Latest / NO FILTER / Season 1_ Sidebar 10(M4A_128K)

Transcript

Season 1_ Sidebar 10(M4A_128K) · NO FILTER

0:10
Speaker 1: Hi, and welcome to this week's Proof Sidebar. We're here
0:13
Speaker 1: this week with Senda Davis and Kevin Fitzpatrick discuss episode
0:16
Speaker 1: twelve of our series on Caine Story and Lee Clark.
0:24
Speaker 2: Hey guys, Hey, Susan, how are you.
0:27
Speaker 1: I'm good? Ye had this episode we talked about Angela Bruce,
0:32
Speaker 1: the state's most comprehensive witness who is the only direct
0:35
Speaker 1: source of their theory of this case. They use Angela
0:39
Speaker 1: Bruce a trial to spell out the whole theory about
0:41
Speaker 1: the free Birds and the you know, the gang revenge
0:44
Speaker 1: killing and the pillow and all that. But we talked
0:47
Speaker 1: to Angela Bruce ourselves and got a very different answer.
0:51
Speaker 2: You know, we took a road trip to find Angela Bruce,
0:54
Speaker 2: and we weren't convinced she'd want to talk to us
0:56
Speaker 2: or be willing to talk to us. And I remember
0:58
Speaker 2: pulling into her driveway and she stepped outside, you know,
1:01
Speaker 2: even before we really got out of the car, And
1:04
Speaker 2: it took a few minutes for her to warm up
1:06
Speaker 2: to us. But when she did, she seemed like she
1:11
Speaker 2: wanted to get this off her chest.
1:13
Speaker 1: Yeah, it was no shock to me that she cannid.
1:17
Speaker 1: Her story seemed false from the person I read it,
1:21
Speaker 1: and I really was not surprised that you can't, but
1:25
Speaker 1: I was surprised by some of the specifically, and she
1:27
Speaker 1: told us about what had happened back then.
1:31
Speaker 3: I remember sort of in the whole investigative production process
1:35
Speaker 3: of this show that YouTube very early on were so
1:40
Speaker 3: adamant that this woman may hold some of the keys
1:43
Speaker 3: to what actually happened, and that you needed to find her.
1:47
Speaker 3: And I think that maybe what doesn't become clear and
1:50
Speaker 3: the production was how much time and effort you found
1:54
Speaker 3: you spent on actually tracking her down and sort of
1:57
Speaker 3: driving around to different states looking, you know, to try
2:00
Speaker 3: and get her to actually talk. And I remember getting
2:04
Speaker 3: a phone call from Decinda saying that you guys have
2:09
Speaker 3: found her and that it was sort of amazing, sort
2:12
Speaker 3: of an exciting moment.
2:14
Speaker 1: Yeah. Well, she for one thing, this is true for
2:16
Speaker 1: a lot of people in the case we spoke to.
2:17
Speaker 1: She had no idea that Lee and Kane were still
2:20
Speaker 1: in prison, like a lot of other witnesses. She assumed
2:22
Speaker 1: they've been out years ago, been paroled or something like
2:25
Speaker 1: the jurors too, so she was surprised to learn that
2:27
Speaker 1: they were both still certain life sentences, and I think
2:30
Speaker 1: that may have possibly influenced her decision to tell us
2:33
Speaker 1: what really happened.
2:34
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think so too. I mean, like you said,
2:36
Speaker 2: she's not the only one who has said that to us.
2:38
Speaker 2: It seems like we're these witnesses deliberately misled into thinking
2:43
Speaker 2: these kids would get a lighter sentence. Who knows, but
2:47
Speaker 2: it feels almost like that's what happened.
2:52
Speaker 1: And when we spoke to her, she also was able
2:53
Speaker 1: to clarify some of the parts of her story that
2:56
Speaker 1: had never made sense before. And it goes back to
2:58
Speaker 1: the Something we see again in the game in these
3:00
Speaker 1: cases is that most of the time, witnesses who are
3:04
Speaker 1: making up stories don't make them up out of whole cloth.
3:08
Speaker 1: It is rare to encounter witness who makes up a
3:10
Speaker 1: story just from start to finish. What they usually do
3:16
Speaker 1: is what Angela did, which will start with some basic
3:18
Speaker 1: truths and then blend them into a story that fit
3:21
Speaker 1: whatever narrative with our story she was aiming to have,
3:25
Speaker 1: which explains how Capries came part of the story and
3:28
Speaker 1: how when she told when the cops apparently came to
3:30
Speaker 1: her and said, we need to priest be part of
3:31
Speaker 1: this whole story about the confession of your trailer. She
3:35
Speaker 1: talks about the little blue or black car that the
3:38
Speaker 1: blonde girl drove up in, and it seems the element
3:41
Speaker 1: of truth to that is that at some point of
3:42
Speaker 1: this party, a girl named Jessica, who was strawberry blonde,
3:47
Speaker 1: not blonde but sort of red blonde hair color, did
3:50
Speaker 1: drive out in this car with another blonde girl and
3:54
Speaker 1: possibly picked up Phil's story, who was very drunk, says Angela,
4:00
Speaker 1: became the genesis of the capriste, came to get lead
4:03
Speaker 1: in Caine's story.
4:04
Speaker 2: Yeah, you're right, there are elements of truth. There was
4:07
Speaker 2: a party. Phil's story was at the party, Caine was
4:11
Speaker 2: at the party. A blonde or strawberry blonde drove up
4:16
Speaker 2: to the party at some point in a blue black car.
4:18
Speaker 2: Like all of those things seemed to be true. So
4:22
Speaker 2: the question is how does the rest of the story
4:24
Speaker 2: develop from that point?
4:25
Speaker 1: Though, with the assistance of the police, it would appear,
4:31
Speaker 1: such as the introduction of the pillow to the story.
4:33
Speaker 1: And as Angela told us, she's like, I don't know
4:35
Speaker 1: why a pillow is part of it doesn't make any
4:36
Speaker 1: sense to me, But a pillow was part of the
4:39
Speaker 1: story anyway, because the cops seemed to have been convinced
4:41
Speaker 1: that the pillow was somehow used, despite the lack of
4:43
Speaker 1: any evidence that that could have been the case.
4:46
Speaker 4: She seemed, even now after all these years, oddly focused
4:51
Speaker 4: on this idea of getting teenagers out of the party
4:54
Speaker 4: like alcohol, which I couldn't quite figure out why she
4:58
Speaker 4: was still so focused on that.
5:00
Speaker 1: So, according to Angelo, she was threatened with criminal charges
5:05
Speaker 1: and threatened that her kids would be taken away as
5:06
Speaker 1: a result of the illegal things she had done, which
5:10
Speaker 1: she says involved the presence of underage people at this party,
5:13
Speaker 1: which there were quite a few. Her place is kind
5:16
Speaker 1: of the party place where people young teens included could
5:19
Speaker 1: go and hang out and drink and not have printal
5:22
Speaker 1: figures tell them to stop it.
5:25
Speaker 3: She was still just so focused on that concept, like
5:27
Speaker 3: saying that she almost suggesting that she hadn't done anything
5:30
Speaker 3: wrong with it wasn't the lead in the story.
5:33
Speaker 1: In my mind, but for her, it was the pressure
5:36
Speaker 1: point that was used all those years ago, and she
5:38
Speaker 1: still is focused on it. And Angela says that she
5:43
Speaker 1: does not recall her trial testimony. But you know, I
5:47
Speaker 1: we've mentioned before, I have encountered witnesses that have literally
5:50
Speaker 1: forgotten they ever testified, and I believe them. In this case,
5:54
Speaker 1: I'm not so certain. I believe that Angela has actually
5:56
Speaker 1: forgotten her trial testimony. And there could be a lot
5:59
Speaker 1: of reasons Angela would say that, and one of them
6:01
Speaker 1: is that she's possibly fearful of perjury charges. If she
6:05
Speaker 1: were to admit that she did testify at the stand
6:08
Speaker 1: and gave false testimony, well that would be essentially admitting
6:12
Speaker 1: to a crime.
6:13
Speaker 3: Correct me if I'm wrong. But she just walked into
6:15
Speaker 3: a firestorm, too right. I mean, she wasn't even living
6:18
Speaker 3: there when Brian Bolin shot no.
6:21
Speaker 1: A couple months later she moved to town and heard
6:24
Speaker 1: about the case. And then a month or two she
6:25
Speaker 1: moved to town. She had this party that Phil's story
6:29
Speaker 1: and his nephew Kane.
6:30
Speaker 2: Appeared at, and Smitty.
6:32
Speaker 1: And Smitty, and Smitty and Smitty.
6:35
Speaker 2: Someone sent a message to us about when you ask
6:39
Speaker 2: what does Smitty look like? And Kane's uncle says, a
6:44
Speaker 2: pile of bones.
6:48
Speaker 1: And one sort of side point that I got fixated
6:50
Speaker 1: on for a while has to do with the pillow
6:52
Speaker 1: thing and where the origin of Angela Burug's story came
6:56
Speaker 1: about how Lee and Kane confessed of putting a pillow
6:59
Speaker 1: over Brian had before shooting him, and we told her
7:02
Speaker 1: that the pillow in question was a couch cushion. She
7:04
Speaker 1: was like, what what? That doesn't make any sense. How
7:06
Speaker 1: would go over someone's head? You know our point exactly,
7:09
Speaker 1: But I still think what may have happened is that
7:11
Speaker 1: the cops realized before they talked to Angela that the
7:14
Speaker 1: pillow in question did not have a hole all the
7:17
Speaker 1: way through it. It had a hole that only went
7:19
Speaker 1: part way through or something. It's it's again, we don't
7:22
Speaker 1: know for sure because there's not really good records here,
7:24
Speaker 1: but I wondered if they got Angela tell a story
7:27
Speaker 1: about the pillow over the head to explain theoretically how
7:30
Speaker 1: could have entered partially through the pillow and hit Brian
7:33
Speaker 1: but not exited the whole way.
7:36
Speaker 3: Well.
7:36
Speaker 2: Also, I've always wondered, like if the confession wouldn't have
7:40
Speaker 2: to be an exact match it, I mean, if we
7:43
Speaker 2: don't Lee wasn't even at this party. But that's the
7:45
Speaker 2: theory that Lee and Kan are at this party and
7:47
Speaker 2: they're confessing, no matter what they say or the details,
7:50
Speaker 2: just them saying they did. It would be pretty damning evidence.
7:55
Speaker 1: It would, but the cops would definitely want it to
7:57
Speaker 1: match your theory as much as possible. For me, this
7:59
Speaker 1: is the big red flat an Angela's story and why
8:01
Speaker 1: it should have caused everyone involved in the case to
8:03
Speaker 1: double take and been skeptical. What she said to say
8:06
Speaker 1: is that everything Angela says in her statement is confirmation
8:10
Speaker 1: of things the cops already knew. She gives a statement
8:12
Speaker 1: that perfectly recaps what the police believe at that point
8:16
Speaker 1: without adding any new information, and that to me is
8:20
Speaker 1: a strong sign that it's a story being repeated based
8:22
Speaker 1: on what the cops had told her. We also had
8:25
Speaker 1: a part that was didn't get included in the episode
8:28
Speaker 1: about how the party actually ended. Now we've mentioned before,
8:30
Speaker 1: the Angela's story changes a lot about how it ends.
8:32
Speaker 1: She says at one point that you know, the party
8:34
Speaker 1: just wrapped up at four am and everyone home can included.
8:37
Speaker 1: Then she says that she pulled a knife on Lin
8:39
Speaker 1: and Kane to make them leave, And she says that
8:40
Speaker 1: Capriese pulled up and they lean Kane drive away with
8:43
Speaker 1: her and her little black or blue car. But I
8:45
Speaker 1: asked Kin about how the party actually ended. And here's
8:49
Speaker 1: what he told me.
8:51
Speaker 5: And then.
8:54
Speaker 2: Okay, and that was nothing about nothing.
8:58
Speaker 5: Oh, I have no idea what that was.
9:01
Speaker 3: Did you talk to a police officer that night?
9:04
Speaker 5: No, matter of fact, we lived long after that.
9:07
Speaker 3: Did an officer see you there that night?
9:11
Speaker 5: Yeah? Everybody there.
9:16
Speaker 3: So yeah.
9:17
Speaker 1: One thing we don't know for sure is exactly how
9:20
Speaker 1: the cops found Angela Bruce. She didn't know. She told us.
9:23
Speaker 1: She's like, someone must have talked or told HI about
9:24
Speaker 1: the party. I don't know how they found me. They
9:25
Speaker 1: just did. But given the patrol officer was at the
9:28
Speaker 1: party that night looking for someone else, I've wondered that
9:31
Speaker 1: they saw came there and they passed us on to
9:33
Speaker 1: Dallas Battle and that's how they got to Angela.
9:36
Speaker 2: But yeah, that makes sense if they noted that, Hey,
9:39
Speaker 2: Kane story was at that party we busted.
9:41
Speaker 1: Up, yep. And if there's a report possibly that even
9:46
Speaker 1: describes him being there, that's interesting to know. But at
9:48
Speaker 1: this point we just don't have the full details about
9:50
Speaker 1: how Angela came to be. So, yes, as we discussed
9:53
Speaker 1: the episode, Angela's story that she told us is in
9:56
Speaker 1: terms of figure out what happened in this case, it's
9:59
Speaker 1: monumental she able to clarify what really happened in the
10:02
Speaker 1: investigation and at this party. But for a lot of
10:05
Speaker 1: post commction cases, or for all of them, really finding
10:08
Speaker 1: out what really happened is often not the important part. Legally,
10:13
Speaker 1: being able to prove what really did happen, or even
10:15
Speaker 1: be able to prove innocence, in no way guarantees that
10:19
Speaker 1: a defendant will have any success in challenge their conviction
10:22
Speaker 1: in court. And for a lot of reasons, Angela Bruce's
10:26
Speaker 1: regentation by itself is probably not going to be significant
10:31
Speaker 1: evidence without more because in Georgia, recanting witnesses are very
10:37
Speaker 1: much his favorite evidence. Their statement in court under oath
10:41
Speaker 1: is presumed to be true. The only exception is if
10:44
Speaker 1: the witness has been convicted of perjury. Now this is
10:49
Speaker 1: problematic because it obviously means that people are not likely
10:52
Speaker 1: to come forward to recant or to explain that they
10:54
Speaker 1: lied before if they know that the only way their
10:57
Speaker 1: testimony can be useful or their statement can be useful
10:59
Speaker 1: is if they actually think crime.
11:01
Speaker 2: Wow.
11:01
Speaker 3: But one question I have then is if she were
11:04
Speaker 3: to say that she were coerced into saying something, does
11:07
Speaker 3: that not make a difference with her changing her story.
11:10
Speaker 1: Well, Angela Bruce, by her own mission, is a liar.
11:13
Speaker 1: That's what the court will focus on is that she
11:15
Speaker 1: says now she lied back then. But why should they
11:17
Speaker 1: believe her now instead of believing what she said under.
11:19
Speaker 2: Oath right, So they won't take her word for it
11:22
Speaker 2: because what she said during the original trial is not true,
11:26
Speaker 2: So why should they believe what she's saying now is true.
11:29
Speaker 2: You would need someone else who would support her.
11:32
Speaker 1: Well, yeah, you would need something more than recantation. So
11:35
Speaker 1: in Georgia O there's a famous case, the Troy Davis case,
11:38
Speaker 1: where a man was on death row and several witnesses
11:41
Speaker 1: I witness came forward to say they made it all up.
11:44
Speaker 1: They were canted their stories so they didn't see him there.
11:47
Speaker 1: And it's from for to Georgia rule that recantations by
11:50
Speaker 1: themselves were not relevant and he was executed.
11:53
Speaker 5: Wow.
11:54
Speaker 1: We also got a question this week from Josephine Trott.
11:56
Speaker 1: She wrote to say, I'm wondering what the latest six
11:59
Speaker 1: three ruling from Preme for the United States saying that
12:01
Speaker 1: convictions can't be appealed even if new exciptorial evidence is
12:04
Speaker 1: found means for Leeds and Josh chances of getting out.
12:07
Speaker 1: What Josephine's referring to is the recent decision released on
12:11
Speaker 1: Monday of this week in Hindi or maras. I honestly
12:14
Speaker 1: didn't think this ruling would be issued, even from the
12:18
Speaker 1: current court, which is extremely unfavorable towards defendan's rights, are
12:22
Speaker 1: towards constitutional protections for criminal defendants. But the ruling in
12:27
Speaker 1: that case has to do with two death row prisoners
12:31
Speaker 1: in Arizona who are challenging their sentences. One of them
12:35
Speaker 1: is challenging it in the grounds of mitigation the court
12:39
Speaker 1: or the jury and not properly consider the fact that
12:41
Speaker 1: he admitigating evidence he had lo IQ, he had abuse
12:43
Speaker 1: from his background, and that should have been brought to
12:45
Speaker 1: their attention. The other one has maintained innocence and says
12:49
Speaker 1: he's not guilty of the crime he's comed of committing
12:52
Speaker 1: and there's some very strong scientific evidence to show that,
12:56
Speaker 1: and that to show that he could not have been
12:57
Speaker 1: the one to cause the injuries that killed the victim
12:59
Speaker 1: in this case. Now, despite the strong evidence of innocence,
13:04
Speaker 1: so the lower court overturned the conviction. Arizona appealed, and
13:08
Speaker 1: it's now before Scotus and Arizona's position in oral arguments
13:13
Speaker 1: for the court was innocence isn't enough and that under
13:16
Speaker 1: our system, finality matters. There's only so many opportunities that
13:22
Speaker 1: can be given to defendants to try and challenge it.
13:25
Speaker 1: And if a defendant is unlucky enough to have two
13:27
Speaker 1: different sets of bad counsel, that's their problem, and they're
13:31
Speaker 1: not allowed to complain about what occurred at them. So
13:34
Speaker 1: even though there's this strong evidence of innocence that if
13:37
Speaker 1: the jury had known about, they would not have convicted him,
13:39
Speaker 1: that doesn't matter because innocence isn't enough and finality is
13:43
Speaker 1: more important, and it'd be an infringement in states rights
13:45
Speaker 1: for the Supreme Court to step in and uphold the
13:50
Speaker 1: trial court's decision to over rules condition. Now this means
13:56
Speaker 1: for Lee and Canyon particular, this particular ruling does not
14:00
Speaker 1: apply to them. It's a federal case, meaning it applies
14:03
Speaker 1: to cases being appealed to federal courts from state courts.
14:07
Speaker 1: There have been no appeals or no post conviction proceedings
14:09
Speaker 1: whatsoever for Lee, so there's nothing that could be appealed
14:13
Speaker 1: up to the federal courts at this time. But it
14:16
Speaker 1: does indicate that for defendants all of the United States
14:21
Speaker 1: that they have additional hurdles are not even hurdle. That
14:25
Speaker 1: implies the way past it that they're now barred from
14:28
Speaker 1: raising certain claims of innocence if the procedural wins aren't
14:32
Speaker 1: in their favors.
14:34
Speaker 3: Lifting mm hmm.
14:35
Speaker 5: Yeah.
14:35
Speaker 1: It was a really devastating decision and I think plainly
14:39
Speaker 1: wrong on its face. I think the reasoning is at
14:42
Speaker 1: odds with the statues that it's a shit show. The
14:45
Speaker 1: ruling to be totally honest, and it's devastating for the
14:49
Speaker 1: defendants that'll apply to and it indicates that this court
14:52
Speaker 1: is going in a very dark direction. It does very
14:54
Speaker 1: much see this court will uphold the principle that the states,
14:58
Speaker 1: the federal government have the right to execute innocent person
15:01
Speaker 1: if they don't meet certain procedural bars about when they
15:05
Speaker 1: can actually assert that and the fact they're innocent is
15:08
Speaker 1: not enough because they lost the game. They're convicted, they
15:10
Speaker 1: had a chance and they failed, so the state has
15:12
Speaker 1: the right to kill them or either of them prison
15:15
Speaker 1: for the rest.
15:16
Speaker 3: Of their lives. I was reading this article in The
15:20
Speaker 3: Guardian that just send this sentiment, and then the Innocence
15:25
Speaker 3: Project actually released the statement where they say, quote today's
15:29
Speaker 3: Supreme Court decision makes it much harder to secure justice
15:33
Speaker 3: for wrongfully convicted people end quote. So they're clearly not
15:38
Speaker 3: excited about it.
15:40
Speaker 1: No one is. I mean, the whole criminal defense bar
15:44
Speaker 1: is up in arms about it because it's just that
15:46
Speaker 1: terrible of a ruling. And even though this will only
15:48
Speaker 1: apply directly to a certain subset of cases that happened
15:51
Speaker 1: to be in this procedural posture, it's just the greater
15:54
Speaker 1: implications of it suggest that even existing law that's favorable
15:58
Speaker 1: to defendants right now, which is few and far between,
16:00
Speaker 1: if it goes up to appeal for the court, they're
16:03
Speaker 1: likely to strike it down. So whatever protections we thought existed,
16:06
Speaker 1: as soon as they are well those who may not
16:09
Speaker 1: exist either.
16:11
Speaker 2: So, Susan, A lot of people wrote in specifically about
16:16
Speaker 2: the last bit of the episode where you're on the
16:19
Speaker 2: phone with Lee and you play a clip of Angela
16:23
Speaker 2: Bruce apologizing to him, and basically I think she asks
16:26
Speaker 2: she says, I hope you can forgive me a lot
16:28
Speaker 2: of people were really touched by that and moved. They
16:31
Speaker 2: felt sympathy for Angela too. A lot of people. A
16:34
Speaker 2: couple of people wrote in saying, you know, if your
16:37
Speaker 2: children are being friend they could understand why she would
16:39
Speaker 2: do that, But the majority of people who wrote in
16:41
Speaker 2: talked about Lee and how heartbreaking it was to hear him, finally,
16:46
Speaker 2: after all these years, to hear what he's believed all
16:50
Speaker 2: along be confirmed. So how I you know when you
16:54
Speaker 2: were talking to him on the phone, and how did
16:57
Speaker 2: that make you feel? When he's thanking you for finding this?
17:02
Speaker 1: It's hard in this case. I mean I almost say
17:07
Speaker 1: all the cases that I work on to not just
17:08
Speaker 1: carry on the sick feeling at times when you come
17:12
Speaker 1: across something that's so demonstrably wrong, and yes, you can
17:17
Speaker 1: bring it to light, but there's also the knowledge that
17:20
Speaker 1: that doesn't fix things. And Lee knows this as much
17:24
Speaker 1: as anyone like. He's well aware that, you know, what
17:27
Speaker 1: happens in course is not what happens in the real world,
17:31
Speaker 1: and that even proof of his innocence would in no
17:34
Speaker 1: way guarantee that he could actually raise a challenge to
17:37
Speaker 1: his conviction. But despite knowing that, for him, and I
17:43
Speaker 1: guess I hadn't quite anticipated this. It was even whether
17:46
Speaker 1: or not it matters legally. It was profound for him
17:49
Speaker 1: to hear her set the record straight because he's been
17:51
Speaker 1: living with her accusation for twenty five years, and just
17:54
Speaker 1: to have her say like, no, that didn't happen. No,
17:56
Speaker 1: Lee did not do this to him, was a really
18:00
Speaker 1: powerful moment. And I think, as he acknowledged on the show,
18:05
Speaker 1: like it was her that stopped his appeal, his direct
18:08
Speaker 1: appeal for Roger's conviction from being successful, because the court
18:12
Speaker 1: found that all the ovans of the Freebird's gang, well
18:15
Speaker 1: all the other events of the Ruber Frebird gang was
18:16
Speaker 1: not admissible. It was in valid and come in. But
18:20
Speaker 1: none of that matter because angel said it happened. Angela
18:22
Speaker 1: said there was a freeword gang. So therefore there's there's
18:24
Speaker 1: no reason to concern themselves with the problems in the
18:28
Speaker 1: trial court's rulings.
18:29
Speaker 3: I don't think we can put ourselves in a position
18:33
Speaker 3: to imagine what's going through Lee's mind, and we're not
18:36
Speaker 3: sitting there for two and a half decades, and must
18:40
Speaker 3: have been some victory inside him for maybe people will
18:44
Speaker 3: understand at least now. The thing that stood out to
18:47
Speaker 3: me was, I was there when you two told Glenn
18:53
Speaker 3: about Angela Bruce and provided him with this statement, and
18:57
Speaker 3: I remember being sort of shocked the time because there
19:01
Speaker 3: was not much of a reaction from him, and his
19:03
Speaker 3: response was sort of like, you're not telling me something
19:05
Speaker 3: I don't already know. I know that you lied. And
19:10
Speaker 3: I remember that moment being stunning because just because he
19:15
Speaker 3: has the truth, it didn't matter because he in his
19:18
Speaker 3: mind he already had the truth, right, he already knew
19:23
Speaker 3: and in a way it was didn't change anything in
19:27
Speaker 3: his mind.
19:29
Speaker 1: Yeah, sure, having it confirmed is great, but like you said,
19:32
Speaker 1: common sense don't mean anything in the courtroom. So the
19:37
Speaker 1: fact that she said this by itself, I mean, it
19:40
Speaker 1: just it's not news to him, and there's no guarantees
19:44
Speaker 1: that it will ever help Lee's case. That doesn't mean
19:48
Speaker 1: it won't, though I would caution a note because Angela
19:52
Speaker 1: Bruce is not the only source of information here about
19:54
Speaker 1: what happened. The big hurdle is that this case has
19:59
Speaker 1: all the docum it's missing mostly the DA's lost their
20:02
Speaker 1: entire file. And if what Angela Bursu is saying is true,
20:05
Speaker 1: well there is likely to be records in there that
20:07
Speaker 1: would confirm it, and those records just don't exist any
20:09
Speaker 1: more accordant to the DA, But that doesn't mean there's
20:12
Speaker 1: not documents somewhere that might support what she had to say,
20:16
Speaker 1: and that would change things significantly.
20:20
Speaker 2: So, you know, the other interesting thing to point out
20:22
Speaker 2: is that, you know, Glenn kind of knew this in
20:25
Speaker 2: his soul all along, that Angela was lying, and Lee
20:28
Speaker 2: thought so too, And now that's been confirmed. That's the
20:31
Speaker 2: opposite of what Bryan's family has believed and was told
20:35
Speaker 2: all these years. And they've been very open to us,
20:39
Speaker 2: you know, inviting us into their homes and talking to us,
20:43
Speaker 2: and they have questions, but up until now they believe
20:48
Speaker 2: the opposite of what Lee and Glenn believed, and I
20:52
Speaker 2: think it's it's been a journey for them as well,
20:54
Speaker 2: and it takes a lot of faith and character to
20:56
Speaker 2: let someone kind of reinvestigate a case where a loved
20:59
Speaker 2: one has been murdered, knowing that what we find might
21:04
Speaker 2: not be what they thought had happened.
21:13
Speaker 1: Just to know the episode next Monday, we're off Memorial Day,
21:16
Speaker 1: but we're back the Monday after that with the penultimate
21:19
Speaker 1: episode in our series on Lee, Clark and Kaine's story.
21:25
Speaker 1: If you have any questions for future cyber episodes, don't
21:27
Speaker 1: forget to send them our way through email, Twitter, Facebook
21:30
Speaker 1: or Instagram. On all social media we are Proof Crime Pod.
21:33
Speaker 1: You can find me on Twitter at the VF Melow
21:35
Speaker 1: two and on Instagram at Soo simp and you can
21:38
Speaker 1: now find Just Send on Instagram too, I just send
21:41
Speaker 1: up proof