U.S. Phenomenon with Mario Magaña
Welcome to "U.S. Phenomenon" with Mario Magaña, a riveting podcast that dives deep into the unexplained and the extraordinary. Join Mario, the host as he explores the most intriguing paranormal events, alien encounters, and mysterious sightings across the United States. With his unique blend of real-life experience and passion for the unexplained, Mario brings you thrilling stories and expert insights in every episode. Whether it's alien abductions, ghostly apparitions, or cryptozoological creatures, Mario's engaging storytelling will captivate and keep you on the edge of your seat. Tune in to "U.S. Phenomenon" and embark on a journey into the unknown that will have you questioning everything you thought you knew.
U.S. Phenomenon with Mario Magaña
Unraveling Small-Town Mysteries: Crime, Media, and Justice in the Pacific Northwest
Have you ever wondered what lies beneath the surface of small-town mysteries? This episode takes you into the heart of the Pacific Northwest with a focus on Fall City and Carnation, where peculiar happenings have left both residents and investigators scratching their heads. Steve Hickey, a veteran crime reporter, joins us to unravel the threads connecting the notorious 2007 Carnation massacre to a recent, equally baffling case in Fall City. His unexpected involvement as a potential juror adds a personal twist, as we navigate the murky waters of crime reporting and the intense public scrutiny that comes with it.
Our discussion takes a critical look at the media's role in shaping legal narratives, especially when traditional journalism intersects with modern platforms. We dissect a gripping case that has captured the attention of a tight-knit community, where the delicate dance between media coverage and legal proceedings can influence the course of justice. The volatile nature of these events underscores the challenges faced by law enforcement and legal teams, highlighting the broader implications for the communities affected.
We also explore the evolution of crime investigation, from the potential of DNA testing to the ethical dilemmas surrounding juvenile suspects. The chapter on crime scene controversies offers insights into the intricacies of legal strategies, while our conversation about sex work and crime prevention provides a broader societal perspective. Steve Hickey's insights—paired with my own reflections—promise a nuanced exploration of true crime, justice, and community impact. Join us for an eye-opening episode that promises to challenge your perceptions of crime and media.
Fan Mail Be apart of the show, or send your suggestions or feedback.
Elevate the Extraordinary: Support U.S. Phenomenon!
Welcome to US Phenomenon, where possibilities are endless. Put down those same old headlines. It's time to expand your mind and question what if? From paranormal activity to UFOs, bigfoot sightings and unsolved mysteries, this is US Phenomenon?
Speaker 2:From the Pacific Northwest in the shadow of the 1962 World's Fair, the Space Needle. Good evening, I don't even know how to talk anymore. Good evening, this is Mario Magana and I'm your host for US Phenomenon. I'm a little. Oh, jesus Christ, I'm so all right. Yeah, I'm just puttering along here. Our guest tonight is no stranger to this show and many of those around the Pacific Northwest and abroad. If he's not out chasing televangelists in Texas, he's out here in the Northwest, being the, I would say, leading the chase for crimes out here in the Pacific Northwest, the, uh, the chase for crimes out here in the pacific northwest. Our guest tonight is steve hickey, photog. Steve, uh 81, I mean, jesus christ, welcome back to the show.
Speaker 3:Wow, hopefully having me, especially under these circumstances.
Speaker 2:I mean, I just am gonna go ahead and just continue to get go through it, but, um, let me ask you this. So when we decided that we were going to do this topic here about one of the biggest let me just get to what the hell's in the water in fall city carnation, I mean, think about this real quick you had this massacre that happened on christ Eve 2007. The carnation, where the boyfriend and the girlfriend or whatever they were, I mean they killed the entire family. It was like a whole thing. And then now we have this situation. Now this is in Fall City, right?
Speaker 3:That's correct. What's in the water? No-transcript man.
Speaker 2:When they do it, they do it big I was gonna say because, like, I mean, I remember that case in general and man boy, well, let me tell you, when I was, uh, before I started doing the radio show, I was still working in in broadcast, but I got summoned for that case. I made it into the jury box, which was cool, really cool. Um, my only, you know, I was pretty straight down the middle. Just I was really trying to try to work it and, sure enough, um, you know, uh, the guy, um I, what was his name? Um, um, I want to say it was like my uh, uh, mcelroy, or something like that.
Speaker 3:So I should have prepped for that one. I didn't even think about it. Yeah, I think it was, though so he was there in the.
Speaker 2:He was sitting there looking at me. I was like, oh my god, I'm like, I'm sitting this close. I mean I'm in the jury box, the. What eventually got me out of the the case was I mean I you know I couldn't sit in on a long case like that and not get paid. So, yeah, I appreciate king county for uh allowing me to walk, but, man, that would have been a great case to be a part of. Yeah, absolutely. So what's going on in uh carnation? I know that you, uh there's been some twists and uh, some twists and turns in regards to this false city case, in regards to implications of like that have been transpiring and and like kind of bringing you into the fold. Is that right?
Speaker 3:yeah, oddly enough, you know, normally I'm from the outside looking in.
Speaker 3:I didn't expect to get named in the documents and that's exactly what happened and so, um, you know, there's been some it's kind of the latest big twists and turns and and we just had a final hearing yesterday on this portion was there has been an insinuation that the defense had participated in evidence tampering, evidence theft, and then the defense had participated in evidence tampering, evidence theft, and then the defense came back and accused the prosecution of really trying to take away their client's ability to a fair trial, dragging this unfairly into the media and used me as an example because I was on the John Curley show on Cairo Radio and spoke about some of the conversations I had.
Speaker 3:In the end it was very much taken out of context radio and spoke about some of the conversations I had. In the end it was it was very much taken out of context. We can go through some of that tonight, but uh, it was interesting nonetheless, just to be, you know, brought into it, brought into the rough in the end. That you know there's been a determination yesterday of, uh, who's at fault or not at fault.
Speaker 3:We can go over tonight, but it was really it was kind of an interesting thing, because you never know who's watching. You never know who's listening. Sure, and it could be really smart people sitting around analyzing what you've said and done as if it's post-game footage, and I think I like that. You know, after the football game they come back and go hmm, what do you think about this? What do you think about that? Like drawing the circle, what do you think about right there?
Speaker 2:And then making making you know a determination that they believe that there's something improper happening. What's interesting to me about that piece where you talk about the improper uh conversations that may have what they were thinking may have happened?
Speaker 2:no, uh, you're, you're press yes you are press, so uh, is it? Would you say that there maybe it's cutting edge? We're on the fringe right now, because of you being a newer style of media, that they were coming after you, well, so they seem to go after the work I was doing in the I guess quote-unquote legitimate side.
Speaker 3:It was what I was doing on a mainstream channel, if you will, a legacy organization that I contribute to pretty frequently, and so they you know later on in it then they talk about social media and all that and they didn't even seem to lump me in that. So I took that as well. Okay, I guess that's kind of good. Maybe I I also don't agree with kind of that, the framing that's I think some people put on this, as this is something different. For those of you who've followed my work, you know I really try and do more traditional, old school style journalism, but through social media platforms, just because I think it kind of removes some of the constraints you might have.
Speaker 3:You know I don't have advertisers I have to answer to. I don't have the time constraints. Sometimes I think I get an unfair advantage where I go. Man, you went so much deeper than the other organization gave somebody. Well, yeah, they had to have it in by 11 am or noon or one o'clock. I just kept going until everybody else was done and the extra evening I took made a much better piece. That doesn't mean they didn't have the skills or the talent to do the same. They just had a deadline. And I don't have those because I'm out here, kind of on the outside.
Speaker 2:On the outside looking in. I believe that this is the media of the future the way in which how you're continuing to produce cut footage. Put these pieces together. Now, what intrigued you the most about this case from the beginning?
Speaker 3:Well, so day one when it happened I was still in Texas, as you mentioned, chasing church, chasing megachurch pastors, and so I wasn't back until it was so cheap, I just had to buy it.
Speaker 3:Yeah. So you know, when I first started getting information the morning of and this was very early on I think when I heard the age range and the amount of victims involved, it was like okay, we have something very unique here thing. When they were going, they thought it was a swatting incident. They actually didn't think it was real at first. What was coming in was just so over the top. And then the second call came in and they realized this very much is exactly what they said, and so those things really stuck out to me. And then obviously, it happening in a town like that and, granted, you know, a family of five getting killed really in any area is remarkable.
Speaker 3:But, especially when you're in these picturesque towns, that you don't expect it. Thankfully it is an area that is unincorporated King County, meaning they get the King County Sheriff's Office, which is a very skilled, very robust agency that can handle big cases like this. I'm sure small departments get to as well. If you look at the Brian Koberger case you know that was a very small department that then had to take that thing on and they've managed to get through it. But the pace that this case has worked I think is a big testament to washington state patrol and the king county sheriff's department being the lead agency with that being said, um, I mean for the town of uh City.
Speaker 2:I mean it's tiny, that's right. You know, they just kind of stick to themselves, kind of small town. Everyone knows each other. There. I mean, the vibe just is different there. It is very much different there. I mean, I remember living out in Stockholm and being able to spend some time down by the river. Down there in Fall City. People are, you know, everybody knows each other.
Speaker 2:It's just a different type of feel and to have something like this happen is kind of eye-awakening, but it's so shocking to think you're like, wow, this is like right in our backyard, that's right. So Steve is hanging out with us this evening. Think you're like, wow, this is like right in our backyard, that's right. So, uh, steve, uh is uh hanging out with us this evening? Uh, photog, steve, 81 steve. When you, when you took on this case and you had to go um and and spend some time in court, yeah were you thinking that this was going to be knockout, drag out like this?
Speaker 2:it was going to get muddy for you you know they can.
Speaker 3:I I didn't know what this one because you don't really know what type of argument they're going to have. And they do have an uh, an argument that is counter to what investigators say happened and, as that has come to light, and especially through this last motion, trying to get the defense to basically compelling the defense to turn over all of their discovery. This is going to be a knockout, drag-out fight. It's not done. The fact that there was this motion made and there's been a ruling on that yesterday doesn't mean that this isn't going to continue to be a very volatile case, especially sitting there yesterday.
Speaker 3:That hearing that normally probably would have went about 15 minutes went about an hour. And the defense side side, the new attorney I'd struggled. I actually took it out of my piece. I said that she had gotten emotional when speaking with passion and I think sometimes that can get misinterpreted, especially for women when they're in a place of authority. So I took that line out. But I will say I'm putting up the entire hearing here in the next couple of days or something to redact out certain bits of information I'll talk about here in a little bit. But you know it was an emotional hearing and then the senior deputy prosecuting attorney, who was there as well, was getting visibly frustrated, was starting to stumble on words and wanting to interject. That's not typical. This isn't, like you know, law and Order. Um, some of the other shows we see where it's. I object. These are very structured hearings with career professionals who know how to manage their emotions, and it was an emotional hearing for someone who has, who's jumping in right now listening.
Speaker 2:They're like what, what have I been missing? Give them the Cliff Notes version of what's been going on, what's transpired from the beginning to now.
Speaker 3:So on October 21st just last month, there was a call at about 4.55 am to 911, and it came from a young man who still has not been identified publicly and I'll talk about that in a little bit from Lake Alice Road, saying that both of his parents and four siblings had all been shot and killed. He goes on to say that he's hiding in the bathroom and that it was his brother, who's now deceased, who did this. He goes on to say the brother basically did this and committed suicide and that he was there safe and so they start sending resources. Well, shortly after, just seven minutes later, another phone call comes in from the supposedly one of the sisters who's supposedly deceased. She's not deceased, she's managed to get out of the home, she has been shot and she is at a neighbor's house about a quarter mile down the road. She says everybody's dead except my brother, names the brother who's on the phone with dispatchers on the other line and says he's actually the shooter. So they relay that to deputies at 5-11. So we're now about 16 minutes into call. They get there and they detain this one. We're going to call him the 15-year-old suspect. They detain the 15-year-old suspect. As they go through the house they identify 43-year-old Mark Humiston, who's deceased. The wife is deceased. Seven-year-old Catherine is deceased and then also Joshua who was 13 years old, also deceased. They officially take Andrew into custody. So first they detain him, but they take him into custody.
Speaker 3:At 5.33 am the sister, since she's been shot, is being transported to the hospital for her injuries. They have that initial statement that they got on the 911 call, but they're going to be sending investigators over there to talk to her to learn more about what all has happened. So as they do that and they interview her farther, according to her she saw her brother we're going to call the 15-year-old suspect who's still alive go and systematically execute each family member, supposedly also shot her and it sounds like from the reports that I have read, she got hit in the neck and she either put a hand up or caught a second one and then played dead. And so cause he went around and checked to make sure each one was no longer breathing and no longer had a pulse the bed that she was in. Apparently, according to her, it was an awkward reach for the suspect who still checked and didn't realize that she was still breathing. She held her breath. So when he then went out of that room and finally made the 911 call. That's when she went out of a window and went over to this neighbor's house. It's not clear when he realizes she's alive. Obviously he finds out from investigators at some point that she is still alive and that she's accusing him of doing it. So by the very next day first off, I mean, massive amounts of resources are on this thing now, outside of the initial response, which of course is fire and aid and so on State patrol joined the party Sammamish police, you've got the King County Sheriff's Department, state Patrol crime lab gets involved, just layers upon layers upon layers.
Speaker 3:By the very next day, which is the 22nd, autopsies are done on three of the family members and the suspect appears in court, and so, as I mentioned, I was back by this point. So I go in there and usually they waive that first appearance. They didn't, but the rules are a little bit different over there. It's a lot harder because they are juveniles, and so the defense makes an argument that says, hey, we are arguing identity, there's an issue with identity, and so that kind of generically means like when they're chasing people, there's a pursuit and they lose a direct contact with the car. They can't see it anymore, and then they catch up to it later. There's an argument that now you have a problem with identity. What's to say that really was a second person. So since we have sister saying this, but nobody, there's no other evidence. They're saying, hey, we have argument of identity and we also have a theory that it wasn't him. So determinations made, we're not going to show his face.
Speaker 3:The other determination, though, which is is not typical. So as a general rule, the media doesn't name juveniles, but in a case like this, where the rest of the family is named, his name is going to get out. I'm sorry, not the lawyer. The judge makes an additional determination that the media cannot name the suspect, and why this also matters is all the public records have him named. Everything I have in front of me. When I post it and publish it, I have to redact out stuff. Normally that's pre-redacted, but we're not allowed to speak about what is actually public record, and the general consensus in the media world is we don't believe that this would actually hold up in court, but nobody wants to be the first and lose their court privileges. So if somebody does break the rule, you can expect to see everybody start naming him Until then he's not going to be the first and lose their court privileges. So if somebody does break the rule, you can expect to see everybody start naming him Until then he's not going to be named.
Speaker 3:So he has given two public defenders, career professionals, amy Parker and Molly Campera. They've done this for a long time. They're not doing this so that they can eventually land a big firm job. They believe in it. They've done it well over 10 years, very, very seasoned in this type of thing. They don't address bail. There was no expectation of bail being granted. That's the end of the hearing. They also one other thing they asked to go and see the crime scene. They wanted to go visit it and that is granted. They're given an hour to go do so.
Speaker 3:The next day, which is October 23rd, autopsies are performed on the last of the victims and everybody's identified, and so out of that there was some interesting things. So 9-year-old Joshua Humiston got a gunshot wound to the head. 43-year-old Mark Humiston, which is the father, multiple gunshot wounds. Catherine Humiston, the 7-year-old, has one gunshot wound to the head. Sarah Humiston, the mother, multiple gunshot wounds to the head and to the abdomen. And then Benjamin Humiston, which is the 13-year-old who the suspect says did this, has multiple gunshot wounds to the head. I don't know, because I haven't been able to see the reports exactly, where those enter and exit. I don't know, because I haven't been able to see the reports, exactly where those enter and exit. That, of course, will be a big part of the evidence later to determine whether or not it is practical for that person to have sustained those in a self-inflicted way.
Speaker 2:What's interesting that sticks out to my mind here on this case is if the victim who shot himself allegedly was checking on the bodies, wouldn't there be DNA evidence on said suspect's hand?
Speaker 3:Yeah, absolutely, and so that is one of the things that comes up later in the documents, one of the challenges that comes with this. You know, we get probable cause documents. We get a lot of things. We don't get everything and there's so much evidence and it would be inappropriate. A lot of these things can go out into the public and then end up on gore sites and places that they really shouldn't be so. But at the time, you know, it was very curious how you could say malt, and it does happen. You know my background. I've mentioned before.
Speaker 3:I was an emt right and I am familiar with suicide calls and sometimes it does take more than one. That's usually low caliber and they usually are a certain direction. You're not going like this right and so it's more like this. So, depending on what comes out of that, I think that will be discussed heavily down the line. So on the 25th, there's a determination at that point to amend the charges. 25th, there's a determination at that point to amend the charges. Originally it was going to be five murder charges with domestic violence enhancements, and then the one attempted murder. They make a determination that the domestic violence enhancement doesn't actually apply to siblings and so they make some modifications. It really doesn't matter. It was a big headline at the time but ultimately it's really just making sure that everything's compliant. Again, no plea entered and this was one that stuck out to me as well. There was an ask at that point and this is that Friday for a mental health evaluation, and the defense pushes to deny that request and are ultimately successful in doing so.
Speaker 3:And I talked to Ann Bremner, who has been my quotable legal source on a lot of this. It's been amazing For those of you who don't know who Ann Bremner is, if you remember Vili Fulao with the Mary-Kay Laterno case. She was Vili Fulao's attorney. She contributes to a lot of cable news, really kind of a local legend, and been involved in a lot of big cases. So if Ann, if you see this, thank you again for all of your time. She mentioned she goes. Well, it's sometimes that happens because the defense really wants to control who that person is. If it's done by the state, you don't know who it is, and so on. So nonetheless, that's where it is. They then at that point plan to not meet again till november 8th. Well, they give the the house back now to the maternal grandmother. So deceased mom's mom now controls the estate and she has scheduled a cleaning company to show up that saturday the 26th.
Speaker 3:The defense is saying now that, hey, we want to get back in there, we need more time. An hour wasn't enough. And so first they say that they asked the family to get in. The family is not interested in doing that the maternal grandmother. And so on Saturday there's an emergency order filed to get access to the scene again and the judge that weekend says I don't know where to even go with this whole thing, but what I will do is lock the scene down, it's ice, no one can go back in and you'll have a hearing next week and you can argue your case October 28th.
Speaker 3:They have that hearing and this is in front of Judge Veronica Galvin, and this state basically says hey, you don't need to be back in. If you do, we should be there with you. The defense makes an argument that I haven't seen before and they say well, we do need to go back in Some basics where we want, from like 10 am to 8 pm, we want to be able to look in all these places, but more than that, we believe that we are inherently officers of the court and because of that we shouldn't be supervised. King County Sheriff's Department shouldn't be even in the building. We definitely don't want them hearing what we are saying and we should be able to go in unobstructed. The judge agrees, and this is something a lot of us haven't seen before, and it becomes kind of interesting later in the argument, because the defense is saying, hey, this is a scene of a crime, while the prosecution is saying crime scene, it's always a crime scene, it'll always be a crime scene, and that comes up later in the story.
Speaker 3:So there's a few conditions made, so they agree to the 10 to 8 pm no entering cabinets or containers, only search binders and papers in plain view in the boy's bedroom. No searching of BAH, which is what we're calling the surviving sister, because she has not been identified, which that is typical and I should also mention in all the documents I have she's never fully, she's only listed as BAH, and that is typical. But they may enter for a Farrows scan. And so for you real estate professionals out there, if you're familiar with the Matterport, it's the 3D modeling Farrows, basically the same thing. But it's the accepted standard in legal cases like this. They're not allowed to look at school docs, medical docs or any legal records and no items can be removed. But all items identified for further review will be provided. Meaning they say, hey, we review will be provided. Meaning they say, hey, we want something in there. Then they have to go through a process to get that.
Speaker 3:So on October 29th they go back, but first the King County Sheriff's Department, as part of the order, go in and document the scene. So they take pictures throughout the house of what it looks like before they enter Defense, enters the home, takes up that entire time frame, then leaves when the King County Sheriff's Office goes to re-secure the home. They say that they notice things moved significantly. They see things missing from the scene. They mention that the cabinets and containers have been opened specifically cabinets, and it sounds like in the girl's bedroom. So they take photos of this. They also notice a shoe that they said originally was outside is now inside and there's this missing container of Clorox wipes. And they then filed paperwork shortly after saying hey, you guys touched the scene, you did things you weren't supposed to, and within 48 hours of this, the defense team fully withdraws from the case the existing defense team, which was Amy Parker and Molly Campera.
Speaker 3:So, as this happens, on November 1st a new attorney, kristen Gestadt, joins on. She is the owner of Obsidian Law Group. She's a private attorney, another career professional, very good at her job. But it stuck out to me because the first thing I thought was well, how is that being paid for? He had public defenders. I know maternal grandmother's not signing off on this. That's the only place money could be coming from and I can't imagine an attorney wanting this case on pro bono, because these are extremely heavy cases. So then, on november 5th, the state files a motion to cons to compel discovery from the defense. They're saying hey, because you made such a mess of this, we want all your photos, all your, everything you collected, not only from the time you went back but also from the first time you went in, and they outline it because of this significant alterization to the scene. So at that point the defense then goes and makes a response. It takes some time. That was all I had to work with, and at that time that's when I go on the John Curley show and I go through a similar rundown that I just gave you, and a lot of the media is going with it.
Speaker 3:The only other media outlet that was really on the cutting edge of this was Como 4, which Jeremy Harris and any of you who don't know who Jeremy Harris is absolute killer in this space. I cannot speak highly enough of him. I think he is a rare individual. Highly enough of him. I think he is a rare individual. Not only is he a professional, great journalist, all the things you would expect out of somebody in that spot but he really understands the legal system. He is extremely efficient in his work and goes in and just attacks things, and so we both are putting stuff out within about 30 minutes of each other, which is kind of fun because it takes all the others. So all the other stations end up trying to put something on their website that night just to catch up, and then, within days, seattle times and all them are catching up and you can tell where they're using quotes that we already got and such, which is in the news world Awesome. It's never like, oh, you're copying, it's like got it, you watched it, you're catching up. Yeah.
Speaker 3:So they start catching up and then comes this next hearing. That happened this week. Well, as they start filing documents, it got really wild. First off, the accusations that they touched this stuff, took things, is already really just off the charts. But the defense comes back and files about 60 pages of documents and say what you're accusing of us of is provably false. You miscategorized your photos, you have them out of order. We've checked the metadata and you are being reckless in accusing us of such things. And they even put in there quotes from my appearance on the John Curley Show and say Steve Hickey says that he talked to the prosecutor's office and they made a comment about how they were not surprised he called, which is true but in itself really a non-issue.
Speaker 3:What they're trying to say is that the prosecutor's office was trying to insinuate that. Well, of course you would call, look what they're doing. No, they just said yeah, we were expecting to get a bunch of phone calls and we don't have a statement, which I said on the show. They added I said well, what do you think happens next? They go, we don't really know. There's not really a precedent for this. We don't have a statement. Right, it was always kind of just like we don't know, we don't know. Well, they took that as as if the prosecutor's office was now pushing information out to discredit the defense, which I didn't. I don't interpret it that that. I didn't interpret it as that. I think they were actually extremely respectful to the defense, saying we got nothing for you. Look at the documents. The documents speak for themselves what's up.
Speaker 2:It's wild to think that it could go down this tumultuous world of hearsay. But like, almost, like I don't know, like I don't want to put anything out there, that's crazy, but it's like, almost, like they're flailing a little bit.
Speaker 3:Yes.
Speaker 2:In regards to what was transpiring. When I start sitting here listening to you explain everything, I start thinking about the OJ case and how that all went down and how much time was spent in the house. That kind of thing.
Speaker 3:There's a couple ways to look at that too. There are some defense teams that say you know what, let them do all the investigation they want. And then it's up to us to just pick apart the investigation when you make a decision to go into the scene early, regardless of this outcome. Right, let's take out what the insinuation of the outcome is. When you go into that scene, you now have planted your flag on what it was.
Speaker 2:Sure.
Speaker 3:And it's not as easy to go back and insinuate when you also have borrower scans and so on. It really depends on what you think you're looking at. I don't pretend to be an attorney or legal expert, but from a strategy standpoint there's very different schools of thought in that and if you look at some of the big historical cases, that's always it Let the police do it, let them then destroy the crime scene, so we can't go back and see what it really was and then just prove that they screwed it up. But nonetheless, you know this was the decision they made and you know I want to reiterate Amy Parker and Molly Campari. They're good at this. They've done hundreds and hundreds of cases, many of which involve homicides. So you know they've, they have talked with their client. At this point I don't know what those conversations are, but they came to the determination that this was a solid strategy and they've also insinuated at this point too, in writing, that they are still going with the theory that the brother did this, the deceased brother did this, or at least working through that theory and in the documents this, or at least working through that theory, and in the documents they allude to evidence that it's insinuated that the brother, the living brother, the suspect, showered. Between this happening and the phone call, and the timeline shows a lapse in time from when sister leaves the house. She has to go a quarter mile to the neighbor's house and she says that you know she was in there playing dead for some amount of time. Over 10 minutes, possibly up to 15 minutes, had passed and they have said in the documentation that there was a shirt of suspect found that was wet and did have blood on it and and I don't know if they're going to say, well, brother, deceased brother, actually had that on, but it sounds like they also found blood in the drain of the tub.
Speaker 3:Now, any scene like this is going to have. I won't get overly graphic with this, but as somebody who has been there on the first response side as well, as somebody who studies this frequently, you would be probably surprised at just how much fluid is created in these situations. And that was part of the reason the family said they didn't even want to have the second time for the defense to go out there because they say, hey, we've already got a cleaning team in. There's so much fluid that it's degrading the house. And that's true Years ago, before any of this, I used to be in construction and home building. We actually did some restoration work for some insurance companies where there would be self-inflicted death, and it was amazing what one person that process can destroy a home, let alone. You have all these people, and so I'm sure there's so much evidence coming that we haven't even seen yet that the state crime lab is still going through. But nonetheless, as the attorney, you have to go with what you have and work through those processes. So when we get to the hearing this week which is something I've really never seen before at this point now Amy Parker and Molly Kamper are now going to be on the other side of that little half wall right, you got the half wall between the jury and everybody. Now they're on the side sitting, actually just a little ways away from me, and Christian Gestalt is now in there, and Jason Brookhiser, who's a senior deputy prosecuting attorney, are up on there as well as Judge Galvin, and she's the one who made the ruling before she's going to overhear, oversee this hearing now, and so as they go through this, the defense really went on.
Speaker 3:I, when I put this whole thing up, I really, uh, encourage everybody to watch it because it's one of those rare ones. I had a one of my camera guys who hasn't worked court before and afterwards. Like man, I want to go to these. All the time I was like they don. They're not usually this exciting, but they go through each photo and first they said the Clorox wipes were never missing, they were in another room. How do I know that? Because of the pictures you supplied, sure, and then they go through trying to pick apart the other pictures. Now the senior deputy prosecuting attorney does acknowledge. He says we concede you are correct on the Clorox wipes. Those were not missing. We concede that fully. We stand by every other accusation in here.
Speaker 3:You went through and opened cabinets. There's apparently a bookshelf that had been gone through. And the defense says yeah, we did, but it had glass doors on the front of it. We could see stuff in there, so it was in plain sight. The prosecution says that's not enough and the judge says so you're telling me that the plain sight doctrine doesn't apply anymore, which is what law enforcement uses heavily, especially during traffic stops, to come up and look through your windows and make a determination if they can search your car. And the judge says I don't think you want to lean on this what that will do to trigger things down. The you don't want, we don't want, and decides that with because there were glass doors, that it was plain sight and it was reasonable to open it up. Same thing about a lot of the containers. Apparently these containers were, you know, clear bins, those type of things. And so the judge says, yeah, in my, in my order, I said you can't touch that, but I I see this as reasonable, what what they went through, and reasonable what they tossed. The prosecution then says, well, the sheets of the bed which had a significant amount of fluid on them had been tossed. And the judge says, well, they had their expert there and he's trying to see if he can get viable forensic evidence off of it. And you know, I think it's a testament.
Speaker 3:Sometimes you see an order that's written very rigidly and I think this order was written pretty rigidly but then comes down to well, what did the judge intend? And now you have the same judge this isn't an appeal later with a different judge, you have the same judge who wrote it, who can then say, well, here's what I intended. And in the end it's determined that the defense did nothing wrong, that they followed within the judge's intent. Um, a lot of us in the courtroom we're kind of looking at each other, going really Like this is we. We didn't think it was, certainly didn't think it would be that clean. Once we heard, though, early on the prosecution concede the. Um, the early on the prosecution concede the Clorox wipes, where they were like, okay, that's a big one. But then it just seemed to go downhill from there.
Speaker 3:And Judge Galvin also was a prosecuting attorney, as you mentioned too in her previous career, and she really feels like, hey, that this actually could have been solved just by phone calls, feels like, hey, that this actually could have been solved just by phone calls. She almost admonished both sides about why, why are we even here? She says literally quote she goes this is much ado about nothing. You brings up an analogy about how, when she was a kid, she would get vanilla ice cream, the sister, her sister, would get chocolate. They'd want to trade and somehow that had to do with like, basically, these are just kids arguing over the things that they've already been given. And she felt like, had you guys just called each other, gotten to the bottom of this? This wasn't necessary. I will say the.
Speaker 3:The prosecution did not seem to. They accepted it, professionally accepted, but did not agree with this. This determination did not agree with this outcome one bit. However, the defense was very happy with it. I mean the body language. Like I said, these are people who were really trained to keep their emotions locked in and it was an emotional hearing. So the suspect, the 15-year-old suspect, was in there for this hearing as well and got to see this thing go together. It's been you, said earlier the suspect looking at you. I had that same thing. So the first hearing I went to sure where he was going to be out there.
Speaker 3:Uh, you know, I go back to that half wall where we all sit on the one side. Yeah well, the tv cameras daisy chains, so they have these plugins, one camera films and everybody plugs into the next so they don't have a row of cameras. My camera can't daisy, so I have to go and film too. So I go and talk to the bailiff and she goes oh, I'll get you a spot. And I was like I don't even need a special spot, I'm just telling you why my sticks are out. And she goes Nope, I'm going to sit. She puts me on the other side of the wall on the prosecution. How do you get this spot?
Speaker 3:I was like I don't know, man, I'm just up here but I'm out on my own on that side and he comes in and looks at me First. He looks at the crowd and family members are in there, by the way, extended family. He looks at me and just locks on me and I remember looking at him going what? And I'm thinking either one he's wondering does you know who's this camera guy compared to those, and is this like a court camera? Or does he follow my work on on social media he's going. Oh, that's that guy I've watched a bunch of times now.
Speaker 2:He's here.
Speaker 3:But I don't like being center of attention. Anyways, in those scenarios I already felt awkward. Being up front Is that they were all looking. And then to look at him and I was like I don't know, man, this is just what we're doing today.
Speaker 2:What do you think? How long do you think this case is going to be?
Speaker 3:Yeah. So that actually comes back to to what I found out about the defense. So, because the I had, I have said that my sources tell me that they removed themselves from the case because they were conflicted out. However, the they argue that no, it was a staffing issue. That's why they pulled out of the case. They since had to basically go outside.
Speaker 3:To the new private attorney. They're paying her full boat because we owe this kid defense and so I do crime news right, we're pretty black and white over here. Nonetheless, whether or not he did or didn't do it, or you think he did or didn't do it, in this country we owe everybody defense and then, once the entire public defense team couldn't do it, you have to outsource it. But this thing they were talking about in the hearing upwards of five years. The judge said this will not take five years. If that's the attitude you're in, it will take five years. Do not have that attitude.
Speaker 3:But this will be a multi-year case. You are looking at over a million dollars in legal fees to private defense to get there as well, as there's going to be a bunch of you know the expert witnesses and more testing and all of that. So this is going to be a solid seven-figure cost to that organization ultimately the taxpayer. But you know I don't hammer on that much on the stuff I've put out because I don't want people to feel like that in itself is inappropriate. That's exactly what we need to do. I think how we got here might have been avoidable. I also still wonder, behind closed doors, what was the real reason for outsourcing this. But on record they say it was specifically because of staffing issues over there that they're already so backlogged. They couldn't take on a case this size.
Speaker 2:I'm sure I mean, especially if they're talking multiple years in regards to this case. I know I just was watching some other stuff that was going on in today's news. What's going on in Bellevue, I mean oh yeah people. Uh, I thought bellevue was like the happy place. You know everything's festive and you get the lights and the music and what's going on.
Speaker 3:I just walked in here from. I was at a hearing for that and then another case. There's a big rollover on michigan. I worked and so I just walked in the door and kind of decompressing the hearing.
Speaker 3:So we have a 87 year old man who was accused or basically right now accused, not charged yet of killing his 86 year old wife. They both were living in an assisted living memory care facility, and that matters, because it's not clear that he knows what he did. Um, he didn't understand when his Miranda rights were read to him to that, and she may have not known who he was. We don't really know yet, but devastating, it sounds like it. And so Bellevue this is their first homicide of the year, so not a very violent place. I don't know what that memory care facility will be doing as far as what they keep on site and don't sure I don't know what that memory care facility will be doing as far as what they keep on site and don't. I don't know his case at all, but should he have had access to knives in an organized facility? I don't know. I don't know what the history is going to be.
Speaker 2:So Thanksgiving has already gone by us. We were having dinner in Edmonds, uh for dinner and we were heading home and to get back to west seattle you can go two ways. You can go back i-5 or you can go down the trusty 99 aurora, yeah. And so my daughter was like let's go down down Aurora and let's see what's going on. Yeah, it was surprisingly quiet on Thanksgiving evening. There was nobody working. Yeah.
Speaker 2:So are we starting to see a downturn on the Ave there in regards to ladies of the night working, Not at all, just that night.
Speaker 3:I mean mean that was a fluke, just because everyone had to get the turkey, yeah yeah, the men are out there trying to uh do their family duties. Yeah, sure, on every other night it's it's plenty busy and it's not really affected by weather rain a little bit just because makeup and so on, but I mean you will see girls dress like it's summertime, uh I don't know how they don't get around I don't.
Speaker 3:I would assume it's probably substance and so on that they're having to manage the the pain that may go with that. But yeah, so far I mean statistic wise, numbers wise it doesn't seem to be going down. Um, I hit that area a bit. It's not an area where a lot of the stuff I'm after happens. It's really not. You know, it's not the I'm looking for homicides and scenes of violence there are. There is violence up there, for sure, but not people aren't calling 9-1-1 but is it?
Speaker 2:is it a gang war? Is it a turf war? Is it a pimple?
Speaker 3:gang's got a lot to do with it. You know the, the, the, the true pimps. I'm speaking for them. But uh, you know they're not interested in that type of stuff. But when you get the gang component in there, that's where a lot of that comes from.
Speaker 2:I'm a lover, not a fighter.
Speaker 3:Yeah, I'm not trying to glamorize that life or any of that, but nonetheless they really pride themselves in saying, hey, we're not here for the violence, we're not here for shootouts and the gun toting and so on.
Speaker 2:But when gangs get involved, involved, that's going to happen. Do you think with uh, I mean with a new administration coming? But do you see in the future a red light district where, like maybe a portion of you know, 99 becomes kind of a safe haven for ladies of the night to be able to work, to properly work, to make an income, uh, to get safely tested, uh, to understand who their johns are? That kind of thing do we? Do we think that we see something like that in the future?
Speaker 3:you know I don't do a lot of opinion, but I'll tell you this I I think something like that would probably make a lot of sense. Um, that's the closest I get into giving my opinion. I think you can see where I sit on that. But I feel like, from everything I see, the public's just so far from that. You have people who are very passionate about it and I think it gives a false sense of hope that an organized structure can be given to that. I just don't see it, and I think it's a multitude of things. One, people just aren't comfortable with it too. They've seen, seen it not organized and not put together and they're frustrated.
Speaker 3:You know, I think it's also if you look at the las vegas and nevada model. Yeah, I think people get this vision that it's like the strip where this stuff goes down, where people. It's not, it's far out and so like, geographically that may be, yeah, it might be hard to put together out here because you don't have a place where you can say, okay, go out there x amount of miles out. You'd really have to have it within the city life and I don't know that people would be ready for that. You know, and I think I think the pushback for people against something like that would be well, look at safe, at safe sites, safe use sites, look how well that's worked right.
Speaker 3:It's easy to then demonize something like that, where I think this is. I don't think that I don't. I've seen that argument made before. I don't think it applies to this, because here you have two consenting adults. Over there I think you have something very different. When you have people kind of stuck in the bond and there's, you know the whole, there's not a business structure to that, which it shouldn't all be about business. But when you're looking at trying to structure something, the business component is going to help that happen we're not condoling.
Speaker 2:Uh, you know we're just talking about and having this the conversation because it's still an uptick in crime and with this show, you know, we've been kind of covering some horrific stories. Um, man, yeah, we didn't see anything on on the ave, which was it was nice to see a quiet night driving down, although there was cars that were still kind of running around doing their thing. But it's interesting to me when you drive down that how much of that still is that old school, industrial, 1980s vibe.
Speaker 3:Um, I kind of dig it, you know, just because it reminds me I remember those buildings that I actually used to see when I was a kid. You drive around seattle so much now and you forget what it even looked like to see some old footage yeah, everything's because it really just changed yeah tear down, rebuild, tear down, rebuild.
Speaker 2:Yeah it's. It's interesting because you think about it too and you go down, even like when I go down to Federal Way or down to Kent Des Moines, and I head down that way and I'm like man, everything is so different now and you know, being a part of driving home. I don't know if I've told you this story, but I was little. We were leaving the Mexican restaurant in Kent, down in central Kent, heading home across the Green River Bridge, and there were helicopters and they found the first body that night, that day, and I will say this, being that young, I thought the Green River Killer was just coming after anybody.
Speaker 2:I didn't know that he was looking for young ladies or prostitutes and things of that nature. And that's why I always think about that piece coming after anybody I didn't know. I didn't know that he was, uh, looking for young ladies or, you know, prostitutes and things of that nature. And and that's why I always think about that piece where you know, making a place where it might be safe for ladies who do that. That's not something that I'm interested in, but maybe that's you know, a safe haven to make sure that women aren't being sex trafficked. You know trafficked, or you know trafficked, or you know that they are able to. You know, maybe they rehabilitate themselves.
Speaker 2:But again, it's the same thing as in you know the injection sites. It's like, oh, you know everything, everything has its flaws. And how do you make it flawless or flaw proof? I think that that's a long ways, you know. You think about it. You're like, okay, would you have to put this on? You know like way out in Snoqualmie, on you know like incarnation or somewhere far where it's like a Carson city, where it's on reservation, where it's on sovereign land, that kind of thing. But then it gets, then it gets messy when you start to think about all those other things that go along.
Speaker 3:I think, as you said, that that easy it's, easy it's, you can never going to find perfection, and perfection is the enemy of progress. Sure, you know we got to try something. What we know is going on is not working. Yeah, now there's a lot of other reasons why, right, we know that vice isn't what it once was, and and there's other things that could maybe be looked at. But I think we can unilaterally agree what we have doesn't work. So what else can we try? And I think whenever you add structure to something you're going to have, you can go and tell everybody no, this is the oldest game in the book, this goes back before the substances we have. Now. This is not going anywhere.
Speaker 3:Now you can maybe quell it, I guess, and go down that route, but I think a better option would be give the girls a way to make money structured safely, and they're going to make more money that way than they would where they're at now. That's one of the rare thing. If you look at I mean look at drugs, or look at marijuana, I, the people now with entire dispensaries, are making not the money you would expect for what it is. All the other things seem to lower the price of structure. It doesn't seem to work that way in prostitution. Yeah, you know that that's still very expensive, and then the girls get to keep a lot more of the money than they do when they're when they're working for a pimp yeah, um, I was thinking about this, a couple cases that we've talked about in the past, um, the guy that uh pulled out a gun down in South Center, who was?
Speaker 2:I mean, they made sure that that guy was unalive. Any updates on that case, or is it pretty much no?
Speaker 3:I talked to people in close to the investigation and you know they said, unfortunately, they really wanted to go deeper because I think they believe that he was involved in much more than we know. Sure, but they said when they're no longer there, they're no longer a threat and we are so deep in other things that we just don't get the resources to continue, and so they've moved on. I can tell you so icac internet crimes against children are bus people all the time. I have a stack a mile high now they're trying to go through to work those cases. They're're certainly busy. They get a lot of tips to. I don't know if I mentioned in the past. They get a lot of tips actually from the platforms themselves social media platforms, when people have certain types of chats or share certain types of content.
Speaker 3:I've still really been trying to find a way I'd like to cover not just their cases their cases are all well and good but really get more into them as an organization. I've also really wanted to try and look at creating an organization to help try and capture these types of people. You know Chris Hansen, though he did it very different. You know he did it obviously for salacious content, but it's been a successful organization. There's some other groups out there that you don't see on TV in the same way, but that do good work.
Speaker 3:The challenge is getting a good relationship with investigators, because there's some people now trying this just to try and get clicks on social media. Where they meet these men just to shame them, and that doesn't work. You really just educate them on what to look for next time. But more than that, to hit that prosecutorial hurdle is really hard, and so investigators really don't like it, because then they get this case that's kind of half full of shit anyways, and now they have to try and make it into a prosecution, or this person is just going to be smarter for it when they get out the other end and they're not convicted, and so it's quite a challenge.
Speaker 2:Phot. Steve 81. Steve hickey, our guest this evening. Um any updates on, uh, our good friend, uh, gary ridgeway? Do we know any? Uh new updates from our buddy? Yeah?
Speaker 3:you know, I don't know that he identified anything or, if he did, they're still working through it, um, because they've been very tight-lipped on it. But by now, generally we should have seen some sort of breakthrough or some sort of announcement that, hey, here's the fruits of that effort and nothing's come out. And I know people who have historically been much closer to the Gary Ridgeway cases than I could ever dream of being, and even they're saying, yeah, we're not hearing anything, including from some of the retired people who were involved in the investigation, saying we don't know what happened. They obviously they went out, they thought it was credible, it either hasn't panned out yet or it just didn't pan out.
Speaker 2:Vacation gary, you know, getting a little time back in king county. Um, it's strange to think about him. Some of the other you know serial killers wesley allen dodd a lot of people don't talk about him. He was, you know, a child molester, him. Some of the other serial killers Wesley Allen Dodd a lot of people don't talk about him. He was a child molester, scary, I mean 90s, and this guy said if you don't hang me or if you don't execute me, I will break out of jail.
Speaker 3:That's right.
Speaker 2:And people need to start I don't know man, medicaid, I don't know what's going on around here the water or something, steve, it's just, it's wild. I mean, I can't you think of this case, the one that you've been covering for us for the last hour crazy to me, it's like, horrific, like on levels that I'm still in shock that anyone has the capacity to do any of that remote stuff. You know, and I'm surprised that I'm still in shock that anyone has the capacity to do any of that remote stuff. You know, and I'm surprised that I'm sure that this will come out, that there will be some type of eval that will come out on that young man, the suspect.
Speaker 3:You know something, I should add. So, talking to people who were close to this one, something stuck out to me so there's this team that goes in whenever there's a big case like that and it's called peer support, and so peer support is always brought out to these big ones and it's meant to help from the first responder side, because they've seen things that most people shouldn't, and they were brought out to that site just like they normally are, and a lot who went in there would say you know what we're used to. I mean, we know how to deal with this stuff. We've seen terrible things. We've seen kids with their heads blown off. We've seen blood baths. We're not dead to this stuff, but we know how to process that. We know what that step looks like.
Speaker 3:What stood out to them was the coldness of the suspect.
Speaker 3:They said that was what at night they would wake up thinking about, was this individual seems completely dead inside, and so, whether or not this happened now and he got caught now, or would he have waited till later in life and been a serial killer or not, if he is indeed the one who did this, we won't know.
Speaker 3:I'm working on another story too, with CODIS, which is the DNA database that we use out here, and so CODIS has had some amazing breakthroughs just in the last couple of years where they're now taking the same samples that are in the evidence room from years ago that at the time were not viable, and they're coming back now and getting viable, solid numbers out of it. Also, in the past you would get this result, that is, this is definitely the suspect, it's a one in seven million. Now they're coming back saying, hey, we've taken a sample you saw in the past that wasn't viable, and we're not only saying was it viable, but it's one in seven billion. That it's your sus, that that rating you would hear in the past and you think it was always the same number, like, yeah, whatever, it's just it sure that number's gotten so much bigger and they're working stuff in the past.
Speaker 2:So I'm hoping, as that continues to happen, we will get to a point now where you realize that you really you know why we're not seeing serial killers in the same way anymore like we did in the past well, it's interesting too when you talk about this evidence in the uh dna piece with the whole jam, uh jaminet ramsey case you know, reappearing, I I just still am baffled that there's still not any like hard evidence of, like yeah, it was x, y and z and I don't know evidence wise.
Speaker 3:What happens with evidence from a case like that, evidence of like, yeah, it was x, y and z and I don't know, evidence wise, what happens with evidence from a case like that, some of these? There are times evidence does finally get tossed and sometimes it gets kept. I don't know the rhyme or reason.
Speaker 3:I there's procedural issues, there's storage issues, there's all those things that every different agencies sure it's going to come through differently on um, but it's getting to a point now and, talking to some of the people involved in these testing, they're going. You know we are now to a point where, if it was practical which it is not, but if it was practical you could test every stolen car on the steering wheel and we could tell you who stole the car, who was in the car in the last 24 hours. It's not practical to backload that system to that level and it's not cost effective. But we are getting to a point now where they will find something. Now you still have to match it. So there's that part. You may get a viable sample, but you're one of those rare people that nobody in your bloodline has also done a 23andme right and you don't have a previous case and so on, but it's getting very far and few between.
Speaker 3:There's a lot of these now where it's distant relatives doing a 23andMe or Ancestrycom DNA test and then that's linking them back and I think it's good overall. But it's interesting to see the public now knows that and there still seems to be no slowdown and people willing to take these tests. Right, we're so worried about cameras everywhere but we're fine giving a dna sample.
Speaker 2:Sure, it like it's nothing and we do it for our pets now and yeah, and speaking of cameras, they sure are showing up all over the place in seattle now, yeah, I'm it's. It's kind of wild, like if you go down occidental, like they're all over occidental, I don't know if they're uh and then the back side over there, um, behind king five, I forget what the street is over there where they kind of were, you know, hawk alley, I believe, is what they call it yep, there's so many cameras that are just popping up everywhere. Is it because the city just doesn't have the resources to patrol, or is it Big Brother? In regards to, hey, does these private companies give Seattle PD the video for that?
Speaker 3:Generally no, they should, and I think they're even willing to, but it's quite a bureaucracy. I did a story last year about a fire truck that was parked down in Hunts Point that got ransacked while they were in the side of the QFC and it had one of these trailers outside that has all the stuff. So I went down the process of just trying to get that footage and it was like dead end after dead end after dead end. These things are seen more as deterrence than anything else. They're just trying to prevent crime because if they do catch it, you have to get the sign off of the business, you have to get the sign off then of the next person up and three other managers, and all these things have to happen sure I don't know why it's so difficult, but they, you know they're hoping that by just putting it out it'll stop.
Speaker 3:You also see more wash dot cameras. So when you have city cameras, it's a very different process than wash dot, which is the state level, and you have areas like seattle that have a lot of highways alaskan way viaduct, not just the freeways, but you have 99 aurora, all those places too and they don't have to go through the approval process. They can just put those things up, because state law is very different, right, and so I think things will adapt overall. Maybe I'll start putting out content, just putting out the hypocrisy of people giving their DNA but being stressed about a camera. At the same time, I don't want people not to give their DNA. I think that's fine. Sure, let's just be real here. Why are we so worked up about one thing and yet giving away far more data?
Speaker 2:I think, still, you think I'm on it too, and the distraction of like, oh, you know, you're like, oh, yeah, cool, right, puppy, you know. Oh, so I'm a quarter black, you know, or? Right right, I'm like this is the thing I hear all the time. Like, did you know? I'm african-american. I'm like what are you talking about?
Speaker 3:if you could add some sort of allure to security cameras, like, oh, we're going to get you this opportunity to whatever later and you got us people probably be into it. There's just no allure to it, but there is when you go do this test and you get to find out something about yourself, sure, make, make security cameras be fun and people will give up their rights no time I mean uh, I mean what?
Speaker 2:what did they do? What was that stupid? Uh, what was that stupid thing where, uh, that francis guy got arrested for, uh, what was that? Uh, the spring break guy where he was doing all the filming and yeah, I forget his case.
Speaker 3:But yeah, that was a big deal because he was the one doing the girls gone wild stuff.
Speaker 2:That's right, yes, the girls gone wild, yeah, and, and when you think about that, I mean people were willing, were willing, you know back in those days, but the repercussions of what that looked like now and how many of those were underage, it just blows my mind. I'm like….
Speaker 3:That would be an interesting documentary. To go back and track those people down and say, well, why did you agree? And I wonder how many of them said well at the time. I'm not saying it was a good decision or not, but it was the moment I didn't know it was going to get that big. It was the success of the commercial product that then amplified and they're going whoa, this is not what I signed up for. I thought I was at a party, whatever, making a stupid decision in the moment. Now there's mass distribution, right, and be able to really learn those stories. What's the psychology behind how that whole thing went down?
Speaker 2:right and none of them. You know a lot of them victims of, you know yeah very scary. I mean, you know when you think about in a situation like that. Excuse me getting back to as we wrap things up from the pacific northwest. Um man, I appreciate you coming to hang out, share your story in regards to what this, this current, we call in the carnation false city. It's, it's not a massacre. Are they calling the massacre?
Speaker 3:yeah, massacre's been pretty good. You don't know what else to call it. I mean, when you got five people stacked up, that's what it's going to be. Oh, I should also mention uh, real quick, we can name him once he's charged. He actually still has not been charged. Now, that's not a bad thing. It's going to be. Oh, I should also mention real quick, we can name him once he's charged. He actually still has not been charged. Now, that's not a bad thing. It's because they're trying to move it to adult court. That probably won't happen until June, so that's why we're saying suspect, that's why it's being framed the way it is. He will get charged, I promise you that. But there has to be a process and it's not a quick process. And and for those saying well, I thought you couldn't charge juveniles like that, whenever you stack up five bodies, uh, or accused of stacking up five bodies, forget the rules. The rules are out the door. Uh, when you need a trailer to haul everybody out, they're. They're going to make new rules oh, man, I mean it.
Speaker 2:Devastating for the town of Fall City. Prayers to the family, the victims, because at the end of the day, man, it's just like my God. You think this cannot happen. It's not possible. It's possible. It's always that one time that you need to be prepared, when you're out and about, pay attention to your surroundings, know what's going on, have an understanding of what, what your surroundings are. You know, you don't know. There may be someone who's open caring. I talk about it all the time, about my chipotle story, about the guy that was open caring. If that other guy who was flailing around would have grabbed his gun, oh it would have been, it would have been, it would have been ugly flailing around would have grabbed his gun. Oh, it would have been, it would have been, it would have been ugly. You know it's understanding what is around you. Uh, our guest this evening, steve hickey, photog, steve 81 on the gram, on all his social platforms.
Speaker 3:Uh, any last parting words before we leave you know we'll have some big stuff coming out. Hopefully you guys can follow on youtube too. We're gonna start doing long-form content and do more of a true crime breakdown of current cases that are going on and really work through the charging docs and show you how it is Investigators came to the conclusions that they have and then what that looks like going through the court system.
Speaker 2:For my entire team Mark Christopher, Jeff Jensen, Sophia Magana and myself, Mario Magana. Be sure to look up at the sky, because you never know what you might see. Good night.
