Law&Crime Sidebar - Woman Allegedly Blinds ‘Sugar Daddy’ with Detergent Over $2,000

Episode Date: November 27, 2023

Police in Texas believe Kaley Medina had one date with the victim, then showed up at his home in the middle of the night weeks later, demanding money. When he refused, she allegedly poured detergent on him, causing serious burns to his face. The Law&Crime Network’s Jesse Weber discusses the bizarre case with famed homicide detective Fil Waters. PLEASE SUPPORT THE SHOW:BLACK FRIDAY SALE: Save 20% OFF your entire POM Pepper Spray order November 22-27 by using code SIDEBAR20 at: https://bit.ly/SIDEBAR20-BFHOST:Jesse Weber: https://twitter.com/jessecordweberLAW&CRIME SIDEBAR PRODUCTION:YouTube Management - Bobby SzokePodcasting - Sam GoldbergVideo 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. A woman meets an older man on a Sugar Daddy website, then proceeds to blind him with detergent and steal his things. That's what authorities say happened, and we discuss it with renowned former detective, Phil Waters. Welcome to Sidebar, presented by Law and Crime. I'm Jesse Weber. Hey, everybody, you know from watching Sidebar how important self-defense is? Well, that's why we have teamed up with Palm Pepper Spray, a very proud sponsor of us here at Long Crime, and we got some exciting news for you.

Palm is running a Black Friday sale on our channel right now. By using Code Sidebar 20, you can take advantage of 20% off of your entire Palm Pepper Spray order. Now, let me talk to you a little bit more about this. So Palm, not only has this incredible range. capacity to it, but its design prevents accidental misfires too. So whether you're carrying the unit on your keys or your keychain or snapping it on your backpack, you don't have to face the dangers of this world empty-handed. You can learn more at palm pepper spray.com. And again, use code sidebar 20 for a special 20% off. So here's a story for you. A man meets a woman online

on a sugar daddy website. They go out on one date. She goes over to his place. She goes over to his place, in the middle of the night, asked for $2,000 and then blinds him with detergent after he refuses to give her the money. That's a true story. Yeah, that's what authorities say happened out in Texas. And this woman, 26-year-old, Kaylee Renee Medina, is charged with robbery.

Let me bring in right now, legendary former homicide detective, Phil Waters, to talk about this. Phil, good to see you. Thank goodness, this is not a worst-case scenario where, you know, there's actually a homicide, but my goodness, incredible details here. Let me just lay out a little bit more.

Phil, this is a, we have a 61-year-old man, and he meets Medina on this website called Seekingarrangement.com. The sheriff has described it as one of these, for lack of a better term, sugar daddy type sites, where people with money meet up with younger people that need money and make some sort of arrangement to date or what have you. That's what the sheriff said. And you know, Phil and I, we've talked about this,

dangers of meeting strangers online. What about this? Well, it's great to be back with you, Jesse. It's it has been a while. Yeah. So I tell you, you know, I read the article and get the sense of this whole scenario here. And, you know, I guess all I can say is, you know, there's a lot of lonely people out there on both sides of the coin and and what as you already alluded to that the blinding with the detergent that's this guy needs to be thankful that's all she did and you know she's going to she's going to pay a price for what she did of course but you know these things these websites that are set up they're they're targeting us. specific marketplace here and to use the sheriff's words a sugar daddy so that would imply that

this is something for older men to go on to so that younger women can facilitate some sort of a hookup of some kind and let's just be clear about how this went down so it's not like he met her and then she immediately came back to his place that's not what happens so they go on one date I believe in early November, nothing reportedly bad happened between the two of them, but according to him, he had no plans to meet up with her again. But later on in the month, she arrives unannounced at his home at 2.30 in the morning, knocking on his door, he lets her in, they speak, they drink wine, and Medina suddenly asks for $2,000.

And when he refused to give over the money, she allegedly threw a fit. He apparently said he didn't have that kind of money. Medina destroyed all these items, including his flat screen TV, his entertainment center, a painting, he told her to stop. She then takes this laundry detergent, allegedly, pours it on his head, and it burns and blinds his eyes. This is a chemical burn. So that scenario of facts right there, that timeline, how she was actually approached him in the middle of the night, what are you looking for there? well i would tell you this the fact that she knew his address right right where he was he disclosed way too much information on this first date and so therefore or let's be clear

they could have been texting they might have still been texting um throughout i might have been reports that like he still texted her but yeah you're right he probably disclosed too much it's possible the the i guess the point i'm trying to make here is is that she knew where he lived yeah And that is, that's a huge mistake, especially if he goes out with this gal one time and has no plans, I think, in the article, so it has no plans to seek her out again. So we don't know, there's always a backstory. So we don't know the backstory here about why he decided he did not want to see her again. And does that mean that something culminated at his residence? They went out to dinner.

They went back to his house. blah, blah, it's over the so on. So something happened on the first day that he wanted nothing more to do with her. And then she shows up weeks later knocking on the door, middle of the night, because she knows where he lives. And she has, I would assume that she's been there before because she knows what he has in the house that is of value. And she's presuming, and this is all just my speculation, that he's got two thousand bucks. that he can lay out that's very interesting that she has a specific amount that she would like right yeah yeah so the whole backstory is going to be pretty interesting even just the

story that we know yeah and yeah like i'll tell you the fact that she asked for the two thousand dollars but my understanding is after she was arrested she was able to post a twenty thousand dollar bond curious how that was possible um what do you think about that well well and a normal bonding situation is 10% of the bond. So it would be $2,000, right? Which is kind of odd. I've never believed in coincidence. I don't know if she was planning.

Who know? But the, and there is a possibility that I don't know what their bonding process is in Baira County, but she may have been released on a PR bond. She may put up some sort of collateral. There's a lot of different ways that she could have posted that $20,000 bond, or I would think not, but I mean, maybe he wouldn't post it with the $2,000 that she wanted. I mean, you know, there's a lot of things here, but it would be interesting to see how she posted

the bond. That would be an interesting question. I think what's interesting is the fact that, I mean, if this is true that she came over and wanted the money, because you mentioned it before, if this was, in fact, a sugar daddy relationship or they're met on a website where that is the implied. relationship. That is a financial arrangement. And if he had, again, I don't know, if he had given off the impression that he had more money than he did, have you ever seen those kinds of scenarios where somebody, you know, gets enraged and attacks because they believe someone

had more money than they promised. Have you ever seen anything like that? Again, I don't know the circumstances of it. But the idea that she came over, or allegedly came over, demanded $2,000, he didn't hand it over. And that's what happened. Have you ever heard of a scenario like that? oh well sure and that that that happens a lot when you have somebody who's who's representing themselves as being something more than perhaps at least in the in the terms of possessions and income they represent themselves as something that they're not and then when somebody calls them out or calls them for some sort of money then they don't then they're exposed to to what they really are. And it makes a person angry because they didn't get what they wanted from a person

who they thought they could get it from. Phil, what about what she allegedly took? So after she pours the liquid on him, she allegedly ended up stealing his possessions like his passport and iPhone, a surveillance camera, a Dyson hair dryer. What's that all about? Well, perhaps she was going to go do her hair after she was finished here with this thing. I don't know. Anyway, I will tell you, I will tell you not to make light of it. Nice and hairdryer. I know this from experience, fantastic hairblower. So I'm not surprised.

Yeah. Yeah. So I don't know, of course, we don't know what her thinking is. Obviously, she's trying to get some sort of remuneration for her effort of coming over and asking for the two grand. The phone, I guess perhaps she's thinking she can sell the phone. I don't think she can pawn the phone. I think she could probably sell it on the street somewhere. The hairdryer, maybe she recognizes the value of a Dyson hair dryer

and she thinks she can go pawned it for a paltry sum of money. Yeah. The passport, that's a little weird. I'm not sure what she's seen. Unless she was going to hold it for ransom. Like, I'll give this back to you unless you pay me money. And the surveillance camera, the surveillance camera is like basically she wanted to make sure she wasn't caught. I don't know.

That would be, I mean, if I'm trying to think like her, I would think, yeah, she sees the camera and then she suddenly says, well, if I take the camera, not knowing that, I mean, she's already been exposed to it, right? So the camera, I guess she's thinking if she takes the camera, then she's taking the video that the camera, that the camera. camera, which is not true, which is not true, right? So who knows what she's thinking? I mean, she shows up in the middle of the night, one, two grand from this guy. So she's not thinking clearly anyway. And you mean that because the video is stored somewhere else, it's not necessarily on the camera, right? Yeah, yeah, it's not going to be the camera, more likely.

Yeah. And what I think is interesting is where was the camera? Hmm. An exterior camera, was an exterior. So who knows what this thing got set up as when they had their first meeting? I mean, are they in there doing whatever they're doing and it's being, it's being filmed? I mean, so there's a whole lot of, the things that she took, for me, generates a whole lot of questions, why she took those specific items, what was, what led up?

to this in the first place, what promises had he possibly made to her in their first engagement? And then now he's saying, well, he didn't plan on getting with her again. communicated to her, so forth and so on. So, I mean, it's, there's a lot of questions, for me, as a detective, I'm just, you know, wow, there's a whole lot of moving parts here. And by the way, the reason she is charged with robbery is because under Texas law, let me read what it is. It's a person commits an offense. If in the course of committing theft, as defined under the statute, with intent to obtain or maintain control of the property, he or she, intentionally, knowingly or recklessly causes

bodily injury to another, which based on the facts of this case, seems to fit perfectly in line with, this is a second-degree felony, two to 20 years in prison. That's my understanding. And, Phil, I'm curious if she's convicted of this, what she could face here, because let me just give a little background about her criminal history. The sheriff said that this young lady, quote, has actually got a pretty extensive criminal history, DUI times three. That's according to the sheriff. So there's a felony level DWI.

She has been arrested for intoxication assault, aggravated assault, aggravated assault on a security guard from a 2020 case. She's certainly no stranger to the law. That's what the sheriff said. Now, our understanding is that when she was arrested for aggravated assault, that case was ultimately dismissed for insufficient evidence. And so with all that in mind, what could she be looking at here? Well, if they're charging it and if they're going to charge her with a second degree, which is the two to 20, I mean, obviously she could be looking at two to 20 years and a fine. Now, I don't know how the Barrett County DA operates. They may have determined the path of lease resistance is the second degree robbery charge.

it's the easiest to prove and they moved on from there. Given her history, I would be curious to know. I know that she may have, if she was convicted three times, if she's got three DWI convictions, that third one would have been a felony. And then we've got an aggravated assault, I think you said, and an aggravated assault on a security guard, which I believe when it is a security guard, And she wasn't convicted of that. She was just an arrest.

She was, she was not convicted. She was not convicted of the, yeah, of the security guard. Well, but we still have the charge there. And that, I'm curious about that particular charge because I believe the law changed. If it's an aggravated assault on a security guard, the level of punishment is raised to a first degree. But without a conviction, without a conviction, I don't know if it could. be used against her in a sentence. Well, it, it, you have to understand, you know, what was the, why was it dismissed?

Right. It says lack of evidence, but that could mean that the, the, the, the complainant in that case may have decided to not seek for the prosecution. So, let me ask you real quick before I let you go about her side for a second. I was wondering if there's any way she could say that she was lord there. you know, he told her to come over or, you know, he gave her the address. She shows up and she acted in self-defense. Now, I don't know if that's going to work considering the circumstances of this,

but more particularly, if she took items from him, how you argue self-defense and take the items. I just was trying to brainstorm potential ways she could defend herself here. Oh, I just think she was going to, I thought she, I think she just thinks she was going to get away with it. but she's she can claim self-defense all day long, but you have to go to the end of it. And she takes these items out of, after, after, after pouring the detergent on him. And I don't think she's got much of a defense here at all,

even if he, let's just say for the sake of the discussion, he did contact her, said, come on over, yada, yada, and then her. Because we're only hearing. his side of this right so there's always two side story and this is what the sheriff is is revealing at this point now she may say i'd be curious to know if they interviewed her to get to get her side of her if they just you know cuff her and stuffed her but uh so i mean it's kind of one of these she may say he called me up he said come on over i came over and i told him that if we're going to do

whatever it was we're going to do, it's going to cost you $2,000. It's not going to be a freebie, like maybe the first one was a free. You know what I'm saying? There may have been a quid pro quo here regarding the two grand. And then he said, well, I don't have two grand. And I'm not going to pay you two grand. And they may have already done whatever it was they were going to do. And then she's asking for the money.

So there's a lot of variables here about. Yeah. I don't know. I hear you. I hear you. Still not going to be a defense. Still not going to be a defense for robbery. We promised me $2,000, but I hear you.

No, no, no. It won't be a defense for robbing the guy. And, you know, he's just, you know, he paid a price for, you know, getting off into this nonsense in the first place. So he needs to stay off those websites. you get what you pay for, right? Or what you don't pay for? I don't think that's what he's paying for. But Phil Waters, thank you so much.

Good seeing you. Always love having you here on Sidebar. Always appreciate it. Always good being with you, Jesse. You have a great day. You too. And that is all we have for you here on Sidebar, everybody. Thank you so much for joining us.

As always, please subscribe on Apple Podcast, Spotify, YouTube, wherever you get your podcast. I'm Jesse Weber. I'll speak to you next time. You can binge all episodes of this long crime series ad free right now on Wondery Plus. Join Wondery Plus in the Wondery app, Apple Podcasts, or Spotify.