Dave Aronberg (2:42)

Well, actually, I don't think that when I was state attorney, we had any man act cases. I mean, in particular, because we're state prosecutors, not federal prosecutors. But I am familiar with the actual. And that act is used a lot when it comes to sex trafficking these days. It's not your grandfather's man act anymore. In fact, in 1986, it was an amendment to the act that replaced this immorality clause of it, which allowed it to be used and misused in all sorts of matters. And that's why people like Jack Johnson, the boxer and musicians, and even Charlie Chaplin was implicated under the man act. Because if you want to go after your political enemies, that was the broad act to do so. Not anymore. It's been limited. It's more specifically defined. And now you see it in sex trafficking cases is like a backstop. And it is used here to give the victims of. Of Diddy some justice, even after he was acquitted of all the major charges.

Ashley Merchant (3:45)

Well, what do you think? You think that this is a strong argument, Matt? Do you think that they'll actually be able to get some type of a reversal on these few convictions that Diddy has?

Matt Murphy (3:54)

No, I don't think they will.

Ashley Merchant (3:57)

I don't either.

Matt Murphy (3:58)

You know, people have to remember we have a separation of powers. And essentially, when you have a law like Dave just pointed out, it's been updated multiple times. It's over 100 years old. Whatever the sources were, it's used a lot still, right or wrong. And it's not really a judge's job to bless it or not bless it. It's really. That's more a function of the appeals court, potentially. But. But I think the time to bring a motion saying that the elements don't fit were during the trial itself. They didn't. I think it's kind of waived. And I was kind of surprised today that we even saw the judge taken under submission. I don't see anything happening. I've been wrong before. I think the defense did a very good job during the trial itself on this, but I think they're going through the motions at this point. I'd be shocked if the judge actually granted this.

Ashley Merchant (4:49)

Yeah, I almost felt like this was a preview of the sentencing. We're trying to throw everything at sentencing to get as much leniency as possible. Let's throw these in right before, on the eve of sentencing to sort of butter the judge up. If he's going to rule against us on these, maybe we'll rule for us on sentencing. So let's talk a little bit about Sentencing they filed, I think it was 192 page sentencing motion. And this is common in federal court filing these motions to say that our side thinks that the guidelines show one thing and the other side thinks the guidelines show another. Looks like Diddy's lawyers are saying he should serve maybe 14 months, which means he'd be out right before Christmas and the government saying five years. What do you think is the strongest argument on each side? Dave, let's start with you.

Dave Aronberg (5:30)

Well, I do think that he will get more than what the defense is asking for because the judge saw what we all saw, that there was violence here. That video of Diddy just manhandling Cassie cannot be ignored. And I do think the judge thinks, like most of us, that Diddy got away with one here, that I was shocked that he got away with sex trafficking when I thought the evidence was pretty clear when it came to Cassie. Maybe not as much with the others. And so I do think that the judge will give him more than the defense is requesting, but not as much as the prosecution, I think, who wants at least four years, five years. You mentioned that he can get up to seven years and three months according to the sentencing guidelines because of his, his violence in this past and also the role that drugs played in all this. So I think the best argument for the prosecution will be the violence that you cannot ignore because it's on video. People live. Video does not. And I think the best argument for the defense would be that these are just the less, the least of the charges. These are prostitution charges and they should not be used to put someone in prison as a makeup for the larger crimes that he was convicted of.

Ashley Merchant (6:44)

I know, I, I agree. What do you think, Matt? The best?

Matt Murphy (6:47)

Well, actually, I think that you and I, all three of us now, we've had those cases where you go in front of a judge and you make an argument this throw all the spaghetti on the wall and hope something sticks has never been, I think, the best way to go because you lose so much credibility. And we see a lot of that actually in this motion. They, they talk about disparity in sentencing. That's something I think the judge is really going to pay attention to. It's what does the typical man act violation entail? What are the typical sentences? Because you really have to, in federal court, you've got to justify any sort of departure from that from a legal perspective. And the judge would have to defend his decision on that. So I think that that's going to be very persuasive. Some of the Other stuff in there is he doesn't like the food in jail, he has to sleep too close to other inmates. That is kind of for. I was kind of surprised to read that, honestly, because they did such a good job in the trial and they just in my view, looked stupid. Sorry. Including that. That's a boohoo thing. That comes off to me as a guy who, like Dave said a lot of people see this as he dodged a bullet, but that sounds like a really privileged, wealthy guy who doesn't like the conditions of his confinement. And, and I see that going nowhere with the court. So disparity in sentencing. That's a really good issue for them. And I think Dave's exactly right. I think the court will. Somewhere, somewhere along the way he's going to split the baby between what the defense, what the prosecution is asking for. And my guess is did. He's going to be out in about a year.

Ashley Merchant (8:19)

Yeah. You know, Matt, I was looking at those conditions and I think they're atrocious, but I think most jail conditions are atrocious in this country. And I just couldn't help but think that that was a client driven decision to put those in. You know, we've all had those clients that are like, hey, you know what I've gone through, I want the world. And I just caution them against it. But let's talk a little bit about those conditions. You know, we've got the motion. Some of the things that they included was that he's on constant suicide watch. And you know, this has gotta be difficult. I mean, every two hours, apparently they wake him up to make sure he's alive and well. Doesn't really make a whole lot of sense to me why that's going on. His cell is illuminated for 24 hours a day. He's got limited access to clean water. I didn't really understand that we're not in a third world country. But apparently he heats his own water before he's able to drink it so that he couldn't get the sleeping arrangements. That's pretty typical. I mean, sleeping in a dorm style room with two other inmates with a bathroom. That didn't seem that crazy for incarceration to me, you know, that he hadn't breathed fresh air in nearly 13 months, nor felt the sunlight on his skin again. You know, it's pretty typical. I mean, I don't think it's right, but it is pretty typical of the types of conditions. You know, what I didn't know was that he's got some medical issues. They Talked about he walks with a limp, doesn't have healthy food. Yeah, that's pretty fair. I don't know about you guys, but I know the Fulton. If you've probably seen the articles, I read this, it said expired processed pork. And all I could do was think of the odor of bologna sandwiches, which is what they feed for breakfast, lunch, and dinner at the Fulton County Jail. And it is literally the most vile smell. So, you know, I definitely understand that. Said that his food could have maggots. I mean, do you think any of these arguments, Dave, are gonna carry any weight with the judge? Or think the judge is just gonna say, you know, why are you complaining about this stuff?

Dave Aronberg (10:04)

Yeah, the latter. I don't think that's his best argument. I was surprised about the maggots. I. I understand you sandwiches. And remember, Donna Adelson said, hey, they're giving me all carbs. I'm putting on all this weight. I'm getting pasta with potatoes. Well, maggots and your expired pork. I don't know if I believe all that. Maybe he saw one. One or two. Is that a normal thing? That they just eat their maggots? It sounds like some of these terrible movies from the 70s, like Escape.

Ashley Merchant (10:28)

I know, I know, it's pretty nasty. I don't think it's going to be that successful either. But it, you know, if any of it's true, it is pretty disturbing. I mean, we are. We're not a third world country. We can do a little bit better than that. But I don't know that it's going to carry a lot of weight with the sentencing court. Another thing, though, that very curious what you think about his free game with Diddy. So one of the other things that he put in his sentencing memo is that he has launched a jailhouse course to teach fellow inmates business skills. Apparently, he did this to spread his knowledge of business with his fellow inmates. And I sort of think this could go both ways. I mean, we always like to show that our clients are trying to utilize their time for the betterment of society. But, you know, what type of an impact did this have? What do you think, Matt? Do you think this is just a Hail Mary?

Matt Murphy (11:13)

You know what? I think this is just an attempt to garner some sort of mitigation. And what does that mean? Is this a formal thing where the people are signing up and he's got an actual room? Or is this him sitting at the frigging lunch table in the day room telling stories about his rise to fame, hoping that the guys aren't gonna freaking steal his food. There's a lot of stuff in that motion that, frankly, I'm not believing Diddy on anything that he says. So there's a lot of that stuff that I think is. I think you hit the nail on the head, Ashley. This is client driven, and he's trying to talk to everybody. And that could be one other inmate who wants a job when he gets out. I don't think the judge is going to put any weight on any of that.

Ashley Merchant (12:01)

Right. I don't either. And I don't think the judge is going to put a lot of weight on the mom's letter. I mean, it's sad. And I read these and we get them from clients all the time. Diddy's mom is 85 years old. She doesn't want to die with her son in custody. I get that. But is that something that really differentiates this case from the next case or really is a factor in sentencing? I mean, it always breaks my heart to see these mom's letters. But let's talk about his new lawsuit. So he has been sued. This was interesting because this is a guy who testified, Deontay Nash, who actually testified at the trial and testified he was his ex stylist, said that he had been subjected to a nightmare of sexual, physical, psychological abuse, unreasonable demands, et cetera, et cetera. But when he testified at trial, he said that he did not ever consider suing. So what do you think, Matt changed his mind on this?

Matt Murphy (12:52)

I think. Look, I don't know. I haven't read his lawsuit, but I think that there's a phenomenon, especially in the modern era, when you got somebody who's wealthy and one person steps up and tries to take some of their money, seems like the piranhas really come out. And I. I did see, you know, well, I remember when that guy testified and, you know, you'd think that that would be the type of thing that would come up during the testimony. It didn't. So my gut instinct, again, I don't know, I don't want to pass any judgment on the merits of a lawsuit that I'm not involved in, but I kind of had to hold my nose a little bit on that. As much as what we saw from Diddy was awful and what he engaged in. He's treated people horribly. I don't know. It's pretty late in the game, and I'm skeptical about that one.

Ashley Merchant (13:44)

Yeah, I thought the same thing. I thought it was pretty late in the game. What about you, Dave?

Dave Aronberg (13:47)

I think it's probably Lawyer driven. I actually do believe when he testified, he believed in his mind that, no, he wasn't going to sue. And then I think afterwards, some lawyers got to him and said, you can make a lot of money on this. Look how much money others are making, and others are filing lawsuits. And I know I should be more cynical about it, but I actually do believe that there are people who go into this thinking, I really don't want to be here. I'm under a subpoena. I want this to be over. And then they see all these other people who have stepped forward, and it emboldens them. And so I don't think he was lying. I think that he was just convinced otherwise by people afterwards. And best of luck to him.

Ashley Merchant (14:22)

Oh, yeah. And I think he heard the testimony at trial that other people had gotten paid, they'd gotten settlements. And his lawyers probably heard that and said, you know, hey, why not? Why not send it to me and let's see if we can shake that. That apple tree, see what falls. Well, we've got another story. Taylor Swift. Couple things to talk about with, with Taylor Swift. First, someone tried to serve her papers for a deposition. And apparently this was an ex law enforcement officer jumped her fence. It looks like she is staying at her fiance Travis Kelce's home in Kansas. And someone was trying to serve her papers, deposition papers for a lawsuit on behalf of Justin Baldoni. He has a lawsuit with the. It ends with us director and actor with Blake Lively. And so apparently this guy was trying to serve T. Swift with some papers and decided to jump her fence that are private property and try and, you know, knock on her door, which I don't think is a really smart thing to do at this point in time. But as you know, as we were all talking about before the show, this is an issue. How do you serve people? How do you get them served when people are dodging subpoenas? When people are dodging service? And I know, you know, I mentioned that I'd been trying forever to serve Fani Willis, and my poor process server just couldn't get her served. And so, you know, what do you do at this point? I mean, I know the answer is you definitely don't jump someone's fence. But, you know, what, what do you, what do you think is the answer? How could to make personal service a little bit better on folks who, you know, deserve some privacy? Dave, what do you think?

Dave Aronberg (15:48)

It's the year 2025, and we're still having individuals jump over fences and use ruses to give you paperwork, you gotta believe there'd be an easier way to do it. I mean, after all, you can lose your house based on things that you ignore through the Internet, right through the emails they sent you. I mean, if you weren't home, it can post things on your door. I just gotta believe there's gonna be easier and better than this. And no, I'm not justifying what this guy did. Because if you're going to jump over anyone's fence to try to reach them, don't make it Taylor Swift. I mean, that's gotta be the most guarded house in the world, right? I mean, maybe easier than the White House, I would think. I mean, Taylor Swift, every paparazzi, everything. And she's got like, private security who aren't under the same constitutional guidelines as Secret Service and government officials. So that guy's like, he didn't get shot.

Ashley Merchant (16:37)

Oh, completely, completely lucky. Matt, what do you think about this whole lawsuit, though? They're trying to bring Taylor Swift in. They're trying to have her be part of this deposition. You know, they've tried to subpoena Megyn Kelly and her team. I mean, this lawsuit, we've just seen it in the news back and forth and back and forth. It just is getting nastier and nastier by the day.

Matt Murphy (16:54)

You know, there really is a decency limit on these cases. And there is a line and I don't know how to define it, but there is a real abusive process issue that we see in quite a few lawsuits. And Taylor Swift was never on this movie set. You know, she had nothing to do with this. She did. She never, she never was given a script to approve. I think they played one of her songs in the soundtrack that she didn't. I don't even think she wrote it for the movie. So she effectively has absolutely nothing to do with this. And there are. Blake Lively serving. Megyn Kelly was an overreach, I believe. And you know, Baldoni and his team, I think, really need to remember that when you do stuff like this, especially on a high profile case, if you have some outlandish technique that your process server is going to engage in, it's going to make you look bad. I read this and I thought Baldoni's whole team looked bad with this 2 o' clock in the morning. There's a time and place issue. And I think Dave's right. He's lucky he didn't get shot. But talk about the house of Travis Kelce. He's like, he just didn't get his ass beat. So but, but more importantly, as an attorney, we are responsible ultimately, and depending on the state, you are actually responsible for the actions, ethical or unethical of anybody that is under your employee that's acting on your behalf. And, you know, I think that it's a, it's a good reminder for all of us as attorneys that if you hire some lowlife to, to do stuff like this, and this guy's a former police officer, I have no idea what his story is, but hopping a fence at 2 o' clock in the morning, that, that, that shocked me for a former professional law enforcement officer, because that's outrageous. And yeah, he deserves to be, he deserves to have gotten hooked for that. And there's, it's just. For somebody who's so peripheral, it's disturbing. And look, there's. I'll tell you that real quick, where you see a lot of this is when you have a sexual assault case where you have actual victims who have protections under the law. If there is a parallel civil case, you will see the defense lawyers. And look, we've seen this all the time, right? Like engage in that civil suit and begin to circumvent the protections and rights of sexual assault victims in ways that they never would be able to do during the criminal discovery process. And it's something that nobody is really aware of unless you're actually in the practice. And I think that it's like everything else, I think that if it's abused long enough, there's going to have to be changes in the law. And I think this is kind of a good example of that.

Ashley Merchant (19:26)

Yeah, this case is a great example of it. It's a good point. So what's been going on with this case, though, is apparently Valdani's attorney has asked for more time. He says that Taylor Swift agreed to be deposed, but then she says that she didn't agree to be deposed. So there's a lot of back and forth. And that's the same issue that we saw with Megyn Kelly when there was a lot of back and forth with Blake Lively's lawyers over whether or not they had subpoenaed her or hadn't subpoenaed her. And I think they were just mincing words where they clearly subpoenaed Megyn Kelly and her team. I can't help but wonder where this is going to end. But like you said, Matt, I think it needs to have some constraint. I mean, the judges need to get these folks under control, need to get this lawsuit under control. I wonder, though, with what's going on with Taylor Swift and some of the other stalking cases that she's had. How something like this would probably affect her. And you know, we always think that everyone who is rich and famous lives this fairy tale life. But we've got a of couple other stories where Taylor Swift has had someone stalking her. The first gentleman, he, let's see, she just got a five year restraining order against him. His name is Brian Jason Wagner. And a Los Angeles judge just granted her a five year restraining order against him. He repeatedly appeared at her home and continued to insist that she was the mother of his son. The order required him to stay at least 100 yards from her residence, her vehicle and her workplace. He's prohibited from communicating with her in any way and he's got to surrender his firearms. This is what really, really bothered me about this though. Not only the fact that he is not able to be found, but he attempted to divert her mail and successfully changed the address on his driver's license to her residence when he tried to divert her mail. I just can't help but wonder why the feds aren't involved in that. You know, messing with someone's mail, that just seems like a federal offense. It seems like this could go somewhere further than that. But you know, she had to go and get this, this protective order and you know, what is she supposed to do at this point to get this gentleman to, to stop harassing her and now he can't even be, it can't even be found. What do you think about that, Matt?

Matt Murphy (21:28)

Well, look, number one, we're talking about somebody who's super famous, right? And we were talking about it off air that restraining orders, especially with mentally ill people, they're difficult to get. A lot of judges are reluctant to issue them, believe it or not. So for people that aren't famous, that don't have a security detail, that these mentally ill people, they're ubiquitous and it's a real problem. But this is something that let's overlap the two issues, right? This is kind of the awfulness, for lack of a better word of this process server hopping her fence. This woman, Taylor Swift had another stalker, a scary one in 2024. And so she's one of the most famous people in the world, but that, you know, she is just as susceptible to physical harm as the rest of us if somebody actually gets to her. And this process server, well, she's got a stalker that nobody can find. Hops a fricking fence at 2 o' clock in the morning. Like he really is lucky I mean, if Travis Kelsey had shot him on his front lawn, who could have blamed him? And that kind of. It's just. It's not right, you know, and that's something that, again, it's the responsibility of those lawyers not to increase the fear of a woman, famous or not, in my view.

Ashley Merchant (22:45)

Yeah, and I'm glad you brought that up, Matt. About the mental illness aspect of it, Dave, you probably have dealt with this in your practice in prosecution, primarily. But that gentleman that Matt mentioned, in 2024, he was found mentally unfit to stand trial and was sent to a state mental institute. So there's definitely this mental health component. But what do you do, Dave? What can we do with these aggravated stalking reports? Can we start having mandatory mental fitness evaluation? I mean, we've already got a registry. This is such a scary situation.

Dave Aronberg (23:13)

Well, there are ways to have involuntary commitment. In Florida, it's called the Baker Act. And other places have similar acts where you can put this person without committing a crime, without this person committing a crime. And here it looks like he committed crimes, but you can put them in an institution, especially if they're a danger to themselves or others. There's the red flag laws, which can take away their guns and ammunition if a court finds that there are danger themselves or others. So there are legal ways to do it. I keep thinking back to Rebecca Schaefer. I was a young man at the time, and you may remember that back in 1989, she was 21 years old. She was the actress from the sitcom My Sister Sam, and she was gunned down by a stalker. And so this is nothing new. And we just have to remain vigilant because, yeah, the celebrities look like they have everything in the world, but they also have stalkers, and it could lead to deadly consequences.

Ashley Merchant (24:10)

Do you think this could lead to some type of policy changes? You know, as far as how we deal with aggravated stalking or even process serving, Like Matt said, you know, this gentleman who jumped the fence and could have been shot, I mean, it's got to lead to some type of policy changes.

Dave Aronberg (24:22)

Well, perhaps it can lead to some legislation or at least increase enforcement. You would hope it could help protect everyone involved. Doesn't have to be a major celebrity like Taylor Swift. We've seen tragedies now happening in various places. I mean, from Charlie Kirk to others who just have. There's so many people who are deranged who have access to guns, and it's hard to know what else to do to stop it. I mean, I like red flag laws. I think that's one answer where you can take away guns and ammunition to those who have proven that they are a danger to themselves or others. And there's due process in it and something that I think could help at a federal level.

Ashley Merchant (24:59)

Yeah, definitely. Well, next we've got a new docu series about a serial killer, Joseph NASA. He's claiming he has many more victims than we thought. Also, if you have any questions or comments for us, we would love to hear from you. You can email mktruechrimelmaycare media.com again it's mktruecrimelmaycaremedia.com or you can comment on social media tag any of us, we would love to hear from you.

Commercial Narrator (25:25)

You know those movies that tell the stories of real life heroes with the courage to stand up in the face of indescribable evil and hatred to protect and save others? They're important, especially now when the world seems to need heroes more than ever. Artist at War is a film about how art and love can save lives, literally and spiritually. It's the remarkable true story of Joseph Bao, a gifted artist and master forger who risked his life to save others during the Holocaust. There he not only found the strength to survive, but also an unexpected love with Rebecca, a woman whose courage matched his own. Their secret wedding, held inside a concentration camp, was later immortalized in the film Schindler's List. Artist at War opens only in theaters for a limited run beginning September 26th. Go to baomovie.comb a u movie.com to watch the trailer, read about Joseph's real life journey and find showtimes near you. Visit visit baobaumovie.com to watch the trailer and learn more. And you can also sign your organization up for group screenings.

ExxonMobil Advertiser (26:34)

Again, that's Baumovie.com can lighter structures really be stronger? Yes, they can. ExxonMobil is helping advance American industrial innovation with Proxima Systems, enabling a lighter and stronger alternative to traditional rebar while lowering greenhouse gas emissions to help build a more efficient construction industry with sustainability in mind. Exxon Mobil, let's deliver.

Ashley Merchant (27:09)

All right, now let's talk about serial killer Joseph Naso. He isn't a name known like Ted Bundy or Jeffrey Dahmer, but he's just as deadly. According to a new document series, the Oxygen Channel has a new docu series called Death Row Secrets of a Serial Killer, and it explores his unsolved murders. And we're very lucky today to have Matt Murphy who actually prosecuted someone involved in this case. And so he's going to be able to fill us in. So, Matt, for people who haven't been following this story, what's the plain English version? What happened?

Matt Murphy (27:41)

So essentially you've got a guy who. Who was a very active serial killer in the. In the 70s. He was convicted years later of four murders, and they sent him to sense to death. He goes to death row, and he apparently has been gabbing with some of his fellow inmates. That's the allegation. And one of these. One of these guys who was on death row with him came forward with information that he claims Naso shared with him concerning other victims. So he was convicted of four. He was sentenced to death. He's 91 years old now. He's in the medical facility in Stockton, California, where a lot of death row inmates wind up living their final days. And there's been a new push to identify additional victims which could be, and I have no doubt are dozens and dozens more than what he was actually convicted of. So that's the kind of the foundation of this. And there's some really interesting things on this Oxygen documentary series.

Ashley Merchant (28:41)

Well, one of the things that really struck me was the crime scene that they found. It looks like he was essentially caught when he was on probation and the police went or probation, went to his house and saw photos because he was a photographer. Saw, you know, they just described it as a nasty crime scene. I think we've got a sot on it. SOT one.

Matt Murphy (28:59)

I've been through some pretty nasty crime scenes, but Joe's house was more emotionally disturbing than. Than most cases I've ever seen. There were mannequins in the house with lingerie, lipstick on the face, hair done.

Commercial Narrator (29:18)

A few are strung up by their necks by pantyhose.

Matt Murphy (29:26)

There was photography equipment and thousands, dozens of photographs of women. But while I was cataloging the evidence, somebody went, hey, wait a minute, there's this, too. We called it the list of 10. It's just a piece of scrap paper with Joe Naso's handwriting On it, number one through 10. And it just lists locations. That's when we knew for sure the list of 10 is actually a list of murder victims.

Ashley Merchant (30:06)

Wow. I mean, as a defense lawyer, when I see something like that, I just think, God, what? You know, can you imagine having a case like that and trying to figure out how to defend something like that? Matt, What? I mean, this crime scene, how is that linked to the case that you were handling?

Matt Murphy (30:22)

Well, first of all, I thought that this was like a scene out of seven. Remember that movie with Brad Pitt and Kevin Spacey. That. What. This was his apartment, essentially, that they. They found all that stuff in a probation search. The connection is there was a young woman named Pamela Lamson who was found strangled in. On a hiking trail in Marin County. And this was. This came up during my prosecution of a guy named Rodney Alcala. Now, what's fascinating about this is that, you know, and this is kind of you can. This can only happen in America, right? You have two active serial killers in California at the exact same time, both professional photographers, both using that professional photography to lure their victims into positions of vulnerability. And they're both doing it throughout California, but especially in the Bay Area.

Ashley Merchant (31:12)

And they didn't know each other.

Matt Murphy (31:14)

They did not know each other. Right. So they. They had a connection. They were looking at Rodney Alcala. The Marin county sheriffs were looking at Rodney Alcala as a potential. Potential suspect in the Pamela Lamson case. And when we. Not we. I was 12 years old at the time. It was 1979 when he was arrested, and Alcala probably murdered 100 people. Okay, so. And again, he's only been convicted of a very small number. We did five in Southern California. There were three other victims in New York. There was another one in Wyoming. But we've always known when they got into his storage locker during our investigation, they found thousands and thousands of photos, just like they did in Nassau. And these guys would. They would murder their victims and then take pictures of the victims when they were dead. Almost certainly both engaged in necrophilia. And also interesting, I mean, I think fascinating, really. Each one of these guys, Rodney Alcaulo, represented himself in court, and so did Naso. He represented himself. It's like the psychology of the serial killer. They can't help themselves. And I don't know if it's a combination of just the ability to have the power to subpoena witnesses and call them on the standard, or whether it's that they get discovery so that they get to go in with the photographs that they took of their own victims and spend alone time with that in their cells. The parallels are really interesting from an objective, academic perspective, but what happened here is they looked at Alcala as a potential suspect of Pamela Lamson. And there were a lot of things they don't talk about on a documentary that I'm going to share after the next slide that connected Alcala as a suspect in the Pamela Lamson murder. But this jailhouse informant essentially has claimed that Naso claimed credit for that murder as well. And I want to get into that after the next slide.

Ashley Merchant (33:08)

Okay, well, yeah, let's play that. I think it's thought to. We've got Joe Naso where he's asked about this list and how many people he killed.

Matt Murphy (33:13)

Who are those women? You tell me. I don't know. You know and I'll tell you. You tell me. I don't know. You're still playing games. No, ask the prosecution, ask the judge. I don't know. How many people did you kill, Joe? Do you think? How many did you. I killed none.

Dave Aronberg (33:29)

It's easy for me to say.

Matt Murphy (33:30)

I killed none. How about you? None.

Ashley Merchant (33:37)

Wow. Well, we've got another one also. We've got slot four where Bill says that he was giddy.

Dave Aronberg (33:43)

He got very giddy about this particular.

Matt Murphy (33:46)

Girl because another killer was actually accused of killing her.

Dave Aronberg (33:53)

And Naso found that to be the.

Matt Murphy (33:56)

Most hilarious thing in the world. He would continue to tell me she's one of mine.

Dave Aronberg (34:01)

But they accused someone else of it.

Ashley Merchant (34:07)

All right, Matt, so tell us about that.

Matt Murphy (34:09)

All right, so first of all, Alcala was never accused of it. Okay, let's clear that up right now. I never accused him of it because we had insufficient evidence. So that's wrong. I've always had an issue with J House informants. So this guy's on death row with him, the guy that we just saw in the last sod, and he's, you know, he's coming forward with conversations now. In that first clip that we saw, you get a glimpse of the arrogance and the extreme narcissism. And for him to even sit down with the reporter, understand there's a whole background there, he had to want to do that. No lawyer in the world is ever going to tell their client, go sit down with a reporter and subject yourself to an interview. All of that, just the lead up to that interview with not with Nassau shows the arrogance and the. The. I mean, it is a. They are lamentable human beings. And we'll get into that a little bit when we talk about Rex Heuermann. And he's just accused. Okay, but jailhouse informants. You got one guy who murdered somebody who's on death row, who's now telling authorities something that NASA supposedly said. There's a lot of potential BS in that. And that's why, as a prosecutor, I never used a jailhouse informant on a single case, because you just. You can't trust them. But the link with Alcala is this young woman, Pamela Lamson, was found on this hiking trail. And that's just like Alcala dumped a Bunch of his witnesses or a bunch of his other victims. He was about half and half, half indoors, half outside. Her earrings were missing, which was a calling card of Rodney Alcala. He would collect earrings of his victims, many of which were found in the storage locker during the investigation. And maybe most tellingly, Pamela Lamson had spent some time around Fisherman's Wharf in the San Francisco area, which is just on the other side of the Golden Gate Bridge from Marin county, not far from where Pamela Lamson was found. And photos of that area from the time were located in Alcala storage lockers so we could put them in. The area had very, very similar circumstances to some of his other victims. So they looked hard at Alcala, and I think Marin county may have actually cleared the case, but he was never accused of it, he was never prosecuted for it because there just wasn't enough evidence to link him. So very, very interesting stuff, but I think that that sought, I am fascinating, fascinated every time I look at that, because you can see that look in Naso's eye. That is a quintessential serial killer. And I dealt with Alcala interpersonally for six months during that trial because he represented himself. And it really is a, a super intriguing, very interesting personality type on these serial killers.

Ashley Merchant (36:49)

Well, and before we move on to the next topic, this, this jailhouse snitch, this Bill Nouguera. So he was on death row, he helps the government, gives this information, and now he's out on parole, or at least on his way to parole. Is this guy credible?

Matt Murphy (37:04)

In my, in my view? No. Okay, so he's providing information. Maybe he's being honest, maybe he's not. I never in a million years would I touch that guy with a ten foot pole. He murdered his girlfriend's mother when he was 18. So he's gonna get off death. He's already off death row. He is, I believe he's actually been paroled already. So he's out. Good for him. I hope he doesn't kill anybody else. But am I as a prosecutor or as a citizen or as a potential juror gonna believe anything that this guy says? I wouldn't, unless there was really good corroborating information. Now that said, I have absolutely no doubt that Naso killed many, many more victims because serial killers, there's always victims that they get away with, you know, cases that aren't filed, cases that are closed, cases that you, you're pretty sure he did it, but it just doesn't rise to the level of being able to file criminal charges. So NAESA is a monster. He murdered untold number of victims. But do I believe this guy? I don't believe a word that comes out of his mouth.

Ashley Merchant (38:09)

Yeah. All right, well, let's talk briefly about the Gilgo beach case. I'll just sum it up for everyone. Rex Heuermann is now gearing up to trial. There's been some dispute recently about if all of his charges should be tried together or if they should be severed. He's trying to get every single victim tried separately. And I think we've got a sot, which is really kind of creepy about what his favorite tool is. If we could play slot 6.

Matt Murphy (38:33)

If you were a tool or an object to help you in your. To bring your business to greater heights, what would it be?

Dave Aronberg (38:48)

I have one tool that's pretty much.

Matt Murphy (38:50)

Used in almost every job, and it's actually a cabinet maker's hammer. Oh, okay, Kevin. It's maker.

Ashley Merchant (38:58)

Okay.

Matt Murphy (38:58)

It is persuasive enough when I need to persuade something.

Dave Aronberg (39:04)

Not someone, something.

Ashley Merchant (39:10)

All right, so Rex is accused of killing all of these women in Long island and leaving their bodies. I want to ask both of you. We'll start with Dave. If you were the lawyer on this case, what would keep you up at night? What's the one thing that was the.

Dave Aronberg (39:20)

Prosecutor or the defense lawyer?

Ashley Merchant (39:22)

Either. Yeah, pick your side.

Dave Aronberg (39:24)

Defense lawyer. You want a client like that? This is a guy who has double personalities. He lived amongst us. By day, he had a wife and a child, and he was living in a neighborhood. And by day and at night, he was just. Or when his wife was away, he was slaughtering innocent women for sport. And he just clearly is a sick, deranged individual, allegedly. But they. And he's kept us on the run for guessing for years and years, so now finally, he got him. So if I was representing him, you know, I'm sure he'd be really nice. I would make sure that he handcuffed and was treated like Hannibal Lecter from Silence of the Lambs every time I showed up in his cell to talk with him, because I wouldn't trust this guy alone in a cell or anywhere. So maybe that's why I spent most of my life as a prosecutor, only recently became a defense lawyer and would not represent someone like this.

Ashley Merchant (40:16)

What about you, Matt?

Matt Murphy (40:18)

Well, he's six, eight, too, I think, and, like, 180 pounds. He's a massive human being. And, yeah, I'm kind of with Dave on this one. Every time I look at this case, I just kind of. I feel like one of Those cats looking at birds outside of a window. Like, I get twitchy because the evidence just looks so good. I love to prosecute this case. And what's interesting about this one is that there's. There are cell phones that he would take from his victims, and he would actually use those. Allegedly. Allegedly. He would use those phones to call the family members of his victims and essentially torture them.

Dave Aronberg (40:50)

Them.

Matt Murphy (40:51)

He would. He would. He. He would say horrific things using the victim's cell phones. And that's part of his whole process that he's been accused of. But he lived in Long island, and he owned an architecture firm in midtown Manhattan, not far from where my apartment is, in fact. And he would commute in, and he had his phone, his actual cell phone. He had a burner phone, allegedly, that he would use to contact sex workers when his wife was out of town, many of whom became his victims, allegedly. And then he would have the victim's phones, and they're all pinging simultaneously as he's moving around, which is incredibly compelling evidence. And I would love to be the prosecutor in this case.

Ashley Merchant (41:30)

Next. Luigi Mangione's lawyers claim that the DOJ has broken court rules. Stay tuned.

Commercial Narrator (41:37)

Who's really on your side when it comes to your health? Insurance companies, bureaucrats, pharmacies that refuse valid prescriptions. Not so much. Too many parts of our healthcare system are working against you. Blocking proven treatments, jacking up prices, making you jump through hoops that are unnecessary. This is why I want to tell you about all Family Pharmacy, an independent pharmacy that's on your side, fighting for your medical freedom, making it simple to get the treatments you trust without the insurance runaround. Just order online. A licensed doctor will review your request, and your medication ships straight to your door. It's fast, simple, and secure. Right now, Ivermectin and mebendazole are 25% off, starting at just 2 bucks a capsule. And you can save another 10% off with code MEGAN10. Choose from over 200 medications. Antibiotics, hydroxychloroquine, NAD antivirals and more, all with a prescription, including. Go to allfamilypharmacy.com Megan and use the code Megan10 to save today. That's all Family Pharmacy, where your health and your choice matters.

ExxonMobil Advertiser (42:49)

Can lighter structures really be stronger? Yes, they can. Exxon Mobil is helping advance American industrial innovation with Proxima systems, enabling a lighter and stronger alternative to traditional rebar while lowering greenhouse gas emissions to help build a more efficient construction industry. With sustainability in mind, ExxonMobil, let's deliver.

Range Rover Advertiser (43:16)

What makes a leader? It's a tough question, but this we know for sure. True leaders lead by example. They take risks and plunge into life with determination. And for real leaders, there's a symbol of high adrenaline and high achievement, the Range Rover Sport. The Range Rover Sport redefines sporting luxury with a dramatic modern design that meets a distinctive sporting character. And a well appointed cabin brings a sense of occasion to every drive. The active noise cancellation feature filters out unwanted sound, making the cabin a cocoon like sanctuary. Optional PM2.5 filtration reduces odors, bacteria and allergens while CO2 management enhances the wellness of everyone on board. Plus, you can curate the mood of every journey with configurable cabin lighting and bring a hint of refinement to every drive with optional 22 way adjustable heated and ventilated electric memory front seats with massage function. Build your Range Rover Sport@range Rover.com USSport that's range Rover.com US Sport.

Ashley Merchant (44:20)

All right, well, Luigi Mangione, the prosecutors with the Department of Justice have been under a little bit of hot water lately because a federal judge demanded that they explain why they keep making comments about his case despite her order to keep quiet. These come last week as President Trump said on fox news that Mr. Mangione was someone who shot in the back, as clear as you're looking at me. White House officials have also referred to him as a left wing assassin. These comments have been rebuked by the judge and she is pretty upset that they're talking about it. And I've had a lot of experience with judges getting upset about us talking about the media. And it's always a difficult situation because, you know, when cases are in the news, we want to be able to answer questions about it. We want to appear as though we're transparent. We don't want to look like we're hiding things. So it's always difficult. But I do know that the federal government tries very hard to keep these things under wrap. How do you all handle when people are asking you about cases, current cases, and you might be under a gag order or maybe you're not able to talk about it or something like that. How would you handle something like that?

Dave Aronberg (45:22)

Dave well, it's much easier if you're a party, a lawyer in the case. When you're the president of the United States, what power can a judge have over you? You're allowed to speak out about matters. And the worst thing that could happen, I guess, is that the judge could say, no, there's a violation of your right to a fair trial. So we're going to move the case. But where do you move it? This is a national case. Everyone knows about it. So, you know, the judge can put all the gag orders they want. They can't have any jurisdiction over someone who's not a party to the case, or not a lawyer involved in the case, or not a member of the media. It's already tough when you start putting gag orders on the media because there are first amendment issues there. But to the President, United States, for speaking out. Well, sorry, a lot of us are speaking out about this case, and we're gonna keep doing it because people are really interested in it. And by the way, the evidence is really, really strong. So if anything, all this publicity that you've seen about Luigi's case could help him because he's become a folk hero to people, I guess, on the far left that he's somehow justified in murdering this father of two.

Ashley Merchant (46:29)

Well, and I think it's just, you know, I think it's just a situation in 2026 and beyond where we're going to have to deal with the media, we're going to have to deal with how everybody talks about the case. And that's not a bad thing. You know, we just incorporated into jury selection, we incorporated into our arguments. You know, ask jurors if they've heard stuff like that. I know, Matt. I mean, we love talking about cases and people like hearing about them, and we need to be transparent and be able to talk about cases. So, you know, it is hard to. To keep these comments unlimited.

Matt Murphy (46:55)

Yeah. As a prosecutor, especially in California, there are very strict ethical guidelines about what you can share publicly prior to a trial. So on one respect, I really, I understand the judge's frustration because it's getting out there. But on the other, if they're not a part of the prosecution team, good luck. Especially when you're talking about the President of the United States. And this is a huge national issue issue right now. You've got. It seems like we have a new shooting every day. It's something that is going to be. It's going to be discussed, but it's very, very important that the prosecutors themselves or anybody in the actual prosecutorial agencies, whether it's Pam Bondi's office in the federal case, or Alvin Bragg, who I'm not a super fan of in the state case, every single one of those prosecutors or anybody involved in those cases needs to be very careful not to say anything. I think, think let the winds of the media Buffet back and forth. But I think those people have to be able to come into court and say, judge, that was not me or anybody that I have any control over. We're doing everything we can to make sure he's got a fair trial.

Ashley Merchant (47:58)

Yeah, completely agree. All right, well, now we're going to return to our legal mailbag and if you don't know, you can write us here, you can talk to us on social media, you can email us. But we got a really nice comment. It's not a question, but it's a comment from Ricky. She wanted to say hello to our team and to thank us for a terrific show. She says she's enjoying every bit of it and hasn't missed a single episode. It's so nice to listen to level headed and professional lawyers like us who can explain and entertain without all the extra noise. She's saying. She's counting down to Wednesdays and Fridays and wishes the show was every day. Maybe in the future, Ricky, maybe thank you for the wholesome show. She relies on it, enjoys it, and it's a pleasure for the camaraderie and respect between the attorneys even when they disagree. We need more of that. I cannot agree more, Ricky. We definitely need more of that. Well, now you're gonna get to hear a bit of a rant. I'm gonna start with if you want to give us your closing argument and your rant of the day.

Dave Aronberg (48:47)

Sure enjoyed being on with you guys and Ricky, thank you for your kind words. I want to talk about another item in the news. The impending indictment of James Comey, former FBI director, who, depends who you talk to, is the one who is Trump's biggest enemy, or maybe the one who helped elect President Trump the first time around. I, coming from the Democratic side of the aisle, think that Trump should probably give Comey a gift basket rather than an indictment. But here we are. And now it looks like, and by the time this is broadcast, he could be indicted already. And people think that this is an example of out of control prosecutors. Well, let me tell you someone who is a prosecutor for at least state attorney for 12 years and a prosecutor for longer. There are limits, there are guardrails in place. And the out of control prosecutors are limited by the fact that first you have to go through a grand jury. You gotta show probable cause that someone committed a crime. And that grand jury, although people say that a grand jury can indict a ham sandwich, it's so easy for prosecutors just to roll over these grand jurors. Those folks haven't been in front of a grand jury, especially nowadays when you're in the CSI era and everyone wants the DNA evidence or the video. And you have to sometimes commence a skeptical grand jury. But assuming you can get it through a grand jury, then you've gotta show enough evidence for a judge, judge to keep the case going. A judge can just dismiss it because there's a motion to dismiss out there, and you just don't have the goods. And so the judge is another defense mechanism here. And then you've got jurors. And the only thing predictable about juries is that they're unpredictable. And juries want real evidence. Prosecutors have to prove a case beyond a reasonable doubt. And especially when you have President Trump out there saying, let's go after these folks. That could lead to what we call vindictive prosecution or selective prosecution. And a judge can just say, you can't do that. This, that. We're not even gonna send this case to the jury. So there's a lot of mechanisms in place. And if you think that prosecutors have unlimited jurisdiction, talk to Mike Nifong, who is the Duke lacrosse prosecutor, because he trumped up, no pun intended, a case against the Duke lacrosse team. He had his bar license revoked, he was disgraced, and he actually had to serve a day in jail. So I leave you with this. Although it's true you can beat the rap, but you can't beat the ride, there is still a lot of guardrails in place to protect against unwarranted and unjustified prosecution.

Ashley Merchant (51:10)

Right, Matt, tell us what's on your mind.

Matt Murphy (51:13)

You know, I want to go back to that serial killer, Mr. Naso, and I think that this demonstrates what's really good about the blending almost or the melding between people that are interested in true crime and being able to deliver justice to victims families. When you have, and we've seen it go awry, like in the Coburger case, there was some poor professor who was accused of that by some crazy lady online who didn't do it. So we certainly have examples where it goes wrong. But the Oxygen this, the Oxygen documentary series is basically bringing attention to cases that were unsolved. And by bringing attention, that prompts a lot of times people in law enforcement to devote the resources, even this guy, even though the fact that this guy's very old and he's 91 years old, he is a monster. And if they can can close one case and bring some sort of finality to that family regarding the killer of their loved one, it's worth it. And I. And I really like to see that. I think that every day, people that are interested in true crime get a little bit more educated, they get a little smarter, they get a little more sophisticated. And I think that we really do benefit as a society with that. And I. I just. I love to see that. I know the people at Oxygen. I'm in total support of these investigators and everything that they're doing. And sometimes TV is what it takes to get people to make some moves and to do some things and to spend some time. And for those family members who I work with very closely for my career, it's worth it. Those are my tax dollars well spent. And I want to say bravo to Oxygen.

Ashley Merchant (52:48)

Thank you, guys. It was great being on with you. And let me give you my quick rant. It's not really a rant today. It's more of an update. So a lot of people have been wonderful and supportive over the last two years in the Fulton county case that I was involved in with Fani Willis and. And the prosecution of Donald Trump. And I wanted to give everyone kind of a quick update because we had some pretty, Pretty major news last week. The Supreme Court of Georgia ruled that they were not going to hear Fani Willis's appeal. And a lot of people are like, what does that mean? And while I would love to rant about what it means, I'm gonna kind of try to explain what it means and where we go from here. So if you haven't followed along. Fani Willis tried to prosecute President Donald Trump and a lot of other gentlemen. Female also. And my client, Mike Roman, who was one of the Election Day campaign workers who got sort of brought in. When was this large racketeering net cast in Atlanta, Georgia, in a RICO prosecution? We were able to bring a motion to disqualify the prosecutor because the prosecutor was sleeping with his boss and paying a lot of money for the job of trying to prosecute the president and all of these other members of the team. So we were able to get that prosecutor disqualified at the Court of Appeals level. What happened was we had a hearing. I think a lot of people watched it. We had a couple days worth of a hearing, and the judge said, you know what? It wasn't okay. It was really bad, actually, but I'm not going to get rid of her. I'm going to get rid of him. So we appealed that to the Court of Appeals, and the Court of Appeals luckily said, you know what? Nope, gotta go. It's not okay. The whole team has to go. You need a neutral prosecutor, which is what we asked for all along, because I firmly believed that when we had a fair shot, they would all see that my client had not committed any crime and that this wasn't a criminal case at all. But this was a political prosecution. I always thought that. And so we got the Court of Appeals to agree with us. And unfortunately, Fani Willis couldn't just say, you know what? I messed up. Let's move on. Let's let someone else actually look at this case. And she appealed it to the Supreme Court. Luckily, last week, the Supreme Court in a very contentious split decision, which does not ever happen. I will note they rarely ever even issue an opinion on a cert issue. And what we mean by cert is sort of, you know, an appeal. It's just another word for an appeal. They don't usually issue an opinion. They usually say yes or no. But this time they issued a very lengthy opinion. They had dissents, they had concurrence, they had lots of different reasonings. But the gist of it was, was, you know, what you messed up shouldn't have happened. We're not going to let you keep prosecuting it. And what does that mean? At the end of the day? That means that we're finally going to have a neutral prosecutor who we fully believe is not going to think that a crime happened. So that's my rant for the day. I'd like to thank my fellow contributors. It was amazing being on with you, the great Dave Aronberg and Matthew Murphy, and the information that they brought today was just amazing. So thank you so much for joining us. Thank you everyone for joining us at MK True Crime. And please send us your story, suggestions, questions, comments, we would love to answer them. If you have legal questions. You have a new case, you have something you want us to talk about. We love it. It's mktruecrimelmaycare media.com have a great weekend.

ExxonMobil Advertiser (55:49)

When it comes to reducing carbon emissions, the heaviest industries face the toughest challenges. That's where we come in. ExxonMobil is investing in technology to help American industry lower its emissions, including in our own operations. All while empowering businesses and creating job opportunities. It turns out that fewer emissions can mean a stronger economy. ExxonMobil, let's deliver.

Renewal by Andersen Advertiser (56:18)

The biggest homeowner mistakes. Do it yourself, lumberjack. Better leave it to the pros. Doing your own electrical work. The results could be shocking. But letting just anyone replace your windows? Biggest mistake ever. Be a happy homeowner and leave window replacement to the best the certified master installers at Renewal by Andersen. For a limited time, buy one window or door and get the second 40% off plus $200 off your entire purchase with special financing. Minimum purchase of four. Visit renewalbyanderson.com today for this great offer.