Murdaugh Murders Podcast - TSP #133 - Bombshell Testimony in Scott Spivey Case: Did Weldon Boyd’s Attorney Really Try to Coerce a Witness?
Episode Date: January 22, 2026Investigative journalists Mandy Matney and Liz Farrell uncover explosive testimony that tears Weldon Boyd's self-defense narrative to shreds. In newly released depositions from the Scott Spivey wrongf...ul death case, Witness No. 2 reveals disturbing allegations that Weldon Boyd's attorney may have attempted to coerce witness testimony—raising serious questions about just how far the Good Ole Boy network will go to protect one of their own. We’re also looking at how Dr. Randy Beallis’ second wife died from a gunshot wound to the forehead. Now his third wife, Charity, and their six-year-old twins are murdered the day after their final divorce hearing. The Sebastian County, Arkansas investigation raises disturbing questions: Why isn't Randy the prime suspect? Plus updates on JP Miller's federal trial scheduled for March 2026, Alex Murdaugh's upcoming Supreme Court hearing in February, and the crucial Stand Your Ground hearing in the Scott Spivey case set for February 17-20. Oh! And we hope to see you in Denver on Friday, February 6 if you’re nearby. Join LUNASHARK Premium for the link to RSVP! 🦈 Let’s Dive in 🥽 Episode Links All the LUNASHARK Upcoming Events 📅 Sunlight on Scott Spivey Spotify Playlist 🎧 “Community still seeks answers in Charity Beallis case one month later” - 5 News Online, Updated Jan 5, 2026 📰 Stay Tuned, Stay Pesky and Stay in the Sunlight...☀️ Learn more about LUNASHARK Premium Membership at lunashark.supercast.com to get bonus episodes like our Premium Dives, Wherever It Leads..., Girl Talk, and Soundbites that help you Stay Pesky and Stay in the Sunlight Support Our Show, Sponsors and Mission: https://lunasharkmedia.com/support/ Quince - Hungry Root - Bombas https://amzn.to/4cJ0eVn *** ALERT: If you ever notice audio errors in the pod, email info@lunasharkmedia.com and we'll send fun merch to the first listener that finds something that needs to be adjusted! *** For current & accurate updates: lunashark.supercast.com Instagram.com/mandy_matney | Instagram.com/elizfarrell bsky.app/profile/mandy-matney.com | bsky.app/profile/elizfarrell.com TrueSunlight.com facebook.com/TrueSunlightPodcast/ Instagram.com/TrueSunlightPod youtube.com/@LunaSharkMedia tiktok.com/@lunasharkmedia Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Transcript
Discussion (0)
Thank you so much for supporting our mission to give voice to victims by watching Hulu's Murdoch death in the family.
We have been hard at work for weeks curating Soak Up the Sun premium content to go with each of the eight episodes.
We are so excited to share the behind-the-scenes photos from the show, maps, more audio, timelines, case files,
and the original source material that inspired the writers and directors for Hulu's original series.
All for our Soak Up the Sun members on Luna Shark Premium.
Use your Supercast login to get access to the full experience.
That means ad-free, plus extended episodes, bonus drops, exclusive case files,
live streams, access to our exclusive members-only shows like Girl Talk, Corruption Watch List,
premium dives, and more.
Plus, curated behind-the-scenes coverage of the Hulu series.
Join our mission and become a member today at LunaShark.supercast,
or click the link in the description.
I don't know if Weldon Boyd's attorney actually coerced a witness in Scott Spivey's case,
but after we read the explosive deposition of witness number two,
we know one thing for sure.
Weldon Boyd's narrative of what happened that day on Camp Swamp Road has been torn to pieces.
And the Ory County cover-up that took place in the hours after Scott's,
Batsby's death has never been so clear.
My name is Mandy Matney.
This is True Sunlight, a podcast exposing crime and corruption,
previously known as the Murdoch Murders podcast.
True Sunlight is a Luna Shark production, written with journalist Liz Farrell.
Hello, hello from the tundra of Denver, Colorado.
I hope you all got to listen to the COJ episode this week,
where we interviewed our first ever Pulitzer Prize winning journalist Maggie Freeling from the Bone Valley podcast.
If you're like me and feeling just a wee bit down about the state of our justice system these days,
please give that episode a listen. It filled me with a lot of hope that we can make positive change if we just keep going.
And also in positive news, our Luna Shark Premium Denver meetup is a full.
officially happening, y'all. Save the date for Friday, February 6th at Breckenridge Brewery in
Littleton, Colorado for our first ever bruise and news meetup, where we will spill the tea,
drink some beer, sign some books, and take some selfies. Check the link in the description to sign up
today. Check out your Luna Shark premium feed, where you'll also get access to our new exclusive
podcast, wherever it leads, which is our new travel show hosted by The David
Moses and the team and Girl Talk with Liz and Me. And Lunar Shark Premium has so much more.
Just check the link in the description and join today. You won't regret it.
Okay, so some big news. J.P. Miller is likely to head to trial in his federal criminal case this
March. Judge Joseph Dawson III signed an order of continuance on January 13th that said
the case is continued from what was supposed to be this month to the March.
26th term. We will keep a close eye on that case, but justice for Micah could be coming soon.
Also on the Lunas Shark calendar, coming up is Alec Murdoch's February 11th, South Carolina Supreme Court
hearing, where his goofy lawyers will try again to argue that he didn't get a fair trial.
Can't wait for that. We will be streaming that live with Luna Shark's soak up the sun members.
Another big date to mark your calendars for is the Scott Spivey Stand Your Ground Hearing that's on the docket for February 17th through 20th in ORI County.
Y'all, we have to talk about that case because it's been too long and boy, do we have updates.
Namely, we have to talk about the rest of the story of how ORI County Police Department came to be one of the most corrupt agencies that we have ever covered before.
And we need to close the loop on why we strongly suspect that the police planted steroids on Scott the night that he was killed.
The night they towed his truck with his body in it for 45 minutes to the police department's impound lot,
which was yet another major anomaly in how that investigation was conducted.
And that alone drives us in our work on this case, the idea of a publicly funded agency caring
so little for a man's humanity and dignity that they would treat him like roadkill if it meant
being able to help a good old boy get out of trouble. Well, that sends us all into a rage.
The kind of rage that makes us highly motivated to rest control of Ory County Police Department
out of the hands of County Council Chairman Johnny Gardner and his cohorts. Because let's
not tiptoe around things. Police Chief Chris Lionheart
needs to go.
For a lot of things, but for being a spineless little liar, chief among them.
There are strings around that man's wrist and ankles that appear to be pulled by county administrator
Barry Spivey, who has strings around his little wrists and ankles, and they appear to be
controlled by old Johnny Flattop and his pals.
Seems like now is the time to hand the county police department back to the
sheriff who is elected by and who works for the voters, but we will talk about that another day.
Today, we need to talk about the latest filings in the civil case between Scott Spivey's estate
represented by Scott's sister, one of the toughest women we know, Jennifer Spivey Foley,
and Weldon Boyd and Bradley Williams, the two men who killed Scott on September 9th,
2023, without apparent remorse. See previous episodes of True Sunlight Podcast to listen to the
heartless phone calls between Weldon and Bradley after the shooting.
As you know, Weldon and Bradley say they killed Scott in self-defense,
despite having chased Scott onto a side road to further whatever conflict had existed
between Weldon and Scott at that time.
Now, we've spent a ton of time sharing bits and pieces with you all from Weldon's recorded
phone calls that have revealed his thinking over the four days that followed the shooting.
Those calls have shown us that Weldon, quote, had a blast killing Scott.
and that he asked Bradley to erase messages between the two of them
after hearing police were going to have to take their phones and Weldon's tablet.
Those calls showed that Deputy Chief Brandon Strickland was updating Weldon on the investigation
and bragging about helping him, quote, behind the scenes.
That Weldon admitted to chasing Scott Spivey.
He even acknowledged that Scott was terrified of him.
Those calls showed that Weldon believed that he and Bradley would be receiving medals of honor
in a scheme allegedly involving his story.
state representative that seemed designed to keep Weldon and Bradley from getting charged.
The call showed us that the second the shooting was over, Bradley admonished Weldon, asking him
why they couldn't have left Scott alone. The call showed that Weldon lied to people about
seeing combat during the war in Afghanistan and called Scott his first, quote, stateside kill.
The call showed that Weldon and Bradley didn't considerate a big deal to have killed Scott.
We've also talked to you about Weldon's state of mind.
on the day he killed Scott. How this was the day his ex-fiancee was returning the ring and car he had
given her. We've talked to you about how that was a very brief relationship and how his ex-fiancee was
carrying his baby and how Weldon was trying to establish paternity and custody before the child was
born. We've told you how Weldon believed his ex-fiancee had disrespected him and his family by showing up at
his aunt's house to return the items with another man. And we've told you how his ex-fiancee did not go there
with a man, but rather with her mother and her sister who were waiting to drive her back home.
And perhaps most importantly, we have told you about the witnesses and we went into a lot of
detail about the witnesses because Weldon was telling everyone who would listen that the witnesses
all corroborated his story. And South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson and his senior
prosecutor, Heather Weiss, also seemed to be relying on those eyewitness accounts. And yes,
I am putting eyewitness in quotation marks there in their decision not to prosecute Weldon or Bradley.
No, wait, wait, wait.
I need to rephrase that.
I said that Alan Wilson and Heather Weiss are relying on witness accounts to justify their decisions,
but really, it seems like they're relying on the interpretation of those witness accounts
by Weldon and his boys at the HCPD.
Because if you listen to any of our true sunlight episodes in which we break down these witness accounts,
you can see that none of them fully support Weldon's account.
Not even if you taped them all together in that same way that Alan and Heather taped together two laws
to justify their non-prosecution of North Myrtle Beach's very special boy, Weldon Boyd.
They taped together the Stand Your Ground Immunity Defense, which Weldon would have had to invoke after getting charged,
and the Citizens Arrest Law, which neither Weldon nor Bradley nor any of their attorneys has ever claimed to be a thing there.
really hitting me how there's a good old boy trickle-down system. When a case is rotten from the
start, the corruption clicks into place from there on out. It's like a writing class where you're given
a conclusion for a story and your assignment is to write a story that ends in that exact
conclusion you've been given. The premise of your story has a prescribed ending. How else can Ellen
explain his decision-making and his doubling down when the evidence he's been relying on has been
nothing more than a narrative and not actual evidence. Back to the witness accounts. I want to
quickly familiarize you with the basics so it doesn't get confusing. Witness number one is Blaze Ward.
We're using her name because she added herself on social media and she has been named by other
media. Blaze made the first 911 call to police from Highway 9. She is the only other driver
on Highway 9 to have called the police on Scott and Weldon. She believed that she was being targeted by
Scott and said that he had pointed his gun at her. She also described Scott pointing his gun at
Weldon at a time when Bradley was snapping photos of Scott, none of which shows Scott pointing his weapon.
Instead, they show Scott in front of them with his gun pointed upward and his finger off the trigger,
as if he were warning Weldon or reciprocally showing that he too had a weapon. And that should raise
the question with investigators about why didn't Bradley capture that on camera? Was it because he had
something else in his hand? Like a weapon? Just saying. It's a question to ask.
Blaze also told 911 that Scott shot up her window. He didn't. No bullet touched Blaz's car.
Blaze credits Weldon with saving her life. He didn't, which we'll explain in a minute.
Our opinion is that Blaze filled in the blanks of her knowledge about what was happening with
the presumption that Scott was the initial aggressor and with information she had gleaned from
the scene. A narrative Weldon had created to cover up what he knew to be true, that by turning
turning onto Camp Swamp Road, he was escalating a fight that turned deadly, that he caused the
difficulty that led to the firefight, which is not protected by the Stand Your Ground Law.
I'm not assuming, well, I didn't do that to be true, by the way. I know he did.
And that's because he told 911 he was making the turn to follow Scott.
But he told everyone else, including his big time helper at Ory County Police Department,
the now former deputy chief and current salesman, Brandon Strickland, that he turned onto Camp Swamp Road,
merely to check his trailer to see if his couches had shifted.
In the first version, Weldon positioned himself as the aggressor.
In the second revised version, he was but a victim who wasn't there to further engage or agitate Scott.
Weldon and Bradley's joint defense team are likely going to rely heavily on Witness No. 1's version of events,
which is demonstrably inaccurate and inconsistent, but which includes the real-time heightened emotions of a young woman
who authentically seems traumatized by what she was seeing play out.
Okay. Next, Witnesses Number 2 and 3.
They were a couple from Virginia who were driving to Myrtle Beach
and happened to be on Camp Swamp Road at the exact moment the gunfire started.
Witness number 2 called police right away and told them what he had just seen.
His wife, Witness No. 3, didn't see anything because Witness 2 told her to duck.
We're going to talk more about Witness number 2 in a minute,
But his account is also very important to Weldon and Bradley's defense team
because he's the only person other than Weldon and Bradley to have seen Scott with the gun.
But stick a pin in that for a minute.
Finally, we have witnesses number four and five,
an older couple who pulled their SUV right onto the crime scene
before police arrived and who stayed with Weldon and Bradley even after police got there.
It took a long while for Ori County Police to separate these two witnesses from Weldon and Bradley.
By the time four and five were questioned by police, it was clear that Weldon's narrative was influencing their statements because they were way behind Weldon and Scott on Highway 9 and they never saw a gun.
And yet the gun became a factor in witness number four's statement to police.
More importantly, though, witness number four said this.
I guess that guy, I don't know the law exact, but the only question we had was when the black truck turned off here,
Why did the white truck that boy in the white truck city pulled off to check his load?
Well, why would he want to keep on following that truck?
If he was going to check his load, he would go in lower, just leave it along and go on the lower.
That was the only thing that got a little bit.
That was the only thing in question in our mind.
So why would Weldon want to keep on following that truck?
Key words there are keep following.
It's just so wild that Weldon kept telling everyone who would listen.
that all five witnesses corroborated his account of the shooting because, no, they did not, Weldon.
In November, Judge Eugene Bubba Griffith Jr. considered a motion from Weldon and Bradley,
asking that the two 911 calls from witness number one and witness number two to be considered in the stand-your-ground immunity hearing.
I'm not going to get too much into this because I'm not a lawyer, but we will definitely ask Eric Bland about this in our next episode of Cup of Justice.
But it's very relevant, so I have to mention it.
Witness statements and 911 calls are generally considered hearsay.
But Weldon and Bradley's team believe that the calls in the Spivey case
meet the exceptions to the hearsay rule.
Of course they would want Blaze's call to be used because, well, duh,
she thought Weldon was a knight in shining armor.
And also, they would want witness number two's calls
because even though he tells 911 what he saw in real time,
and that's Weldon unloading his gun on Scott before Scott even raised his weapon,
there are two things in that call, we assume, appeal to them.
One is that witness number two says that he saw Scott do something with his hand,
which is wording Weldon and Bradley later said in there what appears to be highly coordinated
in orchestrated interviews with police that evening,
after presumably meeting with Ken Moss at the crime scene, which Ory County Police allowed him to enter.
Two is that witness number two talks to Weldon while on the phone with 911
and begins to add Weldon's narrative to the call, which seems like a place where the defense team
might want to confuse matters. Now, with the statements in 911 calls, witnesses can only
testify to what they saw with their own eyes and not what they were told by others at the
scene. Generally speaking, I mean, obviously hearing a suspect confess at the scene might be
something the court would consider allowing in. But for the sake of this case, the only parts
that Blaze and Witness No. 2 can speak to is not only what they saw with their own eyes,
but what's true about what they saw. For instance, the parts of the call where Blaze says that
Scott shot up her car that wouldn't likely be admissible.
That said, Spivey's team believes that those admissible statements and 911 calls
warrant a cross-examination so that the judge can assess the witness's credibility.
For we assume all the reasons we shared with y'all in our witness episodes and likely many
more reasons.
Again, long story short, Blaze's account falls apart almost immediately and, well, witness number
two comes across as more reliable and his statements would likely not benefit Weldon and
Bradley if he were asked to clarify some points. Only problem, neither Blaz nor witness number two
were making themselves available for depositions or subpoenas and both live out of state. So Judge
Griffith ruled that Weldon and Bradley's team had met the threshold for overcoming the hearsay
rule for these statements and 911 calls, but held the order open, meaning this wasn't his final
order. He basically said he would remain flexible to the circumstances, but that he was well-qualified
in making determinations about reliability based on the evidence that will be presented in February.
That said, surprise.
After that ruling, witness number two agreed to sit for a deposition on December 1st,
which means both sides got to ask him questions.
Last week, attorneys Mark Tinsley and Natasha Hanna filed the transcript from this deposition,
along with transcripts from witness number two's 911 call and statement to police.
to be considered in the Stand Your Ground immunity hearing and, well, pretty explosive.
So first, witness number two is named in these filings because he was not out there looking for attention.
We're going to call witness number two Clark.
We're going to dive into the transcripts from witness number two, aka Clark's explosive deposition
that he clearly didn't want to attend with Mark the Tiger Tinsley after a quick break.
Hey there, E.B. here. Your faithful Cup of Justice co-host. I am so excited to tell you about my new book, Anything But Bland. In this memoir, I share stories about my childhood, marked by bullying, my father's job loss, and the indomitable spirit that propelled me into the law and ultimately international recognition during the Alex Murdole murder trial. I believe in certain life principles that have helped me and helped others achieve success.
From the power of organization and a sense of urgency to the importance of truth, leadership, and resilience.
With vivid recollection from challenges and triumphs framing each chapter, success isn't about luck.
It's earned through skill and hard work.
Please visit theericblan.com to learn more about the book,
Anything But Bland is the manifesto for those seeking triumph over adversity and a guide for anyone aspiring to reach their full potential.
potential. So on December 1st, 2025 in the Scotsby case, Mark Tinsley deposed witness number two,
who, like I said, were going to call Clark since he was on a road trip. If you know, you know.
First off, he clearly did not want to be there and got real surly with Mark Tinsley, who was
asking questions for the plaintiffs. Mark's first question was, you were traveling with your wife
to Myrtle Beach on September 9th, 2023, right? And Clark answered, I don't recall. Not a very
promising start. We're going to read from the transcripts so you guys know exactly what was said.
David will read the part of Clark and Mandy will read Mark's part. We heard y'all when you told us you
did not like the AI voices, so this is the best we can do to make this less confusing. Reminder,
God's Fivvy was in the black truck and Weldon and Bradley were in the white truck.
As Mark Tensley. Okay, do you recall being on Camp Swamp Road? Is it near the intersection of Highway 9
and witnessing the shooting event.
As Clark, it's been a long time.
But do you generally recall?
I remember something happened that day.
Okay, do you remember seeing the gentleman get out of the black truck?
You said this had played through your mind a thousand times or something to that effect.
I don't recall.
Okay, are you going to answer any of my questions today?
Like I told you numerous times, no.
Okay, so.
So every question I ask you, the answer is going to be you don't recall?
Yes, sir.
Mark continues to ask questions about the call that Clark made to 911 and whether that accurately depicted what he saw that day.
And Clark continues to say that he couldn't recall and that he didn't want to review the 911 call.
Again, we'll read from the transcript.
As Mark Tensley, you wouldn't lie to the 911 operator, would you?
As Clark, it's two years ago.
Would you have lied two years ago?
It's going to be a long interview.
You were trying to give truthful and accurate information, correct?
I do not recall.
All right. You said he told the guy, do not follow me anymore.
You recall that?
I don't.
But if you said it at the time, it was accurate?
Most probably?
The guy in a white truck had his pistol drawn and pointed at the guy in the black truck,
and you demonstrated in one video.
I'm going to mark it as exhibit number one,
how the guy in the black truck had his pistol pointed.
Presumably Mark Tinsley handed Clark a still frame
from Clark's interview with police
in which he was demonstrating what he saw Weldon doing with his gun,
meaning holding it and aiming it at Scott.
As Mark Tensley, so that's you in that photograph, correct?
As Clark, yes.
All right, and you're demonstrating a two-handed grip,
on a pistol.
Yes.
Pointed over the dash, correct?
Yes.
And that's what you saw?
Yes.
And almost immediately thereafter, that gentleman in the white truck unloaded his clip through the windshield.
Yes.
And that's what you saw?
Yes.
Okay. And you punched it and you got away from the scene at that point.
Yes.
But you did see, you were able to see, the gentleman in the white truck shot in his
vehicles shot up and you told the dispatcher what you saw, correct?
Yes, sir.
And that's where Mark ended his questioning.
Notice that he got a sir from Clark at the end there?
Something seems to have switched in Clark at this point.
He went from being difficult to now acknowledging he was there on Kent Soft Road
and that he had seen Weldon shoot Scott right after Scott had gotten out of the truck to tell Weldon to stop following him.
Ken Moss did the initial cross-examination of Clark.
During his questioning, he established that Clark had seen the black truck stop first
and then the white truck stopped because the black truck had stopped in front of him.
And that Clark had seen Scott with a gun in his hand and the slide back, just as he had said in the 911 call.
Here's David with excerpts of what Clark said about that.
To make this easier to understand, we're going to change some of the pronouns of he and his to the proper nouns,
meaning to the names of the person he's referring to.
Mr. Spivey was close when he jumped out,
and I'll give you from the time I saw it
because it all kind of plays in.
Mr. Spivey got out of the truck.
The slide was in the rear because it's just, you know,
it was in the rear.
He jumps out.
I heard Mr. Spivey say,
quote, stop following me, boy, end quote.
I pushed my wife down because I saw the gun.
At this point, I don't know what's going on.
You know, now I'm paying attention to the white driver because I don't know what's going on.
That's when I see the white driver's hands like this, and I immediately go, oh my God, and push my wife down.
As I look in my side view mirror, all I saw was Mr. Spivey's arm slightly moved and then all hell broke out.
I could see it clear as day like this.
Mr. Boyd was already drawing, pointing, and that's when I got real nervous because I knew I kind of figured out what they had stopped.
And I looked in the side mirror to see what Mr. Spivey was doing.
His truck door was open.
I mean, Mr. Spivey was just next to his truck, and then, like I said, I didn't even get to,
like I saw the motion of Mr. Spivey's arm, kind of come up to an upward position, like just moved it,
Not draw, not come up, like Mr. Spivey's arm barely moved and everything went crazy.
Ken Moss asked Clark to confirm that he had no idea who fired first.
Here is what Clark said.
Yeah, I have no idea who fired first.
I didn't hear a single pop and then a bunch of pops.
I just heard pop, pop, pop, pop, pop, pop, pop, pop, pop, pop, pop, pop, pop, pop.
Interesting, right?
Because if Scott shot first, as Weldon and Bradley contendi did,
and if he shot in the manner that they described,
where Weldon was trying to back up and retreat,
then you'd surely have heard an isolated pop or two there, right?
But instead, what Clark heard pretty much matched what he was seeing,
one man unloading his weapon on another.
Like we said, when Clark was on the phone with 911,
he spoke with Weldon and began to relay Weldon's narrative to the dispatcher.
Ken Moss asked Clark about this, trying to put on the record that Clark's 911 call doesn't entirely reflect what he had seen with his own eyes.
Clark agrees, but real quick, in asking his questions, Ken Moss thanked Clark for calling 911 as if Clark had done something to help Weldon and Bradley, the victims.
The theatrics of this guy are so gross.
Anyway, here's David with how Clark responded to Ken's questions about his witness statement.
I mean, I remember exactly what I saw until I spoke with your client, if that's the question.
I can depict it too perfectly clear.
Clark made it clear that everything he was testifying to in this deposition was based on his personal observations
and not on what anyone at the scene told him during that 911 call.
Then this interesting exchange happened.
David will read for Clark and Mandy will read for Ken.
as Ken Moss.
Now, in my conversation with you a year ago,
do you recall I asked you specifically?
As Clark, did I see his dash thing on the front of the car?
Girl, that made us laugh,
because there's already evidence that points
to Weldon having a recording of what went down between him and Scott
using his tablet as a dash camera,
something he was also known to do regularly.
That evidence is Weldon.
telling his ex-fiance that he had a recording of it and telling his mother that he hadn't seen
the footage yet. But that video, if it exists like it seems it does, has never been presented
as evidence to investigators, which makes you wonder what it shows, right? What's funny about this
is based on the written transcript alone, it doesn't seem like that was the question Ken Moss
was about to ask Clark. So, not only do we find out that Ken had spoken to Clark before,
we know he was trying to ascertain whether Clark had seen this dash cam.
In the deposition, Ken, who had to have been caught off guard right there, plated through.
As Ken Moss.
Well, I did ask you that a year ago.
Did you see anything on the dash of his truck?
As Clark, no.
Okay.
When I see a gun being pointed, I kind of zone in on that.
I imagine that that isn't how Ken Moss was hoping,
Clark would answer because really hammers home that Clark saw Weldon pointing a gun and not Scott.
Ken then asked about Weldon's demeanor at the scene and another backfire happens.
As Ken Moss, I also asked if you saw my client acting aggressively or in a way that you felt was threatening.
As Clark, no.
The only thing I told you was his demeanor changed when the police got there that we all noticed.
Okay, but prior to the shooting event, did you see anything that you thought was aggressive?
Prior to the shooting event, I didn't see him except for pointing a gun at someone else.
Okay.
So I don't know what he did up until that point.
I don't know anything other than when I drove by and bullets came from his truck.
Oopsie.
Look at Ken Moss, though, working for the plaintiffs.
No wonder he only wanted the judge to review the calls and the wrong.
written statements. My goodness. Ken then further explained what he was getting at. Did Clark
see Weldon pull onto camp swamp in an aggressive manner? Again, Clark says no. Quote,
they stopped pretty quick. Then Ken asks about whether Clark had seen Scott shoot back at Weldon
from inside Scott's vehicle. As Ken Moss, did you actually observe or see Mr. Spivey move from a
position outside the truck to a position inside the truck?
As Clark, no.
You didn't observe that.
No, in fact, we didn't know.
I didn't know where he was when I turned around.
Because the last thing I saw, I saw Mr. Spivey standing outside the truck.
Once again, Weldon's narrative gets torn apart.
Next, Ken asked Clark to describe how Weldon walked up to Scott's truck after the shooting was over.
And Clark said Weldon was, quote,
very comfortable to walk up to a truck after a shooting.
Ken Moss then asked if Clark thought Weldon had gotten close enough to the truck to have put something in it.
To that, Clark said this. David?
Like I said, he could have reached out and touched the truck from what I saw.
We're assuming Ken asked that question to clear up any notion that Weldon had moved one of the casings from inside Scott's truck to outside of it
to support his narrative that Scott had shot first and from outside of the truck.
Remember, Weldon shot entirely from inside his truck with the door closed,
and yet police found one of his casings in the exact same position outside Weldon's truck
as the casing that was found outside of Scott's truck,
meaning the casing could have fallen out of both men's trucks after the fact.
So even if Weldon didn't place the casing there, and there's no evidence that he did,
the fact that there was a casing found near the front driver's side tire of Scott's truck,
likewise doesn't prove that Scott shot at Weldon from outside of the truck.
truck. And regardless, Weldon's version of what happened has Scott positioned at the very end of
Scott's truck and shooting at Weldon from there. If that were true, then one might expect to find
casings around that area. And there weren't any. Ken also asked Clark about whether he had spoken
at all to Bradley at the scene. Here's David with Clark's response. Yeah, nobody had a conversation
with him when I first got there. Police didn't even disarm him. They walked up to Weldon.
took his, I couldn't believe it, took his firearm and no, I didn't.
Nobody had a conversation with Mr. Williams that I could see or, no, no.
Further evidence that this crime scene wasn't handled professionally from the start.
And further evidence that this was and always will be about Weldon.
Bradley was an afterthought to police and to Alan Wilson's office.
But not to Weldon and his family.
Weldon told his parents that they had to protect Bradley at all costs.
Remember that? So according to Ken Moss, he had a couple of calls with Clark and even scheduled a
deposition of resume with him in February 2025, which is when Jennifer's Vivey Foley had gone public
with the egregious evidence of a cover-up in Scott's investigation file. In the deposition from
this past December, Ken reminded Clark that Clark had ducked out on the February deposition and had
stopped answering calls from him. We're going to read from the transcript. Again, David
will read for Clark. As can Moss, do you recall what happened? As Clark, I didn't feel comfortable with you
sending me the package and all the documentation asking me to read it and refresh my story and get on
because I kind of felt like I was, you know, I didn't like it. I felt like it was a force. And I don't,
I didn't, I really didn't like it. So if you want the truth, that's why I didn't show up.
Well now, that sounds like Clark was feeling some sort of pressure, some sort of coercive pressure from Weldon and Bradley's defense team, doesn't it?
Ken then seemingly began badgering Clark about whether or not he knew that three people were shooting that day on Camp Swamp Road.
Again, Mandy is reading for Ken and David is reading for Clark.
No, I don't. I can't recall any. I don't know who was shooting.
Okay.
I've told you that before.
I don't know who shot or did what.
So I can't recall three people shooting.
Ken asked Clark again whether his 911 call was accurate and, putting words in Clark's mouth, said,
You are trying to get help. Is that fair?
Clark's response?
I was worried about the people in the black truck.
Yeah, that's why I called 911.
I initially thought there might have been a family or something in there.
Seems to me like Clark very clearly perceived Weldon and Bradley in the white track as the aggressors.
What else did Clark say about Scott, David?
I didn't think the black driver was overly aggressive when he got out of the truck either,
although it could have been two guys stopping and saying we're going to take a right up the street here.
Clark also confirmed that he never saw Scott put the gun into shooting position,
nor did he see Scott walk anywhere, which is what Weldon says Scott did.
What else did Clark say, David?
The way Mr. Spivey was holding his pistol in his body, it was not intimidating, or it was more down by his side and the slide in the rear.
I mean, that's a clear indication.
Well, he, you know, no, he didn't make any movements.
He wasn't jumping around.
He wasn't, he just said, stop following me, boy, and the gun was down on his side like this, like I told the cops.
And the slide was in the rear.
And he wasn't, there was no, there was no other crazy behavior or any around.
behavior. In fact, I didn't get nervous until I saw the gun in the white truck because I was like, oh.
Again, more insight into Scott's demeanor. Sounds like he wasn't itching for a fight the way,
in our opinions, Weldon was that day. Now, here's another example of why some defense
attorneys are really annoy us. Ken Moss then said this in his next question. So other witnesses
described a gesture or a move that was almost like moving, like when he's, you know,
was raising his weapons. You didn't see that? Ken is trying to trick Clark into thinking that there are
other witnesses who saw Scott with gun in hand that day. Because really, the only other two
quote-unquote witnesses to that are Weldon and Bradley. And both have described Scott's motion
to be more exaggerated and threatening, as if Scott were fly-fishing and rounding his arm back
and over toward them. Clark is the only witness to have seen what happened between Scott and Weldon and Bradley.
Weldon and Bradley aren't witnesses.
They're shooters.
Anyway, here's how Clark responded to that trick of a question.
David.
Like I said, all I saw in the side mirror was Mr. Spivey slightly move his arm.
Not, you know, when you draw a pistol, you draw it fast.
You're, you know, I've been around guns my whole life.
I took, taken multiple training courses.
I've done many things.
Mr. Spivey was brandishing a firearm down by his side is what I think.
He didn't, I didn't see any motion of him raising that up in an aggressive manner or pointing it or anything like that at all.
No, what I saw was when his arm slightly moved in my side mirror all held broke loose.
I don't even think he would have the time to raise his gun and chamber it and fire in that time.
I don't.
Huh, I wonder whether the state attorney general's office has ever spoken to Clark.
Did they even make an effort?
because it seems like this is going to be important testimony in determining whether Weldon and Bradley qualify for stand-your-ground immunity slash citizens' arrest.
After Clark answered Ken Moss that way, Mark Tinsley asked another question.
Mandy will be Mark and David will be Clark.
As Mark Tensley, were you ever told that there was a dash-cam video that captured any part of this?
As Clark, I was told that Weldon was, I believe by the attorneys, that he was recording.
the whole entire thing.
Uh, what?
So Weldon's attorneys have admitted to witness number two that there was a video.
So where is that video?
Let's go back to the transcript.
As Mark Tensley.
And that it cut off just as you showed up?
As Clark cut off, it was, it's somehow, they told me that it's somehow cut off as I showed up
or a certain part of the 911 that the video went dead.
The dash cam video?
The dash cam video.
Well, there's our final answer on that, y'all.
Weldon was recording his interaction with Scott,
but right at the point where the meat and potatoes of this interaction began,
right when you would be able to see what Scott was doing in that moment,
the video went dead.
Darn it.
Murphy's Law, am I right?
No, not right,
because something tells me we'd be seeing this video
if it remotely showed that Weldon and Bradley kill Scott
in self-defense. What are the odds of this footage which Weldon's team has denied existed cut off
right at the moment of the shooting? I mean, y'all, what is it going to take to get Alan Wilson
to stop kissing on photos of the president and start paying attention to his job? More on that
after a quick commercial break. Right after Mark Tinsley had Clark established for the record
that he was told a video did exist and that it cut off right as the shooting happened.
Bradley's attorney Morgan Martin asked some more questions,
pointing out that in Clark's statement to police on the day of the shooting,
Clark said he had seen Scott bring his pistol to an upward position,
and then Clark yelled and pushed his wife down.
Clark seemed confused that this is what his statement said
and told Martin that he replaced the memory over and over in his head,
and that is not exactly what happened.
Let's go back to the transcript.
As Morgan Martin, well, and either, either way,
either as is written in your handwritten statement
or as you are telling us today,
you did see Mr. Spivey at some point in time raise his pistol
and point it towards the white truck.
As Clark, no.
Before there was any shooting.
No, I did.
I have never once said I saw Scott Spivey,
point a pistol at the white truck. I said he went. He moved his arm in an upward position is all I saw.
I never saw him point a gun at the white truck ever. Morgan Martin seems to argue a little while
trying to get clarity. As Morgan Martin, you never said he was raising. You said in both statements here,
and one is to Detective McQueen on video, and one in your statement that he...
As Clark started, it says he started to bring his pistol to an upward position.
I never once said it was aimed or I saw him point that firearm at your client.
No.
I never said that.
I never witnessed that at all.
Morgan tells Clark that there had to be something in his mind for him to have used the word upward.
So Clark explains.
He says, when your arm is down at a right angle and you move it a little up, that's upward.
you're coming upward.
He follows up by telling Morgan
that Scott's arm barely moved.
And he describes Scott's movements
as being akin to your hand
going from your pocket to your thigh.
He reiterates to Morgan Martin
that he didn't hear multiple guns.
There was no pause in the gunfire, he said.
Then Morgan asked Clark
whether he'd be willing to come to South Carolina
to testify,
even though this deposition
is the testimony for the trial,
which Mark Tinsley pointed out.
Again, this is just a written transcript, but it almost seems like Morgan Martin was saying that to agitate or pressure Clark, who responded,
I'd like to do everything in my power, to not have to be involved in this after this day.
Morgan asks Clark what his hesitancy is to come to South Carolina to testify.
Is it just bad memory, he says?
And y'all, this is where it got real.
Here's David with what Clark said.
I don't like the fact that the police department is involved.
It's a multi-millionaire, and I felt like I was painted a narrative by y'all.
When you guys explained to me how he was just a good guy driving nine miles trying to make
911 calls, and I got more information and more narratives from Weldon Boyd's team,
and it didn't make me feel okay, and I didn't like it.
I felt like I was being coached prior to that February 2025 deposition, kind of like,
did you see this, what did you see, are you sure, really review this, really hone in on this,
and I didn't like that.
I'm sorry.
I mean, I just don't want,
I just don't want to be involved.
I saw what I saw,
and that's all I want to do.
It's too involved.
I got four children.
I'm a business owner,
and I was reached out to
by the New York Times
and multiple media posts
trying to get my interview,
calling me and my wife,
saying they're going to publish our names,
publish the story,
and to all this other stuff,
so it was a lot.
It's a lot.
lot. Again, there's that trickery from defense attorneys that we hate. Morgan Martin then asked
Clark this. All right. So to encapsulate, you feel like that you got information from both the
Spivey and the Boyd camps at some point in time after this? Notice how he snucked Spivey in there now.
David, how did Clark respond to that? I have received no information from the Spivey team. I've actually
refused to communicate with them. The only lawyers I have talked to.
to was at a very brief conversation with Mr. Tinsley last Tuesday that I reached out to him.
And Morgan Martin said this in response.
All right, I understand you to say that you have received some information from the boy at a
spivey camp?
That's not correct?
David, what did Clark say to that?
It was what it was.
Was the narrative, you know?
When I get a call about my testimony, what I saw, I don't know what I was told all this stuff
about it prior to.
It was almost like it was just like it was just.
trying to lead me or persuade me to think that this situation was something I didn't need to know
about. I didn't need all that information. I don't know why I was being told all this stuff.
Why Mr. Boyd was on the phone for all this time. Why Mr. Boyd did this, why he did that?
Quote, he was just trying to be a good citizen, end quote, why does that matter?
So that's awkward, right? Clark is telling Morgan Martin what Ken Moss allegedly did,
and what Ken Moss allegedly did
was try to grease the wheels
before his deposition of Clark.
To get Clark to understand
that what he saw that day
was a result of Weldon being a great
gosh darn person.
And it is trickery.
Defense attorney trickery.
The deposition ended
with Ken Moss trying to square the circle
by getting Clark to once again
authenticate his statements
the night of the shooting,
which again, Clark says
don't match his memory.
then or now. Weldon and Bradley's defense team really want Clark's statements to police,
where he, according to their interpretation, has Scott pointing a gun at Weldon. They think it's
going to win the day over Clark's 911 call in which he describes what was happening basically
in real time. Which, by the way, let's look at what Clark actually said to police, because
Clark was right. He never says that he saw Scott point the gun at Weldon.
So when I was about, who the black truck is, I saw a black truck. I saw a black truck.
stop quick in the in the road.
And I kind of slowed down
it's a country road.
And when I, like, the car door flew open.
And I saw a guy get out of the black pistol screaming.
Okay.
At that point, I yelled my wife a gun and, like,
kind of pushed her down.
And kind of, you know, so I started coming past.
And at that point, the white truck kind of had come to a stop.
And then when I looked, when I looked over, sorry, you okay?
Yeah, we're good.
When I looked over, I saw the guy in the white truck.
I just saw a pistol like this, like kind of like pointing at the black truck.
And then that's when I looked in my rearview mirror and I saw the guy with the black gun.
I mean, the guy at the black gun's pistol was coming up.
And then I just heard shots.
And I saw glass exploding from the winchee and I just punched it, took off.
When I turned the corner, we called 911.
I went up and took a U-turn and kind of came back here.
To clear up Weldon and Bradley's teams, a test.
at making it look like there's a marked discrepancy and Clark's testimony.
Mark Tinsley asked Clark whether Clark just didn't get as detailed in his written statement
and his statement to police as he had in the 911 call.
Clark agreed.
Then Mark asked this.
As Mark Tensley, in this idea of don't know who shot first,
the first person you see shooting as you said in the 911 call was the guy driving the white truck,
appearing to unload his magazine through the windshield.
As Clark, mm-hmm.
That was a yes?
Yes, that's my depiction of the yes, yes.
So, again, this might be a reason that Walden Boyd's and Bradley Williams's tag teaming attorneys
wanted the judge to solely go by the 911 calls and written statements.
Because not only does this deposition of Clark clarify that he never saw Scott act aggressive,
toward Weldon and Bradley and actually had called 911 because he was worried about Scott and the possibility of there being other people in Scott's truck,
we got to learn some pretty dirty details about the game that Weldon and Bradley's team is allegedly playing.
Clark said he felt like Weldon's attorney Ken Moss, who was also representing Bradley during the shooting investigation,
was trying to plant a narrative in him before his first deposition, the one Clark didn't show up for.
The funniest part about this whole thing so far has to be that we all get to see how much these apparent trick-a-dic-dic-do tactics from defense attorneys like Ken Moss and Morgan Martin blow up in their faces.
In a story by the Charleston Post and Carter, Morgan Martin attributed Clark's anger over
what happened before the first deposition that was scheduled a year ago to Clark misunderstanding
the legal process and not an attempt to influence Clark's testimony.
Duh, okay.
As for Clark's testimony about there being dash cam footage that he was told got cut off right
as the shooting started, Morgan Martin told the post-incurred.
that, quote, the plaintiffs got it in their head that he recorded things with a tablet as he was driving down the roadway.
These devices were turned over to SLED and they dumped them and analyzed them and there is no recording of the shooting.
He also told the post and courier that there's no evidence of dash cam video from Weldon, which wrong?
Clark testified that he was told by Weldon's team that there was.
And again, Ory County Police did not take Weldon's food.
phone or tablet that night, nor did they take Bradley's phone. They didn't even take them the next day.
Or the day after that, or the day after that. Instead, Weldon and Bradley kept their devices
stored at Ken Moss's office for months until SLED came and got them. And they got a warning
ahead of time because someone from Ory County Police apparently told Ken Moss about it.
And we believe that Weldon is the kind of guy who is open to tampering with evidence,
as demonstrated in this call with Bradley four days after the shooting.
Hey, a couple of things.
Go back on Facebook and just delete our chat again between you and I, and then if they asked,
me and you just talk through the J.R., me, you and chat, or we text or call each other.
um second thing is the the upper and lower were separated and the only reason we had the lower
with us was because we were going to put a different trigger in it that night um the last thing is
uh the family's furious that they didn't seize our phones so ken's trying to work it out the superiors
are saying, well, we're only
to do a data dump and Ken's telling
them that they're not privy to a data dump.
So there's a war over the phones right now.
What Ken's trying to work out
is because
the family's saying that there's pictures
we withheld from
the investigation, which is a lie.
So Ken's
trying to arrange it where the detective
can just, we
hand our phone to the detective, he can
look through and check
make sure all the pictures that we got are the
ones that he was given to, which they were.
But Ken's going to fight them on this data dump shit because our internet search history,
our banking information, all that other crap is none of their business.
Okay, so as far as the pictures, they have the pictures that you took.
Yeah, there's a few that they don't have, but I explained to Ken,
it's because it's the truck 100 yards ahead of us in blurry.
It's not relevant.
There's nothing, but.
No, I'm talking about after the incident.
Yes.
they got the picture where he slumped over.
Ken had all that.
Okay.
Sorry, I got to worry about deleting those.
No, no, I wouldn't delete any pictures.
I mean, and, you know, we provided what were relevant.
If they say, well, we wanted the picture of the truck 100 yards up the road also,
okay, well, there it is.
I didn't delete it.
Okay.
But just delete the Facebook convoy.
Yeah, and then just say that we were,
going to put a trigger in the lower and that upper was there.
We just had the can on it.
I mean, just it was separated.
That gun had not been assembled.
Because you can have a lower and an upper ready to go
with the intention of filing for a form one and not assemble them, right?
So that about sums up our opinion on Morgan Martin's statements about the dash cam.
There's just no credibility there.
As for Clark's testimony that he didn't see Scott point a gun at Weldon and Bradley,
Morgan Martin doesn't seem worried about that, according to his quotes in the posting courier.
In fact, he says that neither Weldon nor Boyd needed to have a gun pointed at them for them to be justified in killing Scott in self-defense.
Actually, this is what he said.
Quote, he saw some movement with his hand.
That is the point.
And if he saw it looking in a side view mirror as he's already past the guy, certainly Welded and Bradley saw that.
If the facts and circumstances would give rise that a reasonable man similarly situated would be in fear at that point of great bodily injury or death, that's all that needs to be shown.
He seems to leave out the part where Weldon brought the difficulty on himself by turning down that road.
So no matter what logical thing you throw in the direction of the people who are determined to make sure Weldon and Bradley remain legally justified in killing Scott,
and the people who are determined, Alan Wilson,
to validate the ORI County Police Department's very corrupt investigation,
those people, they're never going to admit the truth of what we can all see and hear and understand.
Anyway, this transcript is more evidence that our assessment of this case continues to be right.
And it seems like we're all going to have to keep our eyes on these guys
because this transcript also proves that Weldon and Bradley's defense team
has no shame.
So before we go, we need to talk about the Charity Bialis case and again ask our pesky people
in Arkansas for some help in exposing this case. So hopefully we will one day see justice.
40-year-old Charity Bialis was found shot to death, along with her six-year-old twins,
Eliana and Maverick Bialis, on December 3rd in their sprawling Bonanza, Arkansas home.
Just like the Murdoch murders, police have been tight-lipped in the 7th.5.
weeks since the murders. The Sebastian County Sheriff's Office, who are leading the investigation
with the help of other police departments, the Arkansas State Police, and also, and weirdly,
the U.S. Secret Service and Homeland Security. Well, they have said nothing about this case since December.
The Sebastian County Sheriff's Office said that they had no suspects in the investigations.
Yet, they told a local TV station that there was, quote-unquote, no ongoing threat to the public.
Uh, sir, if someone murdered two children and their mother in cold blood in your community,
and you haven't put that person behind bars, then I would argue that there is an actual threat to the community.
I realize that police departments usually say this when they believe that the murders were targeted and domestically related.
But in that case, why isn't Dr. Randy Bialis, who, you know, is Charity's estranged husband
with a history of violence and abuse, at least a suspect?
Especially when Charity and Randy had a final divorce hearing the day before she and her kids were found murdered.
Let's do a little recap on Dr. Randy Bayalas, shall we?
Just, you know, to remind the Arkansas Medical Board to take another look at this man's history.
and also to publicly pressure the police into releasing more information to the public about these murders.
If Randy is truly not a suspect in this murder, the public deserves to know.
Before we talk about Dr. Randy's abhorrent track record with women, two of his ex-wives are dead,
and three wives accuse him of violent abuse, let's talk about Randy the doctor.
And yes, Dr. Randy Bialis, who pleaded guilty to a domestic violence charge in October,
and has a concerning history of abuse allegations against him,
still has an active medical license in the state of Arkansas.
Beth Brayden checked with Randy's most recent place of employment,
Mercy Hospital Fort Smith,
who said that he has not had active privileges at Mercy Hospital, Fort Smith,
since September 2025,
and no longer cares for patients at any Mercy facilities.
So it sounds like old Randy has been unemployed since September.
But again, still has an act.
medical license. He has two notes on his license from the medical board, but any action against
him has been tabled as of October 2, 2025, which is deeply disturbing that they are apparently
in no hurry to take this man's medical license away. Let's have David read a few of the reviews
we have found on Dr. Randall Bialis, the general practitioner. These aren't vetted, we are not
presenting them as fact. They are simply opinions from the internet, but they do tell us something.
On rate MDs, Dr. Bialis has a 1.8 out of five stars, 2.6 out of five on Google, and 2.9 on healthgrades.com as of this week.
One out of five stars on rate MDs from August 2015 says, quote, killed his prior wife, very corrupt, give steroids to cops, etc.
End quote.
Again, that is a totally unvetted allegation on the Internet.
But whoa, Randy's second wife died from a gunshot wound to the forehead in 2012.
We're going to talk about her in a later episode.
Two out of five stars on Rate MDs from March 2012.
You know, two months after his second wife was found dead, mind you.
This man is outrageous, self-centered, and opinionated.
Keep away from him.
Two at a five stars on healthgrades.com from November 2016.
quote, he was my doctor in hospital environment, non-effective communication, horrible bedside
manner.
One out of five stars on health grades from January 2018, quote, Dr. Bialis is heartless and made
unfounded diagnosis just because he was angry with his appointed patient.
It was the most upsetting and scary thing to be told.
It was a heartless and borderline evil thing to do to a person.
He should be investigated for a person.
actions as a doctor. In our personal favorite review from 2018, one out of five stars on Google,
quote, very rude, demeaning physician. He has the bedside manner of a toad. I'm embarrassed for the
healthcare field and Mercy Hospital. It is also important to point out that like all other alleged
abusers that we have covered on this podcast, from the reviews, it looks like Randy was apparently
kind to some people.
review from 2019 says,
quote, Dr. Bialis is one of the most caring physicians I've ever met.
He took his time explaining everything.
He went above and beyond, even covering my mom up when she said she was cold.
I would definitely recommend him to anyone needing a great, caring, thorough doctor.
Randy B. Alice has also been sued for medical malpractice several times.
We will talk about those lawsuits in a later episode because, you know,
So, Randy's track record as a doctor isn't great, but his dating-slash-marriage history is one of the messiest I have ever seen.
Every single red flag is raised when you look at this man's romance timeline.
So Charity Bialis was Randy's third or fourth wife.
I say third or fourth because his first wife told police that Randy was married to a woman named Katie sometime after his second.
second wife Shauna died and after he quickly married and quickly divorced charity for the first time, around 2012.
We haven't found Katie yet, but we are still looking.
Like I said, guys, this is messy.
So, Randy's first wife, Donna, was recently interviewed by the Sebastian County Sheriff's Office in September.
This is important.
Donna was married to Randy from 1997 to 2009.
He married Shauna a month after their divorce was finalized.
Randy Bialis's second wife, Shauna, was found shot to death with a gunshot wound to the forehead on January 5th, 2012.
He then married Charity for the first time a few months later in May 2012.
All three wives have documented extensive allegations of abuse in their relationship with Randy Bialis.
And again, Randy Bialis has two wives who were both found dead from gunshot wounds,
and both alleged that he was abusing them.
Could that be a coincidence?
And again, how is he not the number one named suspect at this point?
In our first part of this series in episode 131,
we told you about the major turning point in charity in Randy's marriage
that was the catalyst for their divorce.
The February 16th incident where Charity says Randy slammed her head on the bathroom floor
and choked her in front of the twins, calling her a bitch and a cheater and violently dragged her down the stairs by the hair.
All because, apparently, their relationship was on the verge of collapsing and he was mad that she was talking to her father.
In our next episode of this series, we will take a deep dive into the documents that show how the Sebastian
County District Attorney's Office built what appears to be a strong case against Dr. Bialis
that could have easily resulted in Randy being in prison in December, you know, when his wife
and children were murdered. But instead, they gave him a plea deal that we believe he did not
deserve, and they recklessly endangered two six-year-olds and their mother, in our opinion.
So, does the Sebastian County District Attorney's Office have blown?
blood on their hands in this case is a cover-up happening in the murder investigation.
What will it take to get justice for charity Eliana and Maverick Bialis?
And why are six different police agencies investigating this case?
If you have any information on this case, or simply if you are an Arkansas resident or
journalist who can help us with FOIA requests, please email info at lunashirkmedia.com.
Arkansas state law requires an Arkansas resident to make FOIA requests.
We don't make the rules, and after what we've learned in this case,
we don't plan on becoming Arkansas residents anytime soon.
So, until next time, stay tuned, stay pesky, and stay in the sunlight.
True Sunlight is a Luna Shark production created by me, Mandy Matney,
co-hosted and reported by journalist Liz Pharrell,
research support provided by Beth Braden,
Audio production support provided by Jamie Hoffman and Grace Hills.
Case file management provided by Kate Thomas.
Learn more about our mission and membership at LunaSharkmedia.com.
Interruptions provided by Luna and Joe Pesky.