Piers Morgan Uncensored - ‘Erika Should STEP DOWN!’ One Year On From Charlie Kirk Death & Candace Owens Feud

Episode Date: September 10, 2026

One year on from the assassination of political commentator Charlie Kirk, conversations in the media have continued to swirl around the circumstances of his death. From theories that the shooter was tied to a higher power, to questions surrounding the role his widow Erika Kirk has played in driving Turning Point USA forward, many questions still remain over the shocking murder. One of those asking the most questions about the death - and Erika Kirk’s handling of losing her husband and the father of her children - is political commentator Candace Owens. She has been publicly critical of Erika, suggesting that she may know more about Charlie’s death than she is letting on. Candace was also a close friend of Charlie, saying that the pair spoke frequently before his death. Joining this special episode of Piers Morgan Uncensored is Turning Point spokesman and Charlie Kirk’s friend Andrew Kolvet; host of The Megyn Kelly Show, Megyn Kelly; as well as a panel consisting of The Crucible host Andrew Wilson, former US Navy SEAL Rob O’Neill, who was involved in the operation that killed Osama bin Laden, Brandon Tatum, aka The Officer Tatum, and Turning Point fundraiser and close friend of Charlie Kirk and Candace Owens, John Mappin. Finally, we are joined by the infamous Nancy Grace, host of Crime Stories, to discuss the Kirk assassination, the conspiracy theories surrounding his death, and, finally, the Lindsay Clancy trial, which concluded in a mistrial. Piers Morgan Uncensored is proudly independent and sponsored by: Ethos: Take 10 minutes to get covered today - get your free quote at http://www.ethos.com/PIERS (00:00:00) Intro and Monologue (00:02:08) Megan Kelly (00:12:02) AD: Ethos: Take 10 minutes to get covered today - get your free quote at http://www.ethos.com/PIERS (00:23:24) Andrew Colvert (00:34:19) Panel debate Charlie Kirk conspiracy (01:21:24) Nancy Grace Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Visit BetMGM Casino and check out the newest exclusive. The Price is Right Fortune Pick. BetMDM and Game Sense remind you to play responsibly. 19 plus to wager. Ontario only. Please play responsibly. If you have questions or concerns about your gambling or someone close to you, please contact connects Ontario at 1-866-531-2,600 to speak to an advisor,

free of charge. BetMGM operates pursuant to an operating agreement with Eye Gaming Ontario. So exactly one year ago tomorrow, A far-left extremist assassinated my great friend and conservative voice, Charlie Kirk. Erica, where is Eric? I personally would like to see her take some personal time and allow herself in year two to just work on moving by not being the CEO of Turning Point. I appreciate Megan's sympathies and her compassion and love for Erica.

You take the red pill. You learn everything about the Tyler Robinson King. Candice is extremely sincere and this idea that she somehow is pushing a conspiracy rather than genuinely trying to get to the truth about what happened to our friend is a total lie. Candice Owens has nothing more than a pure Christian love for Erica. No, she does not. Why are you not being honest? She thinks she's a terrible person.

Exactly one year ago, Charlie Kurt was shot and murdered. The consequences have been profound. above all for his two young children and his wife, Erica, but also for the culture. He did so much to shape. Love him or loat them, and many were in each of these camps. He was known by almost every young person in America. And what he represented to them, whether they realized it at the time or not,

was the ideas are formed and arguments are settled by debate, by open democratic debate. The aim is to win people over by engaging them, not to hide away in silos or which they go away. A divided and embittered America needed more of that. But with his murder, it's only become more. bitter and more divided. The new Big Tent Maga he worked to create, often by inviting dissenters to his turning point events, has collapsed. And it's bitterly ironic that one of the catalysts

that implosion was the true crime saga which has followed his murder. There are always valid unanswered questions. There's always good reason to distrust the official position. The problem in this case is that I've listened to all the evidence and I believe it. It's difficult not to have a cynical view about the people who don't. For those who roll their eyes or spew abuse of me, for saying that, have a perfectly simple request. It'll prove you wrong. Well, joining me now is Megan Kelly, the host of the Megan Kelly Show. Megan, welcome back to Uncensored.

Great to be with you, peers. You did a great post this week where you said, the combination of the Lindsay Clancy story, the one year mark for Charlie's murder, and the 25th, the 9-11, is a lot of darkness for one week. Hug your kids, go outside, hold hands, thank God for the privilege of being alive, and say a prayer,

for the lost and grieving. It really moved me that. I thought you hit, absolutely hit the nail on the head. You've got three things colliding, all of which are incredibly dark, in different ways, but they're all incredibly dark. And sometimes you've just got to take a moment, haven't you? And step away from this and realize what you have and look at perhaps the positives of life. That's exactly right. And I think, you know, it's been sort of a slow build this week for a lot of people. I think there may be many people out there listening who have been feeling like a sense of melancholy or just slightly off. And for me, it's unusual because this is the week. The kids go back to school. It's kind of exciting. You know, you get back to your real life, your real schedule.

And there's a fun feeling about it. I mean, even though the new year is in January, September always feels like the new year since it's the beginning of something new for your kids and so on. But this year there's been this tug on the other side, this tug toward darkness. And I think in particular, if you're in news or you stay abreast of the news, it has been a very dark cycle. You know, not only have we been talking about this mother who brutally murdered her own three children and then this nutcase jury that's been defending her as if she did nothing wrong. But then on the heels of that, we go right into the Charlie one year mark. And every year as we were approached the nine 11 anniversary, what happens on X, and it's important that it happens, is the recirculation

of usually it's the 911 calls being made from the Twin Towers, from the people who do not know that those buildings are about to go down. The 911 calls or the emergency response calls from the firefighters down to the firefighters who are down below about what help they need on the 78th floor, having no idea, they're all about to die. The calls that the people on the airplanes made to their loved ones saying their goodbyes because they knew they were going to die. It's just a lot of death and destruction. And one of the things you see online is some of the younger folks, like not understanding that Gen Xers actually are taking a moment to feel something this week because we're used to

chastising them for feeling everything, empathy for things that have nothing to do with them like it's happening to them, this over the top, oh, woe is me because something happened as somebody who they once saw on television. It's like, you know, try to understand. We, more mature people, are not saying there's never a cause to stop and take note and take stock of what it means to be here and what it means to suffer loss. We just don't believe in nonstop disasterism and feeling sorry for yourself and finding every disorder known to man and latching onto it for attention.

That doesn't mean when something actually heavy happens or three such somethings right in a row, we don't as mature human beings on this earth, pause, look at each other, understand that for whatever reason, God put us on this earth at the same time as one another, and try to connect, try to do something that means something, like say, you matter to me. I care about you. I want us to relate in a way that's loving and kind and good for a moment, a day, an hour, whatever, as opposed to just miring ourselves in the darkness. Yeah, and it's also, I think, it's the same theme, really, but it's about understanding and

having a perspective on life. You know, a lot of the younger people today, they're riddled ever since, I think, the advent of smartphones, I think that's pretty clear. But they're riddled with anxiety about what I call one-of-the-mill life stuff, right? Stuff you just, everybody has to deal with. You lose loved ones. People die. You spit up from girlfriends or boyfriends.

You lose a job, you know, your car brake, whatever it is. But these are in the general pantheon of life, this is what happens to absolutely everybody. And you just have to learn how to deal with it. These three things which you highlighted are absolutely not what happens to everybody. There are exceptional things that happened, all very different, but all very dark. And I want to go through them actually because I thought you lit the touchstone with that post, which really moved me. The Lindsay Clancy story, I think it's a complex story.

I don't think it's a simple thing. My own personal view, and I'm not saying I'm right or wrong, my assessment of this story, is that she obviously brutally killed her children. That is indisputable. The only question is whether she knew what she was doing when she did it, whether she's a cold-blooded murder. I've interviewed a lot of murderers.

I've done literally series of interviewing series. of interviewing serial killers and psychopaths and killers. So I've interviewed a lot of people that deliberately set out to kill people. And I sort of took a view with her that it looked to me like she had in some way just lost her mind, then committed an atrocious heinous act. But that the flaw in the whole thing, which they charged her with the wrong thing,

if they'd actually done what we would in England call something like manslaughter on the grounds of diminished responsibility, she could still end up spending the last part of her life in an institution somewhere. She wouldn't be free to commit more crimes. But we wouldn't be convicting a woman who was incredibly disturbed with a premeditated cold-blooded murder.

So that's where I come from on it. I think you don't share that view. Correct. I understand that, and a lot of people feel as you do, so I don't diminish your POV, but I don't agree with it. I think you need to understand, first and foremost, that medical insanity is not the same as legal insanity.

The bar for legal insanity in the United States is extremely high. It is Jeffrey Dahmer, who cannibalized people, who was zombifying live human beings to try to make them his forever friends with shots to the brain, was not allowed the not guilty by reason of insanity defense. They did not buy it. He was found guilty of murder.

Jeffrey Dahmer was not considered insane legally. But of course he was insane as a medical proposition or as we understand colloquially that term. And so I think if you start there, you understand why people like me do not accept this defense for Lindsay Clancy. She obviously had serious medical issues and mental issues. She obviously wasn't her. But we don't generally accept that as an excuse for murder. Nick Reiner is about to pull the

same card out for murdering Rob Reiner and his wife, Nick's parents. It's not going to work for him either. A woman in Times Square just took out a knife, stabbed a 32-year-old new mother who had just gone back to work at Bank of America after nursing her newborn baby for a few months at home. That poor 32-year-old mom is dead as a result of this other woman who took out a knife and stabbed her out of the blue in the middle of Times Square where you're very very very. viewers have probably gone and watched a show if they came to Broadway. And why did she do it? Oh, her brother says she suffered psychosis related to postpartum that she had had 20 years earlier. No, I don't accept any of that. Obviously, the woman was a nut case. Most people who commit

random violence on strangers are. That doesn't mean they're legally insane. Legally, we look to whether they knew the difference between right and wrong. And the evidence of that that we typically look to is, for example, ordered thinking. And Lindsay Clancy absolutely had ordered thinking on the She murdered her children. She sent the husband out to a restaurant that was farther away than the normal one. She Googled the route to make sure to see how long it would take. When he called her at the point in time in which we believe she was in between murders, she took the call for 14 seconds, redirected him, said, it's fine if you get the generic medication.

This is not a woman in the middle of a psychotic break. And if you speak to most medical professionals who have seen those, they'll back me up on that. She was lying to keep him out of the home so she could commit the behavior. She's not frothing at the mouth. She's methodical. She's chased Dawson, the middle son, who is three, into another room, we believe, to get the court around his neck. Each one would have taken at least two to three minutes. Each child suffered mightily at the hands of the woman who was supposed to love them the most. They saw her coming for them. They ran after having watched their siblings get murdered. It was the most atrocious crime one could commit on this earth. And so those

circumstances together tell me, this person belongs to be treated in the criminal system. not the medical one and just one final point peers there was a woman in america decades ago named constance fisher in maine who drowned all three of her children she was placed in a mental facility she was turned out of that mental facility not long thereafter because they said you know what she's gotten it together this is a mother she loved her kids she didn't really she's not like some crazy murderer she went back to the husband carl with whom she'd been prior they had three more kids and she drowned them too. So we are playing with deadly serious stakes here. This woman does need to be locked up and not put into a Massachusetts mental facility with a bunch of bleeding

hearts that have a high likelihood of turning her through the revolving door back out to reproduce and potentially harm another again. Nobody likes thinking about life insurance, but we all know that we need it. For me, it was asking myself a simple question. If something happens to me, or what happens to the people that I care about. It's an uncomfortable question, but an important one and life insurance can take off a lot of the worry. The problem is that getting hold of it can be a nightmare.

Medical exams, phone calls with agents, weeks of waiting. It puts people off, and that is dangerous. Ethos is completely different. It's 100% online. You get a quote in seconds, apply in minutes, and can get same-day coverage. No medical exam. You just answer a few health questions online.

You can get up to $3 million in coverage, with some policies starting as low as $30 a month. Ethos helps protect the people who depend on you when it takes about 10 minutes. Take 10 minutes to get covered today with life insurance through ethos. Get your free quote at ethos.com slash peers. That's ethos.com slash peers. Well, I know lots of people that share your view too, and I think it'll be interesting if there is a retrial, what happens in the sense? second trial because obviously everyone in America has been talking about this story and everyone has

strong views about it. Moving to Charlie Kirk seems incredible that we're a year on from that. You know, I can remember I just left my studio and was halfway home when they called me and said, you know, have you seen this news, Charlie Kirk had been shot and then there was this kind of agonizing period where no one was quite sure if he'd survived it or not survived it and of course he hadn't. And he was, you know, undoubtedly cold-bloodedly murdered. to me, it seems all the evidence is pointing very, very straightforwardly to the fact that Tyler Robinson did this. There are two aspects to it.

I'm interested in what your view is. One is, are that, I mean, A, do you concur with me? And B, are there, is there another, you know, area of this story that you still feel we don't have enough information about and if so, what is it? And secondly, after that, I'll come to Eric and Kirk is a separate thing. But on that first point, do you believe he did it, Tyler Robinson? And is there something else that you would like more meat on the bone when it comes to the information flow?

I absolutely believe Tyler Robinson committed this crime. I have no doubt about it. The evidence against him is overwhelming. And let's not forget, his own parents encouraged him to turn himself in. I mean, they too believe that their son had committed this murder. I still have a lot of questions about what, if any, connections there are to transceit. for lack of a better word, because there were so many warning tweets by people who are so-called trans. By the way, I've decided not to use that word anymore. They're gender confused. There's no such

thing as transing yourself. You can't transition genders. So gender confused individuals who are online who were warning that something big was going to happen on September 10th at Utah Valley University. And then when Charlie was murdered, got on the internet again and said, told you so. I mean, it was just too much of it. And these were people who seem to have, at least one of them had a connection to Lance Twigs, who is the trans, so-called furry lover of Tyler Robinson. And so I don't think those have ever adequately been answered. I'd like to see more. And we deserve to know more. We deserve to no more. Charlie was a public figure. He didn't belong just to the private individuals who loved him. He belonged to all of us. And in the same way,

we would deserve to know more about a president who had been assassinated. We deserved to know more about Charlie and what happened with those tweets, I think it's pretty despicable that we haven't been told. No, I agree. On Erica Kirk, I don't want to get into Candice Owens with you about all this I know the situation there. But on a wider point, I have looked at the way Erica Kirk has been targeted by all sorts of people in, I think, a pretty repellent manner for a woman who's a grieving widow, still a grieving widow, obviously, very intensely grieving. And she wrote this guest essay in the New York Times this week, in which many, many powerful lines, but she said, eventually I worked up the courage to go into our bathroom. I stared at his side of the sink. His toothbrush

was still lying on its side, his towel still hanging on the hook. I will never touch that towel. And then she described standing in the bathroom, looking at his pillow, wondering how long his scent would remain in the sheets. I stood there in silence, replaying all the completely the ordinary mornings that we woke up there together. And the reason I found it so powerful was it reminded us that there is a human being here, a wife and a mother who lost her husband, who she was obviously very in love with, the loving father of her kids. And I think people have just treated her like some weird commodity for the last year,

where they can say whatever they want about it. They can make any allegations about it. They can treat it as inhumane as they like. And I'm just at a loss of us to understand why, why we have collectively, it seems, lost our humanity about this woman. I mean, I come to this with a bias because I love Erica and I consider her a dear friend and I hate to see her suffer. It's been very painful to watch her suffer this year. The overwhelming suffering has been caused by Charlie's murder and not by the internet nonsense. But that's been an added burden on her.

There's no question. And I, look, I don't like it. I wish it weren't happening. I wish people would move on and just see the evidence that's there. But I think part of the reason this is happening is because Erica stayed in the public eye as the CEO of Turning Point. And therefore, in some ways, criticism of her is fair game. You know, the stuff around did she kill Charlotte?

That's all nonsense. To me, that's so crazy. I don't even spend any time on it. But like the criticisms of Erica's behavior or how she is at this event or how she is at that event, that's going to happen if you are at the head of a political organization. And people who think that she's not grieving correctly, look, all I can say, they're entitled to their opinions. I don't share their opinions, but I can't censor their opinions either. The way Erica could avoid that is by not being the CEO of Turning Point. And she and I have had many conversations about this together. I think she feels very strongly that she was the only one who could get the organization through at least the first year. And she's done that. She miraculously and heroically, she's done that. And I don't know.

I personally would like to see her take some personal time just so she can remove herself from the nonstop battering ram that is heading up a political organization in the United States of America and allow herself in year two to just work on healing, you know, helping her kids. heal and herself heal. I don't know what she's going to do, but that's my prayer for her. That will say. On 9-11, the third part of your post, it's an interesting time, isn't it, in New York, where you have the first Muslim mayor, Mamdani, there now right at the moment, New York will commemorate the 25th anniversary. Rudy Giuliani and many others have said he should skip this Friday's memorial service, drawing a parallel scenes between Mamdani's Muslim faith and the 9-11 hijackers who obviously acted on the orders of the extremist in Osama bin Laden. He responded Mamdani by releasing 170,000 pages of documents exposing Giuliani's administration

for what he said, well, just blatant lies to the public about toxic air and so on. So there's a big furorri brewing there. What do you feel about this? Because, you know, Mam Darni, yeah, he's a Muslim. There are two billion Muslims in the world. He's New York's first Muslim mayor. I may not agree with all his politics. I don't.

But I don't personally have an issue with New York having an elected official who happens to be Muslim around the anniversary of 9-11. And I don't think he should be barred from going to the memorial service based on anything I've seen him say. What do you feel? I don't think he should be barred because he's Muslim. I think he should be barred because when he was campaigning, he was palling around with imams

who had defended the 9-11 terrorists. That's a no. Hard no. And honestly, Pierce, it's one of the reasons why when that race got down to just Mamdani and Andrew Cuomo, who I can't stand, I said,

I guess we have to vote for the sex pest who killed thousands of New York elderly. Because on the other side, you got a guy who's paling around with people who defended the 9-11 terrorists. Hard no, not to mention his communism. I can't forgive that. I don't understand that. I don't understand a person who would do that. I think it's disgusting.

So I agree he should be banned from the 9-11 Memorial Services. he should have nothing to do with it. He can issue a paper statement from Gracie Mansion. That's it. No one wants to see him down there. He's made his position on this clear. And we, there's a lot of grieving still going on around 9-11. You know, while Gen Z and Gen Alpha may have no memory of it,

people who were adults when it happened certainly do. And many of us lost people. We know when those towers went down and planes went down. And we don't want somebody who would ever, pose with someone empathetic toward the hijackers having anything to do with it. And just like, be quiet. Fade into the background. Let the names be read. Let the rest of us who genuinely care pay homage to the victims. Let the news people who understand what they're talking about comment on what the day meant, what the legacy of it meant, what went right and what went wrong

after the fact, the blood and treasure that was spent on the fields of Afghanistan and Iraq for one thing and whether that was worth it or should have gone on anywhere near as long as it did and whether we've learned any lessons at all as we're over in Iran for some apparent reason to this day. But this guy has no role in it. He's, he's, the limited role he's played has deeply offended many of the victims and casual third party observers. And he should take a seat out of respect for those who have genuine grief on this day. You know the problem is if he did skip I can just imagine the headlines, which would be New York's Muslim mayor snubs 9-11 Memorial Day. I mean, in a way, he's in a know-

He could find a way around it. I agree. He's in a know-wean- He could find a way around it. Yeah. But that's what the narrative would be. And I'm sure he's calculated that as well. But it's going to be very interesting what he does do. I'm sure he will attend.

Interesting the reception he gets. Megan, I could always talk to you for about five times as long as you permit me with your wonderful time. Thank you very much indeed for coming back on our Sensor. It's great to see you. Well, join me now as a very close friend of Charlie Kerr, the Turning Point spokesman, Andrew Colver. Andrew, thank you for coming on our Sensor, your first time on the show. Yeah. Thank you for having me, Piers. It's an honor to be here. You were, I think, listening to some of that interview with Megan Kelly, just on, obviously

we're a year on from Charlie's assassination. I can remember it very vividly, but not, I imagine anyone near as vividly as you would remember it. Where were you when you heard what had happened? Yeah, it was in Santa Barbara, actually. So it was where I lived. Charlie had me guest host the show that morning so he could focus on his tour stop at UVU. And so we had a, we actually had Nick Shirley on, believe it or not. It was interesting right there in the first hour. And then we had a pre-record with another guest in hour two that Charlie had already already banked. So I was sitting at my desk at my home office and I was actually texting with Charlie and our co-host now on the show with Blake Neff about talking points about 25, 30 minutes

before it happened actually. The impact on you, on all of Charlie's friends, his family, all his supporters was obviously enormous. A year later, as I said to Megan Kelly, you know, one of the things I've found most repellent about the year has been the way that Eric and Kirk has been treated. And it's interesting to hear Megan, he obviously has enormous love and admiration for Erica, but suggesting that maybe she should take some time out from Turning Point. She should go and just have some time with her family and just away from it all that by attaching herself to a political organization

in the way that she's done, albeit very courageously in this year, make yourself a target. What do you think of that? Well, I appreciate Megan's sympathies and her compassion and love for Erica. I would just say that if you were around turning point, it wasn't something we talked about all the time,

certainly, because we thought Charlie was going to be with us for another 50 years. but we all knew that that was... The Royal Canadian Legion is celebrating its 100th anniversary. And now our change has a $2 coin to mark this milestone. Honor the Legion's mission to carry forward stories of service and sacrifice to new generations and their dedication to supporting veterans

and their families from coast to coast to coast. Celebrate this enduring legacy. Find the 100th anniversary of the Royal Canadian Legion $2 coin today. It's kind of the plan that Erica would take over something happened to Charlie. Charlie told it to me on at least two occasions. I was at the now infamous, you know, Aspen event where he was asked about it in front of donors. And he said that Erica would do a good job and, you know, she should take over. And I was, I'm also aware that that was how he informed the board, that he wanted things to go should something happen to him. So he told his financial planners. I mean,

Everybody sort of knew that Erica was the person that was going to take over. And my viewpoint on it is a little bit unique just because I see it internally, peers that my opinion is she was the only person that could have done what she did in that moment. If you know anything about the inner workings of Turning Point, she knew everybody. Everybody loved Erica. Everybody respected Erica. And we would rally around Erica. There's a real chance that Turning Point unravels in those immediate weeks following Charlie's assassination.

If she doesn't step in the way she did. And yeah, she wants to honor Charlie's legacy. She wants to carry it forward. And I think that for them, it's part of their family legacy and for her kids. And peers, I would just tell your audience, you know, I think there's been, you know, I think cheap attacks against her that she's not taking care of her family or something like that. When she comes into the office here, we've got kids toys all over the place. Her kids are with her when she comes in, you know, we've got a great family environment now these days.

And actually some of our other staff have newborns and kids. as well, so they're running around. So we do our best to kind of balance everything. But this is, I think, a calling, I would just tell people, you know, a wife of a husband, a high-profile husband has one calling, a widow has another, and she's going to do what she thinks is best, and we have her back 100% on that. The person at the center of so much of the conspiracy theory narrative about turning point, about Erica, about all of it, is of course Candice Owens.

And it's hard to ignore that reality because she spends most of her time, spraying out new theories, ever more absurd ones, it seems to me, about all this. You've come in her crosshairs. You know, at one stage she claimed she'd had a dream that Charlie's soul was in purgatory and stated she'd messaged you directly afterward, accusing you of betraying him and asserting he knew much more about what happened than he was letting on. And that's a, you know, if I'm in your shoes, and I'm hearing that, where she's almost saying you were in on this,

on the assassination of your boss, your friend, and so on. I mean, I would be absolutely incensed. How do you feel about stuff like that? You know, I think your first reaction is probably right. Your assumption, you're incensed. You kind of can't believe it. But as time's gone by, I will tell you that, you know, I think people talk about peak woke.

They talk about other sort of, moments that reach a fever pitch and then they kind of subside. And I would just tell you that I feel much better about the state of the country, state of the movement and the online discourse when it comes to Charlie's assassination. Then I did six months ago. And I expect I'm going to feel better in six months from now. And so the lines are clearly drawn. And I think that makes it easier.

I think what made it kind of reached that fever pitch in the beginning was people assumed that Candace was with us or that she agreed with us. on, you know, politics or ideas and ideologies or about who Charlie even was. And I think people have clearly seen just how insane some of these ideas are, some of the new theories, and they constantly are getting debunked. And there's a whole army of people online. No, we don't pay them. We don't even coordinate with them.

They do this on their own because they feel like reality is at stake, good and evil, or is it sick? And so they're constantly going back and forth. And, you know, we have a mission to do. and we're going to focus on the mission. And that's what Charlie did. And I'm borrowing straight from Charlie here, Pears. You know, he didn't get engrossed in the online feud culture.

He just wanted to do good work and to move forward. And I think that's the example that we plan on following. Do you think Candice believes the stuff she says? Or do you think she just thinks of ever more outrageous conspiracy theories that will get huge amounts of clicks and a ton of money? You know, I don't want to speculate on what she believes, Pierce. I don't know anymore. The person that I see online is, you know, not exactly like the person I used to know.

So I don't even know where she's coming from anymore. What do you hope Charlie Kirk's legacy will be? I mean, it always seemed to me incredibly ironic. I interviewed him several times, and I always enjoyed it talking to him. But above all else, regardless of his own political beliefs, and he had very solid beliefs, which he believed, no doubt that he believes his beliefs. But I also have no doubt that there was this horrible irony that here's a guy that goes into almost the opposition camps

again and again and again. He goes to places where most people wouldn't agree with him. And he says, prove me wrong. Literally the mantra, which he used to say, and people would line up and they'd ask him questions and they'd have open democratic debate, which ought to be at the bedrock of any democratic society. And yet it was Charlie who did that, who got targeted and assassinated by somebody who despised him and his views.

And there's a horrible irony there, isn't there? What do you hope his ultimate legacy will be from all this? Well, you're the point about the irony. It's really important. I mean, a lot of people understood in the immediate aftermath that he was, the best of us. He was, you know, some people described him as a moderate, you know. He was doing politics in the way that we should be doing politics as Americans, as Brits, that you actually discuss your ideas and you have this collision of ideas in the public square. It is an ultimate

exercise of free speech. And Charlie believed that he could correct error in thinking in Gen Z what they thought about politics, what they thought about President Trump, and what they thought about America and he was wildly successful. And ultimately, that's why he was targeted because he was impacting a whole generation. He was impacting the whole country. Charlie was so excited to go back on tour in the fall of 2025 because he could see the movement and some of these fracture lines, you know, emerging. And he wanted to address that and basically be able to message to Gen Z. And yeah, the irony is that Charlie was such a. a wonderful person. And you know, you see those videos online peers where, you know, it's like

Charlie Kirk, destroy his lib or whatever, campus radical. 90%, I would say 95% of his interactions on campus were so calm, we're so kind and decent, and he was so patient with people. And I don't know that those ones go so viral, but that was actually what was happening with Charlie. He was so willing to meet people where they were at. Now, if you were a troll or if you came in bad faith, He was willing to match your energy if he felt like that. But so often the crowd would say, you know, dunk on this person, dunk on this person, because they couldn't believe something, you know, one of the questioners was saying. And he would always say, calm down, calm down, be respectful, respect this person.

And, you know, so it's a tragedy and it leaves an incredible void for our movement because on so many levels, he wasn't just the best organizer, he wasn't just keeping people together behind the scenes. He wasn't just an amazing communicator. but he was the moral compass for the conservative movement. And that's what we have to remember is that Charlie's profound faith in Jesus Christ. His profound courage came from a place of moral decency. And it was obviously inspired by his faith. And Erica had a great part to play in that.

Becoming a father had a great part to play in that. But I hope that that's what we remember this week, is that Charlie was fundamentally a decent man that did not deserve obviously what happened to him. As a matter of fact, he deserved all the accolades and more in life. But it is an irony and it is a tragedy. And I don't know what else to say about it than that. Yeah, I think that sums it up.

Andrew Cull, but thank you very much, David, coming on on a sense of. Joining me to debate this is host of the crucible, Andrew Wilson, who of course recently debated Candid's Owens, John Mappin and businessman, public affairs commentator, a former Turning Point insider, Robert Neal, the former U.S. Navy SEAL, who very appropriately this week, the man who killed Osama bin Laden.

And Brandon Tatum, aka the Officer Tatum. Well, welcome to all of you, a stellar panel to debate this. Let me start with you at John Mapping. You were right in the Charlie Kirk camp, a friend of both Charlie, of Candice Owens, and of others around the turning point scene. You helped set up the UK wing, introduced Candice to her husband, George Farmer,

and you're still friends with Candice. My question for you, which would be a question for Candice, but I haven't had her on the show for a while, is I've looked at all the evidence about Tyler Robinson, and it's pretty clear what happened here. Tyler Robinson murdered Charlie Kirk, he didn't like him, and all the conspiracy theory noise, most of it driven by Candice, to me is very cynical. It's just to create a lot of noise, a lot of clicks, and make a ton of money. What's your response to that?

Well, I think if somebody watches Candace's show in sequence, there are plenty of anomalies that don't make any sense at all. And all I can go on is my personal experience of what I witnessed personally as a friend of Charlie's and of somebody who helped, as you say, not just launch Turning Point in the UK, but also introduced Charlie to some of his biggest donors and generated many tens of millions of dollars of donation at Turning Point. My wife and I are also friends with Erica Kirk. And I've paid very, very close attention to this. And I suppose the initial worry that I had was when one of Charlie's closest friends and executives at Turning Point, when I was arriving at the memorial, said to me, well, actually sent me a text, to say, as soon as you arrive, we need to meet, to have a conversation, no phones. And that immediately put me on Twitter. I was turning up to celebrate Charlie's life at a memorial.

I certainly believed the initial story. I had no reason to question it. Obviously, I was distraught. I was actually supposed to have been with Charlie that week in Arizona, but I had postponed my trip. Then I saw the most vitriolic attacks against Candice Owens really for stating things that are absolutely true and demonstrably documented. What things? You know, the text messages that it...

Well, sorry, is that Andrew? Yeah. Yeah. What things? What things are demonstrably true? Well, the text about Charlie's... Well, the fact that Charlie had texted people in turning point to say that he was concerned about threats on his life, which was initially denied. The night before he died, he sent a text that said that he was concerned the left was going to kill him, right?

Well, I think, you know, all I can talk about is my personal experience. But John, you said you met Charlie for dinner when he was last in London in May 2025. And at that meeting, you said Charlie was expressing serious concerns about Israel, was talking about his own death. And when he left, you had a feeling it was the last time you'd see him. I mean, that's an extraordinary revelation, because we're talking about his own death. what you're suggesting there is that his death may be somehow linked to Israel, but there is zero evidence that his death was linked to Israel.

There's zero evidence of any link between Tyler Robinson and Israel. I'm not saying there is evidence of that. What I'm saying is that there was, I spoke to Charlie and his position on Israel had completely changed. I traveled to Israel with Charlie and Erica Kirk, and at that time we were guests actually of Imturitsu, which is the principal Zionist organization in Israel, and we were their guests.

And at that time in March 2019, Charlie was completely all in and would have supported anything that Israel did. Over time, his position was changing. And when I was in London, he told me about it. a letter that he'd written to Netanyahu, and he told me, frankly, that he considered Bibi Netanyahu to be a psychopath. And that is a long, long way away from the narrative

that was being pushed shortly after Charlie's death. Now, Candice started to point this out, and I saw her coming under tremendous attack. So I wrote an open letter to Candice, basically saying, actually, what you're doing is exactly what Charlie would be doing, if the roles were reversed. After I wrote that letter, I had a call from one of the most senior executives at Turning Point telling me that he thought my letter was fantastic,

that it was extremely well written, that he supported it entirely, he thought it was great, and he asked me to give Candace a message to double down on his investigation into Turning Point, specifically naming a very very, senior executive at Turning Point. But you're not going to tell us who any of these people are, right?

You're not going to actually tell us who any of these people are, right? So none of this can be verified, of course. Well, I can verify it, but the, I'm not going to talk about it is now because I'm going to check my source. Yeah, you're not going to tell us who these people are. We just got to, you just, we just got to believe you, right? We just always have to believe you. This happened.

There's no evidence that it happened. You can't actually demonstrate your sources that had happened. For all we know, you just made the entire thing up, how would we know the difference? Well, and also, this is- Listen, Andrew, I'm not going to debate. We've been going around in circles for, I don't know, 10 minutes now hearing you drag this on. What does this have to do with Charlie's death? Well, I think it's very important to get to the truth of who killed him.

Yeah, that's why the trial is going on right now. But, John, the truth is, and I will come to you, Brandon. The truth is, Tyler Robinson killed him. All the evidence has been laid out. It's very clear, right? He had his grandfather's gun. There's video of him going to the rooftop. He takes the shot.

He kills Charlie Kirk. There are text messages of him emitting it to his flatmate, lover, whatever. None of this is particular. I mean, I've studied crime for 40 years as a newspaper editor. I've presented many crime documentary series about serial killers and psychopaths and so on.

This seems to me very straightforward. And the rest of it is just consistent. conspiracy noise designed to get people to tune into Candice Owens' YouTube channel and make her money. But the victim in all this is not just... That's not my interest. I mean... I know, but you are friends with her, and I've said it to her on here. It's like, I don't know why you do this.

And I think the way she's treated Erica Kirk is unbelievably cruel. There's a grieving widow here, right? Who, for the last year has been grieving the appalling murder of her husband and a father of her two kids. and the constant attacks on Erica Kurt by counties, I think, are disgusting. But I look at the evidence of this case. It's straightforward. It's up and down. There's no lawyer or police officer in the country who's looking at this going,

oh, I wonder if Israel were involved. It's just bullshit, isn't it? Well, that's your opinion. And I completely respect your opinion. It doesn't happen to be in my opinion. I think there are many aspects of what we've been told that don't make sense to me. Maybe I'm in a logical person,

or maybe I'm a logical person. But what I've also discovered is that people that have really followed the detail and have actually got into and followed Candace's episodes and have actually watched them in sequence, which I have, tend to feel that the official stories does not stack up. Okay.

Let me... Let me bring the others in. Andrew, look, you had a infamous debate with Candice Owens. You know, to me, like I say, this is straightforward. And you pushed her for the evidence, and she does what she does very well. She kind of obfuscated and deflected and talked about other things and created a sort of, you know, sort of, well, it's all, you know, nudge, nudge, wink, wink, blah, blah, blah.

But no actual factual evidence to contradict the overriding, very straightforward narrative that this guy, Tyler. Which was the, and that was the purpose of the debate from my end was to demonstrate to the world that she had absolutely no foundational evidence for any of her claims. And she doesn't. And she backed away from each one that she's made. I went through also looking at the episodes in sequence, just like Mr. Mappen did. There's no good evidence for her claims at all, just almost none. It's basically hearsay. They rely very heavily on my source said this. My source said that won't reveal who these sources are. So we can't ever make a determination if that's true.

For all we know, they make their sources up. How would we ever falsify? that. The biggest issue with this entire thing is that logically, if you're going to go after something like this, you should go after it attempting to falsify your own claim. And if you can't falsify your claim, that is when you enter into the belief section of this thing, right? These people don't do that. They don't try to falsify the claim. Rather, they try to fit the puzzle pieces together to fit their view. That's the wrong way to go about it. Okay. Officer Tatum, welcome back to our sentence. Before we go any further. but, you know, you were friends with Candice.

Football is back. Every game, every weekend, Draft King's Sportsbook has you covered. Every snap matters. Every comeback can shift the game. And every fourth quarter moment can change everything. Follow the action with Draft Kings, the number one sports book for live betting.

Built to keep up with a speed of sports. Built with Canadian sports fans in mind. Draft Kings brings the action together in one easy-to-use app. Follow the biggest matchups, build your parlays, and explore live bet. betting markets as the game develops. So you can focus on the football and enjoy the action with confidence.

Download the Draft Kings app today and see what everyone is talking about. Draft Kings, the number one sportsbook for live betting. In partnership with Draft Kings, the crown is yours. Gambling problem? Call Connects Ontario. 1866-531-260-19 and over. Physically present in Ontario. Eligibility and restrictions apply.

See DraftKings.com slash sportsbook for details. Please play responsibly. I want sportsbook for live betting based on available live market data. I still get on personally. I get on, well, we can't. I like her personally. But I don't like the way she's gone about this because I don't like the way she's treated Erica Kirk.

I think it's been extremely cruel. But notwithstanding that, the theories that she keeps putting out there, which are completely unsubstantiated, what do you make of what she's doing here? And the effect is having on public opinion because it is resonating with public opinion. Yeah, I mean, Candace is still my friend, but I disagree with her. I don't agree with anything that she's doing or saying.

None of it makes sense to me. Me and her have had private conversations on the phone about this, and I just flat out disagree. You know, I did this for a living. I did investigations for a living. I know how to look at evidence, and I know how to get to the bottom of things. And I love Charlie. Charlie was one of my good friends. I'll fight somebody over Charlie.

And there's no way in the world that I want for the person who killed him to be walking free. So if there was some possibility whatsoever in evidence presenting that there's another person other than Tyler Robinson that killed Charlie Kirk, I would be on it. But it is no evidence that anybody else did it. Everything else is all bull crap and shenanigans. There's no evidence Israel did it. There's no evidence, Egypt did it. There's no evidence turning point did it. Erica Kirk had anything to do with it. And our reason on this, I understand people have questions that's fair. We live in America. You have a freedom of speech. You can question things. But your questions don't leave. you off a cliff. If you do not have evidence, you don't have evidence. We have cell phone records.

Text messages, confessions. He turned himself in. His father was there. His mother was there. A family friend facilitated the turning him in with turning him in. His DNA is on the gun, on multiple areas on the gun. His DNA is on the towel, a screwdriver. We saw him on camera in court. I was there. 30 hours of testimony. The defense is not even arguing some of these things that are pushed out here by conspiracy. theories. The explode a microphone. Nonsensical. And I don't not understand why people who say they love Charlie is still pushing this stuff. It's okay to have questions, but you better doggone have some evidence if you're going to be out here shaming the legacy of Charlie Kirk. It's about his life.

It's about what he did. And now it's conspiracies. Right. And shaming his wife. And of course, what worries me is whatever happens with this, Candice will just continue to, you know, I've got an ongoing bet with her about whether Brigitte Macron is male or female, a $300,000 bet to charity. And I can bet you that even if Brigitte Macron wins that case she's taken against it, which she will, Candice will find some reason to disbelieve it and just not accept it, as she will with this one. And she'll do that, and her supporters will just go along with it. I'll be bringing Rob O'Neill. Rob, welcome back to you.

And obviously, particularly relevant to have you in this week, as we can remember at the 25, anniversary of 9-11. And I'll come to that a little later. But during the debate between Candice and Andrew, one of the main bones of contention was how the bullet that killed Charlie acted on impact. Let's take a look at the clip first. I also want to say that you're saying this can happen and Rob O'Neill is infinitely more qualified, I think, to speak on that. And, well, because he's actually shot and killed people. Why would that have anything do with anything? Well, because- Did he slow down all the videos of the people he shot to see if their clothes moved? Well, why are you able to assert your business as a fact?

Because I'm going to tell you how projectiles were. He's not even going to just, I guarantee you this guy is not even going to disagree with what I'm about to say. If it is the case that you have energy and you have mass and the mass is moving in the air, the air has to go somewhere. It doesn't have a choice. I think you're like totally PSing right now, Van. Well, Rob, I mean, you're the one to ask. Do you agree with Andrew?

Well, I mean, the thing with ballistics is any time, any time you fire, a shot is fired, anything can happen. And that's just how it goes. And yes, there's a shockwave that follows it. The projectile, and generally it goes into the body and it forms a temporary cavity. That's actually what kills you, not the projectile itself. Can it happen a different way? Yeah, I mean, it can happen a lot of different ways. The reason that I brought into this is because the first time I saw it was, I did not like it, no one liked it.

It was sent to me my initial reaction as someone who has happened. killed people within feet was. I've been involved in bad shootings, too. My initial reaction was that didn't look right. How were they going to explain this? Something's off. I'm not saying I know who did it or what happened. I'm saying the way that looked right there is not someone that got shot. And that looked like an exit wound on the left part of his neck. It just doesn't look like, you know, I didn't know what was fired at him. I don't know what hit him. I don't know what killed them. I don't know any of that stuff. Knowing later it's a 30 odd six, I would say 99 out of a hundred times is going to blow someone's head off.

One time it might not. And again, now you start dealing with the court where I wasn't there at the time. I'm not particularly fond of the case very closely. I wasn't in the courtroom. I wasn't as close to Charlie Clerk as anyone on this panel. I'm saying as a C-L-Team Six sniper who's been a sniper says in 1998 and killed a lot of people up close. When I saw it, that's bad.

How are they going to explain it? And then you get stuff because you get the conspiracies. Fortunately, for all of us, we've all experienced immediate response from anything you say or do. And then when word flies, Israel is involved, they say they didn't do it. Now you're saying, well, Israel said they didn't do it. Then they're in the conversation. A lot of, and we know this too.

A lot of people get involved for clicks, and that's how they make their money. And I'm not saying anyone here's doing it. It happens. We've all seen it. It does it. I get involved. My name's brought up because of my past. The one thing I want to say to people is I was not there.

And I'm just saying what I think. Well, what's interesting, wrong? I'm actually enjoying listening to everybody else because I want to get their side. You're being very honest about this, and you're eminently qualified to talk about sniping. Obviously, the authorities are. ballistic data placed the distance of the fatal shot at roughly 140 to 200 yards, so about 122 meters. They have established he used his grandfather scoped bolt action, 0.306 caliber rifle.

Yeah. No evidence was presented that Robinson was a highly skilled or trained marksman. And I guess the conspiracy theories, if that's what they are, as caveat it, because he's not been convicted yet. But let's just talk this through. The fact that he took one shot and was immediately successful in his mission to assassinate Charlie Kirk, if that's what he did, as people believe, you know, in your experience from that distance with that kind of weapon, how likely is it that somebody with no specialist marksman training could perform that one shot to be successful? That's not a far shot. I mean, even when you get into the taking the gun apart or taking

the scope off. If you do take it apart and reassemble it and it looks the same, your cold more shot, you might not have the dope that you had at, say, 100 yards. And for example, if you're on at 100 yards, but now you're not because you put it together, you aim for the head, you might hit the neck. It could happen. A minute of angle at 100 yards is one inch. And, you know, and that's how you start to measure it. So a missed shot at 100 yards could be seven inches off. Right. So anything could have happened. If I was not there filming it or looking and talking to people. I'm just saying, from my experience, what I have seen, I saw this on television, which again is another false flight, because everything we see on television,

you've got to take 50% out of way. Andrew, what's your response to that? Yeah, I mean, he's right. The other issue that you have is that I don't even think that Robinson took the scope off. He brought a screwdriver with him. Usually the type of scope that you would see on that would have Allen wrench. You would need an Allen wrench to take it off. What he likely did was he just removed the stock. The scope was still. fixed on the rifle. And he just put the rifle back on the actual stock. I don't know the full story of how much he took apart. I'm just saying that even if you took it apart, I'm going to be

sure. Yeah, to be fair, nobody does. Like, we don't know if that's the case. This is speculation, but it's not a difficult shot, even open sight at 140 yards with a 30 odd six, not a problem at all. Right. Right. And if he had a scope, even less of a problem. Actually, he got lucky. Yeah, hang on, real quick. Just follow up with this. I'll just, I just want to follow up real quick. the U.S. Army has done tons and tons of research into this particular caliber because we've been using it since World War I. We used it in World War I. We used it in World War I. We used it in Korea. We used it in Vietnam. And you still have some 30-od-6 rifles, which are in service today, I believe. And it is one of the most research rounds around. And it is, in fact, the case that we have tons and tons of examples of a 30-od-6 full metal jacket, which is not even a soft point round, entering into a body and not penetrating all the way. It happens. With a full metal jacket, it happens. With a soft point, it also happens. This is not unheard of. It's just rare.

Okay. In the case of Martin Luther King, he was shot with a 30 out six and it didn't over-penetrate like he would expect. That's a bad example because it entered into the jaw penetrated and then hit again. That's why you shouldn't use that example. But there are two living soldiers. I don't necessarily think it's a bad example because of 30-out-6 who have had that happen to them, Where they were hit with the equivalent of a 30-od-6. Brandon, let me ask you. Let me explain. I don't think it's a bad example because normally when you look at a 30-out-6 being shot at somebody, it'll blow right through you.

And so the fact that it didn't over-penetrate, like one would expect even with Martin Luther King and then also with Charlie Kirk, it's not that odd. You know, it's rare, but it's not impossible. And when you look at the forensic evidence that they extracted the round from his body and the shrapnel. And they did, you know, all of the investigatory things that they needed to do to determine that he was shot with a 30-class round. Well, he also had hemorrhaging. What they're saying is that there was also a lot of hemorrhaging around the chest area. So it's likely that when this cavitation was formed and the round broke up because they pulled it out in pieces, that tons and tons of the actual soft point round moved down into the chest area, which is common in a cavitation like this. So especially if you have a round, that's a soft point.

So, like, all of this is not only plausible and possible, but it's even likely. The only thing that you would even be able to say is a rarity is that there was no full penetration in the neck, but that does happen. Okay. Well, we're going to get to the bottom of all this, I suspect. I just want to talk back to you, John. Officer Tatum posted on X, this. You can't truly be Charlie Kirk's friend if you're tearing down his wife. the sudden wave of hatred directed at Erica is completely backwards.

Why didn't any of these cowards have a word of criticism for her while Charlie was still alive? If we're going to honour Charlie, we need to show some respect to the family that he left behind. And I feel that strongly, that the way Erica Kirk has been treated has been disgusting, frankly, trampling on the grief of a young grieving widow. What do you feel about it? I think it's much more nuanced, Piz. My wife and I are very close to Erica. We love her very much indeed.

And so did Candice, and so does Candice. I've just spent a week with Candice, and she absolutely had no intention whatsoever to be unkind to Erica in any way. There are... What? What? What are you saying? Can you speak?

faster. What are you saying? You're saying now or before? You say currently? When Charlie was killed. When Charlie was killed. You're saying before what we see today? Yes. For nearly, I think it was nearly a month after Charlie was killed. It was prior to the time at which they met, they had a private meeting. And in that private meeting, something happened between Charlie, between Erica and Candice. And she took. tells the story better than I can tell it, but this is much, much more nuanced. Candace is extremely sincere. I mean, you know this, Officer Tatum. She's an extremely sincere person. And this idea that she somehow is pushing a conspiracy rather than genuinely trying

to get to the truth about what happened to our friend is a total lie. She is completely sincere. She is not doing it for clicks. She is not doing it for money. She doesn't need money. Her husband is more than capable of taking care of her for the rest of her life. She claimed Erica Kirk is complicit in Charlie Kirk's murder, man. She's claimed it publicly many times that she's complicit. The TPSA is complicit. When I asked her what that means, what does complicit mean? She says, well, it just means that you believe that Tyler Robinson, who she thinks has a zero percent chance of actually having murdered Kirk, that she just believes that. You don't use the rhetoric of you're complicit, you're part of this. You don't use that rhetoric if it's the case that that's your

friend. And you just want good things for them. Can I just make one point? Yeah. I've, that's your interpretation of what she said. I have never heard her say that. And that is not, you know, you do have a habit of altering things. But I do have to thank you for something, Andrew. I missed the part there. You did pay for a fantastic dinner that we had in Iceland. You're saying that Candace... Great. I wouldn't remember she doesn't need the money?

Hang on. Remember she doesn't need the money? Hold on. Wait a minute. Are you saying that Candace Owens doesn't have any vitriolic feelings towards Erica Kirk? Not at all. Are you... You're lying.

I talk to Candace. I talked to Candice. I talked to Candace the other day. She cannot stand Erica Kirk. I'm fully aware of your conversation and I'm fully aware of the content. By the way, not only am I aware of your conversation. She does not like Erica Coach since the day they met. Why are you not being honest?

Since the day they met, she had no, let me talk. She had no issues with Erica Kurt, and this is what she told me, until they met and she despises her. She thinks she's a terrible person. She talks about her every day on the show. You show, be honest about it. I'm very aware of the conversation. Candice will get on this show right now and tell you she despise her.

Officer Tatum, I'm very aware of your conversation with Candace the other day. She had it when we were in Iceland together. She told me the entire contents of the conversation you had. And I'm not going to do you a disservice of repeating it, because you know exactly what you discussed. Yeah, yeah, we could repeat it. What do you want to do? Are you trying to say it was some secret conversation?

It was not a secret conversation. Me and here had a conversation about this case and other things. It was a private conversation. But I'm just telling you. But I know what you discussed. Hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, John Mappen, just to be clear, it sounds like Officer Tatum's perfectly happy for you to reveal whatever it is you're suppressing. So why do you just tell him, just say what you're talking about?

Yeah. No, I'm not going to, I'm not going to get into a private conversation. What I'm saying is, you're making it sound like a thing to reveal it. Is it Candice Owens. What are you talking about? Candice Owens has nothing more than a pure Christian love for Erica. No, she does not. And as does my wife.

Is that why she made the documentary wife of Charlie Irons? Let me put this in perspective. Let me put this in perspective. To being a sex trafficker, John? Let me explain why she tries to link Erica Kirk to being a sex trafficker if she thinks that Erica Kirk is just, you know, it's just Christian concern. Let me put this in perspective. Let me put this in perspective.

You hung out with her in Iceland. I talked to her on the phone in Iceland. Now, I'm not saying anything that Kenneth Owens is not saying on her own show. And I love Candace. She's a friend of mine. I disagree with her, though. And I appreciate Erica Kirk. I talked to her not too long ago.

She don't like Erica Kirk. It is very clear to you and to me. But you lie, and I'm telling the truth. And Candice wouldn't be mad if I said it because she said on her show every day. She says she needs to be taken to a show every day. She says she needs to be taken to a precinct and investigated for the murder of Charlie Kirk. That means I don't like you. If Erica Kirk killed Charlie, I wouldn't like her either.

But the truth is, Erica had nothing to do with it, and there's no evidence presented. And you don't have to lie. You don't have to be fake on the show. You can just tell the truth. And there's nothing. People are entitled to their own opinion. Candace don't have to like Erica Kirk. She don't have to like Erica.

That's fine. That's her decision. But don't get on here and lie. Obstitatim, I'm not lying to you. And it may be a little bit too deep of a concept for you to fathom. But, you know, friendship takes many things. And being a true friend. She told me flat out that after she talked to Erica Kurt,

that she couldn't stand her because she lied. She told me that Erica Kirk lied about too many things about Charlie Kirk, and she cannot stand her. She thinks she's covering up Charlie Kirk's death. What are you saying? Can I ask you a question, Officer Tatum, that I've been wanting to ask you? Why is it when you know that Owens has done everything possible to destroy everything that Charlie Kirk left behind, including TPSA, his wife, and then by proxy of that? Visit BetMDMGM Casino and check out the newest exclusive.

The Price is Right Fortune Pick. BetMDM and GameSense remind you to play responsibly, 19 plus to wager. Ontario only. Please play responsibly. If you have questions or concerns about your gambling or someone close to you, please contact connects Ontario at 1-866-531-2,600 to speak to an advisor, free of charge. BetMGEM operates pursuant to an operating agreement with Eye Gaming Ontario. At his children, why the hell are you still friends with this chick? Can you explain that to me?

Because I actually don't understand that. Like what you're talking about her doing and what, hang on, hang on. And what did you say publicly that she did? is literally evil. It's the epitome of evil from your view. Good question. I think that's a great question. Hold on. I think it's a great question. The thing is, is that me and canons go back a long way. So our friendship means more than her, her disagreements and her feelings towards Charlie Kirk. Charlie, she's not coming after me. These aren't just disagreements, though.

No, no, let me finish. Let me finish. Let me finish. You ask the question. You ask the question. Let me finish. Let me finish what I'm saying. You ask the question. Me and her go back from 2017. I knew her before I knew Charlie Kirk. I knew her before I knew of Erica Kirk. Candice and I have been best friends for a very long time. She has been always good to me. So you're saying she's an insincere person? Let me explain.

Are you saying that she's an insincere person? But are you saying she's an insincere person? Hold the phone and I will finish and then I'll let you talk. We have been friends for a very long time. It has been recent that she has come out and done this and I disagree with her. two people can still know each other, be friends with each other, and disagree. Now, if she was coming at me to be in. Are you saying that she's insincere and not above us?

We're real quick, let me just get in. This seems like you're just hedging your bets. Like on the, you speak that at both sides of your mouth. I don't have to head your bed. Nobody's talking about me. Hang on, hang on, man. Hang on, man. This ain't got nothing to do it.

This does not have anything to do with me. How is it, how is it the one, in the one hand, you're like, this woman is perpetuating horrible evil on a family of a murdered man who is a widow doing these horrible things to him, but she's my friend. You know, she's my friend, though. Because friendship don't mean you have to agree with people. Friendship don't mean you have to agree with people. That transcends disagreement.

Friendship don't mean you have to agree with people. If I had a family member, if I had a family member, if I had a family member that I disagree with, somebody that I think is doing horrible things or saying horrible things, they still my family. I just disagree with them. Candace can change. She's not your family do. Things that she said may change.

Yeah, but I don't understand. While she's doing these supposedly horrific things to people you claim to love, you're just like, yeah, we're still friends, though. I'm speaking out about it. I'm speaking out about it. Your mind is not complex enough. Maybe you don't have real relationships. Maybe you don't have real friends and relationships in your life. Maybe I'm the only one who does.

I can be your friend and disagree with you. That's not. I can be your friend and disagree with you. This transcends disagreement from your view. This is the difference between me. What is the difference? What is the difference between me saying, I'm her friend and not our friend today or tomorrow?

Did that change what she say every day on the television? Does that change anything? It would show us who you are. It would show us who you are. It don't show anything. I can say, I'm not a friend. That don't change anything. They don't change the reality.

Let me ask, I'm saying, what I'm saying, John saying, in this phone, she's super sincere and you can trust her. And you're like, well, no, you can't, but she's my close friend.

I didn't say that. You're talking about an isolated situation. Let me ask you, Officer Tatum. So, John Mapping won't reveal the contents of the call that you had recently with Candice Owens. In the contents of that conversation you had, is her position still, as you've suggested, that she believes Erica Kirk has something to do with Charlie's death? She believes that Erica Kirk is covering it up or no more than she's presenting to the world. That's what I got from the conversation.

And I'm going to be honest with you. I think she really believe what she's saying. Everything that I mentioned to her, she has a response to it. And John Mapping, just to be clear, is that what you were reluctant to put in the public domain? But now, Officer Tatum has said it. No, there's other material that I wouldn't put in the public domain. but the truth of the matter is, is that Candice is one thousand percent sincere. And what she is doing is doing out of the deepest possible love.

She is doing this out of the deepest possible Christian love for Charlie Kirk, for his wife, and for America. The consequences to the soul of America. I think she's doing more harmed and good in this situation. Well, that's your opinion. matter. Canna's, all I'm saying is she's sincere. Did Candace tell you she's still my friend? Is Candace still my friend? Do she still respect me enough to be my friend? Okay, obviously she is because we talked on the phone. But two people can be, this is one of the thing I want people to understand. Two people can be friends because we go back, way back like two flats. But I just disagree with her. She disagreed with me on this topic. There's been other things that I agree with Candace on. There's been other things that me and Candace have been through. We started a non-profit together. We've done a lot of things together as, two individuals who know each other. Our families are connected.

I know her father. I visit him when he was in the hospital. We celebrate him on Father's Day. There's more to it than a disagreement on a certain time. I know that. I know that. Well, that's why. That's why we're still considered friends, but we disagree.

All I'm saying is Officer Tatum. All I'm saying is I acknowledge that you're sincere about your opinion. She is completely sincere in what she is doing and she's doing it. out of the deepest level of patriotism for America. You know, the price that America will pay for incorrect. That's fair. Let me dive in a little quick. Let me finish.

Let me finish. The communist party in the USA is super sincere too. So what does that mean? That doesn't mean anything. Your sincerity doesn't mean anything. Oh, I truly believe. The communists truly believe in communism. So what?

That doesn't mean anything. I'm not interested in whether or not she's sincere. I'm interested in the amount of damage that she's doing to the right and the horrible things that she's conducting on people, which is life ruination. I thought the thesis was that she was doing it for clicks and money. The thesis is both. You could be sincere and want clicks and money, can't you? Well, I would say, Andrew, let me say. Hang on, hang on.

Hang on. Andrew, hold on. Andrew, hold on. Andrew. But you did the most ridiculous thing. Andrew, you did. And I like you, Andrew, but you did the most ridiculous thing I ever heard of in my life. I don't like you.

the world that you pay her $300,000 to do a debate. No, no, I want to say thank you to Andrew. Hang on. Andrew, Andrew, Andrew, Andrew, Andrew paid. Now, let me just say. Andrew, you paid for the most fantastic dinner in Iceland. Yeah, I know, I heard you the first time. We went out for the most slap-up dinner.

I know. It was great. I know. Fantastic. I'm glad that you, I'm glad that you had, I'm glad that you had a wonderful meal for once that wasn't on the Lolita Express. Now, that aside, I would like to just talk to Mr. Tatum. So what? I get paid a small fortune to do debates all the time all over the country. Tons and tons of cats. Hang on, hang on, hang on.

I don't have an issue with somebody requesting an appearance fee for a debate and somebody who has one of the top podcasts in the world. That was never a question of me for me. I don't care about that. It's not relevant to me. What's relevant to me is actually getting at the facts, getting at the truth and exposing that for the world to see. That's what was relevant to me.

And I'm willing to put my money where my mouth is. Well, here's the thing. You say that Candace Jones is doing such evil and harm, but you gave her $300,000 to do more of it. Well, Andrew, let me ask, let me ask you. You're trying to criticize me or being her friend, but I'm vehemently disagree. But you gave a 300,000.

Guys, if I can get a word in edgeways on my own show, I'd appreciate it. Guys, guys, guys, guys, guys, guys, let me ask a question on my own show. Let me ask a question on my own show. Guys, let me let him speak. Guys, let me ask a question on my own show if I can. Andrew, a couple of things.

One is there's a rumor that you were paid by a turning point to do that interview. And that's how you recoup some of your money. Is that true? No. Okay. Secondly, you know, there's been lots of polls and stuff that came out of it. Some said you won. Some said she won.

Whatever, whatever, whatever. I saw you both scoring points with each other. You became a subject of some memes like this one called the debate tricks. Let's take a look at this. This is your last chance. After this, there is no time. turning back. You take the blue pill and you can just keep saying, so what. You take the red pill. You learn everything about the Tyler Robinson case. So what? So what? So what? So what? Positive evidence?

So what? So what? When? Appeal to emotion. So what? Burden of proof. So what? So what? So what? So what? Appeal to emotion. So what? So what. So what? Appeal to emotion. So what. So what. So what. of proof. So what? Positive evidence, positive evidence, positive evidence. So what? So what? So what? Appeal to emotion. What? So what? What? What did you make of that, Andrew? I don't care. People meme on people all the time on the internet. She has a much larger audience than I do. There's nothing that I can do about that. But on almost every exit poll, before she was able to get the swarmer's in while it was live, I won every single one of them in that debate. Also, any of the AI algorithms point out that she had nothing substantive to say. But she has a larger audience. There's nothing, there's literally nothing I can do about that. But memes, stuff like that, that doesn't bother me. That's part

of internet culture. And I think it's healthy, right? That's a healthy part of criticism. It's a healthy public. Like, you can't laugh at other people if you can't laugh at yourself, Pierce. Yeah, I agree with you. No, Robin Neal. You've been very patient. But can I ask you something, Andrew? Andrew. Can I ask you him, Andrew? Why do you think that one of Charlie's most trusted friends and top executives at Turning Point and one of Erica's most trusted friends and top executives at Turning Point

called me and asked me to tell me John. You've got to give us a name. I know everybody at Turnpoint. Here's, you understand about protecting sources. Let's do this. I don't think you can just say some anonymous person called you.

Okay, but hang on, hang on. If you're going to make a serious charge on that, hang on, let me just grant it. Let me just grant it. Let me just grant it. Why would that happen? And if everything was all hunky dory, and this person told me that there was a power grab shortly after Charlie died,

that a group of people were trying to get hold of the control of Turning Point, and he specifically asked me to let Candace know to specifically keep on investigating. This is one of Erica Kirk's best friends. You don't think that there might be something going on behind the scenes that is slightly more nuanced. Okay, hang on. I'm going to grant that this happened.

and that your source is being legit and all this. What in the hell does that have to do with whether or not Tyler Robinson shot Charlie Kirk? Can you explain that to me? Well, I think with any investigation, you start pulling strings and you start looking into things that don't make sense. And that actually does not, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on, hang on. Do you realize that that doesn't actually answer the question? Great. We want to pull threads. Great.

Can you explain to me why, even if this top executive did call you, did say always, this to you. What in the hell does that have to do with whether or not Tyler Robinson shot Charlie Kirk? Can you just answer that directly? I think what it might speak to, and I don't know, because I don't know exactly everything that Candace has discovered. What I do know is that she's discovered a lot more than she has already revealed. And I think the next few months will be very interesting. I think they will be. Okay, but hang on, hang on. Can you just answer the question that I asked you. what does that have to do with whether or not Robinson shot Kirk? The answer is nothing, right?

It has nothing to do with it at all? Nothing. Nothing. Yeah, exactly. So who cares? Who cares if a top objective called you in wine? I'm not saying Robinson. I'm not saying,

why should anybody care that a top objection called you to whine and cry and bitch about the inner workings of Turning Point USA has nothing at all to do with anything for your obfuscation. He wasn't whining. He wasn't whining. He wasn't whining. He wasn't bitch. How about you tell me who it is?

Because I'm headed down to Turning Point USA tomorrow. And I want to know who this person is that told you this so I can have a conversation with this person. And maybe Erica should know who this person is. Does she know who it is? I'm sure she does. I'm sure she does. Okay. Are you sure you know?

I'm sure she does. You know for a fact, are you guessing? Well, because this is the game I don't want to play. I really do believe in Charlie Kirk and his message and his legacy. I really do believe in Turning Point USA. safe. And if there's somebody that's a rat or somebody who's doing something wrong in turning point and say, I need to know. Well, how about if they're, how about if it's a good person? How about if it's a good person that wants to expose evil? How about it? Well, come on. Let's work together.

I work with that person. Well, how about me and them get together and find out evil? How are you, how are you telling you, we want to discover evil, but you hide the people that they can disclose it. And that's what Candice begged turning point to do after Charlie was killed. Well, well, that everybody work together, that they share truthfully the information that they have. Well, let's put it out here now. That's what she was begging for. So we can shut the place down. We'll shut the place down if they're doing something to fairs against Chartermanage's legacy.

Let's put all the information on the table. Good. Come on. Who is the source? Who is it? He's not going to give us a name. So, well, look, I respect, do not reveal the source? It's fine.

Look, let's, I want to move on to one thing before we finish. And that's to bring Rob O'Neill's being sitting very patiently. Rob, thank you for your patience. 9-11, 25th anniversary. I mean, we talk about conspiracy theories. There are raging conspiracy theories to his day about 9-11 in all different aspects of it. You know, some about you, you know,

that you weren't the guy that killed Osama bin Laden, even though you obviously were. What, Pierce, where did you hear that? But how do you deal with that, though, Rob? I mean, on a personal level, when you know you're the guy that killed bin Laden, and it's been verified by a number of the guys that were with you, but you have some who say, no, no, it wasn't him, it was me, whatever.

How do you deal with that? Well, Andrew Wilson just said, you know, it's part of it, and I don't really care. That's just how it is. I mean, with me, it's not like a story. I'm just telling you what happened. And with the truth, it's like either believe me or you don't. And something else with the truth, it takes no, there's no effort.

You don't really need to prove over and over the truth. When you're covering something up, you really need to get a, emotional and fire stuff up and really, really yell about things. And that's just not, that's not where I am, you know, and it's, uh, I know there's conspiracies everywhere. And we see it with every major event from, uh, 9-11 to October, that we had a years ago, you know, everything from the Gulf of Tonkin. There's always stuff like that. And if you weren't there, you don't know exactly what happened. But the thing is, with stuff like 9-11, October 6, or even going to war, even if you don't believe in why it happened, it comes down to who's

next to you. In combat, we never lost a fight toe to toe. And I was fighting for the man next to me. that's it. It wasn't about George Bush. It wasn't about Barack Obama. It was never about that. And the same thing with the conspiracies. Look, people jumped out of the towers. And all I'm saying is I would much rather have another 9-12 than I would another 9-11. Because it happens. It doesn't matter why we got here or how we just are here. And that's where we are. I mean, even right now, getting together and having a lively debate but cordial. That's what it's all about. The one takeaway I take the way I take from all is I never travel or go to sleep in night, angry with anyone in my family because you don't know what's coming tomorrow.

What you're worried about in life never happens. It's the random lockdown on a Thursday when you're thinking about a primary in the 2020 election, stuff like that. So master the basics, be good to your family and your community and just, you know, take it as The Royal Canadian Legion is celebrating its 100th anniversary. And now our change has a $2 coin to mark this milestone. Honor the Legion's mission to carry forward stories of service and sacrifice to new generations. and their dedication to supporting veterans and their families from coast to coast to coast.

Celebrate this enduring legacy. Find the 100th anniversary of the Royal Canadian Legion $2 coin today. It comes. If it's ever the case that we meet and we're able to have a drink, I'm going to buy you in Osama bin Laden. You know what that is? That's two shots in a drink of water. The way we call it was technically three-southful.

and a splash. Okay, yes. But I appreciate that. That's awesome. I did quit drinking, but I'd love to meet up and do that. I'll think of something else. That'd be lively and fun. Rob, I talked to Megan Kelly earlier about the fact that New York obviously has its first Muslim

mayor, Mamdani, and there's a debate driven by Rudy Giuliani saying he shouldn't attend the memorial service on Friday because of his alleged association with people connected to 9-11. 100% show up for that. He's the mayor of New York and he was elected. And I mean, again, it doesn't matter how we got her. We did. Some New Yorkers say, well, the New Yorkers didn't vote for him. Yes, they did. He won the election. He's a New Yorker. He's the mayor. 25 year anniversary. He should 100% be there. And do you have any problem with him being there personally? I don't at all. No.

Yeah. Well, I can attest, Rob. I've interviewed you many, many times. You were the hero who killed Osama bin Laden. And on the 25th anniversary, I'd like to once again just- We worked with a lot of heroes. Yeah, and I'd like to just thank you and all the Navy SEAL Team Six guys that did that. I was on air. I remember I was at CNN at the time, went on there after it happened. It was an amazing moment in American history, in the world's history.

And you did this all a massive favor when you did that. It was the greatest honor to be picked to be part of that team. Nothing can take that away from any of us. Yeah. We'll end on that very positive note. A very interesting debate, I had to say. I thank all of you for today. That was really fascinating to watch.

I have to say. Thank you all very much. Thanks, good. Well, joining me now is a true crime legend. Nancy Grace, the host of crime stories. Nancy, great to talk to you. Likewise, peers. Nice to see you. It's been a while. We used to have a lot to do with each other when I was at CNN. You were at HLN. It's great to see you again, looking so well. So much happening in your wheelhouse of expertise, isn't there? On this huge story of the Charlie Kirk murder, there are myriad conspiracy theories raging around, many driven by Candice Owens and her followers. What is your assessment on all the evidence being presented so far?

What is your assessment of this case? Conspiracy theorists will always be with us. And I wonder where that comes from. I think people simply do not want to believe the facts because I find them very straightforward. And let's just start with the fact that the alleged shooter Tyler Robinson had access to his grandfather's Mouser, double-ought six. So what am I supposed to think that someone else got Tyler Robinson's grandpa's shotgun, his gun, and then sneaks to the event to gun down Charlie Kirk? Well, who?

Who would that be? let's just start with that straight forward argument. Because very often, and you and I've talked about this before, when you get into scientific theories, let's just go with Top Mom Casey Anthony for a moment. A lot of scientific evidence was brought on that there was decomposition air in Top Mom's trunk where the body was kept. Now, that's hard to explain to a non-scientific person

that the air itself can can control. contain particles of decomposition. And it got very, very intricate. And sometimes it's just too much for the jury. It's just like a tidal wave. But the thought that who else is going to use grandpa's mauser beside him, it ain't the mom. It ain't the dad. So it's him.

And then, of course, there's the video showing him going up and down to the sniper's nest. There are his confessions. There's tons of forensic evidence, yet somehow there are still conspiracy theories that he didn't do it. I suppose the only unanswered question after that is, well, did anyone put him up to it? And that's, I guess, one thing which may or may not emerge. Peers. Well, listen, stop. My view is, my view is as no evidence of any of that.

Put him up to it. Pears, under the law, that would be, some type of coercion. And he looked pretty happy-go-lucky to me as he was going up those steps to a sniper's den to murder Charlie Kirk. And what about all those scouting trips where he would go and look around the scene and pick the location of the perfect sniper's nest? Who was making him do that?

Who made him go get his grandfather's gun? Who made him say, I had my chance to take Charlie Kirk out and I took it? Who made him do all that? Sounds like bragging to me, not coercion. It does. And, you know, one of the problems here is interesting. If you look at the early part of your career, there was no social media, right? And you couldn't have this kind of group thing flooding the airways of the Internet because none of it existed.

Now, with all these cases, we see it and we saw it, you know, with the Lindsay Clancy case, right? Exactly the same thing, where somebody starts a Mac, conspiracy theory. Before we know it, everyone's leaping on this and saying, well, maybe that's what happened. How problematic is that becoming, do you think? For example, to the minds of jurors or potential jurors, when you have this kind of trial by public jury going on at the same time. Well, number one, I like it. I like social media theories because it gives me an idea where the defense is going to go. And you know, peers, when I would prepare any of the, you know, trial. I would not only prepare my own case, but I would try to anticipate what is the defense

going to do so I can shoot it down before they even get it in the air. And I always like to just hit them in the opening statement and shoot down all their theories and turn around and look at them and they look really like deflated balloons. So I like to hear that. I like to research what people are saying online. I like to listen and read the live chats while crime stories is airing. So I can see reaction and where people's minds are going. So we can be prepared for the defense. It's going to be really hard to claim coercion or Assad defense. Some other do did it when we got Tyler Robinson on video going up to the sniper's den.

There's ballistics. There's just so much evidence. There's DNA. And it goes on and on and on. In fact, the towel that was used to wrap the murder weapon has DNA. from the roommate, Lance Twiggs. And I'm not suggesting that he had anything to do with the murders. I'm saying it came from their home.

So some other dude went in to their place, snuck a towel, got grandpa's gun, and then planted the defendant's DNA. That did not happen. Sorry all you conspiracy theorists. There is evidence that this sort of what they call the Candice Owens effect is having an impact on the public. Polymarket shows that the number of people who think Tyler Robinson or be convicted of homicide, has fallen from 59% to just 30% today.

Only a third of people, according to these latest numbers, believe this guy's guilty of the crime of murder. What do you make of that? Not very much, because they're not going to be sitting on the jury, so don't care. Simple. As simple as that. Just as simple as that. Come on.

You know what I found out? You know what I found out, peers? I found out that people were taking bets on the Clancy trial. That is sick. What ghoul is doing that? I mean, three dead children? Peers, this is something I normally would tell a jury. I don't really talk about it on air, but now I feel like I have been forced to in the past few days.

Those strangulations of those three children, Cora, Dawson, and Callan, were so ferocious, partially because of the lulgature itself. They were exercise bands, which are stretchy, like a bungee cord. So Renzi Clancy, who admits she killed the children, that's not up to discussion, had to pull and pull and readjust tension, as experts call it. Translation, pull even harder, which means these children's necks had to be deformed. shrunk down like that

with their head on top of a little neck like that by the time mommy was done with them. I mean, let's just think about that for a moment. But is that the action, Nancy? It's all about Lindsay Clancy. Right. I mean, I had that debate with Megan Kelly earlier because is that the actions of somebody of sound mind or could it be she was genuinely suffering from a psychosis

which compelled her to do this? And it remains just as heinous a crime. But did they charge her with the wrong thing? Should they have charged her with something which, rather than first-degree murder, where you'd have to make a calculation of this was cold-blooded, premeditated, and so on, that actually she lost her mind, did this despicable crime, and she'd be incarcerated in some institution for many, many years, but not convicted of first-degree murder,

because, as it turned out, 11 of the jurors just wouldn't accept that's what happened. Really? Is that what you think, Pierce? Because I have been listening very carefully to what the jurors are now, unbundling. One of them said, well, we had to do not guilty by reason of insanity, or else she wouldn't get the treatment she so desperately needs. In other words, we were worried about the sentencing.

That juror also said she would never get therapy in prison irrelevant to guilt or innocence. They are not to concern themselves with sentencing. And so much more, another juror has just come out, the fourth juror, and says, maybe I still believe she's guilty. What? What the, what? So my point is, yes, you're stating that, is it possible she was insane for what, 18 minutes? Because she Apple mapped her husband's trip on the errands she sent him on.

She mapped how long he would be gone from the home. She called the CVS store manager to make sure they'd have pediatric miralax. So the husband, Patrick Clancy, wouldn't call her in the middle of killing her children. But yet he still did call her. And she sounded perfectly normal, a tiny bit distracted because she was busy killing her children, but completely normal. That very morning, peers, she had gone to Cora, her daughter's pediatrician and interacted with nurses and doctors.

and they said she was normal. She took the children to the park that afternoon just a few hours before murdering them and sent pictures to her husband and her in-laws of them playing in the park. He spoke to her. He communicated with her. And she says, oh yeah, by the way,

when you go pick up the food, can you stop at CVS and get this Merrillax? She had been researching that since 4 o'clock, but she made it seem like an afterthought. So to you, to you she was... That door slams, suddenly a voice comes in her ear and says, the children. And she says, oh, okay, she had never heard it before, never heard it again.

That is not, in my experience, and I have tried, not guilty by reason of insanityes before, how auditory hallucinations start. They normally start up to a year before, telling you to do this evil thing. You don't hear them for 18 minutes of your life and then never again. Nancy Grace, so good to talk to you. I can't think of anyone better qualified to talk about this kind of thing. Right. We're over? Aren't you? you're going to argue with me a little bit? Well, no, because I look at what happened here. And my view is not that there's any doubt

that she committed to despicable crime and killed her three children. But 11 of the jurors were prepared to acquit to her a first-degree murder and one guy held out. And so the judge ended the trial as a mistrial. But if he hadn't held out, then she would have walked free.

And my argument is, They were going for not guilty by reason of insanity, not acquittal. N-G-B-R-I. I understand. But my point would have been if they had charged her with something else, not first-degree murder, they might have all found a guilty. In other words, it may have been a cleaner piece. Such is what?

Well, in England, we would call it manslaughter on grounds of diminished responsibility. There was that charge, Pierce. Yeah. They were charged. The jury had that. option. They had murder one, voluntary, involuntary, NGBRI, not guilty by reason and sanity, and not guilty, a walk. They had the alternative to go with voluntary, and they didn't. And this morning, we hear a juror say, I still think maybe she was guilty. It's just these jurors are all

over the map. They should just stop talking. Well, I agree with that. We don't really get much. We don't get that in England. The jurors don't do media afterwards. It's a very interesting American thing which is always fascinating and quite unsettling when you hear them. I've been listening to the same interviews as you have and it's unsettling. The stories are moving around all over the place and actually I think in the end quite a few of them felt really sorry for her. I don't feel sorry for her. I think what she did was a despicable crime and snuffed up the lives of three young children. It's just I think the fact has ended in a mistrial is extremely unfortunate and there might have been a better way legally to handle this. It is. But one more thing, peers, is

in America, as you will know, because you've covered so many cases here, intent. Intent to commit a crime can be formed and the twinkling of a moment, the blink of the eye. The time it takes me to pull a gun and put a gun and pull a trigger is enough time under our jurisprudence to prove intent. It does not require a long, drawn-out plan such as poisoning Pierce Morgan with a little bit of arsenic every day till he kills over six months from now. It can be formed just like that. And the time she slams the door behind her husband, one hour later he comes back,

all of his children are dead. He comes to her, she says, I tried to kill myself. She didn't mention the children. When she comes out of it, at the hospital, her first words, some of them are, do I need a lawyer? And I need to call Patrick and see where we stand.

Not anything about the children. That's disturbing, and that was no longer under the influence of the voice. Nancy, great to talk to you. Thank you very much indeed for coming on. So don't leave us along next time. Likewise, please invite me back. Bye, buddy.

I'm a bit concerned you giving my team ideas about arsenic in my tea. So I'm just going to go and change my mug. Okay. Bye, Beers. Great to see you. Peers Morgan Unsensored is proudly independent. The only boss around here is me. If you enjoy our show, we ask only one simple thing.

Hit subscribe on YouTube and follow Pierce Morgan Unsensored on Spotify and Apple Podcast. and in return we will continue our mission to inform, irritate and entertain. And we'll do it all for free. Independent, uncensored media has never been more critical, and we couldn't do it without you.