Hey podcast listeners.Tired of ads barging into your favorite news podcasts?Good news.With Amazon Music, you have access to the largest catalog of ad-free top podcasts included with your Prime membership.
Stay up to date on everything newsworthy by downloading the Amazon Music app for free or go to amazon.com slash adfreenews.That's amazon.com slash adfreenews to catch up on the latest episodes without the ads.
Good day, Crime Talk aficionados.We have a great show for you today.First, the jury deliberates the fate of Richard Allen.Is he the bridge guy?We'll talk about what they're talking about.Daniel Penney, we have a trial update.
We have a story about a wife who kills her husband, who just happens to be a judge.Brad Simpson is charged with the murder regarding the disappearance of his wife. Nothing grows out slower than a bad haircut.Have you ever heard that little saying?
Well, a bad haircut could also get you killed.A romance scammer has been charged.We have this day in legal history and our dumb criminal of the day.Let's talk about it. Good day, Crimetalk aficionados.My name is Scott Reich, and this is Crimetalk.
We have a great show for you.You know the drill.Subscribe if you haven't, like if you do, leave me a comment below, and remember to hit that little bell for notifications, and you can always check us out on any of your favorite podcasting apps.
Now, if you haven't done so already, I'm urging you to go do this, all right?Go to crimetalksearch.com.Sign up for a background subscription service today.Because when you get that background subscription service, you can do as many
Background searches on anyone here in the United States that your heart desires.You can check out somebody new coming into your life.Maybe there's something that you don't get that warm, fuzzy feeling on about, I don't know, somebody you're dating.
Go there, check it out.You get a background report, a background search done while you wait and emailed to you.So go there.You're gonna be happy you did and you can cancel at any time.
All right, let's go ahead and open the record for November 8th, 2024.And first on the docket, that's right, the fate of Richard Allen is in the hands of the jury of five men and seven women.
Now, obviously, if you've been following this case, Richard Allen is accused of killing two teens who went missing back on February 13th of 2017 and were found dead the next day.
He was arrested back in 2022 and now faces two counts of murder and two counts of murder while kidnapping in the deaths of Abigail Abbey Williams and Liberty Libby German.
The prosecution concluded their closing arguments early Thursday afternoon and defense attorneys obviously urged the jurors to recognize the problems with the state's case against Mr. Allen.The case ultimately went to the jury about 1.25 p.m.
yesterday afternoon. And they ended for the day about 3.30 and they resumed again this morning at 9 a.m.And people are already lining up to get their spots in the courtroom if there is a verdict today.
What I want to talk about basically is what the jurors are discussing. And yes, it's the facts of the evidence in the case, but it comes down to also the jury instructions that the judge gave.
I have printed out the jury instructions in this case, and frankly, they're pretty small, not too lengthy at all, because frankly, it's not that complicated of a case. Now, the jury was also given the stipulation regarding evidentiary matters.
And it basically says that the parties have reached an agreement regarding the admissibility of certain items of potential evidence and matters related to the separation of witness orders pertaining to the jury trial in this case, and the court finds as false.
A stipulation is simply that the parties, the prosecution and the defense, agree.
And what the parties agreed to in this particular case is that all the items listed below shall be self-authenticated without the necessity of a witness verifying its origin, authenticity, or chain of custody.
Now, this was done to basically streamline the evidentiary matters, nobody's gonna dispute as to who handled the evidence, where it came from, et cetera.
But sometimes the only thing you wave is the American flag and say, no prosecutor, you better bring all your witnesses and I'm gonna do everything I can to keep that evidence out.
Anyway, what the prosecution and the defense agreed to in this particular case and not to fight over is all cell phone video recordings of Richard Allen while at the Westville Correctional Facility or the Wabash Correctional Facilities.
All video recordings of Richard Allen created through the use of a handheld camcorder utilized by the Indiana Department of Corrections staff when Richard Allen was transported outside of his cell, unless said recordings include confidential communications between Richard Allen and his treating psychologist or psychiatrist.
All door sheets from the inmate companions or correctional officers, so long as said companion or officer is called as a witness, and testifies in trial in this case.
All medical records, all items collected at the crime scene where the victims were located near the Monon High Bridge, items collected pursuant to the search warrant of 1967 Whiteman Drive, Delphi, Indiana during the month of October 2022, all AT&T records containing pings and other communications
to and from any cellular towers in the area of the Monon High Bridge, all AT&T cell phone records of Libby German's cell phone from February 13th through February 14th, the chain of custody of Libby German's phone, the chain of custody for the firearms tested by Melissa Oberg, electronic extractions done by Brian Bunner, including the extraction of Libby German's
Liberty German's phone, which would include the video from the phone.Electronic extractions by Christopher Cecil, including all appendices and reports and for said electronic devices.Extraction of Derek German's phone.
The Hoosier harvester video collected by the FBI. with affidavit from the FBI Special Agent Jeff Robertson with collecting paperwork with the generated videos.
And Becky, Patty, Mike, Patty, Anna Williams, Kathy Allen, Janice Allen, and James Jones shall be excluded from the separation or the sequestration order of witnesses pursuant to Rule 615 of the Indiana Rules of Evidence, such that all of these individuals shall be permitted to attend the jury trial without being excluded.
What that is, the stipulation is given to the jury, and they can basically take those facts as true.Here it was more for evidentiary issues, but the jury gets it.Then we have the jury instructions, all right?These are pretty straightforward.
The first one is, hey, this is the judge, and I'm gonna instruct the jury.Then the judge goes over the counts.Now what I wanna do is just simply go over, this is what the prosecution has to prove, all right?
Now counts, instruction number two and number three, are the same except for, obviously, the victims in the case.So it says, a person who kills another human being while committing or attempting to commit kidnapping commits felony murder.A felony.
Before you may convict the defendant, the state must have proved each of the following beyond a reasonable doubt.One, the defendant, Richard M. Allen.
Remember, they gotta prove identity, that it was him, not somebody who looked like him, not someone using his identity, but it was him, Richard Allen.
killed, A.W., while committing or attempting to commit kidnapping, which is defined as a person who knowingly or intentionally removes another person by force or threat of force from one place to another.
If the state failed to prove each of these elements beyond a reasonable doubt, you must find the defendant not guilty.
And if the state proved each of these elements beyond a reasonable doubt, you may find the defendant guilty of count one felony murder.Like I said, jury instruction three, same instruction, but as it relates to Libby German.
Then we have instruction four.The crime of murder is defined as follows. A person who knowingly or intentionally kills another human being commits murder, a felony.
Before you may convict the defendant, the state must have proved each of the following beyond a reasonable doubt.Once again, they have to prove identity.That the defendant, Richard M. Allen.Second, knowingly or intentionally.Three, killed.Four, A.W.
If the state failed to prove each of these elements beyond a reasonable doubt, you must find the defendant not guilty.
If the state did prove each of these elements beyond a reasonable doubt, you may find the defendant guilty of count three, murder of a felony.So, count instruction number five, same thing as it relates to Liberty German.
Instruction number six, intentionally or knowingly, it's defined, a person engages in conduct intentionally if He engages in this conduct in its obvious conscious objective to do so.
Basically, you knew what you were doing, you were aware of the circumstances surrounding what you were doing.They define direct and circumstantial evidence.
Direct evidence means evidence that proves a fact without an inference and which ends in itself, if true, conclusively establishes a fact.
Remember, a circumstantial evidence means evidence that proves a fact from which an inference from the existence of another fact may be drawn.
An inference is a deduction of a fact that may logically and reasonably be drawn from another fact or group of facts.It is not necessary that facts be proved by direct evidence.
Both direct evidence and circumstantial evidence are acceptable as a means of proof, or where proof of guilt is by circumstantial evidence only, it must be so conclusive in character and point, so surely and unreliably, to guilt of the accused as to exclude every reasonable theory of innocence.
Interesting instruction there from Indiana.
Next, credibility of a witness may be attacked by introducing evidence that on some former occasion the witness made a statement, written statement, in former testimony, testified or acted in a manner inconsistent with his testimony in this case.
Evidence of this kind may be considered by you in deciding the value of the witnesses.Instruction number nine, the fact the defendant did not testify raises no presumption of any kind against him.
It shall not be commented upon, referred to, or in any manner considered by the jury in determining guilt or innocence of the defendant.
Alternate jurors instructed they shall accompany the jury into the jury room peacefully and pay careful attention to the deliberations of jury.
You're instructed that you may not participate in those deliberations unless and until directed to do so by the court.That's very interesting.Normally the alternate jurors, everything where I've practiced,
are excused and they're called upon if they're needed, not they sit in the room, observe everything.
And I understand why they would do that because if, let's say, a juror is excused and they need to bring in an alternate, then you need to start all the deliberations all over again.
Whereas if they're already there, then you don't have to start all over again.They just jump right in. And then the final instructions is duty instruction, the laws, standard instruction, and pretty basic.Not a whole lot of instructions there.
Sometimes you have cases where the instructions, you know, it's gonna take hours to read.This is pretty simple, and you can see this is gonna be an all or nothing case.
They either believe that Richard Allen was the bridge guy and killed Abby and Libby, or it wasn't.
And I would note in the final instructions that says, the defendant has entered pleas of not guilty and the burden rests upon the state of Indiana to prove to each of you, beyond a reasonable doubt, every essential element of the crime charged.
The charges which have been filed are the formal method of bringing a defendant to trial.The state has the burden of proving the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
Some of you may have served on juries in civil cases where you were told that it is only necessary to prove a fact that is more likely true than not true.In criminal cases, the state's proof must be more powerful than that.
It must be beyond a reasonable doubt. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is proof that leaves you firmly convinced of the defendant's guilt.
There are very few things in the world that we know with absolute certainty, and in criminal cases, the law does not require proof that overcomes every possible doubt.
The instruction goes on, if based upon your consideration of the evidence you are firmly convinced the defendant is guilty of the crimes charged, you may find him guilty.
If, on the other hand, you think there is a real possibility that he is not guilty, you should give him the benefit of the doubt and find him not guilty.
The burden is upon the state to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty of the crimes charged. It is a strict and heavy burden.
The evidence must be overcome by any reasonable doubt concerning the defendant's guilt, but it does not mean that a defendant's guilt must be proven beyond all possible doubt.
A reasonable doubt is a fair, actual, and logical doubt based upon reason and common sense.A reasonable doubt may arise either from evidence or the lack of evidence.
Reasonable doubt exists when you are not firmly convinced of the defendant's guilt after you have weighed and considered all the evidence.A defendant must not be convicted on suspicion or speculation.
It is not enough for the state to show that the defendant is probably guilty. The state must prove each element of each crime by evidence that firmly convinces each of you and leaves no reasonable doubt.
The proof must be so convincing that you can rely and act upon it in the manner of the highest importance.The rule of law which requires proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt applies to each juror individually.
Each of you must refuse to vote for conviction unless you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt of the defendant's guilt and your verdicts must be unanimous. Under the law of this state, a person charged with a crime is presumed to be innocent.
This presumption of innocence continues in favor of the defendant throughout each stage of the trial, and you should fit the evidence presented to the presumption that the defendant is innocent, if you can reasonably do so.
If the evidence lends itself to two reasonable interpretations, you must choose the interpretation consistent with the defendant's innocence.
If there is one reasonable interpretation, you must accept that interpretation and consider the evidence with all the other evidence in the case making your decision.
The defendant has not been required to present any evidence to prove his innocence or to prove anything. The fact that charges have been filed, the defendant arrested, and brought to trial is not to be considered by you as evidence of guilt.
You are the exclusive judges of the evidence, the credibility of the witnesses, and of the weight to be given to the testimony of each of them.
In considering the testimony of any witness, you may take into account his or her ability and opportunity to observe the manner and conduct of the witness while testifying, any interest, bias, or prejudice the witness may have, any relationship with other witnesses, interested parties, and the reasonableness of the testimony of the witness considered in the light of all the evidence in this case.
You should attempt to fit the evidence to the presumption that the defendant is innocent and the theory that every witness is telling the truth.You should not disregard the testimony of any witness without a reason and without careful consideration.
If you find conflicting testimony, you must determine which of the witnesses you will believe and which one you will disbelieve.
In weighing the testimony to determine what or whom you will believe, you should use your own knowledge, experience, and common sense gained from day-to-day living.
The number of witnesses who testify to a particular fact or the quantity of evidence of a particular point need not control your determination on the truth.
You should give great weight to the evidence which convinces you most strongly of its truthfulness.
During the progress of the trial, certain questions may have been asked and certain exhibits may have been offered in which the court ruled are not admissible into evidence.
You must not concern yourself with the reasons of those rulings since the production of evidence is strictly controlled by law.You must not consider any exhibits or testimony which the court orders stricken from the record.
In fact, such matter is to be treated as though you had never heard it. The unsworn statements or comments of counsel on either side of the case should not be considered as evidence in this case.
It is your duty to determine the facts from the testimony and the evidence admitted by the court given in your presence and should disregard any and all information that you may derive from any other source.
Your verdicts must represent the considered judgment of each juror, and in order to return a verdict of guilty or not guilty, you must all agree.
During the deliberations, you should not yield your individual judgment to your fellow jurors just so you can reach a verdict.
However, it is your duty to impartially consider the evidence with your fellow jurors, to examine your own views in light of your discussions, and to consult and reason with your fellow jurors in a good faith effort to reach a just verdict.
After you return your verdicts, you are under no obligation to discuss them or the reasons for them with anyone.
After you retire to the jury room, the bailiff of this court will be in attendance, but they cannot be present for your jury room during any of your deliberations.Then they go on to talk about how to notify the court.
Those are the classic instructions.Credibility of witnesses, presumption of innocence, you decide the weight and credibility of witnesses, of the credibility of witnesses, and who to believe.That's the job of the jury.
For the defense, I like the instruction about circumstantial evidence, that if it's reasonable, you can't basically ignore it.That's gonna be interesting to see what the jury And like I said, this is going to be an all or nothing verdict.
Either all guilty or all not guilty.They either believe he was a bridge guy or not.Let me know in the comments.Is Richard Allen the bridge guy?Next, let's talk about the Daniel Penney matter.That's right.
The Marine Corps veteran Daniel Penney is on trial for manslaughter in New York City after placing a homeless man by the name of Jordan Neely. in a deadly chokehold on the subway back in May of 2023.
Now, a 911 call played for jurors Thursday captured a teen passenger saying the troubled Mr. Neely was trying to attack everybody before Mr. Penny put him into this chokehold.
Another witness testified earlier in the week that she was also nervous and that Neely ranted, raved, and threatened strap hangers that she thought she was going to pass out.
Now witness Lori Citro said even though she had seen many troubled people during her 30 years riding the New York City subway, Mr. Neely's rant felt different and scary enough for her to barricade her five-year-old son.
She said, quote, No, I did not feel safe when he was moving around erratically.I've taken the subway for 30 years and I've seen a lot.I've seen a lot of unstable people.This circumstance felt different to me.
She said, I felt concerned, concerned enough to put a barrier in front of my son, The mother noted, adding that her fear was that Neely was next level.
She said Neely was coming within a foot or less of people's face on the F train subway car and he was riding and it made everybody scared what he might do.And when Mr. Daniel Penny, the Marine veteran, intervened.She was relieved.
She said it didn't seem like Neely was resisting much against Penny, who put the homeless man in this chokehold, and it didn't seem like Neely's breathing was in any type of distress.
Now, the mother described to jurors being so scared of this belligerent, unhinged man, like I said, that she felt scared and was protecting her child.
Now, Lori Citro is a research director and mother of two, had been in the train with her young son to a therapy appointment when she noticed the commotion and all the shouting that was caused by Mr. Neely.
Apparently he was shouting, I don't have water, I don't have food, I don't have a home, I want to go to Rikers, I want to go to prison.He started lunging in different people's directions.Ms.
Citro testified and later demonstrated to the jurors the movement that Mr. Neely was making.It was erratic and unpredictable. She was scared, she recalled, and it was increasingly loud and it felt increasingly threatening.
And she would describe it as belligerent and unhinged.I actually took the stroller that she had and put it in front of her son, she noted, several times.
Now, once Penny intervened to stop Mr. Neely, Sitcher said, I felt relieved because I was scared for my son.
Now, Mr. Penny's lawyers have said that he shouldn't be held criminally liable for Neely's death since he was simply acting to protect himself and others' riders. Ladies and gentlemen, that witness right there.
The prosecution's known about this witness.This is the prosecution witness, and yet, here we go.Why is Daniel Penney being charged in any way whatsoever?He did not kill that man.He did not kill Mr. Neely.
This is why Alvin Bragg is the biggest garbage prosecutor in the country.Now, yes, there are a couple that are close behind, but Alvin Bragg is probably one of the worst district attorneys here.
They've turned this into a race issue, and it's simply not that.The district attorney should be embarrassed.I hope the jury finds Mr. Penny not guilty.Next, wife kills husband.Husband just happens to be a judge.That's right.
The wife of an Illinois judge has been accused of fatally shooting him inside their home earlier this week.So Megan Sue Valentine, who was arrested on Tuesday for the death of Circuit Judge Michael Valentine,
who was found deceased at their home, according to police.She's been charged with one count of first-degree murder, aggravated battery with a firearm, aggravated discharge of a firearm, and aggravated domestic battery.
She was taken into custody after the sheriff's deputies found Michael's body outside their home there in Albion. Now the sheriff's office asked the state police to lead the investigation into Judge Valentine's death.
Charges were filed yesterday against the wife.Now Mr. Valentine was a former Edwards County State Attorney and he was first elected as a judge in 2016.Be interesting to see if maybe the judge
was a completely innocent victim, or maybe there was something much greater.I'm sure the defense will be self-defense.Next, murder charges for Brad Simpson.
That's right, charges were filed against Mr. Simpson yesterday, and he'd already been in jail on a gun and domestic violence charges related to his wife's disappearance.
Now, Susan was last seen on October 6th when she and her husband went out to a club, a private club in Alamo Heights there in Texas. and police said the two were involved in a disturbance at the club late that evening before returning home.
A neighbor told police that they saw a couple fighting outside later that night and heard screams.Now, in a recent social media post, the daughter of Suzanne Simpson speaks out about her mother being a victim of abuse.
She said in her statement, quote, My mom was a victim of abuse from my father.My father took my mother's life in a state of rage and control.
In our community, this should not happen and I will not stop speaking as the voice of my mother until she is found.I will forever represent all victims of domestic abuse and assault.
As my mother's daughter, I will tell our story over and over again with every breath I have and I will make sure you remember her name. Susan Simpson was a victim of abuse and a victim of this community.
Beyond being a victim, she was a phenomenal mother, hardworking, driven, loving, and kind.So Susan Clark Simpson, the mother of four and the realtor, was last seen on October 6th at her home in Olmos Park.According to the police report,
A neighbor who lived across the street from the Simpsons' home off the East Alamos Drive told police that he saw Brad and Susan arguing outside his window.
The two then began physically fighting with each other, and the neighbors say that Brad then began grabbing her upper torso to gain control of her body.He said that Brad was clearly trying to keep Susan from running away.
And a business associate of Brad Simpson is also facing charges in relation to the case where he's been charged with allegedly hiding one of Brad Simpson's guns in his wall at his house.It's going to be an interesting one.
Now, of course, they haven't found Suzanne, but hopefully something will happen here shortly. All right, we've all had that experience where you get a bad haircut, and nothing grows out slower than a bad haircut, right?
Well, in this particular story, it can also get you killed.A Pennsylvania man murdered his girlfriend, stabbing her multiple times throughout her body with a kitchen knife after she got a new haircut that apparently he didn't like.
So Benjamin Garcia-Gull, G-U-A-L, is accused of killing Carmen Martinez-Silva at her brother's mobile home in East Hempfield Township on Sunday following an alleged dispute over Martinez-Silva's new hairdo the night before.
Now, in the complaint, it alleges that Martinez-Silva was scared of Gull and stayed with her daughter, Ms.Knight, after their alleged fight.Now, the daughter stated that Carmen cut her hair, which angered Benjamin,
According to the complaint, and Carmen relayed to the daughter that Benjamin told her that he was going to stab her over the haircut.Well, Martina Silva left her daughter's house about 8.21 a.m.
on November 3rd and went to see her brother, Luis Martina Silva, to ask if he could go tell Benjamin that their relationship was over and to get his stuff out of the mobile home they stayed at together.
Police interviewed a witness who saw the incident unfold at the Luis Martinez Silva residence, also a mobile home, and recounted what allegedly happened.Here it is.
Benjamin came to the home looking for Carmen and explained to Benjamin that Carmen was not present attempting to protect Carmen, although she was inside the trailer.
The witness then explained to the officers that Benjamin left, but minutes later came back to the scene.Louis came to the front door, at which time Benjamin started stabbing Louise.
Gull apparently utilized a kitchen knife to stab Louise Martina-Silva and then Carmen Martina-Silva multiple times throughout her body, resulting in Carmen's death.
which she had obviously died from, and resulted in severe injuries to Luis's head, chest, abdomen, and arm.
Now, Carmen Martinez Silva attempted to pull Benjamin away from Luis, which is when Benjamin started stabbing Carmen in a backward motion, according to the affidavit.
Another witness told the police that he tried to get a gun to stop Mr. Gull, prompting the alleged killer to turn his kitchen blade onto himself.
Another witness told police he tried getting a gun to stop Mr. Gall, prompting the alleged killer to turn his kitchen knife onto that particular witness as well.
The witness said that he went to the scene attempting to help the victim when Benjamin swung the knife toward his face but missed.
Police say 911 calls reported that Gall remained at the scene, still standing there with a knife in his hand before eventually cowering in his car until police arrived.
He was also treated for injuries, though it's not clear how he got those injuries.Needless to say, Mr. Gall was arrested, and he's been charged with murder, attempted murder, aggravated assault, and reckless endangering another person.
And he's being held in Lancaster County Jail without bail.Bad haircut, ladies and gentlemen.Mr. Gall, you've got some serious issues.
And I guess the good thing, although we'll give you the presumption of innocence, but when you are convicted, you will spend the rest of your life in prison.And I hope nobody, you know, doesn't like your haircut one day.Unbelievable.
Next, a fraudster is arrested.A Nigerian national who went by various versions of the name Giovanni on dating websites defrauded several women out of more than $3 million.How did he do it?
He said he needed money for various bogus reasons, such as his father's funeral and son's tuition. Now, Franklin Ikechukwu Nwadiwalo, I-K-E-C-H-U-K-W-U, common pronunciation, N-W-A-D-I-A-L-O, Wadalo,
was indicted on 14 counts of wire fraud charges for which he faces up to 20 years in prison.Mr. Nawaldo was traveling from Nigeria when he was arrested upon his arrival in Texas.
Now, the indictment alleges a scheme that occurred between December of 2019 and December of 2023.Widaldo used fake profile photos and told the victims he was in the military and deployed overseas so he could not meet them in person.
His alleged victims were apparently much older, often widowed or divorced, according to the indictment, and he allegedly sent victims messages through online dating services that deceived them into believing they were in a romantic relationship.
Court documents allege the victims depleted their accounts and sometimes used up their entire savings.
In one case in November of 2020, a victim identified in court documents as JC was contacted by someone named Antonio 25 Giovanni, who claimed to be an officer in the United States military and used his purported profession as an excuse for being unable to meet in person.
After duping Jaycee into believing that she was in a romantic relationship, Giovanni induced Jaycee to send him funds using false and fraudulent statements.
As one example, Giovanni falsely claimed to have been fined $150,000 for violating the Military Code of Conduct. by disclosing his location to J.C.and asked J.C.to help pay the fine.J.C.
liquidated her dead husband's retirement account, used her home as collateral for a loan, and ultimately sold her home to the tune of at least $2.4 million.After depleting J.C.of her savings, he sent a message to her stating Giovanni died.
while on a foreign mission.Now in December of 2018, a man named Tony Giovanni contacted another victim identified as NF.
Tony Giovanni falsely told NF he was a soldier in the United States military and used his military background as an excuse for being unable to meet in person once again.
After gaining NF's trust, Giovanni began asking for help paying for taxes, funeral costs, and other expenses stemming from his father's purported death.
Giovanni also asked NF to send and receive funds purportedly on his behalf claiming that he had issues accessing his financial accounts.In another instance, David Giovanni initiated communications with another victim identified as AM.
He told her he couldn't meet her in person because he worked in an information technology and had a contract with the United States military. He allegedly sent a fake video and pictures he claimed were of him.
And then in August of 2020, Antoni Giovanni got a woman to send money for his father's purported funeral expenses, and he also got her to pay, to help pay for his alleged son's school expenses.
Nualdo was currently being held at a federal detention center in Houston.Boy, if that is not a, The reason why you should go to crimetalksearch.com, I don't know what it is, it just shows you, check everybody out.
And don't send anybody money unless you've actually met them in person, and even then, be very, very careful of doing it.People have been watching too much 90 Day Fiance type stuff, I guess.I don't know, okay?Don't do it!
Next on the docket, this day in legal history. On November 8, 1914, the state of Montana became one of the earliest states to grant women the right to vote, six years before the 19th Amendment granted suffrage nationally.
This was a significant victory for women's suffrage movement and helped bolster support for a federal amendment to the Constitution.
And on November 8, 1989, Texas voters approved Proposition 1, allowing for the confiscation of property involved in criminal activities.
This led to a huge expansion of asset forfeiture laws across the country, giving law enforcement the power to seize property tied to criminal activity and adding resources to fund public safety and anti-crime initiatives, which the United States Supreme Court has
pared back just a little bit, they got a little overzealous with that.A lot of states did, not just Texas.
And then on November 8th, 1999, law enforcement issued the arrest warrant for Rafael Resendiz, known as the Railroad Killer, a serial killer responsible for multiple deaths across the U.S.
The case highlighted jurisdictional challenges in tracking serial criminals and led to an improvement in cross-state law enforcement cooperation.And finally today, our dumb criminal of the day.
Now, a former Reading, California landlord is in a little bit of trouble today after a recent Reddit post he made that was shared to everybody across the world.Well, please meet Charles Pierce.He's 70 years old.
You'd think he'd have a little more common sense than that, making it to the age of 70.
But, he went on to Reddit and said that he was fired from his job as this property manager because he apparently, in his now deleted account, stated that he received mail-in ballots for four previous tenants at the apartment complex where he worked.
And he posted that he claimed that he used all four of those ballots to cast votes and to vote no on all rent controls and school bond measures in Shasta County.
Well, needless to say, people on Reddit saw it and they reported this voter fraud to the FBI, which they should.Anyway, the Shasta County clerk and registrar of voters stated that he's turned this case over to the district attorney.
and they're deciding what they're going to do.But guess what?Pierce says he didn't actually do what he posted.
In a statement he said he did not engage in any legal activities, adding that this post was just hyperbole and that he was too good at inflating and angering his audience.He says the situation has been blown out of proportion and is just Bogus.
Well, the DA who's investigating this confirmed that the registrar of the voters has referred the allegations to her office, and they have no further information at this time.But what I would say to this gentleman, Mr. Pierce, you're an idiot.
You're an idiot.If you did it, Dumb.It's against the law.If you did it and posted it online, you're a bigger idiot for admitting what you did.And if it was meant to be a bad joke, it was a really bad joke.
And now you're wasting everybody's resources and time because of this thing.So anyway, Mr. Pierce, you are a dumb criminal of the day.Whether you did it or not, it was just dumb.You would think you'd have a little more common sense at the age of 70.
Apparently not. All right, everybody, that's all we have for today.Thanks for watching.Hope you have a wonderful weekend.We'll see you next time on Crime Talk.And remember, the Constitution matters.
Sign in
