MK True Crime Podcast Summary

Episode Title: Diddy’s Leaked Legal Call, Witness Faces Arrest in D4vd Case, and Brian Walshe Shocks with No Defense
Date: December 12, 2025
Host: Mark Eiglarsh
Guests: Mark Garagos, Matt Murphy

Overview

This episode dives into three headline-grabbing true crime stories:

• The controversy and implications behind the leaked attorney-client phone call featured in 50 Cent’s Netflix documentary The Reckoning about Diddy.
• The intensifying legal developments in the D4VD criminal case, spotlighting the grilling of a key witness and potential witness arrest.
• The shocking legal strategy in the ongoing Brian Walshe murder trial, where Walshe put on no defense and declined to testify.

The panel—veteran lawyers with deep experience in high-profile cases—offers expert analysis, inside perspectives, and no-holds-barred discussion.

1. Diddy’s Leaked Attorney-Client Legal Call in Netflix Doc (The Reckoning)

Segment Start: [01:01]

Key Discussion Points

• Documentary’s Impact and Leaked Footage:
  The panel discusses the Netflix doc produced by 50 Cent, featuring a previously private argument between Diddy (Sean Combs) and his lawyer, Mark Agnifilo. There’s shock and controversy over how the footage was obtained and aired.

• Attorney-Client Privilege Concerns:

  • Mark Garagos clarifies he’s not the lawyer in the video, though he’s previously represented Diddy for decades.

  • Garagos describes the horror any defense lawyer feels at attorney-client conversations being public, referencing his own experience with the Michael Jackson case and a $25 million privacy judgment.

  • Discusses the “absolute bar” that’s supposed to exist around these conversations:

    “Aside from the fact that it shouldn’t be in anybody else’s hands, because as a defense lawyer, the most sacred thing in the world is that you have an unfiltered, absolute bar discussion with your client.” — Mark Garagos [05:02]

• Possible Waiver of Privilege:

  • Matt Murphy speculates that any recording by the client in the presence of a videographer amounts to privilege waiver.

  • Wonders why a criminal defendant would willingly record themselves in a case this serious.

    “Who in their right mind records themselves talking to their lawyer about a case this serious?” — Matt Murphy [07:20]

• How Did Netflix Get the Footage?
  The team debates whether a payment dispute with a videographer opened the door, with Netflix defending its source protection and legal review.

• Celebrity Defendant Dynamics:
  Garagos rails against the “celebrity lawyer” label and the complexities of handling ego-driven, high-profile clients as contrasted with regular criminal defense:

  “Being called a celebrity lawyer is almost like calling me a motherfucker. … Most of my practice is not celebrities.” — Mark Garagos [10:11]

Notable Quotes and Moments

• Satirical banter about the “Mark sandwich” with two Marks and Matt on the panel.

• Garagos’ sharp advice:

  “My father used to say they didn’t teach the care and feeding of celebrity clients in law school.” — Mark Garagos [11:40]

• Discussion of Netflix legal clearance; Murphy is confident they’ve minimized liability.

Timestamps for Important Clips

• Diddy/Agnifilo leaked call clip: [04:17]
• 50 Cent’s take on Diddy’s reaction: [15:05]
• Analysis of Capricorn Clark and Cassie Ventura’s testimony: [18:02]

2. Jury Responses to Diddy’s Trial and Testimonial Contradictions

Segment Start: [17:04]

Key Insights

• Juror Perceptions:
  The panel dissects surprising feedback from jurors who viewed some accusers’ testimonies as confusing or ‘performative,’ especially regarding claims by Capricorn Clark and Cassie Ventura.

  “Juries are very good at sniffing [performative testimony] out.” — Matt Murphy [20:18]

• Challenges in High-Profile Federal Trials:
  Garagos laments the lack of cameras in federal court, which filters the story through potentially biased intermediaries and producers with “an ax to grind.”

• Limitations and Risks of Public Opinion:
  The three agree that “there’s no such thing as a slam dunk” in jury trials, and that high drama may play differently on TV versus in court.

3. D4VD Homicide Case: Witness Intimidation and Grand Jury Drama

Segment Start: [24:48]

Key Discussion Points

• Witness Under Fire:
  The president of D4VD's touring company is grilled by a prosecutor in front of the grand jury—details typically kept secret but leaked because the witness spoke to the press.

• Legal and Moral Obligations:

  • Garagos admires the prosecutor’s tenacity, predicting disaster for any witness unable or unwilling to withstand her questioning.

  • Murphy clarifies there’s no strict legal requirement to call the police, but highlights potential for accessory charges, and the broader “human obligation.”

    “I am hardened to hear that [the prosecutor] is going after that guy because, as a resident of LA … F you buddy. You do have to report it to the police. Maybe not a legal obligation but a human obligation.” — Matt Murphy [27:08]

• Grand Jury Secrecy Breached:
  The panel collectively denounces the leaks, noting grand jury proceedings are intended to be secret.

• Predictions:
  Both lawyers believe indictments are imminent. Garagos predicts multiple people will be charged.

  “Oh, there will clearly be an indictment … I would lay some heavy money there’s going to be an indictment. … I think it’s going to be more than one person.” — Mark Garagos [28:40]

4. Brian Walshe Murder Trial: The Empty Defense Table

Segment Start: [32:29]

Key Points

• Case Background:
  Brian Walsh is on trial for allegedly murdering his wife, Anna. He’s already pleaded to misleading police and disposing of a body, but pleads not guilty to murder. The defense claims Anna suddenly died and Walsh panicked, never reporting her death and “conveying” (dismembering) her body.

• Defense Shock: No Testimony, No Witnesses
  The panel analyses the “slow plea” strategy, where the defendant doesn’t mount a defense, recognizing the very limited possibility of acquittal.

  “This is what we used to call … a slow plea. That’s what this case is. They can’t plead in Massachusetts to this charge, so … they have to go through the motions.” — Mark Garagos [34:07]

• Prosecutorial Angle:
  Murphy argues the defense overcommitted to an unsupported sudden-death narrative, instead of offering the jury a plausible lesser charge, like passion killing (manslaughter):

  “The problem with going all in on this totally unsupported theory … [is] you put the jury in that position where they’re making a call between first degree murder or nothing.” — Matt Murphy [36:14]

• “No Body” Prosecutions:
  Murphy shares wisdom from his mentor:

  “The jury can always see the soul of your victim reflected in the eyes of those who loved him.” — Matt Murphy [41:04]

• Consensus Verdict?:
  All agree the evidence points to a first-degree murder conviction.

  “He’s gonna eat first.” — Matt Murphy [43:06]

5. Listener Mailbag: Utah Father Charged After Kids Injured During Hike

Segment Start: [44:17]

Key Points

• The Case:
  A Salt Lake City man took three young children on a treacherous hike; they ended up hospitalized. Initial sympathy shifted to suspicion as facts came out, including possible intent and concerning video evidence.

• Prosecution vs. Defense:

  • Garagos argues these cases are often over-criminalized, and not all parenting mistakes equal criminal conduct.

    “No, this should not be a criminal case … The idea of attaching criminal liability is just a bridge too far.” — Mark Garagos [45:35]

  • Murphy pushes back, noting alleged intent, the father's troubling history, and video evidence showing potential awareness of risk:

    “He was walking into a house with a ski mask on … this dad has some issues. … The more I looked, the worse this appears.” — Matt Murphy [45:43]

  • Panelist banter as they mock each other’s legal hypotheticals and framing of the facts.

6. Closing Arguments

Segment Start: [53:31]

Matt Murphy: “Toxic Empathy”—Release Laws Gone Wrong

[53:54]
Murphy argues that “compassionate release” and “toxic empathy” in law can have dire consequences. He recounts the case of Douglas Hopper, a serial sexual predator repeatedly released only to offend again:

“There’s a certain percentage of the population, guys that are absolutely predatory down to their bones … For certain offenses, they are not eligible for this compassionate release program. … It is not right.” — Matt Murphy [56:23]

Mark Garagos: Human Change and Second Chances

[57:57]
Garagos counters with the Menendez brothers, advocating their full rehabilitation and arguing compassionate release can and should work for some:

“For every one of these … victims Matt has prosecuted, there are guys who turn their life around, and they are prime examples.” — Mark Garagos [58:22]

Mark Eiglarsh: On Donating to Defense Funds

[59:46]
Eiglarsh is shocked by the $1.4 million donated to an accused murderer’s defense fund, asking listeners to consider their charitable priorities:

“I find it disturbing. I find it disgusting. Totally your right. However, those thinking about it moving forward, all I’m asking is that you consider another charity.” — Mark Eiglarsh [61:24]

Notable Moments, Quotes, & Panel Chemistry

• Frequent playful bickering, especially over legal philosophy and the distinction between criminal defense and prosecution work.
• Consistent references to legal practice experience, particularly with high-profile and “celebrity” cases.
• Satirical touches (e.g., “Mark sandwich,” running gags about who gets closing arguments first).
• Strong advocacy for the jury system—its ability to “sniff out” unreliable testimony.

Segment Timestamps (Highlights)

• [01:01] – Introduction and today’s topics
• [04:17] – Playing leaked Diddy call from documentary
• [07:20] – On attorney-client privilege and recordings
• [15:05] – 50 Cent’s thoughts on whether Diddy will like the documentary
• [18:02] – Panel analyzes surprising juror reactions
• [24:48] – D4VD grand jury, witness faces questioning/arrest
• [32:29] – Brian Walshe trial, no defense, legal strategy analyzed
• [44:17] – Listener case: Utah father charged after kids injured during hike
• [53:31] – Closing arguments: Murphy, Garagos, Eiglarsh

Conclusion

For listeners, this episode of MK True Crime delivers expert commentary on legal ethics, high-profile trial strategies, and emerging trends in criminal justice, all shaped by seasoned courtroom and media experience. Panelist chemistry, unrehearsed perspectives, and real-world legal insight make it a compelling listen—even (or especially) for those who missed the episode.

For more legal deep-dives, submit your questions to the MK True Crime mailbag!