of the Southern District office for many, many, I think over A dozen years. She was very well known as a federal prosecutor before she came on the bench again. That doesn't mean she's not going to be fair, but we kind of know where her mindset is, so it'll be interesting. I mean.

[Ashley Merchant]

Yeah.

[Arthur Idalla]

Truth be told is there are a lot more interesting cases around here. There. The interesting part of it is the defendant is. It's. I mean, it's a real tragedy. That whole family is wrecked. This is a kid who went to University of Pennsylvania. His trajectory was, you know, he was going to take over the world. He was a good boy. I mean, quote unquote. He was a good boy. Yes, he had back trouble. Yes, he started acting weird as of late. But he is definitely not your typical defendant who's hanging out in the mdc. I mean, MDC is the prison that he's in. I've seen him.

[Ashley Merchant]

Him.

[Arthur Idalla]

He's. When I go down and to visit other clients there, there's an area where the inmates can use their laptop and go through some of their evidence. And I've seen him there, and he's looking and he's writing, and, you know, so be it. He's got a great legal team. Prosecutors will be tough. He's in front in both jurisdictions. He's in front of real judges. And it really comes down to jury selection. Ashley, as you identified in, like, we'll talk about Weinstein, like, that took me a week to pick a jury in Harvey's case. I think the first trial I did, which was right before COVID like, two months before, it took more than a week because he was really in the headlines then.

[Ashley Merchant]

Oh, a case like this, it takes a long time, and you get a lot of information from jury selection. So the fact that they cut your

[Arthur Idalla]

legs off in federal court, basically, folks in federal court, it's like everyone who's breathing, raise your hand.

[Ashley Merchant]

Yep, you're in the.

[Arthur Idalla]

Great.

[Ashley Merchant]

There's one.

[Arthur Idalla]

Jury number two.

[Phil Holloway]

Oh, really?

[Arthur Idalla]

Oh, your father got shot in the back, too. It's okay, fine.

[Ashley Merchant]

You hate me. You hate defense lawyers. You're fine. You can stay on the. On the jury. You don't believe cops. Yes, of course. You're great. Stay on the jury.

[Phil Holloway]

Arthur, speaking of Weinstein and. And jails and conditions, that. That reminds me of. So there was an interview that Harvey Weinstein gave, I guess it was to the Hollywood Reporter in March regarding life at Rikers Island. And parenthetically, let me just say that two weeks ago, Ashley and I actually had a case involving an inmate at Rikers island. Who was there illegally, unlawfully, on a, on a invalid order from the state of Georgia that Ashley and I were able to get sort of set aside before she was extradited. But she spent two weeks at Rikers. But you know, this guy Weinstein has been there a lot longer and he talked about life there. But one thing that he said in that interview. Did I make a pass at some of these women? Unsuccessfully. Did I overplay my hand? Yes. Was I pushy or overly seductive? Yes to all of that. Look, I should never have gone out with the people I went out with. I was married to a fantastic woman who had no idea what I was doing. I lied all the time. I improperly used my staff to hide these things. But did I ever sexually assault a woman? No. No, I never did that. So I guess what I want to ask you about, to the extent that you can comment on it, if you can, I get it. But do you think that was a good idea? And is, is he going to be blamed for himself stirring up pretrial publicity with this?

[Arthur Idalla]

That's a great question at this point, Phil. There's been so much. I mean, who's got more pre trial publicity than RV1? He's, I mean, he's got to be in the top five live literally of all time because, you know, social media is relatively new to these trials. So I mean, he's everywhere. Look, that's what Harvey's been saying, I can't say for day one, but for quite some time. And that was my summation in the last case was like, we're not saying this didn't happen. We're not saying Harvey, you know, didn't make a pass at these women. And you know, like, look, what's the. This is going to be sound bad folks, but what's the difference between sexual harassment and flirting? Whether the woman is attracted to the guy. So if it was George Clooney doing, making the same, exact. Doing the same thing that, that Weinstein did, I don't think women would be calling it, you know, harassment. The, the first trial where there was an acquittal, it was Annabella Shiora testing testified and she told this very elaborate story about Harvey kicking in her door of her apartment, throwing her down, throwing over clothes and all of this stuff. And you know, he denied it vehemently. He didn't deny fooling around with her, but he denied that he kicked in the door and did all of this stuff. He's like, first of all, I was Harvey Weinstein. I'm gonna be in the Middle of a hallway in Manhattan apartment building, kicking down the door. But all these years later, it was 20 years later, we found the doorman. And this all took place when crime was running rampant in New York. They were like two doorman on duty all the time. Even if one went to the bathroom, they had, the janitor would come. So there was always two people there. They testified there's no way Harvey could have gotten upstairs. And then someone came to us. We didn't know a guy who said, I want nothing to do with helping Harvey Weinstein. But I got to tell you the truth. I remember I was riding a horse and on my phone rang and it was Annabella saying, I did something crazy last night. What'd you do? I asked Harvey Weinstein.

[Ashley Merchant]

Oh, my God.

[Arthur Idalla]

And the jury found. The jury found him not guilty of that charge. And then there's, you know, the woman who he's going back on trial with now. She had a five year relationship with him after they fooled around. They are emails and letters and I can't wait for you to meet my mother and what you mean to me. And she never complained for decades until it got out into the ether. All these women got a lot of money. But here's what happened. I tried his last case, I guess a year ago now, almost a year ago. One count was not guilty. One count was a hung jury and one count was guilty. The counter was guilty. He has not been sentenced on. But not guilty gets thrown out and then there's a hung jury. The hung jury is on the lowest count in criminal law of a felony. E, A, B, C, D. E A is a murder. He's the least right.

[Ashley Merchant]

He's probably already done the time.

[Arthur Idalla]

He's done the time.

[Ashley Merchant]

Time.

[Arthur Idalla]

He's done the time. He's facing 16 years in California. The judge is going to give him a minimum of 10 years of the kale count.

[Ashley Merchant]

He's going to die in jail.

[Arthur Idalla]

I'm like, I go into the prosecutors, Ashley, I swear I was literally one step away from getting on my knees.

[Ashley Merchant]

Yeah.

[Arthur Idalla]

I was like, we can't settle this thing. It's in felony.

[Ashley Merchant]

He's going to die in prison.

[Arthur Idalla]

I've never tried an E felony. And here's the truth, folks. Harvey realized my lack of passion for this E felony after I tried two cases for him. And they're saying this E felony is going to take six weeks. You guys know, to prepare for a six week trial, you need six weeks.

[Ashley Merchant]

What a waste of resources. I mean, that's what's crazy to me.

[Arthur Idalla]

You guys know me. I'm 58 years old. I have a 4 year old. I have a 9 year old. I have a 19 year old. My parents are in their 80s. I'm not spending 12 weeks on an E felony. That's just a waste of time. So he said, arthur, you guys do my appeal. There's still three civil cases. You guys do my civil cases, but I'm going to get someone else to try my criminal case. And he went back to the very first lawyer he had when he first got arrested, Jacob Kaplan. So they're going to try the E felony, and Harvey's life in prison sucks. There's no way around it. You know what's interesting, Phil, about that Hollywood Reporter thing. Harvey called me yesterday. So they printed it, but we went through great lengths to get a camera crew in there. So it's all on video. And they promised him that they were going to air the video on their website, on their YouTube channel. And you know what I think happened? And this is, I can't say this for a fact. The Hollywood Reporter got pushed back because it's, it's. That article garnered sympathy for Harvey. And now to put a video of him in the wheelchair in this crap hole where he's living in and now put his whole thing out there, that's only going to give more sympathy for him. And I don't think the editor wants to do that. So, you know, Harvey's like, I went, I sat there for the interview. They put it in writing, but now they won't air it. And I think people should see where I live, what it looks like, and how bad it is. And let me tell you folks, I was in there not long ago. It's bad. Like, it's like feces on the wall. It's stinking.

[Ashley Merchant]

Yeah.

[Arthur Idalla]

You know, the food is horrible.

[Ashley Merchant]

Yeah.

[Arthur Idalla]

You know, I mean, the gods. Try to be as nice as you can. And if you read that article, Harvey's alone most of the time. Right when he was, before I won his appeal and he was upstate New York, he was in a regular state facility. He quote, unquote. Arthur, being upstate was like being in the Taj Mahal compared to being in Rikers Island. So the guy is really suffering. He's really doing his time.

[Ashley Merchant]

Well, Arthur, thank you so much for joining us. It was a pleasure. We hope to see you again soon.

[Arthur Idalla]

I had no choice. When?

[Phil Holloway]

Natasha, Best War Stories ever.

[Ashley Merchant]

I know, I know. It's super fun. And so next up, we've got our closing arguments and your questions. Stay tuned.

[OnDeck/Lemonade Advertiser]

Need to restock inventory, cover seasonal dips, or manage payroll. On Deck's Small Business line of credit provides immediate access to funds up to $200,000 exactly when your business needs it. With flexible draws, transparent pricing, and full control over repayment, you can tackle unexpected expenses without missing a beat. Apply [e-mail] and funds could be available as soon as tomorrow. Depending on certain loan attributes, your business loan may be issued by Ondeck or Celtic Bank On Deck does not lend in North Dakota. All loans and amounts subject to lender approval.

[Ashley Merchant]

If you're the proud parent of a

[OnDeck/Lemonade Advertiser]

puppy or kitten, you know you can't

[Ashley Merchant]

pet proof your entire life.

[OnDeck/Lemonade Advertiser]

There simply isn't a sock drawer high

[Ashley Merchant]

enough or a couch cover thick enough. But you can pet pro proof your

[OnDeck/Lemonade Advertiser]

wallet with Lemonade Pet Insurance.

[Ashley Merchant]

Whether it's an unexpected accident or a routine checkup, Lemonade can cover up to 90% of the bill, plus they can

[OnDeck/Lemonade Advertiser]

handle claims in as little as two seconds.

[Ashley Merchant]

So before you turn into a complete

[OnDeck/Lemonade Advertiser]

helicopter pet parent, get a [e-mail] Pet

[Ashley Merchant]

cozy earth makes relaxing at home easy with their unbelievably soft robes and slippers. The fabric is breathable, lightweight and incredibly comfortable. Comfortable. It's the kind of robe you put on and immediately feel more relaxed. And their slippers have this plush shearling lining with supportive footbeds so they're warm, comfortable and easy to wear around the house all day. With Mother's Day coming up, Cozy Earth makes an amazing gift, something she'll actually use and appreciate every single day. And here's the best part. Cozy Earth backs everything with a hundred night sleep trial and a 10 year warranty so you can try it completely risk free. Go to cozyearth.com and use code Megan for 20% off. That's cozyearth.com promo code Megan for 20% off. And if you see the post purchase survey, please be sure to mention you heard about Cozy Earth from this show.

[Phil Holloway]

Welcome back to MK True Crime. I'm Phil Holloway along with my co host Ashley Merchant. This is the time in the show where we do what we call our closing arguments where we get to rant a little bit about whatever's on our mind. But beforehand we are going to answer viewer and listener questions. By the way, if you want to reach out to us, it's MK true crimeevelmaycare media.com and today's question comes from Christy with an I who writes Love your show and never miss an episode and Philosopher. Congratulations on the new family member adorable on the show from 3:25 March 25, regarding Justin Timberlake's DUI arrest, Ashley started talking about how she feels about the how police handled DUIs and said something about it could be a whole show. So now I'm curious as to where she, meaning Ashley, was going with that. I'd love to hear a bit more about the subject matter overall, thank you and keep the shows coming. And before I toss it to Ashley to answer that, what she's referring to is my family member is my new puppy, the wire haired, pointing griffin named Duke. For more on Duke, check out my Instagram at philhollawayesq. Plenty of Duke material there. Ashley, look, I don't think I know of anybody better to answer this question that she asks about how we could do an entire show about DUIs. So I know you've got something on this.

[Ashley Merchant]

I do, yeah. This is definitely a passionate subject for me and, you know, as a defense lawyer, but also as just a human and as a mom. So you asked about my thoughts on dui, and I can tell you this is definitely one of the hardest areas of law to talk about. And there's really three things that make DUI is really uniquely complicated to me. The first one is that it is the most real and frightening risk that I feel like we would potentially face as crime victims. You know, me, you, my kids, things like that. Unlike most crimes, you can't really insulate yourself from that. You have to drive. You have to be on the road. It's not about where you live. It's not about how careful you are, what kind of security system you have. You know, how good you are as a parent, teaching your kids not to be subject to predators online. I mean, there's really nothing you can do to protect your family. Every time they get in a car, they're exposed to this. And so that's the first thing that really makes it difficult for me.

[Arthur Idalla]

Me.

[Ashley Merchant]

The second are the DUI laws. They are, let's just say they often turn on the outcome more than the conduct. And what do I mean by that? So the law says you can legally drink and drive? It does. That's the law. As long as you're not over a limit or less safe. But nobody really knows what that means. It's not really defined. I mean, the limit is 0.08. But does anyone really know what that means? It could vary depending on how much you ate, how much you drank, how long it's been. So in practice, if there's an accident and alcohol was involved at all, even if you're under the legal limit. So if you're like 04, for example, the situation shifts dramatically if there's an accident. Fault becomes blurred. Responsibility expands that tension between where the law says, what the law actually says and how it's applied. Creates real fairness concerns. It's even more extreme when you have a driver over 21. So anytime I've had that, those drivers, let's say they had half a beer seven hours earlier, it's still in their system. Trace amounts. If they get in a car accident automatically. Automatically, they can be charged with felonies and sent to prison for a really long time. And I'm not saying that that's not correct, because you got to go back to my first point. It's the most likely that we are for being victims, but that's really hard. And then I'm talking a little bit more about this in my rant. But the biggest problem for me is that we rely heavily on roadside testing and observational evidence. We rely on cops, stops far from perfect. The tests have awful error rates. There's, you know, limits on it. They depend heavily on officer interpretation, and they trigger a lot of very significant consequences. So I'll follow up a little bit more on that in my closing rant. But these are problems and real dangers that everybody faces, and I just don't like them.

[Phil Holloway]

Wow. I mean, you know, look, you're. You're right. There's a lot that goes into a DUI prosecution. And this observational evidence is obviously subjective interpretation. And that's. That's absolutely one of the problems. There's, you know, everybody agrees that DUI is a crime. It should be a crime. It's dangerous, it kills people. All those things are true. But we also, when we prosecute crimes, we have to. To, I guess, objectively identify what is a. When a crime has been committed and how we're going to measure it and how we're going to prosecute it. It's a big challenge. So great answer. Now, look, now's the time for our closing argument, Ashley. And I know this is also something that's sort of along the same lines.

[Ashley Merchant]

It is. It's totally along the same lines. And it's kind of what you were just talking about, Phil. So my closing argument is actually. It's personal. It's about a case. Case. It's about a case I have and I don't typically defend in DUI cases. It's just not part of my practice. But we do civil rights litigation. So what that means is when someone is unfairly arrested. We do litigate cases on their behalf here at the Merchant Law Firm. So I want to tell you a story about a kid named McLean. Super sweet kid. Went to a very small college here in Georgia. A Christian school, private school, played football. It's a very conservative school. It's a very strict coach. Very, very good kid. That though, so he's completely sober. He's got nothing in his system at all. And it doesn't matter. Watch this video

[Courtroom Witness]

time.

[Phil Holloway]

You smoke marijuana?

[Courtroom Witness]

I don't smoke.

[Phil Holloway]

You've definitely done something. I drink energy drinks.

[Courtroom Witness]

Well, you're not acting like somebody that's

[Phil Holloway]

on an energy drink.

[Courtroom Witness]

Because I'm nervous.

[Phil Holloway]

I've never been in this position before.

[Arthur Idalla]

It was 19 year old McLean Fenerin

[Phil Holloway]

who called, called police out to this empty parking lot at Shorter University in Rome. He said he's leaving the funeral. Finneran hit a parked car after studying for a midterm and wanted to make an accident report. I did what I was taught. Keep going, keep going, keep going. But police started testing for alcohol and drugs. Yep, that's what I thought. A zero on the breathalyzer. But the kicker for the Shorter football team was charged with dui. Spent the night in jail. Based off the accident that you had and field sobriety test that we did, I've got enough probable cause to believe that you're under the influence of something other than alcohol. I don't drink. Never have. Haven't done drugs, never have. It's just not what I do. And he said, well, I have the suspicion that you have. A GBI blood and urine test later

[Arthur Idalla]

proved there were no drugs in Finneran's system.

[Phil Holloway]

Close your eyes. Tilt your head backwards.

[Arthur Idalla]

He was arrested based on his performance

[Phil Holloway]

on this field sobriety test. You thought you did pretty well. I thought I did.

[Ashley Merchant]

So guess what happens. We pretend that there's some real science behind these roadside evaluations and there isn't. High error rate. They're never done under perfect conditions, subjective, impression based. And what happens? This happens. McLean is arrested. He's an innocent kid. Arrested. His car's towed, he's got a mug shot, his license is gone. If the police want to get a blood test, which they did here, they're going to strap you down and stick a government needle in your arm to take blood under a search warrant. And guess what? They don't wait for the truth. They don't wait. The consequences happen immediately. You lose your spot on the team, you lose your scholarship. Your reputation takes a hit. You're paying thousands of Dollars to have to prove something that was never true in the first place. And then what happens? Just what happened here months later, guess what? Blood comes back. Nothing in his system. But by then it didn't matter. Does not matter. The damage is already done. And that's the real problem. That's why it's not just that DUI laws are strict because the opposite side the victims, it's awful, but it's that they can be triggered by nothing more than a very subjective call. And once the police flip that switch, it is very hard for an innocent person to undo it and get their way back to zero. So thank you for listening to my rant. And the question, you know, that's.

[Phil Holloway]

Look, that's an incredible story, and I'm glad that you guys were able to address it and to take that case. Well, we just had something that was out of the north Georgia area in Rome, and we've had some things in the media here recently in the Atlanta area, but this is, this is nationwide. We have these standardized field sobriety tests, which, you know, they've come a long way. When I was a police officer, we didn't really do those. We. At best, maybe we would. And this is like we're talking about decades ago. Okay. It's like blowing my hat. And if the person's breath smells strong, then maybe they were going to go to jail. And if you didn't smell a lot, maybe they wouldn't. And so we've come a long way way. So we need some. We need true measuring sticks for this kind of thing. But the obvious case is actually where people are obviously intoxicated. They have very high blood alcohol or very high levels of substances of some kind that impair them. And you have obvious manifestations of bad driving showing that they're less safe than they otherwise would be. Those cases are the easier cases, but it's when they are sort of on the bubble, right? When we rely on the subjective interpretations. In the video that we just saw, these were the standardized field sobriety tests. And, you know, the officer, I guess based on his subjective interpretation, felt that there was, you know, impairment, yet there was actually none, at least none due to substances. So we've got to come up with a better way. And, you know, some people say these things are in the. In the nature of junk science. And there's an argument to be made that, that they are kind of. It's kind of junky when it comes to. To science. But anyway, didn't mean to take over your rant. That was a Great one, thank you. Now, I want to talk to you guys a little bit about something that I've. I've ranted about before here on MK True Crime. And there's nothing in our rule book that says I can't do it again. So here we go. So imagine a criminal trial unfolding in complete secrecy, hidden from the eyes of the public. Now, completely hidden from the eyes of the public is pretty unlikely. But there's an effort underway, as we've seen, like in the Tyler Robinson case. This appears to be part of what their defense team wants. They repeatedly file motions, and they file other pleadings, and they even file those things under seal, asking for the pleadings themselves to be secret. And the judge, much to my chagrin, continues to let them. If I were the judge, I would say, look, we're going to have an open court, okay? If you want to come at me with some request for closure, it's got to be based on something real, something good, something more than just, okay, you showed my client with shackles or handcuffs accidentally. Now, earlier in that case, there was something where they were actually too close with the camera to the defense table, and that was bad. That shouldn't happen. And absolutely, that weighs against what I'm saying now, which is for sort of a general policy of cameras in the courtroom. But we see these trials over and over again doing it right, and there's no reason to think that that can't be done right in the Robinson case. But they repeatedly, the defense repeatedly asked for cameras to be kept out of the courtroom. So, look, that is just my pet peeve about that case. Because, look, this is not complicated. Not at all. Just look, folks, at the cases that we are covering here on MK True Crime. We see the case out of Hawaii, we see the Corey Richards case. We see all of those things where it's done right, and there's no problem whatsoever with having the cameras in the courtroom. So, look, if you want to make sure that we have, I guess, the cleansing power of sunlight in our justice system, we got to make sure we keep the cameras in there. We need the federal court to keep the cameras in the courtrooms or to get them in there. The audio recordings are not sufficient. It's not sufficient either to just have, you know, the artists who draw the pictures of the witnesses. Remember the. Remember those things. And this is all what we get out of federal court. It's nothing like being able to see and hear with our own eyes what's going on to make sure that there is confidence in the end result, we need open court. All right, that's it. That's my rant for the day. And I want to say thank you to all of you who are watching on YouTube. Thank you to all of our subscribers. By the way, make sure you like and subscribe. We're available everywhere you get podcasts and of course, on Sirius xm. And we want to say thank you as well to Arthur Idalla for coming in and joining us here at MK True Crime. And of course, thank you to my co host, Ashley Merchant, for doing, as usual, a wonderful job. Thanks again, everybody, and have a great week.