Latest / Murder Files Unsealed / Ohio Toddler Murdered by Mom's Boyfriend

Transcript

Ohio Toddler Murdered by Mom's Boyfriend · Murder Files Unsealed

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: So I want you to imagine moving into a new
• 0:04
  Speaker 1: apartment with your girlfriend and her three toddlers.
• 0:08
  Speaker 2: Okay. Sounds like a big life transition. Right.
• 0:12
  Speaker 1: A massive one. You settle in. You establish a routine.
• 0:17
  Speaker 1: And then about 90 days later, you walk into a
• 0:21
  Speaker 1: local courthouse.
• 0:23
  Speaker 2: Just out of the blue?
• 0:24
  Speaker 1: Pretty much. You fill out the paperwork to legally change
• 0:28
  Speaker 1: your name. But You don't pick just any name. You know,
• 0:32
  Speaker 1: you choose the exact name of a famous fictional serial
• 0:36
  Speaker 1: killer from a popular TV show.
• 0:39
  Speaker 2: Oh, wow. That is incredibly dark.
• 0:43
  Speaker 1: It really is. And you post about it online, celebrating
• 0:48
  Speaker 1: how you are shedding your old life. And then, I mean,
• 0:52
  Speaker 1: less than 24 hours later, one of those toddlers is dead.
• 0:57
  Speaker 2: And you are the one dialing 911.
• 0:59
  Speaker 1: Exactly. You are the one on the phone.
• 1:02
  Speaker 2: I mean, it sounds like the plot of a psychological thriller, right?
• 1:05
  Speaker 2: Like one that stretches the limits of believability.
• 1:08
  Speaker 1: Yeah, you would watch that movie and think the writer
• 1:10
  Speaker 1: was just being way too heavy handed.
• 1:12
  Speaker 2: Exactly. But what we are looking at today is a
• 1:16
  Speaker 2: stark documented reality. We are dealing with a scenario where,
• 1:20
  Speaker 2: you know, the darkest elements of fictional violence just completely
• 1:24
  Speaker 2: collided with the real world.
• 1:26
  Speaker 1: And left absolute devastation in their wake. Which is the
• 1:30
  Speaker 1: focus of our deep dive today. We are pulling our
• 1:32
  Speaker 1: information from a very specific, like, incredibly detailed source. Right.
• 1:37
  Speaker 2: The Crime Fix broadcast. Yeah.
• 1:39
  Speaker 1: The long crime network show called Crime Fix. It is
• 1:42
  Speaker 1: hosted by Anjanette Levy. And it features these really extensive,
• 1:47
  Speaker 1: unfiltered interviews with Adams County, Ohio, prosecutor Aaron Haslam.
• 1:51
  Speaker 2: And they also bring in insights from a former prosecutor,
• 1:53
  Speaker 2: Mark Weaver.
• 1:54
  Speaker 1: Yes, they do. And the value of this specific source
• 1:57
  Speaker 1: material is that it doesn't just give us the police
• 2:00
  Speaker 1: blotter summary, you know?
• 2:01
  Speaker 2: Oh, absolutely. It grants us access to the underlying machinery
• 2:04
  Speaker 2: of the criminal justice system. Right.
• 2:06
  Speaker 1: We are hearing directly from the architects of the prosecution
• 2:09
  Speaker 1: as they navigate an unbelievably gruesome and complex case in
• 2:14
  Speaker 1: real time.
• 2:15
  Speaker 2: It is a rare look behind the curtain.
• 2:17
  Speaker 1: It really is. So the mission of this deep dive
• 2:19
  Speaker 1: isn't to just sit here and recount a terribly sad
• 2:22
  Speaker 1: story for the sake of it, right? We are going
• 2:25
  Speaker 1: to examine... the mechanics of justice itself.
• 2:28
  Speaker 2: We want to understand how a small-town legal system actually
• 2:31
  Speaker 2: processes the unthinkable.
• 2:33
  Speaker 1: Yeah, exactly.
• 2:35
  Speaker 2: The strategic, high-stakes chess moves prosecutors are forced to make
• 2:38
  Speaker 2: to build an airtight indictment. And of course, the deeply
• 2:42
  Speaker 2: disturbing psychology of the accused.
• 2:45
  Speaker 1: We are going to see how an investigation actually functions
• 2:48
  Speaker 1: when the cameras aren't rolling.
• 2:50
  Speaker 2: Okay, let's unpack this.
• 2:52
  Speaker 1: The timeline begins precisely where law enforcement had to begin,
• 2:56
  Speaker 1: which is early in the morning on July 1st.
• 2:59
  Speaker 2: Right, because that initial point of contact is the baseline
• 3:02
  Speaker 2: for everything that follows. In any investigation, the 911 call
• 3:07
  Speaker 2: is ground zero.
• 3:08
  Speaker 1: It sets the whole stage.
• 3:09
  Speaker 2: It does. It establishes the initial narrative framework. And in
• 3:13
  Speaker 2: this case, the call is placed by a man who
• 3:15
  Speaker 2: identifies himself as Brian Moser.
• 3:17
  Speaker 1: Calling from the apartment he shares with his fiancée, Deanne Hawkins. Exactly.
• 3:22
  Speaker 2: And if we look closely at the linguistics of how
• 3:25
  Speaker 2: he frames the emergency to the dispatcher, it is just
• 3:28
  Speaker 2: incredibly revealing.
• 3:30
  Speaker 1: I read the transcript of that call. And the detachment
• 3:33
  Speaker 1: in his language is, well, it's the first thing that
• 3:36
  Speaker 1: hits you.
• 3:37
  Speaker 2: It really stands out.
• 3:39
  Speaker 1: It sends a chill right down your spine. Moser tells
• 3:43
  Speaker 1: the dispatcher, and this is a quote, I believe my
• 3:46
  Speaker 1: stepchild is dead.
• 3:48
  Speaker 2: My stepchild. Just think about that phrasing for a second.
• 3:52
  Speaker 1: Right. He claims that they just woke up and found her.
• 3:57
  Speaker 1: When the dispatcher asks the child's age, he says she's
• 3:59
  Speaker 1: two years old.
• 4:01
  Speaker 2: And then he follows that up by saying something even
• 4:03
  Speaker 2: more detached.
• 4:04
  Speaker 1: Yeah, he says, I believe she's all the way gone.
• 4:09
  Speaker 1: But the part that really stops you in your tracks
• 4:11
  Speaker 1: is what he does next.
• 4:12
  Speaker 2: Because he volunteers a theory, right?
• 4:14
  Speaker 1: Yes. Without any prompting from the dispatcher, without being asked
• 4:18
  Speaker 1: what happened, he just offers one. He says, I don't
• 4:22
  Speaker 1: know if they suffocated last night or what's going on.
• 4:26
  Speaker 2: Wow.
• 4:26
  Speaker 1: He goes on, there's no way that, I don't know.
• 4:29
  Speaker 1: I don't know she's dead. I just woke up and
• 4:31
  Speaker 1: found her.
• 4:33
  Speaker 2: What's fascinating here is the immediate clinical distancing. I mean,
• 4:37
  Speaker 2: he refers to a two-year-old child that he lives with
• 4:40
  Speaker 2: as my stepchild.
• 4:41
  Speaker 1: A child he has assumed a parental role over.
• 4:45
  Speaker 2: Exactly. He doesn't use her name. He doesn't say our
• 4:49
  Speaker 2: daughter or even my fiance's baby.
• 4:52
  Speaker 1: It's like a calculated semantic space he is putting between
• 4:55
  Speaker 1: himself and the victim.
• 4:56
  Speaker 2: That is exactly what it is. But beyond the distancing,
• 5:00
  Speaker 2: we have this proactive alibi. As you noted, he offers
• 5:03
  Speaker 2: a highly specific guess disguised as confusion.
• 5:06
  Speaker 1: I don't know if they suffocated last night. Right.
• 5:09
  Speaker 2: It's like listening to someone trying to write themselves out
• 5:12
  Speaker 2: of a script in real time.
• 5:13
  Speaker 1: It really is. If you put yourself in the shoes
• 5:16
  Speaker 1: of a normal person finding an unresponsive toddler, your brain
• 5:20
  Speaker 1: would be in sheer blind panic.
• 5:22
  Speaker 2: You would be screaming for an ambulance.
• 5:25
  Speaker 1: You would be begging the dispatcher for CPR instructions. You
• 5:28
  Speaker 1: wouldn't be casually referring to the child as a stepchild
• 5:31
  Speaker 1: while immediately floating a theory about accidental suffocation.
• 5:35
  Speaker 2: And he even goes on to set the physical scene
• 5:37
  Speaker 2: for the dispatcher, doesn't he?
• 5:38
  Speaker 1: He does. He mentions that the child, whose name is Lilith,
• 5:42
  Speaker 1: by the way, referred to as LB by the prosecutor,
• 5:45
  Speaker 1: was on the top bunk of a bunk bed.
• 5:47
  Speaker 2: Okay, so he is establishing the location. Right.
• 5:50
  Speaker 1: He says she was sleeping with her sisters under some blankets.
• 5:54
  Speaker 1: He also makes sure to note that his fiancee is, quote,
• 5:56
  Speaker 1: flipping out.
• 5:58
  Speaker 2: See, he is attempting to construct a tidy diorama for
• 6:02
  Speaker 2: law enforcement before they even arrive.
• 6:03
  Speaker 1: Giving them all the pieces.
• 6:05
  Speaker 2: Exactly. He is giving them the setting, the top bunk.
• 6:07
  Speaker 2: He is giving them the props, which are the blankets.
• 6:10
  Speaker 2: And he is handing them the suspected cause of death.
• 6:14
  Speaker 1: Accidental suffocation.
• 6:15
  Speaker 2: Right. And he is even directing the emotional tenor of
• 6:18
  Speaker 2: the scene by telling them what his fiancee is doing.
• 6:21
  Speaker 2: Contrasting her panic with his own steady narration.
• 6:24
  Speaker 1: It is highly curated information. It is.
• 6:27
  Speaker 2: But the inherent flaw in a curated narrative is that
• 6:30
  Speaker 2: it has to survive contact with physical reality.
• 6:33
  Speaker 1: And, oh man, it absolutely did not survive. When the
• 6:36
  Speaker 1: responding deputies from the Adams County Sheriff's Office arrive at
• 6:39
  Speaker 1: that apartment, the scene just obliterates Moser's entire story.
• 6:44
  Speaker 2: Because they didn't find a tragic accident under a blanket.
• 6:47
  Speaker 1: Not at all. The reality was a nightmare. Two-year-old LB
• 6:52
  Speaker 1: had significant catastrophic injuries from head to toe.
• 6:55
  Speaker 2: It is just so hard to even process that.
• 6:59
  Speaker 1: It is. And the horror didn't stop with her. Her
• 7:02
  Speaker 1: five-year-old sister and her one-year-old sister also exhibited severe physical injuries.
• 7:09
  Speaker 2: All three children?
• 7:10
  Speaker 1: All three. LB was pronounced dead very quickly on the scene.
• 7:15
  Speaker 1: And later, a preliminary autopsy did confirm the mechanical cause
• 7:18
  Speaker 1: of death was Suffocation or asphyxiation.
• 7:22
  Speaker 2: Which is what he said on the call.
• 7:24
  Speaker 1: Right. But the sheer volume of blunt force trauma told
• 7:29
  Speaker 1: a story of brutal, sustained violence. Not a sleeping accident.
• 7:34
  Speaker 2: This creates a profound shift for the responding officers. You know,
• 7:38
  Speaker 2: Prosecutor Haslam details this pivot in the source material.
• 7:41
  Speaker 1: Yeah, he talked about how quickly things changed.
• 7:44
  Speaker 2: Because when that 911 call goes out, they dispatch investigators immediately,
• 7:48
  Speaker 2: including an experienced juvenile prosecutor. Right.
• 7:51
  Speaker 1: They are taking it seriously from minute one.
• 7:54
  Speaker 2: Exactly. At that moment on route, they are bracing for
• 7:57
  Speaker 2: a terrible tragedy, maybe a sudden infant death scenario or
• 8:01
  Speaker 2: a tragic accident like Moser described.
• 8:03
  Speaker 1: Sure. That makes sense. Based on the call.
• 8:06
  Speaker 2: But the second a deputy walks into that room, sees
• 8:09
  Speaker 2: head-to-toe bruising on a two-year-old, and then finds matching traumatic
• 8:13
  Speaker 2: injuries on a five-year-old and a one-year-old.
• 8:15
  Speaker 1: The illusion of an accident just evaporates.
• 8:17
  Speaker 2: Completely. The physical evidence instantly and totally overrides the 911
• 8:22
  Speaker 2: caller's verbal narrative. It transitions from a medical emergency response
• 8:26
  Speaker 2: directly into a criminal homicide investigation.
• 8:30
  Speaker 1: The body does not lie. You know, even when the
• 8:32
  Speaker 1: person making the phone call does.
• 8:34
  Speaker 2: Exactly.
• 8:35
  Speaker 1: And This realization forces us to stop and look backward.
• 8:40
  Speaker 1: To understand how three little girls ended up battered in
• 8:43
  Speaker 1: that bunk bed on the morning of July 1st, the
• 8:45
  Speaker 1: prosecutors had to establish a timeline.
• 8:48
  Speaker 2: They had to figure out what was happening in that
• 8:50
  Speaker 2: apartment leading up to this. Right.
• 8:53
  Speaker 1: They uncovered a deeply disturbing three-month window where the danger
• 8:56
  Speaker 1: in that apartment steadily escalated. So let's look at the
• 9:00
  Speaker 1: cast of characters and the prelude to this morning.
• 9:03
  Speaker 2: The timeline focuses on two adults.
• 9:05
  Speaker 1: Okay.
• 9:05
  Speaker 2: We have the mother of the three children, T.N.
• 9:07
  Speaker 1: Hawkins. Okay.
• 9:09
  Speaker 2: And then we have the man who made that 911 call.
• 9:11
  Speaker 2: He moved into our apartment around April.
• 9:13
  Speaker 1: Let me stop you right there, because his identity is
• 9:17
  Speaker 1: honestly the most jarring element of this entire case.
• 9:20
  Speaker 2: It really is unbelievable.
• 9:21
  Speaker 1: When he moved into that apartment in April, his legal
• 9:24
  Speaker 1: name was Terry Michael Smith III. But the day before
• 9:28
  Speaker 1: two-year-old L.B. was killed, literally 24 hours prior to the murder,
• 9:32
  Speaker 1: he legally changed his name.
• 9:34
  Speaker 2: He went through the whole formal process.
• 9:37
  Speaker 1: He did. He didn't just casually ask people to call
• 9:39
  Speaker 1: him by a nickname. He navigated the court system, filed
• 9:43
  Speaker 1: the paperwork, and officially became Brian Moser.
• 9:46
  Speaker 2: And he didn't keep it a secret either. He broadcasted it. Yeah.
• 9:50
  Speaker 1: The prosecutors found a Facebook post from that exact day.
• 9:53
  Speaker 2: What did it say?
• 9:55
  Speaker 1: He wrote, quote, it's official. My new name is Brian Moser.
• 9:58
  Speaker 1: I couldn't be more happy or get rid of that
• 10:00
  Speaker 1: awful legacy I was bound to.
• 10:02
  Speaker 2: Getting rid of his awful legacy. Yeah.
• 10:05
  Speaker 1: And when I first read that, I thought, OK, Brian Moser.
• 10:09
  Speaker 1: It sounds like a very generic, unremarkable name.
• 10:11
  Speaker 2: It does sound pretty standard.
• 10:13
  Speaker 1: But it is not random at all. You pointed out
• 10:16
  Speaker 1: a deeply disturbing pop culture connection here.
• 10:19
  Speaker 2: It is arguably the most chilling psychological detail of the investigation.
• 10:23
  Speaker 2: Brian Moser is the name of a character from the
• 10:26
  Speaker 2: television show Dexter.
• 10:28
  Speaker 1: For listeners who might not know, what is Dexter about?
• 10:31
  Speaker 2: For context, Dexter is a very popular series centered around
• 10:35
  Speaker 2: a blood spatter analyst for the Miami police who is
• 10:38
  Speaker 2: secretly a vigilante serial killer.
• 10:40
  Speaker 1: Right. He kills other killers.
• 10:42
  Speaker 2: Exactly. And the character Brian Moser is the primary antagonist
• 10:45
  Speaker 2: of the show's first season. He is a highly calculated,
• 10:48
  Speaker 2: brutal murderer known as the Ice Truck Killer.
• 10:51
  Speaker 1: The idea that someone would actively seek out the legal
• 10:54
  Speaker 1: identity of a fictional serial killer is just hard to
• 10:57
  Speaker 1: wrap your head around.
• 10:58
  Speaker 2: It really is.
• 11:00
  Speaker 1: Like, what does that tell us about what is happening
• 11:02
  Speaker 1: inside his mind during those weeks leading up to the murder?
• 11:05
  Speaker 2: Well, if we connect this to the broader field of
• 11:07
  Speaker 2: criminal psychology, we are looking at a textbook example of
• 11:10
  Speaker 2: identity shedding and telegraphing.
• 11:12
  Speaker 1: Identity shedding, meaning the Facebook post about his legacy.
• 11:16
  Speaker 2: Yes. When someone actively decides to erase their birth name,
• 11:20
  Speaker 2: what he referred to as his awful legacy, they are
• 11:23
  Speaker 2: searching for a new skin to inhabit.
• 11:25
  Speaker 1: But to choose that specific skin.
• 11:28
  Speaker 2: Right. To deliberately select the identity of a fictional character
• 11:32
  Speaker 2: whose defining trait is methodical, unremorseful killing. That speaks to
• 11:37
  Speaker 2: a profound and dangerous internal fantasy life.
• 11:40
  Speaker 1: It's like he's blurring the line between media consumption and reality.
• 11:44
  Speaker 2: He absolutely is. He is adopting a persona of absolute
• 11:47
  Speaker 2: power and violence and finalizing that transformation just hours before
• 11:52
  Speaker 2: a child in his care is killed.
• 11:54
  Speaker 1: It suggests that the violence wasn't just a loss of temper,
• 11:56
  Speaker 1: doesn't it?
• 11:57
  Speaker 2: Exactly. It suggests it was part of a newly adopted
• 12:01
  Speaker 2: performative identity.
• 12:02
  Speaker 1: Here's where it gets really interesting, though, because the timeline
• 12:06
  Speaker 1: still just boggles the mind.
• 12:08
  Speaker 2: It happens so fast.
• 12:09
  Speaker 1: Right. How does a person move into an apartment in April?
• 12:13
  Speaker 1: completely take over the domestic lives of a one-year-old, a two-year-old,
• 12:16
  Speaker 1: and a five-year-old, orchestrate a legal name change to match
• 12:20
  Speaker 1: a fictional killer, and escalate to murder by July 1st.
• 12:23
  Speaker 2: It is a shockingly compressed time frame.
• 12:26
  Speaker 1: That is roughly 90 days. And according to Prosecutor Haslam,
• 12:30
  Speaker 1: during that brief window, this new boyfriend became the primary, quote,
• 12:34
  Speaker 1: disciplinarian for these three toddlers.
• 12:37
  Speaker 2: It illustrates how rapidly a vulnerable domestic ecosystem can be hijacked.
• 12:41
  Speaker 1: Hijacked is the perfect word for it.
• 12:43
  Speaker 2: In just three months, he entrenched himself so thoroughly that
• 12:47
  Speaker 2: he seized absolute authority over the physical well-being of those children.
• 12:51
  Speaker 1: And we must heavily scrutinize the word discipline in this context, right?
• 12:55
  Speaker 2: Oh, absolutely. When investigators finally sat him down in an
• 12:58
  Speaker 2: interrogation room, he admitted to striking the children.
• 13:01
  Speaker 1: And his excuse was just, I mean, I can't even
• 13:05
  Speaker 1: process it.
• 13:06
  Speaker 2: His stated justification was that they wouldn't go to sleep.
• 13:11
  Speaker 1: I can't even process calling that discipline. Striking a one-year-old
• 13:15
  Speaker 1: and a two-year-old because they are awake?
• 13:18
  Speaker 2: It defies all logic.
• 13:20
  Speaker 1: Prosecutor Haslam doesn't mince words about this in the transcript either.
• 13:23
  Speaker 1: He flatly categorizes it as assault.
• 13:26
  Speaker 2: Because that is exactly what it is. It is assault
• 13:28
  Speaker 2: masking his parental authority.
• 13:30
  Speaker 1: Is this something we see often in these types of cases?
• 13:33
  Speaker 2: Sadly, yes. This is a highly recognizable pattern in severe
• 13:36
  Speaker 2: child abuse cases. The abuser rationalizes their violence by framing
• 13:40
  Speaker 2: it as a necessary, logical reaction to the child's noncompliance.
• 13:45
  Speaker 1: Like, they refuse to sleep, therefore I had to use
• 13:48
  Speaker 1: force to make them.
• 13:49
  Speaker 2: Exactly. It is a grotesque distortion of reality where the
• 13:53
  Speaker 2: adult entirely removes their own agency and places the blame
• 13:56
  Speaker 2: for the violence on the behavior of a toddler.
• 13:59
  Speaker 1: A toddler who is just doing what toddlers do.
• 14:02
  Speaker 2: Right. And this was the violent reality he was actively
• 14:06
  Speaker 2: enforcing in that apartment from the moment he moved in
• 14:09
  Speaker 2: until the climax on July 1st.
• 14:11
  Speaker 1: So law enforcement has secured this horrific crime scene. They
• 14:15
  Speaker 1: are uncovering this grim three-month history and the bizarre Dexter connection.
• 14:20
  Speaker 2: They have a lot of pieces to put together very quickly.
• 14:22
  Speaker 1: They do. And the immediate aftermath requires the prosecutor's office
• 14:26
  Speaker 1: to make a move. And the strategy they employ is brilliant.
• 14:30
  Speaker 1: but it is an incredibly high-wire, controversial gamble.
• 14:35
  Speaker 2: To fully grasp the magnitude of the strategic decision, we
• 14:38
  Speaker 2: really have to understand the specific environment where this is
• 14:41
  Speaker 2: playing out.
• 14:42
  Speaker 1: Right. Context is everything here.
• 14:43
  Speaker 2: It is, because this is not happening in a massive,
• 14:46
  Speaker 2: sprawling city where crimes can get lost in the noise.
• 14:49
  Speaker 2: This is Adams County, Ohio.
• 14:51
  Speaker 1: Which is pretty small, right?
• 14:53
  Speaker 2: Yes. It is a rural, tight-knit community with a population
• 14:56
  Speaker 2: of roughly 28,000 people.
• 14:58
  Speaker 1: Okay, so everybody knows everybody.
• 15:00
  Speaker 2: Exactly. In a town of that size, anonymity does not exist.
• 15:04
  Speaker 2: News of a tragedy involving a two-year-old child travels instantly.
• 15:08
  Speaker 1: And I imagine the community's emotional investment and outrage is absolute.
• 15:13
  Speaker 2: Without a doubt. And the legal and law enforcement ecosystem
• 15:16
  Speaker 2: is just as intimate.
• 15:18
  Speaker 1: Yeah, the broadcast mentioned that the newly elected sheriff in
• 15:21
  Speaker 1: the county actually worked as an investigator for prosecutor Aaron
• 15:24
  Speaker 1: Haslam's office for over 25 years.
• 15:27
  Speaker 2: They have a very long history together.
• 15:29
  Speaker 1: Haslam himself has two dedicated investigators and an experienced juvenile prosecutor.
• 15:35
  Speaker 1: They aren't a disjointed bureaucracy. They function as a highly synchronized,
• 15:39
  Speaker 1: tight-knit unit.
• 15:41
  Speaker 2: And they were all standing in that apartment together, seeing
• 15:43
  Speaker 2: the unimaginable reality of that bedroom firsthand.
• 15:47
  Speaker 1: So following the discovery on July 1st, they predictably placed
• 15:50
  Speaker 1: Brian Mosher under arrest.
• 15:52
  Speaker 2: Which is standard procedure. Right.
• 15:54
  Speaker 1: They hit him with preliminary charges of child endangering and
• 15:57
  Speaker 1: involuntary manslaughter right out of the gate. But what they
• 16:01
  Speaker 1: did next with the mother, T.N. Hawkins, completely shocked the public.
• 16:05
  Speaker 2: They released her.
• 16:07
  Speaker 1: They just let her go.
• 16:08
  Speaker 2: They let the mother of the murdered child walk straight
• 16:11
  Speaker 2: out of the jail.
• 16:12
  Speaker 1: I really want to make sure we are clear on
• 16:14
  Speaker 1: how wild this is for the listener. You have three
• 16:17
  Speaker 1: battered children, one of whom is dead. You have a
• 16:20
  Speaker 1: mother who, at the very least, was in the apartment
• 16:23
  Speaker 1: while this escalated over three months. And law enforcement just
• 16:27
  Speaker 1: opens the door and lets her walk back out into
• 16:30
  Speaker 1: the community right before the long Fourth of July holiday weekend.
• 16:34
  Speaker 2: The public backlash in a town of 28,000 people must
• 16:36
  Speaker 2: have been deafening.
• 16:37
  Speaker 1: Oh, I'm sure it was. Prosecutor Haslam openly acknowledged how
• 16:42
  Speaker 1: terrible the optics were. He knew it was a highly
• 16:45
  Speaker 1: unpopular move that would enrage the community.
• 16:48
  Speaker 2: But this highlights the agonizing balance prosecutors must strike, right,
• 16:51
  Speaker 2: between managing public relations and quietly building an airtight case.
• 16:56
  Speaker 1: It's like letting a bird out of a cage just
• 16:59
  Speaker 1: to see what tree it flies to.
• 17:01
  Speaker 2: That's a great way to put it.
• 17:02
  Speaker 1: Haslam explicitly states in the transcript that they released her
• 17:06
  Speaker 1: specifically to surveil her.
• 17:08
  Speaker 2: They wanted to utilize the Fourth of July weekend, a
• 17:10
  Speaker 2: time when the media and the public are somewhat distracted
• 17:13
  Speaker 2: by the holiday, to see exactly how she would behave
• 17:16
  Speaker 2: when she thought she was free.
• 17:18
  Speaker 1: How does that actually work mechanically? I mean, in a
• 17:21
  Speaker 1: town where everyone knows everyone, how do police surveil a
• 17:24
  Speaker 1: high-profile suspect without tipping her off? And what kind of
• 17:28
  Speaker 1: intelligence are they actually hoping to gather?
• 17:30
  Speaker 2: Well, in a rural jurisdiction, surveillance relies heavily on community
• 17:34
  Speaker 2: networks and digital footprints.
• 17:36
  Speaker 1: Okay, so cell phones and Facebook?
• 17:38
  Speaker 2: Exactly. They are monitoring her phone communications, watching her social
• 17:42
  Speaker 2: media activity, and likely having plainclothes investigators or informants keep
• 17:46
  Speaker 2: an eye on her physical movements.
• 17:48
  Speaker 1: And what are they looking for?
• 17:49
  Speaker 2: Behavioral intelligence. Who is the first person she calls? Does
• 17:53
  Speaker 2: she try to contact Moser's associates? Does she try to
• 17:56
  Speaker 2: flee the jurisdiction?
• 17:57
  Speaker 1: Or does she make statements to family members that contradict
• 18:00
  Speaker 1: what she told police?
• 18:01
  Speaker 2: Exactly. Because preliminary charges against the boyfriend are just a placeholder.
• 18:06
  Speaker 2: To get a grand jury to hand down a murder
• 18:08
  Speaker 2: indictment against a mother, they need absolute clarity on her role.
• 18:12
  Speaker 1: They need to know if she was an active participant
• 18:14
  Speaker 1: in the beatings or... if she was covering for him,
• 18:17
  Speaker 1: or if she was entirely paralyzed by fear. Right.
• 18:20
  Speaker 2: And the only way to find the unvarnished truth was
• 18:22
  Speaker 2: to remove the pressure cooker of the interrogation room, put
• 18:25
  Speaker 2: her back in her natural environment, and watch every move
• 18:27
  Speaker 2: she made.
• 18:28
  Speaker 1: It is a master class in patience. Really.
• 18:31
  Speaker 2: It is a huge risk.
• 18:33
  Speaker 1: You risk massive public outrage. You have to endure the
• 18:36
  Speaker 1: angry whispers at the grocery store and the outrage on
• 18:39
  Speaker 1: local Facebook groups, all while trusting that the intelligence you
• 18:42
  Speaker 1: gather over that long weekend is going to pay off.
• 18:46
  Speaker 2: The gamble was significant, but the law enforcement unit in
• 18:49
  Speaker 2: Adams County clearly felt they needed that operational window.
• 18:52
  Speaker 1: And the intelligence they gathered during that surveillance period was
• 18:56
  Speaker 1: evidently the final piece of the puzzle they required.
• 18:59
  Speaker 2: Because the moment that holiday weekend ends, they drop the hammer.
• 19:02
  Speaker 1: They sure do. On Monday, July 7th, just days after
• 19:06
  Speaker 1: the murder, they convene a special grand jury.
• 19:09
  Speaker 2: Let's pause here for a second because we should clarify
• 19:12
  Speaker 2: what that means.
• 19:13
  Speaker 1: What exactly is a special grand jury? And how does
• 19:16
  Speaker 1: it differ mechanically from a regular trial jury?
• 19:20
  Speaker 2: So a trial jury, the 12 people sitting in a
• 19:22
  Speaker 2: courtroom during a trial, has to decide guilt or innocence
• 19:25
  Speaker 2: beyond a reasonable doubt. Right.
• 19:27
  Speaker 1: That's what we see in the movies. Exactly.
• 19:30
  Speaker 2: A grand jury has a completely different function and a
• 19:32
  Speaker 2: much lower burden of proof. Their job is simply to
• 19:35
  Speaker 2: listen to the prosecutor's evidence and decide if there is
• 19:38
  Speaker 2: probable cause.
• 19:39
  Speaker 1: Probable cause to believe a crime was committed and that
• 19:42
  Speaker 1: the accused committed it.
• 19:43
  Speaker 2: Right. And if they agree, they issue an indictment, which
• 19:46
  Speaker 2: formally charges the person.
• 19:48
  Speaker 1: So what makes this one special?
• 19:50
  Speaker 2: Usually grand juries meet on a set routine schedule, maybe
• 19:53
  Speaker 2: once a month in a small county like this. But
• 19:55
  Speaker 2: when a prosecutor convenes a special grand jury, they are
• 19:58
  Speaker 2: essentially calling an emergency session outside the normal schedule.
• 20:02
  Speaker 1: Because they can't wait a month.
• 20:03
  Speaker 2: Exactly. It signals that the case is of paramount importance,
• 20:07
  Speaker 2: highly sensitive, and needs immediate formal action before suspects can
• 20:11
  Speaker 2: flee or evidence can be compromised.
• 20:13
  Speaker 1: And the action they took was devastating. The charges from
• 20:17
  Speaker 1: that special grand jury were massive upgrades from the preliminary arrests.
• 20:21
  Speaker 2: Let's hear the upgraded charges.
• 20:23
  Speaker 1: Brian Mosier is formally arraigned on July 10th. He is
• 20:26
  Speaker 1: hit with 10 counts, including murder, involuntary manslaughter, and several
• 20:31
  Speaker 1: counts of endangering children.
• 20:32
  Speaker 2: Ten counts.
• 20:33
  Speaker 1: Yeah. And the judge sets his bond at a $ 1
• 20:37
  Speaker 1: million cash or surety bond.
• 20:39
  Speaker 2: A million dollars. Okay.
• 20:41
  Speaker 1: Then T. Ann Hawkins is arraigned two days later on
• 20:44
  Speaker 1: July 12th. She faces eight counts, including murder, involuntary manslaughter,
• 20:49
  Speaker 1: permitting child abuse, and endangering children.
• 20:52
  Speaker 2: So she is also facing murder charges now.
• 20:55
  Speaker 1: She is. Her bond is set at $ 500, 000 cash, but
• 20:57
  Speaker 1: with a 10% provision allowed.
• 21:01
  Speaker 2: We should definitely clarify these bond terms for the listener
• 21:04
  Speaker 2: because they sound similar but function very differently.
• 21:08
  Speaker 1: What is a surety bond versus a 10% provision?
• 21:11
  Speaker 2: Let's break down the mechanics. For Moser, a $ 1 million
• 21:15
  Speaker 2: cash or surety bond means he either has to deposit
• 21:18
  Speaker 2: $ 1 million in cold, hard cash directly with the court,
• 21:22
  Speaker 2: which is highly unlikely, or he has to use a
• 21:25
  Speaker 2: bail bondsman.
• 21:26
  Speaker 1: Who acts as the surety.
• 21:27
  Speaker 2: Exactly. The bondsman acts as the surety. Moser or his
• 21:31
  Speaker 2: family would pay the bondsman a non-refundable fee, typically around 10%,
• 21:35
  Speaker 2: which in this case is $ 100, 000.
• 21:36
  Speaker 1: And then the bondsman guarantees the full million to the
• 21:39
  Speaker 1: court if Moser flees. Yes. So the bondsman takes on
• 21:43
  Speaker 1: the financial risk, but Moser still has to come up
• 21:45
  Speaker 1: with a massive amount of non-refundable money just to hire them.
• 21:49
  Speaker 2: Right. Now, contrast that with Hawkins Bond.
• 21:52
  Speaker 1: Okay. Hers was $ 500, 000 with a 10% provision.
• 21:57
  Speaker 2: Exactly. She is held on $ 500, 000, but the judge allows
• 22:01
  Speaker 2: a 10% provision directly through the court. This means she
• 22:04
  Speaker 2: doesn't need a bail bondsman.
• 22:06
  Speaker 1: Oh, she can just pay the court directly?
• 22:08
  Speaker 2: Yes. She only has to deposit 10% of the total amount,
• 22:11
  Speaker 2: so $ 50, 000, directly to the court clerk to be released.
• 22:15
  Speaker 2: And crucially, if she shows up for all her court dates,
• 22:18
  Speaker 2: she gets that $ 50, 000 back at the end of the case.
• 22:21
  Speaker 1: Wait, she gets it back?
• 22:23
  Speaker 2: Yes, unlike the fee paid to a bondsman.
• 22:26
  Speaker 1: That is a massive discrepancy. Moser needs $ 100, 000 that he
• 22:31
  Speaker 1: will never see again, while Hawkins needs $ 50, 000 that she
• 22:36
  Speaker 1: can eventually get back.
• 22:37
  Speaker 2: It really highlights how the system treats them differently.
• 22:40
  Speaker 1: It clearly signals how the state views their respective levels
• 22:43
  Speaker 1: of direct culpability. The state is legally categorizing Moser as
• 22:48
  Speaker 1: the primary actor, the main physical threat, and the higher
• 22:51
  Speaker 1: flight risk.
• 22:53
  Speaker 2: The bond amounts are a direct reflection of the threat assessment.
• 22:56
  Speaker 2: And we must also note the strict conditions attached to
• 22:59
  Speaker 2: both bonds.
• 23:00
  Speaker 1: Right. They were issued strict no-contact orders.
• 23:03
  Speaker 2: They cannot communicate with each other, and most importantly, they
• 23:06
  Speaker 2: are legally barred from having any contact with the surviving children.
• 23:09
  Speaker 1: The one-year-old and the five-year-old, who were treated for their
• 23:12
  Speaker 1: severe injuries and placed in the custody of Children's Services.
• 23:16
  Speaker 2: The state is forcibly and legally severing this deeply toxic
• 23:20
  Speaker 2: family unit. both to protect the survivors from further harm
• 23:23
  Speaker 2: and to prevent Moser and Hawkins from coordinating their stories.
• 23:26
  Speaker 1: Speaking of their stories, the Crime Fix broadcast actually gives
• 23:30
  Speaker 1: us a very strange, very surreal audio clip of the
• 23:33
  Speaker 1: exact moment Tianne Hawkins is taken into custody for these
• 23:37
  Speaker 1: upgraded murder charges.
• 23:39
  Speaker 2: It is a profoundly jarring piece of audio to listen to.
• 23:42
  Speaker 1: It really is. You are hearing a mother being arrested
• 23:45
  Speaker 1: and transported for the murder of her own two-year-old daughter.
• 23:49
  Speaker 1: And the conversation in the police cruiser is, well, entirely mundane.
• 23:53
  Speaker 2: It's just so casual.
• 23:55
  Speaker 1: The deputy politely asks for her vape, explaining she can't
• 23:58
  Speaker 1: keep it in the jail. He then asks her, you
• 24:01
  Speaker 1: want buckled in or you trust my driving?
• 24:03
  Speaker 2: And her response?
• 24:05
  Speaker 1: She replies calmly, I trust you. He finishes by advising
• 24:09
  Speaker 1: her to call her attorney in the morning. It is
• 24:11
  Speaker 1: purely transactional.
• 24:13
  Speaker 2: It highlights the absolute banality of the system at work,
• 24:16
  Speaker 2: you know?
• 24:16
  Speaker 1: When you think of a murder arrest, you picture screaming, crying,
• 24:20
  Speaker 1: dramatic confessions in the back of the car. Right.
• 24:23
  Speaker 2: You expect high drama.
• 24:24
  Speaker 1: Instead, it's just hand over the vape and I trust
• 24:27
  Speaker 1: you're driving. It is deeply unsettling because the calm tone
• 24:31
  Speaker 1: contrasts so violently with the horror of the indictment she
• 24:35
  Speaker 1: is facing.
• 24:36
  Speaker 2: It is a very stark contrast.
• 24:38
  Speaker 1: And looking at that indictment, I actually have a structural
• 24:42
  Speaker 1: legal question for you. Both Mosier and Hawkins are charged
• 24:46
  Speaker 1: with murder and involuntary manslaughter for the exact same crime.
• 24:49
  Speaker 2: Right.
• 24:50
  Speaker 1: How does that make logical sense? How can a single
• 24:52
  Speaker 1: death be classified simultaneously as an intentional murder and an
• 24:57
  Speaker 1: involuntary manslaughter? Isn't that contradictory?
• 25:00
  Speaker 2: I mean, on the surface, it does seem entirely paradoxical,
• 25:03
  Speaker 2: but If we connect this to the bigger picture of
• 25:05
  Speaker 2: legal strategy, it is a very common and necessary maneuver
• 25:09
  Speaker 2: that is known as charging lesser included offenses.
• 25:12
  Speaker 1: OK, lesser included offenses.
• 25:14
  Speaker 2: So when prosecutors prepare a case for trial, right, they
• 25:16
  Speaker 2: know the burden of proof for murder is exceptionally high.
• 25:19
  Speaker 2: You typically have to prove a specific intent to kill
• 25:23
  Speaker 2: or you have to prove that the death occurred while
• 25:25
  Speaker 2: the defendant was committing another highly dangerous specified felony.
• 25:29
  Speaker 1: So if they only charge murder, And the jury looks
• 25:32
  Speaker 1: at the autopsy and says, you know, we know we
• 25:35
  Speaker 1: know he beat this child. And, you know, we know
• 25:38
  Speaker 1: that those those beatings caused her death. But we aren't
• 25:40
  Speaker 1: 100 percent certain that he intended for her to die
• 25:43
  Speaker 1: that night.
• 25:44
  Speaker 2: What happens if murder is the only charge on the
• 25:47
  Speaker 2: verdict form and the jury gets cold feet about the
• 25:50
  Speaker 2: specific element of intent? They are legally obligated to return
• 25:54
  Speaker 2: a verdict of not guilty.
• 25:55
  Speaker 1: Wait, really? He would just walk.
• 25:58
  Speaker 2: The defendant would walk entirely free despite causing the death.
• 26:02
  Speaker 1: Just because of the intent aspect.
• 26:04
  Speaker 2: Exactly. By simultaneously charging involuntary manslaughter, the prosecutor creates a
• 26:09
  Speaker 2: vital safety net. They are providing the jury with options.
• 26:12
  Speaker 1: Ah, I see.
• 26:14
  Speaker 2: They're essentially saying, if you can't cross the threshold of
• 26:17
  Speaker 2: intent required for murder, you can still hold this person
• 26:20
  Speaker 2: accountable for a reckless, unlawful act that resulted in death.
• 26:24
  Speaker 1: It ensures that if the primary charge fails, a form
• 26:27
  Speaker 1: of severe justice is still achieved.
• 26:29
  Speaker 2: Exactly. It gives the jury a place to land.
• 26:32
  Speaker 1: That makes perfect sense.
• 26:34
  Speaker 2: It's casting a wide net to ensure they don't slip
• 26:36
  Speaker 2: through on a technicality of intent.
• 26:38
  Speaker 1: And to build that net, investigators have to rely heavily
• 26:41
  Speaker 1: on what happens inside the interrogation room.
• 26:43
  Speaker 2: Which brings us to a huge point in the broadcast.
• 26:46
  Speaker 2: Prosecutor Haslam makes a very stark, very intentional distinction between
• 26:50
  Speaker 2: how Moser and Hawkins behaved when they were questioned by detectives.
• 26:54
  Speaker 2: It is a critical distinction that sheds light on the
• 26:56
  Speaker 2: reality of criminal investigations.
• 26:58
  Speaker 1: What did he say?
• 26:59
  Speaker 2: Haslam states unequivocally that Tian Hawkins was both cooperative and truthful.
• 27:05
  Speaker 1: Truthful being the operative word there. Yes.
• 27:07
  Speaker 2: The statement she gave to law enforcement aligned seamlessly with
• 27:10
  Speaker 2: the physical evidence deputies found at the scene, and they
• 27:13
  Speaker 2: corroborated the timeline investigators had built during their surveillance over
• 27:16
  Speaker 2: the holiday weekend.
• 27:18
  Speaker 1: But when Haslam discusses Brian Moser, the language shifts dramatically.
• 27:23
  Speaker 2: He says Moser was cooperative, meaning he didn't demand a
• 27:26
  Speaker 2: lawyer and sit in silence. He waived his rights and.
• 27:28
  Speaker 1: Spoke to detectives. Right. He talked.
• 27:31
  Speaker 2: But Haslam notes that he was likely not truthful. Moser
• 27:35
  Speaker 2: spent the interrogation constantly downplaying and minimizing his role in
• 27:39
  Speaker 2: the fatal event.
• 27:40
  Speaker 1: He didn't deny everything outright, though, right?
• 27:43
  Speaker 2: No. As we discussed earlier, he admitted to striking the
• 27:45
  Speaker 2: children over sleep issues, but he minimized the severity of
• 27:49
  Speaker 2: the violence.
• 27:50
  Speaker 1: We hear the word cooperative on the news all the time,
• 27:54
  Speaker 1: but this highlights how giving a statement isn't the same
• 27:57
  Speaker 1: thing as telling the truth.
• 27:59
  Speaker 2: The public often assumes that cooperative means innocent or coming clean,
• 28:02
  Speaker 2: but what Moser was executing in that room is a
• 28:05
  Speaker 2: classic psychological defense mechanism.
• 28:07
  Speaker 1: The psychology of the minimized confession?
• 28:10
  Speaker 2: Exactly.
• 28:11
  Speaker 1: Let me make sure I understand the logic here, though.
• 28:14
  Speaker 1: Why would someone admit to hitting the kids at all
• 28:17
  Speaker 1: if they are trying to beat a murder charge? Isn't
• 28:20
  Speaker 1: any admission of violence a terrible idea?
• 28:22
  Speaker 2: It's like paying the minimum balance on a massive credit
• 28:24
  Speaker 2: card bill to keep the collection agency.
• 28:26
  Speaker 1: Off your back. Oh, that's a good analogy.
• 28:28
  Speaker 2: A complete flat denial is completely useless when the police
• 28:32
  Speaker 2: have overwhelming physical evidence. If Moser sits in that room
• 28:35
  Speaker 2: and says, I never laid a finger on those girls,
• 28:37
  Speaker 2: and the detectives are holding photographs of head-to-toe bruising, he
• 28:41
  Speaker 2: loses all credibility instantly.
• 28:43
  Speaker 1: The detectives know he is lying, and he knows they know.
• 28:46
  Speaker 2: Right. So the guilty mind offers a strategic concession. They
• 28:50
  Speaker 2: admit to a lesser sin to explain away the physical evidence,
• 28:53
  Speaker 2: hoping it acts as a shield against the greater sin.
• 28:55
  Speaker 1: Like, yes, I slapped them because they wouldn't go to sleep,
• 28:59
  Speaker 1: but I absolutely didn't kill the two-year-old.
• 29:01
  Speaker 2: The abuser thinks they are outsmarting the detectives. They think
• 29:05
  Speaker 2: they have successfully explained the existence of the bruises without
• 29:08
  Speaker 2: catching a murder charge.
• 29:09
  Speaker 1: But in reality, he is just handing the prosecution the
• 29:13
  Speaker 1: exact building blocks they need.
• 29:14
  Speaker 2: They absolutely need those statements.
• 29:16
  Speaker 1: By offering that minimized confession, he is putting himself physically
• 29:20
  Speaker 1: at the scene. He's establishing his own motive, which is
• 29:23
  Speaker 1: his frustration over the kids not sleeping.
• 29:26
  Speaker 2: And he is legally admitting to a pattern of physical
• 29:29
  Speaker 2: violence against toddlers.
• 29:30
  Speaker 1: He's doing the prosecution's job for them while genuinely believing
• 29:34
  Speaker 1: he is defending himself.
• 29:35
  Speaker 2: That is the exact trap.
• 29:37
  Speaker 1: Investigators use these minimized confessions as evidence. anchors. Once the
• 29:41
  Speaker 1: suspect admits to striking a child, the debate in the
• 29:44
  Speaker 1: courtroom is no longer if they are an abuser.
• 29:47
  Speaker 2: It's just a matter of degree at that point.
• 29:49
  Speaker 1: Exactly. The debate is narrowed down entirely to the extent
• 29:52
  Speaker 1: of the abuse.
• 29:53
  Speaker 2: And when the prosecutor brings in the forensic evidence showing
• 29:56
  Speaker 2: catastrophic fatal injuries... a jury is not going to believe
• 30:00
  Speaker 2: the abuser's minimized, sanitized version of offense.
• 30:04
  Speaker 1: The confession of minor violence becomes the foundation for proving
• 30:07
  Speaker 1: the fatal violence. Precisely. Bringing the jury into the equation
• 30:12
  Speaker 1: transitions us to the next massive hurdle in this process,
• 30:15
  Speaker 1: the courtroom calculus.
• 30:17
  Speaker 2: This is where the rubber meets the road.
• 30:20
  Speaker 1: Because with trials looming, Moser's was originally scheduled for late September,
• 30:24
  Speaker 1: the entire focus of the justice system shifts. The question
• 30:27
  Speaker 1: is no longer just what the police know to be true.
• 30:30
  Speaker 2: The sole question becomes how this harrowing, complex evidence can
• 30:33
  Speaker 2: be presented to 12 ordinary citizens sitting in a jury box.
• 30:38
  Speaker 1: And to understand this phase, the Crime Fix broadcast brings
• 30:41
  Speaker 1: in Mark Weaver, a former Adams County prosecutor, to offer
• 30:44
  Speaker 1: his unvarnished insights.
• 30:46
  Speaker 2: Mark Weaver introduces a very heavy dose of grim reality
• 30:50
  Speaker 2: into the conversation. He points out a fundamental truth of
• 30:53
  Speaker 2: trial law.
• 30:54
  Speaker 1: What's that?
• 30:55
  Speaker 2: Juries, both grand juries and regular trial juries, absolutely hate
• 30:59
  Speaker 2: these types of cases.
• 31:00
  Speaker 1: Because they are so dark.
• 31:02
  Speaker 2: They are bloody, they are graphic, and they are emotionally
• 31:05
  Speaker 2: devastating because the victim is just so vulnerable. You have
• 31:08
  Speaker 2: to remember the makeup of a jury. They are everyday citizens.
• 31:12
  Speaker 1: They are parents, grandparents, aunts and uncles.
• 31:15
  Speaker 2: Right. They have deep, innate, empathetic responses. forcing them to
• 31:20
  Speaker 2: sit in a sterile room and look at autopsy photographs
• 31:22
  Speaker 2: of a battered two-year-old, forcing them to listen to the
• 31:25
  Speaker 2: medical examiner detail exactly how she suffered.
• 31:29
  Speaker 1: It inflicts profound secondary trauma on those jurors.
• 31:33
  Speaker 2: It absolutely does.
• 31:34
  Speaker 1: Weaver notes that ideally prosecutors want maximum sentences for everyone
• 31:38
  Speaker 1: involved in a crime like this. In a perfect world,
• 31:40
  Speaker 1: if you're involved in the abuse and death of a child,
• 31:43
  Speaker 1: the state wants to put you away forever.
• 31:45
  Speaker 2: But prosecutors don't operate in a perfect world. They operate
• 31:49
  Speaker 2: in a courtroom bound by strict rules of evidence.
• 31:52
  Speaker 1: And absent a video recording of the actual murder or
• 31:55
  Speaker 1: absolute undeniable DNA or forensic evidence that points to only
• 31:59
  Speaker 1: one person striking the fatal blow, the prosecution faces a
• 32:02
  Speaker 1: massive hurdle.
• 32:04
  Speaker 2: Proving exactly who did what in that bedroom.
• 32:07
  Speaker 1: Exactly. To overcome that, Weaver explains, they often have to
• 32:11
  Speaker 1: rely on the less responsible party to take the witness
• 32:14
  Speaker 1: stand and tell the story.
• 32:16
  Speaker 2: This brings us to a deeply uncomfortable intersection between the
• 32:19
  Speaker 2: concept of ideal justice and the mechanical reality of the
• 32:22
  Speaker 2: legal system.
• 32:23
  Speaker 1: Yeah, it really does.
• 32:25
  Speaker 2: Weaver notes that if the state cuts a deal with T.N.
• 32:28
  Speaker 2: Hawkins to secure her testimony against Moser, she won't just
• 32:31
  Speaker 2: walk free.
• 32:32
  Speaker 1: She will still go to prison for her role.
• 32:34
  Speaker 2: But her reward for sitting on that stand and testifying
• 32:37
  Speaker 2: will be a reduced sentence. She will get out of
• 32:39
  Speaker 2: prison in a shorter amount of time.
• 32:40
  Speaker 1: I have to be honest. I struggle with this concept.
• 32:44
  Speaker 1: and I imagine anyone listening does too. It feels inherently unfair,
• 32:49
  Speaker 1: doesn't it?
• 32:51
  Speaker 2: It is a bitter pill to swallow.
• 32:53
  Speaker 1: The idea that a mother who is currently indicted on
• 32:56
  Speaker 1: charges of murder and permitting the abuse of her own
• 32:59
  Speaker 1: children might receive a lighter sentence simply because the state
• 33:03
  Speaker 1: needs her to point a finger at the boyfriend who
• 33:06
  Speaker 1: changed his name to a serial killer? It just feels
• 33:10
  Speaker 1: like a failure of justice.
• 33:12
  Speaker 2: This raises an important question about what justice actually means
• 33:15
  Speaker 2: in practice. It is the ultimate expression of grim pragmatism
• 33:20
  Speaker 2: in the justice system.
• 33:22
  Speaker 1: Grim pragmatism.
• 33:24
  Speaker 2: The legal machine is not designed to dispense perfect cosmic fairness.
• 33:28
  Speaker 2: It is a highly utilitarian system designed to secure convictions
• 33:31
  Speaker 2: against the primary, most acute threat to public safety.
• 33:35
  Speaker 1: So they have to make a choice.
• 33:37
  Speaker 2: Right. Consider the alternative. If the prosecution goes to trial
• 33:41
  Speaker 2: against Moser without Hawkins' inside testimony, they are relying entirely
• 33:45
  Speaker 2: on circumstantial and medical evidence.
• 33:47
  Speaker 1: And if the jury gets confused by the lack of
• 33:49
  Speaker 1: direct eyewitness testimony.
• 33:52
  Speaker 2: Or if Moser's defense attorney successfully muddies the waters by
• 33:55
  Speaker 2: pointing the finger back at the mother, creating reasonable doubt,
• 33:59
  Speaker 2: Moser could be acquitted.
• 34:01
  Speaker 1: That is the ultimate nightmare scenario.
• 34:04
  Speaker 2: The primary physical abuser walking free because the jury wasn't
• 34:07
  Speaker 2: sure which adult struck the final blow.
• 34:09
  Speaker 1: Precisely.
• 34:10
  Speaker 2: So the prosecutor makes a cold, calculated calculus. They decide
• 34:15
  Speaker 2: to sacrifice a portion of the mother's sentence to absolutely
• 34:18
  Speaker 2: guarantee that the primary killer, the man who brought the
• 34:21
  Speaker 2: escalating violence into the home, is removed from society forever.
• 34:24
  Speaker 1: It is a terrible trade-off, but it is necessary.
• 34:28
  Speaker 2: Furthermore, it directly addresses the issue of jury trauma we discussed.
• 34:32
  Speaker 1: How so?
• 34:33
  Speaker 2: If the mother takes a plea deal and testifies, she
• 34:35
  Speaker 2: can narrate the timeline. She can explain the toxic dynamic
• 34:39
  Speaker 2: in the apartment.
• 34:40
  Speaker 1: So they don't have to just show pictures. Exactly.
• 34:43
  Speaker 2: This allows the prosecution to build the narrative through her testimony,
• 34:46
  Speaker 2: saving them from having to rely exclusively on graphic, traumatizing
• 34:50
  Speaker 2: medical evidence to tell the entire story.
• 34:52
  Speaker 1: They can carefully curate the presentation of evidence to prove
• 34:56
  Speaker 1: the horror of the crime without completely psychologically breaking the
• 34:59
  Speaker 1: 12 people sitting in the jury box.
• 35:01
  Speaker 2: That is exactly the goal.
• 35:03
  Speaker 1: It is a sobering reality check on how justice is
• 35:06
  Speaker 1: actually manufactured and bartered behind closed doors. We've looked at
• 35:11
  Speaker 1: the horrific crime, the psychology, the name change, the strategic
• 35:15
  Speaker 1: gamble of surveillance, and the agonizing calculus of plea deals.
• 35:19
  Speaker 2: There is a lot to process here.
• 35:21
  Speaker 1: There is. But as we step back from the legal
• 35:24
  Speaker 1: mechanics of this specific tragedy, we have to examine the
• 35:27
  Speaker 1: bizarre ecosystem of the media itself.
• 35:30
  Speaker 2: Which is a whole other layer to this story.
• 35:33
  Speaker 1: We cannot analyze this case without critically analyzing the vessel
• 35:36
  Speaker 1: through which this story was delivered to us, which is
• 35:38
  Speaker 1: the Law and Crime Network broadcast itself.
• 35:41
  Speaker 2: The Crime Fix broadcast is a fascinating, almost surreal artifact
• 35:45
  Speaker 2: of our modern information culture.
• 35:47
  Speaker 1: Surreal is the right word. Because when you read through
• 35:49
  Speaker 1: the full transcript of the show, the juxtaposition of the
• 35:52
  Speaker 1: content is incredibly jarring.
• 35:54
  Speaker 2: It really gives you whiplash.
• 35:56
  Speaker 1: You have the host, Anjanette Levy, delivering these devastating, heartbreaking
• 36:00
  Speaker 1: details about the murder of a two-year-old child. But seamlessly
• 36:03
  Speaker 1: embedded directly within this grim news report are two very specific,
• 36:08
  Speaker 1: highly produced commercial promotions.
• 36:10
  Speaker 2: Let's talk about those promos.
• 36:12
  Speaker 1: Right at the top of the show, before she even
• 36:14
  Speaker 1: gets into the tragic facts of little LB's death. the
• 36:17
  Speaker 1: host delivers a massive, enthusiastic push to subscribe to a
• 36:21
  Speaker 1: YouTube channel for a show called On Patrol Live. Oh,
• 36:24
  Speaker 1: I've heard of that. Yeah, she pitches it energetically, promising viewers, quote, in-your-face,
• 36:29
  Speaker 1: true law enforcement action, with camera crews riding along live
• 36:33
  Speaker 1: on Friday and Saturday nights.
• 36:34
  Speaker 2: And she explicitly boasts that no body cams are involved,
• 36:38
  Speaker 2: doesn't she?
• 36:39
  Speaker 1: She does, which means this isn't about transparency. This is
• 36:43
  Speaker 1: highly produced, cinematic reality television designed purely for entertainment.
• 36:47
  Speaker 2: It's turning law enforcement into a Friday night spectacle.
• 36:50
  Speaker 1: Right. And the dissonance only grows. Right after the segment
• 36:54
  Speaker 1: where they dissect the deeply disturbing fact that Brian Moser
• 36:57
  Speaker 1: legally changed his name to the Ice Truck Killer from Dexter,
• 37:01
  Speaker 1: the broadcast takes a sudden sharp pivot into an advertisement
• 37:04
  Speaker 1: for a digital privacy service called Incogni.
• 37:07
  Speaker 2: Just right in the middle of it.
• 37:09
  Speaker 1: Literally right in the middle. directly from discussing a dead
• 37:14
  Speaker 1: toddler to warning the audience about data brokers selling their
• 37:18
  Speaker 1: public information like their home address and phone number.
• 37:21
  Speaker 2: And she warns that this leads to spam and a
• 37:23
  Speaker 2: loss of privacy.
• 37:24
  Speaker 1: And then she offers a 60% off promo code, literally
• 37:28
  Speaker 1: using the word crime fix as the code to help viewers, quote,
• 37:32
  Speaker 1: get your online safety back.
• 37:35
  Speaker 2: So what does this all mean for us as consumers
• 37:38
  Speaker 2: of this information?
• 37:39
  Speaker 1: That's what I want to know. We are sitting here
• 37:42
  Speaker 1: Absorbing the details of the ultimate loss of innocence, the
• 37:46
  Speaker 1: brutal death of a child in her own bed. And
• 37:49
  Speaker 1: in the exact same breath, we are given an enthusiastic
• 37:53
  Speaker 1: pitch to watch live police action entertainment followed straight into
• 37:57
  Speaker 1: a fear-mongering warning about our personal digital vulnerability, which can
• 38:02
  Speaker 1: conveniently be solved if we just use a promo code.
• 38:05
  Speaker 2: It forces us to hold up a mirror to our
• 38:07
  Speaker 2: own consumption habits, doesn't it?
• 38:09
  Speaker 1: It really does.
• 38:10
  Speaker 2: It is a pure, uncut distillation of the modern media age.
• 38:14
  Speaker 2: We take worst-case human scenarios— murder, betrayal, the catastrophic failure of
• 38:18
  Speaker 2: the family unit— and we package them as content.
• 38:22
  Speaker 1: And we eat it up.
• 38:23
  Speaker 2: It is broadcast, and we consume it eagerly. But that
• 38:27
  Speaker 2: consumption is then immediately monetized by selling the audience a
• 38:30
  Speaker 2: manufactured sense of safety and control.
• 38:33
  Speaker 1: It's a cycle.
• 38:34
  Speaker 2: True crime media operates by creating a heightened state of
• 38:37
  Speaker 2: anxiety— It reminds the viewer that monsters are very real,
• 38:40
  Speaker 2: that they live in regular apartments, and that they change
• 38:43
  Speaker 2: their names to fictional serial killers.
• 38:45
  Speaker 1: And once the viewer is sufficiently anxious?
• 38:47
  Speaker 2: The very same broadcast offers them a commercial product to
• 38:50
  Speaker 2: protect their data, to restore their illusion of safety. It
• 38:53
  Speaker 2: is a perfectly closed loop of anxiety and consumerism.
• 38:56
  Speaker 1: It really forces you to critically evaluate how true crime
• 39:00
  Speaker 1: media frames the very concept of safety.
• 39:02
  Speaker 2: What is safety really?
• 39:04
  Speaker 1: Right. Is safety really about hiding your email address from
• 39:07
  Speaker 1: data brokers so you don't get spam calls? Or is
• 39:11
  Speaker 1: true safety something much more complex, much more fragile, and
• 39:14
  Speaker 1: much harder to guarantee, like the physical safety of a
• 39:17
  Speaker 1: child sleeping in a bunk bed?
• 39:19
  Speaker 2: It is a heavy, uncomfortable question to sit with. It is.
• 39:23
  Speaker 1: And that brings us to the end of our journey today.
• 39:26
  Speaker 2: It has been an incredibly complex and challenging path to now.
• 39:31
  Speaker 1: We started by dissecting a chilling 911 call listening to
• 39:35
  Speaker 1: a man attempt to verbally write his way out of
• 39:38
  Speaker 1: a murder scene.
• 39:39
  Speaker 2: We explored the profound psychological disturbance of an offender adopting
• 39:43
  Speaker 2: a fictional serial killer's identity just hours before committing a fatal.
• 39:47
  Speaker 1: Act we analyzed the brilliant but highly controversial strategic gamble
• 39:52
  Speaker 1: made by a small-town prosecutor utilizing a holiday weekend to
• 39:56
  Speaker 1: conduct surveillance and gather vital intelligence.
• 39:59
  Speaker 2: We broke down the mechanics of the bail system and
• 40:01
  Speaker 2: the grand jury.
• 40:03
  Speaker 1: We looked at the dark, utilitarian realities of plea deals
• 40:07
  Speaker 1: and lesser-included offenses.
• 40:09
  Speaker 2: We decoded the psychological defense mechanisms of the minimized confession
• 40:14
  Speaker 2: inside an interrogation room.
• 40:16
  Speaker 1: And finally... We examined the bizarre, monetized loop of the
• 40:20
  Speaker 1: true crime media ecosystem that delivers these tragedies to our screens.
• 40:25
  Speaker 2: It is a massive amount of heavy information to process.
• 40:28
  Speaker 1: It is. But I want to leave you with a final,
• 40:31
  Speaker 1: provocative thread to pull on. Something to mull over long
• 40:34
  Speaker 1: after this deep dive ends.
• 40:36
  Speaker 2: What is that?
• 40:37
  Speaker 1: When someone walks into a courthouse and legally changes their
• 40:40
  Speaker 1: name to a fictional television killer the exact day before
• 40:44
  Speaker 1: a real world murder occurs, it forces us to ask
• 40:48
  Speaker 1: a terrifying question about the reality we are constructing today.
• 40:51
  Speaker 2: It really blurs the lines.
• 40:54
  Speaker 1: In the digital age, where the boundaries between media consumption,
• 40:57
  Speaker 1: online identity and physical reality are so thoroughly, completely blurred,
• 41:03
  Speaker 1: how much of a violent crime is born from a
• 41:04
  Speaker 1: person's environment? How much of it is a dark, twisted
• 41:08
  Speaker 1: performance executed for an audience that only they can see?
• 41:13
  Speaker 2: It is a chilling thought that challenges our understanding of motive.
• 41:16
  Speaker 2: Where does the fiction end and where does the reality begin?
• 41:19
  Speaker 1: That is the question we have to leave you with.
• 41:22
  Speaker 1: Keep looking deeper.