LIVE: Guthrie and Richins Q&A—Your Questions on Two Major Cases

0:00Teleredic here from 2311 Racing. Game night's fun until someone spends five minutes lining up one shot. Chalk, breathe, re-chalk, still aiming. While they figure it out, I fire up Chamba Casino. I can spin anywhere, anytime, and there's always a new social casino game every week. Spins happen way faster than that shot. Play now at chambacasino.com. Let's Chamba. Sponsored by Chamba Casino, no purchase necessary. VGW Group Fortware prohibited by law, 21 plus terms and conditions apply. Teleredic here from 2311 Racing. Another checkered flag for the books. Time to celebrate with Chamba. Jump in at chambacasino.com. Let's Chamba. No purchase necessary. VGW Group, Fortware prohibited by law. CCNC, 21 plus. Sponsored by Chamba Casino. This is Hidden Killers with Tony Brusky. Here now, Tony Brusky. All right, we are going to be doing something a little bit different today. You, of course, have been flooding us with questions about the Nancy Guthrie case and the

1:02Cori Richens case. A lot of them, we should address on the air. We should go through them. We should have an open discussion about all of them. So that's what we're going to do. It's Q and A day today. We're going to start with the Nancy Guthrie case. Eventually, we'll move over to the Cori Richens case and talk about things from the defense perspective and the prosecution perspective. But we're going to start with Nancy. So feel free in the comments section, wherever you are watching us right now, whether it be on YouTube or whatever. Give us your comments. Give us your questions about the cases. And we will do our best to try and answer them as we go through this today. We'll start to, like I said, with the Nancy Guthrie case, 84-year-old woman gone, the suspect on camera that nobody can identify DNA. It does not match anyone. Over 50,000 tips and that a single one has led to an arrest as of right now.

2:02We are about to, we're approaching week five, basically. We're recording this on a Friday as we enter into that Monday. That will be week five into this some more than a month then. So let's get into it. Your questions, my thoughts on it, no gas, no filter here. Let's jump on into it. This is your Marcus in Las Vegas. I have to ask a question. Nobody wants to answer. Is Nancy Guthrie still alive at four weeks with no ransom demand, no credible sighting, no contact. What does your gut tell you? It's a good question. Yeah, it is a great question. I mean, this far in, let me ask you, Todd. And let's reframe it for a moment and go all the way back to the beginning of this. Do you think Nancy Guthrie left her house alive? You know, and I've said this before, I'm kind of new to the whole crime,

3:06true crime stuff, first coming on board when the co-worker was rolling out. And so that was the first time I had a chance to kind of really deep dive into this kind of stuff. Early on, it was kind of tough to know because we were getting information. And the first information we got days later kind of changed when TMZ was out there, and other reporters were out there reporting. And now there's, we're finding blood and all that kind of stuff. So I think early on, the first couple of days, you're like, you know, this could be something. They've got her, you know, they're probably holding air. I'm not sure that the ransom letters had come out quite at that point. But then you started getting more evidence and you started, you heard about the blood on the front porch or by the door. And as time progressed very quickly for me, I just started believing that she was no longer with us. Like it didn't take me more than maybe the first week to go. Something is not adding up here. And the fact that the ransom notes were coming in,

4:06but they were going to media outlets and not the FBI and not the police and not the family for certain. Everything started to stink to high heaven. Pretty early on for me. It feels like when there's no information, you fill in the gaps. And that's what everybody wants to do. And there, there was information that was coming out in the case. It just wasn't truly, I think, connected to the case. But like right away, I was like, hey, the ransom notes just seem like BS. I mean, the added give them some credence at the beginning because you just don't know, you know, and then after that started getting weirder, I wrote those off pretty quick as being anything. Then you got, well, there's all these gloves everywhere. And we know how crazy that was. And then so there's a glove two miles away. And like I said, like you can go anywhere. You're going to find rubber gloves on the sides of the roads. I don't know who's wearing rubber gloves and throwing them on sides of roads. But apparently, apparently everybody,

5:08because they're all over the place. I know. Like, but why? Like, what, like, what is the crack? Is it drug use? Like, I mean, I don't, but what would you be using the rubber glove? Why does everybody have rubber gloves? I'm not sure, but I think the moment that chef started wearing them in the kitchen and stuff like that, I always said it became kind of this new old thing to always wear rubber gloves, no matter what you do. Either that, we've got a lot of tattoo artists in the area. Why are they after? I'm not sure. Because I'm wondering, like, you do find them on the sides of the road all the time. But it's like, why? I can't, I can't think of a reason why I have rubber gloves. I mean, unless I'm like, I'm staining some wood in my garage or something. I don't really think of it or washing dishes maybe. I don't, I don't really use rubber gloves. Then my mom used to, but it's just, it's weird to me that there's so much rubber glove use everywhere that these items are just all over the place. But back to the question, I don't think she left the house alive. I don't. I think something happened. And again,

6:15so no, I think for the beginning, she hasn't been with us. But I'm not faulting anybody for going down the road and holding out hope, especially the family. You got to do that just in case. But at this point, I'm kind of doubtful on it. Gen Z actually had a question on that. And she says, if something did happen, if it was a B&E and all that kind of stuff, why not just leave the body behind? And I think we've kind of touched on it a couple of times over the past several weeks. Yeah, I think because Nancy becomes the evidence. And what we've, you know, from any other cases that we've covered, if there was some sort of a struggle, some sort of an incident, fingernails particularly, there would be maybe they were thinking far enough ahead. If that took place, that somebody's DNA could be under Nancy's fingernails. For whatever reason, whatever happened, we don't know. I think Nancy became part of the evidence. And Nancy's remains could be something

7:19that could then reveal, excuse me, who, who did this or lead someone there possibly? That would be my guess. I mean, the only other, other, you know, thought process I have on it is if this was an attempt that was originally going to be for money, just very, very poorly thought out, and she died very early on. And then it was like, well, shit, what are we going to do? Right. Almost like a panic kind of situation. What do you do? Do we leave the body? Do we take the body? Whatever. And that's kind of where I'm leaning into it as well. Either way, I, whatever the reason is that this happened, I think there was a moment of pure panic and they just decided to take the body instead of leaving it behind. I do too. And I don't know that I don't think it was thought out. I really don't. Another observation that has been made in the last couple of days, the back pack. I was really, when I was on court, CV the other night talking about it.

8:25And the question I was given was, you know, what do you think was in the back pack? It's like everybody's just purely speculating. And my response was a fleece blanket, yachtsy board, and Michael Bolton's greatest hits on vinyl. Because why not? He was planning a cozy night in that went sideways. But no, I mean, we don't know, but what I was surprised by because, and they did, I was actually thinking of doing this myself, but Cody and Vinnie did this. They went to Walmart and they got the back pack. I was actually thinking of doing that so I'd have it ready for that segment, but I didn't. And so they actually had the back pack on camera, the actual model of it. And there's a lot you can get into that back pack. I mean, a lot. They pulled out, and you could tell they was like just in their production room, and it was, well, what have we got around here to jam in the back pack? So it was like some

9:28tarps and blankets and things of that nature, but they were big. I mean, they got a lot in that pack. The thought process I had, and it was, it comes down to what was the intent of what this person was doing. I mean, if this was intended to be a burglary gone, and I'm thinking there might have been a backpack in a backpack for hauling more stuff out. Get it in there, take it out, there you go, then you can open it up and go. Whatever other tools you may need to have for a B&E, if it was targeting her, then it would be things to restrain her. Possibly, here's a thought process here. Possibly, you could fit a large blanket in that thing or a tarp. So if you were to take a body, but again, this is be assuming that you're going into, and you're going to disable her in her home and like roll her up in a carpet or roll her up in a blanket or roll her

10:31up in a tarp and take her out, which doesn't seem like that would make any sense. If you're trying to get her, I would think you'd be wanting to keep her alive and in decent shape. She's not being rolled up in a tarp. So if they're showing up with a blanket or a tarp for rolling a body out, that shows a very different intent, which again, this doesn't seem to make a lot of sense, but who the hell knows? We had a comment from men's easy menus who said that they believe it looks like there's a drone inside the backpack. That person's seeing the outline of a drone. Now, I'm not sure why you'd have a drone with you. I think that's a stretch to guess, but maybe, I mean, anything's possible. I also have the feeling that we might be seeing Bosch eggs greatest hits in there too. Little low down shuffle. Low down shuffle. Exactly. Yeah, it could be in there. I mean, again, anything, we just don't know, but I was surprised by the volume that could be put in there. Diane in Portland, the gloves they

11:35found two miles from the house had DNA from an unknown male. It didn't hit encodus. What happens next? Are they running investigative genetic genealogy? How long does it actually tape? From what we understand, they are running IGG on this. Does it matter? I wouldn't want to be the person on the end of that. But does it have any sort of investigative like claws to it? At the end of the day, maybe they'll figure out whose glove it was. And they'll probably have an alibi. That's probably where that lands, if it lands anywhere. I just don't feel like those gloves meant anything two miles away. I can't imagine that they would. I feel like that is such a stretch. And it just seems to mean like a lot of what their quote unquote finding in this whole case seems like a stretch. Like there's nothing that's really evident. There's this. There's this. There's this. Everything is just like they're grabbing at whatever straws they can get at this point because

12:38there doesn't seem to be much of anything out there. It really does. And last night, and I haven't had a chance to really dive into this yet today. So if I'm ignorant on this, I'm apologizing. But I know that there was some video that's come out from what I understood. I saw Vinnie, the politician from Court TV posted it. And many others too of a vehicle. But it was like two and a half miles away around the same time. Two and a half miles is a long fucking distance. Yeah. I mean, it really is a long distance. I mean, it sounds short, but there's a lot of things within two and a half miles of Nancy Guthrie's house. And a lot of possible vehicles. I mean, is it something to look at without a doubt? I guess my question is, why is it a month in? We're sitting like, oh, look, here's some video of vehicles active in the area at that time of the night. When do you think that that would be like the first five days? That stuff would just

13:41yes, right? I don't know. The other thought process would be did they already have this information, these videos and they're running into brick walls on it. And it's not going anywhere. So now the investigative thought processes, well, let's throw it out to the public and see if they can figure it out. See if they could because sometimes it works that way. It all depends on the investigator and what their processes are individually. Some think, let's throw it out to the public right away for identification and maybe we'll get it. Some hold it really tight to the vest and then, you know, because they want to get it or they think that if there's less people out there basically polluting the water with, with, with bunk, then, then the investigators can do a better job. It's, I don't know, it's kind of rolling the dice either way. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know what's going on with that video, but I did find it interesting. What do we got over here in our live comments? Anything interesting?

14:41We got a message from Gen Z. She's usually on top of stuff. She said, remember with the Cobra case, it took six weeks for them to find somebody with the genealogy DNA and she believes that they're not really, we're not seeing everything they're actually working on at this point, which is possible as well. Yeah. Yeah. It took less than that. It publicly, that's what we found out. But they knew, and that's a good point because literally, and I've been bringing this up to, during that whole process with Cobrager, and I hope that that's what's going on here. You had Chief Fry at the stand saying in his public addresses to everybody, we have no leads. We don't have this. We don't have that. But in reality, the FBI was tailgating Cobrager all the way to Pennsylvania while he's saying that. So they did know. They just weren't publicly stating it, and they actually lost him along the way too. But could that be going on? Yes. I think you have so many different people in different

15:46areas investigating this case in their own ways, and that's where we get so much noise and so many contradictions because they're, again, it's lack of leadership. It's lack of a clear direction and a clear strategy, and this is what you get. This is what's interesting. I was talking to Robin. I we were texting last night about this Robin Drake, and he's like, you know, what's really disturbing about this is, and I'm just kind of paraphrasing. He'll explain better on Monday. Everybody looks at this and goes, gosh, this seems like really disorganized and really kind of a cluster. It's really not like if you compare it to other cases that have been handled in this jurisdiction under nanos and such, they're all chaos. And if you compare it just to other cases in general, take nanos out of it. It's about par for the course. I mean, every so far, like a lot of the cases that were currently covering besides just this one, you're seeing a lot of like disjointed actions by law enforcement and bad investigations and things that were missed and

16:51and all that kind of stuff. So I guess one of the things I've learned in the almost year that I've been doing this is seems like that's par for the course. It is. It's one of those things where don't look behind the curtain if you don't want to see what's going on. Because you're doing and I think we were brought up in this idea of like, oh, you know, they're smarter people behind the curtain doing things that that need to be done. And they're working in our best interest. And we just, oh, and depending on how you're brought up, okay, I trust that. That seems good. And I think the more we look behind the curtain, the less that's a true statement. And we're all kind of shocked by it. But I think that's true in like almost any, any profession, whether it's law enforcement, whether it's whatever radio, you know, that was, you know, I always laughed at like when we would have, I mean, I thought it was, I was shocked when I first started of like, what do you mean you're not actually tallying the votes for the top nine at nine? You're just

17:52picking these out of your ass of the songs you like. You know, all those sort of things, those facades that we see. And if you think like they're taking caller nine all the time, they're not, you know, they're like, they're going for the caller that's going to sound best on the air. There's, there's, there's so many things that are going on behind the scenes in ways that we don't realize in areas that we're just not familiar with. And it's no different in law enforcement. The difference in law enforcement is the fact that, you know, people's lives are on the line. They're not just winning a two-legged thigh chicken dinner. So right. And each instance is going to be different. Like you can plan for, you can plan for one of these situations to come about in your community. But each one's going to be a little bit different. Yes, there are things that are similar to other cases, to other investigations, but each one is different. So I guess we have to keep that in mind. It's just nice. It's nice as a, as a, as a member of the United States as a citizen here, to think that our law enforcement is more like what we see on TV. I wanted to be

18:55more like Hillsborough Blues or something like that. It's more like Reno 9-1-1. I'd be okay with that, too, because there's some comedy with that. So yeah, I mean, and, and, you know, that's, I mean, that's the reality of it. And it's not an instance. I mean, it's just, it is what it is. There are many wonderful people that are trying to do their best. And in any sort of institution, earning sort of structure, you know, you have leadership. Sometimes you have good leadership. Sometimes you have bad leadership. It is what it is. You have egos, you have personalities, you have people. And unfortunately, when time is of the essence in, in a case like this, if, if you, your luck of the draw for wherever that jurisdiction is, and you got somebody with an ego that can't really see beyond it, that's my conjecture on Nanos. I think a lot of others, this is what you get. And there's, there's not a lot of levers you can pull to reset that beast. And in the timely manner that you need to when time is of the essence.

19:56That's why it's so important to know who you're voting for and why you're voting for them. There you go. I mean, the guy won by like 400 some votes when 98% of his union was saying like no confidence. But the general public said, yeah, it seems like a winner. Like and I don't know, I mean, how many times when you go into vote, you may go in and you're like, okay, I know I'm voting on like this one thing or this one person. And there's like 30 other things you got to vote for. How many times have you gone in and like, I'll do this one. And you don't really know what the fuck you're voting. I don't anymore. If I don't know what I'm voting for, I don't. But I remember like the first handful of times I ever voted in my life. I'm like, oh, I'll just go along party line or I'll just go along with whatever, whatever name seems most recognizable, which is really how most elections are one is who's most top of mind. Not the issues, not anything that's important, not a scandal, not a track record. It's just what name comes to your mind first. And that seems to be how these things are done. But that is why it is so important.

21:01If you're going to vote and know what the fuck you're voting for because this is what you can get. This public service message brought to you by Hidden Killers. Exactly. What is that? What was the question in there? Identify the gun he has and someone will know who owns one. Long barrel semi auto. I have no idea. I don't think we have any identification on the gun. All I know is that they said the holster was odd and an oddly, oddly placed, which I think spoke more to an experience of the individual more than anything else. I have never seen a holster like that before. Me either. I don't know what the hell that was. I don't have a holster. I've never holstered a gun. But I know that that's not how you do it. That doesn't seem like a great idea the way it was. It was set up there like you're kind of waiting for him to bend ever with a foliage and the shot goes off. And then suddenly it's an episode of America's funniest home videos. And not what we had right there. Suddenly Bob Sagitts back and doing, whoa, doing the commentary

22:04of what's going on. From Michelle from San Diego, the footage shows the guy's face. It's been everywhere. Well, I mean, it shows him with the mask on. How is it possible that nobody recognizes him, not a coworker, not a neighbor, not a family member, not a single person who's ever met this guy that seems statistically impossible? I bet people know him. I bet there's plenty of people who recognize that. I mean, there's plenty of people who are like just aimlessly making accusations too. But I would guess there's there's some folks out there that recognize it. But then you have to look at it just because they recognize that person, you got to consider, okay, doesn't mean you're just going to pick up the phone and call them in because what's the repercussions to you if you do that? What community are you in? How is that person part of that community? Is that person someone where if they were caught, that community would look down on you for turning that person in? There's a lot of the lot that goes into that, that decision making process.

23:13And do you want a spotlight on you? Period. If you are in a situation where someone who did this, whether it was a B&E gone wrong or someone who was kidnapping someone for ransom and that went horribly wrong. If that's the circle, you're in whether it's familial or your friends or whatever. The odds are you may not have the cleanest track record either. Or you may have something that may not look favorable to law enforcement. So all of those things are being weighed by anyone who may know this person, especially someone who knows that person closely because it may lead to other things and other people being caught for other crimes. So I think that's a big factor in all of that. Also, I mean, we've got some of the pictures up on our YouTube live stream right now. I don't know if I'd be able to recognize somebody I know just by the photos. I would have to have

24:17intimate knowledge of some of the clothing. I would have to have some intimate knowledge of where they hang out, where they may have been, all that kind of stuff. Looking at that, there's not, except for the clothing and things like that. From the facial features, there's not a ton to really go on. I don't think. There isn't. I mean, we can say, well, he's got eyebrows. Well, yeah, are those eyebrows sticking out? Are those just shadows from the holes in the mask? I don't know. And that's I don't think I would know. I mean, we should do a test next week. I'll get one of those. And then we'll see if you can actually tell it's me. That would be just by wearing it. I think you should go to random people's porches over the weekend. Great. And and then go on the ring app and then see if you can find yourself on people's porches. That's great. And what have you got here? What's your name? Tony, you think multiple people involved? Ain't no way the single guy is

25:17caring Nancy's body alone. This depends how well-built he is. I don't know. I mean, you can't really tell his muscle strength or density from that photo. If you're a strong guy or gal, although this looks like a guy, they could handle Nancy. Could I know? I mean, but the right person, I think, certainly good, don't you? I do. And also we have to remember she was small stature. If you look at any pictures where she's standing next to Savannah Guthrie, she is a short woman. She is not very tall. And I don't think she weighed an awful lot in some of the pictures that we've seen of her recently. So I think even somebody as weak as I could probably walk away with with a body if I needed to. I probably could have drug her out. But I mean, lifting her carrying her. I've seen you lift a lot. I think you could, you'd be fine. You know, I, before a couple of years ago, I had a small farm. It was an idea of my ex-wife.

26:21We played farmer for a couple of years. Trust me, I've known Tony a long time. When I found out he had a farm with farm animals, mined alone. Yeah, mine too, and I live in. In that adventure of a couple of years, we had some pigs. And one of the pigs passed away. And it was about probably 150, 200 pounds somewhere in that range, maybe a little bit more. I've never, I don't know, I've never dealt with like dead weight of an animal other than like a cat or something like that. And oh my god, like that's some hard shit to deal with. Because you can't just like necessarily pull it either. Because if you pull on a corpse or something in the wrong way, I'm not trying to be gross here, but limbs can kind of, you know, break, come off. You know, I mean, it's not just like, it's not as simple as may look.

27:26But I had to get these pigs out of the, this one pig out of the cage it was in, or it's pen. And I had a four-wheeler, and I managed to do it. But as I'm doing this, I'm like thinking to myself about true crime. I'm like, my god, like the people who are like into like serial killing people and like all in bodies around like that's a like that right there. Like even if you're like so disturbed and crazy and you're like, this is fun. Or like I love the thrill of the kill or whatever. I think the body part is where I be tapping out. I'm like, that's just too much work. Way too difficult to do the lifting in all of that. It's horrend, it's hard. It's horrible. So I can't imagine doing that with a human being. Well, I did have somebody message that they believe that they said she was 150 pounds. So that would be about what you're talking about there. You said 150 to 200. So maybe it's maybe it's more to handle than I'm thinking. And it's not, it's distributed differently, because it's not like a weight, you know, where it's like, it's all right here. It's,

28:28it's concentrated over here. And it kind of shifts. And it's, you know, it's a body. So it's somewhat gelatinous in a way, you know, where it, I don't know. It's not an easy task. But I've seen a lot of people say, how could somebody do that? Because people do it all the time. Well, and if there's adrenaline going on, let's be honest, if this, if this was a mistake, if she was not supposed to, if this was not supposed to happen, and they didn't actually think about take, you're going to have a little extra energy to do what you got to do to cover your butt. So it's possible that adrenaline helped them a little bit in this. Yeah. So I imagine that's it played to. But I mean, is it, it could have been done by more than one person? I guess sure. Is there really any evidence that points to that? No. Is there anything that points either way? No. There's just not a lot of evidence period. That's what we got. We got the doorbell. So for basing it slowly on the, so solely on the doorbell, there's one guy in it. Could there be another somebody in a car down the road? Yeah. Totally. But we just, we just don't

29:31know the answer to that question. Anything else on Nancy that's popped up here that we want to get to before we go over to Corey Richens? Nothing, I mean, I was, nothing that we haven't already really touched on. I would just say that there's a lot of people wondering about timeline and the amount of time that that person was in the house. And they also say that that may be why there was such a long amount of time in the house was because they were trying to fumble around and all that kind of stuff. I agree with that. I kind of feel like that might have been an OSHIT moment where what do we do? And that's why I'm curious about cell tower pings and all of that, especially at that moment, because I'm do, I wonder if that person that was in there, either they handled their OSHIT moment by themselves. And okay, here's what I'm going to take or if there was some phone calls made of like, what should I do? I don't know that everyone's guess is as good as me. I think you're going to solve this with the cell tower and crossing that with something else.

30:36I don't know what I was thinking the Walmart receipts if they can find it, but again, there hasn't been any cross there yet. Let me ask you this because you've done this for a little while that the fact that they're they're stopping the constant updates now. Those are going away. They've decided they're only going to update us when they need to. It's not going to be an everyday thing or whatever. Yeah. What does that say about the investigation at this point? Is it getting so cold now that there's just not much to share? I think they should have been slower in that to begin. I mean, yeah, they were just saying random things constantly. The thing is I don't feel like anything they had been sharing was of much value to begin with, other than they felt like they needed to fill the dead air. Is it is it slowing down? I don't know that it ever got really wound up quite honestly. I mean, I think they were trying and looking, but I just don't feel like they ever got traction anywhere. Again, unless there's something behind the scenes that we are completely unaware of. So I don't know. At some point here, yeah. I mean,

31:41it is winding. The immediate search, the immediate issue, you know, somewhere within the general two mile vicinity, in someone's backyard or the desert somewhere, that's winding down because they've done it. They've looked, they've checked. She's not there. So that part certainly ending, and they got a lot of leads to track to run down. I mean, when you got like 50,000 leads coming in, these are human beings that are trying to chase them all down. So they're going to spend some time still doing that. But yeah, I mean, until they get something that that has traction, it is slowing down. But again, like I said, I don't think it ever really got up to a good speed to begin with, right? It's a shame, but that's where that sits right now. Love to see more of your comments. We'll continue the conversation in the comments section on our sub-stack and on YouTube. Be sure to hit subscribe wherever you're downloading this so you don't miss any of our

32:44coverage on this case. Let's move over now to the trial that's going on over to Utah, the Cory Richards trial underway. And we're going to focus first. We're going to do two kind of segments on this one on the prosecution's case, what they're presenting, what they're arguing. We'll go to the defense then second. And whether this adds up to murder beyond a reasonable doubt, the state says Cory poisoned her husband Eric with fentanyl for money and to start a new life with her boyfriend. They've got a witness who says she bought drugs. They got Eric's own words saying he thought Cory was trying to kill him. They've got insurance policies to lead a text and internet searches that paint a picture of premeditation. Let's take into the questions that you've been asking and be sure to ask them if you're watching us live right now in the comments section. We'll try to get over to those. We'll start with this from a bride in Salt Lake City. Carmen Lauber testified that she bought fentanyl for Cory for separate times.

33:46She says Cory told her it was for an investor. Nobody believes that, right? What investor needs the realter to score street fentanyl for them is the prosecution arguing that was always a cover story for murder. The investor story, I mean, that's an interesting angle on this. We're just learning that now that it was for an investor. But are you going to tell somebody that it's for you? Like, you know, you're always going to come up with a story, especially if you're buying a illicit drugs, right? I guess I've never bought an illicit drugs, but I guess I probably have a story, you know, but it's for the neighbor's cat. They're really into fentanyl. Now, I mean, I, I mean, I guess it's, you know, it's kind of a semi believable story. It's interesting, you know, it here's what we're at tracks really well because Cory is someone who's very obsessed

34:49with her image. This is my conjecture and it's until proven guilty and served alleged in front of everything I'm going to say for the next 30 minutes. She, she clearly seems like someone who has the profile that's obsessed or very concerned with image and how she's portrayed to other people, how other people see her. That's how this type of personality profile works. I am under the operational thought process of her of kind of, and I'm not diagnosing borderline-ish narcissistic personality disorder, something in that area. That's my opinion. Those type of folks are very obsessed with their image. The fact that she used it as, oh, it's an investor that she's doing this from. It puts her, even in that weird conversation of getting drugs, it kind of elevates her of like, it's for an investor because I'm so, I'm so busy, I'm so high-falutin, I'm so, I'm so important in this business. I'm getting this from my investor, you know,

35:51because, you know, we're that tight. I'm buying, you know, it's a weird way of doing things, but I can see how through her prism, this seemed like a win. And also, I feel like she did it because, well, you can't let somebody know that they would be for you, right? Like the mask would have to be pulled away. She's so perfect. She would never do something like this now for an investor, for the company, blah, blah, blah. You know, I'll do what I got to do, but she would never herself show that she had that experience with illicit drugs. Grandstanding to get the drugs basically. So they, I mean, the investor story I found to be interesting. Robyn and Robyn just mentioned, and so an influencer personality. I would say that would be absolutely correct, wouldn't you? Yes. I would say she's very, yeah, she could have been down that word. She, I mean, she reminds me somewhat of kind of like Ruby Frankie in some ways. She reminds me of Donna Adelson

36:55in a lot of ways. I mean, just take that, that narcissistic personality type that can never be accountable for anything and has a justifiable reason for anything that they're doing. All their modality, everything that they do, everything they touch, even how were they need to lie, cheat and steal and scheme. They will somehow tell themselves, I'm doing this for the greater good. I'm doing this for a reason, and I'm entitled to do this and anyone who questions me how dare them. That's disrespectful because you're questioning, you know, the genius of this type of a person. That's my opinion on kind of the way that she operates. Yeah. Stephanie from Park City, Eric allegedly told his sister on a phone call just weeks before he died that he believed Corey was trying to poison him. He said those words out loud to family. How does the prosecution use that? Is that hearsay? Can they get it in front of a jury?

38:00I believe it can come out and it probably will. I honestly don't know the answer to that. In this case, specifically, I know that like that has been those sort of statements certainly have been used in other trials. I don't know if the judge has allowed that in, but it certainly has been said. I mean, I would say I'm going to guess it is. The fact that they've brought up the sandwich, which could be also kind of hearsayish too. I'm going to guess that that's going to be in there. And it is powerful. Especially when you look at the character of Eric, and he's not a paranoid guy. I mean, if this was a guy who was constantly paranoid and there could be a track record of see he was paranoid about this and that. So it makes sense. He thinks his wife's trying to kill him too. If you could go down a track record and say, see, that would explain that more, but I don't think they have that. They don't have anything like that. So if you have

39:05somebody making a statement like that, which is pretty rare, I think, to have happen that someone's going to actively feel that way and then still stay in the relationship. Yeah, I mean, that's that's going to be very powerful, I think. And there's a lot of things in this case that are, there's nuggets here and that there's not one big smoking gun. It's an accumulation of things. And you got to kind of look at which pile of shit is worse and then determine, okay, which number one, which is worse, but then is that pile of shit enough to say beyond a reasonable doubt? Or is it still just, yeah, it's pretty, yeah, we're here and still pretty, yeah, over here, because you're going to have both in this case. I think the investigation was extremely flawed, but it doesn't mean that she didn't do it either. Right, you and I had a brief conversation this morning via text and we were talking about the, the witness who's been on the stand for the last day and a half Carmen Lobber. And, you know, there's, there's another piece of

40:07that where it's like her testimony seems to kind of change in waiver and the defense is really going after her about that. Really trying to paint her is somebody that's not trustable, not, not worth trustworthy, I should say. And I have to be honest watching it. I kind of feel that way. I kind of feel like I'm not sure that if this were the only evidence they were going on, I'd have to say not enough for me. And I personally think that, and again, just my opinion, I think Corey probably did do what we all, you know, what she's being on trial for. But I would still have to question whether or not this was enough for me to actually put her behind bars for the death of her husband. I think if you're just basing it on those folks, no, but where it gets there for me, it's going to be the digital. And, and that's what syncs everybody. I mean, on memes alone, just unlike the memes alone. I mean, I guess it doesn't necessarily prove she did it. I

41:14mean, look, if she was, let's look at it from this perspective for a moment, a thought experiment, if you will, as Robin says, the memes of, I'm rich, I'm, you know, wiping their face with money and the Trump, I'm rich meme and idiots, idiots everywhere. Those are the three memes that were brought up that she apparently was searching on her device literally as Eric was being holed out of the house in a body bag. And her children are in the other room inconsolable. She's looking at these, these memes are coming up on her device. Um, pretty barbaric, you know, just, oh my God. But does it mean that she did it or did an opportunity just present itself in his death if he OD'd on something at his own hands? And now suddenly

42:15life is going to be good for Corey because suddenly he's gone and she's wanted him gone for a long time and she didn't have to do anything about it. Now she gets the money, now she gets this in that. And he OD'd saw nothing to do with it. So life is good and she's just a cold, heartless bitch. I mean, is that, is that what that is? Because I guess you really could interpret it one of two ways. She would have to really be a cold-hearted bitch, I think, to, to celebrate it. Even though she apparently wasn't happy, she had this other boyfriend, she had all these things that she wanted in life. They were struggling, they were having some issues. I think it's really tough. And we've all had bad relationships that we've wanted to probably get out of. I don't know that I would celebrate the death of somebody. Even if it was something that I was unhappy in, in that way, that close to the actual time frame of him being pulled out of the house, like maybe a week or two later, you'd be like, oh, I just feel so much better. There's a couple of memes about my life getting better, whatever.

43:19I don't know that the timing on that is really suspect. What makes her more of a monster if she she was looking up those memes and she did it, knowing that she did it, or if she didn't do it, she was looking up those memes. I think it makes her look more humane if she did it. Because that was part of her plan and she knew it all along. She looks even more monstrous in some ways that this is just her instinctual reaction to his accidental death if that's what happened in some ways. So we just got a question from Robin who says, the memes are kind of meaningless. Her name is Richens. How do you prove she was looking at those memes at that time? And then she says, did she post the memes or just see them? And we don't know that the way it was we'll find out, but the way it was described so far in the openings was that they were accessed on her device. So that could simply mean when you go on

44:23your phone and you're looking up to send somebody a meme and you type it in and then that's what comes up as an image that could be that. We don't know the answer to that question. Yet. But I would just say look at it though with her last name being Richens. You know, sometimes like you're typing your texting somebody and you actually press the gift for a meme button. And all of a sudden these memes start popping up. Could she have been typing something else and they just happened to come up? I mean, that's an interesting thought Robin to be honest with you. Robin, you just gave them, you just gave them something they're going to bring up now. Good job. Good job. Because quite honestly, I think they're probably looking for ideas. So I'm going to laugh when that pops up in court because it probably will. Well, there was this is I brought up now several times and this actually my fiance brought

45:26this up the other day because I think it could answer so many questions is a hair follicle test on Eric. As far as we know, none was done. At least we've never seen it. We've never heard of it being brought up as far as we know that's not an evidence. I could be wrong, but a hair follicle test would tell you whether Eric was a regular user of fentanyl or other drugs. It would tell you that. And it would tell you he was not. That benefits one of two sides and I don't know that either side feels strong enough in their case to grab that piece of evidence and go look or because either way whatever that result would be would be very revealing. And I know we've had people say he had very short hair. He could only looking at the length of his hair, depending on how long, how fast he grows his hair, all that kind of stuff. But we could get I think we could get at least

46:29some, some information if that would be done. Hair is hair. It doesn't just have to be on your head. That would be sure we might have some long, you know, if there's a hair anywhere with any length, it's like a tree. You know, it's the rings of a tree. It will tell you it will tell you a lot. So I don't know. I mean, it's that I think would be very telling if, you know, it shows that, oh, it looks like he has us in his system a lot. It would lean a lot more towards in overdose. It would be very strong for Corey if there ain't that. Then, yeah. The toxicologist testified that quantipping, that's Corey's prescription medication. Not Erick's was found in Erick's blood. It was a small amount, but it was there. If Erick had no prescription for that drug, how did it get in the, in his system is a prosecution using that to show Corey was putting things in his food and drinks. But not quite know how they're going to use that yet. But yeah, that was in his system as well. And again, I think you could use that

47:33two ways. You could say, see, he's, he's just going to the medicine cabinet and treating it like skittles, you know, whatever is there, he's just taking some or Corey made, it could be some, well, you know, it's there and he takes it every now that I don't know. I don't know how they're going to, to put that. It is an interesting one because it almost makes you wonder like, what did Corey, so she get the, the fentanyl and she's like, and just for added measure, let me push some of this in here too. Yeah, I mean, the, the mind process, when you start thinking about the mind process on getting the drugs, connecting with somebody to get the drugs. And it looks like from the testimony that I've seen over the last couple of days, there were a few prescriptions around the house in various locations along with the, and I'll, I'll say it like the, the prosecutor and the, the, the defense said, gummies, THC gummies, like they're so afraid of saying THC gummies. I'm not sure why. But yeah, I mean, there seem to be a lot of stuff going on in that house.

48:37And it seems no one seems to have any clue or understanding in how THC works. They think it's like from the devil or something. And it's somehow this horrible, deadly, scary drug that's literally killed no one ever. But some, you know, and that I feel like they're really, they're playing, they're, they're trying to create confusion. They're playing on the jury, also not fully grasping that and going, oh gosh, he's a drug user. He's using THC gummies. Well, like half the people in the courtroom are like, I'm on one right now. You know, I bet a member of the jury probably is on one right now. I was just going to say probably, I mean, of the two of us, I'm guessing there's a 50, 50 shot that somebody here is on one just saying exactly. Yeah. I mean, it's, it's not something where it's, it's not nine, it's not 1952 or something. Right. I don't know. I mean, or the 80s or anything where it's, you know, it's just not that. It's been, yeah, it's been fascinating to watch that.

49:41Your thoughts in the comment section on the prosecution of Corey Richens and where that's all at sub-stack or YouTube is where you can weigh in. We'd love to get your feedback there and be sure to press subscribe. Let's flip it. Same trial, different lens. The defense is arguing that Corey Richens is innocent that she didn't poison her husband that the investigation was botched from day one and that the prosecution star witness is a drug addict whose story keeps changing. They're hammering every crack in the foundation evidence that was never tested evidence that was destroyed evidence. It was collected years too late and a witness who admits she was high on meth during the entire time period she's describing. If you're looking for reasonable doubt, there's a lot to work with. So, what your questions is what we're taking in the comment section and our live right now. Be sure to drop them and also grab the handful over the last week of what we've been seeing from the videos. This is from Brian and Salt Lake City. Carmen Lover admitted on this

50:45stand that she tested positive for meth in late January, mid February and early March 2022. That's the exact time frame she claims she was buying fentanyl for Corey. The defense asked if she was high the whole time and she said, I guess so, yes. How do you trust a witness who is actively using during every event she's testifying about? Todd, you said you watched a lot of that. What was your take? Well, and that Brian, that was my question exactly. I mean, not only did she admit to that, but her recollection of the investigation and the conversation she had with police officials back three, four years ago, didn't match up in her testimony with the prosecution. When kind of drilled down on by the defense, she wasn't able to explain any of that kind of stuff away either. So, not only do you have the fact that she admitted to using meth during this time period, there's a lot of confusion in her mind and I can understand where she's at.

51:48It's tough to remember specific details this far away from the actual incident and activities, but it's really hard for me to sit here and say that there's anything coming out of her mouth that I find believable in any way, shape or form at this point. And as we're recording this, she's still on this stand. They're still drilling down on her. The defense is really growing strong. The fact that there doesn't seem to be any real dispute that drugs transferred from the guy to Carmen to Cory. That process nobody's arguing. That something was transferred several times over. But if you really look at what's really being argued here by the defense and I think it's really just to create confusion is the semantics of it and the name of what the product is. Yes, Eric died of a fentanyl overdose. And in the process of whatever was put into his drink,

52:50it was called propyl, it was called oxy, it was called fentanyl, it was called everything from all of these different people. I don't think any of them truly knew what the hell they were getting other than Cory said, I want stronger stuff. And that's what they got. I don't think it matters. Because I don't think Cory knew what the hell she was getting or why she was getting it other than it was strong enough to kill him. Because she made the Michael Jackson stuff reference, which is propofol, which is not something she got. And it's administered completely differently. So it's, I don't think it matters. I just, I think at the end of the day, it's like, look, you kept asking for stronger shit, they kept upping it. What is it matter if it's rat poison or penzoil? Sorry, they called me up, Garnet. I wasn't expecting you to say, put penzoil. And it was kind of funny yesterday, the defense, the lawyer for the defense who's

53:51doing this, this witness testimony was kind of arguing with Carmen about whether or not blues, the name blues on the street actually meant fentanyl back in the day. And they're kind of going back and forth. And Robin and our chat actually made a very good point. The defense is kind of coming off as a bully here. And I have to agree with that. I will say that I don't trust Carmen's testimony at all. But the defense is really coming off as a bully. And I will tell you that just watching this trial and even her interaction with the judge at times, he's had a reprimander a couple of times for kind of her, her take on things and some of the things that she said about the prosecution and all that kind of stuff. It's, it's, it's a very interesting dynamic in that courtroom. Actually, not one that I've seen, you know, the trials that I've been involved with covering on the, on, on hidden killers. So this is the first time I've actually seen the judge kind of get really upset with, with, with somebody in the, on the defense. Well, what's your take on,

54:56on the, on her as an attorney? You mean, I was just, I was taking a back immediately. It's interesting to me because everybody has different opinions. Bob the other day is like she's doing great. And he's a defense attorney. I was like, this is like Phyllis from the office. If she had a sister that went to community college to be an attorney. And this is what you got seems like probably a lovely woman, probably very funny and has great stories. But not necessarily I'd once representing me on a murder case. She just seemed kind of clustering kind of like, I don't know, didn't really quite have all the T's crossed and the eyes dotted or might have mixed up what to cross and dot. I don't know. That's been kind of my take. Yeah. Kathy Nester does not seem and please, I'm not trying to rip on any of them, but maybe not the, but not the, the brightest ball in the box of that team. Wendy Lewis is the one who's been actually asking the questions on the cross direct on Kekarman. And she's, she's a bully. And she's the one who's kind of gotten some

55:57reprimand from, from the judge. Alexander Ramos is the other lawyer who's involved with that team. He seems to be pretty straight and narrow and kind of has the stuff together, but yeah, Nester is a little different. What about blood worth? What do you think of blood worth? I really feel like he could have been like the cousin that showed up for three episodes of the Adam's family or something. I wouldn't say that he's very strong either as a choice. Not necessarily as a choice, but in the courtroom, I'm not saying that he's necessarily the strongest one I've seen either. But I would say this, I feel like they're all kind of in the same weight class, if you will. They're all kind of like, okay, like, I don't feel like any of them are really outgunned by the other. I don't see one that's like, that's a damn good attorney. I feel like they're all like, they're okay. So I think that makes the playing field more level because you don't have like a

56:58superstar over here that's just wiping the floor with everybody. Anyway, that's just my conjecture, my opinion. I don't know. I'm sure they're lovely people and they're doing the best to their ability. But yeah, I don't know. Robin made a point about the judge. I think the judge has been very, very good in this trial. I'm kind of blown away by how good he is, but she said that judge his very white voice. I could listen to him read the phone book. He's just very calm. And when things kind of go awry, he's just very even keel, very organized. I really like how he's presenting on the stand. Yeah. Grab that last, the DJ comment there. What is this? What do you make of her covered face and no eye contact on body cam footage? Isn't that deception? You know, a lot of, that's not so much what got me, what got me most in the body cam footage was when they said

57:59in no uncertain terms that they're going to take him to do an autopsy. Her response, her response because she was, she was already kind of doing this. And then it's like, you know, because he's, you know, relatively healthy, young guy, he didn't say autopsy, but he alluded to it that, you know, they're going to go test and then see know what, if there's anything else that play here basically. And when that happened, then it was, then it was like, why would you be reacting like that to that? Right. If you really thought, if you had the loved one hit past away, again, take out of this situation that they obviously were having struggles. She didn't seem to care much for him, et cetera, et cetera. Once you just want to know what happened, like, of course, and of course, please, please do an autopsy. So we know what the hell went on here. Yes. Like, let's figure this out. That would be, I wouldn't be throwing my head back in my hands

58:59in the air like, in defeat, because that's what that red like to me, like, oh, shit. Yeah. Like now, like the jigs up. I mean, it wasn't for her amazingly because it didn't, like, so there was, there was no investigation. It seems initially that this was even a homicide because all the obvious things were never tested. But that, that to me was really telling, if we're to look at the body language, the rest of it, she's, she's got reps at deceiving people. She's got reps at getting her way for her 30 some years of life and manipulating people. You can just tell and she's good at it and she's been able to do it. She's, she's not good at it. She's not accustomed to being told no. She's not accustomed to people seeing beyond her mask. And now she doesn't know how the hell to handle it because it's being called that left and right. So she's playing the Donna Adelson role of, you know, meek meek. I'm just, just little me. At least that's, that's my conjecture on it. What did you think of the,

1:00:02I've seen some comments over the last week or so as we've covered this about the 9-1-1 call and the recording and how she presented on the call. What were your thoughts on that? She didn't do horrible. Yeah, I didn't think it was like, you know, I thought it was somewhat believable more so than some of the 9-1-1 calls we've heard in trials in the past. It was, there was a weird, I mean, when you're looking, it's weird because you know, when you're looking for weird, you're going to find weird. If I were to say something that felt off to me was there, there seemed to be a sense of resignation in it, in a sense of, in her voice, this is kind of tone of, kid, I actually did it. I don't know. That's kind of what I got. It was very, it wasn't hysteric. You had a very different woman in that 9-1-1 call than you got on those body cameras. Yes, absolutely. 100%. And that's what, that's the incongruence. That's what

1:01:09Robin would point out. Robin will be here on Monday, by the way. I think is the incongruence and behavior. And that's something that doesn't line up because you would think your hysterics would be, you know, ongoing. You would be in the same state. You wouldn't be over here super calm. And then when people show up and the performance opens and the stage is set, now you're suddenly doing this, it doesn't, it doesn't add up. It's, it's, it's, one's performative, one's not. It's like two different performances and testing the waters of seeing how is the audience reacting. I don't know. That's kind of how I took it. But, yeah. I mean, again, everybody greaves differently and that's the argument that, you know, it's going to be made. But I don't know, it's, it, it did feel odd, odd to me. Yeah. I just, yeah. I just thought that 911 call was, if it was performance, I thought it was one of the better performances that I've heard in covering these cases over the last year or so. It is. We should do a countdown someday of

1:02:14the top 10 911 calls. We'll have KCK. Number five. Yeah. We could, I'll bring KC back from the grave and we'll actually have him do it. That'd be great. And a long distance, death, dedication. We'll, we'll get in there. Lots of questions on this case. And we'll see where this goes. I'm very, I'm very curious to see as to just how many holes they can poke into the, the prosecution's case and what will remain standing at the end of the day because there's just certain undeniable truths in this case. I don't care how many holes you poke into it. They're still going to be there. Yeah. Her, her search history, her digital footprint, that's what's very damning. Everything else, shitty investigation, they should have tested this, they should have tested that. Yeah. They could have had a more of a slam dunk. I mean, there's also ways where this, I think actually could have worked had Corey been a little smarter.

1:03:18If she did this and she wanted it to look more like an overdose, just leave some of those pills next to him. You're right. He did it. Right. And the story, now they're missing. That's what makes it suspicious. That's what makes it more weird. Yeah. I mean, that's, there you go. Sad I have to tell you how to be a killer. You're going to have a class now. You'll travel to the country. I'm a killer consultant. I've never killed, but I consult the killers. Consultant to the killers. Yeah. And consultants spell with a cage. So it goes with the killers. It'll be great. All right. Well, your guys are thoughts in the comments section. Leave them there. We'd love to hear them and see them and we'll continue the conversation there. Next week, well, actually, depending on when you're listening to this, Robin Drake could be joining us and hitting killers live every single day, Monday through Friday.

1:04:19He's going to be our co-host going forward on hitting killers. I'm really excited about that. So we'll have a lot of interesting conversation this coming week with Robin and all of our guests. All the guests are still here. Robin's going to be with us with all of them every week here on the channel. So be sure to join us Monday morning or every morning, really Monday through Friday, 11 a.m. Central on YouTube, Facebook and X for those conversations. And of course, the replays we put them out for you on the channels. All right. We'll continue the conversation in the comments section. Press subscribe until then for Todd. I'm Tony Bursky. We'll talk again real soon.

1:05:26Most fun you can have online and on a plane. So grab your free welcome bonus now at chumbacasino.com. Sponsored by Chumbacasino. No purchase necessary VGW could avoid for prohibited by law 21 plus terms and conditions apply. All during my downtime ready for a fun way to chill out and enjoy a few minutes for yourself. Let's chumbac. No purchase necessary VGW group void were prohibited by law ct's and c's 21 plus sponsored by chumbacasino.

1:06:26Hello it is Ryan and we could all use an extra bright spot in our day couldn't we? Just to make up for things like sitting in traffic during the dishes, counting your steps you know all the mundane stuff. That is why I'm such a big fan of chumbacasino. Chumbacasino has all your favorite social casino style games that you can play for free anytime anywhere with daily bonuses. So sign up now at chumbacasino.com. That's chumbacasino.com. No purchase necessary VGW group void were prohibited by law 21 plus terms and conditions apply. Looking for excitement chumbacasino is here. Play anytime, play anywhere, play on the train, play at the store, play at home, play with your board, play today for your chance to win and get daily bonuses when you log in. So why are you waiting for

1:07:26don't delay? Chumbacasino is free to play. Experience social gameplay like never before. Go to chumbacasino right now to play hundreds of games including online slots, bingo, slingo and more. Live the chumbacasino.com. No purchase necessary VGW group void were prohibited by law 21 plus terms and conditions apply.