Latest / Reality with The King / Breaking News: Wendy Resigns! Is Bravo Next?

Transcript

Breaking News: Wendy Resigns! Is Bravo Next? · Reality with The King

0:05
Speaker 1: Hi, there, Rain Drove. So before we get to the
0:08
Speaker 1: episode of Evane K. Williams and I recapping what's happening
0:14
Speaker 1: with Dr Wendyocepho and her husband Eddiocepho.
0:17
Speaker 2: I first want to start r by breaking.
0:20
Speaker 1: The news that Wendy has officially resigned. She did not
0:25
Speaker 1: get fire, Okay, but doctor Wendy has resigned from West
0:32
Speaker 1: Lehand University amid fraud charges. The reality star and political
0:39
Speaker 1: commentator was previously announced as a distinguished visiting professor at
0:45
Speaker 1: the private Connecticut institution. So this news broke today, Okay,
0:53
Speaker 1: So this is what's going on. Doctor Wendyocepho, in a
0:57
Speaker 1: statement to People Magazine on behalf of her spokesperson wanted
1:03
Speaker 1: to clarify that doctor Wendy was not fired. Okay, news
1:07
Speaker 1: broke that she was fired. But this is what her
1:11
Speaker 1: spokesperson has to say about it, and I quote. Contrary
1:15
Speaker 1: to recent media reports, doctor Wendy Osepha was not terminated
1:20
Speaker 1: from a faculty position at West Lean University. She formally
1:26
Speaker 1: submitted her letter of resignation prior to any public announcement
1:33
Speaker 1: made by the university. Doctor Oceppha made the voluntary decision
1:41
Speaker 1: to step down from her role. This decision was made
1:44
Speaker 1: independently and communicated directly to the university before any external
1:52
Speaker 1: reports surfaced. Now, the reason why they're saying in the
1:58
Speaker 1: statement that doctor Wendy resigned before any external reports surface,
2:06
Speaker 1: it's because was Lean University. They did confirm Oseppho's resignation
2:12
Speaker 1: by telling People magazine Wendy Oceppho is no longer an
2:17
Speaker 1: employee of west Lean University. She resigned from her position.
2:23
Speaker 1: So prior to that, news were saying that she was fired,
2:28
Speaker 1: so they wanted to clear that up. So again, doctor
2:32
Speaker 1: Wendy did not get fired, She actually resigned. Now what
2:40
Speaker 1: is so fast that I think about all of this
2:42
Speaker 1: is the fact that doctor Wendy was supposed to teach
2:45
Speaker 1: a class that she wrote up calling it the Sociology
2:52
Speaker 1: of Reality TV. At that time, she spoke highly of
2:58
Speaker 1: her relationship with wes Lean University as she reflected on
3:03
Speaker 1: past teaching positions where she did not feel appreciated. In
3:08
Speaker 1: a November interview back in twenty twenty four, doctor Wendy
3:13
Speaker 1: did say, I didn't feel like people saw the value
3:17
Speaker 1: in what I brought to the institution, But for wes
3:21
Speaker 1: Lean as much prestige as they have to see me
3:25
Speaker 1: and to say.
3:27
Speaker 3: Not only do we want you, but we want you.
3:30
Speaker 1: To have a title of distinguished professor. I was like
3:36
Speaker 1: this as a sign. So, of course this is all
3:43
Speaker 1: unfortunate news. As more reports are detailing whether or not
3:49
Speaker 1: doctor Wendy will continue promoting this season of Potomac. As
3:55
Speaker 1: I've recorded a Monday Night Live with Dustin and Claudia.
4:00
Speaker 1: Doctor Wendy this week was supposed to appear and watch
4:03
Speaker 1: What Happens Live and have pressed in New York. Her
4:07
Speaker 1: episode on Watching Happens Live is being replaced by KK
4:14
Speaker 1: coming on the show instead of Wendy. What has also
4:19
Speaker 1: sort of been revealed due to stacy Instagram posts, it
4:24
Speaker 1: appears that the Potomac Ladies are shooting their APPA show.
4:30
Speaker 1: Stacy posted a video on a set that appears to
4:35
Speaker 1: be the after show where one or two or three
4:41
Speaker 1: housewives come together separately to give us the audience their
4:46
Speaker 1: thoughts on each episode and that airs exclusively on Peacock.
4:52
Speaker 1: We did see Stacy by herself, we do not know
4:56
Speaker 1: whether or not Wendy was also there, so we don't
5:00
Speaker 1: know if Wendy has started filming back on Potomac Base
5:08
Speaker 1: on what's been happening so far, and we don't know whether
5:12
Speaker 1: or not Wendy has committed to her duties on taping
5:16
Speaker 1: the after show as well. What we do know as
5:21
Speaker 1: of now is Wife Swap now has a premiere date.
5:25
Speaker 1: As you all know, the episode of White Swap was
5:29
Speaker 1: supposed to be Doctor Wendy as their premiere episode. The
5:33
Speaker 1: network has since decided to pull her episode. They delayed
5:38
Speaker 1: the premiere. It is now happening Tuesday, October twenty first
5:42
Speaker 1: at nine pm easterd and the episode will be Angie
5:47
Speaker 1: from the Real Housewives of Salt Lake City, So that
5:52
Speaker 1: will be the premiere episode of White Swap. This is
5:55
Speaker 1: a four episode special. As of today, we do not
6:00
Speaker 1: know whether or not Doctors Wendy's episode will make air
6:06
Speaker 1: so without y'all all know always say this wrong, so
6:10
Speaker 1: I'm gonna give it right without much further ado, I
6:15
Speaker 1: think I survived that child. Here is M. D. K.
6:19
Speaker 1: Williams and I on the Doctor Wendy and Eddie cakese Hey,
6:24
Speaker 1: rain Dross, I mean listen. Ever since news broke.
6:28
Speaker 4: Out about Doctor Wendy and Eddie Osepho, my timeline has
6:34
Speaker 4: been blowing up tremendously and I'm pretty sure hers as well,
6:39
Speaker 4: which made me feel good the fact that my audience
6:42
Speaker 4: in the world really only cared to hear about Emny K.
6:45
Speaker 4: Williams's expert opinion when it comes to anything relating to
6:50
Speaker 4: you know, crime, politics, political stuff.
6:55
Speaker 2: And this woman is ready listen.
6:58
Speaker 4: I wanted to make sure she had enough time to
6:59
Speaker 4: do her due diligence, because, like me, she's not gonna
7:02
Speaker 4: hop on just to have a conversation without having all
7:06
Speaker 4: the information she needed. So ladies, gentlemen, gays and bays,
7:10
Speaker 4: give it up for the woman y'all have been begging
7:13
Speaker 4: for me to talk to ever since news broke out
7:15
Speaker 4: about their cephos Ebony K.
7:18
Speaker 3: William Carlos the King as happy as I am to
7:22
Speaker 3: see you, my darling, looking very delicious and cozy. Might
7:26
Speaker 3: I add this in this green, ever green velvet, you
7:30
Speaker 3: know this chill hit the air, baby, and Carlos said,
7:32
Speaker 3: y'all gonna get your velveteen baby, you know it. You
7:38
Speaker 3: know I do wish gathering. I love you so much.
7:41
Speaker 3: I wish we were gathering under better circumstances. But here
7:44
Speaker 3: we are to discuss simply the facts simply the facts
7:47
Speaker 3: as we know them as of this moment regarding the
7:52
Speaker 3: indictment and charges related to doctor Wendy and Edward osseoppho.
7:57
Speaker 2: Yeah, so let's just get right into it. Listen.
7:59
Speaker 4: As of now we all know what has happened, but
8:02
Speaker 4: I'll update the rain drops as well.
8:05
Speaker 2: Listen.
8:06
Speaker 1: Last Friday, it was revealed that Eddie and doctor Wendy
8:10
Speaker 1: were arrested for allegations of insurance fraud, counts of insurance frau,
8:19
Speaker 1: counts of conspiracy of fraud in addition to falsifying a
8:24
Speaker 1: police report by alleging that the burglary that they reported
8:29
Speaker 1: last year actually did not happen. They could face up to,
8:35
Speaker 1: from what I've read, in the state of Maryland, fifteen
8:38
Speaker 1: years in prison if convicted of this crime.
8:41
Speaker 2: The Ocephos have.
8:43
Speaker 4: Released a statement stating that look, they want privacy at
8:48
Speaker 4: this time, but they look forward to seeing their day
8:52
Speaker 4: in court. Ebany, I really just want to go many
8:56
Speaker 4: ways with you, But first I want to start with
8:58
Speaker 4: the fact that to Wendy professor for degrees, Eddie a lawyer,
9:06
Speaker 4: has his law degree licensed to pre were you just
9:10
Speaker 4: as surprise as the rest of us was when this
9:14
Speaker 4: news hit last Friday.
9:16
Speaker 3: See, you're probably asking the wrong person, Parlos, because unfortunately,
9:20
Speaker 3: due to my almost twenty years of legal expert experience myself,
9:27
Speaker 3: what I know is there's no such thing as a
9:29
Speaker 3: usual suspect. There's no such thing as a usual suspect, right,
9:35
Speaker 3: So surprised in the general sense. Sure, sure you know.
9:39
Speaker 3: I've been at Bravocan with the Osfos. I've shared spaces
9:45
Speaker 3: in a variety of ways over the many years that
9:47
Speaker 3: those of us that live in this wonderful world that
9:50
Speaker 3: intersects between academia and politics and mass media. Do you
9:56
Speaker 3: know we are certainly colleagues. I've had both Eddie and
9:59
Speaker 3: Wendy on on my Grio show. When I hosted The
10:02
Speaker 3: Grilloh with Vany K Williams, which was a nightly news show,
10:05
Speaker 3: they had dsfos graciously came on my show to promote
10:10
Speaker 3: Happy Eddie, you know, their cannabis line. So my point
10:14
Speaker 3: is giving context to the rain drops. My relationship was
10:19
Speaker 3: very casual with with Theosephos, but one that was rooted
10:22
Speaker 3: in shared values as it relates to everything that you
10:26
Speaker 3: named academics, community service and you know, the betterment of
10:31
Speaker 3: our people. So in that generalized sense, sure, but again,
10:36
Speaker 3: you know, those of us that do this legal thing
10:38
Speaker 3: for real, for real and for a living, we always
10:41
Speaker 3: kind of hold out the possibility that it could be anybody. Carlos,
10:46
Speaker 3: nobody's above the program. No one is a perfect person.
10:50
Speaker 3: I want to reiterate what we all know. The Ocephos
10:53
Speaker 3: are innocent, innocent, innocent, innocent until proven in a court
10:57
Speaker 3: of law to be guilty. So we're gonna operate with
11:00
Speaker 3: that presumption of innocence, and we're gonna lay out the
11:03
Speaker 3: facts as we know them, and we're going to talk
11:05
Speaker 3: about possibilities and next steps.
11:07
Speaker 2: Let's let's talk about next steps.
11:10
Speaker 4: We know that they bail themselves out of jail fifty
11:14
Speaker 4: thousand dollars a piece.
11:16
Speaker 2: They are at home.
11:18
Speaker 4: Doctor Wendy was supposed to be in New York City
11:21
Speaker 4: this week doing press watch What Happens Live has canceled
11:25
Speaker 4: her appearance on the show that was supposed to take
11:29
Speaker 4: this week. Her Wife Swap episode, which was the season
11:34
Speaker 4: premiere that was supposed to air this week, has now
11:37
Speaker 4: been erased. And by erase, I mean as of today,
11:42
Speaker 4: we are not going to see Doctor Wendy's episode.
11:45
Speaker 2: Why swap Wive Swap has been pushed back.
11:47
Speaker 4: A week or two in order to replace her episode
11:51
Speaker 4: as the premiere episode to another one. Those are the
11:55
Speaker 4: facts in which we know based on what you have
11:59
Speaker 4: read and Ebany K. Williams in the court documents, Does
12:05
Speaker 4: it concern you based on what you've read?
12:08
Speaker 2: Right, Yes, they're inno sense of proven guilty.
12:10
Speaker 4: The burglary being investigated, the allegations of returning items that
12:18
Speaker 4: they claim in their insurance allegations of doctor Wendy wearing
12:24
Speaker 4: the wedding ring the band that she and Eddie got
12:27
Speaker 4: twenty five, three hundred and eighty dollars for from the
12:30
Speaker 4: insurance company. They're now saying she wore it in a
12:32
Speaker 4: social media post. The things you're reading, dude, are you
12:36
Speaker 4: concerned about whether or not they'll be able to prove
12:39
Speaker 4: their innocence if that's what they want to do.
12:41
Speaker 3: So two things I want to bifurcate these issues for
12:47
Speaker 3: the rain Drops, So everything you just laid out accurately, Carlos,
12:52
Speaker 3: I'm going to put in the category of media impact,
12:56
Speaker 3: the cancelation of Watch What Happens Live, the reshuffling of
13:00
Speaker 3: the new edit that's going to be necessary, for the
13:03
Speaker 3: White Swap series and anything else, you know, whether or not.
13:07
Speaker 3: I think it's being reported that cameras are up to
13:10
Speaker 3: now already start pre record for the new season of
13:13
Speaker 3: Potomac Housewives. So all of that I'm going to put
13:16
Speaker 3: in the category, Carlos, of media impact. That's over there.
13:21
Speaker 3: Let me first address legal impact. Okay, So from the
13:25
Speaker 3: legal impact space, here's what we know so far. Like
13:29
Speaker 3: you said, they had been arrested following the indictment, which
13:32
Speaker 3: is general procedure, they immediately posted fifty thousand dollars bond
13:37
Speaker 3: apiece and they were released. That is typical. So for
13:41
Speaker 3: anybody wondering was that abnormally high or low? That is
13:44
Speaker 3: a standard kind of rate, if you will, for release
13:49
Speaker 3: given the charges and the amount associated, which is around
13:52
Speaker 3: half a million dollars worth of kind of damages being claimed.
13:58
Speaker 3: You know, I think it's a to know, Carlos, like
14:01
Speaker 3: the fact that insurance fraud is a very specific kind
14:06
Speaker 3: of criminal activity. I say that because unlike let's say,
14:11
Speaker 3: tax fraud, which we've seen before with Teresa Judae and
14:16
Speaker 3: her ex husband, which you know, you were a huge
14:19
Speaker 3: producer for Teresa in the series, it's a little different, right,
14:23
Speaker 3: because in tax fraud and even tax evasion, typically you've
14:28
Speaker 3: got third party players. You've got the accountants, you've got
14:34
Speaker 3: other tax specialists conceivably that I think can help create
14:39
Speaker 3: defense arguments that lend themselves to more creativity. Said another way,
14:46
Speaker 3: you could blame it on the accountant. You can say
14:48
Speaker 3: I didn't know. You can do things of this nature. Now,
14:51
Speaker 3: they're not always successful, which is why Judice is deported
14:54
Speaker 3: to this day and Theresa did prison time and they
14:57
Speaker 3: were convicted. So I'm not saying that that's get out
15:01
Speaker 3: of jail free card. I'm simply saying for the rain
15:03
Speaker 3: drops that that from a legal defense strategy point, which
15:07
Speaker 3: is what we're talking about in this part of the conversation,
15:10
Speaker 3: it gives you more opportunity, perhaps to have alternative arguments
15:15
Speaker 3: for the defense. But when you're talking about an insurance
15:19
Speaker 3: claim in the way in which we're hearing these facts
15:22
Speaker 3: that it was indeed doctor Wendy and Eddie directly themselves
15:27
Speaker 3: picking up the phone and asserting these claims straight to
15:31
Speaker 3: their insurance companies. And let's be clear, there were three
15:34
Speaker 3: different insurance companies allegedly involved here, right, so we know
15:38
Speaker 3: that there's allegedly a claim against Travelers Insurance, Home Site Insurance,
15:45
Speaker 3: and a third insurance company known as Jewelers Mutual. Okay,
15:50
Speaker 3: so all three of those insurance companies are at play. Allegedly,
15:55
Speaker 3: all three insurance companies had claims filed directly from the
16:00
Speaker 3: oseppos around costs associated with items and contents in this
16:05
Speaker 3: alleged burglary. The reason I'm saying this, Carlos, is that
16:09
Speaker 3: could make it more difficult from the defense posture because
16:14
Speaker 3: according to the Sheriff's department, and we learned a lot
16:18
Speaker 3: of this information during that press conference that the local
16:21
Speaker 3: sheriff's department and state attorney held. Now, I want to
16:24
Speaker 3: be clear, Carlos King, Like a lot of folks, I
16:27
Speaker 3: didn't like that we got that press conference. And let
16:29
Speaker 3: me tell you why. Yeah, I didn't like it at all.
16:33
Speaker 3: It gave cloud chasing, It gave happy to be seen,
16:39
Speaker 3: especially during the Q and A when the sheriff to me,
16:41
Speaker 3: had a couple of very cringey moments where he's kind of,
16:46
Speaker 3: you know, kind of trying to be cute with the
16:50
Speaker 3: press that was in present. You know, Oh, do you
16:53
Speaker 3: watch the show? I don't watch the show. It was
16:55
Speaker 3: too tongue in cheek. It was too casual for something
16:58
Speaker 3: of this magnitude, don't you and I see you not?
17:00
Speaker 3: You agree, right?
17:01
Speaker 4: Couldn't wait to ask you about that because I wanted
17:03
Speaker 4: to ask you, you know, when the share first of all,
17:05
Speaker 4: a press conference in general, for like, for a situation
17:08
Speaker 4: like this. In addition to him asking the reporters, I
17:11
Speaker 4: don't care if she's a real housewife or an old
17:13
Speaker 4: housewife and asking the reporter, I mean, do you watch it?
17:16
Speaker 4: It's okay, admit it, I thought like, look, I understand
17:20
Speaker 4: this relaciousness surrounding this particular situation with them being celebrities,
17:25
Speaker 4: but I thought it were going to focus on the law.
17:27
Speaker 4: And I want to ask you this, is it normal
17:29
Speaker 4: for a press conference to be held under these circumstances?
17:33
Speaker 3: No, no, no, Carlos King, absolutely not. It is highly atypical.
17:38
Speaker 3: Now they're gonna say in their defense that doctor Wendy
17:42
Speaker 3: and Edward are Seppo, are not typical defendants, which is true.
17:45
Speaker 3: And this is true. This is true of all of
17:47
Speaker 3: us that choose to live our lives publicly. We often
17:51
Speaker 3: lose some of the protection that what so called private
17:55
Speaker 3: citizens continue to enjoy. We talked about this a little bit, Carlos.
18:00
Speaker 3: We talked about the the Frost and their and their son. Right,
18:04
Speaker 3: So the law does treat public figures differently. It does,
18:09
Speaker 3: and whether it's criminal, as we're seeing in this case,
18:13
Speaker 3: or whether it's civil, which we've also seen, whether it's libel.
18:17
Speaker 3: And you know, the standard of proving that somebody has
18:19
Speaker 3: defamed a so called celebrity famous person is much higher
18:24
Speaker 3: than it is if someone tried to defame Carlos King
18:27
Speaker 3: or Giselle Bryant, because you know that bar becomes raised
18:31
Speaker 3: according to your profile. Quite frankly so in this case,
18:34
Speaker 3: because doctor Wendy and Edward Osseppo have Eddie have decided
18:40
Speaker 3: to live their life publicly, this Sheriff's department is set.
18:43
Speaker 3: It is claiming that they're getting overwhelmed with so many
18:48
Speaker 3: media inquiries and that I believe that. I believe. I
18:51
Speaker 3: do believe everybody from TMZ to local outlets, to national
18:56
Speaker 3: network news, to cable news, to every blow and content
19:01
Speaker 3: creator known demand was calling their phone, emailing them asking
19:05
Speaker 3: about the latest and greatest with doctor Wendy and Eddie
19:09
Speaker 3: and these charges. I believe that. And also did they
19:12
Speaker 3: have to take the step of having a press conference,
19:15
Speaker 3: a televised press conference. They did not, So that was
19:18
Speaker 3: a choice. Further to me, Carlos, if you're gonna do that,
19:22
Speaker 3: to say, hey, let us address the entire public at
19:25
Speaker 3: one time, let us give everybody the same information, so
19:30
Speaker 3: everyone's dealing with the same facts. I could buy that.
19:34
Speaker 3: You know where they lost me, Carlos, was the Q
19:36
Speaker 3: and A because normally, let's think back to other press
19:39
Speaker 3: conferences we've seen recently. We saw press conferences with Sean
19:43
Speaker 3: Combs's trial. We've seen press conferences with Meg the Stallion's case,
19:48
Speaker 3: the Tory Lanez shooting. We've seen press conferences recently with celebrities.
19:53
Speaker 3: And nine out of ten times, after the law enforcement agency,
19:57
Speaker 3: the cops or the sheriff or the distri attorneys speaks,
20:01
Speaker 3: what do they do, Carlos, They say, no questions, thank you,
20:07
Speaker 3: we will let you know if we have updated information,
20:10
Speaker 3: and they leave the podium. That's typically what that looks
20:13
Speaker 3: like when you're really to me about the business. But
20:17
Speaker 3: when you start entertaining Q and A and questions and
20:21
Speaker 3: chit chat and small talk at the podium, that's giving
20:25
Speaker 3: an alternative agenda for me. That's giving a different intentionality,
20:28
Speaker 3: and I didn't like that on behalf of If those
20:31
Speaker 3: were my clients, I would have held a counter press conference.
20:34
Speaker 3: Quite frankly, if I represented the Osfos Carlos, Oh baby,
20:38
Speaker 3: oh baby. Now, my clients wouldn't have been there, but
20:42
Speaker 3: I would have been, Ebany K. Williams. That's why I
20:44
Speaker 3: would have been there, greeting the press and letting them
20:47
Speaker 3: know that my clients are horrified by the charges. They
20:50
Speaker 3: are horror bied by the accusations. They're loving on their
20:53
Speaker 3: three babies. They look forward to defending themselves and against
20:58
Speaker 3: these heinous accusations. And please believe, this is America still.
21:03
Speaker 3: This is America still where we presume and enjoy the
21:07
Speaker 3: presumption of innocence, and we can't wait for all the
21:10
Speaker 3: facts to come out. Thank you and have a nice day.
21:13
Speaker 3: Oh y'all would have got that if I was a
21:14
Speaker 3: Vince counsel. Absolutely.
21:19
Speaker 2: I want to ask you this.
21:20
Speaker 4: In their statement, somebody outlined to me, Ebany that there
21:26
Speaker 4: wasn't this proclaimed in a sense that most released statements
21:31
Speaker 4: and press releases have under people who are being prosecuted
21:36
Speaker 4: for a crime. Do you think the omission of yourself
21:39
Speaker 4: are saying, and you know, we proclaim our innocence and
21:44
Speaker 4: we can't wait to defend in the court. Is that
21:47
Speaker 4: omission something that raises eyebrows to you too much.
21:51
Speaker 3: Into that I could hear someone being curious or speculative.
21:55
Speaker 3: We don't do a lot of speculation here with what
21:58
Speaker 3: we do. We really follow the facts, and I'm proud
22:01
Speaker 3: of that for us, Carlos. So, I wouldn't go too
22:03
Speaker 3: far down a rabbit hole that says because there wasn't
22:06
Speaker 3: a staunch defense in the way in which we want
22:10
Speaker 3: to hear it or we're used to hearing it, that
22:12
Speaker 3: that could be interpreted as takeed admission. No, No, I
22:15
Speaker 3: wouldn't say that. I would say the statement was extraordinarily broad,
22:20
Speaker 3: extraordinarily general, and it leaves space for a lot of
22:23
Speaker 3: different things. It leaves space for a staunch, adamant defense
22:27
Speaker 3: that could go to trial. It leaves space for the
22:31
Speaker 3: prosecution's case falling apart pre trial. It leaves space for
22:36
Speaker 3: cooperation while a plea bargain of some sort being worked
22:42
Speaker 3: on or worked out, so a litany of things could happen.
22:45
Speaker 3: And that statement, to me gives us no real indication
22:48
Speaker 3: as to where this will go.
22:49
Speaker 4: Based on the stuff you ran the court documents, Should
22:53
Speaker 4: Eddie and Wendy be very concerned because it appears that
22:58
Speaker 4: the state has a good case.
22:59
Speaker 2: Again, well, I.
23:01
Speaker 3: Certainly think the state has a case. Now, let's go
23:03
Speaker 3: to standards. Let's go back to the law school one
23:05
Speaker 3: oh one, Let's go back to how do you get
23:07
Speaker 3: how does one even get to the place of indictment,
23:10
Speaker 3: because that's that's not always a guarantee. You know, there's
23:16
Speaker 3: a saying a prosecutor can indict a ham sandwich. That's
23:20
Speaker 3: becoming less and less than less true. People the public,
23:23
Speaker 3: social media, the people are less and less inclinent these days,
23:27
Speaker 3: Carlos king to just indict because a prosecutor says so. So,
23:31
Speaker 3: I do want to alert rain drops that this prosecution office,
23:36
Speaker 3: this state's attorney's office, this sheriff's office, and their investigators
23:41
Speaker 3: did have to present evidence in front of a grand jury,
23:45
Speaker 3: and that grand jury decided based off of the paperwork
23:51
Speaker 3: any witnesses that testified everything that came before them via
23:54
Speaker 3: as evidence, they decided it was fifty one percent likely,
23:58
Speaker 3: meaning more likely than not, that the allegations were true.
24:03
Speaker 3: That Eddie and Wendy indeed worked in cooperation with each
24:09
Speaker 3: other conspiracy. That's hence the conspiracy piece to commit insurance fraud,
24:15
Speaker 3: to claim lost money around items totally up to the
24:21
Speaker 3: maximum of their insurance policies, that four hundred and fifty
24:24
Speaker 3: thousand dollars mark, to recover those funds in a way
24:29
Speaker 3: that was fraudulent and fictitious and erroneous. I do think
24:35
Speaker 3: it's important to note, as much as I hated the
24:38
Speaker 3: Q and A, it did give us some facts. The
24:41
Speaker 3: one question I thought was valuable, Carlos, was when one
24:43
Speaker 3: of the journalists asked the sheriff, what made you suspicious?
24:47
Speaker 3: People found insurance claims every day in this country, many
24:51
Speaker 3: of them for high dollar amounts. But he said, the
24:54
Speaker 3: fact that it was at the policy max four hundred
24:57
Speaker 3: and fifty thousand dollars, that was a little bit concerning,
25:01
Speaker 3: But we still carried out an investigation per the reported burglary.
25:06
Speaker 3: But the fact that then the social media was displaying
25:10
Speaker 3: that we saw the twenty five thousand dollars diamond anniversary
25:13
Speaker 3: ring allegedly showing up on social media after it was
25:17
Speaker 3: in the claim. Now some of y'all perused the comments.
25:21
Speaker 3: Several people commented, including real housewife of Atlanta of Portia
25:26
Speaker 3: Williams that, Hey, wealthy people, celebrity people, people with means
25:32
Speaker 3: often get dupes made of their high worth jewelry items.
25:37
Speaker 3: You know, they'll get a jeweler to make a dupe
25:40
Speaker 3: of an engagement ring, anniversary band, even a watch. Right.
25:46
Speaker 3: I think it's an interesting argument. I think that there's
25:48
Speaker 3: going to be an argument made. But this is also
25:51
Speaker 3: very easy to prove true or not true, Carlos, because
25:54
Speaker 3: most of these high end jewelry items, you know, take
25:57
Speaker 3: off any number of those wealthy items you're wearing now,
26:01
Speaker 3: those wealthy items you're wearing now, honey, and we're gonna
26:04
Speaker 3: see indicators on the inside, right, whether it's engravements, whether
26:08
Speaker 3: it's fourteen care of Goals stamps, twenty four carric you know.
26:11
Speaker 3: So while it's an interesting, exciting defense possibility, it's going
26:17
Speaker 3: to be very easy to shoot it down or make
26:19
Speaker 3: the case. You know, was it a duke, was it
26:21
Speaker 3: not a duke. We're going to figure it out real
26:22
Speaker 3: clean again. I think that if I had to point
26:27
Speaker 3: to a piece that the state is arguing evidence, why
26:30
Speaker 3: is Carlos? That is most concerning from a defense strategy.
26:34
Speaker 3: It's the emails. It's the email. The fact that the
26:38
Speaker 3: sheriff talks about that on the receipts that were submitted
26:42
Speaker 3: by the oscephos themselves. See that's also not great. That's
26:46
Speaker 3: not a great. Fact is that a lot of the
26:48
Speaker 3: evidence that the prosecution is alleging to hold came straight
26:54
Speaker 3: from the defendants, not their handlers necessarily, not their accountants.
27:00
Speaker 3: I was saying, third party, not their business managers. No, no, no,
27:03
Speaker 3: this came straight allegedly from doctor Wendy and Eddie. The
27:07
Speaker 3: receipts to prove the valuation to get them to that
27:10
Speaker 3: four hundred and fifty thousand dollars insurance cap total. And
27:14
Speaker 3: on some of those receipts were email addresses from both
27:18
Speaker 3: Wendy and Eddie. And on those email addresses, that's how
27:21
Speaker 3: then the law enforcement was able to because how do
27:24
Speaker 3: you access somebody emails?
27:25
Speaker 1: Right?
27:25
Speaker 3: That's private?
27:26
Speaker 1: Right?
27:27
Speaker 3: They were a because you gave it to me, I
27:30
Speaker 3: now get to execute a search warrant on that basis
27:33
Speaker 3: as law enforcement. And when I execute my search warrant, Carlos,
27:37
Speaker 3: I now get to pull up the content of those emails.
27:40
Speaker 3: You essentially gave me your emails. See they got to
27:43
Speaker 3: connect all these dots when we give people evidence, okay,
27:46
Speaker 3: and when they did that, they're able to now see
27:48
Speaker 3: emails from Eddie saying Hey, Wendy, And this is the
27:54
Speaker 3: conspiracy allegation. This is where that comes in, Hey, can
27:57
Speaker 3: you give me more high value items so that we
28:01
Speaker 3: can meet this inventory requirement to reach the four hundred
28:05
Speaker 3: and fifty thousand dollars maximum threshold on our insurance policy.
28:09
Speaker 3: That's that's a line of facts, Parloughs that gets us
28:13
Speaker 3: to conspiracy allegedly and fraud allegedly.
28:17
Speaker 4: Based on that email alone. Excuse me, based only email alone?
28:22
Speaker 2: Is it?
28:24
Speaker 4: Is it going to be hard for the defense to
28:28
Speaker 4: try to rationalize why someone would suggest to their wife, hey,
28:36
Speaker 4: add more stuff on this claim so that we're able
28:40
Speaker 4: to reach the maximum. Is that alone at least account
28:45
Speaker 4: of guilt versus the other seven he's facing it.
28:48
Speaker 3: I can't say it's a count of guilt. I can
28:50
Speaker 3: say it's going to be difficult depending on This is
28:53
Speaker 3: why jury is so important. You know, can you convince
28:56
Speaker 3: a juror one of twelve presumably that when you said, hey, baby,
29:02
Speaker 3: can you add some more hot ticket items to this list?
29:05
Speaker 3: So we can get to the number we're supposed to
29:07
Speaker 3: get to. Can you find a juror that interprets that
29:10
Speaker 3: as Hey, honey, I forgot how many Chanelle flats you have?
29:15
Speaker 3: Can you remind me so that we can make sure
29:17
Speaker 3: that we're covering all our bases here. If you can
29:21
Speaker 3: convince a juror to a juror to interpret it that way,
29:26
Speaker 3: you're in good position. I think that's gonna be hard.
29:31
Speaker 3: I think most jurors are gonna hear that email and
29:34
Speaker 3: interpret it as hustle. But this is where there, this
29:39
Speaker 3: is where who their lawyer is is gonna matter a lot.
29:43
Speaker 3: And if this goes to trial, who is on that
29:46
Speaker 3: jury is gonna matter a lot. You see how just
29:50
Speaker 3: the I can give you the same the same email,
29:52
Speaker 3: but I can. I could argue it, Hey honey, you
29:56
Speaker 3: have such an enormous wardrobe, you have so many great items.
29:59
Speaker 3: Was it was it the gucciese? Was it the Chanelle's?
30:01
Speaker 3: Was it the van she helped me out? Or girl?
30:05
Speaker 3: You know what, you know what it is, you know
30:06
Speaker 3: what we're trying to do over here, Go ahead and
30:09
Speaker 3: ask some more to this. Because we were a little light,
30:11
Speaker 3: we're a little light on the balance, same facts, but
30:15
Speaker 3: I'm arguing in it in two different ways. How successful
30:19
Speaker 3: can you be as a litigator in getting your jewelry
30:22
Speaker 3: to buy the version you need them to buy. That's
30:25
Speaker 3: the brilliance of a good lawyer.
30:26
Speaker 2: I know we have a short amount of time.
30:27
Speaker 4: I want to get a few more questions before I'll
30:30
Speaker 4: let you go. In the case of Teresa and Joe,
30:33
Speaker 4: Judai is one of the arguments that the defense team
30:37
Speaker 4: didn't make was Teresa had no idea what she was
30:40
Speaker 4: signing on behalf of being a wife to Joe. Joe said,
30:44
Speaker 4: my wife had nothing to do with it. I did
30:46
Speaker 4: everything give her leniency. A lot of people did feel
30:50
Speaker 4: ebony that based on just Teresa being guilty based on
30:54
Speaker 4: signature alone.
30:56
Speaker 1: That's the only sort of proof they had was her signature.
30:59
Speaker 1: That because she was a celebrity, our best were off
31:02
Speaker 1: and they were made an example out of the ones
31:05
Speaker 1: they were.
31:06
Speaker 2: They were both found guilty, but they both served.
31:11
Speaker 4: They're sentencing at different times because they wanted to at
31:16
Speaker 4: least have one parent be with their minor children.
31:18
Speaker 2: In this particular case, you have a.
31:20
Speaker 4: Married couple who are both accused of fraud. Do you
31:23
Speaker 4: see a world where Eddie can say I did everything,
31:27
Speaker 4: I'm guilty. Wendy had no idea what was going on.
31:31
Speaker 4: In order for this not to be something where our
31:33
Speaker 4: kids have to suffer for this, I am guilty. Give
31:39
Speaker 4: her leniency and give me and throw the book at me.
31:42
Speaker 3: Could it happen? Sure? Will this? Will that be a
31:46
Speaker 3: harder sell for Wendy than it was for Teresa. Yes,
31:50
Speaker 3: and let me tell you why. First of all, let
31:52
Speaker 3: me say, because they do have the three small children.
31:55
Speaker 3: If worst case scenario for the Oseephos they were both
31:58
Speaker 3: convicted and both got active jail sentences, I don't see
32:02
Speaker 3: a world in which they're made to serve them concurrently.
32:05
Speaker 3: I do believe at the same time, at the same simultaneously. Rather,
32:11
Speaker 3: I do believe they will get to serve them back
32:13
Speaker 3: to back for the exact same reasons you said the
32:15
Speaker 3: JUDI were able to do.
32:16
Speaker 1: So.
32:17
Speaker 3: Here's where Wendy's rightful in my opinion, rightful ownership and
32:25
Speaker 3: pride of her education and savvy and brilliant and academic
32:33
Speaker 3: excellence will work against her. Now, I don't want to
32:36
Speaker 3: say speak out a turn about Teresa, but I'm not
32:39
Speaker 3: familiar of Teresa having an extraordinary academic background. I'm not
32:44
Speaker 3: familiar with Teresa having extraordinary academic or professional pursuits as
32:50
Speaker 3: it relates to esteemed intelligence or accolades. I'm not aware
32:56
Speaker 3: of that. We are aware of wind having at least
33:02
Speaker 3: four academic professional degrees. We're aware that Wendy has worked
33:08
Speaker 3: very successfully in academia and professionalism and media broadly. So
33:14
Speaker 3: when if Wendy, excuse me, if Eddie were to make
33:17
Speaker 3: the case that you laid out Carlos your honor. We
33:21
Speaker 3: you know we've been convicted. This is all on me.
33:24
Speaker 3: Throw the book at me. My wife had nothing to
33:26
Speaker 3: do with it. She didn't know. She was ignorant to
33:29
Speaker 3: what I had going on and what I was doing,
33:32
Speaker 3: and she thus should be held harmless. That's gonna be
33:37
Speaker 3: hard for a judge to buy Carlos when everybody knows,
33:42
Speaker 3: and it's public record that your wife is brilliant. Your wife,
33:47
Speaker 3: some could argue, is more educated than you are. Counselor Ocevo.
33:53
Speaker 3: It's certainly to be believed that she is a woman
33:56
Speaker 3: of extreme brilliance, high intelligence, and documented academic record. So
34:03
Speaker 3: this court would find it difficult to believe that she
34:06
Speaker 3: was near about as ignorant as you would lead us
34:09
Speaker 3: to think based off this argument. See the difference.
34:14
Speaker 2: Yeah, I do, I do, I do.
34:16
Speaker 4: And what's interesting is Eddie is a lawyer. Even based
34:20
Speaker 4: on the fact that a lawyer is being accused of fraud,
34:25
Speaker 4: in a harder case for the defense to even say
34:30
Speaker 4: that Eddie may not have known what he was doing
34:32
Speaker 4: and did not have that intent when he was sending
34:36
Speaker 4: these emails and when everything else happened. And the part
34:41
Speaker 4: be that question is do you think based on this
34:43
Speaker 4: that there's a possibility of him being disbarred?
34:46
Speaker 3: I answer the first part first, Yes, he's held to
34:50
Speaker 3: a higher standard. No, he will not have an easy
34:53
Speaker 3: time making a defense claim of I didn't know. I'll
34:56
Speaker 3: prove it to you, and I'll take some risk here, Carlos.
34:59
Speaker 3: Let's say you and I had a contract going on.
35:03
Speaker 3: Because I am an attorney and still hold a law license.
35:08
Speaker 3: I'm not active in North Carolina now, but I still
35:12
Speaker 3: have my license, right, the contract would be construed more
35:17
Speaker 3: strictly against me than you. Even if the nature of
35:22
Speaker 3: the contract was just you sold me a baloney sandwich
35:26
Speaker 3: for two dollars, you could say, well, I didn't know
35:29
Speaker 3: she was expecting it to be fried. And if I said, well,
35:32
Speaker 3: yea right, No, of course I wanted it to be fried.
35:34
Speaker 3: Everybody knows a baloney sandwich contract is a fried sandwich.
35:37
Speaker 3: The court would say, none, no, no, Miss Williams. One of
35:40
Speaker 3: y'all two went to law school. One of y'all two
35:42
Speaker 3: took a bar exam. One of y'all two passed it.
35:46
Speaker 3: You did, Miss Williams, So you should know that if
35:48
Speaker 3: you expected your baloney sandwich to be fried, show it
35:53
Speaker 3: to me in the four corners of the document where
35:55
Speaker 3: you specified that you wanted a fried baloney sandwich for
35:57
Speaker 3: the price of two dollars. See how that worked. The
36:00
Speaker 3: contract is construed more strictly against the person with formal
36:05
Speaker 3: legal training and legal experience. And just to show you
36:09
Speaker 3: how minutia this plays out, because I've actually seen this.
36:11
Speaker 3: This is a great line of questioning. By the way, Carlos,
36:13
Speaker 3: you don't sometimes understand the brilliance of the minutia of
36:17
Speaker 3: what you asked. Let's say this was me and a
36:20
Speaker 3: law student. That law student would have some some burden,
36:24
Speaker 3: but I would be held to a higher standard because
36:27
Speaker 3: I completed law school and passed a bar. But if
36:30
Speaker 3: it was you and the law student in a contract,
36:34
Speaker 3: the law student would be held to a higher standard
36:37
Speaker 3: than you. So they really do interpret it on a
36:41
Speaker 3: case by case basis. If this was, you know, a
36:45
Speaker 3: first year lawyer, maybe a little more leeway. To my knowledge,
36:50
Speaker 3: Eddie is at least to think about as old as
36:52
Speaker 3: I am. So Eddie is about twenty years in the game.
36:55
Speaker 3: As an attorney that goes they have they cut us
36:59
Speaker 3: very little margin. The expectation is that we know what
37:02
Speaker 3: we sign, we know what we report, we know what
37:05
Speaker 3: we call in, and we know what the hell we're doing.
37:08
Speaker 3: That is the presumption. Now I'm not saying it's impossible
37:11
Speaker 3: to argue your way out of that, but that is
37:13
Speaker 3: going to be a very high threshold. The same thing
37:16
Speaker 3: basically that has afforded the cephos rightfully. In my opinion,
37:20
Speaker 3: prestige and deference and respect are all things that are
37:27
Speaker 3: going to be held against them respectfully as it relates
37:32
Speaker 3: to crafting a believable successful defense in a case involving fraud.
37:37
Speaker 4: Last question, ebid K Williams, based on what you read,
37:41
Speaker 4: based on your expertise, does ebny K Williams think those
37:46
Speaker 4: cephos will serve jail time, whether it's the maximum fifteen
37:50
Speaker 4: years or six months or whatever.
37:52
Speaker 2: Do you think they'll ultimately serve jalp If they.
37:55
Speaker 3: Are convicted, they will serve time. And part of that
37:58
Speaker 3: I don't like in the sense that if that was
38:02
Speaker 3: Mary Joe and Bobby Smith, I don't know that I
38:06
Speaker 3: would give you that same answer their first time offender.
38:08
Speaker 3: If they are convicted, they will be first time offenders.
38:12
Speaker 3: It is a nonviolent crime, not saying that it is
38:14
Speaker 3: a harmless crime, but it is a nonviolent crime. We
38:17
Speaker 3: all can agree on that, as certainly we have seen
38:21
Speaker 3: cases where people get probation and not what we call
38:24
Speaker 3: non custodial sentences. But to me, this Sheriff's office, this
38:29
Speaker 3: state prosecutor have already told us Carlow's king that they
38:33
Speaker 3: are making examples out of these wealthy, famous black people.
38:38
Speaker 3: They are. We know that from the press conference alone,
38:43
Speaker 3: and we also know that Clock t when that state
38:47
Speaker 3: attorney came out and one of the first things he
38:51
Speaker 3: said out of his mouth was don't think of insurance
38:54
Speaker 3: fraud as a victimless crime. He didn't have to say that,
38:58
Speaker 3: did you Clock Tea on that? Because that was making
39:02
Speaker 3: sure The first foundational premise of his remarks was that
39:06
Speaker 3: this impacts you and me. This impacts every American that
39:12
Speaker 3: folds an insurance policy and any capacity, and all of
39:16
Speaker 3: us are impacted negatively. When people go about the business
39:20
Speaker 3: of committing insurance fraud, all of our premiums rise, all
39:24
Speaker 3: of our coverage decreases. He went into all of that
39:27
Speaker 3: first and foremost. That is an indicator, Carlos, that they
39:31
Speaker 3: intend to be as harsh and scrutinizing as legally possible
39:38
Speaker 3: in this particular matter. And I don't like that. I
39:41
Speaker 3: will tell you objectively, whether those semples are guilty or
39:44
Speaker 3: not is not my business or even at this point
39:47
Speaker 3: my concern. What I am concerned with is the fairness
39:51
Speaker 3: of this process right now, and that indicates to me
39:55
Speaker 3: that there is a tipped balancing of the scales as
39:59
Speaker 3: it relates to the intentionality going into the case, and
40:03
Speaker 3: I do not like that. So I think that they
40:05
Speaker 3: if they are convicted, they will serve an active jail sentence.
40:08
Speaker 3: I don't think there is any question about it. And
40:10
Speaker 3: I think that that was determined at the onset of
40:13
Speaker 3: the case because of all the facts that have been
40:16
Speaker 3: laid out, because of who it is, because of how
40:20
Speaker 3: they are perceived as wealthy, as black, as affluent, as
40:25
Speaker 3: highly educated, and if this political, and don't think for
40:30
Speaker 3: one second, Carlos, that the politics of the moment aren't
40:32
Speaker 3: at play, because they are. They absolutely are. And there
40:37
Speaker 3: is a cultural backlash that is happening in America again,
40:41
Speaker 3: whether they're guilty or not. That says some of you
40:45
Speaker 3: negroes have gotten way too much and we don't like it,
40:50
Speaker 3: and we are looking to course correct in every way
40:53
Speaker 3: available to us. And I think that is also very
40:56
Speaker 3: much at play.
40:56
Speaker 2: Thank you, m k Williams.
40:59
Speaker 4: I would love to bring you back as further information
41:03
Speaker 4: arise from this unfortunate situation. And like Ebany K Williams said,
41:08
Speaker 4: rain Joss, remember they are innocent until proven guilty. So
41:11
Speaker 4: thank you, Ebany, give my best at Baby Liberty.
41:13
Speaker 3: Thank you dearly, See you soon by rain Drops.
41:18
Speaker 1: Reality with the King is executive produced by me Carlos King,
41:23
Speaker 1: produced by Lizzie Nimitz, and a partnership.
41:27
Speaker 2: With the Lack of Effect Network.
41:29
Speaker 1: You can also find us on my YouTube channel at
41:32
Speaker 1: the Carlos King Underscore