Legally Brunette: The Parkland Shooting with Judge Liz

Summary

---

Podcast Summary: Two Ts In A Pod – "Legally Brunette: The Parkland Shooting with Judge Liz"

Episode Date: January 13, 2026
Hosts: Emily Simpson and Shane (subbing for Teddi & Tamra in the Legally Brunette segment)
Guest: Judge Elizabeth "Liz" Shearer

---

Episode Overview

This episode dives into the legal and human complexities of the Parkland school shooting—one of America's most devastating mass shootings—through the firsthand perspective of Judge Liz Shearer, who presided over the penalty phase of shooter Nicholas Cruz’s trial. The hosts and their guest analyze courtroom challenges, the impact on families, the nature of the verdict, and the controversial role of compassion and justice in the legal system. The conversation also touches briefly on updates in other high-profile legal cases and notable changes in Florida law post-trial.

---

Main Segments & Timestamps

• [02:37] – Introduction (skip ads) / Previous episode recap
• [17:55] – Parkland Shooting Recap & Context
• [32:16] – Judge Liz Shearer’s Legal Background
• [39:10] – Interview with Judge Liz Shearer Begins
• [46:27] – Jury Deliberations & Verdict Discussion
• [61:53] – The Issue of Jury Selection and Anti-Death Penalty Bias
• [67:34] – Florida Law Changes Post-Parkland Trial
• [77:18] – Brief Discussion: Nick Reiner Case
• [82:18] – Brief Mention: Diddy Federal Case Verdict
• [85:11] – Judge Liz on Backlash for Hugging Families
• [92:02] – Reflections on Humanity vs Judicial Rules
• [94:09] – Episode Close & Farewells

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

Parkland Shooting Recap & Legal Overview ([17:55])

• Details of the Tragedy:
  • On February 14, 2018, Nicholas Cruz killed 17 people and injured 17 at Marjorie Stoneman Douglas High School, Parkland, FL.
  • After the attack, Cruz fled, visited local stores, and was apprehended within 80 minutes.
• Aftermath:
  • Victims’ families and survivors formed advocacy groups leading to changes in Florida gun laws.
  • National discourse followed about gun control and mental health.

The Trial of Nicholas Cruz ([22:31], [31:31])

• Nature of Trial:
  • Focused entirely on sentencing—death penalty vs. life in prison—since Cruz pled guilty.
• Defense & Prosecution Tactics:
  • Prosecutors presented graphic evidence and emotional testimony to argue for death.
  • Defense emphasized mental health issues, claimed fetal alcohol spectrum disorder (unsubstantiated), and suggested upbringing factors.
• Outcome:
  • Jury failed to unanimously vote for death penalty (9-3 in favor), resulting in a mandatory life sentence.

Judge Liz: “I had no choice in the sentencing, since at the time, Florida law required a unanimous vote from the jury to impose the death penalty...” ([26:02])

Judge Liz Shearer: The Role, Challenges & Reflections ([39:10–73:07])

1. Assignation & Preparation ([43:44]):

• Judge Liz’s appointment was “random,” but her experience and professionalism made it likely she’d preside.
• She tried to run the case like any other, rapidly realizing the demands—intense media, security challenges, and emotional toll.

“I went in with a mindset: this is just like any other case...Then I realized, because of the specific circumstances…my point of view had to shift.”
(Judge Liz, [43:58])

2. Jury Dynamics & ‘The Holdout’ ([46:27–70:00]):

• Judge Liz describes warning signs from her court reporter about one juror’s overt sympathy towards Cruz.
• Jury deliberations were fraught; some jurors were so distressed they “fell down in the parking lot crying hysterically.” ([70:00])
• The so-called “holdout juror” was, in Judge Liz’s view, actively intent on blocking a death penalty recommendation.

“She got on that jury to hijack it…she wouldn’t even engage.”
(Judge Liz, [59:25])

3. Legal & Ethical Reflections:

• On fairness & emotional distance: Judge Liz asserts she never cried, though the entire courtroom frequently did.
• On accountability: She wonders if the process could have been improved but accepts, “If that’s their decision, even if I don’t agree, I have to accept it.”
• On the law’s demands: Deep frustration is expressed at how one juror could override the process; the law was soon changed to require only 8 of 12 jurors for a death sentence in Florida.

4. Hug Controversy & Gender in Justice ([85:11])

• Judge Liz received criticism for hugging victims’ families after the decision, leading to reprimand for perceived lack of impartiality.
• She expresses zero regret, emphasizing no one on the ethics commission “has ever tried a case like this.”
• Gender is discussed: Judge Liz notes women judges are innately more nurturing and that her hugs simply honored her humanity after a harrowing ordeal.

“I knew the cameras were rolling…this could be considered unfair…but I felt…if this gives these people some sort of reprieve from their grief, if I can offer them some kind of human kindness in this simple gesture, I’m going to do it.”
(Judge Liz, [87:00])

---

Sidebar Legal Discussions

The Nick Reiner Case Update ([03:43], [77:18])

• Alan Jackson (high-profile attorney) withdrew as Reiner's counsel, likely due to finances, as the family estate wouldn’t fund defense.
• Public defender Kimberly Green takes over.
• Insight from Judge Liz: It’s likely about money, though there’s speculation some lawyers want publicity from such cases or might “substitute in” later after public defenders do the heavy legal lifting.

Diddy Federal Case ([82:18])

• Judge Liz isn’t surprised by verdict—thinks federal prosecution struggled to prove trafficking/RICO, despite damning evidence of battery.

---

Notable Quotes & Moments

• On Cruz’s upbringing:
  “Many people are under the mistaken belief that Nicholas Cruz came from an abusive home. It was, in fact, the opposite…His mother was a saint, she tried everything.”
  (Judge Liz, [53:34])

• On Juror Dynamics:
  “There were two or three jurors that put their heads down and were crying hysterically. They wouldn't even look at me.”
  (Judge Liz, [70:00])

• On Judge’s Emotional Control:
  “Everybody was crying in the courtroom…Guess who never cried? Me. I never cried…”
  (Judge Liz, [92:24])

• On the aftermath, compassion & the reprimand:
  “If I can offer them some kind of human kindness in this simple gesture, I'm going to do it...I don't regret it.”
  (Judge Liz, [87:00])

---

Memorable Moments

• Behind-the-scenes jury drama:
  • Host Shane referencing how jurors “were screaming, they're pounding on the doors…want to get out…they say they can't, they have to get away from her. They need a break” ([46:38]).
• Host perspectives:
  • Discussion on arming teachers vs. fortifying schools, mental health, and safety ([20:13]–[22:04]).
• Candid look at public service’s toll:
  • “I need to see things and hear things that are not the worst of the worst. Because as a criminal judge…you hear things that are just absolutely tragic” (Judge Liz, [42:26]).

---

Additional Themes

• The challenge of finding impartial, unprejudiced jurors in high-profile death penalty cases
• The procedural aftermath of emotionally charged cases; the role of judicial empathy vs. perception of bias
• The unique burden (and gendered expectations) of women judges in such traumatic contexts

---

Where to Find Judge Liz

• YouTube: @thejudgeliz — legal commentary on current cases and trial analysis

---

This episode offers profound insight into the reality of presiding over one of America’s most infamous mass shooting cases. Judge Liz’s candor humanizes the process—and the toll—of delivering justice in modern America.

---

*For more, search “Legally Brunette” or follow Emily Simpson and Judge Liz on social media.

Transcript

[Haley]

Weight Watchers now offers access to affordable GLP1s. It works for members like I'm Haley

[Emily Simpson]

and I've lost 100 pounds.

[Jo Winterstein]

Weight Watchers has everything I need from weight loss medications to nutrition support and

[Emily Simpson]

help with my side effects. It's all in one place.

[Haley]

Weight Watchers handles the insurance for you and offers affordable cash pay options. With our program, our members are losing more weight with expert nutrition and side effect support.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

I'm Mike and I've lost 135 pounds.

[Emily Simpson]

Weight Watchers prescribing GLP1 medications.

[Shane]

It's been life changing.

[Emily Simpson]

I'm Shar and I lost 80 pounds on Weight Watchers. I realized that it would take more than a prescription to lose weight and

[Jo Winterstein]

feel good on a GLP1.

[Haley]

Better results, expert support, lose more weight, make it last.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

I can't imagine doing a GLP1 without Weight Watchers.

[Haley]

Get started for as low as $[e-mail] GLP1 for over 60 years, we've helped millions of members find what works for them. Now it's your turn, Weight Watchers. Watch it work.

[Shane]

This is Special Agent Riegel, Special Agent Bradley Hall.

[Special Agent Riegel]

In 2018, the FBI took down a ring of spies working for China's Ministry of State Security, one of the most mysterious intelligence agencies in the world.

[Narrator]

The Sixth Bureau podcast is a story of the inner workings of the MSS and how one man's ambition and mistakes opened its vault of secrets.

[Special Agent Riegel]

Listen to the 6th Bureau on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts.

[Jo Winterstein]

Hi, it's Jill Interesting, host of the Spirit Daughter podcast where we talk about astrology, natal charts, and how to step into your most vibrant life. And today I'm talking with my dear friend Krista Williams. It can change you in the best way possible.

[Emily Simpson]

Dance with the change. Dance with the breakdowns.

[Jo Winterstein]

The embodiment of Pisces intuition with Capricorn power moves.

[Emily Simpson]

Just so. I'm like delusionally proud of my chart.

[Jo Winterstein]

Listen to the Spirit Daughter podcast starting on February 24th on the I radio app, Apple Podcasts or wherever you listen to your podcast.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

I'm Nancy Glass, host of the Burden

[Haley]

of Guilt Season two podcast.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

This is a story about a horrendous lie that destroyed two families. Late one night, Bobby Gumprite became the victim of a random crime. The perpetrator was sentenced to 99 years until a confession changed everything.

[Narrator]

I was a monster.

[Haley]

Listen to Burden of guilt Season 2

[Judge Liz Shearer]

on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts.

[Emily Simpson]

Hi, guys. Welcome to another episode of Legally Brunette. I will be your host today, Emily Simpson with Shane. First of all, if you guys haven't listened to our last episode, it was on Jody Hildebrandt, which, if you remember, she had to do with the Ruby Frankie child abuse case. And a lot of you DM'd me. I know, I thought it was interesting. Do you remember when we were talking And Ruby Frankie's YouTube channel was called 8 Passengers? And then you made a comment. Why is it called eight Passengers? Because someone has to be driving.

[Shane]

Should be a driver and seven passengers.

[Emily Simpson]

Right. So I had several people DM me that said they felt as if it was the eight passengers and God was driving.

[Shane]

Oh.

[Emily Simpson]

So anyway, I don't know, I just

[Shane]

thought it might have been Satan.

[Emily Simpson]

That was maybe. But I just thought I would relay that to you because a lot of people heard that and then that was kind of the comment overall.

[Shane]

So that's speculation. We don't know that that was the thinking.

[Emily Simpson]

Well, I don't know. I don't know. I think that's how people interpreted it is that they were the eight passengers and they were a very religious family and so God was like, guiding them.

[Shane]

She's an idiot, right?

[Emily Simpson]

Exactly.

[Shane]

And she's dumb.

[Emily Simpson]

Okay.

[Shane]

As proven by her behavior.

[Emily Simpson]

All right, let's move on. We wanted to do an update on Nick Reiner also. Not only did you guys DM me a lot about the last case, we did the Jody Hildebrandt and Ruby Frankie situation. But as you all know, my obsession with Alan Jackson runs deep. So when you all saw the news that he withdrew from the Nick Reiner case, I got, I got tons of DMS where people were like, did you see this? What's going on? Are you going to talk about it? Did you see this? So anyway, so let's talk about it. Nick Reiner's arraignment has been postponed once again after Alan Jackson quit moments before the scheduled hearing. So this happened last Wednesday. Jackson informed the court that he was stepping away from the case and would no longer represent Reiner, who was charged with murdering his parents. Jackson told the judge we would ask to withdraw. As counsel of record, we have no choice but to withdraw and ask to be relieved.

[Shane]

He didn't announce why. He just announced that he's removing himself.

[Emily Simpson]

Well, he had some things to say, but there is no, no clear cut reason. A lot of people speculate, but, you know, to me, it's interesting that Reiner will now be represented by Los Angeles County Deputy Public Defender Kimberly Green and the judge approved the substitution. And now the arraignment is rescheduled for February 23rd. I think my personal opinion is, I think it had to do with money, because that was my question all along.

[Shane]

What else would it have to do with? Well, some people not disgusted by crimes. He's been around it.

[Emily Simpson]

No, but there's some. We'll talk about some speculation that some other attorneys and money.

[Shane]

When he talks, I.

[Emily Simpson]

My initial reaction when Alan Jackson first took the case was, who is paying this bill?

[Shane]

Yeah.

[Emily Simpson]

Because I would assume, and I'm probably correct, that his retainer would be seven figures for a murder trial. And with the complexities of probably an insanity defense and expert witnesses and all of the due diligence and that goes

[Shane]

into that, there's a lot of due diligence involved. When your client slit the victim's throats and they have a history, it's pretty tough to defend. So it's going to take a lot of work.

[Emily Simpson]

No, but I'm saying if you're going to have an insanity defense, you're going to have to have a lot of testing and. And, you know, all the experts, he was insane.

[Shane]

He killed his parents. That's the part I never really get. They're all insane.

[Emily Simpson]

During the brief appearance, when asked by the judge if he understood the change in council, Reiner replied, yeah, I agree with that. Before being escorted back to the correctional facility. Outside the courthouse, Jackson addressed report. And he said, this morning I had to withdraw as Nick Reiner's counsel, adding that, quote, circumstances beyond our control, but more importantly, circumstances beyond Nick's control made it impossible for us to continue our representation. I'm legally and ethically prohibited from explaining all the reasons why. I know that's a question on everyone's mind. I'm assuming I'm legally and ethically prohibited is just. It's attorney client privilege. Whatever has to do with who's financing it or what's going on behind the

[Shane]

scenes, discuss that his client can, if he wants to, break that privilege.

[Emily Simpson]

He emphasized that his departure should not be viewed as a lack of support for his former client. So he says, quote, be clear. Be very, very clear. My team and I remain deeply, deeply committed to Nick Reiner and to his best interest, asserting that the legal process will ultimately, quote, reveal the true facts of the circumstances surrounding the case. Then he went further, declaring we've learned, and you can take this to the bank, is that pursuant to the law in this state, Nick Reiner is not guilty of murder. Print that.

[Shane]

Pursuant to the law.

[Emily Simpson]

Exactly. So pursuant to the law means he's.

[Shane]

I would assume by a legal standard,

[Emily Simpson]

by a legal standard that it is not murder as in premeditated capital murder because they're going to most likely use.

[Shane]

But you know what he can't take to the bank?

[Emily Simpson]

Sanity defense. What?

[Shane]

Reiner's check. That's what he couldn't take to the bank.

[Emily Simpson]

No, he can't take that.

[Shane]

So he withdrew. Yeah, I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that. I'm just saying that's the reason.

[Emily Simpson]

No, because that was my question from the very, very beginning was why would Alan Jackson represent Nick? Right. We know Nick Reiner doesn't have any money personally or he wouldn't be living in his parents guest house, you know.

[Shane]

Yeah.

[Emily Simpson]

And I mean I don't think he was employed and I, I think they were, his parents were wealthy and well to do and, and Hollywood elite and I think they were continuing to pay

[Shane]

for the wealth to be able to hire Jackson is what you're saying.

[Emily Simpson]

Right. So to me, the only way that there could be someone to cover Jackson's enormous legal bill for a murder trial is if the estate went to the other siblings and the siblings were willing

[Shane]

to pay for some point things settled a little bit, the emotions were set aside. The family attorney, state law attorney, whatever, all got together and started to really realize what they would be doing and that would probably be depleting all their worth for a sibling that was probably troubled and killed the parents. And it's not about trying to find him a better opportunity. And that's worth every penny. It's we're gonna get this guy like off from a criminal charge and deplete all our funds when he killed our parents. And he clearly needs help.

[Emily Simpson]

It's also very telling that a public defender stepped in because if it was not an issue of money, then you would probably have another big time elite attorney step in and Alan Jackson's place.

[Shane]

But it was not Kimberly Green.

[Emily Simpson]

Not a public defender.

[Shane]

I think I heard her speak, make a public speech or whatever like for the press and she was very quiet and she has not one to have public meetings and stuff.

[Emily Simpson]

Not like Alan Jackson. No, she's not media trained.

[Shane]

Yeah, he likes the microphone.

[Emily Simpson]

Oh yes he does.

[Shane]

I don't know if she did so.

[Emily Simpson]

Some legal experts have weighed in and said that maybe Alan Jackson had no chance or had no choice but to quit. Offering some insight, A California New York based entertainment attorney, her name is Lisa Bonner, told Page Six That Jackson's carefully chosen language strongly points to, to a professional conflict. Referencing his remarks to the court, she said that such phrases like we have no choice and circumstances beyond our control are commonly used when an attorney is legally required to step aside, such as an ethical or legal conflict. I don't know if I believe that. I don't really feel like it's a conflict of interest. I still go back to the whole money thing.

[Shane]

But what, what if it was something like, like Alan Jackson's like, oh, wait, you did kill your parents. Oh, like I misunderstood. Okay, I can't defend you.

[Emily Simpson]

Like he got wrong later.

[Shane]

Because I heard as a criminal defense attorney, you never want to ask your clients if they did it.

[Emily Simpson]

Oh, so you never, you never ask. So you're saying maybe he just assumed that, you know, there's some third party out there?

[Shane]

I mean, I was kind of lightly joking, but, you know, but that's the thing. You don't. If you ask your client if they did it now, you can never say that your client is not guilty or, you know, innocent or anything like that. Once you heard it, you can't unhear it and you can't lie. So I talked to some criminal defense attorneys and they don't want to ask

[Emily Simpson]

their client because they don't want to have the knowledge.

[Shane]

Yeah, they'll only ask maybe for what information they want, but they're not going to say like, did you do it? How long have you been planning this?

[Emily Simpson]

Yes.

[Shane]

What were your thoughts? Did it feel good when you did it? Yeah.

[Emily Simpson]

You're not going to ask those questions. So another theory is. Well, and this one makes a little bit of sense to me because he's a high profile defense attorney that he might have a professional fallout from the Hollywood elite. The way I understand it is there's only a handful of attorneys that the elite in Hollywood would go to. And Allen is on that, very short listed so because Rob Reiner and his wife Michelle were very beloved within Hollywood and this is such a heinous crime, he'd be defending.

[Shane]

He'd be defending bad person.

[Emily Simpson]

Right?

[Shane]

Yeah.

[Emily Simpson]

And so it could take him off of that high profile list.

[Shane]

So if Rob Reiner killed his son, it would have been okay to represent him?

[Emily Simpson]

Well, I don't know about that either. I'm just saying I think that's a stretch.

[Shane]

I think it's simply a money thing. And I think Alan Jackson has every right to not represent someone that's not going to pay his fee. That's just the way it works.

[Emily Simpson]

Yeah, I Guess basically it could be that through representing Nick Reiner, there could be some reputational consequences. The backlash is he becomes a pariah in Hollywood because Michelle and Rob were beloved.

[Shane]

You know, the question I have, which I don't think we'll ever get an answer to is how did he. At what if it. If it's a finance thing and there's no. They cut off funds or whatever, there's no money or whatever it is, then what made him initially think he could take the case? Like, did he jump on it before he looked into it? Did the family initially say, yeah, yeah, we got it, we got it. We want to rep. We want our brother taken care of. And then they changed? I don't know.

[Emily Simpson]

We'll never know, but, yeah, we'll never know. But I. That. That interests me, too. Was it Nick Reiner that were. That reached out to Alan? Well, Alan, Jack was legally barred from reaching out to him. But I don't know how they came into contact. I don't know if the family reached out right to Alan. I don't know.

[Shane]

I don't know. I don't know. I bet you. I bet you some of the key parts were they came to. They. Things settled down, they talked to attorneys, they learned how much their parents are worth, how much they're gonna get, how it's going to be dispersed, all that stuff, all the logistics. And then maybe they had a realization of, you know, we're going to lose all the money. And it's not always a muddy thing, but it's like we're going to throw good money after, like, something that's not really going to be productive. And he's just going to, you know, he's a mess. Maybe he needs to be in prison. Yeah.

[Emily Simpson]

Yeah.

[Jo Winterstein]

Hi, this is Joe Winterstein, host of the Spirit Daughter podcast, where we talk about astrology, natal charts, and how to step into your most vibrant life. And I just sat down with a mini driver.

[Mini Driver]

The Irish traveler said when I was 16, you're going to have a terrible time with men.

[Jo Winterstein]

Actor, storyteller, and unapologetic Aquarian visionary. Aquarius is all about freedom loving and different perspectives. And I find a lot of people with strong placements in Aquarius, like, are misunderstood a sun and Venus in Aquarius in her seventh house Spark her unconventional, intentional approach to partnership.

[Mini Driver]

He really has taught me to embrace people sleeping in different rooms, on different houses, in different places, but just an embracing of the isness of it all.

[Jo Winterstein]

If you're navigating your own transformation or just want a Chart side view into how a leading artist integrates astrology, creativity and real life. This episode is a must. Listen Listen to the Spirit Daughter podcast starting on February 24th on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcast, or wherever you listen to your podcasts.

[Narrator (Mind Games)]

What if mind control is real?

[Emily Simpson]

If you could control the behavior of anybody around you, what kind of life would you have?

[Narrator (Mind Games)]

Can you hypnotically persuade someone to buy a car?

[Shane]

When you look at your car, you're

[Judge Liz Shearer]

going to become overwhelmed with such good feelings.

[Narrator (Mind Games)]

Can you hypnotize someone into sleeping with you?

[Judge Liz Shearer]

I gave her some suggestions to be sexually aroused.

[Narrator (Mind Games)]

Can you get someone to join your cult?

[Jo Winterstein]

NLP was used on me to access my subconscious.

[Narrator (Mind Games)]

Nlp, AKA Neuro linguistic programming, is a blend of hypnosis, linguistics and psychology. Fans say it's like finally getting a user manual for your brain.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

It's about engineering consciousness.

[Narrator (Mind Games)]

Mind Games is the story of nlp, its crazy cast of disciples, and the fake doctor who invented it at a New Age commune and sold it to guys in suits. He stood trial for murder and got acquitted. The biggest, best mind game of all, nlp, might actually work.

[Emily Simpson]

This is wild.

[Narrator (Mind Games)]

Listen to Mind Games on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

[Ben Higgins]

What do you do when the headlines don't explain what's happening inside of you? I'm Ben Higgins, and if you can hear me is where culture meets the soul, a place for real conversation. Each episode I sit down with people from all walks of life celebrities, thinkers and every and we go deeper than the polished story. We talk about what drives us, what shapes us, and what gives us hope. We get honest about the big stuff. Identity when you don't recognize yourself anymore. Loss that changes you Purpose when success isn't enough. Peace when your mind won't slow down. Faith when it's complicated. Some guests have answers. Most are still figuring it out. If you've ever felt like there has to be more to the story, this show is for you. Listen to if you can hear me on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

[Haley]

In 2023, a story gripped the UK, evoking horror and disbelief.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

The nurse who should have been in

[Mini Driver]

charge of caring for tiny babies is

[Judge Liz Shearer]

now the most prolific child killer in modern, modern British history.

[Haley]

Everyone thought they knew how it ended. A verdict. A villain. A nurse named Lucy Letby.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

Lucy Letby has been found guilty.

[Haley]

But what if we didn't get the whole story?

[Narrator (Mind Games)]

The moment you look at the whole

[Judge Liz Shearer]

picture, the case collapses.

[Haley]

I'm Amanda Knox and in the new podcast the Case of Lucy Letby, we follow the evidence and hear from the people that lived it to ask what really happened when the world decided who Lucy Letby was.

[Jo Winterstein]

No voicing of any skepticism or doubt

[Judge Liz Shearer]

it'll cause so much harm at every

[Special Agent Riegel]

single level of the British establishment of this is wrong.

[Haley]

Listen to Doubt the Case of Lucy Letby on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts.

[Emily Simpson]

So today on the podcast we are going to have a special guest come on who Shane introduced me to. This is your special guest and before she comes on, I wanted to talk about the Parkland shooting because she was the judge in that case, so she goes by Judge Liz. And before she comes on, let's just talk about the Parkland shooting. So on February 14th of 2018 at Marjorie Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, it became the site of a devastating shooting when 19 year old Nicholas Cruz, a former student who had been expelled for disciplinary issues, entered the campus and opened fire. Cruz entered the school at 2:21pm beginning in the freshman building which housed approximately 900 students along with faculty and staff. He drew his rifle and a stairwell before moving onto a first floor hallway where he fired the first shots. Within about two minutes, 11 people were killed and 13 were wounded. Cruz then moved upstairs and discharged his weapon again. Though he did not hit Anyone on the second floor, he continued to the third floor where he killed six more people and injured four, spending less than a minute there. At 2:28pm Cruz left his rifle in a stairwell and exited the building. He then went to a Walmart at 2:50pm stopped at his subway for a drink and later visited a McDonald's. He was located by Broward county police and arrested on a Nearby street approximately 80 minutes after the shooting began. The Parkland shooting left 17 people dead and 17 others injured. In the wake of the tragedy, survivors organized the student led advocacy group Never Again. MSD focused on addressing gun violence and promoting policy change. Florida responded by passing new gun control laws, including raising the minimum age for gun purchases and imposing mandatory waiting periods. The shooting also sparked ongoing national conversations about mental health, school safety and gun regulations as survivors and communities continue to grapple with the emotional and psychological impact of the event. Let me ask you a question. The high school I graduated from in Ohio actually had a school shooting?

[Shane]

Oh yeah?

[Emily Simpson]

Yeah.

[Shane]

When?

[Emily Simpson]

Maybe 10 years ago or so after that happened, they, they armed teachers with guns.

[Shane]

Then the community, they allowed.

[Emily Simpson]

They allowed teachers. I don't know exactly what the terms are, but they allowed teachers.

[Shane]

They didn't just hand out guns.

[Emily Simpson]

No.

[Shane]

The teacher's lounge.

[Emily Simpson]

Yeah. I mean, I don't know the process that took place, but there they. Initially, after that happened, teachers were then permitted to carry guns on campus. Then the community where I used to live was outraged. And there were tons of meetings with school boards and everything. And I believe that was eventually repealed and they're not allowed to do that anymore. What is your take on that? I don't know if that's.

[Shane]

I mean, as if I thought about this. I don't know. I mean, I would think at the very least, if professors are going to carry, they certainly need to have training. You don't just hand out guns. And I guess if my children's teacher had a gun in class, I'd understand the intention behind it, but I probably wouldn't like it. It's better to have the place secured with a fence as much as possible and security on campus. And then you have a, you, you. Because what if, what if students find out, oh, this teacher doesn't have a gun, but this one does, but that one doesn't. But if you have armed security, like a lot of private schools do, I've been to some of those high schools that are like, you know, run by the Jewish church or community and stuff, and those are highly, like, protected, and it's awesome, you know, and then the kids feel this is a place that's kind of sacred. Right. It's a learning ground.

[Emily Simpson]

Right.

[Shane]

Safe.

[Emily Simpson]

Yeah. So, yeah, I.

[Shane]

That is more effective.

[Emily Simpson]

I always felt as if a situation like that, if you're arming teachers, you're adding more issues eventually down the line. I, you know, the solution. I mean, there is no solution that like there is, other than it all comes down to a mental health issue. I mean, someone's not mentally healthy who does that.

[Shane]

Yeah, but that's. I think we're talking about the defense mechanisms, not the treating mechanisms.

[Emily Simpson]

So. The trial of Nicholas Cruz focused almost entirely on sentencing rather than guilt, as he pleaded guilty in October of 2021 to 17 counts of first degree murder and 17 counts of attempted murder. The penalty phase trial, held in 2022, was tasked with determining whether Cruz should receive the death penalty or life in prison without parole. Prosecutors presented graphic evidence of the killings and testimony from victims families to argue for death. While the defense emphasized mitigating factors, including Cruz's severe mental health issues, fetal alcohol spectrum disorder, childhood abuse and neglect. In October of 2022, the jury failed to unanimously agree on the death penalty, resulting in an automatic sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole. The outcome drew intense national attention and anger from victims families, some of whom criticized the jury and the defense strategy.

[Shane]

Because he didn't get the death penalty,

[Emily Simpson]

because he did not get the death penalty, because they could not unanimously agree on it.

[Shane]

And that's a Florida thing then, huh? They have to unanimously agree.

[Emily Simpson]

So. Judge Elizabeth Shearer served as the presiding judge over the Parkland shooters criminal case in Bauer county, including both the pre trial proceedings and the 2022 penalty phase trial that determined Nicholas Cruz's sentence. She managed an unusually emotional and high profile proceeding, repeatedly enforcing courtroom decorum amid graphic testimony and intense reactions from victims families. After the jury failed to unanimously agree on the death penalty, Judge Shearer was legally required to impose the mandatory sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole, which she did at Cruz's formal sentencing in November of 2020.

[Shane]

So her hands were tied. She could not sentence him to death.

[Emily Simpson]

Right. During a presentation to Miami law students in 2024, Judge Liz sharply criticized Cruz's public defenders, claiming they acted unprofessionally and overstepped boundaries. She said Cruz's defense team lost their minds during the 2022 trial and recalled being friendly with lead defense attorney Melissa McNeil and her team before the case, but said that during four years of pre trial motions, three months of jury selection, and the three month trial, they all lost their perspective. According to Judge Liz, the defense engaged in disruptive behavior, talking, passing notes, using a printer, and even brushing their hair while prosecution witnesses testified. Sounds like a high school classroom. Like this is how I picture Annabelle in school, right? Like passing notes and you know, brushing

[Shane]

hair, which is unacceptable for exactly a seventh grade class.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

Yes.

[Emily Simpson]

She added that one attorney, during a recess, raised her middle finger at a camera broadcasting the trial, feeling at threatened attorney client privilege. This consumed them to a point where they started doing things and acting in ways that I had never seen before from any defense attorney that I have ever dealt with, she said. Judge Liz resigned from the bench in June of 2023, eight months after sentencing Cruz to life without parole, but maintains that this case had nothing to do with her resignation. She had no choice in the sentencing, since at the time, Florida law required a unanimous vote from the jury to impose the death penalty and Cruz's panel split 9 to 3 in favor. Florida soon after changed the law to allow a death sentence if eight or more jurors recommended it. Oh, that's interesting. I did not know that did you know that?

[Shane]

No, but that's why I asked earlier if it was. It had to be unanimous by the juror if that was a state law.

[Emily Simpson]

That's interesting.

[Shane]

So now it's a majority.

[Emily Simpson]

Yeah, well, majority.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

Eight.

[Emily Simpson]

Eight of eight or more. Yeah.

[Shane]

Two thirds.

[Emily Simpson]

The prosecutors and victims families received hugs from Judge Liz after the sentencing, which was a decision later criticized by the Judicial Qualifications Commission for showing, quote, her emotions to overcome her judgment. Judge Liz said she offered hugs to the defense team as well, but was rebuffed. She defended her actions saying, quote, I

[Shane]

regret hugs for everybody.

[Emily Simpson]

Yeah, I regret that it. The hugging was found to be inappropriate, but maintained she oversaw the case properly. You know, that's.

[Shane]

That's the case was over. Right.

[Emily Simpson]

That's interesting. As I think as females, we are innately nurturers. And if you sit in a courtroom for that long and you hear all of this horrific things and the families are sitting there and then once it's over, it's very difficult.

[Shane]

And how long was the trial?

[Emily Simpson]

I think it said three months.

[Shane]

See, that's a lot.

[Emily Simpson]

It's very difficult to be completely robotic and stone faced from.

[Shane]

So you're saying a male judge would have been like, what? Like, well, he.

[Emily Simpson]

Probably a male.

[Shane]

Over and out. Yeah, it's lunchtime.

[Emily Simpson]

Yeah. But, you know, women are natural nurturers. So I think her, her. Probably her just innate reaction was to. And she said she tried it. She tried to equally hug everyone, according to her. So it was an equal distribution of hugs. But she was rebuffed by the defense. So Judge Liz highlighted during her lecture,

[Shane]

well, you know, the defense was probably smart by declining because they're like, maybe they don't want to like, okay, we know your intentions are well, but this is bad optics. My clients get a file for like, you know, some, you know. Yeah, some type of mistrial, you know, because he's got a life sentence.

[Emily Simpson]

Not one person on that commission has ever tried a case like this, much less a case where you have 17 families who have spent a big part of a. Four and a half years with you. She explained that she had been a judge for nearly six years when assigned to the case and that no other Broward county criminal judge at the time had handled a death penalty trial. Judge Liz described the challenge of maintaining composure amid emotional testimony, stating, quote, the men judges don't cry. The female judge was not going to cry. She also commented on Cruz's character, stating that he is a sociopath who knows not one single bit of remorse for his actions or the Pain he caused the families and the Parkland community.

[Shane]

So, you know, I never. That's something I never understood. Like, okay, if he felt bad, he should have a lesser sentence. Because if you feel like you commit a murder, I know this was more than just a murder, but you commit a murder and then it's like, if you feel bad, it's less of a sentence. It's like, well, no, because the person's still dead. Like, the crime was still committed. To me, I don't get that. Maybe in jail or in prison, if that starts to show and they're educating themselves and they're going to be a better person and productive member of society and you'd be better off throw. You know, putting them out in society where they can be productive and they're not just taking tax dollars, but they're contributing, then maybe. But at the sentencing hearing, I never really understood that. I know. That's the way it works. Yeah, but I don't get that.

[Emily Simpson]

So you're saying you.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

You would.

[Emily Simpson]

You're okay during parole hearings that they use the, like an indication of remorse as something to take into consideration during a parole hearing. Because you're saying after. After the sentencing, if they've shown remorse and they've tried to better themsel.

[Shane]

Yeah, then. And then I. It also.

[Emily Simpson]

But you're saying it shouldn't be criteria during this initial sentence and also with

[Shane]

the victim statements, which I know is a therapeutic thing also. And I would. If that happened to me and I was, you know, family to someone that was a victim and I had to give a victim statement, you better believe I would. So I'm not opposed to that. But it's like, because there's more heartache, they should have more jail time. Does that mean if there was less heartache and this person that was killed had no family or no victim statements because they were not really engaged with anyone in their family and their family didn't come, then that person would get a lesser sentence. It's still a life that was taken. So I kind of don't really know how that comes into play with sentencing, but I know it does and I know it's, you know, there's probably more to it than what I'm just saying, but.

[Emily Simpson]

Well, because at the end of the day, both sides want to get to your pull your heartstrings of the jury.

[Shane]

Oh, yeah.

[Emily Simpson]

In some way.

[Shane]

Oh, okay. Yeah, yeah. If the jury is involved in sentencing. But all the time it is sometimes the judge. But, you know, everyone's sorry when they get caught. Right. So that makes it hard to believe I, you know. Right. I caught shoplifters. Right. That was one of my jobs.

[Emily Simpson]

Yes. I love Shane shoplifting stories. They're my favorite. We could do a whole podcast.

[Shane]

I was a store investigator, and every time it was their first time.

[Emily Simpson]

Yes.

[Shane]

And they were sorry and they would never do it again.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

Right.

[Shane]

But that's not true because I'd see him before. Right. I'm like, no, I've seen you many times coming here and still I just couldn't catch you. Now I did. It's not your first time. And they're always sorry when they get caught.

[Emily Simpson]

You know, Shane is an interesting man, and I don't know if the majority of you out there understand how interesting he is. You know, also, by the way, I had a lot of people send me dms and they wanted more information about your, your, your mission because you didn't give away a lot of information. When we talked about Jody Hildebrandt and Ruby Frankie, you know, you did get you touched a little bit on the fact that you did go on a mission with the LDS church, that you went to Portugal, that you went to Cape Verde, but you didn't give away a lot more. And I had a lot of people reach out and ask if we could do an in depth podcast just on you and your mission. And someday, maybe someday, we take a deep dive into Shane Simpson. Shane. Also some of my other favorite stories, some of his other career choices that people don't know about. When were you. You did. He did pest control at one point.

[Shane]

That's how I saved up for my mission.

[Emily Simpson]

He did pest control before he went on his mission. And those are some of my favorite Shane Simpson stories. So anyway, maybe we'll take a deeper dive into Shane Simpson.

[Jo Winterstein]

Hi, this is Jo Winterstein, host of the Spirit Daughter podcast where we talk about astrology, natal charts and how to step into your most vibrant life. And I just sat down with a mini driver.

[Mini Driver]

The Irish traveler said when I was 16, you're going to have a terrible time with men.

[Jo Winterstein]

Actor, storyteller, and unapologetic Aquarian visionary. Aquarius is all about freedom loving and different perspectives. And I find a lot of people with strong placements in Aquarius like are Misunderstood a Sun and Venus in Aquarius in her seventh house Spark her unconventional approach to partnership.

[Mini Driver]

He really has taught me to embrace people sleeping in different rooms, on different houses, in different places, but just an embracing of the isness of it all.

[Jo Winterstein]

If you're navigating your own transformation or Just want a chart side view into how a leading artist integrates astrology, creativity and real life. This episode is a must. Listen Listen to the Spirit Daughter podcast starting on February 24th on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcast, or wherever you listen to your podcast.

[Narrator (Mind Games)]

What if mind control is real?

[Emily Simpson]

If you could control the behavior of anybody around you, what kind of life would you have?

[Narrator (Mind Games)]

Can you hypnotically persuade someone to buy a car?

[Shane]

When you look at your car, you're

[Judge Liz Shearer]

gonna become overwhelmed with such good feelings.

[Narrator (Mind Games)]

Can you hypnotize someone into sleeping with you?

[Judge Liz Shearer]

I gave her some suggestions to be sexually aroused.

[Narrator (Mind Games)]

Can you get someone to join your cult?

[Jo Winterstein]

NLP was used on me to access my subconscious.

[Narrator (Mind Games)]

Nlp, AKA Neuro linguistic programming, is a blend of hypnosis, linguistics, and psychology. Fans say it's like finally getting a user manual for your brain.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

It's about engineering consciousness.

[Narrator (Mind Games)]

Mind Games is the story of nlp, its crazy cast of disciples, and the fake doctor who invented it at a New Age commune and sold it to guys in suits. He stood trial for murder and got acquitted. The biggest mind game of all, nlp, might actually work.

[Emily Simpson]

This is wild.

[Narrator (Mind Games)]

Listen to Mind Games on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

[Ben Higgins]

What do you do when the headlines don't explain what's happening inside of you? I'm Ben Higgins, and if you can hear me is where culture meets the soul, a place for real conversation. Each episode I sit down with people from all walks of life. Celebrities, thinkers and everyday folks. And we go deeper than the polished story. We talk about what drives us, what shapes us, and what gives us hope. We get honest about the big stuff. Identity when you don't recognize yourself anymore. Loss that changes you. Purpose when success isn't enough. Peace when your mind won't slow down. Faith when it's complicated. Some guests have answers. Most are still figuring it out. If you've ever felt like there has to be more to the story, this show is for you. Listen to if youf Can Hear me on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

[Haley]

In 2023, a story gripped the UK, evoking horror and disbelief.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

The nurse who should have been in charge of caring for tiny babies is now the most prolific child killer in modern British history.

[Haley]

Everyone thought they knew how it ended. A verdict A a villain. A nurse named Lucy Letby.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

Lucy Letby has been found guilty.

[Haley]

But what if we didn't get the whole story?

[Narrator (Mind Games)]

The moment you look at the whole

[Judge Liz Shearer]

picture the case collapses.

[Haley]

I'm Amanda Knox, and in the new podcast the Case of Lucy Letby, we follow the evidence and hear from the people that lived it to ask what really happened when the world decided who Lucy Letby was.

[Jo Winterstein]

No voice tracing of any skepticism or doubt.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

It'll cause so much harm at every

[Special Agent Riegel]

single level of the British establishment of this is wrong.

[Haley]

Listen to Doubt the Case of Lucy Letby on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

[Emily Simpson]

So Judge Liz graduated from University of Miami School of Law before working for the State Attorney's Office for the 17th Judicial Circuit, Broward County, Florida. Shearer was first chair in over 75 jury trials, handling charges of murder, attempted murder, armed home invasion, robbery and arson. She worked as a prosecutor for 11 years before she was appointed to the Florida Circuit Court bench by Florida Governor Rick Scott. She spent two years presiding over family court cases before being assigned by the chief judge to the Circuit Felony Division. Judge Liz became widely known for presiding over the Parkland shooting case, which we just discussed, which was the biggest mass shooting case to go to trial in American history. It's bigger than Columbine. How many were killed in Columbine? I don't know. I'd have to look that up.

[Shane]

I don't know. But Columbine was, as far as I remember, like, prior to that, there didn't seem to be such a school shooting.

[Emily Simpson]

I don't.

[Shane]

Also security cameras, something so dramatic, the way they dressed up, the way it was the students that went in and, you know, the. How did the parents not know? And, you know, with media being more accessible, it spread faster. So I don't know that. To me, that always felt like that kind of sparked school shootings, but at least that. That's also just from my generation and what I've seen.

[Emily Simpson]

Well, no, I. I believe that there's a lot of truth to that. I don't. There might have been some school shootings prior to that, but I. I don't know if they had to have been. I don't know if they were widely known or talked about. Columbine was definitely.

[Shane]

And it almost like came on the news in real time, almost. You know, everyone was outside the school and trying to figure out what's going on. And bombs and lots. It wasn't one handgun right there. Lots of weapons. You know, they were gonna, you know, it was like an army kind of

[Emily Simpson]

what was well thought out and. Well, yeah, I think they planned for over a year, I believe, probably.

[Shane]

Yeah.

[Emily Simpson]

So Shearer's career plan was to retire from the bench after 10 years in order to go into private practice at her family's law firm. But at the request of Chief Judge Jack Tudor, she agreed to stay until the completion of the Parkland case. Shortly after the trial concluded, she followed through with her career plan, retired from the bench, and now works as a partner at Conrad and Shearer, specializing in civil litigation. Judge Shearer also works as a legal analyst, making frequent TV appearances on Fox News, CBS News, Nation Law and Crime Court TV. And now legally brunette. She recently started her own YouTube channel. You can find her at the Judge Liz, which is how she came on our radar because Shane watched her YouTube

[Shane]

videos and clips of her in courtroom before. Yeah, before her YouTube channel.

[Emily Simpson]

But then you also watch some of her YouTube channel. Right.

[Shane]

And then somehow it popped up and so I. Yeah, I got wind of it.

[Emily Simpson]

Yeah. Right. Where's she. On her YouTube channel, she shares her insight on a variety of legal issues and cases.

[Shane]

So.

[Emily Simpson]

Hi, Judge Liz, thanks for coming on Legally Brunette today. I appreciate it. It's nice to chat with you. Thanks.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

Thank you for having me.

[Emily Simpson]

Of course. We've actually wanted to have you on for a while. Shane, my husband Shane was watching your YouTube videos and that's how we. We were like, oh, we should have her on the podcast. So we enjoyed watching you.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

Oh, that's so great.

[Emily Simpson]

Yeah. And you. And you do have a YouTube channel. It's called at the Judge Liz. Correct. If anybody wants to find you.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

Correct.

[Emily Simpson]

I know. On your YouTube, do you just kind of take whatever's currently going on and kind of talk about it from a judge perspective or just a legal perspective? Is that kind of what you like to do?

[Judge Liz Shearer]

Yes, I try to get. I try very hard. And you all know, because you do this, it's hard to think of topics that not everybody's doing all the time. Right. So I try to take a case that's popular, that's in the news that people are very interested in, and. And I try, you know, my best to think of an aspect that no one else is covering.

[Emily Simpson]

Right.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

Of course, like I said, you all know how hard that can be, especially if you don't have. If you're not big enough to have, you know, producers and writers and things like that. But I try very hard to think of something that's interesting that has not been talked about ad nauseam.

[Emily Simpson]

Right. Well, I would think, because I feel like a lot of content creators, I mean, they don't have legal background, so it's like everybody's Talking about, you know, the Blake Lively case, and everybody talks about Diddy, and everybody talks about the. The big things that are out there. But, I mean, you're. You're not only an attorney, you're a judge. And so you. You can have, like a. That very deep perspective that other content creators can't. So. Yes, you know, I. I think that's always interesting that you can take a deeper dive into that. So, anyway, before you came on, we were talking about the Parkland shooting. And, you know, I just had a. I. I had. First of all, I didn't realize it was 2022 for some reason. I felt like it was farther back in time, but it actually was pretty recent.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

And the sentencing was actually in 2023.

[Emily Simpson]

Was it? The sentencing was in 2023, yes. Now, I know that you retired right after that. Was that. That was a choice that you had made previously, though, not because of the case. Correct.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

So, yes. So I had. I had. I was appointed to the bench at a young age. I was, I think, 35 or 36. So I knew that wasn't going to be my resting place, so to speak. So I. I wanted to get the experience. I was very flattered for the appointment, and I loved doing what I did, but I knew there was a shelf life. I have a family that has a very successful law firm in Fort Lauderdale. It's always been my dad's dream to have me come help him run his firm with my brothers. And so I had put him off for 20 years. 10 years as a prosecutor and 10 years as a judge. So I told him at the end of my. At the end of the Parkland case, I gave the chief judge my word that I would stay through that case so that the case would have continuity. But at the end, I was going to resign and perhaps take part in my family business or do some other creative type thing. So that decision was made before. I can tell you that the Parkland trial solidified my decision. In other words, if I was on the cusp of should I do it now or should I wait a few years, I felt as though, you know what? I need to. I need to see things and hear things that are not the worst of the worst. Because as a criminal judge, especially presiding over a case like that, you. You hear things that are just absolutely tragic, and you hear of the worst parts of society as opposed to the best. And, you know, I like to tell people I've learned in my profession that most people are good, most people are kind, most people would lend a hand if they. If they had the opportunity. There are very few and far between are the. Are the criminals hardened criminals, like the Parkland shooter? So I just felt like, you know what? I need a new, fresh perspective. Right now I'm in civil. I do civil litigation now, and it's boring. And I'm not sure it's the fresh perspective that I was anticipating or needing, but at least I'm not dealing with, you know, the death of children or shootings or just people, the worst people and the worst behavior, if that makes sense.

[Emily Simpson]

You were offered the. Where they came to you and they wanted you to preside over that case. And, you know, 17, you know, people were affected by that. How do you prepare for something like that? I mean, that's a huge trial. I mean, you're dealing with 17 families that were affected.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

So it came out during the trial that I was randomly assigned. I'm not afraid to say now because it's been long enough. It was random. But the chief judge had told me that if you don't get assigned this case, I'm going to assign it to you. Because I had the most experience and I knew how to handle myself in front of the cameras. A lot of judges really wanted the. The attention, the media attention. I. I had judges that were close to retirement that were. That were like, calling me, begging me, can I cover the arraignment? Can I cover this? Because they wanted to be on tv. And the chief judge knew that I wouldn't do that, that I would take it seriously, that I wouldn't showboat. So I knew it was coming my way. You know, you can't prepare for it at first. I said, you know what? This is like any other case. He's not getting any special treatment. I'm gonna run this case like I do any other case. There's gonna be deadlines. You know, I'm gonna hold their feet to the fire on both sides. As far as discovery goes, he's going to come in with all the rest of the inmates. He's going to sit in the box like the rest of the inmates. And then very, very quickly, it was brought to my attention. Judges is not a regular case. We can't bring him in with the other inmates because it's dangerous to him. Somebody's going to try to kill him. We have to have him in a separate hearing where nobody else is in the courtroom. We have to be able to accommodate all the different lawyers on both sides. So, you know, my point of view is I'm going to handle this like Any other case. Then I realized, because of the specific circumstances with all of the victims, family members that wanted to be present for all of the hearings, and they, the networks livestreamed every single minute of every single hearing for five years, and the fact that there was such a security risk on the part of the shooter, which a lot of people would think, well, who cares? Well, the sheriff's office in any state or county, they do care, because if an inmate is killed or badly hurt on their watch, it leaves them open to liability. And they certainly did not want that to happen. So there were all kinds of precautions that were taken. So I just. I went in with a mindset. This is just like any other case. And I tried to keep that. That mindset. You know, this. This is like any other case. I'm going to call balls and strike. I'm going to deal with what's. What's put in front of me. And. And then, you know, we'll. We'll go from there.

[Emily Simpson]

Yeah. Were you surprised by the jury's decision that he did not get the death penalty? So you were. Was that shocking for you?

[Judge Liz Shearer]

So, okay, yes and no. So my court reporter, who's been a court reporter for, like, 30 years, she's the best. She's worked with all of the judges who's tried death penalty cases. So she has been the court reporter for, let's say, like, I don't know, 25 to 50 death penalty cases and so many trials. And I was lucky enough to have her. So she, you know, the court reporter sits in front of the bench, right? And they have a direct view to the jury, right. I'm on the bench. I'm up here, so I'm sort of looking down on them. So they see me looking at them, they sort of look up and smile. The court reporter is a couple feet from the jury and sits just, you know, five feet from them. So she's watching them. So she had told me throughout the trial, judge, there's gonna be a problem with juror number. So. And so. And I said, what do you mean? And she said, I can tell by the way she looks at the shooter. She. She said, he kind of just makes a face like. Like she's so sorry for him. And I said, trish, I don't want to hear it, because there's nothing anybody can do if she's, you know, sympathetic. It is what it is. And, you know, so. But she kept telling me that. And as much as I wanted to believe that she was mistaken, because even if a juror is sympathetic. They shouldn't be staring at the defendant and making like, you know, like, mom eyes, kind of like, you know, sad faces and. And that type of thing. They should be professional, which most jurors are. So when the jury was out deliberating, which was only for, I think it was like, five hours. And considering the amount of evidence and the number of victims, it was a very short amount of time. But during that time, my chambers were, like, right down the hallway from the jurors, and the. We had armed deputies. And so they would come into my chambers, like, judge, the jurors are screaming, they're pounding. They're pounding on the doors. They want to get out. They say they can't. They have to get away from her. They need a break. What do you want us to do? And anytime you hear that kind of a thing as a judge, it's like, oh, boy, this is not good. And then I found out later on from my bailiffs that this particular juror would not engage with any of the other jurors. Like, they go to a hotel at night, and they're all sitting at the table eating dinner. She goes to her own table. She has her arms crossed. She's giving all of these signs, like, she doesn't even want to participate in with the rest of the. Of the members. So when I got to the verdict and it was so quick, you know, it's hard to. It's hard to guess what a jury is going to do, especially. This was my first death penalty case. I had tried capital cases, but not death penalty. So, I mean, the evidence, as you all know, the aggravating factors have to outweigh the mitigating factors. And in my opinion, my legal opinion, the aggravating factors grossly outweigh the mitigating. In fact, there was. The mitigating evidence was so just. I mean, one of the mitigating factors was. Nicholas Cruz is a human being. I mean, really.

[Emily Simpson]

Right.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

Because basically, you have to include anything that the defense wants. So that. That was a mitigating factor.

[Emily Simpson]

Yeah. Can we just clarify for just the listeners, Mitigating factors means the evidence that the defense presents that would say, okay, he was. Wasn't there some evidence of abuse and things like that?

[Judge Liz Shearer]

Sure. So the. The state will come forward and they will present aggravating factors. And they're statutory, and they're very similar state by state, because I've looked at them. One of them is heinous, atrocious, and cruel. In other words, and I hate to give this example, Emily but if I came into your office right now and shot you in the face, that would not be considered heinous, atrocious, and cruel. If I tied you up and tortured you for an hour and a half and then played Russian roulette at the back of your head until one bullet finally came out, that would probably be considered heinous, atrocious, and cruelty. So as I've explained to my daughter, who's always very curious about this, not every murder qualifies for the death penalty. It has to be the worst of the worst. So some of the aggravating factors were this shooter came in with a high powered assault rifle. Those, the ammunition, and that type of rifle, they're about this big, and I would say about two and a half inches. And they're made to tumble. So imagine a tumbleweed going through your body. So it just shreds whatever's in front of it. So if I shot you with a regular gun, it would go maybe through and through, maybe the bullet would enter your body, but this type would basically tumble weed all the way through your body until it came out. The fact that he planned this, the fact that it was so high, premeditated, a higher level of premeditation, the fact that he went up and down the hallways, shot some people, and then when he went back and made the second pass through, he realized that certain people weren't dead yet, and then he shot him again. Like the terror, the fact that it was done on a school grounds, all of these things were aggravating factors. The fact that he killed so many people, each victim can be an aggravating factor in the other victim's case. Okay, so the state presented all of the aggravating factors. The mitigating factors are by the defense and their factors, like, look, this person is not like you and I. He or she has special circumstances that you should take into account so you can understand the person and know more about them, why they committed the crime. And then you should weigh that according to the aggravating factors and say, which one outweighs the other. Many people are under the mistaken belief that Nicholas Cruz came from an abusive home. It was, in fact, the opposite. He was. He and his younger brother were both adopted at birth by a lovely couple who wanted nothing more but to have kids. But they hadn't been able to, so they adopted them. They gave them every kind of thing, physical and emotional, that they. They could think of. His father died when he was rather young, but his mother was always there, you know, and as he became more and more troubled. She had him in therapy. She had him in, you know, special programs. She, she got him tested. She, she, she worked with him.

[Shane]

It wasn't for a lack of parenting then, huh?

[Judge Liz Shearer]

No, absolutely not. That's the mistaken belief. This woman was a saint. She tried everything. At the end, it got so bad, even with all of these services in place, that she would walk around the house and she was terrified. She was terrified of him and his younger brother because they just, they got, they got a kick out of terrorizing this, this lady. But no, she tried. She tried very hard. They lived in a nice area of parkland. So that was, that's, that's sort of a mistaken belief. What the defense did try to present is that he, he suffered from fetal alcohol syndrome. The problem with that was that there was no evidence of it. His Marconium, I think. I believe that's what you call the, like, the umbilical cord stuff. I'm not very good at science, but it tested negative. He didn't have any of the signs. There's all these factors that you have to have all of these symptoms. He didn't, he didn't even have. Let's say there's. I can't remember off the top of my head, but let's say in order to be diagnosed with this illness, you have to have like five factors. He didn't even have two.

[Shane]

So you're saying, you're saying absent all these possible mitigating factors, he still didn't get the death penalty?

[Judge Liz Shearer]

Correct. He was a psychopath.

[Jo Winterstein]

Hi, this is Jo Winterstein, host of the Spirit Daughter Podcast where we talk about astrology, natal charts, and how to step into your most vibrant life. And I just sat down with a mini driver.

[Mini Driver]

The Irish traveler said when I was 16, you're going to have a terrible time with men.

[Jo Winterstein]

Actor, storyteller, and unapologetic Aquarian visionary. Aquarius is all about freedom loving and different perspectives. And I find a lot of people with strong placements in Aquarius, like are misunderstood. A sun and Venus in Aquarius in her seventh house spark her unconventional approach to partnership.

[Mini Driver]

He really has taught me to embrace people sleeping in different rooms, on different houses, in different places, but just an embracing of the isness of it all.

[Jo Winterstein]

If you're navigating your own transition, transformation, or just want a chart side view into how a leading artist integrates astrology, creativity and real life, this episode is a must. Listen, Listen to the Spirit Daughter podcast starting on February 24th on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcast, or wherever you listen to your podcast.

[Narrator (Mind Games)]

What if mind control is real?

[Emily Simpson]

If you could control the behavior of anybody around you, what kind of life would you have?

[Narrator (Mind Games)]

Can you hypnotically persuade someone to buy a car?

[Shane]

When you look at your car, you're

[Judge Liz Shearer]

going to become overwhelmed with such good feelings.

[Narrator (Mind Games)]

Can you hypnotize someone into sleeping with you?

[Judge Liz Shearer]

I gave her some suggestions to be sexually aroused.

[Narrator (Mind Games)]

Can you get someone to join your cult?

[Jo Winterstein]

NLP was used on me to access my subconscious.

[Narrator (Mind Games)]

Nlp, AKA Neuro Linguistic Programming, is a blend of hypnosis, linguistics, and psychology. Fans say it's like finally getting a user manual for your brain.

[Haley]

Brain.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

It's about engineering consciousness.

[Narrator (Mind Games)]

Mind Games is the story of nlp, its crazy cast of disciples, and the fake doctor who invented it at a New age commune and sold it to guys in suits. He stood trial for murder and got acquitted. The biggest mind game of all, nlp, might actually work.

[Emily Simpson]

This is wild.

[Narrator (Mind Games)]

Listen to Mind Games on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever, wherever you get your podcasts.

[Ben Higgins]

What do you do when the headlines don't explain what's happening inside of you? I'm Ben Higgins, and if you can hear me is where culture meets the soul. A place for real conversation. Each episode I sit down with people from all walks of life. Celebrities, thinkers and everyday folks. And we go deeper than the polished story. We talk about what drives us, what shapes us, and what gives us hope. We get honest about the big stuff. Identity when you don't recognize yourself anymore. Loss that changes you Purpose when success isn't enough. Peace when your mind won't slow down. Faith when it's complicated. Some guests have answers. Most are still figuring it out. If you've ever felt like there has to be more to the story, this show is for you. Listen to if youf Can Hear me on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

[Special Agent Riegel]

China's Ministry of State Security is one of the most mysterious and powerful spy agencies in the world. But in 2017, the FBI got inside.

[Shane]

This is Special Agent Riegel, Special Agent Bradley Hall.

[Narrator]

This MSS officer has no idea the US Government is onto him. But the FBI has his chats, texts, emails, even his personal diary. Hear how they got it on the Sixth Bureau podcast?

[Emily Simpson]

I now have several terabytes of an MSS officer. No doubt, no question of his life.

[Special Agent Riegel]

And that's a unicorn.

[Shane]

No one had ever seen anything like that. It was unbelievable.

[Special Agent Riegel]

This is a story of the interaction workings of the MSS and how one man's ambition and mistakes opened its vault of secrets.

[Narrator]

Listen to the 6th Bureau on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

[Emily Simpson]

Do you think it was the one juror that you were talking about earlier? Do you think that she. Because I know it was nine to three. So do you think maybe she. She managed to convince two other people or something and she was kind of the cancer in this jury pool?

[Judge Liz Shearer]

I don't think it was 9 to 3. I think because this particular juror wrote me a note after the verdict and it's public record, and she said, judge, all the jurors are accusing me, saying that I had made my mind up from the beginning and I wouldn't deliberate. And I just want you to know that. That I deny that fully. And etcetera, and etcetera, there were two jurors, from my understanding, that had not made up their mind. And so people put the one holdout. I wouldn't even call her a holdout. I would say she got on that jury to hijack it. I believe, because all of her answers in a death penalty case, the lawyers are voir dire, or jury selection went on for. I think it was two months of jury selection. So each juror was questioned, I mean, ad nauseam, to the point where you're like, oh, how many times can you ask the same question? So you would have to be really, really good to be able to answer all of the questions to give. You'd have to try very hard if you were not fair. Okay, if you said, I'm anti death penalty or I'm absolutely pro death penalty, and I think this guy should get the death penalty, and I can keep an open mind. If you had either extreme view, you would have to try very, very hard to answer the questions from the lawyers on both sides to be able to make it through to the end, if that. If that makes sense. Because both sides get hours and hours to question each juror individually and ask them in many different ways. And the jurors are told, listen, if you have a belief that you're against the death penalty, that's fine, that's okay. But not in this case, because you have to. At least. You don't have to say, yes, I'll give him the death penalty. You just have to say, I will keep an open mind. I understand that. My duty, my legal duty. And I just have to be willing to be fair and impartial and consider the factors. That's it. You don't have to say, yes, I will give the death penalty or. No, I won't. You just have to say, I will participate in the legal process, have the discussion, and if you have a belief that's firm, like I don't believe in the death penalty, that's okay, but you need to be open minded. Different case.

[Shane]

Well, that makes sense because if, if you were a jury member for a case that was over a crime that the, the juror member didn't believe was criminal, right, like marijuana or something, and they felt that that should be legal and it's not, then obviously they're not going to consider issuing any punishment or finding anyone guilty of a crime. They don't believe it's a crime to begin with. So it's the same with the death penalty. It's not a matter of there's nothing wrong with being opposed to the death penalty. The problem is if you're opposed to the death penalty, then you won't even consider it. And that's what needs to be considered, whether it's right or wrong in this case.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

And we tell them, listen, there's absolutely nothing wrong with being opposed to the death penalty under any circumstances. There's a lot of people that believe that. There's a lot of states that are like that. But in Florida we have the death penalty. So you have to be able to say you'll consider it. You have to be fair. I'll give you a great example. So the, the head of the sexual battery unit at the state attorney's office here in Broward county never went in Broward County. The, the hierarchy is homicide is the sort of considered the highest trial unit. It's the most elite trial unit. So as a trial lawyer, if you want to devote your life to public service, be a prosecutor, your goal would be to get, to get to homicide. So I once, I once asked him, why aren't you in homicide? Why have you been in the sexual battery unit for so long? And he said, because I don't believe in the death penalty. And that's a perfect example. He's a prosecutor, he has no trouble prosecuting cases. He believes in the law, but he knows that if I don't believe in the death penalty, I can't go to homicide. I can't make a decision whether or not the state's going to seek the death penalty. Because I don't believe in it, personal

[Shane]

beliefs would take over.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

Correct. But I think someone who can recognize that even as a prosecutor, I give that person a lot of credit. Because, you know, not everybody has the same beliefs.

[Emily Simpson]

Right.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

As judges. It's hard. Also, I'll tell you.

[Emily Simpson]

Was the jury decision difficult for you?

[Judge Liz Shearer]

I was frustrated because we spent so much time, and I did not feel that. I believe what happened is there were a lot of younger jurors, and I believe that this woman was so adamant that she wouldn't discuss it, that. That they just threw up their hands and gave up. And in my opinion, there were 35 victims. You. If you divide. I did the math. One time, they gave less than, like, 10 minutes of consideration to each victim. And by the way, there were victims who got it much worse than other victims. So the aggravating factors would be worse. For example, little. I always call them little sweet Peter Wang. He was count 17 of the indictment. He was holding the door on the third floor for the mass of students to get out while this shooter is heading towards them, shooting into the crowd. He was shot something like 17 times. His skull was completely. I mean, it was held together by skin. To me, someone like that's much more aggravating than someone who was perhaps shot once. So the fact that they did not even take the time to go through each victim. And also there was. I mentioned there were two or three victims that were shot once and would have lived, and they were trying to crawl to safety into the bathroom or trying to get away. And what he did was he made two passes on each floor. There was a coach and at least two children who were crawling to safety, and he didn't get them the first pass. There was a video of a coach who had been shot numerous times, and he was trying to get up,

[Emily Simpson]

and

[Judge Liz Shearer]

I'll never forget it. And he's trying to get up, and he's trying to get up. And. And. And I'm imagining this guy is this. He's got. He's got. He's got two. Two kids and a grandbaby on the way and a wife who just absolutely adores him. And I. And I could just. You. You can tell he's. He's trying to get up. He. He's. And I'm gonna get out of here for my family, you know, and he's get. And he actually got up and he managed to walk a few feet when. When the shooter made the second pass. And even after he shot him again, I don't know, two or three times, he still struggled, and he's still moving. And you can just see this guy was a veteran, a Marine, wonderful family man, wonderful coach, you know, barged right in trying to save his kids, and he didn't make it. Now, certainly, there's a lot more aggravating factors to that murder than there would be to another person who was shot once. So, yes, I was frustrated. I don't. I don't believe that. I think that the attitude of the one juror made it so that the other jurors were just because they knew if they don't all agree, if it's not unanimous. By the way, that law was changed like, I don't know, 30 days after the verdict.

[Emily Simpson]

I know we read that. I was going to ask you about that.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

That was because of my case, basically, the. The law. The Florida Supreme Court had written an opinion maybe two years before the Parkland shooting case went to trial, saying that the Constitution does not require the verdict to be unanimous as far as life versus death. But the. And by the way, when I read that opinion as a judge, I thought to myself, that's scary. Like, I almost panicked because I thought, that means it's going to be up to me. And I'm Catholic. Catholics are anti death penalty. I can tell you, personally, I am not anti death penalty. But on the other hand, being the person that essentially pulls the trigger, that's a huge responsibility. So the Florida legislature never codified that opinion. They just never got to it. I couldn't help but think maybe I rushed things. Maybe I didn't give. As a judge, you have to move things. You have to. And that case went on forever. And I still. I needed to be efficient and I needed to be fair. And sometimes that means putting your foot down, saying, no, we're not going to take another day to do this. We're going to, you know, giving deadlines and moving things. So I couldn't help but think, in hindsight, did I. Did I push too hard to get. You know, maybe I should have given him longer injury selection. You know, maybe I should have done this. Maybe I should have done that. If, If. If I didn't know all of the. The reasons about. If I didn't know that that particular juror had refused to participate in the jury deliberation process, I wouldn't feel bad, because a jury's verdict is a jury's verdict. It's a jury of your peers, and that's their decision. If that's their decision, even if I don't agree with it, I have to accept it. Right.

[Emily Simpson]

Right.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

My frustration was with all of the banging on the door, get me out of here. Get me away from her. Her. You know, with the. With the arms crossed, not engaging with the jury, not considering anything that was Frustrating. I mean, when the. When the jurors came out with the verdict, there were two or three jurors that put their heads down and were crying hysterically. They wouldn't even look at me.

[Emily Simpson]

Yeah. Because they were so disappointed in the. In the verdict.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

I don't know if they knew that I would be disappointed. But I think the. I think good jurors, if they see you as a good judge who follows the law and tries very hard, hard to be fair and impartial, I think they don't want to disappoint you. And I think they knew that they had failed and that there was no substantive deliberation, and they just. They just finally all gave up. I mean, there were a couple of them that fell down in the parking lot crying hysterically, that had, like, EMS had to be called.

[Emily Simpson]

Wow.

[Shane]

Really?

[Judge Liz Shearer]

Yeah, because they were just besides themselves. And like I say, there was a lot of younger people, 20s and 30s. And I think that if. And I don't know this, but I think that maybe if they. If the jury had been older, maybe they would have the. The strength to sort of fight and say, no, you have to deliberate. That's your job. You took an oath to deliberate. And we're going to, you know, we're going to tell the judge if you don't. If you don't participate in this. Instructions. And the instructions are given to them about how they should, you know, elect a four person and they should go around the room and what they should do. What I believe they should have done is pass a note and say, this juror is not following her oath and she's refusing to deliberate. What would I have done with that? And would I have been reversed? I don't know, but at least it would have given me the opportunity to.

[Shane]

To address some fashion.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

Yeah, to address it. And to perhaps excuse her and replace it with one of the alternates, which we had.

[Emily Simpson]

Right.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

Again, that's never been done. But in the. In the context of a jury saying, this juror won't deliberate. But to me, that means she's not being fair and impartial if she's refusing to have any discussions, you know.

[Emily Simpson]

Right.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

So, yes, that was sort of a long answer. I'm sorry.

[Emily Simpson]

That's okay.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

I was disappointed because I can't help but feel like I may have played a part in what went wrong, and also because the world was watching. And I have to tell you that 99% of juries, they try really hard to get it right, and they listen intently, and they listen to the instructions. And I think even if maybe I don't agree with their decision that they give it their all. And I feel that this was such a bad example for the nation and other countries. I mean this case was watched in every country in the world and I just felt like this is not how justice is supposed to work. For that I I had to blame myself because ultimately the responsibility of making sure the trial is fair is up to the judge.

[Jo Winterstein]

Hi, this is Jo Winterstein, host of the Spirit Daughter podcast where we talk about astrology, natal charts and how to step into your most vibrant life. And I just sat down with a

[Mini Driver]

mini driver, the Irish traveler said when I was 16. You're going to have a terrible time with men.

[Jo Winterstein]

Actor, storyteller and unapologetic Aquarian visionary. Aquarius is all about freedom loving and different perspectives. And I find a lot of people with strong placements in Aquarius like are Misunderstood A Sun and Venus in Aquarius in her seventh house spark her unconventional approach to partnership.

[Mini Driver]

He really has taught me to embrace people sleeping in different rooms on different houses, houses in different places, but just an embracing of the isness of it all.

[Jo Winterstein]

If you're navigating your own transformation or just want a chart side view into how a leading artist integrates astrology, creativity and real life, this episode is a must. Listen Listen to the Spirit Daughter podcast starting on February 24th on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts or wherever you listen to your podcast.

[Narrator (Mind Games)]

What if mind control is real?

[Emily Simpson]

If you could control the behavior of anybody around you, what kind of life would you have?

[Narrator (Mind Games)]

Can you hypnotically pursue persuade someone to buy a car?

[Shane]

When you look at your car, you're

[Judge Liz Shearer]

going to become overwhelmed with such good feelings.

[Narrator (Mind Games)]

Can you hypnotize someone into sleeping with you?

[Judge Liz Shearer]

I gave her some suggestions to be sexually aroused.

[Narrator (Mind Games)]

Can you get someone to join your cult?

[Jo Winterstein]

NLP was used on me to access my subconscious.

[Narrator (Mind Games)]

Nlp, AKA Neuro Linguistic Programming, is a blend of hypnosis, linguistics and psychology. Fans say it's like like finally getting a user manual for your brain.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

It's about engineering consciousness.

[Narrator (Mind Games)]

Mind Games is the story of nlp, its crazy cast of disciples and the fake doctor who invented it at a New age commune and sold it to guys in suits. He stood trial for murder and got acquitted. The biggest mind game of all, nlp, might actually work.

[Emily Simpson]

This is wild.

[Narrator (Mind Games)]

Listen to Mind Games on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

[Ben Higgins]

What do you do when the headlines don't explain what's happening inside of you. I'm Ben Higgins, and if you can hear me is where culture meets the soul. A place for real conversation. Each episode, I sit down with people from all walks of life. Celebrities, thinkers, and everyday folks. And we go deeper than the polished story. We talk about what drives us, what shapes us, and what gives us hope. We get honest about the big stuff. Identity when you don't recognize yourself anymore. Loss that changes you Purpose when success isn't enough. Peace when your mind won't slow down. Faith when it's complicated. Some guests have answers. Most are still figuring it out. If you've ever felt like there has to be more to the story, this show is for you. Listen to if youf Can Hear me on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

[Special Agent Riegel]

China's Ministry of State Security is one of the most mysterious and powerful spy agencies in the world. But in 2017, the FBI got inside.

[Shane]

This is Special Agent Regal, Special Agent Agent Bradley Hall.

[Narrator]

This MSS officer has no idea the US Government is onto him. But the FBI has his chats, texts, emails, even his personal diary. Hear how they got it? On the Sixth Bureau podcast, I now

[Emily Simpson]

have several terabytes of an MSS officer, no doubt, no question of his life.

[Special Agent Riegel]

And that's a unicorn.

[Shane]

No one had ever seen anything like that. It was unbelievable.

[Special Agent Riegel]

This is a story of the inner workings of the MSS and how one man's ambition and mistakes opened its vault of secrets.

[Narrator]

Listen to the 6th Bureau on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

[Emily Simpson]

Now, Nick Reiner's been in the news a lot. Have you been following that?

[Judge Liz Shearer]

And I have, to a certain extent, yes.

[Emily Simpson]

Yeah. And we just talked about before you came on how Alan Jackson was representing him and then he, you know, at the arraignment, he withdrew. We I it me, basically, I'm of the opinion that he withdrew because of finances. Do you have an opinion on the reason?

[Judge Liz Shearer]

You know, it's funny, before the podcast, I was preparing and reading everything and trying to figure things out and the first thing I thought was money, because. Right, he's not gonna have access to his parents money. He's in jail. And when I read that he's been in and out of rehab so many times, I'm. I'm assuming he doesn't have some trust fund sitting in the bank. So, yes, I assume money, but the way that the defense attorney, Mr. Jackson, responded saying it would be unethical for me to say that I was a little confused about, because attorneys come forward all the time, at least in Florida, and say, judge, that he can't, he doesn't have the money to pay me. I can't stand.

[Shane]

But that's all. But that's also in a courtroom setting, right. When they're trying to present and they're making a motion to withdraw or something.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

Sure, but it, but it would be public.

[Shane]

Well, maybe he just doesn't want to look like he's a greedy attorney.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

Well, I'm thinking that a lot of people would want to take this case for free anyway for the publicity.

[Haley]

Right.

[Shane]

I thought, I thought so too, but then I read that he doesn't do pro bona, but I would have thought he did it. In fact, I think I told Emily that I'm like, he's probably doing it for free.

[Emily Simpson]

And then he gets a lot of, for free.

[Shane]

He gets a lot of potential criminal cases, and then he might throw him down to his other attorneys in his firm and he's doing the head, this big one, you know. Well, Emily is just in love with Alan Jackson and she wants to find every reason to say that he's a gentleman and his hands are tied.

[Emily Simpson]

Well, I, I, I, I'm a big fan. I became a big fan of Alan Jackson watching him do the Karen Reed trial. So. Yeah.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

Well, here's the thing. You know, like you, you all are lawyers, practicing lawyers. So you know that, for example, my law firm, we've stopped taking, not completely, but we have tapered down the, the amount of contingency cases that we, we take because you have to bankroll the litigation.

[Shane]

Yeah.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

And then it can be years, and then the case is on appeal and you may not get paid for 10, 15 years. And meanwhile, who's paying at all? You know, who's paying Keep the lights on. So I wouldn't think an attorney is a bad person just because they, they won't take a case for free.

[Shane]

No, no, I said that earlier. I said he has every right to charge what he think he's worth and he's giving him his time. And if they can't afford it, then he's going to put his, you know,

[Judge Liz Shearer]

his, and he may not, he might not have the funds, he may not have the money to be able to bankroll that, that case. He may not, you know, I don't know that much about him, but that's going to be an expensive case to try, I would imagine, to put it lightly.

[Emily Simpson]

Yeah, absolutely.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

You know, all the experts that they're probably going to hire psychologists, psychiatrists. I mean, I don't know what the defense will be, but I would assume.

[Emily Simpson]

We've discussed it, we're assuming some type of insanity defense, right?

[Judge Liz Shearer]

I mean, I don't type. I wasn't able to find like a probable cause affidavit or anything like that. I was able to find just the, the injuries to the victims and then the fact that he was arrested. I don't know if there's more to it that I don't know, but.

[Emily Simpson]

Well, I've read some things about, I mean, just like his past, his past behavior, some of the way he was acting the night before at a party that he was on meds, but the meds had been switched. And so I don't know, I was just taking all that into account, thinking that, you know, when we're talking about mitigating factors, that that's probably something that's going to, to come into play eventually. And the fact that a public defender took the case made me think it also had to do with money because I felt like if there was money to defend him, they would have brought some other big name defense attorney in. But it's not, it's a public defender

[Judge Liz Shearer]

or it may be that what happens a lot of times, and I feel bad for the public defenders for this, but they'll say let the public, you know, a private attorney will say, let the public defender work up the case. Let the public defender take the depots and do all the legwork and then I'll come in, substitute in at the end. Now, of course they don't say this, but when it happens, it's very frustrating to the public defenders and unfair because they bear the brunt. So that, that could be an angle. I wouldn't be surprised if Mr. Jackson or another prominent attorney were to substitute in once the heavy lifting is done.

[Emily Simpson]

Oh, yeah, you know, I didn't think of that, but that's, that's, that's an interesting take. You know what I mean, on that one, right?

[Judge Liz Shearer]

Yeah. Because then they pay for the depots, they pay for the, they pay for everything in two months before trial. You know, you have a right to pick your own lawyer. And as long as the lawyer can be ready within a reasonable time period, the judge has no other choice but to let the person substitute in. I would not be surprised if that were to happen.

[Emily Simpson]

Right. That's interesting. We'll have to keep following that case and see what happens. Just one, one more question. Now, I'm sure you followed Diddy.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

I did.

[Emily Simpson]

Were you surprised by the verdict?

[Judge Liz Shearer]

You know, because it's in federal court and you don't get to watch it, hear it, see it every day. I mean, the bits. And from what I could, you know, you had to rely on reporters to tell you what their sense of what was going on. I mean, my opinion is they just didn't think, they believed it was consensual. So it didn't rise to the level of trafficking.

[Emily Simpson]

Right. Well, we had discussed it a few times on this podcast and I think we always said was, I felt like there they were going to have trouble with the RICO part of it. Yeah, it didn't, that seemed, I mean, obviously he was a horrible person. We all watched the video of him, you know, attacking Cassie in the hallway. He was violent. We knew that. But I felt as if those higher charges, the RICO charges, those were going to be difficult.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

Yes. See, if the prosecution was smart and I've said, I said this on another podcast that I was on, if they would have prosecuted him for the dragging her in that hotel, at least in Florida, and I don't know about California, but that could have been a kidnapping. That could have been a false imprisonment. Holding somebody against their will, that could have been an aggravated battery. That could have been a number of felonies that would, where he would face 15 plus years in prison. And it's all on video. And he can't explain it. There's no way to explain away what he did.

[Emily Simpson]

Right.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

Why they didn't prosecute him for that and ask for the maximum punishment, I don't know. Because certainly that was a much that, that, that would have been a one day trial. You show the video, he hit her with, I believe multiple, he was throwing multiple objects at her. In Florida, that's an aggravated battery with a weapon, deadly weapon. And again, kidnapping, because when you're holding somebody against their will and false imprisonment

[Emily Simpson]

and he drags her like back to the room or something. Right, right. He doesn't let her get on the elevator.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

Right, right. And that's like for anybody that doesn't understand a kidnapping does not necessarily have to be that you put somebody in their, your car and you take them away for like two days. A kidnapping can be 15 seconds. Yeah, you know, trying. Exactly. Trying to get her, get her before she gets on the elevator and keeping her from escaping. To me they should have gone for that. That would have been a slam dunk. But this other case, you know, I think the jury didn't buy it and so they came back with a lesser charge. I Wasn't. I wasn't totally surprised. I, you know, I think they deliberated for quite some time. They were listening and they did their job. And if that's what they. If that's what a jury does, then yeah, then, you know, to me, I'm fully in favor of our. Of our system of justice. I think juries get it right most of the time. So, you know, without having been there, I don't know. But it does not surprise. The verdict did not surprise me.

[Emily Simpson]

Me. Can I ask you one more thing? And I don't know if you're comfortable talking about it, but I do know when. When. When the jury came out in the Parkland case and they gave the. The verdict and everything. And then you hugged the. The families. Yeah. And then I think you got some backlash because of that. I guess you weren't showing what impartiality or. Or whatever is that. That's what the accusation was. But I was. Before you came on, I was discussing that with Shane and I said. I said women are innately nurturers. And like, how you were talking about before with, like, a man on the bench, and I could picture if it was a male judge, the verdict would have come out, he would have whatever, and then walked away. But as women were mothers, we're nurturers. We're like, we're innately that way. So I feel as if what you just giving the families a hug is just a natural progression of what women do.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

Well, so let me just say this. It started off I was going to shake hands with the lawyers and whoever wanted to shake my hand, which men, male judges do all the time. And the way the bench was set up, I had to reach so far over that I was afraid my feet were going to come out from under me and I was going to sort of fall forward. So I said, let me come off the bench and come around. Now, at this point, I know it's a life sentence, so I know there's no appeal. The defendant's already been taken by the corrections officers. So I'm not worried about being unfair because I was planning to. To shake hands with anybody, including defense prosecution, anyone.

[Emily Simpson]

Right.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

So I go up to the first prosecutor, and I thought, you know what? We've all been together hearing this horrible story for five years. I'm going to give him a hug.

[Shane]

Hug.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

It's kind of uncomfortable. Women, we don't really shake hands. Right.

[Emily Simpson]

I. I'm more of a hugger.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

Yeah, I'm not a hugger, but under these circumstances, I just thought you know what? A hug is more appropriate. So I started hugging the lawyers. And then I walked over to the defense and I said, thank you all very much. Before you leave, I would love to give. You know, give you all. I've come down off the bench, and if anyone wants a hug, I'm not a big hugger, but now's your chance. And they all just sort of looked at me like they were not interested. I said, okay, going once, going twice. And then after that, the prosecution said, judge, the family members would like to meet you and thank you. Do you mind? And I said, no, of course not. Because, like I said, if it had been a situation where I had stayed behind the bench, anybody can come up to me. If the defendant had family members there and they want to come up to me, it would have been fine because I was off the bench again. And because the family members had seen me hugging the lawyers, I hugged the press. You know, so they see me hugging the lawyers. So I. The families come up to me, start hugging me. And I thought to myself, you know, as a human being, if I can do this, if this gives these people some sort of reprieve from their grief, if I can offer them some kind of human kindness in this just simple, simple gesture, I'm gonna do it now. I knew the cameras were rolling. I knew I was being filmed. I made the decision. I didn't care. I knew this is. This is. This could be considered unfair. But I felt because I hugged the press, you know, I was hugging everybody, that it was like, you know, it wasn't ex parte because I wasn't just hugging one side. I was, you know, hugging everybody, Right? But I knew this could come back to get me. And my staff attorney was there. And afterwards, I said to him, michael, he said, judge, I think you're fine. And I said, you know what? Even if I'm not, I don't care. Because offering these people just that small gesture, I think it made such a difference to them to know that, look, I tried my best, and I listened, and I. I understand. And so, yes, I was brought before the Judicial Qualifications Commission for that. And they told me that it was not fair and the appearance of impartiality. And we agreed to disagree. I can tell you that nobody on that committee has ever tried a case like this. Most of them are appellate judges. They've never even tried a case in their life. But the. I don't regret my decision.

[Emily Simpson]

That's what I was going to ask you, given the chance to do it again, would Would you do it the same?

[Judge Liz Shearer]

Yes. Well, absolutely. And I could have, I could have taken that charge to trial. I basically pled no contest, meaning I'm not going to dispute this allegation. And the punishment was, oh, we're going to reprimand you. And by way of this order, this is the reprimand which has, by the way, never been done before ever in the history of Florida. A reprimand is, you go before the Florida Supreme Court and on national television, they shame on you, and really let you have it on national tv. The Florida Supreme Court did not do that. They issued a one sentence order that says this will be the reprimand, which to me show says that they either didn't agree with it or felt it was over, overdone. Right. I could have gone to trial, which my family wanted me to do, to dispute it, but I said no, because my witnesses are going to be these family members. I can't have these people go through this again. There's no way.

[Narrator]

I can't.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

If I have to take a slap on the wrist or whatever it was. Plus, I, I kind of, I mean, this is going to sound maybe not that nice, but it's okay because I haven't been a judge for two years so that they don't have jurisdiction over me anymore. But I was thinking, you know what? Fine, bring me up before the Florida Supreme Court, because guess what's going to happen. A whole bunch of my colleagues, fellow judges and all of those family members were going to go and sit in that courtroom right behind me. So I don't regret it. I feel close to a lot of those families, even though we never spoke for all those years, just from listening to their stories and having the opportunity to interact with them.

[Emily Simpson]

Well, sometimes at the end of the day, it's about being human and not what the black and white legal rules of the courtroom are. And I think you just showed humanity.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

I mean, thank you for saying that. I think that the people who criticize

[Shane]

me,

[Judge Liz Shearer]

I just, I know, I know for a fact no one has ever been in that situation before.

[Shane]

None of the people that criticize you have never been in your place either.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

No.

[Shane]

To be able to say what is right and wrong or what they would have done either.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

And I have to tell you, that trial, everybody was crying in the courtroom. The defense attorneys were hysterical. The state shed tears. The court deputies shed tears. The security shed tears. The family were crying. Guess who never cried? Me. I never cried. And I had male judges coming up to me every day saying, liz, how did you do that? How did you not cry? Because I put on my big girl pants, and I said, if a male judge doesn't cry, this female judge is not going to cry. But I had a lot of stuff that I buried deep to make sure that that trial was fair and impartial.

[Shane]

And,

[Judge Liz Shearer]

you know, if I had broken down in tears, I don't think I would have gotten in trouble because they would have said, well, you can't help that. You know what I mean?

[Emily Simpson]

Yeah. But to me, that's more. If that would have happened, that's more showing some kind of emotion than you hugging. After the sentencing and the verdict, after

[Judge Liz Shearer]

the jurors had been excused, after the defendant was excused, when there. There's. I know there's not going to be any appeal. If he had been given the defense death penalty, I would not have done that, because I know there would have been an appeal. But I knew there's no. There's no appeal. This is all over. You know, I buried that. That My emotions this whole time, and I'm going to be a human being, and, you know, I'll deal with it later. So.

[Emily Simpson]

Yeah. Well, you know what? Thank you for sharing all of that. We really appreciate you coming on today and being so vulnerable and talking about that case and your experience. And you can find your YouTube channel. It's at the Judge. Liz. So I would suggest if you. If you guys have the time to watch her. We've watched several of your videos, and I really enjoy them. I like your perspective, and I think it's very well done. So. But anyway, thank you so much for joining us today on Legally Brunette. We really appreciate it.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

It was so great to meet you both. I'm so flattered. And your show, the. The. Was it. Was it a wife swap last week?

[Emily Simpson]

Oh, yeah, I was. I've been on Y swap. Yeah.

[Narrator]

Yeah.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

So my assistant's texting me, you got to turn this on. You got to turn this on. She's a really nice lady. You're gonna love her. And so I turned it on for a few minutes. So I. I was telling a lot of my friends at my barn, like, I'm gonna be on this podcast, and she's on Housewives of Orange County.

[Emily Simpson]

Yeah.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

And they were like, oh, my God, that's so cool. So.

[Emily Simpson]

Yes. Well, thank you.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

Thank you. It's so nice to meet both of you.

[Emily Simpson]

Thanks, Liz. We appreciate it.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

All right, take care.

[Emily Simpson]

You, too. Bye. Bye.

[Judge Liz Shearer]

Bye.

[Emily Simpson]

Thanks, guys, for listening. We appreciate it. Again, you can find us anywhere. You listen to podcasts you can just search for Legally Brunette. Make sure you tell your friends and family. And also, I always appreciate the feedback. You guys DM me on Instagram and let me know what cases you're interested in. And thank you and we will see you soon.

[Shane]

Thank you. Follow.