← MK True Crime
MK True Crime
MAJOR Tyler Robinson Trial Transparency Ruling, “Satanic Panic” Wrongful Conviction, and Neglect in Notorious Jail, with Rachel Kaufman
01:09:27
The MK True Crime Show hosts Dave Aronberg and Phil Holloway join the program to discuss the latest update in Tyler Robinson’s case, Judge Graf’s ruling on why cameras will be allowed in the courtroom, the verdict in rapper Julio Foolio murder trial, why three of the four defendants were also convicted of attempted murder, who benefits most when one trial includes multiple defendants with individual defense teams, the tragic wrongful conviction of Kentucky man Jeffrey Clark in a 1992 murder, how “satanic panic,” junk science, and crooked law enforcement officials left Clark serving 22 years for a crime he didn’t commit, the massive twenty-four million dollar payout a jury just awarded him, Atlanta attorney Rachel Kaufman joins Dave and Phil to discuss the appalling conditions in Fulton County Jail, how medical neglect caused an inmate to lose both his legs, how another inmate ended up dead from a bedbug infestation, why the filth and damaged infrastructure are dangerous for inmates...
Loading summary
Transcript179 lines
- [00:00]
A
If you're an experienced pet owner, you already know that having a pet is 25% belly rubs, 25% yelling drop it. And 50% groaning at the bill from every vet visit. Which is why Lemonade Pet Insurance is tailor made for your pet and can save you up to 90% on vet bills. It can help cover checkups, emergencies, diagnostics, basically all the stuff that makes your bank account nervous. Claims are filed super easy through the Lemonade app and half get settled instantly. Get a'@lemonade.com pet and they'll help cover the vet bill for whatever your pet swallowed after you yelled drop it.
- [00:30]
B
Avoiding your unfinished home projects because you're
- [00:33]
C
not sure where to start.
- [00:34]
B
Thumbtack knows homes so you don't have
- [00:36]
C
to don't know the difference between matte, paint, finish and satin or what that
- [00:40]
B
clunking sound from your dryer is. With Thumbtack, you don't have to be a home pro, you just have to hire one.
- [00:45]
C
You can hire top rated pros, see
- [00:47]
B
price estimates and read reviews all on the app.
- [00:50]
C
Download today. Welcome to the MK True Crime Show. I'm Dave Aronberg, former state Attorney for Palm Beach County, AKA the Florida lawman and current managing partner of Dave Aronberg Law. I'm joined today by my co host Phil Holloway, criminal defense lawyer, former prosecutor and police officer. Hello Phil from Atlanta, ga. Great to
- [01:18]
B
be with you as always, Dave.
- [01:19]
C
Yes, sir. Well, let's go over what we have on the docket today. Cameras will be allowed in the courtroom, thankfully for the Tyler Robinson trial. They heard you, Phil, loud and clear. We'll discuss the details.
- [01:34]
B
And of course, down in Florida, Dave, in your neck of the woods, a jury has found four men guilty of first degree premeditated murder of the rapper known as Julio Fulio. In 2024. We'll share what's next for their sentencing.
- [01:51]
C
And later we'll be joined by lawyer Rachel Kaufman to discuss a case of severe medical neglect at the Fulton County Jail. But first, the latest on the Tyler Robinson case. On Friday, Judge Graff denied the defense's motion to keep cameras out of the courtroom. Check out SOT1. The court before the court is Defendant's motion to exclude still photographers, TV cameras and microphones from the courtroom. Defendant seeks an order categorically prohibiting any electronic media coverage during the pendency of this case because defendant has not shown that a categorical ban on electronic media coverage for all proceedings in this case is allowed by Utah law. Defendant's motion is respectfully denied.
- [02:36]
B
I'm glad for that ruling, but I've got a problem with it. You want to know what my problem is?
- [02:41]
C
The lawyers who are looking down and not listening to the judge.
- [02:44]
B
Well, that's part of it, because, look, zoom. Court etiquette is absolutely atrocious. Not just there, but I think, in my experience, sort of universally. But no, look, the judge said his ruling was based on the idea that the defense has not proven that the law in the state of Utah allows it. He said nothing about the First Amendment. He said nothing about open courts being just a great idea and closed courts being a terrible idea universally. He said that because you haven't shown me that the law in this state allows it. I'm going to deny it. How about just. How about just deny their motion? Because cameras should always be allowed in courtrooms 99.9% of the time. That's my problem with the ruling. It's not really grounded in the right reasoning.
- [03:36]
C
But I'm glad we have it. At least he got to the right place. And I hear you, Phil. You and I are on the same page on this one, because we believe the more transparency, the better. Because especially in this case where you have so many crazy conspiracy theories that it's important for the public to see what's going on. And I think the judge made the right decision. But as you say, maybe he could have gone further in his explanation. I mean, to this day, we have a criminal justice system that has so much secrecy. I mean, grand juries are secret, investigations are kept secret. And then in federal court, there are no cameras in the courtroom. I mean, really, why? And then in some states like New York, no cameras in the courtroom. But here in Utah, they do allow cameras in the courtroom, but the defense doesn't want you to see it. And thankfully, they ruled against the defense's motion.
- [04:23]
B
And of course, as we're going to see a little bit later in just a few minutes anyway, we. We have situations where we still have people that are wrongfully convicted because of shenanigans that the justice system brings to bear on people's lives. And so we've got to have open courts. We've got to have transparency. Like you say, sunshine Dave is the best disinfectant.
- [04:47]
C
Absolutely, my friend. And so do you think this has an impact on the trial? I mean, I don't think so. I think it's not going to affect whether Tyler Robinson is found guilty or not guilty. I think he's going to be found guilty because the evidence is overwhelming. But at least we can all see,
- [05:02]
B
you know, Charlie Kirk didn't have a say. So and whether his murder was going to be televised or happen in front of cameras and TV cameras and still cameras and reporters and everything else. And so we, we on this program and other true crime outlets as well, I mean, we cover trials all the time. We are able to watch courtroom activity without it prejudicing juries. We, this is why this show exists, is so that we can talk about what happens in courtrooms. And so the idea that it's just, you know, it can't, you can't get a fair trial with cameras, I think is just facially devoid of any coherent rationale.
- [05:45]
C
Right, right. Hey, you know, what's a profession though that's still going strong after all these years? Sketch artists. Courtroom sketch artists. I mean, it seems like they work for an hour, get one sketch and it goes on national tv, job done, lunch, you know, not that it's easy to do by you. I don't have that artistic talent. Kudos to them. But how is that still a thing that I'm a courtroom sketch artist. We have cameras now, we got iPhones, just hold it up. But nope, we're still back in the 19th century.
- [06:13]
B
Well, it's because of federal courts. That's where we always see these sketches is out of federal courts because, you know, the federal courts are still in the ice age, so to speak, in this regard because it's just like universal. At least within the states there's some flexibility. I can see situations like, okay, don't show this witnesses face like in the trial where, you know, the, we have undercover officers, right? We've seen this here on this program. Corey Richards, undercover officer. The, the cameras showed his face. And so I can see a situation where maybe you don't want to show a witness's face or you don't want to show the jurors faces or their names. But just, you know, all we really need to see is what's going on on the witness stand and maybe some of the lawyers. We don't even need to see the defendant necessarily, so we can do this without jeopardizing anybody's right to a fair trial.
- [07:06]
C
Yeah, that's very fair. By the way, getting back to sketch artists, here's my question now. How do they remember the actual scene? Because, you know, it takes like a while to do the sketch, but the characters keep moving around, the witness moves off the stand, the lawyers are walking around. What this is based in their mind. I guess that's how you have someone like, remember during Trump's trial. They made him look like Robert Redford. I mean, I guess it's in the
- [07:29]
B
mind of the, I've actually, I've actually met one and I've seen one work before. And they actually do like a really quick sort of rough sketch sort of in the moment. And that's, you know, what they're able to use to refresh their memory.
- [07:42]
C
Interesting, because it's not like they could base it on a photograph because that's not allowed. I mean, you can't even even have cell phones in some of these courtrooms.
- [07:50]
B
Well, Dave, we, we do have, we do have some good video and stuff out of, out of your neck of the woods down there in Florida. We got the Julio Fulio case going on down there. We have some people that transition.
- [08:01]
C
By the way, that was a good segue. Well done, sir.
- [08:04]
B
Well, we've got Georgia has to talk about Florida a little bit later on. You get to talk about what's happening in my neck of the woods in Atlanta. But we got Julio Fulio right? There was a pretty vicious, brutal murder that was, you know, captured on video, a crazy shootout that we've talked about here on the show. And we've got video of that. But now we have some individuals who were found guilty. Right. We've got Isaiah Chance was found guilty. This is on Friday, by the way, May 8th. The jury deliberated eight hours and found Rashad Murphy, Davion Murphy, Sean Gaythright and Isaiah chance guilty of first degree murder and conspiracy to commit murder in the 2024 shooting death of Charles Jones, the rapper, also known as Julio Fulio. SOT2 is the Julio Fulio guilty verdict with respect to Isaiah Chance?
- [08:57]
C
State of Florida vs Isaiah Jermaine Chance, case number 24 CF11996A trial division one verdict form. We the jury finds as follows. As to count one, victim Charles Jones, the defendant is guilty of first degree murder as charged. Did the state of Florida prove beyond a reasonable doubt the defendant was a member or an association associate of a of a criminal gang during the commission of the offense? Yes. Did the state prove beyond a reasonable doubt the defendant committed the crime for the purpose of benefiting, promoting or furthering the interest of a criminal gang? Yes. We the jury finds as follows. As to count two, victim Charles Jones, the defendant is guilty of conspiracy to commit first degree murder as charged. Did the state prove beyond a reasonable doubt the defendant was a member or an associate of a criminal gang during the commission of the offense? Yes. Did the state prove beyond a reasonable doubt the defendant committed the crime for the purpose of benefiting, promoting or furthering the interest of a criminal gang. Yes, so say we all dated this 8th day of May.
- [10:10]
B
So, Dave, so Gay Wright and the Murphy's were all convicted of actually using firearms in the murder. Isaiah Chance was not. I also have a question about the gaythright attempted murder verdict that we can talk about in a minute. But under Florida law, correct me if I'm wrong, Dave, I mean, it should be the same as it is in most states, where if you're part of any criminal act, even if you are just sort of participating along with other people, are you not guilty just the same as the principals? In other words, like an accessory or a party to the crime, why would there not be a guilty verdict across the board?
- [10:53]
C
Well, the getaway driver is just as guilty as the one who holds up the bank. So they could all go down as principals. Now, as far as why in this case, one was not guilty of everything and others were, I don't know. I wasn't there in the courtroom. But I do know that we have video of the Sean Gaithright attempted murder verdict. You referred to it. Let's see. SOT 3. We the jury finds as follows as to count three, victim Xavier Edwards, the defendant is guilty of attempted second degree murder, a lesser included offense.
- [11:32]
B
During the commission of the offense, did
- [11:34]
C
the defendant personally carry, display, use, threaten
- [11:37]
B
to use, or attempt to use a firearm?
- [11:39]
C
Yes. During the commission of the offense, did
- [11:42]
B
the defendant actually possess a firearm?
- [11:45]
C
Yes. During the commission of the offense, did the defendant actually discharge a firearm? Yes.
- [11:54]
B
So this is a strange one to me, Dave. And for those who may not know, you heard the, I guess the clerk or the foreperson, whoever was reading that verdict was.
- [12:03]
C
I think it's a poor person.
- [12:04]
B
Okay, so they're saying that this is a lesser included. So anytime you've got a crime in this case, it's murder. Murders always are comprised of other things that lead up to it, typically some kind of an assault, an aggravated assault, but you know, a criminal attempt to commit a crime. As I Recall Law School 101, when you have an attempt that is successful, the attempted crime sort of goes away. It evaporates into thin air. How can there be a lesser included when someone actually was murdered?
- [12:43]
C
I. Well, I can only speak from my own experience. So we actually had a attempted murder and a manslaughter case in one of our cases. Let me just explain to this one. So we had a case of a police officer who shot and killed a motorist. And it was murder in our eyes. And we went to the jury and we charged with manslaughter and also with attempted murder. And you can be found guilty with both. The attempted murder was 25 years of life. Because if you have multiple shots, that way you don't have to identify which shot it was that killed him. You can't. Because if it's a justified shoot like, or if it's a shoot that is not up to premeditated killing. You don't have to just, you don't have to say which shot was it that led to his death. Attempted murder is for all the shots. Maybe one that was that hit him, one that didn't hit him. You don't have to show who shot what. It's just like if you shot and as an attempted murder, that's it, you can go down for it. And that would cover multiple defendants. So you don't have to prove who is it that actually killed him, who was it that fired the gun? Or you just have to show you all fired the gun and you all tried to kill him.
- [14:04]
B
It kind of smells or seems like it might be some kind of compromise as to Sean Gaythright, but I have a question for you, Dave, since you're the Florida lawman and the expert on Florida law, which I am not, but I think I know the answer to this question. Under Florida law, if you're convicted only of attempted murder, are you eligible to receive the death penalty?
- [14:26]
C
No. No.
- [14:27]
B
What about the rest of them, though?
- [14:29]
C
The rest, well, you can, you can get, you can get life for attempted murder, but as far as murder itself, that's what gets you the death penalty. So your question is, why are they all eligible for the death penalty? You have to be convicted of murder.
- [14:45]
B
Well, so the ones, the ones that are convicted of murder, they could potentially be facing the death penalty. They're eligible. Yeah.
- [14:52]
C
If it's first degree murder only first degree murder, it's a capital crime in Florida. Now, in Florida, it's also very easy compared to other states. Not easy overall, but easy compared to other states to get the death penalty because you only need eight out of 12 jurors in the penalty phase. Does not have to be unanimous in Florida. And Alabama have the lowest burden, but Florida, I believe, is lower than even Alabama, where eight out of 12 jurors. There's an issue with that. That's a new law that was passed after the Marjory Stoneman Douglas massacre, which where that mass murder, who killed 17 innocents, was able to escape the death penalty because three out of 12 jurors said, no, we're not gonna execute this 19 year old with the oversized glasses and the soft sweater. So they changed the law to make it 8 out of 12 which could face Supreme Court scrutiny one day. Where the Supreme Court says that's cruel unusual punishment, it violates the 8th amendment. And so you gotta be careful here when you do laws like that. I'm gonna get to something like that in my closing statement.
- [15:51]
B
I think that's a good point. I can't wait to hear you're closing it a little bit later on in the program. But to put this in context, for this to get to the US Supreme Court, for example, you've got to go through, let's say somebody does get the death penalty under Florida's new statutory scheme, which as you mentioned, is more, let's just say flexible than many states, which might require a unanimous verdict on something like that. And those statutes, by the way, have been tested, Florida's has not. So you've got to go through the state appeals process. We call that the direct appeal. And assuming that death penalty would be upheld under Florida law and on direct appeal, then you start what's called the collateral appeal or the federal habeas types of appeal. And that starts out in a trial court. Then you got the court of appeals and then you know, the U.S. supreme Court, if they were to take it. So before Florida's new statutory scheme can be tested, what do you figure? Probably 20, 25 years or maybe more.
- [16:51]
C
You think it's that long?
- [16:52]
B
Well, I know that people sit on death row that long waiting on all their appeals to take place. Maybe not in Florida, but let's suffice it to say it's going to be many, many years before this issue could reach the U.S. supreme Court.
- [17:05]
C
That that may be true, but you know, this is the type of thing that would affect the whole country. And I think that the spring could want to take this up because there all it takes is one person who just takes it all the way to the Supreme Court and challenges it. But at that. But you have to have someone who has an 8 to 4 verdict. There was that sociopath in Fort Myers and Wade Wilson and he was given the death penalty 10, 2 and 9 to 3 and he'll take it up. But I think the best case is someone who actually gets eight to four. So that may be the delay where you wait for someone who actually gets a death penalty by an 8 to 4, which I think would be tossed by the Supreme Court, not 10 to 2 because there are other states with 10 to 2. By the way, getting back to your previous question, you're also asking about the. You have attempted murder and murder, but I believe also in this case, you had others who were wounded. And so it's attempted murder for others who are wounded and survived, but murder for the ones who were killed. Julio Fulio. But my example is also how you can still charge someone with manslaughter who died and attempted murder at the same time, and you can get a conviction for both.
- [18:17]
B
So you saw in the videos that we played, and by the way, those of you who are listening on podcast or Sirius XM, check out our video version of this show on YouTube, because you can see in the courtroom, you can see all the different defendants sitting there. They brought in, it looks like extra tables, and they're all sitting there with their different defense teams, but there's only one jury. Right. And so our producer, Michelle poses an interesting question. That question being who benefits most from four defendants being tried together and when they may have separate defenses and obviously separate defense teams. Defense lawyers, who benefits from that? Dave, you as when you were a prosecutor, would you benefit from that?
- [19:03]
C
Yes.
- [19:03]
B
You benefit as the defense.
- [19:05]
C
No, no. You get.
- [19:06]
B
That's a softball question for you.
- [19:08]
C
Yeah. Thank you. It's like, I like that question because, oh, you got to put them all in one stew instead of first off, the workload of having to do four separate trials, that's bad enough. But, you know, when you're in a separate trial, you get to point the finger at each other. Oh, they all did it when they're sitting there next to each other. You know, a plague on all your houses. It's. The jury gets a pretty much attribute one conduct to the other because it all looks like they were acting in some synchronicity. So.
- [19:36]
B
Well, having participated, as in the defense, in at least one murder trial that I can think of off the top of my head, that more than one defendant and then won it, by the way. In fact, Ashley and I had one together that we won, too. But the. You're, you're. You're opposing not only the prosecutor, but you're opposing your other defense counsel who are representing the other defendants, because they may be trying to blame it on your guy.
- [20:02]
C
Right.
- [20:02]
B
Or your gal, as the case may be. So it's really, if it's swimming upstream to defend any case, because you're going up against the power of the state and all that, but. So you're always swimming upstream, but when you're also fighting your colleagues who are representing other defendants. It really makes it extra hard.
- [20:21]
C
Yeah, it's much easier to blame the person who's not in the room whose lawyer is also not in the room because when they're in the room, they fight back. If you're the proud parent of a puppy or kitten, you know you can't
- [20:36]
A
pet proof your entire life. There simply isn't a sock drawer high enough or a couch cover thick enough. But you can pet proof your wallet
- [20:43]
C
with Lemonade pet insurance.
- [20:45]
A
Whether it's an unexpected accident or a routine checkup, Lemonade can cover up to 90% of the bill. Plus they can handle claims in as little as two seconds.
- [20:55]
C
So before you turn into a complete
- [20:56]
A
helicopter pet parent, get a'@lemonade.com pet a Beautyrest mattress gives you unparalleled motion separation, isolating movement with pocketed coil technology while providing individualized support. Save during our Memorial Day sale at a retailer near you. Time for some life talk. You probably have life insurance, but you might be paying too much for too little coverage. And did you know if you get it through your employer and you're laid off, you could lose your coverage? And scary to think about, but simple to fix thanks to SELECTquote. For over 40 years, SELECTquote has been one of the most trusted insurance brokers, helping more than 2 million Americans secure over $700 billion in coverage. Unlike one size fits all life insurance companies, select quotes licensed agents work for you for free. In as little as 15 minutes, they will compare policies from top rated carriers to find the best fit for your health and budget. Head to selectquote.com and a licensed agent will find the right policy for you, get the right life insurance for you for less and save more than 50%@SelectQuote.com Megan save more than 50% on term life insurance@SelectQuote.com Megan today to get started,
- [22:16]
B
when I talk about the awesome power of the state, Dave, we've got this case. If we can transition to Kentucky. We're out of Florida now and on to Kentucky. We have a guy named Jeffrey Clark who was convicted wrongfully of a murder back in 1992. It was on or about April 1st of 1992, and he was convicted of this murder. And look, the victim's remains were found in a field 50 miles away from her home. She'd been stabbed multiple times. Investigators said she had defensive wounds. And the night that the victim disappeared in that case, Dave, she had been hanging out with friends and there was somebody was even, you know, issuing threats against her But Dave, we had these other two guys that were, that were convicted. How did this possibly happen?
- [23:14]
C
I mean, this is the greatest fear of a prosecutor is that you get it wrong and then you incarcerate the wrong person. Because I know some people believe that prosecutors just want a conviction in every case. No, we want to do justice. And I know I still speak like I'm currently a prosecutor, but when you convict the wrong person, not only is that an injustice, but then there's a real killer out there that walks free and not like O.J. simpson. Find the real killer. We're talking about a real killer out there that did this and gets a walk free. So how did it happen? It was a blunder. In fact, let's first hear from Jeff Clark himself. Now this is not the Jeff Clark who was indicted for the election conspiracy stuff. This is the accused and convicted murderer Jeff Clark who got free. In fact, we have a SOT from 2016 WLKY. Let's play that.
- [24:07]
B
Understand what it feels like to have your life taken from me for nothing. You know, like I said, it's not over with yet.
- [24:12]
A
Jeff Clark and Keith Hardin are out on bond tonight waiting to hear if
- [24:16]
B
their case will be retried.
- [24:18]
A
Clark and Hardin were charged in the 1992 murder of 19 year old Rhonda Warford. They were convicted of the crime three years later and have been behind bars ever since. Earlier this summer, a Meade county judge
- [24:30]
B
threw out the men's murder convictions and
- [24:32]
A
saying new DNA evidence created doubt in the case. Today that same judge issued an order setting a $5,000 cash bond for the two men.
- [24:41]
B
You just don't know if it's ever going to happen.
- [24:45]
C
Well, you know, hey, DNA has been a game changer. You've got hair, you got blood. I mean, that's the key. And you know, you could say that back in the day when this happened, DNA wasn't quite where it is now, which is true. But it's just cold comfort for Clark and his co defendant hardin, who spent 22 years in prison before the convictions were vacated.
- [25:10]
B
You know, and here's the thing. I'm going to talk more about this kind of junk science in my closing. But in the original trial, a so called expert testified that a hair found on the victim's sweatpants matched Hardin's in color and in certain microscopic characteristics. But for reasons that I'll talk more about, that I think is junk science because in 2014 a Pennsylvania lab analyzed the hair and determined that the hair did not belong to either of the victims. And of course, this is another piece of this particular case that really troubles me. Investigators, Dave, they found a blood stained handkerchief and a broken chalice in Hardin's home. The investigators, I guess, speculated because they literally out of whole cloth, created this sort of narrative. They said the blood was from an animal sacrifice and that Hardin used the chalice to drink the blood of the sacrifices he made to Satan. But in 2014, the same Pennsylvania lab that looked at the hair, they tested the blood on the handkerchief and they found that it belonged to. To Hardin, just as Hardin had testified to at trial, and not an animal. And before I get too much on my high horse, this, I think, represents the phenomenon that when, you know, everybody knows that defendants are presumed to be innocent and the state must prove their guilt beyond a reasonable doubt before you can convict them. But as a practical matter, the truth is when jurors, before they're even selected as trial jurors, when they're just going through the jury selection process, they come into a courtroom, they look at the defendant, and most of the time they wonder to themselves. And the reason I know this is because I ask this question in jury selection. They ask themselves, I wonder what he did or she did. So as a practical matter, they assume there's guilt. Right. And so when a defendant sometimes testifies, a lot of times they're having to go up against this actual bias that's built in. Yeah.
- [27:16]
C
And when they hear that the defendant is praying to Satan and drinking animal blood. Yeah, you're done. I mean, that's pretty much it. I mean, you know, that's all they have to hear. And here it looks like it wasn't even true. And they had an investigator who also, like, said all these things that was contradicted. So I wonder if the investigator was acting in bad faith or was he just wrong? So the other thing was that apparently you had, Clark had this tattoo, a witness said, of an inverted cross, which is a symbol of Satanism. And again, this plays to the jury, like, whoever this guy is, I want him to be locked up forever. And it turns out that the tattoo never existed. And so here's my question to you, Phil. How come the defense lawyer didn't raise that, like, there is no tattoo? Examine the body. You can see there's no tattoo. How did that even get to a jury?
- [28:12]
B
Well, there's a lot of things here that, you know, quite frankly, it's a head scratcher as to how some of this got to a jury, because the lead investigator in the case, guy named Mark Handy, was Actually sued, but before he was also prosecuted, Dave for perjury. Yeah. In a trial that took place before this one and was convicted of perjury. And of course, he was sued civilly. And this whole basically false theory that this was a satanic ritual killing, like I said, it was literally like made up out of thin air by this detective. And the whole thing is like a snowball. It kept developing size and momentum, and by the time it came to trial, it was just like the system was steamrolling these guys.
- [29:03]
C
Yeah. So what's gonna happen civilly, Phil? They're gonna have to pay. Pay out big money for this. I mean, there is a cost when you wrongfully incarcerate someone, you convict someone, especially when the investigator goes down for perjury. Another case and then all this other stuff comes out about the investigator. Someone's going to be paying out and.
- [29:22]
B
Yeah, well, $24.3 million in compensatory damages. What? The jury ruled in favor of Jeffrey Clark, awarded him $24.3 million in compensatory damages and 75,000 in punitive damages. To me, that punitive damages award seems a bit low, but nevertheless, that's what it was. And the Clark said, quote, I finally feel like I'm able to wake up from a 34 year nightmare. He's thankful to be unthankful to the non jurors who saw what I've been through, he says. And so, yeah, that's the answer is who pays? I mean, it's, you know, the taxpayers pay.
- [30:00]
C
Oh, yeah.
- [30:01]
B
Because this was like, this looks like, you know, misconduct that was sort of baked into the cake from the very beginning by law enforcement here.
- [30:09]
C
Yeah. I think the reason why the punies were low 75,000 was because the jury gave them everything they want for compensatory $24.3 million and probably just said, okay, we're doing justice that way, but we're going to issue some punitive damages just to show that we are angry right now that this should not have happened and it should not have felt.
- [30:28]
B
Well, here's. Did you hear? I mean, there's more to it. It's not just the investigator. Right. The local sheriff and the coroner were accused of conspiring to manipulate Rhonda's date of death to fall on a date when neither of these guys had alibis. Because apparently they did have a pretty good alibi for April 3rd through the 5th. The original death certificate, Dave, showed that the coroner originally stated the date of death was likely April 4th and 5th. That fit the timeline of when they had a, an alibi. But then guess what? It was changed to April 1st by using whiteout.
- [31:06]
C
Whiteout. Whiteout.
- [31:08]
B
Yeah. Changed it to April 1st. Well, so. And then they brought a jailhouse snitch in there who said, I guess wrongfully, that, that Clark had confessed to the murder twice. And so it was just, you know, you had jailhouse snitches, you had changed dates of death on the death certificates, you had bogus theories about satanic rituals, and you had junk science. And it was just this whole big giant mess that resulted in a terrible injustice.
- [31:40]
C
Well, since Clark and Hardin were exonerated, now Rhonda's case has been reopened, although no new suspects have been named. Hopefully they'll do some justice for her family. And next, Georgia attorney Rachel Coffin will join us to share a wild story out of Fulton County. You know that area quite well, Phil. Stay tuned.
- [32:03]
A
If you're an experienced pet owner, you already know that having a pet is 25% belly rubs, 25% yelling drop it. And 50% groaning at the bill from every vet visit. Which is why Lemonade Pet insurance is tailor made for your pet and can save you up to 90% on vet bills. It can help cover checkups, emergencies, diagnostics, basically all the stuff that makes your bank account nervous. Claims are filed super easy through the Lemonade app and half get settled instantly. Get a'@lemonade.com pet and they'll help cover the vet bill for whatever your pet swallowed after you yelled drop it. This is a Monday.com ad the same Monday.com helping people worldwide, getting work done faster and better. The samemonday.com designed for every team and every industry. The samemonday.com with built in AI scaling your work from day one. The same Monday.com that your team will actually love. Using the same Monday.com with an easy and intuitive setup. Go to Monday.com and try it for free.
- [33:01]
C
Yes, the same Monday.com everybody's talking about weight loss injections because the results are so dramatic. Yeah, but those needles, right? I mean, these things, they work by lowering blood sugar and reducing appetite. So what if you're looking to lose weight but not interested in painful weekly injections, Especially when you hear of some of those intense side effects. That's why doctors create a weight loss supplement called Lean. And the results are remarkable. The studied ingredients in Lean have been shown to lower your blood sugar, burn fat by converting it into energy and curb your appetite and cravings so you're not as hungry. Sounds good to me. But listen, the lean is not for the casual dieter with only a few pounds to lose. The doctors at Brickhouse Nutrition created Lean for frustrated dieters with 10 or more pounds to lose. Even better, let's get you started with 20% off and free rush shipping so you can add lean to your healthy diet and exercise plan. Visit takelean.com and enter MK for your discount. That's promo code mkakelean.com
- [34:13]
B
welcome back to the MK True Crime Show. I'm Phil Holloway along with my co host Dave Ehrenberg. In this next segment, we've got a very special guest. We want to welcome to the program Fulton County Atlanta attorney Rachel Kaufman, who's a colleague and a personal friend of mine. And Rachel is here to discuss. Of course, we have Fulton County. What else is there to discuss in Atlanta? Because Fulton county is the legal gift that never stops giving when it comes to programs like this. When you want to talk about the justice system or anything related there too. And of course, Rachel is one of the a handful of lawyers that I would say is one of the true Fulton county justice warriors, along with our colleague and co host here, Ashley Merchant. Rachel, welcome to the program. We've got this problem, it's a never ending problem with the Fulton county justice system, particularly today we're going to talk about the Fulton county jail because we have a recent case. We'll start with the most recent, I guess outrageous case involving a former inmate now named Rashad Muhammad. Rachel, he spent 188 days in the Fulton county jail starting in August of 2025. But it really, that's misleading because it wasn't all in the Fulton County Jail. 177 out of 188 days that Rashad Muhammad was in jail, he spent in Grady Memorial Hospital, which is a great hospital if you're seriously ill or injured here in Atlanta. And he was seriously ill because guess what, Rachel, Fulton county jail ignored this man's medical treatment so bad he was desperate, crying out for 11 days when he went into septic shock as a result of an untreated condition. He had a bladder illness and he required antibiotics to treat that because he had a catheter. And Rachel, he almost died. And before we bring you into the conversation, let's, let's go ahead and run SOT5, which is Rashad Muhammad describing the emotional fallout due to medical neglect after he had multiple amputations of both legs and some fingers.
- [36:35]
C
I'm not okay. Every day is a battle. It's a struggle. And me and Mr. Crump had to go back and forth about me even coming here today because it's so traumatizing.
- [36:49]
B
Just when I walked in there and I smelt it.
- [36:51]
C
The smell of this place is disgusting. It turns me off. I can't believe what happened to me here. It's really unbelievable. And I'm processing it all as I go. So please bear with me and just
- [37:03]
B
think about me and what I'm going
- [37:04]
C
through, because it hurts. It hurts daily.
- [37:09]
B
And I need help.
- [37:11]
C
I need a lot of help for the rest of my life, and I don't want to shy away from that. I hear all the other conversation, but I suffered in this place. I asked him for something simple like my medicine. I told him from the moment I got arrested, I need my antibiotics. It's not about being in custody. If I did seven months of my antibiotic, I would have did it with my chest up and my chin out, but I didn't have my antibody. So it was either my life or I die because I don't have my medicine in here.
- [37:44]
B
Rachel, he was comatose in the hospital. What is going on in the Fulton County Jail?
- [37:49]
A
Oh, I'm so. I'm sorry to even. I can't believe I'm crying right now. It's so hard to hear that, because there people have been dying and been injured like this now for, I don't know, almost six, seven years, where it's just become completely inhumane to keep people in those conditions where somebody with a simple bladder infection can't get his antibiotics. And the result, like, it's foreseeable that he would. That he would die or be permanently injured. I hear from tons of clients and people that I volunteer with who've spent time as inmates in the Fulton County Jail, just how traumatizing it is. And these are people who are not used to talking about trauma, about their emotions. And, you know, they smell the place, they think about the place, they see a picture of it, and, you know, it's like a visceral reaction because their lives were literally threatened. I mean, they were threatened every single day that they were in there. And I'm not saying that inmates should be kept, you know, at the Four Seasons, but they do have constitutional rights, and they're just being blatantly violated over and over again.
- [38:58]
B
Dave, I want to bring you in this, too, because, look, we have a. Back in 2024, the Biden Department of Justice basically did a thorough investigation into the Fulton County Jail, found that the conditions there were just completely intolerable, to the point where it Was, you know, violative of the inmates constitutional rights, more or less across the board, just based on the conditions of confinement. Dave, you know, what are people supposed to do when their. Their county jail, so to speak, that handles, like, all the inmates or all the courts is so poorly run that literally they can't take care of people's, or they just choose not to, or negligently don't take care of people's health care needs? Just basic stuff.
- [39:48]
C
Dave, you've got to go to court for it. There's not a big constituency for the incarcerated, the folks here. I'm sure Mr. Muhammad had committed some serious crimes. It does not justify torturing them. That's a violation of the eighth amendment to the Constitution. And they're entitled to due process. They're entitled to be treated like a human being. And you go to court, ask a judge, the judges generally are less political, and they're not going to be like politicians who will stand up there and say, good, let's make it even worse. Because that's not what the criminal justice system is supposed to be about. Yes, it's supposed to be about retribution, but also there's an element of rehabilitation, and we are not like other countries where you torture people to death and so you go to court rather than rely on the politicians who are facing the voters in the next election.
- [40:41]
B
Rachel.
- [40:42]
C
Yeah, go ahead.
- [40:43]
A
Let me jump in. I do not know that he has committed serious crimes, but he. Because he's in the Fulton county jail, he's been arrested, and he's currently being held without bond. And that tells me very little in Fulton County.
- [40:56]
B
People get lost in the. They lose people. Rachel, you and I have talked about this.
- [41:01]
A
That's what's really. Yeah, yeah. And, you know, there. There's not a. A difference in the constitutional right to medical care between jails and prisons. They still, you know, you still maintain that right. But jails are not meant to be holding people for the length of time that Fulton county inmates are on average spending in comparison to, you know, the same crime in other jurisdictions that are comparable. So they're spending a lot of time in a place that's meant to hold people pending either a plea or a trial trial in which they could be found not guilty. So these people haven't even had their day in court, many of them, and they're getting lost. Yeah, go ahead. No, go ahead.
- [41:45]
C
Well, it's a fair point that he's in jail. So it's pre trial. He's not been convicted. And that's. That makes it even worse, he was arrested for a serious crime. It was after a shooting, and he was arrested for aggravated assault and gun possession. So they, they obviously thought he did something. It's very serious. But fair point that he's not in prison, he's in jail, which means this is a pre trial. He wasn't convicted.
- [42:08]
B
So let's, let's go ahead. And I've got one more video of Mr. Muhammad before we get into a really, you know, arguable. Well, I guess it is a more atrocious case than his where someone died. And of course, Rachel has been involved in some litigation involving a death due to medical negligence in Fulton County. Before we get into those, though, here is Muhammad describing his hospital confinement. Because there's stuff here that we can
- [42:37]
C
talk about everybody telling, I can't believe they doing this to you. Why is this happening? Even the sheriffs, all the sheriffs that sat on me for those 188 days
- [42:46]
B
that they said I was in hospital
- [42:47]
C
care, I was chained to a bed. I was in there with a sheriff from 7am to 7pm from 7pm to 7am with a sheriff for months. I was medically cleared by Grady. I could have went home since November. Where's my due process? Why was I in this condition for this long? The mental torture and torment. Every minute feels like an hour just being in jail. Y' all know what I'm talking about, not being in confinement by yourself. I couldn't call my family. I couldn't. They couldn't come visit me. There was no writing the letters. I couldn't talk to attorneys. Grady, detention is different than being in here. You totally cut off from the world because they say it's not a secure environment.
- [43:32]
B
Now, Rachel, we don't know what Fulton County's response would be, but as our producer Michelle asks, you know, does it. Does it violate someone's rights to be so isolated while in the hospital that they, you know, they can't talk to their, even their attorneys?
- [43:49]
A
Arguably, not being able to have contact with, with your attorneys is a violation, I believe, of your constitutional right. But I don't. The problem, the problem is, is that the law, civil rights law with, like, when you're suing a government entity, it's just been set up to really find any way to kind of get around holding the individuals and the like, the organizations that are responsible accountable. What I can say is really, just really quick, is that part of the problem in Fulton county that I've experienced, that I know that other people have experienced, is the, the Facility itself is not conducive to any attorney meeting with their client. And I think that there's bigger issues. It's something that I brought to the attention of the U.S. department of justice about access to a client. Sometimes the elevators are down in their main building, which is 901 Rice Street. And so attorneys either get. I. I know attorneys who've been stuck on the elevator for several hours. I know other people who, you know, wait on the floor trying to get access to their client. So, you know, you go up to the floor that the client's on, but you don't have any access. They're through a plexiglass. Even in the Fulton County Jail itself, you could wait there for two hours, and nobody comes and helps you. There's a buzzer. You're supposed to be able to call the floor, and nobody comes and helps you. If you go down to try to ask somebody at the front desk about it, you might get stuck in the elevator. So you're risking that every time as an attorney going into that jail. So. But I. But Grady Detention Center, I mean, not be. Not. Not having access to a phone is a real problem. One of the things that the DOJ has brought up, I believe they talked a lot about how they've misused within the jail, like solitary confinement for. As punishment, especially for mentally ill people. But, yeah, they are cutting off people's contact to the outside, which is particularly dangerous given that they're not. We know that they're not able to get what they need in there. I mean, that's not a tough thing to get somebody antibiotics that should not be that difficult.
- [45:51]
B
Speaking of what they need. So they're a private medical provider, which is common. This is how most jails work. They don't have medical staff that are employees. This stuff's usually contracted out. A private medical contractor was responsible for Mohammed's medical care. The company is called nafcare. They're standing by their staff's treatment of Mohamed. They say, quote, we are saddened by what Mr. Mohammed experienced. We have conducted a clinical review of the care provided and stand behind the treatment delivered by our team. This involved a medically complex patient, and we believe our staff acted appropriately and did everything within their power to provide care and support under difficult circumstances. Now, look, this is. Dave. This is not the first time, and it would seem that the Fulton county jail is a repeat offender, so to speak. Because, Dave, we had a situation in Fulton county back a few years ago when a man by the name of Lashawn Thompson Literally died. And this is a little bit, I hate to be so graphic, but there's really no other way to describe this. But he literally died because he was eaten by bedbugs.
- [47:04]
A
The family of a 35 year old
- [47:06]
C
man who died in custody is speaking
- [47:08]
B
out against the Fulton County Jail, claiming
- [47:10]
A
he was eaten alive by bedbugs while behind bars.
- [47:14]
C
He was like an everyday person that liked to laugh, play, watch TV. He loved music.
- [47:18]
A
Brad McRae says after not speaking with his brother, Leshawn Thompson for a while, he, he found out last year he'd been arrested in Atlanta in June and in September died in the Fulton County Jail.
- [47:29]
C
I just got a phone call that your brother was found unresponsive.
- [47:32]
A
But what made matters even worse was when he found out he had died in the psychiatric wing covered in sores and bites from bedbugs. The Fulton County ME lists his cause of death as undetermined, but his family claims an infection from the bites led to his death. The pictures of Thompson's dead body covered in bites are graphic. And the pictures of his cell show
- [47:54]
C
the filthy conditions getting the loss was unbearable. Something nobody should see, those type of pictures. They put that man in that cell,
- [48:01]
B
left him there to die. So, Dave, you know, we were talking about, well, you know, why these folks are arrested. This individual was there on misdemeanor simple battery charge and he was housed in the psychiatric wing. And like I said, if you, if you're listening on podcast or on Sirius XM, you need to come to our YouTube channel and check this out because the images there are just unbelievable. And Rachel, correct me if I'm wrong, this was also nafcare, who was responsible for healthcare at the time.
- [48:36]
A
Well, so, yeah, that's my understanding. And I think that what I've learned through my litigation with the county is there's, you know, there's a relationship with their private medical provider. And it's very common for large counties to have outside contracts with medical providers. And NafCare is one of the only ones that, that actually does it. Part of, I think what seems to be the issue is this communicate. There's a lack of communication, a lack of coordination between the county itself that that provides the budget for the sheriff and for the facilities. And then there's like the sheriff's office and then there's the medical provider. But part of the issue is that the building is truly like not, it's not able to serve the needs of the people that are in it. So that's been this kind of big debate is what what are we going to do about, like, all these? And really quick. LaShawn Thompson was in the mental health wing. Part of what I think is a horrible problem in the jail is that there's so many severely mentally ill people who are being held in general population because the psychiatric unit, or whatever they called it, is incredibly small. Like. And so I don't know. I don't know if there's just inadequate staffing, if it's the overcrowding that causes the medical providers to not be able to get to all the patients. But everybody knows that there is a huge problem. And instead of, like, pointing fingers, I'm just like, we all have to come up with a solution now because people are losing limbs and they're dying, being eaten by bedbugs, awaiting their day in court. It's just, it's third World stuff.
- [50:17]
B
Dave, did you ever think we'd be talking about anybody dying from being eaten alive by insects in a jail and there's nothing even being done about it?
- [50:28]
C
I've heard some horror stories, Bill, and so I can't say that I'm totally surprised by these disgusting stories, but the county commission, and this is near you, they did vote back in April to borrow up to $1.3 billion for jail improvements. So, you know, that's supposed to include a special purpose facility and renovations of the existing main jail. So what's going on? I mean, is that happening? So someone's doing something bad. It's just long delayed and long overdue.
- [50:59]
A
Exactly. I'm not better late than never, as they say. Thank God. But in the meantime, the people that are still in that jail, until that other jail is built, we have to do something to make sure that they're getting basic care again. I'm not saying that they need to get, like, you know, you have to get them like, a white, new white robe and change their sheets every day. I'm not. It's not supposed to be a pleasure cruise, but they can't be, like, losing limbs because they can't get access to their medication. They can't be held in solitary confinement as severely mentally ill people. And nobody in the jail realizes that they're severely mentally ill because there is no room to put them in the place that they should be. Which, yes, thank God that it's happening. But in the meantime, these issues are going to continue to arise unless, like, something urgently is done. The DOJ is supposed to be. There's supposed to be a monitor over the whole thing. And I was actually at the south annex, which is another one of their jail facilities last week, and the DOJ was there. I don't know if that was the monitor or what they were looking at, but, you know, there seems to be some sort of oversight even then these things are happening. I mean, this guy.
- [51:59]
B
Well, Speaking of the DOJ, in their. In their report, I'm looking at page 61. This is a. This is a verbatim quote directly from the DOJ's report. They say, quote, the conditions at the jail, including high levels of violence, poor supervision, poor management, and an inadequately maintained facility, unreasonably impede incarcerated people with serious medical and mental health needs from accessing necessary care. Jail officials are aware of the inadequate medical and mental health care in the jail, but have failed to take reasonable measures to improve care. So the DOJ has cited them as being aware of this, Rachel, and they, I guess, have not done anything.
- [52:45]
A
Yeah, and I get. I think that someone who. To those listeners who are thinking, well, like, they're in jail, like, who. Who really cares? I hear you. I do. I really do. Because I think. I understand that in the eyes of many of you, people that are in jail, you know, belong there, and whatever happens to them there is sort of their own fault. I just. I urge you to consider that sometimes once in a while, and if it was somebody in your family, you would be, you know, you'd be feeling like I feel or something. You end up caring about where, like, they are in that jail, and you cannot get them the help that they need. And there's a reason for whatever, an explanation for what they're doing. Even if. Even if you have access to an attorney, the system moves so slow that it isn't going to necessarily get you out faster than you can get your antibiotics. It's just there are people in there who don't deserve that level of depravity. And you can imagine that the Justice Department, you know, they're not investigating every jail in the United States. And so this is like a particularly, you know, horrific, horrific place. And as someone who has never been on the other side of the wall, maybe I should be for things that I've done, but I haven't. You know, I've. I've never been arrested, but I have spent hours and hours and hours in that jail on the other side, unable to, you know, access my clients or see. You know, I wish I could. Could see what was happening, because if I saw somebody being eaten alive by bedbugs, I would do something about it. We can't even bring our cell phones in there, let alone go to the floor. So I don't have. I can't. You know, nobody can really see what's going on behind the wall. And as a result, maybe that's why
- [54:21]
B
they don't want you to have your cell phones in there. But have you ever had them lose one of your clients, Rachel? Because I've heard of many situations, people anecdotally tell me that's going on down there.
- [54:31]
A
Yeah, you know, there's pro. It's. It's. It's funny until it's not, but it's. It's like, you know, they'll. You'll have somebody who's just really not doing their job in booking. So people get booked in, and then there's. It's supposed to, like, pop up where they are, and then someone's supposed to input where they, I think, where they are being housed. And they just don't do it or don't do it fast enough. And people get. People definitely get lost. And now that Fulton county inmates are being housed in several different buildings and facilities, some are even being outsourced to other counties. That makes it even harder for them to keep track of where they go. And so, again, from top to bottom, it's just an absolute. The chaotic mess.
- [55:12]
B
Rachel, before we get to some video and sound, we've got of the Fulton County Sheriff, Pat LeBat, talking about some, I guess, some claimed remedial efforts. You had a case, and I know you can't give us maybe everything because of certain. Maybe aspects of that litigation, but you have a case pending involving a jail, death and medical care, is that right?
- [55:41]
A
I do. So I had a client. It's been so many years, it's crazy. He was my client in 2019. He was a juvenile who was accused of. Of murder. He had, you know, a lot of mental health issues that were known since birth. Long story short is they. He was deemed incompetent by a psychiatrist, sent away to some facility so that they could try him as an adult and restore him to competency. And he received the care that he needed there, like the kind of mental health care that he needed to keep himself safe. And then when he turned 17, we began litigation of his competency. And after two trials, he was ultimately found competent. And so they put him in the Fulton County Jail, and he ended up in general population and lost 65 pounds, stopped taking his medication. Nobody was. I mean, he. He was neglected, and I would. And just abused by having been put in a. An area of the jail that he just really wasn't able to, you know, mentally be there. And he had been sent to, you know, solitary confinement for upwards of, I think, 45 days the night that we believe he hung himself in his cell. But then again, there's, you know, videotape that's missing, and it's just unclear what actually happened to him. But he was not. It was not safe for him to be in general population. They knew it. Everyone should have known it. There was nowhere. Nowhere for him to go because really, what. Clearly what they do in the psychiatric, you know, unit is a problem, too. He would have been eaten alive by bedbugs there. So he was just basically being tortured. And it was during COVID and there were some issues with the medical care that I really can't talk about at this point. However, you can look up Shane Kendall, and there's some information online if you'd like to know a little bit more about him. Our fight is continuing against Fulton county for inadequate funding of the jail because I, you know, when you're actually looking at the root cause of what's going on, I mean, you can have the best doctors in the world, but if they're practicing, you know, in an unsanitary words, I probably can't say here. S hole. I think.
- [57:49]
B
No, we can say.
- [57:50]
A
Get it. Well, yeah, it's. In an unsanitary. I'm pretty sure that, like, they're not going to be able to successfully do their job. And so there's got to be conversations between the medical providers and Fulton County. Everyone's blaming each other and everyone's wanting. I saw there's, you know, asking Sheriff Labat to withdraw. The problem with. I'll say this. The problem with the. The relationship between the sheriff and the county is also really fascinating because the. The county is responsible for adequately funding the jail and the sheriff, you know, in the sheriff's office and their operation of the jail, but they don't really have that much control over when they provide that money to the sheriff, how he spends it. And there seems to be some conflict between certain commissioners and Pat Labat, Sheriff Labat, about the ways in which he's spending his money, which can also, if you look that up, that's kind of interesting because I know there was, like, an ankle monitor or some wrist monitor company. They know that he. I think he paid his wife for some stuff with my. So there's some weird stuff going on there. And so there may be some valid concerns from the commissioners that. That they. That they don't like how he's using their funding. They nonetheless have to provide adequate funding. And they. And arguably the fact that they're providing a billion dollars or they're. They approved the provision of that amount of money to build a new jail. They've been denying, you know, his request for money in, like, the, you know, 10 million square for several years. So if that's not inadequately funding, I don't know what is.
- [59:24]
B
Dave, I got a question for you, because you were the elected prosecutor in Palm beach for quite some time, and so, if you'll put that.
- [59:32]
A
That's why you're so scary. That's why you're so scary, Dave. Oh, my God. I was just. Why is he so serious? I didn't know. I didn't know you were a prosecutor. Okay, okay, I'll shape up.
- [59:39]
C
Oh, but I. He's a.
- [59:40]
B
He's a teddy bear. But look, Dave, responsibility for the elected prosecutor, when you've got this kind of pattern that's clearly emerging here, is there a responsibility by the elected prosecutor to say, hey, you know, does this rise to the level of crime in my jurisdiction? And by the way, we are talking about Fulton District Attorney Fani Willis. Of course. But be that as it may, regardless of who is the person in that office, is there not a responsibility for the elected DA to try to figure out what's going on under that roof, so to speak?
- [60:16]
C
You could impanel a grand jury to investigate those issues. That's what you should do once you have evidence that there are some real problems, like in Mr. Muhammad's case. So that is a real option. Otherwise, the state attorneys or district attorneys, whatever you want to call them, they get the cases vetted from law enforcement. So it comes from law enforcement, and law enforcement is in charge of the jail. And so that's where you need to impanel your own grand jury.
- [60:43]
B
Well, Dave, we've got. We've got one more SOT here. We've got Sheriff Pat Lebanon.
- [60:49]
A
Sure. You don't need. You don't. I don't need a grand jury. I don't need a grand jury. Just talk to some defense attorneys, and I could tell you that if law enforcement gets together with the prosecutor and the sheriff's office and. And the county, who doesn't want to pay that much money, and they're all. They all agree that, like, maybe we could, like, trim the fat off of the amount of people that we arrest and put in this jail, given that it's overcrowded and can't handle it. It wouldn't I don't think that they'd miss. They may miss some revenue, but then people won't die.
- [61:15]
B
We've got the doj. Obviously, there's DOJ that's continuing to look at this. We've got the Georgia Bureau of Investigation looking at it. We've now got the Fulton county commissioners. I guess they're tired of litigating these things or having to foot the bill for it. So they, you know, they're asking Governor Kemp to look into it. And we've got. Well, we've got some people that have compared this to the conditions down at Gitmo and Guantanamo Bay. Here's Sat 8, which is Sheriff Labatt in his response to that comparison.
- [61:49]
A
I was speaking to a criminal defense attorney who compares Fulton County's jail to
- [61:55]
C
Gitmo, and here's why he says that comparison.
- [61:58]
B
He says there are people in Guantanamo
- [62:00]
A
Bay, Gitmo, who have been waiting years for their trial.
- [62:03]
C
Some of them have never been charged. There are similar comparisons to some of your detainees. When you hear that comparison, what goes through your mind? Well, it's unfortunate. It's unfortunate. The county has been in this posture
- [62:17]
B
for years on end, long before I was elected, long before Madam DA was elected.
- [62:21]
C
And so we are on the side
- [62:24]
B
of trying to figure out how to get it done correctly.
- [62:26]
C
And so for us to. To continue create an inmate advocacy unit so that not just the detainee can advocate for themselves, but so we can advocate for those individuals. And it has yield some. Some very good results.
- [62:42]
B
Rachel, have you ever. Are we seeing any results from this advocacy unit, I guess, that he's talking about?
- [62:51]
A
I would. He probably should cite some examples because I actually think that that's. I mean, in the interim, that's not the worst idea in the world. At least people feel like they can get heard through that. I just wonder if, you know, that's a fun thing that they're doing now, but in three months, will someone actually respond when they have something to say? I like to think that Pat Levant means. I mean, he's a nice person every time I've met him, but it's just not a problem to continue to be passed around. This just needs to not happen again. And I don't know if an inmate committee is going to really stop, you know, stop that so.
- [63:24]
B
Well, after Mr. Thompson died of the bedbug infestation, there were a couple of more deaths in the psychiatric unit in the weeks immediately following that. Both were murdered by their cellmate. So there's lots of ways and people continue to die and be killed. And you can chalk some of that up to, you know, jails are just kind of inherently a dangerous place. But the Fulton County Jail seems to stand out. Dave, anything you want to say before we go to our break on this?
- [63:58]
C
No. I want to thank you, Rachel. I thought you were a great guest and I hope you have have you back. Especially you can see what an easygoing prosecutor that I, I am, even though I'm not even a prosecutor anymore.
- [64:10]
B
That's it. Yep. Rachel, thanks so much for joining us. And for everybody else, stay tuned because we're up with our closing argument arguments and our mailbag. Stay tuned. Do you love your pets?
- [64:22]
A
Do you love suspense?
- [64:24]
B
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 quote@lemonade.com pet and get your suspense somewhere else, like from a riveting podcast.
- [64:51]
A
Close your eyes.
- [64:53]
C
Listen to Monday.com feel the sensation of
- [64:56]
B
an AI work platform so flexible and
- [64:59]
C
intuitive it feels like it was built just for you.
- [65:02]
B
Now open your eyes, go to Monday.com, start for free, and finally breathe. Okay, let's talk about an uncomfortable reality. What happens financially to our loved ones once we pass away? We put off thinking about it, but the best thing we can do for our family is to ensure they're not left with the financial burdens of a mortgage, tuition, medical bills, all of it. Fortunately, taking steps to financially protect your family is way, way easier nowadays than it used to be. And that's where Ethos comes in. Ethos makes getting life insurance fast and easy, and it's something you can do 100%. You can get a quote in seconds, apply in minutes, and even get same day coverage. There's no medical exam. All you need to do is just answer a few simple health questions and you can get up to $3 million in coverage. You'll get the lowest rate from their network of trusted carriers with some policies as low as $30 a month. It's no wonder why Ethos has a 4.8 out of 5 stars on Trustpilot with over 4000 reviews. Take 10 minutes to get covered today with life insurance through Ethos. Get your free quote@ethos.com MK that's ethos.com MK Application times may vary. Rates may vary.
- [66:30]
C
Welcome back to the MK True Crime Show. It's now time for our closing segment statements. How about Phil Holloway?
- [66:37]
B
Why don't you go first, Dave? I'm happy to do that and I appreciate everybody listening and watching today. Look, we talked earlier in the show about, you know, wrongful convictions and exonerations and, and sort of, that's, that got me thinking about something that's always bothered me and I've talked about it before on this show. It's, it's junk science. And in this particular case, we have another type of it. For decades, prosecutors have presented microscopic hair comparisons as powerful evidence. Things that really makes an impact with a jury. Basically, an expert would look at a crime scene hair under a microscope and tell the jury that it matched the defendant, or that it could have come only from that person, or it's consistent with that person. And this is the type of stuff that juries really soak it up. But this, folks, this is not science. This is subjective pattern matching with no reliable statistical foundation. And unlike DNA, there is no proof that hair characteristics are unique to one individual. Different examiners, for example, will regularly disagree on the same hair sample. The FBI has admitted this problem. In a review of the FBI's cases, they found erroneous testimony. And get this, 96% of the trials where hair evidence was used to implicate defendants. This is pseudoscience and it's contributed to over 130 documented wrongful convictions, including death sentences. Innocent people have lost decades of their lives because of it. The National Academy of Science has condemned these techniques for lacking scientific validity and standardized protocols. DNA testing from hair is reliable when done properly, but old fashioned microscopic hair analysis simply is not. It has no business in a courtroom in my view, because that's where lives and liberty are on the line. Despite this though, some courts in the US still admit this junk science. Allowing so called experts to refer to hair evidence as consistent with that of a defendant. Even if they can't say it came directly from him, they can say it's consistent with that defendant. This approach runs afoul of federal rule of evidence 403 and similar state rules of evidence, which states basically that any evidence is inadmissible when the probative value, that's the weight of the evidence, that points towards guilt, when the probative value of such evidence is outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice. And I would submit that any wrongful conviction or wrongful prosecution even counts as unfair. So it's Time to finally put an end to the use of this and quite frankly, all junk science from our justice system before more lives are ruined as a result. That's it, Dave. That's my rant for today.
- [69:42]
C
Hey, you made some good points there, Phil, even from a former prosecutor. Well said. And here's my closing statement. In Virginia, we're seeing an aggressive push to classify fentanyl not as a controlled substance, but as a weapon of terrorism. Now, I spent years in the front lines of the opioid epidemic. I was one of the first to investigate Purdue Pharma for their drug OxyContin. And I served as drug czar for the Florida Attorney General. I even wrote a book called Fighting the Florida Shuffle, on sale at a bookstore near you and on Amazon. And that involved fighting against fraud and abuse in the drug treatment industry. Now, I understand the impulse from legislators to try to meet the scale of this tragedy by giving prosecutors the biggest hammer in the toolbox. They want to recognize that fentanyl is a threat to our national stability. Correct. Even the federal government has doubled down on this recently, designating fentanyl as a weapon of mass destruction and labeling the cartels as foreign terrorist organizations. But as a prosecutor or former prosecutor, here's the problem. A good idea in the press release can be a disaster in the courtroom. Usually to prove terrorism, you have to prove a specific intent to intimidate a population or coerce a government. Drug dealers are many things. Monsters, predators, killers. But they are motivated by profits, not politics. And we saw this exact prosecutorial reach fail recently in New York with Luigi Mangione when prosecutors try to slap a terrorism tag on the alleged killer. But a judge dismissed the terrorism charge. Virginia solution is to rewrite the definition of terrorism under Virginia law. They've declared that simply possessing the drug is an act of terrorism itself, regardless of your motive. It bypasses the need to prove a political objective entirely. What could possibly go wrong? But when we stretch a statute to fit a crime that it wasn't designed for, we risk the integrity of the entire system. If a street level dealer is legally the same as a guy plotting to blow up a bridge, then the word terrorism loses its meaning. We don't need creative labeling to push to put these people away for life. We have drug laws for that. Let's punish these dealers for the poison they peddle. But let's not break the legal system just to get a tougher headline. Because if everything is terrorism, eventually nothing is. And that's my closing statement. Phil. It's been great to be on with you today. I want to thank you and I want to thank our guest, Rachel. And I want to thank the audience for being here. Have a great week.
- [72:49]
A
Close your eyes.
- [72:50]
C
Listen to Monday.com feel the sensation of
- [72:54]
B
an AI work platform so flexible and
- [72:56]
C
intuitive it feels like it was built just for you. Now open your eyes.
- [73:01]
B
Go to Monday.com, start for free. And finally, breathe.
- [73:05]
C
Breathe in. Feel the sense of calm that comes from having up to $300 in overdraft protection with GoToBank now.
- [73:12]
B
Did you say $300?
- [73:14]
C
Yes. Now back to our breathing.
- [73:16]
B
So if I overspend my balance, Goto
- [73:18]
C
bank has my back up to $300. Yes. Can we breathe out now? Less worries, more Zen with over $300 in overdraft protection, tap to open an account today. Eligible direct deposits and opt in required for overdraft protection fees. Terms and conditions apply.