The Fourth Amendment requires that search warrants be based on probable cause, meaning police must demonstrate a reasonable belief that a crime has occurred and that evidence will be found at the location being searched. In the Turtleboy case, defense attorneys argued that the search warrant was invalid because the affidavit relied on wiretapping charges that were legally insufficient, as the defendant was alone in the bathroom and could not have intercepted any communications. This case illustrates how constitutional protections against unreasonable searches and seizures can be challenged when law enforcement fails to meet the legal standard for obtaining warrants, and how citizens can defend their rights through legal action when they believe their constitutional protections have been violated.
Martin, Soloman Radner & Michel Bryant Discuss the Turtleboy Case and the First AmendmentAdded:
You guys know these guys. Uh they are Michigan attorneys. Uh one of them Martin goes by brother counsel. Uh he I think he made his debut about two years ago. He suddenly started appearing on the scene and making cool videos about the Karen Reed trial. Took it from a you know videos from like a legal perspective, not like a content creator perspective. like uh he's never been to my knowledge like an outright like FKR cheerleader or anything like that.
Although I certainly think he believes that she's not guilty legally speaking, but he's he he talks about it from a legal perspective and he's great and he's respectful. He had he had Plev and Crusty on and he had a respectful conversation with them which is no easy task. And then he introduced us, brother counsel introduced us to brother brother counsel Solomon Rner uh who's a nationally ranked trial lawyer and uh or national trial lawyer. I don't know the title uh he officially gives him but uh and they're both hockey players too. So we're going to bring them up now. Um we have Martin and Solomon Radner. What's up guys?
>> Hey what's going on doctor?
>> Thanks for coming. I appreciate it.
>> That's right. The good doctors in town.
>> Yes. Thank you guys for joining me on this day.
>> Yeah. Yeah. I mean, I just heard you talking a little bit before about how there's no probable cause to search that house. I mean, you know, when you have a a dead man on your front lawn after you just invited him over for a party and he's got a drink in his hand and he's not wearing any clothing. He's not wearing the I mean, he's not wearing a jacket uh which would fit the weather. I mean, there is absolutely no probable cause to go into that house.
>> Yeah. At all.
>> Well, because Tully wears shorts in the winter, don't you know?
>> You know.
>> Yeah, of course. You know what? I saw that you got that uh brace on your elbow. What's going on with your elbow?
>> Uh it's actually a YouTube injury. Uh thank you for asking, but I and I'm not exaggerating. So when I when I like often I will I have this big Stanley and Stanleys are very heavy when you put ice in them. And I every show I do this motion where I just pick it up like this. And I didn't even think anything of it. Next thing you know, my elbow after a while is just hurting me. and I went to the doctor and I have a tennis elbow which I got from it's a YouTube injury my Stanley like doing that so many times.
>> I hope you have a good workers comp policy.
>> I don't unfortunately. I have to I have to work through the pain. So >> well knows a little bit about tennis elbow.
>> Oh, is he a tennis player?
>> No, I got it from softball and hockey. I actually had tennis elbow for the last four years. I treated it conservatively for the first two and a half years and then I finally gave in and had surgery.
It's the worst.
>> Oh, it's like a like it's stupid because you're like nothing's broken or anything like that, but it just hurts like a mofo and it prevents you from doing stuff.
>> Yeah, it really does. I lost all like I would try to throw a ball from third to first and it just wouldn't go. The ball would just fall halfway down. I lost all the strength in my arm. It got to the point where I literally couldn't lift my arm up.
>> Yeah.
>> So, finally my doctor said, "Time to operate."
>> Yeah. Um >> but thankfully it's been better since.
>> Yeah. And so, did you guys know that like when they like when they charged me with this stuff, my first thing Bradle said to me was, "Uh, they could have just sent you a summon, you know, and the same was with Karen Reed. They could have just sent me a summon." From you guys, you guys are criminal defense attorneys. Uh, what do you think this required? The state police fugitive unit. That's who put me in custody. The fugitive unit came to my house. The thing that jumped out at me about what I was just watching the videos that you were just showing of the uh the warrants, the search warrants on all the seizures that they made is what I would call despair treatment. The way that they treated you differently than they would treat anybody else. Certainly in the Karen Reed case, like you said, I mean, I probably wouldn't have used the language that you used, but yeah, they obviously treat people differently if there's a dead cop on the front lawn than if you have a cell phone and maybe you were doing something with the cell phone. It's good to see that those local cops do in fact know how to do search warrants though because from watching the Kieran retrial, you may think that they don't know how to >> Yeah. Well, they they Well, the thing about it is they know they can see ahead of time. They can predict the future and they know exactly what a judge is going to say. That's the part I thought like when Gallagher and um I think it was Tully were asked about like did you apply for a search warrant and they said no because it wouldn't have been granted. How do you know? How do you know it would? That's that's who it was.
Gallagher, you know, like I was I had a show today that I was doing before yours. We were, you know, we were tailgating. Um, so tailgating for your show. Love it.
>> Yeah. So, we were talking about the Karen this Karen Reed response to the motion to dismiss. And I was part of the arguments that they're making there is that a lot of the actions that they took were before there was any official investigation underway. And I remember from I think it was Gallagher on the stand. He was the solo cups guy, right?
And or was that good?
>> No, it wasn't.
>> It was It was him. It was was It's been It's been a while.
>> The first guy with the with the with the using the leaf blower.
>> Yes, he was the leaf He was definitely the leafblower guy.
>> Okay, fine. Yeah, that guy. Yeah. So, Gallagher. So, I I I'm pretty sure I remember Gallagher saying that he didn't even think that this was a crime scene because, you know, maybe it was just some weird accident uh where someone ended up or, you know, some sort of fight or bar or whatever. I don't know.
like he he didn't he didn't think that it was a crime scene. So if that's true and all these people were, you know, uh petitioning quote unquote the police to get involved and look into Karen Reed and well then there wasn't even a there wasn't even an active criminal investigation quite yet. So that I mean I was just trying to remember the the guy's name. I I don't know. I just blew a blank. You know, there's so many >> Gallagher. Gallagher.
>> I'm pretty Yeah, I'm pretty sure it was Gallagher. He was the one that Yeah, he's solo cups. Come on. He solo cups cuz he's he's the one that says that they hold liquid terrifically.
>> That's right. Terrifically. Uh you know, I think that the solo cup stuff got a little overplayed uh as like the most because it's it's silly, but it's like to me that was the least of their infractions and us like dog like and I thought the leaf blower actually wasn't a bad idea. I don't like I thought the I I think the leaf blower plays and I I always said this. I said, "Don't hate on the leaf blower because a big part of Karen Reed's innocence is that there was no tail light found there at 7 a.m."
Okay? And if the leaf blower is effective in clearing off the snow, then it would reveal the tail light. So, we don't want to hate on the leaf blower, do we?
>> I think the point is obviously that you see what type of investigation that they were doing. You see how sloppy this is.
So yeah, like that's just >> to let everybody know what ex you know, if that's what we see already, then who knows what else they're capable of of botching up, you know? So, uh, that's why I think it was still important to highlight all those good stuff, the solo cups and the leaf blower. And, you know, I mean, the talking about we the the area of where the tail light ended up is significant. If you're going to take a incredibly incredibly significant, especially when you're talking about using physics and where would the uh where would the debris field be and now you take a guy with a with a wind with a with a leaf blower blowing it all over the place. Well, you're completely messing up the investigation that could be done to see whether how how this debris field makes sense. So, you know, >> that's a good point.
>> Yeah. you know, so >> I know you don't want to hate on him, but >> backing up to something you were saying before about police saying that, you know, they never would have gotten a search warrant for that.
>> To me, that sounds like nothing but an excuse. And I've done lots and lots of criminal cases, both state and federal, and I've seen some very, very thin search warrants. It's very rare in my experience that a search warrant will be rejected by a court. So, for the police to say, "Oh, there's no way we could have gotten a search warrant, particularly in a case like this." It just begs the question of what was really going on here.
>> Yeah. You you want to see what the probable cause was used to get the search warrant? I got it here.
>> I'd love to see that. Yeah.
>> So, this was um All right. So, let's see here. Um I So, I've embedded Let's see.
Today, blah blah blah. We went over the affidavit. I've embedded the documents.
Okay. Um is this Oh, so I Here's the three search warrants from my car, my house, and my devices. They could just take all devices in them. And I kind of focused on here. Um, so I >> This is all This is all the witness intimidation charges, right?
>> Yeah. This is all the witness intimidation charges.
>> So they need to search your house because they want to find >> the the probable cause to search my house was not for witness intimidation as we're going to see. It's for this. So this was at on July 25th, 2023.
There was a hearing in Norfick Superior Court. And I held a protest outside for the first time. It's the first time people showed up and I had a megaphone and all that stuff. And I go down to the bathroom and Sergeant Bukaki's down there and I'm taking a leak right next to him. It's a little awkward. Okay. And then he got and I I said something to him about like uh >> Oh, really? You couldn't hold yourself?
>> Yeah. I I said something to him. I'm like, "Okay, so what's up with the camera? You guys framing her or what?"
You know, I forget what I said to him, but he leaves and then after he leaves, I'm by myself and I film it here by myself. Just watch this. I'm so I'm alone when this happens.
>> So you think Michael Proctor playing with that evidence? No. Seriously, just me and you in here.
>> Come on.
So he wasn't really there. Okay. He So he had left by that point and I and I filmed it and I made a post. I go, "While I was taking a leak of court, I found myself alone with Detective Yuri Buchik, the partner of corrupt Michael Proctor." It was very awkward for him as I asked him questions and what must have been the longest whiz of his life. This took place after that. Okay, so he was not there. However, this is the actual search warrant. They go, "So, as Carney was walking down the stairs from the second floor to the first floor, a cell phone with an illuminated screen is observed in his hand. So, they got me inside the courthouse holding a phone.
Okay. It shows Buchanan returning to the courtroom at 2:51 p.m. followed by me at 2:52 PM. Okay, in other words, there was 37 seconds in the bathroom in which I was present and Buchananic was not. This is when I filmed that 12 second video.
But there's just one prop. The probable cause that they used to search my house was wiretapping. This is what it said.
Based upon the foregoing facts, there is probable cause to believe that Aiden Carney committed a violation of MGL chapter 272 section 99C, illegal interception of oral communications, which states in part, "Whoever willfully commits an interception, attempts to commit an interception, or procures whatever blah blah blah blah blah."
Okay? And they believed that I wiretapped Bukaki and that was the probable cause to search my house because they go I was >> You didn't say anything.
>> I But yeah, he he didn't say like uh it requires interception.
>> You recorded you recorded yourself, >> right? There's you don't hear him, right?
>> I didn't hear.
>> Right. So there's no wiretapping if you're not recording someone else because there's no one else in there.
>> Well Well, okay. So the I think what this is referring to and I don't know for sure this is my first time seeing this very often what wiretapping laws refer to in this context is recording somebody without their knowledge. There are some states that are known as one party consent states and some parties are two party or all party consent states. Michigan for example is a one party consent state. I can record a conversation I'm having with somebody as long as I'm a party to that conversation without telling them. Wiretapping is if I record a conversation between two other people that I'm not a part of. In Massachusetts, it's a felony to record a conversation with somebody that they're not without their consent and knowledge.
>> Correct.
>> So, it could be that that's what they're claiming is the wiretapping here.
>> That is No, that's exactly.
>> But he's not but he's not a part of the conversation. He wasn't there.
>> Right. Right. So, there's no legal interception if nothing's intercepted.
Like so, but they you but they use this as probable cause and they put it in front of a judge and they say that I respectfully request authority to seize any mobile device reasonably used by Carney to commit these crimes following seizures of devices. I respectfully request authority to search for the following information. data, evidence, ownership, custody, or control, electronic evidence items, including activation date, email accounts, billing records, and social media account information calendars, and pictures or videos from April 1st through October 5th. Any video that appears to have been recorded inside Norfick Superior Court on July 25th, evidence of dissemination of illegally obtained oral communication, which is obtained. So, the evidence to take all my phones wasn't even witness intimidation. It was, "We believe he wiretapped Bukkakei in the bathroom and we want to like see what he's got on there." And a judge signed this. A judge, like that's what's crazy about it is when Gallagher says, "Oh, they never would have given a warrant." I'm like, "Oh, I assure you they would. They would. A judge would sign any warrant like that cops bring to them from my >> Sadly, that's very true." And and like I said, I mean, Martin and I have both seen things that would really just make your head spin. Warrants that have been signed by judges. And frankly, a lot of judges do a very good job with this and a lot of them don't. And the judges that don't, they got to really do a better job on this kind of stuff. They're the gatekeepers for people's Fourth Amendment protections. And when they just rubber stamp warrants, it's not okay. It's not good.
>> Yeah. The Fourth Amendment, illegal search and seizure. It's kind of what this country was founded on, right? Was that we didn't want the British coming into our homes, sleeping over. That's the third amendment. No sleepovers with the British, right? Uh taking our guns.
Second Amendment, taking our rights, the First Amendment, and taking our stuff and searching our stuff illegally.
That's the that's the first four things.
And they violated all those except for number three. Tully didn't ask to sleep in my house, luckily. But uh you know, well, and two, if I had guns, they would have taken them. But uh you know, I didn't luckily. So, I mean, that would be real pointless. If I bought a gun, they would just be taking them all the time because people get these temporary orders on me. Oh, taking your guns again. Okay.
>> Well, you seem like a guy that that believes in the Second Amendment. I do.
But part of be believing in the second amendment is the right not to own a gun too, right? That's what I always said.
Choice. Like a lot of people say that. A lot of gun second amendment proponents are like, "What? You don't own a gun?"
I'm like, "Bro, I support your right to own a gun, but you should support my right not to."
>> Absolutely. 100%.
>> Yeah. Yeah, these rights these rights are too important to allow uh corrupt judges, corrupt prosecutors, corrupt police to just infringe upon them and and really just destroy them and erode them from from what they were intended to be. I I often say if the founding fathers would see what the country looks like now, they would have just said, "You know what, Georgia, you can keep it. We're not going to fight it."
Meaning uh meaning King George.
>> It's so true. I mean, especially in this state. I mean, is it like this in Michigan?
In certain parts there are certainly things that uh that are problematic throughout the country. Different states have different battles. Um all very often it just comes down to what's hot in that particular legislature and you know what what battles any particular legislator decided to pick up.
>> Hey Solomon, tell tell Aiden about tell the doctor about uh your case with the Detroit cop.
>> Which one you're talking about? Um the one that called Border Patrol.
>> Yeah. So, I have a Okay, so one of the things that I do because I sue cops so much is I have a policy in my office. If you're military or law enforcement and I can represent you, I represent you for free. That's my way of giving back. Wow.
>> I very strongly believe that the police should get the benefit of the doubt and I very strongly believe that most cops are our friends and our heroes and are willing to to put their lives on the line to protect us. The bad cops, there's really no mechanism in place to hold them accountable and that's why I go around suing them. So, I got contacted by a Detroit police officer here in Detroit named Denise Walllet.
Denise Walllet made the grave mistake of doing what her lieutenant ordered her to do and calling Border Patrol to help identify a man that they had in custody.
Turns out that that man was here unlawfully. And when Border Patrol got there, they took him into custody.
Because of that, the city concocted this policy, they twisted this policy into saying that she was not allowed to call Border Patrol for that purpose. And therefore they immediately suspended her because doing what she did Yeah. Because apparently what she did, a 27-year sergeant. She was a supervisor. She was called to the scene because two other beat cops had this man in custody and couldn't identify him. So they brought her to the scene. She ran the fingerprint scanner, couldn't identify him. So she called her lieutenant and said, "What do I do?" The lieutenant said, "Call border patrol. They can help you identify this man." She called Border Border Patrol for identification purposes, which is not a violation of Detroit policy. Border Patrol came, took him into custody. Next thing you know, this is all over the news. She got suspended immediately with pay. Very shortly thereafter, she got suspended 30 days without pay. So, I filed a civil rights lawsuit for her alleging violations of due process. That when you don't violate policy, you can't get suspended without pay. And that uh that lawsuit is kind of making its way through the courts right now here in Detroit. Um, but it's it's just one of it's it's >> so so you're su So you're suing the cops on behalf of a cop?
>> I'm suing the I'm suing the cops on behalf of the cops. And I've done that a number of times.
>> Wow. And did what I mean, did they settle? Is that what happens a lot?
>> Uh, well, the last time I did it, they did. The last time I did this, they pulled the cop into a room with the union lawyer and hammered out a quick deal, had them sign a a statement saying that my lawsuit was completely frivolous, and then the city attorney gave it to me and said, "Here you go.
your client said that the lawsuit's frivolous. So, I called the client. I said, "Hey, also experienced sergeant."
I said, "What do you want to do here?"
And he goes, "I got what I got. I got what I needed. You told me that this was all about me. I got no problem with it."
And I said, "Okay, I'm happy for you then." And we dismissed the case.
>> Did you get paid?
>> No. No, I didn't. I tried to I tried to say that we were that we won the case and therefore I'm entitled to attorney fees, but since it was a settlement, it was a little bit too tricky. Uh, but that's the last time. That happened about a year ago. Now, this one, as of now, they're fighting. There's a pending motion to dismiss, which uh which I just responded to, and we're going to take it from there. We're going to see how this goes.
>> Wow.
>> Yeah. There was >> there was a recent case where Solomon was asked uh by by a news anchor, how much are you demanding on this case?
Like, how much money is it going to take for the city to pay you for you to, you know, to settle this case? So, he looked at them and he said, all of it.
>> That's a good answer. So you're like on like they you're like on TV out there like they interview you and stuff.
>> It depends. It depends. I've been on TV in a in a number of different cities. I I do this kind of work nationwide. I've been on TV in Arizona, Texas, Detroit, Florida, Georgia. I've been on I've been on TV a lot, >> but nothing but nothing is as cool as being on Dr. Turtle Boy's live show.
>> Yeah, I was gonna say. So you're like the Jewish Ben Crump taking on the cops all the time. Suing police departments. I take on civil rights. It's matter that I believe in.
I'll take it on very often. It comes in the form of police brutality, excessive force, malicious prosecution. But I'll take on a civil rights case. I believe I very strongly believe that our civil rights are too important not to fight for. And if there's somebody's rights who's being violated, I will fight for that person's rights.
>> Well, do you guys think that Karen Reed's lawsuit is going anywhere against the police?
>> My opinion?
>> Yeah.
>> I I haven't been following the actual lawsuit. I think she has some very very strong causes of action there. I'm assuming they're being litigated correctly. I haven't, like I said, I haven't pulled the documents and actually read them, but I know she's got a great legal team and I know she's got some very, very strong claims there.
Assuming these claims get litigated correctly, she is going to end up being a very, very wealthy woman.
>> Really, I mean, it just seem it seems like an uphill battle going against because these people all have immunity.
I mean, that's >> it's always an uphill battle. I could tell you more about immunity than probably most people. There's so many different immunities at play here.
There's prosecutorial immunity, there's 11th amendment immunity, and there's qualified immunity. They're all different. They all work differently, but they all can be defeated. There's ways that they can all be defeated. If you want me to bore your viewers with a legal lecture on the three different kinds of immunity that I just said and how they get defeated, I can. But suffice it to say, the actual individual police officers involved can be sued.
their immunity most likely, unless they're state troopers, but generally speaking, the state troopers themselves can't allege 11th amendment immunity unless it's an official capacity claim.
Again, I'm kind of getting into the weeds. The individual law enforcement officers and police officers can be sued under 1983. They can raise qualified immunity, but as long as you can prove that they were acting in bad faith and that there's clearly established law that they violated, then you can proceed with your claims against them.
>> Well, knowing the case, Knowing this case, I think they've got a very strong claim. Go ahead. Tell tell them about qualified immunity because I'm sure Dr. Turtle Boy's uh uh guests want to you know viewers want to hear that.
>> Yes. I think I know what it is but my understanding of it and correct me if I'm wrong is basically that public servants working on the job if they screw up they can't be held personally responsible. Is that right?
>> It's oversimplified. There's two prongs to qualified immunity. There's something called clearly established and then there's something called any reasonable officer. clearly established means that the exact fact pattern that you're suing over has to have already happened in that circuit and there has to be binding case law saying that that exact fact pattern is illegal and therefore the police officers are on notice that this is clearly established constitutional law and you can't violate it. For example, let's say a cop shoot somebody in the arm and then he sues and says, "Hey, you can't shoot me in the arm.
It's a violation of my Fourth Amendment rights." Well, what the cop is going to say is qualified immunity means you have to show me another case where you were doing the same thing, I was doing the same thing or somebody similarly situated and the cop in that case shot him in the arm and there and that was held to be excessive force. If you can't find a factually identical case, the court will say it's not clearly established. Case dismissed. No matter what the intent was, no matter how obvious it is to anybody with a fully functioning brain, I've seen some outrageous things that courts have said not clearly established. Case dismissed.
>> I'd rather not. The we can we can we can do that. The other case is something called any reasonable officer. What that means is what any reasonable officer would think given these circumstances is what governs reasonleness. I had a case where the cops said under oath, I basically I knew that question of fact goes to the jury. So I said, "If the version of facts happened like my client said, then you would agree that your actions were unlawful." And his answer was yes. I took that to the judge and I said, "Any reasonable officer, he obviously knew based on my client's version of events that this was an unlawful action. Question of fact, we go to the jury." Judge said, "No, no, no.
That's his own subjective knowledge. The question is any reasonable officer. So even though he knew it was wrong, it's possible that any other reasonable officer would not know that it's wrong and therefore summary judgement is granted.
>> Oh s right now the immunities that the government has given itself to protect itself from suit would make you sick.
Now one last point on qualified immunity and this is the biggest proof that it's a bunch of baloney, that it's intellectually dishonest, and that it's the court's way of abusing people. Okay?
If let's say a cop does something, let's just say a cop shoots somebody in the face for no reason and he gets sued for that and the attorney general prosecutes him for that. You're only allowed to raise qualified immunity in the lawsuit, not in the criminal case. So this idea of clearly established law and any reasonable officer, those are only defenses that you can use when you're protecting the government's pocketbook.
When you're protecting yourself as a law enforcement officer from prison, you're not allowed to raise that defense.
That's how intellectually dishonest the courts are when it comes to qualified immunity. Qualified immunity is awful.
It was created by the courts. It was created to protect the government from lawsuits. And it is one of the most unamerican things I've ever seen our courts do.
>> I love how Martin just pulled your strings with that.
>> What do you think? What do you think about qualified immunity?
>> He does this to me all the time. We didn't even get into prosecal immunity and 11th amendment immunity. If you want me to get into those, I can, but this is just gonna turn into >> I don't I don't want Yeah, I don't want to get you too hot and bothered. Geez.
Oh my gosh. Tell me how you really feel about that. Well, the I mean, well, that doesn't sound good for Karen Reed, then like is because she's going to be going up against the government. They're they're all going to be like qualified immunity, right?
>> Well, that's why in these kinds of cases, you need a lawyer who actually is an expert in 1983 litigation and in qualified immunity. Now, I've litigated qualified immunity across the country in multiple circuits. I'm sure that her attorneys, and I know that her attorneys, have the same level of experience, probably a higher level of experience. They've been doing this kind of work for a long time. They're very aware of 1983 law, qualified immunity law, and Fourth Amendment law. It is clearly established law that cops are not are not allowed to lie to a court.
It's clearly established law that they're not allowed to lie and concoct evidence and hide evidence in a police report. It's clearly established law that they're not allowed to violate Brady. So the allegations that are going to be made and also it's clearly established law that they're not allowed to lie under oath. So these are all the allegations that are being made in the Kieran Reed case. Clearly established issue is not going to be the the real problem here. It's going to be the ultimate the ultimate uh facts that come out and and like I said, I don't see I don't see this as a winnable case for the for the defense. I think that either the state or the municipality or the law enforcement agency or their taxpayers unfortunately are gonna end up putting the bill and making Miss Reed a very wealthy woman.
>> You know, good for her. I mean, she earned it. She's been through hell absolutely for three and a half, four years, whatever they lost everything. I think she needs to be made whole. I think that's only appropriate. So, >> look, I think that the taxpayers would prefer to pay the money to go to Karen Reed than to pay for Hank Brennan.
>> Yeah. Ser crime. Can Hank Brennan pay that back? I mean, he didn't even Don't even >> I I have such a problem with that because Hank Brennan >> like my biggest problem is the anti don't hate him. Like that's my issue is like how do you guys not how do you guys still simp for this guy when he lost?
Lai at least got you a draw which wasn't bad. That's as good as you're going to get if you're an anti-care reed person, a draw, right? and he got nine people somehow in with trooper Paul as his expert to think that John O'Ref got hit by a car. That's remarkable. That's like actually remarkable lawyering when you think about how like that's amazing. And and Hank couldn't get one and now and Hank picked the jury. That's the other like oh the jury was rigged. Hank picked it. All right. And so like I don't that bothers me when they don't get upset with Hank Brennan because it's like if you guys are sports fans, right? Like if if your team sucked >> I'm not sure if you want to bring up sports right now with the Boston teams and Detroit team you know >> all right so like B what's the the basketball bigger staff is that the coach the basketball coach the distance okay so if he had lost in the first round like the Celtics did right there would be people calling for his job even though he's like coach of the year >> they were calling for when they almost lost to the Magics so yeah they definitely would have called for >> and and that's what I'm saying it's like we hold our we hold our sports coaches to a higher standard than they hold Hank Brennan to. Like, how are you guys like results scoreboard? He lost. Aren't you guys mad about that? That bothers me.
>> There was no case. I've said this to Martin several times. This case never should have even gone to the jury. Once the evidence was in, I don't think there there was enough evidence for any reasonable jury to conclude that she was guilty. And frankly, I think the judge should have thrown the case out on what's called a directed verdict. Yeah.
But >> I mean, yeah, that's one in a long list of of of questionable rulings that that this judge made.
>> I I never thought that when I first started covering this trial, I never thought there was going to be a trial.
I'm like, when I was doing all the pre-trial stuff, I'm like, this can't ever go to trial. This is too embarrassing. They This is going to be a spectacle if they have this trial. And they did. And it was the spectacle that I thought it would be. I I still can't believe they did it. Twice. Twice they did it. No, once they got the ARCA report, there's no excuse for them to try this case, right? Should have been over. It should have been over.
>> Uh I'm going to be bringing on a guest to join us if you guys don't mind. Uh in one second. Um before I do that, I just want to refresh the uh to see where we're at for the fundraiser. We are now up to $344,242.
So, we've raised just over $7,000 in the first hour, ladies and gentlemen.
$7,000. If we keep that pace up, we'll get to $84,000, which is above our goal.
So, thank you. If anyone else would like to donate to the cause, uh the link is at the bottom for the Gibbs and Go. Feel free to click on that, pay whatever you want, and we really really appreciate it. But we're going to be joined now by Mike Bryant. Do you guys know Mike?
>> I I know him. I've seen him. I've seen him uh cover stuff on Kelsey Fitz Simmons and some other stuff. So, >> yeah, I'm gonna Mike's an attorney as well. And uh he's new on the scene.
Well, not that new. I I don't know if he came before or after you, but uh they started this channel, Justice Served, with Linda Kenny Boden, and they're great people. So, I'm going to add What's up, Mike? How you doing? Hey, man.
>> Like, you got one for us?
>> Hey, hey, you know, you I don't know if you know this or not. I heard you talking some sports. There's this guy, Stefan Diggs. He had this chef that was amazing. For some reason, she was available. So, I got her to come by.
>> You eating a hot dog?
>> Oh, she made you a hot dog.
>> A NICE MEAL.
>> What did that cost you? $4,000.
>> Jamilla. Jamila, keep these coming.
She does this thing with bread. It's bread. It's not a bun. God, >> that looks But you know what? That looks a little more juicy than his.
>> Amazing.
>> This is like dried out and cold.
>> Caught me off guard there with the food.
Sorry.
>> Oh my. As funny as that is, that's yet another case of the Norfolk County District Attorney's Office choosing to embarrass itself in front of a national audience. Like, how could they possibly have thought that was going to be a winner?
>> It just I I felt >> How long did it take the 90 minutes from beginning to end?
>> Yeah, about about 90 minutes. They got 90 minutes to uh >> Did you feel for for the the the DA that got sucked into that case? I mean, what >> he didn't even he didn't even try.
>> No, he because he knew it was a piece of [ __ ] >> Yeah. Yeah.
>> Was she a bad witness? Yeah. Probably the worst witness I've ever put up in the stand.
>> When your clothing >> when your closing argument begins with, "Yeah, she was really a bad witness."
And uh you know >> the way the way he came out like pulling his jacket back like his gut came out just like it was like he woke up rolled out of bed that morning. It's like time to make the donuts. Whatever. Just punching in, punching out. Y just another day at the Norfolk ADA's office of Michael Morrisy setting us up to fail. Just setting us up.
>> I I wish that child would have gone on longer just so I can see some more Emily C clips doing him because that would have been, you know.
>> Oh, I didn't see those. Did she make clips of him?
>> He made like one and I was like, "Oh, you know, it was only one day like a two-day trial."
>> Oh, that would have been great. That would have been great.
>> Oh, jeez.
>> Yeah. You know, it's like with that trial, it's like, have they not embarrassed themselves enough with there was that Penny McGee trial where Bev Canon was the judge on that and she acquitted her for manslaughter and, you know, that probably shouldn't have gone.
And then, of course, there was the Karen Reed case, there was my case. Uh they screwed up the Michael Chestnik cage which was one of the most open and shut like the guy killed the woman and a cop in broad daylight and he got somehow a hung jury in the in the first trial and they did it again. They convicted him but um and then of course there was then then there's my case and then there's the Steph Diggs case and they and I was also acquitted in another case across the street that never should have gone to trial during the Karen retrial. I don't know if you guys know this. I got charged with violating a restraining order because I went to cover a a court hearing three days after I got out of jail. And the Mc Alberts decided to recruit and bring with them a stranger by the name of Lindsey Katani who they didn't know at the time just so they could use her as like a toy to evict me from court. And I left and I went I asked the cop when I left. I go, "Where should I go?" He goes, "Just go stand over there." And that guy ended up being a witness for me. So I went where he said court was over five minutes later.
They all everybody came pouring out. I didn't see her. She didn't see me. But apparently the mcalberts saw me on in the hiding in the grassy null and they they told her about it afterwards and I was charged with violating a restraining order. I thought they would drop it, but they brought it to trial and we did it.
>> You went to a jury on this? You >> a judge. Bench trial. Bench trial.
>> Bench trial. And you were found not guilty.
>> Found not guilty.
>> Wow. because I was in undeniably I was within a hundred yards of her like it's definitely with but I didn't see her and she didn't see me. So if you were at the Boston Garden or whatever and if she was sitting across the court from me and I and I don't see her in a sea of 20,000 people then that's not a violation of the order. And so that's basically how the judge ruled.
>> It's terrifying how much how much power prosecutors and police have over us.
They can upend anybody's life like this >> and your life could just flip upside down for >> as long as they want really.
>> And the money, it's the money. It's like you can beat it all. And I beat that, but that's expensive. Trials are expensive.
>> It's expensive. And there's no guarantee. And your freedom is on the hook is on the line.
>> Yes. Absolutely. Yeah.
>> Being labeled felon is no is is nothing to laugh at.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah. I don't want like I that's one of the things I'm proud to say is like Yeah. I have charges. No convictions. So what is it like no convictions? You got a a simple stupid crime like that, you get a conviction, that's a stain on your record forever, a conviction. You got to report that, you know, >> and and there's still some stink on you even just because you're charged and you go through the whole process, you know, it's not like you come out the other end like you went in. You got a little leftover on you. It's just not fair.
It's not right. And if I'm a taxpayer, I'm really pissed because every time I see one of these cases spending my tax dollars, I I got to be asking, how do I get out of here? How do I move?
And then all the special prosecutors.
All the special prosecutors.
>> They're all special. They're very special.
>> Yeah. In my case, there's been uh you know, there was Melo at first. He was a real gem.
>> And they paid him over $100,000 and his private investigator. Then there was some guy Novak who arraigned me uh when on my other charges that I got on the day I got out of jail for uh they paid him $20,000. And then now there's Cosgrove and God knows what the taxpayers have paid him to do what. I don't know.
>> I know. I know exactly what he was doing. He He's watching Turtle Boy live every single day for hours and he's charging them.
>> Yeah, I don't think he is. I think he's having according to the It looks like he's having clips sent to him and that's kind of one of the things that we're going to be arguing in our motion to dismiss. I don't know if you guys you've gone over it.
>> You need to renamed the clips that were sent >> renamed clips >> in a special folder called intent.
>> Intent. if the intent. Do you know about the Solomon?
>> The grand the grand jury shenanigans that they did with me.
>> They showed me. Yeah. Yeah, I did see this. It's unbelievable. It just goes to show when they want you, they'll come after you with with uh with everything.
>> Yeah. And again, we go back to Gallagher and Tully's statement about like, oh, we had no probable cause. I'm like, have you seen the people who get charged in your county? And there's probable cause for everything. I've never heard of anybody not being charged except Karen Reid and me when we were in no build on the conspiracy charge on March 27th.
That doesn't get talked about enough.
Like they a couple weeks before Karen was set to go to trial, they tried to indict her on conspiracy for the sole purpose of having her incarcerated during the trial so she has to fight with her hands.
>> So dirty. It was so transparent. I'm so happy that the grand jury saw through it. I mean that's >> that was so dirty >> from your experience. I mean most grand juries just rubber stamp indictments, don't they?
>> They don't think that they do, but that's what it that's that's what the perception is because because of how low the burden is and because very often you don't even get a defense attorney there.
A prosecutor can literally only show you half the story. If there's a video of you punching me and me punching you back and the prosecutor only shows the part where I punch you, then they can indict me on assault and all they have to do is watch the rest of the video, but they don't see the video. All they see is me throwing a punch at you.
>> Yeah.
>> They don't see that it's self-defense.
So, the prosecutor runs the show. And that's why the joke, and it's sad, but it's the reality. It's it's our constitutional rights being shredded, is that a decent prosecutor can indict a ham sandwich. And that's true. It doesn't take much to indict. And that's why when they fail to indict, there's either you either have a really lousy prosecutor or you just have absolutely no case whatsoever. Or sometimes both.
>> Do you think that's a good system that we have, the grand jury system?
>> Probably not. No, >> I'm glad you mentioned that because I've hated it every time I've come up against it. And first of all, Martin Solomon, nice to meet you guys. We haven't >> You as well. You as well. I I love the hot dog stunt. That was hilarious.
>> Thank you. Uh, so the the grand jury is a joke. I mean, it's an arcane idea. Why Why we still do it, I don't know. And not everywhere is it done. So, I'm guessing in Michigan it's is it more the norm than not?
>> No, it's they they can, but they don't.
What they do in Michigan here is they charge and then they have something called a preliminary examination, which is much better, not as good, but it's much better because the defense attorney gets to cross-examine witnesses, call witnesses, subpoena witnesses, put on evidence, and again, the vast majority of them, the perception is that it's a rubber stamp and it's in front of a judge, a district court judge, and then you get bound over to what's called circuit court. That's how it's done in Michigan. But at least you get the preliminary hearing where you get to have your mini trial, you get to cross-examine witnesses, and if you're smart about it, and a lot of lawyers are, sadly, not all are, but you can kind of use that to set the table for the trial.
>> Of course, >> the prosecutor puts on the bare minimum.
They just put on one or two witnesses to establish the elements. What I do is I call everybody, and I'm allowed to do that. It's my constit It's my client's constitutional right. Ask them all questions. Now, I kind of nail down their testimony for trial. They can't change.
>> Yeah. California is much more similar to that. Uh, in fact, I don't think I've seen the grand jury used there in recent memory. It makes perfect sense that why why just just cut that waste of time out of the mix and go right through the process if you've got a real case? I don't get it. I don't get it.
>> Yeah. I mean, what's the alternative? Do you guys have any the like ideas for a better if you were in charge of this country set in the judiciary? How how would you make it so indictments come forward?
>> You should have to have a defense attorney there. They should have to be put it on with a defense attorney and the defense attorney gets to cross-examine witnesses. To have to have a closed room where just the prosecutor's there just showing you what they want without the rules of evidence, without even a judge overseeing things.
>> It's a prosecutor and a grand jury.
That's it. It's like what are you doing?
>> It's such a joke of a system. It It's awful. It's awful.
>> Is every state like that? Is every state like that? Do you know like with the grand jury?
>> It's a big mix. Yeah, it's a mix. My daughter was on the Manhattan grand jury for a month. uh which had to be a trip of an experience, but you know, >> state or federal >> uh state and and she was 24 at the time, maybe. And here's this group of people just making life and death decisions, you know, with no real basis to do that.
And of course, they're going to believe when the big bad prosecutor comes in and lays out the case, of course. So, more often than not, far more often than not, than than they would issue a bill to to indict. So, >> I mean that's a miracle that like less than half of the they said this is a weak sauce. Like what conspiracy and here we are two years later and they're still talking about conspiracy. Cosgrove is still fighting handing over Karen Reed's phone because he's like, "Oh, well, there's another grand jury. We're going to get about conspiracy." And they're they really think now they got my phone extraction. You might have seen this. It's out there. The bad guys have it now. And like, have you seen anything that suggests conspiracy? Well, I I haven't seen that and I I like to get my information from the court filings because I don't I I trust very little what I see online until I actually see a case number on it. Um but um I I remember that in in the defamation uh lawsuit, they're claiming that Karen Reed conspired with you. So the and the only way that they can have any sort of evidence of that is with her cell phones and showing that she was conspiring with you to commit, you know, this defamation on the McCabes and the Alberts. So um they're not leaving that alone as part of the defamation lawsuit. And I'm looking forward to seeing the motion to dismiss that's going to be filed by Karen's team and your team. Uh it's going to be fun to go through. So I'm sure they're working on it now. You don't have to tell us more about it, but >> yeah. Yeah. I don't want to say what the strategy is, but I'm in really good hands with attorney Jeff Pile, who um who is uh an amazing First Amendment attorney. It's uh funny. He got his start in uh as a as a high schooler. Uh he wore you guys remember those co-ed naked shirts? Like he wore those co-ed he wore co-ed naked uh I forget what it was, band or something like that. Like motion rhythm is the motion or something like that. like whatever. Those used to be controversial shirts in like the 90s and he wore one to school and he got suspended for it or whatever and him and his brother sued the school district and then they lost and they appealed it and they won and that's kind of how he got his love for the First Amendment and and and the law and uh he type of guy.
>> Oh, he's definitely my type of guy. And uh he's like very very excited about this uh case. Um it's from a law firm called Prince Lobel. Um they're very legitimate and they they charge legitimate prices and so you know like so that's kind of the purpose of this fundraiser is uh you know we need it uh it's going to be because you know you win these things.
>> No the defamation lawsuit is going to cost you a lot of money. I mean you know that that I know I mean I can imagine what Solomon's retainer would be on on a defamation lawsuit of this type. Um and yeah it's it's that would be very easy to go into the six digits and uh you know high up there. So, yeah, it's going to cost some money.
>> Yeah. I mean, we got uh we one of the lawyers we spoke with was Johnny Johnny Depp's lawyer, Wayne Dennison. He's barred in Massachusetts. And uh he gave me a Johnny Depp price of $3 million.
And I'm like, Matt, that I'm not Johnny Depp, dude. I can't I can't do that, you know? I can I can, you know? So, that was a non-starter. And uh because that like that's people like that are celebrity lawyers. Like they they represent rich people. And I'm I'd like to think I'm upper middle class. I'm trying to get there, but it's it's hard to become upper middle class when all of your money is just constantly going to the Mark Better Children's Defense College Fund. You know what I mean? It's just like so, uh, it's And again, like I said, you don't >> The best money you'll ever spend is money on a good lawyer.
>> Oh, absolutely. I It's I would I couldn't be happier to give every penny I have to him because he's as good as it gets. You know what I mean? As far Andre, too. It's like I have great attorneys. I'm in great hands. Uh, I have no doubt about that. They're I mean, if you were a betting man and you were like, you know, if you were your sports team's going against them, right?
You have Cosgrove who's a thousand years old and has this kind of weak case going against Brad and Better. I like my chances.
>> I like We have an excellent team around you. There's no question.
>> On on paper, it looks good. I think there's the underlying uh unspoken word about the team that Cosg Grove has behind him, >> not Cosgrove. The team behind him is a little a little >> So, let me show you guys a clip here um of kind of what we're up against. This is an example of how they lied because you guys mentioned lying before with police. Um and so I just want to play this for you real quick. Okay, I'll visit the home witness.
The Commonwealth made it seem like I was threatening to visit the home of witnesses relentlessly in a live stream.
Actual video shows I was talking about returning to Canton to see a DPW worker who was giving me the runaround >> 94 returns to this.
>> Let me put the right speed on. I got it on Turbo returns to this is him reading the indictments against me when I'm being arraigned after carrying visit homes of witnesses. This is not my last trip to Canton. I will be back. I'll be back. Get used to this. These people think, pardon me, these people think I'm [ __ ] around. You haven't seen the last of me. Get used to it. Get used to it at the 119 mark.
>> They combined sentences from two different clips. I will be back was encouraging people not to be afraid of the Mc Alberts. This is not my last trip to Canton. I will be back. And more and more I think people are getting like a year or so ago people didn't want to cooperate with Karen Reed defense team because like yeah it's easier to keep my head down and you know whatever and keep a low profile but now you know now they're like [ __ ] it you know we've made people realize like you don't have nothing to be afraid of the the big bad monster is not going to bite you. We neuted their ass. They can't do anything. They're not so tough anymore are they?
>> This is not my last trip to Canada. I will be back. I'll be back to get used to this. These people think pardon me.
These people think I'm [ __ ] around.
You haven't seen the last of me. Get used to it. Get used to it. At 119 mark.
>> These people think I'm [ __ ] around.
You haven't seen the last of me. Get used to it. Get used to it. But the Commonwealth makes it seem like I'm talking about harassing the McAlberts, which obviously sounds bad. But this was intentionally deceptive. I was actually referring to a DPW employee who was giving me the runaround. And I said that I will be back to get information on who plowed Fair View Road the night that John O'Keeffe was killed.
>> I can leave the message. Yep. I can leave the message and I'll get it to him right now.
>> Watch this.
>> She goes, "How do I spell the last name?" Sorry. She had already written out the first name >> and spelled it correctly. She knows who I am. She didn't have to ask my first name. She didn't even have to ask what my last name was. She just asked how to spell it. She had already spelled my name. She knows who I am at this point.
People are messaging me now and they're saying that she is a she is a friend.
She lives in Tim Albert's neighborhood and she is best friends with the Weeks girls. That is McCabe's sisters. So, this is what we're dealing with here.
This is the home cooking. So, I'll be back. Miss uh Miss Boyy's regular. I'll be back. You haven't seen the last of me because he never called. Walsh. She never called me today. Try to never call me. If you think you're going to get rid of me that easily, you're badly mistaken. I will literally sit there all day. All day. like we'll order a Chinese. I'll make a I'll make a day of it. I'll just sit there all freaking day because he's got to come back sometime.
I'll be like I have unfinished business.
We didn't see Michael today. I'll be back. Like get used to this. Like these people think I'm [ __ ] around. Like I'm Mr. Internet guy. Like I'm going to sit here and I'm going to write blogs all day and it's okay. He's just writing blogs and just ignore whatever. No, no, no. I live an hour away. It's not. I got a Lexus now. It's not a problem. It's got good It's got great mileage and a good engine. I'll be there in an hour.
No problem. Like I'll get used to it.
Get used to it. Well, I bet you gas prices weren't the same. No, >> you see, but you see what they did there? They took one phrase that I said >> that was amazing.
>> And then they took another phrase and they're like, "Oh," he said, "I'll be back." I'm talking about the DPW worker.
Like, she's giving me the runaround. I That's when I was looking for Lucky Lock. I I was on a mission to find the plow driver. Unlike all these other police and other reporters, I'm actually look I'd heard that there was a plow driver that day, which seems pretty relevant to track this guy down. And so I needed to find him independently on my own. I couldn't just get it from Karen Reed. I had to find him on my own. And so that's when I was down to the DPW and every time I would go down there, they'd be like, "Oh yeah, Michael Troda, he'll be back at lunch in an hour." Just give me the runaround. So when I said, "I'll be back," I'm like saying like, "I'll be back." Like, "You're not going to get rid of me that easily." They make it sound like I'm talking about the Mc Alberts. And so they're they're do you consider that a lie? Like they presented that to the grand jury without playing that tape. They just said this is what he said.
You know, I I can't help but find the irony in when this started, Mike was eating a hot dog and now you started talking about the plow driver and we heard a dog barking inside his house.
>> Yes, I I mute. For those who needed Domino proof of life, our Justice TV gang loves loves Domino. Sometimes I don't love Domino. Uh so I'm muted. So I will wait till he finishes and I will join.
>> There's no there must not be any fire trucks out there because dogs sleep through that, I was told. And and it's a Dalmatian, so you would think >> it's a a Dalmat You never see You never see Dalmatians anymore. They're very rare.
>> There's one I'd write I'd like to not see at the moment. But >> And by the way, thank you guys for donating. We're up to over $9,000, guys.
I appreciate every every penny you guys are giving. It's all going to come very much in handy. The link is at the bottom if you guys want to donate as well. But, uh, you know, when they read these out to me, I'm like that most of what I've been indicted for is things I've said on my YouTube presentations. Like, not even like what do you when you hear witness intimidation, what do you think of as defense attorneys?
>> The only witness intimidation case that I've ever dealt with was when uh a witness had his lug nuts loosened and his house burnt down.
>> I'm sorry, what?
and and and I had to I had to somehow argue that to the judge and it was it was a tough one, but um yeah, that's that when I hear witness intimidation, I'm not thinking YouTube YouTube people talking about a case.
>> Yeah, hurt feelings should not be part of witness intimidation. We've talked about this so many times. The statute is is out of whack. But nobody's going to challenge it until they get, you know, thrown in jail as a result of it.
>> Yeah. I I don't want to be the test dummy for that. I don't want to I don't want to be uh you know Randy. I don't want to be uh what was the >> I think people kind of lose I think what people don't really um sometimes people lose sight of is that when it comes to constitutional rights and criminal law we need to heir on the side of the constitution. Otherwise it just becomes too easy for our constitutional rights to be eroded. It's been happening for the last 200 years. Our rights have been eroded non-stop since then. And it's not good because our once our rights get eroded they never they never get back to where they once were. So they just get weaker and weaker and weaker because we're scared because you know there's a there's a line that said bad facts may make bad law. If there's like a really bad guy you got to go after and you got to bend the constitution a little bit to get there. People seem to think okay that that's all right. But the reality of the situation is we need to air on the side of the constitutional rights because otherwise we're not going to have any rights left. This is the first amendment at stake right now. That's why everybody who's donating, keep donating.
If you're donating a dollar, donate two.
If you're donating 10, make it 20. This is too important. And uh Dr. Durtle Boy is is really fighting this case for everybody.
>> Yeah. And you should be glad if you're not dealing with something like this.
I'm suing the Massachusetts State Police, as most folks know, for First Amendment violation. Uh um but if you're not fighting these kinds of things, just take a a shekele of that money that you're not spending and uh and give it to Aiden to help in his fight because it's really for all of us ultimately.
>> And also, even though I just made a pitch for it, I'm not getting a piece of it. Okay? So just so all the viewers are very clear.
>> I think the constitution is under attack and everybody who's watching this really needs to understand that.
>> Yeah. And >> I'm sure I'm sure Let me just say one more thing. I'm sure that by now Dr. Turtle Boy has been offered an amazing plea bargain. I'm sure he was offered great plea deals. Just let this go away.
Let this die. We'll make this the best deal ever. He's not doing it. He's fighting this thing because he knows what's at stake here. He knows his mind.
>> I'm not so confident about that because we know the DA's office. Yeah, I'm not sure about that either.
>> I'm not so confident.
>> I'm just I'm just guessing cases with prosecutors where where they just want the case to go away.
>> In normal world, I think you'd be right.
>> Well, Dulan did say that to us, you know, at a sidebar. He was basically like uh you know, like his first day on the job. He's like because that's what these judges are used to. It's like just plea deal like let's make what do we got to do to make this go away? Like right and then like we don't we're not really going to trial, are we? You know, like it's nobody died here, right? what are we doing? Uh I can I can understand they they weren't going to give Karen Reed a plea deal because they knew the answer to that. Um where and like you know the John Keys family needs justice. They're not going to do whereas with me it's like nobody got hurt. Nobody lost a nobody get lost a toenail in this.
Nobody got a a bruise or you know hurt their pinky or anything like that. Like what are we doing here? And Dulan was like like so yeah you guys what are we you want to do a deal or something? Like he was just like yeah like that's like what they're trained to do. And uh you know I I don't even know what they'd offer. I mean you'd have to listen to it if they offered to it I suppose.
>> Yeah I yeah I doubt that there's had been any offer in this case but I I there's something else I think that's very troublesome about this case aside from you know you're talking about the first amendment which is always like Solomon said here on the side of caution. What what's what's also very concerning to me about this case is the targeted nature of this prosecution.
This wasn't this was we gotta find something on this guy to shut him up. We you know that that's what that's not how America's supposed to run. A guy commits a crime, he runs a red light. Okay, you got him. Now chase him and and track him down and he's got drugs, whatever it is.
Okay, great. But we don't identify people and then try to figure out what type of crime to charge him with. That that's what's more that I mean, not more, but that's equally concerning to me. And especially the way that Mark uh in one of his filings he laid out, you know, the whole trajectory of you getting charged and and everything that happened before that. It's it's very troubling, I think, to to an American.
>> Fallen secret police said that. Show me the man, I'll show you the crime.
>> Yeah.
>> It's terrifying, but that's the reality.
And and by the way, there's enough criminal statutes out there when you look at municipalities, state, county, federal, people commit crimes every single day whether they know it or not.
That's one of the reasons it's so important not to talk to the police. You can be admitting to a felony that you don't even know is a felony.
>> Yeah.
>> If they want you, if they want you, by God, they can get you. It's terrifying.
>> And that that's why the folks there, Aiden, as you know, are frightened. You know, the folks that uh are living in that community, and I've been embedded there enough to know that uh they're upset, they're mad. Not only are their money and their dollars being spent on this crap, but they're thinking I could be next because all I have to do is get on the wrong side of somebody and they're going to come after me. It's it's a brutal way to live. It's like some sort of communist state.
>> Well, I don't if you saw the arrest, you know, at the beginning of the video where I'm being arrested by Tully. I say to him, I'm like, "So, what about the rolling rally was illegal, but there was hundreds of people there. Is anyone else being charged for this illegal event? I mean, it was an illegal event. That's what you're saying, right? So, why it's just me being charged with it? And they go, "We'll see. We'll see." And yeah, to this day, it's been only me. I don't think anyone else should be charged, but they're like, "I'm not being punished for my actions. I'm being punished for my influence." Like, that's the problem here is that like like you've seen with the Canton nine, like they they tried to charge them. Their charges were dropped.
It was never brought forward. Okay. No probable cause. uh the Rich Schiffer rubbery ducky thing. Ridiculous, right?
He like he was charged and it was dropped after a sixmon they put a six-month investigation and resources into that. They got dropped the first day. All right. And it's like so ultimately they're they're kind of accused of the same thing I am. And it's just the judge is just like, "Are you kidding me? Get out of my courtroom."
But with me, there's too many eyeballs on it. I feel like there's this political pressure with judges not to drop this. I think that's why Karen Reid had the same issue is they're just like political pressure like we can't there's a dead cop we're not just going to drop it. Uh and it's unfortunate because it's it's not fair you know I have to if I didn't have the resources to fight this I don't know what I would do. Um but they probably wouldn't be coming after me.
>> So what's Connor running on? Is he running on um um what was that guy's name?
>> Connor.
>> Yeah it wasn't Connor. Right. He's >> Brian Walsh. Brian Walt, is that what he's running on? Like because like that slam dunk of a case like is that what he's running on, you know?
>> Yeah. You know, it's like so I think he's running on. I'm just a cleaned up version of Moresy. Like the establishment can trust me. Give all the money that you were going to donate to Morrisy. I'll take that. Uh you know, the mach the unions that were backing Moresy, you can back me now. I'm just a cleaned up younger version of Michael Moresy. I think that's kind of what he's running on.
>> Are you gonna run for his seat? This is kind of like that movie with The Rock.
>> Yeah. I It's like, well, if you're that guy, you know what I'd like to ask him?
And I I posted this on Twitter yesterday, is how does it feel to know that Michael Morrisy thinks you're so inadequate at your job that he called in Hank Brennan to do your job for you?
Because you're an ADA. You get paid by the taxpayers. You work for him. you guys get assigned these murder cases, right? And he thought that no one in office, including you, was qualified enough to prosecute Karen Reid. So, he begged the state legislature for a million dollars. And he wrote emails using his burner email account uh to state Senate President Karen Spilka and Senate and House Majority Leader Ron Mariano asking for $1 million to prosecute this case to hire Hank Brennan. And how insulting is that if you're Greg Connor, >> you know?
>> Yeah.
>> Hey, listen, Dr. Turtlevoy, I'm sorry to do this to you, but I got a 130. I gotta fly.
>> Okay.
>> Great being on. Very nice to meet you, Mr. Bryant. Uh, brother Council, always good to see you. And like I said, if you guys are donating, keep donating. If you want to make it a dollar, make it five.
If you're going to make it 10, make it 20. This is too important of an issue to let go.
>> Well, thank you so much, Solomon.
Appreciate you joining us, brother of the council.
>> Take care. Nice to meet you.
>> Thank you. Yeah, >> Aiden, I don't know if I ever told you this. I ran into Brennan in the elevator uh in either Salem or Plymouth. I can't even remember the case I was there for, but he was doing, you know, his his thing. He was >> Salem. It was >> defense attorney. Yes.
>> Was it Salem?
>> The the Carmen. Is that the woman? The woman, right? Who was charged with >> I can't remember what the case was for.
It just it was just weird, you know, after having seen him so many times, bumping into him. uh uh and his cordial nature at the trial, you know, over weeks and weeks to see him and you know, it's like seeing your teacher uh at the hardware store. You like, whoa, wait a wait a minute. Uh so I see him coming out of the elevator. I'm like, uh hey, how's it going? I mean, what am I going to say to the guy? How's it? And he was so happy. I mean, but like strangely too happy.
>> Uh and I I asked him if this was his new job. He was running the elevator and it's like a three-story building. Dude, try the stairs. He was He went up and down in this elevator about four times in the time I was in the lobby waiting to get where I needed to go.
>> Lazy.
>> Yeah.
>> Lazy. Unbelievable.
>> Oddly happy.
>> Uh I would have plenty to say to him if I saw him, which is why I probably shouldn't see him because I'm out on bail. And even though the trial's over, they'd still I I assume the witness intimidation thing goes on until they die. And so you can't just ever say anything to these people ever because I have so much they they have effectively like silenced me to a degree. Like I'm definitely scared to approach anyone and ask them any questions now. Like I normally would just go right up to these people and ask them questions, but I'm like now I'm like, well, >> are they gonna say it's are they going to use they're going to act in bad faith no matter what anything? They indicted me over a window. I talked into a window.
>> I remember >> I me'd T-Rex arms and they said that >> I'm like I was they tried to revoke my bail over that. I'm like, are you kidding me? over a goddamn window and I was wiret I didn't even know they were recording me. Like it was just outrageous. Outrageous.
>> You know, I I've spoken to some lawyers uh in Massachusetts who know Hank Brennan and uh told me that they actually are you know friendly and they've spoken to him about this case and uh I you know I asked him I was like I was like does he really think he's going to win? Like did he really think he's gonna win? You know, I mean, all the lawyers that I know that were watching this and covering this said there's no chance he's going to win. You know, how is it that you take this case and and and really believe you're going to win? You know, does he I I really wanted to know and they've told me that he honest to God believed in his case.
>> He believed in his case and he thought he was going to win and surpris.
>> It's like Castanza though. It's like it's not a lie if you believe it. if you believe it.
>> If you believe it, you know, and I I think he convinced himself. Somebody else said the same thing that they met him, they saw him on on vacation or whatever and they were talking to him and that he's like really believes that Karen Reed did this. I'm like, do you though? I mean, do you like how is that possible? Like, do you I mean, some of these All right, so you got all these anti on Twitter and all these places. Uh Kate Peter, we can assume she's doing it because she hates me and a couple other people are like that, too. But like Pleven is I I swear to go to Pleven says that because I called him a fence sitter. He used to be like a supporter of mine early on. If you watch some of his early videos, he says very nice things about me. But then I called him a fence sitter because he wasn't strong enough in favor of Karen Reed. And then he turned into Karen was guilty the next day. So he got mad at me. But some of these other people like the Julie Carpenters of the world and and people like that on Twitter, I feel like they're not they had they didn't know who I was before this. So they can't blame it on turtle boy derangement syndrome. I feel like they're just inclined to say guilty. Like a lot of people just see a defendant and they're just like guilty. That's the only thing I can and and she's not, you know, let's face it. I mean, she's innocent, but uh, you know, the faces that she made in court and some of the things she said doesn't make she's not the most likable defendant. I don't think it's a bad thing to say that. And I think that's why that hurt her with a lot of uh with jurors in the first trial especially.
I'm just saying these these prosecutors like Brandon for him to say he thinks he could win the case or is a big difference from thinking she's guilty.
You know, I think it's more just an arrogant approach to what he thinks he can achieve based on anything that he's presented with versus thinking she's guilty. I I'd be shocked he really thinks she's guilty.
>> Are you saying that prosecutors and lawyers are scummy enough to uh just go that winning is more important than actual justice? I say that when they're hired for a job, uh, Martin, that you're required to zealously represent your client and doing whatever you you must do within the bounds of the law to zealously represent your client. So, if he thinks he can do that with the pile of [ __ ] he's been given, well, God bless him. But >> I I I would say with with the exclusion of a prosecutor, >> I would say everything else, you're you're right. Um but uh I I my personal thought about this all is that there may be a couple people who just always side with the prosecutor. Seems like you know some real staunch prosecutor people will just always jump on that bandwagon.
But I do think and I've told this to my channel so I'm not shy to say it. do think that because people some people not going to say most but because you have haters those people will automatically go against Karen Reid and not be objective and and that I think is real. I think that if you know, you've brought a lot of attention to this obviously, uh, but because you're a certain personality and a certain type and certain people don't like that and they hate it and they go online all day and watch you all day and clip you and post you and and try to make fun of you and and because they hate you so much, they in turn they they automatically just will look at Karen Reed as though she's guilty.
>> And there is I think there is an element of that in this case. And I think that she'd have she would have that percentage of people, you know, even in that minority that that that think that she's guilty, she would be able to like win over that that that portion also.
But, um, like you said, there's always going to be a number of people that just will always side with the prosecution. And a lot of it, I think, is because they're just not trained to be able to critically think about uh cases like this and facts like this. They see a person sitting in the defendant's chair. they see some evidence that points to their guilt and who else could have done it well because you're looking at this five years after like well who else could have done it you know so when you have that type of approach and you have a person sitting there in the defendant share well sure I guess you know makes the most sense that she did it >> I know who else could have done it >> okay >> I know who else could >> was that a rhetorical question I I got you beg I got sued for saying who I thought did it you know um you know it's just weird I mean isn't that crazy that she's being her defense was third party culprit and they're literally the third parties are suing her for that. How outrageous is that?
>> They're going to regret that so bad. I I've mentioned before how uh and we went into a little bit of an analysis of uh the the the attorney for the O'Keefe family uh because he's made such bonehead moves already. Uh and and we we pointed out the timing of this situation. Why do you file a civil suit while the criminal matter is still ongoing? you know, >> they wanted to get the deposition. They wanted to depose her.
>> I understand that theory, but they knew that was going to be stayed unless they're just total morons. Anyway, >> well, it is Massachusetts. I >> Well, that's true. That's true. So, so then, you know, in the real world, in the normal world, you wait until the criminal matter is resolved, hopefully in a conviction. If you're looking for a wrongful death case, then you just take that conviction, you walk across the hall, file your civil suit, and then figure out who's going to pony up the money. You're done. But these guys have dug such a hole by starting the case before the conviction. They didn't get and now they're saddled with this acquitt and the burden it like like going against OJ. Okay. Well, yeah, you couldn't prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she did it. I bet we can prove by preponderance of the evidence. Good luck with all of the information that came out during the trials. How can you as a as a smart attorney look at that and say this is a case? This is a good case.
because they're hoping to just leverage somebody to cave in, throw you some money to go away.
>> Yeah, but they know me and Karen aren't going to do that. They know >> they're idiots.
>> They're idiots. I mean, to file this as early as they did was such a stupid move and they're going to pay for it. If you're carrying this case like this attorney is, this is all out of pocket.
All the depositions to come, all of these motions, all the discover, that's all out of pocket upfront from him that he's unlikely to ever get back. This could ruin his firm. So, who do you guys who do you guys think is financing these lawsuits against me? So, there's three ways, right? Either either they're paying out the Mc Alberts are paying out of pocket, which seems >> the truth.org.
>> I don't think that's enough. I don't think that's going to be quite enough to cover this. Uh the the five lawyers that they have and the amount of depositions they're going to have to do, I don't think that's going to cover it. So either the Mcalberts are paying out of pocket, they're taking it on a contingency, which means that they see a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow here from two random people, not multi-billion dollar corporations. It's me and Karen Reed, right? And so both of those seem unlikely to me. Or this is being financed by some unknown third party who just doesn't like us.
>> Look, you know, it's funny because uh you know, Brennan made his money uh doing this case. So, you know, uh, he made his money, he was going to get paid one way the other. Uh, Diller, if he's working like every other pliff attorney in the world, he's going to be working on contingency, like you said, and that's only going to be if there's a settlement or a verdict. Now, the chances of them being a verdict as we sit here today is very, very slim, as we mentioned a million times because there is so much strong evidence in Karen Reed's favor, the arc experts, they don't have a real action reconstructionist, I mean, you know, the the plaintiffs. So they they have to really they have a really big uphill battle. Now there could be some thoughts that because there's an insurance company involved. So maybe you know they'll be able to get a settlement out of the insurance company because you know the way that they assess risk or whatever. So maybe they'll they'll throw some money on the case. But you know so therefore Karen Reed doesn't ultimately she's not the decision maker when it comes to the insurance money. So that might be a pro. You know that might be where Diller's thinking. But yeah, I I wonder the same thing like this. All these costs, what you got? 30 depositions laid up. I mean, just >> that's a couple hundred grand. I'm sorry. I I used to be married to a court reporter. Uh that's a lot of money.
That's a lot of money per page. Yeah.
When you get >> I know I I do this work.
>> What was Judge Gilda the other day? Is that am I pronouncing that right?
Gildia. Gilda.
>> Yolia.
>> Gilda. He said there's 22 attorneys of record currently in that case. If I'm a court reporter, I'm booking my foreign vacation for two months already because they they do it's like a syndication.
You do one product and everybody pays for it and that's where they make their cash and and this case is a cash cow for any >> the only thing that I can I explain the only explanation I have for this is that they truly believe that I don't believe this that Karen Reed literally conspired with me and came to me and say look it like I mean this is the basis of their lawsuit right is that Karen Reed knows she did But she needed someone in the media who had no morals or ethics and was unscrupulous and would just lie for cash. And then along comes something called Turtle Boy. And she's like, "Yeah, sign this guy up. Let's he'll lie for me and then he'll make all this money off of this and they will live happily ever after." They seem to really believe that theory. And if they can go through our phones and look at all our communications, they're not >> Alex Jones. They think you're like Alex Jones.
Yeah, but I'm not Alex Johnson.
>> Yeah. I I mean, anyone who's >> Yeah.
>> You're either the greatest actor in the world, >> which you're going to be getting a you know, a multi-million dollar from a Hollywood producer at some point, or >> or you actually believe what you're saying. Like, there's no >> Hey, having said that, I I dipped in just before I came on with you guys, and I did see your performance in the restroom, and that was that was that was award-winning stuff. I thought somebody was there, so, you know. Yeah, I was actually looking at the wall because I had the far >> See, but you had it in your brain. You sold it.
>> I sold it. Yeah, I tricked him. You know, it was a joke. I'm like, because I was standing next to him. I go, obviously I'm not going to film him urinating next to me. That's weird.
Like, and he's going to see it. Like, that's I'm not going to do that. That's a little too much. So, I'm like, but it's I want to memorialize this and talk about it afterwards. So, I'm going to post a little video and tease him. I know he's going to see it. I didn't think they were going to get a search warrant over it. Like geez louise, guys.
Oh my god. No one was there.
>> All right, Aiden, I gotta get I gotta bounce now a little bit, but uh thanks for having me on. Um everyone who's watching, you know, we got a very important cause there. First amendment, very important amendment as you can as you know, it's the first one. And uh you know, keep keep on donating.
>> Thank you for joining us, Martin. Always pleasure.
>> A pleasure to meet you, buddy.
>> Yeah, nice to meet you, Michael. Thank you.
>> Thanks. And by the way, we're now up to I just keep refreshing it. We are o we are at $11,500 guys in the first two hours. That's amazing. So we keep up this pace. We're going to be over 50. No problemmo. So uh really appreciate you guys. And like you just heard I mean the >> the amount of money that this c you're just like what?
>> It's unbelievable. And you know um if it weren't so satisfying to know who's going to be dinged for it by that I mean those pursuing this from the wrong side.
Uh I I would be hurting for him. But too bad. Too bad.
>> But they're not. I mean, I'm getting dinged, too. Even if I win, you know, like even if you win, >> it cost a lot of money to be right, you know. Yes. It just does. Uh, and that's unfortunate.
>> Unless, you know, some states have stronger anti-slap laws than other. And I'm not saying that that's the angle that we're going to go with, but you know, uh, they these for the Do you familiar with anti-slap?
>> Oh, yeah. Yeah. And we've gone over it in the context of, you know, the universe of these cases. And we have by that I mean of course Linda Kenny Boden my uh mate on our streaming channel. Um we would be shocked if you aren't using that but that's just me.
>> Yeah I'm not going to talk say what our strategy is or whatever but certainly a you know I believe in most states how anti-slap works is like if you're petitioning the government to do something and you get sued for that speech then you can just file this. It's basically like a motion to dismiss except quicker and uh you get your attorney's fees paid for uh if if you get that granted. So, you know, I I would like to think that uh you know, I mean, a heavy amount. I'll show you this video right here. So, this is me outside. This is on September 24th of 200 or September 19th of 2024.
So, this is between the two trials. Do you know where I'm Can you see where I'm standing here?
>> Let me see.
>> The state house >> part of the courthouse. Where is it?
>> The state house. That's the m the state house in Boston. Okay. And so that to me inside the state house is what's called the government. Okay. And so we are literally down here petitioning the government. That's why we're at the state house. And I come out here and this is my speech.
>> I see Nathan Reed over there. Give it up for Nathan Reed.
THERE YOU GO.
UH, thank you guys for coming. Uh, not only to all of the Kared protests, uh, but to my protest, to my court dates, for the canon nine, for Sandra Burmore, for for everybody who's been wronged by this corrupt administration. We really, really, really appreciate it. So, uh, we are making our voices heard out here.
Uh, we walk, we came to the state house for a reason because this is ultimately the people inside this building are the ones who can do something about this outofc control renegade criminal organization known as the Massachusetts State Police. So the people inside this building are the people that can do something about the state police. Is that >> does that sound like >> petitioning them?
>> It certainly seems like we are there to petition the government. No.
>> Yeah. And that's usually the big issue with these these suits is that what is petitioning, you know, and it's an it's a it's a piece of mercury, you know, it's hard to get your hands on because it keeps evolving. That sounds like a pretty straightforward, easy to determine petitioning of the government.
But there's going to be all kinds, you know, it's your case. There are all kinds of other issues that may suggest that well, is this really petitioning or is it not? Uh, and because it's still kind of an unsettled area of law. Yeah.
Who knows whether it'll be effective?
Could be effective in part, but not completely.
>> Well, you know, where the petitioning really began in all this of the government began at the select board meetings. That was the heart and soul of the petitioning movement. And that is not something I had anything to do with.
That happened organically on its own.
Like I wrote about it and those people in Tanton who are taxpayers read about it and they're outraged that their police department who is asking for more money. Remember Helina Rafferty wanted like a $100,000 kitchen and like more cops. They always want more money. They always want overrides and more money and vote yes and this and that and performance performance like whatever. Like just get >> most of that happens behind behind closed doors. Nobody even really I mean it's in the meeting but still all the wheeling and dealing is behind closed doors and it's a done deal by the time they get to the meetings.
>> Yeah. And so in this case this government particularly had a member by the name of Chris Albert and Chris Albert said in right in the mix of this whole thing it's his brother's house.
His son Colin is tied to it right and and he is in charge of the of not the entire police department. like he gets to vote yes on raises and and whatnot and so like that that is and that's why people started showing up there. The first person to ever show up is this woman Angela Chan O'Donnell and she had I don't know if have you ever seen her speech when she was down there >> might if I saw her I might recognize her but I've seen of them.
>> So she was the first person Let me see if I got a video of this. Yeah, here it is. Uh let's see. Okay pull this video up.
Oh, >> let me see.
>> So I asked this not by traffic this time.
>> And by the way, right in the front row there, this is Bernie Albert. That's uh Brian's father. Okay, he was happened to be sitting in the front row that day, coincidentally. And there's Julie Albert, who was Colin Albert's And this is her this girl's this woman's name. I didn't know her. This is one week after I wrote the Canton Cover up part one. I had never had any communication with this woman before. I didn't know who she was. She read my articles and then she went in front of the commun the select board and did this.
>> My name is Angela Chan O'Donnell and I live at 51 Turtle Brook Road.
>> Turtle Brook Road.
>> So seemed seemed destined.
>> I moved here. I heard that it is a beautiful town for families to live and grow. So, here I am, a new Cantonian who now calls this town my home.
Unfortunately, it is not living up to its reputation. And I want to address the elephant in the room, which is the article in the Boston Globe regarding the alleged corruption of the Canton Police Department and this select board's involvement in it. This is not an argument about a flag in a classroom.
This is much bigger. This is about the people, the police to be specific, that we entrust to keep this town safe. But speaking for myself only, I do not feel safe. I am putting myself in front of this select board, in front of the very people whose names have graced well sourced articles. I'm sure I'll be getting traffic tickets for the rest of my life, >> but I will happily pay them rather than to shut up.
>> I have been on the front page of the Boston Globe calling out bigger politicians with very nice offices at the state house. People in this town are scared of the people who are supposed to protect and serve, of elected officials who are elected to make Canton a better and better place to live. Instead, I've been asked again and again in the past week about John O'Keefe and Karen Reed, not by their names, but by that Canton case with cops. So many people are surprised because they never equated Canton with corruption and misogyny. I mean, were we wrong? Is this really what Canton is like? Am I along with others in town going to have to fight to make this town what I know it can be?
There are many, many intelligent people who live in Canton and their voices are being silenced with threats of things much larger than parking tickets. At the select board candidate panel hosted by the Canton Citizen, either John McCort or Chris Albert mentioned that they will be hiring four police officers this year in light of recent developments. That is unsettling.
So I ask, what will be the select board's role in these appointments in particular?
>> Is that your statement? You're done.
>> Um I asked a question. Yes, >> there's no no questions and answer. We cannot comment there's an ongoing investigation from the nar county district attorney's office and the state police >> and the can police are not involved but we have no comment this time I have a statement I'll read it at the end okay >> this time >> okay thank you >> thank you >> and that was that was the first time anyone ever went in front of the select board like that and it became a thing after that Rita Lombardi Jennifer O'Donnell and many other people in town began showing up the the Sweenies week after week Sean Coburn with signs and and just using this They'd never done this before, these people. So, Angela is the person that kind of got the ball rolling there. But that's what I, you know, what I did all my activism stuff like that. It wasn't just to like, you know, it wasn't about me. It wasn't about like look at me or anything like that or the witnesses. It's about like let's fix this problem, man. This isn't okay.
>> Yeah. Yeah. And I noticed um and one of your your viewers noticed as well, she referenced the Globe.
>> Yeah. Did they pick up your article or she's just not >> I think she just maybe she thought at the time that uh it would sound silly quoting a turtle. I don't know. But uh because I don't remember the the Globe had no interest in this story. The Globe did not >> ever I mean it's how sad is that that that is the newspaper that did spotlight that.
>> Yeah. Exactly. And you know, even even now, you know, because I'm out there at these various matters that involve you that that arguably are peripheral to the original Karen Reed bubble, right? And there will be people that will say, and I mean from the local press, you know, BZ, you know, they say, "Yeah, we're we're not we're not covering we're not covering that part of the story."
>> I don't get it.
>> Yeah. I I >> I just don't get it. Well, aren't you in the first amend first amendment business and and your people don't want to cover that?
I like I had I'm just a guy with I'm just a guy, you know. I don't have unlimited resources. The Globe does like think of what they could have done with this Canton story if they put the same, you know, resources that they did into the spotlight story, which is a great story as well. You know, Catholic Church and I mean it was a huge story what was what they were covering up there. Why not put the same spotlight on this?
Instead, they did the opposite. Like the op-eds that they published by Ivon Abraham and Danny McDonald and others at the Globe were like, you know, it was just like they made they took the position that like I'm the bad guy. That I mean, somewhere along the line that became the narrative that actually the protesters are the bad guys. They're the mindless mob. They're they're out there.
And I was in line with Sean Carter from the Boston Globe. He was the the beat guy. He's a nice guy. He's young. And they threw him on this. And I was standing in line with him outside court and I'm like, "You should go down there and talk to the people and just meet them and and speak with them and ask them why they're there." And he did and he he learned a lot about it. It's like, "But why do I got to tell you to do that?" You know what I mean? Like, why aren't you guys Don't you want to know who these people are? Don't you want to know why they're down there in >> Wouldn't you be curious about that as Mr. Reporter? Wouldn't you want >> Because they're really Because they're really good people. They really are.
Like I stand I love these people. I love like they they like they made me feel every time I went down there like these people that would stand out in the middle of the the winter down there and just all for a stranger all for someone named Karen Reed and uh you know and they were happy to do it because they just believed it in it so much.
>> Yeah. and and and Karen and through her you and your elevating her cause, you know, they see them in you guys because as I said before, we're who's going to get jacked next, you know, we don't want to move out of this community because we're afraid that somebody's going to abuse us here, those in authority, those in power, those that are paid to protect us. Uh but that's how they feel, >> you know.
>> Yeah.
>> And that's wrong. That's just scary and wrong.
>> Yeah, it is scary. And it's like if they could do it to me, they can do it to anyone. Like this is all of our liberties on the line here. And uh you know, it's outrageous. Uh but like it comes in other forms, too. You know, you're c we're having Linda Kenny Boden on later. And there's uh abuse prevention order fraud, if you will. Uh that somebody like anyone can just go into a courthouse as we saw with Kelsey Fitz Simmons. Yep. and get on there and just say that make up a bunch of stuff in front of a judge and then you get a restraining order handed to you and somebody loses their baby over it and next thing you know someone gets shot.
>> And you know you you think about those laws uh when they first came up with it, oh that's not a bad idea because not everybody can afford representation and it's early in the process and they need some sort of you know emergency protection. So that's the theory sounds great >> but how do you keep people from abusing it?
>> That's where the problem is, you know.
people come along and go, "Oh, I see what I can do with this." Right?
>> You know, you can't create laws thinking everybody is uh, you know, well-intentioned.
>> You just can't.
>> No, you can't.
>> Because people aren't. Uh, and they will abuse it and use it to their advantage and take advantage of other people >> and say, "Hey, that's the law. The law lets me do that." And next thing you know, your baby's gone or you're thrown in jail for 60 days.
>> Right. Exactly. And and and jail is no joke. It's just like I mean, it's like >> I don't want to I don't want to know. I I don't I mean I I I would not do well in jail is all I'm telling you.
>> No one would. It's not fun. It's not meant to be fun. It's not meant to be good. Like I think it's like those are small cells, man. They're like and they smell like [ __ ] and it's just like time.
It's the time. It's time has never gone by so slowly. Then when you're in jail, you're just like what?
>> I ask you this. Did you meet anybody in jail that were like like that was an accused or that was you know that you bonded with that you thought was a you know in your similar scenario somebody you could be friends with after you got done?
>> I mean I met Brian Walsh but I think he's guilty. Uh I did not bond >> Did you meet Brian Walsh? Did >> Oh yeah. Yeah. So I did uh exercise uh every day.
>> You were in the yard with Brian Walsh?
>> Well I was in medical by myself and so they but they have to bring you somewhere to do your exercise. And so I would go to this housing unit where other prisoners were held and one of them was Brian Walsh. And so I would they'd be in their cells. They didn't let any other prisoners near me because they were so afraid that like something would happen and I would report on it after I got out. So they were like we are just isolating this dude.
>> Wow.
>> Like you know they treated me like a fabier egg in there. Like it was crazy.
They did not let me near anyone. And so but like sometimes prisoners would call me over their door and they know who I was and they'd like tell try tell me about their case. They're all innocent.
They all have a story. And uh like Brian Walsh, I he didn't call me to his door.
I went to his. I'm like I put a note under it when he was in court for the Andy Warhol federal stuff.
>> Oh yeah.
>> And I'm like, "Hey, I liked My name's Aiden Carney. I've been covering this case uh out of Canton involving Michael Proctctor, and I understand he's involved in your case, and I understand that uh a Google search is involved in your case. It's also involved in the Karen Reed case. would you be willing to do an interview with me? And uh he uh the next day I went back to his cell and I knocked on his cell door and he's just like, "Oh, hey Aiden. Uh I got your note. Uh just got your note." Yeah, sorry I can't talk to my lawyer and uh he says I shouldn't he can't really do an interview. Uh but uh you know thank you anyway and uh you know good luck and and I hope you get to get home and see your kids. I'm like oh thanks Brian Walsh. Thanks for not chopping me up.
That was nice of you. It was really good. very civil for a lunatic.
>> Yeah, exactly. Yeah. Yeah. So, >> okay.
>> Anyway, Mike, I gotta I gotta get going.
I'm gonna go.
>> Okay. All righty.
>> Thank you so much for your time. I appreciate it.
>> You bet. For for those who haven't even thought about it yet, think about it.
This is all for us. Aiden is us when it comes to fighting for your first amendment rights. So, chip in what you can. Thanks, buddy. We'll see you next time.
>> Thanks for having me, Mike. Thanks for coming on, Mike. Talk to you.
>> You bet.
Related Videos
BREAKING: Judge Kathleen Issues Emergency Arrest Warrant After Trump Defies Order
Frontora
2K views•2026-05-29
8 Hidden Things About Mackenzie Shirilla Netflix's 'The Crash' Didn't Show You
MarvelousVideos
2K views•2026-05-28
MP Garnett Genuis warns Canada’s MAiD system has ‘gone too far’
WesternStandard
187 views•2026-05-28
Trump Impeachment STORM IGNITES as 29 Judges Vote for Conviction!!
DanielBriefDaily
2K views•2026-06-02
THE STREISAND EFFECT AT BARBARA STREISAND’S HOUSE! - First Amendment Audit
KULTNEWS
1K views•2026-05-30
EBK Jaaybo Won’t Be Going To Trial?! | Criminal Lawyer Reacts
floridadefenseteam
404 views•2026-05-29
OFFICE HOURS: The Theft of Black Brilliance... AI and Intellectual Property (w/ Lisa E. Davis)
marclamonthillnetwork
2K views•2026-05-29
सुप्रीम कोर्ट में 5 जजों का शपथग्रहण समारोह #supremecourt #judges #oathceremony #shorts #ytshorts
Bharat24Liv
4K views•2026-06-02
