wavePod

Get Wave AI

The Cheat Sheet: Suits and Suitcases - Murder Sheet | Wave AI Podcast Notes

Back to Murder Sheet

The Cheat Sheet: Suits and Suitcases

Murder Sheet

Fri Mar 06 2026

Summary

Murder Sheet: The Cheat Sheet — Suits and Suitcases (March 6, 2026)

Episode Overview

In this “Cheat Sheet” episode, hosts Áine Cain (journalist) and Kevin Greenlee (attorney) deliver their signature blend of sharp crime analysis and casual banter as they dissect several recent and historic cases spanning the UK and the US. The main focus is on wrongful convictions (the Mersey Ripper case, UK), a disturbing double homicide of children in Cleveland, Ohio, a landmark legal ruling against a school shooter's father in Georgia, and the defamation verdict in the high-profile University of Idaho murders saga, where a TikTok creator's baseless accusations led to a $10 million penalty. Throughout, the hosts stress accountability, the impact of junk science and internet speculation, and the responsibility of parents and content creators.

Main Themes

The devastating ripple effects of wrongful convictions
Brutal child homicides and community responses
Legal and moral parental responsibility in child-perpetrated violence
The hazards of internet-driven "true crime" content and real-life defamation
The importance of accuracy and skepticism in true crime reporting

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Mersey Ripper Case – Wrongful Conviction and Forensic Failure (UK)

[07:53–22:26]

Case Details: Murder of Diane Sindel (1986, Birkenhead, UK); known as "Mersey Ripper" case.
- Diane Sindel, 21, was murdered on her way home from work. Initial police work focused on Peter Sullivan, a vulnerable local man.
Flawed Evidence: Reliance on bite mark analysis (“junk science”) and problematic confessions.
- “Bite marks are not considered a reliable...They’re not a fingerprint.” — Áine [13:00]
- Non-recorded initial confession; Sullivan had cognitive impairments.
- No DNA match: Eventually, advanced testing showed the crime scene DNA did not match Sullivan.
Impact: Sullivan served 38 years in prison before exoneration.
- “This is the longest documented miscarriage of justice in the United Kingdom, apparently.” — Áine [19:19]
- 461 men have been eliminated as suspects since; the real killer remains unidentified.
Wider Take: The case is a double tragedy (victim and wrongly convicted) and a cautionary tale on the dangers of dubious forensic evidence and police pressure.
- “Let’s never use bite marks again, folks...We don’t want junk science in the courtroom.” — Áine [21:19]

2. Cleveland Suitcase Murders – Two Children Found Dead

[24:07–31:56]

Case Details: On March 2, 2026, a Cleveland dog walker, Philip Donaldson, found two young African-American girls' bodies stuffed in suitcases on a playground.
- The half-sisters were believed to be 8–14 years old. There were no matching missing persons cases.
Investigation: Police arrested Aliyah Henderson (28) for murder and child endangerment. A third child from her household was found safe.
Reporting Caution: Áine is careful to verify identities and avoids unconfirmed details, highlighting the responsibility in reporting breaking news:
- “I’m going to be very cautious about what I say because...I don’t want to be giving you wrong information.” — Áine [24:46]
Community impact: A call to action for information from residents, reinforcing the gravity and horror of child homicide.
- “What a horrible, horrible case...I hope there can be justice for these two little girls.” — Áine [30:41]

3. Parental Responsibility in School Shooting — Georgia Ruling

[32:21–42:12]

Case Details: Colin Gray, father of school shooter Colt Gray, found guilty of murder and manslaughter after failing to restrict gun access despite knowing his son's violent and unstable tendencies.
- The mass shooting (Sept. 2024) resulted in four deaths and nine injuries.
Legal Precedent: Debate on where parental liability should begin and end.
- “The law...figures out...what sort of responsibilities do we owe each other in a society?” — Kevin [32:43]
- Gray Senior ignored warnings and hoped firearms would bring him closer to his troubled son.
Hosts’ Take: Mixed on broad parental culpability—Áine stresses accountability but is wary of blanket policies:
- “I want people to be accountable...if there can be any measure of accountability, maybe that will be a deterrent to the next set of parents who don’t want to do their jobs.” — Áine [35:52]
- “I don’t think this is an appropriate thing to do in every mass shooting, but I think in certain cases...it is.” — Áine [38:08]
Notable Quote: “If your kid starts worshiping a school shooter, lock up your guns. It’s really simple.” — Áine [39:24]

4. Defamation in the True Crime Space — Idaho Case

[42:12–54:59]

Case Details: TikToker Ashley Gillard accused University of Idaho professor Rebecca Schofield of murder based on tarot readings.
- No evidence; police issued a statement exonerating Schofield.
Consequence: Schofield sued and won a $10 million defamation judgment.
- “It’s really unusual for police agencies to release statements like this.” — Kevin [46:08]
- “She sued the TikToker for defamation. She won. And this week, she was awarded a very healthy settlement...” — Kevin [48:13]
Host Commentary: The dark side of democratized content creation.
- Áine criticizes “mindless” true crime consumers and creators who “whip up internet mobs.”
- “We need some metaphorically...heads on spikes in this space to basically let people know that there’s a limit.” — Áine [52:07]
Media Comparison: Legacy media’s checks/vetting vs. social media’s lack of standards.
- “Mainstream media does have some standards.” — Kevin [53:04]
- Even as true crime podcasters, they recognize their own limitations as a two-person, self-edited operation.

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

On wrongful conviction evidence: “That’s now considered junk science...so I could understand why the jury made that [decision] but nowadays, with the benefit of more knowledge, we can say bite marks are a problem.” — Áine [13:00]
On the tragic fallout of exoneration: “Not only did Diane needlessly lose her life, not only did her family suffer...but then this young man, Peter Sullivan, had his life effectively stolen for 38 years and it’s a double tragedy” — Áine [19:52]
On the school shooter’s father: “If your kid starts worshiping a school shooter, lock up your guns. It’s really simple. That’s not a normal thing.” — Áine [39:24]
On TikTok defamation: “There’s a difference between using [tarot] as just a fun hobby...versus using it to hurt other people.” — Áine [44:58]
On the need for consequences for reckless true crime content: “We need some metaphorically...heads on spikes in this space to basically let people know that there’s a limit.” — Áine [52:07]

Important Timestamps

[07:53] — Start of the Mersey Ripper wrongful conviction case
[19:19] — Sullivan’s exoneration and continued search for the real killer
[24:07] — Transition to Cleveland suitcase child murders
[31:56] — Georgia school shooting parental responsibility ruling
[42:12] — Idaho TikTok defamation case
[55:43] — Listener event plug; lighter banter

Tone and Style

Conversational, informal, and sometimes playfully self-deprecating (“Are we done?” “You’re a clown now.”); moments of wit balance somber, serious discussion of sensitive subject matter.
Strongly opinionated on the need for ethical standards, skepticism, and societal accountability.

Final Notes

Both hosts take pride in their careful, research-driven approach, differing from “irresponsible” content creators in true crime.
Recurring calls for listeners to engage thoughtfully and responsibly with true crime content, and to demand accountability—whether from forensic experts, law enforcement, parents, or social media figures.
They invite listeners to an in-person event in Marion, Ohio (March 12, 2026), closing with characteristic banter and a humorous anecdote about their dog and fans recognizing them in public.

This summary captures the episode’s full sweep of tragic cases, justice, the pitfalls of “junk science” and internet rumor-mongering, and the enduring need for critical thinking and ethical reporting in the world of true crime.

Loading summary...

Transcript

A (0:00)

If you're a maintenance supervisor at a manufacturing facility and your machinery isn't working right, Grainger knows you need to understand what's wrong as soon as possible. So when a conveyor motor falters, Grainger offers diagnostic tools like calibration kits and multimeters to help you identify and fix the problem. With Grainger, you can be confident you have everything you need to keep your facility running smoothly. Call 1-800-GRAINGER clickgrainger.com or just stop by. Grainger are the ones who get it done. If you're a maintenance supervisor at a manufacturing facility and your machinery isn't working right, Grainger knows you need to understand what's wrong as soon as possible. So when a conveyor motor falters, Grainger offers diagnostic tools like calibration kits and multimeters to help you identify and fix the problem. With Grainger, you can be confident you have everything you need to keep your facility running smoothly. Call 1-800-GRAINGER clickranger.com or just stop by Granger for the ones who get it done.

B (1:00)

I'm Anya, and today we're going to be doing a cheat sheet with a range of cases from Idaho to the United Kingdom. So, yeah, today we're doing that. Oh, and I forgot the content.

C (1:13)

Go ahead and do it now.

B (1:14)

Content.

C (1:15)

We're informal here.

B (1:16)

Yeah, that's a cheat sheet for you. Content warning. This episode contains discussion of rape and murder, including the murder or homicide of two little girls. So sad situation. So today we're going to the United Kingdom, Ohio. And you don't feel like the need to write down where you're going on the list so I can read it? But I know Idaho is one of your things.

C (1:38)

Idaho is one of mine.

B (1:39)

Where's the other one?

C (1:42)

The Empire State of the south to Georgia. Georgia.

B (1:45)

Wow. Sad that I know that now.

C (1:50)

See, it's my position. My role in life is to educate you on finer things.

B (1:55)

Are you kidding me?

C (1:57)

Are you Empire State of the South?

B (2:00)

B (7:53)

Five years later, still pondering. So anyway, so this case is horrible on like two specific awful levels. One, the crime and then to the fallout from the crime. And it's just kind of highlights something pretty disturbing. So this is a case where, you know, like it just so many people have been harmed by this. So let's get into it. This is a case involving a killer that the press, the united, the press in the UK dubbed the Mersey Ripper, the Beast of Birkenhead, the Wolf Man. And for many, many years the public and police believed that they got this person. But unfortunately, recent events have revealed that almost 40 years later, this person is still out there and they don't know who it is. So let's go back to August 2, 1986. 21 year old Diane Sindel is working that night at a pub at the Wellington Hotel pub in Bevington. And she's saving up money for her wedding. She's engaged, she's gonna get married. She's a young beautiful woman doing this. And she drives home that night in her blue Fiat van, but unfortunately she ran out of fuel and the car kind of breaks down as a result. She's last seen walking down the road in Birkenhead between midnight and 2 and 12:20am and she never makes it home. Now witnesses between midnight and 2am reportedly hear screaming. They see and hear a man and a woman arguing. They presumably think it's, you know, just a domestic dispute. But unfortunately it seems like it was far more sinister than that because 12 hours after she was last seen approximately, Diane's body was found in an alley, alleyway in Birkenhead off of Burrow Road. She had been viciously attacked. Like this is. I read in the New in some of the articles about this and my primary source for this was the Mirror. They did kind of a retrospective article on it, but they described, you know, almost like people who were investigating this almost said it was like a traffic accident in terms of how horrible and gruesome her injuries were. And, you know, you can skip ahead if you don't want to hear about that, but I will, I will share. So she was half nude. She had been stabbed in the chest and in her genitals. Her breasts had been mutilated. She had been raped. She had suffered extreme blunt force trauma to the head and face, leaving her with. That's ultimately what she died from. Investigators believed that she actually did not die immediately, but ultimately succumbed to a brain hemorrhage from the beating. And so this is a horrible, horrible case. You can imagine that people were scared, people were up in arms that this happened to this young woman, and it was a really big deal. About two weeks after the murder, police also discovered, or, you know, people discovered her burned clothing. Remains of her burned clothing were found in Bidston Hill. So those are some of the clues. Now this. This man named Peter Sullivan comes up as a suspect. This guy was an unemployed young man from Birkenhead. He was ultimately described as having learning disabilities or even sort of maybe reading between the lines, maybe cognitive impairment, intellectual disability, something within that family. In other words, someone who might be more vulnerable as a result, whatever you want to call it, you know, someone who might be having some trouble comprehending at certain points. So this man was arrested September 23rd, 1986. Given the, you know, the murder happened August 2nd pretty quick, right? I mean, that's like a. Almost two months later. So they get this guy, and the evidence against him seems to be primarily in the beginning that he gave conflicting statements about where he was on August 1st and August 2nd. And so that's what, you know, police are going on initially. So this. I'll kind of describe it in one way, and then we'll go back and kind of describe the other side. So police say that he confessed to them, and then he confessed again. And they ultimately said that they thought that he had gotten into some kind of, like, drunken spiral and then, like, lost a game of darts and went out and killed Diane in a rage. So they had that, and then they had what they felt was forensic evidence at the time. They said that bite marks on Diane's body matched Sullivan's bite, and he was convicted and sentenced to life. Okay, let's back up. So we know at this point that bite marks are not considered a reliable. They're not a fingerprint. Okay. They're not like, a reliable one off way to piece of evidence. That narrows it down to one person. Is that. Is that all fair to say?

B (13:47)

That's a big problem. Now, listen, stuff happens. People lose tape, whatever. But again, in the context of this situation, it's a problem. Then he confesses again, and then when he gets legal representation, he immediately recants again. People do that. That doesn't mean they're innocent. But when you have a guy who may have some impairments, may have some issues, and, you know, based on the law, perhaps needs more support or another adult there with him, and police don't provide that, then that's, again, a problem. So you're having some of the ingredients of what you often see with wrongful confessions, which do happen. People think, why would anyone confess to something they didn't do? When you have someone who might be more vulnerable in this case, possibly due to learning disabilities or something. Even more than that, when you have police interrogating someone, and it's. It's like a kind of a hostile situation. He accused the police of, like, beating him in the cell. Again, I don't. Without knowing, but again, that's a concerning allegation. Um, and then when you're having the initial one not recorded. And what's more, apparently when he was. You know, he claims that when he was, like, asked to say, okay, where did. Where were Diane's clothes found? He pointed to the wr spot, and they were almost, like, trying to correct him. So it's like they're trying to make him fit, potentially. That, plus the bite marks are a problem. But he was still convicted. But in 2021, they found that they had enough technology to retest the semen samples collected from the crime scene. And these were not a match to Sullivan. And for me, that is what truly cinches it, because if his. There's certain crimes where the DNA would not sway me. And I'm gonna say that, like, if it's like, oh, the DNA found on the victim's shoes don't match. Who cares? Who cares? They might have stepped in, whatever, you know, like, I don't care about that. But in this case, semen at the site of a rape, a rape murder, I think that that's a pretty good indication that that is your suspect. Enough with overcomplicating your wardrobe. Stop buying trendy, cheap stuff that doesn't last. Curate your style with high quality pieces that you can mix and match. Our wonderful sponsor Quince can help you out with that.

B (18:59)

and if it doesn't match Sullivan, you know, and frankly I think they probably should have looked at this earlier because the bite mark stuff is so shaky. But I don't, I don't know UK law, so I'm not like criticizing, I'm just like, that would have been a pretty big red flag too. But he, he, so this, the CNN doesn't match him DNA wise. He's been released. He served 38 years. He's 68 when he was released. This is the longest documented miscarriage of justice in the United Kingdom, apparently. And according to the media reports I read, and now they're, they're looking for who the real killer is. So this is a case where, you know, they looked at the DNA for Diane's fiance, doesn't match anyone in her family, doesn't match. They've apparently eliminated 461 male subjects so far. They've not found a match yet. It doesn't match anybody in the national database in the uk. So I'm hoping that they can do something, I don't know, maybe with genetic genealogy to narrow this down and find out who did this to Diane. Because it's, it's so horrible because not only did Diane needlessly lose her life, not only did her family suffer and her fiance suffered the loss of her, but then this young man, Peter Sullivan, had his life effectively stolen for 38 years and it's a double tragedy and we want to know, you know, who, who did this, who did this for real? And yeah, it's just horrible. You know, we've talked about where we are often maybe considered within true crime, probably more as skeptics about wrongful conviction claims. We think that wrongful conviction claims are rampant everywhere and I, I just think you have to critically assess them. It's not that I don't think wrongful convictions can happen. I do think they can happen. I just think that people are motivated to claim everything's a wrongful conviction and you have to look at it just like you look a criminal case, like you wouldn't just accept that everyone's guilty as charged. I'm not going to accept that everybody's wrongfully convicted. But when I see a case where the DNA tells a clear story like this and it's not a match to me, that's just game over. Unless, you know, people say, well, well, what if he was an accomplice? Yeah, but like, I don't know, does this look like a crime where that would be the case? I don't know. That, that, that. Either way, that doesn't match the prosecution's initial theory of what happened here. So. I mean, I think it was a wrongful conviction based on what I've read. I'm always open to changing my mind, but what's your take?

B (25:10)

I don't. What are you talking about? I never said that. For the record, he just likes to say things to get my goat on the air. Yeah, he likes to say ridiculous, embarrassing things, but continue. So my sources for this one were KCBD, Fox 8, and WTRF. This is a really horrible case, and it's just happened recently. It's a developing situation. So as of recording March 5th. Fifth, when we're recording this episode, there are things that have not been necessarily, like, confirmed directly by police. So I'm going to be very cautious about what I say because God forbid I go on the Internet, see something on a Facebook page reported to you as news, and it's wrong. So there might be information you see out there that's swirling. I'm aware of that, but I just am trying to be cautious about how we do this, because even though it's a cheat sheet, I don't want to be, you know, we're a little bit more silly and casual and laid back on here. But I'm not looking to be giving you wrong information. That's my nightmare. So, anyways, so March 2nd, which was Monday, 2026, a dog walker is going along with his dog. His name is Philip Donaldson. And they're just hanging out. They're going on a walk like you and I and Nick do. And this is in Cleveland. They're near the. The Gin Academy or Ginn Academy. I'm sorry if I'm saying that wrong. Either way. And it's near the. The dog at some point runs over to the fence line of the saranac playground. And Mr. Donaldson immediately notices that the dog is paying attention to partly buried suitcases along the fence line. And this is off of East 162nd Street. It's a field. And Mr. Donaldson probably does what I think you and I would have probably done, because I think you and I are curious. He'd be like, oh, what's going on here? He unzips one of the suitcases. I can't really tell from the news coverage if it was two suitcases or one. But he unzips one and finds the worst thing you can find when you. In this scenario, which is he finds the body of a child, specifically a little girl. Her head kind of comes out of the suitcase. And he calls 91 1. I mean, he's said to the news that he hasn't slept since this happened. I don't blame him. What a horrible, horrible thing to discover when you're just going around. And so what police found there was doubly horrifying because it was not just one body of a child. It was two. Two little girls. And they were zipped up in these suitcases. And now they're trying to figure out what the heck happened. So they've been able to determine some information about the girls. They're. They're black, they're African American, and they're half sisters. So they. They're, you know, they share one parent, and they're believed to be between eight and a half and 13 years old. And then the other one is 10 and a half and 14 years old. And they appear to have been there for some time. So you might be wondering, like, how on earth is there a situation where we don't know who these girls are officially yet. Well, I First of all, I will say I think at this point police may know who they are. We'll get more to that later. But there has been an arrest seemingly in connection with this case. So that's one thing. The other thing is that though, you know, when these initial reports were coming out, police said pretty clearly, hey, we don't, we don't know who they are. And there's no missing persons cases that match up with these circumstances. So two missing girls who are half sisters. I even went on NAMUS at one point. I was trying to look and I didn't see anything that, I mean there were a couple of things where it was like sisters who were African American going missing. But the dates didn't really make sense and it just, it didn't really work. So you know, they started asking, hey residents, check your security cameras. Let's figure out who they are. And since then a one, a 28 year old woman named Aliyah Henderson has been arrested and booked into the Cuyahoga County Jail Wednesday evening. She was arrested for murder and child endangerment. So while I don't think it is officially confirmed that she is the person of interest who's been detained in connection with this case, looking at the charges fits. And police have confirmed that there was a search warrant at an address near East 162nd and Midland Avenue and a person of interest was, was taken into custody as, as well as a third child from that household. So that person, that kid is now safe. So yeah, there are some reports out there about the girls names. I'm not going to say them just in case they're wrong. Again, I would prefer to wait for like official channels or at least some reputable local news sources before sharing what I saw. But either way, what a horrible, horrible case. Now we don't know all of the details, you know, in terms of murder. Right. You have to prove, you know, more than just like some kind of homicide and then neglecting or abusing a corpse or whatever. But you know, that's, that's what she's been charged with at this point. And hopefully there can be justice for these two little girls. I mean to, to not to have their lives be snuffed out, but then also for them to be discarded in this fashion. It really is just kind of horrible to think about, but certainly a case that will be, I'm sure developing and things will be happening in Cleveland around this and the numbers that are relevant just in case you happen to be in Cleveland and have any information, meaning like direct information about the case like, you don't. As a reminder, we don't need to send police, like, recommendations on, like, DNA. They know. They know about that. But we can. We can. Like, if you are a neighbor and heard something, then that's what they want to hear about. So the Cleveland Police Department's Homicide unit is at 216-623-5464. And the Cuyahoga County Crime Stoppers is at 216-252-7463. And yeah, that is the story there. Very troubling, very disturbing.

C (32:21)

Okay, You. That's what you said. That's what we're doing. So this Georgia case, my source for this is cnn. And one thing that the law does, one thing that we figure out through the legal process, through the judicial process, is what sort of responsibilities do we owe each other in a society? Because we're not islands, the decisions we make affect others. Sometimes positively, often unfortunately, the decisions affect others adversely. How much of that is our responsibility? How much of that should we be held liable for? And I'm bringing this up because of the case of Colin Gray. He is the father of a school shooter named Colt Gray. And the question we are forced to deal with is, does Mr. Gray Sr. Colin Gray, bear any responsibility for the murderous acts of his son? And things that came out in his trial was basically that Mr. Gray Sr. Knew or had reason to know that his child was unbalanced. I think he even had Mr. Gray Sr. Knew that his son had a picture of a school shooter on his wall. He knew that his son had made threats. His estranged wife told him, you know, maybe you should restrict his access to guns. And Mr. Gray Sr. Did not do that, seemingly because it'd be too much trouble and difficulty to raise those issues with his son. And he apparently, at least he claims to have had the hope that by introducing his son to firearms, that could potentially be a father son bonding activity. They could do things like go hunting together. And of course, that didn't happen. And Mr. Gray's son committed a heinous act, carried out a mass shooting back in September of 2024 where two teachers and two students ended up losing their lives and nine other people got wounded. And so the question is, should the father have taken more steps to prohibit access to firearms from his son when he knew his son had some issues? And if so, what sort of consequence should he bear for not having done more? Mr. Gray was found guilty of murder and manslaughter charges. And so he now faces 10 to 30 years in prison on the murder charges, on each murder charge, and one to ten years on each manslaughter charge. So I'm just curious, what, what is your take?

B (39:24)

Pro tip. Pro tip. If your kid starts worshiping a school shooter, lock up your guns. It's really simple. You know, that's not a normal thing. That's not like a normal phase that kids go through that there's something seriously wrong and you should be, you know, considering pretty extreme intervention to. I mean, to protect your own kid, frankly, too, and to protect other people, to protect your community. We do owe people something. We do live in a society, you know, you're not. It's not just a rugged individualism all the way down. Absolutely not. And, you know, I just. I'm just disgusted with people like this. And also, I'm going to say this. Maybe this is. Maybe, I don't know. Like, this is just my opinion, but, like, I would not be surprised if you do a ven. I said this to someone in our Facebook group the other night. If you do a Venn diagram between the people who are negligent, sloppy, irresponsible, neglectful parents and the people who are negligent, sloppy, neglectful gun owners, I. I think there's probably a lot of overlap here. And if this serves a deterrent for people who Want to just kind of like, you know, let their teenage teenager just crash and burn and become a weapon of mass destruction in their community? If this serves as kind of a reminder of. No, no, you definitely, you know, going squirrel hunting in the woods isn't going to fix whatever the heck. This is way too extreme for that. And even if you were going to go squirrel hunting in the woods, lock up your guns properly so that no one's going to get hurt. And I think that's a good thing for society because it seems like, you know, seems like just like there's this, like, washing of the hands of accountability in some of these cases. And it's like, you know, like not. I think if it can. If you can save a couple of innocent lives here or there, because it forces people to act responsibly, then I'm good with it. I mean, do you have any discomfort given that, like, he obviously wasn't involved

B (48:58)

Good. I mean, like, what I was. I mean, here's the thing, unfortunately, you know, I think, like, I hate to. Hate to sound like a snob, although, you know, I mean, I kind of feel like I am a true crime snob, and I'm proud of it at this point because it's like, what's the other option? You're someone who enjoys listening to somebody slam innocent people, you know, But I. I really feel like we occupy a space in true crime where we've cultivated, on purpose an audience that gets this. That gets why it's bad to do this, the problem. So I feel like I'm preaching to the choir all day. The problem are the people who just mindlessly consume true crime, mindlessly eat up nonsense like this and say, you know, and basically take a woman who is, you know, doing tarot cards and saying why it's leading her to believe that, you know, this. This innocent woman is guilty and doing stuff with that. And it's like, that's. That's the problem. I don't know how to reach them because I don't feel like, first of all, they care for the most part. I'm not sure that most of them Are, like, doing it harmful, like, they are trying to be harmful. I think there's probably just like a lack of empathy and a lack of consideration and frankly, a lack of intellectual rigor, let's put it that way. But, like, I don't know how to reach them. And I'd be curious what other people think. Like, how do we get to the people who are just like, propping up? Because, I mean, this tech talker is not the only one. We saw this in Delphi, we saw this in Kieran Reed. We've seen it again and again where basically this creator whips up an Internet mob around somebody and defames them. And I'm, I hope, I hope this is a shot over the bow to the creators who do this. Like, you could be next. You could have your life ruined financially if you continue to engage in this. All you have to do is basically tick off the wrong person and it's over for you. I think we need some metaphorically. I'm not speaking about actual violence metaphorically. We need some heads on spikes. We need some heads on spikes in this space to basically let people know that there's a limit. There's a standard of behavior that if you can't even meet that, you're going to. You're going to get your life wrecked. And that's how it should be. Because as you said previously, we didn't have to deal with this. You know your nutty aunt who got way too into horoscopes and is telling you about how she thinks Ted Bundy was innocent and framed and this is the real killer. She didn't have a talk show. She didn't have a newspaper column. No, the gatekeepers wouldn't let her near that. And people can complain about. Oh, well, then voices were kept out. Yeah, sure, but like, also voices were kept out. And in this case, that was a good thing, but now you can do it yourself. And I'm glad because we're doing it ourselves. I feel like we're pretty responsible. I'm not saying we're perfect, but we're pretty responsible with how we go about things. But not a lot of people care about being responsible. Being responsible is hard, and it's easier to just go out and lie and make stuff up about people. And so, like, I feel we need. There needs to be this kind of retribution in certain cases when people way cross the line. And it's not about free speech anymore. It's just about making up seven defaming people. We need to have these verdicts and these Financial consequences? Because I don't, I don't see how. I think a lot of it has to come from the audience, but barring that, it has to be. Creators are scared to say certain things which they should be. I mean, again, like, this is not a situation where she's like, oh, well, this was a local sex offender who was convicted of breaking into a woman's house. And so could he have done it? I don't think that's necessarily super responsible either, but that would be defensible.