Law&Crime Sidebar - Utah Mom's Lawyers Quit in Husband Poisoning Case Ahead of Critical Hearing

Episode Date: June 25, 2024

Kouri Richins’ legal team filed a motion to withdraw from her case in May, citing a possible conflict of interest. Richins was assigned new attorneys, who told the judge last week that they will be ready for a rescheduled preliminary hearing in August. Law&Crime’s Jesse Weber breaks down what we know about future court proceedings, as well as the case against Richins so far.PLEASE SUPPORT THE SHOW: Get 50% off of confidential background reports at https://www.truthfinder.com/lcsidebarLAW&CRIME SIDEBAR PRODUCTION:YouTube Management - Bobby SzokeVideo Editing - Michael DeiningerScript Writing & Producing - Savannah WilliamsonGuest Booking - Alyssa Fisher & Diane KayeSocial Media Management - Vanessa BeinSTAY UP-TO-DATE WITH THE LAW&CRIME NETWORK:Watch Law&Crime Network on YouTubeTV: https://bit.ly/3td2e3yWhere To Watch Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3akxLK5Sign Up For Law&Crime's Daily Newsletter: https://bit.ly/LawandCrimeNewsletterRead Fascinating Articles From Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3td2IqoLAW&CRIME NETWORK SOCIAL MEDIA:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandcrime/Twitter: https://twitter.com/LawCrimeNetworkFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/lawandcrimeTwitch: https://www.twitch.tv/lawandcrimenetworkTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@lawandcrimeSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Wondery Plus subscribers can binge all episodes of this Law and Crimes series ad-free right now. Join Wondery Plus in the Wondery app, Apple Podcasts, or Spotify. If you don't know how to act, you can go to jail. I did kill Kenai family. But I want you to tell it like it is if you're going to tell it. From a defendant being dragged out of court to an attorney, flipping off opposing counsel to a murderer scaring a judge. The courtroom can be a place for some wild, unexpected moments.

We're going to break down some of these outrageous episodes with the man who knows the ins and outs of court, the founder of Law and Crime, Dan Abrams. Welcome to Sidebar, presented by Law and Crime. I'm Jesse Weber. Now, clearly if you follow us here at Sidebar, you know. There is no shortage of outrageous courtroom moments. They happen all the time across this country.

And that is what we're going to dive into right now, some of the most wild courtroom incidents from recent years. Now, who better to break all this down with me than the man who has been following what has been happening inside of courtrooms for years? He is the chief legal correspondent for ABC News, host of On Patrol Live on Reels, Dan Abrams live on News Nation, court cam, taking the stand. both on A&E, Sirius X-Ms, The Dan Abrams Show, and the founder of Long Crime. I think you can guess what I'm talking about. Dan Abrams joins us right now. Dan, good to see you.

And the man who fills in for me when I'm having to do two things at once. I'm trying to be, you know, Dan Abrams 2.0, so it's good. This is your first time on the set, right? It's my first time sitting on the set. What do you think? You know, it's amazing. It's like lights and looks beautiful.

It's like my Mervyn era. Yeah, I'm happy that, you know, all that money You know, I look at the set in a different way. This better be worth it. Exactly, exactly. Now, before we get started, so as I said, you've been covering cases your entire career. Are you ever still shocked by what you see happening in courtroom? I mean, look, if you're not, you should stop doing it.

Seriously. I mean, if it doesn't have an impact still, then you shouldn't be covering trials. Because, you know, this is real life. People's lives are so impacted by this stuff. And if it's not impacting you as you're covering it, as you're watching it, then you're jaded. Then you should probably be doing something else. Well, absolutely. I'll tell you what.

I'm glad you said that because everything I'm about to play for you is the first time I've ever seen it in a courtroom. So we're going to start this off in Detroit, Michigan. This is where 26-year-old Amanda Casal is about to be sentenced for killing Jerome Zerker while drunk driving. She pled guilty to operating a car under the influence. She's about to be sentenced. And by the way, just to give you a human component of this, Jerome left behind five children, a fiancé, his family. It is such a sad case. And as Jerome's sister is speaking to Judge Keanu Lillard about her brother, this is during a victim impact statement,

apparently Casal's mother, Donna, and some other unidentified man were smiling and laughing in the back of the courtroom, which is, as you can imagine, a big no-no with the judge. Watch. Yeah, it's time for him to go. And I don't know who he is, but whoever can sit here at a tragic moment like this and laugh and smile when somebody has lost a family member, I mean the entire time that Mr. Zerker's sister was speaking, that clown, and that's what I'm going to call him a clown, was sitting there smiling and laughing, that you can go too, because if you don't know how to act, you can go to jail. So leave.

anybody that can sit there and laugh and smirk when somebody take her she's going in a bag she's going in a bag anybody else want to go you can go to this is a court of law and these are very serious matters and I understand you all are upset

because your loved one is going to prison but guess what she's going to prison for the choices that she made ma'am you are being taken into custody for criminal contempt your disruptive and disrespectful behavior disrupted today's proceedings, and you, ma'am, are going to the Wayne County Jail for 93 days for direct criminal contempt. Anybody else want to go? Try it. Try it. Oh, my mouth? Well, thank you. Your mouth got you 93 days.

So what happened? Well, Donna Kassal, she was held in criminal contempt by the judge, and she was originally ordered to spend 93 days in jail. But the next morning, she offered a tearful apology to the judge saying, I deeply apologize for what I did. I was under a lot of stress. and Judge Lillard amended the sentence to just one day, credit for time served. She was released as for Amanda Kassal. She was sentenced to three to 15 years in prison. She was paroled in 2020. I talk about things I've never seen before, that I haven't seen before.

Yeah, and this is a story that we covered on court cam, on A&E. And, you know, it is, it doesn't happen that often that a judge will step in and literally hold people in contempt for misbehaving, by smiling or laughing, et cetera. But, you know, here the next day, she was very different. And that's what led the judge to have a little bit of a leniency here. Now, of course, if you disrupt court proceedings, it could be contempt of court. Right.

There's a lot of emotions, especially for the family of a defendant too, right? They could say, you know, we didn't mean to be laughing, but it's those kinds of moments where you can blame them, but you also can't blame them for how they feel. certain circumstances. Well, look, you know, again, when it's a family member who is the defendant, right, and there's anger about the sentence or whatever the case may be, you know, you can understand, but there's also, it's not an option to lash out in court. So I have lawyers. Yep. That's why I have decorum in court. It's to make sure that the proceedings are dealt with, particularly sensitive proceedings. in, you know, in an organized, controlled manner.

And if you have people in the courtroom who are laughing or in any way mocking the proceeding, particularly when you have victim impact statements, a lot of what we see on court cam are victim impact statements, right? And it's not just the victim impact statements. It's also the way other people react. You know, it's always interesting to see how the defendant reacts. But this goes back to what we were talking about before, which is you have to be able to put yourself in the position as much as one can.

I mean, you can't obviously feel what they're feeling, but you have to be able to understand, this person just lost a loved one, or more than one loved one. And when they're making that statement, boy, there better be a level of respect in the courtroom for that. I think the judge said everything the right way

and handled everything the right way. You talked about decorum. That leads me now to Tampa, Florida. We go to June 2021. So Ronnie O'Neill III is on trial for what is an absolutely horrific crime, beating and shooting to death, his girlfriend, 33-year-old Kenyatta Barron, killing their nine-year-old special needs daughter to death with a hatchet. Her name was Renovia. And then he stabbed their eight-year-old son, Ronnie O'Neill, the fourth, and set their home on fire.

Now, miraculously, that young boy survived. and get this one of the investigators in this case actually ended up adopting him so now he goes to trial and what happened well he decided to act as his own attorney standby counsel present and we've seen that before but what I tell you I haven't seen before is the way he presented to the jury evidence is going to show that we We are under some of the most vicious. Lying. Lying.

Fabricating By the time it's all said and done, you will see who is the mass murderers in Tampa Bay. I did kill Keny Alabama. But I want you to tell it like it is if you're going to tell it. If you think I'm here to put around with y'all. All right, Mr. O'Neill, please stop using swearing language. It's not appropriate in a closing argument. Almost feels like he's doing an impression of an attorney, what he saw on TV.

Yeah, he watched way too many videos. You know, he got his degree at YouTube University, right, watching too many videos, et cetera. Yeah. And, you know, is, in essence, making a mockery of the proceeding. and again, critical to think about the fact, you know, the victims here, and this kind of performance can't make them feel any better. And talking about the victims, so he seemed to allude to the fact that he attacked Kenyatta

to defend the kids that he was acting in self-defense. He also claimed that law enforcement fabricated evidence, that they manipulated, recorded 911 phone calls to make it sound like he was beating his ex-girlfriend. He accused police of removing evidence as well. and then he had an opportunity again never saw this before is his own his own attorney he cross-examined his own son the one that he was accused of stabbing the only surviving victim of what happened this boy was 11 when this trial took place did i hurt you that night of this incident

yes i did and how did i hurt you Do you remember telling Detective Dirks? After he asked, did your dad hurt you the night that he hurt your sister? And you said, no, he didn't hurt me. Do you remember that? No. That was something.

This one I remember when this happened, I was covering it at the time. Really hard to watch. Yeah. I mean, think about a dad who's cross-examining his son, who he stabbed, and trying to catch him in inconsistencies. Kids now 11, right? Eight or nine at the time. It's just the worst of the worst. And he was trying to suggest that while you were adopted by police, so now they're telling you what to say, as if all the other evidence doesn't matter.

Again, I've seen actually a defending cross-examine somebody he's allegedly hurt, like an ex-wife, but this, a young boy, I've never seen anything like it. Right, his own son. I mean, that I've never seen. I mean, I've seen a number of cases where when people represent themselves, right? Yeah. Never a good idea. Generally, generally a terrible idea, right? Generally a terrible idea.

Every once in a while, somehow, but generally it's a terrible idea. But yeah, I've seen a number of cases where the defendant represents himself. It's almost, I was going to say him or herself. I don't remember a woman. It's almost all men who have represented himself. And cross-examining the victims. And the answer is like, yeah, when you shot me, I was this. and this and this. And when you shot me, it's, you know, it's not smart. No. And as you can imagine

what happened here, the jury found Ronnie O'Neill III guilty of two counts of first-degree murder, one count of attempted first-degree murder, two counts of aggravated child abuse, arson, resisting a law enforcement officer. And just two days later, he was sentenced to three life sentences plus an additional 90 years. The judge calling this the worst case she had ever seen in her 19-year career. Hey there, everybody. So I want to thank Morgan and Morgan for sponsoring this episode of Sidebar. Always love talking about them.

Now, here is the incredible thing about Morgan and one of the reasons why I like talking about them so much. Hey, say something about our big wins. I'm not supposed to come on camera. The reason, Morgan and Morgan, America's largest personal injury law firm, is so big, and I'm sure you can guess it, is because they win a lot. And that's... I forget huge verdict. Yeah, they've won big verdicts, $6.8 million in New York, $26 million in Philadelphia. You see, the thing about them is they don't settle for low-ball insurance offers from insurance companies, which is something...

You mention that you can submit a claim from your couch at home and on your phone. Dan, they've completely modernized the process by submitting your claim, talking to your legal team. It's all done straight from your smartphone. Again, that's something that... If eight clicks, it clicks or less. eight clicks or less yes um you can see if you have a case in just a few minutes a thousand lawyer give over a thousand lawyers all right you know what dan um if you really think you can do better maybe you should just do it yourself what jesse was getting that is if you've

ever been injured in an accident you can check out morgan and morgue you can submit a claim in eight clicks or less start your claim just visit for the people dot com slash lc sidebar You came a little too close to me. It hurt me a little bit. I'm probably actually going to have to hire you guys now, but that was well said. That was well said. Well, now we're going to head over to Cincinnati, Ohio, where former judge, Tracy Hunter, she was convicted back in 2014 of unlawful interest in a public contract.

This was for her handing over confidential materials to her brother so that he could keep his job as a juvenile court employee. She was sentenced to six months in jail, but she hadn't served it yet. The imposition of the sentence was delayed for years because attorneys were raising a number of legal challenges. She still lost her job. The license to practice law was suspended. But now, for what we're about to get into, we're in court in 2019, where her attorney is asking her sentence to continue to be delayed. And I want you to keep in mind that this courtroom is packed with her supporters. And by the way, Hunter's supporters had arguably sent intimidating.

letters to the judge in this case, Judge Patrick Dinkalakker's home asking that Hunter be exonerated. Now, the judge, he ultimately imposes the six-month sentence on Hunter, clearly not being deterred by Hunter's defenders. And that is when the courtroom erupts into chaos, someone rushes towards Hunter, and then Hunter appears to go limp and emotionless as she's literally dragged out of the courtroom by a court officer. Mr. Irman, his deputy can take her way. No, no!

No! No! No! No! No! No! No! there!

So I talk about unexpected. I was not expecting that. Yeah, I mean, look, this goes back to the justice system has to treat people as equally as it can. It doesn't always treat people equal, right? There's no such thing as complete parity in the law. But, you know, just because someone had a high-level position, just because she has defenders, doesn't mean that when sentence is imposed, she doesn't have to serve it, right? And, you know, they were talking about she was the first democratically elected juvenile court judge.

She was going to make change, but she was, you know, convicted of a crime here. And have you ever seen in a courtroom somebody, you know, when a sentence comes down or when a verdict comes down, they react in a certain way? I don't think I've ever seen them go limp and being dragged. Here's the problem with answering the question, have I ever seen, right? Because you probably have. Because with court cam, now. in its whatever six seventh season yeah i've seen everything yeah i've seen just about everything including including this clip um and so you know it's unusual certainly to see it but you know i have seen on occasion

people who don't want to cooperate with police and they are dragged out um you know it's just the fact that this is you know a former judge makes it a little bit different and they talked about certain mental health issues she had and obviously maybe she her body went limp, you know, hearing that. It was a wild, wild scene. Well, I think she was just doing it up. I don't know. You think it was active? Yeah. Well, I think she just was active resistance. Yeah. I think she was just allowing, refusing to cooperate and being pulled away. Yeah, because people were yelling like you're dragging her like an animal and no justice, no peace. That's interesting. She ended up only serving three months in jail as opposed to six months she was released early. But now I'm going to go to

somebody else. And this is somebody that we know very well. We cover this a lot. Because when I think about absolutely unforgettable outrageous moments in court, can we talk about Alex Jones for a second? And honestly, I couldn't pick one here because there were so many. Now this, of course, is when the Info Wars founder and host was sued by the families of those who lost loved ones in the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting, as well as a former FBI agent for comments that he made regarding the massacre, namely that it was staged and fake and a hoax. And the parents were crisis actors, you know, just insane stuff to say. And they sued him under various legal theories, such as defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress. Now, Alex Jones, he actually

lost these cases by default judgment. The court automatically ruled against him because he willfully failed to comply with discovery obligations during the course of this case. So the trials that we covered on law and crime and sidebar, they were purely about how much would he owe the plaintiffs and damages? How much would he have to pay up? There were two cases, one in Texas, one in Connecticut, Like I said, I don't know what the most outrageous moment was. Was it when his attorney, Andino Raynaal, seemingly flipped off opposing counsel in court? Will you talk to me? Anina, will you talk to me?

Are you talked to me? Are you stuck in that hallway? Who said to me are all your videos on this? I said, this is a summary of exhibit and we're agreeing to all. Hey, guys, maybe now's not the time. Maybe we can cool off and I'll have a phone call. Neither the judge know the jury were around to see that one. They were around for this, though.

That's Rodney Parker, I think, Mr. Jones. It is. That's the real Rodney Parker, isn't it? I mean, I said years ago, I thought San Diego had them. Just like all the Iraqis, but you liberals kill and love. It's just you're unbelievable. You switch on emotions on and off when you want. It's just an ambulance, Jason.

Why don't you show a little respect? You have families in this courtroom here. that lost children, sisters, wives, moms. This is a struggle session? Are we in China? I've already said I'm sorry hundreds of times, and I'm done saying I'm sorry. But I legitimately thought it might have been staged, and I stand by that and I don't apologize for it. And don't apologize, Mr. Jones. Please don't apologize.

No, I've already apologized to the parents over and over again. I don't apologize to you. Don't apologize to you. And one more, this is my personal favorite, Jones being questioned by the judge. the judge in Texas about chewing gum. Spit your gum out, Mr. Jones. It's not gum. What is it?

Because you're not allowed food or gum of any kind in the courtroom. I had my tooth pull a week and a half ago, and I had some gauze earlier, and it's been causing me to have some pain. So you're chewing on your gauze? Would you like to show you? No, I just want you to answer my question. No, I was massaging the whole of my mouth with my tongue. I'm sure right here. I don't want to see the inside of your mouth.

Oh, no, honey. There's no gum. Dan, take your pick. You know, I remember when I was covering the O.J. Simpson case, there was a rule in the courtroom of no gum. Absolutely no gum. But you were allowed to bring in sucking candy. And before I went into court one day, someone gave me a chicklet, which is, you know, these things that start as a candy and become gum. And I didn't know. At least this is what I told the judge, when I got caught on camera, chewing a piece of gum.

gum in court. And the cameras, you know, he had his own, Judge Edo had his own camera where he would look at the audience. And he has, brings me into his chambers and shows a picture of me sitting there going like this and, you know, serious stuff then. And my defense was that when I got it, it was a candy. Right. And it was legit. And Alex Jones did a version of that in his defense. Look, this was an insane case throughout the proceedings. In part of because responsibility had already been determined, and it was just about the amount of money. But the level of, you know, acrimony between the lawyers, I mean, yes, you see cases where lawyers, you know, lawyers can go at it and really hate each other. This was definitely one of those cases.

But Alex Jones is, you know, a big personality. And he kept that up in court. And in the end, it didn't help him legally. I don't know if he cared about the legal result, because if you cared about the legal result, you would have done things differently. Speaking of that, by the way, so in the latest development, remember, he was ordered to pay almost $50 million in one trial and almost a billion plus $473 million in punitive damages in the Connecticut trial. And most recently, a judge order that Jones's personal assets have to be liquidated to pay off the judgment, but not the company, free speech systems that owns InfoWars, they can still go after the company,

just not in bankruptcy court. It could still be sold to pay it off by a court-appointed trustee. But now that they can go off there's personal assets, do you think any of those plaintiffs are going to see any of that money? Yeah, I think they'll see some of it. The question will be how much, right? I think that they are convinced that he's hiding assets. they're going to have to try to find them, but they'll get some amount of it.

They're certainly not going to get the full judgment here. Yeah. All right. I'm going to finish this off. One last case. I would be remiss if I talk about this because there's an argument that we may not have seen as many insane moments in a courtroom as we did in the next one I'm about to talk about. And this is a very tragic case.

Let me be clear about this. I'm talking about the trial of Dorel Brooks Jr. This was the guy who drove a red SUV through. the Waukesha, Wisconsin Holiday Parade, killing six people, injuring several others. This is back in November of 2021. He goes on trial in 2022, represent himself, represents himself. He identifies, by the way, as a sovereign citizen. This is a movement who, people who seem to believe that the law and the courts don't have authority over them.

And he ended up getting or taking out his anger out on the judge and the prosecutors. I'm a grown man with grown kids. Don't nobody, ain't nobody don't talk to me like that. nobody I don't have a problem with doing what you asked me to do not tell me um you can see that he is seated with his back uh to the court or to the camera he took his shirt off as well i'm also told that he is threatening to throw and break items i would like to provide the defendant and the court with so that had to be that had to be said so the defendant That's not how it was said.

That was how I said. You want to run a record back? Mr. Brooks. I'm the only one, I got one ear that work, and I heard that. This is to benefit you so that you understand your witness has a prior record. One more interruption, and you're going to be removed to the next courtroom. That's what you want to do anyway. W.I.

Second from 1997. I need to take a break. This man right now is having a stare down with me. It's very disrespectful. He pounded his fist. frankly it makes me scared. Talk about making a mockery of the court system. And this judge had enormous patience for this guy, if I recall correct. Oh yeah. Yeah. I mean, I remember, you know, covering this story too and thinking, why is the judge still allowing him to engage

in this? So this judge was, you know, very willing to let him have his say as much as possible to protect the record, et cetera. And he abused it. Um, he just, abused the opportunity and the patience of the judge. She wanted to give him every opportunity. You want to represent yourself? Sure. I'm not going to kick you out of the courtroom so that he didn't have an issue, either him or his attorneys, have an issue on appeal, that he didn't get a fair trial because she knew

what was at stake with a case like this. Absolutely. And really did let him do a lot of things that other judges might not have. I'm not criticizing her. I'm just saying that she had enormous amounts of patients for him. And by the way, real quick, you cover a lot of sovereign citizens on your shows. I find the sovereign citizens to be so somewhat amusing, right? Because they cite all sorts of nonsensical laws, you know, well, we're not driving.

I'm traveling. Okay. And, you know, you don't have, you know, you don't have authority over me because, you know, I am a member of some particular nation, et cetera. You know, and it's, it literally, they've, they've seen this stuff online, right? And someone is in videos telling them, okay, so when you get pulled over, here's what you say, right? And it's going to get, you know, they're going to have to say, hey, it's just all gobbled to gook nonsense that they're basically suggesting that they don't have to abide by the same laws that everyone else has to abide by. And we see them a lot on on Patrol Live on Reels and certainly a lot on court camp on A&E.

Well, clearly they're not watching your shows. They're not watching cyber because they would know because what happened to him, Durelbrook's Jr., he was convicted of over 70 crimes, including six counts of first degree intentional homicide. He was sentenced to six life sentences plus over 700 years in prison. And I kind of think of more. Right. I mean, most of these sovereign citizen cases that we're covering are not murder.

Correct. To be clear, I'm talking about people who just pulled over on traffic violations, et cetera. This is a different level. So, Dan, we can make this show seven hours, but unfortunately, you're a busy man, wanted to do a little selection for you. Thank you so much for coming on. I am a huge sidebar fan. Thank you. So I am thrilled to be able to actually appear on sidebar with Jesse Weber.

Did you, did you hear that, America? Did you hear that? Dan, good to see you. Yes, good to see you, sir. Thank you. Thank you. That's all we have for you right now. Everybody, thank you so much for joining us.

As always, please subscribe on Apple Podcast. Spotify, YouTube, wherever you get your podcasts. I'm Jesse Weber. I'll speak to you next time.