Love Trapped - Not Over Yet | EP 15

Episode Date: July 9, 2026

Clayton Echard and Greg Gillespie attend the most recent hearings in Laura’s criminal case. After frustrating news about the plea deal, Clayton is determined to continue the fight for accountability. Plus, Ronn and Jan’s bankruptcy filing takes a surprising turn.  For exclusive content, follow us on Instagram @glasspodcasts. If you would like to reach out to the Loved Trapped team or have a similar story to share, email us at [e-mail] omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This is an I-Heart podcast. Guaranteed Human. There was no anything inside those eyes. They turned black. It scared the hell out of me. Evil, wake up. I'm the one that saw the murder take place by Krivac and DePippo. Anthony DePippo showed no signs of remorse,

appearing unfazed after being sentenced to the maximum. I said I'm not guilty. I'll take it to the grave. Listen to the devil's quarry in the Bone Valley Feed on the IHeart radio app. Apple Podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts. What's up, fam, it's sports journalist Ari Chambers. Hey, what's up, y'all? It's your girl, Sam J. And we're the hosts of everyone watches women's sports, a new podcast from together.

We're breaking down the biggest headlines, the viral moments, and the stories everyone's talking about across women's sports. From game-changing performances to culture-shifting conversations, we'll give you our takes, our debates, and a few laughs along the way. Because everyone watches women's sports. Listen to everyone watches women's sports. On the IHeart Radio app. Apple Podcast, or wherever you get your podcast.

May, June 26th, I am heading to the courthouse right now for a hearing on whether or not they extend this plea deal out again. Clayton sent me this voice note as he headed to the Maricopa County Superior Courthouse. He was hoping for a resolution, one that included jail or prison as part of Laura's sentence. And Clayton is determined to go to all the pretrial hearings he can, so he can let the judge know that. At every hearing, he's been trying to catch Laura's gaze to let her know he's not afraid of her. She usually won't look him in the eye. But at this specific hearing, Clayton says she looked right at him.

I made eye contact with Laura and she looked away and then looked right back, stared at me for a couple seconds and did that about four times as I stared at her for a solid 20 seconds. Look, it felt different. I almost saw in her eyes like a sadness at what she's done. Maybe it's hit her that it's very real possibility she's going to get locked away. It really felt like she's defeated. Clayton wasn't the only victim who showed up in court that day. Greg Gillespie was there too. He's the one who went on a few dates with Laura back in 2021

and is now named as the state's other primary victim. And I could have been that me and Greg showed up that she realized like, oh, fuck, these guys are not just going to like move on. They're here to make sure that I face accountability. I'm Stephanie Young, and this is Love Trapped. Last week, on Monday, June 29th, Laura was back in court. She's facing 14 felony charges, including fraud, forgery, perjury, tampering with physical evidence, and theft by extortion. She'd been offered a plea deal by the state, and we thought that on June 29th, she'd either have to accept the plea or begin the trial process.

Instead, the deadline for her criminal plea was extended. Once again, I don't like to be the person who brings you this news. I feel like the boy who cried wolf. I believed, like a lot of my sources in this story, that we would finally have an answer on Monday. But we didn't. So I'm going to walk you through what happened. Let's go back to Friday, June 26th. That's when there was a settlement conference in her case.

It's basically a meeting where a defendant can have a more transparent conversation with the judge about how this case can be resolved without trial. We were told these meetings are typically private, behind closed doors, so I didn't plan to attend. But to our surprise, this one was open to the public. Two of the victims listed in this case, Clayton Eckerd and Greg Gillespie, were both in attendance. I caught up with Clayton and his attorney Woodnick right after the hearing.

and you'll hear from them throughout this episode. Thankfully, the hearing was recorded and posted on YouTube. And the court will call matter on the calendar, state v. Laura Owens, case number is here in 2025-007-905. Can have appearances, please, starting with the state. Good afternoon, Your Honor, Christian leaders, in behalf of Laura Owens, who's president, with me a defense table.

This hearing was presided over by a commissioner, not a judge. and Commissioner Jonathan Simon was pretty thorough. Part of his job is to explain the criminal process to the defendant. In this case, that's Laura. Ms. Owens, my name is Commissioner Simon, and I've been asked to do the settlement conference in your case today. This is an informal setting where you'll have the opportunity to talk about your case if you want to and just see if you can get a resolved.

We're going to discuss and you can ask questions about the plea agreement that you've been offered in this case, and the options that you have in this case and the potential range of penalties. Commissioner Simon made it clear that he won't be the one making a ruling on her criminal case. But it's important to have the commissioner explain all the options on the table for the defendant. This has to be on the record. It's part of due process. I'm just going to help you get as much information as you can about your case while you still have some options. And I know that there is the current plea offer on the table. He then detailed what would happen if Laura doesn't take the plea deal.

If you do decide to go to the trial and you don't want to the trial, and you don't want the plea agreement in this case. There is a possibility, obviously, that the jury finds you not guilty on these charges, which would be, I think, your best case scenario, right? But if the jury finds you guilty on any of these charges, then the judge would have to impose the sentence. And you are probation eligible. So if the jury finds you guilty on any of these charges,

the judge at sentencing could place you on probation for each of those counts. With any probation term, a judge can impose up to 12 months of jail as a term of, probation. Do you understand that? Yes, thank you. Okay. And if you don't get probation, the judge may sentence you to prison. Laura is being charged with 14 felonies. Here's the breakdown. 11 class 4 felonies, one class 6 felony, and then the most serious. Two class 2 felonies. Arizona has guidelines for prison terms for each kind of offense. And within each guideline, there's a wide range of sentencing.

You'll see for the class two felony, the lowest sentence is three years, and the aggravated sentence is 12 and a half years. For the class four felonies, that would be a mitigated sentence of one year, and the maximum would be three years on those. And for that class six felony, the mitigated, the lowest would be four months, and the aggravated, which would be the highest, would be two years. So if you found guilty on multiple counts in your sentence, the judge can have those run concurrently, so those prison sentences at the same time or consecutively,

which means they'd run one after the other. Do you understand that as well? Yes, thank you. I guess if you took this to trial and it was the absolute worst day that you could have at trial, but it's just assuming for today's hearing that they'd all have to run consecutively, one after the other, for the class four felonies with the 11 of those, that would be over 37 years for those, and for the class twos, it would be over 25 years for those, and for that class six. it would be two years on that one. So if you add those up, it would be a significant amount of time.

The commissioner said he didn't think that was likely to happen, but wanted to make sure Laura understood what was at stake here. I asked Clayton's attorney Greg Woodnick about this moment. Does that mean she's going to prison? No. But it's really fucking scary. I mean, if I were Laura, I would have been anxious hearing that read out loud, even though she's probably read the supervening indictment,

hundreds of times. After the commissioner explained the whole process, the state prosecutor, Ed Leiter, was given the opportunity to address the plea deal on the table. Your Honor, the plea agreement, which was sent to defense counsel over a month ago, it does expire today. One of the issues, and I do want to express, and I think one of the victims, wants to address the court,

the frustration, and this is often a frustration that all parties, but often victims specifically feel in terms of how long the justice system often takes. In this particular case, Mr. Luters is now her third attorney. Whenever additional attorneys come onto a case or a new attorney, that tends to drag the case on further. And certainly, I understand, and the victims, rightfully so, are deeply frustrated about how long this is taking. And then, Mr. Lighter,

addressed the amount of evidence they're working with in this case. One of the issues, and it provides the crux of the state's case against Ms. Owens, is the vast majority of our evidence against her is digital forensic evidence derived largely from her cloud account, cell phone extractions, among others. As a result, that evidence is voluminous. I think we're multiple terabytes of data. The state has moved as quickly as we can to get that information in front of Mr. Luters, but as I understand he can explain in more detail, but there has been some issues in terms of his ability to review some of that evidence. According to the prosecutor, Laura's attorney is having difficulty accessing some of the digital

evidence, which seems to be causing a delay. Here's how the commissioner responded. I do understand the frustration that this case is taking longer than you'd like, but Mr. Luters does have an obligation to properly advise his client on how to proceed. And in order to do that, I think he has to review all of the evidence. So if you were going to trial without having to review all of the evidence or the court didn't give him that proper time to do that, the case wouldn't be closed as quickly as maybe you would like because I think it would open the case up for potentially an appeal and possibly going back to trial on that. So I think the idea is that if we can give Mr. Luters the opportunity to review all of the.

The evidence here, you can properly advise Ms. Owens and then prepare for trial. Given the terabytes, I would think that that would take some time to go through. So I'd be inclined to give. And it wouldn't be, again, me ruling on this, but any judge would be inclined to give Mr. Litter's time to review that. Laura's attorney is telling the courts there are terabytes and terabytes of evidence. And he needs more time to go through it all. We've only heard about a sliver of what's in that digital evidence. So when I hear there's so much more digital evidence,

my mind is racing, trying to imagine what the state might have found. There was one moment where the prosecutor revealed more details about the charges and the listed victims in this case. I haven't spoken about this, but there's also Stormy Mitchell, who is the woman whose ultrasound was used by Ms. Owens. That is actually a third victim, and she feels very strongly about being exploited by Ms. Owens. Then Laura's attorney asked her,

the prosecutor about the specifics of the fraudulent scheme charge. And in the middle of that question, he said something interesting. Listen, you know, the evidence of perjury is strong. You and I have talked about that. I was surprised Laura's attorney admitted on the record that the evidence of perjury is strong. So I asked Greg Woodnick about it. I heard Christians comment on the recording. I don't know if that's what he meant, but I heard what he said. Is it possible that he's already looked through some of it and seen some very damaging data? Yeah, I think there's probably more than a lot of evidence against Laura. I think we all think that.

I think that's probably the genesis of a lot of the frustration. Because this settlement hearing is informal, the victims were allowed to speak. Clayton went first. He questioned Laura's attorney's request for more time to review the evidence. The big thing I want to focus on is not allowing an extension of the plea deal simply because she has a history of delaying, and it's just going to continue. My understanding is he's come into the case a few months ago,

and this feels like an 11th hour push to say, I can't access the material. You know, to me, if you couldn't access the material, you should have accessed it day one, and every single day you should have been following up to get that evidence. I'm all for due process, but to me, this just feels like an extension of her tactic

carried out by him to extend it, and it's been three years. I'm tired. I know we're all tired. And a ton of evidence, blatantly obvious. She's admitted on the stand to medical fraud. She's admitted to certain lies.

It's a clear-cut case. She's guilty. There's no reason to drag it out and say the terabytes of information are going to somehow change something. When did you come in? When did you get the material first sent to you? And how hard did you really try

to access this material. I just would like to know how much effort he's put in to actually access in the documents. I think that's important to taking into consideration. Yeah, Mr. Litters, I mean, do you have any ideas how long it will take you to get to that information? All right. What's the specific question? The specific question is how hard I've tried. Clayton sent me a voice memo after the hearing where he talked about this moment.

He kind of gave me a smart-ass response to my question as far as like, when did you get the information? and what's he been doing this whole time? And he just said to the judge, like, what's the question? Like, how much effort have I put in? It felt very condescending. Back in the hearing, Christian looters had a response to Clayton. He said he had been trying to access the evidence, at least more so than any of Laura's previous attorneys.

I can safely say, and I've made this clear to the prosecutor's office for the past month and a half or so since this was officially disclosed. and actually was this close to her previous attorney. That's not incorrect. But there was nothing done about that information with any of the previous attorneys. I can safely say that. That we're the first ones who have actually started to look at it.

And we have done everything we can up to this point to do that. That's what I'll say. Before Friday's hearing concluded, there was another victim who wanted to speak. Someone who has his own history with Laura. But we haven't heard a lot from. Greg Gillespie. If Laura attains new representation, are we going to put any timeframes around that,

so we're not doing this over and over and over again? Listen and you're there for heart-wrenching knockouts. The world's biggest stage! And breathtaking triumph. In 2026 FIFA World Cup, the knockout stage. Every match, every moment. Listen on TSN radio. Join the globe.

On the road to the July 19th final. 2026 FIFA World Cup. Stream it all live on TSN Radio. Available on IHeard Radio. In the moment, it felt like it was going on forever. I didn't think I was going to live. I was terrified. There was no anything inside those eyes.

They turned black. It scared the hell out of me. That was your first murder case? Yes, sir. Fear to say this was the biggest case of your career? Yes, sir. Rape and murder for a child. Just as bad as it gets.

I would think so. Evil, wake up. I'm the one that saw the murder take place by Crevent and DePippo. Anthony DePippo showed no signs of remorse, appearing unfazed after being sentenced to the maximum. I said I'm not guilty. I'll take it to the grief. Listen to the devil's quarry on the Iheart radio app,

Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. And to hear the devil's quarry ad free with exclusive content, subscribe to LaVa for Good Plus on Apple Podcasts. What's up, fam? I'm sports journalist Ari Chambers. Hey, what's up y'all? It's your girl, Sam J. And we're the host of Everyone Watches Women's Sports, a new podcast from Together and I Heart Women's Sports. Because let's be real. Women's Sports is giving us way too much to talk about these days.

The highlights, the rivalries, the breakout stars, the moments to take over your entire timeline. in the conversations that start during the game and somehow keep going all week. Every week we're breaking down the biggest stories across women's sports. We'll give you our tapes, our debates, and probably a few disagreements.

We'll talk to athletes, celebrate big moments and get into what's happening on and off the field, court, track, and beyond. Because we're not just interested in what happened. We're interested in why everyone's talking about it. Because everyone watches women's sports. So if you're already a fan, you're just getting into the game,

there's a seat. for you right here. Listen to everyone watches women's sports. From the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcast, or wherever you get your podcast. One of the victims named in Laura's criminal case, Greg Gillespie, attended the hearing on June 26th. Greg had one particular concern. If Laura attains new representation, are we going to put any timeframes around that? So we're not doing this over and over and over again.

Given the circumstances, I would think that if there was a lot of time, a new attorney on the case, the judge would try to put some parameters in place. But again, it's really difficult for me to say what those parameters would be. But again, I do understand your concerns and your frustrations in that regard and wanting to get this case moving and see that justice is done. Greg Gillespie told the judge he'd been dealing with the impacts of this since 2021. And Greg had a good question. What happens if Laura fires this attorney and gets a new one? Or what if he quits? I asked Woodnick about this very real possibility.

If she did part ways with current counsel, she would need enough time to get new counsel so that they could get up to speed and handle advising her on a plea or getting the matter ready for trial. Is that going to cause delays? Or would that cause delays? Absolutely.

At some point, is the court going to say, you know, we can't do this anymore. We need to move this along? Yes. But the court is never going to say that in a way that deprives Laura of the ability to defend herself. And the court should not do that, because it's important that Laura is adequately represented.

It's important that anyone accused of 14 felony charges have adequate representation. Friday's hearing gave us insight into why the state is considering an extension of the plea deadline. But nothing was officially decided. So it sounds like we're not going to be able to get the case resolved today, at least this current version of the plea agreement. Would that be fair? That's fair to your own. Okay.

Is there anything else that we need to address today? I know we do have, there is a case management conference, looks like Monday, you're in front of Judge Ruder. I don't think so, not from the defense's perspective. Did you have any questions for me? No, thank you, Your Honor. Okay. Well, I appreciate you all being here this afternoon and sharing your concerns as well. After the hearing ended, I talked with Clayton.

He told me something interesting. He and Laura were making eye contact, and he felt like something about her had changed. There was a moment in the court where I felt this urge to just stare her down. And in the past, I've done it. It's not so much to intimidate her. It's more like, I'm not afraid of you. You can't do anything to me. And I hope you can feel that.

So I did that this last time. And Laura made eye contact and then darted her eyes away like she typically does. But this time, she darted her eyes away and then instantly looked back at me. Held her gaze for like three seconds, darted her eyes away, then held her gaze for like five, six seconds.

And at that point, I broke my eye contact because, like, I was taken aback because it was the first time that she's ever locked eyes with me and held it. In that moment, there was something different resonating from her. She's looked at me in the past

and she's given me like that, smirk, you know, like, I've got you. And who do you think you are doing this to me? But this time was like, there was something weird there where it was like she was looking at me. And it was almost like a scared child. So it was fear, but it was also a mix of like, I'm sorry, I don't know what I've done. And that was weird.

That was just something on Friday that happened. That was a first time thing. And it was something new. That was for sure. It was a new look that I am like, okay, something is shifted. On Monday, June 29th, everyone arrived at the Maricopa County Superior Courthouse once again. This time, it was for a status update in Laura's criminal case. This is CR 2025-007-905-state versus Laura Michelle Owens, time set for a complex case management conference

and a status conference. I wasn't able to be there in person, but a few of my sources were there, and they said there appeared to be extra security in the courthouse that day. We'd already gotten a preview of what Laura's attorney might say, which is that he needed more time to review the evidence. But Monday was Laura's opportunity for a formal answer on the plea deal. And there was still a little hope that it could finally be over, that Laura would surprise us all by taking the plea.

Clayton told me the hearing began in a way he didn't expect. The judge wants to meet with the process. and her lawyer back in the chambers. So I was already kind of like, really? Like, why can't we discuss this openly? After a few minutes, the judge and lawyers returned to the courtroom. But now that they were on the record, there was very little they had to discuss. Most of it had already been covered at the settlement conference a few days earlier.

The only thing left was an administrative detail. All right, there's a pending motion. modify release conditions to permit travel. Mr. Lider, did you want to be heard on that issue? On Friday, June 26th, Laura submitted an out-of-state travel request. Remember, because she's charged with 14 felonies in the state of Arizona, she has to ask for permission to leave the state. She wanted to go to San Diego, California, right after this hearing.

We've had a voice actor read from the travel request. The purpose of her trip is to help her sister Sarah, with caring for her young children. Sarah has been away from her home on business, and her husband was unexpectedly called away next week for work. They have no one to care for their two young children while they're away. The couple frequently relies on Ms. Owens for child care, and they do not have another option in this situation.

The victims have the right to object to travel requests. In this case, both Greg and Clayton said they didn't want Laura to travel out of state. Afterwards, I asked Clayton why he feels that way. She deserves to start feeling the pain of her actions. There needs to be something inconveniencing her because, as of right now, there is nothing inconveniencing her. Laura can go do anything she wants today because she has no restrictions. You wouldn't even know that Laura is facing felony charges.

You can hear the frustration in Clayton's voice. But in the end, Judge Ruder permitted Laura's travel request. I did review the record. Ms. Owens made all her court appearances. It does not appear to be a flight risk. So over the victim's objection, permit Ms. Owens to travel to California. When I talked to Clayton after the fact,

he was still heated about this. I'm like, that's problematic to me because Laura should have been already feeling the ramifications for her actions. But yet, the court has just said, you want more time? There you go, Laura, have it. At the end of the hearing, there was some back and forth about scheduling the next one.

And interestingly, this line from the judge. I know there's some, I guess there was some recently disclosed evidence that the defense is reviewing. We don't know yet exactly what that means. But it's worth mentioning. Just in case something comes of it. Like we said, most of the substance had already taken place in chambers. The plea deal was not even discussed directly in this hearing. So, Ms. Owens, stay in touch with your lawyer, and we are in recess this minute.

Shortly after the hearing, a new settlement conference appeared on the docket for August 28, 26. That looks like the new plea expiration date. After this hearing, Clayton spoke to the prosecutors directly. They told him about what happened in the judge's chambers that day. and it was illuminating for me. It seems like Laura has a hard line. No jail time, no prison time. He said basically like, look, we were in the chambers

and the judge is trying in everything in his power to get us to come to a plea. He doesn't want to take this to a trial. So he's like, what can we do to make this a plea? Laura's lawyer said if there was no jail time or prison time that could be attached to the plea, she would have taken the plea already. That is what she's most afraid of.

As we know, Laura's demand is at odds with Clayton's. Clayton wants her to see jail or prison time. In this meeting, the prosecutors told Clayton they would not take jail or prison off the table. Clayton also wanted an answer to another question. I asked the prosecutor, I said, this deadline on the 28th of August, is that the absolute last point at which she can take the plea.

He said, yes. I said, there is no situation in which that will get extended. He goes, no, I'll make sure of it. Is it okay? So if she takes the plea on the 28th, because she will wait, she's not going to take it on the 27th, she's not going to take it, you know, a month earlier. She's going to wait until the last minute because she just wants to drag this out

because she knows that it only harms us. but I said if she accepts that day, what happens from there? He goes, well, if she accepts, we go to sentencing, which will be scheduled within a month. He goes, and then that'll be it. You'll go your day at court, and then sentencing will happen, and that'll be it. I said, okay, and if she declines it, he goes, then she goes to trial. I said, realistically, when does that occur, trial? He said, likely two months from that point.

So you're saying probably sometime in November. Crazy how we just pushed trial out four months when it was supposed to be end of July. That's the court system, though. That's just the business, baby. that's what we're all supposed to be okay with. I've spent about 30 hours interviewing Clayton over the last year. This interview was different. His emotion was so raw in this conversation.

I don't feel like I have any power. And again, I'm just being honest. I'm at the mercy of the court. You know, there's nothing I can do. So for me, I'm just going to sit here and go on with my life and live my life outside of this situation. try to think about this as little as possible. And then show up on August 28th,

because there's nothing I can do. I've written a letter to the prosecutor. They've taken what I've said in consideration, but nothing changed. It's neither bad nor good. It's just what it is. We sit and wait, and we just let the justice system

basically go at a snail's pace like it always does. Maybe we just see it for what it is. A system that's broken that is still moving forward at a glacial pace, and let's just wait it out. And that's it.

He sounds defeated, but of course, underneath that, it's frustration and anger. This whole thing is emotional. So let's show it. Let's show people what it really is. Let's show all of it, including some of the stuff that might be perceived as ugly. I don't care. I'm just human. I'm just trying to show the human experience.

And this is the ugly, unfortunate part of it. I'm the one that has to carry this frustration for the next two months. When I spoke with Woodnick, he took a much more measured approach. He says the court has to take. reasonable requests into consideration. Because if they don't, and then Laura's found guilty by a jury, she could have grounds for an appeal, which would make this process much, much longer. The delays that we've dealt with, I think, are very normal delays involving the professionals

and the process and assuring that there's due process for Laura. I think the court's doing exactly what the court is supposed to do. Prosecutor's doing exactly what they're supposed to do, as is Laura's attorney, who's a good lawyer and doing what he's supposed to do. Woodnick says the delays we've seen in this criminal case are all pretty standard so far. We haven't even gotten to the phase where potential delays are coming from the defendant. Are there going to be other delays that we haven't seen yet that are more Laura-centric? And is she going to, on the day, a jury set to a panel to start a trial?

Is she going to be hospitalized? Is she going to claim she's got other medical issues or family emergencies? Maybe, but those are tomorrow problems. You're not going to be able to deal with them until that happens. And the court is going to have to deal with those accordingly when they happen. Woodnick has been navigating the Laura Owen saga for nearly five years. And even he admits he's running low on patients. I get people's frustration.

And candidly, Stephanie, I'm frustrated, not because I'm frustrated with the process. I'm frustrated because I want this chapter to come to an end. I want the book to come to an end. I want to know what's going to happen in the criminal process. We all want to know the end of the story. but Woodnick provided kind of a wake-up call. I want this to be over with two, but I also want it to be over with the right way.

If Laura wants to go to trial, great. Go to trial, let's make sure it's a very fair trial, and there's no argument that she didn't have access to all the data she needed or she needed an extra couple weeks. If those sort of accommodations assured that a defendant, Laura, or anyone else, gets a fair trial, then the court needs to be doing that, and it does seem like the court did that. In the podcast, everyone's kind of expecting this to come to a head.

Your podcast, Love Trap, is kind of in real time. And I think when you watch a lot of docu-series and people documenting crimes that have happened have gone to trial, they're happening after the fact. The story's already been told. And you're in this very unique situation of being in the middle of the story. And I think that's why people feel some level of frustration. Before we hung up, Woodnick stressed one more point, that the victims themselves continuing to come to court

and advocate for justice, as difficult as that can be, really does move the needle. The victim's showing up sends a message that we're here, we will be here, we will be here no matter what, whether or not this trial goes in July or November 2030, we will be here. I think that was the message that Greg and Clayton were sending.

Listen. and you're there for heart-wrenching knockouts the world's biggest stage and breathtaking triumph in 2026 FIFA World Cup the knockout stage every match every moment

listen on TSN Radio join the globe on the road to the July 19th final 2026 FIFA World Cup stream it all live on TSN Radio available on IHeart Radio In the moment, it felt like it was going on forever. I didn't think I was going to live. I was terrified.

There was no anything inside those eyes. They turned black. It scared the hell out of me. That was your first murder case? Fair to say this was the biggest case of your career? Yes, sir. Rape a murder for a child. Just as bad as it gets.

I would think so. People wake up. I'm the one that saw the murder take place. by crevette and de pipo. Anthony DePippo showed no signs of remorse, appearing unfazed after being sentenced to the maximum. I said I'm not guilty. I'll take it to the grief. Listen to the devil's quarry on the Iheart radio app,

Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. And to hear the devil's quarry ad free with exclusive content, subscribe to Love for Good Plus on Apple Podcasts. What's up, fam? I'm sports journalist Ari Chambers. Hey, what's up y'all? It's your girl, Sam J. And we're the host of everyone watches women's sports, a new podcast from Together and I Heart Women's Sports. Because let's be real. Women's sports is giving us way too much to talk about these days. The highlights, the rivalries, the breakout stars, the moments that take over your entire timeline.

And the conversations that start during the game and somehow keep going all week. Every week we're breaking down the biggest stories across women's sports. We'll give you our tapes, our debates, and probably a few disagreements. We'll talk to athletes, celebrate big moments, and get into what's happening on and off the field, sport, track, and beyond. Because we're not just interested in what happened. We're interested in why everyone's talking about it. Because everyone watches women's sports.

So if you're already a fan, you're just getting into the game, there's a seat for you right here. Listen to everyone watches women's sports. On the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcast, or wherever you get your podcast. Right as we pressed publish on the last episodes, we heard some news. It's about Mike Maruccini's Domestic Violence Restraining Order case

in California. As you'll remember, Laura's DVRO against Mike was dismissed by a San Francisco judge. But Laura planned to appeal that decision. She had until June 29th, 2026. But at the last minute, she requested an extension,

and it was granted. She now has until July 29th, to appeal the DVRO dismissal. As for Laura's parents' most recent bankruptcy filing, we have quite the update. Ron and Jan filed for bankruptcy last year in an effort to keep their house from being foreclosed on. But they didn't complete their financial paperwork

or make the required payments. Because of that, their bankruptcy filing was dismissed, and their house was set to go to auction on May 26, 2026. But a few days before that, they filed for bankruptcy again to try to save their home. This time they filed pro se, meaning without an attorney. The judge asked them to come with documentation to prove they qualified for the refiling. Ron and Jan said they would. That's where we left off at the last bankruptcy hearing.

And so do you intend to complete your schedules due on the 26th? I would like to if that timing doesn't work out. I am committed to this. We are committed to this. It turns out, Ron and Jan were only committed for about a week. Six days after that hearing, they filed a motion for voluntary dismissal of their Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing, citing they were unable to obtain counsel. Then, on July 1st, Ron and Jan appeared virtually to continue their bankruptcy hearing. Good afternoon. I'll take the appearances and the no one's better. Let's first start with the debtors.

I expected some boring bankruptcy dismissal, full of technical jargon. And boy, was I wrong. Luckily, a recording of this hearing was posted on YouTube. The presiding judge, the Honorable Madeline Wansley, started it off with a bang. At the last hearing, I heard a lot of information about ponies and GoFundMe accounts. and other potentially non-disclosed assets. Before this hearing, the attorney for the U.S. trustee, Jennifer Giamo, and Ron and Jan had all come to an agreement that their bankruptcy filing would be dismissed. But when they got to court, Judge Wansley wasn't having it. She'd taken into consideration the other potential assets, like the GoFundMe account

that was started for Ron's medical issues. The bankruptcy judge saw some discrepancies that, didn't sit right with her. I guess what concerned me was, if we had this large sum of money within the last year for the GoFundMe account, that that seems to be an asset that could be potentially recovered for the benefit of creditors. Jan tried to minimize the GoFundMe, which is still active, and to date has collected nearly $137,000.

This was Jan's reply to the judge. And with regard to the GoFundMe, which I'm sure you were noted. by the online smear campaign that has gone against us. So let me just interrupt you to say that the court only reviews what is filed with the court. So I know you referenced an online smear campaign before. I really have no idea what you're talking about. All I have is what has been filed on the docket and what people tell me in open court, I do not independently go out and it would be unethical for this judge or any judge to go out and do background

research on people and learn about them. So just so you know, that's the way the court will operate. And I'm not suggesting that. I know that the smear campaign people have said online that they have sent information to your office. So I don't know whether you've received it or not. I know that they also sent it to the U.S. trustees office. But with regard to the GoFundMe, as I mentioned before, it was started in 2024. it was all virtually exhausted by, I would venture to say, by May of 2025.

Here's the thing. Ron's GoFundMe is still active and accepting donations. I did some quick math on the public contributions, and in the last year, they received almost $6,000. I think Jan believed that. she could talk her way out of not reporting that income. But the judge was intent on pushing the issue. Well, transfers that are made shortly before the bankruptcy filing do have to be disclosed.

That it's problematic if you did not disclose the use of those funds. I'm going to order and direct that you provide the records concerning that particular issue to Ms. Jima said that she has an understanding as to the financial circumstances, immediately preceding your prayer case. this case so that we, she, her office and the court has a full understanding of the circumstances before the case is dismissed. Instead of issuing a dismissal, Judge Wansley wanted a full accounting of their finances. I'm really asking for a full accounting of the GoFundMe account, the monies that were

received and the monies that were spent and how they were spent. And so, you know, the whole typical information, you know, what did you get, when did you get it, what did you do with it, where are your receipts? Okay. Okay. Who, when, where, why, and how? Okay. Okay, but again, that was all prior to the chapter 13, that if we'd had those funds,

we wouldn't have needed to file chapter 13 or chapter 11. Okay. Well, I hear what you're saying. Some transfers can be recovered despite the passage of time. This case was filed on May 22nd of 2026, and it could be that if there were funds that were transferred in a particular period, they would be of interest to the U.S. trustee's office, okay? It seems like one of the reasons the judge was so firm with Jan

is because the court previously asked for documentation, and it wasn't submitted to the U.S. trustee, Jennifer Giamo. I know that I had directed you to email to Ms. Giamo the information required, and I don't know if that's occurred. I believe that that should happen before this case is dismissed. I think we should have a fulsome under-sum. of your financial circumstances. So, again, I'm in order and direct that you provide that information to Ms.

Jamo's office. Everything that you're supposed to be providing, you need to provide. So whatever that office is asked for, I'm ordering and directing you to cooperate and to provide that to her. Your Honor, we were unable to do that. I had presumed that we would be able to get counsel to help us. This was never my intention to file pro se, and I'm very aware of the fact that Chapter 11 is a very exhaustive chapter to go into as a pro se litigant, and that was not our intent. Our intent was to be able to get counsel, and we have been unable to obtain counsel.

Well, you know your financial circumstances best, and so you should be able to reconstruct that information and gather those records to provide it to Ms. Gai'amil. Your Honor, I'm unable to without adequate counsel. If I had been able to do that on my own, we would have continued this on our own. Right, but you filed this case. You filed a Chapter 11 bankruptcy case. You have not yet paid the full filing fee. And once you're under the jurisdiction of this court, you have to abide by the United States Bankruptcy Code and its rules and requirements. And I'll tell you one of the most important things about the bankruptcy code is it requires absolute transparency.

And that's the concern of the court is that the schedules and statements here compared to the prior schedule statements seem to indicate a lack of transparency. And so as a participant in the system, you have certain obligations. And I'm directing you to fulfill those obligations. It's not appropriate to file bankruptcy and park in bankruptcy and obtain the protections of bankruptcy. and yet not fulfill the obligations. And so, again, that is your obligation. You filed this case. You undertook these duties and responsibilities,

and now I'm directing you to cooperate. I've heard that the judges and lawyers in bankruptcy court don't mess around. This was my first time really seeing what that means. You were previously ordered to provide them. You haven't provided them. Where the court sits, you're currently in contempt, ma'am. Oh, I understand. I understand.

Okay. Okay. Any other questions or concerns? None for me. Okay, thank you. It's worth mentioning that those are the only words Ron spoke during the whole proceeding, aside from announcing his name at the very beginning. He sounds like he doesn't want to be there.

But Jan has another question for the judge. I'm sorry, did you have a question? Well, the foreclosure date has been set for July the 28th, and I have filed some objections with the lender, and I would like to hire an attorney to handle the foreclosure, so I'm just wondering about how those dates coincide. So with this date being set of August 6th, I'm a little unclear about the overlapping.

I don't really understand your question. I mean, the court has set a hearing on August 6th, And you said you have a foreclosure on July 28th. So I bet I don't understand what your question is. You stated the facts, but what is the question? The question is, if the hearing is set on August the 6th, how does that impact foreclosure on the 28th? To try and translate, Jan is asking if their home will be protected from foreclosure.

When they filed for bankruptcy, an automatic stay was put in place. It instantly freezes all debt collection, loss. lawsuits and foreclosures. That stay was extended until July 1st, the date of this hearing. I see what you're asking is if the court would be inclined to extend the stay that's temporarily in place. Correct. Is that what you're asking? Okay. Correct. Ms. Jammot, to allow us to sort through all of this. Ms. Jammoh, do you have an opinion? Yes, Your Honor. The U.S. trustee objects to the extension of the stay. I mean, this is precisely one of the, reasons that the U.S. trustee considered the case to be filed in bad faith and an abuse of the

system, I believe that the debtors have not paid their mortgage to the tune of $191,000 of arrearages. And while they're seeking the benefit of this day, they haven't complied with the obligations of the bankruptcy court to justify getting the benefit of the stay. I do wish to respond. Jan spends the next three minutes explaining that they've been trying to get in touch with their mortgage lender, but they're having a hard time figuring out who to contact and how to get a reply. So we really have been trying very, very hard for a long time to get this resolved and to get something in place so that we can move our lives forward. And as I say, we have uncovered things that we feel are violations that really need to be addressed before a foreclosure could take place.

I can't really speak to your situation with your mortgage service here. I think you'll have to continue to deal with that and find a way to connect with the appropriate individuals or to assert those claims in a proper forum. This is generally not that forum in bankruptcy court, so I'll answer you that. With respect to the pendency of the automatic stay, the court did take the extraordinary step to temporarily extend that stay so that you could perfect the papers. And unfortunately, those things have not occurred. And so this court can no longer continue to extend the automatic stay.

The court's going to deny that requested relief. They concluded the hearing by setting a deadline for Ron and Jan to submit their paperwork. That includes a full accounting of the GoFundMe. You'll hear Jennifer Giamo asking for clarification. I just want to clarify for the record of a deadline by which the debtors need to provide our office with, number one, the accounting of all the GoFundMe funds, and two, all of the documents that they are on notice of being required to produce. May I suggest that the deadline be set no later than Friday, July 10th, because that gives me sufficient opportunity to review the documents before the meeting. That is a week from this Friday, which seems like it should be a sense. efficient amount of time.

Okay. All right. Anything further from the parties? No. All right. Is that from the U.S.S. custody? Thank you, Your Honor.

All right. Thank you. We're adjourned. Good luck. As you heard, the month of July is going to be a bumpy ride for Ron and Jan. They have until July 10th to submit paperwork about the GoFundMe. Internet detectives have been clamoring for transparency around that fundraiser for years. Plus, their house looks like it will be.

be up for foreclosure auction again at the end of July 26. And they're due back in Judge Wansley's court on August 6th. One of the questions that's gotten lost in this story is the true status of Ron's health. According to the GoFundMe, he has severe health problems, Parkinson's, cancer, and heart issues. In many of the latest bankruptcy hearings, he sounds very frail. Then, on July 4th, Just a few days before I recorded this episode, Ron Owens posted this patriotic message on Facebook. Hey guys, my buddy here and I are hoping you are enjoying the 4th of July. What you're doing? Maybe going on having a barbecue, maybe going to a baseball game, go Giants. Maybe just sitting back and watching TV and remembering this is the greatest country on Earth.

Happy 250 U.S. Day. At the time I'm recording this, Laura's still living in the casita, at her parents' house, the one they might lose. And Laura's also got some big decisions to make this summer, because at the end of August, she'll be due in court again for another settlement conference to discuss her plea deal and hopefully come to a resolution on her 14 felony counts. If that all goes to plan, I'll be there. in person at the courthouse in Arizona with Clayton. You'll hear from me after that. Unless, of course, Laura has something else in mind. Thank you so much for listening. Please be sure to follow Love Trapped on Apple Podcasts, the IHeart Radio app, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts. And please leave us a review. A five-star rating helps others find this show. We're grateful for your

support. If you would like to reach out to the Love Trapped team or have a similar story to share, email us at Lovetrapped pod at gmail.com. That's Lovetrapped P-O-D at gmail.com. LoveTrapped is a production of Glass Podcasts, a division of Glass Entertainment Group in partnership with IHeart Podcasts. This show was executive produced by Nancy Glass, Andrea Gunning, and Ben Federman. Written produced and hosted by me, Stephanie Young. Our story editor is Monique Laborde. Producer on this episode is Sydney Gladu. Additional production support from Todd Gans. Our production manager is Kristen Malkyrie. For IHeart Podcasts, Ali Perry was our executive producer. Audio editing and mastering by Anna

McLean, additional editing support by Tanner Robbins and Matt Delvecchio. Thank you to our voice actor, Olivia Hewitt. This podcast was developed in collaboration with Danny Passman and Leb Abramoff at Crybaby Media. The love-trapped theme is composed by Oliver Baines. Music library provided by Mib Music. A special thanks to Carrie Lieberman, Will Pearson, Jessica Kreinschek, Ali Kanter, and the entire IHeart podcast team. And for more podcasts from IHeart, visit the IHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. And before we end the show, we have some good news. Love Trapped was named one of the best so far 2026 by Apple Podcasts.

I want to thank all of you who've listened and recommended this show to friends. The best so far 2026 list includes some other incredible shows. So be sure to check out the full collection right now in the Apple Podcasts app. There was no anything inside those eyes. They turned black. It scared the hell out. of me. Evil, wake up.

I'm the one that saw the murder take place by Crevec and DePippo. Anthony DePippo showed no signs of remorse, appearing unfazed after being sentenced to the maximum. I said, I'm not guilty. I'll take it to the grave. Listen to the devil's quarry in the Bone Valley Feed on the IHeart Radio app.

Apple Podcasts, wherever you get your podcasts. What's up, fam? It's sports journalist Ari Chambers. Hey, what's up, y'all? It's your girl, Sam J. And we're the hosts of Everyone Watches Women's Sports, a new podcast from Together. We're breaking down the biggest headlines, the viral moments, and the stories everyone's talking about across women's sports. From game-changing performances to culture-shifting conversations, we'll give you our takes, our debates, and a few laughs along the way.

Because everyone watches women's sports. Listen to Everyone Watches Women's Sports. On the I-Heart Radio app, Apple Podcast, or wherever you get your podcast. This is an I-Heart podcast. Guaranteed human.