Julian Dorey Podcast - #294 - Legal Expert UNLOADS on Diddy, Epstein, Blake Lively, Johnny Depp & JFK | Law & Crime’s Jesse Weber

Episode Date: April 18, 2025

SPONSORS: 1) Get firearm security redesigned and save with BOGO the StopBoxPro AND 10% off at StopBox w/ code JULIAN at https://www.stopboxusa.com/JULIAN #stopboxpod 2) American Financing: Go to https://www.AmericanFinancing.net/Dorey or call 888-991-9788 today! (***TIMESTAMPS in description below) ~ Jesse Cord Weber is a host, anchor, attorney, and legal analyst. He anchors for the Law & Crime Network and hosts the nationally syndicated true crime show Prime Crime. Jesse co-hosts Always In Fashion on 710 WOR and major podcast platforms, and is a freelance radio host on SiriusXM POTUS. He has appeared as a legal analyst on Fox News, CNN, CBS, CNBC, NewsNation, and more. His past work includes hosting for HLN, Crime Watch Daily with Chris Hansen, and The Jam in Chicago. PATREON: https://www.patreon.com/JulianDorey JESSE'S LINKS - YT: https://www.youtube.com/@LawAndCrime - X: https://x.com/jessecordweber?lang=en - WEBSITE: https://www.jessecordweber.com/ FOLLOW JULIAN DOREY INSTAGRAM (Podcast): https://www.instagram.com/juliandoreypodcast/ INSTAGRAM (Personal): https://www.instagram.com/julianddorey/ X: https://twitter.com/julianddorey JULIAN YT CHANNELS - SUBSCRIBE to Julian Dorey Clips YT: https://www.youtube.com/@juliandoreyclips - SUBSCRIBE to Julian Dorey Daily YT: https://www.youtube.com/@JulianDoreyDaily - SUBSCRIBE to Best of JDP: https://www.youtube.com/@bestofJDP ****TIMESTAMPS**** 00:00 - Jesse’s background in law and media 11:53 - Coverage of Johnny Depp vs Amber Heard trial 21:15 - How modern juries are selected amidst social media influence 30:11 - Details about Luigi Mangione’s alleged crime 43:20 - Overview of Sean Combs’ criminal enterprise 57:43 - Labor dispute lawsuit involving Blake Lively accusing Justin Baldoni of harassment 01:14:45 - Rise in true crime interest over last decade 01:31:23 - New insights into JFK assassination files 01:43:33 - Challenges faced by defense attorneys representing Weinstein or Cosby 01:57:23 - Upcoming trials coverage including live updates for Diddy case starting May 2025 02:08:42 - Understanding the Conspiracy Charges 02:14:44 - Witness Intimidation and Legal Strategy 02:20:25 - The Impact of Video Evidence 02:25:43 - Understanding Racketeering and Underlying Crimes 02:30:57 - CIA's Role and Historical Context 02:41:19 - The Challenges of Criminal Defense CREDITS: - Host & Producer: Julian Dorey - Producer & Editor: Alessi Allaman - https://www.youtube.com/@UCyLKzv5fKxGmVQg3cMJJzyQ Julian Dorey Podcast Episode 294 - Jesse Weber Music by Artlist.io Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

People get obsessed with killers or suspected killers all the time, but like this? I've never seen anything like it. I'm also covering the Luigi Mangione case. If he is guilty, it wasn't going to stop with Brian Thompson, CEO of a health insurance company that he wasn't even a client of. Where was he going? Who was going to be the next one? Why somebody with all that opportunity, if he really did do this, what would change? I mean, what was his last post? They couldn't believe it. This was like a complete 180 from the guy that they knew. You immediately saw like the support for him. It's the question, can you put aside everything that you've heard that you will look at the evidence strictly and look at the testimony based on your decision purely on the

facts and the law. Think about it. If you're a prosecutor, you want to win the big case. It helps your career. And so you have this case that was out in Virginia, 2022 Johnny Depp Amber Heard, fascinating case. I was shocked that he actually filed the lawsuit. The trial was progressing. I saw exactly what was going on. He was phenomenal. He was incredibly believable on the stand. They didn't believe Johnny Depp abused Amber Heard in any way. Because what the jury basically said was, and it was a big win for Johnny Depp.

That's a scary thing to think about. I'll tell you this, jury. I covered a case recently. It was a really disgusting case. Chinese National, multiple women filmed all of it, had tapes on tapes, on tapes, on tapes. And that jury... Hey guys, if you're not following me on Spotify, please hit that follow button and leave a five-star review. They're both a huge, huge help. Thank you. jesse thanks for coming in man thanks for having me this is an awesome studio thank you so much

is that the great gatsby that is right yeah how many people get that not many thank you yeah probably like four or five before i've gotten it see i've uh i'm legitimate i guess yeah you know you know you're a little pop culture right here. You know your stuff. Look at this. These are some of my favorite movies over here. And by the way, it was cool because I was – before I came on, I was looking at all the plethora of interviews you've done. And the guy that played Carlo in The Godfather, that's awesome.

That was awesome. That was a great interview. Thank you. Thank you. Yeah, Johnny is – he's a national treasure, man. He's so awesome. He's like 84 or 85 too. And he just comes in and he goes, anyway, so let me start at the beginning.

And it's just like fucking three hours. And you're like, well, do you know how many times he's probably told that story? A lot. Exactly. A lot. So he's going to tell from the beginning. Yeah. He actually got recognized in town right after this.

Really? Like right away. Ooh, that's interesting. They're like, they're like, Johnny, is that you? I'm like, is this a, is this a setup? Well, you got a two seconds for an Al Pacino story? Please. That's my favorite actor of all time. So, Johnny, is that you? I'm like, is this a setup? Well, you got two seconds for an Al Pacino story? Please. That's my favorite actor of all time.

Okay. So I go to a polo bar in the city. Okay. A polo bar for anybody who doesn't know. I would say it's probably the best restaurant in New York City. Food's great, but it's like, it's a who's who. You go there. It's a big thing.

So I went with my brother and two friends, and we know one of the managers there. And she goes, listen, I'm going to sit you at a table. You have to promise me you will not look at this person. You will not try to talk to this person. You will not make any kind of eye contact with this person. I was like, okay, well, who is this? She goes, you have to promise. Because last time he was here, there was an issue. I was like, okay. It, who is this? She goes, you have to promise. Because last time he was here, there was an issue.

I was like, okay. It's Al Pacino. Really? So Al Pacino. So they sit us at this table, and I immediately stare at him. So I broke the first door. I mean, it's Al Pacino. What am I not going to look at him like?

Fucking Michael Corleone. I'm watching everything he's doing. Like, what did he order? How did he order it? And he's there with, he's dating a you know younger woman yeah and i'm i'm like watching every which everything happens and he's awesome he's like the coolest guy so a woman walks in with a dog and by the way just for a minute i was like you can't go in the polar bar with a dog unless there's like i think the last time i saw somebody there was like

clive davis and you know he is right yeah yeah i feel like blake lively could get away well we'll talk about that but so she walks with a dog questionable and she sits on the chair and falls backwards so everybody rushes everybody's looking where do my eyes go al pacino i want to see what al pacino's reaction to this and i promise you not he's eating his chocolate cake watching us just laughing at it i'm like this is it was awesome he was he's a legend he's a legend so it was awesome to say yeah i've actually heard he's really cool too so that's like that's interesting that that request was made because he's even the guy who the hell was telling me this but like they'll do those bus

tours out in la i saw that the celebrity people come in and they take pictures on the bus and like he's the one guy that he'll be outside the house like waving like watering his lawn and he's a real movie star there's a few and far between that are like that anymore yeah and you know what that guy because his career almost didn't happen because obviously francis had to keep him in the francis for coppola had to keep him in the godfather like fighting tooth and nail just to get it done because they wanted to fire him but like even before that he did a movie i don't know if you ever seen it but it's called the panic and needle park it's the first one he did and it was the one right before the godfather's wife coppola hired him but like he was incredible man like his run in the 70s starting with that not even just starting

with the godfather that was one of the greatest runs in the history of acting. So I actually did acting. I went to the same acting school as Al Pacino. You went to Strasburg? Yeah, I did. I went for a one-year conservatory program. And he spoke there. So he spoke when I was a student there.

And he was awesome. Like we were asking questions and everything. And, you know, when you think about what he learned and how he became an actor and the techniques he uses, I don't think anybody realizes acting is one of the toughest things you can possibly do. Everybody thinks it's so simple. Being real. It's incredibly difficult. And particularly if you're playing characters who are not like you in any which way and trying to tap into that. It was, I mean, I went there to learn just how to perform on camera, you know, be comfortable in camera, learn how to present.

That's how I, you know, got kind of my start. But when he came there and taught us a little bit more of his techniques and it's, he's such a talent. What were some of the things he said he did? It's obviously he's a method actor, but. So people get a wrong impression about what method acting is. It doesn't mean you dress up like Abraham Lincoln. You walk and go to the sandwich bar and be like, oh, where's a method actor. So people get a wrong impression about what method acting is. It doesn't mean you dress up like Abraham Lincoln. You walk and go to the sandwich bar and be like, oh, where's the steak sandwich?

No. It's literally taking your life experiences, things that you've gone through, and through a series of techniques, replicating them for that scene. Yep. for that scene. So if I'm playing a scene where let's say I'm breaking up with somebody, the easiest thing would be, have I had a situation in my life where I broke up with somebody or they broke up with me? And you go into that mindset and how do you do that? You recreate that time in your life. Do you remember what you were drinking? Do you remember, can you set the scenario? It's all mental. And some of it's easier said than done but i tell you it was i taught me one thing not an actor not an actor definitely a host not an actor i did a few acting things i was in a one show with russell

crowe that's like a flex that was cool that was cool i was in a show called the loudest voice i played a reporter big stretch um and i was terrified because i've never done anything like that and he comes in he's playing rupert murdochdoch, the head of, no, no, I'm sorry. No, not Rupert Murdoch. Roger Ailes. He was playing Roger Ailes. Full get up. You could barely recognize it's him.

And we did the scene in a, it was like in a giant lobby of an office building. And it was when Fox News was announced. Now I'm one of us, a swarmy reporter who comes up and be like, tell me a little bit more about what this Fox News is. I don't think it's going to be really successful. So he does it. So I do it and I'm I've been, I'm on camera all the time. I'm not nervous. I was terrified.

Oh, yeah. It's Russell fucking Crowe. So I go, I go, I start the line and I'm like uh, uh, Roger, like he goes, he goes, can we stop? Can we stop? Mate, I need you to project a we stop mate i need you to project a little louder i need you to project a little louder it's very cavernous in here i'm like yeah yeah yeah yeah sorry and so then i uh i do it again i do it a few takes and i and then i remember the extra next to me goes how'd you get this i don't know but i auditioned i auditioned and i

got it and it was awesome and i got a chance to talk to him and meet him. He's a really cool guy. Is a little cavernous in here? Is a bit cavernous in here? Can you project a little louder? I was like, what are you? I was like, you know. Maximus is yelling at me on set.

No, he was awesome. He was such a nice guy. So you went to Strasburg for how long? I went for a year. One year conservatory program. And you didn't think you were an actor? It wasn't for me. I loved presenting. I loved hosting. That was what my natural inclination was. I've done things like that. And I think it was great just to, first of all, one of the most important classes I ever took that's helped me a lot as an anchor

and reporter is improv. Oh yeah. Helps a ton, a ton. Improv class was fantastic. I also just learning how to be on camera. That's not so easy, not so easy just presenting and talking on camera and pretending like it's not there. So I think it was an incredible learning experience. I did it at one point in my life and I thought it was really useful. And then, you know, I was an attorney and so I had a really different background to get to where I am now. But, you know, I think everything you do in life is a building block to something else. Did you do – so you did Strasburg after getting your JD? Yes.

I went to law school. I practiced law for several years. And then I, you know, went to acting school. And I kind of transitioned into, you know, television. And I had, you know, not automatically. It took a little bit but i had done hosting things before i'd done acting before and basically the way i made a transition i says i took two things i liked practicing law is really really tough it wasn't

for me i i did it for several years it wasn't the life that i wanted but i was fascinated in the law i did really well in law school i was like how, how do I translate that into, you know, something on TV and broadcasting? And the first thing that you have is people who come on are legal experts for networks, right? They do those hits. So I started doing a million of those and I built up reps, made contacts. And then I got in touch with Dan Abrams, who is from ABCc news um on patrol live back in the day um and he had started a network called law news and it was basically like court tv doing live coverage several hours a day of live trials that were happening just started it out i came in auditioned got a job as one of their hosts and i did it you know they then got an investment from a e became the long crime hosts and i did it you know they they then got an investment from a and e became the law and crime network and i was hired full-time five days a week three hours a day straight live

coverage a lot of its improv i mean a lot of it's not scripted so like the red zone of courts exactly that is a great point as we would come out and be like all right let's just talk about what the prosecution just did there like and we would do that for three hours a day. And then the company blew up. The company blew up. It did. It's amazing. It's incredible.

Now it has over almost 7 million subscribers. And I have a bunch of shows that I do for them. I don't do live coverage that much anymore. I do podcasts, sidebar, a documentary show called Prime Crime, body cams, things like that. And the company has exploded. And it's all because of Dan. Yeah. know, things like that. And the, the company's exploded and it's, uh, all because of damn. Yeah. It's, it's really like, that's what you go to. If you're on YouTube and you're looking for anything that's going on in court, you go there. Yeah. It's a long crime. A hundred percent of the time. I mean, it was crazy. It was Johnny Depp Amber Heard. It was

2022 Johnny Depp Amber Heard. That trial blew us up. And you were in there. I was in there for six weeks. I was in there for almost every day of testimony. And I remember this was when we knew something changed because everybody was coming to us, which was incredible. Everybody was coming to our coverage of it. Our videos were getting five, 13 million views, like insane numbers. Do you think that's just because you guys had set the precedent of being on YouTube and putting so much native content up and already having the brand? I think yes. And I think we had already established ourselves, but what also happened was we were getting out clips fast and we were getting out commentary fast and we had a different way we were presenting in a different way. We were, uh, you know, actually distributing it

to the audience. And I think people really respond to that. And there was a video that we, we didn't plan this and we actually used it a lot. Their videos, we would take a B roll in the morning of the crowds because people who were trying to come into that courtroom, you waited like till you wait in like three in the morning have to wait online or we'd have people who wait online. And I remember we took a camera view of everybody out there. And all of a sudden, one of the guys goes, long crime, long crime. I've known about this trial because of you. And everybody just started like jump, long crime. And so we obviously clipped that and became really good for us. But it was Johnny Depp Amber Heard that blew our company up. I mean, we took it to a whole other level and we became a name brand in the digital and online space and YouTube as the premier place for all legal stories and crime stories. If you own a handgun for

self-defense, your storage likely fits into one of two frustrating categories. It's either locked away, safe, but out of reach in an emergency, or it's unsecured, leaving it vulnerable to anyone. Stopbox USA saw the problem and designed a groundbreaking solution, the Stopbox Pro. With the Stopbox Pro, you'll never have to choose between security and readiness again. Boom. This ingenious push-button locking system gives you fast and reliable access when every second matters, without the hassle of keys or reliance on batteries. It's 100% mechanical, so it works every time. No power needed. With Stopbox USA, you can finally have both security and readiness.

Right now, our listeners are going to get 10% off their entire order when you use code JULIAN at checkout. And Stopbox is also giving you a buy one get one free offer on their Stopbox Pro. That's 10% off and a free Stopbox Pro when you use code JULIAN at stopboxusa.com. That link is in the description below. I was actually just at the shooting range the other day with a bunch of friends and there were Stopboxes everywhere. It's so easy to use. You just put your fingers in the one, two, 3 position, push in, and it's open. So once again, for a limited time only, our listeners are getting a crazy deal. Not only do you get 10% off your entire order when you use code JULIAN at checkout at StopboxUSA.com,

but Stopbox is also giving you a buy one, get one free for their Stopbox Pro. That's 10% off and a free Stopbox Pro when you use code julian at stopboxusa.com discover a better way to balance security and readiness with stop box was it you who was telling me that at the beginning like pre-trial stuff you could get into the court easily and then out of nowhere the johnny depp thing i would have thought that would have been packed from day one so not a lot of people knew about it here's what happened johnny deppard, they were in litigation for a while. And they even had litigation out in the UK. But nobody was really paying attention to it.

That's crazy. And so you had this case that was out in Virginia. Wasn't in California. Wasn't in New York. It was in Virginia because he was suing her for a Washington Post op-ed piece that she had penned basically saying she was a survivor of abuse. And the reason they sued in Virginia is because that's where the Washington Post had published it. And nobody had really paid attention to it. So I go there, my company said,

hey, we want to go report there for a little bit. I was like, sure. So I went, got into the courtroom. It's like 30 people, nobody was there. And then what happened? Johnny Depp takes the stand. As soon as the word got down that Johnny Depp was about to take the stand, everybody flocked to that courtroom. I mean, it was, I don't think I can overstate, it was insane. It was insane. So many Johnny Depp supporters. Yeah, actually, can you pull something up? Sure.

How do we pull something up on Instagram? Can we pull something up on Instagram? Yeah, we can pull it up there. If you go to my Instagram, I'll show you something. This is a... What's your ad on... I don't think I have you on Instagram. Oh, it's Real J. Weber. Real J. Weber.

By the way, I did that before I actually got into media. I thought it was funny. Now it's just cringy. But anyway, I'm not going to change it. I like a good real in front of the name. I think I got that on TikTok. Real Jay Weber. Real Jay Weber.

What video are we looking for? Okay, you got to scroll down on Instagram. I'll show you. It's from 2022. This is worth it, I'm telling you. Okay. How often do you post on here? A little bit.

Oh, it's private. Oh, so we got to follow you. Okay. Well, I'll... Hit them with that follow. All right. This is a live Instagram accept of the follow. This is good.

This is just my way to get you as my follower. That's right. Now you have to follow back. I did. All right. Good. All right. It worked.

Follow me on Instagram, by the way, everybody. You got it. Links in description. So if you go by the way you got links in description so if you go all the way uh go to what is it the posts right post yeah so we we gotta we gotta have you what's it called pin this post go all the way yeah yeah yeah yeah we're going to 2022 you said yeah 2022. this is this is pictures too yeah yeah yeah 2022 bear with me this is this is worth it i'm telling you this is worth it okay keep going keep going keep going keep going all right we're gonna pause for one second fine this will be right back yeah all right we're back okay so this was the first day a woman brought alpacas for johnny depp like literally brought alpacas she goes i thought he'd be sad. These are my alpacas.

I was like, what is going on? This is she goes, yeah, yeah, these are for him. And then it just it took off. People were coming in with T-shirts. The courtroom at one point when Amber Heard was testifying was filled with Johnny Depp supporters. There was very few Amber Heard supporters and they were all snickering. They were all laughing. It was like a rock concert for them. I mean, it was out of this world. And you saw like the amount of interest that people had in this case. And I think I will tell you what was very interesting about that situation was I think it was the importance of what we did because a lot of people were taking clips since it was a public trial and it was on camera, and they were splicing it. And they were splicing it to make it look like Amber Heard was worse than she was or her lawyers were doing a bad job.

And it was really, you talk about fake news or misinformation. It was the first time I actually was a part of it because nobody knew that case at that time better than me. I knew every aspect of it. And yet they were like, look at this bad argument the lawyer was making. Look at how it was. She, you know, she was uncomfortable and they were splicing it together. Like it was a movie to create a narrative that wasn't true. So a long crime came forward and we try to give, I mean, look, we knew where public sentiment was. It was mostly in favor of Johnny Depp, but we were like, let's tell it exactly like it is. These are her

arguments. These are his arguments. We're going to be entitledly down the middle. People respected that. But also, I think it was necessary because you saw how much misinformation was happening. So how did you see the case? Like just facts, just on the table, removing all the hubbub and bullshit that was going on. What do you think happened there? So I was shocked that he actually filed a lawsuit because what's the worst thing that'll happen you want your dirty laundry aired for the whole world to see like your dirty shit on the bed yeah yeah there you go and i was like why would he do this well if he really believes he

can turn the narrative that he's not an abuser that he was a victim he goes on the stand tells his story the world sees it how much is it really about the money at a trial not really it's about getting his career back getting his reputation back and i didn't see that at the beginning as the trial was progressing i saw exactly what was going on he was phenomenal on the stand he was incredibly believable on the stand he was he reversed this narrative that you know in the introduction of videos and audio tapes where it seemed like she was constantly berating him and maybe hitting him. This was a much grayer story. Now, having said it, I was surprised by the jury's verdict because what the jury basically said was they didn't believe Johnny Depp abused Amber Heard in any

way. And what I mean that I'm not just talking about physical, emotional, mental, psychological, any which way. And this was a long trial where I think that through text messages and testimony, you could at least make the argument that when Amber Heard penned an op-ed piece where she talked about being a survivor of abuse, it didn't necessarily have to be a survivor of physical abuse. And yet the jury didn't believe it. They didn't believe that she was abused. And by the way, in a civil case, it's a lower standard. They didn't have to find that he abused her. Yeah, all you have to do is tip it. Yeah. It's just, you know, and they didn't believe it. And it was, it's, look, it was a big defeat for her side. And it was a big win for Johnny Depp. And I think it kind of reversed the narrative that, you know, Me Too was such an important movement where finally things that were in the shadows were finally coming to light and so important. I've also

was at the Harvey Weinstein trial. I mean, you talk to me, I think the evidence against him, we shall come back to that. Yeah. So things, it was an an important movement but it also doesn't mean and and i think it's interesting with what's happening with blake lively and justin baldoni it doesn't necessarily mean that the person who comes forward can a prove their case or be it happened that's right it's always you have to look at the evidence you have to look what's being presented and it also has to be the credibility of the people who are making these claims so it was a big tipping point. And I like to believe that the jury, because they also, you know, the jury didn't just side with Johnny Depp. I mean,

yes, he won. But he also they also found that he had defamed her at one in one instance. So this was a careful jury. This was a jury that deliberated looked at the evidence. They didn't seem to me swayed by public opinion. And thank goodness, because there was a lot of public opinion out there. And that's the kind of jury that you want easier said than done. But you know, you got to give them get a your hat goes off to that jury. How do you in today's modern time? How do you separate those two? Because everyone's got a fucking iPhone. Everyone's got access to the internet. Like unless you are living under a rock, you've seen something and yet these juries are supposed to be totally unbiased they don't even know who this is or what's going on like how do

you even create a fair trial the way that they intended it in the constitution so the world's changed it's not about do you know sean combs because that trial's coming up is it's not about do you know donald trump because his trial happened It's not do you know Blake Lively or Justin Baldoni. Have you heard about what happened? You expect they're going to know what happened. Brian Koberger. You expect the people are going to know what the case is about. It's the question can you put aside everything that you've heard?

Can you have a fresh slate? Can you look? Can you promise this court? Can you promise the defendant that you will look at the evidence strictly and look at the testimony and base their decision purely on the facts and the law? And you have to trust them. Our jury system's not perfect. Our legal system's not perfect, but it's pretty great. And it's served us well for many, many years. And I would say there's a system in place. It's called voir dire. It's a jury selection process. Voir dire. Yeah, voir dire. Voir dire. You're in New Jersey place it's called voir dire it's a jury selection process what dire yeah voir dire what voir dire you're in new jersey that's how we oh voir dire did you have a new

jersey lawyer right here i feel like that would have been like it's it's yeah yeah yeah it's called my cousin vinnie there you go two youths um and so no it was interesting so he um so like you have to basically there are questions you ask these prospective jurors. You do research on them. You look at their social media profiles. You can strike jurors. Everybody's, each side's given a number of strikes where they can just strike them for whatever reason they want. And that, through that process, obviously it's strategic.

You try to get a jury that you think is going to be on your side. The prosecution wants somebody. The defense wants somebody. A plaintiff wants somebody. A defendant wants somebody. And it's, again, not a perfect process, but you – and you have to monitor what the jurors do. If the jurors have a conversation with somebody, if the jurors post something on social media, they're – big law firms, they're watching these jurors like a hawk constantly. So you have to make sure.

Yeah, because then if they – God forbid, like during the trial, once they're on there, if they do anything, I mean, you can get them off immediately if they make even one comment. Or it's a mistrial. It's a mistrial. Especially if they already rendered a conviction. If they rendered a guilty verdict, that could be thrown out if there was really jury misconduct. Or they lied on the jury questionnaire. Here's the thing. So, look, I'm also covering the luigi mangione case right is there anything you're not covering now it's everything we're low hey we're low on crime that's what we do uh but no luigi mangione i was asked about this the other day like i haven't seen a case that polarizing on a criminal level quite some time and not even at the point like did he do it or not do it it's like did he do it but like he's justified in what he did yeah it's crazy but to get a jury there like there is a question will there try to be stealth

jurors people who want to get on that jury to render a verdict one way or another that is a legitimate concern and changing the venue like getting it out of manhattan it's not going to solve the problem it's about health insurance that affects everybody so it's uh it's a tough, it's not going to solve the problem. It's about health insurance that affects everybody. So it's a tough issue. And it makes me really sad looking at a case like that because it's another piece of evidence that we are really struggling as a society to hold multiple thoughts at the same time. You can hold the thought that the health insurance industry is fucked up. The laws around it are fucked up. Some of the people in it are fucked fucked up some of the other people in it are incentivized to be fucked up because they got to report a quarterly earning every three months and it's people's lives they're playing with and it's all fucked up and no one's arguing with that but at the same time the idea

that in america where we do live under laws you could just have someone go out and pick one employee you know in this case the ceo and fucking shoot him in the middle of a public street in the biggest city in the world. We can't do that. And I understand that people are angry at the industry, but there are – we have to be above that in my opinion. I think you have 100% the right opinion. And by the way, a couple things about that health insurance has ruined people's lives it's ruined their own individual lives it's ruined families lives it's ruined people they know their friends there's no doubt about it there's a problem

there's a problem i think we can all agree yes but it doesn't stop at the health insurance industry so if we take the point something needed to be, there needed to be a wake-up call. Okay, I'm not saying what he did was right or wrong, but I think it's important, and I think it's, you know, we have to listen. Where does that end? Politics, entertainment, finance, anybody who's affected anybody's life in a major way. This is the answer? It's very scary. And by the way, I feel confident to say that if Luigi Mangione did do this, if he is guilty, it wasn't going to stop with Brian Thompson.

Where was he going before he was apprehended? You think that it was just Brian Thompson, the CEO of a health insurance company that he wasn't even a client of? You think that was going to be where it was going to end? Brian Thompson, look, he knew where he was. Again, taking the allegations is true. He's innocent until proven guilty, but he knew where he was going to be. He was going to an annual investors conference, easy target. Who was going to be the next one? If this really was a wake-up call or trying to take it to the man, I don't believe it was going to end in Brian Thompson. That's a scary thing to think about. I'll tell you this, Julian. When there was that manhunt for a week

we didn't know who it was what was going to go on i said you immediately saw like the support for him like they didn't even know he was oh my gosh this is great i thought people might know who he is see him in public and be like turn the other way i don't want him to get caught i thought that might happen i thought that was a legitimate concern so again hats off to the people in altuna pennsylvania and that mcdonald's who actually alerted authorities and stepped in. Because if they didn't, would he have been apprehended? I mean, look, taking the allegations is true. The fact that the suspect removed the mask and you saw him smiling at the girl in the hostel.

Hey, he's got a spit game. Yeah, listen, that's probably his undoing. That's probably what caught him, you know, let him in. Yeah, and it's actually one of those things where when you look into his backstory and what happened, because I do always try to understand, you know, what gets a person there. You know, you don't have to have empathy for the act, but how did the person become the guy who was going to do that? And when you see this kid, it was like this all-American kid, extremely smart, obviously. He had a privileged life, but he took advantage of every single thing that was put in front of him in a positive way and had a whole –

he had his whole life in front of him. At some point, he gets this back injury when he's surfing, and you can see it on his social media when you go through his Twitter, which – is that even up anymore? Oh, it's up. Oh, it's up. It's up. Take take a look he's got a lot of followers which is interesting because i think the last thing he posted was obviously before the brian thompson killing and it's like he was a normal guy like posting about random stuff and it wasn't like you

from what i last i read you couldn't see somebody that looked indoctrinated i mean the the why of this is still confusing why somebody with all that opportunity if he really did do this what what would change i mean what was his last post go go down a little bit that's the pin post thanks pat yeah it was like a retweet of huberman yeah but i if you look through them all like yes there's a lot of intellectual interests and health hack interests that you'll see but when you start looking through some of putting them all together and i have it in a little in a little while now i looked at this back like when he was arrested you can see the image of someone who had in my my opinion, retreated from society, had some sort of bone to pick and was too smart for his own good because he was a brilliant, brilliant kid for sure.

And I think like he kind of, I mean, I don't know what was, I'm not a doctor. I don't know what was going on in his head, but something happened there that involved him just severely overthinking and getting into some sort of some sort of psychic state in that way and when you hear from his friends and his family like he had totally retreated from them over the past six seven months i want to say leading up to this so i we launched a brand new podcast it's called luigi it's on uh through wondering what a name i mean of course um and we interviewed like people he knew he grew up with people he was hanging out with in Hawaii and like you know some of them might have seen a change but some of them were just so shocked

really what like shocked when it came out that he was the suspect they couldn't believe it this was like a complete 180 from the guy that they knew and I have to imagine it is an incredibly difficult time for his family trying to make sense of all this, but my gosh, hopefully between now and whenever his first trial is, cause he's facing, you know, three different jurisdictions, three charges and charges in different jurisdictions. Yeah. Pennsylvania, New York state, and then, uh, federal charges, although he hasn't been federally indicted yet, but, uh, yeah, whenever that trial happens between now and then hopefully we get more answers. I mean, those writings, the manifesto, even though his defense attorneys don't want to call it that, it gives you a little bit of a glimpse.

But I don't know. I mean, it's funny. You say it is, right? You know what his defense team is saying? It's not a manifesto. Don't call it a manifesto. You know why it's not a manifesto? He didn't release it.

The suspect has to release it in order for it to be a manifesto. Why don't you get caught before it's released? I mean, is it not a manifesto? They't release it the the the suspect has to release it in order for it to be a manifesto why don't you get caught before it's released i mean is it not a manifesto they don't want to do they say it's tainting the jury pool and all that but actually it's an interesting argument they say real quick i won't digress but they basically in order to get terror it's murder for terrorism that's how they're getting first and second degree murder in new york that's how they're getting life in prison and it has to be murder in furtherance of terrorism. In order to prove that, you have to say it was a murder committed to influence a unit of government or intimidate or basically instill fear in a population. And the defense's argument is government, you're deliberately putting those writings out there, calling it a manifesto. You're creating this sensation in order to justify your charge.

Because I actually believe from a legal point of view, it is a stretch to say it's terrorism. I don't think it quite fits. I think it's easily second degree intentional murder. I think they'll probably get them on that. But to say it's terrorism, I don't quite see it. But I think it was an interesting argument they made. Prices over the last few years have been and continue to be high. And most people, unfortunately, have to reach for credit cards to cover bills. Credit card debt has reached an all-time high and it's trapping Americans. But

luckily, American Financing can help homeowners pay off high interest debt by using their home's equity. American Financing is a family-owned mortgage lender that's been around for 25 years. And yes, they're licensed in all 50 states. Their mortgage consultants are salary-based, so there's no incentive for them to put you in a loan that doesn't make sense for you. Furthermore, their customers save an average of $800 a month. And American Financing doesn't charge any upfront or hidden fees to find out how much you can save later. You may be able to close

in as fast as 10 days. And on top of that, you may be able to delay up to two mortgage payments, creating more savings upfront. American Financing has helped hundreds of thousands of homeowners create meaningful savings, and it's reflected in their reviews on Google. So make sure you call today at 888-991-9788. That's 888-991-9788 or AmericanFinancing.net slash Dory. That link is in the description below. American Financing, NMLS, 182334. Yeah, terrorism's like this word we throw around, but the actual legal definition is pretty complicated, you know? it depends upon the statute. This one is if you're going to commit a murder that is designed to influence a unit of government or intimidate a civilian population, which would make sense for a classic example. If somebody goes out, has a suicide vest on, blows it up.

Right. And in the name of some cause abroad clearly fits the definition here. what was he really trying to do? I mean, taking the allegations is true. What change was he trying to make? How was he trying to influence government? He wasn't going after other people in the population. If you look at the video, there was a woman, a bystander, who watched him gun down, or excuse me, allegedly watched him gun down Brian Thomas. I'm a lawyer, I gotta say. Allegedly watched him gun down or excuse me well allegedly watched him gun down brian time i'm a lawyer i gotta say allegedly watch him gun down but she ran away he didn't talk that suspect did not target any civilian person he wasn't trying to instill fear now you can make the argument

you can make the argument ceos of other companies are part of a civilian population was he trying to scare them it's a you see what i'm saying it's a little bit of a it's not clear on its face and i'm sure prosecutors are gonna have to expand upon it leading up to trial yeah and and his family's not supporting him at all in this right like they're not do we know anything about that not i don't know like outwardly i mean he is getting a lot of financial support from the people the fund um i think they the family has been rather quiet and understandably so but I don't know how much they helping him in his legal case can't imagine being in that position how do you even process it and by the way you know I don't know the last time they spoke to him like did they know what he was up to where he was what was going on what was that relationship

like how much is that going to be teased out at a trial? I don't know. Are they going to have a, you know, sit down for an interview? Probably not. But that relationship between him and his family and understanding what did they know about him? What was he up to? How did he make his way to New York? Where did he get a ghost gun? Again, taking the allegations is true. These are questions that are still up in the air. We don't have a clear answer. Yeah, what was the story with the gun again? It was a ghost gun.

It was like a 3D manufactured gun. And by the way, so it was interesting. Like if you think from a defense perspective, he's apprehended in Altoona, Pennsylvania. And he has this weapon on him. And they're able to match the ballistics to the crime scene. You have the surveillance footage right you have um fake ids that match the hostel where he was staying this is relatively a straightforward case for prosecutors now recently his defense team has

said what's the best what's the best way that you uh you get a case thrown out you say the evidence was improperly collected right imagine none of this evidence comes in so they basically said his rights were violated and that mcdonald's police cornered him they didn't properly read him his miranda rights um they broke protocol all of it should be tossed i don't i think it's an uphill argument probably not going to work but that's the first thing they're trying to do to uh to help his legal case what about the dark Dark Knight Rises like perp walk they made him do? Was that a part of the case to throw it out? Good reference. He and Diddy now in the same MDC. It's like the Arkham Asylum, right? Isn't it? Look, I think people can criticize that.

It was unique. You don't see it often. again i think the mayor eric adams is trying to make a statement this is a crime that we don't really see ever in midtown manhattan yes there are shootings obviously but nothing like that i've been by the way that street 300 times in my life i've been on that yeah because i used to park my car right there so i know exactly where it is stuff like that doesn't happen when you see the public fervor for him i think the government has to take a strong position to make sure there's no other copycats they're making they're sending a message i understand that but but the problem is is like that could influence a jury it can embolden other people it's something they have to think about every ever optics are

very important here yeah that's that's a great word for it. It's all about the optics. It was kind of crazy, though, because my buddy Joe Deef and his writing partner Matt Ferrara wrote this script for this play called Sacco and Vanzetti, based on that case. It's called Sacco and Vanzetti are Dead. And so I think Luigi was caught on a Monday, the Saturday before me and my buddy John went in to see their first table read of it. And it's like this ridiculous over-the-top comedy play. And so they had the whole cast in there doing a private table read. And one of the jokes is that they were blaming the assassin on this crazy lone gunman named Luigi. Oh, yeah. And they just wrote this into the script.

Oh, wow. And then on Monday it comes out and they're like this is the greatest marking opportunity of our life unbelievable unbelievable but did you see that thing like when he was first arrested it was like at a nightclub somebody put up his picture on the the dj booth screen and everybody in the club went nuts they were like yeah it's like i was like i've never seen it people people get obsessed with killers or suspected killers all the time it's not new but like this i've never seen anything like it i've never seen anything like it if his name weren't fun to say luigi manjoni's a very fun name to say and if he weren't like a young good looking dude no would it be this big

probably not right probably not i mean it's let's call it what it is he is he has become i think people who believe what he did is right and i'm not saying that's everybody who supports him but people who believe what he did is right or understandable there would probably be some of that like oh he's sending a message i kind of emphasize but the fact that he's young and you know good looking, it helps. And it also will help in a jury. It also helps. It's going to, you know, optics matter.

I say it again. The way you look matters, especially in a courtroom. It's a big consideration. Absolutely. So he could technically be sitting at the table while shit's going on, on the witness stand and just be winking at some you see a middle-aged juror and that lady's gonna vote for him if he gets caught doing that he's in a lot of trouble but no he he had a conversation about this recently with an fbi profiler i don't i saw him i'm saying this this is what she said i asked her the question i said do you think he's deliberately chiseling

his jaw looking at the camera you ever see that when he's like in court he's like looking around like oh he's playing up a little bit. She goes, absolutely, 100% he is. I don't know, that was her opinion, but he knows what's going on. He gets it. I've never seen so much conversation about loafers before in my life

because he wore loafers and a green sweater. They gave him an eyebrow job in prison too. I saw that. Look, it matters. And jurors are human beings. The big concern, we call it in the law jury nullification. It's when a jury comes in and they don't decide a case based on the facts of the law. They base it on emotion.

That's a real consideration. You're not allowed to do that as a defense attorney. You're not allowed to do that, like appeal to the jurors emotion, say you should put aside the facts and law and find them not guilty because of that. But it's implicit. And you wonder if that's something that could happen. Yeah. It's going to be interesting to see it play out because also, like said it's in three different there's like three different jurisdictions with this yes new york state so that's one case the federal case is also in district southern district of new york yep yep and then the case in pennsylvania is that just like uh evidence tampering and illegal gun carrying

forgery charges presenting fake id to police gun weapons possession charges it's obviously the less serious case when you're dealing with federal murder charges that carry potentially death penalty and state murder charges that carry potentially life in prison now let's play a hypothetical here because i don't know i mean i guess because judges are human beings too it does vary judge to judge. But hypothetically, let's say shit goes down. He gets found not guilty of the serious charges in New York and the federal court. But goes to Pennsylvania on the forgery charges and the gun charge and whatever.

I don't know what the sentencing guidelines would be. But let's say it's something that the normal person if they were found guilty on that and in this hypothetical scenario let's say he was they'd get three years or two years or something do you think a judge would use their own judgment to say fuck it i'm giving him 20 years because i think he did this shit i mean for those charges he's facing i don't remember off the top of my head what the maximum is. They would have to be in a, the judge would base the decision based on the arguments from the prosecutor and the defense attorney. Now they could go past it. They could say, I've listened to arguments and I think it actually should go beyond what the minimum is or what the maximum is here. But that'll be appealed because again, you have to look at strictly at what those charges are right and yeah that's

a consideration but i don't i don't think necessarily that would happen okay it's interesting i mean look what oj simpson right oj simpson found not guilty and then oj gets convicted of that whole las vegas stealing the memorabilia and he got what seven years i mean it's like eight years yeah i mean look there were people who were like he he got convicted because well i think the i don't i don't i don't remember that case that well but i remember there was a conversation of how much was it based on the evidence in that case versus this is a second shot at trying to hold him accountable for what he allegedly did again because like we have this system set up that's supposed to be like the system and by the book and we do this and then that and this and then that.

And I know in law school, like every lawyer I talk to, they train you to be objective, objective, objective. But there's still – it doesn't matter how objective you get. We're all still human beings and there are still little things like – forget the jurors. I'm talking about the people, the judges and the lawyers. There are still things that creep into every single case some more than others and like that can change the facts of the case hey by the way i mean this is why we have a system in place where there's a trial court there's an appellate court there's a supreme court right or here in new york we call it the uh or new york we call it the court of appeals

but basically there's a lot of conversation right now about the courts at a political level, right? Should a judge have this much power? This system works. Now, you don't have to agree with the judge's decision, but you can make arguments to have it overturned. Yes, they make mistakes. Yes, there could be an issue of a conflict of interest. Yes, there could be an issue of a bias. But that is why you have another court review it and then another court above that review it. It's, it's again not a perfect system but it works and it works for reasons it's checks and balances and i get look i'm an attorney i get very scared about the idea of attacking the justice system doesn't mean you can't attack the arguments doesn't mean you can't criticize the courts for decisions you should but to attack our framework is is a concern that I have because it works both ways. It works both ways.

No, I agree with you. And I always make sure I say this. I think we have the greatest legal system in the world. I think it's pretty incredible how we set up. Just like anything, I'd always want to improve things where we can, right? So where you see things where they go astray, when you see, like I'm passionate about cases

where people get convicted of stuff on horrible evidence, prosecutorial misconduct, and they get thrown away for the rest of their life and stuff like that. Where you see things like that, you want to go in and say, okay, why did this happen? How can we try to prevent that happening or have it happen a lot less in the future? And I think that's fine. But when you start to take those cases and say, therefore, we should burn the whole system down, that's a bad idea. That's a really bad idea. It's the police officer argument, right?

There are bad apples, but it doesn't mean that you get rid of all police departments. It doesn't work that way. There's corruption at every level of government. There's corruption in every kind of industry. They're bad actors. They're bad people. It happens. But hopefully the system roots itself out, and you can check those people and root it out. You know, look, and I think the beauty of our system is you are innocent until

proven guilty. You put the prosecution on their toes, prove, prove that my client is guilty. Do you have the goods or is there a sloppy investigation? Is what you're presenting not amount to the crime that you're charging the person with? That's a big standard. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt. If people really break it down, proof beyond a reasonable doubt. It's a very, very high standard. And, you know, look, there's a lot of responsibility we give jurors for that. It's not an easy task, particularly with the subject matter.

I mean, let me tell you something. We're talking a lot about Diddy right combs okay people oh my gosh what you know what's this trial going to be like the celebrities or think about the jury think about think about if the videos are true they have videos of these freak offs these sex acts these allegedly illegal sex acts maybe they gotta see it they have to see it. They have to see it. Now, I covered a case recently. It was a really disgusting case. It was actually out in the UK. Chinese National raped multiple women, filmed all of it, had tapes upon tapes upon tapes upon tapes. And that jury had to watch it and they had to be excused. They're like, I need a break. I need a break. Remember what they have to go through and say. It's the worst of the worst. It ain't a movie.

It's not a movie. It's not a movie. Now, you know, especially with a murder case, dealing cases with children, which unfortunately I deal with a lot. I mean, those are the worst cases and it's not easy sitting on that jury and trying to not be influenced by what they're viewing, right? I mean, you see somebody being victimized on a tape. I want justice. But is it going to be Sean Combs that deserves to be found guilty? Or is there more to the story here? You have to be very clear about what you're arguing. And that's the trick for prosecutors.

How do you do that job when you're defending the people like that? And you have the videos. Because everybody's entitled trick for prosecutors. How do you do that job when you're defending the people like that? And you have the videos. Because you have a, everybody's entitled to a defense. That's your job. They're entitled to a vigorous defense. Okay. And you make the argument, what they're making in the Sean Combs cases, if he engaged in, we're not even running away from the term freak offs.

We'll call him freak offs. He had commercial sex workers. Sure. He had threesomes. It's not illegal. Everybody was was it was all consensual and it's interesting because the sean combs case after the release of that video of him beating cassandra ventura in a 26 horrible you would say throw him away lock the cuffs up he's guilty but when you look at actually trafficking and what that means right so it's the idea of harboring somebody,

transporting somebody, enticing somebody to commit commercial sex acts, sex acts for something of value using force, fraud, or coercion. Is that really what's going on? Or did he have a bunch of girlfriends and intimate partners that he traveled around, had group sex with, paid for things? Is that trafficking? Well, it is if it's not consensual. And it's a really thin line because the classic sex trafficking case is somebody who kidnaps a bunch of people, right? Puts them on a boat to pimp out to, you know, wealthy individuals, something like that. This is a different kind of case. And we're seeing it with the Alexander brothers in New York, these high powered real estate, private security

brothers. We're seeing it with- Wait, I don't know about that. Oh, you don't know about the Alexander brothers? Yeah, what's going on there? The Alexander brothers, this was happening a few months ago. They're facing federal and state charges. These guys were like the top of the top of real estate in New York and Miami, and also they had a private security firm, very wealthy, very well known, very well connected. They have been accused of sexually abusing and sex trafficking women for years since high school that they even joked about like gang raping girls in high school. Real quick, Pat, can you just mark down this spot as like, we got to watch for some of the language? Yeah. And it's a really, really disturbing case, but it goes back to the question, is it sex trafficking?

I mean, if they were drugging these women and abusing them, okay, you have a stronger case. But does it fit within the definition? And that's something that defense attorneys are really going to be honing in on. So when this trial happens for Sean Combs in May or when their happens, whenever it will happen, those definitions are going to be very key to say, this is not a classic example of sex trafficking or racketeering like a criminal enterprise. The prosecution, the government's going too far. They're going too far here. They're saying, you know, Sean Combs operating a criminal enterprise. Really? How? Show me. And, you know, it's going to be, it's going to be an interesting narrative,

two different narratives put forward. I don't know. Ten thousand fucking buckets of baby oil. Hey, that doesn't help prove a criminal fucking conspiracy. I mean, Jesus Christ. They they remember what his attorney said when he's not going to make this argument. But, you know, he went to Costco. He went to Costco. He went to Costco. Maybe bought in bulk. Look, they're going to say Sean Combs is a weird guy his sexual proclivities are very different from you and me but it doesn't make it a crime and they and it's interesting because i follow the back and forth is they're trying to get evidence thrown out of this case significant evidence and they say the reason the evidence should be thrown out is because the

warrant the the applications to get search warrants for his houses what he had on his person his electronic devices they were defective. Why are they defective? Because prosecution, you didn't put in evidence text messages between him and these alleged victims that show everything was consensual. That's their argument. We don't know. A lot of it's redacted, so we don't know what the conversations are. But if the judge would have seen this, that there was more to the story, then you wouldn't have granted these search warrants and none of this evidence should have come in.

I don't think it's going to be much successful, but that's going to be the argument. Everything was consensual. Everything's on the up and up. People are just coming after him out of the woodwork for whatever reason. They're fabricating it. They have a financial incentive to go after him. But their argument is nobody's telling the truth. Well, the one thing I keep thinking while you're going through this is that it's almost like it's being made an either or.

Why is it not both? The guy had a lot of sex. I'm sure he had legal sex. I'm sure he had consensual sex. But why – it also appears to me like he did a lot that was possibly at the least not consensual and did involve sex trafficking. It's like, let's say for a second, he were a part of a blackmail operation. We've seen this before. And I don't know that he was, but it certainly looks like there could have been something like that because this is something that's very easy to blackmail people. All you had to do was be around the guy. And now your name is

sullied forever. You may have been there. Let's say he throws, just use round numbers, 50 parties a year. You may have been at 40 parties and those might be the 40 where everything was consensual. But what about those 10 where there weren't? And you weren't there, but no one knows which those 10 are. You know what I mean? So if it's a mix, why does the judge have to assume it was everything or nothing? It's called reasonable doubt. They're trying to muddy any of the waters. And by the way, when you file a case like this where you have four victims, right, four alleged victims, if the defense can strike at the credibility of one victim, it taints the credibility of the others. So in a way, the prosecution is doing what they can to secure a strong conviction against Sean Combs, make sure he never gets out of prison again. You have as many victims as you possibly can to testify to – I mean just recently they filed another indictment adding two more charges with respect to another alleged victim. And you want that it strengthens your case. But on the other hand, if there's one little weakness in your case with one victim, then that can that can, you know, weaken the rest of your

case. And that's a big problem for the prosecution. So I believe, I believe fair argument, I believe that the victim one in this case is Cassandra Ventura. And if you start with her, and you start with her account, remember, she was the first person who sued sean combs back in november of 2023 started this whole thing harrowing account her description of getting beat up by sean combs was identical identical to the video that was released months months later by cnn so if you didn't believe her accounts you're like oh this seems me when that video came out yeah you're like i believe everything she's saying that's that's what's what i think a fair argument is and they've been trying to get that video out but you know what their argument is to that which

i think is going to be a key piece of evidence domestic spat unfortunate incident really unfortunate incident but it was not evident you know not uh not evidence of sex trafficking although the prosecution says where was she running away from in that hotel? She says she was running away from a sex worker that was in that room. And remember, Sean Combs looks like on that video running out in a towel. Why is he in a towel? I think that video may make or break the case, at least from the perspective of her. So it's really important.

And by the way, we don't know what else is out there, right? They have other Digital Evans videos. If that's one part, what else do these videos show? Yeah. Didn't his lawyer step down to, uh, one of them, one of them. And that was the, his wife is Luigi's lawyer. Uh, no, no, no, no. So, uh, he's still represented by Mark Ignifilo. Um, but there was another lawyer that stepped down. Um, but he's, he's got a really strong legal team and uh yeah his that's right mark ignifilo's wife is representing uh mangione so the ignifilos have two very very big clients in the same uh courtroom but look and the problem with the federal case is the sean combs case

there's no cameras so we won't see what happens we'll get reporting back um oh that's transcripts transcripts but it's going to be different. We won't have the actual testimony. When are they going to change that rule? It's a problem. You're talking to a guy who believes all in transparency. I think there should be cameras in the Supreme Court. But look, they have the rules.

They are concerned about. I've heard the arguments. Arguments are you have cameras. It could affect the trial. It could affect the jury. But you do it in state trials. I know. It could affect the way. It could affect the jury. But you do it in state trials. I know. It could affect the way judges and attorneys perform.

You know, they have rules about it. I don't agree. I think it's a real problem. I'm all about transparency. I think it's important for our country to know how our justice system works. 100%. Particularly in a high-profile case like this. 100% in so many of the biggest cases are in federal court.

Yeah. And it's also like, you know, we talk about trying to improve the legal system and stuff listen when people do shit wrong there should be punishment for that and that's what it should be are you drinking a saratoga water right now so i am son of a bitch by the way god i've been drinking this i've been drinking this before that guy did the challenge i don't even know what the guys i was drinking this for the last year do you know why because they said like all those plastics have have those microplastics, whatever. So I've been drinking this. And then all of a sudden Saratoga went on the map because of the guy does the challenge.

I don't know. But yeah, it's delicious. It's phenomenal. Oh, my God. Glass all day, every day. Oh, I thought that was a – I thought they might have paid you to do that. No, no. They should.

They should. But no. Yeah. All right. Anyway, though, what I was saying with the federal system, these cases are often like the biggest cases we have. And when I was saying about improving the system, when I see that our conviction rate in the federal courts is I believe it's between 97 and 98 percent, that I think the lack of transparency is a huge part of that problem because there's no way it's that high like i could see it being 90 10 right i could see 90 of the people coming in there being mostly guilty or at least someone guilty of the things they're accused of but like 97 98 so i'll counter that by saying the feds don't go after everybody when they do i know when they do they they will put all their resources

into it they go after the big fish with the strongest evidence. They won't just pull the trigger on a case unless they really feel they have the goods. That's why it took a long time for there even to be charges against Sean Combs. And so they have to feel fairly confident. Now, it doesn't mean that there's not guilty verdicts. It doesn't mean that they don't have weak cases. But when the feds go after you it's very different than state charges um there's more limited avenues on to charge for

federal crime and they are quite experienced prosecutors the southern district of new york that's prosecuting sean combs is no joke oh i know i'm very very familiar so part of the problem is though again there's you you don't want to paint the whole i guess barrel of apples as like one or two bad ones right but that does exist too and i'll give you an example that's personal to me with this raj raj ratnam you remember that case sort of so he was the first hedge fund guy found guilty of insider trading friend of mine i had him on the show i followed that case when i was in high school which means i followed it in the media because i was interested

in like wall street and how that shit worked and whatever i thought he was guilty as sin so when he first got introduced to me like this is over three years ago now i we were talking about bringing him on the podcast which we ended up doing for episode 87 i told him i said yeah you know i thought you were guilty as hell. He's like, no problem. We'll come talk about it. And so I actually spent like a month going through that case and going through some of the legal documents and how it went down and everything. And I had my dad look at it too, who's an attorney.

He's not a criminal attorney, but he's a civil litigator. And we're looking at it like, holy shit. It's not a popular stance to take. Like billionaire hedge fund guy might be innocent, but we don't think he did this. Could there have been some spots where he was careless? Absolutely, for sure. Could there have been some spots where he was a little naive? Yes.

But I don't think he did it. And part of the reason was because when you actually look at the evidence that the feds presented, the case was rigged against him from the start, including the fact that all of their evidence was not supposed to be admissible in court. They got all of their wiretaps illegally. The judge admitted it in a Frank's hearing out loud, which is a pretrial hearing, as you know, which should mean you then say, therefore, no case. But the judge said, but I'll let the case continue and I'll let you keep the wiretaps and everything. And like the issue with wiretaps that he talks about, and it is true. It's like, yes, they're useful because you can catch guys who are really actually doing bad shit for sure. But then the problem is whenever you're recording thousands and thousands of hours of people, you can take something out of context.

And here's some guy say to his mom, I'm going to be home for spaghetti tonight. And they sound guilty. The judge himself said that in an interview after the trial. And I'm like, then why the fuck did, did you let this in? So that's why I say like, yes, the feds come in and when they come in, they come heavy. We've had some guys in here. They talk about how much, you know, they put into making a case and they're very confident in it. But then sometimes you have a case where even let's say a guy's even guilty of something they'll make him guilty of really like five times more than what he really is you know that's kind of where my concern is it's a legitimate concern it happens across this country all the time there are bad prosecutors there are bad

prosecution and look i see even say with sean combs like i don't know the evidence yet like i don't know everything that they have a video of him doing that doesn't mean that's a racketeering conspiracy or a sex trafficking case so we have to see where it develops but i 100 agree with you um and i and i think it happens in law enforcement too like one of there was a crazy case that i covered i never forget it you know look i'm i'm i believe that our law enforcement is so important and i talked about it before you know there's bad apples you can't just say that there should be police officers, but, uh, on the show, I host prime crime, this documentary show, we did a full hour episode and this guy named Zachary Wester, you know, what Zachary Wester did,

planted drugs in people's cars. And that's how he was getting his, uh, you know, his, uh, his citations up and right. And you see on tape him with what appears to be a bag in his hand i don't remember if it was math or coke and he like literally drops it in and he was you know he the multiple multiple multiple people came forward and said he ruined our lives and he was convicted and it was like the worst of the worst. You know who hates corrupt police officers the most? You know who hates corrupt prosecutors or lawyers or judges the most? The law enforcement, the prosecutors. It puts a bad name on the work that they do.

And it happens. It's shocking, but it happens a lot. Yeah. I wonder what gets someone to that point. Well, think about it. If you're a prosecutor, you want to win the big cases. It helps your career, whatever the next level is, politics, judge, private practice. A lot of prosecutors go into defense work and that can be quite lucrative. But it's

people's lives you're putting in your hands. I know. But the same thing for criminals out there in general, they don't care about the other person. They care about themselves. And I see this in murder cases all the time. They kill someone. Do they think about the impact that that had on the person's, their family, the loved ones? I mean, think about going back to the Luigi case. Okay. Whoever killed Brian Thompson, did they think about what effect that had on his family and outside of his work as the CEO of UnitedHealthcare? And by the way, do you even believe that the work he was doing was detrimental on a personal level to the people that affected you or whatever it might be? I mean, these are human beings and criminals don't think that way,

really. And that's what's very scary about society. I think that's one of the interests that people have in true crime in general. Yeah, it's really been, that was one thing I wanted to ask you about earlier and now's a a good time it over the past 10 12 years you've seen such a boom in that topic and it's ironic because like when you get to the really bloody stuff like when it's all murders and and things like that it's like what 85 percent women are into it yeah yeah like what do you think that is so first of all i think the interest really sparked during, well, there was always been big cases, right? There was the Menendez brothers, there was OJ Simpson, there was things like that. But I think it was Serial.

Remember Serial back in 2014? Yes. It was the Adan Syed case. There's an interest in it. It's a mystery. It's human drama. It's a side of protection. How do we protect ourselves from

the evil in this world? And it's good guys versus bad guys. It's a tale as old as time. People will always want it. Point the finger. You see it in politics. You see it everywhere. Who's the bad guy? Who's the good guy? Who do I side with? I want justice for people. These are real life stories about it. And when you deal, and look, that's, I think, an interest when you deal – and look, that's I think an interest when you see killers, either female killers or male killers. There's an interest. But I also think there are those, to circle back, who believe that people commit crimes but they can change them, right? Those killers who get fan mail and who get remarried and there's interest i mean they're fascinating studies about why people do this if you know going back to the brian coberger case the guy

accused of killing the idaho for those four students he's like going on trial right now right it's going to be happening soon if he did it why on earth did he do that he had no connection to them from what we could see did he have have an interest in criminology? He had an interest in what it felt like. People are fascinated by the human mind and why people do what they do. And that's not going to change. And it's really interesting to see because with the advent of podcasts and YouTube and documentaries, you're able to tell these stories in different ways and engage people in different ways and make them think about cases in different ways on their own time, you know, particularly about podcasts. It's like, you can pick it up at one point, pick it up later.

And I think it's truck month at GMC, tackle the open road with added confidence in a 2025 Sierra 1500 Pro Graphite at 0% financing for up to 72 months. With an available 5.3 liter V8 engine, 20 inch high gloss black painted aluminum wheels, off-road suspension with available 2 inch factory installed lift kit, plus a towing capacity of up to 13,200 pounds. You'll be ready for anything this truck month. Truck month is on now. Ask your GMC dealer for details. pounds you'll be ready for anything this truck month truck month is on now ask your gmc dealer for details that's a more media technology argument but the fact that you can get more content now um and digest it in the way that you know is available to you when it's available to you it helps as well yeah no no you're obviously trained in law like that was your background and

that's where your career started but you've been on the other side now in the media for a while. So you're not in whether it be you know grizzly murders or sexual abuse of kids and stuff like that like how do you does it ever just drive you nuts because you're breaking down these cases you're going as deep into the legal paperwork and the evidence that you're allowed to be able to see like how do you mentally yeah mentally i i'm human so i i host the show called sidebar and i happened last week i was talking about a really really bad i i'm human so i i host the show called sidebar and i happened last week i was talking about a really really bad case i'm not even gonna get into it because same thing will happen i like i teared up like i can't control it when it's about children it's like it tears i can't i can't deal with it it's like kids no not yet but like you know i just it's i'm like talking about i'm getting emotional like i it's, you're talking about people who are as innocent as can be. They deserve a chance at life. And if

they're born into a situation where they're immediately abused or they're killed, it's like, you can't have somebody more defenseless. And, and to see these monsters out there do it, it's, it gets you angry. Now I deal with a lot of tough subject matter. I've been doing it for years. I try to focus on the legal issues, the facts, try to create that separation. When I'm not working on it, I completely put it to bed. I don't watch true crime documentaries. I don't watch this. I try to forget it, try to think about something else because you have to for your own sake. It's really – it's tough. It's really, really tough stuff. And sometimes I say to myself – I say it on air too. I'm like, I wish I was making this up, but I'm not. Like you can't believe what people are capable of. And that's a really scary thing. And by the way, like you hope that with the advent of technology, phones, email, surveillance footage, it's harder to commit crimes yes it was particularly because we cover a number of cases where you know female teachers abusing students why are we seeing that so much

is there something going on there's a proliferation of it or is it just they are getting caught because everything's on social media everything's on their phone it's not so easy to commit these crimes and thank goodness um which is why when the Mangione case happened, like to commit a murder like that, commit a killing like that in a metropolitan city where there are cameras everywhere, I was shocked that the suspect got away. On a city bike. On a city bike.

It was crazy. But you hope that with the advent of technology, it makes it harder. Yeah. I think about that a lot because you're you're like a gps tracking device everywhere you go oh and by the way if you turn it off and you leave it home and you commit a crime well why'd you turn it off at that point why'd it come back on at that time that's a that's the coberger case right coberger case wait i don't know about this so the coberger case they don't say his phone uh was with him during the times of the killings they say the phone was traveling towards the area of the killings and then turned off, turned off for a period of time and then happened to turn back on after they're killed, headed towards the direction of your home.

Weird, weird time for the phone to be off. Very weird. Wouldn't you say? Yes. So that's this thing, this thing right here. It's the number one piece of evidence for prosecutors. Yeah, you almost wonder how there are cases that can't be solved at this point strictly because of that. Just because it's like – but then it gets down to you have to be able to have evidence to get a search warrant and stuff.

And you could be fishing in a city like New York. You'd be fishing through fucking a million people. And how many people are you going to get that warrant on? Not a lot. Or you – I'll give you another example. So have you heard of the Karen Reid case? Wait, yes. What did she do again?

Is this in – Boston. Boston. Boston, yeah, yeah. So there's a case. I won't go into all the specifics, but there's a case. She's accused of running over her police officer boyfriend, John O'Keefe, outfe outside and leaving to die in the snow so if you look at evidence like her phone or whatever like you would see that she either she dropped him off at a location and then drove away okay we're backed up over but you don't know the phone's

not going to tell you whether or not she ran him over but it says she was there then it becomes a question of what's the physical evidence what's the uh you know the witness testimony but the phone will only tell you so much so it might place somebody in a certain position or and by the way you see defense attorneys all the time saying phone data is not 100 accurate i can't say this but like it helps but it won't you know solve every crime there are those though man the biggest idiots in the world who commit a crime and then they google oh yeah the guy who googled how to like dispose of a dead body weird you're looking up that at that time like it's like you and then they go well someone else might have had his phone and just happened to be looking at it at that time yeah it's like it's like the old i've been hacked yeah you say something stupid well look ai i don't know i don't know ai is crazy now i don't know what's going to be with that well is that that's actually a good question yeah i don't know that could that could potentially

affect some things meaning like it could people could hack into other people's phones and stuff using ai i don't even know what this looks like no they don't even have to hack they could couldn't they create a video where it looks like somebody did something or like, Oh my God. Now, but here's what I'm hoping for, okay? Here's what I'm hoping for, that as the technology advances, so does the technology to detect when something is AI. And you also can have other evidence.

Like if your phone says you're somewhere else, you're going to believe this video, you're going to believe the phone. Right. It'll complicate it, but I don't think we're quite at that point yet. Hopefully it's scary though. It's's very scary it's getting really tough to there was do you see that lebron video no so you know the whole beef with lebron and steven

smith oh yeah so there was a video that was posted i think like a month ago where lebron talked about again this is this was fake i thought it was real it was all on social media like he comes goes yeah i confronted steven. Smith. He was talking about it. Yeah. I was like, he said this, he said this. And then I said to my brother,

he goes, no, it's fake. I was like, Oh, is it like, I thought it was real. I was like,

Oh, it's not so fair. I was like, I thought it was him. Oh my God. Tell me I'm not the only one. No, I have to look at a lot of these videos two,

three times. I'm like, Oh yeah. Oh yeah. That's right. Usually. Cause it's so ridiculous. Once I put the three times. I'm like, oh. Yeah. Oh, yeah. Usually because it's so ridiculous. Once I put the lines together, I'm like, okay. I mean, yes, there's like Trump Gaza, that video where you're like, okay, you didn't see the Trump Gaza video?

The Trump Gaza video? Oh, my gosh. Can we pull this up on Twitter? Trump Gaza AI? First of all, this is – okay, so to give a little context, this was, of course, about President Trump's idea to create Gaza, you know, as like a theme park and an investment. So if you look up, like, I think you can look it up on X, like Trump Gaza AI video. Yeah, let's, where is it? Go to videos. It's probably, yeah, I mean, that's the, yeah, I just got to go to videos of's probably yeah i mean that's the yeah i just gotta go to videos of it

yeah try media uh yeah okay you see that one 34 to left to left 34 seconds yeah oh that's all right let's turn let's turn this on you could tell this is ai but yeah i know this one but look i mean you can tell it's AI because once you see Trump and everybody, it's also hilarious. Oh, my God. Look, that's Elon. Jesus Christ. But yeah, I mean, this looks fake. I mean, he posted this, by the way.

Of course he did. Oh, my God. Oh, that's Elon again. Elon again. Yeah. Oh, the gold statue like saddam yeah see okay see so that's yeah that was uh yeah netanyahu and him so you could see you could see it looks like them but yeah but there's other ones you just don't know there there was someone put together a

a short film that was just creepy this was it was all ai yeah this had to and and they said it at the front they said uh you know ai studios or whatever but it was like it was a it was around the election and it was a spoof of of eyes wide shut and they i mean you name a person that from recent history whether it be trump or clinton or kamala Epstein or whoever, just had all these people in the video like going to this meeting with the weird music. And it was actually like kind of good. Yeah. And I was like, oh, my God. Are you an actor?

Do you do acting? I thought about it. I actually read A Dream of Passion in college and really, really considered doing it. The Strasburg book because you were talking about that earlier and i decided against it like my senior year of college so i never ended up doing it well i don't know what the profession's if it's really gets so good like if you okay i love tom cruise love tom cruise i i think he's great actor great great actor weirdo great actor great actor i'll watch anything you know he older. Yes, he's still running around doing stuff, but if you could take an AI video and you make him 35

and he's doing his stunts, at the very least, you know, have him do the, you know, I mean, is that the future of it? Do you pay the actor for the rights to use their image, their name and everything? Well, if he were still, let's say he's not like a decrepit 95-year-old man, and it was like right now, and he couldn't do certain things.

If it were still him, like, remember how they CGI'd De Niro and Pacino for the Irishman? Wait, let's... Come on, please. The scene where he's beating the guy up outside, and he does the

little kick. He does the little kick he does the little kick i'm like i love i love i love they're like they're like come here young man come here young man you're a young man you got a good future ahead of you like am i the only one what are we talking about here well they were they were trying to make that i was following that movie from when i was like 10 years old it was based on a book called so i hear you you paint houses yes they were trying to make that. I was following that movie from when I was like 10 years old. It was based on a book called So I Hear You, You Paint Houses. Yes. They were trying to make that for like 17 years. Yeah.

And they just waited too long. Yes, they did. It was still really good. It was good. But like the CGI. That was CGI though. But like imagine that like Cruise is with it. He's not like Gene Hackman was at the end, 95 years old or something.

And he could do all the acting but you know his legs don't move the same so you ai'd how he moved that could work that said if it were just ai recreating tom cruise this is where i'd love your opinion it's like to me there's something about the fact that you know it's a human being tom cruise when i'm watching a tom cruise movie right now versus like i know that's actually just ai tom cruise when i'm watching a tom cruise movie right now versus like i know that's actually just ai tom cruise that takes away the magic of it acting is all about humans it's all about that you know that human connection and you know some of the best scenes in movies in glorious bastards right it's not action it's watching that scene at the beginning that

conversation looking at their eyes acting's all about eyes, you are going to lose that if it's AI. I 100% agree. I will say, I thought the interesting way they did it was the new Indiana Jones movie. You see what happened? I haven't seen this stuff. So in the first 15 minutes, it's a flashback. And actually, I don't know, you probably can't show it. But in the first 15 minutes, it harrison ford's body younger face it looks it's harris it's like harrison ford at 35 it's you wouldn't know the difference you would not know it's a difference and he's doing it right so i don't remember if they had they might they might have had a younger actor i don't know how they did it but i remember it was his face with his it was his his current body with a younger face and it was his face with his – it was – excuse me. It was his current body with a younger face, and it was incredible. It looked like they filmed it in the 90s or the 80s.

Like you couldn't tell. It was incredible, and I'm wondering if that's the future because they could have probably done a whole Harrison Ford movie as him young Harrison Ford as young Indiana Jones. Is that the future? I don't know. Yeah. You're hitting a lot of things that I'm pretty passionate about too, as far as like how I look at this stuff. But like one of my favorite quotes ever is Al Pacino said it. I don't know if he came up with it though. I feel like it might've been something before that, but he said, it's easy to fool the eyes. It's hard to fool the heart.

And that's the real trouble with this stuff. it's like – that sounds like if it's actually Harrison Ford and you just made him look younger and it actually looked real that he looked younger but he's doing the job. Okay, I can get with that. But if it's just like an AI movie, like that example I gave of the Eyes Wide Shut spoof, it's funny and very interesting and kind of good. But if it were just a real movie i would you know there was a two minute reel you know what i mean that's what separates a great movie from like you can have two action scenes right you could have a shootout and want to shoot out of there but one's a b-rated movie one's an a-rated movie because of the acting and your connection to the characters and that's all it is so yeah i hope for you hopefully it's one of

those situations that were not replaced by AI immediately. And there's the eyes are the windows to the soul. And I will say, the way that I built this podcast, the only reason I exist is because at a time when no podcasts were even making shorts, let alone stuff that was even halfway good, I was like, that's how I could do this. So I was making shorts and making movies out of them. And I would scroll because I have very bad ocd i for a 35 second clip i would spend 30 35 hours on it usually closer about 25 but like if it were a really good one because i would go through on mute on youtube b-roll in hd of just things that i could match together to make the story, right? So I would reinvent, I might take like the movie Apocalypto and a bunch of scenes from that and mix it with

as dumb as this sounds like The Rock and Jumanji because it's a similar setting and be able to match that to the stories that Paul Rosely told in episode 124 and make a movie that's based on the literal words he's saying it's happening on the screen so what i would do is i would just watch these things on mute because i didn't want to hear what the people were saying because then i would like fuck up my head like because i'd be like well that's something different that's happening i kind of wanted to make it like a fever dream and so i learned more than ever just what makes the greatest actors and actresses what they are and the number one thing is their eyes.

They either got it or they don't. And you talk about that Inglourious Basterds scene. That part where they zoom in to Christopher Waltz, Christoph Waltz, and his eyes, his face just sinks a little bit. Or how about, are you a shelter to enemies of the state? You're like, oh!

Or the scene when he's, one of my favorite scenes is when he's making Rita strudel, like like they're at the dinner and he's just like he goes i have one more thing i had to ask you and he just stares you but i don't remember what i was by the way so you have you have godfather behind you right no better scene in my opinion about eyes than godfather one michael and you know him thinking about if he's going to pull out the gun if he's ever going to do this you know it was all eyes it was all eyes and it wasn't overacting it was like you are 100 believing like what is he about to do the tension's building and uh yeah i think that's it's a great scene that's why they didn't fire him they went and did that scene i don't know if you know that story but they were

literally like coppola was fighting for him every day the studio was like no it we don't like what the scenes we're seeing so we're gonna fire him and coppola moved fighting for him every day. The studio was like, no, fuck it. We don't like what the scenes we're seeing. So we're going to fire him. And Coppola moved that scene up. He said, we're filming this today. And him and Al Leary went in there and filmed it. And then they showed the studio bosses. And they were like, OK, he can stay. Yeah.

Because it's just like, it's perfect. I didn't know they didn't like it. They didn't want him. Like all the little, like when he goes in the bathroom, he just like holds it, you know, like fixes it. Oh, he fixes his hair. Yeah, yeah, yeah. And you're watching him from from behind you just see like the weight of the world yeah he's about to shift into this new world how when when did you first see the godfather when i was 13. okay i've seen it about 1500 times okay you look you you're you're a you're a young

looking guy that could be like 10 years i don't know know. But I won't ask your age. But here's what's funny. So the reason I say it is my wife, my wife's younger than me. My wife has never seen The Godfather. Oh, my God. So I said, okay, we're going to watch it. And I'm curious. A movie that's, how old are we talking now? 50 years old?

1972. Yeah, okay. I nuked myself a coffee. It's okay. I said to her, I was like, we're going to watch it. And I'm curious if it'll hold up. She loved it. She was – when the car blew up from Apollonia, she was like heartbroken.

Like she could – that movie is one of the few – and I say this with songs too. We've got good songs and good musicians, but what will last the test of time 10 years down the road, 20 years down the road? You wonder what a movie will be like, a song that will last the test of time 10 years down the road 20 years down the road you wonder what a movie will be like a song that will last the test time that's one of those movies it just never gets old it looks like it was made yesterday yeah especially with it because they you know it's saved at the afi and and they've digitally been able to remaster every single part to make it perfect blu-ray everything about it looks like it's made tomorrow or made yesterday it is a perfect movie every actor in there who was even many of them unknown at the time became a global superstar, right?

Yes. So, and did a million amazing movies after that. It's like, sometimes I just look at it and I'm saying to myself, I know they were miserable while they were making it. Cause all the stress behind the scenes, but at the end of that, you still got to look at it and go whoa like it's massive i can't believe we did that there's only one error in the movie you know when james conn is kicking him and he misses he misses he misses he misses how they i had they missed that i mean well he and johnny

because i had johnny yeah did you ask him about that well they did i didn't ask him specifically about the miss i don't think on camera i definitely talking about that though but you know they they did hate each other that was real like the two of them did not get along and so that scene it's funny because he misses when he's when he's hitting he takes the trash barrel and like technically hits it on the rail and he misses the punch and he misses the punch but in that scene he did actually do a lot of real shit and he broke johnny's rigged him yeah i think i heard that yeah yeah so it was like a it was like of all the places where you're gonna get something fake you got it in the scene where he actually

accidentally did it completely real too so it's like a little bit of irony by the way one of the things they teach you in exoschool is like how to it's it's mostly like stage acting and then it can translate into some movies but they teach you how to do fake fighting and that was my favorite thought oh they do it's like like that is like you it's how you face somebody and they'll do a punch but the way you're positioned you'll it's like right you're like you'll it'll be like a real slap and it's awesome because it looks entirely real and you do a whole choreographed fight in one class that i did and uh the i, I mean, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference. Like, it looks really good.

But I also kicked somebody back. Oh, you did? He's like, you went a little. You get him good. Yeah. And he's a nice guy, I felt bad. But, yeah, I kicked him a little bit. I was like, I'm not, this is why I'm not an actor. But on the, in the movies though, shout out also to the, to the cinematographers when they have like those really complex scenes,

like especially in war movies where there's a million things happening and there's actually weaponry and stuff and somehow they make it look like it's not just, ah, okay, stop. Well, how do you do John Wick?

I mean, it's incredible, right? It's incredible or daredevil. I mean, I think those are some of the best fights, like, but like,

I don't know how they do that stuff. It's incredible. What a science that is. John Wick, though, also, Keanu, legit, is nasty with a gun. He trained his ass off for that. When he goes out, I don't know if you've seen the videos of him shooting on the course. He's amazing.

There's probably Navy SEALs. I don't want to speak for him. Look at that and go. He's legit. If there was an attack going down, give a weapon yeah he's right over here he's fine he's good he's good he's really john he's really john wick yeah he's making another one there's gonna be john wick five another one five yeah do 10 do 10 do 10 dead 10 yeah fuck it age they're gonna reverse aging i believe in the next 20 years i think they're gonna figure out a way to reverse the cell the cellular uh i don't know enough about the science to give a clear opinion on that but i think we are i don't know our timeline but i think we're on a trend line towards something i think that i think that's

fair yeah yeah we're in a good time to do that i mean yeah i mean everything else is a disaster we'll be able to live for a long time as everything's going on yeah it's fine 100 yeah yeah it feels like it feels like we're kind of at that i don't want to say like tipping point but i think people have been filled with enough fighting and enough bullshit over the past say 10 15 years yeah that there is there's now what's the word i'm looking for it's settled in enough that there are enough people kind of like what the fuck i'm just gonna live my life well you hope you hope and i mean you hope that that's it's actually interesting like so i do politics as well i do uh you do i fill in for um dan abrams on sirius xm i do hosting for them i also host another show on this thing called

mediate is there anything you don't do? I'm working constantly, constantly. And I do this show called Spin Room. And like what we try to do, and I work for News Nation, and what we try to do is literally down the middle. Like there's more that we agree on than we disagree on. And even if we can disagree, can you have a normal conversation about it and like really understand the other side? Easier said than done. I think that it's a really, it's a time right now when emotions are heated. And by the way, just to circle back, I think one

of the reasons you see the popularity of certain shows, you see the popularity of certain trials, like Johnny Depp, Amber Heard, or Blake Lively, Ryan Reynolds, Justin Baldoni is because people need it. They need that that outlet they need something to distract away from something else and by the way people are tribal they love like so so just let me tell you about this so the justin baldoni blake lively thing you know they filmed all that right here right is that where what it was hobo when i moved here they were filming did you watch it i i can't get myself to watch that movie oh no i mean did you see them filming i did not see them i saw chalamet he was filming on the street oh he's a he's a he's a he's a real amazing he's like the next big one but um so we posted a poll on long

crime at this point in time how many of you agree with blake lively and how many of you agree with justin baldoni 95 or 97 were favoring justin baldoni i mean so this is tribal people take sides and they have very like when i'll do a video on sidebar and long crime and i you know present both sides i present an argument in her in her favor like this is her argument this is her filing let me break it down you're biased you're in your camp like everybody's going crazy crazy team justin it's nuts it's nuts but that's like you know i don't know if it's a distraction or people just need those sides the good guys the bad guys it's i guess i said tale is old as time i think part of it is a little bit of a meaning of life crisis yeah that's fair For some people because we now in the internet era, we have access to all the perfect lives and stuff like that. And so 99.999% of us don't have those lives.

And so what we feel like what we're doing in our world, whether it be just our life at home or what our job is, feels less sexy than ever before. Things we wouldn't have thought about 30 years ago. That I think people kind of turn that inward and then project it outward and you know they have to feel like they're on the teams with these people and people form communities online and now you like you said you get communities on fucking legal cases that this one hasn't even happened yet no yeah but a lot has been put forward yeah what. All right. So let's get into that. We'll come back to Diddy at some point. But what is going on here? They filmed this movie called It Ends With Us here in Hoboken, a lot of it.

Your favorite movie. I haven't seen it. But he is the director and co-star with her? So he formed this production company called wayfair studios that produced the film okay he's the director and co-star he was the one who was responsible for getting adapted from a book into a movie he was ahead of the whole thing and it was interesting because when the movie was in production but really more so when the movie was about to air uh was out was about to premiere um last summer you saw all this stuff online about bad

blood between him and her and you didn't know exactly what was going on but you saw these rumors something's going on with blake lively justin baldoni he's not attending the premiere what's happening were you already looking at this because you're like this well my wife was watching on social media and was like every five seconds it was stuff about blake lively and there was a lot of negative attention for blake lively there negative stories. Her old interviews were surfacing. There was a lot of anti-Blake Lively sentiment. And I was like, oh, that's, you know, it's interesting. So you fast forward to December and she files a legal complaint, not a lawsuit yet, a legal complaint. It's with the civil rights department of California. It's in not to bog down, but in order to file a lawsuit,

you need to do that first for this kind of labor dispute. So she files this complaint and she basically says, you know why I was getting all that bad press? It was Justin Baldoni and his team. They launched a smear campaign against me, an online digital media smear campaign against me, amplifying negative voices, amplifying negative stories. And you know why? Because I complained about him sexually harassing me on the set. This is a guy, this is her allegations. This is a guy who came forward, would improvise intimate scenes with me. He would talk about pornography. He was very inappropriate. And I reported my concerns and they agreed to make changes.

And out of fear that I would go public, even though I didn't, they retaliated against me, tried to smear my whole reputation. Oh, my gosh. Oh, my gosh. And she has the text messages to prove it because through a subpoena, she got all these text messages between people on Justin Baldoni side, his PR people, his crisis management person. And there was arguably a case that they were trying to create a smear campaign against her, a public relations campaign against her. And I look at this lawsuit, Hollywood looks at this complaint, and I was like, oh my gosh, she's the victim in all this.

And now I understand why there was this negative stories. But hold on to cut you off, though. Sorry. Yeah. At the same time, wasn't this when the movie was like premiering and she's forcing him into the basement, everything. So could it have been a pre shot or something? So so I will get to that. So she would be make the argument.

I was a professional. I did what I had to do, even though all this was going on. You know, the premiere is happening. And I didn't realize, ah, she would say, I didn't know the extent of why I was getting all this bad press until I started realizing it might have been his side. And then she gets a subpoena. And she gets all this information, she puts it out there. And then two days later, or a day later, the New York Times publishes a piece about all this. You know, Justin Baldoni loses his talent agency. He loses awards that he got. You know, it seems like a classic case of, my gosh, another creep in Hollywood, right? Another creep in Hollywood.

And then Justin Baldoni fires back and he goes, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. This is not the story. Files a lawsuit against the new york times blake lively ryan reynolds because i got the proof that not only did i not sexually harass her not only did she taking out of context every conversation we ever had and i'll show you but also she was the one who bullied me she was the one who actually kicked me out of my own film, took control over the movie, prevented me and my family and friends from attending the premiere and weaponized false allegations against me. She's the one who's at fault. So it's, I've seen cases

before where something can look black and white. This is like the grayest case I've ever seen. Now what happened is his team, going back to the idea of how much is important in the court of law versus the court of public opinion, because I think they're both trying to rehabilitate their careers. Of course. His team puts out this video, this footage of them behind the scenes. She had said before in her previous filing, he started sniffing me as you know, she smells so good. He was improvising kiss scenes. It was weird.

Well, when he publishes the video where she's like grabbing him and pulling him in, you see the video she talks about her spray tan so he goes oh it smells good that's different than him coming up there be like oh you smell so good different context she starts making fun of his nose saying he basically needs surgery okay she starts she she's like now now her side would say she's uncomfortable you can see she's uncomfortable with him he's's like, she's the one who got personal. That's, you know, two different sides of the story here. It's going to be up to a jury to decide. And then they post text messages that he had with Ryan Reynolds, where Ryan Reynolds was praising him. He claims that Ryan Reynolds and Taylor Swift had pressured him into accepting Blake Lively's rewrites of a key scene.

So it's a big, big legal mess wait taylor swift yeah stepping in i know she's friends with her so pressure so she's not a defendant in this case whatsoever she's not named but the allegation is from justin baldoni look blake lively ryan reynolds are a-list stars and they start coming to me she wants to make changes to the script i'm trying i don't want to give her full control but i don't know what to do i'm not their level like if they want to make changes i'll try to push back lightly and when i tried to push back blake gladly comes back and feels like i didn't really feel like you accepted my changes so so he makes the allegation he was invited to her penthouse one night he shows up and ryan reynolds and taylor swift they're like i'm

paraphrasing but basically like wasn't blake's rewrites of that scene just great isn't she has such a great mind and so he felt the pressure from a listers like them now taylor swift does not want any part of this ryan reynolds has been trying to get dismissed from this case he's like anything he goes i have no part in this and there was an allegation wait he's trying to get dismissed from the case that he filed he didn't file that that. That Baldoni filed against him. Yes, because he wasn't a part of the case that his wife filed against Baldoni. Baldoni turned around and filed a lawsuit against Blake Lively and Ryan Reynolds. That's how he got brought up.

And the reason is because Baldoni says, not only do I feel like he got himself involved, but B, he went to the talent, my talent agency and said, I'm a sexual predator. And he basically, yeah. And what's interesting is Ryan Reynolds has made the counter argument. I should be dismissed because even if I said that, first of all, that's not defamation and B, it was my opinion. I actually believed it. And also I should be protected under the law from these kinds of like retaliatory lawsuits when I'm just,'s my free speech right to say what i said um so it's a big back and forth about who's going to be dismissed then you have the new york times involved and you have all this this is a trial that's scheduled for 2026 if it happens 2026 2026 christ we gotta talk about this for another year and it's it's been a big battle in the court of public opinion and right now there are people who believe

that from what they've seen so far without the full picture and each lawsuits, like over a hundred pages, there are people who've read all of it. They believe he's in the right and she's in the wrong. There are also those in Hollywood who believe she's in the right, he's in the wrong. So it's going to be, you know, I keep getting this question. Do they want to go to trial? Do they want to go to trial? I think it's a risk, you know, her going on the stand, him going on the stand. There's now, I don't believe, yeah, there would be no cameras in this courtroom because it would also be in New York. So, again, there's no cameras in New York. Wait, but it's state court, right?

No cameras in state court unless it's very limited circumstances. Even in New York. Yeah, it's a problem. So, I don't, you know, it'll be interesting to see if it goes to trial. There's a lot riding on it. I don't think Ryan Reynolds wants any part in this. Yeah, because he's like, he's got a perfect public brand prior to this yeah right he's like mr deadpool lovable to the fans like the greatest marketer in hollywood among the actors arguably i'm a huge fan you know but she

had to do this because she was like my career was tanking people were doing all this negative press about me well guess what um if you take her allegations as true, I'm the victim. Now, if his allegations are true, you'd say, why would you file a lawsuit against Justin Baldoni knowing he had all this to prove that you were the one taking control of the film or you were the one who were weaponizing false allegations? But look, you don't know what to believe. The truth is you have no idea what happened. It all goes down to one thing, whether or not he actually sexually harassed her on that set. And you made a great point before about the Combs case. You said, can't two things be true at once. There could be instances where they're jovial, they're collaborative, they're joking around about things, they're personal, but it doesn't give somebody the right to step over the line. And that can be one instance,

two instances can be sexual harassment. Or it's misinterpreted too. Yeah. Yeah. So it's, I don't know. I just try to present both sides. I try to present the legal arguments for both sides. They're represented by incredible attorneys making some really good legal arguments.

Yeah. She just hired a CIA guy to be her PR person too. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. He was high up. Yeah.

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So it's, it's a lot at stake here and if you're justin baldoni i mean you know his career's over at the moment if he does not win this yeah and uh but again with public attention you know favoring him you wonder if it helped him a little bit i mean he's really in the news all the time yeah yeah a lot of people had never heard

of him before yeah and now he's like i didn't watch him on that show. I don't remember. He was on some show. I definitely didn't. But I think there's two underlying themes here, and this isn't a statement to say who's right or who's wrong in the case. Even before you look at the actual facts of the case, on one side, I'll just even remove Ryan Reynolds for a minute. Just call Blake Lively enough. On one side, you have Blake Lively, superstar, Taylor Swift's best friend, A-list of the A-list, gazillionaire, and then fuck it. Yeah, her husband's Ryan Reynolds too. They are the creme de la creme, the elite, if you will.

On the other side, you have the guy who started his own production company is a lot less known. He's not perfect looking. He's got a little bit of a beak nose. And suddenly – You don't think he's a good looking guy? No, I think he's a good looking dude. But he's not like a – he's not an 11 Hollywood heartthrob, right? So like he's relatable.

He's an underdog is my point. And at the same time, this is happening two years after the Depp heard thing that flipped on its face, the idea that it could always just be the man abusing the woman. So you have two things happening. You have a cultural shift in how we view abuse cases, not across the board, but just like as maybe this is a possibility too. And you have this like underdog versus the elites mentality. So before you even look at the case, people are, they see themselves in that guy more than they do in the perfect Hollywood couple.

Right, right, right. I think that's a very, very fair assessment. I think it's, we've also live in a culture right now where nothing is what it seems on its face. There's always like, well, what's really going on? Well well if you do a little bit more research and sometimes that's good sometimes it's not um and and it comes down to it comes down to the law and the evidence look i i think you you go back to johnny depp uh amber heard he had a incredible defense team he put on an incredibly strong argument he muddied the waters a lot and also hired a

hot lawyer that helped well you know look she became a superstar after that she got like became partner by the way they all became celebrities ben shu his attorney good friend of mine like they all are are superstars and that is a big thing for lawyers you know i mean that helps that helps you become a big name start Start with Johnny Cochran, right? I mean, it's a big thing. Gloves don't fit. You must quit. Yeah.

You interviewed Brian McMonagle, right? I love that you know that. 115. Brian's awesome. He's a big name. He made his name with Cosby. I mean, he made his name for a lot, but he was very well known for Cosby. I do want to say he's one of the greatest guys ever, too.

He is awesome, and he's brilliant. I'm lucky to have the's one of the greatest guys ever too. He is awesome. And he's brilliant. Um, he is, we're luck. I'm lucky to have the opportunity to get it, you know, get his legal perspective. He's,

Oh, you do often. Oh yeah. On sidebar a lot, particularly about Diddy and other high profile cases, because it's different. It's different representing a criminal defendant versus also representing a high profile celebrity criminal defendant.

It's very different. Um, but he's, he's brilliant, brilliant, brilliant legal mind. I've known him since I was like three or four years old. Really? Yeah. He's, he's from my hometown. Oh, well tell my side. Yeah. Really, really his,

he and his wife are really tight with, with my parents. So I've known him forever, but I really appreciated that sit down I did with him because he's, he's tough to get going. He's such a humble guy. Like he's a brilliant talker like in the courtroom, but he's one of those guys where it's like, he'll talk for five minutes and look at you and go your turn, you know, on a podcast. But, you know, I'd always looked at him and he was such a, like growing up, he's literally like the greatest guy ever.

And the most moral guy too, is how I would describe him. But, and he would not be able to say this on camera, but I can say this as not being him. A lot of people he defends probably are guilty. You know? And so I was so curious, like how he could put that apart. And the way he described it in that podcast was so perfect. And like the heaviness with which he approaches it.

Yeah. Not just from the perspective of like the heaviness with which he approaches it yeah not just from the perspective of like the people involved be it the victims and also you know whose life is on the line in the courtroom but also the the constitutional aspect of it of like all right you your job is to put the government to the test yeah because that's how the system works and like it we need guys like that sitting in that seat and and doing the job he does. It's not an easy job, not an easy job, but particularly, you know, if you're defending the worst of the worst, I mean, you become a target, you put a target on your back. It's not easy.

So I give him a ton of credit. He's brilliant. I think it reemphasizes the idea. Everybody's entitled to due process. And, you know, even cases like, I talk about this on News Nation a lot, the whole immigration issue. And like, you know, you can have a conversation that there are people who don't belong in this country. Criminals do not belong in this country, but we have a system in place. There is due process put in place. You have to follow those protocols before certain actions can be taken. That's just the way our system is. You want to change the laws? You want to change

the system? Go right ahead. But you got to go through congress to do it and so um you know the our system is in place where you know even if it seems all the evidence is there to convict somebody they still deserve a trial they still if they plead guilty you still have to ensure they know what their rights are what they're giving up because there are safeguards in place you don't want to live in you know the worst case i say this all the time the brian koberger case i think the evidence as i mentioned seems very strong that he committed this quadruple homicide but the worst thing that would happen is if there is a mistake that's made where he is convicted and that conviction is overturned and they have to retry him. Think about the pain

that's going to be for the family. So I say in the cases of the most high-profile defendants, where they look guilty of sin, you have to dot every I, cross every T, make sure nothing is wrong, because the worst thing that would happen is, you know, for everybody, is to have a conviction overturned and then a retrial. It's incredibly painful, time consuming. It's a weakness. You have a trial 2020, 2025, have a retrial until 2028, 2029, something like that. Evidence gets stale.

You might not get a conviction a second time around. So it becomes very, very important to make sure that everybody's rights are preserved in every single way, even in the Mangione case. I mean, again, you have to ensure, I talked about that whole idea about was his rights violated in Altoona, Pennsylvania? They have to make sure they weren't because that could really be a problem down the road. Yeah, and that's the thing. It's the bigger picture. If someone is guilty as hell, but the system was broken on the federal side for the evidence to be collected for them to be guilty. The people who are victims in that case, my heart goes out to them like crazy because I can't even imagine what that must be like. But analytically, almost like you're being a computer looking at the system, the unfortunate reality is you got to let that person go.

So going back to Harvey Weinstein for a second, I think that there, I was in that trial. I think there was strong evidence he committed those crimes. I don't disagree with the guilty verdict, but conviction was overturned in New York. You know why? Because evidence was let in that shouldn't have been allowed in. And so- What was that evidence? It was called Molyneux witnesses.

And basically he was charged with respect to certain women, but then the judge allowed other women to testify about uncharged conduct to show a pattern. That's quite prejudicial, right? Yeah. the evidence presented he deserved that that conviction overturned and if i believe that that is somebody who is a criminal right who who i still believe that he's entitled to have his rights not violated and that's important because now you have a retrial what's going to happen now bill cosby again you know look his conviction was overturned because of a an agreement a deal that you know was shouldn't have been made and it was made. And it was a misrepresentation. He relied on it. He's entitled to make sure his rights aren't violated. Everybody has that right, even the worst of the worst. And it's not because I like them. It's not because I agree with them. It's because you have to make sure that the process is followed. Otherwise,

the consequences could be quite severe. It's though easier this this is what sucks and it's just how it is the two people you just mentioned Harvey Weinstein and Bill Cosby were famous people with ridiculous access to money yeah and so they got the greatest lawyers who can go not only dig up the evidence for these kinds of things but then be able to get it through the court system at you know blank check type situation whereas the regular guy who has that happen and is sitting in his jail cell or whatever you know he may never get his day in court about that it's it's unfortunate right you know everybody's entitled to a lawyer you're entitled to a public defender but do they have the same kind of resources and

sometimes the government if you can make a good argument, you know, to the court, you know, we need these certain experts to testify for the defense. Sometimes those will be paid. But, you know, it's limited circumstances. I 100% agree. They say if you can afford the best, you'll get the best. But I don't know. Yeah. Yeah.

Now, Harvey Weinstein was – so you were in the trial. So – well, no, I wasn't a witness. I was, I was, I was saying you were attending. So I was attending and I'll tell you this much. This is what's so interesting. This episode is brought to you by Saratoga. As, as we talk about Harvey Weinstein. So I was in that courtroom for the trial and I was out in the freezing cold in February

to try to get a seat into that trial. It was, my hands froze over. What was this, 2020? This was 2020. It was right in the freezing cold in February to try to get a seat into that trial. It was, my hands froze over. What was this, 2020? This was 2020. It was right before the pandemic. This was like right before the pandemic. It was like weeks away. And I sat right behind him, like right behind him.

I'm sorry to hear that. Yeah, I was literally right behind him. And it was a fascinating case because Harvey Weinstein, there was nobody bigger in Hollywood than him. And to hear what these women testified to was really difficult. And you had a jury that had a split verdict. They didn't find him guilty across the board, which again, I think emphasizes a jury that carefully considers the evidence and the facts. And it was the tension in that courtroom. There was a point, and I might be mispronouncing her name. You probably know it. Annabella Scioria. She was in The Sopranos.

Yes. She was a witness who testified. Gloria Trillo. you could hear a pin drop in that courtroom and it was packed. And I remember at one point, she thought somebody was videotaping her in the courtroom and she stopped and she was like, is somebody videotaping me? And like, we all looked and it was nobody. She goes, I'm the major. But like, that was the concern. That's the concern that they have about having to re, I mean, think about what she's testifying to. What did she say? Obviously he abused her. What was the nature? I believe some, it was a long time ago but i think it was like something about her come him coming to her apartment i don't remember exactly but like she would go you have to go detail by detail about what you remember to understand the circumstances

of circumstances of it it's not easy to go through it's not easy to hear about this um and you know to have everybody listening in and taking notes. And it was quite an experience. It was quite a trial to see because it was the first, you know, it was me too, you know, somebody being held accountable. And he had great lawyers. I'm friends with his lawyers, great lawyers. Who were his lawyers?

He was Arthur Idalla. Yes. Great, great lawyer. Love him. He's great. And Donna Rotulo, great, great counsel. And, you know, she talked about how she got a lot of hate for what she was doing. And I didn't think that was fair. She's representing her client who is entitled to a defense. And she takes a lot of heat because she had to grill, she had to cross-examine these victims or alleged victims. And she's just doing her job. So it was unfortunate. But it was a crazy experience. And I remember when the verdict came down, you know, there were deputies lining every aspect of that courtroom. They didn't know what was going to happen.

Somebody jumps up, whatever. And when they said guilty, it was like, whoa, whoa. Was there anyone in there supporting him? No. Yeah. I didn't see. I never saw his wife. I think, I mean, he had PR people with him.

He had his lawyers with him, but I didn't see any support for him as far as I remember. No. Yeah. He was toxic. He was toxic. Yeah. I mean, he was also the ugliest fucking person. Oh, my God.

The stuff that we heard in that trial. I mean, even. His anatomy. It was like like it was crazy they were like he had like an egg dick or some well he had to take like injections and things like that it was I couldn't believe what I was listening to honestly like it sounds like what he did was usually just abused people but anyone who actually consented to it should be put in jail i mean well jesus christ yeah and i i think there was an argument there like you had to the it wasn't a trial about him as a human being or him his personality if he was yelling at people or tough on people whatever was or it was about did he commit these acts these these illegal sex acts

and that's what the jury had to consider and again they were very careful because they didn't convict him across the board yeah and the and the one thing about Weinstein was starting the whole Me Too thing is that I agree with you. I think it's an important moment for people, victims who had felt like they were not able to speak out in the past, especially because it's more powerful people than them who had taken advantage of them and stuff like that. I think that's such an important social moment. The sad part about the movement though, to me, is that unfortunately you also had people infected who just, I don't know what the fuck it was, what's wrong with them, but they want attention. And what that does to me is you suddenly get all these claims, not necessarily against a guy like Weinstein, but against some of the other people who were – who had claims against them. And once some of them are then proven to very clearly have never happened, it creates a boy who cried wolf scenario in society, which I have seen.

I think that has happened to where people are like, yeah, fucking everyone claims this, this or that. And now we're back at that point sometimes where people are like, you know, a victim comes forward and they go, all right, hon, what do you really, you know what I mean? And that's a tough spot to be. Cause I can't imagine being in that position, especially like think about a guy like Weinstein and, and how powerful he was to hold people's careers in the palm of their hand and to have to maybe still exist in that ecosystem, like out there in Hollywood, you know, making a living or whatever. And this guy's always around and you know what he did to you, but you can't do anything about it. That's like the worst, like that sends a shiver up my spine thinking about that. It's the same thing with the Combs case, right? If you, you know, these cases against high profile

people, the number one question is why did you wait years to come forward with a lawsuit? Why did you come wait years before you go to authorities? And you say, I was in fear. I didn't think I had the power that anyone would listen to me, that my career would be tarnished, my jeopardy, you know, my life would be tarnished. Now, I agree with you. There are those who also come out of the woodwork as well. And that takes away from the legitimate stories or the allegedly legitimate stories. And that's a, that's a big battle. Um, and again, I think you're going to see it amplified during the Sean Combs case as well. Um, but yeah, I mean, for, it's unfortunate because with any good thing that happens, people will take advantage of it. And, you know, they feel that, look, do you see

the thing that happened with, uh, Jayz where the law the 13 year old that came on claim that case that case is done the case is done yeah now why was that case dismissed i think there's a fair argument that the story didn't add up his lawyers were picking apart this woman's story that you know she claims this happened we have documentary evidence to prove it didn't he wasn't even in the same place. Right. And, and that case was ultimately dropped and it becomes a question. Why was it brought? How was it brought? Why did she come forward? I mean, does she really believe these claims happened, but her recollection is different. I mean, we don't have a clear answer, but

at a worst case assumption, imagine the story wasn't real. And Jay-Z now was, you know, falsely accused of abusing a 13-year-old girl back in 2000. So, you know, look, it doesn't mean, excuse me, it doesn't mean it didn't necessarily happen. I, we don't know, but the fact that you go forward with that case, knowing that you don't necessarily have the evidence to back it up is a problem. Yeah. And I've talked about this before, but with the Jay-Z thing, first of all, anyone who would be convicted, righteously so, in a court of law of abusing a kid, fucking throw him in prison and lock away the key. I don't care what they've done or whatever. Like that shouldn't have to be said, but let's preface it with that that said there has been like a weird obsession i think and this has been a few years now with people wanting a guy like jay-z to be that guy like i don't know

what it is again if for some reason there were facts that came out and he actually was great throw it were terrible but throw him in prison but like people are obsessed with oh wait till the jay-z stuff comes out now i will say say this and this is anecdotal and counts for very little. I had heard whispers and I know a lot of people who had heard whispers about Diddy for years. Been hearing whispers about him since 2016 or 2017 and I'm a fucking regular schmo. I've never heard that about Jay-Z. Yeah. It's – as much as we love to see the success the success the success story people

rising they love the fall and i think it's also this idea of we talked about before there's got to be more to the story what's hollywood really up to what's the political scheme what are the rich and powerful really up to and it amplified with the diddy case right you know this idea oh you know everybody was attending his parties if he's of this, who else was a part of it? The Epstein situation, right? The Epstein files, everybody wants to know who was involved, who was, it's that idea of justice. It's idea of how do we see, how do we take down the most powerful level of, we immediately assume there's corruption at the highest levels. There's bad actors at the highest levels i'm sure but it's not always the case and uh it's unfortunate because the people get that sense of excitement right at seeing at seeing a story like this break yeah but that's there's

something wrong with us about that yeah because you should never again where the people are doing these things they should be caught and rooted out the whole bit. But you should never be rooting and hoping for someone without having any evidence that like they actually are this monster. And that's – And by the way, a conviction, a case that's dropped, a not guilty verdict, that won't change people's perspective on it. That's right. Yeah. At all. I don't want it to be true.

At all. Okay. Even if whatever happens in any of these cases, people will believe whatever it is they want to believe. That's not going to change. It has obviously legal consequences, but I go back to the idea of there's the court of law and there's a court of public opinion. And sometimes one battle, success in one area is not going to translate into a success into the other. And again, it goes back to also, we want, we have this whole elite versus main street kind of thing going on in society right now. And people it's, it's just, it's like a blood war in that way online. And everyone, you know, behind a Twitter account can say whatever they

want, regardless of who they are. And I was actually, I was talking with a few guys who work out in Hollywood recently, and it was like a really refreshing perspective to hear from them and like how they were going through how people see this stuff. And they're like, yeah, there's fucked up people like Diddy. Like there's some fucked up shit. Some of the business is fucked up and the people suck. And like where that is, like put it in court, 100%. But they're like, we don't all live under we don't like operate under the same roof and have a group chain every day like whose place are we going to

fuck today it doesn't work like that it doesn't that's not how it works no it was there's this aspect that hollywood's bizarre right like what they're up to is bizarre i'll give you a funny story i'm not going to name the name but i'll tell you a funny story so i'm in with my dad um and we're um going in this elevator uh at this hotel he was staying in the city so okay so we're going up and in the elevator was a very very high profile a-list movie star okay i can't tell you who it was i can't but it was very funny we walk in and my dad and i look very similar we have a radio show together, always in fashion. I encourage everybody to check it out. We look very similar.

We walk in and the guy goes, without breaking a beat, he goes, whoa, what are you two boys up to tonight? Being like he thought I was like we were together. Like he thought that we were like some sort of couple or like I was a – And he looks like you? Yeah. And I was like, what? And he goes, yeah, what do you guys – I'm like, no. And I said you yeah and i was like what and he goes yeah what do you get i'm like no and i said his name i was like no no no i was like i was like you've been in i i promise you i said i was like you were not you've been in hollywood no i was like

you've been in hollywood this is my father it was it was crazy it was crazy and he was like he he was super embarrassed like that's what he immediately thought but like you know i don't know why that's why his mind went there immediately but that's why people think like oh man hollywood's messed up it's a little yeah it's a little weird it was weird it was right nice guy afterwards we you know but i love that you hit him with like the first name no yeah yeah yeah i said his name i said his name i was like you've been in hollywood way too long he got it he got it he got it i can't tell you who it is i'll tell you off air but i can't tell you yeah people are gonna be upset that they're blue balls on that yeah but yeah it's it's not it's not one roof and it's not you know one set way of doing things but

also like people the allure of like they're different than you they're above you they're in this separate universe people want to tear that down and i and i get that where it's taken advantage of for sure you know and obviously you've seen these cases but you might you mentioned the epstein case you know did you cover a lot of that in law and crime i did it was complicated right it was complicated because obviously you had her case glaine maxwell's case he died um and then it was civil litigation it was like what do we find out from the lawsuits that were filed against glaine maxwell and in the estate and i gotta tell you when the epstein files were released none of it was a shocker i mean it wasn't bombshells we knew a lot of this information from

prior already out it was already what was interesting was some of it put a little more context i think the address book was interesting remember, you might be listed in his address book, a contact, but it doesn't mean you were involved in alleged sex trafficking or anything like that. Okay. You, you just, he was a guy who knew everybody. He did. He was a guy who was connected to so many different people. Now there's a people who were like, oh shoot. I was, I wish I wasn't in his contact book. Having said that you do wonder who else knew exactly what was a part of it and who else partook in it. I mean, look, Ghislaine Maxwell was convicted of this, you know, crimes related to the sex trafficking. To nobody.

To nobody. Now, it doesn't mean that she should be found not guilty. She should. But who else was involved in it? It's a fair question. It's a fair question. And I don't know if we'll ever see any kind of movement on that you know we won't yeah there's there's too

much this one 1 000 billion trillion percent you don't have to put it in a court of law it is intelligence related and so we will never ever see. And this is what was so, like, sinisterly brilliant about them from, like, an intelligence perspective. All they had to do was take a picture with you. All they had to do. Like, can we pull up – I pulled this up on podcast before. I know it's blank on me. We're talking about it. But can we pull up the picture of Elon Musk and Ghislaine Maxwell?

Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah. it's blank on me we're talking about it but can we pull up the picture of elon musk and guillain-maxwell oh yeah okay now elon technically like that point that people usually don't ever loop him in with this but like there's 0.01 of him that will always technically have to answer for this stupid fucking picture if we pull up images right there it's gonna be the first one do the second one actually because that's better because it's the full body and you can literally see the body language here this is at some event yeah and he's walking i don't know maybe towards the bar i don't know what's on the other side and a photographer who's paid to be at the event says oh mr musk and quickly stops and he doesn't even turn all the way the picture but this little psycho bitch yeah is right behind him and just leans in there like the creepy

woman that she is and now she's got him on picture yeah yeah it's a good point it's a good point you it's it's by the way if you go to the photo of epstein with his hand over galena maxwell do you know they're selling the jacket they're auctioning epstein jacket they're auctioning off and i have it yeah they have it they're auctioning it The Epstein jacket. They're auctioning it off. They have it? Yeah, they have it. They're auctioning it off. Somebody's going to buy that. Why? I have no idea. They're also auctioning off his address book too. It's like, why would you want that piece of memorabilia?

But yeah, 100% agree. You create that photo. That's a contact. That's a contact. Look, when Harvey Weinstein was implicated, okay, even before the charges, like we had the New York Times piece, how many videos did you see of compilations where people are thanking harvey right oh yeah oh thank you so much you know this is my brother you know thank you so much it's like doesn't mean they didn't know what was going on i mean they may be and they did either right you don't know they you

don't know what they knew what they didn't know but it showed his power his influence how much he helped people's careers. And obviously the last thing they wanted from a PR point of view is to have to explain themselves. What did you know about Harvey Weinstein? Did you hear anything? I mean, that's not what they wanted and that's what creates. It doesn't. And that's the thing. Like, are there people who definitely knew? Yeah. Good luck figuring out which ones did and didn't though. Like how many of those people were in the casting rooms with him? How many of those people talked to someone who later whispered to them a powerful person hey you know what harvey did to me the whole thing was these victims were afraid to tell anyone about it yeah you know they're not running and telling oprah about that and it's like we

we make these people guilty of things and again like if they were and they did know something and fucking fry him i'm with you but it just it muddies the water and and to your point like when you go through the epstein black book which i have a lot of fucking times you know i always find something new in there and it doesn't like for example the guy had the contact of every preeminent contractor in the new york city area yeah because he liked real estate and had a lot of fucking houses and built shit and whatever the fuck it was. Does that mean that these contractors

were building like dungeons for him? No. Or that any of them, more than three of them actually worked for him? Right. It doesn't. Yeah.

But then, when I look at page 30 and I see Robert F. Kennedy and he's got fucking, whatever it was, 11 to 13 contacts in there, including his now ex-deceased wife her maid of honor who also happens to be carrie cuomo which is just like chef's kiss right there

but like when i see that i'm like i don't even have 11 contacts for my parents and grandparents put together so you know what he can tell, we were out there doing a fossil. That's why I went on the plane. But I don't like, am I really going to believe that? The fact that you're asking those questions and legitimately asking those questions is the problem. And I think that that was the headache that was Hollywood and politics for a while with everything that was going on with Epstein. When he was arrested, it was like, i say the same thing with combs like when he was arrested you i did wonder people there was a question so there's this lawyer that who filed a bunch of lawsuits on behalf of alleged victims of sean combs uh and he said that people were already contacting him to settle lawsuits before they were sued that's not busby is it it is it is

so i was wondering i was like who are these high profile people that are reaching out to you to try to settle claims before you're named in a lawsuit? How many people, when Sean Combs was arrested, are like, oh, shoot. You know, like, by the way, we don't know and we may never know who the government spoke to in preparation of this case. They might have had interviews with celebrities that will not be called as witnesses at this case. Why? Because they can, they have a fact-finding mission, right? So they might've had speak to people

who will give them a piece of information that leads them then to a witness they do wanna call or that leads them to another piece of physical or digital evidence that might help their case, but doesn't mean they're gonna call them. And so we don't know the scope of what was happening in the last two years, year and a half of an investigation.

We don't know. We might never know. But it does become a question when you see these high-profile people who are – and by the way, it also is a point of do they mention anything? As far as I know, Ashton Kutcher, who used to be good friends with Sean Combs, hasn't said anything about him since all this. I don't think he has. Okay, right?

J-Lo hasn't said anything about him. You don't want to say okay right um JLo hasn't said anything about him you don't want to say anything about him so it becomes a bad Affleck that he left her yeah well yeah I don't know I don't know what the circumstances were but I will say it's basically like you know it's a nightmare for them it's a headache for them about how to respond to something like this yeah it's I mean if you're a publicist right now in Hollywoodllywood you are and i'm making a lot of money and i never believed the idea that oh sean combs is going to avoid criminal responsibility because he's going to name names oh that was the that was the i was like wait a minute no no no first of all what they charged him with they he would never work out a deal where it didn't include significant

prison time he does not want to spend one day more in jail behind boards okay so he's never gonna agree to that number two you just said he's the head of a criminal enterprise a sex trafficking operation who else are you gonna name that's bigger than him he's the head of the alleged head of the the operation i i mean so i never believed everybody's like oh he's gonna name names he's they were like oh he his safety's in danger now i was like i don't i don't believe it i don't here's why i think i might be with you on that yeah because he's a fucking moron i mean there if there are brain cells up there there's like two on a last chance power drive on the boulevard of broken heroes there was not a lot happening this is a guy who was placed on placed into his position when he was 23 with no chops, no understanding, and suddenly, immediately when he's placed as the head of this thing called Bad Boy Records, signs Notorious B.I.G. and is like the biggest record label executive in Hollywood.

That's what made his career. If he was put there, he was a useful idiot and this is one place like epstein horrible guy but like if you really look at the case you have to give him this as far as like what his abilities were outside the sick shit he did he was a spy he knew what he was doing this was this was not an absolutely completely dumb guy or whatever so So Epstein, in my opinion, if you look at the case, it's pretty clear he knew where a lot of bodies were buried. Maybe not all of them, like people say, but he knew where a lot of them were at up to the most powerful people. Diddy, I think he's probably used as more of a useful idiot on a not need to know basis. And so I don't think, you know,

and maybe I'm wrong and I kind of hope I'm wrong about this if that is the case and he's a part of something bigger like i don't even know if he would be able to name people or who's actually using him because i think he's just a sick fuck that they probably took advantage of being a sick fuck and said all right go be a sick fuck now on our dime well the allegations put forward are that he has the tapes, right? He's got tapes of people that were specifically used and kept for a reason to exert his influence, exert intimidation. And you wonder what those tapes will be. And by the way, I do wonder if they're presented in a trial, like how much we'll know about them, right? There has to be, they're not just gonna, I I just don't imagine. I think there's going to be, have to be a protocol put in place. There might have to be sealed where they're not just going to play it on a video screen for, no, that's not true. They'll have it for the, here's what I think they're actually going to do. If I actually had to take a guess, this is what I think they're going to do. I think the jurors are going to have video screens in front of them with headphones and are going to

watch it and nobody in the courtroom else is going to see it. And then afterwards, a witness will be questioned about it in front of the jury, but I don't think any of us will ever know what those videos are or the details of those videos or ever see those videos. Well, that is the thing. Like when I'm saying the people he would name, I'm going off what you're saying as far as like the actual operations like trafficking but to your point the people who might have like i don't know like enjoyed these sick activities yeah absolutely will involve some extremely famous people that could be maybe that could be a bargaining chip no i i again i don't i don't see it i i think because there would be no deal that he would have taken and i don't think like i will tell you this much i do find it very interesting that we are what is it may oh it's april april 5th okay so we're a month

away from the trial okay he's charged with racketeering conspiracy which means you are in agreement with others to further a illegitimate criminal criminal enterprise and sex trafficking and he's the only one charged in this case yeah crazy so it makes me wonder are there going to be people who testify who will say will be questioned by his defense counsel did you work out a deal did you get immunity to testify i mean who are his co-conspirators who are they who are they the assistants the the managers i don't know i don't know who they are is it and that's a that's the same concern that we have with the glenn maxwell case yes trafficking and nobody yeah is it in that scenario though that's crazy that scenario who's he's in agreement with who's he who's the conspiracy with usually you have a conspiracy

and they're all charged together right you know what it is yeah there's a conspiracy the brothers i think the alexander brothers are charged with the conspiracy conspiracy together the real estate guy yeah the brothers make sense you have to have an agreement between one or one or more people um and it has to be over its steps taken in furtherance of that agreement okay uh what would you just agree with himself i mean who are the people now the problem with this federal case and I've been following almost every filing is, we do not know what the evidence is. The defense does, but we don't because all of it's been sealed. And if you have any filings, you see a half of it's redacted. It's all blacked out. I don't know what the evidence is. I don't know what the case is. We are going to see on May. And then we'll have a much clearer picture of the angle of their case, who they plan to call. I believe again – You've read the indictment, right? Oh, I've read all three and I've read all the filings. But I would say I'm fairly confident that victim one in the case is Cassandra Ventura. I think they just announced yesterday that victim one is going to identify herself.

So it – We're going to identify herself so it we're gonna find out cassandra ventura would identify i don't know about the the other the prosecutors are trying to have victims two through four not identify themselves so they would testify as jane doe number one jane number two we'll see if the court agrees but at the very least um we'll know who victim one is and there you said there's three indictments are those in separate jurisdictions they're just a met they amend the charges. It was interesting because you had the first indictment. Then you had the second indictment, which clarified some of the language.

And now this third one that has added two charges, and they're all respect to victim two in this case. We don't know who victim two is, but it regards conduct from 2021 through 2024, which is interesting because if that timeline is accurate, then that is after Sean Combs was initially hit with that lawsuit from Cassandra Ventura back in 2023. So he allegedly engaged in illegal behavior even through 2024 through his arrest. Now, we don't know who victim two is, but the new charges are sex trafficking of victim two and transportation to engage in prostitution with victim two. And it'll be interesting to see who this person is, although, again, we might not know. You had talked about this earlier with like it could just be he's a part of these.

Technically, if you're the defense, you could say, well, these are consensual legal freak offs or whatever. That's the best defense. What is that? Do we know any of the evidence yet of the transportation aspect of it? Because that would mean you are – if I'm incorrect here, please correct me. But that would mean you are, in this case, as Sean Diddy comes, planning to have other people picked up probably against their will. The new BMO VI Porter MasterCard is your ticket to more more perks more points more flights more of all the things you want in a travel rewards card and then some get your ticket to

more with the new bmo vi porter mastercard and get up to 2400 in value in your first 13 months I'm your host, Peter Slevin. against their will? Based on the filings that I've seen, it seems that it would be hotel receipts, like hotel invoices, probably travel records, either by private plane, maybe car. And that becomes important, particularly with, I believe, I think it's fair to say that commercial sex workers will testify about what they saw and what they heard and how they were transported from A to B. What was that kind of process? Who gave them the money? How did it work? So I think it's definitely going to be a case built on documentary evidence it's going to be based on those receipts um and what to what extent they exist but i think that those are things that prosecutors even their initial filings have talked about yeah and this this starts next month starts next month it's crazy this case i didn't think was going to start this soon. Like, he got arrested in September of 2024, now trial in May.

It doesn't usually happen that way, especially for a federal case. But he is of the opinion that he doesn't want to spend one more day in jail. There is an argument that he has been putting the fire to the feet of the prosecutors, basically saying, I want to go to trial as soon as possible. Okay, I don't want to spend one more day. He may think he really has a legitimate shot to be found not guilty and he can move forward. Because look, from a state point of view, look from us, if he's acquitted, right, if he's acquitted, he's not facing charges, criminal charges in another jurisdiction, their statute of limitations issues. Those, if there were potential state charges in new york or other places there

those claims might be too old they might be time barred for example the uh cassandra ventura 2016 tape they can't bring them up on i don't know if it's assault or battery in california but they can't bring them on those charges the claims too old too old. Too long ago. It's too old. So his next battle will be all the civil cases and trying to fight that. If he, you know, but he wants to get out of there. He, by the way, I haven't mentioned this yet. I think that the reason he surrendered himself in New York before he was arrested,

the reason he never skipped town, you know, surrendered his passport. He, I believe, he legitimately believed, in my opinion, that he was going to make make bail that he was going to be let out and if that was the case he probably wouldn't want to go to trial right now he probably let's push this trial out as long as possible i'll be on house arrest whatever but because he was denied bail and i think was shocked that he was denied bail he was like i gotta get out of here let's go to trial as soon as possible yeah he's a narcissistic fuck he thinks that the whole world operates around him and but that like that takes an extra level of complete lack of self-awareness thinking that

well well no from a legal point of view he he wouldn't be the only person accused of sex trafficking who could be let out on bail there was the you know the guy who headed up abercrombie and fitch yes mike jeffries he was let out i mean he was out on bail and look he's older he's not accused of racketeering this is diddy though yeah he's facing serious more serious charges um and more extensive charges so but he he thought that he could make an argument i'm cooperative i'll always show up you don't have to worry but there was an element of danger there was an element that he was a flight risk and there was evidence that he was intimidating witnesses and alleged victims in this case. What's the evidence of that? while he's been in the Metropolitan Detention Center, the MDC out in Brooklyn, he has been reaching out to or using like third party channels to reach out to witnesses or have people reach out

to these witnesses. And so when that evidence was presented to like this guy, imagine he's out, even if you and he actually did something interesting. He put forward a bail package where he was going to hire a private security firm to watch his every movements. There was an argument. Can we trust them? You're hiring them. You're paying them. But it didn't work. It didn't work. And the judge, he kept every court he went to denied him bail and he gave up the fight. Do you think that it is going to be more of an advantage to him or disadvantage to him that he's pushing for the trial to be so fast like do you think it's harder for the prosecution to make this case or for him to defend it so the idea is you try to rush the prosecution because you feel like they're not ready and okay the other way of looking is no the prosecutors

are ready are you going to be ready i mean he was just hit with a superseding indictment yesterday is he going to be ready in a month what's the new new one say? It's the same stuff, but now he's hit with two more charges with regard to a victim two. So sex trafficking a victim two. It's actually interesting. Excuse me. Sex trafficking a victim two and transportation to engage in prostitution a victim two. But there's also a change in the language a little bit. There was – I don't know why they did this. The prosecutors made it clear that if he was brandishing a weapon, it was towards a female victim and that he held a female victim over a balcony.

I believe they just added the word female. And I was like, you know, why they feel that need of specificity going into us. I mean, I guess. I don't know. He had interesting taste. Yeah, yeah, yeah. So they made a couple of changes. I don't think it's really going to change the case per se so much for them.

But in a normal case, if he was out on bail, if he was out right now, his lawyers would say, they just hit us with a new indictment. We need more time to work on this. But not here. They want to go to trial. Now, you're also working at News Nation now, right? Yeah, yeah, yeah. I'm their legal contributor. So I actually work with Chris Cuomo.

So yeah, I heard you mention Cuomo. I'm a huge fan. Chris is a great guy, a friend of mine. I love him. Is he a good guy off camera? Great guy. I didn't know too much about Chris Cuomo. Like I, you know, followed him in the media, never met him.

And then when I got a chance to meet him, he's super nice, humble guy and smart. I love the guy. Yeah, it's interesting because like, you know, he was in the middle of that whole like pandemic cnn versus fox news kind of thing and now he's with news nation which is much more i like news nation it's very down the middle and i love that you know as close as it comes to that i think so i'll give you inside baseball sometimes when you're a you know a media contributor or legal contributor they ask you to take a side you know can you argue this side i remember once i was asked by a very big network, can I take this position?

And it was like against everything I ever believe in. I was like, no, I won't. This one, what do you think? I'm never asked, I'm never asked like, you know, take this side, you know, unless it's like a fun legal segment, like you're going to play the part of the prosecution, you'll play the part of the defense, but no, it's,

and then I anchor for them as well. So I filled in for Chris. I filled in for Dan Abrams. I filled in for all their talent. How long you been there now? Two, three months? No, two, am I in my third year? Shit, you're that far in?

Yeah, I've joined in 2023. Oh, I didn't know that. I thought this was a newer thing. Oh, no, no. I've been with them for like two years. Yeah, two years. No shit. Yeah, yeah.

So you got serious. You got long crime. News like two years. Yeah, two years. No shit. Yeah, yeah. So you got serious. You got long crime. News Nation. You fill in as an anchor. Yeah. And then always in fashion with my dad. So I'm constantly busy. Wow.

Yeah. Full agenda. Yeah. I know my friend Nishan over there. He's great. Love that guy. Good guy. He's working with Chris.

I haven't asked him about it. He's great. He's a good guy. Yeah, yeah, yeah. He does all the shoots with him. Yeah. So my schedule is like insane. I wake up every day at 5 and I'm working at 5.15 and I don't finish until like 10, 11.

My wife is very understanding. That's good. Yeah, you're a hard worker. We're doing this on a Saturday. Yeah, yeah, yeah. But didn't Diddy file a lawsuit against the whole network? He did. It's like a $50 million lawsuit?

I'm not at liberty to talk more about it. I figured. But he did. He did. He did file a lawsuit. So you have like – not referring to this right now or discussing that, but when you're on News Nation, does that affect your ability to even like cover it? No. Again, just give

my opinion about what's happening. Although, um, yeah, no, I, uh, yeah, I can't comment more on it, but, uh, yeah, he, he did that. It was interesting because he's, uh, you know, he's trying to fight back. He's been very adamant, uh, that he believes he, all these allegations are false. I mean, the one thing that he did admit which so interesting he comes out two days after that video of him beating cassandra ventura was posted and he comes out on instagram and says i was messed up so bad you know he thought i don't know i don't know him but i imagine he knew he couldn't be criminally charged with that in a in california but that is an admission that it was you. And that can be used against you at the federal level, which I don't understand why he made that, why he said it. I don't quite understand

it. Because it's not like he made that admission. Everybody's like, it's okay, Diddy. I think he actually thought he might get that. He might get sympathy. He's that psycho. This isn't him yelling at a person in a restaurant because they didn't have his table. He might get that. He might get sympathy. He's that psycho. One thing – and by the way, okay, I have to say it. Allegedly, it's him. Okay, allegedly. But put it this way. If he did that in open, in an open hotel room, maybe he was on drugs, whatever. But in an open hotel room wearing – I mean, my gosh, wearing a towel and beating her up and dragging her, what else was behind closed doors? It's crazy to think about. I don't see how – obviously that's going to get played in court for jurors, and I don't see how that's not going to emotionally anchor people. Even though they're not supposed to be.

They're supposed to look at everything on an individual basis. That's one of the nastiest videos you'll ever see. But it does two things, right? So it does two things. If Cassandra Ventura is victim one, then number one, it would be used as evidence of sex trafficking she was trying to run. But number two, it makes her credible. It makes her credible. I said this happened and now I have the video proof. Okay. I said this happened. What are the text messages say? Now, things that can get muddy the water. If there are messages where she's agreeing to be a part of these freak offs and she doesn't show any kind of resistance toward it or

she's encouraging it, that becomes a problem, right? and she doesn't show any kind of resistance toward it or she's encouraging it that becomes a problem right it's all about raising any kind of reasonable doubt in the minds of the jurors did he commit racketeering conspiracy sex trafficking prostitution charges did he commit the beyond a reasonable doubt if they can muddy the waters and make it we talked about before black white gray they can make it a great case that's how he wins and we're also not going to see it because it's in closed court. But it'll be as much reporting. There's going to be a transcript that's released. Long crime, we're actually going to do live coverage as much as we can. We'll get live

updates about what's happening in court. We have a reporter in the courtroom. It's not going to be you? No, we have a reporter that I'm going to be anchoring. So we'll have a reporter in the courtroom. She'll come out, do a lunchtime show with us. We're going to do live updates about what's happening. We are also going to get the transcript. So the transcript is going to come out the next day. We can probably do like sidebar episodes about that as well and like what happened in court. What's your prediction there?

Again, I don't want to make a prediction yet until I know more about the evidence. It's not like I can look – again, the Koberger case when we know so much out there and I can make a good prediction there. This one, it's tough to say because I think it's a unique way they're charging, trafficking and racketeering and I want to see how they argue it. But, you know, there is a part of me that feels if there is, you have witnesses are talking about being abused and you have that video being played. He's looking potentially at a tough case and potentially life in prison. Yeah. And how, how long do you think a trial like this is going to take? Uh, so I think jury selection is going to be a bit, a minute. It's going to take a second to try to get a jury. Um, probably into early summer, probably like July, I would say. So like, not like six months, but two months.

No, maybe like six weeks, seven weeks, maybe eight weeks. Yeah. It's going to be interesting. Yeah. It's definitely going to be an interesting case. A lot of eyeballs on it. And, uh, you know, it's, it's an important one. It's an important one. He's a very, very high profile figure. You talked about how there's always been like rumors and stuff i i it's going to be a difficult one to sit through and hear and um try to understand what happened but it's it's just it's so much in the secrets right now it's so much in the shadows that it's hard to know what to make of it if they if they don't prove it i will be and again we haven't seen like all the hardcore evidence they're going to bring. But I will be shocked because I mean, I'm a fucking

regular dude. And I'm telling you, I will never forget, I had a conversation with someone over two years ago, where they described everything to a T. That is exactly what came out. Really? And they are not like a very famous person. And then I had another conversation with someone who would know about eight years ago that at the time went right over my head and now when i look back on it and what he said i was like let me ask you a question you know did the person say that they were doing it against their will so the the one two years ago i was talking talking about? Some of it, yes. Some of it, no.

Okay. Okay. So that's – That was the allegation. That's interesting, right? And that becomes – that muddies the waters a little bit about it. Were they scared? So the person talking about this was not someone who had had it happen to them.

Oh, it was somebody that – But they were around people who I believe had. Okay, so it's it's look, it's and then it becomes a question of, you know, did, again, I think it's like, was this a romantic interest? He flew out, gave gifts to promise career opportunities. Is that somebody who's morally despicable or is that you know sex trafficking it's a weird definition of it um and look this case is going to be a bit expansive too because for the racketeering conspiracy case you have to prove underlying crimes like if you have a criminal enterprise what are those crimes right so that it's kidnapping arson you know there's one of the allegations in cassandra ventura's lawsuit that I think is going to make its way here that he blew up Kid Cudi's car.

Oh, yeah. I heard about this. He blew up Kid Cudi's car allegedly because he was romantic interest of Cassandra Ventura. That's an underlying crime to show that he was doing all this kind of – and what was the idea? It was all to benefit Diddy, benefit his businesses. So it's going to be a little bit of a confusing case. I'm sure there's going to be testimony. You're like, what is that? How does that relate to any of this? But it's, they've charged him in a creative way. And there's going

to be, you know, arguments to support one way or another. I, you know, there's talk, what would he take the stand? In a case like this, he shouldn't. Let me be clear, he shouldn't take the stand. The only time I think a defendant really should take the stand and it's their choice is a self-defense case. You have to explain to the jurors why you felt the need to use deadly force. But this is a guy who took the stand in his other trial back in 1999 or 2000. Remember that? Worked out well. He was acquitted. So I wonder if – He didn't have the spotlight on him. No, and he doesn't have the same allegation. I mean he was a famous guy, but it was a totally different yeah yeah i mean if you want to play the game too though with the what they can prove is consensual is not though it gets dangerous because you can start to say the same things about weinstein right because hypothetically you know obviously

i think it's very clear what the guy did but he could say they came over to his hotel room and he just insinuated like, hey, I have the power to put you in this movie, and they consensually said, well, let me put you over the top, which is not how I believe it went down, but you see what I mean? So the counterargument to that is, yeah, I 100% agree. There could be – I think from – you speak to every five, ten people on the street, they would say, yeah, they knew what they were doing. But our understanding of sexual assault and misconduct has changed dramatically. There are people who are sexually assaulted, and they stay in touch with the people who abuse them. They might say they love them. There are a lot of complicated psychological and emotional factors that go into this. And it doesn't mean that they're not credible. It may complicate the story, but it's understandable. There's a lot that goes into this. And there might be people who feel, it looked like everything was consensual. There are people who, they're girlfriends. There are people, you know, it happens. And you said it before, like one thing can be true another one that could be true at the same time it's gonna be very uh fact specific but i would say one of the reasons that i think weinstein was convicted is because if that case happened 20 years before

where someone's like they knew what was going on you know but our whole understanding of it and particularly from the me too movement and hearing the testimony is by the way it's different from me explaining versus actually hearing the testimony from people yes they're cross-examined they're cross-examined they should be but it's different and uh it'll be up to that jury trying to find a jury though it'll be tough it'll be tough i think i think because this case is like it's gonna be a shit show who know everybody knows about this case oh yeah but but do they know the specifics of it do they know exactly what the charges are we'll see we will now you you've also been looking at this jfk stuff yeah you're telling me yeah yeah this is a throwback but it's so much fun i've done great podcasts in

the past with guys who just know all about this so our mutual friend by the way put this together joseph scott morgan love him came in here i had done 146 with him but then he came in for 170 171 and we did which one's this one this is gonna be 290 something okay but you know we did like the whole jfk case from like the how how the evidence was taken from the beginning to the end it was really incredible stuff but like you know now these files come out and it still feels like there's a lot we don't know yeah yeah yeah look you have to think about it like this i didn't know too much about jfk before and i've spoken to experts about it um what it where does it come from it comes from like the warren commission it comes it's first of all it's so not organized right it's so not organized there was no like analog there was

no like a you know was no like index. It was all over the place trying to understand. What I think the conclusion is from the people I've spoken to is Oswald was the shooter. But it seems to me that the CIA at the very least failed to do what they needed to do to watch him and to properly – and it does a question about why that happened they were tracking him they knew his movements but um i don't i can't say from the documents that have been released and analyzed and from the google i've spoken to that say that the cio was you know a part of the assassination or they were complicit in it but there was a failure and what i do think is interesting as well is there are nuggets in there like you know the george underhill one right the guy that said the cia was behind and then he

dies like what six months later a lot of people like that and it's it's only going to amplify the conversation um i know that there were people who testified on on capitol hill recently who say they want a further investigation into it there's the truth truth. It's going to take years, years to properly understand everything. Because by the way, it's not like we haven't seen these documents. The big thing is there was a lot of documents that are now unredacted that were previously released. So I think it's going to take years for people to understand and put into context a lot of what was released. And I'm not sure if anything else is going to be released in addition to that, but I got to give it to the Trump administration for doing this and for releasing it and providing

a point of transparency um but yeah i the conversation will continue and like we said before it doesn't matter what was released people will still have their opinions one way or another it doesn't matter what the verdict is people thought they're well we've got i mean when you look at the at the ballistics and everything one thing that's always been clear is that if Oswald was a shooter, and I actually think he probably did fire shots, he wasn't the only one. And we've now had Congress men and women come out and say they've been told that as well. So there's at least something there. But if you go through some of the guys who really had dug into this case in the past and did it from just a hard evidence perspective. Like to me, one of the guys that puts together this whole picture the best was

the dude, David Talbot. He wrote a book called Devil's Chessboard. You ever read that? No, but I've heard of him. Oh my God, man. It's insane because a lot of people wanted this guy dead. And a lot of those people happen to be in our government. And there were a lot of reasons for it. Like if you talk to any of the Cuban related guys who were within our government and services from the time today who are still alive, they will tell all that and him pulling back, which I think there's a lot more of that story, just my opinion. But it's also because allegedly he was talking with Khrushchev about denuclearizing, and the two of them were having an open conversation about it, and that was the bridge too far. That's where intelligence said, fuck that. We're not taking away any of our nukes or anything like that we reserve the right to have to bomb the soviets because at the time like this is just and you wonder how much of this still exists mentality wise within the government but

this is this is a time where people within the government openly thought of things in the following way like they looked at it like well if the sovi Soviets nuked us, we would lose 60 million. But when we nuke them back, they would lose 240. So we win by 180. Yeah. Instead of the world lost 300 and we lost 60. Yeah. You know what I mean?

Which then you think about it and you're like the people that think like that, it's then far-fetched to say they would have taken on a president. Of course it's not. And I think there was evidence in there that, you know, there was a conflict between JFK. There's some tension between JFK and the CIA. I thought it was interesting. Fidel Castro was quite concerned after the death of JFK. He was like, now we're dealing with Johnson, and I don't know what this is about. And there was an unpredictable nature about it because there was always – was he some sort of – was part of it as well?

I thought the most interesting thing was the CIA operations, just understanding these efforts to poison the sugar supply of – I think it was of Cuba. countries and just i thought that commentary and those memos were the most fascinating part of it because you wonder wow this is what they were up to but what are they up to now it didn't stop it didn't stop it didn't stop in the 60s in my opinion so i don't have proof of that but that's my that was my interpretation of it yeah i think about this a lot that's why i like to put these guys on camera testimony everyone out there yeah yeah you wonder what they hold back but i was I had a guy, Matt Hedger, hitting there who are sitting there recently for a couple of different podcasts. And, you know, he was a knock and he's very forthcoming about what that entailed and what that was and what he thinks was good about that. But it's a moral quandary because a week after I had him sitting there the second time, I had Ed Calderon sitting in that chair who's been battling the cartels for decades.

And Ed Calderon brings up – we can talk about the CIA fucking flipping major banks to get them to fund the cartels. And I'm like – just had the guy sitting there who told a story about how he did that. And it's like, all right, what's the bigger national security implication that makes you do that? It better be good. Yeah. But who – also who are you to decide that in a way like you're talking about organizations that murder people like crazy and infect our streets with drugs in this case and when you look at some of the examples you're given it's like all right you want to the cia wants to overturn this government how many people are they going to kill to do that don't remember president trump said i think it was in his first first term was like talking about like maybe it was about russia and he was like you know like oh he's a killer he's like he goes we got killers

here or like we would kill people you remember that we get kids yeah yeah yeah it was uh but no it's the truth and i and i again i don't think it was every administration that would release this information in this way. And yes, it was a haphazard release. There was things that were released quite quickly. And by the way, there's more Epstein files I think that they have to release as well. They didn't – to your point, they didn't release anything the first time around. Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Those binders, that was a photo op. And the idea that the FBI withheld it from Pam Bondi. Not that guy's call. Yeah, yeah, yeah. That guy got fired. It's not his call i i don't know if he got i don't know if he stepped down because out of principle i don't remember he was taught but he i think he also had like another beef with the administration as well yeah he was

he was he was told to resign i believe yeah so it's like you know i give it credit but it doesn't solve a lot of people's questions that they have about it but it's fascinating it's fascinating it's one of those things that it's so we put it we did a sidebar episode on jfk it's my idea was like we don't usually do this let's do it maybe there's interest made like two million views in the first 24 hours like people were just eating it up they still have it's one of those cases one of those situations people still want to know what's going on. He was a sitting U.S. president. He had his head blown off in public.

So what happened with the Trump assassination? Great question. We don't talk about that anymore. We don't talk about that at all. We don't talk about the attempted assassination. I mean, where's the document release on that? I mean, isn't it amazing, this news cycle? I mean, first it was – by the way, it's funny. The drones in new jersey was

they here yeah well you saw them yeah i saw a few yeah okay where's that story gone gone yeah don't worry about it what'd they say i know why that one's gone well well you're not gonna say okay all right well it's funny the trump administration basically was like you know it was uh i forgot what they say was was it weather related i don't remember but yeah it's some yeah yeah i have i have my own theories too on that but yeah that story went away temptation goes away it's the news cycle changes every second it changes every second and that's why i think it's important you know certain stories that they stay in the media and they stay in the public conscious um it's you know there's just too much to consume though that it's hard to get people to focus yeah the tough one with jfk and this is just a reality is that you do have to

live in a country where you have intelligence services right and it has been proven that our intelligence services have done some awful things over the years you wonder what the reasoning for some of that was and then other ones it's just like that's just awful there's no reason for that but if if it came out as i believe it was that they were they had just a few people involved in it which is what it was like this is an organization of whatever it's 30 50 000 people most of the people had no idea the fucking guy was going to get killed right but the three five people that did and then the three five people the at the Pentagon that did, they speak for the whole brand. And even though it's 60-some years ago, if that comes out definitively today, like, yes, Alan Dulles ordered it and Curtis LeMay signed off on it in the Pentagon, the anti-establishment of the streets is going to say burn it all down. Yeah, of course.

And overnight, you got a problem. Bad apples, right? Same thing, bad apples right same thing bad apples by the way i don't know if i would even want to know everything the cia or fbi are doing on a daily basis i don't know i don't think i would want to know you really want that on your head think about what they have to deal with day in and day out i know a lot of uh people and uh tracy walder uh former fbi cia agent news nation contributor she's fantastic i always think about what she had to deal with on a day-to-day basis and what she knew bringing that home can't tell your family probably what's going on i don't want to know just it's a part of me like yes i

love transparency this part of me like just don't tell me what's going on just take care of the job you can't undownload that hard drive yeah yeah yeah and i've and you know some guys i've had in here who are from those worlds that's one place where i have had a lot of empathy with them like the like matthew hedger talked about it he had to he had to be taken into a warehouse with a bunch of senior level cartel people while a guy was tied up next to a table crying and screaming and on the table was his 10 year old son and they were all taking a carrot peeler to his face because the guy had stolen money and matthew had to sit there and watch it and not do anything and and you can tell like that affects him a lot and and who who wouldn't

i actually i'm glad it affects him because it means he's a real fucking human being but like you know i that's why i i could i could never do these jobs it's it's a difficult difficult thing it's it's you have to be a very specific personality you have to have a certain skill set a certain talent for it but it is incredibly incredibly by the way it's interesting when i was practicing law when i was in law school i didn't know if i was going to practice or what i was going to do but i was like do i want to be a criminal defense attorney i don't want to be around that content all the time that's what my dad said yeah i don't want to be around it it's it's it's one thing to cover but you know we we have that show prime crime and it's a documentary show and we get all the raw footage so the raw crime scene photos to go through that

to blur it out it's like that would be your day in day out as a criminal defense attorney i was like that's not the kind of life i wanted yeah it's it's tough subject matter to say the least yeah and like we were saying with brian mcmonigal it's like you are going to statistically have to represent people who are guilty of heinous things and he even said he's like listen if someone's a terrorist or something find another lawyer he's like i know i'm not supposed to say that but like yeah me there's even some line there you have morally you have to do what you have to do i mean you have to you can't cross that line and look i give it credit to people

who represent the worst of the worst they don't want to do it but they know that's their job and they have to they have to just look at the rights of the person yeah and it's again easier said than done because i remember uh one of the craziest court moments i ever saw was when larry nassar who's the guy that oh yeah abused all of those women and girls you know the father running and chasing him almost trying to you know jumping over the table to grab him. His lawyers like became pariahs and like they're just doing their job. They're doing their job. And it's like not easy when you're representing a guy like that. I mean it was like multiple – hundreds of people testifying about how he abused them.

It's like they got to represent this guy. But again, they're doing – like you said, they're doing their job and they're also upholding the constitution. That is what it's about. That's what it is. And then justice was done there. The guy was righteously found guilty and you hope that that's how it works out. Absolutely. Absolutely.

Fucking – couldn't be me though. No, not at all. Not at all. But listen, I told you I'd get you out of here. Thank you. Thank you. Because I know you got a thing. We could keep going, but we're going to have to do this again at some point.

I would love to. Your breakdown's amazing. Thanks, man. I appreciate you having me. It was such a pleasure, and congratulations on your success. Thank you so much. But we will also be sticking your links down there so that people can enjoy your success as well. Good.

I love it. Thank you so much. So you're on Law and Crime. Just list off all your shows again. So I've got Sidebar and prime crime on law and crime i have uh news nation i'm their legal contributor always in fashion with my dad and then i have a show called the spin room that's uh on mediate so everybody can check it out all right check my links when we put this out but we'll have all those in there everyone go check out the great

jesse's work and thank you again you got it thank you all right everybody else you know what it is give it a thought get back to me peace thank you again. You got it. Thank you. All right. Everybody else, you know what it is. Give it a thought. Get back to me. Peace. Thank you guys for watching the episode. If you haven't already, please hit that subscribe button and smash that like button on the video. They're both a huge, huge help. And if you would like to follow me on Instagram and X, those links are in my description below.