Crime Weekly - S3 Ep344: The Wrongful Death Lawsuit | The Unanswered Death of Christian Griggs (Part 4)

Episode Date: September 26, 2025

On the morning of October 12, 2013, 23-year-old Army veteran Christian Griggs went to his in-laws’ property in Angier, North Carolina to pick up his young daughter, Jaden. At 10:54 a.m., he called his father Tony to say that his father-in-law, Reverend Pat Chisenhall, was yelling at him while his estranged wife Katie hid inside the house. Six minutes later, at 11:00 a.m., Tony arrived at the Chisenhall home to find his son lying face-down, bleeding and unresponsive. Pat had shot him six times with a .22 rifle. Once in the abdomen, once on the top of his left shoulder, and four times in the back. Christian was rushed to the hospital, where he was soon pronounced dead. As his family struggled to process the sudden loss, detectives began piecing together what had happened that fateful morning. What they uncovered were conflicting accounts, multiple 911 calls, and questions that would haunt the case for years to come. Try our coffee!! - www.CriminalCoffeeCo.com Become a Patreon member -- > https://www.patreon.com/CrimeWeekly Shop for your Crime Weekly gear here --> https://crimeweeklypodcast.com/shop Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/c/CrimeWeeklyPodcast Website: CrimeWeeklyPodcast.com Instagram: @CrimeWeeklyPod Twitter: @CrimeWeeklyPod Facebook: @CrimeWeeklyPod ADS: 1. https://www.EatIQBAR.com - Text WEEKLY to 64000 for 20% off ALL IQBAR products and FREE shipping! 2. https://www.RocketMoney.com/CrimeWeekly - Cancel your unwanted subscriptions and more TODAY! 3. https://www.Smalls.com/CrimeWeekly - Get 60% off your first order and FREE shipping!

Hello, everybody. Welcome back to Crime Weekly. I'm Stephanie Harlow. And I'm Derek Lavasser. So today we're diving into the fourth and final part of the Christian Griggs case. And I hope that all will be illuminated and we'll all have a better understanding of what happened in this case and where were left off. That is my hope. So let me give you a quick recap. On the morning of October 12th, 2013, 23-year-old Army veteran Christian Griggs went to his estranged wife, Katie's parents' home in Angier, North Carolina, to pick up his daughter, Jaden. At 10.54 a.m., he called his dad to say that his father-in-law, the Reverend Pat Chishishol, was yelling at him while Katie hid inside. Six minutes later, Tony Griggs, who is Christian's father, arrived to find his son lying face down at the porch,

bleeding from six gunshot wounds, four of them in the back. Christian was rushed to the hospital but died shortly after noon. Investigators quickly discovered that multiple 911 calls had been placed in the minutes leading up to the shooting, but not all of the details matched. Pat claimed Christian was breaking into the home and threatening him and Katie while Katie said she was hiding in a closet during the gunfire. Yet, when dispatch reviewed the recordings, no gunshots could be heard during her call, even though, based on her story, Katie was only a few.

feet away from Pat when he said he fired and from where he said he fired the shots. So as detectives processed the scene, more questions emerged. There were no bullet holes in the curtains, shutters, window frame, or glass. Fingerprint and blood testing on the windows came back negative. Three shell casings were found inside the house, but the other three were missing. That same evening, the scene was turned back over to the chis and friends from the church were allowed to clean it up. Days later, Pat walked detectives through a filmed reenactment, describing Christian as enraged and breaking through a window, but his account was vague and contradicted earlier statements. He also claimed to have little to no memory of what happened.

Now, despite the inconsistencies in Pat and Katie's accounts and the missing evidence, the sheriff's office closed the case, ruling Christian's death as self-defense under the Castle Doctrine. Christian's family could not understand the outcome. They didn't believe Pat's story, and they knew a thorough investigation had not been done. They asked for a new investigation, but of course, they were met with roadblocks at every turn. Still, the Griggs family kept pushing forward, determined to prove that Christian was not killed in self-defense no matter the cost. And that brings us up to date on where we are today. Derek, do you have anything you want to say before we dive in? No, I don't think so. We're into part four on this. We've already covered a lot. I've given

a lot of my opinions and we know where we left off as far as the six shots. Yeah, I think when we talked about it last week at the end of the episode, part three, you said, yeah, I agree with you. Six shots is excessive. The four shots in the back shouldn't have happened. It didn't need to happen. Right. And it made you kind of waiver on whether or not you believe that it's actually self-defense. Right.

I think it could start off self-defense and change into a murder. I think that's possible. So I'm interested to hear where it goes from here. I know there's a civil trial. I did not look it up. So I'm interested to hear how that played out. And we'll wrap it up and give our final thoughts. All right. So the Griggs family knew they couldn't take on the legal system alone, so they hired attorney Patrick Roberts. And Roberts then brought in Lee Denny, a private investigator with decades of experience. Denny had served as a criminal investigator for the U.S. Armed Forces. He was an NRA certified firearms instructor, and he had held leadership roles in the North Carolina Association of Private Investigators. Denny was tasked with reviewing the evidence that had been used to close Christian's case.

in August of 2014, he was granted access to a large portion of the Harnett County investigative file as long as he looked at the file in the company of detectives. I had a question about that, actually. Is that common? Do they say, like, yeah, you can look at the file, but we have to be watching you when you do it? If they're going to look at the original file, for sure. I mean, what if they tamper with the file? Okay.

If they're giving them a copy of it, no, no problem. But they probably didn't want the file leaving the facility. And they probably didn't want him taking pictures, et cetera. Correct. Correct. So Denny later wrote in an affidavit that he was able to listen to the 911 calls made by Katie and Pat. He described them as calm, noting that neither caller was screaming or an obvious panic. So first, we're going to start by playing Katie's first call. Sheriff, I'm sorry. I need someone at my house. My husband is in my yard. I'm crazy, threatening me, threatening my dad.

And what's your name? Katie Griggs. And you said this is your dad? My husband. Your husband? What's the phone of your friend from? And what's your husband's time? Christian Griggs.

And I'm at, I live right beside my parents' house. Okay. And does you have any weapons on him? I don't know. Has he threatened you in any way? Yeah. And threatening my dad. Has he assaulted you?

Not today. Is he drinking or doing drugs? He has, I don't know. He has warrants out. I went last night. He judges asked him to. What kind of warrants are you? He was beaten on my door last night.

Domestic trespassing, I think, was what they called it, and damaged to the property. But he did. What's his day to borough? I don't know how to check that. Okay. And he is still at this other location, correct? He is on my front porch.

Okay, all right, I'll get somebody started that one. Thank you. Thank you. Bye-bye. Okay, now let's hear Pat's first 911 call. Carnet County 911, what is the address for your emergency? Carnet County, 911, what is the address for your emergency? Hello?

Carnet County, 911, what is the address of your emergency? Okay, sir, your name? Pat Chisholnall. Okay, and tell me exactly what happened. My daughter is a strained cousin. We have a restraining order against him. Pick it out last night. I need to hear making threats against this morning.

Okay. So he's there now? Yes. Threats me and her. And you said you took the restraining order out last night? Last night it was looking at the Magist Office. Was it a domestic violence restraining order or was it just a restraining order? Domestic violence.

Okay, are any weapons involved? No, not at this time. Okay, my partner's going to dispatch a deputy. Let me ask a few specific questions, okay? Okay. Okay. Okay? Okay.

All right, hold on just a second. Are you at that location now, sir? He's actually in my house, which is next door. And your daughter is with you now? Yes. Okay, sir. Where is he at now? He's out in the yard.

He's sitting on the front porch. Okay. I need to get his description. What race is he? Blackmail. And what kind of clothing does he have on? A white sweater with a hood. Okay, what kind of pants?

Great. And how old is he? I think 24, I believe. Okay, and what is his name? Christian Griggs, G-R-I-G-G-D-S. And how do you spell his first name? Christian C. H-R-I-S-T-I-N.

Okay, and what is his demeanor, sir? Hostile. And you said this is your daughter's estranged husband? Yes. How tall is he? About 5-10, 5-11. And what is his waiter billed? Medium.

175, maybe. Okay, sir, can you take yourself to a safe location and avoid any further contact with him? Can you tell father what to do with his shop? Can you go inside and lock your doors and windows and avoid any further confrontation with him until an officer can arrive? Sir? Okay, get yourself to a safe location and just avoid. any contact with him okay nothing same did he arrive in a vehicle yeah what kind of

vehicle was it sir what color silver acura is it a two-door or four-door And where's the vehicle parked at now? At the other house. My daughter's house. We're not side by side. Okay. Okay. Are you or anyone else in immediate danger?

Yeah, I think so, possibly. Okay. Yes, I think so. Are you able to get yourself to safety? Yes. Okay, if you think you can leave safely, get away now, where are you going to go? Well, I think I can get in the house.

I think I'm okay here. Okay. If you can get in the house, sir, take the phone with you. What was the threats that he made? She beat me up, and he's just looking through the wind, he's shouting at my daughter, demanding to see his child and crazy. All right, sir. Just keep very quiet.

Just keep very quiet and try to stay out of sight and avoid any confrontation with them. Lock your doors and windows. If anything changes or if he tries to get in and you're inside, call us back immediately and let us know. My daughter would be great. We took out in the restraining order last night. Yes, sir. I'm going to try to look that up so our deputy can know if you can make a list of all dates, times, and details of any previous instances.

Do not disturb anything at the scene, including any weapons, tools, or objects found nearby. an officer have been dispatched. If he could, just give us a call back immediately. So those were the first two calls. I will say they both sound pretty calm. Yeah, they sound calm, yeah. Not, you know, too scared. And Pat's first 911 call was made from outside the house.

Correct. You can hear him having an interaction with Christian there at one point. Yeah. Okay. So now we're going to play Katie's second 911 call. Johnson County He has got to get this over here He has broken to my house

Please I mean where are you at Hold over the sheriff's office Please Okay hold on You are currently Be sure of service Sir sir I just called and spoke to someone

My husband He is broke into my house I just called y'all said you were sending someone But he was broke into my house Please. Okay. I've got two deputies coming, ma'am. Please, thank you so much.

You're all right. You're welcome. And finally, let's hear Pat's second 911 call. Harnett County 911 address for emergency. Okay, your name? Pat, too, the wrong. To me exactly what happened, sir. I just called Mom, my wife.

My daughter, who stayed talking about me, was threatening. And I was trying to get in the door. He busted in the window, was coming in the window, attacking, I shot him. You shot somebody? Yeah. Who was breaking into your house? Christian Bridge. Yeah, I just called 911 just moments ago.

Okay. I was still on the line and I dropped the phone. Okay. All right, stay on the phone with me, okay? Where is he at right now? On the front porch. Okay. Go back through the window.

Is he breathing? I think, sir. Okay. Hold on one second, sir, don't hang up. Hold on. We've got help on the way. Okay, sir, are you still with me? Yes.

Okay. I'm going to ask you some questions, okay? Okay. All right. Is there anyone there that can go check on him and see if he's breathing? He appears to be the wind, but he appears to be. Okay, can you tell where he was shot at?

I shot him in the stomach. In the stomach. All right, how old is he? 24 Katie. Tell you mom and telling him home and not to come home. All right.

Is he awake, sir? I don't know. He's quiet. He was moaning, though he's quiet. All right. Is he still breathing? I believe so. Okay. That's great. All right, sir. Is there any serious bleeding with him? I can't tell. I don't think so.

You can't tell. All right, sir. I want to make no. Sure, no-no. All right, sir, how many times did you shoot him? I'm not sure. You're not sure. I'm extremely upset, and I don't know several.

Okay. on the way to you, okay? I'm staying on the phone with you. Please, sir. I'm going to, okay? Terrible it's true. Can someone get medicate for me on track one? They had something they were calling in. Okay, sir.

Okay, so let's be trapped right. So tell me a little bit more about what happened. He was communicating threats to you? Yes, we took out a restraining order last night against domestic violence against my daughter. He just last night, and he came this morning hospital threatening me, threatened to beat me up. And then I tried to get in. I was outside, my daughter ran in the house and locked the door. And I was going to get inside.

He was chasing me. And I locked the door just in the second, and he was bang on going. Then he busted in the window, which is beside the door, and was coming through the window, yelling threats. And I shot him if he was coming through the window. I don't through the window. Okay. All right. Okay.

All right. So you've got a restraining order out on him. What's his name? Christian Greaves. Okay. And who did you speak with last night when this happened? His father just arrived and he's hospital. Please, hurry.

Are his father is there now? Yes, please get somebody here. They're on the way, sir, okay? I'm actually showing someone to be there. Do you see an officer out there? Yes, yes. Yes, yes, you just pulled up. Yes, thank you, thank you all.

All right. I'm going to stay on the phone with you until he gets right there with you, okay? His father's shown up and he's screaming and yelling. All right. Now, is the officer there with you? They just pulled up. Okay. All right, sir.

I'm going to let you go, okay, since they're there with you. Okay, thank you. All right, thank you. Okay, I do want to talk about these calls a little bit, but let's take a quick break First, we'll be right back. This episode is brought to you by IQ Bar, our exclusive snack and hydration sponsor. IQ Bar is the better for you plant protein-based snack made with brain boosting nutrients to refuel, nourish, and satisfy hunger without the sugar crash.

So I have tried a lot of healthy snacks over the years. Most of them leave me disappointed. But IQ Bar has completely changed that. and I talk to you about all the technical stuff, you know, plant protein and brain boosting nutrients and all that, but let's talk about what really matters, which is the taste and the texture, both are on a point. So their ultimate sampler pack is the perfect way to try everything. You're going to get nine IQ bars, eight IQ mix hydration sticks, and four IQ Joe mushroom coffee sticks. Personally, I like to start my day with a banana nut or a chocolate

sea salt IQ bar. That's going to get me through my editing sessions. And if I, I'm recording, I always keep an IQ mix blueberry pomegranate in my water bottle to stay hydrated and focused. The blueberry pomegranate is great. And all IQ bar products are gluten-free, dairy-free, soy-free, non-GMO, and made without artificial sweeteners, just clean, delicious ingredients like magnesium, lions mane, and adaptogens that help you feel sharper and more energized. We are not the only ones that think this. I mean, Derek and I talk about how much we love IQ bars all the time. We both stock IQ bars in our office, everybody who works for us and with you. us eats all our IQ bars.

I've converted some friends and family. With over 20,000 five-star reviews, IQ bar has become a part of so many people's routines. Mine and Derek's included and everybody else who steals our IQ bars included. So Derek's going to tell you how you can check them out for yourself and get a really, really good deal right now. That's right. And IQ Bar is offering all our special podcast listeners and viewers 20% off all IQ bar products, including the sampler pack, plus free shipping.

To get to 20% off, just text weekly to 64,000. Text weekly to 64,000. One more time, that's weekly to 64,000. Message and data rates may apply. See terms for details. Okay, we're back. Now, I thought it was interesting that in Pat's second 911 call, he said he shot Christian in the stomach. So he appears to know or have some spatial awareness as to where Christian was.

And it wasn't really, as we had previously theorized, that he had. kind of just shot not knowing what he was shooting at or what part of Christian's body he had hit. Would you agree? Yeah, I think at that point he knows he's shooting. He doesn't, oh, he's not aware of how many times he shot. I do think from personal experience, it is hard to remember all those little details. But yes, I would concur with you that initially, especially if he's saying Christian broke in through the window, he broke down the window.

Obviously, at that point, he has to see something in order to make that statement. Because if he's still outside the window, then he would. have a reason to shoot him. So yes, I concur that at that point he's facing him. He's allegedly seeing Christian's head at least or inside the window and he aimed for his stomach, apparently. It doesn't seem like he knows exactly where he shot him, though, just in that general vicinity. So while going through the investigative files, Denny, the PI, also examined dozens of photographs. They showed Christian's body on the porch, the front window he supposedly broke open, the shell casings collected inside the house, and the overall condition of the Chishol's

property. What stood out to Denny immediately was the window. The glass was not shattered and there were no cracks. Instead, the panes were tilted open about six to eight inches in a V shape. And that actually matches exactly what Christian's father, Tony Griggs, said when he first arrived on the scene. He said he saw the windows in that exact position. Yeah, that's kind of what we see in the photo, too. Yeah. That's like that V shape. And it's not even like a window pane, I would say. It's actually the window frame where it's there's individual pains yes but there's a whole frame and the best way I could describe it for anybody who's not watching on video which you should definitely come over and take a look the window doesn't open horizontally it opens vertically kind of where the bottom stays put

and the it's two pieces of window right two frames but the bottom frame kind of pushes in so if you were pushing the top of the frame and you wanted to enter the through the window you would push the top part and it kind of opens and if you're looking at it from the side it would be in the shape of a V as far as it's opening. That's the, that's not even a great description, but that's the best way, unless you have a better way, Stephanie. I mean, to me, it kind of looks like how some windows have the ability to do that so you can clean them. They really like tilt out so you can clean the inside and the outside. Yeah, even the windows that slide, yeah, exactly what you're saying. Like most windows now, they slide up and down, but if you want

to unlock them, you can pull them down. It looks like these windows are older style where they only open that way. Like on a hinge system. I will, the only thing I'll say, about the glass and I was listening to it where what was the exact phrasing Pat used? He broke the window. He broke the window, yeah. That is open to interpretation. I agree. When I hear broke the window, I automatically think window broken glass. Yes. Their interpretation could be window shut and now it's open. It's pushed in and therefore it's broken. I don't know if it was locked. But that's, the window wasn't broken. We can see from the photos. So it would be pretty stupid if this was all set up to say the window was broken knowing that police officers are going to be there

and see there's no broken glass. So the only reasonable explanation I can come to when he says he broke down the window, meaning the window was pushed inward, not necessarily broken glass. I think when Pat Cheson Hall was on the phone with the first 911 operator, she told him, go inside, lock your doors, lock your windows. Yeah. And he did go inside and apparently locked the door but did not lock the window? Maybe you didn't get to it. I mean, think about it. Maybe you forgot to lock the window. Maybe the window was locked. But even if it wasn't locked or unlocked, breaking through, like when we classify a breaking and entering, you could have your door open to your house. We're just talking from a legal perspective, right, if you were going to be charged with

a crime. Let's say it's your house and you decide to leave your front door wide open. And I, not living there, walk through that front door with the intention on stealing something. I just committed to breaking and entering, even though technically I didn't break anything. But crossing that threshold, whether it's a window or a door, would classify as breaking and entering. Now, for here, we don't have to look that deep. We're not charging someone with a crime. But technically, the pushing in of a window would be a crime. But Pat did say he broke the window. Well, that's what I'm saying. Clearly what he meant. I don't even think it's like that hard to fathom. Clearly, he didn't mean broken glass because he knows that law enforcement's on their way. So let's just say

for the sake of this conversation, this is all made up, right? If it's all made up and it's all fake, you're not going to say, oh, he broke the glass, knowing police officers are going to arrive in two minutes and there's going to be no broken glass. So I think it's very clear that based on the phrasing he used, whether we agree it's proper or not, when he said broke down the window, he was referring to the window being closed and Christian opening it or pushing it in, i.e. breaking it down. I think it's an extreme version of describing it, but clearly that's what he meant, because whether this is intentional, where he's lying, or it actually happened the way he's describing, there's no broken glass. And he has to know

that law enforcement is going to be able to see that as well. Very, very strange. So Denny, the PI, asked detectives whether any bullets had been recovered from the house itself, through the curtains, the shutters, the frame, or the glass. And they told him no. He also asked about gunshot residue testing. And detective said tests had been performed on Katie and Pat, but the results were inconclusive, and they did not provide him with those reports. So what do you think with the way the window was open, would it be possible for Pat to be such a good shot that he would shoot through the open windows and not hit the glass at all six times? Yeah, I keep going back to this because as we've been going over this episode, I'm trying to envision what the inside of that house looks like as I'm sitting here, and I think everyone does it when you listen to these episodes, is you kind of envision what Stephanie's describing. Trying to, yeah.

So my first thought is, like, Christian's opening the window, his head's coming through, like, the movie The Shining, like in a closet, you know, that way, you know, Jack Nicholson breaks down the door. And Pat Cheson Hall is like 10 feet across the room and he's hunched down and he's shooting at Christian at like a parallel level, right? Like a level shooting field. And in that case, there's no way he would hit Christian in the stomach without shattering the glass. However, we, as we just alluded to, there's no broken glass. So the only thing I can think of is that my interpretation, my vision of what happened is wrong in the sense that Pat Chisholin Hall was much closer to the window, more than likely standing and shooting downward, which based on how the way that window opens and based on the trajectory of those ballistics that we have in the report from the pathology report with the angle of the bullets going downward, more than likely Christian, who is 5-8, 5-9, I think he said, maybe 5-10. was hunched over, allegedly leaning in the window, right? And Pat Chisholnall must have been within three or four feet shooting downward at the window.

And in that case, based on how the window opens in that V shape, it would be possible to shoot Christian while not hitting the window panes themselves. Okay. But again, it's open to interpretation because I don't have a layout of it, but that's the only way that could occur where he would be shooting over the window frame. and the only way to do that would be at a standing position. And also shooting with that type of weapon would, I mean, how often would you see gunshot residue tests come back inconclusive? Is that common? I mean, we've done in my career, mostly gang shooting, I would say not a ton, maybe 15, 20. We would normally find the GSR on there after doing it.

I don't know how they would come back inconclusive. I would be lying to our audience if I said I was like a GSR expert. There's people who've probably done thousands who would have a better understanding of whether or not that's possible. But the gunshot residue, this chemical react with it, it leaves like a purplish, bluish color on your hand or black color on your hand. It's pretty obvious if they've shot a gun. The only thing I would say is depending on the gun. So with like a pistol or a revolver, you can't see it to the naked eye, but there's a lot of like, there's an explosion. in your hand because the gun isn't like perfectly sealed so as the just picture a glock right as the

round is being extracted and the the slide is racking back and then racking forward again there's this big puff of smoke that comes around the gun and that smoke is the gunpowder that will land on your hand with a with a 22 caliber rifle and I some people did mention long rifle could be a actual rifle or could still be a 22 caliber long rifle round in a handgun I know that's confusing. Stick with me. What you need to remember is that regardless of what it was, and I would assume here it was a long rifle, meaning an actual rifle, the round itself is very small. It's a very small round, which would contain a very small amount of gun powder. So is it possible based on how the gun extracts that round and how it fires and the amount of gunpowder

in that round itself, that there may be a lack of gunpowder residue on the hand? I could see that. And it wouldn't be any gunpowder residue on Katie's hand if she didn't shoot the gun. So that should come back with no result, with a negative result. But they said the results were both inconclusive, which is either bad terminology or if it's inconclusive, to me, that means there was nothing found. Yes, that's what, or they, yeah, how does it, how is it inconclusive? It's either yes or no, right? It's pretty binary where you either see remnants of GSR or you don't.

Yeah, that seems a little suspicious to me. I think that's going to come back to a thing where, again, it's not suspicious in the sense of like they're lying or telling the truth, right? Because you can't fake it. I think it's odd in the in the phrasing used by law enforcement because I've never heard it described as inconclusive. It's either yes or no. Do you see remnants or a reaction to the gun to the chemical? No, I do not. Well, then the answer is negative. Yeah. So they not only said it was inconclusive, which is odd, but they would not provide Denny with the reports. Yeah, that doesn't make sense to me. Yeah. It doesn't make sense to me. It's yes or no.

Yeah. Did you see something on the hands that could be a positive response? Inclusive. I've never, I've never seen that before. What do they do the test in the dark? I guess it would be inconclusive then. But for Pat and Katie, they're not the ones administering the test. So either it's yes or no. Either they had gunshot powder residue on their hands or they didn't. Which I think kind of lends to the idea that. And we know one of them shot, Christian. Yeah. Well, yeah, I think it kind of lends to the idea that law enforcement in this area may have been kind of closer to

Pat than they were to Christian and his family, and maybe they just kind of didn't want to provide this PI with anything that would help Christian's family go after Pat Chisholing Court. That's possible. I can't rule it out. I would also say it's possible that you have a lot of egos in this, and you have, and I have personally experienced this, so I know it's true, where you have a police department who thinks they did a good job, and now you have someone independently, who was also a police

officer, I believe, at one point you said, or a military or whatever. you know, he was, he has a background in. He has a law enforcement background. You have someone coming in and essentially second guessing your work. So whether you're on team pat or not, you, you feel personally attacked. And I'm saying this could be the presumption of law enforcement where they're like, oh, you're going to come in here and double check our work. Well, I'm not going to help you at all. I'm just going to give you the bare minimum that I absolutely have to provide you and nothing extra because the audacity to even come in here and question what we did is an insult to us. Is that possible that egos and hubris got into this?

And they basically said, who is this guy? He thinks he's better than us. We're not going to help him at all. It could be as juvenile as that. I mean, that's unproductive as well. So once again, we talked about this last episode where it's like, if you want to clear your name and you want people to think you did the right thing, you probably want to be transparent. What did I say to you last episode? It's like, hey, come in and second guess my work.

Check it out. Yeah. Please. Well, the shell casings raised another red flag for Denny. Photos showed three clustered behind a chair in the living room. Denny believed that if all six rounds had been fired inside, the casings would have scattered across the room. You did say that last episode, too. Yeah.

So finding them grouped together suggested they may have been placed there. And then there were the three casings that were missing altogether. So when Denny asked a district attorney Vernon Stewart about the missing cases, Stuart grew annoyed. Denny later wrote in his affidavit, quote, At the conclusion of my review of the investigative file, I asked Stewart if he thought it was possible someone could have picked up the three found shell casings outside of the home and put them behind. the chair in the living room. In response to my question, Stewart accused me of creating a conspiracy theory and he ended our meeting. At the close of our meeting, Stuart would not allow me to make copies of the investigative file or any of the materials contained within it, end quote.

And that's kind of what I had thought. Like maybe the shots were fired outside and maybe the shell casings were outside because you even said last week, if you shoot a gun like that, the shell casings are kind of just going to go where they're going to go. They're not going to be all together in one location. It should be in a general vicinity. of each other. They're not going to be in two different. Some of them aren't going to be inside and some of them aren't going to be outside. But they wouldn't be right next to each other clustered together.

No, no. They could roll. They could kind of, whatever, based on gravity and just the way they bounce or whatever. Usually in the same general vicinity, then you're not going to find one down the street, you know, when I think about cases I've done. But you can find one like under the living room couch and, you know, yeah. You would expect to find them all in the living room if you found three of them. Here's what I'll say about the shell casings.

I have no evidence to suggest from what we've been talking about that the shell cases were planted. I also have no evidence to suggest that they weren't, if that makes sense. Of course. There's nothing that's been put forward that suggests that they planted it. The only thing that I'll say sitting here, and this is just an opinion, this isn't based on my profession. It seems like it would be a very tight window to stage the scene. And I say that because we know Christian called Tony, and within six minutes, Tony was at the house. And based on the phone call we heard last, before that six minutes was even up, before Tony even arrived, Pat was already on the phone talking to 911 for about two minutes.

So that means from the time that Christian talked to Tony and the time that Tony arrived, well, even before Tony arrived, but by the time Pat got on the phone, Pat would have had to shoot Christian from inside the house and then maybe go outside and show. shoot him four more times, found the shell casings, picked them back up, brought them back inside, tossed them on the ground, opened the window more. Is it physically possible? I would say yes, but it doesn't seem very likely based on the fact that he was on the phone almost immediately after shooting Christian and talking to law enforcement, not knowing how quickly they were going to show up. And also, I'm assuming, not knowing that Tony was on his way. Exactly. But we also have we also have Pat's son going into the scene after it was sealed off by. law enforcement, which I hate twice.

Which I hate that. Saying he needed medication and then he needed to help with the dog. And why do I hate it? Because it raises this question. There you go. Now, there's a possibility he went in there and completely messed up the scene and moved things and staged things, right? There's also a possibility he went in there and grabbed his medication.

But Pat said there was no medication that he needed. I was, let's say he was going in there to grab his McDonald's that he left over there, right? Regardless, I don't care what he was going in there to get. he shouldn't have been allowed to do it because he went in there the whole scene's in question now as far as i'm concerned will never have the answer yeah you could have avoided all of the speculation by just doing the basic thing that you're supposed to do as a law enforcement officer which is not allow anyone to enter the crime scene simple i guess it was a firefighter so i don't give

yeah i don't give a shit yeah exactly he's related to the family that just shot someone yeah related, not related, only professionals should be allowed in that crime scene. And even when they are, there's a, there's a supposed to be an immediate perimeter set up. The lowest man on the totem pole for law enforcement establishes a sheet. Everyone, I don't care if you're a patrolman or the chief of police is supposed to sign that sheet, what time they arrive, what time they leave. Here's what I'm thinking. Maybe the lowest man on the totem pole saw this guy who's a firefighter come in.

And the guy was like, hey, I'm a firefighter. like I'm here, you know, responding to the scene and he didn't know that this guy was related to Patches and Hall. And so he thought, well, this makes sense. This adds up and only to find out later like, oh, you messed up. You know, that's possible. Again, I know it sounds like a cop out. I have no evidence. There's a lot of things that could have happened. Like, I don't know. I don't know. It could also be as simple as the low man on the totem pole. This guy shows up and says, oh, that's my dad's house. I want to go in and check on him or whatever. And he lets him in, which is still wrong.

Who knows the reasoning behind it? I can tell you this. Regardless of the reasoning, it was unacceptable. And he shouldn't have been allowed in there because if that doesn't happen, then we're not asking these questions. Yeah, but I guess what I would say in argument to that

is if you were Pat Chishol and you did shoot Christian in a place you didn't say you shot him or it wasn't in self-defense, you'd rather have these questions than have shell casings found outside, which would prove that you weren't where you said, you were. So you'd rather have the speculation and the questions and this mystery hanging over it than But it wasn't Pat Chesanhall that let them in. That's what my point. We're talking about the wrong

thing here because Pat Chisenhall didn't give permission to the son to go in there. Law enforcement did. It was an official crime scene. My point being, if yes, if you were to tell me that prior to law enforcement arriving, Pat Chisunhall let his son in the house, well then I would I would agree with you that Pat Chisholne Hall would want as many people as possible entering that crime scene going in and out of it because it creates speculation. But what you're telling me is that after law enforcement arrived and established that area as a crime scene, Pat Cheson's son was allowed to enter that property. But Pat could have sent his son there and said, just see if you can get in, you know, hoping to muddy the waters a bit. He could have. Yeah. He could have. Also, he could not have. Or the son could have done it on his own to just try to protect his father. Who knows, but. Either way. Either way, if law enforcement does their job, we're not having this conversation. Well, after reviewing the file, Denny met with Dr. Lauren Scott, the associate chief medical examiner for the state of North Carolina who had performed Christian's autopsy. And she told him that based on the trajectory of the bullets to Christians back, he would have

been lying face down or bent over when the shots were fired, and his torso would have needed to be parallel to the ground if the shooter was standing. And she saw no evidence that patches and had been crouching. And Denny explained why this was so important. He wrote, quote, The photographs showed Christian Griggs's body a significant distance from the window he was purportedly pushing open when shot, and his body is positioned at an angle parallel with the house. If Christian Griggs would have had his leg or foot placed inside of the house through the window when his spinal cord was severed, he would have become trapped between the window pane and frame. Further, such a scenario is not consistent with the position of his body

depicted in the photographs, end quote. So at the end of his review, Denny's conclusion was clear. He wrote, quote, I am of the professional opinion that Christian was murdered and not killed in self-defense. It is my professional opinion that Christian was shot dead by someone standing behind him on the Chisunhal's front porch and that the shooter fired the four fatal shots into Christians back while Christian was lying face down or was bent over, end quote. Denny later told reporters that when he looked at the case file, multiple details did not add up with Pat's story. He said, quote, it's pretty easy to conclude that it did not happen that way. End quote. He added that it seemed like the sheriff's office had essentially taken Pat's word

and closed the case. He also highlighted one final detail that really stood out to him. All six of Pat's shots struck Christian's body. This seemed improbable, especially given the circumstances Pat was claiming he shot Christian under. Denny explained, quote, in self-defense shootings, only about a third or less of the shots fired actually hit the intended victim or person. even with law enforcement, end quote. So Pat, he had no formal training, no law enforcement or military background, and had barely used the gun, which had sat in a closet since he received it as a graduation gift in 1975. Yet he managed to get all fired shots into his target. So what do you think about that from a law enforcement perspective? Is that true, even for law enforcement, that only about

a third or less of the shots fired actually hit the intended victim or person? I don't know. I know with my shooting, I fired four rounds and I hit them all four feet away. Well, you're a sharpshooter. I mean, I've been, I was scared for my life. I don't know. I don't know. Anecdotally, my experience was different, but I don't know the statistic on that. If what the numbers are, I wouldn't, I wouldn't know the answer to that.

I will speak to the autopsy report because Denny met with Dr. Lauren Scott, who was obviously the chief medical examiner on this case. She was the associate chief medical examiner. I don't know if that matters, but yeah. Well, whatever. I mean, she's in the building. She did the autopsy, yeah. She's in the building, and I respect and appreciate Denny's conclusions, but I would say the

same thing about myself, which is I'm not a pathologist. I'm not a ballistics expert, and neither is Denny. And so I can respect his opinion and also acknowledge that it's an opinion. What I read there from the actual doctor was that Christian would have had to be either face down or parallel to the porch. And by the way, and then before I go there, I agree with Denny's sentiment that if Christian had like put his foot inside the window and it had been shot in the back and the spine,

he would have been rendered incapable of moving at that point and more than likely would have been found on the window. I would say to him, what if Christian didn't fully go through the window, as I said last episode, where he's just leaning into the window, maybe his head's popping through, he's hunched over, and as he gets shot he turns around and in a natural human instinct to protect himself hunches over curls around as he's turning around and as he's facing away from Pat and he is hunched over with his back basically parallel to the porch

Pat fires four more rounds from inside the building and shoots him in the back while he's still standing and as far as where he was found being parallel to the house with on the porch that just means he had a couple steps before he hit the ground and died from his injuries. I say all that to say this. It's still possible that this is a murder.

Because even without Pat leaving the house and coming outside and standing over Christian and shooting him in the back while he's faced down on the ground, if Pat has a clear enough shot where he's shooting over the window frame at Christian, who's clearly not fully inside the window, and as he shoots Christian twice, Christian realizes that he's been hit

and does the right thing and turns around and to protect himself kind of hunches over like we all would you're going to protect your head right that's what we're all going to go for and so as he bends over and his back is clearly facing pat chiszenhall pat fires four more rounds hitting him in the back that's still wrong so i don't necessarily agree with the way that that denny believes it occurred but i would agree with the sentiment that even without pat walking outside the residence it still could be an unjustified shooting i don't know if i explained that well. No, I think you did. I think you did. I always thought, I wonder if it happened outside, and that's why you couldn't find the shell casings. You know, I did feel that way.

That it kind of wasn't instinct to me, but we don't have any solid evidence of that. We don't have anything to suggest that. I mean, if you had found even one shell casing outside, right? Let's say, for example, he did shoot him outside, right? And unfortunately, in that four-minute period, and unfortunately, I mean for Pat, right, let's play this out. Pat shoots him as he's stepping out onto the porch. He's out on the porch. He shoots him four times. He knows law enforcement's going to be there in a matter of minutes. So he's, he's kind of struggling. He's trying to find the bullets. He's able to find three of them. He brings them back. Well, he would only actually be able to find one of them, right? Because he fired the first two rounds from inside. He goes

outside. He goes outside. I think the theory from Denny was that all shots were fired outside. All six were fired. So then he wasn't laying on his back. He wasn't laying on his stomach when he was shot then. Do you mean the, I think they meant the four shots to the back he was laying. So, but all six shots couldn't have been fired from while Christian was laying on the ground if that's the theory? No, I would say not. So do you follow what I'm saying? Unless Pat was like behind the house and Christian was trying to get into the window laying on his stomach, trying to get into the window and Pat came up from behind and started shooting. But I don't see how he could gotten him in the stomach if that was the case. No, no, no, that doesn't make sense. The best thing

I can come to is he was shot twice from inside. And then Pat says, you know what, I'm finishing the job. You're, you know, dead people can't talk, walks outside now that Christian's on the ground injured, probably on his stomach, right, try to, you know, cover his wounds. And Pat proceeds to shoot him four additional times to make sure that he doesn't survive. Although I would argue this too. If your intent is to kill this person, you're not going to shoot him in the back. You're going to shoot him in the head. You're going to make sure they don't survive because you're not guaranteed. I think a headshot would be a lot harder to claim self-defense, too. I agree, but not knowing that people are about to arrive, you shoot him in the back.

What if he even survives another seven minutes and he's able to talk to Tony as soon as he arrives? Maybe that's why he shot four shots into his back instead of one. And back, yeah, it's still not a guarantee, though. So Dr. Lawrence got the Chief, the Associate Chief Medical Examiner, she said that the trajectory of the bullets to Christians back meant that he would have been lying face down or bent over. So not the first two shots the last four. Agreed. And that would fall in line with what I was saying.

But I got off the track there a little bit, but let's say Pat went outside and fired any rounds. Okay. And in the time frame that he had, wasn't able to find the other shell casings that fell through the porch crack or onto the grass or whatever, whatever you want. He brings the three shots back inside, the three casings back inside. He throws him on the ground. And you would expect that law enforcement during their search would be able to find at least one of those shell casings. outside. If there had been any shell casings found outside, I would be singing a different tune. My belief, just from what I see with the actual evidence, is that if he had fired two rounds

from inside, four rounds from outside, you would have only found two rounds inside because that would mean at least one of the shots that went through his back if the shell casings were not planted there had also been shot from inside the residence. Now, you could push back on me and say, police corruption, police tampering. And in that case, I have no defense because there's nothing to suggest that happened. There's nothing to suggest that it didn't. I mean, there is something to suggest that the police did not handle this case, this investigation appropriately. Oh, I agree.

I agree with that. They could have avoided a lot of the speculation by doing a better job. But there's nothing here. Any case where the evidence doesn't fit a certain narrative, you can always say police corruption, police tampering, etc. And it's all an opinion. I can't dispute that. You're entitled to that. What I'll also say is if six shots were fired and, you know, Pat would have known he fired

six shots, why would he or his son have only collected three shell casings and put them inside? You think they would have gotten all of them and put them inside because the missing shell casings raises a question of its own. I mean, maybe those shell casings are still under that porch. Who knows? Maybe the police didn't search thoroughly. I agree.

The only finding the three shell casings is a problem for me. I don't know where they could have did one shell casing. I don't want to be redundant. If you're inside, it's like where they go. One shell casing, okay, I can see that where it falls into just that one crack that nobody can get to. But 50% of the shell casings not being located is a problem for me, especially in a controlled environment like the inside of a residence.

I've had a couple shell casings go missing in a middle of a street at night at two in the morning. And I've had situations where I've gone back the next day and found an additional shell casing in one of those cracks that I didn't see. at night. Some of them fall in the sewer drains, too. That happens a lot. But inside a residence, you have central air maybe where you have the grates that it could be in the HVAC system, but where else is it going to go where the crack is big enough that you're not going to see a brass or stainless steel shell casing. These rounds are small. I would say the equivalent

to a straw as far as their diameter. Their diameter, yeah. They're maybe a little bit thinner than a straw. Small, maybe about one and a half inches, one to a one and a half inches tall. and about the diameter of a straw. So definitely something you would see. So I have a problem with that. I have a problem with only finding the three cases. All right. We're going to take a quick break, and we'll be right back.

Let me ask you something. Do you actually know how many subscriptions you're paying for right now? Because I thought I did. And then I downloaded Rocket Money. And it turns out I was paying for a streaming service I hadn't used in months. And I would have kept paying it if Rocket Money hadn't flagged it. So this podcast is sponsored by Rocket Money. It's the personal finance app that helps you see all your expenses in one place.

It helps you track your spending and to cancel the subscriptions you don't want anymore. And it's not just about cutting what you don't use. Rocket Money also helps you set budgets, stay on top of bill due dates, and even negotiate to lower your bills. So you don't have to sit on hold with customer service. And I've used this quite a few times, by the way. And it's so nice because you just say, like, hey, I want you to cancel this. And then you go back to doing what you were doing. I've started using Rocket Money as well to track where my money's actually going every month and

it's eye-opening. Rocket Money even sends me alerts when I'm close to going over budget or when a bill goes up, which keeps me accountable in a way I've never been before because I cannot keep myself accountable with this kind of stuff. Specifically, I like that they'll tell me when there's a transaction that goes through that's like higher than they think it should be or it's uncategorized, as in they don't know which category in my budget plan to put it in so then I can go in and and label it and let them know it's good or it's not good. I really love it. It works.

Okay, Rocket Money's 5 million members have saved a combined 500 million on subscriptions with members saving up to $740 a year when they use all of the app's premium features, which I do because they work, okay? They really do. I love Rocket Money. It's coming clutch. And maybe we can help you guys as well. Cancel your unwanted subscriptions and reach your financial goals faster with Rocket Money.

Just go to RocketMoney. dot com slash crime weekly today that's rocket money dot com slash crime weekly one more time rocketmoney dot com slash crime weekly okay we're back so once the p i denny was finished with his report the griggs's attorney continued his investigation and meanwhile christian's mother dolly as the administrator of his estate filed a civil rights complaint with the u.s department of justice stating that she believed race has played a factor in her son's case and the county's refusal to press charges. She explained to the media, quote, I think this is what this is about. This black man is on the white man's porch and they are not going to do anything about it.

They are doing everything they can to keep this man from going to prison. They couldn't care less about my son. If it had been the opposite, when the detective went to the hospital and saw the shots and Pat's back, they would have locked Christian up the day of the shooting, end quote. So Dolly's complaint was based on statistics. WRA reported that they analyzed 26,000 homicides in North Carolina between 1980 and 2016, and their review found that when a white person kills a black man, they are far less likely to face charges than in cases involving any other racial combination. Overall, just 1.5% of killings are ruled justified. But in cases where the shooter is white and the victim is black, especially when the victim is male, killings are justified four and a half times. more often than other combinations. Despite these statistics, it doesn't appear that anything came from Dolly's complaint,

but her next step would set much bigger changes in motion. In April of 2015, Dolly filed a wrongful death lawsuit against Pat and his daughter Katie. The lawsuit argued that Pat's story of what happened was impossible given the evidence, and even if the first two shots could be considered self-defense, like Pat claimed, the four shots to Christians back were not.

The filing stated that Christian's death, quote, is not justifiable in accordance with either North Carolina's stand-your-ground law or civil self-defense laws in that Christian was shot four times in the back with a 22-caliber rifle while unarmed in broad daylight, end quote. The lawsuit outlined the same investigative failures we went through previously, no fingerprints lifted from the rifle, no testing to determine whether the three shell casings inside the house had been staged, no clothes sent to the medical examiner. the list goes on and on. The lawsuit further accused Pat and Katie of altering the crime scene and even suggested that Katie herself could have fired shots at Christian during their argument. Then Pat may have fired additional shots. So the lawsuit stated the family was seeking damages exceeding $250,000. The Griggs told the media that making money was not their goal with the lawsuit. If they were awarded damages, they would go to Christian's daughter, Jaden. What they wanted was accountability. Tony explained, quote,

my hope is that we can get an SBI investigation, that those responsible can be held accountable, and that we will set the record straight. End quote. With the lawsuit filed, the Griggs' attorney pressed forward with his case building up evidence to prove the sheriff's office was wrong. In May 2015, Dr. Lauren Scott, the associate chief medical examiner who had performed Christian's autopsy, gave a sworn affidavit, and she wrote, quote, based upon my training and experience and my examination of Christian's wounds, it is my opinion

that Christian was the victim of a homicide, end quote. Dr. Scott explained that Christian being shot while laying down or bent forward was, quote, generally inconsistent with a claim of self-defense, end quote. She also noted that the sheriff's office had never given her Christian's clothing or any investigative or incident reports, items her office quite commonly receives for evaluations. She added, quote, I believe that such information could be useful in making further determinations, including, for example, the proximity of the shooter to the victim, end quote. One year later, in May of 2016, Pat himself was questioned during a deposition.

He was asked about his relationship with Christian and about the events leading up to the shooting. He described Christian as someone he had bonded with, saying, quote, we were close, end quote. But he admitted that as Christian and Katie's relationship deteriorated, his own relationship with Christian became strained. Pat said, quote, I was strained a bit because their relationship was strained, and I was trying to help him, so I wouldn't say it was a good relationship by the fall of 2013, end quote. Pat recounted the AC incident from October 11th, saying that he and Katie believed they had taken out a restraining order against Christian, but they were told to go to a different court the following morning. And when they returned home on October 12th, Christian showed up, demanding to

see Katie who had already gone inside. Pat said Christian stayed in his car at first, but he was agitated and angry. Pat told him to leave, claiming they had a restraining order. He said Christian refused, so he and Katie called 911. Pat testified that he eventually made it to the front door and that he and Katie struggled to close and lock the door as he fought against them. Pat said that seconds after they got the door locked, the window broke. So that would make sense of why the 911 operator told Pat, go inside, lock your doors, lock your windows, and he didn't get a chance to lock the window.

However, Pat said, seconds after they got the door locked, the window broke. He didn't say it was pushed open by Christian. He said it broke. Yeah. So when asked what happened next, Pat claimed, quote, I don't really remember anything after that, end quote. He said he had no memory of seeing Christian come through the window, and that following week, quote, was a real haze, end quote. The only reason he knew he had killed Christian was because of the 911 call where he confessed. He then added that he didn't even remember making that call.

So the Griggs' attorney brought up the autopsy, which showed Christian had been bent forward or laying down when he was shot four times in the back. And when asked if he had any explanation for how that could have happened, Pat admitted he did not. Pat was asked if he thought Christian had been armed and he said, yes, because he knew Christian owned a handgun. But this answer contradicted his 911 call when he explicitly told the dispatcher that there were no weapons involved. Yes. There was no weapons involved at this time. Yeah. So you'd think that at that point, if Pat was in fear that Christian had his handgun that he knew he owned, he would have said, I haven't seen one, but my son-in-law does own a handgun. You should have. He brings it places or something, yeah. That might be what he meant by not yet. Like, it's possible a gun could get brought out. It's possible I could bring a gun out. But to your point, it's, that's not what he said. So he should have been more descriptive in his thoughts. But maybe at that point, he's thinking this isn't going to escalate to a point where I'm going to have to shoot him.

I don't know. Well, Pat explained that he knew Christian owned a gun because he had given it back to him not long after that incident, where Christian allegedly threatened to kill himself Katie and Jaden with this gun. When pressed further, Pat admitted that if his account was true, he had returned the very weapon Christian had supposedly threatened his family with and then allowed him to continue living on the property. Pat told the jury that it was this gun, he assumed Christian had, on October 12. But the Griggs attorney pointed out that in reality, it was inside Katie's house the entire time. So what's happening here is the Griggs' attorney is like, oh, you gave him back that handgun. And then you assumed that he had it on October 12th when, in fact, we have discovered that the handgun was not in Christian's possession, that when he left Katie's house, he left that gun there. There, yeah. And it was in Katie's house.

Yeah, which I could see that happen. And, right, Pat's assuming that the gun he gave back to Christian he had in his possession when a reality unbeknownst to him, the gun was still in Katie's house, which is next door, not in Pat's home. So you're saying Pat would have no way of knowing that the gun was in Katie's house. Yeah. Now, if the gun was found in Pat's home, that would be one thing. That's a problem, yeah.

So what you're saying is Pat gave the gun back to Christian, assuming this whole, I'm going to kill Katie and Jaden and myself with this gun. He gave it back to him after that. And then as far as he knew Christian had it, but would Katie have known that the gun had been left behind in her house when Christian left? Absolutely. And in that moment, now if Pat is thinking to himself, Christian could be in possession of the gun, but never voiced that to Katie, that maybe there wasn't an opportunity for to go, no, he doesn't have his gun. But we remember that first 911 call Katie made where they asked was Christian armed? And she said, I don't know.

He owns a, but he doesn't own a gun. Yeah. Yeah. So Pat was asked a series of clarifying questions about statements he had made two detectives. For example, during one interview, police wrote that he said Katie had tried to go inside and get the gun, but she couldn't work it. So in his deposition, Pat was asked about that statement. And he said, he didn't remember if Katie ever told him that. He was also asked whether he typically kept the 22 caliber rifle fully loaded in the closet.

And Pat said, quote, no, I don't remember how many bullets were in it. But I didn't typically keep it fully loaded, end quote. How many rounds would this rifle take usually? It could depend on the magazine. There's so many types of guns, right? Like you can have a gun that's single fed where you put the round in each time, which you would not do with a 22 caliber rifle. More than likely it was some type of little magazine that could be loaded up

and put into the bottom of the gun. And you can have a 10-round magazine, 15-round magazine, 30-round magazine, 100-round magazine. I would think with a 22-caliber long rifle, probably 10 to 15 rounds. Okay. So then questioning shifted to Pat's son, Patrick, who at the time was a volunteer firefighter and a correctional officer at the Harnett County Prison.

The attorney wanted to know why Patrick showed up at the crime scene multiple times, and Pat said he didn't know why his son came and that he wasn't sure how Patrick even found out about the shooting. He believed his son had heard it over the radio. Pat was also asked about records from his psychiatric treatment following Christian's death. One line in the records read, quote, Pat reports of permitting escape for his son and covering for him, end quote. When asked what that meant, Pat responded, quote, I have no earthly idea, no clue, end quote. He denied ever covering for his son and again stated that despite not remembering much, he was 100% sure Patrick was not present at the scene during the shooting, which, yeah, I didn't know that wasn't question.

Yeah, we know that. But here's the thing. And I'm going to wait until after we take our next break to kind of go into this because I want to give my opinion before you tell me the results of this of this trial. But this is what happens in every trial, whether it's criminal or civil, right? When you have two sides of this, the point is to bring up everything because just like in a criminal case, you only need the jury to latch on to a couple things. And so you don't have like a certain amount of things you can bring up. What you would do is bring up everything in the hopes that a couple of those things resonates. So even though some of this may not be their smoking gun or their big headliner, there's no reason not to present it because at least starts to paint a picture for the jury to say, hmm, maybe things aren't what they appear to be.

So bringing up all these things, including could Patrick have been at the house before Tony arrived? Probably not, but. I didn't know that was even in question, yeah. There's no harm in bringing it up, though. You question everything. And so I understand where Griggs's attorney is going here. It makes sense. That's what they're supposed to do. Okay, we're going to go to our last break now. We'll be right back.

Okay, cat parents, we need to talk to you about one of the most important members of your family, your cat. So you know how cats are. They'll sleep anywhere. They ignore you until they want attention. They will trigger any attachment wounds you have and you'll be wondering all day if your cat hates you because it avoided eye contact with you this morning. and then they demand food like they haven't eaten in years. So my mom has a cat Rascal. So Rascal had this little ritual where she would bring her little tiny toy mouse and like knock it into her food bowl and then just sit there and stare at me and my mom until somebody filled her food bowl.

And it was cute, but what a total diva. When it comes to food, Rascals, picky, and honestly, she deserves to be. And that's why we started feeding her Smalls. Smalls makes protein-packed recipes with preservative free ingredients. you'd actually recognize from your own refrigerator, and they delivered right to your door. No mystery meat, no artificial junk, just real cat food that cats.com even named their best overall cat food. And when we first tried it, we did the ultimate test.

We set two bowls side by side, one with Resckel's old food and one with smalls, and no hesitation. She went straight for the smalls. And since switching, we've noticed that Rascal has fewer hairballs, more energy, and her coat is shinier than ever, which is great because she's kind of getting up there in age. And I also love the story behind Smalls. It started back in 2017 with two guys home cooking cat food and small batches for their friends and their cats. And fast forward, now they've served millions of meals to cats across the U.S. And here's the best part.

The team at Smalls is so confident your cat will love their food. You can try it completely risk-free. If your cat doesn't eat it, they'll refund you. You literally have nothing to lose everything to gain. Well, your cat does, at least. So check Smalls out, and Derek's going to tell you how. That's right. For a limited time only because you're a Crime Weekly listener or viewer,

You can get 60% off your first smalls order plus free shipping when you head over to smalls.com slash crime weekly. That's 60% off when you head over to smalls.com slash crime weekly plus, like I said, free shipping. One more time, smalls.com slash crime weekly. So talking about Patrick and Pat, do I think that, I mean, why? would why would pat's psychiatric records say that he had reported permitting escape for his son and covering for him? And then why would his psychiatric report say that if he had not stated that in some way, right? And Pat's like, I have no clue what you're talking about. Well, yeah, denial is the best way to handle a question like that. And yeah, I think that it's interesting

that Patrick, the son, had his reasons for why he was at the crime scene. And Pat's like, I have no idea why he was at the crime scene. I didn't ask him to go to the crime scene for me. I didn't need medication. I didn't need him to help with the dog. I didn't ask him to do that. Pat's saying he's not even sure how Patrick figured out that this shooting had happened. So why was Patrick there? That's a really good question. Yeah, I want to give my opinion before we go any further because I've heard the facts of the case. A lot of this is going to be the back and forth from Griggs's attorney and then obviously Pat's attorney. And the Chisandhalls are going to have one angle. The Griggs are going to have another but for me i want to start with an analogy okay you have two guys at a bar

and they're there for whatever reason and it's a series of bad decisions that lead to the ultimate outcome that's you can't come back from and in this case it would be one guy goes up to another guy and says hey you're looking at my girl the other guy says yeah maybe i was instead of walking away from it then the other guy instead of walking away from him decides to shove him and then the other guy instead of walking away after that and being the bigger person, shoves him back. And then the other guy says, you know what? I'm going all the way with this. He grabs a bottle. And as soon as he grabs a bottle, the other guy who could now just step away and say, hey, man, I don't want any part of this. We're both adults. Decides to punch that guy in the face, knocks him out clean. That guy

falls back, hits his head, and dies from his injuries. It's a series of bad decisions that lead to an outcome that changes everybody's future. And I think on a more larger scale, that's what happened here. I think what happened was you have a domestic dispute between a couple, which many people who are listening or watching this right now have experienced, unfortunately. I think Christian going into this had some anger issues. I don't think that's in dispute. We know he had issues with his family and he went overseas and saw some things. I'm sure that didn't help the situation. I think even if Christian was here, he would admit that he had some problems with regulating his emotions at certain times. I think Katie knew that. I think Katie probably was

poking the bear by not letting him see Jaden. And there were multiple opportunities for Christian and Pat to de-escalate the situation. And they both chose not to. I think this case is pretty clear cut for me. I think you have a situation where Pat is inside the house. I don't even think Christian attempted to get inside. What I think happened was Christian pushed on that window, maybe just pushed on it

to knock and scare them and because it wasn't locked, it opened. And at that point, Christian's now looking in through the window, that's a jar, and Pat sees that as a threat.

Now, unfortunately, it's his perspective. I think he jumped to conclusions. I think at that point, even then, firing the first two shots was excessive. I've changed my output

on this. I don't think that you can make an argument without seeing a gun in Christian's hands that your life or the life of your daughter is in danger, especially when we look at the ballistics of this. Clearly, based on how Christian was shot, you were very close to the window, meaning Pat, you would have been able to see Christian, see that nothing is in his hands, and you know law enforcement is on their way. They're going to be there in a matter of seconds. Do you really need to shoot Christian in order to protect yourself when clearly he hadn't even gotten inside your residence at that point because you shot him from the outside and he was outside. So even if I were to give him grace and say the first two shots were okay, the four remaining shots as he

turned around and tried to walk away from the window were definitely excessive. But at this point, I would argue that all six shots were not necessary. I don't think they would fall under the Castle Doctrine. I don't think they would fall under the stand-your-ground law. And I think Pat escalated to this to a level that he didn't need to. And if Christian were here, although he would agree with this, obviously, I think, just hearing what I've heard, Christian's intent was to scare, possibly intimidate, but never to hurt. I don't think he had any intentions on assaulting Katie or Pat.

He had just called his father. Yeah. his dad was on the way minutes away yeah i agree i think he was banging on the window and like i said the decision to bang on the window and having it open opened up the door for pat to interpret that as a threat he escalates it even more and decides to shoot christian that's what i think happened here and when we're talking about a civil trial as you're going through right now and that's why i wanted to give my opinion before being like oh yeah i told you so at the end my opinion is that based on the threshold that has to be met in a civil trial i am going to be sure you

shocked at the end of this if you tell me that Pat wasn't found liable in Christian's death. It's possible. It's happened before. But I think in this case, even more so than like the O.J. Simpson case where he was found responsible for Nicole and Ron's death, there's more evidence here to suggest that. I don't see how when you're looking at this case, take out all the noise that we're talking about, because there is a lot of noise in this trial. When you look at the facts, I don't think you can come to the conclusion that.

that a reasonable person would believe that Christian standing on the porch with the window ajar justifies shooting him not once, but six times. Yeah. That's my opinion. I think if Christian had entered the, if he had made a, if his foot had hit the floor inside that residence, maybe. But even then, he could just, he could have walked inside, which is breaking the law. I'm not, I'm not downplaying that.

But once he gets inside, what's his intention there? Is he saying, I'm going to kill all of you? That's not what Pat told us on the phone. And I think the fact that Pat was so calm is reflective of the tone at that time. Yeah, he was talking to him. He was very calm. And I think, again, to go back to my analogy, this was a series of bad decisions that ultimately led to someone dying.

And I don't think Christian thought it was going to go there. I think he thought this was going to be an argument, maybe a little back and forth, maybe a little bit of yelling at each other. I'm going to pound on the window, get my point across. and it escalated to a level that even Christian didn't expect. No, I certainly don't think he expected that, no. That's where I'm at on this one. I want to go through all of it with you,

but I think there's going to be a lot in here that is just, like I said, stuff to kind of bring up in question as you're going through the trial, but you did a great job at covering all the facts of the case, and those aren't going to change. So based on that, I don't even need to hear the rest to know that Pat's wrong and that Pat didn't make the right decision. Now, there may be more that substantiates that even further. But even just with what I have now, I think it's a very clear-cut answer as to what the outcome should be.

Well, the Griggs' attorney also brought up a psychiatric report from December 18, 2013, which read, quote, Pat reports long-term memory has returned in large part, end quote. Now, during his court testimony, Pat was asked if his memory had returned or not, and he explained, quote, well, it went from pretty much nothing to I can remember most of my past. Some of it's foggy, hazy. My short-term memory is pretty good, and it's been a gradual thing. But my long-term memory overall has improved and returned. End quote.

He added that the shooting itself, though, remained a black spot in his brain. And for the rest of the deposition, Pat basically said he did not know or did not recall anything. His memory, he insisted, was gone. I don't believe this. I'm going to outright say, I don't believe this. I think it's convenient, so you're not contradicting yourself, so you're not contradicting the evidence. But he shot six shots pretty confidently with no training, no law enforcement training, no military training, apparently not really a person who's out there

shooting guns all the time. And for somebody to do that while they're desperately in fear to the point where later they're going to lose their memory of everything for a while and then of this event forever, I don't believe that. It seemed he had a pretty steady hand when he was firing off those six shots, they all hit their mark. Katie was also deposed and her deposition has never been released. What is known is that within a week of Christian's death, she filed for his social security benefits, and by the start of 2018, Katie had remarried. That same month, she filed paperwork to legally change Jaden's last name to her new stepfathers,

and in February, the request was approved. That's sad to me. Ten months later, in December 2018, jury selection began for the wrongful death. suit, which at this point was only against Pat. In an opening statement, the Griggs' attorney held the rifle Pat had used to kill Christian. While telling the jury, the trial was not about whether a homeowner has the right to defend themselves or their property. Instead, it was about whether Pat was justified in shooting Christian in the back four separate times. The attorney said, quote, I'm not asking you to say it's not okay to defend yourself. I'm not asking you to say it's not

okay to defend your family. I am not asking you to say it's not okay to defend your home. What I'm asking you to do is say it's wrong to shoot a wounded unarmed man in the back four separate times. End quote. The attorney argued that the evidence showed Christian was shot on the porch, not through the window. It was likely Pat opened to the front door and fired at him there. The attorney then called multiple witnesses to testify about the issues and inconsistencies we've already covered in this series. Next, it was time for Pat's attorney to present their case. The attorney told the jury, quote, Pat Chishol was defending his life, was defending his daughter's life at the time of this unfortunate incident. End quote. The attorney argued that Pat was protected

by North Carolina's castle doctrine. Pat testified in his own defense. His story mostly matched what he had said in his deposition, which meant he claimed he couldn't remember most of the details of the shooting. On cross-examination, however, he admitted to recalling one vivid image. Katie's reaction just before the shooting. Pat said, quote, that's an image that's frozen in my mind, the sheer terror I've never seen it before, end quote. I also think that it's very convenient that he can't remember a single thing from that shooting, but he remembers this very emotionally eliciting sort of memory of his daughter's face while he's sitting in front of a jury.

And he's trying to prove that he felt he needed to protect his home and his child. I think that's also very convenient. But that's just what I'll say. So Pat's attorney called a handful of detectives to testify about what they'd seen at the house, including the broken window and how none of them could recall why Pat's son was allowed to walk around the scene unaccompanied by anyone. The attorney also called Dr. Wang, the psychiatrist who treated Pat after he was involuntarily committed to a psychiatric hospital following a shooting. Wang testified that Pat arrived withdrawn, detached, anxious, and showing

symptoms of acute stress disorder or PTSD. Wang explained that it was not uncommon for people experiencing trauma to block out certain memories, calling it a defense mechanism. On cross-examination, the Griggs' attorney asked whether PTSD more commonly presents through flashbacks of a traumatic event, rather than forgetting it altogether, and Dr. Wang admitted that this was correct. After each side was done calling witnesses, it was time for closing arguments. The Griggs' attorney told the jury that detectives had not done a thorough job investigating Christian's death and even accused them of altering the crime scene to fit Pat's narrative. She argued it was impossible for Pat to fire all six shots from behind a couch

through a partially open window that was 10 to 12 feet away, as he had originally described. The attorney also pointed out that Pat's claimed memory loss meant he could not say whether Christian was actually threatening him or if he had acted in self-defense, which is a really good point. She told the jury, quote, for anybody who shoots somebody four times in the back, I can't remember, is probably the best defense they're going to get. End quote, I agree. So she emphasized that the jury's decision should come down to the bullets found in Christian's back. At that point, she argued Christian was no longer a threat and the castle doctrine. no longer applied. The attorney conclude, quote, use your common sense, shooting someone four times in the back while they're bent over or laying down while they're unarmed, while they're

wounded. That is not self-defense. That comes from somewhere else, end quote. In his closing, Pat's attorney told the jury that Pat had acted in self-defense and he was protected under North Carolina's castle doctrine, and he argued that Pat fired his rifle only because he feared for his own life and for Katie's. The attorney said, quote, Reverend Chisenhall only did what he did because Christian Griggs said, I'm going to kill you, end quote. He acknowledged that Pat and Christian had once cared for one another and that Christian could be kind, pleasant, generous, and respectful, but he said, quote, he could change and he could be monstrous, and that's what happened, end quote.

Pat's attorney also told the jury that Pat's inability to remember the shooting was not suspicious, but a symptom of PTSD, a natural response to trauma. He argued, quote, if he wanted to make up a story, he could have done that. Same thing for Katie Griggs. It makes no sense for them to lie. and not be truthful about what they can and cannot remember, especially Reverend Chisenhall. End quote. That's the weakest defense I've ever heard.

If he wanted to make up a story, he could have. If Katie wanted to make up a story, she could have. No, they couldn't have, really, because the evidence and the scene would not have matched said story. The ballistics would not have matched. And they did say a lot more stuff early on when they were first being talked to by the police that then afterwards they claimed not to be able to remember. Because remember, Pat said he saw Kristen coming through the window. And now when he's being deposed, he's like, I can't remember if he came through the window or not. So, yeah, no, you did try to make up a story.

And then when you saw that that didn't fit what the evidence and the crime scene showed, you started to not be able to remember much, which I think is convenient. And I think this is a very bad defense for this lawyer to say because we know that people on the stand when they're on trial for murder, they forget stuff all the time. They say they can't remember stuff all the time because that's the easiest way to not implicate themselves. So on December 12th, after deliberating for less than two hours, the jury ruled that Pat had not acted in self-defense when he shot and killed Christian.

They awarded $250,000 to Christian's estate, money that would be set aside for his daughter. So Christian's parents, Tony, and Dolly, did keep their word about that. They were not planning to steal this money or keep it for their own, even though they probably paid a good amount of money to mount this defense, or to mount this prosecution, they were keeping that money for Christian's daughter, Jaden. After the verdict, Pat's attorney said that Pat was disappointed by the decision but did not plan to

appeal. On the other hand, Christian's family was thankful for the verdict. Dolly told the media that the citizens of Harnett County, quote, saw the truth in the courtroom today, end quote. She also called on elected officials. to look more closely at Christian's case saying, quote, the truth is out there, and now I challenge D.A. Stewart, Sheriff Coates, Governor Cooper, to look into this case because Harnett County needs help. Please help us here. End quote. After Dolly made that statement, D.A. Stewart refused to

comment. However, Sheriff Coates, who was not in office when Christian was killed, released a statement that said, civil court is a, quote, means to justice, end quote, and emphasized that it requires a much lower burden of proof than criminal court. He said, quote, as law enforcement officers, when we do not believe the proof reaches that highest standard, we confer with the district attorney. In this matter, the opinion of both agencies is that the highest burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt cannot be met, end quote. Basically what he's saying is when we look at the evidence, we have to figure out whether if we brought this to trial, would it be enough to convict this person? And we found in this case that it wasn't. The Griggs has said they were

angry but not surprised by the responses. Dali said of D.A. Stewart, quote, I think he should resign and I think congresspersons. I think the governor and attorney general Josh Stein should demand him to resign with how he has mishandled this case, end quote. The family said they planned to keep fighting for justice, though they didn't yet know what their next step would be, and for the time being, they were grateful for a verdict in their favor. Christian's family did keep their promise to keep fighting. In 2020, they launched a change.org petition demanding an investigation into the Harnock

County Sheriff's Department and accountability for why charges were never filed against Pat, but to this day, no investigation has been ordered and no criminal charges have ever been filed. For Tony, Dolly, and Crystal, Christian's sister, that only strengthens their resolve. They fight not only for justice, but for Jaden, the daughter Christian adored, so that she will know her father's life mattered and that his story was worth fighting for. So with all that being said, do you think, based on what you said before, we kind of launched back into the civil trial, do you think that Pat Chisholenhall should be held or should have been held criminally responsible for this shooting? I think before the Pat Chisholns

of the world can be charged with a crime in a case like this, the law has to change. This is bigger than Pat. This is about the Castle Doctrine. It's about the stand-your-ground law. Because a big component of those laws is whether or not the person involved felt that their life was in danger at the time of the incident. And the only person who really, you know, knows how they felt at that time is them. And so it's a very hard case to prove at a criminal level. As the DA said, you have two different thresholds. You have the proof beyond a reasonable doubt for a criminal case and you have the preponderance of evidence, meaning it's more likely than not. I think the civil trial got it right and I think that this was the right outcome. I'm

actually surprised that it was only $250,000. It should have been a lot more. I think it's pretty clear here that you had bad decisions being made by a lot of people and ultimately whether it's true or not and we'll never know pat at least for that moment or at least after the fact felt like his life was in danger and he had no choice but regardless whether he felt that way or not as the civil trial pointed out as griggs's attorney pointed out if it were only the two shots there might be an argument there but without a doubt and i think all six were excessive but without a doubt the remaining four shots to the back are excessive and I do think depending on where you were you could get a DA in a different part of the country who might have taken the shot and brought it

to a grand jury and you know seen what happened this is one of those cases where you're trying to get into the mind of the person in question and at this point in our science and technology we had we don't have the capability of doing that yet to know what someone was truly feeling at the moment when they decided to take someone's life. Well, I mean, I think I made my position very clear during this. Derek and I don't, we align on the basics of, you know, we don't think it was technically self-defense. The last four shots were excessive. That wasn't self-defense. The last first shots were not, yeah. And Derek is saying, based on the law, it kind of gives people like Pat the ability to live in those gray areas. I felt threatened. So therefore, because I felt

threatened. And of course, I'm going to say after the fact that I felt threatened, whether I did or not, because then I'm not going to go to prison for murder. Yeah, they're hiding out there. I think that this was done. I just can't, like, once again, this was your son-in-law. This was somebody, the father of your grandchild, who you're going to one day have to explain, I killed your father. Okay. And she's going to get older, and she's going to look into it herself, and she's going to realize what happened. And it may isolate her from the family that she has left, the family that she grew up with. And that's not good for Jaden. It's not going to be good for anybody. I don't think in any way, shape, or form that Patches and All had to shoot, Christian.

I don't. And even if he felt he did, the first shot was going to be enough to make him no longer a threat to you. And so I just find, in general, was this a racist-based thing when it comes to Pat versus Christian? Maybe not necessarily. I mean, this was, this Christian was in Pat's family. Was there a racial bias on behalf of law enforcement? It's possible. I'm not going to say it wasn't. We do know that this area of North Carolina did still have some, some issues with, with race. So I think that the police probably just did exactly what the Griggs's lawyer said and just believed everything Pat said and took it at face value because they were like, what are we going to waste all this time searching around for shell casings and doing ballistics and not

performing gunshot residue tests in the dark? What are we going to do that for when this upstanding reverend citizen of our of our great county says that this happened? Why would he lie. And I think that was really terrible on their part. And now they're trying to cover their asses by not allowing people to see certain records and not allowing independent parties to come in and do another investigation. I think that if they knew, without a doubt, they had done everything they could and they had done everything properly, they would have no problem opening it up and saying, hey, everybody can come in. The mayor can come in. The, you know, the governor can come in, CBI, SBI, TBI, FBI. I don't care. Come on in and look, I'm above reproach here. I'm above

approach here. I know we did what we needed to do, but instead they got defensive, which tells me they know they screwed up. So who's at fault here? At the end of the day, everyone. I agree with that. Yeah, it's bad. It's bad news. I think there's an overall message that we can take from this. And I've said this before, but I always try to apply these cases to my personal life. And I've had multiple encounters. I had one within the last year at Target, actually, where you have to ask yourself in the moment, is it worth it? Because you never know what the other person is thinking, what they're going through, where they're going to take it. And try to let cooler heads prevail walk away because, I mean, if we're going to put blame at someone's feet, I would put it at Pat's

feet because Pat was ultimately the one that escalated it to a level of pulling a gun out and shooting Christian. But I would also say, Christian, you just got to walk away, man. And I'm sure if Christian was here right now, and I'm sure Tony would say the same thing. And Dolly as well, They just wished that Christian stayed in his car and waited for Tony to get there. So my message to all of you is if you find yourself in a situation, whether it's with a friend, a family member, or a complete stranger, ask yourself, is it worth it? Because what can happen next could change your life forever. Think about your friends. Think about your family.

Think about the people you have that care about you. Lower the temperature. Be the bigger person. Take the high road. it could be the difference between life and death. And I say that from two different perspectives. I say that from the perspective of somebody taking your life, but also you being put in a position where you have to defend yourself

and it results in a situation where now you're defending your freedom because of what occurred. We talk about that bar incident that I was just describing a few minutes ago. So that's what I take away from this case, that this was very avoidable. It should not have gotten to this point. Christian should still be here. and we have to relook at these these stand your ground type laws because they're too vague

they allow too much of a gray area for the shooter and it offers them an opportunity pretty much to just kill anybody they want as long as they can somewhat describe a scenario in which they were quote unquote in fear for their life

which is too vague it's too vague it's too ambiguous so we need to do better there needs to be higher requirements to shoot someone I think that's a pretty safe thing that we can all agree on. And that's where I'm at on this one. I feel bad for Christian's family.

I feel bad for Jaden, obviously. Everyone involved. Nobody wins here. Everybody loses. And so tragic set of circumstances, I'd love to see the case reopened and allow someone else to at least look at it. And I think even if they came to the conclusion like, hey,

we don't love this, but it's not enough to charge, I think Christian's family would feel better about it, to have that independent third party take a look at it and give a second opinion, but by not allowing that, you're always going to have more questions and answers. Absolutely. So not the best outcome, but at least I feel like Dolly and Tony and Christian's family got some

validation when a jury said, hey, we don't think this was right. Yeah. Right. Exactly. Exactly. Who knows? No statute of limitations on murder, right? So you could get a new DA in there that looks at it and says this one needs to be reevaluated

and, you know, they just got to keep fighting. So weighing down in the comments below, let us know what you think. was four parts. We went pretty deep on this one and let us know what you think. Do you agree with our conclusion that this was excessive? And that Pat Danwell could have been charged with a crime. Unfortunately, based on the way the laws are written right now, that's very difficult to do. But as we said, we agree with the civil outcome and we want to know your opinions on it. We're going to be back next week. We have a big announcement for CWN first. Big announcement. It's the criminal coffee announcement that we've been wanting to share four months for almost years.

So we'll have that on Wednesday. Make sure you check that one out. And then on Friday, we have Megan Trussell Part 1, which we started covering on CWN for our live podcast. And now we're going to do the full-blown deep dive. I covered it on Detective Perspective. Stephanie has now started doing her research on this case. We've been talking about it.

She's all in. I knew she would be. And we're looking forward to it. So until next time. Everyone stay safe out there. We'll see you soon. Right. Bye, guys.