The Trial: USA

Episode: Bryan Walshe: When Your Search History Becomes Evidence

Date: December 12, 2025
Host: Kayla Brantley (The Crime Desk)
Guest: Rachel Sharp (Daily Mail crime correspondent)

Main Theme & Purpose

This episode dives deep into the murder trial of Bryan Walshe, accused of killing his wife, Ana Walshe, in a case that has gripped the nation—not just because of its gruesome details, but because it’s essentially being tried by digital evidence. Google searches revealing a chilling level of planning, surveillance footage, forensic testimony, and a bizarre defense pose tough questions for jurors and the public alike. The episode breaks down the prosecution’s evidence, the defense’s unusual stance, relationships and motives, and what’s at stake as closing arguments approach.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

Introduction to the Case

• Ana Walshe’s Disappearance:
  Ana vanished on New Year's Day 2023 from her home in Cohasset, MA. She was a mother of three and a Washington, D.C. executive.
• Bryan Walshe:
  Husband, art dealer, convicted fraudster, and now charged with her murder.
• Case Spark:
  Investigators found a disturbing set of Google searches on Bryan’s devices just hours after Ana’s disappearance.
  • “‘Best ways to dispose of a body.’” (Rachel Sharp, 00:02)
  • “‘Can a body decompose in a plastic bag?’” (Ryan Reynolds, 00:11)
  • “How long before a body starts to smell?” (Podcast Host, 00:14)
  • “Can you be charged with murder without a body?” (Ryan Reynolds, 00:19)

Breakdown of Evidence (03:58–07:44)

• Surveillance & Purchases:
  Footage captured Bryan dumping trash bags in dumpsters and buying cleaning supplies (including hacksaw, knife, Tyvek suit, and 20 lbs of baking soda).
  • “A kit to dispose of a body.” (Rachel Sharp, 12:58)
• DNA Evidence:
  Trash bags were recovered containing blood, Ana and Bryan’s DNA, and some of Ana’s belongings.
• No Body Recovered:
  Ana’s body has not been found, complicating the prosecution’s case.
• Bryan’s Defense:
  Bryan admits disposing of Ana’s body but denies killing her. His story: claims to have found her dead and panicked, fearing he’d be blamed.

"He claims he was cleaning up after their New Year's Eve party, went upstairs, and found Ana dead in bed."
— Rachel Sharp (06:40)

The Unusual Defense Strategy (06:20–08:22)

• Changed Pleas Before Trial:
  Initially pleaded not guilty to all counts; changed to guilty on lesser counts (disposing of the body and lying to police), but maintains innocence regarding murder.
• Why It’s Unusual:
  Defense expects jurors to believe Bryan found his wife dead, and instead of calling 911, bought items to dismember and hide her body.
• Fear and Panic Claim:
  Defense claims Bryan panicked, fearing both he and his children would lose their parents.

“His claim is that he found her in a panic and that he worried...that he would be blamed for her death. And he also worried that their sons would then lose both of their parents if he was jailed.”
— Rachel Sharp (08:08)

Relationship Motive and Background (08:22–10:58)

• Marriage in Trouble:
  Ana had been having an affair with William Fasto, a real estate agent in D.C.

  • Ana spent key holidays with him.
  • Bryan allegedly searched for Fasto online before Ana vanished, despite later claiming ignorance of the affair.

• Emotional Testimony:
  Ana’s best friend Alyssa Kirby testified about Anna’s unhappiness and that the couple hadn’t been intimate in over a year.

  • “She revealed that Anna had confided in her about the state of her marriage, that it was strained, and that they hadn't had sex in over a year.” (Rachel Sharp, 09:12)

• Financial Motive:
  Bryan stood to inherit $2.7 million in life insurance.

Legal Troubles and Financial Pressure (10:36–11:23)

• Fraud Background:
  At the time of Ana’s disappearance, Bryan was awaiting sentencing for a federal fraud case (selling fake Andy Warhol paintings).
• Prosecution Motive:
  Prosecutors argue financial strain and prospect of sole life insurance beneficiary contributed to motive.

The Google Search Evidence (11:23–13:32)

• Timeline:
  Searches began at 4:52 AM on New Year’s Day, continuing through the next day.
• Nature of Searches:
  After midnight, Bryan searched “best ways to dispose of a body,” “how to soar a body,” “how to dismember a body,” “how to stop a body from decomposing,” and more.
  • Also searched “how to dispose of a cell phone” and for tools/cleaning supplies.

“Those searches were read out in court, and it was pretty shocking. They began at 4:52 am...just a few hours after they'd seen in the New Year together.”
— Rachel Sharp (11:55)

• Supporting Physical Evidence:
  Receipts and surveillance show Bryan buying Tyvek suit, hacksaw, hatchet, 20 lbs of baking soda, cleaning products.

Prosecution vs. Defense: First Degree Murder (13:50–14:58)

• Prosecution Needs to Prove:
  Deliberate, planned murder—not just disposal of the body.
• Defense Argument:
  Searches and purchases were only made after discovering Ana dead—suggesting panic, not premeditation.
• Prosecution Argument:
  Other searches (such as for “divorce” and “cheating wife” on December 27) suggest possible intent.

Testimony Highlights

• William Fasto (Ana’s Lover): (16:50–18:50)
  • Described the affair, Ana’s unhappiness, anxiety over Bryan’s legal issues, and her intent to tell Bryan about the relationship.
  • On Jan. 4, Bryan left Fasto a voicemail, saying Ana was missing—a message Fasto interprets as possible suspicion or confrontation.
• Jem Mutloo (New Year’s Eve Guest): (19:01–20:12)
  • Testified about a seemingly normal, festive New Year's Eve at the Walsh home.
  • Afterwards, found Bryan’s claim that Ana left for a “work emergency” on Jan 1 suspicious, as commercial real estate doesn’t typically call for such emergencies on New Year’s Day.
  • Noted Bryan’s calmness and odd response about whether a fight occurred.

“Brian said to him, while you were there, did it seem like there had been [a fight]? Which is quite an interesting response.”
— Rachel Sharp (20:12)

Legal Proceeding Status and What’s Next (21:15–22:10)

• Prosecution Rests; Defense Calls No Witnesses:
  Defense did not put Bryan on the stand or call any witnesses.
• Closing Arguments:
  Set for Friday, December 12.
• Jury’s Challenge:
  Must decide if evidence shows beyond reasonable doubt that Bryan planned and committed murder—not merely that he disposed of the body.

“The million dollar question was really whether Brian...was going to take the stand...we are not going to hear from Brian in his own words what happened to Anna and why he then disposed of her body.”
— Rachel Sharp (21:28)

• Potential Consequence:
  Bryan faces life in prison if convicted.

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• “These are the Google searches at the center of one of the most disturbing murder trials in America right now.”
  — Kayla Brantley (00:24)
• “It is an unusual strategy. It's hard to argue without him having taken the stand, which is something we now obviously know that he isn't doing.”
  — Rachel Sharp (06:40)
• “So again, obviously, coupled with the searchers, this all really shows, you know, it was a kit to dispose of a body.”
  — Rachel Sharp (12:58)

Timestamps for Important Segments

• Case Introduction: 00:24–03:58
• Detailed Evidence and Bryan's Defense: 03:58–08:22
• Relationship Issues and Motive: 08:22–10:58
• Google Search Evidence: 11:23–13:32
• Physical Evidence (Purchases/Surveillance): 12:58–13:37
• Prosecution vs. Defense, Jury Issues: 13:50–14:58
• William Fasto Testimony: 16:50–18:50
• Jem Mutloo Testimony (New Year’s Eve): 19:01–20:12
• Trial Status and Looking Forward: 21:15–22:10

Additional Crime Desk Stories (22:14–26:49)

Quick mentions of other major cases—Luigi Mangione’s fugitive capture, the Colt Gray school shooting prosecution including parental criminal responsibility, and the Anna Kempner cruise ship murder case. These offer context for upcoming episodes and the scope of The Crime Desk’s coverage.

Summary Takeaways

• The Bryan Walshe trial is defined by the convergence of digital forensic evidence and real-world investigative work.
• The defense’s admission to body disposal, but denial of murder, creates a highly unusual and challenging situation for jurors.
• The most damning evidence remains Bryan Walshe’s search history and subsequent purchases, but the lack of a body and direct cause of death complicate the prosecution’s path to a first-degree conviction.
• Testimonies reveal deep marital turmoil and multiple motives, from a possible affair to financial gain.
• As closing arguments approach, the case stands as a digital-age lesson: your search history can become your most incriminating evidence.

End of summary.