Let's Go To Court! - 102: The Origin of Miranda Rights & an "Ugly" Anchorwoman

Episode Date: January 1, 2020

We all know that Miranda rights are important. They’re a staple in every episode of Law & Order. They’re a quick and concise way of making a person aware of their rights. But how did we get Miranda rights? Well, it’s complicated. And it all started with a world-class douchebag named Ernesto Miranda.  Then, Kristin tells us about anchorwoman Christine Craft. Christine was good at her job. By the time she was hired to co-anchor the evening news in Kansas City, she’d proven herself as a talented reporter and a hard worker. But Christine was no dummy. She knew that women news anchors get unfairly judged for their looks. So before she took the job in Kansas City, she told the station management that she wasn’t looking for a makeover. They assured her they were hiring her for her journalistic talent. They were full of shit. And now for a note about our process. For each episode, Kristin reads a bunch of articles, then spits them back out in her very limited vocabulary. Brandi copies and pastes from the best sources on the web. And sometimes Wikipedia. (No shade, Wikipedia. We love you.) We owe a huge debt of gratitude to the real experts who covered these cases. In this episode, Kristin pulled from: “The surfing and survival of Christine Craft,” by Elisabeth Bumiller for the Washington Post “Judging the news by appearance,” The Age “Jury awards Christine Craft $325,000,” by Peter Kerr for The New York Times “Once fired for appearance: Christine Craft to be anchor in Sacramento,” by Jay Sharbutt for The Los Angeles Times The appellate court opinion on Justia.com The book, “Waiting for Prime Time: The Women of Television News” by Marlene Sanders and Marcia Rock “Manager: Appearance key for the TV news anchor,” United Press International “Christine Craft” wikipedia In this episode, Brandi pulled from: “Miranda v. Arizona: The Crime That Changed American Justice” by Mark Gribben, The Crime Library “Miranda v. Arizona” wikipedia.org “Facts and Case Summary - Miranda v. Arizona” USCourts.gov “Miranda v. Arizona” Encyclopedia Britannica

Meet Mike from Toronto. Mike's an actuary. He's got a head for numbers. Uh, more accurate to say the odds. But at Woodbine Racetrack, he becomes Sir Michael of the Six at the King's Plate. You too can rule the day as you experience the excitement of horse racing, the fashion, the grandeur, the party of the summer, the betting. I call it wagering. I've got multiple picks over three races. Parley away, Sir Michael.

August 17th. Get your tickets now at kingsplate.com. One semester of law school. One semester of criminal justice. Two experts. I'm Kristen Caruso. I'm Brandi Egan. Let's go to court.

On this episode, I'll talk about a woman who was too old, too ugly, and not deferential to men. And I'll be talking about the origin of your Miranda rights. You had a pregnant pause there, lady. Oh. I'm sorry I didn't mean to do that. What are you saying, Kristen? I meant that you had like a really weird i was i i don't think i know what the word deferential means like you defer like oh whatever you say oh yes this is me being

deferential it's like just me kind of what am i doing oh i don't you look like you're dodging i think you're playing dodgeball currently here's what what I, you know, in America's Next Top Model, how they used to be like, okay, now we're doing a shoot for men. It's like this. And like you push out your business. Yes. And now it's for women. It's high fashion.

And it's always like a super sickly, weird thing where you curve your back into a C. That means you're ready for Vogue. So you should have thought that I looked like I was ready for Vogue. Oh, I thought you looked like a Vogue model. Yes. Yeah. Yeah. Do you remember the time when someone said that they were really disappointed after they

saw how I looked? Because they thought I was... That's not at all what they said, first of all. It was Terry, my friend. And she said she had been picturing you like this supermodel. She said you were just as beautiful, just much different than she thought. Okay. Just as beautiful, just different than a supermodel.

Deferential. Yeah, so I was thrown off by the word deferential. Because I don't think I've ever heard it. And the context clues gave me nothing. Well. Do we want to readdress the thing that you just said before that i was waiting for you to do it i wasn't going to do it and i really i'm sorry i didn't mean to no i'm yeah okay do it well no i'm not gonna do it why not because it's not my

thing to announce you weirdo norm norm you announce it no you don't want me to do it i do want you to do it norm because it makes you so uncomfortable yeah you want me to announce this yeah because it makes you uncomfortable makes you so uncomfortable can you say it without like fidgeting in your seat yeah i can say it okay say it say it norm um we found out um look how uncomfortable he is he's not looking at either i'll just say it i'll just say it brandy and david are having a baby that's right we've got a little lgtc baby on board hey norman and i were not involved in the creation of this thing yeah i had nothing to do with this that's 50 out of the podcast now we're so excited yes david and i are also very excited it's just a very exciting time i'm sorry pregnant pause i know the minute it's fine you've had a lot of announcements here

lately oh my gosh i have to be there that's it i'm done there can be no more i. I have to be there. That's it. I'm done. There can be no more. I'm going to have to make some up about myself to keep up. That's the last of the announcements, though. Like, what else is there? I mean, other stuff could happen to you. What? Like, oh. Lost my leg. I don't know why we're picking bad things.

All right. Enough of this. Oh, OK. Enough about that, I'm having a baby. Everybody calm down. Well, should we plug the Patreon? Oh, yeah, do that. Oh, hey. I've got a good plug.

If you were a member of the Patreon, you would have known about this baby already. Think of how upset you are that you didn't know sooner. In addition to that, some of you may remember the episode where I talked about sausage brunch. And I thought that everyone knew what that was. Turns out, very few people did. It's a beautiful, delicious Midwestern dish.

Maybe beautiful is the wrong word. It looks pretty beautiful. At any rate, if you join us on Patreon at the Supreme court level you will get to first of all access that delightful recipe but also see a video of us making it and i think it's hilarious wow kristen so modest i do think it's hilarious i think it's hilarious because i didn't know to look into the camera kristen has like a wonky eye for half of it. I was very nervous for like the first five minutes of that video and it really showed.

But no, it was super fun. We had a great time doing it. So folks, on our Patreon at the $7 level you get bonus episodes, you get into the Discord to learn about Brandy's pregnancies, you know, anytime you want to know about... Pregnancies? Whoa.

Well, I'm assuming the next one you'll also... Ease up. You get a monthly video. What else? Oh, the sticker. The sticker? Come on. My God, the stickers. At the appellate court level, if you're like, you know what, $7?

That's too steep. Got to do five. You still get bonus episodes. You get into the Discord. And then at the $2 level, you get to vote on episode topics and you get case updates. It's all good. Am I missing something?

I think that's all of it. Kristen, what do you know about the Miranda case? I remember briefly looking into it like, maybe I should do this case. And that was months ago. Yeah. And obviously I didn't do it.

Yeah. When you say Miranda, you're Miranda, right? Yes. Yeah. I think there was a movie about this. Oh, there was? I think Gideon. It's called Sex and the Six Two.

Is it? No. It's about a redheaded attorney. I watched a movie called Gideon's Trumpet. I don't think it's about the Miranda rights. I don't think it is either. I'm going to look into that. Hang on.

I watched Mr. Holland's Opus. Again, nothing to do with the Miranda rights, but a delightful film. Hang on, I'm looking into it. I watched Mr. Popper's Penguin. Oh, Gideon's Trumpet is um the right to a attorney okay oh okay yeah that's how that law came all right great all right all right okay so i knew like absolutely nothing about this i think that i remember like one little blurb about like um how miranda rights came to be like when i was in middle school or something

and that's legit all that I knew about it. So looked into it. Most of this comes from this really great article by Mark Gribben for the Crime Library. Of course. Listen, Kristen. It's my favorite website. I'm very suspicious of what you have going on with Mark.

Can you recite the Miranda rights? You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. Say it like you're on Law & Order. You have the right to an attorney. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be provided for you. You're not being serious enough. Is that right?

Yeah, I think it is. It sounds right. Yeah. I've watched a lot of Law & Order SVU. We're in downtown Phoenix. It's like 1963, March 2nd, 1963, to be exact. This young woman is working at a concession stand at a movie theater in downtown Phoenix. It's late on a Saturday night.

The last showing of a movie has just gotten out. The movie was The Longest Day, which is this World War Two movie. So according to this article, it's a really fucking long movie. And so this poor girl is at work much later than she usually is. She's an 18 year old girl. So she has to stay there until everybody's out and then she gets to go home. And so it's well after 11 by the time she gets off work. And she like rides a bus part of the way home, and then she walks the rest of the way. And so it's really late at night, and she's walking through, going to have to walk through like a sketchy part of

Phoenix to get home. So she, this particular article that I pulled from, by Mark Gribben, calls her Patty McGee, which is not her her real name it is a pseudonym i don't know if that's a pseudonym that was widely used for this woman or if that's just what mark grippen chose to call her but that's really specific yes that's what i'm going to call her okay so patty mcgee um takes a bus at first and she sits next to a man that she worked with for almost that whole ride. He gets off just like a little bit before her and then she takes it like another stop and then transfers to another bus. So now she's by herself. Then she gets off at her normal stop. It's near 7th and

Marlette, which is like on the edge of a commercial district on like the edge of Phoenix. So she gets off at her regular stop, and then she starts walking up Marlette towards her home. As she's walking, she notices a car ahead of her pull out from a driveway, and and then starts heading the same direction that she is. And then the car stops about a block ahead of her. And as she is getting nearer to it, a person, a man gets out of the car and starts walking towards her. So a couple of things. At first, she's not that alarmed by it because it's not that unusual. And this is kind of an, I guess, an urban area. So people are often out on foot. It's not that unusual. And this is kind of an, I guess, an urban area. So people are often out on foot. It's not that alarming to her that somebody else would be

walking. It's a little bit alarming that he like pulled out of a driveway and then stopped his car and then got out. But she's like, I'm just going to keep walking, you know, no big deal. So she keeps walking. She kind of takes note of this man's appearance. He's dark haired, tall, slender. Remind me again, what time of night is this? It's after 11. It's somewhere between 11 and midnight. Gotcha. As they get close to each other, Patty is attempt, like tries not to make eye contact.

She's like, I'm just going to mind my own business and I'm going to keep walking. Oh, I know that game. Yeah. And just as she's about to pass this man he reaches out and grabs her oh and with one hand he like grabs her into him and the other hand he puts over her mouth and he like whispers in her ear don't scream don't scream and I won't hurt you. And Patty begged him to let her go. She fought him a little bit, but he overpowered her. He dragged her to his car.

He like tied her hands behind her back, I believe, and then pushed her into the back seat and then down onto the floor in the back of the car. And once she was in there, she just did as she was told. She was like, I'm already in the car fighting at this point doesn't do me any good. And at that point, he tied her ankles. And then he got in the front seat and he drove the car. He started driving into the desert. Oh, God. into the desert.

Oh, God. While they were driving, Patty continued to plead for him to let her go and to not hurt her. And he just kept saying he wasn't going to hurt her. He wasn't going to hurt her. Calm down.

I'm not going to hurt you. Don't worry. I'm not going to hurt you. They drive for like 20 minutes into what they refer to as the high desert, which I don't really know what that means,

but sounds scary. Sounds terrible um and then at some point this man pulls the car over and gets into the back seat with patty or takes patty out of the back seat it's unclear and he rapes her yeah after he finishes assaulting her, he asks Patty for money. And she gave him. He asked her for money? He said, give me money. What do you have? Give me your money. And she had $4.

That's all she had on her. Yeah. And so she gave him the $4. And then he told her to get back in the car. So she gets back in the car, I guess, or back into the back seat, whatever. And he throws his jacket over her head so she can't see where they're going. And then he drives her back towards Phoenix and about a mile, half a mile, something like that from her home. He drops her off, lets her out of the car and then takes off.

You're kidding me. No. No. Huh. So this was a time in Phoenix, really a time in the United States, when rape cases were on the rise. Not saying that rape didn't happen before this. I'm just guessing it was not reported or not believed very much. reported or not believed uh right much but at this time like so in the early 1960s from 1961 to 1970 there was like a 33 increase in rape cases oh wow in the united states yeah i mean that

that was probably like women's lib yeah absolutely yeah so absolutely yeah women were standing up for themselves and so they were really kind of just figuring out how to handle rape accusations. I'm sure they did a great job. So Patty gets home from this assault and she's hysterical. Obviously, her family rushes her to the hospital. They check her out and then they call police because she's claiming that she's been assaulted, she's been raped. And so the police come to the hospital. And the doctors talked to the police. And they said that she definitely had signs of semen inside of her definitely some kind of intercourse had taken place. But I don't, I don't know why this is important. And it has nothing to do with the case. But I guess I'll mention it.

The doctors made a big deal about how Patty had claimed that she was a virgin prior to this, and they were like, well, we don't think that's true. How the fuck would they know? Exactly. Yeah. Oh, boy. And the police determined that they're looking for someone who's maybe 27 or 28 years old, a Hispanic male with a mustache, less than six feet tall, but probably, you know, right around six feet somewhere and weighing maybe 175 pounds. So tall, slender, Hispanic male with a mustache. And that's about all the description that Patty can give. She said that he had short curly hair. He wore jeans and a white shirt and that he'd had

on glasses um she did say that he had not had an accent despite him being of hispanic origin or something like he he spoke very clearly um and then so police are like i guess they thought that was a red flag that he didn't have an accent, but he looked Hispanic. I don't know. Why would that be? Because they pressed her for more information. She's like, well, I don't know. He could have been Italian, I guess.

Well, and there are plenty of people who don't speak with accents. That is the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Remember the time we're in, though. It's 1963. So I mean, that long ago. I mean,'s 1963. That wasn't that long ago. I agree it wasn't that long ago. So she said that she, while she couldn't tell them for sure that he was Hispanic or Italian or what his heritage was, she said that she remembered his face. And if she saw his face again, she would definitely be able to identify him.

Okay. Moving forward, things did not go great for Patty. Yeah. She gave kind of conflicting versions of the order of events that took place. She couldn't say whether her attacker had taken her clothes off or if she had taken her clothes off herself

under his instruction. She had or if she had taken her clothes off herself under his instruction. She had said that she had fought back, but she had no defensive wounds of any kind on her. And again, I'm pulling this part directly from the article. She was vague about how many times she had been penetrated. I'm sorry, what? What does that mean? I have no idea. Like. I don't know. Rape sessions? That's what I'm trying. That's what I'm wondering. Is that the point they're

trying to make? Like, had she been raped multiple times or I don't know. Do these people not realize that it might be a traumatic situation? Exactly. But that's not at all how the police took it. The police thought she was being evasive and vague intentionally, and they started to not believe her story. Gee, I wonder why people didn't want to report stuff. They were like one step away from just writing this off as a false report when a couple of things happened. She remembered something about the car. She remembered, she thought maybe it was a Ford or a Chevy, but she couldn't be certain.

She remembered that it was green. And then she remembered that there was this like loop of rope hanging from the back of the driver's seat. It was used as like a handle for someone to be able to get themselves up and out of the back seat interesting yes so these were two things that she remembered and so they were like okay maybe that's something but they still weren't sure they they didn't like that she had conflicting accounts that she couldn't remember all the details and didn't consider for a second that

she'd been through something super traumatic. Right. And so, like I said, they were about to write this off as like a fraudulent case when her brother-in-law came forward and talked to investigators. And he was like, OK, we really believe that something happened to Patty. And here's some stuff that I think that you need to understand about Patty. Patty was developmentally delayed in some way. She had the mental capacity of like a 12 or 13 year old. Yes.

And so until this point, the police had not been made aware of that. So, I mean, that definitely makes a lot of sense when you talk about, you know, being able to remember details and stuff like that. And then the next thing I think makes even more sense. He told police that she was painfully shy, so much so that he had been in the family for three years, and the family was very close. And she had maybe spoken two dozen, three dozen words to him in that entire time. Oh, my gosh. So this very, very painfully shy girl with developmental delays has had to have these intense, probably contentious conversations with police who don't believe. Oh, God.

Yeah, and so he's like, you guys have got to take that into consideration when you're thinking about how she has responded to these questions. Then a third thing happened like then this is the most important thing um another brother-in-law came forward and said that he had been picking patty up from the bus stop lately because she was afraid to walk home at night after this had happened and as they were doing that, they had noticed a green car frequently in the area where her bus stop was. And so this brother-in-law had written down the license plate on it.

So this was a green Packard, and he had written down the license plate. It was DLF 312. And so he turns that into the police, and the police trace it, but it's registered to a woman. And so he turns that into the police and the police trace it, but it's registered to a woman. Well, so they're like, does she have a husband? Does she have a boyfriend? Come on. Yeah. They look into this and the address on the registration was near the bus stop, but the people had just

moved out of that area and left no forwarding address or anything like that. And so they were trying to track them down and they were able to do so with the help of the post office. So they were able to, I don't know, somehow get through in contact with the postal service and see if this mail had been forwarded or whatever. And so they track down this license plate to a new address and they track down the female owner of it. And she has a tall, slender, mustachioed common law husband. Yeah. And so they go and they talk to him and his name is Ernesto Miranda.

So this article from the crime Library calls him Ernest, but every other article calls him Ernesto. Yeah, those are two very different names. Yeah, I'm going to call him Miranda for most of this, but I don't know why they would call him Ernest in this and everything else call him Ernesto. I've got to guess. White guy's writing the article.

He's like, you look like like an earnest to me right um so they they track down this ernesto miranda and they look into his background and he has a big old rap sheet he's been in trouble since he was a young boy he'd been in reform school and all kinds of he had a lot of like minor convictions when he was a kid. And then he had gone into the military hoping that a change of scenery would do things for him. You know, straight his life out. And he'd actually gotten a dishonorable discharge from the military. Oh boy.

Yeah. So things had not gone well. He'd spent some time in prison for taking a stolen vehicle across state lines. And he actually spent a year and a day in the federal prison system for that. So they had a lot of info on this Miranda dude. At some point, he had moved to Phoenix and he'd gotten a job as a laborer on a loading dock for a produce company. And he had done well at that job. And it was there at that job that the police showed up to and to interrogate him, I guess. That's where they originally tracked him down to that job. And I guess he was not at

work when they tracked him down. And so they sent him to his new house. So he gets to the house. And this, this woman opens the front door. And this is Ernesto Miranda's common law wife. So she has two kids. And they are not two kids with another person. And they are not married because she is still married to the previous person because she can't afford to get a divorce. And so they but they had been in a relationship for so long that that's what they called each other. And by legal definition, they were common law husband and wife. Her name was Twyla Hoffman, and she was the owner of the car with the license plate. So these two officers, Carol Cooley and Wilford Young come to the house

and they're like, Hey, Ernesto, we want to take you down and ask you some questions, you know, about this case that, you know, we don't want to talk to you about. We don't want to talk about it in front of your wife. You know, so why don't you just come down to the station with us and talk about it? A couple of things here. That's how they phrased it to him. Like, hey, let's not talk about this in front of the wife. We're here to do you a favor.

So that's how they phrase it to him. But the real deal is that investigators know and are trained to take someone out of their environment to interrogate them. Sure, sure. You take them somewhere else. You take them to an interrogation room, whatever, where they will you will have the upper hand. You don't keep them around familiar surroundings or anything like that because that gives them some kind of upper hand, some kind of comfort level. because that gives them some kind of upper hand, some kind of comfort level. So they take him to the station, and they bring him in. And almost immediately after bringing him into the station, they put him in a lineup.

So they make a lineup. It's four Hispanic men. Only four? Yeah. It's like a four- a lineup. It's a four, four Hispanic men. Only four? Yeah. It's like a four man lineup. And that all have about the same, you know, general appearance. And they bring in Patty to look at the group.

And she, at first she said she couldn't be sure. She thought it was the first man in the lineup who I believe is Ernesto Miranda. And that was a little bit difficult to find, but I believe he was. That was the loudest sip of tea I I believe is Ernesto Miranda. That was a little bit difficult to find. But I believe he was in. I'm sorry, that was the loudest sip of tea I've ever taken in my life. The ice just collided. I'm sorry.

Yes. No, you're totally fine. So they bring in Patty to look at the lineup. And I believe Ernesto was in the first position in the lineup. And she tells them that she thinks that the person in the first position may be the man who attacked her, but she can't be sure. And so she asks them to all speak and all of that. And again, she still isn't sure.

She cannot confirm. But she is, she feels there is a chance that the person in the first position is the man who attacked her, but she just tells them she can't be certain. And so they take her away and then they bring Miranda out and he's like, so how'd it go? And they lie to him. And they say, well, you flunked it. She picked you out. Wow.

Yeah. But police are allowed to lie to you, right? Is that a real question? Yeah. I really thought that police could deceive you. Yeah, I think to some degree. you yeah i think to some degree yes i think to some degree they can they can say you know somebody's already told us everything yeah that's what they always i mean every time it starts absolutely i think it's a coercive tactic

but sure but it's not illegal yes so he tells them he flunked it and he's like really and they're like yeah let's go talk and so they take him into an interrogation room they set him on one side of the table the two detectives sit on the other side and at no point was um ernesto miranda told that he had the right the fifth amendment right not to incriminate himself or his sixthth Amendment right to consult with a lawyer. Here's something interesting. Okay. So one of the detectives, this Detective Cooley guy, he says, well, I didn't think that I needed to tell him that. This guy has a rap sheet a mile long. He's been in these situations before. Shouldn't he know? No he said he's an ex-convict he should know i think that if anything

that shows that he doesn't know he should shut up and get an attorney so it is like almost no time that they're sitting in this interrogation room that they have a full confession out of Ernesto Miranda. They had him give a verbal confession, and then they had it all written up on a form, and then had him sign it. He read through it, he signed it. And then at one point, this is so crazy to me. So remember, Miranda thinks that he's already been identified in a lineup right at some point when they're finishing up the interrogation in the interrogation room the detectives bring patty mcgee to the doorway of the interrogation room and they have miranda look at her and oh wow yes that really. And they say, what do you think?

Is this the girl? And Miranda says, yeah, that's her. What? Yes. How weird and traumatizing. Yes. Here, let's parade you by the man who we think attacked you. Oh, hang on.

He's going to get a good look at you now. Holy. So he identifies Pattyty he's like yeah that's her okay he gives this full confession and then he signs this whole thing and at the top of the conf on the top of the piece of paper that the confession is written out on that he signs it says i am making a written confession i acknowledge that the confession was voluntary and that i've i understand my rights and that this is not coerced in any way understand my rights huh yeah and so he he writes up the confession or he had they type up the confession

he reads it he signs it all of that whatever he ends up going to trial it's super cut and dry he has he's confessed to it you know whatever yeah um in fact like there was one piece of evidence submitted at trial it is his confession uh patty mcgee testifies no defense witnesses are called. Ernesto is represented by this guy, Alvin Moore, who is this like 73 year old attorney who's like at the end of his career and so much so that he had actually started to step away from criminal law. He had been a criminal defense attorney for a really long time. And he said that it had taken a toll on his mental health because you spend that much time around criminals you begin to think like a criminal does okay um but he had he had spent a lot of his life defending by being a defense attorney and so he looked at uh at miranda's history he looked at the case and he had represented a lot of rapists in fact he had done like 35 rape trials in his career and only one had been convicted.

Oh, God. Yeah. Okay. That's what messes with your head. Yeah. Not, oh, I'm starting to think like a criminal, is if you believe that you are representing guilty people and you've gotten them out of justice. Yeah. So he's assigned to take on Miranda's case.

He looks it over and he decides that the best defense is going to be an insanity defense. He's got a confession. So he's got to work against that. So the only thing you can think of is that this guy is like sexually depraved in some way and was insane in the moment when he committed this crime and so he works towards that and gets you know the court to order psychological evaluations of ernesto miranda and all of that all of them come back fine and then he's like well fuck this isn't gonna work we've got just your garden variety rapist here. Yes. Yeah.

And so he's like, well, that's out the window. And so he's like, this is going to have to boil down to me trying to keep this confession out of court. So the trial begins in June of 1963. Patty McGee is the first to testify, and she has a terrible time testifying. Remember, this is this painfully shy girl with developmental delays. And she's doing something that would be hard for anybody. Exactly. And she's like, get up there in front of a courtroom and say all of these terrible things that happened to her.

And the first time that she told them, nobody wanted to believe her. Right. Right. And so, yeah. I mean, I just can't imagine how difficult that would be. But she does it. And she gets through and explains everything. She has to take some breaks to obviously like recompose herself and all of that, which I think anybody would. Yeah.

And then the detectives who were involved take the stand and they talk about the confession and how they got the confession. And at this point, that's when they try to enter it as evidence. they got the confession. And at this point, that's when they try to enter it as evidence. And Ernesto Miranda's attorney objects and says, this should not be admissible. It is a violation of his Fifth Amendment right. And he, and the judge is like, I guess, asks him to explain that. So he gets to question the detective about how he obtained the confession. And so he asks him, did you warn him of his rights? And this detective is like, yeah, at the heading of this statement at the top of his confession, it's typed out that and I read him that paragraph out loud before he signed it. And I read him that paragraph out loud before he signed it.

And he said, so then this defense attorney, Moore, is like, is it not your practice to advise people that you arrest that they are entitled to an attorney before they make a statement? And this guy, this Detective Cooley says, no, sir, it's not. That would be really hard for my job. And so Moore's like, OK, that's my point. So he objected to this confession being admissible in court based on this U.S. Supreme Court decision where they had ruled that a suspect is entitled to an attorney at the time of an arrest. And so he was referring to the decision in Gideon versus Wainwright. Norm, I'm pointing at you. Wake up. Gideon.

Yes. So the court had said that a defendant is, it's not that a defendant is allowed to have an attorney during their arrest, but that a defendant should be allowed counsel during trial. So that was the decision in Gideon's trumpet that Norm was talking about. Gideon. Right. And so this judge that's overseeing this trial, Judge Yale McFaith, says, no, that doesn't apply to this. Because in that specific case that the defense attorney cites, the Supreme Court had ruled that the defendant is allowed to have an attorney at trial.

Well, here Miranda is at trial with an attorney. Yeah. OK. And so the the judge is like, no, that doesn't apply here. He's got an attorney. No. And so he lets the confession in. And so the jury gets to see the entire confession.

And it's, in fact, as I mentioned, the only piece of evidence that is entered in at this trial. Sure. Before the jury deliberates, the judge gives them some instructions based on Miranda's confession. confession he says that they are they are because he had allowed Miranda's confession in court they are allowed to consider that when they are making their determination on guilt however they are free to overrule his finding if they believe that the confession was coerced so he says okay so this was allowed in his evidence. So you can consider this when you are deliberating. However, if you feel that the defense proved

that this was a coerced confession, you guys overrule my ruling and you can choose not to take that confession into account. Okay. And then he also told the jury that while coercion of a of a confession renders it useless as evidence the fact that a defendant was under the the fact that a defendant was under arrest at the time he made a confession or and was not represented by counsel does not mean necessarily that it was coerced so So they have to make that determination.

Okay. So he's leaving it completely up to the jury if they feel that this was a coerced confession or not. And whether to take it into consideration when deliberating on whether Ernesto Miranda is guilty or innocent. Damn, that's a lot of power. It is. I think that's a lot of power. I think it's crazy that he's like, listen, you guys have that right to overrule me. If you if you think I made the wrong decision here.

This judge is at peace with his ego. I guess. He's listening to what Oprah says. Yeah. The jury deliberated for not long at all before finding Ernesto Miranda guilty of rape and kidnapping. Right. miranda guilty of rape and kidnapping right two weeks later he was sentenced to 20 to 30 years on um the charges of rape kidnapping and robbery for taking the four dollars from um patty but we're not done here obviously

what if that was the end and you're like we never got to the miranda right that would be hilarious if you just dropped the ball you're like and I ran out of time. Yeah and I don't and now we have Miranda warnings. No so his defense attorney Moore could not get over the fact that he felt that this judge, Judge McFaith, had made an error in allowing that confession into court. He was like, okay, maybe I cited the wrong case, but this confession should not have been allowed in court. And he feels like should that not have been allowed in court that Miranda would not have been convicted. There wasn't any other evidence

other than Patty's word, essentially. I am so intrigued by this attorney. I mean, talk about a good attorney. Yeah. So he immediately appeals the case to the Arizona Supreme Court. Do they not have an appellate court? I know some folks don't. And by folks, I mean states.

They do, I think. Seems like they jumped or rung. Yeah, I don't know. Okay, so they leapfrogged to the Supreme Court. That's correct. And so in his brief to them, he says, was this statement made voluntarily? And was the appellant, so Ernesto Miranda,

who is a man of limited education, like he presents his background and all of that, he says, was he afforded all of the safeguards to his rights that are provided under the constitution of the united states which i think is a great point because that was the whole argument was that like i don't know he's a convict shouldn't he know what he should know like shouldn't he know his rights well and you know they don't read them to anybody yeah at that. Yes, exactly. Why would you? Exactly. So this moves forward and this takes some time. So he appealed it immediately.

It was like 1965 before it made its way to Arizona Supreme Court. In the meantime, this other case had been decided at the U.S. Supreme Court, the Escobedo versus Illinois case, which I know very little about. I didn't look into it. But in this case, the court had ruled that when police are no longer conducting like a general inquiry into an unsolved crime, but are focusing on a particular suspect that if they refuse that suspect to consult with an attorney or fail to warn that suspect of their right to remain silent that that is a violation of their constitutional rights good ruling yes so that's saying like when someone is brought in for like a general interrogation about something yes but if they

have then moved on to become a person of interest or a suspect, then they must be told their rights. Sure. However, this ruling was very confusing and they made like a list of five bullet points that then every state in America tried to enforce it based on those five bullet points. And it narrowed it so much that it was impossible to enforce it based on those five bullet points. And it narrowed it so much that it was impossible to enforce it on anything. Okay. So Arizona's looking into the Miranda case based on down to like, at what point are we deciding someone's a prime suspect? Because if the police don't want to give you, hey, this heads up that, oh, you could talk to an attorney, which again, I don't think they would want to give you that heads up.

Right. Then you're just going to be like, oh, well, they weren't really our prime suspect. We were just like thinking about them. So, so essentially, yes. So these are the five bullet points that they that they write up in the opinion on this Escobedo case. OK. So they say that an investigation must be focused on a particular suspect.

They say that the suspect must be focused on a particular suspect they say that the suspect must be in custody um they say they say the suspect has to have requested counsel and been denied um and then the suspect has had to have not been effectively warned about their right to remain silent and the suspect had to have given an incriminating statement. Okay, that's ridiculous. It is ridiculous. It's way too specific. Yes, yes.

And so it doesn't change anything. It's funny. It's one of those things that sounds like a good ruling. Yeah. But then you get into it and you're like, oh, well, this really just sounds nice and it applies to no one. Yeah. So Miranda's case makes it to the Arizona Supreme Court

and they look into it and they they measure it against these five bullet points basically and they're like no it doesn't meet the requirements and so they're like the lower court made the right decision we uphold their finding wow yeah yeah because i mean he never requested an attorney okay yeah yeah and they said it's just it's just not the same. You can't compare this case to that case. It doesn't meet the requirements. Oh, fuck.

Yeah. So. Well, I mean, I don't really care. This is why I admire this attorney. Yeah. Because I care about people getting their rights read. Yeah. And people exercising their rights.

But man, that takes a really um i don't even know the word i'm looking for just a really strong person to be like everyone has certain rights including a shitbag rapist yes i mean yes yeah he's not saying he's not guilty he's saying his rights were violated yeah yeah the argument here has never been that ernesto miranda was innocent yeah it was that his rights were violated yeah which is a difficult position i know because you're like holy shit how what ends of are we going to to to try and defend someone who clearly did something terrible to an 18 year old girl i girl. I'd be like, can I find another similar case where the person's not guilty? Absolutely.

So the Arizona Supreme Court's like, nope, everything's fine. Meanwhile, there's several cases across the United States that are having problems with this Supreme Court rule. You don't say. They can't figure out how to interpret it. There's no room for interpretation. It's too specific.

And so the ACLU steps in at this point and they start looking at cases that might make sense that they can put up against this and say, hey, Supreme Court, you've got to make a broader definition of this because this does not work. Yeah, yeah. And so they take on Ernesto Miranda's case as a as a case that they're going to represent to try and get some kind of reform as far as these rights go. Yeah. And so they hire these two attorneys. Alvin Moore is like at this point, he's too old. He's too he can't he can't take it any further well he's 75 right yeah he should run for president so he so he actually helps get the aclu involved but then he's like i'm gonna have to step back my health is you know going down whatever fucking 75 yeah exactly and so the aclu brings in these two great attorneys um robert corcoran and john flynn who have been defense attorneys

in the phoenix area for a really long time, have really great reputations. And they take on the case pro bono for the ACLU. God bless. Okay. Yeah. Again, neither of these attorneys were like, this is an innocent man behind bars. Like, that just wasn't the case here. At best, they thought that this was a sick individual like he was a sexual

deviant who couldn't control his urgent urges whatever and at worst he was a rapist and kidnapper like but yeah at the end of the day either way he's a rapist and kidnapper absolutely but at the end of the day his his rights had been violated you know what this is why i didn't do this one because it's hard to like want to fight for ernesto miranda yeah it's hard to root for him yeah i think i probably was like i should look up the story of those that great right and then i was like oh rape okay goodbye yeah no he's a total dirtbag yeah yes but he his case led to great reform yeah well hey wow how weird that he's this you know horrible guy who has a great legacy and has yeah i mean not because of his work or anything but you know but because of the work these other people did so these two attorneys

they're moving forward they know they're going to argue this to the u.s supreme court they've got to get the u.s supreme court to see this so they U.S. Supreme Court. They've got to get the U.S. Supreme Court to see this. So they write up this brief. And it's like the tiniest brief ever sent to the U.S. Supreme Court. It's like 2,500 words. So like seven pages. That's pretty brief. Thank you.

But somehow the Supreme Court decides it is going to listen to this case. Well, they were probably like, yeah, finally someone didn't go on and on. Yeah. So they pick it and then like four other cases that all relate back to that original ruling that everybody's pissed about. Well, yeah, because they knew they screwed up. And they're going to hear all of those together at the same time. in this brief is that what they need the court to decide and make a clear like declaration on was whether a suspect needed to know of his right to counsel or if police would have to advise him of that so are you just supposed to know it or should police have to tell you and they wanted

the court to lay that out so that everybody knows and it can be the same every time. That's kind of interesting. Yeah. Because ignorance of the law is no excuse. Right. But I guess ignorance of your rights is kind of okay. Yeah. And so, huh, interesting. Yes.

And I think that makes great sense that that's how they worded it. Yeah. And I think that makes great sense that that's how they worded it. Like, you have to make a ruling on this that is very specific so that there's not all this confusion all over the place anymore. Yeah. So in the meantime, fucking Ernesto's over here in prison like, I'm getting my case all the way to the Supreme Court. I'm going to be a free man. It's going to be amazing. Kiss my butt.

Right. So I think he's totally seeing this as like everybody's fighting for me when that's not the case. He's really like being used as an example. Sure. And meanwhile,

everybody's like, oh, yeah, by the way, he's a giant dirtbag. Yeah. So they take this. It is like the it's late February 1966 when these two attorneys go and argue this in front of the Supreme Court. And how they had ruled, how they'd been basically imprisoned by this Escobedo decision. And how it was severely limiting in its application.

And how this needed to change. They needed broader definitions. And they talked about how Ernesto Miranda had not been advised of his right to remain silent when he'd been arrested or questioned. And that that was a violation of his fifth minute right, as we'd already talked about. or questioned and that that was a violation of his fifth minute right as we'd already talked about at this point this flynn this uh attorney that's arguing this in front of the supreme court um he's interrupted by one of the justices and he's like he it's like he's angry and he says you know at what point do you think a suspect has the right to counsel and so flynn's like trying to answer his question yeah and he's like but this this justice potter stewart is his name i had never

heard not one of the greats no he is unsatisfied with the answers that flynn is giving and so then he he's like well what do you think do you think the entire judicial process should come to bear during an interrogation? Do you think the accused should have the right to a jury right there in the interrogation room? Okay, stop asking ridiculous questions, Potter. And so this plan is like, no, a jury's not necessary, but at the time of questioning, someone should know what their rights are. Yes. I hate it when people ask stupid hypothetical questions. So you're saying I should just go jump off a cliff, huh?

No, dum-dum. That someone who has had an extensive education, who comes from a wealthier background than Miranda did, has knowledge of their rights because they learned it in their education system. They know the basic constitutional rights. Yeah, I mean, yeah. They likely do. Sure. But someone like Ernesto Miranda, who comes from poverty and has no education, doesn't know that. And so at some point someone has to tell him yeah that's their the root of their argument yeah and that because someone's background

should not keep them from having the same rights as everybody else they flynn argued before the court for like half an hour um and he basically did it like you and I do, where he didn't read his notes at all and totally went off script. I don't know what you're talking about. And then the state of Arizona argued for a while. And they talked about how this is not a Fifth Amendment issue, but this is just like a political device to try and expand on the Escobedo decision that everybody's upset about. And that this is all being backed by the ACLU and not really about Miranda at all and all of this. Well, who cares? That's stupid.

Exactly. If that decision needs to make sense, if it needs to apply to more than one person in the United States, then it needs to happen. Yeah. Yeah. Of course, Miranda is the example. Right. So ultimately, the justices came down on the side of Miranda and said, yes, this is a problem. Yes, this is a problem. Chief Justice Earl Warren wrote the opinion. And he said that the prosecution may not use statements, whether exculpatory or inculpatory, stemming from questioning. Inculpatory?

Inculpatory. I don't know what that word is. Okay. Yeah. Stemming from questioning initiated by law enforcement officers after a person has been taken into custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom. They said basically that they have the right, they need safeguards in place to understand their constitutional rights. And so then he wrote what is now the famous Miranda warning.

Wow. Yes. From this point on, law enforcement officials would have to ensure that detainees had been briefed on and understood their constitutional rights. The opinion said that police departments around the country must inform them of their right to remain silent. Anything they say can and will be used against them and that they have the right to an attorney. And if they cannot afford an attorney, one will be provided free of charge. So that's written in the opinion. That's where that comes from.

That's incredible. Yes. I love it. This was's written in the opinion. That's where that comes from. That's incredible. Yes. I love it. This was not a unanimous decision. It was actually extremely split, five to four. Wow. And one dissenter, Justice Byron White, shared some very strong ideas on his dissent. He said, I have no desire whatsoever to share the responsibility for any such impact on the present criminal process. In some unknown number of cases, the court's rule

will return a killer, a rapist, or other criminal to the streets and to the environment which produced him to repeat his crime whenever it pleases him. As a consequence, there will not be a gain but a loss to human dignity. Okay. I agree with part of that. Yeah, that's the risk. You let someone know of their rights, and it's not going to be as easy to catch them if they're the ones who did it. But it's also more importantly going to hopefully protect them, protect some people. Yeah.

And that's much more important in the longterm is that you don't. Yeah. And, but that is not how our justice system is designed. So yeah, the risk should to me the risk of a criminal accidentally goes free to me is a better risk to have than someone who is innocent spending a day behind bars that they shouldn't have yeah but our criminal system is really no it's great shut up

reverse of that it's like well we better just lock him up to be safe. We are sponsored by the prison system. Yeah. We're starting our own for-profit prison. So this opinion was released on June 13th, 1966. And when it was released, Ernesto Miranda's conviction on the rape charges and kidnapping charges was overturned. Yes. And so Ernesto is like watching TV in prison and he finds out that this ruling has come down.

And he's like, I'm getting out of prison. And then they're like, oh, no, sorry. First of all, you still have the you still have the robbery charge. And then, oh, yeah, we're going to try you again for. Yes. The rape and kidnapping. So he's like, oh, fuck, really? And hope the $4 was worth it. Ernesto Miranda was his own worst enemy. He couldn't shut his fucking mouth.

He confessed to the rape and kidnapping to multiple people in prison. Oh, yes. And then at the same time, like he and his common law wife were having all kinds of problems. She was wanting a common law divorce or something. I don't really know. She was trying to get custody of their children. And she went straight to the prosecutors and told them all about how Ernesto had confessed everything to her.

And so she became the star witness at his retrial. So this led to another. So again, he was convicted. This time with no, the original confession was not allowed. Just his common law wife's testimony about him confessing while he was in prison. And his own dumbass talking too much.

Okay. This became the subject of another appeal. He was again convicted. He was again sentenced to 20 to 30 years. And then this got appealed and taken all the way back to the Supreme Court. Good Lord. To try and see if it was legal

for the prosecution to have his common law wife testify against him oh yeah because you're not yeah yes okay because if you're married right then you can't compel you can't compel them to yes but she was not she wasn't compelled to exactly she wanted to do it up the supreme court refused to hear the case anyway and they're like yeah yeah you're talking about this guy too much yes so he was his conviction was upheld um he served about a third of his sentence before he was released in december of 1972 and at that point he felt like he was kind of a celebrity he made up these little cards that had the miranda warnings

printed on them and he sold and he signed them and like laminated them and sold them for a dollar 50 a piece you're kidding yeah um but he told you know he did some interviews and stuff and he told everybody he was ready to have a new life he was ready to start over he wanted to get an education well he wanted to yeah you're not gonna be like i'm ready to rape another person yeah exactly um but old habits they die hard they die hard and miranda was soon back to his old lifestyle over the next few years he'd have lots of run-ins with police from minor driving offenses um he was arrested once with in possession of a gun which you know you're not allowed to have a felon and all of this stuff and he ended up. There was a violation of his parole. He ended up back in prison for another year.

And then he was released again. And then at that point, he spent most of his time in like dive bars and stuff like that. Just kind of hanging out, you know, bird dogging for chicas. Bird dogging. I've never understood that. I don't know what it means either. Norm, do you know what bird dogging means? No, I'm just as confused.

Hold on. Well well so like okay when you so when you're hunting your dog goes ahead and like brings out all the all the women so he's just like looking for women right or brings out all the ducks i don't think your bird dog's looking for women to bird dog means to follow, watch carefully, or investigate. When used in a political context, okay. No. The term refers to activists who seek out the candidates, pin them down with specific questions or information, and retrieve their views. Yeah, I don't think that's what he was doing.

Oh, or the stealing of another's date. Oh. The action of the, okay okay this is the dumbest definition i've ever heard okay this is the number two definition on webster the action of one that bird dogs that's you can't use the you're not allowed to use the word we don't know in the definition anyway he's uh he's he's living it up in dive bars bird dogging all over town until one night in january 1976 that night ernesto spent the evening playing poker gambling whatever there were a bunch of people and all of a sudden a fight erupts over some change

that had been on the bar like it one person had belonged to somebody else went to grab it i don't know whatever break and this huge bar fight breaks out and uh ernesto miranda ended up being stabbed to death in that bar fight he was 36 years old wow yeah of the people that were involved in that fight like like only one person, I believe, was ever arrested. And when the police took him into custody, they made sure to read him his Miranda rights. Whoa. That story was nuts. Yeah, I didn't know hardly any of that.

That's such a great story. Yeah. That was fascinating. Yeah. Okay. Do you know what I'm about to talk about? I don don't i because remember i didn't even know the word deferential differential this is a local case oh and it was huge at the time oh i promise you all of our parents know about it okay Okay. Okay. Christine Craft. Does that mean anything?

No. Keep going. You're going to need more, Christine. Christine Craft was. No, still not. Christine Craft was good at her job. In 1974, she got a job as a weather reporter for a station in Salinas, California. TV station, sorry.

Salinas. Salinas. I'm going to, sorry. Salinas. Salinas. I'm going to mess up a lot of words here. It didn't take too long for her duties to expand. Duties. I knew. You know, I thought about picking another word. You're going to be a mother.

I know. Okay. Time to get it together. It's not happening. Soon they had her doing some sports reporting and news reporting. And then she got a job as a reporter. The source I said called it an all-around reporter. What were those other jobs?

She wasn't a reporter when she was reporting on reports? When you're a sports reporter, that's like a specific thing. Sports reporter. News reporter is also kind of a specific thing. General assignment reporter. See, you're getting a definition you didn't even want i'm seeing your eyes you're bored you're glazed over i'm just saying it's like you said reporter in all of those titles and then you're like and then she was finally a reporter a general assignment reporter okay i want to do a show

now she was at a CBS affiliate in San Francisco. She was a great communicator. She had strong presence. She was smart. And in 1977, CBS hired her for their CBS Sports Spectacular. They wanted her to do a weekly women in sports segment, which I guess is all you need one time a week what you know this story don't you i think i might but i don't know how it's okay no dot go ahead well i don't know the local tie so maybe i'm not thinking of the right case so they wanted her to do this sports

segment but first they needed her to bleach her hair and they needed her to fill in her eyebrows with a black eyebrow pencil what sounds like a terrible combination sounds hideous make the hair lighter and the eyebrows much darker yeah and also put on super dark red lipstick. Great. This was all 100% necessary in order to effectively read the news. Yeah. So, obviously, Christine hated her makeover. Sounded hideous to me. Yeah. She didn't like being told how to look.

And she didn't like having all this weird attention directed at her about her appearance. You know, obviously, you're going to get some of that in broadcast news. But this was like, OK, I don't need the whole shebang. Yeah. But she did the makeover. A year later, she was the co-anchor for an ABC affiliate in Santa Barbara. So she's continuing to move up. You know, things are great.

And a few years later, beautiful Kansas City came a calling. Seems like a downgrade from San Francisco. Yeah, I kind of wondered about that. Oh, no, she was in Santa Barbara, which I still think would be kind of a downgrade. I don't know if our market reach would be bigger. Because I assume it's all about market reach. Well, and if she's maybe working towards an anchor position, then maybe. Right. And, you know, so she was a co-anchor before, but this is for the evening news.

So that's, you know, the tippy top. So Kansas City's ABC affiliate, KMBC, 9 News Heard of it. They had a problem. Oh, no. The anchor for their evening news was kind of cold. They needed to warm things up somehow. And what better way to do that than to hire a woman as the co-anchor? I've seen Anchorman. That's basically what this was so they hired a consulting firm called called media associates

to help them find a female co-anchor media associates sent them tapes from a ton of different women news anchors and kmbc really liked christine craft she seemed engaging and you know they wanted someone really warm and she had this like laid-back California energy yes so they invited her out for a job interview they offered her the job and Christine was a little hesitant during the hiring process she told the station manager look my big thing here is I am not looking for a makeover. I've been there. I've done that with CBS. So if that's what you're after, I'm not the person you should hire. Yeah. She said, I show signs of my age and experience and I'm okay with that. Worth noting here. Christine was not grandma Moses. She was

37. Yeah. But at the time that was really old for a woman news anchor right and probably still is yeah probably at the time across the entire united states there was one woman over 40 anchoring the news at a network affiliate. Wow. So, you know, Christine was not old, but she knew how people would see her. She knew what the industry standard was. So she just told the station manager, this is my face. If you don't like it, totally cool with me.

Just don't give me the job. Yeah. But the station management was like, oh my God, are you kidding? We are not going to try and change you. We are hiring you for your journalistic ability and that's it now we do occasionally hire consultants who help with appearance and wardrobe but it's nothing crazy it's just to make sure everybody's kind of looking their best on

camera keeping it tight and so and christina was kind of like oh okay you know because she was willing to take some guidance i mean it is a visual medium so yeah um as long as it wasn't some big over-the-top makeover she was fine so she took the job her first day was january 5th, 1981. Okay. It is hard to accurately gauge how things went. The station says that their ratings just plummeted with Christina's co-anchor, and other sources said they actually went from third to first in the ratings. Here's what's not debatable.

The station management almost immediately wanted Christina to change her appearance. Of course they did. Uh-huh. it's not debatable. The station management almost immediately wanted Christine to change her appearance. Of course they did. Uh-huh. They bought her a book called The Win...

Unpopular opinion, but this is like... Oh, God. It's going to get me in trouble. Do it, Brandy. Do it. I don't know if I can say it. Say it.

I feel like this is a similar situation where one person is like, absolutely. Of course. Anything you need, please come on board. We'll never change you. Or, of course, we'll never do anything with that naked footage we took of you. You're totally safe.

And then as soon as you get on board, they're like, oh, no, we get to do whatever the fuck we want. Of course we want you to change your appearance. Of course we're going to put your naked footage wherever see i don't i would just think if appearance was that important to you then why would you hire her from the beginning yeah yes i agree yeah so i think it's totally weird that they did this if appearance was this important right i i i i do agree with that but it's, is it one person just telling her whatever? And the whole time they're like, no, it's totally fine. We'll get her on board and then we'll totally change the whole thing. I don't know that it was quite like that. Yeah.

Let's see. Let's see, shall we? Buckle up. Oh, God. So they bought her a book called The Women's Dress for Success Book. Oh, Lord. It was written by a man. Of course it was.

Of course. I looked it up and was like, oh, there we go. Oh, no. So they were just obsessed with her clothes. Which I didn't realize until much later in life that what news anchors wear is like their own wardrobe that's not given to them for free usually i just assumed it was like oh i assumed it was too i assumed the station provided it maybe i'm wrong but anyway so they were just obsessed with her clothes apparently they were so concerned about her wardrobe that kmbc struck up a deal with macy's

and they were like yo macy'sacy's, please, we will give you free advertising if you just like let Christine's supermarket sweep your store. So then, you know,

so they do that. Did she have one minute and 30 seconds? That's right. Did she get the giant inflatables? No, because you can't wear those.

So, you know, it just was impractical how many hams she went for the batteries which is a smart move smart smart batteries and film that's where it's then they gave her a clothing calendar and i cannot begin to tell you how condescending this clothing calendar was it was like on wednesdays we wear pink and you wear it with this skirt and these earrings. I mean, it was like, it was as if she was a very small child and could not be trusted. I mean, she couldn't even pick out her own earrings. It was so dumb. She said, I had to spend three hours a week trying on clothes before the camera instead of going out on stories.

At least they let me keep my brown hair. Wow. So it would just not let up. Yeah. Christine says that station management kept comparing her to this other anchor woman at one of the rival stations. And Christine was like, okay, are you kidding? That woman used to be a model. Yeah, I'm not her. That woman is 23 years old. Oh, my gosh. I'm 37. My background is not be a model. Yeah, I'm not her. That woman is 23 years old.

Oh my gosh. I'm 37. My background is not as a model. It's as a journalist, which you knew. Yeah. Like, no shit, I don't look anything like a 23-year-old model. Holy hell. Then, a few months into her sweet new job, where she was doing really well as a journalist,

the station held focus groups you know just to check in see what people thought of their on-air staff excellent look i'm so nervous uh apparently the focus group did not enjoy christine not because she was a bad journalist or because she had a bad personality but because she was too old unattractive and wouldn't defer to no not deferential to men also they didn't like that she knew so much about sports really yeah she was a sports reporter yeah but she was a woman an old unattractiveractive woman. Oh, my gosh. How dare she? Yeah, because women aren't allowed to like sports.

That's why I don't like them. Because it's not allowed. It's not because they're boring as hell. No, they're amazing, Kristen. Come at me. Hey, Brandi, please defer to men on this one, okay? So one quick thing, that too old, unattractiveive wouldn't defer to men line is what christine says that kmbc news director ridge shannon told her and he of course denied it so i just want

of course yeah he's not gonna be like oh yeah yeah i did pretty horrible huh i said it i'm total asshole also okay a lot of articles mention this. It drives me crazy because this isn't the point, but at the same time, it does feel like it should be mentioned. Christine is attractive. How dare you say that, Kristen? I mean, it's all about how we shouldn't be obsessed with people's looks. But I do think the kind of funny-ish part of this is, like, she's a conventionally attractive woman. Yeah. But, my God, she was just so hideous because she wasn't a 23-year-old former model.

Yes. I don't know. Yeah. How dare she reach the age, surpass the age of 30? I think we should all be killed at 33. Exactly. Shit, my time's about to go. I'm a ghost.

So after the focus group, KNBC did a phone survey of like 400 random people in Kansas City. And they asked like really important questions. Like... How hot do you find your news anchor? Oh my gosh! Yeah.

So it was like, hey, you know all the other women co-anchors at local news stations. Let's play a little game. Does Christine compare to all these other women looks wise? Oh, my gosh. Yeah. There's a dog fight happening outside. And also you're horrified by what I just said.

I'm also horrified. So the results were clear. In the game of hot or not, Christine was not as hot as the other women. The 23-year-old former model? Well, and, like, yeah, I, it's so fucking frustrating. But I ask you,

what was the station to do? Probably fire her. Well, sure. I mean, you've got no other choice, right? That's exactly right. They can't have the least attractive female co-anchor of four in the Kansas City area. So dumb. Yeah.

Because that's what matters when you're delivering the news. Like, how was her journalism? You know what drives me crazy? again there's no mention of it anywhere how what kind of journalist she was well no i mean the thing is like everybody says she was a good journalist like but the thing that drives me crazy and again this is a looks based thing so here i go focusing on looks but you know this drives me crazy like when we're out to lunch and maybe there's like a TV at the bar or something and I see an ugly man, it drives me fucking crazy.

Because every time I see an ugly man anchoring the news or doing whatever, all I can think is, they would never let a woman half that ugly on TV. Stone Phillips forever had the tightest face i've ever seen on my in my life like yeah did he go to the cheapest doctor he could find for that those eyebrows were like just bees upside down bees yes well and you know at least he was trying something he was pulling stuff and he would have been way too much much time in tanning bed. Oh, well, yeah, yeah.

But I mean, like, some... Is that his name, Stone Phillips? Yeah, yeah, yeah. Okay. I think so. I mean, I'm picturing... We're picturing the same dude. Well, let's Google.

Let's do a Google. No, that's not who I'm thinking of. Yeah, I was going to say... Oh, no, that's not him. Stone Phillips has always been a Stone Cold cutie pie. Who are we thinking? No, he's from Fox News. I'd swear his name is Stone something.

There's more than one Stone. You're talking about Shepard Smith? Oh, that's totally who I'm talking about. Yes, I'm sorry. I am referring to Shepard Smith. Okay, I was thinking of another hideous name. Shepard Smith has V eyebrows. Who else could you be talking about?

No, I agree with that, too. And just the tightest face. Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah. I can't even make mine as tight as his is well yeah you need you need surgical tools that's why um so yeah it just drives me crazy because you see some of these guys and you're like they would never let a woman who looked like that on camera. It would just never happen. Or like an overweight man could be an anchor and an

overweight woman, never. Never. Even like a young How dare people have to look at that? My God, can you imagine? The humanity. Also, okay, Bill O'Reilly is obviously not a news anchor. Yeah.

But they need to let go of whoever applies the bronzer to that man. It is unbelievable, right? Yes. Have you seen? Yeah. I mean, sometimes they have him on at the gym, and it's like someone's never learned the neck trick. Yeah. Anyway, okay, back to it should

we talk about a really good looking male anchor who who norm you gotta you wanna pipe in you wanna say something just at the ready oh oh anderson cooper oh he's gotta be the hottest male newsman right well yeah about chris hayes who's chris hayes he looks like norman look him up he looks like a cross between you and rachel maddow so hot he does look like Norris. I'd like to get the scoop on him.

So what was the station to do? Yeah. I ask you. Christine had signed a two-year contract. She was only eight months into it. No, no. So the station obviously had no choice. They had to remove her from the position as co-anchor.

And put her where? As the janitor? I mean, obviously, it's just like a general assignment reporter, you know, because she wasn't the boner producing machine that they'd hired her to be. So they told her, hey, we're not going to reduce your pay. We're not going to take away any of your benefits because we're really nice guys. But you can't be co-anchor anymore. You're just going to be demoted. Cool.

Yeah. Christine was like, I don't think so. She was like, I'm not taking the demotion and i'm not going quietly into the night so she marched over to the local newspaper and she was like hey guys i've got a story for you let me tell you what just happened to me and word spread so fast kmbc had tried to demote christine craft for daring to be 37 in front of a camera. This made national news, partly because this was clearly something that was happening at news stations all over the place, but it just wasn't something that got talked about openly.

So part of the theory was that, basically, if you tell someone, we are demoting you because you're unattractive it would be too embarrassing for them to like speak up about it yeah but christine was just like this is wrong and she didn't give a shit so she spoke about it yeah so you know christine got the hell out of kansas city she went back to santa barb, where she quickly found a job in television. Imagine. Yeah. But Christine was... I'm sorry, she was hot in California, but not hot in Kansas? Yeah. So dumb. You guys should see the look on Brandi's face. So Christine was still shaken up about what happened to her in Kansas City. It hadn't been right. It couldn't be legal. So she looked herself

in the mirror and she said, let's go to court. She sued Metro Media for violating Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, which I had to look at a Roman numerals chart because I'm not great at those. So that's what prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of a lot of things, including sex. She was like, also, they paid me way less than my male co-anchor. Give me $1.2 million, please. I'm glad we fixed that problem. Yeah, that's over.

So is this problem we're talking about right here. Yeah, exactly. We've come so far. 40 years yeah that is deeply disturbing looks like we've made it nowhere we've made it nowhere no in 40 years yeah fuck i. Men are allowed to happily rot on camera and we get killed. So, but KMBC was like, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, sweetheart. Let daddy make this right. No, good. I hated that. I hate that so much.

I knew you would. How about this? How about this how about this we'll give you nine thousand five hundred dollars and and we'll let you keep the clothes um fuck right off i'll take 1.2 million yeah she was like go fist yourself those clothes were polyester. I don't think she actually said go fist yourself, but I'm sure she thought it. When asked about her lawsuit, she said a male and a female go out as reporters over the years. They start as fledglings. Over the years, they cover rape, murder, mayhem, politics, and so on. By the time they are in their mid-30s, and so on.

By the time they are in their mid-30s, they develop bags and wrinkles, the signs of age, experience, and expertise. For the man, that represents credibility. For the woman, it is disqualification. That is clearly discriminatory and violates federal law. That's why I'm pursuing my case in federal court. Yeah. Mm.

Mm. Mm. Get them, girl. Her trial began in 1983 in a courtroom in Kansas court. Yeah. Mm. Mm. Mm. Get them, girl. Her trial began in 1983 in a courtroom in Kansas City. Where? Kansas City Federal Court, so I don't, I don't know.

Great, thank you. Great insight. We give addresses for fucking everything. Well, you can Google the Kansas City... Okay, hang on. Here we go. You know somewhere? You guys are a bunch of athos.

Okay. Okay. Okay. I think it was the Charles Evans Whitaker Courthouse. 400 East 9th Street. Great. I've never seen this building ever before. This is here in Kansas City.

Yes, it's here in Kansas City. Have you seen this building? Oh. God, that is crazy looking. I've never seen... This building is not here. Well, I'm looking at a picture of it. That's a bizarre looking building. That's a bizarre looking building.

That is a bizarre looking building. That is very strange. Yeah, I've never seen this building ever. Okay, so that happened. I'm glad we got that figured out. A lot of disturbing stuff happened in this trial. Stuff came out about the focus group. Apparently during one of the focus group. Ugh. Ugh.

Ugh. Apparently, during one of these focus group sessions, one of the consultants said, let's spend 30 seconds destroying Christine. Is she a mutt? Oh, my gosh. Let's be honest about this. And then, if we all chip in, we can buy her a ticket back to California. Wow.

And if we all chip in, we can buy her a ticket back to California. Wow. Which, is that the way you run a focus group? Yeah, no shit. That's how you get unbiased answers. Yeah. Obviously, when asked about this, that shithead consultant guy was like, whoa, whoa, whoa, I'm not a bad guy. I'm just saying stuff to, like, loosen the loosen the group up you know that's just my job but christine's legal team was like okay first of all small focus groups run

by douchebags are not a fair way to evaluate whether someone's good at their job yeah also this method of testing is a clear violation of title VII. These tests are all about, like, sexual stereotypes. Get comfy, Norm. Jesus, Norm. These tests were all about sexual stereotypes. There was nothing fair going on here. That focus group leader was clearly egging people on to be negative about how Christine looks and dresses. Yeah.

Absolutely. So we pause here because you may be wondering, what can an employer say to an employee about the way they dress? Which you probably already know this. They can say they're out of dress code. We're not meeting dress code standards. And that's about it. Yeah. Yes.

So here's the deal. An employer can demand certain grooming standards um that's totally within the law that's fine but the key is the standards have to be reasonable and they have to apply to everyone yep and they have to be enforced in an even-handed manner so in their defense was like, look, we're working in a visual medium here. So, of course, we care a lot about how our on air personnel look. They have to look professional. And we hold men to the same standards as we hold women. Yeah, OK.

So then they started listing examples. Brenda Williams, we never we've never given her any direction on grooming. But Mike Plackey, we told him to lose some weight. Also, we told him to stop wearing sweaters under his jacket. Which, Mike, I mean, he had to be told. I mean, that'll shed 15 pounds right there same with michael that's how he was trying to lose the weight just sweating same with mike mahoney we told him to lose weight and get a better hairstyle and bob worley we told him to wear contacts and maybe get a hairpiece okay if

i had heard all this and I was not from Kansas City, I would be like, hmm, wow. It sounds like maybe they are kind of harsh to the guys and harsh to the women. Maybe it is even-handed. I know what these guys look like. That's just not the case.

It's just, it's not. Should we say that has like the worst Come over Yeah I mean It is a It's a terrible Come over

Should we say His name though Should we bleep it He's a I mean everyone knows He has a terrible hangover Yeah Okay so

Is he a public figure Yeah Yes Well then you can say Whatever you want about him No I'm thinking more ethically. Hey. I don't think anything less than a business.

If you think he has a terrible comb-over, just say it. Yeah, he's got a terrible comb-over. Okay, so. You should see what people say about me. I know. So, it'll be interesting to see. I think it has nothing to do with his ability as an anchor or a news reporter he has a terrible come over yes so it'll be interesting to hear see what we

ended up cutting from this but i just want to tell people that i've been struggling with how to say this but the fact is that he's been a reporter in kansas city forever i think he's a good reporter i actually when i worked at the university, I worked with him on a little story. I thought he was a great guy. Has a comb over. And so I'm just throwing that out there, not to be mean,

but to say that this idea that KNBC was treating the men and women equally, it's just not true. It's just not true. It's simply not true. It's just not true. It's simply not true. Because no woman would be allowed to be on air like that. Yeah. Okay.

So Kent Reploggle was the general manager. Of the famous Reploggle family. It's amazing he got so far with a last name like that. He was the general manager of kmbc and in his testimony he said i believe it is significantly important it's really missed opportunity what what i thought you were gonna say i believe that children are the future let them grow and wait what's the hold them close? Hold them. Let them lead the way. Show them all the beauty they possess inside.

How do you hold them close and let them lead the way? Well, that's for you to figure out. So in his testimony, he said, I believe it is significantly important a television news presenter have both journalistic credentials and presentation skills. If I had to rank them, I would put appearance at the top of the list. Wow. I think it's interesting that he called them television news presenters. I think that's good coaching right there. Yeah, it definitely is. And he said, hey, as for this unequal pay stuff, it's just not true.

Mm-hmm. Scott makes way more stuff, it's just not true. Scott makes way more than Christine did. That's true. Christine made $35,000 a year. Scott makes $52,000. But when Scott started two and a half years ago, he only made $37,000. The reason their pay is so different is because their skill set is different scott studied broadcasting in school he has experience in bigger markets

if you want my honest opinion i think we gave christina fair salary she was untried and new to the marketplace her salary was competitive so i actually think that kind of makes i actually think that makes total sense yeah because when i when i first read his salary was 52 hers was 35 i was like yeah but there's something to be said for education and experience sure and the to me the bigger thing is that two and a half years earlier he he was at 37. Yeah, absolutely. He also said that, yes, the focus groups didn't like Christine. People called into the station and said they didn't like her. The ratings dipped. It seemed clear that Christine was the problem.

Naturally, she needed to be demoted. They'd done the right thing. But Christine's legal team was like, up wait a minute this was all appearance based that's how you were evaluating her and that's why you demoted her and you know what this isn't just about sex discrimination this is about fraud when you hired her you said you were only hiring her for her journalistic ability. You said that looks weren't the overarching factor. She only took the job because of that promise. Then she lost the job because of her looks.

That is fraud, my friend. Yeah. What do you think the jury found? I think they found in her favor. They did. And they awarded her $500,000. They found that Metro Media was guilty of fraud. So this is interesting.

The jury also issued an advisory verdict asking the judge to find that Metro Media was guilty of sex discrimination. I'm going to explain that in one minute. The only thing that the jury didn't side with Christine on was the equal pay thing. They felt like that story kind of made sense. I think it makes sense. Yeah. So here's the side note. In a Title VII lawsuit, you don't have the right to a jury trial. Instead, under the federal rules of civil procedure which was a terrible class that i took a judge can use the jury as basically a set of advisors yeah and that's what happened here anyway law school adjourned yes metro media was pissed so they appealed they were like we didn't

commit fraud and while they were pouting the judge still had to rule on this sex discrimination thing so for a while christine was in this weird limbo waiting for the judge to reach his decision she had kind of a tough time she was sick of working in tv can't imagine why she was drowning in legal bills she was living above a garage and the only thing that brought her peace was the sense that she was doing the right thing and going surfing. Yeah. Then the judge reached his decision. Christine Kraft had not been the victim

of sex discrimination. The judge said that Metro Media clearly required both male and female on-air employees to look professional and businesslike. They claim that, but watching the channel will tell you that's not true. Yeah, I mean, a set of eyeballs will show you that there's a different standard. Yeah. Ugh, I hate that. Well, I mean, I'm sorry, but you're just wrong because the judge says.

I disagree with the judge. The judge says that the station was totally fair in how it enforced the rule. And, you know, yeah, they had to have more conversations with Christine about her looks, but that was only because she needed it. You know, because of her below average aptitude when it came to clothes and makeup. Wow. Okay. Okay. Which again, you don't get this far in broadcast journalism as a woman if you're an idiot about hair and makeup and appearance. No, you don't. I just don't buy that. Yeah. And that phone survey and the focus group, those weren't discriminatory. They weren't designed to give Christine the boot.

It was totally reasonable that the station ran those tests and decided to use them to enact a personnel change. Okay. Yeah. And then Judge Joseph Stevens threw out the jury's $500,000 roll call. Wow. And he ordered a new trial. Holy shit. He said that the jury had been affected by all the publicity in the case.

What? They had their crazy pants on, clearly. Oh my gosh. So, in 1984, the case went to trial for a second time. This time, the trial was held in federal court in Joplin, Missouri. The same judge presided over it as the first time. But this time, the trial was a little different. The jury was sequestered and it was bigger.

For this trial, there were 12 jurors. At the previous trial, there were six. Dormant Can you keep your fart noises to a minimum please? No he put his feet Sorry it was my foot It was his feet Brandy and I were trying to be professional podcasters

and it was very hard Sorry So also Christine's legal team had to narrow their focus Instead of going after Metro Media for sex discrimination and violation of pay laws, they just stuck to the fraud charge. The trial lasted eight days. Witnesses for Metro Media were like, OMG, we totally hired Christine Kraft in good faith. Yeah, we helped out with clothes and makeup, but, you know, that was just part of the gig.

So Ridge Shannon was the news director for KMBC, and he said that on at least three occasions, Christine told him that she wanted help with clothes and makeup. Interesting. Which, I mean, I would probably say the same thing if someone told me I was so fucking ugly. And anyway, and, you know, he had to have some uncomfortable conversations with Christine. For example, he had to tell her that viewers were so distracted by her appearance that they couldn't pay attention to her reporting. But of course, Christine's legal team stepped in and tried to show that the station had made a big deal about how they were only hiring her for her journalistic ability, blah, blah, blah. And clearly they demoted her.

And it wasn't because she wasn't a good journalist. So there was some rehashing of what happened in the first trial. We won't go into that. We're going to skip ahead. Yeah. The jury deliberated for about three hours. What do you think? Who did they side with?

I think they sided with her. You're right. They sided with Christine. They awarded her $225,000 in actual damages and $100,000 in punitive damages. Metro Media was super mature about the whole thing. They were not. They were like, hey, two juries have decided against us.

We will now pack our bags and go home. No, we will be appealing. Sike! Sike! They were like, we must appeal. Yeah. And so they did. Christine said, two juries. 18 people, I've convinced.

How many more do we have to go? How many people are on this fucking jury? So six the first time and 12 the second time. Oh, okay. Yeah. Which I said, if you didn't pay attention. I'm sorry. She said, how much more justice can I afford?

No kidding. All that money's gone at this point. Well, she was never awarded it. No, that's what I'm saying. That's got to be her legal fees. Yeah, so the first verdict was thrown out. Yeah. And, you know, she's still waiting.

So Metro Media took their case to the appellate court. And they won. Wow. The court obviously had a super long opinion, and I'm going to read all of it now. Don't you dare. The gist of it was that there was insufficient evidence for the jury to reach the conclusion that it now. Don't you dare. The gist of it was that there was insufficient evidence for the jury to reach the conclusion that it did.

Meanwhile, and this is just a super fun fact, do you remember Brenda Williams? No. She was the anchor who replaced Christine Kraft and who in the first trial KMBC used her as an example of how fair they were because they never had talked to Brenda about how to groom herself. Well, in 1985 Brenda sued KMBC used her as an example of how fair they were. Because they never had talked to Brenda about how to groom herself.

Okay. Well, in 1985, Brenda sued KMBC for sex discrimination. Oh, weird. Yep. Yep. This was settled out of court. Anyway, so we're two trials deep. The appellate court has just found against Christine.

But she wasn't done trying. Her legal team was like, how about we go all the way to the Supreme Court? Better the Supreme Court was busy that day. They didn't want to take the case. Apparently, Sandra Day O'Connor, who was like the one woman, was like, I'd like to take it. But yeah, you know. On the very same day that the Supreme Court decided not to take Christine Kraft's case, the California Senate passed a resolution congratulating Christine on her outstanding achievement in journalism and her perseverance and courage in advancing the cause of women. Wow. Where are they now? In the years since this legal battle,

Christine has done a ton of talk radio. She wrote a book called Too Old, Too Ugly, Not Differential to Men. She went to law school and practiced employment and disability law. She's also a public speaker. And there's an exhibit dedicated to her at the Newseum in Washington, D.C.,

which is such a cool museum. Yeah, it's a museum for news. It's so cool. It's the cheesiest name. Well, you know, sorry. You love cheesy. I know, it sounds like I fucking named it. And you just stand there laughing outside the Newseum.

It's like, I named it. Do you get it? Do you guys get it? Because it's the news. Do you get it? And it's a museum? Newseum. Newseum. Do you guys get it? Because it's the news and it's a museum. Museum. Earlier this year, or I guess, I mean, this is coming out January 1st.

So last year, Christine wrote a column for the Kansas City Star about her experience. She talked about that moment when she went to the newspaper to tell them about what had just happened to her. moment when she went to the newspaper to tell them about what had just happened to her she said no one ever thought a female tv personality would admit that she'd been called unattractive they were playing with the wrong person as a former competitive surfer i had seen real sharks the corporate ones just didn't scare me boom so it's sad because ultimately like i mean two juries yeah she had two juries but nothing yeah yeah but i think it's amazing what she did yeah this was this was a huge legal battle and i would love to hear her speak yeah absolutely that was good no i was not familiar with that at all i just the only reason i remember is because like we've had a lot of um local lawsuits from anchor women who i mean are going through this

same thing and it feels like in every story they will at least like name drop christine craft that's that i loved it well i mean i didn't love it no but it's very interesting i actually hated it thanks i hate it thanks i hate it thanks i hate it you know what we should say kristin what should we say happy fucking new year oh yes happy new year happy new year it's 2020 oh well it's great to be in the year 2020. Can you say it like Barbara Walters? And this is 2020. That's pretty good. That was good. That was very good.

That was good. I was always a big Barbara Walters fan. I know you were. That's why I thought you could do it. Should we give a pep talk? Yeah. It's 2020, damn it. Be your best self.

Get your shit together. Yeah, what are you doing? Yeah, you that's listening, talking to you. Drink some your shit together yeah what are you doing yeah you that's listening talking to you drink some water what are you doing put on some chapstick put down the heroin change your sweatpants whoa heroin you know someone might need to hear it oh my god change your sweatpants

people are tired of seeing them oh well I was afraid they were tired of smelling them no it's just that one pair that they keep wearing over and over again. You can wear sweatpants all you want. I feel personally attacked right now. You should be clean every time you put them on. As I sit here wearing sweatpants.

I know. Norm, I'm not talking to you. I haven't smelled your sweatpants once. Oh, God. Congratulations, Norm. Keeping it clean in 2020. We hope you guys are having an amazing New Year so far. And you all survived your New Year's Eve. I meant like hangover free, Norm. Keeping it clean in 2020. We hope you guys are having an amazing New Year so far. And you all survived your New Year's Eve.

I meant like hangover free, Kristen. Oh, okay. I'm sorry. I didn't mean like literally survived. I'm just always afraid to drive on New Year's Eve. Well, yeah. It's like the number one night of drunk driving accidents, right? Yeah.

Well, gosh, this is a downer. Yeah. Thanks for bringing it up. I'm sorry. I'm sorry sorry you're the one who said they survived i know i thought that i meant like getting crazy at the party i hope you didn't drink too much and puke in your front yard why do you say that brandy i did it once won't be doing it this year no you won't well maybe you'll puke i mean i could puke but it won't be from alcohol you were puking for a while there, my friend. I was. There was a time we had to pause our recording so I could go throw up.

You remember? Yes. Okay, I can't remember what episode it was, but I remember I was telling my story. Yeah. And I started to get sad. Yeah. Because I was like, I think this is a good story. And she looked so not interested for like the last 10 minutes solid.

You were just like sitting there. Yeah. And you, I mean. I just had to puke so bad. The second I stopped talking, you're like, that's great, I'm going to go puke. But you seem to be over with the puking. Yeah. Yeah.

I'm feeling much better. So on that note of feeling much better and loving 2020, let's do some Supreme Court induction. Let's. Guys, we have a new topic for Supreme Court inductions. What? Yeah. My God. Kristen, is your computer flying away over there?

Yeah, it's a very old computer. I could really use a new one. This time, we're doing your name and your favorite beverage. I'm very excited for this week's inductions. I would like everybody to eat black eyed peas as we do our inductions. They're supposed to be good luck or something, right? Yeah, I think so. Just eat black eyed peas on New Year's Day for good luck.

Yeah. So do it. So do it. Come on. I'm trying to give you good luck. And try to survive. Sassy Cassie 678. Wine.

Eva Marie. Wild Basin Sparkling Water. Leanne Barrier. Dr. Pepper or Assaulted Caramel White Russian. Emily Jo. Culver's Root Beer. Bowser. Water.

Valerie. Diet Cherry Dr. Pepper. Maria Baker. bowser water valerie diet cherry dr pepper maria baker iced vanilla sweet cream cold brew from starbucks oh that sounds oh it's so good and david just had it for the first time and he's obsessed with it now fay ultra blue monster energy drink yvette boresh pumpkin spice cold brew from Blue Monster Energy Drink. Yvette Beresh. Pumpkin Spice Cold Brew from Starbucks. Delicious. Lakin. Coke with a Lime Wedge. Welcome to the Supreme Court. Oh my gosh, guys.

Thank you for all of your support. It's a new year. It's not a new me. I'm going to thank you exactly how I've always thanked you. Thank you for continuing to support us. If you're looking for other ways to support us, please find us on social media. We're on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube, Reddit, Patreon, of course. And then once you've done that, be sure to subscribe, like, and review the podcast.

Or subscribe, rate, and review the podcast. Yeah, you can't like us. I mean, in your head. You could like us. Just tell people you like us. That's exactly what I want you to do. Okay. And then you can't like us. I mean, in your head. You could like us. Just tell people you like us. That's exactly what I want you to do. Okay. And then be sure to join us next week when we'll be experts on

two whole new topics. Podcast adjourned. And now for a note about our process. I read a bunch of stuff, then regurgitate it all back up in my very limited vocabulary. And I copy and paste from the best sources on the web and sometimes Wikipedia. So we

owe a huge thank you to the real experts. For this episode, I got my info from newspapers.com, the New York Times, the LA Times, the Kansas City Star, the Appellate Court Opinion, the book Waiting for Prime Time, the Women of Television News by Marlene Sanders and Marsha Rock, and Wikipedia. And I got my info from an article by Mark Gribben for the Crime Library, as well as Wikipedia, uscourts.gov, and Encyclopedia Britannica. For a full list of our sources, visit lgtcpodcast.com.

Any errors are of course ours, but please don't take our word for it. Go read their stuff.