Transcript
Speaker: The content you're about to hear may be graphic in nature. Listener discretion. is advised.
Speaker: what it's like to relax See the sky Down Under. Hope my plans c - Collapse.
Speaker: The surface of my... falling down Sunder.
Speaker: This is... True Crime X. Yes.
Speaker: I guess since we were already talking about the death penalty. I had these two stories. I didn't really know where else they went. And I have to give like a lot of props to a couple of people on.
Speaker: Reddit. Racing Fan 123 is one of those people. I don't know when I saw this or like what was going on at that moment. And the other one is Honest Camel 3035.
Speaker: They had written like a couple of interesting things where when I looked at them, I was like... okay, that's a case I was interested in, and this person has figured out like what I want to know. um Do you remember...
Speaker: us talking about and kind of briefly. I, Tomas. Kosowski down in Florida. Yes. So this guy's like a ah plastic surgeon.
Speaker: And. We looked at it from the perspective. I think we looked at it pretty closely to when this happened. Stephen Causey was a 41 -year -old man. He had gone missing?
Speaker: in March of like 23. Yep. So. The story is... that Dr. or former Dr. Thomas Kosowski.
Speaker: did something to Stephen Kazi. And... I'm not going to get into like that part today because... like I don't think the story itself is relevant.
Speaker: But... So this that they brought to our attention from, and this one is... um I wrote it down as belonging to racing fan one 23 and then promptly closed the link. So there's that genius that's going on. Yeah.
Speaker: um But when we're talking about. When we're talking about death penalty cases, Florida is one of the ones that comes up. Like florida Florida is a state where like, if you've got a death penalty case.
Speaker: You're... Probably. Unless you didn't do it and somehow it's all discovered, you're probably going to die. Um, But this one, this guy, like I can't tell if he wants to die. When we talked about him originally, his mom was heavily involved in what was going on in his life. Do you remember that part? Yes I do. In fact that's probably...
Speaker: That's one of the things I remember that made me remember it. So... He has basically gone to the court. That's Thomas Kosowski.
Speaker: um And he has said, to the court. Hey, I want to get rid of my attorneys. And I'm going to represent myself. So a judge has started to entertain this idea where this user on Reddit picks up.
Speaker: And. He ends up in a pretrial hearing where there's all these motions that he's supposed to be. You know wandering his way through and a judge there. It's ah I think it's pronounced baloney.
Speaker: Judge Joseph Bologna. I may be wrong because it's spelled B -U -L -O -N -E. It could be balloon. It could be anything. See ya. He is... This last week, he is walking.
Speaker: Thomas Kowalski through what's going to happen in his world. And he's like, you know We've got... Several different things we can do here. I really think at this point you're going to need... your attorneys to assist you.
Speaker: And. The prosecution. Having realized this genius wants to...
Speaker: essentially represent himself. They're taking full advantage of everything they can think of. They have announced that their intention is to seek then death penalty against Thomas Kosowski if he is convicted of having murdered, first -degree murder style, Stephen Causey.
Speaker: and they Have. Started. arguing their motions. They're... Interestingly enough, also facing the motions that the attorneys who are now being let go.
Speaker: from Thomas Kozlowski's defense. have also filed. And. The... The deal is... The judge wants to know, like how do we move forward with you sitting there at that table? us having this complex death penalty machine that you've decided.
Speaker: Like basically you were going to sit down and for the first time ever not knowing how to drive stick you are going to sit in a million dollar ferrari That is an eight -speed manual stick.
Speaker: car transmission. And what are we going to do with you sitting there? because he clearly is out of his depth. I'm not saying he's not a smart guy, but he's out of his depth, and he seems to be making some really dumb moves. At one point, the judge says to him, to be honest, these are all standard.
Speaker: death penalty motions, the advantage of going forward with your attorneys is ah they can move these motions and it will preserve your rights to argue things later.
Speaker: He's explaining this to him. Yeah. uh
Speaker: They want to argue the attorneys that are... probably going to end up being standby counsel or co -counsel, that the punishment would be unconstitutional in this situation for multiple reasons it's probably being applied against the law This is all pretrial, okay?
Speaker: So the judge says, you understand that. These attorneys here are experts in death penalty law. Kosowski's response is yes. And the judge says, you understand.
Speaker: that maybe you're not. Kozlowski responds. Yes. And the judge says, so you still want to represent yourself for today's hearing?
Speaker: which would be motions to exclude the death penalty in your case. And of course, Kosowski says. Yes. So. he announces.
Speaker: to the court at the end of this little back and forth. I move that we strike them all. He's asking that all the previous motions related to the penalty phase.
Speaker: be removed from the docket. Sue. This is about... The dumbest move. you can make in a capital punishment case. Unless...
Speaker: You want to die. Right. which is exactly what You think he's trying to kill himself? I don't know. This is like suicide by prosecutor? Would that be what we would call this? possibly, but you know.
Speaker: I know we didn't get into like the actual case itself, but one of the things I wondered. back ah when we talked about this briefly.
Speaker: I wondered if... he was going to be able to. get representation based on just the simple fact that essentially Uh,
Speaker: His victim. was an attorney representing someone who had sued him in his capacity as a doctor. and I felt like... It was going to be.
Speaker: Like that's a very specific situation happening, right? And it affects attorneys, right? And so... I'm thinking like. This is not...
Speaker: A smart idea. But then again, What other prerogative could he possibly have? except perhaps being able to argue ineffective assistance of counsel because he represented himself.
Speaker: I mean... at That could be where we're heading, but... I actually think it's something more delusional than that. I think this guy is just convinced.
Speaker: and And by the way, he's innocent until he's proven guilty. Yeah. I think he is just convinced that a, he's innocent, which. Is irrelevant at this point in time.
Speaker: But B... That. He is arrogant enough or delusional enough or whatever the word would be. that he feels like he's just going to sail through this process and prove his innocence. which he He sort of comes back around to that.
Speaker: And like how he's talking about this. Cause he basically. He... Isn't focus on how the system itself works. Like...
Speaker: Back to the Ferrari example for a second. So you've got a stick shift Ferrari. You've got to learn how to drive. And the first thing you do to learn how to drive this very expensive stick shift. Ferrari is you go around and you open the trunk and you try and fit your golf clubs in it.
Speaker: Yeah, it makes no sense. like Yeah, what he's doing, like he is not paying attention to the fact that like once this is... ruled to be a capital case, it's a capital case.
Speaker: It's a whole different type of scenario. So he has no interest in. in understanding these penalty phase motions or pursuing them. He says he wants to file a motion to redepose witnesses in this case.
Speaker: So the prosecutor approaches the judge. with this filing and because I guess e -filing isn't available is what they're saying. uh, I think what they mean is he doesn't have a computer while he's in jail.
Speaker: Which is interesting. That's a whole different problem. and the like In fairness to Thomas Kosowski. I think that... prosecutor screwing up with some of the things he's doing. um because there might be the possibility.
Speaker: that like... The. process itself with digital technology has become unfair for people who are incarcerated awaiting trial to represent themselves. which I don't think is Kosowski's point, but it may be coming across here because essentially the motion he hands to the judge, he said he got from the defendant's mom.
Speaker: Because e -filing wasn't available, right? Right, right. And so, again, his mother makes an appearance, right? Yep, again, she's here. And while...
Speaker: You're right. He is innocent until proven guilty. ah The taste of evidence that we explored when we talked about the case briefly. There's quite a bit of evidence.
Speaker: to rats. That points to his him perhaps. uh being found guilty in a court of law having it presented right Correct. And so...
Speaker: You gotta wonder. Um, So the defendant's mother hands... The motion. To. redepose witnesses to the prosecutor.
Speaker: Because she clearly doesn't know how this works either. Correct. and the prosecutor gives them to the judge. Right. Yeah. Yeah. And like, just. In most jurisdictions, I'm not going to say 100 % of them, what would happen? guys, is this motion would go to the clerk. the clerk would.
Speaker: File it appropriate. you would like they They would tell you. They would say, look, you don't have enough copies for me to distribute this. I can't give you legal advice, but I can tell you that I need another copy. And. while they won't,
Speaker: give you legal advice, they will walk you through the process of your filing from the perspective of their office's requirement. Thanks. right And I promise. No clerk on the planet.
Speaker: for a superior court in any jurisdiction, it's going to be like, all right, What I need you to do is just go sit in court in the back row. And when the prosecutor gets there. When the prosecutor gets there,
Speaker: I want you to take them a copy. That's it. That's all you got to do. but That's just not going to happen. Yeah, no, that wouldn't be because... They would file the motion with the court. Like, because you... I don't know. It seems like most places, even the ones that have gone fully electronic, if you're pro se, you can still file it with the clerk.
Speaker: and so well yeah You get access to certain things and you can always file a motion. Pro se, handwritten. The court doesn't look down on it. They don't criticize you for your formatting or your font. or They might criticize you for your handwriting if they just can't read it. But for the most part... I have recently seen Prose motions go pretty far.
Speaker: Oh yeah. I mean, written on lined paper. I mean, in fact, it's probably one way that it keeps the motion kind of straight and to the point when they have to write it by hand, right?
Speaker: Yes. yeah so And also, on top of that, the motion itself seems ridiculous. So the motion is... that He wants to... redepose or depose for the first time, I guess, himself. Four people because of a contradiction in one person's statements about the chain of custody.
Speaker: of Kostowski's vehicle. And I guess in this motion, it says nobody followed the truck on the way to the processing garage. And that was very clear. It says investigators said a search of the truck in question yielded blood in the pickup's bed and in the cabin, which that's sort of alluding to the evidence that you were talking about from where we had covered this previously.
Speaker: Um, So Bologna said, that he would allow... this to happen. And he says he's going to make arrangements for it to happen over Zoom, which is interesting because... during COVID. Jails did get...
Speaker: good at allowing defendant's access to Zoom when needed. so So going along with this, Thomas Kosowski confirms to the judge that he wants a jury trial. to determine whether or not he's guilty.
Speaker: ah He makes a reference to the fact that he would like. to waive the jury trial for any potential penalty phase. um The judge says they're going to revisit that at the end of the guilt phase, which means we've got to go through this trial first because I think the trial is coming up.
Speaker: In September. yeah Oh, that that's when they're supposed to start jury selects on September 14th. Okay. Um, So... One of the weird things that happens in a pro se case.
Speaker: for a serious felony let alone a capital case, is the judge will constantly check in. Are you sure you still want to keep doing this? It's ah day two. Day three, it's pre -trial day. It's motions day. It's arraignment. Do you still want to represent yourself?
Speaker: But they won't go back through the whole process of determining whether or not. the defendant is capable. of defending themselves. Right. They just give them an out. And i I have a feeling that. The original attorneys that he just fired are probably ordered on standby.
Speaker: Yeah, there that's Florida does that frequently. We've talked about this before. um At one point, I think we looked at... Bundy really heavy because we wondered what had happened there, but that was largely. He had standby counsel.
Speaker: Correct. And that was largely done with standby council in mind. And the fact of the matter is that... Uh, I...
Speaker: I hate to even say this, but Most of the time. You know, a defense attorney can only do so much, right? Right. and When you're driving the ship.
Speaker: And. you know, you're driving up onto the bank instead of continuing. You're on your way in the. water. I mean at what point they have to hop in. There's only so much they're going to have to, they're going to be able to do if they have to. Right.
Speaker: Right. because you know, at As the judge was saying, you know, if he's putting... ah If he's... Having all of the motions that his former attorneys. ah put forth to try and keep it from becoming a death penalty case if he's having them all stricken. Those aren't there as safeguards anymore, right?
Speaker: Right. And they can't go back. at the at At any point in time, he brings them back in. I mean, it's not like just because he brought them back in, he doesn't get any sort of advantage. from having done this, right? It's going to be playing from that point forward. And he's limiting what...
Speaker: any sort of future actual legal advocacy will be able to do for him. But there has to be a prerogative here. And.
Speaker: I am not sure what. I mean, does he... I'm thinking he thinks that he's going to... Um, like, have a technicality because there was nobody following.
Speaker: The truck on the way to the processing garage. Is that what I hear? So, yeah, like he's making some mistakes here. in revealing his strategies, the prosecution and his motions. My guess is he's probably going to try and suppress a big chunk of evidence.
Speaker: And like, in order to File. That motion to suppress that evidence, whatever it is that he, I'm thinking and like anything. attached to this truck is what he's definitely aiming for. um But that's like...
Speaker: one little part of a emotion to suppress. There's a lot more to it, and you really need those. death penalty qualified attorneys to. assist you with this part. The deposition's not going to do it and it. I almost got the impression that he thought it, like...
Speaker: It's almost like... he's saying, yeah, just strike all those motions because they're not going to be necessary. Like, this is somehow... I feel like he's... He... He thinks that he has more than he actually has.
Speaker: A lot of defendants think that. A lot of defendants think that the system works differently because it's them. and Look, yeah Yay. There is no judge.
Speaker: that is going to sit down and just... Toss. evidence in a murder trial because a truck isn't followed from point a to point b because Unless it's a specific... statute or policy or procedure and like I may be lacking in my uh florida law when it comes to this i don't Most...
Speaker: Crime scene. collection efforts. I think he's going for like a chain of custody type thing. And I think it's going to feel like. The.
Speaker: A truck driver arrived. And... investigator A, B, and C. Um, had contracted the... approved vendor to transport.
Speaker: from this position to this position. And he's either an outside vendor or maybe an FDLE member or a local county. uh, that does this for the county. I think he's trying...
Speaker: To. impress upon the court the fact that like there's a chain of custody issue. with this. And unless I'm missing something by what. was available. I don't think it's going to be a chain of custody issue at all.
Speaker: um That's a very common thing. Like, unfortunately. Officer such and such cannot pick up the truck. with all the evidence on it and put it in the trunk of his car and drive it to the station. It has to be done. by an outside entity.
Speaker: Well, and... Is suppression of evidence, I realize in some cases, like especially unlawfully searched or seized. Things, as suppression is. for the court to decide. But in a lot of ah more nuanced ways, the jury gets to make. decisions about If the...
Speaker: chain of custody was broken or not. um Yeah, it kind of depends on if he's trying to do it as like a... Pre -trial motion. Like... It is. As much as like it sort of sounds like he's preparing to... do something I don't think he's really preparing to do anything except really piss off the judge um He doesn't understand that this pre -trial Motion's day was set because of.
Speaker: motions his attorneys had filed about the penalty phase of the hearing. So when the court sets a calendar date like that, That's what they're focusing on. Not only that, that would be sort of an intense and important debate. Right, that just got literally thrown out the window and replaced with...
Speaker: Well, I don't want care about those motions. I want them to be stricken from the record. However, I want to... Re -depose. witnesses four witnesses because nobody followed the truck on the way to the processing garage and that was very clear Right.
Speaker: And so I'm not following. uh, how That motion. thatcussion well i'm not Well, I get that, but I'm not following.
Speaker: Like. We're talking about apples and oranges here, right? Correct. 100%. Yes. And I'm not following how... you know, that was deemed appropriate by him because You know, he ah so he was a surgeon. Of course, he was a surgeon getting sued. for malpractice so...
Speaker: I think it was malpractice. I'm pretty sure. And so there's that, right? But so. Without that element, your my thought is, well, surgeons are sometimes... peculiar people but they're usually pretty smart right uh sometimes they're too smart for their own good I think that's what is happening here. That he's too smart for his own good.
Speaker: Yeah, I think he thinks I will just boil this down to brass tacks, get all the evidence kicked, and then they can't even have a trial. So the death penalty is irrelevant. because we're squashing it up front. That's what I'm thinking, and I...
Speaker: can say with a lot of confidence that the statement he made ah Which is, you know, nobody followed the truck on the way to the processing garage. And that was very clear. i I feel very confident that that's not going to do what he thinks.
Speaker: He must. think it's going to do. I don't think that's going to shut down the whole case. It's just not. There was other evidence. besides just that I mean even if that comes into play I don't even think that that's going to come into play and I don't think it's weighty like that to confidently say Well, I don't need to worry about the penalty phase and argue against the death penalty because I'm about to shut all this down.
Speaker: Yeah, I mean I agree with you. I think like this is a rare occasion where this guy, and so the the victim, the alleged victim in this case, we don't know that he's dead.
Speaker: He's a member of the local bar, and there's a lot of conflict that happens very early on. Just trying to... Get counsel in here. for the person who's alleged to have harmed him.
Speaker: Right. that's I remember that aspect from when we talked about it previously. That was the whole reason we were talking about it was the fact that like this guy is, if he has done this, he has screwed himself and he didn't even realize it at the time of like committing the offense. And like I went on to look to see what was happening here.
Speaker: um I was trying to see if there was a motion that I could grab and see. where he had been approved to represent himself and like what the reasoning was. And I i was just astonished. This is Pinellas. County, Florida.
Speaker: um There's a pretty good set of court documents you could go through. It's already up to seven pages. It is already up to seven.
Speaker: Yeah, it has seven pages of motions since this has been. a since indictment. So it has like... Seven pages of nothing but one -line entries.
Speaker: Where this guy is going... back and forth talking to people. including... including my favorite thing. My favorite thing is. When...
Speaker: Like people like randomly start sending letters to the judge. That is, I'm sure that's going to be in here somewhere. um because i'm always worried when that happens because the minute they start talking to Like who? Like the defendant or just other people? The defendant. It's always the defendant. It's always the defendant who sends a letter to the judge. ah But he does get motion. He gets a granted motion, it looks like.
Speaker: uh, for leave to conduct a limited redeposition. I mean... Whatever is happening here...
Speaker: This case... I think it's going to be... the type of shit show I would want to see. um,
Speaker: That sounds horrible because the death penalty is on the table. And also, I don't know that this guy did it or didn't do it. I know that a lot of what I saw early on made me think, oh, that's interesting. It sort of points his direction. But so far, he's got 439 filed documents going back and forth in his case between the defense and the prosecution.
Speaker: That is a lot. In a lead up to a death penalty trial that's supposed to happen within a month. And he is doing all this from behind bars. 836, 439 documents. Sorry.
Speaker: 439 documents. Have been filed Between the prosecution and the defense in this case. I don't know how many terabytes this is going to be of. a discovery.
Speaker: But it's all happening. And this guy is like sitting behind bars going, yeah, I got those. well and again he Was a surgeon. It's my understanding. um Right.
Speaker: was He's a doctor. Plastic surgeon, yeah. Okay, he's up right. And he's also, um I feel like an un... Controverted ah Mama's Boy.
Speaker: Are you? I think that might be subjective, but okay. Well, okay, maybe it is a controverted point, but, like, to me, like, everything I saw, like, his mom... His mom is very involved.
Speaker: If she's either steering the ship or she's along for the whole ride. Um, I don't know which one Hot. I... I remember quite a few things. um I was...
Speaker: It's interesting because... ah I do have a preconceived notion about this, ah but it's not based on speculation. It's based on like the facts I have seen for some reason. I don't even know why. I've seen them. um But i I saw several things. ah that had occurred And.
Speaker: Based on the evidence I saw. Obviously subject to cross -examination. Actually, I guess subject to being presented in the court of law. and subjected to cross -examination, I would say the evidence that was being put forth because Because this case is a no -body homicide,
Speaker: ah Maybe that's the reason it got. Mm. media coverage about like, the circumstances leading up to the fact that someone's been charged with murder. Right. I think, I think it was the intrigue of like taking out opposing counsel.
Speaker: that's what gets it in the headlines in the first place is like, You're being sued by someone and you essentially kill their lawyer. Because you didn't like something that the lawyer did? That's exactly what I saw happening. and But there was some pretty damning circumstances, which, again, is circumstantial evidence, that he was the last person like to be in contact with the lawyer, right?
Speaker: I mean, I guess I throw in the word allegedly here, but but yeah, like there was a witness who saw someone and the guy disappeared from his building. Somebody out there has got a great timeline going on on this. I don't know who it's going to be, but if you find it.
Speaker: You want to send it to me. I'll come back around to this and go over it. My focus for today was somehow... I have a feeling this is going to end up being a death penalty case. oh well right and so in that case it's going to be completely on.
Speaker: the defendant, right? Like he literally did that to himself. Now, will that hold up? Under the scrutiny of. pellet review. Right. Well, if he continues to represent himself, I'm thinking he may not.
Speaker: He may not appeal it. I don't know. I'm not entirely following his thinking here. Hey, I got to pause for a second. Hold on. Okay.
Speaker: I... I don't fully understand this case. I'm i'm looking forward to seeing it unfold. But one of the things I'm worried about here. is This is sort of... Like this guy seems to be hanging his hat on some kind of technicality.
Speaker: which is fine. If the technicalities... come to be in his favor. Good. That's the system working, I guess. But I don't think that's what's going to happen. And I think this may be.
Speaker: Sort of suicide by prosecution out of stupidity. like him Not being smart enough. Legally speaking, I'm not saying he's not smart.
Speaker: to grasp that, like... he is potentially getting himself into a scenario where he can now get the death penalty. Well, right. and To me.
Speaker: He's concerned about evidence because he wants to... We... depose witnesses, right? Right. And so. it's almost like he I'm It. It seems like he thinks he's about to extinguish a smoking gun. That's what it looks... like he thinks because he's like I want all these stricken. And.
Speaker: um having stricken them I'm now going to shut it all down and I just don't see that happening and that's odd it's an odd thing and i wonder like i don't know to what extent the judge has the responsibility, like.
Speaker: Because they can't be an advocate for either side, right? The judge just... Waits for. ah you know, make sure it happens in a lawful way, right?
Speaker: Yeah, I mean, ultimately, that's the judge's job. I... So. What's fascinating me about this, and I think people should go down the rabbit hole on this, I don't have an opinion as to this guy's innocence or guilt right now. um I will say that from what I read early on, if all the things presented to us.
Speaker: are true. I tend to think that he's gotten himself into a situation that skilled lawyers. are probably his best way to mitigate or get out of that situation if he is to be.
Speaker: somehow found not guilty. I don't know that it's going to be because of his own personal innocence or not. You know what I mean? um I feel like...
Speaker: Eh. Every single person in this particular position. Needs. ah legal assistance from a out. qualified attorney. So does this make a mockery of the death penalty?
Speaker: I mean... A little bit. And. I don't know exactly what. like the law is. With regard to.
Speaker: It seems like something came up with Ted Bundy. where Because, you know, he... basically represented himself right into the Um, Electric. Chair, right. He did.
Speaker: And. It seemed like at that point in time, which is so long ago now. that I had some questions about like how that would work.
Speaker: Um, in practice. Because... You know, it's the... Bundy was so long ago, it was almost like theoretical, right? But I mean, it happened. We saw it happen. But.
Speaker: I wondered how it would apply today in that. it almost seems like it would be Like. a waste of judicial resources to let Ayy. defendant.
Speaker: represent themselves in a capital case where the death penalty was being sought. And i then I also wondered, well, is this going to put pressure on the prosecutor to not seek it?
Speaker: right yeah you're having the same thoughts i am about this one and those are like So my questions become...
Speaker: I don't think that prosecutors should be a... allowed or required or anything to like Not. seek the death penalty because The defendant.
Speaker: can't get out of their own way. i I don't think that that should be the case either. The only thing I would say is that. they If they foresaw that. This was going to be a situation that went on and on and on like.
Speaker: Because of the protein. Uh, Because of the defendant's insistence. on proceeding pro se. I could see where... you know, without it on the table, he's going to get convicted, serve life without the possibility of parole. It doesn't really matter one way or the other. This is a no body homicide.
Speaker: Right. Right, right, which is already complex. That's already very complex. And I'm not saying that... um It's insurmountable. I think a lot of no -body homicides are absolutely triable, right? yeah Yeah, they're prosecutable and they're defendable, but they require people to like pay attention, legally speaking.
Speaker: In a lot of ways. I'm not entirely certain which, I mean, I say that, but. Um. I'm not entirely sure.
Speaker: like what the ratio of death penalty ah convictions. And. ah Versus nobody homicides versus.
Speaker: uh homicides that have you know a body of evidence. Like with the victim. Okay. I don't know like how that plays out statistically. I got you. I follow. Yeah.
Speaker: Okay, and so I don't know. It seems like... It would be... quite a gamble ah to try and present a no body homicide.
Speaker: uh Up. For. uh, the death penalty, a capital murder charge that you are seeking the death penalty for. But I mean, I'm not saying it's undoable. Sometimes...
Speaker: A lot of what... uh, is brought forth now is The lack. of Living. That.
Speaker: we see in, you know, No digital footprint, no financial footprint, no social security number used. They just vanished. Right, and it and that's... in a lot of ways that's not even possible to do right and so the only logical conclusion
Speaker: a jury could draw is that this person died the other thing is sometimes there's copious amounts of blood found and the idea behind that is like this person did not get up and live their normal life after sustaining these injuries, right? And that came more with being able to.
Speaker: identify The victim. As the source of. The blood film. Yeah. Exactly. And so. you know, That can be overcome.
Speaker: In some ways, however. It doesn't completely Like you don't have a body that you can then get evidence of what happened to it. and And how the victim died. and link that accordingly and so that that's a gap right that has to be overcome and so there are advantages still to having ah to finding the body, but it makes logical sense to everyone that just because you hide a body well enough,
Speaker: you shouldn't just be able to get away with the murder. Right? Yeah. I mean, look
Speaker: we've We've seen that for at least... 30 years now, like where. A lot of these cases, and the reason the statistics... The reason that the statistics are so hard to track in a no -body homicide is because a lot of these cases kind of go the way of a plea deal.
Speaker: and both sides sort of work out an agreement, which is probably what was happening here that made this guy want to fire his lawyer. I wondered what the underlying...
Speaker: animosity with either well you know he's had like eight lawyers which is shocking Well, no, it's because that was the whole reason we talked about this case in the first place without like really getting into what had happened in the case, which is funny because now.
Speaker: It's the second time we're saying nothing about the case itself and talking all around the case. They were getting... Awesome. Out. Right. They were getting conflicted out. They were getting off the case because they had a conflict they didn't realize when they started.
Speaker: when they were appointed. And so. Pinellas County was just burning through. attorneys who were who were connected in some way shape or fashion Two.
Speaker: The attorney that's missing. And presumed dead. Right. So that becomes a conflict of interest. Right. And it. So.
Speaker: I lost my thought, but it was something to do with. um, He may be trying to. get put to death. Well, he could also be trying to use...
Speaker: all these conflicts of interest. as some kind of pathway to out like maybe he's got some kind of tunnel vision on all of the things happening to him. Cause like if he's a raging narcissist, so to speak. Which is not uncommon for...
Speaker: ah Surgeons, no offense. To any servant. Yeah, if he is dealing with a lot of self -import. then Looking down that, you know.
Speaker: that hallway that they're frequently driving down like it's a train tunnel. Everything is about them. All the questions are about them. Everything they state. As they look to the light at the end of that tunnel, which...
Speaker: Turns out that the light at the end of the tunnel glows from their face. Like when they're doing that and heading down that path, they can miss a lot of things along the way. Not saying that's happening here. I'm saying.
Speaker: In the course of what we talked... I'm saying in the course of what we talked about in the last episode and in this episode. This is very problematic for capital punishment. i I agree. And so either he's trying to get around it somehow or he. wants to be put to death. Or he's just...
Speaker: Maybe he's the type of... narcissist that Just... As long as he can focus on himself, it doesn't really matter which direction he's going, right? Because this is going to occupy him for quite a while, right? Oh yeah.
Speaker: And so ah sometimes that's... The... That's the prerogative being sought, right? He just wants to focus. on himself through this ah this way and It doesn't really matter what ends up happening at the end. And I can see where this can go.
Speaker: a whole lot of ways that are not great. Right. Not for him, no. and Just the way that he sort of flippantly. tossed all the motions against ah The death penalty.
Speaker: Uh, That's not a good start. And the judge has got to see that. Yeah, i don't I don't know what they're going to do with him, but this is the one. So, okay, by the time we get this out to air.
Speaker: My guess is it'll be about a week from jury selection starting if they stay on track.
Speaker: Inevitably there could be a delay here. But if you're going to if you're going to watch a trial this fall, if you could figure out how to see this one, and I don't remember how Florida does things. I know they televise some things and some things they don't. But if this one pump pops up on your feed.
Speaker: It may be. The in -depth legal nightmare you've been looking for to scratch your current true crime. Itch. Just in terms of how it plays out.
Speaker: in the courtroom in the courtroom, regardless of what you think the outcome should be. um I think this will be one of those cases. And I brought it up specifically because.
Speaker: Whenever I hear about three executions happening in a day, or 40 executions happening in a year, which we're kind of on track for. We may not get that high, but I think we're on track for at least 30 executions by the end of 2026 for the United States and the federal system.
Speaker: When I hear about that, like I'm always looking for reasons that the... that capital punishment does or doesn't work. And. This... This case against Kosowski looks like it's going to be one of those things that test a few of the tenets of whether or not capital punishment.
Speaker: is a good idea. Um, Go ahead. Do you, and... It also, going along with what you're saying, I don't think anything a defendant... does can restrict that one way or the other. Like, I don't feel like a A defendant should be able to...
Speaker: worm their way out of it. Right. By doing certain things. like you know, just because he wants to represent himself. I don't think anything about. the potential for the death penalty. penalty to be sought, I don't think anything should change, right?
Speaker: No. Right. Yeah. If they're going to see like if he had an attorney and they were going to seek the death penalty, then it seems to me that it should continue.
Speaker: ah right along the way. right Now, my question to you is, do you think that... ah there's going to be a continuance.
Speaker: From everything I've seen... I think this case is set up ideally to have a continuance. um it's going to depend on the hard line the judge takes like because he did grant this guy's motion to redepose. So they've taken a little leave for that. It could bump it back a week or two.
Speaker: But. I mean, we seem to be like down to the wire of, Hey guys, like get on the boat. Let's go. and But as far as the, I mean, there's been a lot of filings, but a lot of.
Speaker: The filings. ah the pretrial motions against the death penalty, they're now gone. And I i don't see a whole lot of other things. Um,
Speaker: that. have been brought up. pre -trial but uh it does say on the let's see I can't tell if this is an order or the motion. um But it. It must be the order.
Speaker: The depositions have to occur on or before August 31st. right And they're limited to 45 minutes and a very specific...
Speaker: like a narrow field of of interrogation. very It's very specific. It has to do with... um Yeah, oh wait. This is related to the transportation of the truck.
Speaker: Correct. and And then whatever he's zoned in on here, um I can't tell if this is the actual... um The motion or something. Or the order. I can't tell. um But either way. Yeah, this web website is like a 1995 Angel Fire website, unfortunately.
Speaker: Well, and a lot of stuff isn't there. Correct. Either way, I don't know if that's what was granted, actually, because if it's... If it's not the order. um then that's just him proposing it, right?
Speaker: Right. But this is, so ultimately... So this case is probably going to be one of the next trials in the U .S. to move forward. I think it's one worth watching, if nothing else, from the notoriety, if it goes forward to trial and there's not some kind of plea deal cut. um And if he stays in charge of his own case, I don't think we're going to see a plea deal.
Speaker: But the notoriety surrounding this. Um, It should continue into the trial, I think. like And people, I don't know that people are seeing it as much yet. um There weren't a lot of comments on what I had seen about it. That's why I brought it up here. It fit with what we were talking about with the death penalty. And I really was looking for like reasons that the death penalty could not work. um And I'm positive you and I will come back to this one at some point between now and the end of the year and make a comment on it.
Speaker: ah particularly if there's either a guilty or not guilty here, and we can kind of wrap our heads around what's happening. Um, Do you have anything else on Kosowski today? No, not today. I'm interested to see if it gets ah continued off into the future. Having read through this... um If this is the motion, which, again, I don't know because I can't tell. ah If it's the motion, it's interesting because he is.
Speaker: obviously very intelligent and he is tracking, very minute. details even in just submersion to read a pair of them. That's interesting to me because it makes me wonder.
Speaker: Like, is he... You know, is he playing chess while everybody else is playing checkers or does he just think he's playing? chess while he's really just playing checkers.
Speaker: I mean, it could go either way for me. I like i could anticipate there being... Like. a weird twist ending to all of this if you want me to just like put on my conspiracy hat and be like what if like mom hired somebody or did it herself and that's how he knows he didn't do it because he didn't do it but he doesn't know that mom did it
Speaker: Oh, wow. you but you don't see I think for him to be representing himself, he would have to know that he didn't do it. Oh, but that doesn't mean he knows mom did it. Right. Like he doesn't necessarily know that his mom wasn't trying to save his bacon.
Speaker: It's an interesting idea, right? It is, except being an intelligent person who knows they didn't do something like. I would be at the mercy of...
Speaker: Any attorney that would... Possibly. take my case, right? Especially with all the conflicted out ones, right? Right. And so because of that, like, if you know for sure you didn't do it.
Speaker: Like. I would not be relying on myself. Right. And that's where, I mean, not in a criminal capital potential death penalty situation.
Speaker: Yeah, no, I'm with you. You're right. You're 100 % right. um So when this one comes back around, particularly if it's something bizarre. We'll jump back on it. I had one more thing I wanted to talk about today. It's the one that I pulled from a different Reddit person. This is... the the honest camel one, but they're actually pulling from a couple of blog sources here.
Speaker: I really want to talk about it just from the perspective of how messed up this could make the criminal justice system. um They use this tiffinohio .net article, but they're talking about this judge being.
Speaker: ordered off the bench. Have you heard about this whole thing? Yes. So this is out of the Supreme Court of Ohio. They are suspending Sandusky County Common Pleas Judge John. Ickes? Ikes? I don't know. I -C -K -E -S is his last name. We're going to call him the Judge for the rest of this.
Speaker: But they're... Suspending him from the practice of law entirely for two years. That happened this week. This blog posting is from August 19th. It comes from Jen Ziegler at Tiffin, Ohio.
Speaker: um I think that's all the same person, but... I could be wrong. The judge is a Republican. He's still on the ballot for November. That's only August. He is seeking a full term beginning January 1st, 2027.
Speaker: And this two -year suspension... it would run into 2028 would. be basically the first 19 months of his term. He has an opponent.
Speaker: Kimberly Onko, who's a Fremont attorney running as an independent. She has announced her candidacy back in January of this year. That's according to the Freebot News Messenger.
Speaker: She's a magistrate currently in the same courthouse that this guy is a judge. Um, She's assigned. to the general division's other judge, Jeremiah Ray.
Speaker: so
Speaker: This is a weird story. I'm bringing it up from the perspective of if this type of if this type of stuff is happening on the bench. Like not only do we not need the death penalty. We really don't need people being put in prison for much of anything.
Speaker: Well, right. And I have no doubt that this type of stuff happens. like Judges are just people. Yeah, so the the judge that we have here, he's ultimately reported by this other judge, Jeremiah Ray.
Speaker: Um, So the court. has Done a couple of different things that are weird A disciplinary board has already ruled over this guy. That's the board of professional conduct. They have a four -day hearing.
Speaker: They have testimony from 19 witnesses. They recommend a one -year law suspension. but they're going to stay it. which means they're going to suspend the suspension.
Speaker: So the judge would basically have no time off of the bench. And. It gets appealed. The Board of Professional Conduct says that's... you know, That's their decision. Whoever brought this charge in the first place appeals it to the Ohio Supreme Court.
Speaker: And the justices throw that punishment all the way out. So they turn it around and they say. This is according to... their Chief Justice, Sharon Kennedy.
Speaker: An actual suspension is necessary to protect the public and demonstrate that we will not tolerate the childish, inappropriate, and vulgar behavior the judge exhibited in chambers and in the courtroom.
Speaker: So here's what they find. The justices adopt 10 findings of misconduct. spanning five counts. And. So they use a couple of different rules, but they're finding this under rules requiring judges to promote confidence in the judiciary, to be patient and courteous, and to disqualify themselves.
Speaker: where their impartiality might reasonably be questioned, and to hold their staff to the same standard. The most consequential finding involving the judge's stepson, a guy named Christian Ortolani, he is a Fremont police officer and detective.
Speaker: Ortolani had helped investigate three... criminal cases that landed on his stepdad's docket. And so what would you think should happen if your stepson... and Brings three cases to... you know, Judge Meg's docket.
Speaker: What are you supposed to do? Oh, you have to accuse yourself. It should never be on his docket, ever. And then so how do you document that? Like when you go to recuse yourself, what do you do?
Speaker: you say that Uh. One of the investigators is your stepson? Yeah, you disclosed the relationship, right? On the record. Correct. and And that is a...
Speaker: Like. It's not only reasonable, it's like required. That's it. that's a like one step relationship, right? Yeah. Yeah, so with this first defendant, Curtis Elkins, he never discloses the relationship on the record. he So the reason for doing that is so that it's on the record and you're doing that all the things that are on the up and up. but it's also so that you can give the parties, the prosecution and the defendant,
Speaker: An opportunity, if they want to waive the conflict, they can waive the conflict. So even as prospective jurors were being asked whether they were related to any of the state's witnesses.
Speaker: including... this detective.
Speaker: He still doesn't say anything. So the detective testifies at trial. Ultimately, there's a conviction, and the judge sentences Curtis Elkins to six to nine years in prison.
Speaker: In a separate case, Leroy Stratton was indicted for... raping an 18 -month -old child and live streaming it.
Speaker: Stratton asks the judge to step aside. Because the detective that had arrested him read him his rights, executed a search warrant, and worked the investigation.
Speaker: was Ortolani. But the judge refused, ruling that the standard was not met. I wonder what he's going with there. like This is by marriage, therefore it doesn't count?
Speaker: he's just wrong i know he's doing it because he can get away he thought he could get away with it and i assume maybe his stepson doesn't have the same last name perhaps um If it was a situation where...
Speaker: Like it's a step sign that. But the marriage is later. or whatever where yeah but it doesn't matter like Ultimately. That's too close of a relationship.
Speaker: yeah I don't even think that the parties could waive. that i don't think I don't think... I think it would be read as the same as like father, son. it it It absolutely is. And the reason is because there's another judge that can take care of it. like Correct. it It is not a situation where justice isn't going to happen if...
Speaker: ah If he's... recuses himself and says you know i'm conflicted out of this case he should never have any ah either blood or by marriage, children's cases before him. it's That's... I mean.
Speaker: It's statutory, I'm sure, but like, it's also just common sense. Right. So the stepson testifies at the trail at the trial for Leroy Stratton. um He authenticates video of the crime that was live streamed.
Speaker: And then he sits at the prosecution's table as the lead investigator the whole time. Ultimately, Leroy Stratton is convicted. He's sentenced to life without parole. So the sift did the sixth... District Court of Appeals reverses both convictions.
Speaker: ah In Elkin's case, it found that unconstitutional... unconstitutional potential for bias. In Stratton's case, it found the probability of bias violated his due process rights.
Speaker: So both cases are sent back for a new trial. You're not a very good judge if your cases start all being sent back for trials. Right. And they should realize that, right? Right. Ciao. Do you know if the prosecutor realized that ah the...
Speaker: The investigator sitting at their table was his... Dubsun. In that case, he knew. strike yeah Yeah, because it's brought up in court. In Stratton's case, it's brought up in court.
Speaker: He rules against that. What? In the other case, they did not know. Oh my goodness, he ruled against it. He ruled against it. Conflict? He wrote for himself.
Speaker: And like, No offense, but... From... I guess I'd like to say an unbiased perspective. You want to have someone else make that decision just in case.
Speaker: Right. Right. Like, I mean, when They're saying, so the prosecutor said, like, we want you to recuse yourself because Your stepson is the investigator.
Speaker: and You just refuse yourself and move on. Right. But that's what happened. Right. And he just denied it. Like it wasn't. Which is probably where they ended up going to the other judge and getting him reported, is my guess. Correct. Yeah. Yeah. So...
Speaker: Both of them are sent back. Stratton's tried a second time in January 2026 before a visiting judge who came in to do this because now it's everybody's conflict. He sentenced again February 4th to life without the possibility of parole.
Speaker: Um, This is an identical sentence, but... it's reached at the cost of putting the case on. In front of an eye. second jury. And and This case is particularly trauma traumatizing because it involves the rape of an infant on video on a live stream on social media.
Speaker: You're putting... Another 12 people plus the alternates plus whoever wasn't there for the first trial through this again. That's a major problem so Chief Justice Kennedy calls it a glaring conflict of interest for this to go on.
Speaker: And. writes that, The judge's failures not only waste prosecutorial, public defender, and judicial resources, but also caused incalculable...
Speaker: harm to public confidence in the independence, integrity, and impartiality of the judiciary.
Speaker: The courts added an aggravating factor that the board had not found, and that was that the judge had harmed vulnerable victims. because his conduct left. Elkin, Stratton, and their victims to endure a second trial.
Speaker: So... For the eight months that the Stratton case had sat on his docket, The judge referred to it as the Baby cocksucker case. He testified that the phrase helped him process a disturbing case.
Speaker: One staff member called it disgusting. Another said that it left her extremely uncomfortable and disturbed. During the February 2024 trial against Stratton,
Speaker: The judge texted from the bench with three court employees. They mocked a man sitting in the gallery during jury selection. Calling him a... Potential defendant in the array.
Speaker: See you. and then, quote -unquote, next Christian creeper. a reference to the kind of child predator his stepson investigated. While a video of the crime was being discussed in testimony,
Speaker: The Judge -Senate group a video of a woman eating um a banana. And then a meme of a dancing banana. The court found that the conduct... the mean, the seriousness.
Speaker: of the charged defenses. A separate court. concerned that the judge's treatment of a a separate a separate count. concerned The judge's treatment of a pregnant employee.
Speaker: His assignment commissioner, identified in the opinion as J .D. I think they're just being Jane Doe. In April 2024, he told her to wait until the... Quote, unquote.
Speaker: Titty Fairy comes. She told them she did not want to hear that again. He asked whether they could talk about the quote -unquote butt fairy. B -U -T -T After she complained to the court administrator.
Speaker: The judge had his wife call her. kept bringing it up, asked whether or not she wanted to be there and insinuated that he was going to fire her. JD testified that she was pregnant.
Speaker: had maternity leave banked, and that her husband's factory was closing. The writing was on the wall and I was very scared. She left to go to the other judge's office. So that judge, Jeremiah Ray, he reports it.
Speaker: and Ike's then... like instructs County administrators to. Haunt their investigation into him. And. have an outside firm hired instead.
Speaker: Another one of the counts concerned a January 2024 morning when the judge in his assignment commissioner's office. quoted a line from Blazing Saddles that contained the N -word.
Speaker: nathaniel simmons ah Nathaniel Simmons is a black defendant with a pretrial hearing that day. He's sitting in the hallway and he heard this exchange. Simmons' attorney asked for a different judge.
Speaker: The judge recused without any explanation and he self -reported. A second black defendant, Timothy Norris, Later sought the judge's removal from his own case, arguing the slur applies to all colored people.
Speaker: The judge says he was quoting a movie, denied the motion from the bench. and never entered a written ruling. So the opinion also goes on to catalog a Nerf gun.
Speaker: that the judge had been firing at staff in chambers and in the courtroom, including when defendants faced serious charges. were present in the chord. ah the time he reached for the drawer with his handgun in it by mistake and joked about it afterwards.
Speaker: ah The acronyms that he had been assigning to probation titles, calling the probation secretary. Boris. because she was black. ah calling his assignment commissioner a libtard when she disagreed with his politics. and saying Snapchat instead of Snapchat.
Speaker: while instructing juries so he's saying this in open court by the way
Speaker: As long as somebody like this is on the stand and and this, so this guy's theme is. You mean on the bench. That's what I'm sorry. On the bench. As long as a guy like this is on the bench. Judge John ICKES.
Speaker: uh, in Sandusky County. I don't think we can have the death penalty. Um, There's some dissenting opinions people should read in here. Some of the justices in Ohio, which just moved to the top of my list of places I probably am not going to.
Speaker: Hang out. I don't know Right after Tennessee. Right. Yep. Right after Tennessee, which was already after Florida. and Texas. But this is something people should... check out This judge getting kicked off the bench.
Speaker: Makes me wonder, what else do they put up with in Ohio? I would say that The sample of behavior that was presented.
Speaker: It goes too far, right? Yeah. I think that. This is a man child.
Speaker: who somehow... fell up. He failed upwards. to being a judge right i mean this guy has absolutely no business being on the bench oh agree He doesn't have...
Speaker: He's racist. just He's sexist. All of these things, man. Right. And... and Judges. are so support See, judges are beyond reproach. And and when they act like this.
Speaker: They have not earned that status, right? So while he had the education to do the job and. He was able to. I guess be elected and, and have the job. He was not...
Speaker: it It wasn't. His personality was not a good fit for that role. And he was constantly undermining every single thing. about the justice system in fact I'm surprised.
Speaker: I don't see how every single person that ever encountered this judge in any of these weird... Uh, things that happened. I would have felt like I was being gaslit.
Speaker: Yeah. to see a judge act so ridiculous, right? Because you just do not expect it from a judge. And there's a reason you don't expect it from a judge. It's because the role of the judge, so, you know, when...
Speaker: When you step into a courtroom, The judge is representing. the court of law. Right. And typically in the name of the state. and it's ah It's a role that is played and it's supposed to be given the utmost deference and respect.
Speaker: Right. and And every single thing he was doing was not. Giving the. The power of the state. any It was undermining.
Speaker: the power of the state. is the best way I can put it. and It just is would be unacceptable. now The other thing is... Like the board wasn't.
Speaker: going to take him off the bench. Which is kind of interesting. Because what? Um, It's crazy, right?
Speaker: FOO! The court had to do it? The Supreme Court had to step in on this. and Well, was it the U .S. or the Ohio? It's the Ohio Supreme Court. Yeah, they're they're policing their own state, but barely. And like some of these, some of the dissent in here.
Speaker: It's like, it wasn't that big a deal. And so that makes me think that. They are the exact same type. of judge, right?
Speaker: Well, you could definitely you you could definitely track through the rationale and arrive at that pretty quickly. Yeah, you can. Right. And so you've got his... you know, his colleague, essentially.
Speaker: Right. it To begin with. Which has to be driving. I mean, that would drive anybody crazy, right? Correct. To be in a position, like for one thing.
Speaker: Really? Somebody that is on the exact same level as me is putting me in a position where I have to report their god -awful behavior? Right.
Speaker: Why on earth would they do that? Why would they not want to bring? um maturity and respect to the rule, right? It's it's a weird concept. But then when the board... is like, oh yeah, you know.
Speaker: We're not going to take him off the bench though. It's sort of like what? Like, because to me that's saying, well, it was wrong, but it's acceptable. He doesn't have to be dethroned, right?
Speaker: It'll be okay. Oh. And so what does that mean? Right. What does that mean? That means that, yeah, it's wrong, but we're going to accept it. That's that's what I hear. Right. And so the court has to step in.
Speaker: And say well no. That's not how this works. You know, it's wrong and you're going to be punished. you're You're not going to be on the bench and your law license is suspended for two years. I'm surprised they didn't revoke it permanently, honestly.
Speaker: Um, you know, it's called out the most I think it said like the worst thing that occurred was the stepson situation. That's what they're saying here, but it's all awful.
Speaker: Well, maybe that's just the most obvious thing they can go after because there's absolutely no question. I think. in anybody's mind and if there is a question in your mind i can rest ah you can rest assured that ah There is no situation where.
Speaker: a judge would... Uh, properly. hear any sort of any sort of matter ah having to do with...
Speaker: a major player being their son. or stepson, or adopted son, or nephew. or niece or daughter, like that's a one step away relationship.
Speaker: And that is. absolutely unacceptable in every single situation that you would encounter. It's not just this one. It's just... It's not something that should happen. And the reason behind that is no matter, even the very best judge.
Speaker: It. They want to. Avoid. The appearance of impropriety. Right. And there's no way around it when you've got a close relative.
Speaker: yeah I'm not saying... So they are not saying, and I'm not saying that they would do something improper because their relative is. part of the case, but it... easily gives the appearance that It could.
Speaker: happen Right. it looks like it could be very easily unfair and you want to avoid that and therefore you recuse yourself. So I think that's probably the most cut and dry one.
Speaker: Because a lot of the other things, while the behavior is terrible, I mean, What are you going to do about it? It's a judge. right And honestly, I feel like he has that mentality. I can tell he has that mentality by the repeated offenses and just sort of...
Speaker: just not caring that he's acting so poorly. I don't think he gets it. and like I... I like, that's the state of the world. The state of the world is this guy thinks that everything he was doing here.
Speaker: It's totally fine, but... So. I understand. Like the steps on relationship is like the major issue. But let's just talk about causing a retrial.
Speaker: of whatever is happening that has put a live stream of child sexual abuse on the internet. And we've decided, you know what? It'll be okay for a second jury. Like, and I cannot stress this enough.
Speaker: Juries don't always get over this. This affects them the rest of their life. I would say that. Uh... The... Decision to not conflict himself.
Speaker: out and therefore recuse himself from the case. It. Damaged. I don't know what Ohio is, but probably 24 people.
Speaker: two juries full of people having to. go through And you're right. i can i can I don't get over some of the trials I watch, just like streaming. I'm not even in the jury.
Speaker: And I have like flashbacks from some of that stuff. Yeah. So I can only imagine what it i actually I know what it's like to be on a jury. I've been on a jury, but not in a I've never been on a murder trial jury or anything like that. But I've sat on a jury. And so.
Speaker: You would want everything to be right the first time. Right. yeah The fact that the judge ah can't sit. uh, without it.
Speaker: having the appearance of impropriety is a huge problem that's going to get overturned and remanded for a new trial every single time. And a one -step relationship, no matter how you... twist or turn it is always going to B.
Speaker: remanded. I mean, i I can't even imagine what I mean, maybe if you didn't know that it was like your child somehow. Yeah. But a stepson, you're going to know it's your stepson, right?
Speaker: Right. I'm just saying, like, I can't think of a single thing that would make somebody say, like, oh yeah, it'll be fine. Like, what, if they don't raise it on appeal?
Speaker: And that's not even something that they could waive by not raising it at. Because one of the cases, they raised it at trial, but on the other case, they didn't, right? And so that's not even something that you can waive.
Speaker: By not raising it initially. That's a statutory. like structural part of the case. that the judge never should. have been the judge on the case.
Speaker: Well, since he's not busy for the next two years, I wonder if there's something in Florida he could go do. I think that... You can provide some legal advice to a doctor down there.
Speaker: I know. Well, he doesn't have a law license. he might be able to get He might be able to pass the bar in Florida. Would the suspension in Ohio apply? I'm just saying.
Speaker: And just be like, oh, I think it would apply. But like, maybe he could like go in pro. Park Nishi on this. a particular situation. Oh, my God.
Speaker: this This is terrible. This behavior by someone on the bench is terrible. Meg, and you have to give us a closing line. I don't have a good closing line for this. I don't either. I don't either, but I...
Speaker: This is... This is the worst. I, you know, when initially when you sent this to me. And. You said something to the effect of like... you know.
Speaker: I don't know that it had to do with the death penalty that you're like. Is this what our judiciary is coming to? And I'm like, what could possibly be that bad? Well, this was much worse than that bad.
Speaker: Yeah, and like... and So it's interesting because it's gotten almost no traction online. i mean The dedicated listeners and the dedicated watchers of the blogs and stuff that are covering it are definitely covering it. But like... Somehow.
Speaker: We're here. We're just here. We're like, this is totally okay. I can say that if... A judge in the voting district that I live in. were to have done even a little bit of any of this behavior.
Speaker: I would make it a point. to not vote for them and to vote for their opponent. in the next election And I feel like that's the... best advice I could give to anyone who lives in the district of this judge.
Speaker: vote for the person running against them in fact i'm gonna i will expand what you said because i think what you said is a fantastic idea A lot of times, if you're voting in local elections, Please vote for the judges and please consider the independents because a lot of times the independents have not had time to get caught up in all the local politics and the political machines.
Speaker: And they're... just good lawyers and they're just good future jurists. So. Take the time to get to know those people that have been ADAs and assistant. but Public defenders and they've been you know toiling away in the local justice system for some time. Those are...
Speaker: possibly your Best bets. at having... like a good local jurist. who keeps the district honest and does, like...
Speaker: Help move. The. Pretty. I would say overstuffed. criminal system because there's very rarely justice in the system along. It helps.
Speaker: Do that when you bring in people. who are pretty much apolitical. I agree with that. I feel like a judge's position should be apolitical. I know that it's not.
Speaker: uh but That also has to do with... the premise behind voting, right? Right. You have to. affiliate with one side or the other. And you know, what's even worse is I realized that The fact that this man is a judge behaving so badly, it is a direct. reflection on the fact that he was ah elected.
Speaker: Yeah. Well, I don't have anything else on this guy. If he does something worse or appeals this and somehow it gets worse. I'll come back to him. Otherwise I hope to never hear his name again, to be honest.
Speaker: Yeah, i would I would take that. And I would. Take that as my sign to retire and move on.
Speaker: Special consideration was given to True Crime Access by Labradi Creations. dot com. If you have a moment in your favorite app, please go on and give us a review or a five -star rating.
Speaker: It helps us get noticed. in the crowd. This is... True Crime X. Yes.
Speaker: He took it too far
Speaker: Disappointment
Speaker: of something
Speaker: cultures like Jimin. I lost them.
Speaker: you're expecting. Taitions. The True Crime Access is brought to you by John. and Meg. It's written. produced. Edited. and post it. But John and Meg. You can always support True Crime Access through patreon .com.
Speaker: or if you have a story you'd like them to cover. You can reach them at true crime access .com. Thank you for joining us.
