← The Megyn Kelly Show
The Megyn Kelly Show
Luigi Mangione's Suppressed Evidence, Mackenzie Shirilla’s "Crash" Doc - "Positively Legal" with Mark Eiglarsh and Jonna Spilbor
01:04:49
Megyn Kelly brings you the latest episode of the new MK True Crime Show "Positively Legal" with Mark Eiglarsh and Jonna Spilbor - enjoy, and subscribe for more: Apple: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/mk-true-crime/id1829831499 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/4o80I2RSC2NvY51TIaKkJW YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@MKTrueCrime?sub_confirmation=1 Social: http://mktruecrime.com/
Loading summary
Transcript224 lines
- [00:00]
A
Hey everyone, I'm Megyn Kelly and today we are bringing you this week's episode of our new MK true crime show, Positively Legal.
- [00:07]
B
It's hosted by Kelly's Court ogs Mark
- [00:10]
A
Eichlarsh and Jonna Spilbore. Take a listen, enjoy.
- [00:13]
B
And if you like what you hear,
- [00:14]
A
head on over to mktruecrime.com to see where you can subscribe to all of our true crime content. Or just make it easy on yourself. Go to the purple podcast button on your phone, type in MK True Crime and hit subscribe. And do the same over at YouTube. Enjoy. Hello and welcome to Positively Legal. I'm Janice Spilbore, a criminal defense attorney, shoe maven, and founder of Janice Filbore Law.
- [00:44]
C
Hello everyone, I'm Mark Eiglarsch. I'm a criminal defense attorney, former prosecutor, adjunct law professor, avid pickleball player, and an all around fan of my co host Jona Love.
- [00:57]
A
When you add that in today, Positively Legal, a judge has blocked major evidence from Luigi Mangione's state trial. And we're going to discuss that and the vile super fans sporting press passes outside a Manhattan courthouse.
- [01:18]
C
And I am super excited, John, that we get to talk about this Netflix documentary. It's the number two show in the country right now. It's called the Crash. And the accused, who is merely 17 year old at the time of the crash, went to prison. And we're going to discuss whether she deserved to go to prison for the amount of time that she did.
- [01:40]
B
We sure will.
- [01:41]
A
And later. I already know I'm going to love this guest Ginny Burton is joining us to share her remarkable story of how she used incarceration as an intervention and how she is working to shape public policy. Talk about somebody who literally turned her life around. We're gonna be speaking with Ginny later in the show.
- [02:03]
C
What a story. Oh my goodness. What she went through from childhood to now. Extraordinary. So glad she's on. But right now, Jonna.
- [02:11]
B
Yeah.
- [02:12]
C
It's happy hour time. You got a beverage? What are you drinking?
- [02:17]
A
I don't. I have a seltzer and the thing I want to talk about is. Not that happy. I gotta tell you something. So what's the. Let me ask you, when you wake up in the morning, after you get done with the pigeon pose and the warrior and all that.
- [02:32]
C
Right after. You mean reaching out to my higher power?
- [02:34]
A
Yeah, yeah. After you do that, I do it.
- [02:37]
C
Yeah.
- [02:37]
A
Do you turn on the television? Do you watch anything in the morning while you're getting ready for the office?
- [02:41]
C
No, no, no. Evil. No. No. Why poison myself with all that bad news and stuff? The human race consciousness garbage? Not yet, no.
- [02:52]
A
Who. Who would want to do that?
- [02:54]
C
Right?
- [02:55]
A
No, but I do every morning. So I. I have been. There was a story that I heard on the news this morning before I left my house that I can't stop thinking about. Here is why. You do personal injury. I do personal injury. I know. We're here. We talk about criminal offense. We do a lot of that. There was a story that is so bizarre that I have to. I have to share it. So here's the story. Woman, 56 years old, you could argue, prime of her life, driving her SUV in Manhattan last night. Parks it in one of the most traversed, busiest areas of the city. Fifth Avenue, Midtown, Fifth Avenue, 52nd Street. Fox SUV gets out of her SUV immediately falls into an uncovered manhole. I don't know. Like, the visual must be, like, literally her whole entire body, according to the story, into an uncovered manhole.
- [03:53]
C
I hate when I do that. Yeah. And what happened next?
- [03:55]
B
She died.
- [03:57]
C
Oh, dude.
- [03:57]
B
Killed her.
- [03:58]
C
Oh, my God. Debbie Downer, you're bringing that to happy hour? Oh, my goodness.
- [04:03]
A
Listen, this is why. I mean, it's just so bizarre. Number one, like, I don't even know how that actually happened.
- [04:08]
C
Right.
- [04:09]
A
Number. Number two, of course it's. Somebody's going to pay. Not that that's going to help anything, but it really makes me wonder, like, I'm in the city all the time. You're going to be in the city next week. You never, ever think about something that I worry. You know, scaffolding all the time. Do I try to avoid it? Yes. Something going to fall on my head and take me out. Air conditioning. What? That's, you know, that's happened. I've had clients who've had their air conditioning units fall out of their windows. Right? You think about that. You never think about stepping outside your car into a hole so big that it literally sucks you up and you die instantly.
- [04:45]
C
I don't want to do the rest of the show. You've completely and thoroughly bummed me out. That's why to start my day with that kind of news, I just. I couldn't do it. I mean, that's. That's, you know, it's around the age of me and my wife, and now I gotta picture her dying because I don't know what, some city worker didn't cover it back up. Or some homeless. Excuse me, I was about to say homeless. Unhoused person. I have to say that roadside entrepreneur is too much. Might have removed the COVID I don't know. To sell for recycling. I don't know why that got off. But somebody died. That's just tragic.
- [05:22]
A
That'll be a problem if somebody removed. Just in terms of liability. Although I think the manhole was the electric company Con Ed. If somebody did remove it and Con Ed didn't have notice, can you imagine they're fighting on whether they should pay out? I don't think they'll do that, but that could possibly happen. But here's why you shouldn't be mad at me for telling you that story.
- [05:43]
B
Tell me.
- [05:44]
A
You should not be mad at me. Because now that I've told you this bizarre story, what if it makes you think twice and saves you from falling into a manhole?
- [05:54]
C
Maybe I just shouldn't go to New York at the end of the week. How about that, right?
- [05:57]
A
Just. Just watch. Just watch where. You should be watching where you're going anyway when you're in the city. Don't be. I hate those people who are like, you know what? They practically to. They're like this, but they don't look in front of them. Yeah, that's also annoying. Okay, one other thing. Just one other thing before you go to New York City, just because of my pet peeve. When you're walking on the sidewalk with your wife or your kids or wherever you're there with. No, you cannot walk horizontally like. No. Like a rock band. Stay to one side because people like me gotta scoot around. You all right?
- [06:28]
C
Okay. So why don't we lighten up the podcast by talking about murder like Luigi Mangione. I mean, this is like the murder podcast. Supposed to be positively legal. Positive. Something positive. Jonna, you've bummed me the hell out.
- [06:42]
A
We're gonna find something positive. Although Luigi Mangione. Just when you think that his group of fans. First of all, no murderer should really have fans. But we know they do. Could not be any more vile. We're going to talk about that in a second. But there was a big ruling in the Luigi Mangioni case this week. I'm not. I don't like it. I don't appreciate it. I sort of disagree with it, but I'm not surprised by it.
- [07:10]
C
You do? What part do you disagree and just like fill everybody in and then you can tell us what you disagree with.
- [07:17]
A
Okay, so just. Just to recap for those who are like Mark and don't watch TV first thing in the morning.
- [07:24]
C
Not first thing. Eventually get around to it. I don't want to ruin my day.
- [07:29]
A
So Luigi Mangione, he is charged in both state and federal court, New York and federal court, for the caught on camera, undeniable 100% murder that is on tape because he did it on a busy city street before a convention. He killed a man named Brian Thompson, who is CEO of, I guess it's the largest, if not one of the largest health care companies in the country, United.
- [07:56]
C
John, I'm interrupting right away because I always get this question. I would have probably announced it the same way you did, and people would say, oh, you're a defense attorney. Don't you believe in the presumption of innocence? It sounds like you're already convicting him. What do you tell people when they say that to you?
- [08:14]
A
I say that there is no such thing as the presumption of innocence. I know that we talk a good game, but in actuality, Mark, come on. You know, when we're representing criminal defendants, we often have to prove their innocence. It's not called that. We don't say it out loud, but that essentially what needs to happen even before trial. Especially before trial, when you're negotiating a case with a prosecutor who gets to decide who. Whether or not there's going to be a deal. In your case, by the way, the prosecutor is the one who does that, so.
- [08:45]
C
But I just want to tell you what I tell myself and what I tell others so I don't feel guilty. Right.
- [08:51]
B
Okay.
- [08:52]
C
The presumption of innocence applies to the six or 12 jurors assembled in that jury box. We want to make sure they can presume or believe the defendant is innocent before they hear the evidence. It doesn't apply to the court of public opinion. It doesn't apply to my office right now. It doesn't apply to this podcast. It doesn't apply to my house. It applies solely to court. So we can opine anytime we want that somebody is damn guilty, particularly when our own eyes are seeing a video that we don't think was manufactured by AI and we can say he's likely guilty. And if there's anything wrong with that, what the hell with you. We're allowed to have an opinion. Right?
- [09:33]
A
That's a good answer, and I will. I don't think. There's no question that the video is actually real and the video shows him shooting this man in the back in cold blood on a busy Manhattan street. So we can talk about the presumption of innocence all day long.
- [09:46]
C
But what was suppressed, what was let in?
- [09:50]
A
So now he had a state Court hearing, because his defense attorneys, who are doing a great job, that's what defense attorneys are supposed to do. They move to suppress some of the evidence in the case. Because if you remember, when Luigi Mangione was. He wasn't in custody, when he was detained in a McDonald's, when police were, like, suspicious that he could be who we thought he was, they overstepped. Basically, what you can do without a warrant in terms of searching somebody who you. Who you suspect of committing a crime.
- [10:23]
C
Here's what I wanna talk about. I wanna know from you. The stuff that was let in, everybody's going, oh, all this stuff is out. Who gives a crap? What was let in includes the gun that allegedly shot the guy and his manifesto. If you're the prosecutors, the defense will call it a diary. I don't care what you call it. It includes his thought process that these people needed to die. These types of people. I mean, it is so specific. How is this ultimately not a huge victory for the government?
- [10:57]
A
Oh, the government still has a case. Their case really, to be honest, isn't overly affected by this, which. So sidebar. The defense attorneys, who are very knowledgeable and very skilled, know this. Right. I don't think they were expecting all of the evidence to get suppressed. Right. And you're not going to be able to suppress the video. So what kind of victory is it when just a little bit of it got suppressed, but the rest of it is still ample to support a murder conviction, assuming this case goes to trial or they decide to plead him to something.
- [11:32]
C
So it's a victory for due process because his lawyers needed to file this motion. If they didn't, you and I would say they've rendered ineffective assistance of counsel, which he deserves. So you filed a motion, they went through it, they challenged the evidence. And what remains is still, to me, proof beyond. To the exclusion of every reasonable doubt is still plenty.
- [11:56]
A
But you know what? Before we go on, because I really want to get to his fan club, which has got my backup. Can we play? We. We do have a thought, I believe, of the judge rendering his decision in that motion. Can we play that one?
- [12:10]
C
I find that the search of the backpack at the McDonald's was improper warrantless search. That the backpack was not within the immediate control or grabbable area of the defendant. And further, the people failed to demonstrate exudant circumstances. Therefore, those items found in the backpack during the search at the McDonald's will be suppressed. However, the people have established that the subsequent search of the backpack at the station was a valid Inventory search, and therefore the items recovered at the station will not be suppressed. So as to the issue, I find that the defendant was not in custody until about 9:47am so any statements before that will not be suppressed. However, as Miranda warnings were not given until some seconds after 9:48 in the morning, those statements made shortly before that in response to improper custodial questions that were not merely a request for pedigree information will be suppressed. All right. The remaining statements will not be suppressed as they were either spontaneous, yada yada, yada, yada, yada. So. So look, this is a victory for our rights because. For everybody's rights, right? Because even a murderer, they apply the constitution. And it is a presumptive improper search unless there's a warrant, unless you have some type of exception in this case. Okay? They found it at the police station. They were allowed to then search it at the police station. But on scene, the things that they found get suppressed. Okay, Great. Justice was done. Yes.
- [13:58]
A
Hallelujah. Yes.
- [13:59]
B
Yes.
- [14:00]
A
Okay, so let's move on to. Let's move on.
- [14:02]
C
Oh, let's talk about this. Did you. All right, I'm going to put you on the spot because I don't know if you did your homework and watch this documentary. So good.
- [14:11]
A
Oh, we're going to move on to the crash. You don't want to talk about the super fans.
- [14:15]
C
Oh, you know what? Let's do that. And yeah, you're right. We need to. I need to get upset. You're right. Go, go.
- [14:20]
A
No, no, we really do, because.
- [14:22]
C
Let's play the sot and then we'll just get upset and move on to the crash. Go. All right. Yeah. Brian Thompson.
- [14:29]
A
That's all I'm gonna say.
- [14:31]
C
That's all I want to say. Brian Thompson. His mom.
- [14:34]
A
I said.
- [14:35]
B
I said what I said.
- [14:36]
A
I don't give a. His children are better off without him.
- [14:39]
C
They need to learn to not be
- [14:40]
A
like their dad and enjoy the blood money.
- [14:43]
C
Kid standing on difference. Brian Thompson.
- [14:47]
A
I don't give a.
- [14:49]
B
Millions of Americans liked it. Brian Thompson was a terrorist. And more people should acknowledge this and be appropriate.
- [15:02]
A
You should be dancing on the graves. If the people who profit off killing me, that's completely called for as normal.
- [15:12]
C
Disgusting. Johnna. Decades ago. Okay, I get it. You got an issue with the healthcare industry. You got an issue with this particular CEO, that's fine. That what. That's what makes our country great. You can advocate all you want, but to suggest that murder is okay because of it, what type of person does
- [15:34]
A
that make you Those three people are pieces of crap. And I can't understand why this man has such a fan club. I don't even think it's really for what they think he stands for. Stands for? If they think he stands for. Oh, we're gonna effectuate change. The American healthcare industry sucks. Yeah, it does suck, right? That's my healthcare company. It sucks, but I'm not gonna go kill anybody for it. And the fact that his family has to hear this and see this, I think he's got such a fan club. Just because he's a good looking murderer.
- [16:09]
C
I don't disagree with you. Yeah, his shell somehow works for some of these ladies. And that's why they're justifying it and they're crazy.
- [16:18]
A
All right, let's move on.
- [16:19]
C
Yeah, because this, I watched this Netflix documentary. I told my kids to watch it. They all loved it. We talked about it over lunch. It's the number two show in the country. It's called the Crash. 17 year old. Her name is Mackenzie Shurilla. She was 17 and it was July 31st, 2022. Here's what's uncontroverted. She drove her car that contained her 20 year old boyfriend and 19 year old friend, Daven Flanagan. Her boyfriend was Dominic Russo. She drove that car approximately 100 miles an hour into a brick building. That is uncontroverted. The question is, here's the car, why? Right, so far. So far, John, we're on the same page, right?
- [17:07]
A
Yeah.
- [17:07]
C
This is what happened. Question is why? Nobody wanted to believe at first that this was anything more than a tragic accident. Maybe there was a vehicle malfunction, maybe she was distracted. And so it's not something as sinister as murder. But after they analyzed everything, the car checked out. There was no faulty brakes, no bad equipment. They checked her toxicology. They did that. They found nothing that influenced her driving. And ultimately they found that she intentionally drove that car into a brick building, causing the death of her boyfriend and
- [17:53]
A
friend without stepping on the brake.
- [17:59]
C
But yes, the no breaks.
- [18:02]
A
No breaks. Which kind of begs the question, does it not? Like if you're intending to kill everybody in that car, that would include yourself. Right. There's no eject button there. But the prosecutor really went after her with a vengeance. And I'll tell you what, if you are, we don't want to really give away the entire show. If you watch the show, you were going to walk away. I did. With a genuine disdain for Mackenzie Scurrilla for a number of reasons. Just spoiled little brat.
- [18:36]
C
Let's see what she did, though. Let's come. We'll come back to her character, but let's go to SOT3 and see what police officers were forced to view at the crash site. Take a look at this. The car is split in two. Radio, there's a occupant inside. Send us a squad now. We got to bust the window out. Send us some more units.
- [18:59]
B
Any more units to progress? Now.
- [19:06]
C
31 up. This is not a fresh accident either. She's been here for a while. Brady, we got at least two occupants in here. No one's moving.
- [19:19]
A
Oh.
- [19:19]
C
Oh, my God. Oh, my God. Times three. Guys. Radio. Three occupants. No one's conscious. No one's breathing. Bust that window out. We. She's alive.
- [19:42]
A
We got to get her out somehow.
- [19:44]
C
The chair. Horrible.
- [19:53]
A
Completely horrible.
- [19:54]
C
Okay.
- [19:55]
A
Every parent's worst nightmare. Now. But. But as you mentioned before, we watched that originally. I think people thought this was just sort of a horrible accident. Young kids. She probably had a lot of drugs on board. She was probably drugged, something that caused this.
- [20:09]
C
And they found shrooms. They found shrooms in her bag, but none in her system, so.
- [20:13]
A
None in her system.
- [20:15]
C
Aha.
- [20:16]
A
Right. And then, you know, I don't know. I don't think we have footage of this. But for when you watch the documentary, her parents. Her parents play a big role in the documentary. And while they seem like seemingly law abiding people, when you hear them talk about her, when you hear them talk about the crash, the accident, you no longer question why Mackenzie Shurrilla did what she did because she, Mackenzie Scurrilla, was raised by wolves. And that contributed to why she thought. Either she thought that she was. I don't know beyond any sort of harm, whether she thought that she was going to turn at the last second and just scare her occupants. I don't know what she was thinking, but I'll tell you what she's thinking now. That's a picture of her at the end of the documentary. I saw very little remorse. Very little remorse.
- [21:08]
C
None. She was out. Oh, no. She was acting completely inappropriately, like completely tone deaf after the crash. Whether she intentionally chose to drive into a building, which ultimately I'm giving it away, the judge found because this was a bench trial in front of the judge and not a jury, or whether it was some type of accident that she was responsible for. She was completely tone deaf and pissed off all the victims, as you'll see in the documentary.
- [21:39]
A
Yeah, I do need to split hairs though, for a second.
- [21:42]
C
Go ahead, slice. Slice away, my friend.
- [21:45]
A
Even though she is unlikable. And even though ultimately she is where she belongs. I just had a little bit of a twinge. You know, murder in most states, including where this was, which was Ohio. You know, I'm not convinced that she was intending to kill herself. And the other. And that's why. Because she is so selfish, Marv. Honestly, I don't think she intended to kill herself. And if she wasn't intending to kill herself, then what she was doing. How could she be deemed to be intending to kill the occupants if she wasn't intending to kill herself?
- [22:19]
C
I know he was breaking up with her. Her longtime boyfriend wanted nothing to do with her. I don't know what happened in the car. That's what all the victims want to know. Like, what exactly happened, what. But we know he didn't want to have anything to do with her. There was evidence that a couple weeks before she had said that she was going to do something like this. There was a witness who testified to that. But here's what got me. There are two pieces of evidence that convinced me and I think convinced the judge. One that was not in the documentary. It was in an A and E special. We have the clip. I asked them to put it together. But this one was. Let's start with number two, the thing that was in the documentary. You see her making a safe turn.
- [22:59]
A
Very safe, very safe.
- [23:01]
C
Deliberate, slow, and then she hauls ass 97 miles an hour, no brakes. But it wasn't a straight road. It was a curved road. And if she did suffer from pots, like her mother claimed, and thus would have passed out, like they tried to allege, erroneously, then the vehicle would have gone off the road earlier. She wouldn't have been able to navigate that curved road until she got into the wall. That's number one. Did you want to respond to that one before I move to the second?
- [23:31]
A
No, you can move on. I'm with you.
- [23:32]
B
I'm with you.
- [23:33]
C
All right, number two. A police officer, I think it was a detective, went to visit her in the hospital right after this happened. And they recorded what was said on audio. And she has this conversation with her mother that sounds like pig Latin gibberish. I want you to hear it, and then we'll get into what it was. Let's go ahead.
- [23:56]
B
Okay.
- [23:56]
C
The crime we're investigating is an aggravated vehicular homicide times two. I do want you to know that a lot of people are coming to us and reporting things. And so usually, yes, I was told that usually the most accurate information we're going to get Is from her. If they're just.
- [24:14]
A
Can I say something to her?
- [24:18]
C
She speaks to her mother in a unique language. I was a prosecutor. It's a gibberish or a distortion of the English language.
- [24:32]
A
It's kind of like pig laugh.
- [24:37]
C
Can we tell the police I had a seizure? Can we tell the police something like that?
- [24:41]
A
One of the first things that the
- [24:43]
C
girl said to the detective was instantly. Can't you just take my driver's license away for 10 years?
- [24:54]
A
Like taking my license away for like 10 years?
- [24:58]
C
Jona, did you even see that? Come on, Jona. Jonna. Two things. One, can you take my license. Hold on one second. Take my license for what? She didn't do anything wrong in her mind. Bullshit. She knew what she had done. And. And the other thing was. Let's just say I had a seizure. They were setting it up from the beginning. Come on, Gianna.
- [25:17]
A
That should have been in the. That's not in the Netflix documentary.
- [25:20]
C
I know you heard it here on Positively Legal.
- [25:24]
A
What planet are you from that you can create a whole little weird non language language to communicate with your parents who are wolves who raised you. That's bizarre, right? You know what's okay, one quick thing and I know we're gonna have to move on, but you know how very recently. Oh, God, what is the name? There was a kid who shot up at school. His parents were convicted.
- [25:51]
C
Yeah, I forget their names. That was in Boston.
- [25:53]
A
Crumbley. Ethan Crumbley, I think.
- [25:55]
C
Right, right. Yeah.
- [25:57]
A
For the first time ever we saw parents prosecuted for the conduct of their children. We should see it again.
- [26:06]
C
Oh, not. The facts are different. They had made the gun accessible. It was a whole different thing. And I didn't even agree with that prosecution. But to be continued, preview our guest because I'm excited to hear from her.
- [26:18]
A
Oh, God, me too. I cannot wait to be speaking with Jenny Burton. She is a systems change agent and author of the Gabriel Plan. She's going to join us. You're not going to want to miss her story. Stay tuned. We'll be right back.
- [26:47]
C
Welcome back to Positively Legal. And we are so privileged right now to have joining us, Ginny Burton. She's a systems change agent. She's host of the Modern America channel. She's also the author of the book the Gabriel Plan. Ginny, first of all, thank you so much for joining us. We are extremely grateful for your time. Thank you.
- [27:12]
B
Yeah, thank you guys so much for having me.
- [27:15]
C
All right, so we got to start at the beginning and I'm going to go on record and say you never had a chance. Girl, I feel so sorry for what you went through, Although I know that that's what made you the person you are today. But let's start as a child. What the heck happened?
- [27:35]
B
Yeah, arguably it's exactly what was supposed to happen. So I was born and forged for such a time as this. And I was born to drug addict parents. I mean, in the long and short of it. And though I compared my life to TV shows, God had a different plan for me.
- [27:59]
C
And so how bad was it? I mean, they were obviously not doing what they were supposed to do. But what were you witnessing in the household? What were you subjecting yourself to unwillingly? Because that wasn't your choice.
- [28:12]
B
No, definitely wasn't my choice. My house was raided when I was 4 years old. My dad was taken to prison. Shortly after that, my mom,
- [28:21]
A
her life
- [28:22]
B
sort of cascaded into. To despair and destruction. I think it felt good to her in the beginning because, you know, we're all building the plane as we fly it. And so suggesting that my parents should have done something differently would suggest that they had a different skill set than what they had. So I think that they were functioning from the foundation that they were skilled in. And unfortunately, when you put drugs in chaos, love and children in the same space, you get exactly what that kind of mixture would suggest. And, you know, what I got was a crash course in strength, really, and a real, real college education in the, I think, the real existence of humanity without, you know, the luxuries that we have been conditioned to participate in here in the United States. And so for a long time I thought my life was happening to me and I didn't realize that it was happening for me. And today I just have a very different experience. And, you know, I'm so grateful for the entire thing. My mom and my dad both died in the same way in which they lived, which was in, you know, the outcomes of long term drug and alcohol abuse. And, you know, there are a plethora of things that go along with that. And like I said, I'm just grateful for it.
- [29:51]
C
Weren't they the ones who got you involved in drug use not just because of their behavior, but they actively got you involved? Tell us about that.
- [30:01]
B
Yeah, my mom did. She introduced drugs to me. I was seven years old. I think it made it easier for her to participate in some of the things that she was. And in order for her kids not to say anything, she introduced them to us. And you know, though I did not like the way that they felt What I realized was that they provided an escape from the chaos that was very frightening. And, you know, eventually, just like any other condition that we struggle with as human beings, they became patterns of behavior that provided me opportunity to, you know, move around in the environment that I was in. And they served me until they didn't.
- [30:40]
C
Were there any good childhood memories?
- [30:42]
B
Oh, I mean, yeah. And let me just say, like, I think it's really important to note that because outsiders tend to perceive addiction as just a place of desperation and suffering. Arguably, people wouldn't stay in those conditions if they didn't provide some sort of escape. So, you know, it wasn't like just this terrible experience the entire time. There were definitely things that were hard and very frightening. But, you know, yes, I. I mean, I had six brothers and sisters. We got the opportunity to explore and be free. I mean, I grew up in the 80s. There was definitely violence and fear that came along with all of the life experiences. But, you know, I have a lot of fond memories that I can reflect on, even with my mom, who was my first abuser, et cetera, et cetera. You know, we grew up together. And just the way that I see it now is just very different than the way that I saw it when I was in the midst of it. I had an expect for a long time for my mom to do something that she didn't have the skill set to do. And, you know, and I'm. Again, I just want to talk about gratitude. I'm really grateful for it today, because what I get the opportunity to do today is teach people how to live differently than their patterns of behavior, if that makes sense.
- [31:59]
C
Yeah.
- [31:59]
A
Jenny, I gotta ask you. Sorry, Marv, I gotta ask you something because your story is remarkable and so much different than people who suffer very similar to you. Right. Not. Not everybody breaks free from addiction and turns out to. To change themselves and change the world for the better, but you did so despite being addicted, perhaps at a young age and growing up in that kind of chaos, there had to come a moment, or maybe it was a series of moments that truly changed the way you operated as a person.
- [32:33]
B
Person.
- [32:34]
A
And is there. And I know it's not a secret sauce, but can you describe for our listeners, in case somebody's going through the same thing, what is it that inspired you to change and come out of that chaos in such an inspiring way?
- [32:50]
B
So I've answered this question so many times, and the way that you set it up just caused me to sort of have a different experience with how I'm going To answer. So, first of all, I was tired. You know, every single person, I think, in the world has behaviors that they don't like the outcomes of, but they don't know how to change them. I. I was just really tired. And, you know, I. The moment that I was arrested last time, I just knew that something needed to change. And I realized. I realized something really simple, which was I just have to do the opposite of what I've been doing. And because I realized that I was the author of my story, that the change was going to have to come for me. For a really long time, I had an expectation for systems and governments and providers to have the answer for me. But how could they have the answer when they had never been there?
- [33:55]
C
How old were you when you finally made the shift?
- [33:58]
B
Yeah, 40. I just want to say that I think it's really important to say this. Law enforcement was a blessing that intervened to help propel that shift, so. But I was 40 years old.
- [34:14]
C
Okay. And you had been arrested how many times? And I say this with love. It's just part of your story, you know?
- [34:21]
B
Yeah. Just so you know, my life is an open book. So I. For a long time, I've walked around essentially naked on the stage of the world. Everybody knows my story. So there's no area you cannot go into. I just want to say that right now. But, yeah, I don't know. I've been arrested a lot of times. I served three different prison sentences. I've done a number of different jail stays, juvenile justice days. For a long time, though, I expected other people to, you know, give me what I needed to be able to exist differently. Uh, and. But when I got arrested at 40, I was just. I was sick of it. I was sick of myself. And I knew that something needed to change. So, yeah, I. What a.
- [35:02]
C
Had you got. Had you gone to rehab any of the times as part of any previous sentences?
- [35:08]
B
Sure, yeah. Yeah, I did. Um, and I just want to say,
- [35:11]
C
most amount of time. I'm just curious, what's the most amount of time that you're able to get under your belt? Because maybe that helped when you finally made your decision at 40.
- [35:20]
B
A hundred percent. Now, let me just say I've been to treatment a couple of times. I've been to prison three times prior to this experience. And each of those times I gathered more information. Right. So what these industries do is they provide a one dimension of what is necessary, which is separation from the destructive path. So in saying that it gives a person, in the past, not. Not today, It's a very different system today. It gave or gives a person the opportunity to be removed long enough to get clarity. And every single person that I've ever interacted with in any of these spaces, whether it's me residing inside of these spaces or me serving inside of these spaces, they start to develop a plan for how they want their life to be different. Now, I just want to say this. If a person is not practicing new behaviors, the likelihood of those behaviors changing when they exit out of the other end of those institutions, whether it's treatment, whether it's mental health, whether it's shelter, whether it's prison or jail, if they haven't been practicing those behaviors, the likelihood of those behaviors changing is very slim. We as a species gravitate toward familiarity. We gravitate toward familiarity. So when things get hard or uncomfortable and you have absolutely no idea how to navigate or access things that you want to do to change, you're probably not going to do that. And those are some of the things that I realized at 40, mind you. I was searching for death. I was, I was sick of it. I thought I was a failure in all areas of my life. But there was a different thing that happened for me when I was arrested and I became clear. And, you know, and that's like there's this whole spiritual component to, you know, everything that's happened. But, you know, I woke up. And that's what happens pretty consistently with most people that end up in these environments when they're not put on drugs. And I'm going to tell you that today, when a person is separated, they're immediately put on drugs. Whether it's through detox, whether it's a treatment program, whether it's prison, they are immediately put on drugs. And when you cannot access the deepest recesses of yourself because you are continued to participate in, you know, chemical escape, what happens is people don't ever find that place of clarity.
- [37:46]
C
So you don't believe in Suboxone to wean people off of no go cold turkey.
- [37:52]
B
And then, yeah, I'm not zero tolerance, but I can tell you that I am abstinence based. So when we have blamed the pharmaceutical companies for the problem of opiate addiction, are we all really so dim that we think that the pharmaceutical companies are actually the answer to the very problem we're suggesting that they created? Isn't their business model exactly the same? How does any drug dealer make money? Just like any business return customers, right?
- [38:22]
A
They don't profit. Even some of the rehab. I'm a fan of rehab, a lot of clients have gone through, some of them successfully, some of them not. They tend to make more money if they have more clients, and they have more clients if people remain addicted. And I can you talk to this part of it? And that is you. You just said you were sick and tired of feeling the way you were feeling, right? The pain of doing what you were doing and living the way you were living was just far greater than the pain of change. I get that. But how can a person, you, somebody else, any professional, you get inside another person's head to make that switch, to flip that switch? Because I find when I have clients who are not successful in rehab, it's because they are going through the motions. They're saying what the counselors want them to say. They're just doing it. They're sneaking around behind their backs. They haven't been motivated. They're not sick and tired of feeling that way. And if we can bottle whatever it takes to change that in a person's brain, I think we have a lot more successful people who are rehabilitated. But how do you get there?
- [39:28]
B
Well, you said some really important things. First of all, our entire system currently is focused on long term management. So back in between 2013 and 2015, we had a massive shift. We've saw the DSM 5 change. Everything became diagnosable and prescribable. So when that is the focus, and I can tell you right now, I said it on a federal briefing, I think it was the homelessness EO. It was either the homelessness EO or the treatment EO. I've got some friends, you know, in D.C. that are involved in a lot of this stuff. I do consulting on different policy stuff with currently the state of Tennessee's Department of Human Services. But I was able to sit in on some HUD stuff too, that showed the timeline between 2013 and 2015, which made a lot of sense to me because I was working in the behavioral health industry at the time. So we changed addiction treatment to substance use disorder. With the eo, the briefing that I sat in on, what I saw was a complete rebranding with pharma at the helm of some of these changes. So we have decided that homelessness is a behavioral health problem. So it's Medicaid reimbursable, it's diagnosable. The shift is to move everybody towards some sort of medication assisted treatment. So I just want to say that. How do we bottle that? Well, first of all, we have the wrong people at the table making decisions when you don't have lived experience, have overcome. I just want to identify that very distinctly lived experience who has overcome and not drank the Kool Aid and bought into this idea of industry standard, which current industry standard is long term management. If you're not sick, I'm not funded. We've seen a lot of problems with funding and how funding is directly associated with, with these problems with people remaining sick. Right. So what we can do to bottle stuff, which is what I'm doing inside of prisons today, I'm developing a model that's very intentional and we have to. When a person is removed and clear, are we ever going to have 100% efficacy? No, we're talking about human beings who like to change the way that they feel. But what we do is what during those periods of clarity we assess deficits. So we take a look at many life domains of the individual who is like, you know, receiving some sort of service inside of these indust. Whether it's homelessness, social services, behavioral health, incarceration. The model has to look the same everywhere. And what we have to look for are the outcomes that we seek. Not inputs and outputs of the agency that are serving, but the out the outcomes that we seek with the individuals that are being served. How do we as a system equip and enable individuals to become the strongest version of themselves? Well, we have to first address from lived experience, experience perspectives and engagement. Because I'm sorry, when you have the 25 year old academic who just came from suburbia, who has never once in their life had a challenge outside of what their parents could solve for them, and we're sending them into these arenas, these devil's dens, which. That's exactly what we're doing. We indoctrinate them and we turn them into these advocates that are progressing the very industry that is contributing to the destruction of human lives. And that's exactly what we're doing across the country in any.
- [42:54]
C
Can I ask you, Can I ask you a question? Let me just ask you a question. Is there any way that you can force change upon someone unless they believe their behavior has become intolerable to themselves? In other words, I watch these programs, intervention. Most of the time I don't think it tells the story because a lot of these people, I think, you know, relapse because the parents are forcing it on them or friends want them to get well. You know, doesn't the individual like you, you worked because you said I've had enough. How do you force people to get into treatment if they don't want it. It doesn't work, does it?
- [43:31]
B
Well, yes, it does, actually. So if there are 15 people that hang out in the house or live in the Same Place and 12 of them are mountain climbers and the other three are exposed to these people for a long enough period of time, people acclimate. They just acclimate. They're going to start hiking or something, they're going to start eating better or they're going to leave. That's just the way that we function as a species. Yes, you can. You remove people from the destructive path. When you're, and, I don't know, one drug addict that doesn't commit some sort of crime, we've decided that possession of narcotics that have the ability to kill people is not a crime. I think that's the stupidest thing we've ever done as a country. When we. When your civil liberties encroach on my civil liberties as a community member, then you have put yourself in a position to be removed from society until we address your problems. And so when that happens and we immerse people in an environment where change is actually occurring, we're going to have a much higher likelihood over time that people are going to acclimate to that change. Most people are using drugs and participating in certain behaviors because those are the patterns of behavior that they learn to navigate those environments. People want to have integrity. They want to have self respect. Again, are we going to have 100% efficacy? No. But this is what I can tell you. I teach a process inside of prisons, and my current numbers are really solid. Out of 51 people that have been released, only one has recidivated. Out of that one that's recidivated, he has made his way back to the program. Because though we participate in familiarity, in behaviors that have helped us to ascend escape challenge in the past, what we really want is we really want to be good people. We really want to be parents to our kids. We really want to have a job where we have autonomy in our life. We really want to have our own place to live. But when you have a system that is feeding people the poison that keeps them suspended in their sickness, because we have a gigantic industry that we've called the help industry that is really dependent on these people being sick. Change isn't going to shift. So when somebody is out screwing up and doing crazy stuff, it's our responsibility to hold them accountable, whether it's jail, whether it's treatment, et cetera, et cetera.
- [45:56]
C
I want to ask you about that stat because that's extraordinary. Out of 51 1. Then he found his way back. Tell me what the formula is for the 50. What are you doing? What on a daily basis are those 50 doing to keep themselves off drugs and keeping themselves on the right path?
- [46:15]
B
Well, they've realized that the things that they were doing in their life were not helping them access the outcomes that they sought. The formula is assess deficit, address deficit, teach accountability. Have people recognize that they are the author to their own story. And then once they have stabilized the internal foundation because our solutions are not external, the problems that we're trying to escape from exist within ourselves. So I've developed process and curriculum that I teach inside of prison. And we rigorous, rigorously go through this process for a period of time before I introduce them to real opportunities. So I bring a host of network relationships from around the same state into the prison prior to them releasing right around graduation. And what I do is I introduce the guys that I teach into relationships and opportunities so that they can sustain the goals that they have set for themselves. And so it's been successful. Guys don't want to let go of the positive things that they've developed and they actually respect the guy that's looking back at them in the mirror. So a huge part of it working
- [47:28]
C
the steps are they, are they also, like you incorporate the 12 steps into this? I'm just curious because I know that, that.
- [47:36]
B
No, but I mean I am an. I am a 12 step, abstinence based person. So of course I am also a Bible believing person. My program is. People ask me all the time, is it faith based? I said, no, but it's based in faith. And, but so are the 12 steps. So what I provided is an opportunity for people to look at themselves. Because not everybody wants to go to 12. 12 step. Not everybody identifies as an addict. What I identify is change. I am a change program. The program that I teach is a change program. I also am a lover of Albert Ellis, who is the creator of rational emotive behavior therapy. So this has a lot of radical self acceptance. You know, we've decided that, oh, my life is supposed to look perfect. There's absolutely no human being on the face of the planet that's perfect. Our essential scape really exists within accountability, personal accountability and self acceptance. Like I am okay no matter what it is that I've done. And there's actually power in my past and the things that I've done that I can't ever get away from, that I continue to try to hide from. But Wherever I go, there I am. So is 12 step a part of it? 100%? Because 12 step is a part of me. But the process itself really has to do with personal accountability.
- [48:52]
A
I want to, I want to jump in because we want to take a look at some of your success stories. What you're describing is the Gabriel plan. This is the, the system that you are changing. And I want to call for 5B because we can hear from some of your students themselves. Let's roll.
- [49:09]
C
That nobody put us in prison. Not the police, not the judge, not the prosecutors, you know, and damn sure not the victims. So.
- [49:19]
B
Amen.
- [49:20]
C
Until you start taking accountability on the things you doing wrong, you know, there
- [49:28]
B
won't be no change.
- [49:29]
C
You can't deal with problems until you name them and you know how to deal with them. And all the other programs that I've taken, I never really, no one really told me, hey, this is, this is how you should deal with this. In this situation or whatever and certain scenarios and things people are kind of private about, you know, they don't want to necessarily talk about it anymore. You know, it's. They kind of feel like I'm at the end of my sentence, I'm ready to just be done with that, let's just move forward. But there's a level of healing that I was able to get, I believe, from being an out, that that helped me become a better person and help me see how others may view me and the way that I do things and how it affects others. I've seen even within myself. But for these other individuals, I have seen guys just take more approach at going after the better things in life and then not material things, just the peace of mind, relationships be strengthened and making amends. I just had a guy talk to me about literally making an amends with his mom after so many years because of, you know, whatever bad blood was there, the lack, the cohort I was actually in and the individuals that you may not see that don't participate no longer in, out, in a sense. But I'm going to tell you this. It carries on the way they conduct themselves, the way they help other individuals and things of that nature, let alone the way how they treat themselves. I feel like a lot of individuals that not only are in it, but that stick with it. Their self worth has definitely increased.
- [51:06]
B
What kind of change do you think this could mean for their release?
- [51:13]
C
The people who come from the program are not looking at their counselors and saying, what are you going to do for me? They're not looking at DOC and saying, well, how much money are you going to give me to live here? They're looking at themselves and saying, what can I do to improve my situation? What can I do to provide for my family? What can I do to provide better environments for my, my children, my wife, my brothers and sisters, my parents? It's amazing to me over the years how many times a guy comes to prison and you know, he's got sick parents and he, all he wants to do is take care of them, but he's stuck in prison and then he gets out and he has that old mentality of, well, what's DOC going to do? For me, seeing that these guys are taking ownership in their own futures and really recognizing that they're in control of that and not relying so heavily on DOC to do it for me, I think that's going to make all the difference in the world Extraordinary.
- [52:10]
A
Jenny, I, I hate the fact that we have to wrap up with you, but we do. I just want to say that. So those people that you interviewed were part of your Ouch program, which stands for over overhaul, Unrelenting Transfiguration, which is incorporated into your Gabriel plan. And I have to just tell you something. I, I have this. Listening to those men talk about how they transformed. Ginny this would work for people who aren't addicted to anything. What the, the transformation within in them is something that I think a lot of people without addiction problems or issues, I don't want to, without addiction issues could also just become the best version of themselves. Themselves. That's friggin amazing. And I, I, I, I love you for that and I, I applaud you for that. I would hope that people don't have to be incarcerated to benefit from your plan, from your systems change, from your wisdom, from your experience. What if people do want to work with you or learn more about the program? Is there a way that they can do that?
- [53:17]
B
Ginny yeah, well, they can email me directly@ginny.org you can visit the website o hyphen ut.org you can find me on social media at vginnieburton and that's with Facebook, LinkedIn and Instagram. And I just want to say, and I think it's really important to mention this is that the population that you just witnessed, they predominantly become our homeless addicted population. The people that have been released are people who have been cycling in and out of incarceration for many years. We are breaking cycles because we are focusing on intention and the outcomes that we seek.
- [54:04]
C
Ginny, thank you. We are extremely grateful for your efforts and all that. That we'll call it horribleness. And I put that in quotations that you grew up around, led you to do God's work. And I thank you for all that you do. Thank you very much. Much.
- [54:19]
A
Thank you, Jenny.
- [54:20]
B
Thank you so much for having us.
- [54:22]
C
All right, coming up in just a moment, Jana and I go off the record. Stick around.
- [54:43]
A
Welcome back to Positively Legal. It's time for Mark and I to go off the record. But before we get to that, there's something I've been dying to discuss with you, Mark. And it's from my favorite movie.
- [54:57]
C
Oh, we all know what that is at this point. My Cousin Vinny. Oh, yeah.
- [55:01]
A
Thank you.
- [55:02]
C
All right, so let's watch a clip, one of the many. And hopefully we'll show more during the season. But let's take a look at this one clip, and we'll analyze just how real how likely this is to occur. Go ahead. Mrs. Riley, when you saw the defendants, were you wearing your glasses?
- [55:20]
A
Yes, I was. Over here, dear.
- [55:25]
C
Different levels of thickness. If you gone through thickness, oh, I
- [55:28]
A
don't know, over 60 years, maybe 10 times.
- [55:34]
C
Maybe you're ready for a thicker set.
- [55:36]
A
Oh, oh, oh, no, no, I think they.
- [55:38]
C
Okay, maybe we should make sure. Let's check it out. Now, how far were the defendants from you when you saw them entering the sack of suds?
- [55:54]
A
About a hundred feet.
- [55:56]
C
100ft. Would you hold this, please? Thank
- [56:01]
A
you.
- [56:03]
C
Sorry. Excuse me. Excuse me.
- [56:05]
A
Sorry.
- [56:06]
C
Sorry. So confident. Okay, this is 50ft. That's half the distance. How many fingers am I holding up? Let the record show that counselor's holding up two fingers. Your Honor, please. Huh?
- [56:26]
A
Let's go, Yana.
- [56:29]
C
Sorry. What the hell's Are you. Mrs. Riley and only Mrs. Riley. How many fingers am I holding up now? Risky.
- [56:45]
A
Full.
- [56:52]
C
What do you think?
- [56:53]
B
Think now, dear.
- [56:56]
A
Thinking of getting thicker glasses?
- [57:01]
C
Jona. A great scene. I loved it when I watched the movie. But how realistic is that? Would you ever do anything like that in court? Please tell me.
- [57:10]
A
No, that. That is. That is worse than asking a witness a question you don't know the answer to. It. It kind of. If you think about it in real life, it's sort of like the. If the gloves don't fit, you must acquit.
- [57:22]
C
Like that whole demonstration, that was calculated, at least. No, that was bad. That made more sense, right? Bad for the prosecution for sure. But.
- [57:31]
A
Oh, John, no, no, it would never happen.
- [57:35]
C
It's just. It's silly and. And young lawyers who see that and want to do stuff like that. Please don't. Okay, yeah, just don't. It's good for movies. It's not good in the real world. All right, we gonna. We're gonna rant a little bit.
- [57:50]
A
We're gonna rant a little bit.
- [57:52]
C
Yeah. Who's going first?
- [57:55]
A
I guess I am. Let's do it. You're in my rant. You're in my rant today, Mark.
- [58:01]
C
Really.
- [58:02]
A
Not. Not. Not in a bad way. Okay, so in case you haven't heard, CrimeCon 2026 is taking place in Vegas next week. And the whole group of NK true crime contribs is going to be there. I'm really looking forward to it because, well, Vegas, baby.
- [58:21]
C
I'm talking about getting very, very rich.
- [58:25]
A
Vegas, baby. My games are craps, roulette and poker, Texas hold. And to be exact, win or lose, they're fun to play and can keep you busy for a while if the free margaritas don't make you stupid. But the most fun I have in Vegas is at the slots. The high roll and high risk progressive slot machines where you can burn through your highest paid paralegal salary in a matter of minutes. Or you can spin those wheels to win a ton. Or you can spin those wheels and win tens of millions of dollars with one lucky pull. Have you ever wondered how much of a windfall it would take to change your life?
- [59:13]
C
$1 million.
- [59:16]
A
My number. 100 million bucks. After taxes, of course. That's what I consider fu money. And if I won fu money on this trip to Vegas, here are a few things I would and would not do. First, I would call my office and give everyone a raise so big they would wonder whether I met and married Elon Musk in the Elvis Chapel. Next, I'd round up all my MK true crime contributors and treat them to a Sky's the limit spending spree at the shops at Caesar's Palace. Okay, so yeah, I anticipate Mark Garagos turning me down. He'd be all like, I was just there with the Kardashians. You go ahead, I'll catch up after. The rest of us shop till we drop. I treat my co host, Mark Iglersch to a champagne and wagyu steak experience. So luxuriously expensive, the Prime Minister of Japan would feel compelled to friend me on Facebook. But the most important thing I would do is not tell a second single soul that I won. Not because I don't want to be bothered by my 6 cousin once removed hitting me up for a loan, but because I would want to bless as many people as I could without them ever needing to ask. When I was in law school, working three jobs to pay my rent, I got so behind on parking tickets that I had to ask my grandma to help me out before my car got towed for, like, the 10th time.
- [60:51]
C
Dude, where's my car?
- [60:52]
A
She mailed me a letter and a little bit of dough. Not enough to fully solve the problem, but enough to buy me one good meal before I went to debtors prison. The details of the note don't matter. It's the effect that I'll never forget. I swore that day that when I had enough money to be a blessing to others, I would in fact, be that blessing to whomever was in need before they ever had to ask. I've kept that promise to myself numerous times since then, and it feels pretty damn good. So when I win that FU money in Vegas next week, there's going to be a whole lot of people who. Who will have my slightly frugal, overly judgy grandma to thank for it. And then there will be Mark Eiglarsch, who just might have the best beer fed butt massage cow he ever ate.
- [61:51]
C
Butt massage cow?
- [61:53]
A
That. Don't you know? That's how they make wagu.
- [61:56]
C
Fabulous. All right, that was awesome. Now I'm going to rant, and I got to get serious for a second.
- [62:01]
A
All right.
- [62:02]
C
Becky Hill. I'm going to say it again. Becky Hill. The mere mention of her name raises my blood pressure. She was the clerk in Colleton, South Carolina, and she's the one who, the highest court in the land in South Carolina found tampered with Alex Murdaugh's jury. And just so we're clear, Alex Murdoch was convicted of killing both his wife and his son. Shot them both. And I agree with the higher court's ruling that there was plenty of evidence to prove that he was guilty. But what Becky Hill did was revolting. She tampered with that jury. She said things to them like, don't be fooled by Alex, and this decision shouldn't take too long. She did it because she was promoting a book, and if he was found guilty, the sales would go up. A book, by the way, that she plagiarized portions of. So I was very eager to find out when the news hit this past week that the convictions were overturned, that they were now going to go to trial again. Great financial and emotional and physical attacks on everyone. I was curious to see what did all of her crimes yield? I mean, perjury, obstruction, misconduct. Surely they threw the book at her. Three years probation. I immediately thought the wrong P word. See, what she did didn't just screw with Alex Murdoch and all the people of South Carolina and all those like myself who followed the trial and wanted due process, but she undermined the Constitution and what it guarantees. We would like to believe that people are afforded fair trials. What she did, she knowingly did. She intentionally did, she willfully did it. And I think she got off way too light. What do you guys think?
- [64:15]
A
Mark?
- [64:16]
C
Yes.
- [64:17]
A
Fabulous. Couldn't agree with you more.
- [64:19]
C
I'm outraged. I'm still upset by it.
- [64:22]
A
I know. Very slap on the wrist. Absolute slap on the wrist. But for now, we have to bid everyone an adieu. I want to give a very loud thank you to Ginny Burton, our guest, and to my co host, Mark Eiglar. And thank you for joining us. Remember, new episodes of Positively Legal drop every Wednesday. I hope you choose to have a wonderful week.