Rex Heuermann Guilty Plea? LISK Case Update with Director Josh Zeman & Attorney Bob Motta

A major shift may be coming in the Long Island Serial Killer investigation. Reports suggest that Rex Heuermann is expected to plead guilty on April 8, 2026, in connection with the murders of seven women.

In this audio-only episode of True Crime with the Sarge, retired NYPD Sergeant Joseph Giacalone sits down with acclaimed director Josh Zeman and attorney Bob Motta of the Defense Diaries to break down what this reported plea could mean for the case, the victims, and the future of the investigation.

As co-creator of The Killing Season, Zeman brings a unique, insider perspective on the Long Island Serial Killer case, including the evidence, investigative missteps, and lingering unanswered questions.

In this episode:

• What a potential guilty plea could reveal about the LISK case
• Why this development may be happening now
• The impact on victims’ families and unresolved cases
• Key insights from years of investigating Gilgo Beach
• What questions may never be answered

If you’ve followed the Long Island Serial Killer case, this is a must-listen episode packed with expert analysis and real investigative insight.

Follow, rate, and review True Crime with the Sarge on Apple Podcasts for more in-depth true crime coverage.

#TrueCrime #LISK #RexHeuermann #ApplePodcasts #JoshZeman #ColdCase #TrueCrimePodcast #truecrimewiththesarge #defensediaries #sinisterwithjoshzeman 

Transcript

SPEAKER_02 0:00

This podcast contains subject matter which might not be suitable for all audiences. It contains adult topics and language. Listener discretion is advised. True Crime with the Sarge is a Sarge Media LLC production. Seven women, years of silence, decades of investigations, and a week or so before a major court appearance for the accused long-on-level serial killer Rick Herman. Rumor has it that he will be putting in a guilty plea, changing his not guilty plea. So this is going to be interesting. With us today to break this all down, we have Josh Zeman, director of the killing season, and the podcast Sinister with Josh Zeman. And from the legal aspect of it, we have attorney Bob Mata from Defense Diaries Podcast. Fellas, welcome to the show. And I've been looking forward to this for the last couple of days to speak with you. Good to see you guys.

SPEAKER_00 0:53

Good to see you. You too, Joe. Uh, thrilled to be here, man. Thrilled, I always love hanging, hanging with these guys. Two guys.

SPEAKER_02 0:59

So so yeah, the fellas are in this thing. So this is actually kind of interesting. But Bob, I want to start with you because there seems to me, seems to be, excuse me, a misconception about what this actually means, right? So people are calling it a plea deal, people are calling it a not guilty. Could you just set the record straight for what this really is in the legal sense?

SPEAKER_00 1:19

I I can, and I'm glad that you asked the question because uh a lot of people do misconstrue it. It can be confusing if you don't understand how the process works. So the easiest way to explain it is that fundamentally, defendants in this country have three three rights that are in stone, it's 100% their choice, and it's whether or not to plead guilty or not guilty, whether or not they're going to go bench trial or jury trial. And the third is whether or not they're gonna testify on their own behalf. Those are in the express domain of the defendant. Yes, attorneys can obviously advise their clients, but ultimately the decision is up to them. So when you move over to the Hewerman deal here, this is the equivalent to what happened with Brian Koberger. I don't think Ray Tyranny in this world or any worlds that may exist after this world is ever offering any kind of deal to Rex Hewerman, meaning that because typically a plea deal will shave time, there's some benefit to the defendant in order to entice them to enter into an agreed, agreed stipulated deal between the defense and the prosecution. That's not that's it's not what's happening here. What we see here is what they call a change of plea. And he is he's going to be in full, you know, in full view of the open court, he's going to change his plea from not guilty, which he initially stated to guilty. Now that's a vast difference from him getting a plea deal. They're just two entirely separate things. The even if if Tierney wanted to stop him, even if Tierney said, I want to go to trial on this, the victims deserve to get the facts, they need to hear what happened to their loved ones. You know, if the public outcry, because we all want to know. I mean, that that's the part of a case like this where you have somebody who is alleged to have done many, many horrible things over many, many years, and we still have a lot of questions as to whether or not there's there's others, and I think that a lot of us believe that there are. So we were hoping for a trial in the sense that maybe we'd get more answers during the course of that trial. But what he's doing here is he is simply uh exercising his right to change his plea. So that's what's gonna happen. He's gonna step into court. The judge is gonna say, I understand that your client has uh decided or elected to uh change his plea in the matter, and Hewerman will step up and he'll say, Yeah, you know, and and the bigger question, which we're probably gonna get to, well, let's let's I'm gonna wait to see what questions you have. I have a tendency to answer 15 questions before you ask them. So, does that answer your question?

SPEAKER_02 3:46

Yeah, just wanted to keep it simple, right? Because in the respect that, you know, right now the district attorney has basically been very public saying there is no deal, right? There's no deal. And he said it a bunch of times that there is no deal. Um, is that necessarily the truth? Well, we don't know, right? We don't we don't know for sure what what rate tierney is thinking, but it doesn't appear to be that way when you're watching this. I bet my house on it. I bet my house on it. Yeah, the evidence is just overwhelming, right?

SPEAKER_00 4:12

You know, I mean, he's going in for life without the possibility. You know, there is no death penalty in New York, so I think that that was uh gone the way of the dodo back in 2004. So when you don't have that carrot in terms of you know enticing a defendant to plea by saying, All right, we'll take the death penalty off the table, you know, in that situation, then you are talking about a plea agreement because there is a benefit to the defendant, and you know, that's something that was used to entice the defendant to change his plea, and and it's agreed upon by the parties. Here, you just have the defendant again exercising his right to say, you know what, and I'm sure we're gonna get into it, but for various reasons, and obviously we're gonna be speculating here as to why Hewerman made the decision he he's making, potentially. Um, you know, but it it's it's as simple as that. I like I don't think I really don't believe Ray Tierney has made any kind of offer to him because he's not gonna move off of life without the possibility for this guy ever, never in a million years.

SPEAKER_01 5:12

But right, it is important to note that this is still unconfirmed, unsubstantiated. This is we believe this is a leak, right? Like we can't even get corroboration. This is still somebody leaked this out, and I just wanted to be 100% sure. So I did checking all the articles. The only person, the only news outlet that said this might was quote negotiated was the post, New York Post. Oh, come on, yeah, you know.

SPEAKER_00 5:41

So you can even say that on a live. I've been roading post for three days straight on my Twitter account, man. Yeah, no, I you know it's it's true. It is worth definitely what you're saying, Josh. Until he does it. Right, right.

SPEAKER_02 5:55

But the lingering question, the lingering question I have for both of you, Josh, and I want to start with you. The lingering question is why and why now? That's basically two questions, but why and why now?

SPEAKER_01 6:06

Let's I do want to step back one quick sec because you explained something to me that I thought was really important in understanding kind of the larger thing. Number one, he could change his plea all the way up until sentencing. That was interesting to note. Uh, the other thing is, you know, this April 8th event is just him standing up and changing his plea. And Bob, you correct me if I'm wrong in any of this. The judge kind of really like, were you coerced or or any of that stuff asking him? And and is that when the judge starts to ask him the details about the murders? And only and does he only ask him the details of the murders of which he has been indicted for?

SPEAKER_00 6:53

Yeah, and I mean they call that a statement and allocution, and and that's another difference wherein if it's a if it's a plea deal wherein the the state has offered him something and they have accepted it, in that particular situation, the defendant doesn't have to say anything other than he's accepting the deal. So that's a vast difference than him changing his plea because when you have a plea agreement, uh the state will have to put forth their their facts that they would have presented at trial to show the judge, look, we had him, we had him dead to rights. This is what we would have presented at trial. In this particular situation, the judge basically needs the same thing from the defendant. Like the judge isn't going to accept a plea for a guy who's just going to turn around and say, you know, like I pled guilty, but I wasn't really guilty sometime down the road. So much I and I have no idea what Huberman would do. You know, he's got a massive ego, he's a narcissist, he's all those things. Maybe he spills BTK style, maybe he doesn't. Maybe he just does what Koberger says, where he just says, Yes, I'm guilty. I'm I'm guilty of that crime, I'm guilty of that crime without getting into any of the details because a judge isn't going to be able to force him to get into the details of the crimes.

SPEAKER_01 8:06

So okay, so that's interesting. I thought in a statement of what is it, allocution? Allocution, yeah. Allocution, you had to say, I am guilty of the crimes, at least that you're indicted for, and you have to give some kind of detail. Yes, I murdered this person, you know, uh on this date or at this time or in this place. None of that.

SPEAKER_00 8:26

Yeah, I uh not not as far as saying if they're taking responsibility for the crime that's typically enough for judges. Like we didn't we didn't hear Koberger say a word other than you know, he's guilty of the crime that he's been charged with. He didn't, he didn't everybody wanted to know, you know, but there was never any kind of you know definitive statement by Koberger, yes, I killed Maddie, yes, I killed him, you know. So I I mean a judge can't force you to talk.

SPEAKER_01 8:55

So next question, but it once he there still could be a plea deal that is then negotiated, or or like as of Monday, there still could be a plea deal that then comes in to be negotiated for more details and for other things, right? A chain a change of plea, you know, that it still allows for a plea deal.

SPEAKER_00 9:18

Oh, 100%. You know, but the the interesting question is what does tyranny have to offer? You know what I'm saying? I mean, it could be something as uh as basic as like you know, if if Hewerman has designs on going to a certain facility, right? You know, uh that that could be something where Tyranny could say, Yeah, you know what, man, I'll do everything I can to make that happen for you. I'm not gonna put it in writing, but what I need in exchange from you is details, and I'd like to know uh, you know, if there's any other victims that you'd like to talk about with me before we do it, you know what I'm saying? So I mean it it would have to be something wherein it enticed Huerman to enter into the deal because if he's just saying, nah, I'm not offering you anything, you're gonna get the same thing you're gonna get from the judge when he sentence you. So, you know, I mean, it's it, but I I'm sure a creative mind can think of some things that that might entice him to take a deal, even if he's not moving on the time aspect of it.

SPEAKER_02 10:20

Before we get it back into that, I'm just gonna got a question here, and thank you for the super, Megan. Says, please talk about the evidence would be released to the public after a guilty plea photos or other findings. What do you think we'll see? And Bob, this is one of the questions I wanted to ask you, but it was down the line. Because in Coburger, right? They didn't release anything. They had a there was a fight with foil stuff and like that. Do we see the same? I don't expect you to know everything about New York law, but do we expect to see the same kind of behavior here in a case like this?

SPEAKER_00 10:46

To be honest with you, I I don't think that they will, because I think this is an ongoing investigation. I don't firmly believe that these guys are satisfied that this is all he's done. You know what I mean? So if that's the case, meaning that they're still trying to connect him to the remaining victims, and they still think that there may be more additional victims, they may not be of the mindset that they want to uh put the evidence out or make it available via FOIA requests. So, I mean, and that's gonna be up to basically law enforcement at the end of the day. I mean, that's who you're making your FOIA requests to, and whether or not they're gonna release things, I would just anticipate because people are gonna try. That's there's no question about that. You know, I mean, people are they want to see I already sent my FOIA in. Yeah, right, you know, so I mean, whether or not they release it, I mean, is yet to be determined. I I just have a feeling that in this particular case, at least I would hope to be honest with you, that they are continuing to investigate it, even though you know they had to move forward on these charges. And as we saw, they had uh intervening um charges come in after you've been charged with the initials. And you know, so that that's one of those things where, you know, I'm kind of hoping that we don't get to see it because that means to me that they are continuing to investigate it. You know, that's always my thing with with these guys like Hewerman, you know, when they just they stop as soon as they get the convictions of the first people that that they've charged them for without continuing on with the investigation. And I think that's a disservice to to the other victims and and additional victims that we may not even know about.

SPEAKER_01 12:25

Can I ask a question, Joe, if you don't mind? Real quick. Um would there be uh an evidentiary reason to not release information about one victim because let's say, and I'll throw it out there, like they want to know about Carmen Vargas, and he doesn't say anything about Carmen Vargas. Is there an evidentiary reason why you wouldn't like release information about, let's say, Karen Vargata because somehow it relates to Carmen Vargas?

SPEAKER_00 12:52

Yeah, that's that's what I'm saying. I mean, if it's a continuing investigation for them, you know, that they don't know what may be connective tissue in terms of from one case to another or one that they haven't uncovered yet. So, I mean, I I just tend to think that law enforcement knowing how they typically operate and joke and speak better than this, they're gonna they're gonna try the best that they can to keep everything close to the vest because I think that they would be considering this an ongoing investigation, right?

SPEAKER_02 13:21

And one of the rules is always see what your case is connected to another one, especially when you're dealing with cold cases. And and now you know you have a known serial killer on your hands. There are the potential of having other cases. So, yes, they might keep certain things quiet, but you know what, though, Bob, you might have hit on something because one of the things that we saw in the omnibus is this reference to this Molano hearing. Now, this is a New York hearing. I don't know if if Illinois has something similar or other states have something similar, but basically it's the pretrial hearing where the judge determines uh if the prosecutor can introduce evidence of a defendant's prior uncharged crimes. Now, this is what the defense was saying that we don't want them doing it, but we don't know of any other uncharged crimes in in Rex's case. So it's like, is this is this kind of like uh maybe foretelling something? And then now all of a sudden that we're we're dealing with this.

SPEAKER_00 14:12

It sounds like it's 404B stuff, prior bad acts, which don't have to be charged. So and you see it in in every case. And typically, if it's you know, if the temporal aspect of it, the time aspect of it is is you know within a certain range, the judges are going to allow it in. Um you know, you can't you can't use that type of evidence at trial to say, okay, see, this is he's done it before, now he's done it again, but you can use it for motive uh and and various other other reasons in terms of getting that type of evidence in. But it sounds exactly what you're talking about, is like 405. Yeah, it sounds like they were worried about something, right? In that respect. But yeah, which if he pleads out, obviously.

SPEAKER_02 14:56

Yeah, so Winter Brothers story, thank you for the super. Can an appeal be sent? So we're gonna see are we gonna see something like in the Colberger case where basically like no backseats kind of thing? Like, dude, you're when you do this, there's no going back, there's no appeal after this.

SPEAKER_00 15:08

Yeah, I mean, as far as the appeal goes, it's it's interesting. So anything that would have been related to a trial is obviously going to be waived. So that's not going to be like a real issue. It does that mean that somewhere down the road he can't come in post-conviction world and try for an ineffective assistance of counsel claim and a and a post-conviction pleading. Yes, I mean, in theory he could, because ineffective assistance of counsel always survives, you know, it's like you can't really wave it. Whether or not that's going to be in a direct appeal, I doubt it, because the fact of the matter is with your direct appeal, which is the first appeal coming out of a conviction, you're limited to the record, you know, and the problem that you you rarely see uh ineffective assistance of claims in a direct appeal because they're not in the record. So because when I say you're bound by the record, you're basically bound to the transcripts and whatever pleadings were filed leading up to trial. That's it. Like you're not going to get like strategy type issues or the things that my lawyer should have done or didn't do because they're not on the record. Those are just those are things that may exist in the world as actual things. But if they weren't brought in front of the judge and made a part of the record, the the appellate court can't consider it. They're only going to consider things that were a part of the record. So that's where you would see that somewhere down the road. You know, it's like I hate to keep going back with Kohlberger, but you know, the there is this certain faction of society that thinks that the dude was like, you know, he had to plead out because he had no choice. And as soon as they took the death penalty off the table, that was his best thing. And he's got this big plan to now appeal it down the road. Well, I mean, number one, good luck with that. Number two, I don't remember anybody ever murdering four people uh or not murdering four people and then taking credit for it in terms of pleading guilty. Um, is that to say that that you know people haven't pled guilty to crimes they didn't commit? Of course not. I mean, that happens all the time, typically not quadruple homicides. Uh, but you know, here, I mean, in terms of a direct appeal, I think it's dead in the water. But in terms of uh anything else down the road, you're gonna always have the ineffective assistance of counsel. And you know, the one thing I think that most people would be wondering about are you know whether or not he'd be able to relitigate the fact that he lost on the DNA motions and the motions to sever, because those were really the big dogs here, right? Those are the kind of gut punches when you're the defense attorney and you take your swings on those things and you lose and you know it's coming in, and you know they're trying the the cases all together and they're gonna bootstrap one to the other, you're looking at it uh you know, with a with an eye towards realism, and you're telling your client, we're done, you know, we're done. They've they've got they've got incredibly powerful evidence, you know. So you can either be a human being and spare your family the nightmare of going through a trial and all that coming out. You can also uh spare the victims' families the nightmare, you know. But that's an interesting thing where Josh, you probably have more insight into that. Like I'm always curious, like you saw that split with the families in the in the Coburger thing. Some were outraged because in that particular case, uh, they did offer him the deal. You know, he he got a deal, which was we're we're gonna take the death penalty off the table, you know. So he pleads out, and and you had half the families furious because they wanted this guy to stand trial, you know, they wanted to have their day in court in terms of the families to to be able to kind of cathartically go through this thing and watch that guy squirm in the seat. And you know, I I don't know, everybody's different, everybody has certain feelings. This this isn't as fresh of a wound as say Koberger is. You know, some of these cases have it's been decades, so you know, the while the wounds obviously still there, it's not as fresh. So they may have been of the mindset, I I want to see this guy sitting in that chair and I want to see the prosecution tear him to pieces. We're at least owed that, you know, so they may feel slight in that sense, but at the end of the day, if the result is the same, which is life without the possibility, you know, for each of the victims, you know, it it it there's not much that they could do about it, you know, and and ultimately it's it's you know, you're avoiding the risk of any kind of mistake from the prosecution side at trial, which you know, god forbid would lead to an appeal, and god forbid lead to another trial. So, you know, it's definitely the safer, but plus the prosecution can't do a damn thing about it. If the guy's if the guy's exercising his right to change his plea to guilty, they can't stop it even if they wanted to.

SPEAKER_02 19:52

Right. So, like Josh, what we were talking about before, why now? Why?

SPEAKER_01 19:57

Look, there's a lot, you know, and for full disclosure for everybody, Joe and I have been asking each other why now, I think for five days straight, maybe 20 times a day, uh, having gone through uh a number of different reasons and kind of eliminating and putting them through. One of the early reasons that we were interested in was, oh, maybe it's about one of the things, and there's got to be a multitude, right? But one of the things we spoke about was money, was you know, look, there is an overwhelming amount of evidence, both forensic and circumstantial, so much evidence. So does Michael Brown turn around and go, bro, your goose is cooked, you know, you are not gonna win this. And so uh it is just better at this point to plead and save uh the cost, you know, of me defending you. But we then found out what we think 100% that Michael Brown is court-appointed. So technically it's not coming from Michael Brown in that respect. You know, in fact, he's probably walking away from a huge payday, considering the amount of money and time this trial would have cost. So that reason is off the table, you know. So it could it be or could it have something more to do, and I believe with the family, probably his family, more than anything. And I want to make a point here because I think this is where people kind of get this wrong. There's a lot of people who are like, he's a monster, which he is for sure. Rex only cares about Rex, sure. But look, I think the important point here is for the sake of his family, you know, it doesn't matter what we all think, it matters what Rex thinks. And Rex lives, number one, in a fully information vacuum. He hasn't seen probably any of the documentaries about him. He probably hasn't read half of the news articles about him. Uh his access to media is very limited. So I don't know if he's reading newspaper reports, but he has a somewhat limited worldview and he could still see himself as the savior of this family. You gotta think of the way that Asa, the the wife and the daughter have talked about him as a kind of savior. That's not just off-the-cuff language, that's a cultivated language. So he's constructed this very compartmentalized world that allows him to murder and still be a family man. And I have a feeling those are both working off of each other. So I think in you may you say he's a narcissist, of course, but narcissists can still love. It may not be the love that we truly understand. It may be transactional love, it may be um all this, but you know, he's he's still a human being, and you know, he's not this one lane, one you know, lizard-brained monster. So I don't say this in a way of sympathy. I'm just saying from his perspective, he's creating this reality and he's probably trying to be the hero once again. Maybe if not for his wife, then definitely his daughter. And we also have to remember like his daughter and his wife could be opened up to huge speculation, even more than they have. So I do tend to believe that he is probably doing this for his family in his mind. Also, a number of people have told him to do this, his family probably told him to do this. David Ramirez, his best friend, told him to do this, Jesperson told him to do this. I'm sure his lawyers was like, bro, your goose is cooked. So I think we have to think of it in that respect.

SPEAKER_02 23:34

Yeah, I mean, there's a lot of aspects of this too. But one of the things that, you know, from because I always think of the law enforcement perspective, but when I was doing these cold cases and you're doing these things, yes, you want to hear more from the suspect. You want him to talk about other cases, you want to close other cases. However, you know the best thing for this is that you don't put the victims' families through all this stuff. So we so in in from the law enforcement perspective, listen, I'd love to hear him talk about all these things, but I don't want him to talk about it. I want him to take the, I want him to plead guilty and spare the families this. He also spares his family, yeah, you know, the of going through this and the and the torture and all the other stuff, right? Because we know that this stuff exists between his Google searches and all the other accusations that were made in those, uh, you know, from the district attorney's paperwork. So we know that these things do exist. But the one, if you want to call it a bonus, right, uh, is that you free up the cold case task force now, who have still been working all the cases, right? Which then says, okay, are there any companion cases to this guy? And what about all the other cases? Because if you notice, Ray Tierney has been putting out more and more cold cases on his website recently. So hopefully he's doing that in anticipation of freeing up his team and the team of law enforcement that's already there. I don't see them disbanding that unit for anything, and I think they push forward.

SPEAKER_01 24:54

There's another point. Uh somebody, I'll be honest, somebody we've read these documents, right? RH planning hunt H and K document. It's terrifying. Yeah, we know he's a sexual sadist. Somebody showed me a picture, a video of the basement. And when I saw the picture of the basement, I can't really tell you why, but it all just came, it hit home for me, and I realized how terrifying three days of torture for your loved one would be. Like, and it like it, I gotta chill. And I gotta tell you, like, you don't want the family. I'm sure the families want justice, and like I'm never gonna tell anybody who's been a victim, you know, a family member, how to feel. But man, I don't know if anybody wants to hear, I don't know if the hearing it and knowing it is worth watching him squirm on the stand, considering we we only think I don't even think we can mentally comprehend what he did to these individuals.

SPEAKER_02 25:59

Listen, there's a hundred thousand images, right? And videos that they've they've they have. And if you also recall saying that this happened in the basement, and he's talking about basically, you know, putting people up, you know, hanging them on the thing, and then like yeah, to show the video of of beans, whatever, or things taken out of the ceiling. They showed they showed us that. So, yeah, that's the stuff that you don't want the families to hear at all costs because they've already been damaged on so many levels, and that could really set people back even more. Just want to get a quick shout out to Debbie Luttrell. Thank you very much for that super stick, Debbie. I appreciate it. Right.

SPEAKER_01 26:32

So the so the question becomes is he sparing his family of the horrific things that he did in that house to them? Like if he has again love, everybody's gonna be like he has no love, but you know, you don't it may not be the love that you understand, but there's some, there's gotta be something there. Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 26:52

What what do you think? Uh you know, from your from your take, Bob, you know, as a defense attorney, I'm sure you've had this conversation, right? You go into the into your client and you basically kind of lay it out all on the table.

SPEAKER_00 27:03

Yeah, I look any attorney that's worth their salt, after they took the big swings with the pretrial motions, again, like if you lose the DNA motions, you know it's all coming in, you've got real problems in terms of uh mounting any kind of substantial defense in the case. On top of that, again, you know, they lost their motion to sever the trials, you know. Um, and when you have that that combination of incredibly powerful evidence coming in, in addition to the fact that they're trying these cases together, which even though there was distance in time between the the actual homicides, they're trying them at the same time, which jurors are going to incorporate into their mindset, you know, and and it that that becomes another strong piece of evidence, even though it's not evidence in the traditional sense, it's evidence cumulatively that this guy's a monster, you know what I'm saying? Whereas if they carved out each and every one separately on its on its own accord and they tried each one of them, it it's that that issue doesn't exist from the defense side of it. Whereas when when you're trying them all together, that in and of itself becomes powerful evidence uh of who this guy is. So yeah, and we you know when you've gotten all the discovery in a case and you've litigated it pre-trial in terms of every everything that you can think to do in order to protect your client's rights and all of our rights. Again, I'm always teaching that on my channel. You know, if the cops have done somebody dirty and and violated somebody's constitutional rights during a search, don't blame the don't blame the defense lawyer for bringing it up. Blame the cop who played dirty. You know, the hope being if they suppress evidence, that cop the next time they're presented with that dilemma, they're gonna opt to do the right thing, you know. So that that was kind of the impetus of why suppression became a thing in the United States and why that Fourth Amendment right has to be protected for us, for the for the people out there that are are are good doers, you know, not criminals. We we want our rights protected, and you can't you can't pick and choose when it applies, it's got to apply across the board, even to monsters. So, you know, but once you go through that process and you realize that they have incredibly powerful evidence, you're sitting your client down. Then you're saying, Look, man, you sat next to me in the hearings, bro. You you know what they have, you know what you had on your hard drive, it's all coming in. There is no way to silver tongue our way out of this, it's it's unexplainable, you know what I'm saying? And and like you getting on the stand, Rex, ain't it? You know, you're not gonna be able to talk your way out of this one, big guy. So, you know, I mean, you're sitting there and you're saying, and he says, Okay, well, what are my options? And then that's when you have that conversation as the attorney. You're saying, Okay, well, your options are this, they're not gonna offer you a deal, however, it's well within your rights to change your plea. You can just accept a plea here, and you're gonna have to plead guilty to each and every count. And at that point, it avoids trial. Okay, well, what about my appellate rights? Well, they're pretty much toast, you know, you're not gonna be able to turn around and appeal because there's not obviously not going to be any trial issues because we're not going to trial. If there's pre-trial issues, those are going to be considered waived. So, you know, down the road, if you think that I didn't do the job or you felt that that I gave you bad advice and you entered into this, this uh, you know, you're gonna change your plea because of bad advice I gave you, and you you bring that down the road, that's up to you, buddy. You you know, but what I'm telling you right here is we're not gonna win this case, you're gonna put your family through an absolute nightmare of hearing exactly the depths of what type of human being you are and what you're capable of, on top of the fact, you know, because I agree with you, Josh, 100%. The way that you're if I'm going at my client and it's Rex Huberman, I'm less trying to sell, hey, why don't you give uh you know, give some grace to the victims' families and spare them the nightmare of it? Because that's probably going to be ineffective with them. So I'm going to go with your family, your daughter, your wife, you know, but spare them this nightmare. They've already lived through it for the last two and a half years. Let's let's end their suffering type deal.

SPEAKER_01 31:28

You know, now there could be one other thing that Joe and I talked about, which is, you know, he has some pretty unseemly Google searches having to do with you know transsexuals, homosexual. Not that that's unseemly, but you know, maybe to him, I we don't know. There's been a lot of talk about child pornography, uh, things like that. So the question then becomes, and and maybe because he's in segregation, it's not a problem, but still, could they reveal information generally to the public that he does not want out there? It's embarrassing, whether it's embarrassing for his family or whether it's gonna cause problems for him in jail. But there is some unseemly things in there which would only want which would make somebody else in jail want to take him out that much hard.

SPEAKER_00 32:13

Yeah, I mean, look, we all know their leaks will happen. Eventually, this stuff's gonna start getting out to the public. This is not gonna like everything that they have on them is not going to remain in a secret vault where you have to have the highest security clearance to even look at it like the alien stuff with the president. You know, this is gonna be a thing where there's gonna be people that have the information that would very much like to see him get executed by the hand of another inmate in prison, you know, and and a way to do that might be to leak some of this information. Nobody's gonna ever take credit for it, but you know, I wouldn't be shocked if it makes its way out to the public because it just has a way of doing that. You know, there that it's people have sometimes that eye for an eye mentality, and they like to try to give it a little boost by getting some of the the more granular, uh nasty stuff out to the public.

SPEAKER_01 33:09

Well, we had heard you know, some rumors, if you will, that that was gonna be one of the pushes from the prosecution, that they were gonna try, you know, he's such a man, right? He's so machismo with his hunting and and all this stuff that they were gonna try and take him down a notch by bringing up some of his um extracurricular activities, whether they relate to other men, transsexuals and or children.

SPEAKER_02 33:32

Well, well, his friend kind of gave him up too, right? He said that basically he was being bullied when he was in school, right? This huge guy, his huge person, was being bullied. So, I mean, all these things, you know, could play into that too. But it's an interesting, it's an interesting take, right? Which I I haven't heard anybody really talk about.

SPEAKER_00 33:48

Yeah, and it's uh I think it's a hundred percent accurate. I mean, you know, because when you kind of look over the the history of serial killers in our country and and look at how many of them kind of pled out, some have gone to trial. Obviously, Gacy went to trial, uh Richard Ramirez went to trial. Um, you know, I think for I think Dahmer ended up pleading, but his his sentencing, you know, where he was trying to avoid the death penalty, what was basically a trial. You know, that thing lasted a long time, I think.

SPEAKER_01 34:17

Killed in prison, killed in prison.

SPEAKER_00 34:18

Yeah, ultimately killed in prison. Um, but you know, that for Gacy had the same issues, like for what he was accused and eventually convicted of doing, his his adamant stance was that I'm not gay, I'm not a homosexual, you know, I'm a bisexual. Like that that was a really weird big thing for him. You know, I would hear it in the tapes all the time. He's like, Oh, yeah, he's like, you know, I would never kiss a man. He's like, it was purely sexual, you know, there was no emotion behind it, it was just it was a sex act, and that's it. You you know, and it was like, All right, John. You know, so I mean, though those things when you're talking about a guy with the big ego, those could definitely sway him to say, you know what? Yeah, you're right, I'm good. I'd assume not to get that stuff out.

SPEAKER_02 35:10

Megan, thank you very much for that super. And she writes another if his DNA enters CODIS after all this, and it will see New York State. A lot of people don't realize this, but New York State doesn't put your DNA into the system until a conviction. And if he pleads guilty, it still won't happen until the judge says, All right, that's it, you're done, right? Which won't happen on the eighth, right?

SPEAKER_01 35:30

That was my question. If that won't happen on the eighth, it'll happen when.

SPEAKER_02 35:34

Well, in one case it's got to be victim impact statements, right? And everything else that they're gonna do. They better give victim impact statements.

SPEAKER_00 35:39

Oh, yeah, they will. There, there's no way that they will deny the victims that. So I think what'll probably happen is the judge will will accept the plea, the plea will be entered, and then they'll set a date for sentencing because they're gonna need a pre-sentence investigation done if it hasn't been done, unless the defendant. That's basically where you get uh probation or a probation office to go out and they do an investigation, they talk about uh you know, to the families of everybody, but primarily the defendant, because what they're trying to do is put together a report that's going to, you know, kind of outline for the judge who this guy is, what he is, whether, you know, in terms of trying to help the judge come up with a proper sentence. And in a case like this, I mean, there's not gonna be any kind of budge from the judge anyway. I don't know that the judge has discretion either way, you know. I I think that that's probably a mandatory sentence with the you know what he's been charged with. So ultimately, whether or not they're gonna want a pretrial investigation to be done. I mean, you see it all the time in cases where, you know, maybe the pretrial investigation was done leading up to trial um in anticipation of a guilty uh verdict. But typically, when you get those cases where they turn around after the trial, I've seen it, and it always kind of takes me by surprise because it's just not how we do it here in Illinois. But then they'll turn around and sentence them the same day, you know. I'm like, oh wow. So, but yeah, there will be a separate day, I imagine. And I'm gonna I'm sorry, Josh. Go ahead.

SPEAKER_01 37:12

No, no, no. I don't understand what's the point of this thing, this kind of investigation, secondary investigation.

SPEAKER_00 37:19

Well, it's not a secondary investigation, it's it's done for the purposes of sentencing alone. So, you know, but again, in New York, and I'm not a New York lawyer, so I don't know if the judge has any wiggle room or if these are mandatory sentences in terms of what he's been charged with. If they're mandatory and there's no wiggle room, then there's really no point in doing it, you know, because typically you're doing it to kind of get background on the guy beyond just what's on the papers in front of everybody. You know, that that's what they're doing with these pre-sentence investigations. They're going and talking to family, friends, they're trying to see, you know, if there's any potential for for any kind of leniency that should be brought up to the judge or this guy irredeemable. Good luck with that. Right.

SPEAKER_02 38:01

Yeah. And I'm gonna speculate. Oh, I'm sorry. I'm gonna speculate. I think sorry, go ahead, Judge. No, I think I'm gonna answer your question. This is gonna happen quick because we're talking, we're talking April 8th, right? This thing starts. What's coming up? You got May, you got Labor Day, you got Memorial Day in the summers, and we know the courts kind of shut down June, July, and August. So I think this thing gets done rather quickly. I see it done before Memorial Day, for sure, even maybe even sooner.

SPEAKER_00 38:30

Wow, yeah. I mean, they they could they could make it in two weeks. If if a pre-sense investigation isn't a thing and they're not worried about that at all, then they're the judge can set it for next week, you know, or you know, the week after April 8th. You know, I mean, there's because basically you just want to give the families time to prepare their victim impact statements and get everybody ready and get all your ducks in a row, and you know, then you come in and you have the sentencing. You know, it's it's one of those things where you know, again, I think people that are hoping to get the details, unless this guy turns out to be like Dennis Rader, you know, I mean, Rader spilled it all, like he couldn't wait to tell his story. I mean, the guy pled, but he couldn't wait to tell all the gruesome details of all of his crimes. I mean, we just don't know Rex like that yet. You know, we we don't know what he's gonna go in with. I you know, I mean, what do you really heard his voice yet? Would you want to hear? Like, I mean, but aside from just like the kind of the you know that that interest that we have in the macabre. I mean, would you guys want to hear all the details?

SPEAKER_02 39:37

No, not interested in the details, I'm just interested in other victims. That's where that's where my interest lies, and that's just me as an investigator. I want to know about those other cases, I want to close those cases, I want to tell the families that we have the person responsible, and then however they deal with that, that's you know, that's something that they're gonna need help with. But as you know, this is never over for them. I mean, the families are never this is never over for them. Never, never, never.

SPEAKER_01 40:01

But you know, it's it's it's interesting to know that Rader, by the way, uh he had a letter correspondence with the police, he was always trying to to give them information or take credit. This is not something that Rex did. Rex didn't really communicate with the police, so I think it's going to be a different thing. The other thing you mentioned, Bob, just on a historical note, Rifkin. He's basically, in some respects, you might say, Rex's mentor, andor you know, or what did Kemper do, and what did Rifkin do? That if you want to look, you know, you look to those guys. Rifkin, he after he was convicted for the first victim, he spilled all the beans about everybody. Um, but only after convicted. Now, there's a lot of DNA evidence against Rex, which I don't think there was against Rifkin in the same manner. So, you know, it's just interesting to see what may happen in that respect.

SPEAKER_00 40:59

Yeah, yeah, that that will be interesting to see. And and like Gacy was one of those guys, he took it all the way through trial, but that was you know an insanity defense trial. So, I mean, theoretically, he had he had a like at least a shot at winning it. If you can convince 12 people that a guy who killed 33 people somehow doesn't deserve to be executed, which is a tall task, tall task. My my dad was up against it on that one, but you know, I mean, there up until the guy was executed in '94, he'd never admitted anything.

SPEAKER_02 41:34

You know, he just he took it to his grave. Bob, there's a second part of this question. So if the DNA goes in there and another state picks him up that has the death penalty, will they will they how would they would they try to get him out of New York to bring him there for trial and then execute him in that state? Uh theoretically, they could.

SPEAKER_00 41:52

I mean, we saw it with Lori Vallow, right? So Lori Vallow, she was charged obviously in in uh Idaho, I think is where they tried her first, and then ultimately she was convicted there. But then Arizona said, Hey, wait a second, uh, we got some business we have to handle here. So, you know, they transferred her to Arizona and ultimately, um, you know, she tried, I think they tried two cases against her, both of which she acted as her own attorney in both of them. Um, you know, and ultimately, I think she's still in Arizona. Like, I I don't I don't think that they gave her back to to uh Idaho. So that is an interesting question. If they nail him in a state that is a jurisdiction that has the death penalty, I mean, and they convict him and they they haul him back, and you know, they'll work it out. The states will agree, they're not gonna not allow another state to get justice for one of its victims. So they'll they'll haul him into court and whatever that state may be. And if he's convicted and he gets the death penalty, well, that state's gonna execute him.

SPEAKER_02 42:56

Yeah, because someone else had to ask a question that I I can't find it, but it said, um, like if what happens if they find other cases once he takes his guilty plea? Yeah, or once he pleads guilty. They're not gonna retry him in New York, they're just gonna add it, you know. Okay, you got 700 years. If you live that long, we're gonna we got you, you know, we're gonna then we'll try you for this. I mean, I don't think they're gonna spend the just drop the paper on it.

SPEAKER_00 43:18

Yeah, I I mean if you're the family of that victim, though, does that satisfy you?

SPEAKER_02 43:25

Probably not, but I think the reality of it is I don't think anybody anticipates them going through another trial if the guy's been convicted of seven cases already.

SPEAKER_00 43:33

I think the I think that the hope would be that they'd have to charge it, you know, and indict them, or well, I would assume that they'd probably just indict them. And you know, did you put that in abeyance? It well, I mean, you you don't have to put it in abeyance, but you could just go to them and say, Look, you know, it's the same, same stuff, buddy. We've got the you know, we got the same powerful evidence. You know, you just want to chalk it up and just plead out to it, you know, to save everybody, including you know, your family. family, you gotta always lean on the your family thing with Rex, you know, do you like and just and just get sentenced for it? Because I mean they they would absolutely I think that there would be some outcry if they discovered that that you know they had the evidence to charge them on other other victims' crimes and they're just like you know this guy's not getting out anyway we're not gonna we're not gonna give that family justice I think that there'd be some upset people you know because what do you what are you are you valuing money over people's lives kind of seems that way right yeah I mean it's it's your job do your job I don't care how much money it costs us a it's our money anyway and the taxpayers demand it you know make this guy accountable for each and every crime that he committed that's where we're at with it explore call thank you for gifting that membership and Missy been a member for 22 months we all love missy thank you very much missy so what do we where do where does this go so now set us up Bob he's gonna be brought into court on the 8th and how does this all go does it does it like is it like a like the whole thing going a little crazy in the beginning or is it just going to be like the defense attorney's gonna stand up because I don't think he's ever going to have an argument that he had ineffectual counsel.

SPEAKER_02 45:12

Because honestly I think Michael Brown's done a fine job already bringing up all these different things um is is that how it basically goes that Michael Brown would just stand up and say you know Your Honor my client's got something to say is that how it works uh yeah I mean there they're the judge isn't going to allow for like a circus in there but essentially it'll get called like anything else and the people that do know what's going on are defense counsel the prosecutor's office and the judge so they'll know ahead of time if it is his uh intent to to change his plea to to guilty on all counts then the judge will know ahead of time and then the judge will just run that hearing accordingly it'll it's not gonna be a big production it's going to be like the judge in any other case you know accepting somebody's change of plea and going through what he has to go through he will you know ask him a series of questions is this voluntary have you been coerced you know are you under the influence of drugs or alcohol you know you're doing this under your own volition all those questions will be asked just to protect the record and make promised anything no yep all those things and then ultimately uh he'll go ahead and change the plea and that's where you'll get that statement and allocution and you know like how he's going to play that who knows you know but it's like the judge can't force him to say I need details buddy like you just saying I did it isn't enough.

SPEAKER_00 46:43

I need to know the judge isn't gonna do that. You know it's like in the end he can't force him to talk you just you know you can't do it.

SPEAKER_02 46:50

So Josh we know that you've been investigating this case for over a decade right so we had the killing season we had all that stuff you had monster on top of that now this is a basically a third chapter. So let's look at the big picture stuff here Josh does this look like the end of the Lisp case or just a chapter of wreck human I in some ways I wish it was the end because I wish we were going to get the answers.

SPEAKER_01 47:17

I'm happy that theoretically that the families won't have to go through you know the the terrible things that were done but tragically this only opens up another chapter I want to know about Carmen Vargas I want to know about Karen Vargata I want to know about peaches. Remember we were saying like imagine if he turns around and be like and by the way you know I was the killer of peaches and how that would throw everything into disarray so and he could say anything he wants right I mean basically he could go in there say he was the second gunman on the grass he knolled yeah I mean so unfortunately it's a little bit back to square one in terms of trying to find out about these other victims and I you know whether it's going to be victims who aren't in Long Island but let's just start with Long Island I mean but I do want to ask you guys a question because this is something that I was thinking about what reading the tea leaves what does a plea tell us about some of the questions that we've had about this case if you think about it if why would like would he plea if he was working with somebody else would he plea if he was working with James Burke I'm not suggesting that but I'm just saying there's things that you may be able to kind of assess or narrow in based upon the fact that he has pleaded I think that's a very interesting thing to look at.

SPEAKER_00 48:52

What are other things you learn or might make might deduce about this case based upon the fact that he has pled I I think he puts a lot of that to rest by doing that because you know it's either two things one he wants sole responsibility for everything or two these people had nothing to do with anything and he just this this is it it's over but there are people that will fight this though no matter what like they will be adamant even like his wife you know a lot of people as somebody in in the in the comments said well is she going to believe him now right uh I mean at this point even his daughter changed right she did a 180 you know by the end of that peacock thing uh you know listen now everybody's gonna handle this I'm not saying I'm not my and my point of illustrating this is to not somehow bring in that the fact that I would ever think Burke is is uh connected my point is is for all the folks who do think that which we do not think that is to say look folks maybe this may help put some of those uh conspiracy theories to rest about groups of individuals I'm just trying to show the general public that please let's stop with these conspiracy I wish you're right but that'll never stop man that'll never that'll yeah you know and that's that's the thing about when when these guys decide to plead out on cases like this cases where there's huge public interest where there's people that are invested in this case they're invested uh you know on behalf of the victims they're invested in wanting advocacy and you know these victims to get their names back i mean we we see so many of the advocates in this case and and I consider both of you gentlemen to be that plus Raul who is you know catch list like just people out there that have invested huge amounts of their time blood sweat and tears and investigating this thing there's a certain sense of it just being an incomplete story you know it's it's not satisfying when somebody pleads out because we're not getting the answers that we feel like that everybody deserves you know I mean and that's that's a bitter pill to swallow you know ultimately is it going to spare a lot of feelings at the end of the day yes you know but it's also going to leave a lot of questions unanswered unless Huberman decides to start spilling you know which he could you know what I'm saying but it's just it's just not a satisfying thing when when you follow a case this heavily and and especially you Josh I mean man like you were in it brother you know what I'm saying so like there's gonna be this aspect of like damn man there's a lot of stuff I wanted to know that that I was really I I just I was gonna sit there on you know that that bench in the gallery every day of that trial just soaking it all in because there's so much I need to know you know what I mean and it's like we're not necessarily gonna ever get those answers and you know and it is wholly unsatisfying it really is and it is actually was my was one of the questions I wanted to ask Josh is you know Josh you invested a lot of time in this list case what did you wish for or what would you think you would have pushed harder for back then knowing what you know now like was there a specific part of when you were doing this investigation that you say you know what I was kind of close and I should have pushed harder I mean everything I mean Dave you know Dave should have pushed harder should not have assumed that law enforcement had checked all the boxes when it came to Dave's conversation I don't know if that would have changed anything it would have got us maybe to end point quicker but that would be the one but I gotta tell you just the thing that's running through my mind and again not because I believe it's connected but more that so we could stop talking about it not that she doesn't deserve to be talked about but Shannon Gilbert like oh my God please for the you know for the love of God let us get an answer just did you do it?

SPEAKER_01 52:41

No great okay move on you know there's so many outstanding issues but that you know that that that's that's true crime.

SPEAKER_02 52:52

Well and it's neither here nor there for us I mean we have no control over that but Bob there's no cameras in the courtroom so I need you to tell us remember when we were kids you know put on your lawyer helmet everybody when they do the presses right so the defense is going to talk and the prosecutor is going to talk is there any specific words that we should be keying in on or looking you know into that that kind of that lawyer speak that might give us an insight about maybe what was really going on in the background good point.

SPEAKER_00 53:18

Yeah like I mean it from Hewerman's side of it I I don't imagine Brown's gonna say much you know like I mean and if it's going to be any kind of statement it's gonna be curated and it's going to be something to the effect of because the one thing we know Hewerman's not going to be in front of the cameras talking it'll it'll be his attorney and if it's a situation where you know maybe he tries to put Rex in a better light you know like if he's acting right I mean which seems impossible right but if he's gonna say well you know Rex you know was a pretty pragmatic person in a lot of different ways he understood what the evidence was he understood that we were unsuccessful in terms of our our motions that that we filed pre-trial and you know ultimately he understood that this was going to only end one way and uh it was it was his desire to spare his family any further harm you know and that's something of that effect. I mean he's certainly not going to get into any details of the crime he's certainly not going to breach any privilege that may have taken place any conversations between himself and Rex.

SPEAKER_02 54:31

I mean none of that stuff's gonna happen you know I mean what you're more likely going to see is is tyranny out there you know uh taking a victory lap yeah right and rightly so you know they they they they did good work I mean it was that sucks yeah yeah I know man again it's that unfulfilling thing not satisfying thing um you know but it's it's it's just kind of how this thing works man yeah no I hear Debbie Lutrell thank you for the super says laurie valu has been sent back to Idaho Idaho's been put on the map recently boy in the last year or so and not in a good way dude grief in Utah like Utah and Idaho like I don't know is it in the water over there it's like I don't know I mean look at Long Island like how many serial killers that we had over there and now you there's there's talk of another one this guy Arthur Kinlaw now has been you know Mary Murphy I don't know if you know Mary Bob you know she's she's an icon in New York um reporting and journalism yeah and your show yeah she's awesome I love we love Mary and she was just talking about another case that I mean it's like you're sitting there going like are you kidding me right we might have another one going on here at the same time but but look I you know what just us aside I and let's bring it back because just I don't want to be virtue signaling or something but just us aside I the real question is what do the families think of all this do the families want and I'm very interested because I knew these families when I interviewed them 10 years ago you know what do they want do they want to have them squirm on the stand or do they not want it and you know people react to to grief and pain in a lot of different ways yeah I and it's it's you know in and I know I keep referencing Koberger but kind of in in the last year it's the closest in time and it's the most relevant kind of thing to to compare it to and again there you know that was a deal like it was that first question you asked me it was a different thing it was a a deal that the state offered him and he accepted it which was plead guilty and we'll we'll take death off the table and you saw the outcry like in a lot of different ways not only from the victims' families in terms of like how dare you how dare you offer this guy a plea and take death off the table we wanted to see that guy cook killed our child that was justice for us and you've robbed us of that so not only was he getting it from the families a lot of people thought that that Bill Thompson wasn't up to the task and then he and he he weaseled it that he didn't want to try the case so he took the you know what I mean so like he got that kind of that backlash which you're not gonna get here because tyranny has nothing to do with this clearing the tyranny off the deal you know yeah you know and I don't think Tierney would have relished the challenge I think he would have he would have eaten him for lunch he would have oh my god yeah for lunch yeah but which probably has something to do with the decision right it's just like bro this guy's gonna hammer you does that look like Josh he's messing around and Josh if you remember I had it remember we had said way back when I said he could ride this straight to the governor mansion mansion this case I mean as simple as that and listen the not only is the evidence overwhelming but when you read the um reaction to the omnibus I mean basically he was just like just slapping people around at that point it's just like okay I I I also did want and we haven't mentioned this but in in addition to the other victims you know I did want to know I I was hoping Michael Brown was going to open up the door to some uh a little bit more clarity and understanding of the corruption that was going on between Burke and Spoda at the time or highlighting their deeds in a way that shows how detrimental both to the case and to law enforcement's previous work and and to just jurisprudence you know arguing about the number of serial killers for political reason reasons with Dormer rather than you know I wanted all that you know all those chickens to come home for roost if you will so that we truly understand the problem that happened back then because I still think we don't I you know again I don't think there's guys going around killing people but I think there's really just disgusting behavior there that's worth making public.

SPEAKER_01 58:59

Now we will never know that as well.

SPEAKER_02 59:01

Yeah no and amongst other things too exactly like you know but getting back to the families I mean some families will be I'm sure might be upset about this some you know might not be but think about this for those poor families that have been struggling through this who for better part of a decade or more than a decade never even thought this case was going to get solved. Right. And and I was leaning towards that way too a few years ago saying like I think this case might be too far gone to even close. I mean we're talking like at the time you know 10 11 years out and you say to yourself boy you know not knowing of course because we only know this much about what what's really going on in the case but you know what I think a lot of families are grateful too I would imagine that this has gotten to this point where you're gonna have somebody and and that who's going to be held accountable whether he's gonna plead guilty or been found guilty in a court but I can't speak for them but I would only assume that that would be the case too yeah I mean it's it's sad. You know at the end of the day it's it's a tragedy you know so Bob Bob she boogies want to know your secret to your perfect hair my God I know they're not talking about me.

SPEAKER_00 1:00:09

So um you know on that product product I always put some kind of hair jelly in there. So you know it's uh I'm trying to keep up with Josh there and his fabulous quaff.

SPEAKER_01 1:00:20

Look at that i i I made my hair more gray to match yours by the way so Jine Bob says uh well let's say what we don't know will ever come out what the defense of the state know right so there's there's a lot of things that we we don't know and I think that's what kind of uh situation that we're we're we're dealing with here and and and listen the public I understand is very concerned about what they want to know but in in the reality of this we don't get a chance to to get a to get to know everything and nor are they entitled to everything yeah I mean and and it's that thing you know it's especially in the world that we live in now where we have access to so much because of the internet you know we're all accustomed to being able to to get the intel that we want and if we can dig for it we'll find it because it exists somewhere in these types of cases where you're essentially talking about are they going to release discovery publicly we may never get the answers i mean but there was there was huge huge drops by the prosecutor's office i mean in coberger i mean they they really dumped a lot like a vast majority of the the discovery in that case like thousands and thousands of pages tyranny may be of the same mindset you know he's like like i i hear you public and here i'm gonna give it to you you know have at it dig in you can't do that right there's no way what tyranny yeah to release the discovery sure why not i mean the pri it's it's the it's the prosecution's call like what what would bar him from doing that uh unless it's an ongoing investigation that's what i'm saying it's like if that thing is still going if there's still like like we gotta keep some we gotta keep and that might be a clue can I right that might be a clue is there anything to read from his pleaing with regards to victims in other states i e why would he plead guilty if he had victims in other states wouldn't it be better to roll the dice well here flesh that out for me how do you how do you think that would benefit him because then he knows he's gonna plead guilty and then he's got these other crimes that he committed in these other states and then he's just gonna he could go for the death he could get on the death penalty for those so if you did do vic crimes in other states that you killed wouldn't it be better to have this legal go proacted go as long as it can because then that staves off the inevitable of what may happen later on down the line I mean look if if you're convicted of uh a crime uh that is death penalty eligible in a state and you and you go through the process and that takes two or three years and then ultimately you're convicted I mean the the appeals process on a death penalty case short of you know the defendant waiving all appeals and saying I'm ready put me down um you know is going to be 10 to 15 years.

SPEAKER_00 1:03:21

Well the average is huge right yeah you know what I'm saying so like I I don't I don't think and frankly whether or not he was delaying this thing and and trying to stretch it out for as long as he can worrying about other cases he might pick up in other states I mean they they would still charge him like nothing stops him they don't have to wait for him to get prosecuted here and found guilty to charge him in other states I mean if the guy's committed a crime and they have the evidence they're gonna they're gonna indict him you know I mean they're just gonna do it there's a there's no stopping that train because you know I mean any prosecutor any any county in any state in this country that has the evidence against this guy that he killed one of their own they're going after him you know what I mean regardless of where this they could do it while he's on trial and and there we haven't even discussed Joe as you said right maybe we'll save this for next week considering all the answers that we still need questions to because I have a list of questions that that I got a whole notebook of stuff we need to and how we're gonna get the answers to that to that is the question.

SPEAKER_02 1:04:29

Yep well listen for retirement yes all right sure no problem well everybody I mean listen we had a nice nice crowd uh listening to us and watching us today so I want to thank Bob Motta from Defense Diaries make sure you go over there his link has been shared in the chat make sure you go over there and follow Bob if you're not doing so already Josh even his Sinister is also in the in the chat make sure you go and follow them and guys I wanted to make sure that we will be covering this again yeah next Sunday Josh and I will be back on on Sinister on his channel next Sunday 2 p.m and any Bob you got any upcoming shows that you'd like to uh talk about uh actually I finally got a breather I was on like three weeks of trials I did the Corey Richens live streaming that trial every day and before that it was Colin Gray that trial with the you know the dad of the school shooter the first guy in yeah American history to be charged with a a murder charge not voluntary manslaughter or involuntary manslaughter and then we went right into the Kelsey Fitzsimmons thing which was a short trial so uh we're definitely gonna be covering uh the the appelle's brief and the Richard Allen case the state has answered uh Allen's brief so we're gonna be doing that we might do that tonight we've been talking about it uh but otherwise um I'm hoping to still get on Josh's show not to put you on the spot I like wanted to do the Gacy thing I feel like if you have a really good conversation about the Gacy thing I think it would be right up your alley

SPEAKER_00 1:06:00

So hopefully, hopefully that happens house.

SPEAKER_01 1:06:02

Josh's killer clowns, killer clowns.

SPEAKER_00 1:06:04

Yeah, indeed. That's it, man.

SPEAKER_01 1:06:07

Um, also, folks, do me a favor, please. Questions you want answered. I I think that would be an important topic for next week. You know, issues that we want answered, questions, people are bringing up some great stuff. Lockers, storage lockers. Are we gonna ever find out about that? Victims, Carmen Vargas. You know, there's so much in my head. It really didn't hit me until Joe just asked me like how bad you feel about all this.

SPEAKER_02 1:06:34

Well, we're on overtime already. So, folks, listen, thank you very much for listening and paying attention. Make sure you said Defense Diaries, Sinister with Josh Zeman. Make sure you do that. You guys hang out one second. We're gonna say goodbye to everybody. Take care, everybody. For more shows like this, check out True Crime with the Sarge on YouTube or on my official website, josephjackalone.com. This podcast is owned and operated by Sarge Media LLC. All rights reserved. Thank you for listening.