Latest / Murder Files Unsealed / Playboy Model's Rich-Man Robberies Take Disturbing Turn

Transcript

Playboy Model's Rich-Man Robberies Take Disturbing Turn · Murder Files Unsealed

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: So picture this, right? A 78-year-old man, he's standing there,
• 0:04
  Speaker 1: and he hands over $ 25, 000 in cash to his much
• 0:08
  Speaker 1: younger girlfriend.
• 0:09
  Speaker 2: Right, just hands it over.
• 0:10
  Speaker 1: Literally just hands it to her. And she is weeping.
• 0:13
  Speaker 1: I mean, she is telling him in between these sogs
• 0:16
  Speaker 1: that she just desperately needs this money to bury her
• 0:19
  Speaker 1: recently deceased mother.
• 0:20
  Speaker 2: Which is, you know, incredibly tragic if it were true.
• 0:23
  Speaker 1: Exactly. And he, being this compassionate, wealthy guy... He doesn't
• 0:27
  Speaker 1: even hesitate. He just funds the funeral. But then a
• 0:31
  Speaker 1: few days later, that exact same grieving girlfriend is spotted
• 0:35
  Speaker 1: at a cafe.
• 0:36
  Speaker 2: Oh, wow.
• 0:37
  Speaker 1: Yeah. In her home country of Israel, just having a
• 0:39
  Speaker 1: lovely lunch with her mother. Her very much alive mother.
• 0:42
  Speaker 2: Yeah. I mean, it is just a stunning display of manipulation.
• 0:46
  Speaker 2: And the crazy part is that is just one single
• 0:48
  Speaker 2: data point in this much larger, frankly, staggering mosaic of
• 0:53
  Speaker 2: alleged criminality. So. Our mission for today's deep dive for
• 0:57
  Speaker 2: you listening at home is to really unpack this reality
• 1:00
  Speaker 2: bending case of Adva Levy or depending on which digital
• 1:04
  Speaker 2: profile you happen to stumble across, Mia Ventura.
• 1:08
  Speaker 1: Right. The aliases. She's a 29 year old former playboy
• 1:11
  Speaker 1: and penthouse model.
• 1:12
  Speaker 2: Yes.
• 1:12
  Speaker 1: But currently she is sitting in a jail cell. She's
• 1:16
  Speaker 1: known to the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department as an
• 1:18
  Speaker 1: alleged serial burglar.
• 1:20
  Speaker 2: Which is just a wild transition.
• 1:22
  Speaker 1: It's completely wild. And today, we're pulling from a massive
• 1:26
  Speaker 1: stack of source material for this deep dive. We're heavily
• 1:29
  Speaker 1: featuring a detailed breakdown from the Law and Crime Network.
• 1:33
  Speaker 2: Which is a great source. It is.
• 1:34
  Speaker 1: It includes some incredibly sharp legal analysis from a former
• 1:37
  Speaker 1: federal prosecutor, Nima Rahmani. Right.
• 1:41
  Speaker 2: His insights are really key here.
• 1:43
  Speaker 1: Yeah, but we aren't just going to list off a
• 1:45
  Speaker 1: rap sheet today. We really have to dissect the actual
• 1:48
  Speaker 1: machinery of this con. We're talking... multiple jurisdictions, high-profile political
• 1:53
  Speaker 1: figures throwing their weight around.
• 1:54
  Speaker 2: Oh, the political angle is fascinating.
• 1:56
  Speaker 1: It's crazy. And, you know, a justice system that almost
• 1:59
  Speaker 1: seemed paralyzed by the sheer audacity.
• 2:02
  Speaker 2: Of it all. Yeah, and what's fascinating here is that
• 2:04
  Speaker 2: the underlying dynamic, you know, a young, beautiful woman extracting
• 2:08
  Speaker 2: wealth from older, affluent men, I mean, that is the
• 2:11
  Speaker 2: oldest story in the book.
• 2:13
  Speaker 1: Oh, absolutely. Tale as old as time. Right.
• 2:15
  Speaker 2: It predates the printing press. But what we are observing
• 2:19
  Speaker 2: with Adva Levy... is really the digitalization of that ancient con.
• 2:23
  Speaker 1: The digitalization. Okay, yeah.
• 2:25
  Speaker 2: We are looking at how social media, how dating apps,
• 2:29
  Speaker 2: and this modern communication infrastructure, how all of that has
• 2:32
  Speaker 2: been weaponized to basically scale up this operation to a
• 2:36
  Speaker 2: terrifying degree.
• 2:37
  Speaker 1: Right, because the scale is what gets me. I mean,
• 2:39
  Speaker 1: so how exactly does a magazine cover model transition into
• 2:43
  Speaker 1: a subject of a Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department special bulletin?
• 2:47
  Speaker 2: Right, it doesn't happen overnight.
• 2:48
  Speaker 1: No. Let's start with the physical mechanics of this. According
• 2:51
  Speaker 1: to the investigators, her primary modus operandi was building a
• 2:55
  Speaker 1: digital honeypot.
• 2:56
  Speaker 2: A digital honeypot, exactly.
• 2:58
  Speaker 1: She was specifically targeting a very particular demographic on these
• 3:03
  Speaker 1: dating apps. Basically older, significantly wealthier men all across Southern California.
• 3:08
  Speaker 2: And the precision of her targeting, I mean, that's the
• 3:11
  Speaker 2: first thing that really jumps out from the investigative reports.
• 3:14
  Speaker 1: She knew exactly who she was looking for.
• 3:16
  Speaker 2: Exactly. She wasn't just... You know, casting a wide net
• 3:19
  Speaker 2: on Tinder and hoping for a random match. She was
• 3:22
  Speaker 2: allegedly operating in very specific digital spaces.
• 3:25
  Speaker 1: Right.
• 3:26
  Speaker 2: Posing as a companion or a potential girlfriend really to
• 3:32
  Speaker 2: gain that digital trust.
• 3:33
  Speaker 1: And what's the end game of that digital trust?
• 3:35
  Speaker 2: The objective was singular physical access to their homes. Wow.
• 3:39
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 3:40
  Speaker 2: And investigators believe this wasn't just some recent pivot.
• 3:42
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 3:43
  Speaker 2: You know. She has allegedly been operating this way for years.
• 3:46
  Speaker 1: Funding her lifestyle.
• 3:48
  Speaker 2: Right. Funding a lifestyle that included driving around in a
• 3:50
  Speaker 2: black Porsche SUV and a white Mercedes-Benz sedan.
• 3:54
  Speaker 1: Which, I mean, those are not cheap cars.
• 3:56
  Speaker 2: Not at all.
• 3:57
  Speaker 1: Let's ground this in a specific event, just so you
• 3:59
  Speaker 1: listening can understand the actual mechanics. So, last year, out
• 4:02
  Speaker 1: in Riverside County.
• 4:04
  Speaker 2: Okay, Riverside.
• 4:05
  Speaker 1: Yeah. A wealthy man invites Levy to his home in Indio.
• 4:09
  Speaker 1: The whole plan is to go to the Coachella Music Festival.
• 4:12
  Speaker 2: Sounds like a standard... You know, high-end date weekend.
• 4:14
  Speaker 1: Exactly. So she comes over, and by the end of it,
• 4:17
  Speaker 1: he ends up going to the Indio police. Oh, boy. Yeah,
• 4:20
  Speaker 1: claiming she just vanished from his house. And she took
• 4:25
  Speaker 1: an $ 8, 600 Rolex watch.
• 4:28
  Speaker 2: A Rolex, eh?
• 4:28
  Speaker 1: A pair of $ 700 Louis Vuitton glasses and an $ 1, 800
• 4:34
  Speaker 1: Louis Vuitton cardholder wallet.
• 4:37
  Speaker 2: The selection of those specific items, it's actually highly instructive.
• 4:42
  Speaker 1: How so?
• 4:42
  Speaker 2: Well, it tells us a lot about the sophisticated nature
• 4:44
  Speaker 2: of the alleged operation.
• 4:46
  Speaker 1: Okay, wait, I have to push back here before we
• 4:47
  Speaker 1: even get to the items themselves. I am just struggling
• 4:50
  Speaker 1: with the physical reality of this. Like, if you are
• 4:52
  Speaker 1: wealthy enough to have a home in Indio, you know,
• 4:55
  Speaker 1: a Coachella house.
• 4:56
  Speaker 2: Right, a second or third home, probably.
• 4:58
  Speaker 1: Right, and you just have, what, $ 11, 000 worth of luxury
• 5:01
  Speaker 1: accessories sitting casually on your dresser?
• 5:03
  Speaker 2: It sounds absurd, yeah.
• 5:04
  Speaker 1: You have a security system. You probably have a safe
• 5:07
  Speaker 1: in the wall. So how does a virtual stranger... physically
• 5:11
  Speaker 1: walk out your front door with this stuff without setting
• 5:14
  Speaker 1: off alarm bells in your head.
• 5:15
  Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, is the psychological blind spot of these
• 5:18
  Speaker 2: men really that massive?
• 5:20
  Speaker 1: Exactly. It's like inviting a vampire in, but instead of blood,
• 5:24
  Speaker 1: they're after high-end European accessories.
• 5:26
  Speaker 2: That is the multi-million dollar question right there. And honestly,
• 5:30
  Speaker 2: the answer requires us to look at the psychology of
• 5:33
  Speaker 2: the victims, not just the perpetrator.
• 5:35
  Speaker 1: Right, what's going through their heads.
• 5:36
  Speaker 2: Well, think about it. We are talking about highly successful men,
• 5:40
  Speaker 2: in their boardrooms, in their businesses, they are likely ruthless, right? Calculating,
• 5:45
  Speaker 2: totally risk averse.
• 5:46
  Speaker 1: They didn't get rich by being careless.
• 5:48
  Speaker 2: Exactly.
• 5:48
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 5:49
  Speaker 2: But when it comes to their personal lives, loneliness or,
• 5:52
  Speaker 2: you know, the desire for a certain status, it creates
• 5:55
  Speaker 2: this profound cognitive dissonance.
• 5:57
  Speaker 1: Ah, the status symbol of the young model on the arm.
• 6:00
  Speaker 2: Precisely. I mean, they want the illusion to be real
• 6:03
  Speaker 2: so desperately that they suspend the security protocols they apply
• 6:06
  Speaker 2: to literally every other facet of their lives.
• 6:09
  Speaker 1: That makes sense.
• 6:09
  Speaker 2: When a man in his 60s or 70s matches with
• 6:12
  Speaker 2: the 29-year-old penthouse model, a part of him knows the
• 6:16
  Speaker 2: transactional nature of the dynamic.
• 6:18
  Speaker 1: Deep down, he knows.
• 6:19
  Speaker 2: He has to. But the ego is a powerful thing.
• 6:23
  Speaker 2: He wants to believe he is the exception. So when
• 6:27
  Speaker 2: she comes to his home, locking up his Rolex.
• 6:31
  Speaker 1: Oh, I see.
• 6:32
  Speaker 2: Yeah, locking it up feels like an admission of that
• 6:34
  Speaker 2: transactional reality. It ruins the fantasy of the organic reality.
• 6:38
  Speaker 2: spontaneous romance.
• 6:39
  Speaker 1: That makes a tragic kind of sense, honestly. By securing
• 6:42
  Speaker 1: his valuables, he'd be admitting to himself what the relationship
• 6:45
  Speaker 1: actually is. So he just leaves the watch out.
• 6:47
  Speaker 2: Exactly. And to return to the items she allegedly took,
• 6:50
  Speaker 2: you know, the Rolex, the Louis Vuitton, this is where
• 6:52
  Speaker 2: the mechanical brilliance of the scheme really lies.
• 6:55
  Speaker 1: What do you mean?
• 6:55
  Speaker 2: Well, think about a common burglar. Yeah. A common burglar
• 6:58
  Speaker 2: breaks a window, they grab a television, maybe a laptop,
• 7:00
  Speaker 2: a stereo.
• 7:01
  Speaker 1: Bulky stuff. Right.
• 7:02
  Speaker 2: Those items are heavy. They're serialized. They're hard to transport.
• 7:06
  Speaker 2: And honestly, They yield pennies on the dollar at a
• 7:09
  Speaker 2: standard pawn shop.
• 7:10
  Speaker 1: Right. A stolen TV gets you a couple hundred bucks and, like,
• 7:13
  Speaker 1: a lot of back pain.
• 7:14
  Speaker 2: Exactly. But a Rolex, a Louis Vuitton cardholder.
• 7:18
  Speaker 1: Small.
• 7:18
  Speaker 2: These are highly liquid, completely untraceable microassets. They're essentially wearable
• 7:24
  Speaker 2: bearer bonds.
• 7:25
  Speaker 1: Wow. Wearable bearer bonds. That's a great way to put it.
• 7:29
  Speaker 2: In the underground luxury market or even just, you know,
• 7:32
  Speaker 2: the gray market of private dealers and unscrupulous jewelers, A
• 7:36
  Speaker 2: high-end watch can be fenced for thousands of dollars in
• 7:39
  Speaker 2: cash within hours.
• 7:40
  Speaker 1: And it just fits right in a handbag.
• 7:42
  Speaker 2: It fits in a handbag. It requires no heavy lifting.
• 7:45
  Speaker 2: It is surgical. It requires a real understanding of what
• 7:48
  Speaker 2: holds value density.
• 7:49
  Speaker 1: It is the ultimate high ROI crime.
• 7:52
  Speaker 2: It really is. Think about who you allow into your
• 7:54
  Speaker 2: personal space and how quickly digital trust translates to physical access.
• 7:58
  Speaker 1: It's terrifying. But, you know, as chillingly efficient as that
• 8:02
  Speaker 1: Indio theft was, it almost looks like like petty shoplifting
• 8:06
  Speaker 1: compared to how this escalated.
• 8:07
  Speaker 2: Oh, it gets so much worse.
• 8:08
  Speaker 1: Because when we shift the lens from Riverside County to
• 8:12
  Speaker 1: Los Angeles County, the financial and emotional damage just goes
• 8:16
  Speaker 1: off the charts. Let's go back to that 78-year-old victim
• 8:20
  Speaker 1: we talked about at the top of the show.
• 8:21
  Speaker 2: Right. This is where the profile really moves from just
• 8:25
  Speaker 2: opportunistic extraction to something far, far more insidious.
• 8:30
  Speaker 1: According to the district attorney's office, She allegedly robbed this
• 8:33
  Speaker 1: man of more than $ 17, 000 in physical cash.
• 8:37
  Speaker 2: Which, a huge amount of loose cash.
• 8:39
  Speaker 1: Yeah. And she took $ 100, 000 in designer clothing. And on
• 8:43
  Speaker 1: top of that, gold coins valued at over $ 4, 000.
• 8:47
  Speaker 2: Yeah, we aren't talking about just slipping a watch into
• 8:50
  Speaker 2: a purse while he's in the bathroom anymore.
• 8:51
  Speaker 1: No, we are definitely not. I mean, how do you
• 8:53
  Speaker 1: even steal $ 100, 000 worth of clothes? Extracting $ 100, 000 worth of
• 8:55
  Speaker 1: clothing requires logistics. It really does.
• 8:59
  Speaker 2: It requires sustained access to the property over time or,
• 9:04
  Speaker 2: you know, a highly coordinated removal effort.
• 9:06
  Speaker 1: Like multiple trips.
• 9:07
  Speaker 2: Exactly. It implies a level of comfort and control over
• 9:10
  Speaker 2: the victim's environment that is just deeply discerning.
• 9:13
  Speaker 1: And it's not just the physical theft, right? It's the
• 9:16
  Speaker 1: psychological warfare, the fake dead mother.
• 9:18
  Speaker 2: Right, the $ 25, 000 funeral extortion.
• 9:21
  Speaker 1: To look an elderly man in the eye... to literally
• 9:23
  Speaker 1: weaponize his own empathy against him, take his money, and
• 9:26
  Speaker 1: then go have lunch with the very mother you just
• 9:29
  Speaker 1: claimed was in a morgue.
• 9:30
  Speaker 2: Mechanically, what we are observing here is the exploitation of
• 9:34
  Speaker 2: a completely different kind of vulnerability.
• 9:37
  Speaker 1: How do you mean?
• 9:37
  Speaker 2: Well, the Rolex theft, that exploits ego and carelessness, right?
• 9:41
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 9:42
  Speaker 2: The fake funeral exploits human decency. It exploits compassion. It
• 9:46
  Speaker 2: is a huge shift from a simple property crime to
• 9:49
  Speaker 2: a deeply psychological crime.
• 9:51
  Speaker 1: That's a really good distinction.
• 9:52
  Speaker 2: And sociologically, this relies on a specific kind of modern isolation.
• 9:57
  Speaker 2: A 78-year-old man who is relied on a dating app
• 10:00
  Speaker 2: for connection is likely lacking a robust, protective social network.
• 10:05
  Speaker 1: Right. He's alone.
• 10:07
  Speaker 2: If he had close friends or family actively involved in
• 10:11
  Speaker 2: his daily life, a $ 25, 000 request for a sudden international
• 10:14
  Speaker 2: funeral would Would immediately trigger interventions.
• 10:19
  Speaker 1: Oh, for sure. His kids would have stepped in and said,
• 10:22
  Speaker 1: absolutely not. We are checking this out.
• 10:23
  Speaker 2: Exactly. The scammer isolates the target, becomes their primary emotional outlet,
• 10:29
  Speaker 2: and then turns that emotional reliance into a literal financial pipeline. Wow.
• 10:35
  Speaker 1: So, okay. She extracted the $ 25, 000. She's pulled off the
• 10:39
  Speaker 1: emotional manipulation. She has a literal dragon's horde of designer clothes.
• 10:45
  Speaker 2: She's doing very well for herself. Right.
• 10:46
  Speaker 1: She is free and clear. You would think, logically, this
• 10:50
  Speaker 1: is the part where you go dark. You lay low,
• 10:51
  Speaker 1: you fence the goods quietly, you just disappear.
• 10:53
  Speaker 2: Well, yeah, that would be the behavior of a traditional
• 10:56
  Speaker 2: rational criminal actor. Right.
• 10:58
  Speaker 1: But this is where the modern criminal brain seems to
• 11:01
  Speaker 1: completely short circuit because stealing the money and the clothes
• 11:04
  Speaker 1: wasn't actually the end game, was it?
• 11:06
  Speaker 2: Unbelievably, no.
• 11:07
  Speaker 1: Here's where it gets really interesting. According to detectives, Levy
• 11:11
  Speaker 1: goes on TikTok. Yes. She posts a video giving her
• 11:15
  Speaker 1: followers a tour of her apartment. And sitting right there,
• 11:19
  Speaker 1: plain as day in her closet, is the stolen clothing.
• 11:23
  Speaker 2: Unbelievable.
• 11:24
  Speaker 1: Some of that $ 100, 000 haul, just hanging there for the
• 11:28
  Speaker 1: internet to see. Why the need to flaunt it?
• 11:30
  Speaker 2: We are really witnessing an evolution in criminal behavior here.
• 11:35
  Speaker 2: We have moved from the era of the criminal mastermind
• 11:38
  Speaker 2: who meticulously hides their illicit wealth... To essentially the era
• 11:42
  Speaker 2: of the criminal content creator.
• 11:44
  Speaker 1: The criminal content creator. That is wild. So the crime
• 11:48
  Speaker 1: itself has become subordinate to the content.
• 11:50
  Speaker 2: That is exactly the dynamic at play. Wow. For a
• 11:52
  Speaker 2: certain psychological profile in the social media age, wealth, even
• 11:56
  Speaker 2: stolen wealth, is completely useless if it cannot be monetized
• 12:00
  Speaker 2: for social media engagement.
• 12:01
  Speaker 1: Right. If you can't show it off, what's the point
• 12:02
  Speaker 1: of having it?
• 12:03
  Speaker 2: Exactly. The entire purpose of the luxury clothing isn't to
• 12:06
  Speaker 2: wear it. It's to project an image of immense status
• 12:09
  Speaker 2: to an online audience.
• 12:10
  Speaker 1: The validation.
• 12:11
  Speaker 2: Right. This raises an important question, right? The validation of
• 12:14
  Speaker 2: the algorithm completely overrides the instinct for self-preservation. It is
• 12:19
  Speaker 2: a staggering level of hubris.
• 12:21
  Speaker 1: It's the digital equivalent of robbing a bank and then
• 12:24
  Speaker 1: literally leaving your driver's license on the teller's counter.
• 12:27
  Speaker 2: It really is.
• 12:28
  Speaker 1: But that hubris didn't just, you know, ruin her online facade.
• 12:32
  Speaker 1: It completely boxed her defense attorneys into a corner.
• 12:36
  Speaker 2: Oh, absolutely. They had an impossible job.
• 12:38
  Speaker 1: Because when the Los Angeles deputies finally catch up with
• 12:42
  Speaker 1: her and she is arraigned on six felony counts, including
• 12:45
  Speaker 1: grand theft, unauthorized use of I.D. and first degree residential burglary.
• 12:50
  Speaker 1: Her lawyers had a massive problem.
• 12:52
  Speaker 2: A huge problem.
• 12:54
  Speaker 1: Like how do you argue your client is innocent when
• 12:56
  Speaker 1: there is a public video of her happily parading the
• 12:58
  Speaker 1: spoils of her crimes?
• 12:59
  Speaker 2: You can't. You can't argue the facts when the facts
• 13:02
  Speaker 2: are broadcast in high definition. No.
• 13:04
  Speaker 1: So what do they do?
• 13:05
  Speaker 2: So to solve that cognitive dissonance, her defense team had
• 13:09
  Speaker 2: to attempt this massive legal Hail Mary. They couldn't fight
• 13:12
  Speaker 2: the what, so they had to entirely reconstruct the why.
• 13:15
  Speaker 1: And their version of the why was pretty dramatic. They
• 13:19
  Speaker 1: made a play for what is called a diversion program, right?
• 13:23
  Speaker 2: A diversion program.
• 13:24
  Speaker 1: The goal was to basically yank her out of the
• 13:26
  Speaker 1: criminal justice system, which results in prison time, and drop
• 13:29
  Speaker 1: her into the mental health system.
• 13:31
  Speaker 2: Which is a very different track.
• 13:32
  Speaker 1: Totally. The narrative they spun was aggressive. They claimed Levy
• 13:36
  Speaker 1: was not a mastermind, but a victim.
• 13:40
  Speaker 2: A victim.
• 13:41
  Speaker 1: They argued she had suffered severe physical and sexual abuse-
• 13:45
  Speaker 1: that she had been quote-unquote sex-trapped and was suffering from
• 13:48
  Speaker 1: profound PTSD. They even submitted mental health evaluations to the judge.
• 13:54
  Speaker 2: Building a whole alternate reality.
• 13:56
  Speaker 1: Yeah, and they needed a villain for this story, so
• 13:59
  Speaker 1: they pointed at her ex-husband.
• 14:01
  Speaker 2: Who is a fascinating character in all this.
• 14:03
  Speaker 1: Yeah, he's a porn star named Eden Ives who goes
• 14:05
  Speaker 1: by Big Nick online. And they didn't stop there. They
• 14:08
  Speaker 1: also claimed the victims themselves, these wealthy older men, were
• 14:12
  Speaker 1: pumping her full of massive amounts of drugs and alcohol.
• 14:15
  Speaker 1: which they say fueled her actions.
• 14:17
  Speaker 2: It's a kitchen sink defense. And to understand why a
• 14:20
  Speaker 2: defense attorney would try this, we have to look at
• 14:23
  Speaker 2: the mechanics of diversion programs in California.
• 14:25
  Speaker 1: Okay, let's get into the weeds on that.
• 14:27
  Speaker 2: Specifically, we're talking about mental health diversion under Penal Code 1001.36.
• 14:32
  Speaker 1: PC 1001.36.
• 14:35
  Speaker 2: Exactly. This is a very progressive and generally very beneficial
• 14:40
  Speaker 2: part of the justice system. The underlying philosophy is is
• 14:44
  Speaker 2: that if a crime is committed primarily because of an
• 14:46
  Speaker 2: untreated mental health disorder, society is better served by treating
• 14:50
  Speaker 2: the root cause rather than just locking the person in
• 14:53
  Speaker 2: a cage.
• 14:54
  Speaker 1: Which makes sense on paper. So how does it actually
• 14:56
  Speaker 1: work if a judge agrees? Does the trial just stop?
• 14:59
  Speaker 2: Essentially, yes. The criminal proceedings are completely suspended.
• 15:02
  Speaker 1: Wow.
• 15:03
  Speaker 2: The judge imposes a treatment plan, which can last up
• 15:06
  Speaker 2: to two years.
• 15:07
  Speaker 1: Okay.
• 15:07
  Speaker 2: If the defendant successfully completes the treatment, stays out of trouble,
• 15:11
  Speaker 2: and demonstrates that they are no longer a risk... The
• 15:13
  Speaker 2: original charges can be completely dismissed and sealed.
• 15:16
  Speaker 1: That is massive. It is basically the ultimate get out
• 15:19
  Speaker 1: of jail free card, provided you actually do the hard
• 15:21
  Speaker 1: work of rehabilitation.
• 15:22
  Speaker 2: Exactly. But as you can imagine, the judge in Levy's
• 15:26
  Speaker 2: case was having none of it.
• 15:27
  Speaker 1: Not even a little bit.
• 15:28
  Speaker 2: Not at all. And the legal reasoning here is crucial
• 15:31
  Speaker 2: for you to understand. To get mental health diversion, the
• 15:35
  Speaker 2: defense doesn't just have to prove the defendant has a
• 15:37
  Speaker 2: mental illness.
• 15:38
  Speaker 1: Right.
• 15:39
  Speaker 2: They have to prove a direct causal nexus between the illness,
• 15:43
  Speaker 2: And the specific criminal conduct.
• 15:45
  Speaker 1: OK, stop right there. Explain causal nexus in this context
• 15:49
  Speaker 1: for us.
• 15:50
  Speaker 2: Think of it this way. If someone is suffering from
• 15:53
  Speaker 2: severe untreated schizophrenia and during a hallucinatory episode they break
• 15:57
  Speaker 2: a store window because they believe they are trapped, that
• 16:00
  Speaker 2: is a direct causal nexus.
• 16:02
  Speaker 1: OK, cause and effect. The mental state caused the action.
• 16:05
  Speaker 2: Exactly. But the judge in Levy's case looked at her
• 16:08
  Speaker 2: alleged crimes. Stealing a Rolex. extorting $ 25, 000 for a fake funeral,
• 16:14
  Speaker 2: setting up a TikTok tour to flaunt the stolen goods.
• 16:17
  Speaker 1: None of that sounds like a manic episode. Right.
• 16:19
  Speaker 2: The judge fundamentally asked, even if she does have PTSD
• 16:23
  Speaker 2: from a past relationship, what is the mechanical link between
• 16:25
  Speaker 2: PTSD and systematically, methodically defrauding rich older men over a
• 16:30
  Speaker 2: period of years? Right.
• 16:32
  Speaker 1: There isn't one. PTSD doesn't make you invent a dead
• 16:35
  Speaker 1: mother for cash.
• 16:36
  Speaker 2: Exactly. The judge ruled that the defense completely failed to
• 16:40
  Speaker 2: establish that that her alleged mental state played any role
• 16:44
  Speaker 2: in the highly calculated premeditated nature of these specific crimes.
• 16:48
  Speaker 1: Which is a huge blow to the defense.
• 16:50
  Speaker 2: It is. Furthermore, the judge explicitly rejected the claim that
• 16:54
  Speaker 2: the victims were drugging her. The judge stated right on
• 16:57
  Speaker 2: the record, this is just not true, and broadly questioned
• 17:01
  Speaker 2: Levy's overall truthfulness.
• 17:03
  Speaker 1: It was a brutal rejection. But honestly, the judge's skepticism
• 17:06
  Speaker 1: was just the warm-up, because the prosecution didn't just rely
• 17:09
  Speaker 1: on logic to defeat the diversion request.
• 17:11
  Speaker 2: No, they did not.
• 17:12
  Speaker 1: They had an absolute smoking gun. And in a twist
• 17:15
  Speaker 1: of profound irony, Levy handed it right to them.
• 17:18
  Speaker 2: This part is just staggering.
• 17:19
  Speaker 1: While she was sitting in a jail cell, actively claiming
• 17:22
  Speaker 1: to the court that her ex-husband, Eden Ives, was her violent,
• 17:25
  Speaker 1: abusive trafficker, she was making phone calls to him.
• 17:28
  Speaker 2: The jailhouse phone system is the graveyard of many, many
• 17:31
  Speaker 2: defense strategies.
• 17:33
  Speaker 1: And she wasn't calling to confront him either. According to prosecutors,
• 17:36
  Speaker 1: these recordings captured them speaking lovingly to each other.
• 17:39
  Speaker 2: Wow.
• 17:40
  Speaker 1: Using pet names, saying, I love you.
• 17:42
  Speaker 2: Just completely blowing up her own case.
• 17:45
  Speaker 1: Completely. And on top of that, she was recorded on
• 17:47
  Speaker 1: these very same calls discussing fleeing to Israel. I mean,
• 17:50
  Speaker 1: I am genuinely baffled here. This isn't just a mistake.
• 17:54
  Speaker 1: It's a catastrophic failure of basic survival instinct.
• 17:58
  Speaker 2: It really is.
• 17:58
  Speaker 1: So what does this all mean? Did she just underestimate
• 18:01
  Speaker 1: the system? How does a defense team build this massive
• 18:04
  Speaker 1: narrative of abuse in the courtroom while their client is
• 18:07
  Speaker 1: simultaneously calling the alleged abuser from a recorded line to
• 18:11
  Speaker 1: whisper sweet nothings?
• 18:14
  Speaker 2: It reveals a profound psychological disconnect. When people are arrested,
• 18:18
  Speaker 2: especially people who have lived a life completely shielded from
• 18:21
  Speaker 2: systemic consequences, they often go into a state of deep denial.
• 18:25
  Speaker 1: They just think the rules don't apply.
• 18:27
  Speaker 2: Exactly. And as former federal prosecutor Nima Romani pointed out
• 18:31
  Speaker 2: in the source material, Prosecutors rely heavily on this denial.
• 18:34
  Speaker 2: They count on it.
• 18:36
  Speaker 1: Jail calls are a treasure trove.
• 18:37
  Speaker 2: A total treasure trove. When you are booked into a
• 18:40
  Speaker 2: county jail, you are stripped of all privacy. Before every
• 18:44
  Speaker 2: single phone call, an automated voice announces, this call is
• 18:47
  Speaker 2: subject to recording and monitoring.
• 18:49
  Speaker 1: And there are signs on the walls, right?
• 18:51
  Speaker 2: There are signs everywhere.
• 18:52
  Speaker 1: But they just ignore it.
• 18:53
  Speaker 2: They normalize it. The human brain adapts very quickly. After
• 18:57
  Speaker 2: a few days, the phone becomes their only tether to
• 19:00
  Speaker 2: the outside world, And they simply forget or arrogantly assume
• 19:04
  Speaker 2: that no one is actually listening to their specific calls
• 19:07
  Speaker 2: among the thousands made every day.
• 19:09
  Speaker 1: But the prosecutors are always listening.
• 19:11
  Speaker 2: Always. Especially in high profile cases. By expressing affection for
• 19:16
  Speaker 2: the man she claimed was trafficking her, she annihilated her
• 19:19
  Speaker 2: own defense narrative in real time.
• 19:21
  Speaker 1: Just totally nuked it.
• 19:22
  Speaker 2: But even worse, mechanically, was the talk of Israel. The
• 19:26
  Speaker 2: moment a prosecutor plays a tape for a judge where
• 19:28
  Speaker 2: a defendant with a foreign passport discusses fleeing the jurisdiction,
• 19:31
  Speaker 2: I mean, the legal paculus shifts instantly. Oh, I bet.
• 19:35
  Speaker 2: Diversion is off the table. Bond is jeopardized. You transition
• 19:38
  Speaker 2: from a defendant fighting a case to an immediate flight risk.
• 19:42
  Speaker 1: It's a masterclass in how to dismantle your own life.
• 19:45
  Speaker 1: But as we dig into the timeline, you realize this
• 19:47
  Speaker 1: wasn't an isolated lapse in judgment. She seemed to have
• 19:50
  Speaker 1: a fundamental inability to comply with even the most basic
• 19:53
  Speaker 1: guardrails of the justice system.
• 19:55
  Speaker 2: Yeah, that's a very good point.
• 19:57
  Speaker 1: Which brings us to the ankle monitor situation.
• 19:59
  Speaker 2: Ah, yes. The pre-trial supervision phase of this case is
• 20:03
  Speaker 2: incredibly revealing.
• 20:05
  Speaker 1: It really is.
• 20:05
  Speaker 2: It tells us so much about the systemic realities of
• 20:08
  Speaker 2: the courts in Los Angeles.
• 20:09
  Speaker 1: So let's rewind slightly to her original arraignment on April
• 20:13
  Speaker 1: 6th at the Van Nuys Courthouse. She pleads not guilty
• 20:16
  Speaker 1: to the six felony counts. And the judge, surprisingly, releases
• 20:20
  Speaker 1: her on bond.
• 20:21
  Speaker 2: Right.
• 20:22
  Speaker 1: But there is a strict condition. She has to wear
• 20:25
  Speaker 1: a GPS ankle monitor, which makes sense. These are serious felonies.
• 20:28
  Speaker 1: She has foreign ties.
• 20:29
  Speaker 2: Totally standard.
• 20:30
  Speaker 1: But she allegedly just takes the monitor off.
• 20:33
  Speaker 2: Not once.
• 20:34
  Speaker 1: Multiple times. The court discovers this. The judge admonishes her,
• 20:38
  Speaker 1: warns her on the record about breaking the rules, but
• 20:40
  Speaker 1: they let her walk out the door twice.
• 20:42
  Speaker 2: Twice, which is amazing.
• 20:44
  Speaker 1: It wasn't until late July when Riverside County deputies arrested
• 20:48
  Speaker 1: her on that outstanding warrant for the Coachella theft that L.A.
• 20:52
  Speaker 1: finally dropped the hammer and hit her with a new
• 20:54
  Speaker 1: misdemeanor charge for violating the court order.
• 20:57
  Speaker 2: Right.
• 20:58
  Speaker 1: So I have to push back here because my immediate reaction,
• 21:01
  Speaker 1: and I think the reaction of a lot of listeners,
• 21:03
  Speaker 1: is that this is quote-unquote pretty girl privilege in action?
• 21:08
  Speaker 2: It certainly looks that way.
• 21:09
  Speaker 1: If a typical defendant, someone without a magazine cover background,
• 21:13
  Speaker 1: just popped off their GPS tracker, they'd be tackled by bailiffs.
• 21:17
  Speaker 1: Is there a mechanical reason why the court was so
• 21:20
  Speaker 1: toothless here? Is this normal?
• 21:22
  Speaker 2: No, it is highly atypical, and it definitely warrants a
• 21:24
  Speaker 2: deeper mechanical explanation.
• 21:26
  Speaker 1: Okay, let's hear it.
• 21:27
  Speaker 2: It's a combination of systemic overload and judicial discretion. Mechanically...
• 21:32
  Speaker 2: Pre-trial services in major metropolitan areas, you know, places like
• 21:35
  Speaker 2: Los Angeles, they are absolutely drowning in caseloads.
• 21:38
  Speaker 1: Just too many people to track.
• 21:40
  Speaker 2: Exactly. The sheer volume of data generated by GPS monitors,
• 21:44
  Speaker 2: battery alerts, minor exclusion zone violations, it creates immense alert
• 21:49
  Speaker 2: fatigue for the probation officers monitoring them.
• 21:51
  Speaker 1: So an alert goes off and it's just added to
• 21:53
  Speaker 1: a pile.
• 21:54
  Speaker 2: Often, yes, unfortunately. A judge relies on reports from these
• 21:59
  Speaker 2: overloaded agencies.
• 22:00
  Speaker 1: Mm-hmm.
• 22:01
  Speaker 2: If the violation is framed as a technical violation, perhaps
• 22:04
  Speaker 2: the battery died or, you know, she claimed it was
• 22:07
  Speaker 2: chafing and she took it off for a shower.
• 22:09
  Speaker 1: I see.
• 22:10
  Speaker 2: Yeah. A judge might give a warning rather than trigger
• 22:13
  Speaker 2: the massive administrative burden of revoking bail, issuing a bench
• 22:17
  Speaker 2: warrant and coordinating a remand to custody.
• 22:19
  Speaker 1: It's easier to just yell at her than to do
• 22:21
  Speaker 1: all the paperwork.
• 22:22
  Speaker 2: Essentially, yes.
• 22:23
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 22:24
  Speaker 2: However, if we connect this to the bigger picture. Romani
• 22:27
  Speaker 2: noted that multiple intentional removals of a device usually result
• 22:31
  Speaker 2: in an immediate remand.
• 22:32
  Speaker 1: Right.
• 22:33
  Speaker 2: The fact that she was able to charm or manipulate
• 22:35
  Speaker 2: her way into multiple warnings does suggest that she was
• 22:38
  Speaker 2: applying the exact same manipulative skill set she allegedly used
• 22:42
  Speaker 2: on the dating apps directly to the pretrial officers and
• 22:45
  Speaker 2: the courtroom staff.
• 22:46
  Speaker 1: Testing the fences?
• 22:47
  Speaker 2: Exactly. She tested the boundaries of the cage, found a
• 22:50
  Speaker 2: loose bar, and kept pushing until Riverside County finally locked
• 22:53
  Speaker 2: it down.
• 22:54
  Speaker 1: Which proves that manipulation works until it suddenly doesn't. But
• 22:58
  Speaker 1: this is where the story pivots from a standard true
• 23:01
  Speaker 1: crime narrative into a full-blown political thriller.
• 23:04
  Speaker 2: It really takes a wild turn here.
• 23:06
  Speaker 1: Because her ability to manipulate powerful men didn't just stop
• 23:09
  Speaker 1: with wealthy retirees in Indio. It extended directly into the
• 23:13
  Speaker 1: upper echelons of California real estate and politics. We need
• 23:17
  Speaker 1: to talk about Stephen Kuback.
• 23:18
  Speaker 2: The introduction of Stephen Kuback... fundamentally alters the gravity of
• 23:22
  Speaker 2: this entire saga.
• 23:23
  Speaker 1: It changes everything.
• 23:24
  Speaker 2: It does. We move from a series of property crimes
• 23:28
  Speaker 2: and emotional cons to allegations of severe witness tampering involving
• 23:32
  Speaker 2: a billionaire.
• 23:33
  Speaker 1: Yeah, for the listener, let's establish exactly who Stephen Kubek is,
• 23:36
  Speaker 1: because he's not just some guy.
• 23:38
  Speaker 2: No, he is a major player.
• 23:40
  Speaker 1: He is 64 years old. He is a real estate icon.
• 23:44
  Speaker 1: He is a certified, verifiable billionaire. And he is a
• 23:47
  Speaker 1: massive player in California politics.
• 23:50
  Speaker 2: Very influential.
• 23:51
  Speaker 1: Last year, he actually announced a run for governor of
• 23:53
  Speaker 1: California before eventually dropping out. And when he dropped out,
• 23:56
  Speaker 1: he threw his considerable political weight and support behind Representative
• 24:00
  Speaker 1: Eric Swalwell. And just to be completely impartial with the
• 24:05
  Speaker 1: background provided in our source material, it is noted that
• 24:08
  Speaker 1: Swalwell's own political ambitions have faced headwinds due to accusations
• 24:13
  Speaker 1: of sexual assault. Accusations, which we should note, Swalwell categorically denies.
• 24:18
  Speaker 2: Right. It's important to include that context from the source.
• 24:21
  Speaker 1: Absolutely. But that aside, it perfectly illustrates the rarefied air
• 24:26
  Speaker 1: Quebec breathes. Governors, congressmen, billionaires. And this incredibly powerful, influential
• 24:33
  Speaker 1: man was Advil Levy's fiancé.
• 24:36
  Speaker 2: The timeline here is crucial.
• 24:37
  Speaker 1: Okay, break it down.
• 24:38
  Speaker 2: They got engaged around the same time her divorce from
• 24:40
  Speaker 2: the porn star Eden Ives was finalized. She moved into
• 24:44
  Speaker 2: Quebec's multi-million dollar mansion.
• 24:46
  Speaker 1: Quite the upgrade.
• 24:46
  Speaker 2: Definitely. And this is where we have to analyze the
• 24:48
  Speaker 2: psychology of power, because in May, this 64-year-old billionaire was arrested.
• 24:53
  Speaker 1: A billionaire in handcuffs? What were the exact charges?
• 24:56
  Speaker 2: He was charged with three felony counts of attempting to
• 24:58
  Speaker 2: dissuade a witness from testifying and one misdemeanor count of
• 25:01
  Speaker 2: harassment for making annoying phone calls. According to the prosecution,
• 25:05
  Speaker 2: Kubik allegedly called an attorney involved in the case, swore
• 25:09
  Speaker 2: at him, and threatened him, his family, and his property. Wow.
• 25:13
  Speaker 2: But far more concerning... Court documents allege that Kubik actively
• 25:17
  Speaker 2: reached out to three of the male victims in Libby's
• 25:21
  Speaker 2: case and attempted to convince them not to testify against her.
• 25:24
  Speaker 1: That is wild. He pleaded not guilty and his attorney
• 25:28
  Speaker 1: denies everything and he was released on a $ 300, 000 bond.
• 25:33
  Speaker 1: But let's pause and dissect this logically. Because I cannot
• 25:37
  Speaker 1: wrap my head around the risk to reward ratio here.
• 25:39
  Speaker 1: You are a billionaire. You have infinite resources. You have
• 25:42
  Speaker 1: a legacy. You have political ties. And you are allegedly
• 25:46
  Speaker 1: making unhinged, threatening phone calls to victims to protect your
• 25:50
  Speaker 1: 29-year-old fiancé from a burglary charge.
• 25:53
  Speaker 2: It makes no sense to a normal person.
• 25:55
  Speaker 1: What on earth drives a man in his position to
• 25:57
  Speaker 1: allegedly commit a felony for someone with her track record?
• 26:00
  Speaker 2: It is the ultimate manifestation of the God complex that
• 26:03
  Speaker 2: can infect the ultra-wealthy.
• 26:04
  Speaker 1: The God complex.
• 26:05
  Speaker 2: Think about it. When someone reaches billionaire status, especially in
• 26:09
  Speaker 2: a bare-knuckle industry like real estate development, their entire reality
• 26:14
  Speaker 2: is shaped by their ability to bend the world to
• 26:16
  Speaker 2: their will. Right.
• 26:17
  Speaker 1: If there is a problem, they just throw money or
• 26:20
  Speaker 1: lawyers at it.
• 26:21
  Speaker 2: Exactly. If there's a zoning issue, they crush it with lawyers.
• 26:24
  Speaker 1: Right.
• 26:25
  Speaker 2: If there's a political obstacle, they crush it with campaign donations.
• 26:28
  Speaker 2: They do not experience friction the way normal people do.
• 26:31
  Speaker 1: So he viewed her criminal charges as just like a
• 26:34
  Speaker 1: zoning issue.
• 26:35
  Speaker 2: Precisely. It is highly probable he viewed the district attorney
• 26:39
  Speaker 2: the victims and the entire legal apparatus as just another
• 26:43
  Speaker 2: nuisance to be intimidated or bought off.
• 26:45
  Speaker 1: Wow.
• 26:46
  Speaker 2: He applied the mechanics of ruthless business negotiation threats, leverage,
• 26:50
  Speaker 2: intimidation to the criminal justice system. But the criminal justice
• 26:54
  Speaker 2: system doesn't operate like a municipal planning board. No, it doesn't.
• 26:58
  Speaker 2: Witness tampering is a severe felony that strikes at the
• 27:00
  Speaker 2: very heart of the judicial process.
• 27:03
  Speaker 1: And the fallout was immediate. The moment Kuback gets arrested
• 27:06
  Speaker 1: and realizes the justice system can actually touch him, The
• 27:09
  Speaker 1: romance apparently dies.
• 27:11
  Speaker 2: Oh, shockingly fast.
• 27:13
  Speaker 1: Right. The engagement is called off, Levy moves out of
• 27:16
  Speaker 1: the mansion, and crucially, Kubek allegedly stops paying her massive
• 27:21
  Speaker 1: legal fees.
• 27:22
  Speaker 2: The leverage completely shifted there. And this creates a massive,
• 27:26
  Speaker 2: gaping vulnerability for Kubek. How so? Because loyalty in these
• 27:30
  Speaker 2: high-stakes criminal conspiracies only lasts exactly as long as the
• 27:33
  Speaker 2: legal retainers are being funded.
• 27:35
  Speaker 1: Ah.
• 27:36
  Speaker 2: So.
• 27:37
  Speaker 1: Nima Rahmani suggested that Levy might attempt to flip and
• 27:40
  Speaker 1: cooperate with prosecutors against Quebec.
• 27:43
  Speaker 2: Yes, exactly.
• 27:44
  Speaker 1: But let's break down the mechanics of flipping here, because
• 27:46
  Speaker 1: this makes no logical sense to me. Levy is a
• 27:49
  Speaker 1: documented liar. The judge has already stated on the record
• 27:52
  Speaker 1: that she isn't truthful. She faked her mother's death. Right.
• 27:55
  Speaker 2: Her credibility is shot.
• 27:56
  Speaker 1: So if she's a known liar, how can a prosecutor
• 27:58
  Speaker 1: legally put her on the witness stand, point at a
• 28:01
  Speaker 1: billionaire with infinite resources for defense attorneys, and say, take
• 28:04
  Speaker 1: this woman's word for it? Wouldn't QBEC's lawyers just annihilate
• 28:08
  Speaker 1: her credibility in three seconds?
• 28:10
  Speaker 2: You are entirely correct. Her standalone credibility is effectively zero.
• 28:15
  Speaker 2: But the mechanics of a cooperation agreement flipping do not
• 28:19
  Speaker 2: rely on trust. They rely on corroboration and a very
• 28:22
  Speaker 2: specific transactional sequence.
• 28:24
  Speaker 1: OK, explain the sequence. How does the deal actually get done?
• 28:29
  Speaker 2: A prosecutor doesn't just hand her immunity and hope she
• 28:31
  Speaker 2: tells the truth. First, she has to plead guilty to
• 28:34
  Speaker 2: her own charges.
• 28:35
  Speaker 1: Oh, she has to plead first.
• 28:37
  Speaker 2: Yes. She has to stand in open court and admit
• 28:39
  Speaker 2: she is a burglar, a thief, and a liar. That
• 28:42
  Speaker 2: conviction is locked in. Then the judge delays her sentencing.
• 28:47
  Speaker 1: Okay.
• 28:48
  Speaker 2: The deal is structured like a contract. you will testify
• 28:51
  Speaker 2: truthfully against Stephen Kubek regarding his attempt to dissuade witnesses.
• 28:55
  Speaker 2: If you lie, the deal is void and you get
• 28:58
  Speaker 2: the maximum sentence.
• 28:59
  Speaker 1: So she literally has the sword of Damocles hanging over
• 29:01
  Speaker 1: her head while she testifies.
• 29:03
  Speaker 2: Exactly. And to address her credibility issue with the jury,
• 29:05
  Speaker 2: the prosecution will never rely on her testimony alone. They
• 29:08
  Speaker 2: will use her testimony as the narrative glue to bind
• 29:11
  Speaker 2: together hard empirical evidence.
• 29:13
  Speaker 1: Of receipts. Right.
• 29:14
  Speaker 2: If she says, Stephen told me he was going to
• 29:17
  Speaker 2: threaten victim A... The prosecution will then produce the phone
• 29:20
  Speaker 2: records showing Cubex phone calling victim A at that exact time. Wow.
• 29:25
  Speaker 2: They will produce the cell tower pings. They will call
• 29:27
  Speaker 2: victim A to the stand to confirm the threat. Her
• 29:30
  Speaker 2: testimony becomes a roadmap for the digital and physical evidence.
• 29:34
  Speaker 1: She just provides the context for the receipts. That makes
• 29:36
  Speaker 1: total sense.
• 29:36
  Speaker 2: Precisely. And for Levy, looking at the sheer volume of
• 29:40
  Speaker 2: evidence against her in her own cases, shaving a few
• 29:43
  Speaker 2: years off her sentence by serving Kubek on a silver
• 29:45
  Speaker 2: platter to the DA might be the only viable strategic
• 29:49
  Speaker 2: move she has left.
• 29:50
  Speaker 1: Which brings us to the final act of this deep dive,
• 29:54
  Speaker 1: the brutal mathematical reality of her situation. We've talked about
• 29:57
  Speaker 1: the mansions, the TikToks, the bizarre legal strategies. But the
• 30:01
  Speaker 1: music has stopped. We need to look at the legal
• 30:04
  Speaker 1: reckoning because the numbers here are staggering.
• 30:06
  Speaker 2: They really are. If Admiral Levy is convicted on the
• 30:09
  Speaker 2: theft and burglary charges in Los Angeles County, she is
• 30:12
  Speaker 2: facing a maximum exposure of 11 to 12 years in
• 30:14
  Speaker 2: state prison.
• 30:15
  Speaker 1: 11 years. Let's unpack the legal weeds on this. Because
• 30:18
  Speaker 1: to the layperson, hearing 11 years for stealing some watches
• 30:22
  Speaker 1: and clothes sounds wildly disproportionate. How does the math actually
• 30:26
  Speaker 1: get to 11 years?
• 30:28
  Speaker 2: It fundamentally comes down to how the state of California
• 30:30
  Speaker 2: classifies these specific crimes. The most severe charge she is
• 30:34
  Speaker 2: facing is first-degree residential burglary with a person present. In California,
• 30:40
  Speaker 2: this is not a simple property crime. This is classified
• 30:43
  Speaker 2: as a serious crime of violence. It is a strike
• 30:46
  Speaker 2: offense under California's three strikes law.
• 30:48
  Speaker 1: Wait, I have to stop you. Crime of violence. She
• 30:51
  Speaker 1: didn't break a window. She didn't pick a lock. The
• 30:54
  Speaker 1: victims invited her into their homes from a dating app.
• 30:57
  Speaker 1: How can it mechanically be considered a burglary if she
• 31:00
  Speaker 1: was welcomed through the front door?
• 31:02
  Speaker 2: This is one of the most misunderstood areas of criminal law.
• 31:05
  Speaker 2: To understand it, we have to look at the underlying
• 31:07
  Speaker 2: logic of statutory burglary versus common law burglary.
• 31:11
  Speaker 1: Okay, let's do it.
• 31:12
  Speaker 2: Under old common law, you had to physically break and
• 31:14
  Speaker 2: enter a dwelling at night.
• 31:16
  Speaker 1: Like actually busting the door down. Right.
• 31:19
  Speaker 2: But modern statutes, like California Penal Code 459, Don't care
• 31:23
  Speaker 2: how you entered. They care about why you entered.
• 31:26
  Speaker 1: It's all about intent.
• 31:27
  Speaker 2: Exactly. Let me use an analogy. It is like downloading
• 31:30
  Speaker 2: a file onto your computer. You, the user, authorized the download.
• 31:34
  Speaker 2: You invited the file in. Sure. But if that file's
• 31:37
  Speaker 2: underlying code was designed from the beginning to execute a
• 31:40
  Speaker 2: payload and steal your password the moment it unpacked, it
• 31:43
  Speaker 2: is still a malicious hack.
• 31:45
  Speaker 1: That's a brilliant way to explain it.
• 31:46
  Speaker 2: The law is looking at the payload of her intent,
• 31:49
  Speaker 2: not the method of her entry. If the prosecution can
• 31:52
  Speaker 2: prove via text messages, patterns, or her own admissions that
• 31:56
  Speaker 2: she walked through that front door with the pre-existing intent
• 31:59
  Speaker 2: to commit a felony once inside, the crime of burglary
• 32:02
  Speaker 2: is legally completed the exact millisecond her foot crosses the threshold.
• 32:06
  Speaker 1: That is fascinating. So the invitation is rendered legally void
• 32:09
  Speaker 1: by the malicious intent.
• 32:10
  Speaker 2: Precisely. And because it is a residence and because the
• 32:13
  Speaker 2: victim was physically present in the home at the time,
• 32:16
  Speaker 2: the law views the potential for violent confrontation as extraordinarily high.
• 32:20
  Speaker 2: That is why it carries such severe penalties.
• 32:22
  Speaker 1: Okay, so how does that translate into years?
• 32:26
  Speaker 2: In California sentencing, judges work with a triad, a low, middle,
• 32:30
  Speaker 2: and high term for a charge. For this top count,
• 32:34
  Speaker 2: the maximum exposure is six years.
• 32:36
  Speaker 1: Okay, that gets us to six. How does the math
• 32:39
  Speaker 1: stretch to 12?
• 32:40
  Speaker 2: Once the primary, most serious charge is calculated, the court
• 32:44
  Speaker 2: then looks at all the other separate crimes against the
• 32:47
  Speaker 2: other victims, the grand theft, the identity theft, The extortions.
• 32:51
  Speaker 1: They don't just lump them all together.
• 32:52
  Speaker 2: No. The court doesn't just fold them all into one sentence.
• 32:55
  Speaker 2: California uses consecutive sentencing formulas.
• 32:58
  Speaker 1: Okay.
• 32:59
  Speaker 2: For each additional lesser felony count, the court takes one-third
• 33:02
  Speaker 2: of the middle-term sentence for that specific crime and stacks
• 33:05
  Speaker 2: it on top of the base six years.
• 33:07
  Speaker 1: So it's literally a compounding equation. Six years plus a
• 33:11
  Speaker 1: chunk for the Coachella guy plus a chunk for the
• 33:13
  Speaker 1: fake funeral guy plus a chunk for the identity theft.
• 33:16
  Speaker 2: Exactly. When you aggregate the top count with all the
• 33:19
  Speaker 2: fractional consecutive terms across multiple victims, you arrive at that
• 33:22
  Speaker 2: catastrophic 11 to 12 year figure. And this math dictates
• 33:27
  Speaker 2: the entire prosecutorial strategy, which explains why Los Angeles County
• 33:31
  Speaker 2: is trying her before Riverside County.
• 33:33
  Speaker 1: Yeah. Romani mentioned that Ellie gets the first crack at her.
• 33:36
  Speaker 1: Why wouldn't Riverside go first? The Coachella heist was a clean,
• 33:39
  Speaker 1: easy case to prove.
• 33:41
  Speaker 2: It's about securing the maximum leverage in the heaviest sentence.
• 33:45
  Speaker 2: In multi-jurisdictional crime sprees, district attorneys communicate. Riverside has one victim.
• 33:51
  Speaker 1: Right.
• 33:51
  Speaker 2: If they go first, Levy might get a short sentence,
• 33:54
  Speaker 2: maybe even probation, because it looks like a one-off mistake.
• 33:57
  Speaker 2: Los Angeles County, however, has 10 or more alleged victims.
• 34:01
  Speaker 2: They have the volume. Ah, volume. By going first, LA
• 34:05
  Speaker 2: can introduce all of these incidents under California Evidence Code 1101B.
• 34:09
  Speaker 1: What does that do?
• 34:10
  Speaker 2: It allows prosecutors to show a defendant's prior bad acts
• 34:13
  Speaker 2: to prove intent, Ah.
• 34:18
  Speaker 1: So they can show the jury that the Coachella theft
• 34:20
  Speaker 1: wasn't an accident because she did the exact same thing
• 34:22
  Speaker 1: to nine other guys in Los Angeles. It creates an
• 34:25
  Speaker 1: undeniable pattern.
• 34:26
  Speaker 2: Exactly. It makes the defense's job nearly impossible.
• 34:29
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 34:30
  Speaker 2: If this case goes to a jury trial, it would
• 34:32
  Speaker 2: be an unmitigated disaster for her.
• 34:34
  Speaker 1: Let's play that out. Say she refuses to plead guilty
• 34:37
  Speaker 1: and demands a trial. The defense has no alternative narrative left.
• 34:42
  Speaker 2: None.
• 34:42
  Speaker 1: They can't claim she's a victim because of the jailhouse tapes.
• 34:45
  Speaker 1: They can't claim she didn't take the stuff because of
• 34:47
  Speaker 1: the TikTok videos. If she takes the stand to try
• 34:50
  Speaker 1: and explain it all away.
• 34:51
  Speaker 2: Oh, if she takes the stand, the prosecution would subject
• 34:54
  Speaker 2: her to a cross-examination that would be taught in law schools.
• 34:57
  Speaker 1: Just pick her apart.
• 34:58
  Speaker 2: Completely. They will walk her through every single lie, sequentially.
• 35:02
  Speaker 2: Did you tell this man your mother was dead? Yes
• 35:04
  Speaker 2: or no. Did you take his money? Yes or no.
• 35:07
  Speaker 2: Did you then go have lunch with your mother? Yes
• 35:09
  Speaker 2: or no. Wow. Any competent defense attorney will aggressively advise
• 35:13
  Speaker 2: her to exercise her Fifth Amendment right and stay off
• 35:15
  Speaker 2: the stand.
• 35:16
  Speaker 1: So if she can't testify and the evidence is overwhelming,
• 35:19
  Speaker 1: what is the actual trial strategy? Romani called it a
• 35:23
  Speaker 1: game of chicken.
• 35:24
  Speaker 2: And that is exactly what it is. A cynical, high
• 35:26
  Speaker 2: stakes game of chicken with the victim's egos.
• 35:30
  Speaker 1: Egos again.
• 35:31
  Speaker 2: The defense's only viable strategy at trial is to hope
• 35:35
  Speaker 2: the victims refuse to cooperate. They are banking on the
• 35:38
  Speaker 2: idea that these older, wealthy, highly successful men will be
• 35:43
  Speaker 2: too profoundly embarrassed to sit in a public courtroom, swear
• 35:47
  Speaker 2: an oath, and explain to a jury exactly how they
• 35:49
  Speaker 2: were so easily manipulated by a 29-year-old on a dating app.
• 35:53
  Speaker 1: The defense is hoping the victim's pride is stronger than
• 35:55
  Speaker 1: their desire for justice.
• 35:57
  Speaker 2: Yes. But it is a desperate gamble because the state
• 36:00
  Speaker 2: has the power of subpoenas.
• 36:01
  Speaker 1: They can force them.
• 36:02
  Speaker 2: And if those men do walk into that courtroom and
• 36:05
  Speaker 2: they sit on that stand one after another... all telling
• 36:07
  Speaker 2: the exact same story, corroborated by text logs, GPS data,
• 36:12
  Speaker 2: and stolen property recovered from her closet, a guilty verdict
• 36:16
  Speaker 2: is effectively guaranteed.
• 36:17
  Speaker 1: It really highlights a massive shift in how crime operates today.
• 36:20
  Speaker 1: You know, you watch movies about con artists from the
• 36:22
  Speaker 1: 70s or 80s. A guy pulls a scam, he packs
• 36:25
  Speaker 1: his bags, he moves to a new state, he changes
• 36:27
  Speaker 1: his name, and he starts over. Right.
• 36:28
  Speaker 2: Catch me if you can style.
• 36:30
  Speaker 1: Exactly. The environment was analog. But today, the digital footprints
• 36:34
  Speaker 1: have fundamentally broken that model. The dating app chat logs
• 36:38
  Speaker 1: are stored on servers. The text messages are backed up
• 36:41
  Speaker 1: to the cloud.
• 36:42
  Speaker 2: Forever.
• 36:42
  Speaker 1: The TikTok videos are downloaded by millions before you can
• 36:45
  Speaker 1: delete them. The GPS ankle monitors track your physical location
• 36:49
  Speaker 1: down to the yard. You simply cannot talk your way
• 36:52
  Speaker 1: out of a digital paper trail that spans multiple platforms.
• 36:55
  Speaker 2: That is perhaps the most critical structural takeaway from this
• 36:58
  Speaker 2: entire case. Technology is a double-edged sword for the modern criminal.
• 37:03
  Speaker 1: How so?
• 37:03
  Speaker 2: It enables the con on a scale never before possible.
• 37:06
  Speaker 2: providing instant curated access to a limitless pool of wealthy
• 37:10
  Speaker 2: targets through these applications. But that very same technology ensures
• 37:14
  Speaker 2: the criminal's downfall by flawlessly recording, storing, and timestamping every
• 37:19
  Speaker 2: single step of the crime.
• 37:20
  Speaker 1: It is an incredible dark arc we've traced today. We
• 37:23
  Speaker 1: started by looking at the glamorous facade of a magazine model,
• 37:26
  Speaker 1: and as we chipped away the paint, we found a
• 37:28
  Speaker 1: labyrinth of dating app heists, fake funerals for living parents,
• 37:32
  Speaker 1: the jaw-dropping hubris of TikTok confessions.
• 37:35
  Speaker 2: Grab a billionaire.
• 37:36
  Speaker 1: And a billionaire who apparently decided to incinerate his own
• 37:39
  Speaker 1: political and business reputation just to protect her from the
• 37:43
  Speaker 1: consequences of it all. It is a story that captures
• 37:46
  Speaker 1: every vice of the modern era, and none of it
• 37:48
  Speaker 1: is pretty once you look beneath the surface.
• 37:51
  Speaker 2: If there is a final analytical insight to extract from
• 37:54
  Speaker 2: this saga, it is a profound commentary on modern vulnerability. Yeah.
• 38:00
  Speaker 2: We are conditioned to think of dangerous cons as things
• 38:03
  Speaker 2: that happen in shadowy alleyways, perpetrated by visibly threatening figures.
• 38:07
  Speaker 2: We think of cybercrime as anonymous hackers in foreign countries.
• 38:11
  Speaker 2: But this case forcefully argues that the most dangerous, devastating
• 38:15
  Speaker 2: cons are executed in plain sight, under ring lights, using
• 38:18
  Speaker 2: our own deep-seated human desires, the need for connection, companionship,
• 38:22
  Speaker 2: or validation, as the very payload used to bypass our security.
• 38:26
  Speaker 1: Wow. It brings us right back to the cognitive dissonance
• 38:29
  Speaker 1: of those wealthy victims. We want life to be binary.
• 38:32
  Speaker 1: We expect a threat to look like a threat. But
• 38:35
  Speaker 1: when the threat presents itself as a glamorous model swiping
• 38:37
  Speaker 1: right on your profile, all the diagnostic tools we use
• 38:40
  Speaker 1: to protect ourselves just short-circuit and fail. Which leaves you
• 38:44
  Speaker 1: with one final thought to mull over as we wrap
• 38:46
  Speaker 1: up today's deep dive. We have spent this entire time
• 38:49
  Speaker 1: dissecting the mechanical and psychological manipulation executed by the alleged perpetrator,
• 38:55
  Speaker 1: Adva Levy. But we have to turn the mirror around
• 38:57
  Speaker 1: for a second.
• 38:58
  Speaker 2: We do.
• 38:59
  Speaker 1: What does it say about our society and the profound
• 39:01
  Speaker 1: isolation of modern success that so many wealthy, accomplished men
• 39:06
  Speaker 1: were so desperately starved for the illusion of intimacy that
• 39:09
  Speaker 1: they repeatedly, willingly ignored glaring red flags to let a
• 39:13
  Speaker 1: total stranger into their homes? When we commodify our relationships
• 39:17
  Speaker 1: on dating apps, when we reduce human connection to a
• 39:20
  Speaker 1: transactional swipe, do we inevitably turn our own lives into
• 39:24
  Speaker 1: a storefront just waiting to be robbed? Thank you for
• 39:27
  Speaker 1: joining us for this deep dive. Stay curious, question what
• 39:29
  Speaker 1: you see on your screens, and always make sure you
• 39:32
  Speaker 1: look beneath the surface of the next wild headline you read.