Latest / Narcisist Psychology / The Quiet Theft: How He Erased a Founder's Mind and Life

Transcript

The Quiet Theft: How He Erased a Founder's Mind and Life · Narcisist Psychology

0:03
Speaker 1: At seven thirty in the morning on a November day
0:06
Speaker 1: in two thousand nineteen, John Reynolds walked a well head
0:11
Speaker 1: service route at Calloway Ridge and stopped cold. Lying in
0:15
Speaker 1: the field grass was a leather portfolio, brass clasp fastened
0:20
Speaker 1: elastic pen loop, still holding a pen eleven years old
0:24
Speaker 1: by the date on its first page. Not one page
0:27
Speaker 1: was warped, foxed, or swollen. The leather was supple, the
0:32
Speaker 1: ink was legible. A document does not survive eleven winters
0:36
Speaker 1: in an open Kentucky field looking like it was set
0:39
Speaker 1: down an hour ago. That condition was the first thing
0:42
Speaker 1: that broke the story open. The portfolio belonged to a
0:45
Speaker 1: man named Melvin Andrews. Inside the cover his name on
0:50
Speaker 1: the first page, a date September two thousand, eight forty
0:55
Speaker 1: one handwritten pages of design, notes, projections, analysis, the intellectual
1:01
Speaker 1: corps of a company he had built from nothing. The
1:04
Speaker 1: question was not what the portfolio was. The question was
1:07
Speaker 1: what it was doing there, and who had put it there,
1:10
Speaker 1: and why they needed Melvin Andrews to look like a
1:13
Speaker 1: man with something to hide. That question would take twelve
1:17
Speaker 1: years to answer fully. The answer when it came recontextualized
1:21
Speaker 1: nearly everything Melvin had believed about himself. Melvin Andrews was
1:26
Speaker 1: fifty four years old in October of two thousand nineteen,
1:30
Speaker 1: and he lived on Garrett Street in Harlan County, Kentucky,
1:33
Speaker 1: in a house he had owned for more than a decade.
1:36
Speaker 1: He was a product designer by training and by instinct,
1:40
Speaker 1: the kind of person who solved problems by drawing them first,
1:43
Speaker 1: working through logic on paper before he ever touched a keyboard.
1:47
Speaker 1: Colleagues who knew him in the early years of Thornfield's
1:50
Speaker 1: systems described a man who arrived at meetings with ideas
1:53
Speaker 1: already fully formed, sketched on whatever was near by. He
1:57
Speaker 1: was methodical, He was precise. He was, by most accounts,
2:02
Speaker 1: incapable of sitting still when a design problem was unresolved.
2:06
Speaker 1: He had a ritual every morning before the workday started.
2:10
Speaker 1: He crossed the Cutter Run Bridge near his house on foot.
2:14
Speaker 1: The bridge was narrow, the water low in autumn, and
2:17
Speaker 1: the walk took less than ten minutes. According to his
2:20
Speaker 1: neighbor Connie Phelps, it was the only part of his
2:24
Speaker 1: day for years that felt entirely like his own. That
2:29
Speaker 1: detail matters, because by the time twenty nineteen arrived. Most
2:33
Speaker 1: of the rest of Melvin's professional life no longer felt
2:36
Speaker 1: like his own, and he could not explain why, or
2:39
Speaker 1: when or how that had happened. Thornfield's Systems was Melvin's company.
2:45
Speaker 1: He had founded it, conceived its core architecture, and built
2:48
Speaker 1: its first client relationships before William Sharp entered the picture.
2:53
Speaker 1: In the spring of two thousand seven. Sharp came in
2:57
Speaker 1: as co founder, holding approximately forty nine percent equity, and
3:02
Speaker 1: from the outside, the partnership looked like exactly what a
3:05
Speaker 1: small design firm needed, a creative principle and an operator.
3:10
Speaker 1: Melvin designed, Sharp managed. What Sharp actually managed, it would
3:15
Speaker 1: later emerge, was the systematic transfer of Melvin's professional identity.
3:20
Speaker 1: It did not happen in one move. According to later
3:24
Speaker 1: testimony and forensic review, it happened in a sequence spread
3:27
Speaker 1: across years, each step spaced far enough from the last
3:31
Speaker 1: that no single one looked like much. In the first year,
3:36
Speaker 1: Sharp took over client communication. In the second, he migrated
3:40
Speaker 1: Thornfield's documentation to a platform he controlled. By the third year,
3:45
Speaker 1: Sharp was the sole Thornfield representative at industry events. Melvin
3:50
Speaker 1: stopped attending without fully registering that he had stopped being invited.
3:55
Speaker 1: By year four, Sharp had begun crediting Melvin's ideas in
3:59
Speaker 1: ways that subtly reframed their origin. Internal e mails recovered
4:03
Speaker 1: during investigation showed Sharp using the phrase Melvin's initial sketch
4:09
Speaker 1: to describe finished design systems, language that positioned Melvin as
4:13
Speaker 1: a source of raw material rather than the author of
4:16
Speaker 1: completed work. A former Thornfield developer named Stu Callahan later
4:22
Speaker 1: described the campaign as quiet and total. By year seven,
4:27
Speaker 1: Melvin had stopped initiating. He had not spoken directly with
4:30
Speaker 1: an investor in three years. He had signed five contract amendments,
4:36
Speaker 1: each during a documented period of personal stress, each one
4:39
Speaker 1: narrowing his operational role without formally altering his equity position.
4:44
Speaker 1: When he raised concerns, Sharp's response, according to Melvin's own account,
4:49
Speaker 1: was consistent and calm. You were burned out, mel You
4:53
Speaker 1: said so yourself. That line did something specific. It did
4:57
Speaker 1: not contradict Melvin's perception. It absorbed it, validated a fragment
5:02
Speaker 1: of it, and redirected the rest Melvin had been tied.
5:06
Speaker 1: Sharp was right about that. The conclusion Sharp drew from
5:10
Speaker 1: that fact that Melvin's exhaustion explained his reduced contribution, rather
5:15
Speaker 1: than being a symptom of systematic exclusion, was something Melvin
5:19
Speaker 1: had no immediate way to disprove. He had signed the amendments,
5:23
Speaker 1: he had stepped back from events the evidence, as Sharp
5:27
Speaker 1: arranged it pointed at Melvin. By twenty nineteen, Melvin Andrews
5:32
Speaker 1: was not sure any more whether he had ever been
5:34
Speaker 1: as good as he thought he was. That uncertainty was
5:38
Speaker 1: not accidental, and it was not, it turned out, permanent.
5:42
Speaker 1: Something was about to arrive that would change what the
5:46
Speaker 1: evidence pointed at entirely. In February of two thousand nineteen,
5:51
Speaker 1: a former Thornfield client named Sandra Cho sent Melvin Andrews
5:55
Speaker 1: an email. She had been working with a competitor. She
5:58
Speaker 1: had recognized something. The workflow they had licensed, the one
6:02
Speaker 1: powering the competitor's core product, looked almost exactly like a
6:06
Speaker 1: system she had watched Melvin design. Melvin read the email twice,
6:10
Speaker 1: then he sat with it for several days without telling
6:13
Speaker 1: anyone that hesitation matters, because by that point Melvin Andrews
6:19
Speaker 1: was a man who had been taught very carefully not
6:23
Speaker 1: to trust his own read on things. The doubt Sharp
6:26
Speaker 1: had cultivated over twelve years was doing exactly what it
6:30
Speaker 1: was designed to do. Even with evidence sitting in his inbox,
6:34
Speaker 1: Melvin's first instinct was not to act. It was to
6:38
Speaker 1: wonder whether he was misreading it. He called his sister, Diane.
6:42
Speaker 1: Diane Andrews was an accountant. She was not given to
6:46
Speaker 1: dramatic conclusions. She reviewed the documents Sandra cho had provided,
6:51
Speaker 1: and then she reviewed Melvin's originals, copies she had held
6:54
Speaker 1: for years because Melvin had given them to her before
6:58
Speaker 1: any of this began. Response was direct, mel this isn't
7:03
Speaker 1: you misreading anything? That sentence cracked something open. Melvin contacted
7:09
Speaker 1: his attorney, Doug Faber, the same attorney who had drafted
7:12
Speaker 1: the two thousand and seven partnership agreement. Faber had years
7:16
Speaker 1: earlier advised Melvin to have a second attorney review each
7:20
Speaker 1: amendment before signing. Melvin had not followed that advice. He
7:24
Speaker 1: did not say so to deflect responsibility. He said so
7:28
Speaker 1: because it was true, and because he needed Faber to
7:31
Speaker 1: understand the full shape of what had happened. Faber referred
7:35
Speaker 1: him to a forensic accountant named Wade Vickers. Vickers was methodical.
7:41
Speaker 1: He did not begin with accusations he began with documentation.
7:46
Speaker 1: What he found, moving backward through Thornfield's records was a
7:50
Speaker 1: sequence with a specific geometry. Sharp had taken control of
7:54
Speaker 1: client communication in year one. He had migrated documentation to
7:59
Speaker 1: a platform he alone administered in year two. By year three,
8:03
Speaker 1: he was Thornfield's sole representative at industry events. Each step
8:08
Speaker 1: had an explanation. Each explanation was reasonable in isolation. That
8:13
Speaker 1: was the architecture of it. Not a sudden seizure of power,
8:16
Speaker 1: but a slow lateral expansion, each increment so proportional to
8:20
Speaker 1: the last that no single moment announced itself as a threshold.
8:25
Speaker 1: But Vickers was not looking at moments. He was looking
8:28
Speaker 1: at the shape of the whole. He pulled the five
8:30
Speaker 1: contract amendments. Each one had narrowed Melvin's operational role, none
8:35
Speaker 1: had formally altered his equity position. Melvin remained a nominal
8:39
Speaker 1: holder throughout, which was itself a detail worth examining. A
8:43
Speaker 1: man stripped of function but kept on paper, present enough
8:47
Speaker 1: to appear voluntary, absent enough to be functionally erased. Then
8:52
Speaker 1: Vickers found the calendar entries. Sharp's recovered phone records contained
8:56
Speaker 1: scheduling notes that corresponded precisely to the dates each amendment
9:01
Speaker 1: had been presented for signature. The notes were not explicit,
9:05
Speaker 1: but their timing was. Every single amendment had been brought
9:09
Speaker 1: to Melvin during a documented period of elevated personal stress.
9:13
Speaker 1: Sharp had not stumbled into those windows. According to Vickers's assessment,
9:18
Speaker 1: he had confirmed them first. That is not a pattern
9:22
Speaker 1: by accident. The question Vickers then had to answer was
9:25
Speaker 1: whether this was specific to Melvin, or whether it was
9:29
Speaker 1: something Sharp had done before he began looking. In September
9:33
Speaker 1: of two thousand nineteen, he found Brenda Hollis in Knoxville.
9:37
Speaker 1: Brenda Hollis had co founded a technology firm with William
9:41
Speaker 1: Sharp beginning in two thousand two. By two thousand six,
9:46
Speaker 1: she was no longer functionally part of it. She had
9:49
Speaker 1: filed a civil complaint. The matter was settled confidentially. Sharp
9:54
Speaker 1: had moved on. That settlement had buried the record, but
9:58
Speaker 1: it had not buried Hollis. Vickers reached her. She described
10:02
Speaker 1: what had happened to her company in terms that required
10:05
Speaker 1: almost no translation. Documentation migrated to platforms she could not access.
10:11
Speaker 1: Client relationships, redirected amendments timed to moments of personal vulnerability.
10:16
Speaker 1: The language she used to describe Sharp's methods was different
10:20
Speaker 1: from Melvin's. The methods themselves were not. Vicker's written assessment
10:25
Speaker 1: used one word identical. Sharp had done this before, he
10:29
Speaker 1: had refined it. He had moved to a new city,
10:32
Speaker 1: found a new founder, and run the same play with
10:35
Speaker 1: adjustments for what he had learned the first time. The
10:38
Speaker 1: two thousand six settlement had cost him something. Whatever it cost,
10:43
Speaker 1: it had not stopped him. This is the moment the
10:46
Speaker 1: case changed shape entirely. Not the Sandra Choux email, not
10:50
Speaker 1: Diane's confirmation, not even the calendar entries. It was Brenda Hollis.
10:56
Speaker 1: Because Hollis was not a complication to Sharp's pattern, she
10:59
Speaker 1: was the proof that the pattern had an author. Melvin Andrews,
11:03
Speaker 1: reading Vickers's September report, understood something for the first time.
11:08
Speaker 1: The doubt he had lived with for years, the creeping
11:11
Speaker 1: certainty that he had simply faded, that his best work
11:15
Speaker 1: was behind him, That Sharpe's version of events was the
11:18
Speaker 1: accurate one, had not emerged from inside him. It had
11:22
Speaker 1: been installed. That distinction is the difference between a wound
11:26
Speaker 1: and a diagnosis. Picture the Callaway Ridge property on the
11:30
Speaker 1: morning of November's second week, a well service contractor named
11:34
Speaker 1: John Reynolds arrived for a routine check at approximately seven
11:38
Speaker 1: thirty in the morning. He found a leather portfolio near
11:42
Speaker 1: the well head, brass clasp, elastic pen loop, forty one
11:47
Speaker 1: handwritten pages inside. The name on the inside cover was
11:51
Speaker 1: Melvin Andrews. The first page was dated September two thousand eight.
11:56
Speaker 1: Reynolds flagged it, investigators arrived, and then the forensic examination
12:01
Speaker 1: produced a finding that should have been unremarkable, but was
12:05
Speaker 1: in fact the pivot on which everything turned. The portfolio
12:09
Speaker 1: was pristine, not warned, not weathered. The leather was supple,
12:14
Speaker 1: the ink was fully legible. Not one page showed warping, foxing,
12:20
Speaker 1: or moisture absorption. For a document supposedly sitting in a
12:24
Speaker 1: November field, or if the alternative was considered stored for
12:28
Speaker 1: eleven years and then lost or abandoned, the condition was impossible.
12:34
Speaker 1: Paper does not survive outdoor exposure in that state. Leather
12:39
Speaker 1: does not either. Walk through the first scenario, the portfolio
12:43
Speaker 1: had been there for some time, weeks, months perhaps longer.
12:48
Speaker 1: Sharp's version, had he chosen to offer one, might have
12:51
Speaker 1: suggested Melvin left it there deliberately that it was something
12:55
Speaker 1: Melvin had concealed. That narrative would have positioned Melvin as
12:59
Speaker 1: the man hiding originals, the man with something to obscure.
13:03
Speaker 1: That version collapses the moment you look at the leather.
13:06
Speaker 1: The second scenario required a different timeline entirely. The portfolio
13:11
Speaker 1: had been placed there recently, within days, not months. The
13:15
Speaker 1: condition of the document was not evidence of abandonment, it
13:18
Speaker 1: was evidence of placement. Investigators then pulled the service records
13:23
Speaker 1: for Callaway Ridge. Two days before Reynolds found the portfolio,
13:28
Speaker 1: a contractor from Crossville, Sharp's brother in law had placed
13:32
Speaker 1: a propane line service call at the property. The timeline
13:36
Speaker 1: allowed for access. The condition of the portfolio confirmed recent arrival.
13:41
Speaker 1: Wade Vickers, reviewing the sequence, concluded that Sharp had intended
13:45
Speaker 1: the portfolio to be found exactly where it was found,
13:49
Speaker 1: positioned to make Melvin appear to have hidden his own
13:52
Speaker 1: originals there, creating a preemptive counter narrative to the documentation
13:57
Speaker 1: Vickers had already assembled. Sharp had not left the trap
14:01
Speaker 1: for Melvin, he had gone back to retrieve it. On
14:04
Speaker 1: November fourteenth, two thoy nineteen, investigators found William Sharp at
14:09
Speaker 1: Callaway Ridge. He had returned to the property, he was
14:13
Speaker 1: arrested there. Whatever he intended to do with the portfolio
14:16
Speaker 1: that morning, he did not get the chance. Sharp denied
14:20
Speaker 1: all charges through arraignment. He denied them through two continuances.
14:25
Speaker 1: He denied them through eight months of pre trial proceedings.
14:28
Speaker 1: He denied them through the first four days of his
14:31
Speaker 1: trial in the Harlan County Circuit Court in the summer
14:34
Speaker 1: of twenty twenty. On the fifth day, he attempted to
14:37
Speaker 1: change his plea. The judge declined to accept it. The
14:41
Speaker 1: jury convicted on six counts of fraud and one count
14:45
Speaker 1: of criminal breach of fiduciary duty. The sentence was nine years.
14:50
Speaker 1: There is something in that sequence worth sitting with. Sharp
14:53
Speaker 1: had spent years building a structure in which every piece
14:56
Speaker 1: of evidence pointed at Melvin. Melvins diminished participation, Melvin signed amendments,
15:03
Speaker 1: Melvin's apparent withdrawal from the company he had founded. The
15:07
Speaker 1: portfolio was meant to be the final stone in that structure,
15:11
Speaker 1: a hidden document in Melvin's handwriting on Melvin's property. Instead,
15:16
Speaker 1: it was pristine and pristine meant planted and planted meant
15:21
Speaker 1: Sharp had gone back and going back was the moment
15:25
Speaker 1: he was standing there when investigators arrived. The trap he
15:29
Speaker 1: built for someone else was the one he walked into himself.
15:32
Speaker 1: Melvin Andrews turned fifty four years old in October of
15:35
Speaker 1: twenty nineteen. Three weeks later, William Sharp was handcuffed at
15:40
Speaker 1: Callaway Ridge. The timing is not incidental. Sharp had spent
15:45
Speaker 1: more than a decade systematically relocating the intellectual center of
15:49
Speaker 1: Thornfield's systems from the man who built it to the
15:53
Speaker 1: man who had joined it. By the time Melvin understood
15:56
Speaker 1: what had happened, he had signed five amendments, stopped speaking
16:01
Speaker 1: to investors, and convinced himself, at least partially, that the
16:05
Speaker 1: erosion was his own. He retained his equity stake throughout
16:10
Speaker 1: on paper. He had never lost it. That fact matters
16:14
Speaker 1: more than it might seem. Sharp's method was not to
16:17
Speaker 1: take what belonged to Melvin in a single transaction. It
16:20
Speaker 1: was to make Melvin doubt whether anything had ever been
16:24
Speaker 1: his to begin with. Brenda Hollis understood that when Vickers
16:29
Speaker 1: called her in September of two thousand nineteen, she had
16:32
Speaker 1: been through the same architecture a decade earlier. The documentation migration.
16:38
Speaker 1: The amendment timing the gradual substitution of her presence with his.
16:43
Speaker 1: Her civil complaint in two thousand six had been settled confidentially.
16:47
Speaker 1: Sharp had absorbed the cost and moved on. When she
16:51
Speaker 1: co operated with investigators in two thousand nineteen, she gave
16:55
Speaker 1: the case something no forensic accountant could manufacture. A second instance,
17:00
Speaker 1: a pattern with the prior. The Delaware shell company filled
17:03
Speaker 1: in the rest. Paul Creech, the registered agent, confirmed Sharp
17:08
Speaker 1: as sole director. The competitor firm that licensed Melvin's twenty
17:12
Speaker 1: twelve workflow had licensed it from that entity, a company
17:16
Speaker 1: Melvin had no knowledge of, built on architecture he had created,
17:21
Speaker 1: structured so that Sharp collected the revenue. Callaway Ridge itself
17:26
Speaker 1: had been purchased through a holding company in twenty sixteen
17:30
Speaker 1: during a fiscal deficit. Sharp had reported to Melvin as
17:33
Speaker 1: a genuine shortfall. It was not a genuine shortfall. Sharp's
17:37
Speaker 1: phone calendar entries were, in the end, the most precise
17:42
Speaker 1: evidence against him. Investigators found dates, specific dates that aligned
17:47
Speaker 1: with each of the five amendments Melvin had signed. On
17:50
Speaker 1: each of those dates, Sharp had documented Melvin's condition. The
17:54
Speaker 1: entries did not use clinical language, but their function was clinical.
17:59
Speaker 1: He was confirming that Melvin was distressed enough to sign
18:02
Speaker 1: without pushing back five times each one logged. Stuke Callahan,
18:07
Speaker 1: the former Thornfield developer, described Sharp's campaign as quiet and total.
18:13
Speaker 1: That phrase captures something the financial documents alone cannot. The
18:18
Speaker 1: fraud was not loud. It did not arrive with threats
18:21
Speaker 1: or confrontation. It arrived as support, as partnership, as the
18:25
Speaker 1: ordinary delegation that happens inside any growing company. The reason
18:30
Speaker 1: it worked for twelve years is the reason it was
18:32
Speaker 1: so difficult to see from the inside. Melvin had not
18:36
Speaker 1: failed to notice. He had been given systematically a version
18:40
Speaker 1: of events in which noticing was itself the problem. Sharp's
18:44
Speaker 1: mid trial attempt to change his plea, rejected by the
18:48
Speaker 1: judge after four days of testimony, told its own story.
18:52
Speaker 1: By that point, the calendar entries had been entered into evidence.
18:56
Speaker 1: Vickers had testified, Brenda Hollis had testified, the portfolio's pristine
19:01
Speaker 1: condition had been established in forensic detail. Whatever Sharp had
19:06
Speaker 1: calculated before the trial began, the arithmetic had shifted. The
19:10
Speaker 1: jury convicted on all seven counts, six counts of fraud,
19:15
Speaker 1: one count of criminal breach, of fiduciary duty, the sentence.
19:20
Speaker 1: Nine years the morning after the verdict, Connie Phelps saw
19:25
Speaker 1: Melvin on Garrett Street. She had watched him through the
19:28
Speaker 1: years of the decline, the quieter gait, the shorter answers,
19:33
Speaker 1: the way a person can shrink without any one marking
19:35
Speaker 1: the exact moment it begins. What she saw that morning,
19:39
Speaker 1: she later said, was different. She said he looked like
19:43
Speaker 1: a man who knew what he knew. That image is
19:47
Speaker 1: worth holding. What Sharp had built, at its core was
19:51
Speaker 1: an epistemic structure, not just a financial one. The money
19:55
Speaker 1: and the documentation and the shell companies were instruments. The
19:59
Speaker 1: actual tar it was Melvin's ability to trust his own perception.
20:03
Speaker 1: When Sharp said in the years before the investigation that
20:07
Speaker 1: Melvin had been burned out, that Melvin himself had said so,
20:11
Speaker 1: he was not describing a history. He was constructing one,
20:15
Speaker 1: a history in which Melvin's withdrawal was voluntary, his contribution marginal,
20:21
Speaker 1: his doubt a product of his own limitations. The portfolio
20:24
Speaker 1: was meant to complete that construction. A document in Melvin's handwriting,
20:28
Speaker 1: hidden on property Sharp owned, found by someone else, reported investigated,
20:34
Speaker 1: framed as concealment instead, it was pristine. The leather was supple,
20:40
Speaker 1: the ink was legible. Not one page had warped, and
20:44
Speaker 1: that one detail about paper and moisture that a forensic
20:49
Speaker 1: review could confirm in minutes was the thing that held
20:54
Speaker 1: Sharp had designed a system specifically built to resist being sequenced.
20:59
Speaker 1: Each step survived alone, each document explainable individually. But the
21:04
Speaker 1: portfolio's condition gave investigators something his system had not accounted for,
21:09
Speaker 1: a fact that could not be reframed. Pristine paper does
21:13
Speaker 1: not lie about when it arrived. Melvin Andrews built something real.
21:18
Speaker 1: A competitor firm licensed his twenty twelve workflow without his knowledge.
21:22
Speaker 1: That is a different kind of confirmation, not a court finding,
21:26
Speaker 1: but a market one. Someone somewhere found his architecture worth
21:32
Speaker 1: enough to pay for it. They just paid the wrong person.
21:35
Speaker 1: Brenda Hollis settled in two thousand and six and was
21:38
Speaker 1: not named publicly. She cooperated in twenty nineteen and was
21:43
Speaker 1: that shift from confidential settlement to named cooperating witness is
21:48
Speaker 1: its own kind of resolution, one that the original settlement
21:53
Speaker 1: explicitly did not provide. There is a question this case
21:57
Speaker 1: does not fully answer, and it is worth naming directly
22:01
Speaker 1: how many people go through a version of this and
22:04
Speaker 1: never reach Sandra Cho's e mail, never find a weighed Vickers,
22:08
Speaker 1: never have a sister with the original copies. The mechanism
22:12
Speaker 1: Sharp used does not require a Delaware shell company to function.
22:16
Speaker 1: It requires only patience, proximity, and a person willing to
22:21
Speaker 1: believe that their own doubt is the most reliable thing
22:25
Speaker 1: about them. Melvin Andrews was fifty four years old when
22:29
Speaker 1: the arrest happened. He has his equity stake, he has
22:32
Speaker 1: the record, He has, according to Connie Phelps, the look
22:37
Speaker 1: of a man who knows what he knows. That is
22:41
Speaker 1: not everything, but it is not nothing either. This show
22:45
Speaker 1: is made by Obo Media