Lindsay Clancy’s Defense Strategy and Revisiting the Casey Anthony Verdict Fifteen Years Later

[00:00:04]Hello everyone and welcome [music] back to Positively Legal. I'm Mark Iglard, one of your co-hosts and I am a former prosecutor, adjunct law professor, author, what else? A veteran criminal defense attorney. My bio also says that I'm a avid pickle ball player and a friend of Janna Spilborgs.

[00:00:24]>> You're also a very snappy dresser. I'm going to add that.

[00:00:27]Snappy where the 1920s wants their word back. Okay, go ahead. Who are you?

[00:00:32]>> So, I'm I'm Janna Spilbore. I don't have a a list as long as yours, Mark, my esteemed colleague, but I am a criminal defense attorney and the founder of my firm, Janna Spilbore Law. Now, I'm also going to warn you.

[00:00:45]>> Today, we are discussing the Massachusetts woman, Lindseay Clancy, who is standing trial this week on charges of murdering her three children.

[00:00:53]You guys, I'm just going to say this for the record. I'm going to have a hard time talking about this CA case without welling up because the facts are terrible.

[00:01:01]>> But uh neither side is denying that she committed this awful act, but her defense claims she cannot be held quote criminally responsible. And we're going to dive into that.

[00:01:13]>> That is a fascinating case. Also, I can't believe, John, it's been 15 years since we heard a Florida jury say not guilty to Casey Anthony in her case. She didn't kill apparently her daughter Kaye, or at least they didn't have proof beyond a reasonable doubt, which could be something very different. We're going to dive into that case and ask the important question, did the jury get it wrong? Mhm.

[00:01:42]>> Mhm.

[00:01:43]>> But first, Mark, it is happy hour and I Today's happy hour.

[00:01:49]>> I would like to focus on you and one of your many many many >> I like that subject, Matthew.

[00:01:55]>> Yes. Right. Who doesn't?

[00:01:56]>> Sure. But you have many many famous clientele uh in your repertoire. And one of your uh famous clientele right now you are actively defending is a man by the name of Antonio Brown.

[00:02:11]>> Who?

[00:02:12]>> Yeah. Who?

[00:02:14]>> So I I have to start with a couple things. I know his case is kind of entering into a different phase, but I want to ask you about a picture that I saw >> of you and your client >> heading off to court. Now, I have to say, I've picked my clients up in Ubers.

[00:02:30]I have even picked them up in my own car. I don't think I've ever had a client pick me up in their car, especially when their car looked like this. Mark Iglash, please explain.

[00:02:42]>> All right, so the backstory was the night before I reminded him that we had to go to court just for like a procedural thing. The judge had given him a furlow, let him go to Tampa and care for his kids and his and support his wife who was giving birth to wife or his baby mama who's giving birth to yet another child that he has. And so then he had to report back in Miami and say, "Hi, judge. I'm back." And then they had to affix the ankle monitor back on him, take off the one from the private company that we arranged, and now he's back on Miami house arrest. So we had to go to court. So I reminded him of that the night before and he said, "Did you want to come with me?" And I made clear, wait, hold on, hold on. Who's driving who? And he said, no, we got a driver.

[00:03:25]I'll pick you up and then I'll take you to court. I had no idea he'd be showing up solo. Number one. [laughter] Number two, in that. And let me explain to you it.

[00:03:37]>> Yes, please do.

[00:03:38]>> I was sweating. I was sweating from the door to the car just looking at the fact that there was no cover on the car. It was a convertible. It was 90s something degrees. And I looked at him and I said, "There's no way." And I I just went with it. I said, "Mark, just go with it.

[00:03:56]He'll he'll he'll put the top down.

[00:03:58]You'll crank the air. You'll be fine."

[00:04:00]So, the first problem the first problem other than he's driving is that I spent like a minute literally looking over looking for the seat belt >> and then he pulled down and I haven't I haven't done a lap seat belt since I was like a child, right? I thought I thought science proved those were useless, right?

[00:04:20]>> Exactly. But but wait, Mark, more importantly, I'm looking at that that whip.

[00:04:25]>> What kind of car is it exactly?

[00:04:27]>> Well, I didn't take I didn't take notes, but I can tell you maybe maybe from what I'm about to tell you, you'll get clues.

[00:04:35]I insisted first and foremost, you must put the top down. And after he either didn't hear me or ignored me intentionally a few times, he eventually reluctantly pulled over and put the top down. I thought it was a package deal. I figure you put the top down and then you put the air on. So I spent a few minutes looking and I didn't see the buttons.

[00:04:55]Clearly they must have been hidden, the buttons that turn the air on. So I asked him, I says, "Does this car have air?"

[00:05:03]>> And he said two words.

[00:05:06]>> Nah. classic. [laughter] >> Well, it probably it didn't have air.

[00:05:12]That doesn't surprise me. But did it have any sort of button where you press it and then the car would start kind of like jumping up and down? [laughter] Because when I see that picture with the front end is higher than the back end.

[00:05:24]All I can see is like chich and ch and you know that scene.

[00:05:29]>> Yeah. something I didn't ask and candidly I couldn't speak much because the music and I'm using air quotes for music was so loud that I couldn't hear and I'm pretty sure it was his song that he recently released that we were listening to all the way there. I'm pretty sure we didn't.

[00:05:47]>> I'm just saying [laughter] it was wait.

[00:05:51]Oh, come on.

[00:05:52]>> Now a few bars >> that I in the sauce in the sauce some something like that. I don't know.

[00:05:57][laughter] But I can tell you that it was a nice experience because it was a fun story. But I when we got to court, it was the first time in 34 years of practice that when the media was all there and I think there's a clip actually >> with Antonio Brown singing in the >> explaining he was here on a procedural issue. Take a listen.

[00:06:15]>> He's been on house arrest since his arrest, but he was monitored by a private company because he was in Tampa.

[00:06:21]Now that he's back in Miami, the Miami house arrest can now service him.

[00:06:27]>> You're you're sweating.

[00:06:28]>> Look how sweat that was after I waved them off. They want I go, "No, I can't."

[00:06:32]First time I've ever walked away from the media until I could cool down. I'm telling you, it was 45 minutes in that convertible. Yes, he did eventually put the top down. But the hot summer Miami wind blowing in your face, taking my carefully quafted hair and moving it over so rapidly that I was dripping and not myself. It was brutal.

[00:06:55]>> You know why I'm not believing? You're whining a little bit about about the heat and the hair. You know, I don't believe you. Can we just go? [laughter] >> I just want to see the picture of Antonio in his court clothes. Can you just if we could just I just want to see it for another second, please. Please.

[00:07:10]>> Can I object? Can I object? You can prejuditial not Antonio. Okay. There's Antonio Brown in his court since his arrest.

[00:07:19]>> He's not sweating like you are. And I don't understand it on his side.

[00:07:23]>> That's because he's a warrior. He trains in the in the summertime. All right, enough about me. Stop. Yes. Anyway, so this airs Wednesday, tomorrow. I will be kneede when this is released in a deposition of the alleged victim.

[00:07:39]Finally, I get a chance to cross-examine him on his allegations and hopefully support our stand your ground motion so that this attempted seconddegree murder Mishagas can be dismissed and we can move on with our lives.

[00:07:52]>> I thought you did that like a month ago.

[00:07:55]>> We filed a stand your ground. Yes, but we haven't yet had the hearing. The hearing is supposed to take place on the 28th of July, but if I'm not ready to go, I am not going to have that hearing.

[00:08:07]And I have to be ready to go. And we have not been able to get all the witnesses in for depositions. We have depositions here in Florida. We get to pull witnesses in and cross-examine them and question them about everything.

[00:08:17]>> So many of them have lawyers. I have not been able to depose everybody yet. So, I'm not going to commit malpractice and and do the stand your ground motion without fully vetting all of the witnesses. Some could be very helpful.

[00:08:30]>> Can I ask you a little bit of a boring procedural question there? So, you know, because you know, we have speedy trial rules and stuff, right?

[00:08:37]>> Yeah.

[00:08:38]>> So, is it are those waved or out the window when you file a stand your ground motion to give you time to do all that?

[00:08:46]>> When you take a continuence, the minute any side, you know, takes a delay, when I say any side, when the defense takes a delay of any sort, like, "Hi, judge, we need more time. We'll take a continuence." That waves your right to a speedy trial. The only way you get one is if you then demand it by filing it.

[00:09:01]Otherwise, they have all the time in the world. We're not rushing this thing.

[00:09:04]>> You're not. Yeah. No, no point. Because he gets to go wherever he wants and do whatever he wants and drive that great.

[00:09:11]>> Listen, he's up for the Hall of Fame next year. The more this shadow is over him, um the less likely he is to get people really, you know, when you're facing 30 years with a 20-year minimum mandatory. We need to get that off of his shoulders. And so, we're eager to.

[00:09:27]>> Okay. I'm a proponent of your stand your ground law. I like it. I'm glad you're uh batting for him, going to bat for him, and he's got the best that there is. And and one last thing, because that car just makes me want to break into that scene from um one of my favorite movies, My Cousin Vinnie. Yes. When uh Marissa Toé goes, "No, the defense is wrong. That's not a 64 Tempest." Like, [laughter] >> I love it. You're so good at that. Oh, I applaud you. I can't get enough. All right, let's Can we talk about dead children? I think we kind of have to do that.

[00:09:58]>> We've got to segue into into that. This is going to be one heck of a case. And it reminds me of a case that we talked about just a few weeks ago.

[00:10:05]>> Yes.

[00:10:06]>> Precious land because this is a case where a mother has murdered her three young children. This is really hard for for me to discuss. I'm sure it's going to be hard for you to discuss.

[00:10:18]>> Well, let's get out the facts. Right.

[00:10:19]Happened in Massachusetts. Um Lindsay Clancy. Um they're picking the jury right now. She's charged with murdering her three children ages three, five, and seven months a barely. Barely.

[00:10:33]>> Right. Right. So, it's it's not a who done it. She did it. She did it. They're arguing that she's not guilty by reason of insanity. She's not criminally responsible for this.

[00:10:44]>> And >> what do you think, Janna? Let's uh you want to talk about some of the facts that So, why don't you Well, you want you want to take the prosecution side or the defense side?

[00:10:54]Well, that's you know what? I would take the prosecution side in this case because yeah, only because I just hate it. Like I can't it's really hard for me to wrap my mind around any mother for any reason to your children.

[00:11:07]>> So wait, so let's set it up. There's two prongs when you're arguing insanity. The first part is that she did suffer from a mental defect or disease. That's number one. And as the prosecutor, are you conceding that based upon her history, which I know we'll we'll discuss in a moment. And then the second part, we're staying general right now. The second part is whether she knew right from wrong. Are there any facts that you can point to? Like the person who robs a bank may be absolutely cuckoo for cocoa puffs, but if they put something over the license tag, oh well, why would they do that? Because they knew it was wrong.

[00:11:36]Why do they wear something covering their face? Because they knew it was wrong. What facts can you point to as the prosecutor to say she knew that this was wrong? Something. Here's where the prosecution is going to have the easiest part of their job when they're trying to prove that she knew the difference between right and wrong. They're going to show that day, which is a an interesting day when you analyze what she did because they're going to bring in people who had conversations or some sort of communication with the defendant that day where she seemed perfectly normal. For example, she went to the doctor said, "Oh, no problem." She wasn't slurring a word. She seemed perfectly normal. She asked for a muralax for the kid. Like she's just having a normal mom check. But okay, so number one. Number two, here's where the digital evidence I do think helps them for the most part.

[00:12:29]>> They're going to prosecution is going to claim that she planned this. And if you're planning, you know the difference between right and wrong >> because she made her husband do something unusual and he she asked him to go get takeout from a from a place that was a little farther from home than where they would normally get takeout.

[00:12:47]But [clears throat] again, that's not the that's not >> She went on Google Maps >> to determine how long this food run was going to take him >> so that she could commit these murders and then she was going to kill herself after and she wanted to make sure she had enough time. The digital evidence, the phone evidence is going to clearly support that.

[00:13:14]>> I want you to play the role of the pro.

[00:13:15]Keep playing the role of the prosecutor.

[00:13:16]And now just argue why the suicide is significant. Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, right? The fact that she wanted to kill herself or attempted to kill herself. By the way, she's a quadriplegic. She she didn't succeed in killing herself. I think she jumped out the window and she expected the ice to be mushy. It wasn't. It was hard and frozen. So now she's in a wheelchair the rest of her life. Add that to the stuff she has to live with. But make the argument as to why the fact that she tried to kill herself favors the prosecution.

[00:13:45]>> All right. So, here's the probably the strangest fact of all.

[00:13:49]>> The prosecution is going to contend because this is all they have. Like, look, this is not a situation where she had a lover and she needed to get rid of her kids. Like, we've seen that and Susan Smith, you remember that years ago. This is not that. Mhm.

[00:14:00]>> This is a case where the prosecution wants to show that she wanted to kill herself and in order to compel her own self to take her own life, in order to be committed to that end, >> she first needed to murder her three children because that is the only way that she would make sure that she did what she set out to do.

[00:14:23]>> You know what? That's that's not what I was going for. And you just made a good argument. I think that the the argument that they'll probably make, although that's a great one that you just came up with. I didn't think about that is she wanted to take herself out because she knew what she had done was so heinous and wrong and she wanted to avoid prosecution. She wanted to avoid living with what she had just done as opposed to what we saw in the Precious Bland case. Um, and some others where the the woman is still like cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs. She's she doesn't Why are you guys here? What what's the police here for? what what you know although in the Precious Bland case she did try to kill herself and the argument is going to be because the voices the same voices that >> voices too >> right commanded her to kill her three kids and Precious Bland commanded her to kill you know herself. So it's going to be just interesting. Now can I jump on the defense side since we just heard from you so eloquently and brilliantly?

[00:15:15]>> Oh yeah.

[00:15:16]>> Okay. So like unlike the Andrea Yates case and some others where they say let's come up with something after the fact, right? And say this is what you're suffering with. There was no evidence like in the Andrea Yates case that like in this case psychiatric treatments, hospitalizations, a medical history, uh changes in the medication she reported these these intrusive thoughts, hallucinations, voices she had, um treating doctors. I mean, there's a lawsuit against the um hospital for failing to treat her properly.

[00:15:53]>> She went for help. She held out her hand saying, "I didn't cause this postpartum psychosis. I need help." And I think they did the best they could at their level of awareness, but it wasn't good enough.

[00:16:07]>> No, obvious obviously not. She's suing for malpractice. And I think on behalf of the children, there's a wrongful death suit. um also for the way that she was treated. Now look, I think whatever when she finally does get a jury, people can relate to the whole postpartum things. If they have any women on the jury who's ever had a children, ever had children, they might relate. Not every woman suffers from it, but I think it's a bigger stretch to to ask jurors, look, this is what she was suffering from. She had postpartum depression. She was on medication. They wrongfully called it bipolar disorder. And then it resulted in this because Mark, if I'm prosecuting this case, >> number one, it's going to be so hard for the jury to sit through this evidence, but as a prosecutor, I think they almost have to not reenact it.

[00:16:55]>> But you have to say to a jury, here's how many seconds, count how many seconds it took to to uh esphyxiate the life of an eight-month old.

[00:17:04]>> I'm jumping out of my seat. Objection.

[00:17:06]Objection. Sympathy.

[00:17:09]If you're gonna talk No. If you're going to talk about planning, if you're going to talk about knowing the difference between right and wrong, >> I don't choice do they have.

[00:17:16]>> You're right. Maybe I don't object because you know what? The judge is probably going to let it in if it goes to planning. How each child and and she didn't apparently use the exercise straps like a certain way. She like tied them around which shows extra planning to your point, right? But here's the question just from I'm just talking to you as a human being. Put your lawyer hat down for one second. Just for one second.

[00:17:38]>> Can't do it. I can't do it. Okay. You won't do it. I'll try.

[00:17:41]>> You won't do it.

[00:17:42]>> I'll try.

[00:17:42]>> I mean, the the ace in the hole before I ask this question to you is the husband.

[00:17:48]>> The husband lost his three precious offspring and he is supporting her.

[00:17:55]He is saying that this woman was not in her right frame of mind. She loved those kids. She would never do anything like this. So I ask you, Janna, you're going to convict her? You think that she's a murderer? you will give her life in prison over this. I'm just asking you and I'm not giving my position away. I'm playing devil's advocate.

[00:18:14]>> I I just have a tough time maybe with my lawyer hat off. I have a tough time >> with these types of cases with the with the mother killing the children type cases. I had a tough time with Andrea Yates. I had a tough time with Susan Smith. I had a tough time with um Precious Bland, right? who's I if I recall her husband I think supported her as as well but yes quote me on that I think he did >> that helps >> you know and I guess >> who knows them better than their spouses go on >> yeah that that is true that is true but do you also think again I'm I'm really playing devil's advocate here >> would a lawyer say to a spouse and I'm going to farfield but work with me >> go we like that >> would a lawyer ever say to a spouse Listen, dude. If you don't support her, they'll come after you for not alerting the authorities sooner that your wife was batshit crazy and your children were in danger.

[00:19:16]>> Do you know that at first I was like, J, and then I went >> I mean, >> at a minimum, maybe not criminally, but child protective services, like child, right? No, you know, in a closer examination, but but my gut tells me I don't believe so. I think that this is really pure and that they were getting the help that she was or attempting to get the help that she needed and they just failed her.

[00:19:42]>> Well, it really it's tough on the on the medical community, too. Could you imagine? We don't want to get to a place because this type of mental illness is prevalent and properly treated. You can have a perfectly normal and wonderful life. We don't want doctors saying, "I'm not going to treat you because I don't want to be held accountable if you go off the deep end and you blame me."

[00:20:03]>> Right? I mean, we don't want a whole uh segment of society who can't get treatment for mental illness because you've so scared the doctors or their their insurance premiums go so skyhigh that >> before we leave this topic, I I've got to do this. I I want you to immediately now take off your prosecutor hat, put your defense lawyer hat on, give me a little taste of your closing, the best part of it, the highlights, the stuff they're going to show on the news. Go, Janna. Go.

[00:20:30]>> This mother loved her children. She loved her children so much so that she sought medical help for what she knew was not right. She knew these feelings she had postpartum were not proper. She knew these feelings could be harmful.

[00:20:47]So, she did the responsible thing and went to the professionals, ladies and gentlemen. She didn't self-medicate. She didn't go to the herbal aisle at the Piggly Wiggly and get some St. John's wart. She went to the professionals and the professionals failed her. So if you're going to blame anyone for this type of psychotic break, you cannot blame the mother who was a victim of the pharmarmacology who was a victim of the medical professionals who failed to properly diagnose, treat, and medicate this mother who was crying out for help with every doctor appointment, with every doctor visit, with every ounce she had in her until that day when she could no longer help herself. No one could. on this fateful day. Ladies and gentlemen, you cannot put this woman in prison for the rest of her life.

[00:21:39]>> So good. So good.

[00:21:41]>> Well, >> God, I wish I get in trouble in your town. Oh my goodness. I would love to >> You just got to walk against the light to get in trouble in my town, Mark.

[00:21:49][laughter] >> That is so good. Thank you. That was I really, as much as I hated the topic, I loved hearing your analysis. Thank you.

[00:21:57]That was great. And now we get to talk about Casey Anthony in the next block. I mean, wow. I mean, did you discuss that case back in the day? Were you uh >> Oh my gosh. So all over. I mean, talk about Right. Yeah. We'll save it for Well, we'll we'll come back from the break and we're going to dive into this 15-year-old case. Feels like it was yesterday and so very wrong on many.

[00:22:19]>> Stay tuned. We're talking Casey Anthony.

[00:22:21]We'll be back in just a moment.

[00:22:34]Welcome back to Positively [music] Legal. Almost to the week, 15 years ago, a jury found that Casey Anthony was not guilty of firstdegree murder, aggravated child abuse, and aggravated manslaughter in the death of her 2-year-old daughter, Kaye. Now Mark, we both covered this case extensively back in 2011. I which seems like yesterday, but it was 15 years ago. Yes.

[00:23:02]>> And now it's time to take a look back.

[00:23:06]>> Before we do, can I ask you I I we've never spoken about this.

[00:23:11]>> Were you shocked at the outcome as much as I was?

[00:23:16]>> Yes, I was shocked at the outcome. But later on, we're going to discuss why the jurors did what they did. and and I do want to talk about about that and proof beyond a reasonable doubt and what that really means. But this case was shocking because if you're just if if you were a casual watcher of this case, I I I think you you'd be astounded by how the jury came to the conclusion that they did because if you remember here the the basic facts, right? We have Casey Anthony. She was a young mother. We saw a lot of pictures and heard a lot of testimony about her being like this young partyier. She had a two-year-old, beautiful little two-year-old daughter, Kaylee Anthony, and she did not seem like the most responsible parent.

[00:24:01]Beginning with the fact that what we learned, there she is, little Kaylee Anthony. What we learned almost immediately was that this precious child was missing for a month before anybody alerted the authorities that she had gone missing. And in it was uh Kaylee Anony's own grandmother, Casey's mother, who first alerted the authorities that her baby granddaughter was uh missing.

[00:24:29]Let's do S. What is that? Two.

[00:24:31]>> My daughter finally admitted that the baby's in the store.

[00:24:36]I need to find her.

[00:24:37]>> Your daughter admitted that your the baby is where?

[00:24:40]>> You said it took her a month ago that my daughter's been looking for. I told you my daughter was missing for a month. I just found her today, but I can't find my granddaughter. She just admitted to me that she's been trying to find her herself.

[00:24:55]There's something wrong. I found my daughter's car today and it smells like there's been a dead body in the damn car.

[00:25:01]>> Okay. What is the three-year-old's name?

[00:25:03]Kaye. C A Y L E. Anthony.

[00:25:07]>> Wow. Bringing back memories, Janna.

[00:25:09]Jeez.

[00:25:10]>> Remember that was played every single day and night.

[00:25:15]>> Wow. and the the trauma that this this grandmother is reliving at trial because she knows you can tell in her voice, Mark, she knows that there's something really wrong. This isn't a missing child case. She know the fact that she mentions to the 911 operator that she was in her daughter's car, found her daughter's car, and it smelled like a dead body in there. This woman knew, she just didn't know how. She didn't know when she woke up, but she knew that she was never going to see her grandbaby again. But it always seemed that both of them like worshiped the ground she walked on. She wore the pants in that family and they were willing to do whatever it took to cover for her, including but not limited to when they found chloroform searches um on the computer. Um you know, grandma took the fall, mom said, "No, I I did that." You know, um there was also a discussion about >> duct tape. Remember the duct tape over Kayle's mouth? Yeah. Um Jeff Ashton, the uh prosecutor, discusses that in SA 3 in his closing argument. Let's listen to that.

[00:26:21]>> There wasn't one piece of duct tape placed over Kayle's face. There were three overlapping at angles placed over her face.

[00:26:33]Why do you need three?

[00:26:38]What does three do that one does not?

[00:26:43]You need three because your purpose is not to simply silence the child. Your purpose is to make sure the child cannot breathe. There's just no reason to put duct tape over the face of a child, living or dead.

[00:27:06]And that, ladies and gentlemen, is proof beyond a reasonable doubt of how Kaye died.

[00:27:14]>> Says him. Um, what did you make of the duct tape, Janna? So, I remember during the trial, I think one of the defense witnesses had said, "Well, the duct tape had gotten there because the the the baby had been out in the elements, I guess, for a while, and the duct tape just kind of blew, you know, like like brambles or whatever in the wind. It just blew. And then it just happened to land, you know, somewhere on where that child's face once was. I think I think the remains were >> skeletal. She drew some stuff on there, apparently, if I remember correctly."

[00:27:46]And again, you never know what's real, what's not. But wasn't Wasn't something drawn? Maybe a heart or something. Am I >> Oh, there was there was some kind of weird weird thing in there.

[00:27:55]>> And and I just thought that that was a ridiculous explanation. And when you take I mean, there were quite a few ridiculous explanations, not the least of which, if you remember. So, so this this grown woman child that these parents had coddled and, you know, covered up for her entire life and enabled or whatever they did, >> the first person she threw under the bus was her own father.

[00:28:20]>> Oh, sure.

[00:28:20]>> And trying to throw people off the ch uh trail to say that, "Oh, no, no, no, no.

[00:28:25]Yeah, no, she's missing." But you know why she's missing? Cuz my father drowned her in the pool. Or he accidentally drowned her in the pool. He's trying to cover it up. No, wait. my father molested her and he was so ridden with guilt that he had to drown her in the pool. Like all these third-party defenses from her then attorney Jose Bayas, which was not only I I I I think was just so insulting to that man and and fortunately the judge did put the kibos on being able to go down that road because I don't think it was supported by even a modicum of evidence. But this this grown child did that to the parents who enabled her her entire life.

[00:29:00]Speaking of Joseé Bayz, this launched his career. Had lunch with him um at some point to discuss this case after um I could share some of those things.

[00:29:10]Let's go to Sat 4. Let's get a taste of his closing.

[00:29:15]To find her guilty of any single charge, any single one of them, you have to have an abiding conviction of guilt. That's what you have to have inside of you.

[00:29:26]You have to know that this case was proven. You have to know that these facts were proven and you don't have that.

[00:29:36]>> Yeah. Part of it was I had really I I don't think that I was that kind to him when I was on air discussing the case.

[00:29:44]Part of it is because probably this was the you know his first biggest case and I could see how insecure he was at times. Um, and I also, I don't know, I was fairly critical and it was nice to to have lunch with him and just talk things through. And um, I mean, he's he certainly has a tremendous career as a result.

[00:30:06]>> You know why he won this case? First of all, let me just tell our audience as criminal defense lawyers, you literally win some and lose some. And sometimes you win the cases you should have lost and you lose the cases you should have win, you should have won. And that sometimes just happens and we don't love it, right? We want to win the cases we should win. We want to win the cases we should lose. He won this case knowing full well he should have lost because I think either he lacked the experience or he just lacked the finesse to care that the arguments he was making were utterly ridiculous. and he h and what I mean by that is you know we have a dead baby we have duct tape we have a mother who didn't report her own child missing for 30 days and never her grandmother had to reporter her missing we had every reason in the book oh Zany the nanny we had the nanny who we knew right who wasn't a real person we had we had pictures of her partying while her daughter was missing we have a dead body smell in the daughter's car but ladies and gentlemen of the jury we don't know how Kaylee Anthony died. We don't know when she died. And for those two reasons, ignore all the circumstantial evidence that this mother is the only one or maybe somebody at her behest had this child killed or killed this child. ignore all that because the child wasn't found until she was a skeleton that and because the client doesn't have to testify. You can't prove beyond a reasonable doubt that it was my client who murdered her child or didn't accidentally kill her and then throw her away like garbage.

[00:31:44]>> Janna, if that's what he said, that's pretty good stuff coming out of your mouth. That sounds credible. The truth of the matter is the jurors do have to know how she died because they have to decide, okay, how did the child die? So, is it manslaughter? Is it seconddegree first degree murder?

[00:32:02]>> They had a they had a manslaughter option.

[00:32:05]>> I know, but you don't just go by default and say, "Look, we have no idea, so we'll just go with manslaughter." You need to know how it happened. And these jurors didn't know. Let's remind everybody though about how people reacted to the verdict back in 2011. Sat six. A lot of people were not happy.

[00:32:22]Let's take a look.

[00:32:23]>> Not guilty.

[00:32:34]LOOKS LIKE THERE'S MORE MEDIA THAN PEOPLE.

[00:32:40]>> NO.

[00:32:41]>> YEAH. People freaked. I think Nancy Grace is still grabbing her chest, [laughter] you know, >> clutching her pearls because the common sense factor. Mark, this jury lacked the common sense factor. And how many times, but you can't count on both hands.

[00:32:56]>> How many times have you heard a prosecutor, anybody giving closing arguments saying don't saying don't leave your common sense at the door and that's kind of their way of saying fill in the blanks, people, fill in the blanks, >> right? But they you can't take those leaps. Let's look at the famous not guilty verdict sought number five. And that should bring back some memories.

[00:33:17]Certainly does for me.

[00:33:20]As to the charge of first-degree murder, verdict as to count one, we the jury find the defendant not guilty. So say we all. Dated at Orlando, Orange County, Florida. Winning the lottery of July, 2011. Signed for person.

[00:33:35]>> I wonder if she thought >> the charge of aggravated child abuse.

[00:33:38]Verdict is to count two. We the jury find the defendant not guilty. So say we all. Did it at Orlando, Orange County, Florida. This fifth day of July, 2011.

[00:33:48]assigned four person as to the charge of aggravated manslaughter of a child. Verdict is to count three. We the jury find the defendant not guilty. So say we all dated at Orlando, Orange County, Florida this fifth day of >> ticket to freedom. That's the greatest those are the greatest words you can hear >> as a lawyer as a defendant right I mean Janna that is >> so heavy. I wonder if she expected it. I wonder if she >> thought that would happen. No. did not.

[00:34:19]She did not expect it. And part of the irony is if you're a young mother and you didn't have anything to do with your child's untimely death, >> wouldn't you want to know?

[00:34:31]>> Wouldn't you want to know what happened to my kid? Now, forget the fact that you your kid's missing for a month and you don't do [ __ ] about it. Let's just suspend that for a second.

[00:34:41]>> How do we suspend that? That's what you want to know.

[00:34:43]>> That That's enough for me. That's proof.

[00:34:45]I'm kidding. But in the court of public opinion, that's proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Not in the court of law, >> sensible a sensible person.

[00:34:51]>> Thank you so much.

[00:34:52]>> You know, and now she apparently because and might be premature to talk about this, but she's I I think she works as like a some sort of investigator. She works for an investigator. You're an investigator.

[00:35:03]>> She lives with the lead investigator >> from her case.

[00:35:06]>> From her case, and he was also involved in the OJ case. Listen, you've got you've got an investigator right there.

[00:35:12]Let's go find out what really happened.

[00:35:14]Right. You don't want to know. Like, but who the hell would hire her? I just want to say this.

[00:35:18]>> Who's going to hire? You didn't even You don't know. Well, you do know how your child died. You just got away with that murder. You're going to have to take it to the grave. You're going to have to take Well, technically, well, wait a minute. Let's go off on a little tangent.

[00:35:30]>> Technically, she doesn't have to take this to the grave. She was acquitted.

[00:35:34]She could come out tomorrow and say, "Guess what? If I did it, you know, OJ the sequel." Right. She could do that, couldn't she?

[00:35:43]>> Right. Right. Right. that life would not be grand for her. I want to hear from the jurors because some of them spoke.

[00:35:50]Sat seven juror Jennifer Ford spoke about the lack of hard evidence. Let's hear from her.

[00:35:56]>> The original vote for the aggravated manslaughter was six to six.

[00:36:00]>> Correct.

[00:36:00]>> And which side of the six were you on?

[00:36:02]>> Um the manslaughter. I >> So originally you thought that she was guilty of manslaughter or could be guilty of >> could be. and I wanted to investigate it further to see if it fit based on the evidence that we were given.

[00:36:14]>> So, what convinced you and the five others to switch your votes and vote for not guilty against them?

[00:36:18]>> I think everyone will tell you the same thing. It's just lack of hard evidence.

[00:36:22]It's just like I said, the the duct tape and the chloroform and things like that, you could if you took a hard a good hard look at it, you could kind of there was so much there was a lot of doubt surrounding all of those certain things.

[00:36:33]So, um there's not enough to make anything stick. So, you don't necessarily think she's innocent, but you just feel you don't have enough proof to find her guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, >> right? I I I don't know either way.

[00:36:45]Like, I mean, it's obviously has not been proven that she's innocent, but it certainly hasn't been proven that she's guilty.

[00:36:50]>> You know, to her credit, Janna, she's doing her job. You know, these jurors who know what the public wants them to do, but in spite of that, all of them unanimously, 12 independently and collectively did not have the dots connected. They didn't know how it happened. Some of them, I heard, had tears in their eyes because they're going, "Can you believe what we're about to do here?" They I don't know that they felt good about it, but they had to follow the law.

[00:37:21]You don't necessarily have to connect every dot. If you have a hundred dots and you connect 85, that's pretty good.

[00:37:31]>> But what if it doesn't prove what happened and you still don't know? And they threw out so much stuff. Did the child die somewhere else and the father did something to the child? There were so many theories thrown out there that the jurors just went, "Well, we just don't know, >> right?" And this is and this is how you get away with murder. And I have to ask this, and I don't know if the four person on that jury ever came out and spoke. I was looking for that. But here's my thing. You go back into the jury room, you take an initial vote.

[00:38:02]This woman right here said it was six and six, right? Six of us thought guilty of manslaughter, which was not the murder charge >> at first, but so what?

[00:38:10]>> Right? Six and six. Then you have to wonder, did the four person wrangle not guilty verdicts out of them?

[00:38:19]How did it go after that? Well, I would love it to be a fly in the wall in the jury room.

[00:38:23]>> We don't know. But let's listen to the alternate for what it's worth. He was there and he listened, right? And these jurors were sequestered, by the way. So, which would turned out to be a good thing because if they weren't, >> they would have seen the avalanche. I mean, this was the hottest thing. This made careers out of people. Let's look at S number eight. Um he says two words that I never thought anyone would ever say. Good mother. Sad eight.

[00:38:52]>> Mr. Ucler, good morning. You say you agree with this verdict and that you too would have voted to acquit. Why?

[00:39:00]>> Well, there was a a number of reasons.

[00:39:03]Um the first of all, you know, there was so much reasonable doubt. Uh the prosecution, you know, did not present the evidence that showed that, you know, that Kaye had been murdered. Uh they didn't show uh a motive of why, you know, from their own from their own witnesses, you know, this really nice this really good mother, >> you know, had killed her child.

[00:39:28]>> And then fin and and then finally they did not show, you know, how Kaye had died.

[00:39:36]What do you think of that?

[00:39:37]>> First of all, I think they should give jurors IQ tests before they pick them.

[00:39:42]And number two, >> no reason. We know many are not bright.

[00:39:44]Doesn't mean that they're all not bright. Number >> or dumb, but some are. Go on.

[00:39:49]>> He did hit on the one thing. I think if there was somebody wrangling all those jurors to come to the conclusion they did, the fact that they couldn't prove how the child died, left open the question that the child could have died accidentally and the child could have died.

[00:40:06]>> There we go.

[00:40:07]>> You know, even if you know, could have rolled over. I had a case one time where a parent accidentally rolled over on a child while they slept and the child died. Um, so maybe they because they could not figure that out. But here again, that there are plenty of times, I'm trying to think where you don't have the actual cause of death and jurors still come to a guilty verdict. I know it's happened. I'm just can't think off the top of my head.

[00:40:35]>> Right.

[00:40:35]>> But in this case, maybe because it was she was just such a young child, they thought anything could have happened and therefore come back with not guilty. Now, now Casey again, who who opened up recently her own private investigation firm about >> 40 minutes away from my office here in West Palm. I'm in Fort Lauderdale. Um, she's kind of laid under the radar.

[00:41:00]She's very low profile. You don't hear much about her, but in March of 2017, she did surface and there was she did an audio interview. I think it's Sat 9.

[00:41:10]Let's hear what she had to say.

[00:41:14]your understanding. How did she die?

[00:41:16]>> I don't know.

[00:41:16]>> You don't know. Something about drowning possibly.

[00:41:20]>> Everyone else has their theories. I don't know. I don't give a [ __ ] about what anybody thinks about me. I don't care about that.

[00:41:27]>> I never will.

[00:41:28]>> I'm okay with myself. I sleep pretty good at night.

[00:41:33]>> She doesn't know. I mean, she doesn't know. She doesn't seem like she cares, Janna.

[00:41:38]>> No, she doesn't seem like she cares. She doesn't give a [ __ ] what anybody thinks about her. she sleeps well at night.

[00:41:44]That's not going to win friends and influence people, you know, if she's going to try to have a career and a and a life ahead of her. She should be crying big tears. Her daughter is dead and I know it's been 15 years and if you believe her, she doesn't know how it happened, which I think is utter [ __ ] but she she's just an unlikable person. And I she she needs to go away. Please don't write a book.

[00:42:07]Please are there Did they make make a Netflix about her yet? Because I hope they don't. Did they? you know, >> I don't know pro if they haven't, you know, you know, they probably will.

[00:42:16]>> Um, >> what did we learn from this case? You know, there's a few things I'll start off with. You know, the media didn't always get it right. You know, they were sure, I mean, every one of us, I mean, certainly I did thought with certainty that this was going to be a a guilty verdict and dead wrong on that, >> I guess.

[00:42:41]Yeah, I think everybody with two brain cells to rub together thought it was going to be a guilty verdict of something, but Jose Bayas got to the one nerve of that collective jury, whatever that was.

[00:42:55]>> Now you're giving him credit. So, is it is it because here's the question. Is it because of his arguments or in spite of his arguments they found her not guilty?

[00:43:08]Wow, that's a really good question.

[00:43:11]>> You got to give him credit. I mean, he made the right arguments. He said, you know, you don't know. There's reasonable doubt and and and apparently one of the jurors commented that he was the only one who had emotion and felt anything in that trial. Right. I'm surprised to hear that, but that was one of the juror's perspectives. So, he did a fine enough job. He didn't just wear nice suits.

[00:43:35]Apparently, he did a nice enough job and he certainly got the outcome that he was looking for against all odds.

[00:43:42]>> A classic reasonable doubt argument. And I think the lesson here is when you appeal to it just has to be one nerve, one chord with a jury, you're going to win or at least get a hung jury like these. This jury did the exactly the opposite of what anybody else looking in was going to do. So, >> there's one juror who said uh and I quote, "I think about this case at least once every single day." He told People magazine in an interview, he said that it wasn't until after um he was done being sequestered that he realized that the whole world was watching. They actually then created a bubble. You know, you wonder if it gets in and apparently it didn't. He did not know that the world was watching this case.

[00:44:28]And he said that he's the one by the way who said that Jose Bios was the only one quote in the room who seemed like he cared. So that passion resonated. I teach my law students you got to have passion, right? You got to really care.

[00:44:42]And he believed that his client was innocent whether he really felt it or not. He looked like he did to the jurors anyway. And he said, this is what this juror said. Every time I see her face or hear her name, I get a pit in my stomach. He said it all comes flooding back. I think about all those pictures of the baby's remains and they showed us in court. I remember Casey, I even remember the smell of the courtroom.

[00:45:07]>> Oh, wow.

[00:45:08]>> So, he's saying that when they were about to come out with their verdict, he said, "We sat there for a few minutes and we were like, "Holy crap, we are letting her go free." He told People magazine this in 2011. Everyone was just stunned at what we were about to do. He said, "One woman juror asked him, "Are you okay with this?" And he said, "Hell no, but what else can we do?" We promised to follow the law. He says, "My decision haunts me to this day." He said, "If I think if I could do it all over again, I'd push to convince her of one of the lesser charges."

[00:45:49]Wow, Janna, >> that's actually a shame. I feel [clears throat] for that person. And I gotta tell you, Mark, if that trial was happening today, Yes.

[00:45:58]>> Right. Not in 2011, today, >> it would be a totally different verdict.

[00:46:02]I'm >> Why?

[00:46:04]>> Why?

[00:46:05]>> What changed? Because I think what changed is that jurors now substitute their own common sense in lie of when you have a case that if you when you have a case where you're arguing uh beyond a reasonable doubt to the letter when you're taking an exacto knife to that concept I think when it jurors will will find a way to override it and go with their gut.

[00:46:30]>> I'm going to disagree with you. Yeah, I'm going to disagree with you. I I I don't think anything has changed in 15 years. I think that jurors um still start off or they're supposed to start off with a presumption of innocence. And unless there's hard evidence, which one of the jurors said was missing, >> they can't know exactly what happened.

[00:46:50]And that's reasonable doubt. And that means a guilty person can walk.

[00:46:54]>> I know we have to go to another segment.

[00:46:55]I just got to challenge you on one thing.

[00:46:57]>> Go ahead.

[00:46:57]>> Our good friend Mark Garos.

[00:46:59]>> Yes.

[00:46:59]>> God Peterson. What was Lacy's cause of death?

[00:47:03]Don't know it, do you? Jurors don't know it either, do they? But they convicted him. So that evidence in that case far and that was before 2011.

[00:47:14]>> We can get into that again. But I I think it's different. Apples to oranges.

[00:47:17]But good point. And uh anytime you can mention Gyaragos, that's a good thing.

[00:47:22][laughter] All right. So what are we going to talk about in the next block?

[00:47:24]So people stick around. Janna. Uh what we're going to talk about the ne Oh, guys, please [laughter] do not go anywhere because we have a case involving a kitty cat and a bank robbery that you're not going to want to miss.

[00:47:40]It's also sparked an idea I have for a quote unquote crime that I intend to commit. We're also going to go off the record with one of my favorite segments in the show. We're going to do both of those things and then be a little uh gratuitous when we come back. Don't go anywhere.

[00:48:00][music] Welcome back to Positively [music] Legal. And it's my favorite segment because we get to go off the record. But before we do, >> there's a story that was made for my co-host because it involves a cat because only one of us in Positively Legal Cats and it's going to be um her and it involves bank robbery which she also enjoys. So John, why don't you set this up? Yeah. Two of your favorites.

[00:48:33]>> All right. First, just let me say it's not that I like cat. Don't get me wrong, I do. I have rescued several cats and many of them are still under my roof.

[00:48:42]Um, so I'm sort of a quintessential crazy cat lady. But here's here's an interesting crime that was committed with a cat. So there's a guy in Maryland.

[00:48:54]>> He wanted to rob a bank. Okay, that's happened. People do that. What do you do when you want to rob a bank, right? You get a little mask. You get a gun or a fake gun. You get a bag to put all the dough and whatever. You do all that. But no, no, no, no, no. Not this guy. No, no, no. He first went to like the local animal shelter and he cased the joint.

[00:49:12]He cased the local animal shelter.

[00:49:14]>> Well, you don't just rob the animal shelter. You got to case it. Sure.

[00:49:17]>> No. Yeah, you can't.

[00:49:18]>> So far, that's normal, right?

[00:49:20]>> And then one thing led to another and he ended up >> stealing a little kitten, a cute little tuxedo kitten named Magnolia >> before the bank robbery. What?

[00:49:32]>> Before the bank robbery. Yes. Before the bank robbery. Because Mark, because you when you want to soften up a bank teller and have her give you all the money in the drawer, what do you do? You walk in, you tell her to hold your cat. Hey, hold my cat, would you? And then while she was holding the cat, >> that's not a thing. You can't do that.

[00:49:52]>> It is now. While she was holding the cat, he wrote a nice letter. Give me a little give me all your money letter.

[00:49:59]And then he slid that over to the bank teller. And while the bank teller was holding little Magnolia, she ended up having to give him some money. But here's the here's the good news.

[00:50:10]>> Magnolia is safe and was saved.

[00:50:14]>> Wait, wait, hold on. We start with that, not the bank teller. You don't want to start with the bank teller. [laughter] Was anybody shot? Did anybody have a heart attack? No, the bank teller is okay. Okay, go ahead. Yeah, fingers you start with the cat. Yeah. Little Magnolia was brought back to the shelter and uh believe it or not, now this is something. This is a real cat caper.

[00:50:36]>> Little Magnolia is still available for adoption >> for the next bank robbery.

[00:50:42]>> She's going to need a very special family, right? Because she might have a little little cat monkshot. Like those are things that she's going to need a lot of love to get over. So >> a career criminal canine. She she's really she knows how to behave at bank robberies, right? You know, right? So, if if you're interested in adopting Magnolia, you can send an email to rescue beltsvilles.net.

[00:51:06]That's ble ts b i l ecats.net.

[00:51:11]Little Magnolia needs a good home.

[00:51:15]>> Well, let's hope she finds a good home after all the trauma that she's been through. Oh my goodness.

[00:51:20]>> Poor little accessory after the cat.

[00:51:23]>> Can we adopt the bank clerk? Is anybody able to do that? No, we don't give a crap. Yeah. All right, fair enough. All right, time for closing rants or arguments or whatever we call this segment. Um, Janna, who's going first this uh week?

[00:51:37]>> I guess I guess I'll go first because interestingly, my rant is kind of on point like when we're talking about juries who got it wrong. But I'm not talking about a criminal case. I'm talking about the two civil cases that were filed by one Eugene Carol against one Donald J. Trump. Now, last month, while the Supreme Court was doing out decisions, it refused to hear the appeal by team Trump regarding the second case filed by Carol, which resulted in a $5 million award for which Donald Trump wrote a check last week with interest.

[00:52:16]I'll get to that more in a minute, so sit tight. First, let's talk about how one woman was how one woman was able to win over $88 million between two absurd cases alleging facts for which there was no actual proof on account of the event at the heart of them both occurred when most of us were still wearing leg warmers and getting perms. Case one filed in November 2019. New York state court later moved to federal court.

[00:52:49]Carol sued Trump because Trump denied Carol's claim that Trump sexually assaulted her in a dressing room circa 199 something. Even she could not recall the date, only the decade. Basically, Trump called her a liar. That's the whole case. It sat frozen for years fighting over presidential immunity.

[00:53:11]didn't go to trial until 2024. And tada, the jury spit out an $83 million verdict because Trump exercised his right to deny what he claimed was [ __ ] Case number two, filed the literal day the New York's Adult Survivor Act took effect, November 2022. That law opened a one-year window letting people sue over sexual assault claims that would otherwise be timebarred, no matter how old. When that door opened, Carol walked through it, adding the sexual battery claim she'd never been allowed to bring before, plus a fresh defamation claim over the new denial. This one went to trial first in 2023. That's the $5 million verdict. You keeping up? Okay, here's the part that gets buried. These claims were born from an alleged dressing room encounter almost 30 years old. No physical evidence, no contemporaneous police report. She never went to the police at all. What the jury had was her word and two of her besties words. The court wrongfully allowed, in my opinion, prior bad act evidence of Trump talking smack with Billy Bush about brash encounters with women. And that's about it. That's the case. And notably, the jury itself didn't find rape under New York's legal definition.

[00:54:38]So, you take this true she said he said case, not the kind we see in cases of consensual sex. No. No. Donald Trump flat out denied ever knowing her. And yet, a group of nine people handed Carol 5 million bucks anyway. How does this happen? Were these jurors plain dumb or dangerously defiant? Here's my theory.

[00:55:01]I'm coining it anti-nullification.

[00:55:05]Jury nullification is when a jury ignores overwhelming evidence of guilt because they want a defendant to walk despite the law. We legal analysts are worried we might see jury nullification in the case against Luigi Manion, for example, because his alleged cold blooded blooded this alleged coldblooded killer has a literal fan club. In this pair of absurd Eene Carol cases, we're watching jury nullification birth a bastard child. A jury that lets its contempt for the defendant inflate a verdict past anything the facts support.

[00:55:41]Some jurors think their job isn't to weigh facts. It's to hand out justice as they personally define it. And here's the kicker. Appeals courts can't fix that. They don't reweigh the facts. They check whether the law was followed. So, a jury with a grudge and a courtroom full of technically correct procedure can produce a verdict as real as the feral kangaroos apparently running rampant in both of these civil courts.

[00:56:08]Denying abhorrent accusations is not defamation. On the other hand, calling someone a rapist when he's not a rapist is, and I don't think this evidence proved otherwise. These juries punished a man it had already decided to hate.

[00:56:25]Here's hoping the appellet process does Trump right the second time around.

[00:56:32]And that's my rant.

[00:56:34]>> Nicely done as always, Janna. Thank you very much. Thank you, sir.

[00:56:38]>> And now I'm going to rant.

[00:56:40]>> Okay.

[00:56:42]>> I couldn't believe this when I heard about it this week. You got Taylor Farms, who provides lettuce to Taco Bell. The FDA came out and announced it was the lettuce that caused the explosive diarrhea.

[00:56:59]Don't eat the lettuce. Don't go to Taco Smells. The lettuce will get you.

[00:57:06]So, we reacted. Taylor Farms lost millions.

[00:57:11]Taco Bell is probably still reeling from this. And it all stemmed from a test that the FDA performed on the lettuce and it revealed Taylor Farms was responsible. And then they came out with a oopsie. Our test was wrong. It created a false positive. So, accept our apology if they even gave one. and it wasn't that. So now we don't know what causes the explosive diarrhea. It may or may not be Taco Bell. It's not the Taylor Farms lettuce. And go on your way, folks. I say no. I don't accept your apology. FDA, you've done this too many times before. In 2008, there was an epidemic Sal Manila, not just a guy I went to high school with, Sal Manila outbreak, and they said, "Don't eat the tomatoes.

[00:58:06]Stay away from the tomatoes." The industry lost between 150 and 250 million. Worse, they took these healthy, delicious tomatoes and they destroyed them because the FDA said, "Don't eat tomatoes." Then once again, oopsie, it wasn't the tomatoes.

[00:58:25]It was the peppers. The Mexican jalapeno peppers. Carry on with the tomatoes.

[00:58:31]Sorry. This won't happen again. If I had more time, I'd give you more examples of this happening. So then you think, okay, no harm, no foul. Taylor Farms, Taco Smells, they're going to now sue the government. They should. They screwed up again. How much are they going to get?

[00:58:50]nothing.

[00:58:51]Sovereign immunity.

[00:58:54]They're gonna get nothing.

[00:58:57]So, what I want is names. I can handle the truth. I want to know who's responsible. Tell us. I'd like to know why we're using a test that gives false positives, which gives us no confidence in our government and what the FDA has to say. The last time there was a false positive, it was when I was representing someone who said, "Sure, police. You can test my look through my car and test whatever you find and they found some caffeine powder that he uses on the construction site just to get him boosted up so he can work 12 to 14 hours." They false tested it positive for cocaine. They charged him as a drug trafficker.

[00:59:37]Enough with the government using these false tests. We need to do better.

[00:59:46]Take away sovereign immunity so somebody pays the next time a company gets held out to be the bad guy.

[00:59:55]Let us do better. [laughter] >> Thank you. Sorry for ending with a pun.

[01:00:02]I did.

[01:00:02]>> You didn't just do that.

[01:00:04]>> It came to me, Janna. It just came to me. I don't have this written down today. It just came to me.

[01:00:09]>> Might be the best pun ever.

[01:00:11]>> God bless you. All right, listen. Wait, before we go, what are you grateful for, Jonah? What are you grateful for today?

[01:00:17]>> Positively legal. What are we positive about today?

[01:00:19]>> All right, two things. I am grateful for that off-the- cuff pun because that genuinely made me laugh.

[01:00:25]>> Good. Good.

[01:00:25]>> I'm also grateful that you and I got to be together on uh Newsmax yesterday, and it was a surprise to me, and it was nice to see you because I feel like I feel like we're, you know, partners now.

[01:00:37]We're like legal partners. We're like Boston legal, like LA law.

[01:00:40]>> I feel the same way. I really enjoyed this past hour. I It was It was a treat to spend time with you and hear your thoughts. I'm extremely grateful. I'm also always grateful for my wife of 25 years, my Beth and my precious offspring, some who are with us for the summer. I'm really grateful for that.

[01:00:58]I'm grateful for the last breath of air that I took because it's not guaranteed.

[01:01:02]The next one is never guaranteed. I'm always so grateful. And most of all, I'm glad that we get to do this, Janna.

[01:01:07]Like, this is really cool. I thank the producers. I thank Megan for for giving us this show and I'm just very grateful today. So, thank you. Thank you and every day.

[01:01:16]>> Yeah. So, let's wrap this up. Thank you to you, Janna. I'm grateful for you. And uh we'd love for you to give some feedback. We do read all the comments. I don't I don't know about Janna. I read the comments. I like to know what you guys think. Let us know what you think so we can do better. We can do things that you want us to do. And um we hope you all choose [music] to have a wonderful week. See you next week. Take care. Bye.