EP. 64 - PETITO CASE PART 2
Hi, this is Colin McCallin. Thank you for listening. Please do us a favor and leave us a five star review wherever you get your podcasts and subscribe so that you don't miss any future episodes. Thank you.
Welcome to this legal here. Your hosts attorney called and Russell Hebets.
Hi everyone. This is Colin McCallin. Back with the, is this legal podcast as always. I'm joined by my partner in crime Russell Hebets hello? Hello. Hello. How's everybody doing out there? We hope.
Well, um, last episode we talked about out the Gabby Petito homicide case, uh, that is really still kind of a, a fluid ongoing thing. And we got a lot of feedback. We had a lot of questions, um, about some of the things that we discussed on that episode and we decided, well, maybe it's time for a part tour, right? Yeah. And we also go got some new information we did. Right. And we promised on the last episode to update everyone who was getting all of their news from us. <laugh> so here you go. Promised kept breaking news this just in <laugh>. Right. Um, you know, but we know that there's a lot of discussion in the nation about this case.
It's a, I mean, it's, it's a tragedy. Uh, and yet I think people are kind of trying to wrap their heads around it and figure out how it's gonna conclude. I mean, at the moment, Brian Laundrie is still in the wind he's been gone now for about a month. We have no idea if he's dead, no idea. If he's alive, no idea if he's in the country or not. That's right. Uh, but we got some new information and um, so we're going to make this part two of Gabby Petito. So, uh, some of the new information that we got Russ that we did not have at the last episode was we now have a coroner's report. We now know a lot more about how Gabby Petito died. That's right. We have an actual statement from Dr. Trent blue, the Teton county coroner earlier. They had already determined that it was a homicide, but that was all we knew.
We didn't know if it was a gunshot, a knife wound. We had no idea what the cause of death was. We don't have a ton of new information, but we do have a cause of death. The cause of death of Gabby Petito was strangulation. That's correct. And you know, we're gonna talk a little bit about strangulation generally, but we're also gonna of course, try and focus on what it can reveal about this case. Um, you know, strangulation is something and I, uh, we had a lot of training on this back when we were deputy district attorneys. Um, but I think that strangulation, um, is really something that has been kind of a point of emphasis in recent years in the criminal justice system. And what I mean by that, Russ is there have been a lot of pushes including in our state Colorado to, to really isolate a strangulation case and show that it is different than other types of domestic violence, right.
That that's right. And it's, and it's different largely because there is such a high risk of death, right? From strangulation, exactly absent, like punching someone or hitting someone or pushing someone, you know, strangulation has a high risk of death. But before we get into the details of that, cuz I, I do want to go into that. Like how did Dr. Trent blue know its, how do coroners make that decision? And the answer is probably old news for people who watch CSI all the time. But ultimately he, what he did is he basically does an autopsy where he is looking at the tissue of the neck, both superficial and deep tissue. Andre. What you're able to do is you're able to track the vector of blunt force and you're able to see how much force was applied and where it was applied. And you're able to make that determination.
There is also oftentimes in strangulation cases, little pin pricks of blood in the eyes and in the organs. And so in the skin, what's that called? We're talking about petechiae is the term you're talking about. Exactly. And that comes from asphyxiation, right? So that is another clue. So basically this corner went through and said, based on an exam of the body, we can see exactly where the force was applied. We can tell the vector of force and we can tell this as a strangulation case. Absolutely. Now it's important to note, there's a chance for more forensics to be recovered. It's super rare, but it's possible to leave fingerprints on someone's neck. It's possible to leave DNA. So right now the FBI I'm sure is, is looking into that and seeing if they can match any forensic data to Brian laundrie. Exactly. You know, the other thing that I, I think contributes to why, um, strangulation CA cases are getting a lot more attention is not only do we have some more medical advances to detect, uh, you know, I mean, you're talking about a forensic examination, uh, in an autopsy report, but we also, we also know that a person can, um, suffer really serious, uh, debilitating injuries if not death, by just being strangled for a very short amount of time.
And it does not take, um, very much in terms of pounds per pressure, uh, to choke somebody to the point where they could die. I mean, if you break their windpipe, that's it, they can't breathe. And, and uh, it doesn't take a lot of, uh, force to do that. So, you know, in strangulation cases, there's no requirement that a person be strangled for a set period of time or that both hands be around the suspect. I mean basically if a person saying they're strangled, they're gonna be charged with a strangulation type of an assault case, Russ and, and, and uh, I think that's due to a lot of, I guess, medical knowledge that we now have about, uh, how severe these cases can end up that that's absolutely right. And, you know, kind of building on what you said, how in recent years places have taken it more and more seriously jurisdictions have like in Colorado, there's its own crime now.
Right. And it's normally to be a felony assault in Colorado, you need to have what's called serious bodily injury or assault with a deadly weapon. Yes. Um, and so what used to happen and his, uh, district attorneys would used to charge, uh, a strangulation call, uh, case by what we call second degree assault. And they would name hands as deadly weapons. Well, it's a deadly weapon hands. Yeah. A few years recently though, uh, back recently, the legislature actually decided to say, now we're actually gonna make second degree assault its own, uh, strangulation, uh, type of, of crime. And it, it, it honestly makes it a little bit easier for the prosecution to prove these cases due to again, the severity of a strangulation case. It does. So, so Russ, let's talk about, we've talked a little bit about strangulation generally. Let's talk about, uh, what strangulation means in the case of if we're looking at Brian Laundrie as the potential murderer for this, uh, does it strengthen that hypothesis that he is the killer or does it weaken it?
So, you know, anyone who's followed any of the news stories is gonna tell you that it absolutely strengthens it because it fits right in with this, this story of this just tumultuous, passionate relationship where he was angry and he lost control. And while he lost control, he not meaning to maybe he strangled her and choked her to death. No, no. I mean, a lot of what you said though is supposition. I mean, you're assuming he lost control. You're assuming that that loss of control immediately caused him to snap and strangler. This could have been a premeditated crime. We have no idea. We have no idea. And all of that is speculation. All of that. Like there's, there's news media talking about how this was a crime of passion and saying that, you know, well, it's less, it's, it's less serious us if you will, or it's, he should be less culpable in some I've seen, I seen some stuff on that too, where it it's like, if, if, and, and we're gonna correct some what I think is misinformation out there, because I think some people are saying, oh, he, if they catch him, he'll be able to argue that this death, this homicide was somehow justified, but he, because he was in the throes of, of, of heat of passion or something like that.
Right. And, you know, heat of passion is in fact a defense, but it's not a complete defense. Right. Okay. Here's what I mean by that. Uh, first of all, if he is, if, if he does ever get found, if he does ever get charged with her homicide, okay. That's, those are assumptions that we're kind of making here. But, um, if, if heat of passion is a defense, that means Russ, that he's gonna have to confess yes. To killing her. He's gonna say, yes, I did kill her. But it was because was so enraged. I was out of my mind temporarily, I lost control and I did this horrible thing. And I'm so sorry for it. Right. And, and that is not a defense to a death. That's correct. That doesn't get you off the hook. It's not like the police are gonna be, oh, oh, it was he a passion.
Okay. No charges, no great life. Brian Laundrie. Right. So, so there's a couple important point that we should unpack here. The first one is that it's not a defense, like you're innocent. Then it goes to mens REA. So anyone and that mens REA is mental state when you're committing a crime. So we've done a podcast on this, where we talked all about mens rea, what was the name of that? I don't know. Okay. But there's a podcast out there where you guys should, should listen to it, if you wanna, uh, right. It intent of the actor has to be proven in addition to the act that they committed is essentially the that's essentially what Russ is getting at. So first degree murder is an intentional act, right? You intend to kill someone. So the penalties for a first degree murder are higher than for a second degree murder because it's intent versus maybe knowingly or recklessly.
Right? Exactly. So that's what, that's what that crime of passion defense would do. It maybe lowers the possible penalties, but it doesn't get you off the hook. Well, and, and also it's not like he just gets to come into court and say, look, this was he of passion. I'd like my lesser penalty, please. <laugh> right. If this case goes to trial, he, he can raise that, raise that defense, but the prosecution can disprove it. Absolutely the prosecution. Um, they have the burden of proof. So they, they have, they have the burden of proving, you know what, this wasn't heat of passion. This was either a coldblooded killing or, you know, he wasn't provoked anyway. He just killed her discard, uh, discard that defense jury and the jury can do just that they can say, yeah, we think you're guilty of first degree murder, and we're not gonna buy into this heat of passion defense.
And going back to what you said before, it's really important for Brian Laundrie to bring up the heat of passion defense. The only possible way for him to introduce that defense is to testify. Yeah. And say, I killed her when I was in a heat of passion. That's exactly right. He's not able to say, listen, number one, I didn't kill her. Right. But if you do think I killed her, it was because I was really, really upset. And in the middle of a heat of passion about that, I couldn't control. Right. Pretty ridiculous. Right. That's what we call riding two horses. Very rarely does it work. Right. Um, so yeah, we, we don't think that heat of passion is really something to even be considered right now. We need to learn more coming back though, to what the strangulation tells us, just to, to kind of wrap that up.
First of all, Russ, it tells us something about, uh, murder weapon or a lack thereof. I mean, we, you can strangle someone like we've discussed with your hands. It doesn't require a weapon if this were a blunt force case, for example, you know, at, at that point, investigators might be interested in trying to figure out, okay, how was she killed? Where's the weapon? What did Brian Laundrie do with it here? Um, we know there may not a weapon, no weapon. And, and going back to our earlier podcast, just, uh, two weeks ago, we know now that Brian LA's parents didn't help him get rid of a murder weapon, but that's exactly right. <laugh> but here's what it also, here's what the coroner's report also, uh, discussed. Uh, she was found on Feb, uh, pardon me, September 18th and the court Warner opine that she had been dead for three to four weeks.
Okay. Now we can use that information because we know she was very much alive during her, uh, domestic violence, uh, and, uh, encounter with the Moab Utah police, which occurred on August 12th. So if we do the math, if she's found on September 18th, we, she must have died about a week or two. After that encounter with the police where she's seen alive, August 30th is the last date she would've been alive. That's correct with that. And, and by the way, um, that timeline, where does, where does the coroner get that timeline assume from science and really important stuff like that, that I'm not really able to articulate right now from, from rate rate of decay of tissue, right? I mean, I, it's not just, uh, spitting in the wind and guessing, I mean, well, I, I tell you, I, I had a case once where the prosecution called in a, it was a death case prosecution called in an insect expert to testify about the, um, the cycle of essentially fly larva.
Wow. And said, based on the size of this larva, here's how long they had been incubating in this dead tissue. And here's the time of death. That's amazing. That's amazing. So there's a lot of different that degree in entomology apparently paid off for that guy. All of a sudden, they're getting expert witness fees. <laugh> what are you gonna do with that degree? A few things solve a few murders. No, no problem. Right. So anyway, moving on, um, what we're gonna do, uh, shortly in just a minute is we're also gonna take a look at the Moab police, because remember, as you may know, from our last episode on this, or if you've been paying attention to this case, the Moab police was called out to, uh, look at a domestic violence encounter between Gabby and Brian on August 12th, shortly before her death. And so what we're gonna do is we're gonna talk about that encounter and, uh, discuss the, I guess, the correctness or lack thereof of the police actions right after we play is this legal with our podcast guest.
Our guest this week is Betsy Duffy. Betsy is a long time listener. She claims to be law abiding, but we're not too sure while she is personally, hasn't had occasion to retain habits of McAllen. She has been able to funnel some business to the firm via her eclectic and morally ambiguous network. As we say here at habits of McAllen, sometimes bad things happen to good people. When this working mother isn't driving around listening to is this legal. She donates her time to a Colorado based charity called Kenzie's causes. Kenzie's works to provide equality for low income children in Colorado with their biggest annual effort coming up at the holiday season toy. Shop Betsy, welcome to the show. Welcome Betsy.
All right, you guys, I'm so excited to be here.
We're excited to have you Betsy. So I've known Betsy for a while. Betsy. She is a working mom. She has two kids. Betsy, how is your newest daughter doing?
Doing well, sleeping through the night. So I'm happy.
And, and how are you doing working fulltime while having a, uh, a very small baby at home?
Well, I have to imagine just taking five weeks of maternity leave was a bold move, but I, I survived and, uh, I'm in my stride now. <laugh>
I, in this, the sleep is so important.
Oh, how old is your daughter? Betsy?
Oh, wow. Okay.
So I'm in it.
Yeah, you're right.
And I'm in my forties. So it's, it's a great combination. <laugh> right.
Oh yeah. I, I think sleep is, is really, you know, they say time is the ultimate currency. I think sleep is the ultimate currency.
Like totally agree. Yeah. Especially with kids and everyone who's out there who has kids is nodding their head listening right now. And everybody who doesn't have kids is nodding and saying, yeah, that's why I don't have kids. <laugh> exactly. Yeah. And if anyone out there is thinking of having kids. Yeah. The sleep issue is gonna be worse than you can possibly imagine. <laugh> so prepare yourself. Uh, is your, is your eight month old? A fan of our podcast?
Not yet, but she will be soon. Give her a couple more years.
Put her right to sleep. <laugh> yep. Yeah.
Well, we have a, we have a good one for you today. Betsy. Colin is gonna lay out this week. Is this legal song? Yeah. You're I mean, you're not only our guest, uh, Betsy, you're a contestant. So, um, okay. I got one question for you. Are you ready to play? Is this legal?
You know it right.
All right. Well, uh, you of course know how this works, cuz uh, you're a fan of the show, but to remind you, uh, our, our listeners, I'm gonna present to you a fictional hypothetical situation. And uh, at the end of it, I'm gonna say, okay, is this legal or not? You'll answer. We'll discuss your answer. And uh, we'll declare you either a winner or a, uh, runner winner. <laugh> we're not gonna say loser, right? No losers is this legal,
So, uh, can I preemptively just guess what I'm gonna, what I'm gonna go with.
Yeah, absolutely. Or even what's your answer?
I mean, I'm always on team JEBEDIAH guys. So I'm just gonna say thatRight now. <laugh>
well outstanding. Okay. So you're gonna definitely hear about JBA and uh, here it goes. Here's your, is this legal, okay. JBA diet. You're taking notes. I don't think you'll need it, but uh, if you need to go ahead, whatever makes you comfortable. So here it goes, Jada is driving his car down the highway. He is driving 65 miles per hour. He knows he's driving 65 miles per hour because not only is he closely monitoring his speedometer, but in addition, he PR he just recently installed one of those governor devices, uh, on his car to cap his vehicle speed at 65 miles per hour because his 16 year old son is just learning how to drive his car.
What's his son's name?
Colin. Um, oh, we didn't come up with, oh, how about Joe fat? Yes. His son, Joseph bat. Good name. All right.
So, uh, all of a sudden JIA sees flashing blue and red lights behind him. He pulls over and officer Cornelius approaches his window. Officer Cornelius asked JIA. If he knows why he pulled him over. J ISA says, no. Officer Cornelia says, well, I pulled you over because you were going 85 miles per hour in a 65 mile per hour zone defiantly JEBEDIAH says there is no way that is possible. And officer Cornelia says it is true. I've got you locked in on my radar gun, JEBEDIAH the, and demands to see the radar gun officer Cornelius smiles and says no and says, why don't you make like a tree and get outta here. <laugh>, it's leave. Make like a tree and leave. You sound like an idiot. When you say that, there you go. And, uh, and then, so he Cornelius then smiles and, and he gives him the citation for going 85 miles per hour in a 65 mile per hour zone. Uh, does not show him the radar gun. Is this legal Betsy?
You guys really gave me a one here. I mean, I'm not. So you're saying he put some device on his car that locks in it at 65 65.
Yeah. Uh, for all those parents out there, there are these things. I think they're actually called governor like, like a governor of Colorado. And you can basically cap your vehicle speed at a certain amount. So that's why, uh, Jebediah thinks that Cornelius is kind of full of it here.
Okay. So, I mean, this is really tough because I don't know. I'm not familiar with this device guys. I mean, does it crack your history?
Is there here's the question, Betsy? Okay. The question is, is it legal for officer Cornelius to give Jebediah the ticket without showing him the radar go, oh,
Okay. I'm gonna go with no, it's not legal It.
So you're saying that, uh, officer Cornelius maybe violated JBA DI's rights by not showing him the radar gun.
Correct. I mean, as I predicted I'm on team Jebediah,
<laugh> you're on team Jebediah. And let me just say this, Betsy, I respect your loyalty and I'm sure Jebediah respects your loyalty <laugh> but unfortunately Jebediah is, uh, dragged you down, uh, with ship on this one. Um, in this particular case, it is perfectly legal for officer Cornelius to say, no, I'm not showing you the radar gun. And here's why this is actually a kind of common question that we get for people who have been sought for speeding, who demand to see the radar gun. Uh, the officers are not obligated to show you that, um, it's an officer safety issue. Actually. They, they don't want the person who's already mad at them to be getting outta their car. Um, you know, unrestrained, um, bad things might happen, especially in this day and age. So, uh, yep. You, you, you are, you, you do not get to see a radar gun, even if you ask for it, but Russ, you know, can you take this in issue to court?
Yeah, exactly. I mean, ultimately Betsy, you are correct because jab then comes and hires us and we go to court and we say, judge, this is absurd or prosecutor. This is absurd. Here's proof. Here's a governor here's proof that he was not speeding and the case gets thrown out. So ultimate, it does wind up going Judi's way. So I think what we're saying is that Betsy's a winner. Betsy Betsy was right. That's congratulations. My steps ahead of us. Woo <laugh> well done. What, what do you think about that? Uh, Betsy, do you, do you agree that that's the way it should be?
Uh, no, I guess When you talk about the off officer safety, you know, that totally makes sense, right? Like you don't want somebody that's all twirled up, you know, getting out of the car, getting into your patrol car, playing with your gadgets. So <laugh> um, yeah, I mean, hopefully the likelihood of that happening is very, very low. Um, but interesting.
Yeah. Well, um, Hey, like I said, there, there are no losers when you play, this is legal. We, we really appreciate you coming on and, uh, uh, giving it your best shot. And you know, you got to spend some time with your good old friends, Jebediah and Cornelius who are always up to no good as you know. Yeah. So, um, we'll, we'll leave it at this. Betsy, is there anything, can you tell us more about Kenzie and um, how people can find out about this awesome organization?
Yeah. Thank you guys. So Kenzie's causes hosts a toy shop in early December, which takes place in six markets throughout Colorado. And during these events, brand new toys are given out to kids who may not otherwise get holiday gifts. Last year, over 15,000 toys were given out and 65% of the recipients came from households earning less than $20,000 annually. So if any list would like to learn more about this particular event or Kenzie's causes, please visit Kenziescauses.org, which is Kenziescauses.org. There's great information on how to donate as well as information on how to attend a toy shop. If you need assistance in getting your kids holiday gifts
And for any listener out there, we will put that link in the description of the episode. So just cruise on down to the description and you will be able to link through to this really, really good cause and help make some kids kids' year. This sounds like the, yeah. Sounds like the time is now. I mean we're mid October. The holidays are right around the corner. Betsy, have you done your shopping yet?
Yeah, neither. I'm I'm more of a last minute type person, which supposedly there's some sort of shortage. Maybe I should get on that.
Oh, okay. Well, yeah, especially this year. I'm sure.
Yeah. That I to get on. It's like, well, thank you so much, Betsy. We really enjoyed having Y thanks for playing. Is this legal and, uh, keep on listening for us. Okay.
Absolutely. Thanks guys. A lifetime. Thank you a day.
Thank you, Betsy. Here we are back. And now everyone else is talking about this interaction with the Moab police. So Colin, why don't we right? I think we should. I think we should. Cuz there are some nuggets here that, uh, I think are worth discussing that people might not know, especially in terms of what, there, there are some mandatory requirements that the police have to follow for a domestic violence case generally. Right? Russ. Yeah. Domestic violence. It brings its whole its own whole new set of rules. Let's talk about what, what, what is domestic violence? Uh, and, and I'm, I'm not talking about general. I'm saying there's a legal term that we call domestic violence. Can we talk about what that means? Domestic violence is essentially any crime that is committed where the victim of that crime is a present or past intimate partner.
That's correct. And there are certain requirements that the police, that district attorneys and the courts, uh, are bound by when they are encountering a domestic violence case. Um, I think the first one that really, uh, is important to discuss in the context of this case is in most jurisdictions in this country, police have these mandatory arrest policies, right? Russ. Yeah. These are, these are obviously jurisdiction by jurisdiction. But as you said, generally, um, the vast majority have mandatory arrest policies, which is what that means is if they're called into a domestic violence dispute and they determine a crime has occurred, right. Then they are obligated by mostly it's their department's policy to arrest one or both of the parties. That's correct. And, and honestly they're trained to just, uh, arrest one because usually a lot of these times, a lot of these instances are where there's only two people, there's two witnesses, there's the offender.
And then there's the victim and you know, the police have to figure out, okay, who is the primary aggressor? Who's the victim, which is very difficult in some circumstances we're about to discuss in this case. So, so they arrest someone, let's say they arrest someone do can do they just give 'em a ticket and then say, here's your, here's your summons into court? Um, we'll see you in a month. Yeah. When your court date comes up, the reason that doesn't happen, Russ is because police officers are trained that in domestic violence situations, uh, there really needs to be kind of a separation slash cool off period. Okay. I mean the, the reason that one party is supposed to be arrested is just to get those two people away from each other. Because of course the last thing that we want to have happen is for, for the police to say, okay, uh, maybe something happened, maybe it didn't, you guys work it out, we're gonna leave.
And then two hours later, one of these people get, gets murdered and that's happened. I mean that these, these things have happened, which is why. Right? Right. That drives a mandatory arrest policy that drives these laws. What are some other things that immediately are gonna happen after someone's been arrested for domestic violence arrest before that man or woman is released? The judge is going to who in most jurisdictions, again, Colorado included is going to issue. What's called a mandatory protection order. That is essentially a restraining order that says you, the charged person may not harass, molest, intimidate the other person. And most of the time it's may not contact. Right. And, and, and, and at is, um, often imposed by a judge, even over the objections of the victim. I mean, the victim might come to court the next day and say, listen, your honor, I love this person.
I don't want to be restrained from them. I I'm, I don't feel unsafe around this person. The judge is often gonna say, okay, that's fine. And Dan, but not on my watch, you guys in a situation that required the police to be called for your own protection and really for the judges as well. Yeah. That's, they're going to, um, they're gonna issue that order. Now that order can be amended down the line, but usually after several days or weeks, uh, that the case is pending. So, you know, that's another safeguard to make sure that these two people aren't reintroduced together. Yeah. And that's essentially judges, you know, they don't want, no judge wants to be the judge who says, okay, you guys can go see each other. And then that night someone's dead. That's exactly right now, Russ, what other safeguards are, are there in these types of cases that aren't necessarily automatic in other types of crimes that, uh, go before a court.
So there's other conditions that can be imposed in these types of cases. A common one is pretrial services, which means you're being supervised before trial. Even though you haven't been proven guilty, you're being supervised by the some arm of the judicial branch and a common requirement in cases like this is GPS monitoring. That's right. They, they put a GPS ankle bracelet on you, uh, that tracks your movements to make sure that you're not trying to contact the victim or go someplace where that person is likely to be found. Yep. They can also, I don't think it was an issue in this particular killer case, but they can also monitor someone for alcohol or drug consumption, things like that. I mean, they can place these things on. They can require a defendant who's charged with these crimes, even though innocent, to proven guilty while their case is pending.
Just to make sure that they're, they're, they're watched. Yeah. Cuz it's all for the purpose of safety. Exactly. Um, um, now none of these things ever happened, uh, with Gabby be Tito and Brian Laundrie. Despite the fact, despite the fact that these policies were in fact, um, enforce with the Moab police department as they are with most police agencies. So we should probably discuss why that's the case or why we think that's the case. Yeah. So let's talk just briefly about the contact that the police had and give a little background. So the police contacted Gabby Petito and Brian Laundrie on the side of the road in reference to a dispute they were having that's right now, there was also a independent witness who called in to 9 1, 1 and said that he saw a male party slapping a female. And last podcast, I had said that that information was not conveyed to the stopping officers, the Moab police officers, we actually did find out since then.
So there's some more new that we have. So I'm still updating you guys. I got your back. Is this a retraction? Right? Well, this is, this is this a, it legal retract. <laugh> it's maybe a small retraction. So apparently, um, that information was actually given to them via dispatch. It wasn't SWT upon, but was mentioned in the dispatch that these officers received the radio dispatch. And when I'm saying dispatch, I'm saying basically someone from like headquarters or 9 1, 1 called and said, Hey, we also have a witness who says he saw a male party slapping a female party. So they did in fact know that when they got there, right. But when they got there, Colin, what did they see? Well, I took the Liberty of watching the entire one hour and 17 minute, um, body cam video that is on YouTube. You could find it, uh, very easily.
If you search Petito body cam, um, the entire interaction between the police and both Brian and Gabby is captured. And it it's. I mean, first of all, it's disturbing to watch because of, of course what we know, uh, hindsight being what it is, but I will tell you, it, it, it is fascinating from, from this kind of discussion that we're having because, um, the police will elected not to arrest anybody. The police basically used discretion to say, we're not gonna take either of you into custody now. Now here's why I think this is, this is interesting. Um, you all can watch the video for yourself and, you know, make your own conclusions, but there's a lot of footage of Brian. There's a lot of footage of Gabby, um, basically in terms of what do they say? Um, so the police show up, they do the right thing.
They separate both of them. They get Gabby in the back of one of the patrol cars and they, they have Brian about 50 yards away and they start interviewing both of them. All right. Now, Gabby does not have any apparent injuries on her. And I think that's noteworthy because Brian Laundrie did, um, mean Gabby. There, there, there appear to be from what you can tell and she's wearing shorts in a tank top. There's no bruises, there's no cuts. There's no lacerations. Um, there's no like red marks. I mean, she, she, she looks like she's completely uninjured. She doesn't complain of any injuries. Um, Brian has visible cuts, um, you know, bruises all around his face. And, uh, and uh, actually says, look, these came from Gabby now in terms of how this was reported, Gabby kind of says, we were both fighting. We had both been fighting over little things.
These are two people in a van together and things kind of escalated. And she said, things got physical. She says that she hit Brian in the arm while he's driving. Um, and then she was like, kind of hitting him. I, at one point she says, I think with her phone, um, Brian kind of confirms that that's the case. He even admits saying, you know, yeah, I touched her too, but it was really to get her off of me. I mean, she was hysterical. She was acting kind of crazy. She was coming at me. I was trying to fend her away. So, so hindsight being what it is like you could look at it and say, well, this is a manipulator. This is someone who was just playing against the police with what he knew they wanted to hear. But you know, the police don't know that at the time.
Right. And, and that's interesting, Russ, I've been thinking about that because mean, again, the, the viewer can make their own conclusion, but I think that Brian comes across as very calm, very chummy with the police. Uh, they're kind of joking around, you know, he it's, it's kind of that, that interaction where he is like, oh, you know how you know, crazy girls can get, but he doesn't really call Gabby crazy. You know, he says, you know, you know how girls can get, but I don't want anything to happen to her. You know? And Gabby, um, she is visibly upset. She's crying during the encounter. There are times where she's trying to catch her breath, but she is also saying some of the things such as look yet, we both got upset at each other, but we love each other. We're gonna get married. I don't feel unsafe with him.
You know, uh, it became clear that neither of them wanted to report the other for any sort of criminal wrongdoing. Um, I'll tell you the, I think the, I guess if there is one part in that video that is difficult to watch, um, in, in, in viewing it is, is there's a brief period where the, the cops are huddled together, deciding what to do. And they start talking about the very stuff that Russ and I were talking about. Uh, you know, do we want to take one of these people in, we get a restraining order, make 'em bond outta jail, the whole nine yards in the end, the officers elect not to do that. They're kind of looking at the situation. They're like, okay, these people are from outta state. Uh, their only, um, lodging is this van that they're living in together. All of their possessions are together in this van.
Um, they don't want to have the other arrested. They're saying that they want to make up and move on. And so basically the police say, you know what we're gonna do. We're gonna cut you both loose. We're gonna require you guys to be separated for the night. Um, but we don't want to drag you guys into jail. And, and by the way, I think it's clear from watching the video. I think that if anybody was going to get arrested, it was going to be Gabby. They're talking about whether or not they believed that she was the primary aggressor, right. She didn't really deny that. Yeah, Brian at no point indicated that he was the primary aggressor. And of course he's the one with, with injuries, with injuries. And, and, and that, I know that that's something that the media has also talked about. Russ, Russ is a distinction between, uh, how the law treats a man versus a woman in this situation under the law.
No, there's no difference whatsoever. There's not a different statute. There's not a different treatment. It is uniform as far as written law. Now how it's actually, you know, enforced could be, you know, one thing that strikes me is, you know, and maybe this case, I don't know, I, I will admit that I didn't watch all the body cam, but I will tell you that I think police need more training in the cycle of domestic violence. You know, so what Russ is talking about of course is, is this, this idea that after a domestic violence event, between two people, there is this cycle that happens where the offender, um, is very remorseful. Very apologetic says the right things brings flowers. There's an interview. They call it the hearts and flowers date. Right? Right. They, they, you know, they, the, the person demonstrates remorse. Maybe these two people are financially intertwined.
Maybe they have children together where there's an interest in keeping the family unit together. And the idea is, is that the victim eventually returns to her abuser. Of course, we look at that in a common sense, far away, point of view and say, how can that happen? Well, that, it's how it happens. And there's a lot of scientific literature about the, the cycle of violence. But I will tell you this Russ, I mean, in watching, in watching this body cam I, uh, and you know, that I will often be critical of the police when, when it's warranted. Right. I, I find it very difficult to, to call a question what they did in this case, based on you knew at the time, I mean, you know, the, the notion that in an hour and 15 minutes, uh, they're supposed to be able to determine whether or not they're dealing with the potential killer, um, or a volatile situation.
That's gonna end up with somebody dying. I, I, I think that's really, really farfetched now, of course you can argue, is this, is it case going to make police officer or make police agencies look at their own procedures and take away all the discretion of the officers? Just, we're just gonna assume that, uh, anybody that we encounter could be a coldblooded killer, maybe that's gonna happen well, and that's the way it's been going, right. Honestly, because you know, you, you never wanna be the officer investigates, Brian and Gabby and lets him go and then turns out that, you know, someone ends up dead a few days later. Yeah. I mean, it's tragic. And, you know, honestly, even if they had arrested Gabby in this case, which is what they were looking at, be for all the reasons you already articulated, you know, that probably keeps her alive.
I know. And, and that, and that's the sad thing. He's like, you know, I, but I, I really, I think these officers did a fine job. I think they did the best they could under the circumstances. And, you know, it's only because we know what we know now where we're second guessing this and, and, and this encounter us, we were talking about it before we started recording. I mean, we watch body cams all the time. This presents like 99% of these cases. And, and so how are you, how are you supposed to be able to predict the future and figure out what's best for these people? Yeah, it it's so, so difficult. And, you know, I mean, a as you said, you know, we're not, we're not shy about criticizing the police, but you know, just the police do have an incredibly difficult job. Yeah.
They have an incredible amount of pressure. They are tasked with these impossible decisions and they're expected to make the right decision 100% of the time. And it's just, it's it's well, let's remind, let's remind our listeners on this topic too. I mean, it it's somewhat relevant that neither Brian or Gabby wanted the other to go to jail. Right. But it's not their call. Is it Ross's it's I mean, they don't get this. No. This notion of pressing charges that we have is a myth. We've discussed that in prior podcasts. If, if the state of col well, if, if, if the police representing whatever state they're in, believe that there's probable cause to arrest somebody for domestic violence, they're gonna arrest the person. Yes. It doesn't matter if the victim is saying, please don't do it. I'm not gonna press jars. I don't want this to happen.
Totally irrelevant. Yeah. Yeah. So, uh, that's just a quick note there. All right. So here we are. You know, those are the updates we have. We kind of touched on, um, the police right now, another, another real quick thing. Like there's all of these theories about what's going on with Brian right now. Is he alive? Is he dead? Is he in this giant nature preserve or is he, you know, has he hopped a boat to Cuba? Right. And we got some questions about what happens if he has fled the country. What happens if he's out of the us jurisdiction? Well, I can tell you 100%, the us will absolutely try to extradite him. Okay. So us has extradition agreements with most countries though. Not all. And any countries that he goes to that has an agreement with the us, we will absolutely try to bring him back and we will, well first.
Okay. Let's, let's, let's talk about this real quick. Does this new information mean that he's now gonna be arrested for murder Colin? No, no. As of today, he is still, I think the most I've seen is a person of interest. Yep. And, and I don't the warrants still for financial transaction. Yeah. The, the warrant still for using her debit card at the moment, he is not a suspect in her murder, I should say officially. Right. And, and at this point, it, it makes sense that he wouldn't be because they still have the warrant, like we talked about. Um, but even if he's found in a different country for that warrant at this point, for sure, the us is going to extradite him back to the us quick pull Russ just right now, your gut feeling. Um, and obviously, hopefully this will be born out someday, but do you think he's alive or dead right now?
I personally believe he is alive and hiding or running. I think he's dead. Yeah. I don't know why. I, I will say as more and more time goes by. I am less sure of that. That's kind of what I've always felt though. Just because we've discussed how difficult it is to hide yourself in 2021. Um, I, I don't think there's any way he'd be able to do it without help. Um, I think if he is alive, someone's helping him, his, his parents had a couple weeks to help him get him prepped. They did. And I don't know though how long that can last though. Yeah. Um, but I don't, I, for, for some reason I'm feeling like he is not alive, but then the problem at that is okay. If he killed himself, uh, why hasn't his body been found? And, and, and part of it is I don't, do we know that he's in this preserve, like his parents said, or is that a wild goose chase?
Who the heck knows. Right. It's just crazy. All right. Well, let's, let's better beer on it. All right. At the time of this episode dropping, you say he is dead. I say he is alive. All right. Let, let us know. Maybe we'll tweet a poll to you guys. <laugh> and we can, we can get the public's opinion cuz at this point you guys know as much as us. Yeah, exactly. So we'll, we'll see. It's pretty captivating. We will find out. But um, for now I think we need to move on to much more silly, ridiculous things. Right. Russ, I cannot wait. It's your turn. It is time for D C oh D I rushed the end there <laugh> that's the dumb criminal of the week. That's right Russ. And uh, it's my turn today. Um, I, uh, took the Liberty of, of digging through the, uh, 50 United States to see what we could find.
And I did land, uh, on a case from a particular state to have any guess on where we're going today. Let's let's keep it rolling. I want, I want Florida come on, Florida. Come on, Florida, Florida. I know you request and Florida, you get <laugh> I'm gonna tell you about two guys by the name of Walter Wayne Brown Jr. And Gary Brummett Russ. They were arrested on February 11th at the Windham Deerfield ranch resort in Florida. And they were charged in federal courts with impersonating a federal officer. Uh, would you like to know more? I absolutely would. So these men were arrested at this resort because they were pretending to be federal marshals who were exempt from a mask requirement. Yep. That's right. Here's here's what we have the manager of the resort said that Brut went down to the front desk earlier on February 11th, 2021 for a cup of coffee.
After he was asked to put on a face covering, he revealed a laminated card purporting to show that he was exempt from doing so the card was titled face mask exempt notice card, according to court documents <laugh> and uh, the manager said that Brut was also pointing down toward his belt where a false badge purporting to name him a Cherokee nation. Marshall, uh, was, uh, visible on his badge. Uh, the, uh, the gentleman Brem Brunett said, do you know what this means? I am a us marshal. And can have you arrested if you force me to wear a mask? Wow. A couple other employees had similar encounters with both men and one employee said to himself, this doesn't sound right. <laugh> so what does he do? He calls the actual United States Marshall, uh, office. Awesome. It turns out they have a field office right nearby, and they were happy to come down and check to see if two people were impersonating, impersonating them, impersonating them.
They, uh, immediately discovered that the documents and the badges that they had were completely false, uh, completely created. And that all of this was done to avoid having to wear masks at a Florida resort. That is unbelievable. So these guys, their, their charges are currently pending. I actually was able to look them up. They were in custody for the several weeks before they were able to bond out due to this charge of federal, federal.
Impersonate a federal wow. Impersonating a federal officer. Wow. So, um, that's where we have, uh, Walter Wayne Brown and Gary Brummett, that's a father and son team by the way, Gary's 81 and his son is 53 <laugh> so, um, wow. How do we feel? I mean, it can only come from Florida, right? I, I, it was just on a roll. I mean, there's, there's, there's so many things about this that are just ridiculous. Yeah. First of all, I'm pretty sure Marshalls don't have 81 year olds working for them out in the field. I'm just gonna go out on a limb and say, there's not many 81 year old Marshall also. I'm pretty sure yet he had his, a ARB card. He didn't have his gun or his badge maybe, maybe, maybe doing so gets him a discount at the local Denny's who knows.
I mean, also chair Cherokee nation. Like I'm also relatively sure that us Marshalls don't say Cherokee nation. Um, they don't <laugh> according to court records. So, um, yeah. Okay. Uh, for those listeners, you know, we now have to rate on our one to five knucklehead scale, uh, the actions of Walter Wayne Brown and Gary Russ, what you think, what say you, the, these, these guys are, I, I can't believe, I, I can't believe they didn't. They got away with it for a period of time. Honestly. That's, that's what I can't believe. Um, I, I don't see a way to give them anything but five the risk reward for what they were doing. Just the, the high, high chances they were gonna get caught, like, and, and, and bringing in federal jurisdiction. <laugh> like they did everything wrong, threatening to arrest to tell employees. Right. Right. I mean, man, I, I, I don't see how I can give anything but five to these guys.
I I'm right there with you, man. Um, this is a solid five for me. There's nothing about this plan. That was smart. If I could give six, I would. The interesting thing, I wonder if I could ask Walter, uh, or Gary in their current <laugh> holding cell, you know, was it worth it? I wonder what they'd say. Maybe they, they might say, oh yeah, I was a hundred percent worth it to absolutely enforce my enforce my rights. Um, but yeah, that, that, that's a good one. Uh, I'm gonna give, have knuckleheads solid, good work to these guys. They earned every one of 'em. They did. So, um, anyway, I think that's gonna wrap it up for us. Uh, listen, this is definitely one of those episodes where we would love your feedback. Uh, we might, um, you know, put some Twitter content, uh, asking your opinion on what you think about all this. Do you guys think that the police acted correctly? Um, anybody think that, uh, it, that Brian is alive or dead? Uh, how is this all gonna turn out? Is there enough for a murder charge? We're all gonna find out together, but let us know what you think. Uh, and we'll continue to cover this fascinating story. Russ, you got anything else? Nothing else from me. Take care. Everyone be safe. Bye. Bye.