[0:02][Music] welcome to closing arguments we begin with big breaking news we've heard it before but we've got a little more information actually a lot more
[0:13]information tonight we're talking about Jeffrey Epstein you say the name and and so many things come to mind whether it's
[0:21]a conspiracy or who was he hanging out with and that's the question that a lot of us have been wondering for years and why is everything so secretive why is
[0:33]the evidence in his case why is everything sealed what are they hiding when will it be revealed seems like some of it's been revealed tonight folks oh yeah we're
[0:44]talking about 41 documents containing 943 Pages including names of about 170 Associates now here's what you have to
[0:55]know about the names just because the name is in there doesn't mean they are are a child sex abuser just because a name is in there does not mean that they
[1:06]are even suspected of child sex abuse what it does mean is that they have some association with Jeffrey Epstein who was
[1:15]a child sex abuser a Serial child sex abuser who lost his life Behind Bars and we can discuss that maybe on another
[1:25]night but this is the the judge announcing all of this uh judge presca senior United States District Court Judge the parties have informed the court that they will begin filing the
[1:36]unsealed records outline in this Court's December 18th order later today that was earlier today it is now later today and
[1:44]that has happened folks so um little by little we're we're getting some names so as I go through these names I'd like to
[1:54]bring in our Think Tank tonight joining us live in studio Studio criminal defense attorney entertainment attorney former assistant
[2:04]DA in Atlanta nam's not in there folks Daryl Cohen also with us tonight criminal defense attorney in Emory University law professor Molly Palmer I can confirm we've not seen her name in
[2:15]this and The Man Behind the glass is criminal defense attorney Josh Schiffer uh we haven't finished reading everything no only possibilities there possibilities definitely not in there but let's start and the big headline
[2:26]everyone is talking about tonight is um Bill Clinton look Jeffrey Epstein created chaos when
[2:35]he was alive and he continues to create chaos Bill Clinton Donald Trump it doesn't matter just because they're were there doesn't mean they did anything
[2:46]wrong but oh my gosh guilt by association really seriously well doesn't matter where you are like these like these papers and and documents I I
[2:56]believe the context is not just people who've been in the helicopter or in the plane or on the island but anywhere but if you're on the island is that
[3:07]problematic it's going to depend on what you've done are there innocent trips to the island there are times there are times when you go into a store and the front of the store is legitimate but
[3:18]behind the closed door it is not were these people that were talking about in the legitimate part or do they go behind the sealed closed door I mean I'm going
[3:30]to always start with the presumption of innocence you know I think that that's that's where we are that's where we are and we know there are like 184 names that are going to be among hundreds and
[3:41]hundreds of pages of documents and so yes we have flight manifests who was on the helicopter we have names of who might have gone to the island but without additional details I I don't
[3:52]think it's enough to assume that any of these well some of those details there're also transcripts that are being revealed and that's the part that I'm really interest we all know Bill Clinton's name is going to be in there we all know a bunch of the other
[4:03]prominent names the context of that really means something to me because if it's Bill Clinton just for example going there with a big group of people you're never going to be able to pin any
[4:15]negative takeaway from that but if you've got someone who's making individual trips or solo trips or something where there's context in these depositions those depositions are where
[4:26]the juice is let me ask you this as these names come out and I'll give you another one prince Andrew and Randy Andy and and people aren't being charged for
[4:37]anything right but but let me ask you about the impact that it has on the Public's Trust of our system this is our system right whether you're on the defense prosecution doesn't matter it's
[4:49]our system of justice you know there seems to be throughout all of this an implication that there are different levels of Justice depending upon who who you are
[5:00]who you know how much money you have etc etc that's true and that was all done through the federal prosecution in Florida that No One Believes right now
[5:12]was legitimate well done handled appropriately and some of those prominent names involved in that prosecution have not succeeded in life since then that's a big problem and we
[5:22]should be really upset that Jeffrey Epstein was given the freedom to oh he got an unbelievable deal it's unbelievable stay where are joining us now from New York City scripts news
[5:33]National correspondent Alex Miller Alex uh great to see you tonight um give us first of all the big picture on these documents like what where do they come
[5:45]from what's the nature of the documents um I'm hearing you know 943
[5:53]Pages yeah 942 Pages it's 50 individual documents that the judge decided to today would be released today except for two people uh have not been named in
[6:04]this their names have been redacted in this document at least until January 22nd and the big picture here is that if you were involved with Jeffrey Epstein
[6:14]to any degree you were very clearly running in some very powerful circles around the world the names that are named here kind of what you guys were just talking about there's a lot of context to be brought here so we're not
[6:25]really naming all of the people in here particularly the people whose names we have not heard before because there's a lot of context to be gleaned from these documents some people just showing up at certain locations some people on flight
[6:37]manifest there's a lot to really unpack here but one of the things that we got was Virginia Jeffrey's deposition and in that deposition she talks a lot about
[6:46]individual people she has asked about individual men that while she was underage that she was directed to sleep with at the direction of galain Maxwell and at times Jeffrey Epstein so she did
[6:58]name names there um and some of those people are some of those redacted individuals that the judge is going to have to decide on later this month uh again this is something that she says
[7:08]Maxwell and Epstein directed we also got Maxwell's deposition and what's really interesting in this is they ask her about how she directed um some of these
[7:18]underage girls they a asked her a lot about her own relationship with Jeffrey Epstein whether she really even considered herself uh his girlfriend and it's interesting to kind of watch her
[7:28]walk through this at sometimes she says she was his girlfriend sometimes she says she wishes she was his girlfriend um and so there's definitely a lot of complicated pieces to this puzzle when
[7:38]she talks about kind of the dynamic that the two of them had and how she directed um some of these girls and the there are two names that I think we can talk about
[7:48]one of them being Alan dwit because his accusations were public then he um obviously sued for defamation some of those accusations were withdrawn there was an entire document devoted to that
[7:59]there are also discussions about prince Andrew um and the fact that she had a photo with him the fact that she um met with him and that she accuses him of having relations with her and so um
[8:10]those are really the two I think that are are easy to expect that we were going to see those names the rest of them though there's a lot to unpack about what we really um what their involvement really was and how far back
[8:22]do these documents go and and what time period are we are we talking about here is that clear yet from everything that's been released you know within the last
[8:33]uh hour and a half it's not clear how far back they go and that's just simply because I've only been able to get through about half of the documents that were put in um but we
[8:44]know that this has been documents that people have been seeking to uncover for nearly a decade this is all part of a lawsuit uh that against gal Maxwell what put her in jail for or in in prison for
[8:56]20 years um that the Miami Herald has been trying try to get um the names they've been trying to get the names for quite some time there's a lot of questions in there about timelines and
[9:06]it's clear Within These timelines that sometimes even uh the victims themselves don't know exactly how old they were when things happened I mean they all clearly were underage um according to
[9:17]their depositions but that some of the timelines are a little bit um fuzzy there but in terms of the involvement it you know obviously this goes back um to
[9:27]when they were all underage Alex Miller scripts news in New York City hustling tonight thank you so much we really do appreciate it all right let's get back to our Think
[9:39]Tank Daryl Cohen Molly Palmer Josh shiff are still with us um let's go through some more of these names again folks you have to understand about the names it
[9:49]does not mean that they've been accused or or even suspected of abusing children but again they're part of these documents and as you heard uh there were
[10:00]some specific allegations that were made and those names were redacted um we said prince Andrew Michael Jackson he's gone why is Michael Jackson
[10:11]hanging out with Jeffrey Epstein you made enough money as Michael Jackson did you needed the kind of special tax help apparently Mr Epstein sold is that what he is that is that what was his business
[10:22]what was his business hiss financier yeah money management it's it's so complicated to be tough to explain in other words we can't tell you
[10:33]because we don't know okay another name here French hair stylist and entrepreneur Frederick fakai do we know him I I don't know him I I've never met
[10:44]Frederick he is not my hair stylist I mean Tak mear if you're going to ask me about hair we got other issues okay now Alex mentioned Alan dtz I had him on
[10:56]this show talking about this denied everything said he did go to the island admitted that but went with his wife right I mean that that goes to exactly what I was saying we do need more context here so he was like a
[11:07]lawyer for him right well the man clearly needs a lot of lawyers so I think there's some legitimacy to the fact that there are other reasons to be on the island particularly and remember bringing your wife look at that couple
[11:18]down in Florida they did everything together model Scout Jean Luke Brunell who I believe went to prison for some of this clearly I I believe he was one
[11:29]potentially could have been up to no good my question is these two people I'm not done yet go ahead I know but these two people who don't want their names
[11:38]out if the judge doesn't keep them a secret then what they have done is they focused on the all focus on those well my question is what about the
[11:50]conspiracy theories and does some of this squash some of those conspiracy theories cuz the world is running crazy with speculation are they spies are they International you know who are these
[12:01]mystery people I'm wondering if some of them are part of the government like that's that's the real fear right like if you're connected to the CIA or the FBI or the justice department or you're
[12:12]working in the white house or something like that that's a problem I mean certainly but what you have to allege to keep your name sealed is that you will suffer a particularized harm and so I think that at least one of these people
[12:23]it's you know suspected that they live in a country that if this is revealed they could be object to some sort of like physical retribution we'll see but that's what we suspect I've got two more former New Mexico Governor Bill
[12:35]Richardson who's passed away as well uh Marvin Minsky American Computer scientist you ever hang out with Minsky I was gonna say I know the name for some reason but that doesn't mean much okay
[12:45]so there was another story that popped up relative to this um over the weekend is before the release um you know where Aaron Rogers is Oh
[12:56]Aaron Rogers and he knows Jimmy Kimmel is he's a great quarterback um now the quarterback of the Jets will be in the Hall of Fame Etc um but he
[13:07]suggested that Jimmy Kimmel's name might pop up in the release of these documents today now these two have had an ongoing
[13:18]feud Jimmy Kimmel has been grabbing little um Snippets of Aaron roders on the Pat McAfee show which is a very popular show on ESPN and and and
[13:29]implying in his monologue sarcastically obviously that that Aaron Rogers you know has some mental disabilities or because of being a football player but
[13:39]then Aaron roders said this on the Pat McAfee show about Jimmy Kimmel take a listen a lot of people including Jimmy
[13:49]Kimmel are really hoping that doesn't all right I'll tell you what if that list comes out I definitely will be popping popping some some sort of
[14:00]bottle so after Aaron Rogers made that joke and everybody was laughing uh Jimmy Kimmel responded on Twitter dear and he used a word we don't say on television
[14:09]for the record I've not met flown with visited or had any contact whatsoever with Epstein nor will you find my name on any list other than the clearly phony
[14:19]nonsense nonsense that soft brained wackos like yourself can't seem to distinguish from reality your Reckless words put my family in danger keep it up
[14:29]and we'll debate the facts further in court L's bad man what's that L's bad
[14:37]what do you mean man he doth protest a little bit too much for jimy Kim yes for a casual aside from a let's talk about
[14:48]defamation like did that look like it's not defamation that look like satire right protected by the First Amendment maybe satire maybe defamation what do you mean maybe defam the thought that
[14:59]was defamation by Aaron Rogers joke because I don't like Aaron Rogers I think he's a great football player but he's not a great person so that's that's your that's your opinion that's my opinion that's your opinion so what I'm
[15:10]trying to understand is why would a comedian want to sue someone for making a joke wouldn't that put him out of business if all a sudden we could sue people for defamation for making jokes
[15:22]about us but you see thin skin is okay if it's on you but not on me I'm the comedian I can talk about you right don't say a word about me because I am invisible or maybe not but legally let's
[15:33]just set the record straight here you make a joke like that it's protected by the First Amendment unquestionably and besides what he said is that you know Jimmy Kimmel is worried about this list
[15:44]and then Jimmy Kimmel responds and says I'm not on a quote unquote list there's no list this is not a little black book of who was engaging in sexual escapades with gilan Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein
[15:55]that's not what this is but I think that Kimmel's response again again like Josh was saying is far more overblown than what Jimmy even made in JZ someone who's
[16:05]known for being able to both give out and take jokes that's the guy's entire stick and I find it really funny most of the time for that to be the response
[16:14]makes every one of my Flags go whoa that's not the way this is supposed to be something's off all right so I guess we will continue to follow what's happening here
[16:25]as we dig through those pages uh over the course of the next few days in the meantime they are with us the entire hour up
[16:35]next did the hospital get a fair trial in the take care of Maya case they don't think so and today juror number one was summoned to
[16:46][Music] court we are moving closer to trial in the case against doomsday Prophet Chad deel prosecutors say they will seek the death penalty against him investigators
[16:57]have recovered you remains at Chad Dell's residence there's no way Lan I should ever come up with this his wife Lori valel has already been convicted now will her husband end up with the
[17:09]same fate it's just so hard to know where the truth ends it's the Doomsday Prophet Chad debel on trial we the jury return the following
[17:27]ver claim one false imprisonment October 7th through October 13th 2016 Maya kosi one did John's Hopkins All Children's
[17:37]Hospital falely imprisoned Maya Kowalski without legal Authority Under circumstances that were unreasonable and unwarranted between October 7th and
[17:47]October 13th 2016 yes two what is the total amount of medical off damages
[17:59]psychological to be in the future what a moment from Maya Kowalski inside that courtroom uh dramatic moment
[18:09]here on court TV where they found the hospital liable on all the claims made by Maya in her suit against the hospital
[18:20]that separated her from her parents her mother ultimately took her own life um now it was a civil case so after they found the hospital liable then the jury
[18:31]had to determine well just how liable are they in terms of dollars and cents take a look $2,496 $3 million
[18:46]$67,200 1,400,000 $3 million $561,500 $ million $4 million $8 million
[19:03]$8 million $1 million $22 million $50 million total of $261
[19:14]million and after that massive massive verdict uh the hospital then was claiming juror
[19:24]misconduct kind of like what we're seeing in the Murdoch case but this is in a civil case so the judge brought in juror number one
[19:35]today um here's what the defense motion alleged the evidence reveals a shocking level of involvement in the case and palpable bias in favor of the Plains on
[19:44]the part of Juror number one's wife as well as social media posts sharing inside information the wife could only have obtained from her husband now her
[19:55]husband was juror number one juror number one came inside the courtroom today was questioned and the judge
[20:04]rendered his decision let's take a look the court had gave repeated instructions during the trial not to
[20:15]have any conversation about the case don't learn any information in fact I think on the very first day I told the assembled group that you
[20:24]could even talk to your spouse or part partner about the case and if if they asked that you were to say that judge Carol's a meanie and doesn't
[20:35]allow me to uh talk about this case were you able to follow that instruction throughout the entirety of the case until the time that you were
[20:45]discharged as a juror yes I was at any time until the time that you were discharged uh right the day before
[20:54]Veterans Day or whatever day that was when when wear discharged you at any time before that date did you speak with
[21:03]anyone that would include your wife concerning anything having to do with this case no I did
[21:12]not now the motion indicates that a person who appears to be your wife and I'm assuming it is your wife is that correct yes okay uh
[21:24]was following the trial on various social media platforms and on one day came to court okay are you able to tell me for sure
[21:39]that your wife or no one else no one gave you any information about this case at all yes correct your honor no one and I
[21:51]did not seek out any information on this case at the end of the day the defense has failed to demonstrate any jur
[22:00]misconduct the court will therefore deny the motion for new trial based on alleged jur misconduct that concludes the uh juror
[22:11]interview and I get it when you lose a case to the tune of $261 million you're going to do everything you can for your client in this civil case uh but here you're dragging juror number one in uh
[22:23]alleging that her wife only could have gotten information from him or vice versa whatever just said no there's no evidence of it let's bring back in our Think Tank daral Cohen Molly Palmer Josh
[22:33]shiffer uh what do you think of um this whole scenario this is a little different than Murdoch though like Murdoch involves the court clerk and there's a little different it's a little
[22:43]different so what about this what what did we just see here we saw ineffective assistance of council if you could say it was criminal they're looking they're begging
[22:54]we're dying $261 million were dying now let me say this I thought the evidence could have gone either way with the trial but it was the way it was presented it was the
[23:06]way the hospital's lawyers and the way their Witnesses testified holier than thou hoty and condescending and pretentious that in my view is what turned it around and that's really what
[23:18]they were accused of doing to the family acting the same way that they acted inside the court and they didn't learn their lesson the trial within the trial it really it's it's the reframing that
[23:27]narrative just like Daryl saying is it's not just this betrayal of Maya this is how they are and that's the Betrayal to the public right but here here's the
[23:39]thing to keep in mind it's not over till it's over and those of us who do a lot of post conviction work or Appel at work know that this motion for new trial is just the beginning of the hospital
[23:49]trying to overturn that verdict they negotiate a lower exactly red D so this is you know this is just Fair number to make this whole thing go by the way is
[24:00]giving Yogi Bear all the credit in the world for it ain't over till it's over it shouldn't be though because they Duty as the lawyers is to try to benefit their client by reducing the overall
[24:11]damage Award right now it's a 200 something million dollars what if I give you 100 million right now yeah will you wave your appeals man if I can go back to my boss and say I just saved you 100
[24:21]million doll right and I think that may happen it's very common in the Civil World let me ask you this though are you comfortable whether it's a civil casee or criminal case with jurors spouses and
[24:32]family members coming to the courthouse to watch the trial the word is no it is spelled no not k n w you're not you're not comfortable not comfortable with that at all but we can't prohibit them
[24:43]but it opens up the possibility of exactly what we are witnessing today in that courtroom I will say that my husband served on a murder jury and I did come and watch but he never ever
[24:52]ever came home and spoke to me about anything about the trial whatsoever and took his oath very seriously and that's what we want jurors to do to take their oath seriously and do their civic duty
[25:03]the best part about this and the part that I'm actually kind of happy about is it brought attention to this kind of polite falsehood of jury instructions that judges give people and everybody's
[25:14]going to say yep I followed all the rules and I didn't do anything wrong are you kidding me people violate the rules of the jury system constantly in our
[25:25]system there's I've seen a lot of jurors come back and admit when thing I saw this juror do that they they talk about each other they tell on each other they
[25:34]tell on each other like crazy it's like high school when I tell people jurors it's it's a true slice of America you're going to get all the different flavors and it gets wild but what really we take
[25:46]away is what's a judge really going to do are they going to disturb that ask Verdi before we run that time comparing what just happened here what we saw today which was pretty quick um how
[25:58]similar or different will it be from the Murdoch hearing that's coming up different Universe totally unal I'm with M it ain't over till it's
[26:08]over but Murdoch he's already plad guilty to additional charges so it almost doesn't matter except he probably thinks if he has this reversed he is
[26:18]going to be able to be released at some point before he dies no it's also the provisions of the Constitution when it's somebody's Liberty it's different right to a fair trial is different it's and in the other case it's just money money
[26:30]that's a lot of money oh yeah but it's just money and it is a sense of justice for Maya and her family all right up
[26:39]next it's the first really big trial of 2024 the parents of the Oxford school shooter charged for the deaths of their sons shooting
[26:50][Music] victims I was awakened by my brother screaming in on the door bang bang bang people don't realize human beings like
[27:01]that can exist in the world he said that we'd seen his face and there was no way that he could ever let us go they were not going to let me go
[27:13]easily you better fight and you better get out of here I survive because I'm a boring fighter I survived tonight at 109 Central on court TV
[27:28]is it true in November 30th 2021 that all crimes were carried out while you possessed and used that 9mm handun yes is it true that the firearm that you used in November the 30th was
[27:40]purchased on November the 26 2021 by your father James Trum yes is it true that you asked him to buy the firearm yes is it true that you gave him
[27:50]your own money to buy the firearm yes is it true that you picked that gun out the b yes is it true in nov M the 30th 2021 when you obtained the firearm it
[28:01]was not kept in a locked container or a safe yes it was that's the Oxford school shooter he's pleaded guilty that was part of his
[28:13]guilty plea he has been sentenced um he was 15 at the time of the mass shooting at his school four students uh murdered six others wounded was sentenced to life
[28:24]in prison without the possibility of parole that all happened on December 8th there he is he's the killer I mean he's the one who actually
[28:35]murdered his fellow students now for the first time ever in the first big trial of 2024 his parents are going to face
[28:45]trial four counts of involuntary manslaughter each one is facing um the judge ruled on on November 13th that they're to have separate
[28:56]trials um take a listen to this um you have some of the testimony
[29:09]involving the text messages from the mother and then you've got some of the arguments being made um earlier actually
[29:19]it'll be last year March of last year in this case it gives you an idea of what some of the allegations are of the involvement of the parents and why the parents have been charged with
[29:30]involuntary manslaughter so this message was sent to Ethan Crumbley from Jennifer Crumbley according to your analysis correct all right and what's the first message seriously question mark question mark
[29:41]looking up bullets in school question mark question mark and what time and date was that sent that's on the 29th of November 2021 at 11:53 a.m. okay and
[29:51]what was the response he responded almost immediately after by saying what okay was there a second and third response yep he responded saying oh yeah
[30:03]I already went to the office for that and then this is Page 287 the top this is the blue text bubble what does this say it was in first hour all I did
[30:14]was look up a certain caliber at the end of class because I was curious and what time is that up that's at 11:54 okay next text
[30:24]please he's saying it was on my phone completely harmless teachers just have no privacy and our position is in this case
[30:35]the prosecution has failed to even meet the probable cause standard as it relates to causation on behalf of James Crumbley James Crumbley had no knowledge
[30:45]of what EC was planning he was called over to the school that day wasn't he he was he had knowledge then he had knowledge that there was a drawing but had no knowledge of what EC was planning
[30:56]to do that day or at any other point certainly a warning signal wouldn't you say it could be a warning sign that EC
[31:07]may have been troubled or may have been having certain thoughts but not a warning sign that he was going to kill four other people s warning sign that maybe he had access to a gun James
[31:17]Crumbley did not know that EC had access to that firearm he bought him the gun well and the first thing he did when he heard about the school shooting was go back home to see if the gun was there so
[31:28]certain was on the top of his head Mr Crumbley went home and did check to see if his firearm was there and realized that it wasn't aren't we looking at foreseeability more than
[31:39]anything else to determine whether there can be criminal liability that attaches the prosecution's position is that the shootings in this case were foreseeable by James Crumbley um the defense's position is that they weren't
[31:51]foreseeable so the court can look at foreseeability but just having a a child or a minor who may engage in strange or
[32:01]questionable Behavior doesn't necessarily mean that a parent or any individual can foresee that they're going to carry out a premeditated murder of one or multiple people that's what all this case was
[32:12]about you might be right but that's not all it is I mean it's it's it seems like it would be pretty hard for you to overcome what judge re mentioned which is when they
[32:23]get to the school and they're presented with all that information and with the background information about his mental health situation and his calling out to the parents to try to get help and not
[32:34]receiving it and his interest in guns and shooting and and then when you add in what occurred at the school uh this is not just a parents dealing with a
[32:45]mental health issue it's much more than that there you have it Michigan versus James and Jennifer Crumbley the next hearing is January 10th that will be
[32:56]Jennifer only and then the first really big trial of 2024 uh begins on January 203d right here on court TV let's bring
[33:08]back in our Think Tank Daryl Cohen Molly Palmer Josh shiffer with us here in studio so um and there was more right that morning there's a parent teacher
[33:17]conference disturbing drawings involving guns blood Etc some disturbing notes written by him and really that's where
[33:27]we need to focus because what the justices in that appell Court were just talking about with the foreseeability I think that if it's just foreseeability this case is a giant
[33:38]loser for the state but like you just talked about it's not just about that foreseeability it's the information they knew right then that was and this is different than any any other case
[33:50]because they bought him the gun so they knew he had the gun um it's clear that they were a little worried that maybe he had the gun when they heard about the shooting right ran back home um they
[34:01]knew he had mental problems they knew that he had been looking up uh bullets and got in trouble for that then they were brought in because of pictures like
[34:11]this that he was drawing in class and then they're in the the morning of the shooting they are there with him and say
[34:21]nothing about the gun don't ask about the gun don't mention it don't search don't ask for anything to be searched
[34:29]don't take him home to get help Etc if anything at the very minimum they were accomplices and at the very minimum they knew that this is a possibility Josh
[34:41]mentions foreseeability it is definitely foreseeable that he was going to use that gun on someone or someone's and to me this is a larger issue if these two
[34:51]parents are convicted maybe just maybe it will have a deterrent effect on other parents throughout this country saying we have to pay attention to our child or
[35:02]children and we have to be parents not friends Molly wants no part of that no well here's the problem you know this is not just about hey let's set an example let's have a deterent effect it's about
[35:14]charging somebody under a particular code section of the law and this involuntary manslaughter statute requires much more than foreseeability it requires that the state show
[35:25]causation that these two caused the deaths of these children at the school by their extreme negligence and what we're going to see at trial is the let
[35:35]me ask you this let me ask you this is purchasing a gun for your son right they didn't buy it for themselves they bought it in their own name because he couldn't buy it knowing the the mental condition
[35:46]that he had is is that the recklessness that's part of the recklessness part of the recklessness is seeing the photographs excuse me the pictures that he drew part of the reck not locking the
[35:57]gun up well why would you do that because if you lock the gun up it can't be used but but what where's the causation that's the line that's going to be drawn for jurors by the defense
[36:07]they have to prove that that negligence was the cause not Ethan Crumbley himself there are plenty of parents it's America that buy their children guns and maybe the kid has exhibited some typical
[36:17]teenage angsty behavior is that enough to say this caused the deaths and I think what Molly's really illustrating well is that this is another ridiculous
[36:28]example of overcharging because are there charges no are there charges that are valid yeah they were Reckless they made some bad choices but that causation
[36:39]portion nothing they did was forceably linked firm enough Beyond A Reasonable Doubt to murder we will see what the jury says
[36:49]fasten your seat belts up next in tonight's tank takes a woman heads down to to the local courthouse to bail out a friend who got a little
[36:59]jammed up then she has a little runin with law enforcement and ends up charged with DUI and tonight we're wondering who's going to bail her
[37:11][Music] out there was pounding on the door bang bang bang he said that we'd seen his face and there was no way that he could ever let us
[37:22]go I survive CU I'm a born fighter I survive next on court TV these murders have shaken our community why did you do it
[37:33]the Doomsday Prophet Chad Dell prosecutors say they will seek the death penalty a social media sensation now a suspected [Applause]
[37:44][Music] killer welcome back time for tonight's tank takes where we take a look at the world of crime and Justice and some
[37:55]stories that just just don't fit into the rest of the program even on Wednesday all right first story tonight I'm calling this one oh no Canada um Roy
[38:07]Hyde is his name he's a man in British Columbia which apparently is in Canada um not in Britain has just been sentenced after breaking a Canadian
[38:17]national record most impaired driving convictions he's 66 years old and he was sentenced to just under 5 years in prison after receiving his
[38:28]21st driving while impaired conviction and my question tonight for the think tank does 21 seem a little low for the record it does and we did our own
[38:39]research and you'll be happy to know that we looked up what the most DUIs ever gotten by a United States citizen was and it's 31 we are still number one where Florida are they from South Dakota
[38:51]South Dakota the good thing is at 21 he was legally able to drive and so his view was have a drink have a drive have a drink do Drive in the alcoholic
[39:01]Olympics no one's going to beat America we are number one forever or do you think in Canada the the um I don't know the the the prequisite is just a little
[39:13]bit more like no but they're better drunk the exchange rates different so remember that's 21 Canadian DUIs 17 United States DUI all right let's get to
[39:24]our next uh um tank tape calling this one birds of a feather um uh a woman not from Florida from Indiana it's about 3:00 in the morning and her friend is
[39:36]locked up so she takes a drive down to the um local County jail and on her way there actually runs into a deputy in the
[39:47]parking lot explaining that she was there to bail someone out and at the time apparently she was showing some signs of intoxication she refused the breath test she became aggressive
[39:59]started kicking the deputy to avoid being detained uh she was eventually transported to the hospital where she was found to be twice the legal limit
[40:09]she then got locked up and I'm wondering who's going to bail her out well she's just a little deranged from being detained and this poor woman was trying this her best late at night early in the
[40:20]morning just to be cool and then she was do no good deed goes unpunished it's entament she was there for a benefit of getting her friend out ran into the police they offered her something her
[40:31]friend he clear clear dismissal they going to win at 3:00 a.m. do people get bailed out at 3:00 a.m. absolutely and often times by drunk people yes that's
[40:41]exactly how I go now can you bail yourself out cuz she probably had the money on her to bail her friend out can you use it to bail yourself out how does that work I've never been arrested how
[40:52]does that work there are places that you cannot bail yourself out someone else has to do it unless you can do an so which is sign your own bomb and most important it's illegal for your lawyer to bond you out so don't even ask don't
[41:04]even ask all right final story tonight uh DWG um not driving well intoxicated but driving well Grinch this happened
[41:13]unbelievably take a look folks um Christmas night there he is behind the wheel um full Grinch costume he became
[41:23]distracted near a curve in the road dve through a mailbox through a business sign several lights no one was hurt but these pictures were taken and I'm
[41:33]wondering who is going to represent him this poor guy has been a he's been aligned ever since he's been in green
[41:43]and it's not fair to do this to a poor guy who just wants somebody else's the bigger problem is that Daryl is going to bring out a copyright suit on behalf of
[41:53]the Seuss State and Sue no no really my whole thing is I'm impressed by the driving that is an amazing costume to operate a vehicle in like I I just any
[42:04]crimes committed here you think he aimed for the mailbox didn't he he aimed for the mailbox and successfully he hit it do you think he had any stolen property in there maybe some gifts that he took
[42:14]from some kids no absolutely not but I heard that Cindy Lou was seen running away from the that broken window that broken window she had a little little set of Cindy L keys and he was like man
[42:25]he had a Grinchy type Christmas poor guy all right just think what happened on New Year's he has not been charged by the way big thank you Daryl Co Molly Parmer and Josh shiffer happy New Year
[42:36]great to have you here all right folks take a look at your screens this is important this is Ryan jeti Ryan 16 years old missing out of Taunton
[42:46]Massachusetts since December 26 so if you see Ryan please pick up the phone make that call 9111 800 the Lost or you can call the Taunton Police Department
[42:58]in Massachusetts the phone number is right there on the screen we do it every night we will continue to do it every night this year please see if we can
[43:08]help get Ryan to a safe place tonight I'm vinan thank you so much for watching have a great night and as always please don't forget to hug the kids
[43:26][Music] oh