← MK True Crime
MK True Crime
Shock Arrest in Dentist Double Murder, Nick Reiner’s Psychiatric Med Switch, and Kohberger’s Former College Sued, with Nancy Grace
01:01:50
MK True Crime hosts Ashleigh Merchant and Phil Holloway join the show to discuss the shocking arrest of Dr. Michael McKee, for the murder of his ex-wife Monique Tepe and her husband Spencer Tepe, if the death penalty could be on the table in Ohio, Mike Tyson allegedly handing Diddy’s request for a pardon to President Trump, what is in Diddy’s appeal filed by his lawyers right before Christmas, Nancy Grace, former prosecutor and host of “Crime Stories with Nancy Grace,” joins Ashleigh and Phil to discuss reports that weight gain led Nick Reiner to switch psychiatric medications right before he allegedly killed his parents, if Alan Jackson could still working behind the scenes to assist Reiner with leaks to the media about his concerning state of mind, the wrongful death lawsuit filed against Washington State University by the families of the victims of Bryan Kohberger, and exclusive insight into Fani Willis’ weak election interference case against Donald Trump and co-defendants. P...
Loading summary
Transcript114 lines
- [00:01]
A
Special Agent Will Trent, ABC Tuesdays, you run from the dark. That's why it chases you. Get out of my house.
- [00:08]
B
The hit series Will Trent is back.
- [00:10]
A
Will, this is a manhunt, not a.
- [00:12]
B
Murder that needs to be solved. And the truth, this man killed my.
- [00:15]
A
Mother and left me to die.
- [00:16]
B
He's out. I think if we don't catch this guy, then he's gonna go off the deep end of control.
- [00:22]
C
They won't even see you coming.
- [00:23]
A
I have to end this.
- [00:25]
B
Will tread. Tuesdays 8, 7 Central on ABC and stream on Hulu.
- [00:30]
D
Cash Flow Crunch Ondeck's small business line of credit gives your business immediate access to funds up to $200,000 right when you need it. Cover seasonal dips, manage payroll, restock inventory or tackle unexpected expenses without missing a beat. With flexible draws, transparent pricing and control over repayment, get funded quickly and confidently. Apply today@ondeck.com funds could be available as soon as tomorrow. Depending on certain loan attributes, your business loan may be issued by Ondeck or Celtic Bank. Ondac does not lend in North Dakota. All loans in amount subject to lender. Approv.
- [01:06]
B
Welcome to MK True Crime. I'm Ashley Merchant. I'm a criminal defense attorney out of Atlanta, Georgia. And here's what's on the docket today, a suspect was finally arrested in the murders of Spencer and Monique Tepe. We'll give you the latest. And Diddy loses his hope of a presidential pardon with an appeal now being his only chance of getting out of jail. We'll bring you up to speed. And Nancy Grace, former prosecutor and host of Crime Stories with Nancy Grace, will join us to discuss a couple things. First, the wrongful death lawsuit filed against the university where Brian Kohberger was a teaching assistant. And the latest in the Nick Reiner case. I'm joined today by my co host Phil Holloway, also a criminal lawyer and a former police officer. So Phil, let's start with the shocking update in the Tepe murders. Just a reminder, this is a Columbo Columbus, Ohio dentist Spencer Tepe and his wife Monique. They were murdered and their bodies were found on December 30. A suspect was arrested and charged just this past weekend. That person's happens to be Monique Tepes ex husband Michael McKee. So let's see what's going on in that case. So Mr. McKee is her ex husband Phil, and he was discharged with murder, which, you know, it seems a little odd to me because they were married quite some time ago. But what happened just to catch everybody up is the couple was Found right before New Year's Eve. They have since arrested the ex husband, Mr. McKee. They were found fatally shot though, outside of Columbus, Ohio. And what's really disturbing, mostly I think, is the fact that they had two young children that were home at the time. They had a one and a four year old. Luckily, those children were not harmed, but they're with a relative, but they were home at the time of these murders. They think it happened overnight. But this suspect, Mr. McKee, has just recently been arrested. He was arrested last Saturday and he's been charged, according to Franklin County Municipal Court, he's been charged with murder, aggravated murder, and he has waived extradition. So he's coming back. He's going to be transferred back to Franklin County, Ohio to face these new charges. So, Phil, this, this extradition decision, he. He waived his extradition. And that means, as you and I know, that he's going to be back in court in Ohio in 30 days. Why would someone want to waive something like this, a hearing like this?
- [03:20]
A
Well, you know, a week ago or so, when I was on this show here with our colleague and co host, Dave Aronberg, we, we talked about the likelihood that this was someone who was likely known to the victims. And of course, everyone's presumed to be innocent until they're proven guilty. But the police have arrested someone nevertheless who they believe, and they say they have probable cause to believe committed these murders. And yes, it is someone known to the victims. There was no forced entry, There was no injury to anybody but these two victims. Like you said, the small children were left unharmed and there was nothing stolen that was obvious to investigators. So doing the math, we all can kind of reasonably conclude this was someone who targeted these individuals. And to your question about waiving extradition, you know, look, when you commit a crime in one state and you leave to go to another state, you've got to go through this interstate extradition process. Now, you can fight extradition. You, if you believe that somehow the case may be illegal against you or something like that, there is a mechanism to fight it, but it's almost always futile. I've been doing this a long time, actually. I know you have too. And I can't remember a case that I've ever been associated with where anyone fought extradition and did so successfully. There's an interstate compact that all the states basically have signed onto. And so if you fight extradition, then what happens to the governors of the two states get together and you go through what's called the governor's warrant process? So you're going. It's just a matter of time. And so if you want to get to the destination, which is the jurisdiction that has you charged, so you can get on with your case, a lot of time, the lawyers will just say, go ahead and waive extradition. All it does to fight it is to delay things unnecessarily. So. So almost always these things are waived.
- [05:19]
B
Yeah, I used to, you know, it's ironic, I used to do those at the Public Defender over 20 years ago, I think all duty public defenders, and we would call them that. When you had kind of the jobs that nobody really wanted, but you were stuck doing them, we would do the extradition hearings. And I remember always explaining to my clients, you know, do you really want the government to put you in a bus, essentially a prison bus, and transport you slowly but surely stopping overnight? It's like a bad Greyhound stopping overnight at prisons all along the way, jails all along the way, you know, just to finally get to where you're going, where you could just go a lot faster. And, yeah, you definitely just want to get there. And a lot of folks don't really understand. He, you know, he pled guilty at that. But that public defender doesn't know anything about the case. That's not really indicative of, you know, what he's going to do in the future. You know, I'm very curious, though, what evidence they've got. And I thought this was really interesting. You know, I read in Ohio, I thought this was really interesting, because it's not like that here in Georgia. A grand jury cannot indict someone. They can't even consider the charges unless that person's within the state.
- [06:18]
A
Yeah, so what they do. Oh, sorry, go ahead. Yeah, they get. They get an arrest warrant or they file something, you know, like a criminal complaint filed by a prosecutor, which essentially gets the case going in Ohio. And then they go through the extradition process. And as you mentioned, that even if you waive extradition, I think they still have to. Unless there's special arrangements made where a. A sheriff's deputy or some law enforcement officer physically goes and, you know, does it personally. The standard extradition process that most people go through is extremely unpleasant. If you're just somebody committing a more ordinary, should we say, crime and you get extradited, it's usually a private company that does it. And you're chained on a metal seat to a small bus or a van. And that van or bus will stop at all kinds of little jails along the way. Let's Say you're going from California to Kentucky. That's a long way. It might take you a few weeks because they make many, many stops along the way. It is an extremely unpleasant procedure and process. So I think waving it and getting on with it and getting to your destination and maybe having maybe the sheriff's deputies in Ohio will make that trip and just bring him straight there, that would be more, more, more, I guess, amenable to, to someone's general comfort. But as to your question about the evidence in this case, you know, it's all going to boil down to the video, right? We have a, we have a video, I think, of the. A person they say is a person of interest. We're going to have to determine if that is, in fact the accused killer. And then, of course, they say they have the defendant's car near the scene at the time. And, you know, if I can just listen, we have a sot. One is Johnna, John Spielberg, our colleague here at MK True Crime on Monday show. Sorry, Wednesday show. She said something like, this could be a love triangle if we could play slot one.
- [08:19]
B
What the hell happened here? Okay, final answer.
- [08:23]
E
This is it.
- [08:24]
A
This is.
- [08:24]
E
And then we're going to compare the.
- [08:26]
B
Tape and we'll see. All right, here's what could have happened.
- [08:29]
A
Find out. We're going to. We're going to hear what you have to say. What's your prediction?
- [08:31]
B
This is my total supposition. No additional facts.
- [08:35]
C
Just have to make it up, pull it out.
- [08:37]
B
Thin air.
- [08:38]
A
Let's go.
- [08:38]
B
There had to be some sort of love triangle.
- [08:41]
A
Oh.
- [08:42]
C
With the three of them, the husband, the wife and another person who got upset, very upset with the husband.
- [08:48]
B
That's why there are more bullet holes in the husband than in the wife.
- [08:52]
C
Couldn't leave any witnesses, shoot the wife, don't want to harm the kids, out I go. That's it.
- [09:01]
B
Yeah. You know. Okay. So, Phil, the thing that really kind of made me start thinking was that her family. So Monique, the ex wife of the person charged, Mr. McAfee is charged. Her family said that this arrest did not surprise them. You know, they've been divorced for a decade. They don't live in the same states. He's a vascular surgeon. He is a smart guy. Why did this not surprise them? And they said they didn't want to say anything. They didn't want to come out and say it and like jinx it or give something away, but they did not believe or they, they thought that he was going to be a suspect. Like, that's very Telling. Has this guy been stalking her? Like, what is going on here?
- [09:38]
A
You know, that's. That's an excellent question, and I misspoke. It was actually on Friday's show. It was Jonna that made that prediction, and Johnna May wound up being correct. Maybe it was a love triangle. Maybe there was still something going on here, romantically or otherwise, sexually. Or it could just be garden variety jealousy. Right. But the thing is, as you mentioned, they. She filed for divorce against him in 2017. We're sitting here in January 2026 talking about this. And they were only married for, I think, a few months. Right. It was not. It was not all that long. And that they lived together as husband.
- [10:17]
B
Two years, I think. Yeah, not long.
- [10:19]
A
And they had no children. And normally what we would see is people with no children and they didn't have a lot of assets, according to the divorce papers. Those things were all very, very small kinds of issues in the case. The divorce went quickly. There was no apparent reason for Michael McKee, the ex husband, Dr. McKee, to be sort of back in her life. Like I said, no kids together or anything like that. So we really need to know what is the ongoing current connection between Dr. Michael McKee and the two Tepe victims in the case, particularly the wife. But if you remember the evidence that has been released by police, Dr. Tepe was the dentist. Right. He was shot multiple times. The wife, the ex wife of Michael McKee, was shot one time, which without any other information, would lead me to suspect that maybe Dr. Tepe, the dentist, her current husband, was the intended victim. And maybe she was an afterthought because she was a witness that saw something. So we have, at this point, more information. But the information that we have, unfortunately raises more questions than it does give us answers.
- [11:31]
B
Yeah, but that video is. I mean, if that's him in that video, that's got to be very damaging, particularly the fact that they've traced his car. I mean, I think that's going to be really hard to get around now. They're just going to be looking for motive. You know, what we've learned is that they traced his car from the scene all the way back to where he lives now. And so that's how they linked him to this murder. You know, I am curious, though. How did he get in the house? You know, no evidence of breaking and entering. They've got two small kids. They're home alone. It's the middle of the night. That's kind of suspicious to me, you know, and I mean, Ohio is A death penalty state, could he face the death penalty? I guess that's the next thing that we've got to kind of see what happens.
- [12:08]
A
Well, we've seen this in other cases, the question about the death penalty and in all states that have the death penalty, it requires something that we would just call special circumstances. And ordinarily, a multiple or double homicide in and of itself would be enough. We've talked about that in the case of the Rob Reiner and his wife that were killed, and we're going to talk about that later in the show as well. But that was a case where it would qualify as well because it was a double homicide. Now, that being said, this particular jurisdiction in Ohio is not known for seeking the death penalty that, that frequently. So it's going to be a question for the prosecutor. And also we know that another distinction in Ohio law is the grand jury has to essentially draft the indictment in a way such that the death penalty is on the table. Other states, it's done where the district attorney files just a note of notice of intent. And it doesn't necessarily change the wording of the indictment. But to your question or your point, a few minutes ago, Ashley, the family saying that they all expected it. I want to know why. I want to know why they expected it. Did they know that there was some ongoing relationship between the defendant and the victims in this case? What is it about this divorce that is almost a decade ago, Right. What is it about this that that makes them suspect it was the ex husband? That's a big mystery to me.
- [13:36]
B
That's a big mystery. And the fact that he's not remarried. We haven't heard anything about another relationship. You know, he's moved around a little bit. I mean, he's a surgeon, so he's smart. But that is, that is a big mystery. I think that's going to be really the key to, to the motive and some answers in this case.
- [13:52]
D
Need to restock inventory, cover seasonal dips, or manage payroll. On Deck's small business line of credit provides immediate access to funds up to $200,000 when your business needs it. With flexible draws, transparent pricing and full control over repayment, you can tackle unexpected expenses without missing a beat. Apply today@ondeck.com and funds could be available as soon as tomorrow. Depending on certain loan attributes, your business loan may be issued by Ondeck or Celtic Bank On Deck does not lend in North Dakota. All loans and amounts subject to lender approval.
- [14:22]
F
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.
- [14:52]
E
You've watched the GLP1 craze explode. Friends, celebrities, everyone's talking about it. And yes, the results can be impressive. But if you are looking for a safe, effective, natural alternative that's needle free, consider Verasity. Verasity was founded by a certified hormonal health coach dedicated to creating holistic solutions for metabolic health. Their signature formula, Metabolism Ignite, is a unique blend of hibiscus extracts, green coffee bean extract, magnesium and more. It's caffeine free. And Veracity says clinical trials showed no negative side effects from these wholesome ingredients. They say Ignite is the number one doctor recommended natural GLP1 alternative and booster. And they say it's safe for people already on GLP1 meds and even for new moms who are pregnant or breastfeeding. So consider GLP1 benefits the natural way. Head to VerasityHealth Co and use code MEGAN for up to 45% off your order. Once again, that's VerasityHealth CO. You don't put in the extra M there for up to 45% off promo code Megan. So they know we sent you.
- [16:02]
B
So I want to move to Diddy. One of our favorite suspects, One of our favorite suspects, one of our favorite topics here. So I thought this was really interesting. Apparently Diddy is really good friends with Mike Tyson. Who knew? Yeah, I didn't know that. And so he asked Mike Tyson to personally deliver a letter for him, for Diddy to Donald Trump, begging for a pardon. So this was kind of a surprise method to get to the president for a pardon. Normally I think you'd hire a lawyer and go that route, but maybe his lawyers weren't willing to do it. I don't know. But so anyway, what happened was Mike Tyson had a meeting with the President at the White House back in November, and apparently he was asked to take this letter and hand deliver it. President Trump said, what is this? And said, well, did he ask me to do this? Mike admitted he was feeling nervous about it, which you Know, I think that's, that makes a lot of sense. But he agreed to take it, and I'm sure he was pressured. You know, hey, hey, man, this is my only chance. I'm sure there was a lot of pressure. I know you get those jail calls like I get. There's a lot of pressure from someone who's in jail. Apparently, the president did not take the bait. So he says he is not gonna charge, he's not going to grant the pardon. Let me be honest. Does that surprise you at all, Phil?
- [17:13]
A
No, I'm, look, I'm not surprised at all that Diddy would use a, another sex offender in Mike Tyson to try to deliver, try to deliver a personal appeal to the president. Look, Donald Trump certainly knows how to pardon people. He's done it a lot in his second term. He's also said, though, that this isn't one. He's going to let the courts kind of, you know, do their thing and let that run its course. The sentence, though, that Mike, excuse me, that Diddy got under this indictment in this case, it's, it's longer than the lawyers wanted. In fact, part of their appeal, they're saying that, look, the judge was essentially the 13th juror, and the judge is punishing him, Diddy, for things that maybe he was acquitted of. But here's the thing, actually, and you know this, if a judge grants a sentence that may be longer than the people involved in the case expect, longer than the lawyers and the defendant expect, but it's still within the statutory range of what a permissible sentence is. That judge has almost unfettered discretion in that area. So I don't see this appeal, by the way, which was filed, was it last month in December, 2025. I don't see this appeal getting any traction, at least not on that basis. It just doesn't seem to make sense to complain that the judge gave a sentence that was well within the statutory range.
- [18:43]
B
Yeah, you know, I agree. The sentence, I think he's, he's kind of stuck with that sentence. And I mean, it's 2026. He gets out, what, in 2028. That's if he's on good behavior. That's not insane. That's really not insane. But what was interesting about this appeal, and I don't think we've talked about it on the show before, but so right around the holidays, I believe it was right before Christmas, December 23, his lawyers filed this appeal. And this is normal, you know, for our viewers, anytime you, you lose a count at trial, you're going to file an appeal. Why not? Why would you not? And there's a lot of stuff that they argued during that they want to bring up and they want to raise. But some of these, some of these things out of their brief were interesting. They said that Mr. Combs was paying for a voyeuristic experience rather than engaging in prostitution. And they argued that the law should be limited to situations in which a paying customer engages in sex. Now, this is my favorite part. They also said that these encounters were protected by the First Amendment because they were often filmed, asserting that they amounted to highly choreographed performances involving costumes, lighting and other staged effects.
- [19:47]
A
Yeah, he's saying it's pornography. He's saying that. He's saying that he was paying essentially to watch the production of pornography, which falls outside of most definitions of prostitution, even though there is money that changes hands and sex is performed. So that's certainly an interesting read. But here's the thing. You mentioned that even with this longer than expected, longer than he wanted sentence, actually, he's not going to be. He's not going to be in there all that long. And certainly not long enough, in my view, for this appeal to run its course.
- [20:20]
B
Right.
- [20:20]
A
The appeals will be still pending by the time he does get out. Now, look, you mentioned that good behavior. Hasn't he already had one instance where he was not on good behavior and therefore got his release date extended just a little?
- [20:37]
B
I think he had jail juice, you know, AKA jail wine, which don't even.
- [20:40]
A
Get me started on.
- [20:41]
B
Oh, it just makes me want to.
- [20:42]
A
We talked about it here on the show at mk. True Crown folks can go back and check out that particular episode. But yeah, he was. He was making homemade hooch in the toilet at the jail.
- [20:51]
B
Basically rot fruit in your toilet.
- [20:54]
A
And it cost him, what, a few months added on to the time that he's expected to serve?
- [20:59]
B
Yeah, so, I mean, that's, that's the problem. You know, on good behavior, it could get out, but it doesn't sound like we're really working there. But I think it's possible. And I think you're completely right. I think he may be out before this appeal runs its course, but I still think he's going to pursue it. Another interesting thing, I'm not sure. I mean, I don't really think he needs the money, but he sold his black matte private jet and Black matte, it apparently was custom. It's matte. It's got a lovely interior. The whole thing was custom. It's between 15 and $30 million it was built in 2015. It seats up to 14 people. Apparently, this was a big deal to him, but he has sold it. So, you know, normally I would think, well, maybe that means that he is worried about finances, because we have talked about all the different lawsuits he's got, probably in the hundreds now of different lawsuits where people are suing him for things. And he's probably got to pay for those lawyers. We're not cheap. I wonder other reasons why he might have wanted to sell it. Maybe it's related to a case somewhere, maybe. And he was worried it might be seized at some point. Who knows?
- [22:02]
A
Look, as a pilot, I've been flying since I was 16 years old, and I love airplanes.
- [22:07]
B
You want this one? You're going to go, well, this is.
- [22:09]
A
A beautiful, beautiful airplane. But now, look, even if I were in the market for this jet, which I'm not, look, I think that any buyer is. Would have to basically tear it down to the studs and rebuild it just for disinfectant purposes, just to be sure. It's just the kind of thing that would feel to me to be gross under the circumstances. Because, you want to know, it's like the Epstein plane. What happened in that plane, right? And even if nothing happened in that plane, you're just going to wonder in your mind, okay, what in the world has happened in the seat that I'm sitting on? Do I need to get out the Lysol or what do I need to do? So it just seems like one of the things where it makes it less than completely marketable. But there's somebody out there that will buy that plane. So we'll see.
- [22:56]
B
Well, mark my words, let's see if this comes to fruition. But when I heard it, I thought, is he trying to avoid forfeiture of the plane? You know, I mean, I don't know if they're proceeding with any forfeiture actions in any of his different various cases. But I wonder if what you're saying is true and he performed sex acts on this plane. It could be an instrumentality of a crime, and the federal government could be trying to take it.
- [23:15]
A
I just raised the question. I'm not accusing anybody of anything. I'm just saying that if I were in the market to purchase such a plane, I might look for one that was not owned by Diddy Prior. That's all. I'll leave it there.
- [23:28]
B
Oh, I would as well. Well, we'll see. Mark our words, if it comes up, we can say we called it first.
- [23:33]
A
But he has. He has entered a drug rehab program now and drug and alcohol program in, in prison. And he's, he might be able to shave off a little time with that. I think after the toilet hooch incident where he's, you know, making the wine in the, in the toilet with, was it grapes or raisins or something? You know, after that he realized that his behavior in jail can in fact lengthen his stay. And so maybe he's trying to turn that around and behave in a more appropriate way. Not going to be enough, though, to win a pardon from the president.
- [24:07]
B
No, I really, I really hope he does. I hope he takes it seriously. I hope he really does get rehabilitated and comes out a better person and can put this beyond him. And I don't want anybody in prison. So I hope he gets out as soon as possible. Well, next we've got Nancy Grace. She's joining us to discuss the latest in the Nick Griner case. And there's more. Stay tuned.
- [24:27]
D
Cash flow Crunch on Deck's small business line of credit gives your business immediate access to funds up to $200,000 right when you need it. Cover seasonal dips, manage payroll, restock inventory or tackle unexpected expenses without missing a beat. With flexible draws, transparent pricing and control over repayment, get funded quickly and confidently. Apply today@ondeck.com funds could be available as soon as tomorrow. Depending on certain loan attributes. Your business loan may be issued by Ondeck or Celtic Bank. Ondac does not lend in North Dakota. All loans in amount subject to lender approval.
- [24:57]
F
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 yell drop it, it's open.
- [25:28]
E
Enrollment time, the time when some health insurance companies hope you will blindly sign up for overpriced premiums and confusing fine print. Don't fall for it. Consider taking control of your healthcare with crowd health, the alternative for people who make their own decisions. Crowd health is a community where members fund each other's medical bills directly. No middlemen, no networks, no nonsense for under $100 a month. You get access to bill negotiators, low cost prescriptions, lab testing tools and a database of vetted doctors. If something major happens, you pay the first 500 bucks and then the crowd steps in to help with the rest. And with ACA subsidies, expiring prices could be going up. And Crowd Health members have already saved over 40 million by refusing to overpay this open enrollment. Take your power back. Consider joining Crowd Health to get started today for 99 bucks for your first three months using the code MK True Crime at joincrowdhealth.com that's joincrowdhealth.com code MK True Crime. Crowd health is not insurance. They say opt out. Take your power back.
- [26:32]
A
All right. Welcome back to MK True Crime. We have new reports out of California that there was a specific reason Nick Reiner may have switched his psychiatric medication right before he's alleged to have murdered his parents, Rob and Michelle Reiner. We'll discuss that and more with our next guest. We have former prosecutor and host of Crime Stories with Nancy Grace. Welcome to the program, Nancy Grace. How are you today?
- [27:01]
C
Thank you so much for inviting me. I heard what you said, Phil, and let's just break that down. What they are saying is that Hollywood fears of gaining weight somehow triggered the double murders of Rob and Michelle Reiner. The theory is ludicrous, but what they're saying is that Reiner was concerned about weight gain on his medication, that doctors switched his medication and that switch out made him schizophrenic or exacerbated his schizophrenia. I would like to point out that use of methamphetamines. Meth. A meth head acts much like someone who is schizophrenic. So if it turns out that he, Nick Reiner, was addicted to meth or using meth, that equals voluntary use of drugs, which is not a defense under the law. I'm very curious. What, if anything, his blood revealed at the time of his arrest?
- [28:14]
A
Do you think, Nancy, that they're going to have a search warrant for that blood? Are we going to be able to get that information? Is that part of what you would expect law enforcement to do as part of their investigation? Because you're, you're absolutely right. Voluntary intoxication is not a defense. But you know, the defense is going to use it as best they can, even if it's just for mitigation.
- [28:39]
C
If they haven't already done his, taken his blood by now, that ship has sailed. That cow is out of the barn. What matters is the content of his blood at the time of the incident. If there was, for instance, methamphetamine in his blood, still in his blood when he was arrested, that goes a long way in showing that his outburst, his murderous rampage, allegedly was because of drugs, not because of a medical dish. Medical condition like schizophrenia. And another thing, a mental defect or insanity goes to your ability to create or form premeditation. Right? Let's look at his acts leading up to the alleged murders. I use this argument a lot when I am prosecuting or investigating a vehicular homicide, a DUI homicide, which people insist on calling a tragic accident. It is no accident. That person went to a bar, drank, then got the keys to their car, walked to their car, cranked it up, put it in reverse and drove out onto the street. That happened. All of those are intentional acts compared to what happened here. Nick Reiner reportedly argues with his parents at Conan o' Brien's party. They come home, he's angry, it's simmering. He walks from his pool house where he lives for free, rating his parents sub zero whenever he feels like it. Walks into their home. Step one, obtains a weapon, a knife. Step two, goes into their bedroom. Step three, identifies them as targets. Step four, they are stabbed multiple times. Their throats are slit. You know that under the law, it only takes the time for you to raise the gun and pull the trigger to form intent or premeditation. We have all of these acts leading up to the murders showing intent. Wait, there's more. As they say on the commercials. He then leaves the home, packs his clothes to go to a hotel. An ocean view, I might add. Gets rid of the murder weapon. Like Brian Kohberger. Cops still haven't found it. He's actually outsmarted them. Checks in under his own name, uses his identification, makes his way to the room, gets in there and goes, wow, I'm covered in blood. Takes a shower, changes clothes, washes his hair and says, whoa, I'm hungry and thirsty. Goes to a 711 and gets a cold beverage and pays for it. When he's arrested, nobody says a word. He knows he raises his hands. All that shows intent. And I think it's very powerful to show he was not functioning under some sort of a psychosis.
- [31:36]
A
Yeah, and I agree with you. It shows this consciousness of guilt, particularly the things that he did, you know, after the alleged murders. And that's just part of it, because he's also going to be exploring, I'm sure. And I'm sure I want to hear your take on this as well, the idea that maybe he's not competent to stand trial. Because now we're hearing, Nancy, we're hearing that he knows that he killed his parents, but he doesn't understand why he's in jail. Is this something that is a part of the. Maybe the prior defense team that has now left the case? Is this a seed that. That they planted? Where is this coming from? And where do you see this idea going that he doesn't understand why he's in jail?
- [32:21]
C
Phil, I just want to make clear I like you and I respect you. But you know who you just reminded me of? My son, John David, when He was about 7. He's in the back seat. I'm bringing him home from pre K. And he goes, guess what I heard? I'm like, what did you hear, John David? He goes, I heard Ms. Cartwright hands out candy in the reading circle. I say, where'd you hear that? He goes, I heard it on the playground. So where are you hearing this? Whoa. Think about it. Who has access to Nick Reiner right now? His family. They're not visiting because he murdered their parents. A spiritual guidance counselor hadn't heard anything about a priest, a rabbi. Nobody's coming to visit. So who else? Let's see.
- [33:09]
B
Think, think, think. Ye, think.
- [33:11]
C
Oh, his defense team, they are leaking dribbles and drops to us to taint a jury pool, unable to aid his defense. That is the standard for incompetence to stand trial. It's not, were you insane at the time of the incident? It's, are you able to help your lawyer formulate your defense and execute it at the time of trial? Did you see him walk into the courtroom when Jackson jumped ship, when he couldn't get paid all those millions of dollars he wanted? Reiner walks in the courtroom, looks around and spots Kimberly Green in the mix. Is like, hey, yes, he knows who his new lawyer is. He knows what's happening. He knows what's happening in the courtroom around him. Yes, he is able to aid his lawyers that speak bs. I don't know where you heard that. I guess you've been hanging out on the playground, Phil.
- [34:07]
A
Well, now, TMZ was reporting that sources with direct knowledge of the situation are leaking that to them. The source of the leak. And that's open to suggestion. Yeah.
- [34:17]
C
My friend Harvey Levin now knows everything that's going on. Who do you think told him that? The defense. That's what you want. They want us to. To think. Look, they can argue till they're blue in the face. Maybe a California jury will Buy into it. But I am telling you, I have watched that video of Nick Reiner in the 7:11 over and over and over. And there's going to be more video of him checking himself into a hotel. And as you mentioned earlier correctly, the law is a jury can consider what happened before, during and after the incident. And they will see all this video. And you know what else I bet they're going to see? Remember in the Charlie Kirk shooting, the defendant, the suspect was spotted on cam, ring cam surveillance video walking through that neighborhood right after the shooting. Calm as a cucumber, making his escape, blending in. I bet they're going to have that kind of video all through the Reiner neighborhood and follow him to that hotel. Hey, did he take an Uber? Did he take a cab? I can't wait to hear this. They're going to see him checking in. They're going to see him walking to his room. They're going to see him functioning normally and even getting rid of their murder weapon still hasn't been found.
- [35:32]
A
You know, this is obviously a case that we're all going to be talking about and following for many, many more months to come. While we've got you and before we let you go and bring back in my co host, Ashley Merchant, I want to switch gears and speak with you about the Bryan Coburger case. I know that you.
- [35:52]
C
Oh, dear Lord in heaven, why won't he go away?
- [35:55]
A
Well, for those of our audience who may not be familiar, his family has. Not his family, I apologize. The family of the victims have sued Washington State University for wrongful death. Now, I'm interested to hear your take on it. But look, they are claiming that he exhibited signs that should have put the school on notice that he was a danger to others and that therefore they are liable civilly for the wrongful death of the four students. So I'm very curious, Nancy, to hear your take on that lawsuit.
- [36:31]
C
You know, you ought to be a lawyer. The way you just said that he exhibited signs he stalked women at wsu, Washington State University. Hey, one more thing about Reiner. I don't want Reiner. If he's mentally incompetent or he is psychotic or schizophrenic to be in a general population, they'll tear him to pieces. I don't want that. I want the truth. I want the truth. If he is mentally ill, put him in a mentally ill, a hospital for the mentally ill and keep him there. Take care of him. Just get him out of society so he doesn't hurt anybody else. That's how I feel about that. And I don't. I want that clear. I don't want him in GP general population if he's mentally ill. Now, Brian Kohberger. Hello. Yes. Washington State University had 13 formal complaints by women about Co Burger's behavior. Did you know, according to this lawsuit, the families of the Idaho victims. Just saying that. I can't even imagine. I'm about to send my children away to college and all I keep thinking about is Bryan Kohberger. That said, do you know that some of the women that had to deal with Kohberger actually wanted escorts to their cars? They were so afraid of him. Yes, they were on notice. Can't you just see a bunch of professors? I'm not inferring that they're all eggheads and don't live in the real world and they're stuck in their ivory towers. I didn't say that, but they were talking about having an intervention. Really? Get on it. A day late and a dollar short. So in December, they fire him. Finally. But it's too late. December, my rear end. The murders happened in November. They sat on their thumbs and did nothing. Just think about it. What if they had fired him in a timely manner and he had to pack up his bags and go home to mommy and daddy in the Poconos? Those four students would still be alive. You know what? If I were still practicing, I would jump on this case.
- [38:39]
A
Well, Nancy Grace, thank you so very much for being with us here today on MK True Crime. I know you've got to run. We really appreciate it. Look, to see you back here very soon. I want to bring back in, if I can, my co host, Ashley Merchant, because I want to get her input on this conversation just a little bit about these two cases. Ashley, can you go ahead and give me what you would do if you were bringing this lawsuit against the university in connection with the Brian Kohberger case? What would be your argument? How are you going to prove that there's enough. What we say causation. Right. That would. That would put them on the hook legally so that they have to pay some kind of a judgment. How do you connect those dots?
- [39:27]
B
You know, it's funny that you brought up causation, because in my notes, when I was reviewing everything and reviewing the lawsuit, I literally wrote in large font causation issue. I think that's going to be their biggest issue, whether or not there is a causation link. And basically what they said in their. In their complaint is as a result of the university's actions and failures. The complaint states four young college students were brutally murdered. I think they're going to have a hard time showing that as a result. But what I would do if I was representing the families is I would bring every single victim, potential victim in. I would bring in all those police reports. And what I would try to do is show a pattern, show that this university had heard multiple reports and as we just heard Nancy say, you know, very upsetting reports. And I would try to invoke in families this fear like Nancy was talking about. You know, I'm getting ready to send my daughter off to college. You're getting ready to send your child off to college. This is a very real fear. I mean, I went to University of Florida back in the Danny Rollins days. I mean, this has always been a fear for parents going off. And if you can tap into that, you're going to get a lot of jurors that share in this fear and that will demand that this university is held accountable. Because really, when we send our kids off to college, they need to be protected, they need to be safe. And so I think tapping into those jurors emotions on that is going to be a key strategy for the plaintiff.
- [40:46]
A
Well, these plaintiffs obviously are very sympathetic. Right. And they, if there's anybody that you would want to succeed in a civil lawsuit, you know, it's them. But if you take the emotion out of it and look at it as a lawyer will do. Right. You have to decide, is there enough to prove causation, the, the missteps, if any, that were made by the university. If those things could be directly linked, then you can have liability. But if there's too tenuous of a connection or if it's too speculative, then the law will not allow a recovery. We'll continue to watch that here at MK True Crime and bring you the developments as they occur. Again, thanks to our guest in this particular block, Nancy Grayson. Thanks, Ashley. And when we get back, we are going to have a very special segment for you. We're going to pick Ashley's brain. She's going to spill the beans and give us the inside scoop on Fulton County District attorney. Finally, Willis, you do not want to miss this. Stand by. We'll be right back.
- [41:54]
D
Cash flow Crunch on Deck's small business line of credit gives your business immediate access to funds up to $200,000 right when you need it. Cover seasonal dips, manage payroll, restock inventory or tackle unexpected expenses without missing a beat. With flexible draws, transparent pricing and control over repayment. Get funded quickly and confidently. Apply today at OnDeck.com, funds could be available as soon as tomorrow. Depending on certain loan attributes, your business loan may be issued by Ondeck or Celtic Bank. Ondac does not lend in North Dakota. All loans an amount subject to lender approval.
- [42:24]
F
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.
- [42:55]
E
A new year means new financial goals, like making sure your savings are secure and diversified. Will this be the year you decide to talk to someone from Birchgold Group? They use an educational approach with a deep understanding of macroeconomics. There are forces pushing the dollar lower and gold higher, which is why they believe every American should own physical gold. So under until July 30, not July, January until January 30. If you're a first time gold buyer, Birchgold is offering a rebate of up to $10,000 on qualifying purchases. To claim eligibility and start the process, you just text MK to the number 989898. Birch Gold can help you roll an existing IRA or 401 into an IRA in gold and you are still eligible for a rebate of up to 10 grand. Consider making right now your first time to buy gold and take advantage of a rebate up to $10,000 when you buy before January 30th. Text MK to the number 989898. Claim your eligibility today. Again, text MK to 989898.
- [44:01]
A
All right, welcome back to MK True Crime. Look, this is a very special segment that we've kind of been wanting to do for a while, but for those of you who aren't aware, there was this case in Fulton County, Georgia where Fulton DA Fani Willis indicted Donald Trump when he was former president along with a host of other individuals. She charged them under Georgia's racketeering law, among other things. And Ashley Merchant, who is my co host and good friend here. Here in in real life, we're good friends but co hosts obviously here on the show. Ashley was the Aaron Brockovich of the whole thing and ultimately led to the dismissal of this historic criminal action. Ashley, for those of our audience who might not know, please share with, with them who we're talking about and what this is all about. Set it up for us. And when you do, I'm going to move into a question from a, an audience member directly for you.
- [45:00]
B
Yeah, no, I'm happy to. So, Phil, I represented a gentleman named Michael Roman. And Mike Roman was essentially the election, one of the election workers. He was the campaign day to day person getting things from point A to point B, you know, some type of a campaign manager I guess you could call him. But really how I like to describe it is he was logistics. If someone needed to know which room they needed to go to, he would send them there. If someone needed a poll worker, if someone needed something, he would send that out. So, you know, he had a lot of day to day coordination with different members of the campaign, different electors, you know, different elected officials, all these different folks. And he was part of this broad indictment brought by Fani Willis. If you don't know Fani, then you can just Google and you will find out exactly what's going on. But this really broad indictment that really was trying to reach President Trump, let's be honest, that's what it was really trying to do. It was trying to reach President Trump, trying to reach his chief of staff, trying to reach some of the DOJ lawyers, trying to reach some people that I think certain members of different parties might have really wanted to reach. And I always like to say that my client just sort of got caught up in all of it. And before we go to the, you know, the question, one thing I always like to point out is there was a special purpose grand jury that investigated all this and my client was the only person that they did not recommend indicting. So, you know, I'll get into that a little bit when I talk about the facts in a minute. But I know you said you had a question from a viewer. Yeah.
- [46:22]
A
And it's important to, before we do that, it's important to sort of set the stage here. There was a gag order, right, Ashley, that prevented you from having the discussion we're having now that prohibited you from talking about a lot of the specifics and the case evidence. Right.
- [46:39]
B
So, yes, yes.
- [46:40]
A
That gag order has now been lifted, is that right?
- [46:42]
B
It has. So, yeah. So it's interesting. And so now that you mentioned that, I kind of want to just walk through, if you don't mind, and we can hold on the question, I'll kind of walk through what happened in this case and how we got to the gag order, because I think it's important. So you and I have talked about this a lot, but this is a very different type of prosecution, and you could see it from the very beginning. And I think it's kind of helpful to sort of walk the listeners through what happened. So we are in the courthouse every day. We're criminal defense lawyers. We're in and out. I was actually in the middle of a jury trial in Fulton county when I took the case on of Mike Roman and, you know, Fawnie Willis. Normally when our clients are. There's an arrest warrant for them. You know, maybe a cop will call us, maybe they'll get stopped on the side of the road. Maybe you'll get a professional courtesy call, something like that. Now, what happened in this case was Fani Willis goes on national TV and holds a press conference to say, hey, all of you guys are indicted, and you have until next Friday to turn yourselves in. Have your lawyers call me. Unprecedented. That never happens. So, of course, you know, everybody's talking, and I've got to get on the phone. I work out a. I work out a deal for bond, for essentially, bond. And, you know, another interesting fact about this is that meant that everybody was going to have to go to the Fulton County Jail. For those of you that don't follow, just Google Fulton County Jail. This is the place that a man literally was eaten to death by bedbugs recently. So, you know, not exactly the place that you want your client turning themselves in. So, you know, we're. We're working through this. We've got to get a bond, and just to kind of set the stage, you know, we're in court. We're normally, you know, signing things on the back of a pad. All this stuff. I mean, just things are happening quickly. Well, in this case, I was told I had to go over and actually meet with the prosecutors to sign this bond order, this consent bond, which, you know, that's a little surprising. I'm in the middle of a jury trial. Why can't you just sign it on my behalf? But I do it at a lunch break. I go over, I'm taken into a room. You know, Ms. Willis has redecorated the entire district attorney's office, and I'm taken into her private office to wait, told I'm going to be given an escort. I have an escort. Take me to a whole nother building. So not the DA's office, actually, take me to a whole nother government building, where I later learned they held other press conferences. But it is this huge auditorium, and this is just. This is so abnormal. And you know that, Phil.
- [48:58]
A
Yeah. Well, can I. Before. Let me interrupt you just for a second to expand on that. Just a minute. Talk about how abnormal it was. This was during and right on the heels of the COVID pandemic. Right. So during that time and even before that time, it was customary. You mentioned consent bonds.
- [49:16]
E
Right.
- [49:17]
A
For those who are laypersons, who are watching or listening to this program. That is a bond order that's done by agreement of the parties. It's, you know, you agree on a number, you agree on bond conditions, things like that. And that order has to be presented to a judge. Well, before it could be presented to a judge. A lawyer for each side needs to sign off on it. And customarily, a lawyer can say, you know, actually, we've got this case together. You have my permission to sign my name on this document in addition to yours, and then present it to the judge. It's just done as a matter of common courtesy. It's just professional courtesy if you're not able to sign it in person. So. And then during COVID we got very good at just signing these things by email and other ways. And you're telling us that she sort of made you go down there in person and sign off on this consent bond order.
- [50:16]
B
Yes. And, you know, Fulton county has e signatures, we have e filing. We submit just about everything in this case by e signature. So, yeah, you can. I mean, it's a great illustration of how different it already is. And, you know, I'm just. I'm a practical person, so I'm wondering. I understand this is. Is one of the largest prosecutions in the history of our country. I get that. You know, but at the same time, it's still. We're in Fulton County. This is, you know, this is a bond order. So, you know, I'm taken. And one of the things I first noticed is, I mean, this is taxpayer money. So you walk into an office and there's, you know, there's plaques everywhere. There's tons of different things. This is not even the DA's office. So we're taken. I'm taken by an investigator all the way to this other adjoining building. I go into the room, and I wish I could. I mean, I'm going to try and paint a picture for everybody, but I wish I could explain it. It's a huge auditorium, like. Like, not really auditorium, but Just a huge, like, empty room where you would have. Typically, you know, you'd have tables and things like that. There's one table. One table. And it's got Nathan Wade, it's got Dasha Young, who is the other. One of the other prosecutors that we saw in the case. And then it's got Grant Rood. He's the one that's got this bond order. So I'm physically accompanied by security into this room. There is swag. You know, I don't know how else to say it. Big swag. Fulton county spent a lot of money on things that said Fani Willis and integrity matters everywhere. Integrity matters everywhere.
- [51:37]
A
A lot of that would include the big, giant podium that she used at the press conference announcing the indictment. You told me that they rented that.
- [51:45]
B
They rented it. They ultimately bought one, but it was a couple grand every time they rented it. And so. So this is the same room that you saw that press conference. You know, the blue carpet and all that stuff. This is actually that room. They make it look like a really big room that's literally just a tiny thing in the corner of that room. But there's brochures, there's full colored. You know, Fani Willis does great things for Fulton County. Brochures that I ended up finding out cost tons of dollars. So I'm in there and I'm just like, can I. I gotta go back. I'm in the middle of court. Can I just get my bond order? So I get the bond order, you know, it gets all processed, but that's just sort of the flavor of how this case was handled. And so then we go on and discover, you know, that's what everybody's interested in right now. Everybody's interested because we had a gadget order for discovery. Well, the reason I want to talk about that is we finally have that gag order lifted. And you know what it is? It's a whole lot of nothing. I know, Phil, you and I spent a lot of the day going through it and trying to figure out something that was interesting enough to actually post. And guess what? It's nothing. There it is.
- [52:44]
A
We couldn't find anything because it's a bunch of nothing. It's a nothing burger. Before we get into the case evidence, I have an idea. This is what we were kind of talking about. Part of this case, like, we call it the. The electors case, right? Part of the allegations was that there was this, you know, unlawful slate of presidential electors. We can get to that. I do want to get this listener question in.
- [53:06]
B
And we're not going to have time. We're going to have to come back.
- [53:11]
A
Yeah, it makes, it makes the question actually is, is illustrative of some things. And this question is directly for you, by the way. It's MK True Crime at Devil May Care Media for if you anybody else wants to email us any questions or ideas about anything. But Scott says this question is for Ashley. Will anything change for the people who accepted a plea deal from Willis in the election interference case since the office was removed? Thank you and love the show. Well, thank you, Scott, for that. Great question. I know the answer. But Ashley, this is your red wagon. You answer it. What's the answer?
- [53:50]
B
Well, I hope it's the same answer that you would give, but they're pretty much out of luck. I mean, it is virtually impossible to undo a criminal plea, a conviction that was taken by plea. So I think that they're really out of luck on that, unfortunately. But you know, they made that decision at the time in their life and it was right for them. So hopefully they're able to live with that.
- [54:10]
A
Well, I agree. That is the answer now to the electors charge. Now I want you to break this down for us. But before we do, I want to read to you. This is from the director of the Georgia's Prosecuting Attorneys Council. That was the substitute prosecuting agency that by according to Georgia law, they took over the case because there was an orphan indictment. And then of course, the director, he wound up dismissing the case. And this is just a snippet of what he said was his reasoning for the reasons I found. Lieutenant Governor Burt Jones committed no crime in connection with the the December 14, 2020 meeting of the Republican electors at the Georgia State Capitol. It should come as no surprise that I reached the same conclusion here. Specifically, the the Republican electors lacked criminal intent in taking the actions alleged as overt acts in the indictment. Criminal intent is an essential element of any crime. You cannot presume someone has it. But a jury or a judge may find that a person has it upon consideration of the words, the conduct, the demeanor, the motive and all other circumstances connected with the act for which a person is prosecuted. Of the 16 Republican electors, only three were indicted. And he goes on to say that the record overwhelmingly demonstrates that the electors believed their actions were legally required to preserve Georgia's electoral votes in the event that President Donald J. Trump prevailed in the then pending lawsuit in Fulton county challenging the election. So with that, tell us what this electors case was about and what was the smoking gun? What's the, what's the evidence here, well.
- [56:01]
B
You know, that's whenever you get discovery, you're like me. You're looking for the smoking gun. You know, I don't want the fluff. I want to know actually, is there evidence that my client committed a crime? So the first thing I wanted to know was, where are these elector slates? And I think it's important to spend a minute kind of walking everyone through how an elector actually gets there, because most people don't know it. And I'll be honest, I have a degree in political science, and I didn't know that how the sausage was made. I didn't know how an elector slate, which we have and we can put on. We can put on our website, but how the actual elector slate got from point A to point B. So what happens is it's actually a packet. It's actually a document where these folks who are they take on the job, they're sworn by their party. So every party has a group of electors, their job, and they are sworn to do this. Their job is to go down on a set day, and it's set by law in a meeting room in the Capitol and actually vote on what they're told the election results are. Okay, you got to remember, these folks are not hand counting ballots. These folks are relying on information that's told to them by someone else. So they're there. And that a lot of the folks were charged were electors. My client was charged with coordinating the electors, essentially, and then in mailing the ballot that was sent from point A to point B. That was his whole role in the whole thing, really, just coordinating the mail. But so this document, this slate, and I've got it, and we'll put it up, but it's a packet of papers. It's a memorandum, and it's from David Schaefer, who's one of the folks that was charged. He is the chairman of the Republican Party. His sworn duty is to hold this meeting and have every single person put their signature on this document. Document. Okay, so this is part of it, and I like to equate this to a mortgage application. And I'll explain that in just a minute. This document, it's a letter, it's signed by the electors. It's got all of their signatures on it. What it doesn't have, and this is going to be real important, what was not sent is this thing called a certificate of attainment. Okay, what is that? That is something where the governor, Brian Kemp, puts a big, fancy gold seal on it, and he signs this and he Certifies the election results. Okay? So when I say it's like a mortgage application, you know, when you. You go to buy a house and you apply for a mortgage and your mortgage brokers, like, you're gonna get approved. We're just waiting for that bank letter. We're waiting for them to get your credit report back. But you're gonna get approved. Go ahead and do the application. Because if you don't have the application and you get approved, you're screwed.
- [58:29]
E
Okay?
- [58:30]
B
Yes, of course I'm going to fill out the application. I'm filling it out assuming that I'm going to get approved. Okay? I'm not forging the approval of my mortgage. I'm filling out the other paperwork that's required. And what I fully think is going to happen is at the end, my mortgage broker is going to take my application and the bank's approval letter, put it all together and mail it in. Okay? If I took that approval letter from the bank and I forged it and I sent it in and pretended that that was the truth, I would have committed a crime. If I send in my application and I leave that paper blank because clearly I don't work for the bank and I don't have that information, am I really trying to defraud anybody if it's blank? Am I really. No. I'm doing what I was sworn to do, what my job is, which is fill out the application. Filling out this electoral slate is their job. They sent in an incomplete ballot. They sent it in without the certificate of attainment. Why? Because the law says you have to hold this meeting on December 14th, right after this election. They didn't know yet. They're still counting ballots. They have no idea. So just like the person who doesn't know because the bank maybe got held up on their credit application, they're still going to send in that application. They're not trying to defraud anybody. They're not saying it's a complete application. I'm not making a gold seal and pretending that Brian Kemp signed this. No. If I did that, maybe I would be guilty of fraud. No. So that's what this entire case was. And my client, by the way, his entire case was mailing these documents. He coordinated the mailing of these documents.
- [60:10]
A
And as the director of Georgia's prosecuting attorneys counsel points out, there's no evidence, no reasonable way to even infer that there was criminal intent. And as we know, you've got to have the guilty act and you've got to have the guilty mind, and They've got to be in existence at the same time for there to be a crime. So without the state of mind, the guilty mind, so to speak, the mens rea, as we would call it, under the law, there cannot be a crime. So that's. That's what they were getting at. So obviously we can't go through the entirety of this case evidence here in the time that we've got left. But you did tell me before the show, wanted to talk about certain warrants, search warrants that were sent to, I think, Google and YouTube and other places where the DA was looking to get YouTube videos. Is that correct? Using a search warrant?
- [61:04]
B
Yeah. So there was a video that apparently had been taken down. So the majority of discovery was news clippings. It was videos of people giving statements.
- [61:12]
A
Wait a minute. Things that were already out in the public domain?
- [61:16]
B
Yes, oh, yes. I mean, most of it. I was like, okay, seen that, seen that, seen that. I mean, it was a lot of just. I've already seen this. This is not relevant at all. The only thing that was new, especially initially, was copies of their subpoenas. Okay, well, I already saw the documents that they had subpoenaed, but now I'm getting copies of it or business record certificate. So I think that. And I've always said this, the reason that we had this gag order, this protective order, was to create this illusion that there was some investigation done, some independent investigation, when there wasn't. There was nothing independent about it. It was all information that was already out in the public domain. The only information that was really sensitive was maybe people's phone numbers, their Social Security numbers on things like that, stuff like that. Everything else was copies of YouTube videos, copies of press conferences, January 6th transcripts, other litigation. I got thousands of pages of court documents in other litigation. Thanks so much. So thrilling. I got some. I didn't even know how it was related. I sent you1 from 1999. I still can't figure out how those 400 pages from some random class action lawsuit out in the other side of the country had anything to do with my case and why it was in my discovery.
- [62:27]
A
It was 203 pages. I didn't read it all.
- [62:31]
B
I mean, if you can figure out how it's related, great, because I still have. Haven't two years later. But, you know, the thing that really got me was how this discovery was really treated like it was this, you know, this, this, like, sacred Bible. It was like the original Bible that Jesus himself had touched. And, you know, we had to go in person, to pick it up. I had to sign. I got to the point where I said, you know, if this is just going to be YouTube videos and press conferences again and a copy of a Washington Post article, can, can you just tell me? So I don't drive all the way to pick it up, because this is ridiculous. But that is what it was. So, you know, there's nothing in this file that everybody doesn't already know. It's insane.
- [63:11]
A
So where was the smoking gun that proved that everybody was guilty of a crime?
- [63:17]
B
That's a good question. Well, because everybody wasn't guilty of a crime. And that search warrant you were talking about, that Google search warrant, that was because my client had a spreadsheet. So that was actually for Mike Roman, and that was because he had a spreadsheet, God forbid, with the names of the electors in every state. That is sort of his job. He was an election campaign coordinator. That's his job. He had a spreadsheet. They could have asked us for that. They didn't need to do a subpoena. We would have given them the spreadsheet.
- [63:44]
A
Well, you know, look, that's, you know, your perspective on this is truly unique. And now that the gag order has been lifted, I can only imagine the media request that you're getting for this. Thank you for coming on our show and your show to sort of start the process of getting into this. And look, you've shared some of it with me. I've seen a lot of it. And again, it's just breathtaking. How much of a nothing burger it really, really is.
- [64:16]
B
It really is. And you know what I'd say is it's there's, I think, eight tigabytes, whatever it's called, of data. So if viewers are curious about something, send us a note, ask a question. I'm happy to look it up, I'm happy to dig in it, but there's just really nothing that that's that exciting out of the entire discovery, you know, But I think that's probably the best way. I hope we had more time. I wish we had more time because this could be something that we could talk about for a couple hours. I've obviously lived it for a while, but I feel a lot better now that the gag orders lifted and I can talk a little more freely.
- [64:47]
A
But we'll have to leave it there. But I want to tell people you mentioned they can reach out to us. It's MK True Crimelma. Also, look for us on social media. I'm at Phil Holloway esq. You're at Ashley Merchant, no T on the end. We you and I both are active on social media. We respond to people. That's a good way to find us. You can follow the show at MK True Crime. Also, for those who watch the show on YouTube, look in the comments, because those of us who are in the show, we oftentimes get in the comments. We love to communicate with our audience. We love the audience interaction. And if you like this content, please subscribe on podcast or YouTube or all of the above. And of course, you can hear us on the Megyn Kelly Channel on Sirius xm. Now, we're gonna have to leave it there, but thank you, Ashley. And special thanks to our guest, Nancy Grace. And for those of you who are watching on YouTube and listening on podcast, thank you so much for being here with us and make it a great day.