Latest / NO FILTER / Teacher shot by 6-year-old sues for _40 million_ FBI gambling probe names NBA players and the Mafia(MP3_160K)

Transcript

Teacher shot by 6-year-old sues for _40 million_ FBI gambling probe names NBA players and the Mafia(MP3_160K) · NO FILTER

• 0:11
  Speaker 1: Hello, and welcome to the Sidebar presented by True Crime News,
• 0:14
  Speaker 1: taking you inside the courtrooms of high profile and notorious
• 0:16
  Speaker 1: cases from across the country. I'm your host, Joshua Ritter.
• 0:20
  Speaker 1: I'm a criminal defense layer based in Los Angeles and
• 0:22
  Speaker 1: previously an Eli County prosecutor for a decade. We're recording
• 0:26
  Speaker 1: this on Wednesday, October twenty ninth, twenty twenty five. In
• 0:30
  Speaker 1: this week's episode, a judge rules to allow Charlie Kirk's
• 0:33
  Speaker 1: alleged killer to wear civilian clothes in pre trial hearings.
• 0:38
  Speaker 1: Plus a first grade teacher's forty million dollar lawsuit after
• 0:42
  Speaker 1: she was shot by a six year old student. But first,
• 0:46
  Speaker 1: a high profile federal indictment names NBA players and members
• 0:51
  Speaker 1: of organized crime families in an alleged scheme to rig
• 0:55
  Speaker 1: illegal poker games. I'm flying solo today, so let's go
• 0:58
  Speaker 1: ahead and just jump right in first out of Brooklyn,
• 1:01
  Speaker 1: New York. A gambling scandal surrounding rigged poker games and
• 1:05
  Speaker 1: additional illegal activity has been unearthed after a federal indictment
• 1:09
  Speaker 1: name being NBA figures and members of prominent organized crime families.
• 1:14
  Speaker 1: The recently unsealed indictment lists thirty one defendants, including NBA
• 1:19
  Speaker 1: player Damon Jones and head coach and Hall of Famer
• 1:22
  Speaker 1: Chauncey Billips, along with associates from the Bonano, Gambino, and
• 1:27
  Speaker 1: Genovesei crime families, all part of LaCOSA Nostra. The defendants
• 1:33
  Speaker 1: allegedly used technology including hitting cameras and X ray tables
• 1:37
  Speaker 1: to cheat high profile players out of at least seven
• 1:41
  Speaker 1: million in high stakes illegal poker games. Billips and Jones,
• 1:45
  Speaker 1: along with other co conspirators, allegedly acted as quote unquote
• 1:49
  Speaker 1: face cards to entice the participation of the unwitting victims
• 1:53
  Speaker 1: into the rigged games. Profits from the clandestine card games
• 1:57
  Speaker 1: were allegedly funneled into LaCOSA Crime Syndicate, enriching one of
• 2:02
  Speaker 1: the most notorious criminal networks in the world, according to
• 2:06
  Speaker 1: federal prosecutors. When some of the victims realized they had
• 2:09
  Speaker 1: been cheated and refused to pay, prosecutors claim that some
• 2:13
  Speaker 1: of the defendants used intimidation, threats and violence to coorse
• 2:17
  Speaker 1: victims into coughing up the money. The wide reaching and
• 2:20
  Speaker 1: indictment may also have further effects on the NBA, as
• 2:23
  Speaker 1: Congress has requested that NBA League Commissioner Adam Silver provide
• 2:28
  Speaker 1: a briefing related to the sprawling scandal. This case is wild, folks,
• 2:34
  Speaker 1: but let's talk about where does it go from here.
• 2:36
  Speaker 1: First of all, if you're like me and you hear
• 2:40
  Speaker 1: about a federal indictment, you're wondering, where is the rico charge?
• 2:43
  Speaker 1: When is that coming? And we haven't seen that just
• 2:46
  Speaker 1: yet in this case, but I imagine it might be
• 2:49
  Speaker 1: something that's going to follow soon enough, especially when you
• 2:52
  Speaker 1: have thirty one different defendants and they're all acting in
• 2:56
  Speaker 1: as part of a criminal enterprise towards the same ultimate
• 3:00
  Speaker 1: criminal purpose. Does that sound familiar? It sounds a lot
• 3:04
  Speaker 1: like rico. Rico gives the federal government a very strong
• 3:08
  Speaker 1: tool in prosecuting these types of cases. So don't be
• 3:11
  Speaker 1: surprised is somewhere along the lines there we have a
• 3:14
  Speaker 1: superseding indictment here that charges some sort of rico racketeering
• 3:19
  Speaker 1: indictment in this case. But also with all of these
• 3:25
  Speaker 1: named defendants and all of these people getting swept up,
• 3:28
  Speaker 1: what is the other thing that we expect, Well, we
• 3:30
  Speaker 1: expect some people to start making some very serious decisions.
• 3:34
  Speaker 1: When the federal government comes knocking, they give you a choice. Usually,
• 3:38
  Speaker 1: you hope at least they give you the choice of
• 3:41
  Speaker 1: do you want to be a defendant in this case
• 3:45
  Speaker 1: or do you want to cooperate? And the vast majority
• 3:48
  Speaker 1: of people choose cooperate any day of the week. Last
• 3:52
  Speaker 1: thing you want to do is be the last person
• 3:54
  Speaker 1: standing in this type of a case. And now you're
• 3:56
  Speaker 1: going to trial and you're the one defendant out of
• 3:59
  Speaker 1: a thirty one and you can go thirty people who
• 4:01
  Speaker 1: are willing to testify against you. I expect that we're
• 4:03
  Speaker 1: going to be seeing a lot of that happening in
• 4:06
  Speaker 1: this case because of how sprawling that it is. But
• 4:09
  Speaker 1: let's also talk about the effects that this could have
• 4:14
  Speaker 1: outside of this case. Now, the card games indictment that
• 4:21
  Speaker 1: part of this. There's two separate cases really at play here.
• 4:24
  Speaker 1: There's the illegal card games which were rigged, which were
• 4:29
  Speaker 1: essentially stealing people of their money. And then you've got
• 4:32
  Speaker 1: the betting on NBA games using either players who have
• 4:39
  Speaker 1: allegedly maybe affected their minutes or their scoring in those games,
• 4:45
  Speaker 1: and how that affects gambling on those sports and or
• 4:49
  Speaker 1: players who have you know, insider knowledge of players who
• 4:54
  Speaker 1: may not be playing a game, and how that could
• 4:57
  Speaker 1: affect people who intend to bet on that game. The
• 5:00
  Speaker 1: card game, I think is interesting initially and superficially. This
• 5:06
  Speaker 1: idea of them using technology and X ray tables and
• 5:10
  Speaker 1: special contact lenses and hearing devices and all of this
• 5:14
  Speaker 1: tipping off. Yeah, that spy tech type of stuff is
• 5:19
  Speaker 1: really interesting, and it did take people for you know,
• 5:22
  Speaker 1: people lost money to the tune of seven figures. Some
• 5:24
  Speaker 1: of these allegations are that's important, that is something that
• 5:29
  Speaker 1: should be addressed by the federal government. But it goes
• 5:32
  Speaker 1: on quite a bit. I think we all know this.
• 5:35
  Speaker 1: Why are they getting involved now? Well, I think it
• 5:38
  Speaker 1: might be because of the larger issues at play when
• 5:44
  Speaker 1: it comes to maybe some of these same players being
• 5:47
  Speaker 1: involved in the other investigation, and that's the investigation to
• 5:51
  Speaker 1: how were games being affected that we're being bet on
• 5:57
  Speaker 1: in legal gambling in Vegas. When you've got a player
• 6:03
  Speaker 1: who says, by the way, my the over under on
• 6:06
  Speaker 1: my points, go for the under because I plan on
• 6:10
  Speaker 1: taking myself out of that game. Not saying, hey, I
• 6:13
  Speaker 1: think I'm gonna have a real good game tonight, bet
• 6:16
  Speaker 1: on me, but saying I'm going to take myself out early.
• 6:19
  Speaker 1: I'm going to and I think some of the allegations
• 6:21
  Speaker 1: are fake injuries to take themselves out of a game,
• 6:25
  Speaker 1: and people are betting heavily that he's not going to
• 6:29
  Speaker 1: meet the points that he's expected to make for that game.
• 6:33
  Speaker 1: Now you have one player affecting a game, and think
• 6:36
  Speaker 1: about how easy this is to hide to the common
• 6:40
  Speaker 1: sports fan or even the the the the the common
• 6:45
  Speaker 1: uh sports gambler. Are they really going to take all
• 6:49
  Speaker 1: that much notice about some random game in the middle
• 6:52
  Speaker 1: of the season and some not you know, not a
• 6:56
  Speaker 1: marquee player taking themselves out early. It happens all the time.
• 7:00
  Speaker 1: Time players get hurt. Vegas takes notice. However, they notice
• 7:04
  Speaker 1: that there's a large amount of money moving on this
• 7:07
  Speaker 1: player for this particular prop bet is what they call it.
• 7:11
  Speaker 1: When those things start to happen, when an individual player
• 7:15
  Speaker 1: can have an effect on not just themselves and a
• 7:20
  Speaker 1: couple of bets placed on them, but hundreds of thousands
• 7:23
  Speaker 1: of bets placed on that particular game and that player
• 7:26
  Speaker 1: and that particular bet. Now we're talking about Vegas worldwide
• 7:31
  Speaker 1: gambling and affects way beyond that game itself. And I
• 7:34
  Speaker 1: think that that's why the integrity of the game will
• 7:39
  Speaker 1: be called into questions. So when you see things like
• 7:41
  Speaker 1: Congress wants to speak to the commissioner, you know that
• 7:44
  Speaker 1: there might be more trouble coming. And I have a
• 7:46
  Speaker 1: fear that this just might be the tip of the iceberg.
• 7:49
  Speaker 1: So we will continue to keep our eyes on this
• 7:52
  Speaker 1: case closely as it continues to develop. It. Those are
• 7:55
  Speaker 1: some of the things I expect for us to see happening.
• 7:57
  Speaker 1: Let's move on, though, to aurum Utah, where a judge
• 8:01
  Speaker 1: ruled that Charlie Kirk's alleged killer will be allowed to
• 8:04
  Speaker 1: wear civilian clothes during hearings, but must remain in restraints,
• 8:09
  Speaker 1: citing safety concerns. Tyler Robinson's defense sought to extend the
• 8:14
  Speaker 1: right to regular clothing normally afforded at trial to all
• 8:17
  Speaker 1: pre trial hearings to reduce the risk of prejudice if
• 8:21
  Speaker 1: potential jurors saw Robinson wearing inmate clothing during the high
• 8:25
  Speaker 1: profile proceedings. Prosecutors objected to the motion, alleging that jail
• 8:29
  Speaker 1: clothing helps with identification and safety, but the judges ruling
• 8:33
  Speaker 1: stated that quote Robinson's right to the presumption of innocence
• 8:37
  Speaker 1: outweighs the minimal inconvenience of permitting civilian attire. Robinson has
• 8:42
  Speaker 1: been charged with multiple offenses in the September tenth shooting
• 8:46
  Speaker 1: of right wing activists Charlie Kirk, who's gunned down at
• 8:49
  Speaker 1: an event at Utah Valley University, and prosecutors have indicated
• 8:54
  Speaker 1: that they intend to seek the death penalty while Robinson
• 8:57
  Speaker 1: must remain restrained. The judge also in struct to authorities
• 9:00
  Speaker 1: to quote use the least restrictive restraints necessary to maintain safety,
• 9:06
  Speaker 1: and bard media outlets from recording Robinson's restraints while in
• 9:09
  Speaker 1: court or en root to the court house. The effect
• 9:13
  Speaker 1: this could have on jurors remains to be seen, and
• 9:15
  Speaker 1: Robinson has not yet entered a plea, but we will
• 9:18
  Speaker 1: continue to keep you updated on this case as it progresses.
• 9:25
  Speaker 1: A lot of people have been talking about this case,
• 9:28
  Speaker 1: Tyler Robinson, and another case that does have a lot
• 9:32
  Speaker 1: of very troubling and eerie similarities, and that is the
• 9:37
  Speaker 1: case of Luigi Mangioni, and in that case, they're getting
• 9:41
  Speaker 1: the Mangioni case. It is receiving a lot of public attention.
• 9:46
  Speaker 1: We know how crowds show up every single time that
• 9:49
  Speaker 1: he's in court, how cameras have been appearing at every
• 9:53
  Speaker 1: single court appearance, just even the small calendaring appearances, Cameras
• 9:58
  Speaker 1: are in court, people are watching this case closely, and
• 10:01
  Speaker 1: they've been having him dressed down, is what we call it,
• 10:04
  Speaker 1: into his civilian clothing before he goes inside of court. Now,
• 10:09
  Speaker 1: while this is not unheard of, I would say it
• 10:12
  Speaker 1: is uncommon. The vast majority of defendants who appear in
• 10:16
  Speaker 1: court are coming in their prison outfits, their prison uniforms,
• 10:21
  Speaker 1: just because of the logistics of it. If you can
• 10:24
  Speaker 1: imagine what it would do to the inmate system if
• 10:29
  Speaker 1: you had to dress down every single in custody defendant
• 10:34
  Speaker 1: before every court appearance, it would they'd be spending the
• 10:37
  Speaker 1: half of their day just dressing and undressing people for
• 10:40
  Speaker 1: their court appearances. For the vast majority of people, especially
• 10:42
  Speaker 1: for these pre trial hearings, are going to come in
• 10:46
  Speaker 1: their prison clothing, even in cases where it is high profile,
• 10:50
  Speaker 1: Even in cases where the cameras are in court, many
• 10:52
  Speaker 1: many times we see people in their prison clothing when
• 10:55
  Speaker 1: they're coming into court. It only makes a real difference,
• 10:59
  Speaker 1: and this is where the courts have made clear distinction
• 11:02
  Speaker 1: is when it comes to trial, because we don't want
• 11:05
  Speaker 1: jurors be affected by it to be affected by that.
• 11:08
  Speaker 1: It's one thing to stand in a courtroom and tell jurors,
• 11:11
  Speaker 1: do you all understand that even though the defendant is
• 11:14
  Speaker 1: accused of these crimes, that they maintain the presumption of innocence,
• 11:19
  Speaker 1: And it's another thing to be saying that while the
• 11:22
  Speaker 1: person is sitting there in a jail outfit, in a
• 11:24
  Speaker 1: prison outfit, already looking like they're a condemned guilty person.
• 11:29
  Speaker 1: So it makes sense to have that person dressed like
• 11:32
  Speaker 1: anybody else would in court when they appear during their trial.
• 11:36
  Speaker 1: But now we're talking about extending that to pre trial appearances.
• 11:41
  Speaker 1: And why is that important. Well, the defense made the
• 11:45
  Speaker 1: argument here, as they did in the Mangione case, that listen,
• 11:49
  Speaker 1: this is so high profile that when he is photographed
• 11:53
  Speaker 1: in court, those photographs go out to all the media outlets,
• 11:58
  Speaker 1: and that remains on the internet. Anytime somebody wants to
• 12:01
  Speaker 1: even be curious about this case, or anytime there's any
• 12:04
  Speaker 1: news on this case, they're going to see this defendant
• 12:07
  Speaker 1: in prison clothing, and that's going to essentially the argument
• 12:12
  Speaker 1: is subconsciously start to affect people that they're just going
• 12:14
  Speaker 1: to believe that this person is guilty, so that they're
• 12:17
  Speaker 1: never going to be able to get a fair and
• 12:19
  Speaker 1: impartial jury, even if it's people who haven't been following
• 12:22
  Speaker 1: the case that closely, they'll just only remember seeing this
• 12:25
  Speaker 1: defendant in their clothing. Is that an argument for that? Sure?
• 12:29
  Speaker 1: I follow the logic of it. I don't know if
• 12:31
  Speaker 1: there's data to actually back it up, but I follow
• 12:34
  Speaker 1: the logic of it. And the judge said, you know what,
• 12:36
  Speaker 1: the inconvenience of dressing him down for every court appearance
• 12:40
  Speaker 1: in this case weighed against ensuring the presumption of incidence
• 12:45
  Speaker 1: in this case is enough for him to say, go
• 12:47
  Speaker 1: ahead and dress him down. And he went even farther
• 12:50
  Speaker 1: to say, I don't want him photographed in those restraints.
• 12:54
  Speaker 1: I'm not going to take the restraints off. I'm not
• 12:57
  Speaker 1: going to allow him to be unshackled in court, but
• 12:59
  Speaker 1: I'm not going to allow the media to highlight that
• 13:02
  Speaker 1: and to publish photographs of him in his handcuffs or
• 13:06
  Speaker 1: in his ankle restraints, so that that tears down every
• 13:10
  Speaker 1: good that they're trying to do with this recent change.
• 13:14
  Speaker 1: And I think the reason for that is we're learning
• 13:19
  Speaker 1: first a little bit about this judge, but we're also
• 13:22
  Speaker 1: learning about how this case is going to be handled.
• 13:24
  Speaker 1: Let's talk about that second part. First. This is a
• 13:27
  Speaker 1: death penalty case or potential death penalty case. But in
• 13:31
  Speaker 1: ever a case where you have the government pursuing the
• 13:34
  Speaker 1: greatest punishment that we have in this country, everyone's going
• 13:38
  Speaker 1: to treat it a little bit more seriously. They're going
• 13:42
  Speaker 1: to sit up a little bit more straight in their seats,
• 13:44
  Speaker 1: they're going to pay a little bit more attention. You're
• 13:46
  Speaker 1: going to see far more things put into writing that
• 13:49
  Speaker 1: might otherwise in another type of case just simply be
• 13:53
  Speaker 1: argued orally in court. And I think that's a good
• 13:56
  Speaker 1: thing because we know that in death penalty cases they're
• 13:59
  Speaker 1: automatically appealed if there's a conviction, and so you want
• 14:04
  Speaker 1: things being done by the book. We're also learning about
• 14:07
  Speaker 1: this judge that he's a big fan of doing things
• 14:10
  Speaker 1: by the book, that he definitely is a rule follower.
• 14:15
  Speaker 1: He's not the type of judge to be shooting from
• 14:17
  Speaker 1: the hip about anything. And in fact, he refused to
• 14:22
  Speaker 1: even entertain arguments or rulings on a couple of other
• 14:26
  Speaker 1: issues because he said he wanted further briefing on that.
• 14:30
  Speaker 1: This judge is going to want everything in writing a
• 14:33
  Speaker 1: good argument behind all of it, case lot to support it,
• 14:36
  Speaker 1: statues to support it, and then he's going to make
• 14:39
  Speaker 1: a ruling, and that ruling is likely going to be written.
• 14:41
  Speaker 1: All of the comments that we read from the judge
• 14:43
  Speaker 1: today were something that the judge had pre prepared and
• 14:46
  Speaker 1: written down himself. He even is not speaking extemporaneously in court,
• 14:51
  Speaker 1: He himself is very prepared on everything that he's doing
• 14:55
  Speaker 1: on this case, and I think that we're going to
• 14:56
  Speaker 1: see that moving forward. The other thing you're going to
• 14:59
  Speaker 1: see is him giving not unfairness, but deference to the defense.
• 15:04
  Speaker 1: Because Tyler Robinson is looking at the greatest possible punishment,
• 15:09
  Speaker 1: He's going to make sure that everything is done to
• 15:12
  Speaker 1: give him the most fair shot at defending himself so
• 15:17
  Speaker 1: that there can never be a complaint later on on
• 15:19
  Speaker 1: appeal that he wasn't given a fair trial. Interesting case already,
• 15:25
  Speaker 1: even with these small decisions were I think we're learning
• 15:28
  Speaker 1: a lot about the case and a lot about the
• 15:29
  Speaker 1: judge itself. But we'll leave it there for now. Finally,
• 15:32
  Speaker 1: to our last case out of Newport News, Virginia, A
• 15:37
  Speaker 1: first great teacher is seeking forty million dollars in a
• 15:42
  Speaker 1: civil suit after she was shot by a six year
• 15:45
  Speaker 1: old student. The complaint, filed by teacher Abby's Werner, alleges
• 15:50
  Speaker 1: that multiple school officials failed to act after they were
• 15:53
  Speaker 1: informed that a student referred to only as JT had
• 15:58
  Speaker 1: a firearm. Z Werner was alerted to the presence of
• 16:01
  Speaker 1: the weapon by several of JT's classmates, and which she
• 16:05
  Speaker 1: confronted the child. He refused to let Swerner search his
• 16:08
  Speaker 1: backpack when Zwerner attempted to raise her concerns with other
• 16:13
  Speaker 1: employees and assistant principal Ebony Parker. The lawsuit alleges Parker
• 16:19
  Speaker 1: acted with gross negligence and in reckless disregard for Swerner's safety. Meanwhile,
• 16:25
  Speaker 1: the defense has cited privacy concerns surrounding a search of
• 16:28
  Speaker 1: the child and dismissed the unusual negligence case as hindsight bias.
• 16:34
  Speaker 1: Swerner underwent multiple surgeries in the wake of the shooting
• 16:37
  Speaker 1: after a bullet went through her hand and struck her
• 16:39
  Speaker 1: in the chest, requiring treatment for life threatening injuries. The
• 16:44
  Speaker 1: civil case is expected to proceed through November sixth. Meanwhile,
• 16:48
  Speaker 1: JT's mother, Dejah Taylor, is serving a two year prison
• 16:52
  Speaker 1: sentence for child neglects charges related to the shooting a
• 16:58
  Speaker 1: lot for jurors to on pack in this case. The
• 17:02
  Speaker 1: first question that he's going to be asked of them, though, is,
• 17:06
  Speaker 1: first of all, was a duty of care owed to
• 17:11
  Speaker 1: this teacher? And I think that's absolutely clear that the principal,
• 17:16
  Speaker 1: the other people who were had a position of authority
• 17:21
  Speaker 1: of that school, they owed a duty of care to
• 17:24
  Speaker 1: all of the students and including the teachers to make
• 17:27
  Speaker 1: sure that everyone there was saved. But then the other
• 17:29
  Speaker 1: question becomes foreseeability. Should it have been foreseeable that a
• 17:35
  Speaker 1: failure to act on the part of the principle could
• 17:38
  Speaker 1: have somehow led to something like this. Again, I think
• 17:43
  Speaker 1: there's a fairly strong argument here. So Werner's not saying, hey,
• 17:47
  Speaker 1: this student was behaving fishy, I'd like to search his backpack,
• 17:52
  Speaker 1: or hey, this student just seemed off to me and
• 17:56
  Speaker 1: I'm a little worried. So therefore I want security to
• 18:00
  Speaker 1: come down here and take a look this teacher. According
• 18:03
  Speaker 1: to the complaint, and we'll see how this plays out
• 18:05
  Speaker 1: in court. But this teacher is saying, hey, I've been
• 18:08
  Speaker 1: told by other students that he has a weapon that
• 18:14
  Speaker 1: should have sent off. You would expect in this day
• 18:16
  Speaker 1: and age that we live in that should have sent
• 18:18
  Speaker 1: off every red flag and siren that that school had
• 18:22
  Speaker 1: available to them, and that the smallest step of confirming
• 18:27
  Speaker 1: whether or not the child was armed would have been
• 18:29
  Speaker 1: a very very low hurdle, not that much of an
• 18:34
  Speaker 1: inconvenience for anyone to ensure the safety of everyone. I
• 18:38
  Speaker 1: think there's a very strong argument for this. I also
• 18:43
  Speaker 1: think that it's an interesting argument being made by the
• 18:48
  Speaker 1: defense here to say that this is somehow hindsight bias
• 18:52
  Speaker 1: when we're dealing with a time where we're all hoping
• 18:56
  Speaker 1: that we have a lot more hindsight bias. How many
• 19:00
  Speaker 1: have we seen these types of cases? How many times
• 19:03
  Speaker 1: have we seen these tragedies unfold and we look back
• 19:06
  Speaker 1: and go, well, why didn't certain people do certain things differently?
• 19:10
  Speaker 1: The mother of this child is in prison because of
• 19:13
  Speaker 1: that very question, because we're saying she failed to do
• 19:18
  Speaker 1: things differently. So why shouldn't that apply to the supervisors
• 19:22
  Speaker 1: in the school district in this case? Here? And the
• 19:25
  Speaker 1: idea that somehow there was an overwhelming concern about the
• 19:28
  Speaker 1: Fourth Amendment rights of searching that student's backpack, I'm sorry,
• 19:32
  Speaker 1: it just doesn't hold water. To me, it sounds very weak,
• 19:35
  Speaker 1: and I think that they're going to have a hard
• 19:37
  Speaker 1: time standing up in front of a jury and explaining
• 19:40
  Speaker 1: that when you've got a person who was shot. The
• 19:43
  Speaker 1: other thing I think is interesting about this case, and
• 19:47
  Speaker 1: so I'm wondering if it's a sea change. We've definitely
• 19:50
  Speaker 1: seen a change in the way that criminal prosecutors have
• 19:54
  Speaker 1: started to treat these cases. They're not just looking at
• 19:57
  Speaker 1: the student themselves and saying that that's where the criminal
• 20:00
  Speaker 1: liability ends. They're saying that criminal liability extends beyond that
• 20:05
  Speaker 1: to the parents. We saw this in this case. We
• 20:08
  Speaker 1: saw this in the horrible case involving Ethan Crumbly. His
• 20:12
  Speaker 1: parents were both convicted. And I think you're starting to
• 20:14
  Speaker 1: see that being pursued much more aggressively by prosecutors. And listen,
• 20:19
  Speaker 1: there's a part of me that says great, There's a
• 20:21
  Speaker 1: part of me that's a little worried about it. But
• 20:23
  Speaker 1: I at least appreciate the creative thinking outside of the
• 20:26
  Speaker 1: box on the part of prosecutors. Why not to the
• 20:30
  Speaker 1: schools themselves, Why not to the people in charge of
• 20:34
  Speaker 1: that school and the security of that school, and the
• 20:36
  Speaker 1: supervisors I've asked that many times in these previous criminal prosecutions,
• 20:42
  Speaker 1: Why are we stopping with the parents. Why aren't we
• 20:44
  Speaker 1: looking at other people who could have gotten involved? And
• 20:47
  Speaker 1: at least from a civil perspective, that's what they're attempting
• 20:50
  Speaker 1: to do here, and I'm wondering if this might blaze
• 20:54
  Speaker 1: the trail for prosecutors to start thinking more aggressively about
• 20:57
  Speaker 1: the schools themselves and what they could have done differently,
• 21:00
  Speaker 1: and if they hold any certain certainly civil liability, perhaps
• 21:05
  Speaker 1: even criminal liability beyond that. But that is a big
• 21:08
  Speaker 1: question that we're going to have to leave for here
• 21:12
  Speaker 1: for the moment, because that is our show for this week.
• 21:16
  Speaker 1: I thank you all so much for your support and
• 21:18
  Speaker 1: for listening. I'm your host, josh Ritter. You can find
• 21:21
  Speaker 1: me on Instagram and Twitter at Joshua Ritter ESQ. And
• 21:25
  Speaker 1: if you want to hear my thoughts and coverage on
• 21:26
  Speaker 1: even more true crime cases, you can also check out
• 21:29
  Speaker 1: my YouTube channel, Courtroom Confidential, and you can of course
• 21:34
  Speaker 1: find all of our Sidebar episodes wherever you get your postcasts.
• 21:37
  Speaker 1: And we would love to hear from you if you've
• 21:39
  Speaker 1: got questions or comments you'd like us to address. Please
• 21:41
  Speaker 1: tweet us your questions with the hashtag TCN Sidebar, and
• 21:46
  Speaker 1: thank you for joining us at the True Crime News
• 21:49
  Speaker 1: side Bar.